was a Miracle that the Bath fell not down while Cerinthus was in it This Heresie began at Antioch and spread over Asia and Syria but this Name lasted not though Carpocras and Samosatenus continued the heresie Chiliastae or Millenarii their Author was Papias Bishop of Hierapolis whose Heresie was a Branch of that of Cerinthus in that point that Christ would raise the Godly first and live a thousand years with them on the Earth This Heresie was afterwards maintained by Nepos an Egyptian Bishop Two hundred thirty one years after Christ's Passion Circumcelliones They were the most reprobate Branch of the Donatists they would throw themselves headlong from high places or cast themselves into fire or water and counted it Martyrdome Aug. de Haeres Colarbasus he was Marcus the Magicians Fellow Disciple and held that mens Lives and Actions were ruled by Seven Planets and divided Jesus and Christ into two distinct persons Collyridiani they offered Divine honour to the Virgin Mary and Sacrificed to her as to the Queen of Heaven they worshipped her with Divine adoration and offered to her little Pasties baked Epiphan Coluthiani they denied that any evil either of sin or punishment was of God Donatists from Donatus a Preist of Carthage who missing the Bishoprick he would have had did discontentedly fall into these heresies viz. That the true Church was no where but with him and his Disciples that obedience to Gods precepts ought to be voluntary and not compulsive That no Hereticks ought to be punished by the Magistrate he measured the effects of the Sacrament by the Minister not by the Author He Rebaptized used Incantations and boasted of Revelations he held the Son to be less than the Father and the Holy Ghost less than the Son His followers slew as many opposites to their Sect as they could he was at last Bishop of Numidia Ebioni from Ebion a Samaritan their Founder or from Ebion Hebraice Poor they having made themselves so by distributing their Goods in Alms. They denied the Divinity of Christ rejected St. Pauls Epistles and all the Gospel except St. Matthew and held themselves bound to observe the Law of Moses as necessary to Eternal Life Euseb Elcesai of Elcesai their Founder they were also called Sampsei They opposed the Virginity of the Virgin Mary and held that there were two Christs one inferiour born of her the other superiour also that the Spirit was Sister to Christ They adored water as a God held it Lawful to become Apostates in time of persecution and approved of one onely Apochryphal Book made by themselves They sprang from Ebion the Heretick Enchratitae so called because they abstained from Wine eating of Flesh and living Creatures they condemned Marriage and blasphemed the Epistles of St. Paul The Author of this Sect was Tatianus a Syrian Euseb l. 4. c. 28. Euchitae they held Baptism unprofitable Eunomius Bishop of Syricum an Arian he added to the heresies of AEetius that the Holy Ghost was Created by the Son and that Christ assumed only a humane Body and not a Soul he was confuted by St. Basil Eutyches Abbot of Constantinople confuting Nestorius fell himself into other errors and confounded the two natures of Christ making him after his union to have but the Divine nature only and held that he assumed nothing but Humane from the Divine He affirmed also that the Divine nature was passible and that Christ was rather Deified than God he was condemned in the Council of Chalcedon Foelix Bishop of Vrgel on the Pyrenean hills he held that Christ in his Humane nature was the Adopted Son of God he was condemned for Heresie at Ratisbon hence came the Foeliciani Floriani from Florinus or Florianus a Priest of Rome he held that God Created all Creatures and things in an evil state and celebrated the Passover after the manner of the Jews Fratricelli they were of Opinion that a man might in this world attain to a state of such perfection that he might be altogether without sin and that he who had attained thereto was neither under subjection to Civil nor Spiritual Governors but was freed from all subjection to mortal men and that they had no need of Prayer or Fasting These were in the thirteenth Century and now also in this seventeenth Century are every where to be found among us though under another appellation Gazareni called also Patereni and Gazari these were certain Hereticks about Tholouse in France in the thirteenth Century who held that married men were not in a State of Grace and could not be saved This Opinion was condemned by the Council of Lateran Gnosticks they assumed that Name from the knowledge and learning which they proudly conceived they had above all others They held besides those heresies of the Carpocratians many other fond Opinions concerning the Creation by Angels and affirmed that every faithful man had two Souls that there were two Gods one good and the other bad They distinguished Jesus from Christ and held that Christ was eighteen months upon Earth after his Resurrection There were divers sorts of this Sect. Godescalchus one of the Netherlands about the year eight hundred forty nine perniciously held that those who were predestinated unto life by a decree of Gods predestination were necessitated to do well and those who were predestinated to condemnation were necessitated by a Decree of God to do evil Helsesaitae the same with those formerly called Elcesai otherwise called Sampsaei they mixed the Religion of the Jews Gentiles and Christians together they rejected the Writings of the Apostle Paul and affirmed that a man who denieth the Lord with his mouth in the time of persecution if so be he adhered to the Faith in his heart he had committed no sin they carried about with them a singular Book which they said was sent down from Heaven and promised remission of sins to every man that would hearken to the words of that Book these were of the third Century Epiphan contr haeres 2. Comment Func in Chron. Hermiani they sprung from Hermogenes an Affrican and held that the Mass whereof the World was created was coeternal with God That Angels created mens Souls That Christ ascending left his humane flesh in the Son They denied the Resurrection and received not Baptism by water Hieracitae of Hierax an Egyptian of Leontopolis he spake of the Father as of two lights differing in substance damned Marriage denied the Resurrection excluded Children from Heaven held that Melchisedeck was the Holy Ghost and that Paradise was no Earthly place Jacobitae of Jacob a Syrian called Zanzalus for his poverty They received the heresie of Eutyches Jovinianus a Roman he held all sins to be equal denied the Virginity of the Virgin Mary Contemned Fasting and all Spiritual exercises and held that men did not sin after Baptism Lucianistae and Apelliani so called from Lucianus and Apelles
placuit 10. q. 3. Rebuff de Commenda who yet by the same Law possit expensas facere ex reditibus Beneficii Commendati sumere ex eo alimenta debita persolvere sicut is qui titulum habet c. 1. de Solutio hoc afferit Archidiac in cap. qui plures 21. q. 1. 7. The grand Case of a Commendam was that of Evans and Kiffin against Ascuth which being two daies argued by the Judges and by Noy Attorney is acutely and succinctly Reported thus viz. In Trespass Dr. Thornbury being Dean of York was chosen Bishop of Limbrick in Ireland But before Consecration or Confirmation he obtained a Patent with large words Non obstante retinere valeat in Commendam the said Deanary c. And afterwards he was chosen Bishop of Bristol and then also before Installation he obtained another Patent with a more ample Dispensation of retaining the Deanary in Commendam It was Agreed by all That the Church or Deanary c. in England shall be void by Cession if the Parson or Dean c. be made a Bishop in Ireland For the Canon Law in that is one through all the World Also Ireland is governed by the Laws of England and is now as part of England by Subordinacy Note well 45 E. 3. 19. b. Confirmation under the Great Seal of England is good in this Case Confirmation under the Great Seal of England of Presentation to a Church in Ireland of the Heir of the Tenant of the King and that a Dispensation under the Great Seal of England is good in this Case without any Patent of it in Ireland vid. 8 Ass 27. 10 E. 3. 42. An Exchange of Land in England for Land in Ireland is good Note 20 H. 6. 8 Scir fac sued in England to Repeal a Patent under the Great Seal of Ireland vid. the Irish Statute 2 Eliz. cap. 4. That an Irish Bishop may be made under the Great Seal of England Note Stat. 1 E. 6. the Irish Bishops shall be Donative by Patent of the King under the Great Seal of England yet the King may let them be chosen per Congé d'Eslire c. 1 Noy Attorney Argued at Bar and so stated the Points of the said Case by themselves If a Commendatary Dean by a Retinere in Commendam may well Confirm a Lease made by the Bishop for it is Agreed That a Commendatary Dean by Recipere in Commend cannot Confirm because he is but a Depositarius Note 19 H. 6. 16. 12 H. 4. 20. 27 H. 8. 15. a Commendatary shall be sued by that Name and by such a Commend he may take the profits and use Jurisdiction and yet is not a Dean compleat Note he may make a Deputy for Visitation but not for Confirmation of Leases Note if there be two Deans in one Church both ought to Confirm Vid. Dy. 282. Co. Inst 30. a. 2 The Second point if such a Bishop be chosen to another Bishoprick if now the first Church in Commend admitting that there was a Full Incumbent be void presently by the Election and assent of the Superiour viz. the King And it seemed to him that it was because there need not be a new Consecration and he vouch'd Panormitan 2. par 101. The Bishop of Spires was chosen Bishop of Trevers and had the assent of the Pope and that he came to Trevers and there found another in possession and he would have returned to the former Bishoprick and could not He also Cited 8 Rep. Trollop's Case That the Guardianship of the Temporalties cease by the Election of a new Bishop Note that Serjeant Henden who argued on the contrary vouch'd Mich. 4 Jac. May Bishop of Carlisle made a Lease to the Queen and a Commission issued out of the Exchequer to take it and the Dean and Chapter Confirmed it before the Inrolment of it and yet Adjudged good That Case was for the Castle of Horne First the Judges having Argued two daies Resolved 1 That all Commendams are Dispensations and that Cession commenced by the Canon and Council of Lateran 2 That the King may dispense with that Canon 11 H. 7. 12. For the Pope might and now by the Statute 21 H. 8. that power is given to the King cumulative by way of Exposition veteris and not by Introduction novi Juris and by that Statute a concurrent power is given to the Archbishop of Canterbury and may be granted to the King or by the Archbishop c. 3 That the Dispensation after Election to the first Bishoprick and before Consecration c. and also the Dispensation after Election to the second Bishoprick and before Confirmation is good enough in both Cases and he remains a good Dean to Confirm c. and afterwards the Judgment in the Case being an Action of Trespass was given accordingly 8. A Commendam is to be granted Necessitate evidenti vel utilitate Ecclesiae suadente and in the Infancy of the Church quando defuerunt Pastores they were necessary A Commendam ordinarily is but for six months and he that hath it is Custos only the other is extraordinary and that is for life and he is an Incumbent The King by his Prerogative Royal may grant a Commendam without any Statute yet if such Commendam shall be good it may be very mischievous to the Patron It is it seems agreed in the Books of the Common Law that the use of Commendams in their first Institution was lawful but not the abuse thereof and that a perpetual Commendam viz. for life was held unlawful and condemned by a Council of 700 Bishops It is likewise Reported to us That where the Incumbent of a Church was created a Bishop and the Queen granted him to hold the Benefice which he had in Commendam It was the Opinion of the Justices That the Queen had the Prerogative by the Common Law and that it is not taken away by the Stat. of 35 H. 8. 9. In a Quare Impedit brought by the King against Cyprian Horsefall and Robert Wale on a Special plea pleaded by Wale the Incumbent the Kings Attorney demurred in Law The Case in substance was this viz. the Corporation of Kilkenny being Patrons of a Vicarage within the Diocess of Ossery Presented one Patrick Fynne thereunto who was Admitted Instituted and Inducted After that during the Incumbency of the said Fynne Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin and Ambrose Forth Doctor of the Civil Law being Commissioners Delegates for granting of Faculties and Dispensations in the Realm of Ireland according to the Statute of 28 H. 8. cap. 16. by their Letters Dated 9 Octob. 33 Eliz. granted to John Horsefall then Bishop of Ossery That the said Bishop unum vel plura Beneficia curata vel non curata sui vel alieni Jurispatronatus non excedentia annuum valorem quadraginta Librarum adtunc vacantia vel quae per imposterum vacare contigerint perpetuae Commendae titulo adipisci occupare retinere omnesque fructus
