V4
Srom f £t6rarg of (profeeaor ^amuef (ttliffer tn (gftcmorg of 3ubge ^amuef (ttltffer Q^recftinrtbge
^reecntc^ 65 ^amuef (Qtiffer QSrecfttnribge E^ong fo f &t6rarg of (princefon ^^eofogtcaf ^eminarj?
COLLECTION OF PURITAN AND ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE
I
LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
9
Digitized by tine Internet Archive in 2014
https://archive.org/details/someremarksuponeOOalli_0
r
ERRATA
PAgc ^. Itn. 9^. bis r. theft, p. 12. 1. 1 e/trts r. art y»bich, aad 1. 2$. Tht»A»fiHf i.Grdtian Uy p. 27. 1. 22. fiecatms r. ftccaUr iSj p. $1. 1.1 5. rmxdati r. vtr.undati, and 1. 29. approaching r. rtfrtacUngy p. 58. 1. 23. r. p. £4. 1. 20. r. mtntem, p. 102. 1. 4. fomd r. hMf$Hndedy tnd 1. 6. r. w Hnl(n9wn, p. 1 1 1 . 1. 1 7. r. $ 0. p. 1 25. 1. 2 3. r. PaCchaJim Raibtrtusj p. 150. 1. ii.putouc <w, p.'i59.1.28. wWcfc r. wfc*/?, p. 254.!. 11. x.nphtt- fitvtrbasbm faid,^. 287. 1. 22.r. wij »jwr, 1. 25. r. oxlwr, for
r. *r,p. 2^0. 1. 92. to In r. /r5.
~ SOME <^^^
REMARKS.
UPON <ii;^m^J^^
The Ecclefiafticai Hiftory
OF THE
o F
PIEDMONT
By ^P. ALLJX, D. D.
Imprimatur.
iLptJc. L.o»a. a otLcris.
LONDON, Printed for Richard Chtfwf 11, at the Rofe.and €row2 o;^ in St. PmuPs Chmch'TArd, M DC XC.
TO THE
K I Kt G.
May it pleafe Your Majafty,
F Your Majejly:^ folloimg the Ex- ample of Jour Glorious Ancejlors, did not thinJc it m Honour to maintain the ^formed ^ligmy I P^ould ni^Ver have undertaken to' prefent jiour . Maj^fiy with a Tmttfe of this mturc. Tins Defence of the An- cient Churches of the Valleys of Piedmont , Is a kind of Jpolo^y for the, ^formatld}\ hrouiht about m the Cenrwy Ufl pa/l ^ In ^'hlch thofe A 1 Hero's
The Epiftle Dedicatory.
Hero's of your Name ^ had great a part. Hoe ^formation , rightly conjidered^ confifls only in the rejeSi'mg of what for many Jges has been fuper added to the Chrtfllan Religion, Jhe ConduEl of the ancient Qhurches of the Valleys of Piedmont hai ferVed for a SModel to our Reformers , and has juftificd their Undertaking ; feeing they haVe aU waies preferred -amongft them the Sacred Truths of the Qmflian (Religion committed to thetn, as they had received them from the Difciples -of the Apojlles; and rejeEled the (Corruptions thereof according as by degrees .they broke forth in the Weft. Tins hath been the only thing that hath made them the ObjeH of the Hatred of the Church of Rome, and hath dra^i^n upon them, for fo many Ages, fttch prodigiom Floods of Ter- Jecution. 'Tis Very true that the Wretched mains of thefe Ancient Churches, appear too con- tmptible to attraB the Eyes of the Trinces of the Earth towards them ; their prejcnt Defolation feemtng fo univerfal, that the World looks upon them no otherwije thm . irrecoverably lofi \ and finally dejlroyed. ^ut all Europe knows y That your Majefly does not judge of things according to the Corrupt Maxims of the World }^ hfit the True L^ht of the Gofpel, which informs
U6,
TheEpiftle Dedicatory.
