infallible Chaire they two by the new found art of Transubstantiating wherein that sect excelleth Iannes and Iambres and all the inchanters in the world they by one spell or charme of a few words pronounced out of that holy chaire can turne a serpent into a staffe bread into a living bodie darkenesse into light an hereticke into a Catholike yea the very venome and poyson of all Nestorianisme into most wholsome doctrines of the Catholike faith such as that none may write speake or thinke ought to the contrarie 21. See ye not now as I foretold that you should both the Pope and the Cardinall marching under the banner of Nestorius and like two worthy Generalls holding up a standard to the Nestorians and building in the Romane Church but very cunningly and artificially a Capitoll for Nestorianisme They forsooth will not in plaine tearmes say that Nestorianisme is the Catholike faith that Christ is not God that the Sonne of Mary is not the Sonne of God that Cyrill is an hereticke and the holy Ephesine Councell hereticall Fie these are too Beoticall and blunt they could never have gotten any one to tast of that cup of Nestorianisme had they dealt so plainely or simply rather Rome and Italy are Schooles of better manners and of more civilitie and subtiltie you must learne there to speake heresie in the Atticke Dialect in smooth plausible sweet and sugred tearmes you must say the union which Ibas in his Epistle embraceth is the Catholike union that Ibas by embracing that union was a Catholike and ought to bee judged a Catholike that whosoever embraceth not this union which the Pope hath defined to be the Catholike communion cannot be a Catholike or if you speake more briefly and Laconically you may say the Popes decrees and Cathedrall judgements in causes of faith are infallible Say but either of these you say as much as either Theodorus or Nestorius did you deny Christ to bee God You condemne the Ephesine Councell you speake true Nestorianisme but you speake it not after the rude and rusticke fashion but in that purest Ciceronian phrase which is now the refined language of the Romane Church By approving this union or the Popes decree in this cause of Ibas you drinke up at once all the blasphemies and heresies of Nestorius even the very dregs of Nestorianisme yet your comfort is though it be ranke poison you shall now take it as an antidote and soveraigne potion so cunningly tempered by Pope Vigilius and with such a grace and gravity commended reached and brought even in the golden cup of Babylon by the hands of Cardinall Baronius unto you that it killeth not onely without any sense of paine but with a sweet delight also even in a pleasing slumber and dreame of life bringing you as on a bed of downe unto the pit of death 22. See here again their Synoniā art Oh how nice scrupulous is Baronius in approving or allowing Vigilius to approve the former part of this Epistle of Ibas The Epistle o Bar. an 553. nu 192. was in no other part but onely in the last concerning the union approved Why there is nothing at all in the former no heresie or impiety set downe in it which doth not certainly and unavoydably ensue upon the approving of that union in Nestorianisme which Ibas embraceth in the latter part Why then must the latter and not the former be approved Forsooth in the former part p Vid. Epist Jba loc cit the blasphemies of the Nestorians are in too plaine and blunt a manner expressed Cyrill is an Apollinarian The twelve Chapters of Cirill omni impietate plena sunt are full of all impietie The Ephesine Councell unjustly deposed Nestorius and approved the twelve Chapters of Cyrill which are contraria verae fidei and such like It is not for a Pope or a Cardinall to approve such plaine and perspicuous heresies they might as well say We are heretikes wee are Nestorians which kinde of Beoticisme is farre from the civility of the Romane Court But in the latter part the heresies of Nestorius and all his blasphemies are offered in the shew of union with Cyrill and communion with the Church and comming under the vaunt of that union as in the wombe of the Trojane horse the Pope and the Cardinall may now with honour receive them the union and with or in it all Nestorianisme must be brought into the City the Pope and the Cardinall will themselves put their hands to this holy worke pedibusque rotarum subijciunt lapsus stupea vincula collo intendunt themselves will drag and hale it with their owne shoulders to within the wals nor is that enough it must be placed in the very Romane Capitoll in the holy temple and consecrated to God and that the Pope himselfe will doe by an Apostolicall and infallible constitution by that immutable decree is this union set up as the Catholike union Et monstrum infoelix sacrata sistitur arce this unholy and unhappy union is now embraced by which all the gates of the City of God are set wide open for all heresies to rush in at their pleasure and make havocke of the Catholike saith 23. Now it is not unworthy our labour to