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.

COUNCILS Held in the Seventh Century.

A Conference held in 601. in England, in Worcestershire, between Augustine the Monk, and the British Bishops.

AUGUSTINE the Monk, had instructed the English, and converted their King Ethelbert; and having a mind to unite the Britains to the Roman Church, he invited their Bishops * 1.1 and Doctors to a Conference. When they were come to it, he exhorted them to endea∣vour unanimously the establishment of Religion. These Britains did not keep Easter at the same day with other Churches, and had several practices differing from them. They stood in the defence of them stoutly; and Augustine, seeing he could not prevail with them to leave them, they say, he proposed to them, to bring a sick Man in, and on either side to pray for his Health, and to follow the Usages and Doctrines of those that should heal him. They brought in a blind Man, and the Britains having tryed in vain to restore him to his Sight, they affirm, that Augustine restored him by his Prayers. This Miracle did shake the Britains: But they said, they could regulate nothing, without being acquainted with their Brethren's mind, and they required a Synod might be kept, which was granted to them. Seven British Bi∣shops met there, and the ablest Monks of their Monastery of Bangor. Augustine propounded three things to them: 1. To keep Easter the same day with the Roman Church. 2. To bap∣tize according to the practice of the same Church. 3. To Preach the Gospel to the English, promising them the toleration of their other Practices, if they would yield these 3 Points. They would not, and went away very much offended, for that he did not come to meet them, when they came to him. Upon that refusal, Augustine told them, That since they would not have Peace, they should have War; and that they should be slain by those to whom they would not Preach Life. That was executed accordingly. The King of the Eng∣lish declared War against them, and defeated them in a bloody Fight, in which he put to the Sword above 1200 Monks of the Monastery of Bangor, who were come to the Army of the Britains, to pray for God's assistance upon them. This relation is taken out of the second Book of Beda's Church-history, chap. 2. Sigebert marks the same Facts in his Chronicle; and some Historians do accuse Augustine the Monk of having had a hand in the Massacre of those poor Britains, who did not deserve such hard usage, by reason they maintained their ancient Customs, and the Liberties of their Churches, without deviating from the Catholick Faith.

Assembly of Bishops held at * 1.2 Challon, upon the River Saone, in 603.

THIS Assembly deposed, unjustly, Desiderius, Bishop of Vienna, upon Queen Brunchant's motion, and the earnest suit of Aricius, Archbishop of Lyons. * 1.3

A Council of Toledo, held under King Gondemare, in 610.

THIS Council was made up of Fifteen Bishops of the Carthaginian Province, who owned the Archbishop of Toledo for their Metropolitan, and promised subjection to him. King * 1.4 Gondemare caused this Constitution to be put in execution, and gave out a Declaration, which was subscribed by the Bishops of the other Provinces of Spain, wherein he decreed, That the Bishop of Toledo shall be acknowledged Primate or Metropolitan of the whole Carthaginian Province, and enjoyns all the Bishops of this Province to obey him. He observeth there, That the Country of Carpetania is not a Province, but part of the Carthaginian Province; and that as the other Provinces of his Kingdom, viz. Lusitania, Boetica and Tarraconensis, have each of them but one Primate, the Carthaginian likewise must have but one; according to the Canons and the ancient Usage.

Council of Egara, under King Sisebut, held in the year 614.

THE Bishops of the Province of Tarraco, confirmed in this Council the Decree made in that of Huesca, concerning the Celebacy of the Clergy. The Town, where it was kept, * 1.5 was in the Province of Tarraco, but it is unknown, at present, under the name of Egara. M. Baluzius hath made a short Dissertation, in which he asserts, That Egara was in the place, where is now a little Town, named, Terrasse in Catalonia, within 4 or 5 Leagues of Barce∣lona, in the Bishoprick whereof it is found. He proves it, 1. by the Situation of that Castle, which agreeth to that of Egara, which stood between Barcelona and Girona. 2. Because in the ancient Terriers or Maps, Egara and Terracia are spoken of, as standing in the same place. 3. Because in a Letter of Raimondus of Barcelona, of the year 1112. it is observed, That the Parish of Terrasse stands in the place, where the Church of Egara formerly stood.

Council V. of Paris.

THIS Council met in 615. called by Clotharius the second, then in Possession of the Kingdoms, which did belong to Theodebert and Theoderick; therefore it was made up * 1.6 of a great number of Bishops. It is observed in the end of the Canons of this Council, That they had been subscribed by 79 Bishops; but we have not their Names, neither is it certain, whether they were present in it. If this number of Bishops met there, it was the most nume∣rous Council that ever was held in France. It made 15 Canons of great importance.

By the 1st. it is ordered, That the ancient Canons shall be kept; That for the future, a Bishop being dead, he that shall be chosen by the Metropolitan, who is to ordain him, by the Bishops of the Province, and by the Clergy and the People of the City, shall succeed him; and that Ordinations made either by Force, Faction or Bribery, or without the approbation of the Metropolitan, and the consent of the Clergy and the People, shall be declared null.

The 2d. Canon forbids Bishops to chuse their Successors. It forbids also providing them Successors, unless they be altogether unable to govern their Church and Clergy.

The 3d. imports, That if a Clerk, of what Quality soever he be, despising his Bishop, have Recourse unto Princes, great Lords, or to some other Protectors, no Body shall receive him before he obtains his Bishop's Pardon: And that if any Body keeps him, after Warning given him from the Bishop, he shall be punished according to the Ecclesiastical Laws.

The 4th. declares that no dd 1.7 Secular Judge shall judge or condemn any Presbyter, Deacon or Clerk, nor any of those that belong to the Church, without acquainting the Bishop with it; and that if any Body attempts to do it, he shall be separated from the Church, till he amends and acknowledges his Fault.

The 5th. puts the Franchisements of the Church under the Bishop's Protection, and forbids under the Pain of Excommunication, to constrain any belonging to the Church to serve the Publick ee 1.8.

The 6th. orders, That the Revenues given to maintain the Church Fabricks, shall be ma∣naged by the Bishops, Presbyters and other Clerks, serving those Churches according to the Intention of the Donor; and that, whosoever shall take away any part of them, he shall be cut off from the Church, till he hath made Restitution.

By the 7th. all sorts of Persons are forbidden to seize, either by an Order from the Prince, or by Authority from a Judge, or in any other manner whatsoever, on the Estate left by the Bishops, or other Clerks, whether they belong to the Church, or be their own. It is order∣ed, They shall be kept and preserved by the Arch-deacon and the Clergy: They are excom∣municated that shall. seize on them; and it is said, They are to be looked upon as Murderers of the Poor.

The 8th. forbids Arch-deacons, yea, and the Bishops themselves, to appropriate to them∣selves, after the Death of Abbots, Presbyters, and other Clerks, ministring in the Churches, the Moveables belonging to them, under pretence of taking them for the Bishop or the Church.

The 9th. forbids Bishops to challenge to themselves the Goods, Churches, or Clerks of other Bishops, although the Kingdom or Province had been divided; and those that shall do so, it deprives them of those charitable Duties which their Brethren use to pay them, till they have restored what they have taken, and made Restirution of the Fruits.

The 10th. renews the Constitution made in the second Council of Lyons, held in 570. whereby it was ordered, That the last Wills of Bishops, Presbyters and other Clerks, who bequeath Legacies to Churches, shall be executed, tho' their Testament were not in due Form.

The 11th. Canon renews the Constitution, whereby a Bishop, being at Variance with ano∣ther Bishop, is bound to apply himself to the Metropolitan; and he that applieth himself to a Secular Judge, is deprived of Communion with the Metropolitan, until he give an account of his Proceeding in the next Synod.

The 12th. separateth from the Communion, until the Point of Death, such Monks and Nuns as go out of the Monastery, which they had chosen for their Abode, if, being warned of it, they refuse to return: But if they return to it, and make an humble Satisfaction, the Eucharist may be given them.

The 13th. Canon excommunicates the Virgins or Widows, who do marry, after having put off the Secular Habit, to lead a Religious Life at home.

The 14th. prohibits Marriage with the Brother's Widow, the Wife's Sister, the Daughters of two Sisters, the Uncle's Widow by the Father's and Mother's Side, and with a Maiden that hath taken a Religious Habit. It excommunicates those that contract such Marriages, till they separate themselves.

The 15th. imports, That the Jews are not to sue for the Costs of Recovery of Money from Christians; and if any of them should obtain them, he ought to be baptized, with all his Family.

To this Council is annexed Clotharius's Edict, containing the Confirmation of the foregoing Canons. Nevertheless, there be some of them, to which he hath subjoyned Modifications and particular Conditions. To the Canon concerning Bishops's Ordinations, it adds that if the Person elected be found worthy of it, he shall be confirmed by Order from the Prince; and that a Court-Officer may be chosen, if he be a deserving and learned Man. To the Canon forbidding Bishops to go to Court, it adds, They may go thither, to obtain some Favour, and upon what account soever they shall go thither, if they return with the Prince's Letters, they are to be excused. As for the Inhibition of Clerks applying themselves to Secular Judges, it excepts from it Criminal Matters, into which Secular Judges are appointed to enquire, calling the Bishops to them. It excepts likewise Matters concerning the Publick, which the Bishop and the Secular Magistrate are appointed Judges of. It adds some other Ordinances about Civil Matters.

Council held in France, about the same Time as the former, of which the Place is unknown.

THE same Manuscript, where this Council of Paris is found, contained the Canons of another Council, of which we know neither the Place nor the Year. * 1.9

The 1st. orders the Execution of the Canons of the Council of Paris.

The 2d. prohibits consecrating Altars in the Places where Corps are buried.

The 3d. orders, That Monks shall observe their Rule, and live in common, under the Go∣vernment of an Abbot or a Superior.

The 4th. prohibits baptizing in Monasteries, celebrating Masses for Secular Persons decea∣sed, and burying the Dead, without the Bishop's Leave.

The following Canons to the 8th. are wanting, the Manuscript being defective in that Place.

The 8th. forbids Clerks to have Women in their Houses, excepting their Sister or Aunt.

The 9th. confirms the Right of Sanctuaries for Churches, and prohibits taking away by force those that fly into Churches.

The 10th Canon is wanting.

The 11th. prohibits depriving Abbots or Arch-priests of their Ecclesiastical Function, un∣less they be guilty of some Fault, that deserveth it, as also advancing them to those Digni∣ties, with the Prospect of some Reward: It prohibits, moreover, making a Layman Arch-priest.

The 12th. forbids Presbyters and Deacons to marry, upon pain of being turned out of the Church.

The 13th. prohibits entertaining those that are excommunicated by their Bishop; and that they may be known, it orders the Bishops▪ that excommunicated them, to acquaint the neighbouring Towns and Churches with it.

The 14th. decrees, That Freemen, having sold or engaged themselves, out of necessity, shall be restored again to their former state, giving back the Price they had taken for their Engagement.

The 15th. Canon is imperfect: The next are lost; nay, it is not known how many there were of them.

Council II. of Sevil.

THIS Council was held under King * 1.10 Sisebut, in November 619. and made up of seven Bishops, of the Province of Batica, the president whereof was Isidore Bishop of Sevil. Seve∣ral * 1.11 Ecclesiastical Affairs were treated of there, which are related in the Acts of this Coun∣cil.

In the 1st. Action was received the Petition presented by Theodulphus, Bishop of Malaga; wherein he complain'd, That his Diocess, having been spoiled by the Wars, was become a Prey to the neighbouring Bishops, who had invaded it. It is ordered, That all the Churches, formerly belonging to him, shall be restored to him, all Right of Prescription notwithstand∣ing, because none such is to be alledged when Hostilities are the Ground of the Posses∣sion.

In the 2d. Action they named Deputies to compose the Difference between the Bishop of Astigi and that of Corduba, about a Church which they both claimed to belong to their Juris∣diction, and to be within the Limits of their Diocess. The Council orders, That Depu∣ties shall first of all examine the Limits of the Diocess, and then the Possession; and that if it be of thirty Years standing, the Prescription shall take place in the behalf of the Possessor.

The 3d. Business debated in this Council, is concerning a Clerk of Italica, who having left his own Church, went to that of Corduba. They took from thence the Opportunity to renew the Canons, forbidding Clerks to leave their own Churches to go to others.

The 4th. Constitution is against the unlawful Ordinations, made at Astigi, where some persons that had married Widows had been ordained Clerks, their Ordinations are declared null, and they are forbidden to be raised to the Order of Deacons.

In the 5th. place they depose a Presbyter and two Clerks, of the Church of Egabro, who had been irregularly ordained, the Bishop having sore Eyes, had only laid his Hands on them, whilst that a Presbyter did bless them. They declare they would have punished that Pres∣byter for his boldness, if he h••d been alive still.

The 6th. Deliberation is, Concerning a Presbyter of Corduba, unjustly condemned by his Bishop: He is restored again, and Bishops are generally forbidden to depose a Priest or a Deacon, unless their Cause was examined in a Council. They are exc••mmunicated, That condemn▪ them without Examination, by a Tyrannical Power, and not by Canonical Authority; or that advance some out of Favour, and debase others out of Hatred or Envy, and condemn them upon light Suspicions. They add, That a Bishop alone may indeed conferr the Dignity of a Pres∣byter or a Deacon; but he alone cannot take it away from them to whom he hath given it. This is an excellent Instruction for Bishops.

The 7th. Constitution is made about the Permission which Agapius, Bishop of Corduba, had given to some Presbyters, to set up Altars and consecrate Churches, in the Bishop's Absence. The Bishops say, They do not wonder that such a Bishop had granted such Licences, because he was igno••ant of the Church-Discipline, having been raised all on a sudden to the Sacerdotal Dignity: But they prohibit that Practice for the future, declaring, That altho Presbyters have several Functions common with the Bishops, there be some forbidden them by the Eccle∣siastical Laws, such as the Consecration of Priests, Deacons and Virgins, the erection of an Altar, the Blessing of the Unction: That they cannot consecrate an Altar or a Church, nor conferr the Holy Ghost by the Imposition of Hands on the baptiz'd, or on Heretick Con∣verts, nor consecrate the Holy Chrism, nor anoint the Fore-head of the baptiz'd therewith, nor so much as reconcile a Penitent in a publick Mass, nor send Circular Letters: That all these things are forbidden to Presbyters, because they have not the supreme Degree of the Sacerdoral Dignity, which by the Authority of the Canons is appropriated to Bishops only. They add, That Presbyters are not permitted to enter into the Baptistry, nor to baptize before the Bishop, nor to reconcile Penitents without his Order, nor to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, to Preach, to Bless or Salute the People, in the presence of the Bishop.

The 8th. Decision is against such a Man of a Church, as having been set at Liberty by his Bishop, became disobedient. It is ordered, He shall be deprived of his Liberty, by rea∣son of his Disobedience.

The 9th. Constitution imports, That the Stewards of Churches ought not to be chosen out of the Laity, but the Clergy; and that the Bishops shall not manage Church Revenues with∣out the assistance of the Steward.

The 10th. Constitution confirms the Monasteries founded in the Province of Boetica, and forbids Bishops, upon pain of Excommunication, to seize on their Possessions, and to spoil them.

The 11th. grants to the Monks the Management of the Estate, belonging to Monasteries, of Religious Women, upon condition that they shall dwell severally; and shall have no fami∣liarity with them, they shall not see them, they shall speak with the Superior only, and that in the Presence of Witnesses.

The 12th. Business was, The Conversion of a Bishop of Syria, of the Sect of the Acephali, who coming into the Council, and denying there were two Natures in Christ, and maintaining the Godhead was passible in him, was convinc'd of the Truth, and converted by the Ar∣guments of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this Assembly.

In the last 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this Council, it is proved, That there are two Natures in Christ, united in one only Person.

The Constitutions are subscribed by Isidore Bishop of Sevil, and by the Bishops of Elvira, A••••donia, ••stigi, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, T••c••, Malaga and Corduba. This last, who was charged with Igno∣rance in the Council, was not Ag••pius but Honorius, who probably did succeed him.

Council of Rheims, under Sonnatius.

FLodoard relares, That Sonnatius, Bishop of Rheims, held a Council of about forty Bishops, which made ••••veral Constitutions, whereof he inserted the Extract in his History. * 1.12

By the 1st. it is order'd, that no Body shall appropriate to himself what the Church hath invested him▪ in as Tenant o•• Trustee▪ how long soever his Possession be.

The 2d. forbids the Cabals of Presbyters and Clerks against their Bishops.

The 3d. cof••••••s the Canons of the Council of Paris, held under Clotharius.

The 4th. orders, That the Pastors of Churches shall carefully seek out Hereticks, to con∣vert them.

The 5th. prohibits rash Excommunications, and gives to the Provincial Council Authority to judge of the Validity of the Excommunication.

The 6th. forbids Secular Judges to impose upon Clerks publick Taxes, or to lay any Penal∣ty upon them, without the Bishop's Consent. Bishops are enjoyned to correct Clerks, and forbidden to admit into the Clergy, without the Prince's or the Judge's Leave, those that are entrusted with the Care of the Revenue of the King's Lands.

The 7th. threatens to excommunicate those that shall violently take from the Church the Criminals fled into it ff 1.13. It orders, That before they be delivered, they shall take an Oath from them, into whose Hands they are delivered; That they shall not put them to Death, nor maim them, nor rack them; and that none shall be suffered to go out, before he hath promised to do Penance for his Crime.

The 8th. is against them that contract incestuous Marriages: It does excommunicate them, if they do not separate themselves, and declareth that they are to be deprived of their Places and Estates, till they have separated themselves.

The 9th. declareth, That Men ought to have no Converse with one guilty of wilful Mur∣der, unless he committed it in his own Defence, and does not grant him the Viaticum, that is to say, the Absolution, but only at the Point of Death.

The 10th. condemns those that keep to themselves the Goods given by their Parents toChurches or Monasteries.

The 11th. forbids Christians to sell Christian Slaves to the Jews or Pagans.

The 12th. forbids Clerks to go out of their own Diocess, without Letters from their Bishop.

The 13th. forbids Bishops to sell or alienate Church-Lands.

The 14th puts to Penance those that imitate the Superstitions of Pagans.

The 15th. forbids to receive the Accusations of Slaves, and does not permit an Accuser, who could not prove the first Charge, to alledge any other.

The 16th. excommunicates those that shall seize on Church-Goods, after the Bishop's Death.

The 17th. is against those that would enslave free-born persons.

The 18th. forbids Clerks to go to Law without their Bishop's Consent.

The 19th. forbids to put in Lay-men for Arch-priests in Parishes. It permits only to ordain him a Clerk, who is an Elder among the Laity.

The 20th. Orders, That what shall be bestowed upon the Bishops by Strangers, shall belong to the Church, except those things given be a Feoffment of Trust.

The 21st. excommunicates those that seize on Church-Lands.

The 22d. deprives ab Officio, the Bishops who shall break the Holy Vessels, unless it be in extream Necessity, and to redeem Captives.

The 23d. prohibits ravishing of Widows or Virgins consecrated to God.

The 24th. excommunicates Judges, that shall despise the Canons, or violate the Prince's Edict, given at Paris.

The 25th. imports, That he that is ordain'd Bishop ought to be a Native, and chosen by the Votes of the People and the Bishops of the Province, and approved by the whole Council; that those that shall not be thus ordain'd, shall be turned out of their See; and the Bishops that have ordained them, shall be suspended ab Officio, for three Years.

These are all the Canons of this Council, which was held about 630. There are 21 more attributed to this Council; but it is evident they are much posterior to it: They are not related by Flodoard.

Council IV. of Toledo.

THis Council was assembled in 633, by King * 1.14 Sisenand. The Archbishops of Sevil, Nar∣bon, Merida, Braga, Toledo and Tarragona were present in it, together with 53. of their * 1.15 Suffragan Bishops, and 7 Presbyters, Bishop's Deputies. The Assembly was held in the Church of Leocadia.

