Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	lord_n	love_v	saint_n	5,636	5	6.4232	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19552	Vigilius dormitans Romes seer overseene· Or A treatise of the Fift General Councell held at Constantinople, anno 553. under Iustinian the Emperour, in the time of Pope Vigilius: the occasion being those tria capitula, which for many yeares troubled the whole Church. Wherein 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 Divinitie, 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.	Crakanthorpe, Richard, 1567-1624.; Crakanthorpe, George, b. 1586 or 7.; Crakanthorpe, Richard, 1567-1624. Justinian the Emperor defended, against Cardinal Baronius.	1631 (1631)	STC 5983; ESTC S107274	689,557	538

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 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 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 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 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 reason of the Cardinall may take effect themselves and their Romane Church will be farre the greatest loosers how easie will it be to reject and contemne an whole Volume of their Pontificall Edicts why this was made or written by Iohn 12. that by Hildebrand or Boniface 8. the other by Iohn 23. an heretike an Atheist a Devill incarnate as a generall Councell testifieth another by Formosus Steven or by one of those whom themselves professe to have beene theeves robbers Wolves Tygers and most savage beasts and Apostaticall Popes as Genebrard calleth threescore of them all worse than the Author of this Imperiall Edict though wee should admit him to have beene such or as bad every way as Baronius describeth him 6. But the truth is the Author of the Edict was no such man as the Cardinall fancieth as it beares the name so it was indeed the worke of Iustinian no childe can have more honour by his father than it by such an Emperour and though Baronius having so often slandered Iustinian to bee utterly rude unlearned one that could not so much as reade nor knew his Alphabet or first elements could not but in good congruity confidently deny Iustinian to bee the Writer or Author of so learned and divine an Edict or as himselfe cals it of so exact a Catechisme yet considering what before was declared both out of Procopius of the Emperours often tossing of bookes among the Bishops out of Liberatus of his great paines taken in writing against heretikes and for defence of the Councell of Chalcedon and out of Platina calling Iustinian a very learned Emperour I cannot thinke but that although Iustinian might use the advise helpe and industry of Mennas Theodorus or some other Bishops in this as in other Edicts concerning Ecclesiasticall affaires yet still the ultima manus the last correction and perfecting of all was the Emperours owne doing the rather because both in his other Edicts that against Anthimus against Origen as also in his letters to this Synod and the rest there is so uniforme a stile so Imperiall and so divine a kinde of writing that the same Genius of Iustinian seemes to breathe in them all 7. But Baronius tels us that both Liberatus Facundus and Vigilius doe testifie Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea to bee the Author of this Edict Baronius is ever like himselfe that is untrue and fraudulent Not one of these say it first not Liberatus hee indeed affirmes Theodorus and some others to have suggested this unto the Emperour that hee would condemne those Three Chapters by a publike Edict or booke but hee addes withall Rogaverunt eum ut dictaret Libellum they prayed the Emperour that he would dictate or indite the booke against the Three Chapters and the Emperour consented saith Liberatus unto them hoc se laetus implere promisit and he gladly promised to doe so that is to indite or dictate such an Edict So farre is Liberatus from affirming as Baronius alleageth him Theodorus to bee the Author of this booke or Edict that hee teacheth the quite contrary As for Facundus he saith indeed the Edict was not written by Iustinian but by the adversaries of the truth but that Theodorus writ it that is the Cardinals addition Facundus saith it not and even in that which hee saith that the Edict is contrary to the Emperours faith Facundus doth so manifestly slander both the Emperour as if hee thought the Three Chapters were not to be condemned and the Edict also as if the condemning of these Three Chapters were contrary to the Catholike faith that there is no credit at all to bee given to him in his report touching the Author who is so untrue in his reports both touching the matter of the Edict and touching the knowne profession and faith of the Emperour 8. The Cardinals Vigilius now remaineth whose words are these spoken to Theodorus The booke condemning the Three Chapters by their meanes was read in the Kings Pallace before certaine Greeke Bishops à quibus assentationum favorem tuis vocibus exigebas What if one should here oppose the Cardinall and say tuis vocibus were the Ablative case and that Theodorus had by his words sollicited the other Bishops favorably to consent to the Emperors Edict How will Baronius assure us that

