A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

IBLIOTHECA PATRUM: OR, A NEW HISTORY OF Ecclesiastical Writers. TOME V.

CONTAINING An Account of the LIVES and WRITINGS of the Primitive FATHERS, that Flourished in the Seventh and Eighth Centuries of Christianity, with Censures upon all their BOOKS, determining which are Genuine, and which Spurious.

S. ISIDORE of Sevil.

S. ISIDORE, the Son of Severianus, and Grand-Child of Theodorick, King of Italy, was born at Sevil. He succeeded his Brother S. Leander, in the Bishoprick of * 1.1 that City, about the Year 595. He held a Council in 623. and died in 636. ha∣ving governed the Church of Sevil Forty Years. This Bishop was a Man of great Reading and profound Learning, and has written upon divers Subjects. His Works may be divided into Five Classes. The First comprehending those which concern Arts or Sciences. The Second his Commentaries upon the Scripture. The Third his dogmatical Tracts. The Fourth his Treatises of Church-Discipline. And the last his Works of Mora∣lity or Piety.

The Book of Etymologies, or of Origin's, is the largest of those of the First Class: He wrote it at the Request of Braulio Bishop of * 1.2 Saragosa; who divided it into Twenty Books, and made up what Isidore had not finish'd. This Work is an Epitome of all Arts and Sciences; he explains the Terms, lays down the Principles, and shews what is most in use in each of them. What relates to Ecclesiastical Matters is as follows. In the Sixth Book he maketh a Catalogue of the Books of the Old and New Testa∣ment: In which he places, in the Fourth Classis of the a 1.3 Canonical Books of the Old Testament, Ecclesi∣asticus,

the Book of Wisdom, Judith, Tobit, and the Two Books of the Maccabees. He distin∣guisheth Thr•••• S•…•…es of the Scripture, the Historical Moral and Allegorical He speaks of the Authors of the Canonical Books, and of those that have composed. Harmonies of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Gospels. He reckons up but Four General Councils. He makes a Paschal Cycle. In fine, he treats of the principal Festivals of the Jews and Christians, and of the Administration of the Sacrament. He saith, it is called a Sacrifice, because it is made sacred by a my∣stical Prayer, in remembrance of the Passion of our Lord. He defin••th b 1.4 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacrament, the Sign of an Holy Thing communicating Holiness. He places in that rank Baptism, Chrism, and the Eucharist, which are saith he, Sacraments, because under the Veil of corporeal things, the divine Vertue does se∣cretly operate Salvation. To the Unction he joyns the Laying on of Hands, which brings down the Holy Ghost. He speaks of Exorcism. He makes the Apostles Authors of the Creed: which he thinks to have been called a Symbol, because it is the Badge whereby Christians know one another. He speaks of Prayer, of Fasting and of Penance, which, he says, is a voluntary Punishment for ones Sins. He defines Satisfaction, the Exclusion of the Causes and Occa∣sions of Sin, and the Cessation of Sinning. He calls Reconciliation the End of Penance. He distinguish∣eth two sorts of Exomologesis or Confession, the one of Praise, the other of Sins; and saith, both the one and the other are chiefly made to God. Lastly, he makes mention of the Rogations or Litanies.

In the Seventh Book he treats of the Names and Attributes of God: Chap. 1. Of the Son of God, of his Qualities, of his metaphorical and natural Names. Chap. 2. Of the Holy Ghost. Chap. 3. Of the Trinity, and of the appellative and relative Names of the Persons. Chap. 4. Of Angels and their different Orders. Chap. 5. He explains also the Names of the Persons mention'd in the Bible; he gives the Definition of the Patriarchs, the Prophets, the Apostles, the Martyrs, the Clerks and Monks.

In the Eighth Book he speaks of the Church, of Heresy, of the Number of the Sy∣bils, &c.

The Three Books of the Differences of Names, or of the proper Signification of Words, written by the same Author, are a grammatical Work; and the Book of the Nature of Things to [King] Sisebut, a Physical Treatise, of which we have nothing here to say.

To this Classis of S. Isidore's Works may be added his Historical Tracts; which are a Chro∣nological Abridgment, from the beginning of the World down to * 1.5 Heraclius's Empire. An History of the Goths, from the 176th. Year of Christ, to the Year 610. with an Epitome of the History of the Vandals and Sueves. The Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers, which we have defended in the Preface of the preceeding Volume, and the Treatise of the Life and Death of certain Saints.

The Treatises that S. Isidore writ upon the Bible, which may make up the Second Classis of his Works, are these: Some Prolegomena's, wherein he treats of the Authors of the Books of the Old and New Testament, some Annotations upon the Pentateuch, upon Joshua, upon the Books of Kings, and upon Ezra, wherein he maketh some Remarks Literal or Moral, which are often grounded upon Names, which he explains according to his Fancy, or upon Observa∣tions of little solidity; a Book of Allegories on the Octateuch, which is a compendious Colle∣ction of Allegorical Expositions made by the Fathers before him; and a Commentary upon the Song of Solomon, which he expounds of the Church and of Jesus Christ, with great per∣spicuity and brevity.

Of the Dogmatical Tracts of S. Isidore, we have none remaining but two Books against the Jews, written to his Sister * 1.6 Florentia; in which he hath gathered some Passages of the Holy Scripture to prove our Religion. The First of these two Books is upon the Passion, the Resurrection, the Reign of Christ, and upon the Judgment. The Second is upon the Calling of the Gentiles, and the establishing of the Church: The Proofs he brings are solid, and his Reflections judicious.

Among his Books of Discipline, that of the [Ecclesiastical or Divine] Offices is the most con∣siderable. It is divided into Two Books: In the First he treats of the Parts and Ceremonies of Divine Service; he confesses, in the Primitive Church, Prayers were read with a plain turn of the Voice, more like pronouncing than singing: He distinguisheth two Sorts of Hymns, those of the Scripture, of which the Holy Ghost is the Author, and those of Men's Compo∣sition. He saith, S. Hilarius was the first that made any of them, and that after him S. Am∣brose did also compose some, which have been recited in the Church of Milan, and from thence passed down to the other Western Churches. And further says, That S. Ambrose first establish'd the Use of Anthems; and that Responses were invented in Italy. He distinguishes Seven Parts

in the c 1.7 Mass, or the Canon, which he believes was d 1.8 establish'd by S. Peter. 1. The Admo∣nition to the People, to stir them up to Pray. 2. The Prayer to God, that he would receive the Prayers and Oblations of his People. 3. A Prayer for the Living, who offered the Sacrifice, and e 1.9 for the Dead. 4. The Prayer for Peace. 5. The Prayer for the sanctifying of the Bread and Wine. 6. The Confirmation of the Sacrament. 7. The Lord's Prayer. The Nicene Creed was also recited, and at last they blessed the People. Then he observeth, That the Communion must be taken Fasting, and that the Sacrifice was offered for the Dead. He speaks of the Office of the Third, the Sixth, the Ninth Hour; of Vespers, Compline, Vigils, Mat∣tins, of the principal Festivals of the year, of Lent-Fast, of the Fast on the 22d. of September, of the Fasts on November the 1st. and January the 1st. of the Fasts on Fridays and Saturdays in some Churches. He observes, That, altho' the Custom of the Church was not to Fast from Easter to Whitsunday, some Monks nevertheless did Fast in that Interval out of De∣votion. Lastly, he owns, That Churches have diffe∣rent Uses and Practices in many things.

The 2d. Book of Offices is concerning Ecclesiastical Persons. He says, All that are or∣dained to serve the Church, are called * 1.12 Clerks, because S. Matthias, who was the first or∣dained by the Apostles, was chosen by Lot; or because all Clerks are also called by Lot to the Lord's Inheritance: Or else, lastly, because the Lord is their Lot and Portion. He puts them in mind, That they ought to live retired from the World, to abstain from Worldly Pleasures, not to go to the Publick Shews nor to publick Feasts; to follow their Employ∣ment

without engaging themselves in secular Affairs; not to put Money to Usury; to take no Presents for performing the Functions of their Ministry; to be wise and modest in their Car∣riage, and reserved in their Talk; not to keep Company with Women; to be Sober, Chast and Constant in Prayer. He distinguisheth two sorts of Clerks; some living under the go∣vernance of their Bishop; and others, called * 1.13 Acephali, which can neither pass for Laicks nor Ecclesiasticks. He taketh notice, That all Clerks had a e 1.14 Tonsure, and that the Crown of their Head was all shaved, and had only a little Circle of Hair round about the Head, in form of a Crown. Having spoken of Clerks in general, he speaks of all the Orders in particular. As to the Bishops, which he calls Sacerdotes, he says, They are ordained by the Laying on of Hands; That a Man must be 32 years old to be a Bishop, and ought to have always lived single, or to have had but one Wife; That in their Ordination they give them a Staff and a Ring; That they ought to make choice of a Learned and Ver∣tuous Man, and free from Crimes; That a Bishop ought to take care of the Poor, and use Hospitality towards Strangers. He does not forget the Chorepiscopi, whom he calls the Bishop's Deputies. He says, They may ordain Readers, Exorcists and Subdeacons; but that they cannot ordain Presbyters nor Deacons. He ex∣tols the Dignity of Presbyters, by saying, They par∣take in the Dispensation of the Mysteries with the Bi∣shops; That they preside over Churches as they do; That they consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, and preach the word of God, as they do; but that Ordination is reserved to the Bishops, to maintain the Authority and Splendor of the Priesthood, and to prevent Divisions. Deacons are the Dispensers of the Mysteries consecrated by the Presbyters; they give the Cup to the Laity, who may not take it from the Altar. Subdeacons do also handle the Sacred Vessels; also it was decreed, That they also should be bound to Continency. The other Persons of the Clergy are the Readers, the Singers, the Exorcists, the Door-keepers. There are many kinds of Monks. The Cenobites are they that live in common; the Hermites they that withdraw into Deserts; the Anchorites they that shut up themselves in Cells: These are the several sorts of good Monks. S. Isidore describes and commends the Life of the Cenobites, then he speaks of Penitents; they cut their Hair, they wear Hair-cloath, they strew Ashes upon their Heads, to put them in mind that they are but Dust, and shall return to Dust. By Penance, Remission of Sins committed after Baptism, tho' never so great, is obtained. Clerks do it before God, others before the Bishop. True Penance consists in the amendment of Life. Afterwards he commends Virgins, and gives them some wholesome Advices; as also Widows and those that are Married, and likewise Catechumens. He gives an Account of the Exorcisms and the Salt [used in them.]

Then he passeth to other Points, and expounds the Creed, which he believes to have been composed by the Apostles in common, before they dispersed themselves to preach the Gospel. He treats of Baptism, and distinguisheth it into three sorts; the Baptism of Water, the Baptism of Blood, and the Baptism of Tears. He observes, That the Sacrament of Baptism, that it may be valid, must be conferred in the name, and by the Invocation of the three Persons of the Trinity; That it is God that baptizeth and not Man, and therefore that it matters not, whether it be conferred by an Heretick; That Original Sin in Infants is remitted in Baptism, so, that if they should die without it, they should be excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven; That Bishops and Presbyters are the Ministers of that Sacrament; That the Holy f 1.15 Chrism is given after Baptism, to render the Persons baptized, the Anointed of Jesus Christ; and lastly, That the Bi∣shop lays his Hands upon them, that they may receive the Holy Ghost; That Men do not give it, but pray to God to give it; and that the Bishop only may ad∣minister that Sacrament.

We have a few Letters of S. Isidore; the 1st. and 2d. contain nothing remarkable: The 3d. to Helladius, is concerning Discipline. There he shews, That a Presbyter fallen into the Sin of the Flesh is to be deposed and put to Penance, without any hope of being restored. He teaches the same Doctrine in his Book of Offices; which shews the falsity of another Let∣ter fathered upon him, directed to Massanus, the Author whereof goes about to expound the Canon of the Council of Ancyra, about the deposition of Clerks fallen into the Sin of the Flesh, and to prove it should be understood of those only who do not do Penance, pretending that those that do it, ought to be restored; which Doctrine is so contrary to that of Isidore, that there is no doubt, but that Letter is the Fiction of some Imposter, and perhaps of the famous Isidore Mercator.

I pass the same Judgment on the 4th. Letter directed to Claudius, wherein the Question of the Procession of the Holy Ghost is handled against the Greeks; on the 5th. directed to Re∣demptus, in which the question of unleaven'd and leaven'd Bread is debated against the same Persons; and on the last to Engenius of Toledo, about the Authority of the Pope. It is visible, these Letters were written in the time of the Quarrel between the Greeks and Latins, which was not begun in the Life of Isidore of Sevil.

Lastly, we will join to the Works of Discipline, the Rule of the Monks, composed by S. Isidore, accommodated to the use of his Country, and proportion'd to the strength of the weaker sort.

S. Isidore's Learning did not hinder him from being Eminent in Works of Piety, of which he hath left us these, viz. Two Books of Synonyma's or Soliloquies, and a Treatise of the Con∣tempt of the World, which are Discourses supposed to be had in a Man, between his Soul and his Reason, and contain Advices, Instructions, Christian Meditations, Prayers and Sentences of Piety and Remorse. Some body hath made a Collection of some of these Sentences, and Intituled it, The Rule of good Living. To which is added, a Piece, Intituled, The Lamenta∣tions of Repentance, with a long and good Prayer about Amendment of Life, and another shorter against Temptations.

But the most considerable of the moral Works of S. Isidore, is his Collection of Sentences out of S. Gregory's [Morals,] divided into three Books. The 1st. contains some Christian Considerations about the Doctrine of the Creed; The 2d. about Vertues; The 3d. about Temptations, and the Remedies whereby we may be healed and sanctified.

The Book of the Combat between Vices and Vertues, attributed to S. Austin, to S. Leo, to S. Ambrose, and at last to S. Isidore, is none of theirs, but belongs to Ambrose Auspert, Ab∣bot of S. Vincent of Benevent, as is observed in his Life, tho' Sigebert ascribeth to Isidore a Book bearing the same Title.

By what we have said of the Works of Isidore, it is plain enough, that this Bishop was well read, but he had not so much Fineness of Wit and Elevation of Mind, there is nothing commendable in his Stile but the clearness of it; he is neither Eloquent nor Polite; his own Opinions are often false, and he does not always make a good choice when he borrows of others. He contents himself with a superficial Knowledge, and does not search the bottom of Matters. His Remarks are but trivial, and often mistaken: Nevertheless he was esteemed, in his Age, a Prodigy of Learning, and an Oracle. The Fathers of the 8th. Council of Toledo, give this illustrious Testimony of his Knowledge.

The excellent Doctor of our Age, Isi∣dore, the greatest Ornament of the Catholick Church, the last of the Fathers, with regard to the times, but such as may, for his Learning, be compared to the first, the most learned Man of past Ages.

Altho' this Commendation be Hyperbolical, yet it must be confessed, Isidore was a Man of Desert, and that Braulio was in the right, in saying, God seemed to have given him to Spain, and raised him up in that time, to make the Monuments of the Ancients known, and to hinder Men from falling into extream Barbarity and Rusticity.

The Works of this Father have been printed at Madrid, in 1599. at Paris, by Sonnius, by the care of La Bigne, in 1580. in 1601. by Father Du Breuil a Benedictin Monk of the Abby of S. German, who having revised them, made a larger Edition of them, printed by Sonnius. That Edition was Reprinted at Antwerp, in 1617. [in Fol.] Besides that, there are many Tracts printed severally. The Origins have been printed at Basil, in 1577. [in Fol.] with some Annotations of Vulcanius, and in different Collections, [as at Venice in 1483. in Fol. and at Paris, in 1509.] his Offices were printed in the Bibliotheca Patrum, and in some Collections of Books of Ecclesiastical Rites, [at Rome in 1591. in Fol. and at Paris in 1610.] His Chro∣nicle and Histories were printed at Francfort, in 1605. and 1606. at Hamburg in 1611. at Amsterdam in 1596. [in Octavo.] with Vulcanius's Notes; his Allegories at * 1.16 Haguenau, in 1529. [Quarto.] his Books against the Jews at Venice, in 1584. The three Books of Sen∣tences, Intituled, De summo Bono, Of the soveraign Good, at Paris in 1538. [at Turin in 1593, Quarto, with Loaysa's Notes.] Father Labbe, in his Bibliotheca of MSS. hath published a History of the Goths and Vandals, larger than that printed among the Works of Isidore. The Book of the Ec∣clesiastical Writers, was printed in divers Collections of Authors, which have treated of those Matters [at Antwerp in 1639, Fol. at Francfort in 1603. and with Notes at Colen, in 1580. Octavo.]

BRAULIO, Bishop of Saragosa.

BRAULIO, Bishop of Saragosa, F••i••••d to Isidore of Sevil, wrote two Letters to him, and made an Encomium upon that Father, containing the Catalogue of his Works, * 1.17 wherein he tells us, That he not only hath set in order, but finished his Treatise of Origins. He wrote also the Life of Aemilianus, a Spanish Hermit, vulgarly called, S. Milan. More-over the Life of S. Leocadia is attributed to him. He was present in the 4th. 5th. and 6th. Councils of Tobedo, and died in 646. after he had been Bishop 20 years. [His Epistles and Encomium are extant in S. Isidore's Works, and his Life of Aemilianus in Mabillon's Saec. Ben. 1. pag. 205.]

S. COLUMBANUS.

S. Columbanus, a Monk of the Monastery of Benchor in Ireland, went into France towards the year, 590. with 12 Monks of his Monastery, and withdrew himself into the Solitude of * 1.18 Vosge, near Besancon, where he founded the Monasteries of Luxeuil and of Fontaines. After he had governed them 20 years, he was banished by King Theodorick, upon the Motion of Queen Brunehant. After which, he retired into Switzerland, then belonging to the Kingdom of Theodebert, where he preached the Gospel to some Pagans remaining in that Country: But Theodebert being overcome, and taken Prisoner by Theodorick, Columbanus was forced to fly into Italy in the year, 613. where he founded the Monastery of Bobio, and died there in 615.

The Author of this Saint's Life, and Sigebert of Gemblours, say, he was a great Student and a Witty Man; That in his Youth, he composed a Commentary on the Book of Psalms, which was elegantly written; and that he had published many other Works, useful for Prayers and Instruction. They say, The Title of the Commentary on the Psalms is found in an old Catalogue of the Library of S. Gal; but the Work it self is not there. In the Monastery of Luxeuil there is a Manuscript Commentary on the Psalms, the Author of which is not known. Some would have it pass, for that of S. Columbanus, but it hath not yet been printed, and we know nothing of it, but from him who hath collected the Works of that Fa∣ther.

There are yet extant some of the Poetical Works of S. Columbanus, of which Sigebert maketh mention. The first of them is a Letter to Hunaldus upon the Shortness of Life, and the Vanity of Worldly Goods. The Preface of which begins with the Letters of the name of S. Columbanus, and of him he writes to; so that taking all the first Letters of each Verse, one finds Columbanus Hunaldo. The 2d. is a Letter in short Verses, written to Sedolius; in the end whereof, he taketh notice, That he was come to the 18th. Olympiad, that is, that he was 72 years old at least. The 3d. is an Epigram upon Women. The 4th. is a Poem in Hexameters, Intituled, Monasticon, containing several Precepts of Morality. The last is in Prose upon the Vanity and Misery of this Life.

But these Works are not comparable to his Rule, which is found in the Collection of Bene∣dictus Ananius. It is full of Wisdom and Instruction; for there he does not content him∣self to prescribe Rules only, but shews the Excellency and Usefulness of them, and grounds them upon Testimonies of Scripture, or upon some Principle of Morality. He lays down, for the Foundation of his Rule, the Love of God and of our Neighbour as a general Precept, whereupon all the other are superst••••cted.] Then he commends Obedience and Silence. He appoints, That Monks shall eat in the Evening, and shall feed on such plain Meat, as may sustain them without hurt to their Health. He will have them to eat every day, that they may be able to labour to Pray and to read daily. He orders them to be content with things abso∣lutely necessary, which are very few; to flee from Wealth and Vanity; to be Chast in their Thoughts as well as in their Actions. That which he appoints concerning the Office which was then called the Course, is somewhat obscure. Yet this he seems to prescribe: That they shall meet together three times in the Night, and three times in the day, to Pray; That in the Office of the day, at each hour they shall say three Psalms at each Office, and some other Prayers; That the Night Office is to be lengthened or shortened, according to the length or shortness of the Nights; That from October to February, they must say in the ordinary Office of the Night, 36 Psalms and 12 Anthems, at three several times, and in the rest of the year 24 Psalms only, with 8 Anthems; but for the Saturday and Sunday night, the Office is made up of 75 Psalms and 25 Anthems in Winter; which number is to be augmented or lessened according as the Nights increase or decrease. He observes, some other Monks perform the Night office at 4 times, and Sing both in Winter and Summer, 12 Psalms in the usual Service,

and 36 in the Service of the Saturday and Sunday nights; but he does not approve of that Practice, as being too tiresome in Summer, when the nights are short. Then he recommends to his Monks that Spirit of Discretion, that can discern betwixt Good and Evil; and that Mortification Of Spirit consisting in doing nothing according to Self-will: These are all the Articles of that Rule which were found in the Collection of Bonedictus Ananius. There is another added to it, of the Perfection of a Monk, from a Manuscript of the Monastery of Bobio; but it is evident, That is not the same Author's, but is a Note of some other Monk. Some have thought that we had but one part of S. Columbanus's Rule, because that in the Har∣mony of the Rules there is one Article of it cited, which is said to be the 33d. of that Ab∣bot's Rule; but this an Error in the Quotation, and it must be taken out of some other Au∣thor. After this Rule follows his Penitential, containing a Decree of what Penance is to be imposed upon Monks taken in a Fault, how light soever it may be. It is there supposed, that they must confess it, and then are prescribed Penances for each of those Faults. Some very light ones are punished somewhat severely; one may judge of it by the following In∣stances: He that shall not say (Amen) at Table, shall have six Lashes; he that shall talk in the Refectory, as many; he that shall not sorbear Coughing at the beginning of a Psalm, shall also be treated after the same manner; and he likewise that shall touch the Chalice with his Teeth, or shall Smile in the time of Divine Service; they that have spoken roughly and frowardly, shall receive fifty Lashes, as well as they that have answered again to their Supe∣rior. There are other Penances enjoyned besides Whipping; as Fasting, Silence, Separation from the Table, Humiliation. These Penances seem to be more rational, and fitter to correct Men than Whipping, and yet they are not the most common and usual.

There was found in the Manuscript of Bobio with S. Columbanus's Rule and Penitential, some Spiritual Instructions fathered upon this Saint, agreeable enough to the Style of his Rule. They contain some Exhortations to Piety, and a Spiritual Life, fit for Monks, the Titles whereof are as follows. 1. Of the Trinity. 2. Of the Mortification of Vices, and the Acquisi∣tion of Vertues. 3. Of the Contempt of the World, and the love of heavenly Things. 4. That we ought to work and labor in this Life, to rest in the next. 5. That this Life should not be called Vita but Via. 6. That this Life is like a Shadow. 7. Of the blindness of those who serve the Flesh and neglect the Spirit. 8. That we ought to tend to our Heavenly Country, the End of this present Life. 9. Of the last Judgment. 10. Of the means of fleeing from the dreadful Wrath of him who is to judge us. 11. Of the Love of God and of our Neighbour. 12. Of Remorse, and of the Vigilancy wherewith we ought to wait for the coming of the Final Judgment. 13. That we must have Recourse to Christ, the Fountain of Life. 14. Several Advices for the Spiri∣tual Life. The 15th. which was not in the Bobio Manuscripts, is of The Fervency wherewith we ought to serve God. There is mention made there of Grace, according to S. Austin's Prin∣ciples, but it does not seem to be of the same Style with the rest. The 16th. was not in the said Bobio Manuscript neither, but it hath more of S. Columbanus's Style. It is very short, and is entituled, What is that which is and which shall be? In it he compares this Life with that which is to come. The 17th. Instruction is A Discourse of Faustus Bishop of Ries, to some Monks.

After the 13th. Instruction, in the Bobio Manuscript, there is a small Tract of the Eight prin∣cipal Vices, which are, Gluttony, Fornication, Covetousness, Wrath, Sorrow, Idleness, Vain-glory and Pride, and sets down, in a few Words, some Remedies against these Vices.

Some produce also some Letters of S. Columbanus, taken out of another Manuscript of Bobio, of the Truth of which Letters there can be no doubt. The 1st. is directed to Boni∣face Bishop of Rome, the Third or Fourth of that Name. S. Columbanus says, in that Letter, he had already written to the Pope S. Gregory, concerning the Difference between his own Church and that of Rome, about the Day on which Easter ought to be celebrated, and intreats Boniface to let him keep to the Custom he had, of celebrating that Festival, as the Ancients of his Country did, tho' he now lived in France. He propounds the Example of S. Polycarp, and of Anicetus, to shew that Men may differ in their Practice about the keeping of Easter, without any Breach of Unity and Peace, and annexes the Canon of the first Council of Con∣stantinople; whereby it is order'd, That Christian People living among barbarous Nations, shall live after their Customs: Which is an Argument, that S. Columbanus was not unacquainted with Ecclesiastical History, and the Canons of the Church. The next Letter is to a Council of French Bishops, assembled upon his account. It is written with a great deal of Wisdom and Elegancy, is very Witty, Judicious and Learned. He thanks them, at first, for having met together about his Concerns, and intimates to them, That he could wish they would meet oftner, and that, according to the Canons, they would hold Councils once or twice in the Year, to put a Stop to the Divisions and Disorders of their Time. He prays to God, That their Meeting may be for the Church's good; and that they would not only treat of the Celebration of Easter, but moreover make all necessary Provisions to restore the Discipline to its former State. He does earnestly press their own Duty upon them, and gives them Lessons of Humility and Charitableness, and then, coming to the matter in hand, he sets forth the Difference between the French and the English Bishops, about the Time of the Celebration of Easter. He observes, That the Western Churches were not agreed upon the Day of that

Festival, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 m••ny always 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Day 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Moon to the Twentieth, so that when the •…•…, ••••ey 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Feast of the Resurrection on the very 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Day, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Celebration of it to the Sunday 〈◊〉〈◊〉: He 〈◊〉〈◊〉, That the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the W••stern Churches, in the Writing he se••ds 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Tracts directed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pope 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and in a Boo•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 But without engaging in that Dis•…•…, the only pray•…•… Bishops 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him 〈◊〉〈◊〉 obse••ve a ••ustom, of which he is not the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and which is practised 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Co••••try from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he come•• and intreats the•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they would 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 live in Peace and in Si••••nce in his Solitude, near the Bones of seventeen of his Brethren, as he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 lived thes•• twelve Years, that he may continue praying for them. He tells 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Th••t 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••••••er 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them to comfort poor old Men and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ••han to trouble and molest them. He adds, That he durst not go to the Council, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 should be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to engage in the Dispute, but that he cannot forbear declaring s••••c••rely 〈◊〉〈◊〉, That he gives more Credit to the Tradition of his Country, to the ancient Cycle of Fourscore and four Years, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Anatolius, to Eusebiu•• and S. Hierom, than to Victorius 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Testimony, a new Author, who hath written very obscurely: Nevertheless, he would not have them to think, that he says this our of a contentious Spirit, he desires only, that every one might keep his own Custom, and follow his own Tradition. Then he exhorts them to the Practice of Humility and Charity. He makes a Comparison of the Monks and Bishop••, and says, S. Hierom advises these to imitate the Apostles, and those to follow the Holy Fathers, because Clerks and Monks have very different Practices and Obligations; That every one is to follow his Calling, and perform his Duty. He prays to God, That through his free Grace he would cause his Commandments to be kept by all. In the end, he does beseech them to pray to God for him and his Fellows, as they pray for them, and not to look upon them as Strangers, seeing all Christians are Members of one Body.

It is not known what this Council is, it must have been held towards the Year 600. because it is Twelve Years after S. Columbanus's coming into France, a little before S. Gregory's Death: Some believe it to be the Council held at Challon, upon the River Soane, in the Year 603. in which Arigius Bishop of Lyons presided: But perhaps it might be some other Council: For this was assembled about the Business of Desiderius Bishop of Vienna. This Letter is written before the foregoing.

