reason still to apprehend a Persecution and he actually suffered Martyrdom soon after at the beginning of the Empire of Galienus or under Emilian his Election and glorious Confession About the same time Pupienus an African Bishop giving Credit to the Calumnies which Felicissimus and the Enemies of St. Cyprian had published against him writ him a very disobliging Letter wherein he assured him that he could not with a safe Conscience communicate with him because he did not look upon his Ordination to be lawful and upon that he accuses him of Pride and of being the Occasion of the Divisions that were in his Church St. Cyprian answered him in the Sixty eighth Letter That he wondred extremely how he came to call his Ordination in question after he had been elected Bishop of Carthage by the Consent of the Clergy and People that is to say by the Judgment of God himself and had exercised that Function for the space of six years which shews that this Letter was writ in the Year 254. That it had been approved by all the World and acknowledged even by the Pagans themselves That an infinite Number of Prelates Martyrs Confessors and holy Virgins had owned him for their lawful Bishop that after this he desired Pupienus to judge in his Favour and to ratifie the judgment of God and of Jesus Christ That he had done him wrong in listning to scandalous Calumnies and such too as were justly punishable against his Brother and against a Bishop That even the Pagans were sensible of the Effects of his Humility and that Pupienus had formerly known him when he communicated with him That there were no Divisions in his Church because all his People lived in a wonderful Union with him and that those only continued without the Church who deserved to be ejected out of it if they had been within After this he exhorts Pupienus to repent of his Rashness and Pride and promises to communicate with him provided he is sorry for his Crime and endeavours truly to satisfie God He tells him that God had informed him in a Vision That whosoever would not believe in Jesus Christ when he established a Bishop should believe him against his Will when he came to take Vengeance upon him That he very well knew that the World made these Visions and Dreams pass for ridiculous ill grounded Imaginations but that the same thing had been said of Joseph's Dreams At last he concludes with these Words You have my Letter and I have yours they will both be read on the Day of Judgment before the Tribunal of Jesus Christ. Towards the beginning of Pope Stephen's Pontificate St. Cyprian was consulted by the Bishops of France and Spain about two Affairs of great Consequence To give the Reader a short Account of that which related to France he is to know That the Heresie of Novatian having spread it self in that Country Marcianus Bishop of Arles being infected with it joyned himself to Novatian and brought over several Persons to his Party And because he was not excommunicated by Name he arrogantly insulted over his Brethren Faustinus Bishop of Lyons and the other Bishops of that Province writ to Stephen and St. Cyprian about it earnestly desiring that they would concur with them in excommucating Marcianus Stephen neglecting to send them any Answer Faustinus writ the Second time to St. Cyprian about it t Who advised Stephen in his 66th Letter Bâ—â—onius and some others have made use of this Letter to advance the Authority of Rome but with small success for first of all St. Cyprian only advises Stephen to do what he himself might do and what he had really done Secondly The Gallican Bishops writ to St. Cyprian as well as to Stephen Thirdly They addressed themselves to them because Marcianus had alledged in his own Defence that these Bishops had not excommunicated him Fourthly St. Cyprian does not write to him to Cite or Depose Marcianus but only to declare him separated from the Communion and to advise the People of Arles to Elect another Bishop because he was notoriously Excommunicated and Deposed for joyning himself to Novatian who was then out of the Church Fifthly He does by no means ground the Necessity of Stephen's writing into France upon his Authority but only upon a Motive of Charity whereby Bishops were obliged to asist one another and upon the Unity of the Episcopacy Monsieur Launoy has endeavoured to bring the Truth of this Letter into question and has proposed some Conjectures to shew that it is spurious but they are weak and ill grounded and scarce any body has been induced to embrace his Opinion because this Letter is really St. Cyprian's Style which has a peculiar Character as St. Austin well observes by which it may be easily known The first Difficulty relates to the time of this Letter but this is easily answered by saying that it was written at the end of the Year 255 and that the Quarrel between Stephen and St. Cyprian began not till the Year 256. The second is taken from the Silence of the Ancients but we ought not to be surprized that this particular Fact was not taken notice of since that of Basilides and Martialis which are not questioned by Monsieur Launoy were also as much forgotten Add to this that St. Austin Lib. 6. de Bapt. contra Donatist Ch. 15. makes ment on of a Letter of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephen which takes no notice of the Question about Baptism and cannot be any other than this The Third Objection of Monsieur Launoy is that it is not to be found in several Manuscripts as in that of the Vatican and above twenty more according to the English Edition but then it is to be found in three ancient ones as Rigaltius has observed and there are several Letters of St. Cyprian that are wanting in some Manuscripts The Principal and Last is taken from the History of Trophimus who came not to Arles of which Place he was Bishop if we may believe the ancient Author of the Life of St. Saturninus quoted by Gregory of Tours till the time of Decius which is four or five Years before this Letter of St. Cyprian was written though it appears by this Letter that Marcianus was Bishop of Arles and not Trophimus and the Christian Religion had been a long time established in that City This we confess to be the greatest Difficulty but we may answer it by admitting the Epocha of Sulpitius Severus who tells us that Trophimus came some years before Decius and that it is not the Author of the Life of Saturninus but Gregory of Tours who upon occasion of what this Author says that Saturninus was Bishop of Tholouse in the time of Decius adds seven other Bishops of France amongst whom is Trophimus and it is possible that he might reckon some who came some time before The fifth Epistle of Zosimus which Quâ—snellus has defended against the Conjectures of Monsieur Launoy confirms our
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
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
Extent but very Intricate because of the Diabolical Cheats of the Hereticks and wherein he must use great Cunning because of their Knaveries against which also there were many Prejudices by reason of the Dissimulation and fear of many That this Book would seem strange even to those of the Country where he was tho' there the things themselves were done which he treated of That what he was to deliver had come to pass some years ago but the Silence which he had hitherto kept made all these things still seem New That the Peace had almost made him forget the Memory of them but that not long before these things had been renew'd again by the impious Malice of some notable Seducers After this He describes the State of the Affairs of the Church under Constantius He complains That he had Banish'd those Bishops that would not condemn St. Athanasius and that he interpos'd his Authority in Ecclesiastical Decisions At last he says That he had treated in his Work of Faith in God of the Hope of Eternity and the Defence of the Truth and he exhorts all Christians to inform themselves of those things which he there recites that so every one may be satisfied in his own Judgment without following the Opinions of others blindly After his Preface follow the Letters of the Council of Sardica to all the Churches and in particular to Julius Bishop of Rome together with the Subscriptions of some Bishops and the Names of the Hereticks that were condemned The Author of these Fragments has join'd to these two Letters a Fragment of St. Hilary for St. Athanasius at the End the Recantation of Ursacius and Valens is mention'd Their Letters to Julius and St. Athanasius are at the bottom of this Fragment The Passage which immediately follows has reference to the Condemnation of Photinus and that of Marcellus of Ancyra which he consented to but the End of that Passage concerns the Council of Nice whose Creed he recites and explains The First Letter of Liberius here produc'd is supposititious as the Passage which follows plainly discovers and as we have already shown when we treated of the Works of this Pope The Second is Genuine which is directed to the Bishops of Italy concerning the Restitution of the Bishops who had approv'd the Arian Creeds The Letter of the Bishops of Illyricum concerning the Condemnation of the Creed of Ariminum is one of the most Excellent Monuments of that time The Letters of Ursacius and Valens to Germinius and his Answer are put here out of their proper place being written in the Year 366. We have already spoken of Pope Liberius's Letters that are set down After which there follows a Letter of the Eastern Bishops to the Council of Ariminum with some Reflections of St. Hilary which are very much corrupted After this Fragment the Author of this Collection has added this Note Here endeth the Book taken out of the Historical Work of St. Hilary And yet he adds afterwards many Pieces which are probably taken out of the same Book The 1st is a Letter from a Council of the Bishops of France held at Paris against the Creed made at Ariminum The 2d is a Letter of Eusebius of Vercellae written to Gregory a Bishop in Spain wherein he commends him for opposing Hosius and preserving the Faith The 3d. is a Letter or rather a Confession of Faith by Germinius the Arian Bishop against those of his own Party who had Sign'd the Creed of Ariminum The 4th is a Letter written by the Eastern Bishops in the Name of the Council of Sardica against the Bishops of the West This Letter should have been plac'd before those others which we have already spoken of The 5th is a Letter of the Bishops of the Council of Ariminum to the Emperour Constantius before they had Sign'd the Creed which was presented to them by the Arians There follows after it a short Reflection concerning the Stile of St. Hilary The 6th is the Approbation which the Legates of the Council of Ariminum gave to the Creed made by the Arians at Nice a City of Thracia The 7th is a Letter written to the Emperour Constantius by the Bishops of Ariminum after they had approv'd the Confession of Faith made at Nice which was presented to them by the Arians The 8th is a large Letter of Liberius to Constantius in Favour of St. Athanasius This is mis-plac'd is well in respect of time as of the Matter it self The 9th is a Letter of Constantius to the Council of Ariminum The 10th is the Decree of this Council before they had surrendred up themselves to the Emperour's pleasure The 11th is the Condemnation of Ursacius and Valens in this Council Here end the Monuments taken out of the Works of St. Hilary to which there is subjoin'd in some Copies the Creed of the Nicene Council the Creeds of Ariminum and that which is attributed to St. Athanasius These are the Pieces contain'd in the Fragments of St. Hilary which might be read with more Pleasure and Profit if they were dispos'd according to the Order of time which I have set down in the Notes h According to the Order of Time which I have set down in the Notes These pieces are Pages of the Paris Edition 1652. The Year of Christ. Pag. 447 The Nicene Creed in the Year 325 433 The Letter of the Council of Sardica to all the Bishops A Letter of the same Council to Julius 465 The Letter of the Bishops of the East written from Philippopolis upon their Departure from Sardica 347 443 The Letters of Ursacius and Valens to Liberius and St. Athanasius 349 484 The Letter of Liberius to Constantius about the Cause of St. Athanasius 450 The Supposititious Letter of Liberius to the Bishops of the East A Letter of Liberius before his Banishnishment 352 456 To Eusebius Dionysius and Lucifer 457 To Vincentius of Capua 354 463 A Letter of Eusebius of Vercellae to Gregory a Bishop of Spain upon occasion of the Fall of Hosius 357 The Letters of Liberius written in his Banishment after his Subscription 457 To the Bishops of the East 358 458 To Ursacius and Valens 459 Letters which concern the Council of Ariminum 358 487 A Letter of the Emperor to the Council 488 The Catholick Determination Ibid. The Condemnation of Ursacius of Valens and Germinius 481 The Answer of the Council to the Emperor before he had subscrib'd 459 The profession of Faith of the Bishops of the East that was given in to the Legates of the Council 482 The Acts of the Subscription of the Legates 483 A Letter to the Emperor after their Subscription 359 465 A Letter of Germinius after the Council of Ariminum 360 462 A Letter of the Council of Paris 451 A Letter of Liberius to the Bishops of Italy 362 452 A Letter of the Bishops of Italy to the Bishops of Illyricum Ibid. A Letter of Ursacius and Valens to Germinius 453 The Answer of Germinius to
we do not honour the Water as the Father and the Son St. Basil answers That this Objection is ridiculous and that those who make it are mad That 't is not the Water that Baptizes us but the Spirit That the Water indeed is joyned with the Spirit as the Sign of the Death and Burial of the Old Man but that 't is the Spirit who gives a New Life That Baptism is administred by dipping three times into the Water and by invoking the Trinity three times to signify our dying to Sin and the giving of Life That the Baptism of Jesus Christ is very different from that of St. John which was only the Baptism of Water whereas that of Jesus Christ is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and of Fire Last of all he says That the Martyrs who suffer'd Death for Jesus Christ needed not the Baptism of Water in order to their receiving the Crown being baptiz'd in their own Blood He speaks also in this place of the Fire of the Day of Judgment which he calls the Baptism of Fire that shall try all Mankind In the 17th and 18th he shews That the Holy Spirit is joyn'd to the Father and to the Son as a Person equal and not as one inferiour To prove this he uses the Rules of Logick having to do with an Adversary against whom he must use these Arms. In the 19th he proves That we should celebrate the Glory and Praises of the Holy Spirit as we do those of the Father and of the Son and that we should give him the same Honours In the 20th he refutes the Opinion of those who say That the Holy Spirit is neither a Lord nor a Servant but that he is Free He shows that this Opinion is very absurd for either he is a Creature or not if not then he is God or Lord and if he is he must be a Servant for all Creatures have a Dependance upon God In the 21st he shows by many Testimonies of Scripture That the Holy Spirit is there called Lord. In the 22d he proves his Divinity by many Passages of Scripture In the 23d he alledges the Miracles attributed to the Holy Spirit to prove that he is God In the 24th he shows That we should Glorify the Holy Spirit as we do the Father and the Son In the 25th he answers those who object That the Scripture never uses this Expression The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit and he shews that to say The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit signifies nothing else but the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit That the erroneous way which they would have us use is not to be found in the Holy Scripture Glory be to the Father by the only Son in the Holy Spirit That the Particle in has the same Sence in this place as the Particle with That the Fathers made use of the Particle with as being most proper to oppose the Errors of Arius and Sabellius and that 't is less capable of an ill Sence That notwithstanding he is not ty'd up to this Expression provided we be willing to render Glory to the Holy Spirit In the following Chapter he goes on to explain with much subtlety the Difference between the Particles in and with In the 27th he proposes this Objection We ought to receive nothing but what is in the Holy Scripture But these Words are not to be found Glory to the Father and to the Son with the Holy Spirit In answer to which he First sends his Adversaries back to what he had said in Ch. 25. Afterwards he adds That in the Church there are some Opinions and Practices founded upon the Testimonies of Scripture but then there are also some which are founded only upon unwritten Tradition That the Scripture and Tradition have an equal Authority for the establishing of Piety and Truth and that none who follow the Ecclesiastical Laws resist them That if we should reject all Customs that are not founded on Scripture we shall greatly prejudice Religion and reduce it to a superficial Belief of some particular Opinions 'T is easy says he to give Examples of this and to begin with that which is most common Where find we it written that we must make the Sign of the Cross upon those who begin to Hope in Jesus Christ What Book of Scripture teaches us that we must turn to the East to make our Prayers What Saint has left us in his Writings the Words of Invocation when we Consecrate the Bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of Blessing For we do not content our selves with pronouncing the Words set down by the Apostle St. Paul and the Evangelists but we add several Prayers both before and after which we consider as having much Efficacy upon the Sacrament and yet we have them not but by Tradition We Consecrate the Water of Baptism the Oyl of Unction and him also who is to be baptiz'd Where is this written Is not this a Secret Tradition Is it not Custom which has taught us that we must Anoint him who is to be baptiz'd Where has the Scripture taught us that we must use three Dippings in baptizing We must say the same of the other Ceremonies of Baptism as of Renouncing the Devil and his Angels Who has oblig'd us to do these things Whence have we Learn'd them Have we them not from the Tradition of our Fathers Who observed them without divulging or publishing of them being perswaded that Silence kept up a Veneration for the Mysteries What necessity was there of putting that in Writing which it was not lawful to reveal or to explain to those who were not yet baptiz'd Afterwards he gives the Reason of some Usages which he had mentioned He observes also That Christians pray to God standing from Easter to Whitsunday That they kneel and afterwards rise up He gives Mystical Reasons for these Customs which are so forc'd that 't is easy to perceive there is no better Reason to be given than Custom and Practice Lastly he concludes That since there are so many things which we have by Tradition we ought not to reprehend one simple Particle which the Ancients made use of This he proves in the 29th Chapter where he alledges the Authorities of St. Irenaeus St. Clemens Romanus the Two Dionysii Eusebius of Caesarea Origen Africanus Athenogenes Gregory Thaumaturgus Firmilian and Meletius besides the Prayers of the Church and the Consent of the Eastern and Western Churches Towards the end of this Chapter he complains of the hardships which his Calumniators make him suffer In the last he describes the miserable State of the Church He compares it to a Fleet of Ships tost with a great Tempest which is the cause of Shipwrack to many of them and Points out the Troubles and Miseries wherewith the Church was afflicted very admirably This Chapter alone is sufficient to show that this Book is undoubtedly St. Basil's He proves also the Divinity of the Holy
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 aâ—◠〈…〉 some Things which it signifies little wâ—â—â—her
obliged to reserve nothing of their Goods to themselves since it is their part to give an Example to the Ignorant Christians whom they ought as much to surpass in Devotion as they do in Degree and Dignity For the highest place in the Priestly Office without great worth is nothing else but a Title given to an Office Dignity to an unworthy Person and as a Precious Stone in the Dirt. The Levites of the Old Law had nothing of their own with how much greater reason is it forbidden to the Ministers of the New Law to possess Riches and leave them to their Heirs Jesus Christ doth not advise 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 doth others 〈…〉 Gold or Silver The 〈◊〉 are 〈◊〉 obliged 〈◊〉 others to 〈◊〉 them 〈◊〉 because 't is their State and 〈…〉 Sins we must give them to 〈…〉 of Life I grant we may says 〈…〉 and cut off all Superâ—… We 〈…〉 getting Riches or eâ—creasing them or be troubled in keeping them Lastly Some Goods which we have in this Life must be distributed 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 run to the last 〈…〉 I have children may some say here begins Wordâ—'s Third 〈…〉 for their Salvation But if 〈◊〉 the Affection of Parents who leave their Children something to live on be 〈…〉 their â—ollateral Heirs and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Rich Men Oh unhappy Men as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you are full of Carking 〈…〉 when you are Dead and do not think upon 〈…〉 before God's 〈◊〉 the Devils attend you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you Eternally and you are thinking on the Pleasures which your Heirs will have in enjoying the 〈◊〉 which you have gotten I do not speak this to 〈◊〉 Christians altogether from leaving any thing on their lawful Heirs Heirs but to Teach them above all things to take care of 〈◊〉 Salvation There are some cases in which it is not only justly allowable to leave in their Heirs 〈◊〉 it were the greatest Injustice not to do it As for Example If a Man leaves his Father or Mother 〈◊〉 or Wife 〈◊〉 Necessity if he hath Poor Friends he is obliged to leave them something and so much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they are Dedicated to God although we now do just the contrary and Fathers leave none of their Children less than those they have offered to God But why is it necessary to give to the Religious 〈◊〉 say How Must they be forced to beg their Bread because they are Religious It true That That they need not the things of this World but no thanks to their Parents that they are not in â—ant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Hardness would reduce them to it if they had not other helps You will demand What gâ—â—d would it do them to have an equal share of their Father's Estate with their 〈◊〉 I Answer That it would be useful to maintain the others Religious to impart to those that have nothing that their Charity may make them not to have it soon but may be more happy in having had it Why do you reduce them to Poverty against their wâ—â—â—s 〈◊〉 Suffer them to embrace Poverty voluntarily to chuse it out of Devotion without obliging them to endure it through Necessity There are some that think it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leave the Proâ—… to their Religious Children This is a kind of Impiety and Inâ—â—â—elity says 〈◊〉 For besides that the propriety of their Goods belongs to their Children this is a way found out to provide for their Children without giving any thing to God They would have the Holy Monks Live in Riches but Die in Poverty In fine 〈…〉 much against that Abuse which is become a kind of Law among us To leave nothing to the Religious or only an Allowance for Life he spends the rest of this Book and all the Fourth in proving That Men are obliged at their Death to leave a part of their Estate to be employed in â—ions Uses Salvian cites one place of these Books in his Fourth Book Of the Government of God which shews that they were written before the Year 440. He also gives the reason of the Title of these Books in his Letter written to Salâ—… where he says 1. That he Dedicated them to the whole Church because the disorders were general 〈◊〉 That he concealed his own Name for Two Reasons for fear it should be 〈◊〉 occasion of Pride and upon the account of that small Authority and Esteem he had least they should hurt the important Truths contain'd in his Work 3. That he chose the Name of Tiâ—… according to S. Luke's Example who â—ook Theophilus's because that Name may agree to all Men that Honour God and that being fearful of telling a Lye he assumed a Name which agreed to the design of the Work composed for the Honour of God But that it was needless curiosity to search after the Author because he was not willing to be known There are besides these Eight Letters of Salvian's which are all written with a great deal of Elegancy The best of them is that which is written to his Wife's a Hypatius Father and b Palladia Mother in his own their c Quieta Daughter 's and their d Auspicioâ—a little Daughter's Name to appease the Anger in which their Mother and Father were because they were retreated and had Consecrated themselves to God It is not necessary to commend the Beauty and Elegancy of Salvian's Stile it is sufficiently known to all that have but a little smattering of Learning It would be hard to find a more near beautiful smooth and pleasant Discourse He is not so diffusive but he is more diverting and full of Instructions than Lactantius and he proves what he asserts by Texts of Scripture which he alledges much to his purpose and which come up very well to the Subject in hand He makes very Natural Descriptions of Vices to create Hatred of them he produces very plausible Reasons to induce Men to forsake them and he confutes solidly and ingeniously the idle preâ—…es which they made use of to defend their pursuit of the World His Morals are strict without being unreasonable but he lays down some Principles a little too largely and which he cannot maintain in their strict sence but it is the common fault of 〈◊〉 that are too rigid Censors of Manners and it is hard to inveigh strongly against a Vice aâ—d not fall into the contrary Extream There are Three Books of Questions Printed with Salvian at Basil and elsewhere to reconcile some places of the Old and New Testament together Some attribute them to Salvian but 't is certain they are not his They are commonly imputed to Julian Bishop of Toledo The Works of Salvian have been Printed in the former Age in several places as at Basil in 1530 with the Notes of Alexander Brassicanus in Folio at Paris in 1570 and in 1575 at Rome by Manutius in 1564. M. Pitthaeus reviewed them by several Manuscripts and put out a new Edition at Paris in 1580. After him Ritterhusius caused them to be reprinted in 1611 at
