the Nineth Who in an Epistle to Michael of Constantinople and Leo of Acridanum Bishops in the year of our Redemption 1054. makes mention of the Donation of this Constantinian Edict made to Sylvester From whence I believe it was that much Faith and Authority being hereby added unto it very many of the Gravest and most Learned Doctors without any suspition of Fraud or Imposture with good Faith did read and receive it He makes a large Confession here wherein three things are fit to be noted The first that ever used this Edict was a Pope Pope Leo 9. 2. He used it immediately after it came forth For Sylvesters Acts came forth about the year 1060. being afterwards increased with the Addition of this Edict of Constantine and some 54 years after the Pope made use of the Donation in it Wherein he is followed by many very many of the Gravest and most Learned Popish Doctors which is the third thing to be noted This fault of the Popish Doctors who did read and receive this Donation of Constantine without any suspition of Fraud and Imposture being by Binius charged upon the Pope The Shepherd went out of the way and the Sheep followed him The Captain and the Herd did all stray and miscarry Leo 9. being somewhat like the Dragon in the Revelation that threw down the third part of the Stars with his Tail Binius his Cure is but the shift of a Mountebank to save his Credit There are Errours and Heresies in the Donation of Constantine which whosoever receiveth the Donation he receiveth them in like manner And to say that the Head and its Members in the Church of Rome were deceived by the Evil Art and sorry Faith of the Grecians while they licked up this Vomit of Balsamon for the Popes advantage is but a sorry shift a Corrosive that eats like a Canker For it shews how the Holy Catholick Roman Church may be deceived Head and Members Pope and Doctors Priests and People They were imposed on by an Evil Art it seems and swallowed down Heresie in Constantine's Donation But that Binius lyes in his prevarication about the Greeks and that the Greeks were not the Authors of the Donation and that it did not intend to hurt the Popes Chair is evident by this The Donation was made not to overthrow but confirm the Divine Right of the Popes Supremacy point blank against what Binius pretends He that made it had an eye both to the Temporal and Spiritual Priviledges of the Roman Chair For the Donation applieth those Scriptures on which the Popes build their Right to S. Peter's Successors and makes the Empercur to note that the Will of our Saviour was the Root of all his Kindness to the Chair nay it expresly throws all on our Saviours Institution For it is just that the Holy Law should retain the Head of the Principality there where our Saviour the Instituter of H. Laws commanded the blessed Peter to undertake the Chair of the Apostleship Where you may note another fetch of the Papists Lest what our Saviour did to S. Peter should seem too remote to concern Rome that they might make the Channel of Conveyance clear these old Counterfeits record that S. Peter did not come to Rome by chance but being invested in so great an Hereditary power our Saviour chose the place where it should rest and that Peter came to Rome and there undertook the Chair of his Apostleship by our Saviours Commandment Which if they could make the World believe their work would be half done So that it utterly destroys the Interest of the Greeks and the Donation is Root and Branch altogether Roman Neither did the Greeks ever use it to disgrace the Roman Church for ought I can find though the Romans used it to magnifie their Church above all other Churches CAP. XXIII Melchiades counterfeited Isidore Mercator confessed to be a Forgery The Council of Laodicea corrupted both by a Fraud in the Text and by the False Glosses of the Papists THe Forgery put out at first in the name of Melchiades concerning the Primitive Church and the Munificence of the Emperour Constantine hath now gotten a clause added to the Title viz. Falsly ascribed to Melchiades In Binius Labbé and the Collectio Regia Upon those words Falsly ascribed to Melchiades Binius speaketh thus That this Epistle was ascribed to Melchiades appeareth Can. Futuram 12. q. 1. Can. Decrevit Dist. 88. which bearing the name of Melchiades contain for the most part the things which are written here It appeareth from hence also that hitherto it was commonly put in the former Edition of the Councils just after the Decrees of Melchiades the Pope Thus was this counterfeit Epistle placed among their Laws and Councils But that it was noted with the false Title and name of Melchiades appeareth from hence saith he because it maketh mention of the Nicene Council which by the consent of all men happened after the death of Melchiades and after the Baptism of the Emperour not under Melchiades but under Sylvester in the year of Christ 325. being the 20 year of Constantine as almost all Historians unanimously do testifie Perhaps therefore it is more true that Isidore himself being a Compiler rather than a Collector was the Author of this Epistle Which it is certain was made out of the third Canon of the Council of Chalcedon and a certain fragment of the 24 Epistle in the 1. Book of Pope Gregory and the History of the Nicene Council Baron An. 312. Nu. 80. Here we come to know the manner how Decretal Epistles were made Good passages stoln out of the Fathers are clapt Artificially together and a Grain or two of Interest thrust neatly in makes up an Epistle This of Binius is plain dealing Isidore is confessed to be a Compiler that is a Forger rather than a Collector or Recorder of the Councils * Note this well because Isidore is the Fountain a muddy dirty one out of which they drink their waters This acknowledgment is the more considerable because Baronius Labbè and Cossartius and the Collectio Regia herein do keep Binius Company Confessing it to be stoln out of S. Gregory he acknowledgeth it to be made almost 300 years after it was pretended Which draws near to the time of Hadrian the First and sheds another Ray of Light on the Original of these Impostures In the time of Sylvester there happened many Councils One Feather is finely thrust in into that at Arles to adorn the Papacy The Pope is set before the Emperour In that of Ancyra the Marriage of Deacons is permitted Can. 〈◊〉 Priests also were not compelled to leave their Wives unless they were taken in Adultery Can. 8. The Cup and the Bread were both given to the People Can. 13. In the Council of Laodicea it is determined that the Scriptures should be read on the Sabbath days Can. 16. And that we ought not to leave the Church of God and go and call upon Angels and make Congregations which are known to be forbidden If any one therefore be found observing this hidden Idolatry let him be accursed because he leaves our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God and gives himself over to Idolatry Can. 35. The Invocation of Angels though they were known to be Angels is by the Council of Laodicea called Idolatry Which vindicates Dr. Stillingfleet in his acceptation of the word Idolatry
