look upon Vincentius as a Saint who died a Donatist These Treatises were composed in 419. Though the main Points treated of in St. Augustin's Works against the Pelagians have been mentioned already yea it will not be amiss to give here a general view of his Doctrine God created the First Man in a state of Innocence Holiness and Grace He was subject neither to the Necessity of Dying nor to Sicknesses nor Pain nor the Motions of Lust nor Ignorance nor any of the Inconveniencies of Life or the Imperfections of Nature which are the Consequences and Effect of his Sin His Free-Will was entire and weakened with nothing It was perfectly indifferent to do either Good or Evil though it could not do good without the help of Grace but this Grace which God afforded him was entirely subjected to his Free-Will It was a help without which he could not do good but it did not make him do good Such was the Condition of the First Man like that of the Angels before their Sin Such would have been the Condition of his Posterity had he continued in that Happy state but having offended God by his Disobedience he and all his Posterity are become subject unto Death Pain Sicknesses Punishments and what is worse to Ignorance and Lust that is to say to Extravagant Motions which are within us whether we will or no. But what is yet more incomprehensible all his Descendents begotten in the ordinary way are born in Sin They all contract the Sin which we call Original which makes Children the Objects of God's Wrath and infallibly Damns them except they are regenerated by Baptism Baptism doth indeed take away the stain of Sin but it doth not remove the Punishment and the Consequences of Sin Concupiscence Ignorance Inclination to Sin Weaknesses and other Punishments for Sin abide still during the whole course of this Mortal Life Free-Will is not extinguish'd but it hath not so much strength and stands in need of powerful assistance to do good The Grace which it needs to act is not only that help without which it could neither will nor do that which is good but also such an assistance as makes it both will and do it infallibly This Grace is necessary not barely to accomplish entirely what is good and to continue therein but it is even necessary to begin Faith for Prayer and for the first Motions of Conversion Yet it bereaves us not of our liberty because we do not keep the Commandments but as far as we are willing It worketh this Will in us without Violence or Compulsion for God constraineth no Man to do either good or evil but to do good the Will must be succoured by Grace which doth not deprive it of its Liberty and this Grace is not granted to Merit but is absolutely free Since the First Man's Sin the whole mass of Mankind was corrupt condemned and subject to Death God by free Grace and Mercy takes out of this mass of Corruption whom he pleases leaving the rest in that condition out of that Justice which none can find fault with for what is Man that he should dispute it with God Doth the Earthen Vessel say to the Potter that framed it Why hast thou made me thus However it may be truly said That all Men may be saved if they will if they be not they can only accuse their own perverse Will whereby they resist the Call of God There are some Graces which he refuseth not to Reprobates wherewith they might do good if they would To some he gives the Knowledge of his Law and they despise it He inspires into others a desire of being Converted and they reject it Some he excites to Prayer but they neglect to do it He speaks to the Hearts of several who harden themselves that they may not hearken unto his Voice He overcomes the hardness of some for a time converting them by an Effectual Grace who plunge themselves again in Vice In a word how strong and powerful soever the Grace is which he gives yet it may be said in some sence that Man may always resist it though he doth not actually do it God does not grant this Grace to all Men not only because he oweth it to none but also because some make themselves unworthy of it for to say nothing of Children who die before the use of Reason who are either damned because of Original Sin or saved by the Grace of Baptism the Adult who have not the gift of Perseverance have made themselves unworthy of it either through their own Sins or by the Contempt which they have cast upon God's Vocation or by the Opposition they have made to inward Grace or lastly by falling again into the state of Sin from which God delivered them in his Mercy And so no Man can either excuse himself or accuse the Justice of God because every one receiveth what he deserved every one is rewarded or punished according to the good or the evil which he hath done by his Will which co-operates with the most effectual Grace The Effect of this Grace according to St. Augustin is to make us in love with that which is good it is a pleasure which draws our heart towards good things and enables us to keep the Commandments without this Grace there is no Action meritorious The fear of Punishment though merely servile is good and profitable because it regulates the inward Man but it does not render us Righteous before God We shall never perfectly accomplish the Precept of loving God in this Life because we shall never love him so perfectly as in the next And though through God's Grace a Man may absolutely avoid all Sin in this Life yet it never did nor shall ever happen that a mere Man excepting the Blessed Virgin of whom St. Augustin would not have us to speak when Sin is mentioned passed through this Life without Sin For this reason the most righteous say daily Lord remit us our Debts that is our Sins But these are not mortal Sins which bereave the Soul of Righteousness and Holiness they are venial and daily Sins which are indeed against God's Law but do not utterly destroy Charity St. Augustin's Principles concerning Predestination and Reprobation do exactly agree with his Opinion touching Grace Both those Decrees according to him suppose the fore-knowledge of Original Sin and of the Corruption of the whole mass of Mankind If God would suffer all Men to remain there none could complain of that severity seeing they are all guilty and doom'd to Damnation because of the Sin of the First Man But God resolved from all Eternity to deliver some whom he had chosen out of pure Mercy without any regard to their future Merits and from all Eternity he prepared for them that were thus chosen those Gifts and Graces which are necessary to save them infallibly and these he bestows upon them in time All those therefore that are of the number of the Elect hear
1273. until the year 1422. and the other more large from the Conquest of England by the Normans i. e. from the year 1066. to the 6th year of Henry V. being the 1417th of Jesus Christ. These have been Printed in the Collection of the Historians of England at London in 1574. and at Frankfort in 1602. he has also continued the Polychronicon of Ranulph Higden * Whereof Dr. Wharton saw one Manuscript Copy in the Library of Gonvil and Caius which reaches no further than the Year 1398. tho' the History was continued from 1342 to 1417. Whart Hist. Lit. App P. 120. Nicholas of Inkelspuel of Suabia Rector of the University of Vienna Flourish'd at the beginning Nicolaus Dinkelpulius Rector of the University of Vienna of this Century and was present in the Councils of Constance and Basil. He wrote a Commentary upon the Four Books of Sentences and some Quesâ—ions upon the same Books but these Treatises are lost there remains now only of his some Diâ—courses of Piety Printed at Strasburg in 1516. viz. Eleven Sermons and Discourses upon the Precepts of the Decalogue the Lord's-Prayer upon the Three parts of Penance upon the Eight Beatitudes upon the Seven Mortal Sins and the Tribunal of a Confessor Trithemius also mentions a Treatise of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit a Treatise of Charity a Treatise of the Sins of the Tongue and of the Eight Capital Vices and many Sermons which Aeneas Sylvius says were much sought after in his time The Treatise of the Seven Gifts is to be found in Manuscript in the Library of Ausburg together with a Treatise of Gratitude and Ingratitude and a Treatise of Sacramental Communion At the same time Flourish'd Theodoric of Ingelhuse a German Canon of Hildesheim who wrote Theodoricus Ingelhusius Canon of Hildesheim Herman Petri of Stutdorp a Carthusian Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite the Chronicon of Chronicons or an Universal Chronicon from the beginning of the World to the year 1420. Publish'd by Macerus and Printed at Helmstadt in the year 1671. Hermani Petri of Stutdorp a German Carthusian of the Monastery of St. Anne near Bruges died in the year 1428. wrote a Treatise of the Government of Nuns and many Sermons whereof Fifty upon the Lord's-Prayer have been Printed at Lovain in 1484. Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Village in the County of Essex in England the Son of John Netter and Matthilda Studied at Oxford and after he had taken the Degree of Doctor he entred into the Order of Carmelites He was present at the Councils of Pisa and Constance and was chosen for Confessor to Henry V. King of England whom he waited upon in his Journey to France where he died at Roan November the 3d 1430. He stoutly oppos'd the Errors of Wiclef and confuted them and establish'd the Truth of the Doctrine of the Church he wrote a great Book Entituled A Doctrinale of the Antiquities of the Faith of the Catholick Church against the Wiclefites and Hussites divided into three Tomes and Printed at Paris in 1532. at Salamanca in 1556. and at Venice in 1571. This Work is Dedicated to Martin V. and approv'd by this Pope In it the Author proposes to himself to relate the Doctrin of Jesus Christ of the Apostles and the Fathers against the Errors of the Wiclefites and joyns Tradition and the Testimony of the Universal Church and of the Councils with the Holy Scripture which are the Principles he lays down for his Foundation in refuting the false Maxims of Wiclef who following the foot-steps of the Ancient Hereticks rejected the Tradition and Authority of the Church pretending that we ought to found our Doctrins upon the Scripture only The First Tome of this Work contains Four Books against the Errors of Wicklef In the 1st he Refutes the Errors of Wicklif concerning the Divinity the Human Nature and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. In the 2d he Treats of the Preheminence of St. Peter among the Apostles of the Church of the Primacy and Privileges of the Pope and of the Roman Church of the Authority Rights and Prerogatives of Bishops and other Pastors as well in Matters of Faith as for the Government of the Church In the 3d. he defends the profession of the Regulars and in the last he justifies particularly the Orders of the Regulars Mendicants of those who live by the Labour of their