the Reformation Part II. Book I. p. 17. And this is what I thought fit to Remark for the benefit of the English Reader concerning the Doctrin of Transubstantiation which is said to be Establish'd in the Thirteenth Century by Innocent III. concerning whom I Observe in the 2d Place That this Pope was the first who publish'd a Crusade against the Albigenses which is a way of enlightning Men's Understandings by beating out their brains and converting them by the irresistible force of Sword and Gun the same way which Mahomet us'd for propagating his Religion in the World was follow'd by this Pope whose Cruel and Barbarous Actions are no less agreeable to the Spirit of Mahomet than they are contrary to that of Christ. The same Pope Founded the Office of the Inquisition which at first did only draw up a Process against Hereticks and sollicit the ordinary Judges to Condemn them but in a little time the Power of Judging and Condemning Heresie was committed to them and the Secular Judges did only execute their Sentence And it is observable that the Inquisition was established much about the same time with Transubstantiation the Cruelty of the one being a fit Match for the absurdity of the other And indeed this Holy Office was a necessary Engine to cram down the throats of Mankind such a choaking Morcel as Transubstantiation Mr. Du Pin in this History has given us some account of the barbarous Proceedings against the Albigenses by the Croisade and the Inquisition without passing any Censure upon these Actions but lest any should suspect by his Silence that he approv'd them I will now briefly shew you what Opinion he had of all Corporal Punishments when they are us'd by Ecclesiasticks And this will appear from his Book of Ecclesiastical Discipline Dissert 7. where 1st in the Preface he tells us That the Civii Power respects Mens Bodies which may be forc'd to a Compliance and therefore the Civil Magistrate may Punish Men with Corporal Punishment and Death but the Ecclesiastical Power respects Mens Minds which cannot be forc'd and therefore the Governours of this Society can only reclaim Men from their Vices by Exhortations and Commands which if they do not obey they can inflict no other Punishment but that of Excommunication And then 2dly in Ch. 1. Sect. 5. of the same Dissertation he proves that the Church has no Authority in Temporal Affairs because it cannot force Men by Corporal Punishment and Deprivation of their Goods For says he 't is a thing unheard of among the Ancients that the Church should inflict any other Punishment than that of Excommunication or Deposition He owns that after the Emperors became Christian their affection to the Christian Religion and desire to preserve the Empire in Peace mov'd them sometimes to Banish or Fine those who were Ringleaders of Heresy which was very often done of their own proper motion and sometimes but seldom at the desire of the Fathers of the Church But it was only in the latter Ages that the Church obtain'd of the Emperors a Power to inflict Corporal Punishment For proof of this he shews 1st That Christ gave to the Church no Power but what is Spiritual nor did order the Obstinate and Disobedient to be otherwise Punish'd than by excluding them from Communion But this is not all for he shews in the 2d place whatever Power Churchmen may have receiv'd from Magistrates over Men's Bodies That nothing is more contrary to the Design of the Gospel than such a Power as strikes terror into the Minds of Men which he proves from the words of our Saviour to the Apostles when they would have call'd for Fire from Heaven upon the Samaritans Luke 9. 25. Ye know not what Spirit ye are of for the Son of Man came not to destroy Men's Lives but to save them 3dly He shews That Christ forbad his Apostles to use the Temporal Sword in defence of Religion from the Rebuke that he gave to St. Peter for drawing his Sword Put up thy Sword into the Sheath for all they that take the Sword shall perish by the Sword Matth. 26. And lastly he proves That Ecclesiasticks cannot use the Temporal Sword or Civil Power to Force and Punish Men from the Unanimous Consent of the Fathers whom he there Quotes And this may suffice to shew what Opinion Du Pin had of this Wolf of a Pastor Innocent III. and the Sanguinary Methods he us'd to Extirpate Hereticks by the Crusade and the Inquisition since he declares not only that Churchmen have no such Power from Christ and that it was never practis'd in the first and best Ages of the Church but also that it is contrary to the Design of the Gospel to use such Cruelties and to the Mind of Christ to Defend and much more to Propagate Religion by such violent and bloody Methods ADVERTISEMENT THE Preceeding Volumes of Monsieur Du Pin ' s Ecclesiastical History wherein an Abridgment is given of the Writings of the Primitive Fathers and all other Ecclesiastical Writers from the Time of our Saviour with a Preliminary Dissertation of the Authors of the Bible and an Impartial Relation of all Affairs Transacted in the Church is Printed for and Sold by Timothy Childe at the White-Hart at the West-End of St. Paul ' s Church-Yard And those Gentlemen that have the former Volumes wanting those last Publish'd viz. The Eighth Ninth and Tenth being the History of the Tenth Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries may be Furnish'd with them by Tim. Childe A TABLE of the CONTENTS of the ELEVENTH VOLUME CHAP. I. THE History of the different Revolutions in the Empire and Italy during the Thirteenth Century Page 1 Contests about the Empire between Philip and Otho Ibid. Otho acknowledg'd Emperor 2 Otho goes into Italy andmakes War there 2 Sentence of Excommunication against him 2 Frederick elected Emperor and goes into Germany 3 Crown'd Emperor by Honorius III. 3 But differing with the Pope is also excommunicated Ibid. Pope Honorius dies and is succeeded by Gregory IX Ibid. Frederick departs for the Holy Land Ibid. Gregory excommunicates him Ibid. Frederick makes Peace with the Pope 4 Henry his Son whom he had caused to be chosen King of Germany revolts from him 4 Frederick wars again with the Pope 4 The Sentence of Pope Gregory against him 4 The Opinion of the French upon the Deposition of Frederick 5 The Death of Gregory and Election of Celestin IV. and Innocent IV. Ibid. A General Council at Lions 6 Wherein the Pope complains of the Emperor 6 Frederick's Defence 7 The Landgrave of Thuringen and Earl of Holland chosen Emperors by some of the Princes of Germany 7 The Death of Frederick 8 The Government of Manfred in Sicily 9 Troubles in the Empire and Sicily 9 The Elections of Alphonsus and Richard Earl of Cornwal Emperors 9 Charles Earl of Anjou defeats Manfred and makes himself Master of Italy 9 Conradin disputes the Kingdom of Sicily with Charles 9 Defeated and put to death