uSy Jh/it outward Tro/perity is not oUailed on the True Church ; 7 hat Je/us Chnfl owns thfe only for his Vtfciples, Tpho take up their Qrofs^ and foUo^V him ; That he knows how to fruftrate the hopes of their J'crfecutorSy by miraculoufly [up* porting and continuing his Churchy whilefi they fup- pofe thetnfclves to have finally triumphed oyer it, Jhis is that Tour Majefty gaVe a high proof of tfiheny from Your %oyal Throne^ Ton were pleajed to cajl an Eye on the yiiiferable EJlate of that little Flock of dijperfed Chriftians , in affording tijem an happy retreat in Tour Dominions, as to the Ancient Trofe/fors of Ture Cbrijlianity, and the faithful Witnejfes of thofe faVmg Truths, which all Troteftants do profefs. What Marks of Tdur Charity and Compaffion haVe they not received f Aid of what Efficacy J?ath not this great Ex^ ample of Your Majejly been, to oblige Tour Sub' je^i to give them frejh Inflances of their 'Bro^ therly LoVe and JffeBion towards them> Thus^\ Great Sir, whilefi You make good the CharaSier ^ a Prince, who draws the Eyes of e.ll the World upon Him, by the greatnefs of Hts Exploits, by the fleadimfs of His QoyiduH, ami by the Mo^ deration of His Government ; You, at the fame time, . har the tmprefs of a ^rme truly 0?r if hm , full
The Epiftle Dedicatory.
of Zeal for tU hiterejls of Hts SaVtour^ and of (^ompjfjtGn for thoje wIto fuffer for the Jake of his Cofpel. Tins being a Truth fo generally owtmly I haVt taken the holdnejs to lay at lour Majejifs Feet , and publip under Tmr Jugufi Nme-, the Defence of theJe illuftriousConfeJfors of the Truth, whom thetr Emmies hal'e endeavoured to bear down with their Qalurhnies, after hivi?ig horn them down with the 'violence cf their horrid and bloody Terjecutions. God hath fo miraculoufly raifed Your Majefty for the refcuing of the ^ro= teflant ^ligmty from the DeJltuHton ready pre- pared for it, and which had been infallible, with= out the Vigilance and Fleroical Courage of Your Majcf-y ; that thofe who fuffer for it, fuppofe they may haVe leaVe thus to aidrefs Your Ma* jeffy, whdi'fl they comfort themfehes in their fuf ferings, with the profpeH of that powerful fafcguard and jupport God hath proVided for his poor dtfinf- fed and afflicled Churchy in the ^crjon cf Your Majefty , as an eVulcnt Mark of his Favour and TrotcEfion. Miy the great God, it>}?o}?as fotert" derly preferred Your Majefty againft all the At' tempts and Machinations of Your Enemies, and hi' therto has made You triumph with fo much Glory oyer them, continue to pour forth m Your Majefty
the
1 he Epiftfe Dedicatory.
the choicejl of his 'Bkjfings and Favours j Qrown with a glorious Succe/s the gnat UnJertakinp of Your Majejly for the good of Your SuhjeHs, for the Mv ant age of Europe, and for the comfort of all thofe who profefs the Truth : are the ardent Prayers cwiftantly prefented to God by him "^ho isy with a moji profound refpetly
Your Majeftys
Mofl: humble and obedient
Subjed and Servant,
P. ALLIX.
THE
THE
CONTENTS.
C H A P. I.
Concerning the Firft Rife and Origiual of the Churches of Italy. Pag. i.
C H A P. ir.
The State of the Chriftian Religion in the Dioccfs of Italy, until the end of the Fourth Century.
CHAP. HI.
Opinions of Authors of the Diocefs of Italy^ in the Fourth Century, concerning Matters of Faith and Worfhip. /». 14
C H A P. IV.
Concerning the Faith of the Churches of the Dio- cefs of Italy during the Fifth Century. ^. 2j
CHAP. V.
Opiaions of the Chur^h^s of Italy during the Sixth Century. "^"J
( a ) CHAP.
V?e CONTENTS.
CHAP. VI.
Opinions of the Diocefs of Italy, during the Seventh Century. p- 33
CHAP. VIT.
Some Refledions upon the Liturgy of this Di:ocefs, called the Ambrofian Liturgy. p. l6
CHAP. vni.