Hands and of those who have Revenues and shews against Wicklef that the Ecclesiasticks may possess Temporal Revenues In the Second Tome he lays down the Doctrin of the Church about the Sacraments and shows against Wicklef 1st that the Consecration and Administration of the Sacraments by Ministers is valid tho' they be Sinners After this he Treats of the Eucharist and having prov'd the Real Presence and Transubâ—tantiation he shews that the Communion under both kinds is not necessary As to Baptism he establishes the absolute necessity of it to Salvation and proves that Infants who die without Baptism are Damn'd and that this Sacrament imprints a Character As to Confirmation he insists chiefly upon discovering the effects of it and shews that the Bishops only can Administer it As to the Sacrament of Orders he makes it evident that the Distinction between Bishops and Priests was Establish'd from the beginning of the Church that the Priests ought to be Ordain'd by the imposition of the hands of the Bishops that the Reprobate may Consecrate as well as others and that the Celibacy of Priests is according to the Spirit and Genius of Holy Scripture and agreeable to the practice of the Ancient Church As to Marriage he shews That this Sacrament may subsist between Persons who preserve Continence That it Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite ought to be contracted according to the Forms prescrib'd by the Church and with the Benediction of the Priest and distinguishes between Marriages which are Lawful and which Unlawful In the Treatise of Penance he defends the necessity of Confession the Vertue of Absolution and the Practices of the Church against the Accusations and Errors of Wicklef There he Establishes the difference between Sins Mortal and Venial against Wicklef who made no distinction between them but with respect to the predestination of God and who admitted no other Mortal Sin but final Impenitence He shews also that the Predestinate may lose Charity against the Opinion of the same Heretick Lastly he shews that the Sacrament of Extream Unction was Founded by Jesus Christ and his Apostles and that the Sacrament produces its effect by its own Vertue and not only by the Merits of the Prayers of those who Administer or Receive it In the Third Tome he Treats of those things which are call'd Sacramentals and first of the Effects and the Necessity of Prayer in general 2. Of Singing Prayers in the Church 3. Of the Service of the Church 4. Of the Mass and its parts 5. Of the Ceremonies of the Sacraments of Baptism
the Divine Nature is so high and unsearchable that it is not possible to comprehend it and pursues this Reasoning so far that he sticketh not to say that Seraphims and Angels themselves do not see the Substance of God but only an Emanation of his Divine Light This passage Ib. Orat. 1 hath made some modern Greeks suppose that the Saints do not see the Substance of God but only a Corporeal Light such as they say appeared upon Mount Tabor This also hath exercised the Subtilty of our Divines who constitute Happiness in the Vision of the Substance of God And yet S. Chrysostom hath respect in this passage neither to that Light of the Modern Greeks not to the Disputes of the Schoolmen his only design is to shew against Aetius that the Divine Nature is not to be comprehended and that evident Reasons of the Mysteries are not to be given It is not necessary to inlarge upon the Opinions of S. Chrysostom concerning the Mystery of the Trinity it is certain that he maintained the Faith of the Council of Nice and that he proved the Divinity both of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet it ought to be observed that he was of Meletius's opinion concerning the Signification of the word Hypostasis and that he owned Three Hypostases and one Nature in God As to the Mystery of the Incarnation tho' he was equally contrary to the Errour Ep. ad Caesarium Homil. de Consub in lib. Quod Christus sit Deus V. Theodor. in Dialog of those who distinguished two Persons in Christ and that of those who confounded the two Natures and their Properties yet he in several passages of his Writings declared against the latter Opinion very eagerly In his Panegyricks of the Saints he ascribeth to them all manner of Felicity Homil de B. Philog Hom. de S S. Homil. 39. in ep 1. ad Cor. Hom. 28. in ep ad Hebr. Hom. 29. Matth. he places them in Heaven in the same Rank with Angels and Archangels of Prophets and Martyrs and yet in other places he seems to affirm that their Happiness is referred to the Day of Judgment but these may agree well enough if we say that he spake in the latter of a perfect and consummated Happiness Angels if we believe S. Chrysostom are so called because they declare the Will of God unto Men for which cause the Scripture representeth them with Wings Homil. 3. de Incompreh Hom. 3. in ep ad Coloss. Hom. 14. in ep ad Hebr. They take care of Men are present at Divine Services and every Christian hath his Guardian Angel The Devil is not wicked of his own Nature but is become such by Sin God permits him to tempt Men for their good It is a Childish thing to believe that Hom. de Diabolo tentatore Hom. 22. in Genesim those are Angels which the Scripture calleth the Children of God in Genesis and of whom it is said that they conversed with the Daughters of Men since they are of a spiritual and incorporeal Nature He Confesses in several places that the Fall of the first Men was prejudicial to the whole Race which ever since is become subject to Pains Sicknesses and Death from which it was free before Sin He acknowledgeth that an inclination to Evil and Lusts are Consequences of the first Man's sin but he seemeth not to have owned Original sin after the same manner that S. Austin doth at least it cannot be denied that he hath given another Sence to those places of S. Paul which seem to prove it most As for Example when he expoundeth that famous passage Rom. 5. 12. By One man sin entred into the World c. He understandeth of Death what S. Paul saith of Sin because it is the Wages of Sin and upon those other words of the same Chapter As by the disobedience of one many are become Guilty c. This Sentence saith he seems to have much of Difficulty for how can it be that one only Man having sinned many should be made guilty by his sin We may easily conceive that the first Man being become mortal it was necessary that his Off-spring should be mortal likewise but what Likelihood and what Reason is there that a man should be a Sinner because of anothers disobedience ... What then signifyeth the word Sinner In my Opinion it signifyeth nothing else but a condemned Man subject to Pain and Death This is a way of speaking which does not agree with S. Augustin's Doctrine Tho' it is not hard to defend S. Chrysostom by saying That tho' he spake thus yet he admitted all that Divines own concerning Original sin For what is Original sin according to them It is either a Privation of Original righteousness or Lust with the guilt of Sin or pain and Guilt together But S. Chrysostom acknowledges all these for in the first place he Confesseth that by the first Man's sin all men were deprived and spoiled of the State of Innocence that they are become not only mortal and subject to Pain and Grief but also inclined to Evil. Thus in his Opinion Lust is an effect of the first Man's sin and that Concupiscence in men makes them unworthy of eternal Life if the Grace of Jesus Christ saveth them not by Baptism He ascribes much to the strength of Free-will He always speaks as if he believed that it depends upon our selves to do good or evil and affirms that God always gives his Grace to those De verbis Jer. Hom. 1. Hom. 2. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. 41. in Genesim Hom. de tribus pueris Hom. 12. in ep ad Hebr. 8. in ep ad Phil. 19. ibid Hom. 17. in Joan. Hom. 18. in ep ad Rom. 12. in ep 1. ad Cor. In Matth. Hom. 83. Hom. 45. in Joan. In orat de S. Pelagia Serm. de Zachaeo Hom. 34. in Matth. Hom. 80. in ep ad Rom. Hom. 16. 18. in ep ad Rom. Hom. de obscur Prophet Serm. 5. de Lazaro Hom. 45. in Matth. who on their side doe all they can That we must begin and God makes an end That he followeth the motions of our Wills and giveth them their Perfection yet he owns the necessity of Grace to do good but submits it still to our Will So that according to him We are to will and chuse the good and God gives us the necessary Grace to fulfil the same he prevents not our Will that our Liberty may not be prejudiced he worketh good in us but that is when we are willing when our Will is determined he draweth to himself but only those who do all their endeavours to come near to him Those Principles about foreknowledge and Predestination agree very well with these Conclusions God did not predestinate men but as he foresaw their merits foreknowledge is not the cause of the event of things but God foresaw them because they shall happen He calls all men Jesus Christ died
Anastasius and in his Invectives against S. Jerom. It is true he doth not condemn them in those Places as it is noted in that Profession of Faith nor will I ascertain you that it is infallibly Rufinus's of Aquileia but I say it belongs to him to whom it is attributed for I am apt to believe That it is a Form of Confession of Faith which Pope Anastasius made for Rufinus of Aquileia to sign As to the First Confession of Faith 't is certainly the Work of some Pelagian for he directly opposes Original Sin He maintains That Infants are born without Sin That they are not baptized for the Remission of that Sin since they are innocent and that those that die without Baptism are not condemned to Eternal Torments He owns That the First Man had not died if he had not sinned but he affirms that he was created Mortal and that Death Griefs and Pains which are the effects of Sin are profitable for Man which comes very near the Opinion of Julian whom F. Garner makes the Author of the Translation of this Writing for it is noted at the end That it was translated out of Greek into Latin This proves to us That the Author of this Confession was a Greek or at least that it was made in the East We can say nothing more of the Author of this Confession F. Garner affirms That it is certainly one Rufinus's altho' it be not the Priest's of Aquilcia but another Rufinus whom he believes to be he that was Pelagius's Master of whom Coelestius speaks in the Council of Carthage That he had heard of Rusinus the Holy Priest who maintain'd at Rome with Pammachius That the Sin of the first Man did not descend to his Posterity It hath ever been thought that this Rufinus was the Priest of Aquileia and indeed S. Jerom says in several Places That Rufinus was the fore-runner of Pelagius and his Adherents But F. Garner maintains That it is another Rufinus of whom Coelestius speaks and he says likewise That it is he that S. Jerom sent to Rome in the Time when he