all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximā adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were cōfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
learned but willing to learne and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same ſ Lib. 1. ca. 18. Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per eum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as sound lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of those that were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and sortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus ſ Paralip ad Abb. Vsperg pa. 448. I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held thē now upon another Foundation For thē they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had justled out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the
teach what wee affirme whatsoever any manor Councell saith or can say to the contrarie The like must be said of Pope Vigilius in this cause Had he so professed to hold the Councell of Chalcedon as that upon manifestion that the Three Chapters were condemned by it he would have forsaken the defence of them then certainely his defending of these 3. Chapters had not bin pertinacious nor should have made him an hereticke but his profession to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon notwithstanding his error about the 3. Chapters should have made him a catholike But seeing Vig. persisted to defend the 3. Chapt. though it was made evidēt unto him by the Synodall judgement of the fift Councell that the definition of saith decreed at Chalcedon condemned them all he by this persisting in heresie did demonstrate to all that he professed to hold the Councell at Chalcedon no otherwise then with a pertinacious resolution not to forsake the defence of those Three hereticall Chapters although the whole Church of God should manifest unto him that the Councell of Chalcedon condemned the same and for this cause his defending of those three Chapters with this pertinacie and wilfull resolution declareth him to bee indeed an hereticke notwithstanding his profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon and faith thereof whereby all those Chapters are condemned which profession being joyned with the former pertinacie could not now either make or declare him to be a Catholike 18. The very same must bee said of the present Romane Church and members thereof Did they in such sort professe to hold the fift Councel and faith thereof as that upon manifestation that this Councell beleeved taught and decreed that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is fallible and de facto hath beene hereticall they would condemne that their fundamentall heresie of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie decreed in their Laterane and Trent assemblies then should they much rather for their profession of the fift Councell and faith thereof bee orthodoxall then for professing together with this the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie bee hereticall But seeing they know by the very Acts and judiciall sentence of that fift Councell by which the Cathedrall Constitution of Vigilius is condemned and accursed for hereticall in this cause of faith touching the Three Chapters that the fift Councell beleeved this and decreed under the censure of an Anathema that all others should beleeve it and that all who beleeve the contrary are heretikes seeing I say notwithstanding this manifestation of the faith of that Councell they persist to defend the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in those causes yea defend it as the very foundation of their faith this makes it evident to all that they do no otherwise professe to hold this fift Councell or the other whether precedent or following for they all are consonant to this but with this pertinacious resolution not to forsake that their fundamentall heresie and therefore their expresse profession of this fift and other generall Councels yea of the Scriptures themselves cannot be so effectuall to make them Catholikes as the profession of the Popes infallibility which is joyned with this pertinacy is to make and demonstrate them to be heretikes 19. There is yet a further point to be observed touching the pertinacy of Vigilius For one may be and often is pertinacious in his errour not onely after but even before conviction or manifestation of the truth made unto him and this happeneth whensoever hee is not paratus corrigi prepared or ready to be informed of the truth and corrected thereby or when he doth nor or will not tanta solicitudine quaerere veritatem with care and diligence seeke to know the truth as after S. Austen m Epist 162. and out of him Occham n Lib. 4. part 1. ca. 2. Gerson o Cons 12. de pertinacia part 1. pa. 430. Navar p Ench. ca. 11. nu 22. Alphonsus à Castro q Lib. 1. de justa punit haeret ca. 7 and many others doe truly teach See now I pray you how farre Vigilius was from this care of seeking and preparation to embrace the truth He by his Apostolicall authoritie decreed r Const Vigil apud Bar. an 553. nu 208. that none should either write or speake or teach ought contrary to his Constitution or if they did that his decree should stand for a condemnation and refutation of whatsoever they should either write or speake Here was a tricke of Papall that is of the most supreme pertinacy that can bee devised He takes order before hand that none shall ever I say not convict him but so much as manifest the truth unto him or open his mouth or write a syllable for the manifestation thereof and so being not prepared to bee corrected no nor informed neither hee was pertinacious and is justly to bee so accounted before ever either Bishop or Councell manifested the truth unto him Even as he is farre more wilfully and obstinately delighted in darknesse who dammes up all the windowes chinkes and passages whereby any light might enter into the house wherein hee is than hee who lyeth asleepe and is willing to be awaked when the light shineth about him So was it with Pope Vigilius at this time his tying of al mens tongues and hands that they should not manifest by word or writing the truth unto him his damming up of the light that never any glimpse of the truth might shine unto him argues a mind most damnably pertinacious in errour and so far from being prepared and ready to embrace the truth that it is obdurate against the same and will not permit it so much as to come neere unto him 20. The very like pertinacy is at this day in the Romane Church and all the members thereof for having once set downe this transcendent principle the foundation of all which they beleeve that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is infallible they doe by this exclude and utterly shut out all manifestation of the truth that can possibly bee made unto them Oppose whatsoever you will against their errour Scriptures Fathers Councels reason and sense it selfe it is all refuted before it be proposed seeing the Pope who is infallible saith the contrary to that which you would prove you in disputing from those places doe either mis-cite them or mis-interpret the Scriptures Fathers and Councels or your reason from them is sophisticall and your sense of sight of touching of tasting is deceived some one defect or other there is in your opposition but an errour in that which they hold there is nay there can be none because the Pope teacheth that and the Pope in his teaching is infallible Here is a charme which causeth one to heare with a deafe eare whatsoever is opposed the very head of Medusa if you come against it it stunnes you at the first and turnes both your reason your sense and your selfe also into a very stone By
A TREATISE OF THE FIFT GENERAL COVNCEL Held AT CONSTANTINOPLE Anno 553. under IVSTINIAN the Emperor in the time of Pope VIGILIVS The Occasion being those Tria Capitula which for many yeares troubled the whole Church VVHEREIN IS PROVED THAT THE POPES Apostolicall Constitution and definitive Sentence in matter of Faith was condemned as Hereticall by the Synod And the exceeding frauds of Cardinall Baronius and Binius are clearely discovered By RICH CRAKANTHORP Dr. in Divinity and Chapleine in ordinary to his late Majesty King IAMES Opus Posthumum Published and set forth by his Brother GEO CRAKANTHORP according to a perfect Copy found written under the Authours owne hand LONDON Printed for R. M. 1634. And part of the Impression made over to be vented for the Benefit of the Children of IOHN MYNSHEW deceased TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE EDVVARD LORD NEWBVRGE Chancellour of the Duchie of Lancaster and one of the Lords of his Majesties most Honourable Privie Counsell RIGHT HONOVRABLE IN all duty and submission I here present unto your Lordship a Treatise concerning the fift generall Councell held at Constantinople the cause being the Controversie of the Three Chapters which for many yeares troubled the whole Church and was at length decided in this Councell held under Iustinian that religious Emperour This Treatise now printed was long agoe penned by one well known unto your Honour your sincere affection to the truth of God and Gods cause gives mee good assurance of your favourable acceptance hereof I confesse indeed that when J call to minde the manifold affaires wherein your Honour is daily imployed the very thought hereof had almost perswaded mee not to interrupt your more serious affaires by drawing your Honour to the reading or view of this Booke but when J call to minde those respects of love and duty in which the Author hereof stood bound unto your Lordship J was againe incouraged in his name to tender it to your Honour And although J my selfe can challenge no interest in your Lordships favour to offer this yet your Lordship may challenge some interest in the fruits of his labours who was so truely as I can truely speake devoted unto your Honour Among many other hee especially acknowledged two assured bonds of love and duty by which hee was obliged unto you and your friends the former arose from that unfained affection which you ever bare him from your first acquaintance in the Colledge that other by which he was further ingaged unto you and your friends was when in a loving respect had unto him in his absence without any meanes made by him or knowledge of his he was called by that much honoured Knight Sir Iohn Levison his Patron your Father in law unto the best a Black Notley in Essex meanes of livelihood he ever enjoyed in the Ministery where spending himselfe in his studies hee ended his dayes during which time your Honour made your affection further knowne unto him by speciall expressions of extraordinary favours Jn regard whereof I perswaded my selfe that I could no where better crave Patronage for this worke than of your Honour that it may bee a further testimony of his love againe who cannot now speake for himselfe And this I intreat leave to doe the rather because J doubt not but hee acquainted your Lordship with his paines and intent in this and other Tractates of the Councels b See his Epistle to the Reader for the defence of Justinian printed Anno 1616. for when after divers yeares study bestowed in this argument of Councels hee was desirous to make some use of his labours his intent was to reduce all those points into foure severall Bookes 1. That the right of calling generall Councels 2. That the right of highest Presidency in them 3. That the right of the last and supreme Confirmation of them is onely Imperiall and not Papall 4. That all the lawfull generall Councels which hitherto have beene held consent with ours and oppugne the doctrines of the present Church of Rome Some of these hee finished the fourth hee could not so much as hope to accomplish and therefore after the examining of some particulars therein he desisted and weaned himselfe from those studies And yet after some yeares discontinuance being by some of his learned friends sollicited to communicate to others at least some one Tract in that argument consenting to their earnest desire after long suspence he resolved on this Treatise as being for weighty and important matters most delightfull unto him That it was not then published let it not seeme strange unto your Honour for having long since finished the Tract of this whole Councell it was his purpose that it should have undergone the publike view and judgement of the Church but when he came as J can truely testifie unto them whose art and ayde is needfull in such a businesse and found an aversenesse in them for that it wholy consisted of controversall matters whereof they feared that this age had taken a satiety he rested in this answer as willing to bury it After this being upon a speciall command from his Majesty King Iames of blessed memory made known unto him by my Lord his Grace of Canterbury to addresse himselfe to c Dâ—fensio Ecclesiae Anglic. cont Archiep. Spal another worke hee then desisted from his former intended purpose and in finishing of that last worke of his he ended his dayes Some few yeares after his death being desirous to take a view of some of his Papers I came to the view and handling of this booke a booke fully perfected for the Presse in his life time the publishing whereof being long expected and of many earnestly desired it was my desire and theirs to whose most grave and judicious censure J willingly submitted it that it might be published for the benefit of Gods Church and the rather that it might give some light in the study of the Councels and animate some of the d Eccles 3.7 threescore valiant men that are about Salomons bed being of the expert and valiant men of Israel unto the attempting and undertaking of the like Now what his desire was in this and other of his labours surely none but the very enemies of God and Gods truth can take it to be any other than to testifie his unfained love unto God and Gods Church and to subdue the pride idolatries and impieties of that Man of sinne and to e Iude Epist v. 5 strive for the maintenance of the true faith Now what allowance so ever it may finde abroad among our adversaries it humbly craves your favourable acceptaÌ„ce at home and as it is published with no other intent than to gaine glory to God and good to his Church so J doubt not but that God who f 2 Cor. 4.6 causeth light to shine out of darknesse will effectually in time bring to passe that not onely their violent oppugning of the truth but their fraudulent dealing also against the same wil
10. and his Laterane Synod are ample witnesses that this Sanction was never repealed before that Synod for they f Conc. Later ses 11 complaine that by reason of the malignitie of those times or else because they could not helpe it his predecessors tolerasse visi sunt seemed to have tolerated that pragmaticall Sanction and that for all which either they did or could doe the same Sanction retroactis temporibus viguisse et adhuc vigere had in former times and did even to that very day of their eleventh Session stand in force and full vigor Now seeing that Sanction condemneth as hereticall as did the Council also of Basil that assertion of the Popes Supremacie of authoritie and infallibilitie of judgment in defining causes of faith which the present Romane Church defendeth it is now cleerly demonstrated that the same Assertion was taught professed and beleeved to be an heresie and the obstinate defenders thereof to be heretikes by the consenting judgement of Councils Popes Bishops and the Catholike Church even from the Apostles time unto that very day of their Laterane Session which was the 19. of December in the yeare 1516. after Christ 33 On that day a day never to be forgotten by the present Romane Church it being the birth-day thereof Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councill or as the learned Divines of Paris g Leo 10. in quedam caetu nescimus qualiter tamen non in Spiritu Domini congregato App. Vniv Paris account it Conspiracie they being not assembled in Gods name abolished as much as in them lay the old and Catholike doctrine which in all ages of the Church had beene beleeved and professed untill that day and instead thereof erect a new faith yea a new foundation of the faith and with it a new Church also Hee and his Synod then reprobated h Quae de authoritate Concilij supra Pontificem constituerunt sententia CoÌ„c Lateranensis plane reprobata sunt Bin. Not. in Conc. Const § Ex parte the Decree of Constance for the superioritie of a Councill above the Pope they reprobated i Reprobarunt decre tum Concilij Basiliensis Bel. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. § Denique also the Councill of Basil and the same Decree renewed by them That Councill they condemne as Conciliabulum or k Conc. Lat. sess 11. Conventiculam quae nullum robur habere potuerit As a Conspiracie and Conventicle which could have no force at all They reprobated the l Ibid. Pragmaticall Sanction wherein the Decree of Constance and Basil was for ever confirmed Now that Decree being consonant to that catholike Faith which for 1500 yeares together had beene imbraced and beleeved by the whole catholike Church untill that day in reprobating it they rejected and reprobated the old and catholike Faith of the whole Church In stead hereof they decreed the Popes authoritie to be m Hujus sanctae sedis suprema authoritate Ibid. pa. 640. supreme that it is de n Ibid. necessitate salutis a thing necessary to salvation for all Christians to be subject to the Pope and that not onely as they are severally considered but even as they assembled together in a generall Councill for they define Solum o Jbid. pa. 639. Romanum Pontificem authoritatem super omnia Concilia habere The Pope alone to have authoritie above all Generall Councills This the Councill at Laterane diserte ex professo docuit taught cleerly and purposely as Bellarmine tells p Lib. 2. de Concil ca. 17. § Denique us nay they did not onely teach it but expressissimè definiunt q Lib. cod ca. 13. § Deinde they did most expresly define it And that their Definition is no other then a Decree of Faith as the same Cardinall assures us Decrees of faith saith he r Lib. â—â—d ca. 17. § Ad hunc are immutable neyther may ever be repealed after they are once set downe Tale autem est hoc de quo agimus and such is this Decree for the Popes supreme authoritie over all even Generall Councils made in their Laterane Synod And what meane they thinke you by that supreme authoritie Truly the same which Bellarmine explaineth That because his authoritie is supreme therefore his judgement s Proinde ultimum judicium summi poÌ„tificis esse lib. 4. de Rom. pontif ca. 1. § Sed nec in causes of Faith is the last and highest and because it is the last and highest therefore it is t Restat igitur ut Papa sit Index ultimus et proinde noÌ„ possit errare Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Contra. Et DicuÌ„t Concilij sententiam esse ultimuÌ„ judicium Hinc autem apertissimè sequitur non errare Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3. § Accedat infallible So by their Decree together with supremacie of authority they have given infallibilitie of judgement to the Pope and defined that to be a catholike truth and doctrine of Faith which the whole Church in all ages untill then taught professed and defined to be an heresie and all who maintaine it to be Heretikes and for such condemned both it and them 34 Now because this is not onely a doctrine of their faith but the very foundation on which all their other doctrines of faith doe relie by decreeing this they have quite altered not onely the faith but the whole frame and fabricke of the church erecting a new Romane church consisting of them and them onely who maintaine the Popes Infallibilitie and supremacie decreed on that memorable day in their Laterane Synod a church truly new and but of yesterday not so old as Luther a church in faith and communion severed from all former generall Councils Popes and Bishops that is from the whole catholike Church of Christ which was from the Apostles times untill that day And if their Popes continue as it is to be presumed they doe to make that profession which by the Councils of Constance and Basil they are bound to doe to hold among other this fift Councill ad unum iôta this certainly is but a verball no cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of v In Appel à Leon. 10. quae facta est 21 die Mart. an 1517. Decret
Later fact 19 Decemb. 1517. Paris as being contra fidem Catholicam against the catholike Faith and the authority of holy Councils And even to these dayes the French Church doth not onely distaste that x A Relation of Religion in the West parts published an 1605. pa. 129. Laterane Decree and hold a Generall Councill to be superiour to the Pope but their Councill also of y Gentil Exam. CoÌ„c Trid. Sess 13. Car. Mol. dec Conc. Trid. decret pa. 3. Trent wherein that Laterane Decree is confirmed is by them rejected And what speake I of them Behold while Leo with his Laterane Councill strives to quench this catholike truth it bursts out with farre more glorious and resplendent beauty This stone which was rejected by those builders of Babylon was laid againe in the foundations of Sion by those EZra's Nehemiah's Zorobabel's and holy Servants of the Lord who at the voyce of the Angell came out of Babylon and repaired the ruines of Ierusalem And even as certaine rivers are said to runne z Alpheum fama est huc Elidis amnem Occultas egisse vias subter mare Virg lib. 3. Aeâ—eid under or through the salt Sea and yet to receive no salt or bitter taste from it but at length to burst out send forth their owne sweet and delightfull waters Right so it fell out with this and some other doctrines of Faith This Catholike truth that the Popes judgement and Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is not infallible borne in the first age of the Church and springing from the Scriptures and Apostles as from the holy mountaines of God for the space of 600 yeares and more passed with a most faire and spatious current like Tygris Euphrates watering on each side the Garden of the Lord or like Pactolus with golden streames inriching and beautifying the Church of God after that time it fell into the corrupted waters of succeeding ages brackish I confesse before their second Nycene Synod but after it and the next unto it extremely salt and unpleasant more bitter then the waters of Mara And although the nearer it came to the streets of Babylon it was still more mingled with the slime or mud of their Babylonish ditches yet for all that dangerous and long mixture continuing about the space of a Tot anni intersunt à Conc. Nic. 2. quod habituus est an 787. ad annum quo Lutherus se primum opposuit IndulgeÌ„tijs papalibus pontifici qui fuit an 1517 Cocl in vita Luther 730. yeares this truth all that time kept her native and primitive sweetnesse by the constant and successive professions of the whole Church throughout all those ages Now after that long passage through all those salt waves like Alpheus or Arethusa it bursts out againe not as they did in Sicily nor neare the Italian shores but as the Cardinall tells b Brevi occupavit Lutheri haeresis multa regna Bel. l. 3. de pontif ca. 23. § Similitudo Et Romanasedes amisit nostris temporibus magnam Germaniae partem Suetiam Gethians Norvegiam Daniam universam bonam Anglia Gallia Helvetia Polonia Bohemia ac Pannonia partem lib. eod ca. 21. § Ac postea us in Germanie in England in Scotland in France in Helvetia in Polonia in Bohemia in Pannonia in Sueveland in Denmarke in Norway in all the Reformed Churches and being by the power and goodnesse of God purified from all that mud and corruption wherewith it was mingled all which is now left in it owne proper that is in the Romane channels it is now preserved in the faire current of those Orthodoxall Churches wherein both it and other holy doctrines of Faith are with no lesse sinceritie professed theÌ„ they were in those ancient times before they were mingled with any bitter or brackish waters 36 You see now the whole judgement of the Fift Generall Councill how in every point it contradicteth the Apostolicall Constitution of Pope Vigilius condemning and accursing both it for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes which their sentence you see is consonant to the Scriptures and the whole Catholike Church of all ages excepting none but such as adhere to their new Laterane decree and faith An example so ancient so authenticall and so pregnant to demonstrate the truth which wee teach and they oppugne that it may justly cause any Papist in the world to stagger and stand in doubt even of the maine ground and foundation whereon all his faith relyeth For the full clearing of which matter being of so great importance and consequence I have thought it needful to rip up every veine and sinew in this whole cause concerning these Three Chapters and the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the same and withall examine the weight of every doubt evasion excuse which eyther Cardinall Baronius who is instar omnium or Binius or any other moveth or pretendeth herein not willingly nor with my knowledge omitting any one reason or circumstance which either they urge or which may seeme to advantage or help them to decline the inevitable force of our former Demonstration CAP. V. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted 1 THere is not as I thinke any one cause which Card. Baronius in all the Volumes of his Annalls hath with more art or industry handled then this concerning Pope Vigilius and the Fift Generall Councill In this hee hath strained all his wits moved and removed every stone under which hee imagined any help might be found eyther wholly to excuse or any way lessen the errour of Vigilius All the Cardinalls forces may be ranked into foure severall troupes In the first do march all his Shifts and Evasions which are drawne from the Matter of the Three Chapters In the second those which are drawne from the Popes Constitution In the third those which respect a subsequent Act of Vigilius In the fourth last those which concerne the fift General Councill After all these wherin coÌ„sisteth the whole pith of the Cause the Cardinall brings forth another band of certaine subsidiary but most disorderly souldiers nay not souldiers they never tooke the Military oath nor may they by the Law of armes nor ever were by any worthy Generall admitted into any lawfull fight or so much as to set footing in the field meere theeves and robbers they are whom the Cardinall hath set in an ambush not to fight in the cause but onely like so many Shimei's that they might raile at and revile whomsoever the Cardinall takes a spleene at or with whatsoever hee shall be moved in the heat of his choler At the Emperour Iustinian at Theodora the Empresse at the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters at the Imperiall Edict at Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea at the Synodal acts yea at Pope Vigilius himselfe we wil first encounter the just forces of the Cardinall which onely are his lawfull
declared most evidently that those Three Chapters were condemned in proscriptione fidei Catholicae Apostolicae for the exiling and rooting out of the Catholike and Apostolike faith Facundus himselfe doth not onely affirme this but prove it also even by the judgement of Pope Vigilius Vigilius saith he ſ Lib 4. pro desens trium Capit apud Bar. an 546. nu 57. esteemed the condemning of these Three Chapters to be so hainous a crime that hee thought it fit to be reproved by those words of the Apostle Avoid prophane novelties of words and opposition of science falsely so called which some professing have erred from the faith And hereupon as if he meant purposely to refute this Evasion of Baronius which it seemeth some did use in those dayes he addes Quid adhuc quaeritur utrum contra fidem factum fuerit why doe any as yet doubt whether the condemning of them be against the faith seeing Pope Vigilius calleth it prophane noveltie and opposition of science whereby some have erred from the faith And a little after concluding This saith he t Ibid. nu 58. is not to be thought such a cause as may bee tolerated for the peace of the Church sed qua merito judicatur contra ipsius fidei Catholicae statum commota but it must bee judged such a cause as is moved against the state of the Catholike faith Thus Facundus testifying both his owne and the judgement of the other defenders of those Chapters and by name of Pope Vigilius that they all esteemed and judged this to bee a question and controversie of faith of which Baronius tels us that in it there was moved no question at all concerning the faith and that Pope Vigilius know that it was no question of faith 7. Now whereas the whole Church at that time was divided into u Vniversus fere orbis occidentalis ab orientali Ecclesia divisus erat Bin. not in S. Conc. §. Concilium two parts the Easterne Churches with the holy Councell condemning the Westerne with Pope Vigilius defending those Three Chapters seeing both the one side and the other consent in this point that this was a cause and question of faith what truth or credit thinke you is there in Baronius who saith that All men without any doubt agree herein that this is no cause or question of faith whereas all both the one side and the other agree in the quite contrary Truly the wisdome of the Cardinall is well worthy observing He consenteth to Vigilius in defending the Three Chapters wherein Vigilius was hereticall but dissenteth from Vigilius in holding this to be a cause of faith wherein Vigilius was orthodoxal as if he had made some vow to follow the Pope when the Pope forsakes the truth but to forsake the Pope when the Pope followeth the truth 8. Nor onely was this truth by that age acknowledged but by succeeding approved By Pope Pelagius who to reclame certaine Bishops from defence of those Chapters wherin they were earnest and had writ an apologie for the same useth this as one speciall reason because all those Chapters were repugnant to the Scriptures former Councels Consider saith he x Epist 7. §. Pensate if the writings of Theodorus which deny Christ the Redeemer to bee the Lord the writings of Theodoret quae contra fidem edita which being published against the faith were afterwards by himsefe condemned and the Epistle of Ibas wherein Nestorius the enemy of the Church is defended if these bee consonant to the Propheticall Euangelicall and Apostolicall authority And againe y Ibid. § Sed cur of the Epistle of Ibas he addeth If this Epistle be received as true tota sanctae Ephesinae Synodus fides dissipatur the whole faith of the holy Ephesine Councell is overthrowne Let here some of Baronius friends tell us how that question or cause doth not concerne the faith the defending whereof which Vigilius did is by the judgement of Pope Pelagius repugnant to the Euangelical and Apostolicall doctrines and even anutter totall overthrow of the faith To Pelagius accordeth Pope Gregory who approved z Lib. 2. Ind. 10. Epist 36. this Epistle of Pelagius cōmended it as a direction to others in this cause And what speake I of one or two seeing the Decree of this fift Councell wherein this is declared to be a cause of faith is consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding generall Councels Popes and Bishops til that time of Leo the 10. his Laterane Synod as before we a Cap. 4. have shewed was not this thinke you most insolent presumption in Baronius to set himselfe as a Iohannes ad oppositum against them all and oppose his owne fancy to the constant and consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church for more than 1500 yeares together These all with one voyce professe this to be a cause of faith Baronius against them all maintaineth that it is no cause of faith and to heape up the full measure of his shame addeth a vast untruth for which no colour of excuse can be devised Consentitur ab omnibus that all men without any controversie agree herein that this is no question nor cause of faith 9. Besides all these Card. Bellarmine setteth downe divers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cleare tokens whereby one may certainly know when a Councell decreeth or proposeth any doctrine tanquam de fide to be received as a doctrine of the Catholike faith This saith he b Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 12. § Quartū is easily knowne by the words of the Councell for either they use to say that they explicate the Catholike faith or else that they who thinke the contrary are to be accounted heretikes or which is most frequent they anathematize those who thinke the cōtrary So he Let us now by these markes examine this cause and it will be most evident not onely by some one of them which yet were sufficient but by them all that the Holy Councell both held this controversie to be of faith and also proposed their decree herein as a Decree of faith 10. For the first the Councell in plaine termes professeth even c Coll. 8. pa. 588. a. in their definitive sentence that in their Decree they explane that same doctrine which the Scriptures the Fathers and the foure former Councels had delivered in their definitions of faith Then undoubtedly by Bellarmines first note their Decree herein is a Decree of faith seeing it is an explication of the Catholike faith 11. For the second the Councel in like sort in plain termes calleth the defēders of those three Chapters heretikes For thus cried al the Synod d Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. He who doth not anathematize this Epistle is an Heretike He who receiveth it is an Heretike This we say all And in their definitive sentence they professe e Coll. 8. pa. that they set down the preaching of the truth Haereticorum
sec Act. 4. be exceeding partiall and untrue where he saith that Theodorus and Diodorus in pretio habiti mortem oppetiere died in honour neither did c Viva quidem ipsis cur nemo contradixerat factum ideo c. Ibid. any while they lived reprove any of their sayings yet are there divers other inducements to perswade that Theodorus was not in his life time by any publike judgement of the Church either declared or condemned for an heretike for besides that neither Cyrill nor Proclus nor the fift generall Councell doe mention any such matter the words of Cyrill doe plainly import the contrary The Ephesine Synod saith d Cyril epist ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 550 551. he forbare in particular and by name to anathematize Theorus which they did dispensativè by a certaine dispensation indulgence or connivence because divers held him in great estimatioÌ„ or account what needed either any such dispensation or forbearance had he in his life time beene publikely condemned for heresie Againe the Church of Mopsvestia where hee was Bishop for divers yeares after his death retained his name in e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. seq in act Synod Mopsv Diplicis that is in their Ecclesiasticall tables making a thankfull commemoration of him as of other Catholikes in their Liturgie which had he beene in his life time condemned for an heretike they would not have done Lastly what needed the defenders of the Three Chapters have beene so scrupulous to condemne him being dead had he in his life time beene before condemned Or how could this have given occasion of this controversie whether a dead man might Noviter be condemned if Theodorus had not beene noviter condemned when he was dead 3. Wherefore this particular being agreed upon that Theodorus was not before but after his death condemned the whole doubt now resteth in the Thesis whether a dead man may Noviter be coÌ„demned Now that this is no personall but meerly a dogmaticall cause and controversie of faith is so evident that it might be a wonder that Baronius or any other should so much as doubt thereof unlesse the Apostle had foretold that because men f 2 Thess 2.10 11. doe not receive the love of the truth therefore God doth send unto them strong delusions that they may beleeve lyes Certaine it is that Pope Vigilius held this for no other but a doctrine of faith for he sets it downe as a g Perspeximus si quid de his praedecessores nostri decreverint Vig. Const loc citat nu 176. Hujus causa formam veneranda praedecessorum nostrorum constituta nobis apertissime tradiderunt Ibid. Idem regulâ—ria Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Jbid. nu 179. Definition or Constitution of his predecessors decreed by the Apostolike See particularly by Pope Leo and Gelasius and so decreed by them as warranted and taught by the Scriptures for out of those words Whatsoever ye binde or loose upon earth Pope Gelasius h Ibid. nu 177. collecteth and Vigilius consenteth unto him that such as are not upon earth or among the living hos non humano sed suo Deus judicio reservavit God hath exempted them from humane and reserved them to his owne judgement nec audet Ecclesia nor dare the Church challenge to it selfe the judgement of such As the Pope so also the holy generall Councell tooke this for no other than a question of faith for they plainly professe even in their Synodall resolution that their decree concerning dead men that they may bee Noviter condemned is not onely an Ecclesiasticall i Licet cognosceremus Ecclesiasticam de impiis traditionem Coll. 8. pa. 585. a. tradition but an Apostolicall doctrine also warranted by the texts and testimonies of the holy Scriptures To which purpose alledging divers places of Scripture they adde these words It is many wayes manifest that they who affirme this that men after their death may not Noviter be condemned nullam curam Dei judicatorum faciunt nec Apostolicarum pronunciationum nec paternarum traditionum that such have no regard either to the word of God or the Apostles doctrine or the tradition of the Fathers So the whole Councell judging and decreeing Pope Vigilius to be guilty of all these 4. Now when both the Pope on the one side and the whole generall Councell on the other that is both the defenders and condemners of this Chapter professe it to be a doctrine taught in the Scripture and therefore undoubtedly to be a cause of faith what insolency was it in Baronius to contradict them both and against that truth wherein they both agree to deny this Chapter to be a cause of faith or seeing it is cleare both by the Pope and Councell that the resolution of this question is set downe in Scripture what else can bee thought of Baronius denying either the one or the other part to bee a cause or assertion of faith but that with him the doctrines defined and set down in Scriptures are no doctrines or assertions of faith at least not of the Cardinals faith 5. Seeing now this is a cause of faith and in this cause of faith the Pope and generall Councell are at variance either of them challenge the Scripture as consonant to his and repugnant to the opposite assertion what equall and unpartiall umpire may be found to judge in this matter Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit faith their vaine and vaunting k Camp Rut. 3. Braggadochio Hast thou appealed to the Church to the Church and judgement thereof shalt thou goe at the name of which we are so farre from being daunted or appaled that with great confidence and assurance of victory we provoke unto it 6. But where may we heare the voyce and judgement of the Church out of doubt either in the writings of the Fathers or provinciall Synods or in generall Councels in which of these soever the Church speake her sentence is for us and our side Her voyce is but soft stil in the writings of single Fathers the Church whispereth rather then speaketh in them and yet even in them shee speaketh this truth very distinctly and audibly Heare Saint l Epist ad Bonif. quae citatur Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 548. b. Austen who entreating of Caecilianus about an hundreth yeares after his death saith If as yet they could prove him to have beene guilty of those crimes which were by the Donatists objected unto him ipsum jam mortuum anathematizaremus I and all Catholikes would even now accurse him though dead though never condemned before nor in his life time Againe m Aug. lib. 3. Cont. Cresc ca. 35. In this our communion if there have beene any Traditores or deliverers of the Bible to be burned in time of persecution when thou shalt demonstrate or prove them to have beene such corde carne mortuos detestabor Heare Pope n Pelag. 2. Epist 7.
