before they are Baptiz'd either because they are naturally inclin'd to Vertue or because they would prepare themselves for Baptism He distinguishes also Three Sorts of Persons among those that do not receive Baptism Some are Impious and Malicious who live in the greatest Excesses and have no Veneration at all for Baptism Others have a great deal of Respect for this Sacrament but they delay to Receive it either through carelesness or that they may still have the greater liberty to sin The last are those who cannot receive it either because of their Infancy or because of some sudden Accident As to the first he makes no doubt but they shall be most grievously punish'd not only for their other Crimes but also for despising Baptism As to the Second he says they shall be less punish'd because they are not kept from Baptism by Malice but by Negligence or Folly As to the last he says that they shall never partake of Glory but neither shall they suffer the Punishments of Hell because tho' they were not Baptiz'd yet they were free from Sin and it may be said of them that they rather suffer'd the Loss than were the Cause of it He says also in the following Discourse that Infants must be Baptiz'd tho' there be no danger of their death After this he enlarges upon the Effects of Baptism and upon the divine Fire which purifies us He concludes according to this Custom with an Explication of the Trinity In this Discourse he mentions Unction and some other Ceremonies of Baptism These Three Discourses were spoken at Constantinople in 381. The 41st Sermon is the First Sermon upon the Feast of Easter which is very short and contains nothing remarkable It was spoken at Nazianzum In the 42d Sermon upon the same Festival having repeated some part of what he had said about the Incarnation of Jesus Christ in his Oration upon the Feast of Christmas he explains the Ceremonies of the Jewish Passover which he applies to the Passion of Jesus Christ. This place shews that his Allegory's are very far fetch'd The rest of his Discourse is a Repetition of what he had said in his Sermon upon the Nativity concerning the Impiety of Hereticks and an Exposition of the Faith of the Church 'T is thought that this Sermon was compos'd by St. Gregory at Nazianzum after he return'd from Constantinople The 43d Discourse was spoken at the Feast of the Dedication of the Church of St. Mamas which was near Nazianzum There he Discourses of this Dedication which he calls the New Sunday He exhorts his Auditors to Vertue and concludes with saying something of the Life of St. Mamas This Discourse was made when St. Gregory Nazianzen was Coadjutor to his Father The 44th Sermon of Pentecost begins with an Instruction about the manner of celebrating these Feasts after which follow his Commendations of the Number Seven The rest of the Discourse is about the Holy Spirit and his Gifts These are all the Sermons of St. Gregory Nazianzen The following Treatises are not Sermons but Letters The 45th is a Letter written to a Monk call'd Evagrius who could not conceive how the Divine Nature or Substance could be simple being compos'd of Three Persons St. Gregory resolves this Difficulty by saying That the Essence of God is most simple and that the Persons tho' distinct yet are not separated nor really distinguisht from the Divine Essence which is common to the Three He explains this by many Examples The 46th is a Letter to Nectarius who was his Successor in the Throne of the Church of Constantinople where he bewails the unhappiness of the Church which is attack'd by an infinite number of Hereticks He writes particularly against Apollinarius whose Errors he relates as they were taken out of one of his own Books He accuses him of teaching That the Word assum'd Flesh from all Eternity of affirming That the Divinity of Jesus Christ supplied the place of a Humane Soul and that it may be said to have Suffer'd and to Die as well as the Humanity After this he observes that it is not lawful to assemble at the Publick Prayers with Persons of these Opinions Then he exhorts Nectarius to Act vigorously against the Hereticks and to pray the Emperour that he would suppress the Liberty which they now had of Meeting and Preaching The 47th Discourse is an Allegorical Explication of the Four Animals mention'd in the First Chap. of Ezekiel The Greeks doubt whether this Book be St. Gregory's And indeed the Stile is very confus'd and every thing is handled without any Order or Design and it seems to be patched up of various pieces which makes me believe with Jacobus Billius that this Discourse is unworthy of St. Gregory The 48th Sermon attributed to St. Gregory is a Discourse in praise of the Martyrs publish'd by Leunclavius which is in Greek in the last Edition This Discourse seems not to me to have St. Gregory's Stile Some have attributed it to St. Chrysostom The 49th Discourse of Faith which is said to be a Translation made by Ruffinus from the Text of Gregory Nazianzen is the Work of some Latin Author who quotes the Holy Scripture according to the old Latin vulgar Version The Prologue of Ruffinus which is at the beginning is a Preface to the Apologetick and the Seven Discourses of this Author and not to the Version of the Treatise of Faith The same Judgment is to be given of the following Treatise concerning the Faith of the Council of Nice which is not to be found in many Manuscripts The First Treatise is quoted under the name of St. Gregory by St. Austin in his Third Letter but it must certainly be another Gregory than this of Nazianzum For undoubtedly this Work is a Latin Author's since in two Places he speaks of the Greeks as not being one himself The Reason or the Word says he is call'd by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in another place This is what the Greeks call Homousion This Treatise therefore must be some Latin Author's who was call'd Gregory And there is none to whom it agrees better than Gregory of Baetica of whom we have already said that he wrote a Treatise of Faith Some have attributed it to St. Ambrose others to Vigilius Tapsensis but the Citation of St. Austin shows that it could not be written by this last and that it was not written by the first The following Treatise is also the same Author's being written to explain the former as Monsieur Quesuel has shown in his 14th Dissertation upon the ancient Code of the Roman Church where this Treatise is inserted The 51st and 52d Treatises are Two Letters to Cledonius which St. Gregory wrote against Apollinarius after he return'd to Pontus as is observ'd by the ancient Author of his Life In the first of these two Letters St. Gregory complains of Apollinarius that he and his Disciples publish'd new Doctrines and that they boasted of their being received
apprehend in this Life several Motives keep me in the Bosom of the Catholick Church The general Consent of Nations and People an Authority grounded upon Miracles upheld by Hope perfected with Charity and confirmed by Antiquity the Succession of Bishops from St. Peter to our time and the Name of the Catholick Church which is so peculiar to the True Church that though all Hereticks call themselves Catholicks yet when you ask in any Country whatsoever where Catholicks meet they dare not shew the Place of their Assemblies These are powerful Motives which keep a faithful Man within the Pale of the Church though he be not yet arrived to a perfect understanding of the Truth But among you Manichees that have none of these Reasons either to invite or to keep me I hear none but vain Promises to make me understand the Truth clearly I confess That did you perform it I ought to preferr an evident Truth which none can doubt of before all the Motives that make me keep to the Catholick Church But so long as you do only promise and not give this Knowledge you shall not shake that Trust which I have in the Catholick Church which is grounded upon such powerful Reasons and Motives He examines afterwards the Principles contained in Manichaeus's Letter and proves That he not only fails in the Demonstration of what he affirmeth but that he is contrary even to Reason and Common Sâ—nce This Book is placed in the Retractations among the Books composed bout the Year 397. The most considerable of all St. Augustin's Works against the Manichees is his Treatise against Faustus divided into Three and thirty Disputes or Arguments wherein he writes down the Text of this Manichee's Books which contained most part of the Blasphemies and Impieties of those Hereticks against both the Old and the New Testament which St. Augustin strongly and solidly refutes This Work was compleated about the Year 400. and sent to St. Jerom in 404. The next Book contains the Acts of a Conference which St. Augustin had at Hippo in December 404. with a Manichee one Felix The Dispute lasted three Days but we have a Relation but of what happened in the two last Conferences In the Conclusion of the latter the Manichee was Converted and Anathematized Manichaeus In the same Year St. Augustin composed a Treatise Of the Nature of Good against the Manichees wherein he shews That God is of an Immutable Nature That he hath created all other Beings whether Spiritual or Corporeal which