and the same Nature and that they are one God only though they be two distinct Persons Afterwards he shows that all that is said of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures which seems unworthy of his Divinity should be applied to his Humane Nature because Christ being a Person compos'd of the Divine and Humane Nature the Properties of both these Natures may be attributed unto him At last he examines a Question propos'd by the Arians viz. Whether the Father begot his Word voluntarily or necessarily To which he answers That he begot him naturally and not by constraint and so in this sence he begot him voluntarily because he would beget him though he could not but beget him In the last Discourse he refutes the Arians proving that the Word is Eternal and Consubstantial to the Father and the Sabellians who deny'd that the Son was a Person distinct from the Person of the Father and the Paulianists who distinguish'd the Word from the Son of God and the Paraclete from the Holy Spirit The Discourse upon the words of the Gospel of St. Matth. Ch. 11. My Father has given me all things c. contains a Refutation of that false Conclusion which the Arians drew from those words by saying That if the Father had given all things to his Son in time so that there was a time when he had not all things and by consequence he had not always a Supreme Empire over the Creatures from whence it would follow that he was not equal to the Father To which St. Athanasius answers That this Passage does not treat of the Absolute Power of God over his Creatures but concerns the Mystery of the Incarnation That the Father has given Mankind to Jesus Christ as a Sick Person is left to a Physician for his Cure That Man having sinn'd and Death being the Punishment of his Sin the Word became Man and God gave all Mankind unto him that he might heal them and restore to them that Life and Light which they had lost In the Letter to Adelphius St. Athanasius proves against the Arians that we must worship the Word in the Person of Jesus Christ. In the following Letter to Maximus he shows That Jesus Christ is truly God and truly Man The Titles of the Letters to Serapion sufficiently shew what they treat about Against those that say that the Son and the Holy Spirit are Creatures The Treatise against the Sabellians is a Collection of passages out of Holy Scripture which prove the Trinity of Persons and the Divinity of the Word The design of the Treatise about the Union of the Humane Nature with the Word is rather to prove the Divinity of the Son of God than to explain the Incarnation The Exposition of Faith which is in the First Volume P. 240. is an Explication of the Nicene Creed concerning the Unity and the Incarnation The short Discourse against the Arians is a Writing of the same Nature The Letter to Epictetus is the principal Treatise of St. Athanasius concerning the Incarnation of Jesus Christ where he refutes the Error and the Arguments of those that maintain that the Flesh of Jesus Christ was of the same Substance with his Divinity That the Divinity was chang'd into the Humanity or the Humanity into the Divinity That the Word had adopted a Body without being naturally united to it That the Body was not assum'd in the Womb of the Virgin Mary That the Divinity did suffer or in a word That the Word was a Person different from the Man In short He there refutes the foundations of the Error of the Apollinarians and Eutychians and the principle of the Error of the Nestorians by shewing That Jesus Christ is one Person compos'd of a Divine and Humane Nature wherein all the Properties of those two Natures are found He refutes the same Errors in the Books of the Incarnation against Apollinarius in which he proves particularly against this Heretick That Jesus Christ took one Humane Nature entire and perfect That it was not destitute of a Soul nor of Understanding and Will There are few Moral Treatises amongst the Works of St. Athanasius The Epistle to Dracontius is one of the Chief This is rather concerning Discipline tho' urg'd with Moral Arguments Dracontius was a Monk that had been chosen Bishop But either because he was afraid of Persecution or else because he thought himself unworthy to Govern a Bishoprick he fled and hid himself lest he should be oblig'd to take care of the People of whom he had been ordain'd Bishop St. Athanasius in this Letter reproves his Puâ—illanimity and exhorts him to return to his Bishoprick He represents to him That his Conduct scandaliz'd many Persons That being ordain'd Bishop he was no longer at his own disposal but ow'd himself to those for whom he was ordain'd That he was oblig'd to take Care of them and that he should be answerable for the Salvation of those that should perish for want of Instruction That he should improve the Talent that God had given him and take Care of the Flock that God had entrusted him with That if the Fear of Persecution made him flee from a Bishoprick it was a great weakness in him but if it was from any dislike of the Episcopal Function 't was an injurious Contempt of the Authority and Mystery of Jesus Christ That he could not excuse himself by saying That he had Sworn or Vow'd to the contrary since Jeremy and Jonas were oblig'd to do contrary to what they had resolv'd and besides That many Monks whom he names had accepted of a Bishoprick and that this Profession was no hinderance to their Ordination That a Bishoprick was so far from being an occasion of Sin as some would persuade Dracontius that it would be rather a means to Sanctify him by his imitating the Apostles That this State did not hinder but he might still observe the Customs of the Cloyster You will be permitted says he being a Bishop to fast or to abstain from Wine We have known Monks great Eaters and Bishops great Fasters We have seen Monks that drink Wine and Bishops that drink none Bishops for the most part live in Celibacy * St. Athanasius's Words are these Many Bishops never married and Monks have been Fathers of Children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 958. D. Vol. 1. As these Words are translated they have quite a different meaning from that which was at first designed by St. Athanasius He makes his Comparison between those that practised and those that omitted the Austerities there mentioned in such a manner as shews that he thought them absolutely indifferent and besides there is a great difference between many and the most part Yet I should not have taken notice of it if in his account of St. Athanasius's Doctrine Mr. du Pin had not repeated what he had before observed in this place and with some Additions for there he says That there were Priests and Bishops married tho' but few Here is
Hilary confirms this Answer by many places of Scripture where Jesus Christ gives himself the Title of Good and of Master from whence it appears that the Title was not here refus'd upon its own Account Upon this occasion he Answers the Objection of the Arians who say That Jesus Christ call'd his Father the only God and shows that the Father is the only God because the Divinity of the Father is the same with that of the Son which Truth he proves by many Passages of Scripture The Second Passage objected by the Arians is taken out of the Gospel of St John Chap. 17. This is life Eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent from whence the Arians concluded That Jesus Christ was not â—he true God but one sent from the true God St. Hilary answers That this Passage does not exclude the Essential Unity of the Father and the Son since in this and other places Jesus Christ affirms That he came forth from God That he is with God That he had overcome the World That he should be honour'd as the Father That he had received the Power of giving Eternal Life That all things which are the Father's are his He adds That in the same Place Jesus Christ prays the Father to glorify him with the Glory that he had with him from all Eternity which evidently proves the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son Moreover the words alledg'd in the Objection prove nothing contrary to the Faith of the Church which acknowledges that the Father is the only true God though Jesus Christ is also God because the Father and the Son are not two Gods but one God only The Third Objection is taken from Ch. 5th of the same Gospel of St. John The Son can do nothing of himself he doth only what he seeth his Father do St. Hilary shows that this Passage establishes the Divinity of Jesus Christ and is very far from destroying it because it proves the Unity and Equality of the Father and the Son The Fourth Passage is the grand Objection of the Arians founded upon those words of Jesus Christ in St. John Chap. 14. My Father is greater than I. St. Hilary says That the Father is greater than the Son consider'd as Man and as Mediator The last Objection is taken from those words of Jesus Christ in St. Mark Chap. 13. No Man knoweth the Day of Judgment nor yet the Angels nor the Son but the Father only From whence the Arians concluded That the Knowledge of the Father being more extensive than that of the Son his Nature must be more excellent St. Hilary having in answer to this Objection proved by many Reasons that Jesus Christ could not be Ignorant of the Day of Judgment and having demonstrated this Truth he adds That what Christ says in this place that the Son knew not the Day of Judgment ought not to be understood literally as if he were really ignorant of it but in this sence that he did not know it not so as to tell it unto Men. Wherefore being ask'd about the same Matter after his Resurrection he does not say That he was ignorant of it but he reproves his Apostles with that heat which testified his Knowledge of it by saying unto them 'T is not for you to know the times and the seasons which my Father has reserv'd in his own Power He adds also that it may be said in another sence That the Son of Man was ignorant of the Day of Judgment because he knew it not as he was Man but as he was God For says he as we may say That the Son of God was subject to Fear to Sadness and to Sleep because the Humanity of Jesus Christ was subject to these Infirmities So we may say That he was ignorant of the Day of Judgment because he knew it not as he was Man but upon the account of his Divinity In the Tenth Book he Answers the Objections which the Arians draw from those Passages of Scripture which prove that Jesus Christ was subject to Fear to Sorrow and Pain And here he maintains That Jesus Christ had not truly any Fear or Pain but only the Representation of those Passions within him In which if his Judgment is not different from that of the Church yet it must be confess'd that the manner of expressing it is very harsh He had answer'd the Arians better if he had said That the Fear the Sorrow and Pain of Jesus Christ did belong to his Humane Nature and not to his Divinity He acknowledges in this Book That all Men are conceiv'd in Sin and that none but Jesus Christ ought to be excepted from this General Law He says That the Soul is not communicated to Children by the Parents He observes That what is said in the Gospel of St. Luke concerning the Bloody Sweat of Jesus Christ and of the Angel that appear'd unto him is not to be found in many Greek and Latin Copies of this Gospel In the Eleventh Book he Answers some Passages of the Gospels and of St. Paul concerning Jesus Christ's being risen from the Dead and becoming Glorious which are alledg'd by the Arians to prove that the Son is not equal to the Father But St. Hilary shows That those Passages do much rather prove the Divinity of Jesus Christ than destroy it In the last Book St. Hilary explains that Passage of the Proverbs God created me in the Beginning of his Ways c. He demonstrates that the Word of God was not properly created but begotten of God from all Eternity which he proves by many Passages of Scripture He expounds this Passage of the Proverbs of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. He adds some Proofs of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and Ends with a Prayer to God wherein he begs Grace to preserve in his Heart that Faith whereof he made Profession at his Baptism that he may always worship the Father and the Son and receive the Holy Spirit which proceeds from the Father by the Son His Book of Synods is Address'd to the Bishops of France and Britain He commends them for the Constancy which they had shown in refusing Communion to Saturninus and for the Zeal wherewith they maintain'd the Faith of the Church by condemning the Impieties of the Arians so sharply After this he sets himself to explain the Creeds made by the Eastern Bishops after the Council of Nice He declares That if there were any Error in some of those Creeds it ought not to be attributed to him since he only relates what others had said and if they were found agreeable to the Doctrine of the Apostles the Praise of it ought not to be given to him but to the Original Authors He leaves it to the Judgment of the Bishops to whom his Book is written whether they be Heretical or Catholick Then he intimates to them what Obligation lay upon him to instruct them in the Opinions of the
for governing the Church of Constantinople by describing the wonderful Effects he had produc'd in that Church he prays them to grant him a Successor with as much Earnestness as others desire the Greatest Sees The Reasons which he alledges for obtaining Permission to retire are First his great Age the Quarrels of Churches and Bishops the Envy that some bore to him the Division of the East and the West and his Love of Retirement and Solitude He adds some other Reasons which tend to the Confusion of his Enemies such as the Persecutions which he had endur'd with Patience his Frugality his Modesty his Humility At last He conjures them to create another Bishop who should be more agreeable to the relish of the World Here he represents very naturally the Luxury Ambition and Arts which were but too common among the Bishops of the Great Sees At last He bids Adieu to his Dear Anastasia to the other Churches of Constantinople to the Council the Clergy the People and to the Court These Adieu's are pathetical to those that had an Esteem of him and are very picquant to those that were his Enemies and wish'd that he would abdicate his Charge 'T is plain that this Discourse is the last of those which he spoke at Constantinople The Five following Discourses are Entitled Of Theology because St. Gregory Nazianzen explains there what concerns the Divine Nature and the Trinity of Persons There he treats of the Rules which ought to be observed in the Administration of the Word of God He says First That this Function does not suit all Men That he who discharges it must be pure in Heart and Mind That he should not apply himself to it but with a sedate Temper and Lastly That he ought not to treat of those Matters before Pagans nor before those who have no sence of Religion and who think of nothing but Pleasures He adds many fine things about the Dispositions and Qualifications that are necessary to a Divine He blames those who having their Hands tied that is who do no Good Works yet have a wonderful Itch to prate and those who think to be great Divines because they understand the Subtilties of Aristotle's Logick and the Gentile Philosophy which they make use of nothing to the purpose when they Discourse about Mysteries In the 2d Discourse he enquires what may be conceiv'd concerning the Nature of God He says That his Existence is known by the Creatures That his Immensity Spirituality and his other Attributes are known but that it does not follow from hence that his Essence and Nature can be comprehended which he proves against Eunomius in the second Discourse of Theology which contains many great Notions concerning the Nature and Attributes of God In the 3d. he proves the Equality of the Three Persons of the Divinity and the Son and answers the most part of Eunomius's Sophisms The 4th continues the same subject and in the 5th he proves That the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son That he proceeds from the Father and that he is not begotten as the Son tho' he be of the same Substance and the same Nature He observes towards the End of this Discourse That under the Old Testament the Father only was distinctly known That the Son is clearly Reveal'd in the New That in it also there are found Passages enough to prove the Divinity of the Holy Spirit but that it was fully clear'd by the Tradition of the Church These Discourses seem also to have been spoken at Constantinople And thus we are come to the 38th Sermon upon the Festival of the Birth of Jesus Christ. In it St. Gregory admires the Wonders of the Mysteries of the Incarnation He describes the Fall of the first Man which he supposes to have been the Cause of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and reckons up the Advantages which Mankind receiv'd by this Mystery At last He teaches Christians to Celebrate the Festival of Christmas by purifying themselves from their Sins by imitating the Vertues of Jesus Christ and particularly his Patience and Humility The 39th Discourse is a Sermon upon the Festival Of Lights that is upon the Feast of Epiphany on which also the Solemnity of the Baptism of Jesus Christ is observ'd There he speaks of the Wonderful Effects of this Baptism which had the Vertue of purifying us He distinguishes many sorts of Baptism viz. The Baptism of Moses the Baptism of St. John the Baptism of Jesus Christ the Baptism of the Martyrs and the Baptism of Penance which he calls a Laborious Baptism and taking occasion from this last he Discourses against the Error of the Novatians Last of all He adds also to this Baptism which we have already mentioned the Baptism of Fire wherewith he says one may be baptiz'd in another Life The following Discourse was spoken the next Day 'T is an Instruction about Baptism to those that are to be baptiz'd There he observes the Excellence of Baptism and its marvellous Effects He sets down and explains the different Names that are given to this Sacrament He observes That it consists in Two Things the Water and the Spirit That the washing the Body with Water represents the Operation of the Spirit in purifying the Soul He says That Baptism is a Compact which we make with God by which we oblige our selves to lead a New Life That 't is very dangerous to break the Promise which we made at Baptism for there is no more Regeneration nor perfect Renovation to be hop'd for afterwards That we may indeed cover the Wound by a multitude of Tears and Sighs but that it would be much better not to need this Second Remedy because it is very difficult and troublesome and that we can have no assurance but Death may surprize us before our Penance be finish'd You says he addressing himself to the Ministers of Jesus Christ you can as the Gardener mention'd in the Gospel pray the Lord to excuse the barren Fig-tree yet a little longer you can desire him that he would not cut it down and that he would permit you to dung it that 's to say to impose as a Penance upon it Weeping Watching lying upon the hard Ground Corporal Mortifications and making humble Satisfaction but what certainty have you that God will pardon him Wherefore my Brethren being buried by Baptism with Jesus Christ let us rise with him let us descend with him into the Waters that we may ascend with him into Heaven He proves afterwards that we ought not to delay the Receiving of Baptism and refutes the vain pretences of those who delay it He says that Infants are to be Baptiz'd to consecrate them to Jesus Christ from their Infancy He distinguishes Three Sorts of Persons that are Baptiz'd the First are those who do Evil wilfully and with Delight the Second are those who commit Sin with some reluctancy and without approving it the Third are those who live well
used to dignify the Divinity of the Son of God were eluded by these Bishops by far-fetch'd Explications the Council was forced for excluding all kind of Ambiguity to say That the Son of God was Consubstantial to his Father This Word was the Subject of a great Dispute among the Bishops which was allay'd by the Prudence of the Emperour who made them all agree in the Sence of this Word And thus in the Confession of Faith or in the Creed made by this Council Profession is made Of believing in one only God the Creator of all things visible and invisible and in one only Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God begotten of the Father the only Son of the Substance of the Father God of God Light of Light very God of very God begotten not made Consubstantial to his Father by whom all things were made in Heaven and on Earth who descended for us Men and for our Salvation who was incarnate and made Man who suffered and rose again and ascended into Heaven and who shall come to judge the quick and the dead And in the Holy Spirit After this Creed followed an Anathema against those who should say That there was a time when the Son of God was not or that he was not before he was begotten or that he was created of nothing or that he was of another Substance and another Essence or that he was created and subject to Change All the Bishops except Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmarica Signed this Confession of Faith g All the Bishops except Secundus and Theonas Signed this Creed This appears by the Letter of the Synod and by the Testimony of Theodoret B. I. Ch. 7. and of Philostorgius Some say that Eusebius and Theognis would not Sign the Condemnation of Arius and that they were condemned in the Council This is not true and if they did alledge this distinction it was after the Council of Nice and not in the Council Eusebius of Caesarea refus'd to Sign it at First but he did it the next Day After this Arius Secundus and Theonas were condemned in the Council h Arius Secundus and Theonas were condemned c. This appears by the Letter of the Council tho' St. Jerom affirms the contrary concerning Arius St. Athanasius who is more to be credited than St. Jerom in this matter says several times that Arius was condemned in the Council of Nice Socrates Sozomen and Theodoret do also testify the same thing and a Book of the First entitled Thalia was proscrib'd The Council having thus judged the Arians with rigor treated the Meletians with more moderation It permitted Meletius to continue in the City and to retain the name of Bishop and the honour annexed to that Office but it absolutely forbad him to ordain any body It preserved also the Rank Honour and Office of those whom he had ordained provided nevertheless that they should be confirmed by a more Sacred Imposition of Hands which is a kind of Re-ordination i Which is a kind of Re-ordination It is commonly thought that this Imposition of Hands which the Fathers of this Council call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was only a Ceremony but Valesius has very well proved that it was a new Ordination and this is the thing which the Word does properly signify that they should be inferiour to those who had been ordained by Alexander and that they should have no hand in the Election of Bishops Nevertheless it permits the People and the Clergy to choose them Bishops if they were found worthy of it provided that the Bishop of Alexandria approve this Election Last of all the Council made a Decree concerning the Celebration of Easter and ordained that this Feast should be celebrated only on the Sunday Constantine wrote a general Letter to the whole Church to acquaint them with the Decisions of this Council and the Bishops wrote a Letter particularly to the Christians of Egypt wherein they inform them exactly of what had been ordained about the Cause of the Arians and Meletians and about the Celebration of Easter St. Ambrose indeed seems to intimate that this Council made a Paschal Cycle but these Words must be so understood as meaning only That the Determination of the Council gave occasion to make use of Cycles St. Leo adds in Ep. 64. That the Council gave Order to the Bishop of Alexandria to give notice every Year to the Bishop of Rome of Easter-day that he might publish it to all the Churches of the World But if the Council had made this Order they would have signified it in their Letter to the Egyptians where they speak favourably of Alexander and his Church The Council of Nice did not only determine the Differences which troubled the Church by its Decisions but also made Rules concerning the Discipline of the Church These Rules which are call'd Canons are in number Twenty and there never were more Genuine k There were never more Genuine Theodoret and Ruffinus mention only these 20 Canons tho' the latter reckons 22 of them yet he own'd no more because he divided 2 of them The Bishops of Africa found but 20 of them after they had enquired very diligently all over the East for all the Canons made by the Council of Nice Dionysius Exiguus and all the other Collectors of Canons have acknowledg'd but those 20. The Arabick Canons which Echellensis publish'd under the Name of the Council of Nice cannot belong to this Council tho' some Modern Authors have added many more The First Canon excludes from Sacred Orders those that made themselves Eunuchs but not those who became so by Sickness or by the Cruelty of Barbarians The 2d forbids to advance those Persons to the Orders of Priest or Bishop who were lately baptiz'd and Ordains that those who shall be convicted of any Crime shall be depriv'd of their Ecclesiastical Functions The Third forbids Bishops Priests Deacons and other Clergy-men to keep Women in the House with them yet it excepts Mothers Sisters and other Persons of whom there can be no bad suspicion The 4th Ordains That a Bishop should be Ordain'd by all the Bishops of the Province if it can be done but if it be too difficult to assemble them all either because of an urgent necessity or because of their great distance he may be Ordain'd by Three Bishops provided that those who are absent be willing and consent by their Letter that this Ordination should be made but it adds That the validity of what is done in the Province depends upon the Metropolitan The 5th Ordains That none of those who shall be separated from the Church by the Bishops in each Province can be receiv'd or restor'd to Communion in any other place and that enquiry be the better made whether their Bishop has justly excommunicated them they Ordain That Two Synods shall be held every Year in every Province one before Lent and the other in Autumn The 6th Canon
some Ecclesiastical Rules so these thought fit to compose New Confessions of Faith and to make Canons concerning the Discipline of the Church In the First of these Confessions of Faith they declare That they are not followers of Arius and that they have no other Faith but what they receiv'd by Tradition That they restore Arius because they found that his Doctrines were Orthodox but that they do not follow him After this Protestation there followed a Confession of Faith wherein they do not use the Word Consubstantial but they declare That they believe in one only Son of God coexistent with his Father who begot him by whom all things were made and in the Holy Spirit This was the First Confession of Faith that was made after that of the Council of Nice and it was quickly follow'd by a Second made by the same Bishops in the same place wherein they enlarge much more upon the Attributes of Jesus Christ They say That he was Born of the Father before all Worlds That he is God of God Whole of Whole a perfect Being c. That he is the perfect Image and exact Resemblance of the Divinity of the Substance of the Will the Power and Glory of the Father They add That the Father Son and Holy Ghost are not Three different Names but Three Subsistences and that they are one in Will They pronounce an Anathema against those who say That there was an Age or a Moment before the Generation of the Word or who say That he is a Creature form'd like other Creatures These Expressions of being one by Will of being a Creature like others and some others like them which are in this Confession of Faith render it very much suspected For this reason perhaps it displeased some Bishops of the Synod which obliged Theophronius Bishop of Tyana to make a Third Confession which was approv'd by all wherein they profess to believe in Jesus Christ The only Son of God God the Word the Power and Wisdom by which all things were created who was begotten of the Father before all Worlds perfect God of perfect God who exists in the Father Hypostatically This Confession of Faith has nothing that could render it suspected but only the omission of the Word Consubstantial These are the Three Confessions of Faith which were made in this Council As to what concerns the Discipline of the Church these Bishops supposing that St. Athanasius had been fairly judged in the Council of Tyre though they had no more to do but ordain a Bishop in his room At first they cast their Eyes upon Eusebius of Edessa a Disciple of Eusebius of Caesarea and of Patrophilus of Scythopolis But this Prudent Man refusing it lest he should be affronted by the People of Alexandria who loved St. Athanasius they chose Gregory and pray'd the Emperour to send him with a strong Force to Alexandria to take Possession of that Church Afterwards they made 25 Canons concerning the Discipline of the Church whose Authority has been Disputed upon the account of those who made them St. Chrysostom and Pope Innocent reject them as being composed by Arians yet they were inserted into the Code of the Universal Church and cited in the Council of Chalcedon where some Canons of this Council of Antioch are quoted and since that time they have had a place in all the Collections of Ecclesiastical Canons And indeed they contain the Wisest and the Justest Rules that ever were observed in the ancient Church which has made some Authors believe That part of them at least were made by another Synod but their Conjectures will not hold and it is evident that the 4th 12th and 15th were made by this Synod since they are the same which St. Chrysostom and Pope Innocent reject because they were made by Arians This being evident say I 't is very probable that all the other Canons were made by the same Council especially since in all the Collections they are attributed to one Synod of Antioch only which was held soon after the Council of Nice But we must carefully distingush this Council of Antioch of which we have just now spoken that was held in the Year 341 from another Synod made up of a part of the same Bishops who assembled in the beginning of the Year 342 for this last was held after St. Athanasius was acquitted when the Bishops of the East sent back the Pope's Legates after they had been detained till January in the Year 342. 'T was in the name of this Synod that they wrote a Letter to Julius wherein they excuse themselves for not being able to come to the Synod of Rome which he had assembled both upon the account of the War with the Persians and because of the shortness of the time between the delivery of Julius's Letter to them and the Day which he had signified to them for the meeting of the Synod They took it ill that Julius had written to them all alone and had address'd his Letter only to Eusebius but above all they complained that he had taken into his Communion Athanasius and Marcellus who were condemned and deposed Probably 't was in this last Synod that the Fourth Confession of Faith was compos'd which is produced by St. Athanasius It comes very near to that of the Council of Nice saving only that it omits the Word Consubstantial They made it as St. Athanasius observes to send it into the West to the Emperour Constans The 1st Canon of the Council of Antioch confirms the Decree of the Council of Nice concerning the Celebration of Easter The 2d condemns those who would never communicate and who have an aversion to the receiving of the Eucharist and forbids the holding Communion with those that are excommunicated under the Penalty of being excommunicated themselves The 3d. forbids Clergymen to forsake their Churches to abide in others and ordains that he who will not return being recall'd by his own Bishop shall be deposed and that the Bishop who detains him shall be punish'd by the Synod The 4th ordains That in case a Bishop being deposed by a Synod and a Priest or a Deacon being deposed by his Bishop shall dare to discharge the Functions of their Offices before they be restored they can never hope to be restor'd in another Synod That they shall not be permitted to defend themselves and that all those shall be excommunicated who have communicated with them and knew the Judgment that was given against them The 5th is That if a Priest or a Deacon despising his Bishop separate from the Church and make private Meetings setting up a New Altar and will not obey his Bishop when he shall be admonish'd and call'd back again two or three times he can no longer hope to continue in his Office and if he continue to trouble the Church the Aid of the Secular Arm may be implor'd to chastise this seditious Person The 6th forbids the receiving of an excommunicated Person until he has
he had said nothing of Nestorius's thought he might take that place which bore the Name of the same Author to make a kind of Supplement to the Books of Heretical Fables Lastly if this Fragment and the Letter to Sporatius were Genuine how comes it to pass that it was 〈◊〉 alledged by those that defended his Memory at the time of the 5th Council Why did not Facundus and Liberius cite it How is it That S. Gregory being desirous to prove in his Letter that he wrote in the name of Pelagius II. to the Bishops of Istria That Theodoret had been Orthodox in his Opinions ever since the Council of Chalcedon hath brought no Arguments so Authentick as this would have been These are the Conjectures which seem to be very strong notwithstanding 't is very hard to believe That this Chapter should be added to the Text of Theodoret and so much the rather because Leontius Photius and the Abbot Theodorus acknowledged it to be Genuine and these two last have produced it likewise to justifie him The Conjectures which are alledged against the truth of this Passage are not sufficient wholly to determine it The first were of some consequence if that Work had been written before the Council of Chalcedon but since it is certain that it was written after Theodoret had solemnly cursed Nestorius it might be well enough that he changed his disposition in relation to him 'T is certain That as favourable as he had been to him he disliked him because he never would acknowledge the name of the Mother of God which the Ancients had given the Virgin Since he hath cited S. Cyril as one of the Fathers of the Church altho' he had at other times condemned him why might he not also blame Nestorius after he had heretofore commended him The different disposition that he was in made him speak differently It was the Interest of Theodoret after he had anathematized Nestorius to describe him in that sort as he doth in his Treatise of Heresies as it was before for his honour to excuse him as well as he could As to the difference of Circumstances which is observed between that which is said of the Life of Nestorius in that place and what Theodoret says 't is a thing that deserves no stay upon it 't is so easily solved When he says here that he knows not what was his first Education he speaks not of the time when he was under the Instruction of Theodore but of his first Instructions that he received from his Parents And altho' he knew That he had abode in the Monastery of S. Euprepius he could not know the Journies he had made before he came thither to retire As to that which he says of his Temper and Government he never speaks elsewhere to the contrary He hath spoken some things more honourably of him in other places he excuses him here he blames him and speaks of him as others either because he had changed his Opinion in reference to him or because he thought himself obliged to speak so that he might free himself from the suspicion that some had against him or to make it appear that he did sincerely anathematize him The third Conjecture is weaker than all the rest Theodoret in his last Book doth not name all the Heresies of which he had spoken in the former He contents himself to lay down the Principles which are contrary to their Errors Among those Principles there are things as well against the Heresie of Nestorius as against the Errors of other Hereticks He speaks not against the Heresie of Eutyches in this last Book altho' he hath ranked it among the Heresies in the first Book The Style of this place is not so different from Theodoret's as he imagines but on the contrary it may be said That it hath a great similitude and likeness to the other Chapters of that Work The 5th Objection shews us well enough That it is incongruous to make a Letter to Sporatius into a Chapter of Theodoret's Treatise of Heresies which was dedicated to Sporatius But this doth not prove That this Chapter is supposititious nor that it hath been taken out of that forged Letter But on the other side 't is probable That 't is through Mistake that the name of a Letter is given to an Extract taken out of a Treatise of Theodoret to Sporatius to which a Discourse taken out of some other Work of Theodoret's was joined So that it may be said That this Chapter of the Book of Heresies is genuine and that it was this which gave an occasion to forge the Letter of Theodoret to Sporatius A Conclusion drawn from a negative Argument is not very convincing The Defenders of Theodoret have not cited all the places which might be alledged in his Justification and we have not all that was then said for him S. Gregory did not know all his Works It is sufficient that we see that at length this place has been cited by Authors worthy of Credit as an undoubted Work of this Father I will not undertake to relate in this place what Theodoret hath spoken in particular of every Heresie for then I must transcribe all his Treatise He hath related the Errors of the Hereticks in a way very short clear and easie He hath gathered what he says touching the Ancient Hereticks out of S. Justin S. Irenaeus S. Clemens of Alex. Origen Eusebius of Palaestine and Phoenicia Adamantius Rhodon Titus Diodorus and Georgius These are the Authors which he cites in his Preface He speaks nothing of Epiphanius nor of the Latin Authors which have written an History of Heresies He is more exact and judicious than they yet he is not without some Faults He hath not put the Pelagians nor Origenists in his List of Hereticks He observes at the end of his 3d. Book that the greatest part of the ancient Heresies were of short continuance that they had but few Followers that they spread themselves but into few Provinces and that there was scarce any Man that made Profession of them whereas all the World was full of Christians who made Profession of the Orthodox Faith according to the Promise which God had made to his Church The last Book contains an Explication of the Faith of the Church opposite to the Errors of the Hereticks of which this is the sum There is but one first cause of all things viz. God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. This God is eternal simple and incorporeal infinitely good and just omniscient and almighty The Son is begotten of the Father before all Worlds He is not created but equal to his Father and of the same Substance eternal and almighty as well as he The Holy Spirit received his Existence from the Father He is neither created nor begotten but he is God and of the same nature with the Father and the Son These three Persons are no more than one and the same God who hath created Heaven and Earth Matter
