and Cleanness and in them he discovers as well the sharpness of his Wit as the extent of his Knowledge His Nephew John Francis Picus of Mirandula has also left us many Works which are printed John Francis Piâus of Mirandula with the preceding in the Edition of Basil in 1601. viz. A Treatise of the Study of Divine and Human Philosophy wherein he compares Profane Philosophy with the knowledge of the Scripture and shews how much more excellent this latter is and what use we ought to make of the former A Treatise to prove that we ought to meditate on the Death of Jesus Christ and our own a Treatise of Unity and Being in defence of that written by his Unkle a Treatise of the Imagination two Treatises of Physicks one of the first Matter the other of the Elements a Treatise of Imitation address'd to Bembus together with the Answer of Bembus and the Reply of Francis of Mirandula Theorems of Faith and of what we are oblig'd to believe wherein he Treats very largely of the Principles of our Faith in 26 Theorems After he has shewn that the Faith of Christians is well grounded he proves in the 1st Theorem that we cannot be Sav'd without Faith in Jesus Christ but he believes that God will shew that favour to all those who observe the Law of Nature as to give them Faith In the 2d That the Faith of a Christian is the Gift of God In the 3d That all those who have the Habit of Faith give their consent to the Truths of Faith which are propos'd unto them or at least do not oppose them with obstinacy In the 4th that every one is oblig'd to believe and observe all that the Catholick Church has determin'd by an express or tacit Decision at least as to what concerns Faith and Manners for as to other things she may deceive and be deceiv'd as in the Canonization of Saints according to the Opinion of Thomas and Panormitan In the 5th That every one is oblig'd to believe all that is liâterally express'd in the Old and New Testament In the 6th That we are also oblig'd to believe and practise all that the Church has learn'd or receiv'd from the Apostles In the 7th That the same is to be said of those Truths which follow by necessary Consequence from such as are founded upon the preceding Principles In the 8th That we ought also to believe the Definitions and Decrees of Popes when the Church does not oppose them In the 9th That the Truths which God reveals to private Persons are not of Faith save only for those to whom they are reveal'd In the 10th That we ought to obey the Decisions of Bishops in their Dioceses when they Condemn any Doctrines as contrary to Faith or Good Manners In the 11th That every one is oblig'd to believe and practise what is necessary for attaining happiness In the 12th That among Christians the difference of Dignities States and Understanding obliges some to have more knowledge of Matters relating to Religion than others In the 13th That no Person is oblig'd to believe what one or many private Persons teach but only the Doctrine of the Catholick Church is to be embrac'd by every one In the 14th That none is oblig'd to follow the Opinion of Saints and Doctors and to give credit to their Miracles and Revelations In the 15th That we are not oblig'd to give Credit to the Words or Writings of Men even in such things as do not relate to Faith and Manners In the 16th That in case a Council and the Pope be of contrary Opinions we must adhere to the Decision of a Council and when the Fathers of a Council are divided we must follow the Majority In the 17th That when there are two Persons who call themselves Popes we must endeavour to discover whose Election was Canonical and in case it be difficult to know this that it will be better to follow his Party who is thought to have the greatest probability on his side than to own no Pope at all In the 18th That when Divines or Interpreters differ about any Opinion we must follow that which is thought to be most true but if their Opinions happen to be equally probable we must follow that which is taught by the most Famous and Holy Persons In the 19th That in Matters of Controversie and Faith a Man is not at liberty to follow what Opinion he pleases when the thing is once defin'd In the 20th That when it is not determin'd we ought to follow what is most agreeable to the Gospel and best founded In the 21th That in case the Opinions appear to be equally reasonable we ought to shun that against which Anathema's are thundred out In the 22th That in Controversies of Faith which cannot be explain'd we ought to suspend our Judgment In the 23th That those who have a pure heart who pray to God without ceasing that they may know the Truth and have an humble submissive Spirit cannot Err dangerously in matters of Faith In the 24th That those Truths which one is not oblig'd to believe explicitely at the beginning because they were not explain'd and defin'd become afterwards necessary Points of Faith when they are In the 25th That every Christian is instructed Spiritually nourish'd and perfected in the Unity of one only Church and its Head In the 26th That 't is not sufficient to have Faith but it must be accompanied with good Works whereof God is the Author that we must love God and live in conformity to his Will After this Treatise follows a Piece upon a passage of St. Hilarius of the manner after which Jesus Christ is in us reported by Gratian in the Decree Distinct. 2. de Consecrat A Translation of the Exhortation of St. Justin to the Greeks a Poem upon the Mysteries of the Cross Nine Books of the prescience of Things wherein he treats of the Divine Prescience and of that knowledge which some pretend to of things future by Compacts with Evil Spirits by Astrology Chiromancy Geomancy c. which he confutes at large in this Treatise and therein he justifies these Predictions which Prophets Divinely inspir'd Angels and even God himself has given us of things future The Six Books of the Examination of the Vanity of the Doctrine of the Gentiles and of the Truth of the Christian Religion oppose the Errors of Philosophers and particularly those of the Aristoteleans There are also Four Books of Letters written by this Author which are almost all upon Profane Subjects at the end of which there is a Discourse address'd to Leo X. about the Reformation of Manners There is not so much Wit Vigor Subtilty nor Elegance in the Works of Francis Picus as in those of his Unkle nor yet so much Learning but there is in them more solidity and evenness This Prince was unhappy during his Life for he was driven out of his Dominions by his younger Brother Louis and being
wrote to Stephen about it to exhort him to embrace this Discipline But he was so far from submitting to the Reason of the Africans whether because he imagined they had a Design to condemn the Roman Church or because he thought this Question was of too great Consequence that he was enraged against St. Cyprian and his Colleagues and used their Deputies ill Nay he prohibited all Christians belonging to his Church to receive or lodge them depriving them not only of Ecclesiastical Communion but also refusing them the common Civilities of Hospitality The Letter he writ back was full of Injuries and Invectives and his Decision was comprised in these Terms If any one comes to you of whatsever Heresie he is let there not be made the least Alteration in what has been regulated by Tradition but only impose Hands upon him and so receive him This Letter being brought into Africk St. Cyprian moved at the Proceedings of Stephen sent his Letter with a Refutation of it not only to Pompey of Africk but al 's to Fermilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia who were all of the same Opinion with St. Cyprian touching the Baptism of Hereticks Firmilian having received it writ a long Letter wherein he amply refutes the Opinion and Letter of Stephen and establishes the Discipline which St. Cyprian defended saying It had been observed in his Country by an immemorial Custom and confirmed in two numerous Synods held at Iconium and Synnada As soon as St. Cyprian had received this Letter he assembled a Synod at Carthage in which the Letter he had writ to Jubaianus upon this Question was openly read and all the Bishops gave their Suffrages in favour of St. Cyprian's Opinion Thus I have delivered in a few Words the History of this famous Quarrel between two great Bishops both of whom the Church still reverences as Saints However If I may be allowed to make some Reflections upon their Opinions and Conduct I shall not scruple to observe after St. Austin that St. Cyprian shewed a great deal more Moderation in this Dispute and that we can by no means excuse that Heat and Passion which so far transported Stephen For though the first maintained his Opinion vigorously yet he did it with abundance of Candor and always declared he would leave other Bishops the Liberty to do as they judged convenient and openly professed he would separate himself from the Communion of no body upon the score of this Controversie Neminem separantes said he often aut a Communione submoventes Whereas on the other hand Pope Stephen not only asserted his Opinion with a world of Heat and Rigour but also treated those Bishops unworthily who followed a Practice different from his own calling them false Christians false Apostles and Seducers and refusing their Deputies not only the Communion of the Church but even Lodging and Hospitality As for what respects the Merits of the Cause though 't is commonly believed that the Pope had the Truth on his Side yet there is sufficient reason to doubt whether he did not in the heat of his Opposition to St. Cyprian carry things too far on the other side and whether the Opinion of St Austin which the Church has since embraced That we ought to receive those Persons without Baptism who have been baptized by Hereticks in the Name of the Trinity and to re-baptize those who have not been baptized according to that Form Whether this Opinion I say does not steer the middle Course between Stephen's f Between that of Stephen who seems to have maintained What induces us to believe that Stephen was of this Opinion is in the first place because he make no distinction at all but says plainly à quacunque Heresi Secondly Because St. Cyprian and Firmilian takes Stephen's Words in this sense now who can imagine that they would have engaged themselves in a Dispute without so much as knowing the Opinion of their Adversary Thirdly There were scarce any Hereticks before Stephen who Baptized in the Name of the Trinity so that it had been only a Chimerical Question about a thing which had never been practised to dispute whether it were necessary to Re-baptize those who had been Baptized in the Name of the Trinity by Hereticks since there were almost no Hereticks that used to Baptize after that manner Fourthly The ancient Author of a small Book written against the Opinion of St. Cyprian makes mo mention of this Distinction of Hereticks but generally approves all Baptism whatever given in the Name of Jesus Christ. Fifthly St. Augustin never cites Stephen's Decree for his Opinion on the other hand he opposes the Opinion of Stephen and St. Cyprian and in his sixth Book de unico Bapt. c. 14. he tells us Stephen maintained that no body was to be Re-baptized in nullo iterandum Baptisma There are several other Reasons which I pass over in silence who seems to have maintained that all those who had been baptized by Hereticks should be received without Re-baptization which way soever they were baptized â quacumque heresi and St. Cyprian's who asserted that all such ought to be re-baptized Be it as it will 't is certain g St. Cyprian never altered his Opinion There is not the least probability that St. Cyprian altered his Opinion In the time of the Council of Arles the Africans still continued this Practice and in Optatus's time they distinguished between Hereticks and Schismaticks receiving the latter without Baptism but Re-baptizing the former that St. Cyprian never altered his Opinion that the Greek Churches were for a long time after him h Divided upon this Question Denis of Alexandria in Eusebius testifies that the Eastern Churches were divided upon this Question St. Athanasius rejects the Baptism of Hereticks St. Basil in two Canons of his Letter to Amphilochius examines the different Customs of several Churches about this Question and inclines to the Party of those who reject the Baptism of Hereticks as invalid divided upon this Question that the Council of Arles i First decided it in the West The Council of Arles 1. c. 8. De Afris qui propriâ lege utuntur ut Re-baptizent first decided it in the West that it is not unprobable that this was the Council which St. Austin k Calls the full Council This Question has been discussed with mighty Heat in our time though it be but of small importance It is certain that the Council of Arles has decided it agreeably to the Opinion of St. Austin and that the Africans gave the Name of a full Council to Councils consisting of more than one Province as was that of Arles However it is the Council of Nice has not decided this Question but only ordained that the Paulianists should be Re-baptized Now it is not certain whether they Baptized in the Name of the Trinity or no And St. Athanasius himself seems to affirm the contrary besides that though they had not Baptized in the
the time of this Pope The Epistle attributed to Lucius is full of Citations out of the Vulgar Latin and of several Passages taken out of the First Council of Arles the Third of Carthage that of Milevis St. Leo Gregory Agatho Adrian and Sixtus the Pythagorean Besides it is dated Six Months before the Election of Lucius The two Epistles attributed to Stephanus are filled with Citations out of Modern Authors and Statutes that don't all agree with the time of this Pope and consequently are Spurious For the same Reasons we must pass the same Judgment of the two Letters of Sixtus the Second the two of Pope Dionysius the three of St. Felix the First the two of Eutychianus that of Carus the two of Marcellinus those of Marcellus the three of Eusebius the Letter and Decree of Miltiades and the rest of the Letters of the Popes collected by Isidore that are full of several Passages taken out of the Fathers Popes and Councils more Modern than the very Popes by whom they are pretended to be written and in which many things are to be found that don't in the least agree with the true History of those times and were purposely said to favour the Court of Rome and establish her Pretensions against the Rights of Bishops and the Liberties of Churches But it would take up too much time to show the gross falsity of these Monuments that are now rejected by a common Consent and even by those Authors that are most favourable to the Court of Rome who are obliged to abandon the Patronage of these Epistles though they have done a great deal of Service in establishing the greatness of the Court of Rome and ruining the ancient Discipline of the Church especially in relation to Ecclesiastical Decisions and Rights of Bishops An Abridgment of the Doctrine Discipline and Morality of the Three First Ages of the Church AFter having given a Summary of what is contained in the Works of the Ecclesiastical Authors for the Three first Ages of the Church I supposed it would not be amiss to present the An Abridgment of Doctrine c. Reader with an Abridgment also of the Theology of the Primitive Christians This Design besides the relation it had to the Work it self seem'd in my Opinion to be the principal Fruit and Advantage that could be gathered from it For the ultimate Scope and End which a Man ought to propose to himself in reading the Ecclesiastical Authors and their History is not to gratifie a vain foolish Curiosity but to learn Religion thereby We must not study these Matters only to make a Pompous Ostentation of our Knowledge but to become better Christians to become more certain of the Doctrine of the Church more respectful to its Discipline and better instructed in its Holy Morality For all Theology reduces it self to these Three Points Doctrine Discipline and Morality Doctrine concerns the Articles of Faith that our Religion teaches us Discipline concerns the Government of the Church and Morality teaches us what things we are to do and what we are to forbear Hereticks overthrow the Doctrine of the Church by their Errours Schismaticks destroy its Discipline by violating the Orders and Rules of the Church And lastly The vitious Christian discards and lays aside the Laws of its Morality by living after an irregular manner For the better avoiding these Rocks and Precipices it is exceeding requisite for all Christians to draw out of the Tradition of the ancient Church that is to say out of the Books of the Primitive Fathers who are the unquestionable Witnesses of the Opinion of the Church in their own times to draw I say from thence the Doctrine which they are obliged to believe to examine the Ecclesiastical Discipline which they are to revere and obey and lastly from thence to learn the most Holy Rules of the Christian Morality An Abridgment of the Doctrine THE Doctrine of the Church was always the same and will be ever so till the end An Abridgment of Doctrine of the World For 't is utterly impossible that the true Church should cease to be or that the true Church should not teach the Doctrine of Jesus Christ because whether she should teach a Doctrine different from that of Jesus Christ or whether she should not teach the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour in both these Cases she would cease to be the true Church Jesus Christ as St. Irenaeus Tertullian and all the rest of the Ancients have observed taught his Apostles all the Truths of Faith The Apostles published them throughout all the Earth and opened them to all the Churches in the World whose Doctrine is found to be conformable each to other in Articles of Faith This Doctrine was always preserved in the Church which is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth 'T is indeed very true that they did not always make use of the same terms and that before the Birth of Heresies they did not observe that precaution in speaking of Mysteries which they did afterwards when they were attack'd by the Hereticks But still the Foundation of Doctrine was always the same as to the principal Articles of our Faith We must likewise acknowledge that there were some Errours very frequent in the First Ages of the Church that have been rejected since but then they don't concern the principal Articles of our Faith and besides were never looked upon to be the received Doctrine of the Church but only the most common Opinions These previous Observations will be confirmed by an Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Church as it is delivered by the Authors of the Three first Centuries which we are going to represent in as few words as possibly we can They taught That the Grounds and Principles of Faith were the Holy Scriptures and Tradition that we ought to believe Mysteries though we were not able to comprehend them they spoke of the Nature of God and of his Attributes after a most excellent manner they believed him to be Invisible Eternal Incorruptible c. they have frequently discoursed of his Providence his Power his Bounty his Mercy and his Goodness they wrote very sharply against the false Divinities of the Pagans and the Errours of Hereticks who imagined that there cou'd be above one Soveraign and Independant Being they proved that God Created all Things and even Matter it self which was not Eternal they acknowledged the Trinity of the Three Persons in one only God the Divinity and Eternity of the Word and of the Holy Ghost they maintain'd that the Word was from all Eternity in God as a Person distinct from the Father that the Father created the World by him and that he governs it and that it was the Person of the Word that appear'd to the ancient Patriarchs under different Figures and who was at last Incarnate that Jesus Christ was the Word made Man God and Man all together composed of two intire and different Natures that he had a Soul and Body like
of this Treatise he refutes those that say The Word of God suffer'd Pain At last he concludes with saying That there is but One only God in Three Persons This is what we believe this is what we defend what the Prophets have taught us what the Gospel preaches to us what the Apostles left us by Tradition what the Martyrs confess'd in their Sufferings This is the Faith which is engraven on the Hearts and Minds of the Faithful and when an Angel shall descend from Heaven and teach the contrary he shall be accursed He adds afterwards as a kind of an Appendix when he speaks of Hosius Bishop of Corduba I know very well says he that the Name of Hosius that ancient Bishop may be objected to me whose Faith was always so Firm and I doubt not but they will make use of his Authority as a Buckler to cover the Opinion that is contrary to ours But I answer in a word to those who will make use of these Arms that his Authority cannot be alledg'd as an unanswerable Argument because either he is at present in an Error or else he always was so The World knows what he believ'd till this present time with what Assurance he approv'd the Sardican and Nicene Doctrine which I defend and with what Rigor he condemned the Arians But if he be at present of another Opinion if he maintains now what he always condemned heretofore if he condemns now what he always maintained How can his Authority be objected to me If he was in an Error for 82 Years together How comes it to pass that I must believe that at this Age he found out the Truth But suppose I could believe it What Judgment can be given of those who died in the Faith of the same Doctrine which he maintained before he altered his Opinion What Judgment would he have given of himself if he had died before that Council wherein he changed And so the prejudice drawn from the Arthority of Hosius is of no Consideration because it opposes it self Besides that we read in the Scripture that the Righteousness of a Judge shall not save him when he shall depart from it I was very willing to set down this Passage entire because it may be of great use to weak Persons who suffer themselves to be drawn into Errors by the Authority of those whom they highly Esteem and Value It serves also to discover that the greatest Men are subject to great Infirmities and that therefore we must not follow their Example blindly especially when Religion is the Matter in question and that the only Infallible Rule to which we should adhere is the Authority of the Church to which we ought to pay a blind Obedience and without reserve To Conclude This Tract is written very politely the Stile is clear and clean the Subject is handled very plainly and there are sometimes Sallies of Wit which discover that the Author wrote with much Vigour and Easiness St. OPTATUS ST OPTATUS a St. Optatus The Name of Optatus is very common among the Africans St Austin speaks of many other Persons of this Name who are easily distinguish'd from this Bishop Bishop of Milevi b Milevi Some Authors have thought that he was Bishop of Malta but this is a gross mistake Milevi is a City of Numidia in Africk often mention'd in the African Councils a City of Numidia wrote under the Reign of Valens and Valentinian about the Year 370 his Books of the Schism of the Donatists against Parmenianus St. Optatus a Bishop of that Sect. There is nothing in particular known of the Life of this Author He died according to the Testimony of St. Jerom under the Reign of Valentinian c He died under the Reign of Valentinian In B. II. he places in his Catalogue of Popes Pope Siricius who was not Bishop of Rome till after the Death of Valentinian which would cause a doubt of what St. Jerom says if it were not easy for a Transcriber to add the Name of Siricius when he Copied out this Book after the Death of Optatus St. Austin and St. Fulgentius cite him with great Commendation and he has been numbred among the Saints because of the Service he did the Church by this excellent Book which he compos'd in its Defence It was divided into Six Books since St. Jerom's time There is a Seventh now extant but 't is very probable that it is Supposititious First of all Because Optatus himself in his First Book divides his Treatise into Six Books without mentioning a Seventh Secondly Because St. Jerom says That Optatus wrote but Six Books against the Schism of the Donatists Thirdly Because the Stile of the last Book d The Stile of the last Book The Stile of it is flat mean and weak whereas the Stile of Optatus is sublime masculine and enrich'd with many Figures there are also many Terms which appear not to be Optatus's The Author of this Book treats of what Optatus had already handled in B. I. and III. and the beginning of the IV. which Repetition does also show that it is none of his comes not near the Elegance and Sublimeness that is in the others And Lastly Because it contains Opinions contrary to those that are in the other Books e Opinions contrary to those that are in the other Books This Author extenuates the enormity of their Crime who deliver'd up the Holy Books to be burnt he denies that it was a Capital Crime and endeavours to prove that it was light and pardonable On the contrary St. Optatus declares B. I. That it was a great Sin equal to that of Schism and that those who committed it should purchase some Years of this Life with the loss of Eternal Life which supposes that this Crime was Mortal and deserv'd Damnation but the Author of the Seventh Book teaches the contrary This Book therefore was written by some African who lived soon after St. Optatus for it cannot be doubted but that the Book is ancient who thought he ought to make this Addition which was afterwards attributed to this Father St. Optatus begins his First Book with words very full of Charity He complains That the Peace which Jesus Christ left to his Church is disturb'd by the Schism and by the Actions of the Donatists Yet he gives them the Name and Title of Brethren Though they renounce us says he though all the World knows that they hate us that they detest us though they would not have us call them our Brethren yet we will follow the Command of the Prophet Isaiah in saying unto them Ye are nevertheless our Brethren though ye be Evil We have the same Spiritual Birth but our Actions are different Afterwards he gives an Account of his Undertaking to write to Parmenianus whom he calls his Brother He says That he was the only Donatist with whom he could have a Conference in Writing and he shews the Usefulness of it He observes That this
Variety of Conceptions and Figures He extendeth his Matters by an infinite Variety of Expressions He is very ingenious in finding out Similitudes between things abundant in Examples and Comparisons His Eloquence is popular and very proper for Preaching His Style is natural easie and grave He equally avoideth Negligence and Affectation He is neither too plain nor too florid He is smooth yet not effeminate He useth all the Figures that are usual to good Orators very properly without employing false strokes of Wit and he never introduces into his Discourses any Notions of Poets or prophane Authors neither does he divert his Auditory with Jests His Composition is Noble his Expressions Elegant his Method Just and his Thoughts Sublime He speaks like a good Father and a good Pastor He often directs his words to the People and expresses them with a Tenderness and Charity becoming an holy Bishop He teacheth the principal Truths of Christianity with wonderful Clearness and diverts with a marvellous Art and an agreeable way of ranging his Notions and persuades by the strength and solidity of his Reasons His Instructions are easie His Descriptions and Relations pleasant His Inducements so meek and insinuating that one is pleased to be so persuaded His Discourses how long soever are not tedious there are still some new things which keep the Reader awake and yet he hath no false Beauties nor useless Figures His only Aim is to convert his Auditors or to instruct them in necessary Truths He neglects all Reflections that have more subtilty than profit He never busies himself to resolve hard Questions nor to give mystical Sences to make a shew of his Wit or Eloquence He searcheth not into Mysteries neither endeavours to comprehend them He is contented to propose after an easie way palpable and sensible Truths which none can be ignorant of without danger of failing of Salvation He particularly applies himself to moral Heads and very seldom handleth speculative Truths He affects not to appear Learned and never boasts of his Erudition and yet whatever the Subject be he speaks with Terms so strong so proper and so well chosen that one may easily perceive he had a profound Knowledge of all sorts of Matters and particularly of true Divinity He proveth the truth of the Christian Religion by the strongest the most probable and sensible In lib. Quod Christus sit Deus In Orat de S. Babylâ contra Gentes In exposit Ps. xliv Hom. contra Judaeos Hom. 4. in illud Vid. Dominum lib. Quod unus Christus sit Deus Reasons He urgeth Miracles Prophecies and other Proofs of the truth of Religion but particularly insists upon the miraculous Establishment of the Church and in this Argument he triumphs He shews that it is impossible that the Doctrine of Jesus Christ could have been received and believed all the world over notwithstanding the opposition of Secular Powers the Contradictions of the Wise men in the World and the endeavours of Devils had it not been supported by the power of God himself For says he there is need of more than humane Ability to produce such wonderful Effects both in the Earth and upon the Sea and to oblige Men already prejudiced by extravagant Opinions and prepossessed with prodigious Malice to such Actions yet Jesus Christ delivered all mankind not only Romans but Persians also and all other barbarous Nations from their Calamities And to bring about these Wonders he made use of no Arms and was at no expence raised no Armies and fought no Battles but by eleven Men who at first were unknown despicable ignorant Ideots poor naked and without Arms He persuaded different Nations and made them embrace an high Philosophy not only relating to the Government of this present Life but also to things to come and Eternity self His power over all minkind was such as that it made them abolish the Laws of their Fathers renounce their ancient Customs and follow new ones He spoiled them even of the love of those things they were most fond of to fasten their Affections upon such things as are most difficult and painful But the Promulgation of the Gospel and the setling of the Church are not the only Proofs of the truth of our Religion the Stedfastness and perpetuity of the Church is also in S. * In Ps. xliv Chrysostom's Opinion an invincible Argument of it For he addeth that it is not only a thing worthy of Admiration that Jesus Christ should settle his Church over all the Earth but also that he should render it invincible against so great numbers of Enemies as assaulted it on every side The Gates of Hell that cannot prevail against it are the Dangers which seem to hurry it to the very Gates of Hell Doe you not perceive the truth of that prediction of Jesus Christ .... Tho' Tyrants took up Arms against it tho' Soldiers conspired her Destruction tho' the People raged furiously tho' a contrary Custom opposed it self tho' Preachers Philosophers Magistrates and rich Men stood up to destroy it The Divine word breaking with greater force than fire it self consumed these Thorns cleansed these Fields and disseminated the Seed of preaching over the whole Earth And though such as believed the Gospel were shut up in Prisons sent into Banishment spoiled of their Goods thrown into the Fire cast into the Sea and exposed to all manner of Torments Reproaches and Persecutions and tho' they were treated every where as publick Enemies yet they multiplyed daily their being persecuted increased their Zeal ..... Those Rivers of Blood caused by the Massacres of the Faithful before their Eyes excited their Piety and the Pains they endured inflamed their Zeal This same Saint observes in another place that Christians are never so disorderly in their Behaviour Orat. contra Gentiles de S. Babyla and so cold in their Devotion as when he that sits on the Throne is of their Religion Which saith he justifies that this Religion is not established by the Powers of the World and is not upheld and preserved by Earthly force S. Chrysostom's way of dealing with Hereticks is not less rational than that which he useth towards Heathens and Jews He expoundeth the Mysteries very plainly and proveth them by Testimonies of Holy Scripture and the Authority of the Church not pretending to penetrate or give the Reasons of them and to answer those Difficulties which have no other Foundation but humane Reasonings He confesses that he does not understand the Reasons of what he believes Orat. 1. de incompreh Homil. 24. in Joannem I know saith he that God is every where and entire in every part of the World but I know not how this can be I doubt not but that God is without beginning but I conceive not how that is for humane Reason cannot comprehend a thing that hath no beginning I know that the Son is begotten of God the Father but I cannot imagine how that was done He believes that
Author hath been to justify Theodoret and to shew That since all the Letters are certainly his he cannot be accused of Heresy because it appears That he always acknowledged the Letter which S. Cyril wrote to procure Unity to be Catholick Doctrine and that he never defended Nestorius but in Matter of Fact believing him of the same Judgment Although we have these Letters only upon the Faith of this Author and in one Manuscript which the Romanists likewise are careful to conceal ever since F. Lupus made use of it it may be because it contains some Pieces which are not favourable to the Pretensions of the Court of Rome yet it is not to be doubted but that they are Ancient For 1. We find in this Collection those which are in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus and of the Third Council and of which M. Mercator recites some Fragments 2. They contain such particular Facts and accompanied with such Circumstances and which have such a natural Relation to the rest of the History of the Council of Ephesus that it is impossible that they should be devised by an Impostor 3. The principal Matters which they discover are confirmed by other undoubted Records although they are not sufficiently explain'd and cleared but by these Letters Lastly It cannot be doubted but they are taken out of the Collection of Irenaeus The Terms which are cited make it evident that this Work is not forged Now Irenaeus lived in the very Time of the Controversy and was a Witness of all that had passed so that these Letters are very Ancient It may be objected That Irenaeus being of the Novatians Party might forge those Letters of Theodoret in their Favour But what likelihood is there that he should have the Boldness to do it in a Time in which it was so easy a Matter to convince him of the Imposture There are more than Thirty Letters in this Collection which bear the Name of Theodoret. I will not here speak of every one in particular because I will not repeat the same thing over twice I will content my self to relate the Consequences which may be drawn from them First of all They shew that Theodoret did always approve the Doctrine contain'd in S. Cyril's Letter written about the Reconcilement He looked upon it to speak the Truth as a kind of Recantation of the Doctrine contain'd in the Twelve Chapters but he thought it Orthodox although Nestorius Alexander Bishop of Hierapolis and some others found Fault with it II. At first he shewed a great deal of Averseness to receive S. Cyril into his Communion for though he believed that he professed Orthodox Doctrine and revoked his pretended Errors yet he could not bring himself to a Reconciliation with a Person whom he thought to be the Author of all his Troubles Nevertheless he passed it over at length and offered to Communicate with him provided that he should not be obliged to pronounce Nestorius accursed and that all the Bishops of the Eastern Party might be restored III. Having heard that the Peace was concluded without mention of their Restauration That Nestorius was forsaken and that Paul Bishop of Emesa had cursed him he joyned himself with Alexander of Hierapolis and many other Bishops who would have nothing to do with that Agreement and who separated themselves from John of Antioch because he had made it IV. Being Sollicited by John Bishop of Antioch to yield himself and pressed to it by his Monks who were afraid that he would be driven out of his Bishoprick he entred a Conference about it with John Bishop of Antioch and consented to receive S. Cyril into his Communion nevertheless without cursing Nestorius and exhorted the other Bishops to do the same soon after He wrote Letters to S. Cyril and received Letters from him but he did not entirely put off the good Opinion he had of Nestorius and his most zealous Adherents and although he dare not stand up in their Defence ever after yet he seems always to have some Compassion for them and also a secret Grudge against S. Cyril and the Bishops of Aegypt who envied him both in his Life-time and after his Decease S. Cyril himself complains of his Behaviour if the Letter which is found in the Vatican Manuscript and which F. Garner has printed be really his And Theodoret for his part bespatters the Memory of S. Cyril in as bloody a Letter as can be written If it be of him that he speaks in that which is recited in the Fifth Council and if that Letter be not forged but this we shall examine elsewhere Yet we must observe That F. Gârâââ hath published a Letter of Theodoret's to John of Antioch in Greek and Latin which had been before printed by Leâ Allatius and Câtelierius in which he approves the Form of Agreement as very Orthodox The Third Class of Thââdâret's Letters which are Historical is contained in the Greek and Latin Collection of his Letters which F. Sirmondus hath published at the End of the Third Tome of his Works The Sixtieth Letter may be reckon'd the First according to the Order of Time which was written to Diâsâârus newly preferr'd to the See of Alexandria after the Death of S. Cyril which happen'd in 444. This Letter is a proof that the Reconciliation of Theodoret with the Aegyptians was sincere and that he did not intend to trouble the Peace of the Church Nevertheless he was Accused to the Emperor the next Year by those that favoured the Error of Eutyches of troubling the Peace of the Church by holding frequent Assemblies at Antioch instead of residing in his own Diocess Under this pretence they obtain'd an Order from the Emperor in which he strictly enjoined Theodoret to remain in his own City Cyrus and not stir from thence This Order was shew'd him by Count Rufus and he immediately Obeyed it Yet he wrote in his own defence to Patricius Anatolius to the Praefect Eutrechius and to the Consul Nonius These Letters are the Seventy Ninth Eighty and Eighty One He therein shews That it was very unjust to give Credit to the Accusations of his Enemies without hearing him That he has always lived a blameless Life That no Man complained of him in his own Country That he was not troubled that he was confined to the City Cyrus but on the contrary there was no place of Dwelling more pleasing to him but this grieved him That he was constrain'd to it by the Order of the Emperor because it would give an occasion to the People of his Diocess to slight his Instructions That he was wrongfully Accused of having held frequent Assemblies at Antioch since he never came thither but when he was Summoned by his Patriarch That he had done nothing but what was according to the Canons and Discipline of the Church That he had lived and discharged all the parts of his Ministry without fault That all his Crime was that he Lamented the Miseries of the Phoenician Churches
upon him for suffering them In the One hundred twenty seventh he comforts the Orthodox Bishops of Aegypt who had retired to Constantinople Anatolius bore the Reflections which S. Leo made upon him with a sort of Disturbance Atticus the Priest whom S. Leo had branded sought to justify himself by sending some Writings which he pretended to be Orthodox but S. Leo was not satisfied with that but insisted upon it that he would plainly condemn the Error and Person of Eutyches and sign the Profession of Faith made by the Council of Chalcedon This Letter is dated in March 458. The One hundred twenty ninth Letter of S. Leo to Nicetas or rather to Niceas Bishop of Aquileia is dated March 21. in the same Year The First and Principal Question which he treats of in this Letter is this viz. Whether those Women who in the Captivity or Absence of their Husbands whom they thought dead having been married to others ought to return to their First Husbands if perchance they return again He answers That they are obliged to it if their First Husbands demand them again although their Second Husbands have not sinned in marrying them And he at the same Time orders That those Women be Excommunicated who would not return to them The Second Question is concerning those who have eaten Meats offer'd to Idols being urg'd to it through Hunger or constrain'd through Fear He says That they must be cleansed by Penance which ought to be considered not so much in respect of the length of Time as of the Sincerity of Grief He orders That they do the same to those who have been baptized a Second Time either by Force or because they have been engag'd in the Heretical Factions He wisely observes That the Time for Penance ought to be order'd according to the Devotion Age or Profession of the Penitents In fine as to those Persons who have been baptized but once but by the Hereticks he says That they ought to be Confirm'd by the Imposition of Hands with Invocation of the Holy Spirit Sola invocatione Spiritus Sancti per Impositionem Manuum Confirmandi In the One hundred and thirtieth Letter he comforts the Bishops of Aegypt who were retir'd to Constantinople and advises them not to suffer those Matters to be disputed afresh which were decided in the Council of Chalcedon This Letter is dated March 21. The One hundred thirty first is of the same Date He exhorts the Clergy of Constantinople to continue stedfast in the Faith and separate themselves from the Hereticks and he admonishes them That they ought not to suffer Atticus and Andrew to remain in the Church if they will not make Profession in Writing of the Faith of the Council of Chalcedon The next Day he wrote to the Emperor the One hundred thirty and second Letter in which he declareth to him That he ought not to suffer the Decrees of the Council of Chalcedon to be brought under Examination a second Time That he could neither Communicate with Hereticks nor depart from the Decisions of the Synod That he will send the Legates of the Holy See as he hath desired That he doth it not to enter into Dispute about that which hath already been decided but only to clear it and make it known In the One hundred thirty third Letter to the same Emperor dated Aug. 17. He writes to him That he had sent Two Bishops to require him in his Name to take Care of the Peace of the Church maintain the Faith and not suffer the Definitions of the Council of Chalcedon to be called in question He enlarges chiefly upon the latter shewing that if once it be allow'd to dispute continually and use Logical and Rhetorical Arguments in the Explication of the Mysteries there will never be an end That Jesus Christ hath evidently prov'd that he would not have these Arts made use of since he had not chosen Philosophers or Orators to preach his Gospel but poor Fishermen lest the heavenly Doctrine which is so powerful should be thought to need the Help of Humane Eloquence That the Arguments of Rhetorick appear so much the more by how much the Things that are treated on are the more obscure and uncertain and accounted true because they are defended with more Wit and Eloquence but that the Gospel of Jesus Christ hath no need of that Artifice because the Doctrine of Truth is clear in it self and that no Man seeks what is pleasing to the Ear when he desires only to know what he ought to believe Next he explains in a few Words the Doctrine establish'd in the Council of Chalcedon He bewails the Outrage committed against the Person of the Bishop of Alexandria He requires no Punishment but hopes that the Authors of it would amend and suffer Penance for their Sin In fine he recommends to him his Legates which he sent to him not to enter any Dispute but to represent to him what must be done for the Maintenance of the Faith and Restauration of the Church's Peace He prays him to send an Orthodox Bishop to Alexandria and re-settle the Bishops of Aegypt which have been forc'd away by the Hereticks This excellent Letter is one of those which F. Quesnel hath lately publish'd Prudens * Tricaââânus Bishop of Troyes hath copied out a part of it in his Book against Joannes Scotus Vigilius and Pelagius II. have also cited it and Facundus hath produced a Passage of it The One hundred thirty fourth Letter is a Discourse against the Error of Eutyches S. Leo relates therein first of all the Errors of the Hereticks about the Mystery of the Incarnation He proves That the Council of Nice hath confounded them altogether He demonstrates That it was necessary for the Reconciliation of Man to God that Jesus Christ should be God and Man and the Divine and Humane Nature should be united in one Person He proves afterwards by many Reasons confirmed by Testimonies of Holy Scriptures That these Two Natures are really and truly in Jesus Christ This in the last Place he makes good by the Authority of the Holy Fathers of whom he produces many Passages In a Word he proves and explains the Mystery of the Incarnation in a clear noble and sublime manner without involving himself in School Subtleties The One hundred thirty Fifth Letter is written to Neonas Bishop of Ravenna for so it ought to be read and not Legio F. Quesnel thinks it was written in the Year 458 a Thinks it to be written in 458. He affirms That there is a Fault in the Date of the Consulship and that we must read Majorian for Marcian 1. Because all the Letters of S. Leo written in 451. under the Consulship of Marcian and Adelphius carry all the Name of Adelphius and indeed when S. Leo mentions but one Consul 't is always the Western one which he names 2. It is there Consulatu but S. Leo never sets it down so but Consule or Consulibus 3. Because
