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
Conc. Vig. a nu 60. ad nu 173. and in the Synodall h Conc. 5. coll 4. acts he thus saith i Vigil in const nu 173. Wee decree that by those foresaid chapters nulla injuriandi praecedentes patres praebeatur occasio no occasion be given to injure the former Fathers and Doctors of the Church And again k nu 184. We provide by this our Constitution that by these or the like doctrines condemned in Nestorius and Eutyches no contumely nor occasion of injury bee brought to those Bishops who have died in the peace of the Catholike Church and that Vigilius thought Theodorus so to have dyed we have before l Sup. ca. 7. declared yea that Vigilius knew it Baronius assured us Thus Vigilius to free Theodorus from condemnation pretends those hereticall writings to be none of his 31. What is it that Vigilius will not say for defence of this blasphemous and condemned heretike This cavill was used as Baronius m Defensores Theodori ea ipsius scripta esse negarunt Bar. an 435. nu 14. tells us by the old Nestorians and defenders of Theodorus denying those to bee the writings of Theodorus quae diffamata which were famously knowne through the whole East and which being afterwards detected and discovered to bee truly his writings both they and their author with them were condemned Now this old hereticall and rejected cavill Vigilius here reneweth those writings famously knowne to be the workes of Theodorus condemned as his writings and he with them and for theÌ„ Vigilius will now have thought to be none of his nor he by them nor for them may bee now condemned And that you may see how Vigilius herein doth strive against the maine streame of the truth Saint Cyrill n Cyrill Epistolae ad Proclum citata in Conc. 5. coll 5 pa. 550. b. who then lived testifieth Theodorus to be author of those hereticall and blasphemous writinâ—â— That wee have found certaine things in the writings of Theodorus nimiae plena blasphemiae nulli dubium est full of blasphemie none that thinks aright can make any doubt And againe o Ibid. pa. 550 a. I examining the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus have contradicted them as much as I could declaring that sect to be every where full of abomination Yea hee writ divers bookes p Qui Cyrilli libri citantur saepe in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 538. seq against Theodorus expressing the words of Theodorus and his owne confutation of the same So cleare and undoubted was this truth in Cyrills dayes who lived at the same time with Theodorus that hee thought them unwise who made any doubt of that which Vigilius now calls in question And particularly touching that impious Creed Cyrill saith q Prolata apud sanctâ—m Synodum expositione ab en composita sicut dicebant qui protulerunt c. Verba Cyrill in Epist ad Proclum citat in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 550. b. that they who brought it to the Synode of Ephesus said that it was composed by Theodorus which they said not as by way of uncertaine report but as testifying it to be so in so much that the whole Synode giving credit thereunto thereupon condemned Theodorus r His condemnatis qui sic sapiunt nullam viri Theodori memoriam fecerunt Ibid. though by a dispensation they expressed not his name 32 The same is testified by Rambulas Acatius and the whole Armenian Councell who after examination Å¿ Fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega capitula dogmata ejus Libell Episc Armen ad Proclum in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 542. b. of this cause found the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus to be sacrilegious and therefore by name condemned him exhorting both Cyrill and Proclus to doe the like The Imperiall Edicts of Theodosius t De quibus legibus supra hoc cap. Exta â—t vero in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 544. and Valentinian leave no scruple in this matter who would never have so severely forbidden the memory of Theodorus and the reading or having of his bookes had it not by evidences undeniable beene knowne that those were indeed his workes and hereticall writings If all these suffice not when this cause about Theodorus was now againe brought into question the Emperour Iustinian and the fift Councell so narrowly and so exactly examined the truth hereof that after them to make a doubt is to seeke a knot in a rush They testifie those very hereticall assertions whereof Vigilius doubteth to be the doctrines and words u Habemus quae ex Theodori codicibus collegistu Conc. 5. coll 4. pa. 527. b. idem docet Iustin in suo Edict § Si quis defendit Theodorum of Theodorus that impious creed also whereof Vigilius is doubtfull to be composed by Theodorus they are so certaine x Jmpius Theodorus aliud Symbolum exposuit Iust in Edicto §. Tali Et impium ejus Theodori Symbolum coll 4. pa. 537. a. hereof that even in their Synodall sentence y Licet volentibus codices impij Theodori prae manibus accipere vel quae ex impijs codicibus ejus à nobis inserta his gestis sunt Conc. 5. coll 8. pa. 585. a. they referre the triall of what they decree herein to the true and undoubted bookes of Theodorus And in their sentence is included the judgement of the whole catholike Church ever since they decreed this which hath with one consent approved their decree 33 After all these Pope Pelagius in one of his decretall Epistles wherein at large he handleth this cause not onely testifieth that impious Creed z Ab ejus Theodori discâ—pulis dictatum ab eo symbolum in eâ â—em Synodo Ephesina prolatum Pelagius Epist 7. §. In his and those hereticall a Ejusdem Theodori ex libris illius dicta replicemus ibid. writings to bee the workes of Theodorus alleaging many places of them but wheras some obstinately addicted to the defence of the three Chapters moved againe b Haec Theodori dicta utrum ejus sint fortasse dubitatur ibid. §. Haec this same doubt which Vigilius doth and as is likely by occasion of his decree Pelagius of purpose declareth those c Ibidem seq to have beene the true writings of Theodorus and consonant to his doctrine and that hee proveth by the testimonies of the Armenian Bishops of Proclus of Iohn of Antioch of Cyrill of Rambulas of Honoratus a Bishop of Cilicia and so a neighbor of Mopsvestia which is in the same d Secunda Cilicia sub qua Mopsvestia constituta est Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 547. b. Province of Hesychius of Theodosius and Valentinian the Emperours and of Theodoret then whom not any except perhaps Nestorius was more devoted to Theodorus insomuch that he is thought to have taken from Theodorus the name of Theodoret. After which cloud of witnesses produced Pelagius thus concludeth
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
more nulla ratione id fieri passus I would by no meanes yeeld unto that but I sent them a profession of faith and when Iohn 8. of Antioch caeterique and the rest with him had anathematized the doctrine of Nestorius then and not before communionem illis restituimus did we receive them into our communion Thus Cyrill who by requiring this did in effect require they performed the same a condemning of all their witings which were made against him and in defence of that heresie of Nestorius And had Cyrill lived to see any question made whether those writings by whomsoever they had beene written ought to bee or were by himselfe condemned out of all doubt that holy Father would in most plaine and expresse termes have anathematized them all as vertually and implicitè he had before and would most strictly have exacted the like expresse anathematizing of them of all those who would wash their hands of the blasphemies and heresies of Nestorius 18. Now from these three grounds every one of which is demonstrated to be untrue Vigilius collects his Conclusion or definitive sentence in defence of this second Chapter which also is an errour but not as the former personall but doctrinall yea hereticall that those writings of Theodoret or going under Theodorets name against Cyrill and his twelve Chapters ought not to be condemned which is as much as if he had decreed plainly that the heresies of Nestorius ought not to be condemned for in those writings of Theodoret they are all defended and that with such eagernesse art and acutenesse that if all other Nestorian books were abolished those writings alone of Theodoret would suffice as a rich storehouse to furnish the Nestorians with abundance of all kinde of weapons to maintaine their owne and oppugne the Catholike cause nor ever can Nestorianisme bee puld downe or overthrowne so long as those writings of Theodoret keepe their credit and stand uncondemned yet shal not these be condemned doth Vigilius decree 19. Pope Pelagius seeing the poison of the hereticall doctrine which the defending of this second Chapter doth beare with it exclaimes against it in this manner o Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. Quis hac O my deare brethren who seeth not these things to bee full of all impiety And againe who seeth not quanta temeritate plenum sit Theodoreti scripta superbiendo defendere how full of temeritie it is to defend so insolently the writings of Theodoret The fift generall Councell p Collat. 8. pa. 587. not onely accurseth those writings of Theodoret as hereticall but all who defend them yea all who doe not anathematize them A cleare evidence that they not onely judged this second Chapter to concerne the faith but the Constitution of Vigilius even herein to be hereticall because he would not anathematize those writings of Theodoret and much more because he decreed that they should not be anathematized and to their judgement consenteth the whole catholike Church they all condemne the decree of Vigilius even in this point as hereticall 20. I but Vigilius you will say condemneth q Quaecunque scripta vel dogmata scelâ—ratorum Nestorij Eutychetis erroribus manifestantur consonare anathematizamus damnamus Vig. Const nu 182. those very heresies of Nestorius which are defended in those writings he doth so at least he seemes by his words to doe it and had he not withall decreed that Theodorets writings should not bee condemned he could not justly have beene reproved in this point But in doing both he proves not himselfe orthodoxal by that which he saith well but unconstant and contrary to himselfe in overthrowing that which he saith well for if Theodorets writings against Cyrill may not be condemned as Vigilius decreth then may not the doctrines of Nestorius defended therein be condemned as Vigilius would seeme to doe Theodorets writings and Nestorianisme are inseparable companions either both must stand or both fall together It s as impossible and repugnant to condomne the one and deny that the other may be condemned as to condemne Euticheanisme and yet defend the Ephesine latrocinie and decree thereof or condemne Arianisme and not condemne the Arimine Councel It s the honor of truth that it never is nor can be dissonant to any other truth but heresie not onely may but almost ever doth fight not only against truth but against it selfe overthroweth with one hand or positioÌ„ what it builds up by another as in this of Vigilius is now apparent 21. Now although this clearly convinceth the Popes decree to be hereticall seeing it maintaineth two contradictory positions in a cause of faith the one is without all doubt an heresie yet is it worthy the examining whether of these contradictories must passe for the Popes judgment cathedrall resolution in this cause Cardinall Baronius will certainly direct vs in this doubt for he tells us which of it selfe also is evident that the Popes purpose r Pro ipsorum defensione laborat Vigilius Bar. an 553. nu 172. intent in setting forth this Constitution was to defeÌ„d the 3 Chapters adversus Imperatoris decretum sententiam Synodi against the Emperors Edict and the sentence of the fift Synode As the Emperour then and the Synode condemned Å¿ Ibid. nu 2â—2 so was it the Popes maine purpose to defend the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill which was the second Chapter This is must stand for the judgement cathedrall resolution of the Pope in this matter what he speaks repugnant to this is casuall praeter nay contra intentionem it s against his mind purpose it s to be thought onely by in-incogitancy to have slipt from his pen. So his condemning of the Nestorian doctrine is but in shew it s onely verball his defining that Theodorets writings which maintaine Nestorianisme may not be condemned is the true purpose and intent of his mind its cordial real By his verball condemning of Nestorianisme he shuts it out in words or as you may say at the foregate of his pallace By his defining that Theodorets writings may not be condemned he puls in Nestorianisme with all his might sets wide open a postren gate unto it by condemning Nestorianisme in shew of words he seemes to be orthodoxall by defending Nestorianisme indeed and in truth he demonstrates himselfe to be hereticall Or because Vigilius was so very wise a Pope as hereafter out of Baronius you shall heare it seemes he meant to shew one part of his wisedome and policie in this matter and therefore while the heresie of Nestorius comes in his owne naturall habit or in the liverie of Nestorius away with it the Popes holinesse will not admit it hee cannot abide it but when it comes countenanced and graced with the name of Theodoret and in his liverie the Pope embraceth it in both his armes and by his Apostolicall authoritie commandeth all men to give most friendly welcome and entertainement unto
