going to the Council of Pisa wherein he congratulates them that they were going to this Council to endeavour after the Peace of the Church exhorts them to make a Peace and shews them the means of procuring it There is a Trialogue of his about the matter of the Schism wherein he introduces Zeal Good-will and Discretion disputing together about the means of putting an end to Contention a Letter in the Name of the University of Paris against the Letter in the Name of the University of Tholouse and a Letter in the Name of the King of France to justify his Substraction of Obedience from Peter de Luna After these Works follow many Sermons preach'd at Constance during the time of the Council In the second he sets himself against the Partizans of the Duke of Burgundy who would hinder the Council from Examining and Condemning the Errors of John Petit and shews by many Reasons that 't is very necessary to be done At the end of this Sermon there is a small piece wherein he recollects divers Errors chiefly about this Precept of the Decalogue Thou shalt not kill against which some had advanc'd many cruel and sanguinary Propositions prejudicial to the Security of Princes and about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants The Duke of Burgundy having caus'd the Proposition of John Petit to be maintain'd by Peter Bishop of Arras That it was lawful to kill Tyrants Gerson reply'd to him in the Name of the King of France in a long Discourse spoken in an Assembly of the Fathers of the Council on the 5th of May 1416. and made two other Sermons wherein he searches this Matter to the bottom and refutes at large the Propositions of John Petit and relates the Censure of it made at Paris both by the Bishop and the Doctors The three following Treatises are not concerning the Affair of the Schism but the Principles of Faith The first is entitled a Declaration of the Truths which must be believ'd and according to him they are as follow First All that is contain'd literally in the Canonical Books Secondly All that is determin'd by the Church and receiv'd by Tradition from the Apostles not all that it tolerates or permits to be read publickly but only what it defines by a Judgment condemning the contrary Thirdly The Truths which are certainly reveal'd to some private Persons Fourthly The necessary Conclusions of Truth which are establish'd upon the preceding Principles Fifthly The Propositions which follow from these Truths by a probable Consequence or which are deduc'd from a Proposition of Faith or any other suppos'd to be true Sixthly The Truths which serve to cherish and maintain Devotion though they be not perfectly certain provided they be not known to be false From these Propositions he draws the following Corollaries First That 't is false and heretical to affirm That the literal Sense of Scripture is sometimes false Secondly That 't is Blasphemy and Heresie to maintain That nothing that is evidently known can be of Faith Thirdly That 't is also Heretical and Blasphemous to say That the Precepts of the Decalogue are not of Faith and that the contrary Propositions are not Heretical Fourthly That the Learned are obliged to believe with an explicite Faith many Propositions that are the Consequences of the prime Truths which the common People are not oblig'd to believe Fifthly That the Pastors Doctors and other Persons plac'd in Ecclesiastical Dignity are oblig'd to believe explicitly the Precepts of the Decalogue and many other Points of Faith which other Christians are oblig'd to believe only implicitly The second Treatise is entitled Of Protestation or Confession in Matters of Faith against Heresies where he treats of Protestations both general and particular and of Revocations and Retractations which we are oblig'd to make in Matters of Faith and shews that a general Protestation is not sufficient to justifie a Man when he is guilty of particular Errors that a particular Protestation which is conditional and express'd in these Words I would believe this Truth if it were known to me to be so does no justifie neither before God nor Men. He that revokes an Error which he hath held ought no to satisfie himself with making a particular Protestation of the contrary Truth but ought to mention that he retracts the Error which he maintain'd and this Revocation does not hinder him from being an Heretick before Yet this is not necessary with respect to those who have been in Error but did not know it nor maintain it obstinately Lastly A Retractation does not hinder but he who has made it may still be suspected of Heresie if he discovers by external Signs that his Revocation is not sincere The third Treatise coâtâiâs the Characters of Obstinacy in Matters of Heresie In it he defines Obstinacy a Depravation of the Will caus'd by Pride or some other Vice which hinders him that is in Error from seeking carefully after the Truth or embracing it when it is made known to him The Signs of Obstinacy are these when he who is in Error suffers Excommunication when being Cited he does not appear when he defends an Error contrary to the Truth which he is oblig'd to believe with an explicit Faith when he hinders the explaining and defining of the Truth when he declares himself an Enemy to those who would have the Matter decided when he denies a Truth which he had formerly taught when being requir'd to explain the Truth to the Doctoâ or Judges he will not follow their Advice when he stirs up Wars and Seditions because the Truth has been explain'd when he declares That he would rather die than change his Opinion when he defends or maintains a Heretick knowing that he is in an Error lastly when one does not oppose an Error as he may or ought either by his Office if he be a Judge or from brotherly Charity These according to Gerson are the 12 Signs of Obstinacy The Treatise upon that Question Whether it be lawful to appeal from the Judgment of the Pope in Matters of Faith was compos'd by Gerson after the Election of Martin V. upon occasion of that Pope's refusal to condemn the Propositions of which the Polanders desired the Condemnation There he maintains the Affirmative because the Judgment of the Pope is not infallible as that of a General Council is wherefore in Matters of Faith no judicial Determination of any Bishop or even of the Pope himself does oblige the Faithful to believe a Truth as of Faith although it oblige them under pain of Excommunication not to be Dogmatical in affirming the contrary unless they have evident Reason to oppose against the Determination founded on the Holy Scripture or Revelation or the Determination of the Church and a General Council but in every Case as we may appeal from the Judgment of a Bishop to the Pope so we may appeal from the Judgment of a Pope to a General Council The following Pieces are concerning
is at the end of this Canon a Postil that is very remarkable Let the Church beyond the Sea be consulted to confirm or before this Canon is confirmed De confirmando isto Canone Ecclesia Transmarina Consulatur This Catalogue of Canonical Books is confirmed by the Authority of Pope Innocent the First in an Epistle to Exuperius and by that of a Roman Council held under Gelasius A. D. 494 i and is followed in the Decree of Eugenius to the Armenians and by the holy Council of Trent All these Catalogues serve to acquaint us in general what were the Books that were always believed to be certainly Canonical and which they are whose Authority have been questioned by Antiquity But nevertheless we ought to speak of them particularly for although they were not received in the first Ages by all Churches nor reckoned by all Authors in the Canon of the Books of the Bible yet they were frequently cited by the Ancients and sometimes too as Books of Scripture and for this reason were afterwards admitted into the Canon along with the first The Book of Esther according to some was in the Jewish Canon but others say it was not reckoned at all It is placed in the Canon as we have already observed by Origen by the Council of Laodicea by St. Jerome by St. Epiphanius by St. Hilary by St. Cyril not to mention the Council of Carthage or the Decisions of Pope Innocent and Gelasius Josephus Melito St. Athanasius and the Author of the Abridgment of the Scripture Gregory Nazianzen Leontius the Author of the Book of the Hierarchy and Nicephorus reject it The Action of Esther is commended by Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians and by Clemens Alexandrinus lib. 1. Paedag. and l. 5. Strom. which makes it appear that this Book was known and esteemed by the first Christians The six last Chapters of this Book are not to be found in the Hebrew Origen is of opinion that it was formerly extant in that Language and has been since lost But it is very evident that they are taken out of several places and that they contain some Pieces that were probably collected by the Hellenist Jews And for this reason Dionysius Carthusianus Nicolaus de Lira Hugo Cardinalis and afterwards Sixtus Senensis and several of the Moderns turn them out of the Canon of the Holy Books The Book of Baruch is not to be found by name in the Jewish Canon but perhaps it was joined together with Jeremiah Melito Origen St. Hilary Gregory Nazianzen and St. Epiphanius don't make any mention of it confounding it perhaps with Jeremiah but St. Jerome expresly rejects it out of the Canon in his Preface to Jeremiah On the contrary the Council of Laodicea St. Cyril of Jerusalem St. Athanasius in his Festival Letter and the Author of the Abridgment annex it to Jeremiah along with the Lamentations of that Prophet It is cited under the name of Jeremiah and as a Book of Scripture by Clemens Alexandrinus lib. 1. pedag ch 2. by St. Cyprian in the Fourth Book of his Testimonies to Quirinus ch 6. by Eusebius in his Books of Demonstration by St. Basil in his Fourth Book against Eunomius by St. Ambrose in his First Book of Pennance as also in his First Book of Orthodox Faith ch 2. by St. Austin lib. 18. de Civ Dei by St. Chysostom in his Homily of the Trinity and by many other Church-Writers that are more modern It is not necessary to take notice that it was received by the Council of Carthage by Pope Innocent by the Roman Council under Gelasius by the Decree of Eugenius and by the Canon of the Council of Trent The Book of Tobit is rejected in all the ancient Catalogues of the Books of the Bible and not received into the number of the Canonical Books Origen in his 27th Homily upon the Numbers says it is one of those Books that were read to the Catechumens but that it is not Canonical k St. Jerome who frequently rejects it as an Apocryphal Book that was neither to be found in the Jewish or Christian Canon yet gave himself the trouble to Translate it speaks of it very advantageously in his Preface and calls it a Sacred Volume in his Hundred and fortieth Epistle Ruffinus in his Exposition of the Creed expresly rejects it as an Apocryphal Book But besides that it is received by the Council of Carthage and by Pope Innocent and Gelasius it appears that in Irenaeus's time it was reckoned amongst the Books of the Prophets because this Author l. 1. ch 34 has observed that the Gnosticks who distributed the Prophets into several Classes and attributed them to their pretended Divinities assign the Prophets Haggai and Tobit to Eloi This Book is often cited by St. Cyprian who likewise calls it Holy Scripture in his Book of Alms and Good Works It is also cited by St. Hilary upon the 129th Psalm where he makes use of the Authority of this Book to prove the Intercession of Angels The same Father making a Catalogue of the Canonical Books observes that several Persons made the number of them twenty four by adding the Books of Tobit and Judith St. Ambrose explained it throughout as a Book of Scripture and cited it in his Hexameron and so has St. Chrysostome in his 13th Homily to the People of Antioch and the Author of the Apostolick Constitutions in the 8th Book chap. 45. The Book of Judith is not only rejected in all the ancient Catalogues of the Canonical Books but it is also scarcely mentioned by the Ancients though Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians Clemens Alexandrinus l. 4. Strom. Tertullian in his Book of Monogamy and in his first Book against Marcion commend the Heroick Action of Judith which makes it evident that they had all of them an esteem for that Book St. Jerome after having several times rejected it as an Apocryphal Book and observed in his Preface before it that we ought not to prove any contested Doctrines out of it adds that we read that the Council of Nice rekoned it in the number of the Holy Scriptures Sed quia hunc librum Synodus Nicaena in numero Sanctarum Scripturarum legitur computasse We ought to believe that St. Jerome reported this passage upon the Faith of another there being not the least appearance of its truth For besides that we find nothing like it in the Creed in the Canons and Letters of the Council of Nice and that it is highly probable there are no other Acts of that Assembly is it to be imagined that if they had made a Canon concerning the Sacred Books not so much as one Man that assisted in that affair would make mention of it Is it to be thought that St. Athanasius St. Epiphanius St. Cyril who cou'd not be ignorant of the Decisions of the Council of Nice wou'd have rejected the Book of Judith as Apocryphal if it had been reckoned amongst the Canonical Volumes
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 Câmmodus 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 Sâllust flatter d himself that he should become this King that was intimated by the Sibyl Others have interpreted this Prophecy with respect to Julius Câsar or Augustus as is observed by Cicero and Suetonius Virgil in his Fourth Eâlogue produceth the Verses
much Heat and Passion the Stile is Harsh and Barbarous there is no Reasoning nor Principles in any thing that he says He only proposes Maxims which he proves by the Testimonies and Examples of Scripture whether they be pertinent to his Subject or no from whence it comes to pass that his Writings are nothing but a Collection of Passages of Scripture mix'd with Apostrophe's Applications and Reflections In the Two Books against Constantius he designs to prove That this Emperour was very much to blame for endeavouring to compel the Bishops to condemn St. Athanasius who was Absent and Innocent To prove this Truth he produces abundance of Histories and Passages out of Scripture which show First That God condemns no Man without hearing him And Secondly That 't is forbidden in Scripture to condemn any Man without hearing his Defence Thirdly That those who shed the Blood of the Innocent shall be most severely punish'd Fourthly That Constantius has no right to command Bishops because he is a Profane Person a Heretick and a Persecutor The design of the Treatise Of Apostate Kings is to prove by the Examples of many impious Kings That the Success of Constantius does not demonstrate that he has any right to Persecute the Orthodox Bishops nor that his Doctrine is true The other Books shew their Arguments by their Titles The First is to show That we must neither Assemble nor Pray with the Arians who are declar'd Hereticks The Second Is to Justify the severe Conduct of the Catholicks against the Arians and the Liberty that they take to reprove them with boldness and vehemence without sparing even the Powers themselves that is to say this Book is peculiarly design'd to justify Lucifer St. Hilary and some other Catholicks in their way of speaking to the Emperour Constantius The last Book contains many Proofs of this Truth That we must die for the Son of God He blames the Emperour Constantius for his Impiety and Cruelty and at the same time he praises the Constancy of the Catholicks who suffer Martyrdom with Joy for the Defence of the Orthodox Faith Lucifer's Works with the Letters of St. Athanasius and Florentius were Printed at Paris in 8 vo by Johannes Tillius Bishop of Meaux in 1568. and afterwards inserted into the Bibliothecae Patrum VICTORINUS of Africk FABIUS MARIUS VICTORINUS born in Africk after he had profess'd Rhetorick for the space of many Years in the City of Rome with so much Reputation that a Statue was Victorinus of Africk erected for him in one of the publick Places of the City did at last in his old Age embrace the Christian Religion The studying of Plato's Books which he had translated gave him some relish for the Holy Scripture for when he read it he admir'd it and so became a Christian in his heart He discover'd this Inclination to his Friend Simplicianus who exhorted him to enter into the Church of Christ since he was persuaded of the Truth of his Religion Victorinus thinking it was sufficient to know the Truth answer'd him as it were jesting upon his Simplicity And do the Walls then make Christians But at last being confirm'd in the Faith by Reading and Meditating upon the Holy Scripture and considering that Jesus Christ would not own him at the Day of Judgment if he should be asham'd to confess him publickly here he says to his Friend Simplicianus Let us go to Church and after he had been some time a Catechumen he was baptiz'd in the presence of all the People St. Austin reports this History B. VIII of his Confessions Ch. 2. which he says he learn'd from St. Ambrose St. Jerom places this Victorinus among the Number of Ecclesiastical Writers and observes that he wrote Books against Arius compos'd in a Logical Method Dialectico More which are very obscure and cannot be understood but by Learned Men. He adds That he had also written Commentaries upon the Apostle St. Paul but he says in another place that these Commentaries were almost useless because this Author having been wholly addicted to the Study of humane Learning did not understand the true Sence of the Holy Scripture We have at present those Four Books of Victorinus against Arius which are printed in the Orthodoxographa and in the Bibliothecae Patrum but besides this Book which St. Jerom mentions there are some other Tracts which bear the Name of the same Author These are in the Bibliothecae Patrum viz one in Defence of the Word Consubstantial three Hymns of the Trinity and one Poem of the Maccabees Sirmondus has also publish'd by its self in the Year 1630 a little Treatise against the Manichees and another about the beginning of Day All these Books are written in the same Stile and by the same Author In the Four Books against Arius dedicated to Candidus he refutes the Errors of this Heretick and those of his Followers he proves there the Divinity of the Word and defends the Consubstantiality But he does it in so Scholastick and Intricate a way that 't is very difficult to comprehend his Arguments One may find several Expressions about the Mystery of the Trinity that are scarce Sence and quite different from that way of speaking which is us'd in the Holy Scripture and by the Church of God The Book in Defence of the Term Consubstantial is a kind of Summary of those Four Books The Treatise to Justinus who was a Manichee is written against the Error of those Hereticks who admitted two Principles of the World and believ'd that the Flesh was created by an Evil Principle Victorinus refutes these two Errors in few words and exhorts Justinus to acknowledge one God only Suffer not any more says he my Friend Justinus suffer not your self you who are of the City of Rome to be abus'd by the Impieties of the Persians or Armenians In vain do you macerate your self with extraordinary Mortifications for after you have made your self lean by those Austerities your Flesh is of no other kind than that which shall return to the Devil in darkness who according to you created it I advise and require you to acknowledge That God Almighty is he that created you that so you may be truly the Temple of God according to the Words of the Apostle You are truly the Temple of God and his Spirit dwelleth in you If you have not the Honour to be the Temple of God and to receive the Holy Spirit into you Jesus Christ is not come to save but to destroy you for if we are his our Body and Soul must belong to him and then it may be truly said That God is all in all That he is the One and only Almighty and Eternal Principle of the whole Universe and perfectly Infinite to whom be Honour and Glory This is the Conclusion of this Treatise which ispleasanter and more intelligible than those which are written against the Arians In the little Tract about the beginning of Day he endeavours to show That the
Prayers of those that shall read his Confessions Having set forth in the foregoing Books what he was before his Conversion he sheweth in the Tenth what he was at the time of his writing He finds that his Conscience gave an unquestionable Testimony of his love to God He explains the Reasons that oblige Men to love God reckoning up all the Faculties of his Soul that can lead him to know God especially Memory whereof he makes a wonderful Description He says amongst other things that it serves to teach us many things which entred not into the Mind by the Senses and that it may lift us up to God He occasionally speaks of Happiness and of the Idea that Men have of God afterwards he examineth himself about the three main Passions of Man the love of Pleasures of Knowledge and of Glory He sincerely confesseth what was his disposition with respect to these Passions prescribing at the same time excellent Rules to keep our selves from them Lastly He discovers the knowledge of the true Mediatour and of the Graces which he merited for us The Three last Books are about less sensible Matters He waves the History of his Life to speak of the love which he had for the Sacred Books and of the Knowledge that God had given him of them which to show he undertakes to explain the beginning of Genesis upon which occasion he starts several very subtil Questions In the Eleventh he refuteth those that asked what God was doing before he created the World and how God on a sudden formed the design of creating any thing whereupon he enters into a long Discourse concerning the Nature of Time In the Twelfth Book he treateth of the first Matter He pretends that by the Heavens and the Earth which God is said to have created in the beginning we are to understand spiritual Substances and the shapeless Matter of corporeal things that the Scripture speaking of the Creation of these two sorts of Beings makes no mention of days because there is no time with respect to them He affirms That whatsoever he hath said concerning the World's Creation cannot be denied though the beginning of Genesis were otherwise expounded because these are undoubted Truths He treateth here of the different Explications which may be made of the Holy Scripture affirming That there is sufficient reason to believe that the Canonical Authors foresaw all the Truths that might be drawn from their words and though they had not foreseen these Truths yet the Holy Ghost foresaw them Whence he seems to conclude that we are not to reject any sence that may be given to the holy Scripture provided it is conformable to the Truth At last having admired the Goodness of God who standing in no need of the Creatures had given them not only a Being but also all the Perfections of that Being he discovereth in the last Book the Mystery of the Trinity in the first words of Genesis and even the Personal Property of the Holy Ghost which gives him an admirable opportunity of describing the Actions of Charity in our selves He concludes with a curious Allegory upon the beginning of Genesis and finds in the Creation the System and Oeconomy of whatsoever God hath done for the Establishment of his Church and the Sanctification of Men the only end which he proposed to himself in all his Works St. Augustin placeth the Books of Confessions before those against Faustus which were written about the Year 400 in his Retractations from whence we may conclude that these were both written about the same time After these two which serve as we have said for a Preface to all St. Augustin's Works you find in this first Volume the Books that St. Augustin writ in his Youth before he was a Priest in the same order in which they were written The three Books against the Academici are the first after the Treatise of Beauty and Comeliness which is lost He composed them in the Year 386 in his solitude when he prepared himself for Baptism They are written in imitation of Cicero in the form of a Dialogue and directed to Romanianus his Countryman whom he adviseth to Study Philosophy The dispute beginneth betwixt Licentius Son to Romanianus and Trygetius after them Alypius and St. Augustin begin to speak Having observed in the first Book that the good things of Fortune do not render men happy he exhorts Romanianus to the Study of Wisdom whose sweetness he then tasted He afterwards gives an Account of three Conferences which Licentius and Trygetius had had about Happiness Licentius held with the Academici That to be happy it was enough to seek after the Truth but Trygetius pretended That it was necessary to know it perfectly both being agreed That Wisdom is that which makes Men happy they begin to dispute about the definition of Wisdom Trygetius gives several all disapproved by Licentius who asserts That Wisdom consisted not only in Knowledge but also in the pursuit of the Truth whereupon St. Augustin concludes That since we cannot be happy without knowing and enquiring after the Truth our only application should be to seek for it In the Second Book having again exhorted Romanianus to the Study of Philosophy he sets down three other Conferences wherein Alypius produces the several Opinions of both the Ancient and Modern Academicks And because the latter said That some things were probable though the Truth was not known they laughed at that Opinion it being impossible say they to know whether a thing is like the Truth without knowing the Truth it self And this very thing obligeth Men to enquire the more carefully after likely and probable things according to the Principles of the Academicks The Third Book begins with Reflections upon Fortune St. Augustin shews That the Goods of Fortune are of no use to get Wisdom and that the Wise Man ought at least to know Wisdom refuting withall the Principles both of Cicero and of the other Academicks who affirmed That we know nothing and that nothing ought to be asserted He blames the damnable Maxim of those who permitted Men to follow every thing that seemed probable without being certain of any thing He shews the dangerous Consequences of such Principles and endeavours to prove that neither the ancient Academicks nor Cicero himself were of that Opinion These three Books are written with all imaginable Elegance and Purity The Method and Reasonings are just The Matter treated of is well cleared and made intelligible for all Men it is beautified with agreeable Suppositions and pleasant Stories It may be said That these Dialogues are not much inferior to Tully's for stile but much above them for the exactness and solidity of the Arguments and Notions In his Retractations he findeth fault with several places in them which seemed not to him sufficiently to savour of Christianity but might be born with in a Philosophical Work The Book of a Happy Life or of Felicity is a Work of the same Nature written
Husband's Death and that if the Wife is married to another while he liveth she committeth Adultery St. Augustin enlarges much upon the Sence of these two Passages He endeavours to make the first to agree with his Opinion which he groundeth especially upon the second He answereth Pollentius's Arguments and uses several Reasonings upon the Matter He confesses in his Retractations That he had not yet cleared that Point but that there are some considerable Difficulties besides though he had given Light enough to resolve them He further explaineth in the 1st Book another Passage in the same Epistle of St. Paul concerning the Dissolution of Marriage between Infidels Pollentius held That St. Paul absolutely forbids Believing Husbands to put away their Unbelieving Wives Whereas St. Augustin affirms That it is only an Advice that he gives them Not to use the liberty they have to Separate He concludes this Book with another Question concerning the Catechumens who fall into such Diseases as take away their Speech and Knowledge VVhether they should be Baptized or no He saith That they ought to be Baptized though he doth not condemn those that dare not hazard the Sacrament And he goes so far as to declare That in such Cases those very Catechumens may be Baptized who are known to be in a habit of Sin and who ought not to be admitted to Baptism at another time He adds That Penitents are to be dealt withal after the same manner and they should not be suffered to Die before they are Reconciled In the 2d Book he treateth more at large than in the First Of the Indissolubility of Maâriages and examines several Questions upon that Subject He concludes with an Exhortation to Husbands that have left their VVives to live in Continency alledging the Example of Church-men who abstain so religiously though they often were forced to take that Profession upon them against their VVills The rank which St. Augustin sets these two Books in in his Retractations shews that he composed them in the Year 419. The two next Books are concerning Lying There St. Augustin handleth this Question which was very famous in his time Whether a Lye may be used upon some Occasions He confesseth in the 1st Book entituled Of Lying and written in 395. That this is a perplexing Question often disturbing Consciences and that there seem to be some Occasions when in Civility and sometimes out of Charity officious Lyes may be lawful He says that he will forthwith examine the Question that he may find out some Light in so obscure a Matter and that at last he will declare for the Truth being persuaded That though he were mistaken in so doing yet his Mistake would prove less dangerous because Error can never do less mischief than when Men are deceived by a great Love of the Truth and by opposing Falshood with too much Zeal After this Preface he defines what Lying is He confesses That Ironies are not Lyes That every Untruth which a Man may speak is not a Lye if Men believe that what they say is True and That to Lye is to speak what we do not think with a design to deceive VVhereupon he examines this subtle Question VVhether a Man speaking what he knoweth to be false because he is sure that he to whom he speaks will not believe it tells a Lye And on the other side VVhether a Man that speaketh a Truth with a design to deceive him whom he speaks to because he knows that he will not believe him is free from Lying St. Augustin saith That neither of these can be taxed with Lying because the one design'd to persuade the Truth by telling an Untruth and the other spake the Truth to persuade a Falsity but neither can be excused from Imprudence and Rashness Then he comes to the Question which he proposed to himself VVhether a Man might Lye upon some Occasions Those that held the Affirmative alledged several Examples of Lyes which seem to be both approved and commended in the Old Testament and added a Reason from Common Sence Should any one said they flee to your House for shelter and it is in your power to save him from Death by telling a Lye would you see him unjustly murthered rather than tell a Lye If a sick Man asketh you a Question about something that he must not know yea supposing that he will be the worse if you give him no Answer would you then utter a Truth that might occasion Death or will you keep silence when you may ease him by telling a charitable Lye St. Augustin Opposes to these Reasons those Passages of Holy Scripture which forbid Lying without restriction and then answereth the Examples out of the Old Testament That the Righteous who seem to have Lyed did not intend that what they said should be understood in the usual sence but that by a Prophetical Spirit they meant to discover those things that were signified by those Figures as for other Persons which are not in the number of the Righteous the Holy Scripture never approves their Actions but by comparing it with a greater Evil. He affirms That there is no Example of Lying in the New Testament and endeavours to answer the Inferences which they pretend to draw from the Instances of the Dispute betwixt St. Peter and St. Barnabas and betwixt St. Peter and St. Paul as well as from the Circumcising of Timothy Lastly That he might put an End to all the Reasons alledged from Necessity or Advantage he maintains That we must never do Evil what Advantage soever we may get by it That so the whole Question is Whether Lying be Evil or no And not Whether it is sometimes Profitable VVhence he concludes That no Lye is to be told either to preserve our Chastity or our Life or for the Good of others or for any other reason whatsoever no not for the Eternal Salvation of our Neighbour because that Sin cannot be imputed to a Man which he cannot prevent but by committing himself another Sin To explain what he had said more at large he reckons up Eight sorts of Lyes and having laid this down for a Rule That we must depend altogether upon Gospel-Precepts he enlargeth upon those that make against Lying The Second Book against Lying is written upon the same Principles but long after the First for St. Augustin wrote it in 420 at the Request of Consentius who asked him Whether it was not lawful to make use of Lyes to discover the Priscillianists who concealed their Error by Lying and horrid Execrations St. Augustin condemns not only the Practice of the Priscillianists but also the Zeal of the Catholicks who made use of Lyes to discover the Men of that Sect. He positively condemns the Catholicks Action who feigned themselves Priscillianists more than that of the Priscillianists who feigned themselves Catholicks From hence he takes an opportunity to enter upon the general Question concerning Lying and he affirms That it is never allow'd upon any Pretence
not willing to forsake their Errors to make those Charitable Severities which are made use of to recover them to pass for insupportable Violences and unheard of Cruelties by aggravating them and representing them in such an odious manner as is proper to stir up Indignation The Principles which he lays down in the following Part are very agreeable with those of the Protestants In the First Article he opposes those who will have it determined where the Truth is by the Judgment of the greater Number Jesus Christ saith he is the Truth as Tertullian hath a long Time since affirmed and 't is he that we ought to consult This being so are they not to be pitied who judge of the Force and Authority of a Doctrine only by the Number of those who approve it without considering that our Lord Jesus Christ chose ignorant and poor Men whom he made use of to convert all the World He required that Millions of Men should yield themselves up to the Doctrines of these Twelve Thus hath the Truth always triumphed although it were among the smallest Number and whosoever he be that despairing to prove what he affirms to be true flies to the Authority of the Multitude he confesses himself vanquished The great Number may affright but cannot perswade There are but few that shall be saved S. Stephen Phineas Lot and Noah had the Multitude against them yet who had not rather be on their Side than on that which did oppose them 'T is not saith the same Author that I bear not a due respect to the Multitude but it is to that which proves what it teacheth and not to that which will not suffer us to examine and search out the Truth 'T is to that which doth not condemn with Severity but correct with Gentleness not to that which loves Novelties but to that which preserves the Truth which they have received from their Ancestors But what is this Multitude which you object against me It is the Throng of Men corrupted by Flatteries and Prisons 'T is the Number of ignorant Men who have no Understanding to guide them It is a crowd of weak and fearful Men who suffer themselves to be conquered They are the Souls which preferr the Pleasures that Sin affords us in this Life which are momentary before Eternal Life and Glory So that when you object to me this Multitude to gain Credit to a Lye you do but discover the extent of Wickedness and the great Number of the Miserable The Second Chapter is of like Nature with this First In it he opposes those who maintain That it is needless to search the Holy Scripture that we may know what we ought to believe either because it is sufficient for every one to believe what his own Reason teacheth him or because in searching for the Truth in Scripture we meet with more Obscurity and Uncertainty Our Author cannot approve of this Advice He saith That being perswaded of the Truth of the Mysteries and trusting in the Help of Jesus Christ who hath promised to those who seek after the Truth that they shall certainly find it he seeks after the Truth in the manner that he ought he shall find it without mistaking that he puts himself into a Condition of proving what he teacheth of instructing the Faithful confuting Hereticks and convincing himself of the Truth and confirming the Doctrines so as none can doubt of them Would you have me saith he neglect the Study of Holy Scripture whence then will you have Knowledge necessary to support your Faith It is dangerous for this Life to be ignorant of the Roman Laws and 't is no less dangerous for another Life to be ignorant of the Oracles of our Heavenly King The Scripture is the Nourishment of the Soul Suffer not then the inward Man to die with Hunger by depriving him of the Word of God There are too too many who inflict mortal Wounds upon the Soul suffer them to seek Medicines for their Maladies and Griefs But there are say you things which pass our Understand I own it but the Scripture teaches us That we must search and that there are things that we cannot comprehend And as it would be a kind of Impiety to desire to throughly comprehend it so it is to have a kind of Contempt for the Divine Truths to lay aside wholly the search into them Every one ought to know what it is he adores as it is written We know what we worship But it is a Madness to enquire how much After what manner By what Means and where we must adore him In sum they who discourage others from reading and studying the Holy Scripture under a Pretence That they ought not to dive into Things too profound do it because they are afraid that they should be convinced of their Errors by it So when they find themselves pressed by convincing Testimonies of Holy Scripture they give a Sence clear contrary to the Words and if they find but one Word which can be brought to their Opinion although it be nothing to the Sence of the Place they must use it as an invincible Demonstration We must own that these Principles are not ill although Men may offend in the Application they make of them In the other Chapters he answers the Objections which the Aegyptians made against the Eastern Bishops and opposes some of their Expressions such as these The Word hath suffered in an impassible manner The Word hath suffered in the Flesh. He hath delivered several Expressions agreeable to those of Nestorius In sum He hath written with much Elegancy and Reason This Work is a Doctrinal Treatise and not a Collection of Sermons It is in Tom. 2. of Athanasius's Works under the Name of that Father and since it hath been printed at the end of Tom. 5. of Theodoret's Works put out by F. Garner at Paris in 1684. There are also some of this Bishop's Letters in F. Lupus's Collection THEODOTUS Bishop of Ancyra THEODOTUS Bishop of Ancyra a City of Galatia whom Gennadius calleth Theodorus was one of the greatest Adversaries of Nestorius He was present at the Council of Ephesus Theodotus of Ancyra where he courageously delivered his Opinion against him Gennadius says That he made a Treatise on purpose to confute him and that that Work was very Logical but that it was not sufficiently grounded upon the Authority of Holy Scriptures but lays down several Arguments before he comes to Scripture-proofs This description agrees well to the two Sermons of Theodotus upon the Feast of the Nativity preached in the Council of Ephesus and which are recited in the Acts of that Council where he proves by several Arguments That Jesus Christ is God and Man and that it is truly said That God is born of a Virgin There is also a 3d. Sermon preached at Ephesus upon S. John's day where he likewise speaks against the Errour of Nestorius The beginning of it is remarkable wherein he compares a Bishop to
the 16th of October That Eugenius should be cited to answer what had been produc'd against him Another Assembly was held towards the end of the year at Nuremberg to which the Pope sent the Cardinal of Sancta ââuze the Archbishop of Tarente John de Turrecremata and Nicholas Cusanus to act there on his behalf the Council of Basil sent thither also the Patriarch of Aquileia and other Deputies There it was propos'd That a third place might be made choice of where the Prelats of Basil and Ferrara might Assemble The Deputies of the Council having maintain'd That this Proposal was not reasonable made answer That they had no Commands about this from the Council They desired on behalf of the Council That the Princes of Germany would receive its Decrees and provide for its Security To which it was answer'd That the Emperor and Princes would make known their thoughts to the Council by their Ambassadors while those from France advis'd the Fathers of the Council to hold to the three places they had made choice of Basil Avignon and the Savoy if they could make the Pope and the Greeks agree to them if not to name many Cities among which there should be some which the Pope could not reasonably refuse The Ambassadors of the Emperor and the Princes of Germany being arriv'd at Basil declar'd to the Fathers of the Council That the Germans did acknowledge the Council for General That the Emperor meant that all those who were Assembled should have security in that place but that the Neutrality had been accepted by all the Prelats Princes and People That they honour'd the Council and Eugenius both together That they were of Opinion it was necessary for promoting Peace that the Fathers of Basil and Ferrara should meet in a third Place The Ambassadors of the other Princes joyn'd with those of Germany and desired the same thing At last after much Dispute a Project was set on foot whereby the Fathers of the Council were to name the Cities of Strasburgh Constance or Mayence That the Emperor should communicate this choice to the Pope and the Greeks within a Month and that a Month after he should be bound to accept one of these Cities That the Pope should confirm the Decrees of the Council and the Council should take off the Suspension enacted against the Pope This Project was neither acceptable to the Council of Basil nor to Pope Eugenius and so these matters remain'd in the same state in which they were In the year 1439 the Council sent Deputies to the Assembly which was held at Mayence in the Month of March The Ambassadors of the Princes who were at Basil came thither also and some persons came thither secretly on behalf of the Pope among whom was Nicholas Cusanus The Deputies of the Council urg'd earnestly That he should be oblig'd to receive its Decrees and the Ambassadors of the Princes That they would âurcease the Decison of the Process against Eugenius After much contest the Assembly receiv'd the Decrees of the Council except those that were made against the Pope and the Deputies of the Council promised that it would consent to the desire of the Emperor the Kings and Princes on condition that they would engage to continue the Council after its Translation upon the same foot according to the same Laws the same Order and Customs which were observ'd at Basil and that in case Eugenius did not acknowledge the Truths establish'd by the Council within the time that should be prefix'd nor execute what the Council had Ordain'd they would abandon him and assist the Council and adhere to its Decision The Bishop of Quensa said That the Pope could not accept these Conditions and that the Princes would never consent to them And thus the Deputies of the Council retir'd without making any agreement After their departure two Deputies of the Pope's Legats arriv'd at Mayence and would have them revoke the Resolution of the Assembly about the Decrees of the Council of Basil which not being able to Compass they oppos'd them and made great Complaints That the Princes maintain'd the Fathers of Basil to the prejudice of the Pope's Autority During this Negotiation at Mayence the Divines which were at Basil disputed this Question The Disputes of the Divines at Basil abouâ the Authority of a Council viz. Whether Eugenius could be declar'd a Heretick upon the account of his Disobedience and the Contempt he had shewn to the Orders of the Church Some held the Affirmative and others the Negative and among them who maintain'd the Affirmative some held him simply Heretical and others an Apostate at last after much Dispute they drew up eight Theological Propositions or Conclusions express'd in these words First It is a Truth of the Catholick Faith That the Holy General Council has Power over the Pope and every other Person Secondly The General Council being lawfully Assembled cannot be Dissolv'd Translated or Adjourn'd by the Authority of the Pope without its own consent This is a Truth of the same nature with the former Thirdly He that does obstinately resist these Truths ought to be accounted Heretical These three Propositions are about Law the other five concern the Facts and Person of Eugenius and are as follows Fourthly The Pope Eugenius the 4th has opposed these Truths when he attempted to Dissolve or Translate the first time the Council of Basil by the plenitude of his Power Fifthly Being admonished by the Holy Council he hath revok'd the Errors contrary to these Truths Sixthly The Dissolution or Translation of the Council attempted the second time by Eugenius is contrary to these Truths and contains an inexcusable Error in the Faith Seventhly Eugenius renewing his attempt to Dissolve or Translate the Council has relaps'd into the Errors which he had revok'd Eighthly Being admonish'd by the Council to revoke the second Dissolution or Translation which he attempted and persisting in his Disobedience after he had been Contumacious and holding a Conventicle at Ferrara he has discover'd his Obstinacy These eight Conclusions being read in the Assembly rais'd great Disputes among the Fathers of the Council some meaning to approve and others to reject them The Archbishop of Palerma who had formerly been one of the great Adversaries to Eugenius having receiv'd Orders from the King of Arragon was at the Head of those who would have them rejected He acknowledg'd this Truth That the Council is above the Pope but he maintaind That this Doctrin ought not to pass for an Article of Faith He confess'd That Eugenius had done wrong but he did not believe that he ought to be look'd upon and treated as a Heretick Dr. John of Segovia maintain'd on the contrary That this Truth was a matter of Faith and that Eugenius by opposing it had fall'n into Heresy Amedaeus Archbishop of Lyons Ambassador from the King of France accused also Eugenius of Heresy on the contrary the Bishop of Burgos Ambassador from the King of Spain