consider whether Vigilius and Baronius did in meere ignorance or wittingly embrace this union mentioned by Ibas that is in truth all Nestorianisme And for Vigilius if any will be so favourable as to interpret all this to have proceeded of ignorance I will not greatly contend with him It is as great a crime for their Romane Apollo and as foule a disgrace to their infallible Chaire upon ignorance to decree an heresie as to do it upon wilfull obstinacy yet to cōfesse the truth I am more than of opinion that Vigilius not upon ignorance but out of a setled judgment affection which he bare to Nestorianisme decreed this union and with it the doctrines of Nestorius to be embraced And that which induceth mee so to judge is the great diligence care and circumspection which Vigilius used to enforme both himselfe and others in this matter for besides that this cause was debated and continually discussed in the Church for the space of six yeares and more before the Pope published this his Apostolicall Constitution all which time Vigilius was a chiefe party in this cause himselfe in his decree witnesseth concerning this third Chapter or Epistle of Ibas that he examined it diligenti p Vig. Const nu 186. investigatione by a diligent inquisition yea that he perused his bookes most q Gesta Concilij Chalc. diligentissime perquirentes Jbid. diligently for this point and concludeth both of it and the rest that hee decreed these things cum r Ibid. nu 208. omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all possible care and diligence that could be used And because plus vident oculi quam oculus hee added to his owne the judgement of an whole Synod of Bishops
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
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
that is all that are Papists or members of the present Church of Rome they are all hereby tryed to defend this Apostolicall Constitution of Vigilius that is to maintaine all the blasphemies of the Nestorians to deny the Catholike faith the doctrine of the Apostles of the primative Church of the fift generall Councell so to be not only heretikes but convicted anathematized and cōdemned heretikes by the judgement of a generall approved Councell and so by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church Further yet there is a tryall of them whether upon that ground or foundation of the Popes infallibility they will build up and maintaine any other doctrine or position of faith or religion if they doe as indeed every point of the Romish faith and Religion relyeth upon that they are againe hereby tryed to be hereticall not onely in the foundation but in every position and doctrine of their faith and religion which relyes upon that foundation 4. This was it which netled Baronius and extorted from him those earnest and affectionate wishes that this controversie had never beene heard of nor mentioned in the world he saw what a tryall was like to be made by it of men of doctrines of Churches of the Pope himselfe and their whole Romish Church and seeing that tryall he never ceased to say that it had beene much better that this controversie had never beene moved nor spoken of for so they had avoided this most notable triall Blessed be God for that it pleased him in the infinite depth of his unspeakable wisedome to cause this controversie to be ventilated and discussed to the utmost that among many other tryals this might be one of the Antichristian Synagogue to try them even untill the very destruction of Antichrist It is for heretikes whose errors and obstinacy is tryed and discovered to the world it is for them I say to wish that the controversies about Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutycheanisme and the like had never beene moved they had scaped the just censures and anathemaes by that meanes But Catholikes have cause to rejoyce and triumph in such controversies by which both the truth which they maintaine is made more resplendent and victorious themselves and their faith tryed to be like refined gold the Church thereby is quieted the truth propagated heresies confounded and the glory of Almighty God much more magnified and praysed CAP. XXIII How Baronius revileth both the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian and Theodorus B. of Caesarea and a refutation of the same 1. SEeing now notwithstanding the wishing of Baronius this controversie could not be buried it ought him and all ill-willers of it a greater shame than that in the next place let us see how he declameth both against the Emperors Edict whereby these three Chapters were condemned Theodorus Bish of Caesarea who as he saith was the author penner of that Edict The Edict it self he calleth first Seminarium a An. 534. n. 2◠dissentionū a seed-plot of sedition which was never made upon a good occasion nor had any good end And not content herewith he tells b An. 546. nu 9. us out of Facundus that it is contrary to the faith yea even to that faith which Iustinian himselfe professed as orthodoxall to which effect also Baronius himselfe saith c Ibid. nu 8. that the Emperours Edict was set forth contrary to the three Chapters of the most holy Councell of Chalcedon But he specially seekes to disgrace it by the author of it for though it was published by Iustinian yet saith he d Edere sanctiones sibi arrogat Iustin quas dolose conscripsissent haeretici an 546. nu 41. Egerunt callide adversarii veritatis c. ibid. nu 9. it was written and that craftily by heretikes and adversaries to the truth by the e Ingenue professus est Origenistarum studiis ea fuisse ab Jmperatore promulgata ibid. nu 49. Origenists and in particular by f Illud à Theodoro conscriptū edictum suo nomine Iustin promulgavit ibid. nu 8. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea one gratious g an 538. nu 85 potent and familiar with the Emperour and for proofe of all this the Cardinall citeth Liberatus h an 546. nu 9. an 534. nu 21. alibi Facundus and Vigilius 2. Having thus declared Theodorus to be the author and writer of the Edict Baronius then rageth against Theodorus as if he were to act veterē comoediam or according to the Proverbe ex plaustro to raile out of a cart against him calling him factious i Justin factiosorum studijs se inseruit an 550. nu 14. fraudulēt k Hominem vafrum an 551. nu 4. 564. nu 7. impudēt l Ejus gratia factus impudens ibid. nu 3. a most wicked m Theodorum illum nequissimum quem mirum in modum favisse ostendimus Origenis haeresibus an 564. nu 6. occullum haereticum manifestum schismaticum an 551. nu 5. Praeceps Origenista an eod nu 4. hereticall schismaticall headstrong Origenist the ring-leader of the Origenists one marvellously addicted to the heresie of Origen nor onely a servant to Origens errors but also n Non Origenis tantum errorum assecla sed Eutychianae blasphemia vehementissimus propugnator an 564. nu 7. a most earnest defender of the Eutychean blasphemy nor onely so but plunged o Ita miser Iustinianus caecus cacum Theodorum sectans cū īpso pariter mergitur in profundum an 564. nu 7. agit autē de haresi Aphthardochitarum in the heresie of the Aphthardokites or Phantastickes and like a blinde guide leading the blinde Emperour into that ditch of heresie a sacrilegious p Iuque sacrilegum Theodorum pseudoepiscopum imotyrannum insurgit in perversorem legum eversorem juriū an 551. nu 5. person a pseudobishop a tyrant a perverter of lawes an overthrower of right the q Qui Imperatori omnium illi malorum causa fuit an 551. n. 3 author of all mischiefe to the Empire the very r Hic igitur nefandissimus totius Ecclesiae pestis an 564. nu 7. plague of the whole Church Thus and much more doth Baronius utter against Theodorus by whom being so unworthy an author hee would disgrace the Edict it selfe which he writ though the Emperour published it 3. Let us first begin with that most untrue and malicious calumny of Baronius that the Emperor published his Edict against the three Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon Truly the Cardinall should and might most truly have said the quite contrary that he published his Edict for defence not onely of the three but of every Chapter of every position of every decree of the Councell of Chalcedon The three Chapters which that Imperiall Edict and after it the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church condemneth were not Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon but three impious positions assertions or as they were by an
more nulla ratione id fieri passus I would by no meanes yeeld unto that but I sent them a profession of faith and when Iohn 8. of Antioch caeterique and the rest with him had anathematized the doctrine of Nestorius then and not before communionem illis restituimus did we receive them into our communion Thus Cyrill who by requiring this did in effect require they performed the same a condemning of all their witings which were made against him and in defence of that heresie of Nestorius And had Cyrill lived to see any question made whether those writings by whomsoever they had beene written ought to bee or were by himselfe condemned out of all doubt that holy Father would in most plaine and expresse termes have anathematized them all as vertually and implicitè he had before and would most strictly have exacted the like expresse anathematizing of them of all those who would wash their hands of the blasphemies and heresies of Nestorius 18. Now from these three grounds every one of which is demonstrated to be untrue Vigilius collects his Conclusion or definitive sentence in defence of this second Chapter which also is an errour but not as the former personall but doctrinall yea hereticall that those writings of Theodoret or going under Theodorets name against Cyrill and his twelve Chapters ought not to be condemned which is as much as if he had decreed plainly that the heresies of Nestorius ought not to be condemned for in those writings of Theodoret they are all defended and that with such eagernesse art and acutenesse