§ In his autem Pelagius who both himselfe fully assenteth herein to Saint Austen and testifieth the assent of Pope Leo in this manner Quis nesciat who knoweth not that the doctrine of Leo is consonant to Saint Austen Heare o Cyr. lib. cont Theod. cit à Conc. 5. Collat. 8. pa. 585. a. S. Cyrill who speaking of heretikes saith Evitandi sunt sive in vivis sive in mortuis they are to bee avoyded whether they bee dead or living 7. The Church speakes yet somewhat louder in the united judgement of Provinciall Synods In an p Citatur in Conc. 5. Coll 5 pa. 548 a. Africane Councell it was proved how certaine Bishops at their death had bequeathed their goods to heretikes whereupon statuerunt the Bishops in that Synod decreed ut post mortem anathemati subjiciantur that such should bee accursed even after their death and this Sextilianus an Africane Bishop testifieth upon his owne certaine knowledge The judgement of the Romane Church is to this purpose most pregnant About some twenty yeares before this fift Councell Dioscorus was chosen Bishop of Rome but shortly after dying eum post mortem anathematizavit Romana Ecclesia the Romane Church accursed him even after he was dead although hee had not offended in the faith but in some pecuniary or Symoniacall crime Et hoc sciunt omnes qui degunt Romae and they all who live at Rome know this to have beene done against him after his death they especially who are in eminent place who also continued in the communion with Dioscorus untill hee dyed as after q Inst Edict § Invenimus Iustinian Benignus r Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. Bishop of Heraclea and after them both the fift Councell ſ Coll. 8. pa. 585. b. testifieth In this very cause of Theodorus there was a Synod held in Armenia by Rambulas t Bar. an 435. nu 4 Bishop of Edessa Acatius and others wherein both themselves condemned Theodorus though dead and in their letters to Proclus exhort u Petimus quatenus fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega Dogmata ejus Jn Libell Presbyt Armē ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 542. b. him to doe the like 8. But this voyce of the Church sounds like a mighty thunder in the consenting judgement of generall Councels In the sixt x Act. 12.13 18. Pope Honorius who in his life time had not been was now about threescore yeares after his death convicted to bee an heretike and then noviter condemned and anathematized by the whole Councell The same sentence of Anathema was confirmed and againe denounced against him in the second y Act. 7. in Epistola 2. Synod Can. 1. Nicene and in the other under z Honorius post mortem ab Orientis Episcopi◠anathemate est affectus Conc. 8 Act. 7. pa. 891. b. Hadrian which they account to be the seventh and eighth generall Councels In the Councell of Chalcedon Domnus a Edict Justin § Quod autem Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 575. b. Bishop of Antioch was after his death condemned In the holy Ephesine Councell was this very Theodorus of Mopsvestia after his death condemned as Pope Pelagius b Pelag. 2. Epist § In his expresly testifieth The like to have beene done against Macedonius by the fift Councell at Constantinople Iustinian c Sancta Dei Ecclesia post mortem Macedonium anathem atizavit Iust Edict § Quod declareth Before that was the same done by the Councell at Sardica for when some of those who had subscribed to the Nicene faith returned to Arianisme alij quidem d Jbidem vivi alij autem post mortem anathematizati sunt à Damaso Papa ab universali Sardicensi Synodo they were anathematized some while they lived others after their death by Pope Damasus and by the generall Councell at Sardica as witnesseth Athanasius With such an uniforme consent doe all these Councels teach this and teach it not as any novell doctrine but as a truth successively from age to age even from the Apostles time delivered unto them by warrant of which Apostolical tradition Valentinus Martian Basilides à nulla Synodo e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. anathematizati being by no Synod in their life time condemned were after their death accursed by the Church of God 9. And yet if none of all these particulars could bee produced seeing the doctrine of the faith decreed in this fift Councell one part whereof is this of condemning the dead is consonant to all the former and confirmed by all succeeding Councels as we did before demonstrate nor Councels only but approved by all Popes and Bishops from Gregory the first to Leo the tenth yea by all Catholikes whatsoever who all by approving this fift Councell consent in this truth Seeing all these that is the whole Catholike Church for 1500 yeares with one consenting voyce sound out like a multitude of mighty waters this Catholike truth which Vigilius oppugneth that one may after his death be noviter condemned and found it as a doctrine of the Catholike faith and even thereby found out Pope Vigilius to have held yea to have defined heresie and all who defend Vigilius to bee hereticall I do nothing doubt but if ever you did or can you doe now most distinctly heare the voyce of the Church even of that Church of which their Romane Rabsecha vaunteth that we are marvellously affrighted at the very name thereof 10. May I now intreate that as you have heard the Church so you would be pleased to heare what the Cardinall doth say of this matter After this part of Vigilius decree he sets a memorable glosse upon the Popes text Hic adverte Note here saith the Cardinall that f Bar. an 553. nu 185. this assertion of Vigilius that dead men ought not to be condemned is not so generally received as it is set downe by him A worthy note indeed out of a Cardinals mouth Papa hic non tenetur But I pray you by whom is it not received The Cardinall answers not by the holy Church the holy Church g Ejusmodi homine jure damnare post mortem sancta consucvit Ecclesia Bar. ibid. doth practise the contrary unto it What the holy Church not receive the dogmaticall and Apostolicall assertion of the holy Pope not that assertion which his Holinesse decreeth to be taught by Scripture to be a Constitution a rule a definition of the holy Apostolike See No truly The holy Church for all that receives not this assertion saith the Cardinall And the Cardinall was to blame to use such a palpable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church receiveth it not hee might and he should have said The holy Church rejecteth condemneth and accurseth this Cathedrall assertion of the Pope and all that defend it nor the Church onely of that one age wherein Vigilius lived but the Catholike Church
of all ages speaking by the mouthes of al general Councels of Fathers of Popes of al Catholikes this holy Church condemneth and accurseth the assertion of Pope Vigilius The Cardinall was too diminutive in his extenuations when he spake so faintly The holy Church doth not so generally receive it 11. Let us beare with the Cardinals tendernesse of heart the Popes sores must not be touched but with soft and tender hands Seeing the Cardinall hath brought the Pope and the holy Church to be at ods and at an unreconciliable contradiction the Pope denying the Church affirming that a man after his death may noviter be condemned it is well worth the labour to examine whether part the Cardinall himselfe will take in this quarrell you may be sure the choyce on either part was very hard for him he hath here a worse matter than a wolfe by the eares This is dignus vindice nodus a point which will trie the Cardinals art wisdome piety constancy and faire dealing And in very deed he hath herein plaid Sir Politike would be above the degree of commendation The Cardinall is a man of peace hee loves not to displease either the Pope or the Church he knew that to provoke either of them would bring an armie of waspes about his eares and therfore very gravely wisely and discreetly he takes part with them both and though their assertions bee directly contradictory he holds them both to be true and takes up an hymne of Omnia bene to them both 12. First he sheweth that the Church saith right in this manner Although h Bar. an 553. nu 185. it be proved that one dyed in the peace of the Church and yet it doe afterwards appeare that in his writings he defended a condemned heresie and continuing in that heresie died therein and but dissemblingly cōmunicate with the Church the holy Church useth to condemne such a man jure even by right Having said as much as can bee wished on the Churches part the Cardinall will now teach that the Pope also saith right in this manner Pope Vigilius i Bar. an 553. nu 233. had many worthy reasons for his defence of the Three Chapters by his Constitution and among those worthy reasons this is one for if this were once admitted that a man who dyeth in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned pateret ostium this would open such a gap that every ecclesiasticall writer though hee dyed in the Catholike Communion may yet after his death out of his writings be condemned for an heretike Thus Baronius 13. O what a golden and blessed age was this that brought forth such a Cardinall The Church decreeth that a man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and it decreeth aright The Pope decreeth the quite contrary that no man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and hee also decreeth aright and with good reason So both the Church saith well the Pope saith well you can say no lesse then Et vitula tu dignus hic or because the Cardinall saith better than they both and what Iupiter himselfe could never doe makes two contradictory sayings to be both true and both said well hee best deserveth let him have all the prize Vitula tu dignus utrâque 14. I told you before and this ensuing treatise will make it as cleare as the Sunne that Baronius having once lost the path forsaken that truth where only sure footing was to be found wandreth up and downe in and out in this cause as in a wildernesse treading on nothing but thornes wherewith feeling himselfe prickt he skips hither and thither for succour but still lights on briars and brambles which doe not onely gall but so intangle him that by no meanes he can ever extricate or unwinde himselfe for if one listed to make sport with the Cardinall it clearly and certainly followeth that if the Church say true then the Pope saying the contrary doth say untrue Againe if the Pope say true then the Church saying the contrary doth say untrue and then upon the Cardinals saying that they both say true it certainly followeth that neither of them both say true and yet further that both of them say both true and untrue and yet that neither of them both saith either truth or untruth 15. But leaving the Cardinall in these bryars seeing by the upright and unpartiall judgement of the whole Catholike Church of all ages we have proved the Popes decree herein to be erroneous and because it is in a cause of faith heretical let us a little examine the two reasons on which Vigilius groundeth this his assertion The former is taken from those words of our Saviour k Matth. 18.18 whatsoever ye binde on earth whence as you have seene Vigilius and as he saith Gelasius also collecteth that such as are not on earth or alive cannot be judged by the Church 16. The answer is not hard our Saviours words being well considered are so farre from concluding what Vigilius or Gelasius or both doe thence collect that they clearly and certainly doe enforce the quite contrary for he said not Whatsoever yee binde or loose concerning those that are on earth or living in which sense Vigilius tooke them but Whatsoever concerning either the living or dead ye my Apostles and your successors being upon earth or during your life time shall binde or loose the same according to your censure here passed upon earth shall by my authority bee ratified in heaven The restrictive termes upon earth are referred to the parties who doe binde or loose not to the parties who are bound or loosed The generall terme whatsoever is referred to the parties who are bound or loosed whether they be dead or alive not to the parties who binde or loose who are onely alive and upon earth Nor doth our Saviour say Whatsoever yee seeme to binde or loose here upon earth shall bee bound or loosed in heaven for ecclesiae clave errante no censure doth or can either binde or loose either the quicke or the dead but he saith Whatsoever ye doe binde or loose if the party be once truly and really bound or loosed by you that are upon earth it shall stand firme and bee ratified by my selfe in heaven So the parties who doe binde or loose are the Apostles and their successors onely while they are upon earth the parties who are bound or loosed are any whosoever whether alive or dead the partie who ratifieth their act in binding and loosing is Christ himselfe in heaven For I say unto you whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven 17. This exposition is clearly warranted by the judgement of the whole catholike Church which as we have before declared both beleeved taught and practised this authority of binding and loosing not onely upon the living but upon the
dead also Of their binding the nocent wee have alleaged before abundance of examples for their loosing the innocent that one of Flavianus is sufficient The Ephesine l Act. conciliab Ephes citata in actis Conc. Chalc. Act. 1. pa. 57. b. latrocinie adjudged and condemned Flavianus a most holy and Catholike Bishop for an Hereticke under the censure of that generall Councel Flavianus died nay was martyred m Caesus Flavianus dolore plagarum migravit ad Dominum lib ca. 12. by them The holy Councell at Chalcedon after the death of Flavianus loosed that band wherwith the latrocinious conspirators at Ephesus thought they had fast tyed him but because their key did erre they did not in truth They honored and proclamed Flavianus for a Saint and Martyr n Quae Synodus Chalc. Flaviano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae Edict Valen. Mart. in Chalced. Conc. Act. 4. pa. 86. a. Flavianus injuste quidem in vita condemnatus juste post mortem revocatus est a B. Leone et sancta Synodo Chalcedonensi Iust edict §. Invenimus whom the faction of Dioscorus had murdered for an heretike the holy Councell feared not to loose him because he was dead their power to binde or loose was onely towards those that are upon the earth or living By which example and warrantie of that holy Councell our Church of latter time imitating the religious pietie of those ancient Bishops restored to their pristine o Hist combustionis Bucâ—ri et Fagij et restitutionis eorum dignitie and honor those reverend Martyrs two Flaviani in their age Bucer and Fagius after their death when a worse then that Ephesine conspiracy had not onely with an erring key bound but even burned them to ashes Now it is rightly observed by Iustinian p Si non oporteret anathematizari post mortem eos qui insua impietate mortuisunt oportebat nec eos qui injuste condemnati sunt patres post mortem revocari Lust edict prope finem that if the Church may after their death restore such as being unjustly condemned and falsly supposed to be bound died in their innocency and sincerity of faith it may also by the very same reason condemne and anathematize such after their death who died in their impiety or heresie being charitably perhaps but falsly supposed to have died in the communion of the Catholike Church 18. And truely whether soever of these censures either of binding or loosing the Church useth towards the dead as they both are warranted by the words of Christ and judgement of the Church so in doing either of both they performe an acceptable service to God and an holy duty to the Church of God For as wee professe in our Creed to beleeve the Communion of Saints which in part consisteth in loving praising and imitating all such as we know either now to live or heretofore to have dyed in the faith or for the faith of Christ so doe wee by the same Article of our Creed renounce all communion with whatsoever heretickes either dead or alive and therefore though in their life time they had never beene condemned for such but honored as the servants of God under whose livery they hide their heresies and impieties yet so soone as ever they shall bee manifested to have beene indeed and to have died heretikes we ought forthwith to forsake all communion with them not love them nor speake well of them much lesse imitate them but as Saint Austen saith he would doe of Caecilianus even after their death corde carne anathematizare not making them accursed For that the Church cannot do and themselves have done that already but declaring them to be accursed in truth excluded from the society of God Gods Church and to be such though dead as with whom we can have no more coÌ„munion then hath light with darknesse faith with heresie God and Beliall nay we should wish that if it were possible there might be such an antipathie and disunion betwixt us and them as is said to have been betwixt Eteocles q Impositis eorum cadaveribus eidem rogo flammam se divisisse traditur vid. Stat. in Theb. and Polinices that even our dead bones and ashes might leape from theirs nor sleepe in one Church nor one earth with them from whom one day they shall be eternally severed by a wall of immortality and immortall glory 19. Vigilius his second reason is taken from the rules decrees and Constitutions r Idem regulariter Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Vigil loc citat nu 179. of their Apostolicke See by name of Pope Leo Gelasius both whoÌ„ Vigilius saith to have defined this that a dead man might not noviter be condemned was it not enough for Vigilius that himselfe was hereticall herein unlesse he drew his predecessors also into the same crime of defending yea defining heresies How much better had it beseemed him to have covered such hereticall blemishes of their Apostolike See and of so famous Bishops as Leo and Gelasius were it not with a lappe of his robe as the good Emperour would yet at least with silence and oblivion 20. And yet for all this if Vigilius and the defenders of his infallibility will give me leave I am for my owne part willing to thinke better and more favourably of Leo and Gelasius in this matter specially of Leo whose authority when some defenders of the three Chapters objected Å¿ Praemisislis dicentes doctrina vestrae reverendae sedis est per B. Leonem successoresque ejus mortuum ab hominibus damnari nullatenus opertere Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. In his to Pope Pelagius as according with them Pelagius replyed not onely that hee could no where remember any such thing in the bookes of Leo but that Leo indeed taught the quite contrary as consenting t Quis nescit quod ejusdem Leonis B. Augustini praedicatio contradicat ibid wholly with Saint Austen who professed that he would anathematize Caecilianus after his death if it could appeare that he were guilty of those crimes Which testimony of Pelagius as it fully cleareth Leo of this heresie so doth it manifest how unjustly Vigilius pretendeth his consent with him in this cause yea and the words of Leo which hee citeth doe declare no lesse In that Epistle u Leo Epist 91. Leo intreating of those who by the just censure of the Church were excommunicated or who did not performe the acts required in repentance saith If any of them die before hee obtaine remission quod manens in corpore non receperit consequi exutus carne non poterit hee cannot obtaine that to wit remission of his fault being dead which before his death he had not received And upon these follow the words cited by Vigilius Neither is it needfull that we shold sift the merits or acts of them qui sic obierunt who so die seeing our Lord hath reserved to his justice what
the priestly ministerie could not performe to wit the loosing of that band of censure or of sinne under which they dyed Thus Leo who denieth not that men after their death may be condemned but that any who in his life time is not may after his death bee pardoned Hee speakes not of such as have not beene in their life time condemned of which onely Vigilius entreateth but of such who being unpenitent or condemned by the Church die in their sin or under that just censure therefore in the state of condemnation So neither doe the words of Leo signifie any such thing as Vigilius by them intended to prove and Pope Pelagius assureth us that Leo taught the quite contrary to that which out of Leo Vigilius in vaine laboureth to prove 21. The very like construction is to bee given of the words of Gelasius in both the places cited out of him by Vigilius In the former x Gelas Epist 11. entreating of Acatius he thus saith Let no man perswade you that Acatius is freed from the crime of his prevarication for after he had falne into that wickednesse and deserved to be excluded and that jure by right from the Apostolike communion in hac eâdem persistens damnatione defunctus est hee persisting in this condemnation dyed Absolution cannot bee now granted unto him being dead which he neither desired nor deserved while he lived for it was said to the Apostles Whatsoever yee binde on earth But of him these are the words cited by Vigilius who is now under Gods iudgement that is who is dead in this sort it is not lawfull for us to decree ought else but that in quo eum supremus dies invenit wherein hee was found at the time of his death So Gelasius In which words it is evident that hee speakes not as Vigilius doth of such as in their life time were not condemned nor denieth hee that such may after their death when their heresie is discovered be condemned but of such as being in their life time justly condemned dye impenitent in that estate and of such he denyeth that after their death they can be absolved A truth so cleare that Binius sets this marginall note upon it Qui impoenitens mortuus est excommunicatus post mortem non potest absolvi He who dieth impenitent under the censure of excommunication cannot after his death bee absolved And Gelasius himselfe often repeateth the same most clearly in his Commonitorium to Faustus We reade saith he y Gelas Epist 4. that Christ raised up some from the dead but we never reade that he forgave or absolved any who were impenitent when they dyed and this power he gave to Peter Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth on earth saith he nam in hac ligatione defunctum nusquam dixit absolvi For Christ never said that any who dyed being so bound should be loosed 22. The same is his meaning also in the other place z Epist Synodalis Gelas ij Synod Rom. 2. p. 268. b. alleaged by Vigilius In it he intreateth of Vitalis and Misenus who being the Popes Legates had communicated with Acatius and other hereticall sectaries and were for that cause both of them excommunicated by Pope Felix the next predecessor of Gelasius Misenus repenting was received into the communion of the Church Vitalis remaining impenitent died under that just censure when some of Vitalis friends desired the like absolution for Vitalis being dead a Nos etiam mortuis veniam praestare deposcunt ibid. Gelasius utterly refused to grant it and calling a Romane Synode it was declared in it That Misenus ought in right to be loosed but not Vitalis whom as they professed they gladly would but by reason of his owne impenitency wherein he dyed they could not helpe nor absolve but must leave him which are the words on which Vigilius relyeth to the judgement of God it being impossible for them to absolve him being dead seeing it is said Whatsoever ye shall binde upon earth such then as are not upon earth God hath reserved them not to mans but to his owne judgement Nor dare the Church challenge this unto it So Gelasius and the whole Romane Synode who doe not herein generally deny that any without exception may bee judged being dead for then they should condemne besides many other the holy Councell of Chalcedon which absolved Flavianus and bound or condemned Domnus and both after their deaths but limiting their speach to the present matter which they handled they teach that none who are dead to wit in such state as Vitalis dyed excommunicated and impenitent no such can after their death be judged to wit in such sort as the favourers of Vitalis would have had him adjudged that is absolved or loosed after his death from that censure and that the words of our Saviour doe forcibly conclude seeing whatsoever is bound upon earth is also bound in heaven and seeing such as die in that just bond of the Church are indeed reserved to the onely judgement of God the Church can pronounce no other nor milder sentence then it hath already passed of them That none at all after their death may be condemned by the Church Gelasius saith not and that is the hereticall position which Vigilius should out of Gelasius but doth not prove That none who at their death are justly bound by the Church and dye impenitent therein can after their death be loosed by the Church is a catholike truth which Gelasius teacheth and we all professe this Vigilius firmly by Gelasius doth but should not prove 23. So willing am I to quit Pope Leo and Gelasius from that hereticall doctrine wherewith Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree hath not onely himselfe eternally blemished the Romane See but laboureth also to fallen that heresie as an ancient and hereditarie doctrine from the time of Leo unto their See If this my indeavour for the honor of Leo and Gelasius be not accepted by them I must returne a conditionall and shorter but more unpleasing answer to this second reason of Vigilius relying on their authority and that is this If Leo and Gelasius truely and indeed taught the same with Vigilius that none after their death may noviter be condemned then were they also as Vigilius by the consenting judgement of the catholike Church hereticall If they did not indeed teach this doctrine then is Vigilius not only erroneous in faith both decreeing himselfe and judging them to have decreed heresie but slanderous also falsly imputing so great a crime as is heresie to so ancient famous Popes as were Gelasius and Leo And so whether they taught this doctrine or taught it not this second reason of Vigilius is of no worth at all proving nothing else but either them to be hereticall if Vigilius say true or himselfe to be a slanderer if he say untrue 24. Now after the reasons of Vigilius fully refuted in stead of a conclusion I will adde one short
him not to bee indeed such as hee seemed to bee it renounceth all peace and communion with him whether dead or alive nay rather it forsaketh not her communion with him but declareth unto all that shee never had communion or peace with this man such as hee was indeed before though she had peace with such as he seemed to bee Shee now denounceth a double anathema against him condemning him first for beleeving or teaching heresie and then for covering his heresie under the visor of a Catholike and of the Catholike faith So justly and fully doth the Emperour and Councell refute both the personall errour of Vigilius in that hee affirmeth Theodorus to have dyed in the peace of the Church and the doctrinall also in that he affirmeth it upon this ground that in his life time hee was not condemned by the Church 5. Now whereas i Accesserunt dignae causae ac rationes Bar. an 553. nu 233. Baronius saith that Vigilius had just and worthy reasons to defend this first Chapter one of which is this because if this were once admitted that one dying in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned for an heretike pateret ostium there would a gap be opened that every ecclesiasticall writer licet in communione Catholica defunctus esset although hee dyed in the communion of the Catholike Church might after death be out of his writings condemned for an heretike truly hee feareth where no feare is at all This gap nay this gate and broad street of condemning the dead hath laine wide open this sixteen hundred years Can the Cardinall or any of his friends in all these successioÌ„s of ages wherin have dyed many thousand millions of Catholikes can he name or finde but so much as one who hath truly dyed in the peace and communion of the Church and yet hath beene after his death condemned by the Catholike Church for an heretike He cannot The Church should condemne her owne selfe if shee condemned any with whom she had peace and whom she embraceth in her holy communion which is no other but the society with God Such indeed may dye in some errour yea in an errour of faith as Papias Irenee Iustine in that of the millenaries as Cyprian as is likely and other Africane Bishops in that of Rebaptization but either dye heretikes or be after their death condemned by the Catholike Church for heretikes they cannot 6. But there is most just cause why the Cardinall and all his fellowes should feare another matter which more neerely concernes themselves and feare it even upon that Catholike position that the dead out of their writings may justly bee condemned They should feare to have such an itching humour to write in the Popes Cause for his supremacy of authority or infallibility of his Cathedrall judgement feare to stuffe their Volumes as the Cardinall hath done his Annals with heresies and oppositions against the faith feare to continue and persist in their hereticall doctrine feare to die before they have attained to that which is secunda post naufragium tabula the second and onely boord to save them after their shipwracke to dye I say before they revoked disclamed condemned or beene the first men to set fire to their hereticall doctrines and writings and at least in words if not as the k In fine vitae reconciliatio petentibus et poenitentibus non est neganda dum tamen si haeretici sint recipiantur cum scriptura juramento Gloss in dist 1. de poenit ca. Multiplex custome was by oath and handwriting to testifie to the Church their desire to returne unto her bosome These are the things indeed they ought to feare knowing that howsoever they flatter themselves with the vaine name of the Church yet in very truth so long as their writings remaine testifying that they defended the Popes infallibility in defyning causes of faith or any other doctrine relying on that ground whereof in their life time they have not made l Satis est ut Ecclesiae judicio coâ—flet aliquem decessisse impoenitentem si non conflet de illius poenitentiâ qui haereticus post mortemcoÌ„victus est Fran. Torrens lib. de 6 7 8. Synod pa. 13. ejusdem sententiae ait Pigh fuisse a certaine and knowne recantation they neither lived nor dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church but may at any time after their death and ought wheÌ„soever occasioÌ„ is offered be declared by the Church to have dyed in their heresies and therefore dyed both out of the peace of God and of the holy Church of God This unlesse they seriously and sincerely performe it is not I nor any of our writers whom they imagine but most unjustly out of spleene and contention to speake these things who condemne them but it is the whole Catholike Church Shee by approving this fift Councell and the true decree therof condemns this Apostolicall Cathedral definition of Vigilius and all that defend it that is all the members of the present Romane Church to be hereticall and as convicted heretikes she declares them to die anathematized that is utterly separated from God and from the peace and most blessed communion with the Church of God howsoever they boast themselves to be the onely children of the Church of God 7. If any shall here reply or thinke that by the former examples of Papias Irenee Iustine Cyprian and the rest Baronius and other meÌ„bers of the present Romane church may be excused that these also as the former though dying in their error may dye in the peace coÌ„munion of the Church this I confesse is a friendly but no firme excuse for although they are both alike in this that the former as well as the latter dye in an errour of faith yet is there extreme odds and many cleare dissimilitudes betwixt the state or condition of the one and the other 8. The first ariseth from the matter it selfe wherin they erre The former erred in that doctrine of faith wherein the truth was not eliquata declarata solidata per plenarium Concilium as S. Austen m Aug. lib. 2. de bapt ca. 4. speaketh not fully scanned declared confirmed by a plenary Councell Had it bin we may well think the very same of all those holy men which Austen n Ibid. most charitably saith of S. Cyprian Sine dubio universi orbis authoritate patefacta veritate cessissent without doubt they would have yeelded to the truth being manifested unto them by the authority of the whole Church The latter erre in that which to use same Fathers o Aug. lib. eod c. 1. words per universae Ecclesiae statuta firmatum est which hath beene strengthened by the decree of the whole Church This fift Councell consonant to all precedent and confirmed by all subsequent generall Councels unto Leo the tenth decreeing this cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to bee hereticall
taken and that the heretikes abused their lenitie in forbearing him to strengthen their heresie saw that now it was time no longer to dispense or winke at Theodorus and therefore the time Å¿ Quoniam nec susceperunt dicta illorum et tempus quod dispensationis â—â—digeres praeterijs jam scripserunt patres quae superius dicta sunt post mortem ejus adversus cum et ejus scripta Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. of that dispensation being expired they began now in plaine termes and by name to condemne both his person and his writings as before they had in a generalitie performed them both in the Councell of Ephesus and this was done by severall Bishops in severall Countries and by many severall wayes 10. The first sentence wherein Theodorus was particularly and by name condemned was in a Councell at Armenia where the credit of Theodorus had done most hurt The chiefe Bishops in that Synod were Acatius Bishop of MelitiuÌ„ in Armenia a very learned holy maÌ„ who had bin one t Vt liquet ex subscriptionibus in quibus saepe Acatius To. 2. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 3. of the chiefe also in the holy Ephesine Councel and u Rambulas vocatur in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. et apud Gratian. Caus 24. a. 2. ca. 6. ex â—meÌ„d Greg. 13. Rambulas or Rabulas Bishop of Edessa whose name it seemes the Nestorians for very spite against him turned into x Sic à Liberato homine Nestoriano vocatur ca. 10. et Ibas narrat Theodorum injuste à Rabulae damnatum Bar. an 448. nu 72. Rabula that so they might with more facility revile his person a man of such piety and high esteeme in the Church that Cyrill y Cyrilli Epist ad Rabulam in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543 b. cals him columnam fundamentum veritatis the very piller and foundation of the truth and z Rambulas sanctae memoriae Episcopus qui in Sacerdotibus expleâ—dun â—enig in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. Benignus testifieth that he was a faire and resplendent lampe in the Church These a Liber ca. 10. two stirred up the Bishops of Armenia to reject the writings of Theodorus tanquam haeretici as one who was an heretike yea the author of the Nestorian heresie and themselves were present in that noble Councell of b Fuit nobile Concilium in Armenia celebratum câ—i Acatius cum Rabula interfuit Bat. an 435 nu 4. Armenia wherein they not onely condemned Theodorus as an impious person an oppugner of Christ and the childe of the Devill as by the contents of the acts of that Synod c Libellus transmissus ab Episcopis Armenia Proclo extat in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 542. doth appeare but further also they writ their Synodal letters both to Proclus Bishop of Constantinople to Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria quatenus fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega dogmata ejus that they also would joyne with them and their Synod in coÌ„demning by name both the person and sacrilegious writings of Theodorus giving this as a reason thereof because they exhort them but to doe in plaine and expresse manner the same thing which was done by them before but in a generality We write unto you per vos etiam antea condemnatum sine nomine Theodorum nominatim condemnari that Theodorus may now by name bee condemned by you who hath already though without expressing his name beene condemned by you And what they exhorted Proclus and Cyrill to doe that Rambulas performed not onely in the Armenian Councell but in his owne Church at Edessa for as Ibas in his impious Epistle d Quae extat in Conc. Chal. Act. 10. saith Ausus est Theodorum clarè anathematizare hee was bold by name and expresly to anathematize Theodorus in his owne Church and both Benignus and Liberatus witnesse the same e Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 549. a. 11. f Liber ca. 10. What Proclus did upon receipt of those letters sent from the Armenian Councell unto him is not to be learned out of Liberatus report of this matter for he in the narration of this passage is not onely untrue and partiall but very hereticall also justly herein taxed by Baronius g Liberatus cautè legendus ut pote qui ab aliquo Nestoriano eam videtur mutuatus historiam Bar. an 435. nu 9. and Binius h Historiam ca. 10. incautè nimis ab al quo Nestoriano magna ex parte mutuatus videtur Bin. de Liberato Notis ad Liber as borrowing his narration from some Nestorians which the Reader will easily observe but the truth herein must be taken out of Cyrill and the fift Councell Proclus saith Cyrill i Cyrilli verba citantur in Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 543. b. sent a tome or writing to them of Armenia full of sound doctrine and hee adjoyned thereunto certaine chapters collecta è Theodori codicibus gathered out of the bookes of Theodorus consonant to the doctrine of Nestorius exhorting them etiam illa anathematizare to accurse even those doctrines of Theodorus also The fift Councel explaines this more fully Proclus say they k Coll. 5 pa. 551. a. writeth thus against Theodorus and his impious doctrine And then they cite first those words of Proclus before mentioned wherein he sets Theodorus in the same ranke with Arius Eunomius Macedonius l In Epist Procli quae extat in Bibl. S. pa. to 3. corrupte legitur Manichei and other like heretikes calling them all puddles of errours and deceit And after this those other words of Proclus written to Iohn Bishop of Antioch wherein he calleth the doctrines of Theodorus or those chapters which were collected out of his bookes vaniloquie monstriloquie Iudaicall impietie ad destructionem legentium evomita doctrines vomited out by him to the destruction of the readers and hearers exhorting others to reject to abhorre to tread under foot and to accurse all those chapters of Theodorus utpote diabolicae insaniae constituta inventiones as being the positions and inventions of devillish madnesse From which words of Proclus uttered both against the person and doctrine of Theodorus the Councell concludeth very justly that Proclus not onely in particular condemned Theodorus as the Armenian Councell exhorted him but condemned him as a Iew Pagan and Heretike And this was done by Proclus in the yeare when Valentinian was the 4 and Theodosius the m Corruptè legitur in editione illa epist quae extat to 3. B.S. pat Theodosio 5. pro 15. ut ex fastis liquet 15. time Consull as the date of his letter or Tome to the Armenians doth declare which declares also that the Armenian Councell was held the same yeare n Conc. Armeniae habitum an 435. Bar. anno illo nu 4. is est Coss Theodosij 15 et Valent. 4. for it followed the spreading abroad of the bookes of
of Mopsvestia where hee had beene Bishop gave a memorable example They for a time esteeemed of Theodorus as a catholike Bishop and for that cause kept his name in their dipticks or Ecclesiasticall tables reciting him among the other Orthodox Bishops of that city in their Eucharisticall commemoration But now seeing him detected and condemned both by catholike Bishops by Councells and by the Imperiall Edict for an heretike they expunged and blotted out the name of Theodorus and in his roome inserted in their dipticks the name of Cyrill who though hee was not Bishop in that See yet had by his pietie and zeale manifested and maintained the faith brought both the heresie person of Theodorus into a just detestation and all this is evident by the Acts of that Synode d Acta illa Synodi Mopsvest extant in Conc. 5. Collat. 5. pa. 553. seq held at Mopsvestia about this very matter of wiping out of the name of Theodorus 17. We are now come to the time of the Councell of Chalcedon for the expunging of Theodorus name and inserting of Cyrills followed as it seemes shortly after the death of Cyrill and he dyed about seven e Cyrill obijt an 444. Conc. Chalced. habitum an 451. Bar. et Bin. yeares before the Councell of Chalcedon That by it Theodorus was also condemned their approving f Conc. Chalc. Act. 5. in definit Synodi the Councell of Ephesus and the Synodall Epistles of Cyrill in both which and in the later by name g Vt liquet ex Cyrilli Epistolis ad Iohannem Aâ—tiocheÌ„ et ad Acatium quae citantur in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. et 550. Theodorus is condemned doth manifest and besides this the Emperour Iustinian expresly saith h Iustin Edict §. Tali of it that the impious Creed of Theodorus being recited in that Councell both it cum expositore ejus with the Author and expounder of it and that was Theodorus were condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon 18. When many yeares after that holy Councell some Nestorians began againe contrary to the Edict of Theodosius and Valentinian to revive the dead and condemned memory of Theodorus Sergius Bishop of Cyrus making mention i Vt teslantur Act. Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 578. a. et 582. a. and commemorating him in the Collect among catholikes the truth of this matter being examined and found that same Sergius by the command of Iustinus the Emperour was deposed from his Bishopricke excluded out of the Church and so continued even to his dying day and this was done but six yeares before the Empire of Iustinian as by the date k Iustinus scripsit id edictum Rustico Coss Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 582. b. fuit is Coss an 520. ut teslatur Marcell in Chron. et agnoscit Bar. in illo an nu 1 Justinianus vero coepit imperare an 527. ut Marcell et Baron asserunt of Iustinus his letters doth appeare 19. Now if to all these particular sentences you adde that which the fift Councell l Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 557. a. witnesseth that Theodorus post mortem à catholica ecclesia ejectus est hath beene after his death condemned and cast out and that even by the whole Catholike Church you will easily confesse that from the time almost of his death unto the raigne of Iustinian there hath beene a continuall and never interrupted condemnation of him in the Church But in Iustinians time and perhaps before though lesse eagerly the Nestorians began afresh to renew the memory and doctrine of Theodorus setting now a fairer glosse and varnish on their cause then ever they had before for they very gladly apprehending and applauding those to say the least inconsiderate speeches of the Popes Legates Maximus in the Councel of Chalcedon that by his dictation or Epistle Ibas was declared to be a catholike hereupon they now boasted that the holy Councell by approving that Epistle of Ibas had approved both the person and doctrine of Theodorus seeing they both are highly extolled and defended in that Epistle By this meanes was this cause brought ab inferis the second time upon the stage and that also cloaked under the name and credit of the Councell of Chalcedon And at this second boute all the defenders of the Three Chapters and among them Pope Vigilius as Generall to them all undertooke the defence of Theodorus and as if there had never beene any sentence of condemnation either in generall or in particular denounced against him even in his definitive and Apostolicall constitution declareth That Theodorus was not condemned either by former Councels or Fathers and this he declareth after his solicitous circumspective and most diligent examination of their writings 20. What thinke you was become of the Popes eyes at this time that he could see none of all those condemnations of Theodorus before mentioned Not the general anathema of the Councels at Ephesus and Chalcedon in which Theodorus was involved not the expresse and particular anathema denounced against him by Rambulas and Acatius with the Councell of Armenia not the condemnation of him and his writings by Saint Proclus by S. Cyrill by the Church of Mopsvestia by the Edict of the religious Emperours by the whole Catholike Church None of all these things were done in a corner they were all matters of publike notice and record obvious to any that did not shut their eyes against the sun-shine of the truth But as I said before and must often say Nestorianisme like Naash the Ammonite had put out the Popes right eye he could see nothing with that eye all that he saw in this cause was but a very oblique and sinister aspect as doth now I hope fully appeare but will bee yet much more manifest by that which in the Constitution of Vigilius wee are next to consider 21. For as if it were a small matter not to see Theodorus condemned by the former Councels and Fathers though in a man professing so exact and accurate inspection in any cause such grosse oversights are not veniall the Pope ventures one step further for the credit of this condemned heretike Hee could not finde that Theodorus was condemned by the former witnesses Tush that is nothing he findes him acquitted by them all hee findes by Cyrill by Proclus by the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon yea by Iustinians owne law that Theodorus ought not to be condemned This was indeed a point worthy the Popes owne finding But withall I must tell you that you also shall finde one other thing that Pope Vigilius having once passed the bounds of truth for defence of Theodorus cares not now if he wade up to the eares and drowne himselfe in untruths 22. Let us then examine the allegations which for proofe of this the Pope hath found and begin we as the Pope doth with Cyrill In his m Eam citat Vigi in Const nu 173. 174. apud Bar. an 553. Epist