Pragmatical Constitution we Decree them to be dispased and grant them to remain under the Right and Tenure of the H. Roman Church Poor Priests are fain to cheat the people by witty Miracles and small Devices at Shrines and Images for a little Silver and Gold The best of them can attain no more than Lordships and the Territories of Subjects As the Manours evidence which are given to our Lady of Loretto and those Lands which Jesuites squeeze out of dying men with the fear of Purgatory But the Pope and his Cardinals find it not suitable to their State and Dignity to juggle for less than Empires and Kingdoms and therefore soar high you see in the present Donation Wherefore saith the Emperour we have thought it convenient to change and remove our Empire and the power of our Kingdom into the Eastern Countries and in the best place of the Province Byzantium to build a City after our Name and there to found our Empire Because where the * Head of the Principality of Priests and of the Christian * Religion is ordained to be by the Coelestial Emperour it is not just that the Earthly Emperour should there have any Power Here is a high Career of notorious He resie and Blasphemy together S. Peter was called the Prince of the Apostles but the Pope is the Head of the Principality nor Head of the Priests only but of the Christian Religion which I think none but our Saviour can possibly be It smells rank of Blasphemy but that the Priestly and Imperial Power should be incompatible is Rebellion and Heresie It shews how incompatible Popish and Imperial Power is Yet all these things are ratified by other Dival Sanctions made by the Emperor though recorded no where as you may see in the words following BVT all these things we also have decreed and ratified by other Dival Sanctions and we decree them to stand unblemished and unshaken to the end of the World WHEREFORE we protest before the Living God who commanded us to Reign and before his Terrible Judgment by this our Imperial Constitution that it shall not be lawful for any the Emperours our Successors nor for any of our Nobles and Peers or for the most Ample Senate or for all the people of the whole World now or hereafter from hence in all Ages lying under our Empire by any means to contradict or break or in the least to diminish these things which by this our Imperial Sanction are granted to the Holy Roman Church or to all the Bishops of the same But if any Breaker or Contemner of these shall arise which we do not believe let him be knotted and ensnared in eternal Damnation and find the Saints of God and the Princes of the Apostles Peter and Paul Enemies unto him both in the Life present and in that which is to come and being burnt in the lower Hell let him perish with the Devil and all the wicked The great Council of Chalcedon consisting of 620 Fathers lies under this Sentence because they made the Patriarch of 〈◊〉 equal with the Bishop of Rome If Constantine the Great did make it with the consent of all his Nobles and the whole Senate before all the Princes and People of Rome as is pretended in the Donation It was too publick a thing not to be heard of and too remarkable to be let pass in silence Since therefore it is incredible that so many Fathers should wilfully fall under the Curse it is certain the whole Donation is a Counterfeit Howbeit as the Substance of the Act so the Ceremony is worth the observation But 〈◊〉 the Page of this our Imperial Decree we laid it with our own hands on the venerable Body of the blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles and there promising to that Apostle of God that we would inviolably keep all these things and leave them in charge to be kept by the Emperours our Successors we delivered them to our blessed Father Sylvester High-Priest and Universal Pope and to all the Popes his Successors the Lord God and our Saviour Jesus 〈◊〉 allowing 〈◊〉 for ever and happily to be enjoyed And the Imperial subscription The 〈◊〉 keep you many years 〈◊〉 and blessed Fathers Dated in Rome on the 〈◊〉 day of the Kalends of April Our Lord Flavius Constantinus 〈◊〉 th fourth time and Gallicanus being Consuls A NOTE No Emperour being ever accustomed to stile himself Our Lord c. Those words Our Lord Flavius Constantinus coming out of Constantine's own Mouth bewray the Donation as made by some other unless he were at the same time both his own Subject and his own Emperour CAP. XXII The Donation of Constantine proved to be a Forgery by Binius himself He confesseth the Acts of Sylvester which he before had cited as good Records to be Counterfeit THose things saith Binius in his Notes which are told concerning the Dominion and Temporal Kingdom given to the See of Rome are manifestly enough proved to be likely by what we said in our Notes upon the former Epistle as well as by the Munificence of the Emperour himself never enough to be praised Observe here the modesty of the man He ought to prove the Instrument itself but that he throws by and talks of the Dominion and Temporal Kingdom 2. Neither will he undertake to prove it certain but likely that the Dominion and Temporal Kingdom was given to the See of Rome 3. He cites his Notes on a counterfeit Epistle to make it likely For the Epistle going before was the Epistle of Melchiades which he confesseth to be a Forgery 4. The Munificence of the Emperour makes it probable that he gave away the Empire to the See of Rome If you will not believe this you are an hard-hearted man for Binius says it His Notes upon the former Epistle to which he refers you are these That the things which are written in this Epistle concerning the Donation of Constantine to Melchiades and Sylvester are true is proved not only from hence but most firmly also by the Authority of Optatus Milevitanus a most approved Writer For he writeth lib. 1. cont Parm. that Constantine and Licinius being the third time Consuls to wit in the year of Christ 313. a Council of 19 Bishops was held at Rome in the Cause of Caecilianus and the Donatists in the Lateran in the House of Fausta which was the Seat of the Roman Bishop Truly he doth not expresly write that the House was given to Melchiades by the Emperour but since no reason doth appear for which it is necessary that the Convention of 19 Bishops should require larger Rooms out of the House of Melchiades that wherein the foresaid Synod was assembled to wit the Lateran or House of Fausta can by no prudent person any more be doubted to be given by the Emperour to Melchiades the Bishop of Rome The Lateran is not so much as named in the Epistle of Melchiades but that he left