Athanasius Innocent of those Crimes and sent him back to Alexandria with a very obliging Letter in his favour This was done in the Year 331. The Enemies of St. Athanasius not resting satisfied with this Judgment the next Year renew'd the Accusation of the Chalice broken by Macarius founded upon the Deposition of one Ischyras who call'd himself a Priest altho' he was ordain'd by Collythus who was not truly a Bishop and therefore had not Power to give him a valid Ordination Ischyras had dwelt at Mareotis a Country of Egypt where there was neither Bishop nor Suffragan but only a great many Parishes govern'd by Priests He had one of these Churches which Athanasius understanding sent Macarius to forbid him when he visited his Diocess to Celebrate the Divine Mysteries and to execute any part of the Sacerdotal Function This gave the occasion of accusing Macarius that he had broken one of the Sacred Chalices altho' he found Ischyras out of the Church and in his Bed But to render St. Athanasius more odious they accuse him of having put Arsenius to Death who was Bishop of Hipsele in Thebais and of the Faction of the Melitians The Emperour who had already examin'd the first Accusation which was likewise confounded by the Letter of Ischyras who acknowledg'd that he was forc'd to invent this Calumny did not take any further notice of that Article but wrote to Dalmatius to enquire into the second Accusation concerning the Murder of Arsenius This oblig'd St. Athanasius to search every where for this Bishop whom the Melitians had hid in the Monasteries at their Devotion And at last he was found at Tyre where he was made known before Paul the Bishop Then St. Athanasius having given notice to Constantine that his Accusers were convicted of an Imposture the Emperour wrote to Dalmatius to stop all further Process and sent a very obliging Letter to St. Athanasius wherein he exhorts him to moderation condemns the Rage of the Melitians and promises him Protection But for all this the Arian Faction lost not their Courage nor did they cease to contrive still new Accusations against him Whereupon the Emperour being tormented with their continual Importunity thought fit to call a Council to put an end to all these Differences which he order'd to meet at Caesarea in Palaestine where St. Athanasius was Summon'd to appear But this Saint perceiving that the Council was compos'd of his Enemies would not appear there His Absence irritated the Emperour against him who call'd another Council to meet at Tyre in the year 335 and wrote to St. Athanasius that he should not fail to come there which he did in such Terms as might make him sensible that he was not satisfi'd with his Conduct St. Athanasius was forc'd to appear there in the quality of a Criminal but he answer'd the Accusation of the Murder of Arsenius by producing him before the Council Ruffinus says That they still went on to accuse St. Athanasius by a Woman of an ill Life who was presently convicted of being a Cheat because she took for him a Deacon call'd Timotheus who feign'd himself to be Athanasius But this History which is supported by no other Authority but that of Ruffinus appears very doubtful because neither St. Athanasius nor the Council of Alexandria which relates exactly all the Calumnies and Forgeries which were invented against St. Athanasius say any thing of it which they had never omitted if it had been propos'd There were some other wandring Reports alledg'd against him but wanting Proof they insisted upon that of the Chalice which was suppos'd to be broken by Macarius and to inquire into this Crime they sent Six Bishops to Mareotis who were very resolute against St. Athanasius who heard many Witnesses to this purpose in spite of all the Protestations of the Clergy of Mareotis and Alexandria In the mean time St. Athanasius retires and appeals to the Emperour but the Synod condemns and deposes him upon the Information at Mareotis This was no sooner done but a Letter was brought from the Emperour directed to the Bishops of the Council to come presently to Jerusalem to Celebrate the Dedication of a Church In the mean time St. Athanasius arrives at Constantinople and desires Audience of the Emperour to justify himself But this was not granted and all that he could obtain was an Order wherein the Emperour sends for the Bishops that had condemn'd him to come to Court and give an Account to him of their Proceedings But instead of coming in a Body they sent only Eusebius of Nicomedia with Five other Deputies who without saying any thing of the former Accusations fram'd against St. Athanasius accus'd him now of having threatned to hinder the Exportation of Corn from Alexandria to Constantinople The Emperour was so provok'd by this Accusation that without hearing St. Athanasius he banish'd him presently to Triers a City in Gaul but would not suffer his Bishoprick to be fill'd After the Death of Constantine the Great the Three Caesars his Sons Constantine Constantius and Constans permitted all the Banish'd Bishops to return to their Churches St. Athanasius was sent back to Alexandria with Letters from Constantine after he had been a