be joyned the Letter to Rusticus Lugdunensis Published in F. Dacherius in Tom. V of his Specilegiâ—… In which he thanks that Bishop of Lyons for his assistance and relates how much trouble he had in the business of Acacius but this Letter doth not seem to me to be Gelasius's Style But Pope Gelasius hath not only written Letters but also hath composed some small Treatises We have already observed that several of these Letters may pass for Works Memoirs or Manifesto's Of this Nature is his Treatise De Anathematis Vinâ—â—lo He begins it with an Answer to the Objection of those who complained that he urged the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon in the business of Acacius too much but would not consent to the Privileges which the Council had granted to the Bishop of Constantinople He answers that all the Church embraced such definitions of this Council as were consonant to Holy Scripture to the Tradition of the Holy Fathers and the Decrees of the Church concerning the Orthodox Truth and the Common Faith of all the Church But as to other things therein treated of which the Holy See gave no Person Commission to meddle with to which the Legats of the Holy See oppose themselves and which the Holy See never would approve of which Anatolius himself had abandoned by referring them to the Approbation of the Holy See and which are contrary to the Privileges of the Universal Church he never would in any wise defend them After this he discourses of Excommunication and Absolution He acknowledges that all Sinners may be absolved in this Life if they do Repent and althô it be said in the Sentence given against Acacius that he shall never be loosed from the Curse pronounced against him this ought not to be understood but in case he do not Repent for if that be done in this Life he may be Pardoned but if he go on and Die in that estate he cannot be Absolved That the Judgment of Absolution which the Emperor had caused to be pronounced in favour of Peter of Alexandria was void being done by his own Authority contrary to the Canons of the Church and without the Consent of the Bishop of the Holy See by whose authority he had been Condemned The second Treatise of Gelasius is a Discourse against Andromachus a Roman Senator and * Caeterosque Romanus other Persons who endeavoured to restore the Lupercalia at Rome which were at that time utterly Abolished Superstitiously believing that the Diseases with which the City was then afflicted proceeded from the neglect of those Sacrifices This Pope smartly reproves those who were of this Opinion and proves they are unworthy of the Name and Profession of Christians That they commit a Spiritual Adultery and fall into a kind of Idolatry which deserves a separation from the Body of Christ and severe Penance In sum That their Opinion was a foolish and groundless Imagination because the Lupercalia were not appointed to avert Diseases but to make Women Fruitful as T. Luvius relates in the second Decad of his History That the Plague and other Distempers were as Common when the Lupercalia were Celebrated as they are now and if Rome be afflicted with Diseases the Plague Barrenness c. it ought to be imputed to the corrupt and disorderly manners of the Inhabitants That if the Lupercalia have any thing Divine they ought to be Celebrated with the same Ceremonies and in the same manner that they were heretofore and what Man is there that will be guilty of such shameless Impudence That they were a Remnant of Paganism which was the reason that they were Abolished and thô indeed they remained in use a long time under the Christian Emperors yet it doth not follow from thence that they ought always to be preserved for all Superstitions could not be abolished at once but by little and little Lastly He tells them that a 〈◊〉 Christian cannot nor ought to do it And althô his Predecessors did tolerate it they had some reasons which hindered them from abolishing them but yet he doubts not but that they did endeavour it The third Treatise was composed * D. Cave Entitles it Dicta adversus Pelagianam Haeresin against this Doctrine of the Pelagians that Men may pass their Life without Sin He proves the contrary by several Reasons grounded upon the Testimonies of Holy Scripture In it also he explains in what sense St. Paul says That the Children of the Faithful are Holy and the believing Wife sanctifieth the unbelieving Husband But the most eminent Treatise of Gelasius is his Treatise against Eutyches and Nestorius concerning the two Natures in Jesus Christ. The Criticks at first doubted whether it belonged to this Pope and * The Popish Writers are generally of Baronius judgment because there is a clear testimony against Transubstantiation in this Book Dr. Cave Baronius affirms it with greater Confidence than any that it is not his but Gelasius Cyzicenus's and Bellarmine followeth his Judgment The Conjectures which they bring seem to have some resemblance of truth if we consider them alone They are as follows 1. The Author of this Treatise quotes the Greek Fathers only and never mentions the Latins now what probability is there that Pope Gelasius would not alledge St. Jerom St. Ambrose St. Austin and St. Leo. 2. He numbers Eusebius Caesariensis among the Orthodox Doctors Now Gelasius thought him an Arian and puts his Books among the Apocryphal 3. The Treatise of Gelasius against Eutyches was a large Work according to the testimony of Gennadius this that we have is a small Tract These Reasons seem to prove that 't is not probable that it is Pope Gelasius's On the other hand there are no Objections against Gelasius Cyzicenus all things concur to attribute it to him for the time and name agree there is no other Gelasius to whom it can be attributed the Style of this Book is very like that of the History of the Council of Nice written by Gelasius Cyzicenus Lastly The Author of that History says in the Preface that he hath written against the Eutychians and commends Eusebius in the Body of his Work All this makes it sufficiently evident that this Work belongs to Gelasius Cyzicenus rather than Gelasius Bishop of Rome Nevertheless there want not convincing proofs to evince that it is really the Work of this Latter For first It is found in the MSS. joyned with the Letters of this Pope Second St. Fulgentius who is a Witness beyond exception cites it as Pope Gelasius's Lib. de 5. quest apud Ferrand Diac. c. 18. and John II. uses the Testimony of this Author as Pope Gelasius's in Epist. ad Avieâ—â—m Thirdly Gennasius * De Scrip. c. 94. assures us that this Pope made a large Treatise against Eutyches and Nestorius This agrees to this Book which bears the same Title and is very considerable for thô it be not a great Work in it self 't is a great Volume
Sisenand and decrees that they shall be subject to King * Suintilla the 2d Cinthila his Successor The 3d Pronounceth Anathema against those that shall endeavour to usurp the Crown against the consent of the whole Nation and without being chosen by the Nobility The 4th Forbids consulting Diviners about the Death of the Prince The 5th Prohibits speaking ill of him The 6th Decrees That the favours of Princes shall continue and be enjoyed after their Death The 7th That in all Councils shall be read the Constitution made in the 4th Council for the safety of Kings The 8th Confirms the Princes power to grant Favours The 9th Contains a Thanksgiving to King Cinthila and some Prayers and Vows in his behalf This Council is backed with King Cinthila's Declaration confirming the Decree of the Council about the Publick Prayers of December accompanied with Fastings and ordering that during that time there shall be a cessation from Work and Business Council VI. of Toledo of the Year 638. THIS is a National Council composed of above Sixty Prelates of Cinthila's Kingdom They begin with a Confession of Faith pretty long which is contained in the first Council VI. of Toledo Canon The 2d Confirms the use of the Litanies or Publick Prayers appointed in the preceding Council In the 3d They give the King thanks for driving the Jews out of his Kingdom and for suffering none but Catholicks in it They order That the succeeding Kings shall hereafter be bound to take Oath That they shall Tolerate no Infidels and pronounceth Anathema against those that shall break that Oath The 4th Delareth That persons guilty of Simony are unworthy of being advanced to Holy Orders and those that shall be found in Orders to be fallen from their Degree as well as those that have Ordained them The 5th Decrees That those that shall receive any thing of the Church Revenue shall hold it but by a precarious Title and shall subscribe an Instrument testifying the same that they may not plead prescription The 6th Is against Men Maidens and Widows leaving the Religious Habit to lead a Secular Life they are ordered to be shut up in Monasteries In the 7th the same thing is ordered against those who submitted themselves to publick Penance The 8th Explains a Constitution of S. Gregory's whereby they suppose he gave leave to a Young Man who underwent Penance upon fear of Death to Cohabit with his Wife till he was come to an Age in which it were easier to live Chastly They say that if he or she who hath not received Penance Dieth before he or she which submitted to Penance have practised Continence it shall not be lawful for the surviver to Marry but if he or she that was not put to Penance survive he may Marry again The 9th Ordains That such as are made Free by the Church shall at the Death of every Bishop renew the Declaration that they depend on the Church The 10th That these Free-Men shall do Service to the Church The 11th Forbids receiving Accusations before Examination had whether the Accusers be persons to be allowed of as such The 12th 13th and 14th Are against Rebellious Subjects and in the behalf of the good Loyal Servants of the Prince The 15th Maintains the Donations of Princes to Churches The 16th Provides for the Security of the Life and Estate of King's Children The 17th Provides for the Safety of the Prince himself and forbids all attempts against his Person and Crown as long as he lives and orders that after his Death none shall invade the Kingdom by Tyranny and none but a Noble Goth and worthy of that Dignity shall be advanced to the Sovereignty The 18th Canon does yet renew the Inhibition of attempting against the person of the Prince The 19th Is but a Conclusion of the Council Council VII of Toledo THIS Council was held in 646 under King * Vidisuindus Chisdavind and composed of Twenty Five Bishops Council VII of Toledo The 1st Constitution is against Perfidious and Disloyal Clerks By the 2d A Bishop or a Presbyter is permitted to finish the Celebration of a Mass begun if he that is Officiating falls ill and is not able to hold out to the end but it forbids Presbyters upon pain of Excommunication to leave the Holy Mysteries imperfect or to Celebrate after having taken the least Food The 3d Renews the Canon of the Council of Valentia about the Bishops Funerals The 4th Is against the greediness of some Bishops of Gallicia oppressing the Parsons of their Diocess They are forbidden by that Canon to take above two Pence per Annum of each Church in their Diocess to bring along with them in their Visitations more than Five persons and to stay above a Day in any Church The 5th Canon appoints That Hermits or Recluses that are ignorant or whose Life is not Vertuous enough shall be shut up in Monasteries that those only shall be let alone who are commendable for their Holiness and that for the future none shall be admitted to that Profession but such as have learned the Religious Life in Monasteries The last Canon imports That the next Neighbouring Suffragans of the Arch-Bishop of Toledo shall come every Month into that Town except in Vacation and Vintage-times Council of Lateran against the Monothelites under Martin I. THE Mystery of Christ's Incarnation which since Nestorius's Quarrel had always afforded matter of dispute between the Bishops produced a new one in this 7th Century which for a time divided the Eastern and Western Churches The business was no more Council of Lateran about the Question of the Two Natures and One Person in Christ the Authority of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon which had decided those Two Points was received by all the Patriarchs and they that would not agree upon those Truths were look'd upon as Hereticks both in the East and the West But about the Year 620 they stirred up another Question whether they should say That there were Two Operations and Two Wills in Christ as Two Natures are said to be in him Theodorus Bishop of * A City of Arabia Petrâ—a Pharan was the first who expressing himself upon that Question maintained that the Manhood in Christ was so united to the Word that tho' it had its Faculties it did not Act by it self but the whole Act was to be ascribed to the Word which gave it the motion Cyrus Bishop of Phasis embraced that Opinion and expressed himself about it in the same manner denying there were Two Operations in Christ and affirming that they were reduced to one principal Operation Not that they denied that Human Actions and Passions were in Christ but they affirmed that they were to be attributed to the Word as to the principal Mover whose Instrument only the Man was As for instance they confessed It was the Manhood of Christ that suffered Hunger and Thirst and Pain but they asserted that Hunger Thirst and Pain
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 Siâ—s 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
extolled that Arch-bishop and Complimented him about the Deputy he had sent unto him he Argues against the Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son as an Error contrary to Tradition He says that the Popes Leo the I. and Leo the III. have rejected that Doctrine The first by saying in his Letter against Nestorius and Eutyâ—…jus that the Holy Ghost doth proceed from the Father and the last by disproving those that had added the Filioque to the Creed and causing it to be Ingraven on Plates without that Addition He afterwards brings in many Arguments grounded upon some places of Scripture against the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son He answers to the place alledged by the Latins The Holy Ghost shall receive from me and will declare it to you He objects to himself That S. Ambrose S. Austin S. Jerom and some other Fathers have said That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son He owns it to have been their opinion and that they ought not therefore to be called Hereticks But he pretends their Authority must not be preferred before that of a greater Number who spoke according to the Councils and the Holy Writ He adds that some Fathers of the Church may have swerved from the Truth but whatever respect we have for their persons we ought not to follow their Errors As for Instance though Dionysius of Alexandria be ranked amongst the Fathers the Arian Expressions he used are not to be approved as well as some Tenets of Methodius S. Irenaeus and Papias Lastly he dares affirm That if all the Men in the World should oppose us we ought still to adhere to our Saviour's Words and those of the Gospel and if we do seek after Proofs next to our Saviour we have the Suffrages of Oecumenical Councils the greatest Number of the Fathers the Bishops of Rome and amongst these S. Leo and Adrian the I. That the Legates themselves of the Holy See which lately have been in the East Three several times have alledged nothing contrary to that Doctrine and that in the Council held by him the Legates of Pope John had Subscribed unto and approved of the Creed without that Addition Thus much is alledged by Photius in his Letter to make good his Opinion His Work containing a compendious History of the first seven General Councils which has been several times published separately is nothing but part of the first Letter directed to Michael King of the Bulgarians But as Photius had skill in Composition so he was no less versed in Preaching We have many Photius's Sermons Manuscript Homilies of his whereof Father Combefis has printed the Titles and Beginnings in the last Addition to the Biblioth Patrum But there are only two whole ones extant one upon the Virgin 's Nativity inserted by the same Author into his first Continuation of the Biblioth Patrum and written with much Eloquence and Politeness The other containing the Description and Encomium of a new Church in the Emperour's Palace at Constantinople published by Codinus and Combefis in their Collections In fine Photius had joyned all the Subtilty of the most refined Schoolmen to his other sorts of Photius's Treatise concerning the Wills of Christ. Learning In Canisius's Collection we have some small Treatises of his in Latin which are a convincing proof of his great Ability in School-Learning The principal of which is that of our Saviour's Wills which are called Gnomical found in the Tome added by Stuart to Canisius's Collection It was in Greek in the Emperour and the Duke of Bavaria's Libraries out of which Turrian took it and put it into Latin The state of the Question is to know whether our Saviour had besides a general Will to do a Thing a particular Will to do it in such and such manner whether he has chosen and affected the one more than the other Photius in the first place says That this Question having been but slightly handled by the Fathers is the more difficult to solve but that 't is an easie matter to find out all that has been written upon it S. Maximus being the only Father that he found treating of this Question And to expound him he distinguishes many sorts of Wills The first a Natural Will which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being nothing but a Desire of doing a Thing without any Reason for it The second a General Will by him called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being an Effect of Reason The third called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an Inclination to one Thing rather than another The fourth is the Choice one makes of one Thing rather than another The fifth is the Determination of the Will to do this or that Thing And lastly the Execution The Matter being thus stated he says that our Saviour had unquestionably a general Will attended with Reasoning but that he has not a Will of Choice nor of Deliberation or Design to do one Thing rather than another because having a perfect Knowledge of all Things by his Nature by reason of the Hypostatical Union and his humane Will being wholly subject to the divine Will he cannot deliberate upon what he must do nor will any Thing but what pleases the divine Will That there being two Natures in Christ there ought to be likewise two Wills that is to say two Faculties but by reason there is but one Hypostasis or but one person that wills he therefore wills but one Thing and has but one general Will that is but one sole Affection because the humane Will does in all Things concur with the divine Will This is the Opinion of Photius in this Matter which he backs with many Reasons and gives shrewd Answers to all Objections against it In the fifth Tome of Canisius we find moreover seven short Dissertations of Photius upon several Photius's Theological Treatises Scholastick Questions In the first he puts this Question How God is every where and answers the Objections made against his Omnipresence He shews that God is not in the World as created Beings are but in a more sublime manner that he is in every Thing and above all Things that he is in all Things by his Operation but that his Act being his Substance one may truly say he is both in Act and Substance every where that he is every where without being of the same Substance with the Things in which he is that he makes no part of them not being tied mingled confounded or any way changed by them In the second Dissertation he shews how we know God in this Life and says that we cannot perfectly define or know him but that he is known to us by a small beam of his Majesty shining upon his Creatures and by way of Negation that is by denying that he is any of those Things we see That all Men naturally know that there is a God because there ought to be an Eternal Being a Soveraign Lord of all Things and a