Abbots who are not Priests upon pain of Expulsion from their Monasteries Nevertheless it permits those who are admitted into Monasteries or their Parents or Relations to give voluntary Gifts yet upon this condition That those Gifts shall belong to the Monasteries whether he that is Admitted stays or goes away unless the Emperor turn him out The 20th prohibits making double Monasteries that is for Men and Women and as for those that are Founded it ordains That the Monks and Nuns shall dwell in two several Houses that they shall not see one another nor have any Commerce together The 21st forbids Monks to quit their own Monastery to go to others The 22d forbids Monks to eat with Women unless it be needful for their Spiritual Good or upon a Journey yea though they be their Relations Moreover to the Acts of this Council is joyned a Panegyrick pronounced in Commendation of it by Epiphanius Deacon of Catana in Sicily a Letter of Tarasius to Pope Adrian about the Subject of the Council another Letter of the same Person against the Simonists in which he hath gathered together several Canons upon that Subject another Letter of his to John the Abbot upon the Definition of the 2d Nicene Council and against Simoniacal Ordinations The Acts of this Council being brought to Rome they sent Extracts of them into France where they had a different Practice about Image-worship They were indeed permitted to have them and to put them in their Churches but they could not endure that any Worship or Honour should be paid them whilst the Cross and Sacred Vessels were permitted to be honoured Charles who was then King of France and afterwards was Emperor caused these Extracts to be Examined by * Of whom Alcuin was the chief and R. Hoveden says He it was that composed the Caroline Books some Boshops of his Kingdom who composed a Treatise to vindicate their own Usage and to answer the Proofs alledged in the Council of Nice for the Worship of Images This Work was put out by Charles's Order and under his Name within three Years or thereabouts after the Nicene Council It is divided into four Books In the Preface having observed that the Church redeemed with the precious Blood of Christ her Spouse washed with the saving Water of Baptism fed with the precious Blood of her Saviour and anointed with Holy Oyl is sometimes assaulted by Hereticks and Infidels and sometimes vexed by the Quarrels of the Schismaticks and the Proud that she is an Ark containing those that are to be saved figured by that of Noah which undergoes the Storms of the Deluge of this World without any danger of Shipwrack which does not yield to the deep and deadly Whirlpools of this World and which cannot be overcome by the Hostile Powers wherewith she is surrounded by reason Christ does continually fight for her so that she does still withstand her Enemies and inviolably maintain the true Faith and Confession of the Trinity That she is a Holy Mother without Spot and Corruption always Fruitful and yet a Virgin that the more she is set on by the Contradictions of the World the more she encreases in Virtue the lower she is brought the higher she raiseth up her self After this Encomium of the Church they add in Charles's Name That seeing he hath taken the Reins of his Kingdom in his hands being in the Bosom of this Church he is obliged to endeavour her Vindication and Prosperity that not only the Princes but the Bishops also of the East puffed up with sinful Pride had swerved from the Holy Doctrine and the Apostolick Tradition and do cry up impertinent and ridiculous Synods to make themselves famous to Posterity that some years ago they had held in Greece a certain Synod full of Imprudence and Indiscretion in which they went about to abolish the use of Images which the Ancients have introduced as an Ornament and a Remembrance of Things past and to attribute to Images what God hath said of Idols though it cannot be said that all Images are Idols But it 's plain there 's a difference between an Image and an Idol because Images are for Ornament and Remembrance whereas Idols are made for destroying Souls by an impious Adoration and vain Superstition That the Bishops of this Council had been so blind as to Anathematize all those who had Images in Churches and so boast that their Emperor Constantine had freed them from Idols That besides this there was another Synod held about three years since composed of the Successors of those of the former Council yea and of those that had assisted at it which was not less Erroneous and Faulty than the former though it took a clean contrary way That the Bishops of this Synod order Images to be Adored which those of the former would not permit to be had or seen and that whenever these find Images to be spoken of whether in the Scripture or in the Writings of the Fathers they conclude from thence that they ought to be Worshipped That thus they both fall into contrary Absurdities those and confounding the Use and the Adoration of Images and the other believing Idols and Images to be one and the same thing As for us says he being content with what we find in the Gospels and the Apostle's Writings and instructed by the Works of the Fathers who have not swerved from him who is the Way and the Truth we receive the 6 first Councils and reject all the Novelties both of the first and the second Synod And as to the Acts of this latter which are destitute of Eloquence and common Sense being come to us we thought our selves bound to write against their Errors to the end that if their Writing should defile the Hands of those that shall hold it or the Ears of those that shall hear it the Poison which it might instill may be expell'd by our Treatise supported by the Authority of the Scripture and that this weak Enemy which is come from the East may be subdued in the West by the Sentiments of the Holy Fathers which we have produced In fine we have undertaken this Work with the consent of the Bishops of the Kingdom which God hath given us not out of any ambitious Design but animated with the Zeal of God's House and the Love of Truth because as it is a holy Thing to pursue good Things so it is a great Sin to consent to Evil. This is the Subject of his Preface In the first Book after having made some Cursory Observations upon some Terms of the Council he shews that the places of the Scripture alledged in that Council for Image-worship being explained in their genuine Sense and according to the Fathers do not at all prove what they pretend In the first Chapter he reproves this Expression in the Letter of Constantine and Irene By him that Reigns with us He says That it is a piece of intolerable Rashness in Princes to compare their Reign
the 16th of October That Eugenius should be cited to answer what had been produc'd against him Another Assembly was held towards the end of the year at Nuremberg to which the Pope sent the Cardinal of Sancta ââuze the Archbishop of Tarente John de Turrecremata and Nicholas Cusanus to act there on his behalf the Council of Basil sent thither also the Patriarch of Aquileia and other Deputies There it was propos'd That a third place might be made choice of where the Prelats of Basil and Ferrara might Assemble The Deputies of the Council having maintain'd That this Proposal was not reasonable made answer That they had no Commands about this from the Council They desired on behalf of the Council That the Princes of Germany would receive its Decrees and provide for its Security To which it was answer'd That the Emperor and Princes would make known their thoughts to the Council by their Ambassadors while those from France advis'd the Fathers of the Council to hold to the three places they had made choice of Basil Avignon and the Savoy if they could make the Pope and the Greeks agree to them if not to name many Cities among which there should be some which the Pope could not reasonably refuse The Ambassadors of the Emperor and the Princes of Germany being arriv'd at Basil declar'd to the Fathers of the Council That the Germans did acknowledge the Council for General That the Emperor meant that all those who were Assembled should have security in that place but that the Neutrality had been accepted by all the Prelats Princes and People That they honour'd the Council and Eugenius both together That they were of Opinion it was necessary for promoting Peace that the Fathers of Basil and Ferrara should meet in a third Place The Ambassadors of the other Princes joyn'd with those of Germany and desired the same thing At last after much Dispute a Project was set on foot whereby the Fathers of the Council were to name the Cities of Strasburgh Constance or Mayence That the Emperor should communicate this choice to the Pope and the Greeks within a Month and that a Month after he should be bound to accept one of these Cities That the Pope should confirm the Decrees of the Council and the Council should take off the Suspension enacted against the Pope This Project was neither acceptable to the Council of Basil nor to Pope Eugenius and so these matters remain'd in the same state in which they were In the year 1439 the Council sent Deputies to the Assembly which was held at Mayence in the Month of March The Ambassadors of the Princes who were at Basil came thither also and some persons came thither secretly on behalf of the Pope among whom was Nicholas Cusanus The Deputies of the Council urg'd earnestly That he should be oblig'd to receive its Decrees and the Ambassadors of the Princes That they would âurcease the Decison of the Process against Eugenius After much contest the Assembly receiv'd the Decrees of the Council except those that were made against the Pope and the Deputies of the Council promised that it would consent to the desire of the Emperor the Kings and Princes on condition that they would engage to continue the Council after its Translation upon the same foot according to the same Laws the same Order and Customs which were observ'd at Basil and that in case Eugenius did not acknowledge the Truths establish'd by the Council within the time that should be prefix'd nor execute what the Council had Ordain'd they would abandon him and assist the Council and adhere to its Decision The Bishop of Quensa said That the Pope could not accept these Conditions and that the Princes would never consent to them And thus the Deputies of the Council retir'd without making any agreement After their departure two Deputies of the Pope's Legats arriv'd at Mayence and would have them revoke the Resolution of the Assembly about the Decrees of the Council of Basil which not being able to Compass they oppos'd them and made great Complaints That the Princes maintain'd the Fathers of Basil to the prejudice of the Pope's Autority During this Negotiation at Mayence the Divines which were at Basil disputed this Question The Disputes of the Divines at Basil abouâ the Authority of a Council viz. Whether Eugenius could be declar'd a Heretick upon the account of his Disobedience and the Contempt he had shewn to the Orders of the Church Some held the Affirmative and others the Negative and among them who maintain'd the Affirmative some held him simply Heretical and others an Apostate at last after much Dispute they drew up eight Theological Propositions or Conclusions express'd in these words First It is a Truth of the Catholick Faith That the Holy General Council has Power over the Pope and every other Person Secondly The General Council being lawfully Assembled cannot be Dissolv'd Translated or Adjourn'd by the Authority of the Pope without its own consent This is a Truth of the same nature with the former Thirdly He that does obstinately resist these Truths ought to be accounted Heretical These three Propositions are about Law the other five concern the Facts and Person of Eugenius and are as follows Fourthly The Pope Eugenius the 4th has opposed these Truths when he attempted to Dissolve or Translate the first time the Council of Basil by the plenitude of his Power Fifthly Being admonished by the Holy Council he hath revok'd the Errors contrary to these Truths Sixthly The Dissolution or Translation of the Council attempted the second time by Eugenius is contrary to these Truths and contains an inexcusable Error in the Faith Seventhly Eugenius renewing his attempt to Dissolve or Translate the Council has relaps'd into the Errors which he had revok'd Eighthly Being admonish'd by the Council to revoke the second Dissolution or Translation which he attempted and persisting in his Disobedience after he had been Contumacious and holding a Conventicle at Ferrara he has discover'd his Obstinacy These eight Conclusions being read in the Assembly rais'd great Disputes among the Fathers of the Council some meaning to approve and others to reject them The Archbishop of Palerma who had formerly been one of the great Adversaries to Eugenius having receiv'd Orders from the King of Arragon was at the Head of those who would have them rejected He acknowledg'd this Truth That the Council is above the Pope but he maintaind That this Doctrin ought not to pass for an Article of Faith He confess'd That Eugenius had done wrong but he did not believe that he ought to be look'd upon and treated as a Heretick Dr. John of Segovia maintain'd on the contrary That this Truth was a matter of Faith and that Eugenius by opposing it had fall'n into Heresy Amedaeus Archbishop of Lyons Ambassador from the King of France accused also Eugenius of Heresy on the contrary the Bishop of Burgos Ambassador from the King of Spain
infinite Number of very common Errours into which our Fathers fell for want of examining Things by the Rules of true Criticism For 't is a surprizing thing to consider how many spurious Books we find in Antiquity nay even in the first Ages of the Church Several Reasons induced Men to impose Books upon the World under other Men's Names The first and most general is the Malice of Hereticks who to give the greater Reputation to their Heresies composed several Books which they attributed to Persons of great Reputation in which they studiously spread their own Errours that so they might find a better Reception under the Protection of these celebrated Names And thus the first Hereticks devised false Gospels false Acts and false Epistles of the Apostles and their Disciples And thus those that came after them published several spurious Books as if they had been written by Orthodox Authors that so they might insensibly convey their Errours into the Minds of their Readers without their perceiving the Cheat. The Second Reason that inclined People to forge Books under other Men's Names is directly contrary to the First being occasioned by the indiscreet Piety of some Persons who thought they did the Church considerable Service in forging Ecclesiastical or Profane Monuments in favour of Religion and the Truth And this Reason prevailed with some ancient Christians to forge some Testimonies in behalf of the Christian Religion under the Name of the Sibyls Mercurius Trismegistus and divers others and likewise induced the Catholicks to compose some Books that they might refute the Hereticks of their own Times with the greater Ease And Lastly The same Motive carried the Catholicks so far as to invent false Histories false Miracles and false Lives of the Saints to nourish and keep up the Piety of the Faithful Now though the Design of these Persons seems to be commendable yet we ought not by any Means to approve of the making use of these sorts of Artifices to defend the Truth which is well enough supported by real Proofs without the necessity of inventing any false ones It would be a Shame to call Lying and Falshood to its Assistance and we must never use such sort of Methods which Truth and Sincerity will always condemn whatever good Effects they may pretend to have The Third Reason of the Forgery of some Books keeps a middle Way between those we have already mentioned for there have been some Persons in the World that have been guilty of this Imposture without any other Design than to divert themselves at the Expence of their Readers and to try how nearly they could imitate the Stile of other Men. Hence it is that some Authors have composed Treatises under St. Cyprian's St Ambrose's and St. Austin's Names But it must be confessed that this Reason has not been near so common as the other two and that it very rarely prevailed especially in the Primitive Times Only in these latter Ages there have been some who having Vanity enough to over-value their own Productions have published them under the Name of ancient celebrated Authors desiring rather as the Abbot of Billi says to appear abroad and be esteemed under other Men's Names than to continue despised and be buried in Darkness by writing in their own And these are the Reasons that may have occasioned the Forgery of Books Malice Indiscreet Piety and the Humours of Men. But besides these Reasons that have advanced this Trade of Forgery there are several others that have occasioned the setting Authors Names to several Books which they never writ The first and the most general is the Fault of the Transcribers or Printers who have frequently set wrong Names in the Title-Pages of their Books And this has happened several Ways for either they did it to raise the Price of the Copy or because they found these Tracts at the End of some other Author they therefore concluded too rashly that they were done by the same Hand or through Ignorance and Negligence or lastly some not being able to find out the Name of the true Authors upon the strength of a few feeble Conjectures have supposed they had good Reason on their side to change it From hence therefore one Book has often carried the Name of several Authors in Manuscript and this has principally happen'd to Sermons either because the Transcribers found it their Interest to publish them under the Names of Great Men to make them more vendible or because these Sermons though of different Authors by being often inserted into the Office of the Church and divided into Lessons were so interwoven and confounded one with another that it was a difficult matter to distinguish them A second Reason of the giving to some Books the Name of wrong Authors is because sometimes Men have written Books by way of Dialogue or otherwise to which in imitation of Tully they have given the Names of those Persons whom they have introduced there as Speakers After this manner Vigilius Thapsensis made five Books under the Name of St. Athanasius and perhaps too under the same Name he composed the Creed that is attributed to that Father Whence it happened that those that looked upon the Titles of these Books attributed them to St. Athanasius without examining the Reasons why they carried his Name As if we should attribute Tully's Books to Laelius Brutus or Cato Lastly The Ambiguity of Titles and the Resemblance of Names have often contributed to the ascribing of Books to those to whom they did not belong Two Authors were of the same Name though perhaps they differed in every Circumstance beside and this has given Occasion to several unwary or ignorant Readers to attribute their Books to the wrong Persons This has frequently happened and to give one remarkable Instance of it the Resemblance of the Names of Sixtus the Philosopher and Sixtus the Pope caused the Sentences that were written by the former to be attributed to the latter Having thus discovered the Reasons why we find so many Books attributed to Authors who have no just Title to them we ought to establish the Rules of true Criticism 'T is equally dangerous to be ignorant of them as to take them the wrong Way and mis-apply them for if we do not know them we may be easily imposed upon by false Monuments and if we do not understand them aright or if we abuse them by allowing our selves too great a Liberty we may very often reject the Truth it self This last Abuse has been frequent with many Criticks of our Time and particularly Protestants who upon very slight superficial Conjectures have rejected several Books that are unquestionably ancient and genuine because they contradict their Doctrine or Discipline Wherefore we may in the first place set this down for a general Rule in these Matters that we ought always to act fairly and upon the Square and that we must lay aside our Passions or our Interests and hearken only to our Reason when we pass our
and indeed if such Reasonings were to be allowed I don't know one single Book in the World which might not upon as good Grounds be taken away from the true Author and bestowed upon another From hence we may see of what ill consequence it is to give ones Imagination too large a Scope and mistake bare Conjectures for eternal Truths h They would only prove that the same thing has happened to the Books of Moses which has almost happened to all the ancient Authors viz That some few Words Names and Terms have been added or altered to render the Narrative more intelligible If one examines all these Objections that I have already answered he will be convinced they prove no more and that one might have answered almost all of them by this very Remark Mr. Simon who cannot contradict me in this Point is mighty desirous to set upon me another way by objecting that in my Preface and other places of my Book I have laid down Rules which seem to prove from these Additions that the Pentateuch is a supposititious Work For it seems I had affirmed in the first part of my Preface That impostors for the most part relate Matters of Fact that happened after the Death of those whom they speak of and they give an Account of Cities and People that were not known in the time of those Authors whose Names they assume From whence Mr. Simon draws this Consequence that since I own there are several such Additions in the Pentateuch a Disciple of Spinosa may thence conclude that according to my Rule 't is a supposititious Work To this I answer that this Objection of Mr. Simon shews that he has not so great a share of good Sense and closeness of Arguing as he has of Rabbinical Learning For if he had only considered the General Remark which I made in my Preface about the Rules of Criticism there laid together he could not have been guilty of so manifest a Solecism as this I desire him to mind these Words a little A Man may say that all these Rules which I have here laid down are convincing and probable in different degrees but that the Sovereign and Principal Rule is the Judgment of Equity and Prudence which instructs us to ballance the Reasons of this and t'oher side in distinctly considering the Conjectures that are made of both sides Now this is the General Rule of Rational Criticism and we abuse all the rest if we don't chiefly make use of this Let us now apply it to the present Question There are in the Pentateuch some Terms and Names of Cities and other Passages that could not come from Moses must we therefore hastily conclude that it was not written by Moses because 't is a certain sign that a Book is spurious when one finds such Occurrences in it as have happen'd after the Death of the Author to whom it is attributed and because we there meet with some Names of Cities and People that were not known in his time Or on the other hand Does it follow because the Pentateuch was writ by Moses notwithstanding some Additions which are there to be found does it I say thence follow that the above-mentioned Rule is false These two Consequences are very indiscreetly drawn but the Rule is still good and the Books of the Pentateuch may yet be written by Moses The Rule is good but we ought to make a good use of it When there are no certain Proofs of the Antiquity of a Book and besides there are other Conjectures to incline us to doubt of it we may in pursuance to this Rule conclude it spurious But when it is past Dispute that such a Book is written by such an Author and there is an infinite number of evident Arguments to demonstrate the truth of it then we are necessarily to conclude that these Words and Terms and Names were afterwards added After all where there are Reasons on one side as well as on the other we ought carefully to ballance them to weigh one against the other and at last to determine the matter on that side where the greatest appearance of probability lies These are the true Rules of Criticism which it seems Mr. Simon is ignorant of or at least does not rightly examine otherwise he could never have forgot himself so far as to accuse me wrongfully for giving favourable Rules to the Disciples of Spinosa The fault is by no means to be imputed to these Rules which almost every Critick has given before me but 't is his way of Arguing and drawing of Inferences that has been favourable to the Spinosists His Conjectures and Objections and in short his Hypothesis has served to confirm those Persons in their Errors besides that several places of his Book give the greatest Blow imaginable to the Authority of the Holy Scripture When he asks me What answer I will return to a Spinosist who to prove that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses shall use my own Reasons to show that the Liturgy of St. James as 't is commonly received by the Oriental Nations was not made by him I will answer him that there are not the same Reasons to induce a Man to believe that St. James was the Author of that Liturgy which goes under his Name as that the Books of Moses were written by him That this was never affirmed in any of the Epistles of the Apostles that the Ancients never speak of it that this Liturgy does not agree with the Discipline that was in use in St. James's time Whereas the Scripture informs me that Moses was Author of the Pentateuch and Jesus Christ and his Apostles have assured me of the truth of it and all the ancient Writers have testified so much besides the Universal Agreement of all People in this matter 'T is therefore a manifest Injustice and Calumny in Mr. Simon to accuse me for designing to destroy the Books of Moses under a pretence of defending them against the Spinosists Nor does Mr. Simon reason better in applying what I have said with regard to the Book of Joshuah to the Books of the Pentateuch 't is but comparing the Arguments I brought to prove that the Books of the Pentateuch belonged to Moses with those that are commonly produced to prove that the Book of Joshuah was written by Joshuah and any Man will soon perceive the mighty difference between one and the other and that the Reasons that are alledged in favour of Moses are infinitely stronger than those that are urged to prove that Joshuah composed the Book that bears his Name No Man ever yet doubted that the Pentateuch was written by Moses but 't is not the same case with the Book of Joshuah Mr. Simon supposeth there is as much evidence for one as the other in order to prove this he imagines that all those formal places of Scripture that are produced to shew that Moses was Author of the Pentateuch reduce themselves to this Head viz. That Moses wrote the
his p But it is certain that they cannot be his The Eternity and Divinity of the Word is clearly explained in the Poemander and the Author of this Book attributes to the Son the quality of being Consubstantial with the Father he declares that he is the Son of God our God who proceeds from the Intellect of the Father and he makes use of the very words of the Septuagint in describing the Creation of the World he Discourseth of the Fall of the first Man In short he Copies out several passages of the Old and New Testament and follows the Principles of the Modern Platonick Philosophy But the Book Entituled Asclepius hath not quite so great a Tincture of Christianity The Author Treats therein of Idolatry after an exquisite manner he explains the Greek word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he Transcribes many things out of the Holy Scriptures and the Works of the Grecian Writers Lastly he foretels the Extirpation of the Egyptian Religion for the Author of these Treatises is a Modern Platonick Christian who argues from the Principles of that Philosophy and hath taken from the Holy Scripture that which he writ concerning the Word of God and the Creation of the World IT were needless to shew the falsity of a Letter attributed to Lentulus and directed to the Senate A Letter of Lentulus and People of Rome concerning the Actions of Jesus Christ since the Forgery is apparent It is pretended to have been written by Lentulus as Governour of Jerusalem altho he never was so the Superscription thereof is inscrib'd to the Senate and People of Rome whereas ever since there were Emperors it was the general Custom among the Governours of Provinces to write immediately to them Moreover the Contents of this Letter are ridiculous there is a mean and unworthy Deseription of the Person of Jesus Christ as particularly it is said that his Hair was of a light Colour long and loose after the manner of the Nazarenes the style is also very far from the Purity and Elegancy of the Age wherein Augustus lived In short this Letter is not so much as mentioned by any of the ancient Writers THE Letter of Pilate to Tiberius on the same Subject concerning the Miracles of Jesus Christ seems Pilaet's Letter to be more Authentick for it is recorded by Tertullian in his Apologotick that Tiberius being informed of the supernatural and wonderful Operations that were performed by our Saviour in Palestine which were so many Testimonies of his Divinity made report thereof to the Senate and determined that he ought to be Enrolled among the Gods but that the Senate having rejected this Proposition Tiberius nevertheless persisted in his Opinion and forbad his Subjects to persecute the Christians It is added a little after by the same Author that Pilate being a Christian in his Heart wrote to Tiberius concerning the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Eusebius in the second Book of his History Chap. 2. produceth this passage of Tertullian and giving a large Account how the same of our Saviour was spread abroad and came to the Ears of Tiberius he says that Pilate sent a Letter to the Emperor according to the usual Custom of the Governors of Provinces who were obliged to give an Account of the most remarkable Occurrences that happened within their Jurisdiction and that he wrote to him concerning the Resurrection of Jesus Christ avouching that he had been informed of his Miracles by many and that a great number of People esteemed him as a God after he rose again from the Dead We find in the Orthodoxographa after the Epistle of Lentulus another attributed to Pilate and directed to Tiberius wherein the same things are contained But it is difficult to determine whether this Letter was extant in the time of Eusebius or afterwards forged from his Story However there are divers learned Men that doubt of the Truth of this History which hath but very little probability in its Foundation for what Likelihood is there that Pilate should transmit these things in writing to Tiberius relating to a Man whom he had condemned to Death And altho he had written them is it credible that Tiberius should have made a Proposition to the Senate for the admitting this Person into the number of the Gods upon the bare report of a Governour And if he had propounded it who can doubt but that the Senate would have immediately submitted to his Judgment Therefore tho' this Relation cannot be absolutely Charged with Falsehood yet it ought at least to be accounted as dubious Dr. Pearson late Bishop of Chester in his Lectures upon the Acts of the Apostles p. 64 65. vindicates the Truth of this Story against the Objections of Tanaquil Fââââ so fully that I shall set down his Reasons at large And 1. He says that Tâ⦠might have taken his Information from the Acts of the Senate wherein the Votes and Acts of every day were âââstantly set down 2. He observes from Sâââââius that Tiberius acquainted the Senate with every thing that he was informed of whether publick or private of great or of little Concern 3. He observes that Tibââiâs often took no notice when the Senate decreed things against his own Opinion and this also is expresly affirmed by ãâã 4. The Senate refused to Rank Jesus Christ amongst the Gods out of a Complement to Tiâââius who had before refused Divine Honours Commanding that no Staââââ of his should be Erected in their Temples unless for Ornament they might probably therefâââ suspect that this was propos'd by Tiâââius who never spoke his mind plainly in any thing to ãâã them who could not attribute those Honours to any Body else which Tiberius had forbidden to be paid to himself without making that Person greater than Tiberius 5. It is not probable that Pontius Pilate should neglect so remarkable a thing as the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ when all the Governours of particular Provinces were obliged to send Relations of every one that was considerable under their Governments to the Emperors who sent them And the Question is not âs Fâââr mis-understood it whether the Christians then made any considerable Figure in the World but whether upon Pilate's transmitting an Account to Tiberius of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ at Jerusalem when he was Procurator of Judââ the Emperor did not propose to the Senate that this Jesus Christ might be ranked amongst the Gods which being positively asserted by Tertulliân cannot be disproved by any Negative Arguments that may at this time of day be brought against it But tho' these Reasons which are urged by this great Man against Tanaquil Faber sufficiently vindicate the Truth of Tertullian's Authority in this Matter yet that is no Argument why the Epistle that go's under Pilate's Name should be Genuine Pilate sent this Account of Jesus Christ in the Acts of his Administration not in a particular Letter to the Emperour The Acts are quoted by Justin Martyr
famous Opinion or rather Dotage of Antiquity This was the opinion of S. Justin Athenagoras S. Irenaeas S. Clement Tertullian Lactantius and many other ancient Writers concerning the Temporal Beign of Jesus Christ which they fansied should happen on Earth a thousand years before the day of Judgment when the Elect should be gathered together after the Resurrection in the City of Jerusalem and should enjoy there all the Delights imaginable during these thousand years S. Irenaeus produceth a fragment taken from the fourth Book of Papias wherein he endeavours to prove this Opinion by a passage of the Prophet Isaiah And Eusebius having cited a Paragraph of his Preface to these Books in which he shews the great care that he took to be informed of the Doctrine of the Apostles by interrogating their Disciples adds That this Author hath set down many things which he pretended to have learnt by an unwritten Tradition of which sort there are several new Parables and Instructions of our Saviour Jesus Christ that are not contained in the Gospels together with other fabulous Histories among which we may reckon the Reign of Jesus Christ on Earth during the space of a thousand years after the Resurrection of the Body That which led him into this Error continueth Eusebius is that he understood the Discourses and Instructions of the Apostles too literally not understanding that a mystical sense ought to be given to this sort of Expressions and that the Apostles only made use of them as Illustrations for âe was a Man of a very mean capacity as appears from his Books who nevertheless gave occasion to many of the ancient Fathers and among others to Irenaeus to follow this Error which they maintained by the authority of Papias Eusebius in the same place relates two Miracles the account whereof Papias declares that he had received from the Daughter of Philip the Deacon who resided at Hierapolis That a dead Man was raised at that time and that Barsabas sirnamed Justus Elected to be an Apostle together with S. Matthias having swallowed deadly Poison was not hurt by it Moreover he assures us that Papias had collected in his Books divers Explications on some words of Jesus Christ composed by Aristion a Disciple of the Apostles and the Traditions likewise of the venerable Elder S. John but omitting these things he is content only to recite a passage wherein this ancient Writer affirms that S. Mark compiled his Gospel from what he had heard S. Peter tell of the Actions and Discourses of Jesus Christ and this is the reason that he hath not observed an Historical Method That S. Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew and that it was afterward Translated into Greek Lastly Eusebius affirms that he cited the first Epistles of S. Peter and of S. John and that he explained the History of a Woman that was accused before our Saviour of several Crimes which was found in the Gospel according to the Hebrews Thus we have given an account of all that is recorded by Eusebius concerning Papias Andreas Caesariensis and Oeoumenius have likewise produced some Passages d Andraeas Caesariensis and Oécumenius have likewise produced some Passages Andraeas Caesariensis in Serm. 12. in Apocalyps cites a Passage of Papias wherein he says that the disposing of Sublunary Things was committed to the Care of the Angels that are round the Earth but that they did not perform their Duty as they ought to do Oecumenius upon the Acts observes that Papias believed that Judas did not end his Life by hanging but that he was run over with a Chariot which is the Opinion of Theophylact Euthymius and Oecumneius of his Works in their Commentaries on the Holy Scripture but it is not certain whether they were Papias's or no. The Judgment that ought to be given concerning him is that which hath been already given by Eusebius that is to say that he was a good Man but very credulous and of very mean Barts who delighted much in hearing and telling Stories and Miracles And since he was exceedingly inquisitive and inclined to believe every thing that was told him it is not to be admired that he hath divulged divers Errors and extravagant Notions as the Judgments of the Apostles and hath given us fabulous Narratives for real Histories which shews that nothing is so dangerous in Matters of Religion as lightly to believe and too greedily to embrace all that hath the appearance of Piety without considering in the first place how true it is e Without considering in the first place how true it is This is conformable to an excellent Passage of S. Augustin Non sit Religio nostra in Phantasmatibus nostris melius est enim qualecumque verum quà m omne quicqùid pro arbitrio fingi potest melior est vera stipula quà m lux inani cogitatione pro suspicantis voluntate formata De ver Rel. c. 55. QUADRATUS and ARISTIDES THese two Defenders of the Faith presented Apologies for Christians to the Emperor Adrian The first was a Disciple of the Apostles a A Disciple of the Apostles Hieron Ep. 84. ad Magnum This appears from the Fragment that is set down afterward We must not confound this Quadratus with another of this Name who was Bishop of Athens and the Successor of Publius mentioned by Eusebius Lib. 4. cap. 23. S. Jerom makes no distinction between them in his Catalogue nor in his Epistle to Magnus and they are likewise confounded in the Menâlogium Graecârum But Valesâus clearly proves that they are different for the first was not a Bishop as appears from the Testimony of Eusebius Lib. 3. c. 37. and Lib. 4. c. 3. Besides the former Quadratus was a Disciple of the Apostles and lived in the time of the Emperor Adrian whereas the other never saw the Apostles as being Contemporary with Dionysius Corinthius under the Reign of Antoninus And it cannot be doubted but that it was the Elder who presented the Apology to Adrian and it is said that he had the Gift of Prophecy Quadratus Aristides b It is said that he had the gift of Prophecy Eâsebius Lib. 3. cap. 37. assures us that he was endued with the Gift of Prophecy as were the Daughters of Philip the Deacon and Miltiades in Euseb. Lib. 5. cap. 17. reckons him in the number of the Prophets of the New Testament Eusebius assures us that the Apology of this Author was extant in his ãâã and that it shewed the Genius of this Man and the true Doctrine of the Apostles But we have only a small Fragment produced by Eusebius in the fourth Book of his History chap. 3. wherein the Author declares that none could doubt of the Truth of the Miracles of Jesus Christ because the Persons that were healed or raised from the Dead by him had been seen not only when he wrote his Miracles or whilst he was upon Earth but even a very great while after his Death So that there
Patrum set forth in 1624 and they were afterwards Printed at the end of the Works of S. Justin in the Edition of Morellus Besides these three Books we have another Book in Latin attributed to Theophilus consisting of Allegorical Commentaries on the four Gospels which is in the Bibliotheca Patrum There was a Commentary on the Gospels under his name in S. Jerom's time divers passages whereof are produced by him in his Annotations on S. Matthew there were also Commentaries on the Proverbs of Solomon but this Father observes in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers that they did not come up to the elegancy or to the style of the Writings of Theophilus APOLLINARIUS or APOLLINARIS of HIERAPOLIS APollinarius or Apollinaris Bishop of Hierapolis a City of Phrygia wrote several Books under the Reign of Marcus Antoninus the Titles whereof only remain at present The first was an Apollinarius Oration dedicated to the Emperor in defence of the Christian Religion The second a Treatise against the Gentiles divided into five Books The third two Books concerning Truth The fourth two Tracts against the the Jews The fifth was one or more Treatises against the Sect of the Montanists which then began to appear These are all the Works of this Author that are cited by Eusebius and S. Jerome a By Eusebius and S. Jerome Lib 4. Cap. 27. S. Jerome in Catalogo omits the Books against the Jews neither are they found in the Version of Ruffinus nor even in some Greek Manuscripts of Eusebius they were extant in Photius's time who having read his Books against the Gentiles as also those concerning Piety and Truth b As also those concerning Piety and Truth Photius Cod. 14. It is probable that the Book of Piety is the first of those two that are cited by Eusebius under the Title of Truth Besides he affirms that there were other Works of this Author which he had never seen declares that he was much to be esteemed both for his Doctrine and his Style wherefore I shall prefer the Judgment of this Learned Man before that of Trithemius who without perusing the Works of Apollinarius peremptorily asserts that there seems to be more Zeal than Learning in what he has writ We find in Eusebius Book 5. Chap. 16. a large fragment of a certain Author whom he doth not name against the Heresie of the Montanists from whence Ruffinus and Nicephorus have asserted that this Fragment was taken from the Discourses of Apollinarius against them but they must of necessity be deceived for Apollinarius composed his Books to confute their Opinions when they first began to be divulged whereas the Anonymous Author of this Fragment wrote after the death of Montanus Maximilla and Theodotus who were the Ringleaders of that Party besides he makes mention of this Heresie as maintained in a Country far distant from his and established a great while ago which plainly shews that this Fragment belongs not to Apollinarius and consequently that there is not any part of his Works now extant DIONYSIUS of CORINTH DIonysius Bishop of Corinth lived under the Reign of the Emperor Marcus Antoninus and in the beginning of Commodus's He not only took care of his own Flock says Eusebius Book 4. Chap. 23. but he also made the Christians of other Countrys partakers of his Divine Dionysius of Corinth Labours causing them to fructifie every where by his Catholick Epistles which he sent to many Churches The first is written to the Lacedaemonians containing an Instruction of the Catholick Faith and an Exhortation to Peace and Unity The second is directed to the Athenians to excite their Faith and to induce them to lead a Life conformable to the Rules of the Gospel He likewise reproves their negligence whereby they had almost abandoned the Christian Religion ever since their Bishop Publius suffered Martyrdom in the Persecutions that were raised in his time Moreover he mentions Quadratus who was elected Bishop of Athens after the Martyrdom of Publius and testifies that the Christians of this City owed the renovation of the ardour of their Faith to his Care Besides this he informs us that Dionysius the Areopagite being converted by St. Paul as it is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles was constituted the first Bishop of Athens There is also another Epistle written by him to the Nicomedians wherein he confutes the Heresie of Marcion and keeps close to the Rule of Faith He likewise composed a Letter directed to the Church of Gortyna as also to all those of Crete in which he extreamly commends Philip their Bishop to whom his whole Church had given authentick Testimonies of his singular Abilities and Generosity and he admonisheth them to avoid Heresies In his Epistle to the Amastrians and to the other Churches of Pontus addressing his Discourse to their Bishop Palma he explains divers passages of the Holy Scriptures He therein lays down several Precepts concerning Marriage and Chastity determining at the same time that all Penitents should be received that returned from any Crimes whatsoever and even from Heresie In the same Volume is contained another Epistle to the Gnossians wherein he adviseth Pinytus their Bishop not to impose on the Christians the heavy burden of the Obligation to preserve their Virginity but to have respect unto the weakness which is incident to most of them Pinytus in replying to this Epistle extols and admires Dionysius of Corinth and exhorts him at last to afford them more solid nourishment and to send frequent Letters to him which might fill and satiate the People that were committted to his charge lest being always nourished only with Milk they should grow old and yet remain in a kind of Intancy This answer represents as it were a lively Portraiture of the Faith of Pinytus his diligence in watching over the Flock with which he was entrusted by God his profound knowledge in Divinity and his extraordinary Eloquence We have also in our hand another Letter of Dionysius written to the Romans and particularly directed to Soter who was then their Bishop a passage whereof it will be expedient here to produce in which he recommends to them the continuation of a certain Custom that had been always observed by them from their first plantation unto the persecution which happened in our time This is says he a custom which hath been established among you O ye Romans ever since the beginning of your Church to be charitable unto your Brethren and to send to divers Churches throughout the World things necessary for their subsistence you comfort the poor in their indigence and relieve the urgent necessities of those that are condemned to the Mines This custom you have received from your Ancestors which the blessed Bishop Soter hath not only retained but even augmented by abundantly distributing the Donatives appointed for the relief of the Faithful and cherishing as a Father would do his Children all the Brethren who came to Rome He mentions St. Clement's
Woman but his Wife That his Daughters remained Virgins and his Son was very Chaât He says that the Apostles S. Peter and S. Philip were Married and that they had Children That even S. Philip married his Daughters and he adds also that S. Paul had a Wife wherein he is mistaken Tho' it is uncertain whether S. Paul was ever Married yet it is a rash thing to say positively he was not S. Clement alledges a Tradition in this Matter which might easily be conveyed entire down to his time It is plain that the true Yoke-fellow Philip. 4. 3. was a Woman which others of the Antients understood of his Wife besides S. Clement His Expostulating with the Corinthians and asserting that he had a Power to lead about a Sister or a Wife as well as S. Peter or any of the Apostles may as well prove that S. Paul justified his own Practice as that he thought the thing simply lawful especially since he is there making a Defence for himself The Question however is very far from being certain in the Negative and therefore at least ought to be left undetermined In the Fourth Book he treats of Martyrdom and Christian Perfection He shews the Excellency of Martyrdom and exhorts Christians to undergo it confuting the Hereticks who held that Martyrdom was no Vertuous Action He makes the perfection of Christianity to consist in the Love of God and our Neighbour He would have us love Sinners and yet detest their Sin that we should do good out of a principle of Love and not for Fear For that Man says he that abstains from Evil only out of a slavish Fear is not good voluntarily but for Fear-sake and he who would not have abstained but in Consideration of the Recompence cannot be said to be just with a good Heart For in the one 't is Fear and in the other the hope of a Reward which renders them Just or rather which makes them appear so to the Eyes of the World He says that God inflicts Punishments upon Men for Three Reasons First that the Man whom he Chastises may become better Secondly that those who are to be saved may take warning by these Examples Thirdly lest he should be despised by Men if he did not avenge Affronts and Injuries done to himself In the Fifth Book after having shewn that the way of instructing by Allegories and Symbols was very ancient not only among the Jews but also among the Philosophers he proves that the Greeks took the greatest part of the Truths which are in their Books from the Barbarians and principally from the Hebrews This Book is full of Citations from the Poets and the heathen Philosophers In the Sixth Book he speaks again advantageously of Philosophy Afterwards he begins to draw a Character of the True Gnostick that is to say to give the Idea of a Christian that is perfectly Good and Wise. These are the principal strokes of his Picture The True Gnostick has the Command over his Passions He is exactly Temperate and allows his Body no more than what is necessary He loves God above all Things and the Creatures for Gods-sake and the Relation they bear to him and nothing is able to separate him from this Love He bears with Patience all unfortunate Accidents He makes it his Business to know all things which relate to God without neglecting humane Learning His Discourses are regular and to the purpose full of Sweetness and Charity He is never overcome with Anger He prays continually by Charity that unites him to God First begging of him the Remission of his Sins and then the Grace not to sin any more but to do Good Afterwards S. Clement enlarges upon the Source or Spring from whence this Gnostick derives this true Knowledge and compleat Science He says that it is the Holy Scripture the Law and the Prophets and in particular the Decalogue which he briefly explains and Lastly the Doctrine of Jesus Christ foretold by the Prophets preached throughout the World and received notwithstanding all the Contradiction of Kings and the great Men of this World who opposed it with all their Might In the Seventh Book he goes on to describe the Vertues of his Gnostick he says that he employs himself entirely in honouring God in loving him in understanding hearing and imitating his WORD which was made Man for our Salvation that he does it not only upon certain days but during the whole Course of his Life that the Sacrifices by which he Honours him are the Prayers and the Praises which he offers up at all times and in all Places that he is Gentle Courteous Affable Patient Charitable Sincere Faithful and Temperate that he despises the good things of this World and that he is ready to suffer every thing for Jesus Christ that he does nothing either out of Ostentation or Fear or the Desire of being rewarded but out of pure Love to the Goodness and Justice of God Lastly that he is entirely Holy and Divine Afterwards S. Clement Answers several Objections of the Greeks and Jews who affirmed that the multiplicity of Heresies ought to hinder Men from the embracing the Religion of Jesus Christ. To which he Answers that this multitude of Sects is likewise to be found among the Heathens and the Jews that it was foretold by Jesus Christ that such a thing should happen among the Christians That it ought not to make us forsake the Truth but rather on the contrary to seek after it with the greater Care and Diligence That there is an infallible Rule to distinguish Truth from Falshood that this Rule is the Holy Scripture which being an incontestable Principle serves for a Proof of whatever we say That it must be Confessed that the Hereticks make use of it as well as the Catholicks But then first they do not make use of all the Sacred Books Secondly those which they do use are corrupted Thirdly they chiefly urge ambiguous Passages which they explain according to their own Fancy by departing from the true Sense and keeping only to Terms Hence he takes occasion to condemn in general all Hereticks who rejecting the Tradition of Jesus Christ and his Apostles and forsaking the Faith of the Church have made themselves the Authors of particular Sects by inventing new Doctrines and corrupting the Truth He says that there is but only One Catholick Church which is more ancient than all the Assemblies of the Hereticks that it was founded by Jesus Christ who dyed under Tiberius and established it in the World by the Apostles before the end of Nero's Region Whereas there was hardly so much as one Heresie older than Adrian's Time and that they all bore the Name of their Author or that of the Places and Countries where they first appeared or from the Doctrine they taught or the things which they honoured which sufficiently discovers their Falshood and Novelty He concludes by making the Description of these Books of the Stromata and by promising to begin