and Cleanness and in them he discovers as well the sharpness of his Wit as the extent of his Knowledge His Nephew John Francis Picus of Mirandula has also left us many Works which are printed John Francis Piâus of Mirandula with the preceding in the Edition of Basil in 1601. viz. A Treatise of the Study of Divine and Human Philosophy wherein he compares Profane Philosophy with the knowledge of the Scripture and shews how much more excellent this latter is and what use we ought to make of the former A Treatise to prove that we ought to meditate on the Death of Jesus Christ and our own a Treatise of Unity and Being in defence of that written by his Unkle a Treatise of the Imagination two Treatises of Physicks one of the first Matter the other of the Elements a Treatise of Imitation address'd to Bembus together with the Answer of Bembus and the Reply of Francis of Mirandula Theorems of Faith and of what we are oblig'd to believe wherein he Treats very largely of the Principles of our Faith in 26 Theorems After he has shewn that the Faith of Christians is well grounded he proves in the 1st Theorem that we cannot be Sav'd without Faith in Jesus Christ but he believes that God will shew that favour to all those who observe the Law of Nature as to give them Faith In the 2d That the Faith of a Christian is the Gift of God In the 3d That all those who have the Habit of Faith give their consent to the Truths of Faith which are propos'd unto them or at least do not oppose them with obstinacy In the 4th that every one is oblig'd to believe and observe all that the Catholick Church has determin'd by an express or tacit Decision at least as to what concerns Faith and Manners for as to other things she may deceive and be deceiv'd as in the Canonization of Saints according to the Opinion of Thomas and Panormitan In the 5th That every one is oblig'd to believe all that is liâterally express'd in the Old and New Testament In the 6th That we are also oblig'd to believe and practise all that the Church has learn'd or receiv'd from the Apostles In the 7th That the same is to be said of those Truths which follow by necessary Consequence from such as are founded upon the preceding Principles In the 8th That we ought also to believe the Definitions and Decrees of Popes when the Church does not oppose them In the 9th That the Truths which God reveals to private Persons are not of Faith save only for those to whom they are reveal'd In the 10th That we ought to obey the Decisions of Bishops in their Dioceses when they Condemn any Doctrines as contrary to Faith or Good Manners In the 11th That every one is oblig'd to believe and practise what is necessary for attaining happiness In the 12th That among Christians the difference of Dignities States and Understanding obliges some to have more knowledge of Matters relating to Religion than others In the 13th That no Person is oblig'd to believe what one or many private Persons teach but only the Doctrine of the Catholick Church is to be embrac'd by every one In the 14th That none is oblig'd to follow the Opinion of Saints and Doctors and to give credit to their Miracles and Revelations In the 15th That we are not oblig'd to give Credit to the Words or Writings of Men even in such things as do not relate to Faith and Manners In the 16th That in case a Council and the Pope be of contrary Opinions we must adhere to the Decision of a Council and when the Fathers of a Council are divided we must follow the Majority In the 17th That when there are two Persons who call themselves Popes we must endeavour to discover whose Election was Canonical and in case it be difficult to know this that it will be better to follow his Party who is thought to have the greatest probability on his side than to own no Pope at all In the 18th That when Divines or Interpreters differ about any Opinion we must follow that which is thought to be most true but if their Opinions happen to be equally probable we must follow that which is taught by the most Famous and Holy Persons In the 19th That in Matters of Controversie and Faith a Man is not at liberty to follow what Opinion he pleases when the thing is once defin'd In the 20th That when it is not determin'd we ought to follow what is most agreeable to the Gospel and best founded In the 21th That in case the Opinions appear to be equally reasonable we ought to shun that against which Anathema's are thundred out In the 22th That in Controversies of Faith which cannot be explain'd we ought to suspend our Judgment In the 23th That those who have a pure heart who pray to God without ceasing that they may know the Truth and have an humble submissive Spirit cannot Err dangerously in matters of Faith In the 24th That those Truths which one is not oblig'd to believe explicitely at the beginning because they were not explain'd and defin'd become afterwards necessary Points of Faith when they are In the 25th That every Christian is instructed Spiritually nourish'd and perfected in the Unity of one only Church and its Head In the 26th That 't is not sufficient to have Faith but it must be accompanied with good Works whereof God is the Author that we must love God and live in conformity to his Will After this Treatise follows a Piece upon a passage of St. Hilarius of the manner after which Jesus Christ is in us reported by Gratian in the Decree Distinct. 2. de Consecrat A Translation of the Exhortation of St. Justin to the Greeks a Poem upon the Mysteries of the Cross Nine Books of the prescience of Things wherein he treats of the Divine Prescience and of that knowledge which some pretend to of things future by Compacts with Evil Spirits by Astrology Chiromancy Geomancy c. which he confutes at large in this Treatise and therein he justifies these Predictions which Prophets Divinely inspir'd Angels and even God himself has given us of things future The Six Books of the Examination of the Vanity of the Doctrine of the Gentiles and of the Truth of the Christian Religion oppose the Errors of Philosophers and particularly those of the Aristoteleans There are also Four Books of Letters written by this Author which are almost all upon Profane Subjects at the end of which there is a Discourse address'd to Leo X. about the Reformation of Manners There is not so much Wit Vigor Subtilty nor Elegance in the Works of Francis Picus as in those of his Unkle nor yet so much Learning but there is in them more solidity and evenness This Prince was unhappy during his Life for he was driven out of his Dominions by his younger Brother Louis and being
intelligible to those that lived in the following Ages For example We find the Ancient Names of Cities are sometimes changed for those they received afterwards because they would have been no longer known by their Ancient Appellations There are likewise some short Explications inserted into these Sacred Books to illustrate what was said by the Author And in short some necessary Passages have been added to compleat the History These things are common and we find Examples of it in the Books of Homer Herodotus and almost all the Ancient Historians and yet no Body is inclined for all this to reject their Books as if they did not belong to those whose Names they bear Why then should we not say the same thing of the Books of the Pentateuch which have been more constantly assigned to Moses than the Poems of the Iliads or the Odysses to Homer or the Histories of Herodotus and Thucydides to those by whose Names they are known Let us examine all the Reasons that are alledged against the Antiquity of the Pentateuch since they imagine they are unanswerable which yet is very false as we shall make appear in these following Discourses and we shall see they only prove that some Names of Cities or Countries are changed some few Words inserted to explain some Difficulties and lastly that the account of Moses's Death has been put in since which was but necessary to finish the History of the Pentateuch We ought therefore to affirm it for a certain Truth That Moses was the Author of the first Five Books of the Bible called the Pentateuch There are given to each of these Five Books which have their Names in Hebrew from the first Word in each Book there are given 'em I say such Names as have a relation to the Subject The first is called Genesis because it begins with the History of the Creation of the World It contains besides that the Genealogy of the Patriarchs the History of the Flood a Catalogue of the Descendaâ⦠of Noah doân to Aâ⦠ãâã the Life of Abrahââ of Jacob and Joseph and the History of the Posâeââty oâ Jââoâ down to the Death of Joseph So that this Book comprehends the History of 2369 Years or thereabouts following the account of the Years of the Patriarchs as we find them in the Hebrew Text. The Second is called Exodus because the principal Subject of it is the Departure of the Children of Israel out of Egypt and all that passed in the Wilderness under Moses's Conduct for an Hundred forty five Years viz. from the Death of Joseph to the Building of the Tabernacle We find there a Description of the Plagues wherewith Egypt was afflicted an Abridgment of the Religion and Laws of the Israelites together with the admirable Precepts of the Decalogue The third is called Leviticus because it contains the Laws the Ceremonies and Sacrifices of the Religion of the Jews All which has a particular Relation to the Levites to whom God gave the charge of all those things that concern'd the Ceremonial part of that Religion The fourth is called Numbers because it begins with the Numbring of the Children of Israel that came out of Egypt and concludes with the Laws that were given the People of Israel during the Thirty nine Years of their sojourning in the Wilderness Deuteronomy that is to say the second Law is so called because it is as it were a Repetition of the first Foâ after Moses has described in a few Words the principal Actions of the Israelites in the Wilderness âe recites abundance of the Precepts of the Law i We don't certainly know when these Books were composed by Moses or which was first written However 't is very certain that Deuteronomy was written last in the Fortieth Year of the Departure out of Egypt and a little before the Death of Moses We can't so certainly tell who are the Authors of the other Books of the Bible Some of 'em we only know by Conjecture and others there are of which we have no manner of Knowledge It is not certain that the Book of k Joshuah was written by himself for as it is observed by the Author of the Abridgment of the Scripture attributed to St. Athanasius this Title is set at the Head of that Book not so much to discover the Author as to make the Subject of it known because it treats of War and other things that happen'd under the Conduct of Joshuah after the same manner as the Books of Judges of Kings of Tobit of Judith are so called because they give an Account of the Lives and Actions of those whose Names they bear But though 't is commonly believed that this Book was written by Joshuah and this Opinion seems to be countenanced by some Words of the last Chapter where it is said that Joshuah wrote all these things in the Book of the Law Nevertheless we must affirm that 't is certain that Theodoret and some others among the Ancients are not of this Opinion and that we have Reasons strong enough to make us doubt whether he is the Author or no. However it is 't is a most unquestionable Truth that this Book is ancient and that if it is not Joshuah's it was written either by his particular Order or a little after his Death It carries the History of the People of Israel Seventeen Years beyond the Death of Moses or thereabout We yet know less of the Author of the Book of Judges Some with the Talmudical Doctors attribute it to Samuel some to Hezekiah others to Ezrah In short some Persons are of Opinion that every Judge wrote his own Memoirs which were afterward collected by Samuel or Ezrah Be it as it will the Book is certainly ancient and l admit it was put into the condition we now find it by Ezrah yet we cannot reasonably question its being composed from ancient Memoirs It contains the History of what happen'd to the Israelites from the Death of Joshuah to that of Sampson We cannot precisely tell what Number of Years it takes in tho' 't is commonly fixed to something above 300 Years The Book of Ruth is a kind of an Appendix to the Book of Judges which is the reason why the Jews made but one Book of these two and for the same reason 't is commonly believed that one Author composed both 'T is certain that the History of Ruth comes up to the times of the Judges but we don't know the time exactly We may assign it to the time of Samgar Eight and twenty Years or thereabouts after the Death of Joshuah The two first Books of Kings are called by the Hebrews the Book of Samuel which has occasioned the Opinion that they were in part written by that Prophet m that is to say that he composed the Four and twenty first Chapters and that the Prophets Gad and Nathan afterwards compleated the Work This is the Opinion of the Talmudists and Isidore and is founded upon these Words of the Chronicles
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
speak things they never thought of and not to understand them aright As for what they add farther concerning these Prophets whom they have invested with an Authority to add or diminish from the Books of Scripture this is still more improbable than the other They barely tell us instead of proving it that in the Books of Kings several other Memoirs are quoted from whence they draw this Conclusion that all the Books of the Bible which have come down to our Hands are only Abridgments and Summaries of the ancient Acts. But does it follow from hence that all the other Books of the Bible were used after this rate Does it follow that they added to or retrenched from them after they were once made Or lastly that they were composed by these Prophets They would have it proceed from this Reason that there are so many Contradictions in the Books of the Holy Scripture They say that this is the Reason of the Differences between the Chronicles and other Historical Treatises of the Bible of that variety of false Conjectures that ruine the Authority of the Scriptures and what is yet more material that 't is not impossible to reconcile these seeming Contradictions To this purpose they amass together a great quantity of other Conjectures of this Nature very subtilely invented but weak and ill-grounded and yet upon the strength of these they make the Authority of the Bible to depend after they have endeavoured to undermine the solid Foundations which bear it up Thus by pretending to advance Criticism they forsake the Rules of true Judgment and follow the Fantastick Chimaera's of their own Imaginations There is no weight in what they have invented themselves or what they have found ready invented to their Hands by some Rabbies and yet at the same time they scruple and doubt of several things that are clearer and better established Although I did not name Mr. Simon in my first Edition yet he very well perceived that this reproach was addressed to himself The manner wherein he answered me sufficiently shewed that he was sensibly touched however this his Carriage does not in the least justifie him For in stead of demonstrating by solid Reasons that the Reproaches I fasten'd upon him were undeserved and ill-grounded he has filled his Letter with nothing but Contumelies and scornful Reflections which shews how heinously he resented the Liberty I took in examining his Hypothesis and this all sensible Men observed as soon as ever his Letter appear'd in publick But now to make it evident to the whole World that I have Reason on my side viz. that Mr. Simon is in the wrong for quarrelling with me upon this occasion I shall only cast my Eyes on the Preface of his Book where he sets down the Principles of his Work at length The World will observe says he that having considered nothing in this Essay but the Prophet of those who have a mind to know the Grounds of the Holy Scriptures I have inserted abundance of Principles very usefull to resolve the most weighty Difficulties of the Bible and at the same time to answer those Objections which are usually made against these Holy Books These Principles are reducible to three Heads The first is That there were always amongst the Hebrews a sort of Prophets or Publick Registers Divinely inspired who made what Alterations or Additions they thought fit in the Books of the Old Testament The second is That they heretofore wrote their Books upon little Leaves which they rowled one over another round a small piece of Wood without stiching them together whence it happen'd sometimes that not taking sufficient care to preserve the order of these ancient Leaves or Volumes the things themselves treated of have sometimes been misplaced The third is That there is a great deal of Reason to believe that those Persons who joyned these old Memoirs together to keep up the Body of those Canonical Books which are now remaining made no scruple at all to cut off several Synonymous Terms which were found in their Copies and were perhaps inserted only for a fuller Illustration These are the great and admirable Principles of Mr. Simon his publick Registers his Rolls and Synonyma's Here is according to him a way to resolve the most perplexed Difficulties of the Bible and to defend its Authority against the Disciples of Spinosa Here is an infallible Expedient whereby we may confound the Socinians and Protestants and invincibly prove the Inspiration of the Holy Books And lastly here is a never-failing Salve to silence all the Objections that can be urged against the Scripture I am of Opinion that Mr. Simon will find very few People who will be inclined to subscribe to the Usefulness of these Principles But this is not the Business I design to examine 't is their Solidity I desire to see upon which he values himself so exceedingly For if it be made evident that these Principles are only established upon weak frivolous Conjectures then adieu to all those Advantages say I that may be drawn from thence Let us therefore examine all the Proofs that Mr. Simon has brought together in his Critical History and other Books The first of his Principles is that about the Scribes or Registers that were divinely inspired But he gives us no Proofs of this matter in his Preface it seems that was not the proper place In the first Chapter of his Critique which is a sort of a second Preface he contents himself with saying That he gives the name of Prophets to the Authors of the Books of the Bible and with repeating what he said before in his Preface concerning the great advantage of these publick Scribes as if it were enough for him barely to assert these things without giving himself the trouble of proving them But in the second Chapter he endeavours to make this whole matter evident and therefore let us consider by what Reasons he offers to do it In the first place he observes that the Jewish State acknowledged no other Chief or Head but God From this Principle he concludes that God himself gave 'em Laws by the Ministry of Moses and of the other Prophets who succeeded him This Conclusion is undeniable but it was not necessary to prove it by a Principle more obscure than the Conclusion that is drawn from thence But we are not concerned to know whether there were any of these Prophets amongst the Hebrews for that is a constantly received Truth but 't is our business to know In the first place Whether there were in all Ages amongst the Jews those Scribes or Registers whom he talks of who looked after the Records and Histories of the Affairs of that Nation Secondly Whether they were divinely inspired Thirdly Whether they are the Authors of the Books of the Bible 'T is Mr. Simon 's business to prove these three Propositions and not barely to tell us in general that there were Prophets amongst the Jews The second Remark made by Mr. Simon is
there would be no other credible ââ¦ess of the trâ⦠of this business the Fathers having talked of them only upon the relation of these Authors Secondly these Criticks pretend that this History does not in any manner agree with the Chronology of those times and they demonstrate it thus All those Authors say they who speak of this subject ãâã that it was Demetrius Pâaâereus who had âeen formerly a great Man at Athens that took the pains to make the Jews come to translate the Books of the Bible and in the mean timâ they pretend that this Version was composed under the Reign of Ptolomy Philadelphus Now Demetrius could not be in reputation under Ptolomy Philadelphus nor could he be alive at that time when they suppose that this Version was made For it is certain that Demetrius lived in Egypt under the Reign of Ptolomy the Son of Lagus and that having counselled this Prince to name for his Suâ⦠the Children which he had by Eâridice he incurred the disgrace of Ptolomy Philââ¦s who âânished him the Court immediately after the death of his Father and ordered him to be kept close in a certain Province where he died soon after as Hermippus cited by Diâgenes Lâertââs testifies All which makes it evident that in the first place Demetrius was never in any credit with Pââlomy Philadelphus and consequently that he was not Supervisor of his Library nor ordered to bring the Jews to translate the Bible Secondly that the Version of the Septuagint being made as we are obliged to suppose some years after the beginning of Philadelphus's Reign Demetrius could not be employed in that affair since he was dead before 'T is commonly answered that Ptolomy Philadelphus reigned some time along with his Father as 't is observed in Eusebius's Chronicon and that in this time he took care of the Library and got the Version of the Bible to be made 'T is likewise urged that this is the reason why some Authors place this Translation in the time of Ptolomy the Son of Lâgus and others in the time of Ptolomy Philadelphus But in my Opinion this answer does not clearly remove the difficulty since Aristeas and Josephus tell us in express words that it happen'd under the Reign of Ptolomy Philadelphus and that he was the King who took so much care âo compleat his Library without making the least mention of his Father 'T was to him alone that Demetrius address'd himself to procure his Letters to the Jews he was the only Man that wrote them In a word all Authors who say this matter happen d under his Reign speak not one word of Ptolomy the Son of Lâgus and those that affirm that it happen'd under the first Ptolomy don't mention a syllable of Philadelphus Vitruvius in the Preface to his 7th Book tells us that Ptolomy Philadelphus made a Library in imitation of the Kings of Pergamus and that Aristophanes an Athenian Grammarian was his Library Keeper from whence it follows that Demetrius never managed that Office and that the Library was not begun till after his death For that King of Pergamus in imitation of whom Ptolomy Philadelphus erected his Library was Eumenes who could not possibly do it till after the death of Demetrius and therefore Suidas says the Version of the Septuagint was not made till the 33d year of the Reign of Philadelphus and he observes that Zenodotus was his Library Keeper This still discovers another contradiction in Chronology that is to be found in Aristeas's and Josephus's Narration for they say that the Seventy came into Egypt when Ptolomy made a solemn Festival occasioned by a Naval Victory which he obtained over Antigonus This Sea-Fight ought to be the same which Diodorus mentions in his 20th Book and happen'd in the third year of the 118th Olympiad Now at that time Demetrius was not come to Egypt where he came not till after the death of Cassander which happen'd in the second year of the 120th Olympiad according to the Testimony of Hermippus And though one should still maintain that he came thither at that time yet it is certain that Eleazer was not then the High Priest since according to Eusebius he did not begin to be so till the 123d Olympiad They observe also another Solecism in Chronology and that is in the Epistle attributed to Demetrius by Aristeas For Hecatâus of Abdera that was Demetrius's Contemporary is there cited as a Man that had been dead a long while ago Thirdly 't is urged against the truth of this Story that it is notoriously full of the fictions and inventions of the Hellenist Jews It is supposed there that Eleazer chose Seventy two Men by taking six out of every Tribe Now all the World knows that at this time some of the Tribes were not to be found there as having been carried away out of Judea by Shalmanezer after the taking of Samaria To this it may perhaps be replied that there were still remaining amongst the Jews some Persons descended from all those Tribes that were concealed in the Tribe of Judah but that Eleazer should find just Six and no more in every Tribe who were able to do such a business seems as they say to look a little too fabulous It is certain says a modern Critick that if we reflect a little upon the History of Aristeas and read it with never so little Application we shall be convinced that an Hellenist Jew wrote this Book under the name of Aristeas in favour of his own Nation The Miracles that are related there and the very manner in which it is written give us a true Idea of a Jewish Genius which always and especially at that time delighted to publish Forgeries that contained scarce any thing but extraordinary things He tells us that some Persons having formed a design to Translate these Sacred Volumes were deterred from their bold resolution by a signal punishment from Heaven that Theopompus having determined to insert some part of their Law into the body of his History became mad That the same Theopompus having pray'd to God during the intermission of his Distemper to discover to him the cause of this unfortunate accident God answered him in a Dream that it happened to him for his great presumption in endeavouring to make common those sacred things that ought to be kept private and that he was restored to his former health after having desisted from this Enterprize We read in the same place that Theodectus a Tragick Poet lost his sight for having presumptuously attempted to insert a passage of the Bible into his Works but that he recovered his sight upon acknowledgment of his fault and begging pardon of God After all the Authors of the Books attributed to Aristeas and Aristobulus say nothing but what is great and pompous and extraordinary Aristeas for example does not content himself with saying that the Seventy carried a Copy of the Law but he adds that they brought one written in Characters of Gold He
out of another Mans Book I own it but I thought they were suitable to the present occasion e It is very certain that at first this Language was not common to all the Jews This is abundantly proved against the common opinion by what is said in the Book of Nehemiah ch 13. v. 24. that the Children of the Jews who had Married strange Women spoke Asotice and not Judaice In the Hebrew the words are Ashdodith and Jehudith and this last word in the second Book of Kings ch 18. v. 26. is opposed to Aramith which signifies in Syriack Precamur loquaris nobis Syriace non Judaice in the first Book of Ezrah ch 4. v. 7. and in the Prophet Daniel ch 2. v. 4. Aramith has still the same signification On the contrary Jehudith signifies the Hebrew Tongue in opposition to the Syriack as we may see in the second Book of Chron. ch 32. v. 18. 2 Kings 18. 26. and in Isaiah ch 36. v. 11. There were several Jews therefore in the time of Ezrah that still spoke Hebrew And this is evidently proved by the Books of Ezrah that were made since the Captivity and yet were written in Hebrew and not in Chaldee except some Chapters of the first Book of Ezrah where he tells us of the opposition that the Officers of the King of Persia who spoke Chaldee gave to the Jews From whence it follows that the Jews both understood and spoke Hebrew For otherwise why should Ezrah if he designed to have his Books intelligible by all the Jews write them in a Language which was not natural to them The same consideration will hold good as to the Books of the latter Prophets who wrote in Hebrew after the Captivity and yet addressed their Prophecies to all the People But lastly that which admits of no reply is a remarkable passage in the Book of Nehemiah ch 8. and 9. where we find that the Law was read in Hebrew before the People and all the People hearkened to it and understood it These Remarks have been lately made by a very Ingenious and Learned Person Mr. Simon indeed brags that he has invincible Reasons to overthrow them When he has honoured the World with a Sight of them we shall see whether they are powerful enough to make us retract this opinion as he would willingly perswade us they are but in the mean time he ought not to take it amiss if till then we continue in the same mind f The Syriack Tongue mix'd with Hebrew Words became the vulgar Language of the Jews which was afterwards called the Hebrew Tongue The truth of this appears by the Hebrew Words that we find in the New Testament which are all as St. Jerome observes Syriack Words and what our blessed Saviour says That not one Iota of the Law of God shall pass away c. makes it evident that the Jews at that time used the present Hebrew Alphabet and not the ancient and it is demonstrated from hence that the of the Jews was a little Letter which is true of the Syriack and Hebrew Jâd and not of the Samaritan which has three Feet g The Chaldee Paraphrasââ which we have seen to be of a lâter date The Cââldee Paraphrase is divided into three Parts The first that contains the Pentateuch is attributed to Oâkelos the second that contains the Prophets to Jonathan the third to one Josephus the blind There is likewise another Paraphrase of the Pentateuch called that of Jerusalem and another of the Canticles but all these Paraphrases are imperfect as well as new Since that time the Jews having committed to writing abundance of Traditions in a Book which they call Misna they afterwards composed Commentaries upon it whereof the most celebrated is called the Gâmera But all these Books are full of ridiculous foolish Fictions and have nothing common with the Scripture The Masora that is a sort of a Critical Performance upon the Bible is of more use and advantage The Follies and Whimsies of the Cabala are impertinent and impious h About the year of our Lord 500 the Jews of Tiberias invented the Points These Points were not used in St. Jerom's time as may be easily proved from several Passages of this Father drawn out of his 22th Question upon Jeremiah and out of his Commentary upon Habakkuk in Chap. 3. Vers. 20. which abundantly shew that in his time the Pronunciation of the Hebrew Words was not determined by the Points as it has been since i I am of opinion that one cannot absolutely deny that there was a Greek Version of the Books of the Bible made in the time of Ptolomy Philadelphus It is not credible that the Authors of the Books attributed to Aristeas and Aristobulus entirely invented the whole History and that there is no part of it true 'T is sar more probable that they only added several Circumstances to the Matter of Fact which was assuredly certain Mr. Simon imagines that this Version was called the Septuagint beause it was approved by the Sanedrim but this is a Conjecture without any Foundation k Some of the Fathers have believed this Fiction of the Talmudists The Author of the Discourse against the Greeks attributed to St. Justin St. Irenaeus and St. Clement believed it St. Austin questioned and doubted the truth of it St. Jeroââ laughs at it l Aquila the Jew A certain Syriack Auther âited by Monsieur Le Jâi the Publisher of the French Poââgââot tells us that he was descended from Adrian and adds many other Passages ãâã are extremely improbable St. Jerom assures us that he was a Jew in his Commentary upon the third Chapter of Habakkuk upon the third of Isaiah and in his Epistle to Marcellus m Theodotion the Disciple of Tatian St. Jerom's Testimony confirms what we have said here St. Irenââs names him in his Book against Hââesy from whence it follows that he lived when Elutâerius was Pope n Symmachus c. What we say concerning this Man is taken out of St. Jerom in his Preface upon Job Eusebius also says l. 6. c. 7. that he was an Ebionite and this is the reason why Hilâry the Deacon Author of The Commentary of St. Paul attributed to St. Ambrose calls the Ebionites Sââ¦machians o We yet find another Version of the Bible in the time of the Emperor Caracalla St. Epiphanius is of opinion that this fifth Version was found at Jericho the Author of The Abridgment attributed to St. Athanasius is of the same opinion But Eusebius following the Testimony of Origen tells us that the sixth was found at Nicopolis that we don't know where Origen found the fifth and that the seventh which was only a Version of the Psalms was found at Jericho Consult Euseb. l. 6. c. 16. St. Jerom assures us that all these Translations were made by Jews p Eusebius St. Jerom and several other Ancients make no distinction between the Octapla from the Hexapla They place the fifth sixth and seventh Version in what they
another of Theological Instructions a Treatise concerning the just Judgment of God i Lib. de Caelest Hier. c. 7. and another of those things that are understood by the Mind and of those that may be perceived by the Senses k C. 1 and 2. de Caelest Hier. but these are lost The others have been often Printed in Greek and in Latin separately l Often Printed in Greek and in Latin separately In Greek by Morellus in the year 1562 with the Scholia of Maximus and Pachymeres at Basil in 1539 and at Venice in 1558 in Latin of the Version of Ambrosius Camaldulensis at Strasburg in 1468 and in 1502 with the Notes of Jacobus Faber Stapulensis in 1504 at Alcala of the Translation of Ficinus at Colen by Quentelius in 1546. In this Edition they have put in the Version of Scotus Erigena Petrus Sarrasinus Ambrosius Camaldulensis and Marsilius Ficinus together with a Paraphrase by the Abbot de Verceil and the Annotations of Dionysius Carthusianus Perionius finding these Versions too obscure made a new Translation which was Printed at Colen at Paris in 1557 and 1567 and at Lyons in 1585. Clausarus likewise made another Translation that was Printed at Strasburg in 1546. The Book de Mystica Theologia was Printed with the Notes of a Divine at Paris in Quarto in the year 1626. and were published in Greek and Latin by Lanselius at Paris Anno Dom. 1615 afterwards at Antwerp in 1634 and again at Paris 1644 by the Jesuit Corderius together with the Commentaries of Pachymeres and Maximus St. IGNATIUS IGNATIUS Sirnamed Theophorus a Sirnamed Theophorus This is not an an Epithet but his Sirname Some have believed that he was that young Child whom Jesus Christ placed in the middle of his Apostles and that from thence he took the Name of Theophorus but this is a vain Imagination without any Ground not supported by the Testimony of any ancient Author and besides it contradicts the Opinion of S. Chrysostom who declares that S. Ignatius never saw our Saviour in the Flesh. was the Successor of Evodius b The Successor of Evodius S. Chrysostom Theodoret and the Author of the Chronicle of Alexandria affirm that he was ordained by S. Peter but Eusebius S. Jerom and the other ancient Ecclesiastical Writers place Evodius between S. Peter and S. Ignatius in the Episcopal See S. Ignatius of Antioch about the year of our Lord 70. He governed this Church for the space of almost Forty years with admirable Prudence and Constancy and at last suffered Martyrdom in the Tenth year of the Reign of Trajan when this Holy Prelate having professed the Faith even in the presence of the Emperor himself with great Courage if we may believe the Acts of his Martyrdom was condemned to be exposed to wild Beasts in the Amphitheatre at Rome And he is reputed to have wrote his Epistles to several Churches in the way as he was carried a Prisoner in Chains to that City for maintaining the truth of the Christian Religion but since there are very great difficulties concerning the number and different Editions of these Epistles it will be necessary to draw up their History and to produce the Testimony of Authors that have mentioned them since his time Immediately after the death of this holy Martyr Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna his Disciple collected these Epistles and sent them to the Christians of Philippi as appears from a Letter that he wrote to them and which cannot be questioned without contradicting not only Eusebius S. Jerom and Photius the most renowned Criticks of Antiquity but also S. Irenaeus himself the Disciple of S. Polycarp who cites this Epistle and commends it in these words There is an Epistle of Polycarp to the Christians of Philippi which is extremely accurate and very proper to shew the character of the Faith and the Doctrine of the Truth to those that take any care of their Salvation Moreover we have not only an approbation of S. Polycarp's Epistle by S. Irenaeus to prove the Authority of S. Ignatius's but it is likewise evident that this Father had read these Epistles Irenaeus says Eusebius was not ignorant of the Martyrdom of S. Ignatius and mentions his Epistles in these words Thus one of our Brethren being condemned for maintaining the Faith to be exposed to the wild Beasts said c Wild Beasts said In citing the Testimony of any Author we say as he says or as he writes without using any Choice and it ought not to be concluded from thence that S. Irenaeus only produced a remarkable Expression of S. Ignatius without taking it from any of his Works for it is much more probable that he took it from his Epistle to the Romans because it is found there word for word I am the Wheat of God and shall be ground by the Teeth of wild Beasts that I may become the Bread of Jesus Christ. The words recited by S. Irenaeus in Lib. 5. contra Haeres cap. 28. are also found at present in the Epistle of S. Ignatius to the Romans Origen hath cited the Epistles of S. Ignatius and that which he produceth in two several places is read in those that are now extant I have found it written says he in his 6th Homily on S. Luke in the Epistle of a certain Martyr I mean Ignatius Bishop of Antioch who was exposed to wild Beasts at Rome I have found it written I say very elegantly that the Virginity of Mary was unknown to the Prince of this World This passage is word for word in the Epistle of S. Ignatius to the Ephesians The Second passage quoted by Origen is in his Commentary on the Canticles We remember says he the Expression of a Saint named Ignatius in speaking concerning Jesus Christ my Love is Crucified and I do not believe that he ought to be reprehended on this Account These are the Testimonies taken from Authors who wrote in the Second and Third Centuries in the Fourt Eusebius cites the Epistles of S. Ignatius declares their number and gives us a Catalogue of them He says in the Third Book of his History chap. 36. that this Holy Martyr being carried from Asia into Italy confirmed the Churches of the several Cities through which he passed in the Faith and admonished them to avoid Heresies by constantly adhering to the Tradition of the Apostles and that being arrived at Smyrna where l Polycarp was then Bishop he wrote four Letters The first to the Church of Ephesus wherein he mentions Onesimus their Pastor The second to the Magnesians wherein he speaks of Damas their Bishop The third to the Trallians where he names Bishop Polybius And the last to the Church of Rome wherein he intreats the Romans not to deprive him through the fervour of their Prayers of the Crown of Martyrdom Afterwards he recites a large Fragment of this Epistle and adds that being departed from Smyrna and arrived at Troas he wrote to ãâã Philadelphians
expounds the Orthodox Doctrines of the Catholick Church that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary that he was really Man that he actually suffered and died and not in appearance as some Hereticks said Lastly in the Epistle to the Romans he expresseth his Zeal and ardent desire of suffering Martyrdom and entreats them not to take this glorious Crown from him by preventing his being exposed to wild Beasts in the Amphitheatre of Rome Upon the whole matter all these Epistles are âull of very wholsom Precepts and usefull Exhortations they are extremely worthy of a Christian of a Bishop and of a Martyr and are all full of Warmth and Piety One cannot read them without perceiving every where that this Holy man was animated with a Zeal truly Divine for the Salvation of Souls for the fulfilling of the Law of Jesus Christ and for the preservation of his Doctrine In every thing that he says he appears to be full of Love to our Saviour of affection towards his Brethren of Care for the Discipline of the Church and of Ardour for the blessing of Peace In short let Criticks that are of a contrary Opinion say what they please I dare maintain that these Epistles deserve to be well esteemed and to be admired by all those who profess to have any Respect for Books of Piety S. POLYCARP ST Polycarp a S. Polycarp Halloixiuâ says that S. Polycarp was originally of Smyrna that he was born in the East and that he was a Slave in his youth that he was bought by a certain Lady named Calistiâne who gave him his Liberty and caused him to be instructed in the Christian Religion that she afterwards made him her Steward and at last her Heir He enlarged on the liberal donations of this Lady he affirms that Bâcâlââ Bishop of Smyrnâ was at first Tutor to S. Polycarp and afterwards S. Joââ he writeâ much in the commendation of this Fictitious Bucâlââ and declares that he ordained S. Polycarp who is the Angel of Smyrnâ These Tales and many others are extracted from the false Acts of the Life of St. Polycarp forged under the name of Pionius from the Mânologium Graecârâm by the modern Greeks the Disciple of S. John the Evangelist b The Disciple of S. John the Evangelist S. Irââ¦us tells us lib. 3. cap. 3. that he was constituted Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles and this could be done by no other than S. Joââ and by him ordained Bishop of Smyrna was after the decease of this Apostle esteemed as the Head of the Churches of Asia c The head of the Churches of Asia S. Jerâme says that he was Priââ¦ps ãâã Asia that is to say that he was the most considerable Bishop and as I may say succeeded in the Authority of S. John when S. Polycarp he went to Rome under the Pontificate of Anicetus about the Year 160 d About the year 160. He died in the seventh year of the Emperor Marcus Aârelius in the year 167. he had then served Jesus Christ 86 years as he declares himself in the Acts of his Martyrdom Thus he might have begun to serve God in the year 81 after the Nativity of our Saviour and then he might be Ten years old He conversed with all the Apostles if we may believe the Testimony of S. Irenaeus S. John died in the year of our Lord 101 and in the second of Trajân he was banished in the fourteenth of Domitian Aâ⦠Dâ⦠95 and returned into Asia after the death of this Emperor These Observations may serve to fix the Chronology of the Life of S. Polycarp He was born about the year of our Lord 70 he began to consecrate himself to the service of God in the year 81. At that time he conversed with the Apostles and became the Disciple of S. John after the return of this Apostle he was ordained Bishop of Smyrna however it is not precisely known in what year but this must of necessity have happened before the year 101 since S. John died that year He undertook his Journy to Rome in thâ beginning of the Pontificate of Anicetââ who presided in that See from the year 158 to the year 169. he converted several Marcionites and obliged them to return to the Bosom of the Church He had several Conserenoâs with Pope Anicetus probably about several particular Customs of the Church of Rome They debated the question of the day when they should keep Easter which was afterwards disputed under the Pontificate of Pope Victor but each of them having judged it to be most convenient to observe his own custom they aââ¦cably communicated one with another and Anicetus to do the greater honour to S. Polycarp caused him to officiate in his own Church e In his own Church All these Circumstances are related by S. Ireââus There are some who affirm that the Expression of S. Irenaeus signifies only that Anicetus administred the Holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper to S. Polycarp but he would not thereby have done him much honour it may be better understood according to our Explication and in his own place This Holy Bishop always abhorred Hereticks and he used to tell a Story That S. John having seen Cerinthus entring into a Bath speedily fled from thence without bathing himself therein fearing lest the building should fall because Cerinthus the Enemy of the Truth was there and he himself having once accidentally met with Mârcion who desired that he would vouchsafe to take notice of him he replied I know that thou art the âldest Son of the Devil He had a very particular respect for the Memory of S. John he took much delight in telling over the Discourses that he formerly had with him and with others that had seen Jesus Christ in the flesh he related every thing whereof he had been informed by them concerning his Doctrine and Miracles and if he had heard any one maintaining any Principles contrary to the Apostolical Faith he was wont to cry out O God to what times hast thou reserved me and would immediately depart from the place where he was All this is recorded by S. Irenaeus and cited by Eusebius in the 14th Chapter of the fourth Book of his History and in Book 5. Chap. 20. The illustrious Martyrdom of this Saint which happened in the year 167. after the Nativity of Jesus Christ on the 23d day of February is described after a most elegant manner in the Excellent Epistle of the Church of Smyrna to those of Pontus produced in part by Eusebius in the Fifteenth Chapter of the fourth Book of his History and published entirely first by Archbishop Ushâr and afterward by Valesius They there give an account that S. Polycarp did not voluntarily surrender himself to his Executioners but that he waited after the example of our Saviour untill he was deliverd into their hands that many Christians suffered before him with admirable constancy all the Torments imaginable that
of Commelinus in Greek and Latin published by Fridericus Silburgius Anno Dom. 1593. It comprehends the entire Works of S. Justin divided into Three Parts the first whereof contains the Books against the Gentiles the Second the Dialogue against Tryphon and the Third the Tracts that were Composed for the Instruction of the Christians They are translated by Langus except the Second Oration against the Gentiles and the Epistle to Diognetus which are of Henry Stephen's Translation at the end are subjoined some Notes of Silburgius Stephens and other Learned men Morellus followed this Edition in the Impression of the Works of S. Justin which he caused to be made at Paris in the years 1615 and 1656. only he added the small Tracts of Athenagoras Theophilus Hermias and Tatian This last Edition is thought to be the best and yet it is very imperfect and it were to be wished that another might ere long be published to this end a new Version ought to be made of all St. Justin's Works because Langus's hath many defects the ancient Manuscripts ought to be consulted if any such can be found and exactly compared with the Greek Text which was not corrected by Silburgius from any Manuscript Lastly some Annotations ought to be added and many of those that are already Printed should be cut off As for the disposing of these Works the following Order may be observed They should be divided into Three Classes 1. Those that were really Composed by S. Justin. 2. Those that may be his tho' we cannot certainly affirm it And 3. Those that are manifestly Supposititious His Apology to the Emperor Antoninus that which ought to be called the first Apology that so for the Future it may always be cited under that Name ought to be placed in the Front the other Apology that immediately follows should be Entituled the Second after this might be inserted the Fragment of the Books concerning Monarchy the excellent Dialogue against Tryphon should be the last Treatise of this Class at least till some of those that are lost happen to be found The Second Class should contain the two Orations to the Greek and the Epistle to Diognetus The Third may take in all the Books that are undoubtedly forged which also might be distinguished into two Parts in the first whereof should be placed those Writings that may be in some manner useful such are the 146 Questions the Exposition of the Faith and the Epistles to Zena and Serenus and then in the Second one may add the Philosophical Tracts above cited if it should not be thought more convenient to omit them altogether MELITO MElito Bishop of Sardis in Asia is one of those Fathers who wrote the most concerning the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church but there remains nothing of them at present but Melito the Titles and a few small Fragments produced by Eusebius in the Fourth Book of his History chap. 26. The Titles are these Two Books of the Feast of Easter one of the Lives of the Prophets a A Book of the Lives of the Prophets Some reckon two Books on this Subject but it is plain from the Greek Text of Eusebius and the Authority of S. Jerom that there was but one one of the Church one of the Lords-Day one concerning the Nature of Man another of his Creation one of the submission of the Senses unto Faith b One of the Submission of the Senses unto Faith S. Jerom and Ruffinus distinguish the Book of Faith from that of the Senses but it is more probable that it was but one Book bearing the above-mentioned Title as being Composed against some Hereticks who asserted that we ought to believe only according to our Senses a Book concerning the Soul the Body and the Spirit one of Baptism another of Truth another concerning the Generation of Jesus Christ one of Prophecy one of Hospitality another entituled the Key one of the Devil another of the Apocalypse one of God incarnate c Of God incarnate It is expressed in Greek ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of God incarnate or invested with a Body Others expound this passage after another manner imagining that he maintained that God was Corporeal but this last is not the proper signification of the Greek word However Origen cited by Theodoret in Quest. 20. in Exodum says that Melito wrote a Book ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that God was Corporeal which answers to the other Interpretation and a Collection taken out of the Holy Scriptures Lastly an Apology presented to Marcus Antoninus whereof we have a fragment in Eusebius wherein Melito intreats the Emperor that he would vouchsafe to examine the Accusations that were alledged against the Christians and to cause the Persecution to cease by revoking the Edict that he had published against them He represents to him that the Christian Religion was so far from being destructive to the Roman Empire that it was very much augmented since the propagation thereof that this Religion was persecuted only by wicked Emperors such as Nero and Domitian that the Emperors Adrian and Antoninus had written several Letters in its behalf and therefore he hoped to obtain of his Clemency and Generosity the favour which he so earnestly requested Eusebius also gives us another little Fragment out of the Book concerning Easter to shew the time when this Author wrote in which he mentions Sagaris Bishop of Laodicea whom he affirms to have suffered Martyrdom under Servilius Paulus the Pro-consul of Asia As also another Fragment more considerable which is the Preface to his Collections wherein he gives us a Catalogue of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament omitting those that are not included in the Canon of the Jews these are the Books of Ecclesiasticus Wisdom for he calls the Book of the Proverbs by the Name of Wisdom Judith Esther and the two Books of the Maccabees There is also another Fragment of Melito's preserv'd by the Author of the Chronicle commonly called the Alexandrian in Olympiad 236. wherein he says that the Christians do not adore insensible Stones but that they worship one God alone who is before all things and in all things and Jesus Christ who is God and the Word before all Ages It is not known from what Book this Fragment was taken but it is probable that it is in his Apology to the Emperor Some other passages are likewise attributed to him which are taken out of a Catena of the Greek Fathers upon Genesis but they seem to me to be unworthy of this Author d Unworthy of this Author One of these passages is produced by Halloixius being a Comparison between Isaac and Jesus Christ full of childish Notions and Expressions that are more agreeable to the Modern than the ancient Writers we find also in the Bibliotheca Patrum another Book under his Name Entituled Of the Passage or Death of the Virgin Mary which is inserted by Pope Gelasius amongst the Apocryphal Writings and rejected by