in doctrinall as personall matters That Theodorus was dead is personall but that none after death may bee condemned for an heretike is doctrinall yea an heresie in the doctrine of faith That Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church is an errour personall but that Theodorus therefore dyed in the peace of the Church because he was not in his life time condemned by the expresse sentēce of the Church or that any dying in heresie as Theodorus did doe die in the peace of the Church are errours doctrinall That Theodorus was not by the former Fathers and Councels condēned is a personall error but that Theodorus by the judgement of the Fathers Councels ought not after his death to be condemned is doctrinall even a condemning of the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon as guilty of beleeving and teaching an heresie So many wayes is the Popes sentence in this first Chapter erronious in faith of which Baronius most vainely pretendeth that it is no cause of faith no such cause as doth concerne the faith 41. There now remaineth nothing of Vigilius decree concerning this first Chapter but his conclusion of the same And although that must needs of it selfe fall downe when all the reasons on which it relyeth and by which onely it is supported are ruinated or overthrowne yet if you please let us take a short view of it also rather to explane than refute the same His conclusion hath two branches the former is that in regard of the foresaid reasons nostrâ b Vig. Const nu 179 eum non audemus damnare sententia wee dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence wee dare not doe it saith Vigilius 42. Oh how faint-hearted pusillanimous and dastardly was the Pope in this cause Cyrill the c Sanctissimorum Episcoporum hic coactorum caput Cyrillum c. Epist Synod Ephes to 4. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 8. head of the generall Councell Proclus a most d Cyrill epist ad Acat in Con. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543. a. Dominus meus sanctissimus Episcopus Proclus holy Bishop whose Epistle as Liberatus e Lib. ca. 10. saith the Councell of Chalcedon approved Rambulas the piller of the Church the religious Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian the Church of Mopsvestia the Councels of Ephesus of Armenia of Chalcedon the whole Catholike Church ever since the Ephesine Synod both durst and did condemne Theodorus and besides these Baronius and Binius two of the most artificiall Gnathonizing Parasites of the Pope even they durst and did even in setting downe the very Constitution of Vigilius cal f Rursumque haereticus blasphemus c. Bar. an 553. nu 120. et seq et Bin. pa. 595. et seq Theodorus more than forty times an heretike a craftie impious madde prophane blasphemous execrable heretike onely Pope Vigilius hath not the heart nor courage hee onely with his sectators dare not call him nor cōdemne him for an heretike we dare not condemne him by our sentence 43. And yet when Vigilius saw good hee who durst not doe this durst doe a greater matter he durst doe that which not any of all the former nay which they all put together never durst doe Vigilius durst defend both an heresie and a condemned and anathematized heretike he durst commend forged and hereticall writings under the name of holy Fathers hee durst approve that Epistle wherein an heretike is called and honoured for a Saint he durst contrary to the Imperiall and godly Edict of Theodosius contrary to the judgements of the holy generall Councells defend Theodorus honor his memorie yea honor him as a teacher of truth while he lived as a Saint being dead These things none of all the former ever durst doe in these Vigilius is more bold and audacious then they are all 44. Whence thinke you proceeded this contrariety of passions in Vigilius that made him sometimes more bold then a Lyon and other times more timerous then an Hare Truely even from hence As Vigilius had no eyes to see ought but what favored Nestorianisme so hee had not the heart to doe ought which did not uphold Nestorianisme If a Catholike truth met him or the sweet influence thereof hapned to breath upon him Vigilius could not endure it the Popes heart fainted at the smell thereof but when the Nestorian heresie blew upon him when being full with Nestorius he might say agitante calescimus illo not Ajax not Poliphemus so bold nor full of courage as Pope Vigilius As the Scarobee or beetle g Pier. Hierog lib. 55. is said to feed on dung but to dye at the sent of a Rose So the filth of Nestorianisme was meat and drinke to the Pope it was vita vitalis unto him but the fragrant and most odoriferous sent of the catholike truth was poison it was even death to this Beetle So truly was it fulfilled in him which the Prophet saith h Jer. 9.3 they bend their tongues for lyes but they have no courage for the truth we dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence 45. The other branch of the Popes conclusion is Sed i Vig. Const nu 179 nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe wee permit that any other shall condemne Theodorus Nay we decree k Vig. Const nu 208 that none else shall speake write or teach otherwise then we doe herein As much in effect as if the Pope had definitively decreed wee permit or suffer no man whatsoever to teach or beleeve what Cyrill what Proclus what the whole generall Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon that is what all Catholikes and the whole Catholike Church hath done taught and beleeved we permit nay we command and by this our Apostolicall Constitution decree that they shall be heretikes and defend both an heresie that no dead man may be condemned and condemned heretikes in defending Theodorus yea defending him for a Saint and teacher of truth This we permit command and decree that they shall doe but to doe otherwise to condemne Theodorus or a dead man that by no meanes doe we permit or suffer it to bee lawfull unto them 46. And as if all this were not sufficient the Pope addes one other clause more execrable then all the former for having recited those threescore hereticall assertions which as we have declared were all collected out of the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus he adjoynes l Vig Const nu 173. Anathematizamus omnem wee accurse and anathematize every man pertaining to orders who shall ascribe or impute any contumely to the Fathers and Doctors of the Church by those forenamed impieties and if no Father then not Theodorus for those may be condemned See now unto what height of impiety the Pope is ascended for it is as much as if hee had said We anathematize and accurse Saint Cyrill Saint Proclus Saint Rambulas Saint Acatius the Synode of Armenia the generall Councells of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople in the time of
Iustinian yea even the whole catholike Church which hath approved those holy Councells all these out of those very impieties which Vigilius mentioneth have condemned Theodorus them all for wronging and condemning Theodorus for those impieties we doe anathematize and accurse saith Vigilius 47. Consider now seriously with your selves of what faith and religion they are who hold and so doe all the members of the present Romane Church this for a position or foundation of faith that whatsoever any Pope doth judicially and by his Apostolike authority define in such causes is true is infallible is with certainty of faith to bee beleeved and embraced Let all the rest be omitted embrace but this one decree of Vigilius nay but this one passage or parcell of his decree touching this first Chapter which concernes Theodorus yet by approving this one they demonstrate themselves not onely to renounce but with Vigilius to condemne accurse and anathematize both the Catholike faith and the Catholike Church yea to accurse all who doe not accurse them which because none but Anti-Christ and his hereticall adherents can doe they demonstrate againe hereby their Church to bee hereticall catacatholike and Anti-Christian such as not onely hateth but accurseth the holy and truly Catholike Church of Christ But the curse m Prov. 26.2 that is causlesse shall not come Nay God doth and for ever will turne their cursings into blessings Blessed are n Ma. 5.11 yee when for my sake for professing and maintaining my truth men revile you and speake evill of you Let Balak hire with hous-fulls of gold Let the Romane Balaam for the wages of iniquity attempt never so oft on this hill on that mountaine or wheresoever hee sets up his altars to curse the Church of GOD the Lord o Deut. 23.5 will turne the curse into a blessing unto them for there is no sorcery p Numb 23.23 against Iacob no curse no charme nor incantation against Israell Nay their curses shall fall on their owne heads and returne into their owne bosomes but peace and the blessings of peace shall bee upon Israel For blessed q Numb 24.9 shall hee bee that blesseth thee and cursed is hee that curseth thee CHAP. IX That Vigilius besides divers personall held a doctrinall errour in saith in his defence of the second Chapter which concernes the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill 1. THere was some shadow of reason to thinke that the former Chapter was a personall matter seeing that was indeed moved concerning the person of Theodorus But in the two other there is no pretence or colour for Baronius to say that in them the question or cause was personall and not wholy doctrinall who in all the fift Councell once doubted of the persons of Theodoret or Ibas whether they were Catholikes after their anathematizing of Nestorius in the Councell of Chalcedon The onely question about them was whether the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill were to bee condemned which the Pope denyeth and the holy Councell affirmeth and whether the Epistle of Ibas was Orthodoxall or he by it known to be Orthodoxal which the Pope affirmeth and the holy Councell denyeth The question about them no way concerned their persons but onely their writings And it might be a wonder that Baronius should have the face to say that the cause in these two Chapters was onely personall if it were not daily seene by experience that necessitas cogit ad turpia were necessity enforced the Cardinall to use any though never so untrue never so unlikely excuses for Vigilius 2. There are I confesse divers personall matters and questions of facts which concernes both these Chapters and although they were not the controversies moved and debated betwixt the defenders and the oppugners of those Chapters yet is it needfull to say somewhat of them also partly for more illustration of the cause of faith specially that we may see how foully Vigilius and Baronius have erred not onely in doctrinall causes which are more obscure but even in those personall matters which had beene easie and obvious if they had not shut their eyes against the truth 3. Concerning the second Chapter the Popes decree herein relyeth and is grounded on three personall points or matters of fact The first is that Vigilius would perswade that Theodoret was not the author of those writings against Cyrill and against his twelve Chapters or Anathematizmes a Extant in Actis Conc. Ephes to 1. ca. 14. et tom 5. ca. 1. which containing a just condemnation of the twelve hereticall assertions of Nestorius were approved both by the Councell of Ephesus b Ibid. to 5. ca. 2. §. Ego vero Et Liber ca. 6. and Chalcedon c Act. 5. in definit fidei To which purpose he calls them not Theodorets but writings quae d Vigil Constit nu 180. sub Theodoreti nomine proferuntur which are set forth under the name of Theodoret. And againe the reprofe of the 12. Chapters of Cyrill à Theodoreto e Ibid. nu 181. ut putatur ingesta made as is thought by Theodoret adding f Jbid. this as one reason why the Councell of Chalcedon did not cōdemne those writings because they having those matters which were done but of late before their eyes Theodoretum nihil tale fecisse probaverunt did judge that Theodoret had written no such thing Thus Vigilius pretending those writings against Cyrill not to be Theodorets and that the Councell of Chalcedon also thought the same whence he would inferre and justly upon this supposall that Theodorets name ought not to bee blemished by those writings which were none of his 4. Not his why Theodoret is knowne and testified by so many to have beene so eager and violent in defence of Nestorius and his heresie and so spitefull both in words and writings against Cyrill and all orthodoxall professors of that time that it were more strange if Vigilius was ignorant of this then that knowing it he should deny or make a doubt thereof Witnesse Binius Iohn of Antioch saith he g Bin. in argumento ca. 2. Append. ad to 5. Act. Conc. Ephes pa. 859. perswaded Theodoret that hee should with all his art and skill oppugne and refute those 12 Anathematizmes of Cyrill Theodoret being as much an enemy to Cyrill as was Iohn himselfe willingly yeelded to his petition and by manifest sycophancy wrested every one of Cyrills Chapters from their true genuine and orthodoxall to a false preposterous and hereticall sense and Enoptius sent that refutation of Theodoret unto Cyrill Againe h Bin. notis in Epist Leonis 62. to 1. Conc. pa. 971. Theodoret did once defend Theodorus and Nestorius two most pestiferous Arch-heretikes against Cyrill Yea Binius saith defendit constantissimè he defended them most constantly as if to defend heresie were with these men not pertinacie but constancy witnesse Baronius Theodoret saith he i Bar. an 427. nu 30. being most addicted to Theodorus
this but a vertuall and implicite anathematizing of those his owne writings against Cyrill which defended Nestorius and his doctrines None can anathematize the former but eo ipso he doth most certainely though not expresly anathematize the later as on the contrary none can say as Vigilius doth and decreeth that all shall doe the like none can say that the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill and his twelve chapters ought not to be anathematized but eo ipso even by saying so he doth most certainly though but implicitè and by consequent say that Nestorius and his heresie ought not to be condemned A truth so cleare that Pope Pelagius k Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. Quis haec from his anathematizing of Nestorius and his doctrine concludeth of Theodoret Constat eundem it is manifest that in doing this he condemned his owne writings against the twelve Chapters of Cyrill 14. Neither is that true which Vigilius fancied that to require men to anathematize the writings of Theodoret is to seeke and require more then the Councell of Chalcedon required It is not It is but requiring the selfe same thing to be done in actuall and expresse termes which the Councel required and Theodoret performed in vertuall and implicite termes The thing required and done is the same the manner onely of doing it or requiring it to be done is different Even as to require of men to professe Christ to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Councell of Nice and the Church ever since requireth is not to require them to professe more or ought else then the Scripture teacheth and all catholikes l Hoc testimonio omnes patres utuntur contra Arianos ut probent unam esse essentiam patris filij Bell. lib 1. de Christ ca. 6. §. Quartum before professed by those words I and my Father are one but it is a requiring of an explicite profession of that truth concerning the unity of substance of the Father and the Sonne which by those words of Scripture they did before implicitè professe 15. But yet at least will some of Vigilius friends reply it was unfit to require this explicite anathematizing of Theodorets writings seeing the Councell of Chalcedon did not require it No not so neither The explicite condemning of them was not only fit but necessarie at that time in the dayes of Iustinian and Vigilius For as when the Arians denyed Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was enough for one to cleare himselfe of Arianisme to say that he held this text for true I and the Father are one though therein he doe implicitè professe Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and though to have professed that alone before the question about the unity of one substance was moved had beene sufficient but now he must explicitè professe that truth which is explicitè denyed and oppugned even so it is in this cause of Theodorets writings and all like it While there was no doubt moved by heretikes whether those writings of his ought to be condemned and whether by the Councell of Chalcedon they were condemed or no so long it was sufficient for one to professe that he condemned Nestorius and subscribed to the definition of Chalcedon both which were implicite condemning of those writings of Theodoret but when the Nestorians began to boast that Theodorets writings against Cyrill neither were condemned but rather with the author of them approved by the Councell of Chalcedon neither ought to be condemned the Church now was necessarily eâ—â—â—rced to require of all men a profession of that truth in plaine and explicite termes which before they made onely in generall and implicite Nor could Vigilius or any other Nestorian who refused in expresse manner to condemne the writings of Theodoret purge himselfe of that heresie of Nestorius at this time by saying they approved the definition of Chalcedon or condemned Nestorius though in both these they did implicitè condemne the writings of Theodoret but now they must expresly professe that which the heretikes expresly denyed they must in plaine termes anathematize those hereticall writings of Theodoret and acknowledge them to have bin anathematized by the Councel of Chalcedon as the heretiks in plaine termes vauÌ„ted that neither they ought nor were anathematized but approved by the Councel of Chalcedon whensoever any point tending to the impeaching of faith begins explicitè to be denyed the holy Church may not then content her selfe in generall and implicitè to condemne the same few perhaps can perceive that and many will make that generality of termes as Vigilius and other Nestorians now did but a cloak for their heresie but the Church must now in most plaine easie and expressed manner that can be devised both teach declare and define the same This the Church did in this fift Councell as in the other two so in this Chapter touching Theodorets writings It taught but the very same which the Councell of Chalcedon had done before it anathematized those his writings which at Chalcedon were anathematized before but they did this now in a plaine manner and explicitè which by the Councell of Chalcedon only in an obscure manner and implicitè was done before 16. The third personall errour which Vigilius m Vig. Const nu 181. taketh for a ground of his decree is that Cyrill himselfe though he was so exceedingly injured by the writings of those Easterne Bishops that tooke part with Nestorius yet when he made union with them he required them not to anathematize their owne writings but overpast them in silence as if there had never beene any such whence Vigilius inferreth that neither ought this anathematizing of their writings by name of Theodorets bee required by others yea he saith the Fathers of Chalcedon imitated this example of Cyrill and so would not require that of Theodoret which they saw Cyrill not to have required of others 17. The answer is easie by that which hath beene declared this saying of Vigilius laboureth of the same equivocall sophistication as did the former for both Cyrill required and all who were united unto him and received into his which was the communion of the Catholike Church they all did though not in explicite termes which then was not needfull yet vertually and after a certaine and undoubted though implicite manner condemne and anathematize all their writings against Cyrill and the Catholike faith for he received none till they had anathematized thâ— doctrines of Nestorius This doth Cyril himselfe most plainly witnesse in his Epistle to n Cyrill Epist ad Dynat extat in Act. Conc. Ephes to 5. ca. 16. Dynatus I would not saith he admit Paulus Bishop of Emisa into communion priusquam Nestorij dogmata proprio chyrographo anathematizasset untill hee had anathematized by his owne hand-writing the doctrines of Nestorius And he intreated me in behalfe of the other Bishops that I would rest contented with that profession which they had sent and require no
contradict their interloquutions verumetiam apertissimum eis noscuntur praebuisse consensum but also they are knowne to have assented and that most manifestly unto those interloquutions So Vigilius It had beene enough and too much to have said that the Councell had assented or had but seemed to assent but Vigilius in saying that all the rest did most manifestly assent to those interloquutions uttered a papall and supreme untruth whereof no colourable pretence can be made witnesse the fift general Councell and the whole Catholike Church which hath approved it They expresly e Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 576. a.b. testifie that the Councell of Chalcedon did pro nullo habere esteeme as nothing that which was spoken by one or two those were Pascasinus and Maximus for that Epistle but of this also I have spoken before 4. Now both these vntruths whereof Vigilius is so evidently and by so ample witnesses convicted Cardinall Baronius hath againe revived telling with a face more hard than Brasse or Adamant Patres f Bar. an 553. nu 191. dixerunt eam Epistolam ut Catholicam recipiendam the Fathers of Chalcedon said that this Epistle of Ibas is to be received as orthodoxall and g Ba an 448. nu 71 againe ex ipsa Ibam fuisse probatum orthodoxum aequè una fuit sententia omnium Episcoporum that Ibas was by this Epistle approved for a Catholike it was the consent and uniforme judgement of all the Bishops at Chalcedon then which two lowder untruths and well worthy of a golden whetstone could hardly have beene uttered And though he tooke them from Pope Vigilius yet are they farre more inexcusable in the Cardinall than in the Pope his Master Vigilius dyed before he saw the judgement of succeeding Popes and generall Councels which had he knowne wee may charitably thinke that his Holinesse would have casseired and defaced such palpable and condemned untruths But Cardinall Baronius knew all this hee knew that the fift h In 6. collatione Conc. 5. allata ab ipso Vigilio pro defensione Ibae Epistolae confutantur Bar. an 553. nu 210. generall Councell had condemned these untruths in Vigilius he knew that Pelagius i Gregorius cum praedecessoribus successoribus ejus omnes quintam Synodum confirmasse noscuntur Bar. an 553 nu 229. Gregory and their successors that the sixt k Bar. ibid. seventh and other generall Councels had approved the fift Councell and so in approving it had condemned those same untruths and yet against the knowne consent and judgement of all those Popes and generall Councels that is against the knowne testimonie of the whole Catholike Church for a thousand yeares together he is bold to avouch both those former sayings for truths which all those former witnesses with one voyce proclaime to be condemned untruths Such account doth the Cardinall make of Fathers Popes Generall Councels and of the whole Catholike Church when they come crosse in his way 5. A third personall matter there is concerning this Chapter of which not Vigilius but Cardinall Baronius doth enforce me to intreate and that is whether Ibas was indeed the author of this Epistle or no for although it be not materiall to the intent of the fift Councell which against the decree of Vigilius we now defend whether Ibas writ it or not seeing neither this fift nor the former Councell of Chalcedon condemned the author of this Epistle but onely the Epistle it selfe yet seeing the Cardinall was pleased to undertake the defence of a needlesse untruth that this is not the Epistle of Ibas I am desirous that all should see how wisely and worthily hee hath behaved himselfe in this point 6. Baronius speaking against this Epistle first makes it doubtfull whose it is saying l Bar. an 432. nu 71. author qui fertur nomine Ibae quisquis ille fuerit the author of this Epistle which passeth under the name of Ibas whatsoever he be and having thus bred a distrust in your mindes then as the serpent dealt with Eve hee positively sets downe his untruth It is not the Epistle of Ibas in this manner Caeterum m Ibid. ut publica acta testantur producta in Concilium Epistola illa non esse Ibae comperta but the publike acts doe testifie that when this Epistle was produced in the Councell at Chalcedon it was found not to be the Epistle of Ibas and so it being condemned Ibas was absolved Thus Baronius who for proofe hereof alleageth the publike acts n Conc. Chalc. Act. 10. Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 6. citantur à Bar. ibidem both of the Councell of Chalcedon and of the 2. Nicene Synod And truly in the second Nicene Synod that which the Cardinall saith is read indeed by Epiphanius a Deacon in that Synod but it is the testimony of the whole Councell Epiphanius onely reading and proposing it in the name o Epiphanius scitam à patribus appositam responsionem per legit Bar. nu 787. nu 34. and behalfe of the Synod And because it is a testimony very pregnant for the Cardinalls assertion and is cited out of a Councel which he much honoreth affecteth I will do him the favour as at large to expresse that passage the rather because this as the whole answer read by Epiphanius is not onely commended as a matter delivered p Quam confutationem nobis spiritus sanctus dedit Conc. Nâ—c 2. Act. 6. pa. 356. a. unto them by the holy Ghost but they further request q Rogamus autem quicunque etc. ibid b. all who shall happen to light on that commentarie of theirs that they will not read it slightly or perfunctorily but with singular indagation and search of the same And I am loth to deny those Nicene Fathers so very just and reasonable a request 7. In that place r Conc. Nic 2. Act. 6. pa. 371. a. there was read on the behalfe of the Iconoclasts a testimonie out of the ancient Father Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus forbidding to set up Images either in the Churches or Å¿ Epiphanius Cyprius sic inquit Ne in ecclesiam imagines infer atis neque in coemiterijs statuatis neque in domo communi tolerentur ibid. in Churchyards or in their common dwelling houses but every where to carie about God in their hearts This saying netled the Nicene Fathers not a little who were very superstitiously devoted to Image-worship and therefore in stead of a better answer they say that the booke whence that is alleaged is falsly t Id ex Epiphanio lectum nequaquam illius existit ibid. a. Et verum ut novitij libelli et alieni falsique sunt ibid b. ascribed to Epiphanius hee was not the author of it Epiphanius they honor u Commentarium illum reijcimus beatum autem patrem Epiph. ecclesiae Doctorem agnoscimus ibid. b. as an holy Father and Doctor of the Catholike Church but that booke going under his name they reject which
admitted for true and then it unavoydably followeth that by the Cardinals divinity and in his judgment Nestorianisme is the Catholike faith which aptly and easily will accord both his sayings for so the author of this Epistle by approving this union shall be a perfect Nestorian as in the one place is affirmed and by approving this union shall be withall a perfect Catholike as in the other place is avouched 28. Besides this confession of Baronius which is cleare enough there is yet another meanes to demonstrate that the Cardinall by defending this latter part of the Epistle touching the union did wittingly and wilfully maintaine the condemned heresie of Nestorius for the fift generall Councell approved as wee have shewed by the judgment of the whole Catholike Church hath adjudged this very part k Posteriora enim inserta Epistolae majori impietate plena sunt Cyrillum et similia ei sapientes injuriantia et omnino impiam sectam Nestorij vindicantia Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 564. a. Scimus et nos haec ita subse quuta est c. Ibid. of the Epistle the defence whereof Baronius hath undertaken not onely to bee hereticall but to bee more full of blasphemies than any of the rest it hath l Qui dicit eam rectam esse vel partem ejus Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. further judicially defined al that defend either this or any part of that Epistle to be heretikes and for such it hath anathematized them yea all that write m Eos qui scripserunt velscribunt pro ea Ibid. eirher for it or for them Now the Cardinall had read the whole fift Councell as appeareth by that summary collection n Extat in Annal. Bar an 553. a. nu 33. ad 217. which he hath made of the Acts and of every Collation thereof nay hee had not onely read these Acts but pried earnestly with a jealous and carping eie into every corner and sentence thereof as you shall perceive hereafter and therefore it is doubtlesse that hee knew the judgement of this fift Councell concerning all that defend any part of this Epistle and specially the latter part which concernes the union Neither onely did he know that to be the judgement of this fift Councell but as himselfe o An. 553. nu 229. expresly witnesseth of all both Popes and generall Councels which followed it all of them approving this fift Councell and the judgement thereof whence it is cleare that Baronius knew certainly himselfe by defending this part of the Epistle touching the union to defend that which by the judgment of the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church ever since hath beene condemned for hereticall and the defenders of it anathematized as heretikes yet such was the Cardinals zeale and ardent affection to Nestorianisme that against the judgement of the whole Church knowne unto him yea knowne for this very cause to anathematize him yet he defends the union there mentioned and the latter part of that Epistle wherein it is mentioned that is in truth all the blasphemies of Nestorius chosing rather by adhering to Vigilius and his hereticall decree to be condemned and anathematized by the whole Catholike Church for a Nestorian heretike than by forsaking the defence of Vigilius and his decree to condemne this latter part of the Epistle of Ibas touching the union which containeth in it the very quintessence of all Nestorianisme 29. I think it is now sufficiently apparent by that which wee have already said that the union which Ibas in his Epistle mentioneth and embraceth and which Vigilius first and after him Baronius approveth is not that true union in the Catholike faith which Cyrill made with Iohn and other Easterne Bishops but onely an union in Nestorianisme and in denying the Catholike faith to which the Nestorians falsly reported and slandered Cyrill with the other Catholikes to have consented and thereby to have condemned and anathematized that truth which the yeare before they had decreed at Ephesus Yet for the full satisfaction of all and clearing of all doubts which may arise I will adde one thing further which will much more manifest both the calumnie of the Nestorians and the constancy of Saint Cyrill and that is upon what colour or pretence the Nestorians raised this slanderous report which I am the more desirous to explane because the narration of this matter is extreamly confounded and entangled by Baronius and Binius and that as may be feared even of set purpose that they might either quite discourage others as almost they had done my selfe in the search of this truth or at least misleade them into such by-paths that they should not finde the truth in this matter 30. When Theodosius the religious Emperour had written by Aristolaus that earnest letter to Iohn and the other Easterne Bishops perswading yea commanding them to consent with Cyrill and embrace the Catholike communion they upon the Emperors motion sought indeed to make an union with Cyrill but they laboured to effect it by drawing Cyrill unto their bent and to consent unto their heresies This they first attempted by a letter of Acatius Bishop of Berea willing p Apud Acatium Bercensem Episcopâ—â— congressi scribi ad me curarunt pacem concordiamque nisi eo modo quem praescriberent fieri non debere Epist Cyrilli ad Acatium quae est 29. ext tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 7. idem habetur in Epist Cyrilli ad Dynatum tom eod ca. 16. him to write in all their names unto Cyrill that no unity or concord could be made but according to those conditions which themselves should prescribe And the condition prescribed by them was that Cyrill should q Vrgebat ut omnibus quae adversus Nestorium scripsimus abolitis velut inutilibus rejectis c. Epist ad Dynat similia habentur in Epist Cyrill ad Acat locis cit abolish and condemne all that ever hee had written against Nestorianisme and so both his twelve Chapters and the Ephesine decree and all the like Cyrill answered r Cyrill Epistola ad Dynat ad Acat with great confidence rem eos postulare quae fieri plane non posset that they required a matter utterly impossible because what hee had written touching that matter was rightly written and in defence of the true faith and therefore that he could not either condemne or deny what he had written 31. When it succeeded not this first way they next attempted to effect the union by Paulus Å¿ Miserunt Alexandriam Paulum Episcopum EmisenoruÌ„ c. ibid. Bishop of Emisa whom they sent to Alexandria to negotiate for them both by words and by a second letter which they sent by him And although they were not in this second so violent as in the former of Acatius yet they writ t At tulit quaedam parum decore commode proposita ibid. some things therein also not sitting nor allowable for they
they meant that either nature made a severall and distinct person by it selfe and so they made Christ to be two distinct persons each subsisting by it selfe two Sonnes two Christs that is in truth no Christ no Saviour at all for a Saviour he cannot bee unlesse the selfe same person which is man be God also 12. Againe when Catholikes said that Christ is one person they meant truly and orthodoxally that both natures together make but one personall subsistence as the humane soule and body make but one person or one man but when the Nestorians said that Christ was one person they meant not of that unity which is by naturall or personall subsistence but of unity in affection of unity by consent and liking of unity by cohabitation the person of the Sonne of God so affecting and liking the sonne of Marie that it inhabited and dwelt therein as in a holy temple or house but yet as neither the house is the inhabitant nor the inhabitant the house so neither was God by their doctrine the sonne of Mary or man nor yet was that man which was the sonne of Mary God but onely the house or temple of God 13. When Catholikes called Iesus Christ our Lord they meant truly and orthodoxally that the man Iesus Christ who tooke flesh of the Virgin Mary is in truth very God the Godhead being hypostatically united unto the manhood and both of them making but one person who is both God and man but the Nestoriās in calling Iesus Christ our Lord meant not that the man Christ was truly personally God or Lord but that he was God and the Lord onely by having God and the Lord inhabiting in him and united not personally but onely affectually unto him wherupon it followed that they in adoring Christ giving divine honours unto him were indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for they gave the honour proper onely to God unto that person or that mā which according to their doctrine they held not to be God 14. And which of all may seeme most strange whereas Catholikes not onely professed the Virgin Mary to bee the Mother of God but under those very tearmes and by that forme of words as being most easie and perspicuous contradicted condemned all the heresies of Nestorius which were all by consequent included in their denying Mary to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God The Nestorians to avoid the hatred of this speech if they should deny it and more plausibly to convay their heresie said and in words professed even this also that Mary was the Mother of God but they meant not thereby as Catholikes did that Christ who tooke flesh of the Virgin Mary was the same person or one personall subsistence with the Sonne of God or that God was incarnate and assumed the manhood to make one person with the Godhead but all that they meant was that the Son of God was onely by affection and love united unto the sonne of Marie being already perfect man in the wombe of his mother and that God was borne of her not by assuming flesh unto him but by inhabiting that man who tooke flesh of her Thus in shew of words the Nestorians seemed to bee Catholikes and to say the same with Catholikes but their sense and meaning in those words was most hereticall and therefore indeed and in truth themselves notwithstanding all these speeches were heretikes 15. For the full and ample proofe of all these I must referre my selfe to another Treatise if it ever happen to see the light wherein I have at large handled this point and proved another of their Popes somewhat more ancient then Vigilius I meane Hormisda to have beene as deepe in the heresie of Nestorius and to have as firmly by his Cathedrall and Apostolicall sentence confirmed the same as Vigilius himselfe hath done who as I thinke by the example and authority of his predecessor was the more emboldned to plead for Nestorianisme it being of all heresies which ever sprung up in the Church most full of all sophisticall subtilties and colourable pretences of wit was most fit of all the rest to be commended by such as under the shew of learning and truth meant to defend and uphold heresie But for this time I will now alleage onely a few evident testimonies to declare the truth of that concurrence in words and difference in sense betweene Catholikes and Nestorians which even now I mentioned 16. Nestorius in his Epistle n Extat in Conc. 5 Coll. 6. pa 57◠b. to Alexander signifying that the two natures in Christ are also two persons saith thus Non duas personas unam personam facimus we doe not make two persons one person but by this one name of Christ we signifie two natures to wit making two persons And to shew how these two persons are called by them one person thou mayst saith he o Nestorij verba citata ibidem pa. 576. a. in Actis Conc. Ephes to 2. ca. 8. pa. 747. a. call him that was borne of Mary by the name of the Sonne of God for the Virgin which bare Christ filium Dei genuit bare the Sonne of God but because the Sonne according to the Natures is double non genuit quidem p Negat Nestorius Mariam genuisse filium ita ut ex ipsa carnem sumpserit affirmat genuisse ita ut ex ipsa prodierit Hoc declarant Nestorij verba apud Cyrillum citata in Epist ad Acatium to 3. Act. Ephes ca. 7 vbi ita ait Nestorius Deum ex Christipaera virgine prodijsse ex divina scriptura edoctus sum at vero Deum ex ipsa genitum esse eo quo dixi sexsu id nusquam edoctus sum filium Dei she did not truly beare the Son of God as taking flesh from her but she bare the man or humane nature quae propter filium adjunctum filij quoque appellatione afficitur which is called the Sonne of God because the Sonne God is united and joyned unto him and in another place q Non per se secundum se Deus est quod in utero formatum est non per se secundum se Deus est quod spiritus sancti operâ effectum est non per se secundum se Deus est quod in monumento conditum est At quia Deus in homine assumpto extitit assumptus assumenti conjunctus propter assumentum Deus appellatur verba Nestorij citata in Act. Conc. Ephes to 2. ca. 8. pa. 748. a. He that was framed in the wombe and laid in the grave is not of himselfe God at quia Deus in homine assumpto existit but because God is in the man whom hee assumes unto him the man assumed is called God because hee is assumed of God So Nestorius plainly calling Christ God and the Son of God and Marie the mother of God and yet denying God and man to be one person but the person of
assent to their Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions and doctrines maintained by the present Romane Church but co nomine even for that very cause they are convicted condemned and accursed heretikes For the manifesting of which conclusion I will begin with that their fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith whereof before I have so often made mention And to prove the present Romane Church to bee hereticall herein two things are to be declared the one that this is indeed the position or doctrine of their Church the other that this doctrine is hereticall and for such condemned by the Catholike Church 7. For the former that the assertion of Popes infallibility in defining causes of faith is the doctrine of the present Romane Church I thinke none conversant in their writings will make doubt Give mee leave to propose some testimonies of their owne The Pope saith Bellarmine g Lib. 4. de pont ca. 3. §. Sic. when hee teacheth the whole Church those things which belong to faith nullo casu errare potest hee can by no possible meanes then erre And this as he saith is certissimum a most certaine truth and in the end hee addeth this is a signe Ecclesiam totam sentire that the whole Church doth beleeve the Pope to be in such causes infallible So he testifying this to be the judgement and doctrine of their whole Church The Iesuite Coster for himselfe and their whole Church saith We h Ench. tit de summo pont §. Fatemur doe constantly deny the Popes vel haeresim docere posse vel errorem proponere to be able either to teach an heresie or to propose an errour to be beleeved When the Pope saith Bozius i Th. Boz lib 18. de Sig. Eccl. ca. 6. §. Sequitur teacheth the Church or sets forth a decree of faith Divinitùs illi praeclusa est omnis via God then stoppeth every way unto him which might bring him into errour Againe k Idem lib. 16. ca. 8. §. Rursus in making such decrees nunquam valuit aut valebit facere contra fidem he never was he never shall be able to doe ought against the faith We beleeve saith Gretzer l Def. ca. 3. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. §. Terius the judgement of him who succeeds Peter in the Chaire non secus ac olim Petri infallibile to be no otherwise infallible then the judgement of Peter was And the m Idem def ca. 28. lib. 1. de pontif §. Quocirca gates of hell shall never be able to drive Peters successours ut errorem quempiam ex cathedra definiant that they shall define any errour out of the Chaire This is saith Stapleton n Relect. Cont. 3. qu. 4. §. Circa a certaine and received truth among Catholikes That the Pope when he decreeth ought out of his pontificall office hath never yet taught any hereticall doctrine nec tradere potest nor can he deliver any error yea if it bee a judgement o Rel. Conc. 6. q. 3. Art 5. §. Respondeo of faith it is not onely false but hereticall to say that the Pope can erre therein They saith Canus p Loc. Theol. lib. 6. ca. 7. §. Quid. who reject the Popes judgement in a cause of faith are heretickes To this accordeth Bellarmine q Lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 8. §. Excutimus It is lawfull to hold either part in a doubtfull matter without note of heresie before the Popes definition be given but after the Popes sentence he who then dissenteth from him is an hereticke To these may be added as Bellarmine testifieth r Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 2. § Quarto St. Thomas Thomas Waldensis Cardinall Turrecremata Cardinall Cajetane Cardinall Hosius Driedo Eccius Iohannes a Lovanio and Peter Soto all these teach it to be impossible that the Pope should define any hereticall doctrine And after them all the saying of Gregory de Valentia is most remarkable to this purpose It now appeareth saith he ſ In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1 part 30. that Saint Thomas did truly and orthodoxally teach that the proposall or explication of our Creed that is of those things which are to be beleeved doth belong unto the Pope which truth containes so clearely the summe and chiefe point of Catholike religion ut nemo Catholicus esse possit qui illam non amplectatur that none can be a Catholike unlesse hee hold and embrace this So he professing that none are to be held with them for Catholikes but such as maintaine the Popes infallibilitie in proposing or defining causes of faith 8. They have yet another more plausible manner of teaching the Popes Infallibilitie in such causes and that is by commending the judgement of the Church and of generall Councels to be infallible All Catholikes saith Bellarmine t Lib 2. de Conc. ca. 2 §. Ac ut doe constantly teach that generall Councels confirmed by the Pope cannot possibly erre in delivering doctrines of faith or good life And this he saith is so certaine that fide catholica tenendum est it is to be embraced by the Catholike faith and so all Catholikes are bound to beleeve it Likewise concerning the Church he thus writeth u Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 14. §. Nostra Nostra sententia est it is our sentence that the Church cannot absolutely erre in proposing things which are to bee beleeved The same is taught by the rest of their present Church Now when they have said all and set it out with great pompe and ostentation of words for the infallibility of the Church and Councell it is all but a meere collusion a very maske under which they cover and convaie the Popes Infallibilitie into the hearts of the simple Try them seriously who list sound the depth of their meaning and it will appeare that when they say The Church is infallible Generall Councels are infallible The Pope is infallible they never meane to make three distinct infallible Iudges in matters of faith but one onely infallible and that one is the Pope 9. This to be their meaning sometimes they will not let to professe When we teach saith Gretzer x Def. ca. 10. lib. 3. de verb. Dei §. Iam. pa. 1450. that the Church is the infallible Iudge in causes of faith per Ecclesiā intelligimus Pontificem Romanum we by the Church doe meane the Pope for the time being or him with a Councell Againe y Ibid. §. An. pd 1451. They object unto us that by the Church we understand the Pope Non abnuo I confesse wee meane so in deed This is plaine dealing by the Church they meane the Pope So Gregorie de Valentia z In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. By the name of the Church we understand the head of Church that is the Pope So Bozius a Lib. 2. de sig eccl ca. 21. §. His. lib.
