Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n earth_n glory_n let_v 6,078 5 4.5887 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A19554 A treatise of the Fift General Councel held at Constantinople, anno 553. under Iustinian the Emperor, in the time of Pope Vigilius. The occasion being those tria capitula, which for many yeares troubled the whole Church. VVherein is proved that the Popes apostolicall constitution and definitive sentence, in matter of faith, was condemned as hereticall by the Synod. And the exceeding frauds of Cardinall Baronius and Binius are clearely discovered. By Rich: Crakanthorp Dr. in Divinity, and chapleine in ordinary to his late Majestie King Iames. Opus posthumum. Published and set forth by his brother Geo: Crakanthorp, according to a perfect copy found written under the authors owne hand; Vigilius dormitans Crakanthorpe, Richard, 1567-1624.; Crakanthorpe, George, b. 1586 or 7.; Crakanthorpe, Richard, 1567-1624. Justinian the Emperor defended, against Cardinal Baronius. 1634 (1634) STC 5984; ESTC S107275 687,747 538

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

reproved the holy Ephesine Councell as if things had been spoken and done therein amisse What did Cyrill answer Hujusmodi epistolas equidem non admisi truly I did not admit or allow of this their second Epistle neither seeing therein they did adde new contumelies who should have asked pardon for the old But where as Paulus did very earnestly excuse the matter affirming and that upon his oath also that their purpose was not to exasperate Cyrill but to accord with him dilectionis gratia excusationem admisi I in charity was content to admit of this excuse And Paulus being very desirous to effect the union consented to anathematize Nestorius and his heresies to consent also to the deposing of Nestorius and the electing of Maximianus in his place which when Paulus had performed and subscribed suo chyrographo with his owne hand-writing which was all that either the Emperor or Cyrill required ad synaxim recepi I received him to the communion of the Church But when Paulus would further have perswaded Cyrill that seeing he was sent in the name of the rest and had subscribed this pro omnibus tanquam ex communi omnium orientalium persona for them all and as it were in the person of them all and therefore laboured with Cyrill that this his subscription might satisfie for the others also and that he would require no more of them but be content with their letters which by him they had sent nulla ratione id fieri passus sum saith Cyrill I could by no meanes indure that I told Paulus also that his subscription in condemning Nestorius and his heresies Ipsi soli sufficere could satisfie but only for himselfe but as for the rest Iohn u Modis omnibus opus esse dixi ut Johannes scriptam de ● his confessionem coleret c. Cyrill Epist ad Acatium and they must personally and for themselves subscribe or else they could not bee received into communion whereupon Cyrill writ an orthodoxall profession x Nisi chartam qua significavi si Iohannes illi subscripserit tum communionem illis reddite Cyrill Epist ad Dynat to that same effect whereunto Paulus had subscribed and sent it unto Iohn requiring his personall subscription to it This was the summe of all that was done by Paulus at his first comming 32. Paulus returning to Antioch brought this resolute answer of Cyrill to Iohn and the Bishops of his Synod They seeing no other meanes to make an union but onely by consenting to Cyrill and seeing that Paulus whom they put in trust as their agent had both himselfe consented and further undertaken that Iohn and they should likewise consent unto the same which hee had done did now at length yeeld y Cum Johannes subscripsisset caeterique qui majore authoritate apud ipsum erant Cyrill Epist ad Dynat to all the demands of Cyrill and for an assurance of their sincerity therein they writ a Synodall z Ea extat inter Epist Cyrilli Epist 27. in Act. Conc. Ephes to 5. ca. 5. and Encyclicall Epistle unto Cyrill which they likewise sent unto Pope Sixtus to Maximianus and other principall Bishops wherein they first set downe a very sound true and orthodoxall confession of their faith and then testifie their willing assent and subscription to the deposing b Placuit nobis Nestorium pro deposito habere pravasque illius prophanasque novitates anathematizare Epist Synodalis Iohannis Antioch Synodi Antioch to 5. Act. Ephes ca. 5. of Nestorius and the condemning of his heresies a Miserunt autem eandem Epistolam quam ad me scripserunt ad Xistum Maximianum Cyrill Epist ad Dynat 33. This Synodall letter they sent to Cyrill by Paulus c Nos Dominum nostrum Paulum ad sanctitatem tuam mittendum duximus Epist Ioh. Synod Antioch loco jam citato ex charta quam Dominus meus Paulus nunc attulit evidenter cognoscimus Continet enim inculpatam fidei confessionem Cyrill Epist 28. quae est ad Johannem Antioch extat tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 6. Bishop of Emisa that he might make a finall peace and union At whose comming to Alexandria this second time and bringing with him this undoubted testimony of the orthodoxie of Iohn and the chiefe of the Easterne Bishops and that they had now consented to all which either the Emperour or Cyrill required of them the union was fully concluded on every part and peace made in the Church In token whereof Paulus preached at Alexandria in the month of December d Nempe 29. mensis Chiath i. Decembris to 6. Act. Ephes ca. 13. in tit making there before Cyrill and the whole City so orthodoxall a profession of the faith that the people for joy interrupting him foure or five times exclamed e Ibid. to 6. ca. 13. Bene venisti Orthodoxe O Orthodox Paul thou art welcome to us Cyrill is orthodoxall Paulus is orthodoxall and Cyrill for his part writ that learned Epistle f Epist Cyrilli 28. qua extat tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 