are all good in their Nature That Evil proceedeth only from the Abuse of Free-Will That the Manichees call Evil Good and Good Evil. The Book against Secundinus is properly an Answer of St. Augustin's to that Manichee who had exhorted him by a Letter never to encounter with the Manichees of whose Opinion himself had been formerly and he had also urged him to return to their Sect. St. Augustin gives him the Reasons of his Conversion and discovers some of Manichaeus's Errors The following Treatise is against a Heretick who was worse than the Manichees who in a distinct Treatise asserted That God did not make the World nor give the Law St. Augustin refuteth him under the Name of The Adversary of the Law and the Prophets in two Books bearing that Title composed about the Year 420. Orosius having consulted St. Augustin in 415. about the Impieties of the Priscillianists and some Errors of Origen's Disciples St. Augustin answered him in a Book directed to him entituled Against the Priscillianists and Origenists In this small Treatise he rejects these Errors 1. That the Soul is of a Divine Nature 2. That the Torments both of the Daemons and of Damned Men shall have an end 3. That the Reign of Jesus Christ will not be Eternal 4. That both Angels and Souls are Purified in this World 5. That the Stars are Animated 6. That Angels commit Sins The rest of St. Augustin's Treatises contained in this Volume are against the Arians The First is an Answer to a Discourse of an Arian containing a great many Objections against the Divinity of the Son of God and of the Holy Ghost This Discourse was made the next Year after the Conference with Emeritus held in 417. Next to this Treatise are The Conference with Maximinus and Two Books against that Arian Bishop The Conference was held at Hippo in the Year 428. whither Maximinus was sent by Count Sigisvultdeus In the Conference were several Discourses on both Sides but Maximinus having said many more things than St. Augustin and spoken last he bragg'd that he had got the Victory which obliged this Saint to recollect all that had been said in the Conference and to refute Maximinus's last Arguments which he had not had time to answer St. Austin's Books of the Trinity are rather a Dogmatical Treatise concerning that Mystery than Polemical Writings against Hereticks for he insisteth not so much upon refuting their Reasons or establishing the Doctrines of the Church as upon subtile Reasonings to expound and clear this Mystery He began them in the Year 400. and finished them in 416. The First Book begins with a Preface containing very important Reflections He observes at first That Men have Three false Notions of the Divinity that some conceive of God as a Corporeal Substance attributing to him Corporeal Properties that others have such an Idea of him as they have of their Souls and of other Spirits and so they ascribe to him the like Imperfections as Repenting Forgetting and Remembring and that others entertain such a Notion of God as may have nothing Common with a Creature and so they conceive none but Chimerical Idea's of him The Holy Scripture condescends to Men's Weakness ascribing often such Things to God as belong properly to Bodies or imperfect Spirits and seldom makes use of Terms peculiar to God because it is very difficult to know in this Life the Substance or Essence of the divine Nature perfectly But because some Persons desire to be informed about this Matter and ask how Three divine Persons make one and the same Essence he undertakes two things in this Work First To shew That the Scripture teaches us such Doctrine and then to raise the Mind as far as it is capable in this Life to the knowledge of this Mystery He proves the First Point in the first Seven Books In the First he establishes by Passages of Scripture the Unity and the Equality of the Three Divine Persons and explains the principal Places that were urged by the Arians against the Divinity of Jesus Christ. The main Rule which he makes use of is That Jesus Christ being one only Person made up of Two Natures what is said of the humane Nature should be distinguished from that which is spoken of the Divine In the Second he confirmeth the former Rule and layeth down another That the Scripture speaks things of the Son and the Holy Ghost which are not spoken of the Father to shew That they receive
was always co-existent with the Father and Equality with the Father r And his equality with the Father In the fourth Book ch 8. he says that the Son is the measure of the Father because he comprehends him He seems to have said something contrary to this lib. 2. where he says that the Father is greater than the Son that he knew not of the day of Judgment And in another place he says that the Father is invisible and the Son visible But as to the first passage there is no more difficulty in it than in that of S. John and he speaks there of Jesus Christ considered as a Man And the second ought to be understood after the same manner as we have explained a like passage of S. Justin. It is yet more favourable to us because he says that the Son makes the Father visible Visibile Patris Filius Which shews that the Father and the Son are of the same nature In the Second Book s In the second Book Lib. 2. c. 51 c. principally in the 59 60 61 62 63 and 64. where he speaks of the Immortality of the Souls of the Just. See likewise Chap. 37. and 73. of the fourth Book and Lib. 5. c. 32. he Treats at large â—onccerning the Faculties of the Soul he conceives that it is distinguished from the Body and that it is of a different Nature he there refuâ—es the Metempsychosiâ— or Transmigration of Souls out of one Body into another and proves that those of the just shall subsist Eternally But 〈◊〉 sâ—…s to have believed as well as S. Justin that they are immortal only through Grace and that those of the wicked shall cease to be after they have been tormented for a long time He maintains also another particular Opinion that the Souls assume the Figure of their Bodies but this word Figure may be understood of some peculiar Quality of the Soul He Discourseth in many places of the Fall of the first Man and of the lamentable Consequences of his Sin t Of the lamentable consequences of his Sin Lib. 3. c. 20 33 34 and 35. and in several places of the fifth Book he teacheth that to repair this 〈◊〉 and for the Redemption of Mankind the Word was made Man and that 〈◊〉 is through Grace that he hath merited for us by his Passion that all Men may be saved u That all Men may be saved Lib. 3. cap. 18 20 22 and 33. Lib. 4. chap. 5. As for the State of Souls separated from their Bodies he determined that they were conveyed into an invisible place where they expected the Resurrection of the Body and that the Just after having Reâ—gned with Jesus Christ on Earth during the space of a Thousand years and enjoyed temporal Pleasures should enter into Heaven to possess Eternal Happiness x To possess eternal happiness Lib. 5. c. 31 32 c. He imagined also that our Saviouâ— descended into Hell to preach the Faith there into the Patriarchs and to the ancient just Men as well Jews as Gentiles and that they that believed at his Preaching should be reckoned in the number of the Saints y Number of the Saints Lib. 4. c. 39 and 45. Moreover he maintained some other particular Opinions he believed for Example that Jesus Christ lived above Fifty years upon Earth z Above fifty years upon Earth Lib. 1. c. 40. c. and that as Man He was ignorant of the Day of Judgment c. He approves the Judgment of S. Justin that the Devil knew not his Condemnation before the coming of Jesus Christ aa Before the coming of Jesus Christ. Lib. 4. c. 78. He asserts that the Saints shall undâ—rstâ—nd by little and little those things whereof they had no knowledge in their Entrance into Happiness bb Whereof they had no knowledge in their Entrance into happiness Lib. 2. c. 47. Lastly he imagines that God sent Enoch to the Angels cc To the Angels Lib. 4. c. 30. whom he conceives to 〈◊〉 câ—rporeal The ancient Propagators of Christianity ought to be excused for these sorts of Opinions thâ—… being scarcely one of them that had not admitted some Notions almost like these The Style of S. 