Records excepting some perhaps that were since invented And if the last two Ages brought so many to light an Age or two more may through Gods blessing accomplish Wonders The Secular state and security of the Pope with his Adherents which Binius in his Epistle to Pope Paul V. calls Honor Augmentum 〈◊〉 was the end of all And if men excogitate Titles to Crowns and patch up 〈◊〉 with some Flaws yet serviceable enough with the help of a Long Sword then a Chair so Politick is able to do it more neatly having had the strong Holds of the Church so long in their hands Now we shall note some few of those many Errours that are in the Pontifical which though it be a duty circumstance to have such a Text to gloss on is the Basis of their Discourses and the Rule of their Method both in the Popes and Councils It beginneth thus Peter the blessed Apostle and Prince of the Apostles the Son of John of the Province of Galilee of the City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Brother of Andrew sate in the Chair of Antioch seven years In the end it 〈◊〉 us how long S. Peter Reigned just twenty five years two moneths and three days Binius tells us with the consent of Baronius it was rather twenty four years five moneths and eleven days The Pontifical saith Peter was Martyred with Paul on the same day Though Prudentius and S. Angustine say It was not the same year Binius reconcileth them They were slain the same day indeed but not the same year Therefore say we Peter was not Martyred with S. Paul The Pontifical says It was 38 years after the Passion of our Lord. More truly the 35. saith Binius in the 13 year of Nero and the 69 after the Birth of Christ. S Peter's Name is the Patron and 〈◊〉 of the Roman Church and therefore inserted like a Shield in the Front Next his Notes on S. Peter's Life Binius inserts the Treatise of the Roman Churches Primary Ex antiquo Codice out of an Old Book without any name at all Which puts me in mind of the Gibeonites old Bottles clouted Shooes and mouldy Bread and the notable Cheat which thereby they put on the Israelites All is Old and Ancient in the Church of Rome and this Old Book of the Primacy set before the Councils according to the Rules of Art because the End is to be proposed before the Means After this old Treatise of the Primacy he cometh to S. Linus Pope and Martyr He is pleased to call him Pope as well as Pope Peter not as if his Contemporaries called him so but because the Modern Title will not sit well on the present Popes unless it be given to S. Peter and the first Bishops of that See And ever and anon he begins with a known Lye in the top of the Chapter formally set by it self the more pleasingly to take the eye after the manner of a Title Ex Libro Pontificali Damasi Papae OUT OF THE PONTIFICAL OF POPE DAMASVS This course he continues from Life to Life throughout all the Popes so far as the Pontifical lasteth intermixing the Decretal Epistles first and then the Councils in the Lives of the several Popes or to use his form under the pope in whose Life they happened And all his Tomes being moulded into that form it makes every Pope seem to him that is not aware of the fetch the Supreme over all Councils from the beginning And with this Method he always goes on Ex libro Pontificali Damasi Papae hoping perhaps that in long tract of time he should be at last believed In all the Book there is scarce a Life wherein there are not as many Errours as in S. Peter's As in example Linus sate eleven years three moneths and twelve days 〈◊〉 the Pontifical Binius saith It was eleven years two moneths and twenty three days A days difference where the exactness is pretended to be so great shews all to be Counterfeit He saith 〈◊〉 sate twelve years one moneth and eleven days Binius tails on him for the mistake though he agrees with him in the 〈◊〉 that Linus and Cletus sate some twenty three years between Peter and Clement So that on this account S. James was dead above 27 years before S. Clement who wrote a 〈◊〉 Epistle to him came to the Chair For before he was Pope he might write an Epistle but not a Decretal Epistle Cletus saith Binius was by S. Irenaeus Ignatius and 〈◊〉 called 〈◊〉 which Baronius thinks was a mistake among the Greeks 〈◊〉 by the Errour of Writers and Libraries What shifts will a man be driven to by a desperate Cause Three of the best and most Ancient Fathers were cheated with the Errour of Writers and Libraries concerning a mans Name that was alive either not long before or together with themselves S. Irenaeus and Ignatius are extremely Ancient Ignatius lived before Anacletus was Bishop of Rome much more before his Name was put into Libraries and much more yet before it could be corrupted there by the mistake of Scribes and Writers But such Errours of Writers and Libraries are a good hint how capable they are of them and how much the Church of Rome is acquainted with them Binius is at last terribly provoked with the nonsense of the Pontifical for whereas it saith Cletus was in the Church from the seventh Consulship of 〈◊〉 and fifth of Domitian to the ninth of Domitian and the Consulship of Rufus that is from the 78 year of Christ to the 85. Binius speaking as if he were present takes him up 〈◊〉 Errorem igitur Errori addis quisquis 〈◊〉 Pontificalis Authores c. Whoever thou be that art the Author of this Pontifical thou addest Errour to Errour For if Cletus began to sit in the forementioned Consulship in the 78 year of Christ how did he immediately succeed Linus dying as thou saidst in the 69 year of Christ Capito and Rufus being Consuls How wilt thou excuse a 9 years Interregnum in the Chair made only by thy Authority contradicting it self How sayest thou that Cletus sate twelve years whose continuance thou doest circumscribe by two Consulships in the space of 7 years distant from themselves How which is more intollerable and absurd doest thou say that Clement sate from the Consulship of Trachilus and Italicus even to the third year of Trajan which is from the 70 year of Christ to the 102. and so to have administred the See 33 years whom in his Life thou affirmest to have continued only 9 years Thus far Binius When Cato saw the Southsayers saluting one another in the Roman Market-place he said I wonder they can forbear laughing to think how delicately they cheat the people Hence therefore saith Binius O Reader thou mayest perceive on what Rocks he shall 〈◊〉 whosoever shall suppose the writings of this Book to be taken up upon Trust without any Inquisition Yet when the fit is over in the