6 in congratulation unto Iohn and the rest which beginneth Let the Heavens rejoyce and let the earth be glad publishing it as an hymne of joy and thanksgiving for the union now effected in the Church singing Glory unto God and peace among men 34. This is the true narration of the whole proceedings betwixt Cyrill and the Easterne Bishops touching this matter of the union as they who diligently peruse the Epistles of Cyril to Acatius Bishop of Melitene to Dynatus and Iohn and compare therewith the Epistle of Iohn and the Synod of Antioch sent to Cyrill and Xistus will clearly perceive whence three things may be observed The first is the most shamelesse dealings of the Nestorians who slandered Cyrill to have at the time of the union consented in all points unto them and to their heresie and to have condemned his former doctrine and the Ephesine Councell wheras the quite contrary was true He was most inflexible and constant in maintaining the true faith more inexorable than Aeacus or rather as Moses g Exod. 10.26 would not consent to Pharoah no not in the least hoofe so would not Cyrill yeeld one heire-bredth unto them but brought them to subscribe wholly and in every point to that which he desired 35. The second is the occasion which the Nestorians tooke for their pretended calumnie They knew that Iohn and the Easterne Bishops had written to Cyrill willing him to condemne his owne Chapters yea that they had writ so resolutely that unlesse Cyrill did so they would not consent unto any peace or union Thus much was true as by the letter of Acatius Bishop of Berea to Cyrill is evident Now they saw that Cyrill afterwards and in that very yeare consented with Iohn and made union with him whereupon they boasted that Cyrill did it upon the condition required by Iohn at the first
such a milde and mercifull disposition that though they dislike and condemne those assertions of the Popes supremacy of authoritie and infallibility of judgement yet are they so charitably affected to the Defenders of those assertions that they dare not themselves nor can indure that others should call them heretickes or accursed Durus est hic sermo this is too harsh and hard See here the fervour and zeale of this holy Councill They first say Cursed be the defenders of this Epistle or any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all who defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Church of Rome Cursed be they all And not contenting themselves herewith they adde Cursed be he who doth not accurse the defenders of that Epistle or of any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be every one who doth not accurse Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all that defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Romane Church Cursed be he who doth not accurse them all The holy Council no doubt had an eye k Nos timen●es maledictionem quae imminet his qui negligenter opera Domini faciunt Col. 8. pa. 584. a. to the words of the Prophet Ieremy l Ier. 48.10 Cursed be he that doth the worke of the Lord negligently Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood To spare when God commands and whom he commands to curse or kill is neither pitty nor piety but meere rebellion against the Lord and pulls downe that judgement which God himselfe threatned m 1 King 20.42 to Ahab Because thou hast let goe out of thine hand a man whom I appointed to dye thy life shall goe for his life 23. What then is there no meanes no hope of such that they may be saved God forbid Far be it from my heart once to thinke or my tongue to utter so hard a sentence There is a meanes and that after the Scripture the Councill expresly and often sets downe even were they denounce all those Anathemaes for thus they say n Col. 8. saept They who defend Theodorus the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill the impious Epistle of Ibas or the defenders of them et in his vsque ad mortem permanent and continue in this defence untill they dye let such be accursed Renounce the defence of these Chapters and of the Defenders of them that is forsake and renounce that position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith renounce the defence of all that defend it that is of the whole present Romane Church Come o Apoc. 18.2.3.4 out of Babylon the habitation of devils the hold of all vncleane spirits which hath made all nations drunke with the wine of her fornication which themselves p Iohannes in Apocalypsi passim Roma vocal Babylonem Bell lib. 2. de po●t Rom. cap. 2. § Praterea Babylon quae casura ●radicitur Roma quidem est R●ber in cae 14. in Apoc. pa. 377. Et. Roma qualis in fine saeculi futura est ib. pa. 378. Iohannes loquitur de Roma qualo sub finē mundi futura est Gretz Def. ca. 13. lib. 3. de Rom. pont pa. 927. Babylon quam esse Romam ait lib 7. pa. 228. sedes et civitas antichristi est Sand. lib. 8. de visib Monar ca. 48. cannot but acknowledge to be meant of Rome This doe and then Come q Isa 55.7 unto the Lord and he will have mercy and to our God for he is very ready to forgive All your former impieties heresies and blasphemies shall not be mentioned unto you but in the righteousnes and Catholike truths which ye then embrace you shall live If this they will not doe we accuse them not we accurse them not they have one who doth both accuse and accurse them even this holy general Council whose just Anathemaes shal as firmely binde them before God in heaven as they were truly denounced by the Synod here on earth for he hath sealed theirs and all like censures with his owne signet who r Matth. 