The Council begins with a larger Confession of Faith than the ordinary Creeds, chiefly about the Incarnation. The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son is establish'd there.

Then the Bishops declare, That as they have but one Faith, so they judge it fit, that they should have but one Discipline, and observe the same things in the Celebration of Di∣vine Service.

The 3d. Constitution is concerning Provincial Councils: It decrees, That seeing they can∣not easily be assembled twice in the Year, they shall hold one every Year, the 16th. of May, in what Town the Metropolitan shall please to appoint; that all those that have any Matters against the Bishops or the Magistrates, and great Lords, shall bring them to that Tribunal, and what shall be adjudged by the Synod shall be executed by the King's Officer: That in case there be any Matter of Faith, or any Affair concerning the Good of the whole Church, they shall call a general Synod of the Provinces of Spain and France.

In the 4th. Canon they settle the Form or Order of keeping the Council. In the Morn∣ing, the Porters having turned the People out of the Church, must stand at the Door, they are to come in at; that the Bishops are to enter in first, and then the Presbyters, and at last the Deacons they shall stand in need of: That the Bishops shall sit down in the Form of a Circle, and the Presbyters behind them: That the Deacons ought to stand up before the Bishops: That they shall also bring in some Notaries to read or to write. Then the Doors being shut, the Archdeacon shall say aloud, Pray ye: That one of the eldest Bishops shall pray aloud, the rest being prostrate: This Prayer being ended, the Arch-deacon shall say, Rise up: Then he shall read the Canons, ordering the holding of Provincial Councils; and the Metropolitan shall invite all them that have any Matter, to propound it: That they shall end that which is pro∣pounded. before they begin another: That if any of them that are without hath any thing to propound, he shall acquaint the Metropolitan with it, who shall relate it to the Council; that he shall be brought in, freely to propose what he hath to say. That the Council shall not end till all Matters be dispatch'd, and that none of the Bishops shall go away, before it be finished.

The 5th. Decrees, That the Metropolitans shall write to one another three Months before the Epiphany, to agree together about the Day on which Easter is to be kept; and then they shall acquaint the Bishops of their Provinces with it, to avoid the Differences which happen'd in Spain about Easterday, because of the several Tables.

The 6th. Canon contains a large Passage of S. Gregory, touching the Liberty of Baptizing with one or three Immersions, according to the Use of the Place.

The 7th. Canon determines, That the Passion shall be preached on Good Friday, and the People shall beg aloud the Pardon of their Sins, that the Faithful being purified by the Com∣punction of Repentance, may celebrate the Resurrection-Sunday, and receive the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ with a clean and pure Heart.

The 8th. prohibits breaking the Fast of Good-Friday before Sun-set, excepting only Children, Aged and Sick Folks.

The 9th. orders, That on Easter-eve they shall bless the Lamp and the Taper. Some Churches of France did not observe this Practice, wherefore they are enjoyned to observe it for the future.

In the 10th. they are reproved, who never said the Lord's Prayer but on Sunday. They prove, by the Testimonies of S. Cyprian, S. Hilary and S. Augustin, that this Prayer is to be said every day; and judged this Practice so necessary, that they threaten to depose the Clerks, that shall omit saying that Prayer every Day in their Publick or Private Office. This shews, that Clerks did even then recite their Office in private.

The 11th. Canon prohibits singing Hallelujah during the whole Lent, because it is a Time of Mourning, as well as the Kalends of January, in which they abstain from Flesh, as in Lent to feed only on Fish and Herbs. It is observ'd, That some did likewise abstain from Drinking Wine: In former Time, Abstinence from Wine was as strictly commanded as Ab∣stinence from Flesh.

The 12th. Constitution decrees, That the Laudes shall not be said after the Epistle, but after the Gospel. These Laudes are some Verses which they recited before the Offertory.

The 13th. rejects the Opinion of those, who believed, That the Hymns of Humane Com∣position, made in the Praise of the Apostles and Martyrs, were not to be recited, as not being drawn out of the Canonical Scriptures, nor authorized by Tradition. They observe, That if it were not lawful to recite any thing in the Divine Service, but what is from the

Scripture, they should retrench the most part of the Masses, Prayers, Collects, Recommenda∣tions, and most of the Prayers said in the Confirmation.

The 14th, orders, That the Song of the Three Children in the Furnace shall be sung in the Pulpit, at the Mass, on Sundays and Holy Days.

The 15th, orders, That, in the End of the Psalms, they shall not only say, Glory be to the Father, but Glory and Honour be to the Father.

In the 16th, it is observed, That some do not say the Gloria after the Responses, because it is not proper to what was said. Gloria is to be said when the Subject is joyful and cheerful, and the beginning of the Response to be repeated when it is sad and mournful.

The 17th Canon pronounces Excommunication against them that will not receive the Revelation of S. John, as a Divine Book, or that will not read it in their Churches, from Easter till Whitsunday, in the Time of Divine Service.

The 18th, orders, That after the reciting of the Lord's Prayer, and the mingling of the Bread with the Wine in the Cup, they shall bless the People before the Distribution of the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood. It says also, That Priests and Deacons ought to re∣ceive the Communion at the Altar, the rest of the Clergy in the Quire, and the People with∣out the Quire.

The 19th, forbids advancing to the Priesthood the following Persons; them that have been convicted of any Crimes, or that having confessed them, have done Penance pub∣lickly.

Them that have been Hereticks, or baptized in an Heresy, or rebaptized.

Them that have made themselves Eunuchs, or have lost some of their Limbs.

Them that have had many Wives, or have married Widows, as also those that have had Concubines.

Those of a servile Condition.

Neophytes, Laymen, or those that are entangled in Businesses.

The Ignorant and Unlearned; those that are not yet 30 Years old, and have not passed through the Ecclesiastical Degrees.

Them that seek to be ordained by Bribery, or to buy that Dignity.

Those that are chosen by their Predecessors.

Those that have not been chosen by the People and the Clergy, nor approved by the Metro∣politan and the Provincial Synod.

That he that hath all these Qualifications, is to be consecrated on a Sunday, by all the Bishops of the Province, or at least by three Bishops, with the Consent of the others, in the Presence and by the Authority of the Metropolitan, and in the Place which he shall chuse.

The 20th, forbids making any persons Deacons before 25. Years of Age, and Presbyters before 30.

The 21st, recommends to the Bishop a chaste and innocent Life, that they may offer the Sacri∣fice with Purity, and pray to God for others.

The 22d, exhorts them, not only to keep a pure Conscience, but moreover, to have a care of their Reputation, and to have always in their Chambers some persons of probity with them, which may bear Witness of it.

The 23d, enjoyns the same thing to the Presbyters and Deacons, that do not live with the Bishop.

The 24th, commands, That young Clerks shall dwell all together in the same Hall, under the Conduct of an Elder.

The 25th, Recommends to Bishops the Knowledge of the Holy Scripture and the Canons.

The 26th, shews, That the Presbyters, put into Parishes, ought to receive from the Bishop a Book, containing the Service of the Church, and instructing them in the manner of admi∣nistring the Sacraments, and when they come to the Council or in his Visitation, they ought to give an account to the Bishop, how they celebrate Service and administer Baptism.

The 27th, That the Presbyters and Deacons put into Parishes, are to promise to their Bi∣shop, that they will live regularly and orderly.

The 28th, That, if a Bishop, a Presbyter, or a Deacon, have been unjustly condemned, and their Innocency be acknowledge in a Second Synod, they cannot be what they were be∣fore, till they have received before the Altar, and from the Bishop's hands, the degrees which they were fallen from. If it be a Bishop, he shall receive the Stole, the Ring, and the Staff; If a Priest, the Stole, and the Chasuble; If a Deacon, the Stole, and the Albe; If a Sub-deacon, the Chalice, and the Patine, or Cover of it; and so of the other degrees, which shall receive again what was given them at their Ordination.

The 29th, is against the Clerks, who consult Diviners, or use Sorcery. It is ordered they shall be deposed, and shut up in Monasteries, to do Penance the rest of their Life.

The 30th, Forbids Bishops bordering upon the Enemies of the State, to receive any order from Strangers.

The 31st, Forbids Bishops to be Judges between Princes and their Subjects, who are ac∣cused of High-Treason, till they have promised to pardon the guilty.

The 32d, Warns the Bishops not to suffer the Magistrates and Men of Power to do un∣justly, and oppress the Poor, to reprove them, if they perceive them to do so; and when they will not amend, to complain to the King.

The 33d, Forbids Bishops to take to themselves above the Third part of the Revenues of Churches Founded in their Diocess, tho' it leaves them the whole Administration thereof.

The 34th, appoints, That between the Bishops of the same Province, Thirty Years pos∣session shall be a valid Title to keep the Churches, which they possess in the Diocess of ano∣ther, but not between Bishops of different Provinces.

The 35th, Puts in an Exception as to Churches newly built, and orders, That, altho' the old Church belongs to him who enjoyed it, Thirty Years since, notwithstanding the Church newly built shall belong to the natural Bishop of the place where 'tis built.

The 36th, Appoints the Bishop to visit every Year the Churches of his Diocess; and if he cannot do it, to commit the doing of it to some Priests and Deacons of known pro∣bity.

The 37th, declares, That Men are bound to pay what they promised to give, for the per∣forming some Ecclesiastical Service.

The 38th, imports, That seeing Presbyters are bound to assist the Poor, if it fall out, that they who have bequeathed something to some Church, be brought to Misery, they or their Children, that Church is bound to help them.

The 39th, Forbids Deacons to take place of the Priests, and to place themselves in the highest place of the Quire, whilst the Presbyters stand below.

The 40th, Forbids Deacons having Two Stoles; yea, and having one of divers Colours, or Embroidered with Gold.

The 41st, Enjoins all Clerks to shave the whole Crown of their Heads, leaving but a small Tuft of their Hair in the form of a round Circle, or a Crown.

The 42d and 43d, Forbids Clerks to dwell with Women, not related to them, and only permit them to live with their Mother, Sister, Daughter, and Aunt.

The 44th, appoints, That Clerks Marrying Widows, Divorced or Debauched Women, shall be separated from them by their Bishop.

The 45th, That Clerks taking up Arms shall be put to Penance in a Monastery.

The 46th, That a Clerk found Robbing Sepulchres, shall be Expelled out of the Clergy, and put to Penance for Three Years.

The 47th declares, That agreeably to King Sisenand's Order, the Council decrees, That Clerks shall be free from all publick Offices.

The 48th, orders, That all Bishops shall have Stewards to manage their Churches Revenue.

The 49th, imports, That a Monk may be made so by the Devotion of Parents, or his own Profession; That all they that are made Monks by either of these Two ways, shall be ob∣liged to continue Monks, and that they are not permitted to return to the World.

The 50th, Gives Clerks leave to become Monks.

The 51st, Forbids Bishops abusing Monks, but it preserveth them the Right which the Ca∣nons give them, to exhort Monks to a good Life, to instruct Abbots, and other Officers; and to correct what is done amiss, contrary to the Rule.

The 52d orders, That Monks leaving their Monastery, to return into the World, shall be Reproved, and put to Penance.

The 53d, Prohibits that sort of Religious persons, which are neither Clerks, nor Monks; and enjoins Bishops to put them to the choice of either of those professions.

The 54th, declares, That they, who being in danger of Death, undergo Penance without confessing any particular Sin, but saying only in general, That they are Sinners, may be pre∣fer'd to the Ecclesiastical State; but it is not so with them who have confessed some grievous Crime.

The 55th, commands, That those that yielded to undergo Penance, and prepared themselves to do it, shall be obliged to finish it, and shall be constrained by the Bishop to it. But if they leave it, and refuse to take it again, they shall be condemned as Apostates, as also the Virgins or Widows which have put on the Religious Habit, if they return to the World and Marry.

The 56th, Distinguisheth Two sorts of Widows, some Secular, who do not leave the Secu∣lar Habit, and other Religious which take a Religious Habit, and declares, it is not lawful for these to Marry.

The 57th, Forbids to constrain the Jews to turn, because Conversion ought to be wholly free; yet as for those who were forced to turn under King Sisebut, they will have them bound to continue Christians, because they have received Baptism, the Holy Chrism, and Christ's Body and Blood.

The 58th, Pronounces Excommunication against those that shall favour, or uphold the Jews against Christians.

The 59th, orders, According to King Sisenand's advice, those Christians that turned Jews, shall be constrained to return to the Church; and if they have Circumcised their Children, they shall be separated from them.

The 60th, decrees, That the Children of the Jews shall be taken away from them by force, to be Christianly brought up in Monasteries.

The 61st, That the Children of the Jews, who are become Christians, shall not be depri∣ved of their Father's Estate, who are condemned for Apostasie.

The 62d, Enjoins Christians to avoid Commerce with the Jews.

The 63d, orders, That Christian Women Married with Jews, shall be separated from their Husbands, if they will not be Converted.

The 64th, That the Testimonies of Christians, that turned Jews, shall not be received.

The 65th, Forbids the Jews bearing Publick Offices.

The 66th, Forbids them having Christian Slaves.

The 67th, Forbids the Bishops, who give nothing to the Church, to set at liberty the Slaves of their Churches.

The following Canons to the 75th, contain some other Constitutions concerning the Slaves and the Free-Men, which are now out of date.

The 75th, and last Canon, is concerning the Fealty due to Kings, and the security of their Persons. The Bishops detest there the Crime of those that violate the Faith they owe to their Prince, and make a long discourse to create an abhorrence of it. And to prevent any such thing in Spain, they pronounce a solemn Anathema against all those that shall Conspire against Kings, that shall attempt against their Life, or usurp their Authority; after having repeated that Anathema Thrice, with terrible Execrations, they promise Loyalty and Fidelity to King Sisenand, and his Successors, and at the same time they beseech him to Govern his People with Justice and Piety, not to Judge alone in Criminal Causes, but to cause them to be examined and judged by the ordinary Judges, reserving to himself the Right of Pardoning. They pro∣nounce Anathema against the Kings that should abuse their Authority to do Evil, and exercise a Tyrannical Power. And they do particularly declare, That by the consent of the whole Nation, King * 1.16 Suintilan, who deprived himself of the Kingdom, and laid down his Au∣thority, by confessing his Crimes, is fallen from his Dignity, his Honour, and his Lands, as well as his Wife, his Children, and his Brother.

Council V. of Toledo, held in 636.

THIS Council was held in the same place with the former, but it was composed but of Twenty Two, or Twenty Three Bishops of several Provinces of Spain. * 1.17

The first Canon decrees, That Litanies, that is to say, Publick Prayers, shall be made Year∣ly during the space of Three Days, which shall begin the next Day after the 13th of Decem∣ber, yet so, that in case one of the Three Days should happen to be a Sunday, they shall be put off to the next Week.

The 2d Canon confirms all that was done in the Council held under Sisenand, and decrees, that they shall be subject to King * 1.18 Cinthila, his Successor.

The 3d, Pronounceth Anathema against those that shall endeavour to usurp the Crown against the consent of the whole Nation, and without being chosen by the Nobility.

The 4th, Forbids consulting Diviners about the Death of the Prince.

The 5th, Prohibits speaking ill of him.

The 6th, Decrees, That the favours of Princes shall continue and be enjoyed after their Death.

The 7th, That in all Councils shall be read the Constitution made in the 4th Council for the safety of Kings.

The 8th, Confirms the Princes power to grant Favours.

The 9th, Contains a Thanksgiving to King Cinthila, and some Prayers and Vows in his behalf.

This Council is backed with King Cinthila's Declaration, confirming the Decree of the Council about the Publick Prayers of December, accompanied with Fastings, and ordering, that, during that time, there shall be a cessation from Work and Business.

Council VI. of Toledo, of the Year 638.

THIS is a National Council composed of above Sixty Prelates of Cinthila's Kingdom. They begin with a Confession of Faith pretty long, which is contained in the first * 1.19 Canon.

The 2d, Confirms the use of the Litanies, or Publick Prayers, appointed in the preceding Council.

In the 3d, They give the King thanks for driving the Jews out of his Kingdom, and for suffering none but Catholicks in it. They order, That the succeeding Kings shall hereafter be bound to take Oath, That they shall Tolerate no Infidels, and pronounceth Anathema against those that shall break that Oath.

The 4th, Delareth, That persons guilty of Simony are unworthy of being advanced to Holy Orders, and those that shall be found in Orders, to be fallen from their Degree, as well as those that have Ordained them.

The 5th, Decrees, That those that shall receive any thing of the Church Revenue, shall hold it but by a precarious Title, and shall subscribe an Instrument testifying the same, that they may not plead prescription.

The 6th, Is against Men, Maidens, and Widows, leaving the Religious Habit, to lead a Secular Life; they are ordered to be shut up in Monasteries.

In the 7th, the same thing is ordered against those who submitted themselves to publick Penance.

The 8th, Explains a Constitution of S. Gregory's, whereby they suppose he gave leave to a Young Man, who underwent Penance upon fear of Death, to Cohabit with his Wife, till he was come to an Age in which it were easier to live Chastly. They say, that if he, or she, who hath not received Penance, Dieth before he, or she, which submitted to Penance, have pra∣ctised Continence, it shall not be lawful for the surviver to Marry; but if he, or she, that was not put to Penance survive, he may Marry again.

The 9th, Ordains, That such as are made Free by the Church, shall at the Death of every Bishop renew the Declaration, that they depend on the Church.

The 10th, That these Free-Men shall do Service to the Church.

The 11th, Forbids receiving Accusations, before Examination had, whether the Accusers be persons to be allowed of as such.

The 12th, 13th, and 14th, Are against Rebellious Subjects, and in the behalf of the good Loyal Servants of the Prince.

The 15th, Maintains the Donations of Princes to Churches.

The 16th, Provides for the Security of the Life and Estate of King's Children.

The 17th, Provides for the Safety of the Prince himself, and forbids all attempts against his Person and Crown, as long as he lives; and orders, that after his Death none shall in∣vade the Kingdom by Tyranny, and none but a Noble Goth, and worthy of that Dignity, shall be advanced to the Sovereignty.

The 18th Canon does yet renew the Inhibition of attempting against the person of the Prince.

The 19th, Is but a Conclusion of the Council.

Council VII. of Toledo.

THIS Council was held in 646, under King * 1.20 Chisdavind, and composed of Twenty Five Bishops. * 1.21

The 1st Constitution is against Perfidious and Disloyal Clerks.

By the 2d, A Bishop, or a Presbyter, is permitted to finish the Celebration of a Mass be∣gun, if he that is Officiating falls ill, and is not able to hold out to the end; but it forbids Presbyters, upon pain of Excommunication, to leave the Holy Mysteries imperfect, or to Celebrate after having taken the least Food.

The 3d, Renews the Canon of the Council of Valentia, about the Bishops Funerals.

The 4th, Is against the greediness of some Bishops of Gallicia, oppressing the Parsons of their Diocess. They are forbidden by that Canon to take above two Pence per Annum of each Church in their Diocess; to bring along with them in their Visitations more than Five persons, and to stay above a Day in any Church.

The 5th Canon appoints, That Hermits, or Recluses, that are ignorant, or whose Life is not Vertuous enough, shall be shut up in Monasteries; that those only shall be let alone, who are commendable for their Holiness, and that for the future, none shall be admitted to that Profession, but such as have learned the Religious Life in Monasteries.

The last Canon imports, That the next Neighbouring Suffragans of the Arch-Bishop of Toledo shall come every Month into that Town, except in Vacation, and Vintage-times.

Council of Lateran against the Monothelites under Martin I.