it 22 You have now the judgement and cathedrall resolution of Vigilius touching this second Chapter that the hereticall writings of Theodoret against Cyril and the Catholike faith may not bee condemned Take a view also of those two reasons by which hee labours to strengthen and perswade the same The former is drawne from the Councell at Chalcedon It is saith Vigilius t Vig. Const nu 180. valde contrarium Chalcedonensis Synodi judicie indubitabiliter inimicum very contrarie and without all doubt repugnant to the judgement of the Synod at Chalcedon that any Nestorian doctrines should now be condemned sub ejus sacerdotis nomine under the name of Bishop Theodoret. So Vigilius 23 Could he not content himselfe to be hereticall alone unlesse he disgraced the holy Councell of Chalcedon as guilty of the same heresie as if they also had judged that none of Theodorets writings not those written against the faith ought to bee condemned They to judge this or is it contrary and that indubitabiliter to condemne those writings of Theodoret or any writings under his name Far was it from the thought much more from the grave judgement of so holy a Councell Even themselves as before we declared condemned and anathematized all those writings of Theodorrt and warranted by their judgement all others to anathematize the same Gregorie u Lib. 7. Indic â— Epist 54. witnesseth of the fift Councell that it is sequax in omnibus in all things a follower of the Councell at Chalcedon Seeing then the fift Councell doth so often and so constantly condemne and anathematize those writings of Theodoret its undoubted that the same writings were formerly condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon the fift Synod but treading in their steps and following them in that judgement wherein they had gone before them If to condemne those writings be repugnant to the judgment at Chalcedon then is the fift Councell not a follower but a confuter and contradicter of the judgement at Chalcedon Nor onely the fift Councell but the whole catholike Church ever since the time of Vigilius they all doe reject and condemne the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon seeing they all by approving the fift Synod and decree thereof do anathematize those writings of Theodoret which to doe is as Vigilius teacheth indubitanter contrarium most certainely contrary to the judgement at Chalcedon If the whole catholike Church bee not hereticall which to thinke is impietie by contradicting and condemning the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon then undoubtedly is Vigilius hereticall in teaching and decreeing that to condemne any writings of Theodoret or any under his name is repugnant to the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon 24. The other reason of Vigilius is because it were a disgrace injury and slander against Theodoret to condemne his writings This the Pope x Vigil Const nu 182. expresseth in the very words of his sentence in this manner The truth of these things those are the three personall points before handled being weighed we ordaine and decree nihil in injuriam atque obtrectationem probatissimi viri hoc est Theodoreti sub taxatione nominis ejus à quoquam fieri vel proferri that nothing shall be done or spoken by any to the injury and slaÌ„der of the most approved Bishop Theodoret by taxing of his name and it must needs be taxed if his writings or bookes be condemned 25. See here the compassionate and tender heart of Vigilius Not onely Iustinian and the fift generall Councell but Pelagius Gregory and other succeeding Popes and Councels even the whole Catholike Church ever since the time of Vigilius they all by approving the decree of the fift Synod doe not onely taxe the name of Theodoret but accurse anathematize the writings of Theodoret and that even under his name Now such a loving and tender affection doth the Pope carry towards the hereticall writings of Theodoret that rather than they may be condemned or his name taxed by the condemning of them Iustinian Pelagius Gregory and other his successors the fift the sixt and other generall Councels even the whole Catholike Church they all must be and are de facto here declared and by the Popes cathedrall sentence decreed and defined not onely to bee hereticall as the former reason imported but injurious persons backbiters slanderers they all must be condemned and for ever disgraced rather then Theodorets name must bee taxed or his hereticall writings condemned or disgraced 26. But say indeed Is it an injurie a slander a disgrace to one that his errors should either by himselfe or by the Church be condemned How injurious was that holy Bishop Saint Augustine to himselfe in writing so many retractations and corrections of what he saw amisse And what himselfe did hee would not onely willingly but gladly have permitted the holy Church to have done Nor may we think this mind to have been onely in Austen Modestie and humilitie are the individuall concomitants of true knowledge and learning and the more learned any man is the more judicious is he in espying the more ingenuous in acknowledging the more lowly and humble in condemning his owne errors As it is but winde and no solid substance which puffes up a bladder so is it never any sound or solid learning but meere ventositie emptinesse of knowledge which makes the minde to swell to beare it selfe aloft and either not see that truth into which his high and windie conceit will not suffer him to looke downe and dive or seeing it not embrace the same though it were with a condemning yea with a detestation of his owne error It must never be a shame or disgrace to any man to recall and condemne his errors till he be ashamed of being a man that is subject to errors Saint Augustine y Illi quos vulgo moriones vocant quanto magis absurdi insulsi sunt tanto magis nullum verbum emittunt quod revecare velint quia dicti mali paenitere utique cordatorum est Aug. Epist 7. more sharply saith That its a token not onely of a foolish and proud selfe-love but of a most malignant z Nimis perversâ— se ipsum a maâ— qui aliâ—â— nuli errare ut error suus lateat ibid. minde rather to wish others to bee poysoned with his heresies then either himselfe to recall or permit others specially the Church of God to condemne his heresies It was no injurie no slander nor disgrace to Theodoret that his hereticall writings were by the Church condemned but it had beene a fault unexcusable and an eternall disgrace to the Church if shee had suffered such hereticall writings to passe uncondemned 27. Oh but Theodoret was probatissimus vir a man most approved by the Councell of Chalcedon saith Vigilius is it not an injury to condemne the writings of a man most approved No verely the more approved the more eminent learned and orthodoxall any man is the more carefull and
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
Could Nestorius judge otherwise or wish any other judgement 51. It may be the sense of Ibas was better before the union and Explanation what was it then Truly it was the very selfe same So long saith Ibas l Verba Ibae in Actis apud Photium in Conc. Chal. Act. 10. pa. 112. b. as the Easterne Councell anathematized Cyrill which was still till the union sequutus sum Primatem meum I followed my Primate that was Iohn of Antioch what his sense was and the Synods with him that was my sense Now the sense of Iohn and his Conventicle set downe in more than twenty Synodall Epistles m Vid. decretum Conciliabuli tom 3. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 2. et reliqui◠cap. of theirs was that Cyrils twelve Chapters were hereticall contrary to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine that there are two Natures making two Persons in Christ that to teach one Nature that is one Person in Christ was hereticall that Cyrill and all that tooke part with him or consented to his Chapters were heretikes yea condemned and anathematized heretikes that the holy Ephesine Councell was a Conspiracie of heretikes of seditious and factious persons This was the sense of Iohn this the sense of Ibas before the union and this sense the Popes Holinesse hath decreed to be a Catholike and orthodoxall sense The sense of Ibas saith hee both before the Explanation or union and after it was orthodoxall so by the Pope Vigilius his decree it is good Catholike doctrine to teach two Persons in Christ to teach Cyrill Caelestine the whole Ephesine Councell to be heretikes that is in a word to teach Nestorianisme and nothing but Nestorianisme to be the Catholike faith 52. But that which I principally aimed at out of those words of Vigilius was to observe that Cyrils Explanation here mentioned and meant by Vigilius neither is nor can be ought else but an absolute condemning and anathematizing of his twelve Chapters for by that explanation which Vigilius intendeth Cyrill shewed that his sense was the very same with that which Ibas had before and after the union but that sense which Ibas had before and divers yeares after the union was that the two Natures in Christ make two distinct Persons and that Cyrils twelve Chapters in which it is constantly taught that there is but one Person or as the Nestorians spake but one nature in Christ are hereticall and to be anathematized as being contrary to the Catholike faith wherefore that Explanation of Cyrils Chapters which Vigilius intendeth is certainly a declaring and acknowledgment that there is not one but two distinct Persons in Christ and that his own twelve Chapters for teaching but one Person are all of them hereticall and to be anathematized 53. The third reason is taken from Vigilius his scope and purpose in this whole passage Suppose Vigilius to have meant the orthodoxall Explanation n Quae extat in Actis Conc. Ephes to 5. ca. 1. set out by Cyrill seeing that is wholly repugnant to the Epistle of Ibas which is full fraught with Nestorianisme o Non diceret Iuvenalis Jbam esse orthodoxum nisi ex verbis Epistolae ejus confessionem fidei orthodoxam comprobaret Vig. Const nu 193. Vigilius by approving that Explanation had condemned this Epistle of Ibas and every part thereof Seeing then by that Explanation which Vigilius intendeth his purpose is to confirme and strengthen this Epistle of Ibas and prove it to bee orthodoxall which is onely done by approving the slanderous Explanation of Cyrill to be orthodoxall the very scope and maine purpose of Vigilius doth declare that it is not nor can be the orthodoxall but the slanderous and hereticall Explanation only of Cyrils Chapters which the Pope here meant and by which being commended for Catholike hee indevoureth to prove the Epistle which shewes Ibas to have consented most gladly and reverently as the Pope saith to it to bee indeed Catholike 54. The fourth and last reason is taken from the fit coherence and congruity which this exposition of Vigilius meaning hath with his whole text concerning this matter Take him to speake of the true and orthodoxall explanation of Cyrill his words are riddles more obscure than Plato's numbers yea they are unreconciliable to the truth of the story Ibas saith the Pope p Jn Const nu 193 upon Cyrils Explanation hastened and ran to communicate with Cyrill Expound this of Cyrils orthodoxall Explanation it is utterly untrue Ibas detested q Misimus vestrae sanctitati recens sāctam expositionem ab Alexandrino haereticorum Capitulorum evidentius etiam per illam ostendēte suâm impictatē ait Conciliabulum Ephes in quo Ibas in Epist missa Iohanni et alijs in Appen ad to 3. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 7. pa. 790. a. Nos ad mortem instare parati sumus et neque Cyrillum neque capitula ab e◠exposita suscipere Jbid. ca. 10. pa. 791. b. that more than the Chapters themselves hee neither ranne to embrace that nor Cyrill for that hee fled from it as a serpent and the like may be said of the rest But take Vigilius to speake as indeed he doth of this slanderous and hereticall Explanation and then all the words of Vigilius are not onely coherent among themselves but perspicuous and easie Ibas by an errour r Jlla quae in Ibae Epistola in injurijs beati Cyrilli per errorum intell gentiae dicta sunt Vig. Const nu 192. et quod de Cyrillo Capitula ejus aliter intelligendo detraxcrat Nu. 193. mis-understood the words of Cyrill as thinkking him to teach one Nature that is one Person in Christ and then hee spake injuriously against him and called him an heretike sed intellectu ſ Ibid. nu 192. Postea professus quia his ab eo explanatis ec à se intellectis in communionem ejus devote concurrerit et de his quae prius aliter intellexerat sit cōversus Ibid. nu 193. Capitulorum meliore recepto but when Ibas better understood the Chapters of Cyrill when hee knew that Cyrill professed two Natures that is two persons in Christ and that Cyrill expounded his Chapters in such sort that the humanitie and deitie were each a distinct person then Ibas amended all that he had said amisse of Cyrill and called him no more an heretike but embraced t Post explanationē beati Cyrilli factam et intellectum Cyrilli sibi Ibae declaratum Jbas Cyrillum ut orthodoxum habuit et in cōmunione ipsius permansit Ib. nu 194. him as a Catholike Again Ibas u Ibid. nu 193. blamed Cyrill while he understood not his Chapters aright while he thought that but one person had beene taught therein but afterwards his ab eo explanatis intellectis when Cyrill had explaned himselfe and Ibas understood his meaning that hee meant either nature to a several person and so that there were two natures in Ibas sense that is