and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per cum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as found lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of 〈◊〉 it were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and fortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held thē now upon another Foundation For thē they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had just led out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made

hold their foundation being not onely uncertaine but hereticall and Antichristian poysoneth all which they build thereon it being vertually in them all makes them all like it selfe uncertaine hereticall and Antichristian and so those very doctrines which in themselves are most certaine and orthodoxall by the uncertainty of that ground upon which and for which they are beleeved are overthrowne with us and all Catholikes it fals out otherwise Though such happen to erre in some one or moe doctrines of faith say in Transubstantiation Purgatory or as Cyprian did in Rebaptization yet seeing they hold those errors because they thinke them to be taught in the Scriptures and Word of God on which alone their faith relyeth most firmely and undoubtedly beleeving whatsoever is taught therein among which things are the contrary doctrines to Transubstantiatiō Purgatory Rebaptization such I say even while they doe thus erre in their Explicite profession doe truly though implicitè by consequent and in radice or fundamento beleeve and that most firmely the quite contrary to those errours which they doe outwardly professe and think they doe but indeed doe not beleeve The vertue and strength of that fundamentall truth which they indeed and truly beleeve overcommeth all their errours which in very deed they doe not though they thinke they doe beleeve whereas in very truth they beleeve the quite contrary And this golden foundation in Christ which such men though erring in some points doe constantly hold shall more prevaile to their salvation than the Hay and Stubble of those errours which ignorantly but not pertinaciously they build thereon can prevaile to their destruction and therefore if such a man happen to die without explicite notice and repentance of those errours in particular as the saying of Saint Austen that what faults Saint Cyprian had contracted by humane imbecillity the same by his glorious Martyrdome was washed away perswades mee that Cyprian did and as of Irene Nepos Iustine Martyr and others who held the errour of the Chiliasts I thinke none makes doubt it is not to be doubted but the abundance of this mans saith and love unto Christ to whom in the foundation hee most firmely adhereth shall worke the like effect in him as did the blood of martyrdome in Saint Cypran For the baptisme of martyrdome washeth away sinne not because it is a washing in blood but because it testifieth the inward washing of his heart by faith and by the purging Spirit of God This inward washing in whomsoever it is found and found it is in all who truly beleeve though in some point of faith they erre it is as forcible and effectuall to save Valentinian neither baptized with water nor with blood and Nepos baptized with water but not with blood as to save Cyprian baptized both with water and with blood Such a comfort and happinesse it is to hold the right and true foundation of faith 30. The quite contrary is to be seen in them Though they explicitè professe Christ to be God which is a most orthodoxall truth yet because they hold this as all other points upon that foundation of the Popes infallible judgement in causes of faith and in that foundation this is denyed Pope Vigilius by his Cathedrall Constitution defining Nestorianisme to be truth and so Christ not to be God it must needs be confessed that even while they doe explicitè professe Christ to bee God they doe implicitè in radice and in fundamento deny Christ to be God and because by the Philosophers rule they doe more firmely beleeve that foundation than they doe or can beleeve any doctrine depending thereon it must needs ensue hence that they doe and must by their doctrine more firmely beleeve the Negative that Christ is not God which in the foundation is decreed then they doe or can beleeve the Affirmative that Christ is God which upon that foundation is builded The truth which upon that foundation they doe explicitè professe cannot possibly be so strong to salvation as the errour of the foundation upon which they build it will be to destruction For the fundamentall errour is never amended by any truth superedified and laid thereon no more than the rotten foundation of an house is made sound by laying upon it rafters of gold or silver but all the truths that are superedified are ruinated by that fundamentall errour and uncertainty on which they all relye even as the beames and rafters of gold are ruinated by that rottennesse and unsoundnesse which resteth in the foundation Or if they say that both the assertions