Eusebius cites a Fragment of this Book by which it appears that the subject and occasion which induced Serapion to write it was a Contest that arose in the Church of Rhossus in Cilicia about the truth of that Gospel that Serapion happening to be there permitted them to read it but that afterwards being convinced that those Persons who defended it were secret Hereticks and that Marcion who was the principal Asserter of it received it from some Hereticks named the Docâtâ who believed that Jesus Christ did not really suffer but only in appearance he wrote this Letter to them till he could go to see them himself to acquaint them with the falsity and errors of that Gospel St. Jerome takes notice that in his time there were some short Epistles of the same Author that were conformable to his austere rigid way of living but they are wholly lost This Bishop governed the Church of Antioch till the first year of the Emperor Caracalla and the year of our Lord 203. Antoninus succeeded him and was the Ninth Bishop of Antioch after the Apostles RHODON RHodon though he was of Asia studied at Rome and had Tatian for his Master He wrote many Books and amongst the rest a Treatise against the Heresie of Marcion dedicated to one Callistion He likewise wrote a Piece upon the Hexaëmeron St. Jerome attributes Rhodon to him a Book against the Montanists a Fragment of which as he supposes Eusebius has cited But since Eusebius says nothing of its being written by Rhodon and since it is certainly of a later date we may be sure that it cannot be his So that we have nothing of Rhodon's left save only a passage or two cited by Eusebius taken out of his Book against the Heresie of Marcion wherein he observes that this Heresie in his time was divided into several Sects that one Apelles acknowledged but one Principle but that the rejected the Prophecies that some others as Potitus and Basilicus acknowledged two and others introduced three Natures He also tells us that he had a Conference with Apelles and that he himself being convinced of several Errors in their Conference said That we are not obliged to examine what we believe and that all those who place their hope in Jesus Christ crucified would be saved that the question about the Nature of God was exceeding obscure that he in truth believed there was but one Principle but that he was not assured of it and that the Prophecies were contrary one to another Lastly Eusebius adds that Rhodon says in this Book that he was Tatian's Disciple at Rome that Tatian had written a Book concerning the most difficult questions of Scripture promising to explain them but that having never done it he himself endeavoured to perform it And this is all we know of this Author he flourished under the Emperors Commodus and Severus PANTAENUS PAntaenus a Stoick Philosopher a Born in Sicily Some have thought that he was an Hebrew but they are mistaken for St. Clement speaking of the Master he had in Aegypt who was our Pantaenus Lib. 1. Strom. calls him the Sicilian Muse which shews that he was a Sicilian for otherwise he would as soon have called him the Attick Muse. That Master of his whom he calls an Hebrew was another Person that instructed him in Palestine born in Sicily about the beginning of the Reign of the Emperor Commodus b Presided Eusebius lib. 5. c. 10. and St. Jerome in Catalogo presided over the celebrated School of Alexandria where from the time of S. Mark the founder of that Church they had always a Divine that was eminent for Pantaenus his Learning and Piety to explain the Holy Scriptures and to instrust them in Human Learning He was obliged for a time to leave this Employment to undertake another far more excellent For the Indians having sent to the Bishop of Alexandria to furnish them with a Divine to instruct them in the Christian Religion Demetrius sent Pantaenus thither who undertook this Mission with Joy and behaved himself very worthily in it 'T is reported that he found that the Indians had already some Tincture of the Christian Religion which had been infused by St. Bartholomew the Apostle and that he met with the Gospel of S. Matthew amongst them written in Hebrew c Which that Apostle had left there S. Jerome tells us that Pantaenus brought it with him and that it was in his time preserved in the Library of Alexandria I cannot easily prevail with my self to believe this Story and indeed I should rather believe that this was the Gospel according to the Hebrews which the Nazarenes owned which might pass for that of S. Matthew for why should S. Bartholomew leave an Hebrew Book with Indians which that Apostle had left there After Pantaenus was returned to Alexandria he re-assumed the Government of the School of that City which in his absence he in all probability had committed to the care of his Disciple S. Clemment a Presbyter of Alexandria He continued to explain the Holy Scripture publickly under the Reign of Severus and Antoninus Caracalla and as S. Jerome tells us was more serviceable to the Church by his Discourses than by his Writings Nevertheless he published some Commentaries upon the Bible where he has discovered as Eusebius says the Treasures of the Scripture We may judge after what manner he explained the Sacred Text by the like performance of St. Clement of Alexandria Origen and the rest that were brought up in that School They abound in Allegories they find mysteries and instructions in every thing and scarce ever follow the literal sence and fill their Annotations generally with a great deal of Learning A Man ought to have abundance of Wit and Eloquence to keep up this way of writing Commentaries and to render it advantageous and entertaining to the People otherwise it will degenerate and grow flat and tedious The Commentaries of Pantaenus are all lost We only know that he was the Author of that Rule which has been ever since followed by all the Interpreters of Prophecies that the Prophets often express themselves in indefinite terms and that they make use of the present time instead of the past and future Theodotus has related this Opinion of Pantaenus but he speaks of it as if he had rather said it than writ it S. CLEMENT of ALEXANDRIA SAint Clement a S. Clement He was called Titus Flavius Clemens S. Epiphanius in the Heresie of the Secundians says that he was called Atheniensis by some and Alexandrinus by others which has been the occasion that it was generally believed that he was of Athens and that he was called Alexandrinus from the name of the Church whereof he was a Priest but his Country is not certainly known He was of the Sect of the Stoicks a Presbyter of Alexandria and Disciple of Pantaenus b Disciple of Pantaenus S. Clement had several Masters as he tells us himself
Christ. Which he evidently makes out from the Prophets who foretold the time of his Coming and the circumstances of his Life and Death He observes that the Original of the Jews mistake arose from their confounding his last Coming wherein he will appear in great Power and Glory with his first Coming wherein he was seen in great Humility and took upon him the mean Condition of other Men. Although the Book of Praescriptions against the Hereticks is not in the order of Time the first that Tertullian has written against them yet it is so as to the Order of the Matters which it contains because it is designed against all Heresies in general whereas the others are only against some particular Heresie This Book is entituled Of Praescriptions or rather Of Praescription against the Hereticks because herein he shews that their Doctrine is not to be admitted by reason of its Novelty Before he enters upon the Matter he endeavours to obviate the Scandal of those who admire how there could be any Heresies in the World how they could have been so great and so powerful and how it comes to pass that so many considerable Persons in the Church have been seduced to embrace them by shewing that Heresies have been foretold that they are necessary Evils for the Tryal of our Faith and that we must not judge of Faith by Persons but of Persons by their Faith Ex personis probamus fidem an ex fide personas After having given this necessary Caution he lays down the first Principle of Prescription We are not allowed says he to introduce any thing that is new in Religion nor to chuse by our selves what another has invented We have the Apostles of our Lord for Founders who were not themselves the Inventors and Authors of what they have left us but they have faithfully taught the World the Doctrine which they received from Jesus Christ. Heresies have risen from Philosophy and humane Wisdom which is quite different from the Spirit of Christianity We are not allowed to entertain our Curiosity nor to enquire after any thing that is beyond what we have been taught by Jesus Christ and his Gospel Nobis curiositate opus non est post Christum Jesum nec inquisitione post Evangelium And when we have once believed we are to give credit to nothing any farther than as we have already believed And here it is that he Answers the Objection of the Hereticks who urged this Passage of Scripture Seek and you shall find by telling us that it is not permitted to seek when we have once found that it would be a Labour to no purpose to seek for Truth among all the Heresies and lastly that if it be permitted to seek it is after having admitted the Rule that is to say the principal Articles of Faith which are contained in the Creed But as the Hereticks did often alledge the Holy Scripture in Defence of themselves he proves that the Church was not obliged to enter into a Discussion of those Passages which they quoted that this way of confuting them is very tedious and difficult because they do not acknowledge all the Books of the Scriptures or else they corrupt them or put a false Interpretation upon them which renders the Victory that is to be obtained over them uncertain and difficult He says then that it is to better purpose to understand perfectly who it is that is in Possession of the Faith of Jesus Christ who those Persons are to whom the Scriptures were committed in Trust and who are the first Authors who have given an Account of our Religion He goes back even to Jesus Christ who is the Source and Original of this Religion and to the Apostles who received it from him He shews that it is impossible that the Apostles should preach any other Doctrine than that of Jesus Christ and that all the Apostolical Churches should embrace any other Faith than that which the Apostles had delivered to them from whence he concludes that it must of necessity follow that that Doctrine which is Conformable to that which is found to be the Faith of all the Churches must be that which was taught by Jesus Christ and that on the contrary that that which is opposite thereto must be a Novel Doctrine He farther confounds the Hereticks by the Novelty of their Opinions It is evident says he that the most ancient Doctrine is that of Jesus Christ and by consequence that alone is true and that that on the contrary which had not any Date till after his Ascension must be false and supposititious Having laid down this infallible Rule he proves the Doctrine of the Hereticks to be of a later Date than that of the Church because the Authors of the Heresies were after the Establishment of the Church from which they have separated themselves That the several Sects of the Hereticks cannot reckon their Original from the time of the Apostles nor shew a Succession of Bishops from their Times as the Apostolical Churches can with whom they do not communicate That though they could pretend to such a Succession yet the Novelty of their Doctrine condemned by the Apostles and the Apostolical Churches would convince them of being Cheats and Impostors and that what they have added taken away or changed in the Books of the Holy Scripture does farther discover that they invented their Doctrine after these Books were composed That lastly their Discipline and Conduct which is absolutely Humane and Earthly without Order and without Rule renders them every way contemptible I have exactly set down the Reasonings of Tertullian in this Work because as he himself observes they are not ânly proper to confute the Heresies that were in his Time but also to disprove all those that sprang âp afterwards or that should arise hereafter even to the end of the Church I shall not enlarge so much upon the Works which were written against those Heresies which âre now extinct The most considerable is that which he composed against Marcion which is disided into Five Books This Heretick maintained that there were two Principles or two Gods the âe Good and the other Evil The one Perfect and the other Imperfect that this last is the God whom the Jews worship who created the World and delivered the Law to Moses whereas the first ãâã the Father of Jesus Christ whom he sent to destroy the Works of the Evil One that is to say âe Law and the Prophets which Marcion rejected He affirmed likewise that Jesus Christ was not âloathed with true Flesh. And by consequence that he did not suffer really but only in appearance âhese are the Errors which Tertullian confutes in this Work In the First Book he shews that the unânown God of Marcion is only a Fantastical and Imaginary Being In the Second he proves that ââ¦at God the Creator of the World whom the Jews worshipped is the Only true God and the Auââor of all Good After having demonstrated this
read it For he therein affirms That we ought to address our Prayers only to God the Father and not to Jesus Christ because the Son of God being different from the Father 't is absurd to direct our Prayers to him This expression is very harsh and difficult to excuse yet we may say That he would have us address our Prayers to the Father alone for fear we might seem to acknowledge several Gods and that when he says That Jesus Christ is an Essence different from the Father he takes the term Essence for Persân And indeed he owns in several other places and principally in the fifth and eighth Book against Celsus That we may and ought to direct our Prayers to Jesus Christ. Be the thing as it will it cannot be denied but that he has asserted in this place several Propositions favourable to the Opinion of the Arians on which it is difficult to put a good Construction There is nothing more for me to do to compleat all that relates to Origen than to give an Account of the Quarrels and Disputes which arose in the Church after his Death upon the Acâount of his Person and his Writings But this not being a Subject which any ways relates to the Design which I have proposed in this Work I do not think it necessary to engage my self in this Relation which otherwise would be but of very little use AMBROSE and TRYPHON Disciples of ORIGEN AMBROSE would not have deserved to be reckoned amongst the Ecclesiastical Authors had he not been Origen's Friend and contributed very much to the Publishing of his Works Ambrose and Tryphon both by furnishing him with Amanuenses and by continually pressing him to his Work He had been a Marcionite and though he was converted yet he retained some of his Errors iâ we believe St. Hierom. However he was ordained Deacon and generously confessed the Faith of Jesus Christ with Theoctistus the Priest in the time of the Emperor Maximus He was a Person of Quality and wanted not Parts which he shewed in some of his Letters to Origen that were extant in St. Hierom's time but now are all lost He died before Origen and S. Hierom says that he was blamed because though he died Rich yet he left nothing to his Friend who was Poor Tryphon who was likewise Origen's Disciple and who had written some Letters to him was looked upon in St. Hierom's time as a Man very well versed in the Learning of the Sacred Scripture which still appears says this Father by several Works which he had composed but more particularly by a Treatise concerning the Red Heifer in the 19th Chapter of Numbers and upon the Division of the Sacrifices made by Abraham in the 15th Chapter of Genesss From whence it appears that Origen's Disciples following their Masters Genius applied themselves wholly to Allegories It is most probable that Tryphon's Commentaries are in imitation of his Master Origen's Allegoâical yet it is only probable at least for any thing that M. Du Pin has to say against it and when things are lost to determine concerning them positively is only beating the Air and though we our selves know how little weighâ can be laid upon our words beyond conjecture yet it may lead others into mistakes who think we can prove what we say though we do not BERYLLUS BERYLLUS Bishop of Bostra in Arabia after he had been as we have said undeceived of his Beryllus Error by the Conference which he had had with Origen wrote several small Treatises and particularly some Letters wherein he returned Origen Thanks for his Conversion The Conference which Origen had with him upon the occasion of his Error was Extant in Saint Hierom's time but at present we have nothing of his remaining Saint CYPRIAN SAaint Cyprian a Saint Cyprian His own Name was Thascius as appears by the Letter to Pipin and the Acts of his Passion was by Birth an African and taught Rhetorick with great Reputation b Before he turned Christian. This is all we are able to say of what concerned him before his Conversion because Pontius the Deacon in his Life and St. Jerome in his Catalogue tells us no more of him What Baronius has cited taken out of the Oration of St. Gregory Nazianzen concerning one St. Cyprian a Martyr does not belong to our Bishop of Carthâge 'T is commonly believed that St. Gregory speaks of another St. Cyprian but 't is a great deal more probable that the Greeks who knew but little of what passed in the West feigned these Circumstances in the Life of St. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage as it was a familiar thing with them to adorn and set off the Lives of Saints with several uncertain and fabulous Narrations before he was a Christian. c He was Converted His Conversion might happen towards the Year 246. Having been Baptized at Easter or at Whitsontide he writ his Letter to Donatus in Autumn He tells us in his 59th Letter to Cornelius which was written in the Year 252 that it was four years since he had been made a Bishop Thus he was Bishop 10 years He calls Donatus his Predecessor He was converted by the Perswasion of a Priest called Cecilius St Cyprian from whom he took afterwards his Sirname From the time that he was a Catechumen he made a resolution within himself to live continently believing as his Deacon Pontius tells us who has written his Life that it was almost impossible otherwise to come to the Knowledge of the Truth Presently after he was Baptized he sold all his Goods to assist the Poor He was afterwards ordained Priest and after the Death of Donatus Bishop of Carthage he was elected Bishop in his Place in the Year 248 d The Year 248. The Persecution under Decius began at the end of the Year 249 or else at the beginning of the Year 250. by the Suffrages of the Clergy and the People of Carthage and the Choice was confirmed by a great Number of Bishops who were then assembled in that City The Persecution of Decius beginning two Years or thereabouts after his Ordination the Heathens being enraged because he encouraged his People to stand firm to the Religion of Jesus Christ demanded him several times in a full Theatre to expose him to the Wild Beasts And this obliged him to retire from Carthage according to the Command which he believed he had received from God in a Vision In this Retreat he wrote several Letters to his People his Clergy the Confessors and the Clergy of Rome of which we may see a Catalogue with an Account of their Subjects in the Sequel of this History When the Fury of the Persecution abated St. Cyprian came back to Carthage and called a Council there the 15th of May in the Year 251 wherein he with the Bishops his Colleagues regulated whatever related to the Penance of those who had fallen in the time of Persecution either by taking Tickets or
wrote to Stephen about it to exhort him to embrace this Discipline But he was so far from submitting to the Reason of the Africans whether because he imagined they had a Design to condemn the Roman Church or because he thought this Question was of too great Consequence that he was enraged against St. Cyprian and his Colleagues and used their Deputies ill Nay he prohibited all Christians belonging to his Church to receive or lodge them depriving them not only of Ecclesiastical Communion but also refusing them the common Civilities of Hospitality The Letter he writ back was full of Injuries and Invectives and his Decision was comprised in these Terms If any one comes to you of whatsever Heresie he is let there not be made the least Alteration in what has been regulated by Tradition but only impose Hands upon him and so receive him This Letter being brought into Africk St. Cyprian moved at the Proceedings of Stephen sent his Letter with a Refutation of it not only to Pompey of Africk but al 's to Fermilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia who were all of the same Opinion with St. Cyprian touching the Baptism of Hereticks Firmilian having received it writ a long Letter wherein he amply refutes the Opinion and Letter of Stephen and establishes the Discipline which St. Cyprian defended saying It had been observed in his Country by an immemorial Custom and confirmed in two numerous Synods held at Iconium and Synnada As soon as St. Cyprian had received this Letter he assembled a Synod at Carthage in which the Letter he had writ to Jubaianus upon this Question was openly read and all the Bishops gave their Suffrages in favour of St. Cyprian's Opinion Thus I have delivered in a few Words the History of this famous Quarrel between two great Bishops both of whom the Church still reverences as Saints However If I may be allowed to make some Reflections upon their Opinions and Conduct I shall not scruple to observe after St. Austin that St. Cyprian shewed a great deal more Moderation in this Dispute and that we can by no means excuse that Heat and Passion which so far transported Stephen For though the first maintained his Opinion vigorously yet he did it with abundance of Candor and always declared he would leave other Bishops the Liberty to do as they judged convenient and openly professed he would separate himself from the Communion of no body upon the score of this Controversie Neminem separantes said he often aut a Communione submoventes Whereas on the other hand Pope Stephen not only asserted his Opinion with a world of Heat and Rigour but also treated those Bishops unworthily who followed a Practice different from his own calling them false Christians false Apostles and Seducers and refusing their Deputies not only the Communion of the Church but even Lodging and Hospitality As for what respects the Merits of the Cause though 't is commonly believed that the Pope had the Truth on his Side yet there is sufficient reason to doubt whether he did not in the heat of his Opposition to St. Cyprian carry things too far on the other side and whether the Opinion of St Austin which the Church has since embraced That we ought to receive those Persons without Baptism who have been baptized by Hereticks in the Name of the Trinity and to re-baptize those who have not been baptized according to that Form Whether this Opinion I say does not steer the middle Course between Stephen's f Between that of Stephen who seems to have maintained What induces us to believe that Stephen was of this Opinion is in the first place because he make no distinction at all but says plainly à quacunque Heresi Secondly Because St. Cyprian and Firmilian takes Stephen's Words in this sense now who can imagine that they would have engaged themselves in a Dispute without so much as knowing the Opinion of their Adversary Thirdly There were scarce any Hereticks before Stephen who Baptized in the Name of the Trinity so that it had been only a Chimerical Question about a thing which had never been practised to dispute whether it were necessary to Re-baptize those who had been Baptized in the Name of the Trinity by Hereticks since there were almost no Hereticks that used to Baptize after that manner Fourthly The ancient Author of a small Book written against the Opinion of St. Cyprian makes mo mention of this Distinction of Hereticks but generally approves all Baptism whatever given in the Name of Jesus Christ. Fifthly St. Augustin never cites Stephen's Decree for his Opinion on the other hand he opposes the Opinion of Stephen and St. Cyprian and in his sixth Book de unico Bapt. c. 14. he tells us Stephen maintained that no body was to be Re-baptized in nullo iterandum Baptisma There are several other Reasons which I pass over in silence who seems to have maintained that all those who had been baptized by Hereticks should be received without Re-baptization which way soever they were baptized â quacumque heresi and St. Cyprian's who asserted that all such ought to be re-baptized Be it as it will 't is certain g St. Cyprian never altered his Opinion There is not the least probability that St. Cyprian altered his Opinion In the time of the Council of Arles the Africans still continued this Practice and in Optatus's time they distinguished between Hereticks and Schismaticks receiving the latter without Baptism but Re-baptizing the former that St. Cyprian never altered his Opinion that the Greek Churches were for a long time after him h Divided upon this Question Denis of Alexandria in Eusebius testifies that the Eastern Churches were divided upon this Question St. Athanasius rejects the Baptism of Hereticks St. Basil in two Canons of his Letter to Amphilochius examines the different Customs of several Churches about this Question and inclines to the Party of those who reject the Baptism of Hereticks as invalid divided upon this Question that the Council of Arles i First decided it in the West The Council of Arles 1. c. 8. De Afris qui propriâ lege utuntur ut Re-baptizent first decided it in the West that it is not unprobable that this was the Council which St. Austin k Calls the full Council This Question has been discussed with mighty Heat in our time though it be but of small importance It is certain that the Council of Arles has decided it agreeably to the Opinion of St. Austin and that the Africans gave the Name of a full Council to Councils consisting of more than one Province as was that of Arles However it is the Council of Nice has not decided this Question but only ordained that the Paulianists should be Re-baptized Now it is not certain whether they Baptized in the Name of the Trinity or no And St. Athanasius himself seems to affirm the contrary besides that though they had not Baptized in the
Advices of our Brethren when-ever they are useful and agreeable to Truth Some time after this St. Cyprian assembled at Carthage a Council of Seventy one Bishops as well of the Province of Africk as Numidia who confirmed all that had been determined by the preceding Synod concerning the Baptism of Hereticks and decreed that all Priests and Deacons who were ordained amongst them or who after having been some time of their Party returned to the Church should be received only in the Quality of Laicks And after this to maintain that Honour and Friendship which Bishops owed to one another they acquainted Pope Stephen with these Constitutions by a Synodical Letter which is the Seventy second amongst those of St. Cyprian in Pamelius's Order and towards the end of it represented to him that since the things they had ordained were conformable to the Christian Religion and to Truth they hoped he would make no difficulty to approve them That nevertheless they knew there were some Bishops in the World who could be hardly perswaded to change their Opinions and yet though they kept up their own particular Customs would never break the Laws of Peace and Charity That after the same manner they would not pretend to prescribe Laws or constrain any Persons since they were satisfied that every Bishop was free to behave himself as he saw expedient in the Administration of his own Church for which he was accountable to God alone About the same time likewise St. Cyprian immediately after this Council writ a long Letter to Jubaianus a Bishop who had also consulted him about this Question wherein he urges abundance of Reasons and Texts of Scripture to support his own Opinion and after he has answered the Objections that were brought against it concludes with this new Protestation that he had not the least Design to impose Laws upon any of his Colleagues or to fall out with them upon this Occasion but inviolably to preserve Faith and Charity the Dignity of the Priesthood and Concord with his Brethren Stephen having answered St. Cyprian very roughly Pompey Bishop of Sabra a Maritime City of Africk desired him to let him know what Stephen had writ to him So he sent him a Copy of the Letter with another of his own wherein he bestows a particular Answer upon the Pope's Letter which is the Seventy third as Pamelius has placed them In it he principally opposes the Truth of the Gospel and the first Traditions of the Apostles both to the Custom and Tradition which Pope Stephen had alledged for himself He sent likewise by Rogatianus the Deacon another Copy of Stephen's Letter to Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia and to the other Bishops giving them an Account of what had been determined in Africk upon this Question and desiring them to acquaint him with the Opinion of their respective Churches He could not have expected a more favourable Answer than what he received from Firmilian for that Bishop openly condemns and that in Terms severe enough the Procedure of Stephen extols St. Cyprian's Conduct declares himself entirely in favour of the last proves it by several Reasons and assures him it was the ancient Custom of the Asiatick Churches and that it had been regulated many years before in two numerous Synods held at Synnada and Iconium This Letter of Firmilian which is the Seventy fourth amongst those of St. Cyprian x It was written in the Autumn in the Year 256. We are told in this Letter that it was written about Twenty two years after the Empire of Alexander who died in the year 235 and that it was composed in haste because Rogatianus was obliged to return by reason of the approaching Winter It could not be written in 257 because St. Cyprian was banished at the end of that Year was written in Autumn in the Year 256. Before this Letter came to St. Cyprian's hands he writ to Magnus who had asked his Opinion about the Baptism of the Nâvatians whether these Hereticks were to be excepted out of the Number of those who were to be re-baptized since they owned the same Faith as the Catholicks did in relation to the Trinity and Baptized after the same manner He answers him I say y In the 75th Letter The English Annalist thinks that this is the first Letter which was written concerning the Question of Baptism because it does not plainly and openly make mention of the Synods that were held in Africk upon that Occasion It appears more probable to me that it was written afterwards because it supposes the general Question to be decided and the Author clearly speaks of some of his Colleagues that received the Baptism of Hereticks He says he knew no reason why Christians should take the Part if he might so say of Antichrists which induces me to believe that it was written after his Qârrel with Stephen besides it is more natural to imagine that this Question which regards the Excâption of the general Rule was made after the Decision For Magnus proposes it to him as a new difficulty You demand of me says he whether those that come from Novatian ' s Party are to be baptized as well as other Hereticks in the Seventy fifth Letter that they ought to be re-baptized as well as the rest forasmuch as there was no true Baptism out of the Church In this Letter he answers another Question proposed to him by Magnus concerning the Baptism of Clinicks that is to say of those that were Baptized in their Sickness that there was no reason to doubt of the Validity of this Baptism That the Sacrament was equally efficacious whether the Person was plunged in the Water or had it sprinkled upon him He concludes with repeating his usual Protestation that he would give Laws to none but leave them an entire Liberty of doing what they thought convenient and that every one must give an Account of his Conduct to GOD alone Thus we have given an exact Account of all the Letters extant in St. Cyprian's Works that treat of the Baptism of Hereticks To these we ought to add the Acts of the last Council of Carthage consisting of Eighty seven Bishops who assembled there the same Year in the Month of September In the first place the Letters of Jubaianus to St. Cyprian and those of St. Cyprian to that Bishop were read in the Council After that St. Cyprian proposed to all the Bishops that were present to deliver their Opinions freely but yet so as not to condemn or excommunicate those that were of a different Judgment For none of us says he ought to make himself a Bishop of Bishops or pretend to awe his Brethren by a Tyranical Fear because every Bishop is at liberty to do as he pleases and can no more be judged by another than he can judge others himself But all of us ought to wait and tarry for the Judgment of Jesus Christ who alone has Authority to set us over the Church and to
divided into Four Canons in the First of which he discourses about the Fast which the Ancient Christians observed before Easter and tells us That some Christians fasted Six days before Easter others Two others Three after an extraordinary manner That we ought not to break our Fast before Midnight and that those that were able to hold on till Easter-morning were more generous That there were some Persons who though they did not fast at all nay had spent the Four first days of the last Week in sumptuous and delicate Entertainments yet imagined they did Wonderful things in fasting only two days But that they were not to be compared with those that fasted several In the second Canon he says That Women ought not to enter into the Church or receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ while they have their Courses but to offer their Prayes to God at Home since none by right ought to enter the Sanctum Sanctorum that is not pure in Body and Spirit In the Third he particularly Counsels those that are superannuated to abstain from the use of Marriage that they may the better attend their Devotions In the Fourth he leaves those Persons that have had an Illusion in the Night-time at liberty to receive or forbear the Eucharist following the Dictates and Motions of their own Conscience Anastasius of Nice in his 23d Question upon Genesis cites a Passage drawn out of a Book of Dionysius of Alexandria against Origen but there is no ground to believe that it was written by our Dionysius who was so far from being his Adversary that he was both his Disciple and Defender He died in the Year 264 after he had held the See of Alexandria Seventeen years and had one Maximus for his Successor The Style of this Author is Pompous and Lofty he is excellent in his Descriptions and Exhortations in his Polemical Discourses he falls upon his Adversaries with all the Vigour imaginable he perfectly well understood the Opinion the Discipline and Precepts of the Church he had sound piercing Judgment he was very moderate very discreet and ready to take Advice In short the Loss of his Works is one of the most considerable Losses we could have sustain'd in this kind THEOGNOSTUS THEOGNOSTUS of Alexandria is an Author unknown to Eusebius and St. Jerome whom St. Athanasius cites with Commendation and whose Books were extant in Photius's time who read them over We don't precisely know the time when he liv'd though we cannot doubt but he was some time after Origen and long before the Council of Nice Photius informs us That he composed Seven Books Entituled Hypotyposes that is to say Instructions and he gives us this Account of that Work In the first Book he treats of the Father and endeavours to shew That he is the Creator of all things against the Opinion of those that suppose Matter to be Eternal In the Second Book he advances some Arguments whereby he pretends it necessarily follows that the Father had a Son but speaking of this Son he says That he is a Creature above all Creatures that have Reason He likewise attributes to the Son of God several other Qualities of the like Nature as Origen has done Whether he was of the same Opinion or whether he speaks after that manner rather by way of Disputation than a Design to propose his own true Doctrine or in short whether he was somewhat mistaken in the Truth and that to accommodate himself to the weakness of his Auditors who having no Knowledge of the true Religion were not capable of comprehending a perfect Instruction he supposed it most expedient to give them an imperfect Knowledge of the Son of God than not to speak of him at all But though a Man may follow this Method in a Dispute or in a Discourse when he is constrained to say the same things often that are not altogether conformable to his own Opinion of the matter yet 't is a Weakness to make use of this Pretence to excuse those Errours that are published in any Book where we are obliged to speak the Truth to all the World In the Third Book speaking of the Holy Ghost he brings some Arguments to prove that there is an Holy Ghost but in the rest he falls into the same Extravagancies with those of Origen in his Book of Principles In the Fourth Book he talks erroneously about Angels and Daemons and assigns small Bodies to them In the Fifth and Sixth he treats of the Incarnation and uses all his Endeavours to demonstrate after this manner That it was possible for God to make himself Man This Book likewise is full of several groundless Fancies As for Example when he has a mind to prove that the Son of God is circumscribed in Place by our Imagination though in Truth he cannot be known there In the Seventh Book which he wrote concerning the Creation of God he discourseth of matters of Religion after a manner conformable to the Doctrine of the Church and especially of the Son of God of whom he treats in the Last Part. His Style is elevated and very ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã His Discourses have the Beauty of Old Athens but without Affectation so that in his Compositions he does not go very far from the ordinary manner of Conversation and yet he avoids saying mean things Thus I have shown you what Photius has informed us of this Author St. Athanasius calls him an Admirable Man Studious and Eloquent and is so far from accusing him for having any Unorthodox Sentiments about the Divinity of the Word that he cites him as a Witness of Consubstantiality Learn says he O Arians ye Rebels to Jesus Christ that the Eloquence of Theognostus has made use of the Word Substance for behold after what manner he discourseth in his Second Book of Instructions The Substance of the Son is not a strange Substance he was not produced of nothing but was begotten of the Substance of the Father as the Raye is of the Light or a Vapour of Water Theognostus for the Vapour is not Water not is the Ray Light but neither one nor the other is a Stranger to that which produces it Thus the Son is as it were the gentle running of the Substance of the Father yet so as that the Father suffers no Division For as the Sun is not diminished though it produces Rayes continually so likewise the Father is not diminished in begetting the Son who is his Image This Passage and the Authority of St. Athanasius ought to convince us that Photius has wrongfully accused Theognostus to have erred concerning the Divinity of the Son upon the score of a few Expressions that did not agree with those of his own Age without taking notice that though the Ancients have spoken differently as to this Point yet the Foundation of the Doctrine was always the same and that it is an horrid Injustice to require them to speak as nicely and with as much precaution
Philosophers believed the same things that are received by the Christians as for Instance The Immortality of the Soul the Resurrection of the Body and Hell Fire He takes occasion from thence to discourse of the Nature of Souls he pretends that they are of a middle quality between a Spirit and a Body that they are by Nature Mortal but that God of his Goodness immortalizes the Souls of those who repose their Considence in him He confutes Plato's Notions concerning the Soul's Immortality and it's Excellency Dignity Exile or Imprisonment in the Body He supposes that it is Corporeal and extraduce That Man is but very little different from the Beasts That his Soul is mortal by Nature but that it becomes immortal by the Grace of God Opinions unworthy of a Man that had been perfectly instructed in the true Religion What he at the same time observes that in the Matters of Religion we ought not to indulge a fond Curiosity not endeavour to penetrate into the Reasons of God Almighty's Conduct nor judge of it by our own Light is infinitely more worthy of a Christian Jesus Christ says he was God and I ought to tell you so though you are not willing to understand it yet he is God and speaks unto us from God He has commanded us not to perplex our selves with unprofitable Questions let us therefore leave the Knowledge of these things to God and not amuse our selves in a vain pursuit after them And yet he does not forget to answer those Questions that were ordinarily proposed by the Pagans concerning Jesus Christ. Now they often demanded the reason why our Blessed Saviour since his Coming was so absolutely necessary for the Saving of Souls from Death would suffer so long an Interval of time to pass before he came to deliver them Arnobius replies Is it possible for Man to know after what manner God dealt with the Ancients Who has told you that he never relieved them any other way Do you know how long it is since Men have been upon the Earth or in what place the Souls of the Ancients are reserved Who has informed you that Jesus Christ did not deliver them by his coming Forbear then to torment your selves about these things and meddle not with those Questions which 't is impossible for Humane Reason to resolve Be perswaded that God has shown Mercy to them Jesus Christ perhaps had taught you how and when and after what manner it was done if it would not have afforded matter to your Pride But wherefore continued the Pagans did not Jesus Christ deliver all Mankind He invites he calls upon all the World says Arnobius he rejects no body he readily receives those that come to him he only requires that Men would desire and wish for him but he constrains and forces no Man for otherwise it would be Violence and not Grace But are none but Christians delivered from Death No assuredly for Jesus Christ alone has Power to effect it But say the Pagans this is a new upstart Religion and why should we quit that of our Ancestors for it Why not reply'd Arnobius provided it is better Did we never change our Ancient Customs Did we never alter our old Laws Is there any thing in the World which had not a beginning at first Ought we to esteem a Religion for the Antiquity of it or rather for the sake of the Divinity which we honour Within less than Two Thousand Years none of the Gods that are now worshipped by the Pagans were in being whereas God and his true Religion has been from all Ages Jesus Christ had his Reasons why he appeared when he did though they are unknown to us But why does he suffer those that worship him to be Persecuted And why replies Arnobius do your Gods suffer you to be afflicted with Wars with Pestilence and Famine c. As for us 't is not to be admired that we suffer in this Life for nothing is promised to us in this World On the contrary all the Evils and Calamities which we suffer here make way only for our Deliverance In the Three following Books Arnobius falls upon the Pagan Religion and shows that the Christians had very great reason to reject a way of Worship so very foolish Extravagant and Impious In his Sixth and Seventh Books he demonstrates that the Christians did very wisely not to Build Temples or trouble themselves with the Pageantry of Statues Images and Sacrifices and that it is a ridiculous piece of Folly to imagine that God dwells in Temples that the Images are Gods or that the Divinities are contained in them Or lastly That we honour the true God when we Sacrifice Beasts burn Incense or pour out Wine in Adoration of him Thus we have considered the Subject of the Seven Books of Arnobius that are written in a manner worthy of a Professor of Rhetorick The turn of his Thoughts very much resembles that of an Orator but his Style is a little African that is to say his Words harsh ill-placed unpolisht and sometimes scarce Latin and 't is likewise evident that he was not perfectly acquainted with the Mysteries of our Religion He attaques Paganism with a greater share of Skill and Vigour than he defends Christianity and discovers the Folly of That better than he proves the Truth of This. But we ought not to be surprized at it for 't is the ordinary Fate of all new Converts who being as yet full of their former Religion know the weakness and blind-side of it better than they understand the Proofs and Excellencies of that Perswasion which they have newly embraced I will say nothing concerning the Latin Commentary upon the Psalms that carries the Name of Arnobius because it is a certain truth in which all the Learned World agrees that this Arnobius is a different Person from him of whom we have been speaking that he is of a later Date and lived after the Council of Chalcedon since he mentions the Pelagians and Predestinarians The Books of the Senior Arnobius were first published by Faustus Sabaeus and Printed at Rome by Theodorus Priscianensis in the Year 1542. out of a Manuscript belonging to the Vatican Library but with abundance of Faults that were to be found in that Manuscript Galenius who afterwards set out another Edition of them at Basil in 1546. and 1560. by Frobenius took the liberty to Correct them upon his own bare Conjecture and to insert his own Emendations into the Text. Thomasinus printed them at Paris 1570. Canterus Corrected the Edition of Gelenius and was the first Man that wrote Annotations upon Arnobius His Edition was Printed by Plantin at Antwerp 1582. in Octavo Elmenhorstius published a larger Comment upon him and reviewed his Seven Books out of an ancient Manuscript They are likewise Printed with Heraldus's Notes in the Year 1583 and 1603 at Paris 1605 and at Hamburgh 1610 Stewechius a Learned Man took pains also with the same Author and Printed him at Doway