of Eugenius and the Election of Foelix because many Persons of Probity and Authority doubted whether his Suspension and Deposition and the Election which follow'd upon it had been done justly canonically and lawfully and whether at such time as this was done the Congregation did sufficiently represent the Universal Church to do so considerable Acts as these which concern the whole Church therefore the King not being sufficiently inform'd about these things did still persevere and remain in the Obedience of Eugenius but if he should be inform'd of the Truth of this Cause by the Oecumenical Council or by another General Council or even by a more numerous Assembly of the Gallican Church with its Dukes Barons and other Lords or in an Assembly of all the Christian Princes that then having known and examin'd the Truth he would adhere to it and therefore he pray'd That Pope Eugenius would call together and celebrate a Council and that he would be there himself in Person Thirdly That he would consider what was to be done at a convenient time and place about the Embassy of Mayence Fourthly That as to the Pragmatick Sanction he would have it to be inviolably observ'd That if any thing in it appear'd too rigid to the Council of Basil it might be moderated He advis'd also the Ambassadors of the Council of Basil That they would endeavour the Celebration of another future Council This Answer was given in the Assembly of Bourges in the presence of the King assisted by Charles Duke of Anjou and the other Princes of the Blood on the 2d of September 1440. and accompanied with a Discourse which the Bishop of Clermont made wherein the King testifies his Displeasure against the Heats and Animosities which were between the Pope and the Council That he should have been glad if it were in his Power to favour the Duke of Savoy who was his Kinsman but that he could do nothing against Justice that How Christendom stood affected towards Eugenius and Foelix he exhorted the Fathers of the Council to seek after Peace and not to trouble his Subjects with Censures Lastly That he hop'd the Duke of Savoy would accommodate this Affair by his ordinary Prudence The Deputies of Basil were not well satisfy'd with this Answer which lower'd the Expectations of Foelix's Party but they were rais'd again by the Letter they receiv'd in October from the King of Arragon wherein he gave the Title of General Council to the Council of Basil by the Letter from the Queen of Hungary Sigismund's Widow to Pope Foelix and yet The Resolutions of divers Assemblies of States about the Difference between Foelix and Eugenius more by the acknowledgment of Albert Duke of Bavaria and Albert Duke of Austria Kinsmen to Frederick Foelix to make himself more Creatures depending upon him created Eight Cardinals in the Month of October and Six others that were French-Men in November among whom was John of Segovia and Nicolas Archbishop of Palerma The University of Paris the Universities of Germany and that of Cracovia wrote in Defence of the Authority of the Council above the Pope and acknowledg'd Foelix He was also own'd by the Carthusians and by a Party of the Order of Friars Minors Many Prelats and Princes of Germany favour'd also his Party but in the Assembly which was held at Mayence in April 1441. the Deputies on both sides being heard no other Resolution was taken but that a General Council should meet the next Year in the Month of August in another place than Basil and Florence and in a City of Germany or France and that the Emperor should invite the Competitors to be there present But this Proposal had no Effect for the Emperor referr'd the Affair to the Assembly of Frankfurt which was held in the Month of May the next Year where the Emperor was present in Person and having heard the Deputies of the Council and Eugenius confirm'd the Resolution that was taken to call a Council and in the mean time to remain in the Neutrality In pursuance of this he sent Ambassadors to Eugenius and the Council to persuade them to yield to the Celebration of a Council and he himself came to Basil. The Fathers of the Council agreed upon the Translation of the Council and to name many Cities whereof the Emperor should choose one But Eugenius after he had consulted a long time made answer in the Year 1445 That it was no ways necessary to call a New Council since there was one already call'd That in the mean time to satisfie the Emperor assoon as he should come to Rome he would call together in the Palace of the Lateran whither he had translated the Council a great number of Prelats with whom he would consult whether it were expedient to call another The Emperor Frederick seeing that neither the Fathers of Basil nor Eugenius would consent to what he desir'd wrote a Letter to all Christian Princes in June 1443. wherein he desires their Consent for a General Council which he would appoint and prays them to send their Ambassadors to the Diet which was to be held at Nuremburg at the St. Martin that they might there consult together of the Means for putting an end to the Schism This Assembly was not numerous Foelix sent thither his Legats but there was no treating about this Affair which was put off to another time In the mean time Alphonsus King of Arragon the Venetians the Florentines the Siennese and the other People of Italy sollicited the Emperor to consent That a General Council should be held in the Church of St. John of Lateran and some time after the Emperor also sent Aeneas Sylvius to Pope Eugenius to promise him to take off the Neutrality England had no great share in the Transactions at the Council of Basil there being no Prelats in the Council from that Nation The Council had sent Deputies into this Kingdom before the Election of Foelix to whom the English gave almost the same Answer with the French That they honoured the Council and approv'd its Decrees except those which had been made against Eugenius whom they acknowledg'd for lawful Pope The Fathers of the Council sent thither also other Deputies after the Election of Foelix to whom some hopes were given but they had no positive Answer Scotland except some Lords declar'd for Eugenius and the Prelats of this Kingdom being Assembled in a Provincial Council Excommunicated Foelix and the Fathers of the Council of Basil. Poland promis'd to acknowledge Foelix if he would give to their King the Title of King of Hungary and remit to the Lords the Mony which had been gather'd by Indulgences granted for the Union of the Greeks No Body thought that he had Power to grant these Desires yet this prov'd favourable to Foelix and the King of Poland forbad any to obey Eugenius Italy continu'd firm to Eugenius except Piemont and Savoy The Duke of Milan begun a Treaty with Foelix and seem'd to
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
A NEW HISTORY OF Ecclesiastical Writers Containing an ACCOUNT Of the Authors of the several Books of the OLD and NEW TESTAMENT Of the LIVES and WRITINGS of the PRIMITIVE FATHERS An Abridgment and Catalogue of their WORKS Their Various Editions and Censures Determining the GENUINE and SPURIOUS Together with a Judgment upon their Style and Doctrine ALSO A Compendious History of the COUNCILS With Chronological TABLES of the whole Written in FRENCH By Lewis Ellies du PIN Doctor of the SORBON And Regius Professor of Divinity at Paris VOLUME the FIRST Containing the AUTHORS that Flourished in the THREE First AGES of the CHURCH The Second Edition Corrected LONDON Printed for Abel Swalle and Tim. Childe at the Unicorn at the West-End of St. Paul's Church-Yard M DC XCIII ADVERTISEMENT Concerning this TRANSLATION WHEN I first undertook to Revise this following Translation I had no Thoughts of having my Name made so publick as it has been since upon this Occasion Few Men I suppose will ascribe it to Vanity or Ambition since the French Language is so very common among us that it is not thought a part of Learning to understand it For though Translating is not always the easiest Employment in which a Man may be busied yet the Opinions of Men by which most Things receive their Estimate have set so much an higher Value upon Original Productions than upon any even the exactest Copies that it is no Wonder if that has been for the most part concealed which when divulged would have brought so little Credit But I am sensible that Apologies are tedious Things to those who are absolutely unconcerned And it will be rather expected that I should acquaint the World with what they shall find in this Translation than either why it was Revised by me after the several Translators had finished their Parts or why the Notice of its future Publication seemed to have been immediately given by my Order And here indeed I ought to say that the Book it self with which the English Reader is presented is a very valuable One. The Doctrines and Practices of the Primitive Church are represented with so much Candour and Sincerity that those who are unacquainted with the Writings of the Fathers need not fear being imposed upon Our Author is indeed of the Communion of the Church of Rome and accordingly he does not as indeed he durst not any where conceal his Own Opinion but yet as long as he never suffers the Sorbonist to break in upon the Historian his Writings carry an Authority with them greater than they could have done had they come from a Protestant Truth I confess is the same whoever speaks it yet all Men grant that it carries a more Convictive Force along with it when extorted from those whose Ingenuity over-bears their Interest than when it freely comes from Men that advance their Cause by telling it For this Reason I have taken as much Care as I could that Monsieur Du Pin's Sence should be exactly preserved and therefore when he cites Authors whom for Form sake he was obliged to call Hereticks if they are not named with Applause it is not to be wonder'd at In some few places I have thought fit to interpose But lest that might occasion any Confusion the Paragraphs are all inclosed in Hooks which will plainly distinguish whatever I say from my Author's Words The great Use of Books of this kind is to form an Idea in the Minds of those that read them of that unaffected Piety and Zeal which inspired the Primitive Christians and which at last subdued the whole Roman Empire and made its Princes follow the Banner of the Cross of Christ with Joy and Pleasure What a Thing that was can be but imperfectly conceived from the Writings and God knows much more imperfectly from the Practices of this degenerate Age. The Abridgments of the Books of these first Christians will be much more effectual to this Purpose than a bare dry History could possibly have been for they wrote about Things that their Hearts were full of And Men who are at all Times ready to lay down their Lives in Defence of any Cause will produce warmer and more moving Arguments to awaken their drowzy Brethren than can possibly come from others that are less concerned because in much less Danger If therefore the Reading of these Papers shall be a Means to incite those that are able to draw from the Fountains in larger Quantities having found these small Streams sufficiently inviting and those that must take what they read upon Trust to endeavour to live up to these great Patterns which are here proposed to their Imitation I shall have my End and shall think the Pains which I have taken in this Work not only very well bestowed but my self abundantly rewarded W. W. THE Author's PREFACE PART I. The Reason of the Title An Account of those Authors that have written upon the same Subject A general View of the Design of this Work THE Name of Bibliotheca or Library is not only given to those Places that contain great Numbers of Books but also to Collections that have been made by several Authors and to those Books that treat of their Works Thus Collections of the Works of several Fathers are called Bibliothecae Patrum A General History drawn out of vast Numbers of Historians such as Diodorus Siculus's Bibliotheca Historica A Book that treats of the Sacred Volumes of Scripture such as Sixtus Senensis's Bibliotheca Sancta or rather Bibliocheca Sacrorum Codicum A Treatise upon those Authors who have written concerning Matters of Religion as this of ours is Bibliotheca Authorum Ecclesiasticorum And in short any Book that speaks indifferently of all sorts of Authors and Writings composed upon different Occasions may be called a Bibliotheca This is not the first time that such sort of Libraries have been made Apollodorus an Athenian a most learned Grammarian that lived under the Reign of Ptolomaeus Euergetes Two Hundred and Forty Years or thereabouts before the Nativity of Jesus Christ composed a Bibliotheca of the Original of the Gods that is to say of the most ancient History as it lies disguised under Fictions and Fables In imitation of him Diodorus Siculus that lived in Augustus's Time composed a Bibliotheca of General History which was taken out of an infinite Number of Authors To these we must join those Authors that have written the Lives of Illustrious Persons such as Hermippus Antigonus Satyrus Heraclides Aristoxenus and Diogenes Laertius amongst the Greeks and amongst the Latins Varro Tully Nepos Santra Hyginus and Suetonius who have composed the Lives of the Philosophers and other Authors To descend now to those Christians that have made Catalogues of their own Authors Are not Clemens Alexandrinus's Stromata a Bibliotheca of the Opinions and Judgments of an incredible Number of Writers May not the History of Eusebius be called a Library of Ecclesiastical Authors since his whole Book is little else but an Account
Edition When we suppose that there have been such publick Scribes we ascribe to them all the Historical part of the Pentateuch and to Moses all that belongs to the Laws and Ordinances and 't is this which the Scripture calls the Law of Moses And so one may say in this sense that all the Pentateuch is really and truly written by Moses because those persons that made the Collection lived in his time and what they did was by his particular Direction He says the very same thing in his 2d Chap. p. 17. 'T is therefore not improbable that there were in Moses ' s time such sort of Prophets who were necessary to the State because they preserved the most considerable Actions that passed in their Commonwealth This being granted we shall distinguish in these five Books of the Law that which was written by Moses from what was written by the Prophets and publick Scribes We may attribute to Moses the Commandments and Ordinances which he gave the People in lieu of which we may suppose these same publick Scribes to have been the Authors of the greatest part of this History In the seventh Chapter p. 50. he adds As for what concerns the Books of Moses such as they now are in the Collection which we have the Additions that have been made to the ancient Acts hinder us from discerning what is truly his and what has been added by those who succeeded him or by the Authors of the last Collection Besides this Compilation being now and then Epitomized out of the ancient Memoirs one cannot be assured that the Genealogies there are set down in their full length and extent From these Principles of Monsieur Simon it follows in the first place that Moses is not the Author of the greatest part of the Pentateuch for the Controversie here is not about some few Passages that are of small consequence but even those that make up the Body and principal Part of the Pentateuch Moses according to his Notions being only concerned about the Laws and Ordinances has no share in any thing besides and so the History of the Creation and of the Deluge in a word all Genesis and whatever has a relation to the Historical part is taken away from Moses It is to no purpose to say as he has done already p. 3. That one may say that all the Pentateuch is Moses ' s because they that made the Collection lived in his time and did nothing but by his order For would it not be a Jest to ascribe to Moses the Works of the publick Scribes of his time If this were really true a Man might ascribe all publick Registers to those Kings and Princes in whose time and by whose order they were compiled But what is a great deal more surprizing Monsieur Simon or at least one of his Zealous Defenders abandons this Hypothesis as not to be maintained and acknowledges that there is no convincing proof to make us believe there weresuch publick Scribes divinely inspired in the time of Moses This is taken notice of in a Marginal Note of the 17th Page of his Critical History and the same Edition that we cited before We find in truth says the Author of that Remark this sort of publick Scribes in the time of the Kings amongst the Hebrews … but we find no Foot-steps of them in the Books of Moses The Author of the Answer to a Letter which Monsieur Spanheim wrote against F. Simon confesses the same thing If you now demand of me what is my Opinion concerning these publick Scribes I answer That it would be very hard to reject 'em totally… In the mean time I don't altogether agree with him as to the time wherein he pretends that these Prophets were Established in the Jewish Commonwealth for the Reasons he brings and indeed the greater part of his Authorities clearly suppose that this happened after Moses If this Letter was Monsieur Simon 's as the World was inclined to believe he cannot possibly excuse himself from having dealt very treacherously in a matter of the highest consequence about Religion since he has established the truth of the Pentateuch upon a supposition which he himself acknowledges to be either false or uncertain But suppose this Letter was not his it shows at least that those persons who are the most favourable to his Hypothesis freely own 't is impossible to prove there were any of these publick Scribes divinely Inspired in Moses's time and consequently that Monsieur Simon who has grounded the validity of the Pentateuch upon this Hypothesis has done it upon a very weak Foundation even in the judgment of those Criticks who stand up the strongest for him Thus Monsieur Simon alledges this Conjecture as only a matter of probability In the second place Monsieur Simon has of himself ruined whatever he says of the Antiquity and Authority of the Pentateuch by confidently asserting as he has done in the third passage we quoted that the Pentateuch in the condition we find it in at present is only an Abridgment of the ancient Acts that were made in the time of Moses and that 't is impossible to discern what is ancient and what is not Is not this formally to deny that Moses was the Author of the Pentateuch and that the Books which we now have are not so ancient as is pretended In a word he establishes the Authority of the Books of Scripture upon the pretended Inspiration of certain Scribes or Keepers of the publick Registers whom he believes to have been from time to time among the Jews Now nothing is more uncertain than the Existence or Inspiration of these publick Scribes as we shall shew in the following Pages b By express Texts of Holy Scripture It is very certain that Moses wrote the Law and that in Scripture we are to understand the Pentateuch by the Law Exod. 24. v. 4. and 7. Moses wrote all the Words of the Law and took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the audience of the People Deut. 31. v. 19 and 22. Moses therefore wrote this Law and gave it to the Priests the Sons of Levi… and to all the Elders of Israel In Exodus ch 17. v. 14. God commanded Moses to write the Law and give it to Joshuah And in the Book of Joshuah ch 1. v. 7 and 8. God tells him That the Volume of the Law which he received from Moses ought to be always in his mind This Book of the Law shall not depart out of thy mouth but thou shalt meditate therein day and night… that thou mayst observe to do according to all the Law which Moses my Servant commanded thee Now tho' the Word Law may indeed be applied to one part of the Pentateuch yet we ought to take notice that it is generally taken in Scripture for the whole Pentateuch And 't is certain that in the 31st Chapter of Deuteronomy where it is said Moses therefore wrote this Law it is meant of all this Book
had Writers that were divinely inspired Who questions it As also That it did not belong to all the World to judge who they wâ—re that were thus divinely inspired but this Province was reserved for those Persons who had the same Inspiration themselves Well then suppose it were so does it therefore follow that the Books of Moses were composed by the Keepers of Registers Does it follow that those who were appointed to write History and that too out of the publick Memoirs were divinely inspired Or lastly That all the Books of Scripture which we now have are but so many Abridgements extracted out of these Memoirs As for what remains Mr. Simon could not have cited any Author more contrary to his own Hypothesis than Eusebius and that even in this very Book De Praeparatione Evangelicâ For one of the great Principles which he there establishes in several places is the Authority and Antiquity of the Books of Moses which he always supposes to have been written by that Prophet in the same manner as we have 'em at present The Truth of this Assertion he confirms by these three Propositions which he lays down in the beginning of the 14th Book The first is That Moses is ancienter than any Greek Author The second That he has written what he had learned of his Ancestors The third That the Jews have neither added nor diminished from the Writings which he left them And now I 'll leave the World to judge whether these Principles of Eusebius agree with those of Mr. Simon The third Author cited by Mr. Simon is Theodoret It must be confessed that this Father owns as well as several other Authors have done that the Books of Kings and Chronicles were composed from very ancient Memoirs But this is not the point in Question We confess we are not assured of the Authors of those Books We acknowledge they are a Collection drawn out of old Memoirs But we demand of Mr. Simon whether it follows from hence that the Pentateuch and other Books of the Bible are of the same Nature This is a thing which Theodoret wou'd beware of saying because he owns Moses to be the Author of the Pentateuch 'T is with this Assertion he begins his Preâ—â—â—â— to the Books of Kings from whence Mr. Simon has drawn these passages which he quâ—â—â—s After having explained the Books of Moses c. To these three Authors has Mr. Simon in his Letter to Monsieur L' Abbe added the Author of the Synopsis attributed to St. Athanasius This Author follows the Opinion of Josephus and after having observed that the five first Books of the Bible do without dispute belong to Moses he says that all the following Books are not written by those whose Names they bear but that they were composed by Prophets who lived from time to time Lastly he observes when he is speaking concerning the â—â—râ—â—icles that one finds several Historical Books of the Prophets quoted there And what does all this make for Mr. Simon 's Hypothesis Have not we said the very same thing Does not all the World agree as to this particular Had Mr. Simon kept himself here no Body would have fell upon him The last Author whom Mr. Simon cites to justifie his Hypothesis is the Author of the Chroniâ—â—â— Alexandrinum This Author in the place transcribed by Mr. Simon tells us that there were some Prophets who wrote their own Prophesies themselves as David the Book of Psalms and Daniel his Prophecy and that there were others who did not write themselves but that they had Scribes in the Temple who wrote down as it were in a Journal the Words of each Prophet ...... That the Books of Kings were thus composed by parts that under Saul ' s Reign they wrote whatever passed in his time and so likewise in David ' s time and the other Kings That the Chronicles are but a Collection of Registers and several Papers of their Kings That Moses wrote the Pentateuch That Joshuah is the Author of the Book which bears his Name That the Book of Judges was written by the Scribes in the Temple from time to time as well as that of Ruth That Salomon composed the Proverbs the Canticles and Ecclesiastes This Author's Hypothesis is extreamly different from that of Mr. Simon 1. He supposeth for a certain truth that Moses was the Author of the Pentateuth and does not attribute his Works to the publick Scribes or Abbreviators 2. He does not say that these publick Scribes were inspired by God or that they wrote the History of themselves He supposes the Prophets dictated that to them as well as their Prophecies 3. He believes that the Books of Kings and Judges were the very Originals from the Prophets which were joyned together Instead of which Mr. Simon believes that these Books are Abridgments I won't lose so much time as to answer the Rabbi's and other Authors of that Stamp whom Mr. Simon has mustered up in his last Letter 'T is visible there 's not one single Author he quotes that is of the same opinion with himself For In the first place they all of 'em acknowledge That the Books of the Pentateuch ought not to be attributed to Scribes or to Prophets divinely Inspired but to Moses himself Secondly they say That the following Books were written by Persons divinely Inspired to whom they gave the name of Prophets but they don't tell us that these Prophets were Supervisors of the Registers or publick Scribes Thirdly they acknowledge That there were ancient Memoirs or ancient Histories often quoted in the Books of Kings and the Chronicles No body doubts this I have frequently observed it and have made a Catalogue of the Books that are quoted in the Old Testament But it does not fâ—llow from hence that all the Books of the Bible are Extracted from these Memoirs and Compiled a long time after Mr. Simon has given these publick Scribes authority to change to enlarge and abridge these Sacred Books as they see convenient To prove this he quotes Don Isaac Abarbinel a Learned Spanish Jew as if we were obliged to take all for Gospel that these Rabbi's have been pleased to deliver He joyns Procopius and Theodoret to this Jew as Men that have observed that the Books of Kings and Chronicles were drawn out of several other Historical Books Not to displease Mr. Simon he has mightily altered the Point for this is not the Question under debate We agree with him that the Authors of the Books of Kings and the Chronicles compiled their Histories out of Memoirs and particular Historians whom they found as Livy and Mezâ—ray made use of the ancient Historians to compose their Histories But for all this we dare not say they have changed or diminished the ancient Histories that always continued in the same condition they were in nor that they had a Privilege to do this much less that they have made any considerable Alterations or Additions to the Books of Moses Mr. Simon