had the Contests with Rufinus of Aquileia of whom this last complains in his Apology to Pope Anastasius There is no doubt but that this Rufinus condemned the Opinions of Origen and that he contended with the Priest of Aquileia because he defended them But we do not see that he maintained the Doctrine of Pelagius touching Original Sin Let us consider the Reasons which F. Garner brings to shew that the Master of Pelagius and Coelestius is a different Person from the famous Rufinus of Aquileia 1. The Master of Pelagius was a Syrian but the Priest of Aquileia was an Italian according to the Testimony of M. Mercator 2. This same Author speaks of the Master of Pelagius as a Man little known one Rufinus saith he 3. The Priest of Aquileia came to Rome under Syricius The Master of Pelagius came not till the Popedom of Anastasius according to the Testimony of the same Author 4. The Master of Pelagius sojourned with Pammachius the Priest of Aquileia was none of this great Man's Friends but on the contrary it was Pammachius that put S. Jerom upon writing against Rusinus 5. The Master of Pelagius taught at Rome That there was no such thing as Original Sin the Priest of Aquileia was gone when this Doctrine was preached 6. When S. Jerom accuses the Priest of Aquileia of being the Fore-runner of Pelagius he speaks of no other Doctrines but those of Apathy and Sinlesness 7. Paulinus who disputed against Coelestius in the Council of Carthage doth not retort upon him That that Rufinus whom he cited had been condemned which he undoubtedly would have done if he had heard him speak oâ— the Priest of Aquileia 8. Coelestius speaks of Rufinus as then alive the Priest of Aquileia was then dead 9. Lastly Rufinus cited by Coelestius was in the Communion of the Church the Priest of Aquileia was excommunicated from it These Reasons are not incapable of Reply and it may be said that many of them are too subtle That which amazeth me most is that which Coelestius says That Rufinus who denied Original Sin abode with Pammachius for what likelihood is there that he should lodge with one of his greatest Adversaries and one of the best Friends of S. Jerom The rest are weaker for Rufinus having dwelt in Palaestine for near Thirty Years and coming from that Country when he taught his Doctrine to Pelagius Marius Mercator might say That he was a Syrian and that he first brought that Doctrine to Rome and so much the rather because this Author had a Design to demonstrate that this Doctrine came from the East It is true that Rufinus came to Rome at the end of the Popedom of Syricius in 397. but he staid there some time in the Popedom of Anastasius Coelestius doth not say That he of whom he speaks was then alive If Paulinus did not object his Condemnation if he passed for a Man who died in the Communion of the Church it was because he was not looked upon in Africk as an Heretick or an excommunicate Person There is then nothing of Difficulty in any of the Objections but concerning the abode with Pammachius but perhaps Coelestius was mistaken or Rufinus was after reconciled to Pammachius Nevertheless it cannot be denied but that the Opinion of F. Garner hath much probability in it For this cause I have set down his Reasons that it may be left to the Reader to judge POSSIDIUS THis Deacon of Africa and Scholar of S. Austin hath written the Life of his Master in a plain Style and hath joyned to it a Catalogue of his Works We have nothing more Possidius to note about this Work besides what we have written of it in the Life and Works of S. Austin URANIUS URANIUS the Priest a Scholar of S. Paulinus hath also written the Life of his Master in a Letter directed to Pacatus This Letter hath been published by Surius Uranius by F. Chiffletius and Lastly in the last Edition of S. Paulinus The Style of it is plain clear and elegant This is all the Goodness it has in it S. COELESTINE ST COELESTINE was chosen Bishop of Rome after the Death of Boniface in the beginning of * November in 423. This Election was made without contending and S. Coelestine division and he governed the Church of Rome peaceably till April anno 432. The Business of Nestâ—rius and the assembling the Council of Ephesus have made his Popedom famous and Septemb. 16. given him occasion to write several Letters of which we shall deferr to speak till we come to the History of the Council of Ephesâ—s where they have a more fit Place so that we have nothing more to speak of here save Three Letters which have no relation to the Business of Nestorius The First was written in 431. after the Death of S. Austin and is addressed To Venerius Bishop of Milan
unworthy Priests have the Power of the Keys as well as the worthy The Twentieth Section contains the Opinions of the Fathers concerning the Repentance of dying Persons In the Twenty first he discourses of the Expiation of light Sins by the Pains of Purgatory of the general Confession of venial Sins and of the Penalties to be inflicted on Priests who divulge matters related to them in Confession In the Twenty second he proposes this Question viz. Whether Sins that have been once forgiven return by the Commission of following Sins And after having produced the Reasons on both sides leaves the Question undecided In the Twenty third Distinction he treats of the Sacrament of Unction which he believes to have been instituted by the Apostles the Effect of it being the remission of Sins and the comfort of the Sick Person He also proves that this Sacrament may be reiterated In the Twenty fourth he treats of the Functions and Dignity of the Seven Orders and of the different Dignities among Bishops In the Twenty fifth he discourses of the validity of Ordinations made by Hereticks and after having produced different Opinions seems to approve that of those who affirm that Persons who were ordain'd in the Church still retain the Power of ordaining though they turn Hereticks but deny that those whom they ordain have the same Power Afterwards he treats of Simoniacal Ordinations and of the Age requisite for admission into Orders In the Twenty sixth he shews the Antiquity of the Sacrament of Marriage In the Twenty seventh he enquires in what Marriage consists and distinguishes a Promise of future Marriage from Marriage contracted by the present Consent of the Parties In the Twenty eighth Twenty ninth and Thirtieth he gives a farther Account of the Conditions that ought to be annexed to such a Consent as is necessary for the Consummation of Marriage In the Thirty first he explains the Advantages of Marriage which are Fidelity the Lawful Procreation of Children and the Benefit of the Sacrament and treats of the contrary Vices In the Thirty second he discourses of Matters relating to the Continency of married Persons at certain times In the Thirty third he relates divers Considerations of the Fathers with respect to the Polygamy of the Patriarchs In the Thirty fourth he treats of the Impediments that render Persons uncapable of contracting Marriage and which make their Marriage void and of none Effect In the Thirty fifth he shews that a Man may be divorced from his Wife upon the Account of Adultery and that they may be afterwards reconcil'd The Author adds that he who has committed Adultery with a Woman may marry her after her Husband's decease provided he were not accessory to his Death and did not promise his Wife to marry her in his Life-time In the Thirty sixth Section he treats of the Impediment that arises from the difference of Age and Condition between the Parties who contract Marriage In the Thirty seventh he discourses of the Injunction of Celebacy observ'd by Bishops Priests Deacons and Sub-deacons and of Pope Calixtus's Ordinance declaring such Marriages null In the Thirty eighth he treats of the Impediment of a Vow In the Thirty ninth of that of difference in Religion In the Fortieth Forty first and Forty second of the Degrees of Cansanguinity and Affinity as well Temporal as Spiritual The other Sections contain divers Questions concerning the Resurrection the State of the Elect and of the Reprobates after their Death Prayers for the Dead the Invocation and Intercession of the Saints the Circumstances of the last Judgment the several Degrees of Beatitude and Glory and the State and Torments of the Damned with which ends the Fiftieth Section of the Fourth Book by the Master of the Sentences This Work was published by John Aleaume and printed at Paris A. D. 1565. and at Lyons in 158â— It was also revis'd by Antony de Mouchy and reprinted in the same City in 1618. and in otheâ— Places The Author makes it his chief Business as we have already hinted to collect the Opinions of the Fathers concerning all the Questions discussed by him He adds very little of his own except sometimes in reconciling certain Passages which seem to be contradictory and when he cannot bring them to an Agreement he usually leaves the Question undecided He avoids to meddle with Questions concerning which the Fathers have writ nothing and scarce ever makes use of Philosophical Terms and Arguments much less of Aristotle's Authority who is often cited by the other School-men The Book of Sentences by ROBERT PULLUS is not a Collection of Passages of the Fathers Robert Pullus Cardinal as that of Peter Lombard but a Theological Work in which he himself resolves certain Questions which are propos'd either by Ratiocination or by Proofs taken out of holy Scripture This Author sir-nam'd Pullus Pullen or Pully being an English Man by Nation passed over into France and flourished in the Schools of Paris He return'd to England about the Year 1130. and there re-established the University of Oxford in 1133. He was made Arch-deacon of Rochester and although he enjoy'd that Benefice yet forbore not to go back to Paris where he resided in Quality of Professor of Divinity However his Metropolitan thought fit to recall him and not being prevail'd with even upon St. Bernard's Request that he might still remain at Paris caus'd the Revenues of his Arch-deaconry to be seiz'd on to oblige him to return to England Whereupon Pullus appeal'd to the See of Rome and having much Interest in that Court was not only vindicated against the Archbishop but also invited to Rome by Pope Innocent II. and created Cardinal and Chancellor of the Church of Rome by Lucius II. in 1144. This Dignity was enjoy'd by him till the Third or Fifth Year of the Pontificate of Eugenius III. when he died A. D. 1150. Cardinal Pullus's Book of Sentences is divided into Eight Parts in the First of which he treats of the Existence of God of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity and of the Divine Attributes In the Second of the Creation of the World of the Angels of the Nature of Man of the Origine of the Soul of Adam's Fall of the Corruption of human Nature and of Original Sin In the Third of the Law of the Circumcision of the Law of Grace and of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. He continues his Discourse concerning that Mystery in the Fourth Part where he also treats of Faith Hope and Charity of Purgatory and of the State of Souls after their Separation from their Bodies In the Fifth he treats of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ of the Gift of Faith of the Sacraments of Baptism of Confirmation of the Remission of Sins of Charity and of Sin In the Sixth Part he discourses of the Effects of Sin of Concupiscence of Ignorance and other Punishments of Sin of the Temptations of the Devil of the Assistance of good Angels and their Functions