18.18 said Whatsoever ye binde upon earth shall be bound in heaven 24. After all these just Anathemaes denounced as well in generall as in particular by the Councill against the defenders of these Three Chapters or any one of them the holy Synod sets downe in the last place one other point as memorable as any of the former And that is by what authority they decreed all these things of which they thus say s Col. 8. pa. 588. a. we have rightly confessed these things quae tradita sunt nobis tam à divinis scripturis which are delivered unto us both in the divine scriptures and in the doctrines of the holy Fathers and in the definitions of faith made by the foure former Councils So the holy Councill Whence it doth evidently ensue that to teach and affirme that the Pope in his judiciall and cathedrall sentence of faith may erre and define heresie and that Vigilius in his constitution de facto did so is a truth consonant to Scriptures fathers and the foure first general Councils But on the other side to maintaine or affirme as do all who are members of the present Romane Church that the Popes cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is infallible is an hereticall position repugnant to Scriptures Fathers and the 4. first Councils and condemned by them all So at once the Holy Councill judicially defineth both our faith to be truly ancient Apostolical the selfe same which the Holy Fathers generall Councills and the Catholike Church professed for 600 yeares and the doctrine of the present Romane Church even that fundamentall position on which all the rest doe relye to be not onely new but hereticall such as none can maintaine but even thereby he oppugneth and contradicteth both the Scriptures Fathers the foure first general Councils and the Catholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ 25. Further yet because one part of their sentence is the accursing of all who defend the Three Chapters either expresly as did Vigilius or implicitè and by consequent as do all who maintaine the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is al who are members of the present Romane Church and so die it cleerely ensueth from that last clause of the Councill that to condemne and accusse as heretikes all these yea all which doe not accurse these is by the judgement of this whole generall Council warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by the foure first generall Councils and by the Caholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ The judgement of this fifth Council being consonant to them all and warranted by them all 26. Neither is their Decree consonant onely to precedent Fathers and Councils but approved and
of all ages speaking by the mouthes of al general Councels of Fathers of Popes of al Catholikes this holy Church condemneth and accurseth the assertion of Pope Vigilius The Cardinall was too diminutive in his extenuations when he spake so faintly The holy Church doth not so generally receive it 11. Let us beare with the Cardinals tendernesse of heart the Popes sores must not be touched but with soft and tender hands Seeing the Cardinall hath brought the Pope and the holy Church to be at ods and at an unreconciliable contradiction the Pope denying the Church affirming that a man after his death may noviter be condemned it is well worth the labour to examine whether part the Cardinall himselfe will take in this quarrell you may be sure the choyce on either part was very hard for him he hath here a worse matter than a wolfe by the eares This is dignus vindice nodus a point which will trie the Cardinals art wisdome piety constancy and faire dealing And in very deed he hath herein plaid Sir Politike would be above the degree of commendation The Cardinall is a man of peace hee loves not to displease either the Pope or the Church he knew that to provoke either of them would bring an armie of waspes about his eares and therfore very gravely wisely and discreetly he takes part with them both and though their assertions bee directly contradictory he holds them both to be true and takes up an hymne of Omnia bene to them both 12. First he sheweth that the Church saith right in this manner Although h Bar. an 553. nu 185. it be proved that one dyed in the peace of the Church and yet it doe afterwards appeare that in his writings he defended a condemned heresie and continuing in that heresie died therein and but dissemblingly cōmunicate with the Church the holy Church useth to condemne such a man jure even by right Having said as much as can bee wished on the Churches part the Cardinall will now teach that the Pope also saith right in this manner Pope Vigilius i Bar. an 553. nu 233. had many worthy reasons for his defence of the Three Chapters by his Constitution and among those worthy reasons this is one for if this were once admitted that a man who dyeth in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned pateret ostium this would open such a gap that every ecclesiasticall writer though hee dyed in the Catholike Communion may yet after his death out of his writings be condemned for an heretike Thus Baronius 13. O what a golden and blessed age was this that brought forth such a Cardinall The Church decreeth that a man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and it decreeth aright The Pope decreeth the quite contrary that no man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and hee also decreeth aright and with good reason So both the Church saith well the Pope saith well you can say no lesse then Et vitula tu dignus hic or because the Cardinall saith better than they both and what Iupiter himselfe could never doe makes two contradictory sayings to be both true and both said well hee best deserveth let him have all the prize Vitula tu dignus utrâque 14. I told you before and this ensuing treatise will make it as cleare as the Sunne that Baronius having once lost the path forsaken that truth where only sure footing was to be found wandreth up and downe in and out in this cause as in a wildernesse treading on nothing but thornes wherewith feeling himselfe prickt he skips hither and thither for succour but still lights on briars and brambles which doe not onely gall but so intangle him that by no meanes