which are directly contradictory are from that foundation deduced Caelestine and Leo decreeing the one that Christ is God as Vigilius decreed the other that Christ is not God then doth it inevitably follow that they can truly beleeve neither the one nor the other seeing by beleeving that foundation they must equally beleeve them both which is impossible Such an unhappy and wretched thing it is to hold that erroneous hereticall and Antichristian foundation of faith 31. My conclusion of this point is this Seeing we have first declared that all who are members of the present Romane Church doe hold the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith yea hold it as the very foundation on which all their other doctrines faith and religion doth relye and seeing wee have next demonstrated this to be a fundamentall heresie and not onely an hereticall but an Antichristian foundation condemned by Scriptures by generall Councels by ancient Fathers and by the consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church that now hence followeth which I proposed to prove that none is or can bee a member of their present Church but the same is convicted and condemned for an heretike by Scriptures generall Councels Fathers and by the uniforme consent of the Catholike Church An heretike first in the very foundation of his faith which being Antichristian is hereticall in the highest and worst degree that may be razing the true foundation of faith in regard whereof the mystery of Antichristianisme farre surpasseth all the heresies that ever went before or shall ever follow after it An heretike secondly in many particular doctrines depending on that Foundation among which are the heresies and blasphemies of the Nestorians all which by the Cathedrall constitution of Vigilius are decreed to be truths and by all men to be defended Lastly an heretike vertually and quoad radicem in every doctrine of faith which hee holdeth or professeth and so hereticall therein that the very holding of Catholike truths becomes unto him hereticall seeing he holds them upon that Foundation which is not only contrary to faith but which overthroweth the whole faith Reward Babylon O ye servants of the Lord as she hath rewarded you give her double according to her workes and in the cup that she hath filled to you fill her the double 32. From hence there ensueth one other conclusion which being worthy observing I many

but in these later there never was any power to binde any either to accept their Decrees or to undergoe their censures because ab initio there was a meere nullity in all their Acts. Againe the inflicting of any punishment upon the judgement of the former had the warrant though not of divine yet of humane authority and was to bee presumed as just the sentence of every Iudge even eo nomine because he is a Iudge being to bee presumed just untill upon evident proofe it bee declared to bee unjust But what censures or punishments soever are or at any time have beene denounced or inflicted on any upon the warrant or Iudgement of these last ten Synods they are all ab initio meerely tyrannous and unjust inflicted without any either divine or humane authority seeing those Synods had none at all there is not so much as a presumption that they were or could be just but for their want of authority in decreeing them they are though otherwise equall presumed to be unjust 43. And thus much I have thought good to insert concerning all sorts of Councels as well lawfull as unlawfull to manifest hereby not onely the injurious dealing of Baronius with this fift Councell against which he declameth as an impious and unlawfull conspiracy but their vanity also in extolling and magnifying many and specially those last ten for holy lawfull and oecumenicall Synods of which dignity they are so farre short that they are all most deservedly to be ranked with the Ephesine Latrocinie and put in the Classis of those which of all other are the most base impious unlawfull and disorderly Councells CAP. XX. How Cardinall Baronius revileth the Emperour Iustinian and a refutation of the same 1. WEE have hitherto seene and fully examined all the materiall exceptions which Baronius could devise to excuse Pope Vigilius from heresie and in them consists the whole pith and all the sinewes of the cause they being the onely arguments which are to be reckoned as the lawfull warriers of the Cardinall Now followeth that other Troupe whereof I told you before of his piraticall and disorderly Straglers which the Cardinall hath mustred together not that they should dispute or reason in this cause but to raile and revile at every thing whereat their Leader is displeased And the Cardinall doth this with so impotent affections in so immodest that I say not so scurrill a manner and with such virulency of all uncivill and most undutiful speeches that you shall see him now having cast away all that gravity and modesty which is fit not onely for a Divine a Cardinall a Disputer but for a man of any temper or sobriety to act herein no other part but Hercules Furens or Ajax mastigophorus without all