the Council to weep cannot be St. Athanasius's since the History which is there related happen'd not as is pretended till the Year 765 and moreover it is full of Fables and unworthy of St. Athanasius The Fragment upon the Incarnation against the Disciples of Paulus Samosatenus is done by an ancient Author but we have it not in Greek and there is no proof that it was St. Athanasius's The other Fragment of the Sabbath is an Extract from part of the Homily upon the same Subject which is in Greek Vol. I. of St. Athanasius's Works The Seven Homilies publish'd by Holstenius have nothing of the Stile of St. Athanasius but are written by some late Greek Declaimer There is nothing in them that is useful or sublime and they come not near the Noble Simplicity of St. Athanasius's Writings as those who have any relish of such things are all agreed The Four other Discourses publish'd by Father Combefis tho' they are more useful than the former yet they are not St. Athanasius's The First rejects so expresly the Errors of Nestorius and Eutyches that 't is plain 't was compos'd after these Two Hereticks had publish'd their Doctrine The Two Last about Easter and Ascension are attributed in some Manuscripts to St. Basil of Seleucia and 't is probable that they are all Four written by him St. John Damascene or the Author of a Discourse upon the Dead cites a Discourse of St. Athanasius upon the same Subject but we have none that bears this Title and 't is probable that this which is cited by this Author is supposititious I say nothing of the Commentary upon the Psalms which in its First Edition bore the Name of St. Athanasius because now 't is certainly known that 't was written by Theophylact. When we consider the Works of St. Athanasius with respect to the Subject on which they treat they may be distinguish'd into four sorts The First are Historical and relate to the History of his own time the Second sort are purely Dogmatical the Third concern Morality and the Last are upon the Holy Scriptures His Apologies ought to be rank'd under the First Head The First Apology was written immediately after he was driven out of Alexandria and is address'd to the Emperour Constantius There he refutes the Calumnies which his Enemies had made use of to render him odious to Constantius And the better to insinuate himself into the Emperour's Favour he begins his Discourse with saying That he made his Defence with much assurance before an Emperour who had been long a Christian and whose Ancestors had embrac'd the true Religion That having made use of the Words of St. Paul for his own Defence he took him for his Intercessor with the Emperour to whom no doubt he would give a favourable Hearing Then he adds That 't was not necessary for him to purge himself from the Accusation relating to Ecclesiastical Matters which his Enemies had formerly fram'd against him since as to them he was sufficiently justified by the Testimony of an infinite Number of Bishops and by the Retraction of Ursacius and Valens who had acknowledg'd that all those Accusations were pure Calumnies invented by them to destroy him and that tho' these things were not so yet he ought not to have any regard to an Information made in his absence by his Enemies which should be of no weight according to all Laws both Divine and Humane And therefore without insisting upon those former Accusations in this Apology he refutes those which were made use of since his Return to blacken his Reputation with the Emperour First of all he is accus'd of having spoken ill of this Emperour to his Brother Constans But he takes God to Witness that he never did it and says That it had been a madness in him to have attempted so bold a thing That Constans would never have suffer'd it That he had not so great an Interest in him as to dare say any thing against his Brother That he never spoke to him but in the presence of many Persons who were Witnesses of what he said But to prove the falseness of this Accusation beyond exception he makes a faithful Relation of all that pass'd in his Voyage to Italy wherein he says That he parted from Alexandria to put his Person and Reputation under the Protection of the Church of Rome That âe assisted at the Assemblies of the Faithful there That he wrote but twice to Constans while he staid at Alexandria The First time to defend himself against some Letters full of Calumnies which his Enemies had wrote to him And the Second time to send him some Copies of the Holy Scriptures and that he never went to wait on him but twice and both times by his own Order At Last he says That the Emperour may judge by the manner of his speaking of his greatest Enemies whether he was capable of speaking ill of him to his own Brother The Second Accusation was no less heinous for they accus'd him of having written a Letter to the Tyrant Magnentius and they said That they had the Original of his Letter To which St. Athanasius answers That this Accusation had no appearance of Truth That he had never seen nor known Magnentius That he never had occasion to write to him That he had all the reason in the World to detest him and to hold no Correspondence with him That the first Calumny destroy'd this since 't was incredible that one who was so much for the Interest of Constans should be of this Tyrant's Faction who had revolted from him and cruelly kill'd him And as to their pretending to have this Letter he says 'T was not to be wondred at that they had found out an Impostor since 't was very well known that they had counterfeited the Emperour's Letters But he prays Constantius to enquire from whence they had this Letter and who gave it them and to Summon before him the Secretaries of Magnentius and inform himself if they had ever receiv'd it He conjures him to examin this Cause as if Truth it self were present at his Decision for says he If they had accus'd me before any other Judge I might have appeal'd to the Emperour but being accus'd before the Emperour to whom can I appeal but to the Father of him who is call'd the Truth that is to God Then he addresses to him in a lively and elegant Prayer That he might enlighten the mind of the Emperour to judge in a Cause which concern'd the whole Church The third Accusation is concerning his Celebration of the Holy Mysteries in the Great Church before it was Consecrated To which he answers That he did not Celebrate the Dedication of this Church which he could not do without the Order of the Emperour but he confesses that he did Celebrate there the Divine Mysteries before its Consecration He excuses himself upon the account of the great Concourse of People that came to Alexandria on Easter-Day and says
Commentaries and that he added many things of his own as the same St. Jerom has also observ'd We have his Commentaries upon St. Matthew we have also more of his Commentaries upon the Psalms than St. Jerem had seen for this Father mentions only the Commentaries upon the 1st and 2d Psalms upon the 51st and those that follow until the 62d and upon the 118th and those that follow unto the last and we have besides thâse Commentaries the Commentaries upon the 14th and 15th Psalms and upon the 63 64 65 66 67 68 Psalms which bear the Name of St. Hilary and are written in his Stile But we have none of his Commentaries upon Job which are cited by St. Jerom whereof St. Austin relates a Passage in his 2d Book against Julian to prove Original Sin There was also attributed to him in St. Jerom's Time a Commentary upon the Canticles but this Father says that he had never seen it St. Jerom mentions also a Collection of Hymns compos'd by St. Hilary a Book Entituled Mysteries and many Letters I place not the Letter and Hymn to his Daughter Apra in the Number of St. Hilary's Works because I doubt not but these piâces were the Work of him that wrote his Life which are not at all like this Father's way of Writing Some have attributed to him the Hymn Pange Lingua and that of St. John the Baptist Ut quâânt laxis but without any Ground The Books of the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son were Rhapsodies taken out of the Genuine Works of St. Hilary St. Jerom in his Apology to Pammachius speaks of a Book of St. Hilary address'd to Fortunatus which was concerning the Number Seven Some have confounded this Treatise with St. Cyprian's Books of Exhortation to Martyrdom being address'd to a Person of the same Name But that which St. Jerom attributes to St. Hilary must be different from those of St. Cyprian and therefore if there be no Mistake in this place of St. Jerom we must say that St. Hilary wrote a Treatise address'd to his Friend Fortunatus concerning the mysterious Significations of the Number Seven And this Work may very well be one of those Treatises of Mysteries which St. Jerom mentions in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers The Twelve Books of the Trinity compos'd by St. Hilary in Imitation of Quintilian's Books as St. Jerom has observ'd are an excellent Work which contains the Explication and the Proofs of this Mystery He has there establish'd the Faith of the Church in a demonstrative Manner he has clearly detected the Errors of the Hereticks refuted them solidly and answered all their Objections So that this is the largest and most methodical Work of any that we have in all Antiquity upon this Subject The First Book is a Preface to the Whole wherein he describes very pleasantly after what manner a Man arrives at Happiness and the Knowledge of the Truth and then gives an Account of the Subject of the Eleven following Books He begins with observing that Happiness does not consist in Abundance nor in Repose as common People imagine nor yet in the bare Knowledge of the First Principles of Good and Evil as many wise Men among the Pagans thought but in the Knowledge of the true God He adds that Man having an ardent Desire after this Knowledge meets with some Persons that give him low and mean Idea's unworthy of the Divinity Some would persuade him that there are many Gods of different Sexes Others take the Representations of Men of Beasts and Birds for Divinities Others acknowledge no God at all and some in short confess That there is a God but deny that he has any Knowledge or takes any Care of things here below But the Reason of a Man discovers these Notions to be false and so by the Light of Nature he comes to know That there can be but one God Almighty Eternal and Infinite who is in all places who Knows all things and Orders all things and afterwards by reading the Books of Mosââ and the Prophets where he found these Truths explain'd he was fully convinc'd of them and studied with the greatest Application of mind to know this Sovereign Being who is the Fountain of all kind of Beauty and Perfection Neither did he stop here but upon further Enquiry he came to understand That 't was unworthy of God to suppose that Man to whom he had given so much Knowledge should be annihilated for ever for if this were true to what purpose would his Knowledge serve since Death would one Day deprive him of all Understanding But then as on the one side Reason discovers it to be fit that Man should be Immortal so on the other side the Sense of his present Weakness and the Apprehension of Death which he sees is unavoidable fill him with anxious Fears In this State he has recourse to the Gospel which perfects all the Knowledge he had before and resolves all the Doubts that yet remain with him There he learns That there is an Eternal Word the Son of God who was made Man and came into the World to communicate to it the Fulness of Grace and Truth This gives him hopes infinitely above all that he could have before for now he presently perceives the Excellency and Greatness of these Gifts by understanding That since the Son of God was made Man nothing can hinder but Men may become the Sons of God and so when a Man joyfully receives this Doctrine he perfects the Knowledge he had of the Divinity by the Knowledge of the Humanity of Jesus Christ. He renews his Spirit by Faith He acknowledges the Providence of one God over him and begins to be fully persuaded that he who created him will not annihilate him In short he understands That Faith is the only infallible means of coming to the Knowledge of the Truth That it rejects unprofitable Questions and resolves the captious Difficulties of humane Philosophy That it judges not of the Conduct of God according to the Thoughts of Men nor of that of Jesus Christ according to the Maxims of this World That 't was by this Faith whereof the Law was only a Shadow and Type that Jesus Christ having rais'd our Minds to that which is most Sublime and Divine prescrib'd to us instead of the Circumcision of the Flesh the Circumcision of the Spirit which consists in the Reformation of our Lives and the Renovation of our Hearts That as we die to Sin in Baptism that we may live a Spiritual and Immortal Life so Jesus Christ died for us that we might rise again together with him and so the Death of him who is Immortal procur'd Immortality to us Mortals Now when once the Soul is fully possess'd with these Thoughts she rests satisfied with this Hope without fearing Death or being wearied of Life For she considers Death as the beginning of Eternal Life and looks upon this present Life as the means of obtaining a happy Immortality
Hilary confirms this Answer by many places of Scripture where Jesus Christ gives himself the Title of Good and of Master from whence it appears that the Title was not here refus'd upon its own Account Upon this occasion he Answers the Objection of the Arians who say That Jesus Christ call'd his Father the only God and shows that the Father is the only God because the Divinity of the Father is the same with that of the Son which Truth he proves by many Passages of Scripture The Second Passage objected by the Arians is taken out of the Gospel of St John Chap. 17. This is life Eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent from whence the Arians concluded That Jesus Christ was not âhe true God but one sent from the true God St. Hilary answers That this Passage does not exclude the Essential Unity of the Father and the Son since in this and other places Jesus Christ affirms That he came forth from God That he is with God That he had overcome the World That he should be honour'd as the Father That he had received the Power of giving Eternal Life That all things which are the Father's are his He adds That in the same Place Jesus Christ prays the Father to glorify him with the Glory that he had with him from all Eternity which evidently proves the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son Moreover the words alledg'd in the Objection prove nothing contrary to the Faith of the Church which acknowledges that the Father is the only true God though Jesus Christ is also God because the Father and the Son are not two Gods but one God only The Third Objection is taken from Ch. 5th of the same Gospel of St. John The Son can do nothing of himself he doth only what he seeth his Father do St. Hilary shows that this Passage establishes the Divinity of Jesus Christ and is very far from destroying it because it proves the Unity and Equality of the Father and the Son The Fourth Passage is the grand Objection of the Arians founded upon those words of Jesus Christ in St. John Chap. 14. My Father is greater than I. St. Hilary says That the Father is greater than the Son consider'd as Man and as Mediator The last Objection is taken from those words of Jesus Christ in St. Mark Chap. 13. No Man knoweth the Day of Judgment nor yet the Angels nor the Son but the Father only From whence the Arians concluded That the Knowledge of the Father being more extensive than that of the Son his Nature must be more excellent St. Hilary having in answer to this Objection proved by many Reasons that Jesus Christ could not be Ignorant of the Day of Judgment and having demonstrated this Truth he adds That what Christ says in this place that the Son knew not the Day of Judgment ought not to be understood literally as if he were really ignorant of it but in this sence that he did not know it not so as to tell it unto Men. Wherefore being ask'd about the same Matter after his Resurrection he does not say That he was ignorant of it but he reproves his Apostles with that heat which testified his Knowledge of it by saying unto them 'T is not for you to know the times and the seasons which my Father has reserv'd in his own Power He adds also that it may be said in another sence That the Son of Man was ignorant of the Day of Judgment because he knew it not as he was Man but as he was God For says he as we may say That the Son of God was subject to Fear to Sadness and to Sleep because the Humanity of Jesus Christ was subject to these Infirmities So we may say That he was ignorant of the Day of Judgment because he knew it not as he was Man but upon the account of his Divinity In the Tenth Book he Answers the Objections which the Arians draw from those Passages of Scripture which prove that Jesus Christ was subject to Fear to Sorrow and Pain And here he maintains That Jesus Christ had not truly any Fear or Pain but only the Representation of those Passions within him In which if his Judgment is not different from that of the Church yet it must be confess'd that the manner of expressing it is very harsh He had answer'd the Arians better if he had said That the Fear the Sorrow and Pain of Jesus Christ did belong to his Humane Nature and not to his Divinity He acknowledges in this Book That all Men are conceiv'd in Sin and that none but Jesus Christ ought to be excepted from this General Law He says That the Soul is not communicated to Children by the Parents He observes That what is said in the Gospel of St. Luke concerning the Bloody Sweat of Jesus Christ and of the Angel that appear'd unto him is not to be found in many Greek and Latin Copies of this Gospel In the Eleventh Book he Answers some Passages of the Gospels and of St. Paul concerning Jesus Christ's being risen from the Dead and becoming Glorious which are alledg'd by the Arians to prove that the Son is not equal to the Father But St. Hilary shows That those Passages do much rather prove the Divinity of Jesus Christ than destroy it In the last Book St. Hilary explains that Passage of the Proverbs God created me in the Beginning of his Ways c. He demonstrates that the Word of God was not properly created but begotten of God from all Eternity which he proves by many Passages of Scripture He expounds this Passage of the Proverbs of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. He adds some Proofs of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and Ends with a Prayer to God wherein he begs Grace to preserve in his Heart that Faith whereof he made Profession at his Baptism that he may always worship the Father and the Son and receive the Holy Spirit which proceeds from the Father by the Son His Book of Synods is Address'd to the Bishops of France and Britain He commends them for the Constancy which they had shown in refusing Communion to Saturninus and for the Zeal wherewith they maintain'd the Faith of the Church by condemning the Impieties of the Arians so sharply After this he sets himself to explain the Creeds made by the Eastern Bishops after the Council of Nice He declares That if there were any Error in some of those Creeds it ought not to be attributed to him since he only relates what others had said and if they were found agreeable to the Doctrine of the Apostles the Praise of it ought not to be given to him but to the Original Authors He leaves it to the Judgment of the Bishops to whom his Book is written whether they be Heretical or Catholick Then he intimates to them what Obligation lay upon him to instruct them in the Opinions of the
a Zeal that he might deserve to be accus'd of too violent a Passion if it were not otherwise certain that he was acted only from a principle of Love to the Truth * The best Excuse that can be made for St. Hilary is That Oppression may make a Wise Man mad and St. Athanasius needs it as much as he for in his Letter to all those that lead a Monastick Life he shews as great Marks of Rage and Anger against Constantius as St. Hilary does here and yet St. Gregory Nazianzen a Man that was never suspected of Arianism has said very great Things of that Prince when he set him against Julian the Apostate He begins with these Words which are all Sparks of Fire 'T is time to Speak since the time to be Silent is past we must wait upon Jesus Christ since Anti-Christ Governs Let the True Pastors cry aloud since the Hirelings are fled Let us die for the Sheep since the Thieves are entered and the Lion full of Rage goes about the Sheepfold After he has exhorted the Pastors in these Words and many others of the same Nature to Defend the Truths of the Gospel with Courage and Boldness He gives an Account of the Conduct which he had observ'd since his Banishment He says That he kept Silence in Modesty hoping that things would change for the better but there being now no further place for hope he found himself oblig'd to speak He declares That he wishes he had rather been in the time of Decius or Nero than in that wherein he liv'd That neither Tortures nor the Fire nor the Cross could have made him afraid but he would boldly have maintain'd the Combate against his declared Enemies and suffer'd with Constancy in this publick Persecution But now adds he we oppose a Persecutor that deceives us with false appearances an Enemy that puts on a Friendly Countenance to us Constantius the Anti-Christ who Persecutes the Church under a mask of designing its advancement He professes says he to be a Christian that he may deny Jesus Christ He procures Union to hinder Peace He stifles Heresies to ruine Christianity He honours the Bishops that he may make them lose the Title of the Ministers of Jesus Christ He builds up Churches that he may destroy the Faith Let him not imagine adds he that I Charge him falsly That I Reproach him The Ministers of Jesus Christ ought to speak the Truth If what I have propos'd be a Calumny I am willing to pass for an infamous Person but if it be true and publickly known I use the freedom of an Apostle in reproving it after a long Silence After this He Justifies his calling Constantius Anti-Christ by giving a horrible Representation of the Persecution that he raised He adds That it was neither through Indiscretion nor Rashness nor Anger that he spoke so of him but that his Reason his Constancy and his Faith oblig'd him to say these things Yes says he addressing himself to Constantius I tell you what I should have told Nero what Dioclesian and Maximian should have heard from my Mouth You fight against God You use Cruelties to the Church You Persecute the Saints You hate those that Preach Jesus Christ You utterly abolish Religion In a word You are a Tyrant I speak not with reference to the Things of this World but with reference to the Things of God This is what is common to you with the Pagan Emperours Let us now come to that which is peculiar to your self You feign your self to be a Christian and you are the Enemy of Jesus Christ You are become Anti-Christ and have begun his Work You intrude into the Office of procuring New Creeds to be made and you live like a Pagan You teach things Profane and are ignorant of Piety and Religion You give Bishopricks to those of your own Faction and take them away from the good Bishops that you may bestow them upon the Bad. You put the Bishops in Prison You keep your Armies in the Field to terrify the Church You assemble Councils to establish Impiety in them and you compel the Western Bishops to renounce the Faith that they may embrace Error You shut them up in a City to weaken them by Famine to kill them with the Rigor of the Winter and to corrupt them by your Dissimulation You foment the Dissentions of the East by your Artifices He adds also many other Accusations of the same Nature and to compleat all he says That the Church never suffer'd so much under Nero under Decius and Maximianus as it has done under Constantius who is more cruel than all those Tyrants because the former gave Martyrs to the Church who overcame Devils whereas Constantius makes an Infinite number of Prevaricators who cannot so much as comfort themselves by saying that they were overcome by the violence of their Torments I should never have done if I should relate all that St. Hilary says in this place of the Persecution of Constantius He charges him particularly with the Banishment of Paulinus and Liberius and the Troubles wherewith he exercis'd the Church of Tholouse and concludes with saying That all those things that he had accus'd him of were publick and certain and therefore he had Just Cause to call him Anti-Christ He shows afterwards the Impiety of those Bishops that Assisted at the Council of Seleucia who maintain'd that the Father was not like in Substance to the Son and condemn'd the Words Consubstantial and like in Substance He answers what Constantius alledges as the Reason of condemning these Terms That we must not make use of any but Scripture Expressions He answers I say That these Terms agree with the Doctrine of the Gospel That Constantius and those of his Party are also forc'd to make use of such Terms as are not to be found in Scripture and in short That the Scripture makes use of Terms more Emphatical since it establishes the Equality and Unity of the Father and the Son He blames Constantius for the variety and contrariety of those Creeds that were made after that of the Council of Nice He explains the Faith of the Church concerning the Majesty of God and proves by many Examples That we are not to wonder if the Eternal Generation of the Son is Incomprehensible This Book is also imperfect The Book of Fragments is a Collection of many Pieces taken out of two Books of St. Hilary and likewise of some Passages out of his other Works 'T is not known who is the Author of this Abridgment nor when he liv'd The Passages that are cited in it are certainly St. Hilary's and for the most part the Pieces that are collected in it are ancient but he does not observe any Order in this Collection He begins with a Fragment of St. Hilary's Preface wherein after he had spoken of the Excellency of Faith Hope and Charity he declares That he had undertaken to publish a Work of great Importance and vast
Galla Placidia Sister to the Emperour Honorius which discovers that they rather belong to Faustinus than Gregory of Baetica who was dead when Placidia had the Title of Empress PHAEBADIUS PHAEBADIUS a Phaebadius Sulpitius Severus calls him Fegadius in St. Jerom and the Greek Translator of his Book he is call'd Saebadius which is a Fault in the Latin and ought to be read Phaebadius as it is in the Manuscripts There is also by mistake in St. Ambrose Fygadius Bishop of Agen having seen the Second Creed of Sirmium compos'd in the Year 357 by Hosius and Potamius wrote immediately a Treatise against this Creed He Phaebadius assisted afterwards at the Council of Ariminum held in 359 wherein he defended until the End of the Council the Nicene Creed and refus'd to Sign that which was there propos'd Neither Fear nor Threatnings could change his Resolution but the Governor Taurus seeing that his Constancy was not to be overcome by these means us'd Entreaties and beseech'd him with Tears to take more moderate Courses that so he might release a great Number of Bishops who had been shut up for the space of seven Months in one City where they were distress'd by the Rigor of the Winter and the want of all things He remonstrated to him That if all the Bishops did not sign the Creed that was brought from the East there would be no hopes that they should ever have permission to return from thence In short That he must fix his Resolution and that he ought to follow the Example and Authority of many that had already sign'd Phaebadius answered That he was ready to go into Banishment and suffer all sorts of Punishment rather than do that which was desir'd of him and that he would never receive a Creed made by the Arians Some days pass'd in these Debates but at last seeing that there was no hopes left of obtaining Peace he departed from his Resolution after that Ursacius and Valens had declar'd That the Profession of Faith which they propos'd was Catholick and that those to whom it appear'd not sufficient might add to it what they thought fit This Proposition was favourably receiv'd by all the Western Bishops Phaebadius and Servatio Tungrensis drew up Declarations wherein they condemn'd Arius and his impious Doctrine acknowledging that the Son of God was without Beginning and that he was not a Creature But Ursacius and Valens added maliciously that he was not a Creature as others are and so deceiv'd the Bishops who sign'd with those Declarations the Creed compos'd at Nice by the Bishops of the East Phaebadius being upon his return to his own Country was one of those Bishops who were most troubled for their Fault and who aton'd for it by Declarations and Protestations against what they had done by Surprise He assisted at the Council of Valentia in 374. We have a Letter of St. Ambrose address'd to him and Delphinius Bishop of Bordeaux St. Jerom assures us in his Book of Illustrious Men That Phaebadius liv'd in his time and that he was then extremely old He adds That he also wrote some other Books besides that which we have already mention'd The Memory of this Saint is particularly honoured at Agen where he is commonly call'd St. Fiari We have still extant in the Bibliothecae Patrum a Treatise of this Bishop against the Second Creed of Sirmium which was first publish'd by Pithaeus in a Collection of Ancient French Ecclesiastical Authors printed by Nivelle in the Year 1589. This Treatise is a refutation of the Second Creed of Sirmium compos'd by Potamius Bishop of Lisbon and Sign'd by Hosius Bishop of Corduba In the Exordium he says That if the greater part of Christians had not been circumvented by the Artifices of the Devil who makes them take Heresy for Faith and condemn the Faith for Heresy he had not undertaken to say any thing of this Writing which was sent a little while ago into France That he could be content to continue Firm in his own Faith without medling with the Examination of other Men's But since says he we are reduc'd to this Condition that we must necessarily embrace Heresy that we may be call'd Catholicks or cease to be Catholicks by not rejecting Heresy we find our selves oblig'd to discover the Poyson of Heresy hid under the appearance of Religion and to lay open that Error which is wrapt up in such Terms as appear at first fight to be Innocent that so Falshood being discover'd the oppress'd Truth may at last take breath We must destroy the Opinions of Strangers that ours may be believ'd and so in refuting Error I shall prove at the same time the Truth of my Creed and demonstrate my self to be a Catholick to those that are not over-aw'd by Fear nor brib'd by Ambition After this he Examines the Second Creed of Sirmium discovers the Malignity of it and refutes by Testimonies of Scripture the Errors that it contains about the Trinity He speaks also occasionally of the Mystery of the Incarnation whilest he refutes a Letter of Potamius who had affirm'd That by the Incarnation of the Word God was render'd passible and that the Son of God and the Flesh of Man were become as it were a Third Person who was neither God nor Man He Disputes against this Opinion showing by Scripture That the Two Substances or the Two Natures continued without mixture in the Person of Jesus Christ That the Word did still preserve the Properties of the Divine Nature and the Humanity of the Humane Nature He is very angry afterwards that they suppress'd the word Substance which was order'd by the Creed that he examines The Bishops says he make an Edict whereby they decree That no Person shall speak of One Substance Alas What have you done O ye Holy Bishops Assembled at Nice from all parts of the World You have to no purpose Compos'd with admirable Circumspection a Creed which should be the Infallible Rule of Truth To what End was your Labour design'd What is the Fruit of your Care 'T is now forbidden to teach in the Church the only Thing which you commanded to be taught there for the Confounding of Error That is now condemn'd which you approv'd and that is now approv'd which you condemn'd Falshood is maintain'd and the Truth is oppos'd But in vain do they strive to do it for Truth shall never be destroy'd it shall remain eternally without Change and shall punish those that set themselves against it Let no Man say they make use of the Word Substance Ha What Evil what Crime is it to make use of this Word Wherein does it wound the Faith Is it the Sound Is it the Sence Afterwards he makes it appear That this Word is us'd in Scripture That the Sence of it is most Catholick and That 't is most proper to expound the Faith of the Church in such a manner as it may not be capable of any further Explication At the End
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
Sabellians At last he says That Corporeal and Temporal Goods are not good in themselves tho' they ought to be preferr'd to the Evils that are opposite to them But he averrs that God sends these Good Things according as he thinks fit for the Good of Men That there is such a Just Man to whom these Evils are necessary that he may be Just and there is another Just Man to whom God gives these temporal Good Things for a Recompence and there is such a Wicked Man to whom God denies them because they would harden him but there are other bad Men to whom he gives them in order to their Conversion In the 399 to the same Person he says That the Spirit of a Man is good of it self but it can apply it self to Good or Evil and to that which is indifferent That 't is given to it to know the Truth That God is this Truth which it ought to know And that he is to be known as far as an infinite Being can be known by a finite Mind This Letter is against the Error of Aetius who believed that the Essence of God might be perfectly known In the following Letter he proposes also one of the Sophisms of this Heretick who thus objected to the Catholicks Do you know whom you adore If you say that you know him What then is his Substance If you know him not How then do you adore him St. Basil answers That the Attributes and Operations of God may be known but we cannot comprehend his Essence nor his Nature That by Faith we believe his Existence which also may be known by his Power and its Effects and yet both Faith and Reason teach us that he is Incomprehensible In the 401 he solves also another Sophism of Aetius who ask'd Whether Knowledge were before Faith or Faith before Knowledge He answers That Knowledge is the Principle of Faith because the Existence of God is known by the Creatures and Faith follows this imperfect Knowledge as Adoration follows Faith He proves also that the Works of God and the Effects of his Power may be known but that we cannot perfectly know his Essence He explains many Significations of the Word Know. In the 408 Letter he speaks of the Relicks of the Martyrs as well as in 241. In the 410 he says That we ought to be content with the Faith which we made Profession of at our Baptism and to confine our selves to the Words that are taken out of the Holy Scripture for expressing it That we should shun all new Expressions because our Salvation does not depend upon the Words but the Orthodox Faith The 412 is against a Deacon nam'd Glycerius who had got into Orders to serve the Cure of a Church in Venesa together with a Priest This Deacon after he was Ordain'd had neglected his Ministry and had gathered together a multitude of Virgins to whom he had made himself Patriarch For St. Basil makes use of this very Term and says That he had taken upon him the Habit St. Basil adds That he did not this for Piety nor Devotion but to get Money That thus he had disturb'd the Church to which he belonged and despised the Parish Priest that Govern'd it That being reproved for this Disorder by the Parish-Priest and the Bishop he had fled with a Company of Virgins and Young Men himself being at the head of them That this happened when there was an Assembly of Bishops in the place and that he had abused the Parents who demanded their Daughters back again St. Basil prays him to whom he sent this Letter who had written to him in favour of this Deacon to perswade him to return to send back the Virgins or at least not to detain those by force who desired to return He promises also Pardon to Glycerius if he returned with a Letter from him to whom he wrote and a Resolution to behave himself more Modestly if not he declares him Suspended from his Function In the following Letter he still presses this Friend to procure the Return of Glycerius and the Young Women whom he had carried away with him and bids tell them That they needed fear nothing At last in the last Letter superscribed to this Glycerius he exhorts him to return and promises to Pardon his Fault upon their Account that had begg'd it for him and chiefly for the sake of his Parish-Priest who had interceded for him He declares That he should lose the Dignity of a Deacon if he absented himself any longer The 417 is written to a Judge upon a Robbery that was committed in his Church Some Garments of the Poor were taken away and the Robbers were discover'd by those that look'd after the Fabrick of the Church whereupon St. Basil condemned them to make Restitution Nevertheless they were accus'd before this Judge and St. Basil wrote to him That he had judg'd them and that the Cognizance and Punishment of any thing that happen'd in Churches belong'd to Bishops The 418 and 419 are written to a Receiver of the Taxes to pray him to relieve the Poor These are all the Letters of St. Basil which concern Religion The others are Letters of Civility of Recommendation or Consolation which have no respect to the Affairs of the Church of which I shall here give you a Catalogue The Letters of Civility of Complement and Congratulation c. are the 83 the 142 and those that follow to the 164 the 169 and so on to the 181 the 122 and so on to the 244 the 248 268 282 283 285 286 287 288 and 312 the 328 c. to 335 the 341 350 351 354 355 356 359 363 369 378 384 386 389 390 407 425 and 426 and the Three Letters of Libanius and St. Basil publish'd by Cotelerius Those of Recommendation or Request are the 11 84 215 c. to 220 221 232 236 237 247 248 267 333 352 353 357 360 365 366 367 373 374 375 376 377 380 381 415 416 420 421 422 423 424 427 428 and the Two publish'd by Cotelerius The Letters of Consolation are 186 188 189 201 202 347 362. I say nothing of the Letter to the Emperour Theodosius publish'd by Cotelerius because 't is evidently Supposititious All these Letters are written very pleasantly and they may be compared for their Stile and Wit to those of the most able Writers of Letters We have reserv'd the Letters of St. Basil to Amphilochius to be particularly treated of because they contain Decisions upon principal Points of Discipline which are not to be considered as the particular Opinions of St. Basil but as the Laws of the Church in his time And therefore they are not written in the form of particular Letters but after the manner of Synodal Decisions which are call'd Canons The 1st of these Canons is concerning the Validity or Invalidity of the Baptism of Hereticks St. Amphilochius had ask'd him particularly whether it was necessary to rebaptize those who had been baptiz'd
by the Novatians or the Montanists He answers him That as to the first of those Hereticks he should follow the Custom of the Churches where he lived because there were different Opinions upon that Subject As to the Baptism of the Montanists he believed that it could not be accounted Valid and he wonders that the great St. Denys of Alexandria who was so well-skilled in the Canons could be ignorant of this Truth To explain his Answer he distinguishes Three sorts of Persons that were divided from the Church The Hereticks who differed in Matters of Faith the Schismaticks who separated upon Points of Discipline and some of the disobedient Christians who withdrew from the Church He maintains That the Ancients were perswaded that the Baptism of Hereticks was absolutely void He adds That the Pepuzians were Hereticks and therefore their Baptism could not be Valid As for Schismaticks he observes That St. Cyprian and Firmilian subjected them to the same Law with Hereticks because being separated from the Church they had not the Holy Spirit and so could not give it He seems also to like this Opinion well enough And yet he adds That since the Bishops of Asia had thought it convenient to admit the Baptism of Schismaticks he would not hinder it But though the Encratites were Schismaticks he declares That their Baptism ought not to be approv'd and that those ought to be rebaptized to whom they had given Baptism because they gave it with Precipitation on purpose to hinder the receiving of it from the Church Nevertheless he confesses That if the contrary Custom were establish'd it ought to be follow'd and that the Decisions of the Ancients should be observ'd In short he recommends this upon the whole Matter That none of those who return'd to the Church should be permitted to approach the Holy Mysteries till they had receiv'd the Unction That is till they were Confirmed In the 2d Canon St. Basil condemns to a Penance of 10 Years a Woman that had procur'd an Abortion and he judges her to be guilty of Murder whether the Child had Life or no. He observes That the time of Absolution should be regulated by the fervour of the Penance as well as by the length of it In the 3d. Canon he declares That if a Deacon commits Adultery after he has been received into the Order of Deacon he ought to be turned out of his Ministry but he would not have him put under Penance nor separated from the Communion of the Layety because we ought not to punish the same Fault twice and a Clergyman is sufficiently punish'd by his Deposition and so much more than a Layman who is deprived of Communion because he can be readmitted afterwards into the Church whereas a Clergyman cannot be restor'd when once he is depos'd But in conclusion the most Effectual Remedy of all Sins is to forsake Sin and abstain from Pleasure The 4th Canon is concerning those that are many times Married He condemns 3d. Marriages as a kind of Fornication and says That the Custom of his Church was to Excommunicate those who Married the third time for Five Years That in other places they were only put under Penance for two or three Years He enjoyns the same thing to Bigamists for one or two Years though he would have neither the one nor the other reduc'd to the lowest Penance but that they should be the first Years in the Rank of Hearers and that the last Years they should partake of the Prayers though they were still excluded from the participation of the Eucharist till their Penance was finish'd and they had given Signs of their Conversion In the 5th he ordains That Hereticks should be received who were converted at the Point of Death provided they gave Signs of their sincere Repentance The 6th is against Concubinage The 7th is against Murders Poisoning Adulteries and against other more infamous Crimes St. Basil says That all who are guilty of these Crimes are to be treated with the same Rigor However he thinks that we ought to have Pity on those who have done Penance for Thirty Years and that we should receive them without delay especially if they still bewailed their Sins and gave signs of Conversion In the 8th Canon St. Basil treats very largely of Murders and distinguishes the different Kinds of them as well those that are Voluntary as those that are Involuntary This Canon is more Curious than Useful The 9th Canon is about Divorce He lays it down as a Principle That the Law of Jesus Christ is equal both to Men and Women and that it does not allow of the Separation of a Man and his Wife but in case of Fornication But he says That the present Custom is not altogether agreeable to the Law of Christ because it does not allow Women to Separate from their Husbands upon any account whatsoever so that it seems to excuse from Adultery a Woman that should Espouse a Man whose Wife had divorced herself but on the contrary if it was a Husband that quitted his Wife to Espouse another that Man should commit Adultery both he that Married to this last Woman and she that was Espoused to him In the 10th St. Basil is against Ordaining those who had Sworn never to take Orders though there be says he a Canon which seems to permit it but he observes that we must consider the Form of the Oath the terms in which it was conceiv'd the Disposition of the Person that made it and all the lesser Circumstances to see whether he is oblig'd by his Oath or no and if no way can be found to dispense with it then he ought not to be Ordain'd After this he explains a particular Question which had been propos'd to him by Amphilochius as far as it can be discover'd by St. Basil's Answer it seems to have been this One Cyriacus a Priest of the Church of Mindana whereof Longinus was Bishop was obliged by Oath never to quit that Church yet he was made Parish-Priest to a Village very near it which was in another Diocess Longinus seeing himself deprived of a Priest who did very much assist him earnestly desired his Return and said That unless he returned to him he should quit his Church 'T is also probable that the Priest had some remorse of Conscience for having violated his Oath Amphilochius demands of St. Basil what was to be done in these Circumstances and this Saint gave an Advice full of Wisdom That they should joyn to the Diocess of Mindana the Territory of Mnistia where this Priest was made Minister by the Bishop Severus And he says That by this means he still belonging to the Church of Mindana might fulfill his Oath and might assist the Bishop Longinus who had demanded him back again He blames the Conduct of the Bishop Severus who had acted against the Canons in removing a Priest from one of his Brethren and had made him guilty of Perjury In the 11th Canon he ordains That a
was call'd to the place That be only followed the Guidâ⦠of the Holy Spirit and that after he ãâã to Constantinople ãâã did not ãâã those who were ââ¦bly Covetous That ãâã had commenc'd no Law-suit against the Arians neither for their Châ⦠nor for the Ecclesiastical Revenues tho' they were ãâã possess'd both of the one and the other That he had Persecuted no Body That âe had Suffered paââ¦tly all manner of Injuries and ãâã Treatment After he has shown these things he makes an Elegant Comparison between the Arians and the Catholicks of Constantinople They have says he the Temples but we have the God that dwells in them and we our selves are the Temples They have the People for them we have the Angels for us They have for their Portion Assurance and Rashness we have the Faith on our side They have Threâ⦠we have Prayers They Persecute and we Suffer They have Gold and Silver and we are in possession of the Holy Doctrine But our Flock is little Yes but it does not go to throw it self upon Precipices our Sheep fold is narrow but it is well guarded against Wolves it does not ãâã open to Robbers and Strangers cannot enter into it This-little Flock which will every Day grow greater by the Grace of God gives me no Cause to fear I see it I count it easily I know my Sheep and they know me they hear my Voice they answer me I call them and they follow me and they will not follow Strangers they will not follow Valentinus Montanus Manes Donatus Sabellius Arius Photinus and they continue stedfast in the Faith of the Trinity in whose Name they were baptiz'd This Discourse was spoken by St. Gregory some time after he was come to Constantinople In the 26th Discourse he exhorts those of his Party to observe Moderation in their Disputes with Hereticks He there lays down a great many very Wise and useful Maxims He observes That Peace is the greatest Good that can be enjoy'd That Schisms and Heresies have been raised up by Men of great Wit but turbulent and designing That those Men are the Cause of Wars Seditions and other Mischiefs both to the Ecclesiastical and Civil Society That we ought neither to be too hot nor too remiss in the Defence of the Faith That upon the whole Matter the Order established in the Church between the Pastors and their Sheep between the Clergy and the Laity must be inviolably observed That 't is often much better to be silent than to speak of Mysteries because it is very Difficult to comprehend and explain them and that 't is very rare to find Ears fit to hear them and Minds capable of bearing them That when we are obliged to speak we should do it with much Humility and Modesty That the common People should content themselves with believing and leave Disputes to the Learned That Faith and Religion are for the Ignorant as well as for the Learned and for the Poor as well as the Rich That the Learned themselves ought to shun useless Questions and Disputes That among the Hebrews it was not allow'd to all the Jews indifferently to Discourse of the Law but they chose such to do it as were judg'd Capable of it That some Men had one Gift some another in short That those who take upon them to Dispute and Teach others being push'd on by a Zeal for the Faith should not condemn those who by a reasonable Precaution and wholesome Fear are hindred from adventuring to do the like He concludes all these Reflections in these Words If you will all obey me as well Young as Old as well Clergy as Laity as well Monks as those that are barely the Faithful you will give over this vain Ostentation of showing your Knowledge by Disputes and you will rather take Care to draw near to God by an upright and prudent Conversation by the Purity of your Manners by your edifying Discourses that so at last you may obtain Eternal Life 'T is not necessary here to observe that this Discourse was spoken at Constantinople In the 27th Discourse St. Gregory vindicates himself against those who accused him of Ambition In his Exordium he enquires after the Reasons why the People of Constantinople were entic'd and as it were charm'd by his Preaching He says That it could not be his Learning which allur'd them for they were satisfied that he had but little of it That it could not be the Doctrine which he taught them since he was not the First who had preach'd it to them neither had he preached any thing to them which they had not learn'd formerly from St. Alexander their Bishop That neither can they say That he had gained them by Artificial and Flattering Discourses as for the most part says he they do now a-Days who are of the Priestly Function who have made an Art of Preaching the Word of God who have brought the Arts of the Bar into the Church and the Ornaments of the Theatre into the Chair of Truth You know adds he and God is my Witness That we are so great Strangers to this Fault that they rather accuse me of Rusticity and of not knowing the World than of being a Flatterer and seeking to please Men since I sometimes Reprove too severely even those who are most Affectionate to me when they do any thing that I think not reasonable You know how I mourn'd how I cry'd when ye plac'd me against my Will upon the Throne violating the Laws of the Church for the Love that you show'd me I used so great Freedom with those who appeared most zealous for me that they withdrew in Anger and changed their ancient Friendship all of the sudden into hatred against me Why then have you so great a Passion for me but only First Because you chose me your selves and called me to your Assistance and Secondly Because you have acknowledged that I was neither Ambitious nor Fierce nor Passionate nor Proud nor given to Flattery and Thirdly Because you have seen how I have suffered for you all both from those that openly attack'd me and from those that so cruelly laid secret Sââ¦s for me After this he vindicates himself from the Charge which his Enemies drew up against him upon the account of his Eloquence He says That 't is Envy which makes them speak thus He justifies himself also from the Ambition whereof he was accus'd and shows That he did not ambitiously aspire after the See of Constantinople That he had met with nothing there but Labour and Fatigue That if he had been free to choose he should have preferr'd his Solitude before so painful an Employment That he was not engaged in it for any other Reason but only to assist the Church of Constantinople which was then without an Orthodox Bishop That he would not trouble himself tho' Men should Censure him for having other Motives than really he had That God knows what his true Intention was That he never sought