for the defence of the True Faith against those Hereticks who belched out their Blasphemies against the Holy Trinity and the Humane Nature of our Saviour the First whereof was at Nice another after that at Constantinople consisting of a hundred and fifty Bishops the Third at Ephesus of two hundred Bishops the Fourth at Chalcedon where many hundreds of Bishops were present and they all with an unanimous Consent confirmed all those Decrees which were made in the Nicene Council These Four Synods says the said Canon are so to be observed by the Church of Christ ut Quatuor Christi Codices There were many other Synods about the same time but these Four were of the best Authority At Jerusalem in the First Century the Apostles Elders and Brethren held a Council against some Pharisees touching Circumcision in the Fourth year of the Reign of the Emperour Claudius The Apostles celebrated also certain Councils for the substituting of Matthias in the place of Judas Act. 1. For the Election of Seven Deacons Act. 6. For not pressing the Ceremonial Law Act. 15. 11 For the toleration of some Legal Observations only for a time Act. 21. 18. To these some will have to be added a Meeting by the Apostles wherein was composed the Apostles Creed Also another Assembly of the Apostles which did obtrude to the Church 85 Canons under the notion of the Apostles Authority concerning which there are various Controversies In this Century there were also Two Synods summoned in Asia for the Reformation of the Churches and Consecration of Bishops at which John the Evangelist was present Euseb lib. 3. cap. 20. At Ancyra in Galatia in the Second Century was Assembled a Synod of divers Bishops wherein the Figments of Montanus were confuted In this Synod Montanus was Excommunicated and his Heresie condemned Euseb lib. 5. cap. 14. In this Century viz. An. 195. Six several Synods were held about the Observation of Easter viz. At Rome in Victors time at Caesarea in Palestina at Pontus in France where Irenaeus was chief in Ostroena and at Ephesus In all which Synods it is observed That the Bishop of Rome had no more Authority than the other Bishops Euseb lib. 5. cap. 23. In the Third Century there were Eight or Nine Synods of Remark viz. At Bastra where Beryllus was confuted by Origen at Rome in the time of Fabianus where the Schism of Novatus was removed another at Rome in the time of Cornelius wherein Novatus the Heretick was condemned at Antioch where Novatus was condemned again at Carthage which erred about the Re-baptizing of Hereticks at Iconium for receiving of Hereticks after Repentance at Antioch again where Samosatenus was condemned this was about the Twelfth year of Galienus Another at the same place under Aurelianus where he was condemned again and deprived of his Church And at Sinuessa consisting of 300 Bishops where Marcellinus Bishop of Rome was condemned for denying Christ and sacrificing to Idols Tom. 1. Concil At Ancyra in the Fourth Century about the year 308 were assembled Bishops of divers Provinces to constitute a form of Ecclesiastical Discipline according to which they who had Sacrificed to Idols in time of Persecution were to be received again upon their Repentance In this Council also it was Ordained That Chorepiscopi that is Countrey-Bishops or Vicarii Episcoporum should abstain from Ordination of Elders and Deacons and from usurping of dominion over the Preaching Elders who were in Cities This Council was subscribed by Eighteen Bishops At Nicea in Bithynia Assembled by the Authority of Constantine the Great a General Council consisting of 318 Bishops The exact time when it began Historians do not agree some conceive it was A. D. 325. So Hillar Socort l. 2. c. 29. Others 359. So Baron N. 27. Others 330. and others referr the year to 333. But Eusebius computeth it to be in the Twentieth year of Constantines Reign It was also in the time of Julius the First and Silvester Popes Three things especially are reported to be condemned by this Famous Council 1. The Arrian Heresie Blasphemously denying to Son to be Co-eternal and Co-essential with the Father 2. The dissent of the Eastern from the Western Christians about the celebration of the Passover in a manner different from the Jewish Custome and it was concluded in this Council That the Feast of Easter should be kept on the Lords Day and not on the Fourteenth day of the First Month of the Jews called Nisan 3. The Schismatical dissentions of the Melitians and Novatians In this Council the Emperour burnt all the Accusations which the Bishops brought against each other as unworthy to be seen Of this Council it is anciently Recorded That Constantinus Imperator congregavit in Nicaea Civitate 318. Episcopos ex omnibus Nationibus ad Confirmandum fidem Catholicam Ita in Tertio Can. AElfrici ad Wulfin Episcop At Tyrus in the Fourth Century was conven'd a National Council by Constantine the Emperour in the Thirtieth year of his Reign wherein were 60 Bishops from Egypt Lybia Asia and Europe the major part whereof were Arrians who charging Athanasius with false Accusations deposed him in his absence whose Deposition Arsenias subscribed with the same hand which the Arrians alledged was cut off by Athanasius At Gangra in Paphlagonia about the year 324. were assembled about Sixteen Fathers in which Council were damned the heretical Opinions of Eustathius who admiring the Monastick life or favouring the heresie of Eucratitae and the Manichaeans spake against Marriage and eating of Flesh and damned the publick Congregations for the Service of God in Temples saying a man could not be saved unless he forsook all his Possessions About this time there was a Council at Antiochia wherein the Arrians deposed Eustatius As also a Council at Arles wherein Cecilianus was absolved from the Accusation of the Donatists At Eliberis in Spain in the time of Constantines Reign were assembled 19 Bishops and 36 Presbyters Among the 81 Canons made in this Synod it was Ordained in the 36 Canon That nothing that is worshipped should be Pictured on a Wall and that in Private Houses no Idols should be found At Carthage the First Council there wherein St. Cyprian with the Advice of many other Bishops of Numidia Lybia and other parts of Africa Ordained those who were Baptized by Hereticks to be Rebaptized was not held under the Reign of Constantine for that St. Cyprian was Martyred in Valexians daies the Eighth Persecuting Emperour but the first Council of Carthage held in Constantines daies was that wherein the Donatists condemned Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage whose innocency was made afterwards to appear At Antioch the First Council there was held by Arrians under the Reign of Constantinus Son of Constantine in the year 340 or 344. This being one of the Councils which either determine Heretical Opinions or raise up Schisms and Troubles to
the dispersing of the Christian Flock doth not undeservedly pass under the name or notion of one of the Rejected Councils To this Assembly resorted 90 Bishops under pretence of Dedicating the Church of Antioch built by Constantine when in truth their principal design was to eject Athanasius out of his Chair and to subvert that Systeme of Faith which was set down in the Nicene Council This Council of Antioch is to be distinguish'd from Five others which Bellarmine reckons Longus also doth name this and mentions other Councils of Antioch But this Council is referr'd to the time of Constantinus and Julius the First Athanasius being restored from Banishment by Constantine the Son of Constantine the Great the Arrians declare it to be unlawful because the same Authority which did eject must restore This matter therefore being referr'd to Pope Julius he Summons the Synod to appear at Rome But the Eusebians chief of the Hereticks that they might avoid this did without much difficulty seduce Constantius to be at the Consecration of the Magnificent Temple built by Constantine the Great at Antioch where were met about 90 Bishops as aforesaid 30 whereof being Arrians the favour and Authority of the Emperour against the double Suffrages of the Orthodox procured the condemning of Restored Athanasius It is said of this Council That they did set forth a Form of Belief so intermixed with Truth and Error that he which is heedful lest he be deceived in his greatest warlness can scarcely be safe for by the omission of what might establish the Truth they weaken that which they undertake to maintain To this Council probably may be referr'd Two other Councils which some report to have been held also at Antioch about the year 348. the former whereof was occasioned by the favour which Julius Bishop of Rome shewed to Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and other Bishops In the other the Arrians did set forth a new Sum of their Faith which being sent to the Bishops of Italy was refused by them adhering to that of the Nicene Council At Sardis in Illyricum in the year 351. by the Command of Constantius and his Brother Constans a great National Council was Assembled consisting of 376 Bishops whereof Three hundred were from the West and Seventy six from the East from Thirty five Provinces in all The Three hundred Western Bishops confirmed the Nicene Creed to this end That Athanasius who was Banished Rome for the space of Three years should be restored to his Place at Alexandria but the other Seventy six Arrians meeting at Philippolis confirmed Arrianism under the Title of the Council of Sardis In this Council by reason of the Arrian Faction and from thence forward were added different Affections to different Opinions In this Council which is commonly called an Appendix to the First Nicene Council were ratified 21 Canons under Pope Julius At Sirmium in Illyria in the year 356. by Command of the Emperour Constantius a Council was held where were present besides Eastern Three hundred Western Bishops and upwards for the hearing and deciding the Cause of Photius who complained to the Emperour that he was unjustly condemned at the Synod of Sardis although he had preached that Christ was meer man and inferiour to his Mother This Council at Sirmium so groaned under the Arrian Tyranny of Constantius that the Supremacy and Presidentship of Pope Liberius dared not to appear Photius Bishop of Sirmium having renewed the Heresies of Sabellius and Samosatenus Of this Council saith Longus there is nothing extant besides Three Forms of Belief which are found in Binius In this Synod there was a hot Dispute between Basilius Bishop of Ancyra an Arrian Heretick and the said Photius a Sabellian Heretick At Millain in the year 355. at the instance of the Arrians a Council consisting of Three hundred of the Occidental Bishops at the command of Constantius was Assembled who after that the Emperour Constans was slain by Magnentius had the whole Sovereignty both of the East and West in his hands This Council was conven'd partly for ratification of the Sentence pronounced against Athanasius at Tyrus and partly for subversion of the Nicene Faith but prevailed in neither In this Council the Emperour himself was President Liberius being Pope I saith the Emperour in this Council am an Accuser of Athanasius The Western Catholick Bishops there present for there were few Eastern promised to consent to the Arrians if they would first subscribe to the Nicene Creed But Valence and Vrsacius the chief Leaders of that Faction withstood them Then followed the degrading of the Bishops and the corrupt Ecclesiastical determination This was effected especially that they might allure Liberius Bishop of Rome either by Gifts or Threats to their way who is reported thus Heroically to have Answered the Emperour who had judg'd him to be Banished to Thrace and offered him the charge of his Journey viz. Thou hast robbed the Churches of the Earth and now offerest to me Condemned an Indigent an Alms Go first and become a Christian thy self At Ariminum in Italy about the year 363. was held a National Council consisting of more than Four hundred Western Bishops under the Emperour Constantius in the 22 d year of his Reign at the motion of the Arrians to whose Opinions the said Emperour was flexible enough but the major part of the said Bishops rejecting the motions made in favour of the Arrian Error touching the Son of God adhered closely to the Nicene Faith This Ariminum is it seems Famous for Two Councils the one Orthodox and lawfully called which is that aforementioned The other Heretical and Tyrannical craftily called by the Arrians under the notion of the Council held at Ariminum that this False one might extinguish the True one whereof the greater part determined the Nicene Creed punctually to be observed and the Sons equality with the Father in Essence to be asserted The Decrees of the Synod at Sirmium to be rejected and Vrsacius and Valence with the Arrians their Followers to be Excommunicated At Seleucia in Isauria which lies between Lycania and Cilcia whence Paul and Barnabas sailed to Cyprus Act. 13. 4. was a Council of 160 Oriental Bishops held the same year wherein the said National Council of Ariminum was held viz. An. 363. The business of this Council procured as the former by the Arrians was much prevented by a Contest arising touching precedency of Debates as whether the matter of Faith or the Lives of such as were to be accused should first fall under Examination At this time there being Convened at Ariminum 600 Bishops according to Bellarmine out of the Chron. of Jerome of which the Eastern Heterodox being overpowr'd both in Number and Arguments by the Orthodox the Emperour Constantius removes them unto Seleucia in Isauria aforesaid Here the Acatians altogether reject Consubstantiality the Semi-Arrians admit it in their sense In this diffention