that if all other Nestorian books were abolished those writings alone of Theodoret would suffice as a rich storehouse to furnish the Nestorians with abundance of all kinde of weapons to maintaine their owne and oppugne the Catholike cause nor ever can Nestorianisme bee puld downe or overthrowne so long as those writings of Theodoret keepe their credit and stand uncondemned yet shal not these be condemned doth Vigilius decree 19. Pope Pelagius seeing the poison of the hereticall doctrine which the defending of this second Chapter doth beare with it exclaimes against it in this manner o Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. Quis hac O my deare brethren who seeth not these things to bee full of all impiety And againe who seeth not quanta temeritate plenum sit Theodoreti scripta superbiendo defendere how full of temeritie it is to defend so insolently the writings of Theodoret The fift generall Councell p Collat. 8. pa. 587. not onely accurseth those writings of Theodoret as hereticall but all who defend them yea all who doe not anathematize them A cleare evidence that they not onely judged this second Chapter to concerne the faith but the Constitution of Vigilius even herein to be hereticall because he would not anathematize those writings of Theodoret and much more because he decreed that they should not be anathematized and to their judgement consenteth the whole catholike Church they all condemne the decree of Vigilius even in this point as hereticall 20. I but Vigilius you will say condemneth q Quaecunque scripta vel dogmata scelâ—ratorum Nestorij Eutychetis erroribus manifestantur consonare anathematizamus damnamus Vig. Const nu 182. those very heresies of Nestorius which are defended in those writings he doth so at least he seemes by his words to doe it and had he not withall decreed that Theodorets writings should not bee condemned he could not justly have beene reproved in this point But in doing both he proves not himselfe orthodoxal by that which he saith well but unconstant and contrary to himselfe in overthrowing that which he saith well for if Theodorets writings against Cyrill may not be condemned as Vigilius decreth then may not the doctrines of Nestorius defended therein be condemned as Vigilius would seeme to doe Theodorets writings and Nestorianisme are inseparable companions either both must stand or both fall together It s as impossible and repugnant to condomne the one and deny that the other may be condemned as to condemne Euticheanisme and yet defend the Ephesine latrocinie and decree thereof or condemne Arianisme and not condemne the Arimine Councel It s the honor of truth that it never is nor can be dissonant to any other truth but heresie not onely may but almost ever doth fight not only against truth but against it selfe overthroweth with one hand or positioÌ„ what it builds up by another as in this of Vigilius is now apparent 21. Now although this clearly convinceth the Popes decree to be hereticall seeing it maintaineth two contradictory positions in a cause of faith the one is without all doubt an heresie yet is it worthy the examining whether of these contradictories must passe for the Popes judgment cathedrall resolution in this cause Cardinall Baronius will certainly direct vs in this doubt for he tells us which of it selfe also is evident that the Popes purpose r Pro ipsorum defensione laborat Vigilius Bar. an 553. nu 172. intent in setting forth this Constitution was to defeÌ„d the 3 Chapters adversus Imperatoris decretum sententiam Synodi against the Emperors Edict and the sentence of the fift Synode As the Emperour then and the Synode condemned Å¿ Ibid. nu 2â—2 so was it the Popes maine purpose to defend the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill which was the second Chapter This is must stand for the judgement cathedrall resolution of the Pope in this matter what he speaks repugnant to this is casuall praeter nay contra intentionem it s against his mind purpose it s to be thought onely by in-incogitancy to have slipt from his pen. So his condemning of the Nestorian doctrine is but in shew it s onely verball his defining that Theodorets writings which maintaine Nestorianisme may not be condemned is the true purpose and intent of his mind its cordial real By his verball condemning of Nestorianisme he shuts it out in words or as you may say at the foregate of his pallace By his defining that Theodorets writings may not be condemned he puls in Nestorianisme with all his might sets wide open a postren gate unto it by condemning Nestorianisme in shew of words he seemes to be orthodoxall by defending Nestorianisme indeed and in truth he demonstrates himselfe to be hereticall Or because Vigilius was so very wise a Pope as hereafter out of Baronius you shall heare it seemes he meant to shew one part of his wisedome and policie in this matter and therefore while the heresie of Nestorius comes in his owne naturall habit or in the liverie of Nestorius away with it the Popes holinesse will not admit it hee cannot abide it but when it comes countenanced and graced with the name of Theodoret and in his liverie the Pope embraceth it in both his armes and by his Apostolicall authoritie commandeth all men to give most friendly welcome and entertainement unto