Year and some Months in Exile h A Year and some Months in Exile Theodoret B. II. Ch. I. says that he was there two Years and four Months but he is mistaken for he was sent into Banishment at the End of the Year 336 and was restor'd again June 15 337. before the Sons of Constantine had taken upon them the Title of Emperors This Emperour praises St. Athanasius in his Letter and says That his Father would not have Banish'd him but that the Eusebians had a design upon his Life and that he had intended to recall him before his Death He was no sooner return'd to Alexandria but his ancient Enemies attack him anew They say That since his Return he had stirr'd up Sedition in the City and caus'd some Persons to be put in Prison and others to be us'd harshly but they chiefly insisted upon his Deposition by the Synod alledging that he was incapable according to the Canons of returning to his Church or performing his Episcopal Function till he was restor'd by another Synod They insinuated themselves into the favour of Constantius and moreover accuse St. Athanasius of Selling and taking Money for the Corn which the Emperour had given to be distributed among the Poor and the Widows of Alexandria This Accusation drew upon St. Athanasius a very sharp Letter from the Emperour And the Eusebians not contented to have Constantius on their side would also have gain'd the other two Caesars and therefore wrote to them against St. Athanasius but they fail'd of their aim and were refus'd They endeavour'd also to render Pope Julius favourable to them by offering him the Arbitration of all their differences with St. Athanasius But this Pope having accepted their offer and Summon'd them to come to a Council they
pure may present themselves before God Clean and Unclean Beasts are the subject of some Allegoties These are the subject of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Books Lastly The Obligations and Sacrifices of the Law are Types of the Spiritual Obligations which we ought to offer to God and the solemn Festivals of the Jews denote to us the Celestial Rewards This is the subject of the Two last Books It is easy to judge by what we have said how mystical a Work this is and how full of allegorical and unusual Explications He must needs have an inexhaustible Fund of them to furnish out Seventeen Books so long as these are which are all-a-long carried on with continual Allegories His * Printed alone in Lat. at Paris in 1605. and in Greek and Latin by A. Schottus at Antwerp in 1618. Glaphyra upon the Pentateuch are not less full of Mystical Notions In them he referrs to Jesus Christ and his Church all that is said in the Pentateuch There is not any History Circumstance or Precept which he applies not to Jesus Christ or the New Testament These sorts of Commentaries are of little use for they help nothing towards the literal Explication they teach little Morality they prove no Doctrine all passes into Metaphysical Considerations and abstract Comparisons which are not proper either to convince Unbelievers or edify the Faithful The long Commentary upon Isaiah which is contained in the Second Tome is much more rational S. Cyril therein applies himself to the literal Sence of this Prophet and doth not digress so much from the Natural Sence to find out Jesus Christ because the Prophecy of Isaiah agrees more naturally to him This Commentary is divided into Six Parts The same Judgment may be given upon the Commentary upon the Twelve Prophets in which also he sets himself to the literal Explication so that there is a great deal of difference between the Commentaries of this Father upon the Prophets and his Writings upon the Pentateuch M. Simon doth not think so but having spoken of the Commentaries of this Father upon the Pentateuch as a Work purely allegorical he adds That he passes over in silence his Commentaries upon the Prophet Isaiah because this Father is very uniform in his Method But whosoever will give himself the trouble to read any Place of his Commentaries upon Genesis and Exodus and compare them with some other Place of his Commentary upon Isaiah or the Minor Prophets he will find in them a very considerable difference The Commentaries upon the Gospel of S. John which make up the Fourth Tome do explain also the Letter and Connexion of the Gospel but he now and then intermixes with it some Theological Questions And because those which concern the Trinity come in naturally in the Gospel of S. John he ordinarily treats of them in proving the Divinity Consubstantiality and Equality of the Son of God He also speaks of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and observes that it proceeds from the Son and takes his Nature of the Son Sometimes he proves that the Law was Figurative and that Salvation and Grace are passed from the Jews to the Gentiles There is also a Chapter in it about Liberty and Man These are the principal Points he treats of This Commentary is very long and divided into Twelve Books We have only some Fragments of the Seventh and Eighth The Fifth and Sixth are not extant in this no more than in the preceeding Editions But Jodoâ—us Clictovaeus a Doctor of Paris who hath translated this Commentary of S. Cyril hath composed Four Books to supply those that are wanting which hath given occasion to some Authors to quote them as S. Cyril's It is true that they are almost all taken out of the ancient Fathers but 't was * But he affixed them to S. Cyril as the Fathers and not made by himself Clictovaeus that collected them not S. Cyril The Fifth Tome of S. Cyril's Works hath Two Parts which make Two Volumes The First contains his Thesaurus and Dialogues upon the Trinity and Incarnation and the Second is made up of his Homilies and Letters His Thesaurus is a Work upon the Trinity in which he lays down Thirty five Propositions about the Divinity and Consubstantiality of the Son and Holy Spirit which he proves exactly after the manner of the Schools by Texts of Scripture upheld and