Saints do not regard what is done here on Earth and do not Pray for us that therefore it is needless to Invocate them and that God alone is to be Prais'd Honour'd and Pray'd to 4. That there are but Two States after Death and consequently no Purgatory 5. That 't is not better to be Interr'd in a Church-yard than elsewhere That 't is needless to Consecrate Churches Altars Sacerdotal Habits to Bless Water Ashes Wax-Tapers c. 6. That the Chanting of the Church is Condemnable That the Canonical Hours and all the other Prayers are useless except the Pater-Noster which is the only Prayer that ought to be us'd and that all that is said at Mass ought to be rejected as being of Humane Institution except the Words of Consecration and the Lord's Prayer 7. That Pilgrimages Indulgences and the Jubilee ought to be rejected 8. That Excommunication is of no force 9. That one ought not to have any Images or to pay them any Worship 10. That the Exorcisms which some Priests make over the Possess'd are Superstitions and the rather because no Man since the Passion of Jesus Christ can be possessed by the Devil 11 That the Study of the Languages and the Sciences are hurtful 12. That all Oaths tho' Judiciarily and Truly made are Condemnable and Sinful 13. That the Pastors and Ministers of the Word of God ought to have nothing de Proprio in imitation of Jesus Christ and the Apostles We do not think fit to add any thing to the Testimonies of these two Authors concerning the Errors of the Waldenses or Vaudois which they have very largely insisted on This Sect increas'd very much in the Thirteenth Century inspight of the Inquisitors and spread it self in Arragon and in the Vallies of Piedmont where it has remain'd still holding the same Maxims till it was United in the Year 1530 with Oecolampadius and the other Sacramentarians to whom the Vaudois sent Peter Mason and George Morel who entred into a Treaty with Oecolampadius and Martin Bucer These two latter propos'd to them the Rejecting of several of their Errors by acknowledging That a Christian might Swear Lawfully and exercise the Office of a Magistrate that the Ministers might Possess something de Proprio That one might Punish Malefactors with Death that Wicked Ministers might Administer the Sacraments c. And they engag'd them to maintain others which they had never maintain'd before particularly That the Body of Jesus Christ is not in the Eucharist and that there was no necessity of Confessing their Sins a Doctrine which the Vaudois never till then openly oppos'd However notwithstanding this Union most of the Vaudois persisted still in their own Principles till necessity forc'd them in the Year 1630 to take the Calvinists for their Pastors Rainerius likewise mentions several other Sects of Hereticks of his time viz. the Buncaires who Espous'd Several other Sects the Errors of the Patarini and who maintain'd That no Mortal Sin was Committed by the lower Part of the Body and upon this false Principle abandon'd themselves to all manner of Irregularities These Men Disguis'd their Sentiments and never gave a direct Answer to the Questions they were ask'd The Siscidois who held the same Opinions with the Vaudois only they had a greater Respect for the Sacrament of the Eucharist The Ortlibenses or Orbibarians who deny'd the Mystery of the Trinity Taught that Jesus Christ was the Son of Joseph and Mary believ'd the World to be Eternal deny'd the Resurrection and the Last Judgment and maintain'd That Jesus Christ had not suffer'd really Annull'd all the Sacraments of the Church and Asserted That the Eucharist was only Bread The Cathari whose Sect was divided into Three Parts that of the Albanois that of the Concoresois and that of the Bagnolois This Sect prevail'd chiefly in Lombardy Their Common Errors were That the Devil was the Author of this World that the Sacraments are of no avail to Salvation that Marriage is a Mortal Sin as well as the Eating of Flesh Eggs and Cheese that there is no Resurrection and that 't is not Lawful to Punish Malefactors nor to Kill Animals That there is no Purgatory They allow'd of Four Sacraments but such as had nothing besides the Name agreeable with those of the Church For instead of Baptism they made use of the Imposition of Hands Instead of Consecrating the Eucharist they Bless'd a Loaf before Meals and after having said the Lord's Prayer they broke and distributed it to all there present About Pennance they Taught That Eternal Glory is not diminish'd by Sin nor the Punishment of Hell augmented by Impenitence that no Person shall go into Purgatory that the Imposition of Hands remits entirely the Punishment and the Guilt of Sin They made no other Confession besides a Publick acknowledgment of their Sins in General and impose no less Pennances on the least than they do on the greatest Sinners They allow'd of Four Degrees of Orders the Bishop the First Son the Second Son and the Deacon Rainerius reckon'd up Sixteen Churches of those Cathari and observes that the Sect of the Albanois was divided into Two Parts viz. One of which Gelesinanza their Bishop of Verona was the Head and the Other which had for its Head John of Lions He in particular related the several Errors of those Sects which Held the Extravagancies of the Manichees and Bulgarians besides they were of the Opinions of the Vaudois and Albigenses with whom they were United For in this Century as well as the foregoing all those Hereticks agreed to oppose the Hierarchical Order of the Church its Usages its Ceremonies and its Sacraments and several particular Sects were faln into Extravagant Errors and Abominable Disorders The Great Sect of the Albigenses was a Mixture and Composure of all those particular Sects It spread it self in Languedoc Provence Dauphiné and Arragon Raymond Count of Toulouse supported The Inquisition and Croisades against the Albigenses their Party which was become very Numerous and Powerful especially in Languedoc and grew every Day stronger and stronger by the Remisness of the Prelates and the Irregular Manners of the Ecclesiasticks Pope Innocent III. being minded to put a stop to them sent in the Year 1198 two Legates Rainerius and Guy into those Provinces to endeavour the Extirpation of those Hereticks recommended them to the Bishops and Lords that they would assist them in this Undertaking and Employ their Authority for to Punish the Hereticks In the Year 1199 he Order'd their Estates should be Confiscated This First Mission having had no great Success Pope Innocent gave Commission to Arnold Abbot of Cisteaux to employ the Abbots and Monks of his Order◠and particularly Peter de Chauteau-Neuf and Radulphus Monks of Fontfroide not only to Preach against those Hereticks but likewise to excite the Princes and People to Extirpate them and to form a Croisade against them These Missionaries making no great Progress at first Held a Council in the Year
Person was spar'd because he testified his Submission and gave good Reasons for his Absence Lastly We must joyn to all the rest who wandred from the right way in the Fifteenth Century The Errors of Peter Osma Peter Osma a Professor at Salamanca who publish'd a Book wherein he maintains that Confession is not the Institution of Jesus Christ but the Invention of Man that Mortal Sins are blotted out by Contrition alone and Sins of thought by a meer Remorse This Opinion was Condemn'd and the Author was Anathematiz'd if he did not retract by the Arch-bishop of Toledo Alphonsus Carrilla whose Sentence was Confirm'd by the Constitution of Sixtus IV. Published at the beginning of August in 1479. There were also some Fanaticks in this Century who publish'd Extravagant Errors among the rest a certain Carmelite Nam'd William of Hildernissen and Giles Le Chantre both Flemings The Impieties of William Hilldernissen and Giles Le Chantre Adamites who called themselves new Prophets Preached a New Law permitted all sorts of Crimes denied the Resurrection and advanc'd many other Errors which were Condemn'd by Peter Ailly and by the Inquisitor of Flanders in 1412. Another Fleming called Pikard was Head of the Sect of the Adamites in Germany who led an infamous Life and were destroyed by Zisca Of this sort were the Diggers of Bohemia so called because they dug their Assemblies in Forests and Caves where they derided the Church its Ministers and Sacraments The Diggers Harman Risvich a Hollander taught horrible Impieties that the Soul dies with the Body that there is no Hell that Matter is Eternal that God never Created the Angels that Moses and The Impieties of Harman Risvich Jesus Christ were Impostors that our Creed is a Fable and the Gospel a Foolery He was Condemn'd to perpetual Imprisonment in 1499. and having made his escape out of it and continuing still to vomit forth his Blasphemies he was burnt alive at the Hague in 1512. CHAP. IX Ecclesiastical Observations upon the Fifteenth Century THOSE who had any thing to do in Ecclesiastical Affairs did almost wholly spend the first years of this Century about the Schism of the Popes It gave occasion to handle the Questions The Principal Questions Debaâ—ed in the Fifteenth Century of the Superiority of a General Council above the Pope and of its Infallibility The Project of the Re-union of the Greeks deserv'd the serious consideration of the whole Earth but the Effects did not answer the Expectations which many had of that Undertaking The Wicklefites and Bohemians made a terrible Schism in the Latin Church which could not be wholly extinguish'd neither by violent nor by gentle means These were the great Affairs of the Church in this Century as to Doctrin for I reckon not in this rank the Errors of some private Divines which were stifled at their Birth nor the Disputes of School-Men about Questions purely Theological This Science I mean Theology purely Scholastical degenerated also in this Century and begun to be laid aside by Men of the best Judgment who apply'd themselves to a Theology more solid founded upon the Holy Scripture and Tradition and who Cultivated the Sciences and polite Learning as we have already observ'd in the beginning of the Fourth Chapter of this Work The Court of Rome continued her Endeavours to make her self Master of all Benefices by Reservations Promises of vacant Benefices Preventions Annates c. but was stoutly