〈◊〉 as far as we can judge by that part of his Works which as yet remains is succinct clear and 〈◊〉 but not very sublime He declares himself in his Preface to the First Book That the Elegancy of a poâ—â—e Dissertation ought not to be sought for in his Works because residing among the Celtae it is impossible but that he should â—nter many barbarous Words that he did not affect Discourse with Eloquence 〈◊〉 Ornament and that he knew not how to perswade by the force of his Expressions but that he wrote with a vulgar Simplicity He takes more pains to instruct his Reader than to divert him and he endeavours more to convince him by the Matters which he propounded than by the manner of Expressing them It cannot be doubted but that he was a very profound Scholar in all sorts of Knowledge as well prophane as Sacred he perfectly understood the Poets and Philosophers dd The Poets and Philosophers It is certain he understood Homer very well since he collects several Verses taken out of different places to describe the carrying away of Cerberus lib. 1. And as for the Pagan Philosophers he knew them so very thoroughly that in the second Book ch 11. he discovers all that the Valentinians had borrowed from each of them We need only read over his first Book to be sufficiently persuaded that he had very particularly applied himself to know all the Opinions of the Hereticks One sees by the Histories which he cites as well in his Books as in his Letter to Victor how well he was verst in History and in the Discipline of thâ— Church there was no Heretick of whose Doctrine and Arguments he was ignorant he had an exquisite knowledge of the Holy Scriptures he retained an infinite number of things which the Disciples of the Apostles had taught by word of mouth Lastly he was exceeding well versed in History and in the Discipline of the Church so that nothing can be more literally true than what is attested of him by Terâ—dlian Irenaeus â—â—â—niuâ— Doctrinarum Cariosissimus explorator Moreover his Learning was accompanied with a great deal of Prudence Humility Efficacy and Charity and it may be justly affirmed that he wanted nothing that was necessary for the Qualification of a good Christian an Accomplished Bishop and an able Ecclesiastical Writer However the Learned Photius had reason to take notice of one defect which is common to him with many other ancient Authors that is That he weakens and obscures if we may so term it the most certain Truths of Religion by Arguments that are 〈◊〉 very solid ee Arguments that are not very solid Phot. God 120. Etsi in aliquibus Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum certa veritas spuritis rationibus
of his first Book of Illustrious Men. In the Poem against Marcion hh In the Poem against Marcion Tertullian in his Book De Animâ chap. 57. says that it was not the Soul of Samuel but only a Phantasm which the Witch raised up and the Author of the Poem in his third Book supposes that it was Samuel himself that was raised to acquaint Saul what was to befall him Tertullian in his Book of Praescriptions makes S. Clemens to succeed S. Peter but this Author places him the Fourth making two Popes of Cletus and Anacletus there are some Opinions different from those of Tertullian There is likewise a Poem to a Senator in Pamelius's Edition one of Sodom and one of Jonas and Ninive in the Bibliotheca Patrum of which we do not know the Authors the first is ancient and the other two seem to be written by the same Author Besides S. Jerom affirms that Tertullian writ several other Treatises which were lost in his time and amongst others a Book Of the Habits of Aaron whereof this Father speaks in his Letter to Fabiola He quotes likewise a Book Of the Circumcision another Of those Creatures that are Clean and of such as are Unclean a Book concerning Extasie and another against Apollonius Tertullian himself cites several other Treatises of his own composing as in his Book Of the Soul a Discourse concerning Paradise and in his Book Of the Testimony of the Soul chap. 2. a Discourse Of Destiny and in another place a Book concerning The Hope of the Faithful and another against Apelles He had also composed a former Work against Marcion which being lost in his own time he was obliged to write a new one Lastly he wrote the Discourses Of Baptism Of Publick Sights and Spectacles and that wherein he proves That Virgins ought to be veil'd in Greek But we have said enough of Tertullian's Works as to what relates to Criticism and Chronology we will now look upon them with relation to what they contain And considering them thus we may distinguish them into three Classes The first comprizing those which were written against the Gentiles The second those which were made against Hereticks And the third those which relate to Discipline and Manners The first Book of this first Classis is his Apology against the Gentiles wherein he shews the Injustice of those Persecutions and Sufferings which they inflicted on the Christians and the Falshood of those Accusations which were laid to their Charge and at the same time proves the Excellency of their Religion and the Folly of that of the Heathens He begins by shewing that there is nothing more unjust or opposite to the very intent and design of Laws than to Condemn without Understanding and to Punish without considering whether there be any just Ground for such a Condemnation And yet that this is put in practise every day against the Christians that they are Hated Condemned and Punished merely upon the account of their being Christians without eve◠considering or giving themselves the trouble to be informed what it is to be a Christian. That there are indeed some Laws made by the Emperors which forbid Men to be Christians but that these Laws are Unjust subject to Alteration made by Evil Emperors and contrary to the Opinions of the Justest and Wisest amongst them He afterwards confutes the Calumnies which were spread abroad against the Christians as that they used in their Night-Meetings to cut a Child's Throat and to devour it and that after they had put out the Candles they had filthy and abominable Conversations amongst themselves He shews that there is not only so much as the least Proof of these Crimes alledged against them but that their Life their Manners and the Principles of their Religion were directly opposite to these Abominations We are says he beset daily we are continually betrayed we are very often surprized and oppressed even in the very time of our Meetings But did they ever find this Child dead or a dying Was there ever any one that could be a Witness of these Crimes Has ever any one of those who have betrayed us discovered these things Besides he presses the Heathens further by shewing that these Crimes were frequently committed amongst themselves that they have slain Children in Africa in Honour of Saturn and that they have sacrificed Men in other places that their Gods have been guilty of a thousand shameful and abominable Practises whereas the Christians are so far from killing a Child and drinking its Blood that they do not so much as eat the Flesh of those Beasts that have been strangled and that they are such inveterate Enemies to all kind of Incests that there are several amongst them who preserve their Virginity all their Lives After having thus confuted those Calumnies which were set on foot on purpose to render the Christians odious he gives an Answer to that Objection which was made to them That they did not own the Pagan Deities and that they did not offer up Sacrifices to them for the Prosperity of their Emperors from whence they concluded that they were guilty of Sacriledge and Treason He answers in a word that the Christians did not pay any Honour to the Gods of the Heathens because they were not true Gods and he appeals for a Testimony of this to the Consciences of the wisest of the Heathens themselves He evidently demonstrates that their pretended Gods were Men and for the most part Criminals that were dead and that their Images cannot be Adored without the greatest Folly and Madness in the World that even the Wisest of the Heathens despised them He occasionally confutes what has been objected by some to the Christians that they worshipped an Asses Head and adored Crosses And from thence he takes occasion to explain the Doctrine of the Christians We Adore says he One only God the Creator of the World who is Invisible and Incomprehensible who will Recompence Good Men with Everlasting Life and Punish Wicked Men with Eternal Torments after he has raised them from the Dead He proves this Truth by the whole Creation which so evidently demonstrates that there is a God That it is says he the greatest Wickedness that can possibly be conceived not to acknowledge him of whom 't is impossible that we can be ignorant even by the very Dictates which Nature inspires into all Men which oftentimes cause them to Invoke the True God as when we say If God thinks good if God pleases God sees us and the like And this he calls The Testimony of a Soul that is naturally Christian Testimonium Animae naturaliter Christianae Lastly by the Antiquity of the Books of Moses which are more ancient than all the Writings of the Greeks and by the Authority of the Prophets who foretold those Things that were to come to pass Then after having proved the Unity of God which the Jews acknowledge as well as the Christians he goes on to that Faith