S. Columbanus's Letter has lately been attributed to S. Gregory, who is mention'd in the Two preceeding Letters; There he does very confidently set down the Authorities he depends upon, to shew that Easter should always be celebrated by the twentieth of the Moon in March, before the Equinox, and creats the Cycle of Victorius with a great deal of Contempt: And does als•• refute Pope Victor's Opinion, That Easter is not to be kept at the same Time with the Jews. He exhorts the Pope to alter his Opinion and Practice about that; and then asks him, Whether he should communicate with those who are ordain'd Bishops, contrary to the Constitutions and Canons, by Simony, or having committed some Crimes in the Time they were Deacons? In fine, he consults him what is to be done with Monks, who depart from their Monasteries, without their Abbot's Leave, renouncing their Vows. He lets him know, he would gladly have come to Rome to see him. He commends his Pastoral, and prays him to send him some of his Works, and chiefly those upon Ezekiel. He acquaints him, that he hath perused the Six Books of S. Hierom on that Prophet, but that that Father hath not explain'd half of it.

S. Columbanus's Fourth Letter is written to Pope Boniface IV. of that Name, upon the Motion of Agilulphus King of Lombardy: By this Letter it appears, That that Prince assisted the De∣fenders of the Three Chapters, and that he had persuaded S. Columbanus, that there was some cause to suspect the Church of Rome of Error; That the Pope himself was consenting to it, or at least permitted it; That Vigilius dyed an Heretick; and that the Fifth Council ought to be rejected. S. Columbanus entertaining these Opinions, writes a vehement Letter to Bo∣niface; wherein he exhorts him to watch over his Flock, and condemns Vigilius's want of Vigilancy. He saith, he died an Heretick, and wonders they should put his Name in the List of Catholick Bishops. He exhorts the Pope to clear both himself and his Church from the Suspicion of Heresy, by calling a Council, to make an exact Exposition of the Catholick Faith, and to condemn all those that swerved from it. He believes, that the Fifth Council approved Eutyches's Error, and confounds the Two Natures; and yet he says, at his coming into Italy, they wrote to him, That Communion with Rome ought to be shun'd, because they there held Nestorius's Heresy: Which shews, he was not rightly informed of the Fact he wrote of. It had been better for him to have only exhorted the Pope, as he does, to endea∣vour to suppress the Schism and Division in Italy, about the Business of the Three Chapters, by tolerating those that defended them.

'Tis said, that S. Columbanus had written some Letters to King Theodorick, but we have none of them. Jonas speaks also of a Letter directed to Clotharius; but it is lost, as well as his Book against the Arians, mention'd in the same Author, his great Treatise of Easter, Two Letters to S. Gregory, and his writing to Arigius upon the same Subject. They say, more-over, He had made a Commentary upon the Gospels, but it is not mention'd in ancient Au∣thors. They ascribe yet to him a little Treatise of Penances for Monks, Clerks and Laicks;

but it does not seem to me to be his. Father Flemingue, an Irish Franciscan, hath collected the Works of this Father, and printed them at Louvain, in the Year 1667. since which they have been printed in the last Edition of the Bibliotheca Patrum at Lyons, with the Works of Two other Irish Writers.

The First of which is a Tract of S. Aeleran, or Ereran, containing a Mystical and Moral Interpretation of the Names recited in the Genealogy of Christ, which are applyed to our Lord's Qualities or Precepts. This Aeleran, sirnamed the Wise, was Presbyter; it is said, he also wrote the Life of S. Patrick. There is another Ereran, an Irish Abbot, who wrote a Monastical Rule.

The Second Tract added to S. Columbanus's Works in this Edition, is a very large Peniten∣tial of one Cumianus or Cuminus, an Abbot, in which there are several remarkable Things, and amongst others, That there are twelve principal Means of obtaining Pardon of our Sins, grounded upon Testimonies of the Holy Scripture, viz. 1. Baptism, 2. Charity, 3. Alms-giving, 4. Tears, 5. Confession, 6. Mortification of the Flesh and Spirit, 7. Change of Man∣ners, 8. Intercessions of the Just, 9. Faith, 10. Converting of others, 11. Forgiving of Ene∣mies, and 12. Martyrdom. That e 1.19 Confession of Se∣cret Sins, and even of Thoughts and Desires, was in Use in that Time; that great Crimes were also subjected to long Penances, that lesser Faults were punished with many Days of Penance; that eating of strangled Beasts and of Blood, was as yet forbidden; that the Fast of Lent was commanded; that all kind of Pollutions were punish'd with Penances; that the f 1.20 Coelibacy of Su∣perior Clerks, and of profess'd Monks, was com∣manded; that it was forbidden to marry on Sunday; that it was wish'd, that married Persons would ab∣stain from the Use of Marriage three Days before Re∣ceiving the Communion; that Men were put to Pe∣nance for Bigamy and Usury also; yea, and even those that did not use Hospitality, nor give Alms; that Clerks that did not give their Superfluities to the Poor were Excommunicated; that whosoever did Com∣municate with an Heretick was Excommunicated; that those that had been ordained by Hereticks were re-ordain'd; that those were re-baptiz'd that had been baptiz'd by such Hereticks as had erroneous Opinions about the Trinity; that they put those to Penance, that let the Sacramental Bread or the Cup fall to the Ground, or were guilty of any other Irreverence, at the Receiving of the Sacrament, out of Negligence or by Accident; that among the Greeks they received the Communion every Sunday, and that those that did not Receive for Three Sundays together were excommu∣nicated; but that among the Latins every one had liberty to communicate or not to communicate; that the * 1.21 Sacrifice of theMass was offer'd for the Dead, and that they did even fast for them; that Women might receive the Sacrament with a black Veil on; that Bishops were permitted to give Confirmation in a Cam∣pagne; that a Priest might in one Day say two Masses at the same Altar; that, in Case of Necessity, Con∣fession may be made to God; that the most usual Penances were Fasting, Separation from the Church, entrance into Religious Orders.

CUMIANUS or CUMINUS.

THERE are 〈◊〉〈◊〉 CUMINUS's in Ireland. This probably is he, of whom there is still ••••tant a Letter to Segenius, Abbot of Hi, publish'd by * 1.22 Bishop Usher, in his * 1.23 Collection of Letters of Irish Men, wherein he would per∣suade the Irish, That they ought to leave their Custom of keeping Easter, and conform to that of the Roman Church. The Author of the Penitential is of the same Opinion; and therefore may be believed to be the same Man, but it is not known who nor whence he was. Some believe 'tis Cuminus, Abbot of Hi; but it is not likely, seeing the Letter is written to Segenius, who was Abbot of Hi, many Years before this Cuminus took Possession of it. I should rather think 'tis Cuminus, surnam'd Fada, that is, the long, Son to King Fiachna, who also is supposed to be Author of an Hymn, which begins with these Words; Celebra Juda festa Christi gaudia. He was born, if one may believe the Annals of that Country, in the Year 592. and died 662. the Letter now mention'd was written about 634.

HESYCHIUS.

AUthors are much divided about this Author's Age and Profession, whose chief Work is a Commentary upon Leviticus. Cardinal Perron ascribed it to Hesychius, Bishop of * 1.24 Salone, * 1.25 who lived under the Empire of Honorius, in the Time of Pope Zosimus, and of S. Austin, because there is a Letter of that Pope directed to this Hesychius Bishop of Salone, and a Letter of that Bishop to S. Austin. Trithemius and Sixtus Senensis did believe, that this we now speak of, was a Disciple of S. Gregory Nazianzen. Bellarmin, Possevin and Miraeus ascribe the Works, bearing Hesychius's Name, to Hesychius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, to whom the Fourth Letter of the First Book of S. Gregory's Letters is directed. The most common Opi∣nion is, That this Hesychius was a Priest only, and of Jerusalem (but some place him in the Fifth, others in the Seventh Century, which is plain) for, 1. The Author discovers himself to be so, in the Preface and Book which he wrote at Jerusalem a 1.26. And, 2. in an old Manu∣script of the King's Library, it is observed in the Title, That this Hesychius was of Jeru∣salem; and the Title of the Letter, which is instead of a Preface, shews he was but a Priest. It is worded thus; To the Deacon Eutychianus, Isychius, a Sinner, Servant of Jesus Christ and Presbyter: Notwithstanding which, he might possibly have been afterward raised to the dignity of Patriarch of Jerusalem; but there are no other Proofs of it, but the Authority of some Manuscripts, and some new Authors, in the Title of which he is called by the Name of Bishop; which is not very convincing: And Photius, who made some Extracts of this Author's Sermons, calls him no other than Presbyter. As for the Time in which he liv'd, there's no question but he is much later than the Bishop of Salone, seeing he writes against the Eutychians and Nestorians: Nay, he seems to have lived after S. Gregory, because he mak∣eth use of S. Hierom's Translation; but he was before the Ninth Century, because his Com∣mentary is quoted by Amalarius, l. 14. of Divine Offices, c. 36. and by Rabanus, in his Pre∣face upon Leviticus, as well as by Freculphus and Strabo; yea, and before the Eighth, if he be the same which Photius quoteth, as very likely he is: Which makes me think, he lived in the End of the Sixth or in the Beginning of the Seventh Century: It is true, there was one Hesychius, Priest of Jerusalem, in the Fifth Century, in the Time of S. Cyril, mentioned in Euthymius's Life, and in Theophanes's Chronicle; but this does not seem to be so ancient, for in S. Cyril's Time S. Hierom's Translation was not used in the Church. I know, it may be answer'd, that that Quotation is none of that Author's, but the Translator's, because we have not the Greek Original of that Work: But I am persuaded, it was written in Latin by its Author, who does carefully mark the Differences between the Vulgar Edition and that of the Septuagint, and likewise of the Translations of Aquila and Theodotion, and sometimes quotes the Greek Terms of those Translations, which he renders into Latin. This Commentary is clear and plain, he gives the literal Sence, adding now and then to that Explication, some short Allegorical or Moral Reflections. It is divided into Seven Books. It hath often been observ'd, That this Author speaks of a Practice of the Church of his Time: That they burnt the

remainder of the Oblation after the Celebration of the Mysteries, and the Communion of the Faithful.

In the Bibliotheca Patrum there are Two Homilies in Greek and Latin, upon the Virgin, bearing the Name of Hesychius, Presbyter of Jerusalem.

Combefis attributes, moreover, to this Author, the second Sermon of S. Gregory of Nyssa, upon Christ's Resurrection; and he proves his Opinion, 1. By the Authority of a Manuscript of the King's Library, where this Sermon is found under Hesychius's Name, Priest of Jerusalem. 2. Because it seems to be of a meaner, more close and dogmatical Style than that of Gregory of Nyssa. Lastly, because it sets down an Opinion directly opposite to that which is brought in the first Sermon on the same subject, bearing also the Name of S. Gregory of Nyssa; for the Author of this supposes, That Christ rose from the Dead on Saturday in the Evening, and gives that Sence to S. Matthew's Words, Vespere autem Sabbathi: Whereas the Author of the second Sermon supposes, That he rose on Sunday Morning, and shews these Words (Vespere autem, Sabbathi, or Sabbathorum) are to be understood thus, When the Week was past. But if this Ho∣mily be Hesychius's, it is not his of whom we speak, but his who lived in the Beginning of the Fifth Century. To the End of that Homily Combefis hath added the Fragment of a Place of Hesychius's Harmony of the Gospels, touching the Hour of Christ's Death. Cotelerius hath made an Abridgment of it in the beginning of his Third Volume Of the Monuments of the Greek Church. This Work contains the solutions of several Difficulties about the seeming Con∣tradictions of the Evangelists.

Hoeschelius hath published, with Adrian's Introduction, the Titles of the Chapters of the Twelve lesser Prophets, and of Isaiah, bearing the Name of Hesychius also. This Work might also be his, who lived in the Fifth Century.

The Treatise of Temperance and Vertue, dedicated to Theodulus, which contains Two hundred Maxims of the Spiritual Life, is the same Hesychius's, for in the Thirty first Maxim of the first hundred, it is observed, That the Author dwelt in a Monastery, and lived under the Conduct of a Superior.

It is probable likewise that Hesychius's Church-History, a Fragment whereof is quoted about Theodorus Mopsuestenus, in the Fifth Council, Collection V. p. 470. and in Justinian's Edict, belongs to the Monk of the Fifth Century.

Lastly, we may attribute to this the Two Sermons, of which Photius recites some Frag∣ments in the 269th. and 275th. Volumes of his Bibliotheca: The one is taken out of a Ser∣mon upon S. Andrew, and the other out of a Sermon upon S. James, the Lord's Brother: I say the first is taken out of a Sermon upon S. Andrew, tho' in Photius's Title there is the Name of S. Thomas, because the Extract contains really a Commendation of S. Andrew, and there is now extant a Latin Translation of that whole Discourse on S. Andrew, in which Photius's Ex∣tracts are found. He says, in that Sermon, That S. Andrew is the first of the Apostles, the first Pillar of the Church, even before S. Peter, the Foundation of the Foundation it self. In the Sermon upon S. James, he says also almost the same Things of that Apostle, calling him, The Prince of Bishops, the Head or Chief of the Apostles, the Top of the Heads them∣selves, the most shining Lamp, the brightest Star. Thus they always extol the Saint, of whom they speak, above the others. Cotelerius tells us, in his Notes, He had collected many other Manuscript Pieces of this Hesychius, which he would have publish'd, if he could have hoped for a Life long enough.

There was another Hesychius, Presbyter of Constantinople, mention'd also by Photius in the 51st. Volume of his Bibliotheca.

I have read, says he, Four Discourses of Hesychius's, Pres∣byter of Constantinople, upon the Brazen Serpent: The Style of them is full of Ostentation, and calculated to stir up the Passions. He brings in the People of Israel spèaking to Moses, and that Prophet making Speeches to the People. He relates also some Discourses of God to the People, and to Moses, and the Answers of Moses and the People, in the Form of Prayers or Excuses. These Speeches take up the greatest part of his Work, which maketh up a large Volume.

That Author was Catholick, as far as one can judge by his Work.

We have none of those Discourses now, nor any Tract of that Author, but the loss of these Declamations is not very considerable.

EUSEBIUS, Bishop of Thessalonica.

THis Bishop having sent to S. Gregory, his Reader Theodorus, with some Writings, he gave * 1.27 them to a Monk, named Andrew, whom he had formerly been acquainted with, who was shut up in a Monastery of Rome: This Monk, who was of the * 1.28 Sect of those who believed Christ's Flesh was always incorruptible falsified them so that it seemed as if this Bishop had advanced some heretical Propositions: But S. Gregory knowing the Genius of that Monk, because he had made some Greek Sermons under his Name, discover'd that Fraud, and wrote about it to Eusebius of Thessalonica, as it appears by the 69th Letter of the Ninth Book of that Pope's Letters. Photius tells us, That same Monk had written a Letter to Eusebius, and pray'd him, for God's sake, to read it; and that Eusebius having read it, wrote him an Answer, in which he shews him at first, That he knew not how to write, and that he conti∣nually committed many Faults; wherein he was so much the more to blame because he for∣sook his Profession, and disturbed the Privacy which he had embraced, to carry on a Business which he was not at all fit for: He then attacks his Error, and shews first, against him, That the Word Corruption is not only applied to Sin, but the Holy Fathers used it to signify the Dissolution of Bodies. 2. He reproved him, for having maintained, That Christ's Body became incorruptible at the Moment of its Union to the God-head, an Opinion which was indeed Julian's (Bishop of Halicarnassus, turn'd out of his See by Justinian, for rejecting the Council of Chalcedon) tho' Andrew pretended to write in that Letter against the Errors of Severus and Julian. The 3d. Error he charged that Monk with, was of having said, That Adam's Body, before his Fall, was not created mortal and corruptible, whenas he should have said, That Man in his Nature was mortal and subject to Pain, but should by Grace have been preserved from Death and Sickness, had he not fallen. The 4th. Proposition he found Fault with, in Andrew's Letter, was, That he had written, That the World was incorruptible: He did also confute some more of Andrew's Propositions in that Writing, and exhorted him to a retractation. But this Monk, instead of following that Advice, made presently another Book, to defend his Errors, against which Eusebius wrote ten Books; wherein he shew'd, That Andrew, out of an intolerable Boldness, had gone about to make a new Exposition of Faith, whereas he should have kept to those made by the Councils; and that he had adulte∣rated and mis-quoted many Passages of the Fathers. Then he confuted the four principal Errors, he had condemned in his first Writing. He shewed the different Sences the Word Corruption is capable of, and how many ways it hath been taken. He cited several Places of the Fathers, for the confuting of those Errors, and laid open the Falsifications of the Places quoted by Andrew. He shewed, That Christ was subject to natural, tho' not to vicious Passions, during his abode on the Earth, and that after his Resurrection he is become immor∣tal and impassible. He did not matter the Name of Phthartolatre, that is, worshipper of Corru∣ption, which Andrew gave to the Catholicks, and omitted nothing that was necessary to main∣tain the Doctrine of the Church, and to render that of his Adversary ridiculous. His Style was plain and clear, pure enough, and did not want Judgment. There is nothing of him now extant. This is gathered out of the 162d. Volume of Photius's Bibliotheca.

BONIFACE IV.

BONIFACE IV. held the Roman See from 607. to 614. Bede says, That in that Pope's Time, Mellitus Bishop of London came to Rome, in the Eighth Year of the Em∣peror * 1.29 Phocas, and that he was present at a Council, which this Pope held at Rome, in the Year 610. in February; in which they made some Constitutions for the Church of England. Hol∣stenius hath published a pretended Decree of this Council, wherein it declares, That Monks may be Bishops, and perform the Sacerdotal Functions; and a Letter of this Pope to * 1.30 Athel∣bert a King of England, in which he declares all those excommunicated that shall hinder the Execution of the Decree now mention'd, even the King's, Athelbert's, Successors. These two Monuments seem very suspicious to me. The Style of them is altogether barbarous, and they are fill'd with impertinent and frivolous Reasons: For instance, he says, It is evident that the State and profession of Monks maketh them fit to be Ministers of the Word of God, see∣ing they are call'd Angels, and Angels are Ministers; Which Reasoning is frivolous: but the reason he gives why they are call'd Angels, is yet more ridiculous. Monks, saith he, are cover'd▪ like Cherubims, with six Wings, the Cowle that covers their Head, maketh two, the Tunick's Arms make other two, and we may confidently say, the two extreams of the Habit, which covers the Body, are two Wings more. Thus you have the Cherubim's six Wings: This is some Monk's Fancy, rather than the Work of a Council of Bishops, or of a Patriarch.

The Letter of Pope Deusdedit, Boniface the IV's. Successor, directed to Gordian Bishop of Sevil, is a Monument evidently false. Isidore was Bishop of Sevil from the Year 600. to the Year 636. and Deusdedit held the Holy See in that interval. Thus the very Title does evince the Falsity of that Letter, it being evident that under Deusdedit's Pontificate, there was no Gordian Bishop of Sevil. The Author of that Letter declares, That according to the Decrees of the Holy See, married Persons, which accidentally stood together Sureties for their Chil∣dren at the Font, ought to be put asunder, and may be married again; which is a gross Error, authorized by no ancient Constitution. In fine, the Style of this Letter is the same with the Pope's other Letters, forg'd by Isidore.

JOHN PHILOPONUS.

JOHN, sirnam'd Philoponus, that is, Laborious, a Grammarian of Alexandria, of the Sect of the Tritheites, flourish'd in the beginning of the Seventh Century, and composed seve∣ral * 1.31 Books.

The first is a writing against Jamblichus the Philosopher's Treatise of Idols. That Philoso∣pher had undertaken in that Treatise, to shew, That Idols had something heavenly in them, and that the Deity dwelt there; which he prov'd both from the wonderful Fabrick of Images, and the incredible things ascribed to them. Philoponus had refuted the two Parts of that Work with a great deal of Elegancy and Strength. Photius speaks of that work in the 216th. Volume of his Bibliotheca.

He wrote, moreover a Treatise of the six Days Work against Theodorus Mopsuestenus, dedi∣cated to Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople; wherein he endeavours to demonstrate, That Moses hath related the History of the Creation of the World more plainly and conformably to the Phaenomena's of Nature than any thing Plato said of it. Photius mentions that Treatise in the 43d. Volume of his Bibliotheca, and there is an Extract of it found in the 240th. Volume. It is divided into four Books, publish'd by Corderius, and printed at Viema, in the Year 1630. in Quarto, together with a Tract of the same Author about Easter, whereof there is no men∣tion made in Photius, who speaks of three Works more of the same Author. The first is a Treatise of the Resurrection, wherein he rejected the Resurrection of the Body. The second is a Writing against the * 1.32 Fourth Council, divided into four Parts; in which he maintains, That the Bishops of that Assembly approv'd Nestorius's Doctrine. And another Treatise against the Catechetical Discourse of Joannes Scholasticus, Bishop of Constantinople, concerning the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity, preach'd under the Empire of Justin junior. He hath also written several other Philosophical Treatises † upon Aristotle's Books, printed in several Places, and a Treatise against Proclus's Opinion of the Eternity of the World.

This Author was as pure, pleasing and elegant in his Style, as impious in his Doctrine, and weak in his Reasonings. One may see by his Treatise of Easter, that in his Time the Greeks used Leaven'd Bread in the Eucharist.

THEODOSIUS, CONON, EUGENIUS, THEMISTIUS and THEODORUS.

PHiloponus's Treatise of the Resurrection was confuted by Theodosius the Monk, by Conon, Eugenius and Themistius. These three last made a Book, entituled, An Invective, in which * 1.33 they treated him as a Man unworthy the Name of a Christian, tho' they agreed with him in not receiving the Council of Chalcedon. This Themistius seems to be that Heretick whose Frag∣ments are found quoted in the sixth Council, who was of the Sect of the Agnoetae, and had written an Apology for S. Theophobius; against which, another Monk, named Theodorus, of the Sect of * 1.34 those, who said the Deity had suffer'd, writ a Book; in which he did refute the four Arguments urg'd by Themistius, to prove that Christ was subject to Ignorance. Themistius wrote an Answer to that Work, to which Theodorus opposed three other Books. Photius saith, They did both of them write indifferent, clear and strong. See the 23d. 24th. and 108th. Vo∣lumes of his Bibliotheca, for we have not now these Works.

NICIAS.

HEre is another Adversary of Philoponus; he was call'd Nicias, and was a Monk: He com∣posed a Book against the Seven Articles of Philoponus, mention'd in his Book, entituled, * 1.35 The Arbiter, or, the Judge. His Style was plain and concise, his Answers satisfactory, and all to the purpose. He had also made a Treatise against Severus, and two Books against the Pa∣gans. See Photius in the 50th. Volume of his Bibliotheca.

ANTIOCHUS.

ANTIOCHUS, a Monk of the Monastery of S. Sabas in Palaestina, liv'd in the begin∣ning of the Seventh Century, when Jerusalem was taken by Chosroes King of Persia, and * 1.36 Palaestine pillaged by the Saracens. He hath made a Book, entitul'd, A Pandect of the Holy Scripture, because it is made up of 190 Moral Discourses; containing Precepts and Maxims upon the principal Duties of a Christian, grounded upon Places of the Holy Scri∣pture. In the 130th. he maketh the Catalogue of Heresies related by S. Epiphanius, to which he adds the Names of the Authors of Heresies, who appeared since. In the End there is a long Prayer, entituled, Exomologesis, to beg of God that he would turn away his Wrath from his People. The Preface speaks of the taking of Jerusalem, and with what Cruelties the Sara∣cens used the Monks of Palaestina. This Treatise is in Greek and Latin, in the first Addition to the Bibliotheca Patrum, and in Latin alone, in the last Bibliotheca, in which they have put the 81st. Discourse, a second Time, under another Title.

JOHN, Bishop of Thessalonica.

THIS Bishop, who is quoted in the 7th. Council, hath left us an Homily upon those Women that carried the Perfumes to imbalm Christ's Corpse. In that Homily he mak∣eth * 1.37 divers Remarks, to set forth the Circumstances of our Lord's Resurrection: These are some of them. He saith, those Women came the night between the Saturday and Sunday to Christ's Tomb; That Mary, the Mother of James, was the Mother of Christ, so called, be∣cause she was Mother-in-Law to James, the Lord's Brother, that is, Joseph's Son by a former Wife; That she that accompanied her, was Mary Magdalen; That they found Christ risen; That the hour of his Resurrection is uncertain; That Mary Magdalen went a second time to Christ's Tomb, with other Women, very early; That she returned thither twice more; That the four Evangelists speak of four different Journies of the Women to the Tomb; That there are five or six Maries; Mary Magdalen, out of whom Christ had cast seven Devils; Mary, the Mother of James, which is the Virgin-Mother of God, Mother-in-Law to James the Greater; Mary, the Mother of James the Lesser, and of Joses; Mary, the Wife of Cleo∣phas, the Virgin's Sister; and Mary, Martha's and Lazarus's Sister. The distinction of these Maries may have some ground; but the four Journies to Christ's Tomb, are a conjecture without probability. This Homily had already been published in Greek by Sir H. Savil, a∣mong the supposititious Homilies of S. Chrysostom; and Combesis hath published it with a Tran∣slation out of a Manuscript, in which it is attributed to John, Bishop of Thessalonica. He had found out one more, upon the Virgin's Assumption, little differing from the Writing at∣tributed to Melito, but he did not judge it worth publishing. In the 7th. Council, Act. 4. are found some Fragments of John of Thessalonica's Dialogues, the first whereof was between a Gentile and a Catholick, and the second between a Jew and a Christian. In the 1st. he proves against the Gentile, That Angels and Souls may be painted, as being corporeal; and in the 2d. he shews, That the b 1.38 Pictures of Christ and of the Martyrs, which were in use among Christians, are not Idols.

GREGORY of Antioch.

GREGORY Bishop of Antioch, who sat in that See from the year 572. to the year 608. made a Discourse upon the same Subject; but it is less Dogmatical, and contains nothing * 1.39 but Prosopopoeia's of Joseph to Pilate, and of Pilate to the Jews; some Reflections of Death speaking to her self, and Complaints of the Women upon Christ's death; some Discourses of the Angel with the Jews and Women, and of Jesus Christ with those Women.

JOHN, ARAUSIUS, HELLADIUS, JUSTUS, NONNITUS and CONAN∣TIUS, Bishops of Spain.

JOHN, an Abbot, and afterwards Bishop of Saragosa, Braulio's Brother, flourished towards the year 620. Ildephonsus assures us, That he was well read in the Holy Scripture, and that * 1.40 he laboured to instruct by his Discourses more than by his Writings; That nevertheless he had elegantly written some Prayers to be sung in Divine Service, and also a Table to find out Easter-day every year. We have nothing now of this Author.

The same Ildephonsus ranks among Ecclesiastical Authors, Arausius Bishop of Toledo, and his Successor Helladius; but seeing he confesseth, they have writ nothing, it was needless to encrease the number of Authors with them. This last, had for his Disciple and Successor, one named Justus, a witty and a worthy Man, who had written a Letter to Richilan, Abbot of the Monastery of Agali, in which he shewed him, That he ought not to leave his Flock. These three Bishops governed the Church of Toledo from the year 606, to 634, or 635. This last signed the Council of Toledo, held under Sisenand in the year 633. and was but 3 years Bishop.

S. Ildephonsus puts also in the rank of Ecclesiastical Authors Nonnitus, Bishop of Gironde, who lived in the same time, but he speaks of none of his Works.

He speaks, lastly, of Conantius, Bishop of Palenzo, as of a Man as Prudent and Grave, as Eloquent and Learned; and he saith, he applied himself to regulate the Order of Divine Service; That he had made Hymns to new Tunes, and a Book of Prayers taken out of the Psalms. We have not now those Works.

BONIFACE V.

BEDE mentions three Letters of this Pope about the Conversion of the English. The 1st. is directed to Justus, who from Bishop of Rochester became Archbishop of Canterbury, * 1.41 wherein he grants him the Pall, and congratulates him for King Adelvad's Conversion. The 2d. is directed to * 1.42 Edwin an English King, wherein he exhorts him to leave Idolatry, to worship the true God, and embrace Christ's Religion. The 3d. is to Queen † 1.43 Edelburgh, whom he congratulateth upon her Conversion, and exhorts her to endeavour that of the King her Husband.

MODESTUS, Bishop of Jerusalem.

WE have no other Monument of this Author, who flourished towards the year 620. but an Extract of one of his Sermons mention'd by Photius in the 275th. Volume of his Bibli∣otheca. * 1.44 The first is taken out of a Sermon upon the Women of the Gospel, which carried Balm to anoint Christ. He tells us there, That Mary Magdalen, out of whom Christ cast 7 Devils, was a Virgin, and that she suffered Martyrdom at Ephesus, whither she went to S. John the Evangelist, after the Virgin's death. Which shews how far they were then from the Opinion which hath obtained since, That Mary Magdalen is the same with the Woman that was a Sinner, [Luk. 7. 37.] The 2d. Sermon of Modestus, mentioned in Photius, was a Sermon upon the death of the Virgin the Mother of God, which he calls, A Dormitory Ser∣mon, after the manner of the Ancients. Photius speaks of no Extract of it; he only taketh notice, 'tis a long Discourse, containing nothing necessary, and nothing like the former. The 3d. Sermon is upon the Festival of the meeting [of Christ and Simeon] or the presentation of Jesus Christ in the Temple. Photius sets down an Extract of it, in which, the Vertues of Anna, and the Virgin's Purification, are discoursed of Figuratively and Rhetorically.

