The church history clear'd from the Roman forgeries and corruptions found in the councils and Baronius in four parts : from the beginning of Christianity, to the end of the fifth general council, 553 / by Thomas Comber ...

THE CHURCH HISTORY Clear'd from the Roman Forgeries And Corruptions found in the COUNCILS and BARONIUS : In Four Parts .

FROM The Beginning of Christianity , to the End of the Fifth General Council , 553.

By THOMAS COMBER , D. D. Dean of DURHAM .

For we have not followed cunningly devised Fables ,

2 Pet. I. 16.

LONDON .

Printed by Samuel Roycroft , for Robert Clavell at the Peacock at the West-End of S. Pauls , 1695.

Imprimatur ,

Martii 2. 1688 / 9. T. Alston R. P. D. HEN. Episc. Lond. à Sacris Domesticis .

TO THE Most Reverend Father in GOD , THOMAS , ( By Divine Providence ) Lord Arch-Bishop of YORK , PRIMATE OF ENGLAND , AND METROPOLITAN . May it please your Grace ,

THere is nothing more Pleasant in it self , nor more Vseful to those of the Sacred Function , than the Study of Ecclesiastical Antiquity : But yet many of that Order have not the Advantage or the Opportunity to acquire this Knowledge from the Original Authors , and therefore are forced to seek it in the Roman Editions of the Councils , and the Modern Historians of that Church : Where every thing is misrepresented and placed in so False a Light , that its hard to find out what is Truth . Some of the genuine Remains of Antiquity they have concealed , but they have falsified and altered more , and added so much to the Primitive Records , especially in the first Four Centuries , that near Three Parts of Four ( both in Baronius and the Councils ) are modern Forgeries , manifest Legends , and impertinent Excursions into Sophistical Vindications , of the later Doctrins and Practices of Rome . It would therefore be a Work worthy of this excellent Church in so Learned an Age , to make an acurate Collection of that , and only that which is true and certain in the Primitive History and Councils . 'T is true , divers Eminent Men have made some steps toward it ; but it is too great an Vndertaking for any One Man to accomplish , as appears by that generous Project of Dr. Thomas James , Proposed to the Most Learned Primate of Ireland , to employ a Select Company of both Universities , with due Assistances and Encouragement for the perfecting this Design : Wherefore in the mean time , it may be serviceable to gather together some Materials for so Noble a purpose , and that first encouraged me to make these Observations as I was Reading the Annals of Baronius with the Councils : Which I have ( by the Advice of some of my Friends ) Methodically digested in this little Tract ; and I hope it may be useful , not only to direct such as apply themselves to this kind of Study , but also to confirm others of Our own Communion in their firm Adherence to their Excellent Religion , when they see so many plain Evidences , That all the Roman Churches Pretences to Antiquity ( both in Doctrin and Worship ) are founded on , and maintained by little else , but those Forgeries and Corruptions , by which they Imposed upon the Ignorant and Easie World for Six or Seven Centuries together . These Pious Frauds ( as They counted them ) did indeed then advance their Interest , and establish their Errors ; but now when they are detected by this Discerning Generation , they prove their utter Shame ; and did not Secular Advantages and Implicit Faith , or Fear and Inquisitions hinder those under their Yoke from being acquainted , or however from owning these unfaithful Actings of their Spiritual Guides ; These Discoveries would not only secure Our People , but make many Converts from Them .

But ( My Lord ) whatever the Work or the Success be , I am obliged to lay it at Your Graces Feet , as the first thing I have made Public since Your Graces happy Advancement to the Government of this Church , whereof I am a Member , and wherein by Your Graces Influence I shall study to serve the Primitive-Protestant-Church of England . Which I beseech Almighty GOD to defend from all its Enemies , and long to preserve Your Grace , to be a Support and an Honour to it . So Prays ,

MY LORD , Your Graces most Dutiful Son and Servant , THO: COMBER . York , Aug. 20. 1689.

THE Introduction .

WHen Campian long ago undertook to defend the Roman Cause , he boasted , that He was strengthned with the firm and powerful Guard of all the Councils , and that all the General Councils were on his side a a Campian . decem rat . pag. 24 , & 30. . Which vain Brag the Writers from the Roman Church do frequently repeat to this very day . But he that with Judgment and Diligence shall peruse their own allowed Editions of the Councils , will easily discover the falshood of this Assertion : For there is such adding and expunging , such altering and disguising things in the Body of the Councils , and such excusing , falsifying , and shuffling in the Notes , that a Judicious Reader will soon perceive these Venerable Records , truly set down and explained , do not favour them . But these Corruptions are carried on with such Confidence and Cunning , that an unexeperienced and unwary Student , may be imposed on by this specious shew of Venerable Antiquity : For their sakes therefore , it 's necessary to take a short view of that Fraud and Policy , which is so commonly made use of in those Editions of the Councils which pass through the Roman Mint , especially in those which are in most use among us , viz. The Edition of Severinus Binius b b Edit. Binii Concil. omn. Colon. 1618. , and that of Labbé and Cossartius c c Edit. Lab. & Cossart . Paris , An. 1671. , wherein Binius his Notes are printed verbatim . Which useful design was begun by a Learned and Ingenious Gentleman , in a Tract entituled Roman Forgeries , printed at London , An. 1673 : But that Author doth not follow the exact order of Time , nor doth he go much beyond the Nicene Council , and even in that Period he left out many plain Instances ; And whereas he died , before he had proceeded any further ; I resolved to begin where he left off : But for Methods sake , and to make thid Discourse more entire , I have begun with the first Century , and so proceeded according to the order of the several Councils ( only writing more briefly upon the Three first Centuries , which were largely treated of in that Author before ) deducing the account of these Impostures down to the end of the Fourth Century , and shewing ( as I go along ) what Artifices have been used by the Editors and Annotator to dress up these Ancient Evidences , so as to make them look favourably upon their great Diana , the Supremacy and other Corruptions of the Roman Church . To this end they have published many spurious Councils , many counterfeit Canons and forged Decretals ; and for such as are genuine , they have frequently altered the Text , both by Additions and Diminutions , and have so disguised the Sense by partial and fallacious Notes , that it will be evident ( by the Remarks here made upon them ) their business in the publishing these Volumes , was not to promote the Truth , but to serve a Party . Nor can any thing else be expected from Binius his Notes , which ( as he owns in his Preface ) He took out of Baronius , Bellarmin and Possevin : The design of which three Men ( saith Richerius an ingenuous Sorbon Doctor ) is evident to all Men to have been no other , but to prove the Pope was appointed by Christ to be the absolute Monarch , and Infallible Judge of his Church d d Richer . Praef. ad hist. Concil. pag. 4. . And since the Notes chiefly follow Baronius , we have , as we go along , in every Period noted several of the designed Falshoods , and of the Contradictions , Errors and Mistakes in his Annals . Which History is so full of Forgeries , false Quotations , and feigned Tales to set up the Credit of the Roman Church , and its corrupt Opinions and Practices , that to discover them all would require almost as many Volumes as his Annals make : So that we must content our selves with some of the plainest Instances which fall into this Matter of the Councils , and will set them in a clear Light , and shew they are as contrary to Reason , as they are to true History . Which Vndertaking we hope will be many ways useful : First , It will tend to the ease of those who intend to read over the Tomes of the Councils , or the Annals of Baronius , and save them much time and pains by presenting the principal Errors of those great Volumes at one View , which they would spend a long time in searching after , if they were to gather them up as they lye dispersed . Secondly , It may be very useful to those who desire to be rightly informed in the Controversies between us and the Roman Church , because it will give them a clear prospect of what Councils and other Antiquities are Authentic , and may be allowed for Evidence in this Dispute ; wherein our Adversaries have so little regard to their own Honour , that generally one half of their Evidence is such as they have either forged or corrupted . Thirdly , It will be necessary ( by way of Antidote ) to prepare those , who by reading Books so full of Infection , may by these plausible Falsifications be in danger to be seduced into a great esteem of the Opinions and Practices of the Roman Church ; when they find so many seemingly ancient Tracts and Councils brought in to justifie her in all things , and see ( by this false Light ) all Ecclesiastical History and Records so modelled , as to perswade their Readers , That in the purest Christian Times , all things were believed and done in the Catholic Church just as they are now at Rome . But when it shall appear , that all this is a continued Series and train of Impostures , it will render their Notions and Practices , not only suspected , but odious , as needing such vile and base Artifices , to make them seem agreeable to true Antiquity .

To this it may be Objected , That divers of the Modern Writers of this Church , and especially the most Learned , do now own divers of these Forgeries which we here detect to have been spurious , and therefore it seems needless to prove that which they have already granted us . I reply , That none of them own all these Corruptions , and divers of their Authors cite them very confidently to this very day , and still the things themselves stand in their most approved Editions of Councils , and the Remarks are only in Marginal Notes . But since they were believed in those Ages , while their Supremacy and other Novel Doctrins were setting up , and were urged for good Proofs , till these Opinions had taken root ; it is not satisfaction enough to renounce that Evidence , of which they now have no more need , unless they disclaim the Doctrins also to which they first gave Credit : And till they do this , it is fit the World should know by what False Evidence they first gained these Points . For , if a Man should get an Estate by Bribing his Iury and his Witnesses , it is not enough for him to confess these Persons were Suborned , unless he restore the Ill gotten Lands ; and till he restore them , he ought to be upbraided with his Bribery , even after he hath acknowledged it . Secondly , It may be alledged , That Junius , River and Daillé abroad ; Perkins , Cook and James at home ; have taken great pains on this Subject , and that the Learned Author of the Historieal Examination of the Authority of General Councils , printed at London , 1688. hath already handled this Argument . I Answer , That the Six former are chiefly concerned in the Tracts of particular Fathers , and make few Remarks on the Councils : The last indeed keeps close to the Great Councils , but passes over the Small ones ; and any who compares this Discourse with that , will find the Design , the Method and Instances so different , that this Discourse will still be useful in its kind , as that will be also : For here , in an acurate Order , all the Frauds of that Church are put together throughout every Century , not only what have been observed by others , but many now first taken notice of , and not observed before . And indeed , the Instances of these Frauds are so many , that we have been forced to give but brief Touches upon divers of the Particulars , and could neither enlarge upon single Instances , nor adorn the Style ; our business being chiefly to direct the younger Students in Ecclesiastical Antiquity ; and if our Remakrs be but so clear as to be understood by , and useful to them , we have our Aim . And it is hoped this may suffice to prove , That the genuine Records of Councils do condemn the Modern Doctrin , Worship and Discipline of the Roman Church , and that whatever in these Editions of them seems to countenance those things , are Forgeries and Corruptions devised on purpose to set a false gloss upon their Modern Inventions . The Methodical Discovery whereof may convince any unprejudiced Man , That Ours is the truly Ancient and Catholic Religion , and Theirs a Device of later times , which cannot be rendred any way agreeable to the Primitive Writings , without innumerable Impostures and Falsifications .

A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE Roman Forgeries , IN THE VOLUMES OF THE COUNCILS , For the First Three Centuries .

PART I.

CHAPTER I.

Of the Forgeries in the First Century .

§ . 1. THE Volumes of the COUNCILS in the Edition of Labbe and Cossartius , begin with divers Tracts ; and in Binius's Edition with several Epistles , designed to prepossess the Reader with false Notions of the Popes supreme Power over Councils , and his Parties high Reverence for them , as also of the Protestants having corrupted or else rejected the greatest part of them : But this whole Discourse will sufficiently shew the notorious untruth , both of their boasting concerning Their own side , and of their Censures concerning Ours . In the Account of Scripture Councils , where they pretend to recite the words of Scripture , they add , for to give colour to their new Supremacy , That Peter stood up , as the Principal and Head a a Lab. Tom. III. pag. 18. & Bin. Tom. I. par. 1. pag. 1. ; And again , as the Supreme and Head b b Ibid. pag. 20. Bin. pag. 2. . S. Luke in the Acts , Chap. VI. 2. saith , Binius's Notes say , They had this leave by the favour and grant of Peter c c Bin. pag. 1. col . 2. F. . S. Luke , Chap. XV. declares , That the Question about Circumcision was finally determined by S. James , who also cited Scripture for his determination , ver. 16 , 17. But Binius's Notes say , This matter was determined , not by Scripture , but by the Suffrage of the Apostles , and by the Judgment of Peter d d Lab. pag. 20. Bin. pag. 2. col. 1. . The same Notes a little after tell us , That this Council committed the care of the Circumcised Converts to Peter e e Lab. pag. 21. Bin. pag 2. col. 2. ; which was a poor Preferment for that Apostle , if Christ had made him Supreme Head , and committed to him long before the Care of the whole Catholic Church . To these Passages of Holy Scripture the Editors have tacked a sabulous Story of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary f f Lab. pag. 24. Bin. pag. 3. col. 2. ; but they do not Cite one genuine Ancient Author , to prove it : That Book which bears the Title of Dionysius Areopagitus being invented many Ages after , as Learned men on all sides now agree .

§ . 2. That Ancient Collection of Canons , which were decreed by the Apostolical Men in divers Synods held during the Times of Persecution , is published by these Editors under the Title of The Canons of the Holy Apostles ; and their Notes affirm , They were made by the Authority of the Apostles g g Lab. pag. 53. Bin. pug . 14. col . 1. ; yet they are not agreed either about their Number or Authority . They print LXXXIV Canons ; but the Notes say , only the first Fifty of them are Authentic , but the rest may and ought also to be received , since they contain nothing ( Two of them excepted , viz. the 65th and 84th Canons , which contradict the Roman Church ) but what is approved by some Popes , Councils and Fathers h h ibid. Lab. & Bin. . Now , if ( as they say ) the Apostles made them , their Church hath been very negligent to lose the certain Account of their number , and it is not very modest to pretend to try the Apostles Decrees by Popes Councils and Fathers ; yet it is plain they make no distinction between the first Fifty and the following Thirty four , rejecting all that oppose their present Doctrine and Practice , as may be seen in these Instances .

The Sixth Canon forbids a Bishop , Priest or Deacon ( 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ) to put away , or be divorced from his Wife on pretence of Religion : The Notes pervert the Sense of this Canon , as if it only forbid Clergy Men to cast off the care of providing for their Wives ; and prove this Sense i i Lab. pag. 53. Bin. pag. 14. col 2. by a false Title , which Dionysius Exiguus put to this Canon in his Version many Centuries after , and by an Epistle of Pope Clement the First , which all Men own now to be spurious , and by an Epistle of Pope Gregory , who lived in the Year 600 ; as if the Sense of Dionysius and Pope Gregory , when Single life was superstitiously pressed upon the Clergy , were good proof , that Clergy Men did not live with their Wives many Ages before that superstitious Opinion was heard of . 'T is certain the Greek Clergy are Married and cohabit with their Wives , according to this Apostolical Canon , and the Fifteenth Canon of the Sixth General Council : And it is not unpleasant to observe , That these Notes cite the Second Council of Nice , to prove there were no Canons made in the Sixth General Council ; yet that very Nicene Council often Quotes , and highly approves the 82d Canon of the Sixth General Council , as giving some Countenance to their Image-Worship . So that their wresting this Canon Apostolical from its genuine meaning k k Vid. Beveridg . Not. Concil. Tom. II. pag. 18. upon such slight and false Evidence , is in effect rejecting it .

The Ninth Canon orders All the Clergy and Laity who are in the Church , to Receive the Sacrament , unless they have a just Excuse l l Lab. pag. 55. Bin. pag. 15. col. 1. : But the Roman Church allows the People generally to stand by and look on ; and therefore though this be one of the Authentic Canons before said by them to be made by the Apostles , after some shuffling to restrain it ( contrary to the very words of the Canon ) only to the Clergy : The Notes say , This whole Decree was made only by Human , not by Divine Authority , and is now abrogated by a contrary Custom . So that if a Canon of the Apostles themselves contradict a Corrupt practice of their Church , it must be abrogated and rejected .

The 17th Canon saith , He that keeps a Concubine shall not be in any Order of the Clergy . The Notes cite some of their Doctors , who affirm , That this Crime doth not make a Clerk irregular m m Lab. pag. 56. Bin. pag. 15. col. 2. ; and , that this Canon is now revoked . The Annotator himself is of Opinion , It is only public keeping a Concubine , by reason of the Infamy which makes a Clergy-mans Orders void : Wherefore such Sinners have now more favourable Casuists at Rome , than the Apostles or Apostolical Men were .

The 65th Canon , though it have as good Evidence for it as any of the rest , is rejected by the Notes n n Lab. pag. 60. Bin. pag 17. col. 2. ; because it forbids Men to fast on Saturday , which is now a Fasting-day at Rome . The Notes say , No Father mentions this Canon ; but presently own , That Ignatius , Clemens Romanus , the Canons of the Sixth General Council , Gregory Nyssen , and Anastasius Nicaenus , ( to which we add Tertullian o o Tertul. de jejun . adv. Psycl . cap. 14 & 15. , ) do all speak of Saturday , as a Day on which Fasting was forbid . The Notes confess also , That the Eastern-Church , and the Church of Milan in S. Ambrose time , allowed not Fasting upon Saturday p p Aug. ad Januar . ep. 118. cap. 2. & ad Casulan . Ep. 86. ; yet after all , they will not grant this Canon to be genuine , only because it is very unlikely that the Church of Rome should contradict a Canon of the Apostles , whereas we have already seen , it makes no scruple to contradict them , if they agree not with their practice . The Notes indeed say , but without any proof , That Rome received the Saturday Fast from Peter and Paul ; yet they grant soon after , That after the Heresie of Marcion was extinct , the Roman Church did not only lawfully , but piously Fast on Saturday . So that this was a private Custom of the Roman Church , in which it differed from all other Churches , and they know not when it began , nor who it came from ; yet for such a Customs sake they reject an Apostolical Canon .

The 69th Canon expresly enjoyns the Wednesday Fast ; and the Notes say , That many Fathers mention it as of ancient Institution ; yea , these Notes affirm , It was certainly a Fast of the Apostles instituting , being observed by the whole Church , and not appointed by any Council , but spoken of by Authors of greatest Antiquity q q Lab. pag. 6. Bin. pag. 18. col. 1. . Well then , I hope the Roman Church ( whose Customs are all said to be Apostolical ) do keep this Wednesday Fast ; They tell you , No : This Wednesday Fast in their Church is changed into the Saturday Fast : And so farewel to this Canon also .

Lastly the 84th Canon gives us a Canon of Scripture , which doth not agree with the Trent Canon , for it rejects Ecclesiasticus from being Canonical , and mentions not Wisdom , Tobit , Judith , nor ( in Old Copies r r Dr. Cosens Histor. Canon . Chap. 4. ) the Book of Machabees , which the Roman Church now say are Canonical Scripture : And this is the true reason why the Notes reject this Canon s s Lab. pag. 61 Bin. pag. 18. col. 2. : They alledge indeed some other frivilous reasons , such as , the leaving out the Revelations , and putting in Clements Constitutions : But it seems very probable to me , that it was not the Greeks ( as the Notes suggest ) but that Impostor ( who gave these Canons a false Title and called them the Apostles Canons ) which for carrying on his Pious Fraud , left out the Revelations , being not written at that time , when he would have us believe these Canons were made ; and He also put in the Constitutions , which are forged in the name of the Apostles , who were to be set up as Authors also of these Canons : And if that were so , this 84th Canon being cleared from those two Corruptions , is an Ancient and very Authentic Record of the true and genuine Books of Holy Scripture , but the Romanists reject it , as being a good evidence against their New Trent Canon .

§ 3. To these Canons are joyned a pretended Council of the Apostles at Antioch , first put into the Tomes of the Councils , by Binius , and continued by Labbè t t Lab. pag 62. Bin. pag. 18. col. 2. ; one Canon of which allows Christians to make an image of Christ : But this notorius , and improbable Forgery was never heard of in any Author , till that infamous second Nicene Council , which wanting proofs for Image-worship from genuine Antiquity , impudently feigned such Authorities as this pretended Council .

§ . 4. The Pontifical or Lives of the Popes ( which begins here ) bears the Title of Pope Damasus ; but the Notes say Damasus was not Author of it , being evidently patched up out of two different Authors , containing contradictions almost in every Popes Life . So that no account is to be made of a Writing so different from it self u u Lab. pag. 63. Bin. pag. 19. col. 2. : Now if this be ( as it certainly is ) a True Character of the Pontifical , Why do these Editors print it ? Why do the Notes so often cite it as good Hisstory ? Why do their Divines quote it as good Authority to prove their Modern Corruptions to have been primitive Rites w w Harding against Jewel , pag. 53. Dr. James corrup . of Faith , par. 1. p. 22. ? Since it is a manifest Legend , and contained at first nothing but the bare Names and continuance of the several Popes ; and was filled up by Isidore Mercator , who forged the Decretal Epistles , with many improbable Fictions unsuitable both to the Men and Times , for which they were invented , and designed to be a ground for those Decretal Epistles ; and to make the World believe , that all the Popes were considerable for their Actions in all Ages , as Dr. Peirson hath excellently proved in his Learned Post humous Dissertation x x Cestriens . dissert. posthum . lib. 2. cap. 1 , 2. &c. : Yet not only these Editors of the Councils print this corrupt Legend , but their very Breviaries and Missals generally appoint the Lessons out of it , on the Festivals of these Ancient Popes ; publishing in the very Church in time of Divine Service , these Fictions for the true ground of the Peoples Devotions on those Days : I confess Binius out of Baronius hath Notes upon every Pope's Life , and rejects commonly some part of it ; but then it is such passages as no way concern the opinion or practice of the present Roman Church : For the passages which do agree thereto ( though equally false ) he generally defends , yea cites them to prove their Modern Faith and Usages : But as we come to the several Popes Lives , which these Editors make the grand direction in Ecclesiastical Chronology , we shall observe the many and gross Errors contained in it ; We begin with the Life of S. Peter , whom if we do allow to have been at Rome , as this Author reports , yet we cannot believe he ordained three Bishops for his Successors there in his Life-time , viz. Linus , Cletus and Clement : Nor that he was Buried in three several places , in Apollo ' s Temple , and besides Nero ' s Pallace in the Vatican , and besides the Triumphal Territory , which this fabulous Writer affirms : Nor will the Annotator admit that S. Peter could be Crucified by Nero in the 38th year after Christ's Passion , which was three years almost after Nero's own Death .

§ . 5. The next place , ( ever since P. Crabs Edition ) is by the Roman Editors allotted to a Treatise of the Popes Supremacy y y Lab. col . 65. Bin. pag. 20. col. 2. , writ of late Times by some manifest Sycophant of the Roman Church , yet placed here among the Venerable Antiquities of the Apostolic Age , to clap a false Biass on the unwary Reader ; and make him apt to believe ( that which Richerius said is the main design of Bellarmin , Baronius and Possevine in all their Works , viz. ) that the Pope was made by Christ the infallible and absolute Monarch of the Church z z Richer . praesul . ad histor. Concil. ; but the Tract it self makes out this high Claim , chiefly by the Decretal Epistles , which are now confessed to be Forgeries ; And by the Sayings of Popes , who were not to be believed in their own case a a John . V. 31. nemo sibi & professor , & tellis . Tert. in Mar●●n . lib. 5. : To which are added some few Fragments of the Fathers falsly applied , and certain false Arguments , which have been confuted a thousand times . So that the placing this Treatise here , serves only to shew the Editors partiality to promote a bad Cause .

§ . 6. The Pontifical places Linus as S. Peters Successor ; but the Notes confess , that the Fathers are not agreed about it b b Lab pag. 72. Bin. pag. 24. col. 1. : They own that Tertullian , Epiphanius and Ruffinus make Clement to succeed Peter ; and the 〈◊〉 Learned Bishop of Chester proves , Linus was dead before Peter c c Cestriens . diss . 2. cap. 2. . Irenaeus doth not say ( as the Notes falsly cite him , ) that Linus succeeded Peter in the Government of the universal Church d d Iren. adv. 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 3. ; but only that Peter and Paul delivered the Administration of that Church to him , which they had founded at Rome ; Which they might do in their Life time , while they went to preach in other places : The Epistle of Ignatius to Mary Cassibolite , and the Verses attributed to Tertullian , which they bring for proof of this Succession , are confessed to be spurious Tracts : St. Hierom is dubious , and upon the whole matter , there is no certainty who was Bishop of Rome next to the Apostles , and therefore the Romanists build on an ill Bottom , when they lay so great weight on their personal Succession .

§ . 7. The like Blunder there is about the next Pope : The fabulous Pontifical makes Cletus succeed Linus , and gives us several Lives of Cletus and Anacletus , making them of several Nations , and to have been Popes at different times , putting Clement between them . Yet the aforesaid Learned Bishop of Chester , proves these were only two names of the same Person e e Cestriens . diss . 2. cap. 1. ; But the Notes attempt to justifie the forged Pontifical , by impudently affirming f f Lab. pag. 74. Bin. pag. 25. col. 1. that Ignatius , ( Anacletus contemporary ) Irenaeus , Eusebius , St. Augustine and Optatus , were all mistaken , or all wronged by their Transcribers , who leave out Cletus : But every Candid Reader will rather believe the Mistake to be in the Pontifical ( which is a meer heap of Errors ) and in the Roman Martyrology and Missal , which blindly follow it , rather than in those Eminent and Ancient Fathers : And every one may see the Folly of the Romish Church , which Venerates two several Saints , on two several Days , one of which never had a real Being ; for Cletus is but the abbreviation of Anacletus his Name .

§ . 8. After this we have the Life of Clement , wherein the Pontifical makes him succeed Cletus , under those Consuls which were in Office the next year after S. Peter's Martyrdom , though he had assigned 23 years to Linus and Cletus , his pretended Predecessors g g Lab. pag. 75. Bin. pag. 25. col. 1. ; which years must all be expired in one years compass , if this Account be true ; and one would admire the stupidity of this Author , who though he had placed S. Peters Death so many years before Clement's Entrance , as to leave room for two intermediate Popes ; yet here again repeats his old Fable of S. Peters delivering the Bishopric of Rome to Clement ; a sufficient proof there is neither Truth nor Certainty in the pretended Personal Succession of the first Popes .

§ . 9. From this Pope Clement down to the time of Syricius , who lived 300 years after him , there are printed in these Editors , after every Popes Life , divers Decretal Epistles , pretended to be writ by the several Popes , and Vindicated by Binius's Notes annexed to them : Which were received in the Western Church for many Hundred years together as the genuine Decrees of these ancient and pious Popes , transcribed into the Canon Law ; and cited for many Ages to justifie the Usurpations , and defend the Corruptions of the Roman Church , to determine Causes and decide Controversies in Religion : And yet they are all notorious Forgeries ; so that since Learning was revived , divers of the most Eminent Roman Writers have rejected them . Card. Cusanus affirms , That being compared with the times in which they are pretended to have been Writ , they betray themselves h h Cusan . de Concord . Cath. l. 3. . Baronius calls them , Late invented Evidences of no Credit , and Apocryphal i i Baron . An. 865. §. 7. & An. 102. § 6 , 7 ; yea , Labbé and Cossartius have in their Edition a Learned Preface to them , proving them to be forged k k Labbé pag. 78. : And in their Margin write almost against every Epistle , This is suspected ; This is Isidores Wares , &c. and also note the very places of Authors who lived long after these Times , out of which large Passages in them are stollen Verbatim . Which clear Confession of our Adversaries may make some think it needless to confute them , and unnecessary to charge this Forgery upon the Roman Church : But I cannot think it sit wholly to pass them by ; because Turrian the Jesuit had the Confidence to defend them all as genuine ; and Binius in his Edition , not only Vindicates them by a general Preface l l Bin. pag. 26. col. 1. , but by particular Notes labours to prove most of them Authentic ; and Labbé himself prints those Notes at large in his Edition , so that such as do not look into his Margen , may be deceived . Besides , this Confession of some Romanists comes too late to compensate for the injury done to the Truth , by their Churches approving them so long : And they still keep up the Supremacy , and all their corrupt Practices and Opinions , which were set up and cherished by these Forgeries ; they now take away the Scaffolds , when the Building can stand alone ; they execute the Traytor , but enjoy freely the benefit of his Treason . Moreover , while some Romanists condemn them , others go on to cite them for good Authority : Harding brags , he had proved many Points of Faith by the Epistles of Clement Damasus , Julius Melchiades , Pontianus , Sixtus , Soter , and Symmachus m m Hard. against Jewel , pag. 22. : Dr. Tho. James shews the particular corrupt Doctrines and Practices , which the late Roman Writers defend by the spurious Epistles of Clement , Marcellus , Marcus , and Hormisda n n Dr. James Cor. of Fath. Part I. pag. 4 , 20 , & 69. : And the Learned Cook with infinite diligence , hath cited the very Places of the Modern Champions for the Roman Opinions , and shewed what Doctrines and Practices they do maintain by these Forged Epistles o o Rob. Coci Censura Patr. per totum . . It is also well known , that the Late Scriblers for that Religion do follow Bellarmin and Others , in citing these Decretals for good Authority , and that the Canon Law is in a great measure composed out of these Epistles ; by which , Causes are determined at this day in all Popish Countries : Therefore till the Romanists raze them and the Notes in their defence , out of the Volumes of the Councils , and expunge all the false Notions taken hence , out of their Canon Law ; yea , and leave citing them in their Disputes with us , we cannot think it needless to shew the apparent Forgery of them ; but we will not enlarge so as to disprove the Particulars , but put together here our Evidence against them all .

§ . 10. These Epistles , though pretended to be writ in the first four Centuries , were never heard of in the World till near 800 years after Christ : About which time came out a Collection of Councils under the name of Isidore Hispalensis ; but whereas he died An. 636 , and this Collector mentions the XIth Council of Toledo and the Sixth General Council , which were held near Fifty years after , this appears not to be the Work of that Isidore , but of one Isidore Mercator , and it was first brought into France by Riculphus B. of Mentz , in which Collection these Decretal Epistles first appeared ; but the Learned Hincmarus of Rheims immediately discerned them to be an imposture , and Writ against them , as Baronius confesseth p p Baron . Annal. An. 865. §. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. : But though he own the Cheat , he is not willing to grant the Roman Church had any hand in it , yet that is as clear as the Forgery ; because Hincmarus was hated and prosecuted by the Pope , and forced at last to Recant his Censure of these Epistles ; and not long after Benedictus Levita having Transcrib'd divers Passages out of them into his Capitulars , got them confirmed at Rome , which could not but cherish so advantagious a Fiction that supported the Supremacy , which they then did so hotly stickle for ; and therefore though they came first to the Birth in Spain ; some conjecture they were all Hatched at Rome , whose evil Designs and Interest they are contrived to serve : But the Age was so Ignorant when they were Invented , that there is such infamous and convincing Marks of Forgery upon them , as makes it very easie to prove the Cheat beyond any possibility of doubting ; and we will here put the principal of them together under their proper Heads .

§ . 11. First , The Style of these Decretals shews they were not writ within the four first Centuries , wherein ( at Rome especially ) they writ Latin in a much more Elegant Style than is to be found here , where the Phrases are modern , harsh , and sometimes barbarous , so that the Reader is often puzled to reconcile them either to Grammar or Sense : As for Example , Pope Victor's Second Epistle q q Lab. p. 595. Bin. pag. 79. col. 1. , which of old began with Enim , and was mended by Binius with Semper enim ; but still there is false Latin in it , viz. aliquos nocere fratres velle r r Rob. Coci Censurae pag. 33. . The like barbarous Style may be observed in the two Epistles of Pontianus s s Lab. p. 622. Bin. pag. 90 , & 91. , and in many others : But the genuine Epistles of Cornelius , preserved in Eusebius and S. Cyprian t t Ep. 3 & 5. Cornel. Lab. pag. 683 , &c. Bin pag. 111 , 112 , 113. , are writ in a more polite Style ; and as Labbé notes , These Epistles shew how much good Mony differs from counterfeit , and how much Gold excels Counters : The like difference there is between the Style of that genuine Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians u u Edit. Lab. pag. 116. , and those silly Forgeries put out in his Name in the very Front of these Decretals w w Lab. p. 82 , &c. Bin. pag. 27 , &c. ; from whence it undeniably follows , That the Decretals were not writ in the Ages wherein the Latin Tongue flourished , nor by those Popes whose Names they bear . And this is further manifest by divers Words , which were not used in the time of these Popes , but are often put into these Epistles : Such is Religiositas for Piety , and Universitas for the World , in the Decretals of Dionysius x x Lab. p. 827. Bin. pag. 158. ; such is Miles for a Servant , and Senior for a Lord , in the Decrees of Pope Pius y y Lab. p. 576. Bin. p. 71. col. 2. , which are Words not heard of till the time of the French Empire , in that sense : Such is the Phrase of making Oblation to redeem mens Sins , and the Name of the Mass in Fabian's Decrees z z Lab. p. 650. Bin. pag. 101. . Pope Gaius his Decretal Epistle mentions Pagans , but that Name was not used for the Gentils till Optatus Milevitanus his time , who first used it in that Sense , saith Baronius a a Lab. p. 925. Bin. pag. 172. col. 2. . Moreover , innumerable places in these Epistles mention Primates and Patriarchs , Arch-Bishops and Metropolitans , &c. which Words were not used in the Christian Church in the time of those Popes , who are pretended to have writ about them ; As for Example , The first Epistle of Clement b b Lab. pag 91. Bin. pag. 30. col. 2. , the second Epistle of Anacletus c c Lab. p. 526. Bin. pag. 47. col. 2. , and many others ; but no Christian Writer ever used the Word Patriarch for a Christian Bishop till Socrates Scholasticus , who writ An. 442 d d Beveridg . Annot. in Concil. Nicen. Tom. II. p. 52. . In like manner we find the Word Apocrisary in Anacletus's first Epistle e e Lab. p. 511. Bin. pag. 42. col. 2. , and also in the second Epistle of Zepherine f f Lab. p. 606. Bin. pag. 82. col. 2. ; yet Meursius in his Glossary cannot find any elder Authority for it than Constantine's Donation ( forged after that Emperor's time ) , and owns the Name was not heard of before , Gloss . p. 43. The Name of Archdeacon also is in Clements second Epistle g g Lab. pag. 98. Bin. pag. 34. col. 2. , and in Pope Lucius's Decrees h h Lab. p. 727. Bin. pag. 131. col. 2. ; but the Office and Title did not come into the Church till many years after : And finally , the Name of a Diocesan for a Christian Bishop , is put into Calixtus second Epistle i i Lab. p 612. Bin. pag. 85. col. 1. , but was not used in that Sense till long after his time . All which prove these Epistles were writ in the later barbarous Ages , and not in the time of those Popes , whose Names they bear .

§ . 12. The same may be proved Secondly , by the Matter of these Epistles , which is no way suitable to those grave and Pious Popes , who lived in times when the Church was pestered with Heresies , and oppressed with Persecutions ; yet these Epistles do not either confute those Heresies , nor comfort the Christians under Persecutions ; But speak great Words of the Roman Supremacy , and of Appeals , of the exemption and priviledges of Bishops and Clergy Men , of splendid Altars and rich Vessels for Divine Administrations , and the like , which make it incredible they could be writ in an Age of suffering : Instances of this we have in Clements first Epistle k k Lab. p. 91. Bin. pag. 30. ; where he Orders Primates and Patriarchs , to be placed in such Cities as the Heathens , of Old had Arch-Flamins in : Whereas the Heathensthen had Flamines and Priests in all Cities : His third Epistle l l Lab. p. 103. Bin. pag. 36. col. 1. is directed to all Princes greater and less , and Commands them to obey their Bishops : Whereas all Princes in the World at that time were Gentils : The like absurdity appears in Calixtus first Epistle , where he gives Laws to the Emperors and all others professing piety m m Lab. p. 609. Bin. pag. 83. col. 2. , as if Heliogabulus and Caracalla had been under his Command : And in the second Epistle of Sixtus , Ano. 260 , who threatens to Excommunicate the Princes of Spain , who spoiled their Bishops n n Lab. p. 822. Bin. pag. 157. col. 1. , though all Princes then were Heathens : Marcellinus also in a time of Persecution , under a Heathen Emperor gives direction what is to be done by an Emperor professing the true Faith o o Lab. p. 934. Bin. pag. 176. col. 2. ; Who can imagin , Anacletus Anno Dom. 104 , should speak of Priests in little Villages , and of Cities which anciently had Primates and Patriarchs , or tell us in Trajans time , That Rome had cast away her Heathen Rites p p Lab. p. 528. Bin. pag. 49. ? Or that he should affirm the Christian people were generally Enemies to their Priests ; and Command the Bishops to visit the Thresholds of S. Peter's Church ( before it was Built q q Decreta ejus Lab. pag. 532. Bin. pag. 51. col. 2. ? ) Is it likely Euaristus the next Pope , should declare , That Children could not Inherit their Parents Estates , if they were not Baptized by a Christian Priest r r Lab. p. 533. Bin. pag. 52. col. 1. ; or suppose Churches and Altars consecrated long before the Memory of any Man in the Parish s s Lab. p. 541. Bin. pag. 54. col. 1. ? Could Pope Xystus in Adrian's Persecution brag , that Rome was the Head over all Bishops , and also a Refuge to such as were spoiled by Christian People t t Lab. p. 558. Bin. pag. 62. col. 2. ? Were there in Pope Hyginus time , ( as his Decrees pretend ) More Churches and larger than the Revenue belonging to them could repair u u Lab. p. 568. Bin. pag. 67. col. 2. ? Is it propable Pope Pius should complain Anno 158 , That Christians should Sacrilegiously take away whole Farms dedicated to Pious Uses ? Yet this complaint is found in his second Epistle w w Lab. p. 574. Bin. pag. 70. col. 2. ; And Binius Notes justify this by a forged Decretal of Urban the First , and by proving that in the time of Constantine ( 140 Years after ) the Heathens had taken Houses from the Christians : The Decree for Vailing Nuns at 25 years of Age must be of later time , because it is certain no Nuns were vailed then , nor were any under Sixty years Old allowed to profess Virginity x x Cestriens . diss . 2. cap. 6. §. 16. &c. : When all Christians were so constantly present at Divine Offices , and received the Sacrament Weekly ; what need was there for Pope Soter to decree , No Priest should say Mass unless two were present , and that all should Communicate on Maunday-Thursday y y Lab. p. 587. Bin. pag. 75. col. 1. ? How could there be Secular Laws forbidding the People to conspire against their Bishop , as Calixtus Decretal pretends z z Lab. p. 612. Bin. pag. 85. col. 1. ? or how could he mention the Laws of the Roman and Greek Emperors , so long before the Empire was divided a a Ibid. ? Had Bishops in Pope Urbans time power to Banish and Imprison the Sacrilegious ? or had they high Seats in the form of a Throne , Erected for them in Churches , as his Epistle pretends b b Lab. p. 618 Bin. pag. 87. col. 2. ? Could the next Pope by his Decree hinder Heathens and Enemies to the Christian Clergy from accusing them ? as the first Epistle of Pontianus gives out c c Lab. p. 623. Bin. pag , 90. col. 1. . Antherus Epistle charges Bishops in those times with changing their Churches out of ambition and covetousness d d Lab. p. 634. Bin. pag. 94. col. 2. , even while nothing but Martyrdom was to be got by being a Bishop : And Fabian is made to charge the Faithful , with spoiling their Bishops , and citing them before the Lay Tribunals e e Lab. p. 636 ▪ Bin. pag. 95. col. 2. ; which is not credible of the Christians of that Age : Cornelius his genuine Epistle saith ; The Christians durst not meet at Prayers in any known Rooms , no not in Cellars under ground f f Lab. p. 682. Bin. pag. 113. col. 1. . But the Pontifical and one of his Forged Decretals , pretend that this same Pope had liberty to Bury the Apostle S. Peter's Body in Apollo's Temple , the Vatican and the golden Mount , that is , in three places ( I suppose ) at once g g Lab. p. 668. Bin. pag. 109. col. 2. : Lucius a Martyred Pope makes it a wonder , that in his days Churches should be spoiled of their Oblations and Ministers vexed h h Lab. p. 721. Bin. pag. 129. col. 1. ; Pope Stephen threatens to make Slaves of Clerks , who accuse their Bishop , and forbids Lay-men to complain of the Clergy i i Lab. p. 732. Bin. pag. 134. col. 1. ; Doth it consist with the poverty of those Ages , for Eutychianus to decree That Martyrs should be Buried in Purple k k Lab. p. 913. Bin. pag. 167. col. 2. ? or with its charitv , for the same Pope to forbid Christians to pray for Hereticks l l Lab. p. 921. Bin. pag. 171. col. 1. ; when our Lord bids them pray for their Enemies ? I should tire the Reader and my self , if I proceeded to Rake together any more Instances ; and these may suffice to shew , That these Epistles were not writ in those early Ages .

§ . 13. Thirdly , The same may be proved from the many Absurdities found in these Decretals , arguing the Author to be Illiterate and Ignorant ; Whereas the Popes , whose Names they falsly bear , were prudent and Learned Men ; however well skilled in Holy Scripture : Yet Anacletus is made to say , that the Apostles chose the LXX Disciples m m Lab. p. 527. Bin. pag. 48. col. 2. , which the Gospel affirms were chosen by Christ himself : He also weakly derives Cephas ( the Syriac Name of Peter , signifying a Stone ) from the Greek word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , and saith it signifies a Head , and proves Peter's Supremacy by this silly mistake n n Lab. p. 529. Bin. pag. 49. col . 2. Vid. Causab . in Baron . pag. 98. : It looks very ridiculously in Pope Antherus in his Epistle to say , it is not fit for one in my Mean condition to judge others , nor to say any thing of the Ministers of the Churches o o Lab. p. 630. Bin. pag. 92. col. 2. ; but indeed the Forger stole these Words out of S. Hieroms first Epistle to Heliodorus , and foolishly applied them to the Pope : The Decretal of Stephen tells the Gallican Church , what the Holy Apostolic and Universal Church had undertaken to observe , as if they had been no part of the Universal Church p p Lab. p. 729. Bin. pag. 132. col. 2. : But nothing is more Ridiculous than the foolish Expositions of Scripture , which Popes ought to interpret Infallibly ; but these Epistles make Pope Alexander prove , that Holy-water doth sanctify , by Heb. ix . 13 , 14. where the Ashes of an Heifer are said to Purify the unclean , and the Blood of Christ to purge the Conscience : And he interprets Hos. iv . 8. where the Priests are said to eat up the Sins of the People , of blotting out their Sins by their Prayers q q Epist. Alex. 1. Bin. pag. 57 , & Ep. 2. Bin. p. 59. ; Pope Pius proves Bishops are only to be judged by God , because ( John II. ) Christ drove the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple with his own hands r r Lab. p. 571. Bin. pag. 68. col. 2. . Pope Anicetus proves , Priests ought to shave their Crowns , because S. Paul saith , It is a shame for Men to have long hair , 1 Cor. XI . s s Lab. p. 581. Bin. pag. 72. col. 2. ; which the Apostle speaks of Lay-men as well as Clergy-men , and so the same Logic would prove , that Lay-men also should shave their Crowns . Pope Soter proves , that Nuns must not touch the Holy Vessels , by S. Pauls saying , 2 Cor. XI . He had espoused the Corinthians ( both Men and Women ) to one Husband , even Christ t t Lab. p. 584. Bin. pag. 75. col. 1. . Pope Stephen proves , That Bishops cught not to be disturbed , by that place in the Psalms , The Heavens declare the glory of God , and the Firmament sheweth his handy work u u Lab. p 732. Bin pag. 134. col. 1. ; And to name no More , Pope Foelix is very happy in that he can make out , That we ought not to persecute and disturb Our Brethren , from Rom. V. 1 , 2. When we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son : And from Math. X. Fear not them which can kill the body , &c. he proves , We must not persecute nor disturb Preachers and Doctors , because their Souls do not dye with their Bodies w w Lab. p. 906. Bin. pag. 164. col. 2. . All these impertinent Inferences from Holy Scripture , shew the Forger of these Epistles was some ignorant and impudent Impostor ; but none can suppose those holy Primitive Bishops would abuse Scripture and themselves at this rate .

§ . 14. Fourthly , this further appears , From many Quotations in these Epistles , which are taken verbatim out of Authors , that lived and writ long after all these Popes were dead , in whose Names these Epistles are forged ; wherefore they could not write them . Now this infallible Mark of their Forgery appears first , in that these Epistles do all generally cite Scripture , according to S. Hieroms Translation * * De Marca makes this an insallible Note , that these Epistles are forged . De Concord . lib. 3. cap. 5. , which was not made in their days ; yet Clement in his 4th and 5th Epistles , Euaristus in both his Epistles , Telesphorus in his Decretal , and indeed all the rest of them who have occasion to quote Scripture , do use the very Words of S. Hierom , and that sometimes for a whole Page together , as the Reader will find by comparing these Quotations with the Vulgar Latin Bible . But Learned Men know that the Latin Fathers , who lived before S. Hierom's Translation was extant , used another Version very different from that , and even Pope Cornelius in that genuine Epistle of his , which is preserved in S. Cyprian , doth not follow S. Hierom's Translation x x Lab. p. 68● . Bin. pag. 113. col. 2. ; but his Forged ones do : Which is a Proof undeniable , That he who Forged these Epistles , lived after S. Hierom's Translation was grown common . Besides ; Anacletus is made to cite a long Passage verbatim out of S. Hierom's Epistle to Nepotian , which was writ almost 300 years after his time y y Ep. 3. Anacl●ti , Lab. 529. ●in. 49. . Pope Eleutherius cites a Law out of the Theodosian Code , Judicantem cuncta rimari oportet , &c. z z Lab. p. 588. Bin. pag. 76. col. 1. , which was made 300 years after this Popes death , and this convinced Contius and Baronius , that this Epistle was Forged after Theodosius his Reign ; yet Binius hath the Impudence to say , Perhaps the Code borrowed this Passage from the Epistle ; but Labbé is so ashamed of this bold Falsehood , that in his Margen he writes , Binius in this is mistaken ; and he had reason for that Note , since this is not the only place in the seigned Decretals where the Code is cited . Labbé owns that the second forged Epistle for Pope Eutychianus quotes a Law verbatim out of Cod. Theod. lib. 9. Tit. 〈◊〉 , & 2. a a Lab. p. 917. Bin. pag. 169. col . 〈◊〉 . . Pope Zepherine also cites Imperial Laws and Edicts , Forbidding Men to cite a Bishop despoiled of his goods , into any Secular Judicature , till all were restored b b Lab. p. 606. Bin. pag. 82. col. 2. the same Passage also is cited out of the Secular Laws in Pope Stephen's second Epistle c c Lab. p. 732. Pin. pag. 134. col. 1. . But it is most certain there could be no such Laws in these Popes times who lived under Pagan Emperors ; nor a Law to forbid the People to conspire against their Bishops , which yet Calixtus cites in his second Epistle d d Lab. p. 612. Bin. pag. 85. col. 1. . Moreover , Antherus cites a long Passage , word for word , out of S. Hierom's Epistle to Heliodorus e e Lab. p. 630. Bin. pag. 92. col. 2. ; Pope Lucius is made to use ( as Labbé confesseth ) the Words of his Successor Agatho , in the Sixth Council of Constantinople , 300 years after f f Lab. p. 721. Bin. pag. 129. col. 1. : And yet Bellarmin cites this place of the Forged Epistle twice , to prove the Pope's Infallibility , Bell. de Rom. Pontif. l 4. c. 3. & de Verb. Dei , lib. 3. cap. 5. Pope Sixtus the Second , His first Epistle is stollen most of it out of Ithacius and Varimadus , who lived many Ages after him g g Lab. p. 820. Bin. pag. 156. . In Eutychianus's first Epistle , there are two whole Pages transcribed out of his Successor , Pope Leo's 97th Epistle h h Lab. p. 914. Bin. pag. 168. col. 1. : And Gains his Decretal Epistle , steals two large Passages from the same Pope Leo's twelfth Sermon on the Passion , and his 97th Epistle i i Lab. p. 925. Bin. pag. 172. col. 2. . Finally , whosoever will take pains to observe Labbe's Margen shall find , that he with great diligence hath marked in the Margen of all these Forged Epistles , the very places of later Authors out of which they are stollen , and transcribed by their cheating Composer , who patcht them up together out of the Writings of S. Hilary , S. Hierom , Pope Leo , Innocent , Gelasius , and Gregory , &c. who lived many years after all these Popes were dead , which is an Unanswerable Proof , that they could not be writ by those whose Names they bear .

§ 15. Fifthly , Those Popes could not but know their own Times ; and if they had writ them , they could not have been mistaken in Chronology , or in the Date of their Epistles ; but the Forger of them had so little skill in the Times for which he invented them , that he is almost every where erroneous in his Computation . The two first Epistles of Clement are written to S. James after S. Peter's death ; yet it is confessed by Binius , S. James dyed six or seven years before S. Peter . Binius would solve this by saying , The Name of James crept into the Title instead of Simeon ; but alass ! the Name of James is repeated often in the very Body of the Epistles , and that proves them Forged k k Lab. p. 82. & pag. 98. Bin. pag. 27 , & pag. 34. . The Names of the Consuls also by which most of these Epistles are Dated , must have been right if they had been writ by these old Bishops of Rome , who could not be ignorant of the true Consuls in their own time ; but alas ! they are so generally false , that Binius in his Notes , in vain labours to excuse some few of them , and is forced to own the rest to be false ; so that Surius was more cunning to leave all the Consuls Names out of his Edition , Because ( he saith ) Calvin takes occasion from thence to despise all the Epistles l l Praesat . Laur. Surii ap. Lab. Tom. 1. pag. 13. ; and doubtless the Dates are as true as the Epistles , both having sufficient Marks upon them of a Modern Impostor , unskilled in those Times . And it is evident , that the Pontifical names the same false Consuls , so that either one Author forged the Popes Lives and their Epistles , or the Inventer of these Epistles took the Consuls Names so constantly from the Pontifical , that he imitates him in false-spelling the Consuls names , and in joyning Men who were never Consuls together ; yea , because that Fabulous Pontifical usually Names no Consuls , but those in Office at Every Popes Entrance and Death , This Forger of the Epistles dates them all either by the first or last Consuls of every Pope , as if all the Popes had only written Epistles in their first and last years : A Few Examples of these Errors shall suffice .

The Pontifical makes Pope Euaristus to enter when Valens and Vetus were Consuls , and to be martyred when Gallus and Bradua were Consuls , and so the Forger dates his first Epistle by the names of his first Consuls , and the second Epistle by the Consuls of his last year : But alas ! both the Pontifical and Epistles are wofully mistaken , since Euaristus ( as Baronius proves ) entred the 13th year of Trajan , that is , fourteen years after the Consulship of Valens and Vetus , and two years after the Consulship of Gallus and Bradua ; so that by this Account he writ Decretal Epistles long before he was Pope m m Lab. p. 532. Bin. pag. 51. col. 2. : So also , whereas Pope Alexander really sat in Adrian the Emperors time , and Trajan was dead before his entrance , yet one of his Epistles is dated with Trajan as one Consul , and Helianus as the other ; but these two were never Consuls together n n Lab. p. 542. Bin. pag. 55. col. 2. : And his second Epistle is dated by the Consuls of Adrian's first yea● , whereas Pope Alexander came but into his See in Adrian's third year . I will not trouble my self with any more Instances , because there are none of these Dates true , and many of them with the Pontifical ( which guides the Forgery ) so grosly false , as to make Popes write Epistles before they were chosen , and after they were dead o o Exempli gratia , Telesphori Ep. 1. A 〈…〉 ceti Ep. 1. Zepherin . 1 & 2. Pontiani Ep. 2. Fabiani Ep. 3. Cornelis Ep. 1 , 2. & in mult●● aliis . ; which is an undeniable Evidence , that the Inventer of these Epistles was a Modern Cheat , ignorant of the true Times both of the Consuls and the Popes . There are other Errors also besides the Dates , which shew , the Bungling Author of these Epistles neither understood Chronology nor History . The Pontifical , before it was corrected , had made Anicetus Pope , Pius his Predecessor ; and therefore Pius his third Epistle doth not reckon him among the Priests at Rome , but puts in Eleutherius as one of Pius his Presbyters p p Lab. p. 576. Bin. pag. 70. col. 2. , who was but a Deacon in the time of his Successor Anicetus q q Euseb. hist. lib. 4. cap. 22. & Brev. Rom. Ma 〈…〉 26. . The same Epistle makes Cerinthus the Heretic to be alive , and busie at Rome in seducing Men , An. 166 ; yet Binius before tells us he was present in the Synod at Hierusalem An. Christi 51 , at which Synod , if he were but Nineteen years of Age , he must in Pius his time have been 130 , which is incredible ; but Binius saith , this may be believed , because the first Epistle of Pius mentions Hermes ( named by S. Paul , Rom. XVI . ) who set forth a Book about this time An. 158 ; which Hermes , if he were but only 34 year old An. Christi 62 , when S. Paul writ his Epistle to the Romans , must be 130 years of Age , when he set forth this Book ; but in conclusion , the Story of Hermes and his Apocryphal Book is a meer Fable , stollen out of the Pontifical r r Lab. p. 572. Bin. pag. 68. col. 2. , and Binius hath no way to defend one of these Fictions , but with another equally absurd . Again , Pope Victor is made to summon one Theophilus ( Bishop of Alexandria ) to a Council at Rome ; but there was no Theophilus Bishop there in Victor's time , Severus was then Bishop of that See , and this Theophilus was Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine s s Lab. p. 593. Bin. pag. 78. col . 1. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 22. ; but if Victor had really writ this Epistle , he could not have made so gross a Mistake : In like manner Antherus Epistle mentions one Eusebius , as then Bishop of Alexandria t t Lab. p. 630. Bin. pag. 92. col. 2. , who was not Bishop there till two or three Ages after u u Dodwel . ap. Cestr . diss . 2. cap. 6. . The first Epistle of Pope Fabian , dated in his first year , mentions Novatus the Heretic coming out of Africa to Rome , and seducing Novatian , with others w w Lab. p. 636. Bin. pag. 92. col. 2. ; but Baronius out of Eusebius and S. Cyprian assures us , that Novatus came not to Rome till Fifteen years after x x Baron . An. 238. §. 9. . Wherefore these Epistles were devised by a later Author , who knew neither the History nor Chronology of those Ages for which he invented these Epistles ; but had only the Fabulous Pontifical in his eye , and follows it in all its Errors and Absurdities : So that since the Pontifical makes Pope Hyginus an Athenian , Pope Pius an Italian , and Pope Soter born in Campania ; Isidore forges three Epistles for H●ginus , To the Athenians ; for Pius , To his Italian Brethren ; for Soter , To all the Campanians : And when the Pontifical falsly devises several Superstitious Rites , begun in the corrupt Ages , and other Usages , to have been first appointed by some of the Ancient Popes , the said Isidore upon that always forges an Epistle in those Popes Names to enjoyn those Rites ; and hence Pope Alexander writes an Epistle about Holy-Water y y Epist. 1. Alexander . ; Sixtus , about none but the Clergies touching Consecrated Vessels z z Sixti Ep. 2. ; Telesphorus , about keeping Lent Seven Weeks a a Telesphor . Ep 1. ; Pius , about keeping Easter upon Sunday b b Pii Ep. 1. ; Anicetus , about Shaving Priests Crowns c c Aniceti Epist 1. ; Calixtus , about four Ember Weeks d d Calixti Epist. 1. ; and so did other Popes , whereas most of these Rites were setled long after , and only prove these Epistles were forged by Isidore .

§ . 16. Now though it be so apparent and undensable , that these Epistles are Forged , and consequently of no Authority ; yet the Roman Church hath made great use of them in the Ignorant Ages : For Binius notes all along in his Margen , what Sections of them are transcribed into their Canon Law ; and even in later times their Writers against the Protestants do commonly cite their Infamous Impostures , to prove the Supremacy of the Pope , his Infallibility , and right to Appeals ; as also for the exemption of the Clergy , their Celibacy and Habits , and to prove their Mass with its Ceremonies , Auricular Confession , Apocryphal Books , Tradition , Chrism , Veneration of Relicks and Martyrs , &c. and Cook in his Censura Patrum , hath noted the several Epistles , and the Authors which cite them , saving us the labour of instancing : And therefore we will only make a few general Observations upon this matter , and so dismiss these Forgeries .

Observ . I. That since the Romanists have no other genuine Ancient Authors , to prove these New Doctrines and Practices by ; but are forced generally to place these apparent Forgeries in the Fore-front of all their Authorities , we may conclude these Points of their Religion are all Innovations , unheard of in the Primitive Ages ; so that Isidore was forced to invent these Epistles almost 800 years after Christ , to give some shew of Antiquity to them ; and these Points were in those Ignorant Times mistaken by this means , for Primitive Usages and Opinions , and so got footing in the World under that disguise ; but now that the Fallacy is discovered , the Doctrines and Practices ought to be disowned as well , as the Epistles on which they are built .

Observ II. There are many other Points of the Roman Religion , which are not so much as mentioned in any of these Forged Epistles , such as Worship of Images , Formal Praying to the Saints , and to the Virgin Mary ; Transubstantiation , Half-Communion , and Adoration of the Host , Purgatory , Indulgences , and Justification by Merits , with some others . Now these are so New , that in Isidore's time , when he invented these Epistles they were not heard of nor received , no not in the Roman Church ; for if they had , no doubt this Impostor , who was so zealous to get Credit for all the Opinions and Usages of that Church which he knew of , would have made some Popes write Epistles to justifie these also , and his silence concerning them makes it more than probable , that these were all invented since the year of Christ 800.

Observ . III. Though the later Romanists frequently cite these Forged Decretals , yet no genuine Author or Historian for Seven hundred years after Christ did ever Quote or Mention them , no not so much as any of the Popes themselves in all that Period . Now it is morally impossible so many important Points should be so clearly decided by so many Ancient Bishops of so Famous a Church , and yet no Author ever take notice of it . And doubtless when the Popes attempted to be Supreme , and claimed Appeals about the year 400 , Zosimus and Boniface , who quarrelled with the Eastern and African Bishops about these Points , and were so hard put to it for Evidence , as to seign some private Canons were made at the first general Council of Nice , would certainly have cited these Epistles , which are so clear Evidence for their pretences , if they had either seen or heard of them ; but they do not once name them in all that Controversie , which shews they were not then in being ; yea , those who know Church History , do clearly discern , that the main Points setled by these Epistles , were things disputed of about the Seventh and Eighth Centuries , a little before Isidore's time ; and therefore these Forgeries must never be cited for to prove any Point to be Ancient or Primitive .

§ . 17. Obs. IV. Though the Inventer of these Epistles was so zealous a Bigot for the Roman Cause , yet many things are to be found in them , which contradict the present Tenents of that Church . For whereas the Pope now claims an Universal Supremacy even over Jerusalem it self ; Clement's first Epistle is directed to James the Bishop of Bishop's , Ruling the Hebrew Church at Jerusalem , and all the Churches every where founded by Divine providence e e Lab. pag. 82. Bin. pag. 27. . Anacletus first Epistle orders all the Clergy present to receive , under pain of Excommunication f f Lab. p. 511. Bin. pag. 42. col. 1. ; which is not observed now in the Roman Church : Pope Telesphorus orders a Mass on the Night before Christmas , and forbids any to begin Mass , before nine a Cleek g g Lab. p. 562. Bin. pag. 64. col. 2. ; But Binius confesses their Church doth not now observe either of these Orders : Pope Hyginus forbids all foreign Jurisdiction , because it is unfit , they should be Judged abroad , who have Judges at home h h Lab. p. 567. Bin. pag. 66. col. 2. ; So the third Epistle of Pope Fabian , appoints that every Cause shall be tried where the Crime is committed ; which passage is also in a genuine Epistle of S. Cyprian to Cornelius i i Lab. p. 698. Bin. pag. 119. col. 2. . And all foreign Jurisdiction is again forbid in Pope Felix his second Epistle k k Lab p. 906. Bin. pag. 164. col. 2. , which passages do utterly destroy Appeals to Rome , unless they can prove all the Crimes in the World are committed there : The second Epistle of Fabian allows the People to reprove their Bishop if he Err in matters of Faith l l Lab. p. 640. Bin. pag. 97. col. 1. ; the same Liberty also is given to the People , in Cornelius second Epistle m m Lab. p. 671. Bin. pag. 110. col. 2. ; which seems to make the People Judges in Matter of Faith , a thing which the Modern Romanists charge upon the Protestants as a great Error : From these and many other passages we may see , that these Impostures do not in all Points agree with the present Roman Church .

§ . 18. I have now done with the Epistles themselves , and proved them to be apparent Forgeries ; I will only give the Reader some cautions about those partial Notes , printed on them both in Binius and Labbè , which though they frequently correct , confute and alter divers passages in these Epistles ; Yet if any thing look kindly upon the Roman Church , they magnifie and vindicate it ; but if it seem to condemn any of their Usages , they reject and slight it : For Example , Pope Pius cites Coloss. XI . 18. against worshiping Angels , and the Notes , reject both S. Hierom's and Theodoret's Exposition of the place , as Reflecting on their Churches practice , adding that S. Paul condemned Cerinthus in that place , for giving too much Honour to Angels ; Yet Binius soon after tells us that Cerinthus was so far from Teaching they were to be Adored , that he thought they were to be Hated as Authors of Evil n n Not Bin. in 1. Ep. Pii . Lab. pag. 571. Bin. pag. 68. . Pope Zepherine cites the Apostolical Canons for the Priviledges of his See , and saith there were but Seventy of them o o Lab. p. 605. Bin. pag. 81. col. 2. : But Binius in his Notes saith he refers to the Seventy third Canon : Yet if the Reader consult that Seventy third Canon , the Pope's See is not named there ; yea , that Canon forbids a Bishop to Appeal from his Neighbor Bishop , unless it be to a Council : Out of Calixtus fust Epistle which Labbè owns to be a manifest Forgery ; Binius Notes cite a Testimoy for the Supremacy , calling it an evident Testimony and worthy to be Noted p p Lab. p. 609. Bin. pag. 83. col. 2. ; Pontianus in his Exile brags , ridiculously about the Dignity of Priests , in his second Epistle q q Lab. p. 624. Bin. pag. 90. col. 1. . And Binius his Notes vindicate this improbable Forgery by a spurious Epistle attributed to Ignatius , which saith — the Laity must be subject to the Deacons : but Binius cites it thus — The Laity , of which number are all Kings , even the most Christian Kings , must be subject to the Deacons ; by which falsifying the Quotation , he makes the meanest Deacon in the Roman Church superior to the French King : Again , in the Vacancy after Fabian , the Clergy of Rome and S. Cyprian writ to each other r r Lab. p. 654. Bin. pag. 103. col. 1. : Where though the Roman Clergy write with all respect to the Clergy of Carthage , and give them humble Advice , not Commands ; yea , and thank S. Cyprian for his humility , in acquainting them with his Affairs , not as Judges of his concerns , but Partners in his Counsels . Binius notes that these Letters do sufficiently shew the Prerogative of the Roman Church — and that S. Cyprian not only desired the Counsel , but submitted to the Judgment of Rome . The first Epistle of Cornelius tells a false story out of the Pontifical about his removing the Bodies of S. Peter and Paul ; and though Binius own this part of the Epistle to be Forged ; Yet in his Notes on the Pontifical s s Lab. p. 667. Bin. pag. 108. col. 1. , he strives to reconcile the differing ways of relating this Fabulous Translation , and slies to Miracles to make those Lies hang together . Cornelius third Epistle is genuine , being preserved in Greek by Eusebius , and yet Binius prints a corrupt Latin Version with it , which where the Greek speaks of one Bishop in a Catholic Church — Reads it — in this Catholic Church ; and the Notes t t Bin. p. 112. col. 2. impudently prove by this Corruption , that the Pope is the sole Bishop of the whole Catholic Church : Of which Labbè was so much ashamed , that he prints Valesius's Latin Version of this Epistle , wherein the ground of Binius his Observation is quite taken away . S Cyprian hath several Epistles printed among the Decretals , wherein are many things which overthrow the Roman Supremacy and Infallibility , upon which no remark is placed , but an obscure passage wherein S. Cyprian saith , that whether he or Cornelius should be the Survivor , must continue his Payers for the afflicted Christians u u Lab. p. 703. Bin. pag. 120. . There it is impertiently noted , That the deceased pray for the living : Pope Stephen's second Epistle asserts , Primates were in use before Christianity w w Lab. p. 732. Bin. pag. 134. col. 1. . Binius in his Notes out of Baronius , saith Herodotus confesses the same thing ; but Labbè declares that some body had imposed upon Baronius , for there is no such thing to be found in Herodotus ; and Adrian in Vopiscus ( his other Authority ) evidently speaks of the Christian Bishop of Alexandria x x Scriptor . Histor. August . pag. 960. : Wherefore Pope Stephen , or he that made the Epistle for him , was mistaken : It is an impudent thing also in Binius to note upon one of S. Cyprian's Letters about Basilides and Martialis , You see the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome : For these two Bishops were justly condemned in Spain , and unjustly absolved by the Pope , after which S. Cyprian condemns them again , only certifying the Bishop of Rome that he had justly nulled his Absolution ; so that we may rather note , You see the Primacy of the Bishop of Carthage y y Bin. p. 136. col. 1. . Pope Eutychianus first Epistle following the Erroneous Pontifical z z Lab. p. 914. Bin. pag. 168. col. 1. , Orders that only Beans and Grapes shall be offered on the Altar : Binius saith this is the Fourth Canon of the Apostles , whereas that fourth Canon doth not name Beans , and the Third Canon forbids all kind of Pulse to be offered on the Altar ; so that the Impostor was deceived , and Binius becomes Ridiculous by attempting to defend him : I shall not need produce any more instances , these will suffice to warn those who study the Councils , not to rely upon any thing in these Notes , which are so full of partiality and Errors , of weak reasonings and false Quotations , of ignorant and wilful Mistakes , that there is little heed to be given to them .

§ . 19. I doubt I have been too tedious in discovering the Forgeries of these Decretal Epistles ; but the Reader must consider they take up the greatest part of this first Period in the Volumes of the Councils , and we have here considered them all together : And now we have nothing to observe in this Century , except the Apostolical Constitutions , which are left out in Binius , but printed in Labbè , in Greek and Latin , next after Clement's genuine Epistle to the Corinthians : Now the Constitutions are a very ancient Forgery , compiled about the end of the Fourth , and beginning of the Fifth Century , of the Rites of which Ages they give a very good account , and have little or nothing in them , to justify the more Modern Corruptions of Rome ; for which cause it is likely Binius omitted them : But if we know before hand that the Apostles did not make them , nor Clement Bishop of Rome collect them , and can pardon the boldness of making the Apostles the speakers , they are useful to be read , as a writing composed in the Fourth or Fifth Age.

CHAP. II.

Of the Forgeries in the Second Century .

§ . 1. THis Period begins with the Life of Anacletus , who was made Pope , as they say , An. 104. but the Fabulous Pontifical brings him in , the 10th Consulship of Domitian , that is , just upon the fictitious Cletus his death , and before Clement entred , who yet is there said to be his Predecessor ; so blundered and uncertain is that ignorant Writer ; yet , except what he saith , no other Author mentions any deeds of Anacletus ; and though Binius in his Notes affirm , Anacletus was most famous for many eminent deeds (s) , yet he cannot name (a) Lab. p. 511. Bin. pag. 42. col. 1. one of them .

Euaristus his Life follows , whom the Pontifical and the Breviary of Sixtus the Fifth b b Lab. p. 532. Bin. pag. 51. col 2. , make to have been Pope in the time of Domitian , Nerva and Trajan ; but Binius out of Baronius takes upon him to correct both the Pontifical and the Roman Office also , assuring us he began in the 13th year of Trajan ; but alas ! these first Bishops of Rome were so obscure , that nothing but their Name is upon Record in Authentic Authors . And what is said in the Pontifical , and the Notes , concerning their several Parents , Countries , times of sitting in that See , and all their Actions almost , are meer Impostures of later Ages , as the Learned Dr. Pierson proves in his afore-cited Posthumous Dissertation .

Alexander's Life is next , wherein Binius again corrects the Pontifical and the Breviary ; which say , He Ruled the Church in the days of Trajan c c Lab. p. 541. Bin. pag. 55. col . 1. Brev. Sixt. 5. in Ma●● 3. ; affirming , he entred not On the Papacy till Adrian's time : But there was more need to Correct the Breviary of his Infallible Church , for those fabulous Lessons it orders to be read in the Church on this Popes day , about Alexander's converting Hermes a Praefect of Rome , Quirinus a Tribune and Balbina his Daughter , who also is Sainted ; yet after all , there were no such persons in those Offices in Rome at that time d d Cestriens . dissert. pos●hum . diss . 2. cap. 7. pag. 227. ; and the whole Story is a Fiction taken out of a fabulous Tract called the Acts of Alexander , yet this Legend Binius's Notes defend .

Of Xystus , the next Pope , nothing is memorable , but that he is said by the Pontifical to be a Martyr . Eusebius saith , he died in Adrian's Twelfth year , and mentions not his Martyrdom e e Euseb. lib. 4. c. 5. ; but Binius contradicts him , and will have him to suffer in the 3d year of Antoninus f f Lab. p. 554. Bin. pag. 60. col. 2. ; and this without any Authority for it , but his own .

Telesphorus , according to Eusebius , was the Seventh Pope from St. Peter , and came in the Twelfth year of Adrian † † Euseb. ut supr. , that is , An. 130. But Binius following the Pontifical , makes him the Eighth Pope , and saith he entred the Third year of Antoninus , that is , Twelve years after ; and in the Notes on his Life g g Lab. p. 559. Bin. pag. 63. col. 2. , upon the Pontificals saying , he Ordained Thirteen Bishops in his Eleven years , he observes , that these Bishops were to be sent into divers parts of the World ; from whence ( he saith ) it is clear that the Pope was to take care not of Rome only , but the whole World . But first , no inference from so fabulous an Author , as the Pontifical , can be clear : And secondly , if there were so many Bishops really Ordained by Popes , as the Pontifical doth pretend , there are but Sixty three Bishops reckoned by him from S. Peter's death to this time , which is near 100 years . From whence ( if we grant the Matter of Fact ) it is rather clear , That the Pope Ordained only some Italian Bishops near Rome ; for otherwise when so many Bishops were Martyred , there must have been far more Ordained for the World in that space of time .

Hyginus , the next Pope , began ( saith Eusebius ) in the first year of Antoninus ; but Binius saith , he was made Pope the Fifteenth of that Emperor ; the Reader will guess whether is to be trusted : The Pontifical could find this Pope nothing to do , but to distribute the Orders of the Clergy , which Pope Clement ( according to him ) had done long before h h Lab. p. 565. Bin. pag. 65. col. 2. .

§ . 2. From the Notes on Pope Pius Life i i Lab. p. 568. Bin. pag 67. col. 2. , we may observe there was no great care of old taken about the Pope's Succession : For Optatus , S. Augustine , and S. Hierom , with the Old Pontifical ( before it was altered k k Cestrieus . diss . 2. cap. 11. pag. 65. , place Anicetus before Pius , but the Greeks place Pius before Anicetus ; and in this Binius thinks we are to believe them rather than the Latins . The rest of the Notes are spent in vindicating an improbable Story , of an Angel bringing a Decree about Easter to Hermes the Popes Brother , who writ a Book about keeping it on the Lord's Day ; yet after all there is a Book of Hermes now extant that hath nothing in it about Easter ; and there was a Book of old writ by Hermes , well known to the Greeks , and almost unknown to the Latins ( though writ by a Pope's Brother ) read in the Eastern Churches , and counted Apocryphal in the Western : But we want another Angel to come and tell us , whether that now extant be the same or no , for Binius cannot resolve us , and only shews his Folly in defending the absurd and incongruous Tales of the Pontifical .

Anicetus either lived before or after Pius , and the Pontifical makes him very busie in Shaving his Priests Crowns , never mentioning what he did to suppress those many Heretics who came to Rome in his time ; but it tells us he was Buried in the Coemetery of Calistus l l Lab. p. 579. Bin. pag. 72. col. 1. , though Calistus ( who gave that Burial-place a name ) did not dye till Fifty years after Anicetus . But Binius ( who is loath to own this gross Falshood ) saith , You are to understand it in that ground which Calistus made a Burying-place afterward ; yet it unluckily falls out , that Amcetus's Successor .

Pope Soter was also Buried ( according to the Pontifical ) in Calistus his Coemetery ; and afterwards Pope Zepherines's Burial-place is described to be not far from that of Calistus , so well was Calistus's Coemetery known , even before it was made a Coemetery , and before he was Pope .

Eleutherius succeeded Soter , and as the Pontifical saith , he received a Letter from Lucius King of Britain , that he might be made a Christian by his Command ; which hint probably first produced those two Epistles between this Pope and King Lucius m m Usserii Antiq. Brit cap. 4 , 5 , &c. & ap. Spelm. Tom. I. Concil. , which Binius leaves out , though he justifies the Story , of which it were well we had better Evidence than the Pontifical . This is certain , the Epistles were forged in an Age when Men could write neither good Latin , nor good Sense ; and I am apt to fancy , if Isidore had put them into a Decretal , they would have been somewhat more polite ; so that it is likely these Epistles were made by some Monks , who thought it much for our Honour , to have our Christianity from Rome .

§ . 3. This Century concludes with the bold Pope Victor , of whose excommunicating the Eastern Bishops ( for not agreeing with him about Easter ) we have a large account in Eusebius n n Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. 23 , 24 , &c. ; but of that there is nothing in the Pontifical ; only we are told he had a Council at Rome , to which he called Theophilus ( Bishop of Alexandria ) and decreed Easter should be observed upon a Sunday , &c. Upon this hint , and the Authority of a better Author , we grant there were at these times divers Councils held about keeping Easter : But the Editors of the Councils ( though Eusebius be the only credible Author which gives an Account of them ) presume to contradict him . For Eusebius makes the Council at Caesarea in Palestina to be first , and makes Theophilus of that City , and Narcissus of Jerusalem , Presidents of it ; but the Editors ( for the honour of the Pope ) place the Roman Council first o o Lab. p. 596. Bin. pag. 79. col. 1 , 2. Vid. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 22. , and upon the bare Credit of the Pontifical ( who mistook Alexandria for Caesarea ) say , That Theophilus was present at it ; whereas Eusebius saith , This Roman Council was the Second called about this Question , consisting of the Bishops about Rome . Secondly , The Editors place the Council of Caesarea , affirming out of a suspicious Fragment of Bede ( who lived many Centuries after , ) That it was Called by Victor' s Authority ; whereas Eusebius ( as we see ) assigns other Presidents to that Council ; yea , they intitle all the other Councils about this Matter , Under Victor ; though in Eusebius they are set down as independent upon one another , The Bishops of each Country Calling them by their own Authority . And though Binius's Notes p p Lab. p. 598. Bin. pag. 80. col. 1. brag of Apostolical and Universal Tradition ; The Bishops of Asia produced a contrary Tradition , and called it Apostolical , for keeping Easter at a different time ; which shews how uncertain a ground Tradition is for Articles of Faith , when it varied so much in delivering down a practical Rite through little more than one Century : And the Asian Bishops persisting in their Custom , and despising Victor's Excommunication , proves , They knew nothing of his Supremacy or Infallibility in those days . We grant Victor was in the right as to the time of Easter , and that which he and other Councils now agreed on , was agreed upon also at the Council of Nice ; but Binius stretches it too far when he pretends , That general Council confirmed Victor's Sentence of Excommunition : For Victor's Authority is never urged in the Nicene Council , nor his Excommunication mentioned ; and we know from Eusebius , That the Bishops of his own Opinion severely reproved him for offering to pass so rash a Sentence , and to impose his Sense upon remote Churches : So that thus far there is no genuine Proof of any Supremacy exercised or claimed by the Roman Church ; for the Decretals , which only pretend to make it out , are notorious Forgeries .

CHAP. III.

Of the Forgeries in the Third Century .

§ . 1. THis Century begins with the Life of Pope An. Dom. 203. Zepherine , who Sat Eight years , saith the Pontifical ; but the Notes tell you , He Sat Eighteen , which is a small Error in that fabulous Author : Yet the Editors believe upon his Credit , that this Pope ordered Vessels of Glass to be used in the Mass q q Lab. p. 603. Bin. pag. 81. col. 1. ; and the Notes prove it by Pope Gregory the Great , who lived Four hundred years after this time . However , if we allow the Matter of Fact upon the Testimonies of S. Hierom and Epiphanius ; it will follow , That in those Ages ( when they used Glass Cups ) they did not believe Transubstantiation ; for if they had , they would not have ventured Christ's Blood in so brittle a Vessel , but have forbid the use of Glasses , as they have done in the Roman Church since this Opinion came in among them r r Dailé de cult. relig. ap. Latin . lib. 2. cap. 22. .

Under this Pope the Editors place an African Council , and say it was Reprobated ; yet they cannot make it appear , that this Pope so much as knew of it . Nor was his Advice or Consent at all desired in that case , which was never disputed at Rome till Pope Stephen's time ( as themselves confess ) viz. Fifty years after this . Council was held ; from whence we learn , That every Province in this Age believed they had sufficient Authority to determine Controversies in Religion among themselves , without the Consent of the Bishop of Rome .

§ . 2. Though the Pontifical be guilty of many Errors in the Life of Calixtus , and mistake the very Emperors under which he lived and died , the Notes gloss them all fairly over s s Lab. p. 608. Bin. pag. 83. col. 1. , and correct them by the Roman Martyrology , which often follows the Pontifical , and is as fabulous as that . However we are told , That Calixtus was buried Three Miles out of the City ; because the Law of the Twelve Tables forbid the Burying of a dead Body within the Walls . Now I would know , if this Law were in force , how that can be true which the Pontifical and the Notes affirm and justifie , That S. Peter , Linus , Cletus , Euaristus , Sixtus , Telesphorus , Hyginus , Pius , and Victor , were All Buried in the Vatican ? And what shall we think of the Miracles done by their Relicks and at their Tombs , if no Body know where they were first Buried ?

Pope Urban , the Successor of Calixtus , is said in the Pontifical t t Lab. p. 617. Bin. pag. 87. col. 1. , to be Buried in the Coemetery of Praetextatus , which could not then be any Coemetery at all , because Praetextatus was not Martyted till the Persecution under Maximinus , which hapned many years after : And if the Story of S. Cecily in the same Author , be no Truer than his Chronology , the Romanists worship a fictitious Saint .

The Pontifical is forced to feign , That the Emperor Alexander Severus was a Persecutor , contrary to his Character in all Histories of Credit ; and this only to make us think , that Calixtus , Urban , and Pope Pontianus his Successor , were Martyrs . However though Eusebius knew not of their Martyrdom u u Euseb. hist. lib. 6. cap. 15 , 17 , & 22. , the Roman Church adores them all as Martyrs , and have peculiar Days dedicated to their Memories .

Antherus ( as the Pontifical says ) Sat Twelve years and One Month ; and the Notes say , that he Sat only one Month w w Lab. p. 629. Bin. pag. 92. col. 1. ; so that there is but only Twelve years mistaken in this Popes Life : And if he was Pope but one Month , doubtless his Secretaries had need be very swift Writers , or else they could not gather many in his time . However Binius will make it out , for he brings in a Poetical Hyperbole , Of those Scribes , who could write a Sentence before a man had spoken it ; and so were as quick at guessing as writing ; and applies this in very serious earnest to this Pope's Notaries , to make us imagine , there were many Acts of Martyrs writ out in this short-lived Pope's time .

§ . 3. Pope Fabian , as Eusebius relates , was chosen by occasion of a Dove 's lighting on his Head , when the People were met to elect a Pope ; of which remarkable Story the fabulous Pontifical takes no notice , but tells us , That in this Popes time Novatus the Heretic came to Rome x x Lab. p. 638. Bin. pag. 95. col. 2. ; that is , say the Notes , Above a year after Pope Fabian was dead , after the Vacancy , and in Pope Cornelius ' s time ; with such absurd Comments do these Gentlemen delight to cover the Ignorance and Falsehood of their Historian ; but such Excuses do only more expose him . In this Pope's time were two Councils held , one in Africa , the other in Arabia , and they Intitle them both under Fabian ; yet the only Authors , who mention these Councils , do not say Pope Fabian was concerned in either of them y y Lab. p. 650. Bin. pag. 101. col. 2. , and therefore they were not under Fabian .

After this Pope's death there was a Vacancy of more than one whole year , which the Editors , to slatter the Papacy , call ( in the style of Princes ) An Interregnum ; but alas ! their admired Monarchy , was now turned into an Aristocracy , and the Clergy governed the Roman Church ; to excuse which flaw in their visible Monarchical Succession , the Notes say , The Members next the Head knew it was their parts , to do the office of the Head : Which notable kind of substitution , if it could be made out in the Body Natural , Beheading would not be a Mortal punishment ; however , they must say something to make us believe there was always a Visible Head of the Catholic Church , or at least a Neck and Shoulders , which stood for an Head , till Cornelius was chosen Pope : And they called a Council ( as they pretend ) in this Vacancy , and writ a Letter of their Determination to all the Churches in the World , that they might all observe what the Empty Chair of Peter had ordered z z Bin. p. 107. col. 1. . But if any one read the Letter it self , it will appear that this Council was only a voluntary Assembly of the Clergy in Rome , and they met only to confirm S. Cyprian's Opinion , and only writ their Letter to him ; but never pretended either to be Judges over Cyprian , or any other part of the Catholic Church .

Pope Cornelius his Life follows , for whose Character we are more obliged to S. Cyprian's Epistles , than to the Pontifical , which invents an idle Story of a Dialogue between Cornelius and Decius the Emperor ; and though the Notes own a a Lab. p. 565 Bin. pag. 108. col. 1. , That Decius ( who is here pretended to Martyr him ) dyed the same Month in which Cornelius entred ; yet they will not own the Story to be false , but boldly put in the Name of Volusianus into their Margen instead of Decius . However , the Breviary b b Breviar. Sixt. 5. 16 dic Septemb. retains the Fiction of Cornelius suffering under Decius , as it doth also the Fable of his Translating the Bodies of S. Peter and S. Paul : But let any considering Man compare the different ways of telling this Sham Story , and he will easily discern , that the Notes cannot reconcile them without flying to a Miracle c c Lab. p. 567. Bin. pag. 108. col. 1. . It is evident they have told us , the Body of S. Peter was in the Vatican , when Pope Victor was there Buried , An. 203 : And there is no Author of Credit mentions their removal into the Catacumbae , and so consequently no reason to believe they were fetcht back from thence in a time of Persecution . Pope Gregory lived 350 years after this , and was very apt to credit feigned Miracles , and he differs much from the Pontifical ; so that probably the whole Story is forged , by those who long after began superstitiously to adore the Relicks of Saints . However , it is read in the Roman Church Septemb. 16. and many devout People on the Credit of this Legend make Pilgrimages , and offer Prayers and large Gifts , to the Shrines of these two Apostles , of whose true Relicks they can have none , because their real Graves are not known .

In this Pope's time there were two Councils holden at Carthage , two at Rome , and one in Italy ; all which in the general Titles are said to be held under Cornelius d d Lab. p. 714. Bin. pag. 126. col. 1. ; though the Notes assure us , That those two at Carthage were called by S. Cyprian's Authority , and that the Italian Bishops made a Decree of their own , besides that of Cornelius at Rome . The Roman Councils indeed were holden under Cornelius , as being Bishop of that City ; but we may observe , He did not Authoritatively confirm the Sentence of the Council of Carthage , but only consented to it . We may also Note , This African Council calls not Pope Cornelius Father , but Brother , and writes to him as one of their Collegues ; yea , they do not except Cornelius , when they Decree , That if any of their Collegues agreed not to their Sentence , he should answer it at the Day of Judgment e e Lab. p. 718. Bin. pag. 128. col. 1. . Moreover , in the same Letter there is an evident Testimony , that the People in those days were prepared for Martyrdom , by receiving the Eucharistical Cup f f Lab. p. 717. Bin. pag. 127. col. 2. ; which being now denied to the Laity , the Editors pass it by without a Note ; yet soon after , where the Council plainly speaks of Confessing the Name of Christ before Persecutors ; they have this impertinent Marginal Note , From this and other places , the necessity of Confession is confirmed : As if this belonged to their new invented Auricular Confession .

§ . 4. The Notes find divers Faults in the Life of Pope Lucius , yet they would palliare the grossest of all ; for the Pontifical says , He was Beheaded by Valerian ; the Notes affirm it was by Gallus and Volusiunus ; and yet the same Notes tell us , The Pontifical ( in saying it was by Vulerian ) may be very well and truly expounded g g Lab. p. 720. Bin. pag. 128. col. 2. . The Reader must understand , It may be so expounded by such kind of Notes , as are designed to make gress Errors seem great Truths .

Pope Stephen , who succeeded Lucius , fell out with Cyprian and the African Bishops , about the re-baptizing of Heretics , which ( though it were the only memorable thing in this Popes Life ) the Pontifical never mentions : And the Editors are are so used to put into the Title of all Councils , Under such or such a Pope , that in this Popes time they style those very Councils , Sub Stephano , which were called without his knowledge , and which condemned his Opinion h h Lab. p 751. pag. 760 , &c. Bin. pag. 137 , 141 , 145 , &c. , as may be seen in the Councils of Carthage , Iconium , and Africa , where ( so easily may Tradition be mistaken ) the Re-baptizing of Heretics is asserted to be an Apostolick Tradition , though it were contrary to Pope Stephen's Opinion , and the Tradition of the Roman Church . And when Stephen on this account presumed to Excommunicate the Asian Bishops , Firmilianus ( Bishop of Coesarea ) in a Letter to S. Cyprian i i Lab. p. 751. Bin. pag. 141. col. 2. , Despises his Sentence , compares the Pope to Judas , complains of his Arrogance , and esteems those to be very silly who took the Roman Bishop's word for an Apostolical Tradition ; from which that Church in many Instances had departed . Moreover , He calls him a Schismatic , and affirms , he had by this rash Sentence only cut himself off from the Unity of the Catholic Church . S. Cyprian also , and his Africans k k Lab. p. 765. Bin. pag. 147. col. 2. , condemned this Pope as a Favourer of Heretics , an Enemy to the Church , and one who writ Contradictions , and was void of Prudence ; describing him as an Innovator and bringer in of Traditions , contrary to God's Word , as one who obstinately presumed to prefer human Doctrines before Scripture . I grant Pope Stephen was in the right in this Controversie ; yet doubtless , if these Bishops had believed the Supremacy , and Infallibility of the Pope and his Roman Council , they could not have used him at this rate : And the Editors are so concerned to cover this rough usage , that they reprint an Epistle of S. Cyprian's Verbatim l l Lab. p. 740. & pag. 764. Bin. pag. 136. col. 2. & p. 146. col. 2. , after this Quarrel was grown hot , which was writ while they two were Friends , and contains very kind Words to Stephen ; which Blind is only to make us think that Cyprian submitted to the Pope at last , though it is apparent he never did so : Again , the Reader may note that Labbè here prints a Tract of some Ancient Author , to justify the Pope's Opinion ; but though there be many good Arguments for it from other Topics , the Argument from Tradition , and the determination of the Roman Church , is not urged in the whole Discourse m m Lab. p. 770. , which shews that these were no Arguments allowed in this Writers time : Lastly whereas the third Council of Carthage , severely censures Pope Stephen for taking upon him as Bishop of Bishops , and for compelling his Equals by Tyrannical Terrors to obey him n n Lab. p. 786. Bin. pag. 149. col. 2. & p. 154. col. 2. : Binius impudently notes upon this , that the Pope was called Bishop of Bishops , to him was the last Refuge in Matters of Faith , and his Determinations were received all the World over as the Oracles of the Holy Ghost : Which is from his Usurping a Title and Authority , to infer he had Right to them ; and to prove that all the World received his Determinations , from a Story which shews , that half the Christian World rejected them .

§ . 5. The Life of Sixtus the Second , in the Pontifical is one heap of Errors , for the Author seems to mistake him for Xystus the Philosopher ; and as the Notes confess , make Decius raise a great Persecution against the Church , Eight year after he was Dead . He also places Valerian before Decius , supposing them to Reign together , and saying Sixtus was Beheaded by Valerian in Decius's time o o Lab. p. 819. Bin. pag. 155. col. 1. ; now Decius was slain two year before Valerian was Emperor : Yet the Notes labour to colour over all these Contradictions , to Salve the Credit of their Missals and Fabulous Maityrology .

Dionysius the next Pope , is said to have been a Monk , upon the credit of the Pontifical p p Lab. p. 827. Bin. pag. 158. col. 1. ; the Notes add that he Lived a Solitary Life , before his Election ; yet the Modern Monks have given over that Primitive Custom , and now croud into great Cities : But the Pontifical is so miserably mistaken in the Consuls in this Popes Life , placing those for his last Consuls who were so , two years before those he Names for his first Consuls , that nothing can be believed on this Authors credit . Under this Pope the Editors have feigned a Council at Rome , to which Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria was Cited , and so far obeyed the Order , as to write an Epistle to clear himself , for which they cite Athanasius q q Lab. p. 830. Bin. pag. 160. col. 1. : But we must never trust their Quotations where the Supremacy is concerned , without looking into the Authors they cite : And Athanasius only saith Dionysius of Alexandria was accused at Rome , and writ to the Pope to know the Articles complained of , who sent him an Account , upon which he vindicated himself by an Apology : But what is all this to a Roman Council , or a citing Dionysius thither ? There were also two Councils at Antioch , about this time as Eusebius tells us r r Euseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 22. ; But the Editors of their own Head put in that the first of them , was appointed by Dionysius Bishop of Rome , to whom the chief care of the Church was committed — Whereas Eusebius never mentions this Pope as being either concerned in the Council , or consulted about it : but if they will have it under Dionysius , then we may infer , that this Pope approved a saying of this Council , viz. That they knew of no other Mediator between God and Man but only Christ Jesus . The Second Council of Antioch is intituled also , Under Pope Dionysius : Yet it appears by Eusebius s s Euseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 24. , that this Pope knew not of the Council , till they by their Synodical Epistle informed him of it after they were risen : And in that Epistle they joyn him , and Maximus Bishop of Alexandria together as Collegues and equals , not desiring either of them to confirm their Decrees ; but acquainting them with their proceedings , they required them to shew their consent by writing Communicatory Letters to Domnus , who was put in by them , Bishop of Antioch , in the Room of Paulus Samosatenus , ejected for Hersie ; and though this Domnus his Father , Demetrianus had been Bishop of Antioch before , yet we hear of no Papal Dispensation to allow him to succeed there : We may also observe , that Firmilianus ( who in Pope Stephens time so much despised the Popes Authority and Infallibility ) is by this Council called a Man of blessed Memory : By which we see how little any Ancient and genuine Councils do countenance the Supremacy of the Roman Church , and what need they had to forge Evidence , who would have it taken for a Primitive Doctrine .

§ . 6. That Foelix the First was a Martyr , is proved only by the Pontifical , and the Roman Martyrology which often blindly follows it : but why may not the Pontifical be mistaken in the Martyrdom , as well as the Notes confess it to be in the Consuls t t Lab. p. 903. Bin. pag. 163. col. 1. ? And the base Partiality of the Notes appears soon after in citing a place of S. Cyprian , as if he desired to know the Days on which the Martyrs suffered , that he might offer a Sacrifice for them by Names on their Anniversaries u u Cypr. lib. 3. ep. 6. vel epist. 37. pag. 81. vid. Da●lè de cult. relig. Lat. lib. 3. cap. 3. pag. 352. ; whereas Cyprian speaks of the Confessors who died privately in Prisons , of whose Names he desires to be informed , that he might celebrate their Memory among the Martyrs : Now there is a great difference between S. Cyprian's and the Protestants practice , to Commemorate the Saints departed ; and the Roman way , of offering the Sacrifice of the Mass for the deceased : Yet the Notes would suborn S. Cyprian to give in evidence for this corrupt practice .

Pope Eutychianus lived not long before Eusebiu's time , and he saith he only sat ten Months w w Euseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 26. ; The Pontifical allows him thirteen Months , but the Notes boldly say he was Pope Eight years x x Lab. p. 913. Bin. pag. 167. col. 2. , and this only upon the Names of two Consuls set down in the Pontifical , and the credit of the Roman Martyrology ; but since these two are scarce ever right in their Chronology , we ought to believe Eusebius rather than the Annotator and his despicable Witnesses .

His Successor Gaius lived in Eusebius's own time , and he affirms he sat Fifteen years y y Euseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 26. ; but the Pontifical allots to him Eleven years only , and so doth the Breviary z z Brev. Roman . April . 22. ; both of them making him Dioclesian's Kinsman , ( which Eusebius knew nothing of ; ) The Notes out of Baronius contradict them all , and ascribe to him Twelve years , making him Dioclesian's Nephew ; and yet the Pontifical saith both that he fled from Dioclesian's Persecution , and died a Confessor . Yet was Crowned with Martyrdom with his Brother Gabinius ; which Non-sense Baronius and the Notes also defend .

§ . 7. This Century is concluded by the Uunfortunate Marcellinus , who as the Pontifical tells us , did Sacrifice to Idols a a Lab. p. 930. Bin. pag. 174. col. 2. ; and S. Augustine in the Notes plainly supposes it to be true : Yet the Annotator ( who dares not deny it ) labours to Amuse the Reader by saying , this Story may be plainly refuted and proved false by divers probable Reasons out of Baronius ; but because their Mis●als and Martyrology do own the thing , he will not go that way to Work : What then ? Doth he clearly charge the Infallible Judge with Apostacy ? No , he saith , He seemed to deny the Faith by External acts , ( that is , Sacrificing to Idols ; ) Yet by his Internal acts , ( it seems Binius knew his thoughts ) he did not believe any thing contrary to the Faith : And truly this is an early Instance of Jesuitical Equivocation : But we may make the same Excuse for all the Apostates in the World ; and it is plain the Notes care not what they say , to protect their dear Infallibility against the most convincing Truths .

About the very time of this Pope's Apostacy was held a Council at Cirta in Africk ; and though S. Augustine , the Author from whom they have all they know about it , say not one Word of Marcellinus , Yet the Editors and Annotator both , put in these Words , that it was under Marcellinus b b Lab. p. 936. Bin. pag. 177. col. 1 , 2. ; Where I cannot but wonder , that ( since they have invented a Council in the same year to set poor Marcellinus Right again , after his Apostacy ; ) they did not place that Council first , and then their re conciled Penitent might with a better Grace , have sat at Cirta and Condemned such as fell in the Persecution .

But the most Infamous Forgery , is the Ridiculous Council of Sinuessa c c Lab. p. 938. Bin. pag. 178. , devised by some dull Monk , who could write neither good Sense nor true Latin , inspired only by a blind Zeal for the Roman Church , whose Infallible Head must be cleared from Apostacy , though it be by the absurdest Fictions imaginable : For he feigns this Apostate Pope met Three-hundred Bishops near Sinuessa , in Dioclesian's time in a Cave , which would hold but Fifty of them at once , and their business was only to hear Marcellinus condemn himself , and to tell him he could be Judged by none . The two first Copies of this Council were so stuffed with Barbarisms , false Latin and Nonsense , and so contrary to each other , that some Body took Pains out of both to devise a third Copy , and by changing and adding at pleasure , brought it at last to some tolerable Sense : Surius and Binius print all three Copies , but Labbè and the Collectio regia leave out the two Originals , and only publish the Third , drest up by a late Hand , which in time may pass for the true account of this Council . But the two first Copies in Binius , yet extant , will give the Reader a good proof into what depths of Ignorance the Monks were fallen , when such Unintelligible and Incoherent stuff as this , and the Letters Forged between the Council of Nice and Pope Sylvester , ( which are in the same Style , ) were designed to support the Roman Supremacy and Infallibility . I shall not reflect upon the Absurdity , of making the Pope his own Judge , when he denies the Fact , nor the Contradiction of the Councils , saying often They must not judge him ; and yet declaring soon after That they have Condemned him d d Bin. p. 179. 180 , & 183. : Whoever will but read this Council over , shall find diversion enough , if Blunders and Dulness be diverting to them . I shall therefore principally note the gross Partiality and Fallacies of the Notes , in colouring over this bare-faced Forgery : First , the Annotator accuses the Century Writers , and English Innovators for rejecting this Rare Council as a Forgery of the Donatists , he should have said of the Romish Monks ; yet he makes more Objections against it , than he himself can answer : Protestants wonder that Three-hundred Bishops should dare to meet in times of Persecution : He replies , a far less number did meet on a slighter occasion Fifty years before , which is but a very indifferent Proof : Well , but to magnify the occasion , he saith , By this Pope's fall , not only the Roman Church , but the whole Christian Religion was in extreme danger ; and in the President of the Catholic Faith , the very Foundation of the Church was shaken and almost ruined : Yet a little before he had told us out of S. Augustine , that Marcellinus's fall did no prejudice to the Church , and had affirmed that the ill Deeds of Bishops may hurt themselves , but cannot prejudice the Churches Orthodox Doctrine e e Bin. p. 175. col. 1. 2. : Again , he proves it could not be an Invention of the Donatists , because they never knew of it ; yet presently he owns they objected it to the Catholics , and therefore must know of it , all that S. Augustine saith , being only that they could not prove it : After this Baronius and he say , that no Writer doth mention this City of Sinuessa , nor is there any Memory of such a place or Cave : Which is a great mistake in them both . For Livy , Cicero , Ovid , Martial and Pliny , do all speak of Sinuessa f f Ferarij Lexic. Geograph . p. 199. , and Alexander ab Alexandro , mentions a famous High-way , leading from Rome to this City g g Al. ab . Alexand. gen. dier. lib. 3. cap. 13. . And if an Earthquake have since Overthrown it , that will not prove there was no such City then : all the Wonder is that these Gentlemen should defend a Council for genuine , which they thought had been held in Utopia : The Notes proceed to tell us that Very many most Learned Men , ( not Hereticks , I suppose ) by very strong Arguments have laboured to prove these Acts spurious : But he ( who values no Arguments against the Supremacy , ) not only thinks them not to be false , but judges them worthy of great Esteem for their Venerable Antiquity , and for their Majesty which extorts Reverence even from the unwilling : Now their Antiquity cannot be proved by one Old Author , and their Majesty is so little , that they extort Laughter and Contempt from the gravest Reader : Let us therefore hear his Reason for this Approbation , it is because they are believed by general consent of all ; ( He forgets that he said but now , very many and very Learned Men did not believe them ; ) And because they are received and retained without any Controversy to this Day , in the Martyrologies and Breviaries of the Roman and other Churches h h Brev. Roman . April . 26. : So that at last , all the Authority for this Council is the Roman Martyrology and Breviary ; which are Modern Collections , out of the Fabulous Pontifical and other Forged Acts of Martyrs ; And though their own Learned Men by good Arguments prove the things to be false , yet if they be Read in a Breviary , &c. these Falshoods become true , and Catholics receive them without Controversy : Yea , they cite the Transcript of a Forgery to prove the Original to be a Truth . Again , the Notes say it is no prejudice to the Truth of Marcellinus his fall , though the Africans did not know of it , nor S. Augustine , no nor any of the African Church : Yet in the next Page it is observed , That there are very many Names of the Witnesses which prove his fall , which are peculiar to the African Christians : Now if these Names were peculiar to the Africans , then these Witnesses were of the African Church Originally , and then it is Morally impossible , that they should never tell none of their Countrymen , of so Famous a Transaction : The Notes confess that these Acts often mention Libra occidua ; which is a Word invented after the Empire was divided into East and West : And thence the same Notes infer , these Acts were not writ in those Ancient times ; yet they make it a wonder , that they were not seen in Africa in S. Augustine ' s time or before : Which is to wonder that they had not seen them in Africa , before they were written : It puzzles the Annotator to make out an excuse for that ridiculous Falshood in these Acts , that Marcellinus was led into the Temple of Vesta , and Isis , and there Sacrificed to Hercules , Jupiter and Saturn ; because these Gods were never placed , nor Worshiped in the Temples of those female Deities : Nor can he allow what the Acts say about this Council , being held when Dioclesian was in his Persian War ; for he affirms it was held Two years after that War , when Dioclesian had devested himself of the Empire , and lived a private Life ; But then the Acts make Dioclesian to be present , and in Rome when Marcellinus did Sacrifice ; and at this rate the Pope would have laied two years at least in his Apostacy , which the Annotator must not endure . To conclude , we now see , That a Council held no body knows where nor when , concealed from all Ancient Authors , writ in later times , full of Barbarisms , and Non-sense , Falshoods and contradictions , if it do but pretend to make out the Supremacy and Infallibity of the Pope , and set him ( while he was an Apostate and falsly denied the Fact , ) above a Council of Three hundred Innocent Bishops ; if it do but say the Pope , though never so wicked , cannot be judged by any but himself : This Council shall be published by the Roman Editors , and vindicated by partial Notes , as if it were a most genuine and Authentic Truth : From whence it is plain , That these Editors , and especially this Annotator hath no other measure of Truth and Falshood , but the Interest of the Roman Church , which they resolve to promote , though it be by the most unjust means . And this may suffice to observe for the Third Century .

A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE Roman Forgeries , IN THE VOLUMES OF THE COUNCILS , For the Fourth Century .

PART II.

CHAPTER IV.

Of the Forgeries in the Fourth Century .

§ . 1. THis Century begins with the Life of Marcellus , An. Dom. 304. a Pope so obscure , that Eusebius's Chronicle wholly omits him a a Lab. Tom. III. pag. 947. Bin. Tom. I. pag. 185. col. 2. ; and Theodoret knew nothing of him , nor of Pope Eusebius , but makes Melchiades immediate Successor to Marcellinus b b Theod. hist. lib. 1 cap. 3. . It is very observable , that these two unknown Popes , in the Notes on their Lives , are said to have sat Seven years between them : And the Pontifical saith , There was a Vacancy of Seven years after Marcellinus , which Vacancy is also asserted by Anastasius Biblioth . by Luitprandus , Abbo Floriacens . Cusanus , and Genebrard c c Richer . de Eccles. potestate cap 3. pag. 46. . And though Baronius's and Binius's Notes , deny this Seven years Vacancy , it is upon meer Conjectures : The Scandal of so long a Vacancy no doubt , setting some of the old Parasites of Rome on work , to invent two Popes Names and put them into the List , from whence probably they have been foisted into O●tatus and S. Augustine , two Latin Fathers , while the Greek Authors ( which these Forgers Understood not ) do continue Uncorrupted : And truly nothing but the Names of these two Popes remain ; for no good Historian mentions any one Eminent Act done by either of them ; however , the Annotator had rather fill up his Scene with empty Names of Feigned Popes , who did nothing for Seven years together , than let the Reader suppose the Catholic Church could so long want it s pretended Head . But though the Notes allow not the Authority of the Pontifical for the Vacancy , they trust it for the fictitious Story of this Marcellus his Life , and would have us believe , That in a time of Persecution this Pope appointed Twenty five Churches in Rome , to Baptize Converts and Bury Martyrs in ; and though the Laws and Customs of that City then , forbad to Bury dead Bodies within the Walls , we are to believe that the Tyrant Maxentius ( who made all these Martyrs , and persecuted this very Pope ) consented to his breaking this Ancient Law . On the Credit of the same Pontifical we are told , That a certain Lady , called Lucina , dedicated her House to this Pope ( while He was alive ) by the Title of S. Marcellus ; and that the Emperor turned it into a Stable , and made the Pope his Beast-keeper there , where Naked , and cloathed with Sackcloth , ( they are the Words of the Pontifical ) He soon after ended his days , the 17th of the Kalends of February d d Breviar. Rom. Jan. 16. pag. 674. . Which Fiction the Roman Breviary orders to be read to the Credulous People of that Communion for Lessions ; and tells them , That Marcellus writ an Epistle to the Bishops of the Antiochian Province about the Roman Primacy , and to prove Rome to be the Head of All Churches , and that no Synod should be held without the Pope's Authority . But this Epistle e e Lab. p. 94● . Bin. pag. 186. col. 1. is owned by Labbé to be a Forgery , patched up out of divers Modern Authors , citing the Vulgar Latin Version , and dated after Marcellus his death : And it is very strage , That times of Persecution should be a proper Season for a Pope to wrangle for his Supremacy : Yet this Notorious Forgery saith , Christ ordered S. Peter , to Translate his Seat from Antioch to Rome ; and that the Apostles by Inspiration decreed , That all Appeals should be made thither , and no Council held , but by the Authority of the Roman Church . For which cause Binius vindicates it with Notes as full of Falsehood as the Epistle it self f f Lab. p. 950. Bin. pag. 187. col. 1. : His first Note of this Epistle being writ to one Solomon a Bishop , is an oversight , and belongs to the first Epistle of Pope Marcell●nus g g Bin. p. 175. col . 2. Baron . An. 296. §. 5. . His next Notes about the Primacy and Power of Calling Synods , cite an Apostolical and Nicene Canon for it ; but no such Canons are to be found . He quotes also two Epistles , one writ to Pope Foelix from Alexandria ; another writ by Pope Julius , to the Eastern Churches , for proof of this Supremacy ; and the same Annotator afterwards owns them both to be Forgeries h h Bin. Not. in Epist. Foel . p. 499 & Not. in Ep. Julii , pag. 385. . He falsly saith , Dioscorus was Condemned at Chalcedon , only for holding a Synod without the Pope's Consent ; whereas he is known to have been accused of many other Crimes . His Text of Fasce oves , is nothing to this purpose ; nor will Pope Pelagius his Word be taken in his own Cause . His Story of Valentinian makes nothing for the Pope , more than any other Bishop ; Yea , the Bishops desiring him to call a Council , shews , They thought it was His Prerogative ; and Nicephorus relates his Answer to have been , That he was so taken up with State Affairs , that he had no leisure to enquire into those matters i i Niceph. lib. 2. cap. 3. & Whitak . de Concil. pag. 51. : Wherefore after all this elaborate Sophistry , to justifie a false Assertion of a Forged Epistle , the Annotator hath only shewed his partiality for the Pope's Power , but made no proof of it .

The second Epistle of this Marcellus ( to the Tyrant Maxentius ) is also a manifest Forgery k k Lab. p. 951. Bin. pag. 387. col. 1. ; part of it is taken out of his Successor Gregory's Epistles , writ almost Three hundred years after this ; and it is highly improbable , That a persecuted Pope should falsly , as well as ridiculously , to a Pagan Emperor , quote the Laws of the Apostles , and their Successors , forbidding to persecute the Church and Clergy ; and also instruct him about the Roman Churches power in Calling Synods , and Receiving Appeals ; and cite Clement's Forged Epistle as an Authority to Maxentius , That Lay-men must not accuse Bishops . The Notes indeed are unwilling to lose such precious Evidence , and so pretend , That Maxentius at this time dissembled himself , to be a Christian ; but this Sham can signifie nothing to such as read the Epistle , where Marcellus complains , That he then persecuted him most unjustly , and therefore he did not pretend to be a Christian at that time ; and consequently the whole Epistle is an absurd Forgery : And so is that Decree subjoyned to it , which supposes young Children offered to Monasteries , and Shaved or Veiled there ; Customs which came up divers Centuries after this .

§ . 2. The Canons of Peter , Bishops of Alexandria l l Lab. p. 967. Bin. pag. 189. col. 1. , are genuine , and a better Record of Ecclesiastical Discipline , than any Pope to this time ever made ; the Reader also may observe , the Bishop of Rome is not once named in these Canons ; and they plead Tradition for the Wednesday Fast , contrary to the Roman Churches pretence , of having an Apostolical Tradition , to Fast on Saturday .

The Council of Elliberis in Spain , is by Binius An. Dom. 305. placed under Pope Marcellus ; which Words Labbé leaves out of the Title m m Lab. p. 967. E. Bin. pag. 191. col. 1. , and justly ; for if there were such a Pope , the Council takes no notice of him , nor is it likely , that Rome did know of this Council till many years after . Yet it is both Ancient and Authentic , though Mendoza in Labbé n n Lab. p. 1030. , reckons up divers Catholic Authors , Caranza , Canus , Baronius , &c. who either wholly reject it , or deny the 34th , 35th , 36th , and 40th Canons of it , which condemn the Opinions now held at Rome : And though Binius ( because Pope Innocent approves it ) dare not reject it ; yet he publishes Notes to make the Reader believe , it doth not condemn any of their Opinions or Practices .

The 13th Canon speaks of Virgins , who dedicated themselves to God ; but mentions not their being Veiled , or Living in Monasteries ; which Customs came in long after , as the Authors cited in the Notes shew o o Lab. p. 983. D Bin. pag. 200. col. 1. .

The 26th Canon calls it an Error , to Fast upon Saturday : But the Notes are so bold as to say , The Error which this Council corrected , was the not Fasting on Saturday ; whereas even these very Notes confess , That the Eastern Churches , and most of the Western , ( Rome , and some few others excepted ) together with the African Church , did not Fast on Saturday , but Wednesday ; yea , those they Call the Apostolical Canons , and Clement's Constitutions , do both establish Wednesday Fast , and condemn their pretended Apostolical Churches Saturday Fast ; and if divers in Spain ( as the Notes say ) in S. Hierom's and Pope Innocent's times , did not Fast on Saturday , and others then needed Arguments to settle them in this Roman practice : It may be gathered from thence , that in the time of this Council , the Saturday Fast was esteemed an Error , as it was also in that Age almost in all Christian Churches , and so the very Words of the Canon import , which Baronius saw , and therefore p p Baron . Annal. An. 305. §. 49. only saith , There is mention of the Saturday Fast in this Synod ; and so passes it , knowing it plainly contradicted the Roman Churches Tradition .

The 34th Canon ( under pain of Excommunication ) forbids the lighting Wax Candles in the places where the Martyrs were Buried (q) ; which agrees with the (p) Lab. p. 985. E Bin. pag. 201. col. 1. Sentiments of the Primitive Church r r Dailé de cultu Lat. lib. 2. chap. 15. . Lactantius condemns Lighting Candles in God's Worship by day , as a Paganish Superstition s s Lactant. Instit. lib. 6. cap. 2. . S. Hierom faith , It was used in his time only by such as did it to humor the silly Vulgar , who had a Zeal without Knowledge t t Hieron . ad Ripar . ep. 53. . Yet the Notes confess this is the Custom of the Roman Church ; for which only cause some of their Doctors reject this Canon ( since nothing must be Authentic , which condemns their Novel Superstitions ) and these Notes make a miserable Blunder to excuse the matter ; but we are not concerned , whether ( with the Annotator ) these Candles in the Day-light disturb the Spirits of the Living Saints , by seeing an Heathenish Rite brought into the Church , or ( with Baronius ) displease the Saints Deceased , to behold so Superstitious a thing vainly devised for their honour . Since it sufficiently appears , the practice is novel and absurd , and ( though now used at Rome ) condemned by the best Antiquity . The Notes also give us one extraordinary distinction u u Bin. Not. in 34 & 35 Can p. 201. col. 2. , between the Souls of deceased Saints in Heaven , and those in Purgatory ; which latter sort , if they had been Saints , one would think should need no such dreadful Scouring .

The 36th Canon determines , That Pictures ought not to be in Churches ; and that none may Paint upon Walls that wich is worshiped w w Lab. p. 986. Bin pag. 201. col. 2. : Which so expresly condemns the Roman-Worship of Pictures and Images , that the boldest Writers of that Church reject this Canon ; but others ( as the Notes say ) would gladly expound it so , as to assert the honour and worship due to Holy Images ; ( which is a notable kind of Exposition , to make a Canon assert that , which it confutes : ) But such transparent Fallacies deserve rather derision , than serious Arguments . Sanders and Turrian observe , That these Fathers forbid not Images , which Christians might take away and hide ; but Pictures , which they must leave exposed to Pagan abuses . But might not this have been prevented , by hanging up their Pictures in Frames ? and are not large Images as difficult to be removed and concealed as Pictures ? Yea , doth not the present Roman Church adore Pictures as well as Images ? so that still this Canon condemns them . Martinez fancies , This Council forbid Painting on the Walls , lest the Pictures should be deformed by the decay of those Walls : But he forgets , that the Council first forbids them to be any where in the Church ; and were not Walls as subject to decay in the time of the Second Nicene Council , as they are now ? And had not those Fathers as great an honour for Pictures , as these at Elliberis ? yet the Nicene Picture-Worshipers , order them to be painted on Church-Walls . Martinez adds , That as times vary , human Statutes vary ; and so the Second Council of Nice made a quite contrary Decree . What! are Decrees of Councils about Matters of Divine Worship , only human Statutes ? what will become of the Divine Authority and Apostolical Tradition , pretended for this Worship of old at Nice , and now at Rome , if the Orders against it and for it be both human and mutable Statutes ? It is well however , that the Patrons of Image-Worship do own , they have altered and abrogated a Primitive Canon , for one made Four hundred years after , in times of Ignorance and Superstition ; and we know , whether of the two we ought to prefer . Baronius is more ingenuous , who saith x x Baron . An. 305. §. 45. , These Bishops at Elliberis chiefly endeavoured , by strict Penalties , to affright the Faithful from Idolatry ; wherefore they made the 34th , 36th and 37th Canons ; and by comparing the First Canon with the Forty sixth , it appears , they dealt more severely with an Idolater , than an Apostate . From whence we infer , That Pictures in Churches tend to Idolatry , in this Councils Opinion . Albaspinaeus ( whose Notes Labbé here prints y y Lab. p. 998 ) would enervate this Canon , by saying , It forbids not the Saints Pictures ; but those which represented God and the Holy Trinity . But it is not probale , these Primitive Christians were so ignorant , as to need any prohibition about such blasphemous Representations of God's Majesty . And he brings no proof , but his own bare Conjecture for this limitation of the Canon ; which Fancy ( if it were true ) would prove , That the Saints were not worshiped or adored in that Age , because nothing that was worshiped and adored , was to be painted on the Walls ; and if that be meant only of God and the Trinity , then nothing else but God and the Trinity was adored in those days : Finally , the former part of the Canon destroys this limitation , by excluding Pictures in general out of Churches . These are the various Fallacies by which these partial Editors , would hide the manifest Novelty of their Churches , Worship of Pictures , which cannot be defended by all these Tricks .

I will only add , That this genuine Ancient Council in the Fifty third Canon , Orders , The same Bishop who Excommunicated a Man , to Absolve him ; and that if any other intermedled , He should be called to an account for it z z Lab. p. 976. Bin. pag. 196. C ; without excepting the Pope , or taking notice of Marcellus's pretended claim of Appeals .

§ . 3. In the Year 306 , was a Council at Cartbage against the Donatists , which never takes any notice of the Pope ; yet they put into the Title of it , Under Marcellus a a Lab. p 1379. Bin. pag. 202. C . But there is a worse Forgery in the Notes , where S. Augustine is cited , as saying , That Cecilian ( Bishop of Carthage ) despised the Censures of the Donatists , because he was joyned in Communion with the Bishop of the Roman Church , from which all Catholic Communion , was ever wont to be denominated : But this is Baronius his false gloss , not S. Augustine's words , who only saith , — because he was united by Communicatory Letters , both to the Roman Church , wherein the Principality of the Catholic Church had always flourished , and to other Lands from whence the Gospel came to Africa b b Aug. cp. 62. Tom. Il. p. 150. Vid. Baron . An. 306. §. 40. . Now there is great difference between a Mans being a Catholic , because he was in Communion with Rome ( then Orthodox ) and with other Churches ; and his being a Catholic meerly for being in Communion with the Roman Bishop , which is the modern and false notion of the word Catholic , among Papists , in our days : But Binius was so convinced , that S. Augustine's words confuted Baronius's Paraphrase , that he cunningly leaves them out , to make this commodious Sense of them go better down with careless Readers .

§ . 4. The next Pope Eusebius , was so obscure , ( as the Notes on his Life declare ) that no Writer mentions any thing of him that is memorable c c Lab. p. 1380 , Bin. pag. 203. col. 1. ; and it is probable , there never was such a Pope : Yet the Pontifical saith , The Cross was found in his time , upon the 5th of the Nones of May , which is the very Day on which the Roman Church now celebrates The Invention of the Cross : And the Third Decretal Epistle of this Pope , was devised on purpose support this Story ; yet both Baronius and Binius reject it for a Fable , even while their Church still observes that Holy-day . There are Three Epistles forged for this Name of a Pope , all which Labbé owns to be spurious d d Lab. p. 1381. Bin. pag. 203. col. 1. ; and I need not spend much time to prove it , since they cite the Vulgar Latin Version , and are mostly stollen out of Modern Authors , ( as Labbe's Margen shews ) having only one Consul's Name for their Dates , because no other was named in the Pontifical . Besides , the first Epistle uses the Phrase , Pro salvatione servorum Dei , which is not the Latin of that Age ; and talks of Rigorous Tortures used among Christians , to make Witnesses confess Truth . The second Epistle repeats the foolish Argument , of Christ's whipping the Buyers and Sellers ( many of which were Lay-men ) out of the Temple , to prove , that God alone must judge Priests ; and out of a much later Roman Council , ( suspected also of Forgery ) speaks of the Peoples not judging their Bishop , unless he err in Matters of Faith — ; and discourses of Edicts of Kings , forbidding to try an ejected Bishop , till he be restored to his place . The third Epistle hath the Fable of the Invention of the Cross , and all other Marks of Forgery on it ; yet Bellarmine cites it to prove , the Pope's Succession to S. Peter , in his Universal Monarchy ; and to make out Confirmation to be a Sacrament e e Bellarm. de Pontif. Rom. lib. 2. cap. 14. & de Confirm . lib. 2. cap. 3. So little do those Writers value the credit of any Evidence , if it do but make for their Churches Authority , or support its Doctrines .

§ 5. The Seven years Vacancy being now expired , Melchiades was chosen Pope , and Sat Three years and Seven Months , according to the Pontifical f f Lab. p. 1394. Bin. pag 209. col. 1. ; and though the Ecclesiastical Tables ( as they call them ) generally follow this Author ; yet Baronius here by them corrects the Pontifical , and allows Melchiades only Two Years and Two Months : But all this is Conjecture , for he grants the Consuls in the Pontifical are so false , that they cannot be reconciled to Truth g g Baren . An. 311. §. 43. ; whence it follows , That the Decretal Epistle ascribed to this Pope , whose Matter is taken from the Pontifical , and whose Date is by those who were not Consuls till after Melchiades's Death h h Lab. p. 1400. A. in Marg. , must be false also : Yet the Notes defend this Forged Epistle , and Bellarmine cites it for the Supremacy , and for Confirmations being a Sacrament i i Bellarmin . ubi supra (c) . , whereas the beginning of it is stollen out of Celestine's Epistle to the French k k Lab. p. 1395. D , E. ; it quotes the Vulgar Translation , and cites an Apostolical Priviledge granted to Rome , for the sole right of Trying Bishops ; to justifie which , The Notes cite the 73d and 74th Apostolical Canons ; but those Canons , order Bishops to judge an offending Bishop , and make the last appeal to a Synod , without taking any notice of Rome , or of this pretended Priviledge . Again , this Feigned Epistle impudently makes Confirmation more venerable than Baptism ; and the Notes defend that bold Expression : But we cannot but wonder , ( since they assert , That Bishops by Gods Law have the sole power of Confirming ; ) the same Men should grant , That the Pope can give a Priest leave to Confirm , Which yet ( they say ) changes not the Divine Right of Bishops l l Lab. p. 1400. Bin. p. 211. col. 2. ; That is in plain terms , One mans sole Right may be delegated to another , by a Third person , without any injury to him who had the sole Right .

After this follows a Council at Rome under Melchiades , wherein the Pope , by delegation from the Emperor , is joyned in Commission with Three French Bishops , ( who are called his Collegues ) to hear the Donatists complaint against Cecilian Bishop of Carthage m m Lab. p. 1401. Bin. pag. 212. col. 1. , and Constantine not only received the Donatists first Appeal , and delegated this Cause to Melchiades and his Fellow Commissioners ; but upon a second Complaint , ordered this Matter to be heard over again in a French Council , which the Pope in Council had determined . Now this so clearly shews , that the Pope was not Supreme Judge in those days , that Baronius and Binius are hard put to it , to Blunder this Instance : The Notes say , Constantine was yet raw in the Faith ; and yet they say also , He knew by God's Law , nothing was to be done without the chief Bishop . But they are forced to prove this by a false Translation of Constantine's Epistle to Melchiades n n Lab. p. 1407. Bin. pag. 212. col. 2. , the words of which in Greek are , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , which in their Version is , As the most holy Law of God requires ; but Valesius's Translation ( which Labbé gives us ) is , As is agreeable to the most Venerable Law ; That is , ( as all men know ) to the Imperial Laws : So that Constantine only says , He had ordered the Accusers and Accused , all to appear at Rome before these delegated Judges , as the Venerable Laws ( which order both Parties to be present when a Cause is tryed ) do require ; and by the help of a false Translation this occasion is made use of , to make the Credulous believe , That God's Law required all Causes should be tryed at Rome : Whereas it is apparent by this Instance , That a Cause once Tryed there before the Pope , might be tryed over again in France , if the Emperor pleased .

The two following Epistles of Constantine out of Pithaeus his Manuscript o o Lab. p. 1430. Bin. pag. 213. , are very suspicious ; the first speaks more magnificently of Christ than one who ( as they say ) was so raw in the Faith was like to do : And in it Constantine is made to decline Judging in Bishops Causes ; which is a protestation against his own Act , and contradiction to the second Epistle , wherein He declares , that this Episcopal Cause shall be tryed before himself : Nor is this first Epistle Recorded in Eusebius , or agreeable to Constantine's Style ; so that we suppose , that was devised by such as designed to persuade Princes , That Bishops were above them : For which purpose Baronius here cites a Law of this Emperor to Ablavius p p Baron . An. 314. §. 38 , 39. , Giving men leave to choose Bishops for their Judges , and not allowing them after that to appeal to Secular Courts ; because they had been heard by Judges of their own choosing : But Baronius perverts this , to signifie , That Bishops were above Secular Judges by their ordinary Jurisdiction , whereas they were not so in any Cause of this kind , but only when they were extraordinarily chosen Arbitrators ; and so Sozomen expounds this Law .

§ . 6. We are now arrived at the time of Pope Sylvester , An Dom. 314. who living about the time when Constantine publickly professed Christianity , and being Pope when the Nicene Council was called ; yet no Author of Credit , records his being much concerned in these grand Revolutions : Upon which the Annalist , and our Editors rake into all kind of Forgeries , and devise most improbable Stories , to set off Pope Sylvester as very considerable ; but we shall look into the Original of the Emperor's becoming a Christian , which will discover all their Fallacies .

Constantine was born of Christian Parents , and brought up under them , and was Thirty years old when he entred on the Empire . And from the Year 306 q q Baron . An. 306. §. 14. He professed openly he was a Christian , Making Laws to encourage Converts , and to suppress Paganism throughout his Empire , Building and Endowing Churches , and granting great Immunities to the Clergy ; yet all this while He took no notice of Marcellus , Eusebius , or Melchiades , S. Peter's Successors , and pretended Monarchs of the Church . After Seven years having Vanquished Maxentius at Rome , they say , He gave to the Pope his Palace of the Lateran r r Lab. p. 1394. Bin. pag. 209. col . 1. Baron . An. 312. §. 82 , & §. 85. : The Notes cite Optatus for this ; but he only saith , A Council of Nineteen Bishops met in the Lateran ; but it doth not follow from thence , that Constantine had then given the Pope this fair Palace . Again , Baronius ( without any ancient Author for it ) saith , That Constantive gave S. Peter thanks for his Victory over Maxentius ; yet at the same time he affirms , He was yet a Pagan , and durst not by his Acts declare himself a Christian s s Baron . An. 312. §. 58 , & §. 62. . Very strange ! Were not Building Churches , setling Christianity by a Law , giving his Palace to the Pope , and ( as they say ) Fixing the Trophy of the Cross in the midst of Rome t t Bin. p. 208 col. 2. , Acts sufficient to declare him a Christian ? No , He must be a Pagan Eleven years after this , and a Persecutor ; yea , in the year 324 He was so meer a Heathen as to know nothing of the Christian Rites , but what an Egyptian taught him . After he had openly professed this Religion Eighteen years , He had forgot it all , and turned so great a Tyrant , that Pope Sylvester ( who had no great mind to be a Martyr ) ran away into the Mount Soracte , or was banished thither : But Constantine , after He had been Ten years Pope , never had heard of him , till being struck with a Leprosie ( mentioned in no Authentic Writer ) two glorious Persons , whose Faces he knew not , appeared to the Emperor , and ordered him to send for Pope Sylvester to cure him ; who ( when He was come ) first shewed Constantine these two glorious Persons were S. Peter and S. Paul , and then Cured him ; made him a Christian , and Baptized him . Which idle and self-contradicting Romance is magnified by Baronius's and Binius's Notes ; but we will now confute it as briefly as we can .

§ . 7. First , This whole Story is devised , to exalt the Glory of the Roman Church ; to make Men believe the Pope could work Miracles , and that the first Christian Emperor was Baptized at Rome : But then it casts such a blot upon Constantine's Memory , and feigns such odious and incredible things of him , as no wise Man can believe concerning a Prince , who S. Augustine saith , was a Christian Eight years before this u u Baron . An. 316. §. 59 , & 62 , 63. . And whoever reads in Baronius , the History of the first Ten years of Sylvester , from An. 314 till An. 324 , and observes what glorious Things he saith of Constantine's Religious Laws , his Piety to God , his Zeal for Christianity , his Respect to Confessors , and his Bounty to Bishops ; his taking part with the Catholics against Heretics and Schismatics : He can never believe this scandalous Story of so excellent a Prince . But in all this Period of Time , Baronius himself cannot find one Evidence , That ever Constantine had any correspondence with Sylvester , and therefore Christianity was setled in the Empire without the Pope's help : To cover which great Truth , some dull ( but zealous Monk ) long since invented this Sham Story , to save the Credit of Rome ; and the Annalist and these Notes strive to defend it .

Secondly , This Fable chiefly relies on the Credit of the Pontifical , ( so often proved false ) and upon the repute of Sylvester's Acts : But the Annotator at first ominously Charges them both with Falshood w w Lab. p. 14 16. Bin. pag. 217. col. 1. ; the former mistakes the Time of the Vacancy , and the latter ( he saith ) is wrong in making Melchiades ordain Sylvester a Priest , he being Ordained by Marcellinus long before . Baronius also confesseth , That these Acts of Sylvester are so false in many particulars , that it shakes the Credit of the whole x x Baron . Annal. 311. §. 59. & An. 315. §. 10 , 11 , & 12. & An. 324. §. 41. . But it is very strange , after he ( who is so concerned for their Reputation ) had found so many Flaws in them , he should justifie them even where they contradict all the Historians of the Age ; which can spring from nothing but a Resolution to maintain every thing which made for the Credit of the Roman See .

Thirdly , The Notes say not only the Acts of Sylvester , but Zosimus and Sozomen do both attest this Story : Now first , Zosimus was a Pagan , and Baronius and Binius confess , He tells many Malicious Lies of Constantine , for suppressing the Heathen Religion ; and though they confute the rest of his Calumnies , they defend his Relation of Constantine's Baptism , as sounding something like those forged Acts y y Baron . An. 324. §. 17. ; and though his Account of it reflect as much upon Constantine , as is possible ; yet the Annalist and Annotator labour to prove this Spightful Heathen to be a truer Historian , than Sozomen , Socrates , or Eusebius , whom they represent as Lyars and Flatterers , not to be believed against Zosimus . Yet there is a mighty difference between this Pagan's History of the Baptism of Constantine , and that in Sylvester's Acts : Zosimus saith , It was a Spaniard , named Aegyptius , lately by the Court Ladies brought acquainted with Constantine , who advised him to be Baptized ; and this the Notes say was Hosius ; yet it is plain , Hosius was Constantine's Intimate Friend , and his Legate into Egypt Twelve years before (z) . Besides , (x) Baron An. 312. §. 91. Zosimus doth not name Sylvester , and only designed by his Relation to blacken Constantine , and represent Christianity as a Sanctuary for Villanies , which could not be expiated among the Pagans : But the Acts discourse of a Persecution , and a Leprosie , and make Peter and Paul the Advisers of Constantine's Baptism ; and their business is only to set up Sylvester's Name . And the Stories ( like all Falshoods ) do not hang together : As for Sozomen , he is no Evidence for Sylvester's Acts , nor doth he once name that Pope in the place cited a a Sozom. hist. lib. 1. cap. 5. . He only confutes the scandalous Stories , which Zosimus had falsly told of Constantine , shewing how improbable it is , that this Emperor ( after he had Reigned nigh Twenty years ) should need a New Conversion ; and how unlikely it must be , that the Pagans would not have found out some Rites to expiate him , that so they might secure him in their Religion : So that he is a Witness , That these Reports of Constantine were false , and invented by Malicious Heathens , and so far as Zosimus and Sylvester's Acts agree , he confutes them both ; and since he lived within an Hundred years after this time , while some alive might possibly remember these Passages ; His early denial of these Fictions is better Evidence against them , than Baronius and Binius's Testimony for them , after Thirteen hundred years ; to serve a Turn , and do Honour to that Church they resolve to Magnifie .

Fourthly , The Notes speak of Sylvester's Returning to Rome in great glory ; which is not mentioned in Zosimus nor Sozomen , and only relies on the Credit of these Acts b b Lab. p. 14 17. Bin. pag. 217. : Which have no Evidence to Attest them , but Pope Adrian , who perhaps forged them ; or however , first produced these Acts in the Second Nicene Council , Four hundred and Fifty years after Sylvester's time , to prove the use of Images in Constantine's Days . But the very Acts declare , That Constantine ( who had Built and Adorned so many Churches , and if Images or Pictures had then been used , must have seen the Faces of S. Peter and S. Paul ) did not know the Faces of these two great Apostles , till Sylvester shewed them their Images . Whence we infer , That the Acts are no good Proof for Images , if they were Authentic ; and their being first cited in an Ignorant Council , made up of Forgeries and False Stories , gives us good Reason to believe them Spurious .