opposed The Pretensions of the Court of Rome Gratiae expectativae herein chiefly by France and Germany the Decrees of the Council of Constance and Bazil the Laws of our Kings and Emperors the pragmatick Sanction and the German Concordate put a stop to their Covetousness and maintain'd the Election of Elective Benefices and the Collations of Ordinaries But the Court of Rome found a way to break thro' these Bars at last to Abolish the Pragmatick to Restore the Annates to Ruin the Elections and to obtain the Sovereign disposal of all Benefices This is what she attempted about the end of this Century and which she compassed at the beginning of the next as we shall shew hereafter The Necessity of the Reformation of the Church in its Head and Members as to Discipline and Manners was acknowledged by the Councils of Constance and of Bazil They did in vain The Reformation of the Church make attempts to compass it for it was always put off and eluded The General Councils which were to meet every ten years to take pains about it was a Project that was never put in execution There were scarce any General Councils and those who did meet thought of nothing but the most gross disorders of the Inferior Clergy the Declarations and Remonstrances of private Men about the abuses of that time were fruitless and serv'd only to preserve the Memory of them to Posterity The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over the Temporal Affairs was by little and little restrain'd Observations upon Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in this Century as to Lay-men but the Exemptions of the Clergy from a Laical Tribunal were maintain'd with Vigour by the Councils The Council of Basil and the Pragmatick Sanction granted the Pope the Right of receiving Appeals in all kind of Causes and the Decision of the greater Causes in the first Instance but upon Condition that he should name Judges to sit upon the several places where the Fact was committed During the Schism the Ecclesiasticks were often vexed with Tenths and other Impositions Of Tithes and Ecclesiastical Revenues which the Popes laid upon the Ecclesiastical Revenues Martin V. in Session 43 of the Council of Constance forbad other Prelats to impose any and even the Popes themselves to do it unless it was for a Cause of great Importance which was difficult and concern'd the Benefit of the Universal Church with the consent of the Cardinals and Prelats and without consulting the Bishops of that Kingdom or Province upon whom the Tax was laid who must consent to it either one third part or at least the greatest part of them and in this case he order'd that the Tax should be gather'd by Ecclesiastical Persons and by Apostolical Authority In the mean time the Popes have since frequently imposed Tenths upon Churches Eugenius IV. granted the King of Cyprus in 1431. the hundredth part of the Ecclesiastical Revenues of France Spain and England to set at Liberty the Hostages which he had left with the Sultan He granted also King Alphonsus a Sum of 200000 Florins to be levied upon the Churches of Arragon and Sicily Nichelas V. imposed Tenths in 1453. upon all the Clergy for a War against the Turk Callistus III. in 1457. laid another Tax on them upon the same Occasion Pius II. did the like in 1459. but the Germans refusing to pay it he was forced to remit it as to them In 1490. Innocent VIII would have imposed Tenths upon the Clergy of France for a War against the Turk but
Philosophers believed the same things that are received by the Christians as for Instance The Immortality of the Soul the Resurrection of the Body and Hell Fire He takes occasion from thence to discourse of the Nature of Souls he pretends that they are of a middle quality between a Spirit and a Body that they are by Nature Mortal but that God of his Goodness immortalizes the Souls of those who repose their Considence in him He confutes Plato's Notions concerning the Soul's Immortality and it's Excellency Dignity Exile or Imprisonment in the Body He supposes that it is Corporeal and extraduce That Man is but very little different from the Beasts That his Soul is mortal by Nature but that it becomes immortal by the Grace of God Opinions unworthy of a Man that had been perfectly instructed in the true Religion What he at the same time observes that in the Matters of Religion we ought not to indulge a fond Curiosity not endeavour to penetrate into the Reasons of God Almighty's Conduct nor judge of it by our own Light is infinitely more worthy of a Christian Jesus Christ says he was God and I ought to tell you so though you are not willing to understand it yet he is God and speaks unto us from God He has commanded us not to perplex our selves with unprofitable Questions let us therefore leave the Knowledge of these things to God and not amuse our selves in a vain pursuit after them And yet he does not forget to answer those Questions that were ordinarily proposed by the Pagans concerning Jesus Christ. Now they often demanded the reason why our Blessed Saviour since his Coming was so absolutely necessary for the Saving of Souls from Death would suffer so long an Interval of time to pass before he came to deliver them Arnobius replies Is it possible for Man to know after what manner God dealt with the Ancients Who has told you that he never relieved them any other way Do you know how long it is since Men have been upon the Earth or in what place the Souls of the Ancients are reserved Who has informed you that Jesus Christ did not deliver them by his coming Forbear then to torment your selves about these things and meddle not with those Questions which 't is impossible for Humane Reason to resolve Be perswaded that God has shown Mercy to them Jesus Christ perhaps had taught you how and when and after what manner it was done if it would not have afforded matter to your Pride But wherefore continued the Pagans did not Jesus Christ deliver all Mankind He invites he calls upon all the World says Arnobius he rejects no body he readily receives those that come to him he only requires that Men would desire and wish for him but he constrains and forces no Man for otherwise it would be Violence and not Grace But are none but Christians delivered from Death No assuredly for Jesus Christ alone has Power to effect it But say the Pagans this is a new upstart Religion and why should we quit that of our Ancestors for it Why not reply'd Arnobius provided it is better Did we never change our Ancient Customs Did we never alter our old Laws Is there any thing in the World which had not a beginning at first Ought we to esteem a Religion for the Antiquity of it or rather for the sake of the Divinity which we honour Within less than Two Thousand Years none of the Gods that are now worshipped by the Pagans were in being whereas God and his true Religion has been from all Ages Jesus Christ had his Reasons why he appeared when he did though they are unknown to us But why does he suffer those that worship him to be Persecuted And why replies Arnobius do your Gods suffer you to be afflicted with Wars with Pestilence and Famine c. As for us 't is not to be admired that we suffer in this Life for nothing is promised to us in this World On the contrary all the Evils and Calamities which we suffer here make way only for our Deliverance In the Three following Books Arnobius falls upon the Pagan Religion and shows that the Christians had very great reason to reject a way of Worship so very foolish Extravagant and Impious In his Sixth and Seventh Books he demonstrates that the Christians did very wisely not to Build Temples or trouble themselves with the Pageantry of Statues Images and Sacrifices and that it is a ridiculous piece of Folly to imagine that God dwells in Temples that the Images are Gods or that the Divinities are contained in them Or lastly That we honour the true God when we Sacrifice Beasts burn Incense or pour out Wine in Adoration of him Thus we have considered the Subject of the Seven Books of Arnobius that are written in a manner worthy of a Professor of Rhetorick The turn of his Thoughts very much resembles that of an Orator but his Style is a little African that is to say his Words harsh ill-placed unpolisht and sometimes scarce Latin and 't is likewise evident that he was not perfectly acquainted with the Mysteries of our Religion He attaques Paganism with a greater share of Skill and Vigour than he defends Christianity and discovers the Folly of That better than he proves the Truth of This. But we ought not to be surprized at it for 't is the ordinary Fate of all new Converts who being as yet full of their former Religion know the weakness and blind-side of it better than they understand the Proofs and Excellencies of that Perswasion which they have newly embraced I will say nothing concerning the Latin Commentary upon the Psalms that carries the Name of Arnobius because it is a certain truth in which all the Learned World agrees that this Arnobius is a different Person from him of whom we have been speaking that he is of a later Date and lived after the Council of Chalcedon since he mentions the Pelagians and Predestinarians The Books of the Senior Arnobius were first published by Faustus Sabaeus and Printed at Rome by Theodorus Priscianensis in the Year 1542. out of a Manuscript belonging to the Vatican Library but with abundance of Faults that were to be found in that Manuscript Galenius who afterwards set out another Edition of them at Basil in 1546. and 1560. by Frobenius took the liberty to Correct them upon his own bare Conjecture and to insert his own Emendations into the Text. Thomasinus printed them at Paris 1570. Canterus Corrected the Edition of Gelenius and was the first Man that wrote Annotations upon Arnobius His Edition was Printed by Plantin at Antwerp 1582. in Octavo Elmenhorstius published a larger Comment upon him and reviewed his Seven Books out of an ancient Manuscript They are likewise Printed with Heraldus's Notes in the Year 1583 and 1603 at Paris 1605 and at Hamburgh 1610 Stewechius a Learned Man took pains also with the same Author and Printed him at Doway