so handsomly defends does infinitely excel the Maxims and Doctrine of the Philosophers He confutes Paganism with all the Ardour and Spirit imaginable and he likewise solidly establishes the Christian Religion He discourses of God after a very sublime exalted manner He explains the Divinity of the Word and the Mystery of the Incarnation in an Orthodox Way He describes the Creation of the World and the Day of Judgment by as lively and solemn a representation as any Body have ever yet used but at the same time it must be acknowledged that he has sometimes inserted false uncertain and fabulous things into his Discourses He is full of admirable Precepts of Morality he lays down Descriptions of all the Vertues clearly and perspicuously and with an invincible Eloquence exhorts Mankind to the Practice of them he shows them the way of Justice and deterrs them from pursuing the Paths of Iniquity he teaches them to honour God with a true sincere Adoration and to be throughly Penitent for their Sins We ought however to own that he has handled Theology after a very Philosophical manner but that he did not examine all our Mysteries to the bottom and that he has committed several Mistakes Pope Damasus writing to St. Jerome is pleas'd to say That he took no great pleasure in reading Lactantius's Books because he frequently turned over several Pages where he discourseth of things that have no manner of Relation to our Religion St. Jerome passes this Judgment of him That he was better able to destroy and confute the Errours of the Gentiles than to maintain the Doctrine of the Christians He is accused of doubting whether the Holy Ghost was the Third Person and to have sometimes confounded him with the Son and sometimes with the Father but it may be alledged in his defence That he meant nothing else but that the Name of the Spirit in Scripture is common to the Father and Son But whatever the Matter is we find no Footsteps of this Errour in any of his Works that are now remaining though in some places he takes occasion to speak of the Holy Ghost He seems to have been of Opinion That the Word was generated in time but it is an easie matter to give a Catholick sence to that Expression as we have seen it done to others and we may be with Justice allow'd to do so since he plainly establishes the Divinity of the Word in that very place His Opinion concerning Angels that being sent to guard and protect Men they were afterward seduced by the Temptation of the Devil and that falling in Love with Women they begot Terrestrial Daemons upon them as it is properly peculiar to him so it is an erroneous Imagination without any Grounds to support it What he says about the End of the World The Reign of a Thousand Years The Fire of Judgment which will prove Men that have been Sinners is common to him with divers other Authors as also what he delivers about the state of Souls after Death being kept in a Common Prison in expectation of the Day of Jugment pretending that God created them all before the Creation of the World I take no notice of several other Errors of less Consequence and some harsh Expressions which may be f Interpreted in a favourable sence In the First Book Chapter the 7th he says That God made Himself His meaning is That he is of Himself and was not Created He tells us Lib. 4. Cap. 14. That Jesus Christ is never called God lest it should be thought that there were two Gods In the Fourth Book Chap. 13th he says That the Son of God was made Man that he might be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a vain Conceit He says Lib. 2. Cap. 9. That Darkness is from the Devil who imitates God and in the Second Book Chapter the 12th That Man was composed of two Natures that strive together words that carry a Tincture of the Manichean Doctrine unless they be favourably interpreted In the Sixth Book Chap. 13. He says That Alms blot out the Sins of the Flesh And he seems in the same place to maintain That they who sin without Passion and without Surprize shall never obtain Forgiveness for their Sins In the Seventh Book Chap. 5. 14. He speaks of Immortality after such a manner as might make us believe that he was perswaded that the first Man was created Mortal He falls into horrible gross Mistakes in his Chronology as for instance when he tells us Lib. 4. Cap. 5. that Moses was 9â—0 Years and Solomon an Hundred and Fifty before the taking of Troy In the Third Book Chap. 23. He denies that there are any such things as Antipodes interpreted in a favourable sence The Works of this Author have been Printed often The First Edition that appeared was at Rome 1468. in Folio by Conraâ—us Leweynheim The Second at Rome 1470. was Revised by an Italian Bishop The Third was at Venice 1472 and it was afterwards Printed in the same City in the Years 1483. 1490. 1493. By Bennalius in 1509. 1511. 1515. By Mauritius in 1521. and 1535. At Paris by Petitus in 1509. At Rome in 1574. in 1583. and 1650. At Florence in 1513. At Basil in 1521. 1523. 1546. and 1563. Twice in 1556. At Lyons in 1532. 1540. At Antwerp by Plantin in 1539. 1582. and in 1570. 1587. and in 1553. 1556. At Genevâ—â— in 1613. At Leyden in 1662. At Amsterdam in 1652. Erasmus Thomasius Isaeus Barthius Thisius Thaddensis Galaeus have wrote Notes upon this Author that are joined together in this last Edition The last Edition is that which was Printed at Amsterdam with the Commentaries of several Authors I have been assured by a very Learned Man That it is not only far from being the best but that it is one of the worst Editions that ever came out of this Author Since the Edition of Amsterdam Dr. Spark set out an Edition of Lactantius at Oxon to which he annexed his Book De mortibus Persecutorum with Notes of his own and a Dissertation of Mr. Dodwell's De Ripa Striga to explain a difficult Passage in that little Book Before this Edition came out it was Printed by it self at Oxon in 12 o. in the Year 1680. Corrected in many places by the Bishops of Oxford and St. Asaph and by Dr. Isaac Vossius who endeavoured to supply the Lacunae which were in Baluzius's Manuscript Copy from whence these Editions were taken The Cambridge Edition 1685. in Octavo of this little Book was taken from these Since it was Published again by it self at Abo with some Notes of Cuperus at the End by Toinardus COMMODIANUS HERE are Two Authors of the Fourth Century whose Works have the same Character and Commodianus Genius with those that were composed by the Writers of the Three first Centuries The First is called Commodianus He is no where mentioned by the Ancients but in reading
the Sabellian Heresy and proves by Thirty Arguments drawn from Scripture That the Word is a Person subsisting of himself In the Second and Third Books he goes on to confute the Consequences of Marcellus's Error and the Arguments which he alledges for it and proves by many Passages of the Old and New Testament that the Word is a Subsistence or a Person-Subsisting distinguish'd from the Person of the Father From these Books we may learn the true Opinion of Eusebius concerning the Divinity of the Word He has declar'd in many places That the Word is God and the Son of God and he says plainly That he was not made of nothing nor created in B. 1. Ch. 2. B. 3. c. 7. B. 8. c. 1. B. 〈◊〉 c. 9 10 11. time but begotten from all Eternity of the Substance of the Father He does expresly reject the Error of those that say The Word was made of Nothing and so place him in the number of Creatures But he seems to insinuate in some places and chiefly B. II. Ch. 7. That the Person of the Son is not equal to the Person of the Father and that the same Adoration is not due to him o He seems to insinuate in some places That the Person of the Son is not Equal to the Person of the Father c. B. I. Ch. 2. of his History he calls the Son the Minister of the Father's Will and the second Cause next to him He says That the Father Commands and the Son Executes and that 't is not possible for the Father to assume a Humane shape In his Oration at the Dedication of the Church of Tyre he calls the Son of God the Second Cause of our Blessings the Angel of his Counsel and the Captain of the Armies of God Yet these Expressions are more tolerable than that which is found B. V. Of Evangelical Preparation Ch. 4. That the Son is not adorable but upon the account of the Father that dwelleth in him and Ch. VIII That the Son is a Lord inferior to the Father In short what he says B. II. Ch. 7. Of Theology and in other places is inexcusable That the Glory of the Son is less than the Glory of the Father and that the Son does not deserve Equal honour with the Father And it is not only in these Books that he speaks after this manner for he does the like in all his other Writings wherein he rejects the impious Opinion of those that say The Son Hist. B. 1. c. 2. Praep. B. 4. c. 5. Dem. B. 4. c. 3. B. 5. c. 3. In an Ep. cited in the Second Council of Nice was made of nothing That he is not of the Substance of the Father That there was a time when he was not But then at the same time he seems to admit some inequality between the Father and the Son and to acknowledge some sort of Dependance upon and Inferiority of the Son to the Father For this reason it was that he made no scruple to declare in the Council of Nice That the Son was God from all Eternity where he also plainly disavow'd the Impiety of Arius who says That he was made of nothing That there was a time when he was not Yet he found some difficulty to approve the term Consubstantial that is to confess That the Son is of the same Substance with the Father and after he had consented to it by his Signing he gave such a Sence of the Word in a Letter which he wrote to his Church as does not at all Confirm the Equality of the Father and the Son His Words are these When it is said That the Son is Consubstantial with the Father the meaning is only That the Son of God has no resemblance to any Creature that was made by him but a perfect resemblance to the Father by whom he was begotten and not by any other Subsistence or Substance This plainly shews That Eusebius did not approve this term as it establishes a perfect equality between the Father and the Son p That Eusebius did not approve this term Consubstantial as it establishes a perfect Equality between the Father and the Son St. Athanasius testifies in his Treatise of Synods and in his Book of the Decision of the Council of Nice that he did by no means approve of the Explication that Eusebius gave of this term but only as it signifies the resemblance of the Son to the Father and that the Son was begotten of the Father It may be said to excuse Eusebius That he did not admit this Inequality between the Father and the Son for any other reason but because the Son receiv'd his Substance from the Father But he does every where make use of such Emphatical Expressions to denote this Inequality that it is difficult to explain them in this Sence especially since he wrote his Books against Marcellus wherein he speaks after the same manner at a time when this Question was debated and even determined For those Expressions which might be innocent in former times ought to be suspected after the Decision of the Council of Nice We might further add the Correspondence which he maintain'd with the Bishops of Arius's Faction the Praises which he always gave them his affected Silence in his History as to what concerns the Council of Nice and the disadvantageous Way that he speaks of it in his Books of the Life of Constantine But though Eusebius's Doctrine could be justified as to the Divinity of the Son yet it will be much harder to Defend what he says of the Holy Spirit for he asserts not only in his Books of Evangelical Preparation and Demonstration but also in his Third Book of Ecclesiastick Theology That he is not truly God The Holy Spirit says he is neither God nor the Son of God because he does not derive his Original from the Father as the Son does being of the number of those things which were made by the Son What we have hitherto said concerning the Opinion of Eusebius about the Trinity does plainly demonstrate on the one side That Socrates Sozomen and some late Authors are to blame who do wholly excuse him and on the other side That it is a great piece of Injustice to call him Arian and the very Head of the Arians as St. Jerom has done whom many others have follow'd since he formerly rejected the principal Errors of Arius which are That the Word was made of nothing That he is not of the Substance of the Father That he is unlike the Father and That there was a time when he was not His Sentiments about the other Articles of the Christian Religion appear to be very Orthodox He explains the Mystery of the Incarnation in a most Catholick manner q He explains the Mystery of the Incarnation in a most Catholick manner In a Letter to the Empress Constantia cited in the Second Council of Nice and ascribed to Eusebius he seems to assert that the
a double mistake for neither does St. Athanasiu's say that there be but few Priests or Bishops married nor does he speak a word of Priests Monks were not constantly Ordain'd in those days St. Anthony their great Master was a Lay-man and in this very Letter to Dracontius St. Athanasius amongst other Arguments to persuade him to accept the Bishoprick to which he was Canonically Elected tells him That if the Monks desired to have Presbyters among them to Instruct them in their Duty they ought not to envy others who for the same Reason were earnest to have Dracontius for their Bishop and we have seen Monks married In a word 't is permitted to every one in whatsoever State he is to use such abstinences as he pleases He concludes with exhorting him to return to his Bishoprick before Easter that his People might not be abandon'd and oblig'd to Celebrate that Feast without him and with earnest Entreaties that he would not hearken to their Counsels that would hinder his Return They would says he have Priests among themselves Why then are they unwilling that the People should have Bishops In the Letter to Ammon the Monk he refutes the Error of some Monks who condemn'd the use of Marriage and shows by the Scripture that 't is permitted and that 't is an Impiety to condemn it tho' Virginity is a more perfect State and deserves greater Rewards The Life of St. Anthony may be reckon'd among his Moral Writings for it contains excellent Instructions for all Monks We must also place among the Moral Works of St. Athanasius his Homily of Circumcision and the Sabbath There he treats of the Institution of the Sabbath and thinks that the principal end of its Celebration was not merely to rest but that it was Instituted to make known the Creator that the Reason why 't is abrogated in the New Law and the Feast of Sunday establish'd in its room is because the first Day was the end of the first Creation and the second was the beginning of the New For the same Reason he believes that Circumcision was appointed on the eighth Day to be a figure of that Regeneration which is made by Baptism Lastly That I may say something of the Treatises of St. Athanasius upon the Holy Scriptures the Abridgment of the Scriptures is the most useful of them There you may see in one view an Enumeration of all the Canonical Books of the Old Testament according to the Catalogue of the Hebrews which contains but 22 and he adds those that are not Canonical but yet are read in the Church to the Catechumens which according to him are the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith and Tobit with this Observation That some plac'd the Books of Esther and Ruth amongst those which they esteem'd Canonical In the Catalogue of the Canonical Books of the New Testament he places all those which we acknowledge at present After he has given us these Catalogues he makes a very faithful Abridgment of what is contain'd in every Book and gives the Reason why 't is call'd by such a Name and Discourses of the Author that wrote it Afterwards he gives a Catalogue of those Apocryphal Books which are of little or no use at all He speaks particularly of the Four Gospels their Authors and the Places where they were compos'd he treats in a few Words of the Greek Versions of the Old Testament and at last gives a Catalogue of some Books cited in Scripture that are lost The Fragment of the 39th Festival Letter is upon the same Subject and it contains also a Catalogue of the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament and of those that are useful tho' they be not Canonical which he distinguishes from these Apocryphal Books that have been forg'd by Hereticks and here he follows the same Catalogue which is in the Abridgment But he adds to the number of these Books that may be read to the Catechumens The Doctrine of the Apostles and the Book entituled Pastor The Book to Marcellinus upon the Psalms is also of the same Nature St. Athanasius shows there the Excellency of the Book of Psalms and relates the Subject of many of them those that are Historical and those that are Moral He observes there That the Book of Psalms referrs to all the Histories of the Old Testament That it includes all the Prophecies of Jesus Christ That it expresses all the Opinions which we ought to have That it contains the Prayers that should be made and comprizes all the Precepts of Morality He observes That there are some Psalms Historical some Moral some Prophetical besides those that consist of Prayers and Praises all which he distinguishes and places in their proper Rank and Order He shews that the Psalms represent to every one of the Faithful the State of his own Soul that every one may see himself there represented and may observe from the different Passions there express'd what he feels in his own Heart and that in whatever State any one is there he may find Words suitable to his present Disposition Rules for his Conduct and Remedies for his Troubles Wherefore he divides the Psalms according to the different Matters of which they treat that every one may make use of them according to his Necessities and according to the different States that he falls into He adds That those who Sing should be of a free and quiet Spirit that the Melody of their Song may agree with the Harmony of their Spirit And last of all He would not have any Words of the Psalms which may appear simple chang'd under pretence of making them more Elegant The Treatise upon these Words of Jesus Christ Whosoever shall speak a word against the Holy Spirit his sin shall not be forgiven him neither in this World nor in the other is an Explication of this difficult place of Scripture wherein he first observes that Origen and Theognostus thought That the Sin against the Holy Ghost was the Sin of those who after they were baptiz'd lost the Grace of Baptism by their Crimes But St. Athanasius maintains That this Explication is not Natural because those that violate their Vows of Baptism sin no more against the Holy Spirit than against the Father and the Son in whose Name Baptism is administred And to shew that this Opinion of the Ancients is not defensible he observes That these Words of Jesus Christ were address'd to the Pharisees who were never baptiz'd and yet sinned against the Holy Spirit by saying That Jesus Christ cast out Devils in the name of Beelzebub He adds That if this Explication were admitted it would give up the Cause to Novatus He explains the Passage of St. Paul to the Hebrews where the Apostle says 'T is impossible that those who were once baptiz'd should be renew'd again which does not exclude says St. Athanasius Repentance after Baptism but only a second Baptism After he has rejected this Explication he advances a New one
These are the Steps by which St. Hilary guides the minds of Men to the Knowledge of Happiness and Truth after he himself had arriv'd at it by the same Methods For he does not deliver these things as curious and profound Discourses which he had meditated in his Study but as the History of his own Thoughts which by degrees carried him on to a perfect Conversion Then he declares That afterwards being Ordain'd Bishop as his Office oblig'd him to take Care of the Salvation of others he preach'd the Truths of the Gospel And at last That the Heresy of the Arians who would judge of the Almighty Power of God by the weak Light of their own Reason had oblig'd him to undertake the Defence of the Truth and the Refutation of their Errors After he has in a few words Explain'd the Faith of the Church he admonishes the Reader above all things when he thinks of God to devest his Mind of the meanness of humane Opinions and to judge of God according to the Light of Faith and agreeable to the Testimony of God himself For says he the chief Qualification requir'd in a Reader is That he be willing to take the Sence of an Author from what he reads and not give that Sence wherewith he himself is propossess'd He must take the meaning of the Author and not give him one of his own He ought not to endeavour to find in the Passages which he reads that which he presum'd ought to be found there before he read them wherefore in Discoursing of God he ought at least to be persuaded that he knew himself and so to Embrace with Reverence that Doctrine which he teaches us He only can give an Account worthy of himself because he is not known but from himself and by himself But if it happens says St. Hilary That some Comparison from humane Affairs be us'd in Discoursing of these Mysteries we must not believe that they are Just or have a perfect Resemblance to them After this Excellent Advertisement St. Hilary gives an Account of the Subject of his Eleven Books of the Trinity and finishes this First Book with an Invocation of the Divine Assistance In the Second Book He explains the Catholick Doctrine concerning the Three Divine Persons He says He should have permitted Christians to keep themselves to the Words of the Gospel without diving further into the Mystery of the Trinity if the Hereticks had not oblig'd them to explain it more clearly The Errors and Blasphemies of the Hereticks says he oblige us to do those things which are forbidden us to search into those Mysteries which are Incomprehensible to speak those things that are Ineffable and to explain that which we are not permitted to examine And instead of performing with a sincere Faith which were otherwise sufficient that which is commanded us i. e. Worshipping the Father and the Son and being fill'd with the Holy Spirit we are oblig'd to employ our weak Reasonings to explain those things which are Incomprehensible being constrain'd if a Man may so say by the fault of others to commit this one our selves lest we fall into the Error of those who have dar'd to give an heretical Sence to the Words of Scripture for that which makes the Heresy says he is not the Scripture but the manner of Expounding it 't is the Interpretation that makes the Crime and not the Words After this he gives an Account of the Errors of the Sabellians the Ebionites and Arians to which he opposes the Faith of the Church He says That the Father who is the First Person of the Trinity is the Fountain and First Principle of all Things being Eternal and Infinite and that the Word who is the Second Person of the Trinity is the Son begotten from all Eternity of the Father He confesses That this Generation is Incomprehensible and reproves those that endeavour to explain it He asks them If they can comprehend how they came into this World How they receiv'd their Feeling Life Preception Taste Sight Understanding and the other Senses How they can Communicate them to others Tell me says he O Man if thou canst comprehend how all this is done and if thou canst not comprehend it with what Face dost thou demand an Explication of the Generation of the Son of God Thou that art so ignorant of what passes in thy self Wilt thou be so insolent as to complain for not knowing what passes in God And so without insisting on the Explication of the Eternal Generation of the Word by humane Reason he proves it by Holy Scripture and confirms the Catholick Faith of the Divinity of the Word against all Heresies He speaks occasionally of the Temporal Generation of the Son of God that is to say of the Mystery of the Incarnation At last He treats of the Holy Spirit who is the Third Person of the Trinity and maintains That he is a Divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son He observes That tho' the Name of Spirit be given sometimes in Scripture to the Father and the Son yet in most places it signifies a Person distinct from them both He Discourses of the Effects and Gifts of the Holy Spirit and says That he Intercedes for us That he Enlightens our Understandings and warms our Hearts That he is the Author of all Grace and of all heavenly Gifts That he will be with us till the End of the World That he is our Comforter here while we live in Expectation of a future Life the earnest of our future Hopes the Light of our Minds and the Warmth of our Souls From whence he concludes That we must beg this Holy Spirit to enable us to do Good and to persevere in the Faith and keeping the Commands of God In the Third Book He proves the Divinity of the Son of God by the Words of the Gospel of St. John I am in my Father and my Father is in me He observes also That the Generation of the Word is incomprehensible as well as the most part of the Miracles of Jesus Christ That Humane Reason cannot give an Account of it and That Jesus Christ was made Man to Preach this Eternal Power to Men and to make known his Father unto them That in this Sence we must understand his desire to be Glorified that he might glorify his Father viz. That the Glory which the Humanity of Jesus Christ receiv'd and made appear unto Men discover'd the Dignity and Power of his Father He observes also That the Birth of Jesus Christ His Resurrection His Entring into the Room where the Disciples were unseen through the Doors and the other Miracles of Jesus Christ are no less above Reason than his Eternal Generation From whence he concludes That the Nature and Operations of God are above the Reason Perception and Understanding of Men That we must acknowledge in these things the folly of Worldly Wisdom and the Vanity of Humane Knowledge and Embrace that Heavenly Prudence and
my Brethren and to prove my own Opinion by Testimonies of Scriptures lest some of the Faithful that are Ignorant of this Doctrine should be seduc'd by those that hold the contrary After he has in the following words observ'd That the Holy Spirit is no where spoken of but in the Holy Scripture and that the same Spirit inspir'd the Prophets and Apostles he enters upon the Matter and proves by many Arguments founded upon Passages of the Holy Scripture That the Holy Spirit is not a Creature but that he is of one and the same Nature with the Father and the Son He shows that the Holy Spirit is not a Creature 1. Because every Creature is either Corporeal or Spiritual Now the Holy Spirit says he is not a Corporeal Creature since it dwells in the Soul neither is he a Spiritual Creature because Spiritual Creatures receive into themselves Vertues Knowledge and Holiness whereas the Holy Spirit produces them in others being himself Substantially Vertue Light and Holiness 2. Because every Creature is liable to Change and circumscrib'd within a place but the Holy Spirit is immutable and every where present and therefore the Holy Spirit is not a Creature 3. Because he who Sanctifies and he who is Sanctified are of different Natures but the Holy Spirit Sanctifies all Creatures and therefore he is not of their Nature He adds That 't is never said that Men are fill'd with a Creature as 't is said that they are fill'd with the Holy Spirit He shows That the Holy Spirit is not divisible but that it receives different Names according to the different Effects it produces though it be always one and the same Spirit In short he shows That the Apostle St. Paul puts an Essential Difference between the Holy Spirit and the Angels which sufficiently discovers that it is not a Creature Afterwards he refutes those that say the Holy Spirit is of the number of those things which were created by the Divine Word He explains a place in the Fourth Chapter of the Prophet Amos where 't is said That God created the Spirit Creans Spiritum by showing that this place is literally to be understood of the Wind and that it cannot be applied to the Holy Spirit but in an Allegorical and Figurative sence After he has thus shown that the Holy Spirit is not a Creature he proves That he is of the same Nature with the Father and the Son 1. Because they have but one and the same Operation and by consequence must be one and the same Substance 2. Because to Lye to the Holy Spirit is to Lye unto God as appears by the words of St. Peter to Ananias 3. Because the Wisdom and Teaching of the Holy Spirit is call'd the Wisdom and Teaching of God 4. Because the Holy Spirit is call'd the Finger of the Father 5. Because 't is said of him that he is Wisdom it self 6. Because we are to believe in the Holy Spirit as we do in the Father and the Son and we are baptiz'd in the Name of the Holy Spirit as we are in the Name of the Father and the Son 7. Because he is call'd Lord as the Father and the Son are 8. Because he is sent from the Father in the Name of the Son as having the same Nature with the Son 9. Because the Father Son and Holy Spirit are never separated every thing that agrees to one of the Three Persons agrees to the other two and whatever is said of one is said of the other two and whatsoever one does is done by the others c. And therefore they have all three the same Nature and the same Substance He concludes with these words Since there is no Pardon for those that Blaspheme against the Trinity we must be very cautious in speaking of this Mystery lest we be mistaken in the least Expression And every one who desires to read this Book must purifie himself that so by an enlightned Mind he may understand what is contain'd in it and by a Heart full of Charity and Holiness he may Pardon us if we do not always answer the expectation of the Reader He must only consider the Mind wherewith we have written and not tie himself up to our manner of Expression For as the Testimony of our Conscience makes us boldly affirm That our Doctrine is that of the Christian Religion so our Sincerity makes us confess That in the manner of Writing we do not come near the politeness fineness and eloquence of others because we have only attempted to give a religious Explication of what the Holy Scripture teaches us without studying to pollish and adorn our Discourse But though he speaks thus of his Stile and St. Jerom says also That this Author is not a very able Penman yet this Treatise is very well written for a Dogmatical Treatise I speak not this of the Words or Terms since we have not now the Original Greek but of the turn of his Thoughts the methodizing of his Arguments and the manner of expressing himself about a Mystery so difficult to explain as this of the Trinity He treats of the Subject in a very clear Method without diverting from the Difficulties of it He proposes his Arguments plainly and smoothly His Reasons are close and convincing one may observe a Vein of Logick which runs through all his discourse without intermission He quotes the passages of Scripture in their natural sence and makes many very curious and profound Remarks He uses the most proper and most fit terms for Explication of the Mysteries He does not too nicely distinguish and yet he clears up all Difficulties In a word it were to be wish'd that all the Schoolmen had taken this Treatise for their Pattern and had follow'd his Method in treating of the Mysteries of Religion I forgot to observe that he speaks occasionally of the Incarnation and that he says Jesus Christ is God-man and yet we must not affirm that there are two Persons in him but believe that he being God and Man both together there is attributed to him what agrees to the Nature of God and the Nature of Man 'T was good to observe this against the Error of the Nestorians We have in the Bibliothecae Patrum Commentaries in Latin upon all the Canonical Epistles which go under the Name of Didymus They seem to be Ancient and they may possibly be a Translation from a Greek Commentary of this Author He speaks of the Opinion of those who thought that Spirits were from all Eternity and he neither Condemns nor Approves it He maintains That Predestination is nothing else but the Choice which God made of those that he foresaw would believe in Jesus Christ and do good Actions He rejects the Millennium and affirms That the Pleasures and Joys of Paradise are all Spiritual He disapproves of servile Fear He believes with Origen That the Incarnation of Jesus Christ was profitable to Angels as well as Men and that it Purifies them
Fire All that I can do is to exhort you 't is your part to Labour and God's to Perfect Raise up your Minds direct your Intentions prepare your Hearts it is for your Souls that you fight and they are Eternal Treasures which you hope for The First Lecture is also an Exhortation to those that are to be baptiz'd to prepare themselves by a Holy Life and by Good Works that so they may receive the Grace of Baptism It is compos'd upon a Lesson taken out of the First Chapter of Isaiah Verse 16. which begins with these words Wash you make you clean put away the evil of your doings c. He exhorts them wholly to put off the Old-man sincerely to renounce all Sin and to spend in the Exercises of Piety the 40 Days that are appointed to Prepare them for Baptism The Second is concerning Sin and Penance He teaches them That Sin is committed voluntarily by the bad use we make of our Free-Will That the Devil was the first Sinner that afterwards he made the first Man sin That by the Sin of the first Man all Men fell under Blindness and Death That he who rais'd Lazarus rais'd our Souls and deliver'd them from Sin by his Blood That therefore we ought not to despair whatsoever Sins we have committed but to trust to the Mercy of God and to have recourse to the Remedy of Repentance He relates many Examples of God's Mercy towards the greatest Sinners He alledges also the Example of the Angels to whom he thinks God pardon'd many Faults He adds towards the end the Example of St. Peter and concludes with these words These are my Brethren the many Examples of Sinners whom God hath pardon'd as soon as they repented Do you also Confess your Sins unto the Lord and you shall obtain the Kingdom of Heaven and enjoy the Heavenly Reward together with all the Saints in Jesus Christ to whom be Glory for ever and ever The Third Lecture is concerning the Necessity of Baptism and of Penance which ought to precede it You must prepare your selves says he by Purity of Conscience for you ought not to consider the External Baptism but the Spiritual Grace which is given with the Water that is Sanctified by the Invocation of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost The Water washes the Body but the Spirit sanctifies the Soul that we being purified may become worthy to approach unto God You cannot be perfect unless you be sanctified by the Water and the Spirit So if any one be baptiz'd without having the Holy Spirit he receives not the Grace of Baptism and likewise if any one receive not Baptism though his Conversation were never so well order'd he shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven This Discourse is bold but it is not mine but Jesus Christ's who has pronounc'd this Sentence when he said Except a man be born again of Water and the Holy Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven He proves this Truth by the Example of Cornelius then he shows the Necessity of Baptism by Water and says That none but Martyrs only can enjoy the Kingdom of Heaven without being baptiz'd The Ancients generally believed that Martyrdom was that Baptism by Fire which John Baptist fore-told Mat. 3. 11. and that was the Cup which our Saviour foretold Zebedee's Children that they should drink and the Baptism wherewith they were to be baptized He teaches That since Jesus Christ was baptiz'd to sanctifie the Waters of Baptism we must descend into the Water to be sanctified and as the Holy Spirit did then visibly appear so now he descends likewise though after an invisible manner upon those that are baptiz'd if they be well prepared for it In short he still exhorts those to whom he speaks to prepare themselves in the remaining part of Lent that so they may obtain by Baptism the Pardon of their Sins and the Grace of the Holy Spirit St. Cyril begins in the Fourth Catechetical Discourse with the Explication of the Articles of our Faith He says in his Exordium That the Worship of God consists in two things in the belief of those Doctrines that Religion teaches us and in the practice of Good Works That Faith is unprofitable without Good Works and that Good Works will prevail nothing without Faith He observes That the Articles of Faith are opposed by Pagans Jews and Hereticks and therefore it is necessary to propose it and explain it to those that enter into the Church He says That before he explains them more largely he will first give a summary of them and prays those that are already instructed to hear with Patience his Catechetical Discourses Afterwards he summarily explains the chief Doctrines of our Religion He instructs them concerning the Divinity That there is but one God only the Creator of all things who is every where present who knows all things who can do all things who never changes who will reward the Good and punish the Wicked c. He adds That we must believe also in Jesus Christ our Lord the only Son of God God begotten of God like in all things to him who begat him who was from all Eternity who sitteth now at his right hand and reigneth with him That we must not believe that the Son is of another Nature than the Father nor confound the Persons of the Father and the Son That he is the Word and the Word of God but a Word subsisting which is nothing like to the Word of Men That this Word was truly and really united to the Humane Nature That he assum'd real Flesh from the Virgin That he was truly Man subject to Humane Infirmities and to Death it self That he was crucified for our Sins That he was buried in the Grave and that he descended into Hell to deliver the Just who had been shut up there a long time with Adam That he was truly risen from the Dead That being ascended into Heaven he was worship'd by all the World and that he shall come again to Judge the Quick and the Dead and to establish an Eternal Kingdom Concerning the Holy Spirit he teaches That we ought to have the same Notions of him as of the Father and the Son That he is One Indivisible and Almighty That he knows all things That he descended in the form of a Dove upon Jesus Christ That he spoke by the Prophets That he Sanctifies the Soul in Baptism and that he ought to be honoured as the Father and the Son being one and the same Divinity He Exhorts his Auditors to hold fast this Creed and gives them Notice That he will prove it in the following Discourse by Testimonies of Scripture For says he we ought not to teach any thing concerning Divine Mysteries but what we can confirm by the Testimonies of Scripture Do not believe what I say if I do not prove it by the Holy Scriptures St. Cyril after having inform'd those whom he instructs what they ought