Protestations before the Bishop and in the Church That we renounce the Devil all his Pomps and Miniââes afterwards we are plunged in the Water three times and they make us answer to some Things which are not precisely set down in the Gospel after that they make us taste Milk and Honey and we bath our selves every day during that whole Week We receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist instituted by Jesus Christ when we Eat and in the Morning-Assemblies and we do not Receive it but from the Hands of those that preside there We offer Yearly Oblations for the Dead in Honour of the Martyrs We believe that it is not lawful to Fast on a Sunday and to pray to God kneeling From Easter to Whitsontide we enjoy the same Priviledge We take great Care not to suffer any Part of the Wine and Consecrated Bread to fall to the Ground We often Sign our selves with the Sign of the Cross if you demand a Law for these Practises taken from the Scripture we cannot find one there but we must answer That 't is Tradition that has established them Custom that has authorized them and Faith that has made them to be observed The Book concerning Flight in time of Persecution is a further Mark of the Extream Rigour of Tertullian for there he maintains That it is absolutely Prohibited to Fly in time of Persecution or to give Money not to be Persecuted The Book De Pallio is a small Treatise wherein he endeavours to prove that he had reason to quit the Toga or the long Roman Gown and to wear a Cloak he shews therein a great deal of Wit and Learning and it seems as if he Composed it rather to shew what he was capable of saying upon so trivial a Subject as this is than seriously to defend the Action In his Book concerning Publick Sights and Spectacles he dissuades the Christians from those Sights and Spectacles shewing how these Pleasures are both shameful and dangerous to those who have Renounced the Pomps and Pleasures of the World and Idolatry There is no need of giving the Reasons why he wrote those Books concerning the Ornaments and Dresses of Women since the Titles themselves do sufficiently shew against what Abuse they were written So likewise the Title of the Book that Virgins ought to be Veiled does discover the Subject but we are not to understand it only of Virgins Consecrated to God for Tertullian's Design is to prove that young Women should be Veiled that is to say that they should have their Face covered in the Church Which he undertakes to prove contrary to the Custom of his Country where only married Women were veiled And upon this Account he speaks against this Custom and maintains that it cannot prescribe against Truth which is true when it relates to Doctrine but not when it concerns only a Matter of Discipline which is but of little Consequence In the First Book written to his Wife he Exhorts her not to Marry again and in the Second he Advises her that in case she will Marry again to take a Christian for her Husband The Treatise of Patience is an excellent Exhortation to the Practice of this Virtue In which Discourse Tertullian sets forth with a great deal of Eloquence all the Motives and Arguments which might induce Christians to Patience and dissuade them from Impatience The Discourse directed to the Confessors whom he calls Martyrs according to the ancient way of speaking is likewise a very powerful Exhortation to those who were in Prison upon the Account of the Religion of Jesus Christ to encourage them to bear with Patience their Chains and Torments and to persevere with Constancy to the End nothing can be more Pathetical and Moving than this little Discourse I have now nothing more to do but to speak of those Books which Tertullian Composed against the Church in Defence of the Montanists and they are Four His Book of Modesty of Monogamy an Exhortation to Chastity and A Treatise of Fasts In his Book of Modesty he endeavours to prove against the Church that it has no Power to Remit the Sins of Fornicators and Adulterers and that when Men are once fallen into these Crimes after Baptism they cannot be any more admitted into the Communion of the Church how Penitent soever they may be In his Book of Monogamy and the Exhortation to Chastity he absolutely condemns second Marriages as being Adultery Lastly In his Discourse of Fasts he commends the Excessive Fasts of the Montanists who made several Lents observing the Stationary Fasts as if they had been expresly enjoyned making them to continue till Night and not eating upon those Days any thing but Bread and Fruits nor drinking any thing but Water In all these Books excepting his Book of Exhortation to Chastity he formally attacks the Church and the Catholicks whom he calls Psychici and speaks every where very advantageously of Montanus and his Prophetesses believing that the Holy Ghost had inspired them to set up and establish a more perfect Discipline For as to what relates to the Rule of Faith that is to say to the principal Doctrines of Religion Tertullian and the first Montanists were of the same Opinion with the Church And therefore it is that in this Book against Praxeas he says that he always believed in One only God in three Persons and that he still believes it more firmly since he has been instructed by the Paraclete or Comforter And in his Book which he wrote to prove that Virgins ought to be Veil'd he says that excepting the Rule of Faith which is immoveable and can no ways be changed Manners and Customs that relate to Matter of Discipline may be reformed and altered That it is this which the Paraclet has done by the Ministry of Montanus who has instructed Men in a much more perfect Discipline than that which the Apostles had taught them that Justice was with him in the Cradle while he was an Infant That the Law and the Prophets were as it were the Infancy that the Gospel was as it were the Youth but that there was no compleat Perfection to be found but in the Instructions of the Holy Ghost who spake by Montanus for Tertullian and the first Montanists do not believe that Montanus was the Holy Ghost but only that the Holy Ghost had inspired him and sent him to Reform and Perfect the Discipline of the Church and they did not attribute this Priviledge only to Montanus but also to several of his Disciples and principally to Women and they would have it believed that there were among them several Persons who had Revelations and prophesied Things to come These Persons were sometimes strangely agitated sometimes they fell into an Extasie This Sect gave a respectful Attention to all that they said either while they were thus agitated or after they came to themselves as it was believed that these were so many Revelations of which it was not lawful to make any doubt
Hom. 35. Luc. 3. per. He says however concerning that to the Hebrews that the Thoughts of this Epistle are St. Paul's but that it was Composed by some other Person and that there is none but God who knows the Author of it though some attribute it to S. Clemens others to S. Luke He says that there is but one Epistle of S. Peter which was received by all the Churches but that we may grant the Second likewise to have been his He says the same thing of the Two last Epistles of S. John He cites the Epistles of St. Jude and St. James in his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans He likewise quotes the Revelations and attributes them to St. John Besides these Books he often cites Apocryphal Writings as the Gospels according to the Aegyptians and according to the Hebrews the Book of Hermas the Epistle of S. Barnabas the Book of Enoch and even some Heretical Books as the Apocalypse of S. Paul a Book conterning the Twelve Apostles the Doctrine of S. Peter the Acts of S. Paul the History of Isaiah and and some others Origen had very quick Parts a very strong and Extensive Phancy but he relied too much on the Vivacity of his Genius and often lost himself out of too great earnestness to fathom and subtilize every thing He had a very happy invention and a much more happy delivery of what he had invented But he had not that exactness in his Inventions nor all that Gracefulness in the Delivery as might be wish'd He carried on his Work with so great ease that he is said to have Dictated to Seven or Eight Persons at a time and he was so ready in Expressing himself that he made the greatest Part of his Homilies Extempore Upon which account his Style was not very Correct nor Coherent He had a vast Memory but he often trusted too much to it He was a Person of most profound Learning and he particularly Studied Plato's Philosophy which he understood to Perfection and indeed he was too much addicted to it for a Christian. He understood likewise the Maxims of the other Philosophers He had apply'd himself mightily to the Study of Humane Learning He was neither Ignorant of History nor Mythology and he had as great knowledge in all the Profane Sciences as those who had Studied nothing else all their whole Lives But he particularly excell'd in the knowledge of the Holy Scripture to the Study of which he entirely addicted himself He had Learned it all by heart and that he might not neglect any thing which might be of use for the understanding the Letter thereof he carefully Examined all the Versions of the Bible which were in his time and compared them all together with the Hebrew Text adding thereto a Literal Commentary upon the most difficult Places He was not very well skill'd in the Hebrew yet he knew enough of it to understand it and to observe the Differences of the Text and the Translations but he did not keep to the Literal Explication of the Bible He thought it necessary for the setting off of the Holy Scripture to the best advantage which appeared but plain and simple to the Heathens and for the rendring it of greater use to all the World to give Mystical or Allegorical Interpretations of every thing in it And herein imitates the way of Philo and Aristobulus and followed the Genius and Manner of the Platonists We have already taken notice that Hippolitus explained the Scripture Allegorically and that it was in imitation of him that Origen undertook this way of Writing St. Clement of Alexandria his Master is also full of Allegories and 't is not to be denied but that the Hellenistical Jews and the Primitive Christians made very frequent use of them But Origen has carried on an Allegory as far as it can possibly go and he has furnished Matter to all the Greek and Latin Fathers who have imitated him and have hardly done any thing else than copy him This way of explaining the Holy Scripture by continual Allegories seems to me to be very defective For though it may be good sometimes to awaken if I may so say the Auditor and to direct him by such kind of Allegories yet they become useless and tedious when they are perpetual and the Mind which requires great Application for the comprehending of them is tired and soon looses the Consequence both of Reasoning and Thought Besides that by minding only the Allegorical Sense we neglect the Literal which is oftentimes more excellent and of greater Advantage than all the Allegories in the World that divert the Mind without instructing it and strike the Imagination without affecting the Heart Lastly If in explaining the Holy Scripture we should only stick to the Allegory as Origen has done it might give occasion to believe that the Scripture taken barely in the Literal Sense would be but of very little Advantage which is a very great Error 'T is therefore a very ill way of defending Origen in this Point to say with a modern Author that he seems to have been excusable in this because he had learned by Experience that the Letter of the Scripture was but of little use for Instruction For this is to make him assert a thing which is very false the Letter of the Scripture being of exceeding use for Instruction and even more profitable than any Allegory which is not to be us'd but only now and then to awaken the Auditors Origen's Books against Celsus are an excellent Work and stored with extraordinary Learning He answers the Objections of Celsus who of all the Heathens that have written againg the Christian Religion had made the most cunning ones and proposed them the most maliciously very solidly He establishes by convincing Proofs the History of Jesus Christ his Miracles his Divinity and Resurrection He confutes the Calumnies and Impostures of Celsus and of the other Heathens against the Chri-Christians and Lastly he proves the Truth and Excellency of the Doctrine and Religion of Jesus Christ. This Book is written very Politely and with great Care and Exactness 'T is not only the best of Origen's Works but also the most accomplish'd and best Composed Apology for the Christians which we have of all the Antients The Books of Principles were likewise written with great Care and they had been of very great use if he had contented himself to explain the Principles of Religion according to Scripture and Tradition without mixing therewith his own Philosophical Notions His Commentaries upon the Scripture are more Polite than his Homilies they are full of Learning but they are not very Exact and we may observe therein a great many Fancies which are useless obscure and perplexed Often after having begun one Explication he passes to another without finishing the first His Homilies are plainer and intelligible but their style is less Elegant The Treatise concerning Prayer is an Excellent Piece of Devotion It contains a great many
divided into Four Canons in the First of which he discourses about the Fast which the Ancient Christians observed before Easter and tells us That some Christians fasted Six days before Easter others Two others Three after an extraordinary manner That we ought not to break our Fast before Midnight and that those that were able to hold on till Easter-morning were more generous That there were some Persons who though they did not fast at all nay had spent the Four first days of the last Week in sumptuous and delicate Entertainments yet imagined they did Wonderful things in fasting only two days But that they were not to be compared with those that fasted several In the second Canon he says That Women ought not to enter into the Church or receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ while they have their Courses but to offer their Prayes to God at Home since none by right ought to enter the Sanctum Sanctorum that is not pure in Body and Spirit In the Third he particularly Counsels those that are superannuated to abstain from the use of Marriage that they may the better attend their Devotions In the Fourth he leaves those Persons that have had an Illusion in the Night-time at liberty to receive or forbear the Eucharist following the Dictates and Motions of their own Conscience Anastasius of Nice in his 23d Question upon Genesis cites a Passage drawn out of a Book of Dionysius of Alexandria against Origen but there is no ground to believe that it was written by our Dionysius who was so far from being his Adversary that he was both his Disciple and Defender He died in the Year 264 after he had held the See of Alexandria Seventeen years and had one Maximus for his Successor The Style of this Author is Pompous and Lofty he is excellent in his Descriptions and Exhortations in his Polemical Discourses he falls upon his Adversaries with all the Vigour imaginable he perfectly well understood the Opinion the Discipline and Precepts of the Church he had sound piercing Judgment he was very moderate very discreet and ready to take Advice In short the Loss of his Works is one of the most considerable Losses we could have sustain'd in this kind THEOGNOSTUS THEOGNOSTUS of Alexandria is an Author unknown to Eusebius and St. Jerome whom St. Athanasius cites with Commendation and whose Books were extant in Photius's time who read them over We don't precisely know the time when he liv'd though we cannot doubt but he was some time after Origen and long before the Council of Nice Photius informs us That he composed Seven Books Entituled Hypotyposes that is to say Instructions and he gives us this Account of that Work In the first Book he treats of the Father and endeavours to shew That he is the Creator of all things against the Opinion of those that suppose Matter to be Eternal In the Second Book he advances some Arguments whereby he pretends it necessarily follows that the Father had a Son but speaking of this Son he says That he is a Creature above all Creatures that have Reason He likewise attributes to the Son of God several other Qualities of the like Nature as Origen has done Whether he was of the same Opinion or whether he speaks after that manner rather by way of Disputation than a Design to propose his own true Doctrine or in short whether he was somewhat mistaken in the Truth and that to accommodate himself to the weakness of his Auditors who having no Knowledge of the true Religion were not capable of comprehending a perfect Instruction he supposed it most expedient to give them an imperfect Knowledge of the Son of God than not to speak of him at all But though a Man may follow this Method in a Dispute or in a Discourse when he is constrained to say the same things often that are not altogether conformable to his own Opinion of the matter yet 't is a Weakness to make use of this Pretence to excuse those Errours that are published in any Book where we are obliged to speak the Truth to all the World In the Third Book speaking of the Holy Ghost he brings some Arguments to prove that there is an Holy Ghost but in the rest he falls into the same Extravagancies with those of Origen in his Book of Principles In the Fourth Book he talks erroneously about Angels and Daemons and assigns small Bodies to them In the Fifth and Sixth he treats of the Incarnation and uses all his Endeavours to demonstrate after this manner That it was possible for God to make himself Man This Book likewise is full of several groundless Fancies As for Example when he has a mind to prove that the Son of God is circumscribed in Place by our Imagination though in Truth he cannot be known there In the Seventh Book which he wrote concerning the Creation of God he discourseth of matters of Religion after a manner conformable to the Doctrine of the Church and especially of the Son of God of whom he treats in the Last Part. His Style is elevated and very ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã His Discourses have the Beauty of Old Athens but without Affectation so that in his Compositions he does not go very far from the ordinary manner of Conversation and yet he avoids saying mean things Thus I have shown you what Photius has informed us of this Author St. Athanasius calls him an Admirable Man Studious and Eloquent and is so far from accusing him for having any Unorthodox Sentiments about the Divinity of the Word that he cites him as a Witness of Consubstantiality Learn says he O Arians ye Rebels to Jesus Christ that the Eloquence of Theognostus has made use of the Word Substance for behold after what manner he discourseth in his Second Book of Instructions The Substance of the Son is not a strange Substance he was not produced of nothing but was begotten of the Substance of the Father as the Raye is of the Light or a Vapour of Water Theognostus for the Vapour is not Water not is the Ray Light but neither one nor the other is a Stranger to that which produces it Thus the Son is as it were the gentle running of the Substance of the Father yet so as that the Father suffers no Division For as the Sun is not diminished though it produces Rayes continually so likewise the Father is not diminished in begetting the Son who is his Image This Passage and the Authority of St. Athanasius ought to convince us that Photius has wrongfully accused Theognostus to have erred concerning the Divinity of the Son upon the score of a few Expressions that did not agree with those of his own Age without taking notice that though the Ancients have spoken differently as to this Point yet the Foundation of the Doctrine was always the same and that it is an horrid Injustice to require them to speak as nicely and with as much precaution
assembled in the same place to deliberate upon the Affairs of the Church that concern either the Faith or the Discipline or the Manners of Christians These Kinds of Assemblies were used in the First Ages of the Church and the Apostles were the first Authors of them For the Christians of the Primitive Church having had some Disputes Whether they were Obliged to Circumcise and Follow the Law of Moses The Apostles and Priests convened at Jerusalem to Examine and Resolve upon this Matter and at last concluded That it was not necessary to impose these Burdens upon Christians but only enjoined them to abstain from Meats offered to Idols from Blood and from things Strangled and from Fornication a And only Council of the Apostles They usually reckon Four The first concerning the Election of St. Matthias Acts. 1. The Second concerning the Election of Deacons Acts 6. The Third that whereof we now speak Acts 15. The Fourth Acts 21. Where the Priests of Jerusalem declare That the Converted Jews might observe the Law and Exhort St. Paul to make a Vow But in strictness of Speech only the Third of these Assemblies deserves the Name of a Council The two First were not held upon the account of any Controversie nothing was there decided the Christians found themselves Assembled together but were not expresly Summoned In short they were Assemblies of allâthe Christians and not of the Apostles only The fourth was rather a famaliar Conversation than a Synodical Deliberation and they only give some Counsel and an Advertisement to St. Paul without deciding any Matter And thus 't is the Third Assembly alone that deserves to be called a Council The Council of Antioch is spurious as we have elsewhere shown This was the First and Onely Council to speak properly that was held by the Apostles themselves After their Examâlâ when âny Differenâe ãâã in the Church or when it was necessary to make any Regulations the ãâã and ãâã the Priests themselves met together to decide the ãâã Questionâ and appoint Laws for the better Government and Discipline of the Church 'T is true indeed that in the Three First Ages of the Church these Assemblies were more rare and less remarkable than they were in the following Centuries as well because the continual Persecutions of the Emperours hindered the Bishops from meeting freely and in Publick as also because the Tradition of the Apostles being as yet fresh in Mens Memories it was not supposed necessary to Summon a Council for the Establishing of every Truth and Condemnation of every Errour Hence it is that we don't find b In any Credible Authors The Author published by Sirmondus under the Name of Praedestinatus mentions some Councils that were held against the Ancient Hereticks but he is a Modern Author and does not deserve Credit upon his own Authority in any credible Authors that any Councils were held to Condemn the first Hereticks such as were the Simonians the Carpocratians the Basilidians the Gnosticks c. The Errours of these Hereticks were looked upon with horrour by all the Christians who considered the Authors of them and likewise those that maintained them as Persons already Excommunicated and separated from the Church without the Solemnity and Trouble of Convening a Synod to Excommunicate them by Name In short every Bishop instructed his own People in the True Faith of the Chuch and confuted all sorts of Errours by the Authority of Scripture and Tradition The first Councils that are mentioned in Antiquity are those that were held under the Pontificate of Pope Victor to adjust the celebrated Controversie about keeping Easter and some others that were Assembled almost at the same time to suppress the growing Faction of the Montanists Eusebius mentions the last in the Fifth Book of his History Chap. 15. and Tertullian assures us That in his time the Montanists also met together c For themselves Tertull. in lib. De Jejun Aguntur praecepta per Gaercias illas certis in locis Concilia per quae altiora quaeque tractantur Some Persons understand this Passage of the Councils of the Catholicks but he speaks of those held by the Montanists as the following words plainly shew for themselves As for what relates to the Synods that were convened upon the Dispute concerning the Celebration of Easter though the Number of them is usually reckoned to be great yet Eusebius mentions but Three one of which was held in Palaestine another in Asia and a Third at Rome And then as for what concerns the Churches of France of Pontus of Corinth and of the East he barely tells us That the respective Bishops there wrote to Pope Victor about this Matter without speaking of any Council Assembled in these places Agrippinus towards the Beginning of the Third Century held a Council in Africk where it was Ordained that Hereticks should be Re-baptized There were likewise Two Councils held in Arabia under the Emperour Gordianus one against Berillus Bishop of Bostra who maintain'd That Jesus Christ was not a different Person from the Father before he made himself Man and the other against the Arabians who affirmed That the Souls of Men were Mortal We don't know at what time the Councils of Iconium and Synnada were Assembled that Decreed It was Necessary to re-baptize Hereticks I shall say nothing more of the Councils held in Africk and at Rome in St. Cyprian's time because I discoursed largely about them when I had occasion to consider the Writings and Life of that Father Dionysius Bishop of Rome Summoned a Council in which he Established the Divinity of the Word and the Mystery of the Trinity against the Errours of the Sabellians and that which was afterwards the Errour of the Arians He wrote a Letter upon this Occasion to Dionysius of Alexandria St. Athanasius mentions this Synod In the time of Pope Stephen a Council was held at Antioch where the Bishops Condemned the Practice of the Novatians St. Dionysius of Alexandria sent word to Sixtus that he was invited thither Eusebius Lib. 7. Hist. c. 8. St. Epiphanius in his Account of the Heresie of the Noetians mentions Two Synods that were assembled in Asia against Noetus and gives us an Account of some Words of that Heretick and of the last Synod But of all the Councils that were Summoned in the Three First Centuries the most Celebrated and Famous are the Two Councils of Antioch Assembled against Paulus Samosatenus Bishop of that City who maintained That the Word was not truly United to the Humanity in the Person of Jesus Christ and who likewise according to the Testimony of some Authors denied that the Word was a distinct Person from the Father The First Council assembled against him was held at Antioch about the Year 264. Eusebius tells us That the principal Bishops who assisted there were Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia Gregory and Athenodorus Bishops of Pontus Helenus Bishop of Tarsus Nicomas Bishop of Iconium Himenaeus of Jerusalem
together with Sound and true Doctrine This he proves by a particular Induction of their Opinions because there is no Theology but this which teaches the Immortality of the Soul which commands Men to Adore one God only which informs them that he was the Creator of the World which teaches them that the Word is the Son of God and that the Holy Ghost is to be Worship'd with the same Worship that is due to the Father and the Son There is no other Religion but this which teaches Men that they must not Adore the Angels as Gods but honour them as the Ministers of God which gives a rational Account of the Fall of some of the Angels and instructs Man that he is made after the Image of God In a word there is none but this whose Doctrine is agreeable to Right Reason After this he subjoins a long Fragment out of a Treatise of Maximus which demonstrates that Matter is not Eternal In the Eighth Book he gives the History of the Version of the Septuagint and to prove the Authority of the Holy Scriptures he makes it appear by the Testimony of the Jews that their Law is Mystical and very Significant which he afterwards represents as worthy of all Esteem by the holiness of their Lives who have embrac'd it by the Example of the Essenes whose manner of Life he describes and by the Wisdom of Philo. In the Ninth Book he relates the Testimonies of the Pagans who have spoken in favour of the Jewish Religion and of those who allow the Truth of Moses's History In the 10th he shows that Plato and the Pagan Philosophers have taken the greatest part of what they have written from the Books of Moses In the 11th Book he demonstrates particularly that the Doctrine of Plato is agreeable to that of Moses and compares many of the Opinions of that Philosopher with those of the Jews He carries on that Comparison in the 12th and 13th Books But in the mean time he demonstrates that this Philosopher had his Errors and that no Book but the Scriptures is wholly free In the 14th and 15th Books he relates the Opinions of the Philosophers he shows their Contradictions and oftentimes confutes one of them by another From all which he concludes that the Christians had reason to forsake the Religion of the Pagans and embrace that of the Jews After he has thus prepar'd the Minds of Men to receive the Christian Religion by establishing the Authority of the Religion and of the Books of the Jews he demonstrates the Truth of it against the Jews themselves by their own Prophecies This is the Subject of his Books of Evangelical Demonstration of which there are only Ten remaining of Twenty which he compos'd In the First Book he shows that the Law of the Jews was calculated for one Nation only but the New Testament was design'd for all Mankind That the Patriarchs had no other Religion but that of the Christians since they ador'd the same God and the same Word honour'd him as they do and resembled their holy Lives In the Second Book he shows by the Prophecies that the Messias was to come into the World for all Mankind In the Third he makes it appear in favour of the Faithful that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the World and demonstrates against the Infidels that he was no Seducer as his Doctrine his Miracles and many other Reasons do evidently prove In the Fourth Book he shows that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and gives an Account of the Reasons for which he was made Man he explains the Name of Christ and cites many Prophecies wherein he was foretold by that Name In the following Books he brings abundance of Prophecies to demonstrate that the Coming of Jesus Christ the time of his Birth the Circumstances of his Liââ and Passion and in a word all things that concern'd him were foretold in the Books of the Old Testament What we have of these Books ends with the last words of Christ upon the Cross And in the following Books he recited the Prophecies concerning his Death his Burial his Resurrection his Ascension the Establishment of the Church and the Conversion of the Gentiles But these are wholly lost These Books of Evangelical Preparation and Demonstration are the largest Work that has been made by any of the Ancients upon this Subject where a Man may find more Proofs Testimonies and Arguments for the Truth of the Christian Religion than in any other They are very proper to instruct and convince all those that sincerely search after Truth In fine Eusebius has omitted nothing which might serve to undeceive Men of a false Religion or convince them of the true The Treatise against Hierocles was written against a Book of that Philosopher publish'd by him under the Name of Philalethes against the Christian Religion wherein to render it ridiculous he has compar'd Apollonius Tyanaeus with Jesus Christ and says That Apollonius wrought Miracles as well as Christ and ascended into Heaven as well as he But Eusebius has prov'd in his Answer That Apollonius Tyanaeus was so far from being comparable to Jesus Christ that he did not deserve to be rank'd among the Philosophers and that Philostratus who wrote his Life is an Author unworthy of Credit because he contradicts himself very often he doubts himself of those very Miracles which he relates and he reports many things which are plainly Fabulous At the End of this Treatise Eusebius has given some Observations against Fatal Necessity In the First of the Five Books against Marcellus of Ancyra Eusebius endeavours to prove That this Bishop wrote his Book upon no other Motive but the hatred of his Brethren he charges him with Ignorance of the Holy Scriptures and rallies him for the impertinent Explications of some Greek Proverbs brought in not at all to the purpose In fine he blames him for accusing Origen Paulinus Narcissus Eusebius of Nicodemia and Asterius of Error touching the Mystery of the Trinity and endeavours to justifie their Doctrine about it In the Second Book he discovers the Errors of Marcellus and proves from many Passages of his Book That he believes the Word was not a Person subsisting before he was born of the Virgin That he denies the distinction of the Son from the Father That he is positive in asserting the Flesh and not the Word to be the Image of God the Son of God the King the Saviour and the Christ and in short That he durst affirm that this Flesh shall be destroyed and annihilated after the Day of Judgment After he has discovered the Errors and the Malice of Marcellus of Ancyra he confutes his Opinions in the Three following Books Entitled Ecclefiastick Theology and Dedicated to Flacillus Bishop of Antioch In the First Book he proposes the Faith of the Church which he explains very exactly rejecting the Errors of the Ebionites Paulianites Sabellians and Arians After this he shows that Marcellus is guilty of
truly the Church had no reason to complain of his Conduct till the latter end of his Life when he gave ear to the Accusations that were brought to him against St. Athanasius by those Bishops that favour'd Arius's Faction For they being offended with him because he would not appear at a Council held at Caesarea whither he had been cited to come mov'd the Emperour to Summon a Synod in the City of Tyre to Judge his Cause There St. Athanasius appear'd and finding that his Enemies had injuriously oppress'd him he had recourse to the Emperour and went to him at Constantinople Constantine although prejudic'd against him yet heard him favourably and commanded the Bishops of the Council of Tyre who had called another afterwards at Jerusalem to come to him and render an account of their Proceedings They deputed Six Bishops to go to the Emperour and accuse St. Athanasius but those Deputies durst not alledge the Facts of which they had accus'd him at the Council of Tyre for fear lest the Emperour being a lover of Justice should discover their Falsity and declare him Innocent They consult therefore how they might charge him with a Crime against the State by saying that he threatned to hinder the Transportation of Corn from Alexandria to Constantinople This Accusation made such Impression upon the Emperor's Mind and so stirred him up against St. Athanasius that he immediately Banish'd him to Triers a City of Gaule The Enemies of St. Athanasius having thus procur'd his Banishment who was the great Opposer of Arius they call'd back again this Heretick and us'd all the Endeavours to restore him to the Communion of the Church But Constantine would not hear of it till after he had drawn up a Confession of Faith which appear'd contrary to his Errors and had Sworn and Protested that this was his Doctrine yet even after he had done this the Emperour being always jealous of the Man said to him If thy Faith be right as thou would'st make us believe thou hast done well to Swear but if not then let God condemn thee to some Punishment for this false Oath Which words were follow'd with a suitable Effect for in a little time after Arius perish'd miserably the day before he should have been admitted to the Communion of the Church at Constantinople The Reader no doubt may wonder that I have not spoke a word all this while of the Baptism of this Emperour for it seems very strange that one who took so great care of the Affairs of Christians one who was convinc'd of the Truth of their Religion and was ignorant in no Point of their Doctrine should continue so long a time without initiating himself into the Church by the Sacrament of Baptism And yet this was certainly so either because he waited to receive Baptism when he should be near his Death that by this Sacrament he might throughly expiate his Sins and so appear Innocent before God or else because he had some other reason for this delay However it came to pass he never thought of preparing himself for Baptism until he felt himself Sick nor had he ever the Imposition of the Bishops hands to make him a Catechumen till the Year 337 d To make him a Catechumen till the Tear 337. Eusebius says expresly That Constantine then first received Imposition of Hands and that he assisted at the Solemn Prayers of the Church which plainly shews that he was not a Catechumen before Neither does the Title of the First Book Chap. 32. of the Life of Constantine contradict this Observation for there it is only said that Constantine was Catechized ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the meaning of which is only that he was instructed in the Christian Doctrine which does not prove that he was a Catechumen and we never read before this time that he assisted at the Publick Prayers of the Church a few days before his Death being then at Helenopolis as Eusebius observes in the Fourth Book of this Emperour's Life Chap. 61. After this he receiv'd Baptism from the hands of Eusebius of Nicomedia in the Suburbs of that City as Eusebius of Caesarea St. Athanasius St. Jerom and St. Ambrose Socrates Sozomen Theodoret Evagrius and all the rest of the Ancients unanimously affirm e All the Ancients unanimously affirm Eusebius B. I. Of the Life of Constantine Ch. 32. St. Jerom in his Chronicle says Constantinus ultimo vitae suae tempore baptizatus est St. Ambrose in his Funeral Oration upon Theodosius says of Constantine Cui licet baptismatis gratia in extremis constituto omnia peccata dimiserit The Fathers of the Council of Ariminum in a Letter written at the beginning of that Synod say That he died a little after he was baptiz'd which is certainly spoken of Constantine the Great after they had mention'd in the same place his assisting at the Council of Nice I might add to this many other unquestionable Witnesses such as Socrates B. I. Ch. 39. Sozomen B. II. Ch. 34. Theodoret B. I. Ch. 32. Evagrius B. III. Ch. 42. the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle c. It is therefore a fabulous Story which is related in the Acts falsly attributed to Pope Sylvester That the Baptism of Constantine was celebrated at Rome And indeed nothing can be more fabulous than the Account set down in those Acts For there it is feign'd that Constantine being an Enemy to the Christian Religion and desiring to Persecute it was smitten with Leprosie That the Soothsayers said unto him the only way to cure him was to bath himself in the Blood of New-born Infants That many of them were sought out to have their Throats cut but Constantine being mov'd by their Tears and the Cries of their Mothers restor'd them again without putting them to Death That he was afterwards admonish'd in a Dream by St. Peter and St. Paul that he should be cur'd if he were baptiz'd by Sylvester which having done he was presently Purified by Baptism both from his Sins and from his Leprosie What Forgeries what Fables are here What inconsistent Ravings of Madmen Constantine was never an Enemy to the Christian Religion he did never Persecute it he was always a Christian from his heart before he came to Rome There is no Historian that speaks of his having a Leprosie or that he was cur'd of it by Baptism How came Eusebius to forget so considerable a Miracle in the Life of Constantine With what Face could Julian the Apostate object to the Christians that Baptism never cleans'd any person from the Leprosie if his own Grandfather had been cur'd by it St. Cyril to confute this Falshood never alledg'd an Example so Illustrious as this of the Emperour had been But I forbear to mention any more of the many Absurdities and Impertinencies which are contain'd in those Acts f I forbear to mention any more of the many Absurdities and Impertinencies which are contain'd in those Acts. There 't is said That St. Sylvester
Divine Wisdom that seems to be folly to the World In the Fourth Book He describes the Errors of the Hereticks concerning the Consubstantiality of the Word He opposes to them the Faith of the Church Answers the Passages which they alledge and endeavours to prove the Divinity of the Word by many Passages taken out of the Old Testament He continues the same Subject in the Fifth Book where he thinks That 't was the Word which appear'd to Abraham to Jacob to Moses and the other Patriarchs who is call'd an Angel because of his Ministry and not because of his Nature In the Sixth Book he proves That Jesus Christ is the Son of God By the Testimony of his Father By his own Declaration By the Preaching of the Apostles By the Confession of the Faithful By the Acknowledgment of the Devils and Jews and by the Belief of the Gentiles We must observe here That in citing a Passage of the Epistle to the Romans he appeals to the Greek Text as to the Original In the Seventh He shews that the Son of God is truly God There he observes That the Hereticks use very great Address and Subtilty to Maintain their corrupt Opinions which they falsly pretend to have from Religion That they deceive the Simple by their Expressions which are Catholick in appearance that they accommodate themselves to the Wisdom of this World That they corrupt the true Sence of Scripture Expressions by the Explications which they add as it were to give an Account of what they say He adds That 't is this which renders the Matter of the Trinity a difficult Subject to treat on For if on the one side says he I declare that there is but one God Sabellius will think that I espouse his Opinion If I say That the Son is God the modern Hereticks will accuse me of admitting Two Gods If I affirm That the Son is born of the Virgin Ebion and Photinus will make use of this Truth to Establish their Impiety But says he the Doctrine of the Church confounds all these Errors The Power of Truth is so great that even its Enemies explain it that the more 't is oppos'd the more force it gains and certainly the Church was never more Triumphant than when it was most vigorously attack'd It was never more Famous than when it was reproach'd It was never more Powerful than when it seem'd to be abandon'd She wishes That all Men would continue in her Bosom and She is never more troubled than when She is oblig'd to throw any one out and deliver him up to the Devil But when the Hereticks go out from Her or when She casts them out as She loses on one side the occasion of giving them Salvation so She gains this Advantage on the other of discovering the Happiness of those who continue inviolably fix'd in Her Communion And a few Lines after he adds All Heresies attack the Church and while they attack the Church they overcome one another But the Victory is gain'd to the Church and not to them for they all Quarrel about those Errors which are all equally rejected by the Church Sabellius for Instance does unanswerably confute the Error of Arius Arius confounds the Error of Photinus and so of the rest but in vain do they mutually Conquer one another for they are always overcome in some Article or other and the Church alone remains victorious over all Errors by professing that Jesus Christ is the true God Son of the true God born before all Ages and afterwards begotten of Mary Lastly he proves that he is God because the Name of God is given him in the New Testament and from what is there said of his Birth his Nature his Power and his Actions In the Eighth Book he shows the essential Unity of the Father and the Son and refutes the Interpretations of the Hereticks by explaining the Passages which they alledged to prove that the Unity of the Father and the Son is an Unity of Will and Judgment and not of Essence and Nature At the Beginning of this Book he observes That 't is not sufficient for a Bishop to live a Good Life but he must also teach Sound Doctrine that as his Life must be Innocent so his Preaching must be Learn'd for if he be Pious without being Learned he will not be serviceable to others and if he be Learned without being Holy his Doctrine will want Authority From whence he concludes That the Holiness of a Bishop should shine more brightly by his Learning and his Doctrine should be recommended by the Holiness of his Life Ut vita ejus ornetur docendo doctrina vivendo There is in this Book an excellent Passage for the real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist where he says That by this Sacrament we truly receive the Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ who remains corporeally in us In the Ninth Book he answers the great Objections of the Arians founded upon Five Passages of Scripture whereof he explains the true sence And First of all he shews That they abuse the Passages which they alledge by perverting them from their Natural Sence That they do not explain them by their Connexion with what follows and what goes before That they attribute to the Divinity of Jesus Christ that which should only be attributed to his Humanity Upon this occasion he discourses of the Union of the two Natures in Jesus Christ and explains how by virtue of this Union those things are attributed to God which agree only to the Humane Nature and those to Man which belong to the Divinity Afterwards he explains the Passages which the Arians continually object to the Catholicks one by one The First which is taken out of the Tenth Chapter of St. Mark is the Answer which Jesus Christ made to the Rich young Man who call'd him Good Master Why callest thou me Good says he there is none Good but God from whence the Arians concluded That Jesus Christ was not truly God St. Hilary answers That he does not particularly reprove the Young Man for calling him Good but because he gives him this Title as if it agreed to him in the Capacity of a Doctor of the Law The Young Man says he not knowing that he was the Messias who came to save the lost Sheep of the House of Israel ask'd him as a Doctor of the Law and gave him the Title which the Doctors take to themselves Jesus Christ reproves this Notion and to explain to him in what sence he should be called Good he tells him None is Good but God showing by this That he was so far from rejecting the title of Good as it agreed to God that he accepted of it in that sence And therefore his Answer is one Proof of his Divinity which ought to be understood in this sence Why call you me good if you believe not that I am God There is none Good but God which supposes that he himself was God St.
