at Chalcedon The other that by this Epistle they judged Ibas to be a Catholike to which purpose Vigilius writeth thus Iuvenalis would never have said that Ibas was a Catholike nisi ex verbis epistolae ejus confessionem fidei orthodoxam comprobaret Vnles by the words of his Epistle he had proved his faith to be orthodoxall which words evidently shew that Vigilius thought in like sort all the Bishops at Chalcedon to have judged the same by the words of that Epistle for it is certaine that they all embraced Ibas himselfe for a Catholike 13. Hereupon now ensueth the Definitive sentence of Vigilius touching this Chapter in this manner m Ibid. nu 196. We following the judgement of the holy Fathers in all things seeing it is a most cleare and shining truth ex verbis Epistolae venerabilis Ibae by the words of the Epistle of the reverend B. Ibas being taken in their most right and godly sense and by the acts of Photius and Eustathius and by the meaning of Ibas being present that the Fathers at Chalcedon did most justly pronounce the faith of this most reverend Bishop Ibas to be orthodoxall we decree by the authoritie of this our present sentence that the Iudgement of the Fathers at Chalcedon ought to remaine inviolable both in all other things and in this Epistle of Ibas so often mentioned Thus Vigilius decreeing both that this Epistle of Ibas is Catholike that by it by the words thereof Ibas ought to be judged a Catholike both which he decreeth upon this ground that the Councill of Chalcedon as he supposeth had judged the same 14. In the end to ratifie and confirme all that concernes any of these Three Chapters in the Popes Decree he addeth this very remarkable conclusion n Ibid. nu 208. His igitur à nobis cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia dispositis These things being now with all diligence care and circumspection disposed Statuimus et decernimus we ordaine and decree that it shall be lawfull for none pertaining to Orders and ecclesiasticall dignities either to write or speake or teach any thing touching these three Chapters contrary to these things which by this our present Constitution we have taught and decreed aut aliquam post praesentem definitionem movere ulterius quaestionē neither shall it be lawfull for any after this our present definition to move any question touching these Three Chapters But if any thing concerning these Chapters be either done said or written or shall hereafter be done said or written contrary to that which we have here taught and decreed hoc modis omnibus ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae refutamus we by all meanes do reject it by the Authority of the Apostolike See whereof by Gods grace we have now the government So Vigilius 15. Thinke ye not now that any Papist considering this so advised elaborate and Apostolicall decree of Pope Vigilius will be of opinion that there was now a finall end of this matter and that all doubt concerning these Three Chapters was for ever now removed seeing the supreme Iudge had published for a direction to the whole Church his definitive Apostolicall and infallible sentence in this cause what needeth the Councill either to judge or so much as debate this matter after this Decree To define the same was needlesse more then to light a candle when the Sunne shineth in his strength To define the contrary were Hereticall yea after such an authenticall decision and determination to be doubtfull o Dubius in fide infidelis est lib. 5. Dec. tit 7. de haereticis onely what to beleeve hath the censure of an Infidell But thrice happy was it for the Church of God that this doctrine of the Popes supreme authoritie and infallible Iudgement was not then either knowne or beleeved Had it beene the Nestorians and their heresie had for ever prevailed the Catholike faith had beene utterly extinguished and that without all hope or possibility ever after this to have beene revived seeing Vigilius by his Apostolicall authoritie had stopt all mens mouthes from speaking tyed their hands from writing yea and their very hearts from beleeving or thinking ought contrary to his Constitution made in defence of the Three Chapters wherein he hath confirmed all the Blasphemies of Nestorius and that by a Decree more irrevocable then those of the Medes and Persians Had the holy Council at that time assembled beleeved or knowne that doctrine of the Popes supremacie and infallible Iudgement they would not have proceeded one inch further in that businesse but shaking hands with Heretickes they and the whole Church with them had beene led in triumph by the Nestorians at that time under the conduct of Pope Vigilius 16. And by this you may conjecture that Binius had great reason to conceale the later part of the Popes decree for he might well thinke as any papist will that it were a foule incongruitie to set downe three intire Sessions of an holy and generall Council not onely debating this controversie of faith about the Three Chapters but directly also contradicting the Popes definitive sentence in them all notwithstanding they knew the Pope by his Apostolicall authoritie to have delivered his Iudgement and by the same authoritie to have forbidden all men either to write or speak or to move any doubt to the contrary of that which he had now decreed But let us see by a view of the particulars and of their following Sessions how this Cathedrall sentence of the Pope was entertained by the holy generall Councill CAP. 4. That the holy generall Councill in their Synodall Iudgement contradicted the Popes Apostolicall Constitution and definitive sentence in that cause of faith made knowne unto them 1. IN the sixt which was the very next Sessions after they had knowne the Popes will and pleasure contrary to the Apostolicall authoritie and command of Vigilius the Holy Synod began to examine the Epistle of Ibas for the causes of Theodorus and of Theodoret were sufficiently discussed in their former Collations And first of all alledging a saying of the Emperour to which themselves doe assent they thus say which being well observed gives light to the whole cause and openeth both the error of Vigilius and the ground thereof Because a Col. 6. pa. 561. a. the most holy Emperor added among those things which he writ unto us that some indevouring to defend the Epistle of Ibas presume to say that it was approved by the holy Councill of Chalcedon using the words of one or two most religious Bishops who were in that Councill as spoken for that Epistle cum alij omne◠whereas all the rest were of another minde we thinke it needfull this question being proposed to recite the Epistle of Ibas Thus said the Synod even at the first calling the Popes judgement Presumption and checking him both for pretending the Councill of Chalcedon and for alledging the Interlocutions of one or two
confirmed by succeeding generall Councils by Popes and other Bishops in the following ages of the Church By the sixt Councill which professeth t Act. 15. pa. 80. a. of it selfe that in omnibus consonuit it in all points agreeth with the fifth By the second Nicene which they account for the seaventh which reckneth v Act. 6. pa. 357. a this fift for one of the golden Councils which are glorious by the words of the holy Spirit and which all being inlightned by the same spirit decreed those things which are profitable professing that themselves did condemne all whom those Councils and among them whom this fift did condemne By other following Councils in every one of which the 2 Nicene and by consequent this fift Councill is approved as by the acts is cleare and Baronius confesseth x An. 553. nu 229. that this fift in alijs Oecumenicis Synodis postea celebratis cognita est atque probata was acknowledged and approved by the other generall Councils which were held after it 27. It was likewise approved by succeeding Popes and Bishops By Pelagius the second who writ an whole Epistle y Epist 7. Pelag. 2. to perswade the Bishops of Istria to condemne the Three Chapters telling z Pa. 687. them that though Pope Vigilius resisted the condemnation of them yet others his predecessours which followed Vigilius did consent thereunto By Gregory who professing a Lib. 1. Epist 24. to embrace reverence the 4 first Councils as the 4 Euangelists addeth of this fift Quintū quoque cōcilium pariter veneror I do in like manner reverence the fift Councill wherin the impious Epistle of Ibas is rejected the writings of Theodoret with Theodorus his writings And then of them all he saith Cunctas personas whatsoever persons the foresaid five venerable Councils doe condemne those also doe I condemne whom they reverence I embrace because seeing they are decreed by an universall consent whosoever presumeth to loose whom they bind or bind whom they loose se et non illa destruit he destroyeth himselfe but not those Councils and whosoever thinketh otherwise let him be accursed Thus Pope Gregory the great ratifying all the former anathemaes of the Councill and accursing all that labour to unty those bands By Agatho b In Cont. 6. Act. 4. pa. 16. a. by Leo c Epist ad Constan Imp. the second who both call this an holy Synod and not to stay in particulars All d Bar. an 869. nu 58 59. their Popes after the the time of Gregorie were accustomed at their election to make profession of this fift as of the former Councils and that in such solemne and exact manner after the time of Hadrian the second that they professed as their forme it selfe set downe by Anton. Augustinus e In manuscripto codice ex quo eum citat Bar. loco citate doth witnesse to embrace the eight generall Councils whereof this was one to hold them pari honore et veneratione in equal honor and esteeme to keepe them intirely usque ad unum apicem to the least iôta to follow and teach whatsoever they decreed and whatsoever they condemned to condemne both with their mouth and heart A like forme of profession is set downe in the Councill at Constance f Ses 39. pa. 1644. where the Councill having first decreed g Ses 4. pa. 1560. the power and authoritie of the Pope to be inferiour and subject to the Councill and that he ought to be obedient to them both in matters of faith and orders of reformation by this their superior authoritie ordaineth That every Pope at the time of his election shall professe that corde et ore both in words and in his heart hee doth embrace and firmely beleeve the doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers and by the eleven generall Councils this fift being reckned for one and that he will keepe defend and teach the same faith with them usque ad unum apicem even to the least syllable To goe no further Baronius confesseth h An. 553. nu 229. that not onely Gregory and his predecessors unto Vigilius sed successores omnes but all the successors of Gregory are knowne to have received and confirmed this fift Councill 28. Neither onely did the Popes approve it but all orthodoxal Bishops in the world it being a custome as Baronius sheweth i An. 869. nu 58. that they did professe to embrace the seven generall Councills which forme of faith Orthodoxi omnes ex more profiteri deberent all orthodoxall Bishops by custome were bound to professe And this as it seemeth they did in those Literae Formatae or Communicatoriae or Pacificae so they were called k Cum quo totus orbis commercio formatarum concordat Opt. lib. 2. p. 40. Quaerebam utrum epistolas communicatorias quas Formatas dicimus possent quo vellent dare Aug. Epist 163. Sub probatione Epistolij sine Pacificis quae dicuntur Ecclesiastica Conc. Chalc. can 11. which from ancient time they used to give and receive For by that forme of letters they testified their communion in faith and peaceable agreemēt with the whole Catholike Church Such an Vniforme consent there was in approving this fift Council in all succeeding Councills Popes and Bishops almost to these dayes 29. From whence it evidently and unavoidably ensueth that as this fift Synod so all succeeding Councils Popes and Bishops to the time of the Councill of Constance l Celebratum est an 1414. that is for more then fourteene hundred yeares together after Christ doe all with this fift Councill condemne and accurse as hereticall the judiciall and definitive sentence of Pope Vigilius delivered by his Apostolical authority for instruction of the whole Church in this cause of faith therfore they al with an uniforme consent did in heart beleeve and in words professe and teach that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith may be and de facto hath been hereticall that is they all did beleeve and teach that doctrine which the reformed Churches maintaine to be truly ancient orthodoxall and catholike such as the whole Church of Christ for more then 14 hundred yeares beleeved and taught but the doctrine even the Fundamentall position whereon all their doctrines doe relie and which is vertually included in them all which the present Church of Rome maintaineth to be new hereticall and accursed such as the whole Church for so many hundred yeares together with one consent beleeved and taught to be accursed and hereticall It hence further ensueth that as this fift Councill did so all the fore-mentioned generall Councils Popes and Bishops doe with it condemne and accurse for heretikes not onely Vigilius but all who either have or doe hereafter defend him and his Constitution even all who either by word or writing have or shall maintaine that the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith is infallible that is
10. and his Laterane Synod are ample witnesses that this Sanction was never repealed before that Synod for they f Conc. Later ses 11 complaine that by reason of the malignitie of those times or else because they could not helpe it his predecessors tolerasse visi sunt seemed to have tolerated that pragmaticall Sanction and that for all which either they did or could doe the same Sanction retroactis temporibus viguisse et adhuc vigere had in former times and did even to that very day of their eleventh Session stand in force and full vigor Now seeing that Sanction condemneth as hereticall as did the Council also of Basil that assertion of the Popes Supremacie of authoritie and infallibilitie of judgment in defining causes of faith which the present Romane Church defendeth it is now cleerly demonstrated that the same Assertion was taught professed and beleeved to be an heresie and the obstinate defenders thereof to be heretikes by the consenting judgement of Councils Popes Bishops and the Catholike Church even from the Apostles time unto that very day of their Laterane Session which was the 19. of December in the yeare 1516. after Christ 33 On that day a day never to be forgotten by the present Romane Church it being the birth-day thereof Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councill or as the learned Divines of Paris g Leo 10. in quedam caetu nescimus qualiter tamen non in Spiritu Domini congregato App. Vniv Paris account it Conspiracie they being not assembled in Gods name abolished as much as in them lay the old and Catholike doctrine which in all ages of the Church had beene beleeved and professed untill that day and instead thereof erect a new faith yea a new foundation of the faith and with it a new Church also Hee and his Synod then reprobated h Quae de authoritate Concilij supra Pontificem constituerunt sententia CoÌ„c Lateranensis plane reprobata sunt Bin. Not. in Conc. Const § Ex parte the Decree of Constance for the superioritie of a Councill above the Pope they reprobated i Reprobarunt decre tum Concilij Basiliensis Bel. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. § Denique also the Councill of Basil and the same Decree renewed by them That Councill they condemne as Conciliabulum or k Conc. Lat. sess 11. Conventiculam quae nullum robur habere potuerit As a Conspiracie and Conventicle which could have no force at all They reprobated the l Ibid. Pragmaticall Sanction wherein the Decree of Constance and Basil was for ever confirmed Now that Decree being consonant to that catholike Faith which for 1500 yeares together had beene imbraced and beleeved by the whole catholike Church untill that day in reprobating it they rejected and reprobated the old and catholike Faith of the whole Church In stead hereof they decreed the Popes authoritie to be m Hujus sanctae sedis suprema authoritate Ibid. pa. 640. supreme that it is de n Ibid. necessitate salutis a thing necessary to salvation for all Christians to be subject to the Pope and that not onely as they are severally considered but even as they assembled together in a generall Councill for they define Solum o Jbid. pa. 639. Romanum Pontificem authoritatem super omnia Concilia habere The Pope alone to have authoritie above all Generall Councills This the Councill at Laterane diserte ex professo docuit taught cleerly and purposely as Bellarmine tells p Lib. 2. de Concil ca. 17. § Denique us nay they did not onely teach it but expressissimè definiunt q Lib. cod ca. 13. § Deinde they did most expresly define it And that their Definition is no other then a Decree of Faith as the same Cardinall assures us Decrees of faith saith he r Lib. â—â—d ca. 17. § Ad hunc are immutable neyther may ever be repealed after they are once set downe Tale autem est hoc de quo agimus and such is this Decree for the Popes supreme authoritie over all even Generall Councils made in their Laterane Synod And what meane they thinke you by that supreme authoritie Truly the same which Bellarmine explaineth That because his authoritie is supreme therefore his judgement s Proinde ultimum judicium summi poÌ„tificis esse lib. 4. de Rom. pontif ca. 1. § Sed nec in causes of Faith is the last and highest and because it is the last and highest therefore it is t Restat igitur ut Papa sit Index ultimus et proinde noÌ„ possit errare Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Contra. Et DicuÌ„t Concilij sententiam esse ultimuÌ„ judicium Hinc autem apertissimè sequitur non errare Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3. § Accedat infallible So by their Decree together with supremacie of authority they have given infallibilitie of judgement to the Pope and defined that to be a catholike truth and doctrine of Faith which the whole Church in all ages untill then taught professed and defined to be an heresie and all who maintaine it to be Heretikes and for such condemned both it and them 34 Now because this is not onely a doctrine of their faith but the very foundation on which all their other doctrines of faith doe relie by decreeing this they have quite altered not onely the faith but the whole frame and fabricke of the church erecting a new Romane church consisting of them and them onely who maintaine the Popes Infallibilitie and supremacie decreed on that memorable day in their Laterane Synod a church truly new and but of yesterday not so old as Luther a church in faith and communion severed from all former generall Councils Popes and Bishops that is from the whole catholike Church of Christ which was from the Apostles times untill that day And if their Popes continue as it is to be presumed they doe to make that profession which by the Councils of Constance and Basil they are bound to doe to hold among other this fift Councill ad unum iôta this certainly is but a verball no cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of v In Appel à Leon. 10. quae facta est 21 die Mart. an 1517. Decret
condemnationem and the condemning of Heretikes So by the second marke of Bellarmine it is undoubted that the Councels Decree herein is a Decree of faith 12. The third note is more than demonstrative For the Holy Councell denounceth not once or twice but more I thinke than an hundred times an Anathema to them that teach contrary to their sentence Anathema f Coll. 4. pa. 537. a. Coll. 8. pa. 586. et 587. to Theodorus anathema to him that doth not anathematize Theodorus we all anathematize Theodorus and his writings Anathema g Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. to the impious writing of Theodoret against Cyril Anathema to all that doe not anathematize them we h Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. all anathematize the impious Epistle of Ibas If i Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. any defend this Epistle or any part of it if any doe not anathematize it and the defenders of it let him be an Anathema 13. So by all the notes of Cardinall Bellarmine it is evident not onely that this question about the Three Chapters is a question of faith but which is more that the holy generall Councell proposed their Decree herein tanquam de fide as a Decree of faith Now because every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest with certainty of faith which cannot be deceived every doctrine and position of faith then especially when it is published and declared by a Decree of the Church to bee a doctrine of faith Seeing by this Decree of faith which the Councell now made not onely the Popes Apostolicall sentence in a cause of faith is condemned to bee hereticall but all they also who defend it to be Heretikes and accursed and seeing all defend it who maintaine the Popes cathedrall sentence to be infallible that is all who are members of the present Church of Rome it hence inevitably ensueth that every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest not onely the doctrine even the fundamentall doctrine of the present Church of Rome to be hereticall but all that maintaine it that is all that are members of that Church to be heretikes and accursed unlesse disclaiming that heresie they forsake all communion with that Church Baronius perceiving all those Anathemaes to fall inevitably upon himselfe and their whole Church if this cause of the Three Chapters which Vigilius defended and defined by his Apostolicall Constitution that they must be defended if this I say were admitted to be a cause of faith that hee might shuffle off those Anathemaes which like the leprosie of Gehazi doth cleave unto them thought it the safest as indeed it was the shortest way to deny this to be a cause of faith which not onely by all the precedent witnesses but by the judgement of their owne Cardinall and all the three notes set downe by him is undeniably proved to bee a cause of faith and that the Decree of the Holy Councell concerning it is proposed as a Decree of faith 14. I might further adde their owne Nicholas Sanders who though he saw not much in matters of faith yet he both saw and professed this truth and therefore in plaine termes calleth k Ob easdem haeresâ—s decrevit eos esse alienos à diaconorii honore Lib. 7. de visib Monarch an 537. the defending of the Three Chapters an heresie Now heresie it could not be unlesse it were a cause of faith seeing every heresie is a deviation from the faith But omitting him and some others of his ranke I will now in the last place adde one other witnesse which with the favourites of Baronius is of more weight and worth than all the former and that is Baronius himselfe who as he doth often deny so doth he often and plainly professe this to be a cause of faith Speaking of the Emperours Edict concerning these Three Chapters he bitterly reproveth yea he reproacheth the Emperour for that he would l An. 546. nu 41. arrogate to himselfe edere sanctiones de fide Catholica to make Edicts about the Catholike faith Again the whole Catholike faith saith he would m An. eodeÌ„ nu 43. be in jeopardy if such as Iustinian de fide leges sanciret should make lawes concerning the faith Againe n Ibid. nu 50. Pelagius the Popes Legate sounded an alarum contra ejusdem Imperatoris de fide sancituÌ„ EdictuÌ„ against the Emperors Edict published concerning the faith And yet againe o An. 547. nu 50. Pope Vigilius writ letters against those qui edito ab Imperatore fidei decreto subscripsissent who had subscribed to the Emperours Edict of faith So often so expresly doth Baronius professe this to be a cause of faith which himselfe like the Aesopicall Satyr had so often and so expresly denied to be a cause of faith and that also so confidently that he shamed not to say Consentitur ab omnibus all men agree herein that this is no cause of faith whereas Baronius himselfe dissenteth herein confessing in plaine termes this to be a cause of the Catholike faith 15. The truth is the Cardinals judgement was unsetled and himselfe in a manner infatuated in handling this whole cause touching Vigilius and the fift generall Councell For having once resolved to deny this one truth that Vigilius by his Apostolicall sentence maintained and defined heresie and decreed that all other should maintaine it which one truth like a Thesean threed would easily and certainly have directed him in all the rest of his Treatise now he wandreth up and down as in a Labyrinth toiling himselfe in uncertainties and contradictions saying and gainsaying whatsoever either the present occasioÌ„ which he hath in hand or the partialitie of his corrupted judgement like a violent tempest doth drive him unto when the Emperour or his Edict to both which he beares an implacable hatred comes in his way then this question about the Three Chapters must bee a cause of faith for so the Cardinall may have a spacious field to declame against the Emperour for presuming to intermeddle and make lawes in a cause of faith But when Pope Vigilius or his Constitution with which the Cardinall is most partially blinded meet him then the ease is quite altered the question about the Three Chapters must then bee no more a question or cause of faith for that is an easie way to excuse Vigilius and the infallibilitie of his Chaire he erred onely in some personall matters in such the Pope may erre he erred not in any doctrinall point nor in a cause of faith in such is hee and his Chaire infallible 16. There remaineth one doubt arising out of the words of Gregory by the wilfull mistaking whereof p An. 547. nu 30. an 553. nu 231. Baronius was misse-led He seemeth to teach the same with the Cardinall where speaking of this fift Synod hee saith q Lib. 3. Epist 37. In eâ de