GEORGE of Alexandria.

IT is thought, That George, the Author of S. Chrysostom's Life, was the Bishop of Alexan∣dria, who succeeded S. John the Alms-giver in the year 620, and held that See till 630. * 1.45 This Life is a great deal larger than that of Palladius, but less faithful, and full of many Un∣truths. His Stile, in the judgment of the learned Photius, is very plain, and somewhat flat. He offends against the Laws of Grammar, and is not exact in the construing of Words. It is needless to make the Extract of this Life, because what it contains more than is in Palladius, and the other ancient Historians, is either false or doubtful. He hath often misrepresented the Matters of Fact, which he relates upon trust from other Authors. He alledges many of them con∣trary to the Testimonies of S. Chrysostom, and the Authors of his time. He hath counter∣feited many Letters, and falsly attributed them to the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius, and Pope Innocent. He confidently asserts, contrary to the truth of History, That this Pope ex∣communicated the Emperor Honorius and Empress Eudoxia. He hath reported an infinite number of things evidently false. Photius, who made a long Extract of this Life, confesses himself, That he hath said many things contrary to the Truth of History; but he thinks, the Reader may pick out that which is true and useful, and pass by the rest. Methinks it were better and fitter to fetch things out of the Originals, than to mispend ones time to read them in those ill Copiers and Plagiaries. This Work was published in Greek by Sir H. Savil. in the last Volume of S. Chrysostom's Works, printed at Eaton; together with the Life of the same Father by other later Authors, who copied out this Man's Fictions, and added others to them, after the manner of the modern Greeks.

HONORIUS.

POpe HONORIUS, whose Name became so famous by reason of his Condemnation in the 6th Council, was raised to the Pontificate the 13th. of May, 626. and died * 1.46 October 11th. 638. Besides the two Letters he hath written to Sergius upon the Question of the two Wills in Christ, which will be spoken of in the Acts of the 5th. Council, where they are inserted, we have some others upon particular Matters. The 1st. is directed to the Exarch Isaeius, to whom he complains, That certain Bishops advised a Lord to forsake Adaluade, the lawful King of the Lombards, to side with the Tyrant Arioualde; and he desires him after having restored Adaluade, to send those Bishops to Rome to him, that he may punish them for their Disloyalty. We learn of Paul, the Deacon, That Adaluade was turned out by the Lom∣bards, because he had lost his Senses, and that Arioualde was put in his room.

The Second Letter of Honorius is directed to the Bishops of the Provinces of Venice and Istria. He recommends to them Primogenius whom he had Consecrated to be Arch-Bishop of Grado, and prays them to admit him into the place of him who had been deprived of that Church.

The Three next Letters are concerning the Question of the Two Wills in Christ.

The Fifth and Sixth are taken out of Beda; Therein he congratulates Edwin King of Northumberland for his Conversion, he exhorts him to perseverance in the Faith and Piety; he recommends S. Gregory's Works to him for his reading, and tells him, He sends Two Palls to both the Metropolitans of his Kingdom.

The Sixth ought to be directed to those Two Metropolitans, Named Honorius and Pauli∣nus, the one Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, the other of York. He exhorts them to discharge the Duties of their Ministry worthily, and grants to them, That when either of the Bishops of those Two Sees shall happen to Die, the Surviver may Ordain another in his room.

Honorius's Two last Letters are taken out of the Collection of Canons of Cardinal Deusde∣dit. In the First directed to the Bishops of Epirus, he tells them, That he sends them the Pall for Hypatius, whom they had ordained Bishop of Nicopolis; but because he had been suspected of having had a hand in his Predecessor Sotericus's Death, his Will is, that when the time of Peace shall give him leave, he should come to Rome to clear himself by i 1.47 Oath before S. Peter's Tomb, from having been any ways accessa∣ry to it; and he says, That. Sotericus had thus clear∣ed himself from some Suspicions against him. The Second is directed to Sergius Subdeacon, about a busi∣ness concerning the Bishop of Cagliari. That Bishop was at variance with certain of his Clerks; the Parties had been cited to Rome; the Bishop had appeared there, and his Clerks being not come thi∣ther, the Pope had sent an Advocate from Rome to bring them; but the Governour of Sardi∣nia detained them in Africk, to keep them out of the Pope's Jurisdiction, which obliged him to intreat Sergius to sue to the Praefectus Praetorio to do him Justice, by ordering that Gover∣nour to send those Clerks to Rome. He transmitted to him at the same time a Copy of Va∣lentinian and Theodosius's Law, to support his pretension.

SOPHRONIUS.

SOPHRONIUS of Damascus, Elected Patriarch of Jerusalem in the Year 629, was one of the great opposers of the * 1.48 Monothelites; when he was but a Monk he opposed that * 1.49 Errour springing up at Alexandria, and did his endeavours to hinder Cyrus from entertaining it. He was the first Patriarch that condemned it, and before he Died, he sent a Bishop to Rome to demand the solemn condemnation of it. Photius in the 231st Volume of his Biblio∣theca says, He had perused a Synodal Letter of that Patriarch, directed to Honorius then Go∣verning the Church of Rome, in which he did exactly explain and defend the Doctrine of the Church; That he observed there, that Magnus had been Excommunicated, together with Apollinarius, and that Theodoret had not been Banished out of the Church, tho' he did not agree with St. Cyril; That he distinguished there Two Origen's, the one Elder, the other Sirnamed Adamantius, altho' they be really the same; That he mention'd one James of Syria Author of the Sect of the Acephali; That he prayed Honorius, that, in case he had forgotten in his Letter something which he should have said, he would supply it, and amend what he should think amiss in it; That he cited the Testimonies of several Fathers, whereof Photius

maketh the Catalogue, to confute those Men's Opinions, who pretended, there was but one Operation in Christ. This is the sum of that Letter, as it is reported by Photius.

This Patriarch of Jerusalem wrote also another Synodal Letter on the same Subject, di∣rected to Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople, mentioned in the 11th Act of the 6th Council. It contains a long profession of Faith, in which, after a large dissertation upon the Mystery of the Incarnation, and having encountered the Heresies and Errours opposite to the Faith of the Church he 〈◊〉〈◊〉, That the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Na••ures, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Jesus Christ have each their distinct Opera∣tion. He names and condemns 〈◊〉〈◊〉 inf•…•…e Number of Hereticks. He asserts, The Souls to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 when our Bodies are 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and that we shall rise with the very same Bodies we have. He attributes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 contrary Opinion to 〈◊〉〈◊〉, against whom he proves the Eternity of Pains.

Besides these Two Dogmatical Monuments, we have Four Sermons Fathered upon Sophroni∣us, the First is o•• our Saviour's Birth, wherein the Cruelties of the Saracens, who had invaded the Town of Bethlehem, are mentioned. The Second is a Panegyrick of the Angels, full of Praises and Prayers, as also the other Two k 1.50 Ser∣mons of the Praises of the Cross. Photius found out the true Stile of that Author, when he observed, that he uses extraordinary Terms, and goes skipping along. By this Character it is plain enough, that it is another Sophronius, spoken of by the same Photius in the 5th Volume of his Bibliotheca, in these words,

I have read a Book of Sophronius's for S. Basil, against Eu∣nomius; he is more Learned and short than Theo∣dorus; he does not keep close to all that Eunomi∣us hath said, but undertakes to oppose and confute the principal points of Eunomius's Heresie, his Cha∣racter is to be Peremptory and Decisive, his Stile is Free and Plain, yet not Tedious, altho' he be full of Logical Arguments.

There is a bad piece, Intituled, S. Peter's and S. Paul's Journeys, tho' S. Peter's only be mentioned, attributed to Sophronius of Jerusalem, but 'tis a ridiculous Forgery, not worth mentioning.

We may more justly attribute to Sophronius of Jerusalem, S. Mary the Aegyptian's Life, Quoted in the 7th Council, Act 4. by S. John Damas∣cene, in his l 1.51 Book of Images, and by Nicephorus Calist. l. 7. c. 3. In the 7th Council are cited Two fragments of a Discouse of Sophronius's upon S. Cyrus, and S. John, for the Images of Saints. A Book like∣wise called the Spiritual Meadow, [Limonarium, or Pra∣tum Spirituale,] is attributed to him. He Died in 636.

JOANNES MOSCHUS.

THE Author of The Spiritual Meadow, is called Joannes Moschus * 1.52 Presbyter and Monk, * 1.53 who having run through the Monasteries of the East, came to Rome with his Scholar So∣phronius, believed to be he, we have now spoken of, tho' without any certain proof. He

gathered into that Book what he had learned of the Life, Actions, Sentences, and Miracles of the Monks of divers Countries. There he relates many strange Stories and Miracles that de∣serve little Credit. We shall not stand to relate them, but shall only remark what may be useful to clear the Church-Discipline. He observes in the Third Chapter, There was a Pres∣byter who did Baptize, and Anoint the Baptized with the Holy Chrism; but that he would have left that Function, because that when he Baptized Women, he felt some Motions trou∣blesome to him. In the 25th he says, That a Friar having pronounced the Words of Conse∣cration upon some Loaves he had brought to Offer upon the Altar, when the Priest offered them, he did not see the Holy Ghost coming down, as it used to do, and that he was warn∣ed by an Angel, that those Loaves had been Consecrated before, because that Friar had pro∣nounced in the way the Words of Consecration, and that this Priest forbad them afterwards to suffer any other to learn them, but such as were to offer the Holy Sacrifice, and that no Body should pronounce them, but in the time of the Consecration. In the 26th he reports, That a Monk, to prove there was no Salvation to be had out of the Church, had shewed to one of his Brethren engaged in Nostorius's Error, Hereticks in a place full of Fire and Filth. In the 27th he says, A Priest would not say Mass, unless he saw the Holy Ghost descending upon the Altar, tho' the Hour of the Celebration of it ought always to be the same. In the 29th he relates, That a Stylite Monk of the Communion of the Catholicks, sent to another Stylite of the Sect of the Severians, for a share of his Communion Bread, and that having thrown it into boiling Water, it was presently dissolved, but that having afterwards thrown a particle of the Eucharist of the Catholicks into it, the Water cooled, and the Eucharist re∣mained intire, without moistening it. In the 30th he relates another m 1.54 * 1.55 Miracle of the Eucharist, That a Severian having forced his Wife, a Catholick, ••to throw the Communion Bread away, he did see it shining in the Mire, and that Two Days after he had seen an Aethiopian, saying to him, We are both Con∣demned to the same Torment. In the 44th he says, That a Friar who had been negligent during his Life, was after his Death seen by an Old Man in a great Fire up to the Neck, and telling the Old Man, he was beholden to his Prayers for the favour he enjoy∣ed, of not having his Head also in the Fire. In the 45th he says, A Recluse promised the Devil, he would n 1.56 Adore the Virgin's Image no more, to be delivered from his Temptation, and that he was re∣proved by his Elder for doing so. In the 47th he re∣lates, That the Virgin having appeared Twice to a Jester, uttering Impious Speeches against her, and ha∣ving warned him to do so no more, but to no pur∣pose, she appeared to him the Third time, and that having Signed his Hands and Feet with the Sign of the Cross, he found himself, when he awoke without Hands and Feet. In the 79th he observeth, It was the Custom in Constantinople, to keep the Eucharist they received on Holy Thursday, to the Holy Thursday of the next Year; and that a Catholick being Ser∣vant to a Severian, having left with his Master the Key of his Chest where he had laid up the Eucharist in a Linen-Cloth, the Master having designed to burn it, because his Servant did not come back, found that the particles of the Eucharist had brought forth Ears of Corn. He relates in the 176th Chapter,

That a young Jew finding himself in great extremity in a Desart without Water, and having called for Baptism on those that accompanied him, one of them Baptized him, by throwing Sand on his Head Three times, and saying the usual Words, Such an one is Baptized in the Name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, that presently after that Jew found himself better; that afterwards it was debated, whether that Baptism was good and valid, and that at last he was sent to Jordan to be Baptized there, and he that Baptized him was ordained Deacon. In the 196th he relates, That some Children of the Province of Apamea, would needs represent the Celebration of the Holy Mysteries, and that having chosen one of themselves to perform the Office of a Priest, and two others of Deacons, they set some Bread upon a Stone, and that he that acted the Priest did pronounce the Words of Oblation, which he had gotten by Heart, because it was the Custom of his Church, that Children should re∣ceive the Communion next after the Clerks, and being for that pretry near the Altar, they over-heard the Words of the Holy Sacrifice, which the Priests in some places used to utter aloud, that having thus performed all the Ceremonies before they brake the Bread to give the Communion, Fire came down from Heaven which consumed the Oblation, and the whole Stone whereon it was laid; That the Bishop of the place hearing of it, built a Monastery in that place, and made all those Children Monks. To this Example he adds that reported by Ruffinus, of the Baptism administred by S. Athanasius, who was then but a Child, to some other Childeen, and says, That S. Athanasius believed, those that receive Baptism out of fear, and without Faith, are nevertheless Baptized, tho' Baptism does them no good. In the 207th, There is mention made of Two Angels who stood Sureties for a Girl which had a mind to be Baptized. In the 214th, It is observed, They Baptized in the East on the Day of Epiphany, as well as on Easter-Day, and Whitsunday.

Such things as these are in that Book, which may be of some use for the Church Disci∣pline. It is moreover full of an infinite Number of Relations, and Miraculous strange Sto∣ries, of Apparitions, Revelations, Visions, and Miracles, wrought by those Hermits, whe∣ther by foretelling things to come, by discovering Men's Thoughts, healing the Sick, com∣manding Lions and Wild Beasts, or working extraordinary Feats. Death it self did not hin∣der them from working Miracles, from the Grave they did speak to the Living, and wrought Miracles in their behalf. Among those wonderful Stories, of little Credit for the most part, there be found inimitable Examples of Vertue, extraordinary Austerities, excessive Fasts, wonderful Poverty, and such a Simplicity and Humility, as would sometimes pass for Sot∣tishness; an immoderate Zeal against Hereticks, fierce Conflicts with Devils, and some Witty and Holy Answers. The Stile of that Work is low and course. It was Translated into La∣tin by Ambrosius Camaldulensis, and Printed in Greek in the Bibliotheca Patrum 1624. Cotele∣rius Published at last the Greek of some Chapters which were before wanting, in his Second Volume of Ecclesiastical Monuments.

GEORGIUS, Sirnamed PISIDES.

GEORGIUS, Deacon and Library-Keeper of the Church of Constantinople, Sirnamed Pisi∣des, wrote a Book in Iambick Verse upon the Creation of the World, which the Anci∣ents * 1.57 call * 1.58 the Six Days Work. He writ also the Life of the Emperor Heraclius, the Persian War, a Panegyrick upon the Martyr Anastasius, and another Work intituled Abarica, [or Avarica, being an History of the Avares.]

We have the first Work of this Author, which is Dedicated to Sergius Patriarch of Constan∣tinople, and another Poem of the Vanity of this Life, together with some fragments taken out of Suidas. He is a better Poet than Divine.

This is probably the same Georgius who made some Sermons in the praise of the Virgin, Pub∣lished by F. Combefis, whereof some are upon the Virgin's Conception, and his Mother's; others upon the Virgin's Birth, her Presentation in the Temple, her assisting at the Cross, and at the Sepulchre; they are full of Fables, (taken out of the Apocryphal Book of the Virgin's Birth, falsly fathered upon S. James,) and of extraordinary commendations of the Virgin, and her Parents. They are Declamations full of Descriptions, Exclamations, Rhetorical Figures, and Emphatical Terms, but void of Sence and Reason, and fitter for Sport than Instruction. The last of these Sermons is upon S. Cosmus and S. Damian.

EUGENIUS, Bishop of Toledo.

EUGENIUS having lived in Solitude, and in the practice of the Monastical Life, near the City of Saragosa, was forced to be Bishop of Toledo, by order from the Prince. Ilde∣phonsus, * 1.59 who succeeded him in that See, tells us, He wrote a Book of the Trinity, and Two little Books, whereof the one was in Verse of divers measures, the other in Prose; that he had also revised Dracontius's Work on the Creation of the World, and had made it a great deal better than it was, and had added to it the Work of the 7th Day.

Sirmondus hath Published Eugenius's Poems, containing several pieces on different Subjects. The Stile of them is not very Polite, but the Fancies are very Exact and Judicious, and he is full of very Christian Sentiments. Cardinal Aguirre, in his Notitia of the Councils of Spain, promises a Letter of this Eugenius to Protasius, and a new Book of Epigrams that has never been Published.

He had a Predecessor named Eugenius, whom Ildephonsus ranks also among the Ecclesiasti∣cal Writers; but he speaks of none of his Works in particular; nay, he does not say he had written any. Wherefore we shall say nothing of his Life.

APOLLONIUS, Presbyter of Novara.

THIS Presbyter hath composed a Poem of the Destruction and Ruin of Jerusalem by Ve∣spasian. His Expressions are Noble, his Terms Poetical, and his Verses have a very * 1.60 sweet Cadence. This Work is divided into Four Books; he is one of the best Christian Po∣ets we have. He makes no difficulty of calling upon the Muses, and to use the Names of Pro∣phane Gods.

JOHN IV.

THIS Pope did not enjoy the Roman See long, for he was raised to it in 640, and Died in 1641. Anastasius hath preserved in his Collections an Apology which he made for his * 1.61 Predecessor Honorius, in which he pretends, that that Pope was not in the Error of the Mono∣thelites, who acknowledged but one will in Jesus Christ; and that when he said, there was not Two wills in Christ, he understood it of Two contrary wills, or of the inferior and supe∣rior part, that is, of Concupiscence which is contrary to the rational will; but he never meant, that there was but one will only in Christ, consisting of the Divine and the Hu∣mane will united into one.

We have yet Two Letters of this Pope; the First is written to the Irish Abbots in the Name of Hilarius, Arch-Priest of the Church of Rome, holding the See, during the vacancy, in the place of John, who was Elected, but not Consecrated yet, and of Two other Officers of the Roman Church, the one having the Title of Secretary of State, the other of Coun∣cellor. They reprove them for not keeping Easter at the same time with other Churches, and for retaining some Relicks of Pelagianism among them.

The Second Letter is to Isaac of Syracuse. He declares therein, That Monks ought to be permitted to chuse, and put into the Churches given them, such Priests as they will, yet with this Proviso, That if they do any thing against the Bishop, they shall be punished by the Synod.

THEODORUS I.

AFter John IV's. Death, THEODORUS was chosen in his room, in November, the Year 641. He wrote two Letters, and a Memoir, against Pyrrhus, Patriarch of Con∣stantinople, * 1.62 who had been depriv'd, and Paul put in his room. 'Tis to this last Theodorus's first Letter is directed. He sends him Word, That Pyrrhus ought to be condemned and deposed in a Synod, for commending Heraclius, and going about to make a new Profession of Faith. He tells him, That in case he could not get him condemned in his Country, he must only pray the Emperor to cause him to be brought to Rome, and that he will get him judg'd in a Council. The Second Letter is directed to the Bishops who had ordain'd Paul. He finds Fault with them for ordaining him before they had deposed Pyrrhus, and for giving him the Title of Most Holy. He takes notice of the Reasons, why he should be condemned; 1. Because he had commended Heraclius; and, 2. Because he had made a new Profession of Faith, contrary to the Apostolick Doctrine, against the Prohibition of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. In the Memoir he exhorts the Eastern Bishops, to preserve the Ancient Faith of the Church, and to reject the Novelties brought in by Pyrrhus, and his Confession of Faith.

MARTIN I.

MARTIN I. being ordain'd Bishop of Rome, in July 649. held, in October following, * 1.63 a Council of 105. Bishops against the Monothelites; in which he condemned Sergius and Pyrrhus, who had been formerly Bishops of Constantinople, and Paul, then in Possession of it. At that Time the Emperor Constans sent the Exarch Olympius into Italy, with an order to force the Bishops of Italy to receive the * 1.64 Type published by him. Olympius found the Pope, the Bishops and the Clergy of Italy in a very contrary Disposition, and was forc'd to enter into Agreement with Martin; but this Exarch being dead, a while after, in Sicily, where he had the Command of an Army against the Saracens, the Emperor sent Theodorus, sirnamed Calliopas; who caused Pope Martin to be taken away by Force, in July 653. He remained a whole Year in the Isle of Naxos, and came not to Constantinople till towards the end of 654. from whence he was banish'd into Chersona, where he died, in 656. in June.

We have Seventeen Letters of his.

The First is a Circular Letter, to all Bishops, to let them know, He had condemned the Error of the Monothelites.

The Second is directed to Amandus Bishop of Utrecht, who had written to him, That he was so much grieved to see the Disorder of certain Clergymen, who committed the Sin of the Flesh after their Ordination, that he had a mind to leave his Bishoprick, to live in Peace and Quietness. He disswades him from that Design, and advises him to deal with those Sin∣ners with all the Severity that the Canons allow; declaring, That all those that are fallen, after their Ordination, shall remain suspended for ever, and be for ever disabled from per∣forming any Sacerdotal Function: That they shall pass their whole Life in Penance, for the Expiation of their Fault; For, saith he, if we chuse persons of innocent Life, to be pro∣moted to Orders, with how much greater Reason should we hinder those who are fallen after their Ordination, from medling with the Holy Mysteries with defiled Hands, and polluted with Crimes? Let them therefore be deposed for ever, according to the Decrees of the Councils; to the end that the Searcher of Hearts, who will not suffer any of his Sheep to perish, seeing the sincerity of their Repentance, may forgive them at the Day of Judgment. Then he exhorts that Bishop to undergo any manner of Pains, Torments and Toil for the Salvation of his Sheep, and the Service of God. Lastly, he gives him notice, that he hath condemned the Monothelites, in a General Council of his Brethren, and sends him the Acts themselves, to the end he may publish them, and cause them to be received in his Country. He prays him to persuade King Sigebert to send some Bishops to the Holy See, that they may carry home the Acts of that Council, and joyn with him in the Defence of the Faith.

The Third is directed to the Emperor Constans, in the Name of the whole Synod. He acquaints him, That he hath condemned the Error of the Monothelites, in a Synod, of which he sends him the Acts.

The Fourth is to the Bishop of Carthage, and to all the Bishops of Africa. He approves the Confession of Faith they had sent him, and sends them the Acts of the Council.

In the Fifth he makes John Bishop of Philadelphia, to whom he writes, his Vicar in all the East, giving him Power to make Bishops and Priests in the Churches of the Patriarchates of Jerusalem and Antioch, to receive those that will renounce their Error, and to confirm them in their Churches, provided there be no other Canonical Impediment: For, saith he, we

ought to be the Defenders, and not Betrayers of the Canons. Thus he will not have him to confirm them, who have chosen themselves, no•• those whose Election was not Canonical. He mentions particularly the Election of Macedonius Bishop of Antioch, who was made Bishop in a strange Country, without the Consent of the People, and without a Decree of Election, as well as that of Peter Bishop of Alexandria. He will have them that shall be admitted, not only to abjure the Error of the Monothelites, but moreover to condemn Theodorus▪ Cyrus▪ Sergius; Pyrrhus Paul, and all of the same Opinion with them; to reject the Type, and to make a clear Profession, That they believe two Wills in Christ. He appoints two Bishops, named Theodorus and Antony, with an Abbot, to help him in that Function 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them he directs the three next Letters, to exhort them to joyn themselves with that Bishop for the Defence of the Faith. In the last he speaks of Stephen, and Eastern Bishop, whom he had also made his Vicar. He explains, that Matter in the next Letter, directed to Pantaleo, in which he com∣plains, That they had accused that Bishop, and hindred him from receiving the Letter which he had sent him, to ordain Priests and Bishops. He repeats also here. That those Bishops ought not to be confirm'd, who have been elected in another Town, than that whereof they are Priests or Bishops, and without the Consent of the Bishop or the Metropolitan; thus he declares ••ord all the Ordinations made in Sophronius's Patriarchate, which had not been done by his Authority.

In the Tenth he recommends his Vicar to a great Lord, named Peter.

In the Eleventh, to the Church of Jerusalem, he acquaints them with the Condemnation of the Error of the Monothelites, and declares void the Ordinations of Macedonius, Patriarch of Antioch, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria.

In the Twelfth he declares to Paul of Thessalonica, That he hath excommunicated and de∣posed him for his Errors.

In the Thirteenth he acquaints the Church of Thessalonica with Paul's Condemnation, and exhorts them to avoid his Heresy.

In the Fourteenth, to Theodorus, he relates what pass'd, when he was violently taken away from Rome. He says, That he coming out of the Constantinian Church, encompassed with Guards, they said in the presence of the Exarch: Anathema to him that believes that Martin did change or will change the least Word in the Faith: Anathema to them that shall not persevere in the Orthodox Faith unto death. That Calliopas hearing this, said, He had no other Faith: that he answered him, He would defend that Faith unto Death; and as for the other things charged on him, he was altogether innocent of them; that he had never writ to the Saracens; that he sent them no mony neither, only that he had given some Alms to some Servants of God coming to Rome; that it was false that he had utter'd any thing against the Respect due to the Virgin, and that he pronounced Anathema to whosoever did not reverence and adore her. These are the Terms used by him, non honorat at{que} adorat; but the Term of Adoring is not to be taken strictly, for in the next Letter they make Calliopas say, He was come to adore the Pope, that is, to pay his Respects to him.

He relates yet the same Story more at large in the Fifteenth Letter, directed to the same Theodorus, where he says, That foreseeing what was to come, he had withdrawn himself and all his Clergy into the Constantinian Church, thus named, because it was the first that Constan∣tine had built, near the Bishop's Palace; that he was there the Saturday, 13th. of June, in the Year 653. when Calliopas came to Rome with an Army; that he sent some of his Clergy to meet him; that Calliopas told them, That he was come to adore the Pope, that is, to pay him his Respects; that, notwithstanding, the next Day, being Sunday, he sent Word, That he was too much tired to come to him; that on Monday he sent word to the Pope by his Secretary, he ought not to call Men together, nor prepare Arms and Stones to defend himself; that Martin shewed to them he had sent, that this was false; that he lay sick ever since October, and had set his Bed before the Altar; that about Noon a multitude of armed Men entred into the Church with a great deal of Tumult, and that they broke, at their entring, all the a 1.65 Tapers in the Church. Then Calliopas shewed an Order from the Emperor, declaring, That Martin was to be turned out of the Holy See, and to be sent to Constantinople, and ano∣ther Bishop be put in his room. Which says he, was never done; for in the Bishop of Rome's Absence, the Arch-deacon, the Arch-priest, and the principal Secre∣tary do occupy his Place. Martin, unwilling that any Body should be kill'd for him, yielded himself pre∣sently to them, and begg'd only some of his Clerks to accompany him. Calliopas finding no Resistance, bad

Martin come along with them to his Palace, when he obey'd; all his Clergy came to him the next day, and many were ready to g•• ••••••••g with him; but that same Night, he was violently carried away, without suffering any 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to accompany him, but six Men Servants and a Cook: From th•••••••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, where he staid one year, at the end of which he was brought to 〈◊〉〈◊〉. This is the Abridgment of what is contained in that L••••••••r.