The Book of Origen's Principles 17 Homilies of the same Author upon Genesis 12 Homilies upon Exodus 16 Homilies upon Leviticus 28 Homilies upon Numbers 26 Homilies upon Joshua 9 Homilies upon the Book of Judges the first Homily upon the Book of Kings 9 Homilies upon the Psalms and Commentaries upon the Epistle to the Romans and a Letter of Origen's where he complains of his Book 's having been corrupted The first Book of Pamphilus's Apology for Origen The Orations of S. Gregory Nazianzen The Ascetical Rules of S. Basil and some other Treatises of both these Fathers of the Church The Sentences of Evagrius Ponticus and some other Treatises of this Author He Translated besides if we believe Gennadius a Treatise of Pamphilus's against the Mathematicians * By Mathematicians they meant Judicial Astrologers as also did most of the ancient Romans who were for the most part very ignorant of that part of Learning till towards the Fall of their Empire when Apuleius Boëthius and Cassiodorus Translated some of the Elementary Books of the Grecians into Latin And S. Jerom observes that he had published an Arian's Book under the Name of Theophilus the Martyr but neither of these Books are extant Rufinus gave himself a great deal of liberty in his Translations and kept more to the Sence which he judged ought to be given to Authors than to their Words In a word his Translations are Paraphrases rather than literal and faithfull Versions He hath used much freedom particularly in Eusebius's History and in Origen's Treatises where he hath changed added and struck out many things as he acknowledgeth himself But if these Translations be not sincere they are eloquent enough and they have that clearness which makes them pleasing to the Reader The Works of Rufinus's own Composition are these Two Books of Ecclesiastical History which he hath added to the Translation of Eusebius his Books wherein he continues the History of the Church to the Death of Theodosius the Emperor These Books are dedicated to Chromatius of Aquileia and were written at the same time that Alaric King of the Goths wasted Italy They were Translated into Greek by Gelasius of Caesarea They are pretty well written but there are many Historical faults l There are many Historical faults These are some of them He supposes that Athanasius hid himself for six years after he was condemned by the Council of Tyre He perverts the Order of Time in the History of S. Athanasius He sheweth but little favour to S. Gregory Nazianzen and S. Basil. He saith that S. Hilary was Excommunicated which is false And he confounds the Time when he says That S. Hilary was Banished after the Council of Milan There are several other faults of the same nature notwithstanding which it is a very usefull Work because he is the first that has unfolded and put in order the History of that time A Discourse to prove that Origen's Books have been falsified published at Rome in 397 with the Translation of Origen's Book of Principles and of Pamphilus's Apology Two Books against S. Jerom's Apology entituled Invectives In the former to justifie his Doctrine against the Accusations of S. Jerom he produces that Creed and that Doctrine which he had learned at Aquileia above Thirty years before from Chromatius Jovinian and Eusebius he observeth that in his Church they did not only profess in their Creed to believe the Resurrection of the Flesh carnis resurrectionem but that they added of this Flesh hujus carnis resurrectionem To the end saith he that making the Sign of the Cross upon our Brother as is usually done at the end of the Creed we may make a publick profession that we believe the Resurrection of the same Flesh which we now touch He uses this Confession for his Justification against S. Jerom from the Accusation of being in an error in the point of the Resurrection of the Flesh and of not believing that Man should rise again with his whole Flesh. He affirms that he is wrongfully accused of that Error for his Opinion is that the whole Body shall rise again with its Members but that it shall be glorious and immortal and shall be no more subject to Corruption and other infirmities of mortal and corruptible Flesh. After this he answers what was objected against him that he entertained Heretical Opinions concerning the Trinity He shews that his Doctrine in that point cannot be suspected of Error That if through inadvertency he hath let pass in the Translation of Origen's Principles any passage wherein he seems to say that the Son sees not the Father and that the Holy Ghost sees not the Son he should not for all that be accused of Error since in so many places he professes the contrary That if they had charitably warned him of it he would have either blotted out or altered it as he had done the others which he found to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church concerning the Trinity He complains also that Paulinianus had poisoned the Translation of that place making him say That it was neither impious or absâ—rd to say that the Son sees not the Father whereas he had only said That he would afterwards give a reason of the Sence in which it might be said That the Person of the Father was invisible After that he repelleth all S. Jerom's reproachfull Allegations declaring that S. Jerom himself had formerly commended Origen Translated his Works and that in his Commentaries there were the same Errors concerning the Nature of the Flesh when risen again the Prae-existence of Souls and the end of the Torments of the Devils and the Damned for which Reason he found fault that Origen's Books were Translated This he sheweth by long Extracts out of different Commentaries of this Father The Second Book of Rufinus's Invective is concerning the personal Reproaches which he utters against S. Jerom. First he charges him with tearing the Reputation of Christians of all States and Conditions in his Book of Virginity and with blaming their Manners at such a rate that Pagans and Apostates enquired diligently after that Book to make use of it against the Church Secondly he accuses him of Perjury because after a solemn Oath to read the Books of profane Authors no more he ceased not to read and make use of them in his Works Particularly he takes notice of a passage in his Treatise of Virginity wherein he pretends that S. Jerom spake of God after an irreverent manner He laughs at S. Jerom for boasting that he was Didymus's Disciple for having had one Month's Conversation with him He jests upon him for taking as his Teachers Porphyry the Philosopher and Barrabas the Jew He quoteth several places of his Writings to prove that he not only commended the Erudition and Learning of Origen but that he approved his Doctrine also He accuseth him of striking out of his Chronicon what he had said before in favour of Melania He reproveth him for the
of the Predestination of Saints and Perseverance written by S. Austin and sent the Places which disturb'd them to S. Prosper This Saint Relates them and Clears them in the Answer which he makes to them wherein he maintains the same Truth That Grace is a meer gratuitous Gift That the Beginning of Faith is the Effect of the Grace and Mercy of God That this Grace is not given to all and That we cannot do any Good without its Help Of all the Books that were written against S. Austin's Principles there was none that was in so much Esteem as the Conferences of Cassiâ—â— That Author in the Thirteenth Conference under the Name of the Abbot Charâ—… lays down Maxims quite contâ—aâ—y to S. Austin's S. Prosper who had already opposed him 〈◊〉 voce * This Book was printed alone at Leyden 1606. and at Arras 1628. attacked him by Writing after the Death of S. Austin and Pope Coelestine under the Popedom of Sixtus Cassâ—an had asserted as we have said That the beginning of our good 〈◊〉 and Faith proceed sometimes from our selves and sometimes from Grace That 〈◊〉 have in us some Seeds of Vâ—rtues That our Free will can naâ—â—nally incline it self to Gâ—… That Grace sometimes prevents it and that sometimes its Motions anticipate thâ—â—â— of Grâ—… S. Prosper maintains That these Principles are the Consequences of the Errors of the Pelagians That it follows from hence That Grace is given according to every Man's Mâ—â—iâ—s and that Nanire is not impair'd by Adam's Sin That they have been condâ—mned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—ose Synods which had condemned the Pelagian Errors and in the Letters which the Popes had written against them and that S. Austin had entirely vanquish'd them in his Writings The Poem called De Ingratâ— Of the †So he calls the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians as being ungrateful in denying that Grace which God so freely bestows on Men. Ungrateful is the most excellent Piece which S. Prosper compos'd about Grace In this Poem afâ—er he hath shew'd wherein consists the Heresy of Pelagius and in what manner it hath been confuted by S. Austin whom he highly extols he saith That there were some Christians who endeavour to revive that Heresy by teaching That Man 's Free-Will can incline it self indifferently to Good or Evil. He makes the Pelagians to come to his Help who exhort Persons to receive them since they approve their Sentiments He represents the Troubles and Perplexity they are in and shews that the Pelagians have a Right to require Admission into the Church or else they must be driven out who have espoused the same Principles He afterwards confutes the principal Points of the Pelagian Heresy condemned by the Church which he reduces to Three Heads That Man is born entirely innocent That he can live in this World without Sin and That Grace is given according to Merit He in the next Place shews the Doctrine of those whom he resists which he also referrs to Three Heads That God calls all the World by his Grace which every one follows or rejects by his Free-will That the Strength of Grace assists his Abilities and teacheth him to love Vertue That it is in the Power of Man to persevere in Goodness because God never refuseth his Assistance to those that are inclin'd to Good S. Prosper holds the contrary That the Grace of Jesus Christ is not given to all and he demonstrates it by the Example of the Infidels who have never heard the Gospel preach'd and because if God would save all the World all the World would be saved That it cannot be said That although God would save all Men yet they shall not be saved because they will not because saith S. Prosper it would then follow That the Effect of the Divine Will would depend upon the Humane Will and that God would help a Person in vain if he would not be helped That Grace doth not depend so upon Freedom That it is not merely of the Nature of the Law which makes us know Good but it converts the Soul and Mind That without this Grace the Law Gospel and Nature were useless That it plants Faith in our Souls That it is not only necessary as his Enemies themselves do unaâ—â—mously confess to acquire a perfect Righteousness and Perseverance in Goodness but also for the Beginning of Faith which is a mere gratuitous Gift which cannot be deserved This he proves by the Example of those who having lived in all manner of Vices have been saved by Baptism which they have received at the Hour of Death That the Error of those who attribute the Will and Desire of Believing to Free-Will relapse into the Errors of the Pelagians by giving that Power to the Free-Will which hath been lost by the Sin of the First Man That they make God himself unjust in saying That the Death of the Body hath passed upon the Posterity of Adam which hath not been infected with his Sin Then he confutes the Objections and Complaints of the Semipelagians which