62 69 71 74 and in his Anchoratus In Heres 23 and 65 he shows that God created the World and the Angels He endeavours to explain in Heres 70. in what Sence Man is created after the Image of God In Heres 24 and 36. he shows that Sin is not a Substance and that God is not the Author of it He explains the Mystery of the Incarnation in Heres 77 30 69 and shews that Jesus Christ was one Person only compos'd of the Divine and Humane Nature He shows in Heres 77 that the two Natures were not confounded after their Union and that they kept their own Properties He proves the Resurrection in Heres 42 and 64. and in the Anchoratus where he maintains That the same Flesh which we now have shall be raised again He holds in Heres 24 and 46. that Jesus Christ descended into Hell to save those that had lived well and believed in God He teaches that the Soul is Immortal and Spiritual and that it partakes of Happiness after Death See what he says about this in Heres 75. In Heres 8. he shows that the Sacraments of the New Law are more Excellent and more Efficacious than those of the Old In his Anchoratus he speaks of Faith as a Disposition necessary to the receiving of Baptism Tho' he speaks obscurely enough of the Eucharist in his Anchoratus yet he says enough of it to make us understand that it is truly the Body of Jesus Christ and that the words of his Institution are to be understood according to the Letter and without any Figure or Metaphor He acknowledges Free-Will in Heres 16. and yet he admits the Grace of Jesus Christ. In Heres 30. he speaks of the wonderful Effects of the Sign of the Cross. He proves the necessity of Ecclesiastical Traditions in many places and chiefly in Heres 69 51 and 57. He shows the Necessity and Usefulness of Fasting in the Heres 33 75 and 80. There he observes That the Christians fasted during Lent and every Wednesday and Friday in the Year except after Easter until Whitsunday He supposes that these Fasts are of Apostolical Tradition and that we are obliged to observe them and that we must abstain from Meat in the time of a Fast He says that in the last Week of Lent nothing but plain Meats were eaten that 's to say Bread and Water and that many pass'd the two or three last Days without eating any thing In Heres 76 he establishes the distinction between Bishops and Priests He ranks in the Order of the Clergy Bishops Priests Deacons and Sub-Deacons The other Ministers according to him do not partake of Holy Orders These inferior Ministers are the Readers Deaconesses Exorcists Interpreters Diggers and Porters He observes in Heres 75. and at the end of Heres 80. that the Assemblies of People in the Church were chiefly made on Wednesday Friday and Sunday and also in some places on Saturday That Baptism and the Celebration of the Eucharist were attended with such Ceremonies as were prescribed either by the Gospel or by the Tradition of the Apostles That Mattins were sung and that Christians kneeled at their Prayers Day and Night That Hereticks Idolaters and all those that were guilty of enormous Crimes were excommunicated and their Oblations not received He proves Prayers for the Dead in Heres 76. and refuces Aetius who said the contrary He says in Heres 78. that the Saints enjoy eternal Happiness and that we ought to honour them As to the honour due to the Virgin he keeps a middle way between the Antidicomarianites who dishonoured her by saying That she had other Children besides Jesus Christ and the Collyridians who ador'd her He says That we must honour her but we must not adore her nor give her superstitious Worship Read the Heresies 78 and 79 where he testifies that there is nothing certainly known concerning her Death nor about the place where her Body is yet it seems that his Piety induces him to believe that she never died but he does not deliver this Opinion as a certain Truth He praises Virginity in Heres 4 8 5 61 and 80. but he does not condemn Marriage nor yet second Marriages There he declares plainly that the Church does not admit any to Holy Orders but such as will observe Celibacy and that she excludes Bigamists And yet he confesses in Heres 59 that there are still some place where the Deacons and Subdeacons do not observe Celibacy but he adds That this is done upon sufferance because of the weakness of Men or the multitude of People Lastly he says That 't is a great sin to violate the Vow of Virginity He says in Heres 59 that a Husband who having divorced his Wife for Adultery or some other Crime marries another is free from Sin according to the Authority of Scripture and that he is no-wise unworthy of Eternal Life and that he ought to be permitted to continue in the Church He would not have Women undertake any Ecclesiastical Function and he proves in Heres 79. That this ought not to be suffered In short if one would have an abridgment of the Doctrine the Discipline and the Morality of St. Epiphanius's time he needs do no more but read what St. Epiphanius has said of them at the end of his Book about Heresies where he has given the sum of them so as to serve for an Antidote against all the Errors of Hereticks Any one that gives the least attention to the Doctrine of Epiphanius which we have now represented may easily perceive that there is scarce any Author who has made more Observations concerning the Doctrine and Discipline of the ancient Church contrary to the Errors and Disorders of the Innovators of our Times Yet they have endeavoured to find in his Writings part of their Errors and have had the boldness to impute to us the Heresies which he refutes This Stultetus has done with so much fraud that 't is impossible to read what he says about it without conceiving an indignation against so unjust a procedure He says First That St. Epiphanius rejected the Invocation of Saints and the Virgin in Heres 79. but this is a mere Cheat. St. Epiphanius indeed there condemns those who adored the Virgin and gave her that sovereign Worship which is due to God only He maintains that the Church neither adores the Virgin nor the Saints altho' she has an Honour and due Respect for them And do not we say the same thing And can any other Doctrine be imputed to us without a palpable Calumny But says Scultetus St. Epiphanius says in Heres 75. That the Saints were prayed for and therefore he cannot approve of their Invocation This Author methinks should not have cited a place which so plainly opposes the Opinions which he maintains which I shall set down entire As to what concerns the custom of reciting the Names of the Dead what can there be more useful and more reasonable
Passim Small Sins are to be avoided as well as great ones Passim One only Sin one evil Action is sufficient to condemn us eternally Passim The accusation of Conscience is the greatest torment Passim It is better to suffer our selves than to make others suffer Epist. to Olympias The ignominy of this World is glory in the eyes of God Passim This present life is death and death is life Passim Afflictions Persecutions and Sicknesses are desirable but delights pleasures and joy are to be feared Passim God's chastisements are great benefits The good things which he bestows in this world are great temptations Passim Giving of Alms is the trade that brings the greatest profit Passim Solitariness and a Monastick life are more to be desired than the greatest Kingdoms Passim True Soveraignty consists in commanding our own Passions Passim It is an effect of God's bounty that the execution of Precepts which are necessary to our Salvation does not depend upon the weakness of our Bodies Hom. in illud Modico vino utere Sorrow is the product of Sin and Sorrow takes away Sin That which was the penalty of Sin is become the Salvation of Man Sin brought weakness into the World and Sorrow hath destroy'd Sin Hom. 1. de jejun Our Worship is not like that of the Jews which was loaded with many Ceremonies and needed much preparation He that went into the Temple to pray was to buy Pigeons to carry Wood Fire a Knife and a Victim Christians want no such thing in every place they have an Altar a Knife and a Victim or rather they themselves are the Altar the Priest and the Victim In what place or what condition soever they are they may offer their Souls to God Hom. 4. de Anna. Man shall be punished for his Sins either in this world or in the next He ought to be punished here to prevent punishment hereafter Serm. 5. de Lazaro Ignorance of the Scripture makes Heresies Serm. 3. de Lazaro These are some of those Maxims wherewith S. Chrysostom filleth his Discourses but he enlargeth upon them with such abundance expoundeth them with so great Eloquence and pursues them with so great strength that it is impossible to discover their beauty without reading them in their Original In reading of these Sermons all Preachers ought to spend their time and not in the Sermons of Modern Authors which for the most part are full of nothing but empty Allegories false Notions forced Declamations unprofitable Questions affectations of Wit Jingles Antitheses and other things of this nature that have no correspondency with those Evangelical Truths which ought to be preached with masculine and natural Eloquence But that S. Chrysostom's Works may be more easily read and that the Editions which should be used may be known I shall draw up a Catalogue of the most considerable The first Collections of S. Chrysostom's Works were made of the Versions of his Book The first was Printed at Basle by Pfortzen anno 1504. There was another made in Germany by Cratander anno 1522. and one at Paris 1524. These were followedby the Edition of Frobenius in five Volumes anno 1533 and 1547. which last is larger and more correct That of Venice in 1574 in five Volumes by Hervetus is better than the foregoing but the most perfect of these ancient Latin Editions is that of Nivelle in four Volumes in Folio of 1581. which was made by the advice and care of the most learned Men of that Age as Billius Hervetus Nobilius Zinus c. The first Greek Edition of all S. Chrysostom's Works is the famous Edition of Eaton procured by the care and vast labour of the learned Sir Henry Savile who having made enquiry in all the Liberaries of the World for the Books that went under S. Chrysostom's Name caused them to be Printed in a very fair Character and very exactly with very just very learned and useful Notes He distinguished the Books that are S. Chrysostom's from those that are dubious or supposititious and hath put them in an excellent Order for a first Edition It is divided into eight Volumes The first contains the 67 Homilies upon Genesis the Commentaries upon the Psalms and Isaiah the two Homilies upon the 50th Psalm which he places among the doubtful Books and the Exposition of the 51st 95th and 100th Psalms and so on to the 107th and upon the 119th which he placeth among the supposititious Writings The Second Volume contains the 90 Homilies upon S. Matthew and the 88 upon S. John The Third and the Fourth comprehend all the Homilies upon S. Paul The Fifth hath Sixty two Sermons upon several particular passages of the Holy Scripture and Thirty four other Sermons upon the Saints or Festival days with Seventy three Sermons upon several Subjects which he Ranks among the supposititious Books The Sixth Volume is made up of the Treatises of S. Chrysostom the Homilies against the Jews that of God's incomprehensibility the Sermon of Anathema his Sermon after he was ordained Priest the Twenty two Discourses about Statues and several other Sermons upon divers Subjects and particularly of Penance Fasting Alms-deeds and other Christian Vertues At the latter end there are some Homilies which he puts among the Collections that were anciently made out of S. Chrysostom and some supposititious Sermons with the Liturgy and two Prayers to God The Seventh Volume begins with a Discourse upon the Scandal of certain Persons caused by the Persecution and Malice of some Priests After this is the Treatise wherein he proves that none is offended but by himself Seventeen Letters to the Widow Olympias and Two hundred forty three Letters to his Friends with Five Letters of Constantius the Priest and a hundred and five Sermons which falsly bear S. Chrysostom's Name the Authors whereof are not certainly known These Sermons are followed by other Discourses of known Authors viz. Six Homilies of Severianus of Gabala upon Genesis the Homily of John the Faster about Penance the Homily upon the Epiphany ascribed to S. Gregory Thaumaturgus the Homily of the Cross by Pantaleon a Monk of Constantinople and Forty eight Homilies upon several Points of Morality collected out of S. Chrysostom's works by Theodorus That Volume endeth with Seven Prayers of S. Chrysostom which are in Latin the three last of them are supposititious The Last Volume containeth some Supplements of Books Printed in the other Volumes the Seven Orations in praise of S. Paul the Sermons upon Eutropius upon the design which Men ought to have in Preaching and upon some other Subjects The Appendix to this Volume hath several Books which are something like S. Chrysostom's The First is an Answer in Theodorus's Name to an Exhortation made by S. Chrysostom Which is certainly spurious The Second and Third are two Discourses of Libanius to Theodosius upon the Sedition at Antioch After these Discourses follow the Extracts which Photius hath taken out of S. Chrysostom and Isidore Pelusiota's Letters in
Panegyrici in S. S. Martyres Burd 1601. Duae homil de S. S. Lugd. 1624. Gr. Lat. Paris 1594. IN FESTA In Nat. Christi in prâcursorem Ant. apud Tornes 1609. Sermo in Pascha Ant. 1598. Sermones in Ascensionem alii ... ex Ed. Vossii Mog 1604. Orat. de occursu Domini Col. 1568. Note Antiochus and Severianus of Gabala IN the days of S. Chrysostom there were two famous Preachers who preached in his Church in his Absence The first Antiochus was Bishop of Ptolemais in Phoenicia and the Second Antiochus and Severianus of Gabala Severianus was Bishop of Gabala in Coelesyria Antiochus came first to Constantinople where having preached a long time and got some Money he returned to his Church Severianus having heard that Antiochus was become rich by preaching at Court resolved to imitate him and therefore went thither with several Sermons which he had prepared He was well received by S. John Chrysostom into whose favour he endeavoured at first to insinuate himself afterwards he grew acquainted with several Persons of Quality and got into the favour both of the Emperor and the Empress and tho' he wanted Antiochus his parts yet he got into great Esteem and Reputation S. Chrysostom being obliged as hath been observed to go into Asia to compose the Affairs of the Church of Ephesus found not a Bishop fitter to preach in his Absence than Severianus of Gabala whom he thought to be his Friend But whether this Bishop taking occasion of S. Chrysostom's Absence had a design to get into the Esteem and Affection of the People of Constantinople to usurp that See or whether Serapion S. Chrysostom's Archdeacon had by his Letters begot in S. Chrysostom an Aversion to Severianus of Gabala as a Person that disturbed the Peace of his Church aiming at getting into his place or Lastly whether there was any secret Jealousie betwixt them These two Bishops were never Friends ever afterwards S. Chrysostom being come back drove away Severianus accusing him of saying that the Son of God was not made Man because that Bishop finding that Serapion would not stand up before him had uttered these Words If Serapion dies a Christian the Son of God is not made Man This Serapion told S. Chrysostom leaving out the first part If Serapion dies a Christian. But Severianus being well at Court the Empress recalled him and did all she could to reconcile them which S. Chrysostom refused to do till the Empress intreated him for the sake of Theodosius her Grand-Child whom she laid at his Feet in the Church of the Apostles S. Chrysostom if Socrates may be credited could not then resist the intreaties of the Empress but this Reconciliation was not sincere and both these Bishops harboured still an Aversion one to the other And therefore in the time of S. Chrysostom's Disgrace Severianus sided with Theophilus and the rest of his Enemies to destroy him This is the Account which Socrates gives of the Dissention of Severianus of Gabala Hist. Eccl. B. VI. cap. 11. The Author of S. Chrysostom's Life accuses this Historian of want of sincerity upon this occasion But till we meet with another Historian of greater credit setting forth the matter of Fact after another manner we cannot reject this Relation nor feign other Motives of Dissention betwixt these two Bishops than those related by Socrates who lived near S. Chrysostom's time The ancient Translator of some of S. Chrysostom's Homilies Anianus observes That Antiochus had plausibilem dicendi pompam a pompous and lofty Stile which got him the applause of the People There is no doubt but formerly they had several of his Sermons Gennadius mentions but two of his Books The former is a long Treatise against Covetousness and the latter a Discourse upon the Miracle of the blind Man to whom Jesus Christ restored sight spoken of in the Ninth Chapter of S. John's Gospel a work of Unction and Humility Trithemius mentions several Sermons and other unknown works of this Author Theodoret quoteth a passage of his but does not Name the Book where he found it the words are these That if we do not confound the two Natures in Christ there will be no difficulty in understanding the Mystery of the Incarnation Gelasius in his Book of the two Natures citeth also some places of Antiochus upon the Incarnation taken out of his Sermons upon the Nativity Easter against Hereticks and from another Sermon Lastly Possevinus tells us That there were some Homilies of this Author in the Medicean Library at Florence I don't know whether they were ever published Severianus of Gabala was less eloquent dryer and more barren than Antiochus Socrates observes that he pronounced the Greek Language ill because he still kept some thing of the Syriack Accent Gennadius says That he had read a Commentary of this Author upon the Epistle to the Galatians and a Treatise upon the Festival of Christ's Baptism and the Epiphany We have observed already that among S. Chrysostom's works there are several Sermons which in all appearance belong to Severianus of Gabala and among the rest a Discourse of the Seals and upon the brazen Serpent which are quoted by Theodoret under the Name of Severianus of Gabala and several others in the same Stile whereof we have given a Catalogue amongst S. Chrysostom's works To these we may joyn the Homily upon Christ's Nativity which is in the Fifth Volume of the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom's works Pag. 843. and the Sermon of the Cross in Greek in the same Volume P. 898 which afterwards was Printed in Greek and Latin by Father Combefis cited by S. Damascen in the third Discourse of Images under the Name of Severianus of Gabala We have also Six Sermons of the same Man upon the Creation of the World Printed in Greek in the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom and in Greek and Latin in the last Volume of the Supplement to the Bibliotheca Patrum by Father Combefis Severianus observes in the Preface that all the Books of the Holy Scripture have the Salvation and Benefit of Men for their ultimate End but that the Book of Genesis is the Ground and Fountain of all the Truths both in the Law and in the Prophets because it containeth the History of the World's Creation without which God's works cannot be known He adds That he very well knew that several Fathers had written of that matter but that it did not discourage him from writing upon the same Subject since the latter Writers were not discouraged by the Discourses of the former that he pretended not to destroy what others had done but to add such things as might serve for the Edification of the Church At last he desireth his Auditors not to inquire whether his Notions be new but only whether they are right In Prosecution of the same Subject he saith that Genesis is an History written by the Lawgiver Moses and dictated by the Holy Ghost who inspired him That tho' it be a
Hereticks was far more intolerable and we do not read that the Fathers quoted by S. Jerom did precisely refute Helvidius's Error However S. Jerom rejects Tertullian's Authority by saying That he was not of the Church and as for Victorinus Patarionensis he saith That his Testimony hath no greater difficulty than that of the Scripture since he speaks of Christ's Brethren but does not say that they were the Sons of Mary In the latter part of this Discourse he speaks like an Orator of the inconveniencies of Marriage and the Advantages of Virginity This Treatise was composed at Rome about the Year 383. In his Treatise against Jovinian he further defends the Excellency of Virginity This Jovinian had asserted in a small Discourse published at Rome That Widows and married Women were not to be less regarded than Virgins if they have the same Vertues This was the first Error of this man The Second was That a Christian baptized could not fall from Righteousness The Third That Abstinence from certain Meats was unprofitable The last That the glorified Saints are all equally Happy S. Jerom refutes the first of these Errors in the first Book He explains at first S. Paul's Notions concerning Marriage and Virginity afterwards he takes notice of the Examples of the Old and New Testament which Jovinian had brought to prove that the greatest Saints and most excellent men of all Ages had been Married S. Jerom shews that he has multiplied those Examples too much He affirms that the Apostles left their Wives after their Call to the Apostleship and that S. John being called before he was Married always lived in Celibacy He answers those places of Scripture alledged by Jovinian and discourses of the Celibacy of Bishops Priests and Deacons He condemns second Marriages with much severity and produces several Examples of Heathen Women that either kept their Virginity or continued in Widow-hood In the second Book he refutes Jovinian's other errours He shews against the second that the holiest of Men may fall from Baptismal Grace Against the third that tho' God is the Creator of all things fit for Man's use yet it is good to fast and use abstinence and that it is very dangerous to indulge one's Senses and satisfie greediness Lastly that as there are various degrees of Vice and Vertue here in this life so there are likewise in the other several degrees of felicity and pain These Books were not compleated by S. Jerom when he writ his book of famous men tho' he mentions these two books there and so they are of the year 392. These Books being published at Rome several persons found fault with the hard terms which S. Jerom made use of in speaking of Marriage Pammachius having sent word of it to S. Jerom hinting withall at the principal Passages excepted against This Father expounds them in the apology directed to him declaring that it was never his intention to condemn Matrimony He found himself obliged a second time to defend himself from the same accusation against a Monk and this he does in the Letter intituled the fifty first to Domnion The fifty second Letter to Pammachius was joyned to the apology directed to him He thanks him for securing the Copies of his Books against Jovinian but he tells him that it was impossible to suppress them that he had not the good fortune to be able always to correct his own Works as some had because he had no sooner composed them but they were made publick even against his Will He insults over those that found fault challenging them to write against him He adviseth him to read the Commentaries of Dionysius Rheticius Eusebius Apollinarius and Didymus who expounded that passage of the Epistle to the Corinthians and spoke in the behalf of Virginity more powerfully than himself He sends him Word that he had Translated out of the Hebrew the Books of the Prophets of Job and that he had written Commentaries upon the twelve Minor Prophets and upon the Book of Kings He observes that if his Translation of Job be compared with the Greek and the old Latin Version there will be found such a difference as is betwixt truth and falshood The fifty third Letter is directed to Riparius a Presbyter in Spain who desired to know his opinion of a Book of Vigilantius a Presbyter of Barcelona who condemned the Veneration of Relicks and the Worship of Saints S. Jerom exclaims against that errour and prayeth Riparius to send him his Book that he might refute it at large and this he does with great earnestness in the Treatise that followeth this Letter written two years after as he himself affirms He taxeth Vigilantius with reviving Jovinian's errours and wonders that any Bishops should be of his mind If saith he the name of Bishops may be given to such as will Ordain no Deacons except they are Married what will the Churches of the East those of Egypt and even of the See of Rome which do not admit into the Clergy any but such as are unmarried or who being married profess to live as if they were not Having made this occasional remark concerning the celibacy of Clarks he particularly undertakes Vigilantius's errour about Relicks and the Invocation of Saints This Man maintained that the Bones of the dead were not to be honoured and that the Saints could not hear our Prayers S. Jerom puts himself into a great heat to prove the contrary and falls upon Vigilantius with a great deal of reproachful Language In that Treatise he likewise defends the Festivals of Saints the Solemnities practised upon their Eves Pilgrimages to Jerusalem the Monastick State and the use of lighted Torches only in the Night for he owns that in his time they lighted none in the Day We saith he do not light Torches in the day time as you accuse us but only in the Night that their Light may afford joy and comfort in the Obscurity of the Night This Treatise was written long after the Book of famous Men about the year 406. The fifty fourth Letter to Marcella is against the errours of the Disciples of Montanus He not only lays them open but accuseth them 1. Of owning but one person in God 2. Of condemning second Marriages as adulterous 3. Of holding the obligation to keep three Lents 4. That they did not acknowledge Bishops to be the Apostle's Successors and the first of the Hierarchical Order but that there were two degrees of Persons above them 5. That they were very rigid in imposing of Penances and never granted Absolution 6. That they believed the prophecies of Montanus Prisca and Maximilla Lastly he says that they were accused of celebrating Criminal Mysteries with the Blood of a Martyred Child but declares that he had rather believe that this was not true This Letter is written about the year 400. In the fifty fifth Letter to Riparius he says that Ruffinus whom he calls his Catiline had been expelled out of Palaestine In the fifty sixth he commends
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 these Ladies had put to S. Jerom. They are very curious Questions and S. Jerom's Answers are very just and learned To these Works we ought to join the Treatises which are at the latter end of the eighth Volume which likewise are Critical Letters Namely The Book of the Names of the Cities and Countries mentioned in the Bible translated out of Eusebius An Exposition of the Hebrew proper Names in the Old and New Testament The Hundred and fifty first Epistle is an Explication of the Hebrew Alphabet written whilst he was at Rome A Collection of Traditions or rather Jewish Expositions upon Genesis a most curious and useful Work for the right Understanding of the Text of the Scripture where he takes Notice of all the Differences betwixt the Hebrew Text and the Translation of the Septuagint The Hundred and fifty second Letter to Minerius and Alexander upon these Words of S. Paul 1 Cor. 15. We shall not all die but we all shall be changed wherein he gives a particular Account of the different Expositions of this Place by the ancient Commentators He quoteth Theodorus of Perinthus Diodorus of Tarsus Apollinaris Acacius of Caesarea and Origen This Letter is of the year 406. In the same place is the Hundred and fifty third Letter to Paulinus written about the same time he answereth two Questions put to him The first how one could reconcile to Free-Will what is said in Genesis that God hardned Pharaoh ' s heart and what S. Paul saith That it is neither of the Will nor of the Endeavours of Men but of God who maketh Man to act The second why S. Paul calleth the Children that are born of baptized Parents holy since they cannot be saved but by receiving and preserving the Grace of Baptism For the former S. Jerom referreth him to what Origen saith upon that Subject in the Book of Principles newly translated by S. Jerom. And to the second he answereth with Tertullian that the Children of Christians are called holy because they are as it were Candidates for the Faith and have not been defiled with Idolatry adding that the Scripture gives the Name of holy to things that are pure and that in this Sence the Vessels of the Temple are said to be holy Lastly There is in the same place the Hundred fifty fourth Letter to Desiderius and Serenilla whom he invites to come to Bethlehem It is written after the Treatise of Famous men about the Year 400. We are to reckon likewise amongst S. Jerom's critical Works upon the Bible the Corrections and Translations which he made of the Books of the Scripture At first he corrected the Greek Text of the Seventy and reformed the common Edition by Origen's Hexapla He made a new Translation o He made a New Translation He speaks of this Version as wholly his own in the Eighty ninth Letter to S. Augustin yet it is likely that he made use in several Books of the Scripture of the ancient vulgar Translation which he only corrected It is certain that he made a new Translation of the Psalms as he says himself in this Epistle to Sunia and Fretela He also translated anew the Book of Job as appears by the two Prefaces to that Book and to those of Salomon as it is observed in the Second Book of the Apology against Rufinus of them wherein he mark'd by two Hooks those passages of the Septuagint that were not in the Hebrew Text and added the Version of what was in the Hebrew Text which was not in the Translation of the LXX noting those Additions with a Star so that in this Translation one might see at once both what was added and what was wanting in the Version of the LXX This Translation of S. Jerom's of the Books of the Prophets is joyned to his Commentaries This was the first Labour of S. Jerom upon the Bible which he undertook when he was but young in his first Retirement Afterwards having attained to a more perfect knowledge of the Hebrew Tongue he conceived that it would prove a considerable Service to the Church if he set forth an entire Translation of his own from the Hebrew Text. Wherefore he fell upon that Work and published a new Latin Version of all the Books which the Jews own to be Canonical p The Books which the Jews own to be Canonical He did not translate the Books that were not in the Canon of the Hebrews except Tobit and Judith and so the Translations of the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Maccabees Baruk and Jeremiah's Letter and the Additions to the Books of Hester and Daniel are not S. Jerom's and of the Books of Judith and Tobit setting before the beginning of each Book the Prefaces already mentioned This new Translation of S. Jerom was but ill received in the Church at first Men were very much pre-possessed in favour of the Septuagint and S. Jerom's enterprize was looked upon as a rash and dangerous Innovation S. Augustin himself disliked it and sent him word as we have seen that he would have done better if he had been contented with the Translation of the Septuagint and not have gone about a new one which would certainly cause some Scandal and trouble in the Church Rufinus and others of S. Jerom's Enemies went yet further and accused him of perverting the Scripture and despising the Authority of the Apostles by rejecting the LXX's Translation which they had made use of to introduce a new one borrowed in some sort from the Jews All these reproaches did not hinder S. Jerom from publishing his new Translation He shews the injustice of his Accuâers in most of his Prefaces Sometimes he complains of the ingratitude of Persons in his Age who instead of acknowledging the good Services he had done to the Church reckoned it as a Crime in him Sometimes he declares That he did not undertake that new Translation to condemn the Septuagint which he commends and approves and which he corrected and translated in his Youth and that his design barely was to do an useful Work Sometimes he saith That he was obliged to make a new Translation because the Septuagint had been corrupted But for the most part he affirms openly That the main reason which put him upon making a new Translation was the want of Exactness in that of the Seventy and the small Conformity which it had with the Hebrew Text which he believes ought to be depended upon as the true Original And for this reason almost as often as he speaks of it he gives it the Name of the Hebrew truth He alledgeth also political Reasons for his undertaking The Jews accused us in their Disputes with us that we did not faithfully quote the Holy Scripture they continually urged that the Hebrew Text was not conformable to what was cited to them out of the Translation of the LXX The Christians who were ignorant of the Hebrew and besides had no Translation from the Hebrew were extremely perplexed
then reflect upon the Action of Jesus Christ when he drove the Merchants out of the Temple with Scourges that came thither to Buy and Sell but saith he That cannot be looked upon as a violent Action Sed quid hoc aut quantum est Upon what he had said That Miracles were ceased in his time lest Men should still cleave to Sensible Things and their Minds be too much accustomed to them he noteth That these words are not to be taken strictly seeing that Miracles are still wrought in the Church and that himself had seen some at Milan The Rule which is the last Piece of this Tome is indeed St. Augustin's but he wrote if for Nuns and not for Monks Some body took it out of the 109th Epistle and fitted it for Men. This Alteration has been long made As they have placed by themselves at the latter end of each Tome those Pieces which are none of St. Augustin's and yet have some relation to those contained in that Volume so at the end of this there are the Treatises of Grammar Logick Categories and Rhetorick that were attributed to St. Augustin in the former Editions perhaps because he saith himself in his Retractations That he had began some Treatises upon those Sciences but his Discourses were written in the form of Dialogues and like that of Musick where he makes use of that Science to raise up the Mind of Man to his Creator but these are neither Dialogue-wise nor fit to lift up Mens Minds towards God The Manner how they are written and the Methods observ'd in them are very different from those of St. Augustin In a word There are in those Treatises several Observations unworthy of that Father and contrary to his Opinions The Discourse of Grammar begins indeed with the same words that St. Augustin hath noted in his Retractations but they have been added and are not to be found in the Manuscripts The Author of the Book of Categories has a great Esteem for Aristotle's Philosophy and saith That he could scare understand his Book of Categories with Themistius his help Whereas St. Augustin who had no great Esteem for Aristotle's Philosophy assureth us That he understood his Categories without Labour and without a Tutor The Name of Adeodatus that was inserted into the Printed Copies is not found in the Manuscripts The Monastick Rules which are at the latter end of this Volume are rejected with Common Consent The last wherein St. Benedict's Rule is quoted is if we believe Holstenius written by Aâlredus Rievallensis an Abbot in England who flourished in the Twelfth Century and indeed it is in the Catalogue of this Author's Works published by Bale in the Second Century of English Writers part of it is among St. Anselm's Works The SECOND TOME THE Second Tome of St. Augustin's Works containeth his Letters which do not only represent Tome II. the Genius and Character of that holy Father but contain also very important Points of Doctrine Discipline and Morality In the last Edition they are placed according to the Order of Time for which Arguments are brought in a Preface They are divided into Four Classes The First contains those which he writ before he was Bishop from the Year 386. to 395. In the Second are those which he writ from the Year 396. to the time when the Catholick Bishops had a Conference at Carthage with the Donatists and the breaking out of the Pelagian Heresie in Africa that is to the Year 410. The Third comprehends those that were written from the Year 411. to the end of his Life that is to 430. And the Fourth contains those whereof the time is not justly known though they were certainly written after he was St. Augustin Tome II. made Bishop There are Two hundred and seventy in all The Benedictines have taken away some Treatises which were put among the Letters and they have added those which he Answered And lastly Some are added that were not published before The thirteen or fourteen first are about Philosophical Matters that St. Augustin used to discourse about with his Friends when he was first Converted The First was written by St. Augustin to Hermogenianus about the latter end of the Year 380. concerning the Books that he wrote against the Academicks He tells him what his Aim was in writing them and asketh his Advice about what he had said concerning those Philosophers About the latter end of the Third Book he commends the Academicks and saith That he was so far from Condemning them that he had Imitated them He blameth the false Academicks of his own time and calleth them stupid who believed the Soul to be Corporeal He concludes with saying That he flatter'd not himself with triumphing over the Academicks as Hermogenianus said but that he thought himself happy for being above despair of finding the Truth which is the Food of the Soul and that he had thereby broken that troublesom Chain which hinder'd him from fast'ning as one may say to the Breasts of the True Philosophy In the Second Letter to Zenobius he testifies his Sorrow for his being Absent and his Impatience to see him again that they might resolve a Question which he had begun to examine This Letter was written the same time with the foregoing The Third to Nebridius is about his Books of Soliloquies composed in the beginning of the year 387. He speaketh there of his Happiness of having attained to the Knowledge of some particular Truths and particularly of those concerning our Nature confessing withal That he was ignorant of many things Among things unknown to Man he proposeth these Why the World is of such Bigness or rather How big it is Why it is where it is rather than any where else He observes That Bodies may be infinitely divided and That there is no Quantity but may be both infinitely encreased and diminished That it is not so with Numbers which may be infinitely encreased but not diminished proportionably seeing there is nothing below Unity In the next directed to the same and written about the same time St. Augustin acquaints him with the Progress that he had made in the Knowledge of the Truth during the time of his Retirement We have not the other Letters which he writ at that time to Nebridius as appears by the Ninth Book of Confessions The Fifth and Sixth are Letters written in Africa by Nebridius to St. Augustin about the end of the Year 388. or the beginning of 389. In the First Nebridius pitieth St. Austin that he was interrupted in the Contemplation of the Truth by other Businesses And in the Seeond he tells him his Notion That Memory cannot act without Imagination and That the Imagination draws her Images of Things from itself and not from the Senses St. Augustin resolves both these Questions in the Seventh Letter To the former he answereth That we remember things which cannot be represented by Sensible Idea's whence he concludes That there is a Memory
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 Spâs 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 ãâ¦ã ãâã Condemned nor ãâã before ãâ¦ã ãâã to let the Name of ãâã be ãâ¦ã ãâã convenient not to scandalize the ãâ¦ã but little to Boniface not to have his ãâ¦ã if the Impurity of his Conscience did ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã Priest who is thought to be that Felix with whom St. Angustin ãâã ãâã in ãâã whom he challenges to Answer that Difficulty ãâ¦ã Fortunatus ãâ¦ã ãâã ãâã ãâã him to explain more clearly than he had ãâã ãâã How it may be known what that is which God ââ¦th of us since we are ãâ¦ã This was written in the Year 405. The Eighty ãâã ãâã a ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã the Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians having deââred That ãâã valued ãâã 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 ãâã 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 lyââ 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 ãâã 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 ãâã 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 ãâã Fault since he had kept them only to shew that they were not to be condemned as Cââ¦inal Superstitions And yet That it is not now permitted to observe these Ceremonies under any ãâã 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 prââ¦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
his Book of Faith The Second Question of Works hath great relation to the former It was demanded Whether the Oblations and Prayers that are made for the Dead avail them any thing St. Augustin Answers what he had said already in his Book concerning the Care that ought to be taken of the Dead That the Oblations and Prayers are profitable to those who deserved in their Life-time that Prayers should avail them He addeth what he had said in his Enchiridion to Laurentius That in all that time between Death and the last Resurrection the Souls shall be detained in secret and hidden places where they shall either enjoy Rest or suffer Pain according as they have deserved when they were in the World That Souls in that Condition are refreshed by the Piety of the Living when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offered for them or Alms are given in the Church in their behalf But saith he That availeth only them who in their Life-time deserved by their Actions that these things should be available to them when they are out of the World ...... Thus when the Sacrifices of the Altar are offered or Alms given for all the Dead that were baptized they become Thanksgivings for them that were extremely Good They are Intercessions for those that were not great Sinners And if these things do not ease those that were very wicked yet they Administer Comfort to the Living The Third Question is Whether all Men shall Die before the Day of Judgment St. Augustin answereth no according to what he had said before in the 193d Letter to Mercator He confesses That this is a difficult Question The other Five Questions are upon some hard Passages of Scripture He repeats those Explications which he had given in his other Books This Book was Composed after the Enchiridion that was written in 421. and before the Book of Retractations written in 427. Which shews That it must necessarily belong to the Years between yet the Date of Easter of the Year wherein this Book was written which is at the beginning should regularly fall in the Year 430 or 419. wherefore there must have been a Mistake in the Cypher The small Treatise concerning the belief of those things which are not conceived is placed again in this Volume among the Treatises that are really St. Augustin's though the Louvain Doctors after Erasmus had put it among the Spurious Books St. Augustin does not mention it in his Retractations but he doth in the 231st Letter to Count Darius and it is written in his Stile and is very worthy of him He shews there That many things are believed though they are not seen He particularly urges the Example of Friendship and good Wishes which are believed without being seen Whence he concludes That if that Faith is taken away which makes us believe things that we see not Society would be utterly overthrown He confesseth That to believe a thing we ought to have some Marks that such thing is But he affirms That we believe not in Jesus Christ without sufficient Proofs of his Authority That the Church alone is a constant and visible Proof of the Truth of his Doctrine since we see that accomplished which Christ and the Prophets Foretold That none can doubt of the Truth of the Prophetical Books since the Jews who were the Christians great Enemies preserved them who also are unquestionable Witnesses of their Antiquity He concludes this Discourse with a short Exhortation to the New Christians to keep the Faith of the Church inviolable What is said in the 10th Chapter concerning the demolishing of the Temples shews That this Treatise was Written and Composed after Honorius his Law that was dated in 399. It has been observed already That St. Augustin being yet but a Priest expounded the Creed in a Council of African Bishops assembled at Hippo. This Discourse which he afterwards put in Writing as he declares in his Retractations contains an exact Exposition of the Articles of the Creed We have it here entituled Of Faith and the Creed In the Book of Faith and Good Works St. Augustin refutes several Errors which he had read in some Books that had been sent to him There it was affirmed 1. That all were to be admitted to Baptism who desired to be baptized without any Examination 2. That it was sufficient to instruct them in the Articles of Faith though they were not taught the Rules of Manners till after they had received the Sacrament 3. That what Crime soever a baptized Christian might commit and in what Condition soever he might die yet he should be infallibly saved after he had passed through the Fire St. Augustin declares against the first Proposition That though the Wicked are to be tolerated in the Church yet Correction was not to be neglected nor the Discipline of the Church suffered to relax He confesses however That Sinners ought to be reproved with Meekness and Charity Against the Second Proposition he teacheth That Sinners who persevered in their Wickedness were by no means to be admitted to Baptism Showing That the Holy Scripture requireth Repentance before Baptism That St. John gave Precepts concerning Manners to those which he baptized and that this is the Temper of the Church which appointed the Times and Ceremonies observed by the Catechumens for no other end but to be sure that they are well-disposed to receive the Sacrament of Baptism Lastly of all St. Augustin proves against the Third Error That whosoever dieth in the State of Mortal Sin without Repentance is eternally Damned And he Answers the place of St. Paul that was alledged to prove the contrary This Treatise was Composed in 413. after the Book of the Spirit and the Letter Garnerius supposeth That St. Jerom is the Person whom St. Augustin disputes with in this Book But he cannot suspect that Father as guilty of either the first or the second Error And it is altogether unlikely that it should be St. Jerom whom St. Augustin refuteth concerning the third The Enchiridion or Treatise of Faith Hope and Charity was written at the Request of Laurentius a great Lord of Rome and Brother to Dulcitius who had desired St. Augustin to send him a small Book containing aâ Abridgment of the Christian Religion To satisfie him St. Augustin dedicated to him this Book wherein he reduceth all Religion to the Vertues of Faith Hope and Charity because a Man knoweth all that is comprised in Religion when he knows what is to be Believed what is to be Hoped for and what is to be Loved He explains what is to be Believed by keeping to the Method of the Creed refuting the Errours and Heresies that are contrary to the Doctrine of the Church without naming their Authors He layeth down also most excellent Maxims such as these That Faith does not stop at a curious Inquiry after Natural Things That Errours of Right are more dangerous than Errours of Fact That aââ ãâ¦ã some Things which it signifies little wâââher