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌ„s of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ„ fundamentuÌ„ summaÌ„ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâ—siam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ„ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ„ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ— Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
sense of them Now because all doubts and controversies of faith depend on the one of these it clearly followeth upon that decree that the very last stay in all doubts of faith is the Churches judgement but that upon no other nor higher stay doth or can relie for whatsoever you take besides this the truth the waight and validity of all must be tried in the Church at her judgement it must stand or fall yea if you make a doubt of the Churches judgement it selfe even that as all other must be ended by the judgement of the Church it is the last Iudge of all This to bee the true meaning of the Trent Councel Bellarmine both saw and professeth when hee saith e Lib. 3. de verbo Dei ca. 3. § Tota The Church that is the Pope with a Councell is Iudge of the sense of the Scripture omnium controversiarum and of all controversies of faith and in this all Catholikes do agree and it is expresly set downe in the Trent Councell So Bellarmine testifying this to be both the decreed doctrine of their generall and approved Councell and the consenting judgment of all that are Romane Catholikes 17. Now all this which they have said of the Church if you will have it in plaine termes and without circumloquution belongs onely to the Pope who is vertually both Church and Councell As the Church or Councell is called infallible no otherwise but by a Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head both of Church and Councell is infallible So is the Church or Councell called the foundation of faith or last principle on which their faith must relie by the same figure Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head of them both is the foundation of faith And whosoever is a true Romane Catholike or member of their present Church hee beleeveth all other doctrines because the Church that is the Pope doth teach them and the Pope to teach them infallibly he beleeveth for it selfe because the Pope saith hee is in such teaching infallible This infallibility of the Pope is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very corner stone the foundation on stone the rocke and fundamentall position of their whole faith and religion which was the point that I purposed to declare 18. I have hitherto declared and I feare too abundantly that the assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie in causes of faith is not onely a position but the very fundamentall position of all the doctrines of the present Romane Church In the next place we are to prove that this position is hereticall and that for such it was adjudged and condemned by the Catholike Church In the proofe whereof I shall not need to stay long This whole treatise and even that which hath already beene declared touching the Constitution of Pope Vigilius doth evidently confirme the same For seeing the defending of the Three Chapters hath been proved f Ca. 3. 4. to be hereticall the Constitution of Vigilius made in defence of those Chapters must of necessity be confessed to be hereticall Nay if you well consider you shall see that this very position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie is adjudged to bee hereticall For the fift generall Councell knew this cause of the Three Chapters to bee a cause of faith They knew further that Pope Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree and Cathedrall Constitution had defined that those Three Chapters ought to bee defended Now seeing they knew both these and yet judicially defined the defence of those Three Chapters to be hereticall and for such accursed it even in doing this they define the Cathedrall judgement of Vigilius in this cause of Faith to be hereticall and therefore most certainly and à fortiori define this position That the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is infallible to bee hereticall and for such they anathematize both it and all that defend it And because the judgement and definitive sentence of the fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all subsequent Councels till the Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth it unavoydably hence ensueth that the same position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is by the judgement of all generall Councells untill that time that is by the constant and uniforme consent of the whole Catholike Church adjudged condemned and accursed for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes And seeing we have cleerly proved the whole present Romane Church and all that are members therof to defend this position yea to defend it as the maine foundation of their whole faith the evidence of that assertion which I proposed g Sup. hoc cap. nu 6. doth now manifestly appeare That none can now assent to the Pope or to the doctrines of the present Church of Rome but he is eo nomine even for that very cause adjudged and condemned for hereticall and that even in the very ground and foundation of his faith 19. From the foundation let us proceed to the walls and roofe of their religion Thinke you the foundation thereof is onely hereticall and the doctrines which they build thereon orthodoxall Nothing lesse They are both sutable both hereticall That one fundamentall position is like the Trojan horse in the wombe of it are hid many troopes of heresies If Liberius confirme Arianisme Honorius Monothelitisme Vigilius Nestorianisme these all by vertue of that one assertion must passe currant for Catholike truths Nay who can comprehend I say not in words or writing but in his thought and imagination all the blasphemous and hereticall doctrines which by all their Popes have beene or if as yet they have not which hereafter may be by succeeding Popes defined to bee doctrines of faith Seeing Stapleton h Lib. 9. doct prin ca. 14. §. Manet assures us That the Church of this or any succeeding age may put into the Canon and number of sacred and undoubtedly Canonicall bookes the booke of Hermas called Pastor and the Constitutions of Clement the former being as their owne notes censure it i Notae in lib. Hermae to 5. Bibl. S. patr haeresibus fabulis oppletus full of heresies and fables rejected by Pope Gelasius k Concil Rom. primū sub Gelasio with his Romane Synod the later being stuffed also with many impious doctrines condemning m Const Clem. lib. 3. ca. 2. lawfull mariage as fornication and allowing n Idem lib. 8. ca. 32. fornication as lawfull with many the like impieties which in Possevine o Bibl. in verbo Clemens Rom. are to bee seene together for which cause they are worthily rejected in the Canons p Can. 2. of the sixt Councell seeing the Pope may canonize these what blasphemies what heresies what lies may not with them be canonized why may not their very Legend in the next Session bee declared to be Canonicall And yet by that fundamentall position they are bound and now doe implicitè beleeve whatsoever
any Pope either by word or writing either hath already or shall at any time hereafter define to be a doctrine of faith Because I will not stay on particulars if any please seriously to consider this matter hee shall perceive that which now I intend to prove such venome of infidelity to lye in that one fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility that by reason of holding it they neither doe nor can beleeve or hold with certaintie of faith any one point or doctrine which they professe to beleeve and hold upon that Foundation 20. For the clearing of which point being very materiall it is to be observed that unto certainty of faith two things are of necessity required The one ex parte objecti on the part of thing beleeved which must be so true and certaine in it selfe that it cannot possibly bee or have beene otherwise then it is beleeved to be to have beene or to be hereafter And therefore none can truly beleeve any untruth for nothing which is untrue is or can be the object of faith The other thing is required ex parte subjecti on the part of him who beleeveth Now faith being onely of such things as are inevident that is which neither by sense can be perceived nor by naturall reason collected or found out but which are onely by the testimonie of such as first knew them made knowne unto us and none doth or can know that which is supernaturall unlesse God himselfe reveale the same unto him it hence followeth that whatsoever is by any beleeved the same is revealed and testified to him by God himselfe who is infallible and further that it is certainly knowne unto him who beleeveth that it is God himselfe who doth reveale and testifie that thing unto him For otherwise though the doctrine proposed be in it selfe never so certaine and divine yet unto thee or me it cannot be certaine nor held by certainty of faith unlesse first we be sure and infallibly certaine that he who testifieth it unto us is himselfe infallible that is that he is God Let us for perspicuity call the former of these two materiale fidei the materiall in faith or the thing beleeved and the later formale fidei that which is formall in faith seeing as the former is the thing beleeved so the later containes the reason the ground or foundation upon which and for which it is beleeved 21. Consider now first the materials in their faith In them there is a great difference for some of them are in themselves credible as being divine truths and true objects of faith Such are all those Catholike truths common to us and them as that there is a Trinity that Christ was borne of a Virgin dyed rose againe and the like Others are in themselves untrue such as cannot be the object of faith Of this sort are all those doctrines wherin they dissent from us Transubstantiation reall and proper sacrifice worshipping of Images Purgatory Iustification by the merit or dignity of our works and the like which may rightly bee called popish doctrines The later sort of these they neither doe nor can beleeve The former they might but they doe not beleeve The reason whereof will appeare by considering that which is formall or the fundamentall ground of their faith where it is first to be observed that a man may hold many yea all the doctrines professed by the present Church except that one of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility and yet bee no Papist or member of their present Church For although the things professed or the Materialls be the selfe same yet the formalitie or diverse reason of holding them causeth a maine difference in the parties that hold them And for our present purpose it may suffice to note three divers wayes whereby their doctrines are or may be held 22. The first is of them who build all those doctrines upon the Scripture as the Foundation thereof upon that ground holding not onely many Catholike truths which they most firmly beleeve the Church inducing the Scriptures outwardly teaching and the holy Spirit inwardly sealing the same unto them but together with those truths hold some errors also of the Romane Church take for example Transubstantiation which although for the inducement of that present Church wherein they live they thinke to be taught in the Scriptures and therefore hold and professe them and thinke they beleeve them yet because they are neither in truth taught in the Scriptures nor sealed by Gods Spirit unto their hearts therefore they hold not these nor in truth can they hold them with that firmnesse and certainty of faith as they doe the former truths but they have a faintnes and feare in their assent unto these and so a readines and willing preparation of heart to disclaime these and to hold or professe the contrary if ever it may be fully cleared manifested out of the Scriptures unto them Of this sort we doubt not but many thousands of our fathers were who living in the darknesse thicke mists of their Antichristian superstition upon the Scriptures word of God which they held for the foundation of their saith builded indeed much gold precious stones but with a mixture of much hay stubble drosse thinking but very erroneously the later as well as the former to be contained in that foundation The state of all these is very like to S. Cyprians and those other Africane Bishops which were so earnest for Rebaptizatiō supposing it to be taught in the Scriptures though the foundation of it of those catholike truths that Christ was God or the like was one and the same unto them yet they held not both with like firmnes certainty of faith The doctrine of Christs deity manhood they so beleeved that they would not cōmunicate with any that denied this nay they would rather die then deny it But Rebaptization they so held as not thinking their opposites to be heretikes nor refusing p Haecre scripsimus nemini praescribentes aut praejudicantes quo minus unusquisque quod putaverit faciat habent liberam arbitrij sui facultatē Nos autem cum Collegis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam dominicam pacem tenemus Cyp. Epist ad Iubaian in fine vid. August lib. 5. de Baptis ca. 17. to cōmunicate with thē that denyed it so they held this with a certaine faintnes of faith or rather as indeed it was of opinion and not of faith having a preparation in heart to beleeve and professe the contrary if it might at any time be made manifest unto them This S. Austen often witnesseth of Cyprian Satis q Lib. 2. de Baptis ca. 4. ostendit se facillime correcturum he sufficiently declareth that hee would most easily have altered his opinion if any would have demonstrated the truth unto him Againe r Lib. 4 ca. 5. That holy man Cyprian being non solum doctus sed docilis not onely
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌ„dent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ„ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri â—ij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ„ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
which is in holding the true foundation of faith The contrary of all this falleth out unto them of the present Romane Church For not onely their sinnes are made more sinfull unto them there being no mantle to cover or hide them from the eyes of God and shield them from his vengeance but even their best and most holy actions which they doe or can performe though they should doe nothing but sing hymnes with David or feed Christs flock with Peter or give their goods to the poore and their bodies to be burned for Christ even these I say are so tainted with the venome of that Apostaticall foundation that being of themselves holy actions yet unto them they are turned into sinne and become pernicious and mortiferous For whatsoever act being in it selfe either good or indifferent any of their Church except onely the Pope himselfe who is a member transcendent doth performe because they doe it in obedience unto him whose supreme authority they make the foundation not onely of their faith but of all good actions in doing any such act there is a vertuall and implicit obedience to Antichrist an acknowledgement of his supreme power to teach and command what is to be done a receiving his marke either in their hand or forehead so that every such act is not onely impious but even Antichristian and containeth in it a vertuall and implicit renouncing of the whole faith In regard whereof none can ever sufficiently I say not commend but admire the zeale of Luther who though he was so earnest to have the Communion in both kinds contrarie to the doctrine and custome of the Romane Church yet withall he e Kemnit Exa Conc. Trid. 1. Tract de communi sub utraque specie pa 136. professed that if the Pope as Pope should command it to be received in both kinds he then would receive it not in both but in one kind onely Blessed Luther it was never thy meaning either to receive it onely in one or to deny it to be necessary for Gods Church and people to receive it in both kindes Thou knewest right well that Bibite ex hoc omnes was Christs owne ordinance with which none might dispense Thou for defence of this truth among many was set up as a signe of contradiction unto them and as a marke at which they directed all their darts of malicious and malignant reproaches Farre was it from thee to relent one hare-bredth in this truth But whereas they f Conc. Constant Sess 13. Conc. Trid. Sess 22. in decreto super petit de concessione calici◠Bell. lib. 4. de Euchar ca. 28. taught the use of the Cup to be indifferent and arbitrarie such as the Church that is the Pope might either allow or take away as he should thinke fit upon this supposall and no otherwise didst thou in thine ardent zeale to Christ and detestation of Antichrist say that were the use of both or one kinde onely a thing indeed indifferent as they taught it to be if the Pope as Pope should command the receiving in both kindes thou wouldst not then receive it so lest whilst thou might seeme to obey Christ commanding that but yet upon their supposall as a thing indifferent thou shouldest certainly performe obedience to Antichrist by his authoritie limiting and restraining that indifferency unto both kindes as now by his authority hee restraines it unto one The summe is this To doe any act whether in it selfe good or indifferent but commanded to be done by the Pope as Pope to pray to preach to receive the Sacraments yea but to lift your eyes or hold up your finger or say your Pater noster or your Ave Maria or weare a bead a modell a lace or any garment white or blacke or use any crossing either at Baptisme or any other time to do any one of these or any the like eo nomine because the Pope as Pope teacheth that they are to be done or commands the doing of them is in very deed a yeelding one selfe to be a vassall of Antichrist a receiving the marke of the beast and a vertuall or implicit deniall of the faith in Christ So extremly venemous is that poison which lyeth in the root of that fundamentall heresie which they have laid as the very rocke and Foundation of their faith 34. Hitherto we have examined the former position of Baronius which concerned Heresie His other concerning Schisme is this g Esse schismatici convicti sunt qui diversam à Romano Pontifice his decernendis sententiam sectati essent Bar. an 547. nu 30. That they who dissented from Pope Vigilius when hee decreed that the Three Chapters ought to be defended were Schismatikes A most strange assertion that the whole Catholike Church should bee schismaticall for they all dissented from Vigilius in this cause that Catholikes should all at once become Schismatikes yea and that also for the very defence of the Catholike faith I oppose to this another and true assertion That not onely Pope Vigilius when he defended the Three Chapters and forsooke communion with the condemners of them was a Schismatike himselfe and chiefe of the Schisme but that all who as yet defend Vigilius that is who maintaine the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith and forsake communion with those that condemne it that those all are and that for this very cause Schismatikes and the Pope the ringleader in the Schisme 35. For the manifesting whereof certaine it is that after Pope Vigilius had so solemnly and judicially by his Apostolicall authority defined that the Three Chapters ought to be defended there was a great rent and Schisme in the Church either part separating it selfe from the other and forsaking communion with the other First the holy Councell and they who tooke part with it anathematized h Coll. 8. talis anathema sit saepe ibid. the defenders of those Chapters thereby as themselves expound it declaring their opposites to be separated i Nihil aliud significat anathema nisi à Deo separationem Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. from God and therefore from the society of the church of God On the other side Pope Vigilius they who were on his part were so averse from the others that they would rather endure disgrace yea banishment as Baronius k An. 553. nu 221. sheweth thē communicate with their opposites But I shal not need to stay in proving that there was a rent and schisme at this time betweene the defenders condemners of those chapters Baronius professeth it saying l Ibid. The whole Church was then schismate dilacerata torn asunder by a schisme Againe m An. eodem 553. nu 250. After the end of the Councell there arose a greater war then was before Catholikes so he falsly calls both parts being then divided among themselves some adhaering to the Councell others holding with Vigilius and his Constitution Againe Many n An. eodem nu 229. relying
of Rome and members thereof professe to hold the faith of the fift generall Councell and so professe implicitè the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and hereticall but they lye in making this profession for they beleeve not the Popes sentence in such causes to be fallible but with the Laterane and Trent Councels they hold it to be infallible It is the practice of all heretikes to make such faire though lying professions For should they say in plaine termes that which is truth indeed wee beleeve not the scriptures nor the Councells of Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon every man would spit at them and detest them cane pejus angue nor could they ever deceive any or gaine one proselyte But when they commend their faith that is their heresie to be the same doctrine with the scriptures which the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon taught by these faire pretences and this lying profession they insinuate themselves into the hearts of the simple deceiving hereby both themselves and others 16. The other consequent is this That the profession of all heretikes is contradictory to it selfe For they professe to hold the scriptures and so to condemne every heresie and yet withal they professe one private doctrine repugnant to scripture and which is an heresie The like may be said of the Councells The Nestorians by professing to hold the faith decreed at Nice professe Christ to bee but one person and yet withall by holding Nestorianisme they professe Christ to be two persons The Eutycheans by professing to hold the Councell of Ephesus professe two natures to remaine in Christ after the union which in that Councell is certainly decreed and yet by professing the heresie of Eutyches they professe the quite contradictory that one nature onely remaines after the union The Church of Rome and members thereof by professing the faith of the fift Councell professe the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and de facto to have beene hereticall and yet they professe the direct contradictory as the Councell of Laterane hath defined that the Popes sentence in such causes is infallible and neither hath beene nor can be hereticall So repugnant to it selfe and incoherent is the profession of all heretikes that it sighteth both with the truth and with it owne selfe also The very same is to be seene in Vigilius and his Constitution For in professing to defend the three Chapters and in decreeing that all shall defend them he professeth all the blasphemies of Nestorius and decreeth that all shall maintaine them and professing to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon and decreeing that all shall hold it hee professeth that Nestorianisme is heresie and decreeth that all shall condemne it for heresie and so decreeing both these he decreeth that all men in the world shall beleeve two contradictories and beleeve them as Catholike Truths Such a worthy Apostolicall decree is this of Vigilius for defending whereof Baronius doth more then toyle himselfe 17. You will againe demand Seeing Vigilius doth so earnestly and plainely professe both these why shall not his expresse profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon make him or shew him to bee a Catholike rather then his other expresse profession to defend the Three Chapters make or shew him to bee an hereticke Why rather shall his hereticall then his orthodoxall profession give denomination unto him I also demand of you Seeing every hereticke in expresse words professeth to beleeve the whole Scripture which is in effect a condemning of every heresie why shall not this orthodoxall profession make or shew him to be a Catholike rather then his expresse profession of some one doctrine contrarie to Scripture say for example sake of Arianisme make or shew him to bee an Arian hereticke The reason of both is one and the same Did an Arian so professe to hold the Scriptures that hee were resolved to forsake his Arianisme and confesse Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon manifestation that the Scriptures taught this certainely his professiō of Arianisme with such a professiō to hold the Scriptures could not make him an hereticke no more then Cyprians profession of Rebaptization or Irenees of the millenarie heresie did make them heretikes Erre hee should as they did but being not pertinacious in error hereticke hee could not be as they were not But it falls out otherwise with all heretickes They professe to hold the Scripture yet so that they resolve not to forsake that private doctrine which they have chosen to maintaine That they will hold and they will have that to be the doctrine of the Scripture notwithstanding all manifestation to the contrarie even of the Scriptures themselves They resolve of this that whosoever Bishops Councells or Church teach the contrarie to that or say judge that the Scripture so teacheth they all erre or mistake the meaning of the Scriptures Thus did not Cyprian nor Irenee And this wilfull and pertinacious resolution it is which evidently sheweth that in truth they beleeve not the Scriptures but beleeve their own fancies though they say a thousand times that they beleeve and embrace whatsoever the Scriptures teach for did they beleeve any doctrine say Arianisme eo nomine because the Scripture teacheth it they would presently beleeve the contrarie thereunto when it were manifested unto them as is was to the Arians by the Nicen Coūcell that the Scripture taught the contrarie to their error Seeing this they will not doe It is certaine that they hold their private opiniō eo nomine because they will hold it and they hold it to bee the doctrine of scripture not because it is so but because they will have it to bee so say what any will or can to the contrarie So their owne will and not Scripture is the reason why they beleeve it nay why they hold it with such a stiffe opinion for beleife it is not it cannot be This pertinacie to have beene in the Nestorians Eutycheans and the rest is evident Had they beleeved as they professed the faith decreed at Nice and Ephesus then upon manifestation of their errors out of those Councels they would have renounced their heresies but seeing the Nestorians persisted to hold two persons in Christ notwithstanding that the whole Councell of Ephesus manifested unto them that the Nicene Councel held but one person and seeing the Eutycheans persisted to hold but one nature after the union notwithstanding that the whole Councell at Chalcedon manifested unto them that the holy Ephesine Synod held two natures to abide in him after the union they did hereby make it evident unto all that they so professed to hold those Councels as that they resolved not to forsake their Nestorian and Eutichean heresies for any manifestation of the truth or conviction of their error out of those Councels and their profession of them was in effect as if they had said we hold those Councels and will have them to
holding this one fundamentall position they are pertinacious in all their errours and that in the highest degree of pertinacy which the wit of man can devise yea and pertinacious before all conviction and that also though the truth should never by any meanes be manifested unto them For by setting this downe they are so far from being prepared to embrace the truth though it should be manifested unto them that hereby they have made a fundamentall law for themselves that they never will be convicted nor ever have the truth manifested unto them The onely meanes in likelihood to perswade them that the doctrines which they maintaine are heresies were first to perswade the Pope who hath decreed them to bee orthodoxall to make a contrary decree that they are hereticall Now although this may be morally judged to be a matter of impossibilitie yet if his Holinesse could be induced hereunto and would so farre stoope to Gods truth as to make such a decree even this also could not perswade them so long as they hold that foundation They would say either the Pope were not the true Pope or that he defined it not as Pope and ex Cathedra or that by consenting to such an hereticall decree hee ceased ipso facto to be Pope or the like some one or other evasion they would have still but grant the Popes sentence to be fallible or hereticall whose infallibility they hold as a doctrine of faith yea as the foundation of their faith they would not Such and so unconquerable pertinacy is annexed and that essentially to that one Position that so long as one holds it and whensoever he ceaseth to hold it hee ceaseth to be a member of their Church there is no possible meanes in the world to convict him or convert him to the truth 21. You doe now clearely see how feeble and inconsequent that Collection is which Baronius here useth in excuse of Pope Vigilius for that he often professeth to defend the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith therein explaned Hee did but herein that which is the usuall custome of all other heretikes both ancient and moderne Quit him for this cause and quit them all condemne them and then this preteÌ„ce can no way excuse Vigilius froÌ„ heresie They all with him professe with great ostentation to hold the doctrines of the Scriptures of Fathers of generall Councels but because their profession is not onely lying and contradictorie to it selfe but alwayes such as that they retaine a wilfull and pertinacious resolution not to forsake that heresie which themselves embrace as Vigilius had not to forsake his defence of the Three Chapters Hence it is that their verbal profession of Scriptures Fathers and Councels cannot make any of them nor Vigilius among them to be esteemed orthodoxall or Catholike but the reall and cordiall profession of any one doctrine which they with such pertinacy hold against the Scriptures or holy generall Councels as Vigilius did this of the Three Chapters doth truly demonstrate them all and Vigilius among them to be heretikes And this may suffice for answer to the second exception or evasion of Baronius CAP. 15. The third exception of Baronius in excuse of Vigilius taken from his confirming of the fift Councell answered and how Pope Vigilius three or foure times changed his judgement in this cause of faith 1. IN the third place Baronius comes to excuse Vigilius by his act of confirming and approving the fift Councell and the decree thereof for condemning the Three Chapters It appeareth saith hee a An. 554. nu 7. that Vigilius to the end he might take away the schisme and unite the Easterne Churches to the Catholike communion quintam Synodum authoritate Apostolica comprobavit did approve the fift Synod by his Apostolicall authoritie Againe b An. 553. nu 235. when Vigilius saw that the Easterne Church would be rent from the West unlesse he consented to the fift Synod eam probavit he approved it Again c Ibid. nu 236. Pelagius thought it sit as Vigilius had thought before that the fift Synod wherein the three Chapters were condemned should bee approved and again d An. 556. nu 1. Cognitum fuit it was publikely known that Vigilius had approved the fift Synod and condemned the three Chapters The like is affirmed by Bellarmine e Lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. § Coacta Vigilius confirmed the fift Synod per libellum by a booke or writing Binius is so resolute herein that hee saith f Not in Conc. 5. § Praestitit A Vigilio quintam Synodum confirmatam et approbatam esse nemo dubitat none doubteth but that Vigilius confirmed and approved the fift Councell Now if Vigilius approved the fift Councell and condemned the Three Chapters it seemes that all which wee have said of his contradicting the fift Synod and of his defending those Three Chapters is of no force and that by his assent to the Synod he is a good Catholike This is the Exception the validity whereof we are now to examine 2. For the clearing of which whole matter it must bee remembred that all which hitherto wee have spoken of Vigilius hath reference to his Apostolicall decree published in defence of those Three Chapters that is to Vigilius being such as that decree doth shew and demonstrate him to have beene even a pertinacious oppugner of the faith and a condemned heretike by the judiciall sentence of the fift Councell but now Baronius drawes us to a further examination of the cariage of Vigilius in this whole businesse and how hee behaved himselfe from the first publishing of the Emperours Edict which was in the twentieth g Bar. an 546. nu 8. yeare of Iustinian unto the death of Vigilius which was as Baronius accounteth h An. 555. nu 1. in the 29 of Iustinian and second yeare after the fift Councell was ended but as Victor who then lived accounteth i In Chron. an 17. post Coss Basil in the 31 of Iustinian and fourth yeare after the Synod And for the more cleare view of his cariage wee must observe foure severall periods of time wherein Vigilius during those nine or tenne yeares gave divers severall judgements and made three or foure eminent changes in this cause of faith The first from the promulgation of the Emperours Edict while he remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperor The second after he came to Constantinople and to the Emperours presence but before the fift Synod was begun The third in the time of the fift Synod and about a yeare after the end and dissolution thereof The fourth from thence that is from the yeare after the Synod unto his death 3. At the first k Ipso exordio asserâ—ae ab Imperatore sententiae Bar. an 546 nu 38. et 39. publishing of the Edict many of the Westerne Churches impugnabant Edictum did oppose themselves to it and as Baronius saith insurrexere made an insurrection against it and
after his returne about a year after out of exile 3. The Cardinall gives yet another evidence hereof Pelagius saith he h Bar. an 553. nu 236. the successor of Vigilius did thinke it fit that the fift Synod should bee approved and the three Chapters condemned moved especially hereunto by this reason that the Easterne Church ob Vigilij constitutum schismate scissa being rent and divided from the Romane by reason of the Constitution of Vigilius might be united unto it How was the Easterne Church divided from the Romane in the time of Pelagius by reason of that decree of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters if Vigilius by another decree published after it had recalled and adnulled it If the Popes condemning of those Chapters and approving of the fift Councell could unite the Churches then the decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have effected that union If the Apostolike Decree of Vigilius could not effect it in vaine it was for Pelagius to thinke by his approbation which could have no more authority then Apostolicall to effect that union If the cause of the breach and disunion of those Churches was as Baronius truly saith the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters against the judgement of the fift Synod seeing it is cleare by the Cardinalls owne confession that the disunion continued till after the death of Vigilius it certainly hence followeth that the Constitution of Vigilius which was the cause of that breach was never by himselfe repealed which even in Pelagius time remained in force and was then a wall of separation of the Easterne from the Westerne Church Againe if the Popes approving the fift Councell and condemning the three Chapters was as in truth it was and as the Cardinall noteth i Cujus Vigilij postremam sententiam pro approbatione 5. Conc. condemnatione triū Capitulorum posteri omnes sequuti universa Dei Ecclesia paucis schismaticis exceptis eandem Synodum ut oecumenicam semper novit Bar. an 554. nu 7. it to have beene the cause to unite those Churches seeing by his owne confession in Vigilius time they were not united for Pelagius k Bar. an 553. nu 236. after Vigilius his death sought to take away that schisme it certainly hence followeth that Vigilius never by any Decree approved that Synod and their Synodall condemning of those Chapters for had he so done the union had in his time presently beene effected 4. The same may be perceived also by the Westerne Church For as that Pontificall decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have united the Easterne so much more would it have drawne the Westerne the Italian and specially the Romane Church to consent to the fift Councell and condemning of the three Chapters but that they persisted in the defence of the three Chapters and that also to the very end of Vigilius his life may divers wayes be made evident Whē Pelagius being then but a Deacon was chosen Pope after the death of Vigilius and was to be consecrated Bishop there could no more then two Bishops l Dum non essent Episcopi qui eum ordinarent inventi sunt duo Iohannes Bonus Andreas Presbyter de Ostia ordinaverunt eum Episcopum Anast in vita Pelagij 1. be found in the Westerne Church that would consecrate or ordaine him Bishop wherefore contrary to that Canon both of the Apostles m Can. Apost 1 and Nicene Fathers n Conc. Nic. Can. 4. requiring three o Certe omnimodo 3 Episcopi debent esse congregati ita faciant ordinationem Can. 4. Conc. Nic. Bishops to the consecration of a Bishop which they so often boast p Bell. lib. de Notis Ecclesiae ca. 8. §. Ex quo Et Bin. in Notis ad Can. 1. Apost alijque of in their disputes against us the Pope himselfe was faine to be ordained onely by two Bishops with a Presbyter of Ostia in stead of the third Anastasius very ignorantly if not worse sets downe the reason thereof to have beene for that Pelagius was suspected q Subduxerunt se à communione ejus dicentes quia in morte Vigilij se miscuit Anast in vitae Pelag. 1. to have beene guilty by poison or some other way of the death of Vigilius A very idle fancie as is the most in Anastasius for Pelagius was in banishment long before the death of Vigilius and there continued till Vigilius r Nam Vigilius obijt anno praecedente quum Pelagius de exilio revocatus est Vict. Tun. in Chron. ad an 16. corrupte legitur 17. Basilij et ad an sequentem was dead he had little leisure nor oportunity to thinke of poisoning or murdering his owne Bishop by whose death he could expect no gaine The true cause why the Westerne Bishops distasted Pelagius is noted by Victor who then lived Hee ſ Pelagius condemnans ea tria Capitula quae dudum constantissime defendebat à praevaricatoribus ordinatus est Vict. ad an 17. corrupte legitur 18. post Cons Basilij before hee came from Constantinople consented to the fift Synod and condemned the Three Chapters Now the Westerne t Adeo exhor ruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales ferè omnes aliam post 4. admittere Oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. Bishops so detested the fift Synod and those who with it condemned those Chapters that among them all there could be found but two Bishops who held with the Synod and so allowed of Pelagius and his act in consenting thereunto and those two with the Presbyter of Ostia were the ordainers of Pelagius whom Victor in his corrupted language calls prevaricators Let any man now consider with himselfe whether it bee credible that in all Italy and some Provinces adjoyning there should be but two Bishops who would consēt to the Apostolicall decree of Vigilius for approving the fift Councell if he had indeed published such a decree If they knew nor the Popes sentence in this cause which they held and that rightly for a cause of faith to be infallible how was not the westerne or the Romane Church hereticall at this time not knowing that point of faith which is the transcendent principle and foundation of all doctrines of faith If they knew it to bee infallible seeing his judgement must then over-sway their owne how could there bee no more but two bishops found among them all who approved the Popes Cathedrall sentence and consented to his infallible judgement Seeing then it is certaine that the Westerne Church did generally reject the fift Synod after the death of Vigilius and seeing it is not to bee thought that they would have persisted in such a generall dislike thereof had they knowne Vigilius to have by his Apostolicall sentence decreed that all should approve the same of which his sentence had