supported by Arguments and Syllogisms in Form which he uses to subdue the Arians and Eunomians and to retort upon them those Testimonies of Holy Scripture which they commonly alledged He propounds their Objections in the same manner and answers them with the like Subtilties Georgius Trapezuntius hath published a very imperfect Version or rather a Latin Abridgment of this Book in which he hath taken out changed and added several things and quite inverted the Order of S. Cyril But since Vulcanius Brugenâ—â—s hath made a faithful Translation which was published at Basil in 1576. There can be no doubt that this Work is S. Cyril's since Photius had read it and described it to be such as we have in the 136th Volume of his Bibliotheca S. Thomas often quotes a Passage in favour of the Court of Rome as being taken out of the Second Book of S. Cyril's Thesaurus which is not to be found entire in that Work But we need only to read it and we shall be satisfied that there was never any such nor ever could be found there This is the famous Passage as he cites it We must remain as Members in our Head in the Apostolick Throne of the Roman Bishops from whom we ought to request whatsoever is necessary to be believed and held having a particular Respect for him and enquiring of him about all Things because it belongs to him to reprove correct order dispose things loose in his stead who hath founded him and given him a fulness of Power him alone â—â—d not any other to whom all the Faithful are obliged by Divine Right to be subject and whom the Princes of the World should obey Who of all the Greek or Latin Fathers ever spake thus Who of them ever flattered the Bishop of Rome at this rate But how is it possible for it to enter into the Thesaurus of S. Cyril which is nothing else but a contexture of Texts and Arguments upon the Trinity What coherence hath our pretended Passage with that Subject What doth this Phrase mean That we may remain as Members in our Head which 〈◊〉 the Apostolick Throne of the Roman Bishops Did ever any Author speak any thing like it To whom doth he speak these Words And of whom are they spoken That we may remain Members c. Are they the Bishops of Aegypt that speak them Could it find a Place in a Theological Treatise of one Father only S. Thomas is the First that cited this Passage and we know with how much carelesness and with how little Judgment he quotes the Works of the Fathers It likewise
often fail'd of his word and now continuing his Violences he found himself forced to punish him for his faults Particularly he accused him of three principal Crimes namely of Perjury because he had often sacredly sworn to reunite the Church and Empire and had as often broken his Oath Of Sacrilege for arresting those Prelates that were coming to the Council Of Heresy because he had laid aside that Fealty which he owed the Holy See had slighted its Authority had invaded its Possessions had stopt its regular Elections had rob'd the Churches and persecuted the Ecclesiasticks and Religious Orders all which justly render'd him suspected of Heresy as well as his League with the Saracens whom he made use of against the Christians and his other many Irregularities As a just consequence of these Crimes and Disorders he declared this Prince who by his Sins had made himself unfit to reign despoil'd of all his Honour and Dignity of which he is by this Sentence deprived and all his Subjects discharged from the Obligation of the Oath of Fidelity which they had taken to him and forbidden under pain of Excommunication ipso facto to acknowledg him for their Emperor and King and finally those whose business it was to elect an Emperor were order'd to choose him a Successor leaving it to the Pope to take care for the Kingdom of Sicily This Sentence was read to the astonishment of all that were present and was published and sent about on all sides Frederick in his defence writ a Letter to the King of France and other Princes of Europe Frederick's Defence wherein having first acknowledged the spiritual Authority of the Bishop of Rome he denies his Power to extend to the disposing of the Empire and the punishing of Kings and Princes by depriving them of their Temporalties alledging that tho he have the Privilege of consecrating Emperors yet he has no more right to depose them than other Bishops have those Kings whom it is the custom for them to anoint But supposing he had that Authority which he has not yet that he could not make use of it against whom he pleased as he had done in his procedure against the Emperor without due form of Law For that he had no Accuser no lawful Summons to appear nor Charge against him nor did they make a just and fair Information but only declared that the things were notorious which they were not that there were very few in the Council which had deposed any thing against him namely one Bishop of Apuleia whose Brothers and Nephew he had hanged for Treason and two Spanish Bishops who were too far off to have good information of what had passed in Italy that had the Pope proceeded against him in due form and he had been allowed to have his Accusers and Witnesses yet he could not have cast him because he was not present nor lawfully summoned and had by his Deputies given such good Reasons for his absence that no one could interpret it to have been out of pride and contumacy and that had he been present he could not have been condemned by a peremptory Sentence nay more than all had the whole Procedure been according to Law and Justice yet the Sentence was not justifiable because it was founded on facts notoriously false and because the Punishment inflicted exceeded as well the Power of him that gave sentence which reaches no farther than spiritual things as the demerit of the Crimes laid to his charge About the end of the Letter he gave the Kings notice how it was their common Interest to disallow this Sentence that they were in danger of being served at the same rate that the Pope had begun