relies upon a fallible foundation If the Pope in defining such causes be infallible then also can they have no faith seeing by the infallble decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith may bee hereticall as this of Pope Vigilius by their judgement was So whether the Pope in such causes be fallible or infallible it infallibly followeth upon either that none who builds his faith upon that foundation that is none who are members of their present Romane Church can beleeve or hold with certainty of faith any doctrine whatsoever which he professeth to beleeve 29. Here I cannot chuse but to the unspeakeable comfort of all true beleevers observe a wonderfull difference betwixt us and them arising from that diversitie of the foundation which they and we hold their foundation being not onely uncertaine but hereticall and Antichristian poysoneth all which they build thereon it being vertually in them all makes them all like it selfe uncertaine hereticall and Antichristian and so those very doctrines which in themselves are most certaine and orthodoxall by the uncertainty of that ground upon which and for which they are beleeved are overthrowne with us and all Catholikes it fals out otherwise Though such happen to erre in some one or moe doctrines of faith say in Transubstantiation Purgatory or as Cyprian did in Rebaptization yet seeing they hold those errors because they thinke them to be taught in the Scriptures and Word of God on which alone their faith relyeth most firmely and undoubtedly beleeving whatsoever is taught therein among which things are the contrary doctrines to Transubstantiatiō Purgatory Rebaptization such I say even while they doe thus erre in their Explicite profession doe truly though implicitè by consequent and in radice or fundamento beleeve and that most firmely the quite contrary to those errours which they doe outwardly professe and think they doe but indeed doe not beleeve The vertue and strength of that fundamentall truth which they indeed and truly beleeve overcommeth all their errours which in very deed they doe not though they thinke they doe beleeve whereas in very truth they beleeve the quite contrary And this golden foundation in Christ which such men though erring in some points doe constantly hold shall more prevaile to their salvation than the Hay and Stubble of those errours which ignorantly but not pertinaciously they build thereon can prevaile to their destruction and therefore if such a man happen to die without explicite notice and repentance of those errours in particular as the saying of Saint Austen k Lib. 1. de baptism ca. 18. that what faults Saint Cyprian had contracted by humane imbecillity the same by his glorious Martyrdome was washed away perswades mee that Cyprian did and as of Irene Nepos Iustine Martyr and others who held the errour of the Chiliasts I thinke none makes doubt it is not to be doubted but the abundance of this mans faith and love unto Christ to whom in the foundation hee most firmely adhereth shall worke the like effect in him as did the blood of martyrdome in Saint Cypran For the baptisme of martyrdome washeth away sinne not because it is a washing in blood but because it testifieth the inward washing of his heart by faith and by the purging Spirit of God This inward washing in whomsoever it is found and found it is in all who truly beleeve though in some point of faith they erre it is as forcible and effectuall to save Valentinian l Ablutus ascendit quē sua fides lavit Amb. Orat. de obitu Valent. neither baptized with water nor with blood and Nepos m Qui jam ad quietem processit ait Dionys apud Euseb l. 1. ca. 23. baptized with water but not with blood as to save Cyprian baptized both with water and with blood Such a comfort and happinesse it is to hold the right and true foundation of faith 30. The quite contrary is to be seen in them Though they explicitè professe Christ to be God which is a most orthodoxall truth yet because they hold this as all other points upon that foundation of the Popes infallible judgement in causes of faith and in that foundation this is denyed Pope Vigilius by his Cathedrall Constitution defining Nestorianisme to be truth and so Christ not to be God it must needs be confessed that even while they doe explicitè professe Christ to bee God they doe implicitè in radice and in fundamento deny Christ to be God and because by the Philosophers rule they doe more firmely beleeve that foundation than they doe or can beleeve any doctrine depending thereon it must needs ensue hence that they doe and must by their doctrine more firmely beleeve the Negative that Christ is not God which in the foundation is decreed then they doe or can beleeve the Affirmative that Christ is God which upon that foundation is builded The truth which upon that foundation they doe explicitè professe cannot possibly be so strong to salvation as the errour of the foundation upon which they build it will be to destruction For the fundamentall errour is never amended by any truth superedified and laid thereon no more than the rotten foundation of an house is made sound by laying upon it rafters of gold or silver but all the truths that are superedified are ruinated by that fundamentall errour and uncertainty on which they all relye even as the beames and rafters of gold are ruinated by that rottennesse and unsoundnesse which resteth in the foundation Or if they say that both the assertions which are directly contradictory are from that foundation deduced Caelestine and Leo decreeing the one that Christ is God as Vigilius decreed the other that Christ is not God then doth it inevitably follow that they can truly beleeve neither the one nor the other seeing by beleeving that foundation they must equally beleeve them both which is impossible Such an unhappy and wretched thing it is to hold that erroneous hereticall and Antichristian foundation of faith 31. My conclusion of this point is this Seeing we have first declared that all who are members of the present Romane Church doe hold the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith yea hold it as the very foundation on which all their other doctrines faith and religion doth relye and seeing wee have next demonstrated this to be a fundamentall heresie and not onely an hereticall but an Antichristian foundation condemned by Scriptures by generall Councels by ancient Fathers and by the consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church that now hence followeth which I proposed n Sup. nu 6. to prove that none is or can bee a member of their present Church but the same is convicted and condemned for an heretike by Scriptures generall Councels Fathers and by the uniforme consent of the Catholike Church An heretike first in the very foundation of his faith which
Augustine Saint Ierome Saint Ambrose Saint Leo Papius Theophilact Tertullian Eusebius Prudentius and others most excellent Divines And I take God and the whole Court of heaven to witnesse before whom I must render an account of this protestation that the same faith and religion which I defend is taught and confirmed by those Hebrew and Greeke Scriptures those Historians Popes Decrees Scholies and Expositions Councells Schooles and Fathers and the profession of Protestants condemned by the same Thus he 11. Did ever mortall man read or heare of such a braggadochio For learning and languages Ierome is but a baby to him more industrious and adamantine then Origen then Adamantius himselfe A shop a storehouse of all knowledge his head a Library of all Fathers Councels Decrees of all writings an Heluo nay a very hell of books he devoures up all Rabsecha Thraso Pyrgopolinices Therapontigonus all ye Magnificoes Gloriosoes come sit at his feet and learne of him the exact forme of vaunting and reviling What silly men were Eutiches Nestorius and the old heretikes they boasted but of one or two Councells All Councells all Fathers all Decrees all bookes writings and records are witnesses of his faith They sayd it he swears it before God and the whole Court of Heaven that all Scriptures Councels Fathers all witnesses in heaven earth and hell yea the Devill and all are his and confirme their Romane faith and condemne the doctrine of Protestants Alas what shall we doe but even hide our selves in caves of the earth and clifts of the rocks from the force and fury of this Goliah who thus braves it out in the open field as who with the onely breath of his mouth can blow away whole legions quasi ventus folia aut pannicula tectoria 12. But let no mans heart faint because of this proud anonymall Philistim Thy servant O Lord though the meanest in the host of Israel will fight with him nor will I desire any other weapons but this one pible stone of the judiciall sentence of the fift generall Councell against Vigilius This being taken out of Davids bagge that is derived from Scriptures consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding Catholike Councells and Fathers directly and unavoydably hits him in the forehead it gives a mortall and uncurable wound unto him for it demonstrates not onely the foundation of their faith to be hereticall and for such to bee condemned and accursed by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church but all their doctrines whatsoever they teach because they all relye on this foundation of the Popes infallibility are not onely unsound and in the root hereticall but even Antichristian also such as utterly overthrow the whole Catholike faith This being one part of the Philistimes weapons wherein he trusted and vanted with his owne sword is his head the head and foundation of all their faith cut off so that of him and the whole body of their Church it may be truly said Iacet ingens littore truncus Avulsumque humeris caput sine nomine corpus 13. You see now how both ancient and moderne heretikes boast of Councells and therefore that the reason of Baronius is most inconsequent that Vigilius was no heretike because hee professeth to hold the Councell of Chalcedon Nay I say more though one professe to hold the whole Scripture yet if with pertinacy hee hold any one doctrine repugnant thereunto the profession of the Scriptures themselves cannot excuse such a man from being an heretike If it could then not any of the old heretikes would want this pretence or to omit them seeing both Protestants and Papists make profession to beleeve the Scriptures and whatsoever is taught therein would this profession exempt one from heresie neither they nor wee should be or be called heretikes But seeing in truth they are and wee in their Antichristian language are called heretikes as Cyrill and the orthodoxall beleevers in his time were by the Nestorians it is without question that this profession to hold the whole Scriptures much lesse to hold one or two Councells as Vigilius did cannot free one from being an heretike 14. You will perhaps say can one then beleeve the whole Scripture and be an heretike or beleeve the faith decreed at Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon and be an Arian Eutychean or Nestorian heretike No verily for as the Scripture containeth a contradiction to every heresie seeing as Saint Austen truly saith l Lib. 2. de doct Christ ca. 9. all doctrines concerning faith are set downe and that also perspicuously therein so doe every one of those three Councels containe a contradiction to every one of those three heresies and to all other which concerne the divinity or humanity of Christ But it is one thing to professe the scriptures or those three Councells and say that he beleeves them which many heretikes may doe and another thing to beleeve them indeed which none can doe and be an heretike for whosoever truly beleeveth the scriptures cannot possibly with pertinacy hold any doctrine repugnant to scriptures but such a man upon evident declaration that this is taught in them though before he held the contrary presently submits his wit and will to the truth which out of them is manifested unto him If this he do not he manifestly declareth that he holds his error with pertinacy and with an obstinate resolution not to yeeld to the truth of the scriptures and so hee is certainly an heretike notwithstanding his profession of the scriptures which he falsly said he beleeved and held when in very truth he held and that pertinaciously the quite contrary unto them The very like must be said of those three Councells and them who either truly beleeve or falsly say that they beleeve the faith explained in them or any one of them 15. Whence two things are evidently consequent the former that all heretikes are lyars in their profession not onely because they professe that doctrine which is untrue and hereticall but because in words they professe to beleeve and hold that doctrine which they doe not but hold and that for a point of their faith the quite contrary All of them will and doe professe that they beleeve the scriptures and the doctrines therein contained and yet every one of them lye herein for they beleeve one if not moe doctrines contrary to the scriptures The Nestorians professed to hold the Nicene faith and so they professed two natures and but one person to bee in Christ for that in the Nicene faith is certainly decreed but they lyed in making this profession for they beleeved not one person but pertinaciously held two persons to be in Christ The Eutycheans in professing the Ephesine Councell professed in effect two natures to abide in Christ after the union for this was certainly the faith of that holy Councell but they lyed in this profession for they held that after the union two natures did not abide in Christ but one onely The Church