any diligent observation If he trusted others he was an unwise man to be so confident in maintaining it upon the report of those that read and transcribed it for him For their inadvertency hath deceived him For S. Clement himself if that Epistle be his owneth the Forgery of S. Clement's Itinerary which Binius so extremely abhorreth It must needs be a Forgery therefore because in this case nothing but a Forgery can defend a Forgery no Author if a Saint acknowledging those Forgeries for his which he never made After a long Oration which S. Clement fendeth to S. James in that Epistle out of S. Peter's mouth concerning the Dignity and Excellency of the Roman Chair he has these words speaking of S. Peter When he had said these things in the midst before them all he put his hands on me and compelled me wearied with shamefacedness to sit in his Chair And when I was sate again he spake these things unto me I beseech thee O Clement before all that are present that after as the Debt of Nature is I have ended this present life thou wouldst briefly write to James the Brother of our Lord either those things that relate to the beginning of thy Faith or those thoughts also which before thy Faith thou hast born and after what sort thou hast been a companion to me from the beginning even to the end of my Journey and my Acts and what being a Solicitous Hearer thou hast taken from me disputing through all the Cities and what in all my preaching was the order either of my words or actions as also what End shall find me in this City as I said all things being as thou art able briefly comprehended let it not grieve thee to destine unto him Neither fear that he will be much grieved at my End since he will not doubt but I endure it for piety But it will be a great solace to him if he shall learn that no unskilful man or unlearned and ignorant of the Discipline of 〈◊〉 Order and the Rule of Doctrine hath undertaken my Chair For he knows if an unlearned or an unskilful man take upon him the Office of a Doctor without the Hearers and Disciples being involved in a Cloud of Ignorance shall be drowned in destruction Wherefore I my Lord James when I had received these precepts from him held it necessary to fulfil what he commanded informing thee both concerning these things and briefly comprehending concerning those which going through every City he either uttered in the word of preaching or wrought in the vertue of his deeds Though concerning these things I have sent thee 〈◊〉 and more fully described already at his command under that very Title which he ordered to be prefixed that is Clementis Itinerarium The Itinerary of Clement not the preaching of Peter In these words he telleth us how S. Peter taking his leave of the World placed him in his Chair and by that Ceremony installed him in the Episcopal Throne in the presence of them all What a charge he gave him in that moving circumstance of time just before his piercing and bitter Passion to write to S. James How he ordered him to make an Itinerary of his Circuits throughout the World and furnished him at the same time with the Materials and Title of the Book The Itinerary of Clement not the preaching of Peter S. Peter's modesty as is to be supposed giving the Honour of the Title not to himself that was the Subject but to the Author How S. Clement according to this commandment had sent to S. James not only this Epistle but the Book it self long before it wherein the Journeys and the Acts of Peter were more fully described And the great care which S. Peter took 〈◊〉 the dead man should be grieved by the Solace he provided in the Tydings sent unto him concerning the perpetual certainty of Skilfulness and Learning in all his Successors securing at once both the Church and his Chair is very remarkable All these things out of the very Bowels of the Epistle disgrace 〈◊〉 Chimera's of Binius and 〈◊〉 For what Saint being well in his Wits would tell the World that S. Peter commanded him to make a Forgery nay a putid Forgery stussed with loathsom Fables S. James his Name is over and over in the body of the Epistle not only in the Title The Epistle was not sent to S. James by a Figure but it plainly tells S. James that he had sent him the 〈◊〉 before which consisting of ten books must be some considerable time after S. Peter's Death in making some time in going from Rome to Jerusalem and some time must be 〈◊〉 in coming back with the Answer that certified him of S. James his receiving it After all which this new Letter was written to S James impertinently giving him an account of the same business And yet all this while S. James was dead before S. Peter For as Binius observes S. Peter was put to Death in the thirteenth year of Nero and S. James in the seventh The Compiler of this Epistle finding S. Clements Itinerary extant in the World several hundreds of years before himself and being not aware of its unfoundness took it up as a good Record and so fitted the Epistle and Fable to the purpose in hand being himself cheated with a Forgery as many others are and not expecting to be detected so clearly as it hath since happened But to make the matter more absurd they have a second Letter to S. James De Sacratis 〈◊〉 vel 〈◊〉 Wherein he divides the Priesthood as Pius in his Decretal afterwards 〈◊〉 into three Orders of Presbyter Deacon and 〈◊〉 With what design I cannot tell unless he would have us think the Pope the only Bishop Wherein he also takes care about the Lords Body orders the Priests with what Ceremony of Fasting and Reverence it shall be consumed Gives Commands about the Pall the Chair the Candlestick and the Vail speaks of the Altar the Worship of the Altar the Door-keepers the Vails for the Gates the covering of the Altar c. As if there were stately Temples Attires Ornaments and Utensils in those early days of poverty Persecution when a Den or a Cave was both Sanctuary and Temple Among other things he orders that no man should through ignorance believe a dead man ought to be wrapt in a Fryers Coul a Novel superstitious Errour All which he speaks out of the mouth of S. Peter whom he calls the Father and Prince of the Apostles In the end of the Letter he denounces a Curse against all them that will not keep S. Peter's Commandments So that Peter's Name and Peter's Authority is used for every thing appertaining to the Chair and all the Apostles to be ordered by S. Peter's Successors as S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our Lord was CAP. XVII Of Higinus and Pius as they are represented in the Pontifical and of a notable Forgery in the name of Hermes