§ . 8. The Annotator in the next place asserts confidently , That Constantine was Baptized at Rome by Sylvester , Anno 324 c c Lab. p. 14 17. Bin. pag. 217. col. 2. : But his Proofs are very weak , viz. First , He cites a Roman Council for this , held the same year : But the Style of that Council is so barbarous , the Sentences so incoherent , and the Matter of Fact so false , that Labbé owns it is a Forgery , and Binius confesses it is suspicious d d Lab. p. 15 44. Bin. pag. 256. ; so that this can be no evidence : Nor Secondly , Anastasius Bibliothecarius , who lived Five hundred and Fifty years after this time , and was a meer Sycophant of the Popes , to set up whose Supremacy ( then newly hatched ) he stuck at nothing , and that spoils his Credit . Thirdly , Zosimus is a malicious Lying Writer , as to Constantine ; and though he do say , Constantine was Baptized at Rome , he doth not affirm , that Sylvester Baptized him : Fourthly , Sozomen only relates Zosimus his Story to confute it ; so that not one of his Witnesses do prove the matter : Yet these Authors with a weak Conjecture , That Constantine could not have been present in the Nicene Council , if he had not been Baptized before ( which we will presently confute ) is all the Evidence that Baronius and these Notes can give for this incredible Story : But on the other side , there are many clear Proofs , that he was baptized at Nicomedia , a little before his death .

First , Eusebius ( who lived at that time , and knew Constantine very well , and writ his History soon after ) doth affirm this : And if it had been False , many then alive who could remember it , would doubtless have exposed him for so manifest a Fiction . The Notes say he Forged this Story in favour of Constantius ; but he must be very Ridiculous , if he would be obliged by a Story of his Father , which many hundreds as well as himself , must have then known to be a Falshood ; And Eusebius must be as silly as he was knavish , to invent a Fable so easy to be disproved by living Witnesses : But the Notes wrong Eusebius , when they say , he reports that Constantine died Impious and alienated from the Catholic Church ; For Eusebius saith he made a most Christian and Pious end : However Eusebius by this Testimony brings upon himself , all the Rage and Spite of Baronius and our Annotator , who upon all occasions Blast this Holy and Learned Writer , to whose pains they and all the Christian World are infinitely beholding ; and though while Eusebius's History continues , it be almost the only true Record used by Baronius in complling his Annals ; yet he and Binius in every Page almost do revile him as an Arian and a Writer of Lies : But there is so much Malice , and so little probability in the Accusation , that their own Writers and ours also do vindicate Ensebius from these Slanders e e Valesij . praes. ad edit . Euseb. Dr. Cave life of Euseb. pag. 31. , and we could easily confute these Calumnies , but only that in this Relation he is so certainly in the Right , that we need not consider his Opinion in other things , but will shew as to this particular he is supported by the best Evidence imaginable . For

Secondly , Theodoret also saith , that Constantine was Baptized a little before his Death at Nicomedia f f Theodoret. hist. lib. 1. cap. 32 ; and though that Eusebius , who was Bishop of that City , was an Arian , yet he dissembled his Heresie while Constantine lived , and the Emperor had restored Athanasius , contrary to this Bishop's mind ; wherefore though he was forced to make use of an Arian Bishop to Baptize him , being taken ill in that City , yet it will not follow that Constantine died an Arian : Moreover that Constantine was Baptized at Nicomedia , is attested also by Socrates g g Socrat. hist. lib. 1. cap. 26. and Sozomen h h Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 32. ; and also by the Chronicles of Isidore and S. Hierom i i Baron . An. 324. §. 47. , and by S. Ambrose in his Funeral Oration for Theodosius ; Yea , Athanasius and a whole Synod at Ariminum , do expresly declare , that Constantine was Baptized a little before his Death ; that is , Thirteen years after this pretended Baptism at Rome k k Athanas . de Synod . pag. 243. Epistol. Synod . Arim. ap. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 29. & Sozom . lib. 4. cap. 17. , which last Testimony Baronius and the Notes presume to corrupt , and contrary to all the best Copies , and the necessary Sense of the place , put Constans his Name into the Text instead of Constantine : So that in fine the only Question is now , Whether we will believe these two Modern partial Writers , with those most Fabulous ( but as they call them most approved ) Acts of Sylvester , first cited by Pope Adrian 450 years after : Or we will believe the concurrent Witness of all the Ancient and Eminent Writers of that and the next Ages ; to whom if we give Credit , then Constanstine's Baptism at Rome by Sylvester , is a meer Forgery devised for the glory of the Roman Church , and for that only reason so eagerly defended by this Annotator and the Annalist .

§ . 9. Together with this Fable we must also reject the Fiction of Constantine's Leprosy , which was invented only that Sylvester might cure it l l Lab. p. 1419. Bin. pag. 218. col. 2. ; and therefore the Notes prove it very slenderly , viz. First , By those Acts of Sylvester , in which they confess there are many Errors m m Vid. ibid. & Baron . Annal. 324. §. 97. : Secondly , By a Roman Council , which is as manifest a Forgery as the Acts themselves : Thirdly , By a Metaphorical expression of Gregorius Turonensis , a credulous Writer , who lived 300 years after this , and yet even he doth not expresly affirm it . Fourthly , But the Annotator tells us the Gentile Historians do confirm this , though he names but one , viz. Michael Glycas , who unlucklily proves a Christian Monk , living in Sicily , Anno 1120 , about 800 years after this time , and long after Adrian and his Nicene Council had dispersed Sylvester's Acts , out of which Glycas took this Fable upon Trust : So that at last he only proves the Acts , by the Acts themselves and by Pope Adrian ; and that is all the Authority he hath for this feigned Leprosy , which Disease no Writer ( of Credit and Antiquity ) saith Constantine , ever had ; no not that Malicious Zosimus , who raked up all the Odious things against this Emperor he could devise ; and if ever he had been struck by Heaven with Leprosy , no doubt he would have Blazed it abroad with great Pleasure .

§ . 10. The Book of Constantine's Munificence , is grounded on the Fable of his Baptism , and seems to be Forged by the same Hand with Sylvester's Acts : So that we ought also to reject it as a Fiction : Anastasius , who put it out , was the Pope's Library-keeper ; and whether he made it , or found it in the Vatican , that Shop of Lies ( as Richerius calls it ) the Credit of it is invalidated , by reason , no Author of Repute or Antiquity , mentions any of these Gifts : It says blasphemously , Constantine gave a Saviour sitting five foot high ( so it calls a dead Image n n Lab. p. 1420. Bin. Not pag. 219. col. 1. ; ) But if this were true , why did not Adrian cite this in his Nicene Council ? Or why did this Emperor's Sister write to Eusebius Bishop of Coesarea for an Image of Christ , when Sylvester could more easily have furnished her ? and by the way , the Notes fraudulently mention this Message o o Not. Y. Bin. pag. 219. col . 2. & Lab. p. 1421. , but do not relate how severely Eusebius reproved that Lady for seeking after a visible Image of Christ : The Annotator also cites Paulinus to prove this Book of Munificence ; but he writ near 100 years after ; and though he speak of a fine Church of S. Peter in Rome ; yet he saith not that Constantine either founded or adorned it : Baronius attempts to prove this Book by mear Conjectures , by the Forged Acts , and by Nicephorus , a late Author , whom he often taxes for Fictions p p Baron . An. 324. §. 72. & 75. ; but he can produce no ancient or eminent Author for it : And yet it is certain , if Constantine , had given so many and so great gifts to the Head City of the World , some of the most Famous Writers would have Recorded it : Besides , the Cardinal himself rejects both the idle Story of S. Agnes Temple , ( attested by a Fiction ascribed to S. Ambrose ) told in this very Book q q Baron . An. 324. §. 107. ; and the apparent Falshood of Constantine's now burying his Mother in one of these Churches , who was alive long after r r Idem , An. 324. §. 114. : So that by his own Confession there are divers Falshoods in this Book ; and he had been more Ingenuous if he had owned the whole to be ( as it really is ) a Forgery .

§ . 11. The Editors now go back to the Council of An. Dom. 314. Arles , held ( as they say ) Anno 314 s s Lab. p. 1425. Bin. pag. 220. col. 1. : And it troubles them much , to ward off the Blows which it gives to their beloved Supremacy : For it was appointed by the Emperor , upon an Appeal made to him by the Donatists , to judge a cause over again , which had been judged before by Melchiades and his Roman Council ; ( the Pope in Council it seems , being not then taken to be Infallible : ) 'T is true , in the Title , which these Editors give us , this Council directs their Canons , To their Lord , and most Holy Brother Sylvester the Bishop , and say , they had sent them to him , that all might know ( the Pope not excepted ) what they were to observe : So that though in Respect they call him Lord , yet they Stile him also a Brother , and expect his obedience to their Decrees ; nor do they ( as the Notes pretend , ) desire him to confirm these Canons t t Lab. p. 1434. Bin. pag. 223. col. 2. ; But only require the Pope who held the larger Diocess , that he would openly acquaint all with them , as their Letter speaks : That is , as he was a Metropolitan , to give notice of these Canons to all his Province , which was then called a Diocess ; and Baronius is forced to point the Sentence salsly to make it sound , toward his beloved Supremacy u u Baron An. 314. §. 68. . So in the First Canon , Pope Sylvester is ordered by this Council to give notice to all , of the Day on which Easter was to be observed : That is , he was to write to all his Neighbouring Bishops under his Jurisdiction about it , not as the Notes say w w Lab. p. 1434. Bin. pag. 224. col . 1. Baron An. 314. §. 58. ; That he was to determine the day , and by vertue of his Office to write to all the Bishops of the Christian World to observe it : The Council had ordered the Day , and command the Pope to give notice to all about him to keep it . And in the Famous Nicene Council , The Bishop of Alexandria ( living where Astronomy was well understood ) was appointed first to settle , and then to certify the day of Easter ; yet none will infer from hence , that he was the Head of the Catholic Church , because he had this Duty imposed on him , which as yet , is more than the Council of Arles did put upon the Bishop of Rome : Again , the Notes are very angry at the Emperor , for receiving the Donatists appeal from the Pope and his Council , which they say Constantine owned to be an unjust and impious thing x x Not in Concil Aret. Bin. pag. 221. col. 2. ; but they prove this only by a forged Epistle mentioned but now , § 5. But it is certain Constantine , ( though a Catechumen , which they pretended was impossible at Nice ) was present in this Council , and so he must act against his Conscience , if he had thought it unjust , and impious to judge in Ecclesiastical Causes : And in this Emperor's Letter to Ablavius , he saith ; God had committed all Earthly things to his ordering : and in that to Celsus he promises to come into Africa , to enquire and judge of things done both by the People and the Clergy y y Baron . Ann. 316. 62. . And indeed Constantine , by all his practice sufficiently declared , he thought it lawful enough for him to judge in Ecclesiastical matters . Finally , the Notes say the Bishops met in this Council , at the Emperor's request z z Lab. p. 1423 Bin. pag. 222. col. 2. ; Now that shews it was not at the Pope's request ; but indeed Constantine's Letter to Chrestus , expresly Commands the Bishops to meet ; The Notes also out of Balduinus or Optatus , ( or rather from an obscure Fragment cited by him ) say , Sylvester was President of this Council ; Baronius addeth of his own head — namely by his Legates a a Baron . Ann. 314. §. 51. , which guess Binius puts down for a certain truth : But it is ridiculous to fancy that a pair of Priests , and as many Deacons in that Age , should sit above the Emperor , when himself was present in that Council ; So that though we allow the Pope's Messengers to have been at this Council , there is no proof that they presided in it : We shall only add , that instead of Arians in the Eighth Canon , we must Read Africans : or else we must not fix this Council so early as An. 314 , at which time the Arians were not known by that name .

§ . 12. In the same year is placed the Council of Ancyra , which the Editors do not ( as usually ) say was under Sylvester , but only in his time b b Lab. p. 1455. Bin. pag. 225. ; and it is well they are so modest ; for doubtless he had no Hand in it ; the Notes confess that it was called by the Authority of Vitalis Bishop of Antioch c c Lab. p. 1478. Bin. pag. 232. col. 2. : Balsamon and Zonaras say Vitalis of Antioch , Agricolaus of Caesarea , and Basil of Amasea , were the Presidents of it d d Beveridg . Concil Tom. I. pag. 375. . Yet not only Leo the Fourth , but the famous Council of Nice , approved of this Synod called and carried on without the Pope's knowledge or leave : There is but one Canon in this Council which contradicts the Roman practice , viz. The Ninth , which allows Deacons to Marry and continue in their Office , if they declared at their Ordination that they could not live Single : This Canon therefore Baronius and Binius strive to corrupt with false Glosses : The former saith , We may by this Canon see how firmly Ministers single Life was asserted , not only in the whole Catholick Church but in the East e e Baron . Ann. 314. §. 88. . Now it is very strange , that a private Canon of a Provincial Council , which allows one Order of Ministers to Marry , should shew it was the Opinion of the whole Church , that none might Marry : The latter in his Notes affirms That , this among other Canons solidly proves , that not only Priests , but Deacons ( by the Apostolical Law ) were bound to Live without Wives f f Lab. p. 1478. Bin. pag. 223. col. 2. : But the Apostles certainly allowed Deacons to have Wives ; and this Canon was made on purpose , that they might live with their Wives , if they pleased : The Notes proceed to say , That Deacons ordained against their Will , and protesting they could not contain , were by these Fathers permitted to Marry after their Ordination , provided they left off all Sacred Administrations , and did not Communicate among the Priests in the Chancel , but among the People : Which is an impudent falsification ; There being no word of being Ordained unwillingly ; nor any reason why they should be Ordained , who were to be reduced presently to Lay-communion : Yea , the Words of the Canon are express , that if they did Marry , they should continue in their Ministration g g 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 . Vid. Bever . not . Tom. II. p. 175. ; So that these Editors make no Conscience , to make these ancient Records to contradict themselves , rather then let them seem to oppose their Churches present practice : For which vile purpose there is another trick in the Notes on this Council ; For whereas the Eighteenth Canon speaks of Lay-persons which Vowed single Life , ( as many had done in times of Persecution ) and afterwards broke their Vow , that these were to be counted Bigamists ; The Notes h h Bin. p. 233. col. 2. on this Canon , put these Words of the Thirteenth Canon , Those who are of the Clergy , &c. Before their observation on the Eighteenth Canon , on purpose to make the Reader think the Clergy in those days , Vowed single Life as they do now at Rome .

§ . 13. The Council of Naeccaesarea ( according to these Editors ) was under Sylvester i i Lab. p. 1479. Bin. pag. 233. , who is not once named in it , nor doth it appear he knew of it : They might also have left out Leo the Fourth's approving it Five hundred years after , because the Notes say , The Council of Nice allowed it , which is much more for its Credit k k Lab. p. 1489. Bin. pag. 236. col. 2. . The same Notes say , The first Canon orders the same thing , which was decreed in the Thirty third Canon at Elliberis , and the Ninth at Ancyra : And if so , that is not , ( as they falsly gloss the Canon of Ancyra ) That the Clergy should live Single , or be reduced to Lay Communion ? For in that Canon some of the Clergy are allowed to Marry , and to continue to minister as Clergy-men still . And the true Sense of this Naeocaesarean Canon is , That whereas in times of Persecution , when Marriage was inconvenient , many Priests promised to live Single : Now these only were not allowed to Marry afterward l l Vid. Beveridg . Not. in Concil. Nicen. Tom. II. p. 180. ; but when the Church had Peace , the Nicene Council left all Clergy-men free , to Marry or not , as they pleased ; which shews , That when the Reason of this Canon ceased , they believed its Obligation did so also . The Fifth Canon forbids a Catechumen , who falls into Sin , to enter into the Church : By which the Notes say , That Baronius had sharply censured Eusebius m m Vid. Baron . An 324. §. 49. : But it is plain , that Baronius shews more Malice than Wit in that Censure : Eusebius only relates Matter of Fact , That Constantine was present in the Nicene Council , and he ( with all ancient Authors ) agrees , That Constantine was yet a Catechumen ; where then is the Crime ? Do not Baronius and Binius both agree , that Constantine was present in the Council of Arles , Ten years before his pretended Baptism at Rome ? And if it be said , This Canon forbid it : I ask , Whether it be probable , that an Emperor ( who , as Baronius saith , was Solutus Legibus , Above the Civil Law ) should be proceeded against by a Canon of a small Provincial Council ? Wherefore Eusebius his only Crime is , That he tells a Truth , which happens to contradict the Lying Acts of Sylvester , and consequently the Interest of Rome , for which the Cardinal and Annotator can never forgive him .

The next place is assigned to a Roman Council , under Sylvester , wherein there was a famous Disputation between the Jews and Christians , before Constantine and Helena ; but in the Notes n n Lab. p. 1491. Bin. pag. 237. col . 1. Vid. Baron . An. 315. §. 12. we are told the Story is utterly false , only attested by Sylvester's Acts , which Swarm with Lies , as they are now extant ; ( yet out of these Acts , as now extant , is the Forgery of Constantine's Baptism at Rome taken ; ) and therefore Baronius and Binius reject this Council as a meer Forgery . But why do they not reject Constantine's Baptism , as well as this Council , since both rely on the same Author ? The Reason is plain , That makes for the Interest of the Pope , and This no way concerns ; and so it may pass for a Forgery , as it is .

§ . 14. On occasion of Arius's Heresie now breaking An. Dom. 315. out at Alexandria , there was a Council of an Hundred Bishops called by Alexander , Bishop of that City , to Condemn him ; which first Council of Alexandria ( the Editors say ) was under Sylvester ; but it doth not appear that this Pope knew of it till Three years after o o Lab. p. 1492. Bin. pag. 237. col. 2. , An. 318 ; at which time Alexander gave notice of this Council ( not to Sylvester by name , as the Notes falsly suggest , but ) to all Catholic Bishops , and in particular to the Bishop of Constantinople . But for fear the Reader should observe , That more respect was shewed to that Bishop , than to the Pope , the Editors have removed these Epistles of Alexander into the Body of the Nicene Council , and only give us Notes upon them here , in which the Annotator out of Baronius turns the Charge of Lying and Forgery , of which themselves have been so often convicted , upon us , whom they falsly call Innovators p p Baron . Annal. 318. §. 18. Bin. pag. 239. col. 1. . Four years after followed a Second Council at Alexandria , which the Notes hope to prove was under Sylvester q q Lab. p. 1493. Bin. pag. 239. col. 1. , because Athanasius saith , This was a General Council , and saith , Hosins was there : Upon this Baronius , fancying nothing could be a General Council unless the Pope were present Personally or by his Legates , conjectures Hosius was the Pope's Legate , and in that capacity presided in this Council r r Baron . An. 318. §. 22 , &c. : And the Notes positively affirm this Dream for a certain Truth . But Athanasius calls many Synods General , which were only Provincial ; and it is plain , he had not the modern Roman Notion of a General Council , because he never mentions Sylvester , nor doth he say , Hosius was his Legate . But even Baronius owns , that Hosius was Constantine's intimate Friend , and his Legate into Egypt six years before s s Baron . An. 312. §. 91 , & 92. ; and Socrates saith , He was now again sent thither as the Emperor's Legate ; and no doubt , if he did preside in this Council , it was not as Sylvester's Legate ( whom no ancient Author records , to have had any hand in this Council , ) but as the Legate of Constantine . After these two Councils is placed a Letter of this Emperors to Alexander and Arius , taken out of Eusebius , but is misplaced by the Editors ; since it is plain , it was written in the beginning of the Controversie about Arius , and not only before Constantine understood any thing of the matter , but before these Councils at Alexandria : But Baronius and the Editors place it here t t Bin. Not. p. 240. col . 2. & Baron . An. 318. §. 91. on purpose to Rail at Eusebius , as if he put out an Arian Forgery ; whereas it is a great Truth , and Constantine may well be supposed to write thus , before he was rightly informed in the Case ; therefore those Gentlemen do not hurt Eusebius's Reputation , but their own , in accusing him so falsly , upon the old Grudge of his not attesting their Forgeries , devised and defended for the Honour of the Roman Church .

§ 15. The Council of Laodicea ( though it do not appear any Pope knew of it till after it was Risen ) they resolve shall be held under some Pope ; the Title saith , Under Sylvester u u Lab. p. 1495. Bin. pag. 241. ; Labbé's Margen saith , Under Liberius , An. 364 , or 357 ; or , Under Damasus 367 : Whereas in truth it was under no Pope , and being placed in the old Collections of Canons after those of Antioch , and also mentioning the Photinians , it must be held long after the Nicene Council w w Beveridg . not . Tom. II. pag. 193. : But it was falsly placed before the Nicene Council by Baronius ( our Editor's main Guide ) to secure the Book of Judith by the Council of Nice's Authority x x Richer . hist. Conc. lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 128. . And the Reasons given for this early placing it are very frivolous : For first , The softening of a Canon of Naeocaesarea is no certain Mark of time . Secondly , This Council rejects Judith out of the Canon of Scripture , and so did the Council of Nice also ; for though S. Hierom , when he had told us , This Book is not of Authority sufficient to determine Controversies ; adds , That the Nicene Synod is read , to have computed it among Holy Writings y y Hieron . Ep. CXI . Tom. III. p. 34. . S. Hierom only means , They allowed it to be Read for Instruction , but did not count it Canonical ; for doubtless he would not have rejected Judith , if that Council had received it into the Canon . And he saith elsewhere , The Church indeed reads Judith , Tobit , and the Macchabees , but receives them not among Canonical Scriptures z z Id. Ep. 115. ibid. p. 39. ; and again , A man may receive this Book as be pleaseth a a Idem Ep. 10. Tom. I. pag. 96. . Herein therefore the Council of Laodicea doth not contradict the Council of Nice at all , as these Notes falsly pretend . Thirdly , This Councels decreeing the same things which were decreed at Nice , without naming it , is no Argument it was held before that of Nice ; nothing being more ordinary , than for later Councils to renew older Canons without citing the former Councils for them .

The Notes on the Second Canon at Laodicea ( which supposes Penitents , to make their Confession by Prayer to God , and mentions no Priest ) would willingly grast the use of their modern Sacramental Confession , to a Priest , upon this ancient Canon b b Lab. p. 1523. Bin pag. 248. col. 2. ; but it rather confutes , than countenances that modern device . Their labouring to expunge the Photinians out of the Seventh Canon , since all the old Greek Copies have these words c c Beveridg . Not. Tom. II. p. 193. , is meerly to justifie their false Date of this Council . The Annotator on the Fifteenth Canon confesseth , that S. Paul Commands all the People to joyn in the Hymns , and that this Use continued to S. Hierom' s time ; yet he owns their pretended Apostolical Church hath altered this Primitive Custom grounded on Holy Scripture ; and that for very frivolous Reasons d d Lab. p. 1524. Bin. pag. 249. col. 1. . But let it be observed , That this Canon forbids not the People to bear a part in the Church Service ; but allows them not to begin , or bring in any Hymns into the Public Service . The Seventeenth Canon speaks of the Assemblies of the Faithful in two Latin Versions , and the Greek is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ; yet because the worst Latin Translation reads , in Processionibus ; the Notes impertinently run out into a discourse of their Superstitious modern Processions ; for any thing serves them for an occasion , to make their late Devices seem ancienter than they are e e Lab. & Bin. ibid. . The Thirty fourth Canon mentions and censures those , who leaving the Martyrs of Christ , go to false Martyrs ; And the Fifty first Canon mentions the Martyrs Feasts : Upon which the Notes f f Lab. p. 1526. Bin. pag 250. col. 1. most falsly infer , That the Martyrs were then adored with Religious Worship : But this is only his Invention . The Canon speaks not one word of Worshiping Martyrs ; but only , whereas the Orthodox Christian Assemblies were generally in the Burial places of true Martyrs , where they offered up Prayers to God : Some it seems began to make separate Meetings in Places dedicated to False Martyrs , and therefore the properest Note here would have been , to have set out the Sin of Schism , and the Pious Fraud ( as they call it ) of feigning false Martyrs , of which their Church is highly guilty . The Thirty fifth Canon expresly forbids leaving the Church of God , and calling upon Angels ; which they say is an hidden kind of Idolatry , and forsaking Christ the Son of God , to go after Idolatry . And Theodoret , who lived soon after the true time of this Council , saith , Those who were for Moses ' s Law , which was given by Angels , brought in the Worship of them ; which Error reigned long in Phrygia and Pisidia ; and therefore the Councill of Laodicea , in Phrygia , did by a Law forbid the Praying to Angels g g Theodoret. in Coloss. cap. 2. . Which Canon doth so evidently condemn the Roman Churches Prayers to the Angels as Idolatry , that the former Editors of the Councils impudently corrupted the Text of this Canon , and put in Angulos , for Angelos h h Edit. Merlini , Pet. Crab. & Barth . Caranz . , as if the Council had only forbid Praying in private Corners ; whereas not only the Greek , but the oldest Latin Copies , and Theodoret , have Angels : But our Editors and Annotator having Baronius for their Guide , venture to keep the true Reading [ Angels ] in the Text , and put [ Angles ] into the Margen , hoping by false Notes to ward off this severe Blow i i Lab. p. 1526. Bin. pag. 250. col. 1. . And first , The Notes dare not produce the place of Theodoret at large ; then they strive to blunder the Reader with a distinction of Dulia and Latria , which can signifie nothing here , because the Canon and Theodoret both say , It is Praying to Angels which is forbid ; and that the Romanists certainly do . Again , Baronius censures Theodoret for saying , That such Heretics as were for Moses ' s Law , brought in ANGEL-Worship : But why doth he not censure S. Paul , who saith , That those who were Jewishly inclined , and observed differences of Meats , New-Moons and Sabbaths , were the Inventers of Angel-Worship k k Coloss. II. ver. 16 , 17 , 18. ? The Angelic-Heretics in Epiphanius and S. Augustine , who came in afterwards , did not ( as the Notes represent them ) say , That Angels were to be worshiped with the Worship due to God alone : Only as the Romanists now are , so they were inclined to Worship Angels l l Aug. de haeres . Tom. VI. pag. 4. m. ; that is , by Praying to them . However , we Protestants say with Theodoret , We neither give them Divine Worship , nor divide the Service due to the Divine Majesty , between them and the true God m m Theod. de Curand . Graec. Off. Serm. 3. : And when the Romanists can say this honestly , and leave off Praying to them , we will not tax them with this Canon . Baronius hath one Device more , viz. That the Angels , which this Council says , must not be Worshiped , were not good Angels , but Devils and the Genii , adored by the Pagans ; For ( saith he ) the former Canon receives the Worship of the true Martyrs , and rejects that of false Martyrs . To which I Answer , first , It is false ( as was shewed ) that the former Canon receives the Worship of any Martyrs , true or false . Secondly , Why doth not this Canon call these Pseudo-Angels , as the former called those it rejected , Pseudo-Martyrs , if the Prohibitions were of the same kind ? Did ever any Christian call Devils , Angels , without some addition , as Evil Angels , Apostate Angels , & c ? Besides , in that Age when this Council was held ( according to Baronius ) the worship of Daemons and the Tutelar Spirits , was public , not secret Idolatry ; so that it is manifest , this Canon speaks not to Pagans , but Heretical Christians . And Theodoret shews , That it was those Angels , who gave the Law of Moses , which were hereby forbid to be Prayed to ; and I hope neither Binius , nor his Master , will say , these were Devils : Wherefore this Canon plainly saith , Praying to good Angels , ( as They of Rome now do ) is Idolatry .

To conclude , The Sixtieth Canon of this Council , is the most ancient Account of the Canon of Scripture , that ever was made by any Christian Synod , being the same which the Church of England holds at this day ; for it leaves out all those Books of Judith , Tobit , Wisdom , &c. which we account not to be Canonical ; but our Annotator finding so Primitive a Council contradicting their new Trent Canon , and not being able to reconcile the difference , passeth this remarkable Canon by , without any Note .

§ . 16. The reproachful Obscurity of Sylvester in this time of Action , in all other Christian Churches , puts the Editors upon giving us an heap of Forgeries together , to colour over the Pope's doing nothing Remarkable for Nine or Ten years : First , We have an Epistle of the Primitive Church , and Constantine's Munificence o o Lab. p. 1528. Bin. pag. 250. col. 2. : But Gratian , and the former Editors of Councils , cited this as a Decretal Epistle of Melchiades , to prove the Pope's Supremacy , &c. whereas the Forgery is so gross , that our Annotator affirms it to be a Fiction of Isidore Mercator's , patched up of Fragments stollen out of the History of the Nicene Council , the Council of Chalcedon , and S. Gregory's 24th Epistle , and wofully . Mis-timed p p Lab. p. 1530. Bin. pag. 251. col. 2. : Yet being used to cite such Forgeries , ( after this Confession ) he will not let it go without making some use of it ; for he Notes , that what is said here of Constantine ' s Donations to Melchiades and Sylvester , is very true , and may be firmly proved by Optatus Milevitanus . Very strange ! Optatus mentions no Donation of Constantine to either of these Popes , Vid. supr . §. 6. and therefore the Reader may note , That false and weak Inferences or Quotations from manifest Forgeries , are Firm Proofs with Baronius and Binius , when they make for the Roman Interest ; but the best Canons of the most genuine Councils are of no value , when they make against it .

After this follows that odious Forgery , called Constantine's Donation , wherein he is pretended to make over to the Pope , the whole City of Rome and all the Western Empire , with all kind of Ensigns of Imperial Majesty , and all manner of Jurisdiction ; which Ridiculous Fiction ( Nauclerus saith ) Antoninus rejected in his Chronicle , because it is not extant in any ancient Author , but only in the Decretals q q Naucler . Chron. gen. XI . pag. 604. . But our Editors print it without any Note of its being false ; yea , with Notes upon it , to prove it either true or very probable r r Lab. p. 1534. Bin. pag. 251. col. 2. & p. 254. col. 1. . And Baronius introduces it with many Stories , to make all that concerns the Popes temporal Greatness credible to an easie Reader s s Baron . An. 324. §. 117. ; yet at last , to secure their Retreat from so indefensible a Post , He and the Annotator make it a Fiction of the poor Greeks : I shall therefore , First , prove it a Forgery ; and , Secondly , make it out , That not the Greeks , but the Pope's Creatures devised it . First , That it is a Fiction appears from divers Arguments : For , First , who can believe Constantine , so unjust , first , to give Rome and the Western Empire to the Pope , and then to one of his Sons ? Or who can think the Pope so tame never to put in his Claim ? Secondly , This Edict is grounded on the idle Story of Constantine's Baptisin by Sylvester , which out of Sylvester's Fabulous Acts is related at large in it ; but those Acts being ( as was shewed ) a meer Forgery , this Edict must be so also . Thirdly , It represents Constantine , who was born and brought up under Christian Parents , and had setled Christianity before this , as a meer Heathen , till he met with Sylvester at this time . Fourthly , It pretends the whole Senate and all the Nobles joyned with the Emperor , to give the Pope this Power . But besides the folly of Constantine's delegating more Power than ever he himself had , it is most false to suppose , That the whole Senate at this time were Christians ; for many of them continued Pagans long after Constantine's Death . Baronius indeed ( out of Sylvester's Acts ) affirms , That none of the Senate was converted before the Year 324 t t Baron . An. 324. §. 76. . Forgetting that he had told us , Divers Senators had given up their Names to Christ Twelve years before u u Id. An. 312. §. 75 , & 76. ; and that one or both of the Consuls were Christians two years before this w w Id. An. 322. §. 1. . So ill a Memory had the great Cardinal , when his Cause obliged him to defend a Lye . Fifthly , It speaks of the Emperor's intending to build a City , and call it by his own Name , in the Province of Bizantium , and his Resolution to transfer his Empire thither ; and yet before this , the Edict had reckoned up Constantinople by name , and Hierusalem , as two of the Five Patriarchates , and given Rome Jurisdiction over all the other Four . Lastly , It is Dated in the Fourth Consulship of Constantine with Gallicanus , whereas Licinius was his Collegue in his Fourth Consulship , which was in the Year of Christ 315 , that is , Nine years before the time fixed by Baronius for this pretended Baptism ; and that clearly shews the Story to be all Sham , as all modest and learned Men of the Roman Church do now acknowledge : But Baronius , and our Annotator , considering not barely the falshood of this Edict , ( for that alone would not discourage them ; ) but observing also , that it destroys the pretended Divine Right of the Pope's Supremacy , grant it at last to be a Forgery , but say , It was devised by the Greeks . Secondly , Therefore I shall shew the Falshood of that Accusation : For , First , they charge Balsamon with publishing it ; Now he did not write till An. 1180 , yet the Notes out of Baronius do confess , that a Pope quoted it An. 1054 , ( that is , near an Hundred years before Balsamon was born ) to justifie his Superiority over the Greek Church ; and therefore Balsamon was not the Inventer of it : Secondly , It doth the Greeks no good , for it gives the Pope power over all their Patriarchs , and reckons Constantinople as the last and lowest Patriarchate , so that the Forger could not come out of that Church . Thirdly , It is grounded on the fabulous Acts of Sylvester , writ in Latin , and feigned in the Western World ; and its whole design is to advance the Pope above all Bishops , Kings , and Emperors ; and therefore no doubt it was advanced by a Friend of the Popes . Fourthly , The Notes confess , That a Pope first set up this Edict , to prove his Universal Supremacy , ( not considering with Baronius , it seems , that it weakened his Title ) and the grave and learned Men of the Roman Church received it as Authentic for many Ages after . We add , That till the Reformation they cited it , and writ in defence of it ; and though now their Point is gained they begin to renounce it , yet the Advantage that Church got by it , shews , that they were the Forgers of it ; yea , it seems Anno 1339 one Johannes Diaconus , a Member of the Roman Church , was thought to be the Author of it . Fifthly , Whoever considers how unwilling the Cardinal and our Annotator are to have it clearly rejected , will be convinced , that their Church gained by it , and consequently invented it . They labour to prove , the Popes temporal Power granted hereby , is both probable and true x x Lab. p. 1539. Bin. pag. 254. col. 1. : And though they own the French Princes , Pipin and Charles , who gave many Cities and Countries to S. Peter , never mention this Edict ; yet they argue from their calling those Gifts , A restoring them to the Church , that they had respect to Constantine's Bounty y y Lab. p. 1540. Bin. pag. 254. col. 2. . These Authors also mention Pope Adrian's confirming this Edict , and quote the Book of Constantine's Munificence ( shewed to be a Fable just now ) to justifie it z z Lab. p. 1541. Bin. pag. 255. col. 1. . They also would make out what it saith of the Images of Peter and Paul , then kept at Rome , by Eusebius , but cite him falsly , leaving out the main part of his Testimony ; viz. That it was only some who had such Images , and that these imitated the Pagans herein ; from whence it will not follow , That eminent Christians then placed them in their Churches a a Lab. & Bin. ut supr. Baron . An. 324. §. 40. . In short , Though they dare not say it is true , yet they would not have it rejected as false , because it gives their admired Church so much Riches and Power ; and therefore doubtless no Greeks , but some of their Church invented this most notorious Forgery : And Aeneas Sylvius observes , That it was warily done of the Popes , to let it be hotly disputed how far this Edict was good in Law , that so the Edict it self might still be supposed valid b b Aene. Sylv. dial . de Donat. Constantini . , it being their Interest it should be thought so .

This feigned Donation is followed by a Roman Council under Sylvester , in the Preface whereof Sylvester is falsly pretended to have called the Nicene Council ; and in the body of which there is a Canon , That none must judge the Chief Seat ; not the Emperor , nor Kings , nor Clergy , nor People . For the sake of which two advantagious Fictions , Baronius and the Annotator , defend and justifie this Synod c c Baron . An. 324. §. 29 , 30 , & 130. Bin. not . p. 260. ; though the Title be ridiculous , the Style barbarous , and the Matter of it as void of Sense as it is of probability . Labbé indeed notes , That the Condemning Photinus here shews , it was put together by an unskilful Hand d d Lab. Marg. pag. 1542. , and rejects it as a Forgery very justly : For Photinus ( as the Notes confess ) was not Condemned till long after e e Bin. p. 260. col. 1. ; nor were there any Christian Kings , but Constantine the Emperor at that time . Besides , the Forger first says , None of the Laity were present ; and yet in the next Page affirms , That Calpharnius ( Praefect of the City ) was there , and that Constantine and his Mother Helena subscribed it f f Lab. p. 1547. Bin. pag. 256. col. 2. & pag. 257. col. 2. ; yea , Baronius himself observes , That this Council mistakes the Custom of the Roman Church , where in that Age Presbyters use to sit in the presence of the Bishops ; but in this Fiction , they are represented as standing with the Deacons g g Baron . An. 324. §. 124. . Moreover , it destroys the Donation ( Lies seldom hanging together ; ) for if Constantine had given the Pope such Supreme Power a few days before , what need was there for these Bishops to grant the same thing ; or however , why do they not remember Constantine's late Gift ? Lastly , Arius ( who then gave so great Trouble to the Church ) is not mentioned here ; not ( as Baronius guesses ) because he was to be more solemnly Condemned at Nice the next year h h Baron . An. 324. §. 27. Lab. p. 1555. Bin. pag. 260. col . 2. An. Dom. 325. ; but because the Forger had nothing in his Eye , but meerly to set off the Grandeur of Rome .

§ . 17. We are now come to the First and most famous General Council of Nice , wherein the worst and most dangerous of all Heresies was suppressed ; and yet the pretended Judge of all Controversies , and Supreme Head of the Church , had so little share in this glorious Transaction , that it is very uncertain in what Popes time it was called : Sozomen and Nicephorus say , it was in the time of Julius i i Sozom. hist. lib. 1. cap. 16. Niceph. lib. 8. cap. 14. ; Others think it was in Sylvester's time ; Photius affirms , it was in the times of both Sylvester and Julius k k Phot. de 7. Synod . , though unhappily Pope Mark was between them two : Yet this Council is introduced by a Preface a la Mode a Rome , styled , The History of the Council of Nice l l Lab. Tom. II. pag. 3. Bin. pag. 262. , wherein ( as well as in the Notes and various Editions of this famous Council ) all imaginable Artifice is used to abuse the Reader into a belief , That Pope Sylvester not only called this Council , and presided in it by his Legates ; but also confirmed it by his sole Authority afterwards . For the clearer Confutation of which Falshoods , we will consider , First , The Authority which convened this Council . Secondly , The President of it , with the Order of Sitting in it , and Subscribing to it . Thirdly , The Power which confirmed it . Fourthly , The number of the Canons . Fifthly , The true Sense of them , Sixthly , The Forgeries for Supremacy herein inserted . Seventhly , The corrupt Editions of the Council it self .

First , As to the Authority convening it . The Preface saith , Constantine assembled it by Sylvester' s Authority m m Lab. p. 3. & Bin. pag. 262. : The Notes affirm , — it was appointed by the Advice , Counsel , and Authority of Pope Sylvester ; and again , — Pope Sylvester , by his Pontifical Authority , decreed the celebration of a General Council n n Lab. p. 63. C. Bin. pag. 291. col. 1. . To prove these vain Brags , they cite Ruffinus ( whose Version of this Council they reject ; ) yet he only saith , That Constantine convened it by the Advice of the Bishops : However , this is Advice , not Authority ; and Advice of the Bishops in general , not of Sylvester in particular ; and if any Bishops did give the Emperor particular Advice , it was those of Alexandria and Constantinople , not He of Rome . Secondly , They quote the Sixth General Council ( held 350 years after this of Nice , and in other things rejected by the Romanists ) which saith , — this Council was called by Sylvester and Constantine : But they quote falsly , for that Sixth Synod puts the Emperor's Name first o o Bin. Tom. III. par. 1. pag. 194. ; and though they are no Evidence against Authors living in the time of the Ni●ene Council ; yet even this shews , they thought the Emperor's Authority was chiefest in this Matter . The Notes also cite the Pontifical ( which they have so often rejected as Fabulous ) and Sozomen , as if they said the same thing : But for Sozomen , he never names Sylvester ; but saith , Pope Julius was absent by reason of his great Age ; and the Pontifical only saith ; It was called by the Consent of Sylvester ; not by his Authority ; and indeed it was called by the consent of all Orthodox Bishops : Wherefore there is no good Evidence , that the Pope did call it . But on the other side , All the Ecclesiastical Historians do agree , That Constantine Convened it by his own , Authority , and sent his Letters to Command the Bishops to meet at Nice p p Euseb. vit. Constant . lib. 3. cap. 6. Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 8. Theod. lib. 1. cap. 7. Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 17. ; and not one of them mentions . Sylvester , as having any hand in this Matter : Yea , ( to put us out of all doubt ) the very Council of Nice it self ( in their Synodal Epistle writ to Alexandria , and extant in these very Editors q q Lab. p. 59. Bin. pag. 285. & Baron . An. 325. §. 117. ) expresly declares , That they were Convened by Constantine's Command . Which clear and convincing Proofs , shew the Impudence , as well as the Falshood of the Annalist and Annotator , to talk so confidently of the Pope's Authority in this Matter ; who , if he had ( as they pretend ) Convened this Council , should have summoned more Western Bishops , of which there were so few in this Council , that it is plain , Either Sylvester did not Summon them , or they did not obey his Summons .

Secondly , As to the President of this Council , and the Order of Sitting in it , and Subscribing to it : The Preface and Notes falsly affirm , That Hosius , Vitus , and Vincentius were all three the Pope's Legates , and Presidents of this Council r r Labbé p. 3 , & 65. Bin. pag. 263 , & 291. ; and vainly think , if it had not been so , it could not have been a General Council : But if this be necessary to the Being of a General Council , surely there is some good Evidence of it . Quite contrary ! The Preface to the Sardican Council is of the Editors , or their Friends making , and so is no Proof : Athanasius saith , Hosius was a Prince in the Synods ; but not that he was President of this Synod , or the Pope's Legate . Cedrenus and Photius are too late Authors to out-weigh more Ancient and Authentic Writers ; yet they do not say , ( as the Notes pretend ) That Sylvester , by his Legates , gave Authority to this Council : Yea , Photius . places the Bishop of Constantinople before Sylvester and Julius , even when he is speaking of the Chief Bishops , who met at Nice ; and he is grosly mistaken also , because neither of the Popes did meet there s s Photii Nomocan . pag. 163. . Socrates only saith , The Bishop of Rome ' s Presbyters were his Proxies , and present at this Counoil t t Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 5. ; but hereby he excludes Hosius ( who was a Bishop ) from being a Legate , and doth not at all prove Vitus and Vincentius were Presidents . Sozomen names not Hosius , but these two Presbyters as the Proxies of Pope Julius ; but reckons that Pope himself in the fourth place u u Sozom. hist. lib. 1. cap. 16. . Though these Notes in citing Sozomen ( according to their usual sincerity ) place the Bishop of Rome first , and all the other Patriarchs after him . Finally , They cite the Subscriptions to prove , these Three were Legates and Presidents at Nice ; but Richerius ( a Learned Romanist ) saith , These Subscriptions are of as little Credit , as the Epistle to Sylvester w w Richer . de Concil. gen. lib. 1. cap. 2. § 6. ; and adds , That the placing these Presbyters before the Bishops , is a plain Proof , That all these Subscriptions were invented in later Ages ; because the Pope's Legates never did precede any of the Patriarchs , till the Council of Chalcedon x x Id. ib. §. 8. . As for Hosius , he had been the Emperor's Legate long before , and divers of the Ancients say , He was very Eminent in this Council ; but not one of them affirms , that Hosius was the Pope's Legate : This is purely an Invention of Baronius ; but he only proves it by Conjectures y y Baron . An. 325. §. 20. . The Truth is , Constantine himself was the President of this Council , and Sat on a Gilded Throne ( not as the Preface saith falsly , Below all the Bishops ; but ) Above all the Bishops , as Eusebius an Eye-witness relates z z Euseb. vit. Constant . lib. 3. cap. 10. ; and the Notes at last own , He sat in the Chief Place a a Lab. pag. 67. Bin. pag. 292. col. 2. ; yea , the Annalist confesseth , He acted the part of a Moderator in it b b Baron . An. 325. §. 73. . Richerius goes further , saying , It is clear by undoubted Testimonies , that the Appointing and Convening of this Council depended on the Authority of Constantine , who was the President thereof c c Richer . hist. Con. cap. 2 §. 2 , 3 , 4. ; and he blames Baronius and Binius , for wilfully mistaking the Pope's Consent ( which was requisite , as he was Bishop of an Eminent Church ) for his Authority , to which no Pope in that Age pretended . It is true , there were some Bishops , who were Chief among the Ecclesiastics in this Council : Eustathius , Bishop of Antioch sat uppermost on the Right-side , and opened the Synod with a Speech to Constantine d d Theodoret. apud Baron . An. 325. §. 54. : Hence some ( and among the rest Pope Foelix , in his Epistle to Zeno ) affirm , He was President of this Council e e Vid. Richer . hist. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 8. : Others say , The Bishop of Alexandria presided ; and indeed all the Patriarchs present , Sat above all others of the Clergy f f Phot. lib. de 7. Synod . ; yet so , as they all gave place to the Emperor , when he came in . And for the Pope's Legates , Baronius and Bellarmin do contend in vain about the Places they had in this Council since no Ancient Author tells us , they Sat above the Chief of the Bishops : So that this also is a Forgery of the Papal Flatterers , to give Countenance to their Churches feigned Supremacy .

Thirdly , As to the Power which confirmed the Canons of this Council ; the ancient Historians do suppose that Constantine gave these Decrees their binding Power , and Record his Letters , to injoyn all to observe them g g Vid Socrat. Sozom. Theodoret . & Ruffin . ut supra . . And Eusebius who was there , saith , that The Emperor ratified the Decrees with his Seal h h Euseb. vit. Constan . lib. 1. cap. 37. ; But the Annalist and Annotator seek to efface this evidence , by Railing at Eusebius , and by devising many weak pretences , to persuade the Credulous , that Pope Sylvester confirmed this Council by his Authority ; and both the Preface and Notes tell us , that this Synod writ a Letter to Sylvester for his confirmation , and that he called a Council at Rome ; and writ back to Ratify what they had done i i Lab. p. 6. & pag. 77. Bin. pag. 64. & pag. 299. col. 1. : But whoever will but read these two Epistles , will find the Latin so Barbarous and the Sense so Intricate , that nothing is plain in them , but that they are Forged k k Lab. p. 68. Bin. pag. 348. col. 1. ; and Labbe's Margin tells us they are Fictions , nor dare Baronius own them to be genuine l l Baron . An. 325. §. 37. ; and though Binius cite them for evidence in his Notes , yet at some distance he tells us , it is evident they are both Corrupted m m Bin. p. 348. col. 1. marg. ; and again he says , if they were not both extreme faulty and Commentitious , they might be Evidence in this case n n Idem p. 365. col. 1. not . ad . Concil. Rom. : But Richerius is more Ingenuous , and declares , That these Epistles are prodigiously salse , The Forger of them being so Ignorant as to call Macarius , ( who was then Bishop of Jerusalem ) Bishop of Constantinople : Yet our Annotator cites Dionysius Exiguus for a Witness of these Epistles ; whereas Richerius shews , they were Forged by some Ignorant Monk long after Dionysius his time , who mentions not the Pope's confirming of these Canons ; nor doth he remember these Epistles ; but only saith it was agreed , these Canons should be sent to Sylvester Bishop of Rome o o Richer hist. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 6. ; The Notes further urge , a Roman Council under Pope Sylvester , to prove his Confirming these Canons ; but that Council is a confessed Forgery it self , and so proves nothing p p Labbè marg. pag. 412. . Lastly , The Annotator here ( and almost every where ) cites Socrates his speaking of an Ecclesiastical Canon , that no Decrees of Councils should be valid without the consent of the Roman Bishop q q Socrat. histor. lib. 2. cap. 13. . But First , Consent is not Confirmation ; It is the priviledge of every Patriarch as well as of him of Rome , That a General Council cannot be held without every one of their consents ; but this proves not their pretended sole and supreme Power of ratifying all Councils vested in the Pope : Besides , Socrates here only Historically relates what Pope Julius said in his own Case ; and therefore the Testimony relies on Julius his Credit ; and indeed that was a peculiar Case , wherein , when the Cause of Athanasius was referred by consent of all parties to Julius as Arbitrator , the Arians took it out of his Hands against Athanasius his Mind ; and judged it in a Council , to which Julius was not at all summoned , which doubtless was very illegal and unjust : But yet none can tell , where this Ecclesiastical Canon was made , which the angry and injured Pope here cites ; and therefore till it appear whence Julius had this Canon , we must be excused , if we give no great Deference to it ; and unless they cou'd prove it was Recorded before the Nicene Council , it is very impertinent to expect the Nicene Fathers should Govern their Actions by it . So that we conclude not Sylvester , but Constantine confirmed this Council .

Fourthly , As to the number of the Canons the Annotator also notoriously prevaricates ; He confesses that all the Greeks , and particularly Theodoret and Ruffinus , assert there were but Twenty Canons made there ; yea , that the Sixth Council of Carthage , ( within less than an Hundred years , ) after a diligent search in the three Patriarchal Seats of Alexandria , Antioch and Constantinople , could find no more than Twenty Canons r r Lab. p. 71. Bin. pag. 395. col. 2. : But the Notes conceal Gratian's naming no more but Twenty Canons , and his saying , there are but only Twenty Nicene Canons to be found in the Roman Church s s Gratian. dist. 16. cap. 10. & cap. 13. . For all this the Annotator boldly tells us , That the truer Opinion , ( or rather that which is most for the Popes interest ) is , that more than Twenty Canons were made there : But we will examine his and Baronius's reasons t t Baron . An. 325. §. 157. &c. . First , They say there is no Decree about Easter among the Twenty Canons : I reply , There is a genuine Epistle of Constantine's , in which this matter is determined with the reasons for it , which is better than a bare Law without Arguments , in a case which had been so much disputed u u Bin. p. 285. & Theod. lib. 1. cap. 9. ; nor could they make any acurate Canon , about it till the exact time was Calculated , which they referred ( not to the Pope , but ) to the Bishop of Alexandria . Secondly , The Notes say S. Ambrose mentions a Canon made at Nice , against Bigamists w w Ambros . ep. 82. ad Episc. Vercel . ; but Baronius himself confesseth , that S. Ambrose only saith , They treated of this matter , but doth not affirm they made a Canon about it . Thirdly , They plead , there was a Decree about the Canon of Scripture made at Nice , ( which is not among these Twenty ) because S. Hierom saith , he had Read that the Nicene Fathers computed Judith , among the Books of Holy Scripture . I reply — S. Hierom only saith they computed it among Holy Writings , that is , ( as we shewed before § 15. ) among Books to be Read for instruction , not to be quoted in Dispute : For if S. Hierom had believed this Council did receive Judith for Canonical , he would not have counted it ( as he doth to be Apocryphal ; So that this proves not that there were more Canons . Fourthly , The Notes affirm there is no Canon now extant here , against a Bishops choosing his Successor in his Life time ; which S. Augustine saith was forbid in this Council x x Augustin . Epist. 110. ; which is a gross Untruth , since the Eighth Canon forbids two Bishops should be in one City ; and the Notes own this was the very Canon meant by S. Augustine , in the next Leaf y y Bin. Not. pag. 296. col. 1. & p. 297. col. 2. : Liers should have better Memories : Fifthly , They say the third Council of Carthage cites a Canon of Nice , forbidding to receive the Sacrament after Dinner ; but if the place be considered ( as Richerius notes z z Richer . histor. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 13. ) that Council only refers to a former African Synod , which had decreed this , and not to the Council of Nice . Sixthly , The Annotator speaks of a Canon about Appeals to Rome , cited out of this Synod in the Sixth Council of Carthage , but he was wiser than to tell us who cited this for a Nicene Canon ; for it was Pope Zosimus's Legate cited it , and he was convicted of a notorious Falsification therein , as shall be shewed in due place . Seventhly , He saith there was a Canon made at Nice ; but not to be found among the Twenty , that a Cause tried in a lesser Synod , might be judged over again in a greater ; and for this he cites the Fourth Epistle of Julius ; but in his Notes on that Epistle a a Bin. Not. in . ep. Julij . pag. 395. col. 2. , he confesseth this was no Canon made at Nice , but only it was matter of Fact ; in that this great Synod did judge Arius over again , who had before been judged at Alexandria . Eightly , The Notes say , Atticus , Bishop of Constantinople at Chalcedon , did affirm , that the Nicene Council agreed upon a Form of writing Communicatory Epistles , which is not among these Twenty Canons : I reply , Baronius and he both own this Form was to be a Secret among the Bishops ; and if it had been put into a Canon , Heretics might easily have counterfeited these Forms , and so the design had been spoiled b b Baron . An. 325. §. 166. & Richer . lib. 1. cap. 3 §. 14. . Lastly , the Annotator cites Sozomen , to proves that the Nicene Council added to the Gloria Patri the later part , As it was in the beginning , &c. Whereas Sozomen c c Sozom. histor. lib. 3. cap. 19. in that place only speaks of such as praised God in Hymns , agreeing to the Faith delivered at Nice , but mentions no Canon or Form of words agreed on at Nice , about these Hymns . So that after all this shuffling , it is very impertinent for this Annotator to brag , that it is manifest there were more than Twenty Canons made in this Council ; and Nonsense to tell us , that the Greeks who stifly maintain there were but Twenty Canons , cannot deny but there were more than Twenty : And for all his Confidence , neither he nor Baronius dare defend those Eighty Canons , which Turrian hath fathered on this Council ; and therefore whatever is more than these twenty , or differing from them , must pass among the many Forgeries of the Roman Church

Fifthly , As to the Sense of those Canons , which oppose the Pope's Interest , the Notes use many Impostures in expounding them . The Third Canon forbids the Clergy to cohabit with Women taken into their Houses ; unless they were so near of Kin , as to avoid Suspicion and Scandal : Which plainly supposes , that they might have Wives , because cohabiting with them , could give no Suspicion nor Scandal : And since the Canon names not Wives , who were the most likely to dwell with their Husbands , doubtless this Council did not suppose the cohabitation of the Clergy with their Wives to be unlawful . Yea , not only Socrates and Sozomen d d Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 8. Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 22. ; but Pisanus and Nauclerus , later Romish Authors e e Pisanus ap. Bin. pag. 343. col . 1. Naucler . Chron. pag. 606. , relate the History of Paphnutius his Advice to the Council in this Point ; upon which the latter saith , The Nicene Fathers allowed Priests to have Wives , if they pleased : Which full Evidence against their Churches practice doth so enrage Baronius , that he not only denies this well-attested History , but lays by the Character of an Historian , and falls ( in his guessing-way ) to dispute against this manifest Truth f f Baron . An. 325. §. 148 , 149 , 150. . And Binius in his Notes g g Lib. pag. 72. Bin. pag. 296. col. 2. out of him , saith , This Canon expresly forbids Clergy men the Use of their Wives , after they were entred into Holy Orders ; rejects the History of Paphnutius , and gives Socrates and Sozomen the Lye : But we shall leave the Reader to judge , whether he will give more Credit to the Words of the Canon , and these Ancient impartial Historians ; or to the Corrupt Paraphrase , and Impudent Assertions of these two notorious Sycophants , who have so often been proved to govern themselves , not by Truth , but by Interest and Design . The Sixth Canon reckons the Pope but Equal to other great Bishops , and limits his Jurisdiction ; at which the Annalist and Annotator are much discomposed , and ( by various Fictions and shuffling Pretences ) labour to pervert the true Sense of this famous Canon . And first , They say , The beginning of it ( viz. The Roman Church hath always had the Primacy ) is wanting h h Lab. & Bin. ut supr. not . in Can. 6. : Whereas no Authentic Edition ever had any such beginning . Dr. Beveridge gives us Eight several Versions , besides the Original Greek , which all want it i i Beveridg . Concil. Tom. II. pag. 50. ; and it is impudently done of Binius , to cite Alanus Copus , saying , That Dionysius Exiguus ' s Version had this beginning ; since that very Version is printed by Binius himself , without any such Preamble k k Lab. p. 45 , 46. Bin. pag. 276. ; but 't is all one to him , true or false , in his Notes , he makes a foolish Paraphrase on this Forged Preface , about the Divine Right of the Pope to his Supremacy ; whereas the plain Words of the genuine Canon shew , That this Council grounded the Jurisdiction of these great Bishops only upon Ancient Custom l l Richer . hist. Concil lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 11. : Nor can it be gathered from this Canon , That the Bishop of Rome then had any Superiority over him of Alexandria ; the one being allowed as much Power within his own Limits , as the other had in his . It is plain , The Great Bishops are all here declared to be Equal , without any Exception or Salvo , upon the Bishop of Rome's account ; which would have been mentioned , as well as the Rights of the Metropolitan of Caesarea are , when the Bishop of Jerusalem's Place is assigned in the Seventh Canon , if the Council of Nice had believed , Rome had any right to a Supremacy over all the rest . The Annotator is also angry at Russinus ; and though upon the Fourteenth Canon he says , Ruffinus set down the true authentic Canons m m Lab. p. 75. B. Bin. pag. 298. col. 1. ; yet because his Version of this Sixth Canon limits the Pope's Jurisdiction to the Suburbicarian Regions ; He first falsly represents the Words of Ruffinus , adding to them , — which above all others are subject peculiarly to the Diocess of the Roman Church ; and then Rails at the Version it self , as evil , erroneous , and proceeding from his Ignorance : But doubtless Ruffinus , who lived so near the time of this Council , and knew Rome and Italy so well , understood the Pope's Jurisdiction at that time , and the meaning of this Canon far better than Binius ; and therefore Baronius ( after he had condemned the Version ) yet strives to accommodate it to their new Roman Sense . But there is full Evidence , that these Suburbicarian Regions were only those Provinces which were under the Praefect of Rome ; that is , some part of Italy , and some of the adjacent Islands ; and these were all the Churches which were then under the Pope's Jurisdiction : As may appear by the great difficulty which the succeeding Bishops of Rome found in the following Ages , to bring Milan , Aquileia , and Ravenna ( Churches in Italy it self ) to be in subjection to them : So that the Pope was so far from having an Universal Supremacy then , that Balsamon is mistaken in thinking he was made Patriarch of all the Western Church ; for the very Fifth Canon , which orders all Causes to be heard and finally ended in the same Province where they hapned , not only destroys Appeals to Rome , but shews that no Bishop did then pretend to so large a Jurisdiction . Again , these Notes frequently brag of that Version of this Canon , which the Pope's Legate cited at Chalcedon n n Concil. Chalced. Act. 16. ; wherein the aforesaid sorged Title of this Canon [ The Church of Rome hath always had the Primacy ] are quoted as part of the Canon it self : But the Acts of that Council of Chalcedon shew , That this Edition was discovered to be false by the Constantinopolitan Code , then produced : And if the Fathers there had believed this to be the true Reading , they would not immediately have contradicted the first famous General Council , by giving the Bishop of Constantinople equal Priviledges with him of Old Rome : So that their Quoting a false , baffled , and rejected Version of this Canon ; rather pulls down , than supports their dear Supremacy ; to maintain which they have nothing but Sophistry and Fraud , as the next Section will shew .

Sixthly , Therefore we will consider the Impostures and Fictions annexed to this Council , to give colour to their feigned Supremacy : And first , because Eusebius speaks little of the Popes , for he could not truly say much of them ; Baronius and the Annotator invent all the Calumnies against him imaginable ; and the former ( though he have little true History in his Annals for Three hundred years together , which is not taken out of Eusebius ) Rails at him most unjustly , as being an Arian ; a malicious , fraudulent , and partial Writer o o Baron . An. 318. §. 46. An. 324. §. 136. §. 143 , & §. 152. item An. 325. §. 192 &c. . And Binius treats this great Historian at the same rate : But Athanasius expresly saith , That Eusebius of Caesarea subscribed the Orthodox Faith p p Athan. Apol. cont. Arian p. 180. . Socrates affirms also , That he agreed to the Faith of the Nicene Council q q Socrat. hist. lib. 1 cap. 3. . Pisanus , his Greek Author of the History of this Council , brings in Eusebius disputing against the Arians r r Bin. p. 313. col. 2. : And Valesius , in his Life , clears him from this spightful Accusation , which these Men invent meerly to be Revenged on him , for not countenancing the Pope's Supremacy ; which is not his Fault , but his Vertue , because there was no such thing pretended to in his days . Secondly , These Editors publish a Letter of Athanasius to Pope Marcus , with that Pope's Answer s s Lab. p. 287. Bin. pag 326. col. 1 , & 2. , among the Records of this Council ; and the Annotator often cites them , to prove the Supremacy and Infallibility ; because the Roman Church is here called , The Mother and Head of all Churches , and , A Church which had never erred ; and the Pope is called , Bishop of the Universal Church ; yet their being Forged is so notorious , that Bellarmin , Possevin , and Baronius t t Baron . An. Dom. 336. reject them . Thirdly , They likewise publish in these Nicene Acts an Epistle of Pope Julius , wherein divers Canons for the Primacy are Fathered on this great Council u u Bin. p. 328. col. 2. : And Pisanus is so bold , and so vain as to defend this to be genuine , by an Epistle of the Egyptians to Pope Foelix ( owned to be Forged w w Bin. p. 499. col. 1. ) , and by other Decretal Epistles , as false as this , which he defends ; but it is so manifest a Forgery , this of Pope Julius , that the Editors themselves afterward reject it x x Lab. p. 483. Bin. pag. 391. col. 1. . Fourthly , Whereas the Ninth Canon of Chalcedon allows the Clergy to complain to the Primate , or to the Bishop of the Royal City of Constantinople ; Notes are put upon this to falsifie that Canon , which say , That Constantinople is here put for Rome y y Bin. p. 331. col. 1. . Fifthly , Here is a Canon called the Thirty ninth of Nice , which faith , He that holds the See of Rome is the Head and Prince of all Patriarchs ; because he is first , as Peter , to whom power is given over all Christian Princes and People z z Lab. p. 303. Bin. pag. 337. col. 2. , which must be a Forgery of some Roman Parasite , because it not only contradicts the Sixth Canon of the genuine Council of Nice , but the Eighth of these pretended Canons , which limits the Bishop of Rome's Jurisdiction to the Places near to him a a Lab. p. 294. Bin. pag. 333. col. 1. . However , the Editors say , Steuchus , Turrian , and Cope cite it ; and they print Turrian's Notes upon it , which affirm it to agree with the Sixth Canon of the true Edition ; and would prove it genuine by no better Evidence , than a Forged Decretal of Anacletus b b Bin. p. 358. col. 1. . By which we see , the most apparent Falshoods shall be published and defended , if they do but promote the Supremacy .

Lastly , We will make some Remarks on the Corrupt Editions of this Council : First , That of Alfonsus Pisanus is so Fabulous , that Labbé for meer shame omits it c c Lab. Marg. pag. 106. ; but Binius prints it at large , with all its Fictions and Impostures d d Bin. p. 300. col. 1. ; of which Richerius gives this Character , By this History of Pisanus we may learn , not what the Council of Nice was , but what it should be to fit it for a Jesuits Palate ; for he hath scraped together all the Falshoods and Forgeries he could find , for enlarging the number of the Canons e e Richer . hist. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 2. §. ult. . But I must add , that there are divers Passages in this Edition , which will not serve the ends of the modern Roman Flatterers : For first , Pisanus his Greek Author highly extols Eusebius f f Bin. p. 301. col . 2. & 302. col. 2. ; for which the Jesuit corrects him with a Note in the Margen . Secondly , The Orthodox Bishop bids the Philosopher believe that which was written , but not to regard things unwritten ; because the Faith is grounded on Holy Scripture g g Bin. p. 316. col. 1. : Whereas the Margen cautions the Reader , not to think that this is spoken against Ecclesiastical Traditions , though it be levelled at them . Thirdly , Hosius doth not subscribe ( as the Pope's Legates here do ) for Pope Sylvester ; wherefore this Compiler did not think him to be the Popes Legate h h Bin. p. 322. col. 1. . Fourthly , It is here said to have been declared at Nice , That every Bishop under God was the Head of his own Church i i Bin. p. 325. col. 2. . Fifthly , Here is printed that part of the African Bishop's Letter to Celestine , wherein they blame his Legate for falsly citing the Nicene Canons k k Bin. pag. 328. col. 1. . So also the LXXX Canons were not invented by a Through-paced Friend to the Roman Modern Interest , and therefore probably Baronius will not defend them l l Baron . An. 325. §. 53. . The 8th Canon ( as was noted ) limits the Pope's Jurisdiction to such places as were near him : The 24th and 66th of these Canons clearly declare , that some Bishops had Wives m m Bin. p. 335. col. 2. & p. 341. col. 1. , forbidding Bigamy , and compelling them to take their first Wife again . And there are other like Examples which are not worth setting down , because they are all forged in later times , as appears by their citing a fabulous Discourse out of the Life of S. Anthony , falsly ascribed to the great Athanasius n n Bin. p. 302. col . 2. Vid. Rivet . Cait . sacr. l. 3. cap. 4. , by their quoting a spurious Work under the name of Dionysius Areopagita , which was ( as all agree ) writ after the Nicene Council many years o o Bin. pag. 336. col. 2. : By their giving the Patriarch of Antioch Jurisdiction over the Archbishop of Cyprus , who was always free from that subjection , as was declared long after in the Council of Ephesus p p Bin. p. 337. col . 1. Vid. Concil. Ephesin . Act. 7. . Finally , Though this Pisanus do impudently reject the true story of Paphnutius his advising to leave the Clergy at liberty to Marry ; which History is in his Author , and in Gelasius Cyzicenus also : Yet he magnifies a ridiculous Fiction afterward of two Bishops , which signed the Nicene Faith after they were dead and buried q q Bin. p. 347. col. 2. . A Fable so gross , that Baronius rejects it , with a Note which I wish he had often remembred , viz. That it was not usual Among Christians to confirm the Faith by Miracles , which was attested by more firm Evidences of Holy Scripture r r Baron . An. 325. §. 182. . Secondly , Turrians Edition of this Council repeats all these LXXX Canons , and in his Preface and his Notes he vindicates them all ; and yet the Tracts which he cites to prove these Canons genuine , are owned to be spurious by all modest Romanists , and his Arguments are so trifling they are not worth consuting . We will only note therefore , that the 7th and the 40th of these Canons require , that Synods shall be held twice a year , which ( as Turrian confesseth ) agrees not with the custom of the Roman Church s s Lab. p. 294. & pag. 303. Bin. pag. 353. col . 2. & 358. col. 1. : And his Notes say , the 72d Canon differs from the 13th , and the 73d Canon is contrary to the 49th t t Lab. p. 315. Bin. pag. 363. col. 1 , & 2. ; but he will rather suppose the Holy Nicene Fathers contradicted themselves , than own any of these Canons to be forged , because some of them seem to favour the Pope's Supremacy . As to the Edition of Gelasius Cyzicenus , it is generally a very modest account of this Council , and hath not many Errors in it , but like all other ancient Authors it speaks very little of the Pope ; for which Reason Binius claps it under Hatches , and will not produce it till the latter end of his Second Tome after the Council of Ephesus , to convince us , That all Authors are valued or slighted meerly as they promote or discourage the Usurpations of Rome .

§ . 18. To all these Impostures , contrived to misrepresent this famous general Council , there is tacked a Third Council at Rome under Sylvester in the presence of Constantine , wherein that Pope with 275 Bishops are said to confirm the Nicene Council , and make two or three new Canons u u Lab. p. 412. Bin. pag. 365. col . 1. Baron . An. 325. §. 199. . But though it be certain and confessed by Binius and Baronius , that Constantine was not then at Rome , though the Style be barbarous , and the Matter frivolous , and the thing be a manifest Forgery contrived to carry on the grand Cheat of Sylvester's confirming the Council of Nice ; yet Barcnius and Binius ( who confess the Title to be false ) labour to prove this Synod to be true , though Binius be forced to justifie it by the forged Letter of the Nicene Fathers to Sylvester , and his Answer to them , both which in the next Column he owns are false and feigned w w Bin. p. 365. col. 2 C . And thus where the Supremacy is concern'd , one Forgery serves for the Evidence of another .

The Council at Gangra is genuine , and was an uncorrupted Remain of Primitive Antiquity , till it fell into the hands of these Editors , who have put the name of Osius , Bishop of Corduba , into the Title in their Latin Version ; and though that Name be not found in the Original Greek printed over against it ; yet from this Fiction of their own x x Lab. p. 414. Bin. pag. 366. col. 1. the Notes impudently say , That this Synod was Convened by Sylvester' s Authority , and from Osius his presence in it , Binius certainly gathers it was celebrated under this Pope ; but a little after he knows not in what year it was held ; and Baronius treats of this Council Anno 361 , that is , near 30 years after Sylvester's Death y y Lab. p. 427 , & 428. Bin. pag. 371. col . 1. Baron . An. 361. § 14. . They tell us that Pope Symmachus in his 6th Roman Council approves this Synod , but he mentions not Osius ; however Baronius guesses , that the reason why Symmachus approved it was , because Osius the Legate of the Apostolic See was there ; which groundless Conjecture and false Assertion , Binius in his Notes turns into a positive Affirmation , viz. That Osius was there as the Pope's Legate . As to the occasion of calling this Council of Gangra , it was to condemn one Eustathius , whom Binius owns to have been a great Favourer of Monkish life , and Sozomen saith , he was a Monk z z Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 13. ; yea , the Synodical Epistle describes him as one who despised Marriage , allowed not the administrations of Married Priests , who had a separate way of Worship , and a different garb from others , making his Followers to abstain from Flesh , profess Continency , and renounce Propriety a a Bin. p. 367 , &c. ; all which are the very Characters of a Monk of the Roman stamp ; and therefore it is wonder that Binius should give Sozomen and himself the Lye , and say he was no propagator of Monkery , and that it cannot be proved that he was a Monk ; yet at last he fancies Eustathius his Name was mistaken for Eutachus an Armenian Monk b b Lab. p. 129. Bin. pag. 371. col. 2. . All which Blunders are only designed to keep the Reader from observing , that a Monk was condemned for an Heretic , yea , and censured for holding those very Opinions , which now pass currant among the Romish Fryers For which end also in his Notes on the 4th Canon , he saith , The Heretics ( that is , Protestants ) foolishly apply this Canon to condemn the Celibacy of the Clergy , whereas ( he saith ) it doth not concern Priests who have Wives , but such as had Wives c c Lab. p. 430. Bin. p. 372. col. 2. . But I doubt it will prove the Romanists are the Heretics here : For both this Canon , and the Synodical Epistle , have [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , ] which signisies a Priest who now hath a Wife ; even as [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] 1 Cor. vii . 10. is those that have Wives , and are actually married ; and so the best Version of this Canon is Presbyterum Conjugatum : For by it all those are Anathematiz'd , who affirm , That men should not Communicate , if a Married Priest say the Office : That is , this Primitive Council Anathematizes the Modern Church of Rome , to hide the shame of which just Censure the Notes quarrel with Our preferring the Translation of their Friend Dionysius , who turns the word [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] Ministrante ; before those Versions which turn it by Sacrificante ; as if Protestants did this out of a design to blot out the Memorial of the unbloody Sacrifice d d Lab. p. 431. Bin. pag. 372. col. 2. ; whereas that Greek word doth properly signifie Ministring and saying the Offices of the Church , but no where is used properly for Sacrificing ; and it is apparent , that Protestants do most religiously believe the Sacrament to be an unbloody Sacrifice , and as such , do make it a Memorial of Christs one bloody Sacrifice upon the Cross .

The Notes also blame these Eustathian Heretics for perswading the People to give them the dispensing of their Alms intended for the Poor , contrary ( saith Binius ) to the Apostles Doctrine and Constitution e e Lab. & Bin. ut supra . . Yet thus the Romish Fryers do at this day , drawing the Peoples Alms to their Convents under pretence of being dispensers of them . The same Notes are mistaken in saying , That the Manicheans were forbid by their Doctrine to give any Alms to the Poor : For S. Augustine ( who knew those Heretics best ) affirms , That they only forbad their People , to give Meat or Fruits — to any Beggar who was not of their own Sect f f Aug. de mor. Manich. lib. 2. Tom. I. pag. 177. . Lastly , whereas this Council condemns the Eustathians , for abhorring the Assemblies and Divine Offices used in the places where the Martyrs were commemorated , Can. ult. These Notes falsly pretend they were condemned , for disapproving the Worship and Invocation of the holy Martyrs g g Lab. p. 434. Bin. pag. 374. col. 1. ; whereas it is plain by the Canon , that the Martyrs were only Commemorated , not Invocated nor Worshiped in those days ; and the expression in this place , is only a Phrase to signifie the usual Assemblies of Orthodox Christians , which were then frequently held in the Burying places of the Martyrs , and these Heretics separated from those public Assemblies .

The Arians , to revenge their Condemnation at Nice , falsly accuse Athanasius to the Emperour Constantine , An. Dom. 335. who thereupon called a Council at Tyre , which these Editors intitle , The Council of Tyre under Sylvester h h Lab. p. 435. Bin. pag. 374. col. 1. . Yet all the Ancients agree the Emperour Called it , and their own Notes confess as much : Only they pretend , He Called this Council contrary to custom and his duty ; but this is notoriously false , since Constantine had already called divers Councils , and particularly that of Nice . And as for Pope Sylvester , he is not once named in this Council at Tyre , which looks a little odly upon the pretended Supremacy , that when the Catholic Cause lay at the stake , we never hear one word of the Roman Bishop , neither in this Council , nor in all the succeeding Letters and Councils relating to Athanasius , till that Cause was afterward brought before the Pope , as an Arbitrator chosen by both parties .

§ . 19. Pope Marcus succeeded Sylvester , and sat but eight Months ; yet , that he might not seem to have An. Dom. 336. done nothing , The Forgers have invented an Epistle from Athanasius to this Pope , desiring a true Copy of the Nicene Canons from Rome on pretence , that the Arians had burnt theirs at Alexandria : To which is annexed Marcus his Answer , who saith he had sent him 70 Canons . Now Binius hath often cited these Epistles , to prove the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility , and to shew there were more than twenty Canons made at Nice , yet here His Notes bring five substantial Reasons , to prove these Epistles forged ; and Labbé notes , These Wares of Isidore are justly suspected by Baronius , Bellarmine , and other skilful Catholics , nor doth Binius himself doubt of their being spurious i i Lab. p. 469 , & 472. Bin. pag. 382. col. 2 , &c. . Yea , it is remarkable , that this very Binius out of Baronius k k Baron . An. 336. §. 59 , & 60. here confesseth , That he who Forged the Epistle of Boniface to Eulalius , devised also these two Epistles , to consult the Credit of Pope Zosimus and Pope Boniface , who had cited a Canon out of the Nicene Council , not found among the genuine 20 Canons . From which we may observe , First , that Binius will cite those things for the supremacy , &c. which he knows to be forged . Secondly , That the great design of all these Forged Records of Antiquity was either to cover the faults , or consult the honour of the Roman Church , which seems to have both employed and encouraged the Authors of these Pious Frauds , because her Pretences could not be made out by any thing that was Authentic .

Julius succeeded Marcus in the same year , in whose Life the Pontifical mistakes the Consuls Names , and feigns he was banished Ten Months , which Baronius proves to have been impossible l l Baron . An. 352. §. 2 , & 3. , He fills up this Popes story ( according to his manner ) with trisling matters , and omits the only remarkable thing in his Life , which was his concern in the Cause of Athanasius . In this Popes name several Epistles are published : The First from Julius to the Eastern Bishops may be proved fictitious , not only by the Confession of Baronius and other Learned Romanists m m Lab. p. 475. in Marg. Bin. pag. 384. col. 1. , but by divers other Arguments . For is it probable , that Julius would Only be solicitous about his Supremacy when he writ to the Arians , and not once reprove them for their Heresie , nor their persecuting Athanasius ? is it likely he should cite the Council of Nice falsly , and feign so many ancient Decrees about the Primacy of the Pope , and the Nullity of Councils not celebrated by his Authority ? This Forger saith , Julius consented to the Nicene Council at the time of its celebration ; but the Romanists agree that it was held in Sylvesters time . He imperiously forbids the Eastern Bishops to judge any Bishops without him , and falsly tells them , They all had received their Consecration from Rome , yea , with the fabulous Pontisical he mistakes the Consuls Name , and puts Maximianus for Titianus . Yet by this Forgery the Editors would prove , that more than twenty Canons were made at Nice n n Lab. Marg. pag. 477. Bin. pag. 385. col. 1. , and ( after Baronius had discarded it ) Binius by frivolous Notes strives to justifie it as speaking big for the Supremacy o o Lab. p. 480. Bin. pag. 386. col. 1. . Secondly , Here is the Eastern Bishops Answer to Julius , wherein though they call the Pope Father , which was the usual Title of Bishops of great Sees ; yet they expresly deny his having any Authority over them , and affirm he ought to be subject to the Canons , as well as other Bishops : So that there is no reason for Binius his Brag , Lo , how they own the Supremacy p p Lab. Marg. pag. 482. Bin. pag. 386. col. 2. ! For indeed they do not own it at all , and yet the substance of this Epistle is genuine , being found in Secrates and Sozomen . The third Epistle from Julius to the Arians , is owned by Baronius and others to be a Forgery q q Lab. p. 483. Bin. pag. 387. col. 2. ; and Binius in his Notes upon it saith , It is false , corrupted , and stollen out of divers Authors r r Bin. p. 391. col. 1. , yet the same Binius infamously quotes it over and over for the Supremacy , the Nullity of Councils not called by the Pope , and the number of the Nicene Canons . The fourth Epistle of Julius comes not out of the Vatican , but was preserved in Athanasius his Apology , and is by all accounted genuine , being writ in an humble style , without any pretences to the Supremacy s s Lab. p. 494. Bin. pag. 391. col. 1. . And here the Nicene Canon ( about the re-hearing in a New Synod , a Cause not well judged before ) is rightly cited , without mention of any final Appeal to Rome t t Lab. p. 495. Bin. ut supr. col . 〈◊〉 . ; The power of all Bishops is supposed to be equal , and not any greater power to belong to him that is fixed in a greater City . Here Julius writes not his own Sense , but the Sense of the Bishops of Italy , who were assembled in a Synod at Rome , of which great City Julius being Bishop ought , by ancient custom , to publish the Decrees of such Councils as were held in or or near that City u u Lab. p. 513. Bin. pag. 395. col. 1. ; but Binius falsly infers from hence , That it was an honour due to his place , to publish the Decrees made in all Synods . And whereas , when any thing was under debate concerning Alexandria ( the second Patriarchate ) Julius saith , it was a Custom , to write to the Roman Bishop ( who was the first Patriarch , ) Binius stretcheth this and saith , It was both agreeable to the Canons and Custom , that no Bishop should be judged till the Popes definitive Sentence were heard w w Lab. p. 516. Bin. pag. 396. col. 1. . The last Epistle also is genuine , and writ in a modest style , owning that Athanasius was not judged by the Pope alone , but by a Synod of Bishops , whose Judgment he supposes above his own x x Ep. 4. ap. Lab. Bin. pag. 396. col. 2. , and by these two Epistles we may discern the Impostures of those other Epistles , which are Forged about this time in the Names of this and other Popes . The Decrees attributed to this Pope are not suitable to the Age , yet we may note , the third Decree forbids a man to Marry his deceased Brothers Wife , though his Brother had not known her : Which was shamefully broken by that Pope , who gave Licence to King Henry the 8th to marry his Brothers Wife , and this Decree justifies his Divorce y y Lab. p. 525. Bin. pag. 398. col. 1. .

After these Epistles follows a Roman Synod , wherein Julius with 117 Bishops confirm the Nicene Council ; but Labbé saith , it is a hotch-potch made up out of many Authors , and put into the form of a Council by Isidore z z Lab. Marg. pag. 527. Bin. pag. 400. col. 1. , and it is dated with the same mistaken Consuls , Felician and Maximian , with which Julius his entrance into the Pontifical , and all his Forged Epistles are dated ( for his genuine Epistles have no date ; ) yet Baronius a a Baron . An. 337. §. 67. and the Notes gravely dispute about the time of this Forged Council , and the Bishops which were said to be in it ; meerly to perswade the Reader , that the Nicene Council needed the Pope's Confirmation ; but since this Council is feigned , it can be no evidence : And therefore Binius gains nothing by alledging it in his Notes on the third Epistle , but only to shew us , that one falshood is the fittest prop for another .

§ . 20. Athanasius being restored to Alexandria , calls a An. Dom. 339. Synod there of all the Bishops of his Province , of which only the Synodical Epistle is now extant , written as the Title declares , To all the Catholic Bishops every where ; yet the Notes from Baronius b b Baron . An. 339. §. 2. & §. 11. say , It was writ particularly to Julius ; whereas the Body of the Epistle saith , The Arians have written to the Roman Bishop , and perhaps ( speaking to other Bishops ) they have writ to you also : So that this is a falshood devised for to make out the Supremacy , which is not countenanced by this Epistle , wherein we are told , that Religion depends not on the greatness of any City : Though the Notes say , That Bishops had Honours and Jurisdiction given them , suiting to the dignity of the Secular Praefects of their several Cities ; and thence Alexandria was reckoned the second Patriarchate , and Antioch the third c c Lab. p. 534. Bin pag. 401. col. 2. , it follows naturally , therefore Rome was the first Patriarchate : But this Inference they will not make : I shall only note that this Synod saith , The lawful use of the Cup of the Lord was to make the People Drink d d Lab. p. 547. Bin. pag. 404. col. 2. ; from whence we gather , that the Roman Church ( who denies the Cup to the People ) doth a very unlawful thing , and leaves off the lawful use of the holy Chalice .

The Council of Antioch , is by the Editors said to be An. Dom. 341. held under Julius e e Lab. p. 559. Bin. pag. 407. , yet it was called by Constantius on occasion of dedicating a new Church there ; and the Notes say , the Emperour not only called it , but being present there , caused such Decrees as he pleased to pass in it f f Lab. p. 588. Bin. p. 416. col . 1. ; yea , it is evident they valued Pope Julius so little , that they judged quite otherwise than he had done in the case of Athanasius , and therefore the Romanists rail at this Synod as a Conventicle of Arians , and in the last Roman Edition ( saith Richerius (g) ) have left out these Canons as not favouring the (x) Richer . hist. Conc. lib. 1. cap. 4. practice of the Roman Court. However Baronius saith , Among 97 Bishops , only 36 were Arians h h Baron . An. 341. §. 4 , & 5. ; and the Canons made here are excellent Rules for Discipline , having been received into the Code of the Universal Church before S. Chrysostom's time , confirm'd by the Council of Chalcedon , allowed by S. Hillary , and ( as Gratian saith ) received by the Catholics ; and the Learned Richerius hath fully answered all the Cavils of Binius and Baronius , by which they would invalidate them : So that we need only make some few Remarks on this Council , and so dismiss it . The 12th Canon Orders a Bishop who was deposed , to appeal to a Synod of Bishops , and allowed none to be restored , unless it were by a greater number of Bishops than had deposed him i i Lab. p. 595. Bin. pag. 417. col. 2. . But they exclaim against this as a device of the Arians , to take away that Apostolical and ancient Law and Custom of appealing to Rome , which ( they say ) was always observed till now : But hitherto they could never produce any such Law , nor prove any such Custom ; nor did S. Chrysostom ever appeal to Rome , but desired to be restored by a greater Synod , as this Canon requires k k Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 16. Vid. Bever . Concil. Tom. II. pag. 191. , and when his Enemies made that impossible , then indeed he objected that this Canon was made by Arians ; yet the Canon remained in force , and was generally received in that Age. Nor did the Sardican Council revoke it ( as Binius falsly saith l l Lab. p. 597. Bin. pag. 418. col . 2. Vid. Richer . ut supr. : For though they put a new Complement on the Pope , yet they did not take away the ancient method of appealing from a lesser Synod to a greater . The second Canon decrees , That such as come to Church to hear part of the Service , and do not receive the Sacrament , shall be Excommunicated . This the Notes say was to condemn the old Audian Heretics m m Lab. p. 596. Bin. pag 418. col. 1. ; but it evidently condemns the new Roman Heretics , who since they exalted their Wafer into a God , expect the People should only gaze at , and adore it most part of the year , and excuse them , though they often go away without receiving it . The 25th Canon forbids Bishops to commit the Treasures and Fruits of the Church to their Kinsinen , Brethren and Sons : Upon which Binius hath no Note , knowing it reflected on the Roman Churches Custom , where the Popes generally give all they can to their scandalous Nipotismo .

Next to this Council of Antioch , is placed a second Synod at Rome , under Pope Julius , in the Cause of Athanasius n n Lab. p. 604. Bin. pag. 419. col. 1. ; but Baronius places it before that of Antioch , An. 340. § . 1. And though the Cardinal confess , That Athanasius and his Enemies by consent had referred this matter to Julius his Arbitration , and that Athanasius came to Rome after this Reference was made ; yet he vainly remarks on this matter , in these words , Behold , Reader , the ancient usage for injured Bishops , to come even out of the East to the Roman Bishop for redress o o Baron . An. 340. §. 2. . But this is one of the first Instances , and was a meer Arbitration by consent ; and the ancient Usage since the Emperours became Christians was to appeal to them , as these Parties had done , before it was referred to the Pope . In this Roman Council it is pretended Athanasius delivered his Creed ; but the Acts of the Council being lost , and the Roman Archives being a repository neither safe nor creditable , we can have no Evidence from thence of the Truth and Antiquity of this excellent Composure . One thing however is remarkable , that Baronius and Binius charge the Greeks with taking away those words [ and the Son ] out of this Creed , and add , that they falsly pretended , this was a late addition of the Latins p p Lab. p. 605. Bin. pag. 420. col . 1. Baron . An. 340. §. 12. . Yet Baronius himself owns , that the Western Church added these words [ and the Son ] to the Nicene Creed , above an hundred years after q q Baron .. An. 447. ; so that they accuse the poor Greeks for keeping the Creed , as Athanasius made it , and as their own Church used to recite the Nicene Creed for many years after .

The year following Julius held a third Synod at An. Dom. 342. Rome , and in it read the Letter of the Eastern Bishops , wherein they wonder he should cite them to Rome , and so value himself upon the greatness of his City , as on that account to take upon him to judge them concerning things which they had determined in their own Synods . Nor durst Julius challenge any Authority over them , by reason of the Eminence of his City r r Baron An. 341. §. 56 , 57. : Only he pleads for Athanasius , who being Bishop of an Apostolical See , viz. Alexandria , ought not to have been condemned by them , till they had writ to all the Western Bishops , and especially to him as Bishop of the first See , that so all of them , ( viz. in Council ) might have determined the matter according to right s s Id. An. 342. §. 28 , 30. . But Baronius and Binius turn this into their being obliged to write to the Pope , and to receive what he had defined : And Binius infers , from the Popes writing this Synodical Letter from a Council held in his own City of Rome ( though the Synod expresly command him to write the Epistle ) That in respect to the Pope , and according to ancient Custom , it was his right to publish Whatever was agreed on in Councils t t Lab. p. 607. Bin. pag. 420. col. 2. . But such false Consequences from Premisses that will not bear them , only shew the Arguers partiality .

After this we have nothing remarkable , but a second Council at Antioch , held by the Arians , yet bearing this Title under Julius u u Lab. p. 608. Bin. 420. col. 2. , wherein the Arians made a New Creed , and sent four Bishops to give Constans the Emperour and all the Western Bishops an account of their Faith , and they met these Legates in a Council at Milain ; and though it doth not appear Julius was present , yet Baronius makes as if this Embassy from the East was sent to Julius , chiefly to desire Communion with him w w Baron . An. 344. §. 4. ; and Binius saith , They desired to be received into the Communion of the Roman Church x x Lib. p. 614. Bin. pag. 422. col. 1. . But the ancient Historians assure us , they desired not the Communion of the Roman only ; but of the whole Western Church , of which that was then esteemed no more than one eminent part .

§ . 21. The Sardican Synod , which saith some kind An. Dom. 347. things of Rome , is prodigiously magnified by the Editors , who place an History before it , and partial Notes after it , which are full of Falsities and designed Misrepresentations : Baronius also spends one whole year in setting it off to the best advantage ; but all their Frauds will be discovered , by considering , First , By whom it was called : Secondly , Who presided in it : Thirdly , Of what number of Bishops it consisted : And , Fourthly , What Authority the Canons of it have .

First , As to the Calling it , the Preface falsly states the occasion thereof : For it is plain Athanasius did not ( as that reports ) leave the whole judgment of his Cause to the Pope y y Lab. p. 624. Bin. pag. 423. ; nor did he ( as is there said ) Fly to Rome , as the Mother of all Churches , and the Rock of Faith : This is the Prefacers meer Invention . For Athanasius went to Rome as to the place agreed on by both sides for Arbitrating this matter ; and the other party so little valued the Pope's decision in his favour , that they would neither restore Athanasius , nor receive him into Communion upon it ; which made Julius complain to the Emperour Constans , who writ to his Brother Constantius about it ; but that Letter did not produce this Council ( as the Preface fully sets out ) but only procured a fruitless Embassy of three Eastern Bishops to Rome . It was the personal Addresses of Athanasius and Paulus , Bishop of Constantinople , to Constans ( when they found the Pope had no power to restore them ) which caused both the Emperours to give order for this Council to meet , as Sozomen , Socrates and Theodoret affirm z z Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 19. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 16. Theod. lib. 2. cap. 5. . And the Bishops in their Epistle do expresly say , They were called together by the most Religious Emperours a a Lab. p. 670. Bin. pag. 440. : But Baronius fraudulently leaves out this beginning of the Bishops Letter b b Baron . An. 347. §. 31. ; and the bold Writer of the Preface saith , This Council was called by the Popes Authority : And the Notes offer some Reasons to justifie this Falshood , yea , they cite the aforesaid Authors , who plainly declare it was called by both the Emperours , to prove , it was called by the Pope ; but they offer nothing material to make this out . 'T is true , Socrates saith , Some absent Bishops complained of the shortness of time , and blamed Julius for it c c Not. ad Concil. Sardic . Lab. pag. 685. Bin. pag. 445. col . 1. Vid. Richer . histor. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 3. ; but that doth not prove the Council was called by his Authority , only it supposes , he might advise the Emperour to make them meet speedily ; but still that is no sign of full power .

Secondly , As to the President of this Council , The Preface saith boldly , That Hosius , Archidamus , and Philoxenus presided in the Name of Julius . But first , it doth not appear that Hosius was the Popes Legate , only as an eminent Confessor he had a chief place in it ; whence Sozomen saith , Osius and Protogenes were chief of the Western Bishops here assembled d d Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 11. : That is , Osius as an ancient Confessor , and Protogenes as Bishop of Sardic , where the Council was held ; but as for Archidamus and Philoxenus , they are not in the Latin Copies of the Subscribers e e Lab. p. 658. Bin. pag. 436. col. 1. . And Athanasius only saith , Julius subscribed by these two Presbyters ; which shews , that Hosius was not the Popes Legate ( for he subscribed in his own name ) and that these Presbyters who were his Legates , were not Presidents of the Council .

Thirdly , They magnifie the number of Bishops also in this Synod , to make it look like a General Council ; where accounts differ they take the largest f f Baron . An. 347. §. 3 , 4. , and falsly cite Athanasius , as if he said it consisted of 376 Bishops , and so exceeded the first Council of Nice g g Lab. p. 685. Bin. pag. 446. col . 1. Baron . ut supr. §. 75. . Whereas Athanasius expresly reckons only 170 , who met at the City of Sardica h h Athanas . Epist. ad Solitar . p. 818. ; and when many of the Eastern Bishops withdrew , there were not one hundred left to pass the Decrees of this Council . 'T is true , Athanasius affirms , that 344 Bishops signed the Decree to restore him ; but many of these hands were got from Orthodox Bishops , who were not at the Council i i Idem Apol. 2. p. 767 , & 768. : So that this was never counted or called a General Council by any , but these partial Romanists ; for though the Emperour seem to have designed it General at first k k Socrat. lib. 2 cap. 16. , yet so few came to it , and they who came agreed so ill ( the Eastern Bishops generally forsaking it ) that it is called frequently , A Council of the Western Church , and so Epiphanius in Baronius describes it l l Baron . An. 347. §. 42. .

Fourthly , The little regard paid to its Canons afterwards shews it was no General Council . Richerius , a moderate and learned Romanist proves , That this Council was not extant in Greek in the time of Dionysius Exiguus , so that he and Pope Leo the 4th reckon it after all the Councils of Note : The Greeks received not its Canons into their Code , and Pope Nicholas Epistle shows , that the Eastern Church did not value its Authority , only the Popes esteemed it , because it seems to advance their power m m Richer . hist. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 3. . The African Church of old valued this Council as little ; for a Synod of Bishops there ( among whom were S. Augustine and Alypius ) were ignorant of any Sardican Council , but one held by the Arians . Baronius tries all his art to palliate this matter n n Baron . An. 347. §. 73. ; but after all his Conjectures it is plain , it was of no repute in Africa , because when two Popes Zosimus and Boniface afterwards cited the Decrees of Sardica as Canons of Nice , the Fraud was discovered , and when they were found not to be Nicene Canons , They would not receive them as Canons of Sardica , but flatly rejected them ; which shews , that these African Fathers did neither take this Sardican Synod for a General Council , nor for an Authentic Provincial Council : And therefore whatever is here said in favour of the Roman Church , is of no great weight . However the Champions of Rome magnifie the 4th Canon of this Council , where in case a Bishop judge that he is condemned unjustly , Hosius saith , If it please you , let us honour the memory of Peter the Apostle , and let those who have judged such a Bishop write to Julius Bishop of Rome , that so ( if need be ) the Judgment may be reviewed by the Bishops of the Province , and he may appoint some to hear the Cause , &c. Now here the Notes talk big , and claim a Supremacy and Appeals as due to the Pope by Divine Right o o Lab. p. 690 , & 691. Bin. pag. 448. col. 1. : But Richerius well observes , It is Nonsence , to ascribe that to a human Law and Privilege , or to the Decree of a Council , which was due before to the Pope by the Law of God p p Richer . hist. Con. lib. 1. cap. 3. . And we add , that Hosius neither cites any Divine Law , no nor any precedent Canon or Custom for this , but supposes it at the pleasure of this Synod to grant or deny Julius this privilege : And yet if it were an express Law , this being only a Western Synod , doth not bind the whole Catholic Church . Besides , it is not said , The Criminal shall appeal to Rome , and have his Cause tryed there ; but only , that the Pope ( if need were ) might order the Cause to be heard over again in the Province where it was first tryed ; and therefore Julius is only made a Judge of the necessity of a Re hearing , not of the Cause it self , which according to the 5th Canon of Nice was to be decided in the Province where it was first moved . And this rather condemns than countenances the modern Popish way of Trying foreign Causes at Rome by Appeal . To this I will add an ancient Scholion on this Canon found in some old Copies : From this Canon the Roman Church is much exalted with Pride ; and former evil Popes producing this as a Canon of Nice , were discovered by a Council at Carthage , as the Preface to that Council shews : But this Canon ( whatever they pretend ) gives no more power to Rome than other Canons , since it saith not absolutely , that any who is deposed any where shall have liberty to appeal to the Pope ; for at that rate the Sardican Synod would contradict the General Councils ; it speaks only of him who is deposed by the Neighbouring Bishops and those of his Province , and therefore doth not comprehend the Synod of the Primate Metropolitan , or Patriarch ; so that if they be present , and the Sentence be not barely by the Neighbouring Bishops , the Pope may not re-hear it , as this Canon orders : And it only concerns those in the West , Hosius and the Makers of these Canons being of those parts ; but in the East this Custom never was observed to this day y y Schol. ap: D. Bever . Conc. Tom. II. p. 199. . I shall make one remark or two more , and so dismiss this Council . The Preface cites Sozomen , to prove , That Hosius and others writ to Julius to confirm these Canons : But Sozomen only saith , They writ to him , to satisfie him that they had not contradicted the Nicene Canons z z Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 11. Lab. p. 625. Bin. pag. 424. ; and their Epistle ( which calls Julius their Fellow-Minister ) a a Lab. p. 670. Bin. pag. 440. col. 1. , desires him , to publish their Decrees , to those in Sicily , Sardinia and Italy , ( which of old were Suburbicarian Regions , ) but never speak of his confirming their Decrees b b Lab. p. 662. Bin. pag. 437. col. 2. . Yet in their Epistle to the Church of Alexandria , they pray them to give their Suffrage to the Councils determinations c c Lab. p. 670. Bin. pag. 439. col. 2. : Which , had it been writ to the Pope , would have made his Creatures sufficiently triumph . I observe also , that upon the mention of the Church of Thessalonica in the 20th Canon , the Notes pretend , that this Church had an especial regard then , because the Bishop of it was the Pope's Legate ; yet the first proof they give , is , that Pope Leo made Anastasius of Thessalonica his Legate an hundred years after ; and hence ( they say ) Bellarmine aptly proves the Popes Supremacy d d Lab. p. 692. Bin. pag. 448. col. 2. : But the Inferences are as ridiculous as they are false , and they get no advantage either to their Supremacy or Appeals by this Council .

§ . 22. The first Council of Carthage was appointed to An Dom. 348. suppress that dangerous Sect of the Donatists ; and though it bear the Title of under Julius , yet this pretended universal Monarch is not mentioned by the Council , or by any ancient Author , as having any hand in this great Work , which was managed by Gratus Bishop of Carthage , and by the Emperours Legates e e Lab. p. 713. Bin. pag. 546. col. 1. . In this Council were made fourteen excellent Canons , which possibly the Romanists may reject , because they never asked the Popes consent to hold this Council , nor desired his confirmation to their Canons ; and whereas the Editors tell us , Pope Leo the 4th ( who lived five hundred years after ) approved of this Council , we must observe that the Catholic Church had put them into their Code , and received them for Authentic long before , without staying for any Approbation from the Bishop of Rome .

Soon after this , there was a Council at Milan , of which there was no mention , but only in the Synodical Letter of the Bishops met at Ariminum , An. 359. f f Baron . An. 359. §. 16. Lab. p. 721. Bin. pag. 459. col. 1. ; who say , that the Presbyters of Rome were present at it ; they say not , Presidents of it : And there it seems Ursacius and Valens , two Arian Heretics , abjured their Heresie , and recanted their false Evidence against Athanasius . And either before or after this Synod ( it is not certain whether ) they went to Rome , and in writing delivered their Recantation to Pope Julius g g Hosti Epist. ap. Baron . An. 355. §. 661. , before whom they had falsly accused Athanasius , and who was the Arbitrator chosen to hear that Cause , and so not as Pope , but as a chosen Judge in that case , was fittest to receive these mens Confessions : Yet hence the Notes make this Inference , That since this matter was greater , than that a Synod at Milan ( though the Roman Presbyters were present ) could dispatch it , and lest the ancient Custom of the Catholic Church should be broken , viz. for eminent Heretics to abjure their Heresies only at Rome , and be received into Communion by the Pope ; they sent them to Julius , that having before him offered their Penitential Letter , they might make their Confession , the whole Roman Church looking on . All which is their own Invention ; for the Authors from whom alone they have the notice of this Council say nothing of this kind , and it is very certain that there was at this time , no custom at all for Heretics to abjure at Rome , more than at any other place , many Heretics being frequently reconciled at other Churches . There was also a peculiar reason why these two Heretics went thither , and it cannot be proved that this Council sent them ; so that these are Forgeries , devised to support their dear Supremacy , and so we leave them : Only noting , That the Editors are not so happy in their Memory as their Invention ; for the next Page shews us a Council at Jerusalem , wherein many Bishops ( who had described the Condemnation of Athanasius , and therefore no doubt were Arians ) repented and recanted , and so were restored to the Churches Communion , without the trouble of going to Rome on this Errant .

A Council at Colen follows next , which they say was in Julius his time , and under Julius ; yet the Notes say , they know not the time when it was held , only the Bishops there assembled deposed a Bishop for Heresie by their own Authority , without staying for the Pope's Advice , though they were then about to send a Messenger to Rome to pray for them ; so little was the Popes Consent thought needful in that Age ; and perhaps it is in order to conceal this seeming neglect , that the Notes h h Bin. Not p. 463. col. 2. ( after they have approved far more improbable Stories , which make for the honour of their Church ) reject the report of this Message to the Prince of the Apostles as fabulous , and we are not concerned to vindicate it .

The last Council which they style under Julius , was at Vasatis , or Bazas in France ; yet the Notes affirm , That Nectarius presided in it ; the time of it very uncertain i i Lab. p. 728. Bin. pag. 464. col . 1. & 2. , and the Phrases used in the Canons of it , shew it to be of much later date . Besides this Council saith , The Gloria-Patri was sung after the Psalms in all the Eastern Churches ; but Jo. Cassian , who came out of the East in the next Century , saith , He had never heard this Hymn sung after the Psalms in the Eastern Churches k k Bin. Not. in Epist. Damas . & Hieron . pag. 506. col. 1. : Wherefore it is probable this Council was celebrated after Cassian's time , when the Greek Churches had learned this Custom ; and yet these Editors place it a whole Century too soon , because they would have us think that custom here mentioned , of remembring the Pope in their daily Prayers , was as ancient as the wrong date here assigned . In Labbe's Edition here is added an account l l Lab. à p. 729. ad pag. 739. of three Councils against Photinus , on which we need make no Remarks .

§ . 23. Pope Liberius succeeded Julius , whose Life with An. Dom. 352. the Notes upon it are very diverting , if we observe the Shifts and Artifices used by the Roman Parasites to excuse him from Heresie . The Pontifical saith , He was banished three years by Constantius , for not consenting to the Asians , in whose place Foelix was Ordained , and he in a Council condemned Ursacius and Valens , two Arian Bishops , who in Revenge petitioned Constantius to revoke Liberius ; and he being thus restored , consented to the Arians and the Emperour , so far as to persecute and Martyr the Catholics , and his Rival Foelix being a Catholic , was deposed . But this Fable is not fine enough for the Palates of Baronius and Binius , who are to dress a Story to make the Reader believe , that neither Liberius nor Foelix erred in Faith while they were Popes . To confute which let it be considered , that Binius confesseth , Liberius consented to the depriving of Athanasius , admitted Arians to his Communicn , and subscribed an Arian Confession of Faith ; as Athanasius , Hilary and Hierom , witness m m Not. ad 7 Ep. laber . Lab. pag. 751. Bin. pag. 470. col. 1. ; and there are Arguments unanswerable to prove , he was an Arian while he was Pope n n Vid. Spalat. de rep. Ecel . l. 7. cap. 5. ; yea , Binius in his own Notes twice confesseth , That he unhappily fell o o Lab. p. 741. Bin. p. 465. E. ; and that , he basely fell p p Lab. p. 743. Bin. pag. 466. col. 2. . Yet to mince the matter , he adds , That by his Fall he cast a vile Blot on his Life and Manners ; and the Notes on the Sirmian Council say , By offending against the Confession of Faith , and the Law of Justice , he cast a most base Blot on his Life and Manners q q Lab. p. 783. Bin. pag. 479. col. 2. . What can be more ridiculous ! He erred in Faith , and subscribed the Arian Confession , therefore the blot was upon his Faith ; this did not concern his Life and Manners . That Absurd Phrase is a meer blind to keep the Reader from discovering a Pope turning Heretic : To which end they impudently say , It is a false Calumny of the Heretics to say , Liberius was infected with the Arian Heresie r r Lab. p. 741. Bin. pag. 465. col. 2. . But I ask , Whether Athanasius , S. Hilary and S. Hieroin ( who affirm this ) were Heretics ? Or was Platina an Heretic , who saith , Liberius did in all things agree with the Heretics : To which the same Forgers have added , [ As some would have it ; ] but those are not Phetinus words , who saith soon after , He was of the same Opinion with the Arians s s Platin. in vit. Liber . p. 50. Eusebius Presbyter urbis Romoe copit declarare Liberium Haereticum . Portitor . Sarish Aug. 14. . And surely the Catholic People of Rome in his time took him for an Arian , and as such would have no communion with him , and therefore we conclude he was an Arian . As for Foelix , who was put into his place , Baronius and Binius would excuse him by a false Latin Version of Socrates , saying , He was addicted to the Arian Sect ; but the Original Greek expresly declares , He was in Opinion an Arian t t 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 . Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 29. . And it is certain , He was chosen by the Arians , and communicated with them , Ordaining Arians to be Priests ; and therefore the Catholic People at Rome avoided his communion , and S. Hierom saith , He was an Arian . As for the Story of his condemning Ursacius and Valens , two of that Sect , there is no better Authority for it , than the fabulous Pontifical . So that after all the devices of Bellarmin , Bargnius and Binius u u Lab. p. 742. Bin. pag. 466. col. 1 , & 2. , to save their Churches Infallibility , we have two Popes at once falling so notoriously into the Arian Heresie , that the Lay-people disowned their Communion : This is more than suspicion of Heresie in S. Peter's Chair , and proves , that their infallible Guides for some years were Arian Heretics .

For this Liberius divers Epistles are published , with a Preface before them , which saith , Two of them were feigned by the Arians w w Lab. p. 744. Bin. pag. 467. col. 1. ; yet these two are found in the Fragments of S. Hilary , among which it is not probable there should be any Fiction of the Arians . So that it is very likely these two Epistles are genuine , but rejected by these Sycophants of Rome , because they tell an ungrateful Truth , viz. That Liberius did condemn Athanasius soon after he was made Pope . And if we consider how inconstant he was , it is very probable that he might condemn Athanasius twice , first in the beginning of his Papacy , as is said in these two Epistles , of which he repented , and then writ that Tenth Epistle , to own he was in Communion with Athanasius , and to tell him , If he approved of his form of Faith , it would tend much to the setling of his Judgment x x Lab. p. 755. Ban. pag. 471. col. 1. , which is an odd Complement from an Infallible Head . Secondly He condemned Athanasius after his Banishment , of which more shall be said hereafter : But as to the particular Epistles , we shall note , That in the first ( which they say is genuine ) Liberius with other Bishops petition Constantius , to order a Council to be held at Aquileia y y Lab. p. 744. Bin. pag. 467. col . 1. Vid item Ep. 2. ; by which we see the Pope had not then assumed the power of calling Councils . When he writ the 7th Epistle ( which they grant also to be genuine ) no doubt he was an Arian : For he calls the Arian Bishops , His most Beloved Brethren , and declares his Consent to their just condemning of Athanasius , together with his being in Communion with them , and his receiving their Sirmian Creed , as the Catholic Faith z z Lab. p. 751. Bin. pag. 469. col. 2. . So in the XIth Epistle ( which is certainly genuine and recorded by Socrates a a Socrat. hist. lib. 4. cap. 11. , ) the Notes confess , he was so easie , as to receive the Semi-Arians to Communion , and to commend their Faith , as the same which was decreed at Nice : But it is gross Flattery , to call this only , Being too easie ; it was in plain terms , Being deceived , and erring in Matters of Faith ; which spoils their Infallibility b b Lab. p. 757. Bin. pag. 472. col. 1. , as it also doth their Universal Supremacy ; for Liberius in the same Epistle to call himself , Bishop of Italy ( referring only to the Suburbicarian Regions ) and saying , He was the meanest of Bishops , and rejoyced that those in the East did ( not submit to him , but ) agree with him in Matters of Faith . Wherefore the XIIth or ( as Labbé calls it ) the XIVth Epistle , which is writ to all Bishops , is manifestly forged c c Ep. 14. Lab. pag. 760. Ep. 12. Bin. pag. 472. col. 2. : And so are the two next , from Liberius to Athanasius , and from Athanasius to Liberius , as both Labbé and Binius confess d d Lab. p. 763. Bin. in Notis pag. 474. col. 2. ; yet in one of these the Pope brags of his Authority over the Universal Church : But the Forger was so bad at Chronology , that while he strives to make this Pope look like an Orthodox Friend of Athanasius , he absurdly brings him in , even under Julian or Valens ( in one of whose Reigns this Epistle was written , ) threatning Offenders with the Emperours Indignation , with Deprivation , yea , with Proscription , Banishment and Stripes e e Lab. p. 767. Bin. pag. 474. col. 2. . I need not mention those Decrees which are attributed to Liberius , whose Style betrays them , and shews they belong to the later Ages , and are placed here by the Collectors , only to make them seem more ancient than really they are .

In Liberius's first year it is said , There was a Council called at Rome by this Pope , to clear Athanasius f f Lab. p. 769. Bin. pag. 475. col. 1. ; yet being sensible that their Authority would signifie very little , they all agreed to petition the Emperour for a Council to Meet at Aquileia , to confirm what they had done at Rome . Anno 355. there was a Council at Milan , the Editors call it , A General Council , because it was with Constantius permission , called by Liberius , whose Legates also were present at it g g Lab. p. 772. Bin. pag. 476. col. 1. . But herein they grosly falsifie , for Sozomen declares , That Constantius summoned all the Bishops to Milan h h Sozom. lib. 4 cap. 8. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 29. ; and Baronius saith , The Emperour called them together i i Baron . An. 355. §. 2. . Therefore if this was a General Council , it was called by the Emperour , and not by the Pope : In the Notes on this Synod they say , Constantius being yet a Catechumen , ought not to be present at a lawful Council . But this is Baronius his device , to colour over the Forgery of Constantine's Baptism before the Council of Nice , there being no Canon forbidding a Catechumen to be present in a Council , or in a Church , except only while the Sacrament was celebrating ; so that if Constantius had been bound by an Ecclesiastical Canon , there being no Canon to hinder his presence in this Council , Baronius assigns a wrong cause of his absence . Again , the Notes do very falsly suppose , That Foelix , though chosen by the Arians , was a Catholic Pope k k Lab. p. 773. : For he was Ordained by three Arian Bishops at Milan , as Atbanasius declares l l Athanas . Epist. ad Solitar . ; and Socrates , as we noted before , faith , He was in Opinion an Arian . Nor is it probable , when the Arians had got Liberius banished , for not complying with them , they should chuse a Catholic and an Enemy into so eminent a See ; or that the Catholic People of Rome should avoid the communion of Foelix , if he were not an Arian . 'T is true , Sozomen speaks of some who said , He kept to the Nicene Faith , and was unblameable in Religion ; yet he adds , — he was accused for ordaining Arians , and communicating with them m m Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 10. . But this bare Report , raised perhaps by the Arians ( who still pretended to be Catholics , and hold the Nicene Faith ) cannot outweigh such strong Reason and Matters of Fact , as are here alledged to prove Foelix , not only a Schismatical , but also an Heretical Pope .

The Dialogue between Constantius and Pope Liberius at Milan , ( here published ) shews , That at this time he refused either to condemn Athanasius , or communicate with the Arians , and was banished into Thrace for this refusal : But the Reader may justly wonder he should never mention his Supremacy and Universal Authority , when Constantius asked him , If he were so considerable a part of the World , that he would alone stand for Athanasius ; and when he advised him , to embrace the Communion of the Churches n n Lab. p. 775. Bin. pag. 478. col. 1. , how properly might he have here told him , he was Head of all Churches , and those who did not communicate with him were no Churches ? Again , Why doth this Pope offer to go to Alexandria , and hear Achanasius's cause there , which had been twice judged at Rome ? Surely he knew nothing of these last and highest Appeals in all Causes : The Popes of after-Ages claimed this as a right of their See ; yet it must be granted , that Liberius was ignorant of that priviledge .

§ . 24. The Council at Sirmium was called by Constantius , An. Dom. 357. and consisted of Arian Bishops , who though they condemned Photinus his gross Heresie , yet would not put the word Consubstantial into any of the three Creeds , which they here composed , however the Editors call it , A General Council partly rejected : Perhaps , because Pope Liberius approved it , who here openly Fell into the Arian Heresie ; and that , not by constraint ( as the Notes pretend o o Lab. p. 783. Bin. pag. 479. col. 2. ) : For out of his Banishment he writ to the Eastern Bishops , assuring them he had condemned Athanasius , and would communicate with them in their form of Faith , and therefore he desired them to intercede for his release and restitution to his Bishopric . The ambition of regaining which great place was the cause of his Fall p p Baron . An. 357. §. 33 , 34 , & 35. , as Baronius confesseth ; and though that Author had produced divers Ancient Writers expresly testifying , That he subscribed Heresie q q Baron . ibid. §. 32. . Yet a little after he again denies , that Liberius was an Heretic ; pretending , that he only sign'd the first Confession of Sirmium , which was not downright Heresie r r Id. ibid. §. 37. . Though elsewhere he saith , Athanasius rejected all these Arian Forms ( which wanted , Consubstantial ) as Heretical s s Baron . An. 359. §. 10. , and declares that the Catholic People of Rome esteemed Liberius to be an Heretic , and would not have Communion with him , for which he cruelly persecuted them . Nay , he brags of it as a singular Providence , that Foelix ( who was a Schismatical Pope in his Exile ) upon Liberius's Fall , suddenly became a Catholic and a lawful Pope , which still supposes Liberius was an Heretic , as doth also Baronius his Fiction of Liberius's speedy Repentance , and Foelix his dying soon after his Adversaries return to Rome : For the Writers of that Age say , Foelix lived eight years after t t Marcelin . ad Faust . & Hieron . Chronic. ; and for Liberius his Repentance , though many Authors expresly speak of his falling into Heresie , none are very clear in his returning , or however , none suppose it to be so long before his Death , as Baronius doth ; whose design in this History is not to serve Truth , but to clear S. Peter's Chair from the imputation of Heresie , and therefore he makes this out chiefly by Conjectures u u Baron . An. 357. §. 59. — ad — §. 63. . The testimonies of Damasus and Siricius being parties and partial for the honour of their own See , are no good Evidence if they did speak of his early Repentance ; but Damasus only faith , The Bishop of Rome did not consent to the Faith of Ariminum : Baronius adds , This was Liberius . I reply , That Damasus was of Foelix his party , before his own advancement to be Pope , and so it is more probable that he meant Foelix . Again , the Catholic Bishop's Letter from Ariminum only says , The Arian Decrees created discord at Rome w w Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 17. ; that is , there were then two Factions there , one of which ( and probably that of Liberius ) did agree to these Decrees , the other rejected them . Baronius adds to the Bishops Letter , — these Decrees created Factions , because the Pope of Rome opposed them : But this will not clear Liberius , since both Factions were headed by a Pope . Baronius goes on to tell us , that Sozomen affirms , Liberius was turned out of his Church , for not consenting to the Faith at Ariminum x x Id. cap. 18. . I Answer , Sozomen must be mistaken in this , unless we feign a double Exile of Liberius , which no good Author mentions , and which Baronius will not allow . As for the Epistle of Liberius to Athanasius , it was writ no doubt before he had condemned him , or else he ought to have confessed his Fault , as well as his Faith to that great Man . I grant Socrates doth say , That Liberius required the Semi-Arians and Macedonians , to consent to the Nicene Faith in the time of Valens y y Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 11. ; but this was Nine years after his return , and not long before his Death , yet then Liberius was imposed on in Matters of Faith by these Bishops , whom he calls Orthodox ; for they were still Heretical , and did not heartily agree to the Nicene Faith , so that his Infallibility was deceived : And though S. Ambrose call Liberius [ Of happy Memory ] where he cites a Sermon of his ; that is Vid. Baron . Andal . An 362. pag. 58. & An. 371. p. 246. a Phrase which the Primitive Charity used of some Men not altogether Orthodox ● : But it is a great prejudice to Liberius his Repentance , that though Athanasius speak of him as having been once his Friend , and report his Apostacy , yet he never mentions his turning Catholic again . Wherefore we conclude , that all these Fictions , and falsifying of Evidence and slight Conjectures in Baronius and the Notes , are intended only to blind the Reader , and hinder his finding out an Heretical Pope , whose Fall is clear , his continuance in his Heresie very probable , and his Repentance ( if it be true ) came too late to save his Churches Infallibility , though it might be soon enough to save his own Soul .

The Editors style the Council at Ariminum , A General An. Dom. 359. Council , and yet dare not say , as usually , under Liberius , who had no hand in it , for it was called by the Emperour Constantius , as all Writers agree z z Sulp●● . Sever. histor. lib. 2. ; so that it seems there may be A General approved Council ( as they style this a a Lab. p. 792. Bin. pag. 482. col. 1. , which the Pope doth not call . Moreover , the Emperour in his first Epistle orders the Bishops to send him their Decrees , that he might confirm them b b Lab. p. 794. Bin. pag. 482. col. 2. 〈…〉 ; and though Baronius saith this was done like an Heretical Emperour , yet the Orthodox Bishops observed his Order , and call it , Obeying the Command of God , and his Pious Edict c c Baron . An. 359. §. 6. & §. 15. : Wherefore this General Council was both called and confirmed by the Emperour . Again , Constanti●s in his Epistle declares , It was unreasonable to determine any thing in a Western Council against the Fastern Bishops . Whence it appears , he knew nothing of the Western Patriarchs claiming an Universal Supremacy over all the Churches , both of the East and West ; and for this Reason Baronius leaves this genuine Epistie ( recorded in S. Hilary's Fragments ) out of his Annals : We have also noted before , that though the Orthodox Bishops in this Council ( who must know the matter ) say , That Constantine was Baptized after the Council at Nice , and soon after his Baptism translated to his deserved Rest ; as the Ancient Historians read that Passage , and the Sense of the place shews they could mean it of none but Constantine d d Theod. lib. 2. cap. 19. Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 17. collat. cum Baron . An. 350. §. 7. ; yet Baronius corrupts the Text , and reads Constans instead of Constantine , only to support the Fable of Constantine's being Baptized by Sylvester at Rome , and the Editors follow him in that gross Corruption : For they examine nothing which serves the Interest of Rome . As for the Arian Synods this year at Seleucia and Constantinople , I need make no Remarks on them , because the Pope is not named in them , and so there is no occasion for them to feign any thing . Only one Forgery of Baronius must not be passed over : That when Cyril of Hierusalem was deposed by an Arian Synod , he is said to have appealed to greater Judges , and yet he never named the Pope ; the reason of which ( Baronius saith ) was , because the True Pope Liberius was then in Banishment e e Baron . An. 359 : §. 65. ; but hath he not often asserted Foelix was a Catholic , and if Cyril had thought fit , might he not have appealed to him ? But it is plain by Socrates , that Cyril meant to appeal to the Emperour and his Delegates , as all injured Bishops in that Age had used to do .

§ . 25. Upon the restitution of Athanasius from his third Exile after the death of George the Arian Bishop , An. Dom. 362. he called a Council of Bishops at Alexandria , for deciding some differences among the Catholics about the manner of explaining the Trinity , and to agree on what terms Recanting Arians were to be received into the Church . And though neither Athanasius , nor any ancient Historian take any notice of the Pope in this eminent Action ; yet the Editors out of Baronius say , It was called by the Advice and Authority of Liberius f f Lab. p. 809. Bin. pag. 487. col . 1. Baron . An. 362. pag. 73. ; and to make out the notorious Fiction of this Popes calling this Orthodox Council ( even while he was an Arian ) the Notes affirm , Eusebius Bishop of Vercelles and Lucifer Calaritanus , as the Popes Legates were present at it ; which they take out of Baronius , who had before told us , That Lucifer Calaritanus was at that time at Antioch , and sent two Deacons to Alexandria to subscribe for him ; yea , this Synod writes their Synodical Letter to Eusebius , Lucifer and other Bishops , which plainly shews they were absent ; though it seems by Ruffinus , that Eusebius came afterwards , and subscribed to what had been agreed in the Council , and was by the Authority of this Council ( not of the Pope ) sent into the East to procure peace among those Churches : Nor have they any one Author to prove either he or Lucifer were the Pope's Legates , nor any reason , but because they were employed in great Actions , though in that Age ( 't is plain ) the Popes were little concerned in any eminent business . Moreover , they bring in a Fragment of an Epistle , writ ( according to the Ancient Custom ) by Liberius at his Entrance into the See of Rome , to shew his Faith to Athanasius , as if it were written now , meerly to impose on the Reader a false Notion of his being at this time Orthodox , and concerned in this Synod . They also cite another Epistle of Athanasius , to certifie Liberius what was done here ; but that Epistle is no where extant in Athanasius's Works , but is cited out of the Acts of the second Nicene Council , where there are more Forgeries than genuine Tracts quoted ; and besides , the Epistle is directed not to the Pope , but to one Ruffinianus , and only mentions the Roman Churches approving what was done here ; but the Epistle being suspicious , it is no good Evidence , and we conclude with Nazianzen , That Athanasius in this Synod gave Laws to the whole World g g Baron . An. 362. Tom. IV. p. 66. : And Pope Liberius had no hand in it .

About this time there were divers Councils called in France by S. Hilary Bishop of Poictiers , and the Catholic Faith was setled in them , one of which was held at Paris , and the Synodical Epistle is extant h h Lab. p. 821. Bin. pag. 490. col. 1. ; yet the Pope is never named in it . Nor yet in that Orthodox Synod at Alexandria , wherein Athanasius and his Suffragan Bishops presented a Confession of their Faith to Jovian , then newly made Emperour i i Lab. p. 823 , Bin. pag. 490. col. 2. , which shews , that Liberius either was an Heretic at this time , or else that he was very inconsiderable : So that it is a strange Arrogance in the Editors to say , that the Second Council at Antioch was under Liberius k k Lab. p. 826. Bin. p. 491. col. 1. , when the very Notes say , it was called together by Meletius , and observe , that many Arian Bishops did there recant their Heresie ; a thing , which a little before they pretended could be done no where but at Rome , in the Popes Presence .

Upon Valentinian's advancement to the Empire , the An. Dom. 365. Eastern Bishops petition him to call a Council , and he ( being then very busie ) told them , they might call it where they pleased : Which the Editors pretend was a declining to meddle in Church Affairs , being a Lay-man : But the Bishops Petition , and his giving them liberty , shews , that the right of calling Councils was in him , and so was also the confirming them , as appears from the Bishops sending the Acts of this Council ( at Lampsacus ) to the Emperour Valens to be confirmed l l Sezen . lib. 6. cap. 7. . The same Bishops also sent their Legates with Letters to the Western Bishops , and particularly to Liberius Bishop of Rome , hoping Valentinian the other Emperour had been in that City ; but he being absent , these Legates , perswaded Liberius they were Orthodox ; upon which he writ back Letters in his own Name , and in the Name of the other Western Bishops , to own them for good Catholics m m Socrat. hist. lib. 4 cap. 11. . Whence we may note , First , That the Eastern Bishop's Letter styles the Pope no more but Collegue and Brother . Secondly , That Liberius calls himself only Bishop of Italy , Liberius Ep. Italiae , & alii Occident is Episcopi : But Baronius alters the Pointing , Liberius Episcopus , Italiae & alii , &c. by that Trick , hoping to conceal this mean Title n n Ep. 11. Liberti ap. Bin. p. 472. Baron . An. 365. pag. 153. . Thirdly , The Pope here saith , He was the least of all Bishops , and was glad their Opinion agreed with his and the rest of the Western Bishops . Fourthly , Yet after all these very Eastern Bishops were of the Macedonian party , as the Title of their Letter in Socrates shews o o Socrat. ut supr. . Baronius indeed leaves these words out of the Title , but he confesses they were Semi-Arians : So that the Popes Infallibility , ( as being imposed on by Heretics in Mattets of Faith ) loses more by this Embassy , than his Supremacy gains by it , because the Legates were not sent to him alone , but to all the Western Bishops . Fifthly , The Notes on this Council p p Lab. p. 830. Bin. pag. 492. col. 1. feign , that besides these Communicatory Letters , Liberius writ other Letters , Commanding that ejected Bishops should be restored by the Apostolic Authority : But this is one of Baronius his Forgeries q q Baron . An. 365. pag. 154. . For S. Basil , and also Sozomen , cited by the Notes on the Council of Tyana r r Lab. p. 836. Bin pag 494. col. 1. , mention not the Legates shewing any other Letters at their return into the East , but only the Communicatory Letters ; and since it appeared by them , that the Western Bishops judged them Orthodox , their Eastern Brethren did restore them : And so also these Legates got the approbation of a Council in Sicily , as they were returning home ; for the Sicilian Bishops by mistake took them for Orthodox , when they saw the rest of the Western Bishops owned their Communion with them , and so approved their Confession of Faith ; and therefore it is very impertinent in the Notes to say on this occasion s s Concil. Siciliae , Lab. & Bin. ut supr. , That the Authority of the Pope was so great , that if he admitted even suspected Heretics to his Communion , none presumed to reject them . Whereas we know that afterwards , the People of Rome rejected even the Pope himself , for communicating with Semi-Arians .

The next thing which occurs is a Synod in Illyricum , Convened at the request of Eusebius Bishop of Sebastia , one of the Eastern Legates , who ( while his Fellows stayed at Rome ) went into that Country , and prevailed with the Bishops assembled there , to send Elpidius a Brother and Collegue of their own , with a Synodical Letter to the Eastern Bishops ; declaring , they would communicate with them , if their Faith was the same with that of Nice . Now though this Synod do not mention the Pope , yet Baronius and the Notes feign , That Elpidius was the Pope's Legate t t Lab. p. 832. Bin. pag. 493. Baron . An. 365. pag. 155. ; whereas the Synod , the Emperours Letter , and Theodoret ( from whom this Story is taken ) mention Elpidius only as a Messenger sent from this Council .

When these Eastern Legates returned home , there was a Council called at Tyana in Cappadocia u u Lab. p. 836. Bin. pag. 494. col. 1. , wherein they shewed the Communicatory Letters which they had fraudulently obtained in the West ; upon which Letters , those who had been ejected as Heretics , and particularly Eustathius of Sebastia , were restored to their Sees ; but neither Sozomen nor S. Basil say , this was done by any special Letters of Liberius , or by any Command of his ; yet if it had been so , this would spoil this Popes Infallibility , it being certain these restored Bishops were Heretics , who Liberius , poor Man ! thought to be good Catholics , and he hath the more to answer for , if this were done not by his Consent alone , but by his Command also .

After this we have the Life of Pope Foelix , about whom they differ so much , that nothing is plain in his Story , but this , that little of him is certainly known . The Pontifical in Liberius Life saith , He died in peace ; but here it saith , He was Martyred by Constantius , for declaring him an Heretic , and one who was rebaptized by Eusebius of Nicomedia : Yet Constantius was not Baptized at all till after Foelix his pretended Martyrdom , and he was Baptized then ( not by Eusebius , but ) by one Euzoius . Again , The Pontifical allows him but to sit One year and three months , and the Notes say , This is right , computing from Liberius Fall to his Return ; which ( as Sozomen affirms ) was but little before Foelix his Death w w Lab. p. 843. Bin. pag. 490. col. 2. : Whereas these very Notes tell us , a little before , that Liberius was above two years in Exile x x Lab. p. 742. Bin. pag. 466. col. 1. ; therefore if he lived but a small time after Liberius's return , he must sit above two years : But Marcellinus ( who writ in that Age ) tells us , Foelix lived eight years after Liberius was restored ; Which Baronius and the Notes would conceal , to hide the Scandal that their Church must get by a long Schism , and by an Heretical Pope , of whom they will needs make a Martyr , only upon the Credit of the Pontifical , and a modern fallacious Inscription , pretended to be found at Rome many Ages after , belonging to some Foelix , but which of them they know not .

The Epistles ascribed to this Pope contain so many and so gross Untruths , that Labbé notes , They are discarded by Baronius and other Learned Men , as Isidores Wares y y Lab. Marg. p. 844 , & 849. ; adding , That the third Epistle was stollen from Pope Martin the First , in his Lateran Council z z Id. Marg. pag. 856. . And though Binius very often cite the two first Epistles , yet in his Notes on them he owns , they are of no credit a a Lab. p. 849. Bin. pag. 499. col. 1. : For they Forge many Canons as made at Nice , and tell that idle story of the true Copies of the Nicene Canons being burnt by the Arians b b Richer . hift . Con. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 9. . But it is certain the Forger of these Epistles was a Creature of the Popes , because the Inscriptions of them are stuffed with false and flattering Titles , and the Body of them nauseously and ridiculously press the Supremacy , and the Universal Empire of the Roman Church .