The Part••culars or Memoir, written under the name of a good 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the Bishops of the West. He says, That Martin, be∣ing come up to that Haven, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 th•• Church 〈◊〉〈◊〉 S••. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of December, he was 〈…〉〈…〉 the ••••••••ning they took him into a Boat, and carrie•• him to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Courtof ••uard; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fourscore and thirteen days, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 being 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to spe•••• to him; That after that space of rimw, he was brought into the Council 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Em•…•… prepared against him, were ordered to appear; they were Soldiers 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Men, who accused him of conspiring with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against the Witne••••es they brought against him, and maintained, he was more innocent by far th••n those Witnesses themselves, and all the rest ••hat sided with Oly••pius 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that he came to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in quality of E••a••••••, that he had the Authority and Power in his Hands, and that they were forced to obey him. A••ter this Tumul∣ruary Information, they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to a a, where they stripped him, and loaded him with Chains, dragged him through the Town, and put him in the Prison of the Praetorium, loaden with the Burden of his Chains, and brought to the last extremity. The next day, the Emperor coming to visit Paul of Constantinople, who was ready to die, and acquainting him with what was done, that Bishop touched with a remorse of Conscience, fetched a deep Sigh, and turning him aside, said: Alas! 'Tis to add to the Account I am to give to God. The Emperor asking him, why he said so? Is it not great pity, answered he, Bishops should be thus abused? And he earnestly besought the Emperor to suffer it no longer. After Paul's death, Pyrrhus sought to be resto••ed; but many opposed it, because of the retractation he had made at Rome. They sent to Pope Martin, to ask him about the Passages of that Affair; he an∣swered, That Pyrrhus came voluntarily to Rome's That his Predecessor Theodorus made him wellcome; That he was entertained at the cost of the Roman Church, the custom whereof was, to find with Victuals all the Strangers who fled thither. They would have forced him to say, That Pyrrhus had signed his retractation by force; but he declared, he would always speak the Truth. After having staid 85 days in that Prison, they fetched him out of it, to ba••••sh him to Chersona, where he died the 16th. of September, in the year, 656. having suffered much. He wrote two Letters from that place of his Exile, which are the two last, in which he represents his Wants, and the Poverty he suffered in that Country. He prays his Friend to send him some relief from Rome. For, saith he, if S. Peter feed so many Pil∣grims at Rome, it is very mee•• he should assist us, who are his Ministers, and suffer so much for the Truth and Religion.

This Pope's Constancy and Firmness appears in his Letters. They are well written, with Strength and Wisdom; the Stile of them is great and noble, and worthy of the Majesty of the Holy See. The third, and the 10 next, are found in Greek and Latin; either he wrote them himself in those two Languages, or they have been translated by some Body of that time.

S. MAXIMUS.

MAXIMUS, descended of a noble Family of Constantinople, having been a while chief Secretary of State to the Emperor Heraclius, withdrew himself into the Monastery of * 1.66 Chrysopolis, of which he was Abbot. The fear of the Barbarians Incursions, and the Errors spreading at Constantinople, forced him to fly into Africa, after Heraclius's death, in the year, 641. of the vulgar Aera. There he stoutly opposed the Error of the Monothelites, and pre∣vailed with the Africans, to join themselves with John Bishop of Rome, to condemn their Opi∣nions. It fell out, that Pyrrhus, Patriarch of Constantinople, and Head of that Party, who was banished out of Constantinople, because he was accused of having Poysoned the Emperor Con∣stantine, fled into Africa, where he met with Maximus, with whom he fell into Discourse, and yielded or feigned to yield to his Reasons; and hoping to be restored by the Pope's help, he resolved to go to Rome with Maximus. Being arrived there, he presented an Orthodox Confes∣sion of Faith to Pope Theodorus. But hearing afterwards from the Exarch of Ravenna, that the Court was of the Party of the Monothelites, and that he could not be restored, unless he altered his Mind, he retracted his Opinions, and embraced again his first Tenets; which forced Pope Theodorus to condemn him in a Council, in which his Condemnation was signed with Ink, mixed with some of our Lord's Blood.

Maximus was the Man that did thus stir up the Romans against the Monothelites, and there is no doubt but he had a good share in the Council Pope Martin held at Rome against them; and therefore the Emperor Constans's Anger did equally break out against him, and Pope Martin. They were brought to Constantinople: Maximus appeared often before the Judges, and was condemned to Banishment in the year 655. He was sent into a small Town of Thrace, named Byzias, whither Theodorus, Bishop of Caesarea, went to see him, to oblige him to yield to their Opinion; but when he could not prevail with him, they brought him back to Constantinople; and by a strange Cruelty, after he had suffered much, they cut off the Hand and Tongue of him, and his Disciple Anastasius; then he was sent into Prison in a Castle, called Schemre, where he died, Aug. 13. 662.

This Father wrote a great many Works. Some of them have been published in divers Col∣lections; but Combefis hath published a good number of them in Greek and Latin in two Vo∣lumes, printed at Paris, 1675. At the beginning of these two Volumes is found S. Maximus's Life, written by a Greek, younger than he, but pretty well acquainted with the Affairs of his time, and the Authentick Acts of this holy Man's Persecutions.

The first part of those Acts contains the verbal Process of what pass'd at Constantinople in the Emperor's Council, when Maximus was brought thither from Italy. In the first Interrogatory we find the Depositions of Witnesses accusing him of injurious Speeches to the Emperors. He defends himself against them, and maintains against the 4th. Witness, that he was in the right, when he said, That the Emperors, tho' Christians, were not Prelates.

For, saith he, he who does not offer upon the Altars does not Baptize, does not give the sacred Unction, does not lay on Hands, does not create Bishops, Priests and Deacons, does not consecrate Al∣tars, does not wear the Sacerdotal Marks nor Habits, cannot be called a Prelate among Christians; therefore, in the Oblation at the Altar, the Emperor is named after the Bishops, the Priests, the Deacons, and the Clerks, in the rank of the Laity.

Then they brought in his Disciple, who was accused of being an Origenist; but he purged himself from that Charge, by saying, Anathema to Origen. The same day, towards Evening, two of the Emperor's Officers, examined Maximus about the Conference he had with Pyrrhus in Africa. He related to them what was said in that Conference, and declared to them, he would not communicate with the Church of Constantinople, nor receive the * 1.67 Ecthesis nor the Type; and tho' they urged him to communicate with the Bishop of Constantinople, he said, he would not. He was brought again the Saturday following to the Palace of Constantinople, and de∣clared a new, that he did Anathematize the Type, and would not communicate with the Church of Constantinople that received it. He said, in that Interrogatory, he was 75 years old, and his Disciple 37. Next after these first Acts, there be two Letters, the one Greek and Latin, written by Maximus to his Disciple; the other Latin, which is Anastasius's to the Monks of Cagliari. S. Maximus relates, in the first, that they would have forced him to say, That there are two operations in Christ, but that they make but one, because of the Unities, which he would not do. In the second, Anastasius does also reject that Opinion, and protests against the Violence used against them. The second part of the Acts contains the Conference which Theodosius, Bishop of Caesarea, had with Maximus at Byzias, in the Presence of the Em∣peror's Commissioners; in which Maximus declares to him that he could not communicate with the Church of Constantinople, in regard, she received the Novelties of the Monothelites; Theo∣dosius promised him, That, if he would communicate with the Bishop of Constantinople, they would reject the Type. He maintained, That that was not enough, and that they ought first to receive the Condemnation made by the Synod of Rome, held under Martin. Theodosius re∣ply'd, That that Council was not valid, as having been assembled without the Emperor's Order. Maximus answered, There were many Synods assembled by the Emperors Orders, which he did not receive; as those held by Constantius against the Faith of the Nicene Coun∣cil, and that they did receive that which had deposed Paulus Samosatenus, notwithstanding it was held without the Emperor's Order; that it was ordered by the Nicene Council, That every year, two Councils should be held in the Provinces, without speaking of the Emperors Orders; and lastly, That which moved them to approve and receive Councils, was the Truth of the Doctrine they established. This brought the Dispute to the Doctrine of the one Ope∣ration only. Theodosius undertook to prove it by supposititious Passages of Pope Julius, of S. Athanasius, and of Gregory Thaumaturgus; but Maximus having answered him, they were Apollinarius's; he produced two more, under S. Chrysostom's name, which Maximus maintained to be Nestorius's, and proved it immediately. Then he explain'd a Passage of S. Cyril, after which it came again to be disputed whether they should say, One or Two Operations; and at last Theodosius said, he was ready to sign, That there were Two Natures, Two Wills, and Two Operations in Christ. Maximus reply'd, It did not belong to him, who was but a Monk, to exact Professions of Faith from Bishops; but that, if they were really of that Mind, they might write about it to the Bishop of Rome; and that though they were agreed in the Doctrine, he could not communicate with them, till they had blotted out of ** 1.68 the Sacred Tables, which they recited at the Altar, the Names of those who had been anathema∣tized in the Council of Rome; notwithstanding that he did advise them, That the Emperor should send an Address to the Bishop of Rome, and the Patriarch a Synodical Decree, agree∣able to the Orthodox Doctrine. Theodosius promised him, that it should be done; yea, and en∣gaged

him, in case he were sent thither, to go along with him. Being agreed about that, they went to Prayers, and p 1.69 kissed the holy Gospels, the Cross, and the Virgin's Image, and touched them, to confirm their mutual Promises. After that, having discoursed about some Points of Morality, Theodosius ask'd Maximus, whether they could not say, in a good sence, That there was but one only Will in Christ, by reason of the Union of the two Wills? Maximus affirmed, That they could not. Theodosius, and they that were present, seem'd to approve his Sentiment, and the Reasons he gave for it. Having parted good Friends in appearance, the Em∣peror Constans sent an Order to the Proconsul, Paul, to remove the Abbot Maximus from Byzias, and to bring him to the Monastery of S. Theodorus, near Rhegium. The next day Theodosius came to him, ac∣companied with two Noblemen, Epiphanius and Troilus. This last asked him, whether he would do what the Emperor should command him? He an∣swered, he would obey his Orders, in all things con∣cerning secular Affairs; but when they told him, it was the Emperor's Will, That he should approve the Type, and if he did do it, they would lead him to the great Church of Constantinople, and receive the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ with him, and own him for their Father. He complain'd to Theodosius, That they did not make good what they had promised. Theodosius answering, That the Em∣peror was against it; Maximus declared, That the very invisible Powers could not force him to do what they required of him. This Answer provoked the fury of the Company against him, so that they abused him. But at last Theodosius having appeased the Tumult, Epiphanius asked Maximus, why he dealt with his Prince and Church as Hereticks, seeing, they owned two Wills, and two Operations in Christ? Maximus reply'd, That, if it was so, they should not urge him to sign the Type. Epiphanius answered, That that was done by a kind of Condescension. Maximus maintain'd stoutly, That they ought to declare aloud and firmly, the Orthodox Faith. Epiphanius ask'd him, whether he had subscribed a Profession of Faith against them? He said, he had. Hereupon Epiphanius threatned him, which he did not seem to matter much. The next day, the Consul Theodosius delivered him into the Hands of the Soldiers, which brought him to Salembria, and then to Perbera, till at last he was con∣demned to have his Tongue cut out. Combefis hath added to these Acts, some pieces collected by Anastasius, relating to the Life and Actions of S. Maximus. An Invective made by a certain Monk against the Cruelty used against him, and some Extracts of S. Maximus's Offices, taken out of the Books of the Greek Church.

The first of S. Maximus's Works is entituled, Questions upon the Holy Scripture, dedicated to Thalassius Presbyter and Abbot. He shews, in the Preface of his Work, That Evil is not an Entity, nor a real Quality, but a defect of the Creature, whereby it swerveth from its ulti∣mate end, that is, from God; from whence he concludes, That all Evil comes from the want of the Knowledge and Love of God, because the only means of Salvation, is to know him, to love and serve him, renouncing the love of the Creatures, the Passions, the Lusts, and the vain Pleasures of this World. This Work contains Answers to 65 Questions. The 1st. is about the nature and use of Passions; the rest about some places of the Scripture. We must not look there for literal Explications of the difficulties that might occurr about those places of the Scripture; they are allegorical Explications and mystical Observations upon places of the Scripture, or Questions of Divinity, which he takes an occasion to handle from those places. He made himself some Scholia or Glosses upon his own Work, where he explains some Terms used, and establisheth or clears some Rules and Principles propounded by him∣self.

Photius did rightly observe, That this Work is very obscure and tedious to read; That he does so often wander from the Letter and the History, that one cannot keep pace with him; and those only who love Allegories and mystical Speculations, do relish him, and take pleasure in the reading of him.

The 79 Answers to some other Questions, are shorter, and less obscure than the former, but they are not less stuffed with Explications not at all pertinent to the Letter of the Scripture, and with mystical and moral Thoughts.

He follows the same Method in the Exposition of the 59th Psalm, as well as in that of the Lord's Prayer, where he loseth himself in his Mystical Speculations.

The Ascetick Discourse is more plain, 'tis a Dialogue between a Monk and an Abbot, in which the Abbot does instruct the simple Monk in the principal Rules of a Spiritual Life. He shews him, That the Love of God, and the Renouncing of the Creatures, are the Foun∣dation of it; That the Love of our Neighbour is the effect of the Love of God; That Je∣sus Christ gave us a perfect Example of that Love; That we ought continually to fight a∣gainst the Temptations of the Flesh and the Devil, mortifie our Passions, resist the Motions of

Lust, reject Idle or Impure Thoughts, be constant in Prayer, have always the Fear of God before our Eyes. He complains, That the greatest part of Monks lived disorderly, and that their seeming Vertue was but Hypocrisie. He maketh an excellent Prayer to God for their Conversion. And adds, We ought to trust in his Goodness and Mercy, hoping for Salvation from him, which we cannot obtain by our selves. Photius speaking of this Work, says, It is useful for all Men, and chiefly for them that lead an Ascetick Life, because there he lays down the means how to become a Citizen of Heaven, by teaching Charitableness, and works of Piety. It must also be confessed, that this Treatise is of the Ascetick Books the most use∣ful, not only for Monks, but all Christians likewise, because it does very well explain the Principles and Fundamentals of the Spiritual Life.

Maximus added to this Work 400 Spiritual Maxims, which he intituled, Of Charity, be∣cause there is many of them about Charity towards God and our Neighbour, in which that Holy Man places the whole Spiritual Life, as being perswaded, all other Vertues and Duties are but Branches and Parts of it. There be sundry of those Maxims containing Precepts and Rules touching the Actions of Life, and those are the most useful; but some of the other contain nothing but Spiritual and Mystical Thoughts. Photius takes notice, that the Stile of these Two Works is clearer and more elaborate than any of the rest, and that they cannot be found fault with, unless it be because he did not always make use of the purest terms.

The Two Hundred Theological and Oeconomical Maxims, contain not only Principles of Divinity, but also Maxims of Morality, and they would deserve, says Photius, to be compa∣red with the Four Hundred Maxims above mentioned, if the great number of Allegories that they are filled with, did not render them more like the Questions to Thalassius. To these Chapters is annexed a Writing to Theopemptus, upon Three Texts of the Gospel, en∣tirely agreeing with the Answers to Thalassius.

Lastly, That Volume ends with 243 Moral Maxims, taken out of a Manuscript of the Vatican, where they are found under Maximus's Name. They are indeed like enough to the 400 Moral Maxims for Stile and Matter.

The fragment drawn out of a Book, intituled, A Resolution of Sixty Three Doubts, Dedi∣cated to the King of Achrida, now L'Ochrida, by S. Maximus, seems doubtful, because in Maximus's time there was no King at Achrida, which maketh it Credible, 'tis the Work of some later Grecian, who wrote that Work when there were Kings in Bulgaria.

The Second Volume of S. Maximus's Works comprehends his Theological and Polemical Tracts, with his Letters. The Twenty Five first Tracts are divers Writings, or Answers, all tending to the same end, to shew that there be Two perfect Natures, Two Wills, and Two Operations, in Jesus Christ; in them he handles that matter Scholastically and Acutely. Among those Tracts there is one, in which he defends that which he had said, That the Ho∣ly Ghost proceeds from the Son.

The Conference with Pyrrhus is clearer, less cumber'd with Scholastical Terms and Rea∣sonings. Therein he relates what was said between them on both sides. The issue was, That Pyrrhus perswaded by his Reasons, that we ought to acknowledge Two Wills, and Two Ope∣rations in Christ, went to Rome with him and retracted his Error.

The Treatise of the Soul is upon another Subject. Therein he Treats of many Questions touching the nature of the Soul; he asserts it to be a Spiritual Substance, distinct from the Body, simple, immortal, and intelligent. These points are handled there in a very dry man∣ner, as a Logician rather than Divine.

Maximus's Letters are upon divers Subjects. The Five first are upon Moral Points. There∣in he does chiefly recommend the Love of God, and of our Neighbour, tho' renouncing Se∣cular Desires, Alms-giving, Retiredness, and Repentance.

In the 6th he shews the Soul to be Spiritual; And in the 7th, That after Death it keeps its Intellectual and other Faculties.

The Three next contain some Allegorical and Moral Observations.

In the 11th, He Exhorts a Superior to deal Charitably with a Nun, which having left the Nunnery, had returned thither to do Penance.

The 12th, Is a Writing against Severus, in which he Establisheth the distinction of the Two Natures in Christ. He complains in the beginning, that the Empress had written some Let∣ters into Africk favouring the Severians. He enquireth into the bottom of the Question of the Two Natures in this Writing. He explains a passage in S. Cyril, and refutes Severus's Er∣ror, That the Two Natures became one in Christ. The same Subject is also handled in the next Writing directed to a Lord, named Peter.

The 14th Letter, which is the 41st piece of this Volume, is also on the Mystery of the In∣carnation; but in the end of it he speaks of the Incursions of the Arabians, which spoiled the Frontiers of the Empire.

The 15th is a Scholastical Tract of the Union and Distinction of the Two Natures in Christ, directed to Conon, a Deacon of Alexandria. To it is joined a Letter directed to the same Deacon, to exhort him to stand up in the defence of the Truth, without being dis∣mayed at the sufferings attending the defence of it.

The 17th is directed to Julian. It is also about the distinction of the Two Natures.

The 18th is written in the Name of George, a Noble-Man of Africa, to some Nuns of Alexandria, engaged in the Error of the Mon••••helites, to dissuade them from it.

The 19th is written to Pyrrh••s, before he was Patriarch, and ••ad declared himself openly against the Church. Maximus asks him, How his saying is to be understood, that there was but one Vertue or Operation in Christ.

The following Letters, to divers private persons, are shorter than the former, and contain nothing but some Moral or Mystical Discourses.

The Five Dialogues upon the Trinity, which were Published under Athanasius's Name, are here restored to S. Maximus, upon the Authority of the Greek Manuscripts and Authors, which have Quoted them under this Father's Name. We have shewed already, that Combefis was in the right, to put them under Maximus's Name, and that they are none of Theodoret's, as F. Garner pretended. After so many Writings of the Ancients upon the Trinity, there is no need to make an Extract of this, where that Mystery is handled after Maximus's Genius Scholastically, and in the form of a Conference.

Maximus's * 1.70 Mystagogy, are Considerations of the Church-Ceremonies. He says there, That the Church is the Figure and Image of God, the World, Man, and the Soul. That the In∣troitus of the Mass, is a representation of Christ's entrance into our Souls. That the Les∣sons signifie the Faith of Christians. That the Songs are signs of the Spiritual Joy. That the Gospel figures the Consummation of the World, and the Perfection of Christians. That when the Bishop descends from his Chair, he represents Christ descending from Heaven in the Day of Judgment. That the going out of Catechumens teaches us, that those that have not Faith shall be rejected. That the Doors shut, the Kiss of Peace, the saying of the Creed, are the figures of the perfect Union of Christians. That the Trisagion and the Sanctus are Types of our future Glory, and present Adoption. This whole Book is full of such Allegories.

Lastly, The last of Maximus's his Works, is a Collection of sundry passages of Ecclesiasti∣cal and Prophane Authors, set down under different Titles, concerning Vertues, Vices, Wo∣men' Duties, Moral Precepts, and Maxims.

We have moreover a Comment, or Scholia of Maximus's upon the Books ascribed to the Areopagite, which is Printed with Dionysius's Works. He writ also some Scholia upon S. Gre∣gory Nazianzen, which were Printed at Oxford in 1681. Petavius hath Published a Kalendar for Easter, ending in the Year 641, ascribed to Maximus.

Photius saith, This Author hath extraordinary well turned Periods, but that he often useth Hyperboles and Transpositions, and is not careful at all to speak properly, which renders his Writings obscure and difficult; That he affects a kind of harshness of swelling Stile, which renders his Discourse unpleasing and ungrateful to the Ear; That in his Rhetorical Figures he does not make choice of that which is neat and handsome; That he tires out his Reader with his Allegorical and Mystical Explications, so far distant from the Letter, and the truth of History, that one cannot see any coherence between his Answer and the Question; That yet he excells in the Allegorical and Mystical way; and that they who take delight in it, can meet with nothing more accomplished. That his very Letters are not without obscurity, which is the only Epistoler Character he hath kept to; That he is plainer and clearer in his Trea∣tise of Charity, and in his Maxims meerly Moral; Lastly, That the Conference with Pyr∣rhus is of a Stile somewhat low, and that he hath not kept the Laws of Logick.

One may add to this Judgment of Photius, That Maximus handles matters after a meer Scholastical manner; That he Speaks and Reasons as a Logician; That he gives his Definiti∣ons, Terms, and Arguments in form; That he maketh use of great big Words, signifying no more than what might be expressed in other terms; That he is acute and close, striketh his Adversaries home, and stands firm to his own Principles; That he was very quick of Appre∣hension, of Reasoning and Disputing, very free of Speech, Stiff and Firm. He was of the Opinion of the Latins about the procession of the Holy Ghost, Original Sin, Christ's Grace, and the Celibacy of Bishops, and the Greatness and Power of the Roman Church. He had the Monastick Life in high esteem, and was much given to Mystical Thoughts. In a word, He was a Scholastical, Mystical, and Speculative Man.

ANASTASIUS, Disciple of Maximus.

ANASTASIUS, Disciple of Maximus, who suffered so much with him for the same cause, wrote a Letter to the Monks of Cagliari against the Monothelites, wherein he re∣futes * 1.71 those that said, That in Christ there was One and Two Wills, from whence he con∣cluded that they admitted Three. It is in the Collections of Anastasius Bibliothecarius, [Published by Sirmondus at Paris 1620,] and among Maximus's Works. He Died in Exile at Lazica.

ANASTASIUS, Apocrisiarius of Rome.

THIS * 1.72 Apocrisiarius of Rome suffered also the same Persecutions for the same cause. He wrote a Letter to Theodosius, Presbyter of Gangra, upon S. Maximus's Death. There he * 1.73 Quotes some fragments of the Writings of Hippolytus Bishop of Porto. It is in Anastasius's Collections, and among Maximus's Works.

THEODOSIUS and THEODORUS.

THESE Two Brothers made an Historical Memorial of the Life and Conflicts of Ana∣stasius, and the other Champions of the Faith. This is also found among Anastasius's * 1.74 Collections.

THEODORUS.

THEODORUS, Presbyter and Abbot of Raithu, to whom Maximus directed his Trea∣tise of the Essence, and Nature, wrote a Tract upon the Incarnation. There he sets * 1.75 down at first the Errors of Manes, Paulus Samosatenus, Apollinarius, Theodorus of Mopsuesta, Nestorius, and Eutyches, about that Mystery. Then he Expounds the Faith of the Church, opposite to those Errors. He shews, How they have been revived by Julian of Halicarnas∣sus, and Severus, to whom he opposed the Fathers Testimonies, but we have not now this last part. This Work was Published in Greek and Latin by Beza, and Printed at Geneva in 1576, [Quarto.] Since that time it was inserted with Turrianus's Version in the First Volume of the Auctuarium Biblioth. Patrum. [Tom. I. p. 319.]

PETER of Laodicea.

WE know nothing in particular of this Author; of whom we have a short and a bad * 1.76 Explication of the Lord's Prayer. It is believed he lived in the Seventh Cen∣tury.

THALASSIUS, a Monk.

WE have 400. Moral Maxims or Truths, of this Author's, famous only for his strict Friend-ship and Concerns with Maximus, to whom he did also propound many Questions * 1.77 upon the Holy Scripture [Printed in Bibliotheca Patrum, Tom. 12.]

ISAIAH, Abbot.

ABbot ISAIAH's Precepts are much of the same kind; they are Advices, Considera∣tions and Instructions useful for Monks. It is also thought he lived in this Cen∣tury. * 1.78

THEOFRIDUS, Abbot.

TWO Homilies upon Relicks are attributed to this Abbot, of whom we know nothing in particular. * 1.79

DONATUS.

DONATUS, the Son of Valdelenus, Duke of the Country between Mount S. Claude and the Alpes, was brought up in this Religious Life by Columbanus, and was afterwards * 1.80 made Bishop of Besancon, toward the Year 630. where he founded two Monasteries, the one for Men, the other for Virgins. He made Rules for both.

That which he made for Monks is in the second part of S. Benedict of Aniana's Rules, and is entituled, Capitula, to serve instead of Advertisements to the Friars of S. Paul and S. Stephen; that is, to the Monks of the Monastery of S. Paul (for the Monastery founded by him, at Besancon, was called so) and to the Canons Regular of the Cathedral Church, which had S. Stephen for its Patron. This Rule contains nothing in it but some particular Advices.

The other Rules of Donatus, for the Monastery of Nuns founded by his Mother Flavia, is larger, well-penned, and contains very wise Constitutions, taken out of the Rules of S. Caesarius, S. Columbanus and S. Benedict. It is found in the third Part of the Rules of Benedict of Aniana, that Bishop was present at a Council of Challon, upon the River Saone, in the Year 650.

VITALIANUS.

VITALIANUS was chosen Bishop of Rome, August 29th. 656. and governed that Church fourteen Years and six Months. He hath left us some Letters. * 1.81

The 1st. is directed to the Archbishop of Creet, upon the Bishop of Lappa's Complaint against the Judgment which that Bishop had given against him. Vitalianus saith, He hath examined that Matter in a Council, where the Acts of that Process were exhibited, and that the Bishops acknowledged the Cause had been illegally managed, and that the Bishop of Lappa had been wrongfully condemned: That they were greatly troubled that he had put that Bishop into Prison, and hindred him from coming to Rome, to clear himself: Therefore he declareth null and void all the Proceedings of the Council of the Archbishop of Creet, against John Bishop of Lappa: and at the same Time pronounceth that Bishop to be innocent, and, as such, absolveth him. In the 2d. he intreats Vaanus, the Emperor's Officer, to procure that Bishop's Restauration. In the 3d. he orders Paul, Archbishop of Creet, to cause his Churches to be given him again. He complains, That a Deacon had married a Wife, since the Time of his being in Orders; and that he did minister in two Churches: He prays him to put a stop to that Disorder, and to follow no longer Eulampius's Counsel, he being a wicked Man, sowing Divisions among them for his own Profit. In the 4th. Letter he desires George, Bishop of Syracuse, to be favourable to John of Lappa, and to endeavour his re-establishment.

The 5th. Letter, alledged by Bede, is directed to the King of Northumberland, in England. He commends his Zeal, and answers him about the Time of keeping Easter. He promises him to send him a Bishop, when he hath met with one fit for it, and willing to go over into England. He thanks him for his Prayers, and sends him some Relicks.

The 6th. is directed to the Benedictine Monks of Sicily: He acquaints them how grievous it is to him, that their Monasteries and Estates have been spoiled by the Incursions of the Bar∣barians. He tells them, He sends them some Monks of the Congregation of Mount-cassin, and exhorts them to obey them, and to labour with them for the resettling of their Monasteries and Lands.

S. ELIGIUS.

S. ELIGIUS, born near the City of Limoges, a Goldsmith, and Friend of King Da∣gobert, was ordained Bishop of * 1.82 Noyon in 646. and died in 663. S. Owen, who wrote * 1.83 his Life, tells us, he made Exhortations to his People every Day, with unwearied Labor; that his Sermons were very short, but they contained important Instructions and wholsom Advices: That Author collected them into one Discourse, containing the most usual Instructions, which Eligius gave to his People: They are for the most part drawn out of S. Caesarius's Sermons, which Bishops did then make use of to preach to their People. This Discourse was printed among S. Austin's Works, and now is in the end of the sixth Volume: 'Tis an Abridgment of the principal Duties of a Christian. In the first place he shews the Obligation laid upon Pastors, to instruct their People. He exhorts them to remember often their baptismal Vows, and to meditate on the last Judgment. He shews them, that it is not enough to bear the Name of a Christian, but that we ought to act and live suitable to it. He endeavours to create in them an Abhorrence of profane Superstitions, and the Relicks of Idolatry. Then he gives them sundry wholsome Advices to honour God, to love Enemies, to give Alms, to frequent Divine Service, and Sunday-Sermons, to q 1.84 cross themselves often with the sign of the Cross, to give to the Church the Tenths of their Gain or Possessions, to avoid r 1.85 Mortal Sins, to watch over their Actions and Words, to despise the World, to repent continually, and never to despair of Salva∣tion, &c. It is observed in this Treatise, that every Christian hath a good Angel to assist him; and when he sins he drives away his good Angel to take a Devil.