teach what wee affirme whatsoever any manor Councell saith or can say to the contrarie The like must be said of Pope Vigilius in this cause Had he so professed to hold the Councell of Chalcedon as that upon manifestion that the Three Chapters were condemned by it he would have forsaken the defence of them then certainely his defending of these 3. Chapters had not bin pertinacious nor should have made him an hereticke but his profession to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon notwithstanding his error about the 3. Chapters should have made him a catholike But seeing Vig. persisted to defend the 3. Chapt. though it was made evidēt unto him by the Synodall judgement of the fift Councell that the definition of saith decreed at Chalcedon condemned them all he by this persisting in heresie did demonstrate to all that he professed to hold the Councell at Chalcedon no otherwise then with a pertinacious resolution not to forsake the defence of those Three hereticall Chapters although the whole Church of God should manifest unto him that the Councell of Chalcedon condemned the same and for this cause his defending of those three Chapters with this pertinacie and wilfull resolution declareth him to bee indeed an hereticke notwithstanding his profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon and faith thereof whereby all those Chapters are condemned which profession being joyned with the former pertinacie could not now either make or declare him to be a Catholike 18. The very same must bee said of the present Romane Church and members thereof Did they in such sort professe to hold the fift Councel and faith thereof as that upon manifestation that this Councell beleeved taught and decreed that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is fallible and de facto hath beene hereticall they would condemne that their fundamentall heresie of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie decreed in their Laterane and Trent assemblies then should they much rather for their profession of the fift Councell and faith thereof bee orthodoxall then for professing together with this the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie bee hereticall But seeing they know by the very Acts and judiciall sentence of that fift Councell by which the Cathedrall Constitution of Vigilius is condemned and accursed for hereticall in this cause of faith touching the Three Chapters that the fift Councell beleeved this and decreed under the censure of an Anathema that all others should beleeve it and that all who beleeve the contrary are heretikes seeing I say notwithstanding this manifestation of the faith of that Councell they persist to defend the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in those causes yea defend it as the very foundation of their faith this makes it evident to all that they do no otherwise professe to hold this fift Councell or the other whether precedent or following for they all are consonant to this but with this pertinacious resolution not to forsake that their fundamentall heresie and therefore their expresse profession of this fift and other generall Councels yea of the Scriptures themselves cannot be so effectuall to make them Catholikes as the profession of the Popes infallibility which is joyned with this pertinacy is to make and demonstrate them to be heretikes 19. There is yet a further point to be observed touching the pertinacy of Vigilius For one may be and often is pertinacious in his errour not onely after but even before conviction or manifestation of the truth made unto him and this happeneth whensoever hee is not paratus corrigi prepared or ready to be informed of the truth and corrected thereby or when he doth nor or will not tanta solicitudine quaerere veritatem with care and diligence seeke to know the truth as after S. Austen m Epist 162. and out of him Occham n Lib. 4. part 1. ca. 2. Gerson o Cons 12. de pertinacia part 1. pa. 430. Navar p Ench. ca. 11. nu 22. Alphonsus à Castro q Lib. 1. de justa punit haeret ca. 7 and many others doe truly teach See now I pray you how farre Vigilius was from this care of seeking and preparation to embrace the truth He by his Apostolicall authoritie decreed r Const Vigil apud Bar. an 553. nu 208. that none should either write or speake or teach ought contrary to his Constitution or if they did that his decree should stand for a condemnation and refutation of whatsoever they should either write or speake Here was a tricke of Papall that is of the most supreme pertinacy that can bee devised He takes order before hand that none shall ever I say not convict him but so much as manifest the truth unto him or open his mouth or write a syllable for the manifestation thereof and so being not prepared to bee corrected no nor informed neither hee was pertinacious and is justly to bee so accounted before ever either Bishop or Councell manifested the truth unto him Even as he is farre more wilfully and obstinately delighted in darknesse who dammes up all the windowes chinkes and passages whereby any light might enter into the house wherein hee is than hee who lyeth asleepe and is willing to be awaked when the light shineth about him So was it with Pope Vigilius at this time his tying of al mens tongues and hands that they should not manifest by word or writing the truth unto him his damming up of the light that never any glimpse of the truth might shine unto him argues a mind most damnably pertinacious in errour and so far from being prepared and ready to embrace the truth that it is obdurate against the same and will not permit it so much as to come neere unto him 20. The very like pertinacy is at this day in the Romane Church and all the members thereof for having once set downe this transcendent principle the foundation of all which they beleeve that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is infallible they doe by this exclude and utterly shut out all manifestation of the truth that can possibly bee made unto them Oppose whatsoever you will against their errour Scriptures Fathers Councels reason and sense it selfe it is all refuted before it be proposed seeing the Pope who is infallible saith the contrary to that which you would prove you in disputing from those places doe either mis-cite them or mis-interpret the Scriptures Fathers and Councels or your reason from them is sophisticall and your sense of sight of touching of tasting is deceived some one defect or other there is in your opposition but an errour in that which they hold there is nay there can be none because the Pope teacheth that and the Pope in his teaching is infallible Here is a charme which causeth one to heare with a deafe eare whatsoever is opposed the very head of Medusa if you come against it it stunnes you at the first and turnes both your reason your sense and your selfe also into a very stone By
the Popes supposed infallibility when hee sits in his Chaire and with his Romane Synod determineth out of it questions and defineth Articles of faith This is indeed to let Rome bleed in her Master-veine to strike heresie at the roote to crush the Cockatrice in the head not to batter and breake downe the mudd-wals but utterly to ruinate the very foundation of the Tower of Babell For howsoever Scriptures Fathers Councels and the Catholike Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are pompously brought in into their Polemike writings against us yet the last resolution of their faith is upon the Pope who gives credit to Fathers validity to Councels and authority at least quoad nos to the Scriptures themselves This their Champion Bellarmine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Skulkenius his second confidently undertakes to maintaine against all oppugners of the Popes transcendent power and uncontroulable verdict in a matters of eternall life and death The h Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. ca. 1 in disputatione de verbo Dei Iam ostendimus iudicem controtroversiarum noÌ„ esse scripturam nec seculares Principes c. ac proinde ultimum iudicium summi Pontificis esse Cardinall thus flourisheth In our disputations about the word of God we have already shewed that the Scripture is not the Iudge of Controversies nor are secular Princes nor private persons though learned and honest but Ecclesiasticall Prelates in our disputations of the Councels it shall bee demonstrated that Councels generall and particular may judge of Controversies in religion but that judgement of theirs is then of force and validity when the Pope shall confirme it and therfore that the last judgement of all is the Popes to which all good Catholikes owe such absolute obedience that i Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. ca. 5 in fine Si Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia vel prohibendo virtutes teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona et virtutes malas nisi vellet contra conscientium peccarâ— if the Pope should erre by commanding vices and prohibiting vertues the Church is bound to beleeve that vices are good and vertues bad unlesse she wil sinne against Conscience What sinne against Conscience in not sinning and not sinne against Conscience in committing sinnes knowne by the light of nature if the Man of sin command the one and forbid the other Woe bee to them saith the Prophet that call evill good and good evill put darknesse for light and light for darknesse bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter Esay 5.20 If Bellarmines divinity be currant Pope Pâ—â—â— the fourth needed not to have coyned twelve new Articles k Bulla Pij 4. super forma juramenti professionis fidei anno Dom. 1564. of faith affixt to the Canons of the Councell of Trent it had beene sufficient to have added this one I beleeve in the Pope his soveraigne infallibility for this is prora and puppis the Alpha and Omega the formalis ratio and demonstratio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a Papists beliefe The Popes power saith Skulkenius l SkulkeÌ„ Apolog. pro Bell. ca. 6. Pontisicia potestas est vel ut cardo fundameÌ„tuÌ„ et ut uno verbo dicam suma fidei Christianae is the hinge and foundation and to speake in a word the summe of Christian faith A short summe and soone cast up What then serves Fathers Councels Church-Traditions and Scripture it selfe for with them for little better than Ciphers which being added to the Popes authority in their Arithmetike makes something but without it nothing To begin with Scriptures they beleeve them to bee divine but not because the Scripture saith that all Scripture m 2 Tim. 3.16 is given by divine inspiration For so saith n Bell. de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 4. ca. 4. Etiamsi scriptura dicat libros Prophetarum et Apostolorum esse divinos tamen non certo id cream nisi prius credidero scripturam qua hoc dicit esse divinam nam etiam in Alchorano Mahometi passim legimus ipsum Alchoranum de Caelo à Deo missuÌ„ c Bellarmine wee read every where in the Alcoran of Mahomet that the Alcoran was sent from God yet we beleeve it not why then doe they beleeve them to bee the word of God hee answers readily propter traditionem Ecclesiae for the Churches tradition o Quicunque non innititur doctrinae Romanae Ecclesiae ac Romani Pontificis tanquaÌ„ regulae fidei infallibili à quâ etiam sacra Scriptura robur trahit et authoritateÌ„ haereticus est coÌ„tra LutheruÌ„ Silvester Pierius outvies the Cardinall affirming that the holy Scripture taketh force and authority from the Romane Church and Pope Vpon which promise of Pierius Gretzer p Gretz defens Bell. lib. 1. de verbo Dei id selum pro verbo Dei veneramur ac suscipimus quod nobis Pontifices ex Cathedra Petri traduÌ„t inferres this peremptory conclusion We doe receive and reverence that alone for the word of God which the Pope in Peters Chaire doth determine to be so Strange divinity to beleeve that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church that is that God receives this authority from man May we not justly upbraid the present Romanists as Tertullian q Tertul. Apol. adversus gentes Ca. 5. doth the ancient heathen apud vos de humano arbitratu divinitas pensitatur nisi homini Deus placuerit Deus non erit Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit With you Deity is estimated by mans valuation unlesse God please man he shall not be God now man must bee propitious to God for if the Pope be not propitious to the Scripture to allow it for Gods word it shall not passe for such in Rome As for the Fathers they deale with their writings as Faustus Manicheus did with the writings of the Apostles in r August lib. 11. contra Faustum Manicheum ca. 2. inde probo inquiebat Faustus hoc illius esse illud non esse quia hoc pro me sonat illud contra me which hee takes it for a good proofe that such passages are the Apostles true writings because they made for him others were spurious because they made against him Fathers saith Å¿ Dureus adversus Whitakerum fol. 140. Neque eniâ— patres censentur cum suum aliquid quod ab ecclesia non acceperunt velscribunt vel dicunt Dureus are not to bee accounted Fathers when they teach or write any thing of their owne which they have not received from the Church meaning the Romane and Gretzer t Gretz lib. 2. de iure more prohibendi libres noxios ca. 10. Nam Ecclesiae pater ille dicitur qui Ecclesiam salutari doctrinae pabulo alit et pascit iam ergo si pro salutari doctrinae pabulo admetiaur Lelium et Zizania non Pater est sed Vitricus backs this assertion with a reason drawn from the formall
