it is in this cause of Theodorets writings and all like it While there was no doubt moved by heretikes whether those writings of his ought to be condemned and whether by the Councell of Chalcedon they were condemed or no so long it was sufficient for one to professe that he condemned Nestorius and subscribed to the definition of Chalcedon both which were implicite condemning of those writings of Theodoret but when the Nestorians began to boast that Theodorets writings against Cyrill neither were condemned but rather with the author of them approved by the Councell of Chalcedon neither ought to be condemned the Church now was necessarily enforced to require of all men a profession of that truth in plaine and explicite termes which before they made onely in generall and implicite Nor could Vigilius or any other Nestorian who refused in expresse manner to condemne the writings of Theodoret purge himselfe of that heresie of Nestorius at this time by saying they approved the definition of Chalcedon or condemned Nestorius though in both these they did implicitè condemne the writings of Theodoret but now they must expresly professe that which the heretikes expresly denyed they must in plaine termes anathematize those hereticall writings of Theodoret and acknowledge them to have bin anathematized by the Councel of Chalcedon as the heretiks in plaine termes vauÌ„ted that neither they ought nor were anathematized but approved by the Councel of Chalcedon whensoever any point tending to the impeaching of faith begins explicitè to be denyed the holy Church may not then content her selfe in generall and implicitè to condemne the same few perhaps can perceive that and many will make that generality of termes as Vigilius and other Nestorians now did but a cloak for their heresie but the Church must now in most plaine easie and expressed manner that can be devised both teach declare and define the same This the Church did in this fift Councell as in the other two so in this Chapter touching Theodorets writings It taught but the very same which the Councell of Chalcedon had done before it anathematized those his writings which at Chalcedon were anathematized before but they did this now in a plaine manner and explicitè which by the Councell oâ— Chalcedon only in an obscure manner and implicitè was done before 16. The third personall errour which Vigilius taketh for a ground of his decree is that Cyrill himselfe though he was so exceedingly injured by the writings of those Easterne Bishops that tooke part with Nestorius yet when he made union with them he required them not to anathematize their owne writings but overpast them in silence as if there had never beene any such whence Vigilius inferreth that neither ought this anathematizing of their writings by name of Theodorets bee required by others yea he saith the Fathers of Chalcedon imitated this example of Cyrill and so would not require that of Theodoret which they saw Cyrill not to have required of others 17. The answer is easie by that which hath beene declared this saying of Vigilius laboureth of the same equivocall sophistication as did the former for both Cyrill required and all who were united unto him and received into his which was the communion of the Catholike Church they all did though not in explicite termes which then was not needfull yet vertually and after a certaine and undoubted though implicite manner condemne and anathematize all their writings against Cyrill and the Catholike faith for he received none till they had anathematized the doctrines of Nestorius This doth Cyril himselfe most plainly witnesse in his Epistle to Dynatus I would not saith he admit Paulus Bishop of Emisa into communion priusquam Nestorij dogmata proprio chyrographo anathematizasset untill hee had anathematized by his owne hand-writing the doctrines of Nestorius And he intreated me in behalfe of the other Bishops that I would rest contented with that profession which they had sent and require no more nulla ratione id fieri passus I would by no meanes yeeld unto that but I sent them a profession of faith and when Iohn 8. of Antioch caeterique and the rest with him had anathematized the doctrine of Nestorius then and not before communionem illis restituimus did we receive them into our communion Thus Cyrill who by requiring this did in effect require they performed the same a condemning of all their witings which were made against him and in defence of that heresie of Nestorius And had Cyrill lived to see any question made whether those writings by whomsoever they had beene written ought to bee or were by himselfe condemned out of all doubt that holy Father would in most plaine and expresse termes have anathematized them all as vertually and implicitè he had before and would most strictly have exacted the like expresse anathematizing of them of all those who would wash their hands of the blasphemies and heresies of Nestorius 18. Now from these three grounds every one of which is demonstrated to be untrue Vigilius collects his Conclusion or definitive sentence in defence of this second Chapter which also is an errour but not as the former personall but doctrinall yea hereticall that those writings of Theodoret or going under Theodorets name against Cyrill and his twelve Chapters ought not to be condemned which is as much as if he had decreed plainly that the heresies of Nestorius ought not to be condemned for in those writings of Theodoret they are all defended and that with such eagernesse art and acutenesse that if all other Nestorian books were abolished those writings alone of Theodoret would suffice as a rich storehouse to furnish the Nestorians with abundance of all kinde of weapons to maintaine their owne and oppugne the Catholike cause nor ever can Nestorianisme bee puld downe or overthrowne so long as those writings of Theodoret keeâ—e their credit