all the Earth Now this Prayer convicts you of a Lye for how can you offer Sacrifice for one only Church since you have divided it into two How can you offer for the whole Church since you are not within the Catholick Church Parmenianus objected to the Catholicks That they had exercis'd Violence and Persecution against them and concluded from thence that they could not be the true Church because that ought never to be cruel nor to feed it self with the Flesh and Blood of the Saints Optatus answers him That the Church had never Persecuted them and that he could Name none of the Church that had done it He retorts this Charge upon the Donatists by observing that in the time of the Emperour Constantine the Church enjoy'd a profound Peace and all its Members liv'd in wonderful Union That then Pagans were forbidden to exercise their Sacrilegious Ceremonies then the Devil groan'd in their Temples where he was shut up and then the Donatists were banish'd into Foreign Countries lest they should disturb the Peace of the Church But no sooner was Julian declar'd Emperour but they begg'd his leave to return into their own Country which he granted them very willingly knowing that they were most fit to trouble the Peace of the Church He observes That the same Edict by which he open'd the Pagan Temples he also restored Liberty to them That they had not so soon obtain'd it but that they exercis'd horrible Violences in Africk He accuses the Donatists of tearing the Members of the Church of driving away the Bishops of invading the Churches of committing Murders of killing two Deacons at the feet of the Altars of rending Mens Garments of dragging the Women stifling the Children and in fine of violating every thing that was most Sacred âour Bishops says he cause the Eucharist to be thrown to the Dogs and presently the Tokens of God's Anger appear for the Dogs being enrag'd turn'd upon their Masters and tore them as if they had been Thieves whom they never knew the Justice of God making use of their Teeth to revenge this Sacrilege They also caus'd a Bottle full of holy Oil to be thrown out at a Window on purpose to break it But though it was cast down from a very high place yet being supported by Angels it fell upon the Stones without breaking He accuses also a Bishop of their Party nam'd Felix of abusing a Virgin to whom himself had given the Veil and of having afterwards depriv'd an ancient Catholick Bishop 62 Years old of his Bishoprick and put him under Penance Here he makes a Digression about the Vanity of the Donatists who boasted themselves to be Holy and Innocent Whence comes this Sanctity of yours says he which the Apostle St. John durst not attribute to himself seeing he says If we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us He that speaks after this manner does prudently referr himself to the Mercy of God for a Christian may desire Good and endeavour to walk in the way of Salvation but he cannot be perfect of himself For though he does run yet there will always remain something to be done by God to perfect him and 't is necessary that he should help a Man in his Weakness for he is Perfection and there was never any but Jesus Christ the Son of God who was perfect all other Men are imperfect It belongs to us to will and to run but God only can give Perfection Jesus Christ has not given us perfect Holiness but has only promis'd it Optatus afterwards returns to his Subject and goes on to charge the Donatists with the Crimes and Sacrileges which they had committed and accuses them of exorcising and washing the Walls of Churches of breaking down the Altars of throwing the Eucharist to Dogs of making the People Swear by their Name of shaving the Bishops and putting them under Penance of sparing neither Priests Deacons nor the Faithful of reproaching the Innocent and putting Christians against their will under Penance and in fine of doing an infinite number of things against Piety and Christian Charity In the Third Book Optatus vindicates the Church from those Violences of which it was accus'd In the first place he says That if some of those Violences were committed by Macarius's Order the Predecessors of the Donatists gave occasion to them because their Seditious Behaviour oblig'd the Governour to call for Aid which they no sooner saw come to him but they presently fled of themselves and that none but those that were most obstinate had been Banished But then he maintains That the Church did not contribute to this Persecution in the least and that there was nothing of all this done by Her Advice that she neither wish'd for it nor knew of it nor contributed any thing towards it but the Justice of God alone had sent this Persecution upon the Donatists to revenge the Dishonour they had done to the Waters of Baptism Here Optatus makes a very obscure Digression concerning Baptism and the Church And afterwards returning to his Subject he says That Paul and Macarius were not sent by Constantine to Persecute the Donatists but to carry Alms That Donatus being transported with Rage demanded of them with unsupportable Pride what the Emperour had in common with the Church That from that time he carried on a Design of doing Injury to the Kings and Princes of the Earth contrary to the Precept of St. Paul who commands us to pray for them that we may lead a quiet Life For says Optatus the State is not in the Church but the Church in the State that is in the Roman Empire Thus St. Paul had reason to say That we must pray for Kings even when they made Profession of Paganism But how much more reason have we to show respect to a Christian Prince one that is Religious and Fears God and has sent Alms to the Poor Wherefore then was Donatus transported with Fury Wherefore did he refuse the Alms which the Emperour sent His Officers said That they were come to distribute Alms in all the Provinces to those that would receive them and Donatus told them That he had written to all places forbidding them to receive them Does this look as if he took Care of those that are in Misery or would relieve the Necessities of the Poor God hath said 'T is I that make Rich and Poor Can he not then give Riches to the Poor Yes but if he had given them to all the World then sinners had wanted the means of expiating their Faults for 't is written That as Water quenches Fire so does an Alms expiate Sin This being so What Judgment should we give of him that would give to the Poor and him that would hinder the giving What would Donatus answer if God should ask him O Bishop What do you think of Constantine Do you take him for an Innocent Man or a Sinner If you believe him to
appears That Silvanus who ordain'd Majorinus had given up the Holy Books to the Heathens Zenophilus there examines a Grammarian nam'd Victor a Deacon nam'd Castus and a Sub-Deacon call'd Crescentianus and makes them confess That Silvanus had deliver'd up the Ornaments of the Church and the Holy Books according to the Deposition of Nundinarius the Deacon who was present He causes also the Verbal Process made in the Year 363. to be read by Munatius Felix Judge of the Colony of Cirtha who further confirm'd the Deposition of Nundinarius The Letters written to Silvanus by the Bishops of his own Party are set down wherein they reprehend him for his outrageous manner of treating his Deacon Nundinarius He is accus'd also of making a Simonaical Ordination of appropriating to his own use the Alms that were given for the Poor and of being ordain'd himself by the Sollicitation of some Country Fellows There are many things very remarkable in this Act For there one may see That at the Beginning of the 3d. Age of the Church they us'd Chalices of Silver and Gold Cups Lamps and Candlesticks of Silver and Copper That they kept in the Church Garments for the Poor That the Readers who were very numerous had the Holy Books That the Christians had a Library near the Church where they put their Books The Third Record is also part of a Verbal Process concerning the Justification of Felix of Aptungis made by Aelianus the Proconsul in the Year 314 in the Month of February as appears by St. Augustin There he examines one nam'd Ingentius and Convicts him of making an Addition to a Letter of Caecilian that he might falsly accuse Felix of being a Traditor The Fourth is a Letter of the Emperour Constantine to Ablabius wherein he orders him to send Caecilian to Arles with some Bishops of his Party as well as some of his Accusers that he might receive Judgment from the Council which was to assemble there The Fifth is a Letter from the Council of Arles of which we have spoken in its place The Sixth is the Letter which Constantine wrote against the Donatists when they appeal'd to his Judgment after they had been condemn'd in the Council of Arles The Seventh is another Letter of the same Emperour wherein he acquaints the Bishops of Donatus's Party That he once design'd to send Judges into Africk to determine their Differences with Caecilian but that he judg'd it more proper to make him come before himself The Eighth is a 4th Letter of the same Emperour written to Celsus wherein he acquaints him That he will quickly come into Africk to decide the Differences between Donatus and Caecilian himself The Ninth is a 5th Letter of Constantine wherein he gives the Donatist Bishops leave to return into Africk The Tenth is a 6th Letter of this Emperour about the Cause of the Donatists address'd to the Catholicks of Africk He tells them That he had done all that lay in his Power to re-establish Peace but since the Obstinacy of some Men had frustrated his good Intentions they must now wait upon God only for the Remedy of this Mischief and that till it pleas'd the Divine Mercy to remedy it they must proceed with Moderation and bear with Patience the Insolence of the Enemies of the Church That they must not render Evil for Evil since Vengeance is reserv'd to God only and that by suffering patiently the Fury of these Insolent Men they should certainly merit the Glory of Martyrdom For says he Is not this to Fight and Conquer for God to bear with Patience the Outrages and Injuries of the Enemies of God's People At last he assures the Catholicks That if they observe this Method they will quickly see their Enemies Party weakned and that God will give Grace to many to acknowledge their Error and do Penance The following Letter is a further Indication of the Meekness of this Emperour and the Moderation of the Catholicks The Donatists had invaded the Church which Constantine had caus'd to be built in Constantina a City of Numidia which the Catholicks demanded back again but they refus'd it The Catholicks to avoid all further Contention pray'd the Emperour to give them a Place in the Dependances of his Demesnes thereabouts where they might Build another Church To which Constantine answer'd That he did not only grant their Desire but he had also written to the Receiver of his Revenues to furnish them with so much Money as was necessary for the Building of this Church In this Letter he praises the Moderation of the Catholicks and condemns the Obstinacy of the Donatists and ordains That the Laws which he had made for Exemption of the Clergy from all Publick Taxes should be put in Execution The last of these Records which are added to the Books of Optatus is a Fragment of the Acts of the Passion of the Saints Dativus Saturninus Felix Ampelius and of some other African Martyrs made in the time of Anulinus and written by a Donatist This Piece contains some part of the Calumnies of the Donatists against Mensurius and Caecilian The Author of these Acts accuses them of hindring the Faithful from carrying Food to the Christians that were in Prison and of beating them back with blows of Whips and Cudgels He adds That these Martyrs would never communicate with Mensurius nor Caecilian because they had deliver'd up the Holy Books to the Heathens and that the Church of Christ being Holy ought not to hold Communion with those that are defil'd with a Crime of this heinous Nature At last he says That those Martyrs who wanted Food by the Cruelty of Mensurius and Caecilian died of Famine in Prison and went to Heaven there to receive the Crown of Martyrdom The Stile of Optatus's Books is noble vehement and close but not enough Polite or Neat. He presses briskly upon those against whom he Disputes and describes very sensibly the Transactions which he relates and explains the Passages which he produces with a great deal of Wit He gives his Thoughts a fine and delicate turn his Expressions signifie very perfectly what he means to say his Reasonings are subtile and his Relations pleasant In a word It appears that the Author of this little Book was Master of much Learning and Wit The Doctrine which he teaches is and always will be of much use to the Church for there is not the same Reason of those Questions which concern the Truth of the Church as of those that concern only some particular Doctrines These continue only so long as the Sect subsists which opposes these Doctrines and the Books which treat of them become almost useless whenever the Heresie is extinct But all Heresies all Schisms having one common Principle of opposing the Church the Books which are written in its Defence are contrary to all Heresies and will be useful as long as there shall be any Hereticks in the World whosoever they be The Books of Optatus teach us also a
't is impossible to read his Writings but one must feel himself Instructed and Convinced of the Truth and he cannot but conceive a Love for Vertue and a Hatred of Vice His Discourses are not void of Thoughts and full of Words as for the most Part those of Orators are but Eloquence is there joyn'd with Doctrine they Instruct they Divert and they Move at once His Stile is Pure and Significant his Expressions are Lofty his way of Writing Elegant Clean and Persuasive his Discourses appear always Natural flowing Gently and without Affectation He persuades Pleasantly he explains things with great Clearness he knows how to give them so probable a turn that he may be taken for a Pattern and he comes near Demosthenes and the ablest Orators of Antiquity in the Judgment of the Learned Photius and even in the Judgment of Erasmus he excells the Ancient Greek Orators and is free from their Faults He was fit for all kinds of Writings His Commentaries upon Scripture are most Instructive and most Natural He excells in his Panegyricks The Force and Subtilty of his Reasoning appear in his Treatises of Controversy his Discourses of Morality are Instructive and Moving In short tho' his Asceticks have not the same Loftiness as his other Works yet there one may find the same Purity of Phrase and the same Clearness but his Method renders them sometimes a little obscure In a word Whatever Subject he treats of he does it always very Learnedly He had all the Properties of a Divine Understanding perfectly the Holy Scripture the Tradition of the Fathers and the Canons of the Church He was a very able Rhetorician a very profound Philosopher and a very subtil Logician He understood also the Mathematicks and his own continual Sickness made him a Physician He understood Philological Learning to Perfection and made use of it to very good purpose He knew all that was most Curious in the Poets the Historians and profane Orators as may appear from many places of his Writings and chiefly from his little Tract of reading profane Authors In a word that which is indeed admirable is that he joyn'd with this Learning a profound Piety and a singular Prudence He was Sweet and Affable to all the World Charitable towards the Poor and Compassionate to others in Misery He was accus'd of being Proud but St. Gregory Nazianzen who suspected him of this Vice vindicates him from it in his Panegyrick He was of a very infirm Health and subject to many Diseases he speaks of them in the most part of his Letters and also in some of his Homilies St. Gregory Nazianzen informs us that he was pale that he wore always a great Beard that he was reserv'd in his Speech often thoughtful and pensive had a particular way in his Apparel in his Bed and his Meat which some would imitate after his Death The Doctrine of St. Basil is very Pure and Orthodox He has explain'd the Mystery of the Trinity against the Hereticks clearly and beyond Contest tho' at the beginning he was reserv'd in his Expressions about the Divinity of the Holy Spirit yet he always own'd it and never spoke contrary to what he thought He never us'd any other Precaution but to be silent upon that Point when he thought it not necessary to speak of it or that it would be to no purpose He was one of those who troubled himself most to distinguish the Three Hypostases in God that 's to say to prove that Hypostasis and Person signify the same thing As to the Mystery of the Incarnation he acknowledg'd in Jesus Christ two Natures without Confusion and yet united in one and the same Person He rejected the Error of the Apollinarians and Thââpâssiââs and maintain'd with the Church that the Properties of the humane Nature do by no means agree to the Divinity He affirm'd several times That the Cause and Reason why the Son of God was made Man was the Salvation and Redemption of Mankind polluted by the Sin of Adam He knew the Greatness of that Fall and the miserable Effects which it produc'd as Concupiscence Sickness Death c. He establish'd the Necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ without which it is impossible to do Good He is the only Person of the Greek Fathers who spoke most clearly of it and attributed least to Free-will tho hâ own'd it He admitted the Efficacy and Necessity of Baptism Yet he believ'd that this Sacrament might be supplied by Faith and Charity and by the Baptism of Blood and that it signified nothing at least to those that had not Faith and were not well dispos'd to receive it He mentions the Unction that accompanied it and approves the Ceremonies that were joyn'd with it He call'd the Eucharist the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Tho' he was of Opinion that we should Communicate often yet he requires Holy Dispositions in those who receive this Mystery He speaks of the Ceremonies and Prayers that were made use of for the Offering and of the Manner in which it was distributed to the Faithful He observes That they carried it and kept it in their Houses and that they believ'd it was always Consecrated He commends Fasting and speaks of Lent as a Fast to which we are oblig'd He has also observ'd That it was attended with Abstinence from Meat He speaks of the Usage of Invocating Saints and Martyrs He is perswaded that they pray for us and that their Intercession is very profitable He preferrs Celibacy to Marriage He approves of Vows and a Monastick State He acknowledges the Authority of Traditions as well as that of Scripture However he has some particular Opinions as when he maintains in the First Homily of the Creation That the Angels were created long before the World and when he affirms in another place That all Men shall be Purified at the Day of Judgment by Fire But there are very few of this sort of slight Errors in this Author There were also some Expressions objected to him which appear'd Hyperbolical or less Exact but 't is easy to give them a good Sence I shall not stay to make a larger Enumeration of his Opinions which I have explain'd at length in the Extracts out of his Works I conclude therefore with giving a Catalogue of the Translations and Editions of the Works of this Father The First Edition of the Works of St. Basil in Greek is that of Frobenius printed at Basil in the Year 1532. It contains the Homilies upon the Creation and the Psalms 29 different Homilies the Book of the Holy Spirit and some Letters After it followed the Edition at Venice made by Sabius in the Year 1537. in which are added the Three first Books against Eunomius At last in the Year 1551 almost all the Works of St. Basil were printed in Greek at Paris by the Care of Janus Cornarius who also printed them in Latin by Frobenius in the Year 1549. Wolfgangus Musculus made a New
Church of Frejus wherein the Synod acquaints it That tho' the Bishop Concordius had spoken in behalf of one Acceptus who probably had accused himself of some Crime whereof he was not guilty yet the Synod did not think fit to make an Exception in his favour from the general Rule which they had made To give a Reason of this Rule they add That tho' they knew that many Persons accuse themselves of those Crimes which they have not committed from the dread they have of the Priest-hood yet Men being more inclined to judge ill than well they thought fit that all those who had said ill of themselves should be removed from the Priesthood whether it were true or false for fear of giving occasion of Disputes by those Accusations which might be urged against the Ministers of Jesus Christ of such Crimes whereof they might be convicted by their own Testimony This Synod consisted of 21 Bishops Phaebadius of Agen is the First in it there is found also the Names of Rhodanius of Tholouse of Justus of Lyons of Britto of Triers of Florentius of Vienna and of Concordius of Arles 'T is observed in some Manuscripts That it consisted of 30 Bishops but perhaps this number ought to be corrected by making it 21. Of the COUNCIL of Antioch for restoring Peace in that Church THE Church of Antioch for a long time had been rent in pieces with Divisions After the Deposition Of Antio 378. of the Great Eustathius some rigid Catholicks had always maintain'd themselves without a Bishop till Lucifer Ordain'd one Paulinus but the greatest part of the Catholicks acknowledged Meletius for their lawful Bishop The East favoured this last Egypt and the West adher'd to Paulinus St. Basil us'd all his Endeavours in vain to reconcile them for he could not compass it but Nine Months after his death as is observ'd by St. Gregory Nyssen in the Life of St. Macrina in the Year 378 a Council was held at Antioch wherein the Two Parties were reconciled upon condition that no Bishop should be Ordain'd in his room who should die first but the Survivor should continue sole Bishop Theodoret says That Paulinus would not accept this Condition but the Bishops of Italy affirm the contrary in the Letter of the Council of Aquileia and in the Fifth Letter of the Council of Italy There was receiv'd in this Synod a Confession of Faith sent from the West which is call'd the Tome of the West as it is declar'd in the Fifth Canon of the Council of Constantinople 'T is probable That this Tome is either the Synodical Letter of Damasus or the Anathematisms which follow it Baronius says That Deputies were named in this Council and he grounds this Conjecture upon a Passage of St. Gregory Nyssen who says That he was deputed by a Council but it cannot be known at present whether he speaks of this Council or of another In short Valesius âttributes to this Council the Letter 69 of St. Basil written by several Bishops to the Bishops of Italy and France wherein mention is made of a Writing of the Bishops of the West but this Conjecture cannot be maintain'd since there are among the Bishops in whose Name this Letter was written the Names of St. Basil Bishop of Caesarea and Theodotus of Nicopolis who were dead when the Synod which we now speak of was held besides that there is no mention in it of the Reconciliation of Meletius and Paulinus which was not till after the death of St. Basil. Of the COUNCILS of Constantinople FOR the better understanding the History of the Council of Constantinople which is called the Of the First of Constantinople 381. Second General Council we must distinguish Three Assemblies of Bishops held at Constantinople at Three several times The First was held in the Month of May in the Year 381. In was compos'd of all the Bishops of the Eastern Empire except Egypt Meletius of Antioch presided in the Assemble and confirmed St. Gregory Nazianzen in the See of the Church of Constantinople There is some probability that in this Synod the Canon was made wherein the Election of Maximus is condemned who endeavoured to invade the See of the Church of Constantinople and also the Canon wherein the second place of Honour is granted to the Bishop of Constantinople However this be Meletius died before the end of this Synod his Body was carried back to Antioch and the Eastern Bishops chose in his room Flavianus contrary to the Promise that was made while Meletius was alive That no Person should succeed in the room of the Bishop that died first Of the Second COUNCIL of Constantinople WHEN Flavian was Ordain'd the Eastern Bishops returned to Constantinople at the beginning Of the Second of Constantinople 382. of the Year 382. They were never after so favourable to Gregory Nazianzen because he reprehended the Ordination of Flavianus as a thing contrary to the Agreement that was made and therefore this Saint had no sooner proposed to withdraw but almost all the Bishops consented to it After his retirement the Council Ordained Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople 'T is to this Synod that the Canon and Creed of the General Council of Constantinople are attributed In it was read the Letter of the Western Bishops assembled at Aquileia wherein they desire that a General Council of the East and West may be held at Alexandria The Eastern Bishops answer'd That they could not go farther off and they only sent Three Deputies into the West to acquaint them with their desires of Peace and to imform them of the truth of their Doctrine The Western Bishops being dissatisfied with this and with what was Ordain'd in the Council of Constantinople complained to the Emperour First That they had Ordained Flavianus in the Room of Meletius contrary to the promise made while he was alive Secondly That they had Ordain'd Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople without any regard to Maximus who had been Ordain'd by the Patriarch Thirdly That they had avoided the calling of a General Council that they might hold one at Constantinople At last they pray that a General Council may meet at Rome to determine all Differences For say they 't is fit that the Eastern Bishops should not despise the Judgment of the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of Italy since they have waited for the Judgment of Ascolius of Thessalonica We do not add they assume to our selves the Prerogative of this Examination but we expect to have a part in the Judgment because the Judgment ought to be common to all those who are of one and the same Communion Of the Third COUNCIL of Constantinople THIS Letter from those of the West was deliver'd in the Year 383 to a Synod assembled at Constantinople whereof Nectarius was President The Bishops of this Council made answer Of the Third of Constantinople 383. That they wished they could be present at Rome to treat there of the Affairs of the
were preached at Antioch In the 21st Homily upon the Epistle to the Corinthians he plainly says that he was preaching at Antioch In the 3d Homily upon the Epistle to Titus he makes mention of Daphne a Suburb of Antioch as belonging to the Town where he preached The Sermons upon the Epistle to the Colossians were preached at Constantinople for in the 3d Homily he speaks with Episcopal Authority threatning Sinners to deny them the Peace of the Church he also mentions the Episcopal Throne whereon he was sitting and calls himself Bishop Of the same time are the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Thessalonians In the eleventh upon the first Epistle he says that he presided over them that heard him The same is to be taken notice of in the 4th Homily upon the second Epistle In the 4th upon the Epistle to the Hebrews he threatens to put those out of the Church who should hire Mourners at the Funerals of their Relations which justifies his being Bishop In the 26th Homily upon the second Epistle to the Corinthians there are these words That the Son of Constantine caused his Father to be buried in this City As to the rest there is no certain proof from what he says to tell us where they were preached but the style of the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians being smoother and more polished whereas that of the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Ephesians Philippians and Philemon being careless and without Art we may believe according to Photius his Rule that the former were preached at Antioch and the latter at Constantinople These Homilies consist of two parts The first contains a Commentary upon the Gospel the other a moral Exhortation to the People In the Commentary he gives a reason of the Contents of the Gospel examines all the circumstances thereof weighs the words and discovers in those places which seem most plain great Numbers of fine things to which no attention would have been given had he not taken notice of them He keeps still to the literal Sence and of all Explications he always chuses not the most subtle but the most natural He seeks for no allegorical or figurative Sence He useth no far fetched notions to prove his opinions avoids all intangled and hard Questions contenting himself to make clear and usefull Observations upon the History and upon the Text of St. Paul He gives a perfect light to all the places of this Apostle's Epistles which seem most difficult and particularly to those which are thought to speak of Predestination and of Grace His expositions remove all that which at the first view makes them appear terrible and fearfull Every-where God is represented as a good and mercifull Being and willing to save all Men and who affords them all necessary means of Salvation Men are exhorted to answer that Call of God since it is their own fault if they be not saved for those that are damned damn themselves He tells them often that God requireth no impossible thing of them That with God's help they may keep the Commandments and practice Vertue S. Chrysostom finds these comfortable Thoughts in the passages of S. Paul which seem most terrifying and endeavours to prove that they are not contrary to the mind of this Apostle The Exposition he gives of the most difficult places is no ways forced yea it seemeth very often to be the most simple and natural However to my thinking it is always the most profitable and edifying and the fittest to be preached to the People which are much edified by such Remonstrances as tend to practice but can reap little or no fruit from Speculations about God s eternal Decrees and other abstracted matters that have but little Relation to the Government of Life and Manners All the Exhortations that conclude S. Chrysostom's Homilies are ordinarily about some points of Morality as about the fear that men ought to stand in of God's Judgments the Necessity of Repentance the Contempt of Riches forgiving of Enemies Humility Abstraction of the Heart from worldly things diligent Meditation upon the Holy Scriptures and God's Laws an Abhorrency of Plays and Shows Charity towards the Poor Alms and Hospitality brotherly Reproof the Duties of Husbands to their Wives of Parents to their Children of Masters to their Servants of Lay-men towards their Pastours Patience in Afflictions that Holiness wherewith Men should come to the Sacraments the Benefit of Prayer and the Conditions required therein of Fasting and the Advantages of a monastical and solitary Life Assiduity in divine Offices Attention to preaching Sobriety Purity Modesty Meekness Clemency Contempt of Death and many other like Subjects which he handleth with such familiar and yet such solid and convincing Reasons that there are no Discourses more capable of inspiring Notions of Piety and Vertue He does not go about as most Preachers do to set forth studied Notions which divert the Understanding but do not touch the Heart He goes to the bottom of things searches the secret solds of Man's Heart and not contented to have discovered and described Vice he begets an horrour of it He sets forth the most powerfull Motives to deter Christians from it and the most proper means to correct it and to practice true and solid Vertue He stretches nothing too far but distinguishes exactly the matter of a precept from the Advice therein contained He is neither too meek nor too severe He is neither too familiar nor keeps too much distance never complies beyond what is meet nor terrifies to discouragement In a word his Exhortations are an excellent pattern of preaching to the People The Sermons in the Fifth Volume upon several Texts of the New Testament are not Commentaries but moral Instructions or Homilies upon different Subjects The First is of Forgiveness of our Enemies upon the parable of that Debtour to whom his Master remitted Ten thousand Talents and yet afterwards exacted the hundred Pence from him that owed them to him He speaks of the exact Account that Men must render to God Rich Men saith he must give account for the use of their Riches poor Men of their patience Judges of the Discharge of their Office but above all Church-men shall account for their Ministery they shall be more strictly examined It shall be asked of him to whom the Word of God was committed whether out of Idleness or Flattery he omitted none of those necessary things which his Ministery obliged him to speak if he explained all and concealed no truth A Bishop charged with the direction of a Diocess hath yet a far greater Account to give his Examination will be not only about his Doctrine and his helping of the Poor but especially about the Orders which he shall have conferred and a Thousand other obligations of the Priesthood S. Chrysostom speaking of S. Peter in that Homily calleth him the Head of the Body of the Apostles the Mouth of the Disciples the Firmament of the Faith the
his Book of Faith The Second Question of Works hath great relation to the former It was demanded Whether the Oblations and Prayers that are made for the Dead avail them any thing St. Augustin Answers what he had said already in his Book concerning the Care that ought to be taken of the Dead That the Oblations and Prayers are profitable to those who deserved in their Life-time that Prayers should avail them He addeth what he had said in his Enchiridion to Laurentius That in all that time between Death and the last Resurrection the Souls shall be detained in secret and hidden places where they shall either enjoy Rest or suffer Pain according as they have deserved when they were in the World That Souls in that Condition are refreshed by the Piety of the Living when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offered for them or Alms are given in the Church in their behalf But saith he That availeth only them who in their Life-time deserved by their Actions that these things should be available to them when they are out of the World ...... Thus when the Sacrifices of the Altar are offered or Alms given for all the Dead that were baptized they become Thanksgivings for them that were extremely Good They are Intercessions for those that were not great Sinners And if these things do not ease those that were very wicked yet they Administer Comfort to the Living The Third Question is Whether all Men shall Die before the Day of Judgment St. Augustin answereth no according to what he had said before in the 193d Letter to Mercator He confesses That this is a difficult Question The other Five Questions are upon some hard Passages of Scripture He repeats those Explications which he had given in his other Books This Book was Composed after the Enchiridion that was written in 421. and before the Book of Retractations written in 427. Which shews That it must necessarily belong to the Years between yet the Date of Easter of the Year wherein this Book was written which is at the beginning should regularly fall in the Year 430 or 419. wherefore there must have been a Mistake in the Cypher The small Treatise concerning the belief of those things which are not conceived is placed again in this Volume among the Treatises that are really St. Augustin's though the Louvain Doctors after Erasmus had put it among the Spurious Books St. Augustin does not mention it in his Retractations but he doth in the 231st Letter to Count Darius and it is written in his Stile and is very worthy of him He shews there That many things are believed though they are not seen He particularly urges the Example of Friendship and good Wishes which are believed without being seen Whence he concludes That if that Faith is taken away which makes us believe things that we see not Society would be utterly overthrown He confesseth That to believe a thing we ought to have some Marks that such thing is But he affirms That we believe not in Jesus Christ without sufficient Proofs of his Authority That the Church alone is a constant and visible Proof of the Truth of his Doctrine since we see that accomplished which Christ and the Prophets Foretold That none can doubt of the Truth of the Prophetical Books since the Jews who were the Christians great Enemies preserved them who also are unquestionable Witnesses of their Antiquity He concludes this Discourse with a short Exhortation to the New Christians to keep the Faith of the Church inviolable What is said in the 10th Chapter concerning the demolishing of the Temples shews That this Treatise was Written and Composed after Honorius his Law that was dated in 399. It has been observed already That St. Augustin being yet but a Priest expounded the Creed in a Council of African Bishops assembled at Hippo. This Discourse which he afterwards put in Writing as he declares in his Retractations contains an exact Exposition of the Articles of the Creed We have it here entituled Of Faith and the Creed In the Book of Faith and Good Works St. Augustin refutes several Errors which he had read in some Books that had been sent to him There it was affirmed 1. That all were to be admitted to Baptism who desired to be baptized without any Examination 2. That it was sufficient to instruct them in the Articles of Faith though they were not taught the Rules of Manners till after they had received the Sacrament 3. That what Crime soever a baptized Christian might commit and in what Condition soever he might die yet he should be infallibly saved after he had passed through the Fire St. Augustin declares against the first Proposition That though the Wicked are to be tolerated in the Church yet Correction was not to be neglected nor the Discipline of the Church suffered to relax He confesses however That Sinners ought to be reproved with Meekness and Charity Against the Second Proposition he teacheth That Sinners who persevered in their Wickedness were by no means to be admitted to Baptism Showing That the Holy Scripture requireth Repentance before Baptism That St. John gave Precepts concerning Manners to those which he baptized and that this is the Temper of the Church which appointed the Times and Ceremonies observed by the Catechumens for no other end but to be sure that they are well-disposed to receive the Sacrament of Baptism Lastly of all St. Augustin proves against the Third Error That whosoever dieth in the State of Mortal Sin without Repentance is eternally Damned And he Answers the place of St. Paul that was alledged to prove the contrary This Treatise was Composed in 413. after the Book of the Spirit and the Letter Garnerius supposeth That St. Jerom is the Person whom St. Augustin disputes with in this Book But he cannot suspect that Father as guilty of either the first or the second Error And it is altogether unlikely that it should be St. Jerom whom St. Augustin refuteth concerning the third The Enchiridion or Treatise of Faith Hope and Charity was written at the Request of Laurentius a great Lord of Rome and Brother to Dulcitius who had desired St. Augustin to send him a small Book containing aâ Abridgment of the Christian Religion To satisfie him St. Augustin dedicated to him this Book wherein he reduceth all Religion to the Vertues of Faith Hope and Charity because a Man knoweth all that is comprised in Religion when he knows what is to be Believed what is to be Hoped for and what is to be Loved He explains what is to be Believed by keeping to the Method of the Creed refuting the Errours and Heresies that are contrary to the Doctrine of the Church without naming their Authors He layeth down also most excellent Maxims such as these That Faith does not stop at a curious Inquiry after Natural Things That Errours of Right are more dangerous than Errours of Fact That aââ ãâ¦ã some Things which it signifies little wâââher
Degrade Caecilian and Optatus Utremotis duobus unum ordinarent This Passage obliged Albaspinaeus to affirm That Donatus of Casae Nigrae had been Bishop of Carthage He likewise draws from it great Advantages in favour of the Church of Rome yet this Period is not in the St. Germains Copy and it signifies nothing either for that which goes before or for that which comes after If we read the Passage we may judge Tunc duo Episcopi ad Africam missi sunt Eunomius Olympius Venerunt apud Carthaginem fuerunt per dies quadraginta vel quinquaginta ut pronunciarent ubi esset Catholica Hoc seditiosa pars Donati fieri passa non est This Place is clear and plain whereas if this Period be inserted Ut remotis duobus unum ordinarent the sence is alter'd and it will be contradictory There is likewise some Lines before another Restitution which is confirmed by St. Augustin's Testimony in the Conference at Carthage Donatus petiit ut ei reverti licuisset nec ad Carthaginem accederet Whereas they read before Ut ei reverti Carthaginem contingeret In the Extract out of the Third Book of Optatus they distinguish Three Persecutions against the Donatists and the Governors are named by whose Orders they were raised This is not to be found in the ordinary Editions of Optatus I shall not mention several other Corrections which may make us wish that a new entire Edition of this Author were undertaken The TENTH TOME THE Tenth Volume not yet Printed is intended for the Books which St. Augustin composed Tom. X. against the Pelagians The Three Books Of Merits and Remission of Sins wherein he treats of Infant-Baptism directed to Marcellinus ought to be set in the first place for till then he had not undertaken the Pelagians except in his Sermons or in Conversation as he takes notice in his Retractations He writ these in the Year 412. in Answer to the Pelagians Questions which Count Marcellinus had sent to him at Carthage He speaks there particularly of Infant-Baptism as necessary to remit Original Sin and of the necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ which justifies us or maketh us righteous though whil'st we are in this Life we cannot so perfectly accomplish God's Law but that we are obliged to say in our daily Prayers Forgive us our Sins These are the principal Truths opposed by the Pelagians St. Augustin refutes them without naming the Authors and speaks of Pelagius in good Terms because several Persons had a great Esteem for his Vertue And he had not yet set forth his Doctrine in his own Name being contented to propose it in other Mens Names in his Commentaries upon St. Paul St. Augustin in the last Book refutes the Explications which he had given of those Passages of the Apostle that speak of Original Sin Count Marcellinus having received these Three Books from St. Augustin sent him word back again That he had found a Passage which puzzl'd him St. Augustin had said That with the help of Grace Man might live without Sin though none was yet arrived to that Perfection in this Life and that none would ever arrive to it Marcellinus asked St. Augustin how he could affirm this to be possible if there were no Examples of it To satisfie him about that Question St. Augustin wrote the Book Of the Spirit and of the Letter Yet he doth not examine this Question to the bottom but having answered in very few words That God can do many things which he doth not he boldly attacks those who durst affirm That a Man may fulfil the Commandments be Just and Vertuous without the succour of Christ's Grace He grounds these Reasonings upon that place of St. Paul The letter killeth but the spirit giveth life By the Letter he understandeth the Law and the Commandments which are unprofitable without the help of Grace which is the Spring of Faith of Righteousness Holiness and all Christian Vertues This Book is of the Year 413. In the Year 414. two young Monks Timasius and James having been undeceived by St. Augustin as to the Pelagian Errors sent to him one of Pelagius's Books wherein he pleaded for the Strength of Nature to the Prejudice of Christ's Grace St. Augustin immediately engaged to write against it and composed upon that Subject the Book Of Nature and of Grace St. Augustin Tome X. wherein he defends the Grace of Jesus Christ without Prejudice to Nature which is delivered and regulated by Grace He explains in this Treatise his Principles concerning the Fall of Humane Nature and the Necessity of Grace to be Justified yet he spares Pelagius's Name But this Monk having afterwards discovered his Opinions was cited by Heros Bishop of Arles and by Lazarus Bishop of Aix to a Council of Fourteen Bishops held at Diospolis in Palaestine in the Year 415. wherein he was declared Catholick in the absence of his Accusers having made a shew of condemning the Errors whereof he was accused St. Augustin fearing lest Men should believe that the Council had approved his Doctrine wrote a Book entituled Of the Acts of Pelagius wherein he declares how Things were carried and discovers at the same time that Pelagius had imposed upon the Fathers of the Council by professing a Doctrine which he had opposed in his Writings This Book is of the Year 416 or 417. Pelagius made use of the same Artifice to persuade Albinus Pinianus and Melania that he did not maintain the Errors he was accused of by Anathematizing them in appearance Coelestius also deceived Pope Zosimus by the same Fraud by presenting unto him a Counterfeit Catholick Confession These Cheats St. Augustin discovers and refutes in the Treatise Of Christ's Grace and in that Of Original Sin wherein he shews that these Confessions of Faith are captious and deceitful These Treatises are of the Beginning of the Year 418. It is probable also that it was at that same time that St. Augustin writ the small Treatise Of the Perfection of Righteousness against Coelestius where he Answers the Objections and Difficulties proposed by this Man under the Name of Definitions against the Opinion of the Catholicks who affirmed That there never was nor ever should be a Man that could attain to that Perfection of passing his whole Life without Offending God St. Augustin maintains That God does not grant this Grace even to the greatest Saints and so that it is ridiculous to believe that Man can compass this by the sole strength of his Free-Will as Pelagius and Coelestius imagined He does not mention this Book in his Retractations buâ St. Prosper quotes it several times The First Book Of Marriage and Concupiscence was composed about the latter end of the Year 418. There St. Augustin Answereth one of the most malicious of the Pelagian Objections against Original Sin If Concupiscence said they is Evil and an Effect of Sin if all Children are Born in Sin how comes Matrimony to be approved which is