THE Mystery of Christ's Incarnation, which since Nestorius's Quarrel, had always afford∣ed matter of dispute between the Bishops, produced a new one in this 7th Century, which for a time divided the Eastern and Western Churches. The business was no more * 1.22 about the Question of the Two Natures and One Person in Christ, the Authority of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, which had decided those Two Points, was received by all the Patriarchs; and they that would not agree upon those Truths, were look'd upon as Hereticks, both in the East and the West. But about the Year 620, they stirred up ano∣ther Question, whether they should say, That there were Two Operations, and Two Wills in Christ, as Two Natures are said to be in him. Theodorus Bishop of * 1.23 Pharan was the first, who expressing himself upon that Question, maintained, that the Manhood in Christ was so united to the Word, that, tho' it had its Faculties, it did not Act by it self, but the whole▪ Act was to be ascribed to the Word, which gave it the motion. Cyrus Bishop of Pha∣sis, embraced that Opinion, and expressed himself about it in the same manner, denying there were Two Operations in Christ, and affirming, that they were reduced to one princi∣pal Operation. Not that they denied, that Human Actions and Passions were in Christ; but they affirmed, that they were to be attributed to the Word, as to the principal Mover, whose Instrument only the Man was. As for instance, they confessed, It was the Manhood of Christ that suffered Hunger, and Thirst, and Pain; but they asserted, that Hunger, Thirst, and Pain, were to be ascribed to the Person of the Word. In a word, that the Word was the Author and Mover of all the Operations and Wills of Christ. Sergius, Patriarch of Constan∣tinople, was of the same mind; and the Emperor Heraclius embraced that Party so much the more willingly, because he believed it to be a means to bring the Jacobites, Severians, and Acephali, back again to the Unity of the Church, by yielding to them part of what they contended for, and to oppose them more easily, by overthrowing the Foundation of one of their strongest Objections. And indeed, having had a Conference in the Year 622 with a Se∣verian Bishop of Armenia, Named Paul, he maintained against him, that there were Two Natures in Christ: But he confessed, that they should acknowledge but One Operation only in him; and the better to confirm that Question, he made a Declaration, directed to Arca∣dius Arch-Bishop of Cyprus, against this Paul, and the rest of the Acephali, whereby he did for∣bid them to say, that there were Two Operations, or Two Wills in Christ.

In another Conference, which Heraclius had with Athanasius, the Universal Patriarch of the Jacobites in 629. He promised him to make him Patriarch of Antioch, if he would receive the Synod of Chalcedon, and own Two Natures in Christ. But he asked the Emperor, whe∣ther they should say, that the Operations of Christ were double, or simple. Hereupon Hera∣clius consulted Sergius of Constantinople, and Cyrus, who did both agree, that they should own in Christ but one only Deivirile Operation.

Cyrus having thus declared himself Head of a Party, was soon transferred from his small Bishoprick to the Patriarchate of Alexandria. Being raised up to that See, he reunited the Theodosians, or Jacobites, by Publishing some Articles, among which there was one only Ope∣ration Theandrick, or Deivirile, in Christ's Person; that reunion being made in June, 633. Cyrus acquainted Sergius with it. Sophronius, who was afterwards Patriarch of Jerusalem, opposed it stoutly, and going away from Alexandria, came to Constantinople to Expostulate the matter with Sergius, whom he found in the same Opinion with Cyrus. But this feigning himself to be a Peace-maker, writ to Cyrus to forbear saying, There was One or Two Wills in Jesus Christ, and enjoined the same thing to Sophronius, seeking thus to extinguish that dis∣pute. Sophronius requested a Writing from Sergius upon that Subject, and Sergius gave him a Letter, a copy whereof he sent to Honorius Bishop of Rome, together with the Letter he writ to him about that Question, in which he related to him that dispute, set him down the state of the Question, let him know how he did think fit to proceed in it, to stifle it in its Cradle, and desired him to write to him what he thought of it.

Honorius Answered him, That he did approve of the Caution he used in it, and the sup∣pressing of the terms of One or of Two Operations, declaring he did own Two Natures in Christ, and yet that he confessed but One Will in him.

In the mean while, Sophronius, being advanced to the See of Jerusalem, notwithstanding the consent of the other Patriarchs, wrote a long Synodical Letter to Sergius, to maintain the Doctrine of the Two Wills, and before he Died he sent Stephen, Bishop of Dora, to Rome, vigorously to defend this Opinion, and to get the contrary Opinion condemned.

After Honorius's Death, Heraclius the Emperor Published a Declaration intituled, Ecthesis, or, An Exposition of the Faith, in which he enjoined silence about that Question. Sergius, the true Author of that Exposition, approved it, and Died soon after in 639, leaving Pyrrhus for his Successor, who was of the same Opinion.

It was not so with Honorius's Successors. Severian, who sat but a little while upon the Roman See, refused to approve the Ecthesis, and John IV. did plainly condemn it. At last Heraclius died in March 641. his Son Constantine lived but 4 Months, and Constans succeeded

him the same year. Then Pyrrhus was expelled, as we have said, out of Constantinople, and Paul put in his place, who was not less zealous for the Party of the Monothelites than Pyr∣rhus. Pope Theodorus endeavoured to re-establish him, because he had feigned that his Mind was altered, and demanded that the Ecthesis should be abolished: But Constans set out a De∣claration [which he called The Type] like that of Heraclius, whereby he did command silence about the question of the two Operations and the two Wills in Christ. This was published at Constantinople in 648. and in the beginning of the next year Pope Theodorus died.

Martin I. of that Name succeeded him, and was ordained in July: He called a Council at Rome presently, about the question of the two Operations and the two Wills. It was held in Constantine's Church: 10•• Bishops of Italy were present at it, among whom were Maximus, Pa∣triarch of Aquileia, Deusdedit, Bishop of Calaris, and a Bishop and a Presbyter, Deputies of the Arch-bishop of Rave••••••.

It was finished in 5 Actions, Sessions or Conferences.

The 1st. was held October 5th. 649. Theophylact, the first of the Notaries, having desired * 1.24 Pope Martin, to tell the Assembly the occasion of his calling this Synod, and what the matter was, he said, it was to oppose the Novelties and Errors published by Cyrus, Bishop of Alex∣andria, and Sergius Bishop of Constantinople, and defended by Pyrrhus and Paul, Successors of Sergius: That 18 Years ago, Cyrus had published 9 Articles in Alexandria, pronouncing Ana∣thema against those that should not hold them, wherein he asserted one Operation only in Christ, as well of his Godhead as of his Manhood; That Sergius had approved this Do∣ctrine in a Letter to Cyrus, and had confirmed it since, by making, under the Emperor He∣raclius's name, an Heretical Exposition of Faith. He adds, that it follows from this Doctrine, That there is but one Will and one Nature in Jesus Christ, because the Holy Fathers have acknowledged, that when there was but one Operation, there was also but one Nature. Hereupon he cites the Testimonies of S. Basil, S. Cyril and S. Leo, proving that the two Na∣tures in Jesus Christ have each of them their several Operations. He charges Sergius with having opposed this Doctrine, by setting out Heraclius's Exposition of the Faith, and confirm∣ing it by his approbation, and that of other Bishops. As for Pyrrhus and Paul, he says, they have made things worse; the first, by obtruding that Exposition of Faith upon many, whom he drew into his Opinion by Fear or Kindness; That he had indeed renounced that Error, and presented a Retractation to the Holy See; but he soon relapsed into his Heresie. In fine, That Paul had not only maintained this Error in a Letter written to the Holy See, but had also opposed the sound Doctrine by writing; and that, after Sergius's Example, he had moved the Emperor to make a new Exposition of Faith, called the Type, which did over∣throw the Doctrine of all the Fathers, by forbidding to profess one or two Wills in Jesus Christ; That he had even ventured to take away the Altar consecrated in the Church of S. Pla∣cidia, and hindered the Apocrisiarii of the Roman Church to offer thereon, or to receive the Sacraments; That he had persecuted them and several Bishops, Defenders of the Orthodox Faith, causing some to be banished, others imprisoned, and some abused; That Com∣plaints of these things having been made at several times to the Holy See, and to his Prede∣cessors, they used Letters, Advertisements, Threatnings, Protestations, to repress those No∣velties, and re-establish the sound Doctrine; but all these means having proved in vain, he did think it necessary to call them together, to the end, that having produced and examined the Writings of those Hereticks, and heard the Charges brought against them, they might pass their Judgment for the confirmation of the Faith, and rejecting of Error. Maurus, Bishop of Cesena, and Deusdedit, Deacon of Ravenna, told them, in the Archbishop of Ravenna's name, That having heard the same things from his Apocrisiarii, he designed to come to the Council; but being hindered from coming, he had sent them, as his Representatives, and had given them a Letter, which they required to have read, and inserted in the Acts. It is directed to Martin, to whom he gives the Title of gg 1.25 Universal Bishop: After having excused himself for not coming in Person to the Council, he declareth, That he rejects the Exposition of Faith, defended by Pyrrhus, and all that was done in confirmation of it; and professeth to believe two Operations and two Wills in Jesus Christ.

Maximus, Bishop of Aquileia, said, he was also of the same Mind, and believed two Ope∣rations in Christ. Deusdedit, Bishop of Calaris, requested that this Matter might be searched to the bottom, and all the Bishops were of that mind.

This Examination was begun in the second Action, which is of the 8th. of October. Steven, Bishop of Dora, of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, presented a Petition, in which he sets forth, * 1.26 That Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus and Paul, have published a new Heresie, teaching, That there was but one Operation and one Will in Christ, both of the Godhead and Manhood; That Sophronius, of blessed Memory, Patriarch of Jerusalem, opposed that Error vigorously, and had made a Writing, in which he alledged an infinite number of the Holy Fathers Testimo∣nies, to convince them of Impiety, and to establish the Truth; That before he died, he had made him to promise him upon the Calvary, that he would go to Rome, to sollicite the Con∣demnation of this Error; That he had performed his Promise, notwithstanding all their en∣deavours to hinder him from it; That he had already demanded it of Theodorus, and did renew his request to the Council.

Some Greek Presbyters and Monks, who had been a while at Rome, presented also a Peti∣tion against Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus and Paul, against the Ecthesis, the Type and the Doctrine of one Operation only, and desired the Council, carefully to examine that Question, and to determine it according to the Doctrine of the Church. Then Sergius's Letter to Theodorus was read, written in 643. wherein this Patriarch, having extolled the Authority of the Holy See, declares, That he follows Pope S. Leo's Doctrine, who taught, That the two Natures do operate in Jesus Christ, but in conjunction one with another; That he does anathematize and condemn all those, that do not hold this Doctrine. The rest of this Action was spent in reading 4 Synodical Letters sent by the African Bishops, against the Monothelite's Exposition of Faith, one whereof is directed to Pope Theodorus, the other to the Emperor, the 3d. to Paul of Constantinople. They alledge, in this last, the Testimonies of S. Austin and S. Am∣brose, to prove the two Wills. The last Letter is Victor's, Bishop of Carthage, to Theodorus, upon the same Subject.

In the 3d. Action of the 16th. of October, they produced the Extracts of the Works of * 1.27 those who were accused of Error. They begin with those of Theodorus, Bishop of Pharan, who owns many sorts of Operations in Christ, but affirms, They all proceed from the Word, which gives motion to the Body, Soul, and the other Faculties of the humane Nature, as an Instrument which he maketh use of. Martin the First confutes his Opinion, to which he op∣poses some Testimonies of S. Cyril, S. Gregory Nazianzen, S. Basil, and the Council of Chal∣cedon. Cyrus succeeds Theodorus. They read his 7th. Article, wherein he owns two Natures in Jesus Christ, but united in one Christ, who doth that which is divine, and that which is humane by one Theandrick or Deivirile Action, according to * 1.28 S. Denys. They join to this Ar∣ticle, Sergius his Letter to Cyrus, wherein he approves this Doctrine, and congratulates with him, for the re-union of the Theodosians with him. Upon occasion of S. Denys's citation, they consulted the original, and they found, that Cyrus and Sergius had changed the Terms of * 1.29 New Will Theandrick, into that of One Will Theandrick. They compared their Expression with Themistius's, and they proved, by some Passages of that Heretick, That Severus and he were the first that said, There was but one Deivirile operation in Jesus Christ. They explain the meaning of the Deivirile operation, and they say, 'tis nothing else but two sorts of operations of the same Person, whichyet proceed from two different Natures (viz. God and Man.)

This being examined, they read the Emperor Heraclius's Exposition of the Faith, known by the Name of Ecthesis, in which he forbids this Expression, That there is one or two Operations in Christ, and commands them to say, That 'tis the same Son thato perates in Christ the divine and humane Operations; that altho' some of the Fathers have said, There is but one Operation, it is better to forbear that Expression, lest it be thought, That they would deny the existence of the two Natures; and that it must not be said neither, That there are two Operations in Christ, because this Expression, being not used by the Fathers, does offend many, who think, they admit two contrary Wills in Christ. To this Ecthesis they add the Acts of Approbation given by Paul and Pyrrhus, and the Letter of Cyrus of Alexandria to Sergius, wherein he commends the Emperor for making that Exposition of Faith.

In the 4th. Action, held the 19th. of October, Martin gave a short Account of what Cyrus, Sergius and Paul, had done against the Doctrine of the Church; and that he might fully con∣vince * 1.30 Paul, their Successor, of the same Impiety, he caused his Letter to Pope Theodorus to be read, wherein, delivering his Opinion; he says, That he owns one Will in Jesus Christ, only to take away the contrariety of Wills, but does not intend to confound the two Natures: That Christ's Soul, endowed with its Intellect and Faculties, is led and moved by the Will of the Word, which causes it to act and to will as he pleases. He adds, That S. Cyril did de∣liver this Doctrine, and that Sergius and Honorius did newly teach it; That he stands to their decision, and is wholly of their Mind. Then was read the Emperor's Type, forbidding to speak or dispute about the question of one or two Operations, or of two Wills, that he might secure the Peace of the Church. The Council commends the Emperor's intention, but dis∣proves part of his Edict.

After they had read over all the Monuments they intended to condemn, they caused the Creeds of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople, and the definitions of Faith of the Councils of Ephesus, Chalcedon, and of the 5th. Council, to be recited.

In the 5th. Action, held the last day of October, they read the Testimonies of the Greek and Latin Fathers, proving either directly or by consequence, That there are in Christ two Wills * 1.31 and two Operations; and, on the other side, they produced some Passages of several Here∣ticks, who had taught but one Will in Christ.

After that, Maximus of Aquileia, Deusdedit of Calaris, and Martin deliver'd their Judg∣ments, alledging many Reasons against the opinion of the Monothelites; the whole Council ap∣proved it, acknowledging two Operations and two Wills, and made 20 Articles against the Error of the Monothelites, in the 18th. whereof it does anathematize Theodorus, Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, and all them that are or shall be of their Opinion.

Pope Martin published these Decrees by a circular Letter, directed to all the Bishops, Pres∣byters, Deacons, Abbots, Monks, and to the whole Church; and wrote of it particularly to several Bishops, as it may be seen in the Extract of his Letters.

This Council of Rome provoked Constans against Pope Martin, because this Emperor look'd upon this Attempt, and the condemnation of his Type, as a kind of Rebellion, and an en∣croachment upon his Authority. He caused this Pope to be violently carried away from Rome in 653. and after most cruel usage, banished him to Chersona. After his departure, the Ro∣mans chose Eugenius in his room, in September 653. who did not openly consent to the Error of the Monothelites: But his Apocrisiarii were forced to unite themselves with the Monothe∣lites, who altering their Carriage and Expressions, said, That there was in Christ one and two Wills. At first they did say, That there was in Christ but one Operation and one Will; afterwards they would not have Men to speak of one or two Operations, and approved one only Will. The Type imposed silence about that question, both as to the Operations and to the Wills. At last to comply with all, they would have it free for Men to say, That there was in Christ one and two Wills. Peter, who was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople in Pyr∣rhus's room, who got up again to that See after Paul's death, was of this Judgment, and many followed that Opinion. But, altho' these were different Expressions, yet they came up to the same thing, and did all tend to the same end, which was to tolerate the Doctrine of one Ope∣ration and one Will, and to make it run equal with that of the two Operations and the two Wills, so that every one might follow that which he liked best.

Yet all this condescension did not procure the re-union of the Eastern and Western Churches; for from Pope Theodosius's time they continued divided, and the Popes sent no more Letters of Communion to the Patriarchs of the East, nor the Patriarchs of the East to the Pope. It was to take away this kind of Schism that the Emperor Constantinus Pogonatus appointed the Third Council of Constantinople, which is reckoned the 6th. General, of which we are going to write the History.

Council III. of Constantinople, 6th. General.

COnstantinus Pogonatus appointed this Council, for the re-uniting of the Churches of the East and the West, and the final determination of the Question of the two Operations, and the * 1.32 two Wills in Christ. He wrote to the Pope a Letter, dated the 12th. of August 678. direct∣ed to Donus, whom he supposed still living, and it was delivered to his successor Agatho. This Pope having received the Emperor's Letter, held a Council at Rome, of 125. Bishops of the West, which determined the Doctrine of the two Wills, and confirmed what was done under Martin. There were at this Council, besides the Bishops of Italy, some Deputies of the Churches of France and England. After the holding of this Council, the Deputies of the Holy See, and the Council departed, to go to Constantinople, to carry their Decision. After they were come, the Emperor gave order to the Patriarchs, to come to the Council, and also to bring the Bishops of their Patriarchate thither. It begun the thirteenth Year of the Empire of Constantine, in the Year 680. Indiction 9th. in November, and was ended after eighteen Meetings or Sessions, the 16th. of September of the next Year, Indiction 10th. The Empe∣ror had the first Place there, and was present at the eleven first Sessions, and at the last: He was accompanied by the Consuls and Officers. The Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch were there in person; those of Rome, Alexandria and Jerusalem by their Deputies, and all the Western Bishops by three Bishops sent by the Council of Rome, with several Bishops of the East, whereof the number increased by little and little, as they came to Constantinople; For in the beginning they were but between 30 and 40. and in the end there were found above 160 of them.

The Acts of the Council began with the Emperor's Letter to Pope Donus; in which he represents to him, his Sorrow to see the Eastern Church divided from the Western: That Theodorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, of blessed Memory, would not send a Synodical Letter to the

Holy Se••, according to the Custom, for fear it should nor be received; and that he contented himself to direct a Letter to him, in the Form of an Exhortation: That that Patriarch and Macarius Patriarch of Antioch, being consulted, why the Chuch was thus divided, seeing all the Bishops received the Definitions of the five General Councils, and the Doctrine of the Fathers, and rejected all Heresies: They answered, the Contest came from some new Expres∣sions, brought in, either out of Ignorance, or out of a Desire of piercing too deep into the unsearchable Works of the Lord: That the Sees of Rome and Constantinople disagreeing about this, they remained divided. He exhorts the Pope not to suffer this Division, about inconside∣rable Points, to continue for ever; and invites him to send some able Legates to the Synod, with necessary Instructions and Books, promising he would cause them to be received, and be equally favourable to both Parties. He tells them, he thinks three Men will be enough to hold his Place, with twelve Archbishops or Bishops, in the Name of his Council. He adds, That he had been desired by the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch, to give them Leave to take Vitalian's Name out of the Dypticks, and to leave none but that of Honorius, because the Bishops of Rome, his Successors, had differed from the Eastern Churches; but that he would not suffer them to do it: And that he could assure him, that the Names of Honorius and Vita∣lian were left in the Dypticks.

There is a second Letter of the Emperor, dated September 10th. 680. directed to George of Constantinople; wherein he orders him, immediately to bring the Bishops and Archbishops to Constantinople, and to send Word to Macarius, to bring likewise those of his Synod.