and stand uncondemned yet shal not these be condemned doth Vigilius decree 19. Pope Pelagius seeing the poison of the hereticall doctrine which the defending of this second Chapter doth beare with it exclaimes against it in this manner O my deare brethren who seeth not these things to bee full of all impiety And againe who seeth not quanta temeritate plenum sit Theodoreti scripta superbiendo defendere how full of temeritie it is to defend so insolently the writings of Theodoret The fift generall Councell not onely accurseth those writings of Theodoret as hereticall but all who defend them yea all who doe not anathematize them A cleare evidence that they not onely judged this second Chapter to concerne the faith but the Constitution of Vigilius even herein to be hereticall because he would not anathematize those writings of Theodoret and much more because he decreed that they should not be anathematized and to their judgement consenteth the whole catholike Church they all condemne the decree of Vigilius even in this point as hereticall 20. I but Vigilius you will say
not so much as any sepulcher nothing praeter laceras has vestes I have left nothing to my selfe but onely this ragged attire wherewith I am apparelled For learning and knowledge both in divine and humane matters he was much honoured compared to Nilus as watering the whole countrie where hee abode with the streames of his knowledge he converted eight townes infected with the heresie of the Marcionites to the faith two other of the Arians and Eunomians wherein he tooke such paines and that also with some expence of his blood and hazard of his life that in eight hundreth parishes within the Diocesse of Cyrus Ne unum quidem haereticorum zizanium remansit there remained not so much as one hereticall weed 30. So learned so laborious so worthy a Bishop was Theodoret and so desirous am I not to impaire any part of his honour much lesse to injure disgrace or slander him Whom almost would not the writings of a man so noble for birth and parentage so famous for learning so eminent in vertue move and perswade to assent unto him if they might goe currant without taxing without note or censure of the Church and that much more than the bookes of Origen both because Origen was but a Presbyter but Theodoret a Bishop and specially because Origen himselfe was by the Church condemned and so the author being disgraced the authority of his writings must needs be very small but the person of Theodoret was approved by the whole Councell of Chalcedon they all proclamed him to bee a Catholike and orthodoxall Bishop Here was a farre greater temptation and greater danger when his writings are hereticall whose person so famous and holy a Councell commendeth for Catholike Now or never was the Church to shew that it honoured no mans person writings or name more thā the truth of Christ. And so much the rather was the Church to doe this in Theodoret because about some thirty yeares before this fift Councell in the time of Iustinus the Emperour the Nestorians as if not onely some writings of his but Theodoret himselfe had beene wholly theirs set up his image in a Chariot and with great pompe and singing of hymnes brought it in triumphant manner into the City of Cyrus where Sergius a Nestorian and Bishop of that place mentioned in a Collect Theodorus of Mopsvestia Nestorius and Theodoret as three of their principall Nestorian Saints was it not now high time to wipe away that blemish from the name of Theodoret and to condemne those writings of his which gave occasion to the Nestorians to make such boasts 31. I appeale now unto any man whether their condemning of Theodorets writings did not much more tend to the honour then as Vigilius fancieth to the slander and disgrace of his person As it is a blemish to a man to retaine a filthy spot in his garment but the taking of it away doth grace and make him more comely even so the name of Theodoret was stained by those writings they emboldened the Nestorians to put him in their cursed Calender but by the condemning of those writings was the staine and blemish wiped away from his person his name and honour was vindicated from the Nestorians and brought as it well deserved to the holy Church of GOD nothing of Theodoret left for heretikes to vaunt of but the onely staines of Theodoret nothing but those hereticall writings condemned and accursed both by Theodoret himselfe and by the whole Church of God 32. No no it is Pope Vigilius and such as applaud his decree for infallible that disgraceth and most ignominiously useth the name person and memory of Theodoret By his decree those heretical writings of Theodoret which by the Churches sentence of condemnation are quite dulled receive full strength and vigour for the Nestorians against Catholikes By him the Nestorians have an eternall charter and irrevocable decree that Theodorets writings against Cyrill and with them the heresie of Nestorius ought not to be taxed nor condemned His Apostolicall Constitution is a triumphant chariot for them to set the Image of Theodoret in their Temples and with Anthemes and Collects to canonize yea adore him in their Masses among their hereticall Saints But for the Church of God I constantly affirme they could not possibly have more honoured Theodoret than by burning up the hay and stubble of his writings the condemning of which the Pope decreeth to bee an injury and slander unto him 33. May wee now in the last place consider a little what might be the intendment of Vigilius in pleading and decreeing this for Theodorets writings I doubt not but the love he bare to Nestorianisme might make him zealous for those writings which are the bulwarks of the Nestorians but non sunt in eo omnia Popes are men of profound thoughts and very long reaches they have deepe and mysticall projects in their decrees Vigilius had and it may be principally