doth not only help Man to do Good when he is willing but makes him willing to do it that the Saints of the Old Testament were only justified by Faith in Jesus Christ that Baptism is not only necessary to Children to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but also to obtain a share in Life eternal out of which they are excluded by original Sin alone In the Two next Books he refutes almost the same Calumnies contained in the other Letter of the Pelagians The Two First are about Free-Will and Marriage St. Augustin adds nothing to what he had said in the fore-going Book In the Third they taxed the Catholicks with introducing Fatality St. Augustin shews the difference betwixt Grace and Fate In the Fourth they accused them of maintaining That the Law was not given to Justifie Man but to render him more Sinful St. Augustin tells them That they did not understand the Opinion of the Church in that Point that the Law was given to teach what ought to be done but that it is Grace which makes us obey the Law and so the Law doth indeed shew what Righteousness is but doth not make us practise it Fifthly They upbraided the Catholicks with believing That Baptism did not remit all Sins so that Men continued partly God's Children and partly the Children of the Devil St. Augustin replies That Baptism doth indeed remit all Sins but it doth not cure Nature of its Weaknesses and Imperfections That the Righteous may and do Sin often without becoming therefore the Children of the Devil because there is no Man so Righteous as that he sinneth not The Sixth Calumny is concerning the Old Testament St. Augustin answereth That the Righteous who lived under the Old Testament were justified through the Grace of the New whereof the Old was only the Figure The Seventh is that the Apostles and Prophets were not perfectly Holy but only less criminal than others St. Augustin answers That they were truly Righteous through Faith and Charity but they had not all the perfection of Vertue which now they have in the other Life He utterly rejects the Ninth Calumny whereby they accused the Catholicks of saying That Jesus Christ had been subject to Sin The Tenth Calumny was expressed in these Terms They affirm That Men shall begin in the next Life to practise the Commandments which they did not practise in this St. Augustin opposes it shewing That they put an ill Construction upon a Catholick Truth which is That the Vertue and the Righteousness of Men shall only be perfect in the next Life In the last Book St. Augustin refutes the Pelagian Doctrines and shews That under pretence of commending Nature Marriage Free-VVill the Law and the Saints of the Old Testament they advanced very dangerous Errors to which he opposes several Testimonies of St. Cyprian and of St. Ambrose The Book of Grace and Free-Will was written by St. Augustin in the Year 427. upon a Dispute which happened in the Monastery of Adrumetum against those who fearing least by the Doctrine of Grace Free-VVill should be denied do indeed deny Grace by defending Free-VVill because they suppose that Grace is given according to Merit This last Error St. Augustin chiefly opposes in this Book shewing That the beginning both of Faith and good Resolutions is an effect of Grace The reading of this Book did not settle Peace among those Monks For there was an Objection proposed which was obvious enough to every Man's understanding If no Man can do Good without the Grace of God and this Grace cannot be merited no Man is to be reproved or corrected for not doing his Duty since it is not in his Power to do it because he wants Grace and cannot deserve it St. Augustin perceiving the Difficulty of this Objection for the Solution thereof composed the Book of Correction and Grace wherein without retracting any thing of what he had formerly said he affirms That Admonition is to be used 1. Because it may happen that God will touch the Heart of him that is reproved 2. Because Sinners sin voluntarily and without Compulsion and that they cannot complain that God hath denied them his Grace or the Gift of Perseverance since he owes his Grace to no body He does not content himself with Answering the Objection but further explains and confirms his Principles by shewing the difference betwixt the Grace of Adam in the State of Innocence and that which is necessary to Man in the state of fallen Nature He speaks also of the Gift of Perseverance which is not granted unto all and of the Power of Grace and the free Predestination of the Elect. He again insisteth upon the same Matter and upon the same Principles in both the Books which he writ in answer to Hilary's and Prosper's Letters The First is of the Predestination of the Saints and the Second of the Gift of Perseverance Wherein he demonstrates That the beginning of Faith and good Purposes is the Gift of God and that so our Predestination or Vocation does not depend upon our Merits The Second Book concerns the Gift of Perseverance which he shews to depend equally upon God as the beginning of our Conversion St. Augustin composed these Treatises in the Year 429. St. Augustin's last Effort against the Pelagians fell upon Julianus his old Adversary who to maintain the Quarrel he had begun composed Eight Books against St. Augustin's Second Book Of Matrimony and Concupiscence St. Augustin having received Five of them from Alypius undertook to write against them and was engaged about the Fourth when he writ the ââ4th Letter to Quodvultdeus in the Year 428. It is probable that Alypius sent him the other Three but St. Augustin answered but Six and this Work remains imperfect as Possidius affirms The Six Books of St. Augustin were published by F. Vignier from a Manuscript of the Abby of Clervaux which in all probability will be revised and corrected in a new Edition from some other Manuscripts These Books are written by way of Dialogue There St. Augustin produces Julianus's own Terms and Answers them plainly and in few Words We referr'd to speak of St. Augustin's Four Treatises Of the original of the Soul to this place because they were not written properly against the Pelagians though St. Augustin handleth there some Questions that have some relation to the Dispute betwixt them Therefore I think that it had been more proper to have set them at the end of the Sixth Volume than in this place The occasion and subject of these Four Books is this A Priest of the Province of Mauritania Caesariensis one Victor who was Surnamed Vincentius from a Donatist Bishop Successor to Victor of that Name whose Memory that Priest who had been a Donatist did reverence very much This Priest I say having met in the House of one Peter a Spanish Priest with a Writing of St. Augustin's wherein this Saint had set down his usual Doubts about the Soul 's Original wrote two Books
Anatolius 138 Andrew of Samosata 80 Anianus 37 Antipater of Bostra 156 Antoninus Honoratus 49 Apollinaris Sidonius 166 Arnobius Junior 148 Asclepius 145 Asterius 143 Athanasius 138 Atticus 1 Author of the Confessions of Faith attributed to Rufinus 20 Author of the Books of the Vocation and the Gentiles and Epistle to Demetrias 128 Author of the Memoir about the Affair of Acacius 175 Author of the Books attributed to Dionysius 188 B. Basil of Seleucia 139 Bassianus 138 C. Capreolus 49 Cassian 9 S. Caelestine 22 Cerealis 155 Charisius 47 Chrysippus 141 Constantine 144 St. Cyrill Patr. of Alexandria 27 D. Desiderius 166 Dorotheus 44 Dracontius 142 E. Evagrius 153 S. Eucherius 117 Eudocia 142 Eugenius 153 Eusebius of Doryloeum 138 Eustathius 153 Eutherius 44 Eutropius 153 Eutyches 138 F. Falconiâ 142 Fastidius 142 Faustus 161 Foelix III. 172 Flavian 138 G. Gelasius I. 175 Gelasius Cyzicenus 187 Gennadius of Constantinople 156 Gennadius of Marseilles 185 H. Helladius of Tarsus 80 S. Hilarius Bishop of Arles III Hilarus or Hilarius Pope 157 Honoratus 148 I. Ibas Idacius 155 John Bishop of Antioch 43 John Priest of Antioch 169 Irenaeus 80 Isaac 145 Ischyrion 138 Isidore Palusiota 2 Julian of Coos 138 Julian of Eclana 38 Julianus Pomerius 183 L. S. Leo. 81 Leontius 138 Leporius 3 Lupus M. Marius Mercator 35 Mamertus 150 Maximus of Turin 120 Maximian 47 Maximin of Anazarbum 80 Meletius of Mopsuesta 44 Memnon 47 Mochimus 145 Musaeus 149 N. Nemesins 187 Nestorius 40 S. Nilus 17 Nonnus 52 P. Paschasius the Deacon 182 Paschasinus 138 Pastor 153 Paulus Emesenus 44 Paul 145 Paulinus 149 Petronius 144 Philippus Sidaetes 51 Philippus 144 Philostorgius 52 Photius of Tyre 138 Petrus Chrysologus 119 Petrus 145 Petrus Fullo 138 Possidius 21 Proclus 48 S. Prosper 122 Proterius 138 R. Rheginus Ruricius 166 Rusticus 138 S. Salonius 149 Salvian 146 Samuel 150 Sedulius 50 Servus Dei 154 Siagrius 144 Simeon Stylites 145 Simplicius 159 Sixtus III. 47 Socrates 53 Sozomen 54 Syrus 149 T. Talaia 169 Theodoret. 55 Theodotus 46 Theodulus 154 Theotimus 138 Tichonius 2 Timotheus Aelurus 141 Timotheus 153 V. Valerian 121 Veranus 149 Victor of Antioch 50 Victor of Cartenna 121 Victor Vitensis 170 Victorinus of Marseilles 50 Victorius 155 Vigilius the Deacon 142 Vigilius Tapsensis 170 Vincentius 149 S. Vincentius Lirinensis 114 Vitalis 138 Voconius 153 Uranius 22 An Alphabetical Table of the Councils A Council at ALexandria against Nestorius 194 Anazarbum 208 Aâjou 247 Antioch by the Eastern Bishop 204 Antioch about the Peace 205 Antioch in 436. 112 Antioch about the Business of Sabinian 240 Arles II. 246 Arles III. 248 Arles IV. in 463. 158 B. Berytus 236 C. Chalcedon to Confer with the Eastern Bishop 202 Chalcedon General 218 Constantinople in Favour of Bassian 239 Constantinople under Flavian against Eutyches 219 Constantinople II. 228 Constant. III. in 459. 248 Carthage under Hunnericus 170 Cilicia 211 E. Ephesus General 119 Ephesus under Dioscorus 226 O. Orange I. 243 R. Ries 243 Rome under Caelestine 193 under S. Leo. 228 under S. Hilary 249 under Faelix 172 173 under Gelasius 181 182 T. Tarsus by the East Bishop 204 Tours 248 V. Vasio 246 Vennes â 249 BIBLIOTHECA PATRUM OR A NEW HISTORY OF Ecclesiastical Writers TOME III. PART II. CONTAINING An Account of the LIVES and WRITINGS of the Primitive FATHERS that Flourished in the latter Part of the Fifth Century of Christianity with Censures upon all their BOOKS determining which are Genuine and which Spurious ATTICUS Bishop of Constantinople ARSACIUS the Brother of Nectarius who had been put into the See of Constantinople in the Place of S. Chrysostom being dead in the Year of his Ordination Atticus Atticus a Monk of Armenia after some Contests * Within sixteen Months and some odd Days Altero post anno Socr. was chosen to fill that See He entred upon it in the Year 406. and enjoyed it peaceably until the Year 427. in which he dyed Socrates who had a very particular Esteem for this Bishop has described him to us as a Man competently learned but very wise and prudent endued with abundance of Piety Meekness and Charity who not only took care of the Orthodox but also won over the Hereticks by his courteous and taking Behaviour He adds That while he was a Priest he got his Sermons by Heart and that after he was a Bishop he accustomed himself to speak ex tempore but that his Discourses were not beautiful enough to gain the Applause of the People nor to deserve to be put in Writing So true is it that a Discourse must be studied with an Intent to please Nevertheless he helped forward the Conversion of many Persons and very much increased the Church His Liberality contributed much towards it for the People are much better disposed to hear and believe their Pastor when they see that he provides as well for their Temporal as Spiritual Wants and at the same time he dispenses to them the Bread of Life to nourish their Souls he also gives them liberally that by which they may procure Nourishment for their Bodies And this he did not only to the poor of his own Diocess but likewise to Strangers Socrates in the Seventh Book of his History Chap 25. recites a Letter which Atticus wrote to Calliopius a Priest of Nice wherein he tells him That he had sent him Three hundred Crowns to relieve the Necessities of the Poor of the City of Nice He admonishes him at the same time to bestow his Charity upon the modest Qui peterâ erubescunt Poor and to give them nothing who made a Trade of Begging He would not have him in this Distribution to have any Regard to Religion And recommends it to him to give that which is necessary to support Life to all that are in Want not excepting such as are of a different Religion Socrates further relates some Answers of this Bishop in favour of the Novatians but since this Historian was a Friend to that Party his Testimony is a little to be suspected However that be the Answers that are attributed to him are very moderate for when one said unto him That he ought not to suffer the Meetings of the Novatians in the Cities He answered Do you not know how much they suffered for the Faith under the Emperours Constantius and Valens They are Witnesses beyond Exception of the Truth of our Doctrine for having separated themselves a long time from the Church they are found to have the same Faith with us He commended Asclepiades an Ancient Bishop of the Novatians that he had undergone that Charge for the space of Fifty Years And he said to this Bishop I praise Novatus but cannot approve of the Novatians Asclepiades having demanded of him the Explication of this Paradox he reply'd Novatus denyed not Communion but only to those who had fallen into Idolatry during the Persecution I have done the same thing my self but I cannot approve
Leontius Bishop of ââesus and some other of their neighbouring French Bishops who tolerated and also favoured those who opposed some of the Opinions of S. Austin concerning Predestination and Grace S. Prosper and Hilarius Scholars of S. Austin and close Adherents to his Doctrine finding themselves the weaker Side among the French went to Rome to complain to Pope Coelestine That the Priests of their Country were suffered to raise Disputes and Divisions in the French Church and to Maintain That S. Austin and his Scholars had promoted Opinions contrary to the Truth Coelestine blames the Bishops Who ought saith he to hinder these Disputes and not allow these Persons to take upon them to teach That the Silence which the Bishops kept upon this occasion might pass for a kind of Approbation That it was enough to declare their own Opinions not to suffer others to speak so that upon such like occasions Silence is a strong Presumption because the Truth could not but oppose it self to Error if Error it self did not please Lastly That the Bishops themselves were guilty of the Error which they favoured by their Coânivance and remaining in Silence He admonishes the Bishops in the next Place To reprove those who veââed their new Doctrines contrary to the Opinions of S. Austin Let them not be permitted saith he to speak for the future according to their own Fancy Let not Novelty be so bold as to oppose Antiquity Let those unquiet Spirits not trouble the Peace of the Church 'T is your Business to keep your Churches quiet Let those Priests know That they ought to be subject to you Let those that do not teach the Truth know That they ought to learn and not pretend to teach What Power have you in your Churches if they are Masters to teach what they please But it is no Wonder adds S. Coelestine if they are not afraid to attempt such things against the Living since they dare assault the Memory of our Brethren after their Death We have always had S. Austin of blessed Memory in our Communion whose Life and Merit is very well known his Fame hath not received the least Blemish and his Knowledge is so well known that my Predecessors have looked upon him as one of the most excellent Doctors of the Church All Orthodox Christians have ever thought well of him he hath been generally honoured and reverenced through the whole World Resist therefore the Enemies of his Memory whose Number increaseth every Day Suffer not those Religious Persons who defend him to be afflicted and persecuted He that is attacked by such a Novelty suffers in the Cause of the Universal Church Shew That those that displease us displease you which you will appear to us to do if having imposed Silence upon such Offenders you cause that there be no future Complaints upon this Account To this Letter of S. Coelestine is usually joyned a Collection of the Decisions of the Popes Coelestine's Predecessors and of the Councils of Africa upon the principal Points touching Grace and Free-will entituled The Authorities or Sentences of the ancient Bishops of the Holy Apostolick See concerning Grace and Free-will It is also called Rules of the Holy Apostolick See But the most common Name which is given it is Articles or Aphorisms about Grace This Writing is cited under the Name of S. Coelestine in the beginning of the Sixth Age for Dionysââ Exiguus hath put it into his Collection among the Decrees of this Pope And Petrus Diaconus writing to S. Fulgentius about the Year 519. cites a Passage of it as taken out of the Decrees of this Pope Cresconius Bishop of Africk who wrote toward the end of the same Age attributes it also to S. Coelestine And ever since it hath always been cited under the Name of this Pope as by the Church of Lyon by ãâã by Lupus of Ferrara by Remigiâs of Lyons by ãâã and many others It is very probable that it is this Collection of Testimonies of which Pope Hormisâââs speaks in his Letter to Possessor written in 520 where he says That tho' it is easily known what is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome touching Grace and Man's Free-will by the Writings of S. Austin yet âe hath more express and plain Articles in his Church-Registry which he will send him to whom he writes if he hath them not and thinks it necessary These Authorities seem to prove very strongly That this Collection is the Work of Pope Coelestine Yet this Opinion is opposed by so many Conjectures that almost all the Criticks in these ãâã times have abandoned iâ ãâã It is affirmed That these Aphorisms are not of the same Style with the Epistle of S. Câlestine 2. This Epistle concluding with these words Deus vos âncolumes custodiat Fratres chârissimi The Lord preserve you in Safety dear Brethren Altho' S. Coelestine doth not say That he added nothing more yet it is not credible that these Articles were any part of it or were added by way of Postscript 3. The Author of these Sentences doth not speak as in Pope he doth not give his Judgment or Advice witâ Authority He declares That he had no other design but to collect the Judgments of the Bishops of the Holy See or of the African Councils which the Holy See had made hers by heâ Approbation 4. Speaking of the Popes he always calls them the Bishops of the Holy Apostâ⦠See without giving them the Name of his Predecessors which no Bishop of Rome would have omitted 5. S. Prosper bringing the Decisions of the Popes concerning Grace and Free-will against Cassian cites âitly S. Coelestine's ââtter but says nothing of these Sentences Is it credible that he would have forgot them if they were this Popes This was a most decretory piece Photius and Viâcentius Lirinensiâ make mention of this Letter of S. Coelestine but speak nothing of the Aphorisms of Grace Besides Is it credible that Vincentius Lirinensis would have cited S. Coelestine's Letter for the defence of the Semi-pelagian Party if this Pope had condem ned them so manifestly 6. If we consider the manner how these Aphorisms are inserted in the Dionysian Code we shall easily guess that he did not attribute them to Pope Coelestine as some think for altho' he puts them at the end of his Letter yet he distinguishes them by this Title Here begin the Authorities of the Bishops of the Holy See concerning Grace And the same Remark is added to the end âero ends c. These are the Conjectures which may balance the Authorities which seem to prove that this Collection is S. Coelestine's And by these have the Criticks been obliged to search out some other Author of them than this Pope and having found none to whom this Work agrees better than S. Prosper many have confidently attributed it to him altho' they have neither MSS. nor ancient Author for them It is true that they quote a Passage of Hincmarus taken out of a Book he made
not willing to forsake their Errors to make those Charitable Severities which are made use of to recover them to pass for insupportable Violences and unheard of Cruelties by aggravating them and representing them in such an odious manner as is proper to stir up Indignation The Principles which he lays down in the following Part are very agreeable with those of the Protestants In the First Article he opposes those who will have it determined where the Truth is by the Judgment of the greater Number Jesus Christ saith he is the Truth as Tertullian hath a long Time since affirmed and 't is he that we ought to consult This being so are they not to be pitied who judge of the Force and Authority of a Doctrine only by the Number of those who approve it without considering that our Lord Jesus Christ chose ignorant and poor Men whom he made use of to convert all the World He required that Millions of Men should yield themselves up to the Doctrines of these Twelve Thus hath the Truth always triumphed although it were among the smallest Number and whosoever he be that despairing to prove what he affirms to be true flies to the Authority of the Multitude he confesses himself vanquished The great Number may affright but cannot perswade There are but few that shall be saved S. Stephen Phineas Lot and Noah had the Multitude against them yet who had not rather be on their Side than on that which did oppose them 'T is not saith the same Author that I bear not a due respect to the Multitude but it is to that which proves what it teacheth and not to that which will not suffer us to examine and search out the Truth 'T is to that which doth not condemn with Severity but correct with Gentleness not to that which loves Novelties but to that which preserves the Truth which they have received from their Ancestors But what is this Multitude which you object against me It is the Throng of Men corrupted by Flatteries and Prisons 'T is the Number of ignorant Men who have no Understanding to guide them It is a crowd of weak and fearful Men who suffer themselves to be conquered They are the Souls which preferr the Pleasures that Sin affords us in this Life which are momentary before Eternal Life and Glory So that when you object to me this Multitude to gain Credit to a Lye you do but discover the extent of Wickedness and the great Number of the Miserable The Second Chapter is of like Nature with this First In it he opposes those who maintain That it is needless to search the Holy Scripture that we may know what we ought to believe either because it is sufficient for every one to believe what his own Reason teacheth him or because in searching for the Truth in Scripture we meet with more Obscurity and Uncertainty Our Author cannot approve of this Advice He saith That being perswaded of the Truth of the Mysteries and trusting in the Help of Jesus Christ who hath promised to those who seek after the Truth that they shall certainly find it he seeks after the Truth in the manner that he ought he shall find it without mistaking that he puts himself into a Condition of proving what he teacheth of instructing the Faithful confuting Hereticks and convincing himself of the Truth and confirming the Doctrines so as none can doubt of them Would you have me saith he neglect the Study of Holy Scripture whence then will you have Knowledge necessary to support your Faith It is dangerous for this Life to be ignorant of the Roman Laws and 't is no less dangerous for another Life to be ignorant of the Oracles of our Heavenly King The Scripture is the Nourishment of the Soul Suffer not then the inward Man to die with Hunger by depriving him of the Word of God There are too too many who inflict mortal Wounds upon the Soul suffer them to seek Medicines for their Maladies and Griefs But there are say you things which pass our Understand I own it but the Scripture teaches us That we must search and that there are things that we cannot comprehend And as it would be a kind of Impiety to desire to throughly comprehend it so it is to have a kind of Contempt for the Divine Truths to lay aside wholly the search into them Every one ought to know what it is he adores as it is written We know what we worship But it is a Madness to enquire how much After what manner By what Means and where we must adore him In sum they who discourage others from reading and studying the Holy Scripture under a Pretence That they ought not to dive into Things too profound do it because they are afraid that they should be convinced of their Errors by it So when they find themselves pressed by convincing Testimonies of Holy Scripture they give a Sence clear contrary to the Words and if they find but one Word which can be brought to their Opinion although it be nothing to the Sence of the Place they must use it as an invincible Demonstration We must own that these Principles are not ill although Men may offend in the Application they make of them In the other Chapters he answers the Objections which the Aegyptians made against the Eastern Bishops and opposes some of their Expressions such as these The Word hath suffered in an impassible manner The Word hath suffered in the Flesh. He hath delivered several Expressions agreeable to those of Nestorius In sum He hath written with much Elegancy and Reason This Work is a Doctrinal Treatise and not a Collection of Sermons It is in Tom. 2. of Athanasius's Works under the Name of that Father and since it hath been printed at the end of Tom. 5. of Theodoret's Works put out by F. Garner at Paris in 1684. There are also some of this Bishop's Letters in F. Lupus's Collection THEODOTUS Bishop of Ancyra THEODOTUS Bishop of Ancyra a City of Galatia whom Gennadius calleth Theodorus was one of the greatest Adversaries of Nestorius He was present at the Council of Ephesus Theodotus of Ancyra where he courageously delivered his Opinion against him Gennadius says That he made a Treatise on purpose to confute him and that that Work was very Logical but that it was not sufficiently grounded upon the Authority of Holy Scriptures but lays down several Arguments before he comes to Scripture-proofs This description agrees well to the two Sermons of Theodotus upon the Feast of the Nativity preached in the Council of Ephesus and which are recited in the Acts of that Council where he proves by several Arguments That Jesus Christ is God and Man and that it is truly said That God is born of a Virgin There is also a 3d. Sermon preached at Ephesus upon S. John's day where he likewise speaks against the Errour of Nestorius The beginning of it is remarkable wherein he compares a Bishop to
That he was ready to be Judged by a Council of Bishops and that in the presence of the most Illustrious Magistrates The Enemies of Theodoret were not satisfied to have accused his Behaviour but they would render his Faith suspected and to this end published in Alexandria that he taught that there were Two Sons of God This obliged him to write his Eighty Second Letter to Eusebius Bishop of Ancyra wherein he declares that he was so far from that Errour that when he discovered some of the Fathers of the Nicene Council to incline to a Division of the Two Natures he was much troubled because he knew that the excessive use they made of it had given occasion to that Errour And for fear addeth he that it should be thought that it is fear which makes me now speak in this manner let those who would inform themselves fully of my Opinion read the Works which I have composed either before the Council of Ephesus or within these Twelve Years last past which if they examine and judge of my Opinions by them they will find that I have no other The Accusation which Theodoret endeavours to clear himself of in this Letter was greedily received by Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria who besides the old Controversie of the Aegyptians had another private Quarrel with Theodoret about the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria He wrote to Domnus who had succeeded John in the See of Antioch that it was told him that Theodoret Preaching publickly at Antioch had divided the Person of Jesus Christ into Two Theodoret having seen this Letter which was given to him in the Seventh Year of the Pontificate of Domnus in 447 he wrote the Eighty Third Letter to Dioscorus wherein he complains that Dioscorus had given Credit to the Testimony of a few Persons so easily He opposes to their Testimony the infinite number of those who had heard the Sermons which he Preached at Antioch in Twenty Six Years time under Three Arch-bishops without incurring blame from any person for that matter He professes to follow the judgment of the Fathers to defend the Doctrine of the Nicene Council and to acknowledge but One Jesus Christ the Son of God as he did confess but One Father and One Holy Ghost He proves this Truth likewise and shews That tho' there are Two Natures in Jesus Christ there is nevertheless but One Jesus Christ to whom the Proprieties of the Two Natures agree He adds That he hath taken this Doctrine out of the Writings of S. Alexander S. Athanasius and S. Basil and that his Writings make it appear that he made use of the Books of Theophilus and S. Cyril to confute the Errours of those that say That One of the Two Natures hath been changed into the other That he hath written to S. Cyril and that that Saint received his Letters That he hath read and admired his Books against Julian That he wrote to him upon that Subject and that he yet hath the Answer which he made S. Cyril He then desires Dioscorus not to harken to his Calumniators nor to reject him from his Communion and after he hath Cited his Books as Authentick Witnesses of the Purity of his Faith he concludes with this Protestation If any one refuseth to confess that the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of God or says that Jesus Christ our Lord is but a mere Man or divides him into Two he who is the only Son of God and the first Born of every Creature Let him lose all the hope which he hath in God Altho' Theodoret seemed to have fully justified himself by this Letter nevertheless Dioscorus gave not over his Enterprize and instead of rejecting the Calumnies which were so ill grounded he called together his Accusers caused them publickly to pronounce him Accursed and did the same himself When Theodoret heard it he implored the help of other Bishops but particularly Flavian Bishop of Constantinople The Letter which he wrote to him is the Eighty Sixth After he hath related the Attempt of Dioscorus he says that he heard that that Bishop of Alexandria had sent some of his Bishops to Constantinople hoping to raise great Commotions against him but he put his Confidence chiefly in God since he is Assaulted upon the account of the true Faith and next in the protection of Flavian whom he prays to maintain the Orthodox Faith and vindicate the Canons which were slighted For saith he the Fathers of the Council held at Constantinople following the determination of the Nicene Council have distinguished the bounds of Diocesses expresly forbidding the Bishops of one Diocess to eÅcroach upon the Rights of another They ordered the Bishop of Alexandria not to concern himself but in Aegypt only and have left to others the Government of their own Diocesses But Dioscorus contemning these Laws boasts that his See is S. Mark 's that he may assume the Rights that do not belong to him We might oppose to him that the Church of Antioch was the See of S. Peter the Prince and Head of the Apostles But we do not regard the Dignity of the See we know and keep within the bounds of Humility which the Apostles have taught us Theodoret says further to engage Flavian on his side that Dioscorus had hated him ever since he consented to the Rules made in the time of Proclus in favour of the See of Constantinople He wrote also Letters to Domnus Bishop of Antioch to the Bishops of Cilicia and to many Officers of the Emperour's Court whom he fills with Complaints We may see upon this subject the Eighty Third Letter and the following to the One Hundred and Tenth But all his endeavours were to no purpose he became every Day more and more odious to the Emperour and the main thing that was sought was an occasion to ruin him This was thought a very fit One to Depose Irenaeus whom he had Ordain'd Bishop of Phoenicia Two Faults were found with that Ordination The first was That Irenaeus was a Nestorian and did not believe that the Virgin ought to be called the Mother of God The other was That he had been Twice Married The Emperour wrote to Domnus to Depose him Theodoret tells him in his Hundred and Tenth Letter that he could not do it without an Offence against God because he had Ordained him pursuant to the Declaration of the Bishops of Phoenicia who had judged him worthy to be a Bishop for his rare Vertues and as to that charge That he had been Twice Married he had passed by the ordinary Rules according to the Example of Alexander Bishop of Antioch who with Acacius Bishop of Beraea had Ordain'd Diogenes a Man Twice Married and of Prailus Bishop of Jerusalem who also had Ordain'd Domnus Bishop of Caesarea altho' he was Twice Married That in fine Proclus had approved the Ordination of Irenaeus and the Bishops of Pontus Palaestine and Cappadocia had acknowledged him and that no Man had ever called in Question
is hard to speak any thing more certain PETRUS CHRYSOLOGUS PETRUS who was surnamed Chrysologus was a Native of * Anciently called Forum Cornelii Imola He was taught and admitted into the Clergy by S. Cornelius Bishop of that City as he Notes in his 165 Petrus Chrysologus Sermon Some are of Opinion That being at Rome with his Bishop at that time when the Clergy and People of Ravenna had sent their Deputies to desire a Bishop of Sixtus III then Pope he was chosen by that Pope to fill that vacant See as he had been warned in a Dream by S. Peter and Apollinaris the first Bishop of the See of Ravenna but this is a groundless Story being related by no Credible Author It is only certain that P. Chrysologus was chosen and Ordain'd about that time Bishop of Ravenna He governed that Church several Years There is a Letter of S. Leo's written to Neonas his Successor which was heretofore the 37th and is at present the 135 which is thought to be written in 451 in the Consulship of Martian and Adelphius * Dr. Cave follows this Opinion This supposeth that P. Chrysologus was Dead in 449. But F. Quesnel having proved in his Notes upon that Letter that it is rather written in 458 some few Years more may be allowed for the continuance of this Saint in his Episcopal Charge yet not to carry it so far as the Year 500 nor confound him with that Petrus who lived under Theodoricus Trithemius says That this Bishop composed several Sermons or Homilies for the People a Letter to Eutyches which beginneth with these words I have read with grief and some other Letters We have 176 Sermons and the Letter to Eutyches These Sermons are very short In them he explains the Text of Holy Scripture in few words but in a way very pleasing and makes short Moral Reflections upon them The Parables and Miracles of Jesus Christ are the chief Subjects of his Sermons In some of them he Treats of Fasting Alms-giving Vigilance Patience and some other Christian Virtues He hath also several upon the Great Feasts with some Panegyricks of Saints S. Chrysologus hath found out the way to join extream Brevity and very great Elegance together in his discourses His Stile is made up of short Sentences and Phrases which have a natural sequence and connexion one with another the words are very fit and the sence is simple and natural It hath nothing swelling or forced His descriptions are clear and easie But for all this there is nothing great enough sublime enough nor eloquent enough to entitle him justly to the Sirname of Chrysologus of which he is possessed we see no extraordinary Motives we meet with nothing that quickens or affects much we find no Truth enforcing consent only Doctrines explained at large All that can be said is this His Relations are pleasant and his Moral Discourses represent very well to the Mind what we ought to do but make no impression upon the Heart nor are able to change the Will The Sermons of this Author have been Collected together above Nine Hundred Years by Foelix Bishop of Ravenna who lived in the Year 702 or 708. F. Oudin proves it in his Advertisement that he found them in Three Manuscripts They have been Printed since at Collen in 1541 1607 1618 and 1678 Quarto at Parn in 1585 at Antwerp in 1618 at Lyons in 1633 1636 at Bologne in 1643. This Edition is the best They are also to be found in Bibliotheca Patrum Tom. VII and with S. Leo's Works at Paris in 1614 and 1670. The Epistle to Eutyches was written after that Monk had been Condemned by Flavian S. Chrysologus tells him That he read with sorrow his sad Letter for if the Peace of the Church the Agreement of the Clergy and the Quiet of the People cause Joy in Heaven on the contrary Divisions ought to beget Sadness and Grief especially when they proceed from so lamentable a cause as that was for which he separated from his Bishop He adds That the Church had been free from Controversies for Thirty Years That Origen and Nestorius had fallen into Error by Reasoning upon the ineffable Mystery of the Incarnation That it was a shame for Priests to be Ignorant of that which the Magi Acknowledged and Adored That when Jesus came into the World Glory to God was Sung and it is strange at present that all the World Bow at the Name of Jesus that he should be Ignorant of the Reason of it He saith afterward with the Apostle That tho' we have known Jesus Christ according to the Flesh yet now we know him no more That it becomes us not to be very inquisitive and that we ought to honour respect wait upon our Judge and not dispute about his Title This is saith he what may be answered to your Letter in a few words I would have sent you a longer Answer if our Brother Flavian had not sent me some Instruments about what passed in your Cause You say That his Judgment ought not to stand because he made whom he thought fit to be Judges but how should we know that since we neither heard nor saw them We should be unjust Arbitrators if we should determine in favour of one Party before we hear the other In sum We Exhort you my most honoured Brother to submit to what hath been written by the Bishop of Rome because S. Peter who lived and presided in his See Teaches the True Faith to those that inquire after it As for us we dare not for the Love we have to Peace and Truth concern our selves either to hear or judge Causes without the consent of the Bishop of Rome Gerard Vossius who hath Published this Letter in Greek and Latin among several other pieces at the end of S. Greg. Thaumaturgus at Mentz in 1604 in 1603 Cave tells us That there are two Manuscripts in the Vatican where this Letter ends at these words This is what I thought fit to Answer at present to your Letter And indeed It is likely that the Letter ends at that place and that what follows hath been added afterward to raise the Authority of the Church of Rome It is nevertheless to be found in the Manuscripts of Cardinal Sirlet and it is Printed also in the first part of the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon and in the ordinary Editions of S. Chrysologus MAXIMUS TAURINENSIS MAXIMUS Bishop of Turin flourished under the Empire of Honorius and Theodosius the younger He Lived to the Year 465 since in that Year we find him at a Synod at Rome Maximus Taurinensis held under Pope Hilarius Gennadius saith That he applied himself to the Holy Scripture and that he was able to make an Extompore Homily to the People We have several of his Homilies which are the greatest part of them cited by Gennadius There are some upon the Feasts of the Nativity Circumcision Epiphany Easter and
and was Ordained Bishop of Rome * Sept. 15. Nov. 28. Anno. 496. The first thing he did was to write to the â Anastasius Emperor to endeavour the Re-union of the Church He exhorts him therefore in the first ** This Letter is in Tom. 4. of Councils p. 1278. Letter and earnestly intreats him to hinder that the Name of Acacius which gave so much offence should not be recited in the Church and by that means procure the Churches Peace At the same time he advertiseth him that this would not derogate from the validity of the Ordinations which Acacius hath conferred or Baptisms which he hath administred because the Holy Spirit works by evil Ministers and Sinners who administer the Sacraments hurt none but themselves nââ¦r do hinder the effect of the Sacraments Anastasius sent * Germanus Bishop of Capua and Cresconius Bishop of Tuder two Legats to Constantinople to Negotiate the Peace and at the same time Festus a Senator of Rome went about some publick affairs There was also then at Constantinople a Priest and another Clergy-man Deputies for the Church of Alexandria who being desirous of a Re-union with the Church of Rome presented a â It is extant in Tom. 4. p. 1283. of the Councils Memoir to the Pope's Legats and Festus wherein they deliver themselves to this Effect That the Churches of Rome founded by St. Peter and of Alexandria planted by St. Mark have always had the same Faith and Doctrine and were so firmly united that when any Councils were held in the East the Bishop of Rome made choice of the Bishop of Alexandria to act in his stead and hold his place in them but there began a Division between these two Churches in the time of St. Leo because his Letter against the Impious Heretick Eutyches being falsified by Theodoret and some other Bishops of the Nestorian Party who Translated it into Greek and by the Authority of that Corrupt Translation had maintained the Doctrine of Nestorius had given the Church of Alexandria occasion to think that the Church of Rome was of that Opinion and upon that account to separate from her Communion On the other side the Bishop of Rome being persuaded that the Aegyptians opposed the Doctrine which he had received from the Apostles had also separated them from his Communion That they had sent Deputies to Rome to justifie that their Church had no other Sentiments than those of the Fathers of the Council of Nice but there was then at Rome a certain Man of their Countrey an ââ¦my to the truth by whose means they were denied Reception and Audience Insomuch that they returned without effecting any thing but they understood since by Photinus a Deacon of the Church of Thessalonica who was sent by his Bishop to Pope Anastasius that this Pope did not approve of the Additions and Alterations which had been made in the Version of St. Leo's Letter That the Legats of this Pope sent to Constantinople having assured them of the same thing they implored them to receive their Confession of Faith that if it were found agreeable to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome these two Churches might be Re-united In this Confession of Faith having asserted with most serious Protestations that they did receive the Doctrine of the three first General Councils and the Anathema's of St. Cyril without mentioning the fourth Council They confess that Jesus Christ is consubstantial with the Father according to the Divine Nature and with us according to the Humane that there is but one Son that the Actions and Sufferings of Jesus Christ are proper to one Son only They condemn those that divide or confound the Natures or introduce a mere Phantom because in the Incarnation there is no multiplication of Sons and the Trinity of the Persons in the Godhead still remains although one of the Divine Persons be Incarnate They pronounce an Anathema against Nestorius and Eutyches But they declare that the Doctrine of Dioscorus Timotheus and Petrus their Patriarchs was such as that they do still follow it and are ready to justifie it Lastly They conjure the Popes Legats to present this Confession of Faith to him that he may approve it and receive them into his Communion Festus also was Commissioned by the Emperor to negotiate the Re-union of the Church of Constantinople and he promised to sway Anastasius the Pope to Subscribe Zeno's Henoticon But when he came to Rome Anastasius was dead having been in the See of the Church of Rome but two years wanting six days There is another * It is extant in Tom. 4. Council p. 1278. Letter of Anastasius to Lewis the French King wherein he congratulates his Conversion to Christianity Lastly M. Baluzius in Tom. 1. of his new Collections of Councils hath published some fragments of a Letter of Anastasius to Ursicinus upon the Incarnation Platina says that he wrote some Books De Trinitate De Libero arbitrio de Regulis Fidei adversus Pelagianam Haeresin and many Sermons but we know not upon what grounds The Letters of this Pope are full of Moral Observations and Applications of Texts of Holy Scripture PASCHASIUS a Deacon of the Church of Rome THIS Deacon flourished in the Popedom of Anastasius and Symachus under this last he Paschasius a Deacon of Rome favoured the Party of Laurentius the Anti-Pope and some hold that he was put into Purgatory upon that Account where Germanus Bishop of Capua saw his Soul if we may believe the Relation which St. Gregory gives us in his Dialogues He made two Books concerning the Godhead of the Holy Spirit * Against Macedonius commended by St. Gregory in which he hath not omitted any Material proof which the Holy Scripture affords us to prove the God-head of the Holy Spirit This Treatise is Written in a very good Method and with much Elegancy It hath been Printed at Collen in 1539 8vo and at Helmstadt in 1613. and put into the Biblioth Patr. Tom. 8. p. 806. Some think that it is to this Paschasius that Eugippius hath Dedicated the Life of St. Severinus JULIANUS POMERIUS JUlianus Pomerius a Native of Mauritania and Ordained a Priest in France lived about the end of the fifth Age. He composed a Treatise by way of Dialogue between Julian a Bishop Julianus Pomerius and Verus a Priest * Dr. Cave takes them for an Abridgment of Nemesius ' s 8 Books Dé Animâ about the Nature and Qualities of the Soul divided into eight Books In the first he tells us what the Soul is and in what sense it is said to be made in the Image of God In the second he examines whether it be Corporeal or Incorporeal In the third he enquires how the Soul of the first Man was made In the fourth he discusses this Question Whether the Soul which is about to be infused into the Body be created anew and without Sin or whether it be
Consecrate the Churches of the Arians as was done in the East has the same marks of Falshood The Date of the Consuls is false It begins with some Scraps of the Letters of St. Leo and the rest is a hotch-potch of passages out of the second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians according to the Vulgar Version In fine this Letter is contrary to History to Ingenuity and good Sense To History because Anastasius assures us that John perform'd this Embassy to Ingenuity because John should not have undertaken this Negotiation if he had a mind to desire of Justinus that which was contrary to his Trust. In fine It is contrary to good Sense for nothing can be more ridiculous then this Inference I have consecrated the Churches of the Arians in the East under a Christian Emperor who desir'd it Therefore you ought to consecrate them in Italy in spite of an Arian Prince who will be provok'd by so doing utterly to destroy the Catholick Churches A delicate Consequence FELIX the Fourth Bishop of Rome AFter the Death of John the Holy See was vacant for almost two Months and at last Theodoric Felix IV. Bishop of Rome caus'd to be chose in his room Felix the fourth of that Name who continued in the Holy See until the twelfth day of October in the Year 529. There are three Letters which go under the Name of this Pope but the two first are manifestly supposititious being nothing but a Collection of Passages patch'd together out of the Letters of St. Innocent St. Leo St. Gregory and the forged Letters to St. Clement and Damasus The third which is addres'd to Caesarius Bishop of Arles was some time attributed to Felix the Third because of the Name of the Consul Boetius which is found in it altho Caesarius was not yet Bishop under that Consulship But F. Sirmondus has found in a Manuscript the Name of Mavortius instead of that of Boetius which discovers that this Letter is Felix the Fourth's and of the Year 528. There he approves the Canon made by the Bishops of the Gauls wherein it was forbidden to promote a Lay-man to the Priesthood unless he were first tried BONIFACE the Second Bishop of Rome Bonif. II. Bishop of Rome BOniface the second of that Name the first Pope of the Nation of the Goths was promoted to the Holy See under the Reign of King Alaricus on the fourteenth day of October in the Year 529. At the same time one part of the Clergy chose Dioscorus who was formerly one of the Deputies sent into the East by Hormisdas Boniface was Ordain'd in the Church of Julius and Dioscorus in that of Constantine But this last died the twelfth day of November Boniface seeing himself left in sole possession us'd his utmost endeavours to bring over those who had been of the other Party he threatned them with an Anathema and forc'd them to subscribe He call'd together the Clergy and condemn'd the Memory of Dioscorus accusing him of Simony He proceeded yet further and as if it were not enough for him to be secur'd of the Holy See for himself he would also appoint himself a Successor and having call'd a Synod he engag'd the Bishops and Clergy by Oath and under their Hands that they should choose and ordain in his room the Deacon Vigilius after his Death This being against the Canons he himself acknowledg'd publickly his Fault and burnt the Writing which he extorted from them To this Pope there is attributed a Letter to Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria wherein he writes to him that the Bishop of Carthage was re-united to the Church of Rome supposing that he had been separated from it ever since the time of Aurelius But as little as is known of the History of these times this Piece appears to be supposititious For every one knows that Aurelius and his Collegues were always closely united to the Church of Rome and that their Successors did never separate from it Besides that there never was any Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria and that the Impost or who contriv'd this Letter supposes it written under the Empire of Justin who was dead before Boniface was promoted to the Holy See But tho he had not so plainly fail'd in History it were easie to discover his Imposture by observing that this Letter is compos'd of Passages taken out of the Letters of St. Leo Hormisdas and even out of the Letter of St. Gregory who was not promoted to the See of Rome till many years after Boniface This Letter therefore is the Work of an Impostor as well as that Libel of this Eulalius wherein he Excommunicates all his Predecessors and all his Successors and all those who shall infringe the Priviledges of the Roman Church For excepting this impertinent passage the rest of this Writing is taken out of St. Gregory and Hormisdas The Date of the Consuls agrees to a year wherein Boniface was dead The only true Letter of Boniface is that which is address'd to Caesarius of Arles who had written to his Predecessor against the Opinion of some Bishops of the Gauls who said that the beginning of Faith should be attributed to Nature and not to Grace and at the same time had pray'd for the removing of all difficulties that it might be confirm'd by the Authority of the Holy See That Faith and the first Motions of the Will to that which is good were inspir'd by preventing Grace Boniface answers him That it is a manifest Truth that we can neither desire nor begin any Good nor have Faith but by the Grace of Jesus Christ. He commends the Bishops of France who had approved this Doctrine and hopes that others would submit to it This Letter is dated the 25th of January under the Consulship of Lampadius and Orestes in the Year 530. The Date of it shews that Boniface was promoted to the Holy See in the Year 529 and that Felix had the Pontificat a year less then is noted in Anastasius In the Year 531 Boniface held a Council about the Petition of Stephen Bishop of Larissa concerning the Rights of the Popes of Illyricum We shall speak of it hereafter in the Acts of this Council His Epistles are printed Concil Tom. 4. p. 1684. Cave p. 402. JOHN the Second Bishop of Rome JOHN sirnam'd Mercurius a Roman by Nation the Son of Prejectus was Ordain'd Bishop of Rome on the 22th of January in the Year 532 and govern'd this Church two Years and some John II. Bishop of Rome Months Immediately after his Promotion the Emperor Justinian wrote him a Letter which he sent by two Bishops call'd Hypatius and Demetrius wherein after he has testified his Respect for the Holy See he informs him that some Persons would not believe that Jesus Christ the only Son of God who was born of Mary and who was crucified is one of the Persons of the Trinity which gave just cause of Suspicion that they were of Nestorius's Judgment He