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
Bishop of Tunen testifieth Synodaliter eum à catholica communione recludunt they in a Synod and synodally excommunicated him or shut him from the Catholike communion A thing worthy observing being done by those whom the Cardinall professeth l An. 547. nu 30. 39. to have beene Catholikes at that time But let that passe Baronius to excuse m Ad haec omnia excusanda illud satis superque est Bar. ibi nu 49. Vigilius from those imputations of colluder and prevaricator and to shew that hoe was not in heart affected with the truth which in his Constitution he declared tells us a rare policy of the Pope which for this time we omit but hereafter will examine the truth and validity thereof and this it was Mox n An. eodem nu 41. presently after Vigilius had made that Apostolicall decree for condemning the three Chapters he revoked the same touched be like with remorse for so hainous a crime as to professe the Catholike faith and he suspended it and his owne judgement in that cause till the time of a generall Councell decreeing o Rursus a Vigilio promulgatum decretum est quo decernebatur ut de controversia de tribus Capitulis penitus taceretur ibid. that untill that time all men should be whisht and silent in this cause of faith they must neither say that the Three Chapters were to bee defended nor condemned they must neither speake one word for the truth nor against the truth they must all during that time be like himselfe lukewarme Laodiceans neither hot nor cold neither fish nor flesh This was the great wisedome and policy of the Pope as Baronius at large declares and makes no small boast thereof adding p Ab hoc anno 547 ad tempus Concilij indictum fuit autem an 553 fuit inea causa silentium ibid. nu 43. that the Pope remained in this mood till the time of the general Councel Thus you see the second judgmeÌ„t of Pope Vigilius in this cause and his cariage during the second period for a fit which perhaps lasted a weeke or a month hee was in outward profession orthodoxall but being weary of such an ague hee presently becomes a meere neutralist in the faith and in this sort hee continued till the assembling of the generall Councell that is for the space of six yeares and more 8. The third period begins at the time of the fift generall Councell Of what judgement the Pope then was it hath before q Sup. ca. 3. nu 4. seq beene sufficiently declared Then Vigilius turned to his old byas hee condemned the Emperours Edict and all that with it condemned the three Chapters he defends those three hereticall chapters and that after a most authenticall manner publishing a Synodall a Cathedrall and Apostolicall constitution in defence of the same And whereas not only others but himselfe also had written and some sixe yeares before made a Constitution to condemne those Chapters Now after long and diligent ponderation of the cause when hee had examined all matters cum omni undique cautela with all warinesse and circumspection that could possible be used he quite casheires repeales and for ever adnuls r Si quid de â—isdem capitulis contra haec quae hic asseruimus nel statuimus factum dictum atque conscriptum est vel fuerit hoc modis omnibus ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae refutamus Const Vigil in fine that former Constitution and whatsoever either himselfe or any other either had before written or should after that time write contrary to this present Decree And this no doubt was the reason why Baronius never so much as once endeavors to excuse Vigilius by that former decree or to prove him to have beene orthodoxall by it seeing by this later the whole force and vertue of that former is utterly made void frustrate and of no effect in the world In this judgement Vigilius was so resolute that hee was ready to endure any disgrace and punishment rather then consent to the condemning of the three Chapters and if wee may beleeve Baronius or Binius he did for this very cause endure banishment It is manifest saith Binius Å¿ Not. in Conc. 5. §. Praestitit that after the end of the fift Councell Iustinian did cast into banishment both Vigilius and other orthodoxall Bishops so hee termeth convicted and condemned heretikes because they would not consent to the decrees of the Synod and condemning of the three Chapters In like sort Baronius t An. 553. nu 222. Liquet ex Anastasio it is manifest by Anastasius that Vigilius and those who held with him were caried into banishment Againe u Ibid. nu 251. Others thought they had a just quarrell in defending the three Chapters when they saw Vigilius even in banishment to maintaine the same and they thought se pro sacrosanctis pugnare legibus that they fought for the holy faith when they saw Pope Vigilius himselfe for the same cause constanti animo exilium ferre to endure banishment with a constant minde Againe x An. 554. nu 6. Horum solum causae for this cause onely was Vigilius driven into banishment because he would not condemne the Three Chapters So Baronius who often calleth this exiling of Vigilius and others who defended those Chapters persecution y Illi tantum immunes à persecutione erant c. an 553. nu 222. yea an heavy z Quod monstrosus accessit ab Imperatore persecutio excitata est baud quidem levis ibid. nu 221. and monstrous persecution complaining that the Church under Iustinian and from him endured more hard conditions and was in worse case then under the Heathen Emperors 9. Now this demonstrates that which before I touched that though the Pope upon his comming to Constantinople made a decree for condemning the Three Chapters yet still hee was in heart an affectionate lover of Nestorianisme and a defender of those Chapters seeing for his love to them and defence of them he is ready not onely to bee bound but to goe and dye in banishment for his zeale unto them For had he sincerely embraced the truth as in his former Constitution he professed why doth he now at the time of the fift Councell disclame the same Of all times this was the fittest to stand constanly to the faith seeing now both the glory of God the good and peace of the Church the authority of the Emperor the exaÌ„ple of orthodoxall Bishops and the whole Councell invited urged and provoked him to this holy duty What was there or could there be to move him at this time to defend the 3. Chapters save only his ardent and inward love to Nestorianisme Indeed had he continued in defence of those Chapters untill this time and now relented or changed his judgement it would have bin vehemeÌ„tly suspected that not the hatred of those chapters or of Nestorianisme but either the
Nations and kingdomes 4. Now behold a miracle e Ita plane magno veluti miraculo factum est c. Ibid. nu 11. indeed by fleeing away Vigilius overcommeth by being persecuted hee is victorious all humane power even hell gates doth and must yeed to him For the Emperor understanding that he was fled away repented f Iustinianus facti poenitens dignam tanto Pontifice legationem â—rnavit c. Ib. him of that which hee had done against the Pope and therefore sent messengers to recall him from Chalcedon and those not ordinary souldiers sed dignam tanto Pontifice legationem but honourable embassadours worthy the estate of so great a Bishop who should assure him even upon their oathes g Iuramento praestito honorificè revocaret Ibid. that he should be honorably received But so stout nay magnanimous was the Pope and so very circumspect and wise h Nuncijs licet magna pollicentibus haud putaevit esse credendum utpote quod in proverbio est Graecorum fides Bar. 552. nu 12. as remembring the proverbe Graecorum fides that he would neither come out of the Church nor beleeve i Neque juratis patricijs voluit fidem adhibere nisi Imperator quae contra Rom. Pontificis voluntatem de tribus Capitulis appendisset Edicta protinus revocaret atque penitus aboleret Ibid. nu 12. the messengers though swearing unto him unles the Emperour would presently recall and abolish his Edicts against the Three Chapters The Emperour yeelded k Constat cessisse tandem Vigilio Jmperatorem atque appensa amoveri jussisse a se prolata de tribus Capitulis Edicta c. Ibid. an 552. nu 15. et Jmperator appensa antea de tribus Capitulis tolli jussit Edicta Ibid. nu 19. to all that the Pope prescribed yea constat cessisse it is certaine and evident that he submitted himselfe to the Popes pleasure and that penitus in every point hee commands the Edicts which hee had published to be taken away to bee removed ex sontentia l Ibid. an 552. nu 19. Vigilii quod fecerat abrogavit and according to Vigilius direction he abrogated what before he had done Nor onely did the Emperour repent but Theodorus l Theodorus facti poenitens ad eum accedens humilis libellum supplicem ipsi Vigilio offert Ibid. an 552. nu 19. Praestitit id ipsum etiam Mennas Ibid. nu 20. also and Mennas they came and offered libellum supplicem Vigilio a booke of supplication to intreat Vigilius that he would be appeased towards them and crying Peccavi suppliciter m Ibid. nu 29. veniam petunt they beseech him in a suppliant manner to forgive their n Quis ista considerans non miretur atque obstupescat c. Ibid. nu 20. offence Oh how admirable is this in our eyes the Rocke which the builders refused is now laid againe in the head of the Corner and those Princes and Prelates which opposed themselves to the Pope doe now submit supplicate and yeeld themselves unto him The Pope o Tali praemissa satisfactione Vigilius eosdem in communionem accepit redditaque est Ecclesiae pax Ibid. nu 20. after this so ample satisfaction was pleased to be reconciled to them all and admitted them into his communion so the storme of persecution being past the Church injoyed tranquillity the Pope was brought againe with great joy from Chalcedon to Constantinople For the joy p Hoc ipso anno 552 Mennas Const Episcopus à Vigilio in communionem admissus Encaeâ—ia celebravit c. Bar. ibid. an 552. nu 22. and solemnity whereof Mennas that same yeare which was the 26 q Anno hoc 552. exordio mensis Aprilis incipit numerari Justiniani annus 26. of Iustinian and next before the generall Councell celebrated a feast of the Encaenia or dedication of the Church of three Apostles Andrew Luke and Timothy and the holy reliques r Cum sacrae reliquiae curru aâ—reo circumvectae ab â—edem Menna reconditae sunt Bar. Ibid. nu 22. of their bodies being then found Mennas carried them round about the City in a Chariot of Gold and then laid them up in the Church After all which Mennas in the peace of the Church and communion with Vigilius in an happy manner gave up the ghost and Å¿ Bar. an 552. nu 23. so the Pope t Sic itaque animis junctis restitutoque in pristinaÌ„ dignitatem atque honorem Vigilio indicta est Synodus c. Bar. an 553. nu 14. being restored to his former dignitie animis junctis their mindes being joyned together the generall Councell long wished for by Vigilius was summoned against the moneth of May in the twenty seventh yeare of Iustinian This is the summe of the narration of Baronius touching the Decree of Taciturnity and the manifold consequents thereof 5. Concerning which none I thinke can judge otherwise but that Baronius as he is miserably infatuated in this whole cause of the Three Chapters so in this passage hee was growne to that extremity of dotage that hee seemes utterly to have beene bereft both of common sense and reason For I doe constantly avouch that in no part of all this his narration which as you see is very large and copious and runneth like a great streame through divers yeares in Baronius Annals there is any truth at al. No such Decree of Taciturnity ever made by Vigilius no Synod wherein it was decreed no assent either of Mennas or Theodorus or the Emperour unto it no violating of that Decree by Mennas or Theodorus no excommunication of them or other Bishops for doing contrary to it no hanging up of the Emperours Edict after it no resistance made by Vigilius against the Emperour no persecuting of Vigilius no buffeting of him no objecting of murder unto him no fleeing either to Saint Peters Church or to Chalcedon no thundring out from thence of his Pontificall Censures no embassage sent from the Emperour to call him thence no such magnanimitie in Vigilius as to refuse to returne no recalling or abrogating of the Emperiall Edict by the Emperour no submission of Mennas or Theodorus to the Pope no solemnizing of the Encaenia for those three Apostles at that time by Mennas no carying of those holy reliques in a triumphing manner and in a golden Chariot no laying them up by Mennas and in a word in that whole passage of Baronius there is not so much as one dramme nor one syllable of truth The Cardinall from an Historian is here quite metamorphozed into a Poet into a Fabler and in stead of writing Annals matters of fact and reall truths he guls his readers with fictitious anile and more than Aesopicall fables 6. For the clearing whereof I will begin with the Decree it selfe which is the ground of the whole fiction and therefore if it bee demonstrated to bee but an idle dreame and fancie all the