There are Sixteen Homilies more, bearing Eligius's Name; but it is doubted whether they be really his, because they are made up of Passages and Quotations of the Fathers, as of S. Austin, S. Leo, S. Ambrose, Caesarius of Arles, and S. Gregory. These Fathers are likewise cited there, under the Name of Saints and Blessed; S. Benedict is there called, most Blessed and most Holy Father: They say that these Citations are affected; they add, That there be even some Passages of Authors, who wrote since Eligius's Time, as of S. Isidore of Sevil, of Alcuin, of Haymo of Halberstat: From whence they conclude, That these Sermons are the Work of an Author of the Ninth Century: Yet methinks he that composed them first was older than that Time, and many things may easily have been added to them since.

However, there are yet found in them some remainders of the Ancient Discipline, not to be slighted. This is an Extract of them.

In the First Sermon, for Christmasday, he shews the Happiness of the Peace, which Christ brought to the Earth, and exhorts his Hearers in the end to Almsgiving. He relates the Story of a Gardner, who being used to bestow what he earned upon the poor, was tempted to keep back part of it, in case he should fall sick; that having thus gathered many Crown-pieces, he got a running Sore in his Foot, which fell into a Gangreen, so that the Surgeon appointed a Day to cut off his Leg, seeing there was no other Remedy; but in the Night, the Gardner coming to himself, and having begged God's Forgiveness, for his not having continued in his Almsgiving, and promised to continue it hereafter, he was miraculously cured, and the Surgeon coming the next Day to cut off his Leg, found him gone abroad.

The Second Sermon is upon the Purification: After having uttered some Allegories upon that Ceremony of the Jews, he speaks of the use of the Church, to have on that Festi∣val

s 1.86 Tapers light, during the Mass; and says, That the Original of this Custom came from the Romans, who having collected the Tribute every fifth Year, offered solemn Sacrifices in the end of Fe∣bruary, and kindled Tapers and Torches in the Town; which Ceremony was called Lustrum: That the Church hath changed that Superstition into an Eccle∣siastical Ceremony, ordering Tapers to be kindled yearly in the beginning of February, in the Time when S. Simeon took our Lord in his Arms. One must needs be very credulous, to believe this Conje∣cture, which hath neither Truth nor Likelihood in it.

The Third Sermon is upon the Fast of Lent; therein he enlargeth upon the good Effects of Fasting.

The Fourth is on Holy Thursday: He observeth, That on that Day was made the Recon∣ciliation of Publick Penitents, guilty of Crimes, which deserved that the Bishop should sepa∣rate them from the Altar, and then reconcile them: Then he addresseth his Speech to those Penitents, and exhorts them to examine themselves whether they be reconcil'd to God or not, because it may happen, that although they be reconciled by the Ministery of the Bishop, yet they be not so with God, who alone grants the true Reconciliation: He shews them, that to be truly reconciled, they ought to be, according to the Apostle, new Creatures, purged from the Crimes of the Old Man; That they who continue in their sinful Habits, should not imagine that they can throughly be reconcil'd, before they have made t 1.87 Satisfaction proportionable to the great∣ness of their Sins.

If saith he, ye repent after a godly sort, and ye be stedfastly purposed and sin∣cerely desirous to sin no more, ye shall be truly re∣conciled by Jesus Christ and by us, to whom he hath committed the Ministery of Reconciliation. But if you be not in that Disposition, do not flatter your selves, don't deceive your selves, for ye cannot deceive God as ye deceive Men; and he who by offending him is become his Enemy, can no other∣wise be Friends again with him than by making him Satisfaction. Do not look upon Bishops as the Authors of your Reconciliation, but meerly as the Ministers of it: It is Jesus Christ who does invisibly absolve and reconcile Men: as for us, we discharge our Ministery, when we do outwardly and visibly perform the Ceremonies of Reconciliation: Never∣theless, he does comfort those who have not re∣pented throughly, giving them Hope, that pro∣vided they forsake their Sins heartily, they may obtain Forgiveness, and be truly reconciled.

He adds,

That there be several means of expiating our Sins, and obtaining the Remission of them,

and he instances in these, a charitable Disposition, Alms-giv∣ing, Sorrow, Confession of Sins, Mortifying of the Flesh and Spirit, amendment of Life, the Intercession of Holy and Just Men, and the forgiving of Ene∣mies.

The Fifth Homily is upon the Sacrifice of Isaac, it is very short, and hath nothing remark∣able in it.

The Sixth is also upon Holy Thursday. Therein he exhorts all Christians to Repentance, and to expiate their lighter Faults with Fastings, Watchings, Alms-giving, and other Works of Charity. He warns them not to put off their Repentance till the hour of Death, which often surprizes us, when we least think of it, without giving us one moment to bethink our selves.

The Seventh is a short Exhortation to the Penitents and Faithful, to give God Thanks for graciously granting them the favour of Reconciliation.

The Eighth is a long Discourse to the Clergy; the People, and the publick Penitents. He exhorts Presbyters, who govern Parishes, to be an Example to the People under their Charge. He recommends to all the Faithful the love of their Neighbour, and the forgiving of Ene∣mies; and exhorts them to purifie themselves from light Sins, that they may escape not only the Fire that shall burn the Ungodly for ever; but u 1.88 that Fire also, through which the Righteous who are not wholly purged from their Sins, shall pass in the day of Judgment. He exhorts also great Sinners to Repent, covering themselves with Hair-cloath, and lifting up their Hands to Heaven, that they may be reconciled by the imposition of the Bishop's hands; and he warns them not to relapse into Sin after Reconciliation. Lastly, he treats of the Ce∣remonies used by the Church on Holy Thursday, which are, besides the reconciliation of Penitents, v 1.89 the Blessing of the Holy Oyls, the consecrating of the Chrism, the Washing of Feet, of Altars, of Sacred Vessels, of the Floor and the Walls of Churches. He speaks clearly of the real Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist; and says, That, as Christ was really and substantially born of the Virgin; so likewise w 1.90 Christians do truly receive under the Mysteries, the Lord's Body and Blood, tho' the ap∣pearance

of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉, because Men would abhor drinking Blood and eating Flesh; but there can be no doubt, but it is verily received. De veritate Carnis & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉. He confesseth, the Apostles did not receive 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Fasting; but he says, That 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all that, they ought not to find Fault with the Custom of the Universal Church, which requires, That it be always received Fasting; because the Holy Spirit, whereby she is 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in Honour of so great a Sacrament, would have Christ's Body to enter into the Christian's Mouths▪ before any other Meat was received in; and it is upon that Account, that this Practice is observed every where. Lastly, he treats of the Que∣stion of frequent Communion, and enquires whether it be good to Communicate every day. Thereupon he says, That there be some Persons, who wish, That they would make choice of those days, in which Men live more Soberly and Godly; but others think, That if they be not guilty of any Sin that deserveth being debarred from the Altar, put to Penance, and then reconciled by the Bishop's Authority, they may come very often to the Sacrament. He leaves every one at his Liberty to do as he shall think best, according to his Godly Motions; and propounds, after S. Austin, the Examples of Zacchaeus and the Centurion. He warns Christians, that, if they exclude themselves from the Eucharist, they shall perish with Hunger; but yet, if they come to it unworthily, they shall Eat and Drink their own Damnation. Lastly, he does vehemently urge great Sinners to Repentance, and to procure their own Separation, from the Altar, by the Judgment of the Bishop; and prays them to consider, That that State of Separation is an Image of the final Judgment, when they see the Just coming to the Eucha∣rist, whilst themselves are excluded from it. In the beginning of that Homily there are some Periods taken out of a Sermon of Caesarius of Arles, but in that time they commonly used that Bishop's Sermons.

In the Ninth Homily, he exhorts Sinners to cure themselves of their Sins by Repen∣tance.

In the Tenth, he speaks also of the Ceremonies of the Thursday before Easter, that on that day they set some Prisoners at Liberty.

The Eleventh Homily is also upon the Thursday before Eastor; he speaks to the Faithful and the Penitents. To the first he recommends Faith and Charity towards God and their Neighbours; on which Vertue he bestows a large Encomium, and recommends the forgiving of Enemies. He speaks of the Practice of the Church, to say every day x 1.91 the Canonical Hours. He stirs up all Christians to Prayer, Fasting and Repentance; he prescribes to Sinners the Confes∣sion of their Sins, in order to doing Penance for them; and at last directs his Speech to Penitents, after this manner.

To those Persons, saith he, who stand here in a Penitential Habit, with a foul mournful Countenance, their Hair torn and flying abroad, testifying, as far as we can judge by their Actions, That they have lamented their Sins, and mortified in themselves the Vices of the Flesh. He lets them know, they are to understand, That altho' they be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to receive the Imposition of Hands, never∣theless they ought to be persuaded, they shall not receive the absolution of their Crimes, if the divine Goodness do not pardon them, giving them the Grace of Contrition; because, as S. Gregory saith, the Bishop's Absolution is then only true, when it is agreeable with the Judgment of him, who judges the Secrets of the Hearts, which is figured by the Resurrection of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, whom Christ raised to Life first before he ordered his Disciples to loose him; and thus all Pastors must have a care, to loose and absolve none, but such whose Souls Christ hath quickened again by his Grace.

After these words, he invites them to shew some Marks of their Conver∣sion; which they having done, by lifting up their Hands to Heaven, he went on in his Discourse, setting forth the effects of true Repentance, which are, to satisfy God, to lament their Sins past, and to commit them no more.

The 12th. Homily is upon Charity on Holy Thursday.

The 13th. for the same day. He exhorts all Christians to purge themselves from their daily Sins by Prayer and Almsgiving; and he advertiseth them in the end, That they should not abhor publick Penitents, as being great Sinners, because among those that are not doing Penance, there may be some guilty of more grievous Sins. He deploreth the misery of those, who do not confess them, nor do Penance for them.

In the 14th. he exhorts Christians diligently to prepare themselves, for the worthy receiving of the Eucharist at Easter.

In the 15th. he speaks again very earnestly of the real Presence.

Know ye, my dear Brethren, says he, and firmly believe, That, as the * 1.92 Flesh which Jesus Christ took in the Virgins Womb, is his true Body, which was offered up for our Salvation; so likewise the Bread which he gave to his Disciples, and which the Priests consecrate daily in the Church, is the true Body of Christ. They are not two Bodies, 'tis the same Body, which is broken and sacrificed. This is Jesus Christ, which is broken and sacrificed, tho' he remains sound and whole.

Then he exhorts all Christians, Clerks, Laicks and Religious, who perceive themselves guilty of the Sins of Envy, Calumny, Hatred, Fornication and Perjury, to purifie themselves on this day, confessing their Iniquity to God. And as to those that have committed greater Crimes, and are doing Penance publickly, he warns them to fall no more into those Sins. He adds, That there be grievous Offenders, whose Crimes are so secret, that they can∣not be admitted to do publick Penance,

That those Offenders are to be excluded from the Church for a while, because that altho' they be not reconciled by the Imposition of Hands, and receive not Absolution, they ought to mortifie their Bodies by Works of Repentance, and heal their Souls by good Deeds.

This would make one think, That publick Offences only, were then liable to publick Penance, and as to them whose Crimes were altogether secret and hidden, they did only ad∣vise them to separate themselves from the Church Assemblies, and to do Penance secretly and privately.

This appears yet by the 16th Homily; for having exhorted all Christians generally to Re∣pent, and to abstain from grievous Crimes for the future, he directs his Speech to two Per∣sons, whom a publick Offence had obliged to do publick Penance. He exhorts them, sincerely to lament their Sins, and to commit them no more. In that Homily, there is an unwarrantable Proposition, related under the name of the Wise Man; That it is as great a Crime for a Man to lie with his Wife, as to eat Flesh in Lent. Besides these Homilies, we have a Letter of S. Eligius's among those of Desiderius Bishop of * 1.93 Cahors.

S. Eligius was an able and learned Man for his time; he had read S. Cyprian, S. Austin, S. Gregory, and some other Latin Fathers, and imitated them. He was a Lover of Ecclesi∣astical Discipline, and a Follower of the Tradition of those Fathers, as near as the Age, he lived in, could permit. His Sermons are better than those of several other Latin Preachers, both for Matter and Stile.

AGATHO.

POPE Agatho may deservedly be rank'd among Ecclesiastical Authors, because of the long Letter he writ to the Emperor Constantine, inserted in the Acts of the 6th Council; in * 1.94 which he does largely confute the Error of the Monothelites: But we ought not to value much another Letter, ascribed to this Pope, directed to Ethelred, King of the Mercians, to Theodorus of Canterbury, and to the Abbot Sexulphus; which seems to be a Supposititious Piece, made by some English Monk, and contains nothing remarkable. We shall speak of this Pope's first Letter, when we come to treat of the Acts of the 6th Council, and of another Letter written upon the same Subject and the same Occasion, by Datian, Bishop of Pavia, in the name of Mansuetus, Bishop of Milan, which is also among the Acts of this Council. This Pope died the 10th of January, in 682. after he had governed the Church of Rome 3 years, 6 Months, and 25 days.

LEO II.

AFTER Agatho's death, Leo II. was chosen in his Room. Constantine the Emperor, hearing of his Election, did immediately write a Letter to him, set down in the end of * 1.95 the 6th Council; but Leo was not ordained till August, in the year 682. After the return of John, Bishop of Porto, one of the Legates, whom Agatho had sent to the Council. And some believe, his Ordination was put off till August, in the year following: But it is not likely; for in May, of this year, he did examine and approve in a Synod, the Acts of the 6th Coun∣cil; and in the end of the same year, sent them into Spain. He died the year after, viz. June 28. 684.

The Emperor's Letter directed to Leo, wherein he acquaints him, That the Council hath confirmed Pope Agatho's Doctrine, and what was done in the 6th Council, is in the Acts of that Council. Baronius pretends, That these two Letters are Supposititious, but his Conje∣ctures are grounded only upon false dates a 1.96, added by some Latin Author, and wanting in the Greek Original, or upon Anastasius's false Chronology.

Besides these two Letters of Leo II. there are four more that were sent into Spain about the Affair of the 6th Council, the definition whereof was sent into that Kingdom by Peter, No∣tary of the Church of Rome. The first is directed to all the Spanish Bishops. He acquaints them with what was defined in the general Council, and exhorts them to receive its Definiti∣ons. He recommends the same thing in particular, to a certain Bishop called Quiricus, in the second Letter. In the third, he exhorts an Earl, named Simplicius, to endeavour the main∣taining of that Doctrine. And in the fourth, he relates to King Ervigius, how the Faith of the Church was confirmed and explained in the 6th Council, and the Hereticks condemned; and exhorts him to cause all the Bishops of his Kingdom, to receive and subscribe the defini∣tion of that Council. Baronius would bring these Letters also into doubt, because Honorius's name is found therein among the Bishops condemned; but these Conjectures are so weak b 1.97, that it is not worth the while to answer them.

BENEDICT II.

BENEDICT II. finished what his Predecessor had begun, by writing to the Notary Pe∣ter, who was sent into Spain, to cause the definition of the 6th Council to be subscribed * 1.98 to, and sent him a Copy of the Letter written to King Ervigius by his Predecessor. Leo's Letters, and the definition of the 6th Council, came too late to be delivered to the 13th Coun∣cil of Toledo; so that the Business was terminated but in the 14th Council, held in that City in 684. in November, where the Faith established by the 6th Council was confirmed. The Authentick Acts of this Council, are an invincible proof of the truth of Leo II. 's and Bene∣dict's Letters against Cardinal Baronius's frivolous Conjectures.

DREPANIUS FLORUS.

DREPANIUS, a French Poet, flourished towards the middle of the 7th Century. We have some Poems of his; the 22d, 26th and 27th Psalms put into Verse; the Song * 1.99 of Ananias, Azarias and Misael in the Furnace; an Hymn to S. Michael, an Hymn upon the Paschal Taper; a Letter to Moduin, Bishop of * 1.100 Autun; upon the reading of the Holy Scripture; a Thanksgiving to one of his Friends, who stood up in his Defence; and a Let∣ter to a Grammarian, to desire him to send him an Answer. His Stile is pretty Poetical, he does not use many barbarous Terms, but he does not place them in an order Poetical enough, and uses sometimes words fit only for Prose.

ILDEPHONSUS, Bishop of Toledo.

ILDEPHONSUS, a Monk, and afterwards Abbot of the Monastery of Agali, was elected Bishop of Toledo in 658. which was the 9th year of the Reign of King * 1.101 Recessuinth, * 1.102 and governed that Church nine Years, and two Months. He made a Book of the Ecclesiastical Writers, for a continuation of Isidorus's, to the end whereof Julian, his Successor, added the Catalogue of his Works, after he had made an Encomium upon him, and taken notice of the principal Circumstances of his Life. He hath composed, says he, several Books very well written, and much to be valued. He divided them himself, thus: The first part compre∣hends the following Tracts, A Writing of his own Weakness, by way of a Prosopopoeia; a Tract of the Virgin Mary's perpetual Virginity against three Infidels; a small Tract upon the Proprieties of the three Divine Persons; another Tract containing Reflections upon his daily Actions; another of Reflections upon Sacred Things; a Book of the Knowledge of Bap∣tism; a Treatise of the advancement of the Spiritual Solitariness, which he joined to the first part of his Works. The second comprehends several Letters written to several Persons, and sometimes under different Names, in which there be many large Answers. The third part was made up of Masses, Hymns and Sermons. The fourth contained many small Works in Prose and Verse; among which there be some Epitaphs and Epigrams. He had moreover be∣gun several other Tracts, which he left imperfect.

Of all these Tracts there is none left to us, but that of Mary's perpetual Virginity, where∣in he asserts, against Jovinian, That she kept her Virginity in her bringing forth; Against Elvidius, That she remained a Virgin after she had brought forth Jesus Christ; And against the Jews, That she Conceived without the loss of her Virginity. He enlargeth upon the Myste∣ry of the Incarnation, and the God-head of Christ. This Treatise is full of Devout Considerations, with a Preface to it, containing many Pious Thoughts. The Stile is Sententious and Concise.

Some ascribe moreover to Ildephonsus of Toledo, another Treatise of Mary's perpetual Vir∣ginity, and * 1.103 Twelve Sermons on the Purification, the Birth, and Assumption of the Virgin; but the Stile of these Works, which are not mention'd by Julian, is so different from that of Ildephonsus, that we may be assured they belong to another Author. They are written in a more Dogmatical way, and are full of Citations from the Fathers, and of Reasonings. Nay, and there are found in them some passages of Authors that lived after Ildephonsus, as of S. Bernard, of the Author Of the Commentary upon the Seven Penitential Psalms, which is under the Name of S. Gregory, of Ratram, and Paschasius. This Author Teaches, That * 1.104 the Virgin was

Sanctified in her Mother's Womb, and was Born without Original Sin. He believes, 'Tis upon that account, the Feast of h••r Nativity is kept; but he does not speak of the Concep∣tion. He asserts, That she suffered no Pain in her bringing forth. He says, That Jesus Christ came out of the Virgin by penetrating through her Bowels, after the same manner that he came forth out of the Grave by penetration, and charges the opposite Opinion with Heresie. He affirms, That she committed no Sin in her Life. He commends her highly, and looks up∣on her as the most Excellent of all Creatures. He describes her Assumption in a stately man∣ner; but yet he dares not affirm she ascended into Heaven in Soul and Body; because, tho' that Opinion, says he, be Pious, yet it cannot be affirmed as a certainty, lest we should deli∣ver doubtful Things for unquestionable Truths. Quod licet pium sit credere, a nobis tamen non debet affirmari, ne videamus dubia pro certis recipere. This is what this Author says, whom I believe to be much later than Ildephonsus of Toledo, and to belong to the Ninth Century of the Church. This Opinion is suitable to that of Usuardus, that lived in the same time, who speaking in his Martyrology of the Virgin's Body, says, The Church had rather confess, that she knows not where it is, than teach any thing Apocryphal and Frivolous about it, Plus elegit Sobrietas Ecclesiae cum pietate nescire, quam aliquid frivolum aut Apochryphum do∣cere.

The Works, bearing Ildephonsus's Name, have been Published by Feuardentius, [at Paris in 1576,] and are extant in the Bibliotheca Patrum, [Tom. 12.] except the Treatise Of Illustri∣ous Men, which was Printed together with those of S. Jerom, Gennadius, and Isidore, [at Ant∣werp in 1639.]

Dacherius hath Published in the first Volume of his Spicilegium some Letters of Ildephonsus of Toledo, of Quiricus, and Idatius, Bishops of Barcelona.

TAIO, or TAGO.

TAIO, Bishop of Saragosa, flourished about the middle of the 7th Century. He reduced into Five Books, under certain Titles, all that he found in S. Gregory's Works about Divi∣nity, * 1.105 without mixing with it any Arguments, or Testimonies of the other Fathers, save only of S. Augustin. The First Book of that Collection, Treats of God and his Attributes. The Second, Of the Incarnation, and the Preaching of the Gospel, of Pastors and their Flocks. The Third, Of the divers Orders of the Church, of Vertues and Vices. The Fourth, Of the Judgments of God, of Temptations, and of Sins. And the Fifth, Of Reprobates, of the final Judgment, and the Resurrection. This Collection is * 1.106 not Printed, and it does not seem very necessary to Publish it. Mabillon, from whom we have learn'd what we have now said of it, hath Published this Author's Letter to Quiricus. The Cardinal of Aguirre pro∣mised another Letter of Taio to Eugenius of Toledo.

LEONTIUS, Bishop in Cyprus.

LEONTIUS, Bishop of a Town formerly called Naples, now Lemonee, in the Isle of Cyprus, is Honourably Quoted in the 7th Council, Act 4. They produce a long fragment, * 1.107 which it's said is taken out of the Fifth Book of his Apology for the Christians against the Jews. He maintains there, That neither Crosses nor Images are Worshipped, but only have outward respects paid them, terminating in God and Jesus Christ. It is observed in the same place, That he is the Author of the Life of S. John the Alms-giver, of S. Simeon the simple, and of some other Works, and that he lived under Maurice the Emperor. Combefis hath * 1.108 Published Two Homilies of that Author, the one upon the Blessed Simeon, when he received Christ into his Arms, and the other upon the Feast-Day kept between Easter and Whitsunday, on the Wednesday of the Fourth Week after Easter.

MARCULPHUS.

THIS Author's Preface, to his Two Books to * 1.109 Forms, shews, that he was a French Monk, and that he made that Work after he was 70 Years old, and Dedicated it to a Bishop * 1.110 Named Landericus, but seeing he does not say, of what place he was Bishop, some have thought, it was. Landericus of Paris a 1.111, who was famous in the Reign of Clovis the Son of Dagobert, towards the Year 660. Others pretend that it is a Bishop of Meaux, who lived in the time of Pepin and Charles the Great, towards the Year 780.

However, these Forms are of the time of the Second Race of our Kings, for Marculphus having written them about the 70th Year of his Age, and having gathered the Forms in use in the time of his Ancestors, and those but in small number, there can be no doubt, but the most part of them are very Ancient.

We shall speak here but of those concerning Ecclesiastical Matters.

The First is the Form of a Privilege granted by a Bishop to a Monastery. It is directed to the Abbot, and the whole Society of the Monastery. Therein he says, That being willing to provide for their Quiet, and conform himself to the Custom, according to which the Mona∣steries of Lerins, Agaune, Luxeuil, and a great number more, enjoy the privilege of Liber∣ty, he made the following Constitutions, to be observed by the Monks, and the Bishops his Successors; That the Monks shall receive Orders from the Bishop; That he shall Bless the Altars in their Church gratis; That he shall every Year give them the Holy Chrism, if they demand it of him; That he shall make him their Abbot that shall be chosen out of them∣selves, by the unanimous consent of the Society; That he shall in no wise meddle with the Affairs, Persons, or the Revenues, present or to come, belonging to the Monastery; That he shall take nothing of what shall be bestowed upon them, nor of their Offerings made upon their Altars; That he shall not come into their Monastery unless he be called into it; And when he shall be desired to go thither, after the Celebration of the Mysteries, he shall with-draw, to leave them in Peace; That the Abbot shall correct his Monks, and that the Bishop shall not suffer them to be in the City.

In the Second Form, The King confirms the Exemption granted by the Bishop, particular∣ly as to what concerns the Revenues, and extends the prohibition of Invading them to all sorts of Persons.

The 3d is a Form, Whereby the King Exempts the Bishop's Lands from the Secular Juris∣diction.

The 4th is the Confirmation of an Exemption already granted.

The 5th is a Form directed by the Prince to the Bishops, whereby he enjoins them to Or∣dain such a Person, chosen by him, with the Bishops and Lords of his Realm, to be Bishop in the room of a Bishop deceased.

The 6th is an Order of the Prince to a Bishop to Ordain him whom he hath chosen.

The 7th is a Request of the Inhabitants of a Town to the King, to beseech him to Elect such an one Bishop of their Town. At the foot whereof is the Prince's Order. These Forms do shew, That from that time the Kings of France enjoyed the Nomination to Bishopricks, and that Bishops were Ordained by the Metropolitans, without any need to go to Rome.

The 14th, 15th, and 16th, are Forms of Donations made to some Churches by their Princes.

The 19th is a Permission of the Prince to make a Man Clerk for the Service of a Church, or a Monastery, and to cut off his Hair.

The 26th is an Order of the Prince to the Bishop, to give again to a private Man a Farm belonging to him, if not, to send one in his Name into his Court, to give an account of that business.

The 27th is an Order to the Bishop to reprove an Abbot, or another Clerk, guilty of some Injustice.

The 35th is a Confirmation of the Privileges of a Monastery.

The Six first Forms of the Second Book, are Forms of a Donation, or Abandoning of Goods to an Hospital, Monastery, or Church!

The 30th is the Form of a Private Separation between the Husband and the Wife.

The 39th is a Form whereby Two Persons give to a Church the propriety of Two Inheri∣tances, belonging to each of them, upon condition, that they shall have the use of them du∣ring their Life, and that the Surviver shall enjoy them both.

The 40th is the Bishop's Consenting to that Deed of Use.

The 42d is a form of a Letter of one Bishop to another, when he sends him * 1.112 the Eulogies at Easter.

The 43d is the Bishop's Answer upon the receiving of them.

The 44th and 45th are forms of Letters of a Bishop to the King, or Queen, or to another Bishop, about Christmas-Day.

The 46th. 47th. 48th. and 49th. are Forms of Commendatory Letters. The first to recom∣mend one to a Bishop, known. The second to recommend him to an Abbot. The third to recommend to an Abbot a Person desirous to enter into a Monastery. The last to recommend one willing to go in z 1.113 Pilgrimages to the Tombs of S. Peter and S. Paul the Apostles.

Among the other ancient Forms of France, which M. Bignon hath publish'd * 1.114, together with those of Marculphus, there are some more found concerning the Church, as the 11th. which is a Cession made to a Church; the 12th. which is a Form of a Commendatory Letter given to Clerks; the 26th. 27th. and 28th. which are Donations to Churches; the 44th. which is a Form of Exemption given by the King to a Monastery of Virgins; the 45th. is a Confir∣mation of that Privilege.

Among those which are according to the Roman. Law, there are Forms of Donation to a Church, N. 1, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38. and lastly, in the last Forms, published by M. Bignon, there are also found Forms of Donations to Churches, and Commendatory Letters of Clerks.

COSMA of Jerusalem.

SUidas says, That in S. John Damascene's Time flourish'd COSMA of Jerusalem, a witty, ingenious Man, very skilful in making Hymns and Spiritual Songs, elegantly and learnedly; * 1.115 and that they surpassed all that ever was done or shall be done in that kind. We have yet Thirteen of those Hymns upon the principal Festivals of the Year, which are so much the bet∣ter, because the Sence of them is taken out of the Holy Scripture, and is nobly express'd. In imitation of him one Mark made one upon Holy Saturday, and Theophanes another on the Annunciation of the Virgin.

PANTALEO.

THE Name of Pantaleo, a Deacon, and afterwards Presbyter of the Church of Con∣stantinople, is found at the head of four Sermons. The first of the Epiphany. The se∣cond * 1.116 of the aa 1.117 Exaltation of the Cross, and the other two upon the Tranfiguration.

The first is in the Bibliotheca Patrum, printed at Colen. The second was publish'd by Gretser, and the other two by Combefis, who durst not affirm them to be the same Author's. There is nothing remarkable in those Monuments. Possevin says, there were at Constantinople some Sermons of this Author for the whole Year.

S. JULIAN of Toledo.

S. JULIAN, Disciple of Eugenius, chosen Archbishop of Toledo in the Year 680. was President in several Councils held in that City, and died in 690. His Successor Felix, * 1.118 having praised his Vertues, sets down the Catalogue of his Books.