for governing the Church of Constantinople by describing the wonderful Effects he had produc'd in that Church he prays them to grant him a Successor with as much Earnestness as others desire the Greatest Sees The Reasons which he alledges for obtaining Permission to retire are First his great Age the Quarrels of Churches and Bishops the Envy that some bore to him the Division of the East and the West and his Love of Retirement and Solitude He adds some other Reasons which tend to the Confusion of his Enemies such as the Persecutions which he had endur'd with Patience his Frugality his Modesty his Humility At last He conjures them to create another Bishop who should be more agreeable to the relish of the World Here he represents very naturally the Luxury Ambition and Arts which were but too common among the Bishops of the Great Sees At last He bids Adieu to his Dear Anastasia to the other Churches of Constantinople to the Council the Clergy the People and to the Court These Adieu's are pathetical to those that had an Esteem of him and are very picquant to those that were his Enemies and wish'd that he would abdicate his Charge 'T is plain that this Discourse is the last of those which he spoke at Constantinople The Five following Discourses are Entitled Of Theology because St. Gregory Nazianzen explains there what concerns the Divine Nature and the Trinity of Persons There he treats of the Rules which ought to be observed in the Administration of the Word of God He says First That this Function does not suit all Men That he who discharges it must be pure in Heart and Mind That he should not apply himself to it but with a sedate Temper and Lastly That he ought not to treat of those Matters before Pagans nor before those who have no sence of Religion and who think of nothing but Pleasures He adds many fine things about the Dispositions and Qualifications that are necessary to a Divine He blames those who having their Hands tied that is who do no Good Works yet have a wonderful Itch to prate and those who think to be great Divines because they understand the Subtilties of Aristotle's Logick and the Gentile Philosophy which they make use of nothing to the purpose when they Discourse about Mysteries In the 2d Discourse he enquires what may be conceiv'd concerning the Nature of God He says That his Existence is known by the Creatures That his Immensity Spirituality and his other Attributes are known but that it does not follow from hence that his Essence and Nature can be comprehended which he proves against Eunomius in the second Discourse of Theology which contains many great Notions concerning the Nature and Attributes of God In the 3d. he proves the Equality of the Three Persons of the Divinity and the Son and answers the most part of Eunomius's Sophisms The 4th continues the same subject and in the 5th he proves That the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son That he proceeds from the Father and that he is not begotten as the Son tho' he be of the same Substance and the same Nature He observes towards the End of this Discourse That under the Old Testament the Father only was distinctly known That the Son is clearly Reveal'd in the New That in it also there are found Passages enough to prove the Divinity of the Holy Spirit but that it was fully clear'd by the Tradition of the Church These Discourses seem also to have been spoken at Constantinople And thus we are come to the 38th Sermon upon the Festival of the Birth of Jesus Christ. In it St. Gregory admires the Wonders of the Mysteries of the Incarnation He describes the Fall of the first Man which he supposes to have been the Cause of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and reckons up the Advantages which Mankind receiv'd by this Mystery At last He teaches Christians to Celebrate the Festival of Christmas by purifying themselves from their Sins by imitating the Vertues of Jesus Christ and particularly his Patience and Humility The 39th Discourse is a Sermon upon the Festival Of Lights that is upon the Feast of Epiphany on which also the Solemnity of the Baptism of Jesus Christ is observ'd There he speaks of the Wonderful Effects of this Baptism which had the Vertue of purifying us He distinguishes many sorts of Baptism viz. The Baptism of Moses the Baptism of St. John the Baptism of Jesus Christ the Baptism of the Martyrs and the Baptism of Penance which he calls a Laborious Baptism and taking occasion from this last he Discourses against the Error of the Novatians Last of all He adds also to this Baptism which we have already mentioned the Baptism of Fire wherewith he says one may be baptiz'd in another Life The following Discourse was spoken the next Day 'T is an Instruction about Baptism to those that are to be baptiz'd There he observes the Excellence of Baptism and its marvellous Effects He sets down and explains the different Names that are given to this Sacrament He observes That it consists in Two Things the Water and the Spirit That the washing the Body with Water represents the Operation of the Spirit in purifying the Soul He says That Baptism is a Compact which we make with God by which we oblige our selves to lead a New Life That 't is very dangerous to break the Promise which we made at Baptism for there is no more Regeneration nor perfect Renovation to be hop'd for afterwards That we may indeed cover the Wound by a multitude of Tears and Sighs but that it would be much better not to need this Second Remedy because it is very difficult and troublesome and that we can have no assurance but Death may surprize us before our Penance be finish'd You says he addressing himself to the Ministers of Jesus Christ you can as the Gardener mention'd in the Gospel pray the Lord to excuse the barren Fig-tree yet a little longer you can desire him that he would not cut it down and that he would permit you to dung it that 's to say to impose as a Penance upon it Weeping Watching lying upon the hard Ground Corporal Mortifications and making humble Satisfaction but what certainty have you that God will pardon him Wherefore my Brethren being buried by Baptism with Jesus Christ let us rise with him let us descend with him into the Waters that we may ascend with him into Heaven He proves afterwards that we ought not to delay the Receiving of Baptism and refutes the vain pretences of those who delay it He says that Infants are to be Baptiz'd to consecrate them to Jesus Christ from their Infancy He distinguishes Three Sorts of Persons that are Baptiz'd the First are those who do Evil wilfully and with Delight the Second are those who commit Sin with some reluctancy and without approving it the Third are those who live well
the Divine Nature is so high and unsearchable that it is not possible to comprehend it and pursues this Reasoning so far that he sticketh not to say that Seraphims and Angels themselves do not see the Substance of God but only an Emanation of his Divine Light This passage Ib. Orat. 1 hath made some modern Greeks suppose that the Saints do not see the Substance of God but only a Corporeal Light such as they say appeared upon Mount Tabor This also hath exercised the Subtilty of our Divines who constitute Happiness in the Vision of the Substance of God And yet S. Chrysostom hath respect in this passage neither to that Light of the Modern Greeks not to the Disputes of the Schoolmen his only design is to shew against Aetius that the Divine Nature is not to be comprehended and that evident Reasons of the Mysteries are not to be given It is not necessary to inlarge upon the Opinions of S. Chrysostom concerning the Mystery of the Trinity it is certain that he maintained the Faith of the Council of Nice and that he proved the Divinity both of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet it ought to be observed that he was of Meletius's opinion concerning the Signification of the word Hypostasis and that he owned Three Hypostases and one Nature in God As to the Mystery of the Incarnation tho' he was equally contrary to the Errour Ep. ad Caesarium Homil. de Consub in lib. Quod Christus sit Deus V. Theodor. in Dialog of those who distinguished two Persons in Christ and that of those who confounded the two Natures and their Properties yet he in several passages of his Writings declared against the latter Opinion very eagerly In his Panegyricks of the Saints he ascribeth to them all manner of Felicity Homil de B. Philog Hom. de S S. Homil. 39. in ep 1. ad Cor. Hom. 28. in ep ad Hebr. Hom. 29. Matth. he places them in Heaven in the same Rank with Angels and Archangels of Prophets and Martyrs and yet in other places he seems to affirm that their Happiness is referred to the Day of Judgment but these may agree well enough if we say that he spake in the latter of a perfect and consummated Happiness Angels if we believe S. Chrysostom are so called because they declare the Will of God unto Men for which cause the Scripture representeth them with Wings Homil. 3. de Incompreh Hom. 3. in ep ad Coloss. Hom. 14. in ep ad Hebr. They take care of Men are present at Divine Services and every Christian hath his Guardian Angel The Devil is not wicked of his own Nature but is become such by Sin God permits him to tempt Men for their good It is a Childish thing to believe that Hom. de Diabolo tentatore Hom. 22. in Genesim those are Angels which the Scripture calleth the Children of God in Genesis and of whom it is said that they conversed with the Daughters of Men since they are of a spiritual and incorporeal Nature He Confesses in several places that the Fall of the first Men was prejudicial to the whole Race which ever since is become subject to Pains Sicknesses and Death from which it was free before Sin He acknowledgeth that an inclination to Evil and Lusts are Consequences of the first Man's sin but he seemeth not to have owned Original sin after the same manner that S. Austin doth at least it cannot be denied that he hath given another Sence to those places of S. Paul which seem to prove it most As for Example when he expoundeth that famous passage Rom. 5. 