Where you have the Testimony of an Angel concerning the Celebration of Easter cited by no body while the matter was in 〈◊〉 HIginus sate saith the Pontifical four years three moneths and four days Binius faith He sate four years except two days counterfeiting as much exactness as the other If we should follow him in his Consuls saith he we should make Higinus sit twelve years But the Pontifical is guilty of a more arrogant and ambitious errour The Hierarchy of the Church it saith was made by Higinus to wit the Order wherein Presbyters were inferiour to Bishops Deacons to Presbyters the people to Deacons Binius mendeth it as well as he is able interpreting it only of a Reformation of Collapsed Discipline But it 〈◊〉 so exactly with the distinction before made in S. Clement's second Epistle who will have the Priesthood divided into the Order of Presbyter Deacon and Minister that the design seemeth deeper than so He doth not say the Hierarchy of the Church was corrected but made by Hyginus which strikes at the Root of Episcopacy as if it were not of Divine but Humane Institution and being made by the Pope alone depended only on the Popes pleasure Binius is not able to name the time wherein the Discipline of the Church was in this respect corrupted so as to need the Reformation pretended Next after Hyginus the Pontifical bringeth in Pius an Italian the Brother of a Shepherd He sate nineteen years four moneths and three days in the times of Antoninus Pius Hermes his own Brother wrote a book in which a Commandment was contained given him by an Angel of the Lord coming to him in the Habit of a Shepherd that Easter should be observed on the Lords Day This man ordained that an Heretick coming from among the Jews should be baptized c This Hermes saith Binius in his Notes on the place is the same whom S. Paul mentioneth in his Epistle to the Romans Salute Asyncritus Phlegon Hermas Patrobus Hermes c. He was at Mans Estate when S. Paul saluted him and a very old man sure for a Writer of Books in the time of Pius Binius is not willing to have him so obscure as a Shepherd but faith He was called Pastor either because he was of the Family of Junius Pastor who in the third year of Aurelian was Consul or more probably because the Angel appeared to him in the form of a Shepherd In this his Guess he is upon the brink of rejecting the Pontifical Howbeit he quits it not of a Lye for instead of nineteen years which the Pontifical giveth him Binius faith he sate but nine years A small mistake in this Learned Pontifical Concerning the Book which Hermes the Shepherd wrote he saith It was almost unknown among the Latines but very famous among the Greeks Which was very strange considering he was the Popes Brother A Book made by so eminent a person and so near home unknown among the Latines But his meaning is perhaps it was better known than trusted For a little after he saith The Latines esteemed it Apocryphal as Tertullian Athanasius and Prosper witness and as Gelasius decreed Can. Sanct. Dift 15. Now because their unmannerliness doth refiect a little upon the Pope himself who in his Decretal Epistle annexed owns his Brother with an Honourable mention of the Angelical Vision Binius to display more Learning on the behalf of the Pontifical and Pius his Decretal tells you that the Book of the true Hermes Pastor praised so much by Tertullian Origen Athanasius Eusebius Jerome c. is not now Extant Which is evident he saith because in that we now have there is no Mention at all of Easter Nay the Author of it saith he was admonished to deliver it to Clement the Pope by whom it was to be sent to forreign Cities They have as good Luck at Rome as if they held Intelligence with Purgatorie The Dead and they have as intimate a Correspondence as if the Pope knew the Way to send his Bulls thither Here is another Forgerie detected by its Dedication to S. Clement who by no unusual Providence is served just in his own kind for he disturbed S. James and another disturbes him in his Crave Yet Binius is very much inclined to this Opinion for from hence he gathereth it was longè ante haec Tempora Scriptus a Book written long before the time of Pius As no doubt it must if it be not the same that was praised by Tertullian Origen Athanasius c. For all Forgeries must be old and True or they are not worth a farthing But how comes Tertullian and Athanasius c. to esteem it Apocryphal and yet to praise it so much in the same 〈◊〉 It is Binius his Breath not theirs They poor men are made like Stage players to say whatsoever the Poet listeth Or else as Binius observes there were two Books of Hermes though it be double dealing thus to have two of a Sort the one right and the other Apocryphal But then Gelasius did very ill there being two of a Sort to condemn the one and not tell us of the other And so did Ivo For this Pastor is one of the Catalogue we told you of in the Beginning But Binius has a fetch beyond this He teaches you a way how to take both these persons for the same man and what you may say in defence of your self if you so do However saith he if any one be disposed to take them for the same Author Ex Sententiâ Illustriss Card. Barona dicendum est c. He must necessarily say as Baronius gives his Opinion that they were two commentaries written at divers times where of the first was more famous among the Greeks the later more obscure among the Latines A brave Antithesis So that upon the point the Latines had none The more obscure among the Latines was obscure every where the more famous among the Greeks and the more obscure among the Latines The Antathesis makes a shew of giving you some Solid matter but when you grasp it in your hand it turnes to Air. Unless perhaps you will learn thereby that the more obscure among the Latines was a Book made in an instant by a meer Conjecture and a pretty Mockery to gull the Reader as a shadow at least of some proof that the Pontifical and the Decretals are not Lyars Among other Things their Allowances are considerable for they are good honest reasonable men and will let you think what you will of the Book so you consent to the main and believe the Popes Supremacy And next that their Art of Instruction is to be weighed Whether it be true or no no matter If the Disciple can but defend himself by a Distinction and escape the Conviction of an Absurdity it is enough Bellarmine is at such Dicendums often Though 't is a Secret among themselves they teach their Disciples What to say not What is True But I thought