an eye to this his owne and all their Cathedrall Constitutions like unto it If the hereticall writings of Theodoret may not be condemned because himselfe was a Catholike à fortiori this decree of Vigilius be it never so hereticall may not bee condemned because the Pope is the head of all Catholikes If it bee an injury and a slandering of Theodoret to taxe him or his name by condemning his writings it must much more be an injury and slander nay that is nothing even a blasphemy and sinne irremissible to taxe the Popes Holinesse by condemning his Apostolicall decree If you presume to condemne nay but taxe them or their names though their decrees shall bee as apparently hereticall as are those writings of Theodoret you are condemned for ever as injurious as contumelious as slandering persons And let this suffice for the errours both personall and doctrinall of Vigilius touching this second Chapter CAP. X. That Vigilius and Baronius erre in divers personall points or matters of fact concerning the third Chapter or the Epistle of Ibas 1. THere remaineth now the third last Chapter which concernes the impious Epistle of Ibas In handling whereof being of them all most intricate and obscure as Vigilius first and then long after him his Champion Baronius have here bestowed greatest paines and used all their subtilty judging this to bee as indeed by reason of the manifold obscurities it is the fittest cloake for their heresie so must I on the other side intreate the more serious and attentive consideration at the readers hands while I indeavour not onely to discover the darke and secret corners of this cause but pull both the Pope and his Parasite out of this being their strongest hold and most hidden hereticall den wherein they hoped of all other most safely and securely to have lurked for the more perspicuous proceeding wherein before I come to the doctrinall errours and maine heresie which in this third Chapter they maintaine I will first manifest two or three of their personall untruths
is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to cōdemne the same saith Omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant Iustinian hath ever done and as yet doth all things which preserve the holy Church and the true faith So the Councell Is not Baronius minde composed of venome and malice who condemnes and reviles the Emperour as bringing hellish confusion into the Church by publishing that law which to have beene an especiall meanes to preserve the Church and Catholike faith the holy generall Councell and all the whole Catholike Church with it proclameth 6. See here againe the love and respect which Baronius beares to the Imperiall lawes and to those holy and religious Emperors which were the nursing fathers of Gods Church and pillers to uphold the faith in their dayes There are extant in the Theodosian Code many laws cōcerning the Catholike faith concerning Bish. Churches and the Clergy concerning Heretikes Apostates Monkes Iewes and Samaritanes concerning Pagan sacrifices and Temples concerning Religion Episcopall judgement those who flee unto Churches and many other of the same kinde lawes wholesome and necessary for those times The like titles are extant also in the Code of Iustinian In the Authenticks there are I know not how many lawes in the like causes Of the foure Councels of the Order of Patriarchs of the building of Churches of goods belonging to sacred places Of the holy Communion of Litanies of the memorials for the dead of the Priviledges of Churches of Patriarchs of the Pope of old Rome of Archbishops of Abbots of Presbyters of Deacons of Subdeacons of Monkes of Anchorites of Synods of deposing Bishops who fall into heresie that Patrons who builded Churches and their heyers shall nominate the Clerks for the same and in case they name such as are unmeet then the Bishop to appoint who he thinks fit that Heretikes shall be uncapable of any legacies and exceeding many the like Now such a spite hath the Cardinall to the Emperours and these their Imperiall lawes made concerning the affaires of the Church that like some new Aristarchus with one dash of his pen hee takes upon him to casheire and utterly abolish those lawes five or sixe hundreth at the least with such care piety and prudēce set forth by Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Martian Iustinian and other holy and religious Emperours And when these are gone whether the Cardinall meant not after them to wipe away which with as good reason and authority he may all the other lawes which are in the Digest Code and Authenticks that so his master the Pope may play even another Iack Cade that all law might proceed out of his mouth let the judicious consider This is cleare that the Cardinals malice is not satisfied with reproofe of the lawes themselves even these holy Emperors Constantine Theodosius and the rest are together with Iustinian for the making of those lawes touching Ecclesiasticall affaires and persons reproved nay reviled by Baronius as having beene presumptuous persons authors of an hellish confusion in the Church and for turning heaven into hell They and such as they make lawes of faith lawes for Bishops lawes for the Church let them heare as they well deserve and as the Cardinall shameth not to upbraid to Iustinian Ne ultra crepidam Sir Cobler goe not beyond you Last and Latchet So indignly doth the Cardinall use those holy and religious Princes and that even for their zeale to Gods truth and love to his Church for that which with exceeding piety and prudence they performed to their owne immortall honor and to the peace and tranquillity of the whole Church of God 7. His third calumnie is that hee revileth Iustinian for his sacrilegious fury and persecution which hee used against Pope Vigilius partly when Vigilius was buffeted and beaten at Constantinople before the time of the Councell and forced