you shall Pray for a poor for lorn Man who wants all things and needs help not daring to address to God for himself for I perceive that every thing is against me since I undertook to Minister at the Altar who am laden with Sins who was brought up out of the Church and followed all my life-time a Profession different from this This Letter is of the Year 411. In the 76th Letter Synesius recommends to Theophilus Antonius who had been chosen Bishop of Olbiata a Town of his Province and was going to Alexandria to be ordained by Theophilus according to the Custom of that time The 95th was written by Synesius Seven Months after he was made Bishop He expresses with what difficulty he accepted of the Office and begs of God Grace to discharge it well The 105th is that famous Letter which he writ to his Brother when he was chosen Bishop of Cyrene wherein he sets down the Reasons that kept him from being promoted to that Dignity The rest of the Letters contain nothing that is remarkable touching Religion We have but two Homilies of Synesius which are not entire The First is the beginning of a Homily upon God's Law of which he understandeth what is said in the 75th Psalm In the Hand of the Lord there is a Cup c. The Second is likewise imperfect It is the Fragment of a Sermon preached upon Easter-Eve Both these Fragments shew That Synesius did not excel in this kind so much as he did in others yet he was Eloquent and composed Pieces of Rhetorick very well as appears by his Discourse concerning the Ruine of his Province And by his Panegyrick upon Anysius which come after the two Homilies now mentioned but there is a particular sort of Eloquence necessary for the Pulpit which he seems not to have had He had a better genius for Hymns We have Ten of his which are very excellent in which there are some Platonick Principles concerning the Trinity This Author ascribes much to God's Help and to the Grace of Jesus Christ which he requires us to ask by fervent Prayer that we may be delivered from those Passions and disorderly Desires of Lust wherewith we are transported We have lost a Philosophical Work of his Intituled Cynegeticks mentioned in the 153d Letter Synesius's Stile according to Photius's Judgment is great and lofty but something Poetical He chiefly excelleth in Narratives and Descriptions He varies the Matters which he treats of with long Prefaces and frequent Digressions He makes them agreeable by excellent Passages out of Histories and Fables and by the best Thoughts of the Profane Poets His Philosophy hath nothing harsh or disgusting He has found a way to render it pleasant and easie He seems to have designed only to recreate when he discovers the main Points of Wisdom The Reader is brought insensibly to the Knowledge of most Important Truths when he thought to read only pleasant Relations He observes in his first Letter That he writ two sorts of Books some of the most refined Philosophy and others Rhetorical Pieces but that they are easily known to be all written by the same Person who applies himself sometimes to serious things and sometimes to pleasant ones And indeed it maintains every where the same Character His Philosophical Works are adorned with Rhetorical and Poetical Figures and his Pieces of Eloquence are supported with Philosophical Thoughts He had a thorough Knowledge of Plato's Writings and from that Fountain he drew the noblest and the sublimest Notions in the old Philosophy concerning the Knowledge of the Supream Being and Principles of Morality He wrote but little touching our Religion and he was far from understanding it so well as he did Plato's Philosophy Yet one may see by his Letters that he was a very Wise Prudent and good Bishop He avoided Business as much as he could but when he was ingaged he acted very dexterously and brought every thing to a good issue His Behaviour was accompanied with great Freedom and Uprightness of Heart He wanted neither Courage nor meekness as there was occasion His endeavours to avoid being a Bishop and his manner of speaking of himself show his great Humility The Year of his Death is not known The Book of Dreams was Printed in Greek and Latin Translated by Ficinus at Venice in 1497. and at Lyons in 1541. In 1553. Turnebus published most of his Works in Greek The Letters were Printed in Greek at Venice in 1499. at Basle in 1558. and at Paris in 1605. with Turnebus's Translation The Hymns were likewise Printed in 1590. with the Poems of St. Gregory Nazianzen and those of St. Cyril of Alexandria and Reprinted in 1603. in Latin by Portus In 1653. Janus Cornarius translated most of Synesius's Works and his Translation was Printed at Basle in 1560. The Discourse of Government of the same Translation was Printed by it self at Francfort in 1583. At last Petavius having review'd and translated a new all Synesius's Works caused them to be Printed in Greek and Latin at Paris by Morellus in 1612. With Nicephorus's Notes and Commentary upon the Book of Dreams This Edition was corrected and augmented in 1640. wherein Synesius's Works are joined with St. Cyril's Catechetical Lectures POLYCHRONIUS POLYCHRONIUS Bishop of Apamea Brother of Theodorus of Mopsuesta and Disciple of Diodorus of Tarsus writ some Commentaries upon Job and Ezekiel whereof you Polychronius may find some Fragments in the Greek Catenae and in St. John Damascen if any Credit may be given to that sort of Quotations There are Spurious Acts of St. Sixtus with Polychronius dated after his Death He lived about the latter End of the Fourth Century Councils Assembled From the Beginning of the FIFTH CENTURY To the YEAR 430. The Canons of a Council supposed to have been held at Rome under Pope Innocent I. SIRMONDUS hath published some Regulations written in the Name of a Synod at Spurious Council of Rome under Innocent I. Rome to the Bishops of Gaul which are certainly ancient though it be unknown to what time they are to be referred but because they appeared to Sirmondus to be written in the Style of St. Innocent's Letters he believed they might belong to this Pope however they are placed immediately after his Letters and these are the Contents of them After a short Preface in the two first Canons according to Sirmondus's Distinction they speak of those Virgins Penance who having solemnly put on the Veil and received the Priests Benediction commit Incest or contract prohibited Marriages it is ordained That they shall do several Years Penance to bewail their Fault Penance is likewise imposed upon those that made the single Vow of Virginity though they made no solemn Profession nor received the Veil when they happen to Marry or suffer themselves to be taken away The Third Canon is concerning the Sanctity of Bishops of Priests and of Deacons they are told That they ought to give Example to the People That they are
Leontius Bishop of ââesus and some other of their neighbouring French Bishops who tolerated and also favoured those who opposed some of the Opinions of S. Austin concerning Predestination and Grace S. Prosper and Hilarius Scholars of S. Austin and close Adherents to his Doctrine finding themselves the weaker Side among the French went to Rome to complain to Pope Coelestine That the Priests of their Country were suffered to raise Disputes and Divisions in the French Church and to Maintain That S. Austin and his Scholars had promoted Opinions contrary to the Truth Coelestine blames the Bishops Who ought saith he to hinder these Disputes and not allow these Persons to take upon them to teach That the Silence which the Bishops kept upon this occasion might pass for a kind of Approbation That it was enough to declare their own Opinions not to suffer others to speak so that upon such like occasions Silence is a strong Presumption because the Truth could not but oppose it self to Error if Error it self did not please Lastly That the Bishops themselves were guilty of the Error which they favoured by their Coânivance and remaining in Silence He admonishes the Bishops in the next Place To reprove those who veââed their new Doctrines contrary to the Opinions of S. Austin Let them not be permitted saith he to speak for the future according to their own Fancy Let not Novelty be so bold as to oppose Antiquity Let those unquiet Spirits not trouble the Peace of the Church 'T is your Business to keep your Churches quiet Let those Priests know That they ought to be subject to you Let those that do not teach the Truth know That they ought to learn and not pretend to teach What Power have you in your Churches if they are Masters to teach what they please But it is no Wonder adds S. Coelestine if they are not afraid to attempt such things against the Living since they dare assault the Memory of our Brethren after their Death We have always had S. Austin of blessed Memory in our Communion whose Life and Merit is very well known his Fame hath not received the least Blemish and his Knowledge is so well known that my Predecessors have looked upon him as one of the most excellent Doctors of the Church All Orthodox Christians have ever thought well of him he hath been generally honoured and reverenced through the whole World Resist therefore the Enemies of his Memory whose Number increaseth every Day Suffer not those Religious Persons who defend him to be afflicted and persecuted He that is attacked by such a Novelty suffers in the Cause of the Universal Church Shew That those that displease us displease you which you will appear to us to do if having imposed Silence upon such Offenders you cause that there be no future Complaints upon this Account To this Letter of S. Coelestine is usually joyned a Collection of the Decisions of the Popes Coelestine's Predecessors and of the Councils of Africa upon the principal Points touching Grace and Free-will entituled The Authorities or Sentences of the ancient Bishops of the Holy Apostolick See concerning Grace and Free-will It is also called Rules of the Holy Apostolick See But the most common Name which is given it is Articles or Aphorisms about Grace This Writing is cited under the Name of S. Coelestine in the beginning of the Sixth Age for Dionysââ Exiguus hath put it into his Collection among the Decrees of this Pope And Petrus Diaconus writing to S. Fulgentius about the Year 519. cites a Passage of it as taken out of the Decrees of this Pope Cresconius Bishop of Africk who wrote toward the end of the same Age attributes it also to S. Coelestine And ever since it hath always been cited under the Name of this Pope as by the Church of Lyon by ãâã by Lupus of Ferrara by Remigiâs of Lyons by ãâã and many others It is very probable that it is this Collection of Testimonies of which Pope Hormisâââs speaks in his Letter to Possessor written in 520 where he says That tho' it is easily known what is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome touching Grace and Man's Free-will by the Writings of S. Austin yet âe hath more express and plain Articles in his Church-Registry which he will send him to whom he writes if he hath them not and thinks it necessary These Authorities seem to prove very strongly That this Collection is the Work of Pope Coelestine Yet this Opinion is opposed by so many Conjectures that almost all the Criticks in these ãâã times have abandoned iâ ãâã It is affirmed That these Aphorisms are not of the same Style with the Epistle of S. Câlestine 2. This Epistle concluding with these words Deus vos âncolumes custodiat Fratres chârissimi The Lord preserve you in Safety dear Brethren Altho' S. Coelestine doth not say That he added nothing more yet it is not credible that these Articles were any part of it or were added by way of Postscript 3. The Author of these Sentences doth not speak as in Pope he doth not give his Judgment or Advice witâ Authority He declares That he had no other design but to collect the Judgments of the Bishops of the Holy See or of the African Councils which the Holy See had made hers by heâ Approbation 4. Speaking of the Popes he always calls them the Bishops of the Holy Apostâ⦠See without giving them the Name of his Predecessors which no Bishop of Rome would have omitted 5. S. Prosper bringing the Decisions of the Popes concerning Grace and Free-will against Cassian cites âitly S. Coelestine's ââtter but says nothing of these Sentences Is it credible that he would have forgot them if they were this Popes This was a most decretory piece Photius and Viâcentius Lirinensiâ make mention of this Letter of S. Coelestine but speak nothing of the Aphorisms of Grace Besides Is it credible that Vincentius Lirinensis would have cited S. Coelestine's Letter for the defence of the Semi-pelagian Party if this Pope had condem ned them so manifestly 6. If we consider the manner how these Aphorisms are inserted in the Dionysian Code we shall easily guess that he did not attribute them to Pope Coelestine as some think for altho' he puts them at the end of his Letter yet he distinguishes them by this Title Here begin the Authorities of the Bishops of the Holy See concerning Grace And the same Remark is added to the end âero ends c. These are the Conjectures which may balance the Authorities which seem to prove that this Collection is S. Coelestine's And by these have the Criticks been obliged to search out some other Author of them than this Pope and having found none to whom this Work agrees better than S. Prosper many have confidently attributed it to him altho' they have neither MSS. nor ancient Author for them It is true that they quote a Passage of Hincmarus taken out of a Book he made
he had said nothing of Nestorius's thought he might take that place which bore the Name of the same Author to make a kind of Supplement to the Books of Heretical Fables Lastly if this Fragment and the Letter to Sporatius were Genuine how comes it to pass that it was ãâã alledged by those that defended his Memory at the time of the 5th Council Why did not Facundus and Liberius cite it How is it That S. Gregory being desirous to prove in his Letter that he wrote in the name of Pelagius II. to the Bishops of Istria That Theodoret had been Orthodox in his Opinions ever since the Council of Chalcedon hath brought no Arguments so Authentick as this would have been These are the Conjectures which seem to be very strong notwithstanding 't is very hard to believe That this Chapter should be added to the Text of Theodoret and so much the rather because Leontius Photius and the Abbot Theodorus acknowledged it to be Genuine and these two last have produced it likewise to justifie him The Conjectures which are alledged against the truth of this Passage are not sufficient wholly to determine it The first were of some consequence if that Work had been written before the Council of Chalcedon but since it is certain that it was written after Theodoret had solemnly cursed Nestorius it might be well enough that he changed his disposition in relation to him 'T is certain That as favourable as he had been to him he disliked him because he never would acknowledge the name of the Mother of God which the Ancients had given the Virgin Since he hath cited S. Cyril as one of the Fathers of the Church altho' he had at other times condemned him why might he not also blame Nestorius after he had heretofore commended him The different disposition that he was in made him speak differently It was the Interest of Theodoret after he had anathematized Nestorius to describe him in that sort as he doth in his Treatise of Heresies as it was before for his honour to excuse him as well as he could As to the difference of Circumstances which is observed between that which is said of the Life of Nestorius in that place and what Theodoret says 't is a thing that deserves no stay upon it 't is so easily solved When he says here that he knows not what was his first Education he speaks not of the time when he was under the Instruction of Theodore but of his first Instructions that he received from his Parents And altho' he knew That he had abode in the Monastery of S. Euprepius he could not know the Journies he had made before he came thither to retire As to that which he says of his Temper and Government he never speaks elsewhere to the contrary He hath spoken some things more honourably of him in other places he excuses him here he blames him and speaks of him as others either because he had changed his Opinion in reference to him or because he thought himself obliged to speak so that he might free himself from the suspicion that some had against him or to make it appear that he did sincerely anathematize him The third Conjecture is weaker than all the rest Theodoret in his last Book doth not name all the Heresies of which he had spoken in the former He contents himself to lay down the Principles which are contrary to their Errors Among those Principles there are things as well against the Heresie of Nestorius as against the Errors of other Hereticks He speaks not against the Heresie of Eutyches in this last Book altho' he hath ranked it among the Heresies in the first Book The Style of this place is not so different from Theodoret's as he imagines but on the contrary it may be said That it hath a great similitude and likeness to the other Chapters of that Work The 5th Objection shews us well enough That it is incongruous to make a Letter to Sporatius into a Chapter of Theodoret's Treatise of Heresies which was dedicated to Sporatius But this doth not prove That this Chapter is supposititious nor that it hath been taken out of that forged Letter But on the other side 't is probable That 't is through Mistake that the name of a Letter is given to an Extract taken out of a Treatise of Theodoret to Sporatius to which a Discourse taken out of some other Work of Theodoret's was joined So that it may be said That this Chapter of the Book of Heresies is genuine and that it was this which gave an occasion to forge the Letter of Theodoret to Sporatius A Conclusion drawn from a negative Argument is not very convincing The Defenders of Theodoret have not cited all the places which might be alledged in his Justification and we have not all that was then said for him S. Gregory did not know all his Works It is sufficient that we see that at length this place has been cited by Authors worthy of Credit as an undoubted Work of this Father I will not undertake to relate in this place what Theodoret hath spoken in particular of every Heresie for then I must transcribe all his Treatise He hath related the Errors of the Hereticks in a way very short clear and easie He hath gathered what he says touching the Ancient Hereticks out of S. Justin S. Irenaeus S. Clemens of Alex. Origen Eusebius of Palaestine and Phoenicia Adamantius Rhodon Titus Diodorus and Georgius These are the Authors which he cites in his Preface He speaks nothing of Epiphanius nor of the Latin Authors which have written an History of Heresies He is more exact and judicious than they yet he is not without some Faults He hath not put the Pelagians nor Origenists in his List of Hereticks He observes at the end of his 3d. Book that the greatest part of the ancient Heresies were of short continuance that they had but few Followers that they spread themselves but into few Provinces and that there was scarce any Man that made Profession of them whereas all the World was full of Christians who made Profession of the Orthodox Faith according to the Promise which God had made to his Church The last Book contains an Explication of the Faith of the Church opposite to the Errors of the Hereticks of which this is the sum There is but one first cause of all things viz. God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. This God is eternal simple and incorporeal infinitely good and just omniscient and almighty The Son is begotten of the Father before all Worlds He is not created but equal to his Father and of the same Substance eternal and almighty as well as he The Holy Spirit received his Existence from the Father He is neither created nor begotten but he is God and of the same nature with the Father and the Son These three Persons are no more than one and the same God who hath created Heaven and Earth Matter
upon him for suffering them In the One hundred twenty seventh he comforts the Orthodox Bishops of Aegypt who had retired to Constantinople Anatolius bore the Reflections which S. Leo made upon him with a sort of Disturbance Atticus the Priest whom S. Leo had branded sought to justify himself by sending some Writings which he pretended to be Orthodox but S. Leo was not satisfied with that but insisted upon it that he would plainly condemn the Error and Person of Eutyches and sign the Profession of Faith made by the Council of Chalcedon This Letter is dated in March 458. The One hundred twenty ninth Letter of S. Leo to Nicetas or rather to Niceas Bishop of Aquileia is dated March 21. in the same Year The First and Principal Question which he treats of in this Letter is this viz. Whether those Women who in the Captivity or Absence of their Husbands whom they thought dead having been married to others ought to return to their First Husbands if perchance they return again He answers That they are obliged to it if their First Husbands demand them again although their Second Husbands have not sinned in marrying them And he at the same Time orders That those Women be Excommunicated who would not return to them The Second Question is concerning those who have eaten Meats offer'd to Idols being urg'd to it through Hunger or constrain'd through Fear He says That they must be cleansed by Penance which ought to be considered not so much in respect of the length of Time as of the Sincerity of Grief He orders That they do the same to those who have been baptized a Second Time either by Force or because they have been engag'd in the Heretical Factions He wisely observes That the Time for Penance ought to be order'd according to the Devotion Age or Profession of the Penitents In fine as to those Persons who have been baptized but once but by the Hereticks he says That they ought to be Confirm'd by the Imposition of Hands with Invocation of the Holy Spirit Sola invocatione Spiritus Sancti per Impositionem Manuum Confirmandi In the One hundred and thirtieth Letter he comforts the Bishops of Aegypt who were retir'd to Constantinople and advises them not to suffer those Matters to be disputed afresh which were decided in the Council of Chalcedon This Letter is dated March 21. The One hundred thirty first is of the same Date He exhorts the Clergy of Constantinople to continue stedfast in the Faith and separate themselves from the Hereticks and he admonishes them That they ought not to suffer Atticus and Andrew to remain in the Church if they will not make Profession in Writing of the Faith of the Council of Chalcedon The next Day he wrote to the Emperor the One hundred thirty and second Letter in which he declareth to him That he ought not to suffer the Decrees of the Council of Chalcedon to be brought under Examination a second Time That he could neither Communicate with Hereticks nor depart from the Decisions of the Synod That he will send the Legates of the Holy See as he hath desired That he doth it not to enter into Dispute about that which hath already been decided but only to clear it and make it known In the One hundred thirty third Letter to the same Emperor dated Aug. 17. He writes to him That he had sent Two Bishops to require him in his Name to take Care of the Peace of the Church maintain the Faith and not suffer the Definitions of the Council of Chalcedon to be called in question He enlarges chiefly upon the latter shewing that if once it be allow'd to dispute continually and use Logical and Rhetorical Arguments in the Explication of the Mysteries there will never be an end That Jesus Christ hath evidently prov'd that he would not have these Arts made use of since he had not chosen Philosophers or Orators to preach his Gospel but poor Fishermen lest the heavenly Doctrine which is so powerful should be thought to need the Help of Humane Eloquence That the Arguments of Rhetorick appear so much the more by how much the Things that are treated on are the more obscure and uncertain and accounted true because they are defended with more Wit and Eloquence but that the Gospel of Jesus Christ hath no need of that Artifice because the Doctrine of Truth is clear in it self and that no Man seeks what is pleasing to the Ear when he desires only to know what he ought to believe Next he explains in a few Words the Doctrine establish'd in the Council of Chalcedon He bewails the Outrage committed against the Person of the Bishop of Alexandria He requires no Punishment but hopes that the Authors of it would amend and suffer Penance for their Sin In fine he recommends to him his Legates which he sent to him not to enter any Dispute but to represent to him what must be done for the Maintenance of the Faith and Restauration of the Church's Peace He prays him to send an Orthodox Bishop to Alexandria and re-settle the Bishops of Aegypt which have been forc'd away by the Hereticks This excellent Letter is one of those which F. Quesnel hath lately publish'd Prudens * Tricaââânus Bishop of Troyes hath copied out a part of it in his Book against Joannes Scotus Vigilius and Pelagius II. have also cited it and Facundus hath produced a Passage of it The One hundred thirty fourth Letter is a Discourse against the Error of Eutyches S. Leo relates therein first of all the Errors of the Hereticks about the Mystery of the Incarnation He proves That the Council of Nice hath confounded them altogether He demonstrates That it was necessary for the Reconciliation of Man to God that Jesus Christ should be God and Man and the Divine and Humane Nature should be united in one Person He proves afterwards by many Reasons confirmed by Testimonies of Holy Scriptures That these Two Natures are really and truly in Jesus Christ This in the last Place he makes good by the Authority of the Holy Fathers of whom he produces many Passages In a Word he proves and explains the Mystery of the Incarnation in a clear noble and sublime manner without involving himself in School Subtleties The One hundred thirty Fifth Letter is written to Neonas Bishop of Ravenna for so it ought to be read and not Legio F. Quesnel thinks it was written in the Year 458 a Thinks it to be written in 458. He affirms That there is a Fault in the Date of the Consulship and that we must read Majorian for Marcian 1. Because all the Letters of S. Leo written in 451. under the Consulship of Marcian and Adelphius carry all the Name of Adelphius and indeed when S. Leo mentions but one Consul 't is always the Western one which he names 2. It is there Consulatu but S. Leo never sets it down so but Consule or Consulibus 3. Because
he asserts That the Bodily Sense is of the same Nature with the Elements whereas the Soul doth not depend upon them nor was formed out of them but enlivens the matter To confute the Objections of the Book which he undertakes to Answer he says That every thing that is incorporeal is not uncreated That the Angels have Bodies really but they have also a Spirit and Soul He maintains That S. Jerom and the Philosophers likewise were of the same Opinion when they held That Men after the Resurrection would be exactly like the Angels because they would have a Body as thin and subtile as theirs and a Soul He wonders that any Christians should be so very dull as to imagine that they shall see God with their Bodily Eyes Having made some such like Observations he comes to the great difficulty The Soul is in the Body it is in a place Ergo 'T is extended and consequently Corporeal He demands of his Adversary in what part of the Body it is Is it in the whole and in every part If it be in all the Body why doth it exercise its thoughts in one place only oâ If it may be divided into parts why doth it not lose its strength when my Member is cut off This he says to intangle his Enemy But he must Answer the difficulty and for the perfect resolution of it he distinguishes Motion into Three sorts ãâã Localâ ãâã that which is performed in no place The First agrees to God only the Second to Coâ⦠Creatures and the Last is that which is proper to Spiritual Creatures God wills always the same thing this is a Stable Motion A Body moves from one place to another this is a Local Motion The Soul chuses a thing and again refuses it sometimes Hates sometimes Hates is sometimes Humble sometimes Proud sometimes Meâây sometimes Sad c. These are the Motions of a Creature which are not Local The effects ãâã perceived in a place but they are not done in a place As for example If a Man thinks upon a Mathematical Figure and to write some Name his Soul contemplates the Immutable Idaea's of these things his Arm and Hand writes them on the Paper by a Local Motion 'T is not his Soul that is Locally moved but without it his Arm could not perform so regular Motions You will say perhaps That it is that part of the Soul which is in the Arm that is Locally moved if that be so then the Soul is divisible Now that can't be for all things that can be divided may be handled by parts and act according to their parts Now the Soul acts all together in all its Motions it has neither length nor breadth noâ heighth it is neither moved upwards nor downwards nor in a circle it hath neither inward nor outward parts it thinks perceives and imagines in all its substance it is all Understanding Sense and Imagination and in a word we may Name the Quality of the Soul but no Man knows how to express the Quantity of it Wherefore 't is neither extended nor in a place Having thus settled the Nature of the Soul of Man he shews how it differs from the Soul of Beasts and Plants The main difference is this That these last have no knowledge The Beasts may have the Images of Bodies impressed on their Brain but they know them not nor know the things themselves whereas the Soul of Man knows things Corporeal by the Body and Spiritual without a Body sometime it doth not apply it self to things which make an impression upon its Body I read another hears me and understands what I read but I my self if my Mind be elsewhere know not what I have read My Soul is present to make me perceive the Letters but not to make me understand what I read But may some say The Substance of the Soul is one thing its Operation is another You are mistaken in confounding the Thoughts of the Soul with the Substance of the Soul The Soul is sometimes without Thoughts Besides when the Soul thinks 't is in the Body and by the Body that it thinks They are the Corporeal Images of Objects that make it think and it would never remember any thing if these Images were not impressed upon the Brain This is as far as the difficulty can be urged But Mamertus gives such an Answer as leaves no intricacy behind it The Soul saith he is not different from the Thoughts altho' the things upon which the Soul thinks are different from the Soul it self It is not true that the Soul is at any time without thoughts it can very easily change its thoughts but to be without is impossible and it is wholly there where its thoughts are fixed because it is all thought You are mistaken in distinguishing the powers of the Soul from the Soul it self altho' it be accidental to it to think upon this or that Object yet its Essence is That it is a thinking Substance The same is to be said of the Will it is by accident that it chuses this or that but its Substance is to Will It is all Thought all Will all Love It is said of God that he is Love but he is Essentially Love Essentially Loving that which is Good The Soul is also Love but such a Love as can incline it self to God or the Creatures to Good or Evil. But upon whatsoever Object it is fixed it is always truly said that the Soul is all Love no such thing can be found in the Body Now to prove That the Thoughts of the Soul do not depend on the Body and are not Corporeal our Author makes use of some Examples in Geometry We conceive saith he what a Point Line Circle and perfect Triangle is Can the Corporeal Figures of these things be represented They never have been and never will be Yet the Soul conceives them and knows the properties of them The Soul knows its Thoughts its Desires its Love Is this done by any Corporeal Image No certainly It is the inward Truth which speaks to it which makes it understand that the Thought is distinct from the Speech Lastly The Soul inquires after God knows him hath it any image of the Divine Nature but it self These are the Principles which Mamertus hath laid down in his First Book concerning the Substance of the Soul I have added nothing but kept my self almost always to his Words which I think fit to remark because his Philosophy hath so great a resemblance to the Meditations of a Famous Modern Philosopher that I may seem to have this rather from him than Mamertus or at least that I have put some new Air upon it But 't is no such thing 't is the Truth it self which causes this Agreement between Two Philosophers They had both of them rational and exact Minds they followed the same train of Thoughts and having freed themselves from all Natural and Childish Prejudices they found out the true Nature of the
Soul and the Adequate Idaea of a Spiritual Substance The only difference between them is that Mamertus enlarges upon proves and throughly discusses those Principles which this Modern Philosopher contents himself to propound as Truths well enough known He doth not relie upon what he hath said in his First Book but confirms his Arguments in the Second and Third Book In the Second he examines more at large what he had asserted in the First That the Soul had neither Weight nor Measure according to Quantity but according to Quality He proves this to be the Opinion of the Heathen Philosophers the greatest part of whom he maintains to have thought the Soul Incorporeal He adds the Testimony of the Ecclesiastical Writers and cites in particular S. Ambrose and S. Austin S. Jerom. He owns That S. Hilarius Pictaviensis did not favour his Opinion because he hath written that all Creatures were Corporeal and believed that Jesus Christ had not suffered Yet in his defence saith That he did extinguish the Crime by the Virtue of Confession and tho' these places of his Writings might be reproved yet that did lessen his Worth He Quotes S. Eucherius with Applause and speaks Contemptibly of his Adversaries Lastly He proves the Soul to be an Immortal Spirit from Texts of Holy Scripture In the last Book he explains the other difficulties that still remained It was Objected That the Soul is contained in the Body and consequently is in a place He demands how it can be that the Soul should be in the Body and yet penetrate all parts of the Body Is it without and not within Or is it within and not without Or is it within and without It is harder to resolve than to understand how a Spirit can move a Body Locally altho' it be not Locally in the Body But how may some say can the Soul be in a place and not be there Locally I Ask you Whether the World be in a place or not If you say That it is in a place you will be obliged to tell what that place is Is it in the World or not If it be out of the World where is it You are then obliged to hold that the World is infinite or say that it is in no place But how say they that the Soul of Jesus Christ departed from his Body after his Death if it were not in his Body as in its place If this be a good consequence saith Mamertus we must also assert That the Divinity of Jesus Christ was also in his Body as in a place because it was no longer united to the Body of Jesus Christ. The Angels have Bodies by which they become Visible The Devils have one by which they suffer These Bodies are not borrowed but their own proper Bodies yet they have also Spiritual Souls Lastly To resolve the last Objection That the Souls of the Wicked are in Hell and the Souls of the Just in Heaven he says If this ought to be understood of different places how could Abraham and Dives hear and talk to one another How could he see Lazarus in Abraham's Bosom Hell and Paradise ought not to be thought different places but different conditions The Just and the Unjust may be Locally in the same place but their state is not at all altered The Soul sees things Incorporeal which are not Locally present with it yet discerns not things Corporeal which are united to it when it cannot make use of the Bodily Eyes to see them Nothing is more nearly joined to the Soul than the Heart Bowels or the Brain and yet doth it see them But some may say That the Soul is Corporeal in the Eyes of God but Spiritual in its own Eyes This is a false distinction saith our Author for either it is Spiritual or Corporeal If it be Spiritual God knows it to be such if it be Corporeal it knows its self to be such as it really is And what is the Conclusion of the whole That Man is compounded of Two Substances the one Spiritual the other Corporeal the one Immortal the other Mortal that is a Soul and a Body This is also the Conclusion of Claudianus Mamertus who at the end of his Treatise had summed up all he hath said in these Ten Principles following I. God is Incorporeal the Soul of Man is the Image of God which it could not be if it were not Spiritual II. Whatsoever is not in a place is Incorporeal The Soul is the Life of the Body this Life is equally in all and every part of the Body Therefore the Soul is in no place III. The Soul thinks and its Nature is to think thinking is an Incorporeal thing and is in no place Ergo the Soul is Incorporeal IV. The Will is of the Substance of the Soul all the Soul wills it is all Will the Will is not a Body Ergo the Soul is not a Body V. The Memory is not in a place it is not extended the great number of things which it remembers doth not make it bigger nor the small number lessen it it remembers Corporeal things after an Incorporeal manner The whole Soul remembers 't is all Memory Ergo it is not a Body VI. The Body cannot be smitten but in that place only that is affected the Soul feels all at once when any part of the Body is touched Ergo this Sensation is in no place and by consequence is Spiritual as well as the Soul that feels VII The Body neither draws near to nor departs from God it approaches to or removes from other Bodies Now the Soul draws near to or departs from God it comes not near or goes far from Bodies Locally Ergo it is not a Body VIII The Body moves in a place and changes its place The Soul moves not it self after that manner Ergo it is not a Body IX Bodies ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Tâe Soul hath none of these â⦠X. All Bodies have several sides the riâht side the left side the upper side the under side ãâ¦ã the bâck side all this doth not agââe to the Soul Ergâ ât is Incorporeal This Book is Dâdicated to Sidâniââ Apoââinariâ who recompânses the great Honour Maâ⦠did him ây the laâge ãâã he gives the Author and his Woâk He preferrs him aboââ all the Wriâ⦠of that time He commends him as the most able Philosopher and ãâ¦ã wââch was thân ââong the Châistians He says That he was an absolutâ Maâ⦠of all the Sââeâces that the Pââity of his Language equalled or surpassed Terence'â Vârrâ's Pliââ's ãâã Thaâ he knew âow to âse terms of Logick Elâquently That âis shoât and concise way of Wâiting containâd the most deep Learning in a few Sentences and he eâpressed the greatest Tâââhâ in ãâã few Wââds That his Stile was not swelled with empty Hyâerbole's and did not deâenerâte iâto a Conââmpâible Flatness In fine He scruples noâ to coâpare him witâ the ãâã ââ¦nt Philosophers most Eloquent Orators and most Learned Fathers of the
That he acknowledgeth the Grace of God but after such a manner as that he joyns Man's endeavour and Labour with it 2. That he doth not say That the Free-will is lost but only that it is weakned and impaiâed and that he that is Sayed might have been Damned and he that is Damned might have been Saved 3. That Our Saviour out of the Riches of his Goodness hath tasted Death for every Man 4. That he desireth not the Death of him that dyeth but is rich unto all that call upon him 5. He professes that Jesus Christ dyed for the Wicked and for those who have been Damned contrary to his Will 6. He confesseth also that according to the disposition and order of Ages some have been Saved by the Law of Moses and others by the Law of Nature which God hath written ãâã the Hearts of all Men by the hope of the coming of Jesus Christ. It is very hard to salve this Proposition as well as the Condemnation in the Seventh if we understand it Literally since none but Pelagius hath dared to affirm That Men have been saved by the Law of Moses and by Nature But Faustus and others understand it plainly in another sense i. e. That the Law and Nature have contributed to their Salvation And for this reason it is that Lucidus adds That no Man can be purged from Original Sin but by the Intercession of the blood of Jesus Christ ân the last place He acknowledges Hell-Fire and Unquenchable ââames are prepared for those who have Committed heinous Crimes because they continue in their Sin they are justly condemned to Punishment which they also deserve that do not believe these truths The Letter concludes with these words Orate pro me Sancti Apostolici Patres c. O Holy and Apostolick Fathers pray for me I Lucidus the Priest have Subscribed this Epistle with my own Hand and I affirm all that is affirmed in it and condemn all that is condemned in it The Bishops of the Council of Arles appointed Faustus Bishop of Ries to write upon this Subject as he tells us in the Preface to his Treatise of Free-will and Grace Dedicated to Leontrus Bishop of Arles These are his Words You have done O my Blessed Father a great deal of good to all the French Churches in assembling a Council of Bishops to condemn the Error of Predestination But methinks you have not sufficiently provided for your reputation in commanding me to put in order and set down in Writing what was said in your Conferences for I am sensible of my inabilities to perform it as it ought to be The honourable judgment which your Charity hath passed upon my abilities hath caused you to make a Choice of which you have Reason to repent At the end of this Preface that after this Work was finished the Council of Lyons had ordered something to be added to it F. Sirmondus concludes from these Records That the Council of Arles was held about the year 475 consisting of 30 French Bishops against the Predestinarians Heresie which began in the time of St. Austin and had its Original in the Monastery of Adrumetum from whence it passed into France where it was opposed by Hilary and Prosper and condemned by Caelestine That it was supported by St. Austin's Writings not rightly understood as is observed in the Chronicon of Tiro Prosper and Sigibert opposed by the Author of the Book of Heresies Entitled Praedestinatus and by Arnobius Junior ranked among the Heresies by Gennadius at the end of St. Austin's Book revived in the Ninth Age by Gotteschalci and confuted at the same time by Rabanus and Hincmarus That Lucidus who was engaged in this Heresie was summoned to the Council of Arles where this Question was disputed and he was ordered by this Council to make the Recantation of which we have already spoken That Eaustus in his Books of Grace doth only deliver the Judgment of this Council That his Work was afterward approved in another Council of Lyons that this Bishop is of very Orthodox Sentiments and is still honoured as a Saint and that Joannes Maxentius and Gotteschalci do wrongfully enveigh so much against him This is almost all that F. Sirmondus saith about this matter in his History of the Predestinarians But on the other side some able Divines maintain that this Heresie is a meer Chimaera and a Calumny which the Semi-Pelagians made use of to blacken the Scholars of St. Austin That there were no Predestinarians in the time of S. Austin That the Monks of Adrumetum who are made the first Authors of this Heresie never thought of any such thing but that all the contest that was among them proceeded from hence that they were not rightly understood That Cresconius and Faelix had accused Florus of denying Free-will and the Judgment which God will render to every Man according to their Works because they did not well understand his Sentiments and that indeed St. Austin who upon the relation of these two Monks had believed that Florus was in an Error having heard him himself found that he had not a false Opinion touching Grace and that it was not he that deserved reproof but they who did not understand him when he explained his Judgment That as to the Controversie which arose among the French some time after it is evident that they are not the Predestinarians which St. Prosper and Hilary oppose but the Enemies of the Doctrine of St. Austin who imputed to his Scholars the same Doctrines which were attributed to the Predestinarians The Authors alledged for the justification of this Heresie are much to be suspected The first is Tiro Prosper an Author of little Credit who says that this Heresie is not taken out of St. Austin's books not rightly understood as Sigibert hath corrected it but out of St. Austin himself qââ ab Augustino accepisse dicitur initium which proves that he that inserted this place in St. Prosper's Chronicon was an Enemy to St. Austin Predestinatus is an Author full of faults and Pelagian Errors The same may be said of Arnobius who doth not acknowledge Original Sin Gennadius was a Learned man but well known to be a favourer of the Semi-Pelagians As for Paustus 't is certain he was their head That Gelasius hath condemned his Books That St. Fulgentius hath confuted them in 7 Books approved by the Council of Sardâ⦠That Caesarius hath written against his Doctrines in a Book approved by Pope Faelix That Pope Hârmisdââ hath rejected theâ That Petrus ãâã hath pronounced Anathema against him That the Head of a Sect so often condemned ought not to be looked upon as a Saint That he was in another very dangerous Error maintaining that all Creatures are Corporeal That all that he says of the Council of Arles and the approbation given to his Books by the Council of Lyons is not true or that the Authority of these Councils is of little consequence since they were
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 ây 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