He wrote, saith he, a Book of the Prognosticks of another Life, directed to the Bishop Idatius; in the begin∣ning of which there is a Letter to that Bishop, and a Prayer. This Work is divided into three Books, the first is of the Original of Man's Death. The second of the State of the Souls of the Dead until the Resurrection. The third is of the last Resurrection. He made moreover a Book of Answers, dedicated to the same Person; in which he maintains the Canons and Laws, whereby Christian Slaves are forbidden to serve Infidels. We have also an Apology for the Faith, dedicated to Pope Benedict, and another Apology upon three Articles, upon which the Bishop of Rome seemed to have had some Doubts; a little Tract of the Remedies against Blasphemies, with a Letter to Adrian the Abbot; a Treatise of the Proof of the sixth Age, [or of the coming of Christ] at the beginning thereof there is a Letter to King Ervigius, with a Prayer. This Work is divided into three Books; the first contains the Texts of the Old Testament, shewing, without any need of sup∣putation of Years, that the Messias is come: The second Book shews, by the Apostle's Do∣ctrine, that Christ came in the fulness of Time: The third proves, that the sixth Age, in which the Messias was to come, is come; There he distinguisheth the five Ages which went before, not by the Years but by the Generations. We have moreover a Collection of his Poetry, containing Hymns, Epitaphs and Epigrams in great number; a Book of Letters; a Collection of Sermons, among which is found a little Writing of the Protection of the House of God, and of those that retire into it; a Book intituled, Of the Contrarieties of the Scripture, divided into two Parts, the first whereof comprehends what relates to the Old Testament, and the second to the New; a Book of History of what happen'd in France in the Time of King Wamba; a Collection of Sentences, taken out of S. Austin, upon the Psalms; some Extracts of the same Father's Books against Julian; a Treatise of Divine Judgments, taken out of the Scripture, with a Letter to King Ervigius; a Trea∣tise against the Persecutors of those who fly into Churches; a Book of the Masses for the whole Year, divided into four Parts, in which he corrected some which were either cor∣rupted or imperfect, and made new ones; a Book of Prayers for the Festivals of the Church of Toledo, either reformed or newly made.

Of all those Works these only remain:

The Treatise of the Prognosticks, directed to Idatius Bishop of Barcelona, with the Letter and the Prayer: The three Books, to shew the sixth Age against the Jews: And the History of the Acts of Wamba in France.

In the first Book of the Treatise of Prognosticks, he treats of Men's Death; he shews it is sin that subjected them to Death, and affirms it is called Mors a Morsu, because the first Man became Mortal, by eating of the Forbidden Fruit. He believes, that, altho' Death be not good, yet it is useful to the Just, and that a sharp Death remits Sins. He examines why Baptism remitting Original Sin, does not free Men from the Law of Death; and he gives two Reasons for it, taken out of S. Austin, and of Julian Pomerius, He believes Angels assist the Just at their Death, and that Devils do then lie in wait for them. He commends the

Piety of the Faithful, who take care to do the last Office to their Parents; hereupon he produces some Passages out of S. Austin, about the Sacrifices offered for the Dead, and the Suffrages of Martyrs.

In the Second, which is of the State of Souls after Death, he says, Those of perfect Christians are immediately carried into a Paradise, where they remain, joyfully waiting for the Resurrection of their Bodies: And that they enjoy in that Place the Happiness and the Knowledge of God. He believes those of them who have some Sins to blot out, are de∣tain'd for a while; but neither the one not the other do enjoy as perfect a Vision of the Divine Substance, as they shall do after the Resurrection, tho' they do already see God, and reign with Christ: That the Wicked, immediately after Death, are precipitated into Hell, where they undergo endless Torments. He establisheth * 1.119 Purgatory, which he believes to be a real Fire, wherewith Sins remaining at ones Death are expiated in the other World; and that the Time of the Soul's abiding there is proportion'd to the number or the grievousness of Sins committed by them. He affirms, That the Souls of the Dead may know one another. He says, The Dead pray for the Living, but not for the Damned; that they know what is done here below; that they pity those they have been acquainted with; that they are earnestly desirous of Men's Salvation; that sometimes they appear to the Living; that the Damned see only some of the Blessed, &c.

The Third Book is of the Judgment and Resurrection: These are his Opinions. Neither the Time nor the Place of the Final Judgment can be known, nor how long it will last. Jesus Christ shall appear descending from Heaven with Angels, carrying his Cross: At the Sight of him the very Elect shall tremble for fear, and that Fear shall purify them from their Sins; but the ungodly shall be in a strange Confusion. All the Saints shall judge the World, toge∣ther with Christ. All Men shall rise in a Moment, and shall put on again a true Body and Flesh, but uncorruptible, without Defect, Imperfection or Mutilation, in a perfect Age and perfect Beauty. The Difference of Sexes shall remain, but without Lust, without any need of Food or Raiment. All Children, who had any Life in their Mothers Womb, shall rise again. Angels shall separate the Good from the Bad; the Consciences of both shall be laid open, the ungodly shall be cast down head-long into real Fires, in which their Bodies shall burn without being consumed; there shall be different Torments, according to the Difference of Crimes; and the Children guilty of Original Sin only, shall suffer the easiest Pain of all; It is needless to ask where that Fire shall be; after the Condemnation the Recompence of the Just shall follow, and then the Heaven and the Earth shall be set on Fire; there will be a New Heaven and a New Earth, where the Saints may dwell, tho' they may also ascend up into the Heavens; they shall then see God as the Angels do see him now; they shall enjoy a Liberty so much the more perfect, as they shall no more be obnoxious to Sin; they shall all be happy, tho' in different Degrees of Happiness; they shall be wholly employed in praising God; they shall place all their Felicity in the perpetual Contemplation and Love of him. These are the Points of Doctrine which Julian gathereth from the Fathers of the Church, for pro∣perly this Work is nothing else but a Collection of Passages of the Fathers, chiefly of S. Au∣gustin, S. Gregory and Julian Pomerius.

The Treatise against the Jews is more of Julian's Composition. He proves in the first Book That the Signs of the Messias's coming, pointed at in the Old Testament, are come to pass; That the Time set down by Daniel agrees with the coming of Christ; and that after Jerusa∣lem's Destruction the Jews can expect no other Messias. In the second he shews, by the Hi∣story of the New Testament, That Jesus Christ is the Messias, and that the Apostles did con∣vince the Jews of it. In the last he distinguisheth the Ages of the World by the Generations, and shews we are in the sixth Age: The first is from Adam to the Flood; the second from the Flood to Abraham; the third from Abraham to David; the fourth from David until the carry∣ing away into Babylon; the fifth from the carrying away into Babylon to Jesus Christ. He compares the Account of the Years of the Hebrew Text, and of the Septuagint, and preferrs the latter, because it was more suitable to his Design, finding by this means 5000 Years run out from the Beginning of the World to Christ's Birth. He extols the Authority of the Version of the Septuagint, and affirms that the Jews have corrupted the Hebrew Text. He adds, That altho it were not so, yet the distinction of the Generations shews the fifth Age of the World was run out when Christ came into the World.

The History of the Acts of Wamba in Gallia, being no Ecclesiastical Work, we will make no Extract of it here, contenting our selves in observing; that it is found in the first Volume of the Historiographers of France, put out by Du Chesne.

In the Bibliotheca Patrum of Colen [in 1618.] they have attributed to Julian of Toledo, a Book of Antilogies * 1.120, or seeming Contrarieties of the Scripture, which had been already printed without the Author's Name; but it was found to be Berthorius's, Abbot of Mount Cassin.

There was also part of a Commentary upon the Prophet Nahum published under Julian's Name: But besides that, there is nothing said of it in Felix's Catalogue, the Style and the manner of the Writing of it, shews plainly enough it belongs to another Author, tho' bearing Julian's Name in the Manuscript upon which Canisius publish'd it.

THEODORUS of Canterbury.

THEODORUS, bred a Monk of Tarsus, was ordained Bishop by Pope Vitalian, and sent in 668. into England, to govern the Church of Canterbury. He arrived there Two * 1.121 Years after his departure [staying long in France as he went] and was well entertained by King Egbert, who had sent to Rome to desire a Bishop to be sent to him. He laboured much in the establishing of the Faith and the Church-discipline in England. He held several Coun∣cils, made Bishops, founded Monasteries, made Peace between Princes, kept the People in their Duty; and having thus performed all the parts of a good Pastor, during the space of 20 years, he died in 690. being 88 years old.

He is the First that composed a Penitential among the Latins, made up of Canons, taken out of the Councils of the Greek and Latin Church. This Book was soon spread all over the West, and many undertook to make such like Works, which in process of time became very common and very bad, because every one making Collections of Canons, according to his Fancy; nay, and some inventing them, this kind of Works soon grew full of Absurdities, Contradictions and Errors, favouring Men's Lusts, and authorizing Looseness and Remissness in Discipline. We have not now Theodorus's Penitential whole and in its Purity. M. Dacherius published some Fragments of it; and since that Mr. Petit published part of it [at Paris in 1677.] under the name of Theodorus's Penitential; but he confesses, in his Preface, 'tis not the whole Penitential of this Author; and it is credible, that this very part of it was altered, and mingled with several other Canons; for it is not without Errors; Theodorus is cited there as a Third Person, and things are met with there contrary to Theodorus himself a 1.122.

However, these are the Contents of the First Part, under Fourteen Titles or Chap∣ters.

The First is of the Church. There it is forbidden to celebrate the Sacrifice in a place, where Infidels have been buried. It is declared, There ought to be no Steps to the Altars, where there be Relicks of Saints; That there ought to be a Lamp burning before them every Night, unless the Church be Poor; That bb 1.123 Frankincense is to be offered on the Festi∣vals of Saints; That it is not lawful for the Laity to recite the Lessons in the Church, nor to say Allelujah; but only to Sing the Psalms and Responses, without Allelujah.

The Second is of the Churches Rights: It shews, That the Bishop may confirm in the Fields; That the Presbyter may consecrate there; That the Bishop cannot force an Abbot to come to the Synod, without a rational Cause; That the Bishop may judge poor Men's Causes, not exceeding fifty Pence; but if the Sum exceed that, the cognizance of it belongs to the King; That the Bishop may dispense with a Vow, if he judges it fit; That Presby∣ters only can say Mass, bless the People, and consecrate Crosses; That Presbyters are not bound to pay Tenths; That they ought not to discover their Bishop's Faults; That Men ought not to take the Sacrament from the hand of a Priest, that is not able to read the Lessons and to perform the Ceremonies; That the Presbyters, singing at the Mass, ought not to put off their † 1.124 Chasuble; That Persons baptized by a Presbyter, that is a Fornicator, are to be re-baptized; That a Presbyter who hath been ordained without being baptized, is to be baptized and re-ordained; and those are to be re-baptized that have been baptized by him (which is a very extraordinary Practice, and contrary to the use of the Latin Church of that time;) That Deacons are not to break the Bread of the Oblation, nor to say the Collect, nor the Dominus Vobiscum, nor the last Prayer; That they cannot impose Penance on a Lay-man, but

they may baptize, bless Meat and Drink; That Monks also, and other Clerks, may bless Meat.

The Third Title is of Ordinations. It shews, That in a Bishop's Ordination, Mass is to be sung by the Bishop who performs the Ordination; and so likewise in the Ordination of Pres∣byters and Deacons; but for the Benediction of Monks, it is enough, That the Abbot say Mass; That the Monk is from that time to keep his Head covered with his Cowle during the space of seven days; That in the Eighth, the Abbot shall take it away, as the Presbyter takes away the Veil of Persons newly baptized; That a Presbyter may consecrate an Abbess; but an Abbot ought to be consecrated by a Bishop; That the Greeks do bless the Virgins and Widows after the same manner, but the Latins do not give the Veil to Widows; That among the Greeks, a Presbyter may consecrate a Virgin, reconcile Penitents, consecrate the Oil for Exorcisms, and the Chrism for the Sick, if need be; but at Rome, the Bishop only may do it.

The Fourth Title is of Baptism. It imports, That Baptism remits Sins; but ac∣cording to Pope Innocent, it does not wash away the slain of Bigamy, [or second Marriages]; That besides Baptism, Confirmation is necessary to Perfection; That he does not deny, but that Confirmation belongs to the Bishop; but yet that the Chrism was established in the Nicene Council (which is a false Supposition.) That the same Linen Clothes in which the baptized are anointed, may be used many times; That the same Person who was Godfather at Baptism, may be Godfather at the Confirmation, but that it is not the Custom; That a Man un-baptized, cannot be a Godfather; That a Man may stand Surety for a Girl, and a Wo∣man for a Boy; That the baptized may not eat with the Catechumens, much less with the Gentiles.

The Fifth is of the Mass for the Dead. It imports, That among the Latins, the Monks use to carry the Corps to Church, to anoint their Breast with the holy Chrism, to say Mass upon them, and then to carry them out to the Grave, and to say a Prayer over them after they are interr'd, to say Masses for them the 1st. the 3d. and the 30th. day, and at the years end, if they will; That for the Laity, they say Masses the 3d. the 9th. and the 30th. day; That they ought to Fast 7 days for them; That Masses are not to be said for Children, unless they be 7 years old; That tho' S. Denys says, 'Tis a Blasphemy to pray for a wicked Man, yet S. Austin says, The Sacrifice is to be offered for all those that are dead in the Communion of the Church; That Presbyters and Deacons that will not, or ought not to communicate, are not to celebrate.

The Sixth Chapter is of Abbots, Monks and Monasteries. It is to this effect: The Abbot may withdraw himself with the Bishop's leave; the Abbot's Election belongs to the Monks; the Abbot cannot change his place, without the Bishop's consent, and without leaving a Priest in the Church, where he was, for the Ecclesiastical Ministery. Monks ought to have no Wo∣men with them, and Nuns to have no Men among them. A Monk cannot make a Vow without his Abbot's consent; if he make any, it is null. A Monk, chosen by his Society to be a Presbyter, ought not to leave his Rule; if he grows Proud, he shall be deposed, and become the last. It is at the liberty of Monasteries to receive infirm and weak Persons. It is also free for Monks to wash Lay-men's Feet, unless it be on Holy Thursday. It does not be∣long to Monks, to impose Penances on the Laity.

The Seventh Chapter is of Womens Functions in the Church or Monastery. They are for∣bidden covering the Altar with the Corporal, laying the Oblations or the Chalice upon the Altar, standing among the Clerks in the Church, sitting at Meat with Presbyters, imposing Penance: But they are permitted to receive the Eucharist upon a black Veil, according to the use of the Greeks; they may make the Oblations (that is, the Loaves offered upon the Altar) but not according to the practice of the Romans.

The Eighth Chapter is of the Customs of the Greeks and Latins. These are observed there: On Sunday the Greeks and the Romans do not ride on Horse-back nor in a Coach, un∣less it be to go to Church; they bake no Bread, and do not go to the Bath; the Greeks write no publick Acts; they both set their Slaves to work on Sunday. The Greek Monks have Ser∣vants waiting on them; the Latin have none. The Latins eat on Christmas-Eve, after having said Mass at the 9th. Hour. The Greeks do all sup the Evening after the Mass. Both the Greeks and the Latins say, they ought to assist the Sick of the Plague. The Greeks do not give to Swine the Meat of strangled Beasts; the Skin, the Wool and the Horns of them may be taken. One may wash his Head and Feet on Sunday; but the Romans do not follow that practice.

The Ninth Chapter is of the Irish and Britains, who differ from the Church about the keeping of Easter and their Tonsure. It is said there, That their Bishops shall be confirmed by the laying on of the hands of a Catholick Bishop; That the Chrism or the Eucharist cannot be given them, except they make Profession to re-unite themselves to the Church; and that those are to be baptized who doubt of their Baptism.

The Tenth is of those who are possessed with the Devil, or kill themselves. If they were godly Men, before they came to be possessed, they may be pray'd for; but if this Possession happened to them, after a Despair or some other Passion, they are not to be prayed for. Mas∣ses cannot be said for Self-murderers, but they may Pray and give Alms for them: Neverthe∣less some say Mass for them that kill'd themselves, being out of their Wits, and having no use of their Reason.

The Eleventh contains many Questions about married Persons. It is said there, they ought to abstain from the use of Matrimony 3 days before the Communion, 40 days before Easter, 40 days before and after Child-bearing; That a Man may leave his Wife guilty of Adultery, and Marry another; and that she may Marry again after two Years Penance: But the Wife cannot leave her Husband, tho' an Adulterer; That a lawful * 1.125 Marriage cannot be dissolved, but with the consent of both Parties; but either of them may give his consent, that the other withdraw into a Monastery, and then that the other may Marry again, if he had not been married again before. If a Hus∣band is made a Slave, the Wife may Marry at the years end; That a Deacon's Wife, forsaken by him, is not permitted to Marry; That a Man may Marry again, within one Month after his Wife's death, and a Woman within one year after her Husband's Decease; That a Woman, that hath vowed Widowhood, can∣not Marry again; notwithstanding if she should Mar∣ry again, it shall be free for the Husband to let her fulfil her Vow or not; That the Bishop may dispense with Vows; That it is free for one baptized to keep or to put away his Wife, being a Pagan. If a Woman forsake her Husband, within five years after he may take another Wife. If she be carried away Captive, he may Marry another; one year after; but if she cometh again, he shall leave this last; That it is lawful among the Greeks to Marry in the Third De∣gree, and among the Romans in the Fifth only; but Marriages contracted by Persons within the Third or the Fourth degree of Consanguinity, are not disanulled. Parents are bound to bestow their Daughter on him, to whom they have betrothed her, except she be unwilling. Children are in the Power of their Father, till they be 16 years old; but that time being past, they may enter into a Religious Order, and the Father cannot Marry them against their Will. I leave out some other Constitutions less important; as also the 12th Chapter of Slaves, as being now out of date.

The 13th Chapter is upon different Customs. It is observed therein, that there are Three solemn Fasts in the Year, that is, besides the ordinary Lent, Forty Days before Christmas, and Forty Days after Whitsunday. It is said there, That the Laity are bound to perform their Vows; That Friars may not bear Arms; That one Child may be given in exchange for another to a Monastery; That the Church ought to pay Tribute, if it be the custom; That Tythes are to be given only to the Poor, and Strangers; That he that Fasts for the Dead, does good to himself; but that God alone knows, how it goes with the Dead; That infirm Folks may Eat and Drink at any Hour.

The 14th Chapter is about the Reconciliation of Penitents. It imports, that the Romans do Reconcile them, intra absidem, (that is to say, near the Altar, in the place which is Rail'd in,) but that the Greeks do not do so; That the Bishop only maketh the Reconciliation, on Holy-Thursday; but if the Bishop cannot well do it, he may empower a Presbyter to do it. He adds, That in his Province there is no Reconciliation, because there is no Publick Penance.

M. Petit hath joined to this Work some other Collections of Canons, bearing Theodorus's Name. The 1st might be entituled a Penitential, rather than that before mentioned. It is discoursed there first of all, what they ought to do who are enjoin'd a Penance of One, Two, or Three Years Fasting. 2. What they may do to redeem those Penances, whether by re∣citing Psalms, or giving Money to the Poor; what number of Psalms they ought to say, or what Sums they ought to bestow. 3. After what manner Penitents are to come before the Bishop to receive Penance. 4. Of the different Penances to be imposed for different Crimes. There one may see some remainders of the Ancient Penance. Penitents did come in the be∣ginning of Lent to the Door of the Metropolitan Church bare-footed, covered with Sack-Cloth, and did cast themselves on the ground. The Arch-Priests, or the Ministers of Parishes, did receive them there, and enjoined them Penances; then they brought them into the Church, they sung the Seven Psalms, the Bishop laid hands on them, threw Ashes and cc 1.126 Holy Water on

them, covered them with Hair-Cloth, and turned them out of the Church. On Holy Thurs∣day they came again, and having confessed their Sins again, the Bishop Prayed to God to for∣give them their Sins, and said some Prayers over them. It was not lawful to receive a Peni∣tent of another Diocess, or Parish, without the leave of the Bishop, or the Ministers. Men were yet put to Penance for Eating things strangled, or Blood of Beasts. Penances were shorter than in former times, but then they were enjoined for very light faults. All others, but Bishops, and Presbyters, were forbidden hearing Confessions, or imposing Penances. The Author of this Collection is different from the former, the Constitutions themselves are diffe∣rent from those in the former Collection. There be some of them which seem to be made since Theodorus's time.

The Ten Capitules proposed to the Council of Hereford by Theodorus, related by Beda, do certainly belong to this Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, tho' they be not taken out of his Peni∣tential, but out of a Collection of Canons. It is decreed in the first, That Easter shall be kept the Sunday after the 14th Moon in March. In the 2d, Bishops are forbidden to encroach upon the Bishopricks of their Brethren. In the 3d, They are forbidden to molest Monaste∣ries, or to take their Goods from them. The 4th, Is against those Friars who go from one Monastery to another, without their Abbot's leave. The 5th, Against the Clerks, who leave their Bishop. Other Bishops are forbidden to entertain them. The 6th imports, That fo∣reign Bishops and Clerks shall content themselves with the Hospitality used towards them, and shall not perform any Function of their Ministery, without permission from the Bishop of the place. The 7th, Appoints Councils to be kept Twice a Year. The 8th, Forbids Bishops to preferr themselves before others out of Ambition, and enjoins them to follow the time and order of their Ordination. The 9th declares, That it is fit to encrease the number of▪ Bi∣shops, according as Believers encrease in number. The last Prohibits unlawful Marriages. It forbids Husbands leaving their Wives, except for the cause of Adultery; and orders those that shall leave them to remain unmarried. By this decision it appears, that the former Col∣lection is not wholly Theodorus's, because the 10th Chapter contains decisions contrary to this.

The Capitules Published by M. Dacherius, in the 9th Vol. of his Spicilegium, are the greatest part of them in M. Petit's first Collection: But this Collection is more Faithful and Genuine; for tho' some places thereof may be corrected by the Manuscripts of the first Collection, it must be confessed, that in this Theodorus's Canons are set down in the order observed by Theo∣dorus, and that they are not mixed with so many strange Canons. These are the most remarka∣ble things contained in them. In the 12th it is said, That among the Greeks, the Clergy and the Laity communicate every Sunday: But that among the Latins, it is left to Men's liberty, to communicate, or not; and that those that do not communicate, are not Excommunicated for that. The 35th, Is that famous Article of the Confession. It imports, That it is lawful, in case of necessity, to confess to God alone. Gratian, Burchard, and Ivo Carnutensis, do quote this passage otherwise. Theodorus says in his Penitential, That some say, with the Greeks, Men ought to confess their Sins to God alone: Others believe, they ought to confess them to the Priests; and almost the whole Church is of that mind: That Confession which is made to God blots out Sins, and that which is made to Men teaches us, how they are blotted out. God oftentimes does invisibly heal our Evils, and sometimes he uses the help of Physicians. This differs much from the very words of Theodorus's Penitential, if they be faithfully related in F. Dacherius's Col∣lection.

M. Petit hath also carefully gathered the Canons cited under Theodorus's Name, in a Col∣lection of the Councils of Spain, in the Penitentials of Egbert of York, and of Beda in the Roman Penitential, and in that of Rabanus, by Regino, Burchard, Ivo Carnutensis, Gratian, and several other Collectors of Canons: But all those Authors have many false Quotations, and so their Authority is not much to be relied upon.

All this shews, that we have not the true Penitential of Theodorus in its Integrity and Puri∣ty; That what Mr. Petit Published under the Title of a Penitential, is nothing less than that; That the Capitules, which he Published also from a Manuscript, which Mr. Faber communi∣cated to him, are not Theodorus's neither; and all the rest of his Collections is taken out of suspicious Monuments. Nevertheless he is to be commended for his diligence and labour, and we are beholden to him, for having gathered together all that bore Theodorus's Name. Spelman found in Cambridge Library a great Penitential ascribed to Theodorus, of which he gives us the Titles. It's to be wished it were Published, that we might see whether it be The∣odorus's own Original, or another Collection of Canons.

Mr. Petit joined to Theodorus's Penitential, an old compilement of Canons, a Collection of divers Monuments about Church Rites, and chiefly about Penance, taken out of several Manuscripts, and a Collection of several Papers, Constitutions, Bulls, Edicts, Declarations, Privileges, Letters, Confessions, and other pieces, which he hath Published. These Monu∣ments are accompanied with Two Dissertations, the one upon Theodorus's Pastoral Vigilancy, to shew, that all Bishops are bound not only to take care of their own Church, but moreover to watch over all the other, to help them in their need; The other upon Penance, in which he pretends to defend Theodorus's Opinion, and to prove against F. Morinus, that, in the An∣cient Church, there was no Penance for secret Sins, tho' never so grievous. Yea, and he

brings in proofs, tending to shew, that there lay no obligation to confess them to Men, nor to submit them to the Ministery of the Church Keys, and that inward Repentance was suffi∣cient to obtain the remission of them. Lastly, He adds some Notes upon his pretended Pe∣nitential, wherein he shews a great deal of Learning and Reading. These are the Contents of the Two Volumes in Quarto Printed at Paris by Dezallier in 1679, under the Title of The∣odori Poenitentiale.

FRUCTUOSUS.

FRUCTUOSUS, the Founder of several Monasteries in Spain, translated from the Bi∣shoprick of Dumes to the Arch-Bishoprick of Toledo, by the Decree of the 10th Council * 1.127 of that City, composed Two Rules, the one for the Monastery of Complutum, and the other common for all Monasteries, which is as a Supplement to the former, they are both found one after another in the Second part of the Rules of Benedictus Anianus, [Printed by Hosteni∣us at Paris, 1663.]

CEOLFRIDE.

CEOLFRIDE, Abbot of * 1.128 Jarrao in England, Beda's Tutor, wrote a Letter upon Easter to Naito King of the Picts, which his Disciple preserved us. He flourished toward the * 1.129 end of the 7th Century, and Died in 720. In that Letter he treats of the several sorts of the Clerk's Tonsure, and of the Celebration of Easter, and confesseth those differences are of small consequence, and that they should not trouble the Peace.

ADELMUS.

ADELMUS, Abbot of Malmesbury in England, wrote also a Book concerning Easter, against the custom of the Britains, and a Book of Virginity in Prose and Verse. We * 1.130 have yet this last Work. That in Prose was Printed by Sonnius in 1576, and inserted in the Bibl. Patrum, that in Verse was Published by Canisius in 1608. In this Tract he gives an Encomium of many Holy Persons, whose Life he describeth.

This Saint is believed to be he, who was Bishop of Sherborn, who had made a Book of Problems in Verse, in imitation of Symposius, of about a Thousand Verses. But Sigebert, who speaks of these Two Authors, in Two different Chapters, seems to distinguish them. One must not look for Politeness in the Works of this English Man.

ADAMAN.

ADAMAN, Abbot of Huy, wrote a Treatise of the places in the Holy Land, taken * 1.131 out of the Memoirs of Arculphus, a French Bishop, who had Travelled into Palaestine. * 1.132 He wrote also the Life of S. Columbus his Predecessor. F. Mabillon hath Published those Two Tracts more intire and correct, [in Saec. Benedict. III. p. 2.]

APONIUS.

ALTHOUGH it be not precisely known in what time this Author lived, it is proba∣ble, he lived about the end of this 7th Century. He made a Commentary upon the * 1.133 Song of Songs, in which what is said of the Bride and the Bridegroom, he applied to Christ

and his Church. We have Six Books of that Work in the Biblioth. Patr. It is pretty well written, full of Wit and Learning, and one of the best that was made upon that Subject. We have an Abridgment of the rest of that Commentary, made by a Benedictine Abbot: And Angelomus, who lived above 700 Years ago, copied out several places of it in his Com∣mentary upon the Song of Songs, [Printed by it self at Friburg, 1538.]

CRESCONIUS.

CRESCONIUS, an African Bishop, flourished towards the end of the 7th Century. * 1.134 He made a Collection of Canons, in Two parts. The First entituled, An Abridgment of the Canon-Law, Contains the Titles pointing to the matters, together with the Citation of the Canons where they are found. The Second contains the Canons themselves, set down in their full length, in the same order that they are Cited in the Abridgment. This is entituled, An Harmony of the Canons, or, A Book of Canons. The Abridgment was Published [ar Paris] in 1588, by M. Pitthaeus, from a Manuscript of the Church of Troyes, and since that by M. Al∣tasaranus [at Poictou] in 1630, and by F. Chifflet in 1649. M. Justel and Voellus inserted it also with the whole Harmony, in their Bibliotheca Juris Canonici, [or, A Compleat Body of the Canon-Law.]

JOANNES MONACHUS.