into banishment or returning out of banishment or of his defending the three Chapters or of his condemning the same Chapters or of the Emperours either casting him into or releasing him from exile or of the fift Councell or of the end thereof and yet out of these words will Baronius like a very skilfull Chymick extract both that Vigilius after the end of the fift Councell was banished for defending the Three Chapters and after that banishment consented to the Synod and to condemne the three Chapters And see I pray you how the Chymick distills this If Liberatus saith he e Bar. an 554. nu 5. being one of those who fought for the Three Chapters had found Vigilius perstantem in sententia usque ad mortem persisting untill his death in that sentence which in his Constitution he had published for defence of the Three Chapters truly he would have praised Vigilius for a Martyr had he dyed in such sort But when he saith Vigilius was afflicted and not crowned planè alludit ad ejus exilium he doth plainly allude to the banishment of Vigilius and to his forsaking or revolt from that judgement after he came from banishment Thus doth the Cardinall glosse upon the words of Liberatus 32. See the force of truth The Cardinalls owne words doe most sully answer his owne doubt and explane that truth which hee wittingly oppugneth Had Liberatus found Vigilius perstantem in sententia usque ad mortem constant or persisting without any change or relenting in his defending the three Chapters untill his dying day then indeed Vigilius should have beene with Liberatus an obstinate defender of that sentence a glorious Martyr at the least a worthy Confessor and for that cause he should have beene condemned by Liberatus But seeing he found him a changeling in his sentence wavering and unconstant therein turning his note as soone almost as he had looked the Emperour in the face Vigilius by reason of that change unconstancie and revolt from his opinion lost his Crowne and all his commendation with Liberatus not for any returning to condemne the Three Chapters after his exile whereof in Liberatus there is no sound nor syllable By publishing his Apostolicall Constitution in the time of the Councell for defence of those Chapters and by his dying in that opinion Liberatus found Vigilius stantem morientem but not perstantem in ea sententia usque ad mortem he found him standing and dying but hee could not possibly find him persisting constantly not persevering in that sentence which first he had embraced for whereas he saw and knew the Synodall Acts to testifie that for five or six yeares together hee not onely was of a contrary judgement but did judicially and definitively decree the contrary and censure also such as continued and persevered in the defence of those Chapters this so long discontinuance and so earnest oppugning of the defenders of those Chapters quite interrupted his persisting and persevering in his first sentence for this cause he lost his Crowne and dyed non coronatus in the Kalender and account of Liberatus 33. I adde further that the words of Liberatus being well pondered doe shew the quite contrary to that which the Cardinall thence collecteth Liberatus as all the defenders of those Chapters held their opposites who condemned the same Chapters for no other then heretikes then oppugners of the Catholike faith and holy Councell of Chalcedon And for Vigilius while hee fought f Comptures Orthodoxi ipse Vigilius contra eadem Capitula asserta ab Imperatore insurrexere Bar. an 546. nu 38. on their side and against the Emperour they honoured g Vigilius arguit ut prophanas vocum novitates Facundi dictum apud Bar. an 546. nu 57. 58. him as a Catholike as a chiefe defender of the Catholike faith As soone as Vigilius had consented to the Emperor and upon his comming to Constantinople had condemned the Three Chapters then they held him for no other then a betraier h Ne Traditor videretur Facundi dictum de Vigilio apud Bar. an 547. nu 37. Collusorem Praevaricatorem conclamarunt Bar. an eod nu 49. vulgarunt vbique eum impugnare Concilium Chalcedonense Bar. an 550. nu 1. of the faith then an heretike then a backslider revolter and lapser from the faith and for such they adjudged and accursed him by name in their Africane i Vict. in Chron. an 9. post Cons Basil Synod at which it is most like that Liberatus being a man of such note for dealing in that cause was present upon his returning at the time of the fift Councell to defend againe with them the Three Chapters they esteemed him as one of those poenitentes which after their lapsing returne againe to the profession of the faith Had Vigilius after this revolted and turned againe to condemne the same Chapters and in that opinion dyed as out of Liberatus the Cardinall would perswade Liberatus and the rest of that sect would have held him for a double heretike for a lapser and relapser from the faith for one dying in heresie and dying a condemned heretike by the judgement of their Africane Synod Now let any man judge whether Liberatus would have said of such an one as hee esteemed an heretike a condemned heretike and to dye in heresie that hee dyed non coronatus would he have minced and extenuated the crime of heresie of one dying in heresie would he not much rather have said he dyed Damnatus condemned and accursed by the judgement of their owne Synod and therefore utterly separated from God Who ever read or heard that one dying in heresie was called by so friendly a title as Non coronatus 43. This will most clearly appeare if we consider that the Church and Ecclesiasticall Writers doe mention as two sorts so also two rewards of Catholike and Orthodoxall professors The one is of those who are couragious and constant in defending the faith such as joyfully endure torments imprisonment exile and if need be even death it selfe rather then they will renounce and forsake the faith and these are called coronati The other is of those who being timerous and faint-hearted yeeld to deny the truth rather then they will endure torments or death for confessing the same and yet by reason of that immortall seed which is in their hearts they returne againe and openly professe that truth from which they had before lapsed and these are called Non coronati saved by repentance and returning to the truth but by reason of their former faintnesse and lapsing Not crowned Both of these are Orthodoxall and Catholikes both of them placed in the blessed house of God but not both in like blessed mansions and chambers of the house of God For in my Fathers k John 14 2. house are many mansions Both of them starres and glorious starres in heaven but even among those heavenly starres one starre l 1 Cor. 15.41 differeth from another in
Omne septim◠ordinatum in eádem numeratione quâ res praecesserunt c. Act. 6. pa. 357. a. the seventh must follow the sixt in the same ranke and order and the sixt the fift if there was no fift generall and holy Councell neither can there bee any sixt nor seventh nor eighth nor any other after it So by the assertion of these men there are at once dashed out fourteene of those which themselves h Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. doe honour by the name of holy generall Councels 4. I say more the expunging of all those fourteene Councels doth certainly follow upon the Cardinals assertion though it were granted that Vigilius had confirmed this fift as it is true that Pelagius and Gregory did For if it was as he teacheth neither a generall nor lawfull Synod while the Councell continued and for that whole time while it was an assembly of Bishops then undoubtedly it never at any time was nor yet is either a generall or a lawfull Synod For after the end and dissolution thereof it was never extant in rerum natura againe it was ever after that time Non ens and being neither Synod nor yet so much as Ens it could not possibly be either generall or lawfull It is a Maxime Non entis non sunt Accidentia If while it was extant and while it was an assembly it was but a conventicle if then it was not gathered in Gods name I pray you when was it ever after that gathered in Gods name Did Vigilius Pelagius or Gregory when they made it by their approbation a generall and lawfull Councell did they like some new Aeolus blow all the Bishops againe to Constantinople and assemble them the second time in the Popes name that so they might be said to be gathered in Gods name Let their Popes trie if by all their magicall skill or omnipotent power they can make any one of those Africane Councels under Cyprian a Generall or make the Arimine Syrmian or second Ephesine a lawfull Councell and I will instantly yeeld that hee may doe the like to this fift If hee cannot doe any of the former what vanitie was it in the Cardinall and Binius to say of this fift that while it was extant and Ens it was neither a general nor lawful Councel but some one or some twenty yeares after when it was non Ens the Pope made it with a word both a generall and lawfull Councell Dixit factum est One word of his mouth makes or unmakes what he list Truth is the Popes or any other Bishops approbation or confirmation of a Councell or any decree thereof after the Councell is once ended may perhaps in the opinion of some men gaine some more liking unto that Councell or decree than before it had seeing now it hath the expresse consent of those Bishops whom the other doe much esteeme but the after consent or approbation of all the Bishops in the world much lesse of the Pope cannot make that to bee a generall which before and while it was extant was onely Provinciall or that to be a lawfull which before and while it was extant was an unlawfull Synod Even as the Pope and a thousand Bishops with him cannot now make any of the foure first generall and holy Councels to be either unlawfull or particular Synods and yet his power is every whit as great in annihilating that which now is as in creating that which never was a generall or a lawfull Councell 5. Say you that the fift Councell was of no authority till the Pope approved it and unlesse he should approve it See how contrary the Cardinals assertion is to the consenting judgement of the whole Church Begin we with the Church of that age Baronius tels i An. 547. nu 41. 43. us that both the Emperour the Pope Mennas and other Easterne Bishops agreed to referre the deciding of this doubt about the Three Chapters to a generall Councell Why did none of them reason as the Cardinall now doth against the Councell Why did the Pope delude them with that pretence of a generall Councel Why did hee not deale plainly with the Emperour and the rest who made that agreement and say to this effect unto them Why will yee referre this cause to the judgment of a Councell it cannot decide this question otherwise than my selfe shall please If they say as I say it shall be a Councell a lawfull a generall an holy Councell If they say the contrary to that which I affirme though they have ten thousand millions of voyces their Decree shall be utterly void their assembly unlawfull they shall neither bee nor bee called a generall nor a lawfull Councell no nor a Councell neither but onely a Conventicle without all authoritie in the world Had the Emperour and the Church beleeved this doctrine there had beene no fift Councell ever called or assembled nay there never had beene any other holy generall Councell The Pope had beene in stead of all and above them all This very act then of referring the judgement in this cause to a generall Councell witnesseth them all even the Pope himselfe at that time to have esteemed the sentence of the Synod to be of authority without the Popes consent and to be of more authority in case they should differ as in this question they did than the sentence of the Pope This before the Councell was assembled 6. At the time of the Councell had the Church or holy Synod which represented the whole Church beleeved their assembly without the Pope to be no Synod but a Conventicle why did they at all come together after their second Session for they were then assured by the Pope himselfe that he would neither come nor send any deputies unto them Or had they beleeved that his definitive sentence would or ought to have overswayed others so that without his assent their judgement should be of no validity why did they after the fift Session once proceed to examine or determine that cause For before the sixt day of their assembling they received from Pope Vigilius his Cathedrall and Apostolicall Constitution in that cause inhibiting them either to write or speak much more judicially to define ought contrarie to his sentence or if they did that he by his authority had beforehand refuted and condemned the same Seeing notwithstanding all this well knowne unto them they not onely continued their Synodall assemblies but judicially defined that cause and that quite contrary to the Popes judgement made knowne unto them it is an evident demonstration that the whole general Councell judged their assemblies both lawfull and Synodall and their sentence of full authority even as ample as of any generall Councell though the Pope denied his presence to the one and expressely signified not onely his dislike but contradiction and condemnation of the other 7. What can pervicacie it selfe oppose to so cleare an evidence or what thinke you will