which is in holding the true foundation of faith The contrary of all this falleth out unto them of the present Romane Church For not onely their sinnes are made more sinfull unto them there being no mantle to cover or hide them from the eyes of God and shield them from his vengeance but even their best and most holy actions which they doe or can performe though they should doe nothing but sing hymnes with David or feed Christs flock with Peter or give their goods to the poore and their bodies to be burned for Christ even these I say are so tainted with the venome of that Apostaticall foundation that being of themselves holy actions yet unto them they are turned into sinne and become pernicious and mortiferous For whatsoever act being in it selfe either good or indifferent any of their Church except onely the Pope himselfe who is a member transcendent doth performe because they doe it in obedience unto him whose supreme authority they make the foundation not onely of their faith but of all good actions in doing any such act there is a vertuall and implicit obedience to Antichrist an acknowledgement of his supreme power to teach and command what is to be done a receiving his marke either in their hand or forehead so that every such act is not onely impious but even Antichristian and containeth in it a vertuall and implicit renouncing of the whole faith In regard whereof none can ever sufficiently I say not commend but admire the zeale of Luther who though he was so earnest to have the Communion in both kinds contrarie to the doctrine and custome of the Romane Church yet withall he e Kemnit Exa Conc. Trid. 1. Tract de communi sub utraque specie pa 136. professed that if the Pope as Pope should command it to be received in both kinds he then would receive it not in both but in one kind onely Blessed Luther it was never thy meaning either to receive it onely in one or to deny it to be necessary for Gods Church and people to receive it in both kindes Thou knewest right well that Bibite ex hoc omnes was Christs owne ordinance with which none might dispense Thou for defence of this truth among many was set up as a signe of contradiction unto them and as a marke at which they directed all their darts of malicious and malignant reproaches Farre was it from thee to relent one hare-bredth in this truth But whereas they f Conc. Constant Sess 13. Conc. Trid. Sess 22. in decreto super petit de concessione calici◠Bell. lib. 4. de Euchar ca. 28. taught the use of the Cup to be indifferent and arbitrarie such as the Church that is the Pope might either allow or take away as he should thinke fit upon this supposall and no otherwise didst thou in thine ardent zeale to Christ and detestation of Antichrist say that were the use of both or one kinde onely a thing indeed indifferent as they taught it to be if the Pope as Pope should command the receiving in both kindes thou wouldst not then receive it so lest whilst thou might seeme to obey Christ commanding that but yet upon their supposall as a thing indifferent thou shouldest certainly performe obedience to Antichrist by his authoritie limiting and restraining that indifferency unto both kindes as now by his authority hee restraines it unto one The summe is this To doe any act whether in it selfe good or indifferent but commanded to be done by the Pope as Pope to pray to preach to receive the Sacraments yea but to lift your eyes or hold up your finger or say your Pater noster or your Ave Maria or weare a bead a modell a lace or any garment white or blacke or use any crossing either at Baptisme or any other time to do any one of these or any the like eo nomine because the Pope as Pope teacheth that they are to be done or commands the doing of them is in very deed a yeelding one selfe to be a vassall of Antichrist a receiving the marke of the beast and a vertuall or implicit deniall of the faith in Christ So extremly venemous is that poison which lyeth in the root of that fundamentall heresie which they have laid as the very rocke and Foundation of their faith 34. Hitherto we have examined the former position of Baronius which concerned Heresie His other concerning Schisme is this g Esse schismatici convicti sunt qui diversam à Romano Pontifice his decernendis sententiam sectati essent Bar. an 547. nu 30. That they who dissented from Pope Vigilius when hee decreed that the Three Chapters ought to be defended were Schismatikes A most strange assertion that the whole Catholike Church should bee schismaticall for they all dissented from Vigilius in this cause that Catholikes should all at once become Schismatikes yea and that also for the very defence of the Catholike faith I oppose to this another and true