respect either of authority or dignity or innocency lashing every body and every thing that comes in his way be it friend or foe sparing nothing that seemes to crosse his fancy not the Emperour Iustinian not the Empresse Theodora not Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea not the Imperiall Edict not the controversie and cause it selfe of the Three Chapters not the Acts of the holy Generall Councell not Pope Vigilius himselfe nothing can scape the whippe of his tongue and pen. Let us begin with the Emperour against whom Baronius declameth in this manner 2. Princes to dare to make lawes for Priests who should obey the lawes made by them Such an one as Iustinian make lawes of faith an abcedary Emperour an illiterate Theologue utterly unlearned who knew not how to reade who could never reade the title of the Bible no not the very first elements not his Alpha Beta He on a sodaine to become a palliated Divine Hee to prescribe lawes for the Church as subject to his Hee against all right and equity to presume to make lawes of sacred matters of Priests He to set downe punishments for them Hee who was not onely thus utterly unlearned but withall an enemy to the Church a sacrilegious person a persecutor a grievous a monstrous persecutor one who was madde franticke and out of his wits who was possessed with an evill spirit and driven by the Devill himselfe Such an one make lawes for Bishops what is this else but to confound all things to treade under foote the sacred Canons to abolish utterly the Church discipline to dissolve all divine order and to make of the Kingdome of heaven which the Church is the very prison of hell where there is nothing but confusion Thus the Cardinall And this is but the first pageant of his Ajax and but some gleanings neither of that harvest which is abundant in his Annals 3. Not to seeke any exact or methodicall refutation hereof All that the Cardinall hath hitherto said may bee reduced to three notorious slanders by which he laboureth to blemish the immortall fame and unspotted 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 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 saith of him He was a man of an excellent wit and hee is deservedly 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 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 Pontificiall most worthy to be observed for this purpose Iustinian the Emperour a religious man sent unto the Apostolike See his profession of saith 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 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 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 cum debere pati That he should not trouble himselfe with writing books but maintaine the faith by publishing

Popes Legates in crossing the decree and knowne resolution of Pope Leo and in being a most lively patterne of that rightfull and ancient authority which Emperours then held above all the Bishops in the Councell but now the Pope usurpes both above all Bishops Emperours and Councels God would by these monuments of antiquity pull downe the lofty Towers and raze from the very bottome that foundation of Babylon which can never be firme and setled hee would have besides other particular witnesses these unconquerable and irresistible forces of these ancient and generall Councels against which no just exception can be taken and although I will not excuse the acts of these nor any of them from all defects and blemishes whatsoever yet I dare boldly averre that they are so few so light and of so small importance that the maine controversies handled in them or relying on them cannot be prejudicated thereby they being rather the errours of the Collectors or of the writers and exscribers of these Councels than of the Councels themselves And particularly for this fift Councell against which Baronius doth so furiously declame I doubt not to make it evident that all the faults which after much prying hee hath objected unto the Acts thereof will prove so many evident testimonies of his owne most fraudulent and corrupt dealing and not the defects or corruptions in the Acts of this Councell But let us view the particulars CAP. XXV The first alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that the text of the Councell at Chalcedon is changed therein refuted THE corruptions which Baronius and out of him Binius objecteth are according to the grammaticall division reduced to three sorts of irregularity Some by variation or alteration others by defect or mutilation the rest by redundance or addition In the first ranke bee pretendeth three examples the first which seemeth to be of greatest moment and carieth the greatest colour of probability is the corrupting of a certaine text of the Councell at Chalcedon cited by this fift Synod Heare the accusation in Baronius his owne words We may not here omit saith he to note the craft of the Grecians who contrary to right and equitie have corrupted the holy text of the Synodall Acts by adding unto the Councell of Chalcedon those words about which there was much contention in the time of Pope Hormisda when