12. By One man sin entred into the World c. He understandeth of Death what S. Paul saith of Sin because it is the Wages of Sin and upon those other words of the same Chapter As by the disobedience of one many are become Guilty c. This Sentence saith he seems to have much of Difficulty for how can it be that one only Man having sinned many should be made guilty by his sin We may easily conceive that the first Man being become mortal it was necessary that his Off-spring should be mortal likewise but what Likelihood and what Reason is there that a man should be a Sinner because of anothers disobedience ... What then signifyeth the word Sinner In my Opinion it signifyeth nothing else but a condemned Man subject to Pain and Death This is a way of speaking which does not agree with S. Augustin's Doctrine Tho' it is not hard to defend S. Chrysostom by saying That tho' he spake thus yet he admitted all that Divines own concerning Original sin For what is Original sin according to them It is either a Privation of Original righteousness or Lust with the guilt of Sin or pain and Guilt together But S. Chrysostom acknowledges all these for in the first place he Confesseth that by the first Man's sin all men were deprived and spoiled of the State of Innocence that they are become not only mortal and subject to Pain and Grief but also inclined to Evil. Thus in his Opinion Lust is an effect of the first Man's sin and that Concupiscence in men makes them unworthy of eternal Life if the Grace of Jesus Christ saveth them not by Baptism He ascribes much to the strength of Free-will He always speaks as if he believed that it depends upon our selves to do good or evil and affirms that God always gives his Grace to those De verbis Jer. Hom. 1. Hom. 2. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. 41. in Genesim Hom. de tribus pueris Hom. 12. in ep ad Hebr. 8. in ep ad Phil. 19. ibid Hom. 17. in Joan. Hom. 18. in ep ad Rom. 12. in ep 1. ad Cor. In Matth. Hom. 83. Hom. 45. in Joan. In orat de S. Pelagia Serm. de Zachaeo Hom. 34. in Matth. Hom. 80. in ep ad Rom. Hom. 16. 18. in ep ad Rom. Hom. de obscur Prophet Serm. 5. de Lazaro Hom. 45. in Matth. who on their side doe all they can That we must begin and God makes an end That he followeth the motions of our Wills and giveth them their Perfection yet he owns the necessity of Grace to do good but submits it still to our Will So that according to him We are to will and chuse the good and God gives us the necessary Grace to fulfil the same he prevents not our Will that our Liberty may not be prejudiced he worketh good in us but that is when we are willing when our Will is determined he draweth to himself but only those who do all their endeavours to come near to him Those Principles about foreknowledge and Predestination agree very well with these Conclusions God did not predestinate men but as he foresaw their merits foreknowledge is not the cause of the event of things but God foresaw them because they shall happen He calls all men Jesus Christ died
notice of it and being Summoned to it as other Bishops were nominated 3 Legats to send into the East Julius Bishop of Putebli Renatus a Priest and Hilarius a Deacon with Dulcitius a Notary he gave them several Letters which are Dated June 13. The first was that famous Letter directed to Flavian in which he Explains with so much Accuracy the Mystery of the Incarnation In it he distinguishes two Births of the Son of God and Ep. 24. two Natures in Jesus Christ whose Properties subsist distinctly although they be united in one and the same Person He maintains that the Word hath assumed our Nature and all the Properties of it Sin only excepted In it he proves that he hath a true Flesh like ours He rejects the Confession of Faith made by Eutyches because says he 't is absurd to say That the Son in the Incarnation is of two Natures and impious to maintain That after the Incarnation he hath but one He acknowledges that he was justly Condemned and yet was willing to shew him some Mercy if he would confess his fault and eondemn viva voce and in Writing the Errors which he had published The second was written to Julian Bishop of Coos who had been present at the Judgment given Ep. 25. against Eutyches and had written about it to S. Leo. In it he speaks passionately against Eutyches calling him an Impudent Old man he accuses him for reviving the Errors of Valentinus Apollinaris and Manichaeus He proves that there is no change nor a confusion made in the two Natures in Jesus Christ. He observes that it follows from Eutyches's Confession of Faith that the Soul of Jesus Christ was united with the Godhead before it assumed a Body in the Womb of the Virgin Mary and that the Body of Jesus Christ was created out of Nothing Lastly He maintains against Eutyches That although Jesus Christ had some particular Privileges as to be Born and Conceived of a Virgin by the Power of the Holy Ghost and not to be subject to the motions of Concupiscence nor Sin yet he hath a Body and Soul of the same Nature with ours and endued with the same Properties The third is directed to Theodosius He tells him That he had sent his Legats to be present at Ep. 26. the Council in his stead which he had called at Ephesus and assure him at the same time that Eutyches was apparently in an Error The fourth Letter of the same Date is directed to the Empress Pulcheria He commendeth Ep. 27. her Zeal for the defence of the Faith explains the Mystery of the Incarnation to her condemns the obstinacy of Eutyches complains that the Emperor had appointed the Council upon a day too near because the Bishops of Italy had too little time from the 12th of May on which they received the News of it to the 1st of August which was the day appointed for the Meeting of the Synod at Ephesus to prepare for and finish such a Journey Tâ—at the Emperor had thought that he ought to be present in Person but although he had had some President for it which he had not the present Conjuncture will not permit him to leave Rome Lastly He shews of what Importance this Question was and prays him to take care that Eutyches's Impiety be Condemned by pardoning him if he Recant it The fifth Letter of S. Leo is directed to the Abbots of Constantinople he tells them that he Ep. 28. condemns the Errors of Eutyches and hoped that he would acknowledge it The sixth is directed to the Council it self In it he opposes Eutyches by the Confession of Ep. 29. S. Peter who acknowledged that Jesus Christ was the Christ the Son of the Living God He exhorts the Fathers of the Council to suppress the Error and to reduce those that are in it There are also two Letters of the same date of which one is addressed to Pulcheria the other Ep. 30 31 32 33. to Julian of Coos as also another to Flavian dated June 17 and another June 20 to Theodosius He repeats the same things in them The Emperor Theodosius also wrote several Letters about the Council The first is about the Calling of it dated May 30 directed to the Patriarchs and Exarchs in which he orders them to be at Ephesus Aug. 1. with the Metropolitans and so many of the Bishops of their Jurisdiction as they would choose except Theodoret who was Prohibited to come thither unless the Council should Summon him The second is a private Letter to Dioscorus dated May 15 in which he gives him Notice That he would have the Abbot Barsumas present at the Council as a Deputy for the Eastern Abbots who complained that they were used hardly by their Bishops who were favourers of Nestorius's Party The third is an Order to Barsumas to be present at the Council It is dated the day before the former Letter The fourth is an Order directed to Elpidius to come to the Council with Eulogius a Tribune and Notary to prevent that there be no Tumults there In it he Orders that the Bishops who have been Judges of Eutyches should be present at it but have no power to Consult nor right to Vote but shall wait upon the Judgment of the other Bishops because they Re-examine what they have Judged He forbids them to meddle with any Civil Affairs least that which concerns the Faith be not throughly decided The fifth is an Order to the Proconsul of Asia to afford Elpidius all necessary Assistance The sixth is a Letter to the Bishops of the Council in which he tells them That he wished that they had had no cause of going from their Churches and leaving their Ministerial Functions and to spare themselves the trouble of so long a Voyage but Flavian having moved a Question concerning the Faith by accusing the Abbot Eutyches after he had done what he could to appease the Contest but to no purpose by perswading Flavian to keep close to the Nicene Creed he thought that there was no other way to decide this Question but by assembling a Council that they might examine all that had passed utterly extirpate the Error and expel all those out of the Church who would revive the Heresie of Nestorius The seventh is a private Letter to Dioscorus in which he gives him the Precedence of the Bishops and the Chief Authority in the Council not only upon the Account of Theodoret whom he commanded to be Excluded out of it but upon the Account of some other Bishops whom he suspected to favour the Sentiments of Nestorius He takes notice also that he was perswaded that Iuvenal Bishop of Jerusalem and Thalassius Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia and the other Orthodox Bishops would join with him and he was unwilling that they who would add or change any thing that had been Established at Nice or Ephesus should have any Authority in this Synod It is easie to perceive by these Letters