such a milde and mercifull disposition that though they dislike and condemne those assertions of the Popes supremacy of authoritie and infallibility of judgement yet are they so charitably affected to the Defenders of those assertions that they dare not themselves nor can indure that others should call them heretickes or accursed Durus est hic sermo this is too harsh and hard See here the fervour and zeale of this holy Councill They first say Cursed be the defenders of this Epistle or any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all who defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Church of Rome Cursed be they all And not contenting themselves herewith they adde Cursed be he who doth not accurse the defenders of that Epistle or of any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be every one who doth not accurse Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all that defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Romane Church Cursed be he who doth not accurse them all The holy Council no doubt had an eye k Nos timenâ—es maledictionem quae imminet his qui negligenter opera Domini faciunt Col. 8. pa. 584. a. to the words of the Prophet Ieremy l Ier. 48.10 Cursed be he that doth the worke of the Lord negligently Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood To spare when God commands and whom he commands to curse or kill is neither pitty nor piety but meere rebellion against the Lord and pulls downe that judgement which God himselfe threatned m 1 King 20.42 to Ahab Because thou hast let goe out of thine hand a man whom I appointed to dye thy life shall goe for his life 23. What then is there no meanes no hope of such that they may be saved God forbid Far be it from my heart once to thinke or my tongue to utter so hard a sentence There is a meanes and that after the Scripture the Councill expresly and often sets downe even were they denounce all those Anathemaes for thus they say n Col. 8. saept They who defend Theodorus the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill the impious Epistle of Ibas or the defenders of them et in his vsque ad mortem permanent and continue in this defence untill they dye let such be accursed Renounce the defence of these Chapters and of the Defenders of them that is forsake and renounce that position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith renounce the defence of all that defend it that is of the whole present Romane Church Come o Apoc. 18.2.3.4 out of Babylon the habitation of devils the hold of all vncleane spirits which hath made all nations drunke with the wine of her fornication which themselves p Iohannes in Apocalypsi passim Roma vocal Babylonem Bell lib. 2. de poâ—t Rom. cap. 2. § Praterea Babylon quae casura â—radicitur Roma quidem est Râ—ber in cae 14. in Apoc. pa. 377. Et. Roma qualis in fine saeculi futura est ib. pa. 378. Iohannes loquitur de Roma qualo sub fineÌ„ mundi futura est Gretz Def. ca. 13. lib. 3. de Rom. pont pa. 927. Babylon quam esse Romam ait lib 7. pa. 228. sedes et civitas antichristi est Sand. lib. 8. de visib Monar ca. 48. cannot but acknowledge to be meant of Rome This doe and then Come q Isa 55.7 unto the Lord and he will have mercy and to our God for he is very ready to forgive All your former impieties heresies and blasphemies shall not be mentioned unto you but in the righteousnes and Catholike truths which ye then embrace you shall live If this they will not doe we accuse them not we accurse them not they have one who doth both accuse and accurse them even this holy general Council whose just Anathemaes shal as firmely binde them before God in heaven as they were truly denounced by the Synod here on earth for he hath sealed theirs and all like censures with his owne signet who r Matth. 18.18 said Whatsoever ye binde upon earth shall be bound in heaven 24. After all these just Anathemaes denounced as well in generall as in particular by the Councill against the defenders of these Three Chapters or any one of them the holy Synod sets downe in the last place one other point as memorable as any of the former And that is by what authority they decreed all these things of which they thus say s Col. 8. pa. 588. a. we have rightly confessed these things quae tradita sunt nobis tam à divinis scripturis which are delivered unto us both in the divine scriptures and in the doctrines of the holy Fathers and in the definitions of faith made by the foure former Councils So the holy Councill Whence it doth evidently ensue that to teach and affirme that the Pope in his judiciall and cathedrall sentence of faith may erre and define heresie and that Vigilius in his constitution de facto did so is a truth consonant to Scriptures fathers and the foure first general Councils But on the other side to maintaine or affirme as do all who are members of the present Romane Church that the Popes cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is infallible is an hereticall position repugnant to Scriptures Fathers and the 4. first Councils and condemned by them all So at once the Holy Councill judicially defineth both our faith to be truly ancient Apostolical the selfe same which the Holy Fathers generall Councills and the Catholike Church professed for 600 yeares and the doctrine of the present Romane Church even that fundamentall position on which all the rest doe relye to be not onely new but hereticall such as none can maintaine but even thereby he oppugneth and contradicteth both the Scriptures Fathers the foure first general Councils and the Catholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ 25. Further yet because one part of their sentence is the accursing of all who defend the Three Chapters either expresly as did Vigilius or implicitè and by consequent as do all who maintaine the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is al who are members of the present Romane Church and so die it cleerely ensueth from that last clause of the Councill that to condemne and accusse as heretikes all these yea all which doe not accurse these is by the judgement of this whole generall Council warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by the foure first generall Councils and by the Caholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ The judgement of this fifth Council being consonant to them all and warranted by them all 26. Neither is their Decree consonant onely to precedent Fathers and Councils but approved and
all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximā adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were cōfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
Later fact 19 Decemb. 1517. Paris as being contra fidem Catholicam against the catholike Faith and the authority of holy Councils And even to these dayes the French Church doth not onely distaste that x A Relation of Religion in the West parts published an 1605. pa. 129. Laterane Decree and hold a Generall Councill to be superiour to the Pope but their Councill also of y Gentil Exam. CoÌ„c Trid. Sess 13. Car. Mol. dec Conc. Trid. decret pa. 3. Trent wherein that Laterane Decree is confirmed is by them rejected And what speake I of them Behold while Leo with his Laterane Councill strives to quench this catholike truth it bursts out with farre more glorious and resplendent beauty This stone which was rejected by those builders of Babylon was laid againe in the foundations of Sion by those EZra's Nehemiah's Zorobabel's and holy Servants of the Lord who at the voyce of the Angell came out of Babylon and repaired the ruines of Ierusalem And even as certaine rivers are said to runne z Alpheum fama est huc Elidis amnem Occultas egisse vias subter mare Virg lib. 3. Aeâ—eid under or through the salt Sea and yet to receive no salt or bitter taste from it but at length to burst out send forth their owne sweet and delightfull waters Right so it fell out with this and some other doctrines of Faith This Catholike truth that the Popes judgement and Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is not infallible borne in the first age of the Church and springing from the Scriptures and Apostles as from the holy mountaines of God for the space of 600 yeares and more passed with a most faire and spatious current like Tygris Euphrates watering on each side the Garden of the Lord or like Pactolus with golden streames inriching and beautifying the Church of God after that time it fell into the corrupted waters of succeeding ages brackish I confesse before their second Nycene Synod but after it and the next unto it extremely salt and unpleasant more bitter then the waters of Mara And although the nearer it came to the streets of Babylon it was still more mingled with the slime or mud of their Babylonish ditches yet for all that dangerous and long mixture continuing about the space of a Tot anni intersunt à Conc. Nic. 2. quod habituus est an 787. ad annum quo Lutherus se primum opposuit IndulgeÌ„tijs papalibus pontifici qui fuit an 1517 Cocl in vita Luther 730. yeares this truth all that time kept her native and primitive sweetnesse by the constant and successive professions of the whole Church throughout all those ages Now after that long passage through all those salt waves like Alpheus or Arethusa it bursts out againe not as they did in Sicily nor neare the Italian shores but as the Cardinall tells b Brevi occupavit Lutheri haeresis multa regna Bel. l. 3. de pontif ca. 23. § Similitudo Et Romanasedes amisit nostris temporibus magnam Germaniae partem Suetiam Gethians Norvegiam Daniam universam bonam Anglia Gallia Helvetia Polonia Bohemia ac Pannonia partem lib. eod ca. 21. § Ac postea us in Germanie in England in Scotland in France in Helvetia in Polonia in Bohemia in Pannonia in Sueveland in Denmarke in Norway in all the Reformed Churches and being by the power and goodnesse of God purified from all that mud and corruption wherewith it was mingled all which is now left in it owne proper that is in the Romane channels it is now preserved in the faire current of those Orthodoxall Churches wherein both it and other holy doctrines of Faith are with no lesse sinceritie professed theÌ„ they were in those ancient times before they were mingled with any bitter or brackish waters 36 You see now the whole judgement of the Fift Generall Councill how in every point it contradicteth the Apostolicall Constitution of Pope Vigilius condemning and accursing both it for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes which their sentence you see is consonant to the Scriptures and the whole Catholike Church of all ages excepting none but such as adhere to their new Laterane decree and faith An example so ancient so authenticall and so pregnant to demonstrate the truth which wee teach and they oppugne that it may justly cause any Papist in the world to stagger and stand in doubt even of the maine ground and foundation whereon all his faith relyeth For the full clearing of which matter being of so great importance and consequence I have thought it needful to rip up every veine and sinew in this whole cause concerning these Three Chapters and the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the same and withall examine the weight of every doubt evasion excuse which eyther Cardinall Baronius who is instar omnium or Binius or any other moveth or pretendeth herein not willingly nor with my knowledge omitting any one reason or circumstance which either they urge or which may seeme to advantage or help them to decline the inevitable force of our former Demonstration CAP. V. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted 1 THere is not as I thinke any one cause which Card. Baronius in all the Volumes of his Annalls hath with more art or industry handled then this concerning Pope Vigilius and the Fift Generall Councill In this hee hath strained all his wits moved and removed every stone under which hee imagined any help might be found eyther wholly to excuse or any way lessen the errour of Vigilius All the Cardinalls forces may be ranked into foure severall troupes In the first do march all his Shifts and Evasions which are drawne from the Matter of the Three Chapters In the second those which are drawne from the Popes Constitution In the third those which respect a subsequent Act of Vigilius In the fourth last those which concerne the fift General Councill After all these wherin coÌ„sisteth the whole pith of the Cause the Cardinall brings forth another band of certaine subsidiary but most disorderly souldiers nay not souldiers they never tooke the Military oath nor may they by the Law of armes nor ever were by any worthy Generall admitted into any lawfull fight or so much as to set footing in the field meere theeves and robbers they are whom the Cardinall hath set in an ambush not to fight in the cause but onely like so many Shimei's that they might raile at and revile whomsoever the Cardinall takes a spleene at or with whatsoever hee shall be moved in the heat of his choler At the Emperour Iustinian at Theodora the Empresse at the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters at the Imperiall Edict at Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea at the Synodal acts yea at Pope Vigilius himselfe we wil first encounter the just forces of the Cardinall which onely are his lawfull
warriours and having discomfited them we shall with ease cleare all the coasts of this cause from all his theevish piraticall and disordered straglers 2. The first and chiefest exception of Baronius ariseth from the matter controversie it selfe touching these Three Chapters concerning which he pretendeth that no question of faith was handled therin so one dissenting from another in this cause might not be counted or called an heretike This was a question saith he a An. 547. nu 30 nu 215. de personis non de fide of persons and not of the faith Againe b Ibid. nu 46. Vigilius knew Non de fide esse quaestionem sed de personis that there was no question moved herein about the faith but about certaine persons And yet more clearly In these disputations saith he c Ibid. nu 231. about the Three Chapters as we have oftē said Nulla fuit quaestio de side ut alter ab altero aliter sentiens dici posset haereticus there was no question at all about the faith so that one dissenting from another herein might be called an heretike And this hee so confidently avoucheth that he saith of it Abomnibus absque ulla controversia consentitur all men agree herein without any controversie Thus Baronius whom Binius applauding saith d Not. in Conc. 5. §. Ne quis Sciendum est bee it knowne to all men that in these disputations and differences about the Three Chapters non fuisse quaestionem ullam de fide sed tantummodo de personis there was no quaestion at all concerning the faith but only concerning the persons So he Whereby they would insinuate that Pope Vigilius did erre onely in a personall cause or in a matter of fact which they not unwillingly confesse that the Pope may doe but he erred not in a cause of faith or in any doctrinall position of faith wherein onely they defend him to bee infallible 3. Truly the Card. was driven to an extreme exigent when this poore shift must be the first and best shelter to save the infallibility of the Apostolike Chaire For to say truth the maine controversie touching these Three Chapters which the Councell condēned and Vigilius defended was onely doctrinall and directly belonging to the faith nor did it concerne the persons any other way but with an implication of that hereticall doctrine which they and the defenders of these Chapters under that colour did cunningly maintaine A truth so evident that I doe even labour with abundance of proofes 4. Iustinian the religious Emperour who called this Councell about this matter committed it unto them as a question of faith We have saith he e Epist ad Synod Coll. 1. pa. 520. a. commanded Vigilius to come together with you all and debate these Three Chapters that a determination may be given rectae sidei conveniens consonant