with him but would end with them if they did not side with him for the support of their Authority He wrote in particular to the King of France making him Umpire of his Differences with the Pope and referring himself to his Judgment and that of his Peers The King of France sensibly touched with these Letters offers Proposals of Accommodation to the Pope assuring him that Frederick was ready to give him due satisfaction and would spend the rest of his days in warring against the Infidels in the Holy Land The Pope did but laugh at it and replyed That he had often promised as much and more but never performed any thing The King of France remonstrated to the Pope that he ought to forgive sixty or seventy times seven times and therefore counsell'd and intreated him in the name of a great number of Holy Soldiers that were in a readiness to go for the Holy Land for the good of the Catholick Church and the benefit of Religion in imitation of JESUS CHRIST who submitted himself even to the Death of the Cross to accept of that humble Proposition that he made him on the Emperor's part but the Pope still refusing to hearken St. Louis went away very much disturbed says Matthew Paris that he could not find that Humility in the Servant of the Servants of God which he himself was master of Many other Princes cryed out against this Sentence of the Pope maintaining that 't was not in his power to raise and put down Kings at his pleasure and the greatest part of The Landtgrave of Thuringen and Earl of Holland Elected Emperors by some of the Princes of the Empire the Electors and Princes of Germany always received Frederick for their lawful Emperor Only a few Malecontents that had been gained by the Pope's Agents elected Henry Landtgrave of Thuringen King of Germany who made no great advances but was killed before Ulme in the year 1247. William Earl of Holland was chosen in his stead and having taken Aix la Chapelle was there Crowned in 1248. All this while Frederick with no small success was carrying on the War against the Guelphs in Italy but his Son Entius who was his Lieutenant General being taken by the Bolognians and put into prison abated his heat and retired into Apuleia where he ended his days in 1250 leaving his Son Conrade Heir to his Estates The Pope confirmed William in the Empire excommunicated Conrade and sent his The Death of Frederick Legates into Sicily to hinder that Kingdom from receiving any other Soveraign than the Holy See Conrade whose Affairs went but ill in Germany did nevertheless raise an Army and pass The History of Conrade Frederick's Son into Italy to secure the Estates his Father had left him and after having spent some time in Lombardy he went into Apuleia where his natural Brother Manfred governed with the Title of Viceroy but with the design of making himself Soveraign Conrade was received and acknowledged by all the Cities of Sicily and Apuleia except that of Naples which he laid Siege to and took at the end of eight months But William in the mean while making great progress in Germany Conrade was forced to return in the year 1251 and took the City of Ratisbone with the help of
Year 1253. PEter de Lambale Arch-Bishop of Tours after he had Visited his Province call'd a Council at Saumur The Council of Saumur in 1253. in December 1253 to Reform the Disorders and Abuses which he had taken notice of in his Visitation He thereupon made Thirty two very useful Decrees By the First it is order'd That they shall recite the Offices for the Canonical Hours in all Cathedral and Collegiate Churches at the times appointed and with requisite Devotion and that one side of the Quire shall not begin a Verse till the other side has ended the foregoing Verse By the Second The Arch-Deacons Arch-Priests Rural Deans and others are enjoyn'd to take Care that the Sacristy the Fonts the holy Oyls the holy Chrism be kept under Lock and Key and that the Sacraments in populous Places and especially in Cities be carry'd with Veneration The Third imports That the Corporals shall be wash'd by the Priests habited with Surplices in a very clean Vessel and set apart for that use and that the first Water shall be cast into the Pond that the Linnen of the Altar and of the Priests shall be washed by a Woman or by a Girl separately from others and that they shall take care to keep them well The Fourth renews the Statute made in the Council of Laval about the Inventory of the Ornaments and Goods of churches which ought to be kept by the Arch-Deacon The Fifth enjoyns That the Arch-Deacons Priests and Rural Deans shall be oblig'd to take Holy Orders within a Year The Sixth prohibits the holding of Pleadings in Churches and in their Portico's The Seventh prohibits the Arch-Deacons and other Inferior Prelates from holding their Pleadings in the presence of their Bishops The Eighth prohibits them from having Officials out of Town The Ninth prohibits the Exacting the Duty of Procuration unless they actually Visit. The Tenth revives the Statute made in the Council of Chateau-Gonthier to prevent the dividing of Prebends The Eleventh prohibits the Admitting any Canon who is not born in lawful Wedlock The Twelfth prohibits the Prelates from exacting any Subsidy from their Inferiors unless they have occasion for it and then to receive a Moderate one with Charity The Thirteenth revokes the Pensions laid on Curates The Fourteenth and Fifteenth enjoyn the Regulars to observe the Rules prescrib'd in the Letters of the Pope which relate to them and to keep Copies of 'em by them The Sixteenth revives the Statute of the Council of Chateau-Gonthier which prohibits the Monks from having any thing de Proprio The Seventeenth prohibits the Monks from concerning themselves with Secular Pleadings The Eighteenth prohibits the Abbots from bestowing Regular Places on Seculars The Nineteenth orders That the Ancient Number of Monks shall be restablish'd in each Monastery The Twentieth and Twenty first prohibit the Abbots from exacting New