the Semi-Arrians prevail and determine That the Form of Faith composed at the Dedication at Antioch should be retained and subscribed unto but they ejected the dissenting Acatians or Arrians from their places At Constantinople where the Acatians remained after the Council at Seleucia were Assembled by them about 50 Bishops out of Bythinia and other adjacent parts In this Synod they confirmed the Sum of Faith read in the Council of Ariminum At Antioch in the 25 th year of Constantius his Reign another Council was Convened with design or ordering matters so that for the time to come no man should call the Son of God Consubstantial with the Father nor yet of a different substance from the Father but neither in this Council could the Arrians perfect their intended purpose of inventing a new Sum of Faith At Laodicea not that Laodicea nigh Antioch in Syria but at Laodicea the Metropolis of Phyrgia and one of the Seven Churches of Asia to which John in his Banishment wrote from Patmos At this Laedicea a Synod was assembled about the year 368. wherein nothing was determined concerning matters of Faith only the Worshipping of Angels was damned as an horrible Idolatry and a forsaking of Christ also the Books of the Canonical Scriptures were particularly set forth wherein no mention was made of the Books of the Machabees of Ecclesiasticus or other Apocryphal Books In Illyricum about the year 370 under the Emperours Valentinian and Valens not yet infected with the Arrian Heresie was held a Council wherein the Nicene Faith had confirmation and allowance At Lampsacum nigh the Hellespont under the Emperour Valens was a Synod of Macedonian Hereticks who ratified the Council of Seleucia and damned that of Constantinople by the Acatians At Rome under the Emperour Valentinian in the West Damasus Bishop of Rome Convened a Council wherein was confirmed the Nicene Faith At Constantinople in the year 383 under Theodosius the Emperour was a General Council held consisting of 150 Bishops whereof 36 were infected with the Macedonian Heresie which blasphemously held the Holy Ghost to be a Creature a Minister and Servant not Consubstantial with the Father and the Son From this Council the said Hereticks having withdrawn themselves they which remained in Council damned the Heresie of Macedonius and confirmed the Nicene Faith with ampliation of that part of the Symbol which concerned the Holy Ghost in this manner viz. I believe in the Holy Spirit our Lord Giver of life who proceedeth from the Father and with the Father and the Son is to be worshipped and glorified This Council was held under Gratian and Theodosius the Great and Damasus They condemned and discharged Macedonius Bishop of Constantinople for his perfidious opposing the Deity of the Holy Ghost together with Maximus Cynicus by reason of his Doctrine against Discipline The Emperour null'd all Confessions except that of those who acknowledged Christ Coessential with the Father which our present Liturgy retains under the name of the Nicene Creed It is thought that Gregory Nazianzen compiled it according to the sense of the Synod At Constantinople under Theodosius another Council was held whence a Synodick Letter was sent to the Bishops then Conven'd at Rome declaring the troubles they sustained by Hereticks and as to matters of Discipline recommended unto them the Canons of the Council of Nice At Constantinople in the Fifth year of Theodosius his Reign a great National Council was again Conven'd wherein the Hereticks were divided among themselves touching what Credit they should give in matters of Faith to the Fathers that preceded their time whereupon that good Emperour rent in pieces the Sums of the Arrian Eunomian and Macedonian Faith and Ordained the Homousian Faith only to take place At Carthage the Second Council was assembled under Theodosius nigh the time of the foresaid General Council held at Constantinople wherein the Nicene Faith was confirmed abstinence from Matrimonial Society with Infidels and Hereticks recommended to Ecclesiastical persons At Nice there was another Council An. 181. under Constantine which wholly restored the Images and Statues of Irene together with the Reliques formerly broken in pieces by Leo Isaurus his Grandfather and Constantine Copronymus his Great Grandfather the business being chiefly promoted by Gregory the Second and the Third together with Adrian the First and Tarasius Patriarch of Constantinople There met at this Council which is one of the Greek or Eastern Oecumenical Councils 350 Bishops who with the said Tarasius President of the said Council by 22 Canons condemned Image-breakers for Hereticks Bellarmine and Baronius imagine that this Synod was condemned by the Fathers at the Council of Franckfort under Charles the Great which yet is denied by Binnius Surius and others according to Longus pag. 632. At Carthage a Third Council was Assembled in the year 399 at which Augustine Bishop of Hippo was present wherein it was inter alia Ordained That the Bishop of Rome should be called the Bishop of the First Seat but not the High Priest or the Prince of Priests Likewise That nothing except the holy Canonical Scriptures should be read in Churches under the notion of Holy Books At Carthage a Fourth National Council was held under the Reign of Honorius about the year 401. consisting of 214 Bishops at which Augustine Bishop of Hippo was also present and wherein were nigh as many Canons made as were Bishops assembled wherein among other things it was Ordained That a Bishop should admit no man to a Spiritual Office without Advice of the Clergy nor pronounce any Sentence without such Advice That Refusers to pay unto the Church the Oblations of persons Deceased should be Excommunicated Whereby it appears That Oblationes Defunctorum were not Soul-Masses said for the Dead but Charity by way of Testamental Legacies At Cyprus under the Reigns of Arcadius and Honorius was Assembled a Council by Epiphanius And at Alexandria by Theophilus under pretence of damning the Books of Origen Also at Constantinople by the malice of Eudoxia the Wife of Arcadius the Emperour to depose John Chrysostome Bishop of Constantinople At Carthage about the year 419. a Fifth Council was held wherein the Opinions of Pelagius and Coelestius were damned as Heretical and whereby it was Declared That the Adoration of Reliques was at this time the Custome of Ethnicks and Appointed That Supplication should be made to the Emperours That such Reliques as were found in Images Groves and Trees or elsewhere should be abolished At Toledo in Spain under the Reigns of Arcadius and Honorius was a Council assembled for Confirmation of the Nicene Council and refutation of some Errors At Melevitum in Numidia was Assembled under the Reign of Arcadius a Council whereof St. Augustine was President which was Assembled chiefly to finish the work begun at the Fifth Council of Carthage in
Clergy At Braga or Bracara in Portugal An. 610. under the Reign of Gundemarus King of Gethes assembled some Bishops of Gallicia Lusitania and of the Province of Lucensis whereby it was Ordained That every Bishop should visit the Churches of his Diocess That they should receive no Rewards for Ordination of the Clergy And that a Church builded for Gain and Contribution of the People redounding to the advantage of the Builder should not be Consecrated At Auxerre in France An. 613. assembled a number of Abbots and Presbyters with one Bishop and three Deacons In this Synod they damned Sorcery made many Superstitious Constitutions as touching Masses Burials Marriages Prohibition of Meats c. At Hispalis commonly called Civil La grand in Spain in the year 634. and in the 24 th year of the Emperour Heraclius a Council was assembled by Isidorus Bishop of Hispalis at the Command of King Sisebutus for suppression of the Heresie of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Branch of the Eutychian heresie and for the decision of some Questions touching the Bounds of their Dioceses At Toledo in Spain An. 639. under the Reign of Sisenandus King of Spain by the Kings Command were more than 70 Bishops and Presbyters Conven'd upon occasion of diversity of Ceremonies and Discipline in that Kingdom This was the Fourth Council at Toledo At Toledo in the First year of Chintilla King of the Gothes about the time of the Emperour Heraclions Reign a Fifth Council was held conven'd by Eugenius Bishop of Toledo In this Council nothing considerable was done but in reference to Annual Letanies and the appointment of Supplications for the King At Rome in the year 652. was a Council convened by Martinus Pope consisting of more than 100 Bishops occasioned by the Error of the Monothelites obstinately maintained by Paulus of Constantinople and countenanced by the impious Edict of the Emperour Constans The Constitutions and Decrees made in this Council tended to condemn those that denied the Trinity the Divine Unity in the Divine Nature the Manifestation of the Second Person of the Trinity and his Sufferings in the Flesh At Toledo in the year 653. a Sixth Council was held consisting of Fifty two Bishops whereof Eugenius Bishop of Toledo was President The occasion whereof was the Renovation of Old Heresies and Contradiction to precedent Councils The Fourth Canon of this Council is against Simony and the Eighteenth is against Rebellion At Toledo in the year 662. a Seventh Council is held of 4 Archbishops 50 Bishops and many Presbyters The First Canon of this Council is against Sedition and Treason By the Fourth Canon it is forbidden That Bishops in their Visitations should extort or oppress their Churches At Quinisext so termed by Balsemon the same year viz. 662. was held a Council which by Bede and many others is accounted an Erroneous Synod it was convened under Justinian the Second and Pope Sergius wherein the Fathers thought fit to supply the defect of the Fifth aud Sixth precedent Synods in reference to manners and Ecclesiastical Discipline for which reason they ratified 102 Canons in the Trullo of the Imperial Palace whence they are called Trullans These are rejected by such Latins whose consent went not to the stablishment thereof specially not empowr'd and authoriz'd thereto by the Pope In the 36 th Canon thereof the Patriarch of Constantinople is equalled to the Roman and in the 13 th Canon Matrimony is granted to the Clergy At Chalon in Burgandy by the Command of Clodoveus K. of France a Council of 44 Bishops assembled wherein the Canons of the Nicene Council had great approbation And it was Forbidden That Two Bishops should be Ordained in one City and Decreed That no Secular work should be done on the Lords Day At Rome in the time of Constantinus Pogonatus Emperour under the Popedom of Agatho was held a Council wherein it was Declared by the Suffrages of 125 Bishops That Two wills and Two operations were to be acknowledged in Christ and the Defenders of the Heresie of the Monothelites were condemned At Toledo in the year 671. an Eighth Council of 52 Bishops was assembled wherein were high Debates concerning Perjury At last it was Resolved That no Necessity obligeth a man to perform an unlawful Oath In this Council Marriage was utterly forbidden to Bishops and eating of Flesh in Lent At Toledo in the year 673. and in the Seventh year of Recesuvindus King of Gothes and by his Command were convened 16 Bishops which was the Ninth Council at that place and in which several Canons were made touching the Discipline of the Church At Toledo in the Eighth year of the said Kings Reign was the Tenth Council consisting of 21 Bishops who made some Decrees touching certain Festivals and others relating to the Clergy and removed Protamius Bishop of Bracara from his Office being convict of Adultery At Toledo in the Seventh year of Bamba King of Gothes 19 Bishops and Seven Abbots were assembled by the Kings Command wherein several Canons were made concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline At Bracara a Second Council was held the first according to Caranza wherein many old Opinions of the Priscilianists and Manichaeans concerning Prohibition of Marriage and Meats are condemned together with the Heresies of Samosatenus Photinus Cerdon and Marcion And in the 30 th Canon of this Council it was Ordained That no Poesie should be Sung in the Church except the Psalter of the Old Testament At Bracara in Spain in the time of Bombas King of Gothes another Synod of Eight Bishops was assembled wherein the Nicene Faith is again rehearsed In the Fifth Canon of this Synod it is Ordained That upon Festival days Reliques enclosed in an Ark shall be born on the Shoulders of the Levites as the Ark of God in the Old Testament was accustomed to be born At Constantinople in the year 680. in the Twelfth year of the Reign of Constantine Pogonatus a General Council was held Pope Agatho procuring it by his Legates In this Council were convened 150 Bishops they who reckon 270 or 286 do compute the Absent Romans and others consenting thereto the Emperour himself was President In this Council was discussed the Question touching the Wills and Actions of Christ Here were condemned the Monothelites Sergius Cyrus Pyrrhus Peter Paul Theodorus together with Pope Honorius who in the defence of Eutychianism pleaded that there was one only Will in Christ This Council confirmed the Canons not only of General but also of Particular foregoing Synods as of Antioch Laodicea and others It also added what was to be approved in the Orthodox Writings of the Fathers as appears by the Second Canon of this Council Vid. Paul Diacon in vit Constant At Toledo the Twelfth Council consisting of 33 Bishops with some Abbots and 13 of the Nobility assembled the first year of the Reign of Euringius to whom Bombas King of