The third Piece is a Latin Letter of Mansuetus, Bishop of Milan, which he wrote to the Emperor, in the Name of the Synod held at Milan; in which he exhorts him to imitate the Zeal of Constantine the Great, for the Faith; and beginning with Arius's Heresy, and the Nicene Council, he maketh a compendious History of the other Errors, condemned in the five first Councils, held by the Authority of the Christian Emperors: He assures him, that they do hold and maintain the Definitions of those Councils, and the Doctrine of the Holy Ortho∣dox Fathers. To this Letter is annexed their Confession of Faith; in which, having asserted two Natures in Christ, they add, That there be also two natural Wills and two Operations. With these Letters they sent some Deputies from the Pope and the Synod: The Pope sent two Presbyters, named Theodorus and George, and a Deacon named John; and the Bishops of the Council sent three Bishops in their Name to the Synod of Constantinople. When these Deputies were arrived at Constantinople, and had saluted the Emperor, September 10th. 680. he gave an order, directed to George of Constantinople, whom he styles OEcumenical Patriarch, (as he had styled the Pope OEcumenical Pope) wherein he commands him immediately to bring the Archbishops and Bishops to Constantinople, and to send Word to Macarius of Antioch, to bring those of his Synod.

The first Action of the Council began the the 7th of November 680. in the Emperor's Palace. It is said, he presided in the Assembly, that his Counsellors or Officers were present at it, and * 1.33 that the Synod was called by the Emperor's Order. The three Legates of the Pope held the first Place among the Bishops of the Council, George Patriarch of Constantinople the second, the Deputy of the Church of Alexandria the third, Macarius of Antioch the fourth, the Deputy of the Patriarch of Jerusalem the fifth, the Bishops Deputies of the Synod of Rome the sixth; next after them were the Deputies of the Church of Ravenna, and about 32. Bishops, with some Abbots.

After they were set down, the Legates of the Pope, and of the Synod of the West said, That they were sent by the Pope and the Council of Rome, and that they brought two Letters with them, which they had delivered to the Emperor: That seeing the Difference came from this, That the Patriarchs of Constantinople had invented and maintained Novelties, by teaching, That there was but one Will and one Operation in Christ, those of their Party ought to shew the Grounds of this new Doctrine. Macarius answered, in the Name of the Churches of Con∣stantinople and Antioch, That they had invented no Novelties, and did teach nothing but what they had learn'd from the Holy Fathers, as they are expounded by Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter their Patriarchs, by Honorius Pope of Rome, and by Cyrus Patriarch of Alexandria; That they were ready to defend this Doctrine by the general Synods and the Fathers, whose Authority was owned. The Emperor commanded them to do so, and the Acts of the Reume∣nical Councils to be brought. Those of the Council of Ephesus were read, and Macarius thinking to have found there a Place favouring his Opinion in S. Cyril's Letter to Theodosius, where Christ's Will is said to be Omnipotent; he would have inferred from thence, that there was but one Will in Christ. But the Western Deputies, some Bishops, and the Judges them∣selves took notice, That the Will of the Word only was spoken of there, and not the Divine and Human Will in Christ; then they read over the Acts of the Council of Ephesus.

In the second Session, held the 10th. of November, the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon were read, and when they came to S. Leo's Letter, the Pope's Legates maintained, That there * 1.34 was a Place where that Pope established two Wills and two Operations. Macarius contrari∣wise affirmed, That the Passage of S. Leo proved only, That there was in Christ one Opera∣tion Theandrick.

In the third, of the 13th. of the same Month, they began to read the Acts of the fifth Council: At the Head of which there was a Discourse written under the Name of Mennas, to Vigilius. The Pope's Legares maintain'd it to be supposititious, and to have been added a little while ago to the Acts of the fifth Council; which they proved, because Mennas dyed the 21st. Year of Justinian, and the fifth Council was not held till in the 27th. Year of the same Emperor: And indeed the Judges and the Bishops examining the Sheets which they were * 1.35 reading, they found three prefixed to the beginning without Cyphers, and written by a diffe∣rent Hand. Whereupon they left out that Discourse of Mennas, and set themselves to the reading of the Acts of the fifth Council. In them they found a Letter of Vigilius, in which he asserted one only Operation in Christ; but the Legates denied it to be his, and when they went on in the reading of the Council, they found that in the Definition there was no mention of one Operation. The reading of the Acts of the Council being finished; the Bishops and the Judges declared, That they had not found it defined, that there was but one Operation and one will in Christ.

The fourth Action was held the 15th. of the same Month: In it the Letters of Agatho, and * 1.36 of the Council of Rome, to the Emperors Constantine, Heraclius and Tiberius, were read. The first contains very large Proofs of the Doctrine of the two Wills, taken out of the Holy Scripture and the Fathers: He does plainly condem the Monothelites, and particularly Theo∣dorus, Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter: He speaks very respectfully of the Emperors, and very advantagiously of his own See: He says, The Apostolick Church of Rome never fell into Error, that it never was depraved by Heresy: That the Fathers and Synods have followed her Decisions, and that his Predecessors have always confirmed their Brethren in the Faith. They might have opposed to him the late Instance of Honorius, who seemed to be as guilty as those he did so severely condemn, and who was not spared in the Council of Constanti∣nople. The Letter of the Roman Council contains a Confession of Faith, in which they ac∣knowledg two Operations and two Wills in Christ: After that they condemn the Doctrine of the Monothelites, and the Bishops condemn'd in Agatho's Letter; and they approve what was done in the Synod held under Martin I. This Letter is subscribed by 25 Bishops, most of them of Italy; there be some of France also, and Wilfride subscribes in the Name of the Bishops of England. They tell us, That they hoped that Theodorus of Canterbury and several other Bishops, would have come thither, but could not; and that they might be assured that all the Bishops of the West and the North were in the same Opinion, and held the same Faith.

The fifth Action was held the 7th. of December. Macarius presented two Sheets of Quota∣tions * 1.37 of the Fathers, which were read in the Council.

He presented also a third in the next Action, which was held the 12th. of February. The * 1.38 Emperor ordered all the three Sheets to be sealed with the Seals of the Judges of the Church of Rome, and the Church of Constantinople. The Pope's Deputies maintained, That none of those Testimonies proved one Will or one Operation in Christ; that they had falsified most of them; and that some of them were only to be understood of the Will of the three Persons in the Trinity. They required them to produce the Authentick Books out of which those Passages were taken, that they might lay open the Cheat; and that they might be permitted to peruse the Collection of the Passages they had made, to prove two Wills and two Opera∣tions in Christ.

In the seventh Action of the 13th. of February, of the Year 681. Agatho's Deputies pre∣sented * 1.39 a Sheet, containing the Testimonies of the Fathers, confirming the Doctrine of the two Wills. They asked Macarius if he received Agatho's Letter, and the Definition of the Council of Rome. Macarius and George required the Sheet, containing the Passages of the Fathers, might be communicated to them, to compare them with the Originals, which were in the Pa∣triarch of Constantinople's Library.

In the eighth Action, of the 7th. of March, the Bishop of Constantinople having examined * 1.40 Agatho's Letter, and the Passages of the Fathers, declared that he was of the same Mind with the Pope, and the other Bishops of the West. All the Bishops of his Patriarchate made the same Declarations, except Theodorus Bishop of Melitina; who presented a Memoir in the Name of himself and three Bishops more, of some Officers of the Church of Constantinople, and of Steven a Presbyter and Monk of Antioch; wherein he requested, That neither Party might be condemned, seeing the general Councils had pronounced nothing hitherto about the two Wills. This Memoir was disowned by those in whose Name it was presented, except∣ing Stephen, the Monk of Antioch. Nevertheless, Constantine told them, That for the full Satisfaction of the Council, they ought to bring a Profession of Faith in the next Action. Hereupon George came near the Emperor, and prayed him, to order Vitalian's Name to be put into the Dypticks again, which had been crossed out, only by reason of the Delay of the Apocrisiarii of Rome, sent to Constantinople. The Emperor ordered it to be done forthwith, and his Order was approved by the Exclamations of the Bishops, who wished him a long Life, as also to Pope Agatho, and to George Patriarch of Constantinople. There remained none but Macarius and those of his Patriarchate, who had not declared themselves: The Council having obliged this Patriarch to deliver his Opinion, he declared, That he did not own two Wills nor two Operations in Christ, but one only Operation and one Will Deivirile. After that Decla∣ration, he was ordered to rise up out of his Place to make answer: Four Bishops of his Patri∣archate

forsook him, and received Agatho's Letter and Doctrine. They produced two Profes∣sions of Faith of Macarius. In the latter, which is the longer, after having explained himself very clearly, about the distinction of the two Natures, he says, it is the same Person that acts and suffers; that it is God that acts and suffers by the Manhood, and according to his divine Will, which only acts in Jesus Christ, it being impossible there should be in him two contrary or like Wills. He adds, for a Proof of his Assertion, that in the celebration of the unbloody Mysteries, in our Churches, we are made Partakers of Christ's Body and Blood, which is not a Man's Flesh, but the quickning Flesh of the Word. He condemns all Hereticks till Hono∣rius, Sergius and Paul; which he commends as Teachers of the Truth. Macarius owns in the Council these Professions of Faith, and protests he will suffer himself to be torn in pieces, or thrown into the Sea, rather than own two Wills and two natural Operations in Christ: Then they examined all the Testimonies, which he had alledged, and it was found that he had falsified them; which provoked the Bishop's Indignation against him, insomuch that they deposed him.

In the next Action, held the eighth of March, they went on in the Examination of the Quorations alledged by Macarius, and received the Declaration of Theodorus of Melitina, and * 1.41 of the Bishops and Clerks that had approved his Memoir; wherein they promised to give a Profession of Faith in the next Action.

The tenth Action was held the 18th. of March: They read the Fathers Testimonies, alledg∣ed by Pope Agatho, which were found right quoted. They received also the Profession of * 1.42 Faith of the four Bishops, suspected of favouring Macarius's Party.

In the eleventh Action, which was more numerous than the former, the Deputy of the * 1.43 Church of Jerusalem required, That the Synodical Letter of Sophronius, Bishop of Jerusalem, might be read; which was read: And after that the Writing which Macarius had directed to the Emperor, although, contrary to the Custom, he had sent it to Rome and to Sardinia, be∣fore it was read in the Senate. At the end of this Session the Emperor declared, That being called out by State Affairs, he had ordered two Noblemen and two * 1.44 Exconsuls to be present in his stead at the following Sessions, at which he was not in Person, except the last.

In the twelfth Action, held the 20th of March, they read a long Memoir of Macarius's, * 1.45 containing the Letters of the Bishops of his Party. The first is a Letter of Sergius to Cyrus, in which he consults him about the Emperor's Prohibition of admitting two Wills in Christ. He answers him, That Question was not decided by any Council; That S. Cyril and Vigilius own but one Will, yet that the two Wills ought not to be condemned, if it was found that some of the Fathers had spoken of them.

The second is a Letter of Sergius to Pope Honorius, in which he maintains, That they ought to forbear speaking of one or two Wills.

The third is Honorius's Answer to the former Letter, which approveth the Suppressing of those Expressions, which he thinks to be new, nothing of them being found in the Scripture, in the Councils, nor in the Fathers. These Letters were examined from the Originals kept at Constantinople, and being found true and genuine, it was ordered that they should be examined in the following Actions. The Judges asked the Emperor, Whether Macarius might be re∣stored, in case he should repent and alter his Mind. The Council required, That by reason of the heady Zeal which he had shewed, he should remain deposed, without Hope of Restau∣ration, and be banished; and the Clergy of Antioch desired another Bishop might be put in his room.

In the thirteenth Session, of the 28th of March, Sergius and Honorius's Letters were read over again. They declared, That this last had wholly followed Sergius's impious Doctrine, * 1.46 and they anathematized him. The Judges asking, Why they did also condemn Cyrus, Pyrrhus, Peter and Paul: The Council answered immediately, That their Heresy was manifest, and that Pope Agatho did sufficiently discover it. Nevertheless, it was agreed upon, That their Writings should be examined: Therefore they immediately read two Letters of Cyrus to Sergius, the Capitula he had got the Theodosians to subscribe, some Extracts of his Sermons and of Theodorus's, a Writing of Pyrrhus's, some Letters of Peter and Paul of Constantinople, proving that those Bishops admitted but one Will and one Operation in Jesus Christ; here∣upon the Council declared, That Agatho had justly condemned them, that they also did con∣demn them, and reject their Errors, and would have their Names blotted out of the Dypticks. As for the Successors of Paul, Thomas, John and Constantine, they read their synodical Let∣ters, and nothing was found in them contrary to the Faith. George, Library-keeper of Con∣stantinople, swore, That they had not put Men to subscribe, that there was but one Operation in Christ, therefore they were absolved. This Action ended with the Reading of the second Letter, directed to Sergius and Cyrus; in which he does equally reject the Opinions of one or of two Wills in Jesus Christ; and intimateth, That Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, promised him to speak no more of two Wills, provided that Cyrus, Patriarch of Alexandria. would speak no more of one Will.

In the next place they read three Writings, the one, under the Name of Mennas, to Vigi∣lius, and the other under the Name of Vigilius, to the Emperor Justinian and the Empress * 1.47 Theodora, which they maintained to be supposititious. George, the keeper of the Rolls, or Library-keeper, brought out a Copy of the fifth Council, in which they were not found.

It was made appear, That the M•…•…thelites had added those Writings, which were not sub∣scribed, as the rest of the Acts of the Council were, and George, a Monk of the Patriar∣chate of Antioch, who had written them, having owned his own Hand, declared that Stephen, Macarius's Disciple, had got him to transcribe those three Writings; telling him, That the Copies of the fifth Council, where they were not found, were defective. Paul of Constanti∣nople had caused the same Addition to be made to the Latin Copy of the fifth Council; which was acknowledged by Constantine, a Presbyter, who transcribed it: These Writings were condemned and the Composers of them. Afterward they examined a long Passage of a Ser∣mon of S. Athanasius upon these Words; Nunc anima mea turbata est valde; in which the Doctrine of the two Wills is strongly maintained.

In the fifteenth Action, of the 26th of April, Polychronius, a Presbyter and Monk, pre∣sented a Confession of Faith, figned by him; wherein he owned but one Will in Christ. * 1.48 He said, That he had been confirmed in this Opinion in a Vision, by a tall Man, clad in white, full of Brightness and Majesty, who told him, 'Twas an unchristian thing to think otherwise: He had seduced several Persons, and was so zealous in his Opinion, that he promised to raise a dead Man to Life again, to prove the Truth of his Doctrine; notwithstanding he attempted it in vain, and made himself to be laughed at and to be anathematized by the Council, which deposed him.

In the sixteenth Session, held the 9th. of August, Constantine, a Presbyter of Apamea, the * 1.49 Metropolis of the second Syria, being come to give an account of his Faith, said; That he did confess two Natures in Jesus Christ, and the Properties of both his Natures; that he did not question so much as the two Operations, but he could own but one Will of the Word. They asked him, Whether he would not admit an human Will also. He confessed, That Jesus Christ had a natural human Will till he was crucified, but since his Resurrection, he had it no more; and as he put off his Mortal Flesh, his Blood, and the Weakness of the Humane Na∣ture, by the same Reason, he had no more a Humane Will, according to Flesh and Blood. He declared, That Macarius was of this Opinion, and persisting in it himself, he was con∣demned by the Council, as an Apolinarist. George, Patriarch of Constantinople, did then re∣quire, in his own Name, and in the Name of the Bishops of his Patriarchate, That they would spare, if it were possible, the Names of his Predecessors, and not comprehend them in the Anathema's: But the Council declared, That since they had been blotted out of the Dypticks, they ought also to be anathematized every one by Name.

In the seventeenth Action they propounded the Definition of Faith, which was read over * 1.50 again, approved and signed in the eighteenth, held the 16th of September, 681. Indict X. at which the Emperor was present in Person. They received the Definitions of the five first General Councils, and particularly that of the fifth Council against Origen, against Theodorus of Mopsuestia, and against Theodoret's Writings, and Ibas's Letter. They recite the Creeds of Nice and Constantinople, and the Council approving the Definition of the Council, held at Rome, and Agatho's Letter, adds, That there are two Natural Wills and two Operations in Jesus Christ, in one Person, without Division, without Mixture, and without Change. That these two Wills are not contrary, but the Humane Will follows the Divine Will, and is en∣tirely subject to it. It prohibits teaching any other Doctrine, under Pain of Deposition to Bishops and Clerks, and of Excommunication to the Layty.

This Definition is signed by the three Legates of Pope Agatho, by George, Patriarch of Constantinople, by the Legate of Peter of Alexandria, by Theophanes, the new Patriarch of Antioch, by the Legate of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, by the Legates of the Archbishops of Thessalonica, Cyprus and Ravenna, by the Deputies of the Council of Rome, and by 160 Bi∣shops. The Emperor asked the Bishops, if this Definition was made and published by the Consent of all. They answered, They were all of this Judgment, that it was the Faith of the Apostles, the Fathers, and the Orthodox. Then they put up many Desires for the Pre∣servation of their Prince, and pronounced Anathema against the ancient and modern Hereticks, and among the rest, against Honorius, who is always named with the Patriarch-Monothelites.

The Emperor protested, That he had no other Design, in calling this Council, than the Confirmation of the Orthodox Faith. He exhorted them, That if any of them had any thing to add to the Definition, which was newly published, they should alledge it. Then all the Bishops having approved it again, they read a Discourse, addressed to the Emperor, in the Name of the Council, signed by all the Bishops, containing many Praises of his Piety and Religion. Then they prayed him to subscribe the Definition of Faith; he promised to do it, desired the Council to receive a Bishop of Sardinia, called Citonatus, who had been accused of attempting something against his Prince and the State, but was found innocent: The Council did it willingly. This is the Abridgment of the Acts of the sixth Council, of which the Emperor caused five Copies to be made for the five Patriarchal Churches.

The Bishops of this Council, before their Departure, sent a Letter to Pope Agatho, in which they tell him; That being, as he was, the first Bishop of the Universal Church, they rely upon him for what remains to be done; that they have received and approved his Letter; that they made use of it to overthrow the Foundations of the new Heresy; that they have anathematized, as Hereticks Theodorus of Pharan, Sergius, Honorius, Cyrus, Paul, Pyrrhus and Peter; and have condemned and deposed Macarius, late Patriarch of Antioch, as also his

Disciple Stephen, and Polychronius, who maintained the same Impieties. They all shew their grief, that they have been forced to come to this. Lastly, They say, that he will learn more at large by the Acts of the Council, and from his Legates, in what manner they have de∣fended the Faith, which he had established in his Letter. This Letter is Signed by Four Pa∣triarchs, or their Deputies, by the Bishop of Thessalonica, by the Deputy of the Metropoli∣tan of Cyprus, by the Metropolitan of Cesarea in Cappadocia, Primate of Pontus, by Citona∣tus, Bishop of Cagliari, by the Deputy of the Council of Rome, by Thirty One Metropoli∣tans in their own Name, and in the Name of the Bishops of their Province, and by Thir∣teen Bishops.

The Emperor, presently after the Council, set out an Edict against the Monothelites, where∣in he maketh a Confession of Faith agreeable to that of the Council; he condemns Honori∣us, as having supported Cyrus and Sergius's Heresie in every thing, and he appoints divers pu∣nishments against those that shall be found maintaining this Error, Deposition, or rather Su∣spension, against Clerks and Monks; Proscription, and Deprivation of Employments, against Persons constituted in Charge and Dignity, and Banishment from all the Towns of the Em∣pire, against private Persons.

Agatho being Dead in 682, Constantine writ to Leo the Second his Successor. In this Let∣ter he commends Agatho's; he tells him, That Macarius was the only Man that would not yield to the Decision of the Council, notwithstanding all his endeavours to recover him from his Error. He exhorts him to Excommunicate all those that shall be found in the Error of the Monothelices, and prays him to send some Apocrisiary to Constantinople, to be his Repre∣sentatives there, and to act in his stead in all Ecclesiastical Affairs, both concerning the Disci∣pline, and the Faith. He wrote also a Letter to the Bishops that had been present at the Council of Rome, where he speaks of the Union of the Bishops of the Council about the Faith, and the condemnation of Macarius. Leo confirmed by his Answer the Definition of the Council, and condemned Honorius by Name. Lastly, Justinian confirmed this Sixth Council by a Letter written to Pope John in 687, and caused the Acts of it to be Sealed in the presence of a great number of Clerks and Lay-Men, that there might be no alteration made in it.