to flee to Chalcedon partly when he was banished after the end of the Councell for not consenting with the Synod in condemning the Three Chapters Alas how hath heresie and malice quite blinded the Cardinall and bereft him of his understanding Iustinian neither before the Councell nor after it persecuted Vigilius Vigilius was neither beaten nor buffeted nor fled hee either to Saint Peter or to Saint Euphemia nor was he banished at all these all are nothing but the Poeticall and Chimericall fictions of the Cardinall no truth no realty at all in them as we have before fully demonstrated Iudge now I pray you whether any but some Ajax furiosus or who were deprived of his wits would call the Emperour madde franticke sacrilegious possessed and guided by the Devill for persecuting and banishing him who neither was persecuted nor banished but enjoyed the latitude of liberty and all the benefits thereof even the Emperours favour and the comforts accompanying it But admit Vigilius had been banished as indeed many other Bishops were for defending the Three Chapters against the Decree of the holy generall Councell was Iustinian a persecutor a monstrous sacrilegious persecutor for banishing or punishing condemned heretikes and Nestorians such as all the defenders of the Three Chapters to have beene wee have before declared what a monstrous persecutor then was holy Constantine for banishing Theognis Bishop of Nice and Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia for refusing to consent to the Nicene Synod What a persecutor was Theodosius the the elder who commanded all that held the Macedonian heresie to bee banished and shut out of their Churches without any hope to recover the same againe What a persecutor was Theodosius the younger who forbad all men to have or reade the bookes of Nestorius or to admit the Nestorians into any City Towne Village or house What an horrible and monstrous persecutor was Martian who made a law that if any should teach the Eutichean heresie ultimo supplicio coercebitur he shall bee put to death If Constantine Theodosius the elder and younger and Martian bee no persecutors notwithstanding this severity in exiling punishing and putting to death heretikes what a malicious slanderer is Baronius for cōdemning Iustinian as a persecutor for banishing imprisoning or punishing with like severity the defēders of the three Chapters who were every way as detestable as damnable as truly convicted condēned heretikes by the judgment of an holy general Councel as either the Arians Macedonians Eutycheans or old Nestorians Thus to persecute that is justly punish heretikes is laudable thus to be persecuted is
this Edict will condemne it for being a Seminary of sedition let him first condemne the Nicene Decree and Imperiall Edict for it let him condemne the Gospell and Christ himselfe which were all such Seminaries as that Edict was If notwithstanding all the oppositions seditions cōtentions raysed by heathen heretical other wicked men against these they were as most certainly they were Seminaries of truth let the Card. know acknowledge his malicious slander against this most religious and orthodoxall Edict of Iustinian which was as all the former a sacred Sanctuary for the Catholike faith Seditions oppositions tumults persecutions and the like disturbances in the Church spring not from Christ nor from his Word and Gospel either preached by Bishops or decreed by Councels or confirmed by Imperiall Edicts all these are of themselves causes onely of unity concord peace and agreement in the Church these onely are the proper native and naturall fruits and effects that proceed from them but contentions and seditions come from the perverse froward wicked and malicious mindes of men that hate the truth and in hatred of it fight against all that uphold the truth bee it by preaching by decreeing or by enacting the truth these are as Wolves which by continuall tumbling in the mire disturbe and trouble the streame The fountaines whence the truth springeth are most pure and most peaceable 5. Now whereas in the third place Baronius seekes to disgrace the Edict by the Author of it whom he describes to have beene not onely an heretike but a most detestable person even the plague of the whole Church let us suppose and admit the Author to have beene such a man indeed nay to have beene Iudas himselfe and worse than Iudas hee could hardly bee seeing CHRIST himselfe called Iudas a Devill Is the Edict or the truth of God thereby published worse because Iudas uttered or penned it was the Arke to bee refused or contemned because wicked men framed and built it Did not Christ say of Iudas a Devill as well as of Peter a Saint Hee that heareth you heareth mee he that despiseth you despiseth me Hath Baronius forgotten the lesson of Saint Iames My brethren have not the faith of our glorious Lord Iesus Christ in respect of persons love it for it selfe but neither love it nor refuse it because of him that speaketh penneth or bringeth the same Did the Cardinall never heare of the Scribes and Pharisees they sit in Moses chaire that is deliver Gods truth out of Moses and the Prophets unto you whatsoever therefore they bid you that observe doe but after their workes doe not Or if this reason of the Cardinall may take effect themselves and their Romane Church will be farre the greatest loosers how easie will it be to reject and contemne an whole Volume of their Pontificall Edicts why this was made or written by Iohn 12. that by Hildebrand or Boniface 8. the other by Iohn 23. an heretike an Atheist a Devill incarnate as a generall Councell testifieth another by Formosus Steven or by one of those whom themselves professe to have beene theeves robbers Wolves Tygers and most savage beasts and Apostaticall Popes as Genebrard calleth threescore of them all worse than the Author of this Imperiall Edict though wee should