NO Authors did ever carry the Virgin Mary's Praises farther, than the Greeks of these latter * 1.135 Ages. We have already spoken of Eight Sermons of George Pisides upon that Subject. Here is a Monk, who is probably of the same time, not at all inferior to him in the Decla∣mation, which he made upon the Birth of the Mother of God. He mingles with the Vir∣gin's Commendations some Speeches, which he applies sometimes to S. Anne, sometimes to the Virgin. He brings in the Patriarchs, the Prophets, and the Righteous. Yea, and Adam himself acts his part there. If any Body liketh those kind of Discourses, he may con∣sult the Originals; for we are not willing to make Extracts of them. Allatius thinks, this John was Arch-Bishop of Bulgaria. It is not known when he lived.

DEMETRIUS CIZICENUS.

WE have, under this Bishop's Name, a little Writing of the Original and Errors of the * 1.136 Jacobites, in which he says, That the Author of that Sect was a Monk of Syria, named James, Sirnamed Tzantzale, who had embraced Eutyches's Error, and Dioscorus's Party; That since the Council of Chalcedon, those among the Syrians, who sided with the Emperor, had been called Melchites, that is to say, Royalists, because * 1.137 Melchi in Syriack signifieth King; and those who followed Eutyches's Opinion, took the Name of Jacobites. That these ac∣knowledge, there were Two Natures in Christ before the Union, but they hold there is but one after the Union; and so they suppose either the confusion, or the mixture of the Two Natures, and are condemned as Theopaschitae, because they believe the God-head did suffer; That they own the Three first Synods only; That when they cross their Foreheads they do it with one Finger only, to signifie the Unity of Nature; That because of that they do not cross themselves from the right hand to the left, as others do, but from the left to the right; That they mingle the Oblation with Oil, and matter not much Communicating; That they put no Water into the Cup; That they care very little, whether they do Worship Images, or not, and look upon that as an indifferent thing; That they Eat Flesh in Lent; That they have their peculiar Offices, and have added these words to the Trisagion, Thou that are Cruci∣fied for us. There be some among them, who call themselves Chatzizarys. They Worship Crosses, and put Nails into them, to signifie that the God-head suffered: But they differ from the true Jacobites, in that they own Two Natures in Christ, and seem to fall into Nestorius's Error, by saying, That during the Passion there were Two Persons in Christ, the one suf∣fering, and the other beholding the sufferings. They Fast some Days before the time that they leave Eating Flesh. In Lent they Eat Eggs, Milk, and Butter; They offered unleavened Bread; They put no Water into the Cup; They Baptized their Crosses. I have made an

exact Extract, or Abridgment, of that small Writing, because it contains some particulars pretty remarkable. It is not known when the Author of it lived. Yet in all probability he is of the 7th or 8th Century.

Upon what he says, That the Jacobites had their peculiar Offices, it may be observed, that in the Bibliotheca Patrum there is an Order of the Prayers and Ceremonies of the Baptism, and Mass, with some other Prayers for the use of the Syrian Jacobites, which are said to have been prescribed by Severus the Patriarch; that Work is probably of the same time.

Memoirs of the Schism of the Armenians.

THE Author of these Memoirs relates the origin of the Schism of the Armenians, how they embraced the Error of the Eutychians, the different Parties that rose up among them, the * 1.138 Councils held among them, the Catholick and Heretick Bishops they had, and several other Particulars relating to them. The Author of these Memoirs belongs to the Eighth Cen∣tury.

JOHANNES NICAENUS's Memoirs upon Christ's Birth, directed to Zachary, a Christian of Armenia.

THIS Author handles this Question; Why the Festival of Christ's Birth is kept on the 25th. day of December; tho' the Constitutions of S. James and the Apostles, appointed * 1.139 that Feast-day on January the 6th, upon which day Christ's Baptism is celebrated. He pre∣tends, that the custom of keeping that Festival on the 6th. of January, came from this, That John Baptist's Disciples, seeing Christ baptized on that day, and having heard, he was then 30 years old, they imagined it was also his Birth-day; That S. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, did write of it to Pope Julius, who, grounded upon some of Joseph's Memoirs, in which it was observed, That in the 7th. Month of the Jews, in the Feast of Tabernacles, the Angel had appeared to the High-priest, and stricken him dumb, until that Elizabeth had brought forth a Son; having cast up the Days and Months, he found that Christ's Birth-day fell on the 25th. of December, and established that custom in Rome; That S. Basil was of the same Mind, and wrote to S. Gregory Nazianzen, to procure the approbation of that practice in the Council of Constantinople, but that many would not receive it; That Honorius the Emperor persuaded his Brother to follow the use of Rome in that; That S. Chrysostom had approved it, and with S. Epiphanius had appointed Christmas to be kept on the 25th. of December; That afterwards, this was confirmed into a Synod held in Constantinople, which writ of it to all the Patriarchs, who did all embrace this Practice. Much might be said against this Historian's Observations, which are almost all false. But we must not seek for Exactness nor Truth in the Memoirs of these modern Greeks.

S. OWEN.

AUDOENUS or DADO, vulgarly called S. OWEN, who governed the Church of Rouen from the year 646, until the year 689. wrote the Life of S. Eligius, Bishop of * 1.140 * 1.141 Noyon, directed to Robert, Bishop of Paris. He relates his Miracles and Life in the two first Books, and in the last, he reproves his Actions Rhetorically.

Notes

• * 1.1

  S. Isidore of Sevil.
• * 1.2

  [Caesar-Augusta.]
• a 1.3

  [Canonical Books—Tobit, Ec∣clesiasticus.] As the Jews never acknow∣ledged these Books to be Canonical, so neither did the Primitive Church of Christ. S. Cyprian, (or rather Rufinus) in his Tract De Expos. Symb. having reckon'd up the Books in Order, which made up the Canon in his Time, and omitting those which were accounted Apocryphal, says, Haec sunt, &c. These are the Books which are received into the Canon by the Church; the other Books (meaning Tobit, &c.) are not Canonical. The same Catalogue of Cano∣nical Writers do Origen in Eusebius Hist. Eccles. l. 6. c. 25. and the Council of Laodicea, c. 59. give us: So that there can be no doubt, but for the First Four hundred Years and more, the Canon was exactly the same that we now have. Indeed the Apocryphal Books were read in the Churches of the purer Ages to the Novices and Catechumens (as were also Clemens and Ignatius's Epistles, and Hermes's Book called Pastor,) yea, and some of the later Fathers, as S. Jerom, Austin and Innocent give them very honourable Titles, calling them Sacred, Divine, Canonical; but then they mean not by Ca∣nonical as the Church of Rome doth, Canones Fidei a perfect Rule both for Faith and Manners, but Canones Morum & Historiae, profitable to Instruction, and to inform Men in the History of the Jewish Church: And so far is this Doctrine of S. Isidore Orthodox in the Judgment of the Church of England, our Mother. Art. 6.]
• * 1.3.1

  Cypr. de exp. symb.
• * 1.3.2

  Conc. Laod. anno 320. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 15, 16. Aug. de civ. Dei, l. 18. c. 36. Hieron. praef. in Macc. Conc. Flor. & Trident.
• b 1.4

  [A 〈◊〉〈◊〉—〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉] The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••••••y in ••pi∣ous and good Sence be said to communi∣cate Sanctifying. Grace and Holiness, not ex opere operato, as the Church of Rome teacheth, but ex opere opera••tis, be∣ing moral Instruments of conferring and conveying the Grace of God to the Souls of all worthy Partakers of them, God being-pleased-by-and-with them, to work Spiritual Graces and Endowments in us, Non propter 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacramen•…•… quae sa∣••••imus, sed propter vim fidei in Christo, qua illis Communicamus. Not through any ver∣tue in the Sacraments, which we receive, but through Faith in the Receiver.]
• * 1.4.3

  Conc. Trid. sess. 7. c. 8.
• * 1.5

  [To the 17th Year of the Em∣pire of He∣raclius, and to the Year 626.]
• * 1.6

  [Floren∣tina, Dr. Cave.]
• c 1.7

  [Mass or Canon.] The Word Missa, or Mass, is an old Latin Word, and signifies generally the whole Service of the Church, but more especially the Holy Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood. It was called Missa or demissio, be∣cause no Man was suffered to remain in the Church, that could not or would not receive the Sacrament; and therefore such Persons as had a Mind to see and hear, but not receive, were all, without excep∣tion, dismissed by the Deacon, after the Sermon was ended, with these Words. Ite, missa est: Go, ye are dismiss'd: And if any delayed, they were urged to depart by the Deacons and Exorcists, saying aloud, Si quis non communicet, det locum; Whosoever will not receive, let him go out. The Roman Church puts a different Sence upon this Word Mass, understanding by it, that Solemn Service, wherein they do pretend to offer unto God the Body and Blood of his Son, as a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins both of the Quick and Dead. Isidore here takes it in the first Sence, calling it, Ordo Precum, i. e. The Form of Prayers: But M. Du Pin, by joyning it with the Word Canon (a Word of a much later use, and which signifies in the Roman Church, the Rule or Form of celebrating their Mass) seems to bring it over to the latter, but against the Sence of S. Isidors of Sevil]
• * 1.7.4

  Ambr. lib: 5. Epist. 33. H•…•…. in Psal. 65.
• d 1.8

  [Established by S. Peter.] But Erroneously; for in the Apostle's time the Holy Sacrament was celebra∣ted without any Ceremonies or Prayers, save that at the Consecration of the Elements, the Priest re∣peated the Lord's Prayer over them. And this S. Jerom says, was done by the Institution of Christ himself. Dominus docuit Apostolos ut Orationem Dominicam dicerent super Sacrificio Corporis. And Innocent III. himself tells us, That S. Peter celebrated the Sacrament at Antioch with three Prayers only. Primus B. Petrus Apostolus Missam Antiochiae dicitur celebr••sse in qua tres tantum Orationes, in primordio nascentis Ecclesiae, dicebantur. So that it is absurd to think S. Peter the Author of so long an Office.]
• * 1.8.5

  Hieron. c••nt. Pelag. l. 3.
• e 1.9

  [Prayers in the Sacrament—for the Dead.] It is evident from some very Ancient Records of the Church, That it was a Custom among the Christians, Ab Antiquo, to pray for the Souls of the Faithful, depart∣ed in the dreadful Mysteries. Whether it were decreed by the Apostles themselves, as S. Chrysostom plainly tells us it was, in his Comment on the Philippians, may be a very great doubt, but it is certain it was in use about 200 years after Christ. This is proved from Tertullian, De Monog. c. 10. who thus speaks, Let the Faithful Widow pray for the Soul of her Husband, &c. And to the same Effect in Coron. Mil. c. 3. So also S. Cyprian, Ep. 66. Euseb. de Vit Constant. l. 4. c. 7. and Epiphanius Haer. 3. &c. And this we find practised by many of the most eminent Fathers of the Church. Nazianzen prayed for his Brother Caesarius, Ambrose for the Emperors Valentinian and Theodosius; and S. Austin for his Mother Monica. But all the Prayers made for the Dead, by the first Christians, contained no other Petitions for them, than what are very Warrantable and Pious, and which our Liturgy seems, in a great Measure, to authorize, viz. That God would hasten his Kingdom, and speedily give them a Consummation of Bliss, not imputing to them their Sins in the day of Judgment, to which they joined a thankful Remem∣brance of their Vertuous and Holy Examples, which they begged Grace to imitate. These, with the Alms to the Poor, which generally accompanied them, were the Oblationes pro Mortuis, spoken of by the Fathers. The Romish Church hath abused this Custom, by praying for Persons who died in their Sins, whom they suppose to be detained in their feigned Purgatory, which is both contrary to the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church; for they acknowledge no such place as Purgatory, nor Remission of Sins after Death.]

  [The Sacrament—a Sacrifice.] The Sacrament was called a Sacrifice by the Primitive Fathers, not be∣cause Christ is really Sacrificed for the Sins of the Quick and Dead in those Mysteries, as the Romish Church now useth the Word; but because, 1. It is a Commemoration of Christ's Spiritual Sacrifice. Annunciantes mortem Filii Dei, celeb•…•…us, saith S. Chrysostóm, incruentum Sacrificium. 2. Because in the Sacrament we offer the Spiritual Sacrifices of Prayers and Praises. 3. Because the Faithful, at this Sa∣crament, offered their Souls and Bodies a living and acceptable Sacrifice to God. 4. Because, at these Mysteries, the richer Christians brought an Oblation of Bread and Wine, and other Gifts, which were partly spent in this Service, and partly distributed to the Poor for their Relief. Thus the Fathers used the Words Sacrifice figuratively, which now is understood properly, but contrary to this place of Isidore.]
• * 1.10

  Chrys. Hom. 3. in Epist. ad Philip. Nazianz. Orat. 7. in Caes. Ambr. de ob. Val. & The∣od. Aug. Con∣fess. l. 9. c. 13. Liturg. in Bur. of the Dead. S. Chrys. Hom. 32. in Mat. Ephrem. lib. de poen. c. 2.
• * 1.11

  S. Chrys. Hom. 17. in Epist. ad Hebr. Iren. l. 4. c. 33. Aug. de. Civ. Dei, l. 10. c. 20. Cypr. Serm. 1. de Eleem. Aug. Ep. 122.
• * 1.12

  [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Lot.]
• * 1.13

  [Without an Head or Governor.]
• e 1.14

  [Tonsure, and that the Crown of their Head was all Shaved.] 〈◊〉〈◊〉, or cutting the Hair short, was in the purest times of the Church imposed upon the Clergy, as be∣ing indecent for them to wear their Hair long, according to the Fashion of those times. The 4th. Council of Carthage, which was held, A. C. 398. decreed, Can. 44. That no Clergyman should wear a long Hair or Beard. Clericus nec C•…•… nutrias, nec 〈◊〉〈◊〉; but on the other side, Rasure, or making the Crown of the Head bald, by Shaving, was accounted a detestable Ceremony, and much condem∣ned by the Fathers Clemens Alex. Optatus Mel. Jerom, Epiphanim, &c. in the Dona∣tists, and other Hereticks, as being for∣bidden in the Law of God, Ezek. 44. 20. and an Heathenish Ceremony derived from the Priests of I••is and Serapis. Jer∣om in Ezek. 44. Wherefore, it ought to be looked upon as a corrupt Ceremony, first received by Hereticks, but after got into the Church, among other profane Usages in this Superstitious Age.]
• * 1.14.6

  Clem. A. Paed. l. 1. c. 11. Opt. cont. Parm. lib. 2. Jerom, Com. in Ezek. 44. And so Conc. Tolet.
• f 1.15

  [Chrism.] Chrism or Unction, was an ancient Rite used in the Jewish Church to denote the conferring of Gifts and Graces on the Persons Anointed, and thence derived to the Christian Church. Our Saviour and his Apostles used it in working their miraculous Cures of the Sick, Jam. 5. 14. Mar. 6. 14. And after Miracles ceased in the Church, it was continued in the Admi∣nistration of Baptism, to signifie (say the Fathers) that the Persons baptized are cut off from the Wild-Olive, and engrafted into Christ the true Olive-tree, and made Partakers of its Fruits and Benefits: Or to shew, that they were become Champions for Christ, and like the Heathen Athletae, were Anoint∣ed for their Spiritual Warfare, or rather to denote their Admission to the great Privileges of Christi∣anity, to be a chosen Generation, a royal Priesthood, an holy Nation (as the Apostle speaks 1 Pet. 2. 9.) to which all Persons were designed by Chrism. The same Ceremony was used by the Church in Confir∣mation, and to the Sick in the beginning of their Sickness, to strengthen and recover them, but not as it is in the Church of Rome, as a Sacramental Viaticum for Persons dying.]
• * 1.15.7

  Ambr. de Sacr. l. 1. c. 2. Dion. Areop. de Hier. Eccl. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2.
• * 1.16

  [Hegenoa.]
• * 1.17

  Braulio Bishop of Saragosa.
• * 1.18

  S. Columba∣nus.
• e 1.19

  [Confession of secret Sins and Thoughts—was in use.] Confession of Sins, private and publick, to God, is ab∣solutely necessary to obtain Pardon of them, and where we have done any Wrongs or Injuries to Men, we must acknowledge them, and making Resti∣tution, endeavour Reconciliation. And if still there remain any Doubts and Scru∣ples in our Consciences, it is convenient to discover our Griefs, to the Ministers of God's Word, that we may receive from them Ghostly Counsel and Advice. In these Cases, no doubt, the Confession of Secret Sins, Thoughts and Desires was ever in use in the Church: But as to that Auricular and Sacramental Confession, which seems to be insinuated in the Words of this Father; as it was not in use in the First Ages of the Church, so can it pre∣tend to no other Ground for the Use of it, than the Lateran Council under Innocent the Third, anno 1215. or the Council of Trent, which is of much later date. Con∣fession of secret Sins was ever approved and used, never generally imposed nor made necessary to Absolution till Popery prevailed.]
• * 1.19.8

  1 Joh. 1. 9.
• * 1.19.9

  Mat. 5. 23.
• * 1.19.10

  Matt. 3. 6.
• * 1.19.11

  Cyprian, Serm. de laps. Tertul. de poeniten∣tia. Origen in Ps. 37.
• f 1.20

  [Caelibacy of Clerks—commanded.] Altho' the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament do no where disallow the Marriage of Priests, but give them an e∣qual Liberty, in that kind, with the Laity, insomuch that all the Apostles (except S. John) were married Men, as also the greatest part of the Clergy of the first Times: But yet some there were of the most eminent Bishops and most zealous Christians, who having imbibed the Phi∣losophers Opinions and Prejudices against Marriage, as an Estate in it self unclean, and so troublesome, that it was utterly inconsistent with an Holy and Specula∣tive Life, did ever retain such an Anti∣pathy against it, especially in the Clergy, that they were ever inveighing against them that were mar∣ried, insomuch that they brought it into a general Dislike. At length a Decree was made against Priest's Marriage, in the Council of Eliberis, anno 305. Can. 33. And the like was attempted in the first Council of Nice, but was suppressed by the Authority of Paphnutius: And not long after the Ca∣non made at Eliberis was as it were reversed by the Council of Ancyra, Can. 9. Indeed Pope Syricius, anno 380. and Innocent, enforced the same Prohibition in the West, and were seconded by the Second Council of Carthage, but were opposed by the Synods of Agatha and Tyron: So that tho' the Celebacy of the Clergy was commanded and practised in some Churches, especially in the West (to which this Author referrs himself) yet it was never universally imposed nor received, especially in the East, till Gregory VII's Time, anno 1074. and then was thought to be establish'd by no Law Ecclesiastical or Divine, and was opposed by the Clergy, unanimously, as a Doctrine of Devils, as S. Paul, 1 Tim. 3. 4. and all good Men esteem it.]
• * 1.20.12

  Athan. epist. ad Dracon. Socr. hist. eccl. l. 9. c. 38. Tertullian. Jerom. Ambrose.
• * 1.20.13

  Conc. Elib. Can. 33. Socr. hist. eccl. l. 1. c. 8. Conc. Ancy. Can. 9.
• * 1.21

  Vide p. 5. (e).
• * 1.22

  Cumianus, or Cuminus
• * 1.23

  [Epistola∣rum Hiber∣nicaru•…•… Sylloge.]
• * 1.24

  [A City in Dalmatia]
• * 1.25

  Hesychius.
• a 1.26

  Which he wrote at Jerusalem.] These are his Words in the Preface: Deprecare ut fiat oblatio verbi mei acceptabilis, non sol•••• in Jerusalem, sed & in omni terra. And in the Sixth Book, Quod manifest at Templum, & civitas haec Jerusalem. And in the Se∣venth Book, Cognoscis autem ea quae ipsis Judaeis eve∣••erunt, ex Josephi historia, quorum plurima etiam nunc nostris ad cernendum adjacent visibus.
• * 1.27

  Eusebius of Thessalo∣nica.
• * 1.28

  [Called A••pthart••∣d••cetae.]
• * 1.29

  Boniface IV.
• * 1.30

  [O•• Ethel∣bert.]
• * 1.31

  John Phi∣loponus.
• * 1.32

  [The Coun∣cil of Chal∣cedon.] [†His Anal••∣tica, De ge∣nerati••ne & Corruptione, De anima, De genera∣tione ani∣mallum, De met••oris, Physicorum Acroamati∣ca, Printed at Venice in Gr. in 1535, 1551.]
• * 1.33

  Theodosius, Conon, Eugenius, Themistius Theodorus.
• * 1.34

  [Theopas∣chitae.]
• * 1.35

  Nicias.
• * 1.36

  Antiochus.
• * 1.37

  John of Thessaloni∣ca.
• b 1.38

  [Pictures of Christ and of the Mar∣tyrs, which were in use among Christians, are not Idols.] The Charge of Idolatry, be∣ing so great a Crime, so stupid a Sin, and so strictly forbidden in Holy Scripture, hath always been denied by the rankest Image-worshippers among Christians, and that with much seeming detestation. The Fathers of the 2d. Council of Nice, who were strenuous Patrons of Image-worship against the Iconoclasts of that time, did yet disclaim that Charge lately laid upon them by a Council at Constantinople, tho' the Reasons brought to clear themselves of it are very weak and frivolous, as the most learned Bishop of Worcester hath sufficiently evinced. Nor doth the Modern Church, tho' as gross Idolaters as the Heathens themselves, seem to bear any Impeachment more grievous than of Idolatry. And then 'tis no wonder, that this Writer, who perhaps was guilty of the same Sin, should assert, That the Pictures, then in use among Christians, were no Idols. And indeed, as they were used by the Church at first from the year 380, to S. Gregory the Great's time, viz. To represent the History of the Bible to the illiterate and ignorant Laity, or to adorn the Church withal, we do not account them Idols; tho' as the Christians for the first 300 years, and more, would not endure any Pictures in their Churches, witness that zealous Fact of Epiphanius in the Church of Anabathla; so it may reasonably be thought, it was the Foundation of that Image-worship, which soon followed in the more superstitious Ages. And if the Christians, of whom this Bishop speaks, made no other use of them, we acknowledge, That they are not Idols. But if the Pictures of Christ and his Martyrs were worshipped by those Christians of whom he speaks, according to the custom of those times, it will be impossible to excuse them from Idolatry, notwithstanding the distinctions made by the Image-worshippers, between an Image and an Idol; for in Holy Scripture, every Image being bowed down to and worshipped, tho' but with a relative Worship, is thereby made an Idol.]
• * 1.38.14

  Conc. Nic. 2. An. 788 Conc. Const. sub Copron. An. 754.
• * 1.38.15

  Still. Idol. c. 1. p. 68. Sect. 9. &c. Aug. de cons. Evang. l. 1. c., 10. Basil. Orat. in S Barla. Epiph. ad Joan. Hiero∣sol. inter Op. Hieron.
• * 1.38.16

  Isa. 44. 9, 10, 13.
• * 1.39

  Gregory of Antioch.
• * 1.40

  John, Arau∣sius, &c. Bishops of Spain.
• * 1.41

  Boniface V.
• * 1.42

  [King of Northum∣berland.]
• † 1.43

  [Wife of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Edwin.]
• * 1.44

  Modestus, Bishop of Jerusalem.
• * 1.45

  George of Alexandria
• * 1.46

  Honorius.
• i 1.47

  [Oath before S. Peter's Tomb.] This Action, tho' but a Ceremony in Swearing, yet being intended as a piece of Divine Honour to S. Peter, was an Ido∣latrous and Sinful Custom which crept in with Saint-Worship.]
• * 1.48

  [A Sect, that held, that there was but One Will in Jesus Christ after the Union of the Two Natures.]
• * 1.49

  Sophronius.
• k 1.50

  [Sermons of the Praises of the Cross.] The Cross of Christ was at first a Stumbling Block to the Jews, Foolish∣ness to the G••••••iles, and a Reproach to the Christians themselves, who were in derision called the Disciples of a Crucified God. To shew therefore their Constan∣cy, and Love to their Profession, they did frequently Cross themselves on their Breasts and Foreheads, to testifie their sincere Belief, That Jesus who was Cru∣cified was their Saviour, and that they were not ashamed of his Cross. These were the only Crosses, (or Cros••••••gs ra∣ther) that were used by the Christians for 300 Years and more after Christ, for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 says, Cr•…•…es 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••abemus, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••pta••••s, We neither have Crosses, nor desire any. But after it pleased God to promise Constantine the Great Victory over his Competitors in the Empire, by making the Sign of the Cross to appear to him in the Air, with this Inscription, In hoc ••igno vinces, which he therefore put immediately into the Imperial Standard to be Adored by all his Soldiers according to the Custom, and was always Victorious with it, it ever-after came to be in very great Esteem and Honour among the Christians. Wooden Crosses were made and placed in the Publick Markets, the Sign of the Cross was used in Celebrating the Sacraments, Honourable Titles were given to it by the Fathers, who called it, Signum Fidei, Trophae•••• Dominicum, Signum Christi, & Dei. At last in this Superstitious and Idolatrous Age it was admitted into the Church, together with the Images of Christ, and his Saints, Excessive Praises bestowed upon it by this, and other Bishops, in their Sermons, who were Zea∣lous for Image-Worship, and became an Object of Adoration together with them.]
• * 1.50.17

  1 Cor. 1. 23.
• * 1.50.18

  Aug. Ser. 8.
• * 1.50.19

  Euseb. de vit. Const. lib. 1.
• * 1.50.20

  Aug. in Jo∣an. Tract. 118. Niceph. l. 8. c. 32.
• l 1.51

  [S. J. Damascene's Book of Images.] This Writer, who is reckoned among the Fathers of the Church, and much Quo∣ted by Romish Authors in their Contro∣versie with Protestants, was a Credulous and Superstitious Person, a great Patron of Images, and a Zealous Defender of Image-Worship, and the other Errors which sprang up about his time. Insomuch, that it is no wonder that we meet with Books of such Titles as this under his Name, better becoming an Heathen than a Christian, for which Reason his Writings are of small Esteem with Judicious and Pious Men.]
• * 1.51.21

  ••as. adv. Bar. p. 83.
• * 1.52

  [Sur∣named Evi∣ratus.],
• * 1.53

  Joannes Moschus.
• m 1.54

  [Miracle of the Eucharist, &c.] It is really very strange to meet with so many Miracles in this Age in the Writers of it, whereas in the Three precedent Centuries we find little or no mention of any. Yea, S. Chrysostom says, Nos Mi∣raculis nequaquam indigemus quae nunc non ba∣bemus, &c. As we have no Miracles, so we want none. The Faith having been sufficiently confirmed by Christ and his Apostles, Miracles afterwards became useless, and therefore ceased. But when the Church began to Preach Alterum E∣vangelium, another Gospel, and such Do∣ctrines were Imposed and Taught as nei∣ther Christ nor his Apostles had ever wrought any one Miracle in Confirmation of, it was thought the readiest way to gain credit to the Imposture, either to feign, or outwardly do some Miracles, which might extort Belief from the Vulgar. To this end did not only Men but Devils conspire together in working Lying Wonders to confirm the Adoration of Images, the Sa∣crament, Saints Relicks, and the like. Strange things were done thro' the Arti∣fices of Satan by the Martyr's Bones, stranger related by the Preachers in their Sermons, and by Historians in their Le∣gends. Many wholly feigned, others in part, or in shew only acted, till Super∣stition and Idolatry at last was fully Esta∣blished, and by these Delusions are still upheld in the Church of Rome. Indeed S. Austin says, That several Miracles were done in his time at the Martyrs Tombs, and by their Relicks, but as he something scrupled the Truth of them, so he was willing to let them pass as such, because the Faith was confirmed by them, and there appeared no other end of them but to advance the same Worship that the Church professed. Had they been made a Foundation of Saint-Worship, as afterward they were, he would certainly have rejected as forged, or wrought for a false end and intention, as it is commanded.]
• * 1.54.22

  Gal. 1. 8.
• * 1.54.23

  Canus in loc. Theol. l. 11. c. 6.
• * 1.54.24

  Aug. de Civ Dei, l. 22. c. 10.
• * 1.55

  Deut. 13. 1, 5.
• n 1.56

  [Adore the Virgins Image.] Among the Images of Saints which were admitted into the Church in this Age, and became Objects of Divine Worship, the Image of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God had a chief place. And tho' this Story were true, That the Devil did Tempt a Monk to Abjure the Worship of the Virgin's Image, which is really a Doctrine of Devils, yet the Artifice of Satan in this Temptation could be no other than this, To Establish that Doctrine as Divine, which he had secretly first brought into practice, by endeavouring openly to extort it from the more Zealous Practicers of it. And so make his Diabolical Delusions pass for Sacred and Divine Truths.]
• * 1.56.25