themselves with the Sign of the Cross on their Forehead in Eating and Drinking at their going out and coming in at their lying down c. He calls this Sign the Terror of Devils and the Mark of the Faithful He says That it drives away Devils That it cures Diseases That it defeats Inchantments and that at one day it will appear in the Heavens when Jesus Christ shall come to judge the World He proves in the Fourteenth the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ where he commends the Piety of those Emperours who built the Church of the Resurrection at Jerusalem where he was and adorned it with Gold and Silver The Fifteenth is concerning the Second coming of Jesus Christ of the End of the World and of Anti-Christ who will come says he after the Destruction of the Roman Empire He says many more particulars of him which he endeavours to prove by Prophecies but the explications he gives of them are not very Solid He observes That the Schisms which he then saw in the Church made him fear that the Reign of Anti-christ was not far off After this he Discourses of the last Judgment and of the Eternal Kingdom of Jesus Christ. He refutes the Opinion of Marcellus of Ancyra who had said That the Son should not Reign any more after the Day of Judgment He makes very curious Remarks upon the particle Until and shows that it is not always exclusive as when it is said That Death reigned from Adam until Moses where the meaning is not That it did not Reign after Moses The Sixteenth Lecture is concerning the Holy Spirit He observes That we ought to take good heed lest we say any thing through Ignorance or Error which is contrary to the Belief we ought to have concerning the Holy Spirit because 't is written That the Blasphemies which are spoken against him are unpardonable Therefore he declares That he will say nothing of the Holy Spirit but what is said of him in the Holy Scripture and that he will not enquire by an indecent Curiosity after that which is not written 'T is the Holy Spirit says he who dictated the Holy Scripture he hath said of himself what he would have us to know and what we are capable of knowing about him He begins with giving an Account of the Errors of Hereticks concerning the Holy Spirit and afterwards recites what is said of him in the Holy Scripture he describes his Effects and attributes to him all the good Thoughts and good Actions of the Faithful He continues the same Subject in his 17th Lecture where he produces the Testimonies of our Lord concerning the Holy Spirit He has exactly Collected in these Two Catechetical Lectures all that is said of the Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testament He teaches That the Holy Spirit is not a Breath form'd by the Mouth of the Father and the Son but that he is a Person subsistent of the same Nature with the Father and the Son He calls St. Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the Porter of Heaven He observes That the Determination of the Council of Jerusalem was a General or Oecumenical Law which all the Earth had and did still observe The Last of those Lectures which are address'd to the Enlighten'd is of the Resurrection of the Church and of Eternal Life In the beginning he shows That the hope of the Resurrection is the Foundation of all good Actions because the expectation of this reward excites Men to labour for it 'T was this that made him say that the Faith of the Resurrection is a great encouragement and a very necessary Doctrine He brings for proof of the Resurrection the Justice of God which requires that Sinners which are not punish'd in this World should be punish'd in another and that the Righteous who are miserable here below should be recompenc'd in another Life He says That all Men have naturally some Knowledge of the Resurrection and that upon this Account they have a horror of those who rob the Dead He brings many Illustrations of it taken from the changes in Nature He does not forget the Example of the Phoenix for which he cites St. Clement for his Authority He observes That the Generation of Man is no less wonderful than the Resurrection and that God who could Create the Universe of nothing can easily raise a dead Man After he has employ'd these Reasons against the Pagans he alledges against the Samaritans the wonderful Effects of the Divine Power related in the Old Testament and proves the Resurrection of the Dead by many passages of the Prophets This seems to be a mistake the Sadducees were the only Sect of the Jews that denied a Resurrection In speaking of the dead Man rais'd at the Sepulchre of Elisha he says That by this Example we may know that we ought not only to honour the Souls of the Saints but also to show Reverence to the Relicts of their Bodies since they have such Power and Virtue The Second Part of this Instruction is concerning the Catholick Church He says It is so called because it is spread over all the Earth Because it universally receives all the Articles of Faith Because it generally cures all Sins and Lastly Because it possesses all Graces and all Vertues He says It is called the Church because it is an Assembly of the Faithful That the Hereticks have also their Assemblies of their Churches That to discern the one from the other when you go to any place you must not ask barely where is the Church or the House of the Lord because the Hereticks give this Name to their Temples but you must ask where is the Catholick Church because this is a Name proper to this Holy Mother of all faithful Christians which is the Spouse of Jesus Christ. In short The last part of this Lecture is of Eternal Life 'T is very Remarkable that in the Creed which St. Cyril used there is found Life Everlasting because as we have observed in the First Volume of our Bibliotheca almost all the ancient Creeds end with the Resurrection of the Flesh. St. Cyril adds to it Baptism whereof he had already spoken the Catholick Church and Life Everlasting He says upon the last Article That the Eternal Life of Christians is the Possession of the most Holy Trinity He concludes this Lecture with a Promise to his Auditors that he would explain after Easter the Sacred Mysteries which they were to receive upon the Christian Altar and with an Exhortation to rejoyce because the time of their Redemption Salvation and Regeneration approach'd The Five other Lectures which are call'd Mystagogical are address'd by St. Cyril to the same Persons after they had received the Grace of Baptism The first is about the Vow which is made in Baptism to renounce the Devil his Works and all his Pomps He declares to his Auditors the Importance of performing this Vow He says That the Works of the Devil are Sins and that
and he promises them That he will not deliver his Letter till he has received their Answers and those Assurances that he shall desire St. Athanasius having received these Letters would not write at all but he sent one of his Priests call'd Peter to dispose their Minds to Peace This Priest was very well received by St. Basil and he perform'd his Message as well as he could But this Affair being of too great Consequence to be so easily determined St. Basil thought it necessary to write to Pope Damasus Having taken up this Resolution he sent the Deacon Dorotheus to Meletius by whom he wrote the 57. Letter wherein he tells him his Design which he had of sending this Deacon to Rome and of desiring some Deputies out of Italy He prays him if he thought it convenient to give him necessary Instructions and to write a Letter in his own Name and in the Name of all the Bishops of his Communion and to direct it to the Western Bishops He writes at the end of this Letter That the Affairs of the Church were in the same state That the Civil Powers would not meddle with them to restore those that were banish'd That Euvippus an Arian Bishop was come but that he had done nothing yet in Publick though he had threatned to fetch the Bishops of his Party from Tetrapolis and Cilicia to Condemn the Orthodox Meletius sent back Dorotheus and thought it necessary for him to go into the West 'T is not certainly known whether he wrote at that time to the Bishops of the West but 't is certain that St. Basil then address'd his 220 Letter to Damasus It has no Superscription but 't is easy to see that 't was address'd to the Bishop of Rome He begins with showing the Advantage which that Bishop had to restore the ancient Union between the Eastern and Western Churches After this he describes the unhappy State to which the Persecution of the Arians had reduc'd the Churches of the East He represents to Damasus That he might give them Ease and Comfort by writing and sending Deputies to them to re-establish Peace and Union in the Church He remonstrates to him that what he desir'd was not extraordinary since it had been the practice of the Saints and particularly of the Church of Rome He observes to him That St. Dionysius had formerly Comforted the Church of Caesarea by his Letters and that he had sent some of his Brethren to deliver Christians from Captivity That now there was more Reason to complain of the Misery of the Church since not only the Captivity of the Body but that of the Soul also was to be fear'd St. Basil gave this Letter to Dorotheus to carry into the West and he sent this Deacon to St. Athanasius to conferr with him about the means of procuring Peace that so after he had met with him he might Embark from Alexandria to go into Italy He charg'd him also with a Letter for St. Athanasius which is the 52. And tho' in it he says That he referr'd himself wholly to the Prudence of St. Athanasius as to the Management of this Affair yet he says That his Advice should be to write to the Bishop of Rome and to pray him since there was no probability of calling a Synod that he would send by his own Authority Deputies into the East He observes That he must chuse such Persons as were able to endure the Fatigues of Travelling and who had much Meekness and Moderation to Correct the Eagerness and Passionate Heats of some of the Bishops of the East And in fine who could speak at a fit Season and accommodate themselves to the Times He would have them carry with them the Acts of the Council of Ariminum and an Account of the Transactions in the West that they may be null'd That they should come by Sea without letting any body know of it That at first they should address themselves to those of his own Communion before they were pre-engaged by the Associates of Paulinus the Enemies of Peace and in short That they should condemn the Heresy of Marcellus of Ancyra This Letter is the 52. At the end he conjures St. Athanasius to send forthwith the Deacon Dorotheus into the West that so the Business might be done the next Year which was 371. He advertises him also That he must take care to recommend to the Deputies from the West that they be very Cautious lest they encrease Divisions instead of allaying them and that they preferr to all things the Good of Peace and that they do not maintain a Schism in the Church of Antioch out of Affection to some particular Persons The desire of Peace and the Fear that St. Basil had of bringing Persecution upon the Church oblig'd him to be very cautious in his Discourse Wherefore though he profess'd to Believe and to defend the Divinity of the Holy Spirit yet he said nothing of it unless he was oblig'd And therefore when he was in an Assembly of Bishops held in the Year 370. at the Feast of St. Eupsichius in the City of Caesarea he discoursed largely of the Divinity of the Father and the Son and said nothing almost of the Holy Spirit Whereupon a Religious Person who was present at this Assembly accus'd St. Basil of betraying the Truth by a Cowardice unworthy of a Bishop and publish'd this Accusation at a Feast where he was present some time after St. Gregory Nazianzen who was one of the Guests at this Feast endeavoured in vain to defend his Friend for all the Company blam'd him and at last St. Gregory himself was offended with his Conduct and wrote to him his Judgment about it in Letter 26. St. Basil having received this Letter by Hellenius was a little offended with it and answered him in Letter 33 That he was surprized that he should so lightly give credit to a Caluminator He signifies a great Contempt of these kind of Accusations He invites St. Gregory to come and see him and says That what was quickly to come to pass would serve for his Justification before all the World because it might be foreseen that he must suffer for the defence of the Truth and perhaps should be forc'd away from his Church and his Country Which discovers that this Letter was written before the Persecution of Valens in the Year 370. This Emperour had a Design to divide the Province of Cappadocia into two St. Basil thought that it was his Duty to defend the Rights of his People and his Church For this Reason he wrote to a great Man of his Country called Martinianus the 376 Letter to pray him to go to Court and hinder this Division This Letter was written in the Year 370 as well as the 362 which was plainly written upon the same Occasion The 309 Letter wherein he declares That he continued unshaken though he had been attack'd by the most powerful at Court referrs to the Sollicitations which the Prefect Modestus
had us'd to him this Year 370 by Order of the Emperour Valens 'T is probable that the Letter 409 wherein he thanks an Eastern Bishop call'd Innocentius for what he had written to him is also of the same Year for 't is likely that this Bishop wrote to him a little after his Ordination and that St. Basil took no long time to Answer him The Deacon Dorotheus departed in the Year 371 but his Journey had not all the Success that might have been hop'd for However the Western Bishops wrote a Letter to the Bishops of the East which was sent to them by St. Athanasius but the Contents are not known It appears also by the Letters of St. Basil That there came from the West a Deacon nam'd Sabinus who carried the Letters of the Bishops of Illyricum Italy and Gaul The Eastern Bishops answer'd the Letter of those of the West which they received by St. Athanasius and that which was brought them by Sabinus There Answers are the Letters 61 and 69. In Letter 61 after they have testified their Joy that they had when they understood that the Western Bishops were all at present United in one and the same Doctrine they desire of them help and relief in their Miseries which they describe in a most lively and natural manner Our Miseries say they are known to you though we should not write them being publish'd over all the Earth The Doctrine of our Fathers is despis'd The Tradition of the Apostles is overthrown The new Inventions of some particular Persons prevail in the Churches They treat Religion as Sophisters not as Divines The Wisdom of this World Domineers and the Glory of the Cross is abhorr'd The true Pastors are driven away and ravening Wolves are entred into their places who tear the Flock of Christ in pieces The Churches are abandon'd The Desarts are fill'd with desolate Christians The Old Men sigh when they compare the times past with the present and the Young Men find themselves miserable because they never saw the Good things of which they are now destitute These things ought to affect those who have any love for Jesus Christ and his Church But what we have said of them is very far short of the Truth wherefore if you have any Charity for us if you be of the same Mind if you have any Bowels of Pity come speedily to our help Arm your selves with Zeal for Piety and deliver us from this Raging Tempest At the end of this Letter they make a short Confession of their Faith wherein they acknowledge that the Holy Spirit is ador'd together with the Father and the Son And they conclude with the Approbation of what the Western Bishops had done in Conformity to the Canons The Second Letter upon the same Subject is written in the Name of Meletius Eusebius of Samosata St. Basil and many other Eastern Bishops to the Bishops of Italy and Gaul that is the 69th among those of St. Basil. There they give a Description of their Miseries yet more large and more moving than the former and conjure the Western Bishops to help them and bring them relief and to send to them speedily a great number of Deputies who may take their Seats in a Synod hoping by this means that they may restore the Faith of the Council of Nice destroy Heresy and re unite the Orthodox who at present are divided in Communion though they hold one and the same Doctrine They compare the state of the Churches of the East to that of Jerusalem during the Siege of Vespasian and they say That as the Jews ruin'd themselves then by their Intestine Seditions while the Enemies Army reduced them to the last Extremity so their Churches were now brought to Desolation not only by the War of the Hereticks who openly attack'd them but also by the Divisions of the Orthodox That if they desire Assistance of the Bishops of the West it was for this particular Reason That Peace might be restor'd and in this they say consisted the Relief of their Churches They conclude their Letter with saying That they commend and approve the Confession of Faith that was made by those of the West and that they consented to all that they had lawfully and canonically determin'd in their Synodical Epistle These two Letters were sent by Sabinus who they say is a Witness of all that they affirm St. Basil wrote particularly by the same Sabinus to Valerianus Bishop of Illyricum or rather of Aquileia the Letter 324 wherein he Thanks him for the Charity he had testified in the Letter he had written and prays him to assist with his Prayers the Eastern Churches that were afflicted with Heresy and Schism These are all the Letters of St. Basil written in this Year 371 concerning the Union of the East and the West The Letters which he wrote in favour of Eustathius of Sebastea against Theodotus of Nicopolis are also of this Year 371 because he was at Difference with the former in the Year 372. The First Letter written upon this Subject is the 26th address'd to Eusebius of Samosata He acquaints him That Meletius and Theodotus of Nicopolis invited him to be present towards the Middle of June at a Synod which was to be held at Phargama He prays St. Eusebius to be present there He sent him this Letter by Eustathius of Sebastea and tells him That he waited for an Answer Eusebius came not to this Synod but Eustathius was present there and St. Basil before he did Communicate with him would have assurance of his Doctrine and having had two Conferences with him he made him agree to the Doctrine of the Church Being thus perswaded that he was Orthodox he joyn'd his Prayers with those of this Bishop to thank God who had given them Grace to think and speak after the same manner The Design of St. Basil was to have a Confession of Faith drawn up by Theodotus or those of his Party which Eustathius should Sign But Theodotus without enquiring into the Conduct of St. Basil refused to admit him to his Synod because he had communicated with Eustathius St. Basil being to go into Armenia passed by a Country House of Meletius called Getasa where Theodotus was present and after a free Conference between them it was agreed That if St. Basil could make Eustathius sign a Confession of Faith which plainly contain'd the Doctrine of the Church he should then continue in his Communion but on the contrary he should separate from him if he refus'd to sign that Confession Meletius and his Priest Diodorus having approved this Proposal it was also agreed to by Theodotus who invited St. Basil to go with him to Nicopolis But when he was arrived there he would not communicate with him contrary to his Word which he pass'd to him which obliged St. Basil to withdraw and to go to Satala there to regulate some Affairs of Armenia and Ordain some Bishops He wrote from thence to Count Terentius the 187
Letter wherein he gives him an account of those Transactions which had passed Letter 78 is the Confession of Faith which St. Basil caused Eustathius of Sebastea to sign at this time It contains the Nicene Creed and rejects the Error of Sabellius and Marcellus of Ancyra He speaks also of those Differences in Letter 364 to Atarbius He wrote also a little while after the Letter 239. to Eusebius of Samosata whom he acquaints with the disgraceful manner wherein he was treated by Theodotus He says That he had also a Conference with Eustathius and that he found him very Catholick He complains That the Bishops of the second Cappadocia lately advanced into a Province refused to have any Correspondence with him He rallies his Brother Gregory and says It were to be wished that he had a Bishoprick that would agree to his Mind That he is so zealous and watchful that he could Govern all the Churches of the World That he was not only capable of Great Things but that he gave weight to Small Matters and made Affairs of no Importance pass for Matters of the greatest Consequence by his manner of treating of them He complains of a Bishop nam'd Palmatius whom Maximus had made use of to Persecute the Church He invites Eusebius to come and see him giving him notice that his Presence was necessary to regulate the Affairs of Cappadocia He invites him also by Letter 256 to be present at the Feast of St. Eupsichius which was the 7th of September to Ordain Bishops and to give him Advice about the Cause which his Brother Gregory Nyssen had undertaken against him in the Assembly which was held at Ancyra Probably Eusebius of Samosata came not to this Synod of Caesarea but he sent thither a Bishop nam'd Sabinus whose Presence comforted St. Basil under the Afflictions which he had met with at Nicopolis as he acquaints Eusebius by Letter 253 where he excuses the too great Zeal which Theodotus had testified for the observation of the Canons He says in this Letter That he passionately wished to see and embrace Eusebius The Letters 252 255 260 were almost at the same time The 254th is to the same Person and in the same Year but it was written before that which we just now mentioned and at the Beginning of the Year He writes to him That Demophilus was upon the Throne of Constantinople and that he was a Hypocrite and yet that he had re-united the two Parties and that some Neighbouring Bishops were joyn'd with him He deplores the miserable state of the Eastern Churches and says That God only knows when there Condition may be better We have already seen that St. Basil went this Year to Satala to regulate the Affairs of this Church and that he Ordained a Bishop there at the desire of the Inhabitants He recommends him to them in Letters 296 and 183 and in 185 he writes to the Church of the Parnassians upon the Death of their Bishop and in 186 he does with much Eloquence and Christian Charity comfort the Widow of the Praetor Anatheus upon the Death of her Husband This Letter may pass for a perfect Pattern of true Christian Consolation Athanasius Bishop of Ancyra dying in the Year 372 it follows that the Letter 53 of St. Basil which is address'd to him was at least in the Year 371. He complains in this Letter of the Conduct of this Bishop who accused him of teaching Errors in his Writings or subscribing to those of others The Complaint of this Bishop made St. Basil apprehend that some Heretick had prefix'd his Name to his Works He declares That he had written against the Anomaeans and against those that say The Holy Spirit is a Creature The following Letter is written to the Father of this Bishop praying him to admonish his Son charitably not to defame his Colleague without reason 'T is credible that the Letter 381 address'd to the Suffragans was also written in the same Year with the preceeding Letters and probably soon after St. Basil was a Bishop He complains in this Letter That some neglected to observe the Canons and to follow the Discipline of the Church in the Ordination of Ministers exactly He observes that formerly none were chosen but those whose Probity was well known and of whom the Priests and Deacons gave a good Testimony to the Suffragans and that neither were these Ordained until the Bishops of the Diocess were first advertised of it He complains That now the Suffragans did not write to the Bishops and that they also permitted the Priests and Deacons to choose whom they pleas'd without enquiring into their Behaviour From whence it comes to pass says he that there are many Ministers and but very few who are worthy of their Ministry To avoid this Abuse he Ordains That there should be presently sent to him a List of all the Ministers that are in the Villages containing the Names of those which have been admitted and an account of the Life which they lead That they should be reduc'd to the Condition of Lay-men who should be found incapable and those who had been admitted by Priests since the time of the first Prohibition and that for the future none should be admitted but those whose Life and Conversation had been well examin'd In fine he declares That those who should be admitted into the Clergy without his Approbation should be thrust down to the station of the Laity again The 392 to Amphilochius was written before he was made Bishop of Iconium and by consequence towards the End of 371 or the Beginning of 372. 'T is written in the Name of Heraclides an ancient Friend of Amphilochius It acquaints him with the Life which he leads under the Conduct of St. Basil and invites him to come and stay with them The 319 to Innocentius may be also about the same time He refuses to charge himself with the Care of the Eastern Churches which this Bishop would have him to do 'T was probably in the same Year that St. Basil undertook to build a Church and an Hospital in Caesarea Some would have hindered the going on of this Work whereupon he writes to Elias Governor of the Province in Letter 372 praying him for leave to proceed in his Buildings The 373 was written to the same Person in favour of a Receiver who had neglected to send an Account of his Receipts In the 305 which is to some Receiver-General St. Basil determines That an Oath should not be exacted from the Collectors of Taxes because these kind of Oaths bring no great Profit to the Receivers and accustom Men to make false Oaths In the 304 he writes to the same Person That the Monks ought to be exempted from paying of Tribute In the Beginning of the Year 372 St. Basil having found out the Frauds of Eustathius of Sebastea separated from him and re-united himself to Theodotus This Separation was begun by two Friends of Eustathius call'd Basil and Euphronius who
a Spiritual Sence of a State of Righteousness and Holiness In the Homily upon the Words of the Proverbs Give no sleep unto your Eyes publish'd by Cotelerius St. Basil exhorts to Watchfulness and the Practice of Good Works His Homilies upon the Psalms are written in the same Stile but they are more fill'd with Morality He departs sometimes from the Literal Sence and does not always apprehend the true Sence of the Prophet Yet he does not make use of obscure and forc'd Allegories but all that he says is Intelligible Natural Useful and Pleasant The Commentary upon Isaiah is not so lofty nor so full of Morality but 't is very Intelligible and very Learned The Five Books against Eunomins are a most compleat Work of Controversy he recites the Arguments and Words of this Heretick and refutes them very solidly and very clearly In the Two first Books he refutes the principal Arguments which this Heretick used to prove that the Son was not like to his Father He answers them very clearly and discovers the Falshood of this Heretick's Reasonings In the Third he answers the Objections which he made against the Divinity of the Holy Spirit In the Fourth he proves that the Son of God is not a Creature but is truly God And Lastly in the Fifth he proves the same thing of the Holy Spirit He handles the most intricate Matters of Theology in a manner very Learned and Profound and yet without perplexing and entangling them with the Quirks the Difficulties and Terms of the Schoolmen He proves also the Trinity of Divine Persons and their Equality in the 16th Homily upon the Beginning of the Gospel of St. John and in the Book against the Sabellians He particularly Establishes the Divinity of the Holy Spirit in the Treatise of the Holy Spirit address'd to Amphilochius He compos'd it upon occasion of a Complaint that some Persons had made against him that at the Conclusion of his Sermons he had said Glory be to the Father and to the Son with the Holy Ghost instead of saying as some do In the Holy Ghost Amphilochius had ask'd him the proper Signification of these Terms and the Difference between the one and the other Expression St. Basil commends him for this Exactness and observes that 't is very useful to search out the proper Sence of the Terms and Expressions which we use In the 2d Chapter he makes this Observation That those who will use different Terms in Glorifying the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost do it for no other End but to conclude from thence the Dissimilitude and Inequality of the Three Persons of the Trinity In the 3d. Chapter he shews That the difference of these Terms of whom by whom in whom have no place but in Philosophy and we ought not to use them when we speak of the Three Divine Persons In the 4th he shows That this Particle of whom signifies in Scripture the Efficient Cause since 't is said that all things are of God In the 5th he shows That the Scripture says of the Father by whom and of the Son of whom and that it uses the same Expressions when it speaks of the Holy Ghost In the 6th he answers those who affirm That we cannot say the Son of God is with his Father because he is after his Father St. Basil maintains that the Son of God is not at all inferiour to the Father neither in respect of Time nor in respect of the Place he holds nor in respect of Honour and Glory being Eternal as the Father Infinite as the Father and having a Glory and Majesty equal to that of the Father In the 7th he proves That this Expression with the Son is not New That the Church has used it to denote the Majesty of his Divine Nature as she has also used that other by the Son to signify the access which we have to God the Father by his Son and therefore we ought to use the former Expression when we sing the Praises of God and the latter when we thank him for the Favours he has done us He explains this Distinction in Ch. 8. and there he recites many Names of Jesus Christ. In the 9th he explains his Judgment concerning the Divinity of the Holy Spirit which he received by Tradition and which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture He proves that the Holy Spirit is a Spiritual Person Eternal Infinite Unchangeable c. who strengthens us and gives us Life by his Gifts In the 10th and 11th he refutes those that would not joyn the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son He proves the contrary by the Institution of Baptism and accuses those that would not add the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son Of Violating the saving Sacrament of Baptism Of Prevaricating in the Vow which they had made and of Revolting from the Religion which they had once professed In Chapter 12. he answers the first Exception of his Adversaries who said That Baptism given in the Name of Jesus Christ was sufficient St. Basil answers First That the Name of Jesus Christ denotes the whole Trinity because it signifies the Anointed of the Lord. Now he says that the Word Anointed designs him that does Anoint and him by whom he is anointed Secondly That Faith is inseparable from Baptism because Faith is perfected by Baptism and Baptism supposes Faith That the Profession of Faith precedes Baptism which is as it were the Seal of it Lastly He maintains that 't is not sufficient to Baptize in the Name of Jesus Christ but that we must invoke the Three Persons of the Godhead according to Inviolable Tradition and that we ought to add nothing to nor take any thing from this Invocation In the 13th he refutes a Second Answer of his Adversaries who say That tho' the Holy Spirit were oftentimes in Scripture joyn'd to the Father and the Son yet it would not follow from thence that he was equal to them since the Angels are there sometimes joyn'd with God St. Basil answers That there is a great Difference between the manner in which the Scripture speaks of Angels and of the Holy Spirit because it considers the former merely as Ministers whereas it considers the Holy Spirit as the Fountain of Life and joyns him with the Father because of the Unity of Essence In the 14th he resolves also a third Difficulty It was objected to him That tho' Men be baptiz'd in the Name of the Holy Spirit yet it does not follow that the Holy Spirit is equal to the Father and the Son since 't is also said in Scripture That they were all baptiz'd into Moses in the Cloud St. Basil answers That this Expression of St. Paul signifies only that Moses and the Cloud were the Figure of the Baptism of Jesus Christ but that the Truth is much more Excellent than the Type In the 15th he answers a fourth Sophism We are baptiz'd in Water said the Hereticks and yet
we do not honour the Water as the Father and the Son St. Basil answers That this Objection is ridiculous and that those who make it are mad That 't is not the Water that Baptizes us but the Spirit That the Water indeed is joyned with the Spirit as the Sign of the Death and Burial of the Old Man but that 't is the Spirit who gives a New Life That Baptism is administred by dipping three times into the Water and by invoking the Trinity three times to signify our dying to Sin and the giving of Life That the Baptism of Jesus Christ is very different from that of St. John which was only the Baptism of Water whereas that of Jesus Christ is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and of Fire Last of all he says That the Martyrs who suffer'd Death for Jesus Christ needed not the Baptism of Water in order to their receiving the Crown being baptiz'd in their own Blood He speaks also in this place of the Fire of the Day of Judgment which he calls the Baptism of Fire that shall try all Mankind In the 17th and 18th he shews That the Holy Spirit is joyn'd to the Father and to the Son as a Person equal and not as one inferiour To prove this he uses the Rules of Logick having to do with an Adversary against whom he must use these Arms. In the 19th he proves That we should celebrate the Glory and Praises of the Holy Spirit as we do those of the Father and of the Son and that we should give him the same Honours In the 20th he refutes the Opinion of those who say That the Holy Spirit is neither a Lord nor a Servant but that he is Free He shows that this Opinion is very absurd for either he is a Creature or not if not then he is God or Lord and if he is he must be a Servant for all Creatures have a Dependance upon God In the 21st he shows by many Testimonies of Scripture That the Holy Spirit is there called Lord. In the 22d he proves his Divinity by many Passages of Scripture In the 23d he alledges the Miracles attributed to the Holy Spirit to prove that he is God In the 24th he shows That we should Glorify the Holy Spirit as we do the Father and the Son In the 25th he answers those who object That the Scripture never uses this Expression The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit and he shews that to say The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit signifies nothing else but the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit That the erroneous way which they would have us use is not to be found in the Holy Scripture Glory be to the Father by the only Son in the Holy Spirit That the Particle in has the same Sence in this place as the Particle with That the Fathers made use of the Particle with as being most proper to oppose the Errors of Arius and Sabellius and that 't is less capable of an ill Sence That notwithstanding he is not ty'd up to this Expression provided we be willing to render Glory to the Holy Spirit In the following Chapter he goes on to explain with much subtlety the Difference between the Particles in and with In the 27th he proposes this Objection We ought to receive nothing but what is in the Holy Scripture But these Words are not to be found Glory to the Father and to the Son with the Holy Spirit In answer to which he First sends his Adversaries back to what he had said in Ch. 25. Afterwards he adds That in the Church there are some Opinions and Practices founded upon the Testimonies of Scripture but then there are also some which are founded only upon unwritten Tradition That the Scripture and Tradition have an equal Authority for the establishing of Piety and Truth and that none who follow the Ecclesiastical Laws resist them That if we should reject all Customs that are not founded on Scripture we shall greatly prejudice Religion and reduce it to a superficial Belief of some particular Opinions 'T is easy says he to give Examples of this and to begin with that which is most common Where find we it written that we must make the Sign of the Cross upon those who begin to Hope in Jesus Christ What Book of Scripture teaches us that we must turn to the East to make our Prayers What Saint has left us in his Writings the Words of Invocation when we Consecrate the Bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of Blessing For we do not content our selves with pronouncing the Words set down by the Apostle St. Paul and the Evangelists but we add several Prayers both before and after which we consider as having much Efficacy upon the Sacrament and yet we have them not but by Tradition We Consecrate the Water of Baptism the Oyl of Unction and him also who is to be baptiz'd Where is this written Is not this a Secret Tradition Is it not Custom which has taught us that we must Anoint him who is to be baptiz'd Where has the Scripture taught us that we must use three Dippings in baptizing We must say the same of the other Ceremonies of Baptism as of Renouncing the Devil and his Angels Who has oblig'd us to do these things Whence have we Learn'd them Have we them not from the Tradition of our Fathers Who observed them without divulging or publishing of them being perswaded that Silence kept up a Veneration for the Mysteries What necessity was there of putting that in Writing which it was not lawful to reveal or to explain to those who were not yet baptiz'd Afterwards he gives the Reason of some Usages which he had mentioned He observes also That Christians pray to God standing from Easter to Whitsunday That they kneel and afterwards rise up He gives Mystical Reasons for these Customs which are so forc'd that 't is easy to perceive there is no better Reason to be given than Custom and Practice Lastly he concludes That since there are so many things which we have by Tradition we ought not to reprehend one simple Particle which the Ancients made use of This he proves in the 29th Chapter where he alledges the Authorities of St. Irenaeus St. Clemens Romanus the Two Dionysii Eusebius of Caesarea Origen Africanus Athenogenes Gregory Thaumaturgus Firmilian and Meletius besides the Prayers of the Church and the Consent of the Eastern and Western Churches Towards the end of this Chapter he complains of the hardships which his Calumniators make him suffer In the last he describes the miserable State of the Church He compares it to a Fleet of Ships tost with a great Tempest which is the cause of Shipwrack to many of them and Points out the Troubles and Miseries wherewith the Church was afflicted very admirably This Chapter alone is sufficient to show that this Book is undoubtedly St. Basil's He proves also the Divinity of the Holy