admit him to have beene such or as bad every way as Baronius describeth him 6. But the truth is the Author of the Edict was no such man as the Cardinall fancieth as it beares the name so it was indeed the worke of Iustinian no childe can have more honour by his father than it by such an Emperour and though Baronius having so often slandered Iustinian to bee utterly rude unlearned one that could not so much as reade nor knew his Alphabet or first elements could not but in good congruity confidently deny Iustinian to bee the Writer or Author of so learned and divine an Edict or as himselfe cals it of so exact a Catechisme yet considering what before was declared both out of Procopius of the Emperours often tossing of bookes among the Bishops out of Liberatus of his great paines taken in writing against heretikes and for defence of the Councell of Chalcedon and out of Platina calling Iustinian a very learned Emperour I cannot thinke but that although Iustinian might use the advise helpe and industry of Mennas Theodorus or some other Bishops in this as in other Edicts concerning Ecclesiasticall affaires yet still the ultima manus the last correction and perfecting of all was the Emperours owne doing the rather because both in his other Edicts that against Anthimus against Origen as also in his letters to this Synod and the rest there is so uniforme a stile so Imperiall and so divine a kinde of writing that the same Genius of Iustinian seemes to breathe in them all 7. But Baronius tels us that both Liberatus Facundus and Vigilius doe testifie Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea to bee the Author of this Edict Baronius is ever like himselfe that is untrue and fraudulent Not one of these say it first not Liberatus hee indeed affirmes Theodorus and some others to have suggested this unto the Emperour that hee would condemne those Three Chapters by a publike Edict or booke but hee addes withall Rogaverunt eum ut dictaret Libellum they prayed the Emperour that he would dictate or indite the booke against the Three Chapters and the Emperour consented saith Liberatus unto them hoc se laetus implere promisit and he gladly promised to doe so that is to indite or dictate such an Edict So farre is Liberatus from affirming as Baronius alleageth him Theodorus to bee the Author of this booke or Edict that hee teacheth the quite contrary As for Facundus he saith indeed the Edict was not written by Iustinian but by the adversaries of the truth but that Theodorus writ it that is the Cardinals addition Facundus saith it not and even in that which hee saith that the Edict is contrary to the Emperours faith Facundus doth so manifestly slander both the Emperour as if hee thought the Three Chapters were not to be condemned and the Edict also as if the condemning of these Three Chapters were contrary to the Catholike faith that there is no credit at all to bee given to him in his report touching the Author who is so untrue in his reports both touching the matter of the Edict and touching the knowne profession and faith of the Emperour 8. The Cardinals Vigilius now remaineth whose words are these spoken to Theodorus The booke condemning the Three Chapters by their meanes was read in the Kings Pallace before certaine Greeke Bishops à quibus assentationum favorem tuis vocibus exigebas What if one should here oppose the Cardinall and say tuis vocibus were the Ablative case and that Theodorus had by his words sollicited the other Bishops favorably to consent to the Emperors Edict How will Baronius assure us that
cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of Paris as being contra fidem Catholicam against the catholike Faith and the authority of holy Councils And even to these dayes the French Church doth not onely distaste that Laterane Decree and hold a Generall Councill to be superiour to the Pope but their Councill also of Trent wherein that Laterane Decree is confirmed is by them rejected And what speake I of them Behold while Leo with his Laterane Councill strives to quench this catholike truth it bursts out with farre more glorious and resplendent beauty This stone which was rejected by those builders of Babylon was laid againe in the foundations of Sion by those Ezra's Nehemiah's Zorobabel's and holy Servants of the Lord who at the voyce of the Angell came out of Babylon and repaired the ruines of Ierusalem And even as certaine rivers are said to runne under or through the salt Sea and yet to receive no salt or bitter taste from it but at length to burst out send forth their owne sweet and delightfull waters Right so it fell out with this and some other doctrines of Faith This Catholike truth that the Popes judgement and Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is not infallible borne in the first age of the Church and springing from the Scriptures and Apostles as from the holy mountaines of God for the space of 600 yeares and more passed with a most faire and spatious current like Tygris Euphrates watering on each side the Garden of the Lord or like Pactolus with golden streames inriching and beautifying the Church of God after that time it fell into the corrupted waters of succeeding ages brackish I confesse before their second Nycene Synod but after it and the next unto it extremely salt and unpleasant more bitter then the waters of Mara And although the nearer it came to the streets of Babylon it was still more mingled with the slime or mud of their Babylonish ditches yet for all that dangerous and long mixture continuing about the space of 730. yeares this truth all that time kept her native and primitive sweetnesse by the constant and successive professions of the whole Church throughout all those ages Now after that long passage through all those salt waves like Alpheus or Arethusa it bursts out againe not as they did in Sicily nor neare the Italian shores but