dead also Of their binding the nocent wee have alleaged before abundance of examples for their loosing the innocent that one of Flavianus is sufficient The Ephesine l Act. conciliab Ephes citata in actis Conc. Chalc. Act. 1. pa. 57. b. latrocinie adjudged and condemned Flavianus a most holy and Catholike Bishop for an Hereticke under the censure of that generall Councel Flavianus died nay was martyred m Caesus Flavianus dolore plagarum migravit ad Dominum lib ca. 12. by them The holy Councell at Chalcedon after the death of Flavianus loosed that band wherwith the latrocinious conspirators at Ephesus thought they had fast tyed him but because their key did erre they did not in truth They honored and proclamed Flavianus for a Saint and Martyr n Quae Synodus Chalc. Flaviano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae Edict Valen. Mart. in Chalced. Conc. Act. 4. pa. 86. a. Flavianus injuste quidem in vita condemnatus juste post mortem revocatus est a B. Leone et sancta Synodo Chalcedonensi Iust edict §. Invenimus whom the faction of Dioscorus had murdered for an heretike the holy Councell feared not to loose him because he was dead their power to binde or loose was onely towards those that are upon the earth or living By which example and warrantie of that holy Councell our Church of latter time imitating the religious pietie of those ancient Bishops restored to their pristine o Hist combustionis Bucâ—ri et Fagij et restitutionis eorum dignitie and honor those reverend Martyrs two Flaviani in their age Bucer and Fagius after their death when a worse then that Ephesine conspiracy had not onely with an erring key bound but even burned them to ashes Now it is rightly observed by Iustinian p Si non oporteret anathematizari post mortem eos qui insua impietate mortuisunt oportebat nec eos qui injuste condemnati sunt patres post mortem revocari Lust edict prope finem that if the Church may after their death restore such as being unjustly condemned and falsly supposed to be bound died in their innocency and sincerity of faith it may also by the very same reason condemne and anathematize such after their death who died in their impiety or heresie being charitably perhaps but falsly supposed to have died in the communion of the Catholike Church 18. And truely whether soever of these censures either of binding or loosing the Church useth towards the dead as they both are warranted by the words of Christ and judgement of the Church so in doing either of both they performe an acceptable service to God and an holy duty to the Church of God For as wee professe in our Creed to beleeve the Communion of Saints which in part consisteth in loving praising and imitating all such as we know either now to live or heretofore to have dyed in the faith or for the faith of Christ so doe wee by the same Article of our Creed renounce all communion with whatsoever heretickes either dead or alive and therefore though in their life time they had never beene condemned for such but honored as the servants of God under whose livery they hide their heresies and impieties yet so soone as ever they shall bee manifested to have beene indeed and to have died heretikes we ought forthwith to forsake all communion with them not love them nor speake well of them much lesse imitate them but as Saint Austen saith he would doe of Caecilianus even after their death corde carne anathematizare not making them accursed For that the Church cannot do and themselves have done that already but declaring them to be accursed in truth excluded from the society of God Gods Church and to be such though dead as with whom we can have no more coÌ„munion then hath light with darknesse faith with heresie God and Beliall nay we should wish that if it were possible there might be such an antipathie and disunion betwixt us and them as is said to have been betwixt Eteocles q Impositis eorum cadaveribus eidem rogo flammam se divisisse traditur vid. Stat. in Theb. and Polinices that even our dead bones and ashes might leape from theirs nor sleepe in one Church nor one earth with them from whom one day they shall be eternally severed by a wall of immortality and immortall glory 19. Vigilius his second reason is taken from the rules decrees and Constitutions r Idem regulariter Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Vigil loc citat nu 179. of their Apostolicke See by name of Pope Leo Gelasius both whoÌ„ Vigilius saith to have defined this that a dead man might not noviter be condemned was it not enough for Vigilius that himselfe was hereticall herein unlesse he drew his predecessors also into the same crime of defending yea defining heresies How much better had it beseemed him to have covered such hereticall blemishes of their Apostolike See and of so famous Bishops as Leo and Gelasius were it not with a lappe of his robe as the good Emperour would yet at least with silence and oblivion 20. And yet for all this if Vigilius and the defenders of his infallibility will give me leave I am for my owne part willing to thinke better and more favourably of Leo and Gelasius in this matter specially of Leo whose authority when some defenders of the three Chapters objected Å¿ Praemisislis dicentes doctrina vestrae reverendae sedis est per B. Leonem successoresque ejus mortuum ab hominibus damnari nullatenus opertere Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. In his to Pope Pelagius as according with them Pelagius replyed not onely that hee could no where remember any such thing in the bookes of Leo but that Leo indeed taught the quite contrary as consenting t Quis nescit quod ejusdem Leonis B. Augustini praedicatio contradicat ibid wholly with Saint Austen who professed that he would anathematize Caecilianus after his death if it could appeare that he were guilty of those crimes Which testimony of Pelagius as it fully cleareth Leo of this heresie so doth it manifest how unjustly Vigilius pretendeth his consent with him in this cause yea and the words of Leo which hee citeth doe declare no lesse In that Epistle u Leo Epist 91. Leo intreating of those who by the just censure of the Church were excommunicated or who did not performe the acts required in repentance saith If any of them die before hee obtaine remission quod manens in corpore non receperit consequi exutus carne non poterit hee cannot obtaine that to wit remission of his fault being dead which before his death he had not received And upon these follow the words cited by Vigilius Neither is it needfull that we shold sift the merits or acts of them qui sic obierunt who so die seeing our Lord hath reserved to his justice what
assent to their Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions and doctrines maintained by the present Romane Church but co nomine even for that very cause they are convicted condemned and accursed heretikes For the manifesting of which conclusion I will begin with that their fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith whereof before I have so often made mention And to prove the present Romane Church to bee hereticall herein two things are to be declared the one that this is indeed the position or doctrine of their Church the other that this doctrine is hereticall and for such condemned by the Catholike Church 7. For the former that the assertion of Popes infallibility in defining causes of faith is the doctrine of the present Romane Church I thinke none conversant in their writings will make doubt Give mee leave to propose some testimonies of their owne The Pope saith Bellarmine g Lib. 4. de pont ca. 3. §. Sic. when hee teacheth the whole Church those things which belong to faith nullo casu errare potest hee can by no possible meanes then erre And this as he saith is certissimum a most certaine truth and in the end hee addeth this is a signe Ecclesiam totam sentire that the whole Church doth beleeve the Pope to be in such causes infallible So he testifying this to be the judgement and doctrine of their whole Church The Iesuite Coster for himselfe and their whole Church saith We h Ench. tit de summo pont §. Fatemur doe constantly deny the Popes vel haeresim docere posse vel errorem proponere to be able either to teach an heresie or to propose an errour to be beleeved When the Pope saith Bozius i Th. Boz lib 18. de Sig. Eccl. ca. 6. §. Sequitur teacheth the Church or sets forth a decree of faith Divinitùs illi praeclusa est omnis via God then stoppeth every way unto him which might bring him into errour Againe k Idem lib. 16. ca. 8. §. Rursus in making such decrees nunquam valuit aut valebit facere contra fidem he never was he never shall be able to doe ought against the faith We beleeve saith Gretzer l Def. ca. 3. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. §. Terius the judgement of him who succeeds Peter in the Chaire non secus ac olim Petri infallibile to be no otherwise infallible then the judgement of Peter was And the m Idem def ca. 28. lib. 1. de pontif §. Quocirca gates of hell shall never be able to drive Peters successours ut errorem quempiam ex cathedra definiant that they shall define any errour out of the Chaire This is saith Stapleton n Relect. Cont. 3. qu. 4. §. Circa a certaine and received truth among Catholikes That the Pope when he decreeth ought out of his pontificall office hath never yet taught any hereticall doctrine nec tradere potest nor can he deliver any error yea if it bee a judgement o Rel. Conc. 6. q. 3. Art 5. §. Respondeo of faith it is not onely false but hereticall to say that the Pope can erre therein They saith Canus p Loc. Theol. lib. 6. ca. 7. §. Quid. who reject the Popes judgement in a cause of faith are heretickes To this accordeth Bellarmine q Lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 8. §. Excutimus It is lawfull to hold either part in a doubtfull matter without note of heresie before the Popes definition be given but after the Popes sentence he who then dissenteth from him is an hereticke To these may be added as Bellarmine testifieth r Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 2. § Quarto St. Thomas Thomas Waldensis Cardinall Turrecremata Cardinall Cajetane Cardinall Hosius Driedo Eccius Iohannes a Lovanio and Peter Soto all these teach it to be impossible that the Pope should define any hereticall doctrine And after them all the saying of Gregory de Valentia is most remarkable to this purpose It now appeareth saith he ſ In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1 part 30. that Saint Thomas did truly and orthodoxally teach that the proposall or explication of our Creed that is of those things which are to be beleeved doth belong unto the Pope which truth containes so clearely the summe and chiefe point of Catholike religion ut nemo Catholicus esse possit qui illam non amplectatur that none can be a Catholike unlesse hee hold and embrace this So he professing that none are to be held with them for Catholikes but such as maintaine the Popes infallibilitie in proposing or defining causes of faith 8. They have yet another more plausible manner of teaching the Popes Infallibilitie in such causes and that is by commending the judgement of the Church and of generall Councels to be infallible All Catholikes saith Bellarmine t Lib 2. de Conc. ca. 2 §. Ac ut doe constantly teach that generall Councels confirmed by the Pope cannot possibly erre in delivering doctrines of faith or good life And this he saith is so certaine that fide catholica tenendum est it is to be embraced by the Catholike faith and so all Catholikes are bound to beleeve it Likewise concerning the Church he thus writeth u Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 14. §. Nostra Nostra sententia est it is our sentence that the Church cannot absolutely erre in proposing things which are to bee beleeved The same is taught by the rest of their present Church Now when they have said all and set it out with great pompe and ostentation of words for the infallibility of the Church and Councell it is all but a meere collusion a very maske under which they cover and convaie the Popes Infallibilitie into the hearts of the simple Try them seriously who list sound the depth of their meaning and it will appeare that when they say The Church is infallible Generall Councels are infallible The Pope is infallible they never meane to make three distinct infallible Iudges in matters of faith but one onely infallible and that one is the Pope 9. This to be their meaning sometimes they will not let to professe When we teach saith Gretzer x Def. ca. 10. lib. 3. de verb. Dei §. Iam. pa. 1450. that the Church is the infallible Iudge in causes of faith per Ecclesiā intelligimus Pontificem Romanum we by the Church doe meane the Pope for the time being or him with a Councell Againe y Ibid. §. An. pd 1451. They object unto us that by the Church we understand the Pope Non abnuo I confesse wee meane so in deed This is plaine dealing by the Church they meane the Pope So Gregorie de Valentia z In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. By the name of the Church we understand the head of Church that is the Pope So Bozius a Lib. 2. de sig eccl ca. 21. §. His. lib.
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌ„s of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ„ fundamentuÌ„ summaÌ„ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâ—siam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ„ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ„ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ— Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌ„dent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ„ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri â—ij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ„ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
professe truly we envy not so apt a name unto them Onely the Cardinal shews himself a very unskilful Herald in the blazony of this coat the descēt of this title unto them He fetcheth f Papista deducitur à Papa qualis fuit Petrus Christus ipse ibid. it forsooth frō Pope Clement Pope Peter and Pope Christ Phy it is of no such antiquity nor of so honourable a race Their owne Bristow will assure g Demand ◠him that this name was never heard of till the dayes of Leo the tenth Neither are they so called as the Cardinall fancieth because they hold communion in faith with the Pope which for sixe hundred yeares and more all Christians did and yet were not Papists nor ever so called but because they hold the Popes judgement to be supreme and infallible and so build their faith on him as on the foundation thereof which their owne Church never did till the time of Leo the tenth It is not then the Lion of the Tribe of Iudah but the Lion of that Laterane Synod who is the first God father of that name unto them when hee had once laid the Pope as the foundation of faith in stead of Christ they who then builded their faith upon this new foundation were fitly christened with this name of Papists to distinguish them and their present Romane Church from all others who held the old good and sure foundation 26. You see now the great diuersity which ariseth from the divers manner of holding the same doctrines The errours maintained by all those three sorts of which I have spoken are almost the same and materially they are Popish heresies and yet the first sort did onely erre therein but were not heretikes because not pertinacious The second doe not onely erre but by adding pertinacy to errour are truly heretikes but yet not Papists because they hold those Popish heresies in another manner and on another foundation then Papists doe The third and last sort which containeth all and onely those who are members of the present Romane Church doe both erre and are heretikes and which is the worst degree of heresie are Papists that is Antichristian heretikes not onely holding and that in the highest degree of pertinacy those heresies which are contrary to the faith but holding them upon that foundation which quite overthroweth the faith 27. By this now doth the evidence of that truth appeare which before h Sup. nu 19. I proposed that none who hold the Popes infallibility in causes of faith for their foundation that is none of the present Romane Church either doth or can beleeve any one doctrine of faith which they professe For seeing the beleefe of all other points relyes upō this so that they beleeve thē because they first beleeve this it followeth by that true rule of the Philosopher i Arist lib. 1. demon ca. 2. Propter quod unumquodque illud magis that they doe more firmely and certainly beleeve this which is the foundation than they doe or can beleeve any other doctrine I say not Transubstantiation or Purgatory but more thā that Article of their Creed that Christ is God or that there is a God or any the like which is builded upon this foundatiō And seeing we have cleerly demonstrated that foundation to bee not onely untrue but hereticall and therefore such as cannot be apprehended by faith it being no true object of faith it doth evidently hence ensue that they neither doe nor can beleeve any one doctrine position or point of faith Impossible it is that the roofe should bee more firme than the foundation which supports the roof or the conclusion more certaine unto us than those premisses which cause us to assent and make us certaine of the conclusion That one fundamentall uncertainty contrariety to the faith which is vertually in all the rest breeds the like uncertainty and contrariety to faith in them all and like a Radicall poyson spreads it selfe into the whole body of their religion infecting every arme branch and twigge of their doctrine and faith whatsoever errour or heresie they maintaine and those are not a few those they neither doe nor can beleeve because they are no objects of faith whatsoever truths they maintaine and no doubt they doe many those they thinke they doe and they might doe but indeed they doe not beleeve because they hold them for that reason and upon that foundation which is contrary to faith and which overthroweth the faith For to hold or professe that Christ is God or that there is a God eo nomine because the Devill or Antichrist or a fallible man testifieth it unto us is not truly to beleeve but to overthrow the faith 28. This may be further cleared by returning to our example of Vigilius If because the Pope judicially defineth a doctrine of faith they doe therefore beleeve it then must they beleeve Nestorianisme to be the truth and Christ not to bee God because Pope Vigilius by his judiciall and Apostolicall sentence hath decreed this in decreeing that the three Chapters are to be defēded If they beleeve not this then can they beleeve nothing at all eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and then the foundation of their faith being abolished their whole faith together with it must needs be abolished also Againe if because the Pope defineth a doctrine they doe therefore beleeve it then seeing Pope Caelestine with the Ephesine and Pope Leo with the Chalcedon Councell decreed Nestorianisme to be heresie they by the strength of their fundamental positiō of the Popes infallibility must at one and the same time beleeve both Nestorianisme to be truth as Pope Vigilius defined and Nestorianisme to be heresie as Pope Caelestine and Leo defined and so they must either beleeve two contradictories to be both true yea to bee truths of the Catholike faith which to beleeve is impossible or else they must beleeve that it is impossible to beleeve either the one or the other eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and so beleeve it to bee impossible to beleeve that which is the foundation of their whole faith Neither is this true onely in other points but even in this very foundation it selfe for the fift Councell which decreed the Cathedrall and Apostolicall sentence in the cause of the Three Chapters to be hereticall was approved by the decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth If then they beleeve a doctrine to be true because the Pope hath defined it then must they beleeve the Popes Cathedral sentence in a cause of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and so beleeve that upon this fallible and hereticall foundation they can build no doctrine of faith nor hold thereupon any thing with certainty of faith So if the Pope in defining such causes be fallible then for this cause can they have no faith nor beleeve ought with certainty of faith seeing all
relies upon a fallible foundation If the Pope in defining such causes be infallible then also can they have no faith seeing by the infallble decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith may bee hereticall as this of Pope Vigilius by their judgement was So whether the Pope in such causes be fallible or infallible it infallibly followeth upon either that none who builds his faith upon that foundation that is none who are members of their present Romane Church can beleeve or hold with certainty of faith any doctrine whatsoever which he professeth to beleeve 29. Here I cannot chuse but to the unspeakeable comfort of all true beleevers observe a wonderfull difference betwixt us and them arising from that diversitie of the foundation which they and we hold their foundation being not onely uncertaine but hereticall and Antichristian poysoneth all which they build thereon it being vertually in them all makes them all like it selfe uncertaine hereticall and Antichristian and so those very doctrines which in themselves are most certaine and orthodoxall by the uncertainty of that ground upon which and for which they are beleeved are overthrowne with us and all Catholikes it fals out otherwise Though such happen to erre in some one or moe doctrines of faith say in Transubstantiation Purgatory or as Cyprian did in Rebaptization yet seeing they hold those errors because they thinke them to be taught in the Scriptures and Word of God on which alone their faith relyeth most firmely and undoubtedly beleeving whatsoever is taught therein among which things are the contrary doctrines to Transubstantiatiō Purgatory Rebaptization such I say even while they doe thus erre in their Explicite profession doe truly though implicitè by consequent and in radice or fundamento beleeve and that most firmely the quite contrary to those errours which they doe outwardly professe and think they doe but indeed doe not beleeve The vertue and strength of that fundamentall truth which they indeed and truly beleeve overcommeth all their errours which in very deed they doe not though they thinke they doe beleeve whereas in very truth they beleeve the quite contrary And this golden foundation in Christ which such men though erring in some points doe constantly hold shall more prevaile to their salvation than the Hay and Stubble of those errours which ignorantly but not pertinaciously they build thereon can prevaile to their destruction and therefore if such a man happen to die without explicite notice and repentance of those errours in particular as the saying of Saint Austen k Lib. 1. de baptism ca. 18. that what faults Saint Cyprian had contracted by humane imbecillity the same by his glorious Martyrdome was washed away perswades mee that Cyprian did and as of Irene Nepos Iustine Martyr and others who held the errour of the Chiliasts I thinke none makes doubt it is not to be doubted but the abundance of this mans faith and love unto Christ to whom in the foundation hee most firmely adhereth shall worke the like effect in him as did the blood of martyrdome in Saint Cypran For the baptisme of martyrdome washeth away sinne not because it is a washing in blood but because it testifieth the inward washing of his heart by faith and by the purging Spirit of God This inward washing in whomsoever it is found and found it is in all who truly beleeve though in some point of faith they erre it is as forcible and effectuall to save Valentinian l Ablutus ascendit quē sua fides lavit Amb. Orat. de obitu Valent. neither baptized with water nor with blood and Nepos m Qui jam ad quietem processit ait Dionys apud Euseb l. 1. ca. 23. baptized with water but not with blood as to save Cyprian baptized both with water and with blood Such a comfort and happinesse it is to hold the right and true foundation of faith 30. The quite contrary is to be seen in them Though they explicitè professe Christ to be God which is a most orthodoxall truth yet because they hold this as all other points upon that foundation of the Popes infallible judgement in causes of faith and in that foundation this is denyed Pope Vigilius by his Cathedrall Constitution defining Nestorianisme to be truth and so Christ not to be God it must needs be confessed that even while they doe explicitè professe Christ to bee God they doe implicitè in radice and in fundamento deny Christ to be God and because by the Philosophers rule they doe more firmely beleeve that foundation than they doe or can beleeve any doctrine depending thereon it must needs ensue hence that they doe and must by their doctrine more firmely beleeve the Negative that Christ is not God which in the foundation is decreed then they doe or can beleeve the Affirmative that Christ is God which upon that foundation is builded The truth which upon that foundation they doe explicitè professe cannot possibly be so strong to salvation as the errour of the foundation upon which they build it will be to destruction For the fundamentall errour is never amended by any truth superedified and laid thereon no more than the rotten foundation of an house is made sound by laying upon it rafters of gold or silver but all the truths that are superedified are ruinated by that fundamentall errour and uncertainty on which they all relye even as the beames and rafters of gold are ruinated by that rottennesse and unsoundnesse which resteth in the foundation Or if they say that both the assertions which are directly contradictory are from that foundation deduced Caelestine and Leo decreeing the one that Christ is God as Vigilius decreed the other that Christ is not God then doth it inevitably follow that they can truly beleeve neither the one nor the other seeing by beleeving that foundation they must equally beleeve them both which is impossible Such an unhappy and wretched thing it is to hold that erroneous hereticall and Antichristian foundation of faith 31. My conclusion of this point is this Seeing we have first declared that all who are members of the present Romane Church doe hold the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith yea hold it as the very foundation on which all their other doctrines faith and religion doth relye and seeing wee have next demonstrated this to be a fundamentall heresie and not onely an hereticall but an Antichristian foundation condemned by Scriptures by generall Councels by ancient Fathers and by the consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church that now hence followeth which I proposed n Sup. nu 6. to prove that none is or can bee a member of their present Church but the same is convicted and condemned for an heretike by Scriptures generall Councels Fathers and by the uniforme consent of the Catholike Church An heretike first in the very foundation of his faith which