external Priesthood in which Power is given by Divine Institution to Consecrate the Eucharist c. In which Decree the Synod doth also condemn those who say all Christians are Priests or have equal Spiritual power which is nothing but to confound the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy which is in an Order as an Army of Souldiers To which Hierarchical Order do belong especially Bishops who are Superiour to Priests Therefore one of the said Anathematisms did reach those who say that there is not an Hierarchy instituted in the Catholick Church by Divine Ordination consisting of Bishops Priests and Ministers The Historian of the aforesaid Council of Trent tells us That the Sixth of the said Eight Anathematisms was much noted in Germany in which an Article of Faith was made of Hierarchy which word and signification thereof says he is Alien not to say contrary to the Holy Scriptures and though it was somewhat Anciently invented yet the Author is not known and in case he were yet says he he is an Hyperbolical Writer not imitated in the use of that word by any of the Ancients and following the style of the Primitive Church it ought says he to be named not Hierarchy but Hierodiaconia or Hierodoulia But Thomas Passius a Canon of Valentia said in that Council That all doubt made of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy did proceed from gross ignorance of Antiquity it being a thing Notorious that in the Church the People have alway been governed by the Clergy and in the Clergy the Inferiours by the Superiours until all be reduced unto one Universal Rector which is the Pope of Rome and that it was plain that the Hierarchy consisteth in the Ecclesiastical Orders which is nothing but an holy Order of Superiours and Inferiours But Francis Forrier a Dominican of Portugal at the same time said That Hierarchy consisteth in Jurisdiction and the Council of Nice placeth it in that when it speaketh of the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch and therefore the handling of Hierarchy not to be joyned with that of Order Others were of a Third opinion viz. That Hierarchy was a mixture of both viz. of Order and Jurisdiction also Thus was that Learned Council divided in this high point of Hierarchy that though they all agreed the thing yet they could not agree wherein to fix it whether in Order or in Jurisdiction or in both Notwithstanding it is generally agreed That the Hierarchy of the Catholick Church is proved by the Testimony of all Antiquity and by the continual use of the Church and that it consisteth of Prelates and Ministers who are Ordained by Bishops in whom resides the power of Consecration which may be a sufficient warrant for this digression Which Consecration as it refers to Persons is done per impositionem manuum except as to Virgins for they also by the Pontifical Law are Consecrable Creatures though they be Foolish Virgins yea though they be Polluted Virgins provided it be not per spontaneam voluntariam pollutionem and there be but putativa Virginitas in the case and shall have not only Laureolam Virginitatis but also Velum Consecrationis as they call it Cajetan in Sum. V. Virgin consecrat Less de Just. Jur. lib. 4. c. 2. Dub. 16. alii DD. But where the Consecration refers to Things as Churches Chappels Bells and other things of the like sound there it is done per preces together with other Consecration-ceremonies the Episcopal Order therein concurring so likewise the Consecration of Virgins is per preces together with other Ceremonies used in the Consecration of Virgins Cujus Signum est quod in Pontificali Romano ubi de hac Consecratione agitur non dicatur roganda de aliqua contaminatione sed de vita conscientia carnis integritate ut notat Cajetanus Less ubi sup That which is next in view is some prospect of Deans and Chapters there were it seems in former times certain Deans who usurped an Authority beyond their Dignity or Function and took upon them to exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction These were condemn'd in a Council at Lateran under Pope Alexander by the fifth Canon of that Council in these words viz. Quoniam quidam in quibusdam partibus sub pretio statuuntur qui Decani vocantur pro certa pecuniae quantitate Episcopalem Jurisdictionem exercent praesenti Decreto statuimus ut qui de caetero id praesumpserit Officio suo privetur Episcopus conferendi hoc officium potestatem amittat Chron. Gervas de Temp. H. 2. Anciently likewise there were certain Deans which were called Decani Christianitatis one of which kind appears in an Ancient Record nigh Four hundred years since relating to the Priviledges of the Priory of St. Austins wherein the words to this present purpose sic se habent viz. Super Privilegiis Innocentii Papae 4. hic superius ad mandatum conservatorum ut praetactum est publicatis Thomas Prior Ecclesiae Christi Cant. Guydo Prior S. Gregorii Thomas Decanus Christianitatis ejusdem Civitatis eadem Privilegia inspexisse ad certitudinem futurorum testati sunt Chron W. Thorn de Temp. Ed. 1. An. 1293. Heretofore also Priors have been called Deans so we find Ceolnothus or Chelnothus in the time of King Ethelred and his Brother Alured Dean of Canterbury to have been called Postea Ceolnothus Cantuariensis Ecclesiae Decanus c. ubi cum Decanus esset quem nos Priorem vocamus non modicum videre solebat Conventum And again Egelnothum alias Ceolnothum ejusdem Ecclesiae Christi Decanum vel Praepositum suum Decanum vocabant quem nos post adventum Lanfranci Priorem appellamus Gervas Act. Pontif. Cant. And where we meet with the word Decania as in the History of Ranulphus Bishop of Durham in the Conquerors time written by Simeon the Monk Deconatus is thereby intended it being the Ecclesiastical Dignity of him qui in Majori Ecclesia denis ad minus Canonicis sive Praebendariis ut vocant sub Episcopo praeest but the DECANVS CHRISTIANITATIS aforesaid so called per Antiquiores Anglos is secundum recentiores DECANVS RVRALIS quem Exteri ARCHIPRESBYTERVM VICANVM vocant De quo de Vrbano vid. Duaren de Sacr. Eccl. minist benef lib. 1. cap. 8. A probable conjecture why anciently he might be called Decanus Christianitatis we may ut mihi videtur have from Mr. Selden in Notis ad EADMERUM pag. 208. Christianitas says he ea quae ad Christianitatem pertinent passim apud Eadmerum atque alios illius aevi Scriptores functionem Episcopalem atque Fori sacri actionem administrationem seu Officium Episcopale ut usitatius appellatur denotant Hinc apud nos Fora sacra quibus jure nempe communi subnixis aut Episcopi praesunt aut ii qui eo nomine Episcopos utpote quos provocare licet suscipiunt Curiae Christianitatis etiamnum vocitantur Glossar Hist Angl. Antiq. ver Christianitas vid. plura in
Scorto Natus in Ecclesiâ—m Domini usque ad decimam generationem Yet the Pope doth usually dispence with that Canon specially where such Illegitimates live commendably and follow not the vicious practice of their Parents In illis qui paterna vitia non sequuntur possunt suffragari virtutes quae inducent Sâ—mmum Pontificem ad Dispensandum si morum honestas eos Commendabiles reddat c. Presbyterorum 56. Distin And lest such should conceive themselves causlesly injured by that Prohibition the Canonists assign three Reasons for it the one is the Dignity of the Clergy and the Sacraments which ought not to be committed to Infamous persons Another is in detestation of their Parents Crime which commonly extends also to their Children The third is the Parents Incontinency and because the Children do for the most part inherit their Parents Vices cap. Si gens Angelorum 56. Distin Yet a Modern Historian speaking of Pope Leo the Seventh An. 935. says out of Luitprandus that Bozon Bishop of Placentia Theobald of Millain and another great Prelate were all the Bastards of Hugo King of Italy by his three Queens Bezola Rosa and Stephana whom he termed Venus Juno and Semalo vid. Prideaux 's Compend Introduct of Hist p. 106. Edit 5. Next follows the matter of Divorce which is the separation of Married persons by force of the Sentence of an Ecclesiastical Judge qualified to pronounce the same Adultery in either party is the common though not the only cause of Divorce Some there are it seems of great Reputation in the Church for this is Quaestio tam Theologiae quam Juris who positively condemn it as unlawful for a Man or Woman to live with their Husband or Wife respectively if either of them be notoriously guilty of Adultery Of which Opinion was St. Hierom saying That a man is Sub maledictione si Adulteram retineat And St. Chrysostome Fatuus iniquus qui retinet Meretricem Patronus enim Turpitudinis est qui celat Crimen uxoris So that it was none of Cato's wisdom nor any great piece of kindness done his Friend Hortensius to lend him his wife Martia whose Chastity deserv'd a better requital Socrates also is reported to be as kind-hearted in this matter as ever Cato was and they are both said to lend their Wives as freely as a man lends an Utensil As these Wife men were beyond the reach of a Diovorce so they were more serious than to blush at Cornutism the common Fate of such Philosophers St. Basil was of Opinion That it was lawful for a Woman still to cohabit with an adulterous Husband to which purpose he made a Canon and commanded it to be done in his Church as appears in his Epistle to Amphilochius 1. Can. 9. 21. This also was the Sentence of St. Austin to Pollentius and in his Book de Adulterinis Conjugiis David received his wife Michal who had lived with another man St. Basil it seems though he be of opinion that the Woman should still live with the Adulterous Husband yet does not think it fit that the man should be so obliged as to his Adulterous Wife The Council of Eliberis refused to give the Sacrament to a Clergy-man that did not instantly expel from his house his Wife whom he knew to commit Adultery And by the Council of Neo-Caesarea he was to be deposed from his Dignity in the same case In the Council of Trent there was a Canon made having an Anathema added to it which condemned those that say That the Bond of Marriage is dissolved by Adultery and that either of the parties may contract another Matrimony whilst the other liveth And by the Fifth Anathematism of that Council 22. July 1563. were condemned Divorces allowed in Justinian's Code which Anathematism was added at the instance of the Cardinal of Lorain to oppose the Opinion of the Calvinists In the same Council upon the Article of Divorce it was said by one of the Fathers there that the Matrimonial Conjunction was distinguish'd into Three parts the Bond the Cohabitation and the Carnal Copulation inferring that there were as many Separations also and that the Ecclesiastical Prelate had power to separate the Married or to give them a Divorce in respect of the Two latter the Matrimonial Bond still standing sure so that neither can marry again Yet the Gospel admits but of one cause of Divorce viz. Fornication which should seem to be understood de Vinculo because Divorce in the other respects may have many Causes Of all Personal Actions within the Ecclesiastical Cognizance that of Defamation seems to be of the tenderest concern if that be observed which Solomon says That a Good Name is to be chosen before great Riches where by Name nothing can be understood other than a mans Credit Fame and Reputation in the World So that the Inference is clear a Defamer is the worst of Thieves the Sacrilegious ones excepted yet were it not for the sweetness of Revenge and the encouragement of the Law such Actions might be better spar'd than what it costs to maintain them and such ill-scented Suits do savour worse being kept alive in a Tribunal than they would by being buried in Oblivion specially if the Defamed considered that to forget Injuries is the best use we can make of a bad Memory This Defamation is not properly that which we call Detractio for Detractio in its proper signification is alienae famae occulta injusta violatio but Defamation though it be an unjust yet it is not an occult violation of another mans Fame or Reputation they have indeed both the same end but they do not both take the same way to that end they both aim and design the extinguishing or diminishing the Credit and Repute which one man hath in the mind and good opinion of another but the one doth it more openly and publickly at least not in so clandestine way as the other This Defamatio is of near affinity to that which we call Contumelia which is an unlawful violation of a persons Honour and Reputation by undecent and false Speeches Gestures or Actions on purpose to disgrace him only in this also they differ that Defamatio may be of one man to another in the absence of the Defamed but Contumelia is not but to the party present vel absenti tanquam praesenti that is in the prrsence of such as have a relative representation of the person Contumeliously so reproached Touching Actions of Defamation there are two Questions raised rather by the Casuists than Canonists the one Whether the Heirs of the Defamer be obliged to make restitution of Dammage to the Defamed in case the Defamer died before satisfaction made the other Whether satisfaction for the dammage done by Defamation be to be made to the Heirs of the Defamed in case he died before such dammages were recovered by him Although both these Questions are answered in the Negative by