Westerne Churches in defence of those Chapters not onely after the death of Vigilius but till the time of Pelagius the second makes evident If Vigilius at all consented to the Synod after the end thereof it was onely by some private or personall but not by any decretall or Pontificall approbation And if the reasons or pretences of Baronius prove ought at all this is the most that can be collected from them And this though wee should grant and yeeld unto them yet can it no way helpe their cause or excuse the Popes Cathedrall judgment from being fallible onely it would serve to save Vigilius himselfe from dying an heretike or under the Anathema of the holy Councell For as they teach and teach it with ostentation as a matter of great wit and subtilty that the Pope may erre personally or in his owne person hold an heresie which onely hurts himselfe and not the Church but erre doctrinally or judicially define an heresie he cannot even so to pay them with their owne coine might it fall out at this time with Vigilius hee being wearied with long exile might perhaps for his owne person condemne the Three Chapters and approve the Synod which may be called a personall truth or a personal profession in the Pope the benefit wherof was onely to redound to himselfe either to free him from the censure of the Synod or procure the Emperors favour goodwill that he might returne home to his See but that this professing supposing he made it was doctrinall or Cathedrall delivered ex officio by the Pope as Pope so that by it he entended to bind the whole Church to doe the like neither Baronius nor any of all his favourers can ever prove Now were I sure that the Cardinall or his friends would be content with this grant of a personall truth in Pope Vigilius I could be willing to let it passe for currant without further examination But alas they are no men of such low thoughts and lookes their eyes are ever upon the Supremacie and Infallibilitie of the Popes judgement As personall errors hurt them not so personall truths helpe them not Baronius will either have this consent of Vigilius to bee Iudiciall Doctrinall Apostolicall l Ante novissimuÌ„ Apostolicae sedâ—â— assensum Bar. an 546. nu 38. itidemque ejus successoribus licuit in ipsius Vigilij abire Decretum Bar. an 553. nu 231. Quintam Synodum Apostolica authoritate comprobavit an 554. nu 7. and Cathedrall or he will have none at all And therefore to demonstrate how farre Vigilius was froÌ„ decreeing this I will now enter into a further discussion of this point then I first intended not doubting to make it evident that none of all the Cardinalls reasons are of force to prove so much as a private or personall consent in Vigilius to condemne the Three Chapters and approve the fift Councell after the end of the fift Synod or after that exile which the Cardinall so often mentioneth 8. The Cardinalls reasons to prove this are three The first is taken from the testimonie of Evagrius m Bar. an 553. nu 223. who then lived Nicephorus Cedrenus Zonaras Photius and all Greeke writers Graeci n Bar. an 554. nu 4. omnes affirmant they all testifie Vigilius to have assented to this fift Councell and that by letters or by a booke whence the Cardinall collects that seeing he consented not either during the time of the Synod or shortly after for he was sent into banishment because he would not consent unto it necesse est affirmare o Ibid. id ab ipso factuÌ„ esse hoc tempore cum ab exilio solutus est liberque dimissus It must of necessitie be affirmed that he consented at that time when he was freed from exile and dismissed home to Rome Thus Baronius whom I will never beleeve to have been so simple and ignorant as that he knew not how lame defective and unsound this his necessarie collection was That his Necesse est is meerly inconsequent it is not so good as Contingens est That Vigilius consented by a booke or letters to the Synod is certaine none that I know makes doubt of it and that is all that Evagrius or any of his other witnesses affirme but neither Evagrius nor any one of them saith that Vigilius consented to the Synod after the end thereof or after he was sent into banishment this and this onely is it which wee deny and which Baronius undertakes to prove but when he comes to his proofe hee still and that most fraudulently omitteth this which is the principall nay the onely verbe in the sentence And to prove that Vigilius consented to the Synod in condemning the three Chapters what needed the Cardinall to cite all or any one of the Greeke writers The verâ— Acts of the fift Councell doe often and expresly testifie this q Act. Conc. 5. Coll. 1. pa 520. a. Coll. 7. pa. 578. a. Vigilius hath p often by writings without writing condemned and anathematized the Three Chapters In the very Synodall sentence q Collat. 8. pa. 584. a. it is said It hath happened that Vigilius living in this City hath beene present at those things which are noted concerning these Chapters tam sine scriptis quam in scriptis ea saepius condemnasse and to have condemned the same as well by writing as by word The whole purpose of the seventh Collation is no other but to shew out of Vigilius own writings that he consented with the Councell in condemning the three Chapters the very letters of Vigilius which were read in that seventh Collation do clearely witnesse his consent and judgement in condemning those Chapters The Councell condemnes them Vigilius condemnes them Doth not Vigilius consent to and with the Synod Did he not per libellum literas expresse that assent when his owne Epistles testifie that he condemned those Chapters as did also the Synod wherefore of his consent to the Synod there is no doubt But this consent of his was before the time that the Councell made their Synodall Decree yea before they assembled in the Synod it was during the time of the second Period before mentioned shortly after his coÌ„ming to Constantinople untill the Councell met together all that time he consented in judgement with the Councell he condemned the Chapters as the Councell did But at the time of the Councell when Vigilius should have consented also in making the Synodall Decree for condemning of those Chapters then hee dissented from the Synod and published an Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters So he both consented and that by letters yea by his Decree with the Synod and withall he dissented and that also by his Decree from the Synod His consent which the Synodall Acts doe shew and testifie Evagrius and the rest who saw and therein followed the Acts report and that truly His dissent which his owne Apostolicall Constitution
the Cardinall or his friends reply hereunto Will he or can he say that these men who thus judged were heretikes They were not The doctrine which they maintained was wholly Catholike consonant as they k Coll. 8. professe and as in truth it was to Scriptures to Fathers to the foure former generall Councells The doctrine which they oppugned and Vigilius then defended was hereticall condemned by all the former Scriptures Fathers and Councels Heretikes then doubtless they could not be that like a leprosie did cleave to Vigilius Will he or can he say that they were Schismatikes Neither is that true For they all even then remained in the communion with the Catholike Church yea they were by representation the true Catholike Church I say further they held communion even with Pope Vigilius himselfe till his owne pertinacy and wilfull obstinacie against the true faith severed him both from them from the truth In token of which communion with Vigilius they earnestly l Sup. cap. 2. nu 1. seq entreated his presence in the Synod they offered him the presidency therein yea they said in expresse words unto him before they knew his mind to defend the Three Chapters Nos m Coll. 2. p. 523. vero communicamus uniti vobiscum sumus We all doe hold communion with you and are united unto you Schismaticall then they could not be So the judgement of these men being all Catholikes and holding the Catholike communion doth evidently prove the whole Catholike Church at that time to have beleeved a Councell to be both generall and lawfull though the Pope dissented from it and by his Apostolicall authority condemned the same and the decree thereof 8. After the end of the Councell did the Church then think otherwise Did it then judge the Councell to want authority while it wanted the Popes approbation or to receive authority by his approbation Who were they I pray you that thought thus Certainly not Catholikes and the condemners of these Chapters For they approved the Councel and Decree thereof during the time of the Councell and while the Pope so far disliked it that for his refusall to consent unto it he endured banishment Neither did the Heretikes who defended those Chapters judge thus For they as Baronius witnesseth n An. 553. nu 221. persisted in the defence of them and in a rent from the others even after Vigilius had consented to the Synod yea among them Vigilius o An. 555. nu 2. redditus est execrabilis was even detested and accursed by them for approving the Synod Or because Vigilius approved it not Pelagius who is knowne to have approved it was so generally disliked for that cause of the Westerne Bishops that there p Adeo exhorruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales aliam post quaâ—tam admittere oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. could not be found three who would lay hands on him at his consecration but in stead of a Bishop they were enforced against that Canon q Can. 1. Con. Nic. can 4. of the Apostles which they often oppose to us to take a Presbyter of Ostia at his ordination So much did they dislike both the fift Councell and all though it were the Pope who did approve it Now the whole Church being at that time divided into these two parts the defenders and condemners of those Chapters seeing neither the one nor the other judged the Synod to be generall or lawfull because the Pope approved it who possibly could there be at that time of the Cardinals fancie that the fift Councell wanted all authority till the Pope approved it and gained authority of a generall and lawfull Councell by his approving of it Catholikes and condemners of those Chapters embraced the Councell though the Pope rejected it Heretikes and defenders of those Chapters rejected the Councell though the Pope approved it Neither of them both and so none at all in the whole Church judged either the Popes approbation to give or his reprobation to take away authority from a generall Councell Thus by the Antecedentia Concomitantia and Consequentia of the Councell it is manifest by the judgement of the whole Church in that age that this fift Councell was of authority without the Popes approbation and was not held of authority by reason of his approbation 9. What the judgement of the Church was as well in the ages preceding as succeeding to this Councell is evident by that which we have already declared For we have at large shewed r Sup. ca. 4. nu 25 26. seq that the doctrine faith and judgement of this fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all following generall Councells till that at Lateran under Leo the tenth Whereupon it ensueth that this doctrine which wee maintaine and the Cardinall impugneth that neither the Popes approbation doth give nor his reprobation take away authority from a Councell was embraced and beleeved as a Catholike truth by the whole Catholike Church of all ages till that Lateran Synod that is for more than 1500. yeares together 10. And if there were not so ample testimonies in this point yet even reason would enforce to acknowledge this truth For if this fift Councell be of force and Synodall authority eo nomine because the Pope to wit Pelagius approved it then by the same reason is it of no force or Synodall authority eo nomine because the Pope to wit Vigilius rejected it If the Popes definitive and Apostolicall reprobation cannot take away authority from it neither can his approbation though Apostolicall give authority unto it Or if they say that both are true as indeed they are both alike true then seeing this fift Councell is both approved by Pope Pelagius and rejected by Pope Vigilius it must now be held both to be wholly approved and wholly rejected both to be lawfull and unlawfull both to be a generall Councell and no generall Councell And the very same doome must bee given of all the thirteene Councells which follow it They all because they are approved by some one Pope are approved and lawfull Councels and because they approve this fift which is rejected by the Pope they are all rejected and unlawfull Councells Such an havocke of generall Councels doth this their assertion bring with it and into such inextricable labyrinths are they driven by teaching the authority of Councels to depend on the Popes will and pleasure 11. Now though this bee more than abundant to refute all that they can alledge against this fift Councell yet for the more clearing of the truth and expressing my love to this holy Councell to which next after that at Chalcedon I beare speciall affection I will more strictly examine those two reasons which Baronius Binius have used of purpose to disgrace this holy Synod The former is taken from the assembling the
the Pope or any Bishop hinder the assembling of a generall Councell and so the publike peace and tranquillity of the whole Church Open but this gappe and there never should have been nor ever shall be any generall Councell The wilfulnesse of Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia at Nice of Iohn Patriarch of Antioch at Ephesus of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria at Chalcedon will frustrate all those holy Councells and make them to be neither generall nor lawfull The saying of Cardinall Cusanus is worthy observing to this purpose I beleeve saith he m Lib. 3. de Concor ca. 15. that to be spoken not absurdly that the Emperor himselfe in regard of that care and custody of preserving the faith which is committed unto him may praeceptivè indicere Synodum by his Imperiall authority and command assemble a Synod when the great danger of the Church requireth the same negligence aut contradicente Romano Pontifice the Pope either neglecting so to doe or resisting and contradicting the doing thereof So Cusanus This was the very state and condition of the Church at this time when the fift Councell was assembled The n Vid sup ca. 1. nu 6. whole Church had beene a long time scandalized and troubled about those Three Chapters it was rent and divided from East to West High time it was and necessary for Iustinian to see that flame quenched although Pope Vigilius or any other Patriarch had never so eagerly resisted the remedie thereof 15. Had the Cardinall pleaded against this Synod that Vigilius had not beene called unto it hee had spoken indeed to the purpose For this is essentiall and such as without which a Synod cannot bee generall and lawfull that all Bishops be summoned to the Synod and comming thither have free accesse unto it and freedome of speech and judgment therein But the Cardinall durst not take this exception against this Synod or for Vigilius for none of these to have beene wanting in this Councell is so cleare that pertinacie it selfe cannot deny it It was not the Pope as they vainly boast but the Emperor who by his owne and Imperiall authority called this Councell as the whole Synod even in their Synodall sentence witnesse Wee are assembled here in this City jussione pijssimi Imperatoris vocati being called by the commandement of our most religious Emperor His calling to have beene generall Nicephorus doth expresly declare The Emperor saith he o Lib. 17. ca. 27. assembled the fift generall Councell Episcopis ecclesiarum omnium evocatis the Bishops of all Churches being called unto it yea the Emperor was so equall in this cause that Binius p Not. in Conc. 5. §. Concilium testifieth of him Paris numeri Episcopos ex Oriente Occidente convocavit that he called in particular and besides his generall summons by which all without exception had free accesse as many out of the West where the defenders of those Chapters did abound as he did out of the East where the same Chapters were generally condemned And yet further Vigilius himselfe was by name not onely invited intreated and by many reasons perswaded but even commanded by the Emperor and in his name to come unto the Synod as before q Sup. ca. 2. nu 1. 3. we shewed Now what freedome hee might have had in the Councell both that offer of the Presidencie doth shew for him in particular and the words of the Councell spoken concerning all in generall doth declare for when Sabinianus and others who being then at Constantinople were invited to the Synod and refused to come the synod sayd r Collat. 2. pa. 524. b. It was meet that they being called should have come to the Councell and have been partakers of all things which are here done and debated especially seeing both the most holy Emperour and we licentiam dedimus unicuique have granted free liberty to every one to manifest his minde in the Synod concerning the causes proposed Seeing then he not onely might but in his duty both to God to the Emperour and to the whole Church hee ought to have come and freely spoken his minde in this cause his resisting the will of the Emperor and refusing to come doth evidently demonstrate his want of love to the truth and dutifulnesse to the Emperor and the Church but it can no way impaire or impeach the dignity and authority of the Councell neither for the generality nor for the lawfulnesse thereof 16. Besides all which there is yet one thing above all the rest to be remembred for though Pope Vigilius was not present in the Synod either personally or by his Legates but in that sort resisted to come unto it yet he was present there by his letters of instruction by his Apostolicall and Cathedrall Constitution which hee published as a direction what was to be judged and held in that cause of the Three Chapters That Decree and Constitution he promised to send ad Imperatorem Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod quod ingenuè praestitit which also he ingenuously performed as the Cardinall tells Å¿ An. 553. nu 47. us That elaborate t Jdque elaboravâ—â— ibid. decree to which an whole Synod together with the Pope subscribed containing the Popes sentence and instruction given in this cause Vniverso u An. eod nu 48. orbi Catholico cunctisque fidelibus not onely to the Synod teaching them what they should define but to all Christians teaching them what they shold beleeve was in consessu Episcoporum recitatum read and recited before all the Bishops in that Councell as Binius doth x Not. in Conc. 5. §. Constitutâ—â— assure us This one kinde of presence in the Synod is suppletive of all the rest of more worth then 20. nay then 200. Legates à latere sent from his holinesse They all may deale besides or contrary to the Popes minde as Zacharias and Rhodoaldus did in a Councell held about the cause of Photius but this Cathedrall instruction is an inflexible messenger no bribes no perswasions no feare no favour can extort from it one syllable more then his holinesse by the infallible direction of his Chaire hath delivered yea though the Pope should have beene personally present in the Synod and face to face spoken his mind in his cause yet could not his sudden or lesse premeditated speech have beene for weight or authority comparable to this decree being elaborated after seven yeares ponderation of the cause and all things in it being disposed cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all diligence and circumspection that could possibly bee used which the Pope though absent in body yet sent as an Oracle from heaven to be a direction to the Synod and to supply his own absence So many wayes is this former objection of Baronius vaine and unsound when he pretends this Councell to have beene unlawfull because the Pope resisted it and the members assembled without
those subsequent confirmations whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops and that was that every one should thereby either testifie his orthodoxy in the faith or else manifest himselfe to bee an heretike For as the approving of the six generall Councels and their decrees of faith did witnesse one to be a Catholike in those doctrines so the very refusing to approve or confirme any one of those Councels or their decrees of faith was ipso facto without any further examination of the cause an evident conviction that he was a condemned heretike such an one as in the pride and pertinacie of his heart rejected that holy synodall judgement which all the whole catholike Church and every member thereof even himselfe also had implicitè before confirmed and approved In which respect an heretike may truly bee called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being convicted and condemned not onely by the evidence of truth and by synodall sentence but even by that judgment which his owne selfe had given implicitè in the decree of the Councell The summe is this The former confirmation by the Bishops present in the Synod is Iudiciall the later confirmation by the Bishops who are absent is Pacificall The former is authoritativè such as gives the whole authority to any decree the later whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops is Testificativè such as witnesseth them to be orthodoxall in that decree The former joyned to the Imperiall confirmation is Essentiall which essentially makes both the Councell an approved Councel all the decrees therof approved synodal and Oecumenicall decrees the later is accidentall which being granted by a Bishop doth much grace himselfe but little or nothing the Synod and being denyed by any doth no whit at all either disgrace the Synod or impare the dignity and authority thereof but doth extreamely disgrace the partie himselfe who denyeth it and puls downe upon him both the just censures of the Church and those civill punishments which are due to heretikes or contumacious persons 38. My conclusion now is this Seeing this fift Councell was both for the calling generall and for the proceeding therin lawfull and orderly and seeing although it wanted the Popes consent yet it had the concurrence of those two confirmations before mentioned Episcopall and Imperiall in which is included the Oecumenicall approbation of the whole catholike Church it hence therefore ensueth that as from the first assembling of the Bishops it was an holy a lawfull and Oecumenicall Councell so from the first pronouncing of their synodall sentence and the Imperiall assent added thereunto it was an approved generall Councell approved by the whole catholike Church and so approved that without any expresse consent of the Pope added unto it it was of as great worth dignity and authoritie as if all the Popes since S. Peters time had with their owne hands subscribed unto it And this may suffice to satisfie the fourth and last exception which Baronius devised to excuse Vigilius from heresie CAP. XIX The true notes to know which are generall and lawfull and which either are not generall or being generall are no lawfull Councels with divers examples of both kindes 1. THAT which hath beene said in the former Chapter is sufficient to refute that cavill of Baronius against the fift Councell whereby he pretends it to have neither been a general nor a lawfull Synod because the Pope resisted the assembling and contradicted the decree and sentence thereof but for as much as it is not victory but truth which I seeke and the full satisfaction of the reader in this cause and seeing this point about the lawfulnesse of generall Councels is frequent and very obvious and such as being rightly conceived will give great light to this whole controversie about Councels I will crave liberty to lanch somewhat further into this deepe and explane with what convenient brevity I can what it is which maketh any Synod to bee or rightly to be esteemed a generall and lawfull Councell 2. As the name of Synod doth in his primary and large acception agree to every assembly so doth the name of Councell to every assembly of consultation The former being derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with Coetus and imports the assembly of any multitude which meeteth and commeth together The later being derived of Cilia a Concilium dictuÌ„ à communi intentione â—o quod in unum omnes dirigant mentis obtutuÌ„ Cilia enim oculorum sunt Isiod Mer. in suam Canon collect whence also supercilium imports the common or joynt intending or bending their eyes both of body and minde to the investigation of the truth in that matter which is proposed in their assembly But both of those words being now drawne from those their large and primitive significations are by Ecclesiasticall writers and use of speech penes quem jus est norma loquendi restrained and appropriated onely to those assemblies of Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons wherein they come together to consult of such matters as concernes either the faith or discipline of the Church Of these because some are lawfull others unlawfull Synods if we can finde what it is which maketh a generall and lawfull Councell it will bee easie therby to discerne which are unlawfull Synods seeing it is vulgarly and truly said that Rectum is index sui obliqui 3. That a Synod be generall and lawfull there are three things necessarily and even essentially required the want of any one of which is a just barre and exception why that Synod is either not generall or not lawfull The first which concernes the generalitie is that the calling and summons to the Councell be generall and Oecumenicall so that all Bishops be called and when they are come have free accesse to the same Councell unlesse for some fault of their owne or some just reason they ought to bee debarred For if the calling to any Synod bee out of some parts onely of the Church and not out of the whole the judgement also of such a Councell is but partiall not generall and the Councell is but particular not Oecumenicall seeing some of those who have judicatory power are either omitted or unjustly excluded from the Synod The want of this was a just exception taken by the Pope Iulius against that Councell of Antioch b Extat tom 1. Conc. pa. 420. wherein Athanasius was deposed by the Arian faction and Gregory of Cappadocia intruded into his See why it neither was nor could be esteemed generall or such as should binde the whole Church by the decrees made by it for said Iulius c Apud Socr. l. 2 ca. 13. et Zozom lib. 3. ca. 9. they did against the Canons of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they did not so much as call him to that Synod whereas the Canons of the Church forbid that any decree which should have power to binde the whole Church should bee made without the sentence judgement and
Presidency The Emperours sent Candidianus m Tom. 1. act Conc. Ephes ca. 32. to keepe away tumult and disorderly n Non licet illos qui necessarij non sunt dogmatum examen aliquo tumultu impedire ibid. persons from the Councell to see that no o Vt diligenter prospiciat ne qua gravior dissentio synodi consultationem obturbet Ibid. dissention and private quarrels might hinder their grave consultations the free and exact discussion of the causes proposed and to provide that every one might freely p Vt omnibus singulis recte perceptis singuli quod vlsum fuerit in medio proponant vel ab aliis proposita si opus id fuerit refutare ibid. and with leisure propose what was needfull and have scope to refute all doubts proposed by others The Emperours when they heard of the dissentions and disorders among the Bishops writ unto them to take a better and more peaceable and orderly examination of the cause saying q Sacr. Imper. ad Synodum to 3. act Conc. Eph. ca. 17. Majestas nostra ea quae acta sunt pro ratis legitimis habere non potest our Majesty cannot hold or esteeme those acts done so disorderly for firme and synodall nay we decree that all things which hitherto have beene done pro irritis nullis habenda esse shall be accounted of no force but utterly void and frustrate than which no greater tokens of Imperiall Presidency can be devised The whole and holy Synod willingly submitted themselves to this presidency In their proceedings the Emperours letters were their direction r Primo omniū Actorum monumentis reverendas pietatis vestrae literas quasi Facem quandam praemisimus Ep. synod ad Imp. to 2. act Conc. Eph. ca. 22. and as themselves professe the very Torch to guide all their actions In the manifold injuries and contumelies which they endured at the hands of Iohn with his Conventicle they fled to the Emperour beseeching ſ Etiam atque etiem rogamus vestram Majestatem ut sanct synod studium erga Deum agnoscat ut Candidianum quinque praeterea è sacra synodo Episcopos ad se accersat qui omnia singula qua Ephesi gesta sunt pietati vestrae ordine coram exponant Epist synodi ad Imp. to 4. act Conc. Eph. ca. 10. idem ca. 11. him to be Iudge of their equall proceedings and take an exact view and examination of their doings which upon t Annuit tandē illorum votis Jmperator Bin. in arg cap. 19 to 4. act Conc. Ephes their request the Emperour did and called u Vestra pielas nostra supplicatione instexa mandavit ut S. Synodus quos voluerit amād et qui universarum rerum statum coram exponant Relat. synodi ad Imper. to 4. act Conc. Ephes c. 22 Nostrae praeces sunt ut judicium à tua pietate accipiamus Iohan. convent cum expetit ad Jmper Append. ad to 2. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 2. pa. 787. b. sive Bishops of either part to Constantinople to declare the whole cause unto him after which being performed he gave judgement x Decretum regium to 5 act Conc. Ephes ca. 11. for the holy Councell and adnulled all the acts of the Conventicle as the holy Synod had earnestly and humbly entreated him So fully and cleerly doth that sacred and Oecumenicall Councell wherein was the judgement and consent of the whole Catholike Church both acknowledge this Imperiall right of Presidency in the Emperours and submit themselves unto it 14. For the Councell of Chalcedon the matter is so evident that Bellarmine though strugling against the truth could not deny it There were present saith he y Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 19. §. Quartam in this Councell secular Iudges deputed by the Emperour who were not Iudges of controversies of faith to give a decisive suffrage therein for that belongs to no secular man whatsoever sed tantum an omnia fierent legitime sive vi fraude tumultibus but they were Iudges onely of Synodall order whether all things were done lawfully without force fraud and tumult And in this doth the very Imperiall Presidency consist And truly how religiously and worthily those glorious Iudges performed that honourable office in the synod all the actions thereof doe make manifest for scarce any matter was done in the synod but the same was ordered moderated and guided by their prudence and authority The Popes Legats very insolently took upon them at the beginning willing that Dioscorus might bee put out of the synod and sayd z Act. 1. Conc. Chal. pa. 4. b. Aut ille egrediatur aut nos eximus Either let Dioscorus goe out or we will depart The Iudges gravely reproved this stomacke in the Legates telling them If you will be a Si Iudicis obtines personam non ut accusator debes prosequi Ibid. pa. 5. b. Iudges you must not prosequute as accusers nor did they suffer Dioscorus to goe away but commanded him as was fit to sit in the place of the Rei The cause of Iuvenalis and Thalassius was proposed to the synod It could not be examined by them till they had leave from the Emperour We said b Act. 4. Conc. Chal. pa. 89. b. the Iudges have acquainted the Emperour therewith and we expect his Mandate herein and after they had received the Emperours minde they then told the synod Imperator c Ibid. sententiae vestrae permisit de Iuvenale deliberare the Emperour hath upon your intreaty permitted you to discusse and judge the cause of Iuvenalis Thalassius and the rest In the cause d Act. 4. Conc. Chal. pa. 90. Omnes clamaveriit Isti haeretici sunt of the ten Aegyptian Bish the Synod had almost pronounced a temerarious sentence against them as hereticall when indeed they were orthodoxall the Bishops cryed out Isti haeretici sunt these ten are heretikes The glorious Iudges knowing which was manifest that they forbore to subscribe by reason of a custome which they had that they might doe nothing without their Patriarke who was not then chosen and not as thinking heretically in the faith moderated the Synod in that matter saying e Act. eadem 5. pa. 90 b. Rationabile nobis clemens videtur it seemes to us to be reason and an act of clemencie not to have condemned them but staid till their Patriarch bee chosen the whole Synod consented to this grave sentence of the Iudges made a Canon f Can. 30. Act. 15 for that purpose In making the very definition of faith there grew a great dissention in the Synod some g Non recte habet Desinitio c. Act. 5. Cōc Chal. pa. 93. b. would have it one some another way set downe in so much that the Popes Legates were ready to make a schisme and depart h Iubete nobis rescriptum dari ut revertamur et
lawfully assemble they could not but onely by Imperiall it hence clearly ensueth that for defect of lawfull calling and assembling they are all of them no other than unlawfull Councels Againe seeing no Synods are congregated in Christs name i Congregari in nomine Christi nihil aliud est quam ab eo congregari qui habet à Christo authoritatem congregandi Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 17. § At hoc but such as are assembled by him who hath from Christ authority to assemble them which in Christian Kingdomes none hath as wee have shewed but onely Kings and Emperours and seeing none of those ten were assembled by them it hence further and certainly ensueth that never one of those ten were gathered in Christs name and if not in Christs then sure in no other but in the name of Antichrist and so all of them in respect of their calling not only unlawfull but even Antichristian Councels 28. After their calling consider their proceedings for as those Councels were unlawfully assembled so were they also unlawfull by defect of the other essentiall condition which is due and synodall order for they all not onely wanted synodall freedome and order but which is worse they wanted that which is the onely meanes to have synodall freedome and order observed in any generall Councell and that is the Imperiall Presidencie in none of them was the Emperour in them all k Addamus his 8. primit reliqua generalia Concilia in quibus omnibus sinè controversia Pontifex Rom. praesedit Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 20 § Si ergo the Pope was President In the first Laterane Calistus l Papa Calixtus 2. coram innumera multitudine Cleri et populi eidem Concilio Viennensem nominat Vsper diceret Lateranensi ut et Bin. agnoscit notis suis in illud Cōc praesedit Abb. Vrsper ad an 1119. et huic Concilio praesedit Pontifex Bin. notis suis ad id Conc. pa. 1317. b in the second Innocentius m Synodus maxima Romae praesidente summo Pontifice Junocētio celebratur Otho Frising lib. 7. ca. 23. the second in the third Alexander n Omnes scriptores fatentur eidem Concilio Pontificem Romanum praesedisse Bin. Not. in Conc. Later 3. § Oecumenicum to 3. pa. 1351. the third in the fourth Innocentius o Ei Pontifex Rom. praesedit Bin. not in Conc. Later 4. to 3. Con. pa. 1466 b the third and the like might bee shewed in the rest but that Bellarmines words may ease us of that labour who speaking of all those ten Councels saith p Bell. lib. 1. de Con. ca. 20. § Si ergo In eis omnibus sine Controversia Pontifex Rom. praesedit the Pope without doubt was President in them all 29. Nor was this an Episcopall Presidencie a preheminence only precedence before other Bishops in the Synod such as any Bish to whō the Emp. pleased to confer that dignity might lawfully enjoy when he gave it to none by name it then by his tacit consent or permission fell as it were by devolution upon the chiefe Bishop that was present in the Councell Such a Presidencie though it bee not due to the Pope seeing in the ancient Councels hee neither had it nor grudged that other should have it yet are wee not unwilling to allow that unto him if contenting himselfe therewith hee would seeke no more But the Presidencie which hee now desires and in all those ten Councels usurped is meerely Imperiall the Presidencie of governing the Synod and ordering it by his authority and power the very same which in all the generall Councels for a thousand yeares after Christ the Emperour held and had it as one of his Royalties and Imperiall rights none of all the Catholike Bishops in those Councels ever so much as contradicting much lesse resisting the same For any Bishops most of all for the Pope to take upon them such a Presidencie utterly overthrows all liberty and order in Councels for by it all the Bishops are to be kept in awe and order and the Pope who of all other is most exorbitant and farthest out of square ought by this to be curbed reduced into order Even as when Catiline took upon him to bee the Ruler and guide to his assembly and a punisher of disorders among them though all the rest willingly submitted themselves and that with a solemne oath q Hos ut se nefando jurejurando adstringerent adegit puerum enim mactavit juramentoque inito super ejus visceribus eadem ipse cum alijs comedit Dio Cass lib. 37. to bee ordered by him in their actions yet for all this order they were no free Romane Senate but a Conjuration of Conspirators striving to oppresse r Catilinam luxuria primum tū egestas in nefaria Concilia opprimendae patris impulere Senatum confodere totam rempub funditus tollere et quicquid nec Hannibal videretur optasse L. Flor. lib. 4. ca. 1. the Romane State liberties and ancient lawes Right so it is in these Synods when the Pope who is the Lord of misrule and Ring-leader of the Conspirators takes upon him this Presidencie to order Councels though the rest not onely consent but binde themselves by a sacred oath ſ Ego Nic. ab hac hora fidelis ero S. Petro et Ecclesiae Romanae dominoque meo Papae Papatum adjutor ero ad defendendum Forma est juramenti secundum quam jurant Episcopi et hodiè omnes recipientes dignitatem â Papa Extra de jurejur ca. Ego N. lib. 2. tit 24. ca. 4. to be subject to his authoritie this very usurpation of such Presidencie doth eo ipso exclude and banish al liberty synodall order makes their assemblies meere Conjurations against the truth and ancient faith of the Church 30. How could it now be chosen but that whatsoever heresie the Pope with the faction of his Catilinarie Conspiratours embraced should in such Councels prevaile against the truth The Imperiall authority was the onely hedge or pale to keepe the Pope within his bounds that being once removed he said he did he decreed what he listed The rule of his Regiment was now the old Canon of Constantius Quod ego volo pro Canone sit the proofe of all their decrees was borrowed from their predecessors the old Donatists Quod t Aug. lib. 2. cöt Ep. Parm. ca. 13. volumus sanctum est Not Emperours not Bishops none might controule him or say unto him u Quid excogitare verum vel verisimile possunt quibus non vel Rex vel Casar non populus non clerus non generalis Synodus non denique tota Ecclesia dicere potest cur ità facis Cl. Espen in cap. 1. ad Titum pa. 76. Domine cur ita facis The Bishops were tyed to him by an oath x De quo supra cap. Ego N. Extra de jreujur to defend the Papacy that