as the Cardinall tells us in Germanie in England in Scotland in France in Helvetia in Polonia in Bohemia in Pannonia in Sueveland in Denmarke in Norway in all the Reformed Churches and being by the power and goodnesse of God purified from all that mud and corruption wherewith it was mingled all which is now left in it owne proper that is in the Romane channels it is now preserved in the faire current of those Orthodoxall Churches wherein both it and other holy doctrines of Faith are with no lesse sinceritie professed thē they were in those ancient times before they were mingled with any bitter or brackish waters 36 You see now the whole judgement of the Fift Generall Councill how in every point it contradicteth the Apostolicall Constitution of Pope Vigilius condemning and accursing both it for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes which their sentence you see is consonant to the Scriptures and the whole Catholike Church of all ages excepting none but such as adhere to their new Laterane decree and faith An example so ancient so authenticall and so pregnant to demonstrate the truth which wee teach and they oppugne that it may justly cause any Papist in the world to stagger and stand in doubt even of the maine ground and foundation whereon all his faith relyeth For the full clearing of which matter being of so great importance and consequence I have thought it needful to rip up every veine and sinew in this whole cause concerning these Three Chapters and the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the same and withall examine the weight of every doubt evasion excuse which eyther Cardinall Baronius who is instar omnium or Binius or any other moveth or pretendeth herein not willingly nor with my knowledge omitting any one reason or circumstance which either they urge or which may seeme to advantage or help them to decline the inevitable force of our former Demonstration CAP. V. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted 1 THere is not as I thinke any one cause which Card. Baronius in all the Volumes of his Annalls hath with more art or industry handled then this concerning Pope Vigilius and the Fift Generall Councill In this hee hath strained all his wits moved and removed every stone under which hee imagined any help might be found eyther wholly to excuse or any way lessen the errour of Vigilius All the Cardinalls forces may be ranked into foure severall troupes In the first do march all his Shifts and Evasions which are drawne from the Matter of the Three Chapters In the second those which are drawne from the Popes Constitution In the third those which respect a subsequent Act of Vigilius In the fourth last those which concerne the fift General Councill After all these wherin cōsisteth the whole pith of the Cause the Cardinall brings forth another band of certaine subsidiary but most disorderly souldiers nay not souldiers they never tooke the Military oath nor may they by the Law of armes nor ever were by any worthy Generall admitted into any lawfull fight or so much as to set footing in the field meere theeves and robbers they are whom the Cardinall hath set in an ambush not to fight in the cause but onely like so many Shimei's that they might raile at and revile whomsoever the Cardinall takes a spleene at or with whatsoever hee shall be moved in the heat of his choler At the Emperour Iustinian at Theodora the Empresse at the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters at the Imperiall Edict at Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea at the Synodal acts yea at Pope Vigilius himselfe we wil first encounter the just forces of the Cardinall which onely are his lawfull warriours and having discomfited them we shall with ease cleare all the coasts of this cause
of it a greater shame than that in the next place let us see how he declameth both against the Emperors Edict whereby these three Chapters were condemned Theodorus Bish. of Caesarea who as he saith was the author penner of that Edict The Edict it self he calleth first Seminarium dissentionū a seed-plot of sedition which was never made upon a good occasion nor had any good end And not content herewith he tells us out of Facundus that it is contrary to the faith yea even to that faith which Iustinian himselfe professed as orthodoxall to which effect also Baronius himselfe saith that the Emperours Edict was set forth contrary to the three Chapters of the most holy Councell of Chalcedon But he specially seekes to disgrace it by the author of it for though it was published by Iustinian yet saith he it was written and that craftily by heretikes and adversaries to the truth by the Origenists and in particular by Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea one gratious potent and familiar with the Emperour and for proofe of all this the Cardinall citeth Liberatus Facundus and Vigilius 2. Having thus declared Theodorus to be the author and writer of the Edict Baronius then rageth against Theodorus as if he were to act veterē comoediam or according to the Proverbe ex plaustro to raile out of a cart against him calling him factious fraudulēt impudēt a most wicked hereticall schismaticall headstrong Origenist the ring-leader of the Origenists one marvellously addicted to the heresie of Origen nor onely a servant to Origens errors but also a most earnest defender of the Eutychean blasphemy nor onely so but plunged in the heresie of the Aphthardokites or Phantastickes and like a blinde guide leading the blinde Emperour into that ditch of heresie a sacrilegious person a pseudobishop a tyrant a perverter of lawes an overthrower of right the author of all mischiefe to the Empire the very plague of the whole Church Thus and much more doth Baronius utter against Theodorus by whom being so unworthy an author hee would disgrace the Edict it selfe which he writ though the