whatsoever Name or Names they may be called in their Convocation in time coming which alwaies shall be assembled by the Kings Writ unless the same Clergy may have the Kings most Royal assent and License to make promise and execute such Canons Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodical upon pain of every one of the said Clergy doing the contrary to this Act and thereof convicted to suffer Imprisonment and making Fine at the Kings will Since this year from Archbishop Cranmer to this day all Convocations are to have the Kings leave to debate on matters of Religion and their Canons besides his Royal assent an Act of Parliament for their Confirmation And as to the General Councils there are not any of them of use in England except the first Four General Councils which are established into a Law by King and Parliament The Learned Bishop Prideaux in his Synopsis of Councils gives us the definition of Synodographie and says It is such a Methodical Synopsis of Councils and other Ecclesiastical Meetings as whereby there may be a clear discovery to him that doubts how any Case may be enquired after and what may be determined concerning the same And then immediately after gives us the definition of a Council which he calls a Free Publick Ecclesiastical Meeting especially of Bishops as also of other Doctors lawfully deputed by divers Churches for the examining of Ecclesiastical Causes according to the Scriptures and those according to the power given by Common Suffrages without favour of parties to be determined in matters of Faith by Canons in cases of Practice by Presidents in matters of Discipline by Decrees and Constitutions Of these Councils he observes some to have been Judaical others Apostolical others Oecumenical some Controverted others Rejected and some National to all which he likewise adds Conferences 1 Under the Title of Judaical Councils he comprehends the more solemn Meetings about extraordinary affairs for the Confirming Removing or Reforming any thing as the matter required Such he observes to have been at Sichem under Josuah and Eleazer Josh 24. At Jerusalem the first under David Gad and Nathan being his Assistants 1 Chro. 13. At Carmelita under Ahab and Elias 1 King 18. At Jerusalem the Second under Hezekiah 2. Chro. 29. At Jerusalem the Third under Josiah and Hilkiah 2 Kin. 33. 2 Chro. 34. At Jerusalem the Fourth under Zorobabel and Ezra and the Chief of the Jews that return'd from the Captivity of Babylon And lastly that which is called the Synod of the Wise under John Hircanus Genebrand Chron. l. 2 p. 197. 2 The Apostolical Councils he observes to have been for the substituting of Matthias in the place of Judas Act. 1. For the Election of Seven Deacons Act. 6. For not pressing the Ceremonial Law Act. 15. 11. For the toleration of some Legal Ceremonies for a time to gain the Weak by such condescension Matth. 21. 18. For composing the Apostles Creed For obtruding to the Church 85 Canons under the notion of the Apostles authority concerning which there are many Controversies Lastly for the Meeting at Antioch where among Nine Canons the Eighth commanded Images of Christ to be substituted in the room of Heathenish Idols the other pious Canons being destitute of the Synods authority vid. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 19. Longum p. 147. 3 Of Oecumenical or General Councils some were Greek or Eastern others were Latin or Western The more Famous of the Oecumenical Greek Councils were the Nicene the first of Constantinople the first of Ephesus the first of Chalcedon Of Constantinople the second of Constantinople the third The Nicene the second The more Famous of the Oecumenical Latin Councils were at Ariminum the Lateran at Lions at Vienna the Florentine the Lateran the fifth and lastly at Trent 4 Of Controverted Councils if that distinction be admissable according to the Classis thereof digested by Bellarmine the Computation is at Constantinople the fourth at Sardis at Smyrna at Quinisext at Francfort at Constance and at Basil 5 Of Rejected Councils whereby are intended such as either determine Heretical Opinions or raise Schisms the Computation is at Antioch at Milain at Seleucia at Ephesus the second at Constantinople at Pisa the first and at Pisa the second 6 Of National Synods which comprehend the Provincials of every Metropolitan or Diocesan Bishop the distribution is into Italian Spanish French German Eastern African Britain 7 To these may be added Ecclesiastical Conferences which were only certain Meetings of some Divines wherein nothing could be Canonically determined and therefore needless to be here particularly inserted vid. B. Prideaux Synops of Counc vers fin The grand Censure of the Church whereby it punisheth obstinate Offenders is by way of Excommunication which though the Canonists call Traditio Diabolo or giving the Devil as it were Livery and Seizin of the Excommunicate person yet the Romanists have a Tradition that St. Bernard Excommunicated the Devil himself Sanctus Bernardus plenus virtutibus quadam die praesentibus Episcopis clero populo Excommunicavit quendam Diabolum Incubum qui quandam mulierem in Britannia per septeunium vexabat sic Liberata est ab eo Chron. Jo. Bromton de Temp. H. 1. A miraculous Excommunication and a Sovereign Remedy against Diabolical incubations The Excommunication which St. Oswald pronounced against one who would not be perswaded to be reconciled to his Adversary had nothing so good though a more strange effect for that Excommunicated him out of his Wits and had it not been for Wolstan who as miraculously cur'd him you might have found him if not in Purgatory then in Bedlam at this day Illi cujus es says Sanctus Oswaldus Te commendo carnem Sathanae tuam trado Statim ille dentibus stridere spumas jacere caput rotare incipit Qui tamen à Wolstano sanatus cum Pacem adhuc recusaret iterum tertio est arreptus simili modo quousque ex corde injuriam remitteret offensam If you have not faith enough to believe this on the Credit of Abbot Brompton who Chronicled from the year 588 in which St. Austin came into England to the death of King Richard the First which was in the year 1198. if you have not I say faith enough for the premisses you are not like to be supplied with any on this side Rome unless you have it from Henry de Knighton Canon of Leyster who wrote the Chronicle De Eventibus Angliae from King Edgars time to the death of King Richard the Second for he in his Second Book de Temp. W. 2. doth put it under his infallible pen for an undeniable Truth And indeed is much more probable than what the said Abbot reports touching St. Austins raising to life the Priest at Cumpton in Oxfordshire 150 years after his death to absolve a penitent Excommunicate that at the same time rose also out of his grave and walked out of the Church at St. Austins command That no
Ordinary at his Visitation may by the Canon require his Synodals or Procurations Extr. de Cens c. Procurationes that is a certain Cense or Tribute in money paid to the Bishop or Archdeacon by the inferiour Clergy at Easter-Visitation called Synodale or Synodaticum quia in Synodo frequentius dabatur So that these Procurations are no other than certain sums of money which the Parochial Clergy do annually pay to the Ordinary or Archdeacon ratione Visitationis Anciently they were paid in provisions of Victuals necessary for the Visitor and his Attendants now converted into money instead thereof So that this Procuratio is by Vallensis aptly defined Necessariorum sumptuum Exhibitio quae ratione Visitationis debetur ab Ecclesia vel Monasterio ei cui ex officio incumbit jus onus Visitandi sive is sit Episcopus sive Archidiaconus sive Decanus sive Legatus summi Pontificis An. 1290. M. quod die Mercurii in Festo Sanct. Lucae Evang. Dominus Episcopus coepit Procurationem in Cibis Potibus apud Bordesley pernoctavit ibidem Whence the word Procuration is supposed to have its derivation even from the duty incumbent on the Visited in Procuring of necessary Accommodations for the Visitor and his Attendants as aforesaid which seems the more probable by what Duarenus says Hoc autem munus ideo Procuratio vocatur quia Ecclesiae Episcopum Procurant id est Curant alunt ac tuentur 2. It hath at times been smartly controverted Whether Procurations be due only ratione Visitationis or whether the payment thereof may legally be enforced without the Act of Visiting and not exclusively to Archdeacons in the years of Episcopal Visitations For if so then the foresaid description which Vallensis makes thereof is not adequate enough to the nature of the thing of which opinion grounded on solid Arguments is the Learned Author of the Historical Discourse on this Subject 3. Anciently as aforesaid these Visitation-Procurations or Exhibitio necessariorum sumptuum as Vallensis calls it was no other than Victuals For by the Council of Lateran not the great General Council under Innoc. 3. but that under Alex. 3. above thirty years before about An. 1180. Visitors are so directed to proceed in the execution of their Visitations as that Sumptuosas Epulas non quaerant sed cum gratiarum actione recipiant quod honeste competenter illis fuerit ministratum That these Procurations were originally paid in Victualibus appears by several Constitutions of the Canon Law Extr. de Censib c. cum Apostolus de Censib c. Romana § Procurationes Consuetudo tamen says Lindwoods Gloss operatur in pluribus locis ut Procuratio hujusmodi sumatur in pecunia quae Consuetudo bene potest procedere ut sumatur à Volentibus sic in pecunia Solvere non autem à Nolentibus Extr. Benedict 12. c. Foelicis gl Lindw ubi supr But that was only where the Custome prevailed the Canon anciently being peremptory to the contrary for in the Sext. there is a Constitution made by Innoc. 4. who became Pope An. 1243. and afterwards ratified by a General Council at Lions under Greg. 10. about An. 1273. forbidding sub poena Maledictionis aeternae the taking of money in lieu of Procurations vel à Volentibus sic solvere C. 1. § Procurationes c. exigit eod in sexto ibi Gloss in casu and the ordinary penalty practiced in this case against Visitors of any rank inferiour to Patriarchs Archbishops or Bishops that should presume to receive Procurations otherwise than in Victualibus was suspension ab officio beneficio And this way of paying Procurations ex antiquo continued till the time of Boniface 8. who succeeding in the Papacy about twenty two years after Gregory made a Constitution about the year 1295 That it should be lawful to any Visitor Volentibus Visitatis not otherwise vice Victualium to receive not to exact Money towards the defraying of their Visitation-Charge Gloss in ver dispendia c. Foelicis eod in sexto Which by Benedict 12. in the second year of his Popedom about 1337. was by a Canon or Constitution limited to a certain sum according to the quality of the Visitor and the condition of the Visited which may take place where it is not otherwise limited by Custome the Procurations of Archdeacons being in Lindwood's time as he informs us which was in Henry the Fifths Reign above two hundred years since the sum of seven shillings six pence according to the number of his Attendants viz. twelve pence to each man and eighteen pence to the Archdeacon himself which comparing the value of Money Then with the times Now was considerable 4. The Question is not whether Procurations are due Ratione Visitationis but whether they are only due Ratione Visitationis and not otherwise It is supposed that they are and may be due otherwise than Ratione Visitationis and that therefore Archdeacons may receive Procurations in the L. Bishop's Triennials and yet Visit not for Custome seems to lay a just claim to this Ecclesiastical payment of Procurations sine Visitatione where the Custome is Rationabilis Legitime praescripta Time was when Archdeacons had jus Visitandi quolibet anno and so accordingly did Visit eâ ratione received Procurations Lindw de Offic. Archid. c. 1. gl in ver Visitation Extr. de Offic. Archid. c. Mandamus gl in ver saepius Visitare And sometimes they Visit not as in the Episcopal Triennials yet by the Custome do and may receive their Procurations understand this only of some not all Archdeacons 5. The Canonists define Procuration to be an Exhibition sumptum Necessariorum paid to the Prelates qui Dioeceses peragrando Ecclesias subjectas Visitant And it is a Rule in the Canon Law Quod nulla est adversus Procurationem praescriptio Inst Ju. Can. l. 2. de Censib And by the same Law the Archdeacon is to go personally to the place that is to be Visited and ought not for that purpose to send another which if he doth not so do he is not to receive in denariis the Procurations due ratione Visitationis Extr. de Cens c. Procurationes Notwithstanding the person whom he Commissionates for that purpose Nomine suo shall receive the Procurations for himself and his Attendants in Victualibus Ar. ad hoc de Offic. Ord. c. si Episcopus l. 7. de Censib c. 1. c. Foelicis de Cens Lindw glo de Offic. Archid. c. ut Archidiaconi ver videant These Procurations are called also Proxies Cenag Pentecostal per. an 64 l. 10 s. ita Archidiaconatus Glouc. valet clare in Proxis which is a profit of Jurisdiction Archidiaconis inhibemus ne aliquo modo Procurationes recipiant sine Causa Rationabili nisi illo die quo personaliter Visitant Provin Constit de Offic. Archid. 6. The Ordinary may not receive above one Procuration that is he