honour of that most religious Emperour The first concernes His knowledge and learning Iustinian not able to reade not know so much as his Alphabet Is there any in the world thinke you so very stupid as to beleeve the Cardinall in this so shamelesse so incredible an untruth Tanti ingenii tantaeque doctrinae fuisse constat saith Platina x In vita Bonifac 2. it is manifest that Iustinian was of so great a wit and so great learning that it is not to bee marveiled if hee reduced the lawes being confused before into order Tritemius y Lib. de script Eccles saith of him He was a man of an excellent wit and hee is deservedly z Lecum inter Ecclesiasticos scriptores merito acquisivit Jbid. reckoned among Ecclesiasticall Writers and hee expresly mentioneth three bookes which hee writ against Eutyches one against the Africane Bishops adding that none may doubt but that besides these hee writ many and very excellent Epist Possevine a Appar Sac. in verbo Iustinianus the Iesuite acknowledgeth him with Tritemius for an Ecclesiasticall Writer besides the reciting of those same books which Tritemius mentioned hee alleageth these words of their Pontificall most worthy to be observed for this purpose Iustinian the Emperour a religious man sent unto the Apostolike See his profession of faith Scriptam chirographo proprio written with his own hand testifying his great love to the Christiā Religion In regard of which his excellēt writings both Pope Agatho * Conc. 6. Act. 4. in Epist Agath and the whole sixt generall Councell with him who lived in the next age to Iustinian reckoneth him in the same ranke not onely of Ecclesiasticall Writers but of venerable Fathers with Saint Cyrill Saint Chrysostome and others whose writings doe give testimony to the truth Liberatus who lived in the dayes of Iustinian and who was no well-willer of the Emperour yet could not but record That he b In Brevia ca. 24. writ a Booke against the Acephali or Eutichean heretikes in defence of the Councell of Chalcedon and that Theodorus seeing him so toyled in writing against heretikes told him Scribendi laborem non eum debere pati That he should not trouble himselfe with writing books but maintaine the faith by publishing Edicts Procopius c Lib. 3. de bell Goth. who was familiarly conversant with Iustinian recites that traiterous perswasion of Arsaces to Artabanus when he excited him to murther the Emperour This said hee you may doe easily and without danger for the Emperour is not mistrustfull and he passeth the time till very late of the night in talking without any watch or guard having none but some old and feeble Bishops about him Christianorum scriptis miro studio revolvendis intentus being marvellously addicted to reade and peruse the writings of Christians Are these thinke you the actions of an illiterate of an Abcedary Emperour And what speake I of these The Pandects the Code the Authentikes the Institutions the whole body of the law proclame the incredible wisedome and rare knowledge of Iustinian All people saith he d Instit Proem are governed by the lawes Tam à nobis promulgatìs quam compositis as well published as composed by us and though he used the learning helpe and industry of other worthy men whose names he hath commended to all posterity and never-dying fame yet when they offred the bookes unto him Et legimus recognovimus saith he * Ibid. wee both read them and examined them which the glosse explaineth saying Nos ipsi legimus We our selves have reade and perused them So that I cannot sufficiently admire this most shamelesse untruth of Baronius in reviling him for an illiterate and not so much as an Abcedarie scholler whose wit learning and prudence hath beene and will for ever bee a mirrour to all ages 4. But Suidas saith the Cardinall e Bar. an 528. nu 2. doth affirme f Jn verbo Iust the same calling Iustinian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and void of all learning For answer whereunto first I would gladly know of the Cardinal how hee can assure us that this is indeed the saying of Suidas specially seeing their owne Iesuite Possevine tels g In appar verbo Suidas us for a certainty that Plaeraque very many things are falsly inserted into Suidas and that à Sciolis Schismaticis by some smatterers or Schismaticks and further that those Plaeraque are such as are repugnant to the Euangelicall truth and Historicall sinceritie How may we bee assured that this concerning Iustinian is not one of those Plaeraque seeing this to be contrary to Historicall sincerity doth by those many and evident proofes which wee before produced fully appeare Againe admitting Suidas for the Author thereof is Suidas thinke you of more or equall authority and credit to their Pontificall which witnesseth expresly that Iustinian writ the holy confession of his faith Chirorgrapho proprio with his owne hand Equall to Tritemius and Possevine or to winke at them to Pope Agatho and the sixt generall Councell who all account Iustinian among the Writers of the Church Who I pray you was this Suidas truly an earnest defender of those impieties which in their second Nicene Synod began to prevaile who in reviling manner doth call h Suid. in verbo Constantimus Constantine Iconomachus a Serpent an Antichrist and the disciple of the Devill and all for his not consenting to the adoration of Images and reliques and to the Invocation of Saints Now how this sort of men were given to lyes and fables the Acts of that Synod doe fully demonstrate Or if you rather desire to have their Iesuites judgement of Suidas hee will tell you first that he was hereticall in teaching i Poss in verbo Suidas the Essence in the Godhead to be generative which their Laterane Councell hath condemned for an heresie Hee will tell you further that this booke is full of errours fables and lyes of which sort are these among many That the world was made of the Poëticall Chaos that it shal continue 1200. thousand yeares that the Sun and Starres are fierie substances fed and perpetuated by terrestriall humours as their nutriment that Paradise is Hortus pensilis a garden hanging in the ayre farre above the earth that Caine was begotten of the Devill which is a lye that the Iewes adored an asses head and every seventh yeare sacrificed a stranger His narration in verbo Nero touching Annas and Caiphas Pilate Peter and Simon Magus wherin multa comminiscitur he forgeth many things His narration in verbo Iulianus which hee calleth in expresse words mendacium flagiciosissimum a most lewd lie His slandering Constantine the great as base of birth and his sonne Crispus as incestuous His commending of Acatius and Acesius two heretikes adding that hee writeth many things contra Historiae venitatem against the Historicall truth His relation in verbo Apolonius where
many things are praised quae omnia monstrosa sunt prorsus explodenda all which are utterly to be hissed at where also he seemeth to allow the impious Art of Magicke and Divinations His approving of Appolonius and Danis two wicked Magitians who both are relegati ad inferos condemned to Hell And to omit very many of this kinde of impieties and fables which abound in Suidas His narration in verbo Iesus which not onely Baronius rejecteth but Pope Paul the fourth for that cause beside some other k Exploserit in Jndicem lib. prohib exploded the booke of Suidas and placed it in the ranke librorum prohibitorum Such even by the confession of their owne Iesuite is this Suidas a depraver of good a commender of wicked men a fabler a lyer a falsifier of Histories a Magitian an Heretike whose booke is by the Pope forbidden to bee read Such a worthy witnesse hath the Cardinall of his Suidas with whom he conspireth in reviling Iustinian as one utterly unlearned Concerning which untruth I will say no more at this time than that which Gotofrid doth in his censure l Arte lib. Instit of those words of Suidas where calling it in plaine termes a slander he rejects it as it justly deserveth in this manner Valeant calumniae nos sinceriora sequamur Away with this and such like opprobrious slanders of Suidas and Baronius but let us follow the truth 5. His second reproofe of the Emperour is for presuming to make lawes in causes of faith which for Kings and Emperours to doe brings as he saith an hellish confusion into the Church of God The wit of a Cardinal Iustinian may not doe that which King Hezekiah which Asa which Iosiah and Constantine the great the two Theodosii Martian and other holy Emperours before had done and done it by the warrant of God to the eternall good of the Church and their owne immortall fame Had hee indeed or any of those Emperours taken upon them by their lawes to establish some new erronious or hereticall doctrine the Cardinall might in this case have justly reproved them but this they did not what doctrines the Prophets delivered the word of God taught and holy Synods had before decreed and explaned those and none else did Iustinian by his Edict and other religious Emperours ratifie by their imperiall authority Heare Iustinians owne words Wee f Edict Justin in causa trium Capitul in princip have thought it needfull by this our Edict to manifest that right confession of faith quae in sancta Dei Ecclesiâ praedicatur which is preached in the holy Church of God Here is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to cōdemne the same saith g Coll. 7. in fine Omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant Iustinian hath ever done and as yet doth all things which preserve the holy Church and the true faith So the Councell Is not Baronius minde composed of venome and malice who condemnes and reviles the Emperour as bringing hellish confusion into the Church by publishing that law which to have beene an especiall meanes to preserve the Church and Catholike faith the holy generall Councell and all the whole Catholike Church with it proclameth 6. See here againe the love and respect which Baronius beares to the Imperiall lawes and to those holy and religious Emperors which were the nursing fathers of Gods Church and pillers to uphold the faith in their dayes There are extant in the Theodosian Code many laws cōcerning the Catholike faith concerning Bish Churches and the Clergy concerning Heretikes Apostates Monkes Iewes and Samaritanes concerning Pagan sacrifices and Temples concerning Religion Episcopall judgement those who flee unto Churches and many other of the same kinde lawes wholesome and necessary for those times The like titles are extant also in the Code of Iustinian In the Authenticks there are I know not how many lawes in the like causes Of the foure Councels of the Order of Patriarchs of the building of Churches of goods belonging to sacred places Of the holy Communion of Litanies of the memorials for the dead of the Priviledges of Churches of Patriarchs of the Pope of old Rome of Archbishops of Abbots of Presbyters of Deacons of Subdeacons of Monkes of Anchorites of Synods of deposing Bishops who fall into heresie that Patrons who builded Churches and their heyers shall nominate the Clerks for the same and in case they name such as are unmeet then the Bishop to appoint who he thinks sit that Heretikes shall be uncapable of any legacies and exceeding many the like Now such a spite hath the Cardinall to the Emperours and these their Imperiall lawes made concerning the affaires of the Church that like some new Aristarchus with one dash of his pen hee takes upon him to casheire and utterly abolish those lawes five or sixe hundreth at the least with such care piety and prudēce set forth by Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Martian Iustinian and other holy and religious Emperours And when these are gone whether the Cardinall meant not after them to wipe away which with as good reason and authority he may all the other lawes which are in the Digest Code and Authenticks that so his master the Pope may play even another Iack Cade that all law might proceed out of his mouth let the judicious consider This is cleare that the Cardinals malice is not satisfied with reproofe of the lawes themselves even these holy Emperors Constantine Theodosius and the rest are together with Iustinian for the making of those lawes touching Ecclesiasticall affaires and persons reproved nay reviled by Baronius as having beene presumptuous persons authors of an hellish confusion in the Church and for turning heaven into hell They and such as they make lawes of faith lawes for Bishops lawes for the Church let them heare as they well deserve and as the * An. 550. nu 14. Cardinall shameth not to upbraid to Iustinian Ne ultra crepidam Sir Cobler goe not beyond you Last and Latchet So indignly doth the Cardinall use those holy and religious Princes and that even for their zeale to Gods truth and love to his Church for that which with exceeding piety and prudence they performed to their owne immortall honor and to the peace and tranquillity of the whole Church of God 7. His third calumnie is that hee revileth Iustinian for his sacrilegious fury and persecution which hee used against Pope Vigilius partly when Vigilius h Bar. an 551.