teach what wee affirme whatsoever any manor Councell saith or can say to the contrarie The like must be said of Pope Vigilius in this cause Had he so professed to hold the Councell of Chalcedon as that upon manifestion that the Three Chapters were condemned by it he would have forsaken the defence of them then certainely his defending of these 3. Chapters had not bin pertinacious nor should have made him an hereticke but his profession to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon notwithstanding his error about the 3. Chapters should have made him a catholike But seeing Vig. persisted to defend the 3. Chapt. though it was made evidēt unto him by the Synodall judgement of the fift Councell that the definition of saith decreed at Chalcedon condemned them all he by this persisting in heresie did demonstrate to all that he professed to hold the Councell at Chalcedon no otherwise then with a pertinacious resolution not to forsake the defence of those Three hereticall Chapters although the whole Church of God should manifest unto him that the Councell of Chalcedon condemned the same and for this cause his defending of those three Chapters with this pertinacie and wilfull resolution declareth him to bee indeed an hereticke notwithstanding his profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon and faith thereof whereby all those Chapters are condemned which profession being joyned with the former pertinacie could not now either make or declare him to be a Catholike 18. The very same must bee said of the present Romane Church and members thereof Did they in such sort professe to hold the fift Councel and faith thereof as that upon manifestation that this Councell beleeved taught and decreed that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is fallible and de facto hath beene hereticall they would condemne that their fundamentall heresie of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie decreed in their Laterane and Trent assemblies then should they much rather for their profession of the fift Councell and faith thereof bee orthodoxall then for professing together with this the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie bee hereticall But seeing they know by the very Acts and judiciall sentence of that fift Councell by which the Cathedrall Constitution of Vigilius is condemned and accursed for hereticall in this cause of faith touching the Three Chapters that the fift Councell beleeved this and decreed under the censure of an Anathema that all others should beleeve it and that all who beleeve the contrary are heretikes seeing I say notwithstanding this manifestation of the faith of that Councell they persist to defend the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in those causes yea defend it as the very foundation of their faith this makes it evident to all that they do no otherwise professe to hold this fift Councell or the other whether precedent or following for they all are consonant to this but with this pertinacious resolution not to forsake that their fundamentall heresie and therefore their expresse profession of this fift and other generall Councels yea of the Scriptures themselves cannot be so effectuall to make them Catholikes as the profession of the Popes infallibility which is joyned with this pertinacy is to make and demonstrate them to be heretikes 19. There is yet a further point to be observed touching the pertinacy of Vigilius For one may be and often is pertinacious in his errour not onely after but even before conviction or manifestation of the truth made unto him and this happeneth whensoever hee is not paratus corrigi prepared or ready to be informed of the truth and corrected thereby or when he doth nor or will not tanta solicitudine quaerere veritatem with care and diligence seeke to know the truth as after S. Austen m Epist 162. and out of him Occham n Lib. 4. part 1. ca. 2. Gerson o Cons 12. de pertinacia part 1. pa. 430. Navar p Ench. ca. 11. nu 22. Alphonsus à Castro q Lib. 1. de justa punit haeret ca. 7 and many others doe truly teach See now I pray you how farre Vigilius was from this care of seeking and preparation to embrace the truth He by his Apostolicall authoritie decreed r Const Vigil apud Bar. an 553. nu 208. that none should either write or speake or teach ought contrary to his Constitution or if they did that his decree should stand for a condemnation and refutation of whatsoever they should either write or speake Here was a tricke of Papall that is of the most supreme pertinacy that can bee devised He takes order before hand that none shall ever I say not convict him but so much as manifest the truth unto him or open his mouth or write a syllable for the manifestation thereof and so being not prepared to bee corrected no nor informed neither hee was pertinacious and is justly to bee so accounted before ever either Bishop or Councell manifested the truth unto him Even as he is farre more wilfully and obstinately delighted in darknesse who dammes up all the windowes chinkes and passages whereby any light might enter into the house wherein hee is than hee who lyeth asleepe and is willing to be awaked when the light shineth about him So was it with Pope Vigilius at this time his tying of al mens tongues and hands that they should not manifest by word or writing the truth unto him his damming up of the light that never any glimpse of the truth might shine unto him argues a mind most damnably pertinacious in errour and so far from being prepared and ready to embrace the truth that it is obdurate against the same and will not permit it so much as to come neere unto him 20. The very like pertinacy is at this day in the Romane Church and all the members thereof for having once set downe this transcendent principle the foundation of all which they beleeve that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is infallible they doe by this exclude and utterly shut out all manifestation of the truth that can possibly bee made unto them Oppose whatsoever you will against their errour Scriptures Fathers Councels reason and sense it selfe it is all refuted before it be proposed seeing the Pope who is infallible saith the contrary to that which you would prove you in disputing from those places doe either mis-cite them or mis-interpret the Scriptures Fathers and Councels or your reason from them is sophisticall and your sense of sight of touching of tasting is deceived some one defect or other there is in your opposition but an errour in that which they hold there is nay there can be none because the Pope teacheth that and the Pope in his teaching is infallible Here is a charme which causeth one to heare with a deafe eare whatsoever is opposed the very head of Medusa if you come against it it stunnes you at the first and turnes both your reason your sense and your selfe also into a very stone By
that curse of the generall Councel The second that both Facundus Baronius do quite mistake the matter in carping at the Emperour as if by his Edict or in condemning those Three Chapters he had taught or published some new doctrine of faith he did not He taught and commanded all others to embrace that true ancient and Apostolicall faith which was decreed and explaned at Chalcedon as both the whole fift Councell witnesseth which sheweth that all those Chapters were implicitè but yet truly and indeed condemned in the definition of faith made at Chalcedon and Pope Gregorie also testifieth the same saying of this fift Councell that it was in omnibus sequax in every point a follower of the Councell at Chalcedon This the religious Emperour wisely discerning did by his imperiall edict and authoritie as Constantine and Theodosius had done before him ratifie that old and Catholike faith which the Nestorians by defending those Chapters craftily undermined at that time The third speciall point which I observe is that which Baronius noteth as the cause why Pope Vigil was so eager against the Emperor and his edict And what thinke you was it Forsooth because Iustinian primus m An. 553. nu 237. legem sancivit was the first who made a law and published a Decree for condemning of those three Chapters Had the Pope first done this and Iustinian seconded his holinesse therein hee had beene another Constantine a second Theodosius the dearest child of the Church But for Princes to presume to teach the Pope or make any lawes concerning the faith before they consult with the Romane Apollo or make him acquainted therewith that 's n Vel si rectum fuisset recte non fieret quia nulli Regum hinc aliquid agere sed solis est sacerdotibus datum Facund Bar. an 547. nu 35. Imperator est fidem coram sacerdotibus profiteri non eandem praescribere sacerdotibus Bar. ibid. piaculum a capitall a◠irremissible sinne the Pope may not endure it So then is was neither zeale not pietie nor love to the truth but meere stomacke and pride in Vigilius to oppose himselfe to the Emperours edict and make an insurrection against him A sory reason God wot for any wise man in the world much more for the Pope to contradict the truth and oppugne the Catholike faith Now if Iustinian for doing this which was an act of prudence and pietie tending wholy to the good and peace of the Church if hee could not escape so undutifull usage at the Pope his orators in those better times religious Kings may not thinke it strange to finde the like or far worse entertainment at the Popes of these dayes and their instruments men so exact and eloquent in reviling that in all such base and uncivill usage they goe as farre beyond Facundus Tertullus and them of former ages as drosse or the most abject mettle is inferiour to refined gold This is the first Period and first judgement of Vigilius touching this cause of the three Chapters in defence of which and oppugning of the Emperours edict hee continued more then a yeare after the publishing of the Edict even all that time while hee remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperour 6. As soone almost as Vigilius was come to Constantinople and had saluted the Emperor and conferred with them who stood for the Edict he was quite another man he changed cum caelo animum the aire of the Emperors Court altered the Popes judgement and this was about a yeare after o Edictū editū fuit anno 546. Bar. eo anno nu 8. Constantinopolin ingressus est an 547. propediē Natalis Domini Bar. an illo nu 26. the publishing of the Edict Now that all things might be done with more solemnitie and advise there was a Synod p Bar. an eod nu 31. 32. held shortly after his comming at Constantinople wherein Vigilius with thirty Bishops condemned the Three Chapters and consented to the Emperors Edict This Facundus expresly witnesseth saying q Ibid. nu 37. How shall not this bee a prejudice to the cause if it bee demonstrated that Pope Vigilius with thirty Bishops or therabouts have condemned the Epistle of Ibas approved by the Councell of Chalcedon and anathematized that Bishop Theodorus of Mopsvestia with his doctrines the praises whereof are set downe in that Councell Thus Facundus Besides all this Vigilius was now so forward in this cause that as before he had written bookes against the Edict in defence of the three Chapters and excommunicated those who condemned those Chapters so now on the Emperors side he writ bookes and gave judgement for the condemning of those Chapters and excommunicated some by name Rusticus and Sebastianus two Romane Deacons because they would not condemne them None can deny saith Baronius d An. 547. nu 40. that Vigilius writ a booke against the three chapters and sent it unto Mennas Bishop of Constantinople Again there e Ibid. is certaine proofe latae ab eo sententiae of the sentence of excommunication pronounced by Vigilius against Rusticus Sebastianus and other defenders of those chapters and this is so cleare ut nulla dubitatio esse possit that there can be no doubt at all but that Vigilius approved by a Constitution the Emperors sentence and condemned the three Chapters So Baronius The Epistles of Vigilius doe testifie the same In that f Extat in Coll. 7. Conc. 5. pa. 578. to Rusticus and Sebastianus he very often makes mention Iudicati nostri Constituti nostri of our judgement of our constitution against the three chapters concerning which he addeth g Ibid. pa. 580. that it was ratified by his Apostolicall authority saying that no man may doe contra constitutum nostrum quod ex beati Petri authoritate proferimus against this our Constitution which we set forth by the authority of Saint Peter The like hee testifieth in his Epistle h Ibid. to Valentinianus We beleeve saith he that those things may suffice the children of the Church which we writ to Mennas concerning the blasphemies of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and his person concerning the Epistle of Ibas and the writings of Theodoret against the right faith Thus Vigilius consenting now with the Emperor defending his Imperiall Edict and condemning the three Chapters in all which his profession was Catholike and orthodoxall 7. When Vigilius was thus turned an Imperialist and in regard of his outward profession declared in his Constitution become orthodoxall though as it seemeth he remained in heart hereticall hee fell into so great dislike of those who defended the three Chapters that they i Bar. an 547. nu 49. did proclamare proclame him to be a colluder a prevaricator or betrayer of the faith one who to please the Emperour revolted from his former judgement yea the Africane k In Chron. an 10. post Coss Basilij Bishops proceeded so farre against him that as Victor
the Popes supposed infallibility when hee sits in his Chaire and with his Romane Synod determineth out of it questions and defineth Articles of faith This is indeed to let Rome bleed in her Master-veine to strike heresie at the roote to crush the Cockatrice in the head not to batter and breake downe the mudd-wals but utterly to ruinate the very foundation of the Tower of Babell For howsoever Scriptures Fathers Councels and the Catholike Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are pompously brought in into their Polemike writings against us yet the last resolution of their faith is upon the Pope who gives credit to Fathers validity to Councels and authority at least quoad nos to the Scriptures themselves This their Champion Bellarmine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Skulkenius his second confidently undertakes to maintaine against all oppugners of the Popes transcendent power and uncontroulable verdict in a matters of eternall life and death The h Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. ca. 1 in disputatione de verbo Dei Iam ostendimus iudicem controtroversiarum noÌ„ esse scripturam nec seculares Principes c. ac proinde ultimum iudicium summi Pontificis esse Cardinall thus flourisheth In our disputations about the word of God we have already shewed that the Scripture is not the Iudge of Controversies nor are secular Princes nor private persons though learned and honest but Ecclesiasticall Prelates in our disputations of the Councels it shall bee demonstrated that Councels generall and particular may judge of Controversies in religion but that judgement of theirs is then of force and validity when the Pope shall confirme it and therfore that the last judgement of all is the Popes to which all good Catholikes owe such absolute obedience that i Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. ca. 5 in fine Si Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia vel prohibendo virtutes teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona et virtutes malas nisi vellet contra conscientium peccarâ— if the Pope should erre by commanding vices and prohibiting vertues the Church is bound to beleeve that vices are good and vertues bad unlesse she wil sinne against Conscience What sinne against Conscience in not sinning and not sinne against Conscience in committing sinnes knowne by the light of nature if the Man of sin command the one and forbid the other Woe bee to them saith the Prophet that call evill good and good evill put darknesse for light and light for darknesse bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter Esay 5.20 If Bellarmines divinity be currant Pope Pâ—â—â— the fourth needed not to have coyned twelve new Articles k Bulla Pij 4. super forma juramenti professionis fidei anno Dom. 1564. of faith affixt to the Canons of the Councell of Trent it had beene sufficient to have added this one I beleeve in the Pope his soveraigne infallibility for this is prora and puppis the Alpha and Omega the formalis ratio and demonstratio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a Papists beliefe The Popes power saith Skulkenius l SkulkeÌ„ Apolog. pro Bell. ca. 6. Pontisicia potestas est vel ut cardo fundameÌ„tuÌ„ et ut uno verbo dicam suma fidei Christianae is the hinge and foundation and to speake in a word the summe of Christian faith A short summe and soone cast up What then serves Fathers Councels church-Church-Traditions and Scripture it selfe for with them for little better than Ciphers which being added to the Popes authority in their Arithmetike makes something but without it nothing To begin with Scriptures they beleeve them to bee divine but not because the Scripture saith that all Scripture m 2 Tim. 3.16 is given by divine inspiration For so saith n Bell. de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 4. ca. 4. Etiamsi scriptura dicat libros Prophetarum et Apostolorum esse divinos tamen non certo id cream nisi prius credidero scripturam qua hoc dicit esse divinam nam etiam in Alchorano Mahometi passim legimus ipsum Alchoranum de Caelo à Deo missuÌ„ c Bellarmine wee read every where in the Alcoran of Mahomet that the Alcoran was sent from God yet we beleeve it not why then doe they beleeve them to bee the word of God hee answers readily propter traditionem Ecclesiae for the Churches tradition o Quicunque non innititur doctrinae Romanae Ecclesiae ac Romani Pontificis tanquaÌ„ regulae fidei infallibili à quâ etiam sacra Scriptura robur trahit et authoritateÌ„ haereticus est coÌ„tra LutheruÌ„ Silvester Pierius outvies the Cardinall affirming that the holy Scripture taketh force and authority from the Romane Church and Pope Vpon which promise of Pierius Gretzer p Gretz defens Bell. lib. 1. de verbo Dei id selum pro verbo Dei veneramur ac suscipimus quod nobis Pontifices ex Cathedra Petri traduÌ„t inferres this peremptory conclusion We doe receive and reverence that alone for the word of God which the Pope in Peters Chaire doth determine to be so Strange divinity to beleeve that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church that is that God receives this authority from man May we not justly upbraid the present Romanists as Tertullian q Tertul. Apol. adversus gentes Ca. 5. doth the ancient heathen apud vos de humano arbitratu divinitas pensitatur nisi homini Deus placuerit Deus non erit Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit With you Deity is estimated by mans valuation unlesse God please man he shall not be God now man must bee propitious to God for if the Pope be not propitious to the Scripture to allow it for Gods word it shall not passe for such in Rome As for the Fathers they deale with their writings as Faustus Manicheus did with the writings of the Apostles in r August lib. 11. contra Faustum Manicheum ca. 2. inde probo inquiebat Faustus hoc illius esse illud non esse quia hoc pro me sonat illud contra me which hee takes it for a good proofe that such passages are the Apostles true writings because they made for him others were spurious because they made against him Fathers saith Å¿ Dureus adversus Whitakerum fol. 140. Neque eniâ— patres censentur cum suum aliquid quod ab ecclesia non acceperunt velscribunt vel dicunt Dureus are not to bee accounted Fathers when they teach or write any thing of their owne which they have not received from the Church meaning the Romane and Gretzer t Gretz lib. 2. de iure more prohibendi libres noxios ca. 10. Nam Ecclesiae pater ille dicitur qui Ecclesiam salutari doctrinae pabulo alit et pascit iam ergo si pro salutari doctrinae pabulo admetiaur Lelium et Zizania non Pater est sed Vitricus backs this assertion with a reason drawn from the formall
all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximā adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were cōfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