certaine suspected of Eutycheanisine specially some Scythian Monkes did labour that unto the holy Councell of Chalcedon these words might bee added Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum unum esse de sancta Trinitate which when they could not obtaine because the Synod was well enough without that addition here now in this fift Councell where the Epistle of Ibas is compared with the profession of the Councell at Chalcedon they recite these words of the Synod Chalcedonensis sancta Synodus in definitione quam de fide fecit praedicat Deum verbum incarnatum esse hominem the holy Synod of Chalcedon in the definition which it made of faith doth professe God the Word to have beene incarnate and made man and they adde unto the words of the Synod qui est Dominus noster Iesus Christus unus de sancta Trinitate who is our Lord Iesus Christ one of the holy Trinitie as if the Synod of Chalcedon had professed that whereas they rather would call Christ unam personam sanctae Trinitatis than unum de sancta Trinitate Thus Baronius In which few words of his there are contained so many notable untruths and hereticall frauds that without a rare dexterity in that craft hee could not have easily contrived and couched them in so small a roome 2. First that they who contended to have Christ called unum de sancta Trinitate were heretikes or Eutycheans or unjustly suspected thereof is not onely untrue but bewrayes the Cardinals obstinate and obdurate affection to Nestorianisme for as Dionysius Exiguus in his Preface to the Epistle of Proclus witnesseth and most truly the disciples of Theodorus Mopsvestenus began to teach an impious faith to the people with most crafty subtilty professing the Trinity to bee in such sort of one Essence ut Christum Dominum nostrum unum ex Trinitate nullatenus faterentur that they would by no meanes confesse Christ our Lord to be one of the Trinity and thereupon they taught a quaternity in the persons If Baronius esteeme it heresie to professe Christ unum de sancta Trinitate then is hee certainly by this besides all other evidences convicted to be a Nestorian heretike for it is an Article of their Nestorian and repugnant to the Catholike faith to deny or doubt to call Christ unum de sancta Trinitate 3. Secondly that the Councell of Chalcedon made ever any doubt to professe Christ to bee unum de sancta Trinitate or that they would rather call him unam personam Trinitatis is another vile Nestorian slander and hereticall untruth of Baronius The Councell of Chalcedon saith Iustinian approved the Epistle of Proclus wherin it is taught that we ought to confesse our Lord Iesus Christ to be one of the holy Trinity Proclus saith Dionysius Exiguus did marvellously resist that impiety and hee taught our Lord Iesus Christ unum de Trinitate esse to bee one of the Trinity When the Nestorians troubled the Church about this matter Iustinian set forth a most religious Imperiall Edict wherein hee commanded all to professe Christ to bee unum de Trinitate wee anathematize saith he every heresie especially Nestorius and those who thinke or have thought as he did wee anathematize those who deny or will not confesse our Lord Iesus Christ unum esse ex sancta consubstantiali Trinitate to bee one of the holy and consubstantiall Trinitie This Imperiall Edict the very next yeare after it was published was confirmed by Pope Iohn who thus writeth 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 he calleth the Scythian Monks Eutycheans heretikes and oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon and that

and Theodora why what meanes this Inscription ad Dominos why doth the Cardinal clip away the one halfe of the Inscription The Inscription in Liberatus is Dominis Christis the Cardinall belike misdoubted by Christis could not bee demonstrated Iustinian and Theodora Christus is the Popes prerogative it demonstrates him and therefore lest the Pope should frowne upon the Cardinall for saying this Inscription Dominis ac Christis doe demonstrate Iustinian and Theodora hee corrupts the Text and maimes the Inscription and makes it to bee but ad Dominos and so the Inscription ad Dominos may well point at the Emperour and Empresse 22. Yet take the Cardinals maimed Inscription as it is doth this title ad Dominos demonstrate the Emperour may not one write Domino or ad Dominum but onely to the Emperour how many thousand millions of Emperors will the Cardinall coine unto us every servant every prentise may write Domino or Dominis unto their Master and then by the Cardinals demonstration you shall have Coblers and Tailors and Weavers and all Artificers in the world turned into Emp. and their wife 's into Empresses for sanè quidem verily this Inscriptiō ad Dominos demonstrates that the Epist. is writ to the Emperour and Empresse Doe you think I say not that Philosophers and Logicians but any elementary boy that hath learned to decline Dominus can hold himselfe at the hearing of such demonstrations But to put the matter out of all doubt and demonstrate the other demonstration to bee as idle a fancie as can devised the Inscription which