I need not enlarge here on the defence of the Acts of the Council, from the injurious Aspersions of Piggius, and the groundless Suspicions of Baronius. These Writers, devoted to the Court of Rome, could not endure to see Pope Honorius's Name among the Hereticks condemned in this Council; and that was the cause, that moved the one openly to attack the Acts of the Council very rudely, and the other to charge them with Corruption. But the former says nothing against this Council, but what might be said against the first Nicene Coun∣cil, and that of Chalcedon; all his Objections being grounded upon the Emperor's being pre∣sent in this Council, with his Officers, and his appointing the order and manner of proceed∣ing. It cannot be denied, but Constantine the First did the same in the Nicene Council; and in that of Chalcedon, the Emperor's Commissioners took more Authority upon them∣selves, and concern'd themselves more in the doings of that Council, than the Emperor him∣self had done in this. And so he cannot touch and blemish this Council, without Aspersing the other Councils at the same time; and would utterly overthrow the most solid grounds of our Faith, that he may support a pretended Infallibility in Honorius's Person.

As to Baronius Fancy, it is founded upon such frivolous Conjectures, confuted by so Au∣thentical proofs, that it hath been abandoned by all those that have not blindly followed that Author. He supposes, That Theodorus, George's Predecessor in the Patriarchate of Constanti∣nople, having been condemned and deposed by the Council, had razed his own Name out of all the Acts of that Council, to put in Honorius's. But there can be nothing worse contrived than this Hypothesis.

For First of all, 'tis a groundless supposition, That Theodorus was Anathematized or De∣posed for Monothelism in the Council. It is evident, that he was not Bishop of Constantinople, when the Council began; no Author says, He was Deposed or Expelled for that Heresie; neither is it probable, that it was the cause of his leaving his See, seeing George, who was put in his room, was also a Monothelite.

Secondly, Put the case Theodorus had been condemned by the Council, how is it likely, that he durst have ventured to falsifie the Acts of the Council it self? And tho' he durst do it, it had been enough for him to cross out his own Name, without substituting that of Hono∣rius; and put even the case, he could have taken that resolution, can it be thought, that he could have brought it about? How could he falsifie all the Copies of the Acts of this Coun∣cil, sent out to all the Patriarchal Sees? How could he bring the Emperor, the other Patri∣archs, and all the Bishops, to consent to this Cheat? Why did not the Legates and the Popes complain of this falsification? Why did they acknowledge after, that Honorius was condemn∣ed in the 6th Council? Why did they not discover this Imposture by the Copy of the Acts of the Council, which the Deputy of the Holy See brought, and which the Popes, Agatho's Successors, communicated to the Western Bishops, and which he sent into Spain? If they were corrupted, when he brought them, why did he suffer that Corruption? And why did the Popes use them? If they were not corrupted, why did they not use them, to discover the Fraud of the Enemies of the Holy See?

Thirdly, Honorius is found condemned in some places, where they could not have spoken of Theodorus. In the 13th Action, his Letter to Sergius is particularly censured, as contrary to the Apostolick Doctrine and the Definitions of the Councils. It cannot be said, this was spo∣ken of Theodorus. In the 14th Action, his Letter to Sergius is again condemned, as perfectly agreeable to the Doctrines of the Hereticks. In the 18th Action, his Letter is condemned to be burnt, as containing the same Heresie, and Impieties, as the other Writings of the Mono∣thelites. In the same Session, he is condemned together with Sergius. Anathema to Sergius and Honorius, and after, Anathema to Pyrrhus and Paul. If Theodorus's Name had been put in the room of Honorius's, they would not have placed him before Pyrrhus and Paul, but af∣ter them; Lastly, He is almost every where called Bishop of Rome. All this shews, there is nothing more unwarrantable than Baronius's conjecture.

Fourthly, 'Tis a plain matter of Fact, that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council. And of this we have proofs more than sufficient. The Council it self owns it in its Letter to the Pope; the Emperor in his Edict declares it. Agatho, who was one of the Notaries testi∣fieth it in a relation which is in the end of a Manuscript of the 6th Council. Leo the Se∣cond, Agatho's Successor, asserts it in Three of his Letters; the whole Church of Rome ac∣knowledges it in the forms of the Oath, which the Popes newly Elected are to take, and in her Ancient Liturgy; the Two General Councils following look upon this condemnation as true. Lastly, No Body ever questioned it, and consequently, Baronius's fancy must pass for a matchless piece of rashness. You will yet be more sensible of it, when you shall see the weakness of the proofs, whereon he founds his bold conjecture. The first is a place of Pope Agatho's Letter, which says, the Apostolick Church of Rome did never swerve from the way of the Truth, and that his Predecessors did always confirm the Faith of their Brethren. This Letter, says he, having been read and approved in the Council, how is it likely, that after this they durst have condemned one of Agatho's Predecessors as an Heretick, or favourer of Heresie? If this Popes Letter had contained but that one point, or it had been read in the Council to justifie Honorius, this Objection might have some strength. But this being said, but by the by in Agatho's Letter, containing a long Exposition of the Faith of the Catholick Church, and a very great number of the Fathers Testimonies and Reasons against the Error of the Monothelites; and the Council having caused it to be read, on purpose only, to know the Doctrine of the Holy See, and the Western Churches: It is evident, their approbation does not fall upon this particular place of his Letter, but upon the Exposition of Faith, and the Doctrine it contained. And tho' we should suppose, that the Council had taken notice of the Commendation which Agatho maketh of his Church, and his Predecessors, and had per∣ceived that it was not absolutely and strictly true, they ought not upon this account to have refused their approbation of his Letter, nor excepted against this place of it. It were a silly thing to imagine, that a Council, called to decide a Question of Faith, should busie it self to wrangle about a Commendation slipt in by the Pope in his Letter in behalf of his Prede∣cessors. But Pope Agatho's praises of his Predecessors in general ought not to be taken in a strict sense; for if we understand them so, all the World will see that they cannot be true; because it cannot be denied, but Liberius and Honorius did but weakly defend the Faith, as well as tolerate Error; they must then be understood in general of al∣most all Agatho's Predecessors, and not of all in particular, so that no exception could be made to it.

Besides, it were an easie thing to retort Baronius's Argument upon himself. For if the com∣mendations of Agatho's Letter ought to be taken strictly, as also the Council's approbation of it, so that it was not lawful for them to condemn those whose Religion and Piety he com∣mends: How durst Baronius charge the Emperor Justinian with Heresie, Perfidiousness, and Impiety, since he is commended in Agatho's Letter, as a most Religious, Orthodox, and Godly Prince, whose Memory is had in Veneration among all Nations?

But I stand too long upon so weak an Objection. He makes one more, which is not harder to solve. How is it possible, saith he, that the Pope's Legates who were present in this Council, should say nothing to vindicate Honorius? But, why would he have them, to engage in a bad cause? Honorius had approved Sergius's Letter, had consented, that they should speak neither of One nor of Two Operations, had asserted but One Will in Christ, had silenced Sophronius, who would have defended the Faith. These Facts were evident by the very reading of his Letter; there is enough for his condemnation; and they could not stand up in his defence without furnishing their Adversaries with Arms. The same Reasons which they should have used to justifie him, might have been urged also to justifie Sergius and the rest; therefore in forsaking Honorius, they took the right course; they did the same thing in the Roman Council under Martin the 1st, for when they read Paul's Synodical Letter who defends his own Error, by the Authority of Honorius, neither the Pope, nor any of the Bi∣shops, did think of vindicating him, nor of maintaining him to have been of another mind. But if he thinks it strange, that the Legates should suffer Honorius's Memory to be condem∣ned; how much more strange must it seem to be, that they should have suffered the Acts of the Council to be falsified, to insert his condemnation in it? Tho' Honorius had been excu∣sable, they may have had reasons not to oppose his condemnation; the advantage of Peace, and the fear to cause some trouble might have prevailed with them to acquiesce in the Judg∣ment

of the Council: But no reason can be found to excuse their Treachery, if they had corrupted the Acts of the Council to insert Honorius's condemnarion there.

I do not trouble my self to confute Baronius's other Reasons, which are a mere begging of the Question, having already said over-much on that Subject; because now his Opinion of the corruption of the Acts of the 6th Council is wholly forsaken, and it goes now for cur∣rent, that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council. This being supposed, there remain Two Questions to be examined, whether he was justly condemned, or not; and for what reason he was condemned.

To decide these Questions, there needs no more than to read Sergius and Honorius's Let∣ters, and to remember the circumstances of the Fact. Cyrus Patriarch of Alexandria, that he might reunite the Theodosians, approved this expression, that there was but one Operation in Christ; Sophronius opposed this Doctrine; Sergius approved the Conduct and Doctrine of Cyrus; but for Peace sake, he did think it better, not to debate this Question, and nei∣ther to af••irm One nor Two Operations in Christ, and only to say, that the same person per∣formed Divine and Humane Actions; because they that use the expression of One Operati∣on only, seem to confound the Two Natures; and when they say Two Operations, they seem to assert Two contrary Wills in Christ; which cannot be maintained, by reason the Soul of Christ never had any motion of its own from it self, or contrary to those of the Word, but such as the Word pleased, and when he pleased. In a word, that, as our Body is governed and moved by our Soul, so the Soul of Jesus Christ was led and governed by his Di∣vinity. Thus Sergius explains himself in his Letter to Honorius, and asks him what was his Opinion about it.

What does this Pope answer to this? He approves of Sergius's proceeding, he commends his Letter, he follows his Opinion, he forbids speaking any more of One or Two Operati∣ons of Christ, and orders that this Question be left to the Grammarians to be discussed; yea, and he declares, that there is but One Will in Christ. Then he writes to Eulogius, that he should maintain no longer Two Operations in Christ. He writes moreover a Second Letter to Sergius, to command silence about that Question. What did Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, and the other Monothelites, who were condemned in this Council, do more? They were in Two Errors, 1. That we ought not to assert, that there was One or Two Operations in Christ, and that we should forbear debating that Question. 2. That we should say, that there is but One Will in Christ, by reason the Soul of Christ was governed and led by his Divinity. Hono∣rius does plainly establish those Two Points; therefore he cannot be excused, without excu∣sing also the Patriarchs of Constantinople. You will say, That when he said there was but One Will in Christ, he said it to exclude the contrariety of Wills; and that the reason he gives of it, does evidently shew it. We own, saith he, there is but One Will in Christ, because he took upon him our Nature, not our Sin; and he had no other Law in his Members, nor any contrary Will. But if this reason may serve for the vindication of Honorius, Sergius ought to be vindicated likewise, as rendring the same reason, and confessing in his Letter, that the Soul of Christ had its proper motions, directed and led by the Divinity. Paul, his Successor, may with much more reason be excused; for in his Letter to Theodorus, he says, That the only reason, why he acknowledges but One Will in Christ, is out of fear, least he should ad∣mit a contrariety of Wills in Christ, or should say, That there be Two Persons with Two different Wills; That he did admit but One Will, not to annihilate the Humane Nature, or any part of his Soul, but to shew that Christ's Soul was filled with the gifts of the Deity, and had no Will contrary to that of the Word. By the same reason one may justifie the Ecthesis, and the Type, and all the Monothelites: For they did not deny, that the Body and Soul of Christ had all their Properties, their Faculties, and Motions; but they affirmed, they were so governed and led by the Will▪of the Word, as to follow his direction and impression in all things. And the only reason they gave, why they would not have Men to say, that there were Two Wills in Christ, was for fear this expression should intimate Two contrary Wills in him. Honorius therefore is no more excusable than Sergius, Paul, and the other Monothe∣lites, who did act and speak as he did; and if they condemned these as Hereticks, they might condemn Honorius likewise. Wherefore not only the 6th Council always joined him with the other Monothelites, and comprehended him in the same Anathema; which they would not have done, had they believed, there was any difference to be made between him and the rest; for it is expressly said,

They condemned him, for delivering in his Letter things contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles, the Desinitions of the Councils, and the Judgment of all the Fathers, and for following the false Doctrine of Hereticks, for approving in every thing the Impious Opinions of Sergius, for writing a Letter tending to the same Im∣piety, for Preaching, Teaching, and Spreading the Heresie of One Operation, and One Will.

In fine, the Council having pronounced Anathema's against Theodorus, Sergius, Honorius, Pyrrhus, Paul, Macarius, and Stephen, Polychronius adds, Anathema to all these Hereticks. They did then believe Honorius to be an Heretick, as well as the rest, and condemned him as such.

But, say they, in the Emperor's Edict, he is called only a Favourer, Helper, and Con∣firmer of Heresie. Pope Leo the Second, in his Three Letters, charges him only with Fa∣vouring

the Error of the Monothelites, and not suppressing it with a vigilancy becoming S. Pe∣ter's Successor. But what maketh most for Honorius's vindication, is, that the Abbot John, who writ his Letter, S. Maximus, and John IV, do defend him, and say, that when he as∣serted but One Will in Christ, he meant it of the Humane Will; but he did not mean, that there was but One Will of the Manhood, and God-head. That's the most plausible thing can be said in the behalf of Honorius; but all this doth not prove, that he was not condemned as an Heretick, and Favourer of Heresie. Honorius was a Favourer of Heresie, because he forbad speaking both of One, and Two Operations in Jesus Christ. He was an Heretick, because he owned but One Will in Jesus Christ.

Besides, one is often a favourer of Heresie, by teaching it; and that Name is given to those who maintain an Heresie invented by others. 'Tis in this sense, Constantin says, Honorius was a favourer of Heresie. Sergius was the Author of this Doctrine, but Honorius approved, confirmed and embraced it; wherefore he tells him (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) the proper Terms not only for him who neglects to stifle a new springing Heresie, but for him also who does formally approve, embrace and teach it. Tho' Leo II. was concerned to be tender of his Predecessor's reputation, and for that reason he expressed, in more gentle Terms, the cause of Honorius's condemnation, yet he confesseth, That Honorius did not only favour the new Heresie by his Silence and Negligence, but moreover, that he did suffer the Apostolick Tra∣dition to be sullied and defiled by a contrary Doctrine. Qui Apostolicam Ecclesiam non Apo∣stolicae Traditionis doctrina illustravit; sed profana proditione immaculatam maculari permisit: And in another Letter, Maculari consensit. And the Roman Church hath so plainly acknow∣ledged, That Pope Honorius did advance the Error of the Monothelites, that in her ancient Breviary, she declares, That he was condemned with the other Monothelites, for maintaining the Doctrine of one Will.

Lastly, Adrian II. taketh notice, That he was condemned by the Synod, because he was charged with Heresie, which he affirms to be the only cause for which he believeth a Coun∣cil may judge the Pope. It cannot be doubted then, but that Honorius was condemned by the 6th. Council, as an Heretick, yea, and that the Council had as much reason to censure him, as Sergius, Paul, Peter, and the other Patriarchs of Constantinople; and that his Letter was as fit to be condemned, as the Ecthesis and the Type. It's true, John the Abbot, who wrote it, and John IV. defend Honorius's Letter, and endeavour to put a good Interpretation upon it; but this was before the Council had condemned it, and they were concerned then in the defence of it. The Greek Church did more than this in favour of Sergius; for notwithstanding the con∣demnation of the 6th. Council, she put into the office of a Festival, kept in Lent, a Story, in which this Patriarch is mentioned as a Saint. But we see, its more just and rational, to give credit to the judgment of a general Council, where Matters are examined to the bottom, than to the Sentiments of some private Men, who judge of this Fact, according to their own Interest or Prejudices. This will stand for certain then, That Honorius was condemned and justly too, as an Heretick, by the 6th. Council.

Council of * 1.51 Challon upon the River Saone.

CLOVIS II. called a Council at Challon upon the River Saone, a 1.52 the 6th. year of his Reign, which is the 650. of the vulgar Aera. It was made up of the b 1.53 Archbishops of * 1.54 Lyons, Vienna, * 1.55 Rouen, † 1.56 Sens and Bourges, and of c 1.57 39 Bishops of France. They made 20 Canons.

In the 1st. they decree, That they shall hold the Doctrine established by the Councils of Nice and Chalcedon.

In the 2d. That the Canons shall be kept.

The 3d. renews the Prohibitions made to the Clergy against having strange Women.

The 4th. forbids ordaining two Bishops at the same time in the same City.

The 5th. decrees, That the Administration of Parishes, or of Church-lands, shall not be committed to the Laity.

The 6th. forbids seizing on, or taking Possession of, Church-lands, * 1.58 before it be so ordered.

The 7th. forbids Bishops, Arch-deacons and any other Person, to take away any of the Goods or Estate belonging to a Parish, Hospital or a Monastery, after the death of the Presbyter who governed it.

The 8th. declares the necessity of Repentance, and orders Bishops to impose Penance upon them that confess their Sins.

The 9th. forbids selling Christian-slaves to Strangers or Jews.

The 10th. declares, That a Bishop ought to be chosen by the Bishops of the Province, by the Clergy and the Citizens; and says, an Ordination, made otherwise, is null.

The 11th. decrees, That the Bishops shall separate from their Communion those Judges, who would assume a Jurisdiction over the Parishes and Monasteries, where the Bishops make their visit.

The 12th. forbids making two Abbots in one Monastery, to avoid division and scandal a∣mong the Friars. Nevertheless, if an Abbot will chuse himself a Successor, he may do it; but he that is chosen, shall not dispose of the Estate of the Monastery.

The 13th. renews the Inhibition made to Bishops to keep the Clerks of their Brethren, or to ordain any Body without his Bishop's leave.

The 14th. provides a remedy against an Abuse which was grown common. The Lords of the places, where there were Chappels, sought to hinder the Arch-deacons and Bishops from the cognizance of what concerned the Clerks, that ministred in those Chappels. This Coun∣cil decrees, That the Ordination of the Clerks, and the disposal of the Revenues of those Chappels shall belong to the Bishop, that divine Service may be regularly performed there.

The 15th. prohibits Abbots and Friars making use of the Protection of the Seculars, and going to the Prince, without their Bishop's leave.

The 16th. declareth, That they who give Mony to be made Bishops, Priests or Deacons, shall be deprived of the Dignity that they would have purchased.

The 17th. forbids raising Tumults or Quarrels in the Church, or at the Church-doors.

The 18th. prohibits Plowing, shearing Corn, Reaping or Tilling the Ground on Sun∣days.

The 19th. prohibits Dancing and Singing lewd Songs within the Church-yards or in the Church-porches, upon Saints Festivals.

The 20th. degrades Agapius and Bobon, Bishops of Digne, for having done many things contrary to the Canons.

The Bishops of this Council wrote a Letter to Theodosius or Theodorick Bishop of Arles, in which they acquaint him, That having met together by King Clovis's order, in the Town of Challon, they did stay for him, hearing he was got near the Town; That the only thing that hindred his appearing, was, that he heard himself to be accused of living dishonestly, and do∣ing several things contrary to the Canons; That they had also seen a Writing signed with his own Hand, and by the Bishops of his Province, wherein it appeared, That he had submitted himself to Penance; That he knew, that those that were come so far, cannot keep nor govern a Bishoprick any longer. Wherefore, they declare to him, That he must abstain from doing any Episcopal Function in Arles, and from receiving the Church Revenues, till he receive his tryal before the Bishops.

Council VIII. of Toledo.