Emperour published it 3. Let us first begin with that most untrue and malicious calumny of Baronius that the Emperor published his Edict against the three Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon Truly the Cardinall should and might most truly have said the quite contrary that he published his Edict for defence not onely of the three but of every Chapter of every position of every decree of the Councell of Chalcedon The three Chapters which that Imperiall Edict and after it the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church condemneth were not Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon but three impious positions assertions or as they were by an equivalent word called Chapters which heretikes specially the Nestorians collected and falsely boasted to bee taught by the Councell of Chalcedon whereas in very truth the holding of any one of them much more of them all is the overthrow of the whole Councell at Chalcedon yea of the whole Catholike faith that Councell contradicteth and condemneth them all no lesse than the fift Councell which as Gregory truly saith is in omnibus sequax it doth in every point follow and consent unto the Councell of Chalcedon The like may be said of that which out of Facundus Baronius observeth and citeth as a proofe of his saying that the Emperours Edict is repugnant and contrary to the orthodoxall faith Baronius will still keepe his old wont in applauding Vigilius and the defenders of the Three Chapters For if the Edict condemning them be contrary then is the defence of them consonant to the faith and then not the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian but the Pontificall Constitution of Vigilius must be approved as orthodoxall And what is this else but to condemne the judgement of the fift generall Councell of Pope Pelagius Gregory and all Popes after them of all generall Councells following it in a word to contradict and utterly condemne the consenting judgement of the whole Church for the space of 11. hundred yeares they all approve the determination of the fift Councell and it so fully consenteth with the Edict in condemning the Three Chapters that in their definitive sentence they differ very little in words but in substance and sense nothing at all from the Emperours Edict which caused Binius to say the Edict of the Emperour was approved by the Pope and the Councell So Catholike and orthodoxall is it so advisedly and orthodoxally penned To seeke no further proofe Baronius himselfe was so infatuated in this cause that he oftentimes confuteth his owne sayings for himselfe gives a most ample and most observable testimony of this Edict and of the orthodoxy thereof saying of it Est veluti Catechismus fidei Catholicae exacta declaratio this Edict of Iustinian is as it were a Catechisme or an exact declaration of the Catholike faith and an exact discussing of the Three Chapters which were afterwards long controversed in the Church So untrue is that his first calumnie against the Edict whereby hee would perswade that it is contrary to certaine Chapters of the holy Councell of Chalcedon or as Facundus plainly but most untruely affirmeth contrary to the Catholike faith 4. For the second calumnie that his Edict was a seminary of sedition Baronius might as justly condemne the decree of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon yea the very Scripture it selfe and preaching of the Gospell Christ himselfe is set as signum contradictionis as a butt of contradiction against which they will ever bee striving and shooting their arrowes of opposition sedition contention himselfe saith I am come to set fire on the earth and what would I but that it should bee kindled and againe Suppose yee that I am come to give peace on the earth I tell you nay but rather division and no sooner was the Gospell preached abroad in the world but that which our Saviour foretold them came to passe Brother shall deliver up brother the father the Childe the Children shall rise against their Parents and cause them to bee put to death and ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake what a seminary of sedition may the Cardinal call the Gospell that caused all these troubles warres seditions murders and burnings in the whole world what another Seminary was the Nicene decree against Arianisme and Constantines Edict to ratifie the same after that how seditiously was Athanasius and the Catholikes persecuted put to flight to torments by Constantius and the Arians how seditiously did the Councels of Ariminum and Syrmium oppugne and fight against that Nicene Decree till they had so farre prevailed that well-neare there had needed no longer contending the whole world almost being turned Arians and even groaning under Arianisme If the Cardinall by reason of those manifold troubles and oppositions which ensued upon
a visor affrayed the Emperour like a little Boy from the truth and led him captive into heresie Doe you not thinke that the Cardinall needed to be sent to Anticyra when he writ this not onely without truth but without braine and ordinary sense 11. The other crime that Theodorus opposed himselfe to Vigilius and to the decree of silence is like the former save that this difference is to be observed betwixt them that the former was forged by Baronius but this later is grounded on a foolish and forged writing applauded by Baronius fictions and forgeries they are both but the one was fained to the Cardinals hand for the other hee was faine to beate it out of his owne anvill There was neither any such decree for taciturnity neither did Theodorus nor needed hee to oppose himselfe to Vigilius for Vigilius as well as Theodorus all the whole time almost from his comming to Constantinople till the fift Councell was assembled wholly consented to condemne the Three Chapters as besides other evident proofes before alleaged to which