St. Amphilochius written by Metaphrastes is also of no great Authority Wherefore one may say That excepting the Fragments produced by the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon by Theodoret and Facundus all the other Discourses publish'd by Father Combefis under the Name of Amphilochius are either manifestly supposititious or at least very doubtful But we must not say the same of the Letter publish'd by Cotelerius in his Second Volume of the Monuments of the Greek Church p. 98. It is a Synodical Epistle written to the Bishops of another Province The Bishops in whose Name St. Amphilochius wrote it declare That they wish'd St. Basil had been present at their Synod but he being detain'd by a grievous Sickness they would be satisfied if he would send to them his Book of the Holy Spirit They add That they receive the Faith of the Nicene Council but that tho' the Fathers of this Council had said that we must believe in the Holy Spirit as in the Father and the Son yet they had not explain'd the Divinity of the Holy Spirit because this Question was not then disputed Afterwards they explain themselves more clearly upon this Subject They prove the Divinity of the Holy Spirit by Baptism they say that we must acknowledge in God but one Nature only and three Hypostases At last They exhort those to whom they write to maintain the Faith and the Peace of the Church and to sing the in Doxology Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost and add That 't is in vain to reject the Communion of the Arians if they do not believe the Divinity of the Holy Spirit This Letter has relation to the 403 Letter of St. Basil wherein he writes to Amphilochius to send Deputies into Lycia to inquire into the Faith of the Bishops of that Country who were for the most part Orthodox Probably Amphilochius did as St. Basil desired him in this Letter and these Deputies brought a Letter from the Bishops of Lycia to which St. Amphilochius answers by this MAXIMUS THis MAXIMUS was a Philosopher of Alexandria who procur'd himself to be Ordain'd Bishop of Constantinople and did all that he could to force away from thence St. Gregory Nazianzen Maximus He wrote a Book of Faith against the Arians which he presented to the Emperour Gratian at Milan this he did in all probability when he came into the West after he had been driven away from Constantinople and Alexandria St. Gregory Nazianzen gave him at first great Praises but afterwards he blacken'd his Reputation in a wonderful manner The Western Bishops protected him but those of the East declar'd his Ordination null and made void all the Ordinations that he had made by the Fifth Canon of the Council of Constantinople EUSEBIUS VERCELLENSIS EUSEBIUS born in Sardinia was Reader of the Church of Rome and afterwards Bishop of Verceilles Pope Liberius sent him Delegate to the Emperour Constantius after the Fall of Vincentius Eusebius Vercellensis of Capua He was present at the Council of Milan from whence he was banish'd into the East and sent away into Scythopolis where he suffer'd very much from Patrophilus the Arian Bishop of that City He obtain'd his Liberty under the Reign of Julian and was present at the Council of Alexandria held by St. Athanasius He was delegated by this Council for restoring Peace to the Church of Antioch but he could not compass his Design because of the Ordination of Paulinus which was rashly made by Lucifer for this was an hinderance to the Reconciliation And therefore having blam'd the Conduct of Lucifer he returned into Italy where he took a great deal of Pains to re-establish the Faith He died in the Year 370. St. Ambrose made a Panegyrick upon him The Title of Martyr is commonly given to him But St. Ambrose St. Jerom St. Gregory of Tours and all the Ancients give him no other Title but that of Confessor and St. Ambrose seems to preferr Dionysius of Milan before him because he died in Banishment We have a Letter of this Bishop written in the time of his Exile and sent to his own Church together with a Protestation against all the Violences of Patrophilus There is also among the Fragments of St. Hilary a Letter to Gregory Bishop of Elvira written in 363 and a little Note that he wrote to Constantius before he went to Milan St. Jerom testifies That he translated into Latin the Commentaries of Eusebius of Caesarea upon the Psalms It is probable that he wrote it in his Exile where he learned the Greek Tongue and publish'd it after his Return MELETIUS MELETIUS was of Melitine He was at first engag'd in the Party of the Acacians and sign'd their Confession of Faith in the Council of Seleucia St. Jerom Socrates Sozomen Meletius and Theodoret say that he was first Ordain'd Bishop of Sebastea a City of Armenia in the Council of Constantinople in the Year 360. After that if you will believe Socrates he was Translated to Beraea and from thence to Antioch But it is more probable that he was never Ordain'd Bishop of Beraea and that when he could not be receiv'd at Sebastea he retir'd to Beraea from whence he was call'd to Antioch after Eudoxus had quitted that See to go to Constantinople The Arians thinking that he would be of their Opinion propos'd him for Bishop of that City in a Council held at Antioch in 361 and the Orthodox knowing him better than the Arians consented to his Election Some time after the Emperour Constantius who was then at Antioch desir'd those Bishops who were most able to Discourse in Publick to Explain these Words of Scripture The Lord created me in the beginning of his Ways for his Works and Order'd their Expositions to be written down that they might be oblig'd to make them the more exact George Bishop of Laodicea did first explain those Words and diffused all the poison of his Errors Acacius Bishop of Caesarea did next give an Explication which held the middle way between the Impiety of Arius and the Catholick Doctrine But Meletius propos'd the Orthodox Doctrine of the Church 'T is also said that his Arch-Deacon having stopp'd his Mouth he made known his Doctrine by Signs The Arians assembled immediately to Depose him and having Ordain'd in his Room an Arian nam'd Euzoïus they caus'd Meletius to be banish'd to the place of his Birth Then the sounder part of the People separated themselves from those that were infected with the Error of Arius and assembled in the Church of the Apostles which was in the old City But besides the Catholicks there were at Antioch a small number of the ancient Orthodox who after the Deposition of Eustathius continued without Bishops These would not be reunited to Meletius and those of his Party tho' they had separated themselves from the Arians Lucifer coming to Antioch after the death of Constantius ordain'd Paulinus for their Bishop but they were
rather that is the only Doctrine which he opposes there It is no ways probable therefore that this Treatise should be his and we must still continue in as great uncertainties as ever concerning its Author The Book of Mysteries or Sacraments is an Instruction to the New-baptiz'd wherein St. Ambrose explains to them the Significations and Virtue of the Sacraments which they had receiv'd Here is an Abridgment of what is most remarkable in this Instruction After we have spoken every day of Morality and propos'd to you the Examples of the Patriarchs and Prophets while the Proverbs were reading that you might be accustom'd to follow the Examples of the Saints and to lead a Life becoming those Persons who are purified by Baptism 'T is now time to discourse to you of the Mysteries and to explain the Sacraments for if we had explain'd them to you before you were initiated we should have thought that we had profan'd rather than discover'd them Besides that the light of the Mysteries themselves which you did not expect has now astonish'd you more than if we had instructed you about them before Open therefore now your Ears to receive the sweet word of Eternal Life which we signified to you when we celebrated the Ceremony by which we wish'd that they might be open'd by saying Ephatha that so all those who were to come to Baptism might know what was demanded of them and what they answer'd At last you are introduc'd into the place where the Sacrament of Baptism is Administred you are oblig'd to renounce the Devil and his Works the World and its Pomps and Pleasures You found in this place the Waters and a Priest who consecrated them the Body was plung'd into this Water to wash away Sins the Holy Spirit descended upon this Water you ought not to fix your mind upon the External part of it but to consider in it a Divine Virtue Do not imagine therefore that it is this Water which purifies you 't is the Holy Spirit There are Three things in Baptism the Water the Blood and the Spirit and without these Three Things the Sacrament is not compleat neither the Remission of Sins nor Grace is receiv'd unless it be in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost The Baptism of Jews and Infidels does not purify at all 't is the Holy Spirit which descended formerly under the Figure of a Dove which sanctifies these Waters We must not consider the merit of the Priest for it is our Lord Jesus Christ who baptizes You made Profession of believing in the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost After this you drew near unto the Priest he anointed you and your Feet were washed This Sacrament blots out your hereditary Sins and the Baptism blots out the Sins contracted by your own Will After this you receiv'd white Garments to signifie that you were stript of Sin and clothed with Innocence You received the Seal of the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Wisdom of Power c. The Father hath mark'd you out the Son hath confirm'd you and the Holy Spirit hath given you assurance of your Salvation Afterwards you run to the Heavenly Feast and see the Altar prepar'd where you receive a nourishment infinitely exceeding that of Manna a Bread more excellent than that of Angels 'T is the Flesh of Jesus Christ the Body of Life 't is the incorruptible Manna 't is the Truth whereof the Manna was only the Figure Perhaps you will tell me But I see another thing How do you assure me that it is the Body of Jesus Christ which I receive That we must prove We must show that it is not the Body which Nature hath form'd but that which the Benediction hath Consecrated Which St. Ambrose confirms by an infinite number of the like Miracles and lastly by the Mystery of the Incarnation which he compares to that of the Eucharist A Virgin says he brought forth This is against the Order of Nature The Body which we consecrate came forth of a Virgin Why do you seek for the Order of Nature in the Body of Jesus Christ since Jesus Christ was born of a Virgin contrary to the Order of Nature Jesus Christ had real Flesh which was fastened to the Cross and laid in the Sepulchre So the Eucharist is the true Sacrament of this Flesh. Jesus Christ himself assures us of it This is says he my Body before the Benediction of these Heavenly Words it is of another Nature after the Consectation it is the Body So likewise of the Blood Before Consecration it is call'd by another Name after Consecration it is call'd the Blood of Jesus Christ and ye Answer Amen that 's to say 'T is true Let the Mind acknowledge inwardly that which the Mouth brings forth let the Heart be of that Judgment which the Words express The Church exhorts her Children to Receive these Sacraments which contain the Body of Jesus Christ. This is not Bodily but Spiritual Food for the Body of the Lord is Spiritual Lastly this Heavenly Meat gives us strength this Divine Drink rejoyces us Having therefore receiv'd these Sacraments let us be persuaded that we are regenerated and let us not say How can this be 'T is not by Nature but by the Holy Spirit From hence we may learn the chief Ceremonies which were observed in the Church of Milan As to the Administration of the Sacraments these which follow are remark'd The Ears of the Catechumens were touch'd saying Ephatha and after that they were bidden enter into the place where they were to be baptiz'd There they were oblig'd to renounce the Devil the World and its Pomps the Bishop blessed the Water of Baptism the Creed was repeated to the Catechumens they were anointed with Holy Chrisms their Feet were wash'd they were plung'd into the Water and at the same time the Three Divine Persons were invocated afterwards they were cloathed with White Garments the Sacrament of Confirmation was given them and the Holy Spirit was called upon for them From thence they were conducted to the Altar where they were present at the Consecration of the Eucharist and received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ answering Amen Since these Ceremonies and the Doctrine of this Treatise do not agree with the Opinions of Protestants some among them have done what they could to raise Doubts about this Book whether it were St. Ambrose's But the Reasons which they alledge are so weak that the ablest Men among them have sincerely acknowledg'd that it is really his There are very strong Proofs that it is this Father's the beginning alone discovers that it is his for there he speaks plainly of the Sermons he had made to the Catechumens upon the Lives of the Patriarchs and Prophets This does not agree to any other Author but St. Ambrose 't is the Stile of this Father tho' he treats of things more particularly than in his other Books 'T is his Doctrine and no body doubts but it is
Church but not being able to do it lest they should leave their Churches in a forlorn condition they thought it would be sufficient to give them an account of all that they had ordain'd They say therefore That they have approved the Creed of the Council of Nice That they admit one and the same Divine Majesty in Three Persons That as to the Incarnation they have a very Orthodox Doctrine being persuaded that Jesus Christ took a Body Soul and Spirit and that he is a perfect Man They prove that this is their Doctrine by the Tome of the West which they approved at the Synod of Antioch As to the manner of Governing the Churches they declare That according to the Canons of the Council of Nice they believed that the Bishops of each Province ought to Ordain the Bishops of their own Province and call in to their assistance their Neighbours also if they thought fit That according to this Law Nectarius was ordained Bishop of Constantinople in the General Synod with the Consent of the People and Clergy of Constantinople and in the presence of the Emperour that after the same manner Flavianus was ordain'd by all the Bishops of the Province and of the Diocess of the East and that St. Cyril was some time ago ordain'd Bishop of Jerusalem by the Bishops of the Province They exhort the Western Church to approve of what they had done and to admonish them to preferr the Edification of the Church before the Inclinations they might have to any particular Persons that so they might re-establish a perfect Union among all the Members of the Church This is what is contained in the Letter of this Synod related by Theodoret. This Council is not different from that mention'd by Socrates Ch. 10. of B. V. of his History and by Sozomen Ch. 12. of B. VII In which were present the Chief Bishops of all the Sects ready to defend their own Opinions But Nectarius confounded them all by asking them if they would referr themselves to the ancient Catholick Authors who lived before the beginning of these Disputes For some being willing to accept of these Terms and others refusing to do it the Emperour who saw them divided desired of every one their Confession of Faith and when they had presented them to him he tore all those in which there was not Profession made of believing the Consubstantial Trinity and made an Edict against all Heresies The Creed of the Council of Constantinople is not very different from that of Nice The Fathers of this Council have only added some more express Terms to denote the Divinity of the Holy Spirit by calling him The quickning Lord who proceedeth from the Father who is to be worshipped and glorified together with the Father and the Son who spake by the Prophets They make Profession also of believing one only Holy and Apostolick Church of confessing one Baptism only for the Remission of sins of looking for the Resurrection of the dead and the Life of the World to come This Creed was not at first received by all Churches and there were some that would add nothing to the Nicene Creed For this cause it was perhaps that no other Creed but that of Nice was read in the Council of Ephesus and there it was also forbidden to make use of any other But this of Constantinople was authentically approved in the Council of Chalcedon where it was read after that of Nice It was a long time before the Canons of this Council were approv'd by the Western Bishops Not only St. Leo rejected them in his Epistle 53 now the 80 but also Gelasius in his Epistle to Dardanus and St. Gregory in his Epistle 25 of B. VI. rejects them as not being received in the West but however they have been received in the East and are put in the Code of the Canons of the Universal Church 'T is not easy to tell how many Canons were made in the Three Councils of Constantinople whereof we have just now spoken nor to which of the Three they are to be attributed and whether they were all made in one and the same Synod The Version of Dionysius Exiguus contains but Three of them but the Second contains that which is the Third in theGreek and the Last is reckon'd for the Fourth which concerns the Ordination of Maximus But the Code of the Canons of the Universal Church adds to these a Fifth which concerns the Tome of the Western Bishops a Sixth about the Form of Ecclesiastical Decisions and a Seventh concerning the manner of receiving Hereticks Photius Zonaras Balsamon and the other Greeks acknowledged these last Canons and attribute them to the Council of Constantinople so that there can be no Question but they were made by one of those three Councils of which we have spoken but it is more probable that they were made by the Last First Because Dionysius Exiguus has not put them in his Collection of Canons Secondly Because Socrates and Sozomen mention only the Four first when they speak of the First and Second Council of Constantinople Thirdly Because 't is plain that these Canons are an Addition or Supplement to the Three other Canons Fourthly because it appears that the Fifth Canon was made by some Bishops who had a Confession of Faith of the Bishops of the West which they call a Tome and which they approv'd Now the Bishops of the Third Council of Constantinople speak of this Confession in their Letter to the Bishops of the West and give it the Name of a Tome which shows that the Fifth Canon and this Letter were from the same hand Lastly Nicholas the I. in his Letter to the Emperour Michael cites the Sixth Canon of this Council as belonging to the Council of Constantinople but he observes that it is not to be found in his Code of the Canons These Reasons shew That the Four first Canons of the Council of Constantinople belong to the First and Second Synods but rather to the First than the Second because of the Fourth which is against the Ordination of Maximus and that the three following belong to the Third Synod held in 383. The 1st of these Canons confirms the Creed of the Council of Nice and pronounces an Anathema against all the Heresies that are contrary to it especially against the Eunomians the Anomaeans the Arians the Eudoxians against the Semi-Arians who were Enemies to the Holy Spirit against the Marcellians the Photinians and Apollinarists The 2d Canon consists of Four Parts In the First the Bishops of one Diocess are forbidden taking the name of Diocess for many Provinces to go out of their own Diocess and 't is ordained according to the Canons That the Bishop of Alexandria shall govern Egypt only That the Bishops of the East shall govern the East saving always to the Church of Antioch its Privileges and Prerogatives which are mention'd in the Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice That the Bishops of the Diocess of
to say there is not one Verse which is not a piece of Homer's Poems Upon which account it is that they are called Centones Homerici Verses made up of Fragments of Homer Zonaras and Cedrenus say That Pelagius Patricius whom the Emperor Zeno put to Death had composed a Work which bore the same Title and indeed in the Catalogue of the Library of Heidelberg this Book is attributed to one Patricius who is there thro' mistake called a Priest There is also in the same place an Epigram of Eudocia's upon the same Poem The first Greek Editions of Aldus and Stephanus in the Year 1554 and 1578 have no Author's Name Photius who speaks of Eudocia's other works makes no mention of this All which would make me believe that 't is not hers but Pelagius's and that 't is imputed to her for no other Reason but because she had commended it in an Epigram which was in the beginning of it There is a Latin Work of the same Nature attributed to Proba Falconia the Wife of Anicius Probus who also hath made an History of the Life of Jesus Christ framed out of pieces of Virgil's Poems It was Printed at Collen in 1601 at Lyons in 1516 at Franckfort in 1541 and at Paris in 1578. These Two Works are also put in the Bibliath Patr. Tom. V. S. Jerâ—m in his Letter to Paulinus says that he had seen these Poems made up of * Centone Homerici 〈◊〉 Virgiliani pieces of Homer and Virgil but he shews no great liking to them and indeed these sort of Works cannot be very excellent but are rather an Indication of the Author's Memory and Labour than the fineness of their Wit or the strength of their Fancy Proba Falconia flourished about the Year * 371. Dr Cave 430. Eudocia was Married to the Emperor about the Year 421 and Died in 460 Zonaras tells us That she fell into disgrace about a â—â—vial matter The Emperor having sent her an Apple of an extraordinary bigness she gave it to Paulinus who was highly in favour with her upon the account of his Learning he not knowing where she had it presented it to the Emperor who seeing the Empress a little while after asked her What she had done with the Apple She fearing least her Husband should grow suspicious of her if she should say she had given it Paulinus affirmed with an Oath that she had Eaten it This made the Emperor believe that she had not an Innocent Familiarity with Paulinus especially seeing her so much Abashed when he shewed it to her Whereupon he forced her to depart from him She went to Jerusalem where she spent her time in Building of Churches and did not return till after her Husband's Death This is the History or rather the Fable reported by Zonaras * Turcius Dr. Cave TYRSIUS RUFUS ASTERIUS TYRSIUS RUFUS ASTERIUS who was Consul in 449 reveiwed and published Sedulius's Poems Some have thought him the Author also of a Book called A Tyrsius Rusus Afterius Comparison of the Old and New Testament written also in Verse but others attribute it to the same Sedulius It is an Elegy which contains in the First Verse of every Strophe some History of the Old Testament and in the Second an Application is made of it to some part of the New It is written in a very clear and smooth Stile PETRONIUS PETRONIUS a Person of great Sanctity after he had been for some time a Monk was chosen Bishop of Benonia He was Co-temporary with Eucherius Bishop of Lyons Petronius as appears by the Letter of this latter written to Valerian concerning the Contempt of the World He is thought saith Gâ—nnâ—dius the Author of some Lives of the Aegyptian Fathers whom the Monks look upon as the Model and Mirror of their Profession I have read saith the same Person a Book concerning the Ordination of a Bishop which bears the same Name but the Elegancy of the Stile proves that it is not his as some have thought it but his Father Petrâ—nius's who was a Man very Eloquent and very well skilled in the most excellent Learning for it is Noted in that Writing that the Author was Praefectus Pratorio He Died in the Reign of Theodosins and Valentinian S. Eucherius cites him in his Book of the Conâ—empt of the World We have none of this Bishop's Works Some Lives of the Fathers are attributed to him but they are supposititious CONSTANTINUS or CONSTANTIUS THIS Author was a Priest of Lyons who wrote the Life of S. German Bishop of Antisiodâ—rum recited by Surius on July the 31st Constantinus or Constantius PHILIPPUS PHILIP a Priest and a Disciple of S. Jerom hath composed a very plain Commentary upon Job He hath also written some Letters to his Friends in some of which he Exhorts Philippus them to endure Afflictions and Poverty patiently He Died under the Empire of Marcian This is what Gennadius says of this Author We have yet a Commentary upon Job under the Name of this Father Printed at Basil in 1527 both in Folio and Quarto It is nothing to the purpose that it hath been since attributed to Beda and Printed under his Name among his Works because this Author himself in his Treatise De Uncia i. e. of the Ounce cites it under the Name of Philip. But 't is not absolutely certain that it is the Work of the Scholar of S. Jerom. The Commentary upon Job falsly reckoned for S. Jerom's is nothing but an Abridgment of this SYAGRIUS STAGRIUS saith Gennadius Ch. 65. of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers hath made a Treatise concerning Faith against the inconsiderate and presumptuous Terms which the Syagrius Hereticks made use of to Abolish or Change the Names of the Three Persons of the Trinity by refusing to give to the First Person the Name of Father which shews that the Son is of the same Nature and by calling him by the Name of the Only Uncreated God without beginning and cause that they may make us believe that the other Persons which are distinct from him are of a different Nature This Author demonstrates against them that the Father may be said to be without a beginning altho' he be of the same Nature with the Son whom he hath begotten and not Created and that the Holy Spirit is produced altho' it may be said that he is neither Begotten nor Created I have also met saith Gennadius further some Books intitled Of Faith and the Rules of Faith which also bear the Name of Syagrius but because they are not of the same Stile 't is not credible that they are his We have nothing more of this Author's ISAAC ISAAC a Priest of the Church of Antioch hath written several Books in Syriack the principal of them are against the Nestorians and Eutychians He hath also made a Poem Isaac wherein he bewails the destruction of Antioch as S. Ephrem before him had lamented the Ruin of Nicomedia This Isaac Died
and prays him to take care to carry himself unblamably because he had taken Notice of some failings in him when he was obliged to rehearse the Name of Dioscorus at the Altar This Letter is dated March 13. 478. He wrote also the same time the 10 Letter to the Emperor Zeno in which he thanks him for settling Timotheus and prays him to eject entirely P. Mongus In the next Letter to Acacius he tells him that Timotheus had excused himself for reciting the Name of Dioscorus at the Altar and that he was satisfied by him as to that particular In the 12th He also desires the Emperor Zeno to defend Timotheus and Banish Petrus Mongus and in the thirteenth Letter he Commands Acacius to contribute his Assistance in it These Letters are dated Oct. 478. The Church of Antioch was in no less disturbances than that of Alexandria Petrus Sirnamed Fullo having slain Stephen who was the Lawful Bishop got possession of it by force The Emperor Zeno did not let this Crime go unpunished but made those seditious Persons suffer the Punishment they deserved and Banished Petrus Fullo But because the Spirits of the People were extreamly heated he thought it would be hard to get a Bishop Ordained quietly in the City of Antioch he resolved to have the Ordination performed at Constantinople by Acacius Pope Simplicius believed as indeed it might well enough be that it was only Pretence and that the Bishop of Constantinople would by this means enlarge his Jurisdiction over the East though the Emperor wrote to him that it should be so for this once only and that for the future the Bishop of Antioch should be Ordained according to the Custom by an Eastern Synod The Pope makes Answer to him by Letter 14 dated Ju. 22. 479 in which having commended his Justice which he had Executed in punishing those who had Murthered the Bishop of Antioch he tells him That this Mischief would never have happened if he had followed his Councels and banished out of the Empire as he had written to him Petrus Mongus and the other Enemies of the Faith and disturbers of the Publick Peace Lastly He approves the Ordination of the Bishop of Antioch made by Acacius but upon Condition that the Bishop of Constantinople shall not attempt the like for the future and the Bishop of Antioch shall be Ordained by the Bishops of his own Country according to the Ancient Custom He says almost the same thing to Acacius in the next Letter He whom Acacius had Ordained Bishop of Antioch dyed in 482 in the third Year of his Pontisicate and Calendion was Ordained in his place 'T was Acacius himself who Ordained him if we may believe the Record of the Acts of the Condemnation of Acacius However that be it is evident That Calendion had his Ordination approved by a Council of Eastern Bishops This did plainly displease Acacius who was never friends with this Patriarch At the same time Timotheus Bishop of Alexandria being dead John Talaia was chosen in his palace and wrote to Pope Simplicius under the Title of the Bishop of Alexandria But the Emperor told him at the same time That he was a perjur'd Person and unworthy of the Priesthood This hindered the Pope for some time from acknowledging him but when he understood that he had designed to put in P. Mongus into that See against whom he had written several Letters he opposed him with all his force and received John Talaia who escaped into the West All these things were done with the Consent of Acacius or at least without his Opposition This made Simplicius after he had written Letter 16. in favour of Calendion to urge him earnestly in Letter 17 and 18. to oppose the attempts of P. Mongus and to represent them to the Emperor that he may not continue in the possession of the See of Alexandria These Letters are dated Anno. 482. This was the Cause and beginning of the Discontent which the Holy See had against Acacius which broke out fully under Faelix the Successor of Simplicius These Epistles are extant among the Councils Tom. IV. p. 1067. FAUSTUS Bishop of * Reium Rhegium Ries FAustus a An Englishman or Britain Avitus in his 4th Letter says that he was ortu Britannus habitatione Riensis Sidonius Epist. 9. l. 9. writing to Faustus says Britannis tuis Facundus calls him a Frenchman in his Book against Marcion Faustus Gallus but he evidently respected the place he dwelt in F. Sirmondus says that he was of the Province of Aremorica I am rather of Usher's judgment who thinks him an Englishman an Englishman or Britain a Priest and Monk of Lerins was chosen Abbot of that Monastry when St. Maximus removed to the Government of the Church of Ries While Faustus Bishop of Ries he was Abbot there he had a Controversie with Theodorus Bishop of Frejus about the Exemption which was decreed in the Council of Arles which is called the III held in 455 which Ordained That the Bishop should perform all Ordinations confirm Novices if there be any in the Abby and that no strange Clergy-men should be admitted but with his Consent but that the Care of the Lay-men of the Monastry belongs to the Abbot That the Bishop hath no Jurisdiction over them and that he cannot Ordain any one without consent of the Abbot After the Death of Maximus Faustus was chosen to fill his place So that he was his Successor twice once in his Abbacy and the second time in his Bishoprick This gave occasion to Sidonius to address these Verses to him Fuerit Quis Maximus ille Urbem tu cujus Monachosque Antistes Abbas Bis Successor agis He was present at the Council of Rome held under Pope Hilary in 462. Being returned into France he composed several Books Governed the Church unblameably lived a very Holy Life was Commended and Honoured by the Greatest Men of his time and dyed at last in Peace and in the Communion of the Church Gennadius gives us a Part of the Catalogue of this Author's Works He hath Written saith he on the Occasion of Explaining the Creed a Book concerning the Holy Spirit wherein he proves agreeably to the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers that he is of the same Substance with the Father and the Son and is as well Eternal as both the other Divine Persons in the Holy Trinity He hath also Composed an Excellent Work about Saving Grace in which he teacheth that the Grace of God always allures precedes and assists our Will and that all the reward which our Free-will obtains by its Labour is not merited by it but is the Gift of Grace I have read also saith the same Person a little Book of his written against the Arians and Macedonians in which he shews That the three Persons of the Trinity are of the same Essence and another Treatise against those who say That there are Incorporeal Creatures in which he pretends to prove by
exalt Free-will above Grace the better to discover the power of this Grace which is not known when it is not received and the great struggle that arises then because without it no Truth can be known neither is there any Light to discover it After this Preface he proposes and maintains the following Propositions 1. That Predestination is purely gratuitous and that this Decree is not made upon foresight of Men's Merits 2. That Infants who die after they are baptiz'd are sav'd by the mere Mercy of Jesus Christ and that those who die without Baptism are condemn'd upon the account of Original Sin 3. That those who believe this Grace is given to all are not Catholicks in their Sentiments since not only all men have not Faith but there are even whole Nations who never heard of the Gospel 4. That it may be said that Man is sav'd by Grace and by his Good Works provided it be confess'd that the Grace and Mercy of God prevents the Will of Man and works in him to will 5. That all those whom God would have sav'd are predestin'd because the Almighty Will of God does always take effect his Power can never be defeated 6. That the Free-will which was sound and entire in the first Man is become weak by sin but is improv'd and strengthned by Grace 7. That the Question concerning the Origine of Souls must not be ventilated or it must be treated of without bitterness but that there is no doubt that Souls do contract Original Sin They cite at the end of this Letter a passage of Pope Hormisdas in favour of St. Austin and praise the Books of Fulgentius about Predestination and Grace and those which he wrote against Faustus We have nothing now remaining but some Fragments of the Ten Books of St. Fulgentius against a famous Arian call'd Fabianus The first Book was entitled Of the most High the Comforter of the Titles of Ambassador Doctor and Judge There he prov'd that these Titles agreed to the Father and the Son In the second Book he shew'd that the Functions of Sighing Desiring and Praying which are attributed to the Holy Spirit are not contrary to his Divinity In the third he prov'd that Immensity agreed to the three Divine Persons In the fourth that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are equally adorable He distinguishes the Worship of Latria from that of Dulia the first agrees to God only and the second may be given to Creatures He speaks also of the Properties which belong to each Divine Person The fifth Book was about the Title of Image which is given to the Son of God where he proves that he is so the Image of God as to be also of the same Nature In the sixth he proves that the Son is eternal as well as the Father The seventh establishes the Divinity of the Holy Spirit The eighth was about the Mission of the Holy Spirit The ninth is concerning the Invocation of the three Divine Persons where he demonstrates that the Son and the Holy Spirit are to be Invocated as well as the Father That Sacrifices are to be offer'd to the Son and Holy Spirit as to the Father and that the like Thanksgiving is paid unto â—â—m The tenth was about a Writing upon the Apostle's Creed where he observes that it was so call'd either because it is a Compact or because it is an Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine After this he proves that what in the Creed is attributed to the Father agrees to the whole Trinity The Treatise address'd to Victor is upon the same Subject and written at the same time There he refutes the Discourse of a Priest nam'd Fastidiosus who having quitted a Religious Profession and the Priestly Office to lead a licentious Life had also abandon'd the Faith by turning Arian St. Fulgentius proves in this Treatise the Divinity of the Son and explains how it may be said That the Word only is Incarnate The time is not certainly known when the Treatise of the Faith was written which is address'd to a Lay-man call'd Peter who having a design to make a Journey to Jerusalem desir'd before his departure to have an Instruction containing the Articles of Faith that he might know what he ought to believe St. Fulgentius explain'd to him first what he ought to believe concerning the Mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation And then he told him that all Beings both Spiritual and Corporeal are the Work of God who created them that Spiritual and Intelligent Beings were to subsist eternally by the Will of God that the Angels being created free and having power by the Grace of God to merit their Happiness or else to fall from it by their sin one part of them had perish'd and the other part was confirm'd in the Love of God which they could never lose any more That the first Man who had been created perfectly free had fall'n into sin and so subjected all Mankind to death and sin That God had deliver'd many of them by his Grace by the help of which they were enabled to live well and to obtain eternal Life That there is no state wherein a Man can deserve well but only during the time of this Life but as long as a Man lives upon this Earth there is always space for Repentance That this Repentance is unprofitable to those that are out of the Church That all Men shall rise one day and those who shall die in a good state shall be happy for ever and others shall be condemned to eternal punishment That a Man comes to the Kingdom of Heaven by means of the Sacraments which Jesus Christ has instituted That none can obtain Salvation without the Sacrament of Baptism except those who shed their Blood in the Church for Jesus Christ That he who has receiv'd Baptism out of the Church has receiv'd this Sacrament and if he returns into the Church he ought not to be re-baptiz'd but his Baptism will profit him nothing if he continues out of the Church or if he lives ill after he has been receiv'd into the Church That those who live well ought continually to do Works of Mercy to expiate those sins which even the Just commit every day That to avoid them the humble Servants of Jesus Christ shun Marriage and abstain from eating Meat and drinking Wine Not that they think that 't is forbidden to use Marriage to eat Meat and drink Wine but because they are perswaded that Virginity is to be preferr'd before Marriage and that Abstinence restrains a Man from sin That neither second nor third Marriages are forbidden and that excess in the use of Marriage is a Venial sin but to those who have made a Vow of Continence Marriage is a great Crime Afterwards he reduces this Doctrine to forty Heads which he thinks are to be believ'd There was a long Article added at the end of this Treatise which is cut off by the Authority of some ancient