assertion That not onely Pope Vigilius when he defended the Three Chapters and forsooke communion with the condemners of them was a Schismatike himselfe and chiefe of the Schisme but that all who as yet defend Vigilius that is who maintaine the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith and forsake communion with those that condemne it that those all are and that for this very cause Schismatikes and the Pope the ringleader in the Schisme 35. For the manifesting whereof certaine it is that after Pope Vigilius had so solemnly and judicially by his Apostolicall authority defined that the Three Chapters ought to be defended there was a great rent and Schisme in the Church either part separating it selfe from the other and forsaking communion with the other First the holy Councell and they who tooke part with it anathematized h Coll. 8. talis anathema sit saepe ibid. the defenders of those Chapters thereby as themselves expound it declaring their opposites to be separated i Nihil aliud significat anathema nisi à Deo separationem Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. from God and therefore from the society of the church of God On the other side Pope Vigilius they who were on his part were so averse from the others that they would rather endure disgrace yea banishment as Baronius k An. 553. nu 221. sheweth thē communicate with their opposites But I shal not need to stay in proving that there was a rent and schisme at this time betweene the defenders condemners of those chapters Baronius professeth it saying l Ibid. The whole Church was then schismate dilacerata torn asunder by a schisme Againe m An. eodem 553. nu 250. After the end of the Councell there arose a greater war then was before Catholikes so he falsly calls both parts being then divided among themselves some adhaering to the Councell others holding with Vigilius and his Constitution Againe Many n An. eodem nu 229. relying
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
Theodora the patron of Anthimus an oppugner of the Councell of Chalcedon whence it may appeare that Anastasius ascribes to the Emperour that which was done by the Empresse against Agapetus and if any such words were used by Agapetus as comparing their tyranny to Dioclesians persecution it was spoken no way of Iustinian who was even then a most earnest defender of the true faith but of Theodora who for a while laboured for Anthimus and against the Councell of Chalcedon till seeing that shee could not prevaile therein neither by the meanes of Agapetus nor Silverius nor Vigilius after he had once writ to the Emperour his confirmation of the deposition of Anthimus she then changed her mind the cause of the three Chapters being then moved she became as the Emperour himselfe was an earnest condemner of the three Chapters as by t Nam Victor asserit Theodoram laborasse ut tria Capitula condemnentur in suo Chron. sub an 2 â—ost Cons Basilij Victor is evident that is in truth an earnest defender of the Councell of Chalcedon Now upon this truth errour alwayes having some truth for his ground Anastasius u Jn vita Agapeti buildeth many fabulous and poeticall fictions of his owne devising as that Iustinian and Agapetus quarrelled about the faith Agapetus defending against him the two natures in Christ that the Emperour threatned banishment to Agapetus unlesse he would consent with him and deny the two natures that Agapetus called him Dioclesian that Agapetus disputed with Anthimus and overcame him before the Emperour that the Emperour thereupon humbled himselfe to the Pope and adored x Augustus adoravit beatissimû Agapetum Papam Anast ibid. the most blessed Agapetus that then hee banished Anthimus and entreated Agapetus to consecrate Mennas in his roome Now Anastasius perceiving these his fictions concerning Iustinian and Agapetus wherein hee had some ground of truth to be plausible and his end being this Papae ut placereÌ„t quas fecisset fabulas hee brings in Iustinian and Vigilius to act the very same pageant againe and that without any ground of truth they for sooth tenne yeares after Anthimus was deposed and for ought appeareth was dead at that time must come in quarrelling againe about Anthimus as fresh as ever the Emperour and Agapetus had done before nay they must contend two other whole yeares after the former tenne about this Helena Iustinian and his Empresse must for want of variety of phrases be termed Dioclesian and Eleutheria Vigilius must be buffeted and beaten haled dragged imprisoned and banished Truly Anastasius had some ground for the act under Agapetus for this of Vigilius he is beholding to none but his own poeticall pate lest any little scene or shadow of resemblance might be wanting Baronius y Bar. an 547. nu 49. supplying one defect in Anastasius tels us how Vigilius for the same cause of Anthimus excommunicated Theodora at his comming to Constantinople even as Agapetus had done before Who sees not all this to be nothing else but a mimesis of the acts of Agapetus