ipsis liceat adversus Idolum Romanum that they might not so much as whisper against him 38. Verily none of those Iron chaines which were used by Dioscorus in the Ephesine Latrocinie are comparable to these No subscription unto blankes like the swearing to maintaine whatsoever their Romane Dioscorus shall define They who were not chained might have no place in the Synod they who were chained with such bands and specially with such an oath could have no freedome in the Synod they must speake thinke and teach nothing but what the Pope breathes into them Had there beene such wise and worthy Iudges for Presidents of that Councell as there was at Chalcedon could they possibly have endured to see all synodall freedome thus oppressed and banished Nay they would in their zeale to God and his truth have broken and burst in sunder every linke of that chaine And as x Conc. Chalc. act 8. 10. Ibas and Theodoret were not admitted to the Councel of Chalcedon as members thereof till they had openly renounced and anathematized the heresies which they had before embraced So would not those glorious Iudges have permitted any of those Tridentine Bishops to have sit in the Councell till they had openly renounced anathematized and abjured that oath and with it their vassallage to the Pope and all those hereticall doctrines which by their adhering to the Pope and following his faction they had embraced and those are Image-worship Transubstantiation proper Sacrifice Adoration of the Host their Purgatorian fire and the rest of those heresies which since the Romane faction began to prevaile and that was about seven hundred yeares after Christ in the dayes of Gregory the second who as I suppose first of all by synodall judgement decreed the worship of Images they have maintained For seeing since that time not truth not equity but faction prevailed in their Synods and swayed matters in their Church there could be no equall triall of the truth by any of their Synods held since that time But when all the Bishops were freed from those chaines of their oath and slavish bondage to the Pope since the faction whereof he hath beene the leader got the upper hand those glorious Iudges would have permitted nothing to passe for a free synodall sentence but that onely which could have had warrant from the Scriptures those holy Councells and consenting judgement of those Fathers who lived within the six hundred yeares or somewhat more after Christ at what time partiality and faction had not corrupted and blinded their judgement as in the second Nicene and ever since it hath 39. But because such glorious Iudges and their most equall Presidency was wanting nay was banished from their Assembly at Trent scarce any tokens or shadow of freedome could take place therein Not towards Protestants Brentius y Gent. Exam. Conc. Trid. sess 15. nu 3. and divers other learned Divines came to Trent offered z Obsecrant in disputationis arenam descēdere se certamine offerebant ibid. themselves and their faith to triall of disputations Nulla ratione a Ibidem impetrari potuit this could not be obtained by any meanes that they should come to dispute b Neque admissi fuerint ad suae fidei professionē proponendam discutiendam et haud unquam admitti potuerunt ut suam fidei confessionem in synodi publico conventu exhiberent ac multo minus ut dogmata quae in ea continebantur disputatione assererent ibid. Gen. in Exam. lib. 5. nu 4. pa. 317. for the faith c Jbid. pa. 320. Nullus unquam liber aditus Protestantibus the Protestants at no time had any freedone to come to the Councell at Trent Not towards their owne Bishops if they spake or did ought tending to the defence of the truth Cornelius Bishop of Bitons said d Melc Can. lib. 12. loc Theol. ca. 13. §. Extat that Christ offered not in his last supper his owne body and blood this crossed their proper sacrifice of the masse therfore Cornelius for that free true speech à Patribus universis explosus est was hissed out of their Trent Councell by all the Fathers and Divines there present Iacobus Nachiantes e Cypr. Valer. in Marc. 2. Bishop of Clodia Fossa sayd he could not approve that traditions should be held in equal reverence as the Scripture he was for this truth expulsed the Councell Gulielmus f Ibid. Venetus a Dominican Fryer sayd in the Councell that the Councell was above the Pope he was commanded to depart out of the Councell Another of the Bishops g Car. Molin li. de Conc. Trid. nu 22. hapning to touch and that but lightly the pride of the Pope in his titles wished that seeing God is no where in the Scripture called sanctissimus but sanctus the Pope also would be content with the same title of sanctus and not take a more ample name of honour than is given in Scripture unto God The Pope being certified hereof sent for him to come from Trent to Rome and gave him to his Officers to use him hardly h Satalitibus suis de gradu deijciendum duriter tractandum propinavit Ibid. and to bee degraded Petrus Vergerius i Ioh. Sleid. Com. lib. 21. pa. 304. seq Bishop of Iustinianople he who endeavoring k Dum confutādi causa libros adversariorum diligenter excutit attente argumenta considerat captum se victumque sensit Ibid. to refute the Protestant writings and began that booke which hee intituled Against the Apostates of Germany was himselfe overcome by the evidence of that truth specially in the doctrine of Iustification which he oppugned came to the Councell at Trent The Pope having intelligence that he was inclined to Lutheranisme writ to his Legats at Trent Ne locum ei tribuant in consessu That they should not admit him into their Councell but command him to depart Ad hunc l Ibid. plura de eo lege apud Cypr. Valer. in Marcel 2. modum eliminatus by this meanes was the Bishop excluded from their free Synod and if Iohannes Casus the Popes Legate to the Venetians and Archbishop of Beneventum who writ a m Nec puduit eum scelus omnium longe turpissimum celebrare laudibus Ioh. Sleid. loc citat booke in the praise of one of the most detestable and damnable sinnes could have prevailed to have entised n him to goe to Rome he had not thence escaped so easily as he did from Trent Could any of these or the like enormous disorders which utterly subvert all synodall freedome have been endured had there beene equall and prudent Presidents for Kings and Emperours in that Councell But the Imperiall presidency being abandoned together with it was all freedome and synodall orders excluded So that I may truly say both of these Tridentine and their other nine Synods m Eum uti Romam peteret modis omnibus
intends such a calamity as hapned before the condemning of the three Chapters but after the condemning of the Acephali Now it is certaine by the Acts of the fift Councell and by the Emperours testimony that as the Easterne Bishops so also Vigilius presently after he came to Constantinople consented to condemne the three Chapters yea condemned them by a Pontificall decree and judgement and continued in that minde till the time of the fift Councell at which time by the general Synod they were also condemned Gregory then should have spoken against himselfe had hee meant Vigilius and his comming to Constantinople in saying that after the sentence of Vigilius against Theodora the City was besieged and taken as it was once againe indeed taken by Totilas p Proc. lib. eodē 3. an 15. belli Goth. pa. 394. in the 23. yeare of Iustinus for his adversaries to whom he writ being defenders of the three Chapters would have replyed against him that this calamity befell them from the very same cause seeing both the Easterne Bishops and the Pope consented in that doctrine of condemning of the three Chapters Thus it appeareth not by surmises and conjectures but by certaine and evident proofe that the text of Gregory is corrupted or else that Gregory himselfe was mistaken therein which in a matter so neare his dayes wee may not thinke and so that it was not Vigilius but Agapetus whom Gregory intended to denounce that sentence against the Acephali or Theodora of which Baronius maketh such boast and commends with such great ostentation that thereby he might make the Empresse who was a condemner of the three Chapters more odious and strengthen that fiction and fabulous tale of Anastasius that Vigilius contended with Iustinian and Theodora about Anthimus CAP. XXII How Baronius declameth against the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters and a refutation thereof 1. BAronius not content to wrecke his spite upon the Emperour and Empresse in such uncivill manner as you have seene carpes in the next place at the very cause it selfe of the three Chapters What did Vigilius saith hee a Bar. an 547. nu 48. offend in appointing that men should be silent and say nothing untill the future Synod of this cause of the three Chapters which if it could have beene potius perpetuo erat silentio condemnanda sopienda sepelienda atque penitus extinguenda was rather to be condemned to perpetuall silence to be buried and utterly extinguished Againe b an 553. n. 237 I doe never feare to avouch that it had beene much better that the Church had remained without these controversies about the three Chapters nec unquam de his aliquis habitus esset sermo and that there had never beene one word spoken of them Thus Baronius 2. What thinke you moved the Cardinall to have such an immortall hatred to this cause as to wish the condemning buriall and utter extinguishing of those controversies What more hurt did this to the Church than the question abut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or about the opinion of Eutiches Very great calamity saith Baronius c Jbidem insued upon this controversie both in the East and West True it did so and so there did and far greater and longer about the controversie of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and more againe than that upon the question whether the Gospell or Paganisme should prevaile and yet by moving those controversies was the faith propagated the truth of Christ spred abroad the blood of Martyrs was made the seed of the Gospell No affliction calamity or persecution is a just cause either to wish that there had never beene any such controversie or to forsake the truth of God when the controversie is moved It was an excellent saying of the Aegyptian Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon d Act. 1. pa. 8. Christianus neminem timet a Christian feareth no mortall man si homines timerentur martyres non essent if men should be feared there would be no Martyrs But the truth is it was not as Baronius fancieth the controversie it selfe nor the disputing and debating thereof that caused so great calamities in the East and West that is non causa pro causa the peevishnesse and perversenesse of wicked men maintaining heresies and oppugning the truth that was the true cause thereof The controversie it selfe if you well marke it was very beneficiall to the Church Oportet haereses e 1 Cor. 11.19 esse there must be heresies among you that they which are approved might bee knowne Every heresie is a probation and tryall of mens love to God and his truth whether they esteeme it more than their honours pleasures and their owne wilfull conceits and the greater the heresie is and the further it spreads it is still a greater tryall Heretikes saith S. Austen f Lib. de ver◠relig ca. 8. doe much profit the Church though they be out of the Church not by teaching the truth which they doe not know but by stirring up those who are more carnall Catholikes to seeke and those who are more spirituall to defend and manifest the truth This triall and probation of men if I mistake not was never so great in any controversie or question as in this of the three Chapters First it sifted and tryed Vigilius to the full and tryed him to be a wether-cocke in faith an heretike and a defender of heresies even by his Apostolicall authority Next it sifted out divers notable conclusions as first that which I think was never before that tryed that not onely the Pope but the Apostolike See also to wit the Romane Church and with it the Westerne Churches all at once adhered to heresie and forsooke the truth and that even after it was decreed and judged by the generall approved Councell and so it proved both Pope and Romane Church to be properly hereticall the Easterne Churches constantly upholding the truth at that time it shewed that the Catholike faith was tied neither to the Chair nor Church of Rome Another conclusion then tryed was that either persons or Churches may not onely dissent from the Pope and the Romane Church and that in a cause of faith judicially defined by the Pope with a Synod but may renounce communion with them and yet remaine Catholikes and in the unity of the Catholike Church the Pope the Westerne Church and all that adheered unto them being then by forsaking the Catholike faith Heretikes and by forsaking the unity of the Church Schismatikes 3. Neither onely was this controversie a triall to them in that age a tryall of their faith love to God charity to the Church obedience to the Emperour but it is as great a triall even in these our dayes and ever since that doctrine of the Popes infallibility in causes of faith hath beene defined and condemned By this controversie most happly decided by the generall Councell all that hold the Popes definitions of faith to be infallible
that is all that are Papists or members of the present Church of Rome they are all hereby tryed to defend this Apostolicall Constitution of Vigilius that is to maintaine all the blasphemies of the Nestorians to deny the Catholike faith the doctrine of the Apostles of the primative Church of the fift generall Councell so to be not only heretikes but convicted anathematized and cōdemned heretikes by the judgement of a generall approved Councell and so by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church Further yet there is a tryall of them whether upon that ground or foundation of the Popes infallibility they will build up and maintaine any other doctrine or position of faith or religion if they doe as indeed every point of the Romish faith and Religion relyeth upon that they are againe hereby tryed to be hereticall not onely in the foundation but in every position and doctrine of their faith and religion which relyes upon that foundation 4. This was it which netled Baronius and extorted from him those earnest and affectionate wishes that this controversie had never beene heard of nor mentioned in the world he saw what a tryall was like to be made by it of men of doctrines of Churches of the Pope himselfe and their whole Romish Church and seeing that tryall he never ceased to say that it had beene much better that this controversie had never beene moved nor spoken of for so they had avoided this most notable triall Blessed be God for that it pleased him in the infinite depth of his unspeakable wisedome to cause this controversie to be ventilated and discussed to the utmost that among many other tryals this might be one of the Antichristian Synagogue to try them even untill the very destruction of Antichrist It is for heretikes whose errors and obstinacy is tryed and discovered to the world it is for them I say to wish that the controversies about Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutycheanisme and the like had never beene moved they had scaped the just censures and anathemaes by that meanes But Catholikes have cause to rejoyce and triumph in such controversies by which both the truth which they maintaine is made more resplendent and victorious themselves and their faith tryed to be like refined gold the Church thereby is quieted the truth propagated heresies confounded and the glory of Almighty God much more magnified and praysed CAP. XXIII How Baronius revileth both the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian and Theodorus B. of Caesarea and a refutation of the same 1. SEeing now notwithstanding the wishing of Baronius this controversie could not be buried it ought him and all ill-willers of it a greater shame than that in the next place let us see how he declameth both against the Emperors Edict whereby these three Chapters were condemned Theodorus Bish of Caesarea who as he saith was the author penner of that Edict The Edict it self he calleth first Seminarium a An. 534. n. 2◠dissentionū a seed-plot of sedition which was never made upon a good occasion nor had any good end And not content herewith he tells b An. 546. nu 9. us out of Facundus that it is contrary to the faith yea even to that faith which Iustinian himselfe professed as orthodoxall to which effect also Baronius himselfe saith c Ibid. nu 8. that the Emperours Edict was set forth contrary to the three Chapters of the most holy Councell of Chalcedon But he specially seekes to disgrace it by the author of it for though it was published by Iustinian yet saith he d Edere sanctiones sibi arrogat Iustin quas dolose conscripsissent haeretici an 546. nu 41. Egerunt callide adversarii veritatis c. ibid. nu 9. it was written and that craftily by heretikes and adversaries to the truth by the e Ingenue professus est Origenistarum studiis ea fuisse ab Jmperatore promulgata ibid. nu 49. Origenists and in particular by f Illud à Theodoro conscriptū edictum suo nomine Iustin promulgavit ibid. nu 8. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea one gratious g an 538. nu 85 potent and familiar with the Emperour and for proofe of all this the Cardinall citeth Liberatus h an 546. nu 9. an 534. nu 21. alibi Facundus and Vigilius 2. Having thus declared Theodorus to be the author and writer of the Edict Baronius then rageth against Theodorus as if he were to act veterē comoediam or according to the Proverbe ex plaustro to raile out of a cart against him calling him factious i Justin factiosorum studijs se inseruit an 550. nu 14. fraudulēt k Hominem vafrum an 551. nu 4. 564. nu 7. impudēt l Ejus gratia factus impudens ibid. nu 3. a most wicked m Theodorum illum nequissimum quem mirum in modum favisse ostendimus Origenis haeresibus an 564. nu 6. occullum haereticum manifestum schismaticum an 551. nu 5. Praeceps Origenista an eod nu 4. hereticall schismaticall headstrong Origenist the ring-leader of the Origenists one marvellously addicted to the heresie of Origen nor onely a servant to Origens errors but also n Non Origenis tantum errorum assecla sed Eutychianae blasphemia vehementissimus propugnator an 564. nu 7. a most earnest defender of the Eutychean blasphemy nor onely so but plunged o Ita miser Iustinianus caecus cacum Theodorum sectans cū īpso pariter mergitur in profundum an 564. nu 7. agit autē de haresi Aphthardochitarum in the heresie of the Aphthardokites or Phantastickes and like a blinde guide leading the blinde Emperour into that ditch of heresie a sacrilegious p Iuque sacrilegum Theodorum pseudoepiscopum imotyrannum insurgit in perversorem legum eversorem juriū an 551. nu 5. person a pseudobishop a tyrant a perverter of lawes an overthrower of right the q Qui Imperatori omnium illi malorum causa fuit an 551. n. 3 author of all mischiefe to the Empire the very r Hic igitur nefandissimus totius Ecclesiae pestis an 564. nu 7. plague of the whole Church Thus and much more doth Baronius utter against Theodorus by whom being so unworthy an author hee would disgrace the Edict it selfe which he writ though the Emperour published it 3. Let us first begin with that most untrue and malicious calumny of Baronius that the Emperor published his Edict against the three Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon Truly the Cardinall should and might most truly have said the quite contrary that he published his Edict for defence not onely of the three but of every Chapter of every position of every decree of the Councell of Chalcedon The three Chapters which that Imperiall Edict and after it the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church condemneth were not Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon but three impious positions assertions or as they were by an
equivalent word called Chapters which heretikes specially the Nestorians collected and falsely boasted to bee taught by the Councell of Chalcedon whereas in very truth the holding of any one of them much more of them all is the overthrow of the whole Councell at Chalcedon yea of the whole Catholike faith that Councell contradicteth and condemneth them all no lesse than the fift Councell which as Gregory truly saith is in omnibus sequax it doth in every point follow and consent unto the Councell of Chalcedon The like may be said of that which out of Facundus Baronius observeth and citeth as a proofe of his saying that the Emperours Edict is repugnant and contrary to the orthodoxall faith Baronius will still keepe his old wont in applauding Vigilius and the defenders of the Three Chapters For if the Edict condemning them be contrary then is the defence of them consonant to the faith and then not the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian but the Pontificall Constitution of Vigilius must be approved as orthodoxall And what is this else but to condemne the judgement of the fift generall Councell of Pope Pelagius Gregory and all Popes after them of all generall Councells following it in a word to contradict and utterly condemne the consenting judgement of the whole Church for the space of 11. hundred yeares they all approve the determination of the fift Councell and it so fully consenteth with the Edict in condemning the Three Chapters that in their definitive sentence they differ very little in words but in substance and sense nothing at all from the Emperours Edict which caused Binius to say the Edict of the Emperour was approved by the Pope and the Councell So Catholike and orthodoxall is it so advisedly and orthodoxally penned To seeke no further proofe Baronius himselfe was so infatuated in this cause that he oftentimes confuteth his owne sayings for himselfe gives a most ample and most observable testimony of this Edict and of the orthodoxy thereof saying ſ an 534. nu 21. of it Est veluti Catechismus fidei Catholicae exacta declaratio this Edict of Iustinian is as it were a Catechisme or an exact declaration of the Catholike faith and an exact discussing of the Three Chapters which were afterwards long controversed in the Church So untrue is that his first calumnie against the Edict whereby hee would perswade that it is contrary to certaine Chapters of the holy Councell of Chalcedon or as Facundus plainly but most untruely affirmeth contrary to the Catholike faith 4. For the second calumnie that his Edict was a seminary of sedition Baronius might as justly condemne the decree of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon yea the very Scripture it selfe and preaching of the Gospell Christ himselfe is set as signum t Luk. 2.34 contradictionis as a butt of contradiction against which they will ever bee striving and shooting their arrowes of opposition sedition contention himselfe u Luk. 12.49 51 saith I am come to set fire on the earth and what would I but that it should bee kindled and againe Suppose yee that I am come to give peace on the earth I tell you nay but rather division and no sooner was the Gospell preached abroad in the world but that which our Saviour foretold them x Mat. 10.21 came to passe Brother shall deliver up brother the father the Childe the Children shall rise against their Parents and cause them to bee put to death and ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake what a seminary of sedition may the Cardinal call the Gospell that caused all these troubles warres seditions murders and burnings in the whole world what another Seminary was the Nicene decree against Arianisme and Constantines Edict to ratifie the same after that how seditiously was Athanasius and the Catholikes persecuted put to flight to torments by Constantius and the Arians how seditiously did the Councels of Ariminum and Syrmium oppugne and fight against that Nicene Decree till they had so farre prevailed that well-neare there had needed no longer contending the whole world almost being turned Arians and even groaning under Arianisme If the Cardinall by reason of those manifold troubles and oppositions which ensued upon this Edict will condemne it for being a Seminary of sedition let him first condemne the Nicene Decree and Imperiall Edict for it let him condemne the Gospell and Christ himselfe which were all such Seminaries as that Edict was If notwithstanding all the oppositions seditions cōtentions raysed by heathen heretical other wicked men against these they were as most certainly they were Seminaries of truth let the Card. know acknowledge his malicious slander against this most religious and orthodoxall Edict of Iustinian which was as all the former a sacred Sanctuary for the Catholike faith Seditions oppositions tumults persecutions and the like disturbances in the Church spring not from Christ nor from his Word and Gospel either preached by Bishops or decreed by Councels or confirmed by Imperiall Edicts all these are of themselves causes onely of unity concord peace and agreement in the Church these onely are the proper native and naturall fruits and effects that proceed from them but contentions and seditions come from the perverse froward wicked and malicious mindes of men that hate the truth and in hatred of it fight against all that uphold the truth bee it by preaching by decreeing or by enacting the truth these are as Wolves which by continuall tumbling in the mire disturbe and trouble the streame The fountaines whence the truth springeth are most pure and most peaceable 5. Now whereas in the third place Baronius seekes to disgrace the Edict by the Author of it whom he describes to have beene not onely an heretike but a most detestable person even the plague of the whole Church let us suppose and admit the Author to have beene such a man indeed nay to have beene Iudas himselfe and worse than Iudas hee could hardly bee seeing CHRIST himselfe called y Iohn 6. v. 71. Iudas a Devill Is the Edict or the truth of God thereby published worse because Iudas uttered or penned it was the Arke to bee refused or contemned because wicked men framed and built it Did not Christ say z Luk. 10.16 of Iudas a Devill as well as of Peter a Saint Hee that heareth you heareth mee he that despiseth you despiseth me Hath Baronius forgotten the lesson of Saint Iames a Iam. 2 v. 1. My brethren have not the faith of our glorious Lord Iesus Christ in respect of persons love it for it selfe but neither love it nor refuse it because of him that speaketh penneth or bringeth the same Did the Cardinall never heare of the Scribes and Pharisees they sit b Mat. 23. v. 2.3 in Moses chaire that is deliver Gods truth out of Moses and the Prophets unto you whatsoever therefore they bid you that observe doe but after their workes doe not Or if this
Like lips like lettuce Such a writing is a most fit witnesse for Baronius who delighteth in untruths and not finding true records to give testimony to them it was fit hee should applaud the most vile and abject forgeries if they seeme to speak ought pleasing to the Cardinals pallate or which may serve to support his untruths 9. You see that yet it appeares not that Theodorus was the writer or penner of this Decree none of Baronius his witnesses affirming it and Liberatus who is the best of them all affirming the contrary I might now with this answer put off a great part of those reviling speeches which Baronius so prodigally bestoweth on Theodorus But I minde not so to leave the Cardinall nor suffer the proud Philistine so insolently to revile and insult over any one of the Israelites much lesse this worthy Bishop of Cesarea to whom hee could not have done a greater honor than in that which he intended as an exceeding disgrace to him to call and account him the Author and Writer of this Edict It is no small honour that Iustinian so wise and religious an Emperour should commit the care of so waighty a matter to Theodorus that hee should have him in so high esteeme as account his word an Oracle to bee guided and directed by his judgement so to adhere unto him as Constantine did to that renowned Hosius as to thinke it a piaculum or great offence not to follow his advice in matters of so great waight consequence and importance Nay this one Edict supposing with the Cardinall Theodorus to bee the Author of it shall not onely pleade for Theodorus but utterly wipe away all those vile slanders of heresie impiety imprudency and the like so often and so odiously objected and exaggerated by the Cardinall against him this writing and the words thereof being as whosoever readeth them will easily conceive and if hee deale ingenuously confesse the words of truth of faith of sobriety of profound knowledge evidences of a minde full fraught with faith with piety with the love of God and Gods Church and in a word full of the holy Ghost As Sophocles k Cic. de Senect being accused to doate recited his Oedipus Coloneus and demanding whether that did seeme the Poeme of a doating man was by the sentence of all the Iudges acquitted So none can reade this Edict but forthwith acknowledge it a meere calumny in Baronius to call the maker of it an heretike whose profession of faith is so pious divine and Catholike Or rather Theodorus may answer that Baronian slander with the like words as did S. Paul l Act. 24.12.13 They neither found me making an uproare among the people nor in the Synagogues nor in the City neither can they prove these things whereof they now accuse mee but this I confesse that after this way declared in this Edict which they call heresie so worship I the God of my fathers 10. Now as this may serve for a generall Antidote at once as it were to expell all the whole poyson of those Baronian calumnies so if we shall descend to particulars the innocency of Theodorus as also the malice and malignity of Baronius will much more clearly appeare The crimes objected to Theodorus by Baronius are reduced to three heads one his threefold heresie another his opposing himselfe to Pope Vigilius or the Decree of Taciturnity in the cause of the Three Chapters the third his misleading of Iustinian into the heresie of the Aphthardokites and so causing that great persecution of the Church which thereupon ensued all the other disgracefull termes are but the superfluity of that malice which the Cardinall beares against all that were opposite to Vigilius and his Apostolicall Constitution To begin then with that which is easiest the two last crimes are not so easily uttered as refuted they both are nothing else but meere slanders and calumnies without any certaine ground or probability of truth devised either by Baronius himselfe or by such as he is enemies and haters of the truth and truly for the later his misleading Iustinian into the heresie of the Apthardokites that is not onely a manifest untruth for Iustinian as wee have before m Ca. 20. proved did not onely at all hold that heresie but it is wholly forged and devised by Baronius he hath not any one Author no not so much as a forged writing to testifie this no nor any probable collection out of any Author to induce him to lay this imputation upon Theodorus the world is wholly and soly beholden to the Cardinall for this shamelesse calumny and yet see the wisedome of Baronius herein hee was not content barely and in a word to taxe and reprove Theodorus which had beene more than sufficient having no proofe nor evidence of the crime but in this passage as if hee had demonstratively proved Theodorus to bee guilty hereof hee rageth and foameth like a wilde Bore against him calling him a most wicked man and most vehement propugner of blasphemy the plague of the whole Church who with a visor affrayed the Emperour like a little Boy from the truth and led him captive into heresâ—e Doe you not thinke that the Cardinall needed to be sent to Anticyra when he writ this not onely without truth but without braine and ordinary sense 11. The other crime that Theodorus opposed himselfe to Vigilius and to the decree of silence is like the former save that this difference is to be observed betwixt them that the former was forged by Baronius but this later is grounded on a foolish and forged writing applauded by Baronius fictions and forgeries they are both but the one was fained to the Cardinals hand for the other hee was faine to beate it out of his owne anvill There was neither any such decree for taciturnity neither did Theodorus nor needed hee to oppose himselfe to Vigilius for Vigilius as well as Theodorus all the whole time almost from his comming to Constantinople till the fift Councell was assembled wholly consented to condemne the Three Chapters as besides other evident proofes before alleaged to which I remit the reader that one testimony of the Emperour doth undeniably demonstrate Quod n Epist Iustin ad Conc. 5. Act. 1 pa. 520. a. vero ejusdem voluntatis semper fuit de condemnatione Trium Capitulorum per plurima declaravit Vigilius hath by very many things declared that he hath been alwayes since his comming to Constantinople of the same minde in condemning the Three Chapters what thinke you here againe of Baronius who upon this occasion of contradicting Vigilius his decree of silence reviles Theodorus calling o Locis supra citatis him sacrilegious a Pseudo-Bishop a tyrant a schismatike a perverter of lawes the author of all evils and yet when the Cardinall hath said all this there is no truth nor reality in the cause and occasion for which hee thus rageth and revileth no opposition to Vigilius no
but the whole fabrick of them both is questionable whether they were the Synodall Acts or but a relation framed by Anastasius as hee thought best Of all the eight Councels the Acts of Chalcedon this fift and the sixt have beene most safely preserved and like the river Arethusa have strongly passed through so many corrupt ages and hands and yet without tainture of the salt deliver unto us the cleare and sweete current of antiquity and truth And verily when I seriously compare the wrack of other Councels with the entirenesse of these three I cannot but admire and magnifie with all my might the gracious providence wisdome and love of God to his Church for in every one of these there is an unresistable force of truth against that Antichristiā authority supremacy which is now made the foundation of the Popish faith the sixt in the cause of Honorius the fift in this cause of Vigilius and that of Chalcedon in curbing the Popes Legates in crossing the decree and knowne resolution of Pope Leo and in being a most lively patterne of that rightfull and ancient authority which Emperours then held above all the Bishops in the Councell but now the Pope usurpes both above all Bishops Emperours and Councels God would by these monuments of antiquity pull downe the lofty Towers and raze from the very bottome that foundation of Babylon which can never be firme and setled hee would have besides other particular witnesses these unconquerable and irresistible forces of these ancient and generall Councels against which no just exception can be taken and although I will not excuse the acts of these nor any of them from all defects and blemishes whatsoever yet I dare boldly averre that they are so few so light and of so small importance that the maine controversies handled in them or relying on them cannot be prejudicated thereby they being rather the errours of the Collectors or of the writers and exscribers of these Councels than of the Councels themselves And particularly for this fift Councell against which Baronius doth so furiously declame I doubt not to make it evident that all the faults which after much prying hee hath objected unto the Acts thereof will prove so many evident testimonies of his owne most fraudulent and corrupt dealing and not the defects or corruptions in the Acts of this Councell But let us view the particulars CAP. XXV The first alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that the text of the Councell at Chalcedon is changed therein refuted 1 THE corruptions which Baronius and out of him Binius objecteth are according to the grammaticall division reduced to three sorts of irregularity Some by variation or alteration others by defect or mutilation the rest by redundance or addition In the first ranke hee pretendeth three examples the first which seemeth to be of greatest moment and carieth the greatest colour of probability is the corrupting of a certaine text of the Councell at Chalcedon cited by this fift Synod Heare the accusation in Baronius his owne words We may not here omit saith he a An. 553. nu 214. to note the craft of the Grecians who contrary to right and equitie have corrupted the holy text of the Synodall Acts by adding unto the Councell of Chalcedon those words about which there was much contention in the time of Pope Hormisda when certaine suspected of Eutycheanisme specially some Scythian Monkes did labour that unto the holy Councell of Chalcedon these words might bee added Dominum nostrum Iesum Chistum unum esse de sancta Trinitate which when they could not obtaine because the Synod was well enough without that addition here now in this fift Councell where the Epistle of Ibas is compared with the profession of the Councell at Chalcedon they recite these words of the Synod Chalcedonensis sancta Synodus in definitione quam de fide fecit praedicat Deum verbum incarnatum esse hominem the holy Synod of Chalcedon in the definition which it made of faith doth professe God the Word to have beene incarnate and made man and they adde unto the words of the Synod qui est Dominus noster Iesus Christus unus de sancta Trinitate who is our Lord Iesus Christ one of the holy Trinitie as if the Synod of Chalcedon had professed that whereas they rather would call Christ unam personam sanctae Trinitatis than unum de sancta Trinitate Thus Baronius In which few words of his there are contained so many notable untruths and hereticall frauds that without a rare dexterity in that craft hee could not have easily contrived and couched them in so small a roome 2. First that they who contended to have Christ called unum de sancta Trinitate were heretikes or Eutycheans or unjustly suspected thereof is not onely untrue but bewrayes the Cardinals obstinate and obdurate affection to Nestorianisme for as Dionysius b Extat in Bib. §. pat tom 3. Exiguus in his Preface to the Epistle of Proclus witnesseth and most truly the disciples of Theodorus Mopsvestenus began to teach an impious faith to the people with most crafty subtilty professing the Trinity to bee in such sort of one Essence ut Christum Dominum nostrum unum ex Trnitate nullatenus faterentur that they would by no meanes confesse Christ our Lord to be one of the Trinity and thereupon they taught a quaternity in the persons If Baronius esteeme it heresie to professe Christ unum de sancta Trinitate then is hee certainly by this besides all other evidences convicted to be a Nestorian heretike for it is an Article of their Nestorian and repugnant to the Catholike faith to deny or doubt to call Christ unum de sancta Trinitate 3. Secondly that the Councell of Chalcedon made ever any doubt to professe Christ to bee unum de sancta Trinitate or that they would rather call him unam personam Trinitatis is another vile Nestorian slander and hereticall untruth of Baronius The Councell of Chalcedon saith Iustinian c Leg. 7. de summa Trinit ca. 4. approved the Epistle of Proclus wherin it is taught that we ought to confesse our Lord Iesus Christ to be one of the holy Trinity Proclus saith d Loco citato Dionysius Exiguus did marvellously resist that impiety and hee taught our Lord Iesus Christ unum de Trinitate esse to bee one of the Trinity When the Nestorians troubled the Church about this matter Iustinian set forth a most religious Imperiall Edict e Edict extat apud Bar. an 533. nu 7. 9. wherein hee commanded all to professe Christ to bee unum de Trinitate wee anathematize saith he every heresie especially Nestorius and those who thinke or have thought as he did wee anathematize those who deny or will not confesse our Lord Iesus Christ unum esse ex sancta consubstantiali Trinitate to bee one of the holy and consubstantiall Trinitie This Imperiall Edict the very next