that the thing may be done either by himself or by a Bishop of his choosing Lastly he reproves them for not having asufficient horror of the Sect of the Priscillianists whom he accuses of many infamous things which he says are prov'd in the Letter of Turribius to St. Leo. There is also another Letter from the same Person to Tarribius Governor of this Country exhorting him to oppose the Disorders which we have mention'd and to employ his Authority for abolishing these Customs which are contrary to the Discipline of the Church A Conference held at Constantinople between the Catholicks and Severians JUstinian being desirous to reconcile the Severians to the Catholicks summon'd the Bishops and Priests on both sides in the Year 533 to confer together about their Differences in the presence A Conference between the Catholicks and Severians of Strategius a Commissioner sent from himself When they were met together the Bishop Hypatius made a Speech in behalf of the Catholicks The first day the Severians said That they had presented their Confession of Faith to the Emperor and that in it they had explain'd every thing that might raise any Scruple Hypatius answer'd That they could not approve it because therein they blam'd what was done against Eutyches in the Council of Chalcedon He desir'd to know of the Severians what they thought of Eutyches They answer'd That they believ'd him to be a Heretick He reply'd to them That if this were so the Council of Dioscorus had done ill to receive him They answer'd That they had receiv'd him as a Peniteâ—â— Why then said he to them do ye condemn him They confess'd that Dioscorus and his Council were then impos'd upon Then replys Hypatius the Error of this Universal Council was corrected by another Universal Council This Council was assembled at Chalcedon The Severians confess'd the Principle but maintain'd that the Council of Chalcedon had not done what it ought to do Here ended the first enterview In the second the Severians accuâ—'d the Council of Chalcedon of Novelty because they had determin'd that the two Natures in Jesus Christ were distinguish'd after their Union They affirm That we must say with St. Cyril that he was compos'd of two Natures but after the Union there was but one Hypatius ask'd them Whether they condemn'd this Doctrine meerly because it appear'd to them to be new or as false They answer'd That they condemn'd it both as new and as false because St. Cyril St. Athanasius the Popes Felix and Julius St. Gregory Thaumaturgus and St. Dionysius the Areopagite had declar'd that there was but one Nature in Jesus Christ after the Union Hypatius answer'd That the Writings in which this was found were supposititions that St. Cyril had taught the contrary that in the Council of Ephesus he had not produc'd any Testimony of the Fathers where it was said that there was but one Nature in Jesus Christ after his Incarnation The Severians said Think you then that we have forg'd or falsified these Writings Hypatius answer'd That he did not accuse them of this Forgery but that he suspected the ancient Hereticks the Apollinarists to be guilty of it that the Nestorians had also falsified the Letter of St. Athanasius to Epictetus The Severians added That the same things are found in the Books written by St. Cyril against Diodorus and Theodorus Hypatius answer'd That these Books were also falsified and whereas his Adversaries insisted upon it that they could produce ancient Manuscripts taken out of the Archieves of the Church of Alexandria Hypatius answer'd That if they could show such in the time of Proterius or Timotheus Salophaciolus they were certainly genuine but that since that time the Church of Alexandria having been in the possession of Hereticks they were not oblig'd to trust to the Monuments which came out of the hands of their Enemies that they had plainly prov'd that the Letter attributed to Pope Julius was the Epistle of Apollinaris written to Dionysius that Severus and those of his Party would not sign the Confession of Faith which they say was St. Gregory Thaumaturgus's and lastly that the Books attributed to St. Dionysius were forged Here the Severians ask'd Why the Council of Chalcedon had not receiv'd the Letter of St. Cyril which contains twelve Chapters wherein he denies that there are two Subsistences in Jesus Christ. Hypatius answer'd That the Council of Chalcedon had not rejected this Letter but had preferr'd the other Letter because it is more clear The Severians urg'd That St. Cyril us'd the word Subsistence for Nature Hypatius answer'd That indeed the ancient Fathers and the Latins confounded them but the Orientalists distinguish'd them and gave the name of Subsistence to the Person that it is no where found that St. Cyril did ever affirm that there were three Subsistences in the Trinity The Severians reply'd That in the Letters of St. Cyril approv'd in the Council of Chalcedon it was said that Jesus Christ was made up of two Natures ex duabus Naturis which signifies say they according to his language that he is one Nature made up of two ex duabus naturis unam Hypatius answer'd them that this Expression ex duabus naturis is so far from signifying what they pretend that Flavian made use of it and to prove this they reciâ—e the Letter of Flâ—… to the Emperor Theodosius The Severians always insisted upon two Testimonies of St. Ceril Hypatius answer'd them That none is oblig'd to take any thing for a Rule of Faith but the Synodical Letters approv'd in the Councils and not what a Father may have said or written upon different Occasions As says he we must be guided by the Decision of the Apostles in the Council of Jerusalem and not by what every Apostle might write or practise before this common Decision that in the Letter of St. Cyril to Nestorius the Union of the two Natures without confusion or mixture was establish'd that in his Letter to the Orientalists he had approv'd their Declaration which clearly contains the distinction of the two Natures after their Union that it was more reasonable to give credit to these publick Letters then to some private Letters which might easily be corrupted The Severians did not omit to produce the Letter to Eulogius and that which is address'd to his Successor and Hypatius explain'd them protesting always that he did not receive them for genuine After this another Question was debated The Severians complain'd that the Names of Councils were put into the Dipryches they said that this tended only to encrease the Division Hypatius answer'd that this would do no hurt that since the Names of particular Bishops were recited in them it was but just that those of Councils should be plac'd in them and that this could offend none but Hereticks The Severians said against the Council of Chalcedon that it had receiv'd Ibas and Theodoret. Hypatius answer'd that it had not done it till they had pronounc'd an Anathema against
has a Guardian Angel yet owns that the same Angel may serve as a Guardian to several Persons and afterwards proceeds to examine in what particulars the Knowledge of the Angels may be augmented In the following Sections to the Sixteenth he explains the Work of the Creation In the Sixteenth and Seventeenth he treats of the Creation of Man and enquires in what his likeness to God consists when his Soul was created and in what Place he was set He discourses in the Eighteenth of the Formation of Woman and endeavours to explain why she was taken out of the Man 's Rib. In the Nineteenth he treats of the State of Immortality in which the First Man was created In the Twentieth he debates concerning the Manner how Men were to be brought into the World and how they were to be nourished in case the State of Innocence had continu'd In the Twenty first he gives an Account after what manner the Devil tempted Man He discusses in the Twenty second divers Questions relating to the Quality and Circumstances of the Sin of Adam and Eve In the Twenty third he resolves this difficult Point Why God permitted Man to be tempted knowing that he was to Fall And afterwards treats of the Knowledge with which the First Man was endu'd In the Twenty fourth he begins to discourse concerning the Free Will and Grace inherent in the First Man and treats in general in the Two following Sections of the Freedom of Grace according to St. Augustin's Principles In the Twenty seventh Section he discourses of Vertue and Merit which are the Effects of Grace and Free Will. In the Twenty eighth he confutes the Errors of the Pelagians as also those of the Manichees and of Jovinian In the Twenty ninth Section he returns to the State of the First Man and after having shewn that Man even in the State of Innocency stood in need