should soon be destroyed 948 years after its Foundation and many other Things that could never be asserted by later Christians who would have been very far from admitting such Notions when they were convinced of the falsity of these Predictions Upon the whole matter it ought to be concluded that the Books of the Sibyls were certainly forged in the Second Century but it is difficult to determine the precise time and by whom this was done all that can be alledged as most probable is that they began to appear about the end of the Reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius m They began to appear about the end of the Reign of Antoninus Pius Possevinus affirms that these Books were written under the Reign of Câ—mmodus but he is deceived in taking the Conflagration mentioned in Book V. for the Fire of the Temple of Vesta that happened in the time of that Emperor for the Temple of Jerusaleus is to be understood in this place which is called the desirable House and the Guardian Temple of God We have already shewn that the Author had seen Lucius and Marcus but that he knew not the later Emperors All the Fathers that have quoted the Sibylline Books wrote either under the Reign of Antoninus Pius or after that time Josephus indeed and Hermas cite the Sibyls but in general Terms and there were possibly some Verses extant under their Names even in the time of Josephus who produceth one of them concerning the Tower of Babel Lib. 1. Ant. c. 5. M. Vossius in his last Book gives us an Hypothesis of the Sibylline Oracles somewhat different from this he acknowledgeth that the ancient Writings of the Sibyls which were preserved until the burning of the Capitol were entirely prophane and differed from those that are cited by the Fathers But he maintains that among those that were brought from Greece by Octacilius Crassus there were some Prophecies inserted that had been received from the Jews who pretended that they were written by the Sibyls in which the Coming of the Messiah was foretold and that these were cited by the Fathers under the Name of The Books of the Sibyls which Title was actually attributed to them This Hypothesis which is well enough contrived yet lies liable to many Difficulties for first the Collection of Oracles ascribed to the Sibyls that was made after the burning of the Capitol related no less to the Pagan Superstitions than the ancient Verses ascribed to the Sibyl of Cuma Secondly Since the Predictions concerning Jesus Christ expressed in the passages of the Sibylline Books and quoted by the Fathers are clearer than those that were contained in the Prophecies of the Jews there is no probability that they could proceed from any of that Nation Lastly The Doctrine comprised in the Books of the Sibyls seems rather to be that of a Christian than of a Jew since the Coming of Jesus Christ is therein manifestly foretold the Resurrection of the Dead the Last Judgment and Hell Fire are expresly described in plain Terms and mention is made of the Millennium of the appearing of Anti-Christ together with many other Things of the like nature which could not be related but by one that had been instructed in the Christian Religion Therefore it is much more probable that the Writings attributed to the Sibyls were forged by a Christian rather than by a Jew However none ought to be surprised that we reject those Books as supposititious which have been quoted by the Ancients as real and it must not be imagined that we thereby contemn the Authority of the Fathers or that we impugn the Truth on the contrary we should do an Injury to it if we should endeavour to support it by false Proofs especially when we are convinced of their Forgery The Fathers are to be excused for citing the Sibylline Verses as true because they had not examined them and finding them published under the Name of the Sibyls they really believed that they were theirs but they that are certainly informed of the contrary would be inexcusable if they continued to rely on such Testimonials or refused ingenuously to confess what the Truth obliged them to own And indeed it ought not to be admired that the Fathers did not examine these Books critically it is sufficiently known that they wholly applied themselves to Matters of the greatest Consequence at that time and that they often happened to be mistaken in prophane Histories and to cite fictitious Books such are the Works of Hystaspes and Mercurius Trismegistus which they almost always joyned with those of the Sibyls as also the Acts of Pilate Apocryphal Gospels divers Acts of the Apostles and a great number of other Records that have been undoubtedly forged But altho' the most part of the ancient Writers cited the Oracles of the Sibyls yet there were even then many Christians that rejected them as Counterfeit and could not be perswaded to approve the practice of those that made use of their Testimony whom in derision they called by the Name of Sibyllists This is attested by Origen in his Fifth Book against Celsus Celsus says he objects that there are Sibyllists amonst us perhaps because he hath heard it reported that there are some amongst us who reprove those that affirm that the Sibyl is a Prophetess and call them Sibyllists St. Augustine hath likewise acknowledged the falsity of these pretended Oracles and as often as he makes mention of them he declares that he is not convinced of their Truth particularly in Lib. 18. c. 45. De Civit. Dei. Were it not says he that it is affirmed that the Prophecies that are produced under the Name of the Sibyls and others concerning Jesus Christ were feigned by the Christians And in cap. 47. It may be believed that all the Prophecies relating to Jesus Christ that are not contained in the Holy Scriptures have been forged by the Christians Wherefore there can be nothing more solid in confuting the Pagans than to alledge those Prophecies that are taken from the Books of our Enemies But the Heathens say they doubted not of the truth of the Predictions of the Sibyls that were urged by the Fathers they only put another sense upon them nay they even proceeded so far as to own that the Sibylline Verses foretold the Nativity of a certain new King and a considerable Revolution This is mentioned by Tully in divers places moreover when Pompey took the City of Jerusalem it was commonly reported that the Sibyl had foretold that Nature designed a King for the People of Rome the Senate was likewise astonished at it and by reason of this Prediction refused to send a General or an Army into Egypt Lentulus according to the Testimony of Cicero and Sâ—llust flatter d himself that he should become this King that was intimated by the Sibyl Others have interpreted this Prophecy with respect to Julius Câ—sar or Augustus as is observed by Cicero and Suetonius Virgil in his Fourth Eâ—logue produceth the Verses
That the People stretching out their Hands to Heaven invoke only this God and that the Prophets and Philosophers have acknowledged him He afterwards shews that the Antiquity of their Fables ought not to give them any Authority That they have not only so much as the least Appearance of Truth but that they are Impertinent and Ridiculous and that he must be void of common Sense who gives any Credit to them That we are not to attribute the Establishment nor Encrease of the Empire to the Religion of the Romans since it was founded at first by Parricide and by the Rapes of strange Women and that it afterwards grew to its Greatness by Uncleanness by Sacriledge and by unjust Wars That very often their Commanders contemned the Auguries and that nevertheless they were successful in what they undertook That the Answers of their Oracles were very often false and ambiguous and that we are not to wonder if by a great Chance they sometimes hit That the Daemons who are impure Spirits made use of these Superstitions to destroy Mankind and to set them at a greater Distance from God after they were already lost by their Vices and disorderly Desires That 't is these Spirits who answer in their Statues who possess Men and agitate them so furiously but being conjured by the Name of the only true God they are obliged to go out of the Bodies of those whom they have tormented He afterwards confutes the Calumnies wherewith they asperst the Christians He says That if it were true they ought not to be compelled to deny their Religion but rather to own those Incests Impieties and Murders wherewith they were accused That the Christians are too well instructed to adore an Asses Head and too Chast to commit Uncleanness in the Celebration of their Mysteries But that there is a Religion among the Heathens in which they worshipped Beasts and committed execrable Villanies without Punishment that they are not the Christians but the Heathens who place their Hopes in mortal Men and in inanimate Statues and who were frequently guilty of Murders and Incests That the Christians do neither adore nor desire Crosses and that they are so far from shedding Man's Blood that they dare not so much as to eat that of Beasts That they are modest and reserved not only in Body but in Mind That they commonly Marry but once and that they have no other Design in their Marriage but the having of Children That their Repasts are not only very Chast but also very Sober That there are several Christians who preserve a perpetual Continency and yet without any Vanity upon that Account That though they refuse to bear any Offices yet they are not for all that of the Scum of the People That their Number encreases continually which is a certain sign of their Virtue That they do not distinguish themselves from others by any outward Mark but by their Innocence and Modesty That they love one another and call one another Brethren because they have all one and the same God for their Father That they have nither Statues nor Altars nor Temples because the Majesty of God cannot he represented by Images nor enclosed in Houses built by the Hands of Men and that it is better to consecrate our Mind and our Heart as his Temple Nonne melius in nostra dedicandus est mente in nostro Consecrandus Corpore That the Sacrifices and Victims which he requirs and which we ought to offer up unto him are Justice Purity and Innocence That though God be invisible yet he is discovered by his Omnipotence That he knows all things and nothing can be concealed from him That he protected the Jews so long as they honoured him and 't was only for their Sins that they have drawn upon themselves his Anger and Vengeance After having thus disoâ—…sed of the Object of the Christian Worship he goes on to the Proof of the other Points of their Doctrine He shews that the Learned do agree That the World shall have an End That Pythagoras and Plato believed one part of the Resurrection when they taught the Immortality of the Soul and the Metempsychosis That it is not more difficult for God to raise up Men after their Death than it was for him to produce them out of nothing That all the Revolutions of Nature are as so many Images of the Resurrection That several had rather be annihilated for ever than to rise again to endure Eternal Torments and that they were confirmed in their Opinion by the Impunity which they enjoyed in this Life But that the Judgment of God will be by so much the more Rigorous as it is slower in Punishing That these Torments shall be excessive and shall have neither End nor Bounds That the Fire which shall burn the Body without consuming it shall nourish it if I may so say and make it to subsist to all Eternity That it is sufficient not to know God to be Condemned to suffer these Pains because it is not a less Sin to be ignorant of him then to offend him But that the Heathens shall not be Punished only for this Ignorance of God they being guilty of several Crimes that they cannot excuse themselves by alledging Destiny since Man is a free Agent and that Destiny is nothing else but the Execution of God's Decrees which are regulated according to Men's Actions That that Poperty which is so frequent amongst the Christians makes for their Glory that the Evils and Persecutions which they suffered are no Proof that God has forsaken them but that he trys and purifies them That it is a Spectacle well becoming God to behold a Christian stoutly contending with Pain standing firm and stedfast in the midst of Torments insulting over his Executioners and Judges freely resisting even Princes and Emperors and yielding only to God You exalt says he to the Skies a Scevola who after having missed of his Aim in killing a King voluntarily lost his Hand and saved his Life by this couragious Action But how many Persons are there among us who have suffered without Complaining not only their Hand but their whole Body to be burnt though they could have delivered themselves from these Torments had they pleased What do I say Even our Sons and our Daughters laugh at your Gibbets at your wild Beasts and at all your Punishments And ought not this to convince you that it is impossible that they would have endured these Pains to no purpose or that they could be able to suffer them without God's Assistance And do not think that those Persons are happy who being utterly ignorant of God are loaded with Honours and Riches These are unfortunate Men who are raised up that their Downfall might be the greater these are Victims which are fatened for the Sacrifice For what solid Good can be had without God since Death shews that all the rest is no more than a Dream This being so a Christian may indeed seem to be miserable
what wonder is it if they were received with little Contestation And yet Hincmar Archbishop of Rheims with the i The French Bishops made great Difficulty of acknowledging them Hincmar rejected them as having no Authority Nicholas the First in Epist. 42. to the Bishops of France endeavours to confute those that rejected them but since that time they have been received and inserted into a Collection of Canons though Learned Men always questioned the Truth of them However at present no body dares undertake to defend them the Imposture being so abominably gross that all People may discover the Cheat at first fight They may serve as a remarkable Example both of the Credulity of the preceding Ages and the intolerable Impudence of Impostors French Bishops even at that time made great difficulty of acknowledging them But a short time after they acquired some Authority being supported by the Court of Rome whose pretensions they mightily favoured After having thus represented the Reasons that prove in general that all the Decretal Epistles of the Popes before Syricius are Spurious I shall now descend to particulars and endeavour to show in few Words that every Epistle carries undeniable Signs of its being an Imposture along with it The First and that which seems to bear the greatest Authority is the Epistle of St. Clement to St. James the Brother of our Lord the First Part whereof was formerly Translated by Ruffinus Isidore has added a Second to it and they are both of them equally Supposititious The first because it supposes that St. Clement wrote that Letter after the Death of St. Peter whereas it is a Truth that has been constantly received that St. James to whom it is written died before St. Peter Secondly 'T is there said That St. Clement immediately succeeded St. Peter which is contrary to the Ancients that place St. Linus and Cletus or Anacletus between them two Thirdly the West is there ridiculously called the darkest part of the World Fourthly It is composed to justifie the Itinerary or Book of the Voyages of St. Peter which is Apocryphal The Second Part that was composed by Isidore is yet a more evident Cheat For 1. It was unknown in the time of Ruffinus and therefore has been invented since 2. It is full of Texts of Scripture that follow the Translation of St. Jerome And we likewise meet several Passages there Copied out of St. Cyril of Alexandria against Theodore of Mopsuestia out of the rule of St. Benedict out of the Exposition of the Creed by Venantius Fortunatus out of St. Gregory and Isidore of Sevil. In short it speaks of Arch-Priests and Primates and we find abundance of Words and Expressions in it that are unworthy of the time of St. Clement The Second Epistle of St. Clement directed to St. James has likewise all the same Marks of Forgery In the first place it makes mention of Sacraments of the Habits in which the Priests celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of the Pall of Sacred Vessels of Chalices things that seem not to have been in use in the time of St. Clement Secondly It speaks of the Ostiarii or Door-keepers Arch-deacons and other Ecclesiastical Officers that were not then introduced into the Church Thirdly The Letter is writ in a barbarous Stile Fourthly The Author alledges the Authority of his Ancestors Fifthly It ordains several Practices of little or no Censequence to be observed under pain of Excommunication for Six Years Sixthly It supposes that St. Clement instructed St. James in the Actions of our Blessed Saviour and the Discipline of the Church Seventhly It alledges St. James his own words Work out your Salvation with fear and trembling under the Name of St. Peter's This Letter is full of divers Passages taken out of the Author of the Recognitions out of St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Prosper Laurentius Justinianus and St. Gregory the Great Lastly The Scriptures there cited follow St. Jerome's Translation The Inscription of the Third Letter of St. Clement alone is enough to discover the falsity of it It is directed To all Suffragan Bishops Priests Deacons and others of the Clergy To all Princes great and small and to all the Faithful Now in St. Clement's time there were no great or small Princes that were of the Church Secondly This Letter mentions Sub-Deacons an Order not then established in the Church Thirdly It is for the most part wholly composed of Passages drawn out of the Books of Recognitions We ought to reject the Fourth for the same Reasons The Fifth is directed to St. James in the Name of St. Clement Bishop of Rome and Successor of St. Peter Now St. James died before St. Peter from whence it necessarily follows that this Epistle cannot have been written by St. Clement 2. The Author of this Letter seems to approve the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans who taught that Women ought to be kept in common and the place where he maintains this Errour is borrowed out of the Book of Recognitions in which a Platonist is introduced disputing upon this occasion In short the Author of this Letter tells us he was present at the Death of Ananias and St. Clement was not as yet Converted when St. Peter inflicted that terrible Punishment upon Ananias We must add to all the foregoing Arguments this weighty Consideration that all these Letters are of a different Stile from that of the Epistle to the Corinthians which is undoubtedly St. Clement's There were indeed some other Letters formerly assigned to this Saint but they were different from those which we have examined here for St. Epiphanius who mentions them assures us that he there commends Virginity and speak very advantageously of the Prophets Now there is nothing that looks like this in the above mentioned Epistles that are chiefly stoln out of the Itinerary of St. Peter an Apocryphal Work forged by the Hereticks The first Epistles attributed to Pope Anacletus is visibly Spurious For 1. He calls himself in this Letter the Defender of St. Clement now according to St. Irenaeus Eusebius St. Jerome and some other ancients Anacletus â—…d St. Peter and not St. Clement 2. The Author of this Letter is pleased to say That he received several things from his Ancestors by way of Tradition and could this Expression possibly drop from a Man that lived in the time of the Apostles 3. He says That Appeals from Secular Judges ought to he determined before Bishops but this was not Customary in the time of the Apostles 4. He tells us That the Privileges and Laws of the Church ought to be confirmed none of which were written in Anacletus's time 5. He talks of Appeals from Ecclesiastical Judgments to the Holy See and mentions the different sorts of Ecclesiastical Causes But these Questions were never debated under Anacletus and when they came to be afterwards discussed the Authority of this Letter was never alledged 6. He speaks not only of Primates and Metropolitans but also of the
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 Liâ—â— 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
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