personis tantummodo non autem de fide aliquid est gestum In it was onely handled somewhat concerning those persons but nothing concerning the faith So Gregory whose words if they be taken without any limitation are not onely untrue but repugnant to the consenting judgement of Councels and Fathers above mentioned even to Gregory himselfe for speaking of all the five Councels held before his time he saith r Lib. 1. Epist 24. Whosoever embraceth praedictarum Synodorum fidem the faith explaned by those five Councels peace be unto them And if hee had not in such particular manner testified this yet seeing hee approveth as was before ſ Ca. 4. nu 27. shewed this fift Councel and the Decree therof seeing that Decree clearly expresseth this to have beene a cause of faith grounded on Scriptures and the definitions of faith set downe in former Councels even thereby doth Gregory certainly imply that he accounted this cause for no other than as the Synod it selfe did for a cause of faith 17. What then is Gregory repugnant to himselfe herein I list not to censure so of him rather by his owne words I desire to explane his meaning There were divers in his time as also in his Predecessor's Pelagius who condemned this fift Councell because as they supposed it had altered and abolished the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon by condemning these Three Chapters and had established a new doctrine of faith Gregorie intreating against these whom he truly calleth t Exeuntes maligni homines turbaverunt animos vestros Lib. 2. Epist 10. malignant persons and troublers of the Church denieth and that most justly that this Councell had done ought in the faith not simply as if they had done nothing at all but nothing in such a manner as those malignant persons intended nothing that was contrary to the faith decreed at Chalcedon nothing that was new or uncouth in the doctrine of faith in this manner the Councell did nothing in the faith Heare the words of Gregorie expressing thus much Some there are saith hee u Lib. 3. Epist 3. who affirme that in the time of Iulian there was somewhat decreed against the Councell at Chalcedon But such men neither reading neither beleeving those who read remaine in their errour for we professe our conscience bearing witnesse unto us de fide ejusdem Concilij nihil esse motum nihil violatum that nothing concerning the faith of that Councell at Chalcedon was here in the fift Councell moved or altered nothing violated or hurt but whatsoever was done in this fift Synod it was done that the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon should in no sort be infringed So Gregory who to like purpose againe saith x Lib. 2. Ind. 10. Epist 36. In the Synod concerning the Three Chapters it is manifest nihil de fide convulsum esse nihil immutatū that nothing concerning the faith was weakned nothing changed therein 18. Now as against their first calumnie Gregory teacheth that nothing was done contrary to the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon so against their other he sheweth that they decreed no noveltie in the faith nor ought else but what was formerly decreed at Chalcedon To which purpose he saith y Lib. 7. Epist 54. of this fift Synod that it was in omnibus sequax in every point an imitator follower of the Councell at Chalcedō again z Lib. 2. Ind. 11. Epist 10. more clearly In this fift Synod nothing else was done quā apud Chalcedonēsem Synodū fuerat constitutū then was formerly decreed in the Councel at Chalcedon So Gregory Both this fift that at Chalcedon as also the former at Ephesus decreed one and the selfe same faith as by Gregory is truly witnessed but the Councell at Chalcedon and Ephesus decreed it absolutely without any expresse reference to those persons or writings which are condemned in the fift though in them both was implicitè contained a condemnation of all these Three Chapters the fift Councell decreed it with an expresse reference to these Chapters and an explicite condemnation of them The Decrees made at Ephesus and Chalcedon were Introductive as first condemning those heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches The Decree of this fift Councell was onely Corroborative or Declarative explaning and corroborating those former decrees by condemning these writings of Theodorus Theodoret and Ibas which did overthrow the same As Vigilius and other followers of Nestorius did not at this time broach any new heresie but under those Three Chapters on which they put the visor of the Councell at Chalcedon sought to revive the heresie of Nestorius which before when it came in its owne habit was condemned Even so the fift Councell needed not neither did they condemne any new but unmasked the old condemned heresie of Nestorius lurking under the defence of these Three Chapters they pulled off the visor of Chalcedon from it under which it most subtilly now sought to insinuate it selfe and creep into the Church And when Gregory saith that in this fift Councell they dealt tantummodo de personis that tantummodo in his sense doth not exclude all handling of the faith not the explaning not the corroborating of the faith for both these they certainly did and Gregory acknowledgeth but it onely excludes such an handling of the faith as was used ar Ephesus and Chalcedon by making an Introductive decree for condemning some new heresie The fift Councell dealt onely with persons without making such a Decree yet it dealt with those persons with an intent to explane and corroborate those Introductive decrees 19. The words of Gregory next following those on which Baronius relied doe yet more fully explane this to have beene his meaning In the fift Synod nothing was done concerning the faith but only the persons and those persons de quibus in Chalcedonensi Synodo nihil continetur concerning which persons nothing is contained or set downe in the Councell at Chalcedon For as there is much contained in that Councell concerning those persons especially Ibas in whose cause and the examining therof two a Act. 9. 10. whole Actions are bestowed and yet in a favourable construction or according to Gregory his meaning he might truly say that nothing concerning them is contained there to wit nothing to condemne Theodorus or the writings of Theodoret and Ibas in such an expresse and particular manner as they are condemned in the fift Councell Right so though the fift Councell not onely handled a cause of faith but published their decree as a Decree of faith yet in a like favourable construction and according to Gregories meaning he might truly say that nothing was done therein concerning the faith to wit nothing to make such an Introductive decree for condemning a new heresie as was formerly made in the Councell at Chalcedon 20. By all which the true meaning of Gregory is now by his owne explaning most evident In the fift Councell nothing
sec Act. 4. be exceeding partiall and untrue where he saith that Theodorus and Diodorus in pretio habiti mortem oppetiere died in honour neither did c Viva quidem ipsis cur nemo contradixerat factum ideo c. Ibid. any while they lived reprove any of their sayings yet are there divers other inducements to perswade that Theodorus was not in his life time by any publike judgement of the Church either declared or condemned for an heretike for besides that neither Cyrill nor Proclus nor the fift generall Councell doe mention any such matter the words of Cyrill doe plainly import the contrary The Ephesine Synod saith d Cyril epist ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 550 551. he forbare in particular and by name to anathematize Theorus which they did dispensativè by a certaine dispensation indulgence or connivence because divers held him in great estimatioÌ„ or account what needed either any such dispensation or forbearance had he in his life time beene publikely condemned for heresie Againe the Church of Mopsvestia where hee was Bishop for divers yeares after his death retained his name in e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. seq in act Synod Mopsv Diplicis that is in their Ecclesiasticall tables making a thankfull commemoration of him as of other Catholikes in their Liturgie which had he beene in his life time condemned for an heretike they would not have done Lastly what needed the defenders of the Three Chapters have beene so scrupulous to condemne him being dead had he in his life time beene before condemned Or how could this have given occasion of this controversie whether a dead man might Noviter be condemned if Theodorus had not beene noviter condemned when he was dead 3. Wherefore this particular being agreed upon that Theodorus was not before but after his death condemned the whole doubt now resteth in the Thesis whether a dead man may Noviter be coÌ„demned Now that this is no personall but meerly a dogmaticall cause and controversie of faith is so evident that it might be a wonder that Baronius or any other should so much as doubt thereof unlesse the Apostle had foretold that because men f 2 Thess 2.10 11. doe not receive the love of the truth therefore God doth send unto them strong delusions that they may beleeve lyes Certaine it is that Pope Vigilius held this for no other but a doctrine of faith for he sets it downe as a g Perspeximus si quid de his praedecessores nostri decreverint Vig. Const loc citat nu 176. Hujus causa formam veneranda praedecessorum nostrorum constituta nobis apertissime tradiderunt Ibid. Idem regulâ—ria Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Jbid. nu 179. Definition or Constitution of his predecessors decreed by the Apostolike See particularly by Pope Leo and Gelasius and so decreed by them as warranted and taught by the Scriptures for out of those words Whatsoever ye binde or loose upon earth Pope Gelasius h Ibid. nu 177. collecteth and Vigilius consenteth unto him that such as are not upon earth or among the living hos non humano sed suo Deus judicio reservavit God hath exempted them from humane and reserved them to his owne judgement nec audet Ecclesia nor dare the Church challenge to it selfe the judgement of such As the Pope so also the holy generall Councell tooke this for no other than a question of faith for they plainly professe even in their Synodall resolution that their decree concerning dead men that they may bee Noviter condemned is not onely an Ecclesiasticall i Licet cognosceremus Ecclesiasticam de impiis traditionem Coll. 8. pa. 585. a. tradition but an Apostolicall doctrine also warranted by the texts and testimonies of the holy Scriptures To which purpose alledging divers places of Scripture they adde these words It is many wayes manifest that they who affirme this that men after their death may not Noviter be condemned nullam curam Dei judicatorum faciunt nec Apostolicarum pronunciationum nec paternarum traditionum that such have no regard either to the word of God or the Apostles doctrine or the tradition of the Fathers So the whole Councell judging and decreeing Pope Vigilius to be guilty of all these 4. Now when both the Pope on the one side and the whole generall Councell on the other that is both the defenders and condemners of this Chapter professe it to be a doctrine taught in the Scripture and therefore undoubtedly to be a cause of faith what insolency was it in Baronius to contradict them both and against that truth wherein they both agree to deny this Chapter to be a cause of faith or seeing it is cleare both by the Pope and Councell that the resolution of this question is set downe in Scripture what else can bee thought of Baronius denying either the one or the other part to bee a cause or assertion of faith but that with him the doctrines defined and set down in Scriptures are no doctrines or assertions of faith at least not of the Cardinals faith 5. Seeing now this is a cause of faith and in this cause of faith the Pope and generall Councell are at variance either of them challenge the Scripture as consonant to his and repugnant to the opposite assertion what equall and unpartiall umpire may be found to judge in this matter Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit faith their vaine and vaunting k Camp Rut. 3. Braggadochio Hast thou appealed to the Church to the Church and judgement thereof shalt thou goe at the name of which we are so farre from being daunted or appaled that with great confidence and assurance of victory we provoke unto it 6. But where may we heare the voyce and judgement of the Church out of doubt either in the writings of the Fathers or provinciall Synods or in generall Councels in which of these soever the Church speake her sentence is for us and our side Her voyce is but soft stil in the writings of single Fathers the Church whispereth rather then speaketh in them and yet even in them shee speaketh this truth very distinctly and audibly Heare Saint l Epist ad Bonif. quae citatur Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 548. b. Austen who entreating of Caecilianus about an hundreth yeares after his death saith If as yet they could prove him to have beene guilty of those crimes which were by the Donatists objected unto him ipsum jam mortuum anathematizaremus I and all Catholikes would even now accurse him though dead though never condemned before nor in his life time Againe m Aug. lib. 3. Cont. Cresc ca. 35. In this our communion if there have beene any Traditores or deliverers of the Bible to be burned in time of persecution when thou shalt demonstrate or prove them to have beene such corde carne mortuos detestabor Heare Pope n Pelag. 2. Epist 7.
him not to bee indeed such as hee seemed to bee it renounceth all peace and communion with him whether dead or alive nay rather it forsaketh not her communion with him but declareth unto all that shee never had communion or peace with this man such as hee was indeed before though she had peace with such as he seemed to bee Shee now denounceth a double anathema against him condemning him first for beleeving or teaching heresie and then for covering his heresie under the visor of a Catholike and of the Catholike faith So justly and fully doth the Emperour and Councell refute both the personall errour of Vigilius in that hee affirmeth Theodorus to have dyed in the peace of the Church and the doctrinall also in that he affirmeth it upon this ground that in his life time hee was not condemned by the Church 5. Now whereas i Accesserunt dignae causae ac rationes Bar. an 553. nu 233. Baronius saith that Vigilius had just and worthy reasons to defend this first Chapter one of which is this because if this were once admitted that one dying in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned for an heretike pateret ostium there would a gap be opened that every ecclesiasticall writer licet in communione Catholica defunctus esset although hee dyed in the communion of the Catholike Church might after death be out of his writings condemned for an heretike truly hee feareth where no feare is at all This gap nay this gate and broad street of condemning the dead hath laine wide open this sixteen hundred years Can the Cardinall or any of his friends in all these successioÌ„s of ages wherin have dyed many thousand millions of Catholikes can he name or finde but so much as one who hath truly dyed in the peace and communion of the Church and yet hath beene after his death condemned by the Catholike Church for an heretike He cannot The Church should condemne her owne selfe if shee condemned any with whom she had peace and whom she embraceth in her holy communion which is no other but the society with God Such indeed may dye in some errour yea in an errour of faith as Papias Irenee Iustine in that of the millenaries as Cyprian as is likely and other Africane Bishops in that of Rebaptization but either dye heretikes or be after their death condemned by the Catholike Church for heretikes they cannot 6. But there is most just cause why the Cardinall and all his fellowes should feare another matter which more neerely concernes themselves and feare it even upon that Catholike position that the dead out of their writings may justly bee condemned They should feare to have such an itching humour to write in the Popes Cause for his supremacy of authority or infallibility of his Cathedrall judgement feare to stuffe their Volumes as the Cardinall hath done his Annals with heresies and oppositions against the faith feare to continue and persist in their hereticall doctrine feare to die before they have attained to that which is secunda post naufragium tabula the second and onely boord to save them after their shipwracke to dye I say before they revoked disclamed condemned or beene the first men to set fire to their hereticall doctrines and writings and at least in words if not as the k In fine vitae reconciliatio petentibus et poenitentibus non est neganda dum tamen si haeretici sint recipiantur cum scriptura juramento Gloss in dist 1. de poenit ca. Multiplex custome was by oath and handwriting to testifie to the Church their desire to returne unto her bosome These are the things indeed they ought to feare knowing that howsoever they flatter themselves with the vaine name of the Church yet in very truth so long as their writings remaine testifying that they defended the Popes infallibility in defyning causes of faith or any other doctrine relying on that ground whereof in their life time they have not made l Satis est ut Ecclesiae judicio coâ—flet aliquem decessisse impoenitentem si non conflet de illius poenitentiâ qui haereticus post mortemcoÌ„victus est Fran. Torrens lib. de 6 7 8. Synod pa. 13. ejusdem sententiae ait Pigh fuisse a certaine and knowne recantation they neither lived nor dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church but may at any time after their death and ought wheÌ„soever occasioÌ„ is offered be declared by the Church to have dyed in their heresies and therefore dyed both out of the peace of God and of the holy Church of God This unlesse they seriously and sincerely performe it is not I nor any of our writers whom they imagine but most unjustly out of spleene and contention to speake these things who condemne them but it is the whole Catholike Church Shee by approving this fift Councell and the true decree therof condemns this Apostolicall Cathedral definition of Vigilius and all that defend it that is all the members of the present Romane Church to be hereticall and as convicted heretikes she declares them to die anathematized that is utterly separated from God and from the peace and most blessed communion with the Church of God howsoever they boast themselves to be the onely children of the Church of God 7. If any shall here reply or thinke that by the former examples of Papias Irenee Iustine Cyprian and the rest Baronius and other meÌ„bers of the present Romane church may be excused that these also as the former though dying in their error may dye in the peace coÌ„munion of the Church this I confesse is a friendly but no firme excuse for although they are both alike in this that the former as well as the latter dye in an errour of faith yet is there extreme odds and many cleare dissimilitudes betwixt the state or condition of the one and the other 8. The first ariseth from the matter it selfe wherin they erre The former erred in that doctrine of faith wherein the truth was not eliquata declarata solidata per plenarium Concilium as S. Austen m Aug. lib. 2. de bapt ca. 4. speaketh not fully scanned declared confirmed by a plenary Councell Had it bin we may well think the very same of all those holy men which Austen n Ibid. most charitably saith of S. Cyprian Sine dubio universi orbis authoritate patefacta veritate cessissent without doubt they would have yeelded to the truth being manifested unto them by the authority of the whole Church The latter erre in that which to use same Fathers o Aug. lib. eod c. 1. words per universae Ecclesiae statuta firmatum est which hath beene strengthened by the decree of the whole Church This fift Councell consonant to all precedent and confirmed by all subsequent generall Councels unto Leo the tenth decreeing this cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to bee hereticall
e Epist 7. §. Etsi blasphemias has ejus esse quis dubitat who may doubt but that those blasphemies are truly his namely of Theodorus being by so many witnesses declared to be his Now when Pope Vigilius against all these Councells Bishops Emperors Popes of the same of succeeding ages yea against the consenting judgement of the catholike Church shall not onely doubt whether Theodorus be the author of those hereticall and blasphemous assertions and writings but by his Apostolicall Constitution decree it to bee an injury to ascribe those blasphemies unto him or for them to condemne him as the whole Church ever since the Ephesine Councell hath done doth it not argue nay demonstrate an hereticall and most extreme distemper in the Popes judgment and in his cathedrall sentence at that time 34. The other point which Vigilius observeth out of the Ephesine Councel is worse then this for as yet he hath onely found that Theodorus was not de facto condemned by the Ephesine Synode but in the next place he will finde by that Councell that Theodorus de jure ought not to bee condemned To which purpose he saith f Vigilius in Const nu 173. that Cyrill and so the Ephesine Synode consenting to him as President would not have the name of Theodorus contained in the Synodall Acts at Ephesus propter regulam quae de mortuis in sacerdotio servandae est for the rule which is to bee kept in such Bishops as are dead And that rule he explaines in the words following to be this that the dead should not bee condemned nor should the living bend their bow against ashes or insult over the dead whereby Vigilius even by his Apostolicall decree adjudgeth both Cyrill and the whole Ephesine Councell consenting therein with him to have beleeved and held a condemned heresie as an Ecclesiasticall rule or rule of their faith and actions That one who is dead may not bee condemned and so by the Popes Constitution both Cyrill and the holy Ephesine Synode were heretikes Such worthy points doe the Popes finde when they use their art and industry to review ancient writings with a reference to their owne determinations and so easie was it for Vigilius to finde the Ephesine Councell first injurious to the dead and then hereticall in a doctrine or rule concerning the dead 35. The very like he found also in the Councell of Chalcedon that Theodorus ought not to be condemned His reason is this Iohn g Vigil in Const nu 145. Bishop of Antioch writ a letter to the Emperor Theodosius in excuse of Theodorus of Mopsvestia ne post mortem damnari deberet that he ought not to bee condemned after his death Now this letter of Iohn Venerabiliter memoratur is with honour not onely with allowance and liking remembred by the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation or Synodall Epistle to the Emperour Martianus Whence Vigilius collecteth that seeing the Councell with reverence embraceth that letter of Iohn and that letter importeth that Theodorus being dead ought not to be condemned therefore the Councell judgeth that none who are dead and particularly that Theodorus ought not to bee condemned which reason of Vigilius was borrowed from other Nestorians and defenders of the three Chapters as appeareth by Liberatus who explaineth it and sets h Liber ca. 10. it downe almost totidem verbis Iohn saith he writ three letters in the behalfe of Theodorus of Mopsvestia praising in them Theodorus and declaring his wisedome one of those letters he sent to the Emperour Theodosius another to Cyrill the third to Proclus Now the first and third containing the praises of Theodorus the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation to Martianus the Emperour did i Duas Iohannis Epistolas laudes Theodori continentes Chalced. Synod suscepit et confirmavit Jbid. embrace and confirme Thus Liberatus agreeing wholly herein as you see with Vigilius 36. For answer of which reason of Vigilius I will intreat you to spare my labour and heare how fully and soundly Cardinall Baronius doth refute it but yet so that hee will not seeme to taxe or touch Vigilius that had beene great insolency and incivilitie in a Cardinall but he payes the Deacon home to the full who saith but the very same with the Pope Liberatus saith k Bar. an 435. nu 11. hee borrowed this narration of I know not what Nestorian incautè nimis and he affirmes too indiscreetly that the writings of Theodorus were praised in the letters of Iohn Bishop of Antioch and which is farre worse that those letters of Iohn containing the praises of Theodorus were received and confirmed by the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation to Martianus for by that meanes adducit in idem crimen he makes the whole Councell of Chalcedon guilty of the same crime to wit of approving the praises doctrine of Theodorus So Baronius By whō it is cleare that Vigilius saying the same w th Liberatus makes the whole Coūcell of Chalcedon guilty of the same crime that is in plaine termes avoucheth them to be hereticall Videsne saith the l Jbid. Cardinall quot quales lateant colubri sub uno cespite Doe not you see how many and how vile and venemous snakes lye hid under this one turfe or tuft of untruth And that very tuft hath Pope Vigilius chosen to build up and beautifie with it his Apostolicall decree Now if under that one turfe there lurke as indeed there doth and the Cardinall acknowledgeth so great a number of Vipers what infinite and innumerable heapes of most deadly and poisonfull untruths are compacted into the whole body of his Apostolicall Constitution which containeth if one listed narrowly to examine it more than a thousand like turfes nay beyond comparison worse than this 37. But the Cardinall hath not yet done with Liberatus Let us saith m Bar. ibid. et nu 12. hee put the Axe to the roote of the tree and citing the very words of the Councell and their Relation to Martianus he addeth You see that here is no mention at all of Theodorus of Mopsvestia which reason of Baronius Binius n Bin. notis in Liberatum § Breviarium hoc explaneth saying That which Liberatus affirmeth that the Councell of Chalcedon received the praises of Theodorus is not onely untrue sed etiam ipsi relationi Synodicae contraria but it is plainly contrary to the Synodall Relation of the Councell at Chalcedon to which Liberatus referreth himselfe Change but the name and all this is everie whit as forcible against Vigilius as against Liberatus But the Cardinall had well learned the old lesson Dat veniam corvis vexat censura columbas the Pope offends more than any but the poore Deacon must feele the smart and beare all the blowes and yet by your leave through the Deacons sides the Cardinall hath cunningly given a deadly wound and cut the very roote of the Popes Apostolicall decree although he will not bee