§ . 26. The entrance of Damasus into the Papacy An. Dom. 367. was not without Blood , for the People were divided , and some standing for Damasus , others for Ursicinus , Damasus his Party being stronger , slew many of their Adversaries in a Church , as all the Writers of that Age testifie c c Am. Marceli . lib. 17. Ruffin . lib. 2. cap. 10. Hieron . in Chron. ; and though Ammianus be a Pagan Historian , yet it is very probable which he writes , that it was not Zeal , but the ambition of living high and great , that made Men contend so fiercely for the Papacy ; for S. Basil himself about this time taxes the Roman Church with Pride ; and S. Hierom , the great Friend of that Church , often reflects upon the pomp and luxury of the Clergy there : So that the Notes on Damasus his Life do but glory in their Churches shame , when from these Authors they boast of the Magnificence and Majesty of the Papacy d d Lab. p. 860. Bin. pag. 503. col. 2. . The Fabulous Pontifical was for many Ages pretended to be writ by this Damasus , and he who forged the Decretal Epistles , invented one to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage e e Lab. p. 862. Bin. pag. 503. col. 2. ; wherein Damasus is feigned to send him ( at his Request ) all the Epistles writ by the Popes from S. Peter , to his time , and this of old was the Preface to the Decretal Epistles ; but the Forgery is so gross that Binius rejects it , and if his affection for the Papacy had not biassed him , he would also have rejected all the Epistles , which are as errant Forgeries as this Preface . The first and second Epistles written in Damasus his Name to Paulinus , and the Eastern Bishops , are suspicious The third Epistle of Damasus to Hierom is evidently Forged by some illiterate Monk ; but S. Hierom's Answer seems to be genuine ; yet the Notes reject it f f Lab. p. 868. Bin. pag. 506. col. 1. for no other reason , but because it truly supposes the Pope and his Clergy were so ignorant , as to need S. Hierom's help to make them understand the Psalms , and affirms , that Rome obeyed his directions in singing the Psalms , and adding the Gloria Patri to them ; whereas whoever considers the Learning and Authority of S. Hierom in that Age , will not think it at all improbable , that he should teach the Roman Bishop . And Binius is forced to cite this Epistle wrong in his Notes , to get a seeming Argument against it ; for the Epistle doth not advise them to sing the Gloria Patri after the manner of the East ( as he quotes it ; ) but to sing it , to shew their Consent to the Nicene Faith . The fourth Epistle of Damasus , to Stephen Archbishop of the Council of Mauritania , with Stephen's Epistle to him , are owned by Labbé to be both spurious g g Lab. Marg. pag. 869. Bin. pag. 506 , &c. . But since they magnifie the Popes Supremacy , Binius justifies them both ; for whose confutation let it be noted , 1. That it is absurd to style a Man Archbishop of a Council : Secondly , That in this Epistle is quoted a forged Epistle of Foelix , owned by Binius himself to be spurious h h Bin. p. 499. : Thirdly , That place of Math. XVI . is falsly quoted here , and thus read , Thou art Peter , and upon thy foundation will I set the Pillars ( that is , the Bishops ) of the Church : Fourthly , The later of them is dated with Flavius and Stillico , who were not Consuls till Damasus had been in his Grave full twenty year , as Labbé confesses ; wherefore we justly discard these gross Forgeries devised of old , and defended now only to support the Popes usurped Power . The fifth Epistle says , The Institution of the Chorepiscopi was very wicked and extreme evil ; yet presently after it owns , they were appointed in imitation of the LXX Disciples , and were at first necessary for the Primitive Church ; it is also dated with Libius and The disius , who were never Consuls in Damasus's time , and finally Labbé owns , that much of it is stollen out of the Epistles of later Popes i i Lab. p. 876. Bin. pag. 509. col. 1. ; yet Binius will not reject it , because it hath some kind touches for the Supremacy . The sixth Epistle to the Bishops of Illyricum passes Muster also with him , though it be dated with Siricius and Ardaburus , who were Consuls till 30 years after Damasus was dead k k Lab. p. 882. Bin. pag. 511. col. 1. . The 7th Epistle is dated with the same Consuls ; yet Binius allows of it , because in it the Pope pretends to give Laws not only to Italy , but to all the World , though Labbé confess the Cheat , and owns it was stollen by Isidore out of Leo's 47th Epistle l l Lab. p. 883. Bin. pag. 511. col. 2. . So unfortunate is their Supremacy , that whatever seems to give any countenance to it , always proves to be Forged . The Decrees attributed to this Pope seem to have been the invention of later Ages ; for it is not probable Damasus would have Fathered a Lye upon the Nicene Council , in saying , It was decreed there , that Lay-men should not meddle with Oblations m m Lab. p. 885. Bin. pag. 512. col. 1. ; or that he would say , Such as broke the Canons , were guilty of the Sin against the Holy Ghost : Nor doth his Decree about the Pall agree to this Age. So that Damasus's Name hath for better credit been clapt to these Decrees by the modern Compilers , who are the Guides to our Editors .

About this time the Arians having the Emperour An. Dom. 369. Valens on their side , began to grow bold ; but Athanasius condemned them in Egypt by divers Synods , and upon his Admonition Damasus held two Synods at Rome , in the first of which , Ursacius and Valens , two Arian Bishops were condemned , and in the later , Auxentius the Arian Bishop of Milan was deposed ; not by the Popes single Authority , as the Notes and Baronius vainly pretend n n Bin. p. 512 , & 513. Baron . An. 369. pag. 190 , &c. , but by the common Suffrage of Ninety Bishops assembled with him , as the words of Atbanasius , and the very Councils Letter plainly shew . And though Baronius here talks of the Popes sole Priviledge in deposing Bishops , there are innumerable Instances of Bishops deposed without the Popes leave or knowledge ; and Auxentius valued and believed Damasus his Authority so little , that notwithstanding this Sentence of the Pope in Council , he kept his Bishopric till his Death .

Apollinar is having disseminated his Heresie at Antioch , Au. Dom. 373. complaint was made to Damasus of one Vitalis who held those Errors ; but the Pope ( who had not the gift of discerning the Spirits ) was imposed on by his subscribing a plausible Confession of Faith , so that he writ on his behalf to Paulinus Bishop of Anti●ch o o Baren . An. 373. pag 301. . 'T is true , at the request of S. Basil , Damasus did this year joyn with Peter , Bishop of Alexandria ( who was then at Rome ) in condemning Apollinaris in a Roman Council p p Lab. p. 895. Bin. pag. 514. col. 1. ; but Nazianzen saith , He did n●t this till be was better instructed in the Points : For at first ( as the Notes confess ) this Pope took Apollinaris for a picus and learned Man ; and so beld Communion with him till he understood by S. Basil ' s third Epistle , that he was an Herctic . I know they excuse this by saying , that S. Basil himself , and Nazianzen and S. Hierom were all at first under the same mistake with Damasus : But then none of these ever were pretended to be Infallible Jadges in matters of Faith , as Baronius holds Damasus was ; so that the mistake in them is pardonable , but upon Baronius Principles I see not how Damasus his Infallibility can be secured , when he was so long deceived by a Heretic , and was forced to be instructed by a private Bishop at last , even in cases of Heresie .

The next year a Council was held at Valentia in Dauphiné , the true Title of which saith , it was under Gratian and Valentinian ( the Emperours ; ) but the Editors put a new Title over it , and say it was under Damasus q q Lab. p. 904. Bin. pag. 516. col. 1. who is not once named in it ; the French Bishops there assembled making Canons for their own Churches , without asking the Popes leave , or desiring his Confirmation .

Upon the death of Valens the Arian Emperour , while An. Dom. 378. Valentinian was yet very young , Gratian managed both the Eastern and Western Empire , and he makes a Law to suppress all Heresies , and to take away the use of Churches from all such as were not in Communion with Damasus Bishop of Rome , and Peter of Alexandria r r Sozom. lib. 7 ▪ cap. 4. Secrat . lib. 5. cap. 2. Theodoret indeed ( who as Baronius owns is much mistaken in his relating this matter s s Theod. lib. 5. cap. 2. & Baron . An 37● . pag. 339. ) names only Damasus in his report of this Law ; and Baronius cites the Law out of him , meerly to make it seem as if Damasus were made the sole Standard of Catholic Communion , though the Original Law still extant t t Cod. 〈◊〉 . lib. I. tit . I. de sum . Trin. Ll. I. , and all other Historians , name Peter of Alexandria as equal with Damasus : perhaps the Reader may wonder there is no other Patriarch named in this Law ; but it must be observed , that Anticch at this time had two Orthodox Bishops , who separated from each other , Meletius and Paulinus , to make up which unhappy Schism there was a Synod this year held at Antioch , under Damasus u u Lab. p. 908. Bin. pag. 517. col . I. , say the Editors ; but in truth , under the Emperours Legate , , who was sent to see a Peace concluded between these two Bishops by the advice of the Council there assembled : And Damasus had so little interest in this Council , that Meletius was generally approved for the true Bishop , and Paulinus ( whose party the Pope favoured ) ordered only to come in after Meletius his Death w w Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 5. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 . lib. 5. c. 3. : So that since this Council acted contrary to the mind of Damasus , it is very improper to say , it was held under him .

§ . 27. The second General Council at Constantinople An. Dom. 381. was Called by the Emperour Theodosius , whom Gratian had taken for his Paitner in the Empire , and assigned him for his share the Eastern Provinces ; where this pious Prince finding great differences in Religion , he Convened this Council to confirm the Nicene Faith , to fettle Ecclesiastical Matters , and to determine the Affairs of the See of Constantinople . This Council the Editors introduce with a Preface or general History , and conclude it with partial and false Notes , ho●ing to perswade the World , that it was both called and confirmed by the Pope : For which end we read in the Preface , That Theodosius made a Law for all to follow the Faith , which the Apostle Peter delivered to the Romans , and which Pope Damasus preached x x Lab. p. 915. Bin. pag. 521. ; which shews , as if the Pope were the sole preserver of the Faith ; whereas the Law it self truly cited runs thus , — which Pope Damasus , and Peter Bishop of Alexandria , a man of Apostolical Sanctity , are known to follow y y Cod. Justion . ut supr. & Baron . An 380. pag. 358. . And in another Law of the same Emperours next year , those are declared to be Catholics , and capable of Benefices , who were in Communion with the Bishops of Constantinople , Alexandria , Laodicea , Tarsus and Iconium z z Baron . An. 381. pag. 384. ; and in that Law neither Damasus nor Rome are mentioned ; which shews , it was not the peculiar priviledge of any See , for its Bishop to be made the standard of Catholic Communion , but the known Orthodox Opinion of that Bishop who sat in this or that eminent Church . The rest of the Forgeries in this Council , will best appear by considering , First , By whom this Council was called : Secondly , By whom it was confirmed : Thirdly , What Authority hath been aseribed to it : And , Fourthly , Whether the Canons and Creed ascribed to it be Authentic .

First , As to the Calling this Council , Baronius had twice guessed , but never proved that Damasus moved Theod●sius to call it a a Baron An. 380. pag. 359. & pag. 362. ; this the Preface improves and saith , It was called by the Emperour , not without Damasus his Authority ; and the Title before the Notes , advance it still , — gathered ( say they ) by the Authority of Pope Damasus , and the favour of Theodosius b b Bin. p. 540. . But when this is to be proved , their Evidence is , pretended Monuments in the Vatican , that Shop of Forgeries ; the testimony of later Popes in their own cause , and some very remote Conjectures and fraudulent Inferences : Yet at last they a●firm , That none but a pertinacicus Heretic will a●●irm , that this Pious Emperour , who was most observant of the Sacred Canons would call this Synod c c Lab. p. 968. Bin. pag. 542. col. 1. . By which bold Censure , they condemn not only all the ancient Historians , but all the Fathers here assembled for pertinacious Heretics : For the Councils Letter to Theodosius saith , We were called together by your Epistle d d Lab. p. 946. Bin. pag. 533. ; and when they were to have met at Rome , they a●●irm , That Damasus summoned them to meet there , by the Emperours Letters e e Ep. ad Damasum ap. Bin. pag. 539. . S●crates also and Sozomen expresly say , The Emperour called this Synod at Constantinople f f Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 8. Sozom. lib. 7. c. 7. Theodoret also doth a●●irm the same g g Theod. lib. 5. cap. 7. , though the Notes strive to pervert his words : But Richerius , a Learned Romanist h h Richer . hist. Concil. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 1 , & 2. hath fully cleared this Point , and shewed that Theodosius called this General Council by his sole Authority . And the Acts of the sixth General Council , with Photius ( cited falsly in these Notes ) do only import , that the Pope gave a subsequent consent to it , which is no proof that he was concerned in calling it .

Secondly , As to the confirming it , the Preface and the Notes considently aver , That they sent their Acts to Damasus to be approved , and he did confirm them i i Lab. p. 917. & pag. 967. Bin. pag. 521 , & 541. ; yet they tell us , that Pope Gregory above 200 year after declared , That the Church of Rome as yet neither had , nor received the Acts of this Council . I know they would shuffle o●f this Contradiction , by pretending that Damasus confirmed only the Matters of Faith , not the Canons : But first , Gregory denies their having the Acts of this Council , and the Acts contain Matters of Faith as well as Canons ; Secondly , they can not shew any proof , that Damasus made any distinction : If he confirmed any thing , it was all ; for if subsequent consent be confirmation , then he consented to all , and confirmed all that was done here . But in our Sense of giving an Authentic Character to this Councils Decrees , Theodosius alone confirmed them ; for the Bishops desire him , by his Picus Edict to confirm the Decrees of this Synod k k Lab. p. 946. Bin. pag. 533. : And they writ not to Damasus till the year after the Synod , and their Letter was directed not to him alone , but to Ambrose and other Western Bishops with him l l Theoder . lib. 5. cap. 9. nor do they in it desire any confirmation from him or any of them , but say , That they and all others ought to approve of their Faith , and rejoyce with them for all the good things which they had done ; with which Letter probably they sent ( as was usual ) a Transcript of all their Acts : And Photius saith , That Damasus , Bishop of Rome afterwards agreed with these Bishops , and confirmed what they had done m m Phrius de 7 Synod . cap. 2. ; that is , by consenting to it , which is no more than every absent Bishop may do , who in a large Sense may be said to confirm a Council , when he agrees to the Acts of it after they are brought to him .

Thirdly , The Authority of this Council is undoubted , having been ever called and accounted the Second General Council , and so it is reckoned in all places where the General Councils are mentioned , which Title it had not , as Bellarmin vainly suggests , Because at the time when this was assembled in the East , the Western Bishops met at Rome : For that obscure Synod is not taken notice of , while this is every where celebrated , as held at Constantinople , and consisting of one hundred and fifty Bishops , which were they who met in the East n n Lab. p. 967. Bin. pag. 541. col . 2 . As for Damasus , Baronius cannot prove he was concerned in it , but by we think , and we may believe o o Baron . An. 380 p 359. & An. 381. p. 368. ; yet he elsewhere boldly says , Damasus gave it Supreme Authority p p Idem p. 382. ; and the Annotator makes it impossible for any Council to be general , unless the Pope or his Legates be there . Now he and all others call this A General Council : And yet he saith , That neither Pope Damasus , nor his Legates were Presidents of it , nor was he or any Western Bishop in it . Whence we learn , That there may be a General Council , at which the Pope is not present , by himself , nor by his Legates , and of which neither he nor they are Presidents .

Fourthly , As to the Creed and Canons here made , the modern Romanists without any proof suppose , that Damasus allowed the former , and not the later : But if he allowed the famous Creed here made , I ask , Whether it then had these words [ And from the Son ] or no ? If it had , why do the Notes say , That these words were added to it by the Bishops of Spain and the Authority of Pope Leo long after q q Lab. p. 972. Bin. pag. 543. col. 2. ? But if these words were wanting , as they seem to confess , ( when they say , The Roman Church long used this Creed without this addition ) then I must desire to know , how a Man of their Church can be secure of his Faith , if what was ( as they say ) confirmed by Damasus in a General Council , may be al ered by a few Bishops and another Pope , without any General Council ? As to the Canons , Damasus made no objection against them in his time , and it is very certain that the Bishop of Constantinople after this Council , always had the second place . For as the first General Council at Nice gave old Rome the first place , as being the Imperial City ; so this second General Council doubted not , but when Constantinople was become new Rome , and an Imperial City also ; they had power to give it the second place , and suitable Priviledges . Yea , the Notes confess , that S. Chrysostom , by virtue of this Canon , placed and displaced divers Bishops in Asia , and the 4th General Council at Chalcedon ( without regarding the dissent of the Popes Legates ) allowed the Bishop of Constantinople the second place , and made his Priviledges equal to those of Old Rome r r Vid. Concil. Chalced. Can. 28. & Subscrip . ibid. ; which Precedence and Power that Bishop long retained , notwithstanding the endeavours of the envious Popes : And Gregory never objected against these Canons , till he began to fear the growing Greatness of the Patriarch of Constantinople ; but when that Church and Empire was sinking , and there appeared no danger on that side to the Popes , then Innocent the Third is said by the Notes , to revive and allow this Canon again ; by which we see , that nothing but Interest governs that Church , and guides her Bishops in allowing or discarding any Council : For now again , when the Reformed begin to urge this Canon , Baronius and the Notes say , They can prove by firm Reasons , that this Canon was forged by the Greeks : But their Reasons are very frivolous , They say Anatolius did not quote this Canon against Pope Leo : I reply , 'T is very probable he did , because Leo saith , He pleaded the Consent of many Bishops ; that is , ( if Leo would have spoken out ) In this General Council . Secondly , They urge that this Canon is not mentioned in the Letter writ to Damasus . I Answer , They have told us before , they sent their Acts to him , and so need not repent them in this Letter . Thirdly , They talk of the Injury done to Timotheus Bishop of Alexandria ; but his Subscription is put to the Canons as well as the Creed , and it doth not appear that ever he or any of his Successors contended for Precedence after this , with the Patriarch of Constantinople : And that the Modern Greeks did not forge this Canon is plain , because Socrates and Sozomen both mention it s s Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 2. Sozem. lib 7. cap. 8. ; and the Catholic Church always owned it for Authentic . Yea , in the Council of Chalcedon it is declared , That the Bishop of Constantinople ought to have had the second place in the Factious Synod at Ephesus , and he is reckoned in that fourth General Council next after the Pope , whose Legates were there , and yet durst not deny him the second place , in which he sat and subscribed in that order , having first had this Canon confirmed at Chalcedon : So that all Churches , but that of Rome , submit to this General Council ; and they who pretend most to venerate them , do despise and reject the Authority of General Councils , if they oppose the ends of their Pride and Avarice . To conclude , Here is a General Council called and confirmed only by the Emperour , assembled without the Pope or his Legates , decreeing Matters of Faith and of Discipline , yet every where owned and received as genuine , except at Rome , when Interest made them partial , and still no less valued for that by all other Churches : Which gives a severe Blow to the modern Pretences of their Papal Supremacy and Infallibility .

The same Year there was a Council at Aquileia in Italy , wherein divers Arians were fully heard and fairly condemned . Now this Council was called by the Emperour , the Presidents of it being Valerian Bishop of Aquileia , and Ambrose Bishop of Milan ; but Damasus is not named in it , nor was he present at it in Person , or by his Legates , though this Council was called in Italy it self , and designed to settle a Point of Faith : But these Bishops ( as the Acts shew ) did not judge Heretics by the Popes Authority , but by Scripture and by solid Arguments : And they tell us , It was then a Custom for the Eastern Bishops to hold their Councils in the East , and the Western theirs in the West t t Lab. p. 980. Bin. pag. 545 col. 2. ; which argues , they knew of no Universal Monarchy , vested in the Pope , and giving him power over all the Bishops , both of the East and West . For it was not Damasus , but the Prefect of Italy , who writ about this Synod to the Bishops of the East u u Baron . An 281. pag. 386. : Nor did this Council write to the Pope , but to the Emperour , to confirm their Sentence against Heretics ; wherefore Damasus had a limited Authority in those days , not reaching so much as over all Italy , and extended only to the Suburbicarian Regions , out of which , as being Damasus's peculiar Province , Ursicinus his Antagonist for the Papacy , was banished by the Emperour Valentinian w w Baron . An. 371. pag. 235. ; and therefore Sulpicius Severus calls him not Orbis , but Urbis Episcopus x x Sulpic. Sever. pag. 423. , the Bishop of the City , not of the World ; and speaking of Italy , he saith in the next Page , That the Supreme Authority at that time was in Damasus , and S. Ambrose y y Id. pag. 424. . To these two therefore the Priscillian Heretics applied themselves , when they were condemned by the Council of Caesar-Augusta , or Saragosa in Spain , in which Country the Sect first began ; but when they could not get these great Bishops to favour their Cause , they corrupted the Emperours Ministers , to procure a Rescript for their restitution z z Lab. p. 1011. Bin. pag. 554. col. 1. . Now it is strange that this Council of Saragosa should bear the Title of [ under Damasus , ] and that the Notes should affirm , Sulpicius Severus plainly writes thus : For if we read Sulpicius as above-cited , we shall find that Damasus knew nothing of this Synod till long after it was risen ; so we may conclude this Invention of theirs is only to support their pretended Supremacy .

§ . 28. From a Passage in S. Hierom , and the Inscription of the Letter writ from the Council at Constantinople , An Dom. 382. the Editors gather , That Paulinus Bishop of Antioch , Epiphanius Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus , and Ambrose , with other of the Western Bishops , met at Rome in Council this year , which they call the Fourth Roman Council under Damasus a a Lab. p. 1014. Bin pag. 554. col. 2. ; who probably did preside in this Synod , as all Bishops use to do in their own Cities ; but he did not call this Council , for S. Hierom expresly saith , The Emperours Letters called these Bishops to Rome b b Hieron . Ep. 27. . And the Synodical Letter of the Constantinopolitan Fathers tell us , That Damasus desired Theodosius to write to them also of the East to come to Rome : Which shews that Damasus could not summon them by his own Authority ; but the Editors and Baronius , out of a false Latin Version of Theodoret , have put in the word [ Mandato , ] which word is not in the Greek , nor any thing answering to it c c Theodor. lib. 5. cap. 9. Baron . An. 382. pag. 397. & Ben. pag. 539. col. 2. ; and it was foisted in on purpose , to perswade such as did not read the Original , that the Pope had commanded the Eastern Bishops to come to Rome . Again , though the Notes confess , the Acts of this Roman Council are lost , so that it doth not appear what was done there . Yet soon after they produce a long Canon for the Popes Supremacy , and the Precedence of the Patriarchs ; feigning it was made in this Synod . But if the Canon be not a Vatican Forgery ( which is very much to be suspected ) however it is Antedated one hundred and twelve years , as Labbé confesses in his Margen ; for he saith , it was decreed under Pope Gelasius , An. 494. d d Lab. p. 1014. Bin. pag. 554. col. 2. . But the Policy of laying this Canon here , is to make a shew as if Damasus had then publickly declared against the Council of Constantinoples giving that Bishop the second place ; but their forging this Proof only shews , they have no genuine Authority for it ; yet if they could prove that the Pope disliked this Precedence , since it is certain that Constantinople did take the second place according to this Canon , that would only shew that the Popes Authority was not regarded . Which also appears in the Case of Flavianus , who ( as the Notes conjecture ) was in this Roman Synod deposed , and Paulinus made Bishop of Antioch : Yet still the greatest part of the World owned Flavianus for the true Bishop of that See , and the Synod of Sides , where Amphilocius Bishop of Iconium was President , directed their Synodical Epistle to Plavianus , as Patriarch of Antioch e e Lab. p. 1015. Bin. pag. 556. col . 2. Baron . An. 383. ; so that the Editors should not have styled that Council , Under Damasus ; because they acted against his Mind : And so did the Eastern Bishops , who met again this year at Constantinople , when the Pope had desired them to come to Rome , and from this Meeting they writ that Synodical Epistle which the Editors here print over again , and wherein they call Jerusalem , The Mother of all Churches ; a Title now by Usurpation appropriated only to Rome .

§ . 29. Siricius succeeded Damasus , but not without An. Dom. 385. trouble ; for Ursicinus , the Competitor of Damasus , being yet alive and at Rome , was declared Pope by a great party , and Prosper's Chronicle makes him the next Pope after Damasus f f Baron . An. 384. pag 327. ; nor could Siricius get the Chair , but by a Rescript from the Emperour Valentinian , which condemned Ursicinus , and established Siricius g g Baron .. An. 385. pag. 335. . There is little or no notice of him before his Election , and though he sat fifteen years ( as the Pontifical and Platina , ) or thirteen ( as the Notes say ) there is very little worthy remarking done by him : And it is very probable he was one of those ignorant Clergy-men with which the Roman Church was so well stored at that time , that S. Hierom saith , Not one of them did so much as pretend to Scholarship ; but this illiterate Faction , who had proclaimed War against all Learning , conspired also against him h h Hieron in Praef ad Didym . de Spir. Sancto . . For we have reason to judge this Pope to be of their Party , because S. Hierom left Rome in disgust , as soon as Siricius came to be Pope ; and Paulinus who came in his time to Rome saith , The City Pope proudly despised him i i Paulin. ad Sever. Epist. 1. ; yea , Baronius owns , That Ruffinus , when he was fallen into Origen's Heresie , imposed on the Simplicity of this Pope , and got Communicatory Letters of him k k Baron . An. 397. pag. 32. ex Hieron . cp. 16. ; which also seems to spoil his Infallibility , for which Ignorance is no proper qualification . Yet wanting real Matter in this Pope's Life , the Notes run out into the story of the death of Monica , S. Augustine's Mother , saying , That when she died , she was only solicitous to have the Mass offered up for her l l Lab. p. 1016. Bin. pag. 557. col. 1. , and this they prove out of Augustine's Confessions ; but the Fathers words are , She only desired to be commemorated in the Offices , when the Priest stood at the Altar . Now there is a mighty difference between that ancient Custom of commemorating the Faithful departed , which is allowed by the Church of England , and the Popish way of offering Mass for the Souls of the Deceased , a corruption of much later date than S. Augustine's time .

For this Pope are published divers Decretal Epistles , which are the first that can pretend to be genuine ; and if they be really so , it is plain , that their Style is mean , the Arguments trifling , and the Scripture Proofs impertinent ; so that the Author was no Conjurer . The first directed to Himerius is very severe against Marriage , especially in the Clergy : The Notes would perswade us , It is not lawful Marriage , which he calls Pollution ( as they say Calvin falsly affirms m m Lab. p. 1022. Bin. pag. 559. col. 2. ; ) but if we read the Epistle , he calls New Marriages ( that is , the Marriage of such as had been Widows ) Pollution , as well as those Marriages which were prohibited . Again , he foolishly attempts to prove , Clergy-men ought not to Marry , because S. Paul saith , Those that are in the flesh cannot please God ; and though he confess it was usual for many Clergy-men to live with their Wives , he calls that cohabitation , the being polluted with carnal Concupiscence , in his 4th Epistle : So that he is justly taxed with speaking profanely of God's holy Ordinance , and of contradicting S. Paul , who excepted not the Clergy , when he said , Marriage is honourable in all men , and the Bed undefiled , Hebr. XIII . 4. And probably it was the hot and bold discourses of Siricius and some other Writers of this time , which provoked Jovinian , not only to stand up for Marriage , but to decry Single Life , the merit of which had so possessed the minds of some great Men , that they resolved to condemn Jovinian for an Heretic . As for the second Epistle of Siricius to the Council at Milan , relating to this Resolve , it may be questioned whether it be genuine ; but that the style is harsh and barbarous is unquestionable . The Answer to this Letter from Milan is evidently patched up out of divers Authors who writ upon this Subject . However S. Ambrose and his Suffragans there , call the Pope Brother , even when they Complement him , as a great Master and Doctor n n Lab. p. 1024. Bin pag. 560 , & 561. , which smells strong of the Forge ; and if this Epistle were made up there , then the Notes need not triumph so much , when it says , ( upon Jovinians being condemned at Rome ) That the Bishop of Rome had looked well to the Gate committed to him ; that is ( say they ) the Gate of the whole Church of which Christ made S. Peter's Successor the Door-keepers o o Lab. p. 1027. Bin. pag. 561. col . 1. Baron . An. 390. pag. 536. . But if the Epistle be true , it only commends the Pope for looking well to the Gate of his own Church at Rome , as they had done to their Gate at Milan , having turned him out of that Church before . The third Epistle of Siricius is like the former for style and sense , yet the Editors will not reject it , because the Pope saith , He hath the care of all the Churches p p Lab. p. 1027. Bin. p. 561. col. 2. ; but let it be noted , that Aurelius Bishop of Carthage uses the same words of himself a little after q q Bin. p. 577. col. 1. , and there Binius notes , That Aurelius means , of the Churches of Africa only , not of the whole World : So we may say justly of Siricius here , that he means , He had the Care of the Suburbicarian Churches , not those of the whole World . For the fourth Epistle ( said to be writ from a Roman Council ) calls the Pope no more but a Primate r r Lab. p. 1029 , Bin. pag. 562. col. 1. , and that Title belonged to the Bishop of Carthage , as well as to him of Rome ; but indeed Labbé honestly confesses this fourth Epistle to be stollen out of Innocent's Epistle to Victricius . The fifth and sixth Epistles are writ by Maximus , an Usurper of the Empire , and seem to be genuine ; but we need not wonder at the Tyrants speaking so kind things of the Pope in them , since it was his interest to Flatter the Bishop of that potent City .

§ . 30. This Maximus having seized on the Northwest parts of the Empire , summoned a Council at Bourdeaux which the Editors without any ground style , under Siricius ) wherein the Bishops of the Ga●ican Church again condemned the Priscillianists , and they appealed ( not to the Pope , but ) to the Emperour Maximus s s Lab. p. 1030. Bin. pag. 563. col. 2. ) who was so far from favouring these Heretics , that at the instance of Ithacius , a Catholic Bishop , he caused them to be put to death for their Heresie : Which cruel Sentence so displeased Theognistus and other Orthodox Bishops , that they Excommunicated Ithacius and all his Party , who had procured these Heretics to be put to death ; and S. Martin , S. Ambrose , and the best Men of that Age , would not communicate with any of these Bishops , who had prosecuted Men to death for Heresie ; no not though Ithacius and his Adherents were absolved from Theognistus his Excommunication in a Council which Maximus had called at Triers . Now the Notes , fearing the Reader should observe , That many Popes and Bishops of their Communion have done just as Ithacius did , viz. persecuted , such as they call Heretics , to death , and delivered them up to the Secular Magistrate to be executed , tell us , That it was not an ill thing in Ithacius to procure the death of these Heretics , but his Fault was in the violence of his Proceedings , and in his not interposing such a Protestation as their Church uses on these occasions . Wherein , when they have made it necessary for the Magistrate to put an Heretic to death , they solemnly declare , they wish he would amend , and do not desire his Execution t t Lab. p. 1038. Bin. pag. 564. col . 1. Baron . An. 386. pag. 451. . But as this Protestation is a piece of notorious Hypocrisie unknown to those Ages ; so we may be sure so apparent a Sham would not have excused Ithacius , whose Communion ( as Sulpicius Severus shews ) was renounced by S. Ambrose , S. Martin and Others , purely because they thought it unlawful , especially for Clergy-men , to procure any persons to be put to death for their Opinion , though it were Heresie . Wherefore these Holy Bishops , if they were now alive , must renounce the Communion of the Roman Church for the same reason , for which they renounced the Communion of Ithacius , even for their frequent procuring Heretics to be put to death ; and this is so plain , that all their shuflling Notes cannot wash their Bishops hands from Blood , nor fit them in S. Ambrose and S. Martin's Opinion , to celebrate the Eucharist with other Christians .

There had been ( as we noted ) a long Schism at An. Dom. 398. Antioch , between Paulinus ( of whose side was the Pope , and many Western Bishops ) and Flavianus , who was supported by the Eastern Bishops ; and now Paulinus dying , one Evagrius was irregularly chosen to succeed him , and keep up the Schism ; and though Flavianus was owned for the true Bishop by the second General Council , and he it was who ordained S. Chrysostom , and obtained a Pardon from Theodosius for those Citizens of Antioch , who had broke down the Statues of that Emperour and his Empress ; yet at the Instance of some Western Bishops the Emperour was perswaded to cite him to a Council , which he had called at Capua , in which S. Ambrose was present ; but Flavianus not willing to have his Enemies to be his Judges , did easily excuse his Non appearance to the Emperour , and the Synod thereupon referred the Matter between him and Evagrius unto Theoplalus , Patriarch of Alexandria , to whose decision Flavianus refusing to stand , he appealed to Theodosius ; on which occasion S. Ambrose writing to Theophilus , wishes rather Flavianus had referred the Matter to his Brother the Bishop of Rome , because ( saith he ) you would probably have judged it ( if it had come before you ) so as he would have liked u u Ambros . ad Theophil . ep. 78. . Which implies no more , than that Theophilus and Siricius were both of one mind in this case of Flavianus ; yet on this slight occasion the Notes say , That the Synod made Theophilus Arbitrator on condition , he should offer his Sentence to be approved and confirmed by the Roman Church w w 〈◊〉 ●039 〈◊〉 . 564. col. 1. : Which is a meer Forgery ; for Theophilus was made absolute Arbitrator by the Synod , and this is not the Councils wish , but S. Ambroses ; and after all Flavianus did not think a Western Synod had any power over him ; and therefore he rejected the Arbitration of Theophilus , the Council , and Pope Siricius also , with whom though he did not communicate , yet he was always owned to be true Bishop of Antioch .

§ . 31. The Second Council at Arles is supposed to be held about this time , because the Followers of Photinus and Bonosus were there condemned : Wherefore they say , It was in the time of Siricius ; but under him it could not be , since the Bishops there assembled do not name him , nor do they except the Bishop of Romes Supreme Power , when they refer all Ecclesiastical Matters to the final decision of their own Metropolitan and his Synod , and declare , that every Bishop who receives a person Excommunicated by another , shall be guilty of Schism . Yet the Editors are so apt to dote upon the Popes managing all Councils , that they here style a meeting of the Novatian Heretics at Angaris in Bithynia x x Lab. p. 1041. Bin. pag. 566. col. 2. , A Synod under Siricius ; and call poor Socrates a Novatian , for barely relating a Matter of Fact concerning the Novatians .

At this time there was a great Council at Hippo , An. Dom. 393. which the Notes sometimes call a General , and sometimes a Plenary Council , because most of the African Bishops were there , and the Original dates it with the Consuls of this year ; but the Editors clap a New Title to it , saying , it was under Siricius ; who in all probability had no hand in it , nor knew any thing of it : Yet here were made many of those famous Canons for Discipline , by which the African Church was governed . But they are more wary in the next Council of Constantinople , at which many Bishops were present , and among them the two Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch ; being summoned ( in the absence of the Emperour ) by his Prefect Ruffinus ; and they will not venture to say , This was under Siricius , for the Matters treated on it wholly related to the Eastern Church , and in that Age they rarely allowed the Pope to concern himself in their Affairs : No nor in Afric neither , where ( Anno 395 ) there were Councils held both by the Orthodox and the Donatists , which are dated by the Consuls , and no notice is taken of the Pope y y Lab. p. 1153. Bin. pag. 567. col. 2. . We shall only observe , that upon one of these Councils the Notes say , It is a mark of the Donatists , being of the Synagogue of Antichrist , that they named the several Parties among them from the Leaders and Founders of their several Sects , and were not content with the Name of Christians from Christ . Which Note reflects upon the Monks of their own Church , who are called Benedictines , Dominicans , and Franciscans , from the Founders of their several Orders .

In the Council of Turin , composed of the Gallican An. Dom. 397. Bishops , they decided the Case of Primacy between the Bishop of Arles and Vienna , without advising with the Pope , and determined they would not communicate with Foelix , a Bishop of Ithacius his Party , according to the Letters of Ambrose , of Blessed Memory , Bishop of Milan , and of the Bishop of Rome . Now , here the Roman Advocates are much disturbed to find S. Ambrose his Name before Siricius ; and when they repeat this Passage in the Notes , they falsly set the Pope's Name first , contrary to the express words of the fifth Canon , and impudently pretend , That the Bishop of Rome , by his place , was the ordinary Judge who should be communicated with , and Ambrose was only made so by the Popes Delegation z z Lab. p. 1157 , & 1158. Bin. pag. 568 , & 569. . But , how absurd is it ( if this were so ) for the Council to place the Name of the Delegate , before his who gave him power ? And every one may see , that this Council was directed to mark this Decree principally by S. Ambrose his Advice , and secondarily by the Popes ; for at that time Ambrose his Fame and Interest was greater than that of Siricius ; yet after all , the Council decreed this , not by the Authority of either of these Bishops ( as the Notes pretend , ) but only by their Information , and upon their Advice by these Letters , which were not first read ( as they pretend ) but after four other businesses were dispatched .

The Canons of divers African Councils , held at Carthage and elsewhere , have been put together long An. Dom. 397 , &c. since , and collected into one Code , which makes the time and order of the Councils wherein they were made , somewhat difficult ; but since the Canons were always held Authentic , we need not ( with the Editors ) be much concerned for their exact order , or for reducing them to the years of the Pope , because they were neither called nor ratified by his Authority . Yea , the Notes say , It was never heard that any , but the Bishop of Carthage called a Council there , his Letters gave Summons to it , he presided over it , and first gave his Suffrage in it , — and that even when Faustinus ( an Italian Bishop ) the Popes Legate was present a a Lab. p. 1163. Bin. pag 573. col. 1 , & 2. . As for the particular Canons of the third Council , the Nineteenth saith , That the Readers shall either profess Continence ; or they shall be compelled to Marry ; but they feign old Copies which say , They shall not be allowed to Read , if they will not contain b b Lab. p. 1170. Bin. pag. 575. col. 1. ; the falshood of which appears by the 25th Canon in the Greek and Latin Edition , where this is said of the Clergy , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ; that is , Except the Readers , which they translate , Quamvis Lectoram c c Bin p. 580. , on purpose to make us think , that the command of Celibacy ( upon which that Age too much doted ) reached the lowest order of the Clergy , even Readers ; contrary to the express words of the Canons . And to the second Council of Carthage , where only Bishops , Priests and Deacons are under an obligation to live single d d Bin. p. 571. . Secondly , The 26th Canon of the third Council forbids the Bishop of the first See , to be called by the Title of Prince , or Chief of Bishops , ( Gratian goes on ) neither may the Roman Bishop be called Vniversal e e Lab. p. 1170. Bin. pag. 575. col . 2. & Gratian. Decret. part 1. dist. 99. . The Notes tax Gratian indeed for adding this Sentence ; but if he did , it was out of Pope Gregory , who saith , That no Patriarch ought to be called Vniversal . Besides , considering how apt the Editors are to strike out words not Agreeable to the Interest of Rome , it is more probable that some of the Popes Friends lately left these words out , than that Gratian put them in : And since this Council forbid Appeals to foreign Judicatures with peculiar respect to Rome , to which some of the Criminal Clergy then began to appeal f f Lab. p. 1171. Bin. pag. 581. col. 2. , it is not unlikely these Fathers might resolve to check as well the Title , as the Jurisdiction ( then beginning to be set up ) which encouraged these Appeals . Thirdly , The 47th Canon in the Latin , and the 24th in the Greek and Latin Edition , speaking of such Books , as are so far Canonical that they may be read in Churches , reckon up some of those Books which we call Apocryphal , upon which the Notes triumph g g Lab. p. 1177. Bin. pag. 580. col. 1. ; but let it be observed , that we grant some of these Books to be so far Canonical , that they may be read for instruction of Manners ; and also we may note , that the best Editions of these African Canons leave out all the Books of Macchabees and Baruch ( which are foisted into their later Latin Copies h h Cosen's History of the Canon p. 112. & pag. 113. ) . And it is plain , the whole Canon is falsly placed in this Council under Siricius , because Pope Boniface ( who came not into the Papacy till above twenty years after ) is named in it as Bishop of Rome ; yet after all these devices , it doth not declare what Books are strictly Canonical , and so will not justifie the Decree at Trent . Fourthly , In the 48th Canon of the Latin Version , the Council agrees to advise about the Donatists , with Stricius Bishop of Rome , and Simplicianus Bishop of Milan , not giving any more deference to one of these Bishops than to the other , but looking on them as equally fit to advise them : Yet the Notes boldly say , They advise with the Pope , because they knew he presided , as a Bishop and Doctor , over the Catholic Church ; but with the Bishop of Milan only , as a Man every where famous for his Learning i i Lab. p. 1183. Bin. pag. 584. col. 2. . Which is a meer Fiction of their own , for the words of the Canon shew , that these Fathers did not believe either of them had any Authority over them , only they desired their advice joyntly , as being both Eminent and Neighbouring Bishops , and their prohibiting Appeals shews , they knew nothing of the Popes presiding over the Catholic Church .

§ . 32. Anastasius was the last Pope in this Century , An. Dom. 398. of whom there would have been as little notice taken , as of Many of his Predecessors , if it had not been his good fortune to be known , both to S. Hierom and S. Augustine , and to assist the latter in suppressing the Donatists , and the former in condemning the Errours of Origen , for which cause these two Fathers make an honourable mention of him . Yet in the African Councils , where he is named with respect , they joyn Venerius Bishop of Milan with him , and call them Their Brethren and Fellow Bishops k k Baron . An. 401. p. 128 , & 129. . As for the qualifications of Anastasius , S. Hierom gives him great Encomiums ; but it must be observed , that at this time Hierom had charged Ruffinus with broaching the Heresies of Origen at Rome , and he being then at Bethlem , could not beat down these Opinions without the Popes help . And indeed , when Ruffinus came first to Rome he was received kindly by the last Pope Siricius , and Anastasius did not perceive any Errours in Ruffinus or Origen , till S. Hierom ( upon Pammachius Information ) had opened his Eyes ; and at last , it was three years before this Pope could be made so sensible of this Heresie , as to condemn it : So that notwithstanding his Infallibility , if S. Hierom and his Friends had not discovered these Errours , they might in a little time have been declared for Orthodox Truths at Rome ; but Anastasius condemning them at last , did wonderfully oblige S. Hierom , and this was the occasion of many of his Commendations . For this Pope are published three Decretal Epistles , though Baronius mentions but two , and condemns the first for a Forgery , and so doth Labbé l l Lab. p. 1191. Bin. pag. 585. col . 2. Baron . An. 402. pag. 161. ; It is directed to the Bishops of Germany and Burgundy , and yet Burgundy did not receive the Christian Faith till the Year 413 ; it is also dated with the Consuls of the Year 385 , that is , Fourteen years before Anastasius was Pope . The matter of it is grounded on the Pontifical , which speaks of a Decree made by this Pope for the Priests at Rome to stand up at the Gospel ; which the Forger of this Epistle turns into a general Law , and makes it be prescribed to the Germans . The Words of it are stollen out of the Epistles of Pope Gregory and Leo m m Gregor. lib. 12 Ep. 32. Leon. Ep 2. ad Episc. Ital. ; yet out of this Forgery they cite that Passage for the Supremacy , where the German Bishops are advised to send to him as the Head . The second Epistle n n Lab. p. 1193. Bin. pag. 586. col. 2. is also spurious , being dated fifteen or sixteen years after Anastasius his death , and stollen out of Leo's 59th Epistle . As for the third Epistle , it is certain he did write to John , Bishop of Jerusalem , but it may be doubted whether this be the Epistle or no o o Lab. p. 1194. Bin. pag. 586. col. 2. ; if it be genuine , it argues the Pope was no good Oratour , because it is writ in mean Latin ; yet that was the only Language he understood , for he declares in this Epistle , That he know not who Origen was , nor what Opinions he held , till his Works were translated into Latin . So that any Heretic who had writ in Greek in this Pope's time , had been safe enough from the Censure of this Infallible Judge .

The Notes dispute about the fourth Council of Carthage , whether it were under Pope Zosimus or Anastasius p p Lab. p. 1208. Bin. pag. 591. col. 1. ; but it was under neither , the true Title of it shewing it was dated by the Consuls Names , and Called by Aurelius Bishop of Carthage , who made many excellent Canons here without any assistance from the Pope . The 51st , 52d and 53d Canons of this Council order Monks to get their Living , not by Begging , but by honest Labour ; and the Notes shew , This was the Primitive use q q Lab. p. 1210. Bin. pag. 592. col. 1. ; which condemns these vast numbers of Idle Monks and Mendicant Fryers , now allowed in the Church of Rome . The hundredth Canon absolutely forbids a Woman to presume to Baptize ; but the Notes (r) , ( because this practice is permitted II. apr . in their Church ) add to this Canon these words , unless in case of necessity , and except when no Priest is present . Which shews how little reverence they have for ancient Canons , since they add to them , or diminish them , as they please to make them agree with their modern Corruptions .

In the fifth Council of Cartbage , Can. 3. Bishops and Priests are forbid to accompany with their Wives 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , that is , at the time of their being to Officiate ; but in their Latin Copies it is altered thus , — according to their own , ( or , to their former ) Statutes ; which makes it a general and total Prohibition : But the Greek words of this Canon are cited , and expounded at the great Council in Trullo , where many African Bishops were present , as importing only a Prohibition of accompanying their Wives , when their turns came to Minister s s Lab. p. 1219. Bin. pag. 594. col . 2. Beveridg . Concil. Tom. II. pag. 130. ; which is the true sense of this Canon , though the Romanists , for their Churches Credit would impose another . The fourteenth Canon of this Council takes notice of the feigned Relicks of Martyrs , and of Altars built in Fields and High-ways , upon pretended Dreams and Revolutions ; upon which Canon there is no note at all t t Lab. p. 1217. Bin. pag. 594. col. 1. , because they know , if all the feigned Relicks were to be thrown away , and all the Altars built upon Dreams and false Revelations pulled down in the present Roman Church , ( as was ordered at Carthage by this Canon ) there would bè very few left to carry on their gainful Trade , which hath thrived wonderfully by these Impostures .

This Century concludes with a Council at Alexandria , which they style under Anastasius u u Bin. p. 595. ; but it was called by Theophilus , who found out and condemned the Errours of Origen long before poor Anastasius knew any thing of the matter . The Notes indeed say , This Synod sent their Decrees to Pope Anastasius , to Epiphanius , Chrysostom and Hierom : But though they place the Pope foremost , there is no proof that they were sent to him at all . Baronius only conjectures they did , and saith , It is fit we should believe this w w Baron . An. 399. p. 85 , & 88. ; but it is certain Theophilus sent these Decrees to Epiphanius to Chrysostom and Hierom ; and from this last hand it is like Anastasius received them long after , because it was more that two years after this Synod , before S. Hierom could perswade Anastasius to condemn these Opinions of Origen , which this Council first censured : Wherefore it was happy for the Church , that there were wiser Men in it than he who is pretended to be the supreme and sole Judge of Heresie . And thus we have finished our Remarks upon the Councils in the first four Centuries , in all which the Reader ( I hope ) hath seen such designs to advance the Supremacy , and cover the Corruptions of Rome , that he will scarce credit any thing they say for their own Advantage in any of the succeeding Volumes .

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING BARONIUS HIS ANNALS .

§I . THE large and elaborate Volumes of Cardinal Baronius , are the main Guide to the Editors and Annotator : From him they take the Dates of all Councils , and out of him they have added divers new Synods not extant in the older Editions of the Councils , of which they can say no more , than to abbreviate Baronius : From him they borrow most of their plausible Notes , by which they either paint over that which seems for the Interest of Rome , or disparage what makes against it ; and therefore we have had often occasion to discover his Fallacies in all that part of his Annals which concerns the Councils ; but there are many other notorious Frauds and manifest Falshoods in that Author , of which I shall here give some few Instances , which may serve as a Caution to all that read his History , and also as a Direction by which they may in other Centuries find out his manifold Errours ; and I shall confine the Examples here produced to the Fourth Century , because that is the most largely treated of in this Discourse .

It is evident , that all the Writers of the Roman side , for many Ages have designed to impose upon the World ; in that , their Disputants , their Publishers of Councils , and Historians do all agree ; for their Principles and Practices cannot be maintained by plain Truth . The Methods used by Baronius , in his Ecclesiastical Annals ( which he writ purely to serve the Interest of the Roman Church ) may be reduced to these Heads :

First , His frequent quoting Forged and Spurious Tracts ; such as the Pontifical , the Acts of the Martyrs , the Ecclesiastical Tables ( that is , the Roman Missal and Martyrology ) with other late and fabulous Writers , such as Nicephorus , Simeon , Metaphrastes , Laurentius Surius , &c. And the Reader shall find , he very seldom cites any other Authors to prove the Great Actions of Primitive Popes , or the dignity of the Roman Church , and its pretended Priviledges : As also to make out the Miracles done by many of their Saints , and to be evidence for the Invocation of Saints , Praying for the Dead , Worshiping the Cross , Relicks and Images ; for the Merits of Celibacy and Holiness of Monks , or other Superstitions . Some Examples of which in the Fourth Century are these : He cites the Acts of Procopius , which he confesseth need amending , to prove the Adoration of the Cross a a Baron . An. 308 p. 30. §. 19. ; he proves the same by the Acts of Gregory an Armenian Bishop , which he owns do not satisfie many ; and by Euthymius , a late Grecian Monk , An. 1180 b b Id. An. 311. p. 57. §. 23. . Thus he asserts Crispus his being Baptized with his Father Constantine , only by Nicephorus , and makes out Constantine's use of putting an Image of Christ on his Coyns , only by the Acts of Damasus , and by a Coyn which he himself confesseth had been adulterated c c Id. An. 324. pag. 233. §. 13 , & 16. . Constantine's Baptism in Rome is also proved by Anastasius Bibliothecarius , who there hath the false Character of an Acurate Writer d d Ibid. p. 237. §. 30. , and by the Acts of Sylvester , which he himself disapproves of in many things e e Ibid. §. 31. ; and suspects , that notwithstanding all these fabulous Authors , his Reader will not credit the Story f f Ibid. p. 238. §. 32. . The Legend of S. Agnes and her Temple at Rome , he confesses , Was made by an Unknown-hand under the Name of S. Ambrose ; yet he gives a long relation of it g g Ib. pag. 260. §. 107. . So when Eusebius , who writ acurately about the Temple built over the Sepulchre by Constantine , saith nothing of Pictures in it , he proves there was such there by the second Nicene Council h h Baron An. 326. pag. 353. §. 42. . Eusebius's Greek Chronicle saith nothing of the Invention of the Cross , but some Forger hath put it into the Latin Version of it ; therefore Baronius cites the corrupted Latin Translation to prove this Legend i i Id. ibid. . The Miracles of S. Nicholas are all transcribed out of his Acts , which were put together by Authors who lived above Five hundred years after his time , and the genuine ancient Historians mention not one of them k k An. 326. p. 366. §. 86. . Eusebius saith , Constantine dedicated his new City of Constantinople to God ; but Baronius chooses to follow a later Writer of little credit , viz. Nicephorus ; who saith ( in the Phrase of his own time ) He dedicated it to the Virgin Mary l l Ibid. An. 330. p. 396. §. 4. . He makes a discourse about the use of the Pall in the Life of Pope Mark ; yet he can cite no Author , but the fabulous Pontifical , to prove it was used in his time m m An. 336. p. 458 §. 63. . To prove the Arian Pope Foelix was a Martyr , he cites an Inscription pretended to be found in a Grave at Rome ( where such Frauds are common ) about Twelve hundred years after his Death n n An. 357. pag. 715. §. 50. ; so he makes out the Martyrdom of divers under Julian by an Oration of Nectarius ( which he confesses is corrupted ) and by Nicephorus o o Annal. Tom. IV. An. 362. p. 21 , & 22. : And a little after he tells long Stories of Martyrs at that time condemned by Julian at Rome , which he proves by the Ecclesiastical Tables , and by the Acts of the Martyrs ; yet he owns Julian was not at Rome at this time p p Eod. An. pag. 84. . Prayers at the Graves of the Saints he would establish by a forged Book of the Lives of the Prophets , which he cites under Epiphanius's name q q An. 373. pag. 309. : So he would make out Prayers for the Dead , used in this Age , by feigned Writings , which are ascribed to Ephraem Syrus r r An. 378. p. 332. . The Miracles ascribed to Damasus cannot be proved by one Author of Credit , but are set off with the forged Acts of Damasus , and the modern Legends s s An. 384. p. 427. . So also the Miracles ascribed to S. Chrysostom , are not taken generally from any approved Authors , but from his spurious Acts t t An. 386. pag. 468. ; and ( to name no more ) thus he proves the Adoration of the Cross by an Homily falsly ascribed to S. Chrysostom u u An. 397. Tom. V. p. 44. : For his genuine Works do witness against this practice . And now that he did not cite these Authorities out of ignorance , is plain from his Confession ; for he saith of the Acts of the Martyrs , That we might better have wanted many Truths concerning them , than have had such a mixture of Errours as makes the whole suspected w w Baron . An. 307. §. 33. p. 24. Tom III. . And again , speaking of the Acts of Gallicanus , It is the manner of some to be ashamed , to give a short Narrative of a great Affair , and so according to their own Fancy they largely paraphrase on it x x Id. An. 330. §. 51. p. 410. : And yet again in his Preface to the Roman Martyrology he tells us , There was a sad loss of these Martyrs Acts in Diocletian' s time , so that very few of them are to be found , which may not in part be convicted of Mistakes s s Bar. Praecap . ad Martyr . c. 3. . But Melch. Canus is more ingenuous , and saith , Diogenes Laertius writ the Lives of the Philosophers more honestly , than the Christians have writ those of the Saints t t Melch. Can. Can loc. Theol. l. 11. p. 333. : Yet you rarely have any better Evidence than these , for most of the Roman Doctrines and Rites . And though Nicephorus and the Modern Greeks be frequently taxed by him , for giving easie faith to feigned Stories , and for gross Mistakes u u An. 306. §. 12. pag. 3. & Tom. IV. An. 363. p. 105. ; yet when they tell never such improbable Tales for the Roman Interest , then they are cited with great applause . Now it is a clear evidence of an ill Cause , when they can find no other Proofs but such spurious Writings as these ; of which practice I have here given but a few Instances ; but the diligent Reader will observe this to be customary with Baronius , not only in this fourth Century , but in every part of his Annals .

§ . 2. Another Artifice is to corrupt the Words or the Sense of genuine Authors , of which we will select also a few Instances , in the same Century . S. Augustine barely names Peter as one whom the Pagans did Calumniate w w Aug. de Civ . Dei , iib. 18. c. 53. ; but Baronius brings this in with this Preface , That they did this , because they saw Peter extremely magnified , especially at Rome where he had fixed his Seat ; and then he saith , S. Augustine records this , &c. whereas this is his own Invention , to set off the glory of Rome x x Baron . An. 313. §. 17. . So when Athanasius is proving , that the Fathers before the Nicene Council used the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , and first names Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria , and then Dionysius Bishop of Rome y y Athanas . de decret. in Arian . . Baronius saith , He proves it especially by Dionysius the holy Roman Pope , and by Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria z z Baron . An. 325. §. 69. , inverting the Order , and putting a Note of Eminence on the Pope , contrary to the Words and Sense of Athanasius . Again , he cites Pope Leo ( who is no Evidence in his own Cause ) ; and yet Baronius would make him say more than he doth , even where he saith more than he should say : For he cites his 53d Epistle to shew , that Leo affirmed the sixth Canon of Nice , allowed to the Church of Alexandria the second , and to that of Antioch the third Seat , which had before been conferred on them by Rome . But the very words of Leo , cited by Baronius , shew this to be false ; for Leo saith not , that these Sees had their Dignity or Order from Rome , but the former from S. Mark , the later from Peter's first Preaching there a a Leon. cp. 53. ap. Baron . An. 325. §. 28. . Moreover , to make his Reader fancy the Roman and the Catholic Church was all one of old , he mentions out of Epiphanius , Constantine's writing an Epistle to all Romania , Which Name ( saith he ) we sometimes find used for the Catholic Church b b Baron . An. 319. §. 6. ; whereas it is manifest , that Epiphanius both there and elsewhere plainly uses Romania for the Roman Empire c c Epiphan. contra Manich. haer. 66. & contr. Arian . haer. 69. ; and Baronius did not find it used either in him , or in any other ancient Author , in any other sense . That Period in Optatus , which Baronius cites with great applause ( if it be not added by some ignorant Zealot of the Roman side ) is a scandal to the Learning of that Father , for he derives the Syriac word , Cephas , from the Greek 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , and by that ridiculous Etymology would draw as contemptible a consequence , viz. That Peter was Head of the Apostles ; and again he seems wilfully to pervert the Precept of S. Paul , Rom. XII . 13. Distributing to the necessities of the Saints ; which in Optatus's Reading is , Communicating with the Memories of the Saints ; that is , ( as he applies it ) with Rome , where there are the Memorials of two of the Apostles . I could wish for Optatus's Credit that these weak Passages were spurious , or buried in silence ; and the Learned Baldwin is ashamed of this gross Errour d d Opt. Milev . lib. 2. pag. 48. Baldvin . notis , pag. 184. : But Baronius thinks , though they make for the dishonour of the Father , they tend to the Credit of Rome , and so he cites them in great pomp , and puts them in a whole Line to make them look more plausible , — the Head of the Apostles , whence he was called Cephas ( so Optatus : But Binius adds ) deducing the Interpretation from the Greek Word , for in Syriac it signifies an hard Stone e e Baron . An. 321. §. 5. ; and then glories extremely , as if Optatus had made Communion with Rome the sole Note of a Catholic . Whereas in the next Page but one , Optatus goes on , — You cannot prove you have any Communion with the Seven Churches of Asia , — and yet if you be out of the Communion of those Churches , you are to be accounted Aliens . Which Passage Baronius very fraudulently leaves out f f Opt. Milev . lib. 2. pag. 50. , because it shews a true Catholic must not only be in Communion with Rome , but also with all other Orthodox Churches ,

To proceed , Even in spurious Authors he useth this Artifice ; for that Forged Book of Constantine's Munificence only saith , He placed a piece of the Cross , in a Church which he had built : But Baronius relates it That he placed it there with most Religious Worship g g Baron . An. 324. §. 105. ; and a little after he perceiving that Fabulous Author had supposed Constantine buried his Mother long before she died , puts in of his own head , But this ( i. e. the putting his Mother in a Porphyry Coffin ) was done afterward h h Id. ib. §. 114. . Speaking of the Bishops returning home from the Council of Nice , he saith , They took with them the Rule of Faith , confirmed by the Pope of Rome , to be communicated to their People , and to absent Bishops : But no Historian , Ancient or Authentic , mentions any preceding Confirmation of the Nicene Creed by the Pope , who was one of the absent Bishops , to whom it was to be communicated ; wherefore those words , Of its being confirmed by the Pope , are invented and added to the story by Baronius i i Baron . An. 325. §. 197. . He observes , That Constantine confesses , he was not fit to judge in the Case of Athanasius , because Ecclesiastical Matters were to be judged among the Clergy : Which he proves by Constantine's Letter there recited ; but Constantine's Letter is not directed to the Clergy , but To the People of the Catholic Church at Alexandria : And his Words are to the People who lived on the Place , and knew the Matters of Fact ; and therefore he saith to them , It is proper for you , and not for me to judge of that Affair k k Baron . An. 329. §. 7 , 8. ; so that Baronius forceth his own Sense upon the Emperour . And when Theodoret speaketh of — time for Repentance according to the Canons of the Church , he adds , — that is , for Satisfaction . Which Popish Satisfaction he would also prove out of a Canon at Antioch , which only mentions confessing the Fault , and bringing forth fruits meet for Repentance l l An. 341. §. 43 , & 44. . When Socrates only saith , Eusebius of Nicomedia ' s Letters were received by Julius after his death ; Baronius thus enlarges it , Eusebius , who had fled from the Judgment of the Roman Church was forced against his Will , being dead ( as Socrates saith ) to come to the strict Tribunal of God m m Vid. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 13. Baron . An. 342. §. 43. . Where Athanasius saith , I went up to Rome , that I might visit the Church and the Bishop : Baronius ridiculously infers , that when we find the Ancients speaking of THE Church and THE Bishop , they mean the Roman Church and that Bishop , of whom , and in whom , and by whom are all other Bishops n n An. 349. §. 6. . Which Note is forced upon this place , for here Rome is named in the same Sentence with the Church and the Bishop , and so it must be understood of the Pope ; but without any advantage to him more than it would have been to the Bishop of Eugubium , to say , I went to Eugubium and visited the Church and the Bishop . Again , S. Hierom saith expresly , that Acacius substituted Foelix an Arian to be Bishop of Rome in Liberius his stead . Here Baronius pretends some Copies leave out the word Arian , and so he reads it , Substituted Foelix to be Bishop of Rome o o An. 355. §. 51. ; and because some such Parasites of Rome as himself , who would not endure that ingrateful Truth of a Pope's being an Heretic , had left out this word , He boldly asserts it for the true Reading ; whereas not only Socrates expresly saith , He was an Arian in Opinion ; but Hierom himself in his Chronicle affirms , that Foelix was put in by the Arians ; and it is not like they would have put him in , if he had not been of their party . The Greek of Sozomen is no more but 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , but Baronius improves this by a flattering Paraphrase in these words , Lest the Seat of Peter should be bespattered with any spot of Infamy p p An. 357. §. 43. . But it is a bolder falsification of S. Chrysostom , where he saith ( in one of his Sermons , on a day celebrated in memory of two Martyrs , Juventius and Maximus ) — 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ; to pervert this by his Latin Version thus , The Martyrs which we this day worship ; whereas Chrysostom only saith , The Martyrs which occasion us to meet this day q q Chrysost. Tom. V. p. 534. Baron . An. 362. pag. 48. . Epiphanius expresly condemns those as Heretics who worship the Blessed Virgin , and saith , No man may adore Mary . Baronius will not cite this place at large , but adds to it these Words , — she is not to be worshiped as a God : Which Falsification of the Father is designed to excuse their Churches Idolatrous worship of the Virgin Mary r r Epiphan. haeres . 79. Baron . An. 375. p. 309. . The restitution of Peter Bishop of Alexandria is by S. Hierom ( whom he cites with applause ) ascribed to the late Repentance of the Emperour Valens : who recalled ( now at last ) the Orthodox from Banishment ; and Secrates only mentions Damasus's Letters , which Peter took with him , approving both his Creation and the Nicene Faith : Yet he from hence notes the Supreme Power of the Pope , by whose order the Bishop of Alexandria was restored to his Church , in contempt of Valens his Authority ; and when he returned with the Popes Authority , the People placed him in his Seat s s Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 30. & Baron . An. 377. pag. 325. . Yea , after this he pretends to cite Socrates , as if he said , Peter was received , being restored by Damasus t t Id. An. 378. pag. 335. ; yet Damasus did no more in all this matter , than barely to testifie that Peter was an Orthodox Bishop , and that he believed him duly elected ; which is all that Socrates saith , and which if any eminent Orthodox Bishops had testified , it would equally have served the Bishop of Alexandria's Cause . To conclude , Baronius owns Paulinus , to have been a credulous Man , and very unskilful in Ecclesiastical History u u Baron . Tom. V. An. 395. p. 15. ; yet thinking he had not spoken enough , when he relates , That a Church was adorned with Pictures ; he stretches this into , Adorned with Sacred Images w w Id. An. 394. pag. 612. . From all which Instances we may infer , That the Cardinal would not stick at misquoting and misrepresenting his Authors , when it might serve the Roman Interest .

§ . 3. Of this kind also we may reckon his crafty suppressing such Authorities , in whole or in part , as seem to cross the Opinions and Practices of their Church . His leaving out a passage in Optatus , wherein that Father makes the being in Communion with the Seven Churches of Asia a Note of a true Catholic , was noted before x x Vid. supra §. 2. & Baron . An. 321. §. 5. . And we may give many such like Instances : Sozemen relates an Imperial Law , wherein those are declared Heretics , who do not hold the Faith , which Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter of Alexandria then held y y Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 4. p. 415. ; but the fraudulent Annalist leaves out Peter of Alexandria , and mentions only Damasus as the sole standard of Catholic Faith z z Faren . An. 378. pag. 339. . When S. Hierom saith , His Adversaries condemned him with Damasus and Peter : Baronius bids us observe , with what reverence the Pope's Enemies treated him ; for though they accused S. Hierom of Heresie , yet against Damasus they durst not open their Mouth a a Baron . An. 378. pag. 347. ; whereas S. Hierom protected himself by the Authority of the Bishop of Alexandria , as well as by that of the Pope . Again , after a crafty Device to hide the evident Testimony which Gregory Nyssen gives , against going in Pilgrimage to Jerusalem , He slightly mentions an Epistle of S. Hierom , which excellently confutes that then growing Superstition ; telling us , That the Court of Heaven is as open from Britain as from Jerusalem . Which remarkable Sentence , and all the other learned Arguments of that Epistle he omits by design b b Hieron . Ep. 13. Tom 1. p. 120. Baron . An. 386. p. 454 , 455. ; though if it had countenanced this Superstition , we should have had it cited at large . In like manner afterwards , when he had another fair occasion to cite this same Epistle , which doth so effectually condemn Pilgrimages , he will not quote one word out of it , but barely mentions it , and runs out into the Enquiry , what time it was writ c c Baron . An. 394. p. 613. . I have given many more Instances of these fraudulent Concealments in my Discourse of Councils , and therefore shall add no more here , but only this , That whoever reads Baronius's Annals , hears no more generally than the Evidence of one side , and that too , enlarged , if it be never so slight , and commended , if it be never so spurious ; but whatever makes against the Roman Church is depreciated and perverted , or else clapt under Hatches , and kept out of sight : Of which we have an Instance in Eusebius , who because he will not justifie their Forgeries about Constantine's Baptism and Donation , ( though he be the best of all the Ecclesiastical Historians ) is never cited , but with Reproaches and Calumnies d d Anna ' . 324. §. 143 , 144 , & 152. An. 325. §. 192 , & 193. Et An. 336. §. 7 , 8. Item An. 340. §. 40 , &c. ; and whatever he saith against them , is either concealed , or the force of it taken off , by reviling him as an Arian .

§ . 4. Another Artifice of our Annalist is , first to suppose things which make for the honour of his Church , without any manner of proof , and then to take his own Suppositions for grounds of Argument . Thus he supposes , that Constantine gave S. Peter thanks for his Victory , without any evidence from History e e Baron . An. 312. §. 58. ; yea , against his own peculiar Notion , That Constantine was then a Pagan , and durst not do any act to make him seem a Christian f f Id. ibid. §. 62. . Again , To colour their Worship of Images , He barely supposes , that the Pagan Senate dedicated a Golden Image of Christ to Constantine g g Baron . An. 312. §. 68 , 69. : He argues only from Conjectures , to prove the Munisicence of that Emperour to Rome h h Baron . An. 324. §. 72. ; whereas , if so eminent a Prince had given such great Gifts to the most famous City in the World , doubtless some Author would have mentioned it , and not have left the Cardinal to prove this by random Guesses . Again , He supposos without any proof , that Constantine knew the Supreme Power over all Christians , was in the Church of Rome i i Eod. An. §. 117. ; He produces nothing but meer Conjectures , that Osius was the Pope's Legate ; yet he boldly draws rare Inferences from this k k Eod. An. §. 127. . He doth but guess and take it for granted , that the Nicene Council was called by the Advice of Pope Sylvester l l Eod. An. §. ult. ; yet this is a Foundation for the Supremacy , and i know not what . Thus , when he hath no Author to prove , that Athanasius venerated the Martyrs , he makes it out with Who can doubt it ? — and it is fit to believe he did so m m Baron . An. 342. §. 42. . So he tells us , He had said before , that Damasus favoured Gregory Nazianzen in his being elected to be Bishop of Constantinople n n Baron . An. 380. pag. 362. . He supposes this indeed a little before o o Ibid. p. 359. : But all Ancient Authors say , and he himself affirms , That Peter ( Bishop of Alexandria ) did institute him into that Bishopric p p Idem p. 355. . He only supposes Siricius desired Theodosius to banish the Manichees from Rome ; but the Rescript is not directed to him , but to Albinus the Praefect ; and ( except the fabulous Pontifical ) there is no Evidence that Siricius was concerned in this matter q q Baron . An. 389. p. 513. . Theodoret saith , The Emperour chose Telemachus into the number of Martyrs ; but Baronius supposes , This was done not only by the Emperour's Care , but by the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Pope r r Baron . An. 395 §. 621. . To conclude , He affirms by guess , That S. Nicetus came out of Dacia into Italy , to Visit the Apostles Tombs , and to consult the Apostolical Seat s s Baron . An. 397. pag. 28 , & 29. ; but no Author makes this out . Now , how can any Reader trust an Historian , who in relating things done many Ages ago , takes the liberty to invent and suppose whatever will serve a present Turn ?

§ . 5. Add to this that he scruples not to contradict himself , and to tell manifest : Untruths to carry on the Interest of Rome , which we shall prove by these Examples : He affirms Coelicianus ( Bishop of Carthage ) relied upon one defence , The Communion of the Apostolic See ; but immediately he tells us , That he was supported by Constantine ' s favour t t Baron . An. 313. §. 18 , 19. . He cites S. Augustine , saying , Constantine ( when Coelician's Cause was referred to him ) was a Christian Emperour ; yea , he cites a Letter of Constantine , writ in a most Christian style ; and yet he feigns , that Coelicianus delayed his appearing before this Emperour , because he thought it unfit that a Bishop should be judged by a Lay-man , not yet Baptized u u Baron . An. 316. §. 59 , & 62. Collat. cum §. 60. . And again , Eight years after this he represents Constantine as a meer Pagan , who had never heard of Peter or Paul , and took them for some Heathen Deities w w Baron . An. 324. §. 39. ; whereas he saith , He was a Catechumen , and out of the Gospel had imbibed the Christian Meekness eight years before x x Id. An. 316. §. 65. . He also affirms , That in the Year 324 there was as yet none of the Senatours believed the Christian Faith y y Baron . An. 324. §. 76. . And yet he saith , Two year before this , that one or both the Consuls were Christians z z Id. An. 322. §. 1. ; yea , in the year 312. He reckons up many Senatours , who had given up their Names to Christ a a Id. An. 312. §. 75. & 76. . Thus he contradicts himself by following those Lying Acts of Syl vester , in order to support the false Story of Constantine's being Baptized at Rome . Soon after , out of a Fabulous Author he talks very big of the low Reverence which Constantine paid to the Bishops at the Nicene Council b b Baron . An. 325. §. 16. ; whereas all the Authentic Historians say , The Bishops rose up when he entred in , and paid him a great respect c c Idem ibid. §. 52. . And when he hath told many incredible Legends about the Nails of the Cross , and-seems to grant that divers false Nails have been adored for the true , he excuses his abused Catholics for their mistaken Worship of false Relics , saying , That their Faith excuses their Fault d d Baron . An. 326. §. 51 , — & 54. ; so that Lies may be innocently told and believed ( it seems ) at Rome . Again he affirms , there were Monks at Rome in the year 328 , and proves this by what S. Augustine saw there at least fifty years after e e Baron . An. 328 §. 20 , & 21. ; yea , in the year 340 he saith , Athanasius first brought the Institution of Monks to Rome f f Id. An. 340. §. 8. , which is a manifest contradiction .

To proceed , I wonder with what Face he could commend Athanasius for speaking charitably of the Heretic Arius , after he was dead , when he reviles Eusebius after his death g g Baron . An. 336. §. 44. Collat. cum An. 340. §. 38. ; And never mentions any of the Protestant Doctors deceased , but with the bitterest Malice , and in the most spightful Language he can invent : If Charity were a Vertue in Athanasius , then Malice must be a Vice in him . He largely relates many Appeals to the Emperour in the case of Athanasius , and yet when at last the Bishop of Rome was chosen Arbitrator in this Case , and this but once , He cries out , Behold , Reader , the ancient Custom ! &c. Whereas since the Emperours were Christians , it was the Custom to appeal first to him , as his History abundantly proves h h Baron . An. 340. §. 2. . He very largely commends the Acts of Martyrs , but by following them falls into many Absurdities ; as where he tells us , That the Pagan Temple of Daphne at Antioch was burnt two days after the Martyrdom of Artemius i i Baron . An. 362. pag. 37. : Yet a little after he brings in this Artemius arguing with Julian , about the burning of this Temple k k Ibid. p. 44. . So he tells us , The Body of S. John Baptist was burnt to Ashes , except some Bones which were carried into Egypt to Athanasius : And yet a little after S. Hierom affirms , his Bones remained at Sebaste , and wrought Miracles there l l Baron . An. 362. pag. 56. . As little Truth is there in his accusing Maximus the Emperour for presuming to judge of Bishops Causes m m Baron . An. 385. pag. 441. ; whereas Maximus his Letter to Siricius ( which Baronius records n n Id. An. 387. pag. 474. declares , He would call the Bishops to a Council in what City they pleased , and refer it to them ( who were best skilled ) to determine these matters . Again , in order to justifie those feigned Relicks of Protasius and Gervasius shewed now at Rome , he affirms , That S. Ambrose gave part of them to several Bishops , and some of them were brought to Rome : Whereas S. Ambrose himself ( who knew best what was done ) assures us , He buried the Rodies whole , putting every Joynt in his own order o o Baron . An. 387. pag. 468. Collat. cum Ambrose Ep. 85. . And to name no more , He brags , that Idols were pulled down no where with more zeal , than at Rome p p Baron . An. 389 , & 390. pag. 526. . Yet in the same Page he tells us , There was then newly dedicated an Alter there for sacrificing to the Heathen Gods : So that we see , designed Falshoods are not scrupled by him in things which seem to make for the honour of Rome , or her Opinions .

§ . 6. We may also observe , that for the same ends He makes innumerable false Inferences on purpose to pervert the Truth ; thus from S. Augustine's calling Melchiades , A Father of Christian People , ( as every Bishop is ) Baronius concludes , that S. Augustine was for the Popes Supremacy q q Baron . An. 313. §. 29. : So from Bishops judging in Causes where the People referred their Differences to them , he frequently infers , A right in Bishops , to judge in Temporal Matters r r Baron . An. 319. §. 30. item An. 326. §. 100 &c. item An. 398. pag. 61. & 62. : In like manner from Theodoret's , mentioning a Canon of the Church in general , and ( as his discourse shews ) referring to the Canon , which forbids any Bishop to judge a Cause till both parties were present , Baronius gathers , that the Pope was supreme over the Bishop of Alexandria , and that by the Canons of Nice s s Baron . An. 325. §. 128. . Again , That the Pope was not beholding to the Council of Nice for his Supremacy , which he had from Christ , he proves by Pope Nicholas his Testimony , who had the impudence in his own Cause and for his own Ends , to tell this Story Five hundred years after t t Id. ib. §. 130. : So he condemns the Arians , for ejecting Bishops without staying for the Bishop of Rome's Sentence , which he proves was unjust by an Epistle of Pope Julius , which says , The Arians should first have writ to all Bishops , that so what was right might be determined by all u u Baron . An. 336. §. 34. ; where Julius arrogates nothing to himself alone , as Baronius falsly pretends . And to make this single Priviledge of Rome the more credible , he doth frequently apply what the Ancients say of all the Bishops of the West , to the Pope : Thus what S. Basil saith of all the Western Churches , he applies only to Rome w w Baron . An. 371. pag. 239. : And when he recites two Epistles of S. Basil , whose Title is to the Western Bishops , and the whole discourse in it directed to many Bishops , he feigns the Name of the Pope is left out or lost , and concludes these Letters were peculiarly directed to him , and this only to support the Roman Supremacy x x Baron . An. 371. pag. 238 , & An. 372. pag. 269 , 270 , 271 , &c. ; and therefore he repeats over and over this matter , and affirms , it was an Embassy sent to the Pope y y Ibid. 273 , 274. . Thus also when S. Ambrose saith , The Western Bishops ' by their Judgment approved of his Ordination : He infers that S. Ambrose implies , It was confirmed by a public Decree of the Apostolical See z z Baron . An. 375. pag. 320. . And whereas Basil speaking of those Western Bishops in his time , who ( he saith ) kept the Faith entirely ; Baronius infers from hence , That their Successors , and especially the Bishops of Rome , have never erred since a a Baron . An. 372. pag. 276. & An. 373. pag. 310. . Like to which is his inferring the usage of Praying to Saints from a pure Rhetorical flourish of Nazianzen's , in one of his Orations b b Baron . An. 372. pag. 285. . And thus when S. Hierom uses all his Oratory to set off Virginity , because that seems to make for the Roman Celibacy , he takes him to be in good earnest , and will have all his Reflexions upon Marriage to be solid Arguments c c Baron . An. 382. pag. 402. , though S. Hierom himself calls them Trifles * * Baron . An. 390 pag 540. . But when he tells a sober Truth about the Ignorance of the Roman Clergy , then the Cardinal tells us , He speaks by way of Hyperbole d d Idem An. 385. pag 435. . From which Instances it doth appear , that our Annalist did not , like an Historian , endeavour to declare Truth , but only to serve an Interest and a Party .

§ . 7. Lastly , His Partiality notoriously appears where-ever the Church of Rome is any way concerned ; for when any thing of this kind comes in his way , he puts off the Character of an Historian and turns Disputant , labouring to confute the most ancient and authentic Authors , if they seem to say any thing against that Church . Thus we may observe what tedious digressions he makes about the Primacy of Rome in his discourse on the Nicene Council , for which he twice makes Apologies e e Baron . An. 325. §. 136 , & 140. . Again , he runs out into a long and very impertinent dispute about the Worship of Images , in an Age when no good Author mentions them as used in the Church f f Baron . An. 362. pag. 18. . In like manner , He makes a long excursion to disprove an Authentic Story of Epiphanius , tearing a Veil with a Picture wrought in it , because such things were not fit to be in Churches g g Baron . An. 392. p. 568. ; and he scarce ever meets with any of the Roman Corruptions , mentioned in the most fabulous Authors , but he leaves the History , and enlarges into Remarks upon those Passages . But if the Writer be never so eminent , that touches any of these Sores , his business always is , to baf●le the Evidence ; of which there is scarce one year in his Annals , wherein there are not some Examples . On the other side , He takes every slight occasion to make the most spiteful Reflexions on all that he counts Enemies to the Roman Church : Thus he applies the Bishop of Alexandria's description of the Arians to the Reformed Churches , though it agree much better with these of his own Religion h h Baron . An. 318. §. 80. . Again , He reviles us , because we do not honour the Modern idle lewd Monks of their Communion , as much as the Ancients did those holy and devout Monks , which were in the Primitive Times , though it be plain to all the World , these are like them in nothing but the Name i i Baron . An. 340. §. 10. item An. 363. p. 132. . The like Outcry he makes upon Protestants , for undeceiving some of those silly Nuns , who have been decoyed into unlawful Vows , meerly for Interest and Secular Ends ; and affirms the perswading these to Marry , is worse than the Arian's ravishing and murthering them at Alexandria k k Baron . An. 326. §. 29. . Thus also he compares the Reformed Divines to the Eunomians , who taught , Their Faith alone would save them , though their Lives were never so wicked l l Baron . An. 360. §. 38. ; forgetting that their Priest's convert ( as they call it ) Murderers at the Gallows , by teaching them this very Principle . And , to name no more Examples , when S. Basil inveighs against those who despised the Ancient Customs of the Primitive Church , He spitefully applies this to the Reformed m m Baron . An. 363. pag. 131. . Whereas in very Truth , they of Rome have left off more Ancient Rites , and brought in more new ones , than any sort of Christians in the World . By these and many more Instances which might be given , even out of this one Century , it is evident , that the whole design of his History is to make all the Doctrins and Practices of Rome seem to be Primitive and right , and that he cares not how unlawful the Means be which he uses , to gain this belief in his Reader .

§ . Yet to conclude , we will observe , That after all his evil-Methods there are many things which he could neither avoid relating , nor yet excuse , which condemn the Modern Roman Church . I wonder how he could Commend Constantine for abolishing the Stews , and the prostituting of Christian Women there ; and not observe , That the Pope now tolerates these Abominations in Rome it self n n Baren An. 314. §. 74. . Again , how doth it agree with the INFALLIBILITY of the Pope , to say , That one Holy Spirit governs the Catholic Church , so as to make the Bishops of all Ages and Places agree in the same Opinion o o Id. Ib. §. 76. ? If this be so , what need one Bishop alone be made Infallible ? And if it be ( as he saith ) a Doctrin taught by the Apostles , and consequently true , That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father ; then the Pope , who condemns this as an Heresie of the Greeks , is not Infallible p p Baron . An. 325. §. 70. . If Constantine had known of this Infallibility lodged at Rome , he would have sent thither for exact Copies of the Holy Scriptures , and not to Eusebius in Palestina q q Baron . An. 330. §. 23. . If Damasus had this Infallible Spirit , how came he ( after he was Pope ) to need to be instructed in the meaning of Scripture by S. Hierom r r Baron . An. 379. pag. 353. ? Or , if his Successor Siricius had been Infallible , how could the Origenists ( who held such palpable Heresies , that a Woman discovered them to be in an Error ) impose upon his Simplicity ; and get Letters Testimonial from this sole Judge of Heresie s s Baron . An. 397. pag. 32. ? How came the Council of Alexandria to send their Decrees to Epiphanius , S. Hierom and S. Chrysostom , and not first send them to Anastasius , who was Infallible ? And indeed Baronius cannot prove they were sent to him at all , but by saying , It is fit to believe , they were sent t t Baron . An. 399. p. 85. cum 88. . Moreover , many things in this Century related by these Annals , look not favourably upon the SUPREMACY . Constantine calls Eusebius's Election to the See of Antioch , An advancement to the Bishopric of the Universal Church u u Baron . An. 324. §. 152. , which looks as if he knew nothing of the Pope's Pretences : That Marcellus of Ancyra , even when he was accused before Pope Julius , should call him his Fellow-Minister , would have been very Sawey , if he had known Julius to be the Supreme Bishop of the World w w Baron . An. 341. §. 51. . And if this Supremacy had been owned in former Ages , how came the Eastern Bishops to be so angry at their being desired to come to Rome x x Baron . An. 341. §. 56 , & 57. ; yea , how came they to Excommunicate the Pope , for communicating with one whom they had judged a Criminal y y Id. An. 347. §. 64. ? It is not concerning the Pope , but Athanasius , that Nazianzen saith , He did again prescribe Laws to the whole World z z Baron . An. 362. pag. 66. : It seems the Pope was not the Supreme Caller of Synods , when S. Hierom ( speaking of a Council which he thought was not Authentic ) Asks , What Emperour ordered it to be Convened a a Eod. An. pag. 80. . We cannot find in any genuine Antiquity in this Age , so great an Encomium of Rome , as Nazianzen the Elder gives of Caesarea , viz. That from the beginning it was , and now is accounted the Mother of almost all Churches , on which all the Christian World casts its Eye , like a Circle drawn from a Center b b Baron . An. 369. pag. 194. . A man would guess the Pope's Authority reached no further than the Suburbicarian Regions , because Ursicinus ( Damasus his Competitor ) was forbid by the Emperour from entring into Rome , or the Suburbicarian Regions c c Baron . An. 371. pag. 235. . S. Basil was very unmannerly , if not unjust ( had this Supremacy been then claimed ) to send his first Embassy unto Athanasius , and tell him , that He had the Care of all the Churche ; d d Baron . An. cod . p. 236 , 237 , &c. ; yea afterward , when he did send into the West , he directs his Epistle to the Italian and Gallican Bishops , without mentioning the Pope in particular : And truly Damasus ( if he were Supreme ) took little care of his Office , since upon so pressing Occasions he would neither Answer S. Basil , nor S. Hierom for a long time . And S. Hierom was somewhat bold when he reproves the Ambition of Rome , and said , He would Follow no Chief but Christ e e Bar. An. 372. pag. 281 , 282. . S. Ambrose also seems not to give that deference to the Mother of all Churches that he ought , since he often Dined and made Feasts on the Saturday , which was a Fast at Rome f f Baron . An. 375. pag 321. ; and had the Pope then been Supreme , why did Ambrose make a Bishop at Sirmium , in Iliyria , so far from his own City of Milan g g Idem An. 380. pag. 362. ? The same S. Ambrose also speaks of Supreme Bishops in Gallia h h Baron . An. 392 p. 558. . It is strange that Siricius , the Supreme Pastor should let the Pagans set up an Altar to the Goddess of Victory in the Roman Capitol , and that S. Ambrose should be the only Complainant in this Case i i Id. cod . An. pag. 560. . Finally , if the Pope then had any Jurisdiction over the Eastern Churches , why was not he consulted about Ordaining S. Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople ? and how came the Patriarch of Alexandria to be sent to , and to Ordain him k k Baron . An. 397. pag. 14. ? These Instances shew , the Supremacy of Rome was unknown in that Age : And so was the INVOCATION of SAINTS and ADORING of RELICKS also , as one might suspect by these Passages , That the Holy Men of those Ages , in their Dangers and Necessities are said only to have prayed to God , not to the Blessed Virgin , or to Saints and Angels for help : So did Alexander Bishop of Constantinople against Arius l l Baron . An. 336. §. 47. ; so did Parthenius against the Pagans m m An. 337. §. 41. ; so did Constantius the Emperour , for Recovery of his Health n n An 338. §. 11. ; so also did those Persian Martyrs o o An. 343. §. 16. . Thus Euphrates , an Eminent Bishop , implores only the help of Christ against an illusion of the Devil p p An. 348. §. 9. . The Christians who translated the Bones of Babylas the Martyr , did not Pray to him , but Praised God q q An. 362. pag. 40. ; and Macedonius , an holy Monk , is observed only to call upon God Night and Day r r An. 388. pag. 477. . Arcadius the Emperour in an Earthquade prayed to the Lord , the only preserver of the Humble s s An. 396. pag. 21. . Porphyrius , Bishop of Gaza , and his People , called only upon Christ , not upon any Saints t t An. 398. pag. 71. : So that all these used the Protestant way of Worship . And the Romanists must be very unsafe in their Worship of Saints , since Baronius confesses , one of their Catalogues of Saints puts in the Names of two Hereticks , as good Catholic Saints u u Baron . An. 340. §. 41. & An. 341. §. 11. . So also as to the Adoration of Relicks , the Faithful in Persia did not keep the Body of their Martyr to Worship , but buried it in a Tomb w w An. 343. §. 16. . So S. Anthony the Primitive Hermit , fearing and disliking this Superstition , ordered his Body to be put into a private and unknown Grave , according to the Custom of the Catholic Church x x Baron . An. 358. §. 23. ; and therefore Metaphrastes his sole Evidence will not pass , for the Legend of translating the Bodies of S. Andrew and S. Luke to Constantinople y y Ibid. §. 25. . 'T is true , this Superstition was then creeping in , and some Cheaters did begin to sell the Bones of False Martyrs ( a Trade used at Rome for many Ages ) ; but Theodosius his Law severely punished this Crime z z Baron . An. 386. pag. 455. : Which ridiculous Imposture , Julian the witty Apostate had justly exposed some years before , as being contrary to Scripture and to the Christian Law a a Id. An. 362. pag. 92. & An. 361. p. 36. .

To proceed , Had the Altars been then used to be adorned with IMAGES , as they are now at Rome , the Faithful would not have been so surprized at bringing in an Image , and placing it on the Altar , as Optatus saith they were b b Baron . An. 348. §. 33. ; and Baronius can find no Precedent for carrying Images in Procession to procure Rain , but the Pagan Superstition c c Baron . An. 362. pag. 60. . In S. Ambroses time the Virgins Apartment in the Church was not adorned with Pictures or Images , but ( after the Protestant way ) with Sentences of Holy Scripture d d Baron . An. 377. pag. 327. . Theodosius should have excepted the Images of the Saints , when he forbad the honouring any Images void of Sense , with lighting Tapers , offering Incense and Garlands to them e e Baron . An. 392. pag. 562. : So that doubtless this is an INNOVATION in their Church , and so are many other of their Rites . The Pope's Bull , to choose a Stranger to be Bishop of a Church , whereof he never had been a Member , was unknown when Pope Julius condemned this Practice f f Baron . An. 341. §. 17. . The Custom of putting the Wafer in the Communicant's Mouth ( as Baronius confesseth ) was unknown in this Century , when ( Protestant like ) they took it into their hands g g Baron . An. 361. p. 2. . In S. Augustine's time the People at Rome Fasted on Wednesdays which use they have now left off h h Baron . An. 388. pag. 495. . When the Rites of Burial used at Christian Funerals are described by Nazianzen ( on occasion of the Funeral of Caesarius ) there is no mention of any Prayers for his Soul ; for that Superstition was not then allowed i i Baron . An. 368. pag. 179. . The carrying a Cross before them in Procession , cannot be made out in this Age , but by the spurious Act of Martyrs cited by Metaphrastes .. k k Baron . An. 398. p. 71. But lest I tire the Reader , I will conclude with one or two Instances more , to shew the difference between Modern Rome and this Age : Their Monks now are not like those of that time , but resemble the Messalian Heretics , who pretended to Pray continually , and never used any labour , and claimed all mens Alms as due only to them ; who said , that Marriages might be dissolved , seducing Children from their Parents , and boasting they were pure from Sin ; yea , wearing Sackcloth , that all may see it l l Baron . An. 361. §. 35 , ad §. 39. . Theodosius made a Law to banish Monks from Cities , and oblige them to retire into Desert places m m Baron . An. 390. pag. 537. : But the Modern Monks are all for Noble Seats in the best freqnented Cities ; so that these and those are vastly different . Finally , He makes the Persecuting Spirit of Macedonius , and the Patience of Athanasius , a mark to distinguish Truth from Heresie : Now , if we apply this Mark ; as none are greater Persecutors than the Romanists , so we must conclude none are further from the Truth n n Baron . An. 360. §. 27 , & 28. .

And now by these few Instances , within the compass of one Century , the Reader may judge what Truth there can be in that Religion , that needs so many Frauds to hide its Faults ; and what trust can be given to that Historian , who to serve an ill Cause , makes no scruple to use all these kinds of Deceit . This may warn all that design to peruse these Annals , not to rely upon any of his Authorities or Arguments without examining , and also not to take every thing for Primitive and Ancient , which he pretends to be so . This may suffice for this Volume , and ( if we proceed ) we shall make the like Remarks on the following Tomes ; to shew , that their Religion is made up of Falshoods , and cannot be defended without Lying and Forgery , which is the great support of their Evil Cause .

FINIS . Glory be to the GOD of Truth .

Imprimatur

26 March , 1695. C. Alston , R. P. D. HEN. Episc. Lond. à Sacris .

THE CHURCH HISTORY Clear'd from the Roman forgeries And Corruptions found in the COUNCILS and BAR ONIUS : FROM The Year 400 , till the end of the Fifth General Council , An. Dom. 553.

Being the Third and Fourth Parts of the Roman Forgeries .

By THOMAS COMBER , D. D. Dean of DURHAM .

For we have not followed cunningly devised Fables , 2 Pet. I. 16.

LONDON .

Printed by Samuel Roycroft , for Robert Clavell at the Peacock at the West-End of S. Pauls , 1695.

TO THE Most Reverend Father in GOD , JOHN , By Divine Providence Lord Archbishop of YORK , Primate of ENGLAND , AND METROPOLITAN . May it please your Grace ,

WHen I formerly had the Honour of Your Acquaintance , tho' at a distance , I reckon'd it none of my least Felicities : But since that happy Providence that delivered these Nations , brought Your Grace nearer , to Illustrate these Northern Regions with Your excellent Doctrine , and warm them with Your pious Example ; I could not better express my extraordinary Satisfaction and my Duty both , than by presenting these Papers to Your Grace , who have suffered so much from the Romish Party , and done so much to prevent their once growing and dangerous Errors .

These Collections were all made , when this Church was threatned to have their Corruptions imposed on us ; and the First Part was ready for the Press while that Cloud hung over our Heads . This Second Part hath been hindred by divers necessary Avocations , but now comes to appear under Your Grace's auspicious Patronage ; and if it be so happy also to gain Your Approbation , that will recommend it to all that know Your Grace's solid Judgment and Undisguised Integrity . Frauds and Forgeries are naturally Your Aversation , and therefore the discovery of so great a heap of them , may I hope be acceptable to Your Grace ; not on your own Account , to whom probably here is nothing New ; but because this Essay may assist young Divines and such as begin to read Church-History , at a cheap and easy rate to distinguish Truth from Falshood in matters of great importance . I shall add no more , since to give your Grace your just Character , is as needless as it would be difficult for me , and would not be pleasing to your Grace ; only I shall most heartily pray , That the Church may be long happy in Your Conduct , and that he may be reckoned among Your Grace's Friends , who is ,

My Lord , Your Grace's most faithful Servant , and Your True Honourer , THO: COMBER .

THE PREFACE .

ANTIQUITY seems so Naturally to challenge Veneration from all succeeding Times , that it gives a Value to many things which have nothing else to recommend them : But the Records of former Ages , especially those relating to the Faith and Practice of the Church , while it was in its purity and splendor , are by all sober Men accounted truly Sacred . Yet no Writings have suffered more by fraudulent Hands than these : For most of them being for many Ages in the custody of those , who had a new Authority to set up , and were to contrive new Doctrines to furnish and support it with Wealth and Power , their Interest obliged them to corrupt all genuine Ecclesiastical History , and to invent innumerable spurious Pieces , under great and ancient Names , thereby to impose upon the ignorant Ages , and make them imagine , their later Devices were of Apostolical , or at least Primitive Original : And this is done with so much Artifice and Cunning , that a careless Reader of the Ecclestastical Story ( as they represent it ) is in danger of being persuaded , That the Modern Roman Church is in all things conformable to the Primitive , from which it differs as much as Darkness doth from Light : To prevent which fatal Mistake , I think no Time can be better spent , no Pains more usefully employed , than in correcting the History of the Ancient Church , and discovering the various Falsifications thereof .

Wherefore I have now pursued and enlarged my Design of remarking the Roman Frauds and Forgeries in their Editions of the Councils , and in Baronius , by rectifying the History of the Church , and all Passages relating to it , as I go along ; having proceeded as far as the Middle of the Sixth Century : A Period which contains Three of the first Five General Councils , and is memorable for variety of most important Transactions . It was in this time that the most refined Hereticks disturbed the Church , and the barbarous Nations broke into the Roman Empire , and setled in divers parts of it . And while the former employed the Pens of the Learned , and the later diverted the Thoughts of the declining Emperors , Rome had an unlucky Opportunity to serve the ends of her aspiring Ambition , and to lay the Foundation of her future Grandeur : Which Projects were furthered by a great decay , not only of Learning , but of Piety and good Manners , toward the End of this time , which made way for divers Superstitions to creep into the Worship , and many Irregularities to grow up in the Discipline of the Christian Church . Yet still there were many Learned and pious Writers , who laboured to defend the Faith , to check all sorts of Vsurpations , and to keep up the Primitive Purity and good Order : So that the Editors of these Councils and Baronius have been put to all their shifts , to feign an Agreement between the Records of this Period , and the Modern Doctrines and Practices of their Church , foisting in many Legends and spurious Tracts , and corrupting the Words , as well as forcing the Sense of the genuine Writings of these Ages .

Of which Proceedings I was in hopes to have found , both an exact Account and a just Censure in the lately published Work of the Learned Monsieur . Du Pin a a New Hist. of Eccles. Writers , &c. Lond. 1693. . And it must be confessed he hath owned more of these ill Practices , than any Writer of that Church , and suffered for telling more Truth than the Roman Cause can bear . Yet after all , either by the prejudices of his Education , or the influence of his Superiors , and the disadvantage of his Circumstances , many things of this kind are omitted , which are necessary for us to know : And though I would advise Young Students of Ecclesiastical Antiquity ( whose service I aim at ) to Read those Elaborate Collections ; Yet I cannot assure them , they may every where depend on them .

The best method to know the wole Truth , is to Read over the Councils themselves , and compare them , as they go on , with Baronius's Annals , and both with these brief Remarks ; which will so unfold that Mystery of Rome's corrupting and falsifying the Church-History and Writings of these times , that a diligent observer will hereby be enabled ( without a Guide ) to discover more of these Errors , than our designed brevity would allow us to set down : And such a Reader may not only safely peruse the Historians and Disputants of that side , but will soon arrive at the Skill to confute all their Arguments , which are supported by disguising of Ancient Records : And as his discovery of the Roman Frauds , will give him a just aversation for that Church ; so his seeing that our Church rejects these Arts of deceiving , and needs no false or feigned Evidence , must give him as true a value for it ; since we appeal to all uncorrupted Antiquity , Our Pastors can say with S. Peter , We have not followed cunningly devised Fables b b 2 Peter I. 16. . Deceit in Human Affairs , is equally Odious and Mischievous : But in Religious Matters it is highly Impious and Intollerable ; because it not only misleads Men in matters relating to their Eternal Salvation : But ( as a Learned Prince used to say , ) it makes God himself an Instrument of the Crime , and a Party to the holy Cheat c c Dum homines decipunt , Deum ipsum interponunt tanquam sceleris mediatorem : Rex Alfons . apud Phil. Camerar . hor. subs . Tom. III. pag. 127. : To this Horrid Degree of Guilt , may the design of imposing false and gainful Doctrines drive partial Men. But the Mischief is prevented as soon as it is discovered ; wherefore I hope these Papers , which so plainly expose this sort of Falsifications , may set the History of these Times in a clearer Light ; and not only help to undeceive some well meaning and misled Romanists , but to Establish the Inquisitive and Ingenious Members of this rightly Reformed Church , for whose Safety and Prosperity the Author daily Prays , and to whose Service he Dedicates all his Labours .

THE CONTENTS . PART III. CENT . V. Chap. I OF the Time before the Council of Ephesus , Page 1 Chap. II. Of the Time from the Council of Ephesus , till the Council of Chalcedon , p. 47 Chap. III. Of the Council of Chalcedon , being the Fourth General Council , p. 84 An Appendix concerning Baronius's Annals , p. 122 Chap IV. Roman Errors and Forgeries in the Councils , from the end of the Fourth Council , till An. Dom. 500. p. 157 An Appendix concerning Baronius his Annals , p. 189 PART IV. CENT . VI. Chap. I. Errors and Forgeries in the Councils , from the Year 500 , to the End of the Fifth General Council , An Dom. 553. p. 218 An Epitome of Dr. Crakenthorp's Treatise of the Fifth General Council at Constantinople , Anno 553. p. 279

ERRATA .

PAg. 10. lin. 11. read , fourth time , p. 14. l. 4. those words Quibus verbis , &c. were to be in the Margen at ( * ) , p. 15. l. 24. r. noting in the , p. 21. l. 18. r. prove themselves , p. 26. l. 26. 1. to assert , p 51. l. 21. r. from giving , p. 62. l. 3. r. divers proofs , p. 64. l. 35. r. him by their , p. 66. l. 29. ( dele ) when , p. 68. l. 16. r. yet the inventor , p. 69. Marg. at l. 33 , r. amplificatorem , p. 74. l. 5. r. That inded Leo , p. 76. l. 4. r. S. Germanus , p. 79. l. 24 r. a strange assertion , ib. l. 32. r. a packed party , p. 80. l. 31. r. Pulcheria , p. 92. l. 21. r. forgēs the title , p. 108. l. 28. r. made to these , p. 113. l. penul . r. Emperors patronage , p. 134. l. 11. r. Constantius his time , p. 152. l. 16. r. the pilgrimages , p. 153. l. 17. r. Legates ; of , p. 161. lin. ult. & p. 162. l. 1 , r. Pontificate , p. 279 l. 19. r. Theodoret , p. 289. l. 14. r. and again by , p. 301. l. 23. r. and Marcian , ib. l. 24. r. commend Justinian , p. 402. & 403. wrong numbred for 302 , 303. p. 302. l. 13. r. Agathias ( ibid. ) penult. & ult , r. Justin .

Roman Forgeries IN THE COUNCILS .

PART III. CENT . V.

CHAP. I.

Of the time before the Council of Ephesus .

§ . 1. THE Editors of the Councils being An. Do. 400 generally the Popes Creatures , seem not so much concerned to give us a true Account of what was done , as to make their Readers believe , that all the Affairs of the whole Christian World were managed solely by the Bishop of Rome , and every thing determined by his single Authority : Thus the first Council . of Toledo was a a Bin. Tom. 1. Par. 2. pag. 596. Lab. Tom. 2. Col. 122● . held in Spain , under Patronus , Bishop of that City : The Title says it was held in the time of Pope Anastasius , and notes the Name of the Consul for that year , 400. But Baronius finding an Epistle of Pope Innocent writ to a Council of Toledo five years after this b b Epist. 23. P. Innoc. ap. Baron . An. 405. pag. 235. ( relating to the Priscillian Hereticks then abounding in Spain . ) purely to make us think the Bishops of Spain could do nothing without the Pope , removes this Council down to the Year 405. Yet afterwards in his Appendix , perceiving the trick was too gro●● , he recants that Chro●ology , and restores it to its true Year Anno 400. c c Baron . Ap. pend . ad Tom. 5. pag. 691. But after all , this Epistle of Pope Innocent is by some suspected to be forged ; and Sirmondus confesseth , that all the Old Books cite this Epistle as written to a Council at Tholouse d d Lab. pag. 1279. ; so that he and Baronius , probably altered the reading , and put in Toledo instead of Tholouse , because this was the more Famous Council ; and they had a mind it should be thought that all eminent Councils expected the Popes Letters before they durst act : Whereas this Council of Toledo , makes it plain , that they censured the Priscillianists , and absolued such as recanted purely by their own Authority . And when they thought fit to acquaint other Churches abroad with what they had done , they send an Embassie , not only to the Pope , but to Simplicianus , Bishop of Milan , whose Judgment and Authority they value as equal with the Popes e e Bin. pag. 602. & not . pag. 606. Lab. col. 1231. not . col. 1240. . And here we must observe , that Baranius and the Annotator ( seeing it was a reflection upon the Popes to have a Bishop of Milan ranked equal with the Pope ) affirm ( without any Proof ) that St. Ambrose and his Successor Simplicianus were only the Pope , Legates , and that these Spanish Bishops would communicate with none but such as the Apostolical S●● did communicate with f f Bin. notes . . Whereas they have the principal regard to the See of Milan , and in the definitive Sentence name only St. Ambrose g g ut supra : ita Lab. Baron . , though some Forger hath there manifestly put in these words , add also what Siricius advised : And in the Council of Turin , which Baronius cites , St. Ambrose is named before the Pope ; yea it is manifest by divers African Councils * * About this time . , that they gave equal respect at least to the Judgment and Authority of the Bishop of Milan , as to those of Rome f f Baron . An. 405. & appen . ad Tom. 3. pag. 693. . So that it is ridiculous and absurd to fancy that St. Ambrose and his Successors ( who were greater Men than the Popes for Learning and Reputation ) were the Legates of Rome ; and this hath been invented meerly to aggrandize that See . And for that same reason they have stusted into the Body of this Council a Rule of Faith against the Priscillianists , transmitted from some Bishop of Spain with the Precept of Pope Leo , who was not Pope till forty years after this Council g g Bin. pag. 599. Lab. col. 1227. . Yea , Binius in the very Title of this Council , would have it confirmed by another Pope that lived divers Centuries after , of which Labbè was so ashamed , that he hath struck that whole Sentence out of his Edition h h Vid. Titul . Concil. ap. Bin. & Lab. . As to the Canons of this Council I shall only remark : That the first of them lays a very gentle punishment upon Deacons and Priests who lived with their Wives , before a late Interdict , which is no more but the prohibiting them to ascend to any higher Order i i Concil. Tol. 1. can . 1. Bin. p. 597. Lab. col. 1223. . And no wonder they touched this point so gently , for this prohibiting Wives to the Clergy was never heard of in Spain till Siricius ( who died about three years before ) advised it in his Epistle to Himerius , and therefore Innocent in his third Epistle said , Siricius was the Author of this form of Ecclesiastical Discipline , that is , of the Clergies Celibacy : and adds , that those who had not received his Decree were worthy of pardon k k Innoc. cp. 3. Bin. pag. 612. Lab. col. 1254. : And by the many and repeated Canons made in Spain afterward in this Matter , it appears , the inferior Clergy would not follow the Popes advice . The fourteenth Canon l l Concil. Tol. can . 14. Bin. p. 598. Lab. col. 1225. shews that the Primitive way of receiving the Communion , was by the peoples taking it into their hands , as they do now in our Church : And the Notes confess , that the Roman Custom of taking it into their mouths out of the Priests hand is an innovation m m Not. Bin. pag. 598. Lab. col. 1239. , brought in after the corrupt Doctrine of Transubstantiation had begot many superstitious Conceits about this Holy Sacrament , the altering of the Doctrine occasioning this change in the way of receiving : Whereas the Protestant Churches which retain the Primitive Doctrine , keep also the Primitive Rite of Communicating . To this Council are tack'd divers Decrees which belong to some Council of Toledo or other ; but the Collectors , Burchard , Ivo , &c. not knowing to which , have cited them under this General Title , out of the Council of Toledo , and so the Editors place them all here n n Bin. pag. 602. Lab. col. 1231. . But most of them do belong to later times , and the name of Theodorus , Arch-Bishop of Canterbury , in one of these Fragments shews it was made 300 years after this time o o Bin. pag. 604. Lab. col. 1236. An. Dom. 401. .

We have in the next place two African Councils said to be under Anastasius , though indeed they were under the Bishop of Carthage : The former of these , decrees an Embassie shall be sent both to Anastasius , Bishop of Rome , and Venerius , Bishop of Milan , for a supply of Clergy-men , of whom at that time they had great scarcity in Africa p p Bin. pag. 606. Lab. col. 1241. . The other African Council determines they will receive such Donatists as recanted their Errors , into the same Orders of Clergy which they had , before they were reconciled to the Church , provided the Bishop of Rome , Milan and other Bishops of Italy ( to whom they sent a second Embassie ) consented to it : Now here , though all the Italian Bishops were applied to , and he of Milan by name , as well as the Bishops of Rome ; and though it was not their Authority , but their Advice and Brotherly Consent , which the African Bishops expected ; yet Baronius and Binius tell us , it is certain that Anastasius did give them licence to receive these Donatists in this manner , because St. Augustin said they did receive them q q Bin. pag. 607. Lab. col. 1242. Baron . An. 401. pag. 130. . Whereas St. Augustine never mentions any licence from the Pope , and his leave or consent was no more desired than the leave of other eminent Bishops , only the Annalist and his followers were to make this look as an indulgence granted from Rome alone .

§ . 2. Pope Innocent succeeded Anastasius , who had the An. Dom. 402. good fortune to be convinced ( by St. Augustine , and other Bishops more learned than himself ) that Pelagius and Celestius were Hereticks , and so to joyn with the Orthodox in condemning them , for which he is highly commended by St. Augustine , St. Hierom , and by Prosper , who were glad they had the Bishop of so powerful and great a City of their side ; and so was poor St. Chrysostom also , whose Cause he espoused when Theophilus of Alexandria and the Empress oppressed him ; and by that means Innocent also got a good Character from St. Chrysostom and his Friends in the East : But some think it was rather his good fortune than his judgment , which made him take the right side : The Pontifical fills up his Life , as usually , with frivolous matters r r Bin. pag. 607. Lab. col. 1242. . But two things very remarkable are omitted there , the one is a passage in Zosimus , viz. That when Alaricus first besieged Rome , and the Pagans there , said the City would never be happy till the Gentile Rites were restored , The Praefect communicates this to Pope Innocent , who valuing the safety of the City before his own Opinion , privately gave them leave to do what they desired s s Zosim . hist. lib. 5. pag. 816. . The other is , That when Rome was taken afterwards by Alarious , Pope Innocent was gone out of the City to Ravenna , and did not return till all was quiet ; and therefore I cannot with Baronius think that St. Hierom compares Pope Innocent to Jeremiah the Prophet t t Baron . An. 410. pag. 301. ; for Jeremiah staid among God's People and preached to them , but Innocent was gone out of Rome long before it was seized by the Goths . Further we may observe , that whereas St. Hierom advised a Noble Roman Virgin to beware of the Pelagian Hereticks , and to hold the Faith of Holy Innocent u u Hieron . ad Dem. ep. 8. pag. 75. : Baronius is so transported with this , that he quotes it twice in one year , and thus enlarges on it , That St. Hierom knew the Faith was kept more pure and certainly in the Seat of Peter , than by Augustine or any other Bishop , so that the Waters of Salvation were to be taken more pure out of the Fountain than out of any Rivers w w Baron . An. 413. pag. 354 , & 358. ; which absurd Gloss is easily confuted by considering , that this Lady was a Member of the Roman Church , and so ought to hold the Faith of her own Bishop , especially since he was at that time Orthodox ; and this was all St. Hierom referred to : For he doth not at all suppose the Roman See was infallible , nor did he make any Comparison between Augustine and Innocent , since he well knew that in point of Learning and Orthodox Judgment Augustine was far above this Pope , who indeed derived all the skill he had as to the condemning Pelagius from the African Fountains , and especially from St. Augustine : Besides , nothing is more common than for some Eminent Bishops to be named as the Standard of Catholick Communion , not from any Priviledge of their See , but because at that time they were Orthodox : So the Bishops of Constantinople , Alexandria and Antioch are named in a Rescript of Arcadius the Emperor , with this Character , that such as did not hold Communion with them should be cast out of the Church x x Baron . An. 404. pag. 202. . And thus Athanasius , Ambrose , Cyril and others , eminent for being Orthodox , have been made the Touchstones of Mens Faith , such passing for true Believers only , who held the same Faith with them .

For this Pope there are divers Epistles published , upon which and the partial Notes upon them we will make some brief remarks .

The first Epistle to Decentius , Bishop of Eugubium , was writ the last year of Innocent Anno 416. y y Bin. marg. pag. 609. Lab. marg. col. 1248. but is placed first , because it talks big of St. Peter , and of the duty of other Churches to conform to the Roman usages : But there are some passages in it which make it questionable whether this Pope writ it ; or , if he did , shew his ignorance and gross mistakes ; for the Author affirms , That no Apostle but Peter did Institute Churches , Ordain Priests and Preach in Italy , France , Spain , Africa , Sicily and the adjacent Islands z z Innoc. ep. 1. Bin. pag. 608. Lab. col. 1248. . Whereas the Scripture testifies that St. Paul did institute the Church at Rome and preached in Italy ; and most of the Ecclesiastical Writers affirm that St. James preached in Spain . 2ly . He enjoyns the Saturday Fast a a Bin. pag. 609. Lab. col. 1246. which was a peculiar Custom of the Roman Church not observed in the East , nor at Milan , nor almost in any other Churches of divers Ages after ; and we may observe that among all Innocent's Reasons for it , there is not one word of the Blessed Virgin , who was not worshiped in those days , as she is now by the Romanists , who now pretend to observe this Saturday Fast peculiarly to the honour of the Virgin Mary . 3ly . He allows not only Priests , but also Lay Christians to give extream Unction to the Sick , if the Oyl be but consecrated by a Bishop b b Innoc. ep. 1. §. 8. Bin. ibid. Lab. col. 1238. . In which point the Roman Church hath since altered her Opinion , and I doubt not but they will call this now , a manifest error .

The second Epistle to Victricius ( as Labbè confesseth ) is patched up out of the fourth Epistle of Siricius and the seventh of Pope Zachary c c Bin. marg. pag. 610 , & 611. Lab. col. 1252 , 1253. . And the Centuriators note concerning all these Epistles which go under Innocent's Name , That sometimes whole Paragraphs are taken out of the Epistles of both former and later Popes d d Magdeb. Cent. 5. pag. 1233. , which is a ground to suspect that most of them are not genuine : However there hath been a later hand employed to foist in a passage or two into this Epistle ; for whereas the First Writer declares that , all Causes shall be determined in the Province where they happen , some have put in a Sentence [ excepting the reverence due to the Roman Church ] into the Body of the Section ; and an exception of reserving the greater Causes for the Apostolick See , in the end of that Section e e Bin. pag. 611. Lab. col. 1250. , which make the whole Decree null , and contradict the Nicene Canon cited there : And whereas the former sentence was meer non-sense in Binius , Labbè hath put two words ( siue praejudicie ) into his Edition , to make this gross Addition seem coherent , and conceal the Forgery : Again , the Author of this Epistle in his zeal against the Clergies Marriage , falsly cites it for Scripture , That God's Priests must marry but once f f Bin. ib. §. 6. Lab. col. 1251. ; and it is but a poor excuse which Labbè makes , that Tertullian had cited this as out of Leviticus , since the infallible Interpreter of Scripture should have corrected his Error , and not have countenanced an addition to the Holy Text to serve an ill Cause . 3ly . The Writer shews himself grosly ignorant of the Courses of the Jewish Priests , when he saith , they did not depart from the Temple nor go to their House in the year of their Ministration g g Ibid. ap. Bin. Lab. § 9. . Whereas every one knows that there was but 24 Courses of the Priests , and that every Family ministred but one Week at a time from Sabbath to Sabbath h h See Selden of Christ's Nativity , pag. 58 , &c. . Yet this Author makes the same mistake again in the third Epistle , and considently talks again of the year of their Course . 4ly . Whereas St. Paul had declared Marriage honourable in all Men ( without excepting Ministers ) and the Bed undefiled i i Heb. XIII . 4. . This Impudent Epistolizer calls the use of Marriage in the Clergy a being stained with Carnal Concupisence , and expounds that place , Those who are in the Flesh cannot please God k k Rom. VIII . 8. ; of such Marriages l l Ibid. §. 9. , making the Apostle contradict himself by this sensless and false Gloss : But notwithstanding all these pernicious and absurd Errors , Baronius and Binius do extreamly magnifie the Pope upon this occasion , as being that Original Fountain from whence the most Famous Bishops of the World used to draw Water , knowing of what great Strength and Authority these things were which came from the Apostolical See m m Not. in cp . 2. Bin. pag. 612. Lab. col. 1253. Baron . An. 406. pag. 249. . But first , If these Epistles be forged ( which is very probable ) then all these brags and bold inferences are vain ; if they be true and were writ by Innocent , they may justly blush , that such poor stuff should come from the Bishop of so great a See ; and however it will not follow that the Roman Bishop was the Head of the Catholick Church , because Victricius and Exuperius writ to him for advice . For how many more and greater Bishops writ to St. Basil , St. Augustine ; yea to Isidore of Peleusium and St. Hieroin who were only Priests ? and how far do their Answers exceed those of the Pope ? Yet none will be so ridiculous to magnifie the See of Coesarea or Hippo , or the Monasteries of Peleusium and Bethlehem , as if they were the very Fountains of Religion , or these Persons the Heads of the Catholick Church : I will only add , that Orosius is noted by Baronius himself to have consulted with St. Augustine and St. Hierom , ( about matters of Faith , and greater concernment by far than these ) and not with Innocent his pretended Original Fountain n n Baron . An. 414. pag. 363. ; so that every one doubtless did not take the Pope for the sole infallible Oracle in those days .

The third Epistle to Exuperius is liable to all the Objections against the former : Labbè saith it is patch'd up out of Siricius Epistle to Himerius , the second Epistle of Celestine , and one of Leo to Theodorus o o Lab. col. 1254 , &c. in marg. ; and therefore probably it is forged : Or if we grant it genuine , it looks not very favourably upon their Modern Pretence to Infallibility ; for the Pope here says , he will answer according to the measure of his understanding ; and confesses , that by Conference he added to his Knowledge ; and while he was answering others , always learned something himself p p Bin. pag. 612. Lab. col. 1254. . The Notes also are much mistaken in arguing from two Bishops enquiring of Pope Innocent's sense in some matters of Discipline , That all the Catholick Church ought to keep the Decrees of the Apostolick See q q Notis Bin. pag. 613. Lab. col. 1257. . For there were many hundred Bishops in those and other Provinces , who never enquired after the Bishop of Rome's customs , nor desired his advice ; and it is very certain that divers of these pretended Decrees were not observed , no not in France ( where these two Bishops lived ) for divers Ages after they are pretended to be sent thither . Before I leave this Epistle I must observe , that the last Section about the Canon of Scripture , wherein all the Apocryphal Books are reckoned up as part of the Canon r r Ep. 3. Innoc . §. 7. Bin. p. 613. Lab. col. 1256. , is a gross Forgery added to it 300 years after Innocent's death ; for Cresconius never saw this part of the Epistle , nor doth he mention it under this Head , though he cite the other parts of it ; so that if the whole Epistle be not forged , yet this part of it is certainly spurious , and added to it by a later hand , as is at large demonstrated by Bishop Cosens in his History of the Canon of Scripture , to which I refer the Reader s s Cous . Schol. Hist. An. 405. pag. 118. , noting only that the Council of Trent grounded their Decree about the Canon of Scripture , not upon genuine Antiquity , but palpable Forgeries and Corruptions .

In the following Epistles unto the twelfth , there is nothing remarkable , but some brags of the dignity of Rome , and many pretences to a strict observance of the Ancient Canons , which were no where oftner broken than in that Church : Some think they are all forged , because they want the Consuls names t t Bin. pag. 614 , &c. Lab. col. 1260 , &c. . And the twelfth Epistle may pass in the same rank , since it is dated with false Consuls , viz. Julius the fourths time , and Palladius u u Bin. pag. 615. Lab. col. 1264. ; but because it seems to shew that the Pope took care even of Foreign Churches , Baronius resolves to amend it of his own head , and puts in Theodosius and Palladius , though still the number is false w w Baron . An. 416. num. 30. pag. 393. ; for Theodosius was the seventh time Consul with Palladius , not the fourth ; and had not this Epistle made for the Popes Supremacy , the Annalist would not have taken pains to mend it .

The thirteenth Epistle , which passes in Binius for a famous testimony of Innocent's zeal in discovering the Pelagians x x Bin. pag. 616. , and meriting Notes , is the same with the beginning of the second Epistle of Foelix the fourth y y Bin. Tom. 2. Par. 1. p. 637. ; and Labbè saith it is a forgery of the counterfeit Isidore z z Lab. marg. col. 1265. . The fourteenth Epistle calls Antioch a Sister Church , and from Peters being first there seems to confess it was the elder Sister ; and both that and the sixteenth Epistle speak of one Memoratus , which Baronius will not allow to be the proper name of a Bishop , because indeed there was no such Bishop in that time ; so that he expounds it of the Bishop remembred , that is , of Paulinus ; but the ill luck is , that Paulinus is neither named before , nor remembred in either of these two Epistles a a Bin. ut supr. Lab. col. 1256. Baron . An. 408. pag. 275. . The Notes on the sixteenth Epistle mention it as a special usage of the Bishop of Rome , not to restore any to his Communion , unless they were corrected and amended ; but this was ever the rule of all good Bishops , and of late is less observed at Rome than in any other Church . The eighteenth Epistle maintains a very odd Opinion , viz. That the Ordinations celebrated by Heretical Bishops are not so valid as the Baptism conferred by them ; and the Notes b b Bin. pag. 618. Lab. col. 1270. own that the Persons so Ordained may truly receive ( as they call it ) the Sacrament of Orders , and yet neither receive the Spirit , nor Grace , no nor a power to exercise those Orders , which seems to me a Riddle . For I cannot apprehend how a Man can be said truly to receive an Office , and yet neither receive Qualifications for it , not any Right to exercise it . The twenty second Epistle cites that place of Leviticus , That a Priest shall marry a Virgin , and affirms it as a Precept founded on Divine Authority ; and he censures the Macedonian Bishops as guilty of a breach of God's Law , because they did not observe this Precept , which every one knows to be a piece of the abrogated Ceremonial Law ; and the Annotator cannot with all his shufling bring the Pope off from the Heresie of pressing the Levitical Law as obligatory to Christians c c Bin. pag. 619. Lab. col. 1272. not. 1276. : But there is one honest passage in this Epistle which contradicts what this Pope had often said before of the sinfulness of Priests Marriages ; for here he saith , The Bond of Matrimony , which is by Gods Commandment , cannot be called sin : However out of this Epistle ( which is a very weak one , and dated only with one of the Consuls names ) the Editors feign a Council in Macedonia * * Bin. pag. 701. Lab. 1524. and a Message sent to the Pope for confirmation of their Acts ( which doth not appear at all in the Body of the Epistle ) . And Baronius desires the Reader to note , How great Majesty and Authority shined in the Apostolick See , so that it was deemed an injury to require the Popes to repeat their former Orders d d Baron . ●n . 414. pag. 365. . Whereas if this Epistle be not forged , it is no more but a nauseous repetition of the same Orders which he and his Predecessors had given over and over ; and the frequent harping upon the same string , in all the Decretal Epistles , especially as to the Marriage of the Clergy , shews how little Majesty or Authority shined in the Popes , since all the Countries to which they sent their Orders , so generally despised them , that every Pope for divers Ages was still urging this matter without that effect which they desired . The twenty third Epistle was writ to some Synod or other , they know not whether at Toledo or Tholouse , as we noted before e e Bin. pag. 621. Lab. col. 1277. . And the Jesuit Sirmondus in Labbe , by elaborate conjectures , and large additions ( probably of his own inventing ) had put it out more full , and adorned it with Notes f f Lab. col. 1279. , which pains the impartial Reader will think it doth not deserve . The twenty fourth Epistle is dear to the Editors and Baronius , because the Pope therein is his own witness , that all Matters ought to be referred to his Apostolical See , and that the Africans application to him was a due Veneration , since all Episcopal Authority was derived from him g g Bin. pag. 621. Lab. col. 1283. . 'T is true , St. Augustine doth mention a Message sent to Innocent out of Africa ; but he adds that , he writ back according to what was just and becoming a Bishop of an Apostolical See h h Aug. Bonif. ep. 106. . But as to this Epistle , besides the hectoring language in the Preface , there is neither Style nor Arguments but what are despicable ; and Erasmus did long since justly say , In this Epistle , there is neither Language nor Sense becoming so great a Prelate i i Not. Marg. in Ep. 91. inter Ep. Aug. edit. Erasm . p. 86. ; so that probably the whole may be a Fiction of some Roman Sycophant , which is the more likely , because Labbè owns that one of the Consuls names is wrong , that is , Junius is put for Palladius k k Lab. col. 1287. : Erasmus adds , that the twenty fifth Epistle is of the same grain with the former l l Not. marg. in 93 ep. inter ep. Aug. edit. Erasm . p. 88. , the Style is no better , and the Matter of the same kind ; for he brags that whenever Matters of Faith are examined , application must be made to the Apostollcal Fountain . And yet this Pope , as the Notes confess , held the Eucharist ought to be given to Infants , yea that it was necessary for them m m Bin. pag. 624. Lab. col. 1289. , that is ( I suppose ) for their Salvation : Now the Council of Trent hath determined otherwise , so that the Romanists must grant , this Pope erred even in defining things necessary to Salvation ; unless they will allow the whole Epistle forged by some later hand , who ( whatever Binius say to the contrary ) hath dated it with the Consuls of the year after Innocent's death , according to the best Chronologers . The twenty sixth Epistle ( as the Notes confess ) was writ to Aurelius , Augustine and three more eminent Bishops of Africa , by Pope Innocent , to clear himself from the suspicion of being a Favourer and Protector of the Pelagian Heresie * * Bin. not . pag. 625. Lab. col. 1292. ; and by computation also this proves the very year in which he died ( according to most accounts ) . Now if in those days it had been believed ( as it is now at Rome ) that the Pope had been Infallible , and could not err in Matters of Faith , no Man durst have raised this suspicion , nor would any have regarded it ; and Innocent's best way of vindication had been only to have told them he was Pope and sate in the Holy Infallible Chair ; but now his labouring to clear himself by an Epistle , shews it was possible he might err . As to the Epistle it self , Erasmus saith , Innocent answers after his fashion , being fierce rather than learned , and more ready to condemn than instruct n n Not. Erasm . in ep. 96. inter ep. August . pag. 90. ; and whosoever reads it will find that to be a true Character of this Epistle : To these is subjoined a Letter of St. Chrysostom's to Innocent , in Latin only in Binius o o Bin. p. 625. , but in both Greek and Latin in Labbè p p Lab. col. 1291. . The Phrase of which is so polite , the Matter so pious and solid , that Gold doth not excel Lead , more than this genuine piece of the Golden-mouth'd Father doth all the former Epistles of the Pope , who ( if he writ those Decretals ) was far more below St. Chrysostom in Learning than he pretended to be above him in Dignity : I confess the Editors would persuade us to think this Epistle was writ only to Innocent , and to him it is superscribed in Savil's Greek Edition , thus , To innocent Bishop of Rome * * Chrysost. Tom. 7. pag. 154. edit. Sar. ; but the Roman Parasites have added to this Title , To my most reverend and pious Lord ; but this hath been lately invented , for [ Domino meo ] is not in the Title in Baronius q q Baron . An. 402. pag. 192. . And the Epistle it self seems plainly to have been written to many ; for towards the end , he saith , Therefore my most venerable Lords , since you see these things are thus , use your utmost study and diligence to repress this injustice that is broke into the Church r r Bin. pag. 626. col . 2. Lab. col. 1300. ; and the Phrase doth every where suppose it was writ to divers Western Bishops ; and Baronius in the end of the Epistle hath these words , We have writ this also to Venerius Bishop of Milan , and to Chromatius Bishop of Aquileia s s Baron . An. 404. pag. 195. ; Quibus verbis Rom. Episcopi primatum erigit , iisdem Venerij & Chromatij primatum erexisset * * Lannoy ep. 3. p. 15. : so that since St. Chrysostom writ to all the eminent Bishops of Italy as well as to the Pope , it is unjustly done of Baronius , to say , That Chrysostom fled to his only refuge , viz. to the Roman Church , which he knew to be above all other Churches , and to have power to correct the ill-deeds of others t t Id. ibid. pag. 192. . There is one thing more remarkable in this Epistle , St. Chrysostom tells the Western Bishops , that being oppressed by Theophilus and his party , he appealed ( not to the Pope , but ) to a Synod ; yea , Innocent himself saith , There was great need to have a Synod called for this cause of St. Chrysostoms u u Innoc. ep. 29. Bin. pag. 627. Lab. col. 1304. . So that neither did St. Chrysostom appeal to the Roman Church alone , nor durst Innocent take upon him to judge in this matter . As for those two Epistles of Innocent's , one to Chrysostom , and another to the Clergy of Constantinople ( which are certainly genuine , as being preserved in Sozomen w w Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 26. pag. 471 , &c. and not derived from the Roman Mint ) ; These two Epistles ( I say ) are in an humble Style , and so well written x x Bin. pag. 627. Lab. col. 1301. that they make all the former Decretals which come from Rome , justly to be suspected as forged and spurious . The second Epistle of Chrysostom's which follows these two , seems also to have been written to other Bishops as well as Innocent , for it runs generally in the plural number ; but they who would have us believe the Pope alone did all the business of the Church , have falsified one place in it , where St. Chrysostom saith , ye have shewed your selves loving Fathers towards us : There the Latin is in Binius in the singular , Paternam ergo nos benevolentiam declarasti y y Bin. pag. 627. col . 20. F. . But Labbè thought fit to mend this corruption , and reads it in the plural , declarastis , ye have declared z z Lab. col. 1305. . But the grossest Forgery of all in this cause of St. Chrysostom are the Letters that are pretended to pars between Innocent and the Emperor Arcadius , wherein first Innocent excommunicates Arcadius , and Eudoxia the Empress , for their injustice to St. Chrysostom a a Innoc. ep. 30. Bin. pag. 628. Lab. col. 1308. . And then the Emperor writes first one submissive Letter b b Bim . ib. Lab. col. 1309. to desire him to absolve them , to which the Pope consents c c Lab. solus ibid. ; yet after all this , Arcadius doth again write another Letter to excuse himself and tells the Pope , Eudoxia was very sick upon the grief for her fault d d Lab. col. 1313. Baron . An. 407. pag. 259. : And all these Letters are said to be writ after St. Chrysostom was dead . But that which discovers the cheat is , that all the ancient Historians do with one consent agree that Eudoxia the Empress was dead three years before St. Chrysostom , which is attosted by Socrates , Sozomen and Marcellinus e e Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 19 , 20 , 21. Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 27 , 28. Marcell . Chron. pag. 13. ; and the same is affirmed by learned Modern Authors f f Vid. Ap. Coci censuram . pag. 113. . The first who affirmed the contrary was Georgius Alexandrinus , a fabulus Writer , who lived above 300 years after this time , and he was followed by Nicephorus , Glycer and Gonnadius g g Baron . An. 404. pag. 220. , which are all the Authorities Baronius can produce for these Forged Epistles ; only he countenances them , true or false , because this is an instance of a Pope who excommunicated an Emperor , and serves them for a good proof that the Roman Bishop is above the greatest Princes : But Labbè spoils the Argument by noting the Margen , that Eudoxia died before St. Chrysostom h h Lab. marg. col. 1308. , and so these Letters are notorious Forgeries . Before I leave this matter I must observe that Baronius his great design was to represent Pope Innocent as the chief , yea and almost sole Instrument in vindicating the injuries done to St. Chrysostom , and therefore he tells us , That Innocent would not communicate with the Bishops of the East , unless they would put his name into the Tables ; and he cites Theodores to prove this ; but Theodoret's very words are , That the western Bishops would not communicate with them , but on that condition * * Baron . An. 407. pag. 258. . So when the Adversaries of St. Chrysostom ( hearing that complaints of their proceedings were made among others to the Pope ) sent some to give an account of what they had done , Baronius ( without any proof ) dreams of a sentence passed by Innocent to null what they had done i i Idem . An. 404. pag. 207. ; whereas it appears the same year , that Pope Innocent writ very frientlly to Theophilus the chief Agent in Chrysostom's condemnation , and held communion with him long after that unjust Fact k k Ibid. pag. 196. ; so that there is no reason to brag of this Pope , as being the Judge and Patron of that glorious Confessor l l Baron . An. 406. pag. 144. . who alas , died in his exile , and ( excepting good wishes ) had no benefit by the Popes kindness : Yea , he was so far from being Judge , that he referred this Cause of St. Chrysostom's to the Judgment of a Synod m m Baron . An. 404. pag. 196. , as Baronius himself afterwards declares : So Theophilus of Alexandria also never did submit the Cause to Innocent as Baronius pretends n n Id. ibid. pag. 192. , nor did he take him for the supreme Judge in it ; but after all , retained his obstinacy to his death : So that if we do allow Pope Innocent to be right in his Judgment , yet he either had little power or small courage to serve this great and good Man ; and what he did for him was in conjunction with other Bishops , not by his single Authority . Innocent's 31st . Epistle is directed to Theophilus ( St. Chrysostom's mortal Enemy ) the Patriach of Alexandria , wherein the Pope calls him Brother , and saith he held Communion both with him and with Chrysostom also , and wishes him to refer the Cause to a Synod , and there let it be tried according to the Nicene Canons o o Bin. pag. 628. Lab. col. 1311. . Now Baronius from hence notes , that the Communion of the Roman Church was highly valued , and that all were to hold Communion with those who were in Communion with Rome , and therefore they were to stick to the Communion of Chrysostom p p Baron . An. 404. p. 196. ut supr. : But the very words of the Epistle confute this Gloss ; for such as followed the Popes example at that time , were to communicate both with Chrysostom and Theophilus And I must observe that Innocent's advising Theophilus to come to a Synod and let this Cause be tried there according to the Nicene Canons ; this ( I say ) shews , That the Pope did not then pretend to find any thing in the Nicene Canons , for referring Causes by appeal to Rome ; but his two next Successors ( as shall be shewed presently ) forged such Canons soon after , and pretended they were made at Nice . After this follows a rescript of Honorius , pretended to be writ to his Brother Arcadius q q Bin. pag. 628. Lab. col. 1311. ; wherein that Emperor saith , Chrysostom's was a cause concerning the Bishops , which ought to have been determined in a General Council , and when either Party had sent Legates to the Bishop of Rome and those of Italy , a final Sentence was to be expected from the Authority of them all : But the Editors have forged a Title to this Letter , wherein they say , Episcopal Causes are to be tried by a Council of Bishops , and to be examined and determined by the Popes Authority : Where we see the forged Title expresly contradicts the Letter it self ; for that refers these Causes to a Council in the East with the consent of all the Bishops of Italy as well as the Pope ; but this Title is designed to persuade us , that the Popes Authority was finally to determine all matters of this kind . The 32th 33th and 34th Epistles of Innocent have nothing in them worth noting , and if they be genuine , their mean Style and many Incongruities are no credit to the Author r r Bin. pag. 629. Lab. col. 1315. .