Manuscript wherein it is not to be found and there is so much the more reason for it because it is plain that this Treatise was concluded before the fortieth Article and this Chapter has no relation to the preceding St. Fulgentius explains also the principal Points of our Faith in the Treatise of the Trinity address'd to Felix who had also desir'd to be instructed that he might be able to answer the Hereticks with whom he convers'd And in the Treatise of the Incarnation to Scarilus who had pray'd him to clear up a Question which had been propos'd at Table Whether or no it might be said that the Father or the Divine Nature was Incarnate After he has gone over other Mysteries upon occasion of this Question he handles another which was also propos'd at the same time viz. Whether God created all Animals He says 'T is certain that God created all things that at the time of the Creation he formed all the living Creatures which the Earth and the Water produce and as to those which are engendred out of the Corruption of Flesh and Fruit he made them not in the first six days Creation but he created those things out of which they were one day to be form'd The Questions which were propos'd to him by Ferrandus a Deacon are more useful and more rational A godly Man having an Ethiopian Servant caus'd him to be well instructed in our Religion and put him among the number of the Catechumens after he had continued there his time and learn'd the Creed he was plac'd among those who were to be baptiz'd at Easter The ordinary Exorcisms were us'd to him he renounc'd solemnly the Devil pronounc'd the Creed and receiv'd the Exposition of the Lord's Prayer When he was ready to be baptiz'd he was seiz'd with a violent Fever which brought his Life into danger but Easter-day being near his Baptism was put off to that day and then he was carried to the Church in such a Condition that he had no knowledge nor speech nor motion nor sense Yet he was baptiz'd tho he could not answer himself A little time after this he died without knowing that he had receiv'd Baptism This History gives occasion to three Questions The first is Whether Baptism administred to an Adult Person who neither knows any thing nor can speak and answer himself does put him in a state of Salvation The second is Whether he had been sav'd tho he had not receiv'd Baptism The third is Why we do not baptize the Dead whose Faith and Piety were well known while they liv'd St. Fulgentius in answer to these Questions proves first That Baptism without Faith availeth nothing to the Adult 2. That Children receiving the Sacrament receive the Grace of Faith This being premis'd he determines That the Faith of this Slave having preceded his Baptism there is no doubt but he received the effect of Baptism because he had both Faith and the Sacrament but that it would have been in vain to have had Faith without receiving the Sacrament for then he could not be sav'd and that it is unprofitable to baptize the dead because the Soul cannot obtain remission of its sin after it is gone out of the Body and the Flesh alone is not capable of sin After these Answers he says in general That the Canons have justly ordain'd to baptize the sick altho they cannot themselves give an account of their Faith provided there be Witnesses who answer for their willingness Lastly He enquires whether a person that has been baptiz'd and dies without receiving the Eucharist can be sav'd Jesus Christ having said That he who eateth not my Flesh and drinketh not my Blood hath no life in him To which he answers affirmatively That by Baptism we become the Members of Jesus Christ and so by this means we are partakers of his Flesh. He cites a passage out of a Sermon of St. Austin who explains thus the words of Jesus Christ in John chap. 6. of the necessity of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood There is another Writing of St. Fulgentius in Answer to five Questions from the same Deacon Ferrandus The first to know whether the Three Persons of the Trinity can be separated St. Fulgentius answers That they cannot and proves that all the Attributes which agree to One agree to the Others except the relative Properties of the Persons which necessarily denote the Union of one with the other The second is to know whether it may be said that the Divinity of Jesus Christ suffer'd or died as it is said That a God suffer'd a Man died c. St. Fulgentius maintains that this Expression cannot be condemned and endeavours to justifie it by the Testimonies of St. Leo Galasius and St. Ambrose The third Question is Whether the Soul of Jesus Christ did perfectly know the Divinity St. Fulgentius is very confus'd upon this Question which he decides by saying That it knew the Divinity perfectly but not so as the Divinity knows it self that it knows as much but not after the same manner as the Divinity it self that the Soul of Jesus Christ knows fully the Divinity but it is not the Divinity The fourth Question is Why it is said in the Prayers of the Church That the Son reigneth with the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost which expression may make a Man think that the Holy Spirit does not reign as the Father and the Son but only unites them in their Reign St. Fulgentius answers That we pray to the Father through the Son because the Son is the Priest and the Sacrifice and that the Unity of the Holy Spirit denotes the Unity of Nature with the Father and the Son The fifth Question is How St. Luke is to be understood when he speaks of the last Supper of Jesus Christ that he took the Cup and gave it to his Disciples that he took the Bread and said This is my Body and that afterwards taking the Cup he said This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Was it the same Chalice which was given both times or two different Chalices St. Fulgentius answers That according to some it was only one Chalice given but once and that St. Luke in the first place says by way of anticipation that he distributed it to his Disciples That according to others it was one and the same Chalice given two several times He confesses that both these senses are Catholick but he approves the last and finds a great many Mysteries in this double distribution of the Cup. Nevertheless the first sense is more natural and the only true sense according to the Letter The last Work of St. Fulgentius is his Treatise to Reginus who had propos'd two Questions to him He answers the first viz. Whether the Flesh of Jesus Christ was corruptible or incorruptible as some affirm'd He answers I say that the Flesh of Jesus Christ was not corruptible if by Corruption be understood Sin but it was
1580 Carterius publish'd the Commentary of Procopius upon Isaiah from a Manuscript of the Cardinal of Rochefoucault This Work is printed at Paris in Greek and Latin over against it and is very carefully done The Anonymous Author of an Exposition of the Octateuque THis Author who is mention'd by Photius in the 36th Volume of his Bibliotheque liv'd under the Empire of Justinus He had compos'd a Book entitled The Book of Christians or An Exposition The Anonymous Author of an Exposition of the Octateuque of the Octateuque dedicated to one nam'd Pamphilus The style of this Work was mean and the Syntax of it not extraordinary He has proposed many Parodoxes altogether indefensible which are more like Tales and Fables then any thing that is serious Here follow some of them That the Heaven and the Earth are not of around figure but the Heaven is in the form of a Vault or an Arch That the Earth is longer one way and that its Extremities touch the Heaven That all the Stars are in Motion and that the Angels move them with several other things of this Nature He speaks also of Genesis and Exodus but as it were by the by He dwells a long time upon the Description of the Tabernacle he runs thro the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles he says that the Sun is as big The Monk Jobitus as the two Climates that the Angels are not in Heaven but above the Firmament and amongst us That Jesus Christ ascending into the Heavens stay'd between the Heavens and the Firmament that this is the place which is call'd the Kingdom of Heaven These are some part of the Absurdities which this Author asserts His Work was divided into Twelve Books We have none of them now remaining and what we have now said shews sufficiently how little reason we have to regret the loss of them The Monk Jobius THis is also an Author of the sixth Age out of whom Photius has preserv'd long and excellent Extracts The Monk Jobius wrote a Treatise of the Word Incarnate divided into nine Books and 45 Chapters upon those matters which were disputed in this Age concerning the Mystery of the Incarnation Photius remarks that he treated the Questions largely enough but he gave not very good Solutions of them contenting himself with what might probably satisfie without searching deeply into the Truth That his Doctrine was very Orthodox both in this Work and in what he wrote against Severus that he was well-skill'd and vers'd in the Holy Scripture and that he undertook to write this Treatise at the desire of an honourable Person This is what Photius observes in general upon this Work of which he afterwards gives an Abridgment The first and second Book were for the Explication of this Question Why is the Son made Man and not the Father or the Holy Spirit The Reason that he gives for it is That the Son bears the Name of the Image of the Father and of his Reason and that from these Titles it was reasonable that he should come to reform the Image of Man and restore to him that Reason which he had lost He thinks that the Birth of Jesus Christ in a Stable among Oxen and Asses the Parable of the Nets cast into the Sea which took all sorts of Fish the Piece of Silver which was found by St. Peter in a Fish the Entrance of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem upon an Ass and the Gift of Tongues are Figures of this Truth After this Preface which appears not very grave nor worthy of the matter he handles In the third Book which begins at the ninth Chapter he gives another Reason why the Son of God was made Man And that is because it was reasonable that he who created and form'd Man should create him anew and reform him Now tho the Father and the Holy Spirit created Man as well as the Son yet the Creation is attributed to the Son and 't is said that by him the Father made all things He demands afterwards Why Redemption was not made by an Angel or a Man And upon this Question he says That Men have try'd many times to bring Salvation to Men but with all they could do they were not capable of saving one single Nation how much more then was it impossible for them to redeem all Mankind and to chain up the Devil who was become their Master That no meer Man could do it because none of them is free from sin That neither did this agree to an Angel to whom it did not belong to lead Spiritual Powers in triumph That One being of the same Nature with the Rest could not bring them into subjection and that if St. Michael disputing with the Devil about the Body of Moses durst not bring a railing Accusation against him how much lefs could an Angel make us Children by Adoption From this Question he passes to another Why God did not redeem Men by his Divinity without making himself Man He answers That God having not done it we should believe that he ought not to have done it This is the best Answer or rather the only reasonable one and this being propos'd all the other become needless In this place he shows that tho God be Almighty yet there are some things which he cannot do because it would be a defect or imperfection to do them He says moreover That the Redemption of Mankind was a more excellent thing then his Creation and that it is a more particular sign of the Love of God to us He adds That it was fit the Word should be made Man for our Salvation since all other means had been ineffectual But one may say Why did he permit that Man should become wicked why did he not create him necessarily good If this had been so he would have had no Free-will and consequently he could have deserv'd nothing Why did not he make him may one say like the Angels This could not have been an advantage to Man answers our Author because God did not save the Angels who sinned But we easily fall into sin Yes says he and we rise again easily God having left to Man a thousand ways whereby he may do Penance and save himself He proposes to himself another very important Question Why God made Man of two Parts of a different Nature But he answers not this Question very well for he only relates some passages of the Fathers and says That the Terrestrial Substance must have been adorn'd with the Union of a Spiritual Substance He enquires Why the Word was made Man and he gives three Reasons for it The first is That he might give us an Example of Vertue The second is To deliver us from the Bondage of Sin The third To blot out Original Sin and restore us to the state in which we were before Sin He remarks that in the Trinity the Father is consider'd as the first Cause the Son as the acting Cause and the Holy Spirit as that
which perfects That for this reason the Catechumens are seven days in a white Habit that they are first baptiz'd and then anointed Justinian with Oyl and lastly made partakers of the precious Blood before the Bread be given them and upon this Subject he makes very mystical Reflexions Afterwards he gives three Reasons why Moses does not speak of the Creation of Angels The first is Because he wrote only for Men. The second Because he would make God known by the visible Creatures The third is Lest it should be thought that the Angels created the World He maintains that the Angels were not known till after the Promises which God made to Abraham The fourth and fifth Book contain only two Chapters wherein he endeavours to prove That it was more convenient that the Son should be made Man then the Father The sixth which begins at the 22th Chapter contains the Question Why the Titles of Creator Redeemer and Judge are attributed to the Son He says That they agree well enough to all the three Persons but by way of excellence they are appropriated to the Son He discourses of the Order of the Persons of the Trinity and of the Title Holy which is given to each Person He cites upon this Subject St. Gregory Nazianzen and the Books attributed to St. Denys the Areopagite In the seventh Book he observes three Changes of the World The first from Idolatry to the Knowledge of one God by the Law The second from the Law to the Gospel which Reveals the Son and the Holy Spirit And the third which gives a perfect Knowledge of the Trinity in another Life Upon this occasion he handles many Questions concerning the Names of the Father and the Son He gives many Reasons why the Son was not Incarnate from the beginning of the World He speaks of the knowledge of the Trinity which the Blessed shall have in another Life of the Obscurity of the Old Testament and the Mysteries which it covers under the Letter of the Law In the eighth he handles two Scholastical Questions The first is If it be a good proof that there is in God one Person of the Word because God cannot be without Reason why will it not follow from hence that there is in this Word another Word and so in infinitum Photius remarks That he endeavours to answer this Objection thirteen manner of ways but that they are weak and tho they may satisfie such Persons as are pious and religious yet they afford matter of raillery to those who are of a contrary Disposition In effect these kind of Questions and Arguments can never produce any good Effects but expose Religion to the Contempt of great Wits and the Scoffs of the Impious The other Question is no more useful altho it be at present more common 'T is demanded Why the Son and the Holy Spirit proceeding both from the Father the one is call'd the Son and the other the Holy Spirit and why they have not both the Title of the Son He could find no other Answer to this Question but that this is the Custom and that Men express as they can the Differences of the Divine Persons altho they comprehend them not This Answer is ingenuous very wise and reasonable In the ninth Book he treats of the Dignity and Graces of the Angels and Men compar'd together and applies to them the Parable of the Prodigal Child After this he enquires How it can be that Jesus Christ should die for all since there was an infinite number of Men dead before his Coming He answers to this Question That Jesus Christ preach'd the Gospel to the Dead and that all those who have lived well and believed in him are saved He enlarges here very much upon the Explication of another passage of Jesus Christ I came not to call the Righteous but Sinners to Repentance After this he treats also of the state wherein Angels and Man were created of the Fall of the one and the other of the Reasons for which God redeemed Man and not the Angels c. This is enough to discover to us that the Work of this Author was not very useful that he delighted to start difficult and intricate Questions that he gives extraordinary Sences to passages of Scripture that he maintains Propositions which are indefensible In a word that we ought not much to regret the loss of his Work whereof the Extracts related by Photius are but too long and very tedious JUSTINIAN THe Emperor Justinian may be justly rank'd amongst Ecclesiastical Writers for never Prince did meddle so much with what concerns the Affairs of the Church nor make so many Constitutions and Laws upon this Subject He was perswaded that it was the Duty of an Emperor and for the good of the State to have a particular care of the Church to defend it's Faith to regulate External Discipline and to employ the Civil Laws and the Temporal Power to preserve in it Order and Peace Upon this account he did not only make a Collection of the Laws made by the Princes his Predecessors about Ecclesiastical Discipline but he added many to them Here follows the Catalogue and the Substance of them The third Novel regulates the number of the Clergy of the great Church of Constantinople and fixes it to 60 Priests 100 Deacons 40 Diaconesses 90 Sub-deacons 110 Readers 25 Chanters and 100 Porters It contains also That it shall not be lawful for Clergy-men to remove from a lesser Church to a greater and that the Possessions of the Church shall be employed for the maintenance of the Poor and other pious Works The fifth Novel contains Regulations concerning the Monks and the Monasteries That a Monastery shall not be built until the Bishop comes to the place to Consecrate the Ground where it is to be built by Prayer and fixing a Cross in it That the Habit of a Monk must not be given to those who present themselves immediately after they are entred into the Monastery but that they ought to continue Probationers for three years in their Secular Habit that during this time it shall be lawful for those who redeem them as Slaves to take them back again and not after this time is past That the Monks ought to abide and lye in one and the same place except the Anchorets and Hesycastes who have attained a great perfection That a Monk who quits his Monastery shall lose all his Riches that he had at his entrance into it which shall belong henceforth to the Monastery That a Man or a Woman who enter into a Monastery may dispose of their Possessions before they enter into it but if they enter into it without disposing of them their Possessions belong to the Monastery except the fourth part which belongs to Children or the Portion of a Daughter if she be married and except that which they might have given That if any Person abandon his Monastery to go into the Militia he cannot enter into
publish'd them in the Year 1629 according to a Copy taken from that Manuscript They have been printed also since together with Optatus in 1676. VICTOR of Capua VIctor Bishop of Capua liv'd about the middle of the sixth Age. He compos'd a Paschal Cycle wherein he asserts that Victorius was mistaken in setting down the Feast of Easter for the Year 455 to be on the seventeenth day of April which should have been the five and twentieth day of the same Month in that Year Having light upon a Harmony of the Evangelists which he believ'd to be Tatianus's he publish'd it and took the pains to add to it some Marks for discovering how many of the Evangelists relate the same thing This is observ'd in a Preface which he prefix'd to this Work RUSTICUS Deacon of the Church of Rusticus Deacon of the Church of Rome ROME THis Rusticus is famous in the History of the three Chapters which he boldly defends against the Judgment of Pope Vigiâ—… by whom he was Depos'd He has left us a Treatise in the Form of a Dialogue written against the Acephali wherein he proves that there are two Natures in Jesus Christ and that this Doctrine is far enough from the Error of Nestoriaâ—â— He says en passant that the Son does not proceed from the Holy Spirit but 't is not certainly known Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as from the Father This Treatise is written with much exactness and clearness In it he mentions a Discourse which he had written against the Acephali and the Nestorians and promises a Treatise in Defence of the three Chapters but these Works are now lost That of which we have now spoken was printed in divers Collections of Works against the Hereticks and in the Bibliotheques of the Fathers Some have thought that this is only a Translation but there is no probability of that for Rusticus himself was a Latin and the Work it self discovers sufficiently that it is an Original and not a Translation PRIMASIUS PRimasius Bishop of Aâ—ruâ—ettum a City in the Province of Byracena was at Constantinople at the time when the fifth Council was held Câ—…odorus assures us That he wrote a Commentary Primasius upon the Reâ—â—lations divided into five Books This Work was printed at Basil in 1544 and at Lyons in 1543 together with a Commentary upon all the Epistles of St. Paul These Works are Collections of Extracts out of the Fathers and Commentators In the Commentary upon St. Paul he copies oftentimes that which goes under the Name of St. Jerom. St. Isidore of Sevil says nothing of these Commeâ—… but he informs us that Primasius wrote three Books of Heresies address'd to Fortunatus wherein he explains what St. Austin had left imperfect in his Book of Heresies showing in the first Book what it is that makes a Heretick In the second and third by what Hereticks may be â—nown Some Learned Men think that the Book which F. 〈◊〉 has publish'd under the Name of Predestiâ—… because it had no Title in his Manuscript iâ— the Work of 〈◊〉 This Opinion is not only founded upon a bare Conjecture but upon the Authority of a Manuscript of this Treatise found in Germany by F. Mabillon which bears the Name of 〈◊〉 This seems to be a concluding Argument but yet if it be well consider'd what 〈◊〉 says of the Book of Prâ—… and withal we attend to the Doctrine of the Author â—…led 〈◊〉 it will appear that this cannot be For the Book written by Primasius was not according to Isidore a Catalogue of Heresies but it was a Treatise wherein he undertook to resolve the Question which St. Austin proposed to himself and which he design'd to handle in the second Part of his Book of Heresies viz. Wherein consists Heresie and how it may be known when a Person is a Heretick Now there is not a word said of this Question in the Treatise publish'd by Father Sirmondus under the Name of Predestinatus 'T is divided into three Parts but the first is a Catalogue of Heresies the second is a Treatise compos'd under the Name of St. Austin by a pretended Predestinarian the third is a Confutation of this Treatise This is wholly different from the Subject of that whereof Isidorus speaks Moreover Primasius was a faithful Disciple of the Doctrine of St. Austin as appears by his Commentaries but this Author on the contrary is one of his greatest Enemies and in some places he afferts Doctrines which are altogether Pelagian 'T is very probable therefore that some half learned Man knowing that Primasius had written a Treatise of Heresies divided into three Parts and finding 〈◊〉 Anonymous Author upon the same Subject which was also divided into three Parts made no scruple to put the Name of this Bishop to it JUNILIUS Junilius JUnilius a Bishop of Afric address'd to him of whom we spoke last a Treatise of the Parts of the Divine Law which is a kind of Introduction to the Study of the Holy Scripture Cassiodorus mentions it The Author says that he had this Work from one Persanus named Paul who had studied at Nisibis where there was a Publick School for teaching the Holy Scripture The Reflexions of this Author are very Judicious and Methodical Here follows an Abridgment of it The Knowledge of the Scripture consists of two Parts The first concerns the Surface or the Diction of the Scripture the second concerns the things themselves which the Scripture teaches us The first Part contains five things the Nature of the Book its Authority its Author the Manner wherein it is written and the Order wherein it ought to be plac'd There are in it five kinds of Books History which is the Relation of things past of which kind the Author reckons but seventeen Canonical Books in the Old and New Tastament and rejects as Apocryphal not only the Books of Maccabees and that of Judith but also the two Books of Chronicles the Book of Job the two Books of Esdras and the Book of Esther Prophecy is the second kind of Books in the Holy Scripture which he defines A Declaration of things past present or future Of this kind he finds seventeen Books in both the Testaments and observes that the Orientalists reject the Apocalypse The third manner of writing is the Proverbial Manner which he defines A figurative way of speaking which intends something else to be understood then what it signifies and contains Advices for the present time The Proverbs of Solomon Ecclesiastes and the Wisdom of Syrach i. e. Ecclesiasticus are of this kind to these may be added the Book of Wisdom and the Canticles Allegory pertains to this kind which is taken either from a Metaphor or a Comparison or a Parable or from a Proverbial way of Speaking Lastly the last Manner is that of mere Instruction the Epistles of St. Paul are of this kind As to the Authority of Scripture he observes That there are Books of a perfect
employ his Authority for punishing Euphrasius who was guilty of Murder and an Incestuous Adultery He counsels him to drive the Obstinate out of the Province and to send the Authors of this Schism to the Emperor and chiefly him who was in the See of Aquileia who being says he a Schismatick ought to have neither the Name nor Dignity of a Bishop He recommends it also to Narses by another Letter to send the Bishops of Aquileia and Milan to the Emperor with a strong Guard because the first was incapable of being Bishop by his irregular Ordination and the second ought to be punish'd for Ordaining after such a manner The sixth Letter of Pelagius is address'd to the Bishops of Tuscany who would also separate from the other Churches for the Affair of the three Chapters He remonstrates to them what a Crime it is to break the Peace of the Church and make a Schism He declares to them that he professes the Faith of the four first Councils and the Doctrine contain'd in the Letter of St. Leo and he admonishes them if they have yet any scruple to come to him that they may have it resolv'd This Letter is dated Febr. 16. 556. The seventh Letter is this Pope's Confession of Faith address'd to the whole Church wherein he declares That he has a Veneration for the four first Councils and that he will never undertake to lessen the Authority of their Decisions about the Faith that he follows and approves the Canons which were receiv'd by the Church of Rome That he is ready to Vindicate the Letters which his Predecessors beginning at Celestine and ending at Agapetus had written in Defence of the Faith and the Authority of the four first Councils That he Condemns those whom they have condemn'd and Receives those whom they have receiv'd even Theodoret and Ibas whom he believes to be Orthodox The nine following Letters are written to Sabandus Bishop of Arles or to Childebert King of France In these Letters he sends to Childebert his Confession of Faith He grants the Pallium and the Office of Vicar to Sapandus he prays Childebert to maintain this Bishop in his Rights and complains that he would have him judg'd by another Bishop He prays that the Revenues of the Church of Rome that are in France may be employ'd for buying Garments to the Poor and that they may be sent to him There are also the Fragments of some other Letters of Pelagius written to several Persons The first are about the Ordination of Paulinus Bishop of Aquilcia made by the Bishop of Milan He confesses that the Bishops of these two Sees have mutually ordain'd one another but he affirms that this Ordination was made in that City whose See was vacant He rejects the Ordination of Paulinus because it was at Milan against the Will of the Holy See and the Order of the Emperor He remarks That even during the Wars between the Goths and Franks the Ordination of the Bishop of Milan had been stopped until he receiv'd Orders from the Emperor In the third he declares That 't was a year before he Ordain'd him who was chosen Bishop of Syracuse because he was married and had Children but because those of Syracuse would not choose another he thought fit to pass it by after he had promis'd to him that he would neither directly nor indirectly take any part of the Possessions of the Church nor leave any thing to his Children or Heirs The other Letters concern particular Affairs as the Foundations of Churches He remarks That for building a Church they should choose a Place where no Body has been buried AGNELLUS 'T IS thought that this Agnellus who was a rich Man and descended of a good Family was Bishop of Ravenna from the Year 558 to the Year 566 and that he was the Author of a Letter to Armenius concerning the Faith which is found in the Bibliotheque of the Fathers Trithemius being the only Person who speaks of this Author and this Work there is no full assurance whether it be so or no. However it be this Letter is inconsiderable The Author affirms in it That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son LEONTIUS Leontius LEontius a Native of Constantinople was an Advocate and afterwards a Monk in the Laura of St. Sabas he liv'd till about the end of the sixth Century for he reckons Eulogius amongst the Bishops of Alexandria who held this See from the Year 581 to the Year 604. He is different from Leontius Byracenus who is mention'd in the Life of St. Sabas and St. Quiriacus for this Leontius was an Origenian and defended the Doctrines of Theodorus of Mopsuesta But he on the contrary declar'd openly against Origen and Theodorus The first contains an Abridgment of the History of our Faith short Remarks upon the Doctrines of Arius Sabellius Nestorius and Eutyches an Exposition of the Faith of the Church about the Trinity and Incarnation and the distinction of Nature and Personality The second contains a Catalogue of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament agreeable to that of the Jews and of those of the New agreeable to ours and general Proofs of the Coming of the Messias The third contains a List of the Fathers who liv'd from the Birth of Jesus Christ until Constantine and also of some of those who flourish'd since He speaks also there of the Principal Heresies which arose in that space of time In the fourth Action he inquires into the Origine of the Heresies of Macedonius Apollinaris Nestorius Eutyches and continues this History down to the Condemnation of Dioscorus The fifth Action relates the Controversies that arose in the Church upon occasion of the Council of Chalcedon which were settled by the Authority of the Emperor and renew'd again by the Question of the Corruptibility and Incorruptibility of Jesus Christ to which the Agnâ—…tae and Tritheites succeeded The four following Actions contain Answers to the Objections which were made against the Council of Chalcedon The first answers the Historical Difficulties the second the Reasoning Part and the third the Authorities of the Fathers The last explains the Passages of the Council which were alledg'd to prove that the Council favour'd the Doctrines of Nestorius The tenth Action is against the Gaianites the Agnoetes and Origenists The same Author has also written three Books against the Error of Nestorius and Eutyches The first is entitled A Confutation of the contrary Figments of Nestorius and Eutyches concerning the Divinity and Humanity of Jesus Christ. He proves against Eutyches that there are two Natures and against Nestorius that there is but one Hypostasis or Person in Jesus Christ He explains in what sense St. Cyril could say that there is but one Nature of the Word Incarnate and proves what he affirms by Reasons and the Authorities of the Fathers The second Book is against the Error of those who maintain'd that the Body of Jesus Christ was incorruptible before his
is forbidden to Marry 96. the degrees prohibited 97. third Marriages forbidden 98. Questions about marryed Persons 47. unlawful Marriages forbidden 149. degrees of Affinity and Consanguinity forbidden 126. degrees forbidden 54. divers civil Constitutions about Marriage 129. Mary Honour due to the Virgin Mary 23. her perpetual Virginity 39. Opinion about her Assumption ibid. Mary Magdalen different from the Sinner 16. Mass ought not to be left unfinished 62 80. not to be said without communicating 81. Abuses in the celebration of the Mass reformed 81 84 86. is to be taken Fasting ibid. only one Chalice to be placed upon the Altar at it 97. the Sacrifice to be offered for all that die in the Faith 46. Priests not to celebrate it alone nor say private Masses on Sundays 124. the Mass of this thing before consecrated 87. Miracles extraordinary 19. Monks Several sorts of them 4. The Age at which they may be received 87. All persons may be received ib. A Canon for Monks and Nuns ib. How they ought to live 128 129. A Decree about the Life of Monks 20. Divers Constitutions about Monks 60. A Rule for the Monks 6. They ought to observe their Rule 55. and obliged to dwell in their Monastery 54 87. Extravagant Commendations of Monks 12. The greatest part of Monks disorderly and Hypocrites 27. Forms of the Monks Priviledges 41. A Rule for Abbots and Monks 46. Other Rules for Monks Nuns and Religious Persons 140. Monasteries It is not allowed to baptise or bury in them 55. Double Monasteries forbidden 145. Monothelites Their Doctrine and Original 63. Their History ibid. condemned in the Lateran Council 64. and in that of Constantinople 66 c. N. Nativity of Jesus Christ. Reasons for keeping that Festival upon the 25th of December 51. O. Oecumenick or Universal in what sense all that is Catholick may be called Oecumenick Ordination of Bishops 4. They may not be or dained but in Cities only 81. The Qualifications of such as are raised to the Priesthood 140. Elections of Princes null ibid. The age and qualities of such as are ordained 119. The Ordinations of Persons twice married are void 126. Other Ordination irregular and invalid 85. The Qualifications of a person to be ordained Bishop 57. He ought to be made by two or three Bishops 98. He may not chuse his Successor 99. Age required to be ordained 100. What persons are forbidden to be ordained 59 75. Age of Ordination 59 86. Persons ordained can't return to the World 75. The Ordination of persons twice married forbidden 126. A Form of a Prince to oblige the Bishops to ordain a person chosen by him for Bishop 41. Ordinations for Money or Faction forbidden 53. Prohibitions to chuse a Successor ibid. A Priest ordained before he is baptized ought to be re-ordained 45. The Offices of such as Ordain and Consecrate ibid. P. Pall given to the Bishop of Mentz 97. To Metropolitans ordain'd by Boniface 29. Granted to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury 16. Passion A Canon to preach upon the Passion on Holy-Friday 58. Penance Its parts 2. The Clergy do it before God and the Laity before the Bishop 4. In what consists true Penance ibid. The Priests ought to put the Penitents in mind of it and absolve only such as are well qualified for it 88. How and where Penitents are to be reconciled 47 48. There was no publick Penance in England ibid. The Ceremonies and Practice of publick Penance ibid. Reconciliation of Penitents upon Holy-Thursday 32. Necessary dispositions for reconciliation ibid. Penance for small sins 36. They who have begun a course of Penance ought to finish it 60 81. Divers Punishments and Penances imposed 126. Penance of Clergy-men 107. Bishops subjected to Penance with confessing any Crimes may be restored to their Office 82. The Penance of Monks 7 8. Pepin Zachary declares that he ought to be King 98. Pilgrimages forbidden to Women and Virgins 96. Prayers for the Prince 116 118. Several sorts of Prayers 3. The Service of the Church 6 7. The Lord's-Prayer ought to be recited every day in the Service of the Church 58. The Liturgy used by the Monks 7. For the Dead 97. In all Languages 117. Prayers for the Dead 104. Princes Obedience due to them 148. Power the difference between Ecclesiastical and Civil Power 133. Purification the Original of that Feast and the Ceremonies used on it 35. Purgatory acknowledged by Julian of Toledo 44. R. Relicks ought to be put in Churches 140. Resurrection with the same Bodies 18. Revelations a Canonical Book 59. Rogations or Litanies mentioned by S. Isodore 2. S. Sacrament The Definition of a Sacrament by S. Isidore 2. The Number of Sacraments mentioned by Isidore ib. Sacrifice defined ib. Saints Invocation of Saints by an Image 119. New Saints forbidden to honour them 117. Schools established in Bishopricks and Abbies 119. Scripture a Catalogue of the Canonical Books by S. Isidore 1 2. Service how it ought to be celebrated in the Church 45. A Rule concerning the Service of the Church 58. Simony condemn'd 62 79 81. It is forbidden to take any thing but what is voluntarily offered for Baptism 79. Simony forbidden 121. Condemned 149. Souls their Natures and Qualities 103. Created by God and put into the Body 143. Their State after Death 44. A Vision of that State 95. Created when the Body is formed 14. It is spiritual and retains its faculties after death 27. Holy Spirit its procession from the Father and Son defined in the fourth Council of Toledo 58. Proceeds from the Father and Son 144. Spain Questions determined by the Bishops of Spain 55 56. Sunday Works allowed on Sunday 130. T. Toledo The Bishop of it Metropolitan of the Province of Carthage 53. Holy Thursday Ceremonies used on that day 32. V. Holy Vessels not to be broken unless upon great necessity 57. Virginity the oligation to keep a Vow of Virginity 149. Unction of the Sick common in the eighth Century 119. Usages different among the Greeks and Latins 46 47. Usages of Churches 47. W. Women not allowed to perform any Ecclesiastical Functions 46. ERRATA of Volume VI. PAge 3. line 8. from the bottom read word p. 6. l. 20. from bot r. Anianus and so p. 7. l. 5. p. 12. in marg r. Apthartodocetae p. 15. l. 2. r. Church of Rome p. 19. l. 8. from bot r. rejected them p. 20. l. 12. r. for that reason p. 21. l. 17. from bot 1641. r. 641. l. 11. from bot r. in one p. 25. l. 31. from bot Unities r. Union p. 30. l. 6. in this r. in a. p. 41. l. 2. r. of Forms p. 42. in marg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 43. l. 24. upon r. for l. 25. upon r. about p. 47. l. 9. dele again after married p. 49. l. 12. r. Holstenius l. 14. r. Jarrow p. 51. l. 9. into r. in p. 56. l. 14. from bot the.