in doctrinall as personall matters That Theodorus was dead is personall but that none after death may bee condemned for an heretike is doctrinall yea an heresie in the doctrine of faith That Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church is an errour personall but that Theodorus therefore dyed in the peace of the Church because he was not in his life time condemned by the expresse sentēce of the Church or that any dying in heresie as Theodorus did doe die in the peace of the Church are errours doctrinall That Theodorus was not by the former Fathers and Councels condēned is a personall error but that Theodorus by the judgement of the Fathers Councels ought not after his death to be condemned is doctrinall even a condemning of the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon as guilty of beleeving and teaching an heresie So many wayes is the Popes sentence in this first Chapter erronious in faith of which Baronius most vainely pretendeth that it is no cause of faith no such cause as doth concerne the faith 41. There now remaineth nothing of Vigilius decree concerning this first Chapter but his conclusion of the same And although that must needs of it selfe fall downe when all the reasons on which it relyeth and by which onely it is supported are ruinated or overthrowne yet if you please let us take a short view of it also rather to explane than refute the same His conclusion hath two branches the former is that in regard of the foresaid reasons nostrâ b Vig. Const nu 179 eum non audemus damnare sententia wee dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence wee dare not doe it saith Vigilius 42. Oh how faint-hearted pusillanimous and dastardly was the Pope in this cause Cyrill the c Sanctissimorum Episcoporum hic coactorum caput Cyrillum c. Epist Synod Ephes to 4. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 8. head of the generall Councell Proclus a most d Cyrill epist ad Acat in Con. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543. a. Dominus meus sanctissimus Episcopus Proclus holy Bishop whose Epistle as Liberatus e Lib. ca. 10. saith the Councell of Chalcedon approved Rambulas the piller of the Church the religious Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian the Church of Mopsvestia the Councels of Ephesus of Armenia of Chalcedon the whole Catholike Church ever since the Ephesine Synod both durst and did condemne Theodorus and besides these Baronius and Binius two of the most artificiall Gnathonizing Parasites of the Pope even they durst and did even in setting downe the very Constitution of Vigilius cal f Rursumque haereticus blasphemus c. Bar. an 553. nu 120. et seq et Bin. pa. 595. et seq Theodorus more than forty times an heretike a craftie impious madde prophane blasphemous execrable heretike onely Pope Vigilius hath not the heart nor courage hee onely with his sectators dare not call him nor cōdemne him for an heretike we dare not condemne him by our sentence 43. And yet when Vigilius saw good hee who durst not doe this durst doe a greater matter he durst doe that which not any of all the former nay which they all put together never durst doe Vigilius durst defend both an heresie and a condemned and anathematized heretike he durst commend forged and hereticall writings under the name of holy Fathers hee durst approve that Epistle wherein an heretike is called and honoured for a Saint he durst contrary to the Imperiall and godly Edict of Theodosius contrary to the judgements of the holy generall Councells defend Theodorus honor his memorie yea honor him as a teacher of truth while he lived as a Saint being dead These things none of all the former ever durst doe in these Vigilius is more bold and audacious then they are all 44. Whence thinke you proceeded this contrariety of passions in Vigilius that made him sometimes more bold then a Lyon and other times more timerous then an Hare Truely even from hence As Vigilius had no eyes to see ought but what favored Nestorianisme so hee had not the heart to doe ought which did not uphold Nestorianisme If a Catholike truth met him or the sweet influence thereof hapned to breath upon him Vigilius could not endure it the Popes heart fainted at the smell thereof but when the Nestorian heresie blew upon him when being full with Nestorius he might say agitante calescimus illo not Ajax not Poliphemus so bold nor full of courage as Pope Vigilius As the Scarobee or beetle g Pier. Hierog lib. 55. is said to feed on dung but to dye at the sent of a Rose So the filth of Nestorianisme was meat and drinke to the Pope it was vita vitalis unto him but the fragrant and most odoriferous sent of the catholike truth was poison it was even death to this Beetle So truly was it fulfilled in him which the Prophet saith h Jer. 9.3 they bend their tongues for lyes but they have no courage for the truth we dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence 45. The other branch of the Popes conclusion is Sed i Vig. Const nu 179 nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe wee permit that any other shall condemne Theodorus Nay we decree k Vig. Const nu 208 that none else shall speake write or teach otherwise then we doe herein As much in effect as if the Pope had definitively decreed wee permit or suffer no man whatsoever to teach or beleeve what Cyrill what Proclus what the whole generall Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon that is what all Catholikes and the whole Catholike Church hath done taught and beleeved we permit nay we command and by this our Apostolicall Constitution decree that they shall be heretikes and defend both an heresie that no dead man may be condemned and condemned heretikes in defending Theodorus yea defending him for a Saint and teacher of truth This we permit command and decree that they shall doe but to doe otherwise to condemne Theodorus or a dead man that by no meanes doe we permit or suffer it to bee lawfull unto them 46. And as if all this were not sufficient the Pope addes one other clause more execrable then all the former for having recited those threescore hereticall assertions which as we have declared were all collected out of the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus he adjoynes l Vig Const nu 173. Anathematizamus omnem wee accurse and anathematize every man pertaining to orders who shall ascribe or impute any contumely to the Fathers and Doctors of the Church by those forenamed impieties and if no Father then not Theodorus for those may be condemned See now unto what height of impiety the Pope is ascended for it is as much as if hee had said We anathematize and accurse Saint Cyrill Saint Proclus Saint Rambulas Saint Acatius the Synode of Armenia the generall Councells of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople in the time of
Ibae à patribus pronunciata dictatio therefore for that confession of faith which Ibas by his Epistle sheweth that he embraceth for that did the Fathers of Chalcedon pronounce the writing or Epistle not the end onely of it to be orthodoxall So he takes this one part of which hee made no doubt but it was approved at Chalcedon as a Medium to prove that which was doubted to wit that the Epistle it selfe even the whole Epistle was by the same Fathers approved yea and Baronius also though hee in words pretends the contrary yet seemes to be indeed of the same judgement for he useth the very like reason as Vigilius doth quod c Bar. an 553. nu 191. ex illa because Ibas in this Epistle professeth himselfe to consent to the union therefore Patres dixerunt eam Epistolam ut Catholicam recipiendam the Fathers at Chalcedon said that the Epistle loe the Epistle saith the Cardinall not a part onely of it ought to bee received as Catholike 10. Which will be more plaine if we observe one other point out of Vigilius and Baronius which may not well be omitted for whereas all contained in any part of the Epistle respects things done either before or at or after the union in none of these if ye will beleeve them is this writing hereticall or against the faith for what was done before the union though therein much be spokeÌ„ against Cyrill the Ephesine Councell and Cyrill called an heretike yet is all that saith d Bar. an 448. nu 71. Epistola historiam continet rerum gestarum inter Iohannem Cyrillum et quae inter eos transacta essent refere c. Baronius spoken by way of an historical narration as declaring what was done not as allowing that which was done ut ex hac parte nihil adversus Cyrillum obloquutus videatur that in this part there is no wrong done to Cyrill At the union or when it was concluded then was Ibas reconciled to Cyrill and received to the communion of the Church and so would not write against the faith so teacheth the Cardinall Ibas saith e An. eodem nu 59. he tooke part with Nestorius usque ad tempus per Paulum Emissenum untill the time that the union was made by Paul Bishop of Emisa quando ipse sicut alij communicare cum S. Cyrillo Ecclesia Catholica caepit at which time Ibas as the rest begun to communicate with Cyrill and with the Catholike Church Vigilius f Vigil Const nu 192. noteth the same and out of him Baronius seemes to have borrowed it By Paulus Bishop of Emisa Iohn atque omnes orientales Episcopi and all the Easterne Bishops then Ibas among them returned to concord with Cyrill And Baronius further by the Epistle it selfe makes this plaine for by it saith g Bar. an 448. nu 75. he is declared that Ibas though before that time he had doated tunc temporis fuisse Catholicum yet then to wit when he writ this he was a Catholike and Ibas writ this Epistle eodem h Ba. an 553. nu 211 momento pacis initae at the verie time and moment when the peace was made and concluded after which he never spake one undecent word against Cyrill so at the time of the union being a Catholike hee would not oppugne or write against the faith much lesse after the time of the union for after that time Vigilius i Vig. Const nu 194 testifieth that Ibas remained still a catholike and in the catholike communion usque ad exitum even to his dying day And Baronius expresseth the same saying k Bar. an 553. nu 211. that after the union it could not bee proved aliquod verbum indecens adversus Cyrillum protulisse that Ibas spake any unseemely word against Cyrill Hereupon now it followeth that the whole Epistle is to be approved written by Ibas when he was a catholike written with a catholike minde and affection by him who both at and after the union would not write against the faith which himselfe professed and what is spoken of matters before the union that is all historically narrated not by assent approved 11. Oh how doe these men even labour and study to be miserable and to tye more fast the knots of those Anathemaes denounced against them by the holy Councell which nothing but renouncing their hereticall defences of this Epistle can ever dissolve what will they doubt or feare to say who would justifie that whole Epistle as affirming nothing repugnant to the faith for a narration is no assertion of that which is related of which the holy Councell and catholike Church hath pronounced that it is wholly hereticall and every part head and taile beginning and ending an absolute and positive deniall of the faith what untruth will they not avouch who deny Ibas after the union to have injured Cyrill whereas the holy generall Councell witnesseth and that truly as you shall straight see that even in this union which Ibas mentioneth he wrongeth Cyrill and all catholikes more than in any part of his Epist yea more thaÌ„ Nestorius himself ever did But omitting for this time al the other untruths which are not a few in those assertions of Vigilius and Baronius there are two things therein which I may not wel passe over in silence 12. The former is at the consideration whereof I could not refraine from laughter how curious and even superstitious the Cardinall is in calculating the nativity of this impious Epistle as if he had performed the office of Iuno Lucina unto it and knew the very moment of time when this faire babe was first brought to light It was written saith hee eodem momento pacis initae in that very moment when the union was made betwixt Iohn and Cyrill At that very moment Sure the Cardinals Ephemerides or the constellations deceived him It was neither written in that moment nor in that moneth nor in that yeare nor at the least two whole yeares after the union was concluded for the Epistle mentioneth not onely the praise of Theodorus of Mopsvestia but his commendation by Rambulas Now neither did the Nestorians so much honour nor did the catholikes by name condemne Theodorus till the Emperour had by his Edict straightly forbidden the reading writing hearing or having of the bookes of Nestorius till then the name and writings of Nestorius being a Patriarke and of so eminent a citie as Constantinople was farre more fit to credit and countenance their doctrines than the name of Theodorus being but a Bishop and of a very obscure and ignoble towne or corner rather which in likelihood had beene buried in eternall oblivion had not he by his owne infamy made it famous as Herostratus l Herostratus ut nomen memoria sceleris extenderet inâ—endium nobilis fabricae quod inter 7. orbis miracula unuÌ„ erat manu sua struxit sicut ipse fassus est Sol. n. ca. 53.
Church and generall Councels to be infallible seeing their infallibility is none but onely by adhering and consenting to the Pope it necessarily ensueth that they all à fortiori doe beleeve and must professe the Pope to be infallible seeing on his the infallibility of both the other doth wholly and solely depend 12. Let me adde but one other proofe hereof taken from Supremacy of authoritie and judgement It is a ruled case in their learning Si o Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Quintū et lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. § Denique et lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. § De tertio errare non potest debet esse summus judex He who is infallible must be the highest and last Iudge and Vice versa He p Affirmant ejus judicium esse ultimū Hinc autem aperte sequitur non errare Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3 § Accedat who is the last and highest judge must be infallible Supremacy and infallibility of judgement are inseparably linked To whomsoever Supremacy is given even for that cause infallibility of judgement is granted unto him also for seeing from the last or supreme Iudge there can be no appeale it were most unjust to binde Christians to beleeve his sentence who might be deceived most unjust to binde them from appealing from a judge that were fallible or from an erronious judgement Consider now to whom Supremacy of judgement in causes of faith belongeth To whom else but to the Pope whereas some dare affirme saith the Canonist q Cupers com ad cap. oporteb pa. 4. nu 33. that a Councell is above the Pope Falsissimum est This is most false The Successor of Peter saith Stapleton r Rel Cont. 6. q. 3. art 5. opin 10. supra omnes est is above all Bishops Church generall Councels above all The Pope saith Bellarmine ſ Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. is simply and absolutely above the whole Church and above a generall Councell t Lib. eod ca. 14. § Vltimae Hee further tels us that this assertion That the Pope is above a generall Councell is not only the judgment of all the ancient Schoole Divines the cōmon sentence of their Writers of whom he reckoneth thirteene and if it were fit three times thirtie might bee scored up with them but that it is the publike doctrine of their Church decreed in their Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth There the Councell saith he u Lib. eod ca. 17. § Denique disertè ex professo docuit did plainly and of set purpose teach the Pope to bee above all Councels yea expressissimè x Lib. eod ca. 13. § Deinde rem definivit that Laterane Councell did most expresly define this and their definition hereof is Decretum de fide a Decree of faith for which cause in his Apology bearing the name of Schulkenius hee professeth y Ca. 6. § Probo pa. 227. that this is Articulus fidei an Article of faith such as every Christian is bound to beleeve that the Pope is Summus in terris totius Ecclesiae Iudex the Supreme last and highest Iudge of the whole Church here upon earth which he proves besides many other authorities by this very Laterane z Cap. eodem § Lateran pa. 249. decree and by their Trent Councell The words themselves of those Councels make the matter plaine in that at the Laterane Councell they thus decree Solum a Sess 11. pa. 639. b. Romanum Pontificem supra omnia Concilia authoritatem habere that the Pope alone hath authority above all Councels and this they say is taught not b Nedum ex Scripturae sacrae testimonio dictis sanctorum patrum c. Ibid. onely by Fathers and Councels but by the holy Scriptures thereby shewing that in this decree they explicate declare the Catholike faith which is one of the Cardinals notes to know when a decree is published by a Councell tanquam de fide as a decree of faith and they threaten the c Ibid. pa. 340. indignation of God and the blessed Apostles to the gainsayers of their decree A censure as heavy as any Anathema the denouncing whereof is another of the Cardinals notes that they proposed this decree as a decree of faith In the other at Trent the Councell teacheth d Sess 14. ca. 7. that unto the Pope is given Suprema potestas in universa Ecclesia the Supreme power in the whole Church And this Supremacy is such that from all Councels all other Iudges you may appeale to him and hee may reverse e Pontifex ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest retractare illud judicium Concilij Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico Potest approbare vel reprobare Idē lib. 2. ca. 11. § De tertio adnull or repeale their judgement but from him as being the last and highest Iudge as having supreme power qua f Bell. lib. eodem 2. ca. 18. § Praeterea nulla est major cui nulla est aequalis then which none is greater and to which none is equall you may appeale to none no not as some g Aug. Triump de potest Eccl. q. 6. ar 8. of them teach unto God himselfe The reason whereof is plaine for seeing the Popes sentence in such causes is the h Sententia Concilij cui praest Petrus est sententia Spiritus sancti Bell. lib. 3 de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Sextum Idem asserere possunt caetera legitima Concilia Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 2. § Tertius sentence of God uttered indeed by man but assistente i Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 10. § Decimum gubernante Spiritu Gods Spirit assisting guiding him therein if you appeale from him or his sentence you appeale even from God himselfe and Gods sentence Such soveraignty they give unto the Pope in his Cathedrall judgement Now because Infallibility is essentially and inseperably annexed to supremacie of judgement it hence evidently ensueth that as their Laterane and Trent Councels and with them all who hold their doctrine that is all who are members of their present Romane Church doe give supremacy of authority and judgement unto the Pope so with it they give also infallibility of judgement unto him their best Writers professing their generall Councels desining and decreeing their whole Church maintaining him and his Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee infallible which was the former point that I undertooke to declare 13. Suffer mee to goe yet one step further This assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is not onely a position of their Church which hitherto wee have declared but it is the very maine ground and fundamentall position on which all the faith doctrines and religion of the present Romane Church and of every member thereof doth relie For the manifesting whereof that must
sense of them Now because all doubts and controversies of faith depend on the one of these it clearly followeth upon that decree that the very last stay in all doubts of faith is the Churches judgement but that upon no other nor higher stay doth or can relie for whatsoever you take besides this the truth the waight and validity of all must be tried in the Church at her judgement it must stand or fall yea if you make a doubt of the Churches judgement it selfe even that as all other must be ended by the judgement of the Church it is the last Iudge of all This to bee the true meaning of the Trent Councel Bellarmine both saw and professeth when hee saith e Lib. 3. de verbo Dei ca. 3. § Tota The Church that is the Pope with a Councell is Iudge of the sense of the Scripture omnium controversiarum and of all controversies of faith and in this all Catholikes do agree and it is expresly set downe in the Trent Councell So Bellarmine testifying this to be both the decreed doctrine of their generall and approved Councell and the consenting judgment of all that are Romane Catholikes 17. Now all this which they have said of the Church if you will have it in plaine termes and without circumloquution belongs onely to the Pope who is vertually both Church and Councell As the Church or Councell is called infallible no otherwise but by a Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head both of Church and Councell is infallible So is the Church or Councell called the foundation of faith or last principle on which their faith must relie by the same figure Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head of them both is the foundation of faith And whosoever is a true Romane Catholike or member of their present Church hee beleeveth all other doctrines because the Church that is the Pope doth teach them and the Pope to teach them infallibly he beleeveth for it selfe because the Pope saith hee is in such teaching infallible This infallibility of the Pope is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very corner stone the foundation on stone the rocke and fundamentall position of their whole faith and religion which was the point that I purposed to declare 18. I have hitherto declared and I feare too abundantly that the assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie in causes of faith is not onely a position but the very fundamentall position of all the doctrines of the present Romane Church In the next place we are to prove that this position is hereticall and that for such it was adjudged and condemned by the Catholike Church In the proofe whereof I shall not need to stay long This whole treatise and even that which hath already beene declared touching the Constitution of Pope Vigilius doth evidently confirme the same For seeing the defending of the Three Chapters hath been proved f Ca. 3. 4. to be hereticall the Constitution of Vigilius made in defence of those Chapters must of necessity be confessed to be hereticall Nay if you well consider you shall see that this very position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie is adjudged to bee hereticall For the fift generall Councell knew this cause of the Three Chapters to bee a cause of faith They knew further that Pope Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree and Cathedrall Constitution had defined that those Three Chapters ought to bee defended Now seeing they knew both these and yet judicially defined the defence of those Three Chapters to be hereticall and for such accursed it even in doing this they define the Cathedrall judgement of Vigilius in this cause of Faith to be hereticall and therefore most certainly and à fortiori define this position That the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is infallible to bee hereticall and for such they anathematize both it and all that defend it And because the judgement and definitive sentence of the fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all subsequent Councels till the Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth it unavoydably hence ensueth that the same position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is by the judgement of all generall Councells untill that time that is by the constant and uniforme consent of the whole Catholike Church adjudged condemned and accursed for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes And seeing we have cleerly proved the whole present Romane Church and all that are members therof to defend this position yea to defend it as the maine foundation of their whole faith the evidence of that assertion which I proposed g Sup. hoc cap. nu 6. doth now manifestly appeare That none can now assent to the Pope or to the doctrines of the present Church of Rome but he is eo nomine even for that very cause adjudged and condemned for hereticall and that even in the very ground and foundation of his faith 19. From the foundation let us proceed to the walls and roofe of their religion Thinke you the foundation thereof is onely hereticall and the doctrines which they build thereon orthodoxall Nothing lesse They are both sutable both hereticall That one fundamentall position is like the Trojan horse in the wombe of it are hid many troopes of heresies If Liberius confirme Arianisme Honorius Monothelitisme Vigilius Nestorianisme these all by vertue of that one assertion must passe currant for Catholike truths Nay who can comprehend I say not in words or writing but in his thought and imagination all the blasphemous and hereticall doctrines which by all their Popes have beene or if as yet they have not which hereafter may be by succeeding Popes defined to bee doctrines of faith Seeing Stapleton h Lib. 9. doct prin ca. 14. §. Manet assures us That the Church of this or any succeeding age may put into the Canon and number of sacred and undoubtedly Canonicall bookes the booke of Hermas called Pastor and the Constitutions of Clement the former being as their owne notes censure it i Notae in lib. Hermae to 5. Bibl. S. patr haeresibus fabulis oppletus full of heresies and fables rejected by Pope Gelasius k Concil Rom. primū sub Gelasio with his Romane Synod the later being stuffed also with many impious doctrines condemning m Const Clem. lib. 3. ca. 2. lawfull mariage as fornication and allowing n Idem lib. 8. ca. 32. fornication as lawfull with many the like impieties which in Possevine o Bibl. in verbo Clemens Rom. are to bee seene together for which cause they are worthily rejected in the Canons p Can. 2. of the sixt Councell seeing the Pope may canonize these what blasphemies what heresies what lies may not with them be canonized why may not their very Legend in the next Session bee declared to be Canonicall And yet by that fundamentall position they are bound and now doe implicitè beleeve whatsoever