Opinions of the Churches of Italy, during the Eighth Century. />. 45
CHAP. IX.
Opinions of the Church of Italy, during the Ninth Century. - />. 57
CHAP. X.
The Faith of the Churches of Italy m the Tei.tii Century. /'..So < ^ly-y- CHAP. XI.
An Enquiry into the Opinions of GunAulphm and his Followers, befora the year 1026. ' 93
CHAP. XII.
Refle£l:ions.upon fbme Pra&ices of tiie Churches of the Diocefs of //"/t/y. /». loi
C H A P. XIII.
That the Piocefs of Italy vizs an Independent' D'io- a^ls, till after the midft of the Eleventh Century.
f. 109
CHAP.
Tf?e CONTENTS.
CHAP. XIV.
Concerning the Separation of the Churches of the Diocefs of h.'i/v, from the Church of Rox^e ; anid of the Faith of the Patenms. />. 1 18
CHAP. XV.
Concerning the Belief of tlie MAnichees^ of their rife in lidy^ theh* growth, and their eftabhrhment.
/». 129
CHAP. XVI.
Concerning the C^M^r/ fpoken of by Evervinus and St. Bernard.:, and their Diftinftion from the P^- terines. p. 129
CHAP.- XVII. A Continuation of the Hiftory of the Cathnri in Itdy, as ellewhere , and their Diftinclion from the Paterines. /• '49
CHAP. XVIII.
That the Pater ims and Subalpini were not Manieheesy as is evident from their Writings, and from their Opinions in the Twelfth Century. ^ 59
CHAP. XIX. That the Churches of Italy- were ix)t founded by Peter Waldo. p. 175
CHAP. XX. Wliether the IValdeufes were at firft only Schifma- ticks. />. 185
C H^ A P. x:ii.
epncerning the State of the Church of Ror?iey2i.t thcv time ofthe Separation of the Paterines or Walden- fes ; together with the Accufations charg'd upon (a 2 ) them .
The CONTENTS.
them by the faid Church, and the Idea they had conceived of her. ^.198
CHAP. XXII.
Concerning the Belief andCondu6l of the Walefe?tfes in Bohemia, " p. 211
C H A P> XXIII.
Some inftances of the Arguments which the WaU denfes of Bohemia waged in their iDifputes with the ' Church of jRfjw^. /. 221
cn At. XXIV.
Concernins the Government of the Churches of the Waldenfts, and of the fucccflion of their Minifters.
CHAP. XXV.
Concerning the Perlccutions which the Waldenfes have fuffered fince the XI. Century. f • 2 56
CHAP. XXVI. *
An Inftance of the Calumnies of feme Inquifitors.
p. 269
CHAP. XXVII.
That the Church of the Valleys of P. edmom have con- ftantly perfeverd in tlie fame Faith, until the Time of the Reformation. />. 280
C H A P. XXVIII.
Containing the Conclulioa of this Treatife. 292
T O
THE
PREFACE.
r^~~^//£ Effhop of Meaux has lately puhltffjed
I a Treatife, tntituUd [ The Hiftory of the
i Variations of Proteftants.] He had formed the draught of it feme Y^^rs ago, to engage the French Court to reed the Edict of Nantes, without any Scrufle or Hefitation. The pretence feemed very plauJibUy the Clergy^ who were both Party and Judge againfl the Protejlants, were to declare, That forafmttch as the French Protejlants had changed their Belief \ the Court was no longer obliged to the Obfervation of an EdiBy which Henry IV. had granted to their An-3lfcf ^fia.»Jcj f*^^ cejlors, who were of other Principles. But thisEdi^t hJ^^ f^f'^,^'^^^''^ being recalled before the Bifljofs work was fini(hedjand the ^ ^^^f French Court, which is not guilty of being overfcrupulous, not thinking it f elf to fiand in need of fo vain a pretence , the Bi/kop was fain to employ his Work to another ufe.His Dejign therefore in the prefent pftbli[hing thereof is , to deceive thofe^who by ways of P^iolence have been made to enter into the bofome of the Romijh Church, and whow the fame violence keeps there, againjl the fenfe of their Confcience.