After these Epistles Labbè publishes certain Canons sent from Rome to the Gallican Church , by some Pope or other ; and because by Sirmondus his guess , it was Innocent , they are placed here s s Lab. col. 1316 , ad 1322. ; there is nothing remarkable in them , but the zeal of the Collector of these Canons to persuade the French to follow the peculiar Customs of Rome .

§ . 3. The Councils which the Editors place next , and with the Title of Councils under Innocent , were called indeed in his time , but neither by his Authority , nor so much as by his Advice : The first Council of Milevis , An. Dom. 402. said to be under Innocent , was ( as the Notes confess ) held under the Primacy of Xantippus t t Bin. pag. 630. Lab. col. 1323. , and was held so soon after Anastasius his death , that probably these African Fathers had not yet heard of Innocent's Election , nor do the Acts of it mention any Pope : The Council An. Dom. 403. at the Oak , wherein Chrysostom was deposed , was called by , and held under Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria , wherein they proceeded to deprive an Eminent Patriarch without the knowledge or consent of the Pope ; and had not the Articles been false and the Sentence unjust , it had never been revoked barely for wanting Innocent's approbation u u Bin. pag. 631. . Labbè prints the Acts of this Synod which Binius had omitted w w Lab. col. 1334. . About this time were frequent Synods held in Africa ; the Years and Order of which being uncertain , the Editors have placed the Acts of them altogether x x Bin. pag. 744. Lab. col. 1104. ; and here we have only some Notes with the bare Titles : On which we will make some few remarks : First , they are all here said to be held under Innocent , but the Acts themselves intitle them to be held in such a year of the Emperor . Secondly , The Notes on the First African Council tell us of Legates sent to the Pope for obtaining some indulgence to the Donatists ; which Legates being returned , they related in this Council , what they had obtained from Anastasius y y Bin. pag. 631. col . 2. Lab. col. 1332. . Now this would make any one , who doth not consult the Acts themselves ( printed on purpose in Pages far off ) to think , the Pope was solely concerned in this matter , which is an invention of Baronius z z Baron . An. 403. pag. 181. & An. 405. pag. 234. . But if we look back into the former Council , we shall find these African Legates were sent in general to the parts beyond the Seas , and to Venerius Bishop of Milan as well as to Anastasius Bishop of Rome a a Bin. pag. 745. col . 1. Lab. col. 1081 , &c. . And Baronius himself in the year when these Legates were first sent , saith , they were to go first to Rome , and also to other transmarine Bishops b b Baron . An. 401. pag. 129. ; and again , Letters being sent to Anastasius and other Bishops of Italy c c Ibid. pag. 130. . Now the African Fathers applying to all these Bishops as well as to the Pope , declares they did not look on him as sufficient alone to determine their Matters : Besides , they did not send to these Western Bishops to obtain indulgence ( as the Notes out of Baronius falsly pretend ) ; For they had decreed before to indulge them , only desired the Western Bishops for the more credit , to give their Suffrages to this Fact ; for so it would appear not to be only their single Opinion . The Second African Council was not under An. Dom. 404. Innocent , as the Title pretends d d Bin. pag. 631. Lab. col. 1332. , but under Aurelius , as may be seen by the Acts ; and after the message from the Italian Bishops , added to their own Authority , would not work on the obstinacy of the Donatists , they decree to send Legates to the Emperor Honorius to desire him to suppress them , ordering these Legates to carry Letters of Communion to the Bishop of Rome , and other Bishops of those parts , and to receive other Letters of Communion from them in Italy to testifie they An. Dom. 407. were Catholicks : But a little after the Notes , turn this into receiving Letters of Communion only from the Pope e e Concil. Afric . 4. Bin. pag 632. col . 2. Lab. col. 1233. , and infer from thence , that none were Catholicks but such as were in Communion with the Bishop of Rome : Whereas they should have added , and with other Bishops of those parts ; and then it had appeared , that this was no peculiar priviledge of any one See , but related to all Sees which then were filled with Catholick Bishops . I shall note only , that in these Notes the Emperor is stiled The Lord of the General Council f f Bin. & Lab. ibid. , which Title the Roman Parasites of late have robbed him of , and given it to the Popes .

The eighth Council of Africa petitions the Emperor An. Dom. 410. Honorius to revoke that Edict , whereby he had granted liberty of Conscience to the Donatists ; and the Notes out of Baronius make it so meritorious a thing to revoke this scandalous and mischievous Indulgence , that this made Honorius so blessed as to have Rome quitted by Alaricus three days after he had taken it g g Bin. pag. 633. Lab. col. 1335. ; but our English Romanists , when an Indulgence served their ends , counted it meritorious in that Prince who granted the Sects such an Indulgence here , for we must note that Things are good or evil just as they serve their interest , or disserve it .

The Synod of Ptolemais in Egypt h h Bin : & Lab. ibid. , whereby Andronicus , An. Dom. 411. a Tyrannical Officer , was excommunicated ; is strangely magnified by Baronius , saying , that Synesius Bishop of Ptolemais , knew that when he was made a Bishop , he was elected by God to give Laws to Princes : And a little after he tells us , He deposed Andronicus from his Tribunal ; adding , that this shews how great the Power of Bishops was , even to the deposing of evil Governors i i Baron . An. 311. pag. 328 , 329. . But after all , there is no more of this true , but only that Synesius gives notice to his neighbour Churches by circular Letters that he had excommunicated Andronicus , who seems to have been a Military Officer in a little Egyptian Town , and was guilty of most horrid Cruelties and notorious Crimes k k Synes. ep. 57 , 58. : But what is this to Kings and Princes ? And the words which he cites out of Synesius 89th Epistle , which falsly translates , we have put him down from his Tribunal , are these , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , &c. We have here taken him off from the Seat of Mourners ; that is , Synesius tells Theophilus his Patriarch and Superior , that though he had justly put Andronicus among the Penitents , yet now upon his sorrow and repentance , they had there absolved him and taken him out of that sad station where the Penitents were wont to stand ; and if Theophilus approved of this mercy shewed Andronicus , he should hope God might yet forgive him l l Vid. Causab . pref. ad exerc . in Baron . & lege ep. 89. Synes. ap. Baron . ibid. pag. 329. . Now was not the Cardinal hard put to it for an instance of a Bishops deposing a King , when he is forced to falsifie his Author , and use the words which express a restauration to the Communion of the Church , to prove a deposing from a Throne ? It seems he could not or would not distinguish a Captain or petty Magistrate from a King ; nor a Stool of Repentance from a Princes Throne : This it is to serve a Cause .

About this time was held that famous Conference at Carthage between the Catholicks and the Donatists . Seven Bishops of each side being chosen to dispute before Marcellinus a Count sent by the Emperor to hear this Cause m m Bin. à pag. 634 , ad 698. Lab. à col. 1336 , ad 1506. . Now Baronius tells us that this Marcellinus was not called simply a Judge , but had the Title of Cognitor , because it was not allowed to a Lay-man to act as a Judge in Ecclesiastical Matters n n Baron . An. 411. pag. 318. . But Cognitor is often used by the best Authors for a Judge , and cognoscere Causam , is , to hear a Cause ; Dies Cognitionis , is , the day of Tryal : And which is more , the Emperors Edict calls him by the title of Judex ; Our will is , you shall sit in that Disputation in the principal place , as Judge o o Inter Gesta Bin. pag. 647. Lab. col. 1346. ; and Baronius in the very page before cites St. Augustine speaking of Marcellinus by this Character , ipse Judex p p Baron . ut supr. pag. 317 , & pag. 322. . And as he moderated in the Disputation , so in the Conclusion he pronounces the Sentence , and the Emperor confirms it q q Bin. pag. 698. & Lab. col. 1506. ; which if the Pope had done in Person , or by his Legate , to be sure that had been ground enough to prove him the Universal and Infallible Judge in all Causes . This is certain , Honorius did judge in this Cause by his Legate Marcellinus , and Baronius ( who use to quarrel at other Emperors for medling in these Cases ) tells us God rewarded him for the pains he took about setling the True Religion r r Baron . An. 411. pag. 322. . But as to the Pope he was not concerned in this Famous Dispute ; and which is very remarkable , though the Main Dispute be about the Catholick Church , and the Orthodox alledge the Churches beyond the Seas as being in Communion with them , and so prove them Catholicks ; yet they do not once name the Roman Church apart , as if communicating with that Church or its Bishop were any special evidence of their being Catholicks : Indeed they name Innocent once , but give him no other title but Bishop of Rome : Whereas if these African Fathers had believed the Pope to be the Supream Head of the Catholick Church , and that all of his Communion , and only such were Catholicks , this Dispute had been soon ended , and they had nothing to prove to the Donatists , but their Communion with Pope Innocent . And I remember Baronius argues that Caecilianus , Bishop of Carthage , was a Catholick , because he had Communicatory Letters from the Church of Rome ; but the place he cites to prove it out of St. Augustine is this , When he ( that is , Caecilianus ) saw himself in Communion with the Roman Church , ( in which the eminence of an Apostolical See always flourished ) and with other Countries from whence the Gospel came to Africa , &c. s s Aug. ep. 162. ap. Baron . An. 412. pag. 336. . By which it is plain , that it was Communion with other Churches as well as Rome which proved Caecilianus a Catholick : And I know not where Baronius found another passage , which he affirms was proved in this Conference , viz. That the first Head of the Church was demonstrated by the succession of the Roman Bishops to be in Peter's Chair t t Baron . An. 411. pag. 320. : For there is not one word to this purpose in that Conference which is printed by the Editors here : So that till better Authority be produced , this must stand for a devisable of the Annalists .

Nothing after this occurs which is remarkable , till An. Dom. 415. the Council at Lidda or Diospolis in Palestina , wherein Pelagius imposed upon fourteen Bishops a pretended recantation of his Heretical Opinions , and was by them absolved u u Bin. pag. 701. Lab. col. 15●9 . . Binius his Title of this Synod is , that it was under Innocent : But Labbè ( fearing this might imply the Popes consent to a Hereticks absolution ) hath struck that out . However we have Baronius his word for it , that no Letters were written to the Pope from this Synod w w Baron . An. 416. pag. 388. , only some Lay-men brought him the Acts of it . And he , Good Man ( not so cunning at finding out Hereticks as the African Bishops ) confesses he could neither approve nor blame the Judgment of these Bishops of Palestina x x Vid. Innoc. ep. 26. & Bin. not . p. 702. Lab. col. 1532. . And Pelagius himself , though he could not finally deceive the Roman Church , yet he hoped he might gain the Pope to his party , and did attempt it ; yea 't is very probable he had succeeded , if St. Augustin and other African Fathers had not instructed the Pope , and made him understand the danger of this Heresie : And ( we have noted before ) that Innocent's carriage in this matter rendred him suspected to be a favourer of Pelagius y y Baron . An. 416. pag. 388. ; upon which the Africans ( not trusting to his Infallibility ) writ very plainly to him : And after they had condemned Pelagius and Celestius in a Council of thirty seven Bishops at Carthage , they writ another brisk Synodical Epistle to the Pope , telling him , that they intimated to him what they had done , that the Authority of the Apostolical Seat might be added to their Decree , because his Eminent Place gave more weight to his Doctrine ; and if he thought Pelagius was justly absolved , yet his Errors and Impieties ought to be Anathematized by the Authority of the Apostolical See z z Concil. Carthag . Bin. pag. 702 , &c. Lab. col. 1533. . Now the reason of this Letter , was not so much for the confirmation of their Acts ( as the Notes pretend ) upon any single Priviledge believed to be in the Pope , as their Supream Head ; because they call him by the Title of their Brother , both in the Title and the Letter ; but because the Pelagians had reported he was their Friend , and a favourer of their Opinions ; which Report did very much mischief because of the Eminence of his See , and therefore it concerned both the Pope for his own vindication , and them also , that he should wipe off this accusation : And it appears both by St. Augustine and Prosper , that at last Innocent did condemn this Heresie ; but this Synodical Epistle from Carthage , dated An. 416. shews that he had not condemned it before the last year of his life ; for he died ( according to Baronius ) in July An. 417. So hard a thing was it for the African Fathers to get a pretended Infallible Judge to understand and censure a notorious Heresie . I might now leave this Head , but that I must first observe the confidence of Baronius , who from one word in a verse of Prosper's , will needs have Celestius a Disciple of Pelagius , to have been first condemned at Rome , after the antient manner , that a new Heresie should be first Examined and Condemned by the first Seat a a Baron . An. 412. pag. 340. . But when he should make this out , he owns that Pelagius and Celestius indeed were first condemned in Africa , but he tells us their Heresies were condemned long before at Rome in the person of Jovinian : But if it were true that Jovinian had held all the Heresies of Pelagius ( which is most false ) then we must attribute no great sagacity to Innocent as to condemning Heresies , because 't is plain he did not know these were the same Heresies that Jovinian had held , nor could he be brought to censure them , till above four year after .

The Second Council of Milevis consisted of sixty Bishops , An. Dom. 416. the Title is , under Pope Innocent b b Bin. pag. 704. Lab. col. 1537. . But Baronius had told us before , that the same Aurelius , Bishop of Carthage , presided in the former Council of Milevis , and in this also c c Baron : An. 402. pag. 164. ; so that neither of them were under any Pope : The 22d Canon of this Council saith , that he who thinks to appeal to a Tribunal beyond the Sea , shall not be received into Communion by any in Africa d d Bin. pag. 705. Lab. col. 1543. : Which is a clear prohibition of appeals to Rome ; and therefore Gratian either found or made this notorious addition to it , unless they appeal to the See of Rome e e Not. Bin. pag. 710. Lab. col. 1554. , which is so gross a Forgery that Binius rejects it , and out of Bellarmin expounds this passage only , of prohibiting the inferiour Clergy , Priests and Deacons , &c. to appeal beyond the Seas , i. e. to Rome ; but he supposes that Bishops in Africk still had liberty of appealing thither according to the 17th Canon of Sardica : But to confute this false Gloss , let it be noted , That these African Fathers profess in a following Council , that they had never heard of any such Canon , or of this Sardican Synod , and so it is not likely they should be guided by it : Again , about ten years before upon a complaint to Innocent of some Bishops , who being censured in Africa , ran to Rome with Complaints , this very Pope had written , that Bishops should not lightly go to the Parts beyond the Seas : And the Council in Africk confirmed that passage of the Popes Letter f f Bin. pag. 752. Lab. col. 1112. . And since this would not restrain some Bishops here in this second Milevitan Council , they make a Decree , That Bishops Causes should be determined by Bishops , either such as the Primate ( of Africk ) should appoint , or such as the Parties chose by his consent g g Bin. pag. 705. Lab. col. 1542. : And then they add this 22d Canon to confine all appeals of the inferior Clergy also to an African Synod , or to their own Primate ; and then add this Clause recited before , that those who appeal beyond the Seas , shall not be received to Communion by any in Africa : which certainly is the penalty relating to both Canons ; because in their Letter a few years after written to Pope Celestine , they declare it is contrary to the Nicene Canons for the Pope to receive any into Communion by Appeal , who have been censured in their own Province , especially Bishops , adding , That his Holiness should ( as became him ) also forbid the wicked refuges of Priests and the lower Clergy , &c. That is , not only the Appeals of Bishops , but of Priests also h h Epist. ad Celest . ap Bin. pag. 757. Lab. col. 1675. , which makes it as clear as the Sun , that these Fathers at Milevis absolutely forbad all Appeals to Rome . And they had great reason so to do , not only because it was their right to judge finally all Causes in their own Province : But because some Popes about this time had encouraged Hereticks and notorious wicked Men , both Priests and Bishops who had fled from the just Censures of their own Church , and found a Sanctuary and Shelter at Rome : But of this more hereafter . This second Council of Milevis writ also to Pope Innocent about the Pelagian Heresie , to quicken him in providing some Remedies to prevent the spreading of that Infection , supposing the eminency of his place would add much weight to his Censures , if he would heartily appear against these Doctrines i i Bin. pag. 706. Lab. col. 1546. . At the same time Aurelius and St. Augustin with three other eminent Bishops there , writ a private Letter to their Lord and Brother ( as they call him ) Pope Innocent , on the same subject k k Bin. pag. 707. Lab. col. 1546. ; in which they deal very plainly with him , and give the reason why they writ so many Letters to him against this Heresie , because they had heard that in Rome ( where the Heretick lived long ) there were many who favoured him on divers grounds ; some , because they say that you have been persuaded such things were true ; but more because they do not think he holds those Opinions . And doubtless it was this Report which rouzed up the Pope at last to condemn the Pelagians , as may appear by our Notes upon his 26th Epistle , which is in Answer to this Epistle of the five Bishops : But that Answer , as also the Answers to the two Councils Letters were not till January An. 417. as Baronius and Binius themselves compute l l Bin. pag. 703. in not . ad Concil. Carthag . Lab. col. 1536. , which was but six Months before Innocent's death ; so long did this Pope remain under the suspicion of being a favourer of Pelagianism .

§ . 4. Zosimus succeeded Innocent in his Chair , and in An. Dom. 417. his partial affection for the Pelagians ; his life as it is writ in the Pontifical , hath nothing in it that is remarkable m m Bin. pag. 710. Lab. col. 1554. , for his time was very short , but one Year , two Months and eleven Days according to the Pontifical , or One Year , four Months and seven Days as Binius in his Notes ; though Labbè correct both him and Baronius , and says it was nine Months and nine Days above a year that he sat ; and he follows Prosper ( who then lived ) in this Account , and therefore it is the most certain . As to his Acts , Baronius prepares his Reader for his entrance , by telling us out of the Pontifical and Gennadius , That Innocent made a Decree for the Universal Church against the Pelagians ; and Zosimus afterward promulged it n n Baron . An. 417. pag. 396. . But we shall see presently that he was very slow in publishing any Censures against these Hereticks : For though both Baronius and Binius would colour over the matter , yet Labbè very honestly confesseth , that Pope Zosimus was deceived by the Craft of Celestius , and he proves it out of St. Augustin o o Lab. not . col. 1560. ; and Marius Mercator a Writer of that very time ( whose admonition is printed in Labbè ) owns that Zosimus was imposed on by this Heretick , till the African Fathers had better informed him in these matters p p Lab. col. 1513. scil. in Marij Merc. commonitorio . Vide item not . Sirmond . in Ap. Lab. col. 1815. ; so that the Church was rarely well provided of an Infallible Head in the mean time , who was only zealous to affect his Primacy , but had not sense enough to judge of Heresie till he was informed of it from better Divines .

This Pope is said to have writ thirteen Epistles ; The first by the want of a good Style and the barrenness of the Matter , may probably enough be genuine q q Bin. pag. 711. Lab. col . 1556. , having nothing worthy of note in it , except some impertinent brags of the Authority of his See . The second Epistle is a declaration of some of the Roman Clergy excommunicated , who had fled to Ravenna to complain of the Pope (a) . Baronius and the Notes meerly (r) Bin. ibid. Lab. col. 1557. guess these to be favourers of Pelagius ; but it seems more probable that they were Catholicks who disliked the Popes proceedings while he favoured Celestius , which it is certain he did , till the year 418. was well advanced ( in which this Epistle is dated , ) for he writ his fourth Epistle for those Hereticks , the 11th of the Kalends of October s s Bin. pag. 714. Lab. col. 1560. , doubtless in the year after his third Epistle , which is dated An. 417. As to that third Epistle , Zosimus declares , that upon a solemn and judicial examination of Celestius ( the Scholar of Pelagius ) he found him clear of the Heresies with which he was charged in Africa , and cites his Accusers to come to Rome within two Months , or he should be intirely restored to Communion t t Bin. pag. 712. Lab. col. 1558. . At the same rate he talks in the fourth Epistle , pleading the Cause of both Pelagius and Celestius , declaring them innocent , and representing Heros and Lazarus ( two holy Bishops of France ) as ill Men and false Accusers ; railing at Timasius and Jacobus , who had been converted from this Heresie by St. Augustin , as meer Calumniators , boasting all along that the Cause was by appeal referred to him , and magnifying the Authority of his Apostolical Seat u u Bin. pag. 713. Lab. col. 1561. . With this Epistle also he sent into Africa Pelagius his Confession of Faith , which Zosimus took to be very Orthodox , and doubted not but the African Fathers would think his Faith to be unblameable ; whereas in that whole Confession , there is not one clear acknowledgment of the absolute necessity of God's Grace , or of the necessity of Infant Baptism to wash away Original Sin , which were the Main Errors that Pelagius was charged with w w Bin. pag. 714. Lab. col. 1563. : So that we see a Pope , an Infallible Judge , either out of Ignorance or evil Principles , deceived both in Matters of Faith and of Fact , mistaking Heresie for Truth , condemning the Innocent and Orthodox , and absolving the most notorious Hereticks . Now let us enquire how Baronius and Binius bring him off : They say first , that Zosimus could not , if he would reject this Confession of Faith , because they said , if they had erred , they desired Zosimus to correct whatever he thought to be wrong x x Notis ad ep. 3. : And that they were ready in all things of Faith to believe as the Pope believed y y Not. ad cp. 4. Baron . An. 417. pag. 405 , 406 , &c. . Now this is no manner of Excuse , but rather an Aggravation , that after so fair an offer the Pope did not rectifie their Errors ; this shews either that he did not understand the Question , or that he was as much a Heretick as they , especially since he not only passed over their Errors , but commends them and pleads their Cause : Yea , Baronius himself saith , this Confession contained a manifest Error , and bad things in it far from the Catholick Faith z z Baron . An. 418. pag. 410. ; yet still the Pope could not or would not see these Errors in matters of Faith ; so that here was a manifest failure in their pretended Infallibility , at a time when there was great need of it , to condemn a dangerous Heresie , which the Pope was so unacquainted with , that in his Third Epistle he calls these Disputes Ensuaring Questions , and Foolish Contentions , which rather destroyed than edified : I further add , that in Pelagius his Confession of Faith , which he pretended to be the Faith of the Roman Church ; the Holy Ghost is said only to proceed from the Father , the Filioque is not added ; and though the Popes of later times have condemned that omission as Heresie in the Greeks , Zosimus here passes by that also , and takes all for sound Doctrine .

Secondly , As to matter of Fact , Orosius and the African Fathers , believed Heros and Lazarus to be holy Bishops , and Orthodox Men ; and Prosper ( who might know them personally ) testifies as much of Heros a a Not. Bin. ad cp. 3. : But Baronius and Binius say Celestius had belied them to Zosimus , and so excuse the Pope from blame : But if Celestius did raise these Scandals , Zosimus made them his own by believing and publishing them ; and he who took upon him so much Authority as to judge a Cause , should not have espoused one of the Parties so far , as to take all they said of their Adversaries to be true : Yet thus this Pope dealt with Timasius and Jacobus also . Like to this was his Judgment about Patroclus Bishop of Arles , and the Priviledges of that See ; For ( as Prosper informs us ) Heros , an holy Man , Scholar of St. Martin , though free from all Crimes , was expelled out of his Bishoprick by the People , and Patroclus put in his place b b ibid. An. 422. pag. 475. , whom Baronius calls an Vsurper c c Baron . An. 412. pag. 345. : And when afterward he was slain , he saith , it was God's just judgment upon him to avenge his wickedness , who had invaded a worthy Mans See , and also disturbed the rights of his Neighbour Bishops d d Id. An. 426. pag. 500. . But Zosimus in his fifth Epistle , makes him the Primate of all those parts of France , on pretence that Trophimus was sent from Rome , and was the first Bishop there , and that it was his ancient right ; and allows none to come from thence to Rome without Letters dimissory from this Patroclus e e Bin. pag. 715. Lab. col. 1567. . And in the 6th , 7th , 8th and 9th Epistles , he still advances this ill Man , condemning Proculus Bishop of Marseilles , and all others who opposed Patroclus in his most unjust usurpations and encroachments : Yet Binius in his Notes confesseth , that both his next Successors , Boniface and Celestine did judge otherwise f f Notis ad ep. 5. ; that is , they took away this Primacy from Patroclus , and censured him for his evil doings , giving the Priviledges to Hilary Bishop of Narbon , to whom of right they belonged g g Bonif. ep. 3. pag. 721. : So that here is Pope against Pope , and Decretal against Decretal ; so odly do Causes go at Rome : But by Zosimus his 11th and 12th Epistles it doth appear , that the French Bishops despised the Popes Decrees , and that Proculus went on in exercising his Primacy for all his being prohibited h h Bin. pag. 717. Lab. col. 1573. , which looks not favourably on the Roman Supremacy . As ill fortune had Pope Zosimus ( who was always on the wrong side ) in admitting the Appeal of Apiarius , an African Priest , who was excommunicated by Urban his own Bishop for most horrid Crimes , which he afterwards confessed in an open Council ( as we shall shortly shew ; ) yet Zosimus thinking it for the honour of his See to have Appeals made to it from Foreign Parts , admits this wicked Wretch to Communion , commands the African Synod to receive him , and threatens Vrban with an excommunication if he did not retract his Sentence : But the African Fathers for all this went on to judge Apiarius , as will be seen afterwards ; for Zosimus died before this Cause was ended .

I have deferred the consideration of Zosimus his 10th An. Dom. 418. Epistle to the last place , because it was the last he writ ( that is now extant ) in the Cause of Celestius , and because it was writ to the Council of Carthage now assembled : For the Pope after he had admitted Hereticks and evil Men to appeal to Rome , was resolved to justifie the Fact , and sent two Bishops , Faustinus and Potentinus , and two Priests , Philip and Asellus , his Legates into Africa , with false Copies of the Nicene Canons to prove he ought to be appealed to in all Causes from all Provinces ; and probably by them ( or some little time before ) he sent this Tenth Epistle i i Bin. pag. 717. Lab. col. 1572. , wherein he brags , that Tradition and the Canons had given such great Authority to the Apostolical Seat , that none might presume to question its Decrees ; with a great deal of such stuff about Christ's giving Peter the power to bind and loose , and the Canons giving this to his Successor , who was to have the care of all Churches ; and that since he held this place , none might examine a Cause which he had determined , &c. Yet out of respect to the Africans ( he saith ) he had done nothing in the Cause of Celestius , till they had deliberated about it , and that this Cause was just in the same state as it lately was . I relate this more at large , because this unjust and ambitious Claim was the occasion of a famous Controversie that lasted many years after the death of Zosimus : But as to the Letter , the impertinency of it is very obvious ; for though he assume this Authority , it is plain , that St. Cyprian of old , and the African Fathers afterward , did not think it any presumption to confute the Decrees of Popes , and to examine Causes which had been ill judged at Rome . And in the Cause of Celestius , whom Zosimus would not yet be induced to condemn ; the Council of Carthage ( as Prosper relates ) tell the Pope , That they had resolved to confirm Pope Innocent' s Sentence against him , till he did openly confess the necessity of Grace k k Baron . An. 418. pag. 409. : And they went on with the judgment against Apiarius , for all his Appeal to Rome , and his being absolved there ; so that it is impudently done of the Roman Writers to go about to prove the Supremacy from a Popes evidence in his own Cause ; yea , from a Claim which was denied and despised at the same time that it was made . Another note I make on this Epistle is , that it is dated but the 12th of the Ka. of April , and Zosimus died in January following ; so that it is plain , that he had not condemned Pelagius and Celestius nine Months before he died . And though by those passages which Labbè hath published out of St. Augustine and Prosper l l Lab. col. 1575. , it be certain he did censure this Heresie at last ; yet it could not be long before his death , and therefore Zosimus was a manifest favourer of Hereticks , almost all the time he was Pope ; and he may thank the African Fathers for his Repentance ; who ( though they were abused and injured by him ) hide as much as may be all his ill deeds in favour of Celestius , and for the credit of Zosimus and the Catholick Cause , only publish his latest Acts , after he was by them convinced that Pelagianism was an Heresie : But Celestius and his party openly exclaimed against Zosimus for a Turncoat m m Vid. Opt. in Voss . Hist. Pelag. lib. 1. c. 28. .

The same year was that Council in Africa , which the Editors intitle under Zosimus n n Bin. p. 718. Lab. col. 1576. , but really was against him : For without regarding his suspending the Cause of Celestius , they particularly condemned all the points of the Pelagian Heresie by Anathema's , and order all Causes between Bishops to be tried in the Province where they arise , and renew the Canon of Milevis ; that the Priests and inferior Clergy should be tried by their own Bishops ; and whoever should appeal to the parts beyond the Seas , should not be received into Communion by any in Africa o o Bin. pag. 754. Lab. col. 1131. : So that we see the African Church persisted in maintaining their Rights , and condemning Appeals , as they had very good reason , considering the bold attempt of Zosimus , to usurp a jurisdiction over them ; and his erroneous judging such Causes both of Faith and Manners as he had presumed to meddle in ; which hapning in other Provinces , he broke the Canons of the ancient Councils , by pretending to examine and decide them elsewhere ; forgetting that which Gratian had collected out of his own seventh Epistle , and gives us here for Zosimus his Decree p p Bin. pag. 718. Lab. col. 1574. , viz. That the Authority of the Roman See it self cannot make any new Order , nor alter old ones against the Statutes of the Fathers : So Gratian reads it , and so Aeneas Sylvius cites it q q De gest . Concil. Bas . Fascic . rer. expet . Tom. 1. pag. 12. ; so also the Editors publish it here ; but some forging hand in the seventh Epistle hath put concedere instead of condere , for fear this Sentence should take away from the Pope the power of making New Canons contrary to the Fathers Decrees ; a Priviledge , of which Rome hath made more use than any Church in the World . This Pope's time is concluded with a forged African Council at Telepte , wherein it is pretended they only read the fourth Epistle of Siricius , and thence the Notes and Baronius gather that the African Church shewed great respect to the See of Rome r r Bin. pag. 719. Lab. col. 1577. . But first Labbè confessed before , that this Epistle of Siricius was forged s s Lab. col. 1029. : And Secondly the Story is ill timed ; for the African Church had never less reason to respect the Popes than now , when they so manifestly robbed them both of their Rights and their Peace also : Wherefore it is not probable that a Council should meet there at this time , only to read an Epistle which was invented long after .

§ . 5. Upon the Death of Zosimus , there were two An. Dom. 419. Popes chosen , Boniface and Eulalius , and the Pontifical fairly tells us , the Clergy were divided for seven Months and fifteen days , and that both of them acted as Popes . This Schism being notified to the Emperor by Symmachus , the Prefect of the City , he cites both the Pretenders to Ravenna , and appoints divers Bishops to examine into the Cause ; but they not being able to agree whether had the better Title , the Emperor defers the business till the Kalends of May , and forbids both Parties to enter into Rome , till a Council had met at Rome to determine this Controversie . But Eulalius ( who before stood fairer of the two ) impatient of this delay , contrary to the Emperors Command , on the fifteenth of the Kalends of April goes into the City , and causes great Factions there : Upon which 250 Bishops met by the Emperors Order , execute his Commands , and declare Enlalius to be no Pope , setting up Boniface s s Vita Bonif. & not vid. Bin. pag. 719 , 720. Lab. col. 1580 , & 1581. . Upon which passage I shall observe , First , That the Notes make but a vacancy of two days between Zosimus and Boniface ; and Baronius saith it was not vacant above one day t t Baron . An. 418. pag. 429. . Whereas it is plain from the Emperors Letters , dated three or four Months after , that neither of them was reckoned to be Pope ; and he writes to the African Bishops , that he would have the Council meet by the Ides of June , that the Papacy might be no longer void u u Baron . An. 419. pag. 435. ; so that in truth the See was vacant till the Emperor had judged it on Boniface his side . Baronius doth not like it should be said that the Emperor had any right to interpose in the Election of a Pope ; but Symmachus , the Praefect of Rome , saith expresly to Honorius , it is your part to give judgment in this Matter w w Idem An. 418. pag. 430. ; and the Emperor did at first by his single Authority declare Eulalius to be rightly chosen x x Ibid. An. 419. initio . : But upon better information he revokes that Rescript , and Commands that neither Party should have any advantage by what was past , but all should be reserved intirely to his judgment y y Ibid. pag. 433. : And though he employed a Synod of Bishops to examine the Matter , yet it appears in Baronius , that the Emperors Edict was that which gave the Papacy to Boniface z z Vid. ibid. pag. 438 , 439. : Which will appear more plainly by the first Epistle of Boniface , and Honorius his Answer to it .

For after this Pope was in peaceable possession , fearing the like mischief after his death , which had hapned at his entrance , he writes an humble Supplication to the Emperor to take care of this matter for the future : And the Emperor writes back to Boniface , declaring , That if ever two should contend about the Papacy , and be Ordained , neither of them should be Pope , but he who by a new Election should be taken out of the Clergy by the Emperors judgment , and the Peoples consent a a Epist. & Rescript . vid. ap. Bin. pag. 720 , 721. Lab. col. 1582 , 1583. . This writing of the Popes among the Councils , hath this Title , The Supplication of Pope Boniface : But Baronius thinking that too mean , fraudulently leaves out the Title b b Baron . An. 419. pag. 440. ; though the Humility of the Style sufficiently shews that the Pope believed that the Emperor was above him ; and whereas Boniface there calls the Church Our Mother , as the Margin in Binius rightly reads it c c Marg. Bin. p. 720. col. 2. . Baronius will have it to be your Mother ; and Labbè leaves out the Marginal and true Reading d d Lab. col. 1582. ; for it seems they think it below the Pope ( though not the Emperor ) to be a Son of the Church . If the second Epistle of Boniface be genuine , it shews that when Complaints were made to Rome out of the near adjoining Provinces , the Popes ( even after they had given too much encouragement to Appeals ) were wont to refer the matters complained of , to be examined and decided by the Bishops of those Provinces where the Fact was done e e Bin. pag. 721. Lab. col. 1584. . But the Notes conclude from hence , that the accusation of Bishops use to be referred to the Pope * * Vid. Baron . An. 419. pag. 460. ; which is an universal Conclusion from Premises that will not bear it . The third Epistle of Boniface contradicts all those which were writ before by Zosimus , in favour of Patroclus , Bishop of Arles ; for Boniface forbids Patroclus to exercise the Power granted him by the last Pope , and decrees that Hilary , Bishop of Narbon shall be Metropolitan † † Bin. ut supr. Lab. col. 1584. ; and if he judged right , then Zosimus judged wrong in this Cause . For this Pope the Editors publish six Decrees , one of which orders the differences among Bishops to be decided by the Metropolitan ; or however by the Primate of that Country ; from whose determination there was to be no Appeal f f Decret. Bonif. 2. Bin. pag. 722. Lab. col. 1587. . The fourth Decree is certainly spurious , because it not only forbids a Bishop to be brought before any Judge Civil or Military for any Crime , but declares the Magistrate who presumes to do this , shall lose his Girdle , that is , be put out of his Office . Now doubtless it was not in the Popes power to give or take away Civil or Military Offices : So that this hath been invented meerly by those who affected the Popes being supreme over Kings and Emperors , and would have the Clergy exempt from all Secular Jurisdiction . As to the Pelagian Controversie , he writ nothing about it himself ; but we are told by Prosper , that Boniface desired St. Augustine to answer the Books of the Pelagians g g Prosp. adv. Collat. c. 41. , and he shewed his Wisdom in putting the Cause into a better hand than his own .

We must now return to the business of the Legates sent into Africa by Pope Zosimus , a little before his death , who appeared in the sixth Council at Carthage , not till the time of this Pope Boniface , in order to justifie the Roman Churches Right to receive Appeals from all Churches . The Title indeed falsly saith this Council was held about the manner of prosecuting Appeals h h Bin. pag. 722. col . 2. Lab. col. 1589. ; but it is plain that the African Fathers questioned the right of appealing , and had condemned before , all Appeals to any Church beyond the Seas . In this Council the Popes Legates produce a Canon , which they say was made at Nice , importing , That if a Bishop were condemned in his own Country , and appealed to Rome , the Pope might write to the neighbouring Bishops to enquire again into the matter , and decide it ; but if all this did not satisfie the Complainant , the Pope might either send his Legates , with his Authority to judge it there with the Bishops , or leave it finally to those of that Country as he pleased i i Extat Graeco Lat. ap. Bin. p. 727. Lat. extat ap. Lab. col. 1590. . Now this Canon was no sooner read , but Alypius , one of the African Bishops , declared he could not find any such Canon in the Greek Copies of the Nicene Council , and desired Aurelius , who presided in the Council ( though the Popes Legates were there ) to send to the three other most famous Patriarchal Churches of Constantinople , Alexandria and Antioch , to search their Copies of the Nicene Council ; and that the Pope might be desired to send some thither also at the same time ; which motion was so fair , and so certain a way to find out the truth , that the Legates yielded to it , as they did also to have another Canon examined , whether it were in the Nicene Council or no , about the Appeals of the lower Clergy : After which they resolve to annex a genuine Transcript of the Nicene Creed and Canons , to the Acts of their Synod , which concluded with a Letter to Boniface ; which the Editors had no mind to publish in this place , but give it us elsewhere i i Bin. pag. 755. Lab. col. 1670. . The Sum of it is , they tell their honourable Brother , that hearing he was in Zosimus place , they had writ to him about Apiarius , who had now confessed his Faults before them , and begged pardon , and was removed from officiating in his old Church , but allowed to keep his Degree . Then for the two Canons pretended to be made at Nice , they say , they had inserted them in their Acts till the true Copies of the Nicene Council came ; but if they were not found there , they would not be compelled to endure such things as they had no mind to mention , nor to suffer such intollerable burdens ; but they hoped while he was Pope , they should not be used with such Insolence or Pride , but that they should be dealt with by brotherly Charity ; adding , that they had sent a Copy of their Acts by two of his Legates , who might make them known to his Holiness . This is the true , though brief account of this Famous Council , wherein the Roman Church was discovered to aim at Superiority , and a usurped Jurisdiction , and to practise it to the prejudice of the Faith , and the Rights of other Churches . Moreover , it was here discovered , that Rome , to cover this injustice and irregularity , had corrupted the Canons of the most famous of all Geneneral Councils , and cited such Canons out of it , as never were made there . And now to wipe off this scandal , Binius and Baronius stickle vehemently , and try all their Art to get St. Peter's Ship off from these Rocks . The former publishes long Notes k k Bin. pag. 729. Lab. col. 1599. ; the latter falls from writing History to dispute l l Baren . An. 419 , pag. 447 , ad 456. : But all in vain ; for Binius after he hath falsly told us , that it was the Antient Custom for Bishops and Priests to appeal to Rome , and for the Africans to desire their Sentences to be confirmed by the Pope ; Confesses , that the Popes Legates cited the Canons of Sardica under the name of those of Nice , and that they were not to be found in the Originals of the Council of Nice , kept in the other Patriarchal Sees : But then he pretends the African Bishops did not ( as we do ) charge Zosimus with fraud and forgery . I answer , that how modestly soever they might speak of this Fact , it really was a notorius Imposture , and it was sufficient that they proved it to be so , and writ plainly to both Boniface and Celestine ( as the Letters yet extant shew ) that they would never endure that usurped Power any more , which the Popes by virtue of these feigned Canons had exercised : And if rejecting Appeals to Rome be making a Schism , 't is certain the Africans did not suffer them so long as the face of a Church remained there ; so that probably that Epistle of Boniface the second , writ to Eulalius near an hundred years after , may be true , and had not been censured by Baronius and Binius , but only because it supposes a Church might have Martyrs in it and be a true Church , though it utterly disowned all subordination to Rome : And I am sure they justifie many Epistles that are less probable , if they make for the interest of the Pope . Against this , Baronius and the Notes Object , that there was an Appeal made by an African Bishop of Fussala , who for notorious Crimes was put out of his See by St. Augustine and others ; and it seems Boniface and Celestine both allowed this Appeal , and heard his Cause ; and this , these Flatterers of Rome think hapned at this time by the Providence of God m m Bin. & Lab. not . ut supr. Baron . An. 419. p. 451. . But let it be considered , that for so notorious a Criminal as this Bishop to appeal at this time , is neither any credit to the Pope , nor any proof that there were no African Canons at this time to prohibit it ; for it is likely enough , that an ill Man , who had no means to shelter himself from the Justice of his own Country , but by appealing to those Popes , who at that time pretended a Right to receive such Complaints , would use that means of Appeal , even though it were condemned in Africa . So that his appealing doth not prove it was lawful , nor that it was not forbid there : Besides , though St. Augustine writ modestly , yet he intimates no more , but that some such Sentences as he had passed on this Bishop of Fussala , had been passed or approved by the Popes ; which only prove in Fact , that some African Bishops had before this time appealed , but he doth not say it was right ; yea , we see the Councils , in which he was present , condemning it as an usurpation and great injustice , ex malis moribus bonae Leges . The thing had been practised till the Popes fostering Hereticks , and lewd convicted Criminals opened the Eyes of the African Church , and made them prohibit them , and claim their antient Rights . Again , upon St. Augustine's Letter it appears , the Pope did not proceed to restore this Bishop ; and it seems when former Popes had taken upon them to restore ejected Bishops , they were forced to do it by strong hand , even by sending Clerks with Soldiers to execute the Sentence , which shews their Authority was not submitted to in Africa : And the Bishops in their Letter to Celestin● , boldly charge him never to send any such again ; for if they should submit to such proceedings , they should be guilty of bringing Secular Violence into the Church of God . The Notes go on to charge us Protestants for ignorantly and treacherously insulting over Zosimus , as one that attempted to steal a Power to receive Appeals from Africa . Whereas the African Bishops themselves prove the Fact : And in the second Part I have produced a very antient Scholion n n Rom. Forg . 〈◊〉 . 2. An. 34● . pag. 111. , which expresly censures these Popes for Imposture as well as Usurpation ; and I now add , that Zonaras above 400 year before the Reformation saith in his Notes upon the Sardican Council , That the Bishops of Old Rome , from this Canon , boasted a right to Appeals from Bishops in all Causes , and falsly said it was made in the first Council of Nice ; which being propounded in the Council of Carthage , was found not to be true , as the Preface to that Council shows . So that neither was this Canon made at Nice , nor doth it decree that Appeals shall be made to him from all Bishops , but only from those who were subject to him , which at that time were almost all those of the West , that is , Macedon , Thessaly , Illiricum , Greece , Peloponesus and Epirus , which afterwards were subjected to the Church of Constantinople ; so that Appeals from thence were to be made to that Patriarch for the future o o Zon. Schol. 5 Can. Concil. Sardic . Bever . Tom. 1. pag 489. . Wherefore we are not the first , who charged the Popes with Usurpation and Imposture both in this Case : But the flattering Notes go on and tell us , that if the Controversy had been about the Right of Appeals , and not about the manner of appealing , the Popes Legates would have cited the 4th and 5th Canons of Sardica , which treat of the Right of Appeals , and not the 7th which treats only of the manner of prosecuting them : Now this is an open Falshood ; for the first Canon the Legates cite is in the best Edition of the Sardican Canons , the fifth , and is about the Right of Bishops to appeal p p Bin. Tom. 1. pag. 426. Bever . Tom. 1. pag. 488. . And the second they cite is the 14th Canon , and it is about the Appeals of Priests and Deacons q q Bin. pag. 429. Bever pag. 501. ; so that neither of the Canons cited is about the manner of prosecuting Appeals ; and the latter which the Notes call the 7th Canon of Sardica doth not mention Rome .

They proceed to tell us there were 217 Bishops first and last subscribed to this Council , being a great Provincial Council , which shews how unanimous the Africans were in condemning the Popes Usurpation : As to the Popes Legates , the Notes grant they did not preside there ; and truly it was not fit they should , when their own Cause was to be examined , and Rome was the criminal Church here to be tried . Again , The Note ( k ) impudently calls the fifth Canon of Sardica by the name of the seventh Canon , and pretends the Africans did not like the latter way of prosecuting Appeals ; That is , by the Popes sending Legates into Africk to hear these Causes , but allowed him to delegate them upon an Appeal to rehear the Appellant : Whereas the Council doth expresly reject the whole Canon as a Forgery , and forbid all Appeals to the parts beyond the Seas , so that this is only defending one Lie by another , and cleansing a Blot with blotted fingers .

The next Note ( l ) gravely tells us , that the words Sardican Council , were falsly put into the Text of this Council , because the Legates professed these Canons were made at Nice , and because the African Fathers say they knew of no Sardican Council , which had allowed of the Popes sending Legates , &c. r r Not. in Concil. 6. Carthag . Bin. pag. 730. Col. 2 F. Lab. col. 1602. Now all this pains might have been spared ; for these words ( Sardican Council ) are only in a corrupt Latin Edition , but the Greek and Latin Copy which is the best , hath no such words at all . But we may note here very justly , That these Popes were strangely insolent to cite two Canons of a poor obscure Council , never heard of in Africa , no not by the learned S. Austin ( as the Notes confess , ) and daringly fix these Canons upon the most famous general Council that ever was , especially since the Nicene Council doth expresly charge s s Concil. Nicen. can. 5. vid. Bin. pag. 725. , That every Bishops sentence shall stand good in his own Province ; so that he who is Excommunicated by some shall not be received by others . Now the pretended Canon allows the Pope to receive any person Excommunicated by the Bishops of his own Province : So that it expresly contradicts the Canons of the Nicene Council ; and yet the Popes confidently said it was made there : Had the African Fathers believed them and submitted , no doubt these two Canons , and perhaps all the rest of that petty Synod had been imposed upon the World for genuin Canons of the Nicene Council , by the Roman Church , whose Emissaries have forged no less than 60 new Canons , and published them under the name of that famous Council . Before I leave this subject , I must note , that Baronius and Binius who here confess these two Canons were made at Sardica , do in the Notes on the Nicene Council , impudently cite them , to prove there were more than twenty Canons made at Nice , of which number they say were the Canons about Appeals , produced in the sixth Council of Carthage t t Bin. notis ad Concil. Nicen. supr. pag. 296. . Baronius hath one trick more , For he saith the Council of Sardica was a General Council , as well as that at Nice , and of as great Authority , and so it was all one , which Council the Popes cited u u Baron . An. 419. pag. 448. & 454. . I have disproved this before , and only note here , that if the African Fathers had believed this , doubtless they would not have put themselves to so great cost and trouble , to send to three foreign and remote Churches to search out the Truth : I must add , that the Bishops assembled at Carthage , thought the Nicene Canons so considerable , that they annex a Copy of them to their Acts , wherein this is remarkable , That the sixth Canon is cited without that forged Preface , which the Roman Writers of late would make a part of the Canon it self , viz. The Roman Church hath always had the Primacy . No such words appear in this African Copy w w Bin. pag. 725. Lab. col. 1595. ; wherefore we may conclude , they have been invented since by some of the Popes Creatures .

§ . 6. Celestine succeeded Boniface , yet so as the Notes An. Dom. 423. confess the Faction of Eulalius would not communicate with him : However , he seems to have been very Orthodox as to the Pelagian Controversy , though Laurentius Valla truly censures him for one of no great Learning ; the Style of his Epistles shewing he was no accurate Latinist ; and in his own Epistle to Nestorius , yet extant in the Ephesine Council , he confesses he understood no Greek x x Concil. Ephes. Epist. Celest . ad Nest . Bin. pag. 135. Lab. col. 353. : So that whatever he did against Pelagius or Nestorius , was done at the request and by the direction of Men more learned than himself : However it was well , that this Pope was so willing to assist S. Cyril against Nestorius , and Prosper , with others , against the Pelagians ; for his See being eminent , his appearing on the Orthodox side gave great countenance to their Cause , and promoted the Condemnation of those Hereticks , which the Notes and Baronius so extremely magnify y y Vita Celest . Bin. pag. 732. Lab. col. 1610. as if he was the first who condemned them ; and that it was solely his Authority which suppressed them , the falshood of which we shall shew presently . The Pontifical saith , He ordered the Psalms to be sung by way of Antiphon by all , before the Sacrifice : But if he first brought in this kind of singing them at Rome , we are sure they had been sung so long before , both in the East and at Milan ; and it seems it is no disparagement for the holy Roman See to follow other Churches .

The first Epistle of Celestine , hath a great many Sections added to it in Binius , which are a Collection made by Prosper , or some Eminent Writer against the Pelagians z z Bin. pag. 733. Lab. col. 1611. . But Labbè prints the Epistle by it self , and then prints the Collections apart : However it is thought Celestine approved them , and so they are cited by divers Ancients under his name a a Vossij Hist. Pel. cap. 30. pag. 82. : But if we compare the Matter or the Style of those Additions with the former part , which is Celestine's genuin work , it will easily be discovered , that the Popes Authority was far more considerable than his Learning : And if any Man wonder why this Collector is so careful , to set down the Decrees of the Roman Church against this Heresy b b Bin. ibid. §. 3. Lab. col. 1614. , the reason is plainly expressed , viz. That some secret Favourers of Pelagius , ( considering the kindness he and his followers had found at Rome ) professed they would stand by the Decrees of that Church .

His second Epistle hath nothing memorable in it , but that the Pope thinks the affairs of the Province of Narbon , to be things far remote c c Bin. pag. 735. Lab. col. 1619. ; which shews they had not then usually intermedled with the concerns of all the Churches in the World . A little after he saith , we of the Clergy ought to be distinguished from the Laity , by our Doctrin , not by our Garments ; by our Conversation , not by our Habit ; by our purity of Mind , not our Dress : Which looks as if he would abrogate wholly the distinct Habits of the Clergy , and persuade them and the Laity to go alike : Which gross notion the Notes labour to cover as well as they can , by pretending he for bids only new Fashions of Habit to the Clergy : But if it were so , this would reflect upon the various Habits of every several Order of Monks . And yet if we look well upon the Text , he positively dislikes all Habits which may distinguish the Clergy from the Laity , which now adays Protestants account a Fanatical Opinion .

Most of the following Epistles are printed in the Council of Ephesus , and shall there be considered : It suffices to observe here , That the 9th Epistle to the Emperor Theodosius d d Bin. pag. 737 Lab. col. 1623. owns that Arcadius and Projectus were to represent his Person in the Council of Ephesus , which the Emperor had Commanded to be held : Therefore Cyril did not represent Pope Celestine ; and not the Pope , but the Emperor called that Council .

The 10th Epistle affirms , that the care which Kings take in the matters of Religion is not ineffectual e e Bin. ibid. Lab. col. 1624. ; which shews , that Baronius had no reason to be so severe upon all those Princes who medled with Religious Affairs . Out of the 12th Epistle to Theodosius we may note , that Atticus late Bishop of Constantinople is said to be of most reverend Memory , and a most couragious defender of the Catholick Faith f f Bin. pag. 739. Lab. col. 1629. : And in Celestine's Epistle to Nestorius , Atticus of blessed memory , a Teacher of the Catholick Faith g g Bin. Concil. Ephes. pag. 134. . But this very Bishop had a long contest with the Bishops of Rome , and was Excommunicated by Pope Innocent h h Baron . An. 406. pag. 244. ; and he on the otherside valued this so little , that he Excommunicated those who were in Communion with Rome ; and calls Paulinus and Evagrius and their adherents ( among which was the Pope ) by no gentler a name than that of Schismaticks i i Baron . An. 412. pag. 348. . So that how Orthodox so-ever he might be in any other things , 't is plain , he did not believe the Roman Church Infallible , nor think it was necessary to be in Communion with it : And though he erred ( as they now believe at Rome ) in so main a Point ; yet while he was at open Enmity with the Pope , Baronius tells us he wrought a Miracle k k Baron . An. 408. pag. 272. ; so that a Man would think , Miracles are no proof of the true Church : Another passage in this Epistle is Memorable , viz. That Celestine saith , Nestorius was Excommunicated by the general sentence of the Bishops : Which the Reader must remember , when the flattering Notes any where say , the Sentence against this Heretick was solely the Act of Celestine . And indeed Baronius having recited his 11th , 12th , 13th and 14th Epistles , boasts of him , as if God had raised him up to stand in the gap against those Hereticks which then infested the Church , and gives him all the Glory of the Victory over them l l Baron . An. 432. pag. 616. . Whereas , if Prosper and Cyril had writ no better against Pelagius and Nestorius than Celestine , it is to be feared that these Heresies had not been censured in that Age. Yet in the main he was a good Pope , and had the fortune to take the right side in these Controversies , and therefore is highly commended by divers of the Orthodox ; and he is very free in returning the Complements : For in his last Epistle he calls Cyril an Apostolical Man m m Bin. pag. 741. Lab. col. 1633. ; and Maximtanus of Constantinople he styles his Colleague . And this may suffice for this Popes Epistles .

We are entertained next with another Collection of African Councils , held , as they say , under Pope Boniface and Celestine n n Bin. pag. 744. Lab. col. 1641. ; but the Titles mention no Pope at all ; nor were they called by any Pope , but by the Bishop of Carthage , who presided in them , even when the Popes Legates were present : We have taken notice of most of these before , and therefore shall pass them over very briefly . In one of them they resolve to send a Legate to their holy Brethren and fellow Bishops , Anastasius of Rome , and Vencrius of Milan , putting them so equally into the Scale , that the Pope is only first named o o Bin. pag. 745. Lab. col. 1643. . A little after Aurelius , Bishop of Carthage saith , That he by God's appointment sustained the care of all the Churches : The Margin tells us he means in Africa p p Bin. pag. 747. Lab. col. 1647. ; but I must note , that if a Pope had said so in this Age , though he could mean no more than the Churches of the Suburbicarian Regions , these Gentlemen would have stretched that to all the World . Another Council in the twelfth Consulship of Honorius , and the eighth of Theodosius , had a Canon in some ancient Copy , wherein these Fathers . Anathematize them that hold any middle place between Heaven and Hell , to which unbaptized Infants go ; and they expresly declare , that whoever is deprived of the Right Hand , must fall into the Left ; and that no Catholick doubts but he is with the Devil who is not a Coheir with Christ q q Bin. pag. 753. Lab. col. 1664. . Now this looks so foul upon Limbus Infantum and Purgatory , the later Inventions of Rome , that their Parasites have left this Canon out in other Copies of this Council r r Vid. Bin. pag. 786. : And here it is printed in a different Character , as if it were no genuine piece of the Council , only because it condemns the modern Opinion of the Roman Church ; but the impartial Reader will conclude , that the Ancient Copy of this Canon was elder than either Purgatory or Limbus Infantum .

Here also the Editors print at large the two famous Epistles of the African Bishops , to two Popes successively , Boniface and Celestine , wherein they do utterly condemn Appeals to Rome , and discover the forgery of those pretended Nicene Canons , by which their Legates attempted to justifie them . I have given an account of the former of these Letters in the Life of Boniface . And I shall add here , that the latter Epistle to their honourable Brother Celestine ( writ some years after ) shews the Africans continued still in the same mind s s Bin. pag. 757. Lab. col. 1674. ; for therein they acquaint him that they had called a Council ; and though Apiarius alledged the Priviledge of the Roman Church which had received him unlawfully to Communion , they examined his Cause , and at last he confessed his notorious Crimes : Wherefore they earnestly desire the Pope not so easily to receive Complaints from thence , nor admit those to his Communion whom they had excommunicated ; for they shew that the Nicene Council forbids this , both as to Bishops , Presbyters and Lay-men , without any derogation to the priviledge of the African Church , committing all the Clergy to their own Metropolitan , and wisely ordering every business to be determined in that Province where it arose , knowing that the Spirit of God would not be wanting to any Country , where a Council of Bishops should meet ; so that none need fear to be injured , since they might appeal to a greater Council of their own Province , or to a Universal Synod : Whereas if Judgment were to be given beyond the Seas , many Witnesses must be wanting , and many other things must hinder the finding out of truth . They add , — That they could not find any Council which allowed his Holiness to send any Legates to hear Causes ; and for those Canons which Faustinus had produced , as made at Nice , they could find no such Canons in the Authentick Copies of that Council . Finally , They bid him not send any of his Clerks to execute his Sentence , to which if they should submit , they should seem to bring the vanity of Secular Arrogance into God's Church . This is the Sum of this excellent Letter , which disowns and condemns all Appeals , and renounces the Popes jurisdiction over Africa , with a modest intimation , that his claim was grounded upon a notorious Forgery , and therefore he is required to pretend to it no longer , for that they will not submit to such an Usurpation . Yet such is the Impudence of the Roman Editors , that in a Marginal Note upon this Epistle t t Bin. pag. 757. col . 2. Lab. col. 1675. , they say these African Bishops desire the Pope , to appoint another way of prosecuting Appeals : Which is a gross contradicting the Text it self , wherein all manner of Appeals , and all ways of prosecuting them are utterly condemned ; but this was too harsh , and therefore the Truth was to be daubed over with this plausible Fiction .

After this Binius presents us with another Edition of these African Canons and Epistles , in Latin and Greek u u Bin. pag. 758. . And Labbè newly publishes the Epistle of one Leporius , who had been converted from Heresie , and reconciled to the Church by the African Bishops w w Lab. col. 1678. , by which we may learn , that a Heretick need not go to Rome to recant , as the Notes formerly affirmed . There is nothing further observable before the Council of Ephesus , except two Councils , one at Rome , wherein the Pope is said to make Cyril his Legate in the Cause of Nestorius ; the other at Alexandria , in which Cyril is pretended to Act by this delegated power x x Bin. pag. 794. &c. Lab. col. 1688. . But this will be more properly considered in the History of that General Council , where these Epistles are printed at large .

CHAP. II.

Of the time from the Council of Ephesus till the Council of Chalcedon .

§ . 1. IN this Year was held the Third General Council at Ephesus , upon the account of Nestorius , An. Dom. 431. who about three years before had been made Bishop of Constantinople , and was at first believed to be both Pious and Orthodox ; but he had not sat long in that See , before he began to publish certain Doctrines about our Saviour , which gave great offence ; for he taught that Jesus Christ was two Persons , one as the Son of God , another as the Son of Man ; and therefore he denied the Blessed . Virgin to be the Mother of God , holding that the Person which was born of her , was no more than a Meer Man : Which Opinions , not only made a Faction at Constantinople , but caused Divisions among the Egyptian Monks ; whereupon St. Cyril first writ a Confutation of them to those Monks , and then with great modesty admonished Nestorius of these Errors , by divers Letters ; but he despised his Admonition , justified the Doctrines , and persecuted those who would not own them , being supported by his Interest in the Imperial Court. Upon this , Cyril called in Pope Celestine to his assistance , sending him an account of what he had writ to Nestorius : On the other side , Nestorius also writ to Celestrine , and sent his Sermons in which these Doctrines were contained , for him to peruse . The Pope by the advice of such Western Bishops as he could then get together , takes the part of Cyril , and offered him to join with him in condemning Nestorius , if he did not recant : But the Authority of these two Patriarchs of Rome and Alexandria , not sufficing to condemn a Patriarch of Constantinople , it was thought fit to desire the Emperor to call a General Council at Ephesus , where Nestorius might appear , and his Opinions be examined ; and the Emperor at length did agree to this Request . Now that which we are to observe concerning this General Council , shall be under these Heads . First , To enquire by whom it was called and convened . Secondly , Who presided in it . Thirdly , What is memorable in the Acts of it . Fourthly , Who confirmed the Decrees there made .

As to the first , the Historical Preface , before this Council , labours to persuade us , That Celestine commanded the Council to be called a a Bin. Tom. 1. par. 2. pag. 2. Lab. Tom. 3. col. 4. ; and the Notes after it say , it was appointed by the Authority of Gelestine , and gathered together by the counsel , aid and assistance of Theodosius the Emperor b b Bin. pag. 477. Lab. col. 1241. . The Cardinal goes further , and saith Theodosius called it by the Authority of Celestine c c Baron . An. 530. pag. 547 , &c. ; but when this is to be proved , both the Notes and Baronius are content to make out , that this Council was not called without the Popes consent ; which may be proved concerning every Orthodox Bishop that was there ; and so gives no peculiar advantage to the Bishop of Rome . But as to the Convening it by his Authority , nothing can be more false : For by the Emperors first Letter to Cyril , it appears that some then thought to order Matters of Religion by Power , rather than by consulting in common d d Bin. pag. 162 , 163. Lab. col. 433. ; in which words he reflects upon Pope Celestine and Cyril , who thought , by the Authority of their Private Synods at Rome and Alexandria , to have condemned Nestorius , who was a Patriarch as well as they ; and therefore the Emperor rightly considered , that he could not be tried but by a General Council : So that it seems Celestine , at first , had no mind such a Council should be called , nor Cyril neither ; but when they saw their Authority was insufficient , then Cyril put the Monks of Constantinople upon petitioning the Emperor to command a General Council to meet very speedily ( as their words are ) e e Bin. pag. 162. Lab. col. 429. ; and the same Cyril put Juvenalis , Bishop of Jerusalem , upon writing to the Emperor for the same purpose f f Bin. pag. 147 , &c. Lab. col. 388. . Now why should not these Applications have been made to the Pope , if the Council were to be called by his Authority ? Besides , if Celestine had called it , his Letter of Summons would appear ; but though none ever saw that , the Emperors Edict is yet extant , wherein he fixes the day and place for the Council to meet , enjoyns Cyril , with the Bishops of his Province , to be there at that time , and tells him he had writ to all other Metropolitans ( probably to Celestine among the rest ) to attend the Synod , and not to meddle with this Matter , till the meeting of this General Assembly , from which whoever absented himself , should not be excused g g Bin. pag. 164. Lab. col. 436. . Which is as full a proof that the Emperor called it by his Authority , as is possible to be made ; and we need add nothing to it but this , that the Synod it self every where declares it was called 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , by the Emperors Decree h h Bin. pag. 168 , 210. Lab. col. 445-560 . , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , by his Will i i Bin. pag. 171. Lab. col. 452. , and Summoned by his Letter k k Bin. pag. 211 , 212 , 214. Lab. col. 562 , 564 , 567. ; yea , the Pope himself saith , I have obeyed your Pleasure as far as I was able , and I do appear in the Council which you have commanded , by those I have sent in my stead l l Bin. pag. 236. Lab. col. 620. . And when these Legates came to Ephesus , they say , we are come to the Synod which hath been appointed by the most Christian and Gracious Emperors m m Bin. pag. 238. Lab. col. 626. . So that it is a strange impudence of Baronius and Binius , in despite of so clear evidence , to pretend this Council was convened only by the Advice and Ministry of Theodosius , but by the Authority of Pope Celestine .

Secondly , The like prevarication they use about the President of this General Council , for Bellarmine had made it a Maxim , That in General Councils it was the Popes priviledge to preside by himself or his Legates , and to moderate all as Supream Judge n n Bellar. de● Concil. lib. 1. cap. 19. : Wherefore the Preface to the Council saith , Cyril was to preside by the command of Celestine , and the Authority of the Apostolick See o o Pref. Bin. pag. 2. Lab. col. 5. ; and the Notes say , The Pope presided there by Cyril , who had the Office of his Legate p p Not. Bin. pag. 477. col . 2. Lab. col. 1243. : And a little after they produce all the Historians who writ after Evagrius ( An. Dom. 595. ) ; and because he saith Celestine had given Cyril his place , they conclude thence , that he was President of the Council by virtue of that Grant : But indeed the first place belonged to Cyril as Patriarch of Alexandria , in his own Right , because the Bishop of Rome was absent , and he of Constantinople was the Criminal to be tried ; yet Celestine had cunningly given him that which was his due without any gift ; for in his Letter to him long before the Council was called ( when the Synod at Rome had condemned Nestorius ) Celestine saith , he might take to him both the Authority of his Throne , and the Order of his Place q q Concil. Eph. par. 1. cap. 15. Bin. pag. 133. Lab. col . 349. ; which signifies no more , than that Cyril might vote in Celestine's Name , and add the Credit of the First Patriarch to his own Authority , to make the Sentence against Nestorius the more Venerable . And the beginning of the Acts distinguish Cyril's precedency from his holding Celestine's place ( if they be rightly pointed , ) (r) 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , &c. Bin. pag. 168. Lab. col. 446. Cyril , Bishop of Alexandria , presiding , and [ having ] the place of Celestine , &c. And so Zonaras understood it , who saith , Cyril of Alexandria presided , and also had the place of Celestine ; thus also Balsamon s s Balsam . & Zonar . in 1. Can. Eph. ap. Bever . Tom. 1. pag. 99. . So that it seems Cyril was President of the Council , either by choice of the Fathers , or in his own Right , as the Chief Patriach present ; and he also voted in the place of Celestine who was absent ; and probably by virtue of that Representation also , sate above all the other Patriarchs . However this is certain , that the Bishop of Ephesus , Memnon , who had no delegation from the Pope , is also reckoned President of the Synod ; and he , together with St. Cyril , are often called 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , even thrice in one Epistle t t Bin. pag. 295 , 296. Lab. col. 763 , &c. . And again , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 u u Bin. pag. 303. Lab. col. 783. ; yea , these two are called , the Head of the Council w w Bin. pag. 304. Lab. col. 786. : And all this without any mention of their having these Titles , or this Power from the Pope . Moreover , we may observe , that Cyril alone is sometimes called the President of this Council x x Leo Pap. ep. 47. & Concil. Chalced. Act. 4. & in Act. Eph. cap. 60. ; and the Party of John , Bishop of Antioch , charges him with usurping this place , which was not given him by the Canons or the Emperor's Edict ; ( they valued not , it seems , the Popes Grant y y Act. Concil. Bin. p. 274. Lab. col. 714. ; so that this Title is variously applied , and no Argument can be formed from it for the Popes Supremacy ; who also sent three other Legates to this Synod , to represent his Person , and supply his Place , as Celestine's own Letter declares z z Bin. pag. 236. Lab. col. 620. : Yea , the Council it self declares , that these three Legates , Arcadius , Projectus and Philip did supply Celestin's place a a Bin. p. 154 , & 303. Lab. col. 666 , & 783. . Now it is not easie to understand how Cyril should be the Popes Legate and supply his Place , and yet at the same time three other Legates need to be sent also to supply the same place , unless we expound this Grant of the Popes to Cyril , to signifie no more than a declaration , that he would agree to all that Cyril voted for , which is far from making him a formal Legate , or for giving him that Authority which he had in this Council . We conclude therefore , that Cyril , as the first Patriarch present , and the most learned of all that opposed Nestorius * * Cyril . — Cui tune dabatur primatus de talibus agendi Liberat. Brer . cap. 4. , and Memnon as Bishop of Ephesus , where the Council was held , were chosen Moderators by the Synod : Nor is it likely that the Popes making these his Legates ( if that were true , which Baronius only supposes , but doth not prove ) b b Baron . An. 430. & An. 431. , would have given them any Power over the Council , since Arcadius , Projectus and Philip , who really were the Popes Legates , did not preside , nor are they reckoned up in the first place , no not in the Subscriptions , which yet are not certainly genuine c c Baron . An. 431. pag. 566 , 568. . And when the Council sent two of these Legates among others on an Embassie to Constantinople , they lay their Commands on them , and threaten , if they do not observe their Orders , they would neither confirm their Acts , nor yet receive them into Communion d d Bin. pag. 302. Lab. col. 782. : Which shews the Council was superior even to the Popes Legates ; and that their representing the Popes person , did not intitle them to any Power over the Council , which is that the Roman Parasites would make out . Richerius exposes Baronius for saying Philip had a place before the Bishops , because he was a Cardinal * * Tom. 1. cap. 7. §. 6. p. 287. . The first Seat and Vote therefore belonged to Cyril , but Christ ( as these Fathers say properly ) was the Head of this General Council e e Concil. Eph. par. 3. cap. 13. pag. 403. Bin. , and was represented by the Holy Gospels , placed above all , on a Throne , out of which all decisions were made , not by any Humane Authority , either of Cyril or Celestine himself .

Thirdly , We shall next examine into the proceedings of this Council , and see where the Editors have prevaricated therein for the interest of Rome , as also what else therein is pertinent to our purpose . Now these are , First those things which hapned before ; and , Secondly in the Council . First , Before the Council in Cyril's Letter to Nestorius , he tells him , that Celestine and the Bishops assembled at Rome , had advised him to enquire whether those Papers were writ by Nestorius or no f f 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , &c. Concil. Eph. par. 1. p. 119. Lab. col. 313. & Baron . An. 430. p. 533. . This they all falsly translate , Celestino jubenté , &c. as if the Pope had a Power to command Cyril ; whereas the Original Word imports no more than an intimation given him to make this enquiry ; and that not by the Pope alone , but by the whole Roman Synod . Again , since this Controversie began between two Patriarchs , Cyril was so modest , that he would not by his own single Authority Anathematize Nestorius , till he had acquainted the Bishops both of the East and West with it ; yet he declares he had power to have done this if he pleased g g Bin. pag. 125 , & 131. Lab. col. 329. & col. 344. . Now his forbearing to do this out of Prudence and Humility , is by the Roman Editors , in their Preface and Notes , ascribed most falsly to his want of Power and Authority . Thirdly , In the Protestation of the Clergy of Constantinople , they prove themselves Orthodox , because they held the same Faith with the Church of Antioch ; and that which was held by Eustathius , Bishop there , in the time of the Nicene Council , making no mention of Rome at all h h Concil. Eph par. 1. cap. 13. Bin. p. 129. Lab. col . 340. . And though now the Faith of the Roman Church is pretended to be the sole Infallible Rule of what is Orthodox , it was not thought so then : For Pope Celestine himself saith Nestorius is to be condemned , unless he profess the Faith of the Roman and the Alexandrian Churches , and that which the Catholick Church held i i ●b . cap. 15. Bin. p. 133. Lab. col. 349. & Baron . An. 430. p. 536. : And the Pope repeats this in his Epistle to Nestorius k k Cap. 18. Bin. p. 138. Lab. col. 361. ; and in that to John , Bishop of Antioch l l Cap. 20. Bin. p. 143. Lab. col. 376. : So that the Roman Church was then only a part of the Catholick Church as that of Alexandria was ; had it then been ( as now it is said to be ) the same with the Catholick Church , the Pope was guilty in three several Epistles of a notorious Tautology ; for according to the modern Style ) it had been enough to have said Nestorius must profess he held the Faith of the Roman Catholick Church . So when Cyril had informed John of Antioch , that the Roman Synod had condemned Nestorius , and writ to him , to the Bishop of Thessalonica , to those of Macedon , and to him of Jerusalem to joyn in this Sentence , Cyril adds , that he of Antioch must comply with this Decree , unless he would be deprived of the Communion of the whole Western Church , and of these other Great Men m m Cap. 21. Bin. p. 144. Lab. col. 380. . This passage the Preface cites to prove that Cyril made use of the Popes Authority as his Chief Weapon in this Cause n n Pref. Bin. p. 2. Lab. Pref. p. 3. Baron . An. 430. p. 539. ; but it is plain he doth not so much as mention the Pope , or the Roman Church alone , nor doth he urge the danger of losing the Communion of that Church , singly considered , but of all the Western Churches , and divers eminent ones in the East ; and it was the Popes agreeing with all these that made his Communion so valuable . Fourthly , as to the Titles of these Epistles , which were writ before the Council , we may observe , that Nestorius writes to Celestine as to his Brother , and saith he would converse with him , as one Brother use to do with another o o Cap. 16. Bin. p. 133 , 134. Lab. col. 349. & 351. Baron . An. 430. p. 530. ; which shews , that as Patriarchs , they were upon equal ground . 'T is true Cyril ( who was as eminent for his Modesty as his Learning ) calls Celestine by the Title of his Lord p p Cap. 21. Bin. p. 144. Lab. col. 377. , from which the Romanists would draw conclusions for their Supremacy ; but we note , that in the same Epistle he calls John of Antioch also his Lord , beloved Brother and Fellow-minister q q Bin. & Lab. ibid. , which very words Cyril uses when he speaks of Celestine in his Epistle to Juvenal , Bishop of Jerusalem , calling the Pope there , his Lord , most Religious Brother and Fellow-minister r r Cap. 24 Bin. pag. 147. Lab. col. 388. ; yea , such was the Humility of those Primitive Bishops , that they frequently stiled their Equals and Inferiors their Lords ; so Cyril calls Acacius Bishop of Beraea s s Cap. 22. Bin. pag. 145. Lab. col. 381. : So John , Bishop of Antioch , calls Nestorius , his Lord t t Ibid. cap. 25. , and the same Title in the same Epistle he bestows upon Archelaus , Bishop of Mindus , a small City u u Ibid. Bin. pag. 150. Lab. col. 393. . And of this we might give many more instances , but these may suffice to expose those vain Arguers , who from some such Titles bestowed on the Roman Bishop , think to establish his Universal Supremacy . Fifthly , Among all these preliminary Epistles , there are none meaner , both for Style and Sense , than those of Pope Celestine ; yet Baronius brags of that to Nestorius , as the Principal Thing which confuted him , calling it a Divine Epistle w w Baron . An. 430. pag. 534. . But alas it is infinitely short of Cyril's Letters ; the Phrase is very ordinary , the Periods intricate , the Arguments such as might have been used against any Heretick , and his Application of the Holy Texts very odd ; as when the Church of Constantinople discovered Nestorius to be a Heretick , he saith , he may use St. Paul's words , we know not what to pray for as we ought x x Cap. 18. Bin. pag. 135. Lab. col. 356. . However there is one remarkable Passage in it ( a little after ) where he saith , Those things which the Apostles have fully and plainly declared to us , ought neither to be augmented nor diminished . Had his Successors observed this Rule , a great part of their Trent Articles had never been established : And it had been well if the Editors had not in that very Page left out by design , one of Celestine's own words . For he threatens Nestorius , that if after this third Admonition he did not amend , he should be utterly excommunicated ( 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ) by his Synod , and by a Council of all Christians . Here they leave out ( 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ) , and translate it ab Universitate Collegii & conventu Christianorum y y Bin. pag. 136. Lab. col. 357. ; as if the Pope alone had power to separate a Patriarch from the Communion of the Universal Church ; whereas even when the Western Bishops joyned with him , St. Cyril notes , that those who submitted not to their Decree , would only lose the Communion of the Western Church z z Ep. ad Joh. Antioch . cap. 21. Bin. pag. 144. Lab. col. 380. : And if this Sentence were confirmed in the East too , then indeed Nestorius and his party , as Celestine intimates , would be cast out of the Universal Church . Sixthly , In Cyril's Letter to Nestorius , there is this remarkable Saying , That Peter and John were ( 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ) of equal Dignity , as they were both Apostles and Holy Disciples a a Cap. 26. Bin. pag. 153. Lab. col. 400. ; which shews ( for all the brags of the Popes Legate in the Council , that Peter was the Head of the Faith , and of the Apostles ) b b Par. 2. Act. 2. Bin. pag. 235. ; they did not believe there was any difference as to Power and Dignity among the Apostles , and that saying must pass for a piece of Flattery , and is not to be regarded , because it comes from a Creature of the Popes , and one of his own House , who by the Canons was no lawful evidence c c Ad testimonium non admittendos quos ipse accusator de domo sua produxerit . Concil. Carthag. 7. can. 4. . Seventhly , In the Emperor's Commission to Candidianus , one of his great Officers , who was to preside in the Council , we may see , the Emperor gives him power to appoint what Causes and Questions shall be first treated of , and to forbid any pecuniary or criminal Causes to be tried there d d Cap. 35. Bin. pag. 167. & 225. Lab. col. 443. & col. 594. ; which shews that the Emperor reserved the Power of managing and ordering the Synod , to himself , and made a Lay-man his representative for that purpose .

Secondly , As to the Passages in the Council , if the Preface and the Names before the Acts , be genuine ( of which there is some doubt ) , we may note , that it is there declared , the Council met by the Emperors Command , and that Cyril is mentioned first , both in his own Right , as the chief Patriarch present , and as he had the precedence due to Celestine , here called Arch-Bishop of the Roman Church ( a Title given to Cyril afterwards ) whose Legate he is no where said to be , but only to have his place e e Concil. Eph. par. 2. Act 1. Bin. pag. 168. Lab. col. 445. ; that is , to sit first as the Pope would have done had he been there . Moreover , it is remarkable , that the Council begins without the Popes Legates , who did not come till the three Sessions of the first Act was over . But there is one notorious falshood both in the Notes and in Baronius , which they devise purely in favour of the Pope , and to make him seem to have had some Supremacy in this Council : For they say , that in the very first Action , Peter , a Priest of Alexandria , did read that which Pope Celestine and Cyril writ against Nestorius f f Bin. not . pag. 481. Lab. col. 1246. Baron . An. 431. pag. 568. . Whereas the Acts of the Council shew the contrary , namely , that though Peter did say he had those Epistles of Celestine and Cyril in his hands , yet the Council ordered , that the Emperors Edict , by which they were convened , should be read in the first place g g Bin. pag. 171. Lab. col . ●52 . , and it was read accordingly : Binius , by false translating the Acts saith , Peter offered to read these Epistles first ; but Labbè honestly alters that corrupt Version , and saith only , he had them in his hands to do with them as the Synod pleased : But we see the Synod did not allow them to be read in the first place ; and afterwards when these Epistles were called for , Cyril's Epistle to Nestorius was first read and approved by the whole Synod to be Orthodox , not because it was agreeable to the opinion of Celestine ( whom they do not once name ) , but because it was conformable to the Council of Nice h h Bin. pag. 174 , 175. Lab. col. 461. &c. : Yea the whole Council had confirmed the Faith of Cyril , and unanimously condemned Nestorius before they called upon the Notary to read the Epistle of Celestine Arch-Bishop of Rome i i Bin. pag. 190 , 191. Lab. col. 501. : So that the matters contained in that Popes Epistle , could neither be the sole nor principal Motive to the Council to condemn Nestorius . For after the reading this Epistle , they also read other Writings of Cyril upon this Subject , and then heard the Opinions of the Ancient Doctors , Martyrs and Orthodox Fathers recited ; as also a Collection of the Blasphemies contained in Nestorius his Works , and the Epistle of Capreolus , Bishop of Carthage , declaring his consent to their proceedings : After all which they both pronounce and subscribe the solemn Sentence of deposing and excommunicating Nestorius , according to the Canons , and agreeable to the Decree mentioned in the Letter of Celestine , but the Sentence was passed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ , the true and supream President of this Assembly k k Bin. pag. 204. Lab. col. 533. : And all this was done before Arcadius , Projectus and Philip , the Popes Legates , came to Ephesus , and yet their absence was never objected by Nestorius , as if that had invalidated these Acts. Further , we may observe that an Oath was given in this Council only upon the Holy Gospels ( according to the Protestant usage ) l l Bin. pag. 192. Lab. col. 504. , not upon any relicts of the Saints , as the practice is now at Rome . In the second Action , both Baronlus and Binius add a word to the Text , and make the Popes Legate call the Pope when he speaks to the Synod [ vestrum Caput ] your Head m m Bin. pag. 235. Baron . An. 431. pag. 576. ; and Baronius bids the Reader observe , that Philip the Popes Legate in open Synod professed the Bishop of Rome was the Head of the Càtholick Church , and other Bishops , members under this Head : But first , this word [ vestrum ] is forged by Baronius and Binius , the Greek having no more than [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] and Labbè hath been so much ashamed of this addition , that he leaves out [ vestro ] n n Lab. col. 619. ; and the sense of the place is , that upon the Councils Acclamations by way of approving Celestines Letter as Orthodox , Philip gives them thanks , that by their Holy Voices , they as Holy Members had agreed to an Holy Head ; he doth not say to their Holy Head , yet if he had , the whole Synod , and the three Legates particularly in a solemn Relation to the Emperor , call Cyril the Head of the Bishops here assembled o o Par. 2. Act. 5. Bin. pag. 250. Lab. col. 655. ; but he would be ridiculous who should thence infer That Cyril was the perpetual Head of the whole Catholick Church ; yet we may more justly prove that from an Act of the whole Council , than Baronius doth the Popes Supremacy , from a Rhodomontado of his own Legate , who barely said this , the Council neither approving nor disapproving * * Vide dictum Imp. Justiniani ap. Richer . Tom. 1. cap. 7. §. 9. p. 299. Bin. Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 162 , 163. of what he said in favour of his own Bishop . And no doubt the Orthodox Patriarchs might any of them properly be called by this Title of an Head : For Cyril , yea Memnon , Bishop of Ephesus , are so stiled in the Councils Petition to the Emperor , to set them at liberty , lest the Synod want an Head , and all the Bishops of the World lie under an heavy burden of grief for want of their Presidents p p Bin. pag. 304. Lab. col. 786. . So that it is plain by these Titles , in those days , no more was meant , than that the Bishops to whom they are applied had some eminent place in the Church , and in this General Council ; not that all , or any one who is called an Head , had , or ought to have any supream standing Jurisdiction in all times over the whole Catholick Church . So when the Council calls Alexandria the greater Seat q q Act. 4. Bin. pag. 243. Lab. col. 638. , and Jerusalem is called an Apostolical Church r r Ib. Bin. pag. 244. Lab. col. 641. , and Pope Celestine stiles Cyril an Apostolical Man s s Par. 3. cap. 23. Bin. pag. 416. Lab. col. 1077. ; none of those Churches did ever draw any consequences from these passages , that their Bishops were Supream Judges over the whole Catholick Church ; that absurdity is peculiar to the Parasites of Rome , who make this Inference from every Honourable Title , that is , any where , or upon any occasion , by way of Complement , or seriously bestowed upon the Pope ; but since others had the same Titles given them upon Occasion , it is plain there is no good ground for such Conclusions . It is further memorable , that when John , Patriarch of Antioch , would have usurped a Jurisdiction over the Bishops of Cyprus , the Council of Ephesus decreed , that no Bishop should have , or assume any Power over those Provinces which had not been under him or his Predecessors before that time t t Bin. pag. 306. Lab. col . ●01 . ; which Decree plainly condemns the Bishop of Rome usurping a Jurisdiction over this Island of Britain since the Ephesine Council , because it was not under any of the Popes , either then , or of many years after . Finally , we may note , that John , Patriarch of Antioch , being secretly a favourer of Nestorius , would not joyn with Cyril or Celestine in condemning him , but held a separate Council with such Bishops as were of his party , and there they Excommunicated and Deposed Cyril and Memnon with all that joyned with them . On the other side , the lawful general Council Excommunicated John of Antioch and his accomplices ; and afterwards upon his Repentance Cyril declares , he restored him to Communion upon the terms prescribed by the true Council of Ephesus u u Par. 3. cap. 38. Bin. pag. 447. Lab. col. 1153. . Now if the Pope of Rome had then been known and believed to be the supreme head of the Catholick Church , and the only infallible Judge in matters of Faith ; how could the Bishop of Antioch so much as pretend to Condemn that side on which Celestine was , or to reject that Council wherein his Legates sat and voted against him ? Or how came the Pious Emperor Theodosius , and his Officers so openly and so long to abet the party of John of Antioch , against that of Celestine and Cyril ? There needed but two Arguments , viz. those of the Popes Infallibility and Supremacy , to have confounded all the pretences of this Schismatical Council , and they are not so much as once mentioned ; Which is a certain Evidence , that neither side knew of , or believed these Papal Priviledges , usurped in later times by that encroaching See .

Fourthly , I come to consider the confirmation of the Acts of this general Council : And this the Preface ascribes intirely to the Pope w w Bin. Prof. pag. 5. Lab. col. 10. , and so do the Notes after the Council upon the word [ Approved ] x x Bin. Notis . pag. 478. Lab. col. 1244. , and so doth Baronius in several places : But all this is without any just ground ; For the Preface saith , he sent his Legates to confirm the Acts of the Council in his name , and cites for this these words out of Celestine's Letter sent to the Synod by these Legates : And what you derce● , shall be accounted , defined and determined for the tranquility of all Churches y y Praefat. Bin. pag. 5. Lab. col. 10. . But no such words are in that Epistle , the Pope saying no more , but only that he had sent these Persons to be present at their Acts , and to confirm what he had long since decreed * * Editio Peltani & Contij ita legit — Actis vestris intererunt , quaeque à vobis sunt constituta suo calculo denuò confirmabunt . Richer . Hist. Concil. Tom. 1. cap. 7. pag. 294. ; To which he hoped their Holiness would assent , because they knew that which was determined , was for the peace of all Churches z z Concil. par. 2. Act. 2. Bin. pag. 234. Lab. col. 618. . The sense of which is , that Celestine having long before Condemned Nestorius at Rome , he sent his Legates to the general Council to get that Sentence confirmed , and doubted not of their assent to it , since this casting out of Nestorius ( the disturber of the Churches quiet ) would tend to the Peace of the whole Church : So that this passage proves , that the Council was to confirm the Popes Decree , not that he was to confirm their Acts : And the Synod in their Letter to Pope Celestine do expresly say , That they had judged his Sentence against the Pelagians should remain firm and be valid , &c. adding that they had sent him the Acts of the Synod and the Subscriptions , that he might know what was done a a Par. 2. Act. 5. Bin. pag. 254. Lab. col. 666 , & 667. . But there is not one word desiring him to confirm their Decrees : But as to the Emperors , the case is clear ; For the Synod and the three Legates of the Pope address to them , to Command that what this General Council had done against Nestorius might be in force , being confirmed by their consent and approbation b b Ibid. Bin. pag. 251. Lab. col 659. Baron . An. 431. pag. 579. . And they Petition the Emperors to make null and void the false Synods uncanonical proceedings against Cyril and Memnon c c Bin. pag. 304. Lab. col. 786. . And in another Relation to the Emperors , they put both these requests together d d Bin. pag. 295. Lab. col. 766 , 767. : And Sozomen saith in express terms , that the Emperor by his suffrage confirmed their Acts e e Sozom. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 9. pag. 419. : Yea these Testimonies are so express , that Binius himself in his Notes at last grants , That the Emperor dimissed the Bishops , adding this Decree , that the Sentence of this Holy General Council against Nestorius should stand in full force f f Bin. not . pag. 483. Lab. col. 1251. Richer . cap. 7. §. 12. p. 307. The Emperors Letter in the Pseudo-Synod saith , The confirmation of the Acts should have been obtained from him : And there Bin. his Note is , How this confirmation is to be understood , other imperial Letters shew . Bin. pag. 270. Lib. col. 706. . So that nothing but the prodigious partiality of Baronius and Binius for the Popes supremacy could put them upon inventing so groundless a Story , as that of the Popes confirming the Decrees of this Council ; which he did no otherwise than all other eminent Orthodox Bishops , that is , by consenting to their Acts , and applauding them afterwards .

§ . 2. Some other scattered passages there are which we will briefly put together here before we conclude this discourse . The Preface boasts much of the words of Firmus Bishop of Caesarea , and cites them thus , that the Synod had followed that which Celestine had prescribed , and being compelled by his Authority had passed Sentence on Nestorius and his Opinion g g Praesat . Bin. pag. 2. Lab. col. 4. ; and a little after , Firmus his words are otherwise cited in the same Preface , viz. That Celestine had prescribed a certain Rule for this business , which the Council following , observing diligently the form of the Canons , they had inflicted the Canonical and Apostolical Judgment † † Richerius shews that the Apostolical Judgment is meant of the Synods Sentence . Tom. 1. §. 9. pag. 297. upon him h h Bin. ibid. pag. 4. Lab. col. 8. ; and hence they infer , that the Pope had commanded the Eastern Bishops , to Decree over again and execute his Sentence against Nestorius i i Bin. ut supr. pag. 2. Lab. col. 4. ; Yea Baronius is so bold as to affirm . That Celestine sent his Legates , not to subject the Cause of Nestorius to a new Examination , but only to see his Sentence Executed ; and that neither did he allow the Council any more than only to Execute his Decree ; nor did this general Council Arrogate any thing to it self , but to Act according to his Sentence k k Baron . An. 431. pag. 559. . According to which account , this Council of Ephesus was a mear mock Assembly , and all these Bishops no more than Officers under the Pope , to put his Decrees in Execution . But that this is most notoriously false appears ; first , from their false citing of the words of Firmus , who truly quoted saith thus . The Apostolical seat of Celestine formerly gave his suffrage , and set a Pattern in this business l l 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , &c. Par. 2. Act. 2. Bin. pag. 235. Lab. col. 618. . And a little after , which we also following — have put in force that Form , decreeing both a Canonical and Apostolical judgment against him : The sense of which is this ; That whereas the Pope in his Roman Synod had condemned Nestorius unless he repented in ten days , this general Council approving of that Sentence , had upon Nestorius his refusal to appear after divers admonitions , condemned him also : So that he was now not only censured by one Apostolical See , but canonically also by all the Bishops of a general Council : And that this is the Sense , is evident from the words of the Synod it self in the Preface to the Sentence by them pronounced , being convinced by divers proof , that Nestorius holds impious Opinions , we are forced by the Canons and the Epistle of Celestine our Fellow-Minister , even with Tears to come to this severe Sentence against him , &c. m m Par. 2. Act. 1 Bin. pag. 204. Lab. col . We see they name the Canons first , and before Celestine's Epistle , as laying an obligation upon them so to proceed ; and they call the Pope their Fellow-Minister ; nor was it his Authority , but his having proceeded according to the Canons , that laid the necessity upon this great Council to follow his Example , and imitate the Pattern he had set them . For nothing is plainer , than that the Council did always intend to examin this Cause over again ; and for that reason they cited Nestorius , and read first the Letters of Cyril and then of Celestine ; and after a full hearing both of the Fathers Opinions , and of the Blasphemies collected out of Nestorius his Writings , finding him finally obstinate , they pronounce Sentence on him , not in the Popes name , but thus , Our Lord Jesus Christ , whom he hath Blasphemed , by this Holy Council Decrees , that Nestorius shall be deprived of his Episcopal dignity , and shall be excluded out of the Communion of Bishops n n Bin. Lab. ut supr. . This certainly was an Original Decree , in the name of the General Council , and by the Authority they derived from Christ , by which they gave force and validity to the Sentence formerly pronounced by the Pope and his Roman Council ; which had signified nothing ( against his Equal , a Patriarch of the Eastern Church , over whom he had no jurisdiction ) if it had not been thus confirmed : So that it is a strange extravagance to talk , as if a whole general Council in that Age were convened to no other end , but only to execute the Popes Decree blindly , without any enquiry into the merits of the Cause . And Celestine's own Letter ( cited by Baronius to make out this Fiction ) declares he believes , the Spirit of God was present with the Council o o Baron . An. 431 pag. 559. , of which there had been no need , if all their business had been only to execute a Sentence passed before : There is also great prevarication used by the Cardinal and Binius , about the case of John B. of Antioch , one of the Patriarchs summoned to this Council : This John was Nestorius his old Friend , for they had both been bred in the Church of Antioch ; and he having ( as Baronius relates ) received Letters both from Celestine and Cyril , ( before the general Council was called , ) importing that Nestorius was Condemned both at Rome and Alexandira , if he did not recant within ten days ; writes to Nestorius to perswade him for peace sake to yield , telling him what trouble was like to befal him , after these Letters were published p p Baron . An. 430. pag. 540. cum pag. 542. : Here Baronius puts into the Text these Letters , that is , of the Pope of Rome : As if the Pope were the sole Judge in this matter , and his Authority alone to be feared ; whereas the Epistle it self tells Nestorius , he had received many Letters , one from Celestine , and all the rest from Cyril q q Vid. init . Epist. ap. Baron . & Bin. Par. 1. Cap. 25. pag. 148. Lab. col. 389. . So that this Parenthesis contradicts the Text , and was designed to deceive the Reader . But to go on with the History , though Nestorius would not submit to John upon this Admonition , yet he had no mind to condemn him ; and therefore he came late to Ephesus , after the Council was assembled , and when he was come would not appear nor joyn with the Bishops there , but with a party of his own held an opposite Synod , and condemned Cyril and Memnon with the rest , as unjustly proceeding against Nestorius , and by false Suggestions to the Emperor , he procured both Cyril and Memnon to be Imprisoned . Now among others in the Orthodox Council , who resented these illegal Acts * * Juvenalis speaks , because Cyril and Memnon being now accused , left their places and stood at the Bar. Richer . Tom. 1. §. 11. pag. 304. cap. 7. , Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem saith , That John of Antioch ought to have appeared and purged himself , considering the Holy , Great and General Council , and the Apostolical seat of old Rome therein represented , and that he ought to obey and reverence the Apostolical and Holy Church of Jerusalem ; by which especially , according to Apostolical Order and Tradition , the Church of Antioch was to be directed and judged r r Par. 2. Act. 4. Bin. pag. 244. Lab. col. 641. ; alluding no doubt to that passage Acts xv . where the Errors arising at Antioch , were rectified and condemned in the Council at Jerusalem . But Baronius falsly cites these words of Juvenalis , as if he had said , John ought to have appeared at least , because of the Legates sent from Rome ; especially since by Apostolical Order and ancient Tradition , it was become a custom , that the See of Antioch should always be directed and judged by that of Rome s s Baron . An. 4●1 . pag. 578. . And Binus ( in his Notes ) transcribes this Sentence as Baronius had perverted , mangled and falsified it t t Notis ad Concil. Ephes. Bin. pag. 482. Lab. col. 1249. . Which Forgery being so easily confuted by looking back into the Acts of the Council , and so apparently devised to support the Papal Supremacy , is enough to shew how little these Writers are to be trusted , when fictions or lying will serve the ends of their darling Church . After this the Preface-tells us , that though John still continued obstinate , the Synod referred the deposing of him to the Popes pleasure u u Pref. ap. Bin. pag. 3. Lab. col. 7. ; as if they had done nothing in this matter themselves . But the Councils Letter to Celestine says , That though they might justly proceed against him , with all the severity he had used against Cyril ; yet resolving to overcome his rashness with moderation , they referred that to Celestine ' s judgment ; but in the mean time , they had Excommunicated him and his party , and deprived them of all Episcopal power , so that they could hurt none by their Censures w w Par. 2. Act. 5. pag. 254. Bin. Lab. col. 666. . Therefore the Council both Excommunicated and deprived him by their own Authority , and only left it to the Pope , whether any greater severity should be used against him or no : 'T is true not only the Pope x x Par. 3. cap. 20. Bin. pag. 414. Lab. col. 1072. , but the Emperor y y Ibid. cap. 24. Bin. pag. 418. Lab. col. 1081. afterwards moved , that means should be used to reconcile this Bishop and his Party to the Catholick Church , by suspending this Sentence a while , and procuring a meeting between Cyril and John : But still it must not be denied , both that the Council censured him their own Authority ; and that Cyril without any leave from the Pope , did upon John's condemning Nestorius , receive him into the Communion of the Catholick Church z z Par. 3. cap. 38. Bin. pag. 447. Lab. col. 1153. . Yet because Sixtus the Successor of Pope Celestine , among other Bishops was certified of this , thence the Notes and Baronius infer , that this reconciliation also was by the Authority of the See of Rome : Whereas Cyril's own Letter shews , that the Terms of admitting John , to Communion , were prescribed by the Council and the Emperor , and that Cyril alone effected this great work .

We may further observe , Binius in his Notes tells us , that after the condemnation of Nestorius , the Fathers shouted forth the praise of Celestine , who had censured him before a a Bin. Not. pag. 481. Lab. col. 1247. . And Baronius saith , the Acclamations followed the condemning of Nestorius , in which they wonderfully praised Celestine , as the Synodal Letter to the Emperor testifies b b Baron . An. 431. pag. 570. . By which a Man would think , that Celestine had the only Glory of this Action . But if we look into the first Act of the Council , there are no Acclamations expressed there at all after the condemnation of Nestorius ; and the Synodical Letter to the Emperor , cited by Baronius , hath no more , but [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] viz. that they praised Celestine , which imports only their commending his Sentence ; whereas in that first Act every one of the Bishops present , makes a particular Encomium in the praise of Cyril's Faith , as being in all things agreeing to the Nicene Creed , which fills up at least forty pages together in Labbe's Edition c c Bin. pag. 175. Lab. col. 461 , ad col. 501. . As for the Acclamations , they are in the second Act , and in them Cyril is equally praised with Celestine ; for the Fathers say , To Celestine , another Paul ; to Cyril , another Paul ; to Celestine , keeper of the Faith ; to Celestine , agreeing with the Synod ; to Celestine , the whole Synod gives thanks ; one Celestine , one Cyril , one Faith of the Synod , one Faith of the whole World d d Par. 2. Act. 2. Bin. pag. 235. Lab. col. 618. . This was just after the reading of Celestine's Letter , brought by his Legates to the Council ; yet we see even when the occasion led them only to speak of the Pope , the Fathers joyn Cyril with him , knowing that Celestine's Sentence , as well as his Information , was owing intirely to Cyril's Learning and Zeal .

Moreover we have another touch of their sincerity about the Virgin Mary ; For Baronius calls the people of Ephesus The Virgins Clients , Subjects and Worshippers , adding , — That as they had once cried out , great is Diana , so now being converted , they set out Mary the Mother of God with high and incessant Praises , and persevered to venerate her with a more willing Service , and to address to her by a more solemn Worship e e Baron . An. 431. pag. 570 , 571. . By which one would imagin , that in the time of this Council , and ever since , the Blessed Virgin had been worshipped as she is now at Rome ; but there is not one word of this true , except only that she was there declared to be the Mother of God : That Epistle of Cyril's , from whence Baronius proves this , saith nothing of either Praises or Worship given to the Blessed Virgin ; he saith indeed , that when the people heard Nestorius was deposed , they began with one voice to commend the Synod , and to glorifie God , because the Enemy of the Faith was cast down . And when he had related what Honours the People did them by carrying Lamps and burning Incense before them , he add● , Thus our Saviour manifested his Glory and his Power of doing all things , to those who blasphemed him f f Baron . ib. vid. Epist. ap. Bin. pag. 216. Lab. col. 574. : So that all this story of their praising and venerating the Blessed Virgin , is his own Fiction ; as is also that other conjecture of his , that the Synodal Epistle declares , that John the Evangelist , and Mary the Mother of God once lived together at Ephesus g g Baron . ib. pag. 571. : For that Synodal Epistle speaks only of two Churches there called by their Names h h Bin. ut supr. & ita Lab. . So when he and Binius say , it is believed that this Addition to the Angelical Salutation was then made , Holy Mary , Mother of God , pray for us i i Baron . An. 431. pag. 601. Bin. not . pag. 483. Lab. col. 1252. ; and Baronius adds , that all the Faithfull use to say , and often repeat this , and teach it their Children , even while they suck'd the Breasts . But I ask , Why doth any Man believe this ? Is it barely because Baronius says so ? Doth not he say an hundred false things to justifie the Corruptions of Rome ? Or can he produce one ancient Author , about this time , or of divers Ages after , wherein this Phrase , Mother of God pray for us , is used ? It is certain he cannot * * Cy●illi verba sunt 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 — 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 — . &c. Homil. Cyril . in fine Bin. pag. 222. Lab. pag. 590. Ubi cultum attribu● it Sanctae Trinitati , Gloriam Christo , at solum Laudes Beatae Virgini . ; and therefore this blasphemous addition is much later than the Council of Ephesus ; and the Custom of saying it and teaching it to their Children , is a Scandalous Innovation , brought in by the Roman Church in the Superstitious Ages , and justly rejected by us who keep close to Antiquity , in owning the Blessed Virgin to be the Mother of God , but do not Worship her or Pray to her . And thus much for the Council of Ephesus , whose Acts being extant at large , do abundantly confute the Popes Supremacy , and set forth many other Usages and Practices of Rome , to be Innovations and Corruptions .

§ . 3. After Celestine's death , Pope Sixtus or Xystus the An. Dom. 432. Third succeeded , who sate about eight years , but did few Memorable things : In his younger days he was not only a Favourer , but a Patron of the Pelagians k k Aug. ad Sixt. Presb. ep. 104 , & 105. , though afterwards he writ against them , and strenuously opposed them l l Prosp. adv. Collat. & Chro. An. 440. . Wherefore Baronius doth not sufficiently prove those three Tracts ( Of Riches , Of Evil Teachers , and of Chastity ) which go under the name of this Pope , were not his , by saying there are divers Pelagian Doctrines in them ; since if they were writ in his youth , Xystus was then a Pelagian himself . This Pope writ ( as is said ) three Epistles , two of which are put into the Council of Ephesus , because they shew Xystus his Consent to what the Council had done , and to Cyril's actings afterwards as to John , Bishop of Antioch : In the later of these Epistles , there is a memorable Saying , cited by Vincentius Lirinensis , Let there be no liberty for Novelty hereafter , since it is not convenient to add any thing unto that which is Old m m Bin. pag. 486. Lab. col. 1262. Baron . An. 432. p. 618. . Had his Sucessors minded this good Rule , the Roman Church had not added so many New Doctrines and Practices to those Old Ones , which were received and used before Xystus his time . The Pontifical relates a Sory of one Bassus , who accused this Pope of Adultery , and that a Synod of 56 Bishops , convened by the Emperor's Order , cleared him , and condemned his Accuser . Now for the greater credit of this Pope , some have forged a third Epistle , wherein he is made to signifie to them his purging himself upon Oath : But Labbe condemns the whole Epistle as spurious , and Binius rejects it , because it is stolen in part out of Pope Fabian his third Epistle , and because the Date is wrong n n Bin. pag. 486 , 487. Lab. col. 1263. 1265 ; for these Arguments will serve to condemn an Epistle , that supposes a Pope accused and tried by his Peers , whereas , had it been for the Supremacy , Binius would have justified it , though it had these and greater faults . Besides this Epistle , some illiterate Monk hath forged the Acts of this Council , wherein the Pope was tried ; and though there be neither Latin nor Sense in it ( being as dull as that of Sinuessa ) but the Inventor designing to do Honour to the Pope , is very gently censured both by Baronius and Binius o o Bin. pag. 489. Lab. col. 1265. Baron . An. 433. pag. 641. . And to this they have tacked another such a Council of the Trial of Polychronius , Bishop of Jerusalem , before Pope Sixtus , for attempting to challenge the Precedency before Rome , &c. And Binius confesseth not only , that Pope Nicholas alledged this Council for good Authority , but that the Modern Writers of their Church do so also : Whereas he owns there was no such man Bishop of Jerusalem , and that the whole Story and Acts are a Fiction of no credit in the World p p Not. Bin. pag. 494. Lab. col. 1283. ; by which we may learn to be cautious how we trust the Roman Writers ( Ancient or Modern ) when they cite Records to support the Grandeur of the Church .

About this time Theodoret mentions a great Council at Constantinople , under Theodosius , about setling the An. Dom. 439. Precedence of the Eastern Patriarchats , on occasion of a Contest between the Churches of Alexandria , Constantinople and Antioch . Baronius ( and out of him Binius ) in relating this , have added to Theodoret's words , that Alexandria claimed the Priority before all the Eastern Bishops , because he was the first Bishop of the Catholick Church after the Pope : But the Quotation he produces out of Theodort , Ep. 86. doth not so much as mention Rome nor the Pope : So that they have invented that part of the Story to keep up their Churches Credit . However this Council evidently shews q q Baron . An. 439. pag. 678. Bin. pag. 495. Lab. col. 1284. , that the Roman Church had nothing to do with the East ; they called great Councils without him , and setled the Precedencies of their own Patriarchats without taking notice of the Pope . As for Sixtus , he made no figure in the World ; and all we hear of him further is , that being warned by Leo his Deacon ( and Successor afterwards ) he discovered and prevented the Attempts of Julianus of Hecla , a Pelagian Heretick , who endeavoured to get into the Churches Communion , as Prosper informs us , An. 440. in Chron. In this year was held the Synod of Riez , in the Province of Narbon , dated by the Emperors and Consuls , without any mention of the Pope r r Bin. pag. 495. Lab. col. 1284. . For it was held under Hilary , Bishop of Arles , who first subscribes , and is meant in the Canons by the name of the Metropolitan , as Marca confesses s s De Marca de sac . & imper. lib. 5. cap. 31. pag. 93. . And though Binius have no Notes to this purpose , I must observe , that this Hilary of Arles , as Primate of those parts of France , calls a Provincial Council , deposes a Bishop of Ambrun , uncanonically chosen , and makes divers Decrees with his fellow Bishops , who doubtless were not then so much enslaved to the Pope , as in after times .

§ . 4. Leo the First succeeded Xystus , being an active , An. Dom. 440. bold and aspiring Man , so that he concerned himself in all the affairs of Christendom , and every where laboured to advance the Roman Supremacy * * Permaximum fuisse Authoritatis Papalis amplificationem . Richer . de Leon. hist. concil . univ . Tom. 1. pag. 336. , for which he had a favourable conjuncture by the misfortunes which then hapned to all other great Churches . The Africans were under a cruel persecution ; the Eastern Church distracted with Heresie , and a woful Schism ; the Orthodox Bishops in the East betrayed , and oppressed by three of the four Patriarchs , and the fourth of the Eastern Patriarchs condemned and murdered ; the Emperor of the West very young , and he in the East a weak man : and both governed by devout and zealous Women : All which circumstances contributed to make Leo ( who was always Orthodox and powerful ) very great . The Pontifical relates but few of his Actions , and those with many mistakes t t Bin. pag. 497. Lab. col. 1290. ; but because all the following Councils give us so much of his Life , I shall only make some remarks upon the Pontifical , and take the rest in the order of time . First , 'T is said there he found out two Heresies , the Eutychian and the Nestorian : But the Nestorian Heresie was found out and condemned long before his time ; and as for Eutyches , he was found out and censured by Flavianus , Bishop of Constantinople , before Leo took him for a Heretick ; yea , he writ a kind Letter to this Heretick u u Leon. ep. 6. pag. 95. , and two angry Letters in his behalf to the Emperor and Flavianus w w Leon. ep. 7. & 8. , because he was excommunicated . And till he was informed by the Bishop of Constantinople what dangerous Doctrines he held , Leo inclined to be Eutyches friend , for which ( indeed ) afterwards he made ample amends , in assisting toward Eutyches condemnation . Secondly , The Pontifical variously and falsly reports the number of Bishops in the Council of Chalcedon , and is mistaken in saying , Pulcheria was present with Martianus there , and that they confessed their Faith before the Council , desiring them to send to Pope Leo to expound the Faith : And that Leo after this did write a Tract , condemning all Heresies ; all which are gross mistakes : But it is true , that he writ many Epistles , and frequently shewed his approbation of the Council of Chalcedon , and that he did prevail with Attila , King of the Hunns , to deal gently with Rome , when it was in his power to have destroyed it . 'T is very probable also , that he added some passages to the Roman Office , and that he ordered some to watch the Church of St. Peter and Paul , to which , in this Age , many began to make Visits and Oblations . But Binius his Notes add divers incredible Stories , as that about the Hearse-Cloth , which Bled when Leo clip'd it with Scissors , which Gregory mentions near 200 year after only as a report , which he could not cite any Author for : And another Story or two out of Sophronius his Pratum Spirituale , a Book stuffed with Fables , as Baronius himself confesseth x x Baron . An. 407. n 35. pag. 261. , for having cited a false Story out of this Author , he hath these words , since he put so many lies together in this one Narration , what credit can be given to the rest ? Yet Baronius himself cites this Author for Miracles and Visions , very oft , and in one place relates two Miracles out of Sophronius , for the glory of that Epistle which Pope Leo writ to Flavianus against Eujyches and Nestorius . An Epistle indeed very Orthodox , and at that time very seasonable , but far from meriting those prodigious Encomiums Baronius or the Legends give it , who magnifie it as if it equalled the Creed , and proved the Pope alone was to define all controversies of Faith , to teach General Councils what they were to believe , and to give Laws to all Bishops in the World y y Baron . An. 449. pag. 80 , & 81. . But whatever excellency there is in this Epistle ( which is in number the Xth , and printed in the Council of Chalcedon z z Lab. Tom. 4. pag. 344. , it is not to be ascribed to Pope Leo , but to the learned Prosper , who was his Amanuensis , and wrote not only this , but many other Letters for him ; so that the Sense and Phrase is Prosper's , only they are writ in Leo's name , as Gennadius testifies , who lived but fifty year after Leo became Pope a a Gennad . catal . ap. Hieron . Tom. 1. pag. 402. ; and the same is affirmed by Trithemius b b Trithem . de script . in Prosp. col . 37. & Marcellin . in Chron. : And we may observe , that an Epistle of this very Prosper's against the Pelagians ( as we noted before ) went under Pope Celestine's name , but far exceeded the Style of Celestine's own Letters : I only add , that Labbè here prints all these Epistles which bear Leo's name c c Lab. col. 1293. , some of which I shall have occasion to consider afterwards .

The first Council of Orange , Binius intitles under Leo ; An. Dom. 441. but Labbè , ashamed of that gross pretence , leaves these words out d d Bin. pag. 498. Lab. col. 1446. . For it was called by , and held under Hilary , Bishop of Arles , who exercised the Jurisdiction of a Metropolitan and Primate in those parts ; and all the Bishops of those parts owned his Primacy , and met at his Summons e e P. de Mar. lib. 5. pag. 94. , of which Binius takes no notice . There were made in this Synod many good Canons for Discipline , which were observed in the Gallican Church , without any confirmation from the Pope . At the end of this Council is published a Form of Excommunication , and a very excellent Office for reconciling Penitents , supposed to be made in this Council , which proves Forms had then been long in use .

The second Council at Vasatis , or Razai in France f f Bin. pag. 501. Lab. col . , seems to me to be wrong dated ; for I observe the An. Dom. 442. fourth Canon cites a passage out of St. Hierom , with this Title , One of the Fathers asserts , &c. Now St. Hierom died but 20 year before the date of this Council , and could hardly so soon have been cited by the Title of One of the Fathers ; besides , the sixth Canon cites one of the spurious Epistles of Clement , forged after this Age. But the fifth Canon orders , him who is aggrieved with the Sentence of his Bishop , to appeal to a Synod ; which shews , that reserving Causes to Rome was not allowed or used then .

The Editors have a Roman Council of Pope Leo's , which was no more than a Solemn meeting of the An. Dom. 444. Clergy and Laity , to examine the Manichean Hereticks g g Bin. p. 502. Lab. . But there were two remarkable things in Leo's proceeding against them , of which the Notes say nothing ; but Baronius informs us h h Baron . An. 443. pag. 14. Tom. 6. , First , That he discovered the Manicheans by their refusing to drink of the Cop in the Blessed Sacrament , which this Pope counts a great impiety in this sort of People , not foreseeing that his Successors would take the Cup away from all the People of that Church . And this passage makes it clear , that all the People at Rome , who were Orthodox , did receive the Cup then , or else the Hereticks not receiving it could not have discovered them . Secondly , Baronius notes , that because these Manicheans idolatrously adored the rising Sun ; Leo forbid the Orthodox People to use that innocent and ancient Custom of bowing toward the East , for the peril of Idolatry : Now had there been any Images adored in his time ; for the same reason he must rather have forbidden bowing down before them .

The second Council at Rome under Leo , was in the An. Dom. 445. Cause of Hilary Bishop of Acles , who had justly deposed a scandalous Bishop in a Provincial Synod i i Lab. col. 1461. . But he ( as such ill Men had often done ) flies to Rome to complain ; and Leo not considering the equity of the censure , but Hilary's having acted as a Primate in those parts of France , contrary to the Decrees of former Popes , espouses this evil Bishops Quarrel , being more concerned for his designed usurpation of a supremacy , than the honour of the Church . Upon this Hilary , who was one of the most pious and learned Men of that Age , goes on foot to Rome , and requires the Pope to act more solito , in the accustomed manner , and not to admit such to Communion , who had been justly condemned in their own Country k k Lab. col. 1462. ; and when he saw the Pope was resolved to break the Canons , and set up his Supremacy by right or wrong , he suddenly departs from Rome without taking any leave of Leo , for which the Angry Pope writes to the Bishops of France , declaring Hilary's Acts null , and depriving him of his Power , to Congregate Synods and Depose Bishops , &c. l l Leon. ep. 89. ap. Lab. col. 1396. And though he brags much of his universal Authority , &c. in that Epistle , yet knowing how little this would signifie to Hilary and the rest of the French Bishops , he gets an Edict from the Emperor Valentinian to back his Orders , which because there are some great words for the Popes Supremacy in it , Baronius magnifies as worthy of perpetual Memory m m Lab. col. 1397. Baron . An. 445. pag. 31. . And since their Champions alledge this Edict as a proof of the Roman universal Supremacy , I will observe upon it , First , That it was easie for the Pope to cite false Canons to a young and easy Emperor , and persuade him , that the Councils had given him this Supremacy , as his Predecessors had lately done in Africa . Secondly , That the Pope probably drew up this Edict himself , and so put in these Flourishes about his own Authority : Which will be more plain if we consider , that the Emperor Leo in one of his Edicts saith , Constantinople is the Mother of the Orthodox Religion of all Christians , with much more to this purpose n n Baron . An. 472. pag. 294. Vid. item An. 458. pag 233. ; but Baronius relating this saith , Thus indeed Leo speaks thus , but without doubt it was conceived in the words , and writ in the Style of Acacius who swelled with Pride : But Leo Bishop of Rome was as proud as Acacius , and had more influence over Valentinian , than Acacius ever had over the Emperor Leo ; wherefore in Baronius own words , without doubt Valentinian' s Edict was drawn up in Pope Leo ' s Style , and so he is only a Witness in his own Cause . Thirdly , The Sentence of both the Emperor and the Pope was unjust ; and although Leo wheedled the Bishops of France to reject Hilary , that Bishop still acted as Primate , and called Synods afterwards ; so that this big-speaking Edict was neither believed nor obeyed as de Marca shews o o P. de Marca de concord . lib. 5. cap. 33 , & 34 pag. 98 , &c. . For indeed Hilary was Primate by Original right , and the French Bishops stuck to him not only for his great Sanctity , but because they feared the then growing Encroachments and Usurpations of Rome : And finally Pope Hilary , Leo's Successor determined this Controversie , contrary to Leo's Decree p p Vid. Hilar. ep. 11. Bin. Tom. 2. par. 1. pag. 430. ; by which we see how odly Causes go at Rome , since some Popes were for the Primacy of Arles and some against it : But when there was a stout Bishop there , he kept his Post without regard to the Roman Sentence : And now I hope the Reader will smile at Baronius his inference from this Edict of Valentinian's , Thou seest clearly from hence ( saith he ) the Pope of Romes Authority over all Churches q q Baron . An. 445. pag. 32. , for he must be quick-sighted indeed , who can see any more in this instance than an unjust and ineffective Claim .

§ . 5. Soon after Pope Leo had an opportunity to encroach An. Dom. 447. upon the Churches of Spain ; for one Turibius a Bishop there , who is called Leo's Notary , ( and probably had been bread a Notary at Rome , ) certifies the Pope that there were many Priscillian Hereticks there , who confirmed their Errors by certain Apocryphal Writings full of Blasphemies ; Leo writes back to Turibius r r Leon. ep. 93. ap. Lab. col. 1410. , advising him to get a Council of all the Bishops in Spain , and there to Condemn the Hereticks and their Apocryphal Books : This advice Baronius calls his enjoyning a general Council ( more Majorum ) this being the right of the Pope of Rome . And though he confesses the Bishops did not meet where the Pope advised , nor could they meet in one place , because they were under divers Kings , and those Arians ; yet he desires us to observe from hence , how weighty the Popes Authority was , even with Barbarous and Arian Kings s s Baron . An. 447. pag. 46 , 47. . But alas any one may see , he cannot make out that ever these Kings gave leave for any Council , and it is more probable these Bishops met privately on this occasion ; yet they have made out of this , A General Council of Spain t t Bin. pag. 503 Lab. col. 1465. : And here they would have that rule of Faith first received from Leo and approved , which is printed before , in the first Council of Toledo u u Bin. Par. 1. pag. 599. ut supr. : And Baronius saith the word [ Filioque ] proceeding from the Father and the Son , was first added in this Council to the Creed , by the Authority of Pope Leo , and brags much of the Popes supremacy , even in matters of Faith on this occasion w w Baron . An. 447. pag. 47 , & 48. . But first these words were put in by these Councils , to check and discover Priscillian Hereticks , not by any express order of the Pope ; and indeed Leo had been an ill Man , if he had imposed an Article of Faith upon the Churches of Spain , which ( as Baronius confesses , ) was not received expresly at Rome till many Ages after . Secondly , These Spanish Bishops did not add these words to the ancient Creed , but put them in by way of Explication , into an Occasional Confession of their own Composing . Thirdly , Baronius himself notes , that the Spaniards and French afterwards added it to their usual Creeds , and at last Rome took this Addition from them : And in the same place he commends the Northern Nations for adding these words , and those of Rome for rejecting them a long time ; so that contradictory Actions may be ( it seems ) equally commended , by those who can blow Hot and Cold with the same Breath .

About this time was held a great Council at Verulam in Britain , by St. Garmanus a French Bishop , called over by the Orthodox Britains to assist them , in confuting and condemning the Pelagian Heresy , as Math. of Westminster computes x x Lab. col. 1464. Spelm. Concil Tom. 1. pag. 47. . Baronius indeed pretends this hapned divers years before , only because Prosper ( or some who have since corrupted his Chronicle ) affirms , that Pope Celestine sent St. Germanus hither y y Baron . An. 429. . But most Historians agree , the French Bishops from a Council of their own , sent over this assistance to the British Church the first time , without any order from Celestine ; and this Council of Verulam z z Usherij Brit. Eccles. Antiqu. pag. 174. was held long after Celestine's death , at St. Germans second coming hither : So that in this Island , the Roman Church was not considered in those days ; and one Sister Church desired help of another to repress Heresies , without any recourse to Rome .

§ . 6. In a Synod held at Constantinople under Flavianus , An. Dom. 448. . Eutyches a Monk was formally accused of Heresy , for affirming that Christ had but one Nature after his Incarnation , and that it was as much Nestorianism to hold two Natures as two Persons ; Upon which he was three several times cited before the Council , and had sufficient time given , but refusing to come till the time was expired , and ( though he did come at last ) obstinately defending his Heresy , he was unanimously condemned , and by Flavianus and the whole Synod Excommunicated and Degraded , which was a judicial proceeding agreeable to the ancient Canons . Binius and Baronius in relating this a a Bin. pag. 504. Lab. col. 1467. Baron . An. 448. pag. 55. , make some remarks which must be considered : For first , when Eutyches saith , He would subscribe the Nicene and Ephesine Councils , so far as they were agreeable to Scripture ; They note this was ( more Haereticorum ) according to the manner of Hereticks : But I would ask First , Whether it be not true , that the Decrees of Councils in matters of Faith , are no further obligatory than they are proved by Scripture ? Secondly , Whether the most Orthodox Fathers Athanasius , Cyril , &c. did not always appeal to Scripture in the first place ? And the greatest Councils ever confirm their determinations first by Scripture ? Thirdly , Whether any of the Adversaries of Eutyches in that Age did censure him , for appealing first to Scripture ? Baronius himself cites Flavianus his Letter , wherein he first alledges Scripture , and then the Expositions of the Fathers b b Baron . An. 449. pag. 76. . And Pope Leo saith Eutyches erred , by not having recourse to the Prophets , Apostles and Evangelists , but to himself c c Ep. x. Leon. M. ad Flav. inter ep. Leon. pag. 304. ; so that it was no fault in Eutyches to prefer Scripture before the Fathers expositions ; nor to appeal to it ; but to expound it wrongfully was his Crime , and that is ( more Haereticorum . ) Secondly , When Eutyches petitioned Theodosius in this case , for a safe conduct to the Synod , Binius adds to his Authors words , that this was also after the manner of Hereticks : Whereas it appears , that divers of the Orthodox have applied themselves to the Emperors to assist and support them , and none oftner than Pope Leo himself ; so that a thing done as frequently by the Orthodox as Hereticks , can be no sign or mark of Heresy . Thirdly , Binius pretends , that Eutyches appealed from this Synod to Pope Leo : Now this is confuted by the very Acts of the Synod , related in the Council of Chalcedon , and recited by Baronius , where it is said , Eutyches appealed to the Council of the Roman Bishop , and of the Bishops of Alexandria , Hierusalem and Thessalonica d d Baron . An. 449. pag. 75. ; yet they make as if this had been an Appeal only to the Pope . Fourthly , Binius notes , the Appeal was not admitted : I reply , Pope Leo did so far receive Eutyches Letter , that he writ three Epistles on his behalf , before he was informed of the true State of the Case , and quarrelled with Flavianus for condemning a convicted Heretick , before he had consulted him e e Leon. Ep. 6 , 7 , & 8. . But in truth there was no Appeal at all : Flavianus did write indeed to Leo , ( and probably to all other Patriarchs ) after the Canonical Judgment was over , to acquaint them with his proceedings ; that so they might not break the Canons , by admitting an Heretick in one Church , who was Excommunicated in another : But the Style of Flavianus his Letter shews , that he need not ask Leo's leave to censure an Heretical Priest of his own Diocess , nor doth he desire the Pope to confirm his Sentence , but only to make it known f f Epist. Flavian . ad Leon. inter Epist. Leon. pag. 298. : So that Baronius falsly infers the Popes power to judge of Heresy , and confirm all Sentences against them , from this Letter of Flavianus : And he as falsly makes the like inference from Eutyches writing to Leo , as if he knew of what weight the Popes judgment was , for which Councils in doubtful Cases use to stay , and to which all the Catholick Church would certainly incline g g Baron . An. 448. pag. 63. . For Eutyches writ to other Bishops of Italy as well as the Pope , ( as Baronius in that Page confesseth ) and considered Leo no otherwise than as one Eminent Bishop : And this Synod of Constantinople stayed not for the Popes Judgment , nor did those Bishops who despised the Decree of this Synod , value Pope Leo's Judgment after he had declared for Flavianus : So little truth is there in the Annalists pompous observations , which only shew , that all his aim is from every passage , to extort some kind of colour for his dear Supremacy .

In the same year were two Synods , one at Tyre , the other at Berithus , in the cause of one Ibas a Syrian Bishop , wherein the Patriarch of Antioch and Constantinople were concerned ; but the Pope is not once mentioned in the whole proceedings h h Bin. pag. 505. Lab. col. 1468 , &c. Baron . An. 448. pag. 64. An. Dom. 449. ; But of the Cause it self , we shall hear more afterward .

Theodosius the Emperor being deceived by Eutyches and Chrysapius , one of his great Courtiers , an Eunuch , espouses the Quarrel of that Heretick , and labours to have the Sentence which Flavianus passed against him in the late Synod , revoked ; and Pope Leo was drawn into the same snare by the Letters of Eutyches and Theodosius , till Flavianus had better informed him : For Leo writ both to the Emperor and Flavianus on Eutyches behalf at first : And whereas Baronius ought to blush for the Popes mistake , he recites these two Letters , and talks big of his being owned for the lawful and chief Judge in Ecclesiastil Controversies ; yea the supreme Judge of the Universal Church , &c. i i Baron . An. 449. pag. 72 , 73. But though ( as an ingenuous Romanist observes , ) Leo in all his Epistles boasts of the power of his Apostolical Seat , as much as he can , and more than by the Canons he ought to do k k Richer . Histor. Concil. Cien . cap. 8. §. 2. pag. 335. ; yet neither of these Epistles say any such thing , as Baronius infers from them . And that Letter of Flavianus , which delivered this infallible Judge from his mistake , declares that Eutyches had received a just and Canonical Condemnation , to which the Pope ought to consent , and to joyn in it : By which we see a Sentence against an Heretick was just , before the Pope knew of it , and that he and all Orthodox Bishops , ought by their subsequent consents to ratifie what any one Bishop had Canonically done : And since Eutyches was already rightly censured , Flavianus requires Leo ( and no doubt other Eminent Bishops ) to publish their consent to it , thereby to prevent the design of Eutyches , which was to get a general Council called , to judge his Cause over again : Now this serves Baronius to brag , that Flavianus knew there was no need of a general Council , for that which the Popes Letters had defined * * Vid. Richer . ibid. pag. 336. A strange affection ! For when Pope Leo , not first ( as Baronius saith falsly ) but last of all the Orthodox Bishops did stand up for Flavianus , and write to confirm his Censure upon Eutyches , that very Cause was tried over again in the Pseudo-general Council of Ephesus , and the true Oecumenical Council of Chalcedon : Yea , Theodosius while the matter lay before the Pope , not staying for his Sentence , calleth a second Council at Constantinople , wherein a pacted party of Hereticks Friends revoked the Judgment passed on him by Flavianus l l Bin. pag. 505. Lab. col. 1470. Baron . An. 449. pag. 74. . And yet fearing this was not sufficient , Eutiches moved by Dioscorus , Patriarch of Alexandria , to have a general Council called at Ephesus , which might have sufficient Authority , not only to restore Eutyches , but to Condemn Flavianus , though Leo should take his part .

§ . 7. This was the true occasion of calling this Second The 2d Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus . Council of Ephesus , which as to the manner of calling , the Persons present , &c. was a General Council . But from the violent and unjust proceedings thereof , is commonly stiled The Pseudo-Synod , or the Thievish Council of Ephesus The Acts of this Council are recited at large in the Council of Chalcedon ; wherefore the Editors refer us thither , only entertaining us here with Binius his Notes , on which we will make some remarks m m Bin. pag. 506. Lab. col. 1471. . First , The Notes say , the Emperor called this General Council , usurping the Popes Authority against right and the custom of the Church . Now here he first owns that the Emperor called it : As to the pretended usurpation and breach of Custom , it is certain the Pope never yet had called one General Council , as we have particularly shewn in three General Councils before , and they own it here ; so that undoubtedly the Emperor only followed the Custom of the Church , and used that Right which his Ancestors had . Besides , let Binius or Baronius produce one syllable in all Leo's Epistles , where that Pope ( so jealous of his Rights ) did once complain of any injury done him by the Emperor in calling this Synod : His Legate owns in this very Council , that the Pope had received such a Letter of Summons as the rest of the Patriarchs did receive n n Richer . Hist. Concil. Gen. Tom. 1. c. 8. §. 4. p. 340. ; and he obeyed this Summons , and sent his Legates thither , excusing his own absence , without any reflection upon the Emperors having no Right to Summon him : Yea , had he known it was his Right to call a General Council , why did he write so many Letters to Theodosuis and to Pulcherius , humbly beseeching the Emperor to call a General Council in Italy o o Richer . ib. p. 350. ? Nothing can be clearer , than that this pretence of Usurpation is a most notorious Falshood . Secondly , The Notes blame the Emperor for making Dioscorus President of this Council ; and Baronius calls this arrogating and usurping a Right never attempted before , and he thinks God justly deprived Theodosius of his Life the year after , for his wronging the Pope herein p p Baron . An. 449. pag. 78. . But we have shewed , Osius was the Emperors Legate , and by him made President of the Council at Nice , and Cyril was by the Emperor made President in that of Ephesus : As for this Council , the Pope was not like to be there in Person . Flavianus , who should have had the second place , was a Party , whose Sentence was to be enquired into ; Domnus , of Antioch , was not altogether unsuspected ; but Eutyches friends had commended Dioscorus , of Alexandria , and Juvenalis , of Hierusalem , to the Emperor as impartial and fit to Judge ; and their Characters made them ( as the Case was supposed to stand ) to have right to that q q Vid. Richer . Tom. 1. c. 8. §. 5. p. 246 , &c. . 'T is true the Popes Legates did murmur at this , as Liberatus saith r r Liberat. brev. c. 12. , and the Legates at Chalcedon called this a usurpation in Dioscorus ; but neither this Council nor that did insist upon that matter . Thirdly , The Notes pretend Theodosius therefore summoned Leo to this Council , because he knew the Council would be null without the Popes Authority . But the Letter of Summons declares he called it by his own Authority , and he writ no other Summons to Leo than he did to the Bishops of Alexandria and Jerusalem ; so that it may as well be said , Theodosius knew their Authority was as necessary as the Popes ; but the truth is , the consent of the great Patriarchs was so far necessary , that they were to be duly summoned , and if possible , to be present ; but they had no Authority single , as to the calling or disannulling of any Council . Wherefore , Fourthly , Though it be rejected , yet not because the Pope did not call it , or preside in it ( as his Notes pretend ) but because of the unjust and violent proceedings used in it ; against which , not only the Popes Legates , but divers other Bishops did protest , and oppose them , even to the suffering of Banishment and Deprivation . And here I must note a manifest contradiction in Baronius , who in one page saith , All the Bishops consented to the restitution of Eutyches , and the deposing of Flavianus , the Legates of the Apostolick See only opposing Dioscorus to his face : Yet in the next page he reckons up some Bishops by name , who suffered for opposing Dioscorus ; and adds out of Leo's Epistle to Pulcheria , that many were deprived and banished for this opposition , and others put in their places s s Baron . An. 449. pag. 95. cum pag. 96. . Lastly , I only add , that the Emperor , being deceived by Eutyches , confirmed the Decrees of this Pseudo-Synod , as his Ancestors were wont to do t t Baron . ib. pag. 104. ; and for this reason the Acts of it were valid till they were disannulled by the General Council of Chalcedon ; and though the Pope disliked and complained of this Council , he had no Authority to null all its Acts till another General Council was called : Wherefore that Third Roman Council , wherein Leo and the Bishops of Italy reprobated the Acts of this Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus u u Bin. pag. 507. Lab. col. 1475. , was not sufficient to repeal the Council it self , but only to shew that those western Bishops would not receive it . For if the Popes Council alone had made it null , what need had their been of a General Council to do that over again ? Yea , the Pope and this Roman Synod writ to the Emperor , earnestly entreating him , that all things might remain in the same state they were before any proceedings , till a General Council could meet w w Vid. Baron . An. 449. pag. 109. ; which shews that they did not believe their single Authority was sufficient to annul all that was done t t The Emperor was desired to disanul this Synod , by the Pope , &c. Concil. Chalced. Act. 10. Bin. p. 294 , &c. . After this Roman Council , it seems Dioscorus , in his Private Council at Alexandria , excommunicated Pope Leo , and Baronius makes this a greater Crime than his confirming the Heresie of Eutyches , and he ( with the Notes ) observe it as a wonder , that whereas Ninety Bishops signed the Heresie of Eutyches , only Ten could be found to subscribe the Excommunication of the Pope x x Bin. in predict . Concil. 3. Rom. p. 508. Lab. ut supr. Baron . An. 448. pag. 113. ; but the wonder ceases , if we consider that Eutyches was restored in a General Council , or that which was called so , wherein there met an hundred twenty eight Bishops , or their Deputies ; but the Pope was excommunicated in a Private Synod at Alexandria . I shall not enlarge upon the cruel usage of Flavianus in this Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus , who died soon after of the blows and wounds given him there , nor remark how Baronius would make him a Martyr for the Popes Supremacy y y Baron . An. 449. pag. 97. , whereas he was a Martyr for the Orthodox Faith , corrupted by Eutyches : Nor shall I detain the Reader with any of his odd observations upon the flight of Hilary , one of the Popes Legates , from this Council .