we had been agreed before that of these Hermes at least was a Forgerie It seems by Pope Pius his Letter that Hermes was a Doctor and not a Shepherd for in these Days he saith Hermes a Doctor of the faith and of the H. scriptures shined among us Not of old but in these Days Yet it is pretended that the Book of old was by some order from on high to be delivered to Clement the Pope by whom it was to be sent to forreign Cities Notwithstanding all their Contrivance there Wit failes them sometimes that are so accustomed to Lying They have so many Irons in the fire that some of them miscarry whether they will or no. Nevertheless that Hermes received this Commandment from the Angel Tertullian witnesseth in his third Book of verses against Mareion saith Binius I have not heard much of Tertullian's Poetrie I have his Works put forth with the Notes of Beatus Rhenanus and cannot find any such verses among them If he hath all that Binius pretendeth out of them is that Hermes spake Angelical Words Therefore he saw the Angel Pius in his Decretal Epistle applieth this Scripture Not holding the Head from which all the body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit together increaseth with the increase of God to the Pope of Rome Whereupon he saith We instruct you all by our Apostolical authority that you ought to observe the same Commandments because we also observe the same And ye ought not by any means to divide from the Head The Commandment was given to Hermes by an Angel Whereupon Pope Pius after the first complement beginneth very unluckily with forbidding the Religion or worshipping of Angels Whereas upon this occasion some eminent matter ought to have been spoken concerning Angels But because of the words following he puts them together Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility of worshipping Angels c. Not holding the Head from which all the body by joynts and bands c. Where he taketh off the Eternal Head and puts a New one on the Churches shoulders For in these dayes Hermes a Doctor of the Faith and of the Holy Scriptures shined among us And though we observed Easter on the foresaid day yet because some doubted for the confirming of their Souls an Angel of the Lord appeared to the same Hermes in the shape of a Shepheard and commanded him that the Passeover should be celebrated by all on the Lords day Whereupon we also instruct you all by our Apostolical authority that you ought to observe the same Commandments Not because an Angel brought them or GOD sent him but Because we also observe the same and ye ought not by any means to divide from the Head And because the business is to promote the Apostolical Authority above all the Angels instead of extolling and magnifying them which had been the natural method on such a Topick as if he would enervate the evidence of the Angel he biddeth them take heed and that diligently least any one seduce you by any Astrology or Philosophy or vain Fallacy according to the tradition of men after the Rudiments of this World and not after Christ's and true Tradition As if no more heed were to be given to an Angel than to an Asse unless the Pope first approved the Vision Nor is Philosophy nor the Tradition of men nor any thing else to be valued in opposition to him and his true Tradition for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily that ye may be repleat in him who is the Head of all Principality and Power and who bath commanded this Apostolical See to be the Head of all Churches saying to the Prince of the Apostles Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church What it is to walk after Christ and true Tradition you may see Cleerly by this Glos upon our Saviours Text. They that do not hold the Head from which all the Body by Joynts and Bands having nourishment ministered and knit together increaseth with the increase of God are in extream peril of damnation And our Saviour who is the Head of all Principality and Power hath commanded this Apostolical See to be the Head of all Churches Therefore Whosoever holdeth not to this Head is in extream peril of damnation For the Pope is not the Head of all Principality and Power in himself but only by Derivation he is made the Head c. And consequently 't is as necessary to cleave unto him as to Christ himself Since he in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth Bodily dwelleth in his Vicar even as S. Peter does in like manner So that all Angels and 〈◊〉 of men Reason Philosophy c. 〈◊〉 but feeble Threeds for him that hath 〈◊〉 Potestatis the fulness of Power and may open the Kingdom of Heaven to whom he will It is a Cross Observation to note the little Authority of the Popes Custome For though it it was the Practice of all the Roman Church to Keep Easter in such a manner before yet some doubted that is all the Eastern Churches were of another Opinion till an Angel came to teach them otherwise Yet when he came he must not be believed for his own sake but the Popes nor be obeyed for himself so jealous was the Pope of his Apostolical Authority How weak both the Popes Authority and the Angels were which thus mutually needed each others assistance appeareth by the Event for notwithstanding the Testimony of Pius and the Angel this Controversy was left undetermined till the Nicene Council It continued above 150 years after Pope Pius his days Yet through all that considerable Tract of time this Testimony of the Angel was cited by no Body Only as Ovid makes use of the 〈◊〉 and his Crowing in the Morning to introduce the fable of Alector this wicked Pius maketh use of this Controversy for the fable of the Angel But it was a little Suspicious that the Angel should appear to no body but the Popes Brother and the matter be published by no body but the Pope himself It smelleth of the Forge out of which it came being proved by the Pontifical of Pope Damasus CAP. XVIII A Letter fathered on Cornelius Bishop of Rome in the year 254. concerning the Removal of the Apostles Bones giving Evidence to the Antiquity of many Popish Doctrines but is it self a Forgery THe forgery made in the Name of Pius is fitted to the year 158. You shall now see one made in the Name of Cornelius Bishop of Rome in the year 〈◊〉 54. 100. years after the former excepting four Not as if there were no forgeries between this and that there is scarce a year upon which they have not fastned something but should we trace them all through the weary Length of so many Ages our Travail would be Endless We have chosen one or two as Exemplars of the residue THE FIRST EPISTLE Of Cornelius