to the right faith Againe stirring f Ibid. ◠them up to give a speedy resolution in this cause hee addes this as a reason Quoniā qui de side recta interrogatur for when one is asked concerning the right faith and puts off his answer therein this is nothing else but a deniall of the true confession for in questions answers quae de fide sunt which are questions of faith hee that is more prompt and ready is acceptable with God Thus the Emperour 5. The Holy Councell esteemed it as did the Emperour to be no other than a cause or question of faith for thus they say Gum h Coll. 8. pag. 584. a. de fide ratio movetur when a doubt or question is moved touching the faith even he is to be condemned who may hinder impiety but is negligent so to doe and therefore Festinavimus bonum fidei semen conservare ab impietatis Zizanijs We have hastened to preserve the good seed of faith pure from the tares of impietie So cleerly doth the whole generall Councell even in their definitive sentence call the condemning of the Three Chapters which themselves did a preserving of the good seed of faith and the defending of them which Vigilius did a sowing of hereticall weeds which corrupt the faith Againe m Ibid. pa. 586. b. We being enlightned by the holy Scriptures and the doctrine of the holy Fathers have thought it needfull to set downe in certaine Chapters those are the particular points of their Synodall judgement Et praedicationem veritatis haereticorum eorumque impietatis condemnationem both the preaching of the truth or true faith and the condemning of Heretikes and their impietie And in the end having set downe those Chapters and among them a particular and expresse condemning of these Three w th an anathema denounced to the defenders of the they conclude thus n Ibid. pa. 588. a. We have confessed these things being delivered unto us both by the sacred Scriptures by the doctrine of the holy Fathers by those things which are defined de unâ eâdemque side concerning one and the same faith by the foure former Councels Then which nothing can be more cleare to witnesse their decree touching these Threee Chapters most nearely to concerne the faith unlesse some of Baronius his friends can make proofe that the condemning of heretikes and their impious heresies and the maintaining of that doctrine which the Scriptures and Fathers taught and the foure first Councels defined is not a point of faith 6. Neither onely did the Catholikes which were the condemners of these Three Chapters but the heretikes also which were the defenders of them they also consent in this truth that the question concerning them was a controversie or cause of faith Pope Vigilius in his Constitution o Apud Bar. an 553. nu 106. 197. 208. alibi still pretendeth his Defence of Those Chapters to be consonant to the Councell at Chalcedon and the Definition thereof and of the Epistle of Ibas hee expresly saith The Councel of Chalcedon pronounced it to be orthodoxall And none I suppose will doubt but that the question whether that or any other writing be orthodoxall and agreeable to the Definition of Chalcedon as Vigilius affirmed that Epistle to be or be heretical and repugnant to that Definition as the Holy Councell adjudged that Epistle to be is a plaine question and controversie of faith Victor B. of Tunen who suffered imprisonment and banishment for defence of these Three Chapters teacheth the like saying p Jn Chron. an 2. post Consul Basilij That Epistle of Ibas was approved and judged q Iudicio Synodi approbata oribodoxa judicata est ibid. orthodoxall by the sentence of the Councell at Chalcedon and the condemning of these Three Chapters is the condemning and banishing of that Councell Facundus B. of Hermian who writ seven bookes of these Three Chapters doth more than abundantly witnesse this of him Victor thus writeth r In suo Chron. an 10. post Consul Basilij Evidentissime declaravit Facundus hath
declared most evidently that those Three Chapters were condemned in proscriptione fidei Catholicae Apostolicae for the exiling and rooting out of the Catholike and Apostolike faith Facundus himselfe doth not onely affirme this but prove it also even by the judgement of Pope Vigilius Vigilius saith he ſ Lib 4. pro desens trium Capit apud Bar. an 546. nu 57. esteemed the condemning of these Three Chapters to be so hainous a crime that hee thought it fit to be reproved by those words of the Apostle Avoid prophane novelties of words and opposition of science falsely so called which some professing have erred from the faith And hereupon as if he meant purposely to refute this Evasion of Baronius which it seemeth some did use in those dayes he addes Quid adhuc quaeritur utrum contra fidem factum fuerit why doe any as yet doubt whether the condemning of them be against the faith seeing Pope Vigilius calleth it prophane noveltie and opposition of science whereby some have erred from the faith And a little after concluding This saith he t Ibid. nu 58. is not to be thought such a cause as may bee tolerated for the peace of the Church sed qua merito judicatur contra ipsius fidei Catholicae statum commota but it must bee judged such a cause as is moved against the state of the Catholike faith Thus Facundus testifying both his owne and the judgement of the other defenders of those Chapters and by name of Pope Vigilius that they all esteemed and judged this to bee a question and controversie of faith of which Baronius tels us that in it there was moved no question at all concerning the faith and that Pope Vigilius know that it was no question of faith 7. Now whereas the whole Church at that time was divided into u Vniversus fere orbis occidentalis ab orientali Ecclesia divisus erat Bin. not in S. Conc. §. Concilium two parts the Easterne Churches with the holy Councell condemning the Westerne with Pope Vigilius defending those Three Chapters seeing both the one side and the other consent in this point that this was a cause and question of faith what truth or credit thinke you is there in Baronius who saith that All men without any doubt agree herein that this is no cause or question of faith whereas all both the one side and the other agree in the quite contrary Truly the wisdome of the Cardinall is well worthy observing He consenteth to Vigilius in defending the Three Chapters wherein Vigilius was hereticall but dissenteth from Vigilius in holding this to be a cause of faith wherein Vigilius was orthodoxal as if he had made some vow to follow the Pope when the Pope forsakes the truth but to forsake the Pope when the Pope followeth the truth 8. Nor onely was this truth by that age acknowledged but by succeeding approved By Pope Pelagius who to reclame certaine Bishops from defence of those Chapters wherin they were earnest and had writ an apologie for the same useth this as one speciall reason because all those Chapters were repugnant to the Scriptures former Councels Consider saith he x Epist 7. §. Pensate if the writings of Theodorus which deny Christ the Redeemer to bee the Lord the writings of Theodoret quae contra fidem edita which being published against the faith were afterwards by himsefe condemned and the Epistle of Ibas wherein Nestorius the enemy of the Church is defended if these bee consonant to the Propheticall Euangelicall and Apostolicall authority And againe y Ibid. § Sed cur of the Epistle of Ibas he addeth If this Epistle be received as true tota sanctae Ephesinae Synodus fides dissipatur the whole faith of the holy Ephesine Councell is overthrowne Let here some of Baronius friends tell us how that question or cause doth not concerne the faith the defending whereof which Vigilius did is by the judgement of Pope Pelagius repugnant to the Euangelical and Apostolicall doctrines and even anutter totall overthrow of the faith To Pelagius accordeth Pope Gregory who approved z Lib. 2. Ind. 10. Epist 36. this Epistle of Pelagius cōmended it as a direction to others in this cause And what speake I of one or two seeing the Decree of this fift Councell wherein this is declared to be a cause of faith is consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding generall Councels Popes and Bishops til that time of Leo the 10. his Laterane Synod as before we a Cap. 4. have shewed was not this thinke you most insolent presumption in Baronius to set himselfe as a Iohannes ad oppositum against them all and oppose his owne fancy to the constant and consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church for more than 1500 yeares together These all with one voyce professe this to be a cause of faith Baronius against them all maintaineth that it is no cause of faith and to heape up the full measure of his shame addeth a vast untruth for which no colour of excuse can be devised Consentitur ab omnibus that all men without any controversie agree herein that this is no question nor cause of faith 9. Besides all these Card. Bellarmine setteth downe divers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cleare tokens whereby one may certainly know when a Councell decreeth or proposeth any doctrine tanquam de fide to be received as a doctrine of the Catholike faith This saith he b Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 12. § Quartū is easily knowne by the words of the Councell for either they use to say that they explicate the Catholike faith or else that they who thinke the contrary are to be accounted heretikes or which is most frequent they anathematize those who thinke the cōtrary So he Let us now by these markes examine this cause and it will be most evident not onely by some one of them which yet were sufficient but by them all that the Holy Councell both held this controversie to be of faith and also proposed their decree herein as a Decree of faith 10. For the first the Councell in plaine termes professeth even c Coll. 8. pa. 588. a. in their definitive sentence that in their Decree they explane that same doctrine which the Scriptures the Fathers and the foure former Councels had delivered in their definitions of faith Then undoubtedly by Bellarmines first note their Decree herein is a Decree of faith seeing it is an explication of the Catholike faith 11. For the second the Councel in like sort in plain termes calleth the defēders of those three Chapters heretikes For thus cried al the Synod d Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. He who doth not anathematize this Epistle is an Heretike He who receiveth it is an Heretike This we say all And in their definitive sentence they professe e Coll. 8. pa. that they set down the preaching of the truth Haereticorum
personis tantummodo non autem de fide aliquid est gestum In it was onely handled somewhat concerning those persons but nothing concerning the faith So Gregory whose words if they be taken without any limitation are not onely untrue but repugnant to the consenting judgement of Councels and Fathers above mentioned even to Gregory himselfe for speaking of all the five Councels held before his time he saith r Lib. 1. Epist 24. Whosoever embraceth praedictarum Synodorum fidem the faith explaned by those five Councels peace be unto them And if hee had not in such particular manner testified this yet seeing hee approveth as was before ſ Ca. 4. nu 27. shewed this fift Councel and the Decree therof seeing that Decree clearly expresseth this to have beene a cause of faith grounded on Scriptures and the definitions of faith set downe in former Councels even thereby doth Gregory certainly imply that he accounted this cause for no other than as the Synod it selfe did for a cause of faith 17. What then is Gregory repugnant to himselfe herein I list not to censure so of him rather by his owne words I desire to explane his meaning There were divers in his time as also in his Predecessor's Pelagius who condemned this fift Councell because as they supposed it had altered and abolished the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon by condemning these Three Chapters and had established a new doctrine of faith Gregorie intreating against these whom he truly calleth t Exeuntes maligni homines turbaverunt animos vestros Lib. 2. Epist 10. malignant persons and troublers of the Church denieth and that most justly that this Councell had done ought in the faith not simply as if they had done nothing at all but nothing in such a manner as those malignant persons intended nothing that was contrary to the faith decreed at Chalcedon nothing that was new or uncouth in the doctrine of faith in this manner the Councell did nothing in the faith Heare the words of Gregorie expressing thus much Some there are saith hee u Lib. 3. Epist 3. who affirme that in the time of Iulian there was somewhat decreed against the Councell at Chalcedon But such men neither reading neither beleeving those who read remaine in their errour for we professe our conscience bearing witnesse unto us de fide ejusdem Concilij nihil esse motum nihil violatum that nothing concerning the faith of that Councell at Chalcedon was here in the fift Councell moved or altered nothing violated or hurt but whatsoever was done in this fift Synod it was done that the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon should in no sort be infringed So Gregory who to like purpose againe saith x Lib. 2. Ind. 10. Epist 36. In the Synod concerning the Three Chapters it is manifest nihil de fide convulsum esse nihil immutatū that nothing concerning the faith was weakned nothing changed therein 18. Now as against their first calumnie Gregory teacheth that nothing was done contrary to the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon so against their other he sheweth that they decreed no noveltie in the faith nor ought else but what was formerly decreed at Chalcedon To which purpose he saith y Lib. 7. Epist 54. of this fift Synod that it was in omnibus sequax in every point an imitator follower of the Councell at Chalcedō again z Lib. 2. Ind. 11. Epist 10. more clearly In this fift Synod nothing else was done quā apud Chalcedonēsem Synodū fuerat constitutū then was formerly decreed in the Councel at Chalcedon So Gregory Both this fift that at Chalcedon as also the former at Ephesus decreed one and the selfe same faith as by Gregory is truly witnessed but the Councell at Chalcedon and Ephesus decreed it absolutely without any expresse reference to those persons or writings which are condemned in the fift though in them both was implicitè