the Syrian Deacon of Edessa Time of his Birth Country and Life 115. Writings justified 116 c. Catalogue of his Works 118 c. Their Editions 120. St. Epiphanius Time and Place of his Birth 234. Education ibid. Election to the Bishoprick of Salamis ibid. Quarel with John of Jerusalem ibid. Assembles a Council in the Island of Cyprus ibid. Comes to Constantinople ibid. Will not Communicate with St. Chrysostom ibid. Eudoxia conjures him to pray for her sick Child and his Answer 235. His Death 235. His Writings ibid. c. Doctrine 236 237. Stile and Genius 239. Editions of his Works 240. Episcopacy Monks ought not to Refuse it when they are worthy 44 45. When they are to Refuse and when Accept it 45. 160 161. 200. Evagrius of Antioch A Bishop of Paulinus's Party 198. His Books upon different Subjects ibid. Eucharist Sacrilege to profane it 91. 94. 115. 149. Sacrifice of the Eucharist 96. 113 114. Celebration of the Eucharist and Ceremonies then used 48. 96. 113 114. To be taken fasting 203. Eugenius the Tyrant When defeated and killed 230. Evil not a Substance 59. Not a Nature incorruptible and uncreate 179. Eulalius and Boniface their Schism By whom appeased 18. Eunomius Disciple of Aëtius Country 99. Life Errours Writings and Genius ibid. Book of St. Basil written against him ibid. St. Gregory Nyssen's Book against him ibid. Eusebius of Caesarea Country 1. and b. Surname 1. and a. By whom ordained Priest 1. During the Persecution exhorts the Christians to suffer courageously for the Faith and remains firm in it 2 e. Is suspected to have offered Incense to Idols 1. Succeeds Agapius in the Bishoprick of Caesarea 2. And protects Arius ibid. Signs the Profession of Faith of the Council of Nice 2. And in the mean time holds Correspondence with the Arians ibid. Refuses the Bishoprick of Antioch ibid. Assists at the Councils of Antioch Tyre and Constantinople ibid. Makes a Panegyrick in honour of Constantine ibid. Death ibid. Works 2 3. Account of his Ecclesiastical History and other Works 3 4 5 c. to 9. His Judgment upon the Trinity 6 7. Upon the other Points of Religion 7 8. A Judgment upon some of the Works of this Author 8. Of his Sermons 8 9. His Character 9. Whether he be to be called a Saint 10. and f. Different Editions of his Works 10 11. Eusebius of Nicomedia 2. 9. 22. Eusebius Vercellensis His Country 186. Assists at the Council of Milan from whence he is sent into Exile and at that of Alexandria ibid. His Death ibid. Called Confessor by the Ancients ibid. Letters and Writings ibid. Eustathius Bishop of Antioch Country 21. and a. Life 21 22. Assists at the Council of Nice 21. and c. Unjustly deposed 22. and d e f g Writings 23 24. and k l m n. Commentary upon the Biginning of Genesis falsely attributed to him 24. Eustathius of Sebastea Quarrels with St. Basil His Frauds 123 124. 130. 135. Euzoïus an Arian Author 106. Different from the famous Arian Euzoïus Bishop of Antioch 106. Exarchs established at Ravenna 18. Excommunication The ancient manner of it 137. F. FAst The Usefulness and Obligation of Fasting 150. 181. 203. 243. 268. 369. Fast of Wednesday and Friday 26. 226. 290. Fast of Lent 48. 196. 226. Canons concerning Fasting 26. 195. 268 269. 282. Faustinus a Luciferian His Petition to the Emperors Valentinian and Theodosius 192. Felix Ordained Bishop of Rome in the Place of Liberius who was banished not a lawful Pope 61 62. and a. Neither Saint nor Martyr ibid. 1. and b. Flacillus Bishop of Antioch 6. Fulradus Abbot of St. Denys Received in the Name of Pepin the Exarchate of Ravenna which he immediately restored to the Pope 19. G. GAlerius Emperor 11. Galienus Emperor 1. and c. Gangra Council of Gangra in 370. 267. St. Gaudentius Successor to Philastrius 193. Gelasius of Caesarea Author of some Writings 196. George of Laodicea Driven from the Church by Alexander engaged in the Party of Arius and Author of some Books 100. George Usurper of the Church of Alexandria killed in a Popular Sedition 31. St. Gervasius and St. Protasius 226. God Of the Nature of God 5. Of his Providence and Justice 9 c. St. Gordus Martyr His Panegyrick 155. St Gorgonia Sister to St. Gregory Nazianzen Her Panegyrick 165. Grace What Opinion we ought to have concerning the Questions of Grace and Free Will 58. Necessity of Grace 119. 149. 154. Gregory III and Zachary Popes Demand Succours of Charles Martel 19. Gregory of Boetica Life Writings and Genius 85. Gregory Father of St. Gregory Nazianzen Life and Conduct 159. Funeral-Oration for him 166. St. Gregory Nazianzen Names of his Father and Mother and Time of his Birth 159. His Life ibid and c. Ordained Priest by his Father afterwards Bishop by St. Basil ibid. Abridgment of his Sermons 160 c. to 172. Subject of his Poems 172 c. to 175. Letters and Will 175. Their Number ibid. His Commendation ibid. Editions of his Works 175 and 176. St. Gregory Nyssen Time of his Birth and Ordination 176. Life ibid. Writings 177 c. to 182. and c d e. His Character 183. Editions of his Works ibid. Persecutions he suffered from the Arians 131. 135. H. HEliodorus Priest Book of his concerning Principles 53. Heraclius Count. Raises a Tumult in Alexandria against Athanasius 38. Heraclius Ordained Bishop of Jerusalem 107. Heremius Ordained Bishop of Jerusalem 107. Hereticks Constantine's Edicts against them 17. Hierocles Philosopher His two Books against the Christian Religion 2. 6. Hilary Ordained Bishop of Jerusalem 107. St. Hilary Bishop of Poictiers His Life 64. c. His Ordination ibid. Banished by the Order of the Emperor Constantius and why ibid. Assists at the Council of Seleucia ibid. and 65. His Writings 65 66. Dispute against Auxentius ibid. Abridgment of his Books of the Trinity 66 c. And of his other Books 69 c. to 78. Judgment upon his Style Genius and Doctrine 79. Editions of his Works ibid. Hilary the Deacon His Life 189. His Works ibid. Q. Julius Hilarion Author of a Chronicle Hippo. Council of Hippo in 393. 277. Homicide Canons against it 140 141 143 143. 182. Hosius Bishop of Corduba In what Time he generously confessed the Faith When 50. The Donatists falsely calumniate him ibid. Why sent by constantine to Egypt ibid. Presides in the Councils of Nice and Sardica and what he did there ibid. Communicates with Ursacius and Valens and subscribes the Second Sirmian Creed ibid. Why and by whom accused 51. History of the two Luciferians touching him ibid. How long he lived ibid. His Death ibid. His Writings ibid. His Authority could not prejudice the Truth 86 87. Hospital of St. Basil at Caesarea 165. Humility Exhortation to Humility 154. I. JAcobus Nisibenus Life and Miracles 49. His Writings ibid. Iconium Metropolis of Lycaonia 184. St. Jerom. His Translation of Eusebius's Chronicon 4. Jerusalem Synod there in 335. for the Dedication
of Rome or Eugubium whether of Constantinople or of Rhegium Alexandria or Tunis it is still the same Dignity and the same Function Power and Riches do not make a Bishop greater Poverty and want of Credit do not render his Station more vile All Bishops are Successors of the Apostles But you will say how cometh it to pass that at Rome a Priest is not ordained except a Deacon gives him his Testimonial Why is the Custom of one only Town objected to me Why is the small number of Deacons so exalted as if that were the Law of the Church All that is rare is most esteemed The small number hath made Deacons valued and the great number hath rendred Priests contemptible However Deacons stand before the Priests even when the Priests are sate down and this is observed even in the Church of Rome Tho' I have seen a Deacon sitting in the same rank with Priests in the absence of the Bishop and give the Blessing in the Presence of the Bishop such is now the Corruption of Manners But let such as undertake these things know that they are against Order Let them hear these words of the Apostle It is not just that we should leave the word of God to serve Tables let them learn wherefore Deacons were established let them read the Acts of the Apostles and remember their condition The Name of Priest or Presbyter denotes Age and that of Bishop Dignity wherefore in the Epistle to Timothy mention is made of the Ordination of Bishops and Deacons but not of that of Priests because Priests are comprised under the Name of Bishops Lastly to shew that a Priest is above a Deacon one needs only observe that a Priest is made of a Deacon but not a Deacon of a Priest This Letter was written after his going from Rome the Year is not known but it was in all probability about the Year 387. What he saith of Bishops may have a good Sence if we consider his design in this place which was to exalt the Dignity of the Priesthood by comparing them with Bishops not that he thought them equal in Dignity since he positively excepteth the Power of Ordination and that of Confirmation in his Dialogue against the Luciforians but since Priests have a share in the Government of the Church they may in that Sense be called Bishops Like Expressions may be seen in S. Jerom's Commentary upon the Epistle to Titus and in many Authors that have followed him The Eighty sixth is a Letter from S. Augustin to S. Jerom whereby he thanks him for the Answer to his and intreats him in the Name of the whole African Church to translate the Greek Authors that had writ Commentaries upon the Scripture He says That he was very desirous that S. Jerom would translate the Sacred Books after the same way that he had translated Job by setting down the differences of the Version of the LXX which had great Authority in the Church Now because S. Augustin did not understand Hebrew he could not apprehend that there should be so much difference betwixt the Hebrew Text and the Translation of the LXX and doth not approve of any departing from it For saith he to S. Jerom either those passages are clear or they are dark If they are dark you may be mistaken as well as the Seventy If they are clear can any Man believe that those learned Men did not understand them This Letter which was written about the Year 395 not being carried S. Augustin wrote another to S. Jerom upon the same Subject in 397. But the Person to whom he had given it to deliver to S. Jerom gave out some Copies of it which were spread in Rome so that it was publick before S. Jerom saw it This second Letter is here the Ninety seventh S. Augustin asketh of S. Jerom the true Title of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers afterwards he reproves what S. Jorom had said That S. Peter and S. Paul pretended to have a difference tho' they were agreed He pretends that this Opinion is of very great Consequence and may have dangerous Effects because if we admit of an officious Lye in the Holy Scripture it seems to give Men a handle to doubt of all He therefore exhorts him to alter that passage in his Commentary At the latter end he prays him to add to his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers the Errors of some Hereticks of whom he speaks or to make a Book purposely on that Subject S. Augustin having no Answer because neither of those two Letters were delivered to S. Jerom wrote a Third by Cyprian the Deacon wherein he requireth an Answer to the two former adding in this That he found fault with his writing a new Translation of the Bible pretending that it would cause Disturbances and Scandals if it were publickly read in the Church as it really happened in a Church of Africk where a Bishop having publickly read the Prophecy of Jonas according to S. Jerom's Translation the People hearing other Terms than they were wont to hear accused their Bishop of falsifying the Scripture This Letter was written some years after the foregoing about the Year 403. S. Jerom having received these Three Letters by Cyprian the Deacon thought himself affronted by S. Augustin's demands and answered him with some Loftiness in the Eighty ninth Letter He repeats all the Questions that had been put to him by S. Augustin and endeavours to give him Satisfaction He telleth him 1. About the Title of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers that it ought to be Entituled the Book of Famous Men or of Ecclesiastical Writers 2. He defends his Exposition of S. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians about the Action of S. Peter and S. Paul by the Authority of Origen Didymus and other ancient Authors whose Commentaries he only translated as he had said before in the Preface That if he is in an Error he had rather err with those Great men than flatter himself with having the Truth only on his side He adds Reasons to Authority shewing by the History of the Acts That S. Peter could not but know that Christians were freed from the Burden of the Law That on the other side S. Paul had himself practised that very thing whereof he here accuseth S. Peter by observing the Ceremonies of the Law from whence he concludes that both these Apostles being of the same Opinion had agreed to raise that small Dispute to instruct both Jews and Gentiles by that pious Artifice Afterwards he refutes S. Augustin's Opinion and strives to answer the Reasons which he had produced Last of all he gives him Reasons for the Notes that were in his Translation of the Scripture He answereth S. Augustin's reasoning to prove that he had not done well in Translating the Bible a new very pleasantly by retorting the same upon him You cannot be ignorant saith he that the Psalms have been expounded by several Commentators Greek and Latin who wrote before you Pray tell
which was then vacant by the Demission of his Brother Maximian who for Quietness sake being obliged to quit the Bishoprick had generously done it as appears likewise by a Canon of the Council of Milevis in the Year 402. which is the 88th in the African Code The 71st 72d 73d 74th and 75th of St. Augustin to St. Jerom and of St. Jerom to St. Augustin are about that Dispute that was between them Of which we gave an Account in the Abridgment of St. Jerom's Works The 76th Is an Exhortation in the Church's Name to all Donatists which contains the most prevailing Motives to make them return to the Church It was written after the Donatist Bishops had refused a Conference that was offered in pursuance of the Order of the general Council of Africa in the Year 403. The 77th and 78th are concerning a Scandal that happened in the Church of Hippo. One Spes of St. Augustin's Monastery had been accused of Uncleanness by Boniface a Priest This Man charged the Crime upon the Priest affirming That he was the guilty Person St. Augustin finding no Proof to Convict either of them remited the Judgment to God But Spâ—s desiring to come into the Clergy and being denyed by St. Augustin insisted That if he might not be admitted because he had been accused neither was Boniface to continue in the Order of Priesthood St. Augustin thought fit to oblige them both to go to the Grave of St. Felix of Nola that God might be pleased to discover the Truth by some Miracle Now he intended that this should be kept Secret but the Thing taking vent St. Augustin wrote about it to the Clergy of Hippo and to Two private Men That none ought to be disturbed at the Scandals happening in the Church That no Man should be rashly Condemned That there was no 〈…〉 〈◊〉 Condemned nor 〈◊〉 before 〈…〉 〈◊〉 to let the Name of 〈◊〉 be 〈…〉 〈◊〉 convenient not to scandalize the 〈…〉 but little to Boniface not to have his 〈…〉 if the Impurity of his Conscience did 〈…〉 〈…〉 Priest who is thought to be that Felix with whom St. Angustin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 whom he challenges to Answer that Difficulty 〈…〉 Fortunatus 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him to explain more clearly than he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How it may be known what that is which God â—…th of us since we are 〈…〉 This was written in the Year 405. The Eighty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 of Complement from St. Jerom to St. Augustin concerning the Dispute that was betwixt them He exhorts him to give over such Questions and to exercise himself about the Scriptures The Fighty second is the last of St. Augustin's Letters to St. Jerom about their Contests He insists especially upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians having deâ—â—red That 〈◊〉 valued 〈◊〉 but Canonical Books so far as to believe that the Authors of them were never deceived And as for other Authors how holy soever they might be he doth not think that what they say is a Rule to him because they believed it to be true out that 〈◊〉 dependeth no further upon them than the Reasons and Authorities of Canonical Books which they lean upon persuade him that their Assertions are conformable to Truth Having laid down this Principle he proves That St. Paul's correcting of St. Peter was serious because St. Paul saith it in his Epistle to the Galatians at the beginning of which he declares that he lyâ—â— not and takes God to witness what he saith He endeavours to answer St. Jerom's chief Reason grounded upon this That it is incredible that St. Paul would reprove in St. Peter what he did himself by showing that the Circumstances were very different He maintains That the Ceremonies of the Law being of themselves indifferent neither good nor bad the Use of them becomes good or bad according to Times and Occasions That they were necessary to the 〈◊〉 before Christ came That they signified That he being come it was not convenient immediately to forbid them as Sacrilegious and that it was sufficient to let them die and go out of themselves but that they were now neither to be looked upon nor practised as necessary 〈◊〉 solvation That St. Peter's Fearfulness having made him observe Legal Ceremonies in such Circumstances as might have persuaded others that he believed them necessary St. Paul was in the right to accuse him of not walking uprightly according to the Truth of the Gospel and to oblige the Gentiles to Judaize whereas St. Paul could not be reproached with the 〈◊〉 Fault since he had kept them only to shew that they were not to be condemned as Câ—…inal Superstitions And yet That it is not now permitted to observe these Ceremonies under any 〈◊〉 oâ— for any purpose whatsoever he does not examine the case of an officious Lye and doth not decide whether it is permitted to tell a Lye at any time He leaves to every Man to take what Side he pleases provided that this be believed and laid down as an unalterable Principle That there is no Lye in the Authors of the holy Scriptures He sets St. Cyprian and St. Ambrose against the Authors that St. Jerom had alledged to justifie his Opinion but chiefly he citeth St. Paul against them who saith and declares at the beginning of his Epistle That he lyes not and That God is Witness of the Truth of what he affirms He concludes his Argument with a Complement and Expressions of the high Esteem and Respect that he had for St. Jerom He approves of his Translations of the Scripture prâ—…sing withal some Objections concerning the Correction of the Hebrew Text representing the difficulty of having his new Translation publickly read to People who were accustomed to that from the Septuagint which was authorised by the Apostles themselves who made use of it The Argument of the Eighty third Letter as it is explained by the Translator is this The Men of Thiana having renounced the Donatists Schism they wanted a Priest to govern them One Honoratus was Chosen and for that purpose taken out of the Monastery at Tagasta and was Ordained Priest of Thiana The Custom was That those who enter'd into Monasteries did begin with parting with all they had for the benefit of the Poor or of the Monastery it self That if any offer'd to come in that was not yet in a Condition to dispose of his Estate they refused him not provided he was sincerely resolved to execute the Order as soon as he could Honoratus was in this Condition and Owner of his Estate when he was Ordained Priest of Thiana The Question was Who should have this Estate The Men of Thiâ—… pretended to have it by the Rule of those Times That the Goods of such as were Ordained Priests of any Church should be converted to the Use of that Church Alypius on the contrary pretended That Honoratus's Estate belonged to the Monastery of Tagasta and was afraid that if the Church of Thiana had it
main End which St. Augustin aims at there is To prove the Probability of Man's Resurrection His chief Reason is grounded upon Christ's Resurrection attested by such credible Witnesses that none can rationally doubt of it the truth thereof having been confirmed by so many Miracles But because Unbelievers demanded why Miracles were not still wrought St. Augustin mentions several that were done in his time which he pretends to be very certain and very well attested He speaks again of the Condition of Glorified Bodies and Crowns his Work with an excellent Pourtraicture of the Happiness of the Saints How great saith he will be that Felicity that shall be disturbed with no Evil and where no other Business shall be followed but singing the Praises of God who shall be all in all ... There will be found True Glory where there is neither Error nor Flattery There is True Honour since it it is refused to none that deserve it and it is not given to any that deserve it not yea where no Unworthy Person shall pretend to it because there shall be none there but such as are Worthy There will be True Peace where a Man shall suffer nothing either from himself or from other Men. He that is the Author of Vertue shall himself be the Reward of it because there is nothing better than He. He shall be the End of our Desires whom we shall See to be without End whom we shall Love without Disgust and Praise without Weariness This Employment will be common to all Men as well as Eternal Life but it is impossible to know what degree of Glory shall be proportionable to each Man's Merit and yet it is certain that there is a great difference betwixt the Happiness of the one and of the other But one of the great Advantages of that City will be That none shall envy those whom he shall see to be Above him .... Every one shall enjoy a Happiness some greater and others less but every one shall have this Gift Not to desire a greater than what he has And we are not to imagine that Men shall be there without Free-Will because they cannot take pleasure in Sin For he will be so much the more Free who shall be delivered from the Pleasure of Sinning so as to take an unalterable Pleasure in not Sinning any more .... Wherefore all the Inhabitants of this divine City shall have a Will perfectly Free exempt from all Evil fill'd with all manner of Good enjoying without intermission the Delights of an Immortal Joy without remembrance either of his Faults or of his Miseries otherwise than to bless their Deliverer for the same They have left out in this Edition the Commentaries both of Ludovicus Vives and of Leonardus Coquaeus which exceeded the Text of St. Augustin by much and which served but little to understand it though otherwise full of Learning and Erudition These Books of St. Augustin are very pleasant for the surprising variety of the things which he hath brought in to serve his purpose so as all to tend to the same end Their Learning is generally admired yet they contain nothing but what is taken out of Cicero Varro Seneca and other profane Authors whose Works were common enough in those days and one may say that there is nothing very curious or elaborate and in some places he is not exact and he does not directly resolve most of the Difficulties which he proposes both upon the Text and upon the History of the Books of the Bible He discusses very useless Questions and sometimes makes use of Reasons too weak to persuade those that would doubt of what he intends to prove yet for all that this is a most excellent Book What I most admire in it is the Management of the whole Work the judicious Reflections which he makes upon the Opinions therein related and the great Principles of Morality which he layeth down upon Occasion At the latter end of this Volume there are some Letters which have some relation to what St. Augustin saith in the 8th Chapter of the last Book of the Miracles that were done in his time The First is one of Avitus upon the Translation of a Letter written by Lucianus concerning the Discovering of St. Stephen's Body With this Translation they have added another Tract translated out of Greek by Anastasius the Library-Keeper about another Discovery of St. Stephen's Relicks at Constantinople They have likewise placed their Bishop Severus's Letter touching the Miracles happened in the Island Minorca at the appearing of St. Stephen's Relicks for the Conversion of the Jews And two Books ascribed to Evodius Bishop of Uzala concerning St. Stephen's Miracles which have been mentioned already The EIGHTH TOME THE Eighth Volume of St. Augustin's Works contains his Writings against Hereticks excepting those that are against both the Donatists and the Pelagians which make up two Tom. VIII distinct Volumes It begins with the small Treatise of Heresies composed in the Year 428. at the Request of Quodvultdeus a Deacon to whom it is directed This Writing was to have had Two Parts The First concerning the Heresies raised from Jesus Christ's to St. Augustin's time He promised to examine in the Second what it is that makes a Man an Heretick This Second should naturally have been the First because that to know the Heresies that have broken out since Jesus Christ's time it is necessary to know what is Heresie But St. Augustin finding this Question hard to be resolved began with the other that was more easie and never undertook the Second Therefore this Treatise is only a very succinct Catalogue of the Names of Heretical Sects and of their principal Errors It beginneth with the Symonians and endeth with the Pelagians and containeth Eighty eight Heresies it is by no means exact and one shall hardly find any thing there which is not taken out of St. Epiphanius and Philastrius The Treatise against the Jews is a Sermon in which St. Augustin proves by the Prophecies That the Jewish Law was to have an End That it was to be changed into a New Law and That God would reject the Jews to call the Gentiles These Two short Treatises are follow'd by St. Augustin's Writings against the Manichees which are set down in the first place because those Hereticks opposed the first Principles of the Christian Religion The First of all is that of the Usefulness of Faith which St. Augustin composed sometime after he was Ordained Priest in the Year 391. to reclaim his Friend Honoratus from the Errors of the Manichees wherein he had been engaged as well as St. Augustin because those Hereticks had put him in hope That without making use of Authority they should discover the Truth to him by the Light of Reason and by this one only mean bring him to the Knowledge of God and deliver him from all sorts of Errors St. Augustin having shewed the difference betwixt the Author of a Heresie and a Person surprized with