Pensions of Priories and from retrenching their Revenues The Twenty second imports That the Abbots or Priors shall not keep their Registers out of the Monastery The Twenty third prohibits the Clergy from concerning themselves with Merchandise and from making any Contracts of Society with Merchants The Twenty fourth prohibits the Ecclesiastical Judges from commissioning several Persons to cite without distinction such as they please before them The Twenty fifth and sixth are against those who hinder the Exercise of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction or the Execution of the Sentences The Twenty seventh prohibits Clandestine Marriages The Twenty eighth is against an Abuse which was practis'd at that time of granting several Curacies in Commendam to one and the same Person who has already one in Title They who receive those Benefices are depriv'd of them and those who Collate them of the Power of Presenting The Twenty ninth prohibits Bishops from applying to their Profit a part of the Revenues of Parochial Churches and from charging them with New Pensions The Thirâ—ieth prohibits the Clergy from bequeathing any thing to their Natural Children or their Concubines The Thirty first orders That those who have Sacerdotal Prebends in Chapters shall take upon them Priests Orders and serve them in that Quality The Thirty second orders That all the Canons made by the Arch-Bishops of Tours Predecessors to Peter shall be inviolably observ'd under Pain of Excommunication The Council of Alby in the Year 1254. THis Council was held by Zoan Bishop of Avignon and Legate of the Holy See and consisted of The Council of Alby in 1254. several Bishops of the Provinces of Narbonne Bourges and Bourdeaux Therein they reviv'd a great many Decrees made in the Preceeding Councils The Twenty eight First relate to the Inquisition and the Punishment of Hereticks The Twenty ninth orders the Execution of the Canon styl'd Omnis utriusque sexus concerning the Easter-Confession and obliges all the Faithful to Receive the Communion at Christ-mass Easter and Whitsontide The next to the Fortieth revive the Decrees of the Councils of Narbonne Valenza and Toulouse about being present at the Divine Service of the Parish about Ecommunications Persons Excommunicated and Last Wills and Testaments The Forty first prohibits the Priests from keeping Women within the Inclosures of the Church The Forty second orders That there shall be Silver-Chalices in all Churches which have Fifteen Pounds a Year Revenue The Forty third enjoyns the Bishops to make use of Ecclesiastical Censures to oblige those who hold Churches to repair and maintain them The Forty fourth and fifth revive the Laws which prohibit Ecclesiasticks from having any secular Employments or Offices The Eight next prescribe the Modesty which Ecclesiasticks and Regulars ought to observe in their Habits and in their way of Living The Fifty fourth and fifth import That there shall be at least Three Monks or Two Regular Canons in each Priory The Fifty sixth orders the Patrons to present the Benefices in their Gifts to able Persons within the time perfix'd without any Compact and without diminishing the Revenues And prohibits the Applying the Revenues of a Vacant Church to any other Uses than to the Interest of that Church The Four next fix the Duties of Visitations The Sixty first and Second revive the Decrees of the Council of Avignon against Perjur'd Persons and Usurers The Eight next are against the Jews The Seventy first prohibits any new Imposts under pain of Excommunication The Council of Bourdeaux in the Year 1255. THis Council properly speaking is only a Synod of the Clergy of Bourdeaux held the 13th of April The Council of Bourdeaux in 1255. in the Year 1255 wherein Gerard de Malemort Arch-Bishop of that Church publish'd the following Constitutions 1. He order'd the Clergy-men who have Churches to be resident and to present themselves in time to receive Orders under the Penalty of losing their Benefices 2. He prohibits the Priests and Curates from tolerating Questors in Churches without his or the Holy See's Order 3. From admitting of strange Clergymen without his Leave 4. From Executing the Letters of Commission issu'd
Postill upon the Epistles and Gospels of the Year printed at Paris in 1509. and at Strasburg in 1513. and 1521. The two Dominicans called Joannes Parisiensis both Doctors and Professors of Divinity of John of Paris a Dominican the Faculty in Paris must be distinguished The former lived in the Thirteenth Age about the Year 1220. He was Sirnamed Pungens Asinum the Ass-pricker and is mentioned by Joannes de Salagnac speaking of the Authors of his Order who lived before the time of S. Thomas He Founded two Chapels to S. Eustathius and is meant in an Information made in 1221. as the Records of those times make it evident It is undoubtedly he that Composed the Commentary upon the Sentences of which Trithemius speaks The other John of Paris was not a Licentiate in Divinity till 1304. when he brought himself into a great deal of Trouble by asserting That Transubstantiation was not a Point of Faith and that the Real Presence of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament might be explained after another manner viz. By supposing that the Bread being united with the Word mediante corpore Christi becomes the Body of Christ or that the Change be made after some other manner This new Doctrine which had never been taught in the Schools of Paris before made a great Noise and was opposed by Three other Divines who maintained That Transubstantiation was an Article of Faith according to the Decretal in the Chapter Firmiter John of Paris nevertheless maintained his Opinion with great Resolution and not only wrote a Book to prove it but defended it several times before many Doctors and Batchelors of Divinity and more particularly before William D' Orillac Bishop of Paris who having examined that Doctrine and taken advice with Giles of Rome Archbishop of Bourges Bertrandus Bishop of Orleans William Bishop of Amiens and several other Doctors injoined Silence to Friar John of Paris under the Penalty of Excommunication and strictly forbid him to Teach or Preach any more in Paris John of Paris appealed from this Sentence to the Court of Rome and went to Pope Clement V. then at Bourdeaux who appointed him Judges but he died before the Matter was decided upon S. Maurice's Day Jan. 15. 