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
needless to discuss the Writings of Theodorus of Mopsuesta who died a long while ago in the Communion of the Church that his Memory is struck at for no other reason but because he was commended in the Letter of Ibas approv'd in the Council of Chalcedon but then he was also commended and approv'd while he was alive by the Fathers of the Church as by John Chrysostom by St. Gregory Nazianzen by John of Antioch by Domnus and even by a Synod of Oriental Bishops held at Antioch That the Writings of Theodoret and the Letter of Ibas would not be condemn'd but only to lessen the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon and that the chief reason why the Letter of Ibas is attack'd is because it clearly distinguishes the two Natures in the Person of Jesus Christ That the reason which they make use of for condemning it Because St. Cyril is abus'd in it is a vain pretence since they say nothing of Gennadius of Constantinople and Isidore who have spoken much worse of this Father That in short they cannot condemn this Letter of Ibas because the Council of Chalcedon having examin'd it did not think it convenient to condemn it and so much the rather since St. Leo and the Synodical Assemblies of the Eastern Churches had declar'd that nothing must be added to the Decisions of this Council That it was needless to wait for the Judgment of Vigilius since he could not depart from the Sentiments of his Predecessor having receiv'd his Soveraign Power for Edification and not for Destruction and he had no Power against the Truth but only for the Truth In the third Book he defends particularly Theodorus of Mopsuesta In the first place he remarks That he cannot be condemned without accusing the Council of Chalcedon or St. Leo of Error or Negligence After this he maintains That the Doctrine of this Bishop was very Orthodox and that he condemn'd the Error of Paulus of Samosata and Nestorius and he proves from his Writings that he rejected these Errors He asserts that the Creed which is attributed to him and was condemn'd in the Council of Ephesus is none of his He gives a good Sense to the Passages which are alledg'd to prove that he was in an Error he defends him also against that Accusation That he had subverted the Prophecies of Jesus Christ. In the fourth Book he maintains That we ought not to follow the Judgment of St. Cyril about the Condemnation of Theodorus since what he says against St. Chrysostom and Diodorus of Tarsus is not approv'd He shows that the Eastern Patriarchs acknowledg'd at first sight that the Condemnation of the three Chapters was invented only to lessen the Council of Chalcedon He complains That notwithstanding they had sign'd it and cowardly surrendred themselves to the Will of the Prince he remârks that Vigilius would not consent to it and that the greater part of the Western Churches oppos'd it The fifth Book is about the Letter of Ibas He pretends to prove That the Council of Chalcedon approv'd it that Ibas never deny'd his writing of it He affirms as to Theodoret That he had a Seat in the Council before the Condemnation of Dioscorus and Eutyches He shows that St. Leo approv'd all that was done in the Council except what concern'd the Pretension of the Patriarch of Constantinople From whence he concludes That after so solemn an Approbation by the Council and the Pope 't is not lawful to condemn this Letter He goes further in the sixth and seventh Book wherein he undertakes to justifie the Judgment of the Council by showing that the Letter of Ibas contains no Heresy and that he acknowledg'd two Natures and one Person in Jesus Christ. He confesses that in it he condemn'd St. Cyril and excus'd Nestorius But he maintains That this was by a mistake of the matter of Fact that the Council did not think it their duty to condemn him for this as an Heretick That it cannot be charg'd upon him as a Crime that he prais'd Theodorus of Mopsuesta since St. Chrysostom and St. Gregory Nazianzen had also prais'd him In the eighth Book he defends Theodorus first by showing that the Holy Fathers and the Eastern Bishops used Expressions like to those of Theodorus that 't is false that Proclus prâscribed him that the Eastern Bishops wrote to Theodosius and St. Cyril that he must not be condemn'd that Theodosius approv'd their Judgment that Domnus Bishop of Antioch prais'd him and declar'd that we must not blacken the memory of those Persons who died in the Communion of the Church that the Fathers and Bishops of his Time praised and esteem'd him that St. Cyril is the only Father who condemn'd him but his Judgment ought not to be prefer'd before all the others In the ninth Book he undertakes to justifie Theodorus by his Writings and to prove that be believ'd that Jesus Christ was God and that he acknowledg'd in him two Natures united in One Person only He explains some Expressions of this Author which may appear harsh He lays it down for a Rule that we must interpret obscure and ambiguous Places by those that are clear and evident In the tenth Book he shows That tho some places were to be blam'd in the Writings of Theodorus yet the Council had done well not to condemn him either because these places had not come to their knowledge or because they were capable of a good sense or lastly because it may be believ'd that they were added by his Enemies That tho it were evident that he was in an Error yet he ought not to be condemn'd as an Heretick since he was not obstinate in it and had shown himself to be of a tractable spirit by retracting what he had affirm'd That tho he had been more culpable yet Ibas might praise him for what he had written well That tho he had been accus'd Judicially in the Council yet he could not be condemn'd since he died in the Peace and Communion of the Church That Athanasius was not condemn'd for defending Dionysius of Alexandria that it is yet more easie to defend Theodorus of Mopsuesta That the Council had as much right to excuse Theodorus as St. Basil had to explain the passages of Gregory Thaumaturgus or St. Hilary to interpret the Expressions of the Councils of Antioch and Sirmium Lastly he reprehends four things in the Anathema pronounc'd against Theodorus of Mopsuesta against his Doctrine and those of his Opinion 1. That a Person is anathematiz'd who died in the Communion of the Church 2. That in anathematizing him all those who approv'd him are anathematiz'd 3. That all his Dogmes in general are condemned 4. That they do not only condemn those who are of his Opinion but those who have been of it In the eleventh Book he shows That the ancient Fathers us'd many Expressions altogether like those of Theodorus of Mopsuesta He produces their passages and argues very much upon them He observes that
Authority and others of a less perfects and others lastly which are of none at all The Authors of these Books are known either by their Titles or by the beginning of their Works Moses is the Author of the Pentateuque Joshua of the Book which goes under his Name Samuel of the first Book of the Kings There are Books in it whose Authors are altogether unknown as the Book of Judges of Ruth and the last Book of Kings Among these Books there are some written in Verse as the Psalms the Book of Job and some places of the Prophets and others in Prose The Order of the Books of Scripture is not different from ours This is what concerns the External Surface of the Scripture As to the Substance of the things which it teaches the Author observes that there are in it some Names that agree to the Essence and others to the Persons of the Trinity and among these there are some which precisely denote them and others only consequentially because they signifie the Operations which are attributed to them He gives Examples of them and shows what is common to the three Persons and what is particular to each Lastly he speaks of the Attributes which agree to God In the second Book he makes a particular Ennumeration of what the Scripture teaches concerning the Creatures and explains after what manner God governs them From thence he passes to what concerns the World to come He treats of the Figures of the Law and the fulfilling of Prophecies concerning Jesus Christ. Lastly he enquires How it may be prov'd that the Books of our Religion are Divinely inspir'd And he answers That it may be known by the Truth of them it self by the Order of Things by the admirable Agreement of Precepts by the Simplicity and Purity wherewith they are written That to these Characters we must add the Qualities of those that wrote them and who preach'd the Doctrine which they contain because it was not possible without the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit that Men should write of Divine things that simple Men should write of things so Sublime that Men so ignorant and plain should discover Truths so great and Subtil That the success of their Preaching was also a proof of the Truth of their Doctrine For how was it possible that Persons so despicable should Convert the whole World Reform the Doctrines of the Philosophers and Confound their Adversaries without the Assistance of a visible Protection from God Lastly That the Accomplishment of Prophecies and the Miracles which produc'd a Belief of our Religion were convincing Proofs of its Truth and that if at present no Miracles are wrought it is because there is no need of them because the Establishment of this Religion is a Miracle more then sufficient to prove it This is what is most useful in this Treatise which is to be found in the Bibliotheques of the Fathers LIBERATUS Liberatus LIberatus a Deacon of the Church of Carthage and a Defender of the three Chapters is the Author of an Historical Memorial of the Contests that arose about the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches He begins with the Ordination of Nestorius and ends at the fifth Council i. e. in 553. This Memorial therefore was not written by Liberatus till after the Year 560. It contains some very useful particulars of this History which are no where else to be found and Extracts of the Authentick Acts to justifie what he affirms This Work was publish'd by F. Garner in 1675. It is also in the fifth Tome of the last Collection of the Councils VICTOR of Tunona VIctor Bishop of Tunona in Afric was also one of the zealous Defenders of the three Chapters for which reason he was banish'd into Egypt and afterwards shut up in a Monastery at Constantinople Victor of Tunona Isidore of Sevil informs us That he made a Chronicon from the beginning of the World to the first Year of the Empire of Justin the younger wherein he plac'd in Order the Consuls the most memorable Events of War and the Holy Fathers of the Church We have nothing now remaining but one part of this Chronicon which begins where that of St. Prosper ends i. e. in the Year 444 and ends at the Year 565. In it he particularly describes what concerns the History of Eutyches and the Affair of the three Chapters Canisius was the first that caus'd it to be printed at Ingolstadt in the Year 1600 and since that Scaliger has inserted it into his Treasure of Time PAULUS SILENTIARIUS PAulus Cyrus Florus Chief of the Silentiarii of the Palace flourish'd towards the middle of the sixth Age. He made a long Poem containing a Description of the Temple of Sancta Sophia Pauluus Silentiarius which is printed at the end of the History of Cinnamus He wrote also many other excellent Poems says Dr. Cave out of Agathias De Rebus Justiniani Hist. Lit. p. 416. PELAGIUS the First PElagius after he had been a long time at Constantinople return'd into Italy with Pope Vigilius and was Ordain'd after the death of this Pope by two Bishops in the presence of a Priest of Pelagius I. the Church of Ostia This extraordinary Ordination and the suspicion that went about of him that he had been the cause of the death of his Predecessor induc'd many to separate from his Communion and brought upon him the hatred of the People To purge himself he mounted into a Chair after a solemn Procession from the Church of St. Pancratius to that of St. Peter and swore upon the Holy Evangelists and the Cross That he was no wise guilty of that whereof he was accus'd the People were satisfy'd with this Oath and with the Prohibition he made against giving Money for Ordinations Altho there was nothing remarkable that happen'd in the Church during the Pontificat of this Pope which lasted almost five years yet he has written many Letters The first address'd to Vigilius is a supposititious Piece made up of Passages patched together which are taken out of St. Leo Itachius the date whereof is false The second is address'd to Count Narses He prays him to assist Peter the Priest and the Deacon Projectus whom he had sent to Prosecute two Bishops of Italy who disturb'd the Order of the Churches and would appropriate to themselves all the Ecclesiastical Revenues In the third he exhorts the same Count to employ the Authority which his Office gave him for correcting and punishing the Bishops of Istria Liguria and the Country of Venice who had separated Agnellus from the other Churches for the Affair of the three Chapters He remarks That if they had any Complaints to make against the Decision of the Council of Constantinople they should send Deputies to the Holy See and not rend in pieces the Body of Christ by their Separation In the fourth Letter he inveighs vehemently against the same Bishops for their boldness in excommunicating Narses He exhorts him to
Ep. 30. Of the Apostolick Sees EUlogius Patriarch of Alexandria had written many things to St. Gregory in favour of the See of St. Peter St. Gregory observes to him in his Answer that they were the more grateful to him because they were written by one who sits also in the Chair of St. Peter himself and that he had done an Honour to himself by endeavouring to do one to the See of Rome That he should know that the Church was solidly founded upon the Firmness of the Prince of the Apostles from whence he had his Name of Peter and that to him the Truth it self said I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to whom he also said when you are Converted strengthen your Brethren without forgetting these other words Simon Son of Jona lovest thou me feed my sheep That upon this account though there were many Apostles yet there was but one See of the Prince of the Apostles which was raised in Authority above the rest because of the Primacy which he founded That this See is in three places at Rome the place where he finish'd his Course at Alexandria whether he sent his Evangelist St. Mark to supply the place and at Antioch where he continued seven years but that these three Sees are but one See which belongs to St. Peter on which three Bishops now sit which are in effect but one in him who pray'd That they may be one as I am in the Father and the Father in me B. 6. Ep. 37. The Form of Ecclesiastical Decisions HEre follow the principal Rules observ'd by St. Gregory in Ecclesiastical Decisions He Judg'd in the first place the Bishops of Italy Sicily and the Neighbouring Isles which immediately depended upon Rome as their Metropolis as for Example he cites Januarius Bishop of Calaris to Rome to come and purge himself of the Accusation charged upon him B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 36. He causes the Bishop of Syracusa to come to Rome B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 12. He cites Maximus Bishop of Salone B. 5. Ep. 3 25. Having depos'd the Bishop of Naples he writes to the Clergy and People of that City to choose another Bishop in his room B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 3. He requires his * The Defensores of St. Peter's Patrimony were certain Officers appointed by Popes in the Provinces for maintaining and taking care of the Patrimony of the Roman Church which Officers were afterwards appointed for Parochial Churches and are now call'd Churchwardens Spelm. Gloss. Warden in Sicily to send to Rome the Bishop of Messina and his Accusers B. 11. Ep. 32 33. The Bishops of the Vicariate of Rome were oblig'd to come every year to his Synod As to those of Sicily they came thither once in three years and St. Gregory assures them that he will be satisfied if they come but once in five years B. 6. Ep. 19. Yet to facilitate the dispatch of Affairs he makes Maximian Bishop of Syracuse his Legat into Sicily to whom he gives Power to judge of smaller Affairs on condition that he should reserve to him such as were of greater Consequence He Commissions the Bishop of Syracuse and four other Bishops to judge the Cause of Mellitus Bishop of the Isle of Malta B. 7. Ind. 2. Ep. 63. As to the other Bishops of the West who did not depend upon his Metropolis he would have them judged by a Synod of the Province without an Appeal to the Holy See He affirms that a Bishop of Afric should be judg'd by a Synod held in Afric B. 1. Ep. 82. He remits Paulinus of Tegesta to the Judgment of Columbus B. 10. Ep. 32. He affirms That a Bishop ought never to be Depos'd till his Cause has been first heard in a Synod B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 8 9. In case of an Appeal or where recourse is had to the Holy See he commonly commissions Judges upon the place whereof here follow some Instances Florentius Bishop of Epidaurus which is now Ragousa had been condemn'd by his Metropolitan without being judg'd or convicted in any Synod but St. Gregory declares that his Deposition ought not to take place but the Cause ought to be re-heard and decided in a Council He commissions Antonius to be present at this Decision B. 1. Ind. 4. Ep. 8 9. He remits to Columbus Bishop of Numidia the Judgment of two Bishops of Afric B. 5. Ep. 36. B. 10 Ep. 32. He Commissions one of his Wardens at Rome to draw up a Process and Judge the Bishop of Malaga B. 11. Ep. 52 53. The Judgment of this Deacon is related in the Letter 55 wherein he declares by virtue of his Commission that Januarius Bishop of Malaga was unjustly forc'd away He nulls all that had been done against him altho it was null in it self He ordains that the other Bishops who were guilty of this bold Invasion of another's Right shall be shut up in a Monastery to do Penance there that he who was Ordain'd in the room of Januarius shall remain depriv'd of the Priesthood and all Ecclesiastical Orders and that Januarius shall re-enter upon the Possession of his Bishoprick This Deacon pronounc'd the Sentence in the presence of the four Gospels and according to the Memorial of the Imperial Laws about the Decisions of Bishops St. Gregory remits to the Bishop of Vienna the Judgment of an Abbot of Cesena who was forsaken by his Bishop B. 12. Ep. 1. He Commissions Sigibert Bishop of Autun to determine the Differences between the Bishop of Turin and Tarentasia about the Parishes of their Diocese B. 7. Ind. 2. Ep. 120 121. He pretends also to have a Right of Reviewing the Causes which were decided in the East even after an Appeal The Affair of Hadrian Bishop of Thebes in Thessaly is too remarkable to be pass'd over here in silence This Bishop had been condemn'd by the Bishop of Larissa upon a Civil Affair and he had brought his Appeal but having recourse to the Emperors he was sent back to be judg'd before the Bishop of Corinth yet he was afterward forc'd to acquiesce in the Judgment of the Bishop of Larissa Some time after two Deacons who had been depos'd one for his Uncleanness and the other for Embezelling the Revenues of the Church accus'd Hadrian of suffering a Deacon of an ill Life altho he knew of his Disorders and of suffering Infants to die without Baptism The Bishop of Larissa condemn'd him now for a Criminal Affair as he had done before for a Civil Matter be appealed from this Sentence the Emperors caused the Informations to be communicated to Honoratus a Deacon who found none of these things true which they charged upon Hadrian Yet his Cause was remitted to the Metropolitan of the first Justinienna Primat of Illyria and Vicar of the Holy See This Bishop without exââ¦ing the Cause judicially confirm'd the Sentence of the Bishop of Larissa upon the ãâã of some Witnesses who declar'd that they had
given to ãâã Leander being lost in Spain Tagion Bishop of Saragosa was deputed in a Council held at Toledo under King Cyndesides to be sent to Rome to enquire for a Copy of it That this Bishop being arriv'd there and finding no satisfaction from the Pope who put him off from day to day pretending it was very difficult to find these Books of St. Gregory because of the multitude of Volumes that were in the Archieves of Rome at last this good Bishop went to Prayers in the Church of St. Peter and there appeared unto him the Apostles St. Peter St. Paul and their Successors and among the rest St. Gregory who drew near to him and show'd him the Study where the Books were which he enquir'd after This Relation which appear'd not till about 400 years ago appears to me of little credit a Of little Credit 'T is said in this Relation that St. Leander carried into Spain his Copy of the Books of St. Gregory upon Job But it appears by the Letters of St. Gregory that he himself sent it to him 2. 'T is no ways probable that the Pope would refuse Tagion a Copy of St. Gregory's Morals 3. 'T is also said in this Relation that Tagion enquir'd of St. Gregory where St. Austin was and that he answer'd him That he was not among the Successors of St. Peter and St. Paul whom he came to see but in a higher place This Reflexion the Vision and the whole History smells strong of a Fable The Pastoral of St. Gregory or his Book about the Care which Pastors ought to take of their Flocks was as well receiv'd as his Morals It was no sooner gone out of the hands of St. Gregory but it was sought for and valued by all those who had a love for Episcopacy The great Reputation it had got mov'd the Emperor Mauritius to desire it of Anatolius a Deacon of the Church of Rome who was at Constantinople Assoon as he had a Copy of it he gave it to Anastasius the Patriarch of Antioch who translated it into Greek St. Leander desir'd it of St. Gregory In fine this Book quickly spread over all the Churches and the Bishops look'd upon it as their Rule But chiefly those of France judg'd it so necessary that they ordain'd in many Synods held in the ninth Age that the Bishops should be oblig'd to understand it and to live according to the Rules prescribed in it And to the end that this Obligation might the more readily be remembred it was put into their hand at the time of their Ordination b Ordination The Council of Tours 3d. held under Charlemagne in the Year 81â Can. 3. Nulli Episcopo liceat Canones aut librum Pastoralis Curae à B. Gregirio Papa editum si fieri potest ignorare in quibus se debet unusquisque quasi in quodam speculo assidue considerare The Council of Chalons the second held under the same Emperor ordains Episcopi Canones intelligant librum B. Gregorii De Cura Pastorali secundum formam ihidem constitutam doceant praedicent Council the second of Aix la Chapelle under Lewis the Debonaire held in the Year 836 Counc 4. Convenit Sacerdotali Ministerio scire formam Evangelicam Monumenta Apostolica Canonum Instituta Normaâ Regulae Pastoralis à sanctissime Pontifice Gregorio editam ne juxta eundem sanctissimum virum ab imperitis quod absit Pastorale Magisterium aliqua temeritate usurpetur aut vilescat They us'd it for Reforming Discipline at the Council of Mayence in the Year 813 and in the second Council of Rhemes Can. 10. In the sixth Council of Paris held in 829 't is ordain'd that the Advices which St. Gregory has given in this Pastoral should be exactly follow'd 'T is not without reason that this Book is so highly valued in France for indeed it contains Instructions of great Importance and very good Rules about the Pastoral Office 'T is divided into four Parts After a Letter to John Bishop of Ravenna to whom St. Gregory address'd this Book because he had reprov'd him for refusing the Priesthood so obstinately He begins with showing what rashness it was for any one to undertake the Conduct of Souls who had neither the Capacity nor Knowledge necessary for discharging it well which he calls the Art of Arts and Science of Sciences He deplores the blindness of those who are so unhappy as to seek after Ecclesiastical Offices under pretence of promoting the Salvation of Souls by their Direction when indeed they have no other design but to satisfie their own ambitious desire of Honour of appearing learned and able men and of being exalted above others He bemoans the People who are under the Conduct of such ambitious and ignorant men who can neither instruct them by their Example nor by word of mouth He adds That this Ignorance of Pastors is often a Punishment of their disorderly Life and that God by a just Judgment suffers their Ignorance to be an occasion of Falling to those who follow them From those that are Ignorant he passes to those who have acquir'd Knowledge by their Industry but never reduc'd it into Practice and on the contrary have defil'd their feet by walking in a way unbecoming the Truths which they have learned He cannot endure those Men who are very forward to teach others that which they never practise and who are a Scandal to the Church by a Life perfectly contrary to the Truths which they teach He would have Pastors to be of such a Disposition as to despise the Glory the Dignities and the Prosperity of this World to fear neither the Terrors nor Threatnings of it to beready to suffer for the Defence of the Truth and to shun the Pleasures of this Life Altho he was perswaded that the Duties of the Pastoral Office wearied the Mind yet he would not have those Perlons who are fit to conduct Souls and may be useful to others by their Doctrine and Example to prefer their own Ease before the Care of Souls Upon this Principle he does equally reprove those whose Humility makes them shun Ecclesiastical Offices so as obstinately to oppose the Order of Providence and those who desire them passionately and importunately seek after them He would have him who has the Qualifications necessary for being a Guide of Souls to yield when he is urg'd to accept that Office and on the contrary he advises him who is not qualified never to engage himself tho he were never so much urg'd to accept the Office After he has laid down this Maxim he enlarges upon the particular Qualifications which belong to those who should accept of a Bishoprick and the Defects which should make others decline it In the second Part St. Gregory treats of the Duties of the Pastoral Office when one is promoted to this Dignity by lawful and canonical ways He shows that there ought to be a great difference between the Vertue of a
the second Syria wherein they accuse him of saying to his Readers who desir'd to be promoted to Holy Orders Unless ye hold your peace I will ordain you all Sub-deacons and when the crucified Man shall descend he shall not pluck you out of my hands of having made an ill use of the Church of having baptiz'd a Woman of a bad Life of holding immodest Discourses in the Church of entertaining frequently a Comedian Woman in private of wearing thro Pride a white Garment as a sign of his Innocence of spitting upon the Altar in the time of celebrating the Mysteries of refusing to baptize the Catechumens at the season of keeping about him a multitude of Women and committing Crimes with some of them of persecuting and anathematizing the Catholicks Lastly of establishing the Eutychian Heresie destroying the true Faith and subverting Discipline The Monks of Apamea complain'd also of the Outrages which he had committed against them Their Libel was read in the Council and then the Sentence of Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople and of his Council against Severus and Peter which was follow'd and confirm'd by that of Mennas and all the Bishops of the Council of Constantinople Justinian joyn'd his Authority to that of this Council and ordain'd by his Edict That the Sentence of the Council against Anthimus Severus Peter and Zoaras should be executed forbids them to continue at Constantinople condemned their Writings to the fire and forbade all Transcribers to write them for the future under the Penalty of having their Hand cut off Lastly He does most strictly forbid all those who held the Opinions of Nestorius Eutyches Severus or other Hereticks to stir up any Sedition or give any Disturbance to the Peace of the Church The Patriarch of Jerusalem having receiv'd this Law from the Emperor and a Letter from Mennas which acquainted him with the Sentence given at Constantinople assembled his own Council consisting of the Bishops of the three Palestines wherein the Condemnation of Anthimus Severus Peter and Zoaras was approv'd The History of the second Council of Constantinople which is commonly call'd the fifth General Council THe Commotions wherewith the Eastern Church had been toss'd after the Council of Chalcedon seem'd to be appeas'd by the Deposition of Anthimus and the Condemnation of Severus The Bishops of the great Sees were all of one and the same Communion and profess'd to follow the Doctrine of the Council of Chalcedon Egypt where the Error of the Eutychians had been more deeply rooted then in any other place was almost wholly recover'd from it's defection by the Care of Paul whom Mennas had ordain'd Bishop of Alexandria for this Bishop having obtain'd Orders of the Emperor address'd to the Governors and Intendants of the Province was careful and diligent to drive away all the Hereticks and to cause the Council of Chalcedon to be receiv'd in the Churches and Monasteries of Alexandria 'T is probable that Elias General of the Militia of Egypt did not favour Paul's undertaking which made this Bishop resolve to have him recall'd Psoius Deacon and Steward of the Church of Alexandria immediately acquainted Elias with the design which Paul had against him One of the Letters of Psoius falling into the hands of Paul he resolv'd to be reveng'd upon him to call him to an account for the management of the Churches Possessions and for this reason prosecuted him before the Governor call'd Rhodon This Magistrate put the Steward in Prison and caus'd him to be put to death some days after in Prison at the sollicitation of one nam'd Arsenus The Children and Kinsfolk of Psoius having desir'd Justice of the Emperor he remov'd Rhodon from the Government of Egypt and sent Liberius in his room whom he order'd to inform himself of this Murder Rhodon was not wanting in his own defence to say That he put Psoius to death by order of the Bishop Paul but he had no proof against him and there was proof that Arsenus was the cause of this Murder Nevertheless either because Paul was not fully justified or because he was accus'd of other Crimes he was banish'd to Gaza where he was depriv'd of the Pallium and depos'd by Pelagius Surrogate of the Roman Church and by three Bishops who ordain'd Zoilus in his room in the Year 539 or 540. Pelagius returning from this Dispatch of Affairs brought along with him some Monks of Jerusalem These Monks were call'd Eulogius Conon Cyriacus and Pancratius They brought with them some Propositions taken out of Origen's Books with a design to have them condemn'd with Origen himself Pelagius and Mennas supported their Pretensions out of a secret Aversion which they had to Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia a great Defender of Origen Justinian the Emperor being mightily pleas'd to find this occasion of judging in Ecclesiastical Matters caus'd to be presently drawn up a large Declaration against the Errors oâ Origen which he address'd to all the Patriarchs This Edict which was publish'd in the Year 541 is found after the Acts of the fifth Council altho it should precede them It begins with these words We have often earnestly desir'd to preserve the Christian Faith in its purity and to maintain the Catholick Church in peace And this was always our chief and greatest care being fully perswaded that it is the best means to preserve that Secular Empire which God has given us to conquer the Enemies of our State and to feel the happy Effects of the Divine Mercy in another Life Now tho the Enemy of Mankind seeks all occasions to destroy Men yet the goodness and mercy of God defeats all the Efforts of his Malice and by confounding his Enemies preserves his own Flock from the Infection and Desolation which he threatens it We speak thus adds the Emperor because we are told of some Persons who have not the Fear of God before their Eyes and who have forsaken the Rule of Truth without which there is no Salvation by departing from the Doctrine of the Scripture and of the Doctors of the Catholick Church who have maintain'd the Orthodox Faith and condemn'd all Heresies by adhering to Origen and maintaining his impious Doctrines like to those of the Arians Manicheans and other Hereticks After this Preface Justinian recounts the Errors which he ascribes to Origen The first is about the Trinity The second about the Plurality of Worlds The third about the Prae-existence of Souls The fourth That the Heavens and Stars are animated The fifth That the glorified Bodies shall be of a round Figure The sixth That the Torments of the Damned shall have an end After he has refuted these Errors he orders Mennas to call an Assembly of Bishops who shall meet at Constantinople and of Abbots of Monasteries and to cause them to Anathematize Origen and the Errors which he had noted before He forbids for the future to ordain Bishops or Abbots unless they do the same He adds That he has sent Copies of this Letter to
communicate with the Church of Constantinople nor receive the * A Confession of Faith composed by Sergius and put out by Heraclius as a compleat Rule of Faith whereby the Doctrine of one Will in Christ was established and imposed upon all Ecthesis nor the Type and tho' they urged him to communicate with the Bishop of Constantinople he said he would not He was brought again the Saturday following to the Palace of Constantinople and declared a new that he did Anathematize the Type and would not communicate with the Church of Constantinople that received it He said in that Interrogatory he was 75 years old and his Disciple 37. Next after these first Acts there be two Letters the one Greek and Latin written by Maximus to his Disciple the other Latin which is Anastasius's to the Monks of Cagliari S. Maximus relates in the first that they would have forced him to say That there are two operations in Christ but that they make but one because of the Unities which he would not do In the second Anastasius does also reject that Opinion and protests against the Violence used against them The second part of the Acts contains the Conference which Theodosius Bishop of Caesarea had with Maximus at Byzias in the Presence of the Emperor's Commissioners in which Maximus declares to him that he could not communicate with the Church of Constantinople in regard she received the Novelties of the Monothelites Theodosius promised him That if he would communicate with the Bishop of Constantinople they would reject the Type He maintained That that was not enough and that they ought first to receive the Condemnation made by the Synod of Rome held under Martin Theodosius reply'd That that Council was not valid as having been assembled without the Emperor's Order Maximus answered There were many Synods assembled by the Emperors Orders which he did not receive as those held by Constantius against the Faith of the Nicene Council and that they did receive that which had deposed Paulus Samosatenus notwithstanding it was held without the Emperor's Order that it was ordered by the Nicene Council That every year two Councils should be held in the Provinces without speaking of the Emperors Orders and lastly That which moved them to approve and receive Councils was the Truth of the Doctrine they established This brought the Dispute to the Doctrine of the one Operation only Theodosius undertook to prove it by supposititious Passages of Pope Julius of S. Athanasius and of Gregory Thaumaturgus but Maximus having answered him they were Apollinarius's he produced two more under S. Chrysostom's name which Maximus maintained to be Nestorius's and proved it immediately Then he explain'd a Passage of S. Cyril after which it came again to be disputed whether they should say One or Two Operations and at last Theodosius said he was ready to sign That there were Two Natures Two Wills and Two Operations in Christ. Maximus reply'd It did not belong to him who was but a Monk to exact Professions of Faith from Bishops but that if they were really of that Mind they might write about it to the Bishop of Rome and that though they were agreed in the Doctrine he could not communicate with them till they had blotted out of * Diptychs the Sacred Tables which they recited at the Altar the Names of those who had been anathematized in the Council of Rome notwithstanding that he did advise them That the Emperor should send an Address to the Bishop of Rome and the Patriarch a Synodical Decree agreeable to the Orthodox Doctrine Theodosius promised him that it should be done yea and engaged him in case he were sent thither to go along with him Being agreed about that they went to Prayers and p Kissing the Gospels Cross to confirm their mutual Promises These Ceremonies are also the product of the superstitious Worship which was established in this Age. For the Christians in the purer Ages confirmed their Oaths and Promises by kissing the Gospels testifying not only their belief of them but their fear of falsifying their Words left they offended the God therein revealed and incurred the Punishments threatned to Falshood and Perjury But when the Christians did as it were deifie the Martyrs Cross and Images they used the same Ceremony toward the Cross as having an equal Fear and Reverence for that as for God himself and his Holy Gospel kissed the holy Gospels the Cross and the Virgin 's Image and touched them to confirm their mutual Promises After that having discoursed about some Points of Morality Theodosius ask'd Maximus whether they could not say in a good sence That there was but one only Will in Christ by reason of the Union of the two Wills Maximus affirmed That they could not Theodosius and they that were present seem'd to approve his Sentiment and the Reasons he gave for it Having parted good Friends in appearance the Emperor Constans sent an Order to the Proconsul Paul to remove the Abbot Maximus from Byzias and to bring him to the Monastery of S. Theodorus near Rhegium The next day Theodosius came to him accompanied with two Noblemen Epiphanius and Troilus This last asked him whether he would do what the Emperor should command him He answered he would obey his Orders in all things concerning secular Affairs but when they told him it was the Emperor's Will That he should approve the Type and if he did do it they would lead him to the great Church of Constantinople and receive the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ with him and own him for their Father He complain'd to Theodosius That they did not make good what they had promised Theodosius answering That the Emperor was against it Maximus declared That the very invisible Powers could not force him to do what they required of him This Answer provoked the fury of the Company against him so that they abused him But at last Theodosius having appeased the Tumult Epiphanius asked Maximus why he dealt with his Prince and Church as Hereticks seeing they owned two Wills and two Operations in Christ Maximus reply'd That if it was so they should not urge him to sign the Type Epiphanius answered That that was done by a kind of Condescension Maximus maintain'd stoutly That they ought to declare aloud and firmly the Orthodox Faith Epiphanius ask'd him whether he had subscribed a Profession of Faith against them He said he had Hereupon Epiphanius threatned him which he did not seem to matter much The next day the Consul Theodosius delivered him into the Hands of the Soldiers which brought him to Salembria and then to Perbera till at last he was condemned to have his Tongue cut out Combefis hath added to these Acts some pieces collected by Anastasius relating to the Life and Actions of S. Maximus An Invective made by a certain Monk against the Cruelty used against him and some Extracts of S. Maximus's Offices taken out of the Books of the Greek
Sophronius Bishop of Jerusalem might be read which was read And after that the Writing which Macarius had directed to the Emperor although contrary to the Custom he had sent it to Rome and to Sardinia before it was read in the Senate At the end of this Session the Emperor declared That being called out by State Affairs he had ordered two Noblemen and two * Persons who had been formerly Consulâ Exconsuls to be present in his stead at the following Sessions at which he was not in Person except the last In the twelfth Action held the 20th of March they read a long Memoir of Macarius's Act. xii containing the Letters of the Bishops of his Party The first is a Letter of Sergius to Cyrus in which he consults him about the Emperor's Prohibition of admitting two Wills in Christ. He answers him That Question was not decided by any Council That S. Cyril and Vigilius own but one Will yet that the two Wills ought not to be condemned if it was found that some of the Fathers had spoken of them The second is a Letter of Sergius to Pope Honorius in which he maintains That they ought to forbear speaking of one or two Wills The third is Honorius's Answer to the former Letter which approveth the Suppressing of those Expressions which he thinks to be new nothing of them being found in the Scripture in the Councils nor in the Fathers These Letters were examined from the Originals kept at Constantinople and being found true and genuine it was ordered that they should be examined in the following Actions The Judges asked the Emperor Whether Macarius might be restored in case he should repent and alter his Mind The Council required That by reason of the heady Zeal which he had shewed he should remain deposed without Hope of Restauration and be banished and the Clergy of Antioch desired another Bishop might be put in his room In the thirteenth Session of the 28th of March Sergius and Honorius's Letters were read over again They declared That this last had wholly followed Sergius's impious Doctrine Act. xiii and they anathematized him The Judges asking Why they did also condemn Cyrus Pyrrhus Peter and Paul The Council answered immediately That their Heresy was manifest and that Pope Agatho did sufficiently discover it Nevertheless it was agreed upon That their Writings should be examined Therefore they immediately read two Letters of Cyrus to Sergius the Capitula he had got the Theodosians to subscribe some Extracts of his Sermons and of Theodorus's a Writing of Pyrrhus's some Letters of Peter and Paul of Constantinople proving that those Bishops admitted but one Will and one Operation in Jesus Christ hereupon the Council declared That Agatho had justly condemned them that they also did condemn them and reject their Errors and would have their Names blotted out of the Dypticks As for the Successors of Paul Thomas John and Constantine they read their synodical Letters and nothing was found in them contrary to the Faith George Library-keeper of Constantinople swore That they had not put Men to subscribe that there was but one Operation in Christ therefore they were absolved This Action ended with the Reading of the second Letter directed to Sergius and Cyrus in which he does equally reject the Opinions of one or of two Wills in Jesus Christ and intimateth That Sophronius Patriarch of Jerusalem promised him to speak no more of two Wills provided that Cyrus Patriarch of Alexandria would speak no more of one Will. In the next place they read three Writings the one under the Name of Mennas to Vigilius and the other under the Name of Vigilius to the Emperor Justinian and the Empress Act. xiv Theodora which they maintained to be supposititious George the keeper of the Rolls or Library-keeper brought out a Copy of the fifth Council in which they were not found It was made appear That the Mââ¦thelites had added those Writings which were not subscribed as the rest of the Acts of the Council were and George a Monk of the Patriarchate of Antioch who had written them having owned his own Hand declared that Stephen Macarius's Disciple had got him to transcribe those three Writings telling him That the Copies of the fifth Council where they were not found were defective Paul of Constantinople had caused the same Addition to be made to the Latin Copy of the fifth Council which was acknowledged by Constantine a Presbyter who transcribed it These Writings were condemned and the Composers of them Afterward they examined a long Passage of a Sermon of S. Athanasius upon these Words Nunc anima mea turbata est valde in which the Doctrine of the two Wills is strongly maintained In the fifteenth Action of the 26th of April Polychronius a Presbyter and Monk presented a Confession of Faith figned by him wherein he owned but one Will in Christ. Act. xv He said That he had been confirmed in this Opinion in a Vision by a tall Man clad in white full of Brightness and Majesty who told him 'T was an unchristian thing to think otherwise He had seduced several Persons and was so zealous in his Opinion that he promised to raise a dead Man to Life again to prove the Truth of his Doctrine notwithstanding he attempted it in vain and made himself to be laughed at and to be anathematized by the Council which deposed him In the sixteenth Session held the 9th of August Constantine a Presbyter of Apamea the Act. xvi Metropolis of the second Syria being come to give an account of his Faith said That he did confess two Natures in Jesus Christ and the Properties of both his Natures that he did not question so much as the two Operations but he could own but one Will of the Word They asked him Whether he would not admit an human Will also He confessed That Jesus Christ had a natural human Will till he was crucified but since his Resurrection he had it no more and as he put off his Mortal Flesh his Blood and the Weakness of the Humane Nature by the same Reason he had no more a Humane Will according to Flesh and Blood He declared That Macarius was of this Opinion and persisting in it himself he was condemned by the Council as an Apolinarist George Patriarch of Constantinople did then require in his own Name and in the Name of the Bishops of his Patriarchate That they would spare if it were possible the Names of his Predecessors and not comprehend them in the Anathema's But the Council declared That since they had been blotted out of the Dypticks they ought also to be anathematized every one by Name In the seventeenth Action they propounded the Definition of Faith which was read over Act. xvii again approved and signed in the eighteenth held the 16th of September 681. Indict X. at which the Emperor was present in Person They received the Definitions of the five first General Councils and