of operating and co-operating Grace for the doing of Good he debates certain Questions about the manner how he was expell'd Paradise and concerning the Tree of Life which preserv'd him from Death In the Thirtieth Thirty first Thirty second and Thirty third he treats of Original Sin and enquires in what it consists how it is transferr'd from Parents to their Children after what manner it is remitted by Baptism whether Children contract the Sins of their Parents as Original Sin c. In the Thirty fourth and Thirty fifth he discourses of the Nature of Actual Sin In the Thirty sixth he shews that there are Sins which are both the Cause and the Punishment of Sin He makes it appear in the Thirty seventh that God is the Author of the Actions by which Sin is committed and of the Punishments of Sin although he is not the Author of Sin In the Thirty eighth he demonstrates that it is the End and Intention of the Will which renders the Action either Good or Bad and that in order to its being Good it must of necessity be terminated in God In the Thirty ninth he enquires into the Reason Why of all the natural Faculties the Will only is susceptible of Sin In the Fortieth he continues to shew that an Action to be denominated Good ought to have a good End and Intention In the Forty first he produces divers Passages of St. Augustin about the necessity of Faith and of an upright Will to avoid the committing of Sin and shews that the corrupt Will is the cause of Sin He enquires in the Forty second Whether the Will and the Action be two different Sins And Afterwards explains the Division of the Seven Capital Sins shewing that they derive their original from Pride and Concupiscence In the Forty third he relates the Opinions of St. Ambrose and St. Augustin concerning the Sin against the Holy Ghost Lastly he makes it appear in the Forty fourth Section that the Power of committing Sin proceeds from God and that the Power the Devil has to tempt us to Evil ought to be resisted The Third Book begins with the Questions relating to the Mystery of the Incarnation In the First Section the Author lays down the Reasons Why it was more expedient that the Son should be Incarnate rather than the Father or the Holy Ghost and discusses this Question Whether Two Persons were in like manner capable of being Incarnate In the Second Section he treats of the Union of the Word with the Body and the Soul In the Third he shews that the Body taken by the Word was free from the corruption of Sin that the Virgin Mary herself was then also free from Sin and that in the very moment that the Humanity of Jesus Christ was conceiv'd the Word was united to it He enquires in the Fourth Why the Incarnation is attributed to the Holy Ghost rather than to the other Persons of the Trinity and in what Sense it is said Jesus Christ was conceiv'd and born of the Holy Ghost In the Fifth Section he treats of the Union of the Person of the Son with the Human Nature and shews that the Word was not united to the Person but to the Nature In the Sixth he gives an Account of these Propositions viz. God was made Man God is Man and produces Three several Explications of them made by the Fathers The same matter is farther handled in the Seventh Distinction In the Eighth he resolves this Question Whether it may be said that the Divine Nature was born of the Virgin Mary And discourses of the two-fold Nativity of Jesus Christ. In the Ninth he produces certain Passages of the Fathers concerning the Adoration of the Body of Jesus Christ. In the Tenth he proposes this Question viz. Whether Jesus Christ quatenus Man be a Person or a Thing He maintains the Negative and afterwards proves that the Quality or Title of adoptive Son cannot be appropriated to him In the Eleventh he asserts that neither ought Jesus Christ to be call'd a Creature without adding quatenus Man In the Twelfth he discusses divers Questions viz. Whether it may be said of Jesus Christ as Man that he always was or that it was possible that he might not be God He determines that it cannot be said of the Person of Jesus Christ but only of his Human Nature In the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Sections he treats of Knowledge Grace and the Power of Jesus Christ quatenus Man In the Fifteenth and Sixteenth he proves that Jesus Christ took upon him the Infirmities of Human Nature Sin and Ignorance only excepted and that he was capable of undergoing Sufferings In the Seventeenth he explains the two-fold Will of Jesus Christ. In the Eighteenth he discourses of what Jesus Christ merited for himself and of what he merited for us In the Nineteenth he treats of Redemption In the Twentieth he enquires Why Jesus Christ redeem'd us by his Passion and Death And whether he could not have done it by some other means In the Twenty first he proposes this Question viz. Whether the Word remain'd united
Infidels Proud and the Saracens Powerful He concludes all with the third Passeover which is the passing to Glory where he Prays he may one Day meet with them He Preach'd likewise another Sermon to the Fathers of the Council which is only a Moral Exhortation Afterwards he Orders the Reading in a full Council the Chapters or Canons upon the Discipline of the Church which were already drawn up Matthew Paris saies That those Canons seem'd tolerable to some of the Prelates but grievous to others His Words are these Facto prius ab ipso Papa exhortationis Sermone recitata sunt in pleno Concilio Capitula Septuaginta quae aliis placabilia aliis videbantur onerosa Let the Case be how it will 't is certain That these Canons were not made by the Council but by Innocent III. who presented them to the Council ready drawn up and order'd them to be Read and that the Prelates did not enter into any Debate upon them but that their Silence was taken for an Approbation These Seventy Chapters or Canons begin with a Form of Faith drawn up in these Terms We do firmly Believe and sincerely Confess That there is but One True Eternal Immense Omnipotent Immutable Incomprehensible Ineffable God the Father Son and Holy Ghost who are Three Persons but only One Essence One Substance and One Simple Nature The Father derives his Substance from none the Son has it from the Father and the Holy Ghost proceeds from Both without Beginning and without End The Father begets the Son is begotten and the Holy Ghost proceeds They are Consubstantial and Co-equal in all things equally Powerful equally Eternal One Individual Principle of all things the Creator of things Visible and Invisible Spiritual and Corporeal who by His Omnipotent Power Created out of Nothing at the Beginning of Time and all together two sorts of Creatures Spiritual and Corporeal and afterwards the Humane Nature which is a Compound of Soul and Body For the Devil and the other Daemons were Good when God Created them and became by their own fault Wicked and Man Sinned and Fell by the suggestion of the Devil This Holy Trinity which is Indivisible with respect to its Essence and distinguish'd according to its Personal Properties has given to Mankind a Salutary Doctrine by the Ministery of Moses the Prophets and the other Servants of God according to the Order and Disposition of Times And at last Jesus Christ the onely Son of God who was Incarnate by the Power of the whole Trinity and Conceived of the Virgin Mary always a Virgin by the Power of the Holy Ghost who was true Man made up of a reasonable Soul and humane Body one single Person compounded of two Natures has more clearly shown us the Way of Life who being Immortal and Impassible as to his Divinity as to his Humanity became Passible and Mortal And he suffer'd for the Salvation of Mankind on the Cross he Dy'd and Descended into Hell is Risen from the Dead and Ascended up into Heaven but he Descended in his Soul and Rose again with his Body and is Ascended into Heaven with his Body and Soul and shall come again at the End of the World to Judge both the Living and the Dead and to give to all Men according to their Works as well the Reprobates as the Elect who shall all rise again with their own Bodies which they at present bear about them that so they may receive according to their Deserts whether they be Good or Bad the latter Eternal Glory with Jesus Christ and the former Eternal Damnation with the Devil There is but one Catholick Church of the Faithful out of which none is Saved wherein Jesus Christ is both Priest and Sacrifice whose Body and Blood are contain'd really in the Sacrament of the Altar under the Species of Bread and Wine the Bread being Transubstantiated into the Body of Jesus Christ and the Wine into his Blood by the Power of God that so to render the Mystery of the Unity perfect we might receive of His Nature what he receiv'd of Ours No Person may Consecrate the Sacrament but the Priest who has receiv'd Lawful Ordination by the power of the Keys of the Church which Jesus Christ has given to his Apostles and their Successors The Sacrament of Baptism which is Consecrated by Invocation of the Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost on the Water is the Cause of Salvation as well of Infants as of Adult Persons when 't is Conferr'd according to the Form of the Church whoever