are reducible to Two 1 That the Freedom of Man's will is utterly destroyed by holding That Man of himself is not able to do any thing but Evil. S. Prosper answers to this Objection That the Sin of the First Man hath reduced us to that Necessity but that we are not by that Means deprived of our Liberty which always subsists but which declines infallibly to evil when it is left to its own proper Strength but to good when it is helped by Grace which restores us to our first Dignity That this Grace is the Original of all our Deserts That the Example of Infants of whom some receive Baptism and others are debarr'd from it makes it appear that it is merely gratuitous and that God gives to whom he pleases only The Second Objection is this That if the Grace of Living well were not given to all Men those who have not received it are not to be blamed for living ill S. Prosper also answers That this Objection could not be proposed but by Persons that did not acknowledge Original Sin because all Men being by that Sin become subject to Condemnation and having deserved to be abandon'd for their own Offences God would not have been unjust if he did not shew Mercy to any Man That we must not search into the Reasons why he doth it to one and not unto another because that is a Secret which God hath thought fit to conceal from us in this Life as he does many others Lastly He compares the Sentiments of those whom he confutes with the Principles of the Pelagians which directly oppose the Grace of Jesus Christ He owns that they seem to condemn their Principal Errors by acknowledging that Adam's Sin hath made us Mortal that no Man can obtain Eternal Life without Baptism and that Children are washed from their Sin by this Sacrament but that they still follow their Principles in asserting That Nature hath yet in it self Force enough to chuse
the True Good and that the Saints confirmed in Vertue may resist the Devil by their own Strength God leaving them to themselves to give them a greater Opportunity of meriting That we ought to have these Opinions in Abomination and must acknowledge that Sin hath made so great a Wound in our Nature that it is not able so much as to desire the Recovery of them from God not being sensible of its own Misery That the Gifts of Nature serve only to make us proud and give us no manner of Power to chuse that which is really Good That if it were not so Jesus Christ would die in vain That the Necessity there was that a God should die to save Mankind ought to inform us how deep our Wound was That the Faithful who are engrafted into Jesus Christ ought to acknowledge that they can do nothing without him He maintains That it is foolish to imagine that if the Saints have done no good Actions by the Strength of their own Freedom they deserve no Reward That on the contrary all our Confidence ought to be in God and that our Vertue is so much the more worthy of Reward as it is the more fixed on Jesus Christ That Christian Humility obliges us to acknowledge that we cannot do any good in this Valley of Tears but by the Grace of Jesus Christ which doth not destroy but restores our Freedom yet after such a manner as that all the Good it doth ought to be attributed to Grace and not to it That in the last Place it doth not countenance our Negligence nor hinder Men from pursuing after Vertue since on the contrary we cannot do a vertuous Action without this Grace These are the Books of S. Prosper which he purposely composed for the Defence of S. Austin's Doctrine concerning Grace He maintains the Principles of this Saint but he mollifies them at least as to the Terms especially about the Subject of Predestination to Glory and of Reprobation which he supposes to be built upon the Fore-sight of Man's Good-works as the Schools speak He speaks also of the Universal Desire of God to save all Men after a very moderate manner But he departs not from S. Austin's Principles as to the Fall of Man the Necessity of Grace the Weakness of Man's Will as also the Beginning of Faith and Conversion and the Efficacy by which it works upon Men's Hearts Indeed he hath no other Divinity that what he hath taken out of S. Austin it was that he might acquaint himself the better with the Principles of this Father that he made an Abridgment of Divinity made up of certain Extracts taken out of the Works of this Father He puts some of his Sentences in Verse We have yet these Two Works among the Books of S. Prosper The one is entitl'd * These were printed alone at Helmstadt anno 1613. Sentences gathered by S. Prosper from the Works of S. Austin and the other a Book of Epigrams composed of S. Austin's Sentences There are †98. Cave 97. He consulted no other Author but S. Austin in composing his Commentaries upon the Scriptures as appears by his Commentary upon the Fifty last Psalms in which he follows the Explications of S. Austin so exactly that he doth nothing almost but abridge him and put him into other Words The Two Epigrams which he hath composed against * In obtrectatorem Cavc the Adversaries of S. Austin are also a Mark of the Esteem he had for that Father I see no Reason to take from S. Prosper the Epitaph upon the Nestorian and Pelagian Heresies But there is not the like Grounds for the Poem upon Providence which contains Principles concerning Grace directly opposite to what S. Prosper lays down in his Poem of Ungrateful Persons for the Author of the Poem about Providence maintains That Man since the Fall into Sin hath still some Ability to do good That the Will goes before Grace That the Good and Sinners are equally tempted and assisted and that which makes the Righteous Men so glorious is that they resist whereas the Sinner yields to them These are the very Opinions which S. Prosper opposes in his Poem of Ungrateful Persons and in his other Works For though we should suppose with M. Abbot Anthelmi that S. Prosper sought for mollifying Terms yet we cannot think that he proceeded so far as to deliver that for Truth which he had formerly confuted besides the Style of this Poem differs much from the Poem of Ungrateful Persons The Author wrote after the Vandals broke in upon the Empire The Poem of An Husband to his Wife which bears Paulinus's Name doth in many Manuscripts bear S. Prosper's Name and Bede says 't is his The Book of Promises and Predictions is not S. Prosper's for the Author is an African and the Stile of this Work is very different from S. Prosper's other Works Nevertheless it is attributed by Cassiodorus to S. Prosper but either it is anothers of the same Name or in the time of Cassiodorus this Work was falsly attributed to S. Prosper either because it was conformable to his Doctrine or perhaps because S. Prosper Published it in the West But however that be it cannot be our Authors The end and design of the Book is to make a Collection of the Promises and Prophecies contain'd in Holy Scripture and to shew which of them are already fulfilled and which were yet to be accomplished hereafter The Two Books concerning a Contemplative Life is manifestly Julian Pomerius's of which we shall speak hereafter Printed alone 1487 and at Col. 1536 Octavo There remains nothing now but the Chronicon Gennadius assures us That S. Prosper had made a Chronicon from the beginning of the World down to the Death of Valentinian and the taking of Rome by Gensericus King of the Vandals Victorius Cassiodorus and S. Isidore of Sevil and many other Authors make mention of it So that we cannot doubt but that S. Prosper hath composed a Chronicon The first which appeared under S. Prosper's Name was an Addition to the Second Part of Eusebius's Chronicon augmented by S. Jerom which begins at the Death of Valens and ends at the Year 455. This hath been since augmented 10 Years more in the Edition which M. Chiffletius hath Published in his First Tome of his Collection of the French Historians This is the very same which F. Labbe hath Published entire in his First Tome of his Bibliotheca Manuscripta It begins at the Creation of the World and ends at the Year 455. But M. Pitthaeus hath Published another which begins and ends at the same Year which bears S. Prosper's Name but he gives it the Name of Tiro which might make us think it some other Author's Some believe that the First is S. Prosper's and that the Second is not Some others think that neither of them is his others that both are his In my Judgment the most probable Opinion is That the Chronicon
Sophronius Bishop of Jerusalem might be read which was read And after that the Writing which Macarius had directed to the Emperor although contrary to the Custom he had sent it to Rome and to Sardinia before it was read in the Senate At the end of this Session the Emperor declared That being called out by State Affairs he had ordered two Noblemen and two * Persons who had been formerly Consulâ— Exconsuls to be present in his stead at the following Sessions at which he was not in Person except the last In the twelfth Action held the 20th of March they read a long Memoir of Macarius's Act. xii containing the Letters of the Bishops of his Party The first is a Letter of Sergius to Cyrus in which he consults him about the Emperor's Prohibition of admitting two Wills in Christ. He answers him That Question was not decided by any Council That S. Cyril and Vigilius own but one Will yet that the two Wills ought not to be condemned if it was found that some of the Fathers had spoken of them The second is a Letter of Sergius to Pope Honorius in which he maintains That they ought to forbear speaking of one or two Wills The third is Honorius's Answer to the former Letter which approveth the Suppressing of those Expressions which he thinks to be new nothing of them being found in the Scripture in the Councils nor in the Fathers These Letters were examined from the Originals kept at Constantinople and being found true and genuine it was ordered that they should be examined in the following Actions The Judges asked the Emperor Whether Macarius might be restored in case he should repent and alter his Mind The Council required That by reason of the heady Zeal which he had shewed he should remain deposed without Hope of Restauration and be banished and the Clergy of Antioch desired another Bishop might be put in his room In the thirteenth Session of the 28th of March Sergius and Honorius's Letters were read over again They declared That this last had wholly followed Sergius's impious Doctrine Act. xiii and they anathematized him The Judges asking Why they did also condemn Cyrus Pyrrhus Peter and Paul The Council answered immediately That their Heresy was manifest and that Pope Agatho did sufficiently discover it Nevertheless it was agreed upon That their Writings should be examined Therefore they immediately read two Letters of Cyrus to Sergius the Capitula he had got the Theodosians to subscribe some Extracts of his Sermons and of Theodorus's a Writing of Pyrrhus's some Letters