he can ever extricate or unwinde himselfe for if one listed to make sport with the Cardinall it clearly and certainly followeth that if the Church say true then the Pope saying the contrary doth say untrue Againe if the Pope say true then the Church saying the contrary doth say untrue and then upon the Cardinals saying that they both say true it certainly followeth that neither of them both say true and yet further that both of them say both true and untrue and yet that neither of them both saith either truth or untruth 15. But leaving the Cardinall in these bryars seeing by the upright and unpartiall judgement of the whole Catholike Church of all ages we have proved the Popes decree herein to be erroneous and because it is in a cause of faith heretical let us a little examine the two reasons on which Vigilius groundeth this his assertion The former is taken from those words of our Saviour k Matth. 18.18 whatsoever ye binde on earth whence as you have seene Vigilius and as he saith Gelasius also collecteth that such as are not on earth or alive cannot be judged by the Church 16. The answer is not hard our Saviours words being well considered are so farre from concluding what Vigilius or Gelasius or both doe thence collect that they clearly and certainly doe enforce the quite contrary for he said not Whatsoever yee binde or loose concerning those that are on earth or living in which sense Vigilius tooke them but Whatsoever concerning either the living or dead ye my Apostles and your successors being upon earth or during your life time shall binde or loose the same according to your censure here passed upon earth shall by my authority bee ratified in heaven The restrictive termes upon earth are referred to the parties who doe binde or loose not to the parties who are bound or loosed The generall terme whatsoever is referred to the parties who are bound or loosed whether they be dead or alive not to the parties who binde or loose who are onely alive and upon earth Nor doth our Saviour say Whatsoever yee seeme to binde or loose here upon earth shall bee bound or loosed in heaven for ecclesiae clave errante no censure doth or can either binde or loose either the quicke or the dead but he saith Whatsoever ye doe binde or loose if the party be once truly and really bound or loosed by you that are upon earth it shall stand firme and bee ratified by my selfe in heaven So the parties who doe binde or loose are the Apostles and their successors onely while they are upon earth the parties who are bound or loosed are any whosoever whether alive or dead the partie who ratifieth their act in binding and loosing is Christ himselfe in heaven For I say unto you whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven 17. This exposition is clearly warranted by the judgement of the whole catholike Church which as we have before declared both beleeved taught and practised this authority of binding and loosing not onely upon the living but upon the
the priestly ministerie could not performe to wit the loosing of that band of censure or of sinne under which they dyed Thus Leo who denieth not that men after their death may be condemned but that any who in his life time is not may after his death bee pardoned Hee speakes not of such as have not beene in their life time condemned of which onely Vigilius entreateth but of such who being unpenitent or condemned by the Church die in their sin or under that just censure therefore in the state of condemnation So neither doe the words of Leo signifie any such thing as Vigilius by them intended to prove and Pope Pelagius assureth us that Leo taught the quite contrary to that which out of Leo Vigilius in vaine laboureth to prove 21. The very like construction is to bee given of the words of Gelasius in both the places cited out of him by Vigilius In the former x Gelas Epist 11. entreating of Acatius he thus saith Let no man perswade you that Acatius is freed from the crime of his prevarication for after he had falne into that wickednesse and deserved to be excluded and that jure by right from the Apostolike communion in hac eâdem persistens damnatione defunctus est hee persisting in this condemnation dyed Absolution cannot bee now granted unto him being dead which he neither desired nor deserved while he lived for it was said to the Apostles Whatsoever yee binde on earth But of him these are the words cited by Vigilius who is now under Gods iudgement that is who is dead in this sort it is not lawfull for us to decree ought else but that in quo eum supremus dies invenit wherein hee was found at the time of his death So Gelasius In which words it is evident that hee speakes not as Vigilius doth of such as in their life time were not condemned nor denieth hee that such may after their death when their heresie is discovered be condemned but of such as being in their life time justly condemned dye impenitent in that estate and of such he denyeth that after their death they can be absolved A truth so cleare that Binius sets this marginall note upon it Qui impoenitens mortuus est excommunicatus post mortem non potest absolvi He who dieth impenitent under the censure of excommunication cannot after his death bee absolved And Gelasius himselfe often repeateth the same most clearly in his Commonitorium to Faustus We reade saith he y Gelas Epist 4. that Christ raised up some from the dead but we never reade that he forgave or absolved any who were impenitent when they dyed and this power he gave to Peter Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth on earth saith he nam in hac ligatione defunctum nusquam dixit absolvi For Christ never said that any who dyed being so bound should be loosed 22. The same is his meaning also in the other place z Epist Synodalis Gelas ij Synod Rom. 2. p. 268. b. alleaged by Vigilius In it he intreateth of Vitalis and Misenus who being the Popes Legates had communicated with