sole Prince conferred the Tithes of all the Kingdom upon the Church by his Royal Charter Of which Ingulph Abbot of Crowland An. 855. saith That King Ethelwolph with the consent gratuito consensu of his Prelates and Princes did first enrich the Church of England with the Tithes of all his Lands and Goods Many other Laws of the Saxon Kings for the payment of Tithes are recited by Mr. Selden as entirely the Gift of Kings And so saith King Elred Nemo auferat à Deo quod ad Deum pertinet Praecessores nostri concesserunt The whole Bishoprick Anciently was in a large sense a Paroecia and the income of it by Contributions first and by Tithes also afterwards was the Common stock of all the Clergy of the Diocess and Mr. Selden asserts it to be the general Opinion of all the Common Lawyers That before the Lateran Council under Innocent 3. every man might have given his Tithes to what Church he would probably within the Diocess because they were not the Propriety as yet of any one Presbyter but the Common Patrimony of all the Diocesan Clergy So that Tithes are a Tenth part of all increase Tithable due to God and consequently to his Ministers that wait on the Altar These are divided into Three sorts 1. Praedial Tithes arising only either of the Fruits of the Ground as Corn Hay Hemp and the like or of the Fruits of Trees and Orchards as Apples Pears and the like 2. Personal Tithes arising of the profits that come by the labour and industry of Man either by Handicrafts as Carpenters Masons and the like or by Buying Selling or Merchandizing 3. Mixt Tithes arising partly of the Ground and partly of the Industry of Man as of Calves Lambs Piggs Milk Cheese and the like No Tithes shall be paid for such things as do not increase and renew year by year by the Act of God Of Praedial Tithes some are called Majores vulgarly termed the Great Tithes others Minores vel Minutae vulgarly the Small Tithes The Great such as Wheat Rye Hay c. The Small such as Min◠Annis Cumin c. And commonly with us here in England we compute Flax in the number of Small Tithes which is a Praedial Tithe as also Wool Milk Cheese Eggs Chicken of all kinds Lambs Honey Bees-wax and the like Vid. Lindw cap. de Decimis In Ancient times the Laity were so far from subtracting their Tithes as is the common practice of these daies that oft-times they would give more than was due or demanded and were so Conscientious in the payment thereof as at their death they usually bequeathed a Soule-Sceat to their Parochial Priest in lieu of any Tithes forgotten and at their Funerals caused their best Ox or Horse to be led with the Corps and as a Mortuary or Oblation given to the Priest in recompence of any Tithes which possibly in their life-time might have been omitted to be paid But in these latter Ages not regarding what S. Hierom says That Fraudare Eccelsiam est Sacrilegium all Artifices imaginable are put in practice to subduct the Tithes and therefore to enforce the due payment thereof were the Statutes of H. 8. and Ed. 6. made and enacted 2. Covarruvias with other Canonists and Schoolmen holds That by the Moral Law the rate or proportion of Tithes is not necessarily to be the Tenth part of the Fruits which the more received Opinion holds to be both Erroneous and Mischievous and that by the Law of God and Nature no Custome deviating from the exact rate and proportion of the Tenth of the Fruits ought to prevail any longer than by the free and mutual consent of Parson and Parishioner For which reason it is supposed That the paying of a Halfpeny for a Lamb or a Peny for a Calf by such as have under Seven in one year is now become an unreasonable Custome in regard the value of such Lambs and Calves is now raised four times higher than in Ancient times This seems far remote from Tithes the very Quotity whereof seems to be Moral rather than Ceremonial or Judicial and not only allowed or approved but even commanded by our Saviour himself Yea by the very Law of Nature which is the ground of the Moral Law and long before the Levitical Tithes appear to be due in that Abraham paid it to Melchisedec And God himself who is the best Interpreter of his own Law calls the detention of Tithes Sacriledge And that Command of Christ affirming that Tithes ought to be paid of all even to the very Herbs spoken by him at the period of the Levitical Law ought not to be restrained only to the Priesthood of Aaron for it doth now remain in force as to Priests under the Gospel as that other part of the Moral Law Thou shalt not steal the withholding of Tithes being expresly interpreted Theft and Robbery by the Prophet And lest it should be thought a meer Human Interest or in the power of Man to alienate God himself hath vouchsafed to take Tithes upon his own account in his Ministers behalf These Tithes could not be meerly Ceremonial as some would have it for they prefigure nothing nor are they repealed by any one Text in the Gospel but reinforced as aforesaid so that whatever was commanded in the Old Testament and grounded on the Law of Nature and being not Repealed in the New must yet stand in force as a Duty of the Moral Law And if it be Objected That Tithes were not paid in the Primitive times of the Christian Church the Reason is not because they were not then due but because there was not then any such settled Order for things of this or the like nature in the Church 3. Wherefore all the Common Objections made against the payment of Tithes in the Christian Church may be reduced to one of these Four 1. That our Saviour gave no Command to his Apostles to take Tithes but rather on the contrary said Freely ye have received freely give Answ Yet our Saviour says These things speaking of Tithes ought you to have done And says The workman is worthy of his meat And St. Paul says The Labourer is worthy of his Reward Where hath Christ in totidem verbis forbidden Sacriledge wilt thou therefore commit it because he hath not in terminis terminantibus forbidden it Thou that abhorrest Idols dost thou commit Sacriledge 2 Tithes were not paid till about three hundred years after Christ as Tertullian Origen and S. Cyprian do testifie Answ These Fathers do withal acknowledge that during that time the Churches Maintenance was the Peoples free Contribution which probably might have continued to this day had not that Contribution in process of time turned into a Sacrilegious Century by Covetousness instead of a Commanded Decuma as a Duty Morally enjoyn'd 3. That Tithes came first into this Kingdom by the power of the Pope as by Pope
is the causes thereof the difference between the Civil and Canon Law touching the proof of impotency frigidity or disability and what manner of proof the Law requires thereof 2. What time of absence in the Husband may cause a Divorce 3. Whether Divorce by reason of Adultery dissolves the Marriage à vinculo or whether the innocent party may remarry altera existente 4. What the Canon in Concilio Arelatense provides in that Case 5. The opinion of some eminent Common Lawyers in this point 6. The different Opinions of Divines and Lawyers and of each among themselves touching this matter 7. The Opinion in summa Hostiens as also of Suarez touching the legality of second Marriage after Divorce 8. The Canon of the Council of Trent concerning Matrimony also the Opinion of some of the Ancient Fathers and a Decree of one of the Popes touching second Marriage after a Divorce 9. Decrees and Histories of great Antiquity relating to this Subject 10. What the Pontifical Law what Justinian what Baldus and what Grotius says in this matter 11. Opinions in this point take their diversification much from the cause of the Divorce as whether ex causa praecedenti vel subsequenti 12. Judgments at the Common Law that a Divorce for Incontinency is only à Thoro mensa non à vinculo 13. What the Law intends by Alimony and what Elopement signifies no Alimony due to her that Elopes 14. In what Cases the Law will allow Alimony or not 15. How the Civil Law provides in that Case of Alimony 16. The Ecclesiastical Court is the proper Court for Alimony 17. Whether the High Commission-Court had power of Alimony or not 18. Prohibition denied to the Husband sued in the Ecclesiastical Court by the Wife for Alimony in causa saevitiae 19. Whether the Ecclesiastical Court may take Bond for Alimony or Imprison for non-payment thereof 1. A Divorce is a Sententence pronounced by an Ecclesiastical Judge whereby a Man and Woman formerly Married to each other are separated and parted The word Divortium or Repudium is often taken promiscuously both for a Total and Perpetual Divorce à vinculo Matrimonii as also for a Partial and Temporal Divorce or Separation à Cohabitatione vel à thoro mensa The causes of this Divorce whereof some are precedent others subsequent to the Marriage are many in the Law Thomas Aquinas reckons up no less than a dozen of them and thinks he hath Poetically compriz'd them all in four Verses viz. Error Conditio Votum Cognitio Crimen Cultus Disparitas Vis. Ordo Ligamen Honestas Si sis Affinis Si forte Coire nequibis Haec Socianda vetant Connubia Facta retractant But the Causes of Divorce in the Law as now commonly practicable may be reduced to these few 1. The Levitical Degrees within which it is prohibited to Marry 2. Precontract And so if a Man Marry one precontracted and have Issue by her it is the Fathers Child until there be a Divorce upon the precontract and then it is Nullius Filius a Bastard 3. Impuberty or Minority And so if two be Married infra annos nubiles and after full age are Divorced for the same the Woman may bring an Assize against the Man for Land given her in Frank-marriage which proves that the Divorce is by that Law from the very Bond of Matrimony 4. Frigidity in the Man or Impotency in the Woman termed Arctitudo in the Law but the word Impotency is promiscuously used in both Sexes for it is said that if after a Man be Divorced for Impotency he take another Wife and have Children by her these shall not be Bastards because a Man may be habilis inhabilis diversis temporibus But in this Case the Civil Law hath made other provision for that Law in causa Frigiditatis requires three years Cohibitation for Trial of the Disability before it doth upon other legal evidence and proof conclude any Married persons either Frigid or Impotent Indeed the Canon Law expects present proof and in case of such Impotency or Frigidity not Accidental but Natural and Incurable concludes that the Matrimony was never a Matrimony The evidence of which Disability depends on the Oaths of able Physicians as also of aged and grave Matrons experienced in such affairs nor is it to be alledged till after a Triennial experience of each other post Matrimonium Consummatum and is a just cause of Divorce for that it frustrates one of the chief ends of Marriage viz. Procreation of Issue if it be sufficiently proved by Inspection of the Body Triennial Cohabitation and the Oaths aforesaid Consil Matrim To. 2. Consil 8. nu 1. And in Cases doubtful whether it did precede the Marriage or not the Law will presume it to antecede the Marriage and consequently nulls it in case it be Natural otherwise both as to the presumption and operation in case it be only Accidental Sanch. lib. 7. disp 103. nu 4. And where the Impotency doth sufficiently Constare to be Perpetual by the Oaths aforesaid upon Inspection there the Triennial probation ceases Vt cum Glossae cap. Fraternitatis De Frigidis Maleficiis Panor nu 11. Pope Sixtus 5 th in his Bull An. 1587. declared that Matrimonia cum spadonibus vel eunychis prorsus eviratis seu utroque testiculo carentibus cum quibuslibet Mulierihus seu defectum praedictum ignorantibus seu scientibus esse semperque fuisse irrita Antonini â—â—ana resolutiones morales Tract 4. Miscelan resol 75. p. 190. 2. There are also other seeming causes of Divorce than what are forementtoned for the Civil and Canon Law do allow of Divorce after a long absence but are not agreed touching the Time of that Absence for in one place it is after Two years Absence in another after Three years in another after Four Cod. lib. 5. tit 1. l. 2. post biennium tit 27. post tres an l. 27. post Quatuor an others hold that the Civil Law requires Five years Absence before there may be a Divorce on that account In the Council of Lateran a Sentence was allowed by the whole Council which was given by a Bishop pronouncing a Divorce for a Woman complaining that her Husband had been absent Ten years giving also leave to the Woman to Marry again In Concil later par 50. cap. 23. But the truth is no absence be it for any time whatever doth properly cause a Divorce in Law Indeed Seven years Absence without any tidings or intelligence of or from the Absent Party will so far operate in Law towards what is equivalent to a Divorce as to indempnifie the Woman from the penalty of Polygamy if in that case she Marry again Also the Canon Law hath decreed that if the Wife refuse to dwell with her Christian Husband he may lawfully leave her Causa 28. q. 1. c. 4. And some of the Imperial Laws allow Homicide Sacriledge Theft Man-stealing c. for