and a meere fiction of Anastasius in which there are not so few as thirty lyes 22. You have seene the tragicall part of this Anastasian fable now followeth the Catastrophe or sudden change of all this hard fortune Tunc Gothi secerunt then saith he the Gothes made Totilas their King who comming to Rome besieged it so sore that the City was pressed with a great famine so that they did eate their owne children Totilas entred the Citie at the gate of Saint Paul in the 13. Indiction and for a whole night caused a Trumpet to be sounded till all the Romane people were fled away or hid in Churches And Totilas dwelled with the Romanes quasi pater cum filijs even as a father with his children Thus Anastasius Who would not think by this narration that Totilas were made King after the beating dragging and imprisonment of Vigilius and banishment of him his fellows upoÌ„ which Anastasius presently adjoyneth Tunc Gothi fecerunt then the Gothes made Totilas King and yet Totilas was King a Totilas creatur Rex Gothorum anno 7. belli Gothici Proc. lib. 3. pa. 346. Is est annus Iust 16. ut ait Bar. an 542. nu 1. Vigilius Bizantium venit anno 12. belli Gothici Proc. lib. 3. pa. 364. iâ— est Iustiniani 21. isto anno Constantinopolim venisse Vigilium ait Bar. an 547. nu 26. not onely before all that tragicall act but foure or five yeares also before Vigilius came to Constantinople or before the Emperour sent for him and in like sort Totilas his besieging of Rome by Anastasius narration follows all the former whereas by Procopius b Totilas Romam contendit quam statim obsedit Procop. lib. 3. pa. 360. Per id tempus obsidionis cum Vigilius in Sicilia esset c. lib. eod pa. 364. it is evident that Totilas besieged Rome while Vigilius stayed in Sicilie before he set forward to Constantinople The like errour is in the note of the Indiction for Totilas tooke the City not as Anastasius saith in the 13. but as c Indictione 10. 6. post Cons Basilij anno Totilas Romam ingreditur Marc. in Chron. Is est juxta eundem Marc. an 547. cui consentit Bar. an 547. nu 12. Marcellinus witnesseth and that aright in the 10. Indiction neither did he enter at the gate of Saint Paul but as Procopius d Vniverso exercitu instructo ad pâ—rtam Asinariam duxit c. Proc. lib. 3. p. 372 expresly declareth at that which was called Asinaria neither did Totilas sound any such Trumpet to give them warning or space to flee but entring the City in the night and that by trechery of the watch he stayed e Vnum in locum copias omnes coegit hostium insidias verituâ— Proc. ibid. his army together till morning for feare that some danger might befall himselfe or his army in the darke by the lying in wait of the enemies And when after this Bellisarius having recovered the City Totilas againe wan it from the Romanes which was three yeares after this to wit in the 15. yeare of the Gothicke warre as Procopius f Annus 14. exibat hujus belli Totilas deinde copias Romam ductavit c. Proc. l. 3. pa. 394. sheweth which was the 24. of Iustinian whereas his first taking it was in the 21. of Iustinian then indeed Totilas as Procopius g Praecepit ut quanta vi posseÌ„t buccinâ clangorem eliderent c. Proc. ibid. pa. 394. declareth caused divers Trumpets to sound an alarum on the river of Tyber in the night time as if hee would on that side assault the City while hee had his army in readinesse on the contrary side and entred there by trechery also of the Watch the Romanes giving little regard to that part These Trumpets gave the occasion to Anastasius his fiction which is
in the second Nicene Synod and by them rejected p. 109. sect 7. the booke was the booke of Epiphanius p. 112. sect 12. The explanation meant by Ibas was a condemning of the twelve chapters of Cyrill pa. 159. sect 42 43. a condemning of the faith p. 160. sect 44. the like explanation meant by Vigilius p. 166. sect 52. F. FAcundus set on by the Pope writ against the Emperours Edict p. 214. sect 4. Facundus and Baronius revile the Emperor p. 215. sect 4. Facundus an enemy to the Catholike faith p. 371. sect 13. The Foundation being hereticall poysons all which is built thereon p. 190. sect 29 30. Faith unto certainty of faith two things required p. 182. sect 20. G. GOntharis not trecherously slaine by Bellisarius p. 448. sect 15. Gregory his words and meaning pretended by Basil about the three Chapt. explained p. 43. sect 16 17. c. H. HEretikes dying dye not in the peace of the Church pag. 59. and pag. 61. § 6. Heresie with pertinacy differs much from an error p. 61. in fine First in regard of matter p. 62. sec 8. secondly for the manner ibid. sec 9. thirdly in regard of the persons who erre p. 64. sec 11. fourthly in regard of the Churches judgement ibid. sec 12. Heresie in its owne habit doth lesse harme p. 103. sec 27. Heretikes in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall p. 147. sec 20. proved in Vitalis ibid. An hereticall profession may be in termes orthodoxall ibid. sec 21. Heretikes pretend to hold with ancient Councels p. 