the Pope Concerning the Translations of the Bodies of Peter and Paul c. 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 to his Dear and most Beloved 〈◊〉 the Sons or the Holy Church of God and to all them that serve our Lord in the right Faith Considering the 〈◊〉 of your Charity because ye are Lovers of the Apostles and hold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Doctrine I determined 〈◊〉 write unto you the Lord being the Author some of those things which are at this time necessary to be Known and which the Lord assisting by the Merits of the Apostles were lately done among us in the Church of Rome or are now in Doing Because Charity patreniring I believe with fatherly Grace ye willingly receive 〈◊〉 Writings of the Apostolical See and preform the Commandments of the same and 〈◊〉 in the Increases thereof Because whosoever engrasses himself in the root of Charity neither 〈◊〉 of Greatness nec a fructibus inanes eis nor waxes vain from fruit neither does he by Love lose the Efficacious Work of fruitfulness For Charity it self does exercise the Hearts of the faithful corroborates their Senses that nothing seemeth Grievous nothing difficult but all is easy which is done while its property is to nourish Concord to keep the Commandments to joyn things disleyered to correct Evil things and to consolidate all other vertues by the Bulwark of its perfection Wherefore I 〈◊〉 you to rejoyce with us because by the Entreaty of a certain devout Woman and most noble Matron Lucina the bodies of Peter and Paul were lifted out of the Catatumbae And first of all the Body of the Blessed Paul was carried with Silence and put in the Grounds of the foresaid Matron in the Ostiensian Way neer to that Side where he was beheaded But afterwards we received the Body of the Blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostes and decently placed it neer the place where he was crucified among the Bodies of the H. Bishops in the Temple of Apollo in the golden Mountain in the Vatican of Nero's palace the third day of the Ca ' end of July praying God and our Lord Jesus Christ that these his holy Apostles interceding he would purge away the Spots of our Sins and keep you in his Will all the dayes of your Life and make you perseverable in the Fruit of Good works But see that ye rejoice together for these things Because the Holy Apostles themselves also rejoice together for your joy Praise ye God alwaies and he shall be glorified in you For it is written What shall I return unto the Lord for all he hath returned to me I will take up the Cup of Salvation and call upon the Name of the Lord. In this first part of the Epistle concerning the Translation of the Bodies of the B. Apostles Peter and Paul the Pope does you to wit of his wonderful kindness and charity to the Dead as also of his devotion and reverence towards the Relicks of such glorious Saints Wherein first of all he would have his gratitude towards those blessed Founders of the Roman See made conspicuous it being a thing meet to be published all the World over as it is in most solemn manner here by Decretal Epistle 2. He does intimate the veneration due to Relicks especially those of such glorious Saints as Peter and Paul 3. He gives us to know that the Translation of their Bodies from one Grave to another was a matter of such moment that it was Quaedam ex his quae 〈◊〉 temporis necessaria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A thing in these dayes necessary to be 〈◊〉 4. That the merits of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God to assist and 〈◊〉 the Church of Rome in all her Doings 5. That God was the Author of those things which he wrote unto them 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 saith Decrevivobis seribere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. That all the World did even in Cornelius daies and upward to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S Clement and S. Peter Script 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostolicae libenter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Writings of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obey its commands and 〈◊〉 in its increases For the Roman Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 increasing in Tradition Doctrine Wealth c. 7. That Love is so excellent an ingredient that like Salt it must 〈◊〉 all things especially this Ppistle Because it 〈◊〉 a multitude of faulrs The 〈◊〉 of it otherwise comes in very 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Story of removing the 〈◊〉 bones The Epistle 〈◊〉 many other 〈◊〉 even in this little part of it As that 〈◊〉 Saints are to rejoice for any benefit done to the Church of Rome That the bodies of the most blessed Apostles being too dishonourably buried before turned to the greater joy of the Church which otherwise had lost this occasion of Festivity If you ask how it was possible they should be interred so gloriously in the days of Decius a bloudy Persecutor It was at the intreaty of Lucina a noble Matron of which kind there are some alwayes that have a great influence in the Church of Rome That Peter was buried in the Golden Mountain as a presage of his Successors glory That the Bishops of Rome were even in the Height of Paganisme and Idolatry buried in the Temple of Apollo That Peter was buried in three or four places at once among the Bishops of Rome in the Temple of Apollo in the Golden Mountain and in the Vatican of Nero's Palace a little before Cornelius his Martyrdome on the 3. of the Kalends of July If you will not believe this consider yet further the holiness of Cornelius affirming it For while he was settling these Holy Bodies he and the Saints of the Church of Rome with him prayed God and our Lord Jesus Christ that upon the Intercession of those Holy Apostles he would purge away the Sins of all them to whom he wrote the Merits of the Apostles and especially the Intercession of those that sate in the Roman Chair being established 1450 years ago by the Decretal Epistle of Cornelius The Vision of the Apostles and their knowledge of things done upon Earth is intimated sufficiently together with the Principality and Piety of the Church of Rome that was ever a Loyer of the Saints and a Worshipper of their Relicks Way is made too for Praying to Saints departed this Part of the Epistle ending with that notable Passage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What shall I give unto the Lord for all his Benefits towards me I will take up the Cup of Salvation and call upon the Name of the Lord. Which shews the honourable use they make of the Scriptures Now if you enquire Whether this Epistle be Authentick you sin against the Doctrine of Implicit faith and highly Scandalize the Church of Rome For can any man be so wicked as to believe that Cornelius or any other Pope should counterfeit COD to be the Author of a Counterfeit or return such Solemn praises for a feigned Deliverance or write Publick Admonitions to all the Churches in the World concerning a Lie or abuse the Holy Scriptures and make nothing of