contained a condemnation of all these Three Chapters the fift Councell decreed it with an expresse reference to these Chapters and an explicite condemnation of them The Decrees made at Ephesus and Chalcedon were Introductive as first condemning those heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches The Decree of this fift Councell was onely Corroborative or Declarative explaning and corroborating those former decrees by condemning these writings of Theodorus Theodoret and Ibas which did overthrow the same As Vigilius and other followers of Nestorius did not at this time broach any new heresie but under those Three Chapters on which they put the visor of the Councell at Chalcedon sought to revive the heresie of Nestorius which before when it came in its owne habit was condemned Even so the fift Councell needed not neither did they condemne any new but unmasked the old condemned heresie of Nestorius lurking under the defence of these Three Chapters they pulled off the visor of Chalcedon from it under which it most subtilly now sought to insinuate it selfe and creep into the Church And when Gregory saith that in this fift Councell they dealt tantummodo de personis that tantummodo in his sense doth not exclude all handling of the faith not the explaning not the corroborating of the faith for both these they certainly did and Gregory acknowledgeth but it onely excludes such an handling of the faith as was used ar Ephesus and Chalcedon by making an Introductive decree for condemning some new heresie The fift Councell dealt onely with persons without making such a Decree yet it dealt with those persons with an intent to explane and corroborate those Introductive decrees 19. The words of Gregory next following those on which Baronius relied doe yet more fully explane this to have beene his meaning In the fift Synod nothing was done concerning the faith but only the persons and those persons de quibus in Chalcedonensi Synodo nihil continetur concerning which persons nothing is contained or set downe in the Councell at Chalcedon For as there is much contained in that Councell concerning those persons especially Ibas in whose cause and the examining therof two a Act. 9. 10. whole Actions are bestowed and yet in a favourable construction or according to Gregory his meaning he might truly say that nothing concerning them is contained there to wit nothing to condemne Theodorus or the writings of Theodoret and Ibas in such an expresse and particular manner as they are condemned in the fift Councell Right so though the fift Councell not onely handled a cause of faith but published their decree as a Decree of faith yet in a like favourable construction and according to Gregories meaning he might truly say that nothing was done therein concerning the faith to wit nothing to make such an Introductive decree for condemning a new heresie as was formerly made in the Councell at Chalcedon 20. By all which the true meaning of Gregory is now by his owne explaning most evident In the fift Councell nothing
sec Act. 4. be exceeding partiall and untrue where he saith that Theodorus and Diodorus in pretio habiti mortem oppetiere died in honour neither did c Viva quidem ipsis cur nemo contradixerat factum ideo c. Ibid. any while they lived reprove any of their sayings yet are there divers other inducements to perswade that Theodorus was not in his life time by any publike judgement of the Church either declared or condemned for an heretike for besides that neither Cyrill nor Proclus nor the fift generall Councell doe mention any such matter the words of Cyrill doe plainly import the contrary The Ephesine Synod saith d Cyril epist ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 550 551. he forbare in particular and by name to anathematize Theorus which they did dispensativè by a certaine dispensation indulgence or connivence because divers held him in great estimatioÌ„ or account what needed either any such dispensation or forbearance had he in his life time beene publikely condemned for heresie Againe the Church of Mopsvestia where hee was Bishop for divers yeares after his death retained his name in e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. seq in act Synod Mopsv Diplicis that is in their Ecclesiasticall tables making a thankfull commemoration of him as of other Catholikes in their Liturgie which had he beene in his life time condemned for an heretike they would not have done Lastly what needed the defenders of the Three Chapters have beene so scrupulous to condemne him being dead had he in his life time beene before condemned Or how could this have given occasion of this controversie whether a dead man might Noviter be condemned if Theodorus had not beene noviter condemned when he was dead 3. Wherefore this particular being agreed upon that Theodorus was not before but after his death condemned the whole doubt now resteth in the Thesis whether a dead man may Noviter be coÌ„demned Now that this is no personall but meerly a dogmaticall cause and controversie of faith is so evident that it might be a wonder that Baronius or any other should so much as doubt thereof unlesse the Apostle had foretold that because men f 2 Thess 2.10 11. doe not receive the love of the truth therefore God doth send unto them strong delusions that they may beleeve lyes Certaine it is that Pope Vigilius held this for no other but a doctrine of faith for he sets it downe as a g Perspeximus si quid de his praedecessores nostri decreverint Vig. Const loc citat nu 176. Hujus causa formam veneranda praedecessorum nostrorum constituta nobis apertissime tradiderunt Ibid. Idem regulâ—ria Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Jbid. nu 179. Definition or Constitution of his predecessors decreed by the Apostolike See particularly by Pope Leo and Gelasius and so decreed by them as warranted and taught by the Scriptures for out of those words Whatsoever ye binde or loose upon earth Pope Gelasius h Ibid. nu 177. collecteth and Vigilius consenteth unto him that such as are not upon earth or among the living hos non humano sed suo Deus judicio reservavit God hath exempted them from humane and reserved them to his owne judgement nec audet Ecclesia nor dare the Church challenge to it selfe the judgement of such As the Pope so also the holy generall Councell tooke this for no other than a question of faith for they plainly professe even in their Synodall resolution that their decree concerning dead men that they may bee Noviter condemned is not onely an Ecclesiasticall i Licet cognosceremus Ecclesiasticam de impiis traditionem Coll. 8. pa. 585. a. tradition but an Apostolicall doctrine also warranted by the texts and testimonies of the holy Scriptures To which purpose alledging divers places of Scripture they adde these words It is many wayes manifest that they who affirme this that men after their death may not Noviter be condemned nullam curam Dei judicatorum faciunt nec Apostolicarum pronunciationum nec paternarum traditionum that such have no regard either to the word of God or the Apostles doctrine or the tradition of the Fathers So the whole Councell judging and decreeing Pope Vigilius to be guilty of all these 4. Now when both the Pope on the one side and the whole generall Councell on the other that is both the defenders and condemners of this Chapter professe it to be a doctrine taught in the Scripture and therefore undoubtedly to be a cause of faith what insolency was it in Baronius to contradict them both and against that truth wherein they both agree to deny this Chapter to be a cause of faith or seeing it is cleare both by the Pope and Councell that the resolution of this question is set downe in Scripture what else can bee thought of Baronius denying either the one or the other part to bee a cause or assertion of faith but that with him the doctrines defined and set down in Scriptures are no doctrines or assertions of faith at least not of the Cardinals faith 5. Seeing now this is a cause of faith and in this cause of faith the Pope and generall Councell are at variance either of them challenge the Scripture as consonant to his and repugnant to the opposite assertion what equall and unpartiall umpire may be found to judge in this matter Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit faith their vaine and vaunting k Camp Rut. 3. Braggadochio Hast thou appealed to the Church to the Church and judgement thereof shalt thou goe at the name of which we are so farre from being daunted or appaled that with great confidence and assurance of victory we provoke unto it 6. But where may we heare the voyce and judgement of the Church out of doubt either in the writings of the Fathers or provinciall Synods or in generall Councels in which of these soever the Church speake her sentence is for us and our side Her voyce is but soft stil in the writings of single Fathers the Church whispereth rather then speaketh in them and yet even in them shee speaketh this truth very distinctly and audibly Heare Saint l Epist ad Bonif. quae citatur Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 548. b. Austen who entreating of Caecilianus about an hundreth yeares after his death saith If as yet they could prove him to have beene guilty of those crimes which were by the Donatists objected unto him ipsum jam mortuum anathematizaremus I and all Catholikes would even now accurse him though dead though never condemned before nor in his life time Againe m Aug. lib. 3. Cont. Cresc ca. 35. In this our communion if there have beene any Traditores or deliverers of the Bible to be burned in time of persecution when thou shalt demonstrate or prove them to have beene such corde carne mortuos detestabor Heare Pope n Pelag. 2. Epist 7.
to have accursed those who confesse one onely nature in Christ and to have confessed the two natures to make one person and Lord Iesus Christ So Baronius teaching not only that profession which Ibas makes in his Epistle of two natures and one person to be Catholike but that Ibas by that very confession is proved nay demonstrated to be a Catholike 3. Vigilius handles this matter farre more largely but very obscurely mystically as being indeed so miserably intangled in the birdlime of Nestorianisme that hee knew not possibly how to unfold himselfe I must first of all set downe his words though they be many and because they are very obscure they will require more attentive and serious ponderation Those things saith he e Vig. Const nu 192 which in the Epistle of Ibas are injuriously spoken against Cyrill by a misunderstanding of Cyrills sayings the Fathers at Chalcedon when they pronounced the Epistle to be orthodoxall did not receive for the venerable Bishop Ibas himselfe by changing refuted those when he had gotten better understanding of those Chapters which Eunomius in his interloquution doth most evidently declare And f Ibid. nu 193. the interloquution of Iuvenalis doth signifie the same who therefore decreed that Ibas should receive his Bishopricke as holding the orthodoxall profession of faith because he devoutly ranne to embrace the communion with Cyrill after that Cyrill had explaned his Chapters and Ibas had understood them otherwise then before he did though he had carped at Cyrill when hee misunderstood those Chapters for thus said Iuvenalis The holy Scripture commandeth that hee who is converted should be received for which cause we receive such as returne from heretickes wherefore I decree that the reverend Ibas should obtaine favour and receive his Bishopricke both because he is an old man and because he is a Catholike So Iuvenalis By which this is understood If wee receive such as returne from heretikes how should we not receive Ibas who is a Catholike whom it is manifest to be a Catholike seeing hee is now converted from that understanding of Cyrills Chapters whereby hee was deceived who while hee doubted of the understanding of those Chapters did seem to speak against Cyrill for never would Iuvenalis say that Ibas were a Catholike unlesse he had proved by the words of this Epistle his confession to bee orthodoxall And that the Interloquutions of Iuvenalis and Eunomius doe agree the words of Eunomius doe shew which are these In what things Ibas seemed to blame Cyrill by speaking ill hee hath refuted all those things which he blamed by making a right confession at the last By which words of Eunomius it is evidently declared that in the confession of faith made by Ibas nothing was reproved seeing it is manifest that his faith was praised and that Ibas hath refuted that which by misunderstanding Cyrill hee had thought amisse of him 4. For g Ibid. nu 194. the same venerable Ibas by the precedent Acts as the judgement of Photius and Eustathius doth shew is most manifestly declared to receive and embrace all things which were done in the first Ephesine Synod and judge them equall to the Nicene decrees and to put no difference betwixt those and these at Ephesus and Eustathius is shewed very much to commend the sanctity of Ibas for that he was so ready and willing to cure those who either by suspition or any other way did hurt the opinion of his learning For after that Cyrill had explaned his twelve Chapters and the meaning which Cyrill had in them was declared unto Ibas after that Ibas professed himselfe with all the Easterne Bishops to have esteemed Cyrill a Catholike and to have remained even unto his end in the communion with him whence it is cleare that Ibas both before he understood the twelve Chapters of Cyrill and when hee suspected one onely nature of Christ to be taught and maintained by them did then in an orthodoxal sense reject that which he thought to be spoken amisse in those Chapters and also after the explanation thereof did in an orthodoxall sense reverently embrace those things which he knew to be rightly spoken in those Chapters 5. Further h Ibid. nu 195. it doth without all doubt appeare to the minds of all the faithfull that Dioscorus with Eutiches did offer more wrong in the second Ephesine Synod than Ibas to Cyrill and the first Ephesine Councell by understanding Cyrils Chapters in an hereticall sense beleeving Cyrill to teach by his twelve Chapters one onely nature in our Lord Iesus Christ and for this cause did Dioscorus condemne some of the Easterne Bishops who would not acknowledge one only nature in Christ among whom he condemned as an heretike and deposed Ibas from his Bishopricke specially for this very confession of his faith wherein hee most plainly professeth two natures one power one person which is one Sonne our Lord Iesus Christ and Dioscorus restored Eutiches as a Catholike for the confession of one onely nature in Christ condemning also Flavianus of blessed memory for the same doctrine of holding two natures And Dioscorus and Eutiches are found much more to indeavour to overthrow the first Ephesine Synod while they defeÌ„d it under the shew of an execrable sense of one nature and to slander Cyrill more while they praise him than did Ibas when by the errour and misconceiving of Cyrils meaning he dispraised him for seeing their praise and dispraise doe tend unto the same thing Dioscorus and Eutiches who condemned Cyrill are found to have commended him with an hereticall spirit or in an hereticall sense and therfore were they condemned in the Councell at Chalcedon but Ibas who at the first dispraised Cyrils Chapters thinking one onely nature to bee taught by them and who after the sense and meaning of them was declared unto him did professe himselfe with the Easterne Bishops to communicate with Cyrill was judged by the same Councell of Chalcedon to have continued in the right faith Thus farre are the words of Vigilius and so much of his Constitution as concernes this profession made by Ibas of two natures and one person in Christ 6. Words like the Oracles of Apollo ful of thick darknes hidde mysteries Nor must you here expect any light at al from Binius was wise enough to decline these rocks in the Epist of Ibas both that of the union with Cyril this of his coÌ„fessing two natures and one person at which fearing to make shipwracke of faith as Vigilius had done before he thought it to be far the safest course at one stroke to wipe away and spunge out those whole passages both out of the Popes Constitution and his owne Tomes of Councels best to have them smothered in silence or buried in eternall oblivion Add yet to say truth had Binius used all his art in this point that alas wâ—uld but have helped a little he poore lambe is not able of himselfe to wade no not