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
yeare after it was published was confirmed by Pope Iohn who thus writeth f Epist 1. Ioh. 2. ad Justin to 2. Conc. pa. 404. et Bar. an 534. nu 15. et seq to the Emperour You for the love of the faith and to remove heresie have published an Edict which because it agreeth with the Apostolike doctrine wee confirme by our authority and againe You have writ and published those things which both the Apostolike doctrine and the venerable authority of the holy Fathers hath decreed nos in omnibus confirmamus and we confirme it in all points This your faith is the true and certaine religion this all the Fathers Bishops of Rome and the Apostolike See hath hitherto inviolably kept this confession whosoever doth contradict hee is an alien from the holy Communion and from the Catholike Church Thus Pope Iohn What can any man in the world now thinke else of Baronius but condemne him for an accursed heretike Hee denyes the Councell of Chalcedon to embrace that profession unum de Trinitate which as the Emperour and Pope witnesse it earnestly embraceth he not onely suspecteth in this place but in plaine termes else-where g Planè comperitur eosdem ipsos Scythiae Monachos Eutycheanos fuisse haereticos Bar. an 519. nu 99. he calleth the Scythian Monks Eutycheans heretikes and oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon and that for this cause for that both themselves professed and required others to professe Christ to bee unum de sancta Trinitate nor content herewith hee addeth these words the heresie whereof with no niter can bee washt away hee faineth saith Baronius h An. eod nu 102. that these words unus de Trinitate est crucifixus are to bee added for the strengthning and explaning of the Councell of Chalcedon which sentence unus de Trinitate est crucifixus the Legates of the Apostolike Sea prorsus reijciendam esse putarunt thought to bee such as ought utterly to be rejected as being never used by the Fathers in their Synodall sentences latere enim sciebant sub melle venenum for they knew that poison did lye under this hony Now seeing by Iustinians Edict and the Popes confirmation thereof all who either refuse or who will not professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate are accursed and excluded from the Catholike Church and communion Baronius cannot possibly escape that just censure who condemneth that profession as hereticall and as repugnant to the faith of Chalcedon Thus while the Cardinall labours to prove by this the Acts of the fift Councell to bee corrupt hee demonstrates himselfe to bee both untrue hereticall rejected out of the Church and a slanderer of the holy Councell of Chalcedon as favouring the heresie of Nestorius 4. Thirdly whereas hee saith that the Scythian Monkes would inferre verba ista in Synodum Chalcedonensem bring or thrust in those words into the Councell of Chalcedon it is a slander without all colour or ground of truth they saw divers Nestorians obstinate in denying this truth that Christ was unus de sancta Trinitate who pretended for them that these words were not expressed in the Councell of Chalcedon the Monkes and Catholikes most justly replyed that though the expresse words were not there yet the sense of them was decreed in that Councell that this confession was but an expression or explication of that which was truly implicitely and more obscurely decreed at Chalcedon To falsifie the Acts of that Councell or adde one syllable unto it otherwise than by way of explanation or declaration that the Monks and Catholikes whom Baronius calleth Eutycheans never sought to doe as at large appeares by that most learned and orthodoxall booke written by Iohannes Maxentius about this very cause against which booke and the Author thereof the more earnestly Baronius doth oppose himselfe and call them hereticall hee doth not therby one whit disgrace them his tongue and pen is no slander at least not to weighed but the more he still intangles himselfe in the heresie of the Nestorians out of which in that cause none can extricate him as in another Treatise I purpose God willing to demonstrate 5. Fourthly whereas Baronius saith that the Scythian Monkes prevailed not in the dayes of Hormisda quod absque additamento Synodus rectè consisteret because the Synod of Chalcedon was well enough without that addition hee shewes a notable sleight of his hereticall fraud That the Synod is well enough without adding those words as an expresse part of the Synodall decree or as written totidem verbis by the Councell of Chalcedon is most true but nothing to the purpose for neither the Scythian Monks nor any Catholikes did affirme them so to bee or wish them so to bee added for that had beene to say in expresse words wee will have the decree falsified or written in other words than it was by the Councell But that the Synod was well enough without this additament as an explication of it and declaration of the sense of that Councell is most untrue for both Iustinian by his Edict commanded and Pope Iohn by his Apostolike authoritie confirmed that to bee the true meaning both of that Councell and of all the holy Fathers And when a controversie is once moved and on foote whether Christ ought to bee called unus de sancta Trinitate for a man then to deny this or deny it to bee decreed in the Councell of Chalcedon or to deny that it ought to be added as a true explanation of that Councell is to deny the whole Catholike faith and the decrees of the foure first Councels and though one shall say and professe in words as did Hormisda and his Legates that they hold the whole Councell of Chalcedon yet in that they expresly deny this truth which was certainly decreed at Chalcedon their generall profession shall not excuse them but their expresse deniall of this one particular shall demonstrate them both to bee heretikes and expresly to beleeve and hold an heresie repugnant to that Councell which in a generality they professe to hold but indeed and truth doe not Even as the expresse denying of the manhood or Godhead of Christ or resurrection of the dead shall convince one to bee an heretike though hee professe himselfe in a generality to beleeve and hold all that the holy Scriptures doe teach or the Nicene fathers decree If Baronius his words that the Councell is right without that additament bee taken in the former sense they are idle vaine and spoken to no purpose which of the Cardinals deepe wisedome is not to bee imagined If they bee taken as I suppose they are in the later sense they undeniably demonstrate him to bee a Cardinall Nestorian 6. But leaving all the rest of the Cardinals frauds in this passage let us come to that last clause which concernes the corrupting of the Councell of Chalcedon This saith he which in Hormisdaes dayes they could not now in this
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
applauding the same Thus Vigilius at last got what in his ambitious desires hee so long gaped and thirsted after At the first onset hee sought the Papacy but got it not at the second turne hee got it but by usurpation and intrusion onely but now at this third and last boute hee hit the marke indeed hee got the rightfull possession of it and is now become what hee would bee the true Bishop of Rome and Vicar of S. Peter 16. I have stayed somewhat long in the entrance of Vigilius and yet because I have set downe no more but a very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a naked undecked narration or as it were onely rough hewed I must pray the reader that hee will permit mee to set downe some few exornations and polishments of it out of Cardinall Baronius for though all men knew him to bee one whose words concerning their Popes are as smooth as oyle and who will bee sure to say no more ill of any of them than meere necessity and evidence of truth inforceth him yet so unfit am I to write their Popes lives that for want of fit termes I am inforced to borrow from him the whole garnish and varnish of this Description of Vigilius heare then no longer mee but the great Cardinall the deare friend of Vigilius telling you what a worthy man the Electors at this time chose for their Pope heare him defining Vigilius in this manner Hee was an ambitious f Ab ambitioso Diacono procurata Bar. an 538 nu 9. Deacon who by a madde g Insana cupiditate flagrans ambitione Vigilius Jbid. nu 5. desire burned with pride whom thirst h Enin quod burathrum infaliceÌ„ hominem conjecit ambitio in quantum insaniam infamiam adegit euÌ„ vana gloriae cupido cujus causa cogatur in ipso portu pati naufragium in Petra Petrae scandalum esse et in fide infidâ—lem haberi Jbid. nu 17. of vaine glory drove into madnesse and into the hellish gulfe by meanes whereof he makes shipwracke in the very haven becomes a Rocke of offence and seemes an infidell in faith a bondslave i Se Theodorae Augustae instar mancipij turpissimè vendidit Bar. an 540. nu 8. to impious and hereticall Theodora that is to Megera k Accipiat Theodora nomen potius ab inferis Alecto vel Megera vel Tisiphone nuÌ„cupanda Bar. an 535. nu 63. to Alecto and the hellish furies who with Lucifer desired to ascend l Dum sursum ascendere meditatur deorsum demergitur An. 538. nu 18. into heaven and exalt his throne above the Starres but being loaden with the weight of his heinous crimes fals downe into the depth which crimes with Cain m Vagetur necesse est cum Caine qui intus clausum habet quod eum agit in adversa peccatum Ibid. he having so inclosed in his breast must needs wander up and down like a Vagabond Vnsavory salt n Quid reliquuÌ„ esse potuit salis infatuati nisi ut conculcetur et proijciatur in sterquiliniuÌ„ haeresum An. 538. nu 17. worthy by all to bee trodden under foote and cast into the dunghill of heresies who had got unto him the stench o Putorem contraxit haeretica pravitatis Ibid. of heretical pravity who bouÌ„d himselfe p Pactis conventis conscripta jurataque haereticorum defensio An. 540. nu 4. by an obligation under his owne hand yea by his oath also to patronize heretikes who promised q Augusta Vigilium sibi profiteri flagitavit ut tolleret Synodum lubenter suscepit Vigilius promissum ejus Haec cum ipso sacrilega foemina molita est An. 536. nu 123. to abolish the faith and Councell of Chalcedon It was the just iudgement r Ita planè sententiâ Domini judicatur à fide excidere qui gloriae mancipium se constituit An. 538. nu 17. of God that hee should fall from the faith who became a Vassall to vaine glory a schismatike Å¿ Vigilij schismatici an 538. nu 20. a Symoniacke t Alienae sedis emptor Jbid. et Symoniaca labes eum deturpavit an 540. nu 4. a murderer u Silverij necis cooperatio eum redarguit Ibid. whose sacriledges x Clamantibus undique sacrilegijs an 538. nu 19. cried unto heaven an usurper y Silverij viventis sedem usurpasse malis artibus nactum esse imo invâ—sisse eum intelligit an 540. nu 4. violentus intrusor an 538. nu 11. a violent invader an intruder of the Apostolike See a bastard z Agit Rom. PoÌ„tificem quamvis spurius et penitus illegitimus an 538. nu 2â— and unlawfull Pope whom the true and lawfull Pope hath bound a Sciens cunctos sibi subjectos quos vel absolvat vel aeternis vinculis obliget authoritate c. an 539. nu 4. with eternall chaines against whom hee hath shot the dart b Adversus Romanae Ecclesiae invasorem spurilique intrusum Pontificem validè telum damnationis intorquet an 539. nu 4. of damnation and shewed to the whole world that he ascended into the throne ut lapsu graviore ruat that hee might have a greater and more shamefull fall that hee did not represent c Silverius osteÌ„dit universo orbi Vigilium non referre Simonem Petrum sed Maâ—um neque Vicâ—rium Christi sed Antichristum Ibid. nor was the successor of Simon Peter but of Simon Magus and that hee is the Vicar not of Christ but of Antichrist an Idol d Cernebanc quod rursus Idolum collocanduÌ„ esset in Templo conspiciendamque abominationem desolationis slanseÌ„ in loco sancto an 540. nu 7. even the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place and set up in the temple of God one rightly e Quonam alio nomine quam lupus sur et latro Pseudoepiscopus ac denique Antichristus jure potuit appellari an 538. nu 20. to bee called by no other name than a Wolfe a Thiefe a Robber a Pseudobishop and even Antichrist and which after all the rest is especially to bee remembred as the cloze of the Cardinals Description all this time Vigilius f Cum Vigilij personam satis perspectam haberent eum nempe esse hominem revera Catholicum an 540. nu 8. both was and was known to the Electors to be a very sound and true Catholike A true Catholike Such Catholikes indeed doth the Cardinall describe and commend unto the world a Catholike Schismatike a Catholike heretike a Catholike Antichrist a Catholike Devill If such were their Romane Catholikes and Catholike Popes in those ancient times O gracious God what manner of Catholike Popes are they in these ages Then and untill the yeare 600 was the golden age of the Church their Romane Bishops were then like the head of Nebuchadnezzers Image to the late and moderne Popes Vigilius a golden Bishop indeed to the brazen iron