THIS Council of 52 Bishops of Spain, was called by an order from King * Receswinthe, in the year 653. Its Constitutions are in the form of Acts, very obscure, written in a * 1.59 barbarous Stile, and full of false Notions. They begin with King Receswinthe's Letter to the Bishops of the Synod, wherein he exhorts them to follow the Faith of the first 4 general Councils; to provide against the Disorders that would happen, if they should execute the Oath they had taken, of putting all those to death that should be found to be concerned in * 1.60 any Conspiracy, against the Prince or State; to re-establish the discipline of the ancient Ca∣nons; and to regulate those Matters that shall be brought before them. The Bishops obeying the King's Order, professed themselves to hold the Decisions of the Councils and the Fathers; they read the Creed, which was then recited in the solemn Service of the Churches of Spain, which is that of the Council of Constantinople, to which they had super-added, That the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and the Son. Then they made a long Discourse upon Oaths, and cited many Places of the Scripture and the Fathers, to shew, that Men ought not to keep nor execute the Oaths, wherewith they have sworn to commit wicked Actions, and prejudicial to the State. The third Canon is against those that use Intreaties and Prayers, to obtain the Priesthood. They are declared Excommunicate, and those that do confer or receive Orders thus, are deprived of their Dignity; these last are likewise put to Penance in a Mo∣nastery. The three next Canons are made to keep the Clergy pure and chaste. The 7th is against an Abuse, by which some Persons ordained Bishops or Presbyters, did think themselves free to leave the Priesthood, under pretence, that in their receiving it, they had said that they would not receive it: The Council declares, That this cannot be done; and that, as Baptism conferred on Persons unwilling to receive it, and on Children who know nothing of it, is valid; so likewise Ordination ought to subsist, being as indelible as Baptism, the Holy Chrisme

and the Consecration of the A•••••••••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 who after thei•• Ordination, shall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••e 〈◊〉〈◊〉 out of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Church, and shut up in a Monastery, to d•• ••enan•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ The 8〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ Constitution prohibi•••• ordaining, hereafter, any Cl•••••• that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the P•…•…, the Anthems, the Hymns in use, and the Ce∣remonies of Baptism; and that if any o•• them that are ordained, be ignorant of these things, they shall be constrained to learn them. The 9th forbids eating Flesh in Lent, and orders, That those that have need of eating of it shall ask the Bishop's Leave. The 10th. Constitution is concerning the Election of Kings, and the Qualifications they ought to have. The 11th con∣firms the ancient Canons of Councils. The 12th confirms the Decree of the Council of Toledo, held under King Sisenand, about the security of Kings. They conclude with pious Wishes for King Receswinthe, and with a general Confirmation of the preceeding Constitutions. The Acts are subscribed not only by 52 Bishops, but by 9 Abbots besides, and 10. Presbyters or Deacons, Deputies of Bishops, and 16 Lords. Moreover, there is another Decree of this Council, about the disposing of Kings Revenues, which is confirm'd by an Edict of King Receswinthe. The Jewish Converts presented a Petition to this Council, wherein they bound themselves, sincerely to renounce the Jewish Doctrine and Ceremonies.

Council IX. of Toledo.

TWO Years after, the same King Receswinthe called a Provincial Council, the Bishops whereof willing to renew the ancient Discipline, and to publish the Canons of the Coun∣cils, * 1.61 thought they ought to begin by making Laws to reform themselves: for, say they, in the Preface, It would not become Superiors to go about to judge their Inferiors, before they have judged themselves by the Laws of Justice itself. Judgments are more just by far, when the Life of the Judges is well ordered; and when their Vertue is known, their Judgment is better submitted to.

Therefore, they 1st. forbid the Bishops, and others of the Clergy, to appropriate to them∣selves the Lands given to Churches; and give leave to the Relations and Heirs of the Lega∣tees, to apply themselves to the Bishop or Metropolitan, to hinder the Lands given by their Relations from being converted to private uses.

Secondly, to prevent the ruine of Parish-Churches and Monasteries, they give leave to those that built them, to take care of them, and to recommend to the Bishops some Persons to govern them, whom he shall be bound to ordain, if he finds them capable of that Office. This was one beginning of Lay-Patrons.

Thirdly, It is ordered, That if the Bishop, or any other of the Clergy (to pay the Churches Debts) alienates some part of his Church-Lands under the Titles of Patrimony, he shall be bound to set down in the Deed the cause of his doing so, to the end, that it may appear, whether it be done justly or fraudulently.

Fourthly, they decree, That if Bishops have but a small Patrimony, the Purchases they make ought to be for the Profit of the Church; but if the Revenue of their own Patrimony be found to be as great as that of their Bishoprick, their Heirs shall divide their Estate in half, or according to the proportion of their own and the Church Patrimony. Lastly, that they may, during their Life, dispose of what falls to them by Donation; but if they do not dis∣pose of it, after their Decease, those Donations shall belong to the Church.

In the Fifth they declare, That the Bishop that will build a Monastery in his Diocess, shall endow it only with the fiftieth part of the Revenue of his Bishoprick, and with the hundredth if it be but a Church only.

In the Sixth, That he may forgive Parochial Churches the third part of the Revenues which they owe him, and that such Release shall be perpetual and irrevocable.

For the more punctual execution of these Canons, by the Seventh Constitution, they forbid the Heirs of the Bishop to enter upon their Inheritance, without the Consent of the Metro∣politan, or, if he be a Metropolitan, before he hath a Successor, or there be a Council assem∣bled. And likewise they forbid the Heirs of Presbyters and Deacons to take possession of their Inheritance, without the Cognizance of the Bishop.

In the Eighth Canon they declare, That the Prescription of thirty Years shall not be reck∣oned against the Church, as to the Lands alienated by any Bishop, but from the Day of that Bishop's Death, and not from the Day of the Date of the Deed.

In the Ninth they forbid a Bishop, who cometh to bury his Brother, to take above the value of a Pound of Gold, if the Church be rich, or of half a Pound if she be poor; and orders him to send the Inventory which he shall make, to the Metropolitan.

In the Tenth they declare the Sons of Clergymen, who were obliged to Celibacy, uncap∣able of Inheriting.

The six following Canons are concerning Ecclesiastical Persons or such as are made free by the Churches, and are not now in use.

The Seventeenth and last lays an Obligation upon the Jews, who are newly converted, to be present on their ancient Feast-days, in the Towns and Assemblies of Christians, kept by the Bishop.

They conclude with making pious Wishes for King Receswinthe. They appoint the next Council on the 1st of November following. This Council is signed by Eugenius of Toledo and 15. Bishops, by 3 Abbots, by the Deputy of a Bishop and 4 Lords.

Therefore we ought not to wonder that these Councils should make Laws about Political Matters, because they are properly Assemblies of the States, authorized by the Prince; in which the Civil Authority was joyned to the Ecclesiastical Power.

Council X. of Toledo, in 656.

THIS Council was held a Month later than it had been appointed: It made seven Canons. * 1.62

In the 1st, the Festival of the Virgin was appointed to be kept eight Days before Christmas.

By the 2d the Clerks or Monks, which shall be found to have violated the Oaths taken to the King and the State, are deprived of their Dignity, yet so as that it shall be free for the Prince to restore them to it, if he thinks fit.

By the 3d Bishops are forbidden to give Parochial Churches or Monasteries to their Kindred or Friends, to enjoy the Revenues of them.

In the 4th it is ordered, That Women who have embraced the state of Widowhood, ought to make Profession of it, in Writing, before the Bishop or the Presbyter, to take the Habit of it, to keep it on always, and to wear a Veil of a Black or Violet Co∣lour.

The 5th decrees, that those who leave the Habit of Widowhood, after they have worn it, shall be excommunicated, and shut up in Monasteries.

The 6th orders, That those Children, whom their Parents caused to take the Tonsure, or the Religious Habit, shall be obliged to lead a Religious Life: That, nevertheless, Parents cannot offer their Children, before they be ten Years old, and after that Age the Children's Consent is necessary.

The last Canon contains an Advertisement, to disswade Christians from selling their Slaves to the Jews.

There was presented to this Council a Confession in Writing from Potamius Bishop of Braga, who was accused of many Crimes. They brought him before the Council; he owned that Writing, declared himself deeply guilty of those Faults; and said, that nine Months since he had relinquished the Government of his Church, and shut himself up in a Prison, to do Pe∣nance. The Council being informed that he had had the carnal Knowledge of a Woman, they declared, That although, according to the Ancient Rules, he was to be wholly degraded, and deprived of his Dignity, yet, out of compassion, they left him the Title and the degree of a Bishop, but they would have him to do Penance all his Life-time, and they did chuse Fructuosus, Bishop of Dumes, to govern the Church of Braga in his room. This Decree is put after the Canons of the Council; and to it is annexed another Decree, disannulling the Bequests of a Will, made by Recimer Bishop of Dumes, to the Prejudice of his Church.

This Council is subscribed by 3 Metropolitans, Eugenius of Toledo, Fugitinus of Sevil, Fructuosus of Braga, by 17 Bishops and 5 Bishops Deputies.

A Conference held in Northumberland, in 664.

THE chief occasion of this Conference, related by Beda, l. 3. c. 25. of his History, was the Dispute about Easterday. Colman maintained the Practice of the Britains, and Wil∣fride * 1.63 that of the R•…•…. King 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was present at it. Wilfride founded his Practice upon the universal Custom of the Church, which kept Easter on the same Day, excepting the Picts and the Britains. Colman would have defended their Practice by the Authority of S. John. But Wilfride shewed him, that he did not agree with this Apostle, who kept Easter without staying for the Sunday; which they did not follow, seeing they staid till the Sunday next after the fourteenth Moon. That they did not agree with S. Peter neither, for this Holy Apostle kept Easter between the 15th and the 21st Moon, whereas they would keep it from the 14th to the 20th. so that they did sometimes begin this Feast at the end of the thirteenth Moon. Colman alledged, for his Defence, the Authority of Anatolius, Columba and the Ancients of his Country. Wilfride answered, That they did not agree with Anatolius, who made use of the Cycle of nineteen Years, which they were strangers to, because that Author's Opinion was not that Easter was necessarily to be kept before the 21st Moon, but that he had mistaken the fourteenth Moon for the fifteenth, and the twentieth for the twenty first. As to Columba and his Successors, he would not condemn them; that he was persuaded they might be excu∣sed for their Simplicity, in a Time when no Body was able to instruct them: But, as for them, they could have no Excuse, if they refused the Instructions given them. However, that Columba's Authority was not to be preferred before S. Peter's, to whom Christ gave the Keys of the Church, and said, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.

The King struck with these last Words, ask'd Colman if it was true, that Christ said so to S. Peter? Column having confessed it was true, the King said; That, seeing S. Peter was the Door-keeper of Heaven, he would not contradict him, but would obey his Statutes.

This Decision was approved by the Company: Colman and his Men withdrew, refusing to yield to the Practice of the Romans, about the keeping of Easter and the Tonsure, about which there was also a Contest: Men take such delight in Disputes about small Things.

Council of Merida * 1.64.

THIS Council, made up of the Bishops of the Province of Portugal, was assembled by the Order of King Receswinthe, in the Year 666. After having prayed for the King, * 1.65 they recited the Creed, with the addition, of the Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son.

Then they decree, That on Holy Days they shall say Vespers in their Churches, before they sing what they call the Sound, that is, the Venite exultemus, which is thus called, because it was sung with a loud sounding Voice.

In the third Chapter they ordain, That whenever the King shall go to the Army, the Bi∣shops shall offer every Day the Sacrifice, and put up prayers for him and his till his Return.

The decree in the fourth, That Bishops, after their Ordination, shall give a Writing, whereby they shall bind themselves to a chaste, sober and honest Life. The Metropolitans were to send this Writing to the Bishops of their Province, and the Bishops to their Metro∣politan.

By the fifth, Bishops are enjoyned to come to the Synod, at the Time appointed by the Me∣tropolitan's Letters, and the King's Order. If any of them be detained by Sickness, he is permitted to send a Presbyter for his Representative, but they will not have him to depute a Deacon.

Moreover it is decreed by the sixth, That the Suffragan Bishops, which shall be sent for by the Metropolitan, to come and keep Christmas and Easter with him, shall be bound to obey his Orders.

The seventh renews the Law of holding every Year a Council, and the Penalties laid upon the Bishops that do not come to it.

In the eighth it is mentioned, That King Receswinthe hath re-establish'd the Rights of the Province of Portugal and its Metropolis: And then it says, That Selva Bishop of Ingidane had made his Complaint, that Justus Bishop of Salamanca had invaded his Diocess, and demanded Restitution of what belonged to him. It was ordained, That Surveyors shall be sent to compose this Difference, because there had not been thirty Years possession. In the end Bishops are warned to look well to the Preservation of what belongs to their Diocess; and it is decreed, That 30. Years Possession shall go for a Title.

By the ninth Canon, he to whom the Holy Chrisme is sent, is forbidden to take any thing for his Distribution of it; and Presbyters are forbidden exacting any thing for Baptizing; but they are permitted to take what shall be freely given to them.

The tenth enjoyns every Bishop to have an Arch-priest, an Arch-deacon and a Secretary; and these Officers are enjoyn'd to be subject to their Bishops, to pay them their Dues, to en∣tertain them in their Visitation, and to undertake no Business without their Consent.

By the twelfth a Bishop is permitted to take Parish Priests and Clerks into his Cathedral Church, yet so that they shall not lose their Title, nor the Revenue of their Livings, provided that another Priest or Clerk shall be put in their room, with a competent Maintenance.

The thirteenth impowers the Bishop to Prefer the Clerks, who discharge their Duty well, and to deprive them of this Advantage, if they abuse it.

The fourteenth Decrees, That all the Money offered on Holy Days, in Churches, shall, be gather'd together and put into the Bishop's Hands; who shall divide it into three parts the one for himself, the other for the Priests and Deacons, and the rest for the other Clerks.

The fifteenth orders the manner of punishing Church-Servants, that it be done agreeably to the Ecclesiastical Gentleness and Lenity.

By the sixteenth, the Bishops of the Province of Portugal are forbidden to appropriate to themselves the third part of the Church's Revenue, and are ordered to employ it in the Repair∣ing of the Churches.

The seventeenth appoints Penalties for those who speak ill of their Bishops after his Death.

By the eighteenth Parsons are enjoyn'd to have Clerks.

The nineteenth enjoyns Presbyters, charged with the Care of several Churches, to say Mass in every one of them every Sunday, and to recite the Names of those that built them, whether they be alive or dead.

The twentieth contains some Constitutions about the bestowing Freedom on the Slaves of the Church.

The twenty first decrees, That the Donations, made by a Bishop, shall stand, when the Church is found to have got more by his Estate, than he gave by his Will.

By the twenty second it is decreed, That those that will not observe these Decrees, shall be excommunicated.

This Council ended, as all the preceeding Councils of Spain, with Wishes and Prayers for King Receswinthe. It is subscribed by the Archbishop of Merida, and 11 Suffragan Bishops; which are the Bishops of Indane, of Pace, now Bece, of Avila, of Lisbon, of Lamega, of Salamanca, of Conimbra, of Cauria, of Oxonobe, now Istombar, of Elbora, now Talaverre, and of Caliabria, now Setuval; which we do now take notice of, because there was some Difference since between the Metropolitan of Braga and that of Merida, about 3 of those Churches, viz. Conimbra, Lamega and Indane.

Council of Autun.

S. Leger, Bishop of Autun, held a Council in this City, in which he made some Constitu∣tions for Monks; wherein they are ordered, To appropriate nothing to themselves, not * 1.66 to be seen in Towns, To obey their Abbots, To let no Woman come into their Monasteries, To suffer no Vagabond Friers, To keep S. Benedict's Rules, and exactly to discharge their Duty: It appoints different Penalties against Transgressors, among which is reckoned the Basti∣nado for simple Friers. Some place this Council in 663, others in 670. and some others in 666, because in his last Will it is said, That in the 7th Year of his Pontificate, which an∣swers the 666th Year of Christ, he was present at a Council of 54 Bishops: But those 54 Bishops did not meet at Autun, but in a Place named Christiac; and the Constitutions above-mention'd, are intituled, in the old Collection of the Church of Angers, Canons of the Coun∣cil of Autun.

Council of Hereford in England.

THIS Council was held in 673. by Theodorus of Canterbury, who read and promulged * 1.67 there 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Canons, of which we spake, when we treated of this Father's Works.

Council XI. of Toledo.

THIS Council, held in 675. begins with a long Exposition of Faith, upon the Trinity and the Incarnation. The 1st Canon is of the Modesty and Order to be kept in the Council. * 1.68

The 2d enjoyns Metropolitans to be diligent in instructing of their Suffragans.

The 3d enjoyns all the Bishops of the same Province, to observe the same Rites and Ceremonies in the Publick Service, and to conform themselves to the Metropolitan Church, from which they receive their Consecration. Abbots likewise are enjoyn'd, in the Publick Ser∣vice, to follow the Use of the Cathedral Church.

The 4th forbids receiving the Oblations, or suffering the Bishops that are at Variance to come near the Altar before they be reconcil'd.

The 5th is to prevent the Attempts and Excesses the Bishops might commit, by reason of their Authority.

By the 6th, Clerks are forbidden to be present in Capital Judments, or to punish any Body with Loss of Limbs.

The 7th forbids Bishops to put any Body to Penance, but according to the Publick Order of the Church, or in the presence of Witnesses.

The 8th. prohibits taking any thing, even of what is freely offered for Baptism, the Holy Chrisme, or Holy Orders.

The 9th enjoyns him, who is ordained Bishop, to give Oath before the Altar, that he neither did no•• will give any thing to be chosen Bishop.

The 10th enjoyns those that take Orders to bind themselves under their Hand, to keep inviolably to the Faith of the Church, to live a good Life, to do nothing contrary to the Ecclesiastical Laws, and to be obedient to their Superiors.

The 11th. excuses those whom Illness causes them to cast up the Eucharist, and condemns them that do it out of Impiety.

The 12th ordains, That those shall be reconciled who desire Penance, being in Danger of Death, and that Commemoration be made of those, and their Oblation be received, who die after they have been admitted to Penance, by the Imposition of Hands, tho they have not been reconciled.

The 13th forbids those who are possessed by the Devil, or stirred with violent Moti∣ons, to wait on the Altar, or to come near it, to receive the Sacraments: Yet those are excepted who fall down out of Weakness or Ilness, without any other Symptome.

The 14th orders, That there shall always be some Body assisting to the Priest, whilst he is singing the Service or celebrating the Holy Sacrifice, to the end that, if he should fall ill, ano∣ther might take his Place.

The 15th renews the Constitutions about the holding of Councils.

The Council concludes with Wishes for the Prosperity of King [* 1.69 Wamba.

It is subscribed by the Archbishop of Toledo, by 16. Bishops, 2 Deacons, Bishops Deputies, and 7 Abbots.

Council IV. of Braga.

THE same Year, and under the same King, was held a Council in Braga. The Bishops having recited the Nicene Creed, with the Addition of the Holy Ghost's proceeding from the Father and the Son, do condemn some Abuses which had crept into the Celebration of the * 1.70 Holy Mysteries: Some offered Milk, others Grapes instead of Wine; some gave to the People the Eucharist dipt in Wine: Some Priests would make use of the Sacred Vessels to eat and drink in; others said Mass without a Stole on: Some hung about their Necks Relicks of Mar∣tyrs,

and then made themselves to be carried about by Deacons, with their AAbes on. Seve∣ral Bishops companied with Women, and some misused their Clerks; Simony was a common thing. They made Canons against all those Disorders.

By the 1st they forbid offering Milk and Grapes, in lieu of Wine, and dipping the Eucha∣rist in the Wine.

The 2d prohibits putting Sacred Vessels and Ornaments to prophane and common Uses.

By the 3d it is ordered, That Priests shall celebrate the Holy Mysteries with a Stole only, which shall cover their Shoulders, and go down, cross-wise, over the Stomach.