any Pope either by word or writing either hath already or shall at any time hereafter define to be a doctrine of faith Because I will not stay on particulars if any please seriously to consider this matter hee shall perceive that which now I intend to prove such venome of infidelity to lye in that one fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility that by reason of holding it they neither doe nor can beleeve or hold with certaintie of faith any one point or doctrine which they professe to beleeve and hold upon that Foundation 20. For the clearing of which point being very materiall it is to be observed that unto certainty of faith two things are of necessity required The one ex parte objecti on the part of thing beleeved which must be so true and certaine in it selfe that it cannot possibly bee or have beene otherwise then it is beleeved to be to have beene or to be hereafter And therefore none can truly beleeve any untruth for nothing which is untrue is or can be the object of faith The other thing is required ex parte subjecti on the part of him who beleeveth Now faith being onely of such things as are inevident that is which neither by sense can be perceived nor by naturall reason collected or found out but which are onely by the testimonie of such as first knew them made knowne unto us and none doth or can know that which is supernaturall unlesse God himselfe reveale the same unto him it hence followeth that whatsoever is by any beleeved the same is revealed and testified to him by God himselfe who is infallible and further that it is certainly knowne unto him who beleeveth that it is God himselfe who doth reveale and testifie that thing unto him For otherwise though the doctrine proposed be in it selfe never so certaine and divine yet unto thee or me it cannot be certaine nor held by certainty of faith unlesse first we be sure and infallibly certaine that he who testifieth it unto us is himselfe infallible that is that he is God Let us for perspicuity call the former of these two materiale fidei the materiall in faith or the thing beleeved and the later formale fidei that which is formall in faith seeing as the former is the thing beleeved so the later containes the reason the ground or foundation upon which and for which it is beleeved 21. Consider now first the materials in their faith In them there is a great difference for some of them are in themselves credible as being divine truths and true objects of faith Such are all those Catholike truths common to us and them as that there is a Trinity that Christ was borne of a Virgin dyed rose againe and the like Others are in themselves untrue such as cannot be the object of faith Of this sort are all those doctrines wherin they dissent from us Transubstantiation reall and proper sacrifice worshipping of Images Purgatory Iustification by the merit or dignity of our works and the like which may rightly bee called popish doctrines The later sort of these they neither doe nor can beleeve The former they might but they doe not beleeve The reason whereof will appeare by considering that which is formall or the fundamentall ground of their faith where it is first to be observed that a man may hold many yea all the doctrines professed by the present Church except that one of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility and yet bee no Papist or member of their present Church For although the things professed or the Materialls be the selfe same yet the formalitie or diverse reason of holding them causeth a maine difference in the parties that hold them And for our present purpose it may suffice to note three divers wayes whereby their doctrines are or may be held 22. The first is of them who build all those doctrines upon the Scripture as the Foundation thereof upon that ground holding not onely many Catholike truths which they most firmly beleeve the Church inducing the Scriptures outwardly teaching and the holy Spirit inwardly sealing the same unto them but together with those truths hold some errors also of the Romane Church take for example Transubstantiation which although for the inducement of that present Church wherein they live they thinke to be taught in the Scriptures and therefore hold and professe them and thinke they beleeve them yet because they are neither in truth taught in the Scriptures nor sealed by Gods Spirit unto their hearts therefore they hold not these nor in truth can they hold them with that firmnesse and certainty of faith as they doe the former truths but they have a faintnes and feare in their assent unto these and so a readines and willing preparation of heart to disclaime these and to hold or professe the contrary if ever it may be fully cleared manifested out of the Scriptures unto them Of this sort we doubt not but many thousands of our fathers were who living in the darknesse thicke mists of their Antichristian superstition upon the Scriptures word of God which they held for the foundation of their saith builded indeed much gold precious stones but with a mixture of much hay stubble drosse thinking but very erroneously the later as well as the former to be contained in that foundation The state of all these is very like to S. Cyprians and those other Africane Bishops which were so earnest for Rebaptizatiō supposing it to be taught in the Scriptures though the foundation of it of those catholike truths that Christ was God or the like was one and the same unto them yet they held not both with like firmnes certainty of faith The doctrine of Christs deity manhood they so beleeved that they would not cōmunicate with any that denied this nay they would rather die then deny it But Rebaptization they so held as not thinking their opposites to be heretikes nor refusing p Haecre scripsimus nemini praescribentes aut praejudicantes quo minus unusquisque quod putaverit faciat habent liberam arbitrij sui facultatē Nos autem cum Collegis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam dominicam pacem tenemus Cyp. Epist ad Iubaian in fine vid. August lib. 5. de Baptis ca. 17. to cōmunicate with thē that denyed it so they held this with a certaine faintnes of faith or rather as indeed it was of opinion and not of faith having a preparation in heart to beleeve and professe the contrary if it might at any time be made manifest unto them This S. Austen often witnesseth of Cyprian Satis q Lib. 2. de Baptis ca. 4. ostendit se facillime correcturum he sufficiently declareth that hee would most easily have altered his opinion if any would have demonstrated the truth unto him Againe r Lib. 4 ca. 5. That holy man Cyprian being non solum doctus sed docilis not onely
learned but willing to learne and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same ſ Lib. 1. ca. 18. Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per eum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as sound lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of those that were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and sortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus ſ Paralip ad Abb. Vsperg pa. 448. I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held thē now upon another Foundation For thē they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had justled out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the
and then you will pitty Baronius for this so weake and silly excuse for Vigilius 5. In the Ephesine Latrocinie there came n Act. Concil Eph. recitat in Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 45. certaine Eutychean heretikes to the number of 35. who being justly excommunicated by that holy Bishop Flavianus desired to bee restored to the coÌ„munion of the Church Dioscorus his Synod willed them to make a profession of their faith they did so their confessioÌ„ was this Sic sapimus sicut 318. Patres in Nicea sanxerunt sicut hic congregata sancta Synodus confirmarunt wee beleeve as the Nicene Fathers decreed and the former holy Synod at Ephesus confirmed nor did we ever beleeve or thinke otherwise than those holy Councels decreed wee beleeve as S. Athanasius S. Cyrill S. Gregory omnes Catholici Episcopi and as all Catholike Bishops have beleeved and we accurse all that beleeve otherwise Thus professed those Eutychean heretikes and upon this profession they were by Dioscorus and his Synod restored to the communion of the Church yea which is more that same Latrocinie or hereticall Synod at Ephesus professing o Ibid. pa. 46. the former Councels to be tutelam nostrae Catholica fidei the stay and prop of their Catholike faith so they call their heresie commanded the Nicene Creed which was confirmed in the holy Ephesine Councell to bee read before them and the testimonies of many holy Fathers p Jbid. pa. 47. consenting thereunto Peter Athanasius Poelix Iulius Cyprian and others together with the decree of the Ephesine Councell Nulli q Ibid. pa. 50. licere proferre vel conscribere vel componere aliam fidem praeter eam that it should not be lawfull for any to utter write or compose any other faith or Creed but that which was decreed at Nice After all these read before them Dioscorus said Existimo r Ibid. pa. 57. omnibus placere I thinke that this faith decreed at Nice and confirmed at Ephesus is approved by us all for we may not either retract or make doubt of what they have done and let every man say his judgement hereof Then said Thalassius I thinke the same qui contraria eis sapiunt abominor and I abhorre all who thinke the contrary Iohn of Sebastia I detest all heresies colo hanc solam fidem and embrace this faith onely which was decreed at Nice Stephanus If any beleeve otherwise than the Nicene Fathers decreed let him be accursed because this is the true and Catholike faith and the whole Councell said Omnes sumus ejusdem fidei we are all of the same faith which the Nicene Fathers decreed Thus professed that whole Ephesine Latrocinie consisting of 128 Bishops they all said they held the Nicene faith and none but that accursing all that received not that while yet at that very time when they thus professed they were most damnable heretikes and conspired together to abolish for ever the holy Nicene saith They being Eutycheans learned to make such a dissembling profession of Eutyches himselfe who delivered up to that Synod Å¿ Conciliab Ephes in Act. Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 11. a confession of his faith bemoaning that he was persecuted because he would not deny the Nicene faith nor beleeve otherwise then those holy fathers had decreed and the Ephesine Councell had confirmed and who having repeated verbatim the Nicene Creed addeth this Thus was I taught by my progenitors thus have I beleeved in this faith was I borne in this faith was I baptized and signed with the Crosse in this faith was I consecrated in this faith have I lived to this day and in this faith doe I desire to dye And this confession doe I make attestante mihi tam Deo quam vestra sanctitate both God and this holy Councell being my witnesse hereof Thus Eutyches of whom notwithstanding this so holy a profession and all his partakers their second Nicene Councel truly saith t Act. 6. pa. 561. Eutiches Dioscorus and the heretikes of that branne approved the Nicene faith confirmed in the holy Councell at Ephesus sed tamen haeretici permanserunt yet for all that they remained heretikes 6. What can the Cardinall or any of his friends oppose to this Example If Vigilius be no heretike because hee professeth to hold the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon then neither Dioscorus nor the Eutycheans nor Eutyches himselfe is an heretike because they all with as great earnestnesse professed to keepe inviolable the Councels at Nice and Ephesus the Catholike faith explaned in them accursing all who beleeve the contrary thereunto If notwithstanding this so resolute and earnest profession Dioscorus the Eutycheans with that Ephesine coÌ„spiracy were heretikes Eutyches himself an archheretike as they al undoubtedly were for even while they thus professed they all denied u Consiteor ex duabus naturis fuisse Dominum ante adunationem post vero adunationem unam naturam confiteor Dixit Eutyches sanctae Synodus dixit consentimus Act. Conc. Ephes in Act. Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 28. b. two natures to remaine in Christ after the union as the very acts of that Latrocinie doe expresly declare then was it a very silly reason of Baronius to conclude that Vigilius was no heretike because in his decree for defence of the Three Chapters hee is so resolute to keepe inviolable the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith there decreed 7. The like may bee seene in the Monothelites of whom their second Nicen Synod saith x Act. 6. pa. 5â—1 thus Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Cyrus Bishop of Alexandria Honorius Bishop of Rome and all who are called Monothelites embraced both the Councell of Chalcedon and the next which followed it which is this fift and the generall Councels which went before these to wit the Nicen Constantinopolitane and Ephesine veruntamen ut haeretici a Catholica ecclesia dammati sunt yet for all this they were condemned for heretickes by the whole Church Why may not the Catholike Church give the like doome of Vigilius for defending the three Chapters though hee professe and imbrace all the same Councels and particularly that of Chalcedon as they did 8. Perhaps other Heretickes would dissemble in their profession but the Nestorians of which ranke Vigilius was they were men of a better fashion they would never professe to hold the decrees and faith of an holy Councell unlesse they did so indeed Fie of all heretickes they were most vile in this kinde Read the acts of their Conventicle held in an Inne at Ephesus during the time of the holy Ephesine Councell and you shall see that as by lies slanders and all base revilings they sought to disgrace Cyrill and all other orthodoxall Bishops calumniating them as heretickes and oppugners of the Nicen faith so they boasted of themselves that they forsooth were the onely men who defended and upheld the Councell of Nice and the faith there explaned Witnesse
Augustine Saint Ierome Saint Ambrose Saint Leo Papius Theophilact Tertullian Eusebius Prudentius and others most excellent Divines And I take God and the whole Court of heaven to witnesse before whom I must render an account of this protestation that the same faith and religion which I defend is taught and confirmed by those Hebrew and Greeke Scriptures those Historians Popes Decrees Scholies and Expositions Councells Schooles and Fathers and the profession of Protestants condemned by the same Thus he 11. Did ever mortall man read or heare of such a braggadochio For learning and languages Ierome is but a baby to him more industrious and adamantine then Origen then Adamantius himselfe A shop a storehouse of all knowledge his head a Library of all Fathers Councels Decrees of all writings an Heluo nay a very hell of books he devoures up all Rabsecha Thraso Pyrgopolinices Therapontigonus all ye Magnificoes Gloriosoes come sit at his feet and learne of him the exact forme of vaunting and reviling What silly men were Eutiches Nestorius and the old heretikes they boasted but of one or two Councells All Councells all Fathers all Decrees all bookes writings and records are witnesses of his faith They sayd it he swears it before God and the whole Court of Heaven that all Scriptures Councels Fathers all witnesses in heaven earth and hell yea the Devill and all are his and confirme their Romane faith and condemne the doctrine of Protestants Alas what shall we doe but even hide our selves in caves of the earth and clifts of the rocks from the force and fury of this Goliah who thus braves it out in the open field as who with the onely breath of his mouth can blow away whole legions quasi ventus folia aut pannicula tectoria 12. But let no mans heart faint because of this proud anonymall Philistim Thy servant O Lord though the meanest in the host of Israel will fight with him nor will I desire any other weapons but this one pible stone of the judiciall sentence of the fift generall Councell against Vigilius This being taken out of Davids bagge that is derived from Scriptures consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding Catholike Councells and Fathers directly and unavoydably hits him in the forehead it gives a mortall and uncurable wound unto him for it demonstrates not onely the foundation of their faith to be hereticall and for such to bee condemned and accursed by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church but all their doctrines whatsoever they teach because they all relye on this foundation of the Popes infallibility are not onely unsound and in the root hereticall but even Antichristian also such as utterly overthrow the whole Catholike faith This being one part of the Philistimes weapons wherein he trusted and vanted with his owne sword is his head the head and foundation of all their faith cut off so that of him and the whole body of their Church it may be truly said Iacet ingens littore truncus Avulsumque humeris caput sine nomine corpus 13. You see now how both ancient and moderne heretikes boast of Councells and therefore that the reason of Baronius is most inconsequent that Vigilius was no heretike because hee professeth to hold the Councell of Chalcedon Nay I say more though one professe to hold the whole Scripture yet if with pertinacy hee hold any one doctrine repugnant thereunto the profession of the Scriptures themselves cannot excuse such a man from being an heretike If it could then not any of the old heretikes would want this pretence or to omit them seeing both Protestants and Papists make profession to beleeve the Scriptures and whatsoever is taught therein would this profession exempt one from heresie neither they nor wee should be or be called heretikes But seeing in truth they are and wee in their Antichristian language are called heretikes as Cyrill and the orthodoxall beleevers in his time were by the Nestorians it is without question that this profession to hold the whole Scriptures much lesse to hold one or two Councells as Vigilius did cannot free one from being an heretike 14. You will perhaps say can one then beleeve the whole Scripture and be an heretike or beleeve the faith decreed at Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon and be an Arian Eutychean or Nestorian heretike No verily for as the Scripture containeth a contradiction to every heresie seeing as Saint Austen truly saith l Lib. 2. de doct Christ ca. 9. all doctrines concerning faith are set downe and that also perspicuously therein so doe every one of those three Councels containe a contradiction to every one of those three heresies and to all other which concerne the divinity or humanity of Christ But it is one thing to professe the scriptures or those three Councells and say that he beleeves them which many heretikes may doe and another thing to beleeve them indeed which none can doe and be an heretike for whosoever truly beleeveth the scriptures cannot possibly with pertinacy hold any doctrine repugnant to scriptures but such a man upon evident declaration that this is taught in them though before he held the contrary presently submits his wit and will to the truth which out of them is manifested unto him If this he do not he manifestly declareth that he holds his error with pertinacy and with an obstinate resolution not to yeeld to the truth of the scriptures and so hee is certainly an heretike notwithstanding his profession of the scriptures which he falsly said he beleeved and held when in very truth he held and that pertinaciously the quite contrary unto them The very like must be said of those three Councells and them who either truly beleeve or falsly say that they beleeve the faith explained in them or any one of them 15. Whence two things are evidently consequent the former that all heretikes are lyars in their profession not onely because they professe that doctrine which is untrue and hereticall but because in words they professe to beleeve and hold that doctrine which they doe not but hold and that for a point of their faith the quite contrary All of them will and doe professe that they beleeve the scriptures and the doctrines therein contained and yet every one of them lye herein for they beleeve one if not moe doctrines contrary to the scriptures The Nestorians professed to hold the Nicene faith and so they professed two natures and but one person to bee in Christ for that in the Nicene faith is certainly decreed but they lyed in making this profession for they beleeved not one person but pertinaciously held two persons to be in Christ The Eutycheans in professing the Ephesine Councell professed in effect two natures to abide in Christ after the union for this was certainly the faith of that holy Councell but they lyed in this profession for they held that after the union two natures did not abide in Christ but one onely The Church