condemning the Heresies of Pelagius and Coelestius concerning the power of Mans Nature not supported by the Grace of God and Free Will of Man to do good of it self as also to inhibit Appeals to Bishops beyond Sea on pain of being secluded from the Communion of all African Bishops At Carthage in the year 402 under Honorius and Theodosius the Second a National Council of 217 Bishops was assembled which continued for the space of Six years The business of this Council was prevented by a Controversie happening between them and the Bishops of Rome who successively endeavoured but not successfully to perswade the African Bishops that they were under the Sovereignty and Jurisdiction of the Bishops of Rome to whom this Council would not allow of any Appeal from the Bishops of Africa At Bagaia in Africa about the year 433. certain Donatists to the Number of 310 assembled themselves in Council chiefly for the deposition of Maximinianus Bishop of Bagaia whom they Deposed and Accursed because he had renounced their Heresie and had recovered many others from the Error of that way At Ephesus in the year 434. and in the Eighth year of the Reign of Theodosius the Second by some called Theodosius the Younger was a General Council assembled against the Heretick Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople which Council consisted of above Two hundred Bishops by Command from the Emperour By which Council Nostorius for his Heresie in denying the Son of the Virgin Mary to be God and consequently the Personal Union of the Divine and Humane Nature of Christ was Banished to Oasis This was the first General Council of Ephesus promoted by Celestine the First wherein Two hundred Bishops as aforesaid condemned Nestorius together with Carisius his flattering Presbyter who instead of Two Natures acknowledged divers Persons in Christ and therefore pleaded that the Blessed Virgin Mary should be styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In this Council Cyrillus of Alexandria is recorded President whom Nestorius being piously and brotherly invited to a better Opinion proudly contemned and having craftily allured John of Antioch to his party Anathematiz'd him and the Council who had formerly Anathematiz'd him The matter being related to the Emperour and throughly understood Cyrillus and his are cleared but Nestorius with his party is Banished as aforesaid to Oasis a Sandy Habitation where like another Cain says a Modern Historian roving here and there Blaspheming at length his Tongue being consumed and eaten up by Worms he breathed out his last There are it seems two Copies of this Council the First observing Eight the Second Thirteen Canons which are comprehended in the Anathema's of Cyrillus The Massilianites termed also Euchites and Enthusiasts were condemned by this Council and thereby the integrity of the Nicene Creed confirmed At Ephesus under Theodosius the Second was likewise a Particular Council assembled by Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople who condemned Eutyches an Abbot of Constantinople for Affirming That in Christ after the Union of the Divine and Humane Natures there were no longer Two Natures which absurd Opinion Flavianus damned as Heretical So that the occasion of this Second Council of Ephisus An. 449. was this Eutyches an Archimandrite of Constantinople who after Manes and Apollinaris denied the Flesh of Christ to be like ours but affirmed that falling from heaven like the Rays of the Sun it penetrated the Virgins womb And so he denied that Two Natures were in Christ Incarnate but asserted that his Flesh was changed into his Divinity for which he was as aforesaid condemned by Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople and Eusebius Bishop of Doril and others their Associates yet by the help of Chrysaphius the Eunuch and Eudoxia the Empress whom he had seduced he prevailed with Theodosius that the matter might be determined by a Famous Synod for which reason this at Ephesus by the Emperours Authority was called where 128 Bishops met Dioscorus of Alexandria being President one so full of Eutychianism that Eutyches is absolved and the reclaimers forced says the Historian to subscribe by Club-Arguments Flavianus opposing it was so suriously trodden upon that three days after he died besides many very Learned Bishops discharged of their Places yet not long after all this was dashed in pieces by the most Famous Council of Chalcedon At Berytus in Phoenicia was held a Council about this time where in the Cause of Ibas Bishop of Edessa whom Dioscorus had deposed was revived and himself justified and absolved At Agatha in France was a Council held wherein nothing was more remarkable than that they had liberty to meet together by the Command of Alaricus King of Gothes who at that time had the Sovereignty in that parr of France called Gallia Norbonensis whence it appears That Councils both General and National were in all Countreys Convened by the Authority of Sovereign Princes At Chalcedon in Bythinia in the year 455. and in the Fourth year of Marcianus the Emperour was a General Council at which was present in person the Emperour and 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers from most parts of the World In this Council Dioscorns Bishop of Alexandria together with Eutyches and Juvenalis Bishops at Jerusalem was condemned as an Heretick for absolving the Heretick Eutyches in the Council at Ephesus and acting other Crimes whereof he was then accused In this Council it was Ordained That men should believe that the Natures of Christ albeit that they were united yet were they not confounded as Eutyches had Heretically affirmed Also in this Council it was Ordained That Anatelius Bishop of Constantinople and his Successors should have the chief Dignity next unto the Chair of Rome This Council was called by the said Emperour Martianus against the said Eutyches Abbot of Constantinople and his Champion Dioscorus of Alexandria the suppositious Acts of the Council held at Ephesus were condemned by this Council those of Ephesus being in favour of Eutyches who affirmed one only Nature to be in Christ viz. his Divine Nature after his Incarnation It is not clear or certain who was President of this Council of Chalcedon excepting the Emperour and Judges Moderators The matters thereof were for the most part by favouring parties between Leo the First of Rome and Anatholius Patriarch of Constantinople At Ravenna in the Sixth Century was a Council Assembled by occasion of the Schism happening on the Election of Symmachus to the See of Rome whose Competitor was Laurentius afterwards made Bishop of Nuceria In Symmachus his time were no less than Six Councils held at Rome all Convened by Authority of Theodoricus King of Gothes who then Reigned in Italy and all of little importance otherwise than the Endeavours that then were for the Supremacy whereat they aimed At Valentia in Spain were assembled Two Councils called Herdense and Valentinum both very obscure Councils there being in the one but Eight Bishops present
the Gothes resigned his Royal Authority chusing rather to be Shaven than to wear a Crown and to enter into a Monastery than to fit on the Throne of Majesty This Council as to the Confession of Faith adhered to the Council of Nice and confirmed the Acts made in precedent Councils against the Jews Other Councils there were at Toledo under the Reigns of Euringius and Egista but not of such Remark as needs any apology for their omission At London in the year 712. under the Saxons Reign a Council was assembled at which the Popes Legate Bonifacius and the chief Prelate of England Brithwaldus was present The two grand Points treated in this Council were concerning the Worshipping of Images and Prohibiting Marriage to persons in Spiritual Orders At Constantinople about the same year of 712. a Council was called by the Emperour Philippicus for the undoing or the Sixth General Council wherein the Error of the Monothelites was condemned At Rome in the year 714. a Council was Assembled by Pope Gregory the Second whereat two Bishops of Britain were present Sedulius and Fergustus Most of the Canons made at this Council did concern Marriage Masses Sâ—rceries and the Mandates of the Apostolick Chair At Rome a great Council of 903 Bishops was assembled by Pope Gregory the Third having received a Mandate from the Emperour Leo for the Abolishing of Images In this Council was the Emperour Leo Excommunicated and deprived of his Imperial Dignity because he had disallowed the Worshipping of Images Now is the Popes Banner displaied against the Emperour which is the Forerunner of that Enmity which ensued between the Pope and the Emperours In France in the year 742. under the Reign of Charles the Great Zacharias the First being then Pope a National Council of the Bishops Presbyters and Clergy of France was assembled by Bonifacius Archbishop of Mentz according to the Mandate of King Charles This Council was called for Reformation of Abuses in that Countrey or rather to reduce it to a conformity unto the Rites of the Roman Church At Constantinople in the year 755. and the Thirteenth year of the Emperour Constantinus Copronymus a General Council of 338 Bishops was Assembled by the Emperours Command In this Council the Worshipping of Images was damned and the placing of them in Oratories and Temples as a Custome borrowed from the Pagans was forbidden yet in the 15 th and 17 th Canons of this Council the Invocation of Saints is allowed The Council of Constantinople is by some accounted two which others contract into one but the distinction it seems is manifest because the first is said to be celebrated under Father Leo Isaurus An. 730. The Second by Constantius Copronymus in the year 755 as aforesaid The one opposeth the Worshipping of Images and Reliques on which account both may be esteemed as one or at least united The first under Leo discovers Intercession of Saints to be imaginary and the Worshipping of Images meer Idolatry Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople and John Damascene and others too much inclined to Images are deprived of their Dignities Gregory the Third intercedes for Images in a Roman Anti-Synod in which he Excommunicated the Eastern with the mark of Heretical Image-breakers but this did not terrifie the said Constantine Copronymus from declaring himself to be an Image-breaker but assembled 338 Bishops at Constantinople as aforesaid over whom himself was President and persecuted the Maintainers of Images Some will have This and the Seventh Council as Occumenical but the Romans so abhorr'd it that for this Controversie about Images they denied their Subjection to the Greek Emperours whenc afterwards ensued the Western and Eastern Division never to be reconciled How well the Nicene Council corrected the Errors of this appears by the Decrees thereof At Francfurt in the year 794. a Council was convened but it is not agreed whether it was an Occumenical or Provincial Council the more Ancient Writers will have it to be Oecumenical because it was called by Charles the Great and Adrian the First and it consisted of at least 300 Bishops yet the latter Writers will have it Provincial because it seems not to favour Images The Reason of the convening of this Council was because Elipardus Archbishop of Toledo and Felix Vrgelitanus Bishop of Aurelia or Orleance in France preached That Christ was only the Adopted Son of God which Aquinas refutes 3. part q. 23. art 4. But Binius with Longus and others will have it that this Council or Synod confirmed the Opinion of the 2 d Nicene Council concerning the Adoration of Images which Bellarmine will not believe though he wishes it to be true At Nice in Bythinia in the year 788. a Council of 350 Bishops was assembled in which it was Ordained That the Image of Christ the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Saints should not only be received into places of Adoration but also should be adored and worshipped At Frankford in the year 794. a great Council was assembled by Charles the Great King of France partly by reason of the Heretick Felix who called Christ the Adopted Son of God in his Humane Nature and was condemned in a Council at Ratisbone An. 742. partly also by reason of great Disputes that were in most places concerning the Worshipping of Images disallowed in the Council of Constantinople but allowed in the Second Council of Nice At Mentz in the year 813. by the Command of Carolus Magnus was Assembled a Council of 30 Bishops 25 Abbots with a great number of Priests Monks Counts and Judges about Reformation of the dissolute manners of Ecclesiastical and Lay-persons At Rhemes in the same year 813. a Council was Assembled by the Command of Charles the Great who not only called that Famous Council of Frankford An. 794. in which the Adoration of Images was condemned but also about one and the same time viz. An. 813. appointed Five National Councils to be convened in divers places for Reformation of the Clergy and Laity viz. at Mentz aforesaid this at Rhemes another at Tours a Fourth at Chalons and a Fifth at Aries In all which no opposition was made to the foresaid Council of Frankford nor was the Adoration of Images avowed in any of these Councils At Tours An. 813. at the Command as aforesaid of the Emperour Carolus Magnus a Council of many Bishops and Abbots was assembled for the Establishing of Ecclesiastical Discipline in Tours At Chalons An. 813. was the Fourth Council convened the same year under Charles the Great and by his Command for the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical state the Canons whereof for the most part are consonant to those made in the said former Councils under Charles the Great At Arles the same year of 813. wherein the Four preceding Councils were held another was convened by Command of Charles the Great wherein as to matters of Faith Church-Discipline Regulation of