the Clergy and People of the Metropolis of Reims with the consent of the Abbots and Monks of his Monastery A year after his Ordination the Emperor Lotharius who favoured Ebbo who was Deposed meerly because he had put Lewis the Kind to Penance and hated Hincmarus whom he looked upon to be wholly for Charles the Bald King of France endeavoured to revoke the Sentence passed upon Ebbo and restore him supposing that some did not acknowledge Hincmarus to be their Lawful Bishop of Reims To this end he wrote to the Pope and obtain'd a Letter from him wherein he gave Gonbaldus Archbishop of Rouan Commission to examine this Affair with such Bishops of the Kingdom as he should think ht to choose who should meet at Treves and having cited Hincmarus examine him before the Popes Legats who should be present After Easter Hincmarus went to the Council and waited for the Popes Legats till the time appointed After this Gonbaldus Summoned Ebbo who not daring to appear left Hincmarus in quiet possession of the Archbishoprick of Reims He governed that Church almost thirty years for he Died not till Dec. 21. 882. He had a great share in all the Affairs which were transacted in that time in the Church of France and as to his own particular had no small difficulties to extricate himself out of in which he shewed a great deal of Wit Diligence and Courage Being endued with these Qualities he was pleased to meet with so good an occasion of signalizing himself by the Condemnation of Gotteschalcus he first heard him himself and resolved with himself Council of Quiercy to present him before the Council of Bishops that was to meet with the Parliament appointed by Charles the Bald at Queircy which was the Kings Palace in the Diocess of Reims And that things might be done in the better order he gave Rhotadus notice of it to be present there because he was the properest Judge of Gotteschalcus Wenilo Archbishop of Sens was present with Hincmarus and 11 other Bishops among whom were Rhotadus Bishop of Soissons two Suffragan Bishops of whom Rigboldus who Ordain'd Gotteschalcus was one and three Abbots viz. Paschasius Rathbertus Abbot of Coââ¦by Bavo Abbot of the Monastery of Orbez where Gotteschalcus was a Monk and Hilduinus Abbot of Hautevilliers Gotteschalcus having been questioned in their presence and maintained the same Opinions which he had done at Mentz with the same obstinacy and incorrigibleness casting some reflexions upon his Enemies was condemned for an Heretick degraded from his Priesthood which he had received from Rigboldus Suffragan of Reims without the knowledge of his Bishop and moreover for his obstinacy was condemned according to the Laws Canons of the Council of Agatha Can. 38. and Constitutions of S. Bennet to be beaten with Rods and Imprisoned as the Bishops of Germany had before ordered Hincmarus fearing that Rhotadus had not power enough to see this Sentence executed and so he might escape took care to shut him up in a Monastery of his Diocess The Judgment passed against Gotteschalcus was delivered in these words Brother Gotteschalcus know that thou art deprived of the Sacred Office of Priesthood which if thou hast ever received you have managed contrary to all Rules and Profaned to this day by thy Manners disorderly Actions and corrupt Doctrines And that by the Judgment of the H. Spirit of whose Grace the Priesthood is a special Gift and by the Virtue of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ thou art utterly for bidden to offieiate in any Office of it for the future Moreover because thou hast intermeddled with Ecclesiastical and Civil Affairs contrary to the Profession and Duty of a Monk and in contempt of the Ecclesiastical Laws we do by Virtue of our Episcopal Authority Order and Command that according to the Rules of the Church thou be severely Scourged and afterwards shut up in a close Prison And that thou may never Teach again to infect others we enjoyn you perpetual silence in the Name of the Eternal Word Thus was Gotteschalcus Condemned in the presence and with the consent of his Bishop Abbot him that Ordain'd him and of those who were well affected to the Doctrine of S. Austin which shews that he had an injury This Sentence which was pronounced against him was Executed with the utmost severity for he was Whipped in the presence of the Emperor Charles and the Bishops till he cast out of his Gotteschalcus Punished and Imprisoned own Hand into the Fire a Book wherein he made a Collection of such Texts of Scripture and Testimonies of the Fathers as proved his Opinion after which he was kept close Prisoner in the Monastery of Hautevilliers in the Diocess of Reims Nevertheless Hincmarus that he might induce him to change his Opinion sent him a Writing in which he explained those places of the Fathers on which he grounded it and proved That God indeed knows them that shall be Reprobated for their Sins but hath Predestinated to Man to Evil and that his prescience is not the cause of any Mans ruin He sent him also a second Instruction but could not remove him from it Hincmarus also wrote to Prudentius Bishop of Troyes an Account of what had passed in the Judgment given against him and consulted that Bishop what he ought to do in case Gotteschalcus should Two Confessions of Faith made by Gotteschalcus continue obstinate whether he should deprive him of the use of Divine Service and the Communion What answer Prudentius gave to these Questions is not known but about the same time Gotteschalcus composed two Confessions of Faith one more long in which he confesseth That God hath not Predestinated any Man to Sin or Evil but to Good only which is of two sorts viz. The Rewards of his Favour and the Effects of his Justice That he hath freely Predestinated his Elect to Life Eternal and also hath Predestined the Devils and Reprobates to Eternal Death He grounds this Doctrine upon Consequences taken from Holy Scripture and assertions of the Fathers chiefly of S. Austin Gregory Fulgentius and Isidore That this Predestination is but one in it self though it hath respect to two Objects as Charity towards God and our Neighbour is the same Charity in two parts To prove himself no Heretick he brings a Definition of an Heretick out of S. Cassiodorus viz. He is a Person saith this Author who either out of Ignorance or Contempt of the Law of God defends a new Error or follows an old one He affirms That he holds nothing but what is agreeable to the Doctrine of H. Scripture and the Ancients and consequently the Definition of an Heretick doth not touch him He doubts not but he can prove the Truth of his Doctrine in an Ecclesiastical Assembly if he could be so happy as to have the liberty given him not only by his Discourses but also by casting himself into scalding Water Pitch or flaming Oyl without suffering any harm He
Adult Persons who are Baptized but are not of the number of the Elect are not true Members of the Church of Jesus Christ. In the fourth place he doth not like his words where speaking of Predestination he saith That the Devils and Reprobates are Predestined to Damnation so that none of them can be saved He affirms That this is an horrible Blasphemy against God and an Impiety that makes Sin necessary That God indeed foresees the Siâs of Devils and wicked Men without which they would be necessitated and that he hath not Destined them to eternal punishments but upon the prevision of their Sins which he knew they would commit freely Fifthly He abhors the Proposition delivered by Gotteschalcus that the Damned are as infallibly and irrevocably Predestined to Damnation as God is Infallible and Immutable And he laughs at that which he adds That the Bishops ought to exhort the Reprobate to Pray that tho' their Damnation is irrevocable yet their Torments may be less Sixthly He can't endure what he hath said That God and his Saints rejoyce at the Eternal Condemnation of the Reprobates He says That God rejoyces in their Destruction but not for it That he rejoyces not in their Evil doing but in the Exaltation of his own Justice Lastly He condemns his behaviour toward the Bishops by railing at them contemning them and calling them that are not of his Judgment Hereticks and Rabanists He chides him for being unconcerned at the separation of the Church which he had suffered a long time for exalting himself against his Spiritual Fathers the Bishops for submitting to no Authority nor desiring a peaceable Decision of the Controversie in hand with humility and for thinking himself the only Person enlightened and inspired by God to confirm the Truth He exhorts advises and conjures him to reflect upon himself return from his Errors to the Church and submit himself to the Bishops and gives him with a Fatherly goodness such other Counsels as were proper for him to follow This Epistle is Printed by Mauguin in Collect. Script 9 Saeculi Tom. 2. and with his other Works at the end of Agobardus's Works put out by Balurius at Paris 1666. Some have pretended that this Writing of Gotteschalcus which Amolo confutes in this Letter was Forged by Hincmarus whom they accuse of this Forgery but they have no proof of it and the two conjectures upon which they ground the Accusation are took weak to raise any Credit upon so that 't would be a very rash thing to condemn so illustrious an Archbishop of so scandalous a Crime without better proofs especially since we do not find any of the Favourers of Gotteschalcus to have laid any such thing to his Charge It is most reasonable for us to believe that Gotteschalcus composed this Writing privately and sent it to Amolo Archbishop of Lyons supposing that that Church would be more favourable to him because it was of S. Austin's Judgment about Predestination and Grace but since he strain'd his Opinions to too high and faulty a pitch and drew hard and unwarrantable Consequences from them 't is no wonder that Amolo gave him such an Answer which is written with all the insinuating Art possible to appease Hincmarus and oblige this Monk to make him satisfaction There is another small Piece which is annexed to this Letter to Gotteschalcus which is thought to be a fragment of the Letter written at the same time to Hincmarus in which he treats of Grace and Predestination In it he teaches us to believe that 't is Grace by which men are saved which is not given them according to their merits but through the pure and free Mercy of God which moves them to good not by Necessity but by their Will and Love That this Grace is given to Infants in their Baptism to Adult Persons and all the Faithful in all their Actions Thoughts and Words that are good because there is no good but is the gift of God That his Prescience is certain and that he foresees how all things will come to pass so that the number of the Elect is known to him and cannot be changed That the Predestination of the Just is of free Mercy and is not done in consideration of their Merits but that he hath justified and sanctified by his Grace in time all those who have been Predestinated from all Eternity through his meer Mercy that they may be holy and just That Perseverance is a Gift of God That our Free-will is so much weakened by Sin that it can't raise it self to the love of Truth and Justice if it be not excited healed and strengthned by the Grace which frees it He adds That this Doctrine needs not to cast us into Despair but gives us confidence in the Mercy of God That that which is found in S. Austin and some other Fathers that God hath Predestinated the Wicked to Damnation and eternal Death ought not to be understood as tho' God constrained them by his Power or Predestination to be Sinners and so Damned but in this sense That God hath Ordain'd by his just Judgment eternal punishments for those that he foresaw would continue in the Mass of Perdition by the Sin of Adam or who would make themselves subject to Damnation by their own voluntary Sins This fragment of Amolo's Epistle is also extant in the forementioned Edition of Agobardus Hincmarus seeing Amolo thus in a manner to condemn Gotteschalcus thought it convenient to write Hincmarus's Letter to the Church of Lyons to the Church of Lyons upon that subject Whereupon he wrote a Letter to him giving him an account after what manner Gotteschalcus was Judged and Condemned in two Councels and comprises his Doctrine under five chief Heads 1. That God hath Predestined from all Eternity those whom he pleaseth to the Kingdom of Heaven or Eternal Damnation 2. That they that are Predestined to Eternal Death can't be Saved and those that are Predestined to Eternal Glory can't be Damned 3. That God will not have all Men to be Saved and that the Apostles Words ought to be understood only of those that are Saved 4. That Jesus Christ came not to save all Men that he hath not suffered for all Men but for those only who are saved by the Mystery of his Passion 5. That since the Fall of Man no Man can keep himself safe by his own Free-will from the commission of Sin Pardulus Bishop of Laon wrote also to the Church of Lyons upon the same subject telling them that of those six Persons who had written upon these Questions none of them had sufficiently cleared them Some join to these Letters one of Rabanus's written to Notingus Pardulus's Letter is not extant to the Church of Lyons When these Letters were carried to Lyons Remigius who succeeded Amolo in the Archbishoprick of The Answer of the Church of Lyons to Hincmarus by Remigius Lyons wrote in the Name of his Church an Answer to three Letters
any thing they should teach others and which is necessary to render them capable of Instructing them That they ought to understand very well the Holy Scriptures not only the Historical part but be able to Expound the Figures and Mystical Sense of it That it is good for them to have a Tincture of other Arts and Sciences That they be Civil and Regular in their Manners and Affable and Courteous in their Speech That they be of an Acute Judgment and know how to apply proper Remedies to the different Diseases of the Soul He afterwards makes use of the words of St. Gregory the Great to Reprove those who undertake to teach others and Cure Souls without being very well instructed in their Duty themselves I mean such as enter into the Ministry meerly through the Prospect of Interest or Ambition and those that dishonour God by an Irregular Life whose Deportment does not answer their Doctrine He says That the Grounds and Perfection of Wisdom is the Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures which is an Emanation of the Eternal Wisdom of God and a Participation of his Truth That all the Wisdom and Truth that Men have and all that is to be found Profitable in Profane Writers is to be attributed to the Divine Wisdom which gave it a beginning That the Scripture has its Obscurities which are good to exercise Mens wits But there are scarce any Truths contained in one place which are not explained in another Nihil autem de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non plenissimè dictum alibi reperiatur This is taken from St. Austin's Treatise of Christian Doctrine as well as the rest of this Book which is nothing but an Extract from this Father excepting what he says upon the Seven Liberal Arts upon which he quotes a passage taken out of the Pastoral of St. Gregory The Book of Orders Holy Sacraments and Priests Habits which followeth this is almost nothing else but a Copy of the first of the three foregoing Books It is very near the same with the three Books of Ecclesiastical Discipline for the two first are nothing but an Abridgment of those of the Instruction of Clerks to which he has added some passages out of St. Austin In the last which is about the Christian Warfare he Treats of Vertues and Vices * Dr. Cave adds a third De Puritate Cordis Or the Purity of the Heart The two Books dedicated to the Abbot Bonosus of which the first is about the Vision of God and the second upon Penance are made up of passages out of the Fathers upon these Subjects The three Books of Questions about the Rules of Penance do not belong to Rabanus The first and second are Halitgarius's Bishop of Cambray and the third an unknown Author's The three Books of Vertues and Vices belong to the same Halitgarius who has also made a Penitential at the Request of Ebbo Arch-Bishop of Rheims divided into Five Books and published under his Name by Canisius These are not much different from the Five Books which here bear the Name of Rabanus But the Penetential dedicated to Otgarus Arch-Bishop of Mayence is certainly the Work of Rabanus which he composed towards the Year 841 before he was Bishop of Mayence This Tract is Printed alone at Venice 1584. Quarto The Name of a Penitential has also been given to the Letter which he wrote to Heribaldus Bishop of Auxerre published by Stewart in his Addition to the Antiquities of Canisius at Ingolstadt 1616. and by M. Balusius at the end of Regino at Paris 1671. But this is a Canonical Letter in Answer to some Questions propounded by that Bishop It is divided into Articles and quoted by Regino and the Collectors of Canons He there gathers together many Canons concerning the Penances of Homicides Adulterers Forsworn People Sorcerers and about the Punishments of those that commit any great Crimes after they are admitted into Holy Orders and about other Circumstances of Penance and Absolution But towards the end he Treats about two Questions much debated in his Time The First about the Eucharist whether it goes into the Draught A Question that has been spoken of before And the Second about Ebbo Old Arch-Bishop of Rheims who after his Deposition retired to Hildesheim in Saxony where he exercised his Episcopal Functions He says that he knows not whether he was justly or unjustly Deposed but nevertheless that it did not hinder him from doing the Duty of that Office For he has heard that he was afterwards re-established by the Holy See He adds That he had lately written thereupon to Hinemarus after he understood that he had removed from the Priesthood and Clerkship all those who had been ordained by Ebbo after his being deposed This Letter of Rabanus was written about the Year 853. a long time after the Penetential of which we have spoken before Rabanus's Letter to Humbert about the Degrees of Consanguinity within which 't is forbidden to Contract Marriage is also a Work of the same Nature In it after he hath related the Opinions of Theodorus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Isidorus he says 't is his Judgment that a Man may Marry after the fifth Degree of Consanguinity And that if there be any Marriages found within that Degree without their knowledge they were so near of Kin they might be suffered to continue married only enjoyning them Penance and exhorting them to live in Abstinence from the Marriage-Bed Humbertus not being satisfied with this short Answer sent him some new Questions about this Subject and also askt him what he thought of Fortune-tellers Divinations Rabanus Answers him in a longer Letter in which he shews that he was in the right to make use of the Chapter in Leviticus to Regulate the Degrees of Consanguinity within which it is forbidden to Marry Because that this Law related to Manners and that the Precepts of this kind have not been abolisht by Jesus Christ. He afterwards relates a passage of St. Austin which explains the passage of Leviticus Another passage in the Answer of St. Gregory to Austin the Monk and a great many Canons concerning the Degrees of Consanguinity in which it is forbidden to Contract Marriage In the Second Part after having spoken of the Artifices of Magicians or Sorcerers he concludes That we ought to take care how we apply our selves to them for the Cure of any Distemper or to find things that are stollen or lost In his Book Of the Soul he treats briefly contrary to his ordinary Custom about such Questions that respect the Original and Nature of our Souls He says also that it is a disputable Point whether God created it to be infused into our Bodies or whether it be produced from the Souls of our Fathers and Mothers He maintains that it is altogether Spiritual and has no particular Figure although its principal seat be in the Head He says it is not less in Infants than more aged Persons and that it is of the
he would have no Obsequies bestowed upon them nor any Sacrifice or Prayer offer'd for them In the 99th he permits such to be buried in the Church as have liv'd well The 100th approves of the Custom of carrying dead Bodies into their own Countries In the 101st he commends Alms. In the 102d he forbids doing violence to Pagans to convert them In the 103d he command them to burn the Books of the Sarazens The 104th is concerning the validity of Baptism administred by a Jew who had no Religion Nicholas the first answers That such ought not to be Re-baptized if he did confer it upon them in the name of the Trinity In the 105th he speaks of those that preach'd a Doctrine contrary to that of the Apostles He answers that they ought not to be heard But that it doth not belong to the Bulgarian Lay-men to judge whether the Doctrine be true or not In the last he exhorts them to take Instructions from none but the Church of Rome which always delivers the Truth to such as desire it These are the Decisions or Answers of Nicholas the first in this Work This Pope was a great Canonist He wrote readily and with Authority He often quoted the Canons and Decretals of the Popes He maintain'd the Grandeur of his See with vigour and manag'd the most difficult Matters he was concern'd in with Honour M. de Marca observes That he had done some Injuries to the Discipline and Liberties of the Church by maintaining that it was not lawful to assemble a National Synod without the consent of the Pope In attributing to himself the Appeals of the Clergies Cases determined in National Synods and also after a Review brought in Citing the Persons and Causes to Rome to be there determined anew instead of appointing Judges on the places and affirming that the Causes of Bishops wholly belong'd to his Cognizance But these Pretensions have not been acknowledg'd by the Church and particularly by that of France who have always kept to their Liberties without the least diminution of Respect and Submission due to the Holy See These Epistles are all put out in Tome VIII of the Councils After the death of Nicholas the first which hapned the 13th of November in the year 867. Adrian Adrian II. the second who was about 76 years of age was chosen in his place He was a Roman the Son of Talanius related to the Popes Stephen the fourth and Sergius the younger Gregory the fourth Ordained him Priest and gave him the Title of St. Mark His Liberality gained him a great repute in Rome and he was proposed to be chosen Pope after the death of Leo the fourth and Benedict the third And after the death of Nicholas he obtain'd it both by the Votes of the People who lov'd him and by the joynt consent of both Parties of Grandees Lewis the Emperour approved of his Election and he was Ordained the 14th of December He was at first suspected not to favour much the Memory of his Predecessor Nicholas the first because he seem'd not so severe towards Lotharius and Waldrada as he had been But he freed himself from this suspicion and re-united those to him that before had forsaken his Interest upon this account The beginning of his Pontificate was disturb'd by the Invasion of Rome which the Duke of Spoleto seiz'd on and harrass'd with Robberies and Plundering of his Soldiers But Rome was deliver'd both by the Authority of the Emperour who depriv'd the Duke of Spoleto of his own Dominions and the Thunderbolts of Excommunication which the Pope sent out against these Robbers A Peace was no sooner granted to the Church of Rome but the Affair of Photius was brought before Pope Adrian The Emperour Basilius having restored Ignatius sent some of his Officers to Rome to accompany the Deputies of Ignatius and Photius Those of Photius's side were drown'd for the most part and there appear'd in his behalf but one inconsiderable Monk call'd Methodius who durst not maintain his Cause and who suffer'd himself to be cited thrice and was at last condemn'd for Non-appearance But the Officer of the Greek Emperour and John Metropolitan of Caesaria in Cappadocia having presented to Pope Adrian the Transactions of the pretended Council which Photius had assembled against Pope Nicholas the first he caused them to be examined and condemned in a Council which pronounced an Anathema against Photius and had the Book burnt which he wrote against Pope Nicholas After this Adrian sent Legates to Constantinople to assist in his name at the eighth General Council They had at first all the satiââ¦ction they could wish but after the Council they enter'd upon the Affair of Bulgaria and after it was debated in their hearing judged that it ought to be subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople which troubled the Legates extreamly Wherefore having protested against and declared this Judgment null they immediately left the City dissatisfied And being but very meanly accompanied they fell into the hands of the Sclavonians who robbed them and took them Prisoners They soon after made an escape and came to Rome at the end of the year 870. There are five Letters of this Pope concerning the Affair of Ignatius and Photius in the Version of the Acts of the eighth Council done by Anastasius The three which follow relate to the Affairs of France and the Churches of Brittany to Lotharius and Weldrada Actardus Wulfadus and the other Clergy-men Ordained by Ebbo To the Kingdom of Lotharius on which Charles the Bald seiz'd after his death and which Adrian would have had been left to Lewis the Emperour To the pretended Privileges of Caroloman and to the Quarrel of Hincmarus Bishop of Laon with his Uncle It is not necessary to give any Extracts of these Letters in particular having spoken of them particularly elsewhere Adrian dyed the first of November in the year 872. He was naturally good and well temper'd zealous for Peace and for the welfare of the Catholick Church His Letters are written in a Style mixt with Gravity and Modesty Zeal and Humility he maintaining in every part of them his Authority without Affectation or Contempt of any Body He behaves himself towards those he had Business with according to the Rules of Honesty and Charity not Flattering them by a base Complaisance or Offending them by high Words nor Enraging them by his extraordinary Claims John the VIII was Arch-Deacon of Rome when he was rais'd to the Holy See it was in December 872. that he came to this Dignity at a time when all Italy began to be very much molested by the inroads of Barbarians and Divisions between the Dukes and Lords He was obliged to make a Treaty with the Sarazens to hinder their Invasions After the death of the Emperour Lewis the II. he set the Imperial Crown upon the Head of Charles the Bald in the year 875. and supported himself by his Protection as long as this Prince lived But having
gives us likewise the Life of St. Bernard compos'd by Alanus who from being Abbot of Larivoir was made Bishop of Auxerre in the year 1153. and retir'd Other Lives of St. Bernard to Clairvaux in the year 1161 where he dy'd in the year 1181. Also some Fragments of a third Life of St. Bernard which was believ'd to belong to Geofrey And a fourth Life of St. Bernard written toabout the year 1180 by John the Hermit who had liv'd with St. Bernard's Disciples He also Adds a Poem of the Monk Philotheus of the Life and Praises of St. Bernard with Verses likewise of other Authors in his Commendation And Lastly the Bull of the Canonization of this Saint together with the Testimonies that divers Authors had given of him which concludes this Volume He might also have put into this Volume the Letters of Nicholas of Clairvaux Secretary to St. Bernard Nicholas a Monk of Clairvaux Publish'd by Father Picart a Regular Canon of St. Victor and Inserted in the 22 Tome of the last Bibliotheca Patrum They are about 55. all full of wit and written in a very engaging Style but they contain nothing remarkable either on account of Doctrine or Church-Discipline This Nicholas after having left Clairvaux retir'd into his Monastery of Montier-Ramey where he dy'd about the year 1180. M. Baluze has also given us two of his Letters in the Second Tome of his Miscellaneous Works St. Bernard's Style is Lively Noble and Concise his Thoughts Sublime and his Diction Pleasant and Curious He equally abounds with good Matter Tenderness and Force He is sweet and Violent The Character and Judgment of St. Bernard He engages the Mind by his Insinuating Manner and touches the heart with his Movements His Exhortations are Pressing His Admonitions full of Gravity His Reprimands Efficacious His Reproaches so temper'd with good nature that it is easie to perceive that he is in Charity with the Person that he Rallies and reproves rather to correct than to insult or domineer over him He knows how to commend without Flattery and to tell Truth without Offending He diverts recreates and pleases He Instills dread and Inspires Love his knowledge is more useful and wholesome Doctrine than Curious Learning He is so full of the Holy Scriptures that scarce a Period passes but he has some words or expressions out of them St. Ambrose and St. Austin are those of the Fathers which he has follow'd most and which he considers as two Patterns that he is Indispensably bound to Imitate He also Understood very well the Canons and Rules of Discipline of the Church but he more particularly apply'd himself to Divinity and Morality His Moral Sentences are noble lively weighty and contain a great deal of sence in few words He is Ingenious and very fertil in Allegories He treats of Doctrines after the manner of the Ancients and not According to the Methods of the Scholasticks and Controversiaries of his Time which has gain'd him the Title of the Last of the Fathers Altho' he has taken most of his Thoughts from the Ancients yet has he manag'd them with so great Address that they seem to be his own He was in so great Reputation for Piety and Learning while he liv'd that all Potentates desir'd to have their Differences determin'd by him and they look'd upon his Decisions as Indispensable Laws The Proudest Kings and Princes have willingly condescended to obey him The Bishops not only had recourse to his knowledge but likewise regarded his Decisions as so many Oracles and have Referr'd themselves to him about the most Important Affairs of the Church The Popes themselves have taken his Advice and look'd upon it as the greatest support of the Holy See And all People had a very profound Respect and particular Veneration for his Person and Character In a word it may be said of him that even in his solitude he govern'd all the Churches of the West But what is most remarkable is that he knew how to join the Love of silence and a Retreat with so many Occupations and Employs as likewise a Profound Humility with so great an Elevation No Father of the Church has had his works so often printed as St. Bernard The First Edition is that of his Sermons on the Times and Saints Printed with his Book Dedicated to the Knights Templars in Editions of St. Bernards Works the year 1475 at Mayence by Peter Schoiffer About the same time the Treatise of Consideration the Apology to William Abbot of St. Thierry and The Treatise of Commands and Dispensations were printed at Rhoan In the year 1481. his Letters with his Sermons were Printed at Brussels This Edition was follow'd by that of Paris in the year 1494. which contains 310 Letters with his Sermons on the Canticles The Editions of Bresse of the year 1495. of Spire in the year 1501. and of Venice in the year 1503 are also very Imperfect That of Paris in the year 1508 contains almost all this Saints Works They were Collected by the care of John Bouchard and Printed by John Petit. In the year 1515 Josse Clictou Printed them at Lyons with the Sermons of Gilbert de Hoiland on the Canticles This Edition has been several times Reprinted at Paris and Lyons In the year 1520 two Monks of Clairvaux Publish'd a New Edition of St. Bernard's Works more correct than the former Printed the First time at Lyons Some time after Francis Comestor of the College of Sorbonne revis'd the works of this Saint and Printed a new Edition at Paris in the year 1547. Whilst this Edition was selling and Reprinting Anthony Marcellin publish'd another at Basil in the year 1552. In which St. Bernards works are rang'd after a New Order and Divided into four Parts The First containing his Sermons The Second his Letters The Third his Treatises and the Fourth his suppos'd Works In the year 1566 Francis Comestor's Edition was Re-printed as Printed with the Additions found in the Edition of Basil and some other Treatises After this John Gillot undertook to present the Publick a New Edition of St. Bernard's Works more Correct and more Ample than the former This was Printed at Paris by Nivelle in the year 1572. and afterwards Re-printed several times particularly in the year 1586. In the beginning of the following Century Edmund Tiraqueau a Monk of Cisteaux publish'd a new Edition of St. Bernard's Works in the year 1601. And Eight years after John Picart gave another which was reprinted several times at divers Places At length James Merlon Horstius labour'd seriously to get a good Edition of this Fathers works and after a considerable time and a great deal of pains taken he Produc'd one and Printed it in the year 1641. This Edition was receiv'd with Applause and Reprinted in divers Places Nevertheless Horstius having past over several Faults in the Text which might be corrected by Assistance of the Manuscripts Father Chantelon of the Congregation of St. Maur
Power at all 4. That the Holy Ghost does not partake of the Substance of the Father and the Son in the same manner as the Son does of the Substance of the Father 5. That the Holy Ghost is Anima mundi i. e. the Soul of the World 6. That one may do either Good or Evil by one's own free Will without the Influence and Assistance of the Grace of God 7. That Jesus Christ was not made man and did not suffer to deliver us from the Bondage of the Devil 8. That Christ as God-Man is not one of the three persons of the Trinity 9. That in the Sacrament of the Altar the form of the Substance of Bread and Wine which was there before the Consecration remains the same afterwards 10. That he maintains that the Suggestions of the Devil are infus'd into Man by Physical Causes 11. That we do not contract the Guilt but the punishment only of Original Sin 12. That there is no Sin unless in the Consent we give to Sin and in the Contemning of God 13. That there is no sin of Concupiscence Lust or Ignorance These are the Articles which William Abbot of Thierry says that he drew out of the Book of Abaelard's Divinity He adds that he heard say that he had written likewise several other Opuscula whereof one was Intituled the Yea and the No another Know thy self and several others the Doctrine of which he was affraid was as Monstrous as the Titles were extraordinary and singular After this Letter William writes a Treatise levell'd expressly against those Errors which is to be met with in the Library of Cisteaux and to which this Letter serves as a Preface Saint Bernard return'd William this Answer that he perceiv'd that the Zeal which he express'd against the Errors of Abaelard was reasonable and necessary and that the Book which he had compos'd to refute him seem'd very useful tho' he had not as yet time but only to read it cursorily and not exactly but that since this was a business of great Consequence he desir'd to have a Conference with him about it which yet he thought could not be before Easter for fear of interrupting his Devotions in the Season of Lent That besides he would not have been so long silent if he had had a perfect Knowledge of the Errors of Abaelard When he was inform'd of them and had examin'd Abaelard's Book himself he very charitably admonish'd him to retract his Errors and to correct his Books and advis'd his Disciples to read them no more This Admonition serv'd only to exasperate Abaelard who made loud complaints against Saint Bernard So that this Saint perceiving that the private Admonition which he had given him prov'd ineffectual he thought it his Duty to tell it the Church and wrote against him to Innocent II. and to several Prelates of the Court of Rome accusing him of making Degrees in the Trinity with Arius of preferring Free-Will before Grace with Pelagius of dividing Jesus Christ with Nestorius by excluding him out of the Number of the persons of the Trinity He exhorts them warmly to oppose those Errors and Condemn them This is the Subject matter of the hundred and Eightieth the three hundred and thirtieth the three Hundred and thirty first thirty second thirty third thirty fourth thirty fifth and thirty sixth Letters of Saint Bernard Abaelard seeing himself thus accus'd made his Application to Henry Arch-Bishop of Sens and The Decrees of the Council of Sens against Abaelard intreated him that he would summons Saint Bernard to the Council which was to be held that so he might enter into dispute with him about the Principal Errors which he imputed to him The Arch-Bishop of Sens wrote to Saint Bernard to come on the day appointed on the Octave of Pentecost in the year 1140 to the Synod that he might enter into a Conference with Abaelard in presence of the Bishops Saint Bernard made some Scruple at first of coming thither whether he thought as he said that he was too strong for him in Disputes or whether he thought that the truths of the Christian Faith ought not to be expos'd to the Argumentation of Humane Reasonings He at first answer'd that the Writings of Abaelard were sufficient to convince him and that it was not his Business but the Bishops to whom of right did belong the Determination of the Doctrines of Faith Abaelard made an Advantage of this Refusal and spread abroad that he would be at Sens on the day appointed to answer Saint Bernard Upon this Saint Bernard's Friends fearing that his Absence would prove an Offence to the People and create a Confidence in his Adversary and confirm his Error advis'd him to go to the Council of Sens. He advertises the Bishops and his Friends of it in a Circular Letter which is his hundred and Eighty seventh and exhorted them to undertake the Defence of a Cause which was more properly their than his own The Bishops met at Sens on the Octave of Whitsontide when the Relicks were to be shown in the Cathedral Church of that City All the Bishops of the Province of Sens met there except the Bishops of Nevers and Paris viz Geofrey of Chartres Legate of the holy See Elias of Orleans Hugh of Auxerre Hatto of Troyes Manasses of Meaux Sampson Arch-Bishop of Rheims was likewise there with three of his Suffragans viz Josselin Bishop of Soissons Geofrey of Chalons and Alvisus of Arras a great many Abbots Deans and persons of Learning and Piety were likewise there The King himself Lewis the Young was likewise present with William Count of Nevers The Council being set Saint Bernard produc'd there Peter Abaelard's Book recited the Erroneous or Absurd Propositions which he had extracted thence and urg'd Peter Abaelard either to disown that he had writ them or if he would acknowledge them to be his to prove or retract them Peter Abaelard had recourse to shifts and would not answer expresly thô ' he had Liberty given him to do it had very favourable Judges and was in a place where he need not to fear any thing But whether he fear'd an Insurrection of the People if Otho of Frisingen's Word be to be taken in the Case or whether he thought he should have greater Advantage at Rome where were Cardinals and Prelats who thought it an honor to be his Disciples he appeal'd to the Pope and afterwards withdrew from the Assembly attended with those of his Party Thô ' the Bishops were of Opinion that this Appeal was not Regular because he appeal'd to Judges of his own Choosing yet out of Respect to the holy See they would not pronounce any sentence against his person but they condemn'd his Opinions after they had been read over several times and refuted Publickly by Saint Bernard This Sentence being pass'd the Arch-Bishop of Sens and his Suffragans and the Arch-Bishop of Rheims with his three Suffragans who were at the Synod wrote severally to
two Couriers to the King who arrived at Paris on the 14th of May and presented to his Majesty a Bull written at Porto-Venere the 18th of April by which he declared to him That if he put in Execution the Neutrality he had projected he would not only incurr the Penalties of the Law but also those mentioned in the Bull which he sent to him to acquit himself of his Duty towards God This latter Bull was dated the 19th of May in the preceding Year and it Prohibited all Christian People to Authorize or Approve the Substraction or to Appeal in any manner from the Decrees of the Pope under Pain of Excommunication of Interdiction of Deprivation of Dignities and Benefices and likewise as to the Laity of their Goods and Estates The Couriers who brought these Bulls deliver'd them to the King fast sealed and withdrew before they were opened The King The Proceedings against Benedict and his Bulls having called to him the Princes made them be broke open in their Presence and after they had been read it was deliberated by the space of three Days what was hereupon to be done On Monday 21st of the same Month the King sent for the Princes the Lords the Parliament the Prelates and the University heard the Harangue which was made in the presence of the People by John Courtecuisse Doctor of Divinity who having taken for his Text these words Convertetur dolor ejus in caput ejus c. declaimed against the Conduct of Benedict and shewed that his Bulls were Unjust and that they deserved to be condemned and torn to pieces seeing they tended to perpetuate the Schism to vilify the Authority of the King and to divest him of his Power He accused Peter de la Lune to have said That though all Christendom should be of Opinion for the Cession he would not change his Resolution and to have threatned France with great Misery in case of the Substraction He maintained next That Peter de la Lune was a Schismatick and a Heretick that he deserved not only to be deprived of the Papacy but likewise to be dispossessed of all Ecclesiastical Dignities That he ought not to be called Pope any more nor be obeyed That all the Gifts and Grants which he had passed since the Third of May of the preceding Year were actually Void and that they ought to be proceeded against who upheld or assisted him in France as against Persons guilty of Treason When John de Courtecuisse had ended his Discourse another Person of the University made five Demands of the King and his Council for the Good of the Church the Preservation of the Peace of the Kingdom and the Honour of the Crown The First That there be Examination had touching these Bulls and that all those be Arrested who shall be found to have supported or entertained the Followers of Peter de la Lune or taken his part as there are many in the Kingdom whom the University would Name to the King in time and place The Second That the King would receive no Letter from Peter de la Lune The Third That it would please the King to injoin the University to Preach the Truth of this Doctrine through his whole Kingdom The Fourth That the Bishop of St. Flour be recalled from his Embassy and that the Dean of St. German of Auxerre and of St. Lupus be Punished The Fifth That the Letter in form of a Bull be torn as giving a Wound to the Faith and being injurious seditious and offensive to his Royal Majesty The King approved of the Demands of the University order'd the Dean of St. German of Auxerre to be Arrested immediately took the Bull and sent it to his Chancellor The Chancellor caused it to be torn into Three Pieces whereof one was given to the King the other to the Princes and the Council and the third to the Clergymen who pulled it to pieces The next day the King sent Order to Mareschal Baucicaut who was at Genoa to seize by any means the Person of Peter de la Lune recalled the Bishop of St. Flour whom he had sent to the King of Spain to perswade him to the Neutrality because some had written to him that in stead of following his Instructions he had acted contrary He sent for the Archbishop of Rheims the Bishop of Cambray Peter d'Ailly and several others who were taxed with adhering to Peter de la Lune but they obeyed not fearing to be put in Prison Some were Arrested viz. the Bishop of Gap the Abbot of St. Denys some Canons of Paris and other Persons who were kept Prisoners in the Louvre as guilty of High Treason for having had Cognisance of these Bulls and not discovering it to the King They made search for the two Couriers that brought them one of them a Castilian was taken about Lyons and the other named Sancius Lupus an Arragonian was Arrested in the Church of St. Clairvaux and both of them being brought back to Paris they acquitted some that were accused affirming positively that they knew nothing of the Contents of those Bulls nevertheless the Commissioners who were Members of the University left not off the pursuit of the Process and kept them long in Prison After this the King caused the Neutrality to be Published that is to say the Substraction The Publication of the Neutrality in France of Obedience to the two Adverse Popes wrote to the Christian Princes and sent them Ambassadors to exhort them to take this Method which was accepted by the Germans Hungarians and Bohemians The King wrote likewise on the 22. of May to the Cardinals on Gregory's side to meet together with those of Benedict's in order to cure the Schism and the University of Paris wrote a very Eloquent Letter to one and t'other wherein they are exhorted to procure Peace to the Church by choosing one absolute Pope by common Consent This Letter bears Date the 29th of May. The two Colleges answer'd the King and the University that they had taken up this Resolution before the receipt of their Letters and that they were assembled to put it in Execution Their Letter is dated from Leghorn on the last of June Nevertheless the King on the 18th of the same Month by his Letters Patents published to all his Subjects his Commands that they should not regard any Bulls or Letters sent by Benedict since the Date of the injurious Bulls to present receive or perform them The two Contending Popes then found themselves very much intangled Gregory desirous Gregory and Benedict appoint Councils and the Cardinals likewise do it at Pisa. to lay the Fault on Benedict wrote a Circular Letter to all the Faithful on the 20th of June to insinuate that it was not his Fault but Benedict's that the Union was not settled Also to elude the Design of the Cardinals he call'd a Council at Aquileia by his Letters of the 2d of July and having passed the Winter
Postill upon the Epistles and Gospels of the Year printed at Paris in 1509. and at Strasburg in 1513. and 1521. The two Dominicans called Joannes Parisiensis both Doctors and Professors of Divinity of John of Paris a Dominican the Faculty in Paris must be distinguished The former lived in the Thirteenth Age about the Year 1220. He was Sirnamed Pungens Asinum the Ass-pricker and is mentioned by Joannes de Salagnac speaking of the Authors of his Order who lived before the time of S. Thomas He Founded two Chapels to S. Eustathius and is meant in an Information made in 1221. as the Records of those times make it evident It is undoubtedly he that Composed the Commentary upon the Sentences of which Trithemius speaks The other John of Paris was not a Licentiate in Divinity till 1304. when he brought himself into a great deal of Trouble by asserting That Transubstantiation was not a Point of Faith and that the Real Presence of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament might be explained after another manner viz. By supposing that the Bread being united with the Word mediante corpore Christi becomes the Body of Christ or that the Change be made after some other manner This new Doctrine which had never been taught in the Schools of Paris before made a great Noise and was opposed by Three other Divines who maintained That Transubstantiation was an Article of Faith according to the Decretal in the Chapter Firmiter John of Paris nevertheless maintained his Opinion with great Resolution and not only wrote a Book to prove it but defended it several times before many Doctors and Batchelors of Divinity and more particularly before William D' Orillac Bishop of Paris who having examined that Doctrine and taken advice with Giles of Rome Archbishop of Bourges Bertrandus Bishop of Orleans William Bishop of Amiens and several other Doctors injoined Silence to Friar John of Paris under the Penalty of Excommunication and strictly forbid him to Teach or Preach any more in Paris John of Paris appealed from this Sentence to the Court of Rome and went to Pope Clement V. then at Bourdeaux who appointed him Judges but he died before the Matter was decided upon S. Maurice's Day Jan. 15. 1306. The Book which John of Paris wrote about Transubstantiation was Intituled The Determination of Friar John of Paris Preacher of the Manner how the Body of Jesus Christ is in the Sacrament of the Altar different from that which hath been commonly held in the Church 'T is nothing else but the very same Explication of his Opinion which he delivers to the Assembly of the Doctors of Divinity abovementioned It was found in MS. in the Library of S. Victor and has been often quoted about that Point by the Authors of the Reformed Religion It hath lately been published by Mr. D Allix entire with a large and learned Preface and printed at London in 1686. There is a Treatise concerning the Regal and Papal Power printed at Paris in the Year 1506. and in the Collection of Goldastus's Monarchia S. Rom. Imp. Tom. 2. p. 107. which bears the Name of John of Paris It was written upon the Account of the Difference between Pope Boniface VIII and Philip the Fair. This Author observes in his Preface that they who seek to avoid one Errour often fall into another and thereupon brings an Example from the Controversie which was between the Monks and Seculars concerning Confession and the Administration of the Sacraments The one saith he asserted That the Monks ought not to meddle with them at all because they renounced all Secular Affairs The other said That they properly belonged to them by their Order The Truth lies in the middle between these two Errors which is That it is not altogether unfit that they should do it although they have no right to it upon the account of their Order And much the same thing happens in this Question about the Spiritual and Temporal Power concerning which there are contrary Errors The first of them is the Error of the Waldenses who hold that Clergymen ought not to have any Power or Temporal Estates the other is something like the Opinion of Herod who thought that Jesus Christ was Born to be an Earthly King so these Men suppose that the Pope as Pope hath a Power in Temporal Things above Kings The True Opinion lies between these two Errours and is this That the Successors of the Apostles may exercise a Temporal Jurisdiction and enjoy Temporal Estates by the Allowance and Grant of Princes but it does not belong to them as the Vicars of Jesus Christ and Successors of the Apostle To prove this Proposition he shews 1. That the Regal Power is founded upon the Law of Nature and Law of Nations 2. That the Priesthood is a Spiritual Power given by Jesus Christ to his Church to Administer Sacraments 3. That 't is not Necessary that all the Kings upon Earth should depend upon one Person only as all the Ministers of the Church upon one Head 4. That the Regal Power was erected before the Priesthood in time but the Priesthood is before the Regal Power in Dignity 5. That the Pope has not the sole Jurisdiction over the Churches Revenues but they belong to Bodies and Societies which possess them and that the Pope can't dispose of them as he pleaseth nor deprive the Owners of them without a just Cause That he may much less dispose of the Goods of Laymen but only in case of urgent Necessity to use censures to oblige them to assist and help the Poor or the Church in their Needs 6. That he hath no Jurisdiction over the Temporal Goods of Laymen nor any Secular Power because Jesus Christ as Head of the Church had none himself nor did give any to his Apostles but all the Power that he has given to the Church is purely Spiritual yea even that which belongs to the Exterior Ecclesiastical Court which may concern it self only in Spiritual Causes That the Pope may indeed Excommunicate an Heretick King and inflict Ecclesiastical Censures on him but cannot depose him He Answers all the Objections that may be made to this Doctrine and at last shews that the Pope may be judged and may either resign or be deposed Besides these Treatises of John of Paris Mr. Baluzius assures us that there are in the Library of Mr. Colbert Cod. 3725. three Sermons preached by this Monk at Paris the one in Advent the other on the Second Sunday in Lent and the Third on the First Sunday after Easter Some Englishmen also tell us That there is in the Library at Oxford a MSS. which contains a Treatise which proves the Truth of the Christian Religion from the Testimony of the Heathens and some other Treatises about the Confessions of Monks Some also attribute to him a Book Intituled The Correction of the Doctrine of S. Thomas against William de la Mare printed under the Name of Aegidius Romanus or