French but retracted it in Africa In the Second and Third Book he proves That Jesus Christ is God and Man and the Virgin may be called the Mother of God In the Fourth he endeavours to shew That there is but only one Hypostasis or Person in Jesus Christ. In the Fifth he comes to a close Examination of the Error of Nestorius He confutes his Theses and shews That the Union of the Two Natures in one Person alone makes it lawful to attribute to the Person of Jesus Christ whatsoever agree to both Natures In the Last Place he proves That the Union of the two Natures is not a Moral Union only nor a Dwelling of the Divinity in the Human Nature as in a Temple as Nestorius asserts but it is a real Union of the two Natures in one Person In the Sixth he falls upon Nestorius with the Creed of the Church of Antioch where he was brought up taught and baptized Some have needlessly enquired by what Council of Antioch that Creed was made Cassian speaks of the Creed which was usually recited in the Church of Antioch and not of a Creed composed by any Council of Antioch But we must not forget here what Cassian observes That the Creed * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn together c. Symbolum is so called because it is a short Collection of all the Doctrine contained in Holy Scripture He urges Nestorius extreamly with the Authority of the Creed of his Church which contained the Faith which he had embraced when he was baptized and which he had always professed If you were saith he to him an Arrian or a Sabellian and I could not use your own Creed against you I would then convince you by the Authority of the Testimonies of Holy Scripture by the Words of the Law and by the Truth of the Creed acknowledged by all the World I would tell you That tho' you had neither Sense nor Judgment you ought to yield to the Consent of all Mankind and that it is unreasonable to preferr the Opinions of some particular Men before the Faith of the Church That Faith say I which having been taught by Jesus Christ and preach'd by the Apostles ought to be received as the Word and Law of God If I should deal thus with you what would you say what would you answer You could certainly have no other Evasion but to say I was not brought up in this Faith I was not so instructed my Parents my Masters taught me otherwise I have heard another thing in my Church I have learned another Creed into which I was baptized I live in that Faith of which I have made Profession from my Baptism You would think that you had brought a very strong Argument against the Truth upon this Occasion And I must freely own 'T is the best Defence that can be used in a bad Cause It discovers at least the Original of the Error And this Disposition were excusable if it were not accompanied with Obstinacy If you were of the same Opinions which you had imbibed in your Infancy we ought to make use of Arguments and Perswasions to bring you from your Error rather than severity to punish what is passed but being born as you were in an Orthodox City instructed in the Catholick Faith and baptized with a true Baptism we must not deal with you as an Arian or a Sabellian I have no more to say but this Follow the Instructions you have received of your Parents depart not from the Truth of the Creed which you have learned remain firm in the Faith which you have professed in your Baptism 'T is the Faith of this Creed which hath gained you admittance to Baptism 't is by that that you have been regenerated 't is by this Faith that you have received the Eucharist and the Lord's Supper Lastly I speak it with Sorrow 'T is that which hath raised you to the Holy Ministery to be a Deacon and Priest and made you capable of the Episcopal Dignity What have you done Into what a sad Condition have you cast your self By losing the Faith of the Creed you have lost all the Sacraments of your Priesthood and Episcopacy are grounded upon the Truth of the Creed One of these two things you must do either you must confess That he is God that is born of a Virgin and so detest your Error or if you will not make such a Confession you must renounce your Priesthood there 's no middle way if you have been Orthodox you are now an Apostate and if you are at present Orthodox how can you be a Deacon Priest or Bishop Why were you so long in an Error Why did you stay so long without contradicting others Lastly he exhorts Nestorius to reflect upon himself to acknowledge his Error to make Profession of the Faith into which he was baptized and have recourse to the Sacraments That they may regenerate him by Repentance they are Cassian's very Words as they have heretofore begat him by Baptism With this Discourse he mingles Arguments against the Error of Nestorius whom he undertakes to confute in the last Book by answering the Objections which he proposed and by alledging the Testimonies of the Greek and Latin Church against him He concludes with a Lamentation of the miserable Condition of Constantinople exhorting the Faithful of that Church to continue stedfast in the Orthodox Faith which had been so learnedly and eloquently explained to them by S. Chrysostom He seems to be much troubled for the Misery of that Church Altho' I am very little known saith he am of no worth and dare not rank my self with the great Bishop of Constantinople nor assume the Title of a Master I have the Zeal and Affection of a Scholar having been Ordained and Presented to God by S. John of blessed Memory And altho' I am far distant from the Body of that Church yet I am united in Heart and Spirit which makes me to sympathize in her Grief and Sufferings and pour out my self in Complaints and Lamentations This and the foregoing Place teach us That this Treatise of Cassian's was composed before the Deposition of Nestorius or at least before it was known in the West They also give us ground to conjecture That the Reason why S. Leo imposed this Task upon him to write against Nestorius was this That being known at Constantinople to be S. Chrysostom's Scholar his Work might have more Weight and be more effectual than if any other had written on the same Subject The Institutions of Cassian saith the learned Photius are very useful especially for those who have embraced a Monastick Life It may likewise be said That they have something so Powerful and Divine that the Monasteries which observe that Rule are flourishing and make themselves eminent for their singular Vertues but they that do not observe it have much-a-do to uphold themselves and are always near a Dissolution And indeed of all the Rules for Monks there are
Faith which we have been taught and that lastly the Grandeur of the Priestly Dignity shews it self best when we respect the Authority of the Bishops that are most highly promoted yet with a Proviso that we do not in any wise encroach upon the Privileges of such as are inferior to them Afterward he invites Theodoret to rejoice with him at the Victory which the Truth had obtained He sets himself against the Outrages which Dioscorus had committed He tells Theodoret That he must equally avoid the Errors of Nestorius and Eutyches He thanks God That he hath been freed from all manner of Suspicion and at last exhorts him to be watchful for the Defence of the Faith of the Church and not permit either Lay-men or Monks to become Preachers This Letter is dared June 12. The Ninety Fourth Letter to the Emperor Marcian is about a difficult Controversie which was in the Church concerning the day on which Easter should be kept in the year 455. S. Leo says That the Ancient Fathers had imposed that Task upon the Bishop of Alexandria to find out the Feast of Easter every year and to make it known to the Apostolick See that he might give notice of it to the far distant Churches That Theophilus had made a Calendar for an Hundred years beginning at the year 380. but that the Passover in the 76th year i. e. in the year of Jesus Christ 455 is appointed upon an extraordinary day and too much advanced in the Month of April He beseeches Marcian to command That an exact Calculation be made that all Churches may celebrate this Feast at the same time The following Letter to Juliaâ— is upon the same Subject Both are of June 16. This last in the ordinary Editions is directed to Eudoxia But the manner of writing and MSS. prove to us That it was really written to Julian The Ninety Sixth Letter is addressed to the Empress Eudoxia In it he exhorts her to make use of her Authority to compel some Monks of Palaestine to submit themselves to the Council of Chalcedon In the Ninety Seventh Letter to the Monks of Palaestine he explains the Opinions which he had asserted in his Letter to Flavian and evinces That his Doctrine is clear contrary to the Error of Nestorius as well as that of Eutyches In his Ninety Eighth Letter he desires Julian to give him an exact Account of the News of what happened at Constantinople and to take effectual care that the Canons be observed It is dated June 25. 453. The Ninety Ninth bears date Jan. 9. following He gives the Emperor Thanks for appeasing the Troubles of Palaestine and restoring Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem to his See again The following Letter to Julian is of the same date In it he shews much Joy That the Monks of Palaestine had acknowledged their Error and that Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem was restored He adds That Proterius Bishop of Alexandria Successor of Dioscorus who was deposed did write him a Letter in which he makes known to him the Purity of his Doctrine He speaks of the difference between himself and this Bishop about the Celebration of Easter in the year 455. He says That he hath approved nothing in the Council of Chalcedon but what concerns the Faith and was much pleased that Aetius had been found Innocent In the Hundred and First Letter to Marcian S. Leo assures this Emperor That he will freely be reconciled to Anatolius and for that end had already written to him if his Letters which he hath sent him had had any effect or he had answered them yet if he will submit himself to the Canâ—ns and renounce his ambitious Pretensions he would instantly receive him to his Communion This Letter bears date March the 9th The following Letter to Julian is of the same date He lets him know That he had receiv'd a Letter from Proterius in which he shews himself well principle'd in the Faith but because he was extreamly troubled with the Faction of the Eutychians who having made a corrupt Translation of S. Leo's Letter to Flavian would perswade Men That it favoured the Error of Nestorius he desires Julian to cause it to be translated into Greek and send it to Alexandria sealed with the Emperor's Signet He commands him to get knowledge of the Emperor's Answer about the day on which the Feast of Easter is to be kept the next year and send him word of it because the time of sending the Circular Letters for the Passover is at hand The Hundred and Third Letter is written to Proterius Bishop of Alexandria S. Leo discovers to that Bishop the Joy which he had conceived when he understood by his Epistle That he is of an Orthodox Judgment and that the Church of Alexandria hath received of S. Mark the Scholar of S. Peter the same Faith which the Romans have received of his Master He exhorts Proterius carefully to defend this Faith He adds That he hath taught no new Doctrine in his Letter to Flavian nor departed from the Rule of Faith received from his Ancestors and if Dioscorus had done the same he would not have separated from the Church since he had the Works of S. Athanasius the Sermons of Theophilus and S. Cyril which ought to have encouraged him to resist the Error of Eutyches He advertises Proterius That he must carefully avoid speaking any thing which may come near the Opinions of Nestorius and that in teaching the People he must let them know That he vents nothing new but teaches what the Holy Fathers have unanimously preached and to convince them of it it is not sufficient to say so but it is convenient to prove it by bringing and explaining their Authorities to which he may join his Letter In fine S. Leo says That he applies himself to Antiquity as well in Matters of Discipline as Faith and for this reason it is That he hath opposed them who through their Ambition would rob the Church of Alexandria of her Privileges and Metropolitans of their Rights He advises Proterius to uphold the Customs which were in use in the time of his Predecessors To keep the Bishops who according to the ancient Canons are subject to the Church of Alexandria close to their Duty by obliging them to be present at his Synod at the appointed times or when there is some Business that requires their presence This Letter is of March 10. 454. It hath never been published To this Letter the Epistle of Proterius Bishop of Alexandria to S. Leo touching the Feast of Easter in the year 455. is joined He was of a contrary Judgment to the Pope who at length yielded to the Opinion of Proterius Those that are curious Inquirers after the Accounts which were then made to find out the day on which Easter was to be kept every year may find much satisfaction in it About the end he cautions S. Leo That he should not venture to have this Letter turned into Latin because it is very hard
in Gennadius's sense We ought not to wonder that he doth not quote the Latin Authors being engaged with the Greeks against whom he might very well use the Authority of Eusebius Caesariensis Lastly The Style of this Treatise demonstrates plainly that it is Pope Gelasius's In it he shews that there are two Natures in Jesus Christ united in one Person and that these two Natures have retain'd their Properties This truth is proved in the first part by the Authority of Holy Scripture and in the second by the Testimonies of the Greek Fathers About the end of the first part we meet with a passage about the Eucharist exactly like Theodoret's This Treatise hath been Printed at Basil in 1528 in Antidoto adversus Haereses and at Tigur 1571. 'T is also extant in Biblioth Pat. Tom. 8. p. 699. This Pope had made also some other Treatises upon different subjects and some Hymns in imitation of St. Ambrose of which Gennadius makes mention but we have no more of his than the Works above-mentioned Besides these Works which are his alone the Decree concerning the Apocryphal and Canonical Books composed or rather approved by a Council of 70 Bishops held at Rome in 494 may also be attributed to him for indeed * Dr. Cave thinks them not the Work of Gelasius 1. Because it doth not bear his name in the ancientest Editions 2. Because some Books arecited in it which were not then Written or unknown as Sedulius's Paschal Work a Treatise de Revelatione Capitis S. Baptistae c. 3. It contains many absurd things in it unbecoming the Judgment of Gelasius and a Synod c. 't is the Work of Gelasius This Decree contains first of all a Catalogue of such Books as the Church of Rome acknowledges to be Canonical both in the O. and N. Testament like to the Decree of the Council of Trent save that he reckons but one Book of the Macchabees Next he establisheth the Authority of the Church of Rome and its Primacy which according to him was not before confirmed â—y any Synodical Decree but only by the words of Jesus Christ to Saint Peter to whom St. Paul was joyned and with whom he suffered Martyrdom under Nero insomuch that these two Apostles have Consecrated the Church of Rome and by their Presence and Martyrdom given it a pre-eminence above all other Churches So that the first See of the Churches of the World is Rome and the second Alexandria the third Antioch where St. Peter abode before he came to Rome After this Declaration comes a Catalogue of the Councils and the Books which are received by the Church of Rome viz. The four first General Councils and other Synods received and authorized in the Church The Works of St. Cyprian St. Gregory Nazianzene St. Basil St. Athanasius St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Hilary St. Ambrose St. John of Constantinople St. Theophilus of Alexandria St. Austin St. Jerom St. Prosper the Letter of St. Leo to Flavian and all the Treatises of the Orthodox Fathers that dyed in the Communion of the Church and the Decretals of the Popes As for the Acts of the Martyrs he observes that although he did not doubt of the truth of them nevertheless the Church of Rome doth not read them because the Authors of them are not known and there are some of them forged by the ignorant Men and Infidels and others full of falshood such as are the Acts of St. Quiritius St. Julitta St. George and several others Nevertheless it receives the lives of St. Paul St. Arsenius St. Hilarian and other Holy Men but it is only because they are written by St. Jerom. The Acts of St. Silvester are read in some Churches althô the Author be not known The Stories of the finding of the Cross and of John Baptist's Head are Modern Relations which some Christians read but when such sort of Works fall into our hands we must then follow the Apostles direction who teaches us to try all things and make use only of that which is good He commends some works of Ruffinus and Origen although he will not leave the Judgment which St. Jerom gives of them nor approve what he hath condemned in them He doth not wholly reject the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Caesariensis because it relates many Important matters although he condemns the Praises which he gives of Origen He commends the History of Orosius Sedulius's Paschal Work and the Poem of Juvencus Lastly He sets down a Catalogue of some of those Apocryphal Works which the Church rejecteth After the Acts of the Council of Ariminum he places the false Gospels and other Apocryphal Books of Holy Scripture the Works of Hereticks and of some Orthodox Authors who have departed from the Doctrines of the Church in some things such as Eusebius Tertullian Lactantius Africanus Commodianus Clemens Alexandrinus Arnobius Tichonius Cassianus Victorinus Petavionensis and Faustus Reiensis In the next year this Pope held another Council of 55 Bishops at Rome where Misenus the Legat of his Predecessor who had been Excommunicated for Communicating with Acacius was absolved having humbly begged Pardon for his fault This is all we have been able to Collect of Pope Gelasius He was a subtle and intelligent Man who much enlarged his Authority He Wrote well but obscurely He is guilty of much false Reasoning and often supposes those things for certain which never were done He was very skilful and knowing in the Customs and Usages of the Church of Rome He loved Order and Discipline and joyned Prudence and Courage with them both He gave an ample demonstration of it in the business of Acacius which he maintained against all opposition and would not remit any thing for Peace sake which he might easily have procured if he had not so severely insisted upon the Condemnation of Acacius By which it appears that the Popes were sometimes a little too stiff and resolute for although Acacius had been more blame-worthy than indeed he was yet the Pope ought to have more mildly dealt with him for Peace-sake and not to have persecuted with so much rigour the Memory of a Bishop whose Sentiments were Orthodox and whose Fault seems to have been nothing but this that he was not careful to please the Bishop of Rome and was too submissive to the Will of his Prince He is also thought to be the Addition Author of the Codex Sacramentarius which is a Collection of such Forms of publick Prayers and Administration of Sacraments as were in use in the Church of Rome in his time which he digested into one Volume putting them into a good Order and adding much of his own This Book lay hid for many Ages but at last falling into the hands of Paulus Petavius it was published at Rome in 1680 4to And not long after it was Reprinted with some other ancient Liturgies at Paris in 1685 4to by the Care of F. Mabillon ANASTASIUS II. Anastasius II. ANastasius II. Succeeded Pope Gelasius
address'd to the Orientalists wherein he does earnestly exhort them to suffer all sorts of Persecutions rather than communicate with the Complices and Followers of Eutyches Dioscorus Timothy Peter of Foulon and Acacius This Letter is dated Octob. 8. in the Year 512. The ninth Letter is a Letter of the Orientalists to Pope Symmachus They pray him to put an end to that Schism which had now continued many years upon the account of Acacius's Disobedience They remonstrate to him that their Faith is Orthodox that they condemn the Errors of Nestorius and Eutyches and those of their Followers that they approve the Council of Chalcedon That those who separated from the Communion of others upon the account of Acacius's affair did not take sufficient care of the Flock of Jesus Christ. That on the contrary those who overlook'd that formality had made Churches for the Publick Good that both the one and the other are Orthodox and that he ought not to refuse Communion to either of them To prove that they were Catholicks in their Judgment they propose an Exposition of their Faith wherein they do clearly reject the Errors of the Nestorians and Eutychians We have already spoken of the tenth Letter which is the Definitive Sentence that pass'd about the difference between the Churches of Arles and Vienna In the eleventh he confirms to the Bishop of Arles upon the Request of that Bishop presented to him the Right of Citing the Bishops of Gaul and Spain to the Synods that were necessary to be held for Judging of Ecclesiastical Matters He orders him to give an account to the Holy See of those Causes which should want his Authority to determine them The twelfth Letter wherein it is suppos'd that Pope Symmachus gave the Pallium to the Bishop of Laurea in Pannonia appears to me to be a Forgery It is no where cited it is taken from a place of little authority the style is different from that of the other Letters and does plainly discover that it is very late In short it is stuff'd with thoughts so mean and impertinent that it cannot be attributed to any man of sense You need only read it to be convinc'd of the Truth of what we say and that it is a suppositious Piece The style of Symmachus's Letters is harsh but it has smartness and vehemence AVITUS Bishop of Vienna Avitus Bishop of Vienna SExtus Alcimus Ecditius Avitus Son to the Senator Isychius and Brother to Apollinaris Bishop of Valentia was promoted in the beginning of the Sixth Century to the Episcopal See of the Church of Vienna which his Father had also governed for some years This Bishop laboured very much in the Conversion of the Arians held many Conferences with Gondeband King of the Burgundians who was an Arian converted his Son Sigismond and vigorously opposed the Hereticks of his time Dr. Cave says he converted King Gondeband to the Catholick Faith and made him publickly profess it when he endeavour'd to conceal it from his Subjects Hist. Lit. p. 372. He wrote also in defence of Pope Symmachus he presided in a Council held at Epaon in 517 he died in 523 he wrote Letters Sermons and Poems His Letters are the most curious and most beautiful of all his Works and they are in number 87. The first is addrest to Gondeband King of the Burgundians In it he first explains two places of the Gospel and takes occasion from the former to remark that the word Mass is used in Churches in Palaces and Courts to dismiss the People Afterward he proves that the Holy Spirit is not a Creature and that the Breath of Life which God breathed into the first man is not the very Substance of the Holy Spirit In the second Letter addressed to the same Prince he treats of the Incarnation and opposes the Errors of Nestorius and Eutyches but he was so ill informed of their History that he attributes to the latter the Error of the former although it be perfectly contrary to his Opinions In the following Letter he appears to be no better informed of the Transactions in the East which happened in his own time for there he accuses the Bishop of Constantinople of having cut off in the year preceding these words from the Trisagion O thou that was crucified for us have pity upon us and he defends this Expression as being very ancient Now it 's certain that it was Peter of Foulon who had added these words to the Trisagion a little while before and the Bishop of Constantinople was so far from cutting them off that on the contrary he approved this addition and caused the Trisagion to be sung after this manner which caused a Tumult in the Church of Constantinople mention'd by Avitus who is mistaken in attributing the Disorder to the cutting off of these words which had not happened but because they were added In the fourth Letter he examines two places in the Writings of Faustus Bishop of Regium One is about a very short Penance which is done at the point of Death and the other is about the unprofitableness of Faith without good Works Avitus maintains in speaking of the former That it 's false and very harsh to affirm that the Penance which is granted at the point of Death does not at all profit a man But he confesses that if those who have received it relapse afterward into their former Debauchery it was unprofitable to them and that hereby they render themselves unworthy of the Communion Nevertheless he does not think that they can be obliged to renounce altogether the use of Marriage After this he remarks upon the second place of Faustus That it cannot be said that Faith without Works is altogether unprofitable since Infants are justified by Faith without Works and That the Faith of Adult Persons is commonly accompanied with Good Works In the sixth Letter addressed to Victorius Bishop of Grenoble Avitus maintains That it is never lawful for Catholicks to use the Altars Oratories or Churches of Hereticks He procur'd this Prohibition to be made in the Council of Epaon altho the contrary had been establish'd in the first Council of Orleans The seventh Letter is written to the Patriarch of Constantinople wherein he congratulates his Reconciliation to the Bishop of Rome This Patriarch was John of Cappadocia who was reconcil'd to Pope Hormisdas in the year 519. In the eighth Letter he praises Eustorgius Bishop of Milan for his Charity to the Captive Gauls whom he had caus'd to be redeem'd In the ninth he recommends to Caesarius Bishop of Arles a Foreign Bishop call'd Maximianus who was come into his Country to find there an able Physician who could cure him of a distemper in his eyes wherewith he was afflicted There are two things remarkable in this Letter the first is That a Catholick Bishop in whatsoever place he is ought not to pass for a Stranger the second is That a Bishop is oblig'd to take care of his health that he may 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