By the 4th Ecclesiastical Persons are forbidden to dwell with a Woman, excepting their Mother only, but not their very Sisters, nor any other near Relations.

The 5th declares, It belongs to the Deacons to carry the Relicks of Martyrs; and that if the Bishop will carry them, he shall go afoot, and not be carried by the Deacons.

The 6th forbids Bishops to cause the Priests, Abbots or Deacons under him to be beaten.

The 7th. prohibits Simony, and for that purpose renews the Canon of the Council of Chalcedon.

The last forbids Bishops to take more Care of their own Patrimony than of the Church's; and if this happens to be embezel'd by their Negligence, whilst the other is improved, they shall be bound to make up the Loss out of their own.

This Council is signed by 8 Bishops.

Council XII. of Toledo

THIS Council was held in 681, under King * 1.71 Ervigius. The Metropolitans of Toledo, Sevil, Braga, and Merida, were present in it, together with Thirty Bishops, Four Ab∣bots, * 1.72 Three Bishop's Deputies, and several Lords. King Ervigi••s came to it at the begin∣ning of it, and withdrew after having made a short Speech to the Council. He left them a Memoir, wherein he exhorted them to absolve the Guilty, to reform Manners, to re-establish Discipline, to renew the Laws made against the Jews, to procure the Restoration of those who had been Degraded, by vertue of a Law of his Predecessor, for not bearing Arms, or for laying them down. He directs his Speech to the Bishops and the Lords, that these Laws being made by the unanimous consent of both Spiritual and Temporal Authority, they may stand firm, and be put in execution.

The Council, having, according to the custom, made a protestation, that they did receive the Faith of the first Four Councils, and recited the Creed, approves Ervigius's Elevation to the Throne, and Wamba's Deposition, who had withdrawn himself by taking a Religious Habit, shaving his Head, and chusing King Ervigius to Reign in his stead, and causing him to be Consecrated by the Sacerdotal Unction. It is very remarkable, that the Fathers of this Council do not depose King Wamba, nor chuse Ervigius of their own accord. But after ha∣ving seen the Declaration, which that Prince had made in Writing, and Signed in the pre∣sence of the Lords, whereby he had made profession of the Religious Life, and got his Hair cut; and that whereby he desired, that Ervigius might be chosen King; and the order he had given to the Bishop of Toledo, to Consecrate Ervigius with the usual Ceremonies; and the Verbal Process of that Consecration, Signed by Wamba, they join their consent to Wam∣ba's, and approve of what he hath done, and consequently declare, that Ervigius ought to be owned for their lawful King, and in that Quality to be Obeyed, upon pain of Ana∣thema.

The 2d, Canon binds those, who receive Penance in the extremity of Sickness, and when they are not Sensible, to lead a Penitent Life, if they recover. Yet they will have the Priest to give Penance to those only that desire it; they give the instance of Children's Baptism, to shew that Penance may be given to those who are not sensible.

The 3d, ordains, That those that have been Excommunicated for some Crime against the State, shall be restored when the Prince taketh them into his favour again, or they have the Honour to Eat at his Table.

In the 4th, The Bishop of Merida having represented, that King Wamba had constrained him to Ordain a Bishop in a Country-Town; and assayed to do the same thing in other places. They recited the Canons forbidding to Ordain Bishops in Burroughs, or to put Two in the same City; by vertue whereof they declared, that the Ordination of him, whom Wamba caused to be Ordained, was irregular: But seeing it was not out of Ambition that he had been Ordained, but by the Prince's express Orders, they out of mere favour granted him the next vacant Bishoprick; and they make a general Inhibition, to Ordain Bishops in places where there were none before.

The 5th, Forbids Priests to Offer the Holy Sacrifice without Communicating, because some of those who Offered it many times in one Day, would not Communicate but at their last Mass.

The 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Arch-Bishop of Toledo to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 King 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈…〉〈…〉 to the Rights of Provin∣ces; and upon condition, that within 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 after h••s Ordination he shall present himself •…•….

The 7th, declares, That whereas King Ervigius intends to moderate the Law made by his Predecessor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against them that had not taken A•…•…; it was their Opinion, that such persons had a Right to bear witness, and were not to be rejected as infamous.

By the 8th, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 are forbidden to leave their Wives, except for Adultery.

The 9th, Rene•…•… several Constitutions against the Jews.

The 10th, Grants the Right of the Sanctuary to those who escape into Churches, or with∣in Thirty Yards about, provided nevertheless, that they shall be delivered back into their Hands, who shall promise with an Oath not to hurt them.

The 11th Canon does severely punish Superstitions and Idolatry.

The 12th, Renews the Law for holding a Council every Year.

The 13th, Contains Wishes and Prayers for the Prince.

These Canons are confirmed by a Declaration of King Ervigius.

Council XIII. of Toledo.

THIS Council was also holden under King Ervigius, (An. 683.) The same Metropoli∣tans assisted at it, together with Forty Four Bishops, Twenty Four Deputies of other Bi∣shops, * 1.73 Eight Abbots, and Twenty Six Lords. They read the Memoir sent to them by King Ervigius, containing the Heads of such matters as he would have to be regulated by them. Then they made a Confession of Faith, and recited the Creed, according to the custom. The Three first Canons respect Secular Affairs, and confirm what the Prince had done.

The 1st, Is a Pardon in favour of those who had formerly conspired with Paul against the State.

The 2d, Is a determination of the manner how to proceed against the Lords of the Court, accused of Capital Matters, and how to judge them.

And the 3d, Is about the remitting of the extraordinary Taxes granted to Ervigius. These Three Canons are all of the First Day.

The next Day the Bishops being desirous to shew their gratitude to their Prince for the fa∣vours he had bestowed upon them, provided for the Security of his Children and Family.

By the 4th Canon, and by the 5th, They forbid any person Marrying his Widow:

The 6th, Prohibits advancing the Offices of the Court-Slaves, or Free-Men, unless they be∣long to the Exchequer.

The 7th, Forbids to uncloath the Altars, take away the Wax-Candles, Adorn the Church in a Mournful manner, or to cease to Offer the Sacrifice, without great necessity.

The 8th, Orders Bishops to come, when sent for by their Metropolitan, to be present at some Festival.

The 9th, Confirms and repeats compendiously the Canons of the 12th Council of To∣ledo.

The 10th, made in the 3d Meeting of the Council, Is concerning a difficult case proposed by Gaudentius Bishop of Valeria, or Villareo, who being fallen Sick had subjected himself to the Laws of Penance. He desired to know, whether, in case he recovered, he might Exe∣cute his Function, and Celebrate the Holy Mysteries. The Council ordains, That he may, after he is reconciled; because the Canons permit those who being at the point of Death, have indeed received Penance, but yet have confessed no Crimes, to be admitted into the Clergy. Upon this Principle, they make a general Law, that the Bishops, who have received Penance, without confessing any Mortal Sins, being reconciled by their Metropolitan, may return to their Functions. Notwithstanding, if they had been convicted of any Crimes, before they were put to Penance, or if they have confessed some capital Sins upon their receiving of it, they shall abstain from their Functions, as long as the Metropolitan shall think fit. But if in submitting themselves to Penance they confessed no Mortal Sin, tho' they have committed some, which they conceal in their own Conscience, they have the liberty to examine them∣selves in their own Conscience, whether they should offer the Sacrifice, or not: But this de∣pends upon their own Will, and not upon Men's Judgment.

The 11th Canon prohibits keeping or entertaining another Bishop's Clerk, or helping his escape, or affording him means of hiding himself. It is observed there, that those ought not to be reckoned among Fugitives, who go to their Metropolitan about their own bu∣siness.

It is ordained contrary-wise by the 12th Canon, That a Clerk, who having some business with his Bishop, betakes himself to the Metropolitan, ought not to be Excommunicated by his Bishop, before the Metropolitan hath judged whether he deserve Excommunication. Like∣wise,

If a Clerk pretending himself to be wrong'd by his Metropolitan, betaketh himself to another Metropolitan; or if, both the Metropolitans refusing to do him Justice, he hath re∣course to the Prince, he shall not be Excommunicated before his Cause be Judged. Yet, if he who appeals to the Synod, to the next Metropolitan, or to the King, be found to have been Excommunicated, before he brought his Matters before them, he shall remain Excom∣municate till he hath cleared himself.

The 13th, Contains Thanksgiving to King Ervigius, and some Petitions to Heaven for him.

This Prince set out an Edict, whereby he confirmed these Canons, after the recitation of them.

Council XIV. of Toledo.

THIS Council was called by King Ervigius, (Anno 684.) to approve what had been done against the Error of the Monothelites, which they call the Doctrine of Apollinaris. * 1.74 He inten•…•… to call a General Council of his whole Kingdom for this purpose; but time not permitting it, the Bishop of Toledo assembled his Suffragans; and the Metropolitans of Tar∣ragona, Narbone, Merida, Braga, and Sevil, sent their Deputies thither. In this Council they approved the Acts of that of Constantinople, and added an Exposition of Faith, wherein they did acknowledge Two Wills in Jesus Christ.

Council XV. of Toledo.

THIS Council was held under King * 1.75 Egica, Ervigius's Successor, and Son-in-law, (An. 688.) and composed of Sixty Bishops. In this Council they justifie themselves about * 1.76 some Articles of the Exposition of Faith, which the Spanish Bishops had sent to Rome by Peter a Presbyter, which Articles Pope Benedict had found fault with.

The First is about their saying, That the Will had begotten a Will. They defend this Ex∣pression, because the Eternal Will of God is common to the Three Persons, as well as Wis∣dom, and other Divine Attributes; so that as Wisdom may be said to have begotten Wisdom, the Will likewise may be said to have begotten a Will; they also defend this Expression by some Testimonies of S. Athanasius, and S. Austin.

The Second is about their saying, That there were Three Substances in Jesus Christ. They maintain, that Jesus Christ being composed of a Body, a Soul, and the God-head, he may be said to be of Three Substances in this sense, though, the Body and the Humane Soul being ta∣ken but for One Nature, and One Substance, Two Natures, and Two Substances, only may be said to be in him. They shew, that S. Cyril, and S. Austin, did speak as they did. They do not enlarge upon the other Two Articles, thinking it sufficient to observe, that they are taken out of S. Ambrose, and S. Fulgentius. Afterwards they treat of the Oaths taken by King Egica. He had made one to King Ervigius, to defend and protect his Children against all persons whatsoever; and another at his Consecration, to administer Justice to his People. It was demanded, that in case these Two Oaths should be found to interfere with one ano∣ther, and that Ervigius's Children were to be protected against Right and Justice, and to be rescued from the Punishment due to them for Wrongs done by them, whether the King be bound to keep the first, or the last Oath. The Council Answers, He is more strictly bound to keep the last, as being more just, more solemn and necessary. This Council is Signed by the Metropolitans of Toledo, Narbone, Sevil, Braga, and Merida, by Fifty Six of their Suf∣fragans in person, by the Deputies of Six, among whom Iva the Arch-Bishop of Tarragona, by Eleven Abbots, by Seventeen Lords, and confirmed by the King's Declaration.

Council of Saragosa.

THIS Council was assembled under King Egica, 691. It made Five Canons.

By the 1st, Bishops are forbidden to Consecrate Churches but on Sundays. * 1.77

The 2d, Orders the Bishops to enquire of their Metropolitan, or Primate, about Easter-Day, and to keep it upon the Day he shall appoint.

The 3d, Forbids Monks to admit Secular Persons into their Cloysters.

The 4th, Ordains that the Church-Slaves, freed by their Bishop, shall be bound to exhi∣bite to their Successor their Letters of Freedom within a Year after the Death of the Bishop that set them at Liberty; provided they have been warned to do so.

The 5th, Renews what had been Decreed by the Council of Toledo, that the King's Wi∣dow should not Marry again; and ordains moreover, that she shall withdraw into a Convent, and take the Religious Habit, immediately after the Prince's Death.

The Council ends with Thanksgivings to, and Prayers for the King.

Council XVI. of Toledo.

THIS Council was kept in 693, under the same King Egica. After the reading of the Memoir, containing the proposal of what was to be treated in the Council, the Bishops * 1.78 made a long Exposition of Faith, which is followed with Twelve Canons.

The 1st, Is in the behalf of the Jewish Converts, to exempt them from the Tribute which they paid to the Exchequer.

The 2d, Is against the remainders of Idolatry.

The 3d, Appoints very severe Punishments against the Sodomites, and excludes them from the Communion until the time of Death, when they have not done Penance being in health.

The 4th, Is against them that fall into some Fit of Despair.

The 5th, Forbids Bishops to take above the Third part of the Churches Revenues, and orders them to lay it out in Repairs. It prohibits also giving the Government of many Churches to one Priest, and ordains, that small Churches shall be united to greater ones.

The 6th, Forbids an Abuse crept in among some Spanish Priests, who at the Sacrifice upon the Altar did not Offer clean and decent Loaves, nor prepare them carefully; but did only Consecrate a Crust of their own Bread cut round. The Council to stop this Abuse, Ordains, That the Bread, to be Consecrated upon the Altar, shall be whole, decent, made on purpose, that it shall not be a very great Loaf, but of a reasonable bigness, Modica oblata, the remain∣ders of which may easily be preserved, and which may not load the Stomach.

The 7th commands, That Bishops shall call their Clergy and the People together for the promulgation of the Canons of Councils within Six Months after the holding of the Coun∣cils.

The 8th, Contains several Constitutions for the safety of King's Children, and Ordains, that every Day Sacrifices shall be Offered up for the Health and Prosperity of the King, and the Royal Family, except the Day of the Passion, when Altars are uncovered, and no Body is permitted to say Mass.

The 9th, Is against Sisbert, Bishop of Toledo, who had broken his Oath to King Egica, by Conspiring against his Person and Family: They Depose and Excommunicate him for his whole Life, they declare his Goods to be confiscated to the Prince, and condemn him to perpetual Imprisonment. They Decree the same Punishment against all that are guilty of the same Crime.

The 10th, Pronounces Three times Anathema against them that attempt against the Life of Kings, and Plot against them and the State, and reduces them and their Posterity to the con∣dition of Slaves.

The 11th, Contains some Prayers for King Egica's Prosperity,

By the 12th, They put Felix, Bishop of Sevil, into the room of Sisbert newly deposed, and Faustin, Bishop of Braga, into Felix's room, and to Faustin they substitute another Bishop.

The 13th ordains, That a Council shall be held at Narbone to approve the Canons of this; because the Bishops of this Province could not come to it by reason of a Sickness. This Council is confirmed by the Prince's Edict, and Signed by Five Metropolitans, viz. those of Toledo, Sevil, Merida, Tarragona, and Braga, by Fifty Two Bishops, Three Bi∣shop's Deputies, Five Abbots, and Sixteen Counts, or Lords.

Council XVII. of Toledo, held in 694.

THIS Council hath the same Form with the preceding. King Egica presented a Memoir, which the Bishops of the Council having read, they recited the Creed, and made the * 1.79 following Canons.

1st, That they shall Fast Three Days, in Honour of the Holy Trinity, before they begin any Conference in Councils.

2dly, That in the beginning of Lent the Bishop shall shut the Font, and Seal it with his Ring till Holy Thursday, to let People know, that no Body ought to be Baptized during that time, but in case of extream necessity.

3dly, They Ordain, That the Ceremony of washing of Feet shall be used on Holy Thurs∣day.

4thly, They renew the prohibition of putting Sacred Vessels to Prophane Uses.

5thly, They condemn to Excommunication, and perpetual Imprisonment, those Priests that say the Masses of the Dead for the Living, out of a conceit that this Sacrifice will bring them to their Death.

6thly, They re-establish the ancient custom to make Litanies, or Publick Prayers, every Month for the Church, the King's Health, the good of the State, and the remission of Sins.

7thly, They provide for the Security of the King's Children, that no Body may attempt against their Life, or Estate, after his decease.

8thly, They Ordain, That the Jews, who being Baptized remained in their Religion, yea, and Conspired against the Prince, shall be made Slaves, and all their Estates confiscated, that they shall be hindred from using their Ceremonies, and their Children shall be taken away from them to be brought up in the Christian Religion.

Lastly, They return their Thanks to King Egica, who confirms their Canons by his Edict.

Council held at Constantinople, Anno 692, called Quini-Sextum, or In Trullo.

THE Fifth and Sixth General Councils having made no Canons about Discipline, Justini∣an the Second thought fit to call a Council, to renew the old Canons, and to make a * 1.80 kind of a Body of the Canon-Law, for the Clergy of all the East.

This Council was held in 692, at Constantinople in the Tower of the Emperor's Palace, called Trullus. The Four Patriarchs of the East were present at it, together with 108 Bi∣shops of their Patriarchats. This Council was called Quini-Sextum, because it was look'd upon as a Supplement to the Fifth and Sixth Council. It took the Name of General Coun∣cil, and the Greeks owned it for such, but the Latins rejected it. It made 102 Canons.

In the 1st, It approves all that was done in the first Six General Councils, condemns the Er∣rors and the Persons they had condemned, and pronounces Anathema to those that hold any other Doctrine, than that they have Established.

In the 2d, The Bishops of this Council deliver the number of Canons which they received, which are the Constitutions attributed to Clemens, the Canons of the Councils of Nice, An∣cyra, Neo-Caesarea, Gangra, Antioch, Laodicea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon, Sardica, and Carthage. The Canons made in the time of Nectarius at Constantinople, and in the time of Theophilus at Alexandria; the Canons of Denys, and Peter of Alexandria, of Gregory Thau∣maturgus, of S. Athanasius, S. Basil, S. Gregory Nyssen, S. Gregory Nazianzen, of Amphilachi∣us, Timothy, and Theophilus of Alexandria, S. Cyril, Gennadius of Constantinople, and the Ca∣non of S. Cyprian, and his Council, which is only observed in Africk, according to their custom.

The 3d Canon is concerning those of the Clergy, Presbyters, or Deacons, that had Mar∣ried two Wives. They declare, that those that would not leave that custom shall be deposed; but as to those, whose second Wives are dead, or who have left them, they shall keep the honour and place of their Dignity, being forbidden only to perform the Functions of it; it being not fitting, say they, that he that ought to heal his own wounds, should bless others: As for them who had Married Widows, or had Married, being Priests, Deacons, or Subdea∣cons, they ordain, they shall for a time be suspended from their Functions; but they grant them the power of being restored, when they leave their Wives, upon condition, that they shall not be raised to a superior Order. And Lastly, they Ordain, That, for the future, all those that have been Married Twice after Baptism, or have had Concubines, shall not be made Bishops, Priests, Deacons, or Clergy-Men; as also those that have Married, Divorced or Prostituted Women, or Slaves, or Stage-Players.

The 4th Canon inflicts the punishment of Deposition upon such Ecclesiastical Persons as shall company with a Virgin Consecrated to God, and of Excommunication upon Lay-Men.

The 5th, Renews the Canon which forbids Clerks to have with them Women, not related to them, except those which the Canons allow them to dwell withal. It extends this prohibi∣tion to the Eunuchs.

The 6th, Forbids those that are in Orders, including the Subdeacons, to Marry after their Ordination.

The 7th forbids 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 down before 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Presbyter, unless they represent the Person of the P••••riarch or Metropolitan.

The 8th ordains, That a Synod shall be kept at least once a Year in each Province.

The 9th forbids Clerks to keep a Tavern, or to resort thither.

The 10th forbids them to lend upon Usury.

The 11th forbids them having any Commerce or Familiarity with the Jews.

The 12th ••yes the Bishops of Africk and Lybia to the Law of the Celibacy,

The 13th probits the Separation of Presbyters, Deacons or Sub-deacons from their Wives, or binding them to Continenoy, before they be ordained.

The 14th renews the Canon, ordaining, That he who is made a Priest shall be 30 Years old at least, and a Deacon 25.

The 15th decrees, That he who is ordained Sub-deacon, be at least 20 Years old.