is but in briefe set downe by Liberatus is fully and at large expressed by Victor who lived and writ also at that time The tenour saith hee of Vigilius Epistle is proved to bee thus Bishop Vigilius Dominis ac fratribus to Theodosius Anthimus and Severus Bishops my Lords and brethren joyned to us in the love of Christ our Saviour What is now become of the Demonstration ad Dominos how doth the Inscription ad Dominos sanè quidem truly and verily demonstrate Iustinian and Theodora when together with Dominus is expresly set downe and named who those Domini were to whom Vigilius writ even three deposed hereticall Bishops 23. The Cardinall and Binius following him will not yet let goe this demonstration but much please themselves in a new device The Epistle saith hee is inscribed also ad Patres now it is unusuall for Popes to call Emperours their Fathers and therefore sure it is but a counterfeit Epistle in Vigilius name Why but if Popes doe not use that terme it is their owne fault thy might justly so call Emperours Emperours are the fathers of their whole Empire and that in a more eminent manner than any other father Imperiall Fathers commanding and compelling fathers fathers superiour to all other fathers even to all Pontificall fathers but where I pray you is that Inscription Dominis ac Patribus Not in Victor not in Liberatus at least not in the best Edition of him not in that which Binius hath set forth there the Inscription is faire and cleare Dominis ac Christis and yet so ridiculous was Binius and so foolishly addicted to Baronius that he proves this Epistle to bee forged because the Inscription is Dominis ac Patribus whereas himselfe in the lease before had set downe the Inscription to bee Dominis ac Christis let it bee Patribus the Cardinall and Binius surely doated when they concluded that the Epistle was writ to the Emperour for as out of Liberatus but most clearely out of Victors words is demonstrated it was writ to father Anthimus father Theodosius and father Severus Vigilius might well call them Patres when in the Inscription he called them Bishops 24. And certainly Baronius was conscious to himselfe that this Epistle was writ to Bishops not to the Emperour and Empresse for as misdoubting that this would and justly might bee replied to his demonstration hee adds Si dicas scriptum ad Episcopos if you say the Epistle was written to Bishops and not to the Emperour yet even so it is a forgery also and why for Qui novus iste mos est what a novelty is it and utterly unusuall that the Pope should call his fellow Bishops Patres Dominos or if you say that it should be read fratribus and not Patribus yet certainly that procul abhorret is very abhorrent that he should call the same both brethren and Lords What is the demonstration come now to relye upon this It is new It is unusuall as if nothing that is new or unusuall were done or writ It was new and unusual to thrust out and murther the true Pope yet Vigilius did it for all the novelty thereof Could Vigilius act a matter so horrible being new and unusuall and might not hee write a phrase or give a title being new and unusuall It is unusuall I trow for Popes to call hereticall Bishops deposed by generall Councels their brethren beloved in Christ he that would honour deposed heretikes with such loving termes would hee doubt to call them by an unusuall title Dominos ac Patres or Dominos ac Fratres and yet neither of both is so unusuall as the Cardinall would have it thought In the Councell at Barre when the Greekes disputed against the Pope Vrbane so eagerly against the procession of the holy Ghost that the Pope was at a non plus and unable to answer being driven to that exigent and remembring that Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury was in the Councell exclamat he cried aloud before the whole Councell Pater et Magister Anselme ubi es Oh my father and Master Anselme where are you come now and defend your mother the Church And when after much crying and shouting they brought him in presence among them Pope Vrbane said includamus hunc in orbe nostro quasi alterius orbis Papam let us inclose him in our circle as the Pope of the other world Might not Vigilius do that to three Patriarks which Vrbane did to an Archbishop might not Vigilius call them fathers as well as Vrbane called Anselme father and Master Might not that bee done secretly and in a private letter which the Pope did openly in the audience of the whole Councell Is it more incongruity for the Pope to call the Patriarcke of Alexandria or of Antioch his father or Lord than to call the Patriarke of England father master yea Pope in his owne Patriarchal Diocesse in England 25. But the Cardinall still harps on a wrong string Vigilius neither in the Inscription subscription nor body of the Epistle called them fathers but brethren That title is given them indeed three or foure times both in Liberatus and in Victor fraternitati vestrae fraternitatem vestram orate pro nobis mihi fratres in Christo conjuncti pray for us my brethren in the Lord. Which evidently shewes that Baronius and Binius either themselves