Acatius and other hereticall sectaries and were for that cause both of them excommunicated by Pope Felix the next predecessor of Gelasius Misenus repenting was received into the communion of the Church Vitalis remaining impenitent died under that just censure when some of Vitalis friends desired the like absolution for Vitalis being dead a Nos etiam mortuis veniam praestare deposcunt ibid. Gelasius utterly refused to grant it and calling a Romane Synode it was declared in it That Misenus ought in right to be loosed but not Vitalis whom as they professed they gladly would but by reason of his owne impenitency wherein he dyed they could not helpe nor absolve but must leave him which are the words on which Vigilius relyeth to the judgement of God it being impossible for them to absolve him being dead seeing it is said Whatsoever ye shall binde upon earth such then as are not upon earth God hath reserved them not to mans but to his owne judgement Nor dare the Church challenge this unto it So Gelasius and the whole Romane Synode who doe not herein generally deny that any without exception may bee judged being dead for then they should condemne besides many other the holy Councell of Chalcedon which absolved Flavianus and bound or condemned Domnus and both after their deaths but limiting their speach to the present matter which they handled they teach that none who are dead to wit in such state as Vitalis dyed excommunicated and impenitent no such can after their death be judged to wit in such sort as the favourers of Vitalis would have had him adjudged that is absolved or loosed after his death from that censure and that the words of our Saviour doe forcibly conclude seeing whatsoever is bound upon earth is also bound in heaven and seeing such as die in that just bond of the Church are indeed reserved to the onely judgement of God the Church can pronounce no other nor milder sentence then it hath already passed of them That none at all after their death may be condemned by the Church Gelasius saith not and that is the hereticall position which Vigilius should out of Gelasius but doth not prove That none who at their death are justly bound by the Church and dye impenitent therein can after their death be loosed by the Church is a catholike truth which Gelasius teacheth and we all professe this Vigilius firmly by Gelasius doth but should not prove 23. So willing am I to quit Pope Leo and Gelasius from that hereticall doctrine wherewith Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree hath not onely himselfe eternally blemished the Romane See but laboureth also to fallen that heresie as an ancient and hereditarie doctrine from the time of Leo unto their See If this my indeavour for the honor of Leo and Gelasius be not accepted by them I must returne a conditionall and shorter but more unpleasing answer to this second reason of Vigilius relying on their authority and that is this If Leo and Gelasius truely and indeed taught the same with Vigilius that none after their death may noviter be condemned then were they also as Vigilius by the consenting judgement of the catholike Church hereticall If they did not indeed teach this doctrine then is Vigilius not only erroneous in faith both decreeing himselfe and judging them to have decreed heresie but slanderous also falsly imputing so great a crime as is heresie to so ancient famous Popes as were Gelasius and Leo And so whether they taught this doctrine or taught it not this second reason of Vigilius is of no worth at all proving nothing else but either them to be hereticall if Vigilius say true or himselfe to be a slanderer if he say untrue 24. Now after the reasons of Vigilius fully refuted in stead of a conclusion I will adde one short
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.
Iustinian held no such heresie as hee is slandered withall there neither was nor could there bee any effects or consequents of a cause not existent Yet will I not so sleightly reject the Cardinals calumnie in this point but fully examine first the publike and then the private mischiefes which hee without all truth hath fancied and objected against the Emperour 37. The publike was partly the subversion and overthrow of the faith and partly the decay of the Empire in the time and under the government of Iustinian Disertus esse posset Hee that would in an elaborate speech refute this calumnie of Baronius might have an ample scope to display all his Art and skill in this so large an argument My purpose is onely to point at the severall heads and not expatiate at this time Truly the Cardinall could hardly have devised any calumny more easie to be refuted or more evidently witnessing his malicious and wilfull oppugning of the truth I will not insist on those private testimonies of Procopius a Lib. 3. de aedif Justin pa. 433. Iustinian seemeth to have beene advanced by God to that Imperiall dignitie ut totum Imperium repararet that he might repaire and beautifie the whole Empire Of Otho b Lib. 5. ca. 4. Iustinian being a most valiant and most Christiā Prince Imperiū quasi mortuū resuscitavit did raise the Empire as it were from death to life and exceedingly repaired the Common-wealth being decayed Of Gotofrid c In Chron. part 16. in Justinian The whole glory of God was repaired by his vertue and the Church rejoyced in the stable peace which under him it injoyed Of Wernerus d An. 504. Hee was in all things most excellent and by his just lawes and wisedome he governed the world by his impiety he glorified God Of Aimonius e De gest Fr. lib 2. ca. 8. He was a Catholike a pious a just Emperour therefore all things prospered under his hands I oppose to that Baronian calumny the judgment of Pope Agatho and of the Romane Councell with him wherin this is expresly witnessed f In Epist Aga●● Act. 4. Conc. 6. pa. 18. a. His integritie in faith did much please God exalt the Christian Common-wealth and againe g