pleased themselves with starting a great many unprofitable Questions with explaining Mysteries by the Principles of Logick and disputing with Dogmatical stiffness about things of small consequence Moreover too great Credulity begun to possess the minds of the more Learned and Wise. There was nothing then heard of but Miracles Visions and Apparitions the Veneration due to Saints and their Relicks was advanc'd beyond just bounds and a mighty bustle was made about some very indifferent Ceremonies Altho the Councils continually renewed the Ancient Canons yet Discipline now grew remiss and the rigor of the ancient Laws about Penance was now very much abated The Riches of the Church begun to be burdensom to it because its Ministers consider'd them as their own peculiar Possessions whereas before they were look'd upon only as the Patrimony of the Poor This oblig'd the Councils of this Age to make so great a number of Canons about the distribution and preservation of these Possessions which was a matter wholly new about which there were never any Canons made before this time In the Latin Church the obligation to live in Celibacy was extended as low as to Sub-deacons but to free their behaviour from all suspicion she was forc'd to renew very often and with particular circumstances the ancient Canons which forbid Clergy-men to keep strange Women in their Houses Contests and Canvassings for obtaining Bishopricks were very common and many were promoted to them who had neither Knowledge Merit nor Capacity The Church of Rome was thrice disturb'd with the Schisms of Anti Popes and the Sees of Alexandria and Antioch were frequently the Prey of the Ambitious The Eastern and Western Churches begun to be divided some Popes pretended to such Rights and Prerogatives as their Predecessors never thought of and there wanted not Flatterers who endeavour'd to perswade them that they were independent upon and superior to Councils But the more Holy rejected these false Maxims and asserted their greatest Glory to consist in maintaining the Laws of the Church Yet it cannot be deny'd but this Age had also its own peculiar advantages In it the Doctrine of the Church was explain'd with all possible exactness the African Bishops defended the Faith with a Constancy and Boldness equal to that of the Primitive Bishops The Popes in it show'd much Prudence Conduct and Charity in the most difficult times and the Eastern Bishops discover'd great subtilty and sharpness of Wit in the Disputes they had among themselves and with the Occidentalists The Western Councils made very good Laws concerning the Discipline of the Church which are still observ'd to this day They regulated the Ceremonies and Rites of Divine Service the Degrees of Consanguinity within which 't is unlawful to contract Marriage the Qualifications requisite for entring into Orders the Impediments which render Persons uncapable of receiving them and many other things of this nature Lastly The Monastical Order was perfected in the East by the Laws of the Emperors and divers pious Writings and in the West by many Rules and particularly by that of St. Benedict whose Order in a littletime spread not only into Italy but also into France and England I should here conclude this Advertisement but that I think my self oblig'd to precaution the Reader against a Doubt which has been started since the Impression of this Tome against some Authors contain'd in it whose Works all the Criticks have hitherto received as most authentick Monuments 'T is in a Writing entituled A Defence of the Letter 〈◊〉 St. Chrysostom to Câ—sarius p. 78. He has also says the Author of this Writing added â—…over Facundus He has explain'd his Words agreeably to the Sentiments of the African Chuâ—â—h because he who forg'd this Work under his Name would not have it thought that he was of any other Judgment Yet P. H. was convinc'd from thence that it was a forg'd Piece tho he chose rather to follow for some time the common Opinion because he must be reserv'd in declaring who is the genuine Author of a Work But since I know the original of his Secret and his Proofs I am willing to make you now my Confident in this particular Know then that Facundus Liberatus Marius Mercator Victor of Tunona Cassiodorus to whom so many Works are attributed excepting only his Formularies the Treatise of the Soul and his Commentaries upon the Psalms and Isidore who is thought to be the Author of the Book of Ecclesiastical Writers Know then I say that all these pretended Africans Italians Spaniards with some others were born in France and are not near so old as they are believ'd to be I will tell you at some time hereafter the Reasons I have to reckon them among forg'd Writings If he to whom this Opinion is attributed were an ordinary Person his Judgment might be despis'd as not being founded upon any proof But because P. H. is an Author famous for Learning and Worth whose Reputation may make some Impression upon the mind of the Reader it will be convenient to produce the Proofs upon which the Monuments which he is said to reject are founded We shall begin with the Treatise of Illustrious Men written by Isidore of Sevil which gives testimony to the truth of the Books of Facundus and of the Chronicle of Victor of Tunona Never was Book attested to be genuine by Authors more worthy of credit The first of them is Braulio Bishop of Saragosa the Friend and Cotemporary of Isidore This Bishop surviving him made his Elogy and the Catologue of his Works and there he has reckon'd among the rest The Book of Illustrious Men to which we have added says he what I said just now about it The authority of the Witness cannot be rejected nor can his testimony be call'd in question the former is unquestionable and the other has all the Characters of Truth that can be desir'd He speaks of the Works of St. Isidore as one that was very well acquainted with them He observes that it was at his request that this Author undertook the Book of Etymologies that he had left it imperfect and only divided it into Titles He speaks of Isidore also in such a manner as sufficiently discovers that he had seen him and had been his Friend The second Witness for this Book of Isidore of Sevil is Ildephonsus of Toledo who may haveseen Isidore for Isidore died in 636 and Ildephonsus was ordain'd Bishop in 658. This last wrote a Book of Illustrious Men in the Preface to which he observes that he did it to continue the Works of St. Jerom Gennadius and Isidore To these two Witnesses may be added Honorius of Autun who abridg'd the Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers and their Works and transcribe from St. Jerom in the first Book from Gennadius in the second and from Isidore in the third I do not relate the testimony of the Chronicle of Isidore of Paca concerning this Work because it is not an unquestionable Monument If we should
came from Time to Time to give the Bishop an account of their Conduct and the Bishop did also visit his Diocess Publick Penance was in use yet but not with the same rigor as in the former Ages They granted Absolution several Times They never denyed the Communion to dying People Secret Confessions were frequent They recommended frequent Communion They administred yet Baptism by immersion and only at Easter and Whitsuntide unless in case of Necessity Prayer for the Dead was very much practised This is part of the Discipline contained in Charlemagne's Capitularies This is the Catalogue of this Emperor's Letters A Letter to Offa King of the Mercians in the Year 774. A Declaration for the Designation of Bishopricks A Letter to Fastrade his Wife Some Instructions given to Angilbert going to Rome anno 796. A Letter to Leo sent by Angilbert Two Letters to Offa. A Fragment of a Letter against vicious Priests directed to the Bishops of France A Letter to the Monks of S. Martin of Tours wherein he enjoyns them to send back again to Theodulphus Bishop of Orleans some Clerks of Orleans who had harboured among them A Letter for the Restauration of Schools in Churches and Monasteries A Letter to Pepin for the Peace of the Churches and of those who serve them A Letter to the Bishops of the Kingdom written in 811. commanding them to instruct the Priests and the People in the Signification of the Ceremonies of Baptism The Copy we have of it is directed to Odelbert it was set forth by F. Mabillon and is found as well as the preceeding in the Collection of Capitularies of M. Baluzius This Letter stirred up Amalarius Jesse and some other Bishops to make some Treatises to explain the Right of Baptism A Letter to Alcuin about the number of the Works in the Year among Alcuin's Works A Letter which he made for a Preface to the Book of Homilies made by Paul the Deacon and collected into one Volume by his order set out by F. Mabillon in the first Volume of his Analecta pag. 25. Sigebert ranks Charlemagne among Ecclesiastical Writers upon the account of this Work which yet was none of his but of Paul the Deacon of Aquileia F. Mabillon hath moreover set forth in the fourth Volume of his Analecta an Epistle of Charlemagne touching the Grace of the * Of the sevenfold Spirit Holy Ghost Lastly we meet with several Letters more of Charlemagne as Foundations Donations Priviledges c. in the Collection of such kind of Pieces But the two most considerable Ecclesiastical Works that have appeared under this Prince's Name are the Letter written in his Name to Elipandus Bishop of Toledo and the other Bishops of Spain against the Error of Felix Bishop of Urgel which is at the end of the Council of Frankfort and the four Books called Carolin against Image-Worship and the Decree of the Nicene Council Some attribute them to Ingilram Bishop of Mets others to Alcuin others would have us think them to be supposititious But this last Pretension is unwarrantable for not to speak of the Authority of Hincmarus who cites them and of several ancient Authors which are found in Libraries Pope Adrian's Answer to this Work shews it had been published in his Time by Charlemagne's Order and the Councils of Frankfort and Paris are authentick Testimonies of the Truth of these Books So that there can be no Doubt but this Work is a kind of Manifesto containing the Sentiment of the French Church published under the Name and by the Order of Charlemagne We shall speak more fully of these Works of Charlemagne when we make the History of the seventh Council and of this of Frankfort where we will examine the Affair of Felix of Urgel and the Sentiments of the Author of the Carolin Books touching Images ALCUIN FLaccus ALBIN or ALCUIN born in England Deacon of the Church of York and the Scholar of Bede and of Egbert was invited into France anno 790. by Charlemagne Alcuin who looked upon him as his Master and shewed a great esteem for him He had the Reputation of one of the most learned Men of his Age in Ecclesiastical Matters He instructed the French not only by his Writings but moreover by the publick Lectures he read in the King's Palace and other Places Charles gave him the Government of many Abbies and at last charged him with the Care of the Canons of S. Martin of Tours He died in this Society anno 804. This Aâ—thor's Works 〈◊〉 collected by Andreas â—…us or 〈◊〉 Chesne and Printed at Paris by Craâ—… in 1617. They are divided into Three parts The 1st comprehends his Tracts upon the Scripture the 2d his Books of Doctrine Discipline and Morality and the 3d the Verses Letters and Pâ—â—ms he made The first part comprehends the following Works Questions and Answers about several difficult passages of Geâ—…sis with an Explication of these words Let us make Man in our â—mage An Exposition of the Penitential and Gradual Psalms and of the 118th Psalm A Treatise of the use of Psalms with Prayers taken out of the Psalms An Office of the Church for the Year A Letter upon what is said in the Song of Songs that there be Sixty Queens and Eighty Concubines A Commentary upon Ecclesiastes and Seven Books of Comâ—…taries upon the Gospel of S. John It is observed in the end of this part that Alcuinus had laboured to correct the whole Text of the vulgar Bible by Charlemagne's Order and that this Manuscript-work is found in the Library of Vauxcelles with some Verses of Alcuinus upon this Work The Second part comprehends the following Treatises A Tract of the Trinity Dedicated to Charlemagne divided into Three Books wherein he handles with great accuracy and clearness some Speculative and Scholastick Questions concerning those Mysteries with Twenty Eight Questions and Answers about the Trinity A Letter explaining what is Time Eternity and an Age c. * In the Biblioth Patrum it is attributed to Paulinus Bishop of Aquileia but falsly A Tract of the Soul directed to his Sister Eâ—â—alia a Virgin Seven Books against the Opinion of Felix Bishop of Urgel who believed Jesus Christ might be called the Adoptive Son of God as to his Humane Nature A Letter upon the same Subject written to Elipandus Bishop of Toledo Elipandus's Answer in which he treats Alcuin very rudely and having loaded him with Calumny cites some passages of the Fathers and the Church-Office to justifie that Jesus Christ may be called God's Adoptive Son as to his Humane Nature Alcuin's Reply to Elipandus's Letter divided into Four Books In the Two first he Answers the Authorities alledg'd by Elipandus and in the Two last he proves his own Opinion by Testimonies of the Fathers and the Scripture He forbears Reviling Words and deals with him with as much Moderation as his Adversary hath express'd himself with Heat and Passion At the end of these Four Books there is an
Church for the hallowing of Images Those of the second answer there are many Holy things in the Church which are not Hallowed by Prayer but are Holy by their very Name as the Cross and the Sacred Vessels which are Reverenced by reason of their Shape and Use that it is so with Images which have Reverence paid them for the sake of that they represent and of their Usefulness The Bishops of the first Council charge them that Honour Images of Saints with lapsing into Heathenism Those of the second make a vigorous Defence upon this Article maintaining that they Worship them not as they Worship God but that they â—embrace and salute them and pay them an outward Worship to express their Veneration of the Saints represented by them besides that they use them for their own Instruction and for raising Godly Motions in the Beholders From Reasons they come to Authorities and first of all they alledge two Testimonies of the Scripture where it is said That God is a Spirit that they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and in Truth and that no Man hath seen God at any time The Fathers of the Second Council answer This cannot be understood but of the Deity and cannot be applied to Christ's Humanity thus confessing that they would not have approved of the Images of the Trinity The Second Place of Scripture is that famous one of Deuteronomy Ye shall make to your selves no Graven Idol The Fathers of the Second Council Answer This ought not to extend to the Images of Christians but respects only the Jews and prophane Images and that Moses himself explained this Precept by making Cherubims by God's Order I pass by the other places of Scripture which are less pertinent by far than the preceding to come to the Testimonies of the Fathers The First is that of St. Epiphanius who will not have Christians to set up Images in Churches nor in Church-Yards nor even in their Houses The Fathers of the Second maintain this Letter to be false that St. Epiphanius could not be of a contrary Mind to St. Basil St. Amphilochius St. Gregory Nyssen and the other Fathers who commanded the Use of Images It had perhaps been better for them to say That this Father speaks too harshly The Second Passage is drawn out of St. Gregory Nazianzen's Verses where it is said Men ought not to have their Trust and Hope in Colours but in their Hearts This Passage is of a dubious Sense and does no way concern Images but 't is a moral Reflexion according to the Remark of the Fathers of the Second Nicene Council wherein this Father observes that Men ought not to place their Confidence in worldly Goods which he compares to Colours but in a good Conscience The Passages of St. Basil are yet of a larger Sense They say That Scripture does represent to us the Images of the Souls of Saints but not of their Bodies This does not overthrow other Images neither should they have alledged against Images a Place taken out of an Homily which is not St. Chrysostom's The Passage of St. Athanasius that Creatures ought not to be worshipped is only against Idols That of Amphilochius hath something in it of greater Difficulty This Father says That we should have no Care to paint out in Colours a Corporeal Representation of the Saints because we have no need of them but that we should Imitate their Virtues The Fathers of the Second Council make a large Discourse to shift off this Passage They shew the Usefulness of representing the Histories of Saints which do both instruct and stir up Godly Motions But they say it 's not enough to erect Temples and Images to their Honour but we ought besides to imiâ—ate their Virtuous Actions They pretend Amphilochius meant nothing else and explain themselves with a Passage of Asterius of Amasea which gives them an opportunity to produce another of the same Father proving the Use of Images The Bishops of the first Council had cited a Passage stronger yet than that of Amphilochius drawn out of a writing of Theodatus of Ancyra saying That Christians have not learnt to draw the Pictures of the Faces of Saints but to imitate their Virtues For saith he what benefit can they that would set up those kind of Representations reap thereby And what Spiritual Thought can they suggest to them 'T is a Vain Imagination and a Diabolical Invention The Fathers of the second Council answer That this place of Theodotus is supposititious Perhaps it had been more to the purpose to observe That the first Part is Theodotus's but the second is a Conclusion which their Adversaries draw from the place of Theodotus to which they might easily have returned the same Answer they had done to that of Amphilochius The last Passage reported in the Acts of the Council of Constantinople is a Passage taken out of a Letter of Eusebius Caesariensis to Constantia Augusta which is attributed to that Author yet is it not sure that it is his and the Passage drawn out of it does not at all concern Images Nevertheless the Fathers of the second Council without telling us thus much reject the Authority of Eusebius charge him with being Anathematized represent him as a Theopassian who hath condemned Images and rank him with Severus Peter Gnaphaeus Philoxenus c. believing it advantageous to them that Eusebius should be their Adversary and the Enemy of Images The Definition of the Council of Constantinople follows these Testimonies They forbid all sorts of Persons to make to worship or to set up in Churches or in private Houses any Image upon pain of Deposition if it be a Bishop a Priest or a Deacon or of Excommunication if it be a Monk or a Lay-man and it enjoyns them to be dealt withal according to the Rigour of the Imperial Laws as Adversaries of God's Laws and Enemies of their Ancestors Doctrines But they forbid to take away the Sacred Vessels under that pretence or to make them pass for Images as also the Veils the Vestments and the other Things used in the Sacred Ministry This Declaration is joyned with the Anathematizing of those that do not receive the Doctrine of the 6 First Councils They are also Anathematized who make Images of Christ or of the Saints after the Acclamations to the Emperors Leo and Constantine and Imprecations against German Gregory and John Damascene who are Anathematized and Deposed The Council of Nice confutes these Definitions in every Article The 7th Action was held the 13th of October It contains a Confession of Faith in the end whereof vv It is defined That Images be placâ—d in Churches and Reverenced but not Adored with the true Adoration due to God only It is clear from the Premises that this Definition of the Council was resolved upon before the Matter was heard or canvassed and though they had no Grounds for this Practice either from Scripture Reason or Ecclesiastical Constitutions yet Image-worship they