Anatolius , being by Dioscorus advanced to the See of An. Dom. 450. Constantinople , in the room of Flavianus , Leo had great reason to fear he was infected with the Heresie of Eutyches , and therefore he very carefully sent three Legates to Constantinople , to inform him whether Anatolius were Orthodox , and to desire a General Council might be called by the Emperor , and in Italy , if he pleased , as his Letter imports z z Baron . An. 450. pag. 115. ; in the mean time ( if we may trust the Acts of one of these Legates coming out of the Vatican ) Anatolius calls a Council at Constantinople , and in the presence of the Popes Legates owns himself Orthodox , receives Pope Leo's Letter to Flavianus , and condemns Eutyches and Nestorius ; and this the Editors publish with the Title of a Council at Constantinople a a Bin. pag. 508. Lab. col. 1475. . Now though their own Author of the Vatican expresly says , that Anatolius called this Council ; yet both Baronius , and the Notes in the same page daringly affirm , that the Popes Legates commanded all the neighbouring Bishops to meet in this Council b b Bin. & Lab. ut supr. Baron . An. 450. pag. 120. : Which is as false , as that these Legates were sent to restore the lapsed Oriental Church ; and that both Theodosius and Anatolius , and all the Eastern Bishops , in all these Transactions , owned the Pope to be the Supream Head of the Church . These things are only to be found in Baronius his Inferences , but no Author or Record of these proceedings hint any such thing . The Legates chief business was to petition the Emperor for a General Council ; and it was usual when any new Patriarch was advanced , that he should write an account of his Faith to all the other Patriarchs ; and Anatolius having been justly suspected , was obliged to do it something more solemnly , for Leo's satisfaction .

CHAP. III.

Of the Council of Chalcedon , being the Fourth General Council .

BEING to discourse of the Fourth General An. Dom. 451. §. 1. Council at Chalcedon , we must observe , that besides the partial Preface before it a a Bin. Tom. 2. par. 1. p. 2. Lab. Tom. 4. p. 1. , and the fallacious Notes after it b b Bin. ib. pag. 409. Lab. col. 979. , published by the Editors , the Acts of it are divided into three parts . The first containing the Epistles , and other Writings precedent to the Council . The second containing the several Acts of it . The third containing the Epistles , and other Transcripts relating to that Council afterwards . Of the first part I shall treat very briefly , having spoken of divers things , there collected , in the former Chapter ; only noting now some of the Frauds and Errors in these preliminary Epistles . And first , I need not enlarge upon those false Stories in the Preface to this Council , ( which I confuted before , Anno 448 , and Anno 449. ) That Eutyches appealed from Flavian' s Council at Constantinople , to the Pope ; That the Pope immediately became an Enemy to that Heretick ; That it was the highest Crime in Eutyches to appeal from the Pope to the Emperor c c Bin. Pref. pag. 3. Lab. col. 3 , & 4. . Nor will it be necessary to insist upon the Prefacers owning that Theodosius called the Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus , at Dioscorus his request ; and though Pope Leo did labour to hinder it , yet he durst not but send his Legates to it , who indeed did generously refuse to joyn in the condemnation of Flavianus : But whereas the Prefacer pretends Flavianus appealed to the Apostolick See d d Bin. Pref. pag. 3. Lab. ib. col. 5. ( as if the Pope were alone fit to receive Appeals ) , I must note , First , That de Marca confesses All the rest of the Patriarchs were his open Enemies , and therefore he was compelled to apply to the Western Church for help e e De Marca de concord . l. 7. c. 7. p 324. , and yet he did not Appeal to the Pope alone ; and Leo told Placidia , that Flavianus Appealed not only to the Apostolick Throne , but to all the Bishops of those parts f f Concil. Chalced. par. 1. Bin. p. 24. Lab. col. 54. ; and Leo saith the same thing in his own Epistles , that the Appeal was to all the Churches of those parts g g Ibid. Bin. pag. 19. Lab. col. 42. ; and therefore all the Western Bishops joyned with Leo in desiring a Council might be held in Italy : Which was when they were met in Council at Rome , and had ( no doubt ) declared their dislike of Dioscorus's proceedings ; but it sufficiently confutes the Prefacers boast of Leo and his Councils rescinding the Acts of this Ephesine Pseudo-Synod , as if that had been sufficient to null all that was done there ; because if the Pope , in that Council of Rome , had sufficient Authority to have abrogated the Acts of Ephesus , there was no need for them to desire a greater Council to re-examine this matter , or for Leo ( as the Preface owns ) to engage the Western Emperor , his Mother and his Empress to write to Theodosius , to suffer the Transactions at Ephesus to be heard over again h h Bin. pag. 4. Lab. col. 6. . But Theodosius having called that Synod by his own Authority , and being persuaded by Eutyches his Party , that the proceedings in it were regular , would not be prevailed on by any importunities to grant this request ; but he dying soon after , and Marcian ( by marrying Pulcheria , Sister and Heir to Theodosius ) coming to be Emperor , consented to call a General Council , but not ( as the Pope desired ) in Italy , but in the East , where the Controversie began , and where by the Ancient Canons it was to be decided . Which suffices to discover all those falshoods that are in that part of the Preface , which concerns the things before this General Council .

In the Preleminary Epistles and Edicts which constitute the first part of the Council of Chalcedon , we may observe many of the Titles of the Epistles are corrupted by Roman Parasites . So in the first Epistle of Flavianus i i Vid. Lab. num. 4. col. 15. marg. ita num. 6. Bin. p. 8. Lab. col. 18. the true reading is , to Leo Arch-Bishop of the elder Rome ; but they have made it Pope , &c. In Flavians second Epistle to Leo , the Latin Copies leave out of the Title , and Fellow minister k k Bin. & Lab. num. 6. : So again [ Pope ] is put into the Latin Copy instead of Arch-Bishop in a Letter of Leo's to the Monks at Constantinople l l Bin pag. 12. Lab. col. 23. num. 9. . And in Leo's Epistle to Theodosius , in the Latin ( for Leo , Bishop ) there is put in these absurd words , Leo , Pope of the Catholick Church of the City of Rome m m Bin. pag. 12. Lab. col. 26. num. 10. . And in his Epistle to the second Synod at Ephesus , the Latin leaves out these Material Expressions , to his beloved Brethren in the Lord greeting n n Bin. pag. 15. Lab. col. 31. num. 13. . To conclude , the Greek Title owns that Leo and his Roman Synod petitioned for a Council in Italy ; the Latin leaves this out , though the body of the Letter do expresly declare that request o o Bin. pag. 18. Lab. col. 37 , 38. num. 19. Now these are plain Instances how little Credit is to be given to the Latin Copies of this Council , and especially to these Titles , which the Popes Flatterers have frequently corrupted , and altered them from the modest Style used in those days . And hence we may gather how frivolously Baronius argues from the Titles of Pope Leo's Epistles , wherein he stiles himself Bishop of the Roman and of the Universal Church p p Baron . An. 451. pag. 159. Leon. ep. 54. in Concil. Chalced. par. 3. Bin. p. 355. num. 6. ; that the Popes then did use the style of Universal Bishop ; though St. Gregory expresly denies that ever any of his Predecessors used that profane , new and proud Title ; but the Annalist makes bold to give Gregory the Lie , meerly on the credit of these corrupted and fictitious Titles , prefixed by forging Parasites ; for Leo's usual Inscription was , Leo , the Bishop of Rome , to , &c. so that where we see Bishop or Pope of the Catholick Church of Rome , &c. q q Leon. ep. 12 , & 13. Concil. Chal. par. 1. Bin. p. 12 , & 14. , there 't is certain the Flatterers have been at work . But as to more material observations ; when Flavianus had condemned Eutyches , he doth not desire the Pope to confirm the Sentence , which being regularly passed on him by his own Bishop in Council , no man could relax ( as Leo himself grants r r Leo ep. ad Pulcher. Bin. p. 13. Lab. col. 27. num. 11. ) : But his Letter to Leo requires him to publish it to all the Bishops under his jurisdiction s s Flav. ep. ad Leon. num. 6. Bin. p. 9. Lab. col. 19. . In Leo's Epistle to Julian , one of his Legates , the Latin Copy puts in [ nobis , ] and makes Leo say there is one Doctrine and Teaching of the Holy Ghost , in us and in you ; but the Greek reads — in the whole Catholick Church t t Ep. Leon. ad Jul. num. 8. Bin. p. 10. Lab. col. 19. . Again , it is commonly pretended that Pope Leo was utterly against the Emperors calling the second Council at Ephesus ; and that one reason which made all its proceedings null , was because it was called without his consent : But it appears by divers of this Popes Letters here published , that he owned it a pious Resolution of the Emperor to call this Council u u Ep. Le. ad Theod. n. 10. Bin p. 10. Lab. col. 2● . ita in ep. ad Pulcher. num. 11. ep. ad Synod . Ephes. num. 13. , and in observance of his Commands , he sent his Legates to it : So that he never pleaded his Authority in bar to the Emperors Right , even when in his Judgment he thought there was no need of it w w Ep. Leon. ibid. num. 16. & 17. Bin. p. 17. Lab. col. 37. . And he declares that he sent these Legates , not to preside there , but to agree with them by common consent on such things as might be pleasing to God , as his Letter to this Synod shews , Num. 13.

It appears by Petrus Chrysologus , Bishop of Ravenna's Letter to Eutyches , that he appealed to him as well as to the Pope ; for he excuses himself as unfit to judge a Cause that had been tried in a far Country , especially upon hearing only one Party x x Ep. Petr. Raven . ad Eutyeh . num. 15. Bin. p. 17. Lab. col. 35. : A Rule , which if the Popes had duly observed , they would not have received so many unjust Appeals . 'T is true , he refers him to Pope Leo's Epistle to Flavianus , lately writ on this subject ; but Binius in his Notes falsly puts in , that he warns him to rely on it as an Oracle of the Holy Ghost y y Not. in Concil. Bin. p. 415. Lab. col. 992. ; for he only saith , there was now an Orthodox Pope in St. Peter's Chair , who had taught the Faith aright in this Epistle , which had been sent by Leo , a little before , to this and other Bishops of the West , for their approbation . But that of Leo himself in his Epistle to Theodosius , shews he was no honester than he should be , and deserved not so good a Character as the Bishop of Ravenna gives him ; for he impudently cites one of the Sardican Canons , under the forged Title of the Nicene Canon made by all the Bishops in the World z z Ep. Leon. ad Theod. num. 19 , 20. Bin. pag. 19 , 20. Lab. col. 42 , & 46. ; the Margin would excuse this , by pretending that other Fathers cite these Sardican Canons under the Title of Nicene Canons ; but we know no ancient Fathers did so , except Zosimus and Boniface his Predecessors , who , to their lasting infamy , were convicted of this notorious Fraud in the Council of Carthage ; and therefore it was an odd piece of assurance in Leo , so soon after , to make use of the same detected Cheat. In another Epistle of his against Eutyches , he saith , In the mystical distribution of the spiritual Food , that is given and received , by which those who partake of the virtue of the Heavenly Food , are changed into his Flesh , who was made our Flesh a a Ep. Leon. ad Const. num. 23. Bin. p. 22. Lab. col. 48. , which is point blank against their modern Opinion of Transubstantiation , making the Bread to be Spiritual and Heavenly Food , and the change to be not in the Elements , but in the Receivers . After this we have divers Epistles of the Western Emperor Valentinian ; of his Mother and Empress , to Theodosius and Pulcheria , writ at the request of Pope Leo , to desire that Emperor to revoke the Judgment passed in the Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus , which further proves the Pope had no Authority in himself to null those Acts ; for he would not have begged with Tears that which was in his own Power . But the great use the Romanists make of these Letters , is on account of some high Expressions in them about the Popes having a Power over all Bishops b b Ep. Valent. num. 25. Bin. p. 23. Lab. col. 51. , and a Principality among them c c Num. 28. Bin. p. 25. Lab. col. 58. . But there is some doubt whether these Epistles are genuine , the Story of their being at Rome the night after St. Peter's day , not agreeing to the time when these pretended Epistles must be writ : But if they be not forged , Rome will gain nothing by these phrases , which Leo put into their Mouths ; for he certainly endited these Letters for them , as we may know by this Evidence , that the Emperors Mother , Galla Placidia ( who understood no more of the Canons than the Pope told her ) cites the Canon of Sardica , for a Canon of Nice d d Ep. Gal. Placid . num. 26. Bin. p. 24. Lab. col. 54. , as Leo had done before ; and therefore ex ungue Leonem ; we may easily know the Penman of these Epistles : Now when he bears witness only to himself , his testimony is suspicious , and of no weight at all ; and Theodosius valued these brags so little , that he calls Leo only by the name of Patriarch in his answer , and affirms the Nicene Canons were not broken , and therefore he utterly rejected the request e e Ep. Theod. num. 29 , 30 , 31. Bin. p. 25. Lab. col. 58 , &c. . Yet Leo was forced to be content , and to receive Anatolius chosen Bishop of Constantinople , in this Synod of Ephesus into his Communion , only desiring him to give an Account of his being Orthodox in the Faith , that he might publish it to other Bishops f f Ep. Leon. ad Theod. Num. 32. Bin. pag. 32. Lab. col. 61. ; Soon after which Theodosius died .

Marcianus succeeding , and having no other Title to the Empire than his being married to Pulcheria , he remitted much of the Majesty of Style in his Letters to Leo and other Bishops , used by Theodosius and other Emperors g g Richer . Hist Concil. gen. l. 1 c. 8. §. 11. pag. 363. . But even when he complements the Pope in the highest strain , he will not yield the Council should be called in Italy as the Pope desired , but resolves to have it in the East , in some City which he himself should choose h h Epist. Marcian . ad Leon. Num. 34. Bin. pag. 28. Lab. col. 63. : Where we may see a notorious Forgery in Baronius and Binius , for whereas the Emperor saith , where it shall seem good to us , Baronius turns nobis , into vobis , and Binius in his Notes follows him i i Baron . An. 450. pag. 119. Bin. not . pag. 409. Lab. col. 980. ; as if the Emperor had left it to the Pope , to choose what City he pleased for the Council to meet ; Nay further , Binius who reads it nobis in the Epistle , yet in a Note before that Letter , he saith it was where the Peope pleased ; and hath the Confidence to say in his Notes at the end of the Council , that the Emperor writ to the Pope to appoint the place , time and manner of calling this General Synod : Than which nothing can be more false ; for the Pope would have had it in the West if he might have chosen , but the Emperor Summoned the Bishops first to come to Nice , as his Letters yet extant shew k k Epist. Marcian . Num 36 , & 37. Bin. pag. 29 , &c. Lab. col. 66 , &c. ; and thither the Popes first Letter to the Synod ought to be directed ; and I wish that ignorant hand which altered the Title , and put in Chalcedon instead of Nice , hath not put in those words in it , of saving the honour of St. Peter , and of his Legates being sent to preside in the Council l l Epist Leon. ad Synod num. 40. Bin. pag. 31. , which passages might look favourably on the supremacy if they be genuine ; only they are no more but Leo's own Evidence in his own Cause : After this the Council being assembled at Nice , they with the Popes Legates desired the Emperors presence among them , upon which he removed the Council to the City of Chalcedon , and thither he afterward came to them m m Epist. Marcian . Num. 41. Bin. pag. 32. Lab. col. 74. . On which I shall only note , that Baronious and Binius have turned this Petition of the Council and Legates , into a Declaration of the Legates alone ; for they pretend that the Emperor writ to the Council , That it seemed good to the Popes Legates that he should be present n n Baron . An. 451. pag. 132. Bin. not . pag. 409. Lab. col. 980. ; Which is a false representation of the matter , as the Emperors Letter shews .

§ . 2. We proceed now to the Council it self assembled at Chalcedon , and will first consider these generals , viz. 1st . Who called it . 2ly . Who presided in it , and in what Order they sate . 3ly . Who confirmed the Acts of it : And secondly make some brief remarks on the particular Acts of this Council .

First , As to the Authority by which it was convened ; Though the Preface had owned that Marcian called this Council o o Praef. Bin. pag. 4 Lab. p. 6. , yet the Notes affirm , it was appointed by the Authority of Leo , and by the advice , assistance and help of Marcian congregated : And again , it is clear this General Council was convened by the Exhortation and Counsel of the Emperor , but by the Command and Authority of the Pope p p Not. Bin. pag. 409. Lab. col. 980. : And this they pretend to prove by the Epistle of the Bishops of Maesia , writ some years after the Council , which they cite thus , Many holy Bishops meeting in the City of Chalcedon , by the Command of Leo ( who is truly an head of Bishops ; ) but the Epistle adds — and of the venerable Bishop and Patriarch Anatolius a Council was held , which was confirmed under two Emperors q q Concil. Chalced. par. 3. Num. 32. Bin. pag. 381. Lab. col. 912. . But these fraudulent Editors leave out these last words , which shew that these Bishops were as much called by the Authority of Anatolius as of Leo , and also that the Emperors confirmed the Acts of this general Council , which two things Binius would conceal from his Reader : Now this accidental expression of six Bishops long after , implying no more but only that Leo and Anatolius sent out the Emperors Summons to all Bishops , ( the other three Patriarchs being not then of unsuspected fame , ) is all they have to prove this egregious falshood of this Councils being called by the Popes sole Authority , except an Epistle of Gelasius , another Pope pleading his own Cause : Whereas there are clear and express proofs almost innumerable , that it was appointed and convened or called by the Emperors Authority : For Leo was summoned himself by the Emperor , and in obedience to that Summons excuses his own absence , and sends his Legates to the Council r r Epist. Leon. Num. 40. Bin. p. 31. Lab. col. 70. . And the Emperors general Letter , strictly requiring all Bishops to be there is extant s s Epist. Marcian . Num. 36. Bin. pag. 29. Lab. col. 66. , a Copy of which probably was delivered to the Pope : And in the beginning of every Act it is expresly said , The Synod met ( 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 — 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , &c. ) by the command , or divine Authority of the Emperors t t Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. Bin. pag. 34. Lab. col. 78 , &c. ; and it is so often repeated , that this Council was called by the precept or command of the Emperor , as makes it needless and impossible to cite all the places : Liberatus the Deacon who writ some years after ( when the Popes had encroached something further ) saith , at the Popes request the Emperor commanded this Council to be assembled u u Liberat. Brev. cap. 13. Bin. Tom 2. par. 2. pag. 185. ; which makes it a strange boldness in Baronius to affirm , that the Emperor requested the Pope that a Council might be called w w Baron . An. 451. pag. 126. , which not only this Historian but the Emperors Letter in the next page contradicts : Yea Leo himself in his 61st Epistle , which the Notes cite with great applause owns , the Council was gathered by the precept of the most Christian Princes , &c. x x Not. Bin. p. 410. Lab. col. 982. and the Pope in divers of his Epistles , owns the Authority of calling general Councils to be in the Emperor ; yea the Legates own in the very Council it self , that the Council was summoned by the Emperors Authority : So that for any of the Popes flatterers to pretend the contrary , is to wink against the clearest light .

Secondly , As to the Presidents of this Council , the Historical Preface is very positive , that the Apostolical Legates presided y y Praef. Bin. pag. 4. Lab. col. 6. ; and the Notes prove it was a general Council , because the Pope presided by his Legates z z Not in Concil. Bin. pag. 410. Lab. col. 981. . But if that were essential to a General Council , there was none before this of Chalcedon : Here indeed three of the five Legates named by the Pope , Paschafinus , Lucentius and Boniface , were allowed to sit uppermost on one side of the Bishops , but Basilius and Julianus , the other two , who also were named Legates by the Pope , were not owned by the Council under that Character , and therefore had no precedency given them a a Not. Bin. pag. 411. Lab. col. 984. . And if this be all they mean by the Legates presiding , that they in right of the Pope had the first place among the Bishops , we will not contend with them ; but if they suppose any Power or Authority these Legates had over the Council by this precedency , we must deny that . Baronius brags that all things were determined by the Popes Authority b b Baron . An. 450. pag. 120. And the Notes before cited , speak as if they had done all things in this Council c c Not. in Concil. Bin. pag. 410. Lab. col. 981. ; yea , the Latin version of the Council forgets the Title of Presidents , thrice , and claps it to the names of these Legates d d Act. 3. Bin. pag. 174. Lab. col. 380. ibid. in subscrip . Act. 3. Bin. pag. 208. Lab. col. 448. Et subscrip . Act. 4. Bin. pag. 259. Lab. col. 580. , which Title is not in the Greek : But if we examine into the matter , these three Legates who were allowed by the Council , had nothing more than the honour of sitting uppermost upon the left hand , and sometimes speaking and subscribing first : But in the twelfth Act concerning the Church of Ephesus , over which the Patriarch of Constantinople claimed some Jurisdiction , Anatolius speaks before the Popes Legate , and by his direction the matter was determined e e Act. 12. Bin. pag. 305. Lab. col. 771. . And though both Baronius and the Notes boast , That the Legates pronounced the sentence on Dioscorus in the Popes name , as Presidents of the Council f f Baron . An. 451. pag. 145. Not. in Concil. Bin. pag. 410. Lab. col. 981. ; Yet if we consult the place we shall find , that they twice asked the Synods Opinion of Dioscorus his Case , and the whole Synod declared he was to be condemned ; yet the Legates durst not pronounce the Sentence , till they asked if the Synod commanded them to give the Ecclesiastical Sentence , and upon the Order of the Synod they first pronounced it , and every Bishop single , declared Dioscorus was deposed and excommunicated g g Act. 3. Bin. pag. 192 , &c. Lab. col. 421 , &c. : So that there was nothing of Authority in the Legates , but only their speaking first , and declaring that which the whole Council had agreed upon . And because Anatolius commonly spoke in the second place , therefore he is joyned with Leo , and both of them together are called the Princes of this Council h h Act. 4. Bin. pag. 243. Lab. col. 540. . So in one of the Epistles , after the Council , Leo and Anatolius are said to have regularly presided herein i i Concil. Chalced. par. 3. num. 42. Bin. pag. 389. Lab. col. 933. : By which Titles are meant only that they had the principal Places in this General Council : But the true President of this great Synod , was the Emperor , who , when he was present , sate above all the Bishops in the midst , and his Legates , the Lay-Judges , in his absence , sate there ; and these Representatives of the Emperor indeed had not only the most honourable place of all , but some Authority over the Synod it self : For they propounded or allowed all matters to be debated ; of them all Bishops , even the Popes Legates k k Act. 4. Bin. pag. 236. Lab. col. 518. item Act. 16. Bin. pag. 334. Lab. col. 793. , desired leave to speak ; they summed up the Debates , and generally gave the decisive Sentence , and upon that followed the Acclamations ; so that these Judges performed all that the Modern Popes Legates in late Councils have taken upon them , since their Supremacy hath been in its greatest Exaltation . If they object , that neither they nor the Emperor were allowed to be present when Dioscorus was condemned according to the Canons l l Baron . An. 451. pag. 143. Not. Bin. pag. 412. Lab. col. 986. . I Answer , the Judges in a former Session , after a full hearing of the Cause , had determined ( if the Emperor consented ) that Dioscorus should have the same punishment which he had inflicted on Flavianus , and that he and his Accomplices should by the Council be deposed from Episcopal Dignity , according to the Canons ; to which Decree the whole Synod consented m m Act. 1. Bin. pag. 152. Lab. col 310. : So that there was no more to be done in the third Session , but only for the Bishops canonically to execute this Sentence upon Dioscorus ; and there was no occasion for the Emperor , or the Lay-Judges to be present , only his confirmation of this Sentence was so necessary , that they writ both to Marcian and Pulcheria to desire their confimation thereof n n Act. 3. in fine , Bin. pag. 215. Lab. col. 463. : So that the chief Authority was in the Emperor and his Representatives , the Bishops advising , and they finally determining and confirming what was agreed upon , so that they were properly the Presidents here .

Thirdly , As to the Confirmation of all these Acts , the Notes affirm , That all which was decreed here concerning the Faith against Eutyches , was confirmed and approved by Leo's Authority , as the Fathers had desired of him in their Synodical Epistle ; but they pretend he annulled and made void the 28th Canon o o Not in Concil. Bin. pag. 410. col . 2. Lab. col. 982. ita Baron . An. 451. pag. 159. : And this they pretend to prove , not by the Synodical Epistle it self , for that speaks only of the Emperors confirmation , and never desires the Pope to ratifie the matters of Faith , but saith , he and they by his Legates had agreed on these points , only they wish for his consent to the 28th Canon about the Primacy of Constantinople , which his Legates had opposed p p Ep. Synod . ad Leon. Concil. Chal. par. 3. num. 2. Bin. pag. 351. Lab. col. 836. . And indeed they supposed they had his consent in all things which the Legates agreed to ; and so those passages cited by the Notes out of Leo's Epistle , do not prove that he confirmed the Decrees of Faith , otherwise than by giving his common suffrage to them by his Legates , and agreeing with them afterwards q q Vid. Leon. ep. 61. cit . in not . verb. [ approbatum . ] : And thus all other Bishops , who were absent , and had Legates there , confirmed them as well as the Pope ; as for his dissent from that Canon , and their brags that he had made it void , we shall shew afterwards , that it remained in force for all the Popes opposition . But it may be observed how notoriously the Latin Version corrupts the Text to insinuate this Papal confirmation ; for in the Speech they made to the Emperor , in the end of the Council , the Latin hath these words , Concilii hujus a vobis Congregati Praedicationem , Petri sedis Authoritate roborantes , implying that the Popes Authority was to confirm the determinations of the Council : But the Greek hath a quite different sense , viz. that the determinations of the Pope ( that is , Leo's Epistle to Flavianus ) were confirmed by that Holy Council which the Emperor had gathered r r Concil. Chal. par. 3. num. 1. Bin. pag. 347. Lab. col. 828. : And not only that Speech , but many other evidences do shew clearly , that the Emperor confirmed the Decree of this Council . For First , In the end of divers Acts , the Judges , as the Emperors Legates , do confirm what was agreed upon s s Act. 4. Bin. pag. 248. Lab. col. 552. , and sometimes promise to acquaint the Emperor for his confirmation t t Act. 5. Bin. pag. 254. Lab. col. 568. : Yea , the Emperor in his Speech made to the Synod , saith he came to the Synod to confirm the Faith , and not to shew his Power , as Baronius and the Latin Version reads it u u Baron . An. 451. pag. 141. vid. Act. 6. Bin. pag. 258. Lab. col. 577. ; but the Greek more truly reads , I came to the Synod to confirm what was agreed on , &c. which shews sufficiently , that the Emperor was to confirm all the Acts : Yea , in that very Session wherein the Faith was subscribed by the Bishops , the Emperor expresly confirms it , and makes a penal Sanction against all that shall contradict or oppose it w w Act. 6. Bin. pag. 269. Lab. col. 608. 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 . &c. ib. , upon which the Fathers cried out thou hast confirmed the Orthodox Faith x x Ibid. vid. : And a little while after the Council was ended , the same Emperor put out two Edicts , wherein he doth fully confirm the Decrees of this Holy Council , adding in the later , penalties to all that would not receive it y y Par. 3. Concil. num. 3 , & 4. Bin. pag. 352 , &c. Lab. col. 840 , &c. . Wherefore we can make no doubt that the main confirmation of the Acts of this Council was from the Emperor .

§ . 3. In the next place we will consider the several Sessions and Acts which were in number sixteen . In the first Action , Baronius , by mistake , affirms , that the Emperor was present z z Baron . An. 451. pag. 141. ; but the Acts shew that he was only present by his Legates , the Lay-Judges , who representing the Emperor the true President of this August Assembly , sate in a more honourable place than the Popes Legates , and here and always are named before them a a Act. 1. Bin. pag. 34. Lab. col. 88. . But the Champions of the Supremacy boast extreamly of the great words of the Popes Legates concerning the See of Rome ; who say in this first Action , on the mention of Rome , which is the Head of all Churches b b Ibid. Bin. p. 41. Lab. col. 94. ; and the Greek seems to refer it to Pope Leo. To which may be added , that the same Legates in the third Action , though they do not call the Pope Head of the Universal Church , as Bellarmine falsly cites their words c c Bellarm. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 11. pag. 85. ; yet they magnifie St. Peter as the Rock and groundwork of the Catholick Church , and the Foundation of true Faith d d Act. 3. Bin. pag. 192. Lab. col. 425. : And in some other places they call the Pope Universal Bishop , &c. To which I answer , The Council no where gives the Bishop of Rome any of these extravagant Titles , and did so little regard these empty brags of the Legates , that in the first Act , the Judges do reject the very first request which Leo's Legates made to the Council ; and when they petitioned in Leo's name , that Dioscorus might stand at the Bar , the Judges bid him sit down e e Act. 1. Bin. pag. 41. Lab. col. 94. : And if we consider how zealous this ambitious Pope was for the Dignity of his See , and that his Legates had been taught their Lesson at Rome , we may justly argue from the Councils silence , and the lower Style of Arch-Bishop which they give him , that these big Thrasonical Titles were not believed nor approved by them ; for many things are reported in the Councils , as said by particular persons , which were not the Act of the whole Council ; for which reason Bellarmine egregiously prevaricates , when he makes this whole General Council to call Peter the Rock and Ground-work of the Catholick Church f f Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 1. cap. 10. pag. 540. ; For it was only the Popes Domesticks called him so ; and had the Council foreseen the consequence , they would expresly have opposed , that which they only silently passed by as frivolous . In the next place we may observe , that it is said in this Council , that the Emperor confirmed the Acts of the second Council at Ephesus g g Act. 1. Bin. pag. 48. Lab. col. 111. , therefore it was usual then for the Emperor so to do , since this is alledged to prove that a lawful Council . Again , when the Acts of this second Council at Ephesus were read at Chalcedon , the Greek plainly saith , the Emperor by his Letters exhorted the Pope to be present there , but the Latin Version corrupts the Text , and puts in supplicarunt b b Ibid. Bin. pag. 52. Lab. col. 122. 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 . , as if the Emperor had humbly supplicated the Pope to be there ; whereas one of his Legates , a few lines before , owned , that the Pope had the same Form of Summons sent him , that was sent to the other great Bishops . Moreover , in Eutyches Petition read in that Council , Cyril is called the President of the third General Council at Ephesus i i Ibid. Bin. pag. 57. Lab. col. 135. , without any mention of the Pope : And we may further observe , that the Heretick Eutyches , in the Acts of the Council of Constantinople which condemned him , is called Pope Eutyches , that being a name formerly given to all Eminent Clergy-men , especially in the East k k Ibid. Bin. p. 90. Lab. col. 222. . I shall make no more remarks upon this first Session , which was spent in reading over and reviewing the Council of Constantinople , wherein Eutyches was condemned , and the Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus wherein Dioscorus absolved him , because I have treated of both before : It is sufficient to observe upon this full hearing , the Council of Chalcedon condemned both Eutyches and Dioscorus , and the Lay-Judges summ'd up the Act ; but there seems to be a Roman addition in the end of this first Act , where it is thrust in without choerence and sense , that Leo writ an Epistle to Flavianus ; which , though it be true l l In fin . Act. 1. Bin. pag. 153. Lab. col. 310. , comes in very impertinently here ; but the Forger thought when the Writings of the Orthodox Fathers were mentioned , that of Leo ought by all means to be mentioned right or wrong .

In the second Action there is nothing considerable , but the reading of this very Epistle of Leo to Flavianus ( after the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed ) being written expresly about the Eutychian Heresie , the main Cause to be then decided m m Act. 2. Bin pag. 151. Lab. col. 344. ; which was therefore received there as other Orthodox Writings were , with general Acclamations ; but the Notes , citing these Acclamations , quote them imperfectly no further than these words , Peter speaks by Leo n n Not. in Concil. Bin. p. 412. Lab. col. 986. Collat. cum Act. 2. Bin. p. 169. Lab. col. 368. : But the Council goes on , and says , The Apostles and Cyril taught thus , by which we may see it was the consonancy of Leo's Doctrine , to the writings of the Apostles , and of St. Cyril , not the infallibility of his See which procured his Epistle this general applause . Wherefore the Prefacer need not have mentioned these Acclamations , as if they were only given to Leo's Epistle , or had been made upon some single excellency peculiar to the Bishop of that See o o Pref. Bin. p. 4. Lab. col. 7. ; for both the Creeds , and two of Cyril's Epistles had been honoured with such like Acclamations a little before .

The third Action contains the canonical deposition of Dioscorus , after the Bishops had heard all the complaints against him , cited him thrice , and could not prevail with him to appear . Now there being nothing to be done at this Session , but to proceed according to the Canons , of which the Bishops were the proper Executors ; they only met , without Lay Judges , which ( saith Binius ) is the most evident note of a General Council p p Not. in Concil. Bin. pag. 412. Lab. col. 986. , but in truth it is no note of any such matter ; for if that were not a General Council , wherein some of the Lasty were present , then there never was any General Council till this time , and this single Act would then be the sole Regular Act of this General Council ; to such absurd consequences doth these mens blind zeal lead them . The next thing to be noted is , a corruption in the Titles of the Petitions , which some of the Aegyptian Clergy offered to the Council against Dioscorus ; for the Greek hath no more but this , The Petition of Theodorus , the Deacon , exhibited against Dioscorus ; but the Latin Version thrusts in Pope Leo's name thus , exhibited to Pope Leo and the Council of Chalcedon q q Act. 3. Bin. p. 181. Lab. col. 396. , and the same corruption is in the Titles of the following Petitions of Ischyrion , Athanasius and Sophronius . If it be objected , that the Superscriptions of all these Petitions , both in Greek and Latin are , To the most Holy , &c. — Universal Patriarch of Great Rome , Leo , and to the Holy General Council , &c. r r Baron . An. 451. pag. 144. : I reply , these Superscriptions seem to be forged also : For first , Eusebius his Petition before , mentions not Leo , and these Petitions are addressed only to the Council , there being not the least sentence in them peculiar to Leo , or supposing him to see or read them ; so that these Superscriptions to an absent Bishop are non-sense , and in all probability added by some Roman Transcribers , as may be guessed by the great swelling Titles , with which the Pope is loaded . Again , in the Summons sent to Dioscorus the third time , it is declared , that the Emperor had commanded the Bishops to hear this Cause ; the Greek word is [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] , but the Latin softens it into [ permisit ] s s Act. 3. ib. Bin. p. 189. Lab. col. 417. . However , whether the Emperor commanded or permitted the Bishops to hear this Cause , it is plain , that even in this Session , consisting only of Clergy , the Bishops had the Emperors leave , and proceeded by his permission . As to the Sentence it self ; the Preface t t Pres . Bin. p. 4. Lab. col. 7. , the Notes u u Not. in Concil. Bin. p. 413. Lab. col. 987. and Baronius w w Baron . An. 451. p. 145. pretend it was pronounced in Leo's name , and boast much of the Legates pronouncing it . But if we consult the place , we shall find that since no Lay-Judges were there , the Popes Legates were ( as these Judges did in other Sessions ) to collect the Votes , and then to sum them up , and publish them ; and therefore , after the enquiry was ended , they ask what the Synod thought fit to be done ; which they do over and over again , and till the Council expresly commanded them , they did not pronounce the Sentence x x Act. 3. Bin. p. 191 , 192. Lab. col. 421 , &c. . 'T is true , these Legates had learned their Lessons so well at Rome , that they contrive it . in words very pompous , The most Holy and Blessed Arch-Bishop of the Elder and Greater Rome , Leo , by us , and by this present Synod , with the most Blessed and Honourable Apostle , Peter , who is the Rock and Groundwork of the Catholick Church , and he that is the Foundation y y 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , omissam in edit . Bin. & Lab. ever . edit . restituit Richer . Hist. Concil. Gen. Tom. 1. p. 395. of the Orthodox Faith , ( that is , Jesus Christ ) hath deprived him of his Episcopal Dignity , and degraded him from all Ministration ; therefore let this most Holy General Council decree concerning the said Dioscorus what is agreeable to the Canons z z Act. 3. Bin. p. 192. Lab. col. 425. . But these Rhetorical Flourishes , coming only from the Popes Domesticks , give him no right to them ; it is more material what Cardinal Cusanus observes , that the Legates , as sitting first in this Council , first pronounce Sentence by the Synods command , and then all she rest in order ; and the force of the Sentence depends upon the agreeing Votes of all : And we see , that though the Pope had before canonically deposed Dioscorus , yet his Sentence was re-examined in a General Council a a Cusan . lib. de Concord . Cath. lib. 2. c. 8. . This is certain , that Anatolius , of Constantinople , and all the rest , though in modester words , did singly condemn Dioscorus , and he was deposed and degraded by the Authority of the General Council , and the free Votes of the several Bishops , who , as Pope Leo himself speaks , had confirmed his Sentence with an assent , which made the Cause uncapable of being tried any more b b Leo ep. 63. ad Theod. . And the Sentence which was published about his deposition c c Act. 3. Bin. p. 214. Lab. col. 460. , as well as the Letter writ to Alexandria d d Bin. ib. Lab. col. 461. expresly declare , that he was deposed and degraded by the Holy General Council (c) : And the very same is affirmed in the Synodical Epistles , writ to Martian and Pulcheria , to desire them to confirm the Councils Sentence e e Ib. Bin. p. 215. Lab. col. 463. . So that in vain do the Modern Romanists brag of the deposition of Dioscorus by the Popes Supream Authority ; for it was the opinion indeed of the Pope , before the Council met , that he ought to be deposed ; but it was the Authority of the Council , ratified by the Emperor , which actually deposed him .

In the fourth Act , the Epistle of Pope Leo to Flavianus ( wherein the Heresie of Eutyches was confuted and condemned ) was subscribed by all the Bishops , who severally declared they received it , because it was agreeable to the Faith declared in the three former General Councils of Nice , Constantinople and Ephesus ; and some of them add , because it was agreeable to the Scripture , and to the Expositions of the Orthodox Fathers f f Act. 4. Bin. p. 218. Lab. col. 471 , &c. . Now had these Fathers believed the Pope to be Infallible in matters of Faith , they must have received this Epistle only upon the Credit of the Pope ; whereas they now examin and judge of it by the Rules prescribed in former Councils , and receive it , not because the Enditer of it was Infallible , but because he had kept close to former determinations in General Councils . And since the business of this Council was to discover and condemn the Heresie of Eutyches , against which new Sect no eminent Bishop but Leo had written , therefore this Epistle was made a Test , and all were obliged to subscribe it , not ( as the Romanists brag ) because the See of Rome was to fix the Rule of Faith ; but because this was the only Writing then extant of this kind ; and we may as well prove that St. Cyril was the Supream Bishop of the World , and the sole Arbiter of Faith , because his Epistles were subscribed in the General Council of Ephesus , as a Test to find out and condemn the Nestorians , as infer the Roman Supremacy or Infallibility from the Bishops subscribing Leo's Epistle at Chalcedon . We may further note in this Action , that how confidently-soever modern Editors place the Councils of Constantinople and Ephesus , under Damasus and Celestine ; the Popes Legates here plainly say the Council of Constantinople was held under the Emperor Theodosius g g Act. 4. Bin. pag. 217. Lab. col. 471. ; and other Bishops affirm , that Cyril was the President and Head of the Council at Ephesus h h Ib. Bin. p. 218 , & 221. Lab. col. 474 , & 482. : Again , it is to be noted , that though Juvenalis of Jerusalem , and four other Bishops who had joyned with Dioscorus in the Synod at Ephesus , to condemn Flavianus , repented and had subscribed Leo ' s Epistle , and so declared themselves to be Orthodox ; yet the Council could not restore them to their Places , till the Emperor , by his Judges , gave them leave to determine their Case i i Ibid Bin. pag 232. Lab. col. 507. . It is also memorable , that the Egyptian Bishops , after their own Patriarch Dioscorus was deposed , refused to sign the Epistle of Leo , till they had a new Bishop of Alexandria , under whose jurisdiction the Nicene Canons had put them ; and though the Popes Legates and many others urged they should subscribe immediately , yet these Bishops were excused by the Council , and their Plea allowed k k Ibid. Bin. p. 233. Lab. col. 510 , &c. ; which shews , that those who were under the Patriarch of Alexandria , owed no subjection at all to Rome ; nor did they or the Council of Chalcedon think the Pope was really ( what his Legates flatteringly call him ) the Universal Arch-Bishop of Patriarch , for then they could not have allowed this Plea . Moreover , 't is observable in this Act , that Photius , Bishop of Tyre , affirms , both Anatolius and Leo were the Presidents of this Council l l Ib. Bin. p. 243. Lab. col. 540. : Also this Bishop in his Petition to the Emperors , stiles them Lords of the Earth and Sea , and of all Men , Nations and Kindreds m m Ib. p. 244. Lab. col. 541. ; which shews that Titles are not to be strictly understood , or to be made any ground for Argument , since Complements were used then as well as now ; and therefore the Romanists should not attempt to prove a right from every flourishing Title bestowed on the Pope by those who speak of him . In the Cause between this Photius of Tyre , and Eustathius of Berytus , there is a passage , how one of these Bishops claimed a right to some Churches by the Imperial Edicts , and the other by the Canons ; and he who claimed a right by the Canons , got the better : Yea , the Council declared , that Edicts ought not to prevail against the Canons * * Act. 4. Bin p. 245. Lab. col. 544. . From whence Baronius infers , that Princes ought to learn from hence to make their Laws submit to the Ecclesiastical Canons n n Baron . An. 451. p. 149. . But it must be noted , this was not intended to be a Rule in all Cases , only as to the old Rights of Bishops Jurisdictions ; and it was a Rule made now , only upon this occasion ; and which is most remarkable , the Judges tell the Council , it was the Emperor's pleasure , this Cause should be tried , nor by the Edicts , but by the Canons ; for which the Bishops gave that pious Emperor thanks : And therefore it is a great fallacy to argue from hence , that Ecclesiastical Canons are above the Laws of Princes in their own nature ; only in this Case the Good Emperor , to oblige the Bishops , suffered the Canons to prevail . To conclude , this Session ended with a confirmation of all things done by the Lay-Judges , who declare they should remain firm o o Act. 4. Bin. p. 248. Lab. col 552. , and so the Session ended .

In the Fifth Action , wherein the Matters of Faith were to be declared , the Emperors Legates were present , and prevented a Schism which was like to happen among the Bishops , some of which would not consent to the Councils definition ; but the Lay-Judges from the Emperor advised the Dissenters to go with Anatolius and the Popes Legates , and to confer among themselves so as they might agree , otherwise they threatned that the Emperor resolved to call a Council in the West , to which they must go to determin the difference p p Act. v. Bin. pag. 250. Lab. col. 560. : From whence we may note , that they knew of no single Person who could finally decide questions of Faith ; and though it was to be determined at Rome , a general Council must do it there : However , this Method proved effectual , and so they published their Faith unanimously , annexing it to the Creeds of Nice and Constantinople q q Ib. Bin. pag. 251. Lab. col. 561. . We shall only note further , that in the Acclamations made in this Session it is said , That the Councils definition had confirmed Leo ' s Epistle , and the Faith of Leo is commended because he believed as Cyril believed : And after all , the Bishops agreement was not sufficient to ratifie this definition of Faith , till it was shewed to the Emperor r r Ib. Bin. pag. 254. Lab. col. 568. as the last words import .

The Sixth Action was adorned with the presence of the Emperor Marcianus , who made a Speech to the Fathers , ( which Baronius by mistake saith was in the first Session s s Baron . An. 450 , pag. 141. ; ) telling them he was come to confirm the Faith they had agreed on , ( as Constantine did ) not to shew his power t t Act. vi . Bin. pag. 258. Lab. col. 577. . Which is a clear and undeniable proof , that the confirmation of their Decrees depended on the Emperor , in whose presence the definition of Faith was read and subscribed by every one of the Bishops ; and he declared his Approbation thereof , and in the open Synod appoints penalties for them who should , after this , call these Points into question u u Ib. Bin. pag. 269 , &c. Lab. col. 608. . And then he gives them some Rules , to be formed into Canons , because they related to Ecclesiastical Affairs ; after which having been highly Applauded by the Bishops , he was petitioned to dimiss them , but told them they must not depart for some few days , and so took his leave of them . Which shews that the Emperor who convened them , had also the sole power to dissolve this general Council : I shall add what Richerius observes upon that definition of Faith made in this Session , that it contains many of the very words and expressions of the Athanasian Creed ; and though he doubt whether Athanasius did compose that Form which bears his name ; yet he saith , It is now become the Creed of the Catholick Church , and there is not a Tittle in it which is not agreeable to the Credit , Holiness and Learning of Athanasius w w Richer . Hist. Concil. gen. Tom. 1. pag. 407. . He notes also the policy of the Popes Legates , who contrary to all ancient usage , and to the Primitive simplicity of the former Councils , do most impertinently put this Epithete to the Popes name , Bishop of the Universal Church of the City of Rome x x Act. 6. Bin. pag. 259. Lab. col. 580. . But when I consider the absurdity of the expression , and the frequent corruptions in these Acts , why might not that bold hand who added to the Legates name , President of the Council ; in this very place ( and in this Session where the Emperor being present certainly presided ) add this huffing Title to the Pope's name ? And if so , it is a corruption and can be no ground for an Argument : However , 't is a great prejudice to all these Titles , that when any others of the Council speak of the Pope , they call him only Bishop or Archbishop , and none but his own Legates load him with those vain Titles .

The Seventh Action contains only the Ratification of a private Agreement , made between Maximus Bishop of Antioch , and Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem , concerning the extent of their Jurisdictions y y Act. 7. Bin. pag. 271. Lab. col. 612. .

The Eighth Action was the case of Theodoret , who having formerly favoured Nestorius , yet being afterwards convinced of his Error , was received into Communion by Pope Leo , who had judged his cause and acquitted him before the Council met : But for all that , the case was heard over again , and he called an Heretick , and had been expelled the Council , if he had not cleared himself over again by subscribing Leo's Epistle , and Anathematizing Nestorius and Eutyches , upon which he was restored to Communion and to his Bishoprick z z Act. 8. Bin. pag. 273. Lab. col. 617. : By which it is as clear as the Sun , that the Council was above the Pope , and had Authority to Judge over again the Causes he had determined ; and also that barely being in Communion with the Pope , could not clear any Man from Heresie , nor give him a right to the Communion of the Catholick Church . And if the Epistles of Theodoret to Leo be genuin , ( whereof there is good cause to doubt ) and this cause were referred to the Pope by Appeal ; ( as the Romanists brag ) This makes the matter worse , and shews that the last Appeal is not to the Pope , and that he cannot finally decide any cause , which shall not be liable to be tried again in a general Council , yea though it be , as this was , a Cause of Faith ; which utterly ruins the Infallibility .

The Ninth and Tenth Actions , concern Ibas Bishop of Edessa , who had been a Nestorian , and was deposed by Dioscorus in the Pseudo Synod of Ephesus , in which are these observables : First , The Emperor commanded a Lay-man and some Neighbouring Bishops to hear this Cause , first at Tyre , and then at Berytus a a Act. 9 & 10. Bin. pag. 277. & pag. 280. Lab. col. 628. & 637. ; so that even Provincial Councils did not meet without the Emperors Authority , and the Popes universal supremacy was not known then . For in the Council of Berytus , Antioch is called an Apostolical Throne b b Act. 10. Bin. pag. 283. Lab. col. 644. , and the Council after they had restored him to his Bishoprick , referred the cause between him and Nonnus , ( who had been thrust into his place ) to Maximus Bishop of Antioch , as the proper Judge of that matter . No more is here to be noted , but only that the Popes Legates and the whole Council desire , that the Emperor would revoke and utterly annul the Ephesine false Synod d d Ib. Bin. pag. 294. Lab. col. 673. . For though the Pope had done this , yet they knew that was insufficient , since none but the Emperor had right effectually to confirm , or null a Council which pretended to be Oecumenical . To this Action Baronius and Binius tack another , concerning an allowance to be made to maintain Domnus late Bishop of Antioch , who had been deposed e e Bin. pag. 298. Lab. col. 681. Baron . An. 451. pag. 155. : But they own this is not in the Greek , nor was there any such thing in the Acts of the Council in Justinian's time , who expresly affirms Domnus was dead before , which is certainly true f f Vid. Cratenthorp . vigil . dormit . chap. 35. §. 9. ; Wherefore the Cardinal owns they found this in an old Latin Copy , in the Vatican , the very Mint of Forgeries ; and this Action ought to be rejected as a mear Fiction .

The Eleventh and Twelfth Actions were spent in examing the cause of Bassianus and Stephanus , both pretending to be Bishops of Ephesus , wherein we may observe : That Bassianus pleads , he was duly elected by the suffrage of the Nobility , People and Clergy of that City and the Emperor confirmed the Election g g Act. 11. Bin pag. 300. Lab. col. 688. ; for the Pope had not then usurped the nomination or confirmation of remote Bishops . Again , whereas Baronius brags , that the Pope deposed Bassianus from the Bishoprick of Ephesus , and cites the words of Stephen his Antagonist thus , it is now four years since the Roman Bishop deposed Bassianus — arguing from thence , That it was the ancient usage for the Pope to depose Metropolitans h h Baron . An. 447. pag. 49. ; He doth notoriously prevaricate , for Stephen's words are , since the Roman Bishop deposed him , and the Bishop of Alexandria condemned him : And a little before the same Stephen saith more fully , That Bassianus was expelled by the holy Fathers , Leo and Flavianus and the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch i i Act. 11. Bin. pag. 301. Lab. col. 689. . By which the Reader may see there is no credit to be given to Baronius Quotations , who always resolves by false Citations of Authors , to ascribe that to the Pope alone , which was done by him in conjunction with other Bishops : And it appears , that the principal right over Ephesus was in the Patriarch of Constantinople , whence it was pleaded by the Friends of Bassianus , that Proclus of Constontinople who had the right , received him to Communion : And Stephen urges , that Flavianus of Constanstinople expelled him afterwards k k Ibid. Bin. pag. 302. Lab. col. 692. . And therefore it is remarkable , that in the twefth Action where the Sentence was to be pronounced , Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople declares his Judgment before the Popes Legates , and is always named before them in all that Session , where a Cause was to be decided concerning a Church , which was specially under his jurisdiction l l Act. 12. Bin. pag. 305 , 306. Lab. col. 771. &c. ; by which it appears , the principal Person in the deposing of Bassianus , was the Patriarch of Constantinople , who probably desired the other great Patriarchs concurrence for the better credit of his Sentence : Moreover it is to be noted , that though Pope Leo favoured the cause of Stephen , and writ an Epistle in his behalf mentioned in the Council ; The Popes favour did him no service , for his Cause was tried over again , and he deposed by this general Council as well as Bassianus ; and this by the consent of the Popes Legates , who notwithstanding their big words , did not believe it unlawful for a general Council to contradict a determination of the Popes .

The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Actions concern only the Causes of private Bishops , who had complained to the Emperor ( not to the Pope ) of injury done them ; and the Emperor appointed them to be finally determined by the Council , and so the Bishop of Nichomedias's Jurisdiction was cleared , and the Bishop of Nice ordered to be content only with the honour of a Metropolitan m m Act. 13. Bin. pag. 307. Lab. col. 708. . And in the fourteenth Action Athanasius was setled in the Bishoprick of Perrhaea ; and Sabinianus , who claimed it , ordered to keep the honour of a Bishop , and to be maintained out of the Profits of that Church , as the Patriarch of Antiooh should direct n n Act. 14. Bin. p. 311. Lab. col. 717. . Nothing is remarkable in them , but only that the Lay Judges pronounce the Decree , and not the Popes Legates , and then the Synod consent .

The Fifteenth Action contains the Canons of this General Council for Ecclesiastical Discipline , three of which were recommended to the Fathers by the Emperor to be formed into Canons o o Supr. Act. 6. : So that in obedience to the Emperor , they were obliged to make some Ecclesiastical Rules : And one of these is the fourth Canon , which decrees , that all Monks every where shall be subject to the Bishop of that Diocess wherein their Monastery is built p p Act. 15. Bin. pag. 326. Lab. col. 757. ; which being a genuine Canon of a General Council , not objected against by the Popes Legates , it is somewhat strange that the Modern Popes have no regard to it , but daily and openly break it , in defiance of the Primitive Discipline , by exempting all Monasteries from due subjection to their own Bishop q q Vid. Bever . not . in Can. Chalced. 4. Tom. 2. p. 111. ; and this meerly out of policy to make the Monks intirely depend upon the Pope , and serve his interests . The ninth Canon ordains , that the Causes betwen Clergy-men shall be tried before their own Bishop , and not in Secular Courts ; and if a Bishop have a complaint against his Metropolitan , he shall go to the Primate of the Diocess , or appeal to the See of Constantinople : Which Canon Pope Nicholus resolved to force into his interest , and so ridiculously expounds , the Primate of the Diocess , is meant the Bishop of Rome , who is Primate of all Dioceses r r Nicol. 1. ep. 8. ad Mich. Imp. : Turrian as boldly expounds it , the Primate of the universal Diocess : And Binius in his Notes will have the word to signifie the Prince of the Christian Diocess s s Bin. not . p. 418. Lab. col. 996. . But all these feigned additions and forced glosses will not help them , because the Canon gives leave to the Party injured to complain , either to the Bishop of Constantinople , or to the Pope , at his own choice , which sets that Patriarch upon equal ground with him of Rome . But the Original Word signifies an Order of Bishops below a Patriarch , but above a Metropolitan ; and the Canon expresly limits Appeals either to be made by these , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Primates , who had Jurisdiction over the Province , or to the Patriarch of Constantinople ; which shews that this Council never thought of any Right that Rome then had to receive Appeals from all parts of the World . And if any question why the Pope is not here named , at least , for the Western Churches Appeals , as well as the Patriarch of Constantinople for the Eastern ; I take the true reason to be , the absence of the Popes Legates from this Session , consisting only of Oriental Bishops ; for which reason they modestly refused to decree any thing concerning Discipline in the West , leaving affairs there to proceed according to parity of Reason . We may add , that the Latin Version of the sixteenth Canon hath put in the word [ confitentes ] into the Body of the Canon , which is not in the Original * * Bin. pag. 328. , but Labbè leaves out this corruption .

But that which hath occasioned the greatest Controversie , is the twenty eighth Canon , wherein this Council confirms the Decrees of the Fathers , and the second Council of Constantinoples Canon about the Priviledges of that See . For as the Fathers had given the See of Rome its priviledges , because it was the Imperial City , for the same reason the second General Council gave like honour to the See of Constantinople ; and would have it also even in Ecclesiastical Affairs , to be advanced to the second place : And they order that the Bishop of Constantinople should ordain and have a Jurisdiction over all the Metropolitans of the Dioceses of Pontus , Asia and Thrace t t Act. 15. Bin. pag. 330. Lab. col. 769. . The Modern Romanists do all they can to suppress or baffle this Canon . The Editors put a Note before it , that it is not in their Greek Manuscripts ; but that is no wonder , since it hath been long the design of their Church to conceal this Canon ; but that such a Canon was really made at Chalcedon , is apparent , not only from the sixteenth Action , where it was read at large , and allowed by the whole Council , and confirmed by the Lay-Judges , notwithstanding the opposition of the Popes Legates ; But it is also found in all the Greek Collectors , cited in Photius his Nomo-Canon ( writ above 900 year ago ) and is also extant in that old Latin Interpreter , who put out the Canons before Dionisius exiguus ( that is , soon after the year 500 ) u u Bever . Pand. Tom. 2. annot. pag. 124. : So that there is no doubt but this Canon was really made at Chalcedon . Yet Gratian would not cite it under the name of a Canon of Chalcedon , but quotes it out of the sixth General Council , wherein there are almost the same words ; but his old Editions ( which were in use while the Roman Primacy was setting up ) had grosly corrupted the main words of it , and instead of the affirmative etiam in rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus , ac illam extolli , — &c. it was in him non tamen in rebus Ecclesiasticis magnificetur , ut illa w w Vid. Gratian . Decret. par. 1. dist. 22. c. 6. in not . , which quite alters the sense , and makes it seem as if the Council had not spoken of any Ecclesiastical Priviledges ; whereas they speak of no other but such . Now this was so apparent a falsification , that the later Copies of Gratian have mended it , and made it nec non x x Edit. in Octav. Francof . 1585. : But this was not till that Church had seen Constantinople under the Turkish Yoke , and in no capacity to vye with her .

In the Sixteenth Action the Popes Legates complain to the Judges , before all the Council , That this Canon was made after their departure , and irregularly ; and desire it may be read : They were answered by the Arch-Deacon of Constantinople , that it was customary in General Councils to treat of Discipline after matters of Faith ; that they told the Popes Legates this , and desired their concurrence as to what should be done for the Church of Constantinople ; but they refused , saying they had other Orders ; upon this they acquainted the Judges , and they commanded the Council to proceed ; and so they did , nothing being done fraudulently , but all publickly and canonically ; upon this the Canon aforesaid was read y y Act. 16. Bin. pag. 333. Lab. col. 792. . Then the Legates Objections were heard and answered ; First to his insinuation , that it was fraudulently obtained : The Bishops all declared , and especially those of Pontus and Asia , newly subjected to Constantinople , that they consented and subscribed to this Canon , without any circumvention or force , voluntarily and freely . Secondly , whereas the Legates pretended it was contrary to the Nicene Canons ; and cite the sixth Canon of Nice falsly , putting this forged Title ( That the Church of Rome always had the Primacy ) into the body of the Canon : The Council first discovers the fallacy by reading a true and authentick Record of that Canon , without that corrupt Addition , ( though still Baronius z z Baron . An. 451. p. 157. c. and Binius a a Bin. Annot. pag. 418. col . 2. B. Lab. col. 997. blush not to argue from this feigned Addition ) ; and then was read the Canon of the second Council at Constantinople , ( for in that Age the Popes Cause was to be judged by the Canons ) to both which this Canon of Chalcedon was thought so agreeable , that the Bishops principally concerned , declared again , they had freely subscribed it as agreeable both to the Canons and Custom . And Eusebius , Bishop of Dorylaeum , declares he read that Canon of Constantinople , here confirmed , to the Pope at Rome , and he owned it : Where by the way , Baronius egregiously prevaricates in expounding hanc regulam ( that is , this Canon of the second General Council ) of Eusebius his rule or confession of Faith b b Baron . An. 451. pag. 126. Bin. pag. 342. Lab. col. 816. , quite contrary to the plain sense of the Bishop here . To proceed , whereas the Legates objected Thirdly , That the Bishops of Constantinople had not formerly used the Rights now conferred on them ; the contrary is manifest , both as to precedence , since all the Acts of this Council shew ; that Anatolius sate and spoke in the second place next to the Popes Legates ; and they had said in the first Act , that his due was the second place c c Act. 1. Bin. pag. 50. Lab. col. 115. . And as to Jurisdiction , the very Bishops of these Provinces do in these Acts , declare the Patriarchs of Constantinople had used it in their Countries and Dioceses for many years : Upon which the Judges pronounce the Sentence , and give the second place to Constantinople , with the Patriarchal Jurisdiction over those Provinces named in the Canon , to which the whole Council consents , except the Popes Legate , who entred his Protestation against it ; but still the Bishops stood firm to the Canon , and the Judges declare it valid , with which this General Council is concluded . Baronius thinks the final Acclamations are wanting d d Baron . An. 451. pag. 158. ; if they be so , we may easily guess who rased them out ; even that Church which then , and since hath opposed this Canon , and would conceal that General Consent by which it passed . But the last words are plain enough , where the Judges say , The whole Synod hath confirmed it e e Act. 16. Bin. pag. 344. Lab. col. 820. , even though the Legates did dissent . I shall conclude this History of Fact , when I have noted two Corruptions in favour of the Roman Church , which are evident in this last Act. First , The Latin Version affirms the Judges said , Rome truly , by the Canons had all the Primacy , omnem Primatum ; but the Greek is , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the Primacy before all others f f Ib. Bin. pag. 343. Lab. col. 817. , which is not a Supremacy over all other Bishops , but the first place among them . Again , the Legates in the Latin Copy say , The Apostolical See ought not to be humbled in our presence ; but the Greek is quite different , that is , the Apostolical Throne commanded that all things should be done in our presence g g Id. ibid. : But he who made the alteration was one who dream'd that this Canon was to humble Rome , whereas it takes not away the first place from the Pope , only gives the second equal Priviledges within its own bounds to Constantinople .

§ . 4. We shall now proceed to the third part concerning what was done after the Council , and there will shew that this Canon was valid , notwithstanding the dissent of the Popes Legates , and Leo's furious endeavours to annull it .

The first thing , after the Councils speech to the Emperor , in the old Collectors of Councils , was the Imperial Edicts , by which the Decrees were confirmed ; but these late Editors have removed these into the third place h h Bin. par. 3. num. 3 , & 4. pag. 352 , &c. Lab. pag. 840. : And first set down a pretended Letter from the Council to the Pope , which is done only to impose upon unwary Readers , and make them think it was not the Emperor , but the Pope who had the power of confirming the Acts. But as to the Epistle it self , it was dated in the end of March , four Months after the Council was separated ; and ( if it be not a Forgery , as some vehemently suspect , on the account of a foolish and improbable story in it of Euphemia's dead body confirming the true Faith by a Miracle ) it was writ not by the General Council , but by Anatolius , after he had heard of the Popes dislike of the twenty eighth Canon ; and therefore he doth not desire his consent to any other thing , but only labours to gain his assent to this Cannon i i Par. 3. num. 2. Bin. pag. 350. Lab. col. 833. . So that Baronius falsly argues from hence , it was the custom to send the Decrees of General Councils to Rome , to be confirmed by the Popes Authority k k Baron . An. 451. pag. 159. : For this Letter was not writ by a General Council , nor doth it desire a confirmation of any thing but one Canon , which stood firm notwithstanding the Pope always disallowed it : I only note that where the original is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , that is , taking his wonted care , the Latin reads consuete gubernando : As if the Pope had by custom governed all Churches as far as Constantinople l l Ibid. Bin. pag. 351. Lab. col. 837. . I observe also , that Binius leaves out the date of this Epistle to the Pope , which is later in time than either of the Imperial Edicts ; hoping by that means the cheat of placing it before those Edicts would be undiscovered , and that easie People might judge it a formal Letter writ while the Council was sitting , to Petition the Pope to confirm all they had done . I shall not insist upon any more particulars , but smile at Baronius , who for a few Complements , that the writer of this Letter gives the Pope , draws a serious Argument for the Supremacy , and would have all Bishops , even in a General Council , to be Sons to their Holy Father the Pope m m Baron . An. 451. pag. 159. . To proceed , the Edicts of the Emperor are dated , one in February , and the other in March , and they do effectually confirm the Acts of the Council , and ordain penalties on such as oppose the definitions of the Synod n n Par. 3. num. 3 & 4. Bin. pag. 352. Lab. col. 840. . After this follow three Letters of Pope Leo , dated all of one day , directed to Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople , and to the Emperor and Empress Marcianus and Pulcheria o o Ibid. num. 5 , 6 , 7. Bin. pag. 354 , &c. Lab. col. 844. , in all which he shews his consent to the other things done at Chalcedon ; but argues and exclaims against the 28th Canon , saying in his Letter to Pulcheria , that by the Authority of Peter he utterly makes it void . But all this spoils the Cause ; for notwithstanding all his huffing , this Canon did remain in Force ; for Liberatus , who writ in the next Century , saith , The Judges and all the Bishops did not value the Legates protestation ; and though the Apostolical See still oppose it , this which was confirmed by the Synod , by the Emperors , Patronage remains even till now p p Liberat. Brev. cap. 13. Bin. Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 186. ; and Almain of later times affirms , the Constitution of the Council prevailed over the protestations of Leo against it : For the Canons of general Councils do prevail over the opposite Decrees of Popes q q Almain . de Eccles. Author . cap. 7. . And the History of following times doth clearly shew , that the Bishop of Constantinople was ever after this reckoned the second Patriarch , and took his place accordingly in succeeding Councils , and retained the jurisdiction over those Provinces which this Canon gives him : Wherefore it is very weak in Baronius , from some bold passages in Leo's Letters to draw this consequence , that it is clearly in the sole power of the Pope to make void , what 630 Bishops in Council , the Emperor and Senate had agreed on and confirmed r r Baron . An. 452. pag. 166. . For the contrary is clear as the Sun , that the Legates contradiction there , and the Popes ranting afterwards , for all his pretended Authority of St. Peter , did not signify any thing towards a real annulling this Canon ; and the more he strove to do it , the more he shewed his Pride to be above his Power : And indeed General Councils were needless , precarious and insignificant , if any one Bishop were not to be concluded by the major vote , or had a negative voice there . But because the Pope argues as well as condemns , let us hear his reasons against this Canon : First , He every where urges , it is contrary to the Nicene Canon : But this is false ; he and his Legates indeed pretend this , but the Nicene Canon was read over in open Council , and all of them unanimously agreed , it did no way contradict it : The Council of Nice declared those Patriarchates , which Custom had then setled , and ( since after that time Constantinople came to be the Imperial City , ) the second General Council , and this at Chalcedon had as good right to declare Constantinople a Patriarchate , as the first at Nice had to declare others ; and since Precedency was purely of Ecclesiastical Institution , and given ( as this Canon saith , ) on consideration of the honours of the Cities , when the Emperors had made this City equal to old Rome , as to the Civil State , the Council might allot it a suitable precedence in the Church , which was a perfecting of the Nicene Canon , and a proceeding upon the same reason ; but no contradiction to it . Secondly , Leo argues , that this was a prejudice to the two Sees of Alexandria and Antioch , which were elder Patriarchates , and so ought to preceed Constantinople : I reply , Maximus Bishop of Antioch did not think this Canon any injury to him , for he is the second who subscribed it , and all-along in the several Sessions Anatolius sat and spoke before him : And though Leo stood nicely upon his points in these matters , we do not find other Bishops were of that temper ; they freely submitted to the Bishop of the imperial City , especially since he only had a place before them , but no Authority over any other Patriarch : So that Leo need not make any objections for them , who are not found to complain , or to have thought themselves injured . I shall not insist upon Leo's insinuation , that this Canon was procured fraudulently , and that Anatolius his Pride made him seek it , and strive to impose upon the Council : For every body sees the whole Council clears him of this ; and 't is plain , Leo was far prouder than Anatolius ; he scorned a Second , and feared in time he might prove an Equal : But Anatolius only got that place confirmed to him in this Council , which he and his predecessors had hold long before : I might add here the elaborate Arguments of Baranius and Binius ; but fearing I have been already too tedious , I shall refer the Reader to Richerius ( who discovers all their Fallacies s s Richer . Hist. Concil. gen. Tom. 1. cap. 8. §. 44. ; ) and make some observations on the rest of these Letters after the Council . In an Epistle of the Emperors to the Monks of Alexandria , who disliked the Council of Chalcedon , he recommends its definitions , as agreeing to the Faith of Athanasius , Theophilus and Cyril , former Bishops of Alexandria t t Par. 3. num. 8. Bin. pag. 356 Lab. col. 849. , which it seems was more considerable to them , than the Faith of Leo , in whom that Age knew of no Infallibility . Again , it is a good Rule in an Epistle of Leo's , That none should seek his own advancement by the diminution of another u u Ibid. num. 76. Bin. pag. 369. Lab. col. 882. , which had he and his Successors observed they would not have degraded all the other Patriarchs to set themselves up as supreme over them all . There may be some suspicion , whether that Epistle of Leo to Maximus Bishop of Antioch be genuin ; however there is a very improbable story in it , viz. That Juvenalis of Jerusalem had sought to get the jurisdiction of all Palestina in the famous General Council of Ephesus , and that Cyril had writ to Leo to joyn with him in opposing that design ; whereas that Council of Ephesus was held nine years before Leo was Pope w w Ibid. num. 17. Bin. pag. 370. Lab. col. 884. ; and therefore Leo could not be applied to , as to any thing agitated in that Council : After this follows a multitude of Epistles , in answer to the complaints of the Aegyptian Bishops , who adhered to this Council of Chalcedon , and the Emperor Leo's Order to all Bishops , to give the Sense of every Provincial Church , concerning this General Council which some heretical Monks had questioned : For this Emperor prudently avoided the charge and trouble of another General Council , appointing the Metropolitans to call their own Bishops together at home , and to send him their Opinion of this Council of Chalcedon ; which was universally owned by all in their several Letters , to have been an Orthodox Council , sufficiently approved and confirmed : Now had the Pope then been infallible , or thought to be so , it had been sufficient to write to him alone , and he could have told the Emperor the Sense of the Catholick Church ; but he was only writ to as other Bishops were , to declare his own Opinion : So that in this proceeding there are no marks of his Supremacy ; for the other Bishops confirm the Faith decreed in this Council as well as the Pope , nor did his ratifying it make it needless for the Emperor to require the sentiments of others .

§ . 5. We have no more to add to this , but only to make a few brief Remarks upon such passages in Binius's Notes upon this Council , as have not yet come under our consideration . The Miracle of Euphemia the Martyrs taking the Orthodox Confession of Faith into her Hand ( so long after her Death and Burial ) and casting away that which was Heretical , is only hinted at in that suspicious Epistle from the Council x x Par. 3. num. 2. Bin. pag. 351 Lab. col. 836. : But the Notes and Baronius cite , for the formal story , no Author elder than Metaphrastes , who lived above 450 years after ; and if we consider how he and the later Writers , who mention it , vary and contradict one another in the time and manner of this pretended Miracle y y Vid. Bin. not . P. 410. Lab. col. 983. , we shall easily discern the whole Story to be a Fiction . A little after the Notes say , that they highly injure this Holy Council , who say the Epistle of Ibas , which is Heretical , and contains the praises of Hereticks , and the condemnation of the Orthodox , was received and approved by the Fathers at Chalcedon ; for those who say so joyn with the Nestorians z z Bin. not . p. 411. col . 1. Lab. col. 984. . But alass it proves very unluckily , that it was Pope Vigilius who said this , and who was condemned for an Heretick for this and other things of like nature , by the fifth General Council a a Crakenthrop . Vigil . Dormit . chap. 10. p. 107. ; and Binius knew this well enough , but because it was a Friend , he conceals his Name . Again , he tells us of one Julianus , Bishop of Coos , that he was the Popes Legate b b Not. Bin. p. 411. col . 2. Lab. ut supr. , and so he is called indeed in the Subscriptions sometimes ; but let it be noted , that the Pope doth not name this Julianus in his Letter to the Council among his Legates c c Par. 1. num. 40. Bin. p. 31. Lab. col. 70. ; but Paschasinus , Lucentius and Boniface with one Basilius are there said to be his Legates : And yet this Basilius never appeared in the Council , which makes a very Learned Man conjecture , that the Fathers at Chalcedon rejected two of those whom the Pope had nominated for Legates , viz. this Basilius and Julianus , the former not being admitted into the Council , and the later having no other place than what his own See gave him ; so that Baronius his observation concerning this Julianus his speaking Latin , as the dignity of the Roman See required , will not prove him properly a Legate , or if it do d d Baron . An. 451. p. 143. , then the Council placed the Popes Legates as they pleased . Moreover , the Notes call the excommunicating of the Pope by Dioscorus , scelus inauditum , an unheard-of-wickedness ; and a little after they say , That Dioscorus was the first that ever was known to excommunicate the Pope , or had committed this unheard-of-wickedness e e Bin. not . p. 412. col . 1. C. & col . 2. D. . But why all this ? Doth the Council say such a Fact was never attempted nor heard of before ? No , that is their addition , for we have heard of Asian and African Bishops , who took themselves to have as much Power to excommunicate Victor and Stephen , Bishops of Rome , as they had to Excommunicate them . And we have heard of Liberius and Foelix , whose Communion was renounced by the Orthodox ; and therefore Dioscorus's fault was his excommunicating an Orthodox Patriarch in a pack'd , private , heretical Synod , not because this Patriarch was Bishop of Rome ; for had Leo deserved this Sentence by holding Heresie , no doubt a greater Council would afterward have ratified it , and joyned with Dioscorus . In the account which the Notes give of the third Session , we are told that Dioscorus was accused for wasting the Goods left to the Poor , and Pious Uses , by a Noble Lady deceased , so that no Incense could be offered for her Soul . And Binius and Baronius hence infer that they used then to pray for the Dead f f Bin. not . p. 412. col . 2. E. Lab. col. 986. Baron . An. 451. p. 144. . But if we look into the Council , this will appear an invention of their own ; for there is no mention of praying for that Ladies Soul , or offering in co●●e for it to God ; but only that Dioscorus by spending 〈◊〉 Gifts riotously , had ( as much as in him lay ) hindred the offering a sweet Savour to God out of her oblation g g Act. 3. Bin. p. 183. Lab. col. 401. . Now whether this sweet Savour be meant literally of Incense , then used in Christian Churches , or allegorically of Alms , ( so called Philip. iv . 18. ) yet still there is not the least intimation that either of these were offered for the Lady or her Soul , or any Prayers made for her after her Decease . Yet this false Inference is nauseously repeated again afterwards h h Bin. not . p. 417. col . 1. D. Lab. col. 994. : In which last place Binius saith , Dioscorus his with holding the Wheat which the Emperor gave to the Churches of Lybia , so that the terrible and unbloody Sacrifice could not be offered there , is a clear Testimony for the Mass i i Bin. & Lab. ibid. . Whereas it is only an evidence , that the Eucharist was made of Wheat , and that they received a large Morsel ( as we Protestants do ) of the Holy Bread ; and when it is called an unbloody Sacrifice , I think that to be a Testimony , they did not believe the natural and true Blood of Christ was there by Transubstantiation . It is also very false to say , That after the Cause of Sabinianus , Act. 14. the Council was ended , the Assembly dissolved , when the Legates and Judges went out , and that the Eastern Bishops staid behind clandestinly k k Bin. not . p. 415. col . 1. Lab. col. 991. ; In which Words there are more falshoods than Lines . For if the Council was ended , how came the whole Council to meet again without a new Summons , the very next day ? Again , the Legates went out indeed , but it was after the Judges , not before them , as the Notes insinuate ; and the Judges went out because the Causes were all heard , and only the Canons to be treated of ; but before they went they ordered the Bishops to make some Canons : So that to say the Council was ended , and the Synod dissolved because none but the Bishops staid , is ridiculous , and contradicts his Note upon the third Session , where he makes it a most clear evidence of a General Council , when the Bishops meet without Lay Judges : If he say the Popes Legates did not stay ; I reply , they were desired to stay , and their peevish absence could not hinder the Councils proceedings , no more than Dioscorus his absenting ; and the Acts were next day approved as good , though done without them ; and there it was also proved , that the Council did not act clandestinly ; yea , it is very absurd to say the going out of three Men from 627 who staid behind , could make the Synod which remained , to be a Clandestine Assembly : So that we may wonder at the boldness of these Editors , who in spite to the 28th Canon upon false grounds condemn those Actions which were examined , justified and approved by this whole General Council . We have in the next place an old Inscription , pretended to have been made in a Chappel built by Hilary , the Legate of Pope Leo , after his wondrous escape from the Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus , in these words , To his Deliverer St. John the Evangelist , Hilary , the Bishop and Servant of Christ l l Bin. not . p. 415. col . 2. Lab. col. 992. Baron . An. 449. p. 96. : Which Inscription gives Baronius and the Notes occasion to affirm , that he had prayed and made Vows to St. John for his Deliverance . But I see no reason to believe this Inscription to be so ancient as the time of this Hilary ( Leo's Successor An. 461. ) . For in his Letter extant in the Council , he relates the Story of his flight , but-mentions no Saint at all , only saith , he trusted in the grace of Christ m m Par. 1. num. 24. Bin. p. 23. Lab. col. 52. . And this Style which is so like the Pagan Vows to their little Deities , was above the Infant Superstition of that Age ; so that besides the improbability of an Inscription continuing legible for near twelve hundred years ; none who knows the time of Hilary can believe the invocation of Saints was so far advanced , for a Man to forget God and Jesus Christ the only Deliverers of their Servants , and publickly , yea blasphemously to ascribe his deliverance to a Creature , Rom. i. 25. Wherefore we conclude this Inscription was writ by some later Hand in times of gross Idolatry and Ignorance ; and that this which they call an Egregious Monument of Antiquity , and an Argument for Invocation of Saints , is nothing else but an Egregious Imposture , and an Argument to prove the Fraud of those who set up false Doctrines by feigned Antiquity . 'T is true in the 11th Action , when Stephen , whom Flavian had condemned in his life-time , was deposed by the Council after his death , some of the Bishops cried out , Flavian lives after his death , the Martyr hath prayed for us n n Act. 11. Bin. p. 304. Lab. col. 697. ; but this is far short of the aforesaid Inscription , for they neither vow nor pray to the Martyr ; only since his Sentence was agreed to be just after his death , they Rhetorically say this seemed as if Flavianus had prayed for them * * Vide ap. D. Crakenth . in Spalat. c. 59. p. 383. : Yet this ( if it be genuine ) is the greatest step toward Invocation of Saints that I have seen in any Writing of this Age ; though it be no more than a Flourish , proceeding from an excess of Admiration of Flavianus , so lately martyred by Dioscorus , the Mortal Enemy of this Council , Concerning which Dioscorus ( for likeness of the Subject ) I observe the Notes say , the Aegyptians gave him ( oh horrible ) Divine Honours , and Religious Worship after his Death o o Bin. not . p. 419. col . 1. Lab. col. 998. ; which means no more , as Baronius ( the Author of the Story ) saith , but that they worshipped him as a Saint , and gave him such Religious Worship as they give to Saints p p Baron . An. 452. p. 168. . Now the wary Romanists will not say these are Divine Honours , much less were they such Honours , as were paid to any Saints in this Age , or some that followed : But when Modern Writers speak of Ancient Times , they often speak in Modern Phrases ; and so Binius took it to be the same thing to honour Dioscorus as a Saint , and to give him Religious Worship , because they at Rome now give Religious Worship to those they Canonize .

And this may suffice for this famous Council , wherein Leo ( being all along Orthodox , while the Patriarchs of most other great Sees had been either faulty or suspected ) had the greatest advantage imaginable to carry on his great Design of setting up for the Supremacy ; and though by this accident , which he and his Legates improved , higher Titles are given him , than to any of his Predecessors or Successors for some Ages in any Council ; yet if the Forgeries and Corruptions be abated , and the Fallacious Notes well understood , there is no ground from any thing here said or done , to think the Fathers at Chalcedon took this Pope for the sole , supreme and visible Head of the Catholick Church .

An Appendix concerning Baronius's Annals .

§ . 1. THIS Century proving so full of various observations as to swell beyond our expectations , we must here divert a-while , to view the Errors in Barvnius , lest the deferring these Observations to the last , should make the Reader forget the Series of affairs already past , by laying these matters too far from the History of that time to which these Notes belong ; and for brevity sake , as well as for the clearer seeing into this Authors Fallacies , we will follow our former Method .

And first we will observe , that when he would set up any Doctrines , or justifie any Practices of the Modern Corrupt Roman Church , he generally cites spurious Authors , or such as writ so long after this time , that their Testimony is justly suspected , since no Authors of this Age do mention any such thing .

The Miracle of Julia , a Manichean Heretick Woman , struck dead by Porphyrius , Bishop of Gaza , when he could not convert her by Arguments , is taken out of a Latin Copy ascribed to one Mark , a Deacon of Gaza , very improbably ; but the stress of the Evidence lies upon the Credit of Metaphrastes , Lipoman and Surius the Collectors of Legends , who trade in few others but spurious Authors q q Baron . An. 403. pag. 179. . It were to be wished we had some better evidence of St. Ambrose's appearing after his death , and promising Victory over the Goths , than a Womans Testimony : For both Orosius and St. Augustin , who write of that Victory , ascribe it wholly to the Power of God , and mention no Saint concerned therein . And Baronius cites both these , as well as the credulous Paulinus , who for advancing the credit of St. Ambrose , records an Old-Wives Tale , not supported by any credible evidence r r Baron . An. 406. p. 238. I wish he had remembred here his own words , Non enim indigent Sancti nostris illustrari mendaciis , Ibid. p. 262. . The ridiculous story of St. Paul's appearing to St. Chrysostom , who is pretended to have had the Picture of St. Paul in his Study , and to have discoursed with the sensless Image , is not proved by any Author near that Age , but by Leo the Philosopher and Emperor , who lived 500 year after , and writ a very Fabulous History of St. Chrysostom's Life ; and by a spurious Tract of Damascens , who lived 450 year after Chrysostom's Death s s Baron . An. 407. p. 256. . Yet upon these false Legends the Annalist triumphs over those who oppose Image-worship . Like to this , is that fabulous Story of Theophilus , Bishop of Alexandria , not being able to die in peace till the Image of St. Chysostom was brought to him , and he had adored it t t Baron . An. 412. p. 345. ; which he hath no other Authority for , than the aforesaid spurious Book ascribed to a late Author Damascen ; for the Writers of this Age mention no such thing : And there can be no doubt but the Relation is false , because St. Cyril , Theophilus his Nephew and Successor continued for some time to have as ill an opinion of St. Chrysostom , as his Uncle had to his last breath , as his Letter to Atticus ( in Baronius ) u u Id. ibid. p. 348. shews : And therefore there is a Story invented of a Vision appearing to St. Cyril , by which he was terrified into a good opinion of St. Chrysostom : But though the Quarrel he had at first to his memory be real , this Apparition is feigned , and proved by no elder nor better Authors w w Id. ibid. p. 351. than Nicetus and Nicephorus . Another Forgery of St. Cyril's removing the Relicts of St. Mark , and other Saints into a Church , newly built in place of an Idol-temple , and thereby clearing it from Evil Spirits , hath no better Authority than certain Legends read in that woful Council of Nice , which set up Image-worship 300 year after this Age x x Baron . An. 414. p. 365. . The Revelation of the Relicks of St. Stephen , pretended to be writ by Lucian , is transcribed by the Annalist , but it contains many improbable lies , and frivolous impertinencies , such as Gamaliel ( the Master of St. Paul ) being a Priest , and that St. Stephen's body was exposed to Wild Beasts by the command of Wicked Princes , and that the way to engage St. Stephen , Gamaliel and the rest to interceed for them , was to build a Chappel over their Relicks , with many more absurd passages : So that indeed it is fitter to be derided , or left to the Moths and Batts , than to stand in a Church History (y) . He cites for this one of St. Augustin's Sermons (z) Baron . An. 415. pag. 367. de diversis ; but it is supposititious , and therefore can be no evidence for this Fable z z Serm. 51. vid. Rivet . censur . lib. 4. cap. 16. : And it is a mighty prejudice to the whole Relation , that St. Hierom , who lived at Bethlehem at this very time , doth not confirm it , no not in his fierce discourse against the mistaken Opinion of Vigilantius , who ( as he thought ) denied even common respect to be shewed to the Bones of Martyrs : And it is like Sozomen did not like the story , because he ends his History with a promise to give an Account of the invention of these Relicks of St. Stephen , but he omits it a a Sozom. Hist. lib. 9. cap. 17. ; Though he writes out another Legend there of the finding the Body of Zechary the Prophet , of which he brings no other proof , but that he had been told this Story b b Baron . An. 415. pag. 382. . But it is very unlikely , that the Jews should have no regard to the Bodies of their own Prophets , nor know of any vertue in them , and yet after so many hundred years , the Christians should find such power in their supposed Dust ; And it is one of the greatest Blots upon the latter end of this Century , that their Superstition made them too credulous and apt to be imposed on with Fables of this kind , in which there is scarce any verisimilitude , or shadow of probability : Which led the following Ages into greater Errors , and had worse effects than were foreseen by those easie and well-meaning writers , who hastily took up these false reports : Which Note I am obliged to insert here , to caution the Reader against divers relations of Miracles in Baronius about this time , for some of which he cites Authors , who are in other things credible enough c c Vid. Baron . An. 416. pag. 390 & alib . passim . . To proceed , it is no great credit for the Pope , that he and the Western Bishops mistook the time of Easter a whole Month , and were reproved by a miraculous appearance of Water in the Font on the right day of Easter , if the story be true d d An. 417. pag. 406. : However to confirm this relation , Baronius hath put together a great many such like Miracles , but writ by later Authors , ( Cassiodorus An. 514. Gregory Turonensis An. 590. Sophronius An. 630. ) when all Men doted on these reports : But it is a little hard , that he should charge the Reformed Christians with being mad , for not believing these suspicious relations , and accuse them with deriding the consecration of baptismal Water e e Baron . An. 417 pag. 407. ; which is a known practice in all regular Protestant Churches . A litle after he would prove the antiquity of the Mass by a spurious Sermon , faslly ascribed to St. Augustin , viz. de temp. Ser. 251. f f Baron . An. 418. pag. 418. vid. Rivet . censur . lib. 4. c. 16. : And he transcribes a suspicious Epistle full of improbable Stories for nine pages together , about the Miracles wrought by St. Stevens Relicks , which Epistle he would prove by another Tract equally fabulous , which some say , was writ by Evodius an African Bishop ; others think it was only dedicated to him , in which are Domnus and Domna ( after the Gallican Fashion in later Ages ) for Dominus and Domina : But the judicious Reader who compares these Legends with other writings of this learned Age , will easily discern both these Tracts to be Forgeries of the modern superstitious Times g g Baron . An. 418. pag. 419. ad 428. collat. com Baron . An. 416. pag. 390. & Coci censur . pag. 205. : So that perhaps one Miracle-monger made them both . And Baronius had justified neither of them , if he had remembred what himself says of a spurious Tract of the Acts of St. Hierom , viz. That the candor of Ecclesiastical truth , and the modesty of Christian sincerity , abhors always that which is feigned , rejects and accurses all that is spurious ; The true Faith always bitterly hating and severely punishing every lye with the Author of it h h Baron . An. 420. pag. 473. : But his practice is every where contrary to this profession . And soon after he cites the Lives of the Fathers , under Theodoret's name , to prove the efficacy of St. John Baptist's prayers , as to the Conversion of the Marcionites , whereas the Epistle of Theodoret there cited , ascribes it to the divine ayd i i Baron . An. 424. pag. 487. . And this fabulous Book of the Lives of the Fathers is despicable for its gross absurdities , and can be none of Theodorets , because it contains many Miracles , that Simeon Stylites wrought after his death ; and Baronius himself owns , That Theodoret dyed seven year before this Simeon k k Baron . An. 453. & An. 460. vid. Ceci censuram . pag. 207. : Yet this is the Man who is so severe an Enemy to all feigned Tracts , who again , cites the Rules for conjugal Chastity as prescribed by St. Augustin , but finds them only in a forged Sermon , ( de Temp. pag. 244. falsly ascribed to that modest Father l l Baron . An. 428. pag 508. ; Wherein there is so much Obscenity , as cannot be supposed to proceed out of St. Augustin's mouth in publick , and such as is hardly fit for Christian Ears : besides many things that would be hissed at in any sober Auditory m m Vid. Coci censur . pag. 198. . Again , he cites Sophronius his Pratum spirituale , as a Book of good credit , and relating an Apparition of the Blessed Virgin as it truly happened n n Baron . An. 429. pag. 524. : Whereas both Possevine and Baronius himself confess this Book to be full of Fables , and of no credit o o Vid Coci censur . pag. 228. ; and the Author of it lived above 200 year after , in a credulous and ignorant , as well as a superstitious Age , whose name was not Sophronius , but Joannes Moschus : Upon whose credit he would not have relied so much , had he observed a rule of his own , That he who writes the History of his own time is of greater Authority , than he who writes after many Ages p p Baron . An. 431. pag. 604. ; Which Rule he breaks in the very next Page , by justifying a Legend writ by Gregory , the Author of the Dialogues , long after the year 600 , and cited by Eulogius of Corduba , An. 847. concerning Paulinus of Nola , who died An. 431. as a Writer of Paulinus own Age testifies there q q Baron . ibid. pag. 605. : Whereas if this Fable were true , ( as those late Writers relate it ) Paulinus must be alive 45 years after ; so that he credits later Writers in contradiction to those of the same Age. We have often seen modern Authors describing the holy Men of this and former Ages , with Images , Crucifixes , &c. but Constantius , who about this time writ the life of St. Germanus , mentions no Images or Crucifix among that which he left at his death , but only a Box of Relicks , the sole point wherein Superstion was advanced as yet r r Baron . An. 435. p. 652 , 654. . And whereas late Writers of the Saints Lives speak of Addresses to the Blessed Virgin , to deceased Saints , &c. this old Author mentions only Prayers to God ; for those other kind of Prayers were not used in this Age. A little after he tells more Fables about the translation of the Relicks of St. Stephen to Constantinople out of late and unfaithful Authors , such as Cedrenus , Nicephorus , Nicetus , &c. but he himself observes , that they do not agree as to the time , nor the quantity of the Relicks translated s s Baron . An. 439. p. 667. : And this disagreement should have made him suspect the whole for an Imposture . And if the Reader consider what incredible Stories are told of the Miracles wrought by the Relicks of this one Martyr , in Sardinia , Africk , Spain , Palestine and Constantinople , &c. he must believe they cut his Body into as many pieces as there were Stones thrown at him , and will wonder how the Body could become whole again , and be intirely translated out of Palestine in the year 439. What Theodoret relates of one African Virgin Captive , may be believed to be true , and that Relation hath no Miracle in it : But when Ado , of Vienna , writ the Acts of another Virgin , called Julia , captivated at the same time , he hath stuffed the Story with Miracles t t Baron . An. 440. Tom. 6. p. 6. ; and the only reason of this difference is , that this later Author writ his Martyrology , Anno 850 , that is , above 400 year after , when Legends grew to be more in Fashion . The Annalist takes great pains to prove certain Homilies ( which some ascribe to Eusebius Emissenus , others to Faustus Rhegiensis , others to Caesarius of Arles ) to be the work of Eucherius , Bishop of Lyons ; but as the Author is uncertain , the matter of them is justly to be condemned , being full of Superstitions , and some that came not in till the corrupter and later Ages u u Baron . An. 441. p. 8. . However , Baronius was obliged to get these Homilies ascribed to some Writer of good repute , since many of the evil Practices and Errors of their Church w w Vid. Coci censur p. 117 , 118. Rivet . Crit. Sacr. lib. 4. c. 20. , which cannot be justified by known and genuine Authors , are defended by such obscure Tracts as this . Again , we have a very absurd Story of St. Cyril's convincing a Monk that Melchisedech was not the Son of God , by a Revelation made to the Monk himself , who had fallen into that Error x x Baron . An. 444. p. 19. : But that Fable of Cyril's being a Monk upon Mount Carmel , is so gross , that he rejects it with this Note , That a vehement desire to seem of Antient Extraction , makes Men sometimes to dote y y Id. ibid. p. 21. ; which Remark is most true of almost all the Monastick Orders of the Roman Church ; for Aventinus , an excellent Historian , of their own Communion , affirms , he had discovered the Monks were wont to delight the Minds of the vile Populace with feigned Tales , invented for gain , to make the Original of their Temples more Noble and August z z Aventin . Annal. lib. 3. p. 225. . He brings in a ridiculous Story of an Image of the Blessed Virgin , found in a Cypress Tree , and of a Church built in the place by one Cyrus , Bishop of Smirna ; but the credit of this relies only upon Nicephorus , a modern and fabulous Author . And at the same place he brings in a Fiction of an Image of our Saviour , wounded by a Jew , but he knows not when this matter hapned ; he thinks not till after the second Nicene Council ; but why then doth he mention it in this Age ? No doubt to abuse his Reader into a belief that Images were then in use . But the Story it self is all over Legend , and not more Authentick for being recorded in their publick Monuments , and read in some Churches in the corrupt Ages a a Baron . An. 446. p. 39. , in which there are the grossest Romances imaginable . A little after he taxeth Nicephorus for unfaithfulness and great mistakes in his Relations ; yet immediately he cites him as good evidence for Relicks belonging to the Blessed Virgin b b Baron . An. 450. p. 117. . In the next year we have two ridiculous Stories , the one of St. Stephens praying to St. Peter and St. Paul to spare his Chappel , when Mets was sack'd and burn'd by the Hunns c c Id. An 451. p. 134. ; the other of a Drunken Man , shut up all Night in St. Peter's Church at Rome , and heard St. Peter and St. Paul talking together : But telling their Discourse next morning , he was struck blind d d Id. ibid. p. 137. . Upon which last Miracle , Baronius gathers , that blind Men may see great benefits are received by the intercession of Saints . But I should rather think , he was blind indeed that could not discern these to be meer Fables ; and truly the only Author he cites for them is Gregory Turonensis , who lived 150 year after , and is full of these Fictions , contradicting even Salvian , who lived in that Country at this very time . But it is observable , that the Writers of the Lives of St. Lupus and Anianus ( cited in this very place ) do mention these Holy Men as praying only to God in these Calamities e e Id. ibid. p. 135 , 136 , 137. : For the direct invocation of Saints was not used , no not when those Lives were written . Again , after the Council of Chalcedon had been confirmed by the most Legal and Authentick ways , it is very ridiculous in this great Annalist to cite so many frivolous Stories out of Legends , how some Ignorant and Enthusiastical Monks confirmed it , or were convinced by Miracles , that it was a Genuine and Orthodox Council f f Baron . ibid. p. 160 , 161 , &c. : For he cites no better Author than Surius for these Fables , yet relates them with great confidence ; but this Cause needs no such evidence .

§ . 2. Secondly , We will note some passages in genuine Authors , which he hath corrupted to serve a turn : He that reads Baronius his Note in the year 402. that it was an Ancient Custom to paint the Saints in the Churches , and that they use to worship them , with kindling Lamps before them g g Baron . An. 402. p. 163. , would imagine this Superstition was ancient in the beginning of the Fifth Century ; whereas the Author he cites for this is Venantius Fortunatus , who lived till the year 600. that is , 200 year after , and though he speak of a Picture drawn on a Wall , and a Lamp beside it , doth not mention that as any worship to the Picture , that is Baronius's own addition . Again , when he cites a Law of Theodosius prohibiting the Jews to burn any Cross in contempt of Christianity , he adds , that they burnt the Cross together with our Saviour crucified on it h h Baron . An. 408. p. 272. ; but that is his own invention ; the custom of making a Cross alone being indeed very ancient , but the adding the Figure of our Saviour to it , which they call properly a Crucifix , is but a late device , and seems not at all to be referred to in that Law . To proceed , he makes Synesius a notorious dissembler , when he declares he had most solemnly protested to Theophilus , who was to consecrate him Bishop of Prolemais , that he would not accept that Order , unless he might live with his Wife as before time i i Synes. epist. 105. Baron . An. 410. p. 309 , 310 , 311. . Now whoever reads that Letter may see that Synesius professes he tells truth in this relation ; yea , he solemnly calls God and Men to witness , that it is true ; he observes Truth is one of God's Attributes , and most pleasing to him : Yet Baronius will have him to use the Art of Lying , in all these protestations , because forsooth he cannot think Theophilus would ordain a Bishop , who should live with , and have Children by his Wife ; that is , he measures the Primitive Church ( in which there were divers Bishops married ) by their Modern Corrupt Roman Standard . And this sincere Father must be made to mock God , and deceive Men , and exposed as a Notorious Liar and Dissembler , rather than there should seem to be any difference between the Primitive Church and theirs in the point of the Clergies Marriage . Again , he observes out of St. Augustin k k Aug. ep. 163. Tom. 2. fol. 153. & Tom. 7. contr. Cresc . l. 3. f. 57. , that he accounted the Council of Sardica heretical , because Julius , Bishop of Rome , was condemned there ; and he infers , that whatever was said or done against the Pope was of evil Fame among the Antients l l Baron . An. 412. p. 336. : But if St. Augustin had not been misrepresented , there had been no room for this fallacious Note . St. Augustin blames this Council ( in the second place cited ) as heretical for condemning Athanasius , and doth not mention Pope Julius there at all ; and in the former place he names Athanasius first , and Julius only in the second place ; and he blames them not for condemning him as Bishop of Rome , but because he was Orthodox , as Athanasius was . Wherefore Baronius leaves out the main part of St. Augustin's Argument , only to bring in a false and flattering Inference for the Popes Supremacy . And I have observed before , he falsly gathers , that the Roman Church was the sole Standard of Catholick Communion in Cecilian's time , from a place where St. Augustin saith , Cecilian of Carthage , was a Catholick , because he was in Communion with the Roman Church , and other Lands from whence the Gospel came into Africa m m Aug. ep. 162. fol. 150. Baron . An. 412. p. 336. ; that is , he was in Communion with the Eastern as well as the Western Church . But Baronius is so dazled with Rome , that where that is found in any Sentence , he can see nothing else : And therefore when he cites this very place again a little after , he would prove that Carthage owned a right in the Roman Church to receive Appeals , and this , contrary to the express Protestation of that African Council , wherein St. Augustin was present ; and the place it self doth not mention any Appeals , and speaks of Communion with other Churches as well as Rome n n Baron . An. 419. p. 450. ; and so would equally prove a right in other Bishops as well as the Pope , to receive Appeals from Africa , if that had been spoken of there . Further , from Socrates his relation of a Bishop of Gyzicum , named by Sisinnius , Patriarch of Constantinople , but not received , by reason of their mistaking a late Law made to confirm the Priviledges of that See of Constantinople , and this in the time of a mild and quiet Bishop ; he infers , that this Patriarch challenged no right , no not in Hollospont , by the Canon of any General Council o o Baron . An. 426. p. 494. . Now his naming a Bishop for this City , shews he challenged a right , which was well known to be his due , both by the Canon of the second General Council , and by this late Law ; but a peaceable Mans receding from his right , after he hath made his claim , rather than provoke a Factious City , is no proof there was no right , as Baronius doth pretend . I observe also , that the Latin Version of an Epistle to the Council of Ephesus , hath these words , cujus Reliquias praesentes veneramini : Which is to abuse the Reader into an apprehension , that the Relicks of St. John were worshipped in that Age p p Baron . An. 531. p. 560. : But the Greek word is , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 q q Bin. Tom. 1. par. 2. p. 234. , which imports no more than that they were honoured , which is far less than that which Rome now gives even to feigned Relicks of uncertain Saints . A like Falshood about the People of Ephesus worshipping the Blessed Virgin , I noted before r r Vid. supr. p. 37. . Again , he manifestly perverts a Phrase of Theodosius , the Eastern Emperor , in his Epistle to Acacius , where he advises the Nestorians to shew themselves approved-Bishops of the Roman Religion s s Baron . An. 43● . p. 620. ; which Baronius pretends , respects the Western Church of Old Rome in Italy ; but the Emperor plainly refers to his own Empire in the East , which was then generally Orthodox , and against Nestorius : Constantinople is often called Rome , without any other addition ; and Romania , or the Roman Empire , is in many Authors of these Ages , put only for the Eastern part of it . It is also very odd , that he should cite Basil's Epistles to prove that the Roman Church was wont to send Legates to regulate Affairs in the Eastern Churches t t Baron . Tom. 6. An. 450. p. 116. : Whereas St. Basil in many Epistles grievously complains of the Pride of the West , and of their despising the Calamities of the East , not so much as giving them that Brotherly Aid , which they might expect , when they were in great distress ; but there is not one syllable of any jurisdiction which the Pope then did so much as pretend to over those Eastern Churches . Leo was the first who ventured to make any steps towards this Usurpation , an hundred years after St. Basil's time . To this device we may add his silent passing by all that makes against the Roman Church ; but being large in his Notes upon any thing which seems to make for it , How many words doth he every where use when one is described to be Orthodox , for communicating with an Orthodox Pope ? but when those are declared to be Orthodox who communicated with the Patriarchs of Constantinople , Alexandria and Antioch ( at that time differing from the Pope ) u u Baron . Tom. 5. An. 404. p. p. 202. , we have not one observation of the honour of those Sees . Thus though he cite innumerable heretical and illiterate Writings , meerly to confirm some incredible Miracle or superstitious Practice , without any Censure passed on them ; yet when he comes to mention the Imperfect work on St. Mathew , ascribed to St. Chrysostom ( which many Roman Writers highly commend , as writ by a Catholick , Antient and Learned Author ) w w Vid. Rivet . Critic . Sacr. l. 4. c. 1. p. 351. , he falls into a fit of railing against it , as Heretical , and what not , because in that Book we are told , The Scripture is the only rule by which true Christians may judge of the right Faith x x Baron . An. 407. p. 255. : Which Sentence , though it condemn the new Romish way , yet it is agreeable to the Primitive and most Orthodox Fathers , who very often say the same thing . * * An. 401. p. 137. And Baronius relates a little before , that a certain Bishop who wrought Miracles , and converted many Pagans , charged his new Converts to apply themselves diligently to read the Holy Scriptures . Moreover he brings in a Quotation out of St. Augustin , with a long Preface , because he designs to misapply it to justifie the Roman Supremacy : But the place it self plainly supposes the Western to be but one part of the Catholick Church ; only he thinks the Authority of Latin Fathers alone , and of Innocent , a Successor of the Apostles , Chief of this Western Church , might suffice his Adversary ( who was one of the Latin Church ) . And as to Innocent's Opinion he might be sure it would agree with what the African Councils had declared , and the Roman Church constantly held with other Churches y y Baron . An. 419. p. 444. ex Aug. contra Julian . l. 1. c. 4. : Where we see Innocent is only set out as the first in Order of Dignity in the Western Church , and his Opinion supposed to be right , not because of the Infallibility of his See , or any Supream Power in him to judge in matters of Faith , but because he agreed with the African and other Churches ; and now de Facto took the Orthodox Side : Wherefore when Zosimus , and other succeeding Popes favoured these Pelagians , the Dignity of his See did not secure them from the Censures of the African Fathers , as we shewed before .

§ . 3. We pass thirdly to his rare faculty of supposing things without any proof , and sometimes making inferences from his own inventions , for the advantage of Rome : So when a few persecuted Eastern Bishops of Chrysostom's party fled to the Roman Church to avoid the Storm , their own Patriarchs being all combined against them , Baronius saith , they fled to it as to their Mother , being admonished by the examples of their Predecessors : And he goes on to insinuate a very false thing , viz. That all the Bishops who were persecuted by the Arrians in Constantin' s time , in the East , fled to Rome z z Baron . An. 404. p. 207. . Whereas only some few came both then and now , and dire necessity had left them no choice , nor other refuge . Thus he resolves Ruffinus shall be a Pelagian Heretick ; and out of a Council whose Acts are not extant , and the relation of it only saith , Celestius was condemned there ; he will have Ruffinus condemned in that Council upon meer conjecture , and can no other ways prove him a Heretick , but by one Witness , even this Heretick Celestius , who being in a strait , cited Ruffinus's words , but probably very falsly a a Baron . An. 412. p. 339 , 340. ; so that one Heretick shall be sufficient evidence against a man that Baronius hates ; but many Orthodox Witnesses will not persuade him that Innocent favoured the Pelagians almost to the end of his Life . It is an odd conjecture that St. Hierom would not translate any of Theophilus his Paschal Epistles , after once he differed with Pope Innocent about restoring St. Chrysostom's name into the Dypticks b b Baron . ibid. p. 346. : For except another guess of his own , without any manner of evidence c c Idem An. 404. p. 223. , there is no appearance that ever St. Hierom was concerned for St. Chrysostom's sufferings ; and it is certain he was kind with his Mortal Enemy Theophilus in the year of Christ 404 , when he got him to be banished ; and it would be very strange that St. Hierom should refuse to translate any more of Theophilus's Epistles , on the account of a quarrel between him and Pope Innocent about restoring Chrysostom's name into the Dypticks , since the last Paschal Epistle translated by Hierom , was writ Anno 404 ; and Baronius saith , Theophilus writ every year one till Anno 412 , but Chrysostom died not till Anno 407 ; and Innocent himself did not quarrel with Theophilus till long after the year 404 : So that the Cardinal contradicts himself , meerly to support an idle conjecture , viz. That all Eminent Fathers loved and hated only those who were loved and hated by the Pope : And into what Absurdities and Contradictions this Fancy hath led him , may be seen by comparing those two places aforecited together ; and we may note , that though it be certain Theophilus died unreconciled to Chrysostom's memory , or to Innocent , yet Baronius shews he was commended as a most approved Bishop d d Baron . An. 412. p. 346. , for so it seems a man might be , though he had a difference with the Bishop of Rome . Again , it is a bare supposition , that the Priviledges of the Patriarch of Constantinople asserted in the Province of Illiricum , by a Law of Theodosius , was founded upon the false suggestions of Atticus e e Baron . An. 421. p. 475. : For the very Law it self forbids innovations , and requires the ancient Canons and Customs , thus far observed , should be in force , on which Theodosius plainly grounds the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Constantinople in this Province : So that he refers to the Canon of the Second General Council of Constantinople , and the usage ever since ; and how could this proceed from any false suggestions of Atticus ?

To proceed , Prosper relating Germanus his going into Britain , as some think , mistakes the time at least seventeen years f f Vid. Spelm. Concil. Tom. 1. p. 48. , and says nothing of St. Lupus his Companion in that Journey ; howbeit , because Prosper saith the Pope sent St. Germanus , Baronius will have him to be authentick , contrary to all other Authors g g Baron . An. 429. p. 520. , who affirm St. Germanus and Lupus were sent by a Gallican Council , to whom a Petition from the British Bishops was sent : However he affirms it for a certainty soon after h h Ibid. p. 523. , that St. Germanus was the Popes Legate into Britain , which he had but half proved before . And one Author , who speaks favourably of the Popes Authority , shall be believed against many of equal Credit who speak otherwise : I grant Prosper is a credible Writer ; only he is apt , for the credit of the Cause , always to bring in the Popes as Enemies to the Pelagians , sometimes without reason ; and Constantine , Bede with others who write of this journey into Britain , and ascribe this mission to a French Council , deserve more credit in that particular than he . A little after , upon Cyril's mentioning Nestorius's writing to the Roman Bishop , in hopes to draw him to his Opinion : Baronius supposes of his own Head , that it was an ancient use in Controversies of Faith to write to the Bishop of Rome , and that the part he chose was generally favoured ; so that if Nestorius could persuade him , the whole Catholick Church would follow his Judgment i i Baron . An. 430. p. 532. ; which is all Chimaera , for Pope Victor , Stephen and Liberius of old , Vigilius and Honorius afterward , found opposition enough ( for all the dignity of their place ) when they seemed to other Bishops to take the wrong side . From a fabulous Writer called Probus k k Vid. Ush . Antiq. Brit. c. 17. p. 426. who hath given us a Legend of St. Patrick's Life ; he not only confidently affirms that Pope Celestine sent this Patrick to convert the Irish , but infers from thence , That it was clear to all men , the Gospel was to be received from the Apostolical See for the conversion of the Pagans l l Baron . An. 431. p. 605. . Whereas it is not clear that St. Patrick was sent from Rome ; but it is clear , that other Heathen Countries have received the Gospel by the care of other Patriarchs and Eminent Bishops ; so that his Ground is but conjecture , and the Superstructure wholly vain . 'T is true indeed , that Pope Leo , to shew his Authority , desired three Bishops of Sicily to appear in his annual Roman Council once a year , and was the first Pope who put this Yoke upon them ; but how this new encroachment shews the ancient observance of holding Councils of Bishops twice a year , is very hard to conjecture m m Baron . An. Tom. 6. An. 447. p. 49. : only when a Pope alters the Fathers Customs , the Annalist will suppose he observes and confirms them : And he could see no usurpation in this Popes calling the Sicilian Bishops yearly to Rome , against the ancient Usage . But when Dioscorus of Alexandria would have encroached upon the Bishops of Syria , he blames him severely n n Baron . An. 448. pag. 54. . We shall not mention the Authority of the Writings of Athanasius , Cyril and other Eminent Bishops of other Sees , in Controversies of Faith : But it is very imposing for Baronius to suppose , The Pope presided as the Master over the whole Christian World , and out of his high Throne taught all men the Catholick Faith o o Baron . An. 449. pag 86. ; and all this only , because Leo had the good Fortune ( by his Secretary Prosper's help ) to write one Orthodox Epistle against Eutyches in a lucky time , when a Council was to be called to condemn that Heresie : As to the Author of it Eutyches , it was always a Rule in the Church to receive even the Inventors of Heresies , if they would renounce their Errors : So that for Leo to say ( in his Letter to the Council of Chalcedon ) he thought they might deal so with Eutyches , is no manner of ground for Baronius to suppose , that this was a special Favour indulged to that General Council by the Pope , contrary to Ecclesiastical Laws and Customs p p Baron . ibid. pag. 88. . For it is well known , that a General Council in that Age gave Laws to the Pope , but did not receive any from him ; and whatever Leo's Opinion might be , the Council were sole Judges of the terms on which Eutyches was to be restored ; and had he Recanted they would have received him into Communion by their own Authority , since Arius , Nestorius and Pelagius had that Favour offered them by former Councils , and Eutyches would have found the like Kindness here , if the Pope had said nothing at all of the matter : Wherefore the Annalist hath crouded many Falshoods into a few Lines only , to persuade his weak Readers , That the Pope was above a General Council . And to make him seem above all the other Patriarchs , he supposes from a Letter of Theodosius the Emperor , which he never saw , and which is not extant , That the Emperor writ to Rome about the Succession of Anatolius at Constantinople , knowing it to be the Head of all Churches q q Baron . An. 450. pag. 115. . This is a groundless Conjecture , because he doth not so much as know in what style Theodosius writ ; and it was an Ancient Custom , for to give Notice to all the absent Patriarchs , when any New one was elected , and the Patriarch Elect ( even he of Rome ) was obliged to satisfie the rest by Letters , that he held the Orthodox Faith . Certain it is that Theodosius valued not Leo much ; because he confirmed the Condemnation of Flavionus , though he knew that Pope and his Legates were of his side ; and it is plain by the best Historians that he died in this Opinion : Nor can Baronius prove , that Theodosius repented of that mistaken Judgment otherwise , than by Nioephorus ( an Author of no credit when single , ) or that he Obeyed the Pope before his death r r Baron . An. 450. pag. 117. ; for this last he can cite no Author at all , and it is not only a Conjecture of his own , but a very false one . For the last Letter that ever Theodosius writ to Valentinian , not many Months before his death s s Baron . An. 449 pag. 111. , shews how little he esteemed Leo's Request for a new General Council , and how close he stuck to Dioscorus , Leo's Enemy ; and therefore he could not write after this to Leo , as Head of the Church . His Successor indeed , Marcianus , had some reason to Caress the Pope , and therefore he writes more respectfully to him than other Emperors had used to do t t Richer . hist. Concil. gen. Tom. 1. cap. 8. pag. 363. : Yet even in that first Letter of his he must be very sagacious , who can discorn what Baronius again supposes , That Marcian turned his Eyes to the Chief visible Head of the Church , resolving to do all things by his command , or ( as he phrases it ) to be at his beck : For even in this highest strain of Complement Marcian saith no more , but that since Leo had a principal Bishoprick among the true Believers , he desires him to pray for him , that he might resolve to call a Council with Leo ' s consent , to take away all Error and settle a general Peace u u Baron . An. 450. pag. 118. . Which implies the power of calling Councils was in the Emperor , and the Popes part was only to consent as one of the Chief Bishops , who was there to meet and consult : And if Marcian had known or believed Leo to be the sole Supream Judge of all Controversies , he would not have been at the trouble of Calling a General Council , but referred all to him .

§ . 4. The rest of my Observations on Baronius shall be put in Order of Time for the better assistance of the Reader , and not under those several Heads which doth too much separate and confound things .