fift Synod they obtained now they added to the words of the Synod this clause qui est Dominus unus de sancta Trinitate A very perilous corruption sure to expresse that clause which all the Bishops of Rome semper excipio Hormisdam with all Catholikes beleeved and taught which whosoever denieth or wil not professe is anathematized and excluded from the Catholike Church Is not this thinke you a very sore corruption of the Councell of Chalcedon Is not the Cardinall a rare man of judgement that could spie such a maine fault in these Acts of the fift Councell that they professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate to which profession both they and all other were bound under the censure of an anathema 7. Yea but in the Acts those words are cited as the words of the Councell of Chalcedon whose they are not A meere fancy and calumny of the Cardinall they are plainly set downe as the words of the fift Synod whose indeed they are and it relateth not precisely the words of the Councell of Chalcedon nor what it there expressed totidem verbis but the true summe and substance of what is there decreed For thus they say i Coll. 6. pa. 575. a. The holy Synod of Chalcedon in the definition which it made of faith doth professe God the Word incarnate to be made man this is all they report of the Councell of Chalcedon as by the opposition of Ibas his Epistle is apparent wherein they oppose not that he denyed Christ to be one of the Trinity but that hee called them heretikes who taught the Word incarnate to be made man That clause which they adde That Christ is one of the Trinity is an addition of the fift Councell it selfe explicating that of Christ which the Emperours Edict bound them to professe as being the true sense and meaning of the Councell at Chalcedon but not as being word for word set downe in the decree of Chalcedon And even as he were more than ridiculous who would accuse one to corrupt the Councell of Chalcedon for saying they professed Christ to be God and man who was borne in Bethleem and fled from Herod into Aegypt so is the Cardinall as ridiculous in objecting this as a corruption of the Synod or addition to the Councell of Chalcedon that they say the Councell taught the Word of God to bee man who is our Lord Iesus Christ one of the holy Trinity Both additions are true but neither of them affirmed to be expresly and totidem verbis set downe in the Councell of Chalcedon Why but looke to the Cardinals proofe for he would not for any good affirme such a matter without proofe What doe yee aske for proofe of the Cardinall I tell you it is proofe enough that he sayth it and truly in this poynt he produceth neither any proofe nor any shadow of reason to prove either that those words are falsely inserted into the Acts of the fift Councell or that the fift Councell cited them as the very expresse words of the Councell of Chalcedon all the proofe is grounded on his old Topicke place Ipse dixit which is a sory kind of arguing against any that love the truth for although against the Pope or their popish cause any thing which he writeth is a very strong evidence against them seeing the Cardinall is very circumspect wary to let nothing no not a syllable fall from him which may in the least wise seem to prejudice the Popes dignity or the cause of their Church unlesse the maine force and undeniable evidence of truth doe wrest and wring it from his pen yet in any matter of history wherein he may advantage the Pope or benefit their cause it is not by many degrees so good to say the illustrissimus Cardinalis affirmes it which is now growne a familiar kinde of proofe among them k Vide Gretz tractatus varios alios ejus farinae as to say Ovid Aesop or Iacobus Voraginensis affirme it therefore it is certainly true His Annals in the art of fraudulent vile and pernicious untruths farre excell the most base fictitious Poemes or Legends that ever as yet have seene the Sunne CAP. XXVI The second alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that Ibas is sayd therein to have denyed the Epistle written to Maris to be his refuted 1. THe second thing which our Momus a Dum falsa quaedam ibi in Actis 5. Concilij asserta reperiuntur de impostura non mediocrem suspicionem inducunt cum viz. ibi dictum habetur Ibam negasse Epistolā esse suam Bar. an 553. nu 211 carpeth at is for that in these Acts it is sayd that Ibas denyed the Epistle written to Maris to bee his which saith Baronius is untrue for Ibas professed the Epistle to be his And Binius not content to call it with the Cardinall an untruth in plaine termes affirmes b Duo aut plura mendacia de Ibae epistola leguntur Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. pa. 606. b. Acta Conc. 5. nō uno loco indicant quod Ibas Epistolam non agnoverit verū haec sententia c. iid p. 607. a it to be a lye Had not hatred to the truth corrupted or quite blinded the judgement of Baronius and Binius they would never have quarelled with the Acts about this matter nor for this accused them to have beene corrupt They may as well collect the Edict of Iustinian or that famous Epistle of Pope Gregorie wherein he writeth of Ibas and the three Chapters to be corrupted and of no credit as well as the Acts of the fift Councell for in both c Ibas non est ausus eam suam dicere Epistolam Iustin edictum pa. 496. b. Epistolam Jbas denegat suam Greg. lib. 7. Epist 53. them the same is said concerning the deniall of Ibas which is in these Acts. If notwithstanding the avouching of that denyall they may passe for sincere and incorrupt it was certainly malice and not reason that moved the Cardinall and Binius to carpe at the Acts for this cause which will much more appeare if any please but to view the Acts themselves For this is not spoken obitèr nor once but the Councell insisteth upon it repeateth it in severall d Abnegans Epistolam Coll. 6. pa. 563. b. Eo quod abnegabat Ibas illa Coll. eadem pa. 564. a. Vnde Jbas eam abnegabat ibid. alibi places and divers times and if those words were taken away there would be an apparent hiatus in the text of those Acts. The words then are truly the words of the true Acts the corruption is onely in the braine of Baronius and Binius 2. Now whereas the Cardinall and Binius so confidently affirme this to be untrue or a lye that Ibas denyed his Epistle and so accuse the whole Councell to lye in this matter they doe but keepe their owne tongues and pens inure with calumnies the untruth
was not this a condemning of the Epistle of Ibas which defendeth Nestorius and his heresies which is full fraught with all his blasphemous doctrines Could the Councell of Chalcedon condemne and anathematize the doctrine of Nestorius and yet not condemne that Epistle which defends all those doctrines By the Acts it is cleare and certaine that the Councell of Chalcedon approve l Huic omnes cōsentimus omnes ita sapimus Act. 5. pa. 98. their owne decree of faith now this Epistle as not onely the fift Councell often m Epistolam definitio S. Chalcedonensis Concilij condemnavit Collat. 6. pa. 576 b. et alibi but after it Pope Gregory saith procul dubio definitioni Synodi probatur adversa without doubt is contrary to the definition of the Councell of Chalcedon n Lib. 7. Ind. 2. Epist 54. Is not the approving of their definition a rejecting and condemning of whatsoever writing is contrary to the same By the Acts it is cleare and certaine that the Councell even in their definition o Chal. Conc. Act 5. pa. 38. forbids and pronounceth it unlawfull for any to teach or produce or write or deliuer any other doctrine which whosoever doth if hee bee a Bishop or Clerke hee shall bee deposed if a Monke or Lay man anathematized Is not this a plaine forbidding of that Epistle to bee read or taught the doctrine whereof is directly contrary to their decree when by the Councels decree it may neither be taught written nor read otherwise then with a detestation is not this a condemning of it by the Councell by the Acts that is cleare in the fift Councell p Hoc judicium Photij et Eustathij omnes Episcopi Chal. Cōc sequuti perspexerunt ipsum Jbam anathematizare Nestorium et impia ejus dogmata Con. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 563. b. that the Councell of Chalcedon approved the judgement of Photius and Eustathius for as Photius and Eustathius so they all at q Ibam anathematizantem Nestorium et ejus impia dogmata permanere in Sacerdotio volo Euseb Epis Ancyrae in Conc. Chal. Act. 10. pa. 115. sic Stephanus Romanus Eunomius et omnes Episcopi clamaverunt omnes eadē dicimus Ibid. pa. 116. a. Chalcedon required Ibas to anathematize Nestorius and his doctrines before they would receive him Now as the fift Councell r Coll. 6. p. 563. b truly saith to approve the judgement of Photius and Eustathius Nihil est aliud quam condemnare impiam Epistolam this is nothing else than to condemne the impious Epistle seeing in it Nestorius and his heresies are defended To be short for there are very many other evidences to declare this Pope Gregory ſ Loco citato testifieth that the fift Councell was in omnibus sequax did in all things follow the Councell of Chalcedon if in all then in condemning this impious Epistle and if they followed it therein then most certainly the Councell of Chalcedon condemned it before them So untrue it is which the Cardinall saith that the Acts doe shew and that out of them he hath demonstrated that the Councell of Chalcedon did not condemne this Epistle whereas he hath demonstrated nothing so cleare as himselfe to bee a malicious and shamelesse downfacer of most certaine and evident truths Thus much of his first sort of corruptions namely the three variations or depravations wherewith as you see hee hath slandered the Acts of this fift Councell to his immortall disgrace CAP. XXVIII The three first defects in the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that the Acts against the Origenists the Edict of Iustinian and his Epistle touching that cause are wanting therein refuted 1. THE second kinde of the Cardinals Heteroclites are his defectives a Intelligas quā plurima in eádē 5. Synodo desiderari Bar. an 553 nu 243. And here he and Binius labour to prove the lamenesse and defects of these Acts by five instances The first of them concernes the proceeding against Origen and the Origenists which was done in the fift Synod but is now wanting in the Acts thereof Let us first heare what Binius b Decurtationē et mutilationem Actorum indicant illa fragmenta quae in sine hujus curavimus Bin. not in Conc. 5. § Constitutum saith hereof The curtaling and maime of these Acts doe those fragments declare which we have added to the end of the Synod quodque nulla vel levis tantum mentio reperiatur de condemnatis erroribus Origenis and because there is no mention no not any small or light mention found in them touching the errours of Origen condemned If one were disposed to quit Binius with his owne uncivill words Binius should here be proclamed both for a most impudent lyar and a shamelesse belyar of these Synodal acts of this holy Councell There is expresse mention of condemning Origen in the fift Collation Origen c Coll. 5. pa. 552. was anathematized after his death in the time of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria which also your sanctitie hee speakes to the Bishops of this Synod and Vigilius Pope of Rome have now done Again there is expresse mention of him and his errours in the eighth collation in the very Synodall and definitive sentence of the Councel wherein Origen and his impious writings are condemned for thus it is writen c Coll. 8. Anath 11. pa. 587. a. If any man doe not accurse Arius Eunomius Macedonius Apollinarius Nestorius Eutyches Origen cum impijs eorum conscriptis with their impious writings and all other heretikes condemned by the Catholike Church let that man bee accursed When the holy Councell not onely mentions the condemning of Origen but by their judiciall sentence themselves also condemne both him his errors and his impious writings what a face of Adamant had Binius against the truth against his owne text of the Councell against his conscience and knowledge to say there is no mention no not any levis mentio to be found in the Acts of the errors of Origen condemned or if Binius will not be perswaded of his untruth for us let him acknowledge it for his Master Baronius his credit who saith d An. 553. nu 248. In these Synodall Acts there is made onely brevis mentio de Origine ejusque erroribus condemnatis a short mention in the eleventh anathematisme of Origen and his errours condemned if there bee brevis mentio of him and his errours then Binius must cry the Acts forgivenesse for saying there is no mention at all no not levis mentio of his errours 2. Let us see now if Baronius deale any better Constat saith e An. 553. nu 238. hee It is manifest by the testification of many that Origen Didimus and Evagrius together with their errours were condemned in this fift Synod and that there was written at least recited repeated against them those ten Anathematismes which Nicephorus setteth downe but in the Acts there is
non re seu honore non potestate Bell. lib. 1. de Pontif. Rom. ca. 24. § â—orro and Binius k Binius verba Bellar. repetit et ait id patere ex Conc. Nic. Can. 7. notis in Epist 3. Anaclet to 1. Conc. pa. 105. not in Conc. Nicen. ca. 7. pa. 31â— a. professe though it was but a single Bishorick subject as both Ierome l Hoc ibi in Conc. Nic. decernitur ut Palestinae Metropolis Cesarea sit et totius Orientis Antiochia Hier. Epist ad Pammach contra Johan Epis Hieros and the Nicene m Habeat Aelia honoris consequentiam post Antiochiam Metropoli propria dignitate servata Conc. Nic. Can. 7. Councell declare to the Bishop of Antioch as his Patriarke and to the Bishop of Cesarea Palestina for there is another in Cappadocia as his Metropolitane yet for honor of our Saviors resurrectioÌ„ in that place it had the name of n Hieros limitaâ—â—â—â—scopus scâ—â—bat loco sed nullâ— Archi-Episcopo vel Episcopo praeerat Bell. loc cit Patriark and preeminency in Councels o Nam sedit 4. loco in Concilio Niceno et subscribit ante Episcopum Caesariensem in Conc. Nicene et Constant ut ex subscriptione liquet et in Conc. Chalc. Act 5. to the Bishop of Caesarea Not to the authoritie and power of a Patriarke for that it had and had it justly long before this fift Councell even by the decree and judgement of the Councell of Chalcedon Iuvenalis p Epist 62. Leonis had sued for it in the Ephesine Councell but the Bish of Antioch as it seemeth then being unwilling to manumit him as it were free him from his subjection Cyrill resisted it writ to Pope Leo praying him to do the like But after long contention both parties being throughly agreed the matter was brought to the Councell of Chalcedon where Maximus and Iuvenalis the Bishops of both Sees first of all and before the whole Councell professed that they were both willing that q Placuit mihi ait Maximus et Iuvenali propter multam contentionem ut sedes Antiochena habeat duas Phaenicias et Arabiam sedes autem Hierosolymorum habeat tres Palestinas et rogamus ex decreto vestrâ— haec firmari Conc. Chalc. Act. 7. pa. 105. the Bishop of Antioch should hold the two Pheniciaes and Arabia and the Bishop of Ierusalem should hold the three Palestinaes and they both requested the whole Synod to decree confirme and ratifie the same The whole Councell thereupon by their decree coÌ„firmed the same all the most revereÌ„d Bishops cryed r Ibid. We all say the same and we consent thereunto After them the most glorious Iudges in the name of the Emperor added Imperiall authority and the royall assent to the Synods decree saying Firmum etiam per nostrum decretuÌ„ sententiam Concilij in omni tempore permanebit hoc this shall abide firme for ever by our decree and by the judgement of the Councell that the Church of Antioch have under it the two Pheniciaes and Arabia the Church of Ierusalem have under it the three Palestines Thus the Iudges The same Decree of this Councell at Chalcedon is expresly testified both by Evagrius Å¿ Evag. l. 2. ca. 18 and Nicephorus t Nic. Callist lib. 15. ca. 30. So untrue it is which Guil. Tyrius and out of him Baronius avoucheth that the Church of Ierusalem was first made a Patriarchall See or had the Provinces and Metropolitanes of Casarea and Scithopolis annexed unto it by the fift Councell that it is undoubtedly certaine that it had with the title and dignity true Patriarchal authority and power over divers Provinces together with their inferiour Bishops conferred upon it with a plenary consent of the whole Church in the Councell of Chalcedon And that you may see the most shamefull dealing both of Bar. and Binius in another place where their choller against this fift Councell was not moved they acknowledge that truth for intreating of the Councell at Chalcedon In this seventh Session of it saith Baronius u An. 451. nu 124. and the like doth Binius x Not. in Conc. Chalc. pa. 184. b. was the controversie coÌ„posed betwixt the Bishops of Antioch IerusaleÌ„ and the cause being judged the two Pheniciae and Arabia were given to the Bishop of Antioch and the three Palestines were adjudged to the Bishop of Hierusalem ex quibus jam perspicuè â—â—paret jus Metropolis in Hierosolymitanam Ecclesiam esse translatum whence it doth evidently appeare that the right of the Metropolis which before belonged to the Bishop of Caesarea was translated to the Bishop of Ierusalem So they who yet in hatred against the Acts of the fift Councell with faces of Adamant deny that truth which here they confesse to be cleare and conspicuous 3. But saith the Cardinall y An. 553. nu 246. the decree of Chalcedon was made post absentiam Legatorum when the Popes Legates were now gone and so they being absent is to be held invalid O the forehead of the Cardinall Were the Popes Legats absent were they gone Truly they were not onely present at this decree and consenting unto it but after it was proposed by Maximus and Iuvenalis they were the very first men that gave sentence therein whose sentence the whole Councell followed For thus it is sayd z Conc. Chalc. Act. 7. pa. 105. a Pascasinus and Lucentius the most reverend Bishops and Boniface a Presbyter these holding the place of the Apostolike See said by Pascasinus These things betwixt Maximus and Iuvenalis are knowne to be done for their good and peace nostrae humilitatis interloquutione firmantur and they are confirmed by the interloquution of our humility ut nulla imposterum de hac causa sit contentio that never hereafter there should be any contention about this matter betweene these Churches Is it credible that the Cardinall could be so audacious and impudent as to utter such palpable untruths Vnlesse he had quite put off I say not modesty but reason sense and almost humane nature Let this stand for the second capitall untruth in this passage 4. Yet Pope Leo himselfe saith Baronius a Loco citato withstood that Decree of the Councell at Chalcedon because it was prejudiciall to the rights of other Churches and by reason he consented not it was not put in execution as it was after this Decree of the fift Synod Had the Cardinall and his friends beene well advised they would feare and bee much ashamed once to mention the resistance of Pope Leo to the Councell at Chalcedon either in those Patriarks or in the other of Constantinople for first the resistance of Leo which was meerely ineffectuall demonstrates that the Popes contradiction with all his might and power can neither disanull nor infringe the judgement of a generall Councell which is no small prejudice to his Princehood or Princely
of them hainous crimes and notorious in Vigilius the matters that offend the Cardinall No none of these hee is not used to finde such faults in their Popes these all hee commends as rare vertues as demonstrations of constancy of prudence of fortitude in Vigilius what then is it that his Cardinalship dislikes Truely among many great and eminent vices in Vigilius which are obvious and runne into every mans sight it hapned that once in his life he did one thing worthy of commendations and that was his obedience in going to Constantinople when the Emperour a Vigilius ab Imperatore evocatus Bizantium venit Proc. lib. 3 pa. 364. called and requested b Jpsum summâ celeritate venire rogans Bar. an 546. nu 54. him to come thither and the Cardinall winking at all the other reproves his Holinesse for this one thing which both in equity and duty hee ought to have done This forsooth is it which hee notes as a very c Caeterum Vigilij profectionem Constantinopolim magnum intulisse Catholicae Ecclesiae damnū eventa declararunt quae et sigficarunt quam prudentissimè egerunt illius praedecessores S. Leo et alij qui vocatisaepe ab orthodoxis licet Imperatoribus nunquanm passi sunt se ab ipsâ fixâ Romae sede divelli c. Bar. an 546. nu 55. dangerous and hurtfull matter and a speciall point of great indiscretion in Pope Vigilius that leaving Rome that holy City hee would goe to Constantinople and to the Emperours Court which his predecessors Leo and others in very great wisdome would never do not goe into the East nor suffer themselves to bee pulled away from their See fixed at Rome 2. Truely I never knew before that there was such vertue in the Romane or such venome in the Constantinopolitane soile or in the Easterne ayre specially seeing the holy Land and the holy City and the holy Temple were all in the East All the Westerne nations are beholding to the Cardinall for this conceit 2 King 5.17 Shall there not bee given to thy servant two Mules load of this Romish earth But let us a little more fully see why the Pope and particularly Vigilius might not goe to Constantinople Oh saith the Cardinall d Bar. los. cit it is found by experience that the Popes going from Rome to the Court obfuisse haud modicum hath done great hurt to the Church for then partly by the threats and partly by the favours and faire intreaties of Emperours as it were with two contrary windes the ship of Peter is exposed to great hazzard Modicae fidei phy a Cardinall to feare or distrust any wracke of Saint Peters ship though never so dangerous a tempest happen though Vna Eurusque Notusque ruant creberque procellis Africus S. Peter hath left such a Pilot in his Rome that a thousand times sooner might he himselfe than his ship sinke Pasce oves tu es Petra oravi pro te Petre will uphold it against all winde and weather And truly I would gladly know of his Cardinalship for my learning how any of their Popes can forsake their See or Rome They have heretofore held it for a maxime e Sententia illa omnium ore versata Vbi Papa ibi Roma Bar. an 552. nu 10. ubi Papa ibi Roma let the Pope goe to Peru yea ultra Garamantas Indos he hath a priviledge above all creatures but the Snaile hee carrieth not onely their infallible Chaire but the whole City of Rome on his backe whithersoever hee goes If not so or if the Chaire bee fixt to Rome where sate all their Popes for those seventy yeares f Clemens 5. propter seditiones Jtalicas sedē Pontificiam ab urbe Roma Avionem Galliae urbem ubi successores mansere annos 70. transtulit Geneb in Chron. in an 1305. when they were at Avinion or how shall they sit in the Chaire when their Babylonish Rome for her Idolatries shal be burnt with unquencheable fire and sinke like a Milstone into the bottome of the Sea which being foretold by Saint Iohn of the Romane City which yet remaineth as their owne Iesuite Ribera g Iohannes in omnibus quae de Babylone loquitur adversus urbem Romanam vaticinatur c. Rib. Com. in ca. 14. Apoc. nu 57. et Vicarius Christi ubicunque sit erit Episcopus Roma etiamsi illa penitut excisa sit Ibid. nu 48. doth truely and undeniably demonstrate is a most certaine Article of the Catholike faith though they seldome thinke of it and will hardly put it into their Creed When their Pope goe whither hee will carieth still with him his infallible Chaire was it not infidelity in the Cardinall to dreame or doubt lest that ship should any where miscarry more at the Court or Kings Pallace than in a Country Cottage more in the Trullane than in the Laterane Temple 3. Yea but usu rerum reperitur h Obshisse haud modicum usu rerum reperitur Pontificum ab urbe profectio ad Comitatum Bar. an 546. nu 55. experience teacheth that their going to the Emperour hath done exceeding hurt and particularly for Vigilius that his going to Constantinople hath brought i Ibid. magnum damnum great harme to the Catholike Church declararunt eventa the events have shewed Events and experience are the most woefull arguments in Divinitie that can possibly be devised Measure the Gospell by temporall calamities which ensued upon it the bloody murdering of the Apostles of the Saints of God almost for three hundred yeares together and hee may as well conclude that the Gospell and truth of Christ is found by woefull experience to have brought exceeding great hurt to the Church The Cardinall was driven to a narrow strait and an exceeding penury of reasons when he was forced to put Argumentum ab eventu for one of his Topicall places 4. But say what hurt can he tell us that ever any Emperours presence with the Pope brought unto the Church If both were Catholike or both hereticall they agreed well enough together As not Satans so much lesse is Gods Kingdome devided against it selfe if the Emperour Catholike and the Pope hereticall the worst the Emperour ever did was but to inflict just punishment on an heretike the worst the Pope sustained was but a just recompence of his heresie and hatred of truth The execution of Iustice never did nor ever can hurt the Catholike Church If the Emperor were hereticall and the Pope orthodoxal there was trial of the Popes art skil in converting such a man to the truth triall of his constancy and love unto Gods truth whether by feare or favour he would forsake it triall of his patience and fortitude in induring all torments even death it selfe for his love to Christ All the hurt which such an Emperour did or could doe was to crowne him a glorious Martyr and in stead of the white garment of innocency to
this age when any argument or Topick place is for the Romish Pharao it shall sting like a Serpent when it is used against King Pharao it shall bee as dull and dead as a stick 6. And yet what are those ill events and dangers whereunto the Church was brought by the comming of Vigilius to Constantinople what hurt received it by the presence of the Pope with Iustinian Sure the Cardinall in good discretion should have expressed them at least some one of them but hee was too politike to open such secrets of their State for mine owne part I cannot but first condemne his foule ingratitude in this point Vigilius before hee came to Constantinople was earnest in oppugning the truth and Catholike faith by defending of the Three Chapters hee defended them by words by writings by censures by the utmost of his power All the hurt the Emperour did him was this that he converted him to the truth that hee brought him to define by an Apostolicall Constitution that truth which before hee oppugned and in this tune the Emperour kept him for five or sixe yeares together but then when his old fit of heresie came upon him againe when at the time of the generall Councell he forsook the Emperours holy faith his communion and as may bee thought even his company and presence also by this absence from the Emperor he relapsed quite from the Catholike faith even from that which before hee had defended and defined so long as hee kept society with the Emperour When the Emperours presence made hereticall Pope Vigilius for the space of five or sixe yeares a Catholike Pope at least in shew and profession doe you not thinke Baronius to deale unkindly with the Emperour in blaming the time that ever Vigilius came to the Emperour that is in effect to blame and little lesse than curse the day wherein Vigilius renounced heresie and embraced or made profession of the Catholike faith 7. Now as this good redownded to Vigilius in particular by his comming to Constantinople so there is another and publike benefit which ensued thence to the whole Church and that so great and so happy that if we should as the Cardinall doth measure things by the event the comming of Agapetus to Constantinople though they glory therein more than in any other example of antiquity is no way comparable to this of Vigilius for by this comming of Vigilius it was demonstrated by evident experience that the Pope may say and gainsay his owne sayings in matters of faith and then define ex Cathedra both his sayings that is two direct contradictories to be both true seeing Pope Vigilius first while hee temporized with the Emperour defined ex Cathedra that the Three Chapters ought to bee condemned and after that when it pleased him to open the depth of his owne heart defined the quite contrary ex Cathedra that the Three Chapters ought to bee defended By it was further demonstrated that the Pope may not onely be an heretike but teach also and define and that ex cathedra an heresie to be truth and so be a convicted condemned and anathematized heretike by the judgment of an holy generall Councell and of the whole Catholike Church These and some other like conclusions of great moment for the instruction of the whole Church of God are so fully so clearly so undenyably demonstrated in the cause of Pope Vigilius when he came to Constantinople that had the Cardinall or his favourers I meane the maintainers of the Popes infallibility grace to make use thereof for the opening of their eyes in that maine and fundamentall point wherein they are now so miserably blinded they might have greater cause to thank God for his comming thither than for the voyage of Agapetus or of any other of his predecessors undertaken in many yeares before 8. Where are now the great hurts and inconveniences which the Cardinall fancieth by Vigilius his comming to the Emperour Truly I cannot devise what one they can finde but the disgrace onely of Vigilius in that upon his comming he shewed himselfe to be a temporizer a very weather-cocke in faith a dissembler with God and his Church pretending for five or six yeares that hee favoured the truth when all that time he harboured in his brest the deadly poyson of that heresie which as before his comming he defended so at the time of the Councell he defined This blot or blemish of their holy Father neither I nor themselves with all the water in Tiber can wash or ever wipe away The best use that can be made of it is that as Thomas distrusted to make others faithfull and void of distrust so God in the infinitenesse of his wisedome permitted Pope Vigilius to be not only unconstant but hereticall in defining causes of faith that others by relying on the Popes judgement as infallible might not be hereticall and yet even for this very fact thus much I must needs say that if the Cardinall thinke it was the place or the City of Constantinople that wrought this disgracefull effect in Vigilius it may bee truly replyed unto him much like as Themistocles t Cic. lib. de Senect did to the foolish Seriphian ascribing his owne ignobility to the basenesse of the towne of Seriphus certainly though Silvester Iulius and Caelestine had beene never so oft at Constantinople they had beene orthodoxall and heroicall Bishops but Vigilius hereticall and ignoble though he had beene nayled to the posts of the Vaticane or chained to the pillars of it as fast as Prometheus to Caucasus The soyle and ayre is as Catholike at Constantinople as in the very Laterane it is as hereticall in Rome as in any City in all the world The onely difference is in the men themselves the former where ever they had come caried with them constant heroicall and truly pontificall minds Vigilius in every place was of an ambitious unstable dissembling hypocriticall and hereticall spirit which that every one may perceive I will now in the last place and in stead of an Epilogue to this whole Treatise set downe a true description of the life of Vigilius partly because it may bee thought a great wrong to reject the narration of Anastasius and not some way to supply that defect touching the life of so memorable a Pope as was Vigilius partly with a true report of this hereticall Popes life to requite the labour of Baronius in his malitious slanders of the religious Emperour Iustinian and specially because Vigilius being the subject in a manner of this whole Treatise it seemes to mee needfull to expresse the most materiall circumstances touching the entrance the actions the end of him who hath occasioned us to undertake this so long and as I truly professe both laborious and irksome labour 9. I confesse I have no good faculty in writing their Popes lives Nec fonte labra prolui Caballino nec in bicipiti somniasse Parnasso memini I have not tasted of their streames of
duty they should what to teach or knowing it but willingly teaching the contrary to their knowledge which in duty they should not even so Nestorius Macedonius Arius and Eutyches every Bishop and Presbyter when they erred they erred not simply as Bishops or as Presbyters but as persons failing in their Episcopall or Presbyteriall duties either not knowing the truth as by their office they should or wilfully oppugning and contradicting the truth as by their office they should not So by his subtilty if any applaud themselves in it not only the Bishops of Rome but of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria yea all Bishops and Presbyters in the world shall be as free from errour as his holinesse himselfe yea all professors of any Art Science or faculty shall plead the like Papall exemption from errour every man shall bee a Pope in his owne faculty no Grammarian speaking incongruously as a Grammarian but as wanting the skil required in a Grammarian no Iudge giving a wrongfull sentence as a Iudge no Galenist ministring unwholsome physicke as a Physitian no Artificer working any thing amisse in his trade as an Artificer but as being defective in the duties either of that knowledge or of that fidelity which is required in a Iudge a Physitian and in every Artificer If they will exempt all Bishops and Presbyters all Iudges and Physitians from erring as they are such Officers or Artificers we also will in the same sort and sense allow the like immunity to the Pope If they notwithstanding this subtilty will admit another Bishop to erre as Bishop they must not thinke much if wee exempt not the Pope as Pope For to speake that which is the very truth of them all and exactly to measure every thing by his owne line a Iudge simply as Iudge doth pronounce a judiciall sentence as a skilfull and faithfull judge an upright judiciall sentence as an unskilful or unfaithfull Iudge an erronious or unjust sentence A Bishop or Presbyter simply as Bishop or Presbyter doth teach with publike authority in the Church as a skilfull and faithfull Bishop or Presbyter he teacheth the truth of God as an ignorant and unfaithful Bishop he teacheth errours and heresies in the Church the one without the other with judicall power to censure the gainsayers The like in all Arts Sciences and faculties is to be sayd even in the Pope himselfe A Pope simply as he is Pope and defined by them teacheth both with authority to teach with power to censure the gainsayers and with a supremacy of judgement binding all to embrace his doctrine without appeale without doubt as an infallible Oracle as a skilfull or faithfull Pope he teacheth the truth in that sort as an unskilfull or unfaithfull Pope he teacheth errour or heresie with the like authority power and supremacy binding others to receive and swallow up his heresies for Catholike truth and that with a most blind obedience without once doubting of the same 48. Apply this to Vigilius his hereticall Epistle In a vulgar sense Vig. erred as Pope because he erred in those very Pōtifical duties of feeding confirming which are proper to his office In a strickt sense though hee did not therein erre simply as Pope but quatenus talis taught onely with a supreme binding authority yet hee erred as an unfaithfull Pope binding others by that his Pontificall and supreme authority to receive Eutycheanisme as Catholike truth without once moving any doubt or making scruple of the same What may wee thinke will they oppose to this If they say Vigilius doth not expresse in this Epistle that hee writ it by his Apostolicall authority Hee doth not indeed Nor doth Pope Leo in that Epistle to Flavianus against the heresie of Eutyches which to have beene writ by his Apostolicall authority and as he was Pope none of them doe or will deny that Epistle being approved by the whole Councell r Conc. Chalc. Act. 2. et 3. of Chalcedon Pope Leo by his Papall authority condemneth Eutycheanisme Pope Vigilius by his Papall authority confirme Eutycheanisme both of them confirmed their doctrine by their Papall authority both writ as Popes the one as orthodoxall the other as a perfidious and hereticall Pope neither of both expresse that their Apostolicall authority by which they both writ The like in many other Epistles of Leo and of other Popes might easily bee observed Not the tenth part of their decretal Epistles such as they writ as Popes have this clause of doing it by their Apostolicall authority expressed in them It is sufficient that this is vertually in them all and vertually it is in this of Pope Vigilius Yea but hee taught this onely in a private letter to a few to Anthimus Severus and Theodosius not in a publike generall and encyclicall Epistle written for instruction of the whole Church What is the Pope fallible in teaching of a few in confirming three of his brethren why not in foure in eight in twenty and if in twenty why not in an hundred if so why not in a thousand if in one why not in two foure or ten thousand Caudaeque pilos ut equinae paulatim vellam where or at what number shall we stay as being the least which with infallibility he can teach Certainly confirma fratres in cathedra sede pasce oves respects two as well as two millions If in confirming or feeding three the Chaire may bee erroneous how can wee know to what number God hath tyed the infallibility of it But the sixt generall Councell may teach them a better lesson Pope Honorius writ an hereticall Epistle ſ Quae recitatur Conc. 6. Act. 12. pa. 64. but onely to Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Vigilius writ this to three all of patriarchall dignity as Sergius was Honorius writ it privately as Vigilius did which was the cause as it seemes that the Romane Church tooke so little notice thereof yet though it was private and but to one it is condemned by the sixt Councell for t Vocantur istae et aliae Epistolae dogmatica scripta In eodem Conc. Act. 12. p. 65. a. et retractantes dogmaticas Epistolas à Sergio et ab Honorio ad Sergium Act. 13. pa. 67. a. et Honorius impia dogmata confirmavit Jbid. a domaticall writing of Pope Honorius for a writing wherein hee confirmes others in heresie and Pope Leo u Anathematizamus quoque Honorium qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam et immaculatam fidem prophana proditione subvertere conatus est Leo 2. Epist 1 the second judged it to bee such as was a blemish to the Apostolike See such as by which Honorius did labour to subvert the Catholike faith The like and more danger was in this to these three deposed patriarchs It confirmed them in heresie it confirmed the Empresse it confirmed all that tooke part with them it was the meanes whereby the faith was in hazard to have beene utterly subverted For plurality or paucity it is