it be that Administers it If any one falls into Sin after Baptism he may be always restor'd to Grace by a true Repentance Not only Virgins and those who live Continently but also Marry'd Persons who please God by their Faith and Good Life merit Eternal Life This is the Abstract of the Doctrine of the Church contain'd in the Profession of Faith of this Council Which is the first Chapter or Canon of it In consequence to this the Council condemns in the Second Chapter the Treatise Compos'd by the Abbot Joachim against Peter Lombard about the Unity of the Essence of the Trinity because that Abbot had treated him as a Fool and an Heretick for having said in his Book of Sentences That the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one Supreme or Soveraign Being which is neither begetting begotten nor proceeding A Proposition from whence he pretends it follows That there is a Quaternity in the Godhead namely Three Persons of the Trinity and one common Essence The Council explains and confirms the Doctrine of the Master of the Sentences and rejects that of Joachim who pretended That the Father Son and Holy Ghost where not the same thing tho' they be one Substance and one Nature which yet he explain'd in such a manner that he seem'd to admit of only a Specifick Unity or resemblance between those Three Persons The Council declar'd those to be Hereticks who would maintain the Opinion of the Abbot Joachim However they order'd That the Condemnation should be no prejudice to the Monastery of Flora of which Abbot Joachim was the Founder because there they liv'd Regularly and put in practice a very good Discipline but especilly because that Abbot had submitted his Books to the judgment of the Holy See and had protested in Writing That his Belief was the same with that of the Church of Rome which is the Mother and Mistress of all the Faithful The Council likewise condemn'd in the same Chapter the Errors of Amaury of whom 't is said That the Father of Lies had so obscur'd his Understanding that his Doctrine may rather pass for Nonsense than Heresie In the Third Canon they Excommunicated and Anathematiz'd all the Hereticks who oppose the Catholick and Orthodox Faith as before Explain'd And 't is therein Order'd That the Hereticks shall be deliver'd up after their Condemnation to the Secular Powers or to their Officers to be Punish'd according to their Demerits the Clerks being
Variety of Conceptions and Figures He extendeth his Matters by an infinite Variety of Expressions He is very ingenious in finding out Similitudes between things abundant in Examples and Comparisons His Eloquence is popular and very proper for Preaching His Style is natural easie and grave He equally avoideth Negligence and Affectation He is neither too plain nor too florid He is smooth yet not effeminate He useth all the Figures that are usual to good Orators very properly without employing false strokes of Wit and he never introduces into his Discourses any Notions of Poets or prophane Authors neither does he divert his Auditory with Jests His Composition is Noble his Expressions Elegant his Method Just and his Thoughts Sublime He speaks like a good Father and a good Pastor He often directs his words to the People and expresses them with a Tenderness and Charity becoming an holy Bishop He teacheth the principal Truths of Christianity with wonderful Clearness and diverts with a marvellous Art and an agreeable way of ranging his Notions and persuades by the strength and solidity of his Reasons His Instructions are easie His Descriptions and Relations pleasant His Inducements so meek and insinuating that one is pleased to be so persuaded His Discourses how long soever are not tedious there are still some new things which keep the Reader awake and yet he hath no false Beauties nor useless Figures His only Aim is to convert his Auditors or to instruct them in necessary Truths He neglects all Reflections that have more subtilty than profit He never busies himself to resolve hard Questions nor to give mystical Sences to make a shew of his Wit or Eloquence He searcheth not into Mysteries neither endeavours to comprehend them He is contented to propose after an easie way palpable and sensible Truths which none can be ignorant of without danger of failing of Salvation He particularly applies himself to moral Heads and very seldom handleth speculative Truths He affects not to appear Learned and never boasts of his Erudition and yet whatever the Subject be he speaks with Terms so strong so proper and so well chosen that one may easily perceive he had a profound Knowledge of all sorts of Matters and particularly of true Divinity He proveth the truth of the Christian Religion by the strongest the most probable and sensible In lib. Quod Christus sit Deus In Orat de S. Babylâ contra Gentes In exposit Ps. xliv Hom. contra Judaeos Hom. 4. in illud Vid. Dominum lib. Quod unus Christus sit Deus Reasons He urgeth Miracles Prophecies and other Proofs of the truth of Religion but particularly insists upon the miraculous Establishment of the Church and in this Argument he triumphs He shews that it is impossible that the Doctrine of Jesus Christ could have been received and believed all the world over notwithstanding the opposition of Secular Powers the Contradictions of the Wise men in the World and the endeavours of Devils had it not been supported by the power of God himself For says he there is need of more than humane Ability to produce such wonderful Effects both in the Earth and upon the Sea and to oblige Men already prejudiced by extravagant Opinions and prepossessed with prodigious Malice to such Actions yet Jesus Christ delivered all mankind not only Romans but Persians also and all other barbarous Nations from their Calamities And to bring about these Wonders he made use of no Arms and was at no expence raised no Armies and fought no Battles but by eleven Men who at first were unknown despicable ignorant Ideots poor naked and without Arms He persuaded different Nations and made them embrace an high Philosophy not only relating to the Government of this present Life but also to things to come and Eternity self His power over all minkind was such as that it made them abolish the Laws of their Fathers renounce their ancient Customs and follow new ones He spoiled them even of the love of those things they were most fond of to fasten their Affections upon such things as are most difficult and painful But the Promulgation of the Gospel and the setling of the Church are not the only Proofs of the truth of our Religion the Stedfastness and perpetuity of the Church is also in S. * In Ps. xliv Chrysostom's Opinion an invincible Argument of it For he addeth that it is not only a thing worthy of Admiration that Jesus Christ should settle his Church over all the Earth but also that he should render it invincible against so great numbers of Enemies as assaulted it on every side The Gates of Hell that cannot prevail against it are the Dangers which seem to hurry it to the very Gates of Hell Doe you not perceive the truth of that prediction of Jesus Christ .... Tho' Tyrants took up Arms against it tho' Soldiers conspired her Destruction tho' the People raged furiously tho' a contrary Custom opposed it self tho' Preachers Philosophers Magistrates and rich Men stood up to destroy it The Divine word breaking with greater force than fire it self consumed these Thorns cleansed these Fields and disseminated the Seed of preaching over the whole Earth And though such as believed the Gospel were shut up in Prisons sent into Banishment spoiled of their Goods thrown into the Fire cast into the Sea and exposed to all manner of Torments Reproaches and Persecutions and tho' they were treated every where as publick Enemies yet they multiplyed daily their being persecuted increased their Zeal ..... Those Rivers of Blood caused by the Massacres of the Faithful before their Eyes excited their Piety and the Pains they endured inflamed their Zeal This same Saint observes in another place that Christians are never so disorderly in their Behaviour Orat. contra Gentiles de S. Babyla and so cold in their Devotion as when he that sits on the Throne is of their Religion Which saith he justifies that this Religion is not established by the Powers of the World and is not upheld and preserved by Earthly force S. Chrysostom's way of dealing with Hereticks is not less rational than that which he useth towards Heathens and Jews He expoundeth the Mysteries very plainly and proveth them by Testimonies of Holy Scripture and the Authority of the Church not pretending to penetrate or give the Reasons of them and to answer those Difficulties which have no other Foundation but humane Reasonings He confesses that he does not understand the Reasons of what he believes Orat. 1. de incompreh Homil. 24. in Joannem I know saith he that God is every where and entire in every part of the World but I know not how this can be I doubt not but that God is without beginning but I conceive not how that is for humane Reason cannot comprehend a thing that hath no beginning I know that the Son is begotten of God the Father but I cannot imagine how that was done He believes that