several Authors but chiefly by Eusebius Caesariensis and Rufinus whom he makes a Roman Priest and whom he says falsly to have been present at that Council And indeed this History is nothing almost but a Collection of Treatises and pieces taken out of Eusebius Socrates Sozomen and Theodoret. That which is not taken out of these Authors is either dubious or manifestly false as all that is related from Chap. 11. to Chap. 24. of the second Book about the Disputes of the Philosophers upon the Trinity and the Divinity of the Holy Spirit It is manifest that these Disputes are a mere Fiction and 't is certain that the Question concerning the Divinity of the Holy Spirit was not moved in the Council of Nice There are many other faults in his History There is neither Order in his Relation nor Exactness in his Observations nor Elegancy in his Expressions nor Judgment in the choice of Things nor good Sense in his Sentences So that this Historian must be accounted a bad Compiler who hath collected without any Judgment whatsoever he found concerning the Council of Nice whether bad or good not examining whether it were true or false Which being so 't is no wonder that he hath said That Hosius supplied the place of the Bishop of Rome in the Council of Nice and that it was he that called that Council though both are contrary to the Testimonies of the Letters of the Council it self and of the Authors that lived at that time This Work is divided into three Books the two first contain the History of the Council the third is made up of three Letters of the Emperor Constantine It hath been published in Greek and Latin by Robert Balforeus a Scotch-Man with his own Notes and printed at Paris by Morellus with some Works of Theodorus a Priest of Raithu in the Year 1595. 1599. ca. and in 1604. by Commelinus Since it hath been put into the Councils of Rome in Binius's second Edition as also in Louvre's and the last Editions It would be better to leave it wholly out in the first Edition of the Councils that shall be hereafter published The Author of the Books Attributed to S. DIONYSIUS The Authors of the Books attributed to S. Dionysius the Areopagite the Areopagite THis is a fit time to speak of the Books attributed to S. Dionysius the Areopagite For * Dallée's Opinion comes near our Authors but Dr. Cave and the Learned Bishop of Chester Dr. Pearson place him sooner viz. about the Year 362. since they first appeared in the beginning of the sixth Age it is very probable that they were composed at the end of the fifth We will not repeat here what we have said in the first Part of this History but content our selves to observe whatever is most useful in them The Book of the Coelestial Hierarchy is full of Metaphysical Remarks about the Number and Distinction of Angels He divides them into three Hierarchies and nine Orders to which he appropriates different Names and Offices But in all that he says upon this Subject there is nothing either solid or profitable His Book of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy is more useful because they teach us after what manner the Sacraments were administred in the Church in the time of this Author Let us begin with Baptism The Bishop having preached and instructed the Catechumen he sends for him into the Congregation of the Faithful where he recites with all the Church an Hymn taken out of Holy Scripture and having kissed the Holy Table he goes to the Catechumen and demands of him Why he is come thither He having answered him Because he loves God and believes the Truths which he hath heard of him The Bishop gives him a Description of the Christian Life and then asks him If he will live after this manner After he hath promised it he lays his Hands on him and orders the Priests to write down the Name of this Man and of the Person that hath answered for him When this is done he goes on to rehearse some sacred Prayers when they are finished he causes him to be stripped by his Deacons and having caused him to turn and stretch forth his Hands toward the West he commands him to breathe three times against Satan and to make the ordinary Renunciations viz. of the World Flesh and Devil three times Then he turns him to the East and causing him to lift up his Hands towards Heaven he enjoyns him to profess that he believes all that Jesus Christ hath taught and whatsoever is contained in the Holy Scriptures This being done he causes him to rehearse the Confession of Faith three times Then he makes some Prayers blesses him and lays his Hands on him Then the Deacons strip him quite and the Priests bring the Oyl of the Holy Unction and the Bishop having begun to anoint him by making the Sign of the Cross thrice upon him he leaves it to the Priests to anoint his whole Body From thence he brings him to the Sacred Font and having sanctified the Water by the Invocation of the Holy Spirit and having consecrated it by putting in Oyl in the form of a Cross three times while they recite some Prophesies he commands them to bring him to the place where he is to be Baptized The Priests call him and his Godfather by their Names They bring him to the Bishop who takes him by the Hand and the Priests having read his Name he dips him three times in the Water and invokes the Name of the Holy Trinity every time as he goes into and come out of the Water When this is done the Priests carry him away and lead him to his Godfather After he has put on his Cloaths they conduct him again to the Bishop who having anointed him with that Oyl which renders Men Holy he commands him to receive the Sacrament which hath a particular Power to perfect Holiness Thus this Author describes the Ceremonies of Baptism and then makes some Mystical Observations upon them which we shall pass over that we may come to what he says about the Eucharist which he calls the most perfect of all the Sacraments He says That we have Reason to give it the Name of Communion â ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by way of Eminence because this is the Sacrament which unites more particularly and that it is for this Reason that it is not permitted to execute any Function in the Hierarchy unless it be consummated by the Communion After this Reflexion he returns to the manner of the Ceremony and says That the Bishop being returned to the Altar sings some Psalms and all the Clergy sing with him Then the Deacons read the Holy Scriptures and when they have done reading they put out the Catechumens * Lunaticks Persons at certain seasons vexed with unclean Spirits These were kept from the Sacrament though Baptized ob mentis inconstantiam for the levity and inconstancy of their Minds Enurgumeni and
exalt Free-will above Grace the better to discover the power of this Grace which is not known when it is not received and the great struggle that arises then because without it no Truth can be known neither is there any Light to discover it After this Preface he proposes and maintains the following Propositions 1. That Predestination is purely gratuitous and that this Decree is not made upon foresight of Men's Merits 2. That Infants who die after they are baptiz'd are sav'd by the mere Mercy of Jesus Christ and that those who die without Baptism are condemn'd upon the account of Original Sin 3. That those who believe this Grace is given to all are not Catholicks in their Sentiments since not only all men have not Faith but there are even whole Nations who never heard of the Gospel 4. That it may be said that Man is sav'd by Grace and by his Good Works provided it be confess'd that the Grace and Mercy of God prevents the Will of Man and works in him to will 5. That all those whom God would have sav'd are predestin'd because the Almighty Will of God does always take effect his Power can never be defeated 6. That the Free-will which was sound and entire in the first Man is become weak by sin but is improv'd and strengthned by Grace 7. That the Question concerning the Origine of Souls must not be ventilated or it must be treated of without bitterness but that there is no doubt that Souls do contract Original Sin They cite at the end of this Letter a passage of Pope Hormisdas in favour of St. Austin and praise the Books of Fulgentius about Predestination and Grace and those which he wrote against Faustus We have nothing now remaining but some Fragments of the Ten Books of St. Fulgentius against a famous Arian call'd Fabianus The first Book was entitled Of the most High the Comforter of the Titles of Ambassador Doctor and Judge There he prov'd that these Titles agreed to the Father and the Son In the second Book he shew'd that the Functions of Sighing Desiring and Praying which are attributed to the Holy Spirit are not contrary to his Divinity In the third he prov'd that Immensity agreed to the three Divine Persons In the fourth that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are equally adorable He distinguishes the Worship of Latria from that of Dulia the first agrees to God only and the second may be given to Creatures He speaks also of the Properties which belong to each Divine Person The fifth Book was about the Title of Image which is given to the Son of God where he proves that he is so the Image of God as to be also of the same Nature In the sixth he proves that the Son is eternal as well as the Father The seventh establishes the Divinity of the Holy Spirit The eighth was about the Mission of the Holy Spirit The ninth is concerning the Invocation of the three Divine Persons where he demonstrates that the Son and the Holy Spirit are to be Invocated as well as the Father That Sacrifices are to be offer'd to the Son and Holy Spirit as to the Father and that the like Thanksgiving is paid unto ââm The tenth was about a Writing upon the Apostle's Creed where he observes that it was so call'd either because it is a Compact or because it is an Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine After this he proves that what in the Creed is attributed to the Father agrees to the whole Trinity The Treatise address'd to Victor is upon the same Subject and written at the same time There he refutes the Discourse of a Priest nam'd Fastidiosus who having quitted a Religious Profession and the Priestly Office to lead a licentious Life had also abandon'd the Faith by turning Arian St. Fulgentius proves in this Treatise the Divinity of the Son and explains how it may be said That the Word only is Incarnate The time is not certainly known when the Treatise of the Faith was written which is address'd to a Lay-man call'd Peter who having a design to make a Journey to Jerusalem desir'd before his departure to have an Instruction containing the Articles of Faith that he might know what he ought to believe St. Fulgentius explain'd to him first what he ought to believe concerning the Mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation And then he told him that all Beings both Spiritual and Corporeal are the Work of God who created them that Spiritual and Intelligent Beings were to subsist eternally by the Will of God that the Angels being created free and having power by the Grace of God to merit their Happiness or else to fall from it by their sin one part of them had perish'd and the other part was confirm'd in the Love of God which they could never lose any more That the first Man who had been created perfectly free had fall'n into sin and so subjected all Mankind to death and sin That God had deliver'd many of them by his Grace by the help of which they were enabled to live well and to obtain eternal Life That there is no state wherein a Man can deserve well but only during the time of this Life but as long as a Man lives upon this Earth there is always space for Repentance That this Repentance is unprofitable to those that are out of the Church That all Men shall rise one day and those who shall die in a good state shall be happy for ever and others shall be condemned to eternal punishment That a Man comes to the Kingdom of Heaven by means of the Sacraments which Jesus Christ has instituted That none can obtain Salvation without the Sacrament of Baptism except those who shed their Blood in the Church for Jesus Christ That he who has receiv'd Baptism out of the Church has receiv'd this Sacrament and if he returns into the Church he ought not to be re-baptiz'd but his Baptism will profit him nothing if he continues out of the Church or if he lives ill after he has been receiv'd into the Church That those who live well ought continually to do Works of Mercy to expiate those sins which even the Just commit every day That to avoid them the humble Servants of Jesus Christ shun Marriage and abstain from eating Meat and drinking Wine Not that they think that 't is forbidden to use Marriage to eat Meat and drink Wine but because they are perswaded that Virginity is to be preferr'd before Marriage and that Abstinence restrains a Man from sin That neither second nor third Marriages are forbidden and that excess in the use of Marriage is a Venial sin but to those who have made a Vow of Continence Marriage is a great Crime Afterwards he reduces this Doctrine to forty Heads which he thinks are to be believ'd There was a long Article added at the end of this Treatise which is cut off by the Authority of some ancient
inserted with Turrianus's Version in the First Volume of the Auctuarium Biblioth Patrum Tom. I. p. 319. PETER of Laodicea WE know nothing in particular of this Author of whom we have a short and a bad Peter of Laodicea Explication of the Lord's Prayer It is believed he lived in the Seventh Century THALASSIUS a Monk WE have 400. Moral Maxims or Truths of this Author's famous only for his strict Friend-ship and Concerns with Maximus to whom he did also propound many Questions Thalassius upon the Holy Scripture Printed in Bibliotheca Patrum Tom. 12. ISAIAH Abbot ABbot ISAIAH's Precepts are much of the same kind they are Advices Considerations and Instructions useful for Monks It is also thought he lived in this Century Isaiah Abbot THEOFRIDUS Abbot TWO Homilies upon Relicks are attributed to this Abbot of whom we know nothing in particular Theofridus DONATUS DONATUS the Son of Valdelenus Duke of the Country between Mount S. Claude and the Alpes was brought up in this Religious Life by Columbanus and was afterwards Donatus made Bishop of Besancon toward the Year 630. where he founded two Monasteries the one for Men the other for Virgins He made Rules for both That which he made for Monks is in the second part of S. Benedict of Aniana's Rules and is entituled Capitula to serve instead of Advertisements to the Friars of S. Paul and S. Stephen that is to the Monks of the Monastery of S. Paul for the Monastery founded by him at Besancon was called so and to the Canons Regular of the Cathedral Church which had S. Stephen for its Patron This Rule contains nothing in it but some particular Advices The other Rules of Donatus for the Monastery of Nuns founded by his Mother Flavia is larger well-penned and contains very wise Constitutions taken out of the Rules of S. Caesarius S. Columbanus and S. Benedict It is found in the third Part of the Rules of Benedict of Aniana that Bishop was present at a Council of Challon upon the River Saone in the Year 650. VITALIANUS VITALIANUS was chosen Bishop of Rome August 29th 656. and governed that Church fourteen Years and six Months He hath left us some Letters Vitalianus The 1st is directed to the Archbishop of Creet upon the Bishop of Lappa's Complaint against the Judgment which that Bishop had given against him Vitalianus saith He hath examined that Matter in a Council where the Acts of that Process were exhibited and that the Bishops acknowledged the Cause had been illegally managed and that the Bishop of Lappa had been wrongfully condemned That they were greatly troubled that he had put that Bishop into Prison and hindred him from coming to Rome to clear himself Therefore he declareth null and void all the Proceedings of the Council of the Archbishop of Creet against John Bishop of Lappa and at the same Time pronounceth that Bishop to be innocent and as such absolveth him In the 2d he intreats Vaanus the Emperor's Officer to procure that Bishop's Restauration In the 3d. he orders Paul Archbishop of Creet to cause his Churches to be given him again He complains That a Deacon had married a Wife since the Time of his being in Orders and that he did minister in two Churches He prays him to put a stop to that Disorder and to follow no longer Eulampius's Counsel he being a wicked Man sowing Divisions among them for his own Profit In the 4th Letter he desires George Bishop of Syracuse to be favourable to John of Lappa and to endeavour his re-establishment The 5th Letter alledged by Bede is directed to the King of Northumberland in England He commends his Zeal and answers him about the Time of keeping Easter He promises him to send him a Bishop when he hath met with one fit for it and willing to go over into England He thanks him for his Prayers and sends him some Relicks The 6th is directed to the Benedictine Monks of Sicily He acquaints them how grievous it is to him that their Monasteries and Estates have been spoiled by the Incursions of the Barbarians He tells them He sends them some Monks of the Congregation of Mount-cassin and exhorts them to obey them and to labour with them for the resettling of their Monasteries and Lands S. ELIGIUS S. ELIGIUS born near the City of Limoges a Goldsmith and Friend of King Dagobert was ordained Bishop of Noviodunum or Noviomum Noyon in 646. and died in 663. S. Owen who wrote S. Eligius his Life tells us he made Exhortations to his People every Day with unwearied Labor that his Sermons were very short but they contained important Instructions and wholsom Advices That Author collected them into one Discourse containing the most usual Instructions which Eligius gave to his People They are for the most part drawn out of S. Caesarius's Sermons which Bishops did then make use of to preach to their People This Discourse was printed among S. Austin's Works and now is in the end of the sixth Volume 'T is an Abridgment of the principal Duties of a Christian. In the first place he shews the Obligation laid upon Pastors to instruct their People He exhorts them to remember often their baptismal Vows and to meditate on the last Judgment He shews them that it is not enough to bear the Name of a Christian but that we ought to act and live suitable to it He endeavours to create in them an Abhorrence of profane Superstitions and the Relicks of Idolatry Then he gives them sundry wholsome Advices to honour God to love Enemies to give Alms to frequent Divine Service and Sunday-Sermons to q Cross themselves often with the Sign of the Cross. After the Cross was admitted into the Church and became an Object of Worship it was accounted of wonderful efficacy to sanctify all things to cleause and bless our Food confer Grace consecrate Sacraments procure Remission of Sins preserve from the Malice of the Devil and what not So that Eligius thought no better Advice could be given to the Christians than to cross themselves often with the Sign of the Cross that they might thereby be shielded and defended from all Evils and sanctified throughout though the Effect proved it to be but an idle Conceit cross themselves often with the sign of the Cross to give to the Church the Tenths of their Gain or Possessions to avoid r Mortal Sins i. e. More heinous and notorious Guilts for tho' no Sin be so venial and trivial Bellarm. de amiss grat statu p c l. 1. c 4. Matt. 5. 22. 7. 5. 1 Jo. 5. 16. Gal. 3. 10. Ezek. 8. 4. Featly Ser. p. 653. Field of the Church p. 148 277. as the Romanists teach with one Consent as neither to offend God nor deserve Damnation in its own Nature and so only subject them to temporal Punishments yet all Protestants disallow a Stoical Parity and equality of Sins and hold that some are
greater others less some unto others not unto Death And though every the least Sin be offensive to God and deserving Damnation in its own Nature yet they say some are mortal others venial 1. Comparatively and by God's Favour as the Sins of the Elect being committed with Reluctancy and without consent are more pardonable than the Sins of wilful Offenders 2. Because some Sins exclude not Grace the Root of Remission and Pardon out of the Soul but others cannot stand with Grace and so leave the Persons in a state of Wrath and Damnation who are guilty of them Mortal Sins to watch over their Actions and Words to despise the World to repent continually and never to despair of Salvation c. It is observed in this Treatise that every Christian hath a good Angel to assist him and when he sins he drives away his good Angel to take a Devil There are Sixteen Homilies more bearing Eligius's Name but it is doubted whether they be really his because they are made up of Passages and Quotations of the Fathers as of S. Austin S. Leo S. Ambrose Caesarius of Arles and S. Gregory These Fathers are likewise cited there under the Name of Saints and Blessed S. Benedict is there called most Blessed and most Holy Father They say that these Citations are affected they add That there be even some Passages of Authors who wrote since Eligius's Time as of S. Isidore of Sevil of Alcuin of Haymo of Halberstat From whence they conclude That these Sermons are the Work of an Author of the Ninth Century Yet methinks he that composed them first was older than that Time and many things may easily have been added to them since However there are yet found in them some remainders of the Ancient Discipline not to be slighted This is an Extract of them In the First Sermon for Christmasday he shews the Happiness of the Peace which Christ brought to the Earth and exhorts his Hearers in the end to Almsgiving He relates the Story of a Gardner who being used to bestow what he earned upon the poor was tempted to keep back part of it in case he should fall sick that having thus gathered many Crown-pieces he got a running Sore in his Foot which fell into a Gangreen so that the Surgeon appointed a Day to cut off his Leg seeing there was no other Remedy but in the Night the Gardner coming to himself and having begged God's Forgiveness for his not having continued in his Almsgiving and promised to continue it hereafter he was miraculously cured and the Surgeon coming the next Day to cut off his Leg found him gone abroad The Second Sermon is upon the Purification After having uttered some Allegories upon that Ceremony of the Jews he speaks of the use of the Church to have on that Festival s Tapers light during the Mass upon the Feast of the Purification This Ceremony tho' not taken from the Sacrifices called Lustrum as this Author imagines being offered in the end of February yet was certainly instituted in imitation of a Festival celebrated at Rome either in remembrance of Ceres's search after Proserpinâ or in honour of Februâ the Mother of Mers which were both solemniz'd with Tapers burning in their Hands by the Romans These Superstitions the Bishops of the Church very much abhorred yet because it conduced greatly to the Conversion of the Gentiles to make as little Alterations in their Ceremonies as possible therefore did the Heads of the Church institute the same Ceremonies to be used by the Christians on the Feast of the Purification as had been used upon the Calends of February at Rome And this the learned and judicious Rhenanus on Tertul. l. 5. cont Mar. Tertullian confidently afferts Negari non potest Ardentium Cereorum quos bodie Christiani die Purificatâe Mariae ex more circumferunt a Februalibus Romanorum sacris Originem sumpsisse Pertinaci paganismo mutatione subvenâum est quem vei in totum sublatio potius irritasset Tapers light during the Mass and says That the Original of this Custom came from the Romans who having collected the Tribute every fifth Year offered solemn Sacrifices in the end of February and kindled Tapers and Torches in the Town which Ceremony was called Lustrum That the Church hath changed that Superstition into an Ecclesiastical Ceremony ordering Tapers to be kindled yearly in the beginning of February in the Time when S. Simeon took our Lord in his Arms. One must needs be very credulous to believe this Conjecture which hath neither Truth nor Likelihood in it The Third Sermon is upon the Fast of Lent therein he enlargeth upon the good Effects of Fasting The Fourth is on Holy Thursday He observeth That on that Day was made the Reconciliation of Publick Penitents guilty of Crimes which deserved that the Bishop should separate them from the Altar and then reconcile them Then he addresseth his Speech to those Penitents and exhorts them to examine themselves whether they be reconcil'd to God or not because it may happen that although they be reconciled by the Ministery of the Bishop yet they be not so with God who alone grants the true Reconciliation He shews them that to be truly reconciled they ought to be according to the Apostle new Creatures purged from the Crimes of the Old Man That they who continue in their sinful Habits should not imagine that they can throughly be reconcil'd before they have made t Made a Satisfaction proportionable to the greatness of their Sins Tho' these Words seem to come up to the Doctrine of Satisfaction held in the Church of Rome yet it does not appear that the Fathers of this Age had any other Notion of Satisfaction than that which was received in the Ages before which is much different from and much more Orthodox than the Popish We have a Definition of it p. 2. given by Isidore of Sevil to this effect Satisfaction is an Exclusion of the Causes and Occasions of Sin and a Cessation from Sinning which is almost the same with S. Austin's Satisfactio est peccatorum Aug. de dog Eccles. c. 54. causas excindere eorum suggestionibus nullum aditum indulgere This is the Nature of true Repentance which being proportion'd in some measure to the greatness of our Guilts the more pensive and hearty by how much our Sins are more heinous and aggravating is all the Satisfaction that God expects of us besides a firm Faith and Dependance on the Merits of Jesus Christ. The popish Satisfaction is a clear different thing as they Greg. de Val. to 4. d. 7. q. 14. So. Drido Tapper c. define it thus It is an equivalent Compensation made to the offended Justice of God for the Injury done unto him by Sin partly by our Actions and partly by our Sufferings whereby we deliver our selves from Divine Vengeance and save our selves from Punishment A Doctrine unknown to Antiquity Ambr. in Luc. Ser. 46. Of
Iconoclasts HEre are some Authors of whose Works we will speak more at large when we treat of the Acts of the seventh Council Some Greek Authors Tarasius Photius's great Uncle who from the Emperor's Secretary was made Patriarch of Constantinople anno 785. and died in 806. wrote a Circular Letter about Images two Letters directed to Pope Adrian and an Apologetick Oration upon his Election Epiphanius Deacon of Catana in Sicily recited a Panegyrick in the seventh Council Basil of Ancyra offered a Confession of Faith to the same Synod Theodosius Bishop of Ammorium made a Writing upon the same Subject ELIAS Cretensis THis Author made some Commentaries upon S. Gregory Nazianzen's Works which are printed in the second Volume of that Father's Works He hath done the same also upon the Works Elias of some other Greek Fathers which are found Manuscript in Libraries He wrote Answers to Dionysius the Monk's 8 Questions which are extant in Greek and Latin in the fifth Book of the Greek and Roman Law l. 5. p. 194. GEORGE SYNCELLUS and THEOPHANES GEORGE SYNCELLUS of the Patriarch Tarasius made a Chronicon from the Creation of the World to the Reign of Maximinus and Maximinianus anno 300 which hath George c. been continued by Theophanes a Monk to the Reign of Leo Armericus anno 813. they are printed the one at Paris 1652. and the other 1655. Councils held in the Eighth Century The Assembly of Barkhamstead in the Kingdom of Kent WIGHTHRED King of Kent held an Assembly Anno 697. which Birchwald Bishop of Canterbury assisted at and Gebmond Bishop of Rochester with Assembly of Barkhamstead several of the Clergy and Laity which made some Ecclesiastical and Civil Laws The 1st ordains That the Church shall be free and enjoy her Courts of Justice Revenues and Pensions that they shall pray for the Prince and voluntarily submit to his Orders The 2d That the Fine for infringing the Justice of the Church shall be 50 Pence as that of the King's Justice is The 3d ordains That the Adulterers of the Laity shall be put to Penance and they of the Clergy shall be deposed The 4th That Foreigners guilty of that crime shall be expelled the Realm The 5th and 6th That those of the Nobility overtaken in that sin shall be fined in 100 Pence and the Peasant in 50. The 7th permits an Ecclesiastical Person guilty of Adultery if he break off that habit to continue in the Priesthood provided that he have not maliciously refused to administer Baptism or that he be not a Drunkard The 8th imports That if one with the Tonsure that is a Monk do not keep his Rule he shall retire into an hospitium with permission The 9th That the Slaves affranchised before the Altar shall enjoy their liberty and be capable of Succession and of the other Rights of Free Persons The three next Canons punish with pecuniary Mulcts those who set their Slaves to work or to go a Journey on a Sunday The four following appoint Corporal Punishments or Fines against those who sacrifice to Devils The 17th imports That the Bishop's and the King's word ought to be believed without any Oath The 18th That Abbots shall swear as Priests do and that the Priests shall swear before the Altar by saying simply I speak the truth in Jesus Christ and I lie not that the Deacons shall take the same Oath The 19th That other Clerks shall take four persons more with them to clear themselves by Oath and that they shall lay one of their hands upon the Altar The 20th That strangers shall not be obliged to bring other persons with them The 21st That the Peasants shall present themselves with four persons more and shall bow the head before the Altar The 22d declares That the Causes of the Bishops Clients belong to the Ecclesiastical Court The 23d ordains That if any body impeach a Slave his Master may purge him with his bare Oath provided he take the Eucharist but if he taketh it not he must put in Bail or submit to the Penalty The 24th That a Clergy-man shall purge his Slave with his bare Oath The 25th That he that kills a Robber is not liable to pay any Sum for that Death The 26th That he that shall be catched carrying something away shall be punished with Death Banishment or Fine according to the King's will That he that got hold on him shall have half the Fine but if he kills him he shall be fined in 70 Pence The 27th That he that helps the flight of a Slave who hath robbed his Master shall be fined in 70 Pence and he that killeth him shall pay the worth of him The 28th That the Strangers and Vagabonds which run up and down the Country without blowing the Horn or crying aloud shall be used as High-way-men These Laws are followed with some Canons concerning the Pecuniary Compensation of the Wrongs done to the Church or the Priesthood They were found in the same Monument but it is not known whose they are nor at what time they were written Councils held in England about the matter of Wilfrid FEW Men have been more molested and cross'd in their Life than Wilfrid Abbot of Rippon and afterwards Bishop of York He was a Native of Northumberland born towards the year Councils of England 634. He left his Country to go to Rome where he was instructed in the discipline of that Church Thence he returned to Lyons and there he received the Tonsure from Delphin Bishop of that City who was murder'd soon after by Ebroin's order After his death Wilfrid was called home by Alfrid eldest Son of Oswi King of Northumberland who gave him the Monastery of Rippon founded by him in the Bishoprick of York He was ordain'd Priest by Hagilbert Bishop of Dorcester He was present at the Conference held at Streneshall before the King about the difference between the Church of Rome and the ancient British and Irish Churches about Easter-day and there he maintain'd the usage of the Roman Church against Colman an Irish Man Afterward he was nominated to the Arch-bishoprick of York and passed over into France to get himself ordain'd there being then but one Bishop in England He was consecrated by Angilbert Bishop of Paris and Eleven Bishops assisted at that Ceremony During his absence they that stood for the usage of the Irish Churches perswaded King Oswi to put into the Church of York Ceadde Abbot of Listinguen who was consecrated by one English and two British Bishops S. Wilfrid after his return did immediately retire into his Monastery and after that he was called out into Mercia where the King gave him Lichfield to erect a Bishoprick or a Monastery there After the death of Adeodatus Bishop of Canterbury he perform'd for some time the Episcopal Functions in that Church till Theodorus obtained that See This Man re-established S. Wilfrid in the Arch-bishoprick of York and deprived Ceadde who did very patiently bear
Euphration which Passage proved nothing neither for nor against Images yet it gave an Occasion to condemn the Memory and the Writings of Eusebius against whom they cite Antipater of Bostra The Sixth Piece alledged by the Council is an Extract of the Ecclesiastical History of one John whom they call the Separate who says That Christians would not have Angels Pictures to be drawn and that Philoxenus could not endure Doves They prove by a Passage of St. Sabas's Life that Philoxenus was one of the Hereticks Enemies to the Council of Chalcedon They cite in the Eighth Place a Fragment of the Council of Constantinople held under Mennas where Severus is accused of breaking down Altars and taking away the Doves hanging over them saying Doves ought not to be called the Holy Ghost In the Ninth they report a Testimony of John Bishop of Gabale accusing Severus of not honoring Angels The Tenth Monument is a Passage of Constantinian Library-Keeper of the Church of Constantinople maintaining that no Image can be made of the Deity but of Christ's Humanity there may The Eleventh is a Passage of Evagriââ's History about Christ's Image sent to Abgarss The 12th are some Extracts of the Spiritual Meadow From all these Passages they pretend to conclude that the Jews the Pagans the Samaritans the Manichaeans and the Severians were the first Enemies of Images Lastly They read an Account of the Origine of the breaking down of Images shewing that a certain Jew of Tiberius counterfeiting himself to be a Diviner and Sorcerer persuaded the King of the Arabians to order all Images to be taken away out of the Churches of the Christians in his Kingdom promising him a long Life if he would do it that this Order being given out the Christians refusing to take away the Images with their own Hands the Jews and the Arabians had pulled them down burnt torn or defaced them that the King instead of the long Life which the Magician had promised him died within two Years and some Months after and that his Son put the Magician to Death and suffered Images to be set up again After this Relation all the Bishops demanded the Restoration of Images they called for some to be brought in that they might honour them and repeated the Anathema's against those that broke or dishonored them In the 6th Action held the 5th or the 6th of October they read the Acts of the Council of Constantinople held against Images and a uu A Confutation of the Acts of the Council of Constantinople The Arguments drawn from the Scriptures and Fathers which the Council of Constantinople insists upon to shew the Incongruity of the Worship of Images to the Nature of God and the Design of the Christian Religion though not so clear and cogent as might be produced yet are so weakly and insufficiently answered by the Nicene Fathers that they may well pass for inconfutable till some better Answer of them appears which since M. du Pin hath not done but doth acknowledge the same It is needless to stand upon the Justification of the Former or labour to discover the Insufficiency of the Latter which is so evident to every Reader Refutation of what is in this Council The 1st thing they quarrel at is the Title it had assumed of The Holy Seventh General Council They pretend it cannot have those Titles since it was not received but contrary wise rejected and Anathematized by several Bishops nor was it approved by the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops about him nor by his Vicars nor by a Circular Letter according to the usual Law of Councils And lastly that the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch and Jerusalem did not assent to it neither in Person nor by the great Bishops of their Provinces Yet they do not question the Number of the Bishops set down in the Acts of 338 But they say that this Number could not make a General Legitimate Council because those that composed it had swerved from the Truth and embraced an Error I omit the Prefaces of the Council of Constantinople and the Reflexions of the Nicene Council which respects the Confession of Faith about the Trinity and the Incarnation and the Acknowledgment of what was decided in the six first General Councils which are Articles which both Councils agreed in But the former pretends that they who make Images do overthrow the six first Synods The others contrariwise maintain that they who condemn them do act contrary to the Spirit and the Practice of the Bishops who assisted at these Synods and contrary to their Tradition There is nothing weaker than what the former do alledge to prove that the Use of Images is contrary to the Decision of the General Councils There are nothing but a meer Petitiones Principii or evident Sophisms which deserve no Refutation There is one upon the Eucharist which is nothing better than the rest They pretend that no Image of Christ ought to be made because the Eucharist is the visible Image To which the Fathers of the Second Council answer That the Name of Image is not given to the unbloody Sacrifice offered by the Priest but it is the very Body and the very Blood of Christ that those Oblations before the Sanctification have been called Types by some of the Fathers as by Eustathius of Antioch and St. Basil but after the Sanctification they never were called Types or Images of Christ and that they are believed and properly called the Body and Blood of Christ. They add that their very Adversaries could not forbear acknowledging this Truth and that they confess in the same Place that the Eucharist by the Consecration is made Christ's Body which is an Argument that the two Councils held the Reality of Christ's Body in the Eucharist and that they differ only in the Expression and the Name they give it the one pretending that the Eucharist even after the Consecration may be called and considered as an Image and a Type and the others denying expresly that the Fathers did ever give it that Name after the Consecration which is not altogether true though is cannot be said that the Eucharist may be called a Type or Image as other Images and the whole arguing grounded upon this Analogy be very weak The Bishops of the first Council deny Images to be of the Tradition of Christ of the Apostles or of the Fathers Those of the second maintain them to be a Tradition of Christ which was not written and prove it by the Story of the Statue erected by the Woman with the Bloody-Flux to the Honour of Christ. I should desire a better Proof of it They alledge the other Proofs they had brought in some of which do indeed shew the Use of Images was common in Churches in the 4th and the 5th Century but never aâ one comes up to the time of Jesus Christ the Apostles or their immediate Successors The Bishops of the first Council add That there is no Prayer in the
Abbots who are not Priests upon pain of Expulsion from their Monasteries Nevertheless it permits those who are admitted into Monasteries or their Parents or Relations to give voluntary Gifts yet upon this condition That those Gifts shall belong to the Monasteries whether he that is Admitted stays or goes away unless the Emperor turn him out The 20th prohibits making double Monasteries that is for Men and Women and as for those that are Founded it ordains That the Monks and Nuns shall dwell in two several Houses that they shall not see one another nor have any Commerce together The 21st forbids Monks to quit their own Monastery to go to others The 22d forbids Monks to eat with Women unless it be needful for their Spiritual Good or upon a Journey yea though they be their Relations Moreover to the Acts of this Council is joyned a Panegyrick pronounced in Commendation of it by Epiphanius Deacon of Catana in Sicily a Letter of Tarasius to Pope Adrian about the Subject of the Council another Letter of the same Person against the Simonists in which he hath gathered together several Canons upon that Subject another Letter of his to John the Abbot upon the Definition of the 2d Nicene Council and against Simoniacal Ordinations The Acts of this Council being brought to Rome they sent Extracts of them into France where they had a different Practice about Image-worship They were indeed permitted to have them and to put them in their Churches but they could not endure that any Worship or Honour should be paid them whilst the Cross and Sacred Vessels were permitted to be honoured Charles who was then King of France and afterwards was Emperor caused these Extracts to be Examined by * Of whom Alcuin was the chief and R. Hoveden says He it was that composed the Caroline Books some Boshops of his Kingdom who composed a Treatise to vindicate their own Usage and to answer the Proofs alledged in the Council of Nice for the Worship of Images This Work was put out by Charles's Order and under his Name within three Years or thereabouts after the Nicene Council It is divided into four Books In the Preface having observed that the Church redeemed with the precious Blood of Christ her Spouse washed with the saving Water of Baptism fed with the precious Blood of her Saviour and anointed with Holy Oyl is sometimes assaulted by Hereticks and Infidels and sometimes vexed by the Quarrels of the Schismaticks and the Proud that she is an Ark containing those that are to be saved figured by that of Noah which undergoes the Storms of the Deluge of this World without any danger of Shipwrack which does not yield to the deep and deadly Whirlpools of this World and which cannot be overcome by the Hostile Powers wherewith she is surrounded by reason Christ does continually fight for her so that she does still withstand her Enemies and inviolably maintain the true Faith and Confession of the Trinity That she is a Holy Mother without Spot and Corruption always Fruitful and yet a Virgin that the more she is set on by the Contradictions of the World the more she encreases in Virtue the lower she is brought the higher she raiseth up her self After this Encomium of the Church they add in Charles's Name That seeing he hath taken the Reins of his Kingdom in his hands being in the Bosom of this Church he is obliged to endeavour her Vindication and Prosperity that not only the Princes but the Bishops also of the East puffed up with sinful Pride had swerved from the Holy Doctrine and the Apostolick Tradition and do cry up impertinent and ridiculous Synods to make themselves famous to Posterity that some years ago they had held in Greece a certain Synod full of Imprudence and Indiscretion in which they went about to abolish the use of Images which the Ancients have introduced as an Ornament and a Remembrance of Things past and to attribute to Images what God hath said of Idols though it cannot be said that all Images are Idols But it 's plain there 's a difference between an Image and an Idol because Images are for Ornament and Remembrance whereas Idols are made for destroying Souls by an impious Adoration and vain Superstition That the Bishops of this Council had been so blind as to Anathematize all those who had Images in Churches and so boast that their Emperor Constantine had freed them from Idols That besides this there was another Synod held about three years since composed of the Successors of those of the former Council yea and of those that had assisted at it which was not less Erroneous and Faulty than the former though it took a clean contrary way That the Bishops of this Synod order Images to be Adored which those of the former would not permit to be had or seen and that whenever these find Images to be spoken of whether in the Scripture or in the Writings of the Fathers they conclude from thence that they ought to be Worshipped That thus they both fall into contrary Absurdities those and confounding the Use and the Adoration of Images and the other believing Idols and Images to be one and the same thing As for us says he being content with what we find in the Gospels and the Apostle's Writings and instructed by the Works of the Fathers who have not swerved from him who is the Way and the Truth we receive the 6 first Councils and reject all the Novelties both of the first and the second Synod And as to the Acts of this latter which are destitute of Eloquence and common Sense being come to us we thought our selves bound to write against their Errors to the end that if their Writing should defile the Hands of those that shall hold it or the Ears of those that shall hear it the Poison which it might instill may be expell'd by our Treatise supported by the Authority of the Scripture and that this weak Enemy which is come from the East may be subdued in the West by the Sentiments of the Holy Fathers which we have produced In fine we have undertaken this Work with the consent of the Bishops of the Kingdom which God hath given us not out of any ambitious Design but animated with the Zeal of God's House and the Love of Truth because as it is a holy Thing to pursue good Things so it is a great Sin to consent to Evil. This is the Subject of his Preface In the first Book after having made some Cursory Observations upon some Terms of the Council he shews that the places of the Scripture alledged in that Council for Image-worship being explained in their genuine Sense and according to the Fathers do not at all prove what they pretend In the first Chapter he reproves this Expression in the Letter of Constantine and Irene By him that Reigns with us He says That it is a piece of intolerable Rashness in Princes to compare their Reign
and such as ought to be Received by the Faithful Which they cannot do Worthily and Effectually unless they can discern the Excellency of the Mystical Body and Blood of Jesus Christ from what they perceive by the Tast. That it is called Sacrament either because under the Species of a Visible Sign God is pleased to Work some Secret Thing or because the Holy Ghost does Consecrate the Visible Sign and under the Veil of Outward Signs does Work some Mystical Thing for the Salvation of the Faithful That all Sacraments in general may be defined to be an Earnest or a Pledge of Salvation by which under a Visible Representation the Holy Ghost works in an Invisible manner That such are in the Church the Sacraments of Baptism Chrism and that of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ therefore called Sacraments because under the Visible Species the Flesh is Consecrated by a secret and Divine Vertue so that they are in effect Inwardly what they are thought to be Outwardly by Faith That in Baptism we are Regenerated by the Holy Ghost and afterwards by the Power of Jesus Christ nourished with his Body and Blood and that we ought not to wonder that the Holy Ghost who has Formed our Saviour's Body in the Virgin 's Womb should by an Invisible Power change the Bread and Wine though there appear no Visible Change because it is done Spiritually and Invisibly That by the Consecration of this Mystery the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are truly Created Produced and Sacrificed in a Mystical Manner That it is not to be deny'd but that there is some Figure in this Mystery being 't is a Mystery but that the Figure does not hinder the Reality That what appears outwardly is a Figure but the inward a Reality because the Body and Blood of our Saviour are made of the Substance of the Bread and Wine So that this Mystery is both Figure and Verity a Figure of the hidden Truth and a Verity not perceivable indeed by the Senses but believed by Faith That the Ancient Figures differed vastly from this they being but a Shadow and Image of what we really Injoy by Receiving this Mystery the real Flesh and real Blood of Christ our Saviour That those who do not dwell in Christ that is who remain in sin take the Sacramental Elements out of the Priest's hand but do not eat and drink Spiritually the Body and Blood of Christ. That in fine the Church is the Body of Christ that all the Faithful are Members of his Body and that the Eucharist is daily Consecrated to be the Body of Christ but that those onely who are his Mystical Members are allowed to Receive it That from this Food some receive Life others Death it being Life to such as are Members of Jesus Christ and Death to such as are Members of the Devil That we must raise our Mind to God and Believe that after the words of Consecration 't is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ that very Flesh which was Born of the Virgin and died upon the Cross. That Christ himself is upon the Altar Offering as High-Priest our Vows and Supplications to the Lord. That the Angels are present at this Sacrifice in which our Saviour once Sacrificed upon the Cross for the Salvation of Mankind is daily offered in a Mystical manner for the Atonement of the Sins we daily commit to Discriminate the Good from the Wicked to dwell Corporally in such as have received Baptism that they may dwell in him and to Nourish the Faithful That therefore he is called Bread because as the Bread nourishes the Body so the Body of Jesus Christ nourishes the Soul of the Faithful That he is also called Wine because as the Wine is made of the Juice of several Grapes so we are Justify'd by the Graces and Spiritual Influences which flow from him who is the True Vine of which the Faithful are but Branches That it is the very Blood which ran out of his Side at his Death and Passion and that for that Reason it is that we mingle Water with the Wine because out of his Side there came both Blood and Water That others say Water is mingled with the Wine to joyn together the Water of Baptism and the Blood which was the Price of our Salvation That whether the Consecrating-Priest be a good or bad Man we ought to Believe when we receive the Eucharist from his hands that we equally receive the Truth of the Mystery because the Consecration is not made by the Merit of him that Consecrates but by the Power of the Creator and the Virtue of the Holy Ghost and that it is Jesus Christ who Baptizes as it is he by whom through the Virtue of the Holy Ghost the Eucharist becomes his Flesh and Blood That the Priest is not the Creatour of Christ his Body but that he Prays to God the Father by his Son that he Offers Gifts unto him before the Consecration and Prays him to Accept of them and that he makes this Offering in the Name of the Church and of the Faithful That although this Sacrament has neither the Tast nor the Colour of the Flesh and Blood yet by the strength of Faith and Reason our Soul receives 'em as such and that as we have received in Baptism the Image of our Saviour's Death so we receive in this Sacrament the Likeness of his Flesh and Blood so that there is truth in this Mystery and yet the Heathens cannot Reproach us that we Drink the Blood or Eat the Flesh of a Dead Man That to evidence these Truth either to such as called them into question or to those who had a tender love for these Holy Mysteries the f The Body and Blood of our Saviour visibly appear'd This Fabulous Apparition Hospinian de Sacr. l. 4. p. 1. p. 325. tells us is plainly foisted into the Original Manuscript and doth so plainly differ from the Style and Doctrine of the rest of the Treatise that it is easily discernible to a moderate Judgment that the Chapters 38 39 wherein it is are added by the Monk who put it out or by some other who would promote the Doctrine of Transubstantiation by such Legendary Tales Body and Blood of our Saviour have sometimes visibly appeared upon the Altar particularly to a Priest who had desired it ardently That the Consecration of this Sacrament is made by the energy of the words of Jesus Christ. That howsoever this Mystery be the Flesh and Blood of Christ it may nevertheless be call'd Bread and Wine by reason of the Effects they produce For as the Terrestrial Bread is a support to out Temporal Life so this Spiritual Bread yields unto us a Spiritual and Heavenly Life and as Wine doth rejoyce the Heart of Man so does this Heavenly Drink rejoyce the inward Man That by receiving the Flesh of Christ we receive his Divinity and that we receive both his Body and Blood because they cannot