1306. The Book which John of Paris wrote about Transubstantiation was Intituled The Determination of Friar John of Paris Preacher of the Manner how the Body of Jesus Christ is in the Sacrament of the Altar different from that which hath been commonly held in the Church 'T is nothing else but the very same Explication of his Opinion which he delivers to the Assembly of the Doctors of Divinity abovementioned It was found in MS. in the Library of S. Victor and has been often quoted about that Point by the Authors of the Reformed Religion It hath lately been published by Mr. D Allix entire with a large and learned Preface and printed at London in 1686. There is a Treatise concerning the Regal and Papal Power printed at Paris in the Year 1506. and in the Collection of Goldastus's Monarchia S. Rom. Imp. Tom. 2. p. 107. which bears the Name of John of Paris It was written upon the Account of the Difference between Pope Boniface VIII and Philip the Fair. This Author observes in his Preface that they who seek to avoid one Errour often fall into another and thereupon brings an Example from the Controversie which was between the Monks and Seculars concerning Confession and the Administration of the Sacraments The one saith he asserted That the Monks ought not to meddle with them at all because they renounced all Secular Affairs The other said That they properly belonged to them by their Order The Truth lies in the middle between these two Errors which is That it is not altogether unfit that they should do it although they have no right to it upon the account of their Order And much the same thing happens in this Question about the Spiritual and Temporal Power concerning which there are contrary Errors The first of them is the Error of the Waldenses who hold that Clergymen ought not to have any Power or Temporal Estates the other is something like the Opinion of Herod who thought that Jesus Christ was Born to be an Earthly King so these Men suppose that the Pope as Pope hath a Power in Temporal Things above Kings The True Opinion lies between these two Errours and is this That the Successors of the Apostles may exercise a Temporal Jurisdiction and enjoy Temporal Estates by the Allowance and Grant of Princes but it does not belong to them as the Vicars of Jesus Christ and Successors of the Apostle To prove this Proposition he shews 1. That the Regal Power is founded upon the Law of Nature and Law of Nations 2. That the Priesthood is a Spiritual Power given by Jesus Christ to his Church to Administer Sacraments 3. That 't is not Necessary that all the Kings upon Earth should depend upon one Person only as all the Ministers of the Church upon one Head 4. That the Regal Power was erected before the Priesthood in time but the Priesthood is before the Regal Power in Dignity 5. That the Pope has not the sole Jurisdiction over the Churches Revenues but they belong to Bodies and Societies which possess them and that the Pope can't dispose of them as he pleaseth nor deprive the Owners of them without a just Cause That he may much less dispose of the Goods of Laymen but only in case of urgent Necessity to use censures to oblige them to assist and help the Poor or the Church in their Needs 6. That he hath no Jurisdiction over the Temporal Goods of Laymen nor any Secular Power because Jesus Christ as Head of the Church had none himself nor did give any to his Apostles but all the Power that he has given to the Church is purely Spiritual yea even that which belongs to the Exterior Ecclesiastical Court which may concern it self only in Spiritual Causes That the Pope may indeed Excommunicate an Heretick King and inflict Ecclesiastical Censures on him but cannot depose him He Answers all the Objections that may be made to this Doctrine and at last shews that the Pope may be judged and may either resign or be deposed Besides these Treatises of John of Paris Mr. Baluzius assures us that there are in the Library of Mr. Colbert Cod. 3725. three Sermons preached by this Monk at Paris the one in Advent the other on the Second Sunday in Lent and the Third on the First Sunday after Easter Some Englishmen also tell us That there is in the Library at Oxford a MSS. which contains a Treatise which proves the Truth of the Christian Religion from the Testimony of the Heathens and some other Treatises about the Confessions of Monks Some also attribute to him a Book Intituled The Correction of the Doctrine of S. Thomas against William de la Mare printed under the Name of Aegidius Romanus or
spoke some Words prejudicial to the Faculty was obliged to make Satisfaction in 1428. In 1429 John Sarrazin Licentiate in Theology of the Order of Friars Preachers was delated to the Faculty and accused of having advanc'd in his Act de Vesperiis Eight Propositions concerning Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction contrary to the Doctrin of the Faculty viz. 1st That all the Powers of Jurisdiction in the Church which are different from that of the Pope are from the Pope in their Institution and Collation 2dly That these Powers are not of Divine Right nor instituted by God immediately 3dly That Jesus Christ says nothing of these Powers but only of the Supream to which he intrusted the founding of his Church 4thly That when any thing is decreed in a Council all the Authority which gives force to its Decrees resides only in the Pope 5thly That there is no Text in the Gospel by which it expresly appears That the Power of Jurisdiction was granted to any other Apostle but St. Peter 6thly