Ibid. in Epist Synod pa. 22. His vertue and pietie omnia in meliorem ordinem restauravit restored all things into a better state and condition All both Church and Common-wealth both the Civill and Ecclesiasticall state he restored all I oppose the sixt generall Councell that is the judgement of the whole Church in which the suggestions of Agatho evē in that point according to the Cardinals doctrine h Vid. sup he● cap. nu 18. are approved as uttered by S. Peter yea by the holy Ghost himself These pregnant and irrefragable testimonies of so many so holy and divine witnesses are able I say not to confute but utterly to confound overwhelme Baronius w th his deformed decrepit calumnie 38. If any further please to descend to particulars whether hee cast his eyes on the Church or Common-wealth he shal see every Region every Province almost every City Towne proclaming the honour of Iustinian Besides his happy appeasing of those manifold broyles and suppressing sundry heresies which infested the Church in his dayes among which this concerning the Three Chapters was the chiefe How infinite monuments did he leave of his piety and zeale to Gods glory the good of his Church in building new in repairing decaied Churches reducing both to a most magnificēt beauty The Church of Christ called Sophia built by him at Constantinople was the mirrour of all Ages Of it Procopius an eye-witnesse testifieth i Proc. lib. 1. de aedif Iustin pa. 423. that the magnificence thereof amazed those who saw it but was incredible to those that saw it not the k Assurgit in altitudinem caeli Ibid. height of it mounted up into the heaven the splendor of it was such as if it received not l Diceres locum illum non externo sole illuminari Jbid. light from the Sun but had it in it selfe the roofe deckt with Gold the pavement beset m Pavimentum ex diversi coloris unionibus perfectum Glic Annal. part 4. with Pearle the silver of the Quire onely contained foure * Myriadas 4. caelati argenti habuisse fertur Proc. loc cit Myriads that is forty thousand pounds in so much that it is said n Hoc aedificio Solomonem esse superatum Glic loc cit to have excelled the Temple of Salomon Further in the honour of the blessed Virgin hee builded every where so many houses so stately and sumptuous throughout the Roman Empire that if you should comtemplate but onely one of them you would thinke saith Procopius o Lib. 1. his whole raigne to have beene imployed in building that alone At Constantinople he builded three p Ibid. one in Blacernis another in Pege a third in Hierio besides others builded in honour of Anna of Zoa of Michael of Peter and Paul of Sergius and Baccus utrumque fulgore lapillorum Solem vincit either of which by the brightnesse of precious stones excelled the Sunne of Andrew Luke and Tymothy of Acatius of Mocius of Thirsis of Theodorus of Tecla of Theodota Haec omnia ex fundamentis erexit All these he raised from the very ground and foundation and that at Constantinople the beauty and dignity of which cannot by words bee expressed by viewing be perlustrated Nor did he this to one onely Citie he builded like magnificent Churches at Antioch q Pro. lib. 2. at Sebastia at Nicopolis at Theodosia at TZani at Iustinianea r Lib. 4. where hee was borne at Ephesus ſ Lib. 5. at Helena at Nice at Pythia at Ierusalem so magnificent ut nullum aliud aequipare possit that none other may compare with it at Iericho at mount Gerazim at mount Sinai at Theopolis at Aegila t Lib. 6. pa. 453. where they sacrificed to Iupiter Hammon and Alexander the great even to that time at Boreion at Tripolis at Carthage at the Gades or Hercules pillers which was the uttermost border of the known world in those dayes So that one may truly say of him Imperium Oceano famam qui terminat astris his piety and zeale reacheth as farre as the earth his honour as high as the heaven And yet have I said nothing at all of the Monasteries Zenodochies Nosodochies and other like Hospitals which out of his most pious affection to God and Gods Church he not onely erected but inriched with large patrimonies and possessions which for number are as I suppose equall for expences greater than the former all the particulars whereof I referre to be read in Procopius who considering beside other matters al these magnificent and sumptuous buildings did truly say of Iustiniā u Lib. 1. pa. 424 Nulla honorandi Dei satietas eum cepit he was never
these by workes of infidelity of impiety of maligning the Church of reviling the servants of GOD of oppugning the faith of Patronizing heresie yea that fundamental heresie which overthroweth the whole Catholike faith and brings in a totall Apostasie from the faith by these hee hoped to purchase and in condignity to merit the felicity of the Kingdome of Heaven This being the track and beaten path wherein they walke and by which they aspire to immortality what Constantine m Socr. lib. 1. ca. 7. sayd once to Acesius the Novatian the same may be sayd to Baronius and his consorts Erigito tibi scalam Baroni ad coelum solus ascendito Keepe that Ladder unto your selves and by it doe you alone climbe up into heaven But well were it with them and thrice happy had the Cardinall beene if with a faithfull and upright heart towards God he could have said of Iustinian the words of Balaam Let me dye the death of the righteous and let my last end be like his His life being led in piety and abounding in good workes hee now enjoyeth the fruit thereof felicity and eternall rest in Abrahams bosome As for the Cardinall who hath so malignantly reviled him himselfe can now best tell whether he doth not cry and pray Father Abraham have mercy on me and send Iustinian that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and coole my tongue or sing that other note n Wisd 5.4.6 unto his fellowes concerning this Emperour Wee fooles thought his life to be madnesse and his end to bee without honour but now is he numbred