  Mede's A∣post. of lat. times, p. 10, 24.
• * 1.57

  Georgius Pisides.
• * 1.58

  [Hexa∣emeron.]
• * 1.59

  Eugenius, Bishop of Toledo.
• * 1.60

  Apollonius.
• * 1.61

  John IV.
• * 1.62

  Theodorus I.
• * 1.63

  Martin I.
• * 1.64

  [An Edict put out by the Empe∣ror Con∣stans, at the Desire of Paulus Bishop of Constanti∣nople, a Monothe∣lite; where∣by it was prohibited to dispute about the Operations and Wills of Christ.
• a 1.65

  [Tapers in the Church.] As seve∣ral other Heathen and Jewish Ceremonies were received by the Christians, in com∣pliance with the Jews and Gentiles, that their Conversion might be the more easy: So this of burning of Tapers in their Reli∣gious Assemblies. At first they were in∣deed lighted only at the keeping of their Vigils, to which not Religion but neces∣sity obliged them; but afterward, in Je∣rom's Time, they were lighted up upon the Tombs of the Martyrs, in honour to them, and in the Eastern Church, were always lighted up at the Reading of the Gospel, and in some Places at the interpreting of it, and that at Noon-day. At last it was imposed by Gregory the Great, and confirmed by Sabinian, anno 606. Many of the Fathers inveighed fiercely against this Custom, in the Massalians or Euchitae, Cur diem Lucernis infringimus, says Tertullian, Quis Iucernas vanas proferre compellit? And so Lactantius, Num mentis compos putandus est, qui datori luminis Candelarum lumen offer•• pro munere? But Superstition prevailing in the Church brought in this with other Ceremonies, which, if the most noxious, had been more tolerable.]
• * 1.65.26

  Hieron a•• Vigilant.
• * 1.65.27

  Balaeus ••ent. 1. Script. Brit. Tertul. in Apolog. Lact. Inst. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 6. c. 2.
• * 1.66

  S. Maximus
• * 1.67

  [A Con∣fession of Faith com∣posed by Ser∣gius, and put out by He∣raclius as a compleat Rule of Faith, whereby the Doctrine of one Will in Christ was established, and imposed upon all.]
• * 1.68

  [Diptychs.]
• p 1.69

  [Kissing the Gospels, Cross—to confirm their mutual Promises.] These Ce∣remonies are also the product of the su∣perstitious Worship which was establi∣shed in this Age. For the Christians in the purer Ages confirmed their Oaths and Promises, by kissing the Gospels, testi∣fying not only their belief of them, but their fear of falsifying their Words, left they offended the God therein revealed, and incurred the Punishments threatned to Falshood and Perjury. But when the Christians did as it were deifie the Martyrs, Cross and Images, they used the same Ceremony toward the Cross, as having an equal Fear and Reverence for that as for God himself and his Holy Gospel.]
• * 1.70

  [Or an Exposition of the Pub∣lick Liturgy of the Church.]
• * 1.71

  Anastasius.
• * 1.72

  [A Com∣missary or Chancellor to a Bishop]
• * 1.73

  Anastasius.
• * 1.74

  Theodosius and Theo∣dorus.
• * 1.75

  Theodorus.
• * 1.76

  Peter of Laodicea.
• * 1.77

  Thalassius.
• * 1.78

  Isaiah, Abbot.
• * 1.79

  Theofridus
• * 1.80

  Donatus.
• * 1.81

  Vitalianus.
• * 1.82

  [Novio∣dunum or Noviomum.]
• * 1.83

  S. Eligius.
• q 1.84

  [Cross themselves often with the Sign of the Cross.] After the Cross was admitted into the Church, and became an Object of Worship, it was accounted of wonderful efficacy to sanctify all things, to cleause and bless our Food, confer Grace, consecrate Sacraments procure Remission of Sins, preserve from the Malice of the Devil, and what not; So that Eligius thought no better Advice could be given to the Christians, than to cross themselves often with the Sign of the Cross, that they might thereby be shielded and defended from all Evils, and sanctified throughout; though the Effect proved it to be but an idle Conceit.]
• r 1.85

  [Mortal Sins.] i. e. More heinous and notorious Guilts; for tho' no Sin be so venial and trivial, as the Romanists teach with one Consent, as neither to offend God nor deserve Damnation in its own Nature, and so only subject them to temporal Punishments; yet all Protestants disallow a Stoical Parity, and equality of Sins, and hold that some are greater, others less; some unto, others not unto Death: And though every the least Sin be offensive to God, and deserving Damnation in its own Nature, yet they say, some are mortal, others venial. 1. Comparatively, and by God's Favour, as the Sins of the Elect, being committed with Reluctancy, and, without consent, are more pardonable than the Sins of wilful Offenders. 2. Because some Sins exclude not Grace the Root of Remission and Pardon out of the Soul, but others cannot stand with Grace, and so leave the Persons in a state of Wrath and Damnation who are guilty of them.]
• * 1.85.28

  Bellarm. de amiss grat. & statu p c l. 1. c 4. Matt. 5. 22. 7. 5. 1 Jo. 5. 16. Gal. 3. 10. Ezek. 8. 4. Featly Ser. p. 653. Field of the Church. p. 148, 277.
• s 1.86

  [Tapers light during the Mass, upon the Feast of the Purification.] This Cere∣mony, tho' not taken from the Sacrifices called Lustrum, as this Author imagines, being offered in the end of February, yet was certainly instituted in imitation of a Festival, celebrated at Rome, either in remembrance of Ceres's search after Pro∣serpin••, or in honour of Febru••, the Mo∣ther of Mers, which were both solemniz'd with Tapers burning in their Hands, by the Romans. These Superstitions the Bishops of the Church very much abhorred, yet because it conduced greatly to the Conversion of the Gentiles, to make as little Alterations in their Ceremonies as possible, therefore did the Heads of the Church institute the same Ceremonies to be used by the Christians on the Feast of the Purification as had been used upon the Calends of February at Rome: And this the learned and judicious Rhenanus on Tertullian confidently afferts. Negari non potest Ardentium Cereorum, quos bodie Christiani die Purificat••e Mariae ex more circumferunt a Februalibus Romanorum sacris Originem sumpsisse. Pertinaci paganismo mutatione subven••um est, quem vei in totum sublatio potius irritasset.
• * 1.86.29

  Tertul. l. 5. cont. Mar.
• t 1.87

  [Made a Satisfaction proportionable to the greatness of their Sins.] Tho' these Words seem to come up to the Doctrine of Satisfaction, held in the Church of Rome, yet it does not appear that the Fathers of this Age had any other Notion of Satisfaction, than that which was re∣ceived in the Ages before, which is much different from, and much more Orthodox, than the Popish. We have a Definition of it, p. 2. given by Isidore of Sevil, to this effect:

  Satisfaction is an Exclusion of the Causes and Occa∣sions of Sin, and a Cessation from Sinning;

  which is almost the same with S. Austin's Satisfactio est peccatorum causas excindere, & eorum suggestionibus nullum aditum indulgere. This is the Na∣ture of true Repentance, which being proportion'd in some measure to the greatness of our Guilts, the more pen∣sive and hearty, by how much our Sins are more heinous and aggravating, is all the Satisfaction that God expects of us, besides a firm Faith and Dependance on the Merits of Jesus Christ. The popish Sa∣tisfaction is a clear different thing, as they define it, thus: It is an equivalent Com∣pensation made to the offended Justice of God for the Injury done unto him by Sin, partly by our Actions, and partly by our Sufferings, whereby we deliver our selves from Divine Vengeance, and save our selves from Punishment. A Doctrine unknown to Antiquity! Of Tears I read, of Satisfaction I read not, saith S. Ambrose: Yea, Aquinas himself says, To pretend to make a Satisfaction for Sin, is an Injury to Christ's Death: And that this Father was of the same Judgment with Antiquity, the following Words shew, If ye repent after a godly sort, and be sincerely desirous to sin no more, ye shall be reconciled by Jesus Christ, and by us his Ministers.]
• * 1.87.30

  Aug. de dog. Eccles. c. 54.
• * 1.87.31

  Greg. de Val. to. 4. d. 7. q. 14. So. Drido. Tapper, &c.
• * 1.87.32

  Ambr. in Luc. Ser. 46.
• u 1.88

  [That Fire, through which the Righ∣teous, who are not wholly purged from their Sins shall pass in the day of Judgment. The Doctrine of Purgatory which M. Du Pin would seem to build upon this Expression, and another of like Importance, p. 59. taken out of the Works of Julian of Toledo, is not the same with that which is meant by their words, which is no other than what the Fathers before them had held, tho' perhaps not so firm∣ly, as it was believed in these latter Ages. Tertullian, Cyprian and Origen, were of Opinion, That after the Resur∣rection, before the Saints entred into Glory, they should pass through a Purg∣ing Fire, to refine their Souls from their Dross, their Wood, Hay and Stubble before they can become Vessels of Honour fit to obtain a place in the Mansions of Bliss. This seems to be S. Eligius's Opinion here, because; he says, That the Righteous shall pass through a Purging Fire in the day of Judgment. From these Elder Fathers, it passed to S. Jerom and S. Austin, who speak of it as a Conjecture not altogether improbable, but yet very uncertain. I think, says S. Jerom, That there is a moderate and gentle Sentence of the Judge concerning the Burning away the Sins of Christians. And S. Austin, If betwixt Death and Judg∣ment the Souls of the Departed be said to suffer a Fire of Transitory Tribulation burning up worldly smaller Faults, I reprove it not, because perhaps 'tis true. So feeble was the Belief of a Purgatory among the Ancients for some hundred Years. And as it was only a probable Opinion at most, so it was never looked upon as a separate State, but only as it were a Purgation in their Passage to Glory; for it was a settled Doctrine in the Primitive Church, That there is no middle Place; That a Man can be any where, but either with the Devil or Christ, in Hell or in Heaven. There are but two Places after this Life, one for the Elect, another for the Reprobate. So that the Popish Purgatory, which is a place of Torment, wherein they that have not perfected their Obedience here, stay to make Satisfaction for their Sins, and then enter into Heaven, was altogether unknown to the Ancients. And indeed this Pol. Virgil and Roffensis acknowledge. Nemo, saith the latter, nunc Orthodoxus dubitat an Purgatorium 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c, No true Catholick now-a-days but believe a Purgatory, altho' there is little or no mention of it in Antiquity; and the Greek Church believes it not to this day. In reality, Purgatory is a Novel Inven∣tion as it is now taught, a perfect contrivance for the Churches advantage, never received for a Doctrine till the Council of Florence, Anno 1448.]
• * 1.88.33

  Origen Hom. 14. in Luc. Tertul. de anima, c. 55. 1 Cor. 3. 12.
• * 1.88.34

  Hieron. in Isa. l. 18. c. ult August. En∣chirid. c. 67, 68, 69. Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. 2. c. 26. Aug. de pec. mer. & rem. c. 28. Cypr. ad Dem. Tert. de Bapt. Roffen. as∣sert. Lu•…•…. Confut. Ar∣tic. 18. p. 86.
• v 1.89

  [Blessing the Holy Oyl, Consecrating the Chris•…•….] It was a Custom among the Bishops, upon some great Festival, with solemn Prayers and Ceremonies, to consecrate that Oyl which the Presbyters used in the Baptism and Confirmation of Children and Others. In some Churches they did it at Easter, and in others, particularly in the French Church, where Eligius was Bishop, upon Holy Thursday; and from the Bishops, the Priests fetched it themselves, or in case of necessity, sent for it for the Service of their Churches.]
• w 1.90

  [Christians do truly receive under the Mysteries, the Lord's Body and Blood—De veritate Carnis & Sanguinis, tho' 〈◊〉〈◊〉 appearance of the Bread and Wine remain.] This, and such like Expressions, which might be produced in great Numbers from the Books of the Ancients, who unanimously teach, That in the Sacrament is the Body and Blood of Christ. And tho' before the Consecration it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, meer Bread and Wine, yet afterward 'tis verily the Body of Christ. Truly his Flesh, truly his Blood, are really no more than the very words of Christ, This is my Body, This is my Blood, and are only true in a figurative Sence, i. e. by a Change of Condition, Sanctification and Usage. In which Sence, the Church of England thus delivers herself in the Catechize, That the Body and Blood of Christ is verily and indeed taken, and received by the Faithful in the Lord's Supper. For we are so certain, That to eat Christ's Body Spiritually, is to eat him Really, that there is no other way to eat him Really, but by Spiritual Manducation. Christ is as really present Spiritually as Corporeally, and we receive it as well by Faith as by Bodily Eating. There can, therefore, be no Grounds from the Words of this Father to inferr a Transubstantiation in the Sacrament, since they may be better understood of the Spiritual Pre∣sence. Nay, these Expressions, The appearance of Bread and Wine remain under the Mysteries, plainly shew this to be the Sence. They are to the Sences, Bread and Wine; to the Soul, they are really the Body and Blood of Christ; on them we feed by Faith. And thus we must understand the Expression of the same Father, p. 37. seq. ad (w).]
• x 1.91

  [Canonical Hours.] The Ancients had their several Hours for Prayer and Devotion both by Day and Night, in imita∣tion of the Apostles. This must be acknow∣ledged on an hands. Tertullian mentions them as of common use among the Chri∣stians in his time. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 semper & •…•…∣que & omni tempore orandum est, tamen ••••es 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ut insigniores in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 human 〈◊〉〈◊〉, itae sole•…•…∣ores 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in precibus Divinie, quod 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Danielis argumentum ter die Orantis. As Daniel prayed three times a day, so did the Christians in the first devout times. The same also doth S. Jerom deliver as an Apostolical Tradition. Tria sunt tempora quibus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 flectenda sunt Genus, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Horam, Sextam & Nonam Ecclesiastica Tra∣ditio intelligit Denique 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ Spiritus super Apostolor, sexta 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vo∣lens comedere ad Orationem ascendit in Cana∣culum. Non•• P••••rus & Joannes ascen•…•… in Templum. Wherein S. Jerom tells us, That it was an Ecclesiastical Tradition to be observed by the Christians in imitation of the Apostles, to Pray at the Third, Sixth and Ninth Hours. And so also the same Father prescribes Hours of Prayers in the Night, and particularly enjoyns Mid-night so to be observed. But as their Hours for Prayers were but Three by Day, and Two or Three by Night, so they were for private, not publick Devo∣tion, freely and voluntarily performed, not imposed, and being thus used are highly to be approved. But as they have since degenerated into Ceremony and Superstition, and have not only received an Addition of four Hours more to make them up seven; but are imposed on the Priests only in the Ramish Church, and by them are made a Burden or a Task, rather than a Duty; they have been justly abolished by our Reformers; not but that 'tis law∣ful and commendable, for any pious Persons, to follow the old Apostolick Custom, if they see it helpful to Devotion.]
• * 1.91.35

  Dan. 6. 10.
• * 1.91.36

  Hieron. ad Eust•…•….
• * 1.91.37

  Act. 2. 1, 15. 10. 9. 3. 1.
• * 1.91.38

  Hieron ad Eustoch. Athan. de Virgin. Basil. Quaest. 37.
• * 1.91.39

  Pol. Virg. l. 6. c. 2.
• * 1.92

  [Vid. Note (w)].
• * 1.93

  [Of Cadur∣cum.]
• * 1.94

  Agatho.
• * 1.95

  Leo II.
• a 1.96

  False dates.] In the Title of the 1st. Letter it is said, That it was sent in December, Indict. X. Agatho was then living; but they must set down some other Month, for it was delivered in June, Indict. X. It is known, That these Titles, before the true Inscriptions, are added. The second Let∣ter hath no date in the Greek, and the date in the Latin is visibly false. In the Body, there is mention made of the X. Indict. of June before; which agreeth very well with our Hypothesis. Leo was chosen in the beginning of 682. Indict. X. In June he receiveth the Acts of the Council, and the Emperor's Letter; he was ordained in August following, and he writes an Answer in the begin∣ning of the next year, Indict. XI. A••••stasius hath turned all top••y-turvy. He says, Agatho was yet living in March 632. that the holy See was vacant one Year, seven Months. If that be true, Leo was not ordain'd Bishop till October, 683. which cannot be made out. Baronius endeavours more-over to bring into suspicion of Falshood, Constan∣tine's Letter to Leo, because he says, That he had written of that Matter to Agatho; which is not true, says Baronius, because the Emperor's Letter was not directed to Agatho but to Donus. But it is very easie to answer, That this Letter was written to Agatho, because it was he that received it, and answered it. That which troubles Baronius most of all, is, That Honorius is anathematized in Leo's Letter; but there is no reason for it.
• b 1.97

  Conjectures are so ••eak.] There is but one of any difficulty, namely, that it is said in these Let∣ters, That the 6th Council was finished in the IX. Indiction. But the words of the Letter are not to be understood thus; it is meerly said there, That the Question about the M••nothelius was ended in a Council held at Constantinople in the 9th Indict.
• * 1.98

  Benedict II.
• * 1.99

  Drepanius Florus.
• * 1.100

  [Augusto∣dunum.]
• * 1.101

  [Recesu∣i••d.]
• * 1.102

  Ildephons. Bishop of Toledo.
• * 1.103

  [Dr. Cave, VI.]
• * 1.104

  [The Virgin Mary was Sanctified in her Mother's Womb, and was Born without Original Sin.] It is very probable that this Work, which is falsly attributed to Ildephonsus in Monsieur Du Pin's Judgment, was forged by an Author of a much later Date, since it was the Constant Opinion of the Church for above 1100 Years after Christ, that the Virgin Mary was not only Born in Original Sin, as all other Women are, but was also guilty of many Actual Sins. Austin imputes to her Original Sin, Virginis caro, e••iamsi de peccati propagine venit, non tamen de peccati propagine concepit, altho' she was Born in Sin, yet she did not Conceive in Sin. And to the same purpose do Ambrose, Chrysostom, and others, speak of her. And in like manner of Actual Sin many of the Fathers in their Comments upon Jo. 2. 3. think her guilty, for it is certain, that our Saviour did Reprove some Fault or Error in her. This Maldonate on John II. part 11. acknow∣ledges, tho' not of their Mind. And indeed the Holy Spirit by her own Mouth gives us an invincible proof of her Sinfulness, inspiring her to Rejoyce in God her Saviour, as standing need of him to save her from her Sins, as well as other Women. But in these last Ages of the Church, the Immoderate Ve∣neration given to the Virgin Mary hath produced an Opinion, that Mary was by a singular and extraordi∣nary Privilege preserved from Original Sin. Scotus was the first School-Man that held it, and maintained it in his Disputes, but met with great Opposition in this point, both in the Schools, and Church, and tho' it got ground a little by time, yet it was a Subject of Contest among the Learned till it was fully determin∣ed in the Council of Basil, Anno 1439, in which it was Decreed thus, Hitherto a difficult Question hath been made touching the Conception of the Glorious Virgin; We having seen, and diligently examined the Reasons, do define and declare, That the Doctrine which teaches her never to have been Actually subject to Original Sin, but always free from it, and from all Actual Sin, is to be received and approved, as the most Catholick Doctrine, and it shall not be lawful for any to teach the contrary. This Decree hath been confirmed by Pope Sixtus the IV, and since by the Council of Trent, so that it is now become an Article of Faith in the Roman Church, unless it be with the Dominicans, who are Hereticks in this point. And from the Roman Forge it may be reasonably supposed, that this Book came, and perhaps from the Franciscans, who are the most Zealous Patrons of her Immaculate Conception.]
• * 1.104.40

  Aug de Gen. ad lit. l. 10. c. 18. Amb. conc. 6. in Ps. 118. Chrys. Hom. 4•• in Matt. Chrys. Hom. 20. in Joan. Lu. 1. 47. Scot. in 3 dist. 4. q. 1.
• * 1.104.41

  Conc. Basil. Sessio. 36.
• * 1.105

  Taio.
• * 1.106

  [But is a∣mong Thu∣anus's MSS.]
• * 1.107

  Leontius, Bishop in Cyprus.
• * 1.108

  [In his Auctuarium, p. 681, 702.]
• * 1.109

  [Formula∣rum Ecciesi∣asticarum.]
• * 1.110

  Marcul. phus.
• a 1.111

  Some have thought it was Landericus of Pa∣ris.] M. Bignon is of that mind, but M. Launoy be∣lieves, it is the Bishop of Meaux, and he proves it, 1. Because Marculphus says in his Forms, that in his time there was an infinite number of Mona∣steries in France: which he pretends cannot agree with Clovis and Dagobert's time, and proves it by Eligius's Life written by S. Owen, l. 1. c. 21. where it is observed, There was not then such a great number of Monasteries in France, and that those that were there, were not very regular. 2. Be∣cause in Marculphus there be several manners of Speech, which he pretends were not in use but since Clovis and Dagobert's time. F. Labbe is of Mr. Bignon's Mind, and pretends even to shew who that Marculphus is, because in the Life of S. Au∣strogesilus, Arch-Bishop of Bourges, there is menti∣on made of one Marculphus by Name, who was a Reader during the Life of Austrogesilus, and was af∣terwards Abbot of that Saint's Monastery, in the Suburbs of Bourges. What is said of Marculphus in that place, happen'd in the time of Etherius of Ly∣ons, who was Dead in 601. Marculphus might then be Fifteen, or Twenty Years old, he wrote his Forms being above Seventy Years of Age, which comes up to 560.
• * 1.112

  [Some Portions or small pieces of the con∣s••crated Bread, in token of Communi∣on.]
• z 1.113

  [To go in Pilgrimage to the Tombs of S. Peter and S. Paul the Apostles.] Soon after that Peace was settled in the Church by Constantine, the first Christian Empe∣ror, and sacred Learning and Knowledge began to flourish, several inquisitive Persons, that they might gain a more lively and thorough Knowledge of the historical Parts of the Old and New Testament, travelled into the Holy Land, to see the Places so frequently spoken of in the Holy Scriptures, where most of the Matters were transacted. Upon which ac∣count it is that S. Jerom, who travelled thither for the same Reason, saith, That it is a Confirmation of our Faith to see the Ground on which Christ's Feet did tread. In imitation of these Men's practices did others travel to Jerusalem out of Devotion soon after, placing much Religion in visiting and worshipping the Places of Christ's bodily Presence. But the Fathers of these Ages sharply reproved this growing Superstition. Heaven (saith S. Jerom) is as near thee at home as at Jerusalem, and why wilt thou travel thither, as if Christ were only to be found there. Some make it a part of Religion (saith S. Cyril) to have been at Jerusalem, but Christ never commanded it, and what can justify us, to make that a part of Religion which Christ doth not? All this did not yet so repress it, but after that Image and Saint-worship was brought into the Church, Pilgrimages to the Tombs of Saints and Martyrs became more frequent, and at length were imposed, and encouraged as Meritorious, and procuring Pardon of Sins. Innocent III. granted Pardon of all Sins, to all that went in Pilgrimage to the Holy Land; and Boniface VIII. to all that went to Rome to visit S. Peter and S. Paul's Tomb. Clement VI. granted these Pilgrims to Rome a Power to free the Souls of four of their Relations or Friends out of Purgatory, and gave com∣mandment to all the Angels in Heaven, to carry the Souls of such as dyed in Pilgrimage, to Heaven immediately. Thus Pilgrimages became a necessary part of Religion; and because very gainful to the Popes and their Metropolis, were much encouraged and practised, till the Truth recovered strength again by the Reformation, and by enlightning Men's Minds, put out the Superstitious Conceits of the Flames of Purgatory.]
• * 1.113.42

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] Hieron. ep. 154.
• * 1.113.43

  Hieron. ep. 13.
• * 1.114

  [At Paris in 1613. octavo, and 1666. quar∣to.]
• * 1.115

  Cosma.
• * 1.116

  Pantaleo.
• aa 1.117

  [A Sermon upon the Exaltation of the Cross.] Although it be very uncertain whether this Sermon do belong to Panta∣leo, tho' it bears his Name; yet it is probable that the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross had been instituted some Time before, by the Emperor Heraclius I. anno 630. and so 'tis likely enough such a Sermon might be made upon this Feast, by this or some other Father of this Age and Time, as well as others; which were the common Subject of these Centuries.]
• * 1.118

  Julian of Toledo.
• * 1.119

  [Vid. not. (u).]
• * 1.120

  [at Basil in 1530. at Colen in 1533. octa∣vo].
• * 1.121

  Theodorus of Canter∣bury.
• a 1.122

  To Theodorus himself.] 'Tis not so much a Penitential as a Ritual, composed of several Ca∣nons. In the 11th. Chap. it is said, Ergo unam li∣centiam dedit Theodorus; which shews it is a Com∣piler that speaks; and having set down a Canon of Theodorus's, draws a Conclusion from it. It cannot be said, 'tis Theodorus himself. He might well say, the Ancients prescribed such a time of Penance; but Theodorus did much retrench it. But after ha∣ving made a Constitution, he would not say; Ergo Theodorus, &c. There are Errors in this Chapter contrary to the Constitutions he made in the Coun∣cil of Hereford, which are certainly his. What is said in the end, That there is no Reconciliation in his Country, because there is no publick Penance, does not agree to the Age Theodorus lived in, nor to the practice of his Church, and several Canons of his Penitential prove the contrary.
• bb 1.123

  [Frankincense.] This Custom of burning Candles, and offering Incense to the Saints-Images, was derived from the Heathen-Romans, who as Polyd. Virgil tells us, Solebant ad Statuas, thus, & cereos accen∣dere, as Cicero speaks of the Images set up in Honour of Caius Marius. This Ceremony did Pope Leo III. about the year 794. bring into the Church; and commanded, That the Priests should burn In∣cense at the Altars of the Saints. So great Promoters of Superstition were the Bishops of Rome in those Ages, and so careful Nurses of it have they been ever since, that the same Custom is retained to this day in their Image-worship.]
• * 1.123.44

  Pol. Virg. l. 2. c. 23. Cicer. Offic. l. 3. Lib. Pontif. Bal. in vit. Leonis.
• † 1.124

  [A Cope used by the Priests and Deacons, at celebrating Mass.]
• * 1.125

  [Marriage - dissolved by the consent of both Parties, or of one to withdraw into a Mona∣stery.] The great Veneration and Honour which the Fathers of these Ages had for a single and a Monastick Life, made them not only to have a mean Opinion of that sacred Institution of God, Marriage, but also approve of very slight Reasons of dis∣solving it. So apt are Men to make void the Law of God to maintain their own Traditions, whereas neither Celebacy it self is absolutely necessary for a Monastick Life, many of the Monks in the more pure Ages being married; nor, if it were, could the consent of one or both Parties dissolve the Bonds of it upon that account, For what God hath so joined toge∣ther, no Man can put asunder, unless it be for the only Cause allowed by God for Divorce, Adultery.]
• * 1.125.45

  Mat. 15. 6.
• * 1.125.46

  Athan Ep. ad Drac.
• * 1.125.47

  Mat. 19. 6.
• cc 1.126

  [Holy Water.] This Heathen Rite of sprinkling Consecrated Water for the Purging and Purifying of Men, which may seem to have had its Original from the Jewish Law, which prescribes a Water made with the Ashes of an Heifer to purifie the Unclean, by sprinkling them there∣with, was so far from being used or approved by the Christians for many Ages, that they abhorred the use of it as a Diabolical Superstition. Theodoret commends a Fact of Valentinian, then Tribune, after Emperor, as most suitable to the Christian practice; That going before the Emperor Julian the Apostate into the Temple of Fortune, the Priests sprinkled him as the rest of the Company with Holy Water, which when he espved upon his Garment, he immediately not only cut off that part where it was, but also smote the Priest with his Fist in Anger, saying, He was a Christian, and therefore was defiled, not cleansed by their Holy Water, which shews, that it was not then used among the Christians; but in this superstitious Age it crept into the Church among other Ceremonies, and is still in use in the Roman Church, as a Purgative from Sin.]
• * 1.126.48

  Numb. 19. 1,—20.
• * 1.126.49

  Theod. lib. 3. c. 16. Soz. l. 6. c. 6.
• * 1.126.50

  Aug. Steuch. in Numb. 19.
• * 1.127

  Fructuosus.
• * 1.128

  [Then Girvium.]
• * 1.129

  Ceolfride.
• * 1.130

  Adelmus, or Aldhelmus.
• * 1.131

  [From the Mouth of Arcul∣phus, as Dr. Cave.]
• * 1.132

  Adaman.
• * 1.133

  Aponius.
• * 1.134

  Cresconius.
• * 1.135

  Joannes Monachus.
• * 1.136

  Demetrius Cizicenus.
• * 1.137

  [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Syr. Rex.]
• * 1.138

  Memoirs.
• * 1.139

  Johan. Ni∣caenus's Memoirs, &c.
• * 1.140

  S. Owen.
• * 1.141

  [Novio∣dunum.]