suddenly expire and that the Law of the Spirit a great deal more perfect would succeed it This Doctrine spread among a great many Spiritual Men and one of â—hem made a Book to establish it to which he gave the Title of The Eternal Gospel This Piece The Book call'd the Eternal Gospel appear'd about the beginning of this Century but what is the Author's Name is not known Matthew Paris ascribes it to the Order of the Jacobines Aimeric to John the Seventh General of the Franciscans Let the Case be how it will 't is certain that a great many Monks approv'd of this Work and that some of them would have Taught this Doctrine Publickly in the University of Paris in the Year 1254 but the Bishops oppos'd it And the Book of the Eternal Gospel was Condemn'd to be The Condemnation of that Book Burnt in the Year 1256 by Pope Alexander IV. who at the same time Proscrib'd those who maintain'd the Doctrine of that Book as William of Saint Amour and Ptolemey of Lucca assure us All the Errors of this Book turn upon this Principle That the Law of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was The Errors of that Book imperfect in comparison of the law of the Spirit which was to succeed it For according to this Book the Law of the Gospel was to last no longer than Twelve hundred and sixty Years and consequently was upon expiring The Author of that Book advanc'd besides this several particular Errors viz. That none but Spiritual Men had the true Knowledge of the Scriptures That only those who went Bare-foot were capable of Preaching the Spiritual Doctrine That the Jews tho' adhering to their Religion shall be loaded with good things and deliver'd from their Enemies That the Greeks were more Spiritual than the Latines and that God the Father should Save them That the Monks were not oblig'd to suffer Martyrdom in Defence of the Worship of Jesus Christ That the Holy Ghost receiv'd something of the Church as Jesus Christ as Man had receiv'd of the Holy Ghost That the Active Life had lasted till Abbot Joachim but that since his time it was become useless That the Contemplative Life had begun from his time and that it should be more perfect in his Successors That there should be an Order of Monks by far more perfect which should flourish when the Order of the Clergy was perished That in this Third State of the World the Government of the Church would be wholly Committed to those Monks who should have more Authority than the Apostles ever had That those Preachers persecuted by the Clergy should go over to the Infidels and might excite them against the Church of Rome These are some of the Extravagancies which the Authors relate as extracted out of the Book of the Eternal Gospel The Maintainers of this Work are call'd Joachites or rather Joachimites in the Council of Arles 1260 The Condemnation of the Joachimites in the Council of Arles 1260. wherein their Doctrine was Examin'd and Condemn'd in these Terms Among the False Prophets who appear at this time none are more Dangerous than those who taking for the Foundation of their Folly several Ternaries in part true and making false Applications of them establish'd a very pernicious Doctrine and wickedly affecting to do Honour to the Holy Ghost do impudently derogate from the Redemption of Jesus Christ by aiming to include the Time of the Reign of the Son and his Works within a certain Number of Years after which the Holy Ghost shall Act As if the Holy Ghost were to Act with more Power and Majesty for the future than he has done yet since the beginning of the Church These Joachites by a Chimerical Concatenation of certain Ternaries maintain That the time of the Holy Ghost shall for the future be inlighten'd with a more perfect Law laying down for the Foundation of their Error this Holy and Coelestial Ternary of the Ineffable Persons of the Ever-blessed Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost and are for establishing their Error on the Basis of all these Truths They add to this Sovereign Truth other Ternaries by asserting That there shall be Three States or Orders of Men who have had or shall have each their proper Season The First is that of Marry'd Persons which was in Repute in the time of the Father that is under the Old Testament The Second is that of Clerks which has been in esteem in the time of Grace by the Son in this Age of the World The Third is the Order of the Monks which shall be glorify'd in time with a larger measure of Grace which shall be given by the Holy Ghost Three sorts of Doctrines answer to these Three States the Old Testament the New and the Eternal Gospel or the Gospel of the Holy Ghost Lastly They distinguish the whole Duration of the World into Three Ages The time of the Spirit of the Law of Moses which they attribute to the Father the time of the Spirit of Grace which they attribute to the Son and which has lasted 1260. Years and the time of a more Ample Grace and of unveil'd Truth which belongs to the Holy Ghost and of which Jesus Christ speaks in the Gospel when he saies When that Spirit of Truth shall come he will teach you all Truth In the First State Men liv'd according to the Flesh in the Second between Flesh and Spirit and in the Last which shall endure to the end of the World they shall live according to the Spirit The Consequence which they draw from this Fiction of Ternaries is That the Redemption of Jesus Christ has no more place and that the Sacraments are Abolish'd which the Joachites have almost the Impudence to Advance by asserting That all Types and Figures shall be Abolish'd at this time and that the Truth shall appear all naked without the Veil of Sacraments Maxims these are which ought to be Abominated by all Christians who have Read the Holy Fathers and who firmly believe that the Sacraments of the Church are visible Signs and Images of Invisible Grace under the Elements of one of which the Son of God abides as he has promised in his Church to the End of the World This Council adds That tho' this Doctrine had been Condemn'd a while ago by the Holy See in its Censure of the Book of The Eternal Gospel yet because several Persons maintain'd it under a pretence That the Books which serv'd as a Foundation to that Error had not been Examin'd nor Condemn'd viz. the Book of Concordances and the other Books of the Joachites which till then remain'd undiscuss'd because they lay conceal'd in the Hands of some Monks and began then to appear in the World and to Infatuate the Minds of many it Condemns and Disapproves of those Works and prohibits the making use of them under pain of Excommunication In the Year 1240 William Bishop of Paris having Conven'd all the Regent Doctors of the University
in the Chappel of his own Palace The Places there were order'd very near after the same manner as they had been in the Church of St. George at the beginning of the Council The Session began with a long Discourse made by Bessarian about the Advantages of Peace The Conferences of the Greeks and Latins about the Addition to the Creed held at Ferrara after which Mark of Ephesus having spoke of the Charity that was to be preserv'd in Disputes gave them to understand that he would begin with discoursing about the Addition made to the Creed Andrew of Rhodes answer'd on behalf of the Latins by praising the Design of maintaining Charity and would immediately have enter'd upon the Matter about the Addition But Mark of Ephesus stopp'd him and told him That it was not yet time to answer about this Article and having remark'd That the Church of Rome had neglected in times past that Peace which she desir'd at present he said that she could not obtain it but by removing altogether the Principles of Discord and demanded That before any thing was done the Decrees of former Councils should be read In the next Session held the 13th of October Andrew of Rhodes having a mind to begin a Discourse about the Addition to the Creed was interrupted by the Greeks and this Session was spent in Contests about the manner in which they should proceed The Greeks insisting always upon it That it belong'd to them to propose and that in the first place the Decrees of former Councils must be read After much Dispute the Greeks carried it so far That in the third Session held the 10th of October they read the Prohibition made by the Council of Ephesus to add any thing to the Creed upon which Mark of Ephesus made some Reflections and confirm'd it by the Testimony of Saint Cyril and Pope Celestin They reported also the Definition of the 4th 5th 6th and 7th General Councils which would have nothing added to the Creed The Latins produc'd a Manuscript of the 7th Council where they pretended it would be found That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son and assur'd them that this Manuscript was very ancient But the Greeks reply'd That if this had been so Thomas Aquinas and other Latins who were Defenders of this Addition would not have fail'd to relate this Testimony as decisive in the Case In the 4th Conference on the 20th of the same Month after it was agreed That nothing out of Synods should be alledg'd for or against Photius that both Sides should be bounded by the 8th General Council Andrew of Rhodes begun a long Discourse to shew That what the Greeks pretended to be an Addition was a meer Explication which was not forbidden to be made He founded this Proposition particularly upon the Example of the second Council which had added Words to the Nicene Creed to explain more clearly its Doctrin That there was the same Reason as to the word Filioque added by the Latins which was only an Explication of what was in the Nicene Creed That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father because the Son having all that is natural and essential to the Father when 't is said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father it must necessarily be understood that he proceeds also from the Son Andrew of Rhodes continu'd the same Discourse in the next Conference held the 25th of October and undertook to answer the Authorities produc'd by Mark of Ephesus grounding always upon the same Principle That they did not forbid to add Explications or Declarations of the same Faith but only such Things as were contrary to or different from the Doctrin contain'd in the Creed He related many Passages of the Greek Fathers to prove that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son as from the Father and insisted particularly upon the Authority of St. Cyril and Maximus But the Greeks maintain'd that the Passage in this latter was falsified He alledg'd also the Authority of Tarasus the Patriarch of Constantinople and an ancient Manuscript of the 7th Council where the Addition was found He laid some Stress upon the Silence of Photius who had never objected this Addition to the Latins * But this is notoriously false as appears from his Encyclical Epistle to the Patriarchs of the East which is inserted into the 10th Book of Baronius's Annals wherein be charges the Latins with corrupting the Nicene Creed that they might the more freely propagate the Doctrin of the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son and lastly he and the Cardinal Julian concluded this Conference with the Testimonies of St. Cyril and Agathon who acknowledg'd that the Roman Church had Power to explain and establish the Doctrin of Faith The Greeks having conferr'd among themselves about the Discourse of Andrew of Rhodes appointed Bessarion of Nice to answer him He made a long and learned Discourse in the Session held the first of November wherein he undertook to prove That all Additions to the Creed were forbidden and so it was needless to examine whether that made by the Latins was an Explication or no That there was sufficient ground to reject it because it was an Addition That it was not forbidden to explain the Faith but to insert these Explications into the Creed That until the time of the second Council this might have been allow'd but the third had absolutely forbidden it That this Prohibition had been needless if they had only forbidden to add any thing contrary to the ancient Faith since that was always forbidden That the Fathers of this Council had judg'd it not convenient to add to the Creed the Term of Mother of God althoâ—… seem'd necessary to do it And that these Words were only an Explication of the Doctrin contain'd in the Creed That the following Councils would not add their Definitions tho' they were only an Explication of the Doctrin of the Creed Bissarion having not finish'd his Answer to Andrew of Rhodes in this Session continued it in the next held the 4th of November and maintain'd that St. Cyril and Agathon did not only forbid to add any thing contrary to the Creed but also disallow'd of any kind of Addition And as to what they had advanc'd in favour of the Church of Rome's Prerogatives he said That the Greeks knew very well the Rights and Priviledges of that Church but that they knew also the Bounds of them and that when they deny'd the Universal Church and an Oecumenical Council a Right to add to the Creed they had much more Reason to deny it to the Church of Rome or rather they were persuaded that the Councils by their Decrees forbad it When Bessarion had finish'd Andrew of Rhodes undertook to reply but being unprepared he wander'd from the Subject and after he had said many impertinent Things at last he came to the chief Points of the Doctrin John Bishop of Foro-Julio was made choice of by the Latins
still put off the Meeting to Munday next being the 2d Day of March In this Session and the five following John the Theologue for the Latins and Mark of Ephesus for the Greeks disputed earnestly concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit and after they had long contested concerning the Sense of divers Passages of the Greek Fathers each remain'd of his own Opinion without agreeing in any thing The Greek Emperor perceiving plainly That these Disputes were so far from procuring Union that they rather serv'd to exasperate their Spirits call'd his Prelats together to engage them to find out some Temper by means of which an Union might be concluded and he believ'd that he had found out an Expedient by remarking that John the Divine had said That the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks having search'd for divers Expedients thought at last they had found one in a Letter of St. Maximus who says That the Latins by affirming that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son do not pretend that the Son was the Cause of the Spirit and that they know very well that the Father is the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit of the Son by Generation of the Holy Spirit by Procession but they mean only that the Holy Spirit proceeds by the Son because he is of one and the same Essence All the Greeks except Mark of Ephesus and the Archbishop of Heraclea agreed That if the Latins would approve this Letter the Union would easily be concluded The News of this was carried to the Latins who promis'd to give their Answer in the first Conference which was to be held March the 21st The Emperor would not have Mark of Ephesus nor the Archbishop of Heraclea to be there present so that John spoke alone in this Session and in the next which was held the 24th of March. The Greeks were divided among themselves some were Enemies to the Union others on the contrary desir'd it and sought out means to compass it The Emperor supported the latter and desir'd them earnestly to conclude an Union at any price whatsoever He caus'd them therefore to resolve in the Assembly that a Message should be sent to the Pope to tell him That Disputes were useless and they must find out some other way for Union The Pope made answer That the Greeks must acknowledge That the Latins had prov'd very well That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son or else they should have brought Testimonies of Scripture expresly contrary to this Doctrin If they did not That an Assembly must be held wherein they must make Oath upon the Gospels to speak the Truth That after this every one should give his Opinion and that Doctrin should be embrac'd which had a Plurality of Voices This Answer being reported to the Emperor he caus'd tell the Pope That this was not the way to procure an Union That this would end in a Dispute and then they must come to a Decision of it which is what they would avoid and therefore they must pray his Holiness to find out some other way In the mean time Bessarion made a Discourse concerning Union wherein he justified the Doctrin of the Latins The Emperor having a Mind to put an end to this Affair held after Easter a Meeting in the Patriarch's House where the Cardinal Julian was present who endeavour'd to persuade the Greeks to resume their Conferences but the Emperor would not hearken to this Proposal and therefore went himself to meet the Pope and agreed with him That Ten Persons should be appointed on each side who should meet and give their Opinion one after another of the Means which they thought convenient for obtaining an Union Bessarion propos'd in the first Conference That the Latins and Greeks should approve the Letter of Maximus to Marinus without any Explication but the Latins gave it a Sense which was not agreeable to the Greeks Mark of Ephesus propos'd after this That the Addition made to the Creed should be struck out others offer'd for a Model the Profession of Faith made by the Patriarch Tarasus wherein 't is said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son In fine divers Expedients were propos'd in five Conferences which were held on this Subject but not one of them was agreed upon by both Parties After this the Latins drew up a Profession of Faith wherein they declar'd That they would not admit two Principles or two Causes in the Trinity but one only Principle which is the Action of the Father and of the Son and their Productive Power and that the Holy Spirit did not proceed from the Son as from another Principle or another Cause because there is but one Cause one Root and one Fountain of the Divinity which is the Father That notwithstanding this the Father and Son are two Persons tho' they Act by one and the same Operation and that the Person produc'd of the Substance and Subsistence of the Father and the Son is one That those who say the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father must acknowledge that there was a time when the Son was not or else separate the Substance from the Subsistence which is absurd This Profession of Faith was sent to the Greeks by the Latins April the 29th The Greeks not being satisfy'd with it the Latins sent them another which contain'd also the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son yet in such a manner that 't was said the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks after this gave one from their side wherein they declar'd That the Father was the Fountain and Root of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit came forth from the Son and was sent by the Son The Latins desir'd they would explain these Terms and that they would tell in what Sense they took them if they meant them of the Eternal and Substantial Procession of the Holy Spirit or only of a Temporal Mission The Greeks made a Difficulty of doing this At last a Profession of Faith was drawn up conceiv'd in these Words We the Latins on one side do Affirm and make Profession That when we say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son we intend not by this to deny that the Father is the Principle and Fountain of all the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit or that the Son proceeds from the Father or to admit two Principles and two Productiâ—… of the Holy Spirit but we assert and believe That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one sole Principle and by one sole Production And we the Greeks on the other side do acknowledge That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and that he appertains to the Son that he came forth from him and proceeds substantially from these two viz. from the Father
by the Son and we are all united in this unanimous Profession of Faith This Profession of Faith being read in the Assembly of the Greeks was approv'd by some of them and rejected by others But at last having pass'd by Plurality of Voices it was sent to the Popâ—… who demanded still several Explications The Greeks were divided among themselves 〈…〉 of Nice and the Archbishop of Russia maintain'd that it might be said That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and from the Son as the Latins said or from the Father by the Son according to the Expression of the Greeks provided it were acknowledg'd That he proceeded from the Father and the Son as one only Principle and Cause That this was a means of reconciling the Sentiments of the Fathers which seem'd to contradict one another and of coming quickly to an Union Mark of Ephesus the Archbishop of Heraclea and many others were of a contrary Opinion and maintain'd That there was a great deal of difference between saying that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father by the Son and that the Holy Spirit poceeded from the Father and the Son After they had for a long time disputed both on this Subject in the private Congregations the Emperor call'd them all together to give their Opinion on the 2d of June The Patriarch said That since the Fathers taught in some places that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the Son and in others That he proceeded from the Father by the Son and that these Terms from the Son or by the Son were equivalent without making use of this Expression That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son he said That he proceeds from the Father by the Son Eternally and Substantially as one sole Principle and one sole Cause the Preposition by signifying in this place that the Son is the Câ—… the Procession of the Holy Spirit He added That he would receive those of the West who said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son provided they would not add it to the Creed and that the Greeks would unite with them without changing their Rites The Emperor said only in general That he did not believe this Council inferiour to other General Councils That he would follow its Decision being persuaded that the Church cannot Err provided the Latins would not oblige the Greeks to add any thing to the Creed nor change any thing in their Rites After the Emperor Isidore Archbishop of Russia who represented the Patriarch of Antioch said That he believ'd also we must approve the Doctrin of the Occidentals That the Holy Spirit receiv'd his being from the Son and that the Father and the Son were one sole Principle of the Holy Spirit Bessarion was of the same Opinion and made a long Discourse to prove it But Anthony Arch-bishop of Heraclea one of the Vicars of the Patriarch of Alexandria was of another Opinion for he plainly rejected the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son But the * Magnus Primicerius Protosyncelle second Vicar of the same Patriarchat was of a contrary Opinion to him and approv'd the Union with the Latins altho' some Days before he had maintain'd That the Baptism of the Latins was of no validity because it was done by Sprinkling Mark of Ephesus Dositheus Bishop of Monembase Vicar of the Patriarch of Jerusalem and Sophrone of Anchiala would not acknowledge That the Son was the Cause of the Holy Spirit in the Sense that the Greeks took the Word Cause for a Principle and deny'd that it might be said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one only Principle Scyropulus Grand Ecclesiarch was of the same Opinion altho' he gave not his Vote for it Dorotheus Bishop of Mitylene and The Arch-bishop of Trebizonde being Sick would not send his Vote the Bishops of Lacedemon of Rhodes of Nicomedia Distra Drama and Melenique approv'd the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son and concluded for the Union and so did Gregory the Penitentiary and the Abbot Pacomus All the Ministers of the Emperor applauded the Union except Prince Demotrius the Emperor's Brother who would not give his Opinion because he was contrary to the Union The Ambassadors of the Princes and People of Greece who were then present approv'd also the Union except those of the Iberians The Bishops of Cyzicum Trebisonde Heraclea and Monembase came over at last to the Opinion of the others so that there were not any among the Bishops who persisted in a contrary Opinion but only Mark of Ephesus and Sophronius of Anchiala The Emperor having thus dispos'd Matters towards an Union thought it now high time to treat with the Pope about the Succors he wanted He sent to him the Archbishop of Russia to enter upon the Negotiation and this Archbishop brought to him three Cardinals who agreed upon the following Articles First That the Pope should furnish to the Greeks the Expences of their Return Secondly That he should maintain every Year 300 Soldiers and two Gallies to Guard the City of Constantinople Thirdly That the Gallies which carried the Pilgrims to Jerusalem should go to Constantinople Fourthly That when the Emperor had occasion for 20 Gallies for six Months or for 10 for a Year the Pope should furnish him with them Fifthly That if there was occasion for Land-Forces the Pope should earnestly sollicit the Christian Princes of the West to furnish him with them The next Day being the 3d of June the Emperor caus'd all the Greeks to come to the Assembly and to repeat their Suffrages The Patriarch said That since the Latins did not say of their own Heads but according to the Scripture That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son he was of their Opinion and that he thought this Preposition by denoted That the Son was the Cause of the Holy Spirit and thus they would unite with them and embrace their Communion All the Greeks except Mark of Ephesus follow'd the Opinion of the Patriarch and acknowledg'd That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son as one Principle and one Substance That he proceeds by the Son being of the same Nature and the same Substance and that he proceeds from the Father and the Son by one and the same Spiration and Production On the 5th of the same Month the Definition was put in Writing and three Copies were made of it the first which was carried to the Pope the other to the Emperor and the third to the Patriarch of Constantinople The next Day it was carried to the Pope and Cardinals who agreed to it and there were Ten Persons appointed on each side to put the last Hand to it This being done on the 8th of the same Month it was read in Greek and Latin and approv'd by the Greeks and Latins The next Day the Archbishops of Russia Nice Trebisonde and Mitylene being
Venice to take up some Gallies there After he had said this he would have given a Writing to the Emperor who refus'd to receive it The Pope being angry at this Refusal withdrew but he caus'd tell the Emperor by the Cardinal Julian that after the Affair was concluded he might return that he would defray his Charges as far as Venice and give him assistance to go to Constantinople The Greek Prelats having examin'd a-new the Articles propos'd by the Latins found them reasonable and pass'd even the Article of Purgatory On the 17th of June the Emperor call'd together the Greek Prelats who were all found to be of the same Opinion about the Union except Mark of Ephesus who remain'd unmoveable The next Sunday they examin'd the Privileges of the Pope and approv'd them all adding to them two Conditions First That the Pope could not Call an Oecumenical Council without the Emperor and the Patriarchs Secondly That in Case of an Appeal from the Judgment of the Patriarchs the Pope could not call the Cause to Rome but he must send Judges to sit in the Places where the Fact is committed The Pope being unwilling to pass these two Articles the Emperor was ready to break off the whole Negotiation but the Greek Prelats some Days after drew up the Article concerning the Pope in these Words As to the Pope's Supremacy we confess That he is the High-Priest and the Vicar of Jesus Christ the Pastor and Teacher of all Christians who governs the Church of God saving the Privileges and Rights of the Eastern Patriarchs viz. of Constantinople who is next after the Pope and then of Alexandria of Antioch and lastly of Jerusalem This Project was agreed to by the Pope and Cardinals and all Parties consented to labour from the next Day in composing the Decree of Union The first Difficulty which presented it self was to fix upon the Name that should be put at the Head the Latins would have it to be that of the Pope and the Emperor pretended to the contrary that it should be his At last it was order'd That the Pope's Name should be put there but then it should be added with the Consent of the Emperor the Patriarch of Constantinople and the other Patriarchs There was another Difficulty about the manner of expressing the Pope's Privileges The Latins would have it put thus that he should enjoy them as was determin'd in Scripture and the Writings of the Saints This Expression pleas'd not the Emperor for says he If any Saint has made honorary Complements in a Letter to the Pope shall this be taken for a Privilege And therefore he said That he would not pass this Article as it was thus express'd The Pope consented but with Difficulty that it should be amended and that in stead of saying according to the Writings of the Saints it should be put according as was contain'd in the Canons The Archbishop of Russia and Bessarion would have an Anathema pronounc'd against those who did not approve this Decree but the Archbishop of Trebizonde and the Protosyncelle oppos'd it and the Emperor was of their Opinion At last all the Words of the Decree having been for a long time weigh'd and examin'd on both sides it was fairly written out in Greek and Latin and a Day was set for Signing it and then concluding solemnly the Union The manner of expressing this Decree is as follows The Title of it is The Definition The Decreâ— of Union between the Greeks and the Latins of the Holy Oecumenical Council celebrated at Florence of Eugenius the Servant of the Servants of God to serve for a perpetual Monument with the Consent of our dear Son John Palaeologus the Illustrious Emperor of the Greeks and of those who supply the place of our most venerable Brethren the Patriarchs and of the other Prelats representing the Greek Church The Preface is a kind of an Hymn which contains the joyful Thoughts and Thanksgivings for the Union of the two Churches after which the Definition is express'd in these Words The Greeks and Latins being Assembled in this Holy Oecumenical Council have us'd all Care to examine with the greatest exactness possible the Article which concerns the Holy Spirit and after the Testimonies of Holy Scripture and the Passages of Greek and Latin Fathers were related whereof some import that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son and others that he proceeds from the Father by the Son it was acknowledg'd That they had all the same Sense tho' they make use of divers Expressions That the Greeks by saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father did not intend to exclude the Son but in regard the Greeks thought that the Latins by affirming The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son admitted of two Principles and two Spirations therefore they abstain from saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son The Latins on the contrary affirm'd That by saying the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son they had no design to deny that the Father was the Fountain and Principle of the whole Divinity viz. of the Son and of the Holy Spirit nor to pretend that the Son does not receive from the Father that wherein the Holy Spirit proceeds from him nor lastly to admit two Principles or two Spirations but that they did acknowledge there was one only Principle and one only Procession of the Holy Spirit as they had always held And forasmuch as these Expressions came all to one and the same true Sense they did at last agree and conclude the following Union with unanimous consent Therefore in the Name of the Holy Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost by the Advice of this Holy Oecumenical Council Assembled at Florence we Define that the truth of this Faith be believ'd and receiv'd of all Christians and that all profess that the Holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son that he receives his Substance and his Subsisting Being from the Father and from the Son and that he proceeds from these two eternally as one only Principle and by one only Procession declaring That the Holy Doctors and Fathers who say That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son have no other Sense which they discover by this That the Son is as the Father according to the Greeks the Cause and according to the Latins the Principle of the Subsistence of the Holy Spirit and by this That the Father has Communicated to the Son in his Generation all that he has except that he is the Father and also has given him from all Eternity that wherein the Holy Spirit proceedeth from him We define also That this Explication and of the Son was added lawfully and justly to the Creed to clear up the Truth and not without necessity We declare also That the Body of Jesus Christ is truly consecrated in Bread-Corn whether it be Leaven'd or Unleaven'd and that the Priests