That it is repugnant in some manner to Truth to affirm that the Power of Jurisdiction in Inferior Prelates whether Bishops or Parish-Priests is immediately from God as the Power of the Pope is 7thly That no other Spiritual Authorities can do any thing of Right against the Pope 8thly That the Pope cannot commit Canonical Simony which is forbidden by a positive Law The Faculty having caus'd these Propositions to be examin'd by Deputies obliged Sarrazin to retract them publickly and to make Profession of eight Propositions contrary to them wherein he owns 1st That all the Powers of Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions which are different from that of the Pope are from Jesus Christ as to their first Institution and Collation and from the Pope and the Church as to their Limitation and Ministerial Dispensation 2dly That these Powers are of Divine Right instituted immediately by Jesus Christ 3dly That we find in Scripture that Jesus Christ founded his Church and expresly instituted other Powers besides that of the Pope 4thly That when any thing is decided in a Council the Authority which gives force to its Decrees does not reside only in the Pope but chiefly in the Holy Spirit and the Catholick Church 5thly That there are express Texts in the Gospel by which it appears That Jesus Christ has given his Apostles and Disciples an Authority of Jurisdiction 6thly That 't is agreeable to Evangelical and Apostolical Truth to affirm That the Power of Jurisdiction in inferiour Prelats whether Bishops or Parish-Priests is immediately from God 7thly That there is a Power viz. That of the Church which can do something of Right in certain Cases against the Pope 8thly That every Man in this Life having the Use of Reason of whatsoever Dignity Authority and Preheminence even the Pope himself may commit the Crime of Simony This Retractation was spoken by Sarrazin in an Assembly of the Faculty March the 30th 1429. according to the way of reckoning in France at that time i. e. in 1430. In 1432. The Faculty was consulted in the Name of the Bishop of Evreux and the Inquisitor A Censure of a Proposition about the Admonitions of Bishops of that Diocese about a Proposition which one had advanc'd That the Admonitions of Bishops are Abuses and it declar'd by its Conclusion dated May the 16th That this Proposition was reproachful presumptuous rash scandalous tending to Sedition and Rebellion and to weaken the Ecclesiastical Censures contrary to the Doctrin of Jesus Christ and the Apostles and favourable to some Errors condemn'd in the Council of Constance In 1442. Nicholas Quadrigarii a Doctor of Divinity of the Order of Friars Hermites of A Censure of the Errors of Quadrigarii and Augustin St. Austin having advanc'd in his Act de Vesperiis two Propositions 1st That every thing which happens by Divine Providence comes to pass necessarily the other That there is no other Power of Jurisdiction in the Church but the Pope's which is immediately from Jesus Christ was obliged by the Order of the Faculty to retract these two Propositions on the 9th of January and to make Profession of the contrary Doctrin In 1448. a Regular of the Order of Friars Minors having advanc'd in the Diocese of Tournay A Censure of the Propositions of a Friar Minor about the Hierarchy in 1448. A Censure in 1451. against the Propositions of John Bartholomew a Friar Minor contrary to the Rites of Parish Priests many Propositions contrary to the Rights of Parish-Priests like those which had been formerly advanced in 1429. by John Sarrazin the Grand Vicars of the Bishop address'd themselves to Giles Charlier who wrote a piece to refute them which is agreeable to the Doctrin of the Faculty of Theology at Paris in the Censure against Sarrazin In 1451. John Bartholomew of the Order of Friars Minors advanc'd at Roan in his Sermons many Propositions contrary to the Rights of Parish-Priests chiefly about Confession viz. That the Parishioners may freely confess themselves to Regulars Mendicants without asking leave of the Parish-Priests Whereupon the Proctor of the Archbishoprick caus'd an Information to be drawn up against him and the Affair being brought before the University of Paris this Regular appear'd in the Assembly of the University December the 4th and refusing to own that the Parishioners were obliged to confess themselves once a Year to their Parish Priests it was resolved That the Degree of a Licentiate should be denied him and that the deciding of the Question should be referred to the Faculties of Theology and Law In 1456. this Question was started again with some Warmth in the University upon occasion The Differences of the University with Regulars Mendicants about a Bull of privilege which they had obtaimed of a Bull obtain'd from Pope Nicholas V. by the Mendicants who gave them leave to take Confessions to the prejudice of the Right of Parish-Priests established by the Canon Omnis utriusque Sexus and also by Order of the Clementine Dudum The University understanding that it had been presented to the Official of Paris by some Regulars Carmelites interposed an Appeal and cited the Mendicants to appear on Monday May the 24th to declare to them That they should be excluded from the University unless they renounc'd the obtaining of that Bull and would promise to obtain the Revocation of it within a certain time The Mendicants having appear'd and refusing to do it the University declared them perjured and excluded from their Society The Mendicants instead of procuring the Revocation of that Bull address'd themselves to Pope Callistus complain'd of the Treatment they met with from the University and obtain'd of him a Bull which confirm'd that of Nicholas V. and null'd all that the University had done against them Notwithstanding this the University continued firm and the Mendicants were obliged to seek out some ways of Accommodation the Archbishop of Rhemes the Bishop of Paris and the Parliament concern'd themselves in the Affair