of Peter and Paul of Constantinople proving that those Bishops admitted but one Will and one Operation in Jesus Christ hereupon the Council declared That Agatho had justly condemned them that they also did condemn them and reject their Errors and would have their Names blotted out of the Dypticks As for the Successors of Paul Thomas John and Constantine they read their synodical Letters and nothing was found in them contrary to the Faith George Library-keeper of Constantinople swore That they had not put Men to subscribe that there was but one Operation in Christ therefore they were absolved This Action ended with the Reading of the second Letter directed to Sergius and Cyrus in which he does equally reject the Opinions of one or of two Wills in Jesus Christ and intimateth That Sophronius Patriarch of Jerusalem promised him to speak no more of two Wills provided that Cyrus Patriarch of Alexandria would speak no more of one Will. In the next place they read three Writings the one under the Name of Mennas to Vigilius and the other under the Name of Vigilius to the Emperor Justinian and the Empress Act. xiv Theodora which they maintained to be supposititious George the keeper of the Rolls or Library-keeper brought out a Copy of the fifth Council in which they were not found It was made appear That the Mâ—…thelites had added those Writings which were not subscribed as the rest of the Acts of the Council were and George a Monk of the Patriarchate of Antioch who had written them having owned his own Hand declared that Stephen Macarius's Disciple had got him to transcribe those three Writings telling him That the Copies of the fifth Council where they were not found were defective Paul of Constantinople had caused the same Addition to be made to the Latin Copy of the fifth Council which was acknowledged by Constantine a Presbyter who transcribed it These Writings were condemned and the Composers of them Afterward they examined a long Passage of a Sermon of S. Athanasius upon these Words Nunc anima mea turbata est valde in which the Doctrine of the two Wills is strongly maintained In the fifteenth Action of the 26th of April Polychronius a Presbyter and Monk presented a Confession of Faith figned by him wherein he owned but one Will in Christ. Act. xv He said That he had been confirmed in this Opinion in a Vision by a tall Man clad in white full of Brightness and Majesty who told him 'T was an unchristian thing to think otherwise He had seduced several Persons and was so zealous in his Opinion that he promised to raise a dead Man to Life again to prove the Truth of his Doctrine notwithstanding he attempted it in vain and made himself to be laughed at and to be anathematized by the Council which deposed him In the sixteenth Session held the 9th of August Constantine a Presbyter of Apamea the Act. xvi Metropolis of the second Syria being come to give an account of his Faith said That he did confess two Natures in Jesus Christ and the Properties of both his Natures that he did not question so much as the two Operations but he could own but one Will of the Word They asked him Whether he would not admit an human Will also He confessed That Jesus Christ had a natural human Will till he was crucified but since his Resurrection he had it no more and as he put off his Mortal Flesh his Blood and the Weakness of the Humane Nature by the same Reason he had no more a Humane Will according to Flesh and Blood He declared That Macarius was of this Opinion and persisting in it himself he was condemned by the Council as an Apolinarist George Patriarch of Constantinople did then require in his own Name and in the Name of the Bishops of his Patriarchate That they would spare if it were possible the Names of his Predecessors and not comprehend them in the Anathema's But the Council declared That since they had been blotted out of the Dypticks they ought also to be anathematized every one by Name In the seventeenth Action they propounded the Definition of Faith which was read over Act. xvii again approved and signed in the eighteenth held the 16th of September 681. Indict X. at which the Emperor was present in Person They received the Definitions of the five first General Councils and
not sufficient for Salvation and according to the Principles of St. Austin demonstrates that the real and true Virtues are the Gifts of God and the Effects of Grace and Charity He treats in particular of the Virtues and Passions of the Union of Virtues and of the Increases and Decreases incident to them The second part of his Treatise of Virtues is intituled Of Manners He there brings in all the Virtues one after another each of them making a Panegyrick upon them and describing their Advantages and Effects The third part is of Vices and Sins where he treats largely of Original Sin This is followed by a Treatise of Temtations and of the means of resisting them another of Merit and the Rewards of good Works in this Life another of the Rewards of the Saints wherein he treats of their State and Blessedness and another of the Immortality of the Soul which he proves by Philosophical Arguments The Proof of this brings him necessarily to talk of the Soul of Beasts which he will have to be material because its Original is from and its Operations depend upon Matter and because it is destroyed with the Body All these Treatises are one Work and are tied one to another by Transitions That of Divine Rhetorick or Prayer is a separate Treatise and full of very solid Precepts and Maxims about that Duty the disposition of mind requisite thereto the manner in which it ought to be performed and the wonderful Effects of it The Treatises of this Author upon the Sacraments are not near so scholastical as those of the other Authors of this time upon the same Matters The greatest part of what he meddles with have some relation either to Morality or Practice and for the Resolution of the Questions which he handles he makes use of Principles fetch'd from the Holy Scripture the Fathers the Usage of the Church and Morality The next Treatise about the Causes of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ the matter necessarily requiring it is more scholastical That is followed by a Treatise of Penance which is wholly moral and abounds with very useful Rules The great Work of the Universe is a General Treatise of universal Knowledg divided into two parts each of which is again subdivided into three others In the first he treats of the Principles of this World of its Creation and of created Beings of its duration of Eternity of Judgment of the happiness of the Saints and the pains of the Damned and of God's Providence in governing the World which is the Subject of the third part of this first Book His Discourse in the second is of the spiritual World of the Angels of the Devils of Souls of their Natures Operations Names Divisions and Apparitions c. All these Works mentioned are in the first Tome of the last Edition and had been printed before in the Venetian one of 1591. The second Tome consists of four Treatises of this Bishop's newly published by Monsieur Le Feron Canon of Chartres and Doctor of the Sorbonne from a Manuscript of the Church of Chartres The first is a Treatise of the Trinity and of the Divine Attributes quoted by him in his Treatise of the Universe The second is a Treatise of the Soul wherein he discourses of its Existence its Nature and Qualities and the difference of a Man's Soul from a Beast's He makes no doubt that this is mortal and yet he does not scruple to call it spiritual though it depend upon Matter both as to its Existence and Operations He confutes the opinion of those that think the Souls of Beasts only Accidents that is that they consist only in a certain disposition of Particles of Matter He discusses many other Questions about the Nature and Operations of the Soul These two Treatises are more scholastical than any other of the Bishops and therefore there is reason to doubt whether they belong to him or no especially that of the Soul where the Stile and Doctrine about the nature of the Soul of Beasts do not agree with those of the Treatise of the Soul in the first Volume This is not the Case of the third Treatise which is about Penance for that is nothing but the latter part of the Treatise about Penitence in the former Tome in which he discourses of Confession and Satisfaction The last of the four Treatises is about the Collation of Benefices He therein treats of the Call of those that are to enjoy Livings of the sincerity wherewith they ought to enter on them of the Duty of Pastors and other Beneficiaries and of the Plurality of Benefices He declames against the Neglect and Irregularities of the Beneficiaries of his time against such as entred upon the Ministry without a Call who considered Livings only as Places and looked after nothing but the Revenues of them and against the Collators who out of a temporal and carnal Prospect gave them to such as were unfit for them He shows that their Duty is to make use of the Power which they have of conferring Ecclesiastical Dignities to the honor and good of the Church by putting in Persons capable of performing all the Duties of them such as should be of age to acquit themselves in their Station whose Life should be blameless and who designed to live regularly and like Clergymen He compares a Canonical to a Monastical Life and shows that the Canons are no less obliged to lead a Life conformable to their Station than Monks are to observe the Rules of their Order and that as an Abbey is to be accounted vacant when possessed by a false or secular Monk so likewise a Canon's place should be accounted vacant when enjoyed by a Man that lives not like a Clergyman that it was the intention of the Founders that only such should enjoy the Incomes of the Church as were Men of a spotless Life and those who possessed them and yet lived disorderly were Usurpers and enjoyed them against Right and Justice As for Pluralities he says that only the doubt whether they were lawful or not should be sufficient to deter People that had any care for their Conscience from venturing upon more Cures than one because our Salvation is not to be risqu'd and because in a doubtful Case one is obliged to take the safest side He then opposes it with many Arguments 1. Because those who defend the Affirmative speak for their Interest whereas those who maintain the Negative put themselves out of a Capacity of ever after ejjoying more Livings than one 2. Because he who labours not according to the Apostle is not worthy to eat therefore he who labours not doubly and triply ought not to eat doubly and triply that is to have two or three different Livings which demand two or three different Services 3. Because it is the Intention of the Founders of Prebends that there should be as many Prebendaries as Titles for which reason there can be no one allowed to have two Prebends in one