Union at Florence retracted there That this Council condemn'd all that had been done by this Decree rejected the Doctrin of the Latins concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son the Addition made to the Creed and the other Points about which the Latins differ'd from the Greeks That he accused also the Latins of many abuses which he pretended they were guilty of in the Ecclesiastical Discipline The Acts of this Council were sent from Greece to Allatius of which he published an Abridgment in an Appendix to his Book about the Consent of the Greek and Latin Churches but he proves by good reasons that these Acts could not be true and that they contain divers Things contrary to the History of that Time Howsoever this were 't is certain that the Greeks continue still firm in their Adherence to the ancient Doctrin and in their Schism from the Latins To return now into the West The Council of Basil had all this while continu'd with the The Comnâ—lloâ— Basil. consent of the Emperor the King of France and other Princes who had not approv'd its Translation to Ferrarâ— nor sent Ambassadors to Florence except the Duke of Burgundy altho they had not receiv'd the Decrees of the Council against Pope Eugenius but continu'd still to acknowledge him for Pope and so observ'd a kind of Neutrality From the Twenty third of January 1438. Charles the seventh King of France caused to be publish'd an Edict wherein he forbids the Prelats of his Kingdom to go to Ferrara but at the same time he declares that he would not depart from his Obedience to the Holy See In Germany the Electors of the Empire Assembled at Frankfort after the death of Sigismund to choose an Emperor and there made a Decree the Eighteenth of March wherein they declare That they do equally acknowledge Eugenius and the Council Regulations made in France and Germany concerning the Council and that â—â—ey do not receive the Decrees made by the Council against Eugenius or by Eugenius against the Council and took six Months time to consult what they should do during which time they Ordain'd That the Church should be Govern'd according to the usual Laws At the same time they sent Deputies to the Council of Basil to perswade the Fathers to stop the Prosecution of their Process against Eugenius which was also demanded by the Ambassador of the Duke of Milan and maintain'd by the Italian and Spanish Prelates But Louis Cardinal of Arles President of the Council and the greatest part of the Fathers would have the Process go on without any stop Hereupon a general Congregation was held the Twenty eighth of May at which in spight of the opposition they met with from the Ambassadors of the Kings of Castile Arragon and of the Duke of Milan they receiv'd the Accusations that were fram'd against Eugenius and it was order'd that proof of them should be made by witnesses Albert of Austria who had been chosen Emperor in the Assembly of Frankfurt the Twentieth of March appointed for his Ambassadors to the Council the Bishop of Lubeck and George Wischel the same that had been in Sigismund's time approv'd the Council and renew'd the Securities his Predecessor had given to the Prelats there Assembled And they in requital for this granted him the Sums that had been gather'd in Austria for the Voyage of the Greeks But being press'd by the Legats of the Council to cause the Decrees made against Eugenius to be observ'd in Germany he referr'd this Affair to the Assembly of the Princes of Germany which was to be held the Twentieth of July In the mean time the Electors having a mind to cure the Division that was between the Council and the Pope sent Ambassadors to Eugenius to persuade him that he would appoint a third Place in Germany for the holding of a General Council Eugenius made them answer that he waited for the Ambassadors of the new Emperor and that in the mean time he thought it convenient That an Assembly should be held in Germany to which he would send his Legats wherein an Accommodation might be treated of and declared to them That if any other place should be thought more expedient for the good of the Church wherein to hold the Council he would consent to it The Princes of Germany having obtain'd this promise from Eugenius sent their Ambassadors to Basil to pray the Fathers of the Council to delay the Process against Eugenius until the time of that Assembly Fifty Persons were made choice of to examine the Proposal and to consider what was fit to be done Some were of opinion That they should wholly supersede all kind of Prosecution against Eugenius for the space of three Months the Cardinal of Arles on the contrary thought That tho they might stop the Sentence of Deposition for three Months yet in the mean time they must receive the Depositions of Witnesses against Eugenius That he might no longer glory of his Innocence and that he did not believe the Council had accus'd him falsly That this would Facilitate even the Accomodation because Eugenius would â—e more pliable when he knew that his Crimes were prov'd In the Month of July the Cardinal of Tarragona and the Ambassadors of the King of France arriv'd at the Council of Basil. The latter brought thither the Pragmatick Sanction drawn up a little while before and received the seventh of the same Month in the Assembly held at Bourges and compos'd of Twenty three Articles drawn from the Decrees of the Council of Basil and chiefly from those concerning the Authority of a General Council about Collations Elections Promises of Benefices when they shall be vacant Appeals Annates and other Exactions about the Celebration of Divine Service Interdicts c. whereof some are nevertheless modified or explain'd They were commanded to desire the Confirmation of it from the Fathers of the Council and at the same time to pray them to stop their Proceedings against Eugenius upon assurance which the King gave them that he would labour for Peace The Council thought noâ—â—it to delay and therefore in the next Month of August declar'd in a General Congregation That all those who were in the Retinue of Eugenius or at Ferrara under pretence of a Council and all those who opposed the Council of Basil in any manner whatsoever had incurr'd the Penalties Enacted by the Council The Assembly of the German Princes being held at Nuremberg about the end of July the Council sent thither its Deputies those from the Emperor and the Princes propos'd to them The Resolutions of the Assemblies held in Germany about the Neutrality That they should appoint Mediators of the difference between the Council and the Pope which they refus'd Some time after the Proceedings against Eugenius were renew'd and notwithstanding the Opposition of the Ambassadors and the Prelats of Spain Navar and Milan it was resolved in a General Congregation held
long before The Letter of Jovian to St. Athanasius and that of St. Athanasius to Jovian which are in the Second Volume are much to be suspected That of St. Athanasius discovers the Forgery because it contains a Confession of Faith different from that of the Council of Nice and 't is certain that he sent no other to this Emperour The Author of this Letter writes in such terms as plainly discover that he was not St. Athanasius but rather Apollinarius since he acknowledges but one Nature in Jesus Christ and indeed Leontius testifies that Apollinarius had inserted this Doctrine in a Letter to the Emperour Jovian The Book of Definitions which are pretended to be Collections out of St. Clement and other holy Fathers cannot be St. Athanasius's since the Author cites in it Gregory Nyssen in the Chapter of the Act. Moreover he speaks of two Natures and one Person in Jesus Christ as if he had written after the Birth of the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches A good part of the Book is taken out of a Book of Anastasius Sinaita entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Guide and in some Manuscripts the Definitions are ascrib'd to Maximus under whose Name Father Combefis has Publish'd them All the Learned agree that the Seven Dialogues of the Trinity are not St. Athanasius's ll The Seven Dialogues of the Trinity are not St. Athanasius ' s. 1. The Author speaks there of an Addition made by the Council of Constantinople to the Nicene Creed Annon vos fidei Nicenae adjecistis says the Heretick and the Catholick answers Sed non ipsi pugnantia 2. He explains the Six Epithets given to the Holy Spirit by the Council 3. He treats there of subtle Questions about the Trinity which were not started in the Time of St. Athanasius 4. He opposes Eunomius and Macedonius whom St. Athanasius did never particularly attack 5. The Author of the Dialogue acknowledges Three Hypostases in Jesus Christ. 6. The Stile is wholly different from that of St. Athanasius There are cited indeed in the Lateran Council under Martin the 1st Secret 6. Three Testimonies of St. Athanasius and the 3d. under this Title In sermone Athanasii qui per modum Interrogationis Responsionis cum Apollinario fit which Title agrees well enough with these Dialogues But what is here related is no where to be found the difference of the Stile the Terms and the Doctrine are convincing Proofs of it and 't is plain that the Author of this Treatise liv'd since the Council of Constantinople at the time when the Disputes about the Incarnation of Jesus Christ were afoot in the Church Father Combefis has restor'd them to Maximus mm Father Combefis has restor'd them to Maximus In the Greek Manuscript which Beza us'd 't is observ'd on the Margin This Dialogue is not St. Athanasius ' s but some say 't is Maximus ' s. Two other Manuscripts of Rome and Venice and that of Dufresne attribute it to Maximus Gregorius Protosyncellus Veccus Acyndinus Demetrius and some other modern Greeks cite it often under the Name of Maximus and seldom under that of St. Athanasius It appears by the Stile and by all the Arguments in that Author that these Seven Dialogues are by one and the same Hand and the Authorities which we have alledg'd do plainly show that they ought to be attributed to Maximus upon the Authority of some Manuscripts and the Testimony of the Modern Greeks who cite them often under the Name of this Author Garnerius a very learned Jesuit ascribes them to Theodoret and has printed them under his Name in a pretended Supplement to the Works of this Father But he has nothing to support this Opinion but some slight Conjectures nn Garnerius has nothing to support this Opinion but some slight Conjectures He has no Manuscripts nor Citations from the Ancients All that he says to prove it is 1st That Theodoret writ against the Arians the Eunomians the Macedonians and the Apollinarists as he testifies in many Places of his Works 2. That the Doctrine the Expressions and the Reasons of this Author resemble those of Theodoret and this Author denies as well as he that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son These Conjectures are very slight when there are no Manuscripts for him for it may so happen that Two Authors writing upon the same Principles may agree very near in these Things besides the Resemblance of the Stile is not so great as Garnerius would have us believe The Proofs which he brings to show that this Treatise is none of Maximus's are not of any greater Weight He says this Book was written before the Creed of Ephesus because there is no Mention in it of the Nestorians and Eutychians That from Maximus's Time the Question was no longer treated of de Genito Ingenito That there is no Probability that Maximus should dispute against the Anomaeans without opposing the Eutychians and Monothelites 'T is easie to confute these Conjectures by saying that Maximus in these Books disputed against the ancient Heresies and that he sufficiently oppos'd those of his own Time in his other Books and he does not sufficiently refute the Assertion of Father Combefis The following Book entituled A Tragedy is falsly attributed to St. Athanasius Photius in Cod. 46. sets down all the Titles of the Questions which are handled in this Book with some others that are not found there and ascribes them to Theodoret. Garnerius upon the Credit of Marius Mercator attributes them to Etherius Tyanaeus a Disciple of Theodoret. The Questions to Antiochus and those that follow them are yet later oo The Questions to Antiochus and those that follow them are yet later In these Questions to Antiochus the Author cites many Writers more modern than St. Athanasius as Gregory Nyssen in his 8th The Author of the Book ascribed to St. Denys Ibid. St. Epiphanius Question 3. And many others in other Places They have nothing of the Stile of St. Athanasius and the Author in many Places is of a contrary Opinion In short in Athanasius's Time those kind of Questions that were more Curious than useful were not suffer'd The Questions that follow about the Explication of some Doubts upon Places of Holy Scripture and the other anonymous Questions are by the same Author as the preceding and are only a Collection of Passages taken out of St. Chrysostom St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Gregory Nyssen St. Climacus St. Maximus which are sometimes recited under their Names The Author of these Questions calls the Occidentalists by the Name of Franks and says that the Romans are a Nation of the Franks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which plainly discovers that they were compos'd by the Modern Greeks after the Empire of the West came to the Franks The modern Greeks have made many such Collections which they have put forth under the Name of ancient and famous Fathers than those Books of which we have already spoken These were made
also some Idea of the Holy Spirit by comparing him to the Breath that is in us and then after that he would have us to prove the Existence of the Divine Word by the Testimonies of Holy Scripture To make the Incarnation appear probable to the Jews and to the Gentiles he shews them That Man has fallen from the State wherein he was created That his Nature is corrupted by Sin That it cannot be said that God is the Author of Evil That therefore Man must have fallen by his own Fault and by abusing his Liberty but that Man being once fallen must be raised up again by him who created him and thus it was reasonable that the Word who created him should come himself to raise him from his Fall and save him from his Shipwrack Afterwards he answers all the Difficulties which are propos'd against the Incarnation he says That it was not unworthy of God to be born of a Virgin to Eat to Drink to Die and to be Buried because these things are neither criminal nor dishonourable That the Divinity being united to the Humane Nature did not lose its Divine Perfections as the Soul does not lose its Spiritual Perfections by being united to the Body That the Union of Soul and Body to compose a Man is no less incomprehensible than the Union of the Divine and Humane Nature in Jesus Christ That the Miracles of Jesus Christ his extraordinary Birth and his Resurrection are evident Proofs of his Divinity That the Reason which mov'd him to become Man was his Good-Will towards Men and his Compassion towards Mankind That his Divinity always continued impassible and incorruptible That the Incarnation of Jesus Christ was the most natural Remedy for us miserable Sinners and most agreeable to the Goodness the Justice the Wisdom and Power of God That he came at such a time when Wickedness was arriv'd to its highest pitch That he called all Men but by calling them to the Faith he did not take away their Liberty and this was the reason why many of them still perish'd That Men ought not to be compell'd and forc'd to do good for this would take away the praise of good Actions and the blame of bad ones That Christ ought to die that he might be wholly like unto us and that he might confirm our Resurrection by his own That all that he did after his Resurrection firmly proves his Divinity Afterwards he speaks of Baptism and the Eucharist He says of Baptism that there are Three Things in this Sacrament which conduct us to Immortal Life Prayer Water and Faith That the Regeneration which is wrought in Baptism ought not to be attributed to the Water but to a Divine Virtue That by dipping the Person under Water Three Times the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ is represented That without Baptism no Man can be wash'd from his Sins because by it the Divine Virtue is rendred effectual in consequence of that which he believes to depend upon Free-will That as the Soul is united to God by Baptism and by Faith so the Body is united to God by the Eucharist This is the Doctrine of St. Gregory Nyssen who says That the Body of Jesus Christ entring into us is an Antidote or Preservative against Sin That it changes and transforms us into him and communicates unto us Incorruptibility Afterwards he enquires How it is possible that this Body which is distributed alone to so many Millions of the Faithful over all the Earth should be entire in each of these and in each part which they receive and yet not cease to remain still entire in it self And he answers That the Body of Jesus Christ having been the Habitation of the Word of God was chang'd into a Divine Dignity And therefore I have reason to believe says he that to this Day the Bread being Sanctified by the Word of God is chang'd into the Body of the Word of God For here the Bread is Sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer not that 't is presently turn'd into the Body of God by eating it but because it is tranform'd and chang'd at the same time into his Body as the Word has said in these Words This is my Body He adds That this Flesh of Jesus Christ is communicated to us and is changed into us by means of the Bread and Wine which God hath chang'd and transformed into his Body by Virtue of the Sacred Benediction He speaks in the following Discourse of Regeneration He thinks that it depends in some manner upon our Will and Free Pleasure and shews that it is unprofitable unless after we have received the Sacrament we lead a Life free from Sin At last he Discourses of the Reward of those who have liv'd well and the punishment of the wicked He affirms That the Fire of Hell is of another Nature than the Fire upon Earth There are at the End some Periods added against the Heretick Severus Some Protestant Criticks have call'd this Book in Question whether it was St. Gregory's or no but the ablest as Casaubon and Albertin have been forc'd to acknowledge it because they found it quoted oftentimes by Theodoret in his Dialogues and taken notice of by Euthymius Zigabenus In the Book of Faith address'd to Simplicius St. Gregory treats of the Trinity There he proves the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit and Answers the principal Objections of the Hereticks The Discourse which was formerly Entituled Of Great Abraham is now Of the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit there he answers the Anomaeans whom he compares to the Epicureans and the Stoicks he makes also a great Digression in praise of Abraham wherein he describes the Sacrifice of his Son very naturally In the Treatise address'd to Ablavius and Entituled That we must not say there are Three Gods he shews that the Three Divine Persons cannot be call'd Three Gods but that they are One God only The Treatise to Eustathius and that of the Difference of Hypostasis and Nature are upon the same Subject but they are found as we have already said among the Letters of St. Basil and 't is probable that the first was written by him The Latin Treatise which contains the Passages of the Old Testament to prove the Divinity of the Son against the Jews is not St. Gregory Nyssen's since St. Chrysostom who liv'd after St. Gregory is cited in it The Treatise of Common Notions address'd to the Greeks is a scholastical Treatise about the Terms by which the Ancients us'd to explain the Mystery of the Trinity There are two little Tracts of St. Gregory Nyssen's against Apollinarius the one very short in the First Volume which is probably nothing but a Fragment the other a little longer in the Second Volume There he refutes some Objections of this Heretick and proves that 't is the same Word which appear'd to the Patriarchs and which assum'd real Flesh in time and which is so intimately united to
pure may present themselves before God Clean and Unclean Beasts are the subject of some Allegoties These are the subject of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Books Lastly The Obligations and Sacrifices of the Law are Types of the Spiritual Obligations which we ought to offer to God and the solemn Festivals of the Jews denote to us the Celestial Rewards This is the subject of the Two last Books It is easy to judge by what we have said how mystical a Work this is and how full of allegorical and unusual Explications He must needs have an inexhaustible Fund of them to furnish out Seventeen Books so long as these are which are all-a-long carried on with continual Allegories His * Printed alone in Lat. at Paris in 1605. and in Greek and Latin by A. Schottus at Antwerp in 1618. Glaphyra upon the Pentateuch are not less full of Mystical Notions In them he referrs to Jesus Christ and his Church all that is said in the Pentateuch There is not any History Circumstance or Precept which he applies not to Jesus Christ or the New Testament These sorts of Commentaries are of little use for they help nothing towards the literal Explication they teach little Morality they prove no Doctrine all passes into Metaphysical Considerations and abstract Comparisons which are not proper either to convince Unbelievers or edify the Faithful The long Commentary upon Isaiah which is contained in the Second Tome is much more rational S. Cyril therein applies himself to the literal Sence of this Prophet and doth not digress so much from the Natural Sence to find out Jesus Christ because the Prophecy of Isaiah agrees more naturally to him This Commentary is divided into Six Parts The same Judgment may be given upon the Commentary upon the Twelve Prophets in which also he sets himself to the literal Explication so that there is a great deal of difference between the Commentaries of this Father upon the Prophets and his Writings upon the Pentateuch M. Simon doth not think so but having spoken of the Commentaries of this Father upon the Pentateuch as a Work purely allegorical he adds That he passes over in silence his Commentaries upon the Prophet Isaiah because this Father is very uniform in his Method But whosoever will give himself the trouble to read any Place of his Commentaries upon Genesis and Exodus and compare them with some other Place of his Commentary upon Isaiah or the Minor Prophets he will find in them a very considerable difference The Commentaries upon the Gospel of S. John which make up the Fourth Tome do explain also the Letter and Connexion of the Gospel but he now and then intermixes with it some Theological Questions And because those which concern the Trinity come in naturally in the Gospel of S. John he ordinarily treats of them in proving the Divinity Consubstantiality and Equality of the Son of God He also speaks of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and observes that it proceeds from the Son and takes his Nature of the Son Sometimes he proves that the Law was Figurative and that Salvation and Grace are passed from the Jews to the Gentiles There is also a Chapter in it about Liberty and Man These are the principal Points he treats of This Commentary is very long and divided into Twelve Books We have only some Fragments of the Seventh and Eighth The Fifth and Sixth are not extant in this no more than in the preceeding Editions But Jodoâ—us Clictovaeus a Doctor of Paris who hath translated this Commentary of S. Cyril hath composed Four Books to supply those that are wanting which hath given occasion to some Authors to quote them as S. Cyril's It is true that they are almost all taken out of the ancient Fathers but 't was * But he affixed them to S. Cyril as the Fathers and not made by himself Clictovaeus that collected them not S. Cyril The Fifth Tome of S. Cyril's Works hath Two Parts which make Two Volumes The First contains his Thesaurus and Dialogues upon the Trinity and Incarnation and the Second is made up of his Homilies and Letters His Thesaurus is a Work upon the Trinity in which he lays down Thirty five Propositions about the Divinity and Consubstantiality of the Son and Holy Spirit which he proves exactly after the manner of the Schools by Texts of Scripture upheld and supported by Arguments and Syllogisms in Form which he uses to subdue the Arians and Eunomians and to retort upon them those Testimonies of Holy Scripture which they commonly alledged He propounds their Objections in the same manner and answers them with the like Subtilties Georgius Trapezuntius hath published a very imperfect Version or rather a Latin Abridgment of this Book in which he hath taken out changed and added several things and quite inverted the Order of S. Cyril But since Vulcanius Brugenâ—â—s hath made a faithful Translation which was published at Basil in 1576. There can be no doubt that this Work is S. Cyril's since Photius had read it and described it to be such as we have in the 136th Volume of his Bibliotheca S. Thomas often quotes a Passage in favour of the Court of Rome as being taken out of the Second Book of S. Cyril's Thesaurus which is not to be found entire in that Work But we need only to read it and we shall be satisfied that there was never any such nor ever could be found there This is the famous Passage as he cites it We must remain as Members in our Head in the Apostolick Throne of the Roman Bishops from whom we ought to request whatsoever is necessary to be believed and held having a particular Respect for him and enquiring of him about all Things because it belongs to him to reprove correct order dispose things loose in his stead who hath founded him and given him a fulness of Power him alone â—â—d not any other to whom all the Faithful are obliged by Divine Right to be subject and whom the Princes of the World should obey Who of all the Greek or Latin Fathers ever spake thus Who of them ever flattered the Bishop of Rome at this rate But how is it possible for it to enter into the Thesaurus of S. Cyril which is nothing else but a contexture of Texts and Arguments upon the Trinity What coherence hath our pretended Passage with that Subject What doth this Phrase mean That we may remain as Members in our Head which 〈◊〉 the Apostolick Throne of the Roman Bishops Did ever any Author speak any thing like it To whom doth he speak these Words And of whom are they spoken That we may remain Members c. Are they the Bishops of Aegypt that speak them Could it find a Place in a Theological Treatise of one Father only S. Thomas is the First that cited this Passage and we know with how much carelesness and with how little Judgment he quotes the Works of the Fathers It likewise
the Council but contemning all these Rules he had rashly and inconsiderately pronounced a Sentence of Deposition against them immediately after his arrival without letting them know for what reason he condemned them That it was a matter of consequence not to suffer the Laws of the Church to be despised That one Bishop dared to do such things to another who ought to have the precedence That he would not dare to attempt the like against the meanest Person of the Clergy These Considerations forced them to desite the Council to Summon John and his Associates to give an Account of their behaviour before the Synod Hesychius Juvenal's Deacon read this Petition and Juvenal presided upon this Occasion because S. Cyril taking upon him the Person of an Accuser could not preside in it nor his Notary give his Opinion in it The Synod having respect to the Demand of S. Cyril and Memnon sent twice some Bishops to John Bishop of Antioch and the Bishops of his Party but they were not suffered to enter and the only Answer which was made them was that they would not have any thing to do with Persons which they had Excommunicated Then the Council pronounced that all that had been done against Cyril and Memnon was Null and ordered that John Bishop of Antioch should be cited a third time and if he did not appear he should be condemned The same Day John caused an Abusive Libel to be fastned in a publick Place not only against Cyril and Memnon but also against all the Bishops of their Council declaring Cyril and Memnon Deposed for Heresie and the other Bishops Excommunicate for favouring them till they should forsake them and re-unite themselves with the Eastern Bishops The next Day the Council being assembled again S. Cyril made his Report concerning the Libel of John Bishop of Antioch and declared that he Condemned Arius Apollinaris and the other Hereticks as well as Nestorius and the Followers of Pelagius and Caelestius Whereupon he required that John Bishop of Antioch should be cited the third time And they sent three Bishops and a Notary to him John Bishop of Antioch received them by his Arch-Deacon who would have given them a Paper as from the Council but they declared that they came not to receive any Act V. Paper but to cite John Bishop of Antioch This Arch-Deacon went to tell his Bishop so and being returned presented them again with his Paper and because they would not receive it he said to them Let No body come from you and we will send No body from our side we have sent our Resolutions to the Emperor and we wait his Orders to know what we shall do The Bishop insisting upon it and desiring him to hear what the Synod had given them in Charge to say He answered You have refused to receive the Paper which I have tendered to you and I will not hear the Orders of your Synod This being said he withdrew himself The Bishops told Asphalius and Alexander the Priest the Reason of their coming and then returned to give the Synod a Relation of the whole Matter who declared John Bishop of Antioch and the 36 Bishops his Adherents to be separated from the Communion of the Church and then gave the Emperor an Account of what they had done praying him to confirm it by his Authority and consent to all that they had done They also wrote a Synodical Letter to S. Caelestine in which they relate all that had passed at Ephesus and tell him That they had read and approved his Synodical Decrees against the Paelagians and Caelestians in the Council He sent him also a Copy of the Acts of the Council This Act was concluded with a Sermon preached by S. Cyril at Ephesus against John Bishop of Antioch The Eastern Bishops on their side wrote to the Emperor that Cyril and Memnon having been Deposed by their Synod could not be absolved by Bishops Excommunicated and they prayed the Emperor to send for them to Constantinople or at lest to Nicomedia and not to permit any Metropolitan to bring more than two Bishops of his Province because a great Multitude is only fit to cause disturbance That their Adversaries had brought with them a great number of Bishops contrary to the Intentions and Orders of the Emperor That as for themselves they had obeyed them exactly by bringing only three Bishops out of each Province and had sent no Bishop to Court as their adversaries had done but contented themselves with writing to him because they would not disobey his Orders They sent this Letter by Count Ireraeus The 6th Session of the Council was held July 22. Because the Eastern Bishops accused the Bishops of the Council of introducing another Creed besides that of the Council of Nice they read Act VI. it in this Session declared their approbation of it in general and owned that it contained a Sound and Orthodox Doctrine But they added that several Persons who pretended to acknowledge it putting false Interpretations upon it they had been forced to produce the Testimonies of the Holy Fathers to discover the true meaning of it Then they read over again the Testimonies of the Fathers which they had quoted already at the Condemnation of Nestorius This done that they might fasten the Reproach which was laid upon them upon their Adversaries themselves they caused Charisius a Priest and a Steward of the Church of Philadelphia to present a Petition apainst one James a Priest a Friend of Nestorius accusing him for making the Quartodecimans who returned to the Communion of the Church to sign a Confession of Faith different from the Nicene Creed and full of Heresie He alledged that form of Faith which M. Mercator attributes to Theodorus of Mopsuesta although there be not the least word spoken of it in that Session that among other things maintains That the Holy Spirit hath not derived his Subsistence from the Son that we Adore the Son of Man in Jesus Christ because of its inseparable Union with the Word That there is but one Son which is the Word to whom the Manhood being inseparably joyned partakes of his Dignity and is called God and Lord after a particular manner This Creed and the Names of those that signed it being read the Council made this famous Declaration That it is not allowable to any Person whatsoever to Alledge Write or make a Different Creed from that which was made by the Holy Fathers Assembled at Nice and that all those who are so audacious as to make or alledge or offer any other to be signed by such as turn themselves or are converted to the Church whether they be Jews Pagans or Hereticks if they be Bishops or Clergy-men they shall be degraded from their Dignity and if they are Lay-men they shall be accursed Then they read the Extracts of Nestorius and Peter the Chief-Notary observed that he owned that he was the first that had spoken in that manner This Act
his Grace to enlighten them and to make the Word fruitful in them for in vain does the Word of God strike our Ears if God does not open our Understanding by his Grace Thus ends this Answer of the Bishops of Afric which is worthy of the Faithful Disciples of St. Austin The Books of Faustus against these Principles were publish'd at Constantinople and because they made a great noise these Monks sent them to St. Fulgentius who wrote seven Books to refute them This Work is not printed Father Vignerus of the Oratory had a Manuscript of it but since his Death it is not known what is become of it St. Fulgentius had finish'd it before he was call'd back into Afric When he was upon his return thither he wrote upon the same subject and according to the same Principles three Books of Predestination and Grace address'd to John the Priest and Venerius a Deacon He shows in the first Book That Predestination is purely gratuitous and that it does not depend upon the prospect of Men's Merits The example of Infants is one of his strongest Proofs But whereas some save themselves by saying That God permits them to receive or not to receive Baptism according to the knowledge of the good or evil which he foresaw they should have done if they had liv'd he rejects this Solution and this middle Science In the second Book he confesses that the Good and Evil have a Free-will but he maintains that it is aided and improv'd in good Men by Grace and that it is weakned and punish'd in the bad that it is God who converts us and worketh in us to will that which is good that 't is he who gives us the design and will to pray that the Will of Man always follows the grace of God which precedes it Towards the end he confutes the Opinion of his Adversaries who affirm'd That the Vessels of honour and dishonour mention'd by the Apostle are not the Predestinate and the Reprobate but the Vessels of dishonour are the Poor the Monks and Ecclesiasticks and the Vessels of honour are the Noble the Rich and the Potentates of this World He proves that this Exposition is false and hereupon he says That in this World there is no Dignity in the Church above that of a Bishop nor in Secular Affairs above that of a Christian Emperor but all the Bishops and Emperors are not Vessels of Mercy but only those who acquit themselves well in their Offices A Bishop says he shall not be sav'd because he is a Bishop but he shall be sav'd if he watch over his Flock if he preach the Word in season and out of season if he reproves sinners if he uses to them Entreaties and Rebukes with all kind of patience and meekness if he has not the spirit of domineering and pride if according to the Command of the Apostle he serves for an Example to all his Flock So likewise an Emperor is not a Vessel of Mercy destin'd to Glory because he has the Soveraign Power but he shall be if he live in the Orthodox Faith if being possessed of true Humility he makes his Royal Dignity subservient to Religion if he loves rather to serve God with fear then to command his People with pride if he moderates his severity by a spirit of meekness if his power is accompanied with goodness if he would rather be lov'd then fear'd if he minds nothing but the good of his Subjects if hâ— loves Justice without forgetting Mercy if he remembers in all his Actions that he is a Son of the Church and that he ought to employ his power for its quiet and peace For this Honour for the Church makes the Emperors greater and more glorious then all their Battels and Victories In the third Book he returns to Predestination and having affirm'd that it is gratuitous that Vocation Justification and Glory are its effects that it is infallible and certain that the number of the Predestin'd is determin'd and that it is impossible to add too or take away any from them he answers this great Objection That if this were so we ought then neither to pray nor watch but follow our own Wills since if we are of the number of the predestin'd we shall infallibly be sav'd and if we are not we cannot be sav'd He says That this Objection is like that of those to whom God should promise a long Life when they infer from this promise that they will no more take those things that are necessary to maintain this Life He adds That as the love of Life makes him to whom this promise is made seek for those things which are necessary to maintain it so the Grace which God has prepared for us by his Predestination does infallibly make us watch pray and labour Afterwards he enlarges upon this Passage God would have all men to be sav'd and is of Opinion that the true sense of it is That God would have some Men of all Nations Ages and Conditions sav'd and not that he wills the Salvation of every Man in particular since he would not make himself known to such Men as would have believed in him if he had made himself known unto them From hence he passes to consider the difference between the state of the first Man and ours The first Man was perfectly and fully free he had no inclination to evil and he had the power to do good by the assistance of that Grace which he could use or not use But since sin entred the liberty of Man's Will is deprav'd and his Free-will is become a Slave to sin and he has need of a powerful preventing Grace to deliver him from the unhappy necessity of sinning and to render him victorious over Temptations Lastly He treats of the Origine of Souls whether they be created and put into the Body or produc'd by other Souls He follows and approves the Modesty of St. Austin who treating of this Question left it undecided He shews what Difficulties there are to reconcile the first Opinion with the belief of Original Sin and the second with the manner of propagating Mankind And so without determining any thing upon the Question he says only That we must believe that the Soul is not a Body but a Spirit that it is not a part of the very Substance of God but a Creature that it is not put into the Body as a Prison for sins that are past but that it is put into the Body by the appointment of God to animate it and that being united to the Flesh it contracts Original Sin from which it is purified by Baptism He refutes in a few words these Errors and those who asserted them St. Fulgentius wrote also a Letter in the Name of the Bishops of Afric to John and Venerius to whom he address'd these two Books This Letter contains the same Principles and the same Doctrine about Grace and Predestination There they observe that God permits some Persons to