God to assume a perfect man or the person of Man 17. Theodorus the master of Nestorius declares the same In ipso r Theodori verba citata in Conc. 5. Coll. 4. pa. 528. a. plasmato Deus verbum factus est The Word or Sonne of God was united to the man Christ being framed and formed shewing plainly that Christ was first made a perfect man and person and that then the Sonne of God as another person was united unto him And shewing that the unity of the two natures is not personall but onely affectuall hee compares the unity which is betwixt the Godhead and the manhood in Christ to that unitie which is bewixt man and wife who though they bee called one yet are they in naturall subsistence two distinct persons Even so saith he Å¿ Coll. eadem pa. 532. a. Coll. 6. pa. 576. a. in Christ non nocet naturarum differentiae unitas personae the unity of person doth not take away the distinction of the natures And the two natures joyned together unam personam dicimus we call one person which unity not to be personall no more then it is in man and wife but affectuall hee immediately explaneth expresly affirming either nature in Christ to be a perfect and distinct person or personall subsistence by it selfe saying for when we discerne or teach two natures perfectam naturam verbi Dei dicimus perfectam personam perfectam autem hominis naturam personam similiter we affirme both the perfect nature and the perfect person of the Sonne of God and also the perfect nature and perfect person of man to be in Christ but when we look at the conjunction of these natures unam personam tunc dicimus then wee call them one person to wit one by affectuall but not by naturall and personall unity for he said plainly before that they were two perfect distinct persons Thus Theodorus 18. This is to have beene the very true meaning of the Nestorians Iustinian in his Edict manifestly declareth writing thus and most divinely In t Edict Jâ—stir §. Credimus autem that the Apostle saith of the Sonne of God that he tooke the forme of a servant he sheweth that the Word was united to the Nature of Man but not to any subsistence or person for he doth not say he tooke him who was in the forme of a servant least he should imply thereby that the Word was united unto the man being formerly formed as impious Theodorus and Nestorius did blaspheme affectualem dicentes unitatem teaching an affectuall and no personall unitie betwixt them The fift Councell after most exact sifting of this matter doth witnes the same writing thus Theodorus u Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 575. b. and Nestorius teaching two persons two Christs two sonnes would hide their impietie by calling them two natures and one sonne And a little after Theodorus affectualem unitatem dicens naturas pro personis subsistentijs accipit Theodorus teaching an affectuall union onely to bee betwixt the two natures useth the word Nature for Person and so indeed teacheth two persons Quomodo Nestorius duas dicit naturas in which same sense also Nestorius teacheth two natures to be in Christ sed pro personis eas accipit but hee taketh twose two natures for two persons So the generall Councell 19. Pope Iohn the second doth clearly expresse this setting downe the faith of the Romane Church Wee x Joh. 2. Epist praâ— Senatore professe Christ to be perfect in deity and perfect in the humanity non antea existente carne postea unita verbo sed in ipso Deo verbo initium ut esset accipiens his flesh or humane nature not first existing and then the Word being united unto it but his flesh taking beginning in the very Word nec duas personas in Christo intelligimus neither doe wee understand two persons to be in Christ when wee say two natures to be in him as madde Nestorius thought Thus the Pope But no where is this more clearly and fully explained then in the Dialogue of Maxentius where the Catholike disputing with the Nestorian saith thus This is y Ioh. Maxent Dial. 1. ca. 12. the cause of your errror you cannot discerne the difference betwixt Person and Nature But understanding Nature to be all one with Person ye confound or use for one and the same thing these two duas omnino personas sicut duas naturas unius filij Dei sine dubio praedicatis and without all doubt you teach two persons to be in the Sonne of God when yee professe two natures to be in him 20. By this which I have sayd it is now evident that the Nestorians spake like Catholikes but they thought contrarie to Catholikes their words were holy and orthodoxall but their sense and meaning was blasphemous and hereticall Neither was this any new policie of the Nestorians The Arians the Pelagians almost all heretikes have practised the like out of them all I will here alleage but one example Vitalis z Elias Cretens in Greg. Nazian Epi. 2. ad Clidon a Presbyter of Antioch was accused unto Damasus to maintaine in some part the heresie of Apollinaris as denying Christ to have a soule or minde At the motion a Poscente illo Damaso ut fidem suam exponeret eam scriptis maâ—datam edidit ibid. of Damasus he delivered in writing a confession of his faith In that confession disertis verbis confessus est in Christo sicut carnem ita mentem b Baron an 373. nu 3. hee in plaine termes professed Christ to have as well a soule as a body This his confession seeming at the first to be sound c Prima fronte recta sana visa ea professio idcirco Damasus hic divinus maâ—ister Gregorius eam admiserunt quod abditam occultam fraudeÌ„ nullo modo deprehendissent nec versutam malignitatem sub verbis latentem Elias Cret loc cit and good was approved for catholike both by Pope Damasus by Gregorie Nazianzen and other Catholikes who suspectd no hereticall fraud to lye hid under such faire and orthodoxall words for in his confession of faith Scripturae d Elias Cret ibid. verba sine ulla depravatione collocabat nihil prorsus immutans nec orationis seriem adulterans Vitalis had placed the very words of the Scripture not depraved not any way changed neither the order nor writing of them being corrupted But when Vitalis e Hi cum discipulis suis abditis mystis de absconditis theologicum instillant sermonem quemadmodum Manichei totam eis morbum revelantes Greg. Nazian Epist 2. ad Clidon came among his owne fellowes to whom he opened his secret meaning and his fraud as the Manichees were wont to do among their electi he then told them That by the soule f Animam rationem ac mentem Christi divinitatem ipsam introducunt
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌ„s of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ„ fundamentuÌ„ summaÌ„ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâ—siam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ„ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ„ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ— Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
any Pope either by word or writing either hath already or shall at any time hereafter define to be a doctrine of faith Because I will not stay on particulars if any please seriously to consider this matter hee shall perceive that which now I intend to prove such venome of infidelity to lye in that one fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility that by reason of holding it they neither doe nor can beleeve or hold with certaintie of faith any one point or doctrine which they professe to beleeve and hold upon that Foundation 20. For the clearing of which point being very materiall it is to be observed that unto certainty of faith two things are of necessity required The one ex parte objecti on the part of thing beleeved which must be so true and certaine in it selfe that it cannot possibly bee or have beene otherwise then it is beleeved to be to have beene or to be hereafter And therefore none can truly beleeve any untruth for nothing which is untrue is or can be the object of faith The other thing is required ex parte subjecti on the part of him who beleeveth Now faith being onely of such things as are inevident that is which neither by sense can be perceived nor by naturall reason collected or found out but which are onely by the testimonie of such as first knew them made knowne unto us and none doth or can know that which is supernaturall unlesse God himselfe reveale the same unto him it hence followeth that whatsoever is by any beleeved the same is revealed and testified to him by God himselfe who is infallible and further that it is certainly knowne unto him who beleeveth that it is God himselfe who doth reveale and testifie that thing unto him For otherwise though the doctrine proposed be in it selfe never so certaine and divine yet unto thee or me it cannot be certaine nor held by certainty of faith unlesse first we be sure and infallibly certaine that he who testifieth it unto us is himselfe infallible that is that he is God Let us for perspicuity call the former of these two materiale fidei the materiall in faith or the thing beleeved and the later formale fidei that which is formall in faith seeing as the former is the thing beleeved so the later containes the reason the ground or foundation upon which and for which it is beleeved 21. Consider now first the materials in their faith In them there is a great difference for some of them are in themselves credible as being divine truths and true objects of faith Such are all those Catholike truths common to us and them as that there is a Trinity that Christ was borne of a Virgin dyed rose againe and the like Others are in themselves untrue such as cannot be the object of faith Of this sort are all those doctrines wherin they dissent from us Transubstantiation reall and proper sacrifice worshipping of Images Purgatory Iustification by the merit or dignity of our works and the like which may rightly bee called popish doctrines The later sort of these they neither doe nor can beleeve The former they might but they doe not beleeve The reason whereof will appeare by considering that which is formall or the fundamentall ground of their faith where it is first to be observed that a man may hold many yea all the doctrines professed by the present Church except that one of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility and yet bee no Papist or member of their present Church For although the things professed or the Materialls be the selfe same yet the formalitie or diverse reason of holding them causeth a maine difference in the parties that hold them And for our present purpose it may suffice to note three divers wayes whereby their doctrines are or may be held 22. The first is of them who build all those doctrines upon the Scripture as the Foundation thereof upon that ground holding not onely many Catholike truths which they most firmly beleeve the Church inducing the Scriptures outwardly teaching and the holy Spirit inwardly sealing the same unto them but together with those truths hold some errors also of the Romane Church take for example Transubstantiation which although for the inducement of that present Church wherein they live they thinke to be taught in the Scriptures and therefore hold and professe them and thinke they beleeve them yet because they are neither in truth taught in the Scriptures nor sealed by Gods Spirit unto their hearts therefore they hold not these nor in truth can they hold them with that firmnesse and certainty of faith as they doe the former truths but they have a faintnes and feare in their assent unto these and so a readines and willing preparation of heart to disclaime these and to hold or professe the contrary if ever it may be fully cleared manifested out of the Scriptures unto them Of this sort we doubt not but many thousands of our fathers were who living in the darknesse thicke mists of their Antichristian superstition upon the Scriptures word of God which they held for the foundation of their saith builded indeed much gold precious stones but with a mixture of much hay stubble drosse thinking but very erroneously the later as well as the former to be contained in that foundation The state of all these is very like to S. Cyprians and those other Africane Bishops which were so earnest for Rebaptizatiō supposing it to be taught in the Scriptures though the foundation of it of those catholike truths that Christ was God or the like was one and the same unto them yet they held not both with like firmnes certainty of faith The doctrine of Christs deity manhood they so beleeved that they would not cōmunicate with any that denied this nay they would rather die then deny it But Rebaptization they so held as not thinking their opposites to be heretikes nor refusing p Haecre scripsimus nemini praescribentes aut praejudicantes quo minus unusquisque quod putaverit faciat habent liberam arbitrij sui facultatē Nos autem cum Collegis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam dominicam pacem tenemus Cyp. Epist ad Iubaian in fine vid. August lib. 5. de Baptis ca. 17. to cōmunicate with thē that denyed it so they held this with a certaine faintnes of faith or rather as indeed it was of opinion and not of faith having a preparation in heart to beleeve and professe the contrary if it might at any time be made manifest unto them This S. Austen often witnesseth of Cyprian Satis q Lib. 2. de Baptis ca. 4. ostendit se facillime correcturum he sufficiently declareth that hee would most easily have altered his opinion if any would have demonstrated the truth unto him Againe r Lib. 4 ca. 5. That holy man Cyprian being non solum doctus sed docilis not onely