Routiers That he would maintain the Persons and the Privileges of Ecclesiasticks That he would cause the Sentences of Excommunication to be duly Executed That he would shun the Excommunicate and oblige them to Re-enter into the Bosom of the Church That he would set up Judges unsuspected of Heresy That he would restore to Churches and Church-men all the Estates which belong'd to them before the Croisado that he would cause the Tithes to be paid to the Churches That he would give Seventeen Thousand Marks for the Dammages done to the Churches of which Ten Thousand should be distributed by the Direction of the Legate Four Thousand to the Abbeys of Cisteaux Clairvaux Grand-Selve and Candeil Six Thousand to Fortify the Castle of Narbonne and the others which shall be put into the King's Hands Four Thousand to Found an University at Toulouse That after he had receiv'd Absolution he would take the Cross from the Hands of the Legate and depart within two Years to make War against the Saracens for Five Years That he would give his Daughter in Marriage to the King's Brother upon Condition That after the Death of the Count the City of Toulouse and the Diocess thereof should belong to that Prince and that in case he should Die without Heirs that Country should be annex'd to the Crown and no other Children or Heirs of Count Raymond to make any Pretensions thereto That they would likewise leave him the Diocesses of Agen and Cahors and part of that of Albi but that the King shall retain the City of Albi and what is on the other side the River Tarn towards Carcassonne That he would do Homage to the King for the Territories left him and that he would quit all his Pretences to the Country on this side the Rhone That he would stand by what had been done by the Count of Montfort that he would make War against the Count of Foix and the other Enemies of the Roman Church that he would demolish the Fortifications of the City of Toulouse and Thirty other Castles that for a Guarantee of this Treaty he would put into the King's Hands the Castle of Narbonne and several others which the King should detain for Ten Years and keep at the Charges of the Count. This Treaty was Concluded at Paris on April 18. 1228. Afterwards the Count and those of his Retinue who had been Excommunicated went into the Church of Notredame at Paris on Good Friday bare-foot in a Sheet to receive Absolution from the Legate This done the Count remain'd Prisoner at Paris till the Conditions of the Treaty were performed About the Feast of Pentecost the King sent him into his own Country whither the Legate accompanied him and held a Council at Toulouse in the Year 1229. wherein he set up the Inquisition and made several Orders for the Extirpation of Hereticks Count Raymond was not at first so violent against the Albigenses for which the Pope's Legate upbraided him in the Year 1232 in an Assembly held at Melun where he was resolv'd that this Count should make Laws against them according to the Instructions of the Arch-Bishop of Toulouse and of a Lord who should be Nominated by the King The Arch-Bishop drew up the Heads according to which the Count in the Year 1233 made a very large Declaration against the Hereticks which he Publish'd at Toulouse on the 14th of February This last Bâ—â—w put an end to the Contest of the Albigenses who were afterwards left to the Inquisitors who totally destroy'd the Unhappy Remainder of those Hereticks This Sect being as has been already obâ—erv'd compos'd of several other particular Sects 't is hard The Errors of the Albigenses to determine what Errors were common to all the Sect and what were only taught by particular Sects The following are such as are charg'd upon them by Alanus Monk of Cisteaux and Peter Monk of Vaux de Cornay who wrote against them at that time They accuse them 1. Of owning Two Principles or Two Creators the one Good and the other Bad the former the Creator of Invisible and Spiritual things the latter the Creator of Bodies and the Tutor of the Old Testament 2. Of admitting Two Christs the one Bad who appear'd upon Earth and the other Good who never liv'd in this World 3. Of denying the Resurrection of the Flesh and of believing that our Souls are Demons confin'd to our Bodies for the Punishment of their Sins 4. Of Condemning all the Sacraments of the Church Of rejecting Baptism as useless Of Abominating the Eucharist Of Practising neither Confession nor Pennance and of believing Marriage to be Unlawful 5. Of Ridiculing Purgatory the Prayers for the Dead Images Crucifiâ—…s and the other Ceremonies of the Church These are the Heads to which the Principal Errors charg'd upon the Albigenses may be reduc'd As to their way of Living There were two sorts of People among them the Perfect and the Believers the Perfect boasted of living Continently did neither Eat Flesh nor Eggs nor Cheese abhorr'd Lying and never Swore The Believers liv'd as other Men and were as Irregular in their Manners but were perswaded That they were sav'd by the Faith of the Perfect and that none of those who receiv'd the Imposition of their Hands were Damned Luke Bishop of Tuy in Spain has Compos'd a Work against the Albigenses divided into Three Parts The Treatise of Luke of Tuy against the Albigenses In the First he refutes their Errors about the Intercession of Saints Purgatory the Prayers for the Dead the State of departed Souls by Passages taken out of the Dialogues of Saint Gregory and Saint Isidore In the Second he refutes their Erroâ—s about the Sacraments and Sacramental things Benedictions Sacrifices the Authority of the Holy Fathers the Worship of the Cross and Images In the third Part he detects the Fallacies which the Hereticks were guilty of whether in denying of Truths or by dissembling their Sentiments or by spreading of Fables and setting up false Miracles or in imposing on the Church or in corrupting the Writings of the Catholick Doctors or by affecting to suffer with Constancy Among all the Sects which started up during the Thirteenth Century there was none more detestable The Stadings then that of the Stadings which shewâ—d it self by the Outrages and Cruelties which it exerâ—…s'd in Germany 1â—30 against the Catholicks and especially against the Church-Men Those Imâ—ious Persons Honour'd Lucifer and inveigh'd against God himself believing That He had unjustly Condemn'd that Angel to Darkness that one Day he would be re-establish'd and they should be â—â—ved with him Whereupon they Taught That till that time it was not requisite to do any thing that â—as pleasing to God but the quite contrary They were perswaded that the Devil appear'd in their Asâ—â—mbly They therein committed Infamous things and utter'd strange Blasphemies 'T is said that â—…er they had receiv'd the Eucharist at Easter from the Hands of the Priest they kept
he debates the question about the Poverty of Jesus Christ and his Apostles and endeavours to reconcile the Decretal Exiit with the Opinion of John XXII and proves that it is not Heretical to assert that Jesus Christ and his Apostles had not any Dominion either in common or particular to themselves nor any property nor any right of Use but the more actual usage of them Upon this Subject he enlarges with the respect to the Franciscans and the Questions debated in Pope John XXII's time but defends his Constitutions notwithstanding affirming That it belongs to the Pope to explain the Rule He after speaks of the other Virtues of the Monks as their Obedience Humility Charity Silence and the Opposite Vices and ends this Work with an Explication of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit William Ockam born in a Village of the same Name in the County of Surrey in England a Grey-Friar and Sirnamed The Singular Doctor was the Head or Leader of the Sect of William Ockam Schoolmen called Nominals because they did not multiply things according to the difference of their Names but attempted to know and explain the Proprieties of terms He flourished in the University of Paris in the beginning of this Age and made a Work of the Ecclesiastical and Secular Power in the defence of Philip the Fair against Boniface VIII He after fell in with a Party of his own Order who maintained that Jesus Christ had nothing in Proper nor in Common and was one of the great Adversaries of John XXII who Condemned him to Silence under the Penalty of Excommunication but in the issue he declared himself openly for the Emperor Lewis of Bavaria and for the Anti-Pope Petrus Corbarius and wrote against John XXII who Excommunicated him in 1330. whereupon he left France and went to Lewis of Bavaria who received him favourably He finished his Life in that Court and wrote always in his defence It is said that he used to speak to the Emperor thus O Prince defend me with thy Sword and I will defend thee with my Pen. He died at Munick April 10. 1347. His Works were never Collected into one Body but printed severally They are of Three Sorts 1. Works of Philosophy 2. Treatises of School-Divinity 3. Books of Controversie His Philosophical Books are his Exposition upon Logick printed at Bononia in 1496. A Sum of Logick printed at Venice in 1508. and 1591. and at Oxford 1675. His great Summ of Logick printed at Venice in 1532. His Questions upon the Eight Books of Aristotle's Physicks printed at Strasburg in 1491. and 1506. His Natural Philosophy or an Abridgment of a Summ taken out of the Books of Physick printed at Venice in 1606. and at Rome in 1637. His Works of School-Divinity are his Questions upon the Four Books of Sentences printed at Lyons in 1495. his Centiloquium containing the whole Science of Speculative Divinity in a Hundred Conclusions printed in the next Year in the same place A Commentary upon the first Book of the Sentences printed in 1483. Seven Quodlibetical Questions with a Treatise upon the Sacrament of the Altar or of the Body of Jesus Christ printed at Paris in 1487. and 1513. at Strasburg in 1491. and at Venice in 1516. and at Paris 1487. and 1513. His Books of Controversie against the Popes Boniface VIII and John XXII are put together by Goldastus into his Collection Intituled Monarchia The First is about the Ecclesiastical and Secular Power in the form of a Dialogue between a Soldier and a Clergyman in it he confutes the pretended Claim of Pope Boniface VIII to a Superiority over the Temporal Affairs of Kings This Treatise was printed before at Paris in 1598. The Second is a Treatise containing a Resolution to Eight Questions about the Ecclesiastical and Secular Power In it he discusses these following Questions I. Whether the Supream Spiritual Power and the Supream Temporal Power may meet in the same Subject and whether the Pope hath them both He recites the Reasons and Answers on both sides and at last concludes That although both these Powers may meet in the same Man yet it is not at all fit that they should meet in him and that the Pope hath only a Spiritual Jurisdiction II. Whether the Lay-Power hath any thing proper to it which is immediately derived from God and whether it depends on the Pope He treats of this Question in the same manner as the former and gives us to understand that the true Opinion is this That Kings depend immediately on God and not on the Pope as far as concerns their Temporal Power III. Whether the Pope and the Church of Rome have by the appointment of Jesus Christ a Power to give a Temporal Jurisdiction to the Emperor and Kings and whether they hold it from him He recites the Reasons on both sides but manifestly shews what Opinion he was of IV. Whether the Election of a King of the Romans or of the Emperor entitles to a Supream Power and whether it depends upon the Ceremony of Unction used at the Coronation He treats of the Distinction between the King of the Romans and the Emperor of the Right of Charles the Great to the Empire and of the Right of his Successors as well to the Empire as Kingdom of France of the Right of Election and concludes that the Electors in choosing a King of the Romans which he looks upon as not differing from the Emperor confer on him a Right to Govern the Empire V. Whether in those Kingdoms where there is a Succession established the Unction performed by the Clergy gives any Temporal Authority VI. Whether Kings are Subject to them that Crown them VII Whether a King who shall suffer himself to be Crowned by any other Bishop than him to whom it belongs of Right loses his Title of King and his Regal Authority VIII Whether the Canonical Election of the Princes Electors gives the King of the Romans a Right to any other than the Hereditary Countries He treats of all these Questions after such a manner that though he does not plainly lay down his own Judgment yet he shews where the Truth lies In the end of his Treatise he relates the Errors of which John XXII was accused as well concerning the Poverty of Jesus Christ and his Apostles as about the Vision of God His Third Work is a large Treatise in the form of a Dialogue divided into several Books in which he examines the Questions controverted in his time between John XXII and his Adversaries in the same Method as in his former Treatise In the First Book he inquires whether it belongs to Divines or Canonists to judge of Heresies and Catholick Truths In the Second he lays down what is Heresie and what Catholick Truth In it also he Treats of several Curious Questions concerning the Principles of Faith and the Condemnation of Heresies by Councils and Popes In the Third he Examines who are Judges of Heresies and shews
Prelats of the Places The 7th Wherein he renew'd the Laws about the modest Habits of Clergy-men The 8th Wherein he declares that by the preceding Constitutions and by the Concordats made with each Nation he had satisfy'd the Decree concerning Reformation made in the Session of the 30th of October last by which means he eluded the Reformation of the Cardinals and the Court of Rome which had been decreed in the Council The News of the Election of Martin V. being carried into France and Louis de Flisque being The Regulation made in France about the Discipline of the Church sent to communicate it to the King this Prince held an Assembly of Prelats of his Counsellors his Court of Parliament and the University wherein it was resolv'd That the Edict of the Year 1406 should remain in Force and that for the future in Cathedral Collegiate and Conventual Churches and other Elective Benefices they should be provided for by the Election or Postulation of the Chapters Colleges and Communities as well Regular as Secular and that as to other Benefices which were not Elective they should be provided for by the Presentations Collations and Institutions of those to whom it belong'd of common Right or by Custom or Privilege notwithstanding and without having regard to any general or special Reservations from any Person whatsoever On the 26th of February 1418 the Dauphin coming to Parliament forbad the University to acknowledge or obey the Pope chosen at Constance until the King and his Council should order it Nevertheless he was acknowledg'd for lawful Pope but because the Council in spite of the pressing Sollicitations of the Ambassadors of France would not take care to reform the Court of Rome the Regulation made in 1406. concerning the Collation of Benefices was confirm'd anew in France There remain'd no more to be done by Pope Martin V. for satisfying the Decrees made by the Council before his Election but to appoint the Place where the future Council was to be held which he did in the 44th Session April the 19th wherein he read the Constitution for appointing the future Council at Pavia In fine on the 22d of the same Month the last Session of the Council of Constance was held The end of the Council of Constance wherein after the Mass of the Holy Ghost Umbaud Cardinal-Deacon by the Order of the Pope and the Council said Sirs Go in Peace and those who were present answer'd Amen The Ambassadors of Poland demanded the Condemnation of a Book of John de Falkemberg which contain'd most cruel Errors and Hersies and had been condemn'd by the Deputies of the Nations Whereupon Martin V. made Answer That he approv'd whatever had been determin'd concluded and ordain'd in Matter of Faith by the Council that he approv'd and ratified what was done in it Conciliarly and not what was done in it after another manner i. e. That which had been concluded only by the Nations and had not been approv'd in the General Assembly of the Council as the Decrees of Reformation proposed in Session 40th the Condemnation of the Errors of John Petit and Falkemberg Gerson remonstrated That there were yet many Articles to be decided in the Council about Matters which had been already debated and chiefly about divers Errors that if they were not condemn'd some would impute this Omission to an affected Negligence about Things which require a very particular Care and Attention and which are of the greatest Consequence such as the Error of John Petit that every Tyrant might lawfully be killed That others would believe it was through Ignorance that they would not decide some Propositions which are not of the first Principles of Faith whether they are False or True Holy or Impious and whether they ought to be receiv'd or rejected Others would pretend that they us'd respect of Persons or were mov'd by the fear of Man which would make these murmur against whom they had proceeded in Matters of Faith as the Bohemians Others would say there was a denial of Justice in Matters of Faith and Manners or at least a blameable Dissimulation a great many would impute it to the Covetousness of the Prelats who sought nothing but their own profit in the Reformation of the Church and not the Spiritual Good of others Some would observe that it was a Contempt of Kings Princes and Universities as of the King of France of Poland and the University of Paris Others would imagine That they intended nothing but to weaken the Power of Ordinaries in their Diocese and commit all Authority to the Court of Rome Others would impute it to the Corruption of Manners in the Prelates of the Council or to the negligence of the Ambassadors of Princes and the Universities who had not done their Duty Many would maintain That this would weaken the Authority of what the Council had done That it would expose the Truth and those that Preach'd it to Danger That it would give occasion to Murders Perjuries Seditions That it would be so far from procuring the Conversion of Hereticks That it would confirm them in their Errors That this would give occasion of slackning Obedience to the Pope newly chosen and afford Matter of Derision to Infidels and the Partizans of Peter de Luna who would laugh to see that in the presence of the Council Errors were suffer'd or over-look'd and lastly That this Silence might pass for a tacit Approbation of the Error Gerson made these Protestations and gave them in Writing but no Answer was made to him nor any regard had to what he said The Ambassadors of Poland insisted upon the Demand of the Condemnation of the seditious Book of Falkemberg which at least warranted the Massacre of all the Polonians without hearing them and when they saw that no Satisfaction was given them they appeal'd to the future Council The Pope oppos'd this Appeal with a Decree wherein he declar'd That it was not lawful in any Case to appeal from the Judgment of the Pope which as Gerson remarks destroy'd a Decree of the Council and subverted the Fundamental Maxim upon which it was establish'd However the Bull of Martin V. containing the Prohibition of appealing to the Council was not read nor approv'd in this Session of the Council but publish'd in a private Assembly of the Cardinals In the mean time Pope Martin V. without any regard to the Remonstrances of Gerson or the Demands of the Ambassadors of Poland put an end to the Council by causing to be read a Constitution wherein he gave leave to all who had been present in the Council to return to their own Houses with plenary Indulgences for them and their Domesticks Thus ended the Council of Constance which seem'd to have wholly extinguish'd the Schism yet it was not so fully done but there remain'd still some Sparks of it And as to what concerns the Reformation of the Church in its Head and Members which was another end of the Council it was
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 â—â—uze 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 â—urcease 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
of August wherein he forbids under pain of Excommunication Ipso Facto to maintain or teach the Propositions which had been Condemn'd and ordains that John Monteson should be taken up Arrested and clapt up in Prison with the assistance of the Secular Power if it were necessary Monteson appeal'd from this Sentence and from the Decision of the Faculty to Pope Clement The Appeal of John Monteson VII who Resided at Avignon and went to that City to maintain his Appeal The University sent thither on their behalf for Deputies Peter of Ailly Giles of Champs and John of Neuville Doctors of Divinity together with Peter of Alinville Doctor of the Canon-Law After this Affair had been debated in many Consistories in presence of the Pope and the Cardinals in one of which Peter Ailly made a Discourse which was very acceptable to the Pope in defence of the Cause of the University the Cardinal of Embrun in the Name of the Pope forbad Monteson to absent from the Court of Rome until his Affair was determin'd by the decision John Monteson Condemn'd by the Pope of the Holy-See but notwithstanding this Prohibition Monteson foreseeing that the Event would not be favourable to him and that this Prohibition was made for no other end but to seize him and send him back to Paris to make his Retractation there as the Deputies of the University should require of him he retir'd secretly from Avignon and went into Arragon where he embrac'd the Obedience of Urban VI. and wrote in his favour against Clement After his departure this Pope appointed Guy the Cardinal of Palestrina the Cardinal of St. Sixtus and Amelius Cardinal by the Title of St. Eusebe to judge of this Affair and order'd them to make a Process against Monteson They caus'd to search for him in the place where he Lodg'd at Avignon and having learnt by the Search which was made that he went from thence August the 3d in 1388. they caus'd him to be Summon'd by publick Placarts Sentenc'd him as Contumacious and declar'd him Excommunicate they ordain'd also that this Excommunication should be solemnly publish'd and Excommunicated those who should hold any Correspondence with him The Sentence of these Cardinals is dated January 27. in 1389. and was thunder'd out against him at Paris the 17th of March following While these things were Transacted at Avignon the University of Paris being highly offended The Retractations of the Bishop of Evreux and many Dominicans with the Behaviour of John Monteson and his Superiors who protected him and of other Dominicans who publickly approv'd his Opinion oblig'd many amongst them to retract the Propositions which they had advanc'd against the Belief of the Immaculate Conception and in defence of the Doctrin of John Monteson We have many of these Retractations in the Registers of the Faculty of Divinity at Paris The most Remarkable is that which was made by William Valon Bishop of Evreux and Confessor to the King in the presence of his Majesty the Deputies of the University and the Chancellor of the Church of Paris on the 21st of February in 1388 where he retracted what he had said in favour of the Doctrin of John Monteson After this follow the Retractations of John of St. Thomas on the 21st of March in the same year of Friar Adam of Soissons on the 16th of May in 1389. of Richard Mary in the same year of John Adam in the Month of August of Peter Chancey in the Month of October and of John Nicholas in the Month of September of the same year All these Friars-Preachers were obliged to retract the Propositions they had advanc'd or other publick Dicourses against the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin and against the Feast of the Conception The Common People were no less Scandaliz'd at the Doctrin of the Dominicans than the Divines and conceiv'd so great a hatred against them that they durst hardly appear in publick At last when the Confirmation of the Condemnation of Monteson was obtain'd from the Pope the University made a Decree wherein they exclude from their Society all those who would not Swear to maintain the Condemnation of the Errors of Monteson and Ordain'd that for the future those who would take any Degrees should take the same Oath The Dominicans being perswaded that this Censure impeacht the Doctrin of St. Thomas would not take this Oath and therefore were excluded from the Faculty which render'd them The Dominicans excluded from the University so odious that after this they were not admitted to Preach nor to take any Confessions nor do any other Office and the Common People did not only refuse to give them their usual Alms but also abused and persecuted them The Dominicans to allay this Storm had recourse to the Pope and in their general Chapter held in the Province of Tholouse in 1389. they appointed ten Doctors of their Order to go and maintain the Cause of St. Thomas at the Pope's Court against the University of Paris who should be maintain'd at the expence of the Regulars of their Order who should all contribute towards it viz. the Doctors 20 Sous and the other Regulars 10 Sous as is to be seen in the Original Instrument which is in the hands of Monsieur Baluzius The University at this time caus'd a Treatise to be written in its own defence which is at A Treatise of the University in its own defence the end of the Master of the Sentences wherein they undertake to prove 1st That the Faculty of Theology and the Bishop of Paris have not exceeded their Power in Condemning the Propositions of John Monteson 2dly That these Propositions are justly Condemn'd 3dly That the Doctrin of St. Thomas was not approv'd by the Church after such a manner that the Approbation could hinder the Execution of the Sentence given by the Bishop of Paris As to the first Point the Faculty distinguishes two sorts of Approbations or Condemnations of Error the one Doctrinal and Scholastical and the other Authoritative and Judicial and divides this latter into Sovereign and Inferior This distinction being supposed it lays down the following Conclusions 1st That it belongs to the Holy Apostolick See to define Matters which concern the Faith by a Supream Judicial Authority 2d That it belongs to the Bishops to decide them by the same Authority but which is Inferior and Subordinate 3d That it belongs to Divines to give a Doctrinal Judgment upon these Matters since it is their Duty to teach the Holy Scripture and to make use of it for rejecting Heretical Opinions and approving Catholick Truths 4th That the Bishop and the Faculty of Theology may joyntly or severally Condemn Heretical and Erroneous Propositions after the manner which has been now explain'd 5th That the Condemnation which is pass'd by the Faculty may be even judicial with respect to its Members 6th That the Superior Judge ought not to hinder the Bishop nor the Faculty to proceed to some