The 16th declares, That the seven Deacons, spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles, were but Ministers of common Tables, and not of Altars; and thereby rejects the Canon of the Coun∣cil of Neo-caesarea, which by the Authority of this Place had ordained, that there should be but seven Deacons in every Church.

The 17th forbids Clerks to go out of their Churches, without dimissory Letters from their Bishops.

The 18th enjoyns those who were forced to withdraw because of the Incursions of the Bar∣barians, or for any other Cause, to comeback again, as soon as they can.

The 19th enjoyns those who govern Churches, to preach to those committed to their Care, the Doctrine of the Church, and to expound the Scripture agreeably to the Sentiments of the Fathers.

The 20th forbids Bishops to preach in a Church, which is out of their Diocess.

The 21st gives permission to Clerks deposed, if they repent of their Fault, to wear short Hair, like other Clerks: But if they lead a secular Life, it binds them to wear long Hair, like other Laymen.

The 22d ordains, That they shall be deposed that have been ordained for Money.

The 23d prohibits exacting Mony for the distribution of the Holy Communion.

The 24th forbids Clerks to be present at the Shews of Stage-players.

The 25th ordains, That Country-parishes shall belong to the Bishop who had them in pos∣session 30 Years ago; and if before 30 Years possession any will prove them not to belong to them, the Matter shall be examined in the Provincial Council.

The 26th renews the Prohibition made to a Priest, engaged in an unlawful Marriage, to execute his Function.

The 27th forbids Clerks to wear any other Garb than such as belongs to their Order, and separateth for a Week those that do.

The 28th forbids distributing with the Oblation the Grapes offered at the Altar, by reason the Oblation ought to be given to the People for the Sanctification and Remission of Sins, whereas Fruits are only blessed and distributed for Thanksgivings.

The 29th ordains, That, according to the Council of Carthage, the Mysteries shall be cele∣brated Fasting, not excepting Holy Thursday itself.

The 30th ordains, That the Bishops of Churches in barbarous Countries, if they will leave their Wives, shall dwell no longer with them.

The 31st forbids Clerks to baptize, or to celebrate the Mysteries in Chappels of private Houses, without the Bishop's Consent.

The 32d condemns the Practice of the Armenians, who put no Water into the Wine which they did consecrate.

The 33d rejects another Custom of the same Armenians, who admitted none into the Cler∣gy but those of a Sacerdotal Race, and made them Clerks and Readers without cutting their Hair. The Council does not allow that regard should be had to the Race of those that are ordained, but only to their Merit; and forbids the Readers to read publickly in the Church, without their Hair cut, and without receiving the Blessing of the Pastor of the Church.

The 34th decrees the Penalty of Deposition against caballing Clerks.

The 35th forbids a Metropolitan to seize on the Estate of a Bishop deceased, or on his Church; and appoints that they shall be in the Keeping of the Clerks, till there be another Bishop▪ unless there be no Clerks, in which case the Metropolitan shall keep them for the Successor.

The 36th renews the Canons of the Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon, concerning the Authority of the See of the Church of Constantinople, and grants to it the same Privileges as to the See of old Rome, the same Authority in Ecclesiastical Affairs, and the 2d place, the 3d to that of Alexandria, the 4th to that of Antioch, and the 5th to that of Jerusalem.

The 37th preserveth to the Bishops, ordained into Churches, which have been invaded by the Barbarians, the Dignity and Rank of Bishops, and permits them to perform their Functions.

The 38th renews the 12th Canon of the Council of Chalcedon; whereby it is ordained, That the Disposition of Churches shall follow that of the Empire.

The 39th preserveth to the Metropolitan of Cyprus, (who was forced to withdraw by reason of that Island's being taken by the Barbarians, and was come to settle in the new Justiniano∣polis) they preserve him, I say, the Right of Supremacy, and the Government of the Churches of the Hellespont, with the Right of being chosen by the Bishops subject to it, ccording to the Ancient Custom. They do also subject to him the Bishop of Cyzicum.

The 40th declares, They may receive a Monk in the 10th Year of his Age.

The 41st ordains. That those who will be Recluses or Anchorets; ought to have been three Years at least in a Monastery.

The 42d forbids to suffer Hermits to be in Towns.

The 43d imports, That all kind of People may be admitted into Monasteries, even the greatest Sinners, by reason Monachism is a state of Penance.

The 44th is against Monks guilty of Fornication or Married.

The 45th forbids to dress with worldly Apparel and Ornaments the Virgins that conse∣crate themselves to God, when they go to take the Religious Habit.

The 46th forbids Friars and Nuns to go out of their Monastery, without the Superior's Leave.

The 47th forbids Friars to lie in the Monasteries of Virgins, and Virgins to dwell in the Monasteries of Friars.

The 48th ordains, That the Wife of him who shall be made Bishop shall be put away from him, and shall withdraw into a Monastery, at a distance from the Bishop's Residence.

The 49th prohibits converting Religious Houses to profane uses.

The 50th forbids those of the Clergy and the Laity to play at any Games of hazard, upon pain of Deposition and Excommunication.

The 51st forbids Jesters, Dancers and Shews.

The 52d ordains, That the * 1.81 Mass of the Pre-sanctified shall be celebrated every Day in Lent, except Saturday and Sunday, and Lady-day.

The 53d forbids them that stood Sureties for Children, to marry the Mother of such In∣fants.

The 54th prohibits marrying the Uncle's Daughter: Forbids a Father and a Son to marry the Mother and the Daughter, or two Sisters; as also a Mother and Daughter to marry the Father and Son, or two Brothers, upon Penalty of 7 Years Penance.

The 55th ordains, That the Canon forbidding to fast on Saturday and Sunday shall be ob∣served in the Church of Rome, as well as in other Churches,

The 56th forbids eating Eggs and Cheese in Lent.

The 57th forbids offering Milk and Hony on the Altar.

The 58th forbids Laymen to give to themselves the Eucharist, before a Bishop, a Priest or a Deacon.

The 59th forbids baptizing in Domestick Chapels.

The 60th is against them that feign themselves to be possessed.

The 61st is against Superstitions.

The 62d against the Fooleries which were acted on New-year's-day.

The 63d condemns to the Fire the false Stories of Martyrs, made by the Enemies of the Church.

The 64th imports, That the Laity ought not to undertake to teach Religious Matters.

The 65th is against the Custom of kindling Fires before Houses on the New Moons.

The 66th ordains, That Easter Week shall be spent in Prayer.

The 67th forbids eating the Blood of Beasts.

The 68th forbids burning, tearing, or giving to Victuallers the Books of the Gospels, if they be not quite spoiled.

The 69th forbids the Laity to enter within the Rails of the Altar; yet the Emperor is ex∣cepted, who, according to an Old Custom, is permitted to enter in, when he is willing to make some Oblation to the Lord.

The 70th forbids Women to talk in the Time of the Holy Sacrifice.

The 71st is against some prophane Practices of Students in the Law.

The 72d declares the Marriages between an Orthodox Christian and an Heretick to be null and void.

The 73d ordains, That Reverence shall be paid to the Cross; and that Crosses shall not be suffer'd to be made on the Floor.

The 74th forbids making the Feasts, call'd Agapae, in Churches.

The 75th ordains, That they shall sing in the Church without straining or Bawling, modest∣ly and attentively.

The 76th enjoyns, That no Tavern or Tradesman's Shop shall be suffer'd to stand within the Inclosure of the Church.

The 77th, That Men ought not to bathe with Women.

The 78th, That they ought to instruct those that are to be baptized.

The 79th is against an Abuse of some, who at Christmas made Cakes to the Honour of the Virgin's Lying-in.

The 80th is against them that without Cause absent themselves for 3 Sundays together from their own Church, whether they be of the Clergy or of the Laity.

The 81st pronounces Anathema to those that have added these Words to the Trisagion: Thou that hast been crucified for us.

The 82d approves of the Pictures, in which Christ is painted in the Form of a Lamb.

The 83d forbids giving the Eucharist to the Dead.

The 84th orders them to be re-baptized, who can bring no Witnesses; nor certain Proofs that they have been baptized.

The 85th grants Liberty to the Slaves which their Masters have freed before two or three Witnesses.

The 86th condemns the infamous Company of debauch'd Women.

The 87th is against Divorces made without lawful Cause.

The 88th forbids bringing Horses into the Church without great Need and evident Danger.

The 89th shews, That they ought to fast on Good Friday, till Midnight.

The 90th renews the Law of not kneeling on Sunday.

The 91st Condemns to the Punishment of Murtherers those Women that procure Abortions.

The 92d is against Ravishers.

The 93d condemns the Marriages of those Men or Women who are not sure of the Death of their Wives or Husbands: But after those Marriages have been contracted, and when the first Husband comes again, he is ordered to take his Wife again.

The 94th is against those that use the Oath of Pagans.

The 95th is of the Reception of Hereticks. It ordains, That the Arians, Macedonians, Novatians, Continents, Tesseradecatites, and Apollinarists, shall be received after they have made Abjuration in Writing, by anointing their Fore-head, Eyes, Nostrils, Mouth and Ears with the Holy Chrism, pronouncing these Words; This is the Seal of the Holy Ghost. That the Eunomians, Montanists and Sabellians shall be re-baptized. That the Manichees, Valenti∣nians, Marcionites and other Hereticks, are also to abjure their Errors, anathematizing all Hereticks by Name, and making profession of the true Faith.

The 96th is against plating and curling the Hair.

The 97th forbids Husbands to co-habit with their Wives within the Enclosure of the Church.

The 98th prohibits marrying a Maid betrothed to another.

The 99th prohibits offering Roast Meats to Priests in Churches.

The 100th prohibits lascivious Pictures.

The 101st enjoyns, That those that will receive the Eucharist must hold their Hands a-cross, and so receive it. It forbids using Vessels of Gold, or of any other Matter; to receive it in.

The 102d shews, to them that are entrusted with Power, to bind or to loose; that they ought to exercise this Ministry with a great deal of Prudence and Wisdom, considering well the Distemper, applying Remedies as skilful Physicians, and examining whether they do truly and sincerely repent.

Notes

• * 1.1

  A Confe∣rence held in 601.
• * 1.2

  [Caballo∣num.]
• * 1.3

  Assembly of Challon.
• * 1.4

  Council of Toledo.
• * 1.5

  Council of Egara.
• * 1.6

  Council V. of Paris.
• dd 1.7

  [No Secular Judge shall judge, &c.] The Devotion of the Emperors, in the more serene Times of the Church, when Kings became nursing Fathers to Christi∣anity, granted several Immunities and Privileges to the Clergy. Constantine the Great freed the Church of Carthage from paying Taxes, lest it being impo∣verish'd thereby, God's Worship should be interrupted or hindred. And afterward, about the Year 536. Justinian ordained, That in causes merely Civil, the Bishops should hear and determine of the Cases of the Monks and Nuns, as also of all their Clergy, unless the Matters under decision were too diffi∣cult for the Bishop: In wh••ch case they were commanded to go to the Civil Judges. These Imperial Grants did the Bishops (as Patrons of the Ecclesiastical Franchises) confirm and establish by several Canons in this and several other Councils; and that the Secular Judges might not dare to break in upon these Privileges, they back'd them with Anathema's and Excommunications, and so might warrantably enough do, so long as the Laws of the Empire stood in Force: But for the Clergy to stand upon such Exemptions as these, and claim them upon the Account of their Order, as the Clergy of the Romish Communion now doth, is both contrary to Scripture and the Practice of the purer Times of Christi∣anity: For before Justinian's Time the Bishop's ordinary Jurisdiction was but a Power of Enquiry and Restraint for violating and corrupting the Ecclesiastical Discipline.]
• * 1.7.1

  Euseb. hist. ecc. l. 10. c 7 Just. Const. Novel. 79. c. 1. 84. in praefat. & 123. c. 21. Conc. Aga∣then. c. 32. Rom. 13. 1 Conc. Chalc. c. 9. Conc. Carth. 3. c. 9. Conc. Tolet. 3. c. 13. Conc. Ma∣tisc. c. 8.
• ee 1.8

  [Not constrain any Churchmen to serve the Publick.] It hath been the Wis∣dom of all Ages and Nations, but prin∣cipally of the Christian Church, to exempt their Clergy from Publick and Civil Employments and Offices, that they might with the greater Care and Diligence attend the Service of God, which this Council endeavours to preserve.]
• * 1.8.2

  Diod. Sic Euseb. hist. Eccl. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 10. c. 7.
• * 1.9

  Council in France, &c.
• * 1.10

  [Al. Sise∣bulus, a King of Spain, of the Got••ish Race.]
• * 1.11

  Council II. of Se∣vil.
• * 1.12

  Council of Rheims.
• ff 1.13

  [The 7th. threatens to excommu∣nicate those that shall violently take from the Church the Criminals fled into it.] The Ori∣ginal of this Privilege, allowed by the Heathens, and afterward by the Christi∣ans, to their Temples or Churches, was certainly taken from the Divine Consti∣tution, given to Moses, to erect six Cities of Refuge in the Jewish Nation, though not altogether conformable to it, nor of so beneficial an use; for Moses made the Cities only a Refuge, and that for such Man-slayers alone as had killed their Neighbours unawares; but the Heathens made their Temples, and that for all manner of Wickednesses, for so Livy says of the Asylum erected by Romu∣lus at Rome: Asylum aperuit, quo quisquis perfugerit ab omni noxa liberatus esset: And so Herodotus speaks of Hercules's Asylum at Athens. These Refuge-Temples were afterward much increased among the Heathen, and at length, about the Year 300, came to be in use among the Christians; for they thought it a shame that the Temples of the Heathen Gods should enjoy so great a Privilege, as to be Refuges for the Oppressed, and the Christian Temples should be destitute of it: Whereupon they were made such by the Edict of Theodosius and Valentinian, and also by the Canons of the Councils. But although such Grants might be of very good Advantage among Christians, being kept within the Bounds of the first Institution, to be a Protection for the Innocent and Oppressed; yet as they have been, and still are, abused in the Roman and other Churches, being made a Refuge for Murtherers, Rebels, and other enor∣mous Criminals, they are grievous both to the Church and all Civil Societies and have been complain'd of, as such, by many eminent Lights of the Church, in the several Ages of it.]
• * 1.13.3

  Numb. 35. 6
• * 1.13.4

  Liv. hist. l. 1. dec. 1. Herod. l. 2.
• * 1.13.5

  Theod. & Val. in Const. ad Antioch. Syn. Araus. anno 440. c. 5. Aug. de con. Evang. l. 1. c. 12. Pol. Virgil. l. 3. c. 12.
• * 1.14

  [Siseran∣da the 22d. King of the Gothish Race.]
• * 1.15

  Council IV. of Toledo.
• * 1.16

  [Suin∣tilla.]
• * 1.17

  Council V. of To∣ledo.
• * 1.18

  [Suin∣tilla the 2d.]
• * 1.19

  Council VI. of To∣ledo.
• * 1.20

  [Vidisuin∣dus.]
• * 1.21

  Council VII. of Toledo.
• * 1.22

  Council of Lateran.
• * 1.23

  [A City of Arabia, Petr••a.]
• * 1.24

  Act. I.
• gg 1.25

  [Universal Bishop.] This Title, which is here given to M••••tin, Bishop of Rome, doth not import, as is pretended by the Church of Rome, the absolute Supre∣macy of that Bishop over the whole Church, but only the large extent of his Jurisdiction above all other Bishops, as a great Patr••areh. For we find the like Titles given to the other Patriarchs, not only by private Persons and Councils, but even by the Bishops of Rome themselves. For thus the 5th. Council of Constantinople salutes 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and John their Patriarchs; ••cumenico Patri∣archae, Joanni—Me••••a. To the Universal Patriarch, John—Me••a••. So Nicephorus calls the Patriarch of Alexandria, Judex 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉; The Judge of the whole World. And the Emperor Justi∣nian writing to Epiphanius▪ Patriarch of Constantinople, thus superscribes, Epiphani•• oeoumenico Patriarchae; To Epiphanius the Universal Patriarch. No•• doth the Bishop of Rome himself look upon it so much his own peculiar Title, but that he thinks it due to The••••s••us, Bishop of Constantinople, writing thus, to him: Therasio Generali Patriarchae Adrianus servus servorum Dei; To Therasius the general Patriarch, Adrian the meanest of Gods Servants. So evident is it, That this great Title of Universal Bishop imports no such Pre-eminence as is pretended, and tho the Title was commonly used, yet it was thought an Antichri∣stian Usurpation in John Bishop of Constantinople, to assume such a Power and Prerogative to himself.]
• * 1.25.6

  Conc. Con∣stantinop. 5. Act. 1. Nic••ph. l. 14. c. 34. Authen. Const. 3.
• * 1.25.7

  Conc. Nicen. 2. Act. 2. Greg Magn. l. 4. Ep. 34.
• * 1.26

  Act. II.
• * 1.27

  Act. III.
• * 1.28

  [S. Dion▪ Ep. ad Catum.]
• * 1.29

  [Novam Deivirilem Operationem, into Unam Deiv. ope∣rationem.]
• * 1.30

  Act. IV.
• * 1.31

  Act. V.
• * 1.32

  Council III. of Con∣stantinople.
• * 1.33

  Act. i.
• * 1.34

  Act. i••.
• * 1.35

  Act. iii.
• * 1.36

  Act. iv.
• * 1.37

  Act. v.
• * 1.38

  Act. vi.
• * 1.39

  Act. vii.
• * 1.40

  Act. viii.
• * 1.41

  Act. ix.
• * 1.42

  Act. x.
• * 1.43

  Act. xi.
• * 1.44

  [Persons who had been for∣merly Con∣sul••.]
• * 1.45

  Act. xii.
• * 1.46

  Act. xiii.
• * 1.47

  Act. xiv.
• * 1.48

  Act. xv.
• * 1.49

  Act. xvi.
• * 1.50

  Act. xvii.
• * 1.51

  [Concilium Cabilenense]
• a 1.52

  The 6th Year of his Reign, which is the 650.] The Year is not certainly known; but it is sure it was held before the Year 658.
• b 1.53

  Archbishops.] They have signed in the same Order in which we set them down.
• * 1.54

  Council of Challon.
• * 1.55

  [Rotoma∣gius.]
• † 1.56

  [Agendi∣cum.]
• c 1.57

  39 Bishops.] Of which 6 were Deputies.
• * 1.58

  [Before an hearin••. Ante audi∣entiam.]
• * 1.59

  Council VIII. of Toledo.
• * 1.60

  [At Rece∣suind.]
• * 1.61

  Council IX. of To∣ledo.
• * 1.62

  Council X. of To∣ledo.
• * 1.63

  A Confe∣rence in▪ Northum∣berland.
• * 1.64

  [Concili∣lium Emeri∣tense.]
• * 1.65

  Council of Merida.
• * 1.66

  Council of Autun.
• * 1.67

  Council of Hereford.
• * 1.68

  Council XI. of To∣ledo.
• * 1.69

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bam∣ba.]
• * 1.70

  Council IV. of Braga.
• * 1.71

  [al. Ering.]
• * 1.72

  Council XII. of Toledo.
• * 1.73

  Council XIII. of Toledo.
• * 1.74

  Council XIV. of Toledo.
• * 1.75

  [••lias Egypca.]
• * 1.76

  Council XV. of Toledo.
• * 1.77

  Council of Sarago∣sa.
• * 1.78

  Council XVI. of Toledo.
• * 1.79

  Council XVII. of Toledo.
• * 1.80

  Council of Constanti∣nople.
• * 1.81

  [Missa praesanctifi∣catorum, was the Sacra∣ment, which was admini∣stred with Elements, which were before con∣secrated, oblatio pri∣us oblati, & perfecti sa∣crificii, sa∣cri{que} Myste∣rii. Bal∣sam. in hunc Can.]