201. sec 4 5. Worst Heretikes are the moderne Romanists p. 204. sec 10. Heretikes lyars in their profession pa. 207. sec 15. Heretikes profession contradictory to it selfe p. 208. sec 16. An hereticall profession gives denomination to a man rather than an orthodoxall pa. 208. sec 17 18. Heresie is a tryall of mens love to God pa. 361. sec 2. I. IBas his epistle unto Marie an heretike of Persia p. 125. sec 19. full of Nestorianisme Ibas denyeth God to be incarnate and Mary the mother of God p. 122. sec 13. Ibas professeth two natures and one person in Christ p. 139. sec 1. and p. 143. sec 9. Ibas his consenting to the Ephesme Counsell proves not his epistle Catholike p. 154. sec Ibas consented not to Cyrill upon his explanation p. 155. sec 35. c. Vigilius his first reason explained in five severall things first the Popes Rhetorick sec 35. second his Chronology of time sec 36. third his Logicke sec 40. the fourth and fifth his Ethicall and Theologicall knowledge sec 41. vide p. 168. sec 55. Ibas embraced the union in Nestorianisme p. 125. sec 19. Ibas professed not the epistle to bee his as the Acts declare p. 386. sec 2. The Image of Christ sent to Abgarus a fable p. 346. sec 32. Infallibility of the Popes judgement the foundation of a papists faith p. 34. sec 34. and a doctrine of the Romish Church p. 172. sec 7. 8 c. and p. 177. sec 13 14. Infallibility of the Popes judgement in causes of faith defended by any makes the defender hereticall p. 61. sec 6. and p. 63. sec 10. and to dye out of the peace of the Church ibid. Infallibility of the Popes judgement taught by commending the Churches judgement to be infallible and generall Councels pa. 173. sec 8. and by the Church they understand the Pope sec 8 9. and p. 178. sec 15. Infallibility only peculiar to the Pope p. 174 sec 11. Infallibility of the Popes judgement is hereticall p. 180. sec 18. Iustinian his Edict for defence of the three Chapters p. 3. sec 7. Iustinian the Emperour spared Vigilius from banishment and why p. 257. sec 26 27. Iustinian reviled by Baronius p. 324. slandered to be illiterate p. 325. sec 3. 4. for making lawes in causes of faith sec 5 6. for persecuting Vigilius sec 7. Iustinian in his last age no Aphthardokite p. 330. sec 8. and p. 333. sec 12. c. no disturber of the peace of the Church p. 331. in fine Iustinian a defender of the faith witnesse Pope Agatho p. 356. sec 16 witnesse the Rom. Synod sec 17. witnesse the sixt Councell sec 18. witnesse Pope Gregory sec 19. Iustinian no subverter of the faith pa. 349. sec 37 38. Iustinian founded many stately Churches and Monasteries p. 350. sec 39. Iustinian no subverter of the Empire ibid. sec 40. Iustinian severely censured by Baronius p. 354. sec 45. Ierusalem not advanced by the fift Synod to a Patriarchship p. 430. sec 1 2 c. Iustinian Dioclesian-like caused not Vigilius to be beaten p. 453. sec 19. Iustinian favoured not the heresie of Anthimus p. 454. sec 21. K. THe King of England refused to send to their Trent Councell p. 308. sec 24. Kings and Emperours have onely right to call Councels p. 239. sec 5. L. THe Laterane Councell under Leo the 10. reprobated the Councell at Constance and Basil touching the authority of Gen Councels p. 33. sec 33. The Laterane decree condemned by the Vniversity of Paris p. 34. sec 35. The more learned the man is the more dangerous are his heresies p. 123. sec 27. Luther his zeale that hee would not communicate in both kindes if the Pope as Pope should command him p. 195. sec 33. Liberatus an unfit witnesse in the cause of the three Chapt. p. 373. sec 15 16. Leo judged the Nicene Canons for the limits of Sees unalterable p. 405. sec 4. Leo his judgement erroneous for preheminency of Bishops p. 400. sec 4 5. Leontius no sufficient witnesse for the Epistle of Theodoret p. 415. sec 3. Lawes besides those in the Theodosian Code p. 412. sec 5 6. Lawfull Synods and what makes them so p. 282. sec 24 25 26. c. To Lawful Synods besides an Episcopall confirmation p. 281. sec 25. c. there is required a Regall or Imperiall p. 285. sec 31 32. Lawfull Councels require first that the summons be generall p. 292. sec 3. secondly that it be lawfull thirdly that it be orderly ibid. sec 4. M. MEnnas died in the 21. yeare of Iustinian and the Pope excommunicated him in the 25 p. 237. sec 18. The Matrones of Rome entreated Constantius to restore Liberius 248. sec 12. Monkes of Sythia slandred by Baronius for falsifying the Acts of the Councell at Chalcedon p. 383. sec 4 5. Monothelite additions not extant in the fift Synod p. 409. sec 2 3. Mennas his confession to Vigilius a forgery p. 441. sec 2. Mennas not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 442. sec 4 5. N. NEpos died in an errour onely not in any formall heresie p. 65. sec 13. The 2. Nicene assembly a conspiracy p. 111. sec 11. in fine Nestorius his bookes being restrained the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus were in more esteeme p. 121. sec 12. The Nestorians forged a false union between Iohn