but to Men and consequently 't is they not the Spirit which are the Authors of the Words and Expressions which they use although he inspires them with the Sense and Doctrine they ought to write In his Answer to the Third Objection he opposeth the Opinion of his Adversary who maintain'd that the Souls of Men were Created separated from the Bodies he affirms that we ought to believe that they are created in and with the Body although the Philosophers delivered the contrary and Austin doubts of it In the next place he answers a question put to him by his Adversary Whether Truth be any thing but God He answers That Truth is not always taken for God himself although 't is not to be doubted but that God is Truth The Fourth Question concerns the Righteous Men of the old Law Agobard maintains that they may be called Christians although they were not called so because they believed in Jesus Christ and belonged to him being anointed with the invisible Ointment of his Grace as well as those who were good Men among the Gentiles The Jews who were in credit at Court because they had Money obtained an Edict from the Emperour which contained many things in their Favour and among the rest that none of their Slaves should be baptized but with their Masters Consent This Edict being very prejudicial to Religion and contrary to Christian Piety Agobard addressed a Writing to Hilduin the King 's great Chaplain and to the Abbot Vala who was at Court in which he shews the injustice and impiety of that Prohibition being evidently contrary to the Design of the Gospel and the intention of Jesus Christ who will have all Men to be saved and hath commanded his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all Creatures and baptize all that believe whether Bond or Free He desires them to whom he writes to endeavour all they can to get this Edict recall'd which he hoped might be done more easily because he offered to pay the Jews the Ransom of those Slaves according to the appointment of the Canons made in that Case In the Letter written by Agobard in his own Name and Hildegisus and Florus's who were Clergy-men of Lyons to Bartholomew Bishop of Narbonne he speaks of a certain Distemper which took Men suddenly and threw them down like the Falling-Sickness Some also felt a sudden Burning which left an incurable Wound This ordinarily happen'd in the Churches and the astonish'd People to guard themselves from it gave considerable Gifts to the Churches to secure them Agobard disallows this practice and searching into the Cause of this Plague he says 't was nothing else but the will of God who punisheth Men by the Ministery of an Angel After which he relates several Examples of the like Chastisements out of Scripture in which God hath exercised his Justice by Angels and other Creatures He affirms that these sort of inflictions are not from the power of the Devil although he owns that God sometimes suffers the Devil to disquiet and torment Men. Returning then to the Question of Bartholomew viz. what we ought to think of the practice of those who coming into the Churches where they were seized with this Distemper bring presents to them He says that fear causes these people to do what they ought not and hinders them from doing what they ought for it were better says he to give Alms to the Poor or Strangers to address themselves to the Priest to receive Unction according to the Command of the Gospel and of the Apostle to fast and pray and do works of Charity It is true adds he that if the Offerings given to the Church be employed as they ought they are an Action of Charity but because at present they are used only to satisfie the Covetousness and Avarice of Men and not to honour God or relieve the Poor it is a shame to give them to such covetous Wretches to be kept or ill imployed by them The Injustice and Violence which was practised among the people of Lyons and could not be restrained obliged Agobard to write to Maâfredus a powerful Man in the Emperour's Court. He begs of him to use his Interest with his Prince to hinder those Disorders and cause justice to be done This Compliment is short but urgent The Letter to the Clergy of Lyons concerning the manner how the Bishops and Pastors ought to govern is an excellent instruction for them He says that those who are entrusted with the Government of the Church the Spouse of Christ who is Peace Truth Justice and the Author of all Good ought to love that his Spouse singularly as himself and apply himself entirely to the spiritual good of his only Spouse That those who neglect to do their Duty and place all their Pleasure and Affections upon Riches Finery Hunting and Debauchery are the destroyers of God's Work and the Assistants of Anti-christ That though they seem to be Bishops in the Eyes of Men they are not so in the Eyes of God no more than Hypocrites who affect to appear outwardly Holy but whose Heart is full of Impurity who seek not the Edification and Instruction of the Faithful but their own Interest and Glory such are those who seek to get into the sacred Ministery only to obtain Honour and Riches or to live finely He adds that all those that make it their main Business to gain themselves the Love and Respect of those that are under their Charge and not to make Jesus Christ be loved and honoured by them who is the only Spouse of the Church are Adulterers and unworthy of the sacred Ministery because they design rather to feed themselves than their Flock Nevertheless he advises that the Sheep should endure wicked Pastors through Prudence when they can't reform them His Book concerning the Dispensing of Ecclesiastical Revenues was not written against the ill usage which Clergy-men might make of them but against the Laity who took them away and kept them unjustly Lewis the Godly having called an Assembly of Clergy-men and Lords at Attigny in 822. for the Reformation of Church and State Agobard advises Adelardus Abbot of Corbey and another Abbot called Helissicarius that they ought to rectifie the Disorder that was in the Church about the Ecclesiastical Revenues which the Laity had appropriated to themselves that they might speak to the Emperour of it He zealously represents to them that the Churches having been enriched by the Gifts of the Emperours Princes and Bishops had made an abundance of Laws and Canons for the preservation of the Revenues and to hinder Lay-men from encroaching upon them That the necessity which they alledged was not a sufficient Reason to over-look those Laws nor to authorize the Usurpations they had made of them The year following this matter was more fully debated in an Assembly held at Compeigne where the Clergy again represented that the Laity were not to be suffered in the quiet Possession of the Revenues of the
Bishop of Meaux's upon this Question If it be lawful for a Man to Marry his Concubine He tells him that some Laws have forbid it and others have permitted it and leaves the whole matter to the discretion and judgment of the Bishops after which he exhorts the Bishop of Meaux not to approve of King Philip's Marriage with Bertrade The XVIIth to the regular Canons of St. Quentin at Beauvais does with a great deal of Eloquence set forth the troubles he is involved in since he was made a Bishop admonishes them to continue to observe the Rules of their Institution and to make choice of a Superiour in his place In the XVIIIth Ivo highly blames Cardinal Roger the Pope's Legate for being inclin'd to Absolve Simon Count of Niofle whom he had Excommunicated for Adultery This Count after the Death of his Wife Marries one with whom he had formerly been too familiar and now demands Absolution Ivo absolutely refuses it and sends him to the Pope with a Letter setting forth the whole affair the Count makes his suit to Roger hoping to meet with more gentle treatment from him than at the Pope's hands Ivo hereupon declares to the Cardinal that he cannot absolve him nor will he admit him to the Communion till he has an answer from the Pope either in writing or by word of mouth The XIXth Letter is written to William Abbot of Fècamp who had compar'd him to St. John and to Elijah for his boldness in declaring his dislike of the King's Marriage Ivo acquaints him how great inconveniences that liberty of his had brought him under and desires the Prayers of him and his Monks He cannot grant the Abbot's request in behalf of a Canon Regular who would have leave to quit his Rule and enter into the Monastery of Fècamp he tells him if he knew the Man he would not be concern'd for him that he is a proud and idle Fellow that for ten years together he had never as he ought observ'd his week for reading Mass but was at any time for reading out of his turn when there was an occasion of serving his vanity by it however if the Canons his Brethren would consent he should leave their House he would not hinder him and gave him full leave to ask them Ivo being taken into Custody for opposing King Philip's Marriage the Clergy and people of Chartres threatned to assault the Count unless he would release him to them therefore Ivo writes disswading them from all thoughts of taking Arms which would be a means not of procuring his liberty but prolonging his Confinement that it would moreover offend the Divine Majesty that it was not fit for a Bishop to recover his Rights by violence that he was resolv'd rather to Dye than that any Man should lose his Life to rescue him that that would much sooner be obtain'd by their Prayers which was all he had to beg or expect from them These are the Contents of his XXth Letter In the XXIst he pays his thanks to Hoel Bishop of Mans for the Prayers he had put up to God for his deliverance He desires of him the Relicks of St. Julian's Body which had been lately translated to Mans. The XXIId to King Philip acknowledges that having been by that Prince advanc'd to a Bishoprick he owes to him under God the highest respect and observance but that having had the misfortune to fall under his displeasure for offering him as a true and faithful Servant necessary and wholsome advice he had been ill treated and the goods of his Bishoprick embezled by his Enemies that therefore he pray'd His Majesty to excuse his not coming to Court and to allow him some time to breath and to put his affairs into order again He hopes God will one day convince him by experience of the truth of that Maxim of Solomon's that the wounds and harsh usage of our friends who love us are to be prefer'd before the kisses of our enemies and flatterers He concludes with assuring the King that he is ready to answer his accusers when he may know what they have to object against him and that he will defend himself in the Church if his crimes fall under the Ecclesiastical Cognizance or before His Majesty's Council if he be charg'd with any against the State The XXIIId is to Guy Chief Master of the King's Houshold who had interceded with the King in favour of Ivo he returns him thanks for his good offices and assures him 't is impossible they should come to any good terms till the King have totally quitted Bertrade that he had seen a Letter of Pope Urban's to all the Prelates of the Kingdom Commanding them to Excommunicate him in case he continued to live with her and that this Letter had been long since publish'd if he had not conceal'd it out of the true love he bore His Majesty and his unwillingness that his own people should rise up against him The XXIVth is to Hugh Arch-Bishop of Lyons he acquaints him how great joy it was to him to hear that Pope Urban had appointed him Legate of France in which employment he had so well acquitted himself under Gregory the VIIth but that he was now not a little griev'd to understand he had by the advice of several of his friends refus'd to accept of that Office again by reason of the too great business which must lie upon him at the present juncture of affairs while the Church labour'd under such troubles as would not easily admit of being compos'd Ivo tells him he had been ill counsel'd and ought not to be sway'd by his friends perswasions that though in Italy a second Ahab was arisen and France had another Jezebel who endeavour'd to overthrow the Altars and kill the Prophets of the Lord yet he should remember the saying of Elijah that God had yet left him Seven Thousand Servants who had not bow'd their knees to Baal that though their Herodias should request the Head of John and Herod should grant her what she ask'd yet John should not be afraid to tell him 't is not lawful for thee to put away thy own Wife and to Marry another Man's Wife or Concubine These and the like instances are urged by Ivo to induce Hugh to take upon him the Legatine Authority which he hopes he will soon acquaint him he has yielded to and desires to know where he may meet him about the beginning of Lent His XXVth Letter is address'd to Pope Urban and lays before him an account of the troubles and difficulties he was daily oblig'd to encounter with which made him often resolve to quit his Bishoprick He then intreats the Pope not to hearken to what should be alledg'd in his own defence by one of the Clergy of Chartres who had been degraded for Simony Money-Coining and other irregularities The XXVIth is to Walter Abbot of St. Maur des Fossez who had thoughts of leaving his Monastery by reason of the great corruptions and
insight both into Logick and Sophistry to discern good Argumentations from false Ones He maintains that without Logick 't is very difficult to refute Hereticks The Fifth is writ to St. Bernard about the Intelligence which Abaelard had received from Heloissa Abbess of Paraclete that that Saint coming to that Monastery had observed them to repeat the Lord's Prayer quite different from what was done in other Churches and looked upon it as a Novelty which he though Abaelard had introduc'd All the difference consisted in that they said our Super-substantial Bread instead of our Daily Bread Abaelard observes that the first Phrase being in the Text of St. Matthew who has given us the Lord's Prayer more entire and compleat than Saint Luke and whose Phrases are follow'd except in this it seem'd more reasonable to change nothing in the Text and to make use of the Phrase which St. Matthew has used than to insert into St. Matthew's Text a Phrase taken out of St. Luke's Gospel That therefore one ought not to accuse those of a Novelty who in repeating the Lord's-Prayer say Give us our Super-substantial Bread instead of our Daily Bread since they are the very Words used by St. Matthew whose Form was follow'd That however he did not blame the contrary Usage but that he did not believe this Usâge was to be preferâ'd to the Truth and the rather because the Greek Church had retain'd the proper Terms of St. Matthew's Gospel That St. Bernard had the least reason of any Man to find fault with this Alteration since there were in his Order a great many Novelties contrary to the Ancient Customs and Usages of the Monks and Clerks even in the Divine Service such as for instance the Singing of New Hymns the Singing of the same Hymn on different Festivals the not repeating the Suffrages which were elsewhere said after the Lord's Prayer the omitting the Commemoration of the Virgin and of the Saints at the End of the Office the having excluded almost entirely the Usage of Processions the Singing Allelujah even to Quinquagesima-Sunday the not reciting the Apostles Creed at Prime and the Vespers and the Singing of the Invitatory the Hymn and the Gloria Patri the last three days in the holy Week Tho' those Practices were contrary to the common Usage of the Church yet Saint Bernard did not think himself oblig'd to leave them because he esteem'd them more reasonable and more Conformable to the Rule From hence Abaelard concludes that upon a stronger Reason one could not well disapprove the Alteration which he had made in the Lord's Prayer tho' it might seem a Novelty and the Rather because the Novelties which are prohibited are not those of Expressions but those of Opinions since the Church has invented new Phrases to explain our Mysteries That Lastly there be a World of different Customs in the Church with respect to Ceremonies That in Rome no Church beside the Lateran observes the ancient Usage of the holy See That in Milan only the Cathedral Church observes its ancient Rites That the Church of Lions is the only Church which has retain'd it's Ancient Office and that the Diversity of Ceremonies has likewise it's Advantages Lastly he concludes by saying that every one might abound in his own Sense and repeat the Lord's Prayer in the way which he should think most proper That he does not pretend to perswade others to imitate him therein That he left those who would at their Liberty to change the Words of Jesus Christ but for his part he would endeavour all he could to keep to the proper Terms of Jesus Christ as well as to his Words The sixth Letter is an Exhortation to the Religious of Paraclete to study that they might be capable of Reading and understanding the Holy Scriptures It hardly consists of any thing else but passages out of Saint Jerom upon that Subject He congratulates their Happiness in having such a Learned Abbess as was able to teach them Latin Greek and Hebrew the Languages which were necessary for their rightly understanding of the Scriptures He recommends to them the having recourse to the Original Text which is the foundation of all Versions and to study Hebrew and Greek the Study whereof he complains was very much neglected in his Time He wishes that those Nuns would recover that Learning which the Men had suffer'd to be lost And takes notice that they might apply themselves to it the more easily because they were less Capable of working with their Hands than Men and were the more oblig'd to it by the Quietness and Sedateness of their Lives and because the Weakness of their Sex render'd them more liable to temptations which they might divert by being thus employ'd The Seventh is a Panegyrick on Saint Stephen dedicated to the Nuns of Paraclete From the year 1121. wherein Abaelard was forc'd in the Council of Soissons to cast his Book The Charge brought agaiâst Abaelard of Theology into the Fire he had met with no disturbance about his Doctrine tho' he had still continu'd to write and teach the same things as before The first who renew'd the Charge of Errors against him was Wiliam Abbot of Saint Thierry who having read two Books of Theology compos'd by Peter Abaelard and therein found such Propositions as put him to some disturbance and which he thought to be contrary to sound Doctrine sent an account of them to Geofrey Bishop of Chartres and to Saint Bernard Abbot of Clairvaux exhorting them to declare themselves against those Novelties and to get them to be condemn'd His Letter is the three hundred and twenty sixth among the Letters of Saint Bernard He therein says that he is very much abash'd to speak his mind at a time wherein those whose duty it was to do it held their Peace but that he could not be silent when he saw the Faith of the Church corrupted by Very Dangerous Errors and the rather because the Contest was about the Faith which related to the Trinity the Person of our Mediator the Holy Ghost the Grace of Jesus Christ and the Sacrament of our Redemption and because the New Notions which Peter Abaelard taught and writ were spread through the World and taught and Maintain'd publickly and had as 't is said some repute even in the Court of Rome He exhorts Geofrey and Saint Bernard to undertake the Defence of the Faith and tells them that he apply'd himself more particularly to them because Abaelard fear'd them more than all the World beside He afterwards relates thirteen Propositions which he said he had taken out of the Writings of Abaelard viz. 1. That the defin'd Faith to be the Idea of things not seen 2. That he asserts that the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost are not properly applicable to God But that 't is only a Description of the Plentitude of the Soveraign Good 3. That the Father is a full Power the Son a Certain Power and the holy Ghost no
not only Excludes Nogaret but also some other Lords and Prelates of the Kingdom of France from the Favour granted by his Bull. The General Council was opened at Vienne in Dauphiné in the Month of October in the Year 1311. King Philip came thither the Year following in Mid-Lent with a great Company The Judgment of the General Council at Vienne about the Affair of Boniface of Princes and Lords and was present at the opening of the Second Session The Affair of Boniface was there brought into debate as 't was promised the King but he had therein no Satisfaction for it was Voted That Boniface had ever been a good Catholick and that there was no proof of his being a Heretick There was no mention made of other Crimes whereof he was accused and which had been Sworn by the Witnesses The Reasons of his Justification were alledged by Cardinal Richard of Sienne Doctor at Law by the Cardinal John of Namure Doctor of Divinity and by Cardinal Gentil Doctor and Canonist There appear'd also two Knights of Catalonia who maintained that Boniface was a good Catholick by a Challenge to the Combat which was not accepted by any body The Pope and the Cardinals to content the King made a Decree importing that the King nor his Successors should never be disturbed nor call'd to account for what had been done against Pope Boniface Thus ended the Contest which lasted for many Years between the King of France and the Holy See about the Differences of Philip the Fair and Pope Boniface CHAP. II. The History of the Condemnation of the Templars THE Affair of Boniface was not quite finish'd when Philip the Fair undertook another The Settlement Progress and Declension of the Order of Templars which he brought to Effect more successfully and with greater Ease this was against the Order of the Templars which he was resolved wholly to Extirpate This Order was Establish'd as we have said in the Year 1118. by Hugo de Paganis Jeoffry of St. Omer and Seven other Knights who made a Vow between the Hands of the Patriarch of Jerusalem to live according to the Rule of the Canons Regular They were appointed to Guard the Roads and to defend Pilgrims that went to Jerusalem Baldwin II. King of Jerusalem gave them for some time only a House near the Temple from whence they took the Name of Templars The Council of Troyes held in the Year 1118. approved of their Institution gave them a Rule and order'd their Habit they were to wear for the time to come should be white Eugenius III. added hereto a red Cross and ordered that the Knights and the Friars should wear it on their Cloak In the beginning they were Poor and few in Number but by little and little they Multiplied grew very Rich and spread over all Christendom where they had an infinite number of Houses and vast Riches Their Wealth made them Proud and Insolent They shook off the Yoke of Obedience which they owed the Patriarch of Jerusalem exempted themselves from the Jurisdiction of the Ordinaries and from paying of Tithes and their Power carried them out to do several Unjust Enterprizes and render'd them formidable to Princes and Kings While they resided at Jerusalem they imployed their Strength against the Infidels This City being taken by Saladin in the Year 1187. they retreated to St. John of Acre and after that to a Castle near Caesarea from thence they continued to make War upon the Infidels but they were almost all Slain at the Sacking of the City of Acre or Acon in the Year 1191. There remain'd of them but Ten who withdrew to the Isle of Cyprus from whence they made Inroads upon the Saracens They possessed themselves of the Island of Tortosa from whence the Sultan of Babylon expell'd them They Equipped a Fleet in Sicily with which they over-run all the Coasts of Greece which they Plunder'd and Ransack'd invaded Thrace took Thessalonica laid wast the Hellespont and Peleponnesus took Athens where they slew Robert de Brenne who commanded there insomuch that abusing their Strength and Power they turn'd those Arms against the Christians which they ought to have imployed only against the Infidels They no longer made War from a Principle of Devotion as did their Predecessors but to enrich themselves and oftentimes engaged the Saracens to make Incursions upon the Christians to make themselves Necessary and to draw great Summs of Money from Christian Princes not being able to endure any other but themselves should engage in this War They had no sooner forsaken their Duty but they fell into Disorders and Out-rages which Licence and Impunity The Informers against the Templars increased and push'd on to a strange Excess They remain'd a long time conceal'd but were at last discover'd by two Knights Condemned for their Crimes the one the Prior of Montfaulcon of the Province of Tholouse an Apostate condemned by the Great Master of the Order Brother to Squinus of Foriano put in Prison for his Crimes The other named Noffo-Dei a Florentine condemned to rigorous Punishments by the Provost of Paris These two Criminals took a Resolution to rescue themselves out of the Misery wherein they were or else to involve their whole Order in the same Infamy to discover the hidden Disorders of their Brethren King Philip the Fair who hated the Templars and sought occasion to do them a displeasure ordered that these two Informers should be examined and their Depositions taken They declared things so strange and Crimes so heinous that the King hardly believed them Nevertheless he would have the Matter searched to the bottom and know the Truth But in regard this Affair concern'd an Order spread through all Christendom he discoursed of it with Pope Clement the Fifth when he assisted at his Coronation and also had it spoken of to him at Poictiers by his Ambassadors The Pope could not believe the Crimes charged on them to be true they were so very incredible and appeared impossible The Great Master of the Temple and many Templars of divers Countries whose Concern it was to justifie their Order besought him to inform himself of these Accusations submitting to the most severe Punishments if they were found Guilty of what was charged on them The Pope let the King understand it by his Bull of the 23d of August in the Year 1306. in which he sends him word that in a few days he should go to Poictiers and there begin to make Inquisition concerning this Order praying the King to transmit to him the Informations he had already taken Nevertheless the King fearing lest this Business being discovered might cause Disturbance in The Templars Arrested and their Estates Seized the Kingdom the Order of the Templars being so very Powerful in France sent Letters to all the Judges of his Kingdom with a Command to Arrest all the Templars on the same Day and that the Matter might be kept the more Secret they had Orders not to open
Impeachment and the Names of the Witnesses which had Sworn or of those that designed to Swear hereafter that they would distinguish them that had already been Sworn from those that were yet to make Oath that they should be made to depose they would speak the Truth and that they would Suborn no Person that inquiry might be made into the manner how some of their Brethren came to their end and the reason why some of them declined to appear that among others it may be known of Friar Adam of Valencour who had deserted their Order to be enter'd in that of the Carthusians and after that came back to it again whether what was reported of their Order were true While the Pope's Commissioners were informing themselves against the whole Order the A Provincial Council held at Paris against the Templars in the Year 1310. Archbishop of Sens held a Provincial Council at Paris in the Month of May in the Year 1310. wherein he undertook to proceed against the particular Members The Knights engaged in the defence of their Order in General set forth that it was not just while the Pope's Commissioners were taking their Inquest the Archbishop of Sens should attempt to make out their Process That they appealed from all this Archbishop could do and that if in bar of this Appeal any Execution were brought against them 't were an Injustice That they would put themselves under the Protection of the Pope That they prayed the Commissioners to forbid the Archbishop of Sens and other Bishops of the Realm to proceed against any Templar and that they would give them leave to signifie this Appeal to the Archbishop of Sens and to make it Publick The same Evening they presented another Writing directed to the Archbishop of Sens containing their Appeal The Commissioners made Answer That the Matter which was handled by the Archbishop of Sens and his Suffragans in their Council was far different from that which they treated of That they were likewise deputed by the Holy See and that they had no Authority over them and hereupon they did not believe they could oblige them to delay the making out Process against the particular Members of the Order nevertheless they should debate it more fully The Commissioners went on with their Inquest and heard Two hundred and one and thirty Witnesses who took their Oaths against the Order from the close of the Year 1309. to the Month of June in the Year 1310. The greater part confess'd the Facts whereof their Order stood accused but some denied them and others after their Confession retracted and said they had not Sworn those things but for fear of Punishment or because they had perceived they did design to Burn such of their Fellows as had asserted the Innocence of their Order But before the Inquisition of the Commissioners was finished the Provincial Council of Sens pronounced several Judgments upon particular Men of this Order Some were Absolved others Condemned to certain Penances and afterwards released some confined more closely or condemn'd to perpetual Imprisonment and Nine and fifty who persisted in the disowning of what they had confessed were degraded as Relapsed and deliver'd up to the Secular Power and condemned to be Burnt which was accordingly put in Execution without the The Execution of the Templars at Paris Gate of St. Anthony in the Month of May in the Year 1610. These poor Wretches declar'd to the last moment that they were Innocent They dug up the same Year the Body of John de Turreio who had been Treasurer of the Temple to burn his Bones They proceeded likewise in other Kingdoms against the Templars in pursuance of the Pope's Bulls In Italy the Archbishop of Ravenna caused those of his Diocess to be Arrested and got Prosecutions of the Templars in several Kingdoms Information against them After that he assembled a Council of his Province wherein he made Report of the Charge he had against them and asked whether they ought to be put to the Rack it was concluded in the Negative though the Inquisitors maintained that Hereticks ought to be put to it It was demanded whether they should be sent back to the Pope they said No seeing a General Council was suddenly to be called that they ought to be absolved or clear themselves On the next day the Bishops being met declared That the innocent ought to be dismissed with Absolution and the guilty punished according to the Law that the Order ought to be kept up if the greater part were found and innocent The Examinations taken by the Archbishops of Pisa and Florence and other Persons Commission'd by the Pope to inquire in Lombardy and Tuscany were less favourable to the Templars for the Witnesses depos'd that they had seen heard and had Knowledge of the horrid and detestable Crimes of which they were accused James II. King of Arragon having received a Letter from the King of France against the Templars charged the Bishops of Valentia and Saragosa and the Inquisitor General of his Kingdom to get Information against them and notice being given him that the Templars retreated to their strong Forts he caus'd all to be Arrested that he could light on and prepared to force the others in their Castles while the Inquisitor General who had cited them to Valentia made ready their Process The Knights of this Kingdom writ to the Pope that they were falsely accused that their Innocence was known to all the World that they were so far from denying JESUS CHRIST that there were now a great Number of their Brethren in the hands of the Infidels who chose rather to continue in Captivity and suffer divers Torments than renounce the Faith That if some had confess'd Abominable Crimes they ought to be Punished but that it was not just the whole Order or the Innocent should Suffer they besought the Pope to grant them his Protection declaring that they submitted to his Judgment and that waiting for his Answer they were retired to their Fortresses The King of Arragon took several of their Castles and the Pope commission'd the Bishop of Valentia to proceed upon them who were taken In Castile King Ferdinand IV. caused all the Templars to be Arrested and took Informations against them by the Archbishops of Compostella and Toledo and by the Inquisitor Aimerick Their Estates were seized and the Bishops appointed Guardians The Matter having been debated in the Provincial Councils the Templars were declared Innocent and nevertheless sent back to the Pope In England they were all Arrested the same day examined in an Assembly held at London which lasted for two Months and they there confessed the Crimes whereof they were accused The Pope sent a Commissioner into Germany to Examine those of that Country and Exhorted the Princes and Prelates of Germany to prosecute the Templars but it appears not that they did any thing against them He gave Order also to Arrest them in the Isle of Cyprus but Almericus Lord
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
the Processes made against Peter de Luna in the Council to shew that he is Perjur'd Schismatical one that gives Scandal to the Church of God and is suspected of Heresie and that as such he ought to be depos'd In the last Piece he examins this Proposition Whether the Sentence of a Pastor tho' it be unjust ought to be observ'd and he maintains That it is false erroneous suspected in Matter of Faith He explains also this other Proposition Unjust Sentences are to be fear'd that is that they may sometimes be the occasion of fear with respect to timerous Consciences but not that they are in themselves formidable The Treatise of the Incarnation which follows consists of two Parts in the first he treats of the Natural Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the second of the Eucharist In the former he speaks of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin of the Perfections and Graces which she receiv'd from Jesus Christ who gave her all those which he in his Wisdom thought convenient but not all those which he could have given her As for instance he gave her not the perfect use of her Reason immediately after her Conception or Birth which would be a rash Assertion In the second Part he treats of the actual Reception of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist he examines what we ought to think of the Spiritual Sentiments of Love and the Tenderness which some of the Faithful feel and shews that they are not necessary that often times they are Illusions that when one gives himself up to them he is liable to fall into Extravagances and Errors John Rusbroek had fallen into this Excess in the third part of his Book about the Ornament of the Spiritual Marriage where he advances many Propositions about the Union of the Contemplative Soul with God Gerson refutes him in the Letter which he wrote to a Carthusian wherein he shews how dangerous it was to make use of new Terms to express the more sublime Truths of Divinity and that those who have not studied the Doctrins of Religion how contemplative soever they may be ought not to meddle with Teaching or talking of speculative Truths because they are liable to fall into dangerous Errors or at least to advance many Propositions that are false and ill-express'd which give occasion to the common People to fall into Error John Schonhow wrote a Piece to defend the Treatise of Rusbroek to which Gerson answer'd in a second Letter wherein he shews that these Novelties cannot be excus'd nor maintain'd This Piece of John Schonhow and the Answer of Gerson follow the first Letter whereof we now speak The two Lectures upon St. Mark are Discourses wherein he handles divers Questions of Morality and Discipline as about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants the Reiteration of Confession the literal Sense of the Scripture the Causes of Errors c. He shews in a Piece about the Communion of the Laity under both kinds that though the Scripture is the Rule of Faith yet it may admit some Interpretations and that it belongs to the Church to explain it In the second Part of this Piece he opposes the Error of those who maintain'd That it was necessary to Salvation for the Laity to communicate under both kinds and relates the Reasons for justifying the taking away the Cup from them The two next Treatises are very useful for establishing such genuine Principles whereby we may distinguish true Doctrin from that which is false The former is entitled The Tryal of Spirits and the latter The Examination of Doctrins In the former he gives Rules for distinguishing false Revelations from true in the latter he lays down the Maxims by which we may know to whom it belongs to examine a Doctrin and what Rules they are to follow in this Examination A General Council is the Sovereign Judge of Doctrins of Faith after it the Pope whose Authority nevertheless is not infallible and each Bishop in his own Diocess whose Decision is different from that of the Pope so that the Authority of the first extends to the whole Church whereas the two last can oblige only those that are subject to their Jurisdiction The Doctors also have an Authentick Judgment in Matters of Doctrin and each Person instructed in Scripture and Tradition may also give his Judgment and teach even the Pope and Prelats those Truths which he knows The same is to be said of those who have the Spirit of Discretion and Understanding The Rules which we are to follow in judging of a Doctrin whether it be sound or no are these First That it be agreeable to Scripture and Tradition Secondly That he who Teaches have Authority to do it and be worthy of Credit upon which account the Visions and Revelations of Women are commonly suspected because they may be easily seduc'd Thirdly That we ought to examine the Design of him that publishes a Doctrin whether he be acted by Pride Interest or Pleasure In the end of this Treatise he relates the Example of a Woman in a Town of Bresse who persuaded many Persons that she had deliver'd Souls out of Hell by feigning Extasies and wonderful Things and by using extraordinary Abstinence and who being taken confess'd that she seign'd all these things to get a Livelihood He adds afterwards other Rules very useful to preserve us from these ways of Seducing He makes an Encomium of St. Bonaventure in a Letter written 1426 to a Frair Minor at Lyons and in another Letter written 1424. to Oswald a Carthusian In the Letter address'd to the Students of the College of Navar he gives his Opinion about the Studies a Divine ought to follow As to the Schoolmen he advises them to read William Auxerres St. Bonaventure Durand Henry of Gandavo and St. Thomas chiefly in his 2d of the 2d He blames these Authors and the like only for one thing That they have handled Questions purely Physical Metaphysical or even Logical in Theological terms As to Morality he advises them to read Matters of History the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Conferences and Lives of the Fathers the Confessions of St. Austin and the Legends of the Saints As to Preaching the Mystical Expositions of the Fathers such as the Morals and Pastoral care of St. Gregory the Commentary of St. Bernard upon the Canticles and some Works of Richard of St. Victor and of William of Paris As to the Works of Prophane Authors he would not have a Christian give his Mind wholly to them but only look into them and curiously run them over like a Traveller to pick up their moral Sentences to form a Style and to render himself moderately skill'd in History and Poetry In a Letter written to the same he gives them Instructions and exhorts them not to oppose the Re-establishment of the French Preachers in the University of Paris but to favour it Gerson being consulted by a Carthusian if he might quit his Convent or
his own Country where he was made Dean of Lincoln While he was at Rome he wrote in the year 1477. a Poem in praise of Sixtus IV. Entituled Lucubrationes Tiburtinae wherein he gives the History and a Panegyrick of this Pope in Heroical Verses which are a little harsh his Work was Printed at Rome at the same time Peter Natalis a Venetian in the year 1482. finish'd a History or a Catalogue of the Martyrs and Saints which was Printed at Venice in 1493. at Strasburg in 1501. and at Lyons in Peter Natalis a Venetian 1542. Alexander of Imola a Civilian the Disciple of John of Imola Taught Law for the space of Thirty years with good Credit in the Cities of Pavia Ferrara and Boulogne and died in the Alexander of Imola a Civilian year 1487. ag'd fifty four years He wrote Commentaries upon the Sixth Book of the Decretals and upon the Clementines Printed at Venice in 1571 and 1597. noâ to mention his other Works of the Civil Law John Wessel or of Wessales for 't is the same of Groningen Doctor of Divinity to whom John Wessel or Wessales some have given the Epithet of The Light of the World was an Able Man in the Hebrew Greek and Latin Tongues and in Profane Sciences as well as in Theology He Flourish'd from the year 1470. and died in 1489. being Aged more than seventy years He wrote many Books wherein he advances a multitude of Propositions which are too free and bold which brought upon him the Condemnation of the Inquisitors of Germany which was past in the year 1479. wherein many of his Propositions are Censur'd according to the Opinion of the Doctors of the Universities of Heidelberg and Collen and by the Authority of the Archbishop of Mayence who presided at that Assembly James Perez of Valence in Spain was made Bishop of Chrysopolis in 1468. died in 149â Jacobus Perezius Bishop of Chrysopolis wrote Allegorical and Anagogical Commentaries upon the Psalms of David and upon the Canticles with a Treatise against the Jews Printed at Lyons in 1512 and at Venice in 1568. an Exposition upon the Canticles with a Question about the Merits of Jesus Christ Printed at Paris in 1498. and at Lyons in 1513. John Pick Prince of Mirandula and Concordia was Born in 1465. he had from his Infancy a Johannes Picus of Mirandula wonderful sharpness of Wit and a prodigioâs Memory at Fourteen years of Age he Studied Law at Bologne After this he spent Seven years in Travelling to the most Famous Universities of France and Italy and after he had Convers'd with the most Learned Men in those places he went to Rome where he propos'd Theses upon all sorts of Sciences while he was yet but Twenty three years of Age he publish'd them over all the World and engag'd to maintain them publickly But Envy stir'd him up Enemies who found something to be blam'd in his Theses and accus'd some of them of Heresie The Pope appointed Commissioners to Examine them who found some of them suspected of Heresie Picus made an Apology wherein he justified himself and explain'd in a good sense the Propositions which were blam'd and submitted himself to the judgment of the Holy See yet still the Pope forbad the Reading of his Theses and when Picus Retir'd from Rome he caus'd him to be Cited some time after While these things were thus depending Alexander VI. granted him a Brief of Absolution June the 18th in the year 1493. After this Picus apply'd himself wholly to the Study of the Holy Scripture undertook to confute the Jews and Mahometans and to confound Judicial Astrology he resign'd also his own Sovereignty and distributed all his goods among the Poor He died at Florence November 17. in the year 1494. His Theses which contain 900 Questions were Printed at Rome in 1486. at Nuremberg in 1532. and at Collen in 1619. and together with his other Works which are an Apology for his Theses Seven Books upon the beginning of Genesis a Treatise of Being and Unity a Treatise of the Dignity of Man Twelve Rules or Precepts for the Institution of a Christian Life a Commentary upon the Fifteenth Psalm a Treatise of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and of the Vanity of the World an Exposition of the Lord's-Prayer a Book of Lâtters Twelve Books upon Astrology Three Books upon Plato's Banquet All these Works were Printed together at Venice in 1498. and at Strasburg in 1504. at Basil in 1573 and 1601. and at Mirandula in 1596. He wrote also other Pieces whereof John Francis Picus of Mirandula his Nephew makes mention in his Life viz. A Book of the Fidelity of the Version of the Bible by St. Jerom against the Calumnies of the Hebrews a defence of the Septuagint's Version upon the Psalms a Treatise of the true Computation of Time a Commentary upon the New Testament a Treatise against the Seven Enemies of the Church which are the Atheists the Pagans the Jews the Mahometans the Christian Hereticks the Impious Christians who are Catholicks in appearance and the Impious and Heretical Christians some Books against all Hereticks and other Treatises of Philosophy and Grammar The 900 Conclusions of Picus of Mirandula are for the most part Metaphysical and Scholastical Questions many of them are upon the Philosophy of Aristotle and Plato upon the Principles of the Cabbala and of Magick and some upon the Questions disputed by the Scholastical Divines Upon this last he was attack'd and Thirteen of them were accus'd of Heresie Error or Rashness The 1st that Jesus Christ did not really descend into Hell as to his presence but only as to his effects The 2d That an infinite pain is not due to a Mortal Sin of a finite Time but only a pain that is finite the 3d. That we ought not to adore the Cross nor any Image with the Adoration of Latria no not in the sense of St. Thomas the 4th That he was not certain that God could be united hypostatically to every Creature but only to a Rational Creature the 5th That there is no Science that renders us more certain of the Doctrine of Jesus Christ than the knowledge of Magick and the Cabala the 6th That supposing the common Opinion that the Word may be hypostatically united to an Inanimate Creature then the Body of Jesus Christ may be really upon the Altar tho' the Bread be not chang'd into his Body nor annihilated which is to be understood of the possibility of the thing and not in any way as if it were actually so the 7th That 't is more reasonable to believe that Origen should be Saved than be Damned the 8th That as no Person is of any Opinion meerly because he would be of it so neither can any Person believe precisely because he has a mind to believe the 9th That he who will maintain that the Accidents cannot subsist unless they be sustain'd by the Eucharist may nevertheless maintain the truth of