not materiall be they few be they moe if the Pope as Pope or as an hereticall pope may confirme three or but one that one is abundant to prove his Chaire and judiciall sentence not to be infallible 49. But he taught this alone not in a Councell not with advice of his Cardinalls and Consistory why he did it not as a member of a Councell but as x Pontifex non ut praeses Concilij sed ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest iudicium Concilij retractare c. Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico secundo Princeps Ecclesiae He did this as did Agapetus y Agapeti Papae contra Anthimū iudicium absque Synodo fuit secundum supremam Apostolicae sedis authoritatem qua supra omnes Canones Pontifex eminet Bar. an 536. nu 23. in deposing Anthimus above and besides the Canons The whole power of his Apostolike authority much shined in this decision more than in any other where either his Cardinals or a Councell hath ought to doe much more was this done by him as Pope than any of them And yet had he listed to follow the judgement of others or of a Synod herein what better direction advice or counsell could his Cardinalls or any Synod in the world give unto him than the decree of the whole Councell of Chalcedon That Vigilius had before his eyes at this time that was in stead of a thousand Cardinals unto him seeing he as Ecclesiae Princeps defined Eutycheanisme notwithstanding that most holy and generall Synod yea against that Synod what could the advice of another or of a few Cardinals have avayled at this time 50. Thus all the evasions which they use being refuted it may now be clearly concluded not onely that Vigilius writ this impious and hereticall Epistle and writ it when he was the true and lawfull Pope but that he writ it also ex animo even out of an hereticall heart and writ it as he was Pope that is in such sort as that by his Pontificall and supreme authority hee confirmed that heresie which hee taught therein And this is the former of his Acts which as I told you is very remarkable his purpose and intent therein being the overthrow of the Councell at Chalcedon and of the whole Catholike faith 51. The other act of Vigilius concernes the cause of the three Chapters wherein by the heresie of Nestorius he publikely decreed and performed that as much as in him lay and as by his Apostolicall decree could be effected which hee had purposed and intended to doe by the heresie of Eutycheanisme In which whole cause how Vigilius from the first to the last behaved himselfe how at the first hee oppugned the Emperours most religious Edict and the Catholike faith how afterward he played the dissembling Proteus with the Emperour and the whole Church for the space of five or six yeares together how at the last he returned to his naturall and habituall love of heresie and how in decreeing it by the fulnesse of his Apostolicall authority hee sought utterly and for ever to abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and with it the whole Catholike faith the former Treatise doth abundantly declare which withall demonstrates the vanity of that saying of Bellarmine For the time sayth he a Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. § Contigit Ab hoc tempore nullus inventus est in Vigilio aut error aut erroris simulatio c. that hee was true Pope neither any errour nor simulation of errour was found in him sed summa constantia in fide but the greatest constancy of faith that could be For as by our former treatise is evident he was not only most wavering but hereticall in faith And this was in a manner the whole course of Vigilius life or the most eminent acts thereof while he was Pope pretending orthodoxy but embracing heresie and as opportunity offered it selfe labouring by words by private Epistles by resisting the imperiall just and godly Edict by publike constitutions to overthrow the faith and the whole Church of God 52. You see now his ingresse into the Papacy and his progresse in the same touching his egresse both out of it and this life heare what S. Liberatus b Liber Brev ca. 22. saith How Vigilius being by heresie afflicted died it is knowne unto all Heare what Cardinall Bellarmine c Bell. loc cit saith out of Liberatus Ab illa ipsa haeresi afflictus Vigilius was miserably afflicted by that selfesame heresie which at the first he nourished and againe Misere vexatus usque ad mortem he was miserably vexed even untill hee dyed Heare Baronius who first promised d Bar. an 538. nu 20. to declare how invigilavit in Vigilio vindicta Dei how the vengeance of God watched Vigilius and at last revenged the innocent blood which he shed and then performing that promise sayth e Bar. an 556. nu 2. He died in an Iland in Sicily by the just judgement of God confectus ipse aerumnis ex morbo himselfe being wasted with misery by reason of his disease who had caused Silverius in an Iland in Palmaria to bee pined away and put to death As he got the papacy by wicked meanes so was he immensis agitatus fluctibus tossed with exceeding great tempests therein hated by the Emperour not gratefull to the Easterne and execrable to the Westerne Bishops and when hee seemed to have come out of the streame into the haven and almost one foot into the City being pined away immensis doloribus with unmeasurable paines he dyed Thus Baronius Now if we should deale with him as Baronius f Opinari si cui licet facilius est invenire qui Evagrij de ejus condemnatione ad supplicia apud inferos luenda velit sequi sententiam quam aliorum Bar. an 565. nu 2. c. doth with Iustinian and by his precedent acts judge of his reward according to the Text Opera eorum sequuntur eos I feare the censure would seeme very harsh to those who are so ready to examine Iustinian by that rule For what workes I pray you followed Pope Vigilius Ambition usurpation sacriledge murder symony hypocrisie schisme heresie and Antichristianisme concerning which the Apostle sayth They which doe them shall not inherit the kingdome of God I will not I list not be rigorous in this point neither towards him or any other I content my selfe with that lesson of the Apostle g Rom. 14.4 Domino suo stat aut cadit Yet thus much by occasion of this Treatise and the approved judgement of the Church declared therein concerning Theodorus of Mopsvestia long before dead must needs bee said of him of Baronius and of all other who have already or shall at any time hereafter write as they have done in defence of heresie and oppugnation of Gods truth As repentance for such sinnes and impious writings opens unto them so impenitency and
persevering therein eternally shuts against them the gates of Gods mercy and the kingdome of heaven Both which because they are hid from mans eyes the Church leaving the judgement of certainty and verity onely to God passeth her sentence which is the judgement of charity by the outward and apparent acts which are open unto them whomsoever shee seeth not nor findes by certaine and evident proofe to have manifested the detestation and revocation of their hereticall and impious writings which before they published and maintained all those though dead ten an hundred or a thousand years before she by her censure doth and doth most justly condemne accurse and anathematize as by her sentence against Theodorus of Mopsvestia dead an hundred yeares before is most evident whose condemnation and anathema pronounced by the fift Councell is approved by all succeeding generall Councels by all Catholikes and even by the whole Catholike Church Nor will I here dispute whether such a sentence doth not sometimes passe errante clave the party having repented whom they not having proofe of his repentance thought to dye impenitent but howsoever that fall out none may justly complaine of the Churches judgement as unjust or unequall herein for besides that it is presumed that those who so notoriously and publikely by their hereticall writings doe scandalize the Church and people of God if they had seriously repented would have expressed some publike and outward testimony of the same the Church would by this severity of her censure teach all men a lesson which is very hard to learne first that they should not have such an itch and ambitious desire to write or utter those detestable heresies which lurk within their breasts or if they cannot observe that yet at least to learne to be so lowly and humble in heart as to revoke their impieties and blasphemies although to some blemish and disgrace of themselves yet to the great honour of Gods truth and the satisfaction and edification of the holy Church which they had scandalized If in ambition they will first oppugne the truth and then in a worse pride of heart not be reclamed to the truth nor shew their love unto it why should not the Church by her most charitable judgement shew her open detestation of their persons who in the insolency of their hearts will not shew any open detestation of their heresies That Vigilius writ a papall Constitution in defence of heresie it is apparent and undenyable that he at any time revoked that writing I wish it were but it is not yet evident The like may be sayd of Baronius of Pighius of Eccius of the Laterane Florentine and Trent conspirators of all who have whet their tongues against other truth and specially to uphold that fundamentall heresie of the Popes infallibility Their writings for heresie are evident that they ever reclamed those writings it is inevident and if ever they and their cause come to bee tryed in such a free lawfull and oecumenicall Councell as was this fift under Iustinian they may justly feare and certainly expect from the Church unlesse the disclaming of their writings may by certaine proofe be made knowne the very like sentence though a hundred yeares after theirs as passed upon Theodorus of Mopsvestia an hundred yeares after his death And because the houre-glasse for repentance is runne out to the former all that we can doe is which I seriously now doe from my heart to cry amaine unto others to admonish exhort yea even pray and entreat them by the mercies of God and by the love of their owne soules first that they keepe their tongues and pennes from once uttering any heresie or if they have not done that with the same hands to give the medicine wherewith they gave the wound and as openly nay much more openly to disclame than they have ever proclamed their impious and hereticall doctrines 53. You have now some view both of the life and death of Vigilius The exact pourtraiture of the Popes lives Baronius had beene able to set forth if he had listed but he addeth such fucos and so many sophisticall colours that indeed scarce you shall see any one of them in his Annals set out in his native and naturall habit If ought be amisse in this our description and not set forth according to the lively lineaments of Vigilius and his impieties the equall reader will not too rigorously censure the same I acknowledge that I can but dolare in this kinde to polish and set forth the lively image of their Popes I have not learned That is an Art which may not bee too vulgar lest their Romane policies be too farre divulged But by this it is easie to perceive what a silly excuse it is which Baronius useth in this cause blaming Vigilius for coming to Constantinople as if not the Popes owne hereticall minde but the ayre of Constantinople had wrought such effects as to produce that hereticall and yet as they count it Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters FINIS Laus Deo sine fine Errata haec corrigat benevolus Lector In Textu Pag. 48. lin 2. read Theodorus ibid. lin 9. diptisis p. 509. l. 14. eos p. 99. l. 3. John B. p. 125. l. 38. Catholikes p. 141 l. 35. Binius he was p. 145. l. 39. Son of God p. 163. prope finem substances p. 164. l. 5. explanation p. 172. l. 20. of the Pope p. 182. l. 45. their present p. 199. prope finem Catholicae p. 216. l. 17. it p. 224. l. 25. Popes p. 227. l. 5. yeeld p. 289. l. 33. the. p. 350. l. 30. aequiparare p. 425. l. 8. where is ibid. l. 27. Commana ibid. Marcellinus l. 42. inflamed p. 442. in fine Euphemia p. 462. l. 11. quarrels with Pope p. 465. l. 35. all this time p. 478. l. 23. it was written p. 495. l. 37. poysoner of p. 500. l. 35. right hand In Margine Pa. 9. lit c lege Marsorum p. 67. lit e Antioâ—henum p. 233. lit s emissam ibid. lit c corruptè p. 409. lit c commentitias supposititias p. 410. lit q Consilij 5. p. 437. lit l Concil 5. Coll. 5. AN ALPHABETICALL TABLE OF THE CHIEFE THINGS CONTAINED IN THIS TREATISE A. ACts in Councels not so intire but there may be faults from the exscriber pag. 433. Sect. 17 18. Acts of the fift Councell unjustly excepted against by Baronius pa. 379. sect 3 4. Agnoites and other sectaries called Acephali p. 3. sect 6. Agapetus lost nothing by the Emperours presence p. 464. sect 5. Antichrist the Pope first Antichrist nascent secondly crescent thirdly regnant fourthly in their Laterane Councell he was Antichrist triumphant pa. 186. sect 24. Anthimus a Catholike in shew and outward profession p. 157. sect 4. Anastasius narration not helped by Binius p. 458. sect 23. Anastasius a fabler p. 256. sect 23. and pa. 447. sect 12. c. The Author of that Apologicall Epistle published Anno 1601. a vaunting
and Cyrill p. 123. sec 15. and p. 134. se 34. The Nestorians confessed two natures and one person in Christ and how p. 144. how Catholikes confesse it ibid. sec 11 12 13. Nestorius affirmeth the two natures to be two persons pa. 145. sect 16. so Theodorus the Master of Nestorius sect 17. to affirme this is plaine Nestorianisme proved by Iustinian pa. 146. sect 18. by Pope Iohn the second The Nestorians in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall pa. 147. sect 20. and p. 448. sect 22 23. witnessed by Iustinian p. 449. sect 24. by the fift Councell sect 25. by the epistle it selfe sect 26 27. The Nestorians by Nature understand Person p. 162. sect 46 47. The Nestorians slander Cyrill to teach two persons p. 163. sect 47. Narses for his piety and prudence beloved of Iustinian p. 248. sect 12. Narses intreated not for Vigilius pa. 249. sect 14. Narses overcame not Totilas if Binius his glosse be true p. 458. sect 23. Narses overcame not the Gothes by the intercession of Mary p. 459. sect 24. O. THe occasion of the fift Councell was those tria capitula p. 2. sect 3. Origen commended for his gifts and learning p. 103. sect 28. Origen condemned by the Acts of the fift Synod p. 392. sect 1 2. Origens cause not the cause of the first action in the fift Synod p. 393. sect 3. nor the cause of the second action in the Synod sect 4. The order of lawfull generall Councels pa. 304. sect 19. P. PApists are truly such as ground upon the Popes infallibility p. 187. sect 26. Pope Vigilius excommunicated in an African Synod p. 236. sect 16. The Pope refuseth to come to the Synod p. 4. sect 2 3 4. and the true reason why pag. 6. sect 5. The Popes presence not needfull in a generall Councell p. 273. sect 14 15. The Pope present in the fift Councell by his letters of instruction p. 274. sect 16. The Popes consent makes not a Councell to be approved p. 275. sect 27. vid. lit C. In the Pope intensivè there is as much authority as in the Pope with a generall Councell Bellarmines assertion p. 174. sect 10. The Pope vertually both Church and Councell p. 178. sect 15. p. 180. sect 17. The name Papist not heard of till Leo the 10. p. 188. sect 25. to be a Pope an happy thing for all is held for truth that they define pag. 223. sect 16. Papist had need of a strong faith relying on the Popes judgement p. 224. sect 18. Paulus Bishop of Emisa subscribed to the anathematizing of Nestorius to perswade an union betweene Iohn and Cyrill p. 133. sect 31 his Sermon at Alexandria containing an orthodoxall profession of the faith p. 134. sec 33. Pelagius Pope after Vigilius consecrated by two Bishops onely an a Presbyter of Ostia pa. 242. sect 4. A Pope may erre personally they say but doctrinally he cannot p. 244. sect 7. The Pope no competent Iudge of Protestants being an enemy unto them pag. 315. sect 33. Pope Clements epistle to Iames a forgery pa. 422. sect 2. Paul censured by some for an hot-headed person 434. sect 18. in fine R. THe Church of Rome holdeth no doctrine by certainty of faith p. 181. in fine and pa. 282. sect 20. and p. 189. sect 27 28. The Romish doctrines may bee held three wayes p. 183. sect 21. in fine First of them who hold the Scriptures for the foundation p. 183. sect 22. such were our forefathers Second way by grounding upon Scripture but with pertinacy p. 184. sect 23. A third way of holding them is on the Popes word p. 185. sec 24 They of the Romane Church are heretikes p. 192. sect 31. In their Romane Church no true holinesse p. 193. sect 32. They of the Romish Church are schismatikes p. 196. sect 34. Rome miserably besieged by Totilas p. 456. sect 22. Ruba not taken from Alexandria pag. 407. sect 8. S. THe Synod resolves to judge the controversie about the three Chapt. the Pope being absent p. 7. sect 1. Sergius Bishop of Cyrus deposed from his Bishopricke p. 706. sect 18. Scripture being the ground of a mans faith is a comfort unto him though in some things he erre pa. 191. sect 29. and p. 194. sect 33. Supremacy and infallibility are inseparably joyned p. 176. sect 12. Schismatikes are not of the Church pa. 199. sect 39. Profession of Scriptures excuse not from heresie p. 226. sect sect 13. Suidas a fabler 326. sect 4. Sophia built by Constantine the mirrour of ages p. 350. sect 39. Switzers order in judgement p. 394. in fine Shamefull matters not added to the Acts of the fift Synod p. 408. sect 1. 4. Silverius died of famine in the Iland Palmaria p. 472. sect 13. Synods what makes them lawfull p. 282. and what unlawfull p. 306. sect 20. T. THeodorus not condemned in his life time p. 47. sect 2. Theodorus died not in the peace of the Church p. 59. sect 1 2 3 4. and p. 66. Theodorus condemned by Cyrill and Proclus p. 68. sec 2 3. and p. 73. sec 11. c. by the Ephesine Councell p. 69. sec 4. c. by the Armenian Councell p. 72. sec 10. by the Emperours Edict sec 13 14 c. by the Catholike Church p. 76. sec 19. Theodoret writ against Cyrill and the true faith p. 62. sec 4 5. Theodoret very resolute for Nestorianisme p. 93. sec 6. Theodoret his writings condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon p. 96. sec 12 13. and p. 101. sec 23. and by Cyrill p. 98. sec 16 17. Theodoret was not injured though his writings were condemned p. 102. sec 24 26. Theodoret a man of rate worth and learning p. 104. sec 29 30. Taciturnity the decree of taciturnity and what effect it tooke p. 225. sec 2 3 4. a meere fiction p. 228. sec 5 6 c. Trent Bishops were the Popes creatures pa. 319. sec 37. The Trent Councell conspired against Protestants p. 314. sec 32. Theodora unjustly reviled by Baronius pag. 355. sec 1. Theodora favoured Anthimus as being orthodoxall p. 358. sec 5. Theodora not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 359. sec 6. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea no heretike p. 368. sec 9 10. Theodorus of Caesarea no Origenist pa. 374. sec 17. he maimed not the Acts of the 5. Synod p. 697. sec 7. Theodosius law in the Code not corrupted p. 411. sec 4. Theodoret wrote that Epistle mentioned in the fift Synod p. 413. sec 1. hee wrote it after the union p. 416. sec 6 7. and p. 420. sec 12. Theodora writ not to Vigilius to restore Anthimus p. 449. sec 16 17. Theodora sent not Anthimus Scribe to Rome for Vigilius p. 452. sec 18. Theodoret sets forth his owne orthodoxy p. 417. sec 7. Theodoret condemned by the Councell at Ephesus p. 419. sec 10. Theodoret writ an epistle to Iohn of Antioch p. 422. sec 1. Theodoret rejoyceth over Cyrill
whence it doth clearly ensue that as the former who were ready to embrace the truth had it beene manifested unto them erred not of pertinacy but as Austen saith of humane infirmitie so the latter who reject the truth being manifested unto them and withstand the knowne judgement of the whole catholike Church even that judgement which is testified by all those witnesses to be consonant to the Scriptures and Apostolicall doctrine can no way be excused from most wilfull and pertinacious obstinacy seeing they adhere to that opinion which themselves or their particular church hath chosen though they see and know the same to be repugnant to Scripture the consenting judgement of all generall and holy Councels that is of the whole catholike Church So the errour of the former though it was in a point of faith yet was but materially to be called heresie as being a doctrine repugnant to faith yet being not joyned in them with pertinacie which is essentially as Canus p Quod haeresis esse sine pertinacia nequeat non est difficile ostendere cōmuni omnium Theologorum sententia c. Canus lib. 12. Loc. Theol. ca. 9. § Quod. sheweth required in an heretike could neither make nor denominate them to be heretikes The errour of the latter is not onely an errour in a point of faith but is formally to bee called heresie such as being both a doctrine repugnant to faith and being in them joyned with pertinacy doth both make and truly denominate them who so erre to be heretikes and shew them to hold it heretically not onely as an errour but as a most proper heresie 9. The second difference is in the manner of their errour The former held their opinions as probable collections not as undoubted doctrines of faith and so long as those errours were so held the Church suspended q Sancta Ecclesia aliquandiu de ea re supersedit judiciumque suspendit Bar. notis in Martyr in Febr. 22. voce Papiae her judgement both concerning the doctrines and the persons And this was at least untill the time of Ierome touching the millenary opinion for he mentioning the same saith r Hier. in cap. 19. Ieremia thus Haec licet non sequantur tamen damnare non possumus quia multi Ecclesiasticorum virorum martyrum ista dixerunt These things concerning the raigne of Christ for one thousand yeares upon earth in a terrestriall but yet a golden Ierusalem although we doe not our selves follow yet wee cannot condemne them because many of the Ecclesiasticall writers and Martyrs have said the same whereby it is evident that in Ieromes s Hieronimi tempore nihil adhuc ab Ecclesia de eâ re fuit definitum Bar. notis in Martyr loc cit time nothing was defined herein by the Church for then Ierome might and would constantly have condemned that errour by the warrant of the Churches authoritie which then hee held to bee a probable and disputable matter In which regard also Austen calleth it a tolerable t Quae opinio esset utcunque tolerabilis si c. Aug lib. 20. de Civit. Dei. ca 7. opinion and such as himselfe had sometimes held if the delights of the Saints in that time be supposed to be spirituall Baronius tels u Bar. an 118. nu 2. et an 373. nu 14 us how rightly I will not now examine that when Apollinarius renewed this opinion and urged it ut dogma Catholicum no longer as a matter of probabilitie but as a Catholike doctrine of faith It was then condemned by Pope Damasus about the time of Ierome and so being condemned by the Church it was ever after that held for an heresie and the defenders of it for heretikes 10. Did Baronius and the rest of the Romane Church in like sort as those millenary Fathers commend their Popes infallibility no otherwise then as a probable a topicall or disputable matter the like favourable censure would not be denyed unto them but that they also notwithstanding that error in faith might die in the communion of the Church But when Pope Vigilius published his Apostolicall Constitution as a doctrine with such x Statuimus nulli licere quicquam contrarium his conscribere vel proferre Vig. Const in fine necessitie to be received of all that none either by word or writing might contradict the same when the chiefe Pillers of their Church urge the Popes Cathedrall definitions in causes of faith for such as wherein nullo y Bell. lib. 4. de Pōt ca. 3. et Gretz def ca. 2. lib. 1. de Pont. pa. 652. et alij casu errare potest he can by no possibilitie bee deceived or teach amisse when they urge this not onely as Apollinarius did the other ut dogma Catholicum as a doctrine of faith but as the foundation of all the doctrines of faith It was high time for the Catholike Church as soone as they espied this to creepe into the hearts of men to give some soveraigne antidote against such poyson and to prevent that deluge of heresies which they knew if this Cataract were set open would at once rush in and overwhelme the Church of God And therefore the fift generall and holy Councell to preserve for ever the faith of the Church against this heresie did not onely condemne it decreeing the Apostolicall and cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to be hereticall but decreed all the defenders of it to be accursed and separated from God and Gods Church so that whosoever after this sentence and decree of the holy Synod approved by the whole Catholike Church shall defend the Popes Cathedrall judgements as infallible and dye in that opinion they are so farre from dying as Papias and Irene did in the peace of the Church that by the whole catholike Church they are declared and decreed to dye out of the peace and communion of the whole catholike Church 11. A third dissimilitude ariseth from the persons who erre The former for all their errour held z Cyprianus ita dixit quid ei videretur ut in pace unitatis esse volucrit etiam cum eis qui de hac re diversa sentirent Aug. lib. 2. de baptis ca. 1 fast the unity with the Church even with those who contradicted and cōdemned their errours and we doubt not but that was verified of very many of them which Austen a Lib. 1. de baptis ca. 18. affirmeth of Cyprian that they kept this unitie of the Church humiliter fideliter fortiter ad martyrij usque coronam kept it with humility with fidelitie with constancy even to the crowne of martyrdome By reason of which their charity they were not onely fast linked and as I may say glued to the communion of the Church both in their life and death but all their other errours as Austen b Charitate praesenti quaedam veritates venialiter non habentur Aug. ibid. saith became veniall unto them for
ready both himselfe and the Church must be to condemne his former hereticall writings When heresie commeth in his owne deformed habit it doth but little or no hurt at all who will not detest it when he reades it in the writings of Arius Nestorius Eutiches or such like condemned heretikes the odiousnesse of their names breeds a dislike almost of a truth in their mouthes but certainly of an errour But when Satan assumes the forme of an Angell of light when heresie comes palliated yea countenanced with the name of a Catholike a learned an holy a renowned and approved Bishop then and then specially is there danger of infection The reverence the love the honour wee beare to such a person causeth us unawares to swallow the poyson which hee reacheth unto us before we take leasure to examine or once make doubt of his doctrine 28. It was truely said by a Vinc. de Hâ—res ca. 23. Vincentius Lirinensis The errour of the Master is the tryall of the Scholler tanto major tentatio quanto ipse doctior qui erraret and the more learned the teacher is the greater still is the temptation which beside other he shewes by the example of Origen he was in his age a mirrour b Vincent Liâ— loc citato of gravity integrity continency zeale c Zelo dei se truncavit Hier. Epist ad PaÌ„mac Ocean to 2. pa. 194. piety of learning of all sorts both divine and humane of so d Scripturas memoriter tenebat ibid. happy a memory that he had the Bible without booke of such admirable eloquence that not words but hony e Vinc. doc cit seemed to drop from his lips of so indefatigable industry that he was called Adamantius and was said by some f Hier. lib. 2. ado Ruffin to have written six thousand bookes by g Hier. epist ad Pam. Hierome one thousand besides innumerable commentaries of such high esteeme and authority that Christians h Vinc. loc cit honoured him as a Prophet Philosophers as a Master they flocked from the utmost parts of the world to heare his wisedome as if a second Salomon had beene sent from heaven yea most would say malle se cum Origene errare quam cum alijs vera sentire that they had rather erre with Origen then thinke aright with others When such a man lapseth into heresie if his writings may scape without censure if it shall be judged a contumelie an injurie or slander to condemne his bookes for the honour which was given to his person one such man as Origen were able to draw almost the third part of the starres of heaven after him 29. And if any beleeve the Epistles going under his name Theodoret was in divers respects not much inferiour to Origen His birth noble i Nobilibus parentibus nascitur Possen in Theodor. his parents being without hope of Children vowed k Epist Theod. 81. ad Nonium extat apud Bar. an 448. nu 12. him before his conception like another Samuel unto God And accordingly even from his Cradle consecrated him to Gods service Violently l Javitus episcopus sum ordinatus ibid. drawne to the dignity of a Bishop the Citie of Cyrus in Syria where was his episcopall See he nobilitated being before but obscure though worthy m Erat in Syria oppidulum vehemeÌ„ter neglectum Cyrus nomine a Iudaeis extructum ut qualemcunque gratiam benefactori Cyro refarreÌ„t Proc. de aedific Iustin Orat. 2. in fine of eternall memorie as being one monument of the deliverance of Gods people by the hand of Cyrus out of the Babylonish captivitie So upright blamelesse and voide of covetousnesse that having beene five and twenty yeares Bishop of that place in all that time ne n Theod. Epist ad Nonium obolum mihi in tribunali ablatum aliquis conquestus est none could say that hee had exacted or received for causes of judgement so much as one halfe pennie I tooke no mans goods no mans garments nay which is a memorable token of integritie none of mine house saith he hath taken the worth of an egge or a morsell of bread So plentifull in workes of charitie That he distributed o Quae nobis a parentibus obvenerlit post eorum mortem â—atim distribui Theod. Epist ad Leonem extat inter Epistolas Leonis post Ep. 62. his inheritance among the poore repaired Churches p Theod. Epist 81. builded bridges drained Rivers to townes where was want of water and such like in so much saith he that in all this time I have q Epist Theod. ad Leonem ad Nonium provided nothing for my selfe not any land not any house no not so much as any sepulcher nothing praeter laceras has vestes I have left nothing to my selfe but onely this ragged attire wherewith I am apparelled For learning and knowledge both in divine and humane matters he was much honoured compared to Nilus r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epig. apud Poss in Theodor. as watering the whole countrie where hee abode with the streames of his knowledge he converted eight townes Å¿ Theod. Epist ad Nonium quae est 81. infected with the heresie of the Marcionites to the faith two other of the Arians and Eunomians wherein he tooke such paines and that also with some expence of his blood and hazard of his life that in eight hundreth parishes within the Diocesse of Cyrus Ne t Jbid. unum quidem haereticorum zizanium remansit there remained not so much as one hereticall weed 30. So learned so laborious so worthy a Bishop was Theodoret and so desirous am I not to impaire any part of his honour much lesse to injure disgrace or slander him Whom almost would not the writings of a man so noble for birth and parentage so famous for learning so eminent in vertue move and perswade to assent unto him if they might goe currant without taxing without note or censure of the Church and that much more than the bookes of Origen both because Origen was but a Presbyter but Theodoret a Bishop and specially because Origen u Originem fontem Arij Niceni patres percussere damnantes enim eos qui filium negant esse de substantia patris illum OrigineÌ„ Ariumque damnaverunt Hier. Epist ad Pon. mac de error Orig. Omnis tam orientis quam occidentis Catholicorum Synodus illum haereticum denunciat Hier. Apol. 2. adver Ruff. himselfe was by the Church condemned and so the author being disgraced the authority of his writings must needs be very small but the person of Theodoret was approved by the whole Councell of Chalcedon they all proclamed x Con. Chal. Act. 8. him to bee a Catholike and orthodoxall Bishop Here was a farre greater temptation and greater danger when his writings are hereticall whose person so famous and holy a Councell commendeth for Catholike Now or never was the Church to
shew that it honoured no mans person writings or name more thā the truth of Christ And so much the rather was the Church to doe this in Theodoret because about some thirty y Nam Iustini rescriptum de eâ re datum est Rustico Coss ut liquet ex Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 582. Vbi rescriptum extat Eusticus vero Consul cum Vitaliano an 520. Marcel in Chron. et Bar. in eum annum nu 1. yeares before this fift Councell in the time of Iustinus the Emperour the Nestorians as if not onely some writings of his but Theodoret himselfe had beene wholly theirs set up z Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 582. et pa. 578. a. his image in a Chariot and with great pompe and singing of hymnes brought it in triumphant manner into the City of Cyrus where Sergius a Nestorian and Bishop of that place mentioned in a Collect Theodorus of Mopsvestia Nestorius and Theodoret as three of their principall Nestorian Saints was it not now high time to wipe away that blemish from the name of Theodoret and to condemne those writings of his which gave occasion to the Nestorians to make such boasts 31. I appeale now unto any man whether their condemning of Theodorets writings did not much more tend to the honour then as Vigilius fancieth to the slander and disgrace of his person As it is a blemish to a man to retaine a filthy spot in his garment but the taking of it away doth grace and make him more comely even so the name of Theodoret was stained by those writings they emboldened the Nestorians to put him in their cursed Calender but by the condemning of those writings was the staine and blemish wiped away from his person his name and honour was vindicated from the Nestorians and brought as it well deserved to the holy Church of GOD nothing of Theodoret left for heretikes to vaunt of but the onely staines of Theodoret nothing but those hereticall writings condemned and accursed both by Theodoret himselfe and by the whole Church of God 32. No no it is Pope Vigilius and such as applaud his decree for infallible that disgraceth and most ignominiously useth the name person and memory of Theodoret By his decree those heretical writings of Theodoret which by the Churches sentence of condemnation are quite dulled receive full strength and vigour for the Nestorians against Catholikes By him the Nestorians have an eternall charter and irrevocable decree that Theodorets writings against Cyrill and with them the heresie of Nestorius ought not to be taxed nor condemned His Apostolicall Constitution is a triumphant chariot for them to set the Image of Theodoret in their Temples and with Anthemes and Collects to canonize yea adore him in their Masses among their hereticall Saints But for the Church of God I constantly affirme they could not possibly have more honoured Theodoret than by burning up the hay and stubble of his writings the condemning of which the Pope decreeth to bee an injury and slander unto him 33. May wee now in the last place consider a little what might be the intendment of Vigilius in pleading and decreeing this for Theodorets writings I doubt not but the love he bare to Nestorianisme might make him zealous for those writings which are the bulwarks of the Nestorians but non sunt in eo omnia Popes are men of profound thoughts and very long reaches they have deepe and mysticall projects in their decrees Vigilius had and it may be principally an eye to this his owne and all their Cathedrall Constitutions like unto it If the hereticall writings of Theodoret may not be condemned because himselfe was a Catholike à fortiori this decree of Vigilius be it never so hereticall may not bee condemned because the Pope is the head of all Catholikes If it bee an injury and a slandering of Theodoret to taxe him or his name by condemning his writings it must much more be an injury and slander nay that is nothing even a blasphemy and sinne irremissible to taxe the Popes Holinesse by condemning his Apostolicall decree If you presume to condemne nay but taxe them or their names though their decrees shall bee as apparently hereticall as are those writings of Theodoret you are condemned for ever as injurious as contumelious as slandering persons And let this suffice for the errours both personall and doctrinall of Vigilius touching this second Chapter CAP. X. That Vigilius and Baronius erre in divers personall points or matters of fact concerning the third Chapter or the Epistle of Ibas 1. THere remaineth now the third last Chapter which concernes the impious Epistle of Ibas In handling whereof being of them all most intricate and obscure as Vigilius first and then long after him his Champion Baronius have here bestowed greatest paines and used all their subtilty judging this to bee as indeed by reason of the manifold obscurities it is the fittest cloake for their heresie so must I on the other side intreate the more serious and attentive consideration at the readers hands while I indeavour not onely to discover the darke and secret corners of this cause but pull both the Pope and his Parasite out of this being their strongest hold and most hidden hereticall den wherein they hoped of all other most safely and securely to have lurked for the more perspicuous proceeding wherein before I come to the doctrinall errours and maine heresie which in this third Chapter they maintaine I will first manifest two or three of their personall untruths which will both open a passage to the other and will give the reader a taste nay a certaine experiment what truth fidelity and faire-dealing he is to expect at the hands of Vigilius and Baronius in their handling of this Chapter 2. The first and that indeed a capitall untruth is that Vigilius avoucheth the Councell of a Orthodoxa est Ibae à patribus pronunciata dictatio Vig. Const nu 192. Chalcedon to have approved this Epistle of Ibas as orthodoxall They approve that impious and blasphemous Epistle they rejected they condemned anathematized and accursed it to the very pit of hell witnesse the fift generall Councell and the whole Catholike Church which hath approved it for thus cryed out and proclaimed all the Bishops Epistolam b Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. definitio sancti Chalcedonensis Concilij condemnavit ejecit the definition of faith made by the holy Councell at Chalcedon hath condemned this Epistle it hath cast out this Epistle But because I have formerly c Supra ca. 4.5.1.3.13 intreated hereof I will adde no more of this which is proclaimed by the whole Church to be an untruth 3. The second untruth is like this Vigilius having cited the interloquutions of Pascasinus and Maximus wherein they say that Ibas by his Epistle is declared to bee a Catholike d Vig. Const nu 19◠addeth that all the rest in the Councell of Chalcedon did not onely not