When S. Hierom , after three years labouring with Pope Anastasius , had at last got him and the Roman Church to condemn Ruffinus , he then at that time prudently appeals to the Roman Churches Faith for Trial , Whether he or Ruffinus were the better Catholick : But Baronius , when he hath cited some words of S. Hierom against Ruffinus to this purpose , grosly prevaricates when he infers ; You see it was an undoubted Maxim , customary in the Mouths of all the Ancients , and a necessary consequence , That if one were said to follow the Roman Faith , he must needs be a Catholick w w Baron . An. 402. pag. 156. . For if we hear one Father when he had the Pope on his side in a particular Controversie say this , This is not all the Ancients : And many of them describe themselves , as being of the Faith of Athanasius , Cyril , Flavianus , &c. or holding the Faith of the Churches of Alexandria , Antioch , Constantinople , &c. to prove themselves Catholick ; and if S. Hierom did instance now in Rome , the consequence depended on the Orthodoxness of the present Pope , not on the Infallibility of his See . And Pope Gelasius afterward confesseth , That the Roman Church in this Point was guided intirely by S. Hierom , She thought as he thought x x Baron An. 402 pag. 159. . So that to make a General conclusion from such a special Case , is very unreasonable ; and S. Hierom himself a little after is cited , declaring the Consent of many Churches is of greater Authority , than that of the Roman alone y y Id. ibid. pag. 160. . It had been well if their Roman Church had considered the peril of Idolatry , when they went about to establish the use or Images , as Baronius tells us Theodosius did , when he made a Law to prohibit any Adoration to be given to his own Statues , because such worship as exceeds the dignity of Human Nature , is to be reserved to the Divine Majesty . In the same place he relates how S. Chrysostom reproved the People for their folly at the dedication of the Empresses Statue ; because it is easie in those matters to run into the sin of Idolatry z z Baron . An. 404. pag 187. . Which Observations of his own stand on Record in these Annals , to condemn that Church which orders Veneration , and all other expressions of Reverence to be made to all sorts of Images of the Saints . Again , he exposes his dear Church in observing , That the Ancients preserved both the consecrated Elements of the Sacrament in the Church . But no sooner had he condemned us for not following this ancient Usage , but he mentions as great an Innovation in their own Church , for he owns they have forbid the preserving any thing but the species of Bread a a Baron . An. 404. pag 194. . Now I would ask , Who differ most from Antiquity , they who totally take away one part of the Sacrament from the People , and keep only the Bread to be worshipped : Or we who give both Bread and Wine to the People as they did , and provide both , newly Consecrated , for the Sick , when there is occasion , but reserve neither for Worship ? Which was the usage of the first and purest times . And why may not we forbid the needless reserving of the Sacrament in either kind , as well as they may prohibit it in one kind ? But so insatiable is his desire to extol the Roman Church , that though he cite all he can find of this sort good and bad , he wishes ( in one place ) he could find some things , which are not to be found , that he might let his style run out on so luscious a Subject b b Id. ibid. pag. 206. . We note also , that how much soever the Romanists here in the Reign of King James the Second were for Toleration , because it was their Interest , Baronius highly commends the severe Penal Laws made by Arcadius and Honorius against such as differed from the established way of Worship and profession of Faith c c Baron . An. 405. pag. 231. Vid. item An. 423. pag. 480. ; for Baronius is always a bitter Enemy to Toleration , and stiffly opposes the taking away any Penal Laws . Moreover it is observable , that though his Office be to write an History and relate Matter of Fact : When he comes to S. Hierom's Book against Vigilantius , he puts on the Character of a Disputant , and makes large digressions to the Hereticks , ( as he calls the Reformed ) to justifie such a Veneration of Relicks , and such a kind of worship of Saints , as Rome uses at this day ; which kind of Veneration and Worship S. Hierom would have condemned as well as Vigilantius d d Baron . An. 406. pag. 247 , 248 , &c. ad pag. 251. , had it been practised in that Age. He notes that upon the difference between Theophilus and the Pope about S. Chrysostom , a Council of Carthage writ to Innocent , That the Churches of Rome and Alexandria should keep that Peace mutually which the Lord enjoyned e e Baron . An. 407. pag. 253. . Which shews , those African Fathers did not think one of these Churches superior in Authority to the other ; for if so , they had no need to write to Innocent , but only to Theophilus , to submit to the Supream Bishop : For that was the only way to settle a Peace , if Innocent's Supremacy had been then allowed . And it is a vain and false Conjecture , that if Theophilus had writ any Paschal Epistles after his difference with Innocent , no Catholick would have received them f f Baron . ibid. . For divers Eminent and Orthodox Bishops writ to Theophilus , and received Letters from him after this ; yea , Synesius himself writes to him , to determine a Question by the Authority of his Apostolical Succession g g Id. pag. 262. , and he lived and died with the repute of a Catholick , though ( as I have shewed ) he never did yield to Pope Innocent in the case of S. Chrysostom . Alike groundless is his Conjecture , That Arcadius laboured to wipe out the stains he had contracted in persecuting S. Chrysostom , by translating the Relicks of the Prophet Samuel , and by going into a Martyrs Temple and there praying ( not to the Martyr , observe that , but ) to God h h Baron . ibid. pag. 261. . For if we set aside the two forged Epistles recorded by Baronius , pag. 259. there is no good Evidence that Arcadius , at the time when the aforesaid Acts were done , was convinced he had done any fault in the affair of S. Chrysostom ; wherefore he could have no design to purge himself from a Fault he did not own at that time . In the next year he spoils one Argument to prove theirs the true Church , viz. by Miracles , since he owns Atticus , Bishop of Constantinople , did work a Miracle even before he held Communion with the Roman Church i i Baron . An. 408. pag. 272. . So that if Miracles prove a true Church , then a Church that separates from the Roman Communion may be a true Church . Of which also we have another Instance soon after , where the Church of Antioch was in a difference with Rome for many years , ( Theodoret saith , 85 years , ) yet all that while she was owned by the best Catholicks for a true Church k k Baron ibid. pag. 273. . Nor do I see how that can be true which Baronius affirms , That the cause of restoring the Eastern Bishops to Communion in Chrysostom' s case , was only decided by Pope Innocent , since Alexander of Antioch did transact this affair in the East , and 24 Western Bishops subscribed with Innocent in the West , to testifie their consent to this Agreement of Alexanders l l Baron ibid. pag 274. ; yea , Thodoret ascribes this , not to the Pope alone , but to all the Bishops of the West m m Ibid p. 275. . But the Annalist will have all things done by the Pope alone , right or wrong . Poor Socrates is branded for a Novatian Heretick , because he saith , It was not the usage of the Catholick Church to persecute n n Baron . An. 410. pag. 307. . Yet the Emperor Marcian o o Concil Chalced. Bin. Tom 2. par. 1. pag. 361. , and Pope Gregory p p Greg. Mag. cp. ad Epise. Constantinop . , who were both I hope very good Catholicks , say the same thing ; and therefore we may discern Baronius his Spirit , in being so bitter against all who censure Persecuting . In the same Year we may see , that the Bishops under Theophilus Jurisdiction ( for all his quarrel at that time with the Pope ) did reserve the greater Cases to his decision q q Baron . An. 410. pag. 312. ; and yet were very good Catholicks all the while . When a Bishop pleads for Mercy to such as have principally offended the Church , those Intercessions with Pious Magistrates ought to have the force of Commands ; But to make a general Inference from hence , That Bishops ought to command things agreeable to the Christian Law to Magistrates r r Baron . An. 412. pag. 334 & 335. , is to stretch the Instance too far . But there is another obvious Note from S. Augustine's petitioning and urging Marcellinus to spare the Hereticks , and not execute the severity of the Temporal Laws upon them , which Baronius would not observe , viz. That the Primitive Bishops used their power and interest to get Hereticks spared by Secular Magistrates , whereas the Inquisitors use their power now to oblige the Lay-Magistrates to kill and destroy them . Further it is observable , that he takes upon him to interpret Gods Judgments in favour of his own Party ; and thus he expounds the Goths invading France , to be a punishment for the Heresies there broke out s s Baron . ibid. pag. 345. , which Salvian more piously makes to be a Scourge for their Immoralities . But I note , that it was but two year before that Alaricus wasted Italy , and took Rome it self ; yet Baronius could not discern any Heresies there , but his general Maxim is , That God is wont to bring destruction on those Countries where Heresies arise . Now one might observe Leo's attempts to usurp a Supremacy over all other Bishops , and the many pious Frauds used and beginning now to be countenanced at Rome , about false Relicks and feigned Miracles , were as probable occasions of the Divine Judgments in Italy , as those he assigns in France . To proceed , I cannot apprehend how Atticus could have so little Wit in his Anger against Rome , as to call Paulinus and Evagrius ( successively Bishops of Antioch ) Schismaticks , meerly for Communicating with the Roman Church , and this in a Letter to so great a Patriarch as S. Cyril t t Baron . ibid. pag. 348. , if he had known it to be then generally acknowledged ( as Baronius often pretends , ) that to be in Communion with Rome was a certain sign of a Catholick ; and to differ with it , a sure note of a Schismatick . But S. Cyril's Reproving Atticus for restoring Chrysostom's Name into the Dyptics ( which was the known desire of Pope Innocent ) shews u u Baron . ibid. pag. 350. , how little the rest of the Patriarchs valued the Judgment or the Authority of the Popes , when they supposed them to be mistaken in the Case : For none could or durst have so severely Censured the Opinion of a Person taken to be a Supream and Infallible Judge . Again , I wonder how Baronius could Record without some reflection S. Augustin's speaking of Orosius his Journey from Spain into Africa , only out of Zeal to understand the Scriptures , and his sending him to Palestine to S. Hierom on that Errand w w Baron . An. 414. pag. 363. . For according to the Cardinals Notion , he should have been more zealous for Catholick Tradition , than for Scripture , and Rome was the only place both to learn that in perfection , and by that to interpret the Scriptures unerringly ; and this was nearer to Spain than either Hippo or Bethlehem . But while he owns , that the Salvation of some , after they had been purged by the Internal Fire , was one of the Errors of Origen , and counted an Error both by Orosius and Augustine x x Baron . ibid. pag. 364. , it seems to look ill upon Purgatory , which their modern Church hath made a Catholick Truth ; but the Primitive censured it as a false Doctrine . The Reader also may note , that when he is commending Theodosius for his Piery , he magnifies him for fasting upon Wednesdays and Fridays y y Baron . An. 415. pag. 381. , ( the days now appointed for Abstinence by the Protestant Church of England ) : So that a man may be a pious Catholick and not keep the Fasting-days appointed by the Roman Church , viz. Fridays and Saturdays . Moreover he contradicts himself when he saith , According to the ancient usage of speaking , by the Apostolical Seat , is always to be understood the Roman Church z z Baron . An. 416 pag 388. : Whereas he hath often owned the other Patriarchs Sees had the Title of Apostolical Thrones and Seats ; and a little after cites Sidonius calling Lupus Bishop of Troys , a Bishop of Bishops , who had sat a long time in an Apostolical Seat a a Baron . An. 426. pag. 499. , he cites Possidius in the Life of S. Augustine , to prove the Pelagians were first condemned at Rome , and then at Carthage b b Baron . An. 418. pag. 414 , 415. . But if the Reader consult that Author , he will find that S. Augustine writ against them , and that they went near to draw in first Innocent and then Zosimus to their party , till the Councils of Holy African Bishops had with much labour persuaded first the one of these Popes , and then the other , that this was an abominable Heresie and contrary to the Catholick Faith c c Possid . vit. D. Aug. cap. 17. : All which the Cardinal leaves out , and from half the story makes a false Marginal Note , viz. That these Hereticks were first condemned at Rome , and then at Carthage : Which is every way false ; for if it be meant of Innocent's time , it is certain that the African Councils under the Primate of Carthage ; yea , that of Milevis had solemnly condemned Pelagianism before this Pope would openly condemn them , he being under suspicion of favouring that Heresie to the last year of his Life d d Vid. Innoc. Epist. 26. Bin. not . pag. 625. ; and this Council of Carthage did condemn these Hereticks while Zosimus did defend them ; so that Africk , not Rome , first discovered and censured this Heresie . He also falsly cites the Preface of S. Augustine's Books to Pope Boniface , against the Pelagians , telling us he affirms , That the Pope being most eminent in the highest top of the Pastoral Watch-Tower , did watch over all ; and from hence infers , That though S. Augustine and others sometimes call the Pope Brother , and Colleague , yet still they own his supream Pastoral Power e e Baron . An. 419. pag. 442. . But all that S. Augustine there saith is this , Communisque sit omnibus nobis qui fungimur Episcopatûs officio ( quamvis ipse in eo praeemineas celsiore fastigio ) specula pastoralis : The Pastoral watching is common to all of us who are Bishops , though you have the advantage of a higher station f f Aug. Tom. 7. contr. 2 Epist. Pelag. fol. 186. . Which words only intimate the Dignity of the Roman See , as to Order ; but plainly declare Bishops to have equal Obligations to guard the Church . And whereas a little after , from S. Augustine's modest Complement of sending these Books to Boniface , to examine and correct , he would insinuate something of Supremacy in Judging : This is no more than the same Father used to do to all other Bishops to whom he dedicated his Books ; so he desires Claudius , a private Bishop to read and judge of his Books against Julian , dedicated to him g g Aug. ibid. contr. Jul. praef. fol. 202. . This therefore ascribes no Infallibility to Rome ; and if S. Augustine himself had not judged better of Pelagianism than any Pope of these times , it would not have been condemned there to this day . After all these Instances of sincerity , we cannot wonder that he falls upon the Reformed as Innovators , for refusing to stand to a General Council , and so worse than the Pelagians who desired one h h Baron . An. 419. pag. 442. E. . But this calumny will soon be dispelled , if we call to mind the breach of Faith used to such as had trusted Rome , in the Council of Constance ; the Tricks used by the Popes before the Council of Trent for many years together , to avoid a General Council , when the Reformed earnestly desired one ; and the great partiality of that packt Assembly at Trent , who met not to examine or amend Abuses , but to establish them , and had resolved to condemn the Protestants before they heard them . It is something odd , that Baronius should quote Gelasius his Censure of the Legends and Acts of Martyrs , That some of them were writ by Ideots , and some by Hereticks ; wherefore the Roman Church then used not to read them in publick i i Baron . An. 419. pag. 456. . For this condemns him for filling so many Pages of his Annals with this Fabulous stuff , and discovers an alteration in the Roman Church , which of old was wiser and honester than to read those feigned Legends , that in after Ages took up a great part of their publick Service . We may further observe , That Leporius , an Arch-heretick recants in Africa , and applies himself to the Gallican Bishops only , without any notice taken of Rome or Pope Boniface k k Baron . An. 420. pag. 465. ; which confutes what the Annalist often affirms , That all great Hereticks were obliged to recant at Rome . He publisheth a Rescript of Theodosius , and bids us observe , that it contains the principal Feasts received by the Christians : Now these are Sundays , Christmas and Epiphany , Easter and Pentecost , with the Memory of the Apostles Passions , which is a Protestant Catalogue ; and there is not one Feast of our Blessed Lady , Holy Cross , Corpus Christi , &c. which are now so famous at Rome in all this number assigned by Theodosius l l Baron . An. 425. pag. 489. ; which shews they are Innovations , and the effects of modern Superstition . He relates it as the Custom of S. Augustine and other Bishops , as well as of Pope Celestine , to salute Presbyters by the name of Sons , and Bishops by the name of Brothers m m Baron . An. 426. pag. 498. , which looks not favourably on the Pope's Universal Superiority above all Bishops whatsoever . When Pope Gregory grosly mistakes Sozomen's History for Theodoret's , Baronius had better have owned it ; for none ever thought Popes infallible in their Quotations ; but the Cardinal resolves right or wrong to vindicate Gregory n n Baron . An. 427. pag. 507. , who rejects Sozomen's History for that passage which is in Theodoret , but is not in Sozomen ; so rashly do Popes judge sometimes : The Passage is about commending Theodorus of Mopsvestia as an Orthodox Father to the time of his death , which Theodoret doth affirm ; but Sozomen only mentions this Theodorus o o Sozom. hist. lib. 8. cap. 2. his Conversion by S. Chrysostom , but saith no more of him ; and Baronius is forced to feign this Passage was in that Part of Sozomen which was long since lost , and which probably S. Gregory himself never saw ; however Baronius knows nothing what was there written , and therefore it is very boldly done to suppose a thing for a certain Truth , which he could never know any thing of , only to save the Credit of a Pope who had little or no skill in Greek Authors . Again , 't is apparently partial in him , where he produces some ancient Testimonies of the French , being wont to break their words , to restrain this in modern Times only to that part of them which is Reformed , while he boasts of his Catholicks as the justest Men in the World p p Baron . An. 428. pag. 512. . To confute which , the Perjury and Treachery of the Leaguers in our Fathers time , and the many Promises and Engagements broken to the late Hugonots in our days , are abundantly sufficient . He takes it for a proof , that the Eastern Bishops use to refer Causes of the greatest moment to the Pope , because one Daniel a French Bishop fled out of his own Country for his Crimes , ( probably into the East ) was complained of to the Pope , being Uncanonically Ordained ; which Complaint the Pope transmits to the Bishops of the Province of Narbon , as the proper Judges in that matter q q Id. ibid. ; so that this Cause was not referred to him at all , only he was desired to acquaint those with it who ought to determine that Point . Moreover , he makes it a certain Evidence that Socrates was an Heretick , because he complains of Nestorius , for urging the Emperor to persecute Hereticks ( as soon as ever he was Ordained Bishop of Constantinople ) r r Id. An. 428. pag. 513. . But this Kingdom hath found Romanists ( when it was their Interest ) to censure Men as Hereticks for the contrary , viz. for only insisting upon the execution of some gentle Penal Laws upon such as differed from the established Religion . He commends S. Cyril for his Modesty , in not mentioning the Fault of Theodosius his abetting Nestorius ; yet he upon bare Surmizes speaks very opprobriously of Theodosius upon this account , and reflects upon all Kings and Sovereigns as inclined to follow his Example s s Baron . An. 429 pag. 527. Vide iterum An. 430. pag. 550. . Now if the silence of these things proves Cyril's Modesty , who must needs know whether Theodosius were guilty of this or no ; Doth it not prove somebodies Immodesty to rail by meer Conjectures at Theodosius and all Princes ? To proceed , It is a very false consequence from Cyril's calling in Celestine to his assistance against Nestorius , and that Popes condemning the Heretick in his private Council at Rome , That it was the Ancient custom from the beginning , for S. Peter's Chair alone to determine controversies of Faith , and condemn Heresies with their Authors as they arise t t Baron . An. 430. pag. 533. . For Cyril had first condemned this Heretick and his Opinions , and the Pope only came in as his Second ; yet after all it was necessary that a General Council should condemn him , which had been needless if the Pope alone , or in conjunction with another Patriarch had been sufficient . Again , he cites two Authors only for Celestine's sending a Pall and a Mitre to S. Cyril , and these Writers lived 8 or 900 year after this time , and he rejects some part of their account as fabulous ; yet from this Evidence he would prove , That Cyril was Celestine ' s Legate in the Council of Ephesus u u Id. ibid. pag. 538. : But he must have better proof than this to make us believe so incredible a thing . We may further note , that where Possidius is so particular in the circumstances of S. Augustine's death , he mentions nothing of any Image of the Blessed Virgin or the Saints ; no Crucifix placed before him , but only the Penitential Psalms were writ out and fastned on the Wall , which he read over as he lay on his Death-bed . Nor doth he mention any Office said for his Soul after he was dead , but only an Office for commending his Body to the Grave w w Possid . vit. Aug. vers. fin . & Baron . An. 430. pag. 554. , which shews these were devised in later and more Superstitious Times . Baronius indeed supposes the word Sacrificium , to signifie the Mass here ; but it seems to signifie no more than the usual Office at putting the Body into the Grave , in hopes of a joyful Resurrection . But though nothing be more evident , even in these Annals , to a Judicious Reader , than the many Innovations in Doctrin and Worship , made by the modern Roman Church , contrary to the Decrees of Councils , the Judgment and Practice of the Ancient Fathers ; the Annalist a little after ( upon Capreolus Bishop of Carthage his affirming that to be the true Faith which is delivered by the Fathers ) flies out into foul Language against the Reformed Churches for Innovations and reviving Heresies condemned by the Fathers x x Baron . An. 431. pag. 564. . Whereas we freely refer it to those Ancients to judge between us , Whether they or we come nearer to the Doctrin and Usages of pure Antiquity , and can from substantial Evidence prove them to be the Innovators . I will only note , That in this Epistle of Capreolus , this Bishop calls the Emperor , His Lord , and his Son y y Baron . An. 431. pag. 563. : Upon which Baronius makes no Remark , because he would have it thought that no Bishop , but only the Pope did ever call the Emperor , Son . For he alone is to be the Father of all Princes and all Bishops also . A little after he interprets that woful destruction of the Emperor's Army in Africa , to be a Divine Judgment upon him for countenancing the Heretical party at Ephesus z z Baron . ibid. pag. 591. . Though not many Pages from hence he lays all the blame of this Connivance upon the Treachery of the Emperor's Domesticks a a Id. ibid. pag. 597. , and he may find as great Defeats hapning often when the Emperors did take the Catholick part . So true is that of Solomon , No man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before him . All things come alike to all , &c. Ecclesix . 1 , 2. 'T is remarkable what Baronius saith of a very dubious Rescript of Valentinian , cited for the Authority of the Se● of Ravenna by the Friends of that Bishoprick , The love of our Country is an imperious thing ; yea , a Tyrant , which compels an Historian to defend those things , which if they were said of another place , he would utterly explode b b Baron . An. 432. p. 631 , &c. ; which with the rest there said , is so applicable to the Cardinal ( as to Rome ) , that the only wonder is , he did not see how severe a Censure he ( as David once did upon Nathan's Parable ) here passeth upon himself . Again , he forgets that the Miracle out of Prosper concerning a Maid , who could not swallow a piece of the Sacramental Bread dipped in Wine ( being possessed ) , but was cured by drinking of the Cup c c Baron . An. 434. pag. 646 , 647. , manifestly shews the Innovation of the Roman Church , in that it declares they used then to dip the Bread in Wine , and thought it lawful to give the Cup to the Laity ; whereas now they only give the people a dry Wafer . It was certainly a great oversight in the Armenian Bishops ( according to him who makes the Pope the sole Judge of Heresie ) to send to Proclus of Constantinople , to know whether the Writings of Theodorus of Mopsvestia were Orthodox or no ? Yet Liberatus ( an ancient Author ) affirms they did this secundum morem , according to Custom d d Baron . An. 435. pag. 649. . So that neither Liberatus nor the Armenians knew of any Custom to go only to Rome , out of the East , to enquire concerning the true Faith ; had they known this , no doubt they would have sent a little further . Moreover , he highly extols the Piety of Florentius the Praetorian Praefect , who finding the Tax paid by the Curtezans of Constantinople to the Exchequer , hindred their expulsion from that City , gave Lands of his own to compensate the Publick damage , that he might get those Infamous Women banished e e Baron . An. 439. pag. 677. ; forgetting all the while the Impiety of the Pope and Cardinals , who now tolerate them for a little scandalous Pension paid to their Treasury at Rome . He also saith , It is a Pelagian Principle and Heresie , to hold , That no Rich man can be saved , unless he give all his Estate to the Poor f f Id. An. 440. pag. 682. . Yet he knew many hundred Monasteries which have been and are endowed with great Estates , upon a Principle nothing different from this , which is preached frequently to rich Men and Women dying in their Churches Communion , by cunning and covetous Priests and Jesuits . It is manifest partiality also in him , to affirm it was a Judgment of God to deliver Carthage to the Vandals , because there was Pagan Idolatry practised in that City g g Baron . Tom VI. An. 440. pag. 5. . But the same kind of Idolatry was continued in Rome notwithstanding all endeavours to root it out , till the Goths took it ; but the Annalist doth not expound that Calamity after the same manner h h Vid. Baron . An. 410. . Thus he exclaims against the Cruelty of Gensericus the Vandal for persecuting the Orthodox Bishops upon the bare naming of Pharaoh , Nehuchadnezzar or Holofernes in their Sermons , pretending it was meant of him i i Baron . An. 442. pag. 12. . Whereas had he lived to this Age , he might have seen a King intituled , The most Christian , instigated by the Jesuits to persecute the Reformed Pastors for the same pretended Fault . It is remarkable that Theodoret , when he writes to a Bishop of Alexandria proves himself Orthodox , because his Faith was the same with the former Bishops of that See , viz. Alexander , Athanasius , Achillas , Theophilus and Cyril ; as also with S. Basil and Gregory , the Lights of the World k k Baron . An. 444. pag. 23. . The Pope is not named , so that doubtless he was not the sole Standard of Catholick Communion then ; if he had , the name of one Pope had been more to Theodoret's purpose than all these . Again , That Pope Leo writes as imperiously to Dioscorus of Alexandria , as he use to do to others , is very true , but it no where appears that Dioscorus observed his Orders : Much less will it follow from hence , That Leo was the Master set over all Churches l l Baron . An. 444. pag. 25. ; such assuming of Empire over our Equals , may indeed shew our Ambition , but it will not prove our Right . It is obvious to all that read Baronius , how he strains all things that are said of S. Peter , to apply them to the Roman Church ; but the Reader may note ; how silently he passes it by , when our Gildas calls the British Bishops Sees here in this Island , the Seats of Peter m m Baron . An. 446. pag. 36. . But this may satisfie all impartial Men , that the Ancients accounted other Bishops the Successors of S. Peter , as well as the Pope , though now he alone usurps that and many other Priviledges , of Old enjoyed in common by others , as well as by the Bishop of Rome . Again , he spoils the Old famous Story of the Conversion of Spain by S. James , wherein the Spaniards so much pride themselves , out of a zealous partiality for Rome , which inclines him to affirm , That Spain first received the Gospel from the Roman Church n n Baron . An. 447. pag. 42. : Which Notion may in time lessen the Pilgrimaes to S. James of Compostella , and calls in question the Devotion of those many Thousands , who have believed his Body to be there , and worship his Relicks in that place with great assurance . Soon after , upon occasion of Turibius , complaining of the Apocryphal Books used by the Priscillian Hereticks in Spain , the Cardinal shews the necessity of suppressing all Books that are against the Catholick Doctrin , and urges the Bishop of Spain to suppress a Book writ by one John de Roa , about the Rights of Princes , containing Doctrins ( as he saith ) which he could not learn from the Jesuits , Fryers or Clergy of Spain o o Id. ibid. pag. 44. . Now how many Books ( as Apocryphal as those of the old Hereticks , and as extravagant for the Rights of the Pope , as any that ever were writ on any Subject in the World ) doth Baronius cite , approve and admire ? But one Book that speaks for the Prince , and the Civil Rights of Men , must by no means be endured . 'T is observable also , That when Theodoret was suspected of Heresie , he appeals to a Council in which the Bishops and Magistrates may meet , and the Judges may determin what is consonant to the Apostolical Doctrin p p Baron . An. 448. pag. 53. . Now if it had been known and believed then , that the Popes Communion was enough to make a man a Catholick , and he had been the sole Judge , why did not Theodoret in one word appeal to the Pope , and say he was in Communion with Leo Bishop of Rome ? He approves Theodoret's Censure of Dioscorus , for invading the Rights of other Dioceses , contrary to the Canons of Nice and Constantinople , and he blames Dioscorus for his Pride and Ambition ; but though the Pope labour to invade all Dioceses , and make all the Bishops in the World his Vassals , contrary to Law , Equity , and Primitive Usage , this is no Crime in a Friend q q Id. ibid. pag 54. . Baronius is miserably put to it about the Epistle of Ibas , judged ( by two Councils ) to be Heretical ; yet approved by the Infallible Chair . This makes him contradict himself strangly ; for here he saith , This was really Ibas his Epistle , as the Tenth Action at Chalcedon teaches , and himself confessed ; and the Opinion of the Apostolick Legates of Maximus of Antioch and others confirm it , and Ibas was proved a Catholick by it r r Baron . An. 448. pag. 67. . But Baronius had before cited the Tenth Action at Chalcedon to prove , That this Epistle in that Council was found not to be Ibas Epistle , and so the Epistle was condemned , and he absolved s s Id. An. 432. pag. 626. . And in the former place , as well as elsewhere t t Id. Tom. 7. An. 553. Vid. Crakenthorp . Vigil . dormitans , cap. 10. p. 110. , he affirms the Epistle contained Blasphemy and Heresie ; yet Pope Vigilius approved it ; and the Cardinal saith , Ibas was by this Epistle found to be a Catholick . He that can make these Contradictions friends , or reconcile them to the Infallibility , — erit mihi magnus Apollo . He commends Pope Leo for reproving Theodosius the Emperor gently and mildly , when he was going to establish Heresie by a Pseudo-Synod * * In cujus manu est ut prohibeat , jubet agi , si non probibet admitti . Salvian . . Whereas Old Eli's Example may shew ( if the Emperor was his Inferior in this matter , and the Pope his Ghostly Father ) that his Reproof ought to have been sharper ; yea , he should have expresly prohibited the convening of this Council ( if his Authority was necessary to their Meeting ) and have not so meanly truckled as to send his Legates to a Synod , which he judged needless , yea , dangerous u u Baron . An. 449 pag. 80. . And if we consider Leo's high Spirit , this Submission shews , he had no right to call a General Council , nor power to hinder the Emperor from appointing one . Again , When the Pope ( by Prosper's help ) had writ a very seasonable and Orthodox Epistle against Eutyches , the French Bishops were careful to have it exactly Transcribed ; but it follows not from hence , That they would not vary one syllable from his Decrees w w Id. ibid. pag. 82. . For this respect was shewed , not to the Authority of the See , but to the excellency of the Epistle , as appears in that the Gallican Bishops ( as hath been shewed ) rejected other Decrees both of this Pope and his Predecessors , when they disliked them . And Baronius owns a little after , that these Bishops rejoyced that this Epistle contained their own sense as to the Faith , and were glad that the Pope held the same Opinion , that they had always held from the Tradition of their Ancestors x x Id. ibid. pag. 86. . So that this is no Proof , as he would have it , That the Pope was a Master presiding over all the Christian World . For they judged of his Teaching , and approved it , because it agreed with their Churches ancient Tradition . On no better grounds he gathers , there was One only lawful Judge , One Governor of Holy things always in the Church , viz. the Pope ; From Theodoret's Epistle to Leo y y Baron . An. 449. pag. 99 , 101. : For first , these Epistles are justly suspected , as being not heard of till they came to light first out of the Vatican : And , secondly , they are demonstrated to be spurious by divers Learned Men , and especially this to Leo , is shewed to contain manifest Contradictions z z Rivet . Crit. saer . lib. 4. c. 21. Vid Crakenth . Vigil . dorm . pag. 444. . Thirdly , If this Epistle were genuine , it must be considered that all the Patriarchs , except the Roman , were at that time either corrupted or oppressed , and in that juncture Theodoret could appeal to none of them but Leo , and so might well give him good words , who alone was likely and able to assist him . As for that Testimony wherein they much glory , That Rome had the Supremacy over all Churches , ( as their Translation speaks ) because it was always free from Heresie , and no Heretick had sat there a a Id. Baron . ib. p. 102. , it supposes a long experience of the Church of Romes Integrity before this Priviledge was bestowed ; and if the Supremacy was given her for this Reason , she ought to lose it again whenever any Heretical Pope shall get the Chair ; nor doth Theodoret at all suppose this impossible for the future . Moreover he brags , that Leo restored Theodoret and others , deposed by this Pseudo - Ephesine-Synod , and infers , That it was the Popes priviledge alone to restore Bishops deposed by a Council b b Id. ibid. pag. 103. . But the Misfortune is , Theodoret was called an Heretick after the Pope had privately acquitted him , and his Cause was to be tried over again at Chalcedon ; and till that Council restored him he remained suspended for all this pretended Priviledge of the Pope . And before we leave him we may note , that he used all his Interest to persuade the Emperor to call a lawful and impartial General Council , as appears by all his Epistles to his several Friends c c Baron . An. 450. pag. 122 , 123 , 124. ; which shews he knew it was in the Emperor's power alone to call one ; not in the Pope's , to whom he would have written , ( being in favour with him ) if he had had Authority in this Affair . He reckons Attila's leaving to harrass the Eastern Empire , to be a Divine Reward for Marcian's setling the true Religion there ; but presently tells us , That this Scourge of God , and other sad Judgments fell upon Italy and the Western Empire ; from whence he supposes the Reformation of all Eastern Heresies came , and where he believes no Heresie could ever take place d d Baron . An. 450. pag. 125. . So miserably do Men expose themselves , when they pretend to give Reasons for all God's Dispensations . In the next year hapned the Famous Council of Chalcedon , wherein divers of Baronius's Frauds have been already detected ; so that I am only to add , That Leo was politick in pretending to give Anatolius a power to receive Recanting Bishops , who had fallen into Eutyches Heresie , and cunningly reserves the greater Cases to his own See e e Baron . An. 451. p. 128 , & 130. . But 't is plain , Anatolius of Constantinople had as much power in the Provinces subject to him , as the Pope had in Italy , and the greater Cases were , according to ancient Usage , reserved to the next General Council , where both the Bishop of Rome and Constantinoples Acts were to be re-examined , and none of these Erring Bishops were restored but by that Council . And finally , he makes it a great Crime in Dioscorus to pretend to Lord it over Egypt , and to say , He had as much Authority there as the Emperor f f Id. ibid. pag. 144. . Yet the following Popes did and said as much in relation to Italy ; but Baronius cannot see any harm in that , though Socrates did , who saith , That both the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria had exceeded the bounds of Priestly-power , and fallen to a secular way of Ruling g g Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 11. . And this may suffice for this Part of the Period we have undertaken .

CHAP. IV.

Roman Errors and Forgeries in the Councils , from the end of the Fourth Council , till An. Dom. 500.

§ . 1. THE Synod of Alexandria is falsly styled in An. Dom. 453. the Title , under Leo : For their own Text confesseth , it was assembled by the Authority of Proterius Bishop of Alexandria a a Bin. Tom. 2. part. 1. p. 419. Lab. Tom. 4. Col. 1007. .

The Second Council of Arles , which Binius had antedated 70 year , and put out with this false Title , under Siricius , is by Labbè b b Lab. col. 1010. placed here according to Sirmondus his direction .

The Council of Anjou , in Binius , is said to be held under Leo ; who is not once named in it : Wherefore Labbè leaves out that false Inscription , and only saith , it was held in the 13th year of Pope Leo c c Bin. p. 420. Lab. col. 1020. .

The 4th Canon of this Council is corrupted by Binius and Baronius . For where the Text reads , If any be [ coelibes ] unmarried , they put into the Margen as a better reading , if any be [ debiles ] weak : Which is to make the Reader believe , that all the Clergy then were unmarried ; whereas this Canon supposes many of them had Wives . And the 11th Canon allows a married Man to be chosen Priest or Deacon , ( the Popes Decrees not yet prevailing in France : ) So that Labbè honestly strikes out [ debiles ] and keeps only the true reading (d) . We (u) Bin. ut supr. Lab. col. 1021 , &c. note also , that in the end of this 4th Canon , such Clerks as meddle in surrendring Cities are excommunicated . A Sentence which if it were now executed , would put many Priests and Jesuits out of the Communion of the Church , for their treachery to the Emperor and the King of Spain , many of whose Cities they have betrayed to the French .

The Notes falsly cite the first Canon , and so doth Baronius e e Bin. pag. 420. Lab. Col. 1022. Bar. An. 453. n. saying , it orders , That the Clergy shall not against their Bishops Sentence seek to secular Tribunals ; and pretending this was in opposition to an Edict of Valentinian , published the year before , which restrained the Bishops Jurisdiction to matters of Religion , unless the parties chose them . Now the true words of the Canon are , The Clergy shall not appeal from the Bishops Sentence , nor seek to Secular Tribunals , without consulting the Bishop . And Valentinian's Law was of no force in France , nor probably had these Bishops ever heard there was such a Law ; so that it is not likely they ever thought of opposing it . Finally , We observe that Baronius without any Authority falsly affirms , that this Council was sent to Rome f f Baron . An. 453. n. only to insinuate , that it was to be confirmed there . Whereas till Fronto-Ducaeus found the Manuscript in France , they at Rome seem to have known nothing of it .

The Council of Vannes placed by Binius here , by Sirmondus Authority is removed to An. 465. in Labbè g g Bin. pag. 421. Lab. Col. 1054. . Nothing in it is remarkable , but that the Assembly desires ( not the Pope , but ) the absent Bishops of their own Province to confirm the Canons thereof .

The Council of 73 Bishops at Constantinople , was An. Dom. 459. called by , and held under Gennadius Patriarch of that City , and so is falsly titled under Leo ; whose Legates do not subscribe it , and so probably were not present at it h h Bin. pag. 425. Lab. Col. 1025. . Baronius indeed saith they were , but proves it only by conjecture , because Leo in an Epistle speaks of his Legates , being come back to Rome the year after i i Baron . An. 459. n. . But the wonder is , how Baronius and Binius ( who confess all the Acts are lost , except one Canon about Simony ) came to know , that Eutyches was condemned , and the Council of Chalcedon confirmed in this Council . However , if it was confirmed , no doubt the Greek Bishops would confirm the Canons of it , with the rest , to which the Popes Legates could not consent : But since we hear of no difference , it is like these Legates were not present .

§ . 2. Pope Hilary ( who succeeded Leo ) might justly An. Dom. 461. be suspected of Heresie , because he confirms no more than three General Councils , omitting that of Constantinople which condemned Macedonius . But since there is no evidence of this Universal Epistle confirming the other three Councils , but only the fabulous Pontifical , we may acquit him , and perhaps even in the very Pontifical , this Council may have been erased after the controversie of the Primacy was started l l Vita Hilar. Bin. pag. 424. Lab. Col. 1029. . However , this being owned all along by the Catholick Church for a General Council , it can suffer nothing by the Popes not confirming it ; he alone would deserve censure for not subscribing to it .

The Spanish Bishops who write to this Pope , by their Countries being wasted by Euaricus the Goth m m Baron . An. 464. n. were destitute of Power , and desire Hilary to declare the Canons in some particular Cases , hoping the persons concerned ( who despised them in their low estate , ) might have more respect for a great Patriarch n n Bin. pag. 425 , & 426. Lab. Col. 1034 , & 1035. . So that it is very Sophistical in the Annalist and Binius , to draw consequences from hence , for the Popes being the Supream Judge , and having power to dispense with all Canons . The Pope himself in his Answer pretends no such thing o o Hilar. ep 2. Bin. pag. 426. Lab. Col. 1035. . He only declares the Canons , but dispenses with none : Yet if he had such a power , doubtless he ought to have used it in Irenaeus his Case .

But the third Epistle of Hilary , writ about the same affair , seems to discover , that all these Epistles ( which talk so big of the Popes Supremacy ) are counterfeit : For the Forger , weary of inventing new Phrases , steals the beginning verbatim out of those Epistles , that are falsly ascribed to Zepherine and Fabian , and were not extant until long after Pope Hilary's death p p Hilar ep. 3. Bin. pag. 427. Lab. Col. 1038. . And Labbè's Marginal Note on Binius Annotations shews , he smelt out the Cheat , if he durst have spoken freely .

The Notes on the 4th Epistle own , that the Popes may be cajoled by false Stories , and deceived in Matter of Fact ; and this so far as to condemn holier Bishops than themselves , as Leo and this Hilary did , in the cases of Hilary of Arles , and Mammertus of Vienne q q Hilar. Ep. 4. Bin. pag. 427. Lab. col. 1039. . And it is not easie to understand , how he who mistakes Matter of Fact , can infallibly apply the Law to a Fact wherein he is mistaken .

The 5th Epistle was writ three year before those that precede it , and the Humility of the Style makes me think it the only genuine Letter ( as yet set down ) of this Pope ; for he writes to the Bishop of Arles ( not as a Son , but ) as a Brother , and takes it well that he advised him to keep close to the Ancient Canons .

The 9th Epistle shews , that Mammertus his Piety was no protection to him , against the injuries of the Roman Court r r Hilar. Ep. 9. Bin. pag. 429. Lab. col. 1043. . But Binius doth penance for this in his Notes on the 11th Epistle s s Not. in Ep. 11. Bin. p. 431. Lab. col. 1047. ; though all his devices will neither excuse his Popes Morals in persecuting so great a Saint , nor vindicate his Judgment who was so grosly mistaken .

There is but one Roman Council under this Pope , called ( as is pretended ) to confirm his false Judgment about the Spanish Bishops ; for they absolve the guilty Sylvanus , and condemn Irenaeus who was innocent : And though this Popes being commonly in the wrong makes it probable , he might get such a Council together , yet the very Acts smell strong of Forgery , as well as the former Epistles in these cases t t Concil. Rom. Bin. pag. 431. Lab. col. 1061. : For besides their Stile , Maximus Bishop of Turin is mentioned not only as present at it , but speaking in it , who died ( as Gennadius u u Gennad . Catal. ap. Hieron . Tom. 1. pag. 466. & opera Maxim . Turin . pag. 1. a Writer of that Age and Country affirms , ) in the Reign of Honorius and the younger Theodosius , that is , above 40 year before this Council : So that Baronius is very bold out of a suspected Council , to correct a Writer who lived so near this time , against the Authority of divers printed Copies w w Baron . An. 465. n. . And Binius is more audacious to cover this with an evident falsification of Gennadius , as if he said , Maximus lived under those Emperors , but continued Bishop till this time x x Not. Bin. ut supra . . And now let Baronius boast of the Acclamations of this Synod , ( common in other Councils ) as a singular honour done to Hilary ; for after all it is plain , he liked not the Canons of it so well as to give them a place in his Annals y y Baron . An. 465. n. , which here he fills up with other manifest impertinencies .

§ . 3. The next Pope was Simplicius , whose appointing An. Dom. 467. Weekly Confessors at Rome , is far from proving ( what the Notes infer ) that their Sacramental Confession was instituted by Christ z z Not. in vit. Simp. Bin. pag. 434. Lab. col. 1067. . Nor is it for the credit of this Pope that three parts of seven in Rome it self were Arrians in his time a a Ibid. Bin. pag. 435. Lab. col. 1068. . But the Pontifical gives the reason of it , and expresly charges him with dissimulation b b Vit. Simplic . Bin. pag. 434. Lab. col. 1066. , Which seems a just censure ; for though the Arrians and Photinians sadly infested the Western Church c c Baron . An. 475. n. : And though the Princes of that time were generally heretical d d Id. An. 476. n. 6. p. 318. ; yet poor Simplicius did nothing , and till he had been eight years Pope , Baronius cannot pick up one Memoir concerning him , except a few Brags of an interested Successor of his , concerning his resisting the Eastern Emperors , which are both false and incredible : Yea , the Annals shew that all the great Affairs of this time were managed by S. Epiphanius Bishop of Pavy , who far outshined Simplicius e e Baron . An. 471. n. &c , . Wherefore I wonder that Du Pin should say , He was very full of business all the time of his Popedom f f Du Pin. Eccles. Hist. Vol. 4. p. 159. ; since for more than half that time there is no true account of his doing any thing : And when he did begin to write , Baronius owns , He did no good by any of his Letters g g Baron . An. 483. n. 19. pag. 374. ; yet a little before , having a bad Memory , he had ridiculously boasted , That Simplicius in the midst of the Arrian fury governed the See , with the same Authority and freedom that his Predecessors had done , bearing the Causes of all the World , depriving and restoring Bishops , correcting Emperors , opposing barbarous Kings , and sitting as Arbiter and Judge in all things over the East and West , as ( he saith ) he hath proved in the several years of his Pontifical h h Idem An. 483. n. 8. p. 371. . Let the Reader search , and try if he can find this proved . On the contrary this Pope flattered all Parties , and truckled to the Heretical Usurper Basilius ( as I shall shew presently ) nor durst he attempt to do Justice to a persecuted Orthodox Bishop of Alexandria , because ( as an old faithful Historian tells us i i Brev. Histor. Eutych . Lab. col. 1081. , ) Zeno the Emperor had forbidden him .

It is so common for the Roman Forgers to invent sham Epistles , in which the Pope is feigned to make Eminent Bishops his Legates in all parts of the World , that , no doubt , this Popes first Epistle to Zeno Bishop of Sevil ( which hath no date ) is spurious k k Simplie . Ep. 1. Bin. pag 435. Lab. Col. 1068. . And therefore it is of no force , that the Notes infer from such a Forgery , That the care of the whole Church was committed to the Pope by God .

The 4th Epistle tells the Emperor , to whom it was writ , That none doubted of his Orthodox mind , and that be did as certainly imitate Marcian and Leo in their Faith , as he did succeed them in their Empire . Now this Letter ( as Baronius and the Editors say ) was writ to Zeno l l Idem Ep. 4. Bin. pag. 436. Lab. Col. 1071. ; and they own it to be at least prudent dissimulation , for the Notes on the Life of Simplicius affirm , Zeno was an Eutychian Heretick . But indeed it was inexcusable Flattery , or as the Pontifical calls it , downright Dissembling : And the Crime is worse , because upon a strict enquiry this Epistle appears to be writ to that Heretical Usurper Basiliscus . Labbè's Margen from an old Manuscript reads it to Basiliscus ; and Zeno really was deposed a whole year before this Epistle was writ ; for Timotheus Aelurus his coming to Constantinople ( mentioned here by Simplicius ) was in the time of Basiliscus after Zeno's deposition , as an Authentick Author relates m m Theodor. Lect. collect . l 1. pag. 183. ; and the true date of Simplicius his Epistle shews it was writ in Basiliscus his time , and so doth also the Chronicle of Marcellinus , a Book writ near that time : But for all this , Baronius quarrels with Marcellinus , contradicts Theodorus Lector , alters the date of the Epistle , and keeps Zeno on the Throne a year longer before his deposing , than ancient Writers do allow ; and all this to conceal his holy Fathers wicked flattering of an Heretick , and Usurper n n Baron . An. 476. n. 16. & n. 23. pag. 320 , 321. . But I hope the Reader will believe old and disinteressed Historians , before the partial Annalist .

The 5th Epistle writ at the same time to Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople , shews that it was solely in the Emperors power to call a General Council o o Simplic . Ep. 5. Bin. pag. 437. Lab. col. 1073. . Since Timothy of Alexandria applied to the Emperor for such a Council , and Simplicius with Acacius joyned in addresses to the Emperor against it .

In the Notes on the 8th Epistle , where Euagrius only mentioned a bare report of the Martyr Theclas appearing to Zeno ; They out of Baronius add , that she prayed and interceded for Zeno p p Not. in 8 Epist. Simplic . Bin. pag. 439. Lab. Col. 1079. : Which invention is to countenance the Martyrs praying for us ; The date of this Epistle being in October 477 , and ( as the Notes say ) writ to Zeno after he was restored , and had sent to Simplicius an Orthodox confession of Faith ; This date I say shews that the 4th Epistle ( before spoken of ) must have been written to Basiliscus ; for that is dated in January 476 , at which time Zeno was deposed , and Basiliscus after he had reigned two years , as Euagrius writes q q Cum jam biennio regnaverat . Euag. ap. Baron . An. 477. N. Not Ten Months , as du Pin mistakes . pag. 160. , was ejected by Zeno about July 477 , long before which time , Simplicius had writ that flattering Letter to the Usurper .

The Forgers have corrupted the Title and Conclusion of Acacius his Epistle to Simplicius r r Bin. p. 439. Lab. col. 1080. . For Simplicius in a genuine Epistle calls Acacius , his beloved Brother , Epistle 18 : But here by turning Patriarchae into Patri , they make Acacius style Simplicius , Most blessed Lord and Holy Father , Archbishop , &c. Which corruption ( owned by Labbè ) shews how little credit is to be given to the Pompous Titles of these Epistles which are frequently feigned by the modern Roman Parasites .

Upon the 14th Epistle they note in the Margen , The Pope dispenses with the Nicene Canon for peace sake , and in favour of the Emperor s s Simpl. Ep. 14. Bin. pag 441. Lab col. 1086. ( malè 1034. ) . This relates to the hasty election and ordination of Stephen Patriarch of Antioch , which the Emperor and Acacius were forced to dispatch somewhat uncanonically for fear of a Sedition in that City , and on that account they desired the Pope however to own him as an Orthodox Patriarch , since they had resolved this single Example should be no precedent for the future . The Pope like a true Signior Placebo , assents to all tamely , and allows of their resolution , which was not ( as the Notes on the 15th Epistle falsly say , ) any Condition that Simplicius prescribed to the Emperor , but a Rule that Zeno had made for himself , before the Pope knew of the Ordination of Stephen .

The 16th Epistle declares , that Simplicius had taken Calendion the new Bishop of Antioch into his Communion , and call him his Brother and Fellow-Bishop t t Simplic . Ep. 16. Bin. p 442. Lab. col. 1036. . The Notes calls this , the Popes confirming Calendion in the See of Antioch : Whereas it was no more than his owning him for an Orthodox Brother ; yea , Calendion was thus far confirmed by Acacius , for ( at his request ) Acacius had declared himself of his Communion , before he writ to the Pope . These Notes also falsly say , Acacius was made the Popes Legate , which is a groundless Fiction of Baronius u u Baron . An. 482. n. 13. p. 357. . For if Acacius had acted in ordaining and deposing the Eastern Patriarchs , only as the Popes Legate , there had been no Quarrel between him and Rome . And how improbable is it , that he who contended for the Supremacy of the whole Eastern Church with the Pope , and who is taxed by Baronius , to be one that thirsted after nothing so much as the Primacy w w Baron . cod . An. n. 3. p. 355. , that he , ( I say ) should accept of a Legantine power from Rome ? Yea , Simplicius his 17th Epistle doth not say any such thing , but speaks of their Obligation to mutual Love , and of the Patriarchal Office committed to him , as a Talent God had entrusted him with : But not a syllable of his Subjection to the Pope , or of any Office derived from him .

§ . 4. The Council of Tours , Binius places here under An. Dom. 482. Simplicius , Labbè 21 years sooner under Pope Hilary ; but the truth is , that it was held An. 461. but under no Pope at all : For they desire no other but their absent Brethren , ( Bishops of that Province ) to confirm their Canons x x Concil. Turon . Bin. pag. 443. Lab. col. 1049. by their consent . The Notes on this Council mention the Fasts and Vigils , which Perpetuus the 6th Bishop of Tours instituted for his Church , Recorded by an old Historian of that place y y Gregor. Turon . lib. 10. cap. 31. p. 513. . And 't is very plain they differ extreamly from those used at Rome ; which shews how unreasonable it is in the Modern Roman Church , to impose their Fasts , Feasts and other Rites upon all Churches in the World .

The Council of Arles , in the cause of Faustus assembled to examin Points of Faith , doth not so much as mention the Pope , so that surely they did not take him for an infallible Judge z z Ap. Bin. habetur Anno 524. Lab. col. 1041. . Labbè's Notes boast , that one De Champs hath confuted Bishop Usher's censure of the Epistles of Faustus and Lucidus , and of this Council which approved them : But before the Reader credit this , let him hear that most learned Primate , who modestly excuses the Council , but strongly proves , that Faustus was a Semi-pelagian Heretick a a Usher . Antiq. Britan. c. 13. pag. 229. : And if he did not feign the consent of this and another Council to his Doctrins , this will be one instance , that Councils may Err in matters of Faith .

§ . 5. Foelix the Third , who followed Simplicius , was An. Dom. 483. much bolder , and openly reproved the Emperor and Acacius , for that which he called a Fault : But the Notes falsifie when they say , That in the beginning of his Pontificat , he rejected , proscribed and cursed the most wicked Zeno's ( Henoticon ) Edict for Union , anathematizing all that subscribed it b b Not. in vit. Fal. Bin. p. 445. Lab. col. 1047. . For Euagrius recites this Edict , and neither saith Foelix condemned it , nor condemns it himself ; and Foelix former Letters treat both Zeno and Acacius with all respect , nor do they curse either of them on the account of this Edict : Theodorus Lector indeed saith , That when all the Patriarchs besides agreed to Zeno's Edict for Union , Foelix of Rome [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] joyned not with him c c Theodor. Lect. collect . l. 2 pag 190. . Which only implies , his not communicating with the Emperor in that point : But Binius hath improved this into proscribing , cursing and anathematizing the Edict .

The First Epistle of Foelix to Acacius often calls him Brother , which shews as if then he did not reject his Communion d d Foelix Ep. 1. Bin. pag 446. Lab. col 1049. ; and neither this nor the second to Zeno , do at all mention the Emperors Edict for Union , but quarrels only about matters of Jurisdiction , being not so much concerned for any Heretical Opinions , as for keeping up his claim to a pretended Supremacy : However some suspect both these Epistles as being without date , and because that to Acacius seems to contradict Liberatus e e Liberat. Brev. cap. 15. ap. Baron . An. 483. n. 1. p. 370. : But I think they may be allowed for genuine .

The Second Epistle to Zeno is writ with modesty , yet wants not good advice . The Pope owning it his Duty to write to the Emperor , upon his coming into the See of Rome ; and he rather intreats , than either commands or threatens f f Foelic . Ep. 2. Bin. pag. 448. Lab. col. 1053. : But it is certain , if this Epistle be genuine , it is not perfect , wanting that account of the African Persecution , which Euagrius saith was mentioned in this Epistle .

It is said , Foelix writ three Letters to Petrus Cnapheus the Heretical Bishop of Antioch , of which only two are extant , and it is well if both be not Forgeries [ incepi sententiare contrate , ] is a Phrase that smells of the later Ages , when the Flatterers of Rome coyned great variety of this kind of Epistles to make the World think , that an Heretical Patriarch could be deposed by none but the Pope g g Ep. 4. Foelix , Bin. pag. 452. Lab. col. 1067. . But this very Letter owns , that Acacius and his Council had also deposed this Peter of Antioch , as well as the Pope and his : And Baronius saith , Acacius did it first h h Baron . An. 483. n. 54. p. 382. : But the Cardinal thought it worth his while to corrupt this suspicious Epistle , wherein Foelix saith , He was condemned by me , and those who together with me do govern the Apostolical Throne : Which Phrase plainly shews , that the Pope did not Rule alone as a Monarch at Rome , but the Italian Bishops had a share in that Power : To avoid which Truth Baronius and they that follow him falsifie it , and read — condemned by me , and by them , who being constituted under me , govern Episcopal Seats i i Baron . An. 483. n. 68. pag. 385. . The true reading implies the Bishops are co-ordinate with the Pope , but the Corruption is to make us believe , they are only his creatures , substitutes and delegates .

The Fifth Epistle to Zeno speaks honourably of Acacius , as an Orthodox Archbishop , commending him for opposing Petrus Cnapheus k k Foelic . Ep. 5. Bin. pag. 452. Lab. col. 1070. : It is noted by a learned Man , that ( excepting fabulous Inscriptions , ) the name [ Archbishop ] is here first found among the Latins : But I rather observe , that Foelix here reads that famous Text for the Supremacy , Math. xvi . in this manner — and upon this Confession will I build my Church : So it is read often in Gelasiui Epistles l l Gelas . Ep. 1. Bin. 466. Lab. 1158. & Ep. 4. Bin. 471. Lab. 1171. , — on the Confession of Peter will I build my Church : Which shews it is not a casual expression , but a Testimony that at Rome it self , in that Age , it was not believed this Promise belonged so much to St. Peter's Person as to his Faith , nor to his Successors any longer than they held that Confession . Of the 6th Epistle we shall speak when we come to Foelix his second Roman Council .

The Corrupters Fingers have been busie with the Title of the 7th Epistle , which ( as Labbè notes out of Justellus ) was writ only to the Bishops of Sicily ; but they who are to support an Universal Supremacy have changed it thus , To all Bishops m m Foelic . Ep. 7. Bin. pag. 454. Lab. col. 1075. : And the date is falsified also , being pretended to be writ by a Roman Council held in March , An. Dom. 487. yet it is dated in the year after , March 488. But if they will have it genuine , let them observe , that the Pope here saith , ( speaking of a Point of Faith , ) He knows not but in this case , the Spirit of God may have informed them of something that had escaped his Knowledge , promising to hear them , if they can find anything omitted by him n n Ibid. Ep. 7. Bin. pag. 455. Lab. col. 1077. . Let them read this , and reconcile it with Infallibility if they can .

The Decree of Foelix about the subjection of Kings to Bishops , is neither agreeable to the Age , nor to the Style of this Popes other Writings to the Emperor o o Bin. pag. 455. Lab. Ep. 9. col. 1083. ; so that we cannot credit it , though Labbè hath put it into an Epistle to Zeno , because this Epistle speaks of the deposition of Acacius as a thing past , August 1st 484 : But the Margen of the next Epistle saith , Acacius was deposed July 28 , 488 p p Foelic . Ep. 10. ap. Lab. col. 1085. . And it is probable , that both the Sentence and the Synod are spurious , coyned out of a hint in the Pontifical , viz. That Foelix did condemn Acacius in a Synod : Which was ground enough for the Parasites to frame a Council . But how little credit is to be given to the Pontifical in this Popes History , Baronius declares , when he notes that Author is not to be trusted in his Report , That Misenus and Vitalis were sent to Constantinople , three years after this Synod at Rome q q Vit. Foelic . 3. Bin. pag. 445. Lab. col. 1046. . And it seems neither Euphemius Bishop of Constantinople , nor Pope Gelasius knew of this Roman Synod : For when Euphemius asked , In what Synod his Predecessor Acacius was condemned ? Gelasius mentions no Roman Synod r r Gelas . ep. 10. & Baron . An. 484. n. 21. pag. 395. ; but saith , there was no need of any particular Council , since he was condemned by the general Sentence of the Council of Chalcedon , and upon that ground the Roman Church rejected Acacius his Communion .

There are ( in Labbè ) divers other Epistles ascribed to Foelix ; one to Zeno s s Foelic . ep. 12. Lab. col. 1086. , said to be writ some time after the death of Acacius , wherein the Pope extols that Emperour for his care of Religion , and the reverence of Divine Worship ; which shews that Foelix did not so stifly renounce Zeno's Communion , nor damn his Edict for Union so severely as Binius pretends . The rest of these Epistles I pass , though most of them be suspicious .

§ . 6. The first Roman Council under Foelix , may An. Dom. 483. be true as far as concerns the Condemnation of Peter Mongus , the Heretical Bishop of Alexandria t t Concil. Rom. 1. Bin. pag 455. Lab. col. 1095. , though there is nothing to prove it , but the two first suspected Epistles of Foelix . However , if there were such a Synod , it shews how little regard was had to the Pope and his Council in those days , since John , whose side Rome took , did never get admittance to the See of Alexandria ; and Peter Mongus kept that Chair for all the Popes Sentence : And if the other , Peter Cnapheus , the Heretical Bishop of Antioch was condemned here , it is certain , he was condemned before by Acacius at Constantinople : But that Evidence of Acacius his being Orthodox , hath not discouraged the Parasites from forging a pretended Citation , in the name of this Roman Synod , to call Acacius to Rome , there to answer the Matters charged against him : But 't is so improbable , Foelix should attempt this against one , who thought himself his equal , if not superior , that now-a-days the Romanists allow not these Processes , but count them spurious .

There is a second Roman Council placed in this At. Dom. 484. year , wherein Acacius and the two Peters of Alexandria and Antioch are all said to be condemned u u Concil. 2. Rom. Bin. pag. 462. Lab. col. 1123. . But let it be noted , that whereas the 6th Epistle of Foelix saith , he had deposed Acacius in a Synod in August , 484 w w Foelic . Ep. 6. Bin. pag 454. Lab. col. 1075. , and at that time Baronius places his deposition x x Baron . An. 484 n. 30. pag. 397. ; Yet here we have a Synodical Letter , condemning him over again , dated above a year after , viz. Octob. 485 , which Date Baronius and Binius fraudulently leave out y y Bin. pag. 463. : But Labbè sets it down in the Margen , and so discovers the cheat z z Lab. col. 1127. . Upon the whole matter , this Condemnation of Acacius was done they know not when ; and 't is probable all these Letters and Synods were invented after the Controversie for precedence between Rome and Constantinople grew high , meerly to put weight into the Roman Scale . But one corruption of this suspicious Synodical Epistle I cannot pass , being a passage evidently put in by a later Forger : For whereas this Letter makes the Italian Bishops call the Pope their Prince and Head ( by way of limitation , ) who ought to preside in the Synods of Italy : — And tell those to whom they writ — that therefore they had by Tutus sent the Sentence underneath , which pleased the Synod at St. Peters , and which holy Foelix their Head , Pope and Archbishop had decreed : Some later Hand hath broken the Sense , and absurdly thrust into the midst of this Sentence these incoherent words — Who is the Head of all ; the Lord saying to St. Peter the Apostle , Thou art Peter , &c. Math. xvi . Which words the 318 Fathers at Nice following , gave the Authority and Confirmation of matters to the holy Church of Rome , both which , even to our Age , all Successions by the grace of Christ have kept , — and then comes in — Therefore ( as we have said , ) we have by Tutus sent , &c. a a Ep. Synod . Bin. pag. 463. Lab. col. 1126. . 'T is plain they are forced to put in these words ( as we have said ) to tye these latter words to the former : And whoever considers the incoherence , the impertinence , the sham story of the Fathers at Nice , and the many Ages supposed , from that Council of Nice to this time , ( which was but barely 160 years ) will conclude this Passage is a Corruption upon a Corruption , to support the Supremacy , while such stuff passed for Authentick proof to an ignorant Age.

The Third Roman Council under Foelix , ( as we noted An Dom. 488. on his 7th Epistle ) lies under the same suspicion , being dated with the Consuls of the year 488 , yet is said to be read in Council the year before , An. 487 ; and from an Epistle to one Neighbouring Country , is now made a Letter to all Bishops .

§ . 7. Gelasius succeeded Foelix in the Roman See , a An. Dom. 492. man of more wit and learning than most of his Predecessors , for which cause it is thought he was called Scholasticus before St. Gregory's time , and that it was he that corrected and set out the Roman Offices . The Pontifical relates , that the Manichees being discovered at Rome in his time , he made a Decree , That those who would not receive the Sacrament in both kinds , should receive it in neither , and declares it to be a grand Sacriledge for any to divide the holy Mysteries b b Vit. Gelas . Bin. pag. 464. Lab. col. 1154. . Now these Hereticks refusing the Cup , were to be discovered by the Priests taking care that all the People received the Cup as well as the Bread : But this happens to condemn the modern use at Rome , ( of denying the Cup to the People ) as a grand Sacriledge ; wherefore all Hands and Wits are at work to ward off this fatal Blow . Binius in his Margen feigns , That Gelasius ordered the Sacrament to be received in both kinds for a time : But if it had not been the Custom at Rome to receive in both kinds before , the Manichees had never been discovered : It is very plain Gelasius confirms the old Custom , and thinks it in all times a Sacriledge to receive but one half : Wherefore Labbè hath left out this pitiful Note . The Editors of Gratian cover this blot , by Forging this false Title to the Decree , The Priest ought not to receive the Body of Christ without the Blood c c Gratian. decr. 3 par. de consec . dist. 2. cap. 12. p. 710. . But Gelasius speaks principally , if not only of the People , and this Sense supposes most of the Roman Clergy to be Manichean Hereticks . Therefore Baronius rejects this Excuse as frivolous d d Baron . An. 496 n. 21. pag. 510. , but takes as bad a method to salve up this business ; for he manifestly perverts the sense of the Decree , — pretending the Manichees superstition made it Sacriledge only in them to reject the Cup ; but it is none in the Catholick People not to receive it , nor in the Church to forbid it : But this is meer Shophistry , for it was certainly the Custom even at Rome in Gelasius his time , and many Ages after , for all the Orthodox People to receive in both kinds ; and he calls it Sacriledge in any of the People , who did not receive the Cup as well as the Bread : For he saith in general , This dividing the Mystery , can never happen without a grand Sacriledge . Now it is certain , that when either an Heretical or Catholick Man or Woman receives but in one kind , it doth happen that the Mystery is divided ; and therefore in Pope Gelasius Opinion , the present Church of Rome is guilty of a grand Sacriledge , in taking the Cup from the People : And it seems , the Editors thought Baronius had not sufficiently satisfied this Objection , and therefore they cunningly leave it out of this Popes Decrees e e Bin. pag. 493 Lab. col. 1258. , in both Editions .

With like craft , they omit the Tract of Gelasius against Eutyches , and only give a touch at it in the Notes f f Not. in vit. Gelas . Bin. pag. 465. Lab. col. 1156. ; and there also care is taken ( out of Baronius , ) if any shall elsewhere meet with this piece , to keep them from discerning , that Pope Gelasius condemns Transubstantiation ; and expresly saith , That the substance of Bread and Wine remains , after the Consecration : The words they cannot deny ; but first , Baronius and Binius argue it was not writ by this Pope , but by Gelasius Cyzicenus , ( an Author as Orthodox and more ancient than Pope Gelasius ; but their Arguments are not so cogent , as to outweigh the proofs that this Pope writ the Tract . Labbè in his Margen saith , that many learned men think it his . Gennadius Contemporary with the Roman Gelasius , and the Pontifical say , he writ a Tract against Eutyches : Fulgentius cites it as this Gelasius his Work g g Fulgent . da Ferrand . Diac. cap. 18. : Pope John the Second , also ascribes it to his Predecessor : Yea , the Bibliotheca Patrum allowed by the Expurgators , put it out under Pope Gelasius his name h h Bibl. Patr. Edit. Paris . Tom. 4. p. 522. . And at last , Baronius himself is not against supposing it was his . But then Secondly , He manifestly perverts the Sense of the words before-cited , being ( after long shuffling ) forced to this absurdity , that — by the substance , he means , the accidents of Bread and Wine remain i i Baron . An. 496. n. 1. pag. 506 , & n. 14. pag. 508. ; Which makes this learned Pope so ignorant , as to mistake the first rudiments of Logick , and might almost shew he was an Heretick , if his Comparison in that sense be applied to the two Natures of Christ , for illustrating of which he brings it in : For thus it would follow , that Gelasius held , nothing but the accidents of Christs . Body or Human Nature , remained after the Hypostatical Union : Doubtless , Contarenus his Brother Cardinal , was wiser and honester in making no reply at the Colloquy of Ratasbon 1541 , to this clear Testimony : And it is great weakness in Baronius , to brag what wonders he hath done , by heaping up a parcel of falshoods and impertinence . Before we dismiss this , let it be noted , that the Annalist and Binius not only allow , but dispute for 500 forged Tracts and Epistles , which support modern Popery ; but they devise innumerable things , to baffle and disgrace the most genuine Writings that condemn their Innovations : Which is Baronius his meaning , when he gives this reason of his large digression about this Tract , — because out of it the Innovators take their Weapons : But they who reject the old Writings of their own Doctors , do more justly deserve that Title .

As to this Popes extraction , Volatteran and Panvinius say , — his Father Valerius was a Bishop : Which is now left out of the Pontifical , and not mentioned in Baronius or the Notes k k Not. in vit. Gelas . Bin. pag. 465. Lab. col. 1156. Baron . An. 492. n. 6. p. 460. : But the omission signifies little , there being so many instances of married Bishops that had Children ; Yea , of Popes that were Sons , or Grand-Children of Bishops or former Popes : As to the time of this Pope's ingress , Baronius places it An. 492 , and upon the credit of the dates of a few Papal Epistles , ( which are always suspicious and often forged , ) he rejects the Authority of Marcellinus , who lived at this time , and died An. 534 l l Baron . An. 452 n. 6. p. 461. ; in whose Chronicle Gelasius is said to be made Pope An. 494 ; that is , two year later than Baronius places it .

§ . 8. If Marcellinus be in the right , we may justly doubt of those three Epistles , [ the 1st , 2d and 9th , ] which Baronius cites as writ before the year 494 : The 1st hath no date , and though the time of writing it be made an Evidence against Marcellinus his Account ; yet he brings no proof it was writ An. 492 , but this , Nothing hinders us from allowing these things between Euphemius and Gelasius , to be done this year m m Baron . An. 492. n. 27. pag. 465. . I reply , the Testimony of a good Author of that Age , who affirms Gelasius was not Pope till two years after , hinders us from believing it was writ then : But I will not however condemn the Epistle , which is modest enough , calling Euphemius Bishop of Constantinople , — his Brother and Fellow , advanced to a Precedence by the favour of Christ n n Gelas . ep. 1. Bin pag. 466. Lab. col 1157. : And when he was pressed to declare , by what Council Acacius was condemned , he cites no Roman Council , nor pretended Sentence of his Predecessor Foelix : But saith , he was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon ; but this he doth not make out .

The Second Epistle also wants a date , and is by guess placed in this year by Baronius , with this false remark , That the Popes by Custom used to prescribe a Form of Belief to all the Faithful o o Baron . An. 492. n. 30. pag. 466. : Whereas the Letter it self declares the Custom was , — For every new Pope to declare his Faith to the Neighbouring Bishops , that they might know he was Orthodox p p Gelas . ep. 2. Bin. pag. 468. Lab. col. 1163. . Now there is a vast difference , between prescribing a Form of Belief to others , and labouring to get from them a Testimony of our believing aright .

The 4th Epistles true Title is , The Monitory of Gelasius : But in Binius these words , [ Of the most blessed Pope ] are added q q Gelas . ep. 4. Bin pag. 470. Lab. col. 1168. , which Labbè rightly omits : In the Monitory it self observe , First , That Gelasius denies his Predecessor or he had condemned the Emperor Anastasius . Secondly , He saith , the Church hath no power to absolve any after their death . Thirdly , He claims no power to make any new Canons , but only to execute the old . Which other Bishops may do . Fourthly , He cannot prove Appeals to Rome by any Canons , but those of Sardica , which were rejected by many , and slights the Canons of Chalcedon , received every where but at Rome . Fifthly , He very falsly pretends , Acacius was only the Executer of the Roman Churches Sentence , by whose sole Authority some Eastern Bishops were condemned . But we know , Acacius had condemned them long before any Sentence was given at Rome r r Baron . An. 483. n. 54. pag. 382. , and scorned to act under the Pope . Sixthly , Where Gelasius in his own Cause vainly brags , That the Canons have given the Judgment over all to the Apostolical Seat : Binius and Labbè mend it in their Marginal Note , and say , The Canons and Christ gave it this power s s Ep 4. in marg. versus sinem . ; neither of which is true .

In the 5th Epistle , Gelasius owns a Private Bishop for his Brother , and declares , that he himself cannot alter the Canons . The Margen again here saith , The Canons cannot be altered t t Gelas . ep. 5. Bin pag. 472. Lab. col. 1172. , — they should have said — no not by the Pope : But here they say too little , as before they said too much ; which puts me in mind of Juvenal's Note ,

Quisquam hominum est quem tu contentum videris uno Flagitio — You never knew a single Sin Content Men , when their Hands are in .

The Date of this Epistle must be false , being An. 490 , that is , two years before ( as they reckon ) Gelasius was Pope . Labbè would mend it , by antedating the entrance of Gelasius , forgetting that he had printed an Epistle of Foelix to Thalassius , dated that year u u Lab. col. 1092. ; his Invention therefore was better than his Memory .

The 6th Epistle shews , that notwithstanding the Popes fair pretences to an Universal Jurisdiction , his neighbour Bishops in Dalmatia did not own it ; but looked on him as a busie-body , for medling in their affairs w w Gelas . ep. 6. Bin. pag. 472. Lab. col. 1173. , and suspected the Snake of Usurpation lay under the florid Leaves of his seeming care of all the Churches .

The 7th Epistle is briefly and imperfectly set down by Baronius x x Baron . An. 493. n. 36. pag. 478. , because he would conceal from his Reader , that Gelasius makes Purgatory and Limbus Infantum a Pelagian Opinion ; Let them ( saith he y y Gelas . ep. 7. Bin. pag. 474. Lab. col. 1178. ) take away that third place , which they have made [ recipiendis parvulis ] for receiving little Children . And since we read of no more , but the right hand and left , let them not make them stay on the left hand for want of Baptism , but permit them by the Baptism of Regeneration to pass to the right . — Which illustrious Testimony the Editors would obscure by reading , [ decipiendis parvulis ] for deceiving Children : But if that were the true Reading , it shews , this Pope thought none but Children and Fools would believe a Third place invented by the Pelagians ; since Scripture speaks but of two , viz. Heaven and Hell .

It is a trifling Note on this Epistle , That Gelasius admonished some Bishops of Italy against Pelagianism , not fearing two Princes , one of which was an Eutychian , the other an Arrian Heretick z z Not. in Ep. 7 , Bin. pag. 476. Lab. col. 1181. . For what cared these Princes for the Popes Letters , against the Heresies of others , so long as he let them alone , and never admonished them of their own Heresies ?

The 8th Epistle was writ to one of these Heretical Princes , viz. to Anastasius ; and the Pope is scandalously silent about his Heresie , nor doth he once reprove his Errors in the Faith ; but only labours , even by false pretences to justifie his Supremacy , which gave too just a ground for that Emperor and his Eastern Bishops , to tax this Pope of secular Pride , a fault very visible in all his Writings on this Subject . Further we may note , that this Epistle was of old inscribed thus , Bishop Gelasius to the most glorious Emperor Anastasius a a Gelas . Ep. 8. Bin. & Lab. ut supra . ; but the Editors have left out the Emperor's Epithet , for fear he should look bigger than the Pope : Also , where the Pope prays that no Contagion may stain his See , and hopes it never will b b Ibid. Bin. pag. 476. Lab col. 1183. ; which plainly supposes , it was possible Rome might Err ; otherwise he had mocked God , in praying against that which could not happen ; and assurance had left no place for hope , if the Popes were absolutely Infallible : Yet here the Marginal Note is , The Apostolical See cannot Err : Which may caution the Reader , not to trust their Margent nor Index , for there is often more in the Inscription , than can be found in the Box.

The 9th Epistle being dated An. 494. was odly cited by Baronius , to prove that Gelasius was made Pope in An. 492. c c Baron . An. 492. 11. 6. p 461. : It seems to be a Collection of divers Canons put together , no Body knows by what Pope . And one thing is very strange , that whereas the Preface owns , the Clergy were almost starved in many of the Churches of Italy d d Gelas . cp 9. Bin. pag 478. Lab. col. 1188. ; Yet the Epistle impertinently takes great care , that the Rents be divided into four parts , as if all things had then been as plentiful as ever : And whereas these Rules are sent to the Bishops of Lucania , near Naples , the Pope's forbidding them to dedicate Churches without his Licence , is by the Marginal Note made a General Rule for all Countries ; but falsly , since the Bishops of the East , of Afric , Gaul , &c. did never ask the Popes Licence in that Age , to consecrate Churches .

The 13th Epistle is a bold attempt toward an Universal Supremacy e e Gelas . ep. 13. Bin. pag. 483. Lab. col . : For Gelasius finding the Bishop of Constantinople at his Heels , and come up almost to a level with him , uses his utmost effort to make a few Rascian Bishops believe he was set over the whole Church : But he shews more Art and Learning , than Truth or Honesty in this Argument , asserting these downright Falshoods . First , That the Canons order all the World to Appeal to Rome , and suffer none to Appeal from thence : But Bellarmin ( knowing these Canons where those despicable ones of Sardica , and that even those did not intend to oblige the whole World , ) in citing this passage , changes Canones appellari voluerint , into appellandum est f f Bellarm. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 17. pag. 98. : So that he chuses to leave it indefinite , that all must appeal to Rome , rather than undertake to tell us ( with Gelasius , ) how that See came by this Right . Secondly , That the Roman Church by its single Authority absolved Athanasius , Chrysostom and Flavian , and condemned Dioscorus , ( as this little Pope brags ) ; which is as true as it is , that the Roman Church alone decreed the Council of Chalcedon should be received , she alone pardoned the Bishops that lapsed in the Ephesine latrociny , and by her Authority cast out the obstinate : Which this Epistle audaciously asserts , though there are more untruths than lines in the whole passage : And if liberty be not deny'd us , we appeal to all the Authentic Historians of those Ages , who utterly confute these vain brags . Yet Bellarmin adds to this extravagant pretence of Romes alone decreeing the Council of Chalcedon , ( these words ) by her single Authority g g Bel. de Concil. lib. 1. c. 13. pag. 24. : But Launoy blushes for him , and says , what Gelasius here saith is not strictly true , and that he needs a very benign Interpreter h h Lannoy lib. 5 ep. 4. pag. 518. ; that is , one who will not call a Spade a Spade : But let this Pope's assertions be never so false , they serve to advance the ends of the Roman Supremacy ; and therefore you shall find no more of this long Epistle in the Annals , but only this hectoring passage i i Baren . An. 495. n. 2 , 3. pag. 500. Though he unluckily confesseth immediately after , that Gelasius did no manner of good with all this k k Ibid. n. 5. . And no wonder , since that Age , as well as this , knew his pretences were unjust , his reasoning fallacious , and his instances false . Thirdly , He asserts , that Pope Leo vacated the Canons of Chalcedon : 'T is true , he did it as far as lay in him , who measured Right only by Interest : But we have shewed they remained in full force , in all other parts of the Church , notwithstanding his dissent openly declared . Fourthly , He affirms , that the care of all the Churches about Constantinople was given to Acacius by the Apostolick See : Which is , ( as hath been proved ) a notorious Falshood ; of which this Epistle is so full , that one would suspect it was the Off-spring of a much later Age. 'T is certain , the Title is very unusual , Gelasius Bishop of the City of Rome , &c. And the date is false , the Consul named is Victor , whose year was 70 year before : Baronius and the Editors of their own head mend it , and read [ Viator ; ] and Labbè tells us in the Margin , that some things are wanting ( in this Epistle , ) and some are read otherways in Justellus Manuscript l l Lab. marg. Col. 1200. : And again he observes , that instead of these words , Apostolicae sedi frequentèr datum est , — it is now read , Apostolica sedes frequentèr ut dictum est , &c. which makes a great alteration in the Sense : The former implying only a delegated power , the later an original power of absolving all persons : So that if the whole be not a Forgery , yet it is now corrupted in many places , by the bold Champions of the Supremacy , to whom nothing was Sacred ; Yea , we are told it comes out of the Vatican Mint , restored and mended , ( we know what that means , ) as far as was fit by Baronius m m Baron . An. 495. n. 1. p. 500. . So that the Impartial Reader may judge what credit is to be given to this Epistle ( out of which they often prove their Supremacy ) written by a bigotted Pope ( who scrupled not at any thing to advance his See ) if it be genuine , and transcribed by such as are convicted of repeated Corruptions .

Labbè gives us two other imperfect Epistles of Gelasius , about his renouncing Communion with those who kept Acacius his Name in their Dypticks , as most of the Eastern Bishops then did n n Gelas . ep. 14 & 15. Lab. col. 1212. . But in these the Pope humbly saith , It is not for my Humility to pass Sentence concerning a difference reaching through the World , my part being to take care of my own Salvation o o Ib. Lab. col. 1214. . Which is so different from the style of his former Epistles , that if these be genuine those are suspicious .

But since all these Epistles of Simplicius , Foelix and Gelasius , make so soul a matter of Acacius his Case , let me once for all here give his Character , and state that business . That he was Orthodox in all points is manifest by his Epistle against Peter of Antioch p p Lab. col. 1107. : And by his forcing Basiliscus to revoke his Edict against the Council of Chalcedon q q Euagr. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 7. . And while the Pope flattered that Heretical Usurper , Acacius made all the Bishops who had subscribed it , recant r r Id. ib. cap. 9. . He also ejected Peter of Antioch for Heresie , before the Pope knew of it , and excommunicated Peter of Alexandria , yea , deposed him when he maintained his Heresie s s Liberati B●ev . cap. 16 , 17. : And would not admit him to Communion again till he had professed the Catholic Faith , and by name expresly received the Council of Chalcedon t t Epist. Petr. Al. apud Euagr. lib. 3. cap. 17. . 'T is true , this Bishop proved himself a Dissembler by Apostatizing afterward ; but that was not the Popes Quarrel at Acacius , the Roman Bishops were jealous of the Bishop of Constantinoples growing power , who flourished under the Eastern Emperors , while their Church was obscured under a Barbarous King : And Acacius by the Emperors consent ( without consulting the Pope u u Liberati . Brev. ut supr. , put in and put out the Eastern Bishops as he thought fit , pretending this power was given him by the Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon : This galled the Popes , and therefore in the pretended Sentence of Foelix , he is charged as one that usurped others Provinces contrary to the Nicene Canons . This check'd the universal Supremacy that Rome had then been for some time aiming at , so that they could have forgiven any Heresie rather than this attempt : Which appears by this , That though Pelagianism had spread it self all over the Western Church , and Eutyches Heresie prevailed in the East , yea , a great part of Rome it self was Arrian , we find few or no Popes Letters against these Violators of the Faith , as if they ( with Tiberius ) left Christ to revenge his own injuries w w Deorum injuriae Diis curae . Dict. Tiber. Aug. . But all their outcry is against Acacius , whom they would never forgive living nor dead , for touching their Jurisdiction , that was dearer to them than all the Articles of their Creed . But while they hated him , the whole Eastern Church took his part , and he continued to exercise his Office ( in spight of all the Popes Sentences ) until his death , leaving behind him so good a Character , that Suidas saith , If ever any man were truly venerable it was Acacius x x Suidas in ( Acacio . ) . Yea , it was a long time before the Greeks could be persuaded either by the promises or threatnings of Rome to put his Name out of the Dypticks , though the union of the East and West depended at last upon that single Point : They objected , that he subscribed the Edict for Union made by Zeno. I reply , so did three Patriarchs more , and that Edict contained no Heresie , nor did it condemn the Council of Chalcedon . They urge also , that he rejected John Talaia an Orthodox Bishop of Alexandria : But that was because he believed him perjured , and consequently unduly elected . To conclude , Acacius was a good Man , and those who will consider the matter impartially , will think the Popes deserve no commendation for their stiffness and violence in this Contest .

After the Epistles follow some Tracts of Gelasius ; The first of which is about Excommunication : Wherein there is one passage that afflicts Baronius ; For the Pope saith , Christ hath separated the Kings Office and the Bishops ; So that Bishops must not challenge Royal Dignity nor meddle in secular Affairs , nor may Kings administer Holy things y y Tract . 1. G●l . Bin. pag 489. Lab. col. 1232. . But the Cardinal will have the Roman Bishop to have at least Regal Power , and Kings to be subject to Ecclesiasticks , who he thinks may meddle in Temporal Affairs , tho' Kings must not in Sacred matters ; citing for this an Epistle of Gelasius z z Baron . An. 496. n. 25. pag. 511. . But I should rather think the Epistle forged if it did contradict this Tract , tho' Baronius wrests the words he cites , and omits a passage that immediately follows them , viz. The Ecclesiastical Rulers obey your Laws a a Gelas . ep. 8. Bin. pag. 476. Lab. col. 1182. ; which shews Bishops were then subject to Princes .

And the next Tract [ against the profane Pagan Festivals ] shews that the Pope had no shadow of Regal power at Rome in those days ; For Gelasius only declares them unlawful , and saith he will deliver his own Soul in persuading the Christians to forbear them : But it was the Senates part to forbid them and take them away , and his Predecessors were to Petition the Emperor ( as he owns ) to abolish such impieties b b Tract . 2. Gel. Bin. pag. 492. Lab. col. 1239. . So that Baronius his huffing Preface to this argument against these Paganish Feasts is very ridiculous . You may see ( saith he ) how he exalts himself against the Emperor ; and though the City was under a Gothic King , he prescribes Laws to Rome without asking leave of an Impious Prince c c Baron . An. 496. n. 27. pag 512. . He hath good Eyes ( I am sure ) who in this Sermon or Discourse can see either any exercise of Authority or Law prescribed , only indeed it is a pious and rational exhortation .

§ . 9. A Roman Council under Gelasius is placed next , An. Dom. 494. said to consist of 70 Bishops , convened to settle the Canon of Scripture , and to distinguish genuine from spurious Authors d d Concil. 1. Rom. Bin. pag. 500. Lab. col. 1260. . But the whole seems a meer Forgery : For , first , the Publishers are not agreed upon what Pope to Father it : Divers Manuscripts in Labbè , ascribe it to Hormisda ( who sat 20. Years after this e e Lab. ibid. &c in Hormisd . col. 1557. . Another very old Book calls it , A Declaration of Holy Scripture , &c. with Gelasius his Annotations f f Lab. marg. col. 1260. . The Decree in Gratian and in Justellus his Manuscript wants all the Books of the Old and New Testament g g Gratian. Decret. par. 1. dist. 15. c. 3. pag. 20 , &c. Et Lab. col. 1261. . Wherein also , all the stuff about the Primacy , and the order of Patriarchs is omitted : Yea , the Notes in Gratian own , that formerly it went no further than to — item gesta Sanctorum Martyrum — So that the beginning and end ( that is , four parts in six ) are Forged by their own Confession ; Yea , the whole , as Binius grants , is so confused , that in many places it is impossible to read it ; yet ( they say ) they have ventured to mend it as well as they can . But after all their correcting , or ( rather ) corrupting it , the Copies do not agree : Some want the Book of Judith and the 2d of Macchabees : Some have only one Book of Kings , and one of Chronicles : Some reckon but two Books of Solomon , some three , and others five : Some ascribe Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus to the Son of Syrach h h See Lab. col. 1260. in marg. Cosen's Hist. of the Canon , pag. 123. . And after all , as to the Canon it agrees neither with the Council of Laodicea , nor with that of Carthage , nor indeed with it self , whatever Binius vainly brags i i Bin. in not . pag 502. Lab. col. 1266. . And is not this a rare Foundation for the Trent Fathers to build their mistaken Decree upon ? As to the rest of it , That passage [ — that the Roman is preferred before all other Churches , not by any Synodal Decrees , but by the Voice of Christ , &c. — ] is not only a modern addition ( as appears by Gratian and Justellus Manuscript , which omit it ) but it contradicts the 4th Epistle of Gelasius , which saith , The supream power over all is not given to any by the Canons , but to the Apostolical Church k k Gelas . ep. 4. Bin. pag. 471. Lab. col. 1170. . The order also of the Patriarchal Sees ( added since the time of Gratian ) is drawn up contrary to the Canons of Constantinople and Chalcedon : The account of Councils make the Emperors Constantine and Theodosius Presidents of the two first General Councils , Marcian and Anatolius of the 4th , without naming Leo , and only mentions Celestine's consent to the third Council : So that this piece was coyned before the Pope pretended all Councils void wherein he or his Legates did not preside . And that passage , That the Acts of the Martyrs are not read in the Roman Church , because many of them are writ by anonymous , mistaken , weak and Heretical Authors l l Bin. p. 501. Lab. col. 1263. , was writ before that Church had stuffed all her Offices so full of lying Legends , and ridiculous Romances about the Saints , the reading of which ( before the Reformation ) took up a third part of the Priests time upon Festival days : But upon the whole I dare aver , it is not Gelasius his work , but most of it forged by Isidore Mercator 300 Year after the time of this pretended Council : Wherefore it ought not to be cited as evidence on their side .

There is a 2d Roman Council under Gelasius to absolve Misenus , one of the Popes Legates , who had betrayed his Master , and now repented : But admit the matter of Fact be true , yet the bad style , and barbarous phrase of these Acts are strong suspicions of their being Forged .

§ . 10. Anastasius the 2d succeeded Gelasius , according An. Dom 496. to Marcellinus Chronicle ( an Author of that time ) or in the year 498. But Nauclerus places his Election ( out of some other Author ) An. 492 m m Naucler . Chron. Gen. 17. pag. 694. . Baronius and the Editors without Authority correct both these , and place his entrance An. 496 n n Not. in Vit. Anas . Bin. pag. 505. Lab. col. 1276. . The matter is not great , and serves only to shew us the obscurity of the Popes in that Age , whose Times are so differently related in History , that we may be sure they were not made ( as now at Rome ) an Aera to reckon Councils and all other Church matters by : The Author of the Pontifical ( who writ after the quarrel about Acacius was over ) saith hard things of this Pope ; viz. 1st , That his Clergy rejected him , because without any Council he communicated with Photinus a Deacon of Thessalonica , a Man of Acacius party : And 2ly , because he would privately have restored Acacius : For which also ( he saith ) by the Divine Judgment he was struck with death o o Vit. Anas . ut supra . . Now all this was allowed for truth by their own Writers before Baronius p p Rolewine . sascic . Temp. fo . 53. Naucler . Chron. Gen. 17. p. 694. Platin. vit. An. Volatteranu : , &c. . And both Ivo and Gratian received it for Authentic History , and placed it in their collections q q Ivo Carnot . par. 14. cap. 40. Gratian decret. par. 1. dist. 19. c. 9. . But since the partial Cardinal writ , ( not to discover truth , but to disprove all that seemed to reflect on ) the Roman See , Gratian is corrected in later Editions with a Note which contradicts the Text ; and the Editors Notes out of Baronius ( which extol the Pontifical to the Skies when it reports the greatest falshoods for the honour of Rome ) here say that Book is erroneous and faulty ; yea , they charge them all to be Hereticks that spread these reports , largely disputing that all this is false : But in vain ; For 1st , as to his allowing the name of Acacius to be restored in the Dypticks ( which is the meaning of voluit revocare Acacium in the Pontifical ) ; This is certainly true : For the Emperor Justin expresly affirms this Pope did communicate with Acacius his party , as the Notes own , and they cannot disprove it but by falsifying an Epistle of Pope Symmachus , and reading ego for nego ( as shall be shewed presently ) . Nor is it any wonder that one Pope should approve what his Predecessors had condemned ; and if this be true , Anastasius judged better than former Popes , whose Eyes were dazeled so by Ambition , that they could not see the Truth . 2ly , As to his communicating with Photinus without a Council , the Notes finally do not deny it ; and it seems Foelix the Senator doubted not ( if Anastasius had lived ) to have engaged him to subscribe Zeno's Edict for Union ; so that he was likely enough to be moderate toward Acacius his party : Only I do not think he would ( as the Notes pretend ) venture upon his single Authority to absolve Photinus , if he had been condemned by a Council , because in that Age the Popes did not exercise any such power . 3dly , As to his being strook with death by voiding his Bowels , it might be true ; nor can I think ( as the Notes suggest ) that all the Authors above cited are mistaken , and put the Pope for the Emperor , who died by Thunder , because the Deaths were very different : And though Binius say it was about the same time r r Not. in vit. Anas . Bin pag. 506. Lab. col. 1278. ; that is very false ; for the Pope died An. 598 , in the Emperor's Seventh Year : But the Emperor lived near twenty year longer , and died not till An. 517. So that those Historians must be very dull who could not distinguish two such different things happening to two Persons at so great a distance of time and place , but took it for the same story : Yet after all it may be this Pope died a natural death , and that this slander of his dying by Gods Judgment might be the invention of the next Age , after the Popes had got Acacius to be declared a Schismatick ; for then the Writers were to blacken all his Friends by such Fables as these . And now that turn is served , Baronius would wipe off the stain again , meerly because Anastasius was a Bishop of Rome : How probable this guess is , I leave the Reader to judge .

There is but one Epistle of this Pope , writ to the Emperor ( his Name-sake ) Anastasius , wherein 't is plain , he thinks the Quarrel about Acacius now deceased , no just ground for the two Churches to separate from each other s s Epist. Anast . Bin. pag. 506. Lab. col. 1279. : Yet for the scandal he had given , his Opinion was , that his Name alone ought to be left out of the Dypticks ; but withal he approves of the Baptism and Orders he had given , and justifies this by good proofs of Scripture t t Ibid. Bin. 507. Lab. col. 1280. . Gratian holds this last Decree to be illegal and uncanonical , because it contradicts the determinations of some of his Predecessors u u Gratian. decret. par. 1. dist. 19. cap. 7 , & 8. . But impartial Readers will see , that his Opinion is better confirmed by Reason and Scripture , than the contrary ever was by any Pope that held it : Nor ought the Notes to say , Anastasius decreed this by a dispensation grounded on his Apostolical Authority For it is an Orthodox Truth , That the Crimes of the dispensers of Sacraments and Holy Orders , especially if it be only Schism , do not invalidate them , to such as in their integrity receive them : So that unless a Pope need a dispensation to tell Truth , here is no occasion for any dispensing Power .

This Epistle is followed by a Memorial given by the Legates of Alexandria to the Popes Legates then at Constantinople , for an Union between the two Churches w w Memor. Bin. pag. 508. Lab. col. 1283. , which they speak of as equal Sister Churches , and give no hint of any subjection due from them to Rome , ( which they think ) had unfortunately mistaken them , as guilty of Heresie : Nor doth Anastasius in the former Letter to the Emperor pretend to any power that he had over Alexandria , but desires the Emperor by his Wisdom and Authority to reduce them to the Catholic Faith , calling him the Vicar appointed by God to preside in the Earth : Which the modern Roman Writers think too great a complement to a Lay Prince .

Upon the death of Anastasius , the Roman Clergy were An. Dom. 498. divided and chose two Popes , Laurentius and Symmachus : But after a warm and long contest , both parties agreed to refer it to an Heretical Gothish King , viz. Theodoric , to declare an Infallibly Orthodox Head of the Church x x Vit. Symmac . Bin. pag. 509. Lab. col. 1286. . Who modestly referred it to a Synod of Bishops , and they at last confirmed the Election of Symmachus . The Notes call this a Schism of the universal Church y y Not. Bin. pag. 510. Lab. col. 1288. . But it was no more than a Schism of that particular Church of Rome , and had no influence , that we hear of , upon the whole Catholick Church : Only a Legend cited out of the fabulous Dialogues ( which disparage the Name of Gregory the Great ) tells us , that Paschasius , a learned and holy Roman Deacon , was seen after his death in an odd Purgatory of hot Water , condemned thither ( as Symmachus Friends told the story ) for taking part with Laurentius z z Not. ib. Bin. Lab. col. 1289. : But it seems when this Fable was made , praying to Saints was not in fashion ; for Paschasius desires the Bishop that saw him to pray to the Lord to release him . The Notes also here cite a very idle story of an Image which bled when it was shot ; but Damascen is his Author , who lived 250 year after this , and whose stories about Images are generally ridiculous and incredible . But 't is more material to observe , that this Pope Symmachus was charged with notorious Crimes , and the Papal power was then so low , that the Roman Clergy petitioned an Arrian King to send Visiters to try the Pope , who submitted to this Judicature authorized ( say the Notes ) by this excellent Prince : And the Bishops ( as they observe ) not only acquitted the Pope , but were so wise as to conceal the fault of which he was accused a a Not. Bin. pag. 511. Lab. col. 1290. . But if that were so great a piece of Wisdom , Ennodius , who then writ an Apology for him , and Baronius and Binius , who now would vindicate him , shew no great discretion in confessing he was accused of Adultery b b Ennod. ap. Bin. pag. 528. & Lab. col. 1342. Baron . An. 502. n. 32. : For which , ( if it were true , ) he deserved a worse Purgatory than his Antagonist Paschasius .

The Epistles published in Symmachus's name are Eleven . The two first of which were formerly directed to Caesarius , but now they alter the Title , and inscribe them to Eonius : It seems the Forger was no good Chronologer ; and the Stile is so barbarous , the Sense so obscure , and the Matter so jejune , that it would be a Scandal to any Pope to have writ them c c Symmach. Epist. 1 , & 2. Bin. pag. 511. Lab col. 1291. . And if Symmachus writ these , the 5th and 8th may be discerned by their Style , to have been endited for him by a more able hand d d Ep. 5. Bin. pag. 512. Lab. col. 1295. , that is , by Ennodius , who Binius supposes did write the 8th Epistle e e Ep. 8. Bin. pag. 515. Lab. col. 1300. . However , this Pope is very free in blaming his Predecessor for decreeing contrary to the ancient Custom f f Sym. Ep. 1. ut supra . : But he scruples not to break many Canons at once , by ordering that the Popes for the future shall name their Successors g g Concii . 1. Rom. Bin. pag. 519. . In the 7th Epistle of Symmachus , the Editors and Baronius have manifestly corrupted the Text , reading is t a quidem ego , for ista quidem nego h h Sym. Ep. 7. Bin. pag. 514. Lab. col. 1298. Baron . An. 503. n. 17. : But the Sense shews the Forgery ; for the Emperor had charged the Pope for excommunicating him , in the case of Acacius ; Symmachus replies , I deny these things ; we have not Excommunicated you , O Emperor , but Acacius : leave him , and you are quit of his Excommunication ; if you do not thrust your self into his Excommunication you are not Excommunicated by us ; if you do , you are Excommunicated by your self , not by us : So that whether you stick to him or leave him , however you are not Excommunicated by us . We see the Pope over and over declares , they had not by any particular Sentence Excommunicated the Emperor at Rome ; it was only Acacius in particular , and his Followers in general , who were sentenced there ; in which Sentence if the Emperor wilfully involved himself , they ( who had done nothing against him ) could not justly be blamed , as if they had Excommunicated him : Now to bring in this Sentence with ista quidem Ego — is to make the Pope contradict himself , and confess he had Excommunicated the Emperor , which he utterly denies , and therefore ista quidem Nego — must be the true Reading , and that bold Forgery of turning it into [ Ego , ] was made on purpose to set up an early Precedent for the Pope's having Excommunicated Emperors . Finally , The Margen of the same Epistle ( to carry on the same holy Cheat ) observes , That the Pope's Dignity is greater than the Emperors : But this is not in the Text , where Symmachus thus expresseth himself , I will not say , it is a greater , but an equal power : So that when the Pope had stretcht a little , they go much further , and dare tell greater Untruths than he .

And here we shall conclude this Century , because the first Synod said to be held under this Pope , ought to be dated after the year 500 , and belongs to the next Age : To which we shall proceed ( with Gods assistance ) hereafter , when we have first ( in our usual method ) noted some remarkable Errors in Baronius , that are within this Period , but have not fallen in our way , as we treated of the Councils of this time .

An Appendix concerning Baronius his Annals .

THE Cardinal hath given a just , but severe censure of his own History , where he saith , It is dangerous to enquire after Truth among later Writers , who are often found to write that which false rumors , vain imagination , private affection and sometimes Flattery suggested to their Minds , to the great prejudice of Historical Truth a a Baron . An. 1077. . Yet he borrows very many of his Relations concerning the Saints , and ancient Practices , from Modern Authors , or from spurious Tracts , of which this Period affords us these Instances .

§ . 1. They will have Porcarius the Abbot to have been a Martyr , and celebrate his Martyrdom Aug. 12th , and yet the History is taken out of a spurious Tract , and he owns the Matter of Fact to be false b b Baron . An. 453. n. 47. pag. 191 , 192. . His report of a Golden Saviour ( so they name an Image ) decked with precious Jewels , made by the Emperor Valentinian , at the request of Pope Sixtus , hath no better Authority than the Epistle of Pope Adrian to Charlemain , which is stuffed with Fables : No Writer of this Age takes notice of it , nor were such Images then used : So that it need be no wonder , that the Vandals did not plunder this rich Statue , because in the time of their Sacking Rome it was not there c c Baron . An. 455 n. 3. pag. 203. . But if some worshiper of Images about Adrian's time , to gain repute to this Golden Statue , ascribed a greater Antiquity to it , than he ought ( as was usual in such cases , ) Baronius doth ill to represent it as a Wonder , that an Image was not stolen before it was made .

The respect that Childeric , a Pagan King of France , payed to St. Genovefa , and the Miracles that occasioned it , depends on the Credit of Surius , and the Acts of that Virgin ; so that the Matter of fact is very suspicious d d Baron . An. 456. n. 7. pag. 212. ; and the large reflexion upon it is as frivolous , in representing a Heathen King as more pious than those ( whom he calls ) Hereticks , for venerating and worshiping the Saints ; for his Story proves nothing of his worshiping a Saint departed ; and if any living Saints could now be found in their Church , I dare say , the very Hereticks would give them great respect .

That Apparition of the Blessed Virgin to Leo before he was Emperor , which the Annalist describes so prolixly , hath no other nor better Author than Nicephorus , who lived long after this Age , and is by this very Historian often censured for a fabulous Writer e e Baron . An. 457. n. 4. pag 218. . Again , to justifie an improbable Story of Caesarius while he was but a young Bishop , imperiously commanding a greater and much elder Bishop than himself , ( Eucherius Bishop of Lyons ) to work a Miracle , taken out of a corrupted piece of Caesarius his Life ; He rejects the Chronology of Gennadius , and talks of supposing two Bishops of Lyons , named both of them Eucherius d d Baron . An. 463. n. 6. 258. , though no ancient Author mention any such thing .

The Relation of an Angels visibly waiting on St. Marcellus , when he and his Monks went to Petition the Emperor against the making an Arrian , Caesar ; is cunningly contrived : For the Author notes , that of all the company , only some few witnesses fore ordained of God , who had clearer Eyes than the rest , saw this Angel e e Baron . An. 469. n. 4. 5. pag. 283. . And Zonaras ( a more credible Writer than the Deviser of these Acts , ) who mentions the Story , never heard of this Apparition at all f f Zonar . Annal. Tom. 3. . However , if these few sharp-sighted Gentlemen designed to impose upon the rest of the Monks , the Plot was well laid , that none but they should discern the Angel .

The Miracle of the Beam of Light , appearing at the Election of St. Remigius , the Apostle of the French , is very suspicious , because Sidonius who knew and admired him , and lived at the same time , is silent ; and the report is fetched from a Successor of his , who writ ( or is pretended to have writ ) this above 300 year after g g Baron . An. 471. n. 36. pag. 293. .

Though Surius be one of his most common Authors for all his Legends , yet he confesses great defects , and many things which need correction , are found in his Collection h h Baron . An. 473. n. 4. p. 299. ; and he in the same Page taxes Nicephorus to be Erroneous i i Ibid. n. 10. p. 301. , yet hath no better Authors than he and Metaphrastes , for the invention of the most Holy Garment of the Blessed Virgin , which yet no doubt the ignorant People of the Roman Communion do mightily adore k k Id. An. 474. n. 4. pag. 301. : Such another Evidence , is the Pratum Spirituale of Jo. Moschus ( falsly ascribed to Sophronius ; ) yet out of this , he Records a very Scandalous Story ; that the Blessed Virgin declared to a devout Votaress of hers , whom Zeno had abused by violence ; That she could not take vengeance on him for his Lust , because this Emperor gave much Alms l l Baron . ●●d . An. n. 10. p. 303. ; which teaches Rich Men how to continue as filthy as they please , and be secured against the Divine Vengeance , if any be so weak as to credit it .

It shews great partiality for any Story about the Relicks of the Saints , in that Baronius rejects all the circumstances mentioned by Theodorus Lector about the Relicks of St. Eustatius , and yet will have us believe the solemn removal of them to Antioch ; whereas we have reason to respect the Story it self to be false , when the sole Author was grosly mistaken , both in the time and effects of translating the Relicks m m Baron . An 482. n. 4 & 5. pag. 355. . But the business of the Annalist was , to defend and allow every thing that seemed to make the veneration of Relicks ancient .

Nothing is more evident in this Age , than that the Emperors or the Gothish Kings ; yea , the Praefacts of Rome made Rules for the Election of the Popes , and either confirmed or annulled them : But whereas there is a Decree about Elections at Rome , made in the vacancy of the See , by the Roman Clergy and Basilius the Praefect , which seems to be very genuine n n Baron . An. 483. n. 10 , &c. pag. 371. ; Baronius rejects it , by the bare Authority of a Synod that hath been forged , ( as shall be shewed ) on purpose to persuade the World , that Princes had nothing to do in the Election of Popes .

The Story of the Apparition of St. Michael at Mount Garganus , is cited only out of a late Author , viz. Sigebert , who lived above 600 year after this time : And therefore the Cardinal ought not to have been so nice , in mending a gross mistake in the Relation , ( which shews the ignorance of the Inventor of this Fable , ( but rather to have rejected the whole Fiction so absurdly related , and so ill attested (o) . Baron . An. 493. n. 43. pag 480.

With like industry Baronius defends two most ridiculous Fables about Images , which Jo. Damascen cites out of Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History , and yet the Facts happened ( as is pretended in the Reign of Anastasius , ) who was not Emperor till 30 year after Theodoret's death p p Baron . An. 494 n. 59. pag. 494. . Now rather than lose such Evidence for the Veneration of Images , the Annalist falls to guessing , who was the true Author of these Fables ; and first he thinks it was Theodorus Lector ; but he writ in Anastasius his time , who ordered this Picture to be made , so that he could not speak of this , as an old Piece spoiled with moisture : Wherefore at last he finds another Theodoret , besides the famous Bishop of Cyrus , but knows neither where nor when he lived : So that such an obscure Writer is not a sufficient Witness to make great improbabilities credible ; yet he takes this for a mighty and clear Miracle , wrought by God at Constantinople in the East , on purpose to confute the Arrian Princes then Reigning in Africa , Italy and Gaul q q Id. ibid. n. 66 , &c. pag. 396. ; Who in all probability never heard of this Story , and would much sooner have believed it , if it had been done in their own Country .

It is very improbable , that later Authors should know so exactly all the little Acts , Sayings and Miracles of St. Benedict , and yet differ almost 30 year about the year of his Birth ; nor are they agreed about his Age and Death . This minds me of a Comical Authors remark upon such as pretend to Pray and Preach Extempore by an Hour-glass — As if the Spirit could teach them what to say ; but not how much — It is ( doubtless ) a strong suspicion that most of the Relations were invented after the time of this Saint , ( little noted in his own days ) was forgotten . Yet I see not how the time of writing the Dialogues ( called ) Gregory's , should prove Marianus , Scotus , Sigebert and Trithemius mistaken , in saying Benedict was born in the year 507 : Because if Gregory the second ( which is very probable , ) were the Author of those fabulous Dialogues , he was made Pope An. 714. ( in an Age of Legends , ) and so Benedict dying , An. 603 , might have four Abbots his Successors , before this heap of Fables was put together , which are very unworthy of Gregory the 1st Pope r r Baron . An. 494. n. 70. pag. 497. . It is worth noting , that this Benedict despised Learning and Study , and ran away from School s s Id. ib n. 73. ; an ill Omen , that his followers the Monks should help to ruin all polite literature , and bring in that ignorance which covered all Christendom for many Ages : For what other could be expected from such a Founder , that was knowingly ignorant , and wisely unlearned ( as this Gregory speaks ? ) But it was not only his Case ; for St. Francis , another Founder of Monkery , bids his Followers — if they cannot Read , never to learn any Letters , but above all to take heed they may be inspired with the Spirit t t Regula S. Fran cap. 8. pag. 28. : Yea , he makes reading much , and getting Books , to be one of his bad signs u u Idem ibid. pag. 91. . These illiterate Patrons were fit to lead on an Army of Ignoramus Fryers , to extinguish the Light of Learning , that their false Doctrins and cheating Practices might pass undiscovered in the darkness they had made .

Further , we may observe , that the Cardinal severely Taxes Trithemius , and other Monkish Writers , for falsly feigning that many Eminent Men , who preceded Benedict in time , were Monks of his Order , out of a blind Zeal to set up its glory w w Baron . ibid. n. 78. pag. 498. . But he considers not , that the same blind Zeal hath put these Authors , ( out of whom he brings innumerable Stories , ) upon saying very false things for the glory of their Order , which probably never were done upon the face of the Earth . So that he should have better Authority than these partial Monks , for the Miracles of their own Saints .

Theodorus Lector heaped up many scattered Reports without care , and is not of the best credit , especially in case of Relicks ; but his single Testimony is enough , to make Baronius believe , That God takes care of a dead Saints Bones , in an Earthquake , which probably might swallow up many living Saints x x Baron . An. 499. n. 13. pag. 531. , who often suffer in such Common Calamities .

Those Miracles of St. Remigius , which are impiously equalled to them that the Apostles wrought y y Baron . An. 499. n. 27 , 28 , 29. pag. 534 , 535. , have no better evidence than two Authors , ( Aimonius and Hincmarus , ) who writ about 400 year after : For that Epistle of Hormisda , wherein that Pope makes Remigius his Legate , is ( like the rest of that kind , ) a manifest Forgery : For he mentions Clovis , the modern name of Ludovicus , as if he were the King of France , and newly Baptized ; whereas Clovis died at least four year before Hormisda was Pope , and was Baptized near twenty year before this Letter is pretended to be writ . From which Examples , ( though but few ) it appears Baronius his evidence for Miracles , and other things that tend to support the Superstitions of Rome , are generally forged , or suspicious Authors .

§ . 2. But when he cites genuine Writers in such Points , he often corrupts their Sense , and sometimes their Words : For instance , Baronius pretends , that an intire Edict of Marcian's is imperfect , meerly because he cannot find in it any particular expressions , to take away the Primacy of the See of Constantinople z z Baron . Ar. 454. n. 12 , &c 13. pag. 197. . Whereas this Edict clearly confirms the Canon of Chalcedon , which had given the second place to Constantinople , by this very Emperor Marcian's consent : And it is something odd , that our Annalist by meer fancy , should assert even with confidence , than an Emperor of the East should revoke by an Edict , and a Bishop of Constantinople renounce a Priviledge granted by that same Emperor , and in a General Council , to that Church , a few years before .

Again , He insinuates that St. Severine allowed the Worship of Saints departed , now used in the Roman Church a a Baron . An. 454. n. 29. pag. 202. : But the Authors he cites , Euagrius and Eugippius , though they writ many years after St. Severine's death , ) have not one word of any deliverance by the praying to Saints : But one of them saith , they were freed from the Famin by the Providence of God : And the other affirms , they praised God for hearing St. Severine ' s Prayers in this Calamity : So that Severine prayed only to God , and the People of that Age praised him alone : And how can this excite the Posterity of that Nation at this day to pray to St. Severine so long after his decease ?

What Victor saith of those , who suffered death by the Arrian Persecution in Africa , That the Romans would count them Martyrs b b Baron . An. 456. n. 23. pag. 215. , must be meant either of the Roman Captives in Africk , or of the Roman Church in Italy , who looked on these Sufferers as their Brethren , and of the same Faith , and so reckoned them Martyrs : But to stretch this Phrase , to signifie , that then the words [ Roman ] and [ Catholick ] were of the same import , is very unreasonable , and what Victor never dreamed of .

'T is very suspicious , that Ecdicius did not get his wonderful Victory over the Goths by praying to St. Martin , because that History is related by two Authors , one very Authentick , that is , Sidonius , who might have been , and probably was an Eye-witness , who doth not once name St. Martin : The other Gregory of Tours , that lived near 150 years after , and he mentions it indeed , as done by the invocation of the Saint of his Church c c Baron . An. 466. n. 10 , 11 , 12. pag. 271 , 272. . But Baronius in the next year taxes him with writing things that could not be credited d d I 'd . An. 467. p. 11. pag. 275. . Wherefore , he should rather have drawn his conclusion from the living and certain Historian , if Truth had been the business of these Annals .

The Emperor Leo's Edict , is solely designed for the keeping holy the Lords-days , which are the Festivals , properly dedicated to the Majesty of the Most High . But the Annalist expounds this of all Feast-days e e Baron . An. 469 n. 6 , 7. pag. 284. , to give more colour to the scandalous usage of their Church , where more reverence is given to a little Saints-day , than to the Sunday , which from the Creation , or however , from the Apostles times , was most religiously kept to the Honour of God himself , as the principal time of his most solemn Worship .

Baronius also wrongs Zeno the Emperor , in saying , that his Edict for Union did Anathematize the Council of Chalcedon f f Baron . An. 482. n 30. pag. 361. : For the words of the Edict shew the contrary , since Zeno only Anathematizes them , who believed not according to the Nicene Creed , whether in the Council of Chalcedon , or in any other Council ; and the Cardinal himself in the next page , only charges Zeno , with tacitly abrogating the Council of Chalcedon g g Id ib. n. 35. ; and Liberatus affirms , the Emperor was angry with John Talaia , for not relishing the Council of Chalcedon h h Ibid. n. 36. : Yea , the Zealots against this General Council , at Alexandria , renounced the Communion of Peter ; because by subscribing this Edict of Union , he had refused openly to Anathematize the Council of Chalcedon i i Id. ib. n. 43. pag. 364. ; all which shews , that this Edict did not condemn that Council .

Liberatus saith no more , but that the Papers were taken away , lest they should be delivered to the Catholicks , to whom they were written : But Baronius out of this affirms , That the Pope writ to the Clergy , the Monks and Orthodox Laity k k Baron . An. 483. n. 49. pag 381. , ( as if he had seen the Titles of the several Letters , ) and cites Liberatus for his Evidence .

In like manner he brings in the words of Liberatus , after a Fictitious Letter of a Roman Synod : And cites him thus , These Letters being given to Acacius , he would not receive them , &c. l l Baron . An. 484. n. 34. pag. 397. . By which one would imagine , that Liberatus had attested this feigned Synodical Letter ; but this Author speaks only of that Epistle of Foelix , which Baronius had cited three pages before m m Id. ib. pag. 394. n. 17. , and knew nothing of any Synodical Epistle .

Thus he cites part of an Oration made at the dedication of a Church , which had been an Idols Temple , but now was consecrated to the memory of Christ , and of St. Peter and St. Paul ; and though there be not one Syllable in the words cited of any worship of Saints , yet Baronius concludes , that this is enough to intimate , that the worship of the Saints did always flourish , not only among the Bishops of this new dedicated Church , but among all Catholicks n n Baron . An. 489. n. 15. pag. 440. : But he must be very willing to believe a false Doctrin , that will receive it from a bold Conclusion , that hath no Premisses .

Again , To give credit to a Relation of St. Michael's appearing and being worshiped at Rome in this Age , he cites a Poet , who says nothing of the worship of St. Michael ; and he would also insinuate , that this Drepanius lived about this time o o Baron . An. 493. n. 45. pag. 480. , to make this Superstition seem more ancient : Whereas it is well known , that Drepanius Florus writ about the year 650 , that is , 150 year after this Age , and 50 year after Pope Gregory p p Vid. Cave Tabul . Eccles. pag. 132. & Du Pin. Sect. 7. pag. 39 , , at which time many Corruptions and gross Ignorance were visible in the Church .

We may also note , That Baronius corrects Marcellinus's Chronicle , about the ingress of Pope Anastasius , out of the Pontifical ; whereas Marcellinus lived at that time , and brought down his Chronicle to the year 534 , and so is a very credible Author q q Baron . An. 496. n. 55. pag. 518. . But in the same page our Annalist shews , how grosly the Pontifical is mistaken in point of time , speaking of things as done under one Pope , that were done under another ; and affirming such and such Facts done to Persons , that were dead long before r r Id. ibid. n. 23. : Yet not only here , but in many places this mistaken Author is the sole Standard of Baronius his Chronology . And whereas Theodorus Lector , ( who writ An. 518. ) expresly saith , King Theodorick called a Synod at Rome s s Theod. Lector . collect . l. 2. pag 186. : The Cardinal rejects his Testimony , and out of the Pontifical and some spurious Acts , affirms , that Pope Symmachus called this Synod t t Baron . An. 499. n. 1. p. 592. : For those are the best Authors that speak of their side .

§ . 3. With like artifice our Author conceals some part of the Truth , which might prejudice his Cause : As for instance , he notes as a peculiar piece of impudence and madness in Timothy Aelurus , the Invader of the See of Alexandria , that he darted forth his Anathema's against the Roman Bishops , and makes a dismal representation of that Crime u u Baron . An. 457. n. 28. pag. 224. : But the Epistle which relates the Story , saith , he Anathematized Anatolius Arch-bishop of Constantinople , and Basilius of Antioch , as well as Leo Bishop of Rome w w Ibid. n 25. pag. 223. : So that there is no reason to conceal that in his Recapitulation , but only to make the Pope look higher , and greater than he was in those days .

Liberatus ( no doubt ) was better informed what passed at Alexandria , than Leo could he at Rome ; so that his account that Timothy Aelurus was immediately sent into Banishment by the Emperor from Alexandria , is far more credible , than that which Baronius deduces from Pope Leo's Letters , of his coming first to Constantinople : But the Cardinal corrects Liberatus by Conjectures , meerly to persuade the World , that the Emperor obeyed the Pope x x Baron . An. 460. n. 3 , & 8. pag. 246 , 247. in Banishing that Heretick ; whereas the Writers of that time say , he did it by advice of a Synod at Constantinople .

It is also observable , that when he speaks of Epistles writ , or Messages sent to the Bishop of Rome by any new Patriarch , he always adds , de more , according to Custom y y Baron . An. 482. n. 1. pag. 355. ; But though it was as much according to Custom , for every new Patriarch to write to the Bishop of Constantinople , or to him of Antioch , &c. to notifie his Election , and declare his being in the Communion of the Catholick Church z z Id. ib. n. 23 , 24. pag. 359 , 360. ; Yet there Baronius leaves out thole words , according to Custom .

§ . 4. But there are more Instances of his obscuring the Truth by false reasoning , and particularly by supposing things as certain , which are not proved , and then making Inferences from thence , and offering such Conclusions for manifest Truths . Thus upon Supposition that the Pope was then above the Emperor , and that nothing relating to the Church could be done without the Roman Bishop ; He introduces an Edict of Marcian's , with a Letter of Pope Leo's , and with this Phrase , The Emperor Marcian obeyed Pope Leo a a Baron . An. 454 n. 4 , 5 , 6. . Whereas that Letter of Leo hath no relation to the Edict , and is an humble Petition to the Emperor to get his Letter to Flavian well translated into Greek , and sent to Alexandria , to clear him from an imputation of Heresie falsly laid to his charge : But the Edict takes no notice of Leo , or his Epistle , or of the Roman Church , but charges the Alexandrians to follow the Nicene Faith , as it was prosessed by their own Bishops , Athanasius , Theophilus and Cyril b b Baron . An. 454. n. 7. pag. 196. : And though there be a mistake in the Month , the Year is right , and it is dated three years after Leo's Epistle to Marcian c c Cod. Just. lib. 1. tit. 5. l. 8. pag 33. : But the Cardinal alters the date , and would add to the Sense , only to support his mistaken Supposition .

Anatolius , Bishop of Constantinople , might perhaps regulate some of the Officers or Clergy of his Church , at the request of Pope Leo ; but it doth not appear , that either Leo did pretend to command Anatolius , nor that Anatolius owned he had any Authority over him : And it is certain , that for all Leo's huffing , the Patriarchs of Constantinople did keep the place and priviledges granted by the Council of Chalcedon : So that the Cardinals Inferences grounded on supposing , that Leo exercised jurisdiction over , and took away the Priviledges from Anatolius d d Baron . An. 454 n. 14 , 15. pag. 198. , are not only weak , but very absurd .

He supposes Acacius was the Enditer of an Edict of Leo the Emperor , touching the Priviledges of the See of Constantinople , and then harangues upon his Ambition , and severely taxeth his Pride e e Baron . An. 47 2. n. 3 , & 4. pag. 294. . But he brings no proof but his own conjecture , that Acaoius did procure this Edict : Yet if he did , it only confirms the ancient Priviledges of that See , and those it was then in possession of ; and if this make him appear proud as Lucifer ( as the Cardinal intimates : ) How many Edicts with ten times loftier Stiles have the Popes procured or forged , to set up and support their Supremacy ? Yet we find no censures of them , nor no inferences , but in their commendation .

It is a false supposition , that Acacius was stirred up by the Letters of Pope Simplicius to oppose the Heretical attempts of the Usurper Basiliscus : For ( as we have proved before , ) Simplicius flattered this Tyrant , at the same time when Acacius moved by his own Zeal for the Catholick Faith , opposed him f f Baron . An. 476. n 46. pag. 326. . But it is the Cardinals design , to make all good Deeds owe their original only to the Popes , and to blacken all that Acacius did , because he would not truckle to the Papal Chair : Otherwise , when Basiliscus doth no more but restore the Rights that Constantinople had before his time , ( as the words of the Edict shew g g Id. ibid. n. 64. ; and Theodorus Lector affirms nothing , but that the Rights of that See were restored ; why should it be a Crime in Acacius to procure this Confirmation from Basiliscus ? I dare say , Baronius thinks it no fault in Boniface , to get the Primacy of Rome established by Phocas , a Bloodier Tyrant and greater Usurper than Basiliscus .

A little after , upon the bare Affirmation of an interested and partial Pope , he saith , Acacius governed the Eastern Provinces by a power delegated from the Pope h h Baron . An. 477 n. 13. pag. 334. ; and upon this supposition he explains the lapsed Asian Bishops Supplication to him , as if it was on the account of his being the Popes Legate : But nothing can be falser ; for if Acacius would have submitted to such a Delagation , the Popes and he had never fallen out ; so that nothing is more certain , than that he ever despised such a delegated power , and exercised jurisdiction over those Asian Bishops by an Authority granted him by Councils and Imperial rescripts , That is , by as good right as the Pope had in Italy .

Another false supposition is , that Timothy the Orthodox Bishop of Alexandria , sent the Petition of such as had fallen in the time of his heretical Predecessors , to Rome to beg Pardon , and to desire they might be readmitted into the Church ; and thence he infers , That the absolution from the crime of Heresie , was wont to be reserved to the Pope i i Baron . An. 478. n. 15 , 16. pag 342. . A Note so false and absurd , that we must suppose those Millions of Hereticks , which on their repentance were absolved all the World over , in all Ages , without consulting the Pope ; were not rightly absolved , if this were True : But he builds it on a Rotten Foundation ; The Letter of Simplicius , ( whence he deduces it ) saying no more , but that this Timothy of Alexandria had sent him a Copy of this Petition , to shew upon what terms he had readmitted them to the Communion of the Church ; and the Pope thought his proceedings were unexceptionable : But there is not a word of their desiring a Pardon from Rome , or of the Popes granting it ; much less of that Patriarchal Church of Alexandria's wanting power to reconcile its own Members ; which was setled on it by the Council of Nice , as amply as the Roman Churches was .

Soon after he supposes , no Election of a Patriarch of Alexandria or Antioch was good and valid , unless it were confirmed by the Pope : Now he draws this consequence from a Letter of Simplicius , which only says , that upon Zeno the Emperors charging John Talaia the elect Bishop of Alexandria with Perjury , ( who had endeavoured to get the Pope to own his Communion ) Simplicius would not confirm him , upon so eminent a Persons objection k k Baran An. 482. n. 15. pag. 356. . Which confirming , signifies no more than the Popes giving him Communicatory Letters as to an Orthodox Bishop ; which was requisite for every Patriarch to grant to any New-Elected Patriarch as well as the Pope : And that it signifies no more is plain from hence , because though afterwards this John's election was approved at Rome ; yet that confirmation did not make him Bishop of Alexandria : So that a Papal confirmation in those days gave no Bishop a Title , and was no more but a Testimonial of their Communicating with him at Rome , and judging him Orthodox : And John Talaia desired such a Confirmation as this from Acacius as well as from the Pope , as Liberatus affirms l l Id. ibid n 23. pag 359. ; and the miscarriage of those Letters , it seems was one reason why Acacius opposed his Election .

He reckons up a great many things ( in his opinion ) grievous Crimes done by Zeno the Emperor , but that ( saith he ) which is more odious than all the monstrous wickednesses is , that an Emperor should establish a Decree about matters of Faith m m Baron . An. 482. n. 25. pag. 360. . Now this is all on supposition , that Princes are not to meddle in the setling the True Religion : But if he look into Sacred or Ecclesiastical Story , he shall find nothing hath been more usual , than for the most Religious Princes to confirm the true , and condemn false Religions ; and therefore if this Uniting Edict of Zeno were Orthodox ( of which we do not now dispute ) the making it was no Crime as all .

The next Year , he repeats the Story of John Talaia his appealing to the Pope ; and because in this Age they have made him the Supreme Judge over the whole Church , Baronius saith he appealed to him as to the lawful Judge n n Baron An. 483. n 3 pag. 369. . But Liberatus , out of whom he hath the Story , shews he applyed to the Pope only as an Intercessor , and persuaded him to write to Acacius in his behalf : And indeed the Popes definitive Sentence in those days , would have done him no good : Wherefore , he only desired he would use his interest in Acacius , to reconcile him to the Emperor ; but all in vain : Which shews that the Eastern Church did not then believe the Pope was a lawful Judge in this Case . It is a bold stroke , under such a Pope as Simplicius ( who submitted to the Eastern Emperors , who ( in Baronius Opinion ) were Schismaticks , and to the Arrian Gothic Kings in Italy , and who could purge his own City from Heresie , but connived at the Arrians who possessed neer half Rome ) ; for the Historian to brag , that the Popes Majesty and Authority shined as bright as under Constantine , or Theodosius o o Baron An. 483. n. 7. pag. 370 , 371. ; and as vain a boast , that their Universal Power was as great under Pagan persecuting Emperors as at any other time : For he never hath nor never can make this out ; and the History of all Ages shews that the Popes power was very inconsiderable at first , and grew up by degrees ; being larger or narrower in old times , as it happened to be savoured or opposed by Kings and Emperors : But it was never very great , till the Popes had ruined both Empires of the East and West .

From this immoderate conceit of the Papal Authority in that Age , proceeds that mistaken observation , That Pope Foelix and Gelasius rejecting the Books of Faustus Rhegiensis , was more than all the pious and learned Writings of S. Caesarius , S. Avitus and the famous Fulgentius , who in peculiar Tracts confuted Faustus p p Baron . An. 490. n. 33. pag. 449. : They must be very good blind Catholicks doubtless , who reject an Opinion rather upon the bare Authority of the Pope , than upon the solid Aurguments from Scripture , Reason and Antiquity , urged by the most famous Orthodox Writers .

Baronius taking it for granted , that to be a Catholic and to be in Communion with the Roman Church is one and the same thing ; wonders that the Orthodox in the East should communicate with Euphemius the Orthodox Bishop of Constantinople , and main defender of the Council of Chalcedon , who did not communicate with the Bishop of Rome : And hence he supposes the Eastern Catholicks were in the dark , and could not distinguish Friends from Foes q q Baron . An. 492. n. 46. pag. 470. . Whereas , it is the Annalists prejudices that put him into this Mist : The Catholicks of the East cleerly saw their great Patriarch was truly Orthodox , and knew no such Principle as the Cardinal dreams of : Wherefore they did not think an Orthodox Bishop less Orthodox , because Rome rejected him for not submitting to their Usurpations . So that this instance utterly confutes his Supposition , and shews how unjustly he calls us and others Hereticks , meerly for not submitting to the Popes Supremacy , though we hold the Articles of the Catholic Faith in all other Points .

Of this we have a further proof in the next Year , when Elias Bishop of Jerusalem ( owned by Baronius for a good Catholick r r Baron . An. 512. pag. 610. , while the Quarrel continued between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople ( which that Author Taxes as a Schism upon both sides ) . This Elias communicated only with Euphemius , and is highly commended for so doing ; since Euphemius was a sound Catholic , and defended the Council of Chalcedon s s Baron . An. 493. n. 41. pag. 479. . Baronius indeed pretends Euphemius was not yet condemned by Gelasius t t Id. Ibid. n. 42. pag. 480. ; but his Predecessor had condemned Acacius and all that were his partakers , and Gelasius was hotter in this Quarrel than Foelix ; which Elias of Hierusalem knew , and yet took the contrary side to the Popes , as the safer for a good Catholic : Therefore it could not be the opinion of that Age , that holding Communion with Rome , was necessary to denominate a man a good Catholick , or to free him from the guilt of Schism .

To conclude these examples , Who can value all those Pompous Consequences which he draws about the Popes Supremacy , Appeals , &c. from the vain brags of an Ambitious Bishop of Rome u u Baron An. 495. n. 2. &c. pag. 500. , which were despised by those to whom he sent them , and ought not to be regarded by us , who know his partiality , and consider he speaks in his own cause w w Nemo sibi & professor & testis est . Tertul. adver . Marc. l. 5. cap. 1. ? But we may note , this is the best evidence they have ; and therefore they must make as much of it as they can . Our Lord Jesus did not desire to bear witness to himself x x John v. 31. ; But his pretended Vicar , ( knowing the weakness of his claim ) most unjustly Decrees ; That when the Priviledges of the Apostolick See are in question , he will not have any Judge of them but himself y y Decret. Innocent. 3. ap. Decretal . lib. 2. Tit. 1. cap. 12. . And if he be Party , Witness and Judge , we may guess which way the Cause will go .

§ . 5. In the next place we will note some of those absurdities and contradictions , wherein his Zeal to serve a party hath intangled this learned Historian : For Example ;

The Cardinal brings in Leo opposing the advancement of Jerusalem to a Patriarchate , and taxes Juvenalis the Bishop there , for arrogating this Primacy to himself z z Baron . An. 454. n. 19. pag. 199. ; Forgetting that he himself had declared , that the Council of Chalcedon had setled this Primacy upon him a a Idem . An. 451. n. 124. pag. 154. Et Bin. Notis in Concil: Chalced. Sess. 8. pag 414. . As for what he produces out of Leo , that Cyril writ to him against this , and with earnest Prayers desired him to oppose it ; either Leo feigns this Story , or the Epistle is suspicious ; since it is very unlikely that so great a Bishop as St. Cyril , should write so humbly , as to beg a favour of Leo then but Arch-deacon of Rome b b Id. ibid. n. 20 , & 21 pag. 199 , & 200. . But Leo did not like Juvenalis his advancement , and therefore Baronius must condemn it , though granted in a general Council : And though he say here , Juvenalis had nothing of a good Bishop in him , and sought the Primacy by evil arts and forged writings , contrary to the Nicene Council : Yet soon after he tells , that Simeon Stylites and the devout Euthymius , ( the gratest Saints of that Age ) gave Juvenalis a good Character , and charged the Empress Eudocia , to communicate with him c c Baron . An. 455. n. 19. pag. 207 , 208. . I confess , I cannot easily understand how any Man can more evidently blow hot and cold , as occasion serves , than Baronius doth in these different Characters of the same Bishop .

He relates three wonderful , if not incredible Stories of St. Leo , and the last , though justified by an ancient Picture , ( which is proof enough sometimes for a serviceable Miracle ) , he utterly rejects as a Fable ; The reason of which is , that the two former instances tended to the Popes credit , but this last reflected something on his Memory : Otherwise we should have had some Author or other to attest it , at least as good as Sophronius d d Baron . An. 461. n. 7. pag. 252. : But this poor Fable wants a Father , and issaid to be unworthy of Christian Ears , and to want all ancient Authority .

It is observable , that those which he calls the most faithful Acts of Daniel Stylites ( and would have this Saint pass for a Prophet ) relate , that after a great Fire was begun in the City of Constantinople , and other endeavours to quench it proved vain ; they went to Daniel to pray for them , who foretold them , that the Fire should cease after seven days , and so it came to pass e e Baron . An. 465. n. 3. pag. 261. : Yet Euogrius a more credible Author saith , The Fire endured but four days , and some say six f f Id. ib. n. 5. pag. 262. : But his Faithful Acts will have it burn seven days after the Citizens came to Daniel . We may note also , That these Legends ascribe the saving the whole City , one to Daniel's , another to St. Mercellus his Prayers , a third brings in St. Marcian's Prayers , as the means of preserving one Church g g Id. ibid. n. 8. pag. 263. : And Baronius calls all these , consentientia dicta , agreeing Reports : But an impartial Historian would have discerned the difference , and rejected them all as Fictions h h Haec est enim mendaciorum natura , ut cohaerere non possint . Lact. lib. 5. §. 3. : For Truth is one , but Fables have infinite varieties .

He makes a severe reflexion upon the Emperor Leo , for making an Eutychian Heretick his Admiral , and imputes the loss of the Fleet to that sinful choice , and his tolerating of Hereticks i i Baron . An. 468. n. 24. pag. 281. . But unless he could prove all Tolerating Princes were conquered , and all Heretical Generals beaten , there is no strength in the reflexion : Besides , he forgets that his Majestick Pope Simplicius tolerated the Arrians , who about this time possessed almost half the City of Rome k k Idem . An. 483. n. 6. pag. 370. , and yet he makes no remark of any Judgment on him .

There are many Evidences , that Baronius did not understand Greek , and one instance of it is , that when he had named the Heretical Bishop of Antioch , Petrus Cnapheus , ( that is in Greek ) Peter the Fuller , he adds of his own , idemque Fullo nuncupatus est l l Baron . An. 471. n. 6. pag. 287. , the same Man is called also Peter the Fuller .

That Baronius is mistaken as to Ambrosius Aurelianus m m Baron . An. 476. n. 2. & 477. n. 30 , 31. pag. 338. , who was saluted Emperor in Britain , both as to the person and time , is made evident by our learned Country man Archbishop Usher n n Usher . Antiqu. Brit. cap. 13. pag. 240. : To whom the Reader is referred , for a more exact account of that famous Man .

It is very impertinent in Baronius , to upbraid the Reformed Christians of these days , with the miraculous Confession of the Orthodox in Africa , whose Tongues being cut out by the cruel Arrians , they still spoke plainly , and owned the true Faith o o Baron . An. 484. n. 94. pag. 411. : For we confess the same Faith that they did , and have the same and no more Sacraments : But though these Bishops did then say , they held the Faith that then was held in the Roman Church , that belongs not to the present Romanists , who have added new Articles to their Creed , new Sacraments , and set up many new Objects for Worship : So that if those African Martyrs and Confessors were now alive , they would no more own these than they did the Vandals .

The censure of Nicephorus , who lived in a superstitious Age , and the Fictions devised in the second Nicene Council to support Image-worship , are no way credible . Xenaias ( if ever there were such a Man , ) was not the first , who said the Images of Christ and the Saints were not to be adored ; and it seems by his affirming , that Worship in Spirit and Truth was only acceptable to Christ p p Baron . An. 485. n. 16 , &c. pag. 426 , 427. , that he had Read the holy Scripture more considerately than those at Rome now , who overlook the second Commandment , and many other places which expresly condemn their Idolatry : So that for ought appears from any Author of his time now extant , this Xenaias was an Orthodox Christian , however in this point .

Baronius hath missed Binius and others , touching the Age of Faustus the Semi-pelagian , as also the time of the two Councils in France , relating to his Opinions q q Baron . An. 490. n. 17. pag. 445 , &c. . But these and some other Errors are learnedly and acurately corrected by the famous Vossius in his Pelagian History , to which I refer the Reader r r Histor. Pelag. lib. 1. c. 50. pag. 106. , for his own satisfaction .

How often doth our Annalist censure the Eastern Emperors and Patriarchs , for tolerating Hereticks ? How many dreadful Judgments ( in his way of interpreting Providence ) doth he note , came upon them for this single Crime ? Yet here we have an Heretical Emperor tolerated all his Reign for 17 year together , and his name allowed in the Dypticks , by many Successive Popes , for near 30 year after his death s s Baron . An. 491. n. 4. pag. 455. . Surely he will not own so many Infallible Guides , before Hormisda , were ignorant of Zeno's Heresie ; and if they did know it , their fault in tolerating him , and owning his Memory is much greater : How much so ever , therefore he would magnifie his Roman Bishops care of the Catholick Faith , when Truth comes out , the Bishops of Constantinople in this Age did more Service to the Faith , than the Popes ; and Euphemius threatned Anastasius the Emperor into professing the right Faith while Foelix flattered him t t Id. Ibid. n. 7 , & 8 pag. 456. ; which is a good reason , why the pious Eastern Bishops chose to communicate with the Patriarchs of Constantinople rather than with the Popes , while the Churches were divided .

It seems the Emperor Anastasius in a controversie about the Sense of the Council of Chalcedon , falsly thought to procure Peace by imposing silence , both on the Catholicks and Hereticks : And he is censured for this vain hope u u Baron . An. 492. n. 43. pag. 469. . But in a like case that happened afterward , Pope Vigilius also decreed ( as he saith ) both sides should keep silence ; and this he calls a Prudent care to preserve the Church from danger w w Id. An. 547. n. 41. pag. 361. : So that Baronius makes that to be praise-worthy in a Pope , which is a grievous Crime in any Body else : Such partiality is very unbecoming in any Writer , but chiefly in an Historian .

He gives it us , as an ingenious Argument of Pope Gelasius , That the cause between him and Acacius could not be judged at Constantinople , where the same persons were Enemies , Witnesses and Judges x x Baron . An. 493. n. 20. pag. 475. : But this Pope aiming at his Adversary , like an unskilful Fencer hits himself : For this is a very strong Reason , why Acacius his Cause should not be judged by the Pope , an Enemy , a Witness and a Judge .

When a most pious Bishop , the main support of the Catholick Cause was deposed and banished , viz. Euphemius , the Annalist saith , he deserved to be abdicated by Gods just Judgment , for not obeying the Popes in abdicating Acacius his Name — and he pretends the Fathers say , there can be no Confessors or Martyrs out of the Roman Churuh y y Baron . An. 495 n. 23. pag. 505. . Whereas Cyril the Monk , cited by our Historian saith , Euphemius was impiously deposed from his See , and exclaims against the wicked injustice of this Fact z z Id. ib. n. 24. ; which this Mans prejudice makes him call Gods just Judgment . But God doth not punish Men for that which is no fault ; and it was none in Euphemius , not to submit to the Pope's most unjust claim of a Superiority over his Church , which had been exempted by two General Councils from all subjection , and advanced to the second place among the Patriarchs . As for his other assertion , no Father of credit can be produced , that did appropriate Martyrdom , or Confessorship to those in Communion with Rome : Yea , this very Age produced a great many Bishops and holy Monks , such as Elias , Daniel Stylites , St. Sabas , &c. who did not communicate with the Pope , but took part ( in this contest ) with Euphemius , who then were and still are ( even by Baronius ) called Martyrs and Consessors . Yea , the Cardinal himself asserts , that those who were slain , or suffered any thing in a petty contest at Rome , meerly about the choice of a Pope , were Martyrs and Confessors a a Idem An. 502. n. pag. 543. , though no Article of Faith came into the dispute : And doubtless , he cannot rob these Eastern Martyrs and Confessors , ( who suffered by Hereticks only for the true Faith ) of their deserved Titles .

In like manner he uses Paschasius , a learned and pious Roman Deacon , who never separated from the Catholick Church ; but when two ambitious Candidates , scandalously strove for the Papal Chair , he chanced to take the less fortunate side : And this he counts dying in Schism , and ( without any Authority ) takes it for granted , that he repented of it before his death , because otherwise he thinks it was impossible he should be saved b b Baron . An. 498. n. 8. pag. 528. . The ground of these remarks is an idle Legend , out of the fabulous Dialogues ascribed to St. Gregory : But the Principles ( of making it Schism and a mortal Sin to mistake in a Popes Election ) are his own .

To conclude this sort of observations , it is very hard that Symmachus should long expect Letters from Anastasius the Emperour , more majorum c c Baron . An. 499. n. 11. pag. 530. ; when the controversie was yet scarce decided , who was Pope , he or Laurentius . And as for the mos majorum , that would have obliged Symmachus first to write to the Emperor , as his Predecessors use to do .

I need not make a new Head , to observe what excursions he often hath to dispute for the Roman side , which in an Historian is not allowable , since he is to relate pure matter of Fact , and neither to commend a Friend nor reproach an Enemy unjustly .

There are many of these digressions about Acacius , the Bishop of Constantinople , against whom he most bitterly inveighs for a long time together ; and treats him with language so rude and scurrilous , that one would think he was some Monster or Devil incarnate d d Baron . An. 478. n. 6. pag. 339. . Yet at last his greatest Crime is , ( in comparison of which all his other faults were light ones , ) he opposed the Pope ! who attempted to usurp a Jurisdiction over him , and to rob him and his See of the Priviledges , which General Councils had granted to Constantinople : Otherwise ( as hath been shewed , ) he was a most Pious and Orthodox Man : And Zeno the Emperor who stood by his own Bishop in this just Cause , cannot escape many severe lashes from this partial Historian , who frequently goes out of his way and takes every little occasion e e Id. ib. n. 7. pag 340. & ●12 . pag. 341. to aggravate his Miscarriages , yea , to rail at him without any cause .

It is agreed by all impartial Historians , that the Emperor Valentinian the Third , did advance Ravenna to be a Patriarchal Seat , An. Dom. 432 , and that it held this Dignity without any dependance on the See of Rome , till after the middle of the 7th Century f f See Dr. Hammond . of Schism , chap. 6. §. 12. pag. 355. . And how they strugled to keep those Liberties many years after , may be seen in a late Eminent Author g g Dr. Cave disc. of ant. Gov. chap. 5. §. 4. . But Baronius , who allows a thousand Forgeries for Rome , every where disputes against this Priviledge , and condemns all that the Bishops of Ravenna did h h Baron . An. 432. pag. 631. & An. 708. n. 2 , 3 , 4. : And here takes a boasting threatning Letter of the Pope's , to be very good evidence , that all the Priviledges of the Church of Ravenna flowed from Rome i i Idem An. 482. n. 44. pag. 364. . But besides that his Witness is a party , we may note , the Priviledges were so large , that we may be sure the Roman Church never granted them ; their ambition to be absolutely Supream , not allowing them to endure any Equal , especially in Italy .

Again , we have a digression about the hard usage of the Popes Legates at Constantinople ; and he not only aggravates their Sufferings beyond what either his Authors say , or the truth will bear : But also takes occasion to tell you , that this is the way of Hereticks , to act by Violence and Terror , and to treat the Pious with Clubs , Swords and Prisons , instead of Charity and Peace k k Baron . An. 484. n. 2 , 3 , &c. pag. 391. . Now if this be the character of Hereticks , the Roman Church that always did and still doth proceed thus where it hath power , may fairly pass for an Heretical Church . And as for the ground of this unlucky observation , Zeno and Acacius did nothing , but what all wise Governors would have done ; for since these Legates of the Popes came to justifie an usurped Authority , and to disturb the quiet of the Church at Constantinople , their Letters ( which were judged Seditious ) were taken from them , and they ( without any hurt to their persons ) secured , till Time and Discourse had made them sensible how ill an errand they came upon : So that being convinced of the Justice of Acacius proceedings , they communicated with him , and let fall the Popes business .

I have touched that frivolous excursion about the worship of Images before l l Baron . An. 485. n 16 , &c. pag. 426. ; I only note now , that if Petrus Cnapheus did oppose that idle Superstition in its first rise , he was more Orthodox than any who promoted it , as to that point ; And it may be the later Historians , who doted upon the worship of Images , may have given this Peter a worse name than he deserved ; Lying Characters of all Iconoclasts , being as common with them as other fabulous Stories , which abound in the Writers of this Controversie above all others .

From two passages out of the Additions to Gennadius , writ by some unknown hand , mentioning two Books , one of Honoratus Bishop of Marseils , approved by Gelasius , and another of Gennadius his own , presented to that Pope , and one Example of John Talaias Apology sent to his sole Patron the fame Gelasius ; Our Historian largely digresses , to prove that the Pope was the sole Judge of all Writers and Writings , and talks as if he was the only Censor librorum , in that Age m m Baron . An. 490. n. 43. ad 47. pag 451 , 452. : Whereas I can name him divers other Bishops of less eminent Sees , that had twice as many Books sent to them for their approbation ; yet none of their Successors were so vain , as to challenge any Right from thence to judge of Orthodox Books : And for the Decree of Gelasius about Apocryphal Writings , it is a meer Imposture .

He complains of the Arrogance of the Constantinopolitan See , which insulted over that of Rome , as a Captive , and under a barbarous Yoke : But he will scarce allow us to pity the Roman Church , since he runs out into vain boasting , that the Popes had the same Vigor , Authority , Power and Majesty , now , that they had in the best times n n Baron . An. 493. n. 22. pag. 47● . But his Account of the little regard given to this Pope Gelasius , and his Predecessors Letters and Sentences in this Controversie , confutes his Brags , and proves this Authority and Majesty was only in imagination .

§ . 6. After all these Artifices used by the Annalist for the interest of the Roman Church , one would not think any thing should be left , that reflected either upon the present Doctrin or Practice of Rome : Yet Truth ( like the Light ) cannot be concealed with all his Artifices .

It appears that Pope Leo was but a mean Astronomer , since he could not Calculate the true time of Easter himself , but was forced to write to others to inform him ; and when the Infallible Guide is forced to enquire of many Fallible persons to direct him in his Decrees , it seems he is left to the same dull way , that other Mortals use for their information o o Baron . An. 453. n. 34 & 40. pag. 189 , 190. : And at this rate , Learning must be of more use to the Head of the Church , than Infallibility .

He commends the barbarous Suevians and Vandals , for sparing a Monastery in one of their Cruel Invasions , and reproaches the Reformed in France , who had burnt very many Monasteries and Churches , at which he thinks they may blush p p Baron . cod . An. n. 46. p. 191. . But doubtless , Lewis the 14th hath more cause for blushing , since he professes that Religion that gives an extraordinary reverence to Monasteries , and yet without scruple , Burns , Demolishes and Destroys often where he Conquers .

By a Letter writ to the Emperor Leo by Anatolius , it appears that the Eastern Emperors consulted the Bishops of Constantinople in causes of Faith q q Baron . An. 457. n. 34 , &c. pag. 226. : And ordered them to consult the Canons , and enquire into the violations of them ; yea , to give notice to the Pope of such offences . And after all , the Emperor was to give these Canons their due Force , by appointing the Punishment due to such as had broken them : Which proceeding was thought very regular then ; but the present Roman Court will not allow it , though Pope Leo himself begs of the Emperor , ( not commands him , as our Historian words it , ) to use this remedy to the Church , not only to degrade Heretical Clerks , but to banish them from the City r r Baron . An. 457. n. 43. pag. 228. ; yet now they will not have Princes to judge or punish Clerks : Nor will Baronius allow the Emperor a Right to call a General Council without the Pope's consent : But the Letter of Pope Leo , from whence he infers this , shews , He was commanded by the Emperor to come to a Council , which Order the Pope reverently received , and wished he could have obeyed it ; but modestly hopes to be excused by the Emperors approving the Reasons he offers , why there was no need of such a Council s s Ibid. 45 , 47. pag. 228 , 229. . So that the Authority was then in the Emperor , and the Pope was to obey or excuse himself by just Reasons . And as to the confirmation , Pope Leo saith , The Council of Chalcedon was confirmed by the Authority of Marcian the Emperor , and by his consent t t Baron . An. 458 n. 〈◊〉 . pag 234. ; yea , he owns , the definitions of that Council were above him ; for what was defined there , he durst not call to a new scanning u u Ibid. n. 11. : Thus things stood then , but Rome is now above this .