This Prelate had before endeavoured in his Expofi- tion of the Roman Faith, where he employs his utmoji Artifce to fveelen, difguife and dijfemble the matters and difficulties in Controverjie, to abufe the Protejlants, tn order to make them morr enftly digcji the Roman Reli- gion, than they are apt to do, when they view it in its
( U) natural
The PREFACE.
natural colours. And now in this his Hiflory of their Variations^ he endeavours to reprefent to them the Belief of the Reformers^andmojl illuJtrioHS Protejlant Dollars, tn the Jirangefl colo rs imaginable \that thoje whom the Dragoons have converted to the Romnn Faith, might look ufon the force that has been made ufeof to drive them from fo detejlable a Communion, as a faving and charitable violence. It is always the fame Spirit of fal' Ji^cat ion and juggling that animates and guides him.
In this his lajl Dejign^ it had been natural for him^ had his Intention been right, to have endeavoured te> make out, That the Protejlants, or their Teachers, were divided in their Belief of the Articles of the Creed, about the obje5i of Prayer, and the neceffity thereof about the necejftiy of Obedience to the Commands of God, as well as the extent of that obedience ; and about the Do5lrine and number of the Sacraments: for inthefe Points it is, that the Pro- tejlant s make the Ejfence of their Religion to conftjl Now it is well known,, that in all thefe they do agee\ the Q^efiions that are ventilated among them, being like thofe Queflwns that remain d amongthe Primitive Chrifltans, upon fever al points of Divinity ; and fome of them be- ing n-^ ether than meer Controverfies about whtch the Pro- tejlant s have learnt to divide them.felves in imitation of the Schools of the Rami fij Divines, But had the B:JJjop followed this method, he would have failed of his end', wherefore he thought it fufficient for his purpofe, flight ly to touch the matters in Costroverfie, and to put into good French, whatfoever he could rake together, from the voritings of thofe of his Communion, to expofe the frjt Reformers, and to make the Reformation odious.
It would be an afront put upon the Age we live in, to imaginthat this thick layiNg on of Paint ,fhould be caffa- hle to impofe u^on any, that have never fo little Judg- ?nent left. The Bijhop maypleafe to flatter himf elf with
the
The P R E FACE.
the Juccefs of his frfl Work, the Exfojition of the R<9- wiflf Faith : hut 1 believe him too fincere not to ovofty That he has made no impreffion upon the Spirit of any Froteftants, jave fuch only nho were ready to embrace the frji pretences that were offered, to rid themfelves of a Religion^that expos'* d them tofomanyMiferies ; or the profeffion whereof hindred their fettlement in the World. Thofe who have been fori d to hesome Papijls againjl their Confciences, have found by experience, That it was not fifjficient for than to fubfcrihe the Expofition of the B/Jhop of Meaux : A^o ! their Perfecutcrs were not at all minded to make them of his Religion ; but they were fain to fvallow whole and entire the Profeffton of Faith drawn up by YmslW ,
Jnd we may ajfure the Bifbop, That the fame wtllbf the Lot of this prefent Work which he has entitled^ Tlie Hiftory of the Variations of the Proteftants in Matters of Faitic For let us fuppofe that this Prelate 'has very well proved what he pretends to make out, what will follow from heme ? But only this. That the Re- formers were not infallible, that they did not at frfl re" jeci all that deferved to be cerifird as Popery ; that fome difficulties have been met with in the Hypothefis of thofe, who were not happy enough, to refne and clear fuch cor- rupt matters ; in a word, That they did not at firjl dtfcover all that was tobe kno^vn and believed as to fe- ver al Points of Divinity^ and that they were fain to take a great deal of pains in the dif cover y of that Truth, which the Roman Ch:irch had taken fomuch pains to oh f cure- and con f on fid. We^llf uppofe a P rot eft ant Caf uift at t^is time to write about Matters of Confcience-, and, for want of examini/ g with fujficient care the Dec i [ions of Licen- tious Cajuijisy to follow fome of them, being feducd by the falfe Principles of thefe Roman ilafuifls, which the Bifljop of Meaux condemns'., will it foUoiv, That an ( b 2 ^ hundred
The PREFACE.
hundred and fifty years after this^ fome other Bijhop of Mcaux will have right to frofofe under the title of Protejiant Variations, the mijlaken Opinion of this Cafmji^ though afterwards his V arty ^perceiving the De- lufon^ have declared Againjl his Opinion ?