I remit the reader that one testimony of the Emperour doth undeniably demonstrate Quod vero ejusdem voluntatis semper fuit de condemnatione Trium Capitulorum per plurima declaravit Vigilius hath by very many things declared that he hath been alwayes since his comming to Constantinople of the same minde in condemning the Three Chapters what thinke you here againe of Baronius who upon this occasion of contradicting Vigilius his decree of silence reviles Theodorus calling him sacrilegious a Pseudo-Bishop a tyrant a schismatike a perverter of lawes the author of all evils and yet when the Cardinall hath said all this there is no truth nor reality in the cause and occasion for which hee thus rageth and revileth no opposition to Vigilius no decree of silence either oppugned or such as might bee oppugned it was a non ens a chymera floating in the Cardinals idle fancy Was there no Helleborus at Rome or in Italy to purge the Cardinals braine of this extreme distemper 12. The whole hope consists now in the Cardinals Triarij the three heresies objected to Theodorus that of Origen of Eutyches and of the Aphthardokites And for the two last I must say the same almost as to the former calumnies they are meere fictions of Baronius Theodorus was saith hee an Aphthardokite and an Eutychean heretike what Author what witnesse or testimony doth the Cardinall produce to prove so hainous a crime against him truly not one himselfe accusator simul testis is both the accuser and the witnesse But yet hee proves it by some good consequence or reason no nor that neither his proofe is no lesse foolish than his position is false Iustinian saith he was misled into the heresie of the Aphthardokites by some Origenists as Eustathius declareth whereupon we may easily and without calumny affirme that the ring-leader of those who misled the Emperour was Theodorus Bish. of Caesarea an Origenist The ground of which to omit that this Eustathius is of no credit being the heresie of Iustinian seeing that to bee a calumnie and slander wee have before confirmed this whole collection must needs be like the foundation on which it relyeth slanderous and false to say nothing how alogicall and incoherent a consequent this is from particulars Some Origenists misled Iustinian therefore Theodorus how much rather on the contrary may wee certainly conclude that seeing Iustinian who was directed in causes of faith by Theodorus continued orthodoxall and a most worthy defender of the true faith as before we proved therefore doubtlesse Theodorus himselfe the director of the Emperor was and remained orthodoxall and that of a certaine hee was no Eutychean nor Aphthardokite is evident by his subscribing to the decree of the fift Councell wherein not onely the Councell and decree of Chalcedon condemning Eutyches and in it the heresie of the Aphthardokites is strongly confirmed but Eutyches also by name and all that hold his heresies are anathematized by all the Bishops of that fift Councell and particularly by this Theodorus whom the Cardinall without any testimony or proofe at all slanders to have beene an Eutychean and Apthardokite unto both which heresies he was most opposite All which will be more manifest by considering the first of those three heresies wherein Baronius hath the greatest colour for his saying That Theodorus was an Origenist and a most earnest maintainer of that heresie the Cardinall often and most confidently affirmeth wherein hee hath Liberatus the Deacon and Bishop Facundus for his Authors 13. First for Facundus he doth not expresly mention Theodorus as an Origenist but yet because Baronius citeth him to say that Theodorus writ the Edict and Facundus calleth the writers of that Edict Origenists let him be admitted for one of the Cardinals witnesses Who I pray you or of what credit thinke you is this Bishop Facundus Truly an enemy to Iustinian an enemy to Theodorus of Caesarea and to all that condemned the Three Chapters a very heretike and enemy to the Catholike truth Witnesse hereof that testimony which their owne Possevine giveth of him out of Isidorius He writ twelve bookes in defence of the three Chapters whereby he proveth the condemning of those three Chapters to bee the condemning or banishing of the Apostolike faith and the Councell of Chalcedon Now the defenders of the three Chapters and writers in defence of them to bee condemned anathematized and accursed for heretikes by the fift Councell and after it the 6.7 and in a word by all both generall Councels and Popes that follow Gregory we have often before declared So that by the consenting judgement of all those generall approved Councels and Popes Facundus being an earnest defender of them and writer in their defence is anathematized and condemned for an heretike And that the continued pertinaciously in this heresie after the sentence and judgement of the generall Councell Baronius doth witnesse who tels us and that with a Constat It is certaine and manifest that Facundus was sought for to be punished because hee had written most eloquently in defence of the three Chapters but by lurking in some secret place he escaped Possevine further addeth that Facundus writ a booke against Mutianus in defence of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and that Theodorus of Mopsvestia damnatus fuit ab Ecclesia Catholica ob errores contra sidem was condemned by the Catholike Church for his heresie or errors against the faith Must not he needs bee an heretike that defends a condemned heretike yea defends those very writings and errors of him and Ibas which are condemned for hereticall I confesse saith Facundus to your Holinesse that I withdraw my selfe from the communion of the opposites those were the condemners of the three Chapters that is to say in truth Catholikes not because they condemne Theodorus of Mopsvestia but for that in the person of this Theodorus