learned but willing to learne and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same ſ Lib. 1. ca. 18. Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per eum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as sound lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of those that were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and sortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus ſ Paralip ad Abb. Vsperg pa. 448. I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held thē now upon another Foundation For thē they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had justled out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌ„dent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ„ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri â—ij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ„ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
being Antichristian is hereticall in the highest and worst degree that may be razing the true foundation of faith in regard whereof the mystery of Antichristianisme farre surpasseth all the heresies that ever went before or shall ever follow after it An heretike secondly in many particular doctrines depending on that Foundation among which are the heresies and blasphemies of the Nestorians all which by the Cathedrall constitution of Vigilius are decreed to be truths and by all men to be defended Lastly an heretike vertually and quoad radicem in every doctrine of faith which hee holdeth or professeth and so hereticall therein that the very holding of Catholike truths becomes unto him hereticall seeing he holds them upon that Foundation which is not only contrary to faith but which overthroweth the whole faith Reward o Rev. 18 6. Babylon O ye servants of the Lord as she hath rewarded you give her double according to her workes and in the cup that she hath filled to you fill her the double 32. From hence there ensueth one other conclusion which being worthy observing I may not well omit And this it is That in none at all of their Church or of the same faith with it there neither is nor can be so long as they remaine such any piety or holinesse either in their life or in any of their actions nor any act which is truly good and acceptable unto God is or can be performed by any of them For true faith is the Foundation and fountaine of all true pietie and good actions it being impossible as the Apostle teacheth without p Heb. 11.6 faith to please God and to the q Tit. 1.15 unbeleevers all things are impure even their mindes and consciences are defiled How much more their outward actions speeches writings and thoughts which all spring from the heart To this purpose is that in the Prophet Haggai r Ca. 2.14.15 who demandeth of the Priests If a polluted person such are all whose hearts are not purified ſ Act. 15.9 by faith touch any of these things either holy bread or holy wine or any holy thing shall it be uncleane And the Priests answered and said It shall be unclean The pollution of him that toucheth it pollutes all even the most holy things that are Then answered Haggai and said So is this people and so is this Nation before me saith the Lord. So are all the workes of their hands and that which they offer is uncleane The same agreeth to those of whom we intreat The infidelity of their hearts pollutes all their actions seeme they never so holy their almes-deedes and workes of charity their righteousnesse and workes of justice their fastings continency and workes of temperance their prayers sacraments sacrifices and workes of pietie the fountaine being poysoned with infidelity and want of true faith all the waters every river and little brooke derived from it carieth the same infection in it which it tooke at the spring Saint Austen is plentifull in this point Where the faith saith he t Lib. 5. cont Faust ca. 11. is fained or unsound non potest ex ea bona vita existere there can no good life be or arise from it In another place u Lib. 1. de Nup. Conc. ca. 3. hee sheweth that even to keepe ones selfe chast or continent and yet to doe this without faith is a sinne and that thereby non peccata coercentur sed alijs peccatis alia peccata vincuntur sinnes are not expelled but one sinne of intemperancy is overcome by another sinne of continency wanting faith To omit many the like heare what he saith to the Manichees boasting as they x Potest homo facere plus quā Deus praecipit igitur multo magis potest implere praeceptum Bell. lib. 4. de Iustif ca. 13. §. Accedant Catholici omnes docent legem dei justis hominibus esse absolutè possibilem lib. eod ca. 10 §. Porr◠of the Romane Church doe that they fulfilled the Law Why y Aust lib. 5. contra Faust ca. 5. doe ye boast so much of fulfilling the Law and commandements of God Quid illa prodessent omnia ubi non est fides vera etiamsi vere implerentur à vobis what could all the commandements profit you who have not a true faith though ye did truly fulfill them all Thus and much more Saint Austen Seeing then we have proved their faith to be not onely unsound but hereticall and Antichristian worse then which the faith of the Manichees could not be impossible it is that from such a faith either true vertue or any godly act should ever arise The best that can be said of those which they call good workes is that which Lactantius saith z In lib. Inst divin ca. 6 of the works of the Ethnikes which like theirs quoad substantiam operis were good Vmbra est imago justitiae quam illi justitiam putaverunt It is but a shadow and shew of justice which they thinke to be justice Omnis a Lib. eod ca. 9. doctrina virtus eorum sine capite est all the knowledge and vertue which they have wanteth the head of true knowledge and vertue It wanteth true faith in Christ which is the head of all knowledge and vertue This head whosoever wanteth Non dubium est quin impius sit omnesque virtutes ejus in illa mortifera via reperiantur quae est tota tenebrarum there 's no doub◠to be made but such an one is impious and all the vertues which hee thinkes he hath are mortiferous and deadly 33. Where againe I cannot but observe to the comfort of all true beleevers another exceeding difference betwixt us and them even in these matters concerning life and good workes whatsoever things are either in themselves good or being of themselves indifferent are by the lawfull authority either of civill or ecclesiasticall governours commanded we in doing any of those things and shewing our willing obedience thereunto performe an act not onely lawfull but laudable and acceptable unto God For in doing any of these we doe vertually performe obedience unto Christ who by them commandeth the doing of all such things and in our religious performing of them we hold firme that holy foundation not onely of faith but of good workes which the scriptures teach Neither onely are such workes acceptable unto God but even those acts also which are wicked and ungodly being committed by such as doe truly beleeve though they be as heinous as was the crime of David or the abjuration of Peter even those I say by the strength and vertue of that foundation if one doe rightly hold and beleeve it are so covered b Peccatum tectum est Psal 32.1 put c Isa 43.25 away and forgotten that God d Numb 23.21 seeth none iniquity in Iacob nor transgression in Israel Such so infinite is the goodnesse and so soveraigne is the vertue
of Rome and members thereof professe to hold the faith of the fift generall Councell and so professe implicitè the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and hereticall but they lye in making this profession for they beleeve not the Popes sentence in such causes to be fallible but with the Laterane and Trent Councels they hold it to be infallible It is the practice of all heretikes to make such faire though lying professions For should they say in plaine termes that which is truth indeed wee beleeve not the scriptures nor the Councells of Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon every man would spit at them and detest them cane pejus angue nor could they ever deceive any or gaine one proselyte But when they commend their faith that is their heresie to be the same doctrine with the scriptures which the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon taught by these faire pretences and this lying profession they insinuate themselves into the hearts of the simple deceiving hereby both themselves and others 16. The other consequent is this That the profession of all heretikes is contradictory to it selfe For they professe to hold the scriptures and so to condemne every heresie and yet withal they professe one private doctrine repugnant to scripture and which is an heresie The like may be said of the Councells The Nestorians by professing to hold the faith decreed at Nice professe Christ to bee but one person and yet withall by holding Nestorianisme they professe Christ to be two persons The Eutycheans by professing to hold the Councell of Ephesus professe two natures to remaine in Christ after the union which in that Councell is certainly decreed and yet by professing the heresie of Eutyches they professe the quite contradictory that one nature onely remaines after the union The Church of Rome and members thereof by professing the faith of the fift Councell professe the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and de facto to have beene hereticall and yet they professe the direct contradictory as the Councell of Laterane hath defined that the Popes sentence in such causes is infallible and neither hath beene nor can be hereticall So repugnant to it selfe and incoherent is the profession of all heretikes that it sighteth both with the truth and with it owne selfe also The very same is to be seene in Vigilius and his Constitution For in professing to defend the three Chapters and in decreeing that all shall defend them he professeth all the blasphemies of Nestorius and decreeth that all shall maintaine them and professing to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon and decreeing that all shall hold it hee professeth that Nestorianisme is heresie and decreeth that all shall condemne it for heresie and so decreeing both these he decreeth that all men in the world shall beleeve two contradictories and beleeve them as Catholike Truths Such a worthy Apostolicall decree is this of Vigilius for defending whereof Baronius doth more then toyle himselfe 17. You will againe demand Seeing Vigilius doth so earnestly and plainely professe both these why shall not his expresse profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon make him or shew him to bee a Catholike rather then his other expresse profession to defend the Three Chapters make or shew him to bee an hereticke Why rather shall his hereticall then his orthodoxall profession give denomination unto him I also demand of you Seeing every hereticke in expresse words professeth to beleeve the whole Scripture which is in effect a condemning of every heresie why shall not this orthodoxall profession make or shew him to be a Catholike rather then his expresse profession of some one doctrine contrarie to Scripture say for example sake of Arianisme make or shew him to bee an Arian hereticke The reason of both is one and the same Did an Arian so professe to hold the Scriptures that hee were resolved to forsake his Arianisme and confesse Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon manifestation that the Scriptures taught this certainely his professiō of Arianisme with such a professiō to hold the Scriptures could not make him an hereticke no more then Cyprians profession of Rebaptization or Irenees of the millenarie heresie did make them heretikes Erre hee should as they did but being not pertinacious in error hereticke hee could not be as they were not But it falls out otherwise with all heretickes They professe to hold the Scripture yet so that they resolve not to forsake that private doctrine which they have chosen to maintaine That they will hold and they will have that to be the doctrine of the Scripture notwithstanding all manifestation to the contrarie even of the Scriptures themselves They resolve of this that whosoever Bishops Councells or Church teach the contrarie to that or say judge that the Scripture so teacheth they all erre or mistake the meaning of the Scriptures Thus did not Cyprian nor Irenee And this wilfull and pertinacious resolution it is which evidently sheweth that in truth they beleeve not the Scriptures but beleeve their own fancies though they say a thousand times that they beleeve and embrace whatsoever the Scriptures teach for did they beleeve any doctrine say Arianisme eo nomine because the Scripture teacheth it they would presently beleeve the contrarie thereunto when it were manifested unto them as is was to the Arians by the Nicen Coūcell that the Scripture taught the contrarie to their error Seeing this they will not doe It is certaine that they hold their private opiniō eo nomine because they will hold it and they hold it to bee the doctrine of scripture not because it is so but because they will have it to bee so say what any will or can to the contrarie So their owne will and not Scripture is the reason why they beleeve it nay why they hold it with such a stiffe opinion for beleife it is not it cannot be This pertinacie to have beene in the Nestorians Eutycheans and the rest is evident Had they beleeved as they professed the faith decreed at Nice and Ephesus then upon manifestation of their errors out of those Councels they would have renounced their heresies but seeing the Nestorians persisted to hold two persons in Christ notwithstanding that the whole Councell of Ephesus manifested unto them that the Nicene Councel held but one person and seeing the Eutycheans persisted to hold but one nature after the union notwithstanding that the whole Councell at Chalcedon manifested unto them that the holy Ephesine Synod held two natures to abide in him after the union they did hereby make it evident unto all that they so professed to hold those Councels as that they resolved not to forsake their Nestorian and Eutichean heresies for any manifestation of the truth or conviction of their error out of those Councels and their profession of them was in effect as if they had said we hold those Councels and will have them to