of Rome and members thereof professe to hold the faith of the fift generall Councell and so professe implicitè the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and hereticall but they lye in making this profession for they beleeve not the Popes sentence in such causes to be fallible but with the Laterane and Trent Councels they hold it to be infallible It is the practice of all heretikes to make such faire though lying professions For should they say in plaine termes that which is truth indeed wee beleeve not the scriptures nor the Councells of Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon every man would spit at them and detest them cane pejus angue nor could they ever deceive any or gaine one proselyte But when they commend their faith that is their heresie to be the same doctrine with the scriptures which the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon taught by these faire pretences and this lying profession they insinuate themselves into the hearts of the simple deceiving hereby both themselves and others 16. The other consequent is this That the profession of all heretikes is contradictory to it selfe For they professe to hold the scriptures and so to condemne every heresie and yet withal they professe one private doctrine repugnant to scripture and which is an heresie The like may be said of the Councells The Nestorians by professing to hold the faith decreed at Nice professe Christ to bee but one person and yet withall by holding Nestorianisme they professe Christ to be two persons The Eutycheans by professing to hold the Councell of Ephesus professe two natures to remaine in Christ after the union which in that Councell is certainly decreed and yet by professing the heresie of Eutyches they professe the quite contradictory that one nature onely remaines after the union The Church of Rome and members thereof by professing the faith of the fift Councell professe the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and de facto to have beene hereticall and yet they professe the direct contradictory as the Councell of Laterane hath defined that the Popes sentence in such causes is infallible and neither hath beene nor can be hereticall So repugnant to it selfe and incoherent is the profession of all heretikes that it sighteth both with the truth and with it owne selfe also The very same is to be seene in Vigilius and his Constitution For in professing to defend the three Chapters and in decreeing that all shall defend them he professeth all the blasphemies of Nestorius and decreeth that all shall maintaine them and professing to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon and decreeing that all shall hold it hee professeth that Nestorianisme is heresie and decreeth that all shall condemne it for heresie and so decreeing both these he decreeth that all men in the world shall beleeve two contradictories and beleeve them as Catholike Truths Such a worthy Apostolicall decree is this of Vigilius for defending whereof Baronius doth more then toyle himselfe 17. You will againe demand Seeing Vigilius doth so earnestly and plainely professe both these why shall not his expresse profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon make him or shew him to bee a Catholike rather then his other expresse profession to defend the Three Chapters make or shew him to bee an hereticke Why rather shall his hereticall then his orthodoxall profession give denomination unto him I also demand of you Seeing every hereticke in expresse words professeth to beleeve the whole Scripture which is in effect a condemning of every heresie why shall not this orthodoxall profession make or shew him to be a Catholike rather then his expresse profession of some one doctrine contrarie to Scripture say for example sake of Arianisme make or shew him to bee an Arian hereticke The reason of both is one and the same Did an Arian so professe to hold the Scriptures that hee were resolved to forsake his Arianisme and confesse Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon manifestation that the Scriptures taught this certainely his professiō of Arianisme with such a professiō to hold the Scriptures could not make him an hereticke no more then Cyprians profession of Rebaptization or Irenees of the millenarie heresie did make them heretikes Erre hee should as they did but being not pertinacious in error hereticke hee could not be as they were not But it falls out otherwise with all heretickes They professe to hold the Scripture yet so that they resolve not to forsake that private doctrine which they have chosen to maintaine That they will hold and they will have that to be the doctrine of the Scripture notwithstanding all manifestation to the contrarie even of the Scriptures themselves They resolve of this that whosoever Bishops Councells or Church teach the contrarie to that or say judge that the Scripture so teacheth they all erre or mistake the meaning of the Scriptures Thus did not Cyprian nor Irenee And this wilfull and pertinacious resolution it is which evidently sheweth that in truth they beleeve not the Scriptures but beleeve their own fancies though they say a thousand times that they beleeve and embrace whatsoever the Scriptures teach for did they beleeve any doctrine say Arianisme eo nomine because the Scripture teacheth it they would presently beleeve the contrarie thereunto when it were manifested unto them as is was to the Arians by the Nicen Coūcell that the Scripture taught the contrarie to their error Seeing this they will not doe It is certaine that they hold their private opiniō eo nomine because they will hold it and they hold it to bee the doctrine of scripture not because it is so but because they will have it to bee so say what any will or can to the contrarie So their owne will and not Scripture is the reason why they beleeve it nay why they hold it with such a stiffe opinion for beleife it is not it cannot be This pertinacie to have beene in the Nestorians Eutycheans and the rest is evident Had they beleeved as they professed the faith decreed at Nice and Ephesus then upon manifestation of their errors out of those Councels they would have renounced their heresies but seeing the Nestorians persisted to hold two persons in Christ notwithstanding that the whole Councell of Ephesus manifested unto them that the Nicene Councel held but one person and seeing the Eutycheans persisted to hold but one nature after the union notwithstanding that the whole Councell at Chalcedon manifested unto them that the holy Ephesine Synod held two natures to abide in him after the union they did hereby make it evident unto all that they so professed to hold those Councels as that they resolved not to forsake their Nestorian and Eutichean heresies for any manifestation of the truth or conviction of their error out of those Councels and their profession of them was in effect as if they had said we hold those Councels and will have them to
a new song and say just as the Emperor saith Ait aio Negat nego It is wisely done principibus placuisse viris for the Kings wrath is the messenger of death If after both these hee become a meere Neutralist and Ambodexter in faith holding communion with all sides Catholikes heretickes and all this is also an act of rare wisdome the Pope is now become another Saint Paul factus est omnia omnibus with Catholikes he 's a Catholike that he may gaine Catholikes with Heretickes he 's an Hereticke that he may gaine heretickes he 's all with all that hee may gaine them all If when the Emperor the generall Councell the whole Church calls for his resolution in a cause of faith if then hee step into his infallible Chaire and thence by his Apostolicall authoritie define that the three Chapters that is that Nestorianisme shall for ever bee held for the Catholike faith O wisely done he now drops oracles from heaven in Cathedra sedet the voice of God and not of man If when hee is banished for his obstinacie against the truth upon some urgent cause which then he discernes he calls againe for his holy Trevit and thence decrees the quite contradictorie to his former Apostolicall sentence In this he 's wiser then in all the rest for by this he shews that he 's more wise and powerfull then all the Prophets and Apostles ever were They silly men could make but the one part of a contradiction to be true but the Pope he is tanto y Tanto ipse potentior est Prophetis effectus quanto differentius prae illis nomen haereditavit Nam cui prophetarum aliquando dictū est Tu es Petra Bar. an 552. nu 9. potentior Prophetis so much more wise and powerfull then all the Prophets that hee can make both parts of a contradiction to be infallible truths and unto which of the Prophets was it ever said Tu es Petra But the Pope is a Rocke indeed a Rocke upon which you may build two contradictories in the doctrine of faith and in them both say unto him Tu es Petra Such a Rocke neither the Prophets nor Apostles nor Christ himselfe ever was So wise so exceeding wise is the Pope in all his turnings even as wise as a wethercocke for turning with the wind and weather 17. Againe when the Pope his instruments or Inquisitors to whom Phalaris Busiris and all the heathen persecutors may yeeld exercise against us for maintaining the truth of God all exquisite hellish tortures to which the old heathenish were but ludus jocus all which they doe must be extolled as due punishments and just censures of the Holy Father of the holy Church of the Holy inquisition of the Holy house all must bee covered with the mantle of holinesse On the other side when they resist the most religious lawes or Edicts of Kings or Emperors when Vigilius or any of them being by an holy generall Councell declared and condemned for an Hereticke are for their obstinate rebellion against the truth justly punished though Iustinian yea Iustice it selfe shall use rather moderate then severe correction against them they forsooth must be accoumpted catholikes Cōfessers holy Martyrs such as suffer for religion for the sacred lawes and for the Catholike faith but Iustinian the Defender of the faith must be called Iulian Iustice be termed Scelus z Vidisti Scelus c. Bar. an 554. nu 2. and the Church for that cause said to bee in farre worse condition then in the times of Nero Dioclesian or any of the heathen Tyrants Such an happie thing it is to bee a Pope or Papist for then their wavering shall be Constancie their rebellion Religion and fortitude their folly greate and rare wisedome their heresie Catholike doctrine and their most condigne punishments shall be crowned with Martyrdome 18. The other thing which I observe is what a strong faith Papists had need to have who rely upon the Popes judgement which changeth out and in in and out so many times who yet are bound to beleeve al the Pope definitive sentences in causes of faith that is to speake in plaine tearmes who are bound to beleeve two contradictories to bee both true both of them the infallible oracles of God Or if any of them have so weake a faith that he can but beleeve the one I would gladly learne of some who is an Oedipus among them In this case of two Contradictorie Cathedrall decrees such as were these of Pope Vigilius whether of the Popes definitive judgements that is according to their language whether of the sayings of God is true and whether false or what strength the one hath more then the other If the Apostolicall sentence of Vigilius delivered cum omni undique cautela and by his Cathedrall authoritie in defence of the Three Chapters be repealeable by a second why may not the second which cannot possibly have more authoritie bee repealed by a third and the third by a fourth and fourth by a fift and so in Infinitum If the Pope after seaven yeares deliberation and ventilating of the cause while hee is all that time in peace and libertie may be deceived in his judiciall and Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith how may wee be assured that when some yeares after that the tediousnesse of exile and desire of his pristine libertie and honour perswades him to make a contrary decree he may not therein also bee deceived If the Popes decrees made in libertie peace and prosperity be of force why shall not the decree of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters be an article of faith If those free decrees may be admitted by a stronger sentence when the Pope is in banishment how may any beleeve their Laterane and Trent decrees as doctrines of faith For why may there not once againe come some other Iustinian into the world as great pitie it is but there should who in these or future times may minister that soveraigne medicine to cleare the Popes judgement and restraine or close him up in some meaner estate and farre lower place whence as out of a darke and low pit he may discerne those coelestiall truths in the Word of God like so many Starres in heaven which now being invironed with the circumfused splendor of the Romane Court he cannot possibly behold If those Three Chapters were to bee condemned why did the Pope defend them at the time of the Councell If they were to be defended why did he condemne them after his returne from exile Nay if the Three Chapters were orthodoxall why did the Pope at any time first or last by his Apostolicall sentence condemne them If they were hereticall why did he at any time first or last by his Cathedrall and Apostolicall sentence defend them I confesse I am here in a Labyrinth if any of the Cardinals friends will winde mee out he shall for ever be Theseus unto me CAP. XVI
the Pope or any Bishop hinder the assembling of a generall Councell and so the publike peace and tranquillity of the whole Church Open but this gappe and there never should have been nor ever shall be any generall Councell The wilfulnesse of Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia at Nice of Iohn Patriarch of Antioch at Ephesus of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria at Chalcedon will frustrate all those holy Councells and make them to be neither generall nor lawfull The saying of Cardinall Cusanus is worthy observing to this purpose I beleeve saith he m Lib. 3. de Concor ca. 15. that to be spoken not absurdly that the Emperor himselfe in regard of that care and custody of preserving the faith which is committed unto him may praeceptivè indicere Synodum by his Imperiall authority and command assemble a Synod when the great danger of the Church requireth the same negligence aut contradicente Romano Pontifice the Pope either neglecting so to doe or resisting and contradicting the doing thereof So Cusanus This was the very state and condition of the Church at this time when the fift Councell was assembled The n Vid sup ca. 1. nu 6. whole Church had beene a long time scandalized and troubled about those Three Chapters it was rent and divided from East to West High time it was and necessary for Iustinian to see that flame quenched although Pope Vigilius or any other Patriarch had never so eagerly resisted the remedie thereof 15. Had the Cardinall pleaded against this Synod that Vigilius had not beene called unto it hee had spoken indeed to the purpose For this is essentiall and such as without which a Synod cannot bee generall and lawfull that all Bishops be summoned to the Synod and comming thither have free accesse unto it and freedome of speech and judgment therein But the Cardinall durst not take this exception against this Synod or for Vigilius for none of these to have beene wanting in this Councell is so cleare that pertinacie it selfe cannot deny it It was not the Pope as they vainly boast but the Emperor who by his owne and Imperiall authority called this Councell as the whole Synod even in their Synodall sentence witnesse Wee are assembled here in this City jussione pijssimi Imperatoris vocati being called by the commandement of our most religious Emperor His calling to have beene generall Nicephorus doth expresly declare The Emperor saith he o Lib. 17. ca. 27. assembled the fift generall Councell Episcopis ecclesiarum omnium evocatis the Bishops of all Churches being called unto it yea the Emperor was so equall in this cause that Binius p Not. in Conc. 5. §. Concilium testifieth of him Paris numeri Episcopos ex Oriente Occidente convocavit that he called in particular and besides his generall summons by which all without exception had free accesse as many out of the West where the defenders of those Chapters did abound as he did out of the East where the same Chapters were generally condemned And yet further Vigilius himselfe was by name not onely invited intreated and by many reasons perswaded but even commanded by the Emperor and in his name to come unto the Synod as before q Sup. ca. 2. nu 1. 3. we shewed Now what freedome hee might have had in the Councell both that offer of the Presidencie doth shew for him in particular and the words of the Councell spoken concerning all in generall doth declare for when Sabinianus and others who being then at Constantinople were invited to the Synod and refused to come the synod sayd r Collat. 2. pa. 524. b. It was meet that they being called should have come to the Councell and have been partakers of all things which are here done and debated especially seeing both the most holy Emperour and we licentiam dedimus unicuique have granted free liberty to every one to manifest his minde in the Synod concerning the causes proposed Seeing then he not onely might but in his duty both to God to the Emperour and to the whole Church hee ought to have come and freely spoken his minde in this cause his resisting the will of the Emperor and refusing to come doth evidently demonstrate his want of love to the truth and dutifulnesse to the Emperor and the Church but it can no way impaire or impeach the dignity and authority of the Councell neither for the generality nor for the lawfulnesse thereof 16. Besides all which there is yet one thing above all the rest to be remembred for though Pope Vigilius was not present in the Synod either personally or by his Legates but in that sort resisted to come unto it yet he was present there by his letters of instruction by his Apostolicall and Cathedrall Constitution which hee published as a direction what was to be judged and held in that cause of the Three Chapters That Decree and Constitution he promised to send ad Imperatorem Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod quod ingenuè praestitit which also he ingenuously performed as the Cardinall tells Å¿ An. 553. nu 47. us That elaborate t Jdque elaboravâ—â— ibid. decree to which an whole Synod together with the Pope subscribed containing the Popes sentence and instruction given in this cause Vniverso u An. eod nu 48. orbi Catholico cunctisque fidelibus not onely to the Synod teaching them what they should define but to all Christians teaching them what they shold beleeve was in consessu Episcoporum recitatum read and recited before all the Bishops in that Councell as Binius doth x Not. in Conc. 5. §. Constitutâ—â— assure us This one kinde of presence in the Synod is suppletive of all the rest of more worth then 20. nay then 200. Legates à latere sent from his holinesse They all may deale besides or contrary to the Popes minde as Zacharias and Rhodoaldus did in a Councell held about the cause of Photius but this Cathedrall instruction is an inflexible messenger no bribes no perswasions no feare no favour can extort from it one syllable more then his holinesse by the infallible direction of his Chaire hath delivered yea though the Pope should have beene personally present in the Synod and face to face spoken his mind in his cause yet could not his sudden or lesse premeditated speech have beene for weight or authority comparable to this decree being elaborated after seven yeares ponderation of the cause and all things in it being disposed cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all diligence and circumspection that could possibly bee used which the Pope though absent in body yet sent as an Oracle from heaven to be a direction to the Synod and to supply his own absence So many wayes is this former objection of Baronius vaine and unsound when he pretends this Councell to have beene unlawfull because the Pope resisted it and the members assembled without
from God hee signifieth them both unto Ioseph Ioseph neither invocating him nor relying on him but on God whose messenger he was even so admitting the truth of this apparition the Vigin Mary did signifie from God the time when Narses should fight but neither did Narses invocate or adore her nor did shee her selfe more helpe in the battle than the Angell in the birth of Christ nor did the confidence of Narses relie on her but on God whose messenger he then beleeved her to be Let the Cardinall or Binius or any of them prove forcibly which they can never doe out of Evagrius any other invocation or adoration used by Narses to the blessed Virgin and I will consent unto them in that whole point Thirdly all that Evagrius saith of that apparition of the blessed Virgin is but a rumour and report of some who were with Narses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some say Evagrius himselfe doth not say it was so or that Narses either said or beleeved it to be so but reported it was by some of the souldiers of Narses whether true or false that must relie on the credit of the reporters Now for the Cardinall to avouch a doctrine of faith out of a rumour or report of how credible men themselves knew not from such an uncertainty to collect that Generals ought to relie on the aide of the blessed Virgin in their battels and that shee interpellata precibus being invocated by their prayers riseth up and becomes a warrier on their side this by none that are indifferent can be judged lesse than exceeding temerity and by those that are religious will bee condemned as plaine superstition and impiety But let us returne now to Anastasius whose narration as it is untrue in it selfe if the comming of Narses into Italy and victory over the Gothes bee referred to that time when Totilas had before wonne Rome so it is much more untrue if it bee referred as by Binius glosse it is either to the yeare wherein the Emperour recalled his Edict which was never or to the tenth yeare of Totilas which was wholly ended before the comming of Narses into Italie and before the fift Councell and the Baronian banishment of Vigilius 25. After the victory of Narses it followeth in Anastasius tunc adunatus Clerus then the Romane Clergy joyned together besought Narses that hee would intreat the Emperour that if as yet Pope Vigilius with the Presbiters and Deacons that were carried into banishment with him were alive they might returne home In that they speake of this exile as long before begun even so long that they doubted whether Vigilius were then alive or no it seemeth evidently that Anastasius still hath an eye to that banishment for the cause of Anthimus after he had beene two yeares in Constantinople that falling five g Nam Vigilius venit Constantinopolim anno 12 belli Gothici Proc. lib. 3. pa. 364. Narses autem Totilam vicit et Romam recapit an 18. ejusdem belli Proc. lib 3. pa. 408. et seq whole yeares before the victory of Narses they had reason to adde si adhuc if Vigilius doe live as yet that is after so long time of banishment remaine alive Now seeing it is certaine that Vigilius was not at that time to wit not within two yeares after his comming to Constantinople banished as by the fift generall Councell is h Nam ex eo liquet Vigilium à primo ejus adventu Constantinopolim illic mansisse ad finē Concilij dicitur enim illic à Iustiniano quod Vigilius semper ejusdem voluntatis fuit de condemnatione Trium Capitulorum Conc. 5. Coll. 1. pa. 520. a Semper viz. à primo ejus advētu et consensu ad tempus 5. Concilij evident it hence followeth that as this Anastasian exile so all the consequents depending thereon are nothing else but a meere fiction of Anastasius without all truth or probability for seeing Vigilius was not then banished neither did the Romanes intreate Narses nor Narses the Emperour for his delivery nor the Emperour upon that send to recall him or them from exile nor use any such words about Pelagius nor thanke them if they would accept Vigilius nor did they promise after the death of Vigilius to chuse Pelagius nor did the Emperour dismisse them all for of Pelagius that hee three yeares after the end of the Councell remained in banishment is certainly testified by Victor i Nam Victor ait Pelagium redijsse ab exilio anno 18. post Coss Basilij Vict. Tun. in Chron. et Concilium habitum ait ille an 13. post ejusdem Consulatum nor did they returne from exile into Sicilie all this is a meere fiction So in this Catastrophe beginning at the time when Anastasius saith Totilas was King of the Gothes there are contained at least sorty capitall untruths to let passe the rest as being of lesser note and moment Let any now cast up the whole summe I doubt not but hee shall finde not onely as I have said so many untruths as there are lines but if one would strictly examine the matter as there are words in the Anastasian description of the life of Vigilius I am verily perswaded that few Popes lives scape better at his hands than this But I have stayed long enough in declaring the falshood of Anastasius on whom Baronius so much relyeth and who is a very fit author for such an Annalist as Baronius CAP. XXXVI That Baronius reproveth Pope Vigilius for his comming to Constantinople and a refutation thereof with a description of the life of the same Vigilius 1. AFter all which the Cardinall could devise to disgrace either the Emperor or the Empresse or Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea or the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters or the Synodall Acts in the last place let us consider what he saith against Pope Vigilius for this cause so netled him that whatsoever or whosoever came in his way though it were his Holinesse himselfe hee would not spare them if he thought thereby to gaine never so little for the support of their infallible Chaire And what think you is it that he carps at and for which hee so unmannerly quarrels Pope Vigilius was it for oppugning the truth published by the Emp. Edict or was it for making his hereticall Constitution and defining it ex Cathedrâ in defence of the Three Chapters or was it for his pevishnesse in refusing to come to the generall Councell even then when he was present in the City where it was held and had promised under his owne hand that hee would come unto it or was it his pertinacious obstinacy in heresie that he would rather undergoe both the just sentence of an anathema denounced by the generall Councell and also the calamity and wearinesse of exile inflicted by the Emperor as Baronius saith upon him then yeelding to the truth and true judgement of the Synod in condemning the Three Chapters Are these which are all
