Ptōchomuseion [sic]. = The poore mans librarie Rapsodiæ G.A. Bishop of Exceter vpon the first epistle of saint Peter, red publiquely in the cathedrall church of saint Paule, within the citye of London. 1560. Here are adioyned at the end of euery special treatie, certaine fruitful annotacions which may properly be called miscellanea, bicause they do entreate of diuerse and sundry matters, marked with the nombre and figures of Augrime. 2.

Dioscorus. 21.

DIoscorus was Archdeacon of Alexandria. He succeded Cy∣rillus, Theodosius the younger being Emperour.

He was a wicked and vnpure man, he did greatlye hate Cyrillus family, which he ought to haue helped for his testa∣mēts sake, but he sought craftely for their goods & liues, as appereth by Athanasius and Theodorus bookes.

He remoued from the ministery, godly & innocent men, & appoin∣ted in their roumes, them that serued for his wickednes, as Ischirion ob∣iected against him in the Synode of Chalcedon

He polluted himself with many other offences, done against the firste and second table. He spake blasphemy against the holy Trinitye, he em∣braced

and confirmed the heresy of Eutyches, and impugned the true fayth, as foure accusers obiected against him, in the councell of Chalcedō.* 1.1

Sophronius semeth to lay to his charge, that he had cōmitted treasō, and had coueted the empire and rule of Egipt, for he saith thus:

Dioscorus was greued, that such an one should be called lord & gouer∣nour of the world, for he would haue ruled the diocesse of Egipt.

Ischyrion and Theodorus the Deacons, among other crimes, do lay a∣gainst him murders, that he was occasioned to commit. It appeareth in the actes done in the councel of Calcedon, and speciallye in the accu∣sations of Eusebius Doryleus, that Dyoscorus was the causer of Flaui∣nianus the bishop of Constantinople his death in the seconde Synode of Ephesus.

Neither he was void of theft, for the churches of Lybia were wont to haue corn geuen them out of Egipt by the Emperours liberality, by∣cause they gathered no fruites of corne there, by the reason of the drines of the places. This Dioscorus taking vp the corne by the way, and bying it to him selfe with very great summes of money, sold it againe for much more money, then he bought it.

Furthermore, periury was layd to his charge, in the causes of his con∣demnation, bicause he had promised by an othe, that he would exhibite an epistle to be opēly red, which Leo bishoppe of Rome had sente to the Synode of Ephesus. But Dioscorus neglecting the othe,* 1.2 refused to haue it redde.

This was the disposition and piety, these were the vertues of this so great a monster of the church, rather then of a Bishop, of a tirant and a woolfe, rather then of a true pastour.

His accusers sayd, that no man was free from his cruelty, insomuche that things hauing no life, were not free from his furious raginges. For he did cut downe trees, and raised vp fiers, and plucked downe houses.

Athanasius concluding all his accusations wyth these fewe woordes, sayde, that Dioscorus had committed such offences, that were not onely forbidden by lawes, but also which exceeded al cruelty of the most fierce and cruel barbarous people.

Vvhen he had bene thre times called to the coūcel of Ephesus to make answer to his wicked doings, and came not, he was condemned by the voi¦ces of al the fathers, to be put from al the dignities of a bishop,* 1.3 and to be voyd from all maner of ecclesiastical functions.

The causes of his condemnation were these.

Bicause agreing wyth Eutyches, he receyued hym to the communi∣on, before he had talked and consulted with his fellow brethren in the councel of Ephesus.

Bicause he had vniustlye condemned Flauinianus, Eusebius, and o∣thers of errours, being gilty to none.

Bicause he added some things to the councel of Ephesus, which were not spoken of the Fathers.

Bicause he admitted not the reading of the bishop of Romes epistle, being often warned therto.

Bicause he had pronounced the bishop of Rome to be excōmunicate.

Bicause he had contrary to the lawes, receiued them that were law∣fully deposed by diuers Synodes.

Finally, bicause other his fellow cōpanions, confessing their offence, had desired pardon, but he continued in his wickednes, nor came to the Synode, being thrise called. At the last he was sent in to exile, into a cer∣tain place called Gangra, a city of the Paphlagones.

Ariminensis Synodus.

Ariminum was a towne in Italy. This city had a notable port or hauē, whiche in times paste diuided Italye from Fraunce. In this City was the counsel called Consilium Ariminense kept. The cause & beginning of this councel, was this: Vvhē the Arrians after the counsel of Nice, had with lies and falshod inuegled the minde of Constantine the Emperour, Constantine calling some of them from exile, and purposing to cal an o∣ther councel, to heare the matter better discussed, but death preuented him, but he commaunded his eldest sonne Constantius to performe that which his father had purposed, who at the last called a councel to be kept at Ariminum. Before which councell many other assemblies were cele∣brate and kept, in which this question was greatly reasoned and dispu∣ted, whether the sonne wer consubstantial and equal in substance wyth the father. Al refused to teache or saye that the sonne was vnequall in substance vnto the father, vntil one Aetius a Syrmian taught the cōtra∣ry, but yet very peruersly & falsly For the which cause Constantius com¦maunded al the bishops to come to Ariminum & Seleuciā, to rectify this opinion. He had thought to haue brought all the bishops of the East into the west partes, seking all occasions to make an vniforme concord amōg them: but the farre distaunce of place caused him to alter & chaunge his minde, so that he decreed, that there shoulde be but one councell, but kept in two places, & that the bishops of the west shoulde be at Arimi∣num, & the bishops of the East at Seleucia. But they did not agre in nei¦ther place, but great dissention rose among them, ther were at Arimi∣num aboue .300. persons.

As Sozomenus doth declare, when a question was proposed how they should beleue,* 1.4 Valens and Vrsacius stepping forth (whose cause Germi∣nius Auxentius, Gaius, & Demophilus fauoured) required that al that

which was written before of the faith, should be made voide and vaine, and that, that should take place whiche longe before that tyme was com¦posed in the Latine toung at Syrmium, where it was defined, that the sonne was like the father, accordyng to the saying of the Scriptures, but that there should be no mention made of one essence, and they sayd, that this exposition was greatly approued of the Emperour, and that it ought also to be receyued of the Synode. So at the last they graunted, nay ra∣ther falsly betrayed and defamed this worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as a word vnknowē of the Scriptures, and obscure and darcke to many. But this Vrsacius with his complices were after pronounced and condemned for heretikes, and because they defended the doctrine of the Arrians, were remoued from the Churche, as Athanasius writeth in his Epistle to the Bishops of Africa.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Acti 3 et Eu∣seb. Dorileus ad Euagrium lib. 2. cap. 4.
• * 1.2

  Euagrius. li. 2. cap 4. et alibi
• * 1.3

  Euagrius li. 2. cap. 4
• * 1.4

  Lib. 4. cap 17