the Clergy Reformation of Manners c. the Canons generally agree with those of the said Four preceding Councils At Constantinople in the year 871. in the Third year of Basilius Emperour of the East and under the Reign of Lewis 2. Emperour of the West a Council was Assembled by Basilius the Emperour against Photius the Patriarch of Constantinople in which Council he was deposed and Excommunicated and the Books he wrote against the Bishop of Romes Supremacy above other Bishops commanded to be burnt At this Council the Ambassadours of Pope Adrian the Second were present and great endeavours used to have all things therein framed to his content In this Council the Worshipping of Images was again allowed and it was Commanded That the Image of Christ should be held in no less reverence than the Books of the Gospel At Acciniacum in France a Council consisting of Ten Bishops was convened by Carolus Calvus In this Council Hincmarus Bishop of Laudunum was deprived of his Office and his eyes thrust out but Pope John the 9 th under the Reign of Carolus Crassus restor'd him to his Office because he appealed from his own Bishop and a Synod in his own Countrey to the Chair of Rome At Strasburgh in the year 899. and in the Eighth year of the Emperour Arnulphus 22 Bishops of Germany were assembled Many of the Constitutions of this Synod according to Caranza are in effect the same with the Canons of former Councils In the 46 th Canon of this Synod it is Ordained That a man whose Wife is Divorced from him by reason of her Adultery shall not marry again during her life At Ravenna in the year 903. a Council of 74 Bishops was convened whereat was present Carolus Simplex King of France In this Council the Acts of Pope Formosus had allowance and the Decrees of Stephanus the Sixth were condemned and burnt At Rhemes under the said Carolus Simplex a Council was assembled for correcting the abuses of Church-Rents a great part whereof under pretence of the Kings necessary occasions was converted by some Courtiers to their own use against which Fulco Archbishop of Rhemes declaring his mind freely in Council was slain by Vinemarus one of the Oppressors at Court the like not having been known since the Second Council of Ephesus called a Council of Briggandry wherein Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople was slain At Rome in the time of Otto the First a great Council was assembled against Pope John the 13 th or as others affirm Pope John the 12 th In this Council the Pope was accused of Ordaining a Deacon in a Stable of Simony of Adultery of making the Sacred Palace like a Baudy-House of Murthering Benedict his Spiritual Father of Gelding John an Archdeacon of raising Fire of drinking to the Devil of distributing the golden Crosses and Chalices to his Harlots of imploring help from Jupiter and Venus in his playing at Dice and of his not Signing himself with the Sign of the Cross At Canterbury in the year 975. a Council was Assembled when Dunstanus was Bishop thereof The Question that was most in debate at this Council was concerning Marriage in relation to such persons as were in Spiritual Orders the which Dunstanus whether his Crucifix spake True or False if it spake at all declared his Judgment against At Constantinople under the Reign of Nicephorus Phocas Emperour of the East was a Council convened by reason of Nicephorus his taking to wise Theophania the Reflict of his Predecessoâ— Romanus having been Witness in Baptism to Theophania's Children the which so displeased Polyeuchus Patriarch of Constantinople that for the same he debarr'd the said Emperour from Holy things and so in effect Excommunicated the Emperour of the East At Rhemes An. 992. in the Ninth year of the Emperour Otto and in the Fourth of Hugo Capeto King of France a Council was convened against Arnulphus Bishop of Rhemes for countenancing Duke Charles who claimed the Crown as next Heir being Brother to Lotharius Whereupon Arnulphus was deposed and denuded of his Episcopal Dignity who yet afterwards was restored to it again by another Council at Rhemes call'd by Pope John the Thirteenth At Arles in the year 1026. and under the Reign of the Emperour Henry the Second a Council was assembled in order to the appeasing of the wrath of God and his indignation at that time manifested against the greatest part of the whole World At Halingnustat in the year 1023. under the Emperour Henry the Second a Council was Assembled wherein great endeavours were used to make a Conformity and Unity in observation of Ecclesiastical Rites and Ceremonies in Germany wherein Laws were made concerning the degrees of Consanguinity At Triburia An. 1030. under the Reign of the Emperour Conrade the Second a Council was Assembled at which the Emperour was present wherein were made some Constitutions concerning Fasting At Sutrium in Italy An. 1046. under the Reign of the Emperour Henry the Third was an Assembly by the Emperour for the pacifying that grand Schism in the Roman Church when Three Popes at once contended for the Popedom viz. Benedict the Ninth Silvester the Third and Gregory the Sixth all which the Emperour and the Council dispoped and chose one Sindigerus Bishop of Bamberg to be Pope whom they called Clemens the Second At Rome about the year 1050. Leo the Ninth assembled a Council at Rome against Berengarius Deacon at Angiers who disapproved the Opinion of Transubstantiation viz. That after the words of Consecration the substance of Bread evanished and the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ was in the Sacrament under the Accidents of Bread and Wine whose Letters touching this matter not finding Lanfrankus Bishop of Canterbury to whom they were directed in Normandy were delivered to some of the Clergy who opening the same sent them to Pope Leo the Ninth whereupon this Council at Rome was assembled wherein the said Letters of Berengarius being read they condemned him though absent as an Heretick At Vercellis the same year Leo the Ninth assembled another Council against Berengarius At Tours in the year 1055. Pope Victor the Second Assembled a Council against Berengarius who there answered That he adhered to no particular Opinion of his own but followed the Common Doctrine of the Universal Church At Rome in the year 1059. Pope Nicholaus the Second assembled a Council of 113 Bishops against Berengarius who submitting himself to the Pope and Councils Correction they prescribed him a Form of Renunciation of his Error so there called which he accepted and recanted yet afterwards published a Refutation of the same Doctrine In this Council it was Ordained That the Election of the Pope should belong to the Colledge of Cardinals At Millan An. 1060. Pope Nicholaus the Second by Petrus Damianus held a Council wherein the Two chief points debated were touching
Bruis and Arnaldus of Brixia the Disciple of Peter Abullard who rejected Pedobaptism Church-buildings and the Adoration of the Cross It proclaimed these Lay-persons to be Sacrilegious and incurr the danger of eternal damnation who receive Tithes and deprived Usurers of Christian Burial and Cursed them to Hell The Third Lateran Council was under Frederick the First and Alexander the Third by an assembly of 30 Bishops who made up the difference between this Alexander and one Octavianus and his Successors Gindon and John a German taking up the quarrel with him which Dissentions divided Europe into parties Also the Albigenses under the name of Cathari Publicans Paterini taking their Rise from the Waldenses were here condemned Lombard who affirmed that Christ according to his Manhood was nothing was Censured Ordinations made by Schismaticks wholly abrogated Private Oratories and Priests for Leprous persons appointed and the manner of Visitations by Archbishops Bishops and Deacons prescribed The Fourth Lateran Council was under Frederick the Second and Innocentius the Third with 400 Bishops and 80 other Fathers This Council rejected the Book of Joachimus the Abbot against P. Lombard established Transubstantiation Auricular Confession and the Papal Absolution of Subjects from their Allegiance It exacted an Oath from Secular Magistrates to expel Hereticks nominated by the Pope This Council by Indulgencies encouraged those that went with Crosses for recovery of the Holy Land under Godfrey of Bulloigne prohibited Plurality of Benefices and Sale of Reliques At Papia in the year 1160. the Emperour Frederick the First convened a Council occasioned by the difference between Alexander 3. and Victor the 4 th for the Popedom after the death of Adrian the Fourth In this Council Victor the Fourth was declared Pope Whereupon Alexander the Third convened a Council at Cleremont in which he Cursed the Emperour Pope Victor and their Adherents At Rome in the year 1180. a Council of One hundred and eighty Bishops was convened by the Popes Authority Their Consultations and Canons were touching the Form of Electing Popes for the future also touching Ecclesiastical Dignities and Discipline touching Excommunication Residence Continency Plurality Patronage Presentations Festivals Usurers Jews and Sarazens and the like At Rome in the year 1215. Pope Innocentius the Third Convened a General Council wherein the Doctrine of Transubstantiation was ratified This was another of the Lateran Councils At Lions Two Councils the First called by Frederick the Second and Innocentius the Fourth about the year 1244. In this Council the Emperour that deserved so well of the Christian Church against the Infidels was after Four Excommunications deposed by the Pope prohibiting that any should name him Emperour Being thus Deposed he defends his Right by his Gibilines against the Guelphes of the Papal party In this Council appears no other President than the Pope himself who with 140 Bishops and Abbots endeavoured under colour of recovering the Holy Land by the Fifths of the Church to redeem the East By this Council new Festivals were instituted for the Canonizing of Roman Saints The Seventeen Institutions ascribed to this Council are said to be rather Political and Polemical than Ecclesiastical and according to Bellarmine are to be found in the Sixth of the Decretals At Lions the other of these Two Councils was under Rodolphus the First at Haspurge procured by Gregory the Tenth consisting of at least Seven hundred Bishops In this Council was present Michael Paleologus the Greek Emperour Aquinas sent for to this Council dies in his way thither where Bonaventure after his being created Cardinal died also In this Council the Pope in behalf of the Holy Land requires a Subsidy the Tenth of all Ecclesiastical Rights for the space of Six years In this Council also it was ordered That there should be Bowing at the Name of JESVS There were 31 Constitutions or Canons made by this Council which though omitted by the Summulists may yet be found in the Sixth of the Decretals At Vienna in the year 1311. under Henry the Seventh Clement the Fifth being Pope a General Council of above Three hundred Bishops was convened In this Council was set forth a Book of Papal Decrees called Liber Clementiarum which was Ratified by this Council In this Council also it was that Corpus Christi Day was Ordained to be a Festival and the Order of Templers to be quite abolished for the Jerusalem-Expedition being strongly urged in this Council the Templers are removed out of the way for murdering of the Abissins Ambassador and other Impieties and Heresies Whether Trithemius did hit the mark or not it matters not Notorious it is That the Templers were very Rich but if that were a sufficient pretence for Heresie and Expulsion as some conceive then there would be no such thing as the Church of Rome at least not Orthodox In this Council the Clergy are permitted to take an Oath of Allegiance not of Subjection to Lay-Magistrates also Peter John the Dulcimists the Fratricelli the Begwards and Begwins together with the Lollards were condemned Peter John was condemned for denying the Soul to be the Form of Man a new piece of Heresie against Natural Philosophy The Constitutions of this Council under the name of Clementine are extant in 5 Books for a Supplement of the Canon Law in which is that Famous Decree of Constituting Professors to be maintained by a competent Stipend at the Court of Rome at the Vniversities of Paris Oxford Bononia and Salamanca for the instructing in Hebrew Arabick and Chaldee Languages whereby the Jews and Mahumetans might the more easily be converted to the Faith The Fifth Lateran Council in the year 1311. under Maximilian the Emperour Pope Julius 2. President thereof It is supposed this Council was called for disannulling another at Pisa where some Cardinals were met against the Pope There were convened at this Council 114 Bishops and it had Twelve Sessions Five whereof were under Julius the other Seven were finished by Leo the Tenth Suarez Cajetan and Navarr profess this to be a rejected Council The pragmatical Decree made at the Council of Basil in defence of Ecclesiastical Liberty against Popish Usurpations is here discussed and exploded The Immortality of the Soul is here also defended concerning which many at that time doubted it others wantonly disputed it and others heretically denied it By this Council a restraint is laid on such as in Preaching wrest the Scriptures at their pleasure to uphold and disperse some strange Opinions which restraint extended also to the impression of Books not Orthodox nor Licensed as such At Pisa in the year 1409. was as some call it a General Council consisting of Twenty three Cardinals Three Patriarchs Three hundred Archbishops and Bishops Twenty eight Governours of Monasterics and a very great number of Divines and Ambassadours of Princes The great Dissention between Benedict the Twelfth and Gregory the Thirteenth was the occasion of this