favourer of the Eutychean heresie Vigilius saith the Cardinall d Bell. lib. 4. de Pontif. ca. 10. § Sciendum was here in a great straite for if hee openly professed heresie hee feared the Romanes who would never indure an heretike to sit in Peters Chaire if hee should on the other side professe himselfe a Catholike he feared Theodora the hereticall Empresse that she would not indure him Itaque rationem illam excogitavit therfore he devised this policy and I pray you note it well that e Vt Romae Catholicum ageret et interim per literas apud Jmperatricem haereticum simularet Bell. ibid. at Rome or openly hee would play the Catholike but secretly in his private letters to the Empresse and to Anthimus he would faine himselfe an heretike Thus Bellarmine who fully expresseth the nature and disposition of Pope Vigilius as if hee had not onely felt his pulse but beene in his bosome Hee was indeed another Catiline Simulare ac dissimulare hee could semble and dissemble conceale what indeed hee was seeme to bee what hee was not At Rome and in shew of the world a Catholike at Constantinople and in his secret and close actions an heretike Thus farre the Cardinall saith well but hee is extremely mistaken in one circumstance in that hee saith that his open or Catholike profession was mentall and ex animo and his private and secret detestation of the Catholike faith was verball and fained It was quite contrary his heart and Intrals were all hereticall nothing but his face and outward shew was Catholike for proofe whereof I will not urge that the Pope in this Epistle accurseth and f Qui dicit in Christo duas formas i. naturas et non confitetur unam personá unam essentiam anathema sit Vigil in Epist apud Liber loc cit anathematizeth all who hold the Catholike faith or who beleeve otherwise than Eutyches did for so hee doth also in his other Epistle to the Emperour and Mennas condemne Eutycheanisme and yet it is no commendation for his Holinesse either to curse the Catholike faith or to curse that faith which in his heart hee beleeveth But this I would have considered that Vigilius promised g Adimple nobis quae pronâ voluntate promisisti Anast in vita Vigil under his hand-writing yea hee swore h Conscriptaque jurataque haereticorum defensio Bar. an 540. nu 4. also that he would abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and restore Anthimus for performance whereof hee writ i Vigilius implens promissionē suam quam Augustae fecerat talē scripsit Epistolam Liber ca. 22 that private Epistle which was all that as yet hee could doe Let Bellarmine now say if their Popes doe use to promise and that under their hands yea to sweare also to doe that which they meane not to doe Who may bee beleeved upon their words upon their oathes if not the Popes Holinesse if hee not onely in words and writing but in his solemne oathes equivocate whose oath among all that generation can bee thought simple and without fraud 34. Againe to what end should Pope Vigilius dissemble secretly and among his intire friends such as were Anthimus Theodosius and Severus where or to whom should he truly open himselfe and his inward heart if not to such The first lesson that men of Vigilius metall learne is that of Lucilius k Ex quo citat Lactant. lib. 6. divin Jnst ca. 18. Homini amico ac familiari non est mentiri meum The Priscilians who as S. Austen l Exhortantur suos ad mendacium tanquam exemplis Prophetarum Apostolorum Angelorum et ipsius Christi Aug. lib. contr Mend. ca. 2. shewes were the very teachers of lying and dissembling and who perswaded their fellow heretikes unto that base art and trade yet even they taught that Lucilian lesson and most impiously pretended m Aug. ibid. to collect it out of the words of the Apostle Speake the truth every man to his neighbour for we are members one of another To his neighbour and fellow member sayd they we must speake the truth but to such as are not joyned n Cum eis qui nobis in societate veritatis proximi non sunt neque ut ita dicam commembres nostri sunt Ibid. to us in the neighbourhood or fellowship of the same Religion and who are not of the same body with us to them loqui licet oportetque mendacium to them you may lye nay you must not speake the truth to such Anthimus Severus and Theodosius they were the next neighbours to Vigilius all conjoyned o Grati◠qua nos Deo nostro conjungimur eam fidem quam tenetis et tenuisse me tenere significo ut et anima una sit et cor unum Vig. Epist ad Anth. apud Lib. loc cit and concorporated into Eutycheanisme Had he dissembled with them he had beene worse than the Priscilianists nay worse than the devils themselves for they though they lye to all others yet speake truth among themselves and to Beelzebub otherwise his kingdome could not endure It was Iustinian and the Catholikes who were of a contrary religion to Vigilius there was little or no neighbourhood at all betwixt them they were not concorporall not members of one body with him to them not being his neighbors commembres with him by the rules of that blacke Art he might he ought to lye but to Anthimus and Severus being of one body with him he must speake the truth 35. Further yet looke to that old Cassian rule Cui bono where and with whom was Pope Vigilius to gaine more by his cogging and counterfeiting He had now rightfull possession of the See of Rome which was the onely marke he aymed at What hurt could three deposed Bishops or the Empresse her selfe doe now unto him being backt by the Emperor by all Catholikes and which is best by a good cause what needed he for pleasing them to faine himselfe an heretike Could they thrust Vigilius from his See who could not hold their owne or could the Empresse deprive Vigilius who could not restore Anthimus There was nothing that could move Vigilius to faine himselfe an heretike or to write that hereticall Epistle if he had been in heart a Catholike But being in heart hereticall there was many most urgent and necessary inducements why he should faine himselfe a Catholike Had hee shewed his inside unto the Emperour and the Church had he opened to them the heresie lurking in his brest had he made it knowne that he would abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and the Catholike faith hee had instantly incensed all against him both the Emperour and the Romanes as Bellarmine p Metuebat Romanos qui haereticum sedere nunquam passuri videbantur Bell. loc cit sayth yea the whole Catholike Church would have joyned in the expulsing and deposing of such a wolfe and wretched heretike out of
heart I pray you when looked your Cardinalship into the heart of Vigilius how know you that he was not an heretike in heart when he was so hereticall in profession or how know you of S. Hildebrand of Boniface 8. or of any of all the Popes that lived since their times that they were not heretikes and plaine Infidels in heart when their words were Catholike I would gladly for my learning be informed how Bellarmine or the most acute Lynceus of them all do or can know otherwise than by their outward professions what any of all the Popes beleeved and thought in their heart What Innocent the third when he decreed the doctrine of Transubstantiation what Leo the tenth when he condemned Luther or what Paul Iulius and Pius the fourth when they confirmed their Trent Councell How know you that in their hearts they beleeved those doctrines or that they did not dissemble and faine as you say Vigilius did What can you say for Pius the fourth which may not be sayd for Vigilius also Doth Pius say he did before and now doth thinke as the Trent masters doe Pope Vigilius sayth the like and most plainly Eam fidem quam tenetis that faith which you Anthimus Severus and Theodosius doe hold I signifie unto you that I have held and that I doe now hold the same Doth Pius call the Trent Fathers his beloved brethren in Christ so doth Vigilius call those hereticall Bishops his beloved brethren in Christ nay in Liberatus he calls them even Christs Doth Pope Pius professe an unity betwixt himselfe and them all making one body of the Church Pope Vigilius doth the like and he doth it more significantly We sayth he preach this same doctrine that you doe Vt anima una sit cor unum in Deo so that there is in you and mee but one soule and one heart in God How can any speech be cordiall if this testifying himselfe to be one soule and one heart with them doe not come à fibris but onely à labris Doth Pope Pius approve the doctrine of the Trent conspirators So doth Pope Vigilius the doctrine of those Eutychean heretikes Doth Pius condemne and anathematize Lutherans Calvinists and all who thinke or teach otherwise than himselfe and his Trent Conventicle taught or beleeved so doth Pope Vigilius condemne and anathematize all who deny two natures in Christ all who beleeve otherwise than himselfe and his Eutychean fellow heretikes did In all these there is as much to be sayd for Pope Vigilius as for Pope Pius and if you please to adde that one other agreement also as of Vigilius it is sayd that they knew crudelitatem fidei so may it in like manner bee truly sayd of Pope Pius that this did manifest unto all men crudelitatem fidei the cruelty of his and his Trent Councels faith If by these outward acts the Cardinall can know Pius the fourth to have ex animo condemned their Trent heresies why can he not by the like outward acts know Vigilius to have ex animo condemned the Catholike faith If Vigilius for all these outward acts and so many testimonies and evidences of a willing minde did dissemble and thinke in his heart otherwise than he writ how will or can the Cardinall prove unto us that Pius the 4. and the whole Councell of Trent did not dissemble and both write and speake otherwise than they thought in heart Hath the Cardinall some windowes to pry into the secrets of the heart of Pius the fourth and the Trent Councell which are dammed up that he cannot see into the brest of Vigilius If Pope Pius upon his word and writing be to be credited much more is Pope Vigilius seeing he did not only by words and writing teach this hereticall doctrine but which Pius did not he bound himselfe by a sacred oath that hee would teach the same And which is yet a farre greater evidence Vigilius after this did teach the like hereticall doctrine to overthrow the same Councell of Chalcedon in the cause of the Three Chapters which hee did so unfainedly and so cordially that for teaching the same he incurred the just indignation of the Emperour the curse of the holy generall Councell the publike hatred of all Catholikes and if wee may beleeve Baronius even exile and persecution also Why might not the same Vigilius from his heart teach Eutycheanisme as well as Nestorianisme The faces of those two heresies looke contrary wayes indeed but their tayles like Sampsons Foxes are joyned together to undermine the Catholike faith and the holy Councell of Chalcedon Hee who once is proved to be treacherous in this sort and to doe this once from his heart semper praesumitur is alwayes to bee presumed treacherous in the same kinde Hee who did this in the Three Chapters would have done it in Eutycheanisme his heart his desire his purpose at both times was the same the odds was accidental in the oportunity which served better in the one than in the other what need they excuse his teaching Eutycheanisme to have been only labiall when it is cleare his teaching of Nestorianisme was cordiall If they cannot excuse Pope Vigilius for teaching Nestorianisme from his heart which cannot possibly be done what need they be so nice in denying his teaching of Eutycheanisme to have come from the same heart his fault in them both being alike one answer will alike serve for them both 44. But what thinke you meant the Cardinall so to busie himselfe and bee so curious about the heart and secret minde of Vigilius what though hee did not in heart yet exteriori professione by his hereticall writing by his outward confession by that Vigilius condemned the Catholike faith as the Cardinall d Dico Vigilium scripsisse illam Epistolam et damnasse Catholicam fidem saltem exteriori professione Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. §. Respondeo multi acknowledgeth it is the Popes outward profession not his inward cogitation by which wee prove his Chayre to bee fallible what have wee nay what hath the Cardinall or any of them all to doe with Vigilius intent or inward thoughts leave those to his Tribunall who onely e Reg. 8.39 knoweth and seeth the hearts of all the sonnes of men let men who cannot see the heart looke to his words to his writings to that profession by which hee teacheth others If that be hereticall what boots it them though his heart bee orthodoxall Confirma fratres pasce oves are outward acts they looke abroad and outwardly not to the inward and hidden man in the Popes breast If he think as Simon Peter and teach as Simō Magus as Arius Nestorius or Eutyches did is he not an hereticall teacher an hereticall Pope a confirmer of his brethrē in heresie a feeder nay a very prisoner of the sheepe with worse weeds than the Socraticall Cicuta If the Pope onely thinke and beleeve heresie why thought is free to wit from
at that same time what if most of them knew not of this Epistle which was sent secretly by Vigilius and by his advice kept closely by Anthimus and Severus what if they all knew it and yet having other crimes enough to object thought it needlesse to mention that as it seemes they did the Symony of Vigilius and censure of Silverius what if they were not so spitefull as the Cardinall is and therefore would not say the worst they could against his Holinesse 28. But see the strange dealing of the Cardinall How or why should Theodora upbrayd this to Vigilius for the not restoring of Anthimus that quarrell for the restoring of Anthimus as I have often sayd and clearly proved was a meere devise and fiction of Anastasius it was nothing but Alcibiades dogs tayle Or how should Iustinian upbraid it when he was so enraged against Vigilius and persecuted him for not restoring Anthimus Seeing neither Iustinian persecuted Vigilius nor was enraged against him but for the space of five of six yeares they both sang one note they fully consorted together or how should Mennas and Theodorus upbraid it when they were excommunicated by Vigilius Seeing that excommunication all the circumstances of it are merely fictitious as by the death of Mennas which was long before that forged excommunication of him was demonstrated Are not these worthy reasons to disprove this Epistle to bee writ by Vigilius which all relie on fictions on most untrue and idle fancies And whether Facundus upbraided it or no may bee questioned nor will it bee clearly knowne untill they will suffer Facundus to come out of their Vaticane where hee lyeth yet imprisoned But as for the fift Councell it was great sillinesse in the Cardinall once to thinke that they should or would upbraid this Epistle to him they used the Pope in the most honourable and respectfull manner that could be wished they uttered no one harsh or hard word against him but what was rightly said or done by him as his condemning of Origen his condemning the Three Chapters before the time of the Councell that they often mention and approve it also They sought by lenity to win the Popes heart to consent unto the truth which they defended seeing they could not prevaile with him yet they would have the whole world to testifie together with the Popes peevishnesse their owne lenity equity and moderation used towards him and that it was not hatred or contempt of his person nor any precedent occasion but only the truth and equity of that present cause which enforced them to involve him remaining obdurate in his heresie in that Anathema which they in generall denounced against all the pertinacious defenders of the Three Chapters of which Vigilius was the chiefe and standard-bearer to the rest Did the Cardinall thinke with such poore sleights to quit Vigilius of this Epistle If nothing else truely the very imbecillity and dulnesse of the Cardinals reasons and demonstrations in this point may perswade that Vigilius and none but he was the author of it Baronius was too unadvised without better weapons to enter into the sand with old Cardinall Bellarmine in this cause who is knowne to bee plurimarum palmarum vetus ac nobilis gladiator and in this combate with Baronius hee hath played the right Eutellus indeed Come let us give to him in token of his conquest corollam palmam and let Baronius in remembrance of his foile leave this Epistle to Vigilius with this Impresse Vigilio scriptum hoc Eutello palma feratur 29. Vigilius now by just Duell is proved to bee the true author of this Epistle Be it so say they k Etiamsi ista verè scripsisset Vigilius nullum tamen ob id infertur praejudicium Apostolicae sedi cujus tunc ipse erat invasor Silverius autem germanus Pontifex Bar. an 538. nu 15. Fecit id cum adhuc viveret Silverius quo tempore Vigilius non erat Papa sed Pseudopapa Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. Non mirum si Pseudoepiscopus et quasi Antichristus ad schisma haeresin addidisset Bin. not in Lib. pa 626. a. ita etiam Gretz in Defens ca. 10. lib. 4. Bell. yet that is no prejudice at all to the Apostolike See because he writ it in the time of Sylverius while as yet Vigilius was not the lawfull Pope but an intruder and usurper and Pseudopope and herein they all joyne hand in hand Bellarmine with Baronius Gretzer and Binius with them both But feare not the tailes of these smoaking firebrands nor the wrath of Rhesin Aram and Remalias sonne because they have taken wicked counsell against the truth Nor needed there here any long contention about this matter for how doe they prove this saying of theirs that Vigilius writ it whē Sylverius lived and not afterwards Truly by no other but the Colliers argument It is so because it is so proofe they have none at all they were so destitute of reasons in this point that laying this for their foundation to excuse the Pope for teaching heresie they begge this or rather take it without begging or asking by vertue of that place called Petitio Principij Let us pardon Binius and Gretzer who gathered up onely the scraps under the Cardinals tables but for a Cardinal so basely and beggarly to behave himselfe as to dispute from such sophistical topicks is too foule a shame and blemish to his wit and learning And why may not wee take upon us the like Magisteriall authority and to their I say it is so oppose I say it is not so Doe they thinke by their bigge lookes and sesquipedalia verba to down-face the truth 30. But because I have no fancy to this Pythagoricall kinde of learning there are one or two reasons which declare that Vigilius writ this Epistle after the death of Silverius when he was the onely and true lawfull Pope for the former is the narration of Liberatus who in a continued story of these matters after the death of Silverius relates how Vigilius writ this Silverius saith he l Liber ca. 22. dyed with famine Vigilius autem implens promissum And Vigilius to fulfill his promise writ this Epistle Oh saith Gretzer m Gret loc cit Liberatus useth here an anticipation and sets downe that before which fell out after Prove that Gretzer Prove it why his proofe is like his Masters It is so because it is so Other proofe you shall have none of Gretzer He thought belike his words should passe for currant pay as well as a Cardinals but it was too foolish presumption in him to take upon him to dispute so Cardinalitèr that is without reason why should it not be thought seeing we find nothing to the contrary that Liber in his narration followed the order and sequell of things and times as the law of an historian requires rather than beleeve Gretzers bare saying that it is disorderly and contrary to the order of
the times and event of things 31. This will further appeare by the other reason drawne from the time when this Epistle was written Baronius referres it to the yeare 538. wherein Silverius was expelled and faith n Bar. an 538. nu 14 15. that though Vigilius had truly writ it yet it is no prejudice to the Apostolike See cujus tunc ipse invasor of which hee was an invader and intruder at that time when it was written But the Cardinal is mistaken in this point for it is cleare and certaine by the testimony of Liberatus o Lib. loc cit that Vigilius had not writ this Epistle when Silverius returned out of exile from Patara into Italy for Vigilius hearing of the returne of Silverius and being in great feare of losing the Popedome hee hastened then to Bellisarius and intreated him to deliver Silverius into his custody otherwise said hee non possum facere quod à me exigis I cannot doe that which you require me Bellisarius required of him two things as the same Liberat. witnesseth the one to performe his promise to the Empresse that was p Augusta Vigilium profiteri flagitavit ut si Papa fieret tolleret Synodum c. Lubenter suscepit Vigilius promissum Liber loc cit the overthrowing of the Councel at Chalcedon the other to pay him the two hundred pieces of Gold which hee promised to himselfe whereby it is most evident that at Silverius returning into Italy Vigilius had done neither of these and so not writ this Epistle Now it is most likely that Silverius returned into Italy an 540. for seeing he dyed q Silverius hoc anno obijt 12. Kalend. Iulij Ba. an 540. nu 2 in the month of Iune that yeare and being presently upon r Ita Silverius traditus duobus Vigilij servis qui in Palmariam abductus sub eorum custodiâ defecit inedia Lib. loc cit his returne sent away into the Iland of Palmaria by Vigilius a little time you may be sure would serve to famish an old disheartened man But Gretzer easeth us in this point and plainly professeth ſ Mors Silverij fuit an 540. et hoc ipso itidem anno Vigilius ad Theodoram scripsit promissa exolvere volens Gretz def ca. 10 lib. 4. de Pont. that this Epistle was writ in that same yeare 440. wherein Silverius dyed If now you doe consider how little time there was betwixt the death of Silverius and his delivery to Vigilius and how in that short time also Vigilius had a greater worke and of more importance to looke unto than the writing of letters to deposed Bishops to wit to provide that Silverius should not live that himselfe should not bee expelled his owne See and how upon Silverius death himselfe might be againe lawfully chosen Pope none I thinke will suppose that Vig. writ this before Silverius death in that yeare but after it and after all his troubles ended when hee having quiet possession of the See had leisure to thinke on such matters But why stay I in the proofe hereof this being clearly testified by Nauclerus who thus writeth t Naucl. Gener. 18. Silverius being dead Vigilius was created Pope quod postquam comperit Theodora which when Theodora understood she writ unto him to performe his promise about Anthimus but Vigilius answered farre be this from me I spake unadvisedly before and I am sorry for it So Nauclerus who therein no doubt followed Anastasius for hee u Anast in vit Vigilij having set downe both the same motion made by Theodora and the answer given by Vigilius Binius x Ecce ut Vigil statim ac sanctam sedem ascendit c. Bin. not in vit Vig. observes that this was done when Vigilius was now the rightfull and true Pope wherefore seeing Theodora writ to Pope Vigilius and that after the death of Silverius to performe his promise it is certaine that before then he had not done it and so that untill hee was the onely true and lawfull Pope hee did not write this Epistle which would have given full content to Theodora and seeing againe we have clearly proved that hee did write it it remaineth that hee writ it after the death of Silverius when himselfe was the onely lawfull and true Bishop of Rome One doubt in this matter remaineth which Binius y Bin. not in vit Vig § Ex Actis sleightly mentioneth for that Vigilius after he was true Pope did not onely anathematize Anthimus and confirme his deposition but professe himselfe also to defend the Councell of Chalcedon as appeares both by his Epistle to Iustinian and Mennas dated foure months z Epist Vigilij ad Mennam 15 Calend. Octob. data est Ea extat apud Bar. an 540. nu 25. et eodem tempore missa est etiam illa ad Iustinianum apud Bar. an 540. nu 15. et 22. after hee was the true Pope and by that answer which as Anastasius and Nauclerus say hee sent in a Ad haec rescripsit Vigilius Anast in vit Vig. writing to Theodora that hee would not now restore Anthimus being an heretike Whence it may bee collected that after he was once the true and lawfull Pope nihil horum dixerit scripserit vel egerit that hee neither said writ nor did any such thing as it is expressed in this Epistle for confirming the heresie of Eutyches for how is it credible that he should write both these being directly contrary the one to the other 32. I answer that had Vigilius bin an honest man or a man of credit of constancy and resolution he would never have thought or dreamed to write both those But Vigilius was perpaucorum hominum you may goe through the whole Catalogue of the Romane Popes and there is the best choise of wicked men in all formes and fashions of impiety to bee found and not picke out such a Polipus a turncoate a weather-cocke as Pope Vigilius Baronius compares him to King Saul and saith b Bar. an 540. nu 13. that as soone as hee was made the true Pope hee was then Saul inter Prophetas It is true in many things hee was like King Saul but in that act of prophesying wherein the Cardinal compares them there is a marvellous dissimilitude betwixt them Saul was moved by Gods Spirit Vigilius by his owne will Saul was acted and driven to utter those prophesies which God put into his mouth Vigilius himselfe did guide and move his tongue and turned it with the rudder of his unconstant minde when and whithersoever hee would Saul prophesied of necessity not being able to resist Gods motion Vigilius in hypocrisie being desirous to please and humour other men in a word Saul had the gift Vigilius the art or jugling tricke of prophesying When he would seeme to be that which indeed and in heart he was not a Catholike Bishop and gaine the favour of Iustinian a Catholike