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 ââ¦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 presenââd 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
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
going to the Council of Pisa wherein he congratulates them that they were going to this Council to endeavour after the Peace of the Church exhorts them to make a Peace and shews them the means of procuring it There is a Trialogue of his about the matter of the Schism wherein he introduces Zeal Good-will and Discretion disputing together about the means of putting an end to Contention a Letter in the Name of the University of Paris against the Letter in the Name of the University of Tholouse and a Letter in the Name of the King of France to justify his Substraction of Obedience from Peter de Luna After these Works follow many Sermons preach'd at Constance during the time of the Council In the second he sets himself against the Partizans of the Duke of Burgundy who would hinder the Council from Examining and Condemning the Errors of John Petit and shews by many Reasons that 't is very necessary to be done At the end of this Sermon there is a small piece wherein he recollects divers Errors chiefly about this Precept of the Decalogue Thou shalt not kill against which some had advanc'd many cruel and sanguinary Propositions prejudicial to the Security of Princes and about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants The Duke of Burgundy having caus'd the Proposition of John Petit to be maintain'd by Peter Bishop of Arras That it was lawful to kill Tyrants Gerson reply'd to him in the Name of the King of France in a long Discourse spoken in an Assembly of the Fathers of the Council on the 5th of May 1416. and made two other Sermons wherein he searches this Matter to the bottom and refutes at large the Propositions of John Petit and relates the Censure of it made at Paris both by the Bishop and the Doctors The three following Treatises are not concerning the Affair of the Schism but the Principles of Faith The first is entitled a Declaration of the Truths which must be believ'd and according to him they are as follow First All that is contain'd literally in the Canonical Books Secondly All that is determin'd by the Church and receiv'd by Tradition from the Apostles not all that it tolerates or permits to be read publickly but only what it defines by a Judgment condemning the contrary Thirdly The Truths which are certainly reveal'd to some private Persons Fourthly The necessary Conclusions of Truth which are establish'd upon the preceding Principles Fifthly The Propositions which follow from these Truths by a probable Consequence or which are deduc'd from a Proposition of Faith or any other suppos'd to be true Sixthly The Truths which serve to cherish and maintain Devotion though they be not perfectly certain provided they be not known to be false From these Propositions he draws the following Corollaries First That 't is false and heretical to affirm That the literal Sense of Scripture is sometimes false Secondly That 't is Blasphemy and Heresie to maintain That nothing that is evidently known can be of Faith Thirdly That 't is also Heretical and Blasphemous to say That the Precepts of the Decalogue are not of Faith and that the contrary Propositions are not Heretical Fourthly That the Learned are obliged to believe with an explicite Faith many Propositions that are the Consequences of the prime Truths which the common People are not oblig'd to believe Fifthly That the Pastors Doctors and other Persons plac'd in Ecclesiastical Dignity are oblig'd to believe explicitly the Precepts of the Decalogue and many other Points of Faith which other Christians are oblig'd to believe only implicitly The second Treatise is entitled Of Protestation or Confession in Matters of Faith against Heresies where he treats of Protestations both general and particular and of Revocations and Retractations which we are oblig'd to make in Matters of Faith and shews that a general Protestation is not sufficient to justifie a Man when he is guilty of particular Errors that a particular Protestation which is conditional and express'd in these Words I would believe this Truth if it were known to me to be so does no justifie neither before God nor Men. He that revokes an Error which he hath held ought no to satisfie himself with making a particular Protestation of the contrary Truth but ought to mention that he retracts the Error which he maintain'd and this Revocation does not hinder him from being an Heretick before Yet this is not necessary with respect to those who have been in Error but did not know it nor maintain it obstinately Lastly A Retractation does not hinder but he who has made it may still be suspected of Heresie if he discovers by external Signs that his Revocation is not sincere The third Treatise coâtâiâs the Characters of Obstinacy in Matters of Heresie In it he defines Obstinacy a Depravation of the Will caus'd by Pride or some other Vice which hinders him that is in Error from seeking carefully after the Truth or embracing it when it is made known to him The Signs of Obstinacy are these when he who is in Error suffers Excommunication when being Cited he does not appear when he defends an Error contrary to the Truth which he is oblig'd to believe with an explicit Faith when he hinders the explaining and defining of the Truth when he declares himself an Enemy to those who would have the Matter decided when he denies a Truth which he had formerly taught when being requir'd to explain the Truth to the Doctoâ or Judges he will not follow their Advice when he stirs up Wars and Seditions because the Truth has been explain'd when he declares That he would rather die than change his Opinion when he defends or maintains a Heretick knowing that he is in an Error lastly when one does not oppose an Error as he may or ought either by his Office if he be a Judge or from brotherly Charity These according to Gerson are the 12 Signs of Obstinacy The Treatise upon that Question Whether it be lawful to appeal from the Judgment of the Pope in Matters of Faith was compos'd by Gerson after the Election of Martin V. upon occasion of that Pope's refusal to condemn the Propositions of which the Polanders desired the Condemnation There he maintains the Affirmative because the Judgment of the Pope is not infallible as that of a General Council is wherefore in Matters of Faith no judicial Determination of any Bishop or even of the Pope himself does oblige the Faithful to believe a Truth as of Faith although it oblige them under pain of Excommunication not to be Dogmatical in affirming the contrary unless they have evident Reason to oppose against the Determination founded on the Holy Scripture or Revelation or the Determination of the Church and a General Council but in every Case as we may appeal from the Judgment of a Bishop to the Pope so we may appeal from the Judgment of a Pope to a General Council The following Pieces are concerning
the Processes made against Peter de Luna in the Council to shew that he is Perjur'd Schismatical one that gives Scandal to the Church of God and is suspected of Heresie and that as such he ought to be depos'd In the last Piece he examins this Proposition Whether the Sentence of a Pastor tho' it be unjust ought to be observ'd and he maintains That it is false erroneous suspected in Matter of Faith He explains also this other Proposition Unjust Sentences are to be fear'd that is that they may sometimes be the occasion of fear with respect to timerous Consciences but not that they are in themselves formidable The Treatise of the Incarnation which follows consists of two Parts in the first he treats of the Natural Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the second of the Eucharist In the former he speaks of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin of the Perfections and Graces which she receiv'd from Jesus Christ who gave her all those which he in his Wisdom thought convenient but not all those which he could have given her As for instance he gave her not the perfect use of her Reason immediately after her Conception or Birth which would be a rash Assertion In the second Part he treats of the actual Reception of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist he examines what we ought to think of the Spiritual Sentiments of Love and the Tenderness which some of the Faithful feel and shews that they are not necessary that often times they are Illusions that when one gives himself up to them he is liable to fall into Extravagances and Errors John Rusbroek had fallen into this Excess in the third part of his Book about the Ornament of the Spiritual Marriage where he advances many Propositions about the Union of the Contemplative Soul with God Gerson refutes him in the Letter which he wrote to a Carthusian wherein he shews how dangerous it was to make use of new Terms to express the more sublime Truths of Divinity and that those who have not studied the Doctrins of Religion how contemplative soever they may be ought not to meddle with Teaching or talking of speculative Truths because they are liable to fall into dangerous Errors or at least to advance many Propositions that are false and ill-express'd which give occasion to the common People to fall into Error John Schonhow wrote a Piece to defend the Treatise of Rusbroek to which Gerson answer'd in a second Letter wherein he shews that these Novelties cannot be excus'd nor maintain'd This Piece of John Schonhow and the Answer of Gerson follow the first Letter whereof we now speak The two Lectures upon St. Mark are Discourses wherein he handles divers Questions of Morality and Discipline as about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants the Reiteration of Confession the literal Sense of the Scripture the Causes of Errors c. He shews in a Piece about the Communion of the Laity under both kinds that though the Scripture is the Rule of Faith yet it may admit some Interpretations and that it belongs to the Church to explain it In the second Part of this Piece he opposes the Error of those who maintain'd That it was necessary to Salvation for the Laity to communicate under both kinds and relates the Reasons for justifying the taking away the Cup from them The two next Treatises are very useful for establishing such genuine Principles whereby we may distinguish true Doctrin from that which is false The former is entitled The Tryal of Spirits and the latter The Examination of Doctrins In the former he gives Rules for distinguishing false Revelations from true in the latter he lays down the Maxims by which we may know to whom it belongs to examine a Doctrin and what Rules they are to follow in this Examination A General Council is the Sovereign Judge of Doctrins of Faith after it the Pope whose Authority nevertheless is not infallible and each Bishop in his own Diocess whose Decision is different from that of the Pope so that the Authority of the first extends to the whole Church whereas the two last can oblige only those that are subject to their Jurisdiction The Doctors also have an Authentick Judgment in Matters of Doctrin and each Person instructed in Scripture and Tradition may also give his Judgment and teach even the Pope and Prelats those Truths which he knows The same is to be said of those who have the Spirit of Discretion and Understanding The Rules which we are to follow in judging of a Doctrin whether it be sound or no are these First That it be agreeable to Scripture and Tradition Secondly That he who Teaches have Authority to do it and be worthy of Credit upon which account the Visions and Revelations of Women are commonly suspected because they may be easily seduc'd Thirdly That we ought to examine the Design of him that publishes a Doctrin whether he be acted by Pride Interest or Pleasure In the end of this Treatise he relates the Example of a Woman in a Town of Bresse who persuaded many Persons that she had deliver'd Souls out of Hell by feigning Extasies and wonderful Things and by using extraordinary Abstinence and who being taken confess'd that she seign'd all these things to get a Livelihood He adds afterwards other Rules very useful to preserve us from these ways of Seducing He makes an Encomium of St. Bonaventure in a Letter written 1426 to a Frair Minor at Lyons and in another Letter written 1424. to Oswald a Carthusian In the Letter address'd to the Students of the College of Navar he gives his Opinion about the Studies a Divine ought to follow As to the Schoolmen he advises them to read William Auxerres St. Bonaventure Durand Henry of Gandavo and St. Thomas chiefly in his 2d of the 2d He blames these Authors and the like only for one thing That they have handled Questions purely Physical Metaphysical or even Logical in Theological terms As to Morality he advises them to read Matters of History the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Conferences and Lives of the Fathers the Confessions of St. Austin and the Legends of the Saints As to Preaching the Mystical Expositions of the Fathers such as the Morals and Pastoral care of St. Gregory the Commentary of St. Bernard upon the Canticles and some Works of Richard of St. Victor and of William of Paris As to the Works of Prophane Authors he would not have a Christian give his Mind wholly to them but only look into them and curiously run them over like a Traveller to pick up their moral Sentences to form a Style and to render himself moderately skill'd in History and Poetry In a Letter written to the same he gives them Instructions and exhorts them not to oppose the Re-establishment of the French Preachers in the University of Paris but to favour it Gerson being consulted by a Carthusian if he might quit his Convent or
1273. until the year 1422. and the other more large from the Conquest of England by the Normans i. e. from the year 1066. to the 6th year of Henry V. being the 1417th of Jesus Christ. These have been Printed in the Collection of the Historians of England at London in 1574. and at Frankfort in 1602. he has also continued the Polychronicon of Ranulph Higden * Whereof Dr. Wharton saw one Manuscript Copy in the Library of Gonvil and Caius which reaches no further than the Year 1398. tho' the History was continued from 1342 to 1417. Whart Hist. Lit. App P. 120. Nicholas of Inkelspuel of Suabia Rector of the University of Vienna Flourish'd at the beginning Nicolaus Dinkelpulius Rector of the University of Vienna of this Century and was present in the Councils of Constance and Basil. He wrote a Commentary upon the Four Books of Sentences and some Quesâions upon the same Books but these Treatises are lost there remains now only of his some Diâcourses of Piety Printed at Strasburg in 1516. viz. Eleven Sermons and Discourses upon the Precepts of the Decalogue the Lord's-Prayer upon the Three parts of Penance upon the Eight Beatitudes upon the Seven Mortal Sins and the Tribunal of a Confessor Trithemius also mentions a Treatise of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit a Treatise of Charity a Treatise of the Sins of the Tongue and of the Eight Capital Vices and many Sermons which Aeneas Sylvius says were much sought after in his time The Treatise of the Seven Gifts is to be found in Manuscript in the Library of Ausburg together with a Treatise of Gratitude and Ingratitude and a Treatise of Sacramental Communion At the same time Flourish'd Theodoric of Ingelhuse a German Canon of Hildesheim who wrote Theodoricus Ingelhusius Canon of Hildesheim Herman Petri of Stutdorp a Carthusian Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite the Chronicon of Chronicons or an Universal Chronicon from the beginning of the World to the year 1420. Publish'd by Macerus and Printed at Helmstadt in the year 1671. Hermani Petri of Stutdorp a German Carthusian of the Monastery of St. Anne near Bruges died in the year 1428. wrote a Treatise of the Government of Nuns and many Sermons whereof Fifty upon the Lord's-Prayer have been Printed at Lovain in 1484. Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Village in the County of Essex in England the Son of John Netter and Matthilda Studied at Oxford and after he had taken the Degree of Doctor he entred into the Order of Carmelites He was present at the Councils of Pisa and Constance and was chosen for Confessor to Henry V. King of England whom he waited upon in his Journey to France where he died at Roan November the 3d 1430. He stoutly oppos'd the Errors of Wiclef and confuted them and establish'd the Truth of the Doctrine of the Church he wrote a great Book Entituled A Doctrinale of the Antiquities of the Faith of the Catholick Church against the Wiclefites and Hussites divided into three Tomes and Printed at Paris in 1532. at Salamanca in 1556. and at Venice in 1571. This Work is Dedicated to Martin V. and approv'd by this Pope In it the Author proposes to himself to relate the Doctrin of Jesus Christ of the Apostles and the Fathers against the Errors of the Wiclefites and joyns Tradition and the Testimony of the Universal Church and of the Councils with the Holy Scripture which are the Principles he lays down for his Foundation in refuting the false Maxims of Wiclef who following the foot-steps of the Ancient Hereticks rejected the Tradition and Authority of the Church pretending that we ought to found our Doctrins upon the Scripture only The First Tome of this Work contains Four Books against the Errors of Wicklef In the 1st he Refutes the Errors of Wicklif concerning the Divinity the Human Nature and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. In the 2d he Treats of the Preheminence of St. Peter among the Apostles of the Church of the Primacy and Privileges of the Pope and of the Roman Church of the Authority Rights and Prerogatives of Bishops and other Pastors as well in Matters of Faith as for the Government of the Church In the 3d. he defends the profession of the Regulars and in the last he justifies particularly the Orders of the Regulars Mendicants of those who live by the Labour of their Hands and of those who have Revenues and shews against Wicklef that the Ecclesiasticks may possess Temporal Revenues In the Second Tome he lays down the Doctrin of the Church about the Sacraments and shows against Wicklef 1st that the Consecration and Administration of the Sacraments by Ministers is valid tho' they be Sinners After this he Treats of the Eucharist and having prov'd the Real Presence and Transubâtantiation he shews that the Communion under both kinds is not necessary As to Baptism he establishes the absolute necessity of it to Salvation and proves that Infants who die without Baptism are Damn'd and that this Sacrament imprints a Character As to Confirmation he insists chiefly upon discovering the effects of it and shews that the Bishops only can Administer it As to the Sacrament of Orders he makes it evident that the Distinction between Bishops and Priests was Establish'd from the beginning of the Church that the Priests ought to be Ordain'd by the imposition of the hands of the Bishops that the Reprobate may Consecrate as well as others and that the Celibacy of Priests is according to the Spirit and Genius of Holy Scripture and agreeable to the practice of the Ancient Church As to Marriage he shews That this Sacrament may subsist between Persons who preserve Continence That it Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite ought to be contracted according to the Forms prescrib'd by the Church and with the Benediction of the Priest and distinguishes between Marriages which are Lawful and which Unlawful In the Treatise of Penance he defends the necessity of Confession the Vertue of Absolution and the Practices of the Church against the Accusations and Errors of Wicklef There he Establishes the difference between Sins Mortal and Venial against Wicklef who made no distinction between them but with respect to the predestination of God and who admitted no other Mortal Sin but final Impenitence He shews also that the Predestinate may lose Charity against the Opinion of the same Heretick Lastly he shews that the Sacrament of Extream Unction was Founded by Jesus Christ and his Apostles and that the Sacrament produces its effect by its own Vertue and not only by the Merits of the Prayers of those who Administer or Receive it In the Third Tome he Treats of those things which are call'd Sacramentals and first of the Effects and the Necessity of Prayer in general 2. Of Singing Prayers in the Church 3. Of the Service of the Church 4. Of the Mass and its parts 5. Of the Ceremonies of the Sacraments of Baptism
Images Iconomachi and a Treatise of the Celibacy of Ecclesiasticks And under the last Title the following Treatises Of the Election of the Traytor Judas of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy of Revenues for Life of Tithes of Images of Confession of abstaining from Meat among the Benedictines and Carthusia ãâã against the Calculators of the past Age about the Cloistering of the Monks of the Order of St. Dominick There is at the end of the Acts of the Council of Basil a Discourse against the second Article of the Bohemians about the Correction of Publick Sins His Commentary upon the Master of the Sentences is Manuscript in the Library of Navar and many other Treatises upon different Subjects as upon the Communion of the Laity in one kind upon some Propositions against the Authority of the Church upon Indulgences upon the Eucharist and upon several other Questions of Practice or Cases of Conscience with a multitude of Sermons Gregory of Heimburg Doctor in Law was one of the most violent Enemies to the Pope which Gregory of Heimburg a Civilian this Age produc'd He was present at the Council of Basil and was afterwards call'd to Nuremberg where he did the Office of Syndick for the space of Thirty Years and was honour'd with the Title of Counsellor to Frederick of Austria He wrote a Treatise against the Temporal Power which the Popes pretend to have over Princes wherein he does not contain himself within the bounds of the Question but lashes out in Invectives against the Popes The Contest which the Cardinal of Cusa had with Sigismund Duke of Austria gave occasion to Gregory of Heimburg to discharge his Gall against the Popes and in particular against Pius II. who had formerly been one of his Friends Upon the Difference which happen'd between the Cardinal of Cusa and Duke Sigismund about the Execution of the Cardinal's Jurisdiction in his Bishoprick of Brixen Pope Callistus III. cited this Duke and forbad him under pain of an Interdict to trouble the Cardinal in the exercise of his Jurisdiction This Montion did nothing but irritate the Duke who persecuted this Cardinal Pius II. renew'd the Censures against the Duke and cited him and his Adherents anew Then Sigismund appeal'd to a Council and the Act of Appeal was drawn up by Heimburg The Pope Excommunicated the Duke and his Adherents and pronounc'd an Interdict against their Estates by his Bull publish'd at Siena August the 2d in 1460 Sigismund appeal'd also from this Proceeding The Pope denounc'd him Excommunicate again by his Mandates in the Month of January the next Year He Excommunicated also Gregory of Heimburg by his Bull dated October the 18th in the Year 1460. This Civilian made railing Annotations and an Act of Appeal against this Bull. Theodore Laelius Bishop of Feltre who died after he was chosen Cardinal in the Year 1464. made a Reply which is very well written to Heimburg's Act Theodore Laelius Bishop of Feltre of Appeal Against which he wrote an Apology full of Reproaches and he made an Invective yet more passionate against the Cardinal of Cusa All these Pieces have been publish'd by Goldastus in his first and second Tome of the Monarchy and printed a-part at Frankfurt in 1608. Henry Gorcome or Goricheme a Hollander Vice-Chancellor of the University of Colen flourish'd about the Year 1460 He wrote a Treatise of Festivals and a Treatise of some Henricus Gorcomius or Gorichemius Superstitious Observances and Ceremonies printed at Colen in 1503. and at Lyons in 1621 A kind of Table of Conclusions or the Agreement of the Bible and the Canons upon the Master of the Sentences together with a Catalogue of the Opinions of the Master of the Sentences which are rejected at Paris and in England printed at Colen in 1502. at Venice in 1506. and at Basil in 1513 not to mention his Commentaries upon some Books of Aristotle Thomas commonly call'd a Kempis or de Kempis was of Kempen a City in the Diocese of Collen as he says himself in his Chronicle of the Mount of St. Agnes Chap. 8. 10. and not Thomas of Kempis a Canon-Regular of Kampen in the Diocese of Utrecht as some have said He was born at this place about the Year 1380. and was sirnam'd Hemerken which signifies a Hammer his Father was call'd John and his Mother Gertrude he had a Brother nam'd John de Kempis Prior of the Monastery of the Canons Regular of the Congregation of Gerard le Grand in the Mount of St. Agnos near to Zwol Thomas was educated in the Society of the Scholars of Deventer where he learn'd to write to read the Bible and to understand Treatises of Piety and Morality After this he went in 1399. to Zwol to obtain the Indulgences which Pope Boniface IX had granted to the Church of this place and there he desir'd to be admitted into the Monastery of the Mount of St. Agnes into which he was receiv'd in the Month of October the same Year by his Brother and made Profession the 10th of June 1406. The Author of the Continuation of his Chronicle of the Mount of St. Agnes relates that in the first Year after he enter'd into this Monastery he endur'd great Hunger and Tryals and considerable Pains He was ordain'd Priest in 1423. One of the chief Employments of the Canons Regular of this Congregation was to write out the Bible the Writings of the Fathers and Treatises of Piety Thomas a Kempis apply'd himself with Vigor to this Labour copied out the whole Bible a Missal and a multitude of other Works and in performing this Office he practis'd the Advice of one of the Ancients that in writing Books he did not only seek by the Labour of his Hands to gain Food for his Body but also to Refresh his Soul with Heavenly Nourishment For he so possess'd his Mind with the Maxims and Truths contain'd in the Books which he copied out that he prepar'd himself to instruct others by his Example and by his Doctrin by Word of Mouth and by Writing which he did in his Conversation in his Discourses in the Instructions he gave to his Brethren and in the Works of Piety which he compos'd He was humble meek ready to give Consolation fervent in his Exhortations and Prayers Devout Spiritual and Contemplative His Style is plain and has nothing sublime in it but his Thoughts are solid and full of Unction and withal intelligible and useful to the whole World having nothing of that lofty and extravagant Devotion of some Mystical Divines whose Language is uncommon and very singular He liv'd 70 Years in his Order and died not till the Year 1471. on the 24th of July The largest Edition of his Works is that of Colen in the Year 1660. which is divided into three Tomes The first contains the Discourses of Thomas a Kempis viz. first thirty Sermons to the Novices which are Conferences that Thomas a Kempis had with the Novices of his Order at
spoke some Words prejudicial to the Faculty was obliged to make Satisfaction in 1428. In 1429 John Sarrazin Licentiate in Theology of the Order of Friars Preachers was delated to the Faculty and accused of having advanc'd in his Act de Vesperiis Eight Propositions concerning Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction contrary to the Doctrin of the Faculty viz. 1st That all the Powers of Jurisdiction in the Church which are different from that of the Pope are from the Pope in their Institution and Collation 2dly That these Powers are not of Divine Right nor instituted by God immediately 3dly That Jesus Christ says nothing of these Powers but only of the Supream to which he intrusted the founding of his Church 4thly That when any thing is decreed in a Council all the Authority which gives force to its Decrees resides only in the Pope 5thly That there is no Text in the Gospel by which it expresly appears That the Power of Jurisdiction was granted to any other Apostle but St. Peter 6thly That it is repugnant in some manner to Truth to affirm that the Power of Jurisdiction in Inferior Prelates whether Bishops or Parish-Priests is immediately from God as the Power of the Pope is 7thly That no other Spiritual Authorities can do any thing of Right against the Pope 8thly That the Pope cannot commit Canonical Simony which is forbidden by a positive Law The Faculty having caus'd these Propositions to be examin'd by Deputies obliged Sarrazin to retract them publickly and to make Profession of eight Propositions contrary to them wherein he owns 1st That all the Powers of Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions which are different from that of the Pope are from Jesus Christ as to their first Institution and Collation and from the Pope and the Church as to their Limitation and Ministerial Dispensation 2dly That these Powers are of Divine Right instituted immediately by Jesus Christ 3dly That we find in Scripture that Jesus Christ founded his Church and expresly instituted other Powers besides that of the Pope 4thly That when any thing is decided in a Council the Authority which gives force to its Decrees does not reside only in the Pope but chiefly in the Holy Spirit and the Catholick Church 5thly That there are express Texts in the Gospel by which it appears That Jesus Christ has given his Apostles and Disciples an Authority of Jurisdiction 6thly That 't is agreeable to Evangelical and Apostolical Truth to affirm That the Power of Jurisdiction in inferiour Prelats whether Bishops or Parish-Priests is immediately from God 7thly That there is a Power viz. That of the Church which can do something of Right in certain Cases against the Pope 8thly That every Man in this Life having the Use of Reason of whatsoever Dignity Authority and Preheminence even the Pope himself may commit the Crime of Simony This Retractation was spoken by Sarrazin in an Assembly of the Faculty March the 30th 1429. according to the way of reckoning in France at that time i. e. in 1430. In 1432. The Faculty was consulted in the Name of the Bishop of Evreux and the Inquisitor A Censure of a Proposition about the Admonitions of Bishops of that Diocese about a Proposition which one had advanc'd That the Admonitions of Bishops are Abuses and it declar'd by its Conclusion dated May the 16th That this Proposition was reproachful presumptuous rash scandalous tending to Sedition and Rebellion and to weaken the Ecclesiastical Censures contrary to the Doctrin of Jesus Christ and the Apostles and favourable to some Errors condemn'd in the Council of Constance In 1442. Nicholas Quadrigarii a Doctor of Divinity of the Order of Friars Hermites of A Censure of the Errors of Quadrigarii and Augustin St. Austin having advanc'd in his Act de Vesperiis two Propositions 1st That every thing which happens by Divine Providence comes to pass necessarily the other That there is no other Power of Jurisdiction in the Church but the Pope's which is immediately from Jesus Christ was obliged by the Order of the Faculty to retract these two Propositions on the 9th of January and to make Profession of the contrary Doctrin In 1448. a Regular of the Order of Friars Minors having advanc'd in the Diocese of Tournay A Censure of the Propositions of a Friar Minor about the Hierarchy in 1448. A Censure in 1451. against the Propositions of John Bartholomew a Friar Minor contrary to the Rites of Parish Priests many Propositions contrary to the Rights of Parish-Priests like those which had been formerly advanced in 1429. by John Sarrazin the Grand Vicars of the Bishop address'd themselves to Giles Charlier who wrote a piece to refute them which is agreeable to the Doctrin of the Faculty of Theology at Paris in the Censure against Sarrazin In 1451. John Bartholomew of the Order of Friars Minors advanc'd at Roan in his Sermons many Propositions contrary to the Rights of Parish-Priests chiefly about Confession viz. That the Parishioners may freely confess themselves to Regulars Mendicants without asking leave of the Parish-Priests Whereupon the Proctor of the Archbishoprick caus'd an Information to be drawn up against him and the Affair being brought before the University of Paris this Regular appear'd in the Assembly of the University December the 4th and refusing to own that the Parishioners were obliged to confess themselves once a Year to their Parish Priests it was resolved That the Degree of a Licentiate should be denied him and that the deciding of the Question should be referred to the Faculties of Theology and Law In 1456. this Question was started again with some Warmth in the University upon occasion The Differences of the University with Regulars Mendicants about a Bull of privilege which they had obtaimed of a Bull obtain'd from Pope Nicholas V. by the Mendicants who gave them leave to take Confessions to the prejudice of the Right of Parish-Priests established by the Canon Omnis utriusque Sexus and also by Order of the Clementine Dudum The University understanding that it had been presented to the Official of Paris by some Regulars Carmelites interposed an Appeal and cited the Mendicants to appear on Monday May the 24th to declare to them That they should be excluded from the University unless they renounc'd the obtaining of that Bull and would promise to obtain the Revocation of it within a certain time The Mendicants having appear'd and refusing to do it the University declared them perjured and excluded from their Society The Mendicants instead of procuring the Revocation of that Bull address'd themselves to Pope Callistus complain'd of the Treatment they met with from the University and obtain'd of him a Bull which confirm'd that of Nicholas V. and null'd all that the University had done against them Notwithstanding this the University continued firm and the Mendicants were obliged to seek out some ways of Accommodation the Archbishop of Rhemes the Bishop of Paris and the Parliament concern'd themselves in the Affair
Opinion for there it is said Trophimus being sent to Arles by the Holy See was as it were the Spring of all those Rivers that run through the whole Body of France Which Passage shews that it is probable that he came some years before the Empire of Decius though it were a long time after the times of the Apostles and several years after the Martyrdom of St. Irenaeus who advised Stephen in the Sixty sixth Letter to satisfie the Desires of the Gallican Bishops and dispatch Letters into Provence and principally to the Inhabitants of the City of Arles wherein he should declare Marcian Excommunicated and give them notice to elect another Bishop in his Room He remonstrates to him that since this Bishop had joyned himself to Novatian who was notoriously excommunicated there was no necessity of having a new Judgment against him that all Bishops were obliged to take care that Admission into the Church should not be denied to Penitents that the numerous Body of Bishops being united to one another by a Bond of mutual Charity they were all bound in case any one should make himself Chief of an Heresie or the Flock of Jesus Christ which they feed in common should be attacked or carried away to come to their Relief and to re-unite the Sheep of Jesus Christ like good Shepherds that truly love their Flock The Bishops of Spain likewise had recourse to St. Cyprian about an Affair of the same Nature Basilides and Martialis one the Bishop of Leon the other of Astorga having been publickly proved to have taken Certificates of their having Sacrificed and convicted of several other Crimes were deposed and Felix and Sabinus elected in their Places Basilides owning his Crime had voluntarily quitted his Bishoprick and was placed in the Rank of Penitents where he thought himself over happy if he could but communicate as a Laick Nevertheless these two Bishops being afterwards pushed on by their Ambition and Envy used their utmost Endeavours to regain their Sees and finding they could not compass their Designs there they went to Rome not to demand their re-establishment from Stephen but only that he would be pleased to admit them to his Communion which they said would be very serviceable to them to procure their Re-establishment They acted their Parts so dexterously that Stephen granted them what they requested so upon this they went back to Spain where they became more insolent than ever and would by all means re-possess themselves of their Sees by Force The Clergy and People of Spain writ to St. Cyprian about it and deputed Felix and Sabinus who were ordained Bishops in the room of these two Apostates to go to him to know what they were to do in this Exigence But Felix Bishop of Saragossa whom St. Cyprian calls a great Defender of the Faith writ to him likewise in particular The Saint judging this to be an Action of no small Importance read the Letters sent him from Spain in a Synod of the African Bishops who after they had diligently examined the matter came to this Resolution That the Deposition of Basilides and Martialis ought to stand good as well as the Ordination of Felix and Sabinus in their Place They writ a Synodical Letter concerning it to the Clergy and People of Leon and Astorga which is placed the 67th amongst those of St. Cyprian and sent them word that they had no reason to suffer Basilides and Martialis to re-enter upon their Episcopal Functions after they had been found guilty of such enormous Crimes and Basilides himself had acknowledged so much that since the People had Power to elect good Bishops and to reject the bad they would appear culpable before God if they communicated any longer with them That the Ordination of Felix and Sabinus was lawful since it was made with the Consent of the People by the neighbouring Bishops That it ought not to be reversed though Basilides had surprized Stephen who by reason of his great distance from the Place could not exactly inform himself of the truth of Affairs That this Conduct was so far from effacing their Crimes that on the other hand it augmented their Guilt because though Stephen was in some sort excusable for suffering himself to be deceived merely out of Negligence yet we ought to have a Detestation for those Persons who had so maliciously imposed upon his Easiness That they extremely commended their Faith and Zeal and desired them to maintain a Correspendence no more with Bishops of such a profligate Character who were notorious for so many Crimes u In the same Year another Synod of Bishops was held This Synod must of necessity have been assembled in the Year 255 as what followed sufficiently shews It is different from that which was held upon the account of Basilides and Martialis at least the Names that are to be seen at the Head of two Synodical Letters are different Hence it follows that there must have been more than one held that very year and we are not to wonder at it because it was the custom of the Africans to hold two every Year one in the Spring and the other in Autumn This might be assembled in the Month of September in the Year 255 the next in the Spring 256. and the last in the Month of September in the same Year In the same Year another Synod of Bishops was held in Carthage who being consulted by Januarius and the rest of the Numidian Bishops about the Baptism of Hereticks returned them this Answer that it was necessary to re-baptize all those who had been Baptized by Hereticks according to the ancient Regulation made by Agrippinus in Africk St. Cyprian writ the same Year to one Quintus a Bishop who had ordered the same Question to be put to him by Lucian the Priest This Letter is the 71st as Pamelius has ranged them He assures him that some of his Brethren were of a different Opinion from him in this Affair who pretended that it was the ancient Custom before Agrippinus not to re-baptize Hereticks after they had been once admitted into the Church To weaken the Authority of this pretended Custom he lays it down for an undoubted Truth that we are not to be determined by any Customs of that Nature but to examine whether they will bear the Test of Reason That St. Peter in his Dispute with St. Paul upon the Business of Circumcision did not treat that Apostle with Arrogance and Pride That he never alledged his Primacy or told him that the new Disciples of Jesus Christ as St. Paul was who had likewise been a Periecutor of the Church ought blindly to obey him and not to question his Decisions but gave him the Hearing and humbly received the Counsel of Truth which St. Paul gave him and readily submitted to the powerful Reasons of that Apostle teaching us by that Behaviour to be peaceable and Patient and not to espouse our own Opinions with Heat and Obstinacy but to embrace the
Advices of our Brethren when-ever they are useful and agreeable to Truth Some time after this St. Cyprian assembled at Carthage a Council of Seventy one Bishops as well of the Province of Africk as Numidia who confirmed all that had been determined by the preceding Synod concerning the Baptism of Hereticks and decreed that all Priests and Deacons who were ordained amongst them or who after having been some time of their Party returned to the Church should be received only in the Quality of Laicks And after this to maintain that Honour and Friendship which Bishops owed to one another they acquainted Pope Stephen with these Constitutions by a Synodical Letter which is the Seventy second amongst those of St. Cyprian in Pamelius's Order and towards the end of it represented to him that since the things they had ordained were conformable to the Christian Religion and to Truth they hoped he would make no difficulty to approve them That nevertheless they knew there were some Bishops in the World who could be hardly perswaded to change their Opinions and yet though they kept up their own particular Customs would never break the Laws of Peace and Charity That after the same manner they would not pretend to prescribe Laws or constrain any Persons since they were satisfied that every Bishop was free to behave himself as he saw expedient in the Administration of his own Church for which he was accountable to God alone About the same time likewise St. Cyprian immediately after this Council writ a long Letter to Jubaianus a Bishop who had also consulted him about this Question wherein he urges abundance of Reasons and Texts of Scripture to support his own Opinion and after he has answered the Objections that were brought against it concludes with this new Protestation that he had not the least Design to impose Laws upon any of his Colleagues or to fall out with them upon this Occasion but inviolably to preserve Faith and Charity the Dignity of the Priesthood and Concord with his Brethren Stephen having answered St. Cyprian very roughly Pompey Bishop of Sabra a Maritime City of Africk desired him to let him know what Stephen had writ to him So he sent him a Copy of the Letter with another of his own wherein he bestows a particular Answer upon the Pope's Letter which is the Seventy third as Pamelius has placed them In it he principally opposes the Truth of the Gospel and the first Traditions of the Apostles both to the Custom and Tradition which Pope Stephen had alledged for himself He sent likewise by Rogatianus the Deacon another Copy of Stephen's Letter to Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia and to the other Bishops giving them an Account of what had been determined in Africk upon this Question and desiring them to acquaint him with the Opinion of their respective Churches He could not have expected a more favourable Answer than what he received from Firmilian for that Bishop openly condemns and that in Terms severe enough the Procedure of Stephen extols St. Cyprian's Conduct declares himself entirely in favour of the last proves it by several Reasons and assures him it was the ancient Custom of the Asiatick Churches and that it had been regulated many years before in two numerous Synods held at Synnada and Iconium This Letter of Firmilian which is the Seventy fourth amongst those of St. Cyprian x It was written in the Autumn in the Year 256. We are told in this Letter that it was written about Twenty two years after the Empire of Alexander who died in the year 235 and that it was composed in haste because Rogatianus was obliged to return by reason of the approaching Winter It could not be written in 257 because St. Cyprian was banished at the end of that Year was written in Autumn in the Year 256. Before this Letter came to St. Cyprian's hands he writ to Magnus who had asked his Opinion about the Baptism of the Nâvatians whether these Hereticks were to be excepted out of the Number of those who were to be re-baptized since they owned the same Faith as the Catholicks did in relation to the Trinity and Baptized after the same manner He answers him I say y In the 75th Letter The English Annalist thinks that this is the first Letter which was written concerning the Question of Baptism because it does not plainly and openly make mention of the Synods that were held in Africk upon that Occasion It appears more probable to me that it was written afterwards because it supposes the general Question to be decided and the Author clearly speaks of some of his Colleagues that received the Baptism of Hereticks He says he knew no reason why Christians should take the Part if he might so say of Antichrists which induces me to believe that it was written after his Qârrel with Stephen besides it is more natural to imagine that this Question which regards the Excâption of the general Rule was made after the Decision For Magnus proposes it to him as a new difficulty You demand of me says he whether those that come from Novatian ' s Party are to be baptized as well as other Hereticks in the Seventy fifth Letter that they ought to be re-baptized as well as the rest forasmuch as there was no true Baptism out of the Church In this Letter he answers another Question proposed to him by Magnus concerning the Baptism of Clinicks that is to say of those that were Baptized in their Sickness that there was no reason to doubt of the Validity of this Baptism That the Sacrament was equally efficacious whether the Person was plunged in the Water or had it sprinkled upon him He concludes with repeating his usual Protestation that he would give Laws to none but leave them an entire Liberty of doing what they thought convenient and that every one must give an Account of his Conduct to GOD alone Thus we have given an exact Account of all the Letters extant in St. Cyprian's Works that treat of the Baptism of Hereticks To these we ought to add the Acts of the last Council of Carthage consisting of Eighty seven Bishops who assembled there the same Year in the Month of September In the first place the Letters of Jubaianus to St. Cyprian and those of St. Cyprian to that Bishop were read in the Council After that St. Cyprian proposed to all the Bishops that were present to deliver their Opinions freely but yet so as not to condemn or excommunicate those that were of a different Judgment For none of us says he ought to make himself a Bishop of Bishops or pretend to awe his Brethren by a Tyranical Fear because every Bishop is at liberty to do as he pleases and can no more be judged by another than he can judge others himself But all of us ought to wait and tarry for the Judgment of Jesus Christ who alone has Authority to set us over the Church and to