selfe-same heresie of denying one nature in Christ they all consented in teaching two natures making two persons in Christ which Dioscorus and Eutyches condemned Of Theodorus and Theodoret it is cleare by the Councels both of Ephesus and Chalcedon and the fift Synod Of Paulus Samosatenus the writing or contestation of the Catholike Clergy of Constantinople set downe in the Acts of Ephesus a To. 1. act Conc. Eph. ca. 11. doe certainly witnesse and declare the same the title of which is to shew partly Nestoriū ejusdem esse sententiae cum Paulo Samosateno that Nestorius is of the same opinion with Paulus Samosatenus and in the contestation it selfe it is said thus I adjure all to publish this our writing for the evident reproofe of Nestorius the heretike as one who is convinced to teach and openly maintain eadem prorsus quae Paulus Samosatenus the same doctrines altogether which Paulus Samosatenus did and then they expresse seven heretical assertions taught alike by them both Seeing then Vigilius accursed him who taught the same with Paulus Theodorus and Theodoret and that was Nestorius not Dioscorus it is undoubtedly certaine that not Dioscorus but Nestorius was the party written and named by Vigilius in his subscription and that Dioscorus was not by Vigilius but by the oversight and negligence of the exscriber of Liberatus wrongfully inserted in stead of Nestorius And truly the like mistakings are not unusuall in Liberatus In this very Chapter it is sayd that Vigilius a little after the death of Agapetus and election of Silverius when he came from Constantinople to Rome with the Empresse her letters for placing him in the Romane See he found b Quin Ravennae reperi◠Bellisarium Liber ca. 22. Bellisarius at Ravenna a manifest mistaking of Ravenna for Naples for there and not at Ravenna was Bellisarius at that time as by Procopius c Nam Silveriū ait ejectum à Bellisario p. 287 id fuit anno 3. belli Gothici ut liquet ex pa. 313 ubi ait Tertius belli hujus annus exibat at Bellisarius non caepit Ravennam ante finem anni 5. ejus belli ut ait Proc. 340. 343. ubi ait Iam annus 5. exibat is evident and because this is no way prejudiciall to their cause Baronius and Binius can there willingly admit d Hic puto Liberatum memoria lapsum Ravennam pro Neapoli posuisse Bar. an 538. nu 7. idem Bin. Not. in Liber an error or slip of memory in Liberatus and not so hastily conclude as here they doe that because Bellisarius was not then at Ravenna as in Liberatus is falsly affirmed therefore that Chapter of Liberatus is forged and not truly written by him Would his Cardinalship have beene as favourable to Liberatus in naming Dioscorus for Nestorius which the like evidence of truth and all the circumstances doe necessarily enforce the Epistle might as well passe for the true writing of Vigilius as that Chapter for the writing of Liberatus In this very Epistle of Vigilius it is said in Liberatus e Apud Bin. to 2. pa. 614. I know quia ad Sanctitatē vestrā fidei meae crudelitas pervenit that the cruelty of my faith is before this come to your eares and the very same word of crudelitas fidei is in Victor also which argues the fault to be very ancient It is true that the faith of Vigilius was indeed cruell for he by it cruelly condemned abolished and as it were murdered the Councell of Chalcedon that is in truth the whole Catholike faith and so this happened to be not onely a true but a fit and significant error Yet the Cardinall was so friendly and charitable here as to thinke that it was but a slip of the penne or negligence of the writer in saying crudelitas for credulitas as the Cardinall readeth f Bar. an 538. nu 14. it might not by the like negligence and with lesse disgrace to Vigilius Dioscorus slip into the text in stead of Nestorius In the inscription of the Epistle Liberatus reades it Dominis ac Christis Victor Dominis ac fratribus the Cardinall corrects both and makes it worst of all Dominis ac patribus May he play the Criticke and turne Christis or fratribus into patribus and that without nay against reason and may not others in the subscription restore Nestorius for Dioscorus when the truth and necessary circumstances enforce that correction It was Nestorius then not Dioscorus whom Vigilius accursed it is but the errour or corrupt writing of Vigilius Epistle in Liberatus which wee also condemne and not the Epistle of Vigilius at which the Cardinall unjustly quarrelleth 27. His third and last shift is worst of all If Vigilius had indeed writ this Epistle why then saith he g Bar. an 538. nu 15. was it not upbraided unto him at Constantinople neither by the Empresse Theodora when shee contended with him about the restoring of Anthimus nor by Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea and Mennas when Vigilius excommunicated them both and they vexed him so long nor by the Emperour Iustinian when he was furiously inraged against him nor by the fift Synod which was offended with him for refusing to come to the Councell nor yet by Facundus when he writ angerly against him these were publikely debated nec tamen de dicta epistolá vel usquam mentio yet is there not any mention or light signification of any such Epistle Thus the Cardinall Of whom I againe demand where he learned to dispute ab authoritate humanâ negativè the old and good rule was Neque ex negativis recte concludere si vis but the Cardinall hath new Analytickes and new-found rules of Art Ex negativis poteris concludere si vis Himselfe witnesseth h Bar. locis supr citat and proclameth Vigilius to have beene a Symoniack and to have compacted with Bellisarius for 200. peeces of gold to have beene excommunicated deposed degraded by Pope Silverius pronouncing that sentence out of his Apostolike authority and from the mouth of God why was not this Symony why was not this censure of Silverius upbraided neither by Theodora nor Theodorus nor Iustinian nor the fift Councell nor Facundus that being a publike and knowne censure had been a matter of farre greater disgrace to Vigilius farre more justifiable than the epistle writ privately and secretly to Anthimus and commanded by Vigilius to bee kept close that none might know it See you not how vaine this shift of the Cardinall is How it crosseth him in his Annals to slander Vigilius as symoniacall as censured by Silverius both which seeing they are not upbrayded to him by the forenamed persons but set downe in the Cardinals Analytickes sure they are impostures and forgeries What though none of them upbrayded this Epistle unto him Is it not enough that it is assuredly testified and recorded by S. Liberatus by Bishop Victor two who lived and writ
at that same time what if most of them knew not of this Epistle which was sent secretly by Vigilius and by his advice kept closely by Anthimus and Severus what if they all knew it and yet having other crimes enough to object thought it needlesse to mention that as it seemes they did the Symony of Vigilius and censure of Silverius what if they were not so spitefull as the Cardinall is and therefore would not say the worst they could against his Holinesse 28. But see the strange dealing of the Cardinall How or why should Theodora upbrayd this to Vigilius for the not restoring of Anthimus that quarrell for the restoring of Anthimus as I have often sayd and clearly proved was a meere devise and fiction of Anastasius it was nothing but Alcibiades dogs tayle Or how should Iustinian upbraid it when he was so enraged against Vigilius and persecuted him for not restoring Anthimus Seeing neither Iustinian persecuted Vigilius nor was enraged against him but for the space of five of six yeares they both sang one note they fully consorted together or how should Mennas and Theodorus upbraid it when they were excommunicated by Vigilius Seeing that excommunication all the circumstances of it are merely fictitious as by the death of Mennas which was long before that forged excommunication of him was demonstrated Are not these worthy reasons to disprove this Epistle to bee writ by Vigilius which all relie on fictions on most untrue and idle fancies And whether Facundus upbraided it or no may bee questioned nor will it bee clearly knowne untill they will suffer Facundus to come out of their Vaticane where hee lyeth yet imprisoned But as for the fift Councell it was great sillinesse in the Cardinall once to thinke that they should or would upbraid this Epistle to him they used the Pope in the most honourable and respectfull manner that could be wished they uttered no one harsh or hard word against him but what was rightly said or done by him as his condemning of Origen his condemning the Three Chapters before the time of the Councell that they often mention and approve it also They sought by lenity to win the Popes heart to consent unto the truth which they defended seeing they could not prevaile with him yet they would have the whole world to testifie together with the Popes peevishnesse their owne lenity equity and moderation used towards him and that it was not hatred or contempt of his person nor any precedent occasion but only the truth and equity of that present cause which enforced them to involve him remaining obdurate in his heresie in that Anathema which they in generall denounced against all the pertinacious defenders of the Three Chapters of which Vigilius was the chiefe and standard-bearer to the rest Did the Cardinall thinke with such poore sleights to quit Vigilius of this Epistle If nothing else truely the very imbecillity and dulnesse of the Cardinals reasons and demonstrations in this point may perswade that Vigilius and none but he was the author of it Baronius was too unadvised without better weapons to enter into the sand with old Cardinall Bellarmine in this cause who is knowne to bee plurimarum palmarum vetus ac nobilis gladiator and in this combate with Baronius hee hath played the right Eutellus indeed Come let us give to him in token of his conquest corollam palmam and let Baronius in remembrance of his foile leave this Epistle to Vigilius with this Impresse Vigilio scriptum hoc Eutello palma feratur 29. Vigilius now by just Duell is proved to bee the true author of this Epistle Be it so say they k Etiamsi ista verè scripsisset Vigilius nullum tamen ob id infertur praejudicium Apostolicae sedi cujus tunc ipse erat invasor Silverius autem germanus Pontifex Bar. an 538. nu 15. Fecit id cum adhuc viveret Silverius quo tempore Vigilius non erat Papa sed Pseudopapa Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. Non mirum si Pseudoepiscopus et quasi Antichristus ad schisma haeresin addidisset Bin. not in Lib. pa 626. a. ita etiam Gretz in Defens ca. 10. lib. 4. Bell. yet that is no prejudice at all to the Apostolike See because he writ it in the time of Sylverius while as yet Vigilius was not the lawfull Pope but an intruder and usurper and Pseudopope and herein they all joyne hand in hand Bellarmine with Baronius Gretzer and Binius with them both But feare not the tailes of these smoaking firebrands nor the wrath of Rhesin Aram and Remalias sonne because they have taken wicked counsell against the truth Nor needed there here any long contention about this matter for how doe they prove this saying of theirs that Vigilius writ it whē Sylverius lived and not afterwards Truly by no other but the Colliers argument It is so because it is so proofe they have none at all they were so destitute of reasons in this point that laying this for their foundation to excuse the Pope for teaching heresie they begge this or rather take it without begging or asking by vertue of that place called Petitio Principij Let us pardon Binius and Gretzer who gathered up onely the scraps under the Cardinals tables but for a Cardinal so basely and beggarly to behave himselfe as to dispute from such sophistical topicks is too foule a shame and blemish to his wit and learning And why may not wee take upon us the like Magisteriall authority and to their I say it is so oppose I say it is not so Doe they thinke by their bigge lookes and sesquipedalia verba to down-face the truth 30. But because I have no fancy to this Pythagoricall kinde of learning there are one or two reasons which declare that Vigilius writ this Epistle after the death of Silverius when he was the onely and true lawfull Pope for the former is the narration of Liberatus who in a continued story of these matters after the death of Silverius relates how Vigilius writ this Silverius saith he l Liber ca. 22. dyed with famine Vigilius autem implens promissum And Vigilius to fulfill his promise writ this Epistle Oh saith Gretzer m Gret loc cit Liberatus useth here an anticipation and sets downe that before which fell out after Prove that Gretzer Prove it why his proofe is like his Masters It is so because it is so Other proofe you shall have none of Gretzer He thought belike his words should passe for currant pay as well as a Cardinals but it was too foolish presumption in him to take upon him to dispute so Cardinalitèr that is without reason why should it not be thought seeing we find nothing to the contrary that Liber in his narration followed the order and sequell of things and times as the law of an historian requires rather than beleeve Gretzers bare saying that it is disorderly and contrary to the order of