equivalent word called Chapters which heretikes specially the Nestorians collected and falsely boasted to bee taught by the Councell of Chalcedon whereas in very truth the holding of any one of them much more of them all is the overthrow of the whole Councell at Chalcedon yea of the whole Catholike faith that Councell contradicteth and condemneth them all no lesse than the fift Councell which as Gregory truly saith is in omnibus sequax it doth in every point follow and consent unto the Councell of Chalcedon The like may be said of that which out of Facundus Baronius observeth and citeth as a proofe of his saying that the Emperours Edict is repugnant and contrary to the orthodoxall faith Baronius will still keepe his old wont in applauding Vigilius and the defenders of the Three Chapters For if the Edict condemning them be contrary then is the defence of them consonant to the faith and then not the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian but the Pontificall Constitution of Vigilius must be approved as orthodoxall And what is this else but to condemne the judgement of the fift generall Councell of Pope Pelagius Gregory and all Popes after them of all generall Councells following it in a word to contradict and utterly condemne the consenting judgement of the whole Church for the space of 11. hundred yeares they all approve the determination of the fift Councell and it so fully consenteth with the Edict in condemning the Three Chapters that in their definitive sentence they differ very little in words but in substance and sense nothing at all from the Emperours Edict which caused Binius to say the Edict of the Emperour was approved by the Pope and the Councell So Catholike and orthodoxall is it so advisedly and orthodoxally penned To seeke no further proofe Baronius himselfe was so infatuated in this cause that he oftentimes confuteth his owne sayings for himselfe gives a most ample and most observable testimony of this Edict and of the orthodoxy thereof saying ſ an 534. nu 21. of it Est veluti Catechismus fidei Catholicae exacta declaratio this Edict of Iustinian is as it were a Catechisme or an exact declaration of the Catholike faith and an exact discussing of the Three Chapters which were afterwards long controversed in the Church So untrue is that his first calumnie against the Edict whereby hee would perswade that it is contrary to certaine Chapters of the holy Councell of Chalcedon or as Facundus plainly but most untruely affirmeth contrary to the Catholike faith 4. For the second calumnie that his Edict was a seminary of sedition Baronius might as justly condemne the decree of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon yea the very Scripture it selfe and preaching of the Gospell Christ himselfe is set as signum t Luk. 2.34 contradictionis as a butt of contradiction against which they will ever bee striving and shooting their arrowes of opposition sedition contention himselfe u Luk. 12.49 51 saith I am come to set fire on the earth and what would I but that it should bee kindled and againe Suppose yee that I am come to give peace on the earth I tell you nay but rather division and no sooner was the Gospell preached abroad in the world but that which our Saviour foretold them x Mat. 10.21 came to passe Brother shall deliver up brother the father the Childe the Children shall rise against their Parents and cause them to bee put to death and ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake what a seminary of sedition may the Cardinal call the Gospell that caused all these troubles warres seditions murders and burnings in the whole world what another Seminary was the Nicene decree against Arianisme and Constantines Edict to ratifie the same after that how seditiously was Athanasius and the Catholikes persecuted put to flight to torments by Constantius and the Arians how seditiously did the Councels of Ariminum and Syrmium oppugne and fight against that Nicene Decree till they had so farre prevailed that well-neare there had needed no longer contending the whole world almost being turned Arians and even groaning under Arianisme If the Cardinall by reason of those manifold troubles and oppositions which ensued upon this Edict will condemne it for being a Seminary of sedition let him first condemne the Nicene Decree and Imperiall Edict for it let him condemne the Gospell and Christ himselfe which were all such Seminaries as that Edict was If notwithstanding all the oppositions seditions cōtentions raysed by heathen heretical other wicked men against these they were as most certainly they were Seminaries of truth let the Card. know acknowledge his malicious slander against this most religious and orthodoxall Edict of Iustinian which was as all the former a sacred Sanctuary for the Catholike faith Seditions oppositions tumults persecutions and the like disturbances in the Church spring not from Christ nor from his Word and Gospel either preached by Bishops or decreed by Councels or confirmed by Imperiall Edicts all these are of themselves causes onely of unity concord peace and agreement in the Church these onely are the proper native and naturall fruits and effects that proceed from them but contentions and seditions come from the perverse froward wicked and malicious mindes of men that hate the truth and in hatred of it fight against all that uphold the truth bee it by preaching by decreeing or by enacting the truth these are as Wolves which by continuall tumbling in the mire disturbe and trouble the streame The fountaines whence the truth springeth are most pure and most peaceable 5. Now whereas in the third place Baronius seekes to disgrace the Edict by the Author of it whom he describes to have beene not onely an heretike but a most detestable person even the plague of the whole Church let us suppose and admit the Author to have beene such a man indeed nay to have beene Iudas himselfe and worse than Iudas hee could hardly bee seeing CHRIST himselfe called y Iohn 6. v. 71. Iudas a Devill Is the Edict or the truth of God thereby published worse because Iudas uttered or penned it was the Arke to bee refused or contemned because wicked men framed and built it Did not Christ say z Luk. 10.16 of Iudas a Devill as well as of Peter a Saint Hee that heareth you heareth mee he that despiseth you despiseth me Hath Baronius forgotten the lesson of Saint Iames a Iam. 2 v. 1. My brethren have not the faith of our glorious Lord Iesus Christ in respect of persons love it for it selfe but neither love it nor refuse it because of him that speaketh penneth or bringeth the same Did the Cardinall never heare of the Scribes and Pharisees they sit b Mat. 23. v. 2.3 in Moses chaire that is deliver Gods truth out of Moses and the Prophets unto you whatsoever therefore they bid you that observe doe but after their workes doe not Or if this
and Cyrill p. 123. sec 15. and p. 134. se 34. The Nestorians confessed two natures and one person in Christ and how p. 144. how Catholikes confesse it ibid. sec 11 12 13. Nestorius affirmeth the two natures to be two persons pa. 145. sect 16. so Theodorus the Master of Nestorius sect 17. to affirme this is plaine Nestorianisme proved by Iustinian pa. 146. sect 18. by Pope Iohn the second The Nestorians in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall pa. 147. sect 20. and p. 448. sect 22 23. witnessed by Iustinian p. 449. sect 24. by the fift Councell sect 25. by the epistle it selfe sect 26 27. The Nestorians by Nature understand Person p. 162. sect 46 47. The Nestorians slander Cyrill to teach two persons p. 163. sect 47. Narses for his piety and prudence beloved of Iustinian p. 248. sect 12. Narses intreated not for Vigilius pa. 249. sect 14. Narses overcame not Totilas if Binius his glosse be true p. 458. sect 23. Narses overcame not the Gothes by the intercession of Mary p. 459. sect 24. O. THe occasion of the fift Councell was those tria capitula p. 2. sect 3. Origen commended for his gifts and learning p. 103. sect 28. Origen condemned by the Acts of the fift Synod p. 392. sect 1 2. Origens cause not the cause of the first action in the fift Synod p. 393. sect 3. nor the cause of the second action in the Synod sect 4. The order of lawfull generall Councels pa. 304. sect 19. P. PApists are truly such as ground upon the Popes infallibility p. 187. sect 26. Pope Vigilius excommunicated in an African Synod p. 236. sect 16. The Pope refuseth to come to the Synod p. 4. sect 2 3 4. and the true reason why pag. 6. sect 5. The Popes presence not needfull in a generall Councell p. 273. sect 14 15. The Pope present in the fift Councell by his letters of instruction p. 274. sect 16. The Popes consent makes not a Councell to be approved p. 275. sect 27. vid. lit C. In the Pope intensivè there is as much authority as in the Pope with a generall Councell Bellarmines assertion p. 174. sect 10. The Pope vertually both Church and Councell p. 178. sect 15. p. 180. sect 17. The name Papist not heard of till Leo the 10. p. 188. sect 25. to be a Pope an happy thing for all is held for truth that they define pag. 223. sect 16. Papist had need of a strong faith relying on the Popes judgement p. 224. sect 18. Paulus Bishop of Emisa subscribed to the anathematizing of Nestorius to perswade an union betweene Iohn and Cyrill p. 133. sect 31 his Sermon at Alexandria containing an orthodoxall profession of the faith p. 134. sec 33. Pelagius Pope after Vigilius consecrated by two Bishops onely an a Presbyter of Ostia pa. 242. sect 4. A Pope may erre personally they say but doctrinally he cannot p. 244. sect 7. The Pope no competent Iudge of Protestants being an enemy unto them pag. 315. sect 33. Pope Clements epistle to Iames a forgery pa. 422. sect 2. Paul censured by some for an hot-headed person 434. sect 18. in fine R. THe Church of Rome holdeth no doctrine by certainty of faith p. 181. in fine and pa. 282. sect 20. and p. 189. sect 27 28. The Romish doctrines may bee held three wayes p. 183. sect 21. in fine First of them who hold the Scriptures for the foundation p. 183. sect 22. such were our forefathers Second way by grounding upon Scripture but with pertinacy p. 184. sect 23. A third way of holding them is on the Popes word p. 185. sec 24 They of the Romane Church are heretikes p. 192. sect 31. In their Romane Church no true holinesse p. 193. sect 32. They of the Romish Church are schismatikes p. 196. sect 34. Rome miserably besieged by Totilas p. 456. sect 22. Ruba not taken from Alexandria pag. 407. sect 8. S. THe Synod resolves to judge the controversie about the three Chapt. the Pope being absent p. 7. sect 1. Sergius Bishop of Cyrus deposed from his Bishopricke p. 706. sect 18. Scripture being the ground of a mans faith is a comfort unto him though in some things he erre pa. 191. sect 29. and p. 194. sect 33. Supremacy and infallibility are inseparably joyned p. 176. sect 12. Schismatikes are not of the Church pa. 199. sect 39. Profession of Scriptures excuse not from heresie p. 226. sect sect 13. Suidas a fabler 326. sect 4. Sophia built by Constantine the mirrour of ages p. 350. sect 39. Switzers order in judgement p. 394. in fine Shamefull matters not added to the Acts of the fift Synod p. 408. sect 1. 4. Silverius died of famine in the Iland Palmaria p. 472. sect 13. Synods what makes them lawfull p. 282. and what unlawfull p. 306. sect 20. T. THeodorus not condemned in his life time p. 47. sect 2. Theodorus died not in the peace of the Church p. 59. sect 1 2 3 4. and p. 66. Theodorus condemned by Cyrill and Proclus p. 68. sec 2 3. and p. 73. sec 11. c. by the Ephesine Councell p. 69. sec 4. c. by the Armenian Councell p. 72. sec 10. by the Emperours Edict sec 13 14 c. by the Catholike Church p. 76. sec 19. Theodoret writ against Cyrill and the true faith p. 62. sec 4 5. Theodoret very resolute for Nestorianisme p. 93. sec 6. Theodoret his writings condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon p. 96. sec 12 13. and p. 101. sec 23. and by Cyrill p. 98. sec 16 17. Theodoret was not injured though his writings were condemned p. 102. sec 24 26. Theodoret a man of rate worth and learning p. 104. sec 29 30. Taciturnity the decree of taciturnity and what effect it tooke p. 225. sec 2 3 4. a meere fiction p. 228. sec 5 6 c. Trent Bishops were the Popes creatures pa. 319. sec 37. The Trent Councell conspired against Protestants p. 314. sec 32. Theodora unjustly reviled by Baronius pag. 355. sec 1. Theodora favoured Anthimus as being orthodoxall p. 358. sec 5. Theodora not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 359. sec 6. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea no heretike p. 368. sec 9 10. Theodorus of Caesarea no Origenist pa. 374. sec 17. he maimed not the Acts of the 5. Synod p. 697. sec 7. Theodosius law in the Code not corrupted p. 411. sec 4. Theodoret wrote that Epistle mentioned in the fift Synod p. 413. sec 1. hee wrote it after the union p. 416. sec 6 7. and p. 420. sec 12. Theodora writ not to Vigilius to restore Anthimus p. 449. sec 16 17. Theodora sent not Anthimus Scribe to Rome for Vigilius p. 452. sec 18. Theodoret sets forth his owne orthodoxy p. 417. sec 7. Theodoret condemned by the Councell at Ephesus p. 419. sec 10. Theodoret writ an epistle to Iohn of Antioch p. 422. sec 1. Theodoret rejoyceth over Cyrill