among the children of God and his lot is among the Saints Therefore wee have erred from the way of truth and wearied our selves in the wayes of wickednesse and destruction we have gone through deserts where there lay no way but as for the way of the Lord wee have not knowne it CAP. XXI How Baronius revileth Theodora the Empresse and a refutation of the same 1. NExt the Emperour let us see how dutifully the Cardinall behaveth himselfe towards the Empresse Theodora A small matter it is with him in severall places to call her an a Impiae Theodorae Augustae an 535. nu 59. impious an hereticall b Haereticae faeminae impiae Theodorae ibid. nu 60. a sacrilegious c Sacrilega faemina molita est an 536. nu 123 a furious d A furente haeretica faemina excitata an 538 nu 9. hereticall woman a patrone e Jpsa haeretic●rum Acephalorum Severianorum Eutychianorum patrona an 547. nu 49. of heretikes and the like Heare and consider how he stormeth but in one place f An. 535. nu 63 against her These so great mischiefes did that most wicked woman beginne she became to her husband another Eve obeying the serpent a new Dalila to Samson striving by her subtiltie to weaken his strength another Herodias thirsting after the blood of most holy men a wanton mayd of the High Priest perswading Peter to deny Christ But this is not enough Sugillare ipsam with these termes to flout her who exceedeth all women in impiety let her have a name taken from Hell let her be called Alecto or Megera or Tisiphone a Citizen of hell a childe of Devills ravished with a satanicall spirit driven up and downe with a devillish gad-bee an enemy of concord and peace purchased with the blood of Martyrs Thus the Cardinall who tells us afterwards how when Vigilius came to Constantinople she contended long with him for to have Anthimus restored in so much that Vigilius was forced to smite her as from heaven with the thunderbolt of Excommunication g Sententiam excommunicationis inflixit et Excommunicationis sententia fulminis instar coelitus emisse prostravit an 547. nu 49. 50. whereupon she h Theodoram à Vigilio sauciatam diro jaculo anathematis haud diu post ulciscente numine est insequutus interitus an 548. nu 24 shortly dyed Here is the tragicall end which the Cardinall hath made of her 2. Now I would not have any think that I intend wholly to excuse the Empresse she had her passions and errors as who hath not and as Liberatus i Liber ca. 21 22. and Evagrius k Evagr. lib. 4. ca. 10. shew she tooke part with the oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon which was for sometime true shee being as it seemes seduced by Anthimus whom for a while she laboured to have restored to the See of Constantinople though afterwards as Victor Tununensis testifieth she being better informed joyned with the Emperor in condemning the Three Chapters and so in truth in defending the Councell of Chalcedon though Victor thought the contrarie And of this minde in condemning the three Chapters shee was as by Victor is evident some yeares before Vigilius came to Constantinople Her former error seduction and labour for Anthimus I will not seeke to lessen or any way excuse But though she were worthy of blame was it fit for the Cardinall so basely to revile her and in such an unseemly and undutifull manner to disgorge the venome of his stomacke upon an Empresse Tanta ne animis caelestibus irae who would have thought such rancour and poison to have rested in the brest of a Cardinall But there was you may be sure some great cause which drew from the Cardinall so many unseemly speeches against the Empresse and though hee would bee thought to doe all this onely out of zeale to the truth which Anthimus the heretike oppugned yet if the depth of the Cardinalls heart were sounded it will appeare that his spite against her was for condemning the Three Chapters which Pope Vigilius in his Constitution defendeth Anthimus and his cause is but a pretence and colour the Apostolicall Constitution the heresies of the Nestorians decreed and defined therein that is the true marke at which the Cardinall aymeth neither Emperour nor Empresse nor Bishop nor Councell nor any may open their mouth against that Constitution which toucheth them in capite but they shall be sure to heare and beare away as harsh and hellish termes from Baronius as if they had condemned the Trent Councell it selfe Had Theodora defended the Three Chapters as Vigilius in his Constitution did the Cardinall would have honoured her as a Melpomene Clio or Vrania because she did not that she must be nothing but Alecto Megara or Tisiphone and they are too good names for her 3. If one desired to set forth her praise there wants not testimonies of her dignity and honour Constantinus Manasses l Jn annal suis pa. 87. saith that she was Iisdem addicta cum marito studiis iisdem praedita moribus that she so well consorted to her husband that shee was addicted to the same studies indued with the same manners as he was That Iustinian himselfe calleth her m Participem consilij sumentes eam quae à Deo est data nobis