favourer of the Eutychean heresie Vigilius saith the Cardinall d Bell. lib. 4. de Pontif. ca. 10. § Sciendum was here in a great straite for if hee openly professed heresie hee feared the Romanes who would never indure an heretike to sit in Peters Chaire if hee should on the other side professe himselfe a Catholike he feared Theodora the hereticall Empresse that she would not indure him Itaque rationem illam excogitavit therfore he devised this policy and I pray you note it well that e Vt Romae Catholicum ageret et interim per literas apud Jmperatricem haereticum simularet Bell. ibid. at Rome or openly hee would play the Catholike but secretly in his private letters to the Empresse and to Anthimus he would faine himselfe an heretike Thus Bellarmine who fully expresseth the nature and disposition of Pope Vigilius as if hee had not onely felt his pulse but beene in his bosome Hee was indeed another Catiline Simulare ac dissimulare hee could semble and dissemble conceale what indeed hee was seeme to bee what hee was not At Rome and in shew of the world a Catholike at Constantinople and in his secret and close actions an heretike Thus farre the Cardinall saith well but hee is extremely mistaken in one circumstance in that hee saith that his open or Catholike profession was mentall and ex animo and his private and secret detestation of the Catholike faith was verball and fained It was quite contrary his heart and Intrals were all hereticall nothing but his face and outward shew was Catholike for proofe whereof I will not urge that the Pope in this Epistle accurseth and f Qui dicit in Christo duas formas i. naturas et non confitetur unam personá unam essentiam anathema sit Vigil in Epist apud Liber loc cit anathematizeth all who hold the Catholike faith or who beleeve otherwise than Eutyches did for so hee doth also in his other Epistle to the Emperour and Mennas condemne Eutycheanisme and yet it is no commendation for his Holinesse either to curse the Catholike faith or to curse that faith which in his heart hee beleeveth But this I would have considered that Vigilius promised g Adimple nobis quae pronâ voluntate promisisti Anast in vita Vigil under his hand-writing yea hee swore h Conscriptaque jurataque haereticorum defensio Bar. an 540. nu 4. also that he would abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and restore Anthimus for performance whereof hee writ i Vigilius implens promissionē suam quam Augustae fecerat talē scripsit Epistolam Liber ca. 22 that private Epistle which was all that as yet hee could doe Let Bellarmine now say if their Popes doe use to promise and that under their hands yea to sweare also to doe that which they meane not to doe Who may bee beleeved upon their words upon their oathes if not the Popes Holinesse if hee not onely in words and writing but in his solemne oathes equivocate whose oath among all that generation can bee thought simple and without fraud 34. Againe to what end should Pope Vigilius dissemble secretly and among his intire friends such as were Anthimus Theodosius and Severus where or to whom should he truly open himselfe and his inward heart if not to such The first lesson that men of Vigilius metall learne is that of Lucilius k Ex quo citat Lactant. lib. 6. divin Jnst ca. 18. Homini amico ac familiari non est mentiri meum The Priscilians who as S. Austen l Exhortantur suos ad mendacium tanquam exemplis Prophetarum Apostolorum Angelorum et ipsius Christi Aug. lib. contr Mend. ca. 2. shewes were the very teachers of lying and dissembling and who perswaded their fellow heretikes unto that base art and trade yet even they taught that Lucilian lesson and most impiously pretended m Aug. ibid. to collect it out of the words of the Apostle Speake the truth every man to his neighbour for we are members one of another To his neighbour and fellow member sayd they we must speake the truth but to such as are not joyned n Cum eis qui nobis in societate veritatis proximi non sunt neque ut ita dicam commembres nostri sunt Ibid. to us in the neighbourhood or fellowship of the same Religion and who are not of the same body with us to them loqui licet oportetque mendacium to them you may lye nay you must not speake the truth to such Anthimus Severus and Theodosius they were the next neighbours to Vigilius all conjoyned o Grati◠qua nos Deo nostro conjungimur eam fidem quam tenetis et tenuisse me tenere significo ut et anima una sit et cor unum Vig. Epist ad Anth. apud Lib. loc cit and concorporated into Eutycheanisme Had he dissembled with them he had beene worse than the Priscilianists nay worse than the devils themselves for they though they lye to all others yet speake truth among themselves and to Beelzebub otherwise his kingdome could not endure It was Iustinian and the Catholikes who were of a contrary religion to Vigilius there was little or no neighbourhood at all betwixt them they were not concorporall not members of one body with him to them not being his neighbors commembres with him by the rules of that blacke Art he might he ought to lye but to Anthimus and Severus being of one body with him he must speake the truth 35. Further yet looke to that old Cassian rule Cui bono where and with whom was Pope Vigilius to gaine more by his cogging and counterfeiting He had now rightfull possession of the See of Rome which was the onely marke he aymed at What hurt could three deposed Bishops or the Empresse her selfe doe now unto him being backt by the Emperor by all Catholikes and which is best by a good cause what needed he for pleasing them to faine himselfe an heretike Could they thrust Vigilius from his See who could not hold their owne or could the Empresse deprive Vigilius who could not restore Anthimus There was nothing that could move Vigilius to faine himselfe an heretike or to write that hereticall Epistle if he had been in heart a Catholike But being in heart hereticall there was many most urgent and necessary inducements why he should faine himselfe a Catholike Had hee shewed his inside unto the Emperour and the Church had he opened to them the heresie lurking in his brest had he made it knowne that he would abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and the Catholike faith hee had instantly incensed all against him both the Emperour and the Romanes as Bellarmine p Metuebat Romanos qui haereticum sedere nunquam passuri videbantur Bell. loc cit sayth yea the whole Catholike Church would have joyned in the expulsing and deposing of such a wolfe and wretched heretike out of
not hold Let us consider the Exception it selfe Vigilius writ this Epistle that is confessed hee writ it when hee was the onely true and lawfull Pope that wee have proved hee defined heresie in it and that which is against the faith that Bellarmine implyeth hee condemned in it the Catholike faith that Bellarmine in plaine words expresseth Thus far the cause is cleare Now whether Pope Vigilius in it defined heresie and condemned the Catholike faith as he was Pope or no that is the point here to be debated 43. Some may thinke that Bellarmine by those two reasons drawne from secresie and an ambitious minde by which he laboured before to prove that Vigilius did not condemne the faith ex animo meant also that he condemned it not as Pope for it followeth in the next sentence siquidem Epistolam scripsit as giving a reason of his saying If any like to take Bellar. words in that sort then his reasons are before hand refuted for as Vigilius might ex animo write heretically both privately and out of ambition so also might hee tanquam Pontifex condemne the faith notwithstanding both his secrecy and ambitious mind secrecy and an ambitious mind are no more repugnant to the one than to the other they are compatible with them both the Pope may use his Apostolicall authority in teaching as wel privately as publikely as well with Iudas in ambition as with Iohn or Peter in sincerity of heart But the Cardinals Apologist who it may be consulted with the Cardinall about his intent herein doth ease us of those reasons for hee i Gretz loc cit tels us plainly that from Vigilius his desire of secrecie nil aliud colligit Bellarmine collects or proves nothing else but this that Vigilius did not write his letter from his heart or seriò that hee did it not in earnest It is but a sport with Gretzer or with the Pope to condemne the Catholike faith they doe it but they doe it not in earnest they doe it jocularitèr not seriò Have ye indeed such May-games sports at Rome as to condemne the faith and then say I was in jest and in sport Are not these men new Philistines Call in Sampson Condemne the Catholike faith to make us pastime But let us leave them to their sports till the fall of their Babylonish house make a catastrophe and dolefull end both of their actors spectators That which I now note is that Bellarmine doth not in those words Siquidem Epistolam scripsit c. from the privatenesse or secrecy prove any thing else but that Vigilius writ it not seriò in earnest and from his heart that hee writ it not tanquam Pontifex this those words prove not Bellarmine in those words collects not So we have now nothing but the bare saying of Bellarmine without any proofe without any reasons and I must needs confesse I hold it a most sufficient encounter for any man to Bellarmines ipse dixit to oppose ipse dico yet because I desire rather to satisfie such as seeke the truth then contend with those who seeke to smother and betray the truth I will a little further enlarge this point and see if it may be cleared by evidence of reason that Pope Vigilius did not onely condemne the Catholike faith at that time but that he did it even as hee was Pope and tanquam Pontifex condemne the Catholike faith 44. What it is for a Pope to teach an errour as Pope may be perceived by other Arts and Sciences in the practice or exercise whereof together with knowledge judgement and skill fidelity also is required were Baronius or some Romane Facundus to examine this point they would quickly sute the Pope to some Cobler Pedler or such like companion I love not to deale so rudely with his Holinesse yet if I should happen at any time to let slip a word that way you know how the Cardinall quitted the religious Emperour with Ne ultra crepidam If a Physitian or Lawyer or Iudge in any discourse should speake barbarously or incongruously they erre therein but as Grammarians not as Iudges Lawyers or Physitians But if a Iudge for any sinister respect should pronounce that sentence as just which is against the law or if a Lawyer should after his diligent sifting of the cause affirme that title to bee sound which were clearely voide in law or if a Physitian should prescribe to his patient Coloquintida for an wholesome diet each of them now erred offended in his owne profession in that proper duty which belongeth to them the Iudge as a Iudge the Counsellor as a Counsellor the Physitian as a Physitian because they failed either in skill or in fidelity in those faculties wherin they professe both to know themselves and to make knowne unto others what is right and good If in other matters they transgresse it is not quatenus tales if any of them bee prophane covetous or intemperate they offend now quatenus homines as they are mortall men in those duties of morality which are common to them with all men If they bee seditious rebellious and conspire in treasonable practice they offend quatenus Cives as they are parts of the Common-wealth in those duties which are common to them with all subjects but when they offend in Physick law or judgment those are their own peculiar Arts and Sciences they then offend neither quatenus homines nor quatenus Cives nor in any other respect but quatenus tales as they are such professors for now they transgresse against those proper duties which as they are Iudges Counsellors or Physitians are required of them The like of all Artificers of Grāmarians Logicians Poets Philosophers of Presbyters of Bishops of the Professors of Theology which is scientia scientiarum is to bee said If a Divine shall speake rudely incongruously ad populum Antiochenum he offends as a Grammarian not as a Divine unlesse perhaps it bee no fault when it doth so happen for edification that hee ought so to speake as Saint Austen k Aust lib. 4. de doct Christ ca. 16. et Tract 7. in Johan did use divers barbarismes and say ossum for os floriet for florebit dolus for dolor Malo me populus I had rather edifie with rudenesse of words than speake nothing but pure Ciceronian without edifying them without honouring God But if a Bishop or any Divine in stead of truth teach heresie either because hee knowes not the truth or knowing it oppugnes the truth hee is now in his owne element he offends no longer as a Rhetorician or Grammarian but quatenus talis as hee is a Bishop as hee is a Divine as hee is one who both should know and bring others to the knowledge of the truth And this beside that by reason it is evident is grounded on that saying of Austen l Aug. Epist 50. Aliter servit Rex qua homo aliter qua Rex for as a King serveth God