If it were so excellent and pious a Law , that none should force Women to be Nuns , nor any to be vailed till she were forty years old , till which Age she was to remain free to marry if she pleased w w Baron . An. 458. n. 4 & 5. pag. 233. ; How comes it to pass that nothing is more common now , than to carry young Women against their Wills into Nunneries , and to make them take the Vows at fourteen or fifteen ? These practices may be gainful , but they are very wicked , and contrary to the Laws both of Church and State , in elder and purer times .

We may observe a visible difference between the Prayers and Usages of holy Men in this ancient Age , and those of the modern times . St. Marcian takes the holy Gospel in his hand , and directs his Prayers only to Christ to avert a dreadful Fire x x Baron . An. 465. n. 8 , pag. 262. : But later Legends represent their modern Saints , taking up Crucifixes , Relicks or the Host , and praying to the blessed Virgin , or to deceased Saints in all cases of danger : So that any considering Reader may see , that the Primitive Worship was not like to that now used in the Roman Church .

Again , if the Matter of Fact be true , that Pope Hilary forbid the Emperor Anthemius , to allow any Conventicles of the Macedonian Hereticks in Rome , for which we have no proof , but the boasting Letter of a Bigotted Pope , viz. Gelasius ; yet ( supposing this were so ) the Note of the Annalist is very Erroneous , viz. That Heresies could not be planted at Rome so easily as at Constantinople y y Baron . An. 467. n. 2. pag. 273. . For Pelagius and Caelestius , who were as great Hereticks as Eutyches and Aelurus , were sheltered at Rome a long time z z Usherii , Ant. Britan. lib. 1. cap. 8. pag. 115 , &c. : And the Bishops of Constantinople did more against Eutyches and his Heresie , than the Popes against Pelagius : And since a little after , three parts of seven in Rome were Arrians , tolerated by the Pope , methinks we should not have the Purity of Rome extolled at this rate , as if no Weed of Heresie could grow there . It is but five years after this that Baronius himself owns , that Ricimer seized on St. Agathus Church in Rome , where he and the Arrians held their publick Assemblies in spight of the Popes a a Baron . An. 472. n. 10. pag. 295. ; who were not wont to oppose Princes who had great power , and only trampled on such as were weak .

In the Relation of Cyril the Monk , which Baronius so highly commends , it is not much for the credit of Rome , that a Catholick Bishop of Jerusalem , Martyrius , sends a Legate to the Emperor , to assist him in suppressing the Eutychian Hereticks , and not the Pope : And that a Saint from Heaven should call Jerusalem the Mother of Churches b b Baron . An. 477. n. 23 , & 25. pag. 336. : For this Title is now wholly appropriated to Rome . But as to the Embassy sent to the Emperor against the Hereticks , Martyrius took the right course ; for Pope Simplicius in his Letter to the same Emperor saith , The Imperial Authority only can keep the Sheepfold of our Lords slock pure — from the contagion of Heresie c c Id. An. 478. n. 11 pag. 341. ; which shews , the Pope's power was not considerable at that time .

It is something remarkable also , That Pope Foelix in his Letter to Zeno the Emperor , should affirm , That Eustathius Bishop of Antioch , was the President of those Three hundred and eighteen Fathers assembled at Nice d d Baron . Au. 483. n. 72. pag. 386. . For now they will allow no General Council to be Authentick , wherein the Bishop of Rome or his Legates do not preside .

The Romanists proceedings against the Reformed , at their Councils of Constance and Trent , where some were Burnt for a Terror , and the oppressed party who held the right Faith , were cited before their Adversaries , who took upon them to judge in their own Cause ; these proceedings ( I say ) , were an exact Transcript of the Arrian Methods in Asrick , when they resolved under the cover of a Conference to suppress the Orthodox Catholicks e e Baron . An. 484. n. 48 , 49 , &c. pag. 401. .

In the Story of finding St. Barnabas Relicks , we may observe all the Prayers and Hymns were directed only to God and Christ , not any to this or any other Saint ; from which we may learn , That piece of Superstition , ( which now makes up so great a part of the Roman Offices ) was unknown to those Ages f f Baron . An. 485 n. 8 , 9 , 10. pag. 424. vide aliud exemp. Anno 495. n. 26. p. 505. ; and St. Barnabas declares , the chief Bishop of Cyprus is not subject to any Patriarch ; he doth not except the Pope ; so that this Apostle seems not to have believed St. Peter's Universal Supremacy .

Baronius presents us also , with a Confession of Faith made by one Lucidus , and approved by a Synod of Bishops , wherein he declares , that he believes Eternal Fire , and the Flames of Hell prepared for deadly Sins : But there is not one word of Purgatory g g Baron . An. 490. n. 29. pag 448. ; which shews there was no such place invented , or at least believed by the Catholicks then : And the 7th Epistle of Pope Gelasius ( as we noted ) signifies , that he knew of no other places in the next World , but Heaven and Hell .

To conclude , the Annalist shuts up this Century with a Melancholy Note , That at this time there was not one Christian Catholick Prince in the World h h Baron . An. 499. n. 13. pag. 531. . He might also have added , that all the Eastern Patriarchs were separated from the Communion of the Roman Church , ( although three of them that were Orthodox communicated with one another i i An. 496. n. 56. pag. 518. : And he might have noted also , that at this juncture there was no certain Pope ; and an Heretical Prince was then Judge of the pretences of Symmachus and Laurentius , the Rivals for that See . But the true Faith can subsist as well without a Pope , as without Orthodox Princes ; the Church being founded on Christ that invincible Rock , against which the Gates of Hell can never prevail .

The End of the Fifth Centry .

PART IV. CENT . VI.

CHAP. I.

Errors and Forgeries in the Councils , from the Year 500 , to the End of the Fifth Binii Concil. Tom. II. Par. I. Lab. & Cossart . Tom. IV. General Council , An. Dom. 553.

§ . 1. WE referred the Councils said to be held under Pope Symmachus , to the begining of this Century : And the first Six are pretended to be held at Rome . The first was to prevent Mens seeking Bishopricks , especially the Papacy , while the See was full a a Bin. p. 519. col . 1. Lab. col. 1314. : On which we may note the Cunning of this Pope , who probably had got the Papey by this means ; yet sees fit to condemn a Fault after he had made his advantage by it . The Fourth Canon plainly supposes that the Pope will name his Successor , unless he die suddenly ; which is expresly contrary to the ancient Canons ; which the Notes can neither totally conceal , nor fairly excuse b b Bin. p. 521. col . 1. Lab. col. 1317. . But I look upon the Acts to be intirely forged in the later Times , as the gross barbarity of the Style shews ; and 't is not probable that 72 Italian Bishops should come to Rome as so many Cyphers , only to applaud what this Pope did ignorantly and Uncanonically decree . 'T is certain there was a Synod at Rome called by the Arrian King Theodoric , which is perhaps suppressed by the Editors , lest it should discover the Regal Power was then above the Papal : And this new Stuff seems to be put into the old Garment , to fill up the Rent c c Luke V. 36. . Now Baronius and Binius place this Synod before the Kal. of May An. 499. d d Bin. in not . pag. 520. col . 2. Lab. col. 1317. Baron An. 499. n. 1. pag. 529. & n. 10. pag. 530. , and fall foul upon Theodorus Lector , for saying , That Theodoric called this Synod , whereas he knew nothing of this Fiction : He saith indeed , That after the Schism had lasted Three years , ( which must be An. 501. since Pope Anastasius died An. 498. ) Theodoric , who then Ruled all at Rome , called a Synod of Bishops , and setled Symmachus in the Papal Chair e e Theod. Lect. collect . lib. 2. pag. 186. . So that according to him , no body called this Synod of the Editors , nor was Symmachus yet Pope ; but these are devices to make the Schism seem shorter than it was . But Theodorus is of better Credit than the Annalist , and Cassiodorus shews , that this Schism was not fully ended until Symmachus his death , 13 or 14 years after : For he saith , That in his Consulship ( An. 514 ) he had united the Roman Clergy and People , and restored the desired Concord to that Church f f Cossiod . Chron. An. 514. inter opera . pag. 14. An. Dom. 500. So that 't is certain there was a Schisin at this time , and long after .

The Second Roman Council under Symmachus hath no Voucher , but Anastasius , who pretends it was called to condemn Potrus Altinensis , King Theodoric's Visitor , as an Invader of the Roman See . But 't is no way probable , this yet unsetled Pope durst do so bold a thing , considering Theodoric , ( to whose Arbitration they had submitted this , and commended him for determining it by a Bishp ) was then at Rome in great glory , loved and admired both by the Synod and People g g Bin. p. 521. col . 1. Lab. col. 1322. Baron . An. 500. n. 2. pag. 536. . But the sport is , Binius and Baronius do not agree whether this were a distinct Synod , or only one Action of another Synod called Palmaria ; however , the dispute being about so frivolous a Fiction , we shall not interpose .

'T is probable upon Theodoric's having declared Symmachus An. Dom. 501. the true Pope , his Enemies accused him of heinous Crimes : To cover which , a Synod is patch'd up , so full of Barbarisms , False Latin and Non-sense , that it seems to have been writ by that Ignorant Hand who forged the ridiculous Council of Sinuessa for Pope Marcellinus ; and the design of both is the same , viz. to make us think , that a Pope cannot be judged by a Council , neither for Idolatry nor for Adultery h h Bin. p. 521. col . 1. Lab. col. 1323. . Besides , the Forger mistakes the Consul's Names ; and Ruffus Magnus put in as Colleague to Faustus Avienus , instead of Pompeius , who is by two undoubted Writers of this Age i i Marcellinus & Cassiodorus in Chronic. , joyned with Avienus , as the Notes and Annalist confess , who yet have the confidence to say these Acts are genuine k k Bin. not . p. 523. col . 1. Lab. col. 1327. Baron . An. 501. n. 1. pag 539. . But it seems they scarce think so , for these Acts say expresly , The Council was called by the Precept of Theodoric ; and own , that they could decree nothing without that Princes knowledge . Yet these Parasites contradict their so commended Acts , and affirm this Synod was called by the Pope , who was the Criminal ; yea , though they immediately after print some suspicious Precepts of Theodoric about his calling and directing this whole process l l Praecept . regis Theod. Bin. pag. 524. col . 2. Lab. col. 1328. . If the whole were not fictitious , I might note , That there is a manifest Corruption in the Acts ; for where the Roman Churches Grandeur is said to flow , First from S. Peter' s Merit , then following our Lord's Command , and the Authority of General Councils m m Bin. p. 525. col . 1. La. 1323. Baron . An. 502. n. 6. p. 502. , The Period is not sense , and jussione Domini seems put in to make the Flattery still grosser : But the Editor's Margin hath a glorious Note on this blunder , and Baronius cites it with great Triumph . Another Trick the Notes put upon these Acts , which in the next Sentence declare , that Symmachus and his Bishops , desired Letters from the King's Clemency for calling this Synod . Which the Annotator turns , as if the King desired the Popes Letters , and though he was an Arrian , durst not call it without such Letters n n Bin. not . pag. 525. col . 1. Lab. 1332. ; which Note is as false , as it is impertinent . For we see by Theodorus Lector , That Theodoric did call the real Council : And Zonaras saith , Theodoric — calling a Council , rejected Laurentius , and confirmed the Bishoprick of Rome to Symmachus o o Zonar . in vit. Anastas . Tom. 3. p. 121. . And they must be able to out-face the Sun , who out of a falsly expounded Period would prove , that the Kings of that Age called no Councils without the Popes consent .

Symmachus his 4th Roman Synod ( of which Baronius An. Dom 502. makes the two former to be only divers Acts ) is said to be held when Avienus Junior was Consul ; but the name of his Colleague is omitted , which was Probus , This makes it somewhat suspicious ; but the business of it confirms that Suspicion , which was to revoke two Laws made in a Roman Synod after Simplicius his Death , wherein ( according to ancient Custom ) Basilius , Praefect for Odoacer King of Italy , was present , with some Bishops and the Roman Clergy p p Bin. p. 525. col . 2. Lab. 1332. . The first Law was , That no Pope should be elected , without the consent of the King of Italy ( then Lord of Rome . ) The other , That no Pope , Bishop or other Clergy-man should alienate things given to the Church . Which Laws they pretend to annul , because they were both made by Lay-men , and not subscribed by any Pope . But first , It is certain that Lay Princes made many Laws in Ecclesiastical Affairs , by Advice of their Clergy ; and these were frequently confirmed in Synods . Secondly , These Laws were made in a Council of the Clergy , as appears by that Title Sanctitati vestrae , used by Basilius ; and Eulalius in this Council confesses these Laws were made , some Bishops consenting to them q q Bin. p. 526. col . 2. Lab. 1336. . Moreover , the deceased Pope had directed the making these Laws . And the Annotator ( who here objects , They were made in the Vacancy of the See ) , in another place saith , The Roman Clergy well knew , that when the Pope , the visible Head of the Church , was taken away , it was their part , by ancient Custom ( as the nearest Members to the Head , and Administrators of Peter' s Church ) to take care of the Vniversal Church r r Bin. Tom. l. pag. 102. notis ad vit. Fabian . . Wherefore he cannot fairly deny , but the Roman Clergy had power in the Vacancy , to confirm a Law relating to the good ordering of their own Church : And the bloody Contest ( not yet appeased ) occasioned by a double election which was lately submitted to be judged by Theodoric , makes it very improbable this Law should be repealed now , when so fresh an instance convinced them , that their Schisms would be endless and intolerable if Princes did not interpose . And Symmachus must be an ill man when he got the Chair purely by Theodoric's approbation , to kick down the step upon which he was raised , and to take away his right to confirm , by whom his doubtful : Title was confirmed . And finally , neither this Theodoric nor his Successors , did ever take any notice of this Repeal , but in every vacancy did interpose . So that I take this Synod to be a Fiction to cover over the Power that a Lay Prince here exercised in making a Pope , or if there ever were such a Synod it was despised , and the Law was in force after this assembly had revoked it . And thus all Baronius his Oratory about Symmachus his courage , and exalting himself above Kings and Princes s s Baron . An. 502. n. 29. pag. 546. vanishes into air , and is as false as this Popes excommunicating Anastasius the Emperor in this Synod ; which is only proved by a corrupt reading of ( ego ) for ( nego ) as I shewed before .

For the other Law to forbid alienations , they pretend to repeal it meerly because it was made by Lay-men ( which is false ) ; But the Clergy here reestablish it . If the Acts were genuine , I should guess this was to put it in the Clergies power to dispense with themselves and their Canon , whenever they had a mind to be sacrilegious : Since while a Royal Law forbad it , a Royal Licence must be first obtained , which would be hard to procure . But the power of Theodoric and Symmachus his circumstances then , make it clear he durst not repeal a Law of the Prince . So that it seems to be forged . Wherefore I will make but two remarks more , First upon that Sentence in the Acts Quia non licuit Laico statuendi in Ecclesiâ ( praeter Papam Romanum ) habere aliquam Potestatem t t Bin. pag. 526. col . 1. Lab. 1336. . That no Layman , but the Pope , shall have any power to decree in the Church . Which passage supposes the Pope a Lay-man , and is too ridiculous to be spoken by Laurentius Bishop of Milan . Secondly , on the Notes I remark , that it is very strange this Synod should excommunicate Anastasius for communicating with Hereticks supposed , since the former Synod complements Theodoric à professed Arrian ( the worst of Hereticks ) with the Titles of most pious and most holy u u Not. in Synod . 3. Bin. pag. 525. col . 1. Lab. 1333 Baron . An. 502. n. 21. pag. 545. : If the former were as true as this latter of giving these titles is , it would more need to be excused than this : But the truth is , the Popes were then so low , that they were , forced to give flatering Titles both to the Emperor and the Gothick Kings , whatever Religion they were of .

After this Council is added an Apology writ ( to answer a Paper ( now suppressed ) against Symmachus ) by Ennodius , wherein as far as appears by the Objections he cites , and the Answers he gives , the Accusers of this Pope were too hard for his Apologist . The Annalist and Binius highly magnifie this Tract ; yet the former confesseth by the harshness of the style , and the horrid unevenness of a false Copy , the quickest wit can scarce apprehend it w w Baron . An. 503. n. 13. p. 552. . As to the matter of it , the Author huffs at a rate which shews more zeal than judgment ; and we note , First , that he clearly owns Theodoric called the Synod that absolved Symmachus x x Bin. p. 528. col . 2. Lab. col. 1342. , and therein confutes both his admirers , Baronius and Binius . Secondly , whereas his objectors rightly urge that the Apostle commands us not to keep company with a Brother that is a Fornicator y y 1 Cor. 5. 11. as ( Symmachus was said to be ) Ennodius saith it is the Prophet David , and not the Apostle which gives this advice z z Bin. p. 541. col . 1. Lab. 1342. . Thirdly , he ridiculously affirms that S. Peter ( who was not innocent ) transmitted Innocence as an inheritance to the Popes , and wonders any should fancy or imagine that a Pope should not be holy , who hath so high a dignity , and is praeordained ( as he blasphemously speaks ) to be the Foundation on which the weight of the Church leans a a Bin. ibid. Lab. col. 1343. , as if the very Chair gave grace to a prostigate Wretch . Fourthly , He falsifies the Scripture , in saying Samuel appealed to the Lord , that men might not exmaine him b b Bin. pag. 542. col . 2. Lab. 1346. ; Whereas the Text expresly saith he appealed to the People ( before the Lord and the King ) and challenged the People to prove any ill thing upon him , 1 Sam. xii . 3. Fifthly , his Maxim , That Peter's Successors were only to be judged by God ; was not believed by the Councils of Constance and Basil c c Bin. pag. 544 col . 2. Lab. 1352. , nor by Theodoric , nor any who had a hand in censuring or deposing any Bishops of Rome . Lastly , if this Book , which is so Barbarous in its style , so abounding in railing and mistakes , and so void of true reason , were approved and applauded in the Fifth Council ; We may guess at the Qualifications of those Bishops who sat in it . As for the Editors and Baronius , it is enough that it pleads for a Pope , for they must extol it .

The Fifth Roman Synod hath all the marks of Forgery imaginable ; for the Consuls are not named ; and An. Dom. 503. the Indiction is also false ( as Baronius confesseth ) d d Baron . An. 503. n. 1. pag. 549. . And he with Binius own that the Subscriptions are so monstrously falsified , that many Bishops are named here , who were at the Council of Chalcedon 52 years before , and belonged to the Eastern Church , who also had been long ago dead and buried e e Bin. not . p. 550. col . 1. Lab. 1370. Barou . ut supra . n. 9. . And it is highly improbable , that 216 Bishops should meet only to approve such stuff , and to order this Book to be inserted among the Apostolical Decrees to be obeyed by all , as they were f f Bin. pag. 547. col . 2. Lab. col. 1364. . This phrase also smels of a late Forgery ; for in the time of this pretended Synod , the name of Apostolical Decrees was not appropriated to Papal decisions , nor were their Decretals universally Obeyed . For we see that in Rome it self a great party both despised and writ against Pope Symmachus his Synodical absolution Again , here is that foolish Sentence , That the sheep must not judge their Pastor , unless he err in Faith , nor yet accuse him but for injustice g g Bin. pag. 548. col . 1. Lab. 1365. , which is undoubtedly stolen out of a Decretal Epistle forged by Mercator long after this time ; and it is wrong applied too , if Symmachus were so unjust as to rob his neighbors of their Chastity . Wherefore the very Book of Ennodius is suspicious , and this Synod is most certainly Forged to save the credit of an ill Pope .

The Sixth Roman Council hath no date ; but the Subscriptions are certainly forged , having ( like the former ) the names of many Eastern Bishops who could not be in this Synod . The Acts are a Rhapsody out of some later Councils against Sacriledge h h Bin. p 550. col . 1. Lab. 1371. , as appears by divers barbarous phrases , and some expressions , that are the dialect of more modern Ages , such as that of mens giving to the Church , for the remission of their Sins , ( & aeternae vitae mercatione ) , and for purchasing eternalllife . The declaring also that the Sacrilegious are manifest Hereticks , is too absurd for this Age. They further say , That the Canons of Gangra were confirmed by Apostolical Autherity : The Forger meant , by Papal Authority . But those Bishops at Gangra scarce knew who was then Pope : And it is plain the Compiler of this Council had respect to a Forgery of later Ages , where Osius of Corduba's name ( the pretended Legate of the Pope ) is added to the Synodical Letter from this Synod ; and therefore these Acts were devised long after this Council is pretended to have sitten . And he must be a meer stranger to the History of this Time ; who reads here that Symmachus and his Council should say , It is not lawful for the Emperor , nor any other professing Piety , &c. For this supposes Anastasius no Heretick , and that Popes then prescribed Laws to the Emperor of the East i i Bin. pag. 551. col . 2. Lab. 1375. . I conclude with a single remark upon the Notes on this forged Council , which pretend , Theodoric obeyed this Councils Decree k k Bin. p. 553. col . 1. Lab. 1372. in ordering the patrimony of the Church of Milan to be restored to Eustorgius , who was not in this Council , nor Bishop of Milan till eight years after : And no doubt that Order was made by Theodoric in pure regard to Equity ; for it is no way likely that he had ever heard of this Council . I conclude these Roman Councils with one remark relating to Mons. du-Pin , who hath taken things too much upon trust , to be always trusted himself , and therefore he publishes five of these six Councils for genuine l l Du Pin , Vol. 5. pag. ●08 . , and gives almost the Baronian Character of Symmachus . But these Notes I hope will demonstrate he is mistaken , both in his Man and these Synods ; and I only desire the Reader to compare his Account with these short Remarks .

§ . 2. There were few Councils abroad in this Popes time , and he was not concerned in them . The Council An. Dom 506. of Agatha ( now Agde ) in the Province of Narbon , was called by the consent of Alaricus an Arrian King ; Caesarius Bishop of Arles was President of it , and divers good Canons were made in it m m Bin. pag. 554 col . 2. Lab. 1381. ; but Symmachus is not named , so that our Editors only say it was held in the time of Symmachus . I shall make no particular remark but on the Ninth Canon , where Caesarius ( who was much devoted to promote that Celibacy of the Clergy which now was practised at Rome ) and the Council declare that the orders of Innocent and Siricius should be observed n n Bin. pag. 555. col . 1. Lab. 1384. . From whence we may Note , that these Orders had not yet been generally obeyed in France , and that a Popes Decretal was of no force there by vertue of the Authority of his See , but became obligatory by the Gallican Churches acceptance , and by turning it into a Canon in some Council of their own . But that the usages of Rome did not prescribe to France is plain from the Notes on the xii Canon , where it appears their Lent Fast was a total abstinence till evening , none but the infirm being permitted to dine o o Not. in Con. xii . Bin. pag. 560. col . 1. Lab. 1398. . But the Roman Lent ( unless they have altered their old rule ) allows men to dine in Lent with variety of some sorts of meat and drink , which is not so strict by much as this Gallican custom .

The first Council of Orleance , is only said to be in An. Dom. 507. Symmachus time p p Bin. pag. 561. col . 1. Lab. 1404. ; but the Acts shew he was not consulted nor concerned in it . The Bishops were summoned by the Precept of King Clovis , who also gave them the heads of those things they were to treat of . And when their Canons were drawn up , they sent them ( not to Rome , but ) to their King for Confirmation , with this memorable address , if those things which we have agreed on seem right to your judgment , we desire your assent , that so the Sentence of so many Bishops by the approbation of so great a Prince , may be obeyed , as being of greater Authority . And Clovis was not wanting in respect to them ; for he stiles them Holy Lords , and Popes most worthy of their Apostolical Seat . By which it is manifest , that Rome had then no Monopoly of these Titles .

I conclude that which relates to Pope Symmachus his time with one Remark , that in the year 500 the Devout and learned African Fulgentius came on purpose to visit Rome : But the writer of his life , who acurately describes what the holy Man saw there , and largely sets forth his View of Theodoric , his visiting the Tombs of the Martyrs , and saluting the Monks he met with q q Vita B. Fulgen. cap. 13. pag. 16. , speaks not one Syllable of the Pope , whose Benediction one would think Fulgentius should have desired : But whether the Schism yet continued , or Symmachus his manner did not please the good Man , ' its plain he took no notice of him .

§ . 3. Hormisda succeeded Symmachus , and it seems by An. Dom. 514. the Letter of Dorotheus , that in his Election ( and not before ) the Schism at Rome ceased , which began when Symmachus was chosen r r Ep. Dorothei ap. Baron . An. 515. 7 , 8. pag. 642. ; which shews that Symmachus having a strong party against him all his time , could do nothing considerable . This Pope Hormisda was either married before he was Pope , or was very criminal ; for he had a Son , i. e. Sylverius , who ( as Liberatus testifies ) was Pope about twenty years after him s s Liberati Brev. cap. 22. Bin. par. 2 pag. 191. . This was a bold and active Pope , and did labour much to reconcile the Eastern to the Western Church , and at last ( in some measure ) effected it , after the Greeks had been separated ( as Binius notes ) from the unity of the Church ( not Catholick , but ) of Rome ( he means ) about 80 years t t Bin. not . in vit. pag. 557. col . 1. Lab. 1439. . From whence we may observe , that a Church , may be many years out of the Communion of the Roman Church , and yet be a true Church ; for none ( till Baronius ) ever said the Eastern was not a true Church all the time of this Separation . The Notes further tell us , that King Clovis of France sent Hormisda a Golden Crown set with precious stones , for a Present , and thereby procured this reward from God , that the Kingdom of the Franks still continues u u Bin. not . pag. 556. Col. 2. Lab. 1418. . Which stuff is out of Baronius w w Baron . An. 514. n. 14. pag. 632. . But the Story is as false as the inference ; for Sirmondus proves that King Clovis died Anno 511 , that is , three years before Hormisda was Pope x x Labbè in marg. 1420. & Tom. V. col. 305. : Labbè , who owns this to be an Error , would correct the mistake , and put in Childebert's name ; but he who told the Story , could certainly have told the Kings right name y y Labbè 1417. & 1418. marg ; wherefore we reject the whole Relation as fabulous : And for the inference , the Kingdom of Franks indeed like all other Kingdoms ( who sent no Crowns ) hath continued , but not in Clovis his Posterity , which is long since extinct . We shall make more remarks on this Popes History in his Letters .

And many Epistles are lately found of this Popes in the Vatican , or Forged there , which we will now consider .

The First Epistle is certainly Forged , it is directed to Remigius , but names King Lovis or Clovis , who was dead three year before , as Labbè owns z z Ep. 1. Hor●●sd . Bin. pag. 557. col . 2. Lab. 1420. ; for which cause Sirmondus omitted it as Spurious , and so P. de Marca counts it a a De Marca De Concord . l. 5. cap 42. §. 6. . And it is almost the same with another feigned Epistle , wherein the Pope is pretended to make a Spanish Bishop his Legate there b b Ep. 26. Horm . Bin. 578. col . 2. Lab. 1468. : But the Reader must beware of all such Epistles , being generally writ by later Parasites of Rome , who would have it thought , that all the Eminent Bishops in the World , acted by a Power delegated from the Pope .

The Second and Fourth Epistles are this Popes excuse , why he did not go , but send his Legates to a Council in the East , unto which the Emperor Anastasius had summoned him , more majorum c c Ep 2. & 4. Hor. Bin. pag. 558 , &c. Lab. 1422 , &c. : Which shews that as yet the Emperors had the power of calling Councils , and sent their Precepts to the Pope himself .

The Fifth Epistle is also to excuse Hormisda's not going , The Title of which is false , viz. That it was a new thing for a Pope to be called to a Council by the Emperor d d Ep. 5. Hor. Bin. 561. col . 2. Lab. 1430. . For the Letter it self only saith , there is no Example of a Pope going in person to a Council ( in Foreign Parts ) . But as to the Summons , that was no new thing ; for Pope Celestine was called to Ephesus by Theodosius , and Leo to Chalcedon by the Emperor Marcian . And in this Letter Hormisda highly commends Anastasius , for Writing to him to be there in person ; and says , God moved the Emperor to write this .

The Third Epistle is a reply to Dorotheus Bishop of Thessalonica , who calls the Pope his Fellow Minister , in the Inscription . But Binius ( contrary both to Baronius and Labbè ) corrupts the Title and Text of the Epistle of Dorotheus e e Ep. Doroth. Bin. pag. 558. Col. 2. Lab. 1422. Baron . An. 515. n. 8. pag. 642. Vid. n. 11. ●bi legit ( vestro ) , reading Patri — instead of — Papae ; and twice in six lines putting venerando capiti nostro , — for — vestro : Now the true reading , I have writ this to your venerable Head , means no more , but to your self : Whereas the corruption tends to impose upon the Reader a false conceipt , viz. That the Pope was the Father and Head of all Bishops .

The Sixth Epistle shews , that Hormisda for two years after his advancement into the infallible Chair , took Anastasius for an Orthodox Emperor f f Ep. 6. Hormisd . Bin. pag. 563. col . 2. Lab. 1436. . But Baronius had exposed him as a known Heretick , and Persecutor of the Orthodox many years before ; and Binius Notes charge him with the Eutychian Heresie g g Not. in Ep. Anas . Bin pag. 563. Col. 1. Lab. 1435. at this very time : Which shews Hormisda was very meanly qualified for an universal Judge , in matters of Faith . I add , that in this Epistle the Pope declares , He will throw himself down at the Emperors Feet for the Service of the Church . But after-times have seen an Emperor falling down at the Popes Feet , and kissing his Slipper .

The Title of the Epistle of John Bishop of Nicopolis , calls the Pope ( if it be genuine ) Father of Fathers , and Prince of all Bishops h h Ep. Johan . Nicop . Bin. pag. 564. Col. 2. Lab. 1438. . However it can only mean , That the Pope was a chief Bishop , because in the same Title he styles him his fellow Minister , and in the Epistle saith his Predecessor Alciso , was a Prince of Bishops , who was only an Archbishop over a few Suffragans , and there were but eight Bishops in this Synod of Epirus i i Baron . An. 516. N. 47. pag. 663. , of whose complying with the Pope , Baronius brags , as if all the Eastern Church had submitted .

In the Eighth Epistle , the Pope distinguishes the Apostolical ( that is , the Roman ) from the general Catholick Church ; where he affirms that these Hereticks were Condemned , both by the one and the other .

After the Ninth Epistle we have a Paper called a Form of Faith , pretended to be sent with these Letters , to be subscribed by these Bishops of Epirus ; but yet is dated the year after these Letters , and hath other marks of Forgery ; the matter of it being not designed to secure the Articles of the Old Creeds , but to enslave all Churches to believe implicitely as the Church of Rome did , which is so grosly flattered in it , that Hormisda might well blush at it , and must take those who would subscribe it , for his Vassals . But doubtless , this was devised after the Supremacy and Infallibility were got much higher : And we may observe , the Forger of it not only claps it in here , but makes Justin the Emperor sign it , and send it to Pope Boniface , after that Emperor and Pope were both dead , where Binius and Labbè condemn it for an Imposture k k Profess . Fidei . Bin. pag. 645. col . 1. Lab. 1686. : And the deviser of it is so fond of it , that he hath thrust it in most falsly and impertinently , in four or five several places of the Councils .

After all the Noise of the Subjection of the Eastern Churches to the Roman , all the Letters of this time , mention no more than the Agreement and Concord of the Eastern and Western Churches : So Avitus enquires , if they were reconciled and a Concord was made l l Ep. Avit . Bin. p. 568. col . 1. Lab. 1445. . Justin the Emperor saith , he laboured pro Concordia , &c. m m Ep Justin . Bin. pag. 579. col . 2. Lab. 1470. . And Hormisda himself speaks of it as an Union , and a receiving the Bishop of Constantinople into an Unity of Communion n n Indic . Hormisd . Bin. pag. 582. col . 2. Lab. 1476. ; Which shews the Eastern Church owed no subjection then to Rome .

The instructions to the Legates last cited , are something suspicious , and look like the Work of a later Hand : But Binius is so taken with them , that he Prints them again verbatini o o Bin. pag. 560. & pag. 568. , whereas Labbè omits them the second time .

The Seventeenth Epistle shews , that this Pope , under pretence of admitting inferior Bishops to his Communion , broke in upon the Ancient Rights and Customs of Metropolitans , freeing their Suffragans from the obedience they owed to their Superiors by the Canons p p Ep. 17. Hormisd . Bin pag. 573. Col. 2. Lab. 1456. . And a little after , because Dorotheus opposed this usurpation , the Pope represents him as having forsaken Christ q q Ep. 22. Hormisd . Bin. pag. 575. col . 1. Lab. 1459. ; a piece of Cant that is common with every petty Sect , in respect of all that are not of their party . And indeed the Epistle of Anastasius , which follows this 22d Epistle declares , that Hormisda was a stubborn and unmerciful man , and not only slighted the Emperor and injured him ; but pretended to command him ; which he saith , He will not bear r r Ep. Anastas . Bin. ibid. Lab. 1460. ; or as Baronius out of the Pontifical hath it , he told the Pope He would Command , and not be Commanded s s Baron An. 517. n. 48. pag. 677. , which was not spoken in fury , but like a Prince ; and had all his Successors kept the Reins so stiff , they had curbed all the Papal usurpations ; yea , wholly prevented them .

The Relation of the Syrian Monks , which we have here in Latin , is corrupted in the Title , and abused by a silly Translator t t Bin. pag. 575. col . 2. Lab. 1461. . The Title is with great swelling words directed to Hormisda ; but the Text speaks to a whole Synod of Bishops , and says , Rise ye up holy Fathers — and , The Flock cometh to you true Pastors and Doctors , to whom the Salvation of all is committed u u Ib. Bin. 576. & . Lab. 1462. ; yet the Title appropriates all to the Pope single , where the Translator , for Oecumenical Patriarch ( a name which is often given also to the Bishop of Constantinople , ) ignorantly , or by design hath universae orbis Terrae Patriarchae ; And he calls the Western Legate Angelum vestrum , your Angel : 'T is probable also , some such Hand hath put in , vos estis caput omnium : Ye ( not the Pope alone ) , are the Head of all ; where our Editors marginal Note is , The Pope is the Head of all . But the boldest Forgery of all is , That Binius and Labbè make these Monks in the end of their Epistle accurse Acacius Bishop of Constantinople , who did communicate with the Hereticks , which is added by the Editors . For in Baronius w w Baron . An. 517. n. 59. pag. 679. & pag 518. Acacius his name is not once mentioned , neither in his Edition at Antwerp , 1596. nor in that at Venice , 1601. So that we can scarce trust any thing which comes through such Mens hands .

The Twenty fourth Epistle , which pretends to make John Bishop of Tarragon the Popes Legate , and speaks of his coming to Italy , and having Papal Constitutions sent him x x Ep. 24. Hormisd . Bin. pag. 57● . col . 2. Lab. 1466. , not only confirms our Note , that all such kind of Epistles are forged , but is certainly spurious it self . For in this year ( 517 , ) this John presided in the Council of Gyrone in Spain , where he and his fellow Bishops made Canons , and take no notice of the Pope , or any Legantine Power : And the Editors differ about the date of this Epistle . And probably the next Epistle containing the Constitutions is forged also y y Ep. 25. Hormisd . Bin. pag. 579. Lab. 1467. , being directed to all the Bishops of Spain , who were not then under any one King nor Primate — And whereas this Letter speaks of peaceable times ; it is certain these Gothick Arrian Kings , were almost continually at War with France , and with each other : However the Inventer of these Epistles is not very Modern : For he makes Christ the Head of the Church , and Bishops to be his Vicars : And Penitents are here forbid to be chosen Bishops , because they could not decently absolve others , who had openly confessed their own Sins before the People . Which shews , the Pope was not Christs sole Vicar then : And that there was no Auricular Confession when this was writ .

§ . 3. Justin being upon Anastasius his death unexpectedly An. Dom. 518. made Emperor , gives the Pope notice of it , and requires his Prayers ; This Hormisda ( if his Letter be genuine ) craftily calls , offering up the first fruits of his Empire to St. Peter z z Horm . Ep. 27. Bin. pag. 579. col . 1. Lab. 1470. : And the Notes add , That it was the ancient use to certifie the Pope of the new elected Emperor , and to request him to confirm and consecrate him . But I have shewed it was a much more ancient Custom , for the Pope to certifie the Emperor of his Election : Only when an Emperor came to the Throne without a good Title , ( which was Justin's case , ) it was such an Emperor's interest to gain the Pope's favour . But as for either Consecration or Confirmation , there is not one word of it ; that is a device out of Baronius Brain , and the Annotator takes it from him of trust a a Baron . An. 518. n. 2 , 3. pag. 2. Tom. 7. ; and he was owned Emperor by all , long before this notice .

The Epistle of John Bishop of Constantinople , in the Title calls Hormisda , His most Holy Brother and Fellow-Minister b b Ep. to Censt . Bin. pag. 580. col . 1. Lab. ; and in the Letter he calls him , Most dear Brother in Christ ; which Phrases Epiphanius also his Successor uses in his Epistle to the same Pope c c Ep. Epiph. Bin. pag. 605. col . 2. Lab. 1534. : And from John's Epistle we learn , that when Old Rome left out the names of the Patriarches of Constantinople , in their Dypticks : These put out the Popes name from their Dypticks , which shews no subjection was owned or expected , and that the Eastern Church was on even ground with the Pope in those days , despising his Communion as much as he did theirs .

An Epistle writ to Caesarius Bishop of Arles , this year , is suspicious , because Baronius had mentioned his Will and Testament ten year before d d Baron . An. 508. n. 30. pag. 589. : But if he were now alive , we must correct the Title in Binius , where he is called , The Vicar of the Apostolick See in France : Which words are so manifest a Forgery that Labbè left them out . But we may suspect the whole , since the Pope never names his last Embassy before this time received from the Emperor and Patriarch of Constantinople , when he pretends to give an Account of the Affairs in the East to this Caesarius .

The Legates Instructions here begin as the former did , viz. When by Gods Mercy , ye come into the Eastern parts e e Indic . 2. Bin. pag. 582. col . 1. Lab. , &c. and the Legates in their third Suggestion , ascribe their safe Journy only to Gods Mercy f f Sug. 3. Bin. pag. 585. col . 2. Lab. 1485. . So that probably those words ( in the first instructions ) — and the Prayers of the Apostles , are added by a later hand , when they used so often to pray to Saints , as to give them a share of the Glory due to God for his Mercy .

The same hand , to countenance the same practice , seems to have corrupted the Thirty seventh Epistle , where Hormisdu tells Justinian — He did daily and humbly beseech the Apostle Peter , that God might give a speedy issue to his endeavours g g B. Petrum Ap. — obsecramus , Leg. — apud B. Petrum Apostolum . — obsecramus . Ep. 37. Hormisd . Bin. pag. 584. Col. 2. Lab. 1483. : Which borders both on Blasphemy and Nonsense , but probably the true reading was — apud B. Petrum — obsecramus . That the Pope pray'd daily at St. Peter's Church to God , for Justinian's speedy success .

That the Eastern and Western Church were united about this time is true ; but I am apt to believe , that those many particular circumstances , which Baronius and these Editors have out of a sort of reports of the Popes Legates , Letters and other Papers , lately found ( it seems ) in the Vatican , are of later invention . The Epistle of John Bishop of Constantinople , wherein he is pretended to subscribe that flattering confession of Faith , formerly said to be subscribed by the Bishops of Epirus h h Libel . Johan . Bin. pag. 586. Col. 1. 〈◊〉 Lab. 1486. , is certainly a Forgery , that some Parasite hath transcribed as often as any Eminent person was reconciled to the Pope ; and therefore , a little after ( as I noted but now ) he ascribes the same Form to the Emperor Justin , three years after he was dead : There is no proof of this John's subscribing any such Paper , but only the relation of Dioscorus , one of the Pope's Legates , which is certainly false , because he saith , That at this time ( An. 519. ) John consented to rase the names of Phravites , Euphemius , Macedonius and Timotheus out of the Dypticks , as well as the name of Acacius , upon which Baronius Triumphs most extreamly i i Baron . An. 519. n. 54. pag. 32. Tom. 7. : But without any cause ; for if he had not craftily omitted an Epistle of Justinian's , writ the next year k k id . An. 520. n. 4. pag. 55. , ( which is in Binius l l Ep. Justinian . Bin. pag. 610. Col. 2. Lab. 1547. , ) it would have appeared that the Eastern Church would not yield to rase out any more names , but only that of Acacius . But Baronius hath later Epistles of Justinian which expresly say , ( a year after this pretended rasing out the names of Euphemius , &c. ) that only Acacius his Name was left out of the Dypticks , and that the scruple about the other names was not to be medled with ; for the Eastern Bishops would never yield that point m m Baron . An. 520. n. 35 , 36. pag. 62. . And Justin the Emperor saith the same to Hormisda n n Idem 520. n. 56. pag. 66. ; yea , in the year 521 , we find the Emperor still requiring the Pope should communicate with those who only left out Acacius his name , but kept in the other Bishops names o o Id. An. 521. n. 6. pag. 72. . All which is sufficient to prove this Story of Dioscorus to be a meer Fiction : Yet it may be confirmed also by the Chronicle of Victor ; who mentions no Bishops name of Constantinople but Acacius , that was rejected when the Emperor Justin reconciled the Eastern and Western Bishops p p Victor . Tuen . Chron. pag. 7. Valer. & Just. Coss . An. 521. : And no Writers of this or the next Age do mention this pretended submission of John of Constantinople ; Marcellinus , Cassiodorus , Euagrius and Paulus Diaconus are wholly silent in this matter : And if we consider how the Scene is dressed up with variety of Letters , ( lately found out ) we shall be tempted to think this part of the Epistles are forged ; yet we may allow what Baronius saith , that this abundance of Letters may make us that read them now , know more of this case , than they who lived in that Age knew , if they never saw these Letters q q Baron . An. 519. n. 27. & pag. 27. . For 't is probable neither Hormisda , nor his Legates , nor Justin , Justinian , &c. did ever see these Epistles that now appear under their names , so that we may very well know more than they did ; but the reason is only , because we know more than is true .

We may discover some marks of Forgery in divers of these Papers ; As that most of them want the Consuls Names , and are not dated ; That Germanus says , he was received in Procession with Wax Candles and Crosses r r Baron . An. 519. n. 35. pag. 29. ; a Custom of a later date ; for we have no Crosses in another Procession described by a Writer of that time s s Id. An. 522. n. 14. pag. 83. . The calling Hormisda in one of the Letters , Arch-Bishop of the Universal Church t t Ep. Anastas . Bin. pag. 589. col . 1. Lab. 1494. ; and the Emperors giving the Popes Legate the Title of His Angel u u Ib. Lab. 1516 Bin. pag. 598. col. 1. ; These , with many other things that might be observed , make it probable these Papers were Invented for a Pattern to the poor Greeks , when the design of subjecting them to the Latin Church , was on foot in later Ages .

§ . 4. To proceed : Whereas Justinian in one particular point desires the Opinion of Hormisda , and complements him so far as to tell him , He will believe that to be Orthodox , which he shall answer w w Ep. Justin . ap. Baron . An. 519. n. 100. pag. 43. Bin. p. 598 col . 2. Lab. 1517. ; Baronius prints this in great Letters , and Binius from this particular Assertion draws a general Inference in his Margen , viz. That which is defined by the Pope , is to be received by all for the Catholick Faith . A Consequence so absurd , that Labbè is ashamed of it and leaves it out , as well he might , since Justinian did not agree with the Pope in this Question , after he had received his Answer . And the dissenting Eastern Bishops , at this time reckoned Hormisda to be a Nestorian x x Sug. Germ. Bin. pag. 597. col . 2. Lab. 1514. , if we can credit any of these Papers . So that doubtless Justinian never thought a Pope Infallible .

In another Epistle ascribed to John of Constantinople , not so very truckling as the former , that Bishop is made to say , by the help of the Intercession of the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity , and of the glorious and true Mother of God y y Relat. Joh. Constant . Bin. pag. 600. col . 2. Lab. 1521. . A Phrase too absurd for any Bishop to use : For with whom should the Trinity intercede , or what can be more ridiculous than equalling the Virgins Intercession to the Trinity , unless it be the making the Trinity pray to it self ? Labbè boldly attempts to mend this Sentence , but without Authority ; and after all , it s evidently writ by a later Hand .

If the next relation of Germanus be true , it appears , No cause of a Bishop of the East could be tried at Rome , without the consent of the Emperor , who expresly forbids the trying the Cause of Dorotheus at Rome , though the Pope earnestly desired it might be judged there z z Sug. G●rm . Bin. pag 600. col . 2. Lab. 1522. , as Baronius also confesseth a a Baron . An. 519. n. 142. pag. 52. .

By the relation from the Synod at Constantinople it appears , that they call their new elected Patriarch Epiphanius , The Popes own Brother , and fellow Minister ; and count their joynt endeavours , to be one Brothers helping another b b Relat Synod . Const. Bin. pag. 601. col . 2. Lab. 1524. . Binius strives to blunder this by printing it , Germanum vestrum , as if it were the proper name of the Popes Legate . But Labbè honestly restores the true reading germanum vestrum .

The Epistle next to this bears the name of Justinianus Augustus ; yet is dated Anno 520 c c Epist. Justin . Bin. pag 602. c. 1. Lab. 1526. , which is a gross mistake ; for he was not styled Augustus till near seven year after , as Baronius owns Anno 527. Yea , after this Justinian is styled Vir illustris d d Bin. pag. 606. Lab. 1536. ; and for certain was not Emperor when this Letter is said to be writ .

The Notes after Hormisda's 70th Epistle , do bitterly inveigh against Johannes Maxentius , and the Scythian Monks , as notorious Lyers , and Eutychian Hereticks ; and Labbè is more severe in his Censure than Binius or Baronius e e Ep. 70. Horm . Bin. pag. 605. col . 1. Lab. 1532. Baron . An. 519. n. 101. pag. 43. . But they are all mistaken ; For this Maxentius was entirely Orthodox , and defended the Council of Chalcedon against the Eutychians , as is fully proved by two learned and judicious Writers , Bishop Usher and Forbesius f f Usher . Antiq. Britan. cap. 14. pag. 256. Forbes . Instruct . Theolog. lib. 3. cap 21. . And we may be sure Baronius first invented this false accusation , ( thinking it impossible any Man but a Heretick could write against the Pope ) , to be revenged on Maxentius for so bold a Fact . But in the Age before , Cochlaeus a Papist or Catholick ( as Baronius calls him ) did honestly put out Maxentius his Works , as an Orthodox Writer , though Maxentius do write against the Epistle under Hormisda's Name , to Possessor an African Bishop ; and proves whoever was the Author of that Epistle , was a Lyer and an Heretick , as were also Possessor and Dioscorus , one of the Popes Legates ; and he further justifies himself , and the Scythian Monks , blaming the Pope for banishing them from Rome : Saying amongst other thing , If the Bishop of Rome should prohibit us to confess Christ , the Son , to be one of the Holy and undivided Trinity , the Church would never yield to him , nor respect him as an Orthodox Bishop , but utterly Accurse him as an Heretick g g Oper. Max. edit. Cochlaei , fol. 31. . So that no body then believed the Pope to be Infallible ; and for Hormisda , Maxentius suspects him to be a favourer of Pelagianism . The Emperor Justin speaking of the Church of Hierusalem , saith , that all men shew [ tantum favorem , the Editors read tamen , only to blunder the Period ] so much favour to it , as to the Mother of the Christian Name , that none dare separate from it h h Epist. Justin . Bin pag. 608. col . 2. Lab. 1542. . Had this been said of Rome , how would the Parasites have Triumphed ? Yet wanting real Encomiums , in the next Paper they steal one ; and where the Eastern Clergy speak of their own Churches which had not swerved from the Faith delivered to them ; The Editors apply this to Rome , and say in the Margen i i Bin. p. 609. col . 1. Lab. 1543. , The Roman Church never deviated from right Doctrin : But the Reader will find there is no mention of the Roman Church in that place ; only S. Peter , who founded that of Antioch , is pointed at a little before .

Before Hormisáa's 77th Epistle there is one of Justinian , to Hormisda ; wherein he declares , that after the Controversie was setled ultra non patiemur ( they blunder it by reading nos patiemur ) He will not suffer any one under that Government to stir any more in it k k Ep. Justin . Bin. pag. 611. col . 1. Lab. 1547. : Which is a brisk Order to the Pope , in a cause of Religion . For which reason , and because it shews , that he and the Greeks would not yield to leave out any Name , but that of Acacius , Baronius omits it , and only prints the answer to it l l Baron . An. 520. n. 4. p. 55. Tom. vii . : For this was writ the year after the pretended consent of the Patriarch of Constantinople , to rase out Euthymius , and Macedonius , with other Names out of the Dypticks .

We cannot leave this Pope without some remarks on his carriage in answer to the Question propounded to him by Justinian , viz. Whether it were Orthodox to say ( as the Scythian Monks did ) one of the Trinity was crucified for us ? Dioscorus the Popes Legate represented this Sentence to Hormisda , as Heretical , and that to allow it would open a gap to many Heresies m m Baron . An. 519. n. 82 , 83. pag. 39. . The Pope first determined to refer the controversie to the Bishop , of Constantinople , as appears by another relation of Dioscorus n n Bin. p. 599. col. 2. ; though Baronius would conceal this , by omitting the beginning of this Paper o o Baron . An. 519. n. 124. pag 48. : But probably Dioscorus durst not trust this Question with the Patriarch of Constantinople . So that Hormisda not yet declaring himself , Justinian writ to him , that he and the Eastern Church thought this Sentence Orthodox , and required his consent to their Faith p p Id. An. 520 n. 37. pag. 62. , which he further shews in another Epistle complaining of the Popes delays q q Ep. Justin . Bin. pag. 610. Col. 2. . At last , after a long time Hormisda writes a shuffling Letter to the Emperor , wherein Baronius saith he utterly exploded this Sentence r r Baron . An. 521. n. 26 , 27. pag 77. : Yea , Baronius owns afterward , that this Pope would have all Catholicks abhor these words ; One of the Trinity suffered in the Flesh s s Baron . An. 533. n. 4. pag. 179. . But this very Sentence afterward appeared to be True and Orthodox , and they who condemned it were declared Hereticks . Yea , the Scythian Monks appealed from this Pope to that most learned and orthodox Father Fulgentius , who declared they were in the right , and that he believed as they did t t Vid. opera Fulg ep. ad Monach. col. 272. . And finally , one of the succeeding Popes joyned with Justinian and the Orthodox Christians to confirm this Sentence : So that this Pope and his Legate were both on the Heretical side , which spoils the Infallibility .

§ . 5. The Councils abroad in this Popes times take An. Dom. 514. no notice of him , yet bear the Title of being held under him : The first , ( Binius says ) was at Rhemes , and he cites for this Flodoardus u u Cone . Rhem. Bin pag. 614. col 2. Lab. 1572. . But Labbè calls this , a Synod at an uncertain place , and gives us Binius his Notes ; but cites the words of Flodoardus ; by which it appears that Rhemigius his being made the Popes Legate , and calling this Synod there by a Legantine power , are Fictions of Baronius and Binius , taken out of the first forged Epistle of Hormisda , and falsly charged upon Flodoardus , who saith no such thing : And Sirmondus with P. de Marca say , Rhemigius was not the Popes Legate : Which manifestly appears from two Epistles of his , writ ten year after this feigned delegation w w Ep. Rhem. Lab. col. 1608. An. 524. , concerning an Invasion made upon his jurisdiction , wherein he never urges any sort of power as Legate , but pleads his original right as a Metropolitan : And from Baronius and his Plagiary citing Flodoardus at large for this , compared with the words of that Author in Labbè ; the Reader may learn , these Writers are never to be trusted in any Quotation relating to the Pope , till the Authors be searched .

The Council of Tarragon was not under Hormisda , An. Dom. 516. though it were in his time x x Concil. Tarrac . Bin. pag. 615. Lab 1562. ; The Bishops there acting independently on Rome , whose Popes Decrees of dividing the Church Revenues into four parts , they contradict , and divide it only into three y y Not. Bin. pag 617. Lab. 1566. in the eighth Canon : And in the eleventh , they order concerning the Discipline of Monks , the Gallican Canons shall above all others be observed .

Binius misplaces the Council of Pau , Anno Dom. 509. An Dom. 51● . But Labbè sets it in this year rightly ; it was called ( not by the Pope , but ) by Sigismund King of Burgundy , as all Provincial and National Synods in that age were ; the famous Alcimus Avitus was President of it , and the Pope had no hand in it ; for which reason these lesser Councils are more sincere than any , where Rome or the Pope is named , for there the Forgers are always tempted to leave , add , or alter something .

The same year was a Council held at Gyrone in Spain , not under the Pope , but under John of Tarragon ; and though by Hormisda's forged Epistles , he be pretended to have been the Pope's Legate a a See these Notes on Ep. 24. Horm . , and that he received Constitutions from Rome , it is plain this Council proceeds upon its own Authority b b Concil. Gerund . Bin. pag. 618 , &c. Lab. 1567. An. Dom. 518. , and makes its own Rules ; which shews these Fictions are of a later date .

The Council of Constantinople is falsly titled under Hormisda ; the Union was not yet made , and Hormisda sent not his Legates till next year , so that it is very trifling for the Editors to say , it was partly reprobated at Rome c c Concil. Const. Bin. pag. 620. col . 1. Lab. 1586. , because this Synod consisted only of Eastern Bishops , called by Justin the Emperor ; and their own Patriarch John of Constantinople presided , whom they call , Most Holy and Blessed Father of Fathers , Archbishop and Oecumenical Patriarch d d Bin. p. 725. Col. 2. Lab. Tom. 5. p. 162. , and of him and Justin , only do they desire their Acts to be confirmed . And not only they , but two Eastern Synods also at Jerusalem and Tyre ratified these Decrees , which gave them a sufficient Authority ; and it is but a Roman Fiction , that these Acts were revoked upon the reconciling of the Eastern and Westrn Churches .

§ . 6. John the first succeeded Hormisda , probably by An Dom. 523. the interest of Theodoric the Arrian Gothick King , for he commanded him to go as his Embassador to the Eastern Emperor Justin , to require him not to persecute the Arrians , but restore to them their Churches which he had taken away , Threatning he would use the Catholicks of Italy severely , if this were not granted e e Vit. Johan . Bin. pag. 621. Col. 2. Lab. 1600. . The Pontifical softens this with a gentle phrase , Rogans misit — as if Theodoric entreated the Pope to go on this ungrateful Errant ; but the Notes more truly affirm , he forced him to take this Office f f Not. Bin. 622. Lab. 1602. . However , the Pope durst not disobey that King , wherefore he went to Constantinople , and did deliver this request to Justin , so as to prevall for liberty to the Arrians in the East , as all Authors ( before Baronius ) affirm g g Anastasius ut sup. Platina pag 71. Naucler . Chron. pag. 702 Paul . Diaconus l. 17. pag. 166 , & 167. : But the Cardinal calls this a base blot of the Popes prevarication ; and therefore he with the Notes give Anastasius the lye , and forsake him in this part of John's Story whom in all the rest they follow . For Baronius will not allow , that a Pope should do so vile a thing , as to sollicit for Liberty of Conscience for Arrian Hereticks ; wherefore he pretends he encouraged Justin to go on in punishing them : But they cannot prove this , except by a forged Epistle writ in this Popes name , and a mistaken passage out of Gregory of Tours , who knew not the true Story , but speaks of John's Embassy to Theodoric , instead of Justin . One Argument only Baronius urges , which is , Why Theodoric should imprison this Pope at his return , and keep him prisoner till he dyed in that woful confinement , if he had faithfully discharged his Embassy h h Baron . An. 525. n. 8. pag. 106 , & 107. . I answer from Paulus Diaconus , That Theodoric was moved to anger , because Justin the Catholick Emperor had received him so honourably i i Pet. Diacon . l. 17. pag. 167. ; and also as Baronius himself saith , This Gothick King suspected the Romans were then laying Plots against him , and confederating with Justin The Emperor . So that doubtless he thought the Pope was in this design , and so suffered him to dye in Prison : Now all this proves , that these Gothick Kings were absolute Lords over the Bishops of Rome ; and it looks like a Judgment on the Roman See , that whereas they had been so bitter against Acacius and other Orthodox Bishops of Constantinople , for only conversing with supposed Hereticks , one of their own Popes was forced to plead that the worst of all Hereticks , the Arrians , might have the publick exercise of their Religion allowed by Law . I take no notice of the Miracles ascribed to this Pope , because the fabulous Gregorian Dialogues are the only Evidence for them .

The Roman Mint hath Coined two Epistles for this Pope , of which Labbè saith , many things prove that they are both forged k k Ep 〈…〉 Johan . Bin. pag. 623. col . 1. Lab. 1603. . The first is patched up out of the fragments of many other Popes Letters ; and that passage of the Sheeps reproving their Pastor , if he Err in the Faith , is originally stollen out of a feigned Epistle under Pope Fabian's name . Baronius and Binius both confess a false date , viz. Olybrius and Maximus being Consuls , who were never in office together ; and if we read Id. Junij Maximo Consule , John was not made Pope till two Months after , nor will Olybrio Consule , mend the matter with Id. Junij , because this Pope dyed the 27th of May in that year : However , though they cannot reconcile these Errors , the Notes and Baronius would have this Forgery pass for genuine , to clear the Pope from serving the Arrian interest l l Baron . An. 526. n. 3. pag. 111. . The second Epistle is also Fictitious , being a Rhapsody out of Leo's Epistles and some places of Scripture m m Ep 2. Johan Bin. pag. 526. col . 2. Lab. 1605. , and dated after this Pope was dead : So that we must reject them both together , with the Legend of his Consecrating Arrian Churches for the Orthodox , in defiance to King Theodoric , which Baronius and Binius would have us believe .

The Council of Lerida in Spain , was not as Binius An. Dom. 524. saith , under John , but under Sergius Bishop of Tarragon who presided in it , and in the 16 Canon , is called the Bishop of the first See ; a Title common to all Primates of old , but lately engrossed by the Pope n n Concil. Ilerd . Bin pag. 625. col . 1. Lab. 1610. . In the Fragments of this Council , there is a method of canonically purging Clerks accused of Crimes ; but it cannot belong to this Council ( as Labbè owns , ) because it mentions Leo the Third and Charlemaign , who lived near 300 year after this Synod was held o o Lab. in Marg col. 1615. . In the same year was another Spanish Council at Valencia , in Pope John's time , but he is not once named in it , and the Canons were made by the Bishops of the Province p p Cincil . Valent . Bin. pag. 629. Lab. 1617. : Wherefore , Binius falsly Titles it under Pope John .

The same year was held the Council of Arles , which Binius miscalls the third , but was truly the fourth Council there . This Synod was placed wrong formerly An. 453 , when one Opilio was Consul with Vincomalus ; but another Opilio was Consul with Rusticus this year An. 524 , and Caesarius his Subscription to it shews , this is the true date of it q q Concil. Arel . 4. Bin. pag. 631. col . 2. Lab. 1622 , &c. . Binius is here twice mistaken . First , In his old Title of sub Johanne . Secondly , In printing the Epistle of Faustus in this place , as if this Council of Arles were that which Faustus pretended confirmed his Pelagian Errors : But Labbè saith , Binius is mistaken , and 't is certain he was quite out .

In Labbè , we have here a singular Example of the modesty of Fulgentius , who was very justly chosen President of an African Synod : But perceiving a certain Bishop took this ill , in the next Council he renounced the Seat and Dignity , procuring that Bishop to sit before him , resolving not to defend the Primacy he deserved ( saith the Author , ) where it would make a breach of Charity r r Lab. 1628. Baron . An. 523. n. 32. pag 103. . And oh how happy had Christendom been , if the Popes had followed this Pattern ! Who at this time had renounced the Communion of more than half the Christian World ; chiefly for not submitting to their Primacy , and in every Age since , have Qarrelled with all that would not allow them that claim .

The Council of Carthage under Boniface Bishop there , Stiles him Bishop of the first See s s Lab. Col. 1629. : It never names the Pope , and makes it very clear , that this Primate did order all things in that Province , without any dependance on Rome .

§ . 7. Foelix the Fourth was named by King Theodoric , An. Dom. 526. who being now Lord of Rome , did of right propose him to the Clergy as a Candidate for the Papacy , void by Johns death t t Vit. Foel . 4. Bin. p. 634 col . 2. Lab. 1649. . The Notes pretend this was an usurpation , and Baronius for this Rails bitterly at Theodoric ; calling it an arrogant Fact , and giving him the Title of a cruel Barbarian , a dreadful Tyrant and impious Arrian , adding that this was the cause of Gods destroying him u u Baron . An. 526. n. 22 & 25. pag. 116 , 117. . But for all this rage , this is no more than what all Princes then did in their own Dominions : And these Editors a little before printed an Epistle wherein it is said , That Epiphanius was made Bishop of Constantinople by the Election of Justin and the Empress , with the consent of the Nobles , Priests and People w w Relat. Ep. Bin. pag 605. col . 2. Lab. 1537. : And Hormisda in the 76th Epistle saith he was rightly elected : Which shews , that the Eastern Emperors did not learn this of the Gothick Kings ; but these learned of the Emperors to name the Bishops of their chief Cities x x Baron . ut sup. pag. 116. . And Theodoric ever exercised this Right , as the case of Symmachus shewed us before : Wherefore that Law of Ordoacer , that the Pope should be elected by the Princes consent , remained still in force ; and Symmachus his pretended Repeal of it is either forged , or else these Kings despised all Papal Councils which abridged them of their right .

In the Notes on this Popes Life , we have a fabulous Vision of some doting Hermit , who fancied he saw Theodoric's Soul thrown into the Vulcanian Kettles y y Not. in vitam Foelic . Bin. pag. 634 , 635. Lab. 1650. . This out of Gregory's Dialogues is Foundation enough for them to Triumph in his Damnation , who resolve to find out some Vision or Dream to perswade easie Readers , that all Princes who injured any Pope were sent to Eternal Flames : Again , the Notes pretend , that Justinian's Ecclesiastical Laws were made by the Bishops of Constantinople , and put out in that Emperors name : But why might not Justinian make his own Laws about Church matters , as Constantine and all his Successors to this time had done ? No doubt he and they used in such cases to advise with their own Bishops : But these Parasites of Rome are angry , that the Pope is not the sole Law-maker in Causes Ecclesiastical ; now he was not so much as consulted in these Laws , being then the Subject of another Prince : And what they object of Justinian's speaking honourably of Zeno and Anastasius his Predecessors ( Enemies to Rome ) confirms me in the Opinion , that Justinian in composing these Laws took no advice from St. Peter's Chair .

We may justly suspect most of these Papal Epistles , ( out of which the Canonists for some Ages fetcht those Rules , by which they oppressed the Christian World , ) because if a Pope neither did nor writ any thing remarkable , the Forgers invented Business and Letters for him as they have done for Pope John and this Foelix ; whose two first Epistles Labbè declares to be spurious z z Ep. 1. Foel . Bin. pag 635. col . 1. Lab. 1650. Et Ep. 2. Bin. pag. 673. col . 1. Lab. 1656. , and shews the former is made up out of the Forgeries in Pope Eleutherius name , as also out of the Epistles of Leo , and Gregory who was yet unborn ; the latter steals the beginning from an Epistle of Pope Innocent's , and the rest is verbatim taken out of a spurious Epistle ascribed to Pope Dionysius a a Vid. Bin. Tom. 1. pag. 158. : And the date of this also is after Foelix his death . But Binius boldly saith they are genuine ; and Baronius would persuade us , the name of Foelix was put for Boniface , ( which is an unlikely change ) b b Baron . An. 530. n. 1. pag. 153. . Now if you ask why they vindicate such Trash ; I must Note , it is for the sake of one dear Sentence , viz. That the Roman Church in one of them is twice called the Head ; A phrase which is enough to make any Coin currant at Rome .

The Third Epistle was dated 15 year before Foelix was Pope c c Ep. 3. Foelix . Bin. pag. 637. col . 2. Lab. 1657. , till Sirmondus lately mended the Consuls name ; 't is said to be written to Caesarius Bishop of Arles , who is here stiled not the Son , but the Brother of the Pope : But the matter of it is such mean stuff , that the true Author will have no credit by it , nor is it material whether it be genuine or no : And by the way 't is somewhat odd , that these forged or trifling Epistles , should give Du-Pin ground for putting these two Popes into his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers d d Du-Pin Hist. Cent. 6. pag. 29. .

Labbè adds here a Form of Anathematizing the Manichaean Heresie , wherein St. Augustin's Opinion guides the Affair e e Lab. col. 1658. . The Pope is not concerned in reconciling Hereticks ; for the Authority of Rome was not so considerable in those days , as these Men pretend .

'T is true , the Council of Orange owns they had An. Dom. 529. some Capitulars sent from Rome against the Pelagians f f Concil Araus . 2. Bin. pag. 638. col . 1. Lab. 1666. . But Labbè's Notes say , they were Sentences collected out of the Fathers , especially St. Augustin , and agreeable to holy Scripture g g Lab. not . col. 1676. . Wherefore Binius falsly brags , that this Controversie was determined by the Popes Authority ; it was determined by St. Augustin's Authority , whose Doctrin Pope John the second saith , the Roman Church then kept and followed h h Ep. 3. Joan. 2. Bin. pag. 655. col . 1. Lab. 1751. . Rome only furnished the Records toward it ; and a Clerk of the Rolls may as well be called the Determiner and Judge of a Suit where he produces any old writing , as the Pope made Arbiter in this Case : And it was the Gallican Synods Decree , which made these Definitions to be of Force in France . Sirmondus indeed pretends , Pope Boniface confirmed this Council i i Lab. col. 1673. ; but acknowledges the confirmation came some time after , though the modern Parasites had falsly placed this Papal confirmation before the Council : But if we enquire more strictly , it will appear this second Epistle of Boniface the Second , ( which is the confirmation ) is Forged ; for it not only bears date the year after the Council , but ( as Sirmondus owns k k Not. Sirmond . Lab. col. 1689. , ) it is dated seven Months before Boniface was Pope : So that unless you will allow him to alter Dates at his pleasure , this Pope did not confirm this Synod at all : Only any thing must be genuine with these Men , which gives countenance to the Papal usurpations .

The Notes upon this Council cite a Testimony out of Gennadius , that Pope Foelix approved a Book writ by Caesarius against the Pelagians l l Not. ap. Bin. pag. 641. col . 1. Lab. 1676. : Which Testimony is not in my Edition of Gennadius ; and if that Author have writ any such thing , he must mean Foelix the Third , because he writ An. 492 , which is above 30 year before this Foelix was Pope . But when such learned Men as Prosper and Caesarius writ against an Heresie , the Popes Celestine and Foelix gladly subscribed them , not to give the Books any greater Authority , but to prove themselves Orthodox , and in Communion with men so famous for defending the Catholick Faith .

The Second or Third Council of Vaison , was falsly An. Dom. 529. placed by Binius under Pope John the second , who was not Pope till two years after m m Concil. Vas. 3. Bin. pag. 641. Lab. 1679. ; But Sirmondus rightly places it in this year in Foelix his time . In the first Canon it would have appeared plainly , that the Readers then had Wives allowed , if the true reading had stood , which must be Lectores — suas uxores habentes — recipiant . But the Forgers have altered it in Binius thus , — sive uxores habuerint ; in Labbè thus , sine uxore , &c. But the corrupters in both Editions have left this passage so abused , that it is neither Grammar nor Sense . The fourth Canon is double in Binius ; Labbè hath made it but one ; it orders That the Popes name shall be recited in the Gallican Offices . Now to make this Canon seem more ancient , the Parasites had hoisted up this Council 200 year , even as high as Pope Julius , where Binius shamelesly prints it : But Sirmondus proves there could be no such French Council at that time : And considering the Forgers have been so busie with this Canon , I judge it very probable , that it was made by a Council much later than this Age , only it is clapt in here very abruptly , to support an earlier Grandeur than the Popes at the time enjoyed ; I am sure it seems unlikely , the Gallican Church should then pay this great respect to Rome .

§ . 8. Pope Boniface the Second succeeded Foelix , but An. Dom. 530. not by a clear Election , for another party chose Dioscorus who had been Legate to Horsmida n n Vit. Bonif. 2. Bin. pag. 643. col . 2. Lab. 1682. ; but he was either poysoned or died naturally , within a Month , and so Boniface kept the Chair : His Malice however died not with his Rival : For he called a Synod , and got him anathematized after his Death for Simony : Which crime Pope Agapetus a little after proved to be false , and the Sentence extorted from the Clergy by Boniface ' s malicious craft ; So that the Sentence was revoked , and Dioscorus with his party absolved o o Vita Agapet . Bin. pag. 664. col . 1. Lab. 1785. . Another Evidence of this Popes rashness was a Decree made also in this Synod , That the Pope should name his Successor , which was not only against the Canons , ( which this Pope and his Council here had violated , ) but against an express Law of the Gothick Princes ; and therefore when this fallible Pope saw his Error , a little after he called another Synod and revoked this Decree , confessing himself , as Anastasius saith , Guilty of Treason , in making the former Order ; by which we may see , in that Age it was Treason for the Pope in Council to Repeal a Royal Law . Wherefore I wonder that Baronius should call that the wresting a presumtuous and usurped power out of the Goths hands p p Baron . An. 531. pag. 165. n. 1 , 2. , which his poor Master owned to be Treason . In short this Pope is only famous for his Errors and evil Deeds .

But to make him look great , the Forgers have invented an Epistle for him , containing many vaunts of the Roman Churches greatness , and a pretended submission of the Church of Carthage , after a very long separation from Rome , even from the time of Aurelius q q Ep. 1. Bonif. 2. Bin. pag. 644. col . 1. Lab. 1683. . Now though this came out of their own Shop , it is so gross an untruth in the main , That Binius and all their later Writers reject it : But though I think the Epistle certainly Spurious , and this submission forged ; yet it is true , the African Churches ( even while they did own the Roman for an Orthodox Church , ) had for a long time denied that usurped jurisdiction of Appeals from thence to Rome , to which some Popes pretended , which had made them stand at a distance from the See of Rome : The Notes on this Epistle have a fallacious Argument however , to prove the African Church could not so long remain divided from the Roman ; because if so , they could have no true Martyrs all that time , since the Fathers agree , That Crown is only due to those who suffer in the Catholick Church r r Not. in Ep. 1. Bin. pag. 645. Col. 1. Lab. 1686. . I reply , this may be very true ; and yet since no Father ever said that the particular Roman Church is the Catholick Church , a Christian may dye a true Martyr if he die in the Communion of the Catholick Church , though he hold no Communion with the Roman Church , which was the case at this time , or lately , of many Eastern Churches .

Another Forgery out of the same Mint treads on the heels of this , pretending to be a Copy of the Emperor Justin , and Justinian's submission to this Pope ; wherein they are made to own the Supremacy of Rome to the highest pitch , and to Curse all their Predecessors and Successors , who did not maintain that Churches Priviledges s s Exemplar prec . Bin. ibid. Lab. ibid. Baron . An. 530. n. 6. pag. 154. . But the cheat is so apparent , the matter so improbable and ridiculous , and the date so absurd , that Baronius and both the Editors reject it ; So that I shall only note , that a true Doctrine could not need so many Forgeries to support it , and the interest they serve shews who employed these Forgers .

We have spoken before of Boniface's two Roman Councils , one of them revoking what the other decreed : The third is only in Labbè , being a glorious Pageant , drest up by the suspicious hand of a late Library-keeper to the Pope . But it amounts to no more than the introducing a poor Greek Bishop or two , to enquire what was said in the Roman Records , and in the Popes Letters of the Authority of that Church t t Concil. Rom. 3. Bonif. Lab. 1691. . So that the Pope and his Council were Judges and Witnesses in their own Cause , and therefore their Evidence is of no great Credit : And 't is very ominous , that this Synod is dated in December , that is , two Months after Boniface's death , who is said to have been present at all its Sessions u u Not. Luc. Holstein . Lab. 1723. . To cover which evident mark of Forgery , Holstenius gives Baronius and all other Writers the Lye , about the time of Boniface's dying , and keeps him alive some time longer only to give colour to this new-found Synod .

The Council of Toledo might be in Boniface's time , but not under him : For the King of Spain , ( whom the An. Dom. 531. Bishops here call their Lord ) called it , and it was held sub Mantano ( saith Baronius ) w w Baron . An. 531. n. 12. pag. 167. , under Montanus the Metropolitan , to whom the Council saith , Custom had given that Authority x x Concil. Tol. 2. Bin. pag. 646 Lab. 1734. : Wherefore he condemns Hereticks , and exercises all sorts of jurisdiction belonging to a Primate , without taking any notice of the Pope , or of any delegated Power from him . So that probably all those Epistles which make Legates in Spain about this time , are forged .

§ . 9. John the second of that Name succeeded Boniface , An. Dom. 532. but Anastasius and Baronius cannot agree about the Date of his Election or his Death ; and Holstenius differs from both ; an Argument that this Pope made no great Figure y y Vit. Joan. 2. Bin. pag. 650. Col. Lab. 1741. : However , right or wrong we have divers of his Epistles .

The first to Valerius ( saith Labbè ) appears by many things to be spurious ; it is stollen out of the Epistles of Leo and Ithacius , and dated with wrong Consuls z z Ep. Joh. 2. Bin. 651. Col. 1 Lab. 1741. . And I must add , Scripture is shamefully perverted by the Writer of this Epistle ; For he would prove that Christ was not created as to his Deity , but only as to his Humanity , by Ephes. iv . 24. and Coloss. iii. 10. where St. Paul speaks of putting on the New Man , which after God is created in Righteousness and true Holiness , — and is renewed in Knowledge after the Image of him that created him : Had a Pope writ this , I would have affirmed he was no Infallible Interpreter .

The next is an Epistle of Justinian to this Pope , wherein the Emperor is pretended to declare his Faith was conformable in all things to the Roman Church ; and made to say , he had subjected and united all the Churches of the East to the Pope , who is the Head of all the Holy Churches — with much more stuff of this kind a a Ep. Justin . ad Joan. 2. Bin. pag. 651. Col. 2. Lab. 1742. . This Letter is rejected by the learned Hottoman , and many other very great Lawyers , who Baronius calls a company of Hereticks and Petty Foggers b b Baron . An. 534. n. 15. pag. 197. ; But confutes their Arguments with false Reasoning and Forgeries , as I shall shew when I come to note his Errors : I shall now confine my self to prove the greatest part of this Epistle to be spurious : For who can imagin Justinian ( who vindicated the Authority of his Patriarch at Constantinople as equal with Rome , and by an Authentick Law declares , that the Church of Constantinople is the Head of all other Churches c c Justin . Cod. lib. 1. tit. 2. de Sacros . Eccles. Lab. 24. ] pag. 10. : Yea , in the genuine part of this Epistle , calls his Patriarch the Pope's Brother ) That he , I say , should here profess he had subjected all the Eastern Churches to Rome ? And how should he ( that differed from Pope Hormisda in his decision of the Question , whether one Person of the Trinity suffered for us ; and made Pope John now yield to his Opinion , and condemn his Predecessors notion ) declare he submitted his Faith in all things to the Pope ? But we need no conjectures , for if the Reader look a little further among the Epistles of Agapetus d d Inter. Ep. Agap . Bin. pag. 666. Col. 2. Lab. 1789. , he will see one of the boklest Impostures that ever was ; For there Justinian himself recites verbatim , the Epistle which he had writ to Pope - John , and whatever is more in this Letter set out among John's Epistles , than there is in that which is owned by the Emperor , is an impudent Forgery , added by some false Corrupter to serve the Roman Supremacy . Now by comparing these two Epistles , it appears , the beginning and end of both are the same , and may be genuine ; but in neither part is there one word of this subjection , or the universal Supremacy : And all that wretched Jargon comes in where it is corrupted , viz. From Ideoque omnes Sacerdotes universi orientalis tractus , & subjicere — till you come to these words — Petimus ergo vestrum paternum — : Which when the Reader hath well noted , he will admire , that those who had the cunning to corrupt a Princes Letter , by adding twice as much to it as he writ , should be so silly to print the true Letter , within a few Pages : But doubtless God infatuates such Corrupters , and the Devil owes a shame to Lyers .

The next Epistle from the Gothic King Athalaric , was probably writ soon after John's Election , since it mentions the Romans coming to that Prince , to beg leave to chuse a Pope ; and both Athalario and the Senate made Laws to prevent Simony in the Election of the Pope , as well as other Bishops : And which ( Baronius saith , ) was more Ignominious , This Edict was Ingraven on a Marble Table , and hung up before the Court of St. Peters for all to see it e e Baron . An. 533. n. 39. pag. 188. . But to me it seems more Ignominious , that the Letter shews some of the late Candidates for the Papacy had sacrilegiously sold the holy Vessels to buy Voices f f Ep. Atha . Bin. pag. 653. Col. 2. Lab. 1478. : These no doubt were like to make hopeful Heads of the Universal Church . Baronius is angry at this Letter and Edict , and I suppose places it falsly after the forged Epistle of Justinian had aggrandized this Pope ; but do what he can , the Kings reckoning him among other Patriarchs , and making Laws for Papal Elections , and his giving him no huffing Titles , do clearly demonstrate that Popes then were not so great as our Annalist would make them seem ; and I wonder with what face he can say , This Law was not against the Clergy but the Lay-men , When the Law it self , and the occasion of it confutes him .

The Third Epistle may be genuine , wherein he doth well to say , that according to the Decrees of his Predecessors , the Roman Church ever kept and followed the Doctrin of St. Augustin g g Epist. 3. Johan . 2. Bin. pag. 655. Col. 2. Lab. 1752. ; and if they had never followed any other Guide , there would not have been so many false Doctrins brought in to that Church : However , the great impertinence of divers Scriptures here cited shews this Pope to be no great Divine , and one of his proofs I doubt is forged ; for I cannot , in Exod. xxiv . or any other place find these words , You shall see your life hanging on a Tree : Now to feign such a Prophesie must be a horrid Sin , being literally adding to Gods word h h Revel. xx 〈…〉 18. , to which a grievous Curse is due .

The Epistle from Reparatus and his African Council to this Pope , is more likely to be true , because there is nothing of his Universal Supremacy in it : They call him Holy Brother and Fellow-Priest , nor do they expect Laws , but desire advice from him : Yea , they require him to exclude from his Communion such of the African Clergy , as came from them to Rome without leave i i Ep. Repar . Bin. pag. 656. Col. 2. Lab. 1755. ; which shews the African Church still opposed Appeals to the Pope .

The First Council under this Pope was called at Rome , wherein He decreed according to Justinian's desire , That it might Orthodoxly be said , One of the Trinity was crucified for us in the Flesh k k Concil. Rom. sub Joh. 2. Bin. pag. 657. Col. 1. Lab. 1761. . Now this Decree puts Baronius and Binius to stretch their Wits to save the Infallibility : For Pope Hormisda had before judicially determined the quite contrary in a cause of Faith , viz. That it could not be Orthodoxly said so : So that these Parasites are to prove both parts of a contradiction true ; and that two Popes who defined directly contrary to one another , were both in the right : Now here they shufflle and palliate this matter , calling Pope John's disannulling Hormisda's Decree , to be only a declaring his Opinion , how far this Sentence may , and how far it may not be held l l Baron . An. 533. n. 26. pag. 185. & notis Binij . . But before , Baronius compares this Sentence with the Heretical Addition to the Trisagion , and tells us , the Popes Legates ( in Hormisda ' s time ) thought it was utterly to be rejected : And that the Eutychians were the Authors of it ; yea , he magnifies Hormisda for condemning it m m Baron . An. 519. n. 108. pag. 45. & n. 110. ibid. & n. 104. pag. 44. . Yet Pope John says , it is an Orthodox Sentence , though still divers Monks at Rome did not believe him nor receive it : But took Hormisda to have been in the right , and so far questioned John's Infallibility , that as ( Liberatus notos , ) They forsook his Communion n n Ap. Baron . An. 533. n. 3. pag. 179. ; and for my part I cannot see , but one of these Popes must necessarily be an Heretick .

In this year they place a genuine Record of a conscience An. Dom. 533. at Constantinople , between the Catholick and Severian Hereticks (o) . But Binius Notes own , this Conference ( 〈…〉 ) Collat. Const. Bin. pag. 657. Col. 2. Lab. 1673. was held before Justinian writ to Pope John for his Opinion ; and therefore it should have been placed before that Popes Roman Council , and is fraudulently set after , to make it seem as if the East had followed Rome in this Decision . To this Conference the Eastern Bishops were summoned by the Emperor and their own chief Patriarch : And we may here observe , First , That Hypatius Bishop of Ephesus was Prolocutor , and is compared to St. Peter the Apostle p p Bin. pag. 658. Lab. 1764. . Secondly , When they speak of the Opinions of the Fathers , cited by Cyril in the Council at Ephesus against Nesterius , they reckon two Popes , Foelix and Julius , promiscuously with the rest , giving them no precedence , no mark of special priviledge q q Bin. pag. 659. Lab. 1766. . Thirdly , They reject divers Epistles , that bore the names of Orthodox Fathers , pretended to be kept among the Records at Alexandria , as forged and corrupted by their Heretical Bishops ; and say , they must be excused from receiving their Enemies for Evidence r r Bin. ibid. Lab. 1767. . Which just Rule , if the Romanists allow us in our Disputes with them , the Controversie would soon be ended . Fourthly , Hypatius truly affirms , that the Eastern and Western Churches were long time divided , about the manner of expressing themselves as to the Trinity ; the Orientals suspecting the Occidentals to be Sabellians , and these imagining those of the East were Arrians , till Athanasius at last reconciled them by understanding of both Tongues s s Bin. ibid. Lab. 1768. ; which shews that neither side pretended to Infallibility : And that Learning is the fittest qualification for a Judge of Controversies . Lastly , They say , their Holy Mother the Catholick and Apostolick Church of God , held it was Orthodox to say , that one of the Trinity did suffer for us in the Flesh t t Bin. pag. 663. Lab. 1778. . Now this could not be meant of the Roman Church , where Hormisda's contrary Definition was still in force , nor do they name the Pope in all their Conference : So that Binius is mistaken in his Notion , that Justinian contrived this Conference to unite the Bishops of the East with Rome ; for he took no notice of the late Popes Sentence , but designed this Conference to settle the Truth ; and for all the pretence of Union and Subjection in Hormisda's time , the Churches of the East and West were not united till after this ; when Pope John consented to their Desinition , and owned that not his Predecessor , but they were in the right .

§ . 10. The time of Pope Agapetus entrance and An. Dom. 535. death is not certainly known : Anastasius , and from him Du Pin , allow him not one whole year : Baronius and Binius would have him sit longer u u Vit. Agapet . Bin. pag. 665. Col. 1. Lab. 1785. , but can only prove it by the dates of some Epistles which are not genuine . 'T is certain he was dead before May 536. when Mennas Council at Constantinople met ; wherefore he must enter in the year 535. The truest account of him is to be had in Liberatus , a Writer that knew him , Who saith , He was well skilled in the Canons , and being sent by the Gothick King , Theodatus , on an Embassy to Justinian , to divert his Army from Italy , he arrived at Constantinople , where he honourably received the Emperors Messenger , but would not admit Anthimius to his Presence : After this he saw the Emperor , delivered his Embassy , which was rejected ; However , ( as Christs Embassador ) neither the Princes nor the Empress could prevail with him to communicate with the lately ordained Bishop of Constantinople Anthimius , unless he would prove himself Orthodox , and return to the Church which he had deserted : Upon this Anthimius resigned and went off , yet still was under the Emperors Protection : Yet Agapetus by the favour of the Prince consecrated Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople , and having designed Pelagius his Deacon to remain there as his Resident , he prepared to return to Italy , but dyed at Constantinople w w Liberati brev. cap. 21. 22. Bin. par. 2. pag. 191. Lab. 774. . Most of that which is added to this , is feigned by Anastastus and the later Writers ; except what another contemporary Cassiodorus writes of Agapetus , that he was so poor , that the Sacred Plate of St. Peters Church was forced to be Pawned for Mony to defray the Charges of this Embassy x x Cassiodor . Ep. lib. 12. Ep. 20. . But Anastasius his Fictions about the Popes quarreling with Justinian about his Faith , and the Emperors humbling himself , and adoring the Pope afterwards , have no truth at all in them . No , nor those Miracles which Binius notes , and Baronius pretended this Pope did in his Journey y y Vit. Not. in Agap . Bin. pag. 665. Col. 2. Lab. 1787. ; for they have no other Evidence for them than those fabulous Legends , Gregory's Dialogues and the Pratum Spirituale z z Baron . An. 536. n. 68. pag. 254. . And no Writer of Credit , or that lived in that Age , knew of any such thing . The fore-named Authors for the credit of the Roman Martyrology , where Agapetus death is set down on the 12 of the Kal. of October , will have that be the right day of his dying : But I can hardly think he dyed so long before Mennas Council , which was in May 536. and there he is spoken of as lately deceased : I shall only note , that Baronius blunders his own Account wofully , by citing a Constitution of Justinian , directed to Anthimius as still Bishop of Constantinople , dated on the Ides of August 536 , ( long after Agapetus death : ) And upon this he Rails at Theodora and Justinian a a Baron . An. 535. n. 64. pag. 227. ; and 't is true , the Law is so dated and titled in the Novels b b Authent . Col. Novel. 16. pag. 34. : But there must be a fault either in the name of Anthimius , put instead of Menna's , or in the Consuls , because the same Emperor directs another Constitution to Menna , in the same Month and the same . Year , and some Copies read its date , 17 Kal. of August 536. which is the 16 of July c c Ibid. Novel. 42. pag. 77 , & 78. : Wherefore the Annalist should be cautious , how he makes Characters of Princes , on the uncertain Credit of these Dates .

The Copy of Justinian's Letter to John the Second , before stuffed with Forgeries and undated , is here printed without the Additions , and dated in January saith Binius , in June saith Labbè , An. 533. d d Ep. Justin . ad Agap . Bin. pag. 666. col . 2. Lab. 1788. . And it assures us , John's confirmation before related is spurious , because here it is offered again to be confirmed by Agapetus , the day before the Ides of March , An. 535. And this Popes Confirmation is dated at Constantinople , four days after the Emperors Epistle : But Anastasius faith , The Pope came not to Constantinople till the 10 of the Kal. of May ; and Justinian's Letter supposes him then at Rome , and if so , how could the Pope receive and answer this Letter in four days time ? But if Agapetus were at Constantinople , what need the Emperor write to him , or date his Letter from that City ? So that I suspect the Confirmation to be a Forgery , and Labbè himself notes , These things are not coherent e e Labbè in Marg. 1789. ; For which we have a good reason in Lactantius , who saith , Ea enim est mendaciorum natura ut cohaerere non possunt f f Lact. Instit. lib. 5. §. 3. . Yet Binius is so immodest as to stretch this seigned Confirmation , to be a solemn confirming of all Justinian's Edicts and Constitutions in matters of Faith g g Bin. not . in 1 Ep. Agapet . Bin. pag. 666. Col. 1. Lab. 1790. . Whereas that Emperor sent the Constitutions to the Pope and other Patriarchs to be executed , not to be confirmed ; he only advised with his Bishops about them , but his own Authority was enough to ratifie them .

To this is subjoyned that nauseous Forgery called Exemplar precum , which hath been printed by the Editors four or five times over with variety of Titles , and here is ridiculously applied to Justinian h h Exempl . prec . Bin. pag. 666. col . 2. Lab. 1790. .

The matter of Agapetus Second and Third Epistle to the African Bishops and Reparatus is not exceptionable ; for the Pope calls them his most loving Brothers , and owns it was not agreeable to the Canons to receive Clerks from Africk without their Letter ; wherefore he would forbear it , as they had enjoyned : He confesses also the Rights of a Metropolitan to be in the Bishop of Carthage i i Ep. 2. & 3. Agap . Bin. pag. 667. Lab. 1791 , &c. . But there are some suspicions that they are not genuine , for they say they were sent by Liberatus : Now he had been at Rome a little before , and can scarce be supposed to be got back to Afric , and to return to Rome by the 5th of the Ides of September : And which is worse , ( as Labbè truly observes , ) Liberatus himself who writes the Story of Agapetus , speaks but of one Journey to Rome , and says nothing of this second : And besides 't is dated Post . Cons. Paulini , which is wrong , unless they call Bellisarius his year by that name , which is An. 535. And then Agapetus was at Constantinople : So that we may fear the Forgers , who would have it thought all the World applied to Rome , have been at work here . However , if the third Letter be genuine , we learn from it that Agapetus came into the Papacy in Winter ; for it seems Reparatus had writ to Pope John ; but while his Messengers were staied by the Winter from Sailing , he heard in Afric of Agapetus his Election . Baronius here affirms , that the Pope now sent Decretal Letters to be published in Africa , which are not extant k k Baron . An. 535. n. 42. pag. 222. : But I believe there never were any such Letters ; for his advice might be accepted there perhaps , but his Decretals then had no Authority in that Church .

The Fourth Epistle to Justinian is very suspicious , being dated with no Consuls as the rest use to be ; it mentions also the Popes sending Legates on the Ides of October , which if it were An. 534. he was not then Pope ; if the next year , Agapetus must then be at Constantinople , ( or dead there the 12 of the Kal. of that Month , if the Roman Martyrology be true : ) Wherefore we need not be startled at that incredible passage , That Justinian had elevated the Roman See by such Titles of Charity and Bounty , as exceeded their desires and hopes l l Epist. 4. Agap . Bin. pag. 667. Col. 1. Lab. 1793. . For the Letter is not genuine ; And I dare say , the Parasites will not urge this , because they think 't is Justice , not Charity ; and Right , not human Bounty , which gives Rome the highest Titles ; and we are of Opinion , no Titles can exceed that Churches desires , though they may its deserts .

Since Binius suspects the 5th Epistle , as dated before Agapetus was Pope , and Labbè saith , many things prove it false , and more than suspected of imposture , as being stolen out of Hormisda's , and Leo's Letters , and naming Theodatus Consul , who never bore that Office m m Ep. 5. Agap Bin. pag. 668. col . 2. Lab. 1795. ; We may without more ado reject it , only noting the Forger resolved right or wrong , to make the Pope the Mawl of all Hereticks .

The two Epistles to Caesarius ( supposing them genuine ) are very frivolous , the 6th being only to tell him that Ecclesiastical Goods must not be alienated : Which he knew better than the Pope ; and Symmachus had writ this to him above 30 Year before : And the 7th Epistle intimates that Contumeliosus a French Criminal Bishop , whose Cause was decided by Pope John , had appealed again to Agapetus , which shews a Papal Decree was not decisive : But either the Pope or this Letter hath had ill Luck , because it contains in the decretal part , a flat contradiction , both forbidding , and allowing this Bishop to say Mass n n Ep. 6 , & 7. Agap . Bin. pag. 669. Lab. 1798. & 1801. ; wherefore , if we do not reject them , we may throw them by , as very inconsiderable .

Once more the Editors abuse us with their old Forgery of Exemplar Precum , their Corrupt rule of Faith , which cannot without the highest impudence be put upon Justinian o o Bin. pag. 670. col . 1. Lab. 1801. &c. ; and they confess here the Consuls are mistaken a whole year , yet they presume to mend it , and obtrude it for genuine : And Baronius would have us believe Justinian did now repeat this profession of his Faith upon the falsest and slightest conjectures p p Baron . An. 536. n. 18. pag. 243. that can be imagined .

§ . II. The Council of Constantinople about the deposition An. Dom. 536. of Anthimius , and the Condemnation of Severus and his followers , was held , as Binius confesses , in the general Title , after Agapetus his death ; and as oft as this Council mentions him , he is called of happy Memory : Yet in the Title on the Top , Binius saith , It was held under Agapetus and Mennas ; which absurdity of a Council being held under a dead Pope , moved Labbè to say it was under Mennas q q Bin. pag. 671. Lab. Tom. v. pag. 3. . The History of this Council may be had from Du-Pin r r Du-Pin . Eccles. Hist. Cent. 6. pag. 131. . But the Remarks on those things in it , which either condemn the Errors , or savour of the Forgeries of Rome , are my business . Wherefore , I will first make some general observations on the whole : Secondly , consider the depravations in the Acts. Thirdly , examine the falshoods in the Notes .

First , This Council was called to re-examine and confirm the Sentence of Pope Agapetus , and it consisted ( all but five ) of Eastern Bishops s s Concil. Const. Bin. p. 678. col . 1. Lab. col. 19. , to whom Justinian sent this Sentence for their Approbation . And Agapetus himself in a Letter writ a little before his death , desires the Eastern Bishops to signifie to him , That they did approve of the judgment of the Apostolical Seat t t Act. 1. Bin. pag. 687. Lab. 47. ; Which shews that neither the Emperor , the Pope , nor this Council did then take the Bishop of Rome to be the sole nor highest Judge . Secondly , Mennas the Patriarch was the President of this Council , and sat above and before those five Bishops , which the Annalist , and Annotator say were the Legates of Agapetus , and the Representatives of the Roman Church u u lb. Bin. pag. 672. Lab. 3. & 4. . Thirdly , it is certain the Emperor Justinian convened this Council by his own sole Authority ; for every Action owns They met by his Pious Command , and that his care had gathered this Holy Synod together w w Vid. Act. i. & alibi . Bin. pag. 689 , 691 , 696 , & 710. Item Lab. pag. 54 , 59 , 71 & 118. . And it is as certain that he only could and did confirm it ; for Mennas the President having heard the Synods Opinion , desires the Emperor may be acquainted with it , Because nothing ought to be done in the Church without his Royal Consent , and Command x x Bin. Act. v. pag. 703. Lab. 61. . And he finally did confirm their Decree by a special Edict , which made it valid y y Ibid. Bin. pag. 761. Lab. 263. . So that this Council utterly confutes the Popes pretended right to convene all Councils , for which in this Age nothing but Forged evidence is produced . Fourthly , Though Baronius z z Baron . An. 536. n. 32. pag. 246. , and also Binius do affirm that Agapetus did both depose Anthimius , and chuse Mennas , neither of them is true if they mean the Pope did it by his own Authority ; for before the Council , Justinian ( as this Synod often declares ) did assist Agapetus , and made the Holy Canons Authentic in deposing Anthimius a a Act. i. Bin. pag. 677. Lab. 19. & alibi . . And because he thought it was scarce yet Canonically done , he gets the Sentence against him confirmed by this Council : As for Mennas , he was only consecrated by the Pope , who in his own Letter saith Mennas was elected by the favour of the Emperor , and the consent of the chief Men , the Monks and all Orthodox Christians b b Bin. Act. i. pag. 687. Lab. 47. ; yea , the Council declares the Emperor chose him by the general suffrage c c Ibid. Bin. pag. 677. Lab. 19. . So that these are false pretences designed to set up a single Authority in the Pope , unknown to that Age.

Secondly , In the Acts of this Council there are divers instances of the hand of a Roman depraver : The Title of the Monks Petition , as Binius Margen saith , is not in the Greek d d Libel Monach. Bin. pag. 678. Lab. 22. ; yet he hath it both in Greek and Latain (d) ; and so hath Labbè : But it must be the addition of a Later Hand , the Greek being the Original ; it is full of great swelling Words applied to Agapetus alone ; But the Text speaks to more than one , Do not ye suffer , O ye most blessed e e 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Bin. pag. 679. Lab. 23. — Which ye ( O most blessed ) defending , receive ye our Petition f f Bin. pag. 681. Lab. 30. , and generally it runs in the plural number ; So that it was addressed to the Pope with other Bishops . The like corruption we meet with also in the Letter of the Eastern Bishops , where the Title now is only to Agapetus ; but the Text speaks to more than one ; yea , where the Greek is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , The Latin Version of Rome . changes it into Beatissime , and Sanctissime , adding Pater g g Bin. pag. 683 , & 684. Lab. 38. &c. . Which shews the Forgers Fingers have been here . The aforesaid Petition of the Monks , mentions an Image of Justinian abused by the Hereticks : The Greek calls it [ 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ] The Image of that Servant of God h h Bin. 679. Lab. 23. , The Roman Version is imaginem Dei veri : The Image of the true God : As if these Heriticks had been Iconoclasts before that controversie was heard of . In the Bishops Letter the Greek reads — 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , which signifies by open force and secret fraud : For 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 is a Warlike Engine to batter with i i Bin. 684. Lab. 41. . The Translator dreams of Manichaean Errors , which are nothing to the purpose here . In the Epistle of the Syrian Bishops to Justinian , the Greek saith , The Pope deserved to follow the Emperors pious Footsteps , and so Labbè reads it in the Latin : But in Binius ( for fear this should look mean ) we have it Vestra pia vestigia digna facienti k k Bin. pag. 707. Lab. 106. . The Title of Hormisda's Epistle to Epiphanius is corrupted in Latin by the addition of these words which are not in the Greek , wherein he delegates to him the power of a Vicar of the Apostolical Seat , in receiving Penitents l l Act. v Bin. pag. 721. Lab. 151. : Which is confuted by the Epistle it self , which speaks of the Church of Constantinople , not as subjected , but united to the Roman ; and doth not command , but desire Epiphanius to joyn his care and diligence to the Popes , as they now had one friendship , both in Faith and Communion ; yea , Hormisda promises to act by the same measures which he recommends to Epiphanius m m Vid. ibid. . Baronius hath another corruption of his own , in a Letter from the Monks of Hierusalem and Syria ; for where they desire Justinian to cut off all that do not communicate with the universal Church of God , and the Apostolical Seat n n Bin. pag. 708. Lab. 107. ; He leaves out the universal Church , and puts in nothing but the Apostolical Seat o o Baron . An. 536. n. 89. pag. 259. . In the same page he cuts off Mennas Title before the Sentence be pronounced , viz. Mennas , the most Holy and Blessed universal Arch. Bishop and Patriarch said p p Id. ibid. n. 92. : And he adds to the end of this Sentence , that it was according to what Hormisda and Agapetus had prescribed q q Baron . An. 536. n. 95. pag. 260. ; whereas this being the Sense of the Synod , gave Authority to what the later of these Popes had done ; and the former , Hormisda , was dead before this matter came into Question . And now I am upon the Account of this Council in Baronius , I will also note , that in citing an Author which saith Mennas obtained an Universal Bishopric — he adds , that is , of the Churches subject to him r r Id. An. 536. n. 65. pag. 254. . Yet a little after he will not allow that Paraphrase when the same words are applyed to the Popes s s Ib. n. 106. pag. 263. , which shews his unfaithfulness in adding , and his partiality in expounding , two very ill properties in an Historian — But to proceed with Binius and Labbè : In the 5th Act there is a Syod at Constantinople held under John the Bishop there Anno 518 , wherein he is called Most Holy and most Blessed Arch-Bishop , Occumenical Patriarch , and Father of Fathers t t Act. 5. Bin. pag. 723 , 725. Lab. 158 , 162. . Yet the Editors put first in the Margen , and then into the Latin Text , under Hormisda ; which words are not in the Greek , and are absurd , because the two Churches were not yet reconciled u u Bin. pag. 743. Lab. 211. : Which is plain , because in the Acclamations they cry , let the Names of Euphemius and Macedonius be restored to the Church : Which were two of their Orthodox Patriarchs and followers of Acacius , whose Names had been struck out of the Dypticks by Heretical Princes , and stood then condemned by Hormisda : And they cry again , Are our Synodical powers gon away to Rome ? That is , must we reject our Orthodox Patriarchs because Rome censures them ? But the Latin corrupt version reads , Synodica Romana modo valeant w w Bin. pag. 732. Lab. 182. ; which would alter the Sense , and persuade such as cannot look into the Greek , that Rome's Decrees were valid at Constantinople ; whereas , they Decree contrary to the Pope . In the Epistle from John of Jerusalem , to the Patriarch of Constantinople , the late Forgers have put in a Sentence to give some colour to the Worship of the Blessed Virgin , which spoils the Sense . The true reading is — ; Do ye most holy pray for the same things that we do , for it is the common duty of Bishops [ ] to intercede for the peace of the Churches , and the Emperors Victory , and long Life x x Ep. Johan . Hieros . Act. 5. Bin. pag 734. Lab. 190. . But into this they thrust in a line or two — thus — it is the common Duty of Bishops ; ( And pray ye to the Holy , Glorious Virgin Mary , the Mother of God with us ) to intercede for the peace of the Churches — which is a new Piece put into an old Garment so foolishly , that the Rent is very visible . Finally , the subscriptions to the fifth and last Act are corrupted : For whereas the Roman Deacons , Theophanes and Pelagius in all other Acts are placed after the Eastern Bishops , here they are set before them in the Latin Version y y Act. v. Bin. pag. 759. Lab. 2●5 . . And whereas the Editors tell us , that Justinian's Edict to confirm the Decrees of this Council is depraved in the Title to Mennas z z Const. Justin . Bin. pag. 761. Lab. 263. ; I confess it is so ; but the Roman Parasites have depraved it by cutting off all those Titles which the Novel here cited by them gives him a a Authent . col novel . Const. 42. cod . pag. 77. , viz. To Mennas the most Holy , and most Blessed , and Oecumenical Patriarch — All which the Editors of the Council leave out .

To these Notes of the depraving these Acts we may add a few remarks on some passages that are genuine , but oppose the late Notions of the Roman Church . The Epistle of Agapetus was not writ to Peter alone ( as the Epistle pretends ) but to him , and other Bishops ; whom the Pope calls in the first Line , His beloved Brethren ; and to Mennas there he gives the Titles of Brother , and fellow Bishop b b Ep. Agap . Act. 1. Bin. pag. 687. Lab. 47. . The Syrian Bishops Epistle to Justinian , declares that Christ is the Head of the Church c c Ib. Bin. pag. 706. Lab. 100. , which Title the Pope had not yet claimed . In the Epistle from John of Jerusalem , to the Patriarch of Constantinople ( where Leo is called Archbishop and Patriarch of Rome ) we have this memorable Truth , That Christ who gave the power of binding and loosing to Peter the chief of the Apostles , gave it in general to the Episcopal Order d d Ep. Joan. Hieros . Act. v. Bin. pag. 734. Lab. 190. : Which confutes that Doctrine of all Bishops receiving this power from the Pope . The Bishop of Tyre's Epistle to the Synod at Constantinople , calls the See of Antioch , which Severus the Heretick had invaded , The Throne of the Apostolical Church of Antioch e e Ep. Epiphan. Tyr. Act. v. Bin. pag. 736. Lab. 195. , and makes one of his great crimes to be his admitting strange Clerks Canonically deprived by their own Bishop , to officiate without the consent of such as had sentenced them : A crime so often committed by the Popes , that these uncanonical precedents are produced to prove he hath a priviledge so to do . The Sentence of Mennas against this Severus , and his Complices , recites That they had contemned the Apostolical succession in the Church of Rome , which had condemned them , and set at nought both the Patriarchal Throne of Constantinople , and the Synod under it ; Yea , and the Apostolical Succession , which the Lord and Saviour of all had setled in those holy places : And above all , had despised the Sentence of the Oriental Diocess decreed against them ( I ) . So that their greatest fault (f) Sent. Men. Bin. pag. 758. Lab. 255. was not the contemning the Popes Authority , and Apostolical Succession was setled in other Churches by Christ , as well as in that of Rome . Lastly , The Constitution of Justinian is made on purpose to give validity to the Sentence of the Pope and the Synod against Anthimius and the Hereticks , declaring it was the custom for all preceding Orthodox Emperors , to confirm the Decrees of Councils ; and it says in the conclusion , this Law was published , that none might be ignorant of those things which the Bishops had agreed on , and the Emperor had confirmed g g Constit . Just. post . Act. v. Bin. pag. 761. Lab. 263. . So that it is a fallacious Note of the Editors Margen to say ; That it was the duty of Emperors to take care that the Decrees of the Fathers and the Pope were executed . Which makes their Master to be no more than their Servant and under Officer .

In the Notes on this Council are many Falshoods , which may be discovered by what is already observed . Only we may consider some few of them more particularly : As first , He takes it upon Baronius his credit h h Baron . An. 536. n 73. pag. 255. , that Agapetus left the Western Bishops his Legates , and that their Power continued after his decease ; and thence boldly , but falsly affirms , That these Legates procured the Synod to meet , and that they condemned these Hereticks by the Authority of their deceased Master , whose Legate also he feigns Mennas was i i Not. Bin. pag. 763. Lab. 269. ; and in express contradiction to the Council , he will have these Italian Bishops to be Presidents with Mennas k k Ib. Bin. pag. 764. Lab. 270. ; yet immediately calls him alone the President of this Synod l l Ibid. 764. col 2. Lab. 272 . Now all this is to impose upon the Reader , as if nothing could be done without Papal Authority : But we have proved that Justinian called and confirmed this Council , and Mennas presided solely in it : The Acts also take no notice of these Western Bishops having any Legantine power from Agapetus ; and I shall shew presently , that before this Council rose there was a new Pope chosen , who should have renewed their Commission to make it valid , but did not : So that they must suppose the dead and the living Pope to have supream Authority both at once : Who can swallow these gross Fictions ? Again , Mennas and the Council declare , That Pope followed the Canons in allowing Anthimius time to come in and Repent , and therefore they followed him m m Act. 1. Bin. pag. 687. Lab. 47. ; but Binius Notes turn this and say , That Agapetus commanded the Synod to use this mercy n n Not. Bin. pag. 764. Col. 2. Lab. 272. : But it is very pleasant to hear Clodius accuse , and Binius complain of the Modern Greeks , for forging the Title of Oecumenical Patriarch , applied to John in his own Council of Constantinople o o Ib. Bin. p. 765 Lab. 274. . But the Latins are even with them and far out-do them , ( if it were so ) for they ( as we have seen ) have put in that Title for Agapetus into the Latin when it was not in the Greek , and have left it out before Menuas name , though in the Code it be given him : So that they cannot fairly complain ; Yet after all , I can prove by authentic Records of this Age , That this Title of Oecumenical Patriarch , was given to the Patriarch of both old and new Rome ; nor is this Council of John corrupted by the modern Greeks , and Gregory is certainly mistaken in saying it was not used before his time : But the weakest complaint of Forgery , and the worst proof of it imaginable , is that of Baronius and Binius , who pretend the Greeks have fraudulently put the names of Euphemius and Macedonius Bishops of Constantinople , before Pope Leo's p p Bin. p. 766. Lab. 274. Baron . Tom. 7. An. 518. n. 20. pag. 7. ; and the Annalist and Annotator shew shameful ignorance , in thinking to prove by the Liturgy of St. Mark , that the Pope of Rome was prayed for first in all Churches : For though in that Office , God is desired to preserve Their most Holy and most Blessed Pope , whom he did fore-ordain , that his Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church should choose by their common Suffrages , and also for their most holy Bishop q q Lit. D. Marc. in Bib Patr. edit. Paris . Tom. 2 pag. 35. . Yet this ( being the Office used in the whole Alexandrian Patriarchate , ) must be meant of the Alexandrian Patriarch , ( who was called Pope ever since Athanasius his time , ) and was the Bishop of that Church where these Prayers were made : To prove which and shame this illiterate Exposition , I shall produce Jac. Goar , a rigid Papist , the Editor of the Greek Euchologion ; who thus speaks , The Greeks never name the supream Bishop of all ( he means him of Rome ) in publick ; wherefore Urban the Fourth desired of the Emperor Mich. Palaeologus ( An. Dom. 1263. that is , 700 year after this , ) that in their sacred Offices , the Popes name should be recited out of the Dypticks , with the other four Patriarchs , as the first and chiefest sign of their union with Rome : For which he Cites Nicetas , lib. 5. r r Eucholog . in not . Jac. Goar . pag. 144. . Here therefore is a proof , which proves only the mistake of them that produce it : And for the Objection , it is a known Custom for all Churches , to name their own Patriarchs before those of other Churches ; so that it is no wonder , that at Constantinople Euphemius's name should be placed before Leo's .

As soon as the Council under Mennas was ended , the Decrees were sent to Peter Patriarch of Jerusalem , who by the Command of the Emperor , called a Council there to confirm them s s Concil. Hieros . Bin. pag. 766. Lab. 275. .

In this year Labbè places the Synod of Auvergne , which met , as the Preface owns , by the precept of King Theodebert t t Concil. Auver . Bin. Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 31. Lab. col. 1803 , An. Dom. 536. ; there is no Pope mentioned in it : Binius places it in the year 541. under Vigilius , but Sirmondus proves he was mistaken .

§ . 12. As soon as the news of Agapetus his death came to Rome , Liberatus saith , Sylverius was made Pope by Theodatus the Gothick King u u Liberat. Brev. Bin. pag. 191. cap. 22. . Anastasius saith , it was after one Month and 28 days vacancy w w Vit. Sylver . Bin. pag. 770. Col. 1. Lab. 287. ; Which is very probable , being a sufficient time for the intelligence to come from Constantinople ; and if we allow that Agapetus died about a Month before Mennas Council , this entrance of Sylverius will prove to be while that Council sat . Baronius saw this , and fearing it would ruin his invention of the Western Bishops , there being Agapetus his Legates , he blunders the time of Sylverius's Election ; and though he reject Anastasius account , on whom ( in many less probable Reports ) he often relies ; Yet he will not fix any other time , and so leaves it uncertain ; only in general he and Binius say , he was elected in the end of this year ; which cannot be ; because Agapetus certainly died in the Spring , and it required no long time for the News to come from Constantinople . As to this Sylverius , it is certain from Liberatus , he was the Son of Pope Hormisda ; and Baronius with Binius only conjecture that he was lawfully begotten ; they would prove it indeed by this Argument , That otherwise he would have been irregular , and the Roman Clergy would not have chosen him : But they forget that his Election was not regular ; For Theodatus was in haste , and would not stay for that , but forced the Roman Clergy to subscribe , having got money of Sylverius , as their own Pontifical relates . Baronius calls this fear and vile submission of the Roman Clergy , their Clemency and a worthy Example x x Baron . An. 536. n. 123. pag. 267. ; yet confesses this Pope deserved to be kept out : However , being got into the sanctifying Chair , he magnifies him , but very unjustly ; for Procopius a creditable Author , who was soon after at Rome with Bellisarius , tells us , Sylverius first swore to keep the City of Rome for Vitiges the Gothick King y y Procop. de bel . Goth lib. 1. pag. 173. . And so soon as Bellisarius came before it , he was the principal instrument to persuade the Romans , who had sworn with him , to deliver up that City z z Id. ibid. pag. 181. : Baronius would conceal this Perjury , and therefore though he cite Procopius here , yet he saith no more than that Vitiges admonished the Pope and Senate , to keep faithful to the Goths a a Baron . An. 537. n. 5. pag. 269. , who indeed had been extreamly civil to the Roman Church ; and though they were Arrians , yet ( as their Enemy Procopius tells us , ) they had such a reverence for the holy places , that they did not hurt the Churches of St. Peter or St. Paul ; yea , they gave liberty to the Catholick Priests to serve God in their own way b b Procop. de bel . Goth. l. 2. pag. 232. . Which confutes the false Reports of their Cruelty , in destroying the Churches and Bodies of the Martyrs at Rome , mentioned in the Pontifical , and in Paulus Diaconus c c Paul . Diac. lib. 17. p. 170. . However Sylverius turned once more , as Procopius saith , and was suspected by Bellisarius to have designed to betray the City of Rome once more to the Goths , for which he deposed and banished him d d Procop. lib. 1. pag. 209. ; and Marcellinus an Author of great credit , and of that time , saith , Sylverius favoured Vitiges , and for that cause Bellisarius deposed him from his Bishoprick e e Marcelin . Com. Chronic. indic. 15. p. 15. . I know Liberatus ( a mortal Enemy to Vigilius ) would have this to be a Calumny , invented by Theodora , and carried on by Vigilius the succeeding Pope , who had promised Bellisarius two Hundred Crowns to get Sylverius ejected , and himself admitted f f Liberat. Brev. cap. 22. Bin. pag. 191 , &c. ; and Anastasius with Paulus Diaconus follow his Account : But the two former Authors are in this case more worthy of Credit ; however this is certain , Bellisarius did depose and banish Sylverius , and got Vigilius Elected , who fearing his Rival should be restored , got him at last into his Hands , and barbarously caused him to be starved to death . This is a sad Story of two Popes , Sylverius uncanonically elected , a Simoniack and a perjured Person ; and Vigilius a favourer of Hereticks , one that is said to have hired false Witness , and to have given Mony to make the See void , and at last a Murtherer .

Which shews , how little reason there is for Baronius and the Notes , to make such a stir which was the true Pope of these two . They will have Sylverius to remain the rightful Pope while he lived , and so Rail freely at Vigilius as an Heretick , and Bloody Usurper g g Notis in vit. Sylver . , Bin. pag. 771. Lab. 289. Baron . An. 537. n. 18. pag. 277 , 278. . But they cannot prove this by any Evidence , but only by a manifestly forged Epistle of Sylverius . And the contrary is very certain , because the Emperor , the Gallican Churches and all did own Vigilius for the true Pope long before Sylverius his death , and he openly acted as such all that time . Wherefore we must reject that Dream of Baronius , who saith ( without any ground , ) that Vigilius did Abdicate the Papacy for six days upon the death of his Competitor , and got himself new chosen ; and this purged him of all Crimes , and in a moment made him a Saint and a rare Pope : He would force this Fiction out of Anastasius , ( who in like Cases he generally despises , ) who only saith , the See was void six days , but plainly means after Sylverius was deposed ; for he reckons Vigilius his time from thence , allotting him above 17 years and 6 Months ; that is , near two years more than Baronius allows .

There are but two Epistles ascribed to Sylverius , and they are the only Evidence to prove him the true Pope after he was Deposed ; yet it is certain both are Forged . The first charges Vigilius with Simony , yea , excommunicates and deprives him for usurping the Papacy ; it is dated with the name of Basilius , whereas Baronius and the Annotator say , there was no such Consul in his time h h Ep. 1. Sylver . Bin. pag. 772. col . 1. Lab. 291. . And Labbè saith , it is to be rejected for the Barbarity of the Style , and other reasons , and concludes the mistake of the Consul , shews the bold ignorance of Mercator , the Author of this Imposture . Now observe for the ingenuity and credit of Baronius , that this Epistle not only serves him to clear Sylverius from Simony , and to prove him the true Pope , but he calls this odious Forgery , The Sword of the Spirit , the Word of God , and the Exercise of that Power , which he had to Absolve or Damn Eternally all People i i Baron . An. 539. n. 4. pag. 295. , which is no less than Blasphemy .

The Second Epistle to Amator is so gross a Fiction , that both Baronius and Binius reject it , being contrary to the true History delivered by Liberatus , whom the Notes call the most faithful Writer of this time k k Ep. 2. Sylv. Bin. ib. Lab. 293 : Labbè agrees with them that it is spurious , and shews that Mercator stole it out of Gregory's Epistles , wishing that the like censure which is passed on this , were passed upon many more of these Writings . But the Letter of Amator to Sylverius , ( which Labbè saith , Learned men suspect to be as false as the Popes answer to it , ) Baronius will have to be genuine ; and from this slight Forgery alone , he proves , That all the Catholick World groaned together , at the ignominies put upon the Bishop of the Universal Church l l Baron . An. 539. n. 5. pag. 296. An. Dom. 536. : A rare Historian ! Whose Assertions and his Evidence are both false .

Binius places the Second Council of Orleance in this year , but Labbe from Sirmondus puts it three years sooner , An. 533. in the time of Pope John the Second m m Concil. Aurel. 2. Bin. pag. 773. col . 1. Lab. 1779. ; it was called , as the Preface saith , by the Command of the King of France , and made very good Canons , without Papal Advice or Authority . Binius his Notes here blunder this and the following Council , and will keep King Clovis alive three year longer than Nature allowed him , to support a Fable of this Kings giving the Pope a Golden Crown , An. 514. n n Notis Bin. pag. 774. col. 2. whereas he died An. 511. o o Vid. Sirm. notas in Concil. 3. Aur. Lab. 305. An. Dom. 358. .

The Third Council of Orleans , Binius sets An. 540. But Labbè more truly places it here p p Concil. Aurel. 3. Bin. Tom. 2. pag. 2. Lab. 295. . However , it takes no notice of any Pope , though Vigilius about this time is pretended to have writ to Caesarius Bishop of Arles . This Synod made divers Canons for Discipline ; and by the second Canon it appears , they were zealous for the Celibate of the Clergy : But the fourth shews , that hitherto the Canons in this case had not been obeyed ; and the ninth Canon Decrees , That if any Clerks having Wives or Concubines were ignorantly ordained , they should not be removed .

§ . 13. Vigilius was made Pope immediately after Sylverius An. Dom. 537. was deposed , and while the Goths belieged Bellisarius in Rome , which was in this year : But the Editors from Baronius write An. 540. upon this entrance * * Vita Vigil . Bin. Tom 2. par. 2 pag. 1. Lab. Tom. 5. pag. 506. , to cover the Fable of his new Election , after the death of Sylverius : But he must come in in the year 537 : For Marcellinus places Vigilius his death An. 554. q q Marcellin . Chron. P. C. Basil . An. 13. pag. 57. , which makes up the 17 years and odd time that Anastasius truly allots Vigilius ; whose Successor Pelagius entred , as Baronius and the Editors own , An. 555 , which is but 15 whole year from that year 540 , in which ( they say ) he entred ; and from which they falsly compute his time , who writ Letters dated An. 538 , and acted in all things as the sole true Pope , from the time Sylverius was deposed ; which was according to Anastasius , after he had sat one year and five Months r r Vita Sylver . ut supra . ; and he followed Writers of undoubted credit , that is , Marcellinus , who places his deposition and Vigilius his entrance An. 537 s s Marcel . Chron. pag. 56. ; so doth Genebrard t t Genebrard . l. 3. pag. 464. , who with Platina allow Sylverius only some odd time above one year , in which all Writers before Baronius agree . His invention therefore it was to ascribe above 4 years to Sylverius u u Baron . An. 540. n. 3. pag. 301. , that this false Chronology might cover his devisable , of a new Election of Vigilius , An. 540. which we justly reject as an idle Fable , invented to save the Honour of the Roman Chair : Yet it is well Baronius did not think Vigilius the true Pope all this time , for by that means we have his true Character , who , he saith , was driven on with the Whirlwind of Ambition , and like Lucifer fell from Heaven , — that his Sacriledge cried out on every side — he calls him a Schismatick , a Simoniack , an Usurper , a wretched Man , an Heretick , a Wolf , a Thief , a false Bishop , and an Antichrist w w Baron . An. 538. n. 18 , 19 , 20. p. 277 , 278. ; aggravating his Crimes with all his Rhetorick , wherein he rather exceeds the Bounds of Modesty than of Truth ; for he really was extreamly wicked , and beyond the power of the sanctifying Chair it self , to make him Holy . We have so fully described the Acts of this Pope , and all the false Stories about him in the following History of the Fifth General Council , that we may here pass him by , with a few brief Remarks .

First , Liberatus assures us , Vigilius did make good his promise to Theodora the Empress , and communicated with Hereticks x x Liberat. Brev cap. 22. Bin. pag. 192. . Anastasius , a later Author of no credit denies this , and Binius is so fond of this Popeexcusing Fiction , that he puts into the Text these words , See how Vigilius ( though he came by evil means into the Papacy , ) as soon as he got into that holy Chair established by Gods Promise , was changed into another Man , condemning the Heresie he had promised to approve y y Vita Vigil . ap. Bin. & Lab. ut supra . . Which false and foolish Parenthesis Labbè was ashamed of , and leaves it out .

Secondly , There are very many idle Stories in Anastasius his life of this Pope , some of which I will briefly recite , the bare relation of them being enough to disprove them , viz. That when the People of Rome had accused Vigilius for a Murderer , and got the Empress to send for him Prisoner to Constantinople ; the Romans as he was going off , first desired his Prayers , and then threw Stones at him — That though he was brought Prisoner to Justinian , yet the Emperor met and kissed him , and the People sang that Hymn — Behold the Lord the King cometh , &c. — Which being applied to the Pope is Blasphemy , and so the Editors and Baronius counted it , as did also Pope Simplicius , when the Heretical Bishop of Alexandria entring into Constantinople , permitted his Party to sing the words of an Hymn only due to Christ z z Bin. Tom. 2. par. 1. pag. 436. Lab. 1071. & Baron . An. 476. pag. 318. . The rest shall be observed in the History of the 5th Council , where we may find also the Blunders , Fictions and Contradictions of the Notes exposed , and so will mention but few of them here a a Notis in Vit. Vigil . Bin. pag. 2. Lab. 308. , viz. That Vigilius cunningly Abdicated the Papacy after the death of Sylverius , and got himself new-elected by the Roman Clergy , who were divinely inspired in that act . — That Vigilius was a Catholick , and only polluted by communicating with Hereticks , ( which was a horrid Crime formerly in Acacius . ) — That Bellisarius was denied a Triumph at Constantinople , for his ill usage of the Pope . — That Vigilius Anathematized the Empress Theodora , and that God thereupon destroyed her . — That the Roman Church is so secured by Providence , that it is no blot to it , if we can prove this Pope Simoniacal and Heretical — ( I ask by the way , why then do they tell so many Lies to cover this ? ) — That the Eastern Bishops depended upon Vigilius his Judgment , and stayed till he came to Constantinople , before they would subscribe the Edict against the three Chatpers . — That Justinian after his coming revoked this Edict . — That the Pope finally confirmed the 5th Council , — And lastly , That it was Sacriledge in the Emperour , to presume to depose or confirm a Pope . — All which we shall shew to be notorius Falshoods .

The first Epistle of Vigilius is writ to three notorious Hereticks , wherein he assures them he holds the same Faith with them b b Vigil . Ep. 1. Bin. pag. 3. Lab. 311. ; and is so heretical , that the Editors are ashamed of it , and print only the beginning of it , pretending from Baronius that some Eutychian writ it in his name c c Baron . An. 538. n. 15. pag. 277. . But the Reader will remember , that the Annalist always condemns genuine Writings , if they reflect on the Pope , and justifies Forgeries , if they magnifie him ; of which this is another clear instance ; for Liberatus who was a little before called the most faithful Writer of his time , hath this Epistle at large , and affirms Vigilius writ it d d Liberat. Brev. cap. 22. Bin. pag. 192. . Yea , Victor Tuennensis hath recorded it as this Popes almost in the same syllables in his Chronicle ! e e Victor . Tuen . Chron. pag. 9. , who is another Credible Writer of that Age. And both these Africans did ever after look on Vigilius as an Heretick for this , and so he was , but secretly for fear of Justinian .

To whom about this time Vigilius openly writ an Orthodox Letter , though Baronius and the Editors place it Anno 540. and call it his 4th Epistle , pretending it was writ after Baronius his invented new election , and when the Holy Chair had set him right in Faith f f Ep. 4. Vigil . ad Justin . Bin. pag. 5. Lab. 315. . But my reason why I judge it writ Anno 538 soon after his entrance , is because it was customary for a new Pope to write to the Emperor , and give an Account of his Faith ; and since Vigilius had been advanced by Justinian , it is not at all likely he should stay almost three years before he sent an Embassy to enquire if he were Orthodox ; and this Epistle having no Date they have clapt to it , another to Mennas , with a Date that smells of Forgery , because the Emperors Embassador is made to subscribe to the Popes Letter Anno 540 , which is a thing so unusual , that either Justinian highly suspected Vigilius , or this Postscript is added by Mercator g g Ep. 5. Vigil . Bin. pag. 6. Lab. 318. . However it being certain that Vigilius had writ privately to Anthimius , Severus and Theodosius , that he was of the same Faith with them , and it being also probable that he writ these open Letters to Justinian and Mennas at the same time wherein he anathematizes those three Hereticks by name , and professes himself Orthodox , this proves him a most egregious Hypocrite and Dissembler in points of Faith . I shall only briefly note on this fourth Epistle , that Vigilius reckning up the names of his immediate Predecessors , names not Sylverius among them , which seems to intimate he was then alive : And Secondly , if Mercator did not thrust in that Sentence , That to disturb , or diminish the Priviledges of the Apostolical Seat , appeared as bad as violating the Faith : If this ( say , ) be not a latter Addition , we may infer , That Vigilius was more concerned for the power of his See , than for the Faith .

That which the Editors call the Second Epistle , was writ to one Eutherius Anno 538 : And though they and Baronius say he was then no true Pope h h Ep. 2. Vigil . Bin. pag. 3. Lab. 311. ; yet the Collectors of the Decretal Epistles did not think so , for they have put this among the Decretals of true Popes . Du Pin hath well observed , that the latter part of this Epistle is forged by Mercator , where Vigilius is supposed so ignorant of Greek , ( after he had lived long in Greece , ) as to derive Cephas , ( the name of St. Peter ) from 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , an Head . And in this corrupt part is that absurd Sentence , — That no true Believer was ignorant , that all Churches had their beginning from Rome : Which though a Forgery , serves the Editors to note upon in the Margen , The Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches : Of which they have no better evidence than such Trash , and so must be content with such as they have .

The Third Epistle to Caesarius Bishop of Arles , was writ in the same year ; and proves that Vigilius was taken for the true Pope , as well by this eminent Father i i Ep. 3. Vigil . Bin. pag. 4. Col. 2. Lab. 314. , as by Eutherius , Anno 538.

The Sixth , Seventh and Eighth Epistles are writ to An. Dom. 544. Auxanius Successor to Caesarius , and shew Vigilius was then so much at the Emperors devotion , that he durst not grant a Pall to a French Bishop without the leave of Justinian k k Ep. 6. Vigil . Bin. pag. 〈◊〉 . col . 1. Lab. 319. ; and when he had ( above a year after ) got this leave , he tells Auxanius he was obliged to pray for the Emperor and the Empress , who had given their consent l l Ep. 7. Vigil . Bin. ib. Lab. 320. . Now if Theodora were so great a Friend to Hereticks as Baronius pretends , 't is plain , Vigilius then was a Favourite of hers , which makes him still suspected to be inclined to Heresie : But there is one mistake in this Epistle , viz. That his Predecessor had granted a Pall to Caesarius , which De Marca saith is false , and affirms this Auxainus to have been the first Legate the Pope made in France : A hopeful High-Priest to begin that Usurpation upon Metropolitans .

In this year was that Edict put out , which condemned An Dom. 546. the three Chapters ; and here the Editors call it , The Edict of the most pious Emperor Justinian , containing a Confession of Faith , and a Confutation of the Heresies , that are contrary to the Catholick Church of God m m Titul . Edict . ap. Bin. pag. 8 col . 2. Lab. 323. . But for fear Vigilius and his Party might appear Heretical for opposing this Orthodox Edict , the Editors will not print it here , but thrust it on some hundred Pages further n n Edictum vide Bin. pag. 151. Lab. 638. . And put in here their false Comment before the Text , hoping by the sham Stories in these Notes , to take off the Readers aversation to this Heretical Pope : But since all the Errors of these Notes are confuted at large in the History of the Fifth Council , I will only name a few of them now , viz. That Pelagius the Popes Secretary always opposed this Edict , is false , for he afterwards subscribed it . — He saith Vigilius , Pontianus ( whose Letter is here printed ) and Facundus , who writ against this Edict , were Orthodox . — But the Fifth Council condemns all for Hereticks , who wrote for the three Chapters ' here censured ; and none but Heretical Writers could take upon them to confute an Orthodox Confession of Faith : The Decree of Vigilius for silence , with his prudence and courage , are all Fictions , as shall be shewn in due place .

Vigilius had now been near three years at Constantinople , and carried fair with Justinian , so that doubtless An. Dom. 550. he had signed his Edict , which condemned the persons of Theodorus , Theodoret and Ibas , and their Heretical Writings ; yet here is an Epistle of his to a Scythian Bishop , citing his Constitution ( which defends these three Chapters , ) and wishes the persons of Theodorus , &c. might not be condemned , as some favourers of Heresie desired : Yet in the same Epistle o o Ep. 12. Vigil . Bin. pag. 10. Col. 2. Lab. 557. he saith , he had Suspended his two Deacons for defending the three Chapters , and would shortly Excommunicate them : Now what the Notes on this Epistle say , That both the Opposers and Defenders of the three Chapters hated Vigilius p p Not. in Ep. 12. Bin. pag. 11. Col. 2. ▪ is no wonder , for he was false to all Parties , and such trimming Sycophants , who strive to please all , get the favour of no body .