the Imperial Seat which the Roman Princes had possest and granted it to the profit of the blessed Peter and his Bishops Which considering what follows is far more fit to be understood of the Emperours leaving Rome and granting it to the Bishop whence they pretend he did go on purpose So that the agreement between Optatus Milevitanus and the Epistle of Melchiades is very small or none at all But admit that Melchiades and Optatus Milevitanus had said both of them that the Lateran was given to Melchiades what is that to the Dominion and Temporal Kingdom A single House instead of an Empire Though that the House was given Optatus Milevitanus doth not affirm even by Binius his own confession How the things in this Epistle should be concerning the Donation of Constantine to Melchiades and Sylvester is difficult to conceive because Melchiades was dead before the Donation was made to Sylvesier It is very unlikely therefore that Melchiades should make mention of that Donation His Epistle talking of Constantine his being President in the H. Synod that was called at Nice is a manifest Imposture Melchiades being dead before the Nicene Council as is before observed Yet hence it is proved that Constantine 〈◊〉 a Donation to Melchiades and Sylvester Binius holdeth fast the Donation though he lets go the Epistle Like a Lo gician who lets go the premises but keeps the conclusion For it is most firmly proved by Optatus Milevitanus What is proved by him That Constantine the Great gave the Lateran to Melchiades How is it proved Why he testifieth that a Council of 19 Bishops met in Fausta's house in the Lateran Truly he doth not expresly write that the house was given to Melchiades But it seemeth probable to Binius his imagination And so it is most firmly proved by Optatus Milevitanus a most approved Writer Thus those things that are told concerning the Dominion and Temporal Kingdom given to the See of Rome are manifestly enough proved to be likely by what we said in our Notes upon the former Epistle But it is better proved by the continual possession of those houses by the space of thirteen Ages until now as he afterwards observeth Though the length of an unjust Tenure increaseth the Transgression Having first proved the Donation he proceedeth thus Hoc Edictum à Graecis persidâ Donatione quâ juxta illud Virg. 2. Aeneid Timeo Danaos Dona ferentes donare solent acceptum mutilum esse ac dolosè depravatum hae rationes evidenter demonstrant These following reasons evidently shew this Edict of Constantine by the persidious Donation of the Greeks to be maimed and treacherously depraved He enters upon the business gently pretending at first as if the Donation were true that it was depraved by the Greeks But afterwards when he is a little warm in the Argument and somewhat further off from his Sophistical Defences he falls foul upon it as a Counterfeit and rejects it altogether as in the close will appear to the considerate Reader But here let us see what Arguments he produceth to prove it maimed and treacherously depraved 1. Because it pretendeth the Primacy of the Church to be granted by a Lay-man which was immediately given to Peter by God himself and by our Lord Jesus Christ as is manifest by those words Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church 2. The Emperour by this Edict is made to give a Patriarchal Dignity to the Church of Constantinople Which if it be true how then could Anatolius the Bishop of Constantinople be said to take the Patriarchal Dignity to himself long after even after the Council of Chalcedon was ended Leo Gelasius and other Roman Bishops resisting him How could the Church of Constantinople be a Patriarchal See at this time wherein even the name of Constantinople was not yet given to Byzantium 3. This Edict was first published by Theodorus Balsamon out of the Acts of Sylvester the Pope falsly written in Greek under the name of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea not that he might do any service to the Church of Rome but that he might shew the Patriarchate of Constantinople to be the eldest Which Acts of Sylvester were not known till a thousand years after Christ coming then forth in Eusebius his name out of a certain Book of Martyrs but were now increased by the Addition of this Edict of Constantine His design is if it be possible to clear the Church of Rome of this too palpable and notorious Counterfeit And for that end he would fain cast it on the Treacherous Greeks that he might thereby acquit the more Treacherous Romans Which he further pursues in the clause following The new found Hereticks that oppose this Edict of Constantine translated out of Greek into Latine with such great endeavour and impertinent study let them know that in this they rather further our Cause than fight against us Who do our selves with Irenaeus Cyprian and other Holy Fathers as well Greek as Latine profess the Priviledges of the Church of Rome not to be conferred and given of men but from Christ to Peter and from Peter to his Successors Where the 〈◊〉 are so great we need not make a Remark on the common Cheat his vain Brag of the Fathers But this we may observe that whereas the Popes Claim is somewhat blind to the Prerogative which is pretended to be given to S. Peter Binius hints at a proper Expedient to make it clear For suppose our Saviour made S. Peter the Rock on which he built his Church How comes the Pope to be that Rock Since S. Peter being an Apostle immediately inspired and able to pen Canonical Scripture some of his Prerogatives were Personal and died with him He tells you that the Priviledge was granted from Christ to Peter and from Peter to his Successors So that it was not Christ but Peter that gave it to the Bishops of Rome Now it would extremely puzzle him to shew where Peter gave that power to the Bishops of Rome in what place at what time by what Act before what Witnesses All he can produce is S. Clement's counterfeit Letter and that miscarries But in opposing the Edict of Constantine the Protestants further their Cause rather than fight against them Is not this a bold Aslertion Their Popes have laid Claim to the whole Empire of the Western World even by this very Edict or Donation of Constantine And yet the Protestants did nothing when they proved it to be a Forgery This Donation is an old Evidence proving the Divine Right of Peter's Primacy and the Popes Supremacy Did they promote their Cause that proved it to be a Cheat Certainly they that have Fingers so long as to grasp at an Empire and Foreheads so hard as to claim it by Frauds will stick at nothing they can conceive for their advantage Is it impertinent to discover Knavery in the Holy Roman Catholick Church or Imposture in the Infallible