3. ad tom 6. Act. Conc. Eph. p. 907 which Theodoret made to the Nestorians at Chalcedon during the time of that Ephesine Councell of which Peltanus sayth Theodoret is caryed insano impitu with a furious rage against Cyrill and the other Orthodoxall Bishops of the holy Councell comparing them to Serpents Basiliskes murderers and the like Neither doth he onely vomit out his choler against them but he plainly girded at the Emperour also Did he accuse none when he uttered all this Nay he d Theod. loc cit affirmes Catholikes which hold Christ God and man to be one person and so to be passible to be worse than Heathens The Heathens sayth he taught the Heaven the Sun and the Starres to be impassible and shall wee beleeve the onely begotten Son of God to be passible and such as may dye Absit Salvator ne sic simus Apostatae farre be this from us O Saviour let us not be such Apostates as to teach this let us not suspect that our Saviour could suffer Let any man now judge whether it be not a shamelesse untruth which those Epistles avouch that Theodoret was not reproved for this doctrine no not lightly reproved in all those 26. yeares whereas both then and ever since the whole Catholike Church hath accursed his impiety and heresie which he so insolently then preached And omitting infinite like proofes of the falshood of that Epistle the next yeare after the Ephesine Councell there was a Synod e Tom. 5. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 5. pa. 831. pa. 927. held at Antioch where Iohn and divers other Bishops concluded the full union with Cyrill wherein they all condemne anathematize the heresies of Nestorius which their profession of faith and this condemning of the Nestorian heresie Iohn sent both to Cyrill to Pope Sixtus and to Maximianus Bishop of Constantinople Now seeing Theodoret not onely in former time had beene so violent and furious in defence of that doctrine but then and long after continued in the same minde was not his doctrine reproved nay was it not accursed and anathematized by Iohn Patriarch of Antioch and many other Bishops subject to his Patriarchship What a most vile and shameless untruth then is it which the Impostor makes Theodoret to utter that in the whole space of 25. or 26. yeares he neither accused any nor was accused nor reproved no not lightly reproved either by Iohn or any other but that all and every one of his writings contained the true doctrine of the Church But enough of those Epistles which to be forged and false this which is already sayd may for this time suffice 11. Having now declared how untrue that is which Baronius affirmeth that Theodoret after the union did never embrace the heresies of Nestorius and withall seene how weake and unsound his proofe is in this point I will yet adde one consideration which will further manifest and even demonstrate the same That is taken from the history of Theodoret. Certaine it is that when Theodoret writ that history he was earnestly addicted to Nestorianisme whereof in the very last Chapter f Lib. 5. ca. 40. he gives an eminent proofe commending Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia for a worthy teacher of the whole Church and for an oppugner of all heresies adding that whereas he was a Bishop thirty six yeares he never ceased optimam herbam sanctis Christi ovibus suppeditare to feed the flocke of Christ with the best herbes None can doubt but hee who so much extolleth so detestable an heretike and approveth those most damnable heresies which from him Nestorius suckt for the best herbes or doctrines but he must needs be confessed to bee as deepe in Nestorianisme as Nestorius himselfe If now it may appeare that this history was writ by him after the union there can no doubt remaine but that after the union Theodoret favoured Nestorius and all his heresies 12. Baronius knowing this inevitably to follow to decline the whole force of this tels g an 427. nu 28 us that Theodoret writ his history not onely before the union but before the jarre also yea before the time of the holy Councell at Ephesus whereof having given some sleight conjectures in the end he concludes Dicendum est It must be sayd that Theodoret writ this history in the space of those three yeares which were next precedent to the holy Ephesine Councell So he Shall I say the Cardinall was deceived and overseene herein No I will not suspect that such an evident error could creepe into the minde of so exact an Annalist I rather thinke his intent was wilfully and wittingly to deceive others and that therefore hee sayd this to smother that truth touching Theodorets continuance in Nestorianisme which he elsewhere so often denieth Theodoret h Lib. 5. hist Eccl. ca. 36. mentioneth in that his history the translation of the body or reliques of Chrysostome and bringing them to Constantinople The Cardinall was so far from being ignorant hereof that himselfe citeth i Bar. an 438. nu 6. Theodoret with a memorandum He ante omnes above them all mentioneth this translation but in few words That translation as Socrates k Lib. 7. ca. 44. and Marcellinus l In suo Chron. witnesse was when Theodosius was the sixteenth time Consull that is as the Cardinall also accounteth in the yeare 438. Now seeing the union betweene Iohn and Cyrill was made in the yeare 432. it unavoydably followeth that either Theodoret writ not his History till seven yeares at least after the union and how much more I know not whether 8. 10. or 16. after it for it is uncertaine or if hee writ it as the Cardinall divineth before the Ephesine Synod that he writ it prophetically writing those Acts which happened not till eight or nine yeares after his history was written The truth is an orderly and historicall continuation of things done he doth not write but onely to the death of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia where his history for any such continuation of succeeding matters doth end but to shew and testifie that he writ his history after the yeare 438. hee purposely mentioneth some of those acts which fell out in that yeare and hereof further there may be a presumption because Theodoret as Baronius tels m Ecquid mirum si quod dixerat Sozomenus à Theodoreto repetitum inveniatur Bar. in Martyr Rom. Decemb. 23. us followed Sozomen in his commending of Theodorus of Mopsvestia now Sozomens history was continued unto the 17. Consulship of Theodosius as himselfe witnesseth So that if Theodoret as the Cardinall tels us tooke it out of Sózomen and his booke was not published till the yeare 439. sure the Cardinall of all men had reason to think that Theodoret could not before that time otherwise than prophetically in this point write his history It remaineth now seeing Theodoret was an earnest defender of Nestorius at the time when he writ this