The Fifteenth Epistle to the Universal Church , Baronius An. Dom. 551. and the Editors do not censure ; but it is a meer Forgery , being falsly dated ( as they own ) in the 26 of Justinian 552 ; they alter it to 551. Binius found but part of it in Baronius , so prints no more : But Labbé adds a great deal more , not saying where he had it q q Epist. 15. Vigil . Bin. pag. 11. c. 2. Lab. 327. : As to the matter of it , the Story of this Popes sufferings at Constantinople is false and improbable , not attested by any credible Writer of that time : And whereas he saith , he had Excommunicated and Deposed Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea , and Suspended Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople , that must be false , because the Popes Legates in the sixth General Council affirm , that Mennas died the 21st year of Justinian , ( four year before the Date of this Letter , ) An. 547 r r Concil. 6. gen. Bin. Tom. 2 par. 1. pag 21. . Wherefore this Epistle and the Instrument of Condemnation against Theodorus and Mennas are Forgeries s s Damnatio Theo. &c. Bin. pag. 12. Col. 1. Lab. 334. : And it is very unjust , for Baronius and the Annotator on the credit of such stuff so rudely to rail at Justinian , as if he were the vilest Heretick and greatest Monster upon Earth . There are many other things in these Notes deserving censure t t Not. in Ep. 15. Bin. pag. 13. Lab. 337. , viz. The affirming that Theodorus of Caesaria deposed Zoilus of Alexandria , and put in Apollinaris ; whereas Liberatus expresly saith , the Emperor did this u u Liberat. Brev. cap. 24. : The Stories of Justiman's revoking his Edict , and of Theodorus and Mennas humble submission delivered in writing to Vigilius , and of his absolving them , are equally false and most improbable , so that scarce any thing here can be trusted . Were this Epistle genuine I would have observed , that Pope Vigilius here saith , he knew Justinian's Hand-writing w w Baron . An. 552. n 15. pag. 388. : And that utterly confutes Baronius and Suidas , who say , he was altogether illiterate . I would also note , That the Pope here affirms , ( An. 551. ) he had been seven year out of his Country , attending for the Peace of the Church x x Ap. Lab. 333. : Now if this be true , he must leave Rome An. 544 , that is , three years before Baronius his Account ; and this will also prove some of his Epistles to Auxanius counterfeit , being dated from Rome after that time . But after all , I reckon this false account of the Pope's Journey , to be a sign that this Epistle is a Forgery ; only those who count it genuine ought to solve these difficulties .

There is nothing more in our Editors vere remarkable , but only some few French Councils , called by their own Kings , and the Canons in them made by their own Bishops , without any notice of Papal Authority , and so without any Corruptions . Wherefore we pass them , and go on to the Fifth General Council , where Vigilius will be brought on the Stage again .

An Epitome of Dr. Crakenthorp's Lab. Tom. v. 422 , 429. col. 2. 430. Treatise of the Fifth General Council at Constantinople , Anno 553.

Chap. i. THE occasion of this Council , was the Trio Capitulu , or three Chapters about the Writings of Theodorus of Mopsvestia , Theodoret against Cyril , and the Epistle of Ibas to Maris , which the Nestorians pretended was all approved by the Council of Chalcedon ; whereupon some doubted of the Authority of that Holy Council , and the several Sects ( called from their having no one Head , Acephali ) rejected it : So that to appease this dangerous Schism , Justinian set forth an Orthodox Edict a a Bin. Tom. ii . par. 2. pag. 151. Lab. Tom. v. pag. 683. to condemn those Writings : And that not satisfying all Parties , he assembled this Fifth General Council .

Chap. ii . Pope Vigilius was then at Constantinople , and often desired by the Bishops , and commanded by the Emperor to be present b b Bin. Col. 1. 47 , & 49. a. &c Col. 2. 51. 〈◊〉 . : Baronius falsly saith , they had no regard to him c c Baron . An. 553. pag. 399. n. 31. ; yet he afterwards owns twenty Metropolitans , and three Patriarchs invited him to come , and offered him the Presidency d d Id. n. 35. , urging him with a Promise under his Hand to to be there e e Bin. Col. 2. 51. a. Lab. 430. : Vigilius first pretended to be Sick , so they adjourned the first Session , on his saying he would satisfie them next day f f Bin. col. 1. 49. a. . Then he alledged there were but few Western Bishops ; but they shewed there were more with him at that time , than had been in all the four former Great Councils g g Bin. col. 2. 51. a. Lab. 430. . He pretended also , he would offer his Sense to the Emperor alone h h Bin. & Lab. ibid. ; but the Emperor required him to do it to the Council i i Bin. col. 1. 47 b. Lab. 422. : So that the true reason why he would not be there , was , his Affection to the Nestorians and the three Chapters .

Chap. iii. Upon this the Council resolves to proceed without him k k Bin. col. 2. 52. b. Lab. 434. ; which Cusanus saith , ought to be done for the safety of the Church , when the Pope is resolved not to come l l Cusan de concord . Cath. l. 2. c. 1. ; and herein they follow the Example of the Council of Chalcedon , who proceeded without the Popes Legates , when they would not stay and join with them m m Conc. Chal. Act. 16. Bin. Tom. ii . pag. 1. 334. Lab. Tom. iv . 79. h. . Wherefore in the third Collation this 5th Council declared the true Faith , and in the 4th and 5th examine the Cause of Theodorus and Theodoret : On the fifth day ( saith Baronius , ) Pope Vigilius sent his Constitution to the Council n n Baron . An. 553. n. 41 , & 48. , being made by the advice of 16 Bishops and 3 Deacons , and designed to oblige the whole Church , the Western agreeing with him in it o o Ibid. n. 47 , & An. 547. n. 39. , and delivered by Apostolical Authority p p Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. 26. Lab. 376. Wherein he confirms the three Chapters , declaring 1st , That Theodorus of Mopsvestia cannot be condemned after his death q q Bin. 25. Lab. 366. . 2ly , That Theodoret's name should not be taxed r r Bin. ib. Lab. 367. . 3ly , That Ibas Epistle to Maris was Catholick , and both he and that Epistle received by the Council of Chalcedon as Catholick and Orthodox s s Bin. 26. Lab. 369. . But Binius cuts off the five last Columns ( which are added by Baronius and Labbè , ) and which shew how fully Vigilius confirmed all the three Chapters

Chap. iv . In the 6th Collation the Council having received this Constitution , do notwithstanding go on to examine Ibas Epistle t t Bin. 88. Lab. 509. : And wonder any dare presume to say , it was received by the Council of Chalcedon u u Ibid. ; Which Baronius owns was levelled at Vigilius , though out of respect he be not named w w Baron . An. 553. n. 212. . And after a strict Examination , They pronounce , that the approvers of this Epistle are Followers of Theodorus and Nestorius the Hereticks ; They shew the Council at Chalcedon , owns God was made Man , which this Epistle calls Apollinarism ; That Council confesses Mary to be the Mother of God , the Epistle denies it ; They commend the Council of Ephesus , and Cyril's twelve Chapters condemning Nestorius ; Ibas condemns the Council of Ephesus , defends Nestorius , and calls Cyril an Heretick , and his 12 Chapters impious : They stuck to Cyril's Faith and the Nicene Creed , he condemns Cyril's Faith , and commends Theodorus his Creed : They held two Natures , but one Person in Christ ; He is for two Persons also x x In fine Col. 6. Bin. pag. 102. Lab. 544. : Whereupon this 5th Council Decree the whole Epistle to be Heretical , and Anathematize all as Hereticks who receive it y y Ibid. . And for this reason Binius leaves out of his Edition the most of that part of Vigilius's Constitution , which concerns Ibas his Epistle : And Baronius ( who puts it in ) with the Nestorians , would excuse it by saying the latter part of this Epistle is Orthodox : But the Council condemns the whole Epistle z z Col. 6. in fine . , and all that say any part of it is right a a Col. 8. Bin. pag. 116. Lab. 579. ; and all that write for it or defend it b b Col. 8. Bin. pag. 115. Lab. 568. . So that Pope Vigilius , Baronius , Bellarmine and all the Writers for this Heretical Epistle , were and are accursed by the Sentence of this General Council : And if ( as Baronius pretends ) the Popes Legates at Chalcedon , say , that Ibas appeared a Catholick by this Epistle c c Baron . An. 553. n. 213. ; the 5th Council shews the Fathers at Chalcedon condemned it , not heeding what two or three said d d Bin. pag. 104. Lab. 548. . Baronius urges , ( as the Nestorians did , ) that Eunomius said at Chalcedon , the latter end of Ibas Epistle was Orthodox e e Baron . ut supr. ; but the 5th Council saith , this is a Calumny f f Col. 6. Bin. 91. a. Lab. , and cite the very words of Eunomius out of the Council at Chalcedon ; which import that Ibas was innocent , after he had agreed with Cyril and renounced his Epistle , which he had done in the Acts before Photius and Eustathius g g Ibid. . The 7th Collation of this 5th Council , was only repeating and approving former Acts h h Col. 7. Bin. 104. Lab. 549. . In the 8th Collation , Baronius owns this Council condemned the three Chapters contrary to Vigilius Decree i i Baron . An. 553. n. 219. , and Anathematize all that did defend them k k Col. 8. Bin. 115. Lab. , that is , Vigilius , whom Baronius often commends as a defender of them l l Baron . An. 553. n. 233. An. 546. n. 40 , &c. : Yea , they declare them Hereticks , by the Doctrin of the Scriptures and holy Fathers , and of the four former Councils m m Coll. 8. ut supr. & Bin. 116. Lab. 179. : All which therefore Vigilius contradicted in his Constitution . And whatever Baronius first says to disparage this Council , it was ratified by the 6th Council n n Concil. 6. Act. 15. , by the seventh , or second Nicene Council , Act. 6. yea , ( and as Baronius confesseth o o Baron . An. 553. num. 229. ) , by all succeeding General Councils ; by the Popes , Pelagius , Gregory the Great ; Agatho , Leo the second , and by all succeeding Popes , who were sworn to observe all the General Councils , and this among others p p Baron . An. 869. n. 68 , 69. . To which we may add the Councils of Basil and Constance , and all the Catholick Church till Leo the 10th's Lateran Council , An. 1516 , which contrary to the Catholick Faith q q Academia Paris . in Appellat . decreed no Council could condemn a Pope : Wherefore we may conclude , Vigilius was a condemned Heretick .

Chap. v. Now let us examine Baronius his shifts , and those Binius learns from him . First , they pretend this was not a point of Faith , but concerned only persons r r Baron . An. 547. n. 30. n. 46. n. 225. n. 231. Vid. item . Bin. not . in 5. Concil. pag. 174. Lab. 374. : Which is most false ; For the Emperor Justinian calls it a matter of Faith s s Bin. Col. 1. pag. 47. Lab. 422. : so doth the 5th Council it self declare t t Col. 8. saepissimè . : Yea , Vigilius in his Constitution calls the condemning these three Chapters Erring from the Faith ; and Facundus the Apologist for them saith , the opposing them was rooting out the Catholick and Apostolick Faith u u Baron . An. 546. n. 47. . On the other side Pope Pelagius saith , they are contrary to the Faith , and to receive them is to overthrow the Faith of Ephesus w w Pelag. 2. ep. 7. ; which Epistle Gregory the Great confirms x x Greg. l. 2. ep. 36. . Bellarmine saith , that is de fide , which a Council defines to be so , and calls the opposers of it Hereticks and accurseth them y y Bellarm. de Concil. cap. 12. §. 4. . And Baronius calls the Emperors Edict for the three Chapters , Sanctio de fide Catholica z z Baron . An. 546. n. 41. , and Fidei decretum a a Id. An. 547. n. 50. , So that it must be a matter of Faith : And Gregory the Great was mistaken if he meant , that this 5th Council handled no matters of Faith , but treated of Persons b b Greg. l. 3. ep. 37. : For the contrary is manifest . But indeed Gregory means they altered no point of Faith established at Chalcedon , as some in his time fancied ; only condemning the persons there examined ; but still it was by shewing they held notorious Heresies .

Chap. vi . But to consider the three Chapters severally : The first was about Theodorus of Mopsvestia , who ( as Vigilius saith c c Const. Vigil . Bin. 25. Lab. 365. , ) should not be condemned after he was dead , citing Leo and Gelasius for it , as having decreed it for a point of Faith : But on the other side St. Austin declares , if Caecilian were guilty of the Crimes objected ( 100 years after his death , ) he would Anathematize him d d Aug. Ep. ad Bonifac. citat . in Concil. col. 5. : Pelagius urges and approves of this Doctrin of St. Austin , and saith Leo agreed with him e e Pelag. 2. ep. 7. . The same is proved in the 5th Council , to have been the Opinion of St. Cyril , of the African Council , &c. f f Col. 5. Bin. pag. 75. Lab. 479. Thus also Domnus was condemned at Chalcedon after his death , and many of the old Hereticks g g Edict . Just. Bin. 164 Lab. 715. : Honorius was condemned by name sixty years after his death h h Concil. vi . Act. 12 , 13 & 18. . Yea , Baronius who urges this in excuse of Vigilius in one place i i Baron . An. 553. num. 233. , in another declares that it is a mistake , and that the Church of Rome doth condemn Men after their death k k Id. ibid. num. 185. ; So as he is forced to commend and condemn the same Fact ; and to excuse this reason of Vigilius , he disputes for both sides of a Contradiction : As to our Saviours words , of binding and loosing on Earth , Math 18. which Gelasius and Vigilius cite , they respect the living Ministers on Earth , and not the Persons bound or loosed : And Leo and Gelasius both speak of loosing Persons , who dyed Excommunicate and Impenitent , which they held unlawful ; but neither of them say with Vigilius , That an Heretick , who is not discovered till after his death , and dyed in Heresie , may not be condemned then .

Chap. vii . Vigilius pretends in the second place , that this Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church l l Const. Bin. pag. 25. Lab. 366. ; which objection is taken notice of , both by Justinian m m Edict . Bin. 164. Lab. 715. and the 5th Council n n Collat. 5. Bin. 79. Lab. 490. , and largely disproved by shewing he was condemned as an Heretick by all Churches , for that he dyed in his impiety ; and the Council say it is a Lye to affirm the contrary : Wherefore Baronius falsly saith , Vigilius knew he dyed in the Communion of the Church o o Baron . An. 553. n. 49. . For even Binius saith , this cannot be believed , because Justinian's Edict witnesseth the contrary p p Bin. not . in 5 Concil. pag. 174. Lab. 735. , even that he dyed in Heresie . So that unless an Heretick be in the Communion of the Church , Theodorus dyed not in that Communion .

Chap. viii . The Popes third reason is , that neither the Fathers , nor Councils had condemned Theodorus , particularly not Cyril , nor Proclus , nor the Synods of Ephesus or Chalcedon q q Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. 25. Lab. 364. : But the 5th Council cites the very words of Cyril and Proclus , which declare him an Heretick and condemn him r r Collat. 5. Bin. 76 , &c. Lab. 483 , &c. . They cite the words of Cyril to John of Antioch , in the Council of Ephesus , which say there were two Sons s s Ibid. : Also Cyril's Epistle approved at Chalcedon saith , the Council of Ephesus Anathematized not only Nestorius , but all that taught as he did t t Concil. Ephes. Act. 1. c. 6. & Chalcea . Act. 5. pag. 96. : And Nestorius being Theodorus his Scholar , as the Emperor shews u u Justin . Ep. ad Synod . 5. Bin. 47. Lab. 421. , the 5th Council doubts not to affirm he was condemned in the former great Council w w Collat. 8. Bin. 115. Lab. 568. ; So Pelagius the second saith , the Ephesine Council condemned Theodorus and his Creed x x Pelag. 2. Epist. 7. : Vigilius indeed denies it was his Creed ; but Cyril saith it was his , and produced it under his name in the Council of Ephesus , and condemned it y y Collat. 5. Bin. pag. 77. Lab. 486. : So the not mentioning his name in the Anathema , is but a fallacious proof of his being not condemned there : But when the Nestorians began to shroud themselves under his name , then a Synod in Armenia condemned him by name z z Collat. 6. Epist. Ibas & Baron . An. 435. n. 4. , and Proclus exhorted them so to do as Cyril affirms a a Collat. 5. Bin. 77. Lab. 486 , &c. , and Cyril there condemns him by name b b Ibid. : So did Theodosius and Valentiniam , by their Edicts which the 5th Council cites c c Collat. 5. Bin. 71. Lab. 471 , 472 . The Church of Mopsvestia put his name out of the Dypticks d d Ibid. Bin. 81. Lab. 495. : And Sergius Bishop of Cyrus was deposed for reckoning his name among the Orthodox Bishops : Wherefore the 5th Council rightly declares , That the Catholick Church had cast out Theodorus after his death , for his impious Writings e e Collat. 5. Bin. 84. Lab. 503. . But Pope Vigilius cites two forged Epistles of Cyril and Proclus , to shew that neither of them condemned Theodorus f f Ibid. Bin. 76. Lab. 483. & 78. & 487. . And with the Nestorians he denies , that these Impious Writings were composed by Theodorus g g Vigil . Const. Bin. 24 , 25. Lab. 364 , 365. . But the Armenian Synod , St. Cyril , Justinian and the 5th Council , all say they were writ by Theodorus ; the same is also affirmed by Pope Pelagius h h Pelag. 2. Ep. 7. §. etsi . : As for what Vigilius objects , that the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon were against condemning Theodorus after his death i i Vigil . Const. ut supra . , Liberatus fortunes to say the same k k Liber . Brev. cap. 10. Bin. pag. 182. Lab. 752 , &c. ; And Baronius , who takes no notice of Vigilius , severely taxes Liberatus for this , as a Nestorian falshood charged on the Council of Chalcedon l l Baron . An. 435. n. 11 & 12. . And Binius saith , it is contrary to Cyril's Writings ( received at Ephesus , ) and to the Acts at Chalcedon m m Notis in Liberat. Bin. pag. 193. Lab. 779. . Finally , Vigilius most falsly saith , the Emperor Justinian himself , as if he quoted the Acts of Chalcedon in his Edict for the Trinity , is for clearing Theodorus n n Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. 25. Lab. 365. ; which is so gross a slander as can scarce be paralleld . For Justinian in that very Edict condemns Nestorius and all that Teach with him o o Edict . Just. trin. Cod. l. 1. Tit. 1. Lab. 5. pag. 2. ; yea , he censures Theodorus by name in a particular Epistle , writ to this 5th Council p p Bin. pag. 160. Lab. 706. : On these frivolous and false grounds Vigilius Decrees , none shall condemn Theodorus q q Vigil . Const. ut supr. : But the 5th Council , without scruple justly condemns both him , and all that held with him or defended him , that is , Pope Vigilius for one .

Chap. ix . Secondly , Vigilius held the Heretical side as to the Writings of Theodoret , whose person after renouncing his former Heresie all agree to be Catholick ; So that this is a point of Doctrin , not concerning a person . Yet first Vigilius pretends , Theodoret did not write these Papers against Cyril , alledged under his name , as ( he saith ) appeared to the Council at Chalcedon r r Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. 25. Lab. 367. , which is most false ; For Binius owns he writ against Cyril , and defended both Nestorius and Theodorus s s Bin. Praes. Tom. i. pag. 2. pag. 3. & notis in Epist. 61. Leonis . ; and Baronius over and over confesseth the same thing t t Baron . An. 427. n. 30. & An. 431. n. 182. : So doth Liberatus , cap. 4. and Pope Pelagius ep. 7. and the Councils both of Ephesus and Chalcedon u u Act. Concil. Eph. cap. 2. & cap. 8. The Chalced. Act. 1. cap. 6. : Yea , Theodoret himself in his Epistles ( cited in the 5th Council , and by Pope Pelagius ) owns it w w Col. 5. Bin. pag. 72 & 85. Lab. 473 & 504. ; So that it is a wonder Vigilius durst urge so weak and false a thing : But he objects , The Council of Chalcedon only required him to renounce Nestorius , not to condemn his own Writings x x Const. Vigil . ut supra . : Which is a meer fallacy , for he writ for Nestorius , and against Cyrils twelve Chapters : Now since he condemned all the Doctrins of Nestorius at Chalcedon , and also subscribed the twelve Chapters , he did really and virtually , though not by name , Anathematize his own Writings y y Vid. Concil. Chalced. Act. 8. : Yea , Pelagius saith expresly , he did condemn his own Writings z z Pelag. Ep. 7. ut supra . . And though at the Council of Chalcedon this General Condemnation sufficed , yet when the Nestorians in the time of Justinian , defended themselves by Theodoret's Writings , it was necessary to condemn them expresly , and by name . Thirdly , Vigilius saith , Cyril on the Union with the Eastern Bishops , required none of them to renounce their own Writings a a Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. 26. Lab. pag. 367. : Which signifies nothing , since Cyril made them all Anathematize Nestorius , whose Cause they had defended before he would communicate with them b b Cyril . Ep. ad Dynat . in Concil. Ephes. c. 16. . Wherefore Vigilius falsly concludes those Writings innocent , which so vigorously defend Nestorius his Doctrin ; and if he and Theodoret vindicated these Writings , after they had condemned Nestorius , they contradict themselves , condemn only a name , but held the Heretical Doctrins still : Which is plain also from Vigilius his affirming , That the Council of Chalcedon would have no Nestorian Doctrins condemned under Theodoret's name c c Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. Lab. 367. . That Council did condemn all that defended Nestorius , of which these very Writings of Theodoret were the chief : But he there recanting his Errors , they condemned those Errors , when they declared him Orthodox . And it was Vigilius favour for Nestorianism , which makes him so Zealous for Theodoret's Nestorian Writings .

Chap. x. Thirdly , Vigilius held the Heretical side as to Ibas his Epistle , affirming that the Council of Chalcedon pronounced it to be Orthodox d d Vigil . Const. Bin. pag. Lab. pag. 370. : But the 5th Council expresly say , the Council of Chalcedon did condemn and cast it out e e Lab. Concil. 5. col. 6. pag. 515. Bin. p. . Again , Vigilius saith , the whole Council of Chalcedon agreed with Pascasinus and Maximus , who say that Ibas by this Epistle was declared a Catholick f f Vigil . Constit . ut supra . . Whereas the 5th Council positively declare , that the discourse of these two single persons , was not regarded at Chalcedon g g Concil. 5. ut supra . : And Baronius , after so many succeeding Popes and Councils had confirmed this 5th Council , most impudently relates both these untruths , viz. That the Fathers of Chalcedon received this Epistle as Catholick , and that by it they did judge Ibas Orthodox h h Baron . An. 553. p. & An. 448. p. ; yet in contradiction to himself , he in other places i i Baron . An. 432. p. not only doubteth , whether Ibas did write this Epistle , but affirms expresly , it was found at Chalcedon not to be Ibas his Epistle , citing for it the wretched Nicene Council for Images , where this and many false Stories are found : And after all , the Cardinal forgetting himself , saith elsewhere k k Baron . An. 448. pag. 69. Et An. 553. pag. ; The Council of Chalcedon said it was his Epistle , and Ibas owned it to be his own , and that it was well known to be the Epistle of Ibas , and he cites the 10th Act of the Council of Chalcedon to prove this , which he out of the very Acts of Chalcedon had denied before : Into so many confusions and snares , doth he fall by labouring to defend this Heretical Pope .

Chap. xi . Whose frauds , with Baronius's , will further appear if we observe , that the true General Council at Ephesus excommunicated Ibas l l Concil. Ephes. cap. 7. , and the spurious Synod excommunicated Cyril m m Acta Conciliab . Ephes. ibid : The Emperor Theodosius to heal this breach , writes to John of Antioch , Patron of the Nestorians , to condemn Nestorius and agree with Cyril n n Vid. in fine Con. Ephesin . : And he at last with his Accomplices consented so to do , Anathematizing Nestorius , approving the Ephesine Council , and subscribed Cyril's Confession of Faith o o Vid. Epist. Cyril . ibid. , and so were received into the Peace of the Church , and an Union was made between them and Cyril : Now Vigilius and Baronius pretend , that Ibas in the end of his Epistle mentioneth this Union of John and Cyril with joy , therefore he was a Catholick when he writ it p p Vigil . Const. Lab. pag. 373. Bin. pag. ; and was so proved at Chalcedon by this Epistle ; especially by the latter end of it q q Baron . An. 448. & An. 553. ut supr . : But the 5th Council condemns the whole Epistle , and say the latter part of it is most impious r r Concil. 5. Col. 6. pag. 517. Lab. . And they had good reason , for though Baronius pretend this Epistle was writ upon the Eastern Bishops Union with Cyril s s Baron . An. 448. n. 59. pag. 69. ; That is most false ; for that Union was , An. 432 , or 433 , and Rambulus was then Bishop of Edessa . But Ibas succeeded him , and mentions in this Epistle an Edict condemning Theodorns of Mopsvestia , dated An. 435 t t Epist. Jo. ad Xystum inter Act. Concil. Ephes. Bin. T. 1. par. 2. pag. 421. ; yea Rambulus was still Bishop of Edessa , and upon this Edict condemned Theodorus , so that Ibas could not write this Epistle till 2 or 3 years after the Union , being Bishop of Edessa when he writ it u u Liberat. Brev. cap. 10. Bin. pag. 182. Lab. 752 , &c. : Yet then in this very Epistle he affirmed , God was not incarnate , nor Mary the Mother of God : So that the Union Ibas praises God for , must be that false Report spread by the Nestorians of Cyril's recanting , and yielding to John of Antioch w w Cyril . Ep. ad Donatum . Concil. Ephes. par. 3. Num. 38. : So Theodoret 12 years after the Union brags , that the East and Egypt were now agreed , that God was not crucified x x Concil. v. Collar . 5. Bin. pag. 86. Lab. col . 508. . And Ibas explains himself in this very Epistle by saying , God had subdued the Heart of the Egyptian to subscribe ; John of Antioch saith , Yea , to the very Heresie of Nestorius , which this Author calls the Faith y y lb. col . 6. Bin. 88. Lab. 511. in the latter end of this Epistle ; by which Baronius saith he proved himself a Catholick z z Baron . An. 448. ut sup● . : Yet Baronius owns this Story of Cyril's recantation , was a vile calumny of the Nestorians , who ( as he pretends ) forged this Epistle for Ibas , but it was found to be none of his a a Idem An. 432. pag. 625 , 626. ; which is a ridiculous contradiction : And yet these shifts he is put to in justifying an Epistle , wholly condemned in the 5th General Council . But to proceed , Ibas must relate to this feigned Union , because the Nestorians did at first require that Cyril should recant his twelve Chapters b b Concil. Eph. par. 3. Epist. Cyril . ad Acacium . Bin. pag. 431. , and by the proposals of Eusebius Bishop Emisa made to him c c Ibid. pag. 422. , which were in vain ; and John of Antioch was forced at last by that Bishop , to send his Submission to Cyril's Faith : To which second message Cyril indeed consented , and thence the Nestorians falsly said he consented to the first , and ( as they requested ) condemned his twelve Chapters ; which remaining Orthodox , Ibas his Epistle must be Heretical , as it expresses a joy for Cyril's supposed consent to Nestorianism .

Chap. xii . The next Method which Vigilius and Baronius take to prove Ibas Orthodox , is by the Words of this Epistle , wherein he rejects Cyril's twelve Chapters for teaching one Nature , and affirms , Two Natures and One Person d d Vid. Epist. Iboe apud Bin. Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 88. Lab. Concil. 5. Collat . 6. pag. 509. . Now the Nestorians could say this craftily like Catholicks , but their meaning was , that each Nature made a distinct subsistence , united only by Cohabitation , so that the Son of God dwelt in the Son of Mary ; as may be collected from Nestorius own words e e Concil. 5. Collat. 6. Bin. pag. 103. Lab. 546. : And from Justinian's Edict , where he saith , for Person , they perfidiously used the word Natures f f Edict . Just. post Concil. 5. Bin. pag. 161. Lab. col. 709. . But Vigilius , to clear Ibas , saith , Dioscorus and the Pseudo Ephesine Synod did condemn Flavianus for this Confession of Two Natures g g Vigil . Const. in Lab. col. 371. . 'T is replyed , they were all Eutychians who denied two Natures in all Senses , and so might condemn these words , whether Flavianus the Catholick in a right Sense , or Iba● the Nestorian in a wrong , used them : And whereas Vigilius urges , that the Council of Chalcedon condemned Dioscorus and received Ibas h h Const. Vig. ibid. ; 'T is plain , they condemned his whole Epistle , as the 5th Council prove at large i i Concil. 5. Collat. 6. Bin. 104. Lab. col. 548. , and received him only after he had renounced the Doctrin of this Epistle : Again , Vigilius would justifie the Epistle by pleading , that Ibas owned the true Ephesine Council , before Photius and Eustathius i i Const. Vigil . ut supra . : But it was proved before that Ibas writ this Epistle , An. 434 , and was then an Heretick ; but the Acts before Photius were not till 14 years after k k Baron . An. 448. pag. 63. Tom. 6. ; But his being a Catholick then , is no proof that his Epistle is Orthodox : Further , Vigilius saith , that Ibas mistook Cyril till he explained his Chapters , after which he and the Eastern Bishops ran into Cyril's Commuion l l Vigil . Const. ut supr. . And Baronius saith , that he did communicate with Cyril , after he had purged himself of the suspicion of being an Apollinarist by declaring his Chapters m m Baron . An. 448. pag. 66. : Yet Baronius himself owns , that Cyril explained his Chapters at Ephesus , while he was in Prison there , An. 431 n n Idem An. 431. pag. 595. , while the Pseudo-Synod sat ; and so their Title declares o o Concil. Eph. par. 3. Bin. pag. 311. . But Ibas writ this Epistle above 2 years after this Explanation , and was then a Nestorian : Nor did the Eastern Bishops communicate with him till long after ; and Theodoret writ bitterly against him , after that they were reconciled to Cyril p p Epist. Theodoret. ad Nestor . Concil. 5. Col. 5. propè finem . Bin. pag. 86. . And Binius owns the difference between Cyril and the Eastern Bishops , endured full three years after the Council q q Bin. Praefatio ad Concil. Ephes. Tom. i. par. 2. pag. 4. ; yet Ibas writ this Epistle after the Union was made , as the 5th Council expresly declares r r Concil. 5. Collar . 6. Bin. pag. 90. Lab. 514. : From all which it is plain that Vigilius mistakes the point ; for the Explanation Ibas meant of was Cyril's absolute revoking his twelve Chapters , ( a Forgery of the Nestorians ) which in the Epistle he calls his Recanting ; not this Orthodox Explanation of the twelve Chapters , as Vigilius pretends ; yea , it was proved before Photius and Eustathius that , Ibas said , He would not have received Cyril , if he had not Anathematized his Chapters s s Concil. Chalced Act. x. Bin. pag. 289. . Wherefore Ibas his Epistle was always Heretical , and he an Heretick until he recanted and came over to Cyril's Faith ; but Vigilius falsly affirms him to have been Orthodox , both before he rightly understood Cyril's meaning and afterwards t t Vigil . Const. Lab. Col. 371. , and wrongfully supposes Cyril came over to Ibas , who held two Persons , but called them two Natures ; from all which it manifestly appears , 1st , That the dispute about this Epistle was a cause of Faith . 2ly , That Ibas his Epistle was Heretical . 3ly , That Vigilius and Baronius in this dispute take the Heretical side .

Chap. xiii . Baronius further pretends , that neither the asserting or denying these three Chapters , could denominate Men Hereticks u u Baron . An. 547. pag. 358. Item An. 553. pag. 437. : But this was fully disproved before ( see Chap. 5. ) And since this was a cause of Faith , in which the whole 5th Council held contrary to Pope Vigilius , it will follow , that Men may contradict the Popes Decisions in Articles of Faith , and be no Hereticks : Yea , since here the Pope was on the wrong side , they who are to believe all such Decisions must sometimes be Hereticks . Secondly , Baronius falsly affirms , that they who held contrary to the Pope herein , were Schismaticks Convict w w Baron . An. 547. pag. 358. . 'T is true , there was a Schism , as he confesseth x x Id. An. 553. Saepissime . : But Vigilius and his Party were the Schismaticks , who separated from a General Council , owned for such by all Catholicks .

Chap. xiv . In the next place , Baronius would excuse Vigilius from Heresie , because he professed to hold the Faith of the Council of Chalcedon , and writ his Constitution to defend it y y Baron . An. 553 pag. 437 , 438. : So did Victor z z Victoris Chron. An. 2. post Consul . Basil . , so Facundus Hermianensis a a Facundus ap. Baron . An. 546. pag. 344. , who writ for the three Chapters , pretend : Yea , Vigilius himself in his Constitution pretends to maintain the Faith of that great Council b b Vigil . Const. Lab. col. 375. . But let it be considered , that the 5th General Council after a strict examining all these pretences , Anathematizes all that defend the three Chapters in the name of the Council of Chalcedon c c Concil. 5. col . 8. Bin. pag. 115. Lab. col. 568. , which Fact all Catholicks who approve this 5th Council must consent to . And nothing is more usual with all sorts of Hereticks , than to profess they believe as the Orthodox Councils and Fathers have believed ; yet they were condemned for all that pretence , ( See particular instances of this , as to the Eutychians , Monothelites , Nestorians and Modern Romanists , in the learned Author d d Crakenthorps Vigil . dormit . chap. 14. pag. 201 , &c. : Therefore Baronius his excuse is frivolous , since Hereticks professions are as false and contradictory as their Doctrins : And Vigilius would not forsake the three Chapters , no not when they were proved contrary to the Council of Chalcedon , and forbids any to write or speak against them , so as he might never be convicted or convinced .

Chap. xv . Baronius his third excuse for Vigilius is , that he confirmed the 5th Council e e Baron . An. 553. pag. 438 & 439. Idem . An. 554. pag. 445. : And Bellarmine saith , he did confirm it f f Bell. de Concil. l. 1. cap. 5. : Binius adds , no Man doubts it : But if Vigilius case be examined , it will be found he changed four times in this Cause of Faith . First , While he was at Rome , upon Justinian's first putting out the Edict , he opposed it h h Baron . An. 546. pag. 343. , and stirred up Facundus a Nestorian to write against the Emperor in rude Language i i Ibid. pag. 344. . Yea , Baronius in the same place Rails (g) Bin. notis in Concil. 5. pag. 173. at Justinian for this Edict ; and Vigilius writ a threatning Letter to Constantinople , against all that should joyn with the Emperor k k Ibid. pag. 347. : So that Vigilius , Facundus and Baronius stand all Anathematized by the 5th Council , for writing in defence of the three Chapters l l Concil. 5. Collat. 8. Bin. pag. 115. . But Secondly , As soon as Vigilius was come to Constantinople he changed his Mind , and in a Council of 30 Bishops condemned the three Chapters , which Facundus upbraids him with m m Baron . An. 547. pag. 359. ; and Baronius confesses he writ a Book against them , and sent it to Mennas Bishop of Constantinople ; and that he excommunicated Rusticus and Sebastianus ( two Roman Deacons , ) with other defenders of the three Chapters n n Baron . An. 547. pag. 360. ; and in those Epistles writ about these Men , he calls this writing to Mennas , his Constitution , his Judgment by Peter's Authority o o Concil. 5. Collat. 7. Ep. ad Rustic . & Sabin . & Epist. ad Valentin . ibid. . For which the other Party called him a Deserter , a Prevaricator , &c. p p Baron . ib. pag. 362. ; and Victor saith , that the African Bishops in a Synod excommunicated him q q Victoris Chronicon . An. 〈◊〉 post . Consul . Bas . ; yet Baronius owns these Bishops at that time were Catholicks : Nor doth it excuse this Pope , that he revoked this Constitution which condemned the three Chapters , presently after it was published ; and made another Decree , that all should keep silence till the General Council r r Baron . An. 547. pag. 361. . For this only shews him a Dissembler , and a neutral in a Cause of Faith : But Thirdly , At the 5th Council Vigilius returns to his Vomit , condemns the imperial Edict , and defends the three Chapters ( as we shewed before s s See Chap. iii. of this History . ) , and was so obstinate as to endure Banishment for this Opinion t t Bin. not . in Concil. 5. pag. 174. , which ( though none suffered for but such as the 5th Council declared Hereticks , ) Baronius calls an heavy persecution u u Baron . An. 553. pag. 435. ; and indeed his suffering on this side shews he was always a Nestorian in his Heart : But Fourthly , Binius and Baronius say , he changed again after the 5th Council , and condemning the three Chapters was enlarged , but died in his way home w w Bin. notis ad Concil. 5. ut supr. pag. 174. . Yea , they are confident that he did confirm the 5th Council , ( and so condemn his late Constitution x x Baron . An. 554. pag. 444 , 445. ) : Which last change no ancient Author mentions : And though this only could keep him from dying in Heresie , yet this is a Fiction of Baronius , who will say any thing to save a Popes credit ; an instance of which we have in his commending this Proteus , for a Man of Wisdom and Constancy y y Idem An. 547. pag. 362. & 361. , and in Binius his praising Vigilius for a prudent and pious Pope , who imitated St. Paul in changing his Mind z z Bin. notis ad Concil. 5. pag. 174. §. cum . Baron . An. 553. pag. 438 , 439. ; while Justinian , who was always Orthodox and stood firm , is by these Parasites decried as a wicked perfidious person a a Baron . An. 554. pag. 444. : So that Truth in others is Error , and Error in a Pope is Truth , yea , if a Pope hold Contradiction , he is always in the Right .

Chap. xvi . But in this Account of Vigilius changes , two of them are forged by Baronius : First , that Decree of silence is a Fable , though it be so often mentioned in the Annals b b Baron . An. 547. pag. 361. , and though he say Vigilius decreed this Synodically c c An. 551. pag. 382. , and affirm that Theodorus and Mennas consented to it d d An. 547. ut supr. , and that he and Justinian had promised to observe this silence e e An. 551. pag. 381. : Whereupon he pretends Vigilius excommunicated Theodorus and suspended Mennas f f An. 551. pag. 384. ; And stoutly opposing Justinian , who this year hung up his Edict in contradiction to this Decree of silence g g Ibid. pag. 381. ; though he fled to St. Peter's Church , and then to Chalcedon , yet thence he thundred out his spiritual Darts against them all , and rescinded the Emperors Decree h h An. 552. pag. 387. . Upon this Baronius says , the Emperor revoked his Edict , and Theodorus repented and submitted , as did also Mennas , and so all were content ( i ) Ibid. pag. 388 , 389. to be silent till the Council , and great Joy followed thereupon : Now this is all Fiction : For first , if there had been such a Decree for silence , let it be noted , Domnus was condemned at Chalcedon for an Heretick , in that he decreed silence should be kept about Cyril's twelve Chapters k k Concil. 5. Collat. 6. Bin. pag. 103. Lab. col. 546. Edict . Justin . Lab. col . col. 718. Bin. pag. 165. . And by that Rule , Vigilius would have been Heretical for his Decree : Whereas the truth is , he never made any such Decree ; for Justinian affirms , that from his first coming to Constantinople , until the Council , he always was for condemning the three Chapters k k Epist. Justin . ad Concil. 5. Collat. 1. Bin. 47. Lab. 422. ; and as the Emperors messenger affirms , to the 5th Council then assembled , he often promised to joyn with them in it l l Concil. 5. Collat. 7. Bin. 106. Lab. 549. . Nor did Vigilius observe his own Decree , which is pretended to be made An. 547. the 21st . of Justinian m m Baron . An. 547. pag. 361. , and to have silenced all Disputes : For in the 22d year of that Emperor , the two Roman Deacons above named , accused Vigilius for condeming the three Chapters by their Leuers to divers Bishops n n Idem . An. 548. pag. 363. . In Justinian's 23d year , Vigilius purges himself to Valentinianus from these Slanders , by appealing to his Judgment , sent unto Mennas , to which he declares he then adhered o o Concil. 5. Collat. 7. Bin. 109. Lab. 551. . In the Emperors 24th year , he writ the like Apology to Aurelianus p p Ibid. Bin. 109. Lab. 558. ; and as Baronius proves , the same year he published his Sentence against Rusticus , Sabinianus , and others for defending the three Chapters q q Baron . An. 550. pag. 375 & 380. . Now how could he by word and writing , thus sentence and punish all that disliked his Condemnation of the three Chapters , and appeal to his Judgment in that case , if there had been a revocation of it , and a Synodal Decree of Taciturnity three year before ? Nor did Justinian know of , or consent to any such Decree ; for Victor saith , in his 22d year he writ for the Condemnation of the three Chapters , compelling divers Bishops to condemn them r r Victoris Chronic. An. 7. post . Cons. Basilij . . The next year the Illyrian Bishops persuaded the Emperor not to proceed so s s Ibid. An. 8. ; so did Faeundus in the 24th year ; but he that year called the Council at Mopsvestia to condemn Theodorus t t Concil. 5. Collat. 5. Bin. pag. 80. Lab. 492. . In his 25th year , Victor and Liberatus declared , he dealt with the African Primates and Bishops to condemn these Chapters ; and got Zoilus Patriarch of Alexandria deprived for refusing it u u Victoris Chron. ut supr. An. 10. Liberat . Breviar. cap. 23. , and in his 26th year ( just before the Council , ) he Banished several obstinate Afrirican Bishops w w Idem An. II. id est , 26 An. Justin . : So it is very ridiculous in Baronius , to speak of the Emperor's publishing his Edict An. 25th x x Baron . An. 551. ut supr . , since it was published long before ; and to pretend he revoked it the next year , since Justinian every year writ and acted in the defence of it : We add , that neither did Theodorus and the Catholicks observe this Decree of silence ; for Vigilius sentences them for writing against the defenders of these Chapters y y Idem . An. 551 pag. 382. . No nor yet did the Hereticks value it : for they writ warmly for the three Chapters all that time z z Baron . An. 548. pag. 364 & An. 550. initio . : Yea , Victor notes , that the Illyrian Synod in the 23d year of Justinian , and the African in the 24th writ for the three Chapters a a Victor . Chron. An. 8 & 9. post Consul . Basilij . . Well , but Baronius cites publick Acts for this Decree , and the subsequent agreement between Vigilius and Mennas b b Baron . An. 547. pag. 361. : But these Acts are forged , being dated An. 25. Justin . An. 10. post consul . Basil . c c Idem An. 551. pag. 384. where Baronius places the suspension of Mennas , and his submission next year after d d Idem . An. 552. ut supr. An. 26. Just . : But Mennas died the 21st year of Justinian , that is , five year before , as the Popes Legates prove in the sixth General Council e e Concil. 6 Gen Act. 3. & Bin. not . ibid. , and by that shew these Publick Acts were forged ; yea , Baronius , who here cites these Acts to colour over this Fable , there owns the Acts to be forged , and expresly says , Mennas certainly died in the 21st year of Justinian f f Baron . An. 680. . So that we may conclude this Decree of Silence and Mennas suspension with the rest , are a notorious Fable , invented only to save the Credit of Pope Vigilius .

Chap. xvii . And so is his confirming the fifth Council , either before or after his supposed Exile , which Baronius and others so boldly affirm g g Baron . & Bin. ut supr. cap. 15. : For that he did not confirm it neither during its Session , nor soon after , Baronius proves , because his Letters would then have been annexed to the Council h h Id. An. 553. pag 435 , 436. . And he confesses the Reason moving Pelagius , the next Pope , to confirm it , was , That he found the Eastern Church in a Schism by Vigilius his Constitution i i Id. ib. p. 439. , which could not have been if Vigilius in his Life had revoked that Constitution . Again , the Western Church rejected the fifth Council all the time of Vigilius ; for there could be found but two Western Bishops who would consecrate Pelagius after he was chosen Pope , because be condemned the three Chapters ( saith Victor k k Victor . Chron. An. 17. post consul . Basil . , ) and as Baronius adds , because they abhorred the fifth General Council l l Baron . An. 556. pag. 452. n. 1. ; yea , a Council at Aquileia condemned the fifth Council An. 554 m m Beda de 6 aetat . mund. An. 4637. Sigon . de reg. Ital. An. 554. , urging that Pope Vigilius did not agree with it ; and in this Opinion they remained till Pelagius the second ( 20 years after Vigilius death and more , An. 577. ) instructed them that the Apostolick Seat understanding the Controversie better after Vigilius his time , had changed its Judgment n n Epist 7. Pelag. 2. inter fragm. Conc. 5. Bin. pag. 123. Lab. Col. 615. , which Letter of this Pelagius is annexed to the fifth Council , and by Binius compared to the Epistle of Leo to Flavianus o o Bin. Not. in 7 Epist. Pel. 2. pag. 257. . Which Argument shews , that Pelagius never heard that Vigilius changed his Judgment , or confirmed the fifth Council . As to Evagrius , who ( saith Baronius ) with all the Greek Writers do affirm , that Vigilius by his Letters consented to the Council , since he did not this during the Council , nor shortly after ( being banished ) , we must assert he consented when he was freed from Exile p p Baron . An. 553. pag. 435 & An. 554. pag. 444. : So the Cardinal : I Reply , This is very fallacious , for neither Evagrius , nor any Greek Writer , say any more , than That Vigilius did by Letter consent to the fifth Synod — But Evagrius adds , — yet would not be present in it q q Evag. hist. lib. 4. cap. 37. . By which it is clear , the Historian means nothing but that consent , which by word and writing he had often given , as to the Synods Opinion before they met , of which the fifth Council often complains , because he denied it , and flew off afterwards r r Concil 5. collat. 1. Bin. 47 & 49. Lab. 422 , & 425. ; and it was these precedent Writings , that both Nicephorus (s) and Photius mean t t Phot. de 7 Synod . in Concil. 7. . Wherefore it is falsly done of Baronius to apply this to a subsequent Decree , for confirming the fifth Council after it was (f) Niceph. lib. 17. cap 27. ended . Baronius his last Argument is , That since Vigilius was banished for not consenting to the fifth Synod , 't is not likely he should be released till he had confirmed it u u Baron . An. 554. pag 445. n. 6. . But first the consequence is not good , for Justinian might restore him to gratifie so great a Subject as Narses , and Narses might intreat the Emperour to oblige the Roman Clergy , who then were Enemies to the fifth Synod . Secondly , ( which is worse ) The whole story of this Banishment and Release is fabulous : For no Author but Anastasius mentions this last Exile , who is very fabulous , and here much mistaken ; for he saith , Pelagius was present at this Release , and then set free w w Anastas . apud Baron . An. 554. p. 444. n. 1. . Whereas Victor , who then was at Constantinople saith , Vigilius died in Sicily the 16th year after Basilius his Consulship x x Victor . Chron. An. 16. ( malè leg. 17. ) post consul . Basil . , and that Pelagius was not re-called from banishment till the year after Vigilius his death , and so could not ( as Anastasius saith ) be released with him y y Vict. Chr. Anno 17. post cons. Basil . . Besides , Anastasius speaks only of one banishment of Vigilius , for refusing to restore Anthimius , near two years after his coming to Constantinople , in the life-time of Theodora z z Vid. Anastas . vitâ Vigilii . , ( who died Anno 548 , according to Baronius a a Baron . An. 548. p. 369. n. 24. ; and this is the banishment from which Vigilius was released at the intreaty of Narses , according to Anastasius ; and so both Bellarmin and Sanders affirm from the Pontifical b b Bellarm. l. 4. de Pont. Rom. c. 10. Sand. de visibil . Monar . lib. 7. : Wherefore they and all Writers place this banishment of Vigilius divers years before the fifth Council , held Anno 553 : So that the Exile after the fifth Council is a meer Forgery of Baronius , who openly contradicts his Author , as if he mistook the time c c Baron . An. 547. p. 357. n. 27. & An. 552. pag. 387. n. 8. , only because the real time of Vigilius's Exile will not serve his design to excuse the Pope from dying in Heresie . He rejects a Story about Vigilius , told by Anastasius as a manifest Lye , only because neither Facundus nor Procopius mention it d d Id. An. 546. p. 347. n. 54. . By which Arguing it will appear , not only that Vigilius was not banished after the fifth Council , but that he was not banished at all , because neither Victor , Liberatus , Evagrius nor Procopius , who then lived ( and Victor is very particular in naming all that were exiled for this Cause ) do not once mention Vigilius his being banished , no , nor Photius , Zonaras , Cedrenus , Glicas nor Nicephorus . And Platina , with other Western Writers take up this Fable upon the credit of Anastasius , and Baronius improves it to serve a turn . But Baronius asks , If it be likely Justinian would spare Vigilius e e Baron . An. 553. pag. 435. n. 222. ? I reply , Yes ; because he was a weak and inconstant man ; and he having so great a Post , Justinian chose rather to connive at him , than to harden others by punishing him , whom he represents to the fifth Council , as one who condemned the three Chapters ; for which Reason also he is not condemned by Name in the 5th Council . Secondly , Baronius tells us of great Liberties , Gifts , &c. given to Vigilius upon his release and sending home , which he brings as a proof of his consent to the fifth Council f f Id. An. 554. pag. 445. n. 6. Bin. not . ad Concil. 5. p. 174. : Whereas that Sanction granting some Priviledges to Italy is dated in August , the 28th year of Justinian ; and Vigilius ( according to Victor , an Eye-witness ) died not till the 31st of Justinian . So that these Liberties were promised to Vigilius and other Romans long before the Council , while Vigilius and the Emperour were very kind g g Procop. de bell . Gothic● , 〈◊〉 . , viz. in the 23th of Justinian , but performed five year after ; yet three years before Vigilius death , and so his dying before his return with these Priviledges is a Fiction : But Baronius by meer guess , places it falsly in Justinian's 29th years beginning h h Baron . An. 554. initio . , only to colour the Fable . His last Argument is from Liberatus saying , he died afflicted by the Eutychians , but was not crowned i i Liberat. Brev. cap. 22. ap. Baron . An. 554. pag. 444. n. 5. . I reply , he despises Leberatus Testimony as to an Epistle of Vigilius k k Idem . An. 538. pag. 277. : But Liberatus saith not , he was banished or put to death for his Opinions ; yea , he counts his condemning the three Chapters , Heresie , and doth not tell us how he suffered or died , so that he is no Witness to this Fiction , but an Evidence against it .

Chap. xviii . Baronius's last exception is , that this was no lawful General Council , nor had any Authority till Vigilius confirmed it l l Baron . An. 553. pag. 434. n. 224. An , 553. pag. 399. n. 29. : And Binius saith , his Sentence gave it the Title of a General Council m m Bin. notis in Con. 5. pag. 173. Col. 1. . But we have shewed before , this was a lawful General Council received by the whole Catholick Church n n Supr. chap. 4. : Now they grant it was not confirmed till after it was parted , and that it was never gathered by the Holy Ghost ; so that his Act afterwards cannot make a nullity valid : The Cardinal and Binius o o Baron . & Bin. ut supr. ( l ) both tell us , it was no General Council at first , being called though the Pope resisted and contradicted it ; yet Binius had said before , Vigilius called the 5th Council by his Pontifical Authority p p Bin. notis in Con. 5. initio pag. 171. . Baronius also saith , the Emperor called it according to the sentence of Vigilius q q Baron . An. 553. pag. 398. n. 23 , 24. : And the Council charge Vigilius with promising in writing to meet with them r r Concil. 5. Collat. 2. Bin. pag. 51. Lab. 430. ; and his own Letter printed there , declares his consent to the assembling this Council s s Ibid. Collat. 1. Epist. Vigil . . Yet if he had opposed it , so did Damasus the second Council at Constantinople , which was held ( repugnante Damaso t t Baron . An. 381. ) , yet is accounted a lawful General Council ; and Cusanus saith , if the Pope be negligent or refractory , the Emperor may call a General Council u u Cusan . de Concord . lib. 3. ch. 15. . And though he was not personally present in this Council , yet he sent his Constitution , which was his Decree , ex Cathedra w w Baron . An. 553. pag. 403. n. 47. . But saith Baronius , their sentence was contrary to the Popes Decree , and therefore it cannot be a lawful General Council x x Id. ibid. pag. 434. . Bellarmine also urges this for a Rule y y Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 11. , but the matter of Fact sufficiently confutes them , since this Council which did Decree contrary to the Popes Sentence , is and was always held lawful . So was the second General Council good and valid , being confirmed by an imperial Edict in July , An. 381 z z Baron . An. 381. num. 80. pag. , though Damasus did not so much as hear of it , till after the Council of Aquileia held in September that year a a Id. ibid n. 97. pag. ; and it seems by Pope Gregory , that the Roman Church till his time had not received the Canons of it b b Greg. M. lib. 6. Epist. 31. . Yea , the third Canon which Damasus and Leo c c Turrian . de 6 , 7 & 8 Synodis pag. 65. both condemned , and which Binius saith , the Roman Church rejects to this day d d Bin. notis in Concil. Constantinop. 2. ; Yet all the while it was held Authentick , and by it Anatolius held the second place at Chalcedon , and Eutychius in the 5th Council ; by it St. Chrysostom deposed and ordained Bishops , and held a Council in Asia : So that both Canons and Custom had setled this Rule , as is proved in the Council of Chalcedon e e Concil. Chal. ced . Act. 16. Bin. Tom. 2. par. 1. pag. 333. . And Justinian made those Canons of this second Council to be inserted into the Dypticks , and to be read in Churches f f Novel. 131 cap. 1 , 2. : So that Canons are good and valid , without the Popes Approbation , as well as Councils , whose Decrees have their force from the Subscriptions of the major part of Bishops there present g g Euseb. de vitâ Constant . l. 3. c. 13. Digest . lib. 5. Lab. 19. , though two of the Popes Legates h h Concil. 5. Col. 6. , or ten others did dissent i i Concil. Chal. Act. 4. , especially when the Emperor confirms them by his Edict , as Constantine did those of Nice , Theodosius those of the second General Council , &c. In like manner Justinian confirmed this 5th Council : And so it was valid without the Popes consent ; though absent Bishops , ( others as well as those of Rome , ) were desired to confirm a Council after it was past , not to give any new Authority to it , but to preserve Unity , and to shew the Orthodoxy of these absent Bishops .

Chap. xx . Omitting the 19th Chapter , which treats of General Councils at large , we proceed to Baronius lesser and remoter objections against this Council : He begins with Justinian who called and confirmed it , whom he taxes 1st for want of learning , calling him an illiterate man who could not read a Letter k k Baron . An. 528. pag. 139. n. 2. An 538. pag. 281. n. 32● An. 546. pag. 344. n. 41. An. 551. pag. 382. n. 2. & 4. , for which he cites Suidas , a late fabulous , yea an Heretical Author l l Possevin . Apparat. verbo Suidas . ; But Platina commends Justinian for his great Learning and Wit m m Platin. vit. Bonif. secundi . . So also Trithemius who with Possevine reckon him among Ecclesiastical Writers n n Trithem . lib. de Script . Eccles. . Pope Agatho and the 6th Council cite him as one of the venerable Fathers and Witnesses of the Truth o o Concil. 6. Act. 4. in Epist. Agath . : Liberatus , an Enemy of his mentions his writing a Book against the Acephali p p Lib. brev. cap. 24. 〈◊〉 . Procopius speaks of his great diligence in reading the Christian Writings q q Precop . l. 3. de bell . Goth. : So that Gotofred in his Preface to the Institutes shews , this is a meer a Calumny of Suidas ; but Baronius greedily repeats it over and over , of pure malice to this learned Emperor . His second Quarrel at him is , for presuming to meddle in Causes of Faith , and making Laws for Priests r r Baron . An. 528. pag. 139. An. 551. pag. 382. An. 553. pag. 439. n. 237 . But did not all the Religious Kings of Judah do so ? Did not Constantine , the two Theodosij and Martin the same ? And the 5th Council highly commend him for it s s Concil. 5. Collat. 7. in fine Bin. 111. Lab. 561. : The Code of Theodosius , his Code and the Authenticks sufficiently prove this was done by the best of Princes . Thirdly , He reproaches him for his sacrilegious Fury , in persecuting Vigilius t t Baron . An. 551. pag. 382. n. 2. An. 552. pag. 387. n. 8. An. 553. pag. 435. . Now I have proved before this beating and banishing of the Pope is a meer Fable u u See Chap. 16 & 17. ; and if he was persecuted , or rather punished it was for Heresie ; and Constantine , Theodosius the elder and younger , and Martian are commended for the same Acts against the Arrians , Macedonians , Nestorians and Eutychians , and St. Augustin justifies this proceeding w w Aug. lib. contr. Fulgent . Donat. c. 20. . Fourthly , He charges him with falling into the Heresie of the Incorrupticolae in his last days , writing an Edict for it , and madly persecuting all the Orthodox , especially Eutychius Bishop of Constantinople for opposing it , for which he Rails intollerably at him , saying all Authors , Greek and Latin attest this x x Baron . An. 563. pag. 483. 484 , 485. n. 1 , 2 , 6 , 7 , 8. Et An. 564. pag. 487. & passim . : Finally he dooms him to Hell for this y y Baron . An. 565. pag. 497 , &c. 11. 6. . But first , Justinian did not publish such an Edict as Evagrius and Nicephorus , his two main Witnesses attest z z Evagr. Hist. l. 4. c. 40. Niceph. lib. 17. c. 30. Baron . An. 565. pag. 496. ; and Baronius owns as much : And Victor Bishop of Tunen , who suffered ( under Justinian ) Imprisonment , and speaks hardly of him , is silent as to this Edict ; but shews he continued constant to his Edict against the three Chapters to his very death a a Victor in Chron. An. 38. Justin . , wherein he owns all the former General Councils : And it is so far from truth , that all Writers , Greek and Latin charge him with that Heresie , that neither Procopius , Agathus , Victor nor Liberatus do it , nor Damascen , though he treat of this Heresie b b Damsacen . lib. de Haeres . , nor Marcellinus , Bede , nor Anastasius : Suidas saith , he was most Orthodox ; Aimonius and Paulus Diaconus affirm , he was for his Faith a Catholick c c Ai●on . de gest . Franc. lib. 3. c. 〈◊〉 . Paul . Diac. de gest . Lang. l. 1. c. 25. : And twenty other eminent Writers ( cited by this Author ) , do all give him a great Character ; and Pope Gregory d d Greg. Mag. lib. 2. indic . 11. Ep. 10. & lib. 3. Ep. 4. with many others after his death , bestow on him the Title of Pious and of sacred Memory . Baronius names but three Authors for this Slander : First , Nicephorus , whom Possevine calls Heretical and Erroneous in History e e Possevin . in verb. Nicephorut . ; and the Cardinal in this Relation judges him to be a Fool f f Baron . An. 563. pag. 484. n. 8. , and generally he is but Evagrius his Ape . His second Witness is Eustathias g g Eustath . ap. Sur. 6. Aprills . : But Surius is generally stuffed with fabulous Writers , and such is this Eustathius falsly pretended to have writ Eutychius his Life ; for neither Photius , Trithemius , Possevine nor Sixtus Senensis mention any such Writer : And the Story is full of Lyes ; for he makes Eutychius to come to Constantinople to the 5th Council , and then to be chosen Bishop after Mennas death , who died five years before this Council h h See before Chap. 16. ; And this Eutychius was chosen full four years before it : And he reckons that Eutychius was Banished twelve years i i Baron . An. 564. pag. 493. n. 29. , whereas two years after his Banishment he crowned Justinius k k Histor. Miscel. lib. 16. , and was actually Patriarch when Justinius was sick , and nominated Tiberius his associate l l Zonar . Tom. 3. vit. Justin . , and so could not ( as this Fabler pretends , ) be desired from Banishment after Tiberius Reign began with Justin m m Baron . An. 578. pag. 567. n. 5. ; yet to make out this Lye , Anastasius his latine Version of Nicephorus adds ten years to John Successor of Eutychius , and makes him sit twelve year and seven Months n n Idem . An. 564 , 493. n. 29. , who in Nicephorus sat but two years and seven Months . 'T is true , Eutychius was Banished by Justinian , but it was for Prophesying of his Successors o o Baron . An. 578. pag. 566. n. 2. , and for holding the Heresie of Origen as Pope Gregory witnesseth p p Greg. Mag. lib. 14. Moral . chap. 29. , against which Justinian had put out an Edict , and which was sentenced in the 5th Council q q Liberat. Brev. cap. 24. Baron . An. 538. pag. 281. n. 33. & in Concil. 5. . And it was for opposing this Edict , not an Heretical Edict that Eutychius was Banished : So that thirdly , Baronius hath no Author for this Slander of Justinian's being an Heretick , but Evagrius , who is owned by all to be a most fabulous Author , ( as is proved in the History here very fully by many instances ; ) Now what is his credit against so many truer and better Historians ? Finally , Whereas Baronius reviles Justinian as a destroyer of the Empire and the Church , This Author largely proves out of the best Historians , that Justinian was a Wise , Pious and Victorious Prince , the best Emperor as to his Laws , his Buildings , his Wars , and his Love to Religion that ever sat on the Throne Imperial , to which the Reader is referred r r See Crakenthpor's Vigilius dormit . cap. 20. pag. 349 , &c. .

Chap. xxi . In like manner the Cardinal reviles Theodora the Empress , as a Wicked , Heretical , Sacrilegious , Mad Woman , strook with death by Heavens vengeance upon Vigilius Excommunicating her s s Baron . An. 535. pag. 226. n. 59 , 60. An. 536. pag. 268. n. 123. An. 538. pag. 275. n. 9. An. 548. pag. 369. n. 24. . But other Authors say , she was like her Husband in her Studies and Manners t t Constantin . Manas . Annal. pag. 87. : Yea , the Emperor gives her an excellent Character in his very Laws u u Justin . novel . 8. cap. 1. : He also w w Prag . sanct. c. 1. , and the 6th Council after her death , call her a Woman of Pious Memory x x Concil. 6. Act. 3. & Act. 4. . Nor ought Baronius to revile her , for thrusting Anthimius an Heretical Monster into the See of Constantinople , as he doth ( An. 535. pag. 226. ut supr. ) since there he owns , that at his Election he seemed a Chatholick , and that she favoured him as Orthodox y y Baron . An. 535. pag. 227. ; yea , he carried it so as to seem such to all z z Ibid. pag. 233. n. 86. . As to her contending with Vigilius two years about the Restitution of Anthimius , which Baronius relates , ( An 547. pag. 357. ) it is a meer Fable , for that Cause of Anthimius was determined long before ; and Victor saith , that Vigilius and Theodora agreed after he came to Constantinople , and that she persuaded him to condemn the three Chapters a a Victoris . Chronic. An. 2. post . Cons. Bas . , And he ( who best knew ) saith , it was Pope Agapetus who excommunicated Theodora , ( then favouring the Acephali ) b b Idem in Chron. in Cons. Justininani . An. 14. ejus Regni . : So that Vigilius is by the Scribes mistake , put for Agapetus in Gregory c c Greg. Mag. lib. 2. Ep. 36. , as appears by his speaking of the taking of Rome by the Goths immediately after , which was the Sacking it by Vitiges after Agapetus his time , or by Totilas , which was ( not after , but ) before this pretended Sentence of Vigilius against Theodora , viz. that year Vigilius came to Constantinople d d Baron . An. 547. pag. 353 & 356. . From all which it is manifest , that this Pope did never Excommunicate Theodora at all , who in her latter Days was Orthodox , but hated by the Nestorians , for joyning with Justinian in condemning the three Chapters , which also raises Baronius his spleen against her .

Chap. xxii . His next attempt is against the three Chapters , which he wishes had been condemned to Eternal silence , buried and extinguished e e Baron . An. 547. pag. 362. n. 48. , adding it had been better for the Church they had never been spoken of f f An. 553. pag. 439. n. 237. , viz. because of the Troubles ensuing : I reply , so there was about the words 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 : But this settled the true Faith , as it did also that Controversie , and ( by Providence ) shews us , that a Pope may Err in matters of Faith .

Chap. xxiii . After this he Rails at the Edict , calling it a Seed plot of dissention g g Baron . An. 534. pag. 199. n. 21. , and saying it was contrary to the three Chapters of the Council of Chalcedon ; and ( as Facundus affirms , ) contrary to Justinian's own Faith , and writ by Hereticks h h Id. An. 546. pag. 336. n. 8 , 9. ; and the Cardinal saith it was writ by Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea i i Id. ibid. ; against whom he every where Rails as a Factious and Schismatical Man , yea , an Heretick , and obstinate Origenist k k Baron . An. 551. pag. 381. 382 & alibi . , a most wicked Wretch , and a plague to the whole Church l l Id. An. 564. pag. 488. : But as to the Edict , it is in defence of the Council of Chalcedon , and to say otherwise , is to condemn the 5th General Council , who often declare as much : Yea , Baronius elswhere in contradiction to himself saith , this Edict is a Confession of Justinian' s right Faith , a Catechism and exact declaration of the Catholick Faith m m Baron . An. 534. pag. 199. n. 21. . And he might as well call the Decrees of Nice , or other General Councils Seed-plots of dissention ; yea , the Gospel it self may be so calumniated n n Luke xij . 49 , 51. : Nor do Liberatus , Facundus and Vigilius ( as he saith , ) declare that Theodorus writ this Edict o o Baron . An. 546. pag. 336. n. 8 , 9. ; Liberatus only saith , he suggested it to the Emperor , to condemn the three Chapters by a Book , to be dictated by the Emperor , which he promised to do p p Liberat. breviar. cap. 24. : Facundus names not Theodorus , but saith , They were willing to believe it was writ by the Adversaries of the Truth q q Facundus apud Baron . An. 546. ut supr. (o) ; which was but a conjecture , and is as false as what he next speaks of it , being contrary to the Emperors own Faith . And Vigilius words cited by Baronius ( rightly construed ) shew only , that when the Edict was read in the Pallace , Theodorus required the Bishops to favour it by his words r r Vigil . ap. Baron . ibidem . ; however this passage is taken out of a forged Epistle of Vigilius s s Vid. Ep. ap. Binium . Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 12. Lab. col. 334. , wherein Mennas is said to be excommunicated the 25th year of Justinian , who died the 21st year of that Emperor : So that none of his Evidence do prove , that Theodorus writ this Edict : And for his opposing Vigilius his Decree of silence , we shewed before there was no such Decree t t See Chap. 16. , nor could he lead Justinian into the Heresie of the Incorrupticolae , because the Emperor never held it u u See Chap. 20. , and his only Witnesses , that Theodorus was an Origenist Heretick , are Facundus and Liberatus : Now Facundus is an Heretick , condemned by the 5th General Council , for writing in defence of the three Chapters , and a malicious Enemy of Theodorus w w Vid. Possevin . Appar . verbo ( Facundus . ) : And so was Liberatus , for which cause Bellarmine x x Bellarm. de Concil. l. 1. c. 5. , Baronius y y Baron . ap. Bin. notis in Liberat. brev. pag. 193. and Possevine z z Possevin . apparat . verbo ( Liberatus . ) advise us to read him cautiously , especially in such things as he borrowed from the Nestorians , and what he saith of the 5th Council , Professae inimicitiae suspicionem habent mendacij a a Hieron . contr. Russin . Apol. 1. . And this is certainly so , for how could he hold Origen's Heresies , who subcribed the 5th Council wherein Origen is by name condemned b b Concil. 5. Collat. 8. Art . xi . Bin. 116. Lab. 575. ? And among other Bishops , no doubt he had subscribed Justinian's Edict against Origen's Errors c c Ap. Baron . An. 538. pag. 293. , otherwise he could not have been so familiar with the Emperor , nor so beloved by him as Liberatus ( the Author of this Calumny ) reports him to have been : So that Theodorus was always Orthodox , and his advising this Edict is no proof it was against the Faith .

Chap. xxiv . Baronius and Binius do attempt after this to question the Acts of the 5th Council , not indeed in any main thing concerning their not condemning , or Vigilius not defending the three Chapters ( which is our Point , ) but in lesser matters , such as may be objected against all the General Councils in the World d d See instances in the Author . Vigil . dorm . pag. 378. c. 24. ; which therefore if the objections were true , would not take away the Authority of this General Council , whose Acts are as well preserved as any , and better than any of the other Councils , except Chalcedon , that went before it .

Chap. xxv . The first Corruption they charge these Acts with is , that they add to the Acts of Chalcedon ( in reciting them ) these words — which Jesus Christ our Lord is one of the Trinity , which words some ( suspected of Eutychianism , ) would have added to the Council of Chalcedon , but could not obtain it e e Baron . An. 553. pag. 433. n. 214. . But first , it was no Eutychian Heretick who first said Christ was one of the Trinity . Theodorus of Mopsvestia denied it f f Dionys. Exig . in Praef. ad Epist. Procl . Bib patrum . Tom. iii. , but Proclus who was Orthodox , affirmed it , and taught it in an Epistle , approved in the Council of Chalcedon g g Justin . Leg. 7. de sum . Trin. c. 4. ; and Justinian set out an Edict for it against the Nestorians , who denied it , wherein he also Anathematizes the Eutychians h h Baron . An. 533. pag. 180 , 181. n. 7 , &c. ; which Edict Pope John the second confirms , and declares to be agreeable to the Apostolick Doctrin , and to the Faith of the Roman Church i i Idem An. 534. pag. 198. num. 15. . Wherefore those Monks , who affirmed one of the Trinity was Crucified could not be Eutychian Hereticks , as Baronius falsly says k k Idem . An. 519. pag. 43 & 44 , &c. But Baronius is a Nestorian , who denies this Truth . And those Monks did not seek to add it to the Council of Chalcedon , only they declared ( against the Nestorians , ) this was the Sense of that Council , in the time of Hormisda , ( who was Heretical in denying it , ) nor doth the 5th Synod recite it as the words of the Council of Chalcedon , but as their own words l l Concil. 5. Collat. 6. Bin. pag. 102. Lab. col. 545. , who were as Orthodox as any in the Council of Chalcedon , and he is a Nestorian who denies it .

Chap. xxvi . Baronius objects , Secondly , That in these Acts , Ibas is said to have denied the Epistle to Maris to be his , which he saith is false m m Baron . An. 553. pag. 432. n. 211. , and Binius calls it a Lye n n Bin. notis in 5. Concil. pag. 172. Lab. 732. ; and they both give this as an instance of the Corruption of these Acts : They may as well prove Justinian's Edict corrupted , and Pope Gregory's Epistles , where it is said , he durst not confess it ; yea , that he denied it to be his o o Edictum Justin . Bin. pag. 161. Lab. 707. Greg. M. Epist. 53. lib. 7. : And the 5th Council prove he did deny it , by the interlocution of six Metropolitans at Chalcedon p p Concil. 5. Collat. 6. Bin. pag. 91. Lab. 516. . And though Baronius do say positively in one place , that the true Acts of Chalcedon have it , that lbas confessed it to be his Epistle q q Baron . An. 448. pag. 69. n. 77. ; yet he cites those very Acts , and the second of Nice elsewhere , saying , it was found not to be the Epistle of Ibas , and so it was condemned and he absolved r r Id. An. 432. ( pag. 626. n. 71. . And the truth of the matter is , that Ibas denied at Chalcedon that ever he called Cyril an Heretick after the Union : But we have proved before , that he writ this Epistle divers years before that Union , and therein called Cyril Heretick s s See Chap. 10. ; which is a denying the words of his own Epistle , for which he is censured in the 5th Council .

Chap. xxvii . He alledges that these Acts say , the Council of Chalcedon condemned the Epistle of Ibas : Which he saith is untrue , and that he hath demonstrated the contrary out of the Acts of Chalcedon t t Baron . ut supra . ( lit . ( m ) ; and Binius calls this another Lye u u Bin. in notis ut supr. ( lit . n. ) , both of them giving this as an instance that the Acts are corrupted : But if so , the whole Council is corrupted ; for they say over and over , that this Epistle of Ibas was condemned by the definitions at Chalcedon , and that they had demonstrated this w w Concil. 5. Col. 8. Bin. 114. Lab. 567. ; and it was indeed their main business , to shew it was contrary to that Council , who forced him to condemn his own Epistle before they would receive him x x Ibid. Col. 6. Bin. 91. Lab. 517. : And if Binius and Baronius say this be false , they give a General Council the Lye ; and Pope Gregory also who saith , without doubt this Epistle is contrary to the definition at Chalcedon , which was exactly followed by the 5th Council y y Greg. M. lib. 7. in d. 2. Ep. 54. . And since the Council of Chalcedon forbids all Writings for Nestorius , ( such as this Epistle is , ) and approve the Judgment of Photius and Eustathius , ( who condemned this Epistle as Heretical , ) and would not receive Ibas , till he Anathematized Nestorius and his Doctrines z z Concil. Chalced. Act. 5. & Act. 10. ; 'T is certain that Council as well as the fifth , did condemn Ibas his Epistle .

Chap. xxviii . Again , Baronius and Binius accuse the Council of divers defects , first , in omitting the Condemnation of Origen , and giving only a brief touch upon it a a Baron . An. 553. pag. 440. n. 243. & pag. 439. n. 238. Bin. notis in Conc. 5. pag. 172. Lab. 732. . But this is a notorious Calumny ; for the 5th Council not only mention it transiently , in saying , they and Vigilius had condemned Origen now b b Concil. 5. Collat. 5. Bin. 79. Lab. 490. , but expresly Anathematize Origen and his impious Writings c c lb. Collat. 8 Bin. pag. 116. Lab. 575. : And the Cardinal mistakes in saying , they first handled the cause of Origen , and then that of the three Chapters d d Baron . An. 553. pag. 440. : For Nicephorus saith , they read the Libels against the impious Opinions of Origen , the second Session e e Niceph. l. 17. c. 27. Et Evagr. lib. 4. c. 37. : But indeed this Council did not afresh condemn Origen , but only mention his being condemned in that Age , by most of the Bishops present in this Council , about 15 year before ( in Menna's Synod ) upon an Edict of Justinian , to which the Western Bishops had subscribed f f Baron . An. 538. pag. 280. n. 29 , &c. , which both Evagrius , Nicephorus and others mistake for this 5th Council : So that the Cardinal and Binius are both out , in charging the omission of Justinian's Edict , as a defect in these Acts g g Baron . An. 553. pag. 440. & Bin. ut supr (a) . For that Edict was not sent to this 5th Council , but to Menna's Synod ; and that Epistle which Binius hath added to these Acts as Justinian's , is a late extract out of Justinian's large Decree : Yea , Didymus and Evagrius , who they say were condemned in this 5th Council , were not condemned there except in general words h h Concil. 5. Collat. 8. Bin. 116. Lab. 175. Anath. 11. , as holding with Origen in the point of praeexistence i i Concil. Nicen. 2. Act. 1. . So that it is false and malicious in Baronius and Binius to charge Theodorus of Caesarea k k Baron . An. 553. pag. 440. n. 244. Bin. notis in Concil. 5. pag. 172. Lab. 732. , with stealing these things out of the Acts of this Council , which were never in them ; upon an unjust surmise and slander of his being infected with Origens Heresie .

Chap. xxix . Like to this , is their pretence that these Acts want the Emperors Epistle l l Baron . ibid. Bin. & Lab. ib. , which he and Binius add out of Cedrenus , and thence insinuate the Acts are defective : But Justinian's only true Epistle sent to the Council is extant in the Acts m m Concil. 5. Coll. 1. , of which this is an Epitome by an ignorant hand , which saith Eutyches approved the Opinions of Nestorius ; and that Nestorius was the Master of Theodorus , whereas Justinian's true Letter and the Council teach that he was his Scholar : And are not the Cardinal and Binius rare menders of Councils , who would supply their pretended defects with such Stuff as this ?

Chap. xxx . Baronius also objects , that the Constitution of Vigilius which evidently belongs to this Synod , is known to be taken away out of the Acts m m Baron . An. 553. pag. 403. n. 47 , &c. . It is granted , it bears date the 14 of May , upon which the fifth Collation of this Council was had , but was sent to the Emperor first , and by him considered , and then offered to the Counsil the sixth Collation , May 19th as Binius owns n n Bin. notis in Concil. 5. pag. 176. Lab. 738. . But indeed the Council never read this publickly , nor named it or Vigilius ; to prevent offences , they confuted it indeed , and published his Letters to Rusticus and Sebastianus , which contradict the Constitution o o Concil. 5. Collat. 7. ; but for his Credit ( as Baronius owns , ) thought fit to say nothing of his Constitution p p Baron . An. 553. pag. 434. n. 218. : And therefore , if this Constitution were stollen out of the Acts , it was by the Roman Church , to cover their Fathers nakedness , and conceal his Heresie .

Chap. xxxi . Lastly , He and Binius say , the Acts want the assignation of a Patriarchal Seat to Jerusalem , and taking two Provinces out of Antioch , and two out of Alexandria to put under it , which being by Leo opposed at Chalcedon , was now passed contrary to the old Order established at Nice q q Baron . An. 553. pag. 440 , 441. n. 245. è Gul. Tyr. de Bel sacr. l. 24. c. 12. : Which is not true , for it had the Title of a Patriarchate long before this Council r r Bellarm. de Pont. l. 1. c. 24. , and the jurisdiction over the three Palestinas was assigned it at Chalcedon t t Concil. Chal. Act. 7. vel 8. ; which Binius in his Notes on that Council , and Baronius also expresly affirm u u Concil. Chalced. ap. Baron . An. 451. Sess. 8. pag. 154. n. 124. : Yet here in their Account of the 5th Council , the Cardinal most falsly says , Juvenalis got this Decree to pass in the absence of the Pope's Legates , ( Baron . an 553. pag. 441. ) But if we consult the Council , The Popes Legates first spoke in this Cause , and expresly gave their consent to it w w Concil. Chal. Act. 7. Bin. pag. 271. : And though perhaps Pope Leo afterwards might oppose this , ( as Baronius saith ) that only shews how little a Popes Authority was valued ; since in the Council of Mennas , John Bishop of Jerusalem held a Synod , and presided over all the Bishops of the three Palestinas x x Concil. sub . Men. Act. 5. Bin. pag. 734. Lab. pag. 187. . And Baronius recites the Title of another Council at Jerusalem , where Peter the Patriarch presided over all the Bishops of the three Palestinas , 17 years before this fifth Council y y Baron . An. 536. pag. 265. & ap. Bin. p 766 Lab. p. 275. ; which shews , that Jerusalem had the Title and Jurisdiction of a Patriarch by virtue of the Canon at Chalcedon , and that Baronius and Binius are ridiculous and impudent to urge the want of a Fiction of Gul. Tyrius ( refuted by Berterius z z Berterii diatr . 2. cap. 2. ) as a defect in the Acts of this General Council .

Chap. xxxii . The Cardinal objects also spurious and false Additions made to these Acts a a Baron . An. 553. p. 399. n. 29. & p. 439. n. 238. : And he instances in the Monothelites , who in the sixth Synod are proved to have added 24 Leaves to these Acts b b Ibid. p. 441. n. 247. , as also two Epistles of Vigilius to Justinian and Theodora c c Baron . ib. . But though this be true d d Vid. Concil. 6. Act. 3. & 14. , yet those corrupt Additions were detected and razed out in the sixth Council , and our Acts of the fifth Council have not one of those Heretical Additions , but follow those true Copies which were extant in Gregory's time , and those by which ( 70 years after his death ) the false Copies were detected in the sixth Council , so that this is meer Sophistry e e Baron . An. 554. p. 445. n. 8. . As is also his Pretence , That the Laws of Theodosius , recited in the fifth Collation against Nestorius , are different from those in the Code and in the Ephesine Council f f Baron . An. 553. p. 403. n. 46. . For there is but one Law against Nestorius in the Code g g Cod. Theodos . Tit. de haeret . l. 66. , different from these , which mention his former Condemning the Nestorians ; but these Laws were against Diodorus and Theodorus , as well as the Nestorians , at the Armenian Monks Petition h h Concil. 5. coll. 5. . And note , That all Theodosius his Laws against Hereticks , are not in his Code ; for that Law in the Ephesine Council against the Nestorians , was a true Law of this Emperours i i Baron . An. 448 , pag. 50. n. 2. : And another in the Council of Chalcedon k k Id. An. 449. p. 103. n. 130. , which Baronius owns for true Laws of Theodosius ; yet neither of them are in the Code ; so that he may as well say those Acts are corrupted as these , because those Laws are not there .

Chap. xxxiii . Again , Baronius saith , That Epistle of Theodoret's to Nestorius intimating his agreeing with that Heretick and rejecting Cyril after the Union , is a spurious addition to these Acts l l Baron . An. 436. Tom. 5. pag. 658. n. 10. ; which he proves by Leontius m m Qui vixit An. 580. Lib. de sectis . , who affirms some such Letters to be fictitious . But will the Cardinal allow him to be good Evidence , where he makes but 22 Canonical Books of the Old Testament n n Leont . cap. 2. ? And doth he not commend Theodorus of Mopsvestia and Diodorus , and deny that ever Theodoret agreed with Nestorius o o Ibid. cap. 4. ? But even Baronius owns him to have been a Nestorian p p Baron . An. 431. pag. 602 , & 598. ; so that in this case Leontius is of no Credit . But that which is yet more strange , That the Cardinal ( in contradiction to himself ) repeats and owns this very Epistle read in the fifth Council , to have been writ by Theodoret after the Union to Nestorius , and that he favoured him still q q Baron . An. 432. pag. 628. n. 80. ; yet he brags , there is no mention of Theodoret's being addicted to Nestorius after the Peace made , and that his Epistles to Dioscorus and Leo sufficiently wipe off that Aspersion r r ld . An. 436. pag. 658. n. 11 , 12. Et An. 449. pag. 106. n. 140. . But those Epistles are suspicious , as first appearing out of a Vatican Copy . And whereas the Union with Cyril was made An. 432. s s Baron . An. 432. p. 626. n. 72. , these Epistles were writ long after that to Dioscorus , An. 444 , and that to Leo , An. 449. So that if these Epistles were genuine , they do not prove he was Orthodox till ten or twelve year after the Union . But two things prove them spurious : First , Theodoret boasts in them both , that he had been 26 years a Bishop , and a Preacher at Antioch , yet none ever reproved his Doctrin ; yea , that his Sense and the Churches always agreed , having never been accused by any , nor accused any t t Epistol. ad Diosc . Baron . An. 444. & ad Leon. An. 449. & ad Nomum . An. 448. . Which is an horrid falshood ; for had he not been reproved by Cyril , deposed by a General Council , and subscribed the Condemnation of Cyril ? Secondly , In both these Epistles he saith , he had been 26 years a Bishop , yet one was writ 5 years after the other , and by Baronius his Computation he was but 21 years a Bishop when he writ to Dioscorus , being made Bishop Anno 423. u u Baron . An. 423 pag. 481. n. 10. . And his History ( which mentions the Translation of the Body of S. Chrysostom w w Id An. 438. pag. 66 3. n. 6. Theodoret. hist. lib. 5. cap. 36. , and so must be writ seven years after the Union ) commends Theodorus of Mopsvestia for Orthodox x x Theodoret. ibid. cap. 40. , shews he was a Nestorian then . Baronius would wipe off this by pretending he writ his History before the Quarrel about Nestorius y y Baron . An. 427. pag. 506 , & 507. n. 28. ; but in the same place saith , He follows Sozomen ( whose Book came out An. 439. ) in commending Theodorus . So that after all his shifts , Theodoret was a Favourer of Nestorius , An. 436. when he writ that Epistle read in this fifth Council , and long after .

Chap. xxxiv . Baronius and Binius say , The Acts are corrupted , because they affirm an Epistle to John of Antioch , ( wherein the Author rejoyces for Cyril's death ) was writ by Theodoret , which they affirm was writ by an Impostor z z Bin. not . in Concil. 5 p. 172. Lab. 732. Baron . An. 444. p. 20 , &c. & An. 553. p. 402. ; because John was dead seven years before Cyril . I Reply , That is a Mistake , for John was made Bishop An. 427. and according to Nicephorus sat 18 years , which reaches to the year 444. in which Baronius saith Cyril died . But suppose John were dead when Theodoret writ this , Baronius of all men should not make this a mark of Forgery , who allows Clement's Epistle writ to James Bishop of Hierusalem , who had been dead 30 year , for genuine ; and so doth Binius a a Confer . Baron . An. 63 & 93. & Bin. not . in Ep. Clem. & Turrian . maxime . : And the Cardinal cites and commends an Epistle of Theodosius as authentick , writ to S. Chrysostom 30 years after he was dead b b Baron . An. 438. pag. 663. n. 8. . And , Secondly , the Epistle is Theodoret's ; but the Inscription only ( which should be to Domnus ) is mistaken ; for it is as plain by his Sermon before Domnus after Cyril's death , which we have also in the fifth Council c c Concil. V. Collat. 5. Bin. pag. 86. Lab. col. 508. , as by this Epistle , that Theodoret was an Enemy to Cyril after his death ; and Baronins may well pardon the Error in the inscription of John's Name for Domnus ; for he allows innumerable Epistles , Edicts , &c. to be genuine notwithstanding Errors in the Title d d See many Instances in the Author at large . p. 429 , &c , and therefore for so small a mistake in the Title of an Epistle should not ask , What credit is to be given to such Acts e e Baron . An. 553. p. 403. n. 46. ? His own Annals have many greater Mistakes , as the Author proves f f Vigil . dorm . c. 34. p. 435. ; yet he would have us credit them . Yea , in this reckoning of John of Antioch's dying seven years before Cyril , he mistakes the whole time almost , according to Nicephorus , and four years by his own reckoning of John's entring , An. 427 dying 436 , yet sitting 13 years ; for so John did not dye till 440 , that is , four year before S. Cyril : And the Epistles of Theodoret to Dioscoras and Leo , on which he depends for his Arithmetick , are one or both of them forged . We conclude therefore , that the Epistle mentioned in the fifth Council was Theodoret's , who was a Nestorian after S. Cyril's death , and he writ it to Domnus ( not to John ) Bishop of Antioch .

Chap. xxxv . But he who accuseth the fifth Council for Forgeries , doth follow many forged Writings himself in his discourse about it . First , The Confession of Faith made by Mennas , Theodorus of Caesarea and others , by way of submission , recorded in the very Constitution of Vigilius , is Forged g g Baron . An. 553. p 404. n. 50. Bin. Tom. II. par. 2. pag. 13. Lab. col. 338. . For as to the Matter of it : How is it likely the Eastern Bishops should say , They allowed all the Acts of the former four Councils , made by consent of the Pope's Legates ? Or ask him pardon for Injuries which they say they had never done to him ? Or how agrees this with Baronius his saying . Theodorus asked pardon for his Scoffs and Contumelies against Vigilius h h Baron . An. 592. pag. 389. n. 20. ? or with Vigilius his form of Excommunication of Theodorus , for despising his Authority i i Vigil . Epist. post . Ep. 16. Bin. pag. 12. Lab. pag. 334. ? As to the time , this Confession and Submission is said to be made after the Decree for Taciturnity , ( which was never made ) viz. An. 552. k k See above ( h ) . And we have proved Mennas was dead five year before , and that Theodorus did always stand firm against the three Chapters l l See Ch. 23. . Secondly , He cites one Eustathius out of Surius , who is proved Fabulons before m m See Ch. 20. . Thirdly , The Epistles of Theodoret , which were shewed before to be forged n n See Ch. 33. And we add , That for all his brags to Dioscorus , An. 444. he writes a kind Letter to Irenaeus a Nestorian , deposed Bishop of Tyre o o Baron . An. 448. pag. 51. ● . 7 , 8. : And another to Nomus , wherein he rails at the pious Emperour Theodosius , by whom he and other Nestorians were deposed , and his Writings forbidden p p Id. ibid. pag. 52. n. 11. Edict . vide Leg. 66. Cod. Theod. , while as he falsly asserts Arians and all other Hereticks were tolerated . Theodoret therefore was a Nestorian 16 year after the Union with Cyril , and these Epistles are Forged , which say the contrary . Fourthly , He cites the Action at Chalcedon concerning Domnus , which is a Vatican Forgery q q Baron . An. 451. pag. 155. n. 129. : For it is not in the Greek , nor in Liberatus , Evagrius nor Nicephorus ; and that Domnus ( for whom subsistence is provided in this Forged Action ) was dead before the Council of Chalcedon , as both Justinian and the fifth Council witness r r Vid. Justin . Edict . Bin. pag. 165. & Lab. col. 718. Vid. item Concil. 5. collat. 6. Bin. 103. Lab. 546. , who ( for all Baronius frivolous Objections to support this Forgery ) must needs have truer Copies of the Council of Chalcedon , than his Vatican now affords . And indeed Domnus was deposed in the Ephesine Pseudo-Synod , all whose Acts were declared void at Chalcedon , except that which deposed Domnus ( then deceased ) and put in Maximus at Antioch s s Concil. Chalced. Act. 10. Bin. p 295. , Fifthly , Baronius cites Auastasius's Lives of the Popes , who is always full of Fables , especially in Vigilius his Life , in which are more Lies than Lines t t Bin. Tom. II par. 2. pag. 1. Lab. Tom. V. p. 306. : For he makes his Entrance to be when Bellisarius warred against Vitiges , who , he saith , was taken by John the Bloody , and brought to Rome by Bellisarius and Vigilius , who gave Bellisarius the Sacrament to bring Vitiges safe to Justinian u u Vita Vigil . ibid. . But John and Narses were both absent at the taking of Ravenna , where Vitiges freely submitted to Bellisarius , who kept him there till he carried him by Sea to Constantinople w w Procop. de bell . Goth. l. 2 & 3. . So that Vitiges came not to Rome at all . Secondly , Anastasius says , The Emperour then enquired of Bellisarius , how he had placed Vigilius in Silverius room , and thanked him for it x x Vita Vigil . ut supr. . But Silverius was deposed , and Vigilius put in three years before y y Procop. de bell . Goth. l. 1. ; yea , Justinian had writ to Vigilius , and knew that Silverius was dead a year before ; and Vigilius had writ to the Emperour z z Baron . An. 540. p. 303. n. 11. & 305. n. 20. , the year before Bellisarius came with Vitiges to Constantinople a a Baron . An. 541. p. 312. n. 3. ; and Binius saith , Justinian did not thank Bellisarius b b Bin. not . in vit. Vigilii . . Thirdly , Anastasius talks of Bellisarius being sent into Africk , and of his killing Gontharis , and offering great Spoils in his return at Rome , to Vigilius , &c. c c Vita Vigil . ut supra . : But after this Bellisarius was not sent into Africk , but into Persia d d Procop. de bell . Persic . l. 2. , where he stayed three years , and it was Ariobindus and Artabanus who were sent into Africk , the latter of which treacherously killed Gontharis e e Idem bell . Vandal . lib. 2 , & 4. . So that Bellisarius offered no Vandal Spoils at all ; or if ( as Binius would have it f f Bin. not . in Vit. Vigilii . ) he did , when he wan Rome from Vitiges , that was in Silverius his time ; so that is false also , Fourthly , Anastasius makes Theodora write at this time to Vigilius , To come to Constantinople and restore Anthimus , which he refused g g Vita Vigil . ut supra . . Binius after Baronius makes this a Miraculous change h h Bin. not . ibid. Baron . An. 540. p. 303. , and says it was just upon Silverius his death , at his first step into the See : But if it was after Gontharis was slain , it was not till the 19th of Justinian i i Baron . An. 545. pag. 334. , five years or six years after Vigilius was made Pope : And the Change is as false as The time ; for Liberatus saith , Vigilius did perform his Promise to the Empress , and writ as she desired k k Liberati Breviar. c. 22. Bin. pag. 192. Lab. 775. ; but afterwards it seems , he finding the Emperour resolute , did confirm the Deposition of Anthimus l l Vigil . Epist. 4 & 5. . So that Anastasius his Story of Theodora's . writing to Vigilius after Gontharis was slain , is a Fable : And Victor ( who then lived ) saith , Vigilius was called to Constantinople by the Emperour , ( not about Anthimus , but ) to condemn the three Chapters in his Nineteenth year m m Victor . Chron. an. 4. post . Consul . Basil . Baron . An. 545. . Fifthly , Anastasius fables , That the Romans accused Vigilius of Murder , &c. and that Anthimus Sorbo was sent by the Empress to seize him by force ; which he did ( the People abusing and cursing him as he went out of Rome ) , and thus he was violently carried by Sicily to Constantinople ; to which place coming on Christmas Even , the Emperour met and kissed him with Tears , and the People sang , The Lord cometh n n Anastas . in vit. Vigil . ut supr. . But Baronius gives him the Lye o o Baron . An. 546. p. 347. n. 54 , 55. , as doth also Binius p p Bin. not . in vit. Vigil . p. 3. Lab. 310. , For Vigilius voluntarily went from Rome in the 11th year of the Gothic War , An. 546. toward Constantinople q q Procop. de bell . Goth. l. 3. , and staying long in Sicily , arrived at the Court about April of the year following . Sixthly , Anastasius tells a long Story after Vigilius came to Constantinople , of the Contests between him and the Emperour , with his Empress , about restoring Anthimus ; which the Pope refusing , they tore him from the Altar of S. Euphemia , cruelly used him , imprisoned and banished him a a Anastas . vit. Vigil . ut supra . . Which are all Fables ; for Anthimus was deposed Ten years before b b Baron . An. 536. pag. 244. , and his Cause forgot , the three Chapters being now the only dispute ; yea , Baronius and Binius c c Baron . An. 552. pag. 387. n 8. Bin not . in vit Vigil . ut supr. , who would have something of this true , make the buffeting of Vigilius and his flight to Euphemia's Church , to happen four years after Theodorus's death ; and indeed in Pope Agapetus's time there was some such Contest about Anthimus , which Anastasius fabulously applies to Vigilius , and Baronius with Binius do cherish the Fiction . Seventhly , Anastasius tells us , how the Goths after this made Totilas King , who besieged and took Rome ; but spared the People , and lived like a Father among them d d Anastas . in vit. Vigil . ut supr. . But Totilas was made King four or five year before Vigilius came to Constantinople e e Baron . An. 542. p. 322. n. 1. , and took Rome while he was in Sicily f f Baron . An. 547. pag. 353. n. 12. , and was so cruel as to kill all the Citizens they met , and intended to ruin both City and People , had not Pelagius and Bellisarius stayed his Rage from places and persons ; however , he made a woful desolation there g g Procop. de bell . Goth. l. 3. pag. 372 , &c. . Eighthly , Anastasius saith , Narses was sent at the same time into Italy , and Totilas with many Goths were slain , by the help ( saith Baronius ) of the Blessed Virgin h h Anastas . vi● . Vigil . ut supr. Baron . An. 553. p. 396 , & 397. n. 13 & 18. . But first , he mistakes the time ; for Narses overcame not Totilas till six year after his first sacking Rome , in the 18th year of the Gothick War i i Procop. de bell . Goth. l. 3. ; and Binius , with Baronius , foolishly ascribe it to the Year wherein Justinian revoked his Edict , ( which he never revoked at all ) and this Binius saith was the 10th year of Totilas ( as Benedict had predicted k k Bin. not . in vit. Vigil . p. 3. Lab. 310. ) . But Baronius proves Benedict a false Prophet ; for he ( truly ) places Totilas his death in the 11th year l l Baron . ut supr. lit . (h) . . As to the help of the Blessed Virgin , mentioned both by Baronius and Binius m m Locis supr. cit . , Procopius saith , Narses did ascribe the Victory wholly to God n n Procop. de bell Goth. lib. 3. ; and Evagrius doth not mention his praying to , or relying on the Virgin ; but speaks of a Report by some , of the Blessed Virgins appearing to him from God with notice when to fight o o Evagr. l. 4. cap. 23. , but doth not affirm it for truth ; yet the Cardinal proves invocation of Sains by this Fable . Lastly , after this victory ( Anastasius tells us ) the Roman Clergy in a body desired Narses , if Vigilius and the Clergy banished with him were yet alive , they might be recalled p p Anastas . in vita Vigilij , ut supr. ; whereas Vigilius was then at Constantinople and never banished at all ; yea , the 5th Council was assembled that year in which Totilas was slain ; yet hence Baronius ( on the credit of this Fabulous Author ) invents a story of Vigilius Banishment after the 5th Council .

Chap. xxxvi . Finally , Baronius overlooking the Ambition , Treachery and Heresie of Vigilius , can find but one ill thing in his life , which is his going to Constantinople when the Emperor required him ; this he saith , was always fatal to the Catholick Church for the Pope to leave Rome q q Baron . An. 346. pag. 347. n. 55. . Was it so when the Popes removed for 70 years to Avignion r r Genebr . Chron. An. 1305. ? Was it so when Agaperus 10 years before came to Constantinople ? No , saith Baronius , that was lucky , God sent him , and the power of the Apostolick seat was thereby demonstrated s s Baron . An. 536. pag. 241. n. 12 , &c. : So that the difference was in the Men , Agapetus was a steddy Catholic , Vigilius an Heretical Hypocrite : Whose life shall conclude this Treatise .

His Ambition early appeared in procuring Boniface the 2d . contrary to the Canons to choose him for his Successor in a Synod t t Anastas . in vit . Bonif. 2. Bin. pag. 643. An. 532. : But the Senate and the Laws of the Empire forced Boniface by a second Synod , to vacate this Election of Vigilius u u Silverij Ep. 1. & Annst . ut supr. . Again , upon Agapetus death , he made a compact with Theodora the Empress , that for 350 l. in Gold , and the Papcy ( which she was to give , ) he would restore Anthimus , and disannul the Council of Chalcedon w w Liberat. in Brev. cap. 22. Bin. pag. 192. Lab. 775. ; but coming to Rome he found Silverius in the Chair , upon which he tampers with Bollisarius , and shewing him the Empress's Mandate , promises him 100 l. in Gold to make him Pope x x Idem . ibid. . Whereupon Silverius was falsly accused of a Plot to betray Rome to the Goths , deposed and banished , and Vigilius thrust into the Seat y y Idem . Ibid. & vid. Anastas . in vitâ Silverij , Usurping it two years during Silverius life , and acting all that time as lawful Pope , viz. from An. 538. to An. 540. z z Baron . An. 538. pag. 274. & An. 540. pag. 300. , writing to , and receiving Epistles from Justinian , Caesarius , Etherius , &c. a a Vide Epist. Vigil . But persidiously broke his promise both to Theodora and Bellisarius , and would neither restore Anthimus , for fear of the Romans , nor pay Bellisarius the Money b b Liberat. apud Baron . An. 538. pag. 276. : And cruelly uses poor Silverius banished to Patara , who in a Synod there excommunicated Vigilius c c Epist. 1. Silver . ad Vigil . . But the Emperor hearing of it , sent him back to have the Cause heard more fully d d Liberat. ut supr. , and being come into Italy , Vigilius by new promises , gets Bellisarius to put him into his Hands , and sent him to the Island Palmaria , and starved him to death there e e Id. ibid. Baron . An. 540. pag. 300. n. 1. & Anastas . in vit. Silverij . . Upon this Baronius and Binius pretend a fit of Conscience took him , and he abdicated the Papacy , desiring to come in by a new Election , ( of which he was sure by Bellisarius power f f Baron . An. 540. pag. 301. n. 4. ) . And so the Hypocrit gets in a second time , the Electors being inspired , saith Baronius g g Ib. pag. 302. n. 7. ; yet he hath till this moment described him as an Ambitious Deacon , mad with Pride , a Patron of Hereticks , a Schismatick , a Simoniack , an Usurper , a Successor of Simon Magus , and an Antichrist h h Vid. loca citat . ap. Authorem . .

Such was his entrance , and his Acts were suitable , for Liberatus saith , he did write an Epistle pursuant to his promise to Theodora , and Victor affirms , that he writ unto Theodosius of Alexandria , to Anthimus of Constantinople , and to Severus of Antioch , ( Eutychians deposed ) as to Catholicks i i Liberat. cap. 22. Victor in Chronico ubi ipsa Epistola extat . & ap. Baron . An. 538. pag. 276. n. 14. , assuring them he believed as they did , but bids them not tell any so : But Baronius says , this Epistle is not his : Bellarmin says it may be his , but that it was only in shew , and before he was Pope k k Bel. l. 4. de Pontif cap 10. . Baronius Quarrels at the Inscription , as if he called Justinian and Theodora his Lords and Christs , but Victor expresly saith it was writ ( not to them , but ) to three Heretical Patriarchs , and that the Inscription was , To my Lords and Bretheren joyned to us in the Love of Christ our Saviour l l Vict. Chron. An. 2. post Consul . Vigil . ; and for all Binius and his pretences , it is not unusual for the Pope to call Eminent Bishops , Lords ; Pope Urban calls Anselm Father and Master m m Malmsb . l. 1. gest . Pontif. pag. 127. , and Damasus calls Prosper and other Numidian Bishops his Lords n n Damas . Ep. 5. ap. Bin. Tom. 1. pag. 508. . Secondly , He alledges that Liberatus falsly affirms , that Vigilius in the Subscription of this Epistle condemned Dioscorus who was an Eutychian , which is absurd in a Letter whereby he would prove himself of that Party : To which it is replied , it is an Error of the Scribe , putting Dioscorus name for Nestorius , of which Party all the rest were there named ; And the Annalist allows many such literal mistakes in Liberatus o o Baron . An. 538. pag. 275. n. 7. . Thirdly , Baronius asks , if this were his Epistle , why he was not upbraided with it by Theodora and others , when he refused to restore Anthimus ? 'T is answered , for ought he knows this was objected to Vigilius , since none can argue , ab Autoritate human● negativè : However , it would have been objected had there been occasion ; but the Story of the restoring Anthimus is a Fiction of Anastasius , as he applies it to be the ground of a Quarrel , after Vigilius came to Constantinople : As to Bellarmine's Note , that owns the Epistle , but says , it was writ in Silverius his time before he was true Pope p p Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 10. ; which excuse also Baronius , Binius and Gretzer make q q Baron . An. 538. pag. 277. n. 15. Bin. not . in Liberat. pag. 194. Gretzer . defens . Bel. l. 4. : We must Note that Liberatus , an Author of that time , relates it to be writ after Silverius death ; And when Silverius was returned back to Italy , Bellisarius again pressed Vigilius to perform his promise to the Empress , which doth evidently suppose he had not as yet performed it , An. 540. And since Silverius died in June that year , ( soon after he fell into Vigilius hands , ) we may justly think he was too busie in dispatching him and contriving his new Election , to write this till after he was real and sole Pope ; so that r r Naucler . Chron. gen. 18. Nauclerus puts after Silverius death , Theodora's demanding of him to fulfil his promise : But they object , that at this time he condemned Anthimus and confirmed the Council of Chalcedon , in his Epistles to Justinian and Mennas s s Ep. Baron . An. 540. pag. 303. , and so it is not likely he should write the contrary to these Bishops just then . 'T is answered , he was a Notorious Hypocrite ( as they own , ) and so might write on Opinion openly to delude the Emperor , and another secretly to the Hereticks ; and ( for all Bellarmine's pretences ) this last was his heart and mind ; for why should he dissemble in secret with his Friends , with whom , as he tells them , he had but one Soul ? He might very likely dissemble with the Emperor , for fear of being expelled out of the Seat he so much coveted ; But what hurt or good could deposed Bishops do him ? Fear therefore , not an Orthodox mind , restrained him from openly condemning the true Faith , and his Ambition to keep his high Station made him do it privately only : Which shews the weakness of Bellarmine's excuse , as if he did not write this ex animo : And equally frivolous , is that pretence of his not writing it as Pope , for when he writes of a matter of Faith and defines and declares it , he either writes as Pope then or never , for that is his proper office : And the Nestorians might make all these objections against his Orthodox Epistle to the Emperor .

The second Act of Vigilius was his Constitution for Nestorianism , by which he run into the contrary Heresie to that wherein he was dipt before , which hath been sufficiently manifested in this Treatise . There remains now only his Exit to be considered , of which Liberatus only saith , How Vigilius being afflicted by Heresie died is known to all t t Liberat. Brev. c. 22. ut supr. ; Bellarmine expounds him , that it was that same Heresie which he first secretly favoured , that afflicted him u u Bellarm. de Pont. Rom. l. 4. cap. 10. : Baronius observes , he was by Gods just Judgment miserably tossed all his Life , hated by the Emperor and Eastern Bishops for defending the three Chapters , and execrable to the Western for his inconstancy ; and when he was just coming into the Haven , died before he could reach home in Sicily , of the Torment of the Stone : As he had Murdered his Predecessor a little before in an Island , so he died in one : And here we leave him to stand or fall to his own Master , not imitating Baronius his spite to Justinian w w Baron . An. 565. pag. 497. n. 6. , in determining his final Estate .

An Appendix to this History .

IN Labbè's Edition , there is subjoyned to this Council an Epistle of Vigilius to Eutychius , and a dicourse of P. de Marca's upon it , wherein it is extolled as a genuine writing and a sufficient confirmation of this 5th Council a a Lab. col. 596. : And though the foregoing History do abundantly confute this , yet we will not pass it without some observations concerning this pompous piece of Forgery .

First , In the Epistle Vigilius is made to say , that he is and was of the same Faith with Eutychius , and the rest of the Bishops at Constantinople : But if so , why did he exclaim that the Catholick Faith was in danger to be rooted up b b Baron . An. 546. pag. n. 47. ? Or how came he to Anathematize Theodorus ? And why did he suffer so much for a matter that was not of Faith ?

Secondly , In this Epistle Vigilius Anathematizeth all that at any time believed the three Chapters ought to be received or defended , and all that have endeavoured to hinder their being condemned c c Epist. Vigil . ap. Lab. col. 600. : Now is it probable he should curse all his Friends in Africa and in the Western Church , yea and himself so dreadfully , who had received and defended them , and done all in his power to hinder their condemnation ?

Thirdly , This illustrious Monument ( as 't is called ) can be no confirmation of the 5th Council , because it never names or so much as hints at that Council . So that it can pass for no more than Vigilius his Recantation of his former Opinions , and being writ after the Council , seems to be designed for the Emperors private satisfaction : For the Eastern Church then did not believe a Popes confirmation necessary , to make a General Councils Decrees valid :

Fourthly , This Epistle is dated in December , and the Council arose but in June before , which argues the falshood of it ; for it is not likely that he should so soon revoke his solemn constitution , and make so great a change , or if he did , it is strange that living above two years after , he did not receive some mark of Justinian's favour in all that time , no nor return to his See in Peace .

As to the Dissertation of de Marca , we may note d d Dissert. Num. i. Lab. pag. 601. , that the years when , and the place where this writing was found , give just suspicions of its being an Imposture : It was ( it seems ) found by a Greek , An. 1276. in the Vatican , and he pretended to Transcribe it out of a Manuscript there writ An. 753. Now the Original of these is dated two hundred years after the 5th Council , and all that time no body ever heard of Vigilius his Confirmation ; and if this date be genuine , it might very probably be invented at that time , being the very time when the Eastern Church began ( contrary to the sentiments of Rome ) to pull down their Images ; and that was a fit season to produce Evidence , that the Greeks ought to submit to the Latins , whose Popes as they pretended had made all their General Councils Decrees Authentick . And the date of the later Transcript is more suspicious still , being the critical time when the poor Eastern Emperor Nich. Palaelogus for getting Money and Aid from the Pope , was forced to send some corrupted Bishops , to make a seeming Submission to , and Union with the Roman Church , and to carry on this design An. 1276. no doubt , care was taken to find out or make this Epistle and send it into Greece : And the Vatican whence it was taken , is known to be the Mint and Ware-house of Forgeries : So that every circumstance is suspicious . And so is the Reason , which the learned Patron of it gives why it is so valuable , viz. because it vindicates the credit of the Roman See , which was much lessened by the belief , that the 5th Council was owned for a lawful and general , though Vigilius opposed it . Now at Rome where the Popes Authority is the main if not the sole point of Religion , there have been innumerable Writings piously forged , to carry on this great end , and this seems to be of that sort , only it appeared not early enough for Baronius to cite it ; however as our Author notes , he guessed there was ( or foresaw there would be ) such a thing ; For he positively avers , ( as was shewed ) upon meer conjecture , that Vigilius did confirm the 5th Council : But he and his party lay it down for a Maxim , that nothing can be a General Council , but what is confirmed by the Pope : Therefore Evidence or not Evidence , Binius and Baronius affirm it was so ; and they are as confident who never saw this Epistle , as de Marca is who published it ; so that to through-paced Catholicks who take their words , this Epistle is a needless discovery .

But let us see , what Authority he hath to support Num. ii . Lab. col. 601. this famous Confirmation : He saith Evagrius witnesseth , that Vigilius consented in writing , but would not come to the Council e e Evagr. Hist. lib. 4. c. 34. : But this consent was before the Synod met , and is therefore plainly set down in Evagrius before the convening , with which consent in writing both Justinian and the Council do often upbraid this inconstant Pope : Nor can Evagrius be expounded of any subsequent consent , since he goes on after this passage to relate the acts of the Council : Nor do any of the later Greeks who follow him say any more , than to imply Vigilius his precedent consent : And the 6th Council relate the calling of the 5th Council , after the agreement between Justinian and Vigilius f f Concil. 6. Act. 18. Tom. iii. par. 1. pag. 194. ; nor can their words without manifest violence be stretched to this Confirmation , which had it then been extant in the Greek Copy , and ( as de Marca owns ) wanting in the Latin g g Dissertat . insr . n. 21. pag. 612. , that Council had found out and observed this among other Variations .

The Testimony of Pelagius which our Author thinks Num. iii. Lab. col. 603. so clear , is no Evidence unless it be against this Epistle ; for he speaks not of Vigilius , but of the Latin Church , which came slowly to see their Error — laboured a great while — strove a long time even to suffering — and would not of a sudden lose their labour , till the Truth did appear — h h Ep. Pelag. 2. ap. Lab. col. 621. . This plainly refers to the Roman Clergy and Western Bishops , who after Vigilius death stood out in defence of the three Chapters so stisly , that Pelagius the 1st , Vigilius his Successor , could scarce find any to consecrate him i i Vide not . in vit. Pelag. 1. Lab. col. 788. . And at last he was forced to get Narses to use violent Methods to bring them in to his Communion k k Pelag. 1. Ep. 3. Lab. col. 792. Baron . An. 566. pag. 453. ; now this was three year after the Council . But how could Vigilius his hasty turn in six Months time be called a slow change , or a long striving ? And if Pelagius the second had known of Vigilius his confirming the 5th Council , he would not have used so many shifts to ward off the force of his and the Roman Churches dissent , which was objected ; this Epistle had stopt their Mouths for ever ; and if St. Gregory had known of it , he had referred those who doubted of the Apostolical consent , not to Pelagius his Epistle , but to this Authentick Confirmation of Vigilius himself .

It is well , when de Marca resolves to support the Num. iv . Lab col . cad. tottering credit of this Pope , that he hath no better Evidence of Theodorus of Caesarea's favouring Hereticks , than Facundus a condemned Nestorian , and Liberatus who writes so partially for that side ; it is plain , their spite to Theodorus was for his zeal against Nestorius , and for giving the Emperor that wholsome and necessary advice , to condemn all those Men and their Writings under which the Nestorians sheltered themselves ; and it is shewed before that he was no favourer either of Origen l l See the History chap. 23. , or the Acephali .

Yet this defender of Vigilius reflects on Justinian's Num. v. Lab. ib. Edict , approved by a General Council , upon the single Testimony of a convicted Heretick , who writes so bitterly against the Truth , that he is not to be believed nor esteemed as any thing but a bigotted and provoked Adversary : Only our Author passes by one thing , which is , that Facundus and Liberatus both Rail at Vigilius , for desetting their Party , and look upon him after his coming to the Emperor as one that took the Heretical side , which shews they knew nothing of his latter change * * Dissertat . Insr . Num. viii . col. 604. . As to what he saith , That there was nothing of Faith controverted in this Council , but only concerning Persons , This is fully answered before m m See the Hist. chap. 5. : And I will only note the weakness of this distinction ; For what difference is there between condemning a Mans Heretical Opinions , and condemning that Man for holding those Opinions ? Suppose the Arians should pretend , that because Arius was condemned at Nice , the Controversie there was about a Person , not about the Faith , Will de Marca allow that distinction ? And the like may be said of Macedonius , Eutyches and Nestorius in former Councils : Certain it is , that in this Council the Writings or Opinions of Theodorus and his Person also are condemned , and so are the Opinions of Theodoret and Ibas before their Recantation , but not their Persons ; and the main Question in the fifth Council , Whether those Writings of these three there cited were Heretical ? which I think is a matter of Faith and not of Persons .

Wherefore , since the Nestorian Hereticks gloried in these Writings , the Question whether they should Num. vi . Lab. col. 604. be condemned or no , was not ( as he pretended ) concerning discipline ; and so there is no room for his impertinent distinction of 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , unless Vigilius had a Dispensation to defend Heretical Writings ; and his wavering was not prudence , but perfidiousness in such a Case .

Facundus may be a good witness that Vigilius confirmed Num. vii . Lab. ib. & Num. viii . ib. the three Chapters , before his coming to Constantinople , and perhaps he might suspend Mennas after his coming to that City , ( as de Marca out of Theophanes saith ) . But since Mennas died that very year , as is proved by the Acts of the sixth Council at Constantinople , where they must needs know the time of their own Patriarchs death , but in the preceding Century n n Concil. vi . Act. 3. Bin. Tom. 3. par. 1. pag. 21 & notis ibid. pag. 264. , All the rest of his Story is manifest Forgery , viz. his delivering his Decree to Mennas , An. 548. ( after he was dead ) and he would prove this by a meer and gross imposture , which is Vigilius Epistle to Theodorus , where in September , 552 o o Vid. fragm. Epist. Vigil . Lab. col. 337. , the Pope is made to Excommunicate Theodorus and suspend Mennas , ( who had been dead five year : ) Yet in another forged Epistle set down at large in Labbè p p Epist. 15. Vigil . Lab. col. 328 , &c. vid. dat. Epist. col. 334. , in February the year before , the same Pope tells the Catholick Church , he had excommunicated and deposed Theodorus and the other six Months ago : Yet these apparent Fictions de Marca gravely cites as good Evidence , and in truth he hath no other Testimonies but these two spurious Epistles , and the incoherent stuff of Anastasius Biblioth. to prove that Vigilius was persecuted by Justinian at all , or that he ever opposed him after he came to the City of Constantinople till the Council met . De Marca grants Facundus after this called him a Prevaricator ; and we find ( about that very time , wherein those sham Epistles lay the Scene of Justinian's persecuting him , for Excommunicating Theodorus , and the Condemners of the three Chapters , ) by good Evidence under Vigilius own Hand , that this Pope Excommunicated two Roman Deacons , for defending the three Chapters p p Vid. 2. Epist. Vigilij . recit . in Concil. 5 Act. 7. Lab. col. 550 , &c. Baron . An. 550. , full three year after his coming to Justinian : So that this learned Author should not bring such stuff in for Evidence . Yet again he quotes an Epistle of the Roman Clergy to the Legatories , now newly published q q Ep. Legatariis An. 552. Lab. col. 407. , which is as palpable an imposture as any of the former ; For therein the Clergy of Italy tell a long Story to the French Legates upon hear-say , to inform them what Vigilius was then doing and suffering at Constantinople , where these Legates then were ; and whereas they might so easily have informed France of this by Letters from Rome , they desire the Legates to write this from Constantinople to the Gallican Church . Again , these rare Clerks say , that Dacius Bishop of Milan had been absent from his Church 15 or 16 year , till ' all the Bishops of his ordaining were dead , so that vast multitudes died for want of Baptism , ( it seems neither Lay-men nor Presbyters might then Baptize : ) But if Dacius did fly from Milan when it was taken by the Goths r r Baron . An. 539. pag. 239. , and never visited them till now , he had been absent but 13 year at most ; but that stay is not probable , considering how good a Bishop he was .

The long History therefore of Vigilius his returning Num. ix . Lab. col. 605. to his Vomit , and of his being persecuted by Justinian , depending on nothing but forged relations , is to be wholly rejected ; and that Letter which Eutychius writ to Vigilius , to have the three Chapters condemned in a lawful Council , whereunto Vigilius by Letter consented in January 554 s s Vid. Epistol. Concil. 5. collat. 1. Lab. col. 424. , was not writ upon Eutychius first promotion to the See of Constantinople , in which he had sat now almost six years , ( being chosen immediately upon the death of Mennas , ) but was writ purely on occasion of the designed Council ; and the Patriarch professeth his Faith in it , not on the account of his entrance on his promotion , but to remove the scandal , which the Nestorians laid upon such as condemned the three Chapters , as if they did not assent to the former Councils , especially that of Chalcedon .

Vigilius only covered his Nestorian principles with these shifts , and his main Argument of the paucity Num. x. Lab. ibid. of Western Bishops , is abundantly confuted by the Councils , shewing there were more of them present then at Constantinople , than had been in any former General Council . And the event shewed , that neither his absence nor dissenting could hinder this , which our Author wrongfully calls an imperfect meeting , from being universally received as a General Council .

The Constitution of Vigilius is proved Heretical before Numb . xi & xii . Lab. col. 606. t t See the Histor chap. 6 , &c. , and de Marca gives a very weak reason to prove it was not read in the fifth Council . For how could Justinian be so silly , as to suppose he could keep the Bishops then assembled ignorant of Vigilius his aversion to condemning the three Chapters , when he would not come at them , ( and if de Marca say true ) suffered such injuries for defending them ? 't is plain they knew his Mind , and do particularly confute his Constitution , only sparing his name ; yea , 't is Evident , they lookt on him as a sickle Man , and published nothing but his first and soundest Judgment , and never ceased acting vigorously for all his dissent ; for the Greeks at Chalcedon had shewed , they looked on a Councils Decrees as valid , though the Pope opposed them .

After all he hath no Witnesses of his Exile , but the Num. xiii . Lab. col. 607. fabulous Anastasius ; all the Greeks ( he confesses ) are silent as to his sufferings , and so are all Authentick Latin Histories too . The Epistle of Peter of Antioch was writ 500 year after , and only speaks of some difference between Vigilius and Mennas , which must be at his first coming to Constantinople Anno 547 , but that is nothing to this time after the Council .

It seems strange , that Vigilius should pass for so Numb . xiv . Lab. col. 609. great a Politician by the art used in this Epistle ; for if it were his , I should think he never intended to confirm the fifth Council by it , because he never names it ; which silence must proceed either from his fear to anger the Western Bishops , with whom he joyned still in heart , or from his hope that the bare recanting his Opinions , would cajole the Emperor and his Greeks ; and if we consider his Hypocrisie and often changes , both of these might make him omit the naming the fifth Council : But being a Forgery , we need not any conjectures about the reason of a non-entity : Yet if I were convinced Vigilius writ this Epistle , I should believe the date was false , and that this was his first Recantation after he came to Constantinople before this Synod met , which is the most probable reason , why he did not name this fifth Synod , viz. because no such had yet been .

It was not the Greeks , but the Latins who put this Epistle to the end of the Acts of the fifth Synod , Numb . xv . ib. for in their Vatican it was first pretended to be found ; but whoever added it , must be very weak to imagin an unlawful Synod could be confirmed by a Popes private Opinion delivered six months after , or that any body else should receive a Council upon his Authority , who did not own it himself . Photius lived 300 year after this Council had been owned for a General Council , and what he saith may well be explained of the Letters of his which were read in the Council , importing that once he was of their mind . The Arabick Manuscript is so full of mistakes , that its Authority must be inconsiderable ; it says , that the living and dead were never excommunicated before this Synod , and that the Popes profession of Faith was writ not to Eutychius , but to the Emperor Justinian : And all these Testimonies amount to no more , than that which the Emperor and the Council both gave out , that Vigilius was ( as indeed he had often declared ) of the Councils Opinion .

'T is certain Pelagius the first , Vigilius his immediate successor , and who was with him at Constantinople , Numb . xvi . Lab. col. 610. did own this for a General Council ; and if Vigilius had changed his mind , ( as Pelagius had done ) so as to confirm the fifth Council , he must have known of it , and for his own vindication would have pleaded this Writing of Vigilius , to satisfie the Western Bishops who rejected his Communion ; and his silence of Vigilius consent and confirmation , is next to demonstration , that he know of no such thing , and that no such thing ever was : As for all the rest they owned it for a lawful General Council , but not one of them knew of the subsequent consent of Vigilius .

The next thing in de Marca is , the consideration of Numb . xvii . Lab. ibid. the reasons moving Vigilius to make this Decree , the first of which is notoriously false ; For this forged Epistle saith , that now the whole World and the Church was restored to Peace u u Epist. Vigil . Lab. col. 597. , and our Author thinks the Illyrican and African Bishops , were now reconciled to the Condemners of the three Chapters : Whereas 't is plain , Liberatus did not write his Breviary till Vigilius his death , that is , two year after the date of this feigned Epistle ; and he shews how woful a Schism and Scandal there was then in the Church , especially in Africa w w Liberat. Brev. cap. 24. Bin. pag. 193. Lab. col. 778. . And Victor one of the African Bishops of that side , died in restraint , after he had suffered much in defence of the three Chapters thirteen years after x x Baron . An. 566. in fine & An. 553. pag. 435. . As to the Western Bishops , how could their being restored to Peace be a motive to Vigilius to recant An. 553. when three year after , his successor Pelagius was struggling with them to bring them to Peace , and could not do it then without some force y y Vid. Epist. 3. Pelag. 1. Lab. col. 792. ? And our Author owns , that the French , Spanish and Italian Bishops , did not come in till Pelagius had been some time in the Chair ; and Baronius saith the same z z Baron . An. 556. pag. 452. n. 1. , so that his first reason is not so much as true : I shall only add that Justinian acted very sincerely in this matter , and Leontius slanders him in supposing otherwise ; for his Judgment was , that the three Chapters were to be condemned , both Opinions and Persons , the Heretical Doctrins and Hereticks too , if they had not recanted .

But perhaps Vigilius might act dispensatively in Num. xviii . Lab. col. 611. this change , for it is likely he still kept a Nestorian Heart , only this spoils his second reason , why Vigilius writ this Epistle , viz. Christ having enlightned his Mind , God revealing , and he diligently enquiring was now come to the knowledge of the Truth a a Epist. Vigil . Lab. col. 597. . For if after all , Vigilius did only confirm them dispensatively , that supposes he did not believe the points to be either necessary or true , but only such as might be professed for peace sake ; and if that were all , what an Hypocrite must this Pope be , to talk of a change of his Mind , and coming to know the truth by Illumination , Revela●●on and Study ? In vain doth he and his Patron alledge the Example of St. Augustin , St. Paul and St. Peter ; for did St. Augustin retract things , and pretend to be convinced of his Mistakes only dispensatively , that is , secretly believing still they might be true ? Did St. Paul only believe the Gospel 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , after his Conversion ; Or was St. Peter a Jew in his Heart , after he consented to discharge the Gentiles from the Ceremonies of the Law ? Pelagius the Second's Arguments are good as to the Roman Clergy , who sincerely opposed the truth for a time , but upon Conviction as sincerely embraced it : But to apply these instances to such a Proteus and Dissembler as Vigilius , is to prostitute them , rather than defend him , who often dispensed with himself in the duties of Morality .

If Vigilius had gon to the Council he might have Num. xix & xx , Lab. 611. learned those two Rules de Marca speaks of , in six days , without the help of Revelation : But the feigned Epistle says nothing of such Rules ; it pretends that Vigilius now understood the Person and Writings of Theodorus , and the Writings of Theodoret and Ibas against Cyril were Heretical , and that it was his duty to pronounce them Heretical , and condemn them as such ; yea , Anathematize them ; and is this only a point of Ecclesiastical Discipline ? May Hereticks and their Opinions be either condemned or not ? and is it an indifferent thing , whether a Pope absolve and defend , or accurse and condemn in such cases ? Surely the great name of de Marca is forged and put to this weak tract ; he would not have argued at this rate .

That the Acts of this Council were early translated Num. xxi . Lab. col. 612. into Latin for the use of the Western Church , is probable enough ; but Vigilius needed not this Translation ; he had lived at Constantinople long before he was Pope , and now six years together after he was Pope , and so must understand Greek perfectly : But the true reason why Vigilius Epistle was not added to these Latin Acts , was because there was no such Epistle then invented : For had he then writ such an Epistle , or in six Months after , it would certainly have been joyned to both the Greek and Latin Copies for all Mens satisfaction who were scandalized by his dissent , especially if that ( which de Marca supposes ) had been thought true in those Ages , viz. That the Decrees of a General Council were invalid without the Popes Confirmation : But this is an Opinion of later Birth .

Whatever he saith in defence of the sincerity of Num. xxii . Lab. ib. the Latin Acts , I agree to ; but since he borrows from Crakenthorp , not only his Arguments , but his conjectures also , ( such as altering the name of Domnus into John , &c. ) I must believe the Author of this discourse had seen Crakenthorp's learned History of the fifth Council , yet durst not own it , because he could not confute it .

From the same Author he borrows much of what Num. xxiii , &c. Lab. col. 613. he says , about condemning Origen's Opinions in this Council : But since the Council was risen , before Vigilius began to deliberate whether he should receive their Acts or no , ( yea , and their Acts as he thinks translated into Latin also , ) how could Justinian after this send to the dissolved Council , to know their Judgment of Origen and his Followers ? Therefore de Marca mistakes the point ; and the learned Crakenthorp solves this difficulty much better b b See the Hist. Chap. xxviii . , to which I refer the Reader ; And only will enquire how this Author and those Popes he cites could truly say , that no matters of Faith were handled in this fifth Council , if Origen and his Heretical Opinions were here condemned , as he goes about to prove ? This is a manifest contradiction . The Sense of those Popes and others must be , no Points of Faith decided at Chalcedon , were called in Question over again here : For the Question only was , whether the Opinions in the three Chapters were not condemned in the Council of Chalcedon : And the fifth Council affirming this concerning the Opinions of three Persons , did not ( as some feared ) decree any new , or different point of Faith from the Council of Chalcedon .

It is a needless thing to offer conjectures about Num. xxv . Lab. col. 614. the reason , why Vigilius in this Epistle doth not mention the condemning of Origen's Errors ; for the true reason is obvious , which is , Because the Forger of this Epistle had nothing in his Eye , but to clear this Pope from the main thing he was charged with , viz. defending three Heretical Chapters , and that point he makes out : I grant he had ( yet only joyntly with other Patriarchs , and by following , not leading Justinian ) condemned Origen before , as Liberatus declares c c Liberat. Breviar. cap. 23. : But I must note , that Liberatus his telling us that so particularly , and saying nothing of Vigilius his Epistle to condemn the three Chapters , is a shrewd suspicion there was no such Epistle , since Liberatus writ after Vigilius death , and was a favourer of the three Chapters , and writ all that he thought might disparage such as condemned them . To conclude , either the Authority of the Pope was not so considerable in those days , as this learned Apologist fancies , or Vigilius his carriage was such , that no body enquired what side he was of , after his so often turnings ; since he lived above two years after this Council , and yet no mention in any genuine Writer is made where he was , or how he carried himself to the time of his death , which is said to have hapned in Sicily , An. 555. So little a figure did the Roman Pontiff then make ; and when the Controversie was revived in the time of Pelagius the Second , and Gregory the Great , they chose to bury Vigilius name in silence , his inconstancy to his Principles and evil Practices having made it the interest of the Roman Church to clap him under Hatches so long as his Character was remembred ; and this Apologist had better have followed their Policy , than to raise him ( as he hath done ) only to his greater shame .

Books printed for , and Sold by R. Clavel , at the Peacock in St. Paul's Church-yard .

THE Reasons of Praying for the Peace of our Jerusalem : In a Sermon Preached before the Queen at White-Hall , on the Fast-Day , being Wednesday August 29. 1694. by Thomas Comber , D. D. Dean of Durham , and Chaplain in Ordinary to their Majesties . Printed by Their Majesties Special Command .

A Daily Office for the Sick ; Compil'd out of the Holy Scriptures , and the Liturgy of our Church ; with occasional Prayers , Meditations and Directions .

The Catechism of the Church with proofs from the New Testament , and some additional Questions and Answers , divided into 12 Sections by Zach. ●shem , D. D. Author of the Book lately published , Entituled a Daily Office for the Sick , with directions , &c.

A Church Carechism with a brief and easie Explanation thereof , for the help of the Meanest Capacities and Weakest Memories , in order to the establishing them in the Religion of the Church of England , by T. C. Dean of D.

The Pantheon , Representing the Fabulous Histories of the Heathen Gods , and most Illustrious Heroes ; in a short , plain and familiar Method , by way of Dialogue , for the Use of Schools . Written by Fra. Pomey , of the Society of Jesus ; Author of the French and Latin Dictionary , for the Use of the Dauphin .

Bedae Venerabills opera Quaedam Theologica , nunc primùm edita , necnon Historica , antea semel edita . Accesserunt Egberti Archiepiscopi Eboracerifis Dialogus de Ecclesiasticâ Institutione & Aldbelmi Episcopi Scireburnensis Liber de Virginitate ex Codice antiquissimo emendarus .

Disquisitio in Hypothesin Baxterianam de Foedere Gratin , Ab initio & deinceps , semper & ubique omnibus indulto , & adhuc apud Ethnicos & extra-evangelicos vigente ac valente ad salutem . Authore Carolo Robothamo , Ecclesiae Anglicanae Presbytero Norfolciensi , S. Th. B.

Q. Horatii Flacci Opera : Interpretatione & Notis Illustravit Ludovicus Desprez Cardinalitius Socius ac Rhetor Emeritus , Jussu Christianissimi Regis , in usum Serenissimi Delphini , ac Serenissimorum Principum Burgundiae , Andium , Biturigum . Huic Editioni accessere Vita Horatii , cum Dacerii Notis ejusdem Chronologia Horatiana , & Praefatio de Satira Romona .

L. Annaei Flori rerum Romanarum Epitome ; Interpretatione & Notis Illustravit Anna Tanaquilla Fabri Tilia , Jussu Christianissimi Regis , in usum Serenissims Delphini .

Compendium Graecum Novi Testamenti , Continens ex 7959. Verficulis totius N. Testamenti tantum Versiculos 1900. ( non tamen integros ) in quibus omnes universi Novi Test . Voces , una cum Versione Latina , Inveniuntur : Auctore , Johanne Lusden . Philos. Doctore , & Linguae Sanctae in Academia Ultrajectina Professore Ordinario . Editio Quinta .

FINIS .

Notes, typically marginal, from the original text

Notes for div A34084-e560

Notes for div A34084-e1180

Notes for div A34084-e18640

Notes for div A34084-e58090

Notes for div A34084-e66630

Notes for div A34084-e67320

Notes for div A34084-e143790

Notes for div A34084-e194890