Questions of Rusticus The first concerning the Holy Spirit the second against the followers of Bonosus who believ'd that Jesus Christ was an Adoptive Son and not the Natural Son of God the third about the Baptism of Jesus Christ to show that it is not lawful to reiterate it the fourth about the Distinction between John's Baptism and that of Jesus Christ the fifth to prove that the Son is invisible as the Father The second was Justus Bishop of Urgellum who publish'd a little Commentary upon the Canticles wherein he explains in a few words and very clearly the Allegorical sense of this Book of Holy Scripture The two other Brethren were call'd Hebrides and Elpides but it is not known where they were Bishops and what is the subject of their Writings We have not now the Work of Justinian but only that of Justus upon the Canticles St. Isidore has given a sound Judgment of it In it he expounds very succinctly and clearly the Canticles by applying it to Jesus Christ and his Church There are two Letters of the same Bishop in the fifth Tome of the Spicilegium of Luc Dachery the first whereof is supposititious APRIGIUS APrigius Bishop of Beia in Portugal an Eloquent and Learned Man says Isidore of Sevil has explain'd the Revelation of St. John He has given a spiritual sense of it and in a noble style he Aprigius seems also to have succeeded betterin it then the greatest part of the Ancients He did also write some other Books which are not come to our Knowledge He flourish'd in the time of King Theodius i. e. about the Year 540. At present there remains nothing of this Author ARETAS Aretas THis Aretas who wrote a Commentary upon the Revelations taken out of that of Andrew of Caesarea is plac'd in the sixth Age of the Church and he is also thought to be Bishop of Caesarea but there is no proof neither of the one nor the other This Commentary may be seen in the Bibliotheques of the Fathers ZACHARIAS Bishop of Mitylena ZAcharias Scholasticus was made Bishop of Mitylena in the time of Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople and was present at the fifth Council He wrote two Treatises about Matters rather Zacharias Bishop of Mitylena Philosophical then Theological The first is a little Tract against the Opinion of the Manichees concerning the two Principles The second is a Dialogue of the Creation of the World wherein he refutes the Philosophers who believ'd it Eternal These two Treatises are in the Bibliotheques of the Fathers CYRILLUS of Scythopolis CYrillus Monk of Scythopolis wrote the Life of the Abbot Euthymus 'T is in Latin in Surius at the 20th of January and in Greek and Latin in the second Tome of the Monuments of the Greek Cyrillus of Scythopolis Church publish'd by Mr. Cotelerius but it is not the same as it was written by Cyril but as it was amended or rather corrupted by Metaphrastes This Life is well enough written and contains many Historical Circumstances very remarkable FACUNDUS FAcundus Bishop of Hermiana a City of the Province of Byracena in Afric being at Constantinople at the time when Justinian would extort from the Bishops the Condemnation of the three Facundus Chapters wrote a Book in Defence of them before Vigilius arriv'd at Constantinople When this Pope was come Facundus assisted at the Conference which was held upon this Subject and being afterwards oblig'd to give his Opinion in Writing he made Extracts out of his own Book in great haste the Emperor not allowing him but seven days to give his Opinion tho there happen'd two of them to be Festivals This Facundus himself informs us in the Preface of his twelve Books written in Defence of the three Chapters In the first he handles many Questions concerning the Mystery of the Incarnation In the first place he commends the Confession of Faith which Justinian had publish'd in the Year 533 and approves also of this Expression One of the Trinity was crucified after this he remarks that the three Chapters were invented by the Eutychians to weaken the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon That the Origenians to revenge themselves on those who had Condemn'd them were joyn'd with the Eutychians and not daring openly to attack the Council of Chalcedon they had consulted to procure the Condemnation of the Letter of Ibas which was approv'd in this Council that they might indirectly Condemn the Bishops that were present at it That in short it was not necessary for rejecting the Error of the Nestorians to Condemn the three Chapters but it was sufficient to say that One of the Trinity suffer'd and that the Virgin was the Mother of God That there are some Catholicks who would not have it said That one of the Trinity but One of the Persons of the Trinity suffer'd That notwithstanding both the one and the other of these Propositions is capable of a good sense but the last does not formally enough exclude the Error of the Nestorians Here he remarks en passant that when 't is said in Scripture that Baptism was administred by the Apostles in the Name of Jesus Christ this ought to be understood only by way of Opposition to the Baptism of the Jews and not so as to exclude the Invocation of the other Persons Afterward he shows that we ought to say that the Virgin is truly and properly the Mother of God and that it may also be said that God is the Father of a crucified Man without inferring from thence that the Divinity was born of a Virgin or that it was crucified He proves also against the Eutychians that there are two Natures in Jesus Christ and not only One Nature compounded as they affirm He explains the Passages of Julius and St. Cyril which they make use of to give Authority to their Sentiment by proving that these two Bishops acknowledg'd two Natures in Jesus Christ. He pushes these things yet further by maintaining that those who admit but one compounded Nature favour'd the Sentiment of Nestorius because they cannot say that this Nature was of the same Substance with that of the Eternal Father which is most Simple from whence it follows that the Person of Jesus Christ is not of the same Substance with the Father In fine he observes that the difference between the Union of the Soul and Body and that of the Divine and Human Nature in Jesus Christ consists in this That the Soul and Body are united into one and the same Nature whereas the Divine and Human Nature are united into One Person only Facundus having discover'd the Purity of his Faith in the first Book undertakes in the second the Defence of the three Chapters That he may do this the more freely he supposes that the Writing against the three Chapters which goes under the Name of Justinian is none of his but that it was compos'd by the Enemies of the Council of Chalcedon He cries out that it were
St. Gregory 100 R RHeims Vicaracy granted to St. Reâ—â— Archbishop of Rheims by the Pope Hâ—rmisdâ—s 10 Relicks The true Crolâ— 5. Veneration due to Relicks 87. Filings of the Chains of St. Peter and St. Paul ibid. Relicks used in the Consecration of Churches ibid. Their Honour defended by Eulâ—gius 66. They ought not to be put in Chappels where they cannot be honoured 116. Proof of them made by putting them in the fire 160 Repentance and Penance Remission of sins not to be obtained but in this Life and in the Church 15 and in making a true Repentance 16. Repentance useless out of the Church 19. How Remission ought to be demanded and to whom granted 111. True Repentance consists in sinning no morâ— 74. Rules concerning Repentance 156. The Benediction of Penance granted to one on his Death-bed hinders not but that afterwards he must do Penance 115. It is not permitted to the Priest to give the Benediction to the Penitent 112. Those that forsake it punished 113. Death-bed Repentance not useless to all the World but serves nothing to those that return to their Irregularities 4 5. Penance of Clerks for divers sins 74 84 116 127 Clerks fallen into the sin of Incontinence may be restored 118. Those that abandon Penance excommunicated 116 128. Absolution not to berefused to any at Death 117. The Resolution of a Bishop to make a Man do Penance that had abused a young Woman 6 Regulation of the Names of the Clergy of England described by Gildas 64 Ecclesiastical Revenues Use that ought to be made of them 81 92 113 148 Rogatiâ—â—s Institution of Rogations 6. When and how they ought to be celebrated 114 115 Rome The Jurisdiction of the Holy See over Illyrium established 122 Bishop of Rome Primacy of the Church and Bishops of Rome in what it consists 76. Authority of the Pope in Ecclesiastical Judgments ibid. His Authority over the Bishops of the Vicariate 77. Respectful Terms to the Pope 5. He is called Bishop of the Universal Church ibid. He cannot be judged by his Inferiors according to the Opinion of Avitus 5. Priviledges of the Bishops of Rome inviolable 48. Priviledges of the Pope not to be judged by a Council if it be not assembled by his Authority 9. A Paradoxal Proposition that a Pope became holy ibid. Rusticus Deacon of Rome Of his Writings and his Opinions 56 S SAbinus Bishop of Lanusa wrought Miracles 99 Sacrifice of the Altar It is not only offer'd to the Father but to the Word also 15 Schism of the Church of Rome after the Death of Anastasius 1. c. Council of Rome against Schismaticks 108. Another Schism after the death of Felix IV. between Boniface and Dioscorus 30. Another Schism between Silverus and Vigilius 46 Holy Scripture Rules and Critical Reflections upon the Canonical Books 57. Catalogue of the Canonical Books ibid. Severus of Antioch His Ordination and Deposition 132. He divides the Eutychians ibid. Anathematized in the Council under Mennas 133. His Error and his Writings 27 Severus Priest raised one dead 99 Severus Bishop of Malaga Author of a Treatise against Vincent an Arian 104 Sees Apostolick Their Consideration 78 Silverus Pope His Election was made with Freedom 46. His Persecution and Death 47. His Letters supposititious ibid. Simony It is forbidden to take any thing for holy things 161. It is forbid to demand Money for Ordination or other holy things 125 151. It is forbidden in all its parts 82 Slaves Regulation to hinder Christian Slaves from serving Jews 87. Regulation concerning the Christian Slaves belonging to Jews 130. Forbidden to be made Clerks without permission of their Masters ibid. Souls Spiritual Souls 100. State of the Souls after Death ibid. Divers apparitions of Souls ibid. A fabulous History of the Soul of Trajan 102. Question concerning the Original of Souls undecided 18. What we ought to believe of the Nature of the Soul ibid. They act and appear after death 105 Stephen of Larissa Acts of the Council held at Rome upon his Affair 122. Agapetus would that his Cause be instructed by his Legats 31 Another Stephen Accused of Incest and Condemned by the Council of Lyons 117 Symmachus His Ordination 1. Contested by Lawrence ibid. Confirmed ibid. His Letters 2 3. Accused and absolved 2. His Apology 3. Supposititious Letter 3. His Absolution forbidden by Ennodius 8. Councils held upon occasion of this Pope and under him 108 T TEtradius hath written a Rule for Monks 51 Tetradia Wife of Eulalius Count of Auvergne Her History 158 Theft In what manner it ought to be punished 92. Theft in a Clerk punished 111 Theodorus of Mopsuestia His Writings defended 53 Abstracts of his Works alledged against him in the fifth Council 141. Authorities alledg'd against him ibid. Inquest made against him ibid. Accusations and Invectives against his memory 60 Theodorus the Reader His Writings 27 Theodoret. Defence of his Doctrine and his Person 53. Letter attributed to this Author against St. Cyril 142. His Writings defended 146. Concerning an Image of Theodoret carried about with pomp 144 Theodoricus Labours to appease the Schism of Lawrence 1. He names a Visitor to the Church of Rome 2 Theology The true Principles of Divinity 13 Three Chapters By whom and upon what design invented 131. Condemned by Justinian ibid. by a Council 137. Commotions which followed excited by Vigilius 138. Council held at Constantinople upon that occasion 139. Justinian's Letter to the Council against the Three Chapters ibid. The Council send for Vigilius 140. Examin the Question in his absence 141. The Transaction of that Affair 140 c. to 143. Vigilius defends them by Writing 143. Judgment of the fifth Council by which they condemned the Three Chapters 144. Vigilius approves the Condemnation 145. Pelagius pursues the Execution of this Decree ibid. Impartial Judgment upon the whole Affair 145 146. Defence of the Three Chapters by Facundus 53. Defence of the Three Chapters 22. Against the Defenders of the Three Chapters 89. Admonitions to the Bishops of Istria who were separated by reason of the Condemnation of the Three Chapters 65. The Condemnation of the Three Chapters maintained against them ibid. The Bishops of Istria and others Condemned for separating themselves upon the Affair of the Three Chapters 59 Timothy Aelurus His History 132 Traditions The Church hath its Traditions which are not in Scripture 68 Trifolius His Life and Writings 24 Trisagion Addition to the Trisagion 4 34 Trinity Scholastical Explication of this Mystery by Boetius 26. Divinity of the Three Persons of the Trinity 18. If the Three Persons of the Trinity are separable 20. Why we say that the Son Reigns with the Father in the Unity of the Spirit ibid. Rusticus says that it is uncertain if the Holy Ghost from the Son 56. Agnellus assures the contrary 59 Trojanus Bishop of Saintones His Letter 50 V VIctor Capuensis His Writings 55 Victor Turmonensis His Chronicle 58 Vicar Bishop of Rheims made Vicar of Gallia by Pope
the Reformation Part II. Book I. p. 17. And this is what I thought fit to Remark for the benefit of the English Reader concerning the Doctrin of Transubstantiation which is said to be Establish'd in the Thirteenth Century by Innocent III. concerning whom I Observe in the 2d Place That this Pope was the first who publish'd a Crusade against the Albigenses which is a way of enlightning Men's Understandings by beating out their brains and converting them by the irresistible force of Sword and Gun the same way which Mahomet us'd for propagating his Religion in the World was follow'd by this Pope whose Cruel and Barbarous Actions are no less agreeable to the Spirit of Mahomet than they are contrary to that of Christ. The same Pope Founded the Office of the Inquisition which at first did only draw up a Process against Hereticks and sollicit the ordinary Judges to Condemn them but in a little time the Power of Judging and Condemning Heresie was committed to them and the Secular Judges did only execute their Sentence And it is observable that the Inquisition was established much about the same time with Transubstantiation the Cruelty of the one being a fit Match for the absurdity of the other And indeed this Holy Office was a necessary Engine to cram down the throats of Mankind such a choaking Morcel as Transubstantiation Mr. Du Pin in this History has given us some account of the barbarous Proceedings against the Albigenses by the Croisade and the Inquisition without passing any Censure upon these Actions but lest any should suspect by his Silence that he approv'd them I will now briefly shew you what Opinion he had of all Corporal Punishments when they are us'd by Ecclesiasticks And this will appear from his Book of Ecclesiastical Discipline Dissert 7. where 1st in the Preface he tells us That the Civii Power respects Mens Bodies which may be forc'd to a Compliance and therefore the Civil Magistrate may Punish Men with Corporal Punishment and Death but the Ecclesiastical Power respects Mens Minds which cannot be forc'd and therefore the Governours of this Society can only reclaim Men from their Vices by Exhortations and Commands which if they do not obey they can inflict no other Punishment but that of Excommunication And then 2dly in Ch. 1. Sect. 5. of the same Dissertation he proves that the Church has no Authority in Temporal Affairs because it cannot force Men by Corporal Punishment and Deprivation of their Goods For says he 't is a thing unheard of among the Ancients that the Church should inflict any other Punishment than that of Excommunication or Deposition He owns that after the Emperors became Christian their affection to the Christian Religion and desire to preserve the Empire in Peace mov'd them sometimes to Banish or Fine those who were Ringleaders of Heresy which was very often done of their own proper motion and sometimes but seldom at the desire of the Fathers of the Church But it was only in the latter Ages that the Church obtain'd of the Emperors a Power to inflict Corporal Punishment For proof of this he shews 1st That Christ gave to the Church no Power but what is Spiritual nor did order the Obstinate and Disobedient to be otherwise Punish'd than by excluding them from Communion But this is not all for he shews in the 2d place whatever Power Churchmen may have receiv'd from Magistrates over Men's Bodies That nothing is more contrary to the Design of the Gospel than such a Power as strikes terror into the Minds of Men which he proves from the words of our Saviour to the Apostles when they would have call'd for Fire from Heaven upon the Samaritans Luke 9. 25. Ye know not what Spirit ye are of for the Son of Man came not to destroy Men's Lives but to save them 3dly He shews That Christ forbad his Apostles to use the Temporal Sword in defence of Religion from the Rebuke that he gave to St. Peter for drawing his Sword Put up thy Sword into the Sheath for all they that take the Sword shall perish by the Sword Matth. 26. And lastly he proves That Ecclesiasticks cannot use the Temporal Sword or Civil Power to Force and Punish Men from the Unanimous Consent of the Fathers whom he there Quotes And this may suffice to shew what Opinion Du Pin had of this Wolf of a Pastor Innocent III. and the Sanguinary Methods he us'd to Extirpate Hereticks by the Crusade and the Inquisition since he declares not only that Churchmen have no such Power from Christ and that it was never practis'd in the first and best Ages of the Church but also that it is contrary to the Design of the Gospel to use such Cruelties and to the Mind of Christ to Defend and much more to Propagate Religion by such violent and bloody Methods ADVERTISEMENT THE Preceeding Volumes of Monsieur Du Pin ' s Ecclesiastical History wherein an Abridgment is given of the Writings of the Primitive Fathers and all other Ecclesiastical Writers from the Time of our Saviour with a Preliminary Dissertation of the Authors of the Bible and an Impartial Relation of all Affairs Transacted in the Church is Printed for and Sold by Timothy Childe at the White-Hart at the West-End of St. Paul ' s Church-Yard And those Gentlemen that have the former Volumes wanting those last Publish'd viz. The Eighth Ninth and Tenth being the History of the Tenth Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries may be Furnish'd with them by Tim. Childe A TABLE of the CONTENTS of the ELEVENTH VOLUME CHAP. I. THE History of the different Revolutions in the Empire and Italy during the Thirteenth Century Page 1 Contests about the Empire between Philip and Otho Ibid. Otho acknowledg'd Emperor 2 Otho goes into Italy andmakes War there 2 Sentence of Excommunication against him 2 Frederick elected Emperor and goes into Germany 3 Crown'd Emperor by Honorius III. 3 But differing with the Pope is also excommunicated Ibid. Pope Honorius dies and is succeeded by Gregory IX Ibid. Frederick departs for the Holy Land Ibid. Gregory excommunicates him Ibid. Frederick makes Peace with the Pope 4 Henry his Son whom he had caused to be chosen King of Germany revolts from him 4 Frederick wars again with the Pope 4 The Sentence of Pope Gregory against him 4 The Opinion of the French upon the Deposition of Frederick 5 The Death of Gregory and Election of Celestin IV. and Innocent IV. Ibid. A General Council at Lions 6 Wherein the Pope complains of the Emperor 6 Frederick's Defence 7 The Landgrave of Thuringen and Earl of Holland chosen Emperors by some of the Princes of Germany 7 The Death of Frederick 8 The Government of Manfred in Sicily 9 Troubles in the Empire and Sicily 9 The Elections of Alphonsus and Richard Earl of Cornwal Emperors 9 Charles Earl of Anjou defeats Manfred and makes himself Master of Italy 9 Conradin disputes the Kingdom of Sicily with Charles 9 Defeated and put to death
the principal Question about the Union but they shunn'd it in this first and the second Conference In the third the same Cardinal said That there were four Heads of Controversy between the Greeks and the Latins The 1. Concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit The 2. About Unleaven'd or Leaven'd Bread in the Sacrifice The 3. About Purgatory And the 4. About the Primacy of the Pope and he enquir'd of the Greeks with which of these Controversies they thought it convenient to begin their Conferences They refus'd to Treat about the Procession of the Holy Spirit and gave no Answer about the other Articles until they consulted the Emperor without whose Orders they would do nothing In the fourth Conference they offer'd to treat about Purgatory or the Primacy and left the Latins at liberty to choose which of them The Cardinal Julian chose the Article of Purgatory but they did not begin to debate this Matter until the fifth Session held June the 5th Upon the demand of the Greeks That they would expound the Doctrin of the Church of Rome about this Point Julian told them It believ'd that the Souls of the Just which were pure and without Stain and free from mortal Sin ascended streight into Heaven and enjoy'd eternal Repose but that the Souls of those that had faln into Sins after Baptism tho' they had done Penance for them if they had not perfectly accomplish'd the Penance impos'd upon them nor brought forth Fruits worthy of Repentance to obtain an entire remission of their Sins pass'd through the Fire of Purgatory and that some are there a longer and some a shorter time according to the quality of their Sins and that at last being purified they enjoy'd perfect Happiness but that the Souls of those who died in mortal Sins or in original Sin were sent immediately to the place of Torments Mark of Ephesus answer'd That the Doctrin of the Greek Church was not different from this but in a very small Matter and that he hop'd 't was easy to rectify it by an Explication This Difference was expounded in the sixth Conference and the Greeks made it to consist in this That the Latins said the Purification of Souls was made by Fire whereas the Greeks believ'd that the Souls of Sinners went to a place of Darkness and Sadness where they were for some time in Affliction and depriv'd of the Light of God but that they were purified and deliver'd from this place of Affliction by Sacrifices and Alms That they believ'd also that the Damn'd should not be perfectly miserable nor the Saints enjoy a perfect Happiness till after the Resurrection of their Bodies The Latins demanded That this Declaration of the Greeks should be put in writing When they were about to do it Mark of Ephesus and Bessarian of Nice could not agree among themselves and each of them drew up a different Writing the former being persuaded that perfect Happiness was delay'd until the Day of Judgment and the other believing that they wanted nothing to perfect their Happiness but to receive their Bodies This Contest embroil'd them one with another and from this time they acted no more by consent and there was no good understanding between them After this the Conferences degenerated into Heats and ended about the end of the Month of July without treating upon any other Points but that of Purgatory and even about that they could not agree When the time appointed for the sitting of the Synod drew near the Greeks began to be uneasy and the Pest was then in Ferrara All these Considerations should have mov'd both of them to wish for a Conclusion of this Affair but it was not easily to be compass'd The Princes sent neither Prelats nor Ambassadors to the Council those who were at Basil remain'd there still the Greek Emperor would not have the Synod begin until there were a considerable number of Prelats Nevertheless the Pope by his Importunity made him resolve to hold the Council telling him That where the Pope the Emperor and the Patriarch were there was the Synod But a new Difficulty happen'd for the Greeks reflecting upon the smalness of their number concluded That if Things were carried in the Council by plurality of Votes they must needs lose their Cause and therefore they remonstrated That the Case was different in this Council from what it had been in former Councils wherein the Greek and Latin Church were at agreement whereas in this the Difference which was to be determin'd was between them so that the Judges themselves were divided and therefore they propos'd That the Voices of each Party should not be reckon'd by the Party but in proportion to the number of which each Party consisted so that if there were 20 on one side and 200 on the other the 20 Votes should be reckon'd as equal to the 200. The Emperor took upon him to make the Pope agree to this Proposal and he agreed with him about some things but he did not otherwise explain himself to the Bishops but by telling them That they should be content and that the Pope had granted them what they desir'd After this a Resolution was taken to begin quickly the Sessions of the Council The Emperor having sent for the six principal Archbishops the Grand Master of the Rolls the Grand Ecclesiarch Charto-phylax with the two Abbots who had been present at the Conferences and three Doctors acquainted them that the time of the Synod was now approaching that they must consult where they should begin the Question about the Procession of the Holy Spirit which consisted in two Points The first was to understand whether the Doctrin of the Latin Church upon this Subject was Orthodox and agreeable to the Sentiments of the Greek Church The second whether they had reason to add to the Creed That He proceeded from the Son They were divided in their Opinions but the greater number thought that they must begin with this last Head The Greeks and Latins appointed each of them six Persons to maintain the Dispute Those who spoke on Behalf of the Greeks were Mark of Ephesus and Bessarian of Nice on the Latin's side the Cardinal Julian Andrew Bishop of Rhodes the Bishop of Forio-Julio and a Spanish Doctor nam'd John were chosen with two others to Answer the Greeks The Emperor having the consent of his Clergy for beginning the Council sent Jagaris and Scyropulus the Grand Ecclesiarch to advertise the Pope of three Things 1. That the Greeks were ready to begin the Synod and waited only for the Day which he would appoint 2. That they desir'd to be the Aggressors and that the Latins would answer them 3. That the Sessions should be held in the Cathedral or at least in some of the principal Churches The Pope granted them the two first Articles and fix'd the first Session of the Council for the 8th of October But he would never consent to the third and caus'd all the Sessions to be held
to answer Bessarion in the Session held the 8th of November After he had alledg'd many Reasons to prove that the word Filioque was not an Addition but a meer Explication he maintain'd not only that there was no Law forbidding to add any Explication to the Creed but also that none could make such a Prohibition to the Church and that it could extend only to private Persons who would make this Addition without Authority The Cardinal Julian finish'd this Dispute in the Session on November 11th with many Remarks upon the Prohibition of the Council of Ephesus 1. He observ'd That this Law was to be understood with respect to the occasion on which it was made which was the false Creed of the Nestorians that the Council had condemn'd and not that of Charisius which was Orthodox 2. That this Council did not only forbid to Add but also to make any new Exposition of the Faith and therefore if this Prohibition were extended to the Church or a Council it would follow That the Church could not make a new Exposition of the Faith which the Greeks did own to be false 3. That the Council of Ephesus having spoken only of the Nicene Creed it would follow That it must disapprove the Additions made to the Creed by the Council of Constantinople 4. That the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon St. Cyril and St. Leo had no other design but to hinder the teaching or introducing of any new Doctrin When he had finish'd these Remarks he said it was now time to come to the principal Question viz. Whether it were true that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son and in â—…se the Greeks should prove that he did not proceed then it would follow that the Roman Church had made a prohibited Addition to the Creed but if on the contrary it should be prov'd That this was sound and true Doctrin then it must be confess'd that the Roman Church had Power to add this Explication to the Creed Nevertheless Bessarion said That he would answer in the next Conference to what the Cardinal Julian had now advanc'd On the 15th of November Mark of Ephesus and Cardinal Julian conrested among themselves concerning the Creed of Charisius and the Explication of the Prohibition of the Council of Ephesus Towards the conclusion the Cardinal Julian observ'd That there were Manuscripts of the Creed of Constantinople in which these Words are not to be found Descendit de Caelis nor these Secundum Scripturas and that the Latins had added these Deum de Deo about which the Greeks made no opposition as they did about the word Filioque Andrew of Rhodes had also said in his Discourse That the Phrase Desoendit ad inferos was an Addition Mark of Ephesus would have enter'd upon the Question viz. Whether the Roman Church and the Pope had Power to add to the Creed But the Cardinal would not enter upon it and persisted in demanding importunately That they would come to the principal Question concerning the Truth of the Doctrin The Ambassadors of the Duke of Burgundy were receiv'd in the 12th Session held the 27th of November saluted the Pope presenâ—â—d him a Letter from their Master and made a Discourse in the Assembly But because they had not shewn the Greek Emperor the Respect that was due to him nor presented him with a Letter he would not allow them to take their Seat until he had receiv'd Satisfaction which they gave him in the next Session by presenting him with a Letter in their Master's Name and doing him Reverence but after such a manner as did not perfectly satisfy In the mean time the Conference continu'd and was reduc'd to a private Contest between Mark of Ephesus and the Cardinal Julian about the Addition to the Creed Another also was held on the 8th of December which dwindled also into Heats upon the same Subject without the Agreeing of the Parties in any thing The Latins would have them to enter upon the principal Point in Question and after that was explain'd if they should find it true That the Holy Spirit did proceed from the Person of the Son then the Addition should continue in the Creed but if they should find this Proposition false then it should be rejected The Greeks on the contrary asserted That they must begin with cutting off the word Filioque from the Creed and after that examin the main Question That if the Doctrin of the Latins should be found to be true it should be decreed but if it were false it should be condemn'd This Contest was the Cause why the Conferences ceas'd for some time but at last the Greek Emperor made the Greeks resolve to enter upon the Dispute about the Truth of the Doctrin The Pope propos'd afterwards to translate the Council to Florence because he could no longer conveniently furnish the necessary Expence for continuing it at Ferrara and it was agreed with the Florentines That they should raise him a considerable Sum provided the Council were held at Florence The Patriarch of Constantinople and the Greek Prelats oppos'd mightily this Proposal but at last the Necessity to which they were reduc'd oblig'd them to accept of it and to consent that the Synod might be translated to Florence and this Translation was publish'd in the last Assembly held at Ferrara January the 11th 1439. The pretence that the Pope alledg'd in the Bull was the Pestilence which had been at Ferrara and it was to be fear'd it would break forth again in the Spring One part of what was owing to the Greeks was paid them Some Relief of Mony was sent to Constantinople and the Greeks were promised That the Expence of their Voyage and of their living at Florence should be defray'd and that they should be carried home again whether the Union were concluded or no. The Pope and Emperor the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Latin and Greek Prelats parted after this for Florence and arriv'd there at the beginning of February After they had repos'd themselves for some Days they agreed upon certain Measures concerning the Method of continuing their Conferences And the Emperor was of Opinion That they should be held in private The first was held the 26th of February The Cardinal Julian and the Emepror who were the only Persons that spoke at it came to an Agreement That some Expedient should be search'd for by both sides to unite them together The Patriarch being The Conferences of the Greeks and Latins at Florence grievously Sick was not present at this nor the following Sessions The Emperor and Greek Prelats being present at his House consulted about this Proposal which had been made to search after some Means for uniting them together but they all said That they had none to offer and that they were ready to answer the Latins That they would meet in Private the next Saturday and then enter upon a Conference The Pope seeing that they would not propose any Expedient but Dispute on