The Bfjhop is very pleafant in forbidding the Pro- tejiant s to make ufe of the way of Recrimination againjl the Church of ^om,^^ in this Point of Variation, though indeed one only injlance of Variation in Faith^ of fifty rvhereof m can convince them, he a fufficient Conviction of a Church, which pretends her felf to be immoveable, becaufe infallible. But being very fen- fible of the weaknefs of his caufe in this Point, he found he fhould be obliged, either to acknowledge that his Church is a falfe Church, and much more deferving that cenfure, than the Protejiant ^ as having been fubjeci to a far greater number of V ariations in her Belief ; or elfe that he would be obliged to make ufe of the f ime anf ver ire do, in renouncing the infallibility of his Church. But it is no matter of wonder, if- by degrees only we come to the per- feU knowledge of the Truth.
Moreover, is it not a very pleafant Method, to reduce the Difpute to the Examination of fome Pr^eltminaries, whereas the ground it felf has been dijputed above t he fe I 50. Tears.
In a word, whatfoever the Reformers may have been^ •vet "'tis but jufi that the Church of Rome, being ac- cufed of Herefie, Idolatry and Tyranny,Jhould clear her felf of thefe Accufatimn. Whatfoever may have been tffe Carriage of Con^2innnus Copronymus, can the Manners of that Emperor be concerned in the flitejiion, Wheriier the worlhipping of Images be contrary, to the Law of God The Reformation of Jeliu Kjng c/ni acl, did it ceafe to be a Reforma- tion from Ahab'/ Idolatry, though he himjelf were a,
wicked
The PREFACE.
mcked per f Oft J And an Hypocrite y and t ho he did the thing hut imperfe^ily, i
In truth, the care the Bijhop of Meaux has taken in his Preface and whole Book, to reprefent to tu the Immn' tability of his Church-, and her Conjlancy in matters of Fai h and W or (hip, has opened fo fair a field to his Anta- g^onijls, whom he attacks ahont the History of the Refor- mation in the feveral parts of Europe, and particular^ ly in France, that he could not reafonably expect hut to- he opposed by them on all fides, with all the vigor imagina- ble, There are flill /tJ^w^- Luclierans^ who have already mads it appear, they Ae not at all afraid of the Reproaches of a Party, rvhofe H-eud that condemned them, Leo X, was an avowed Atheijl, and who lookt upon the Gofpel to he no better than a Fable. Tiere are Frencli Proteitants left fill, whom Providence has delivered from the bloody hands of the Bijhops (j/Francc, to maintain the Inter eji of the Reformation neither does England want able Di- vines fufficient to repel all the BijJjop of Mqrux' s Slan- ders. After all, I hope the Bijbop will give us leave, to exanun a little the Confiancy of his Church, as to her Faith and Worfbip.
In expectation therefore that the feveral Authors, whom the Bi/hop of McdiU)i has been plcajed to alfaulr^ will give him full f it is faction ; which as u is no hard matter for them to do, fo I queftion not but they will do it vexy fuddenly : I thought I might take to task one cf his Books, viz. the XI. wherein he treats concerning the Albigenies, and the Waldenfes : and forafmuck as- therein he has carried Calumny to the highefl degree ima- ginable, I thought it was my duty, in examirmig this part of his Book T to give a fc ant ling of his fair Dealing, and the Sincerity he employs tn delivering the Hijlory of thbfe two ancient Churches, to whom the Reformed Party are fo much obliged.
The PREFACE.
I know vfell enough that the jtrengtb of our defenee does not defend on the piftifying ofthofe Churches. Let the Albigeaies have been Manicliees, ^sthe Bijhoppre- tends to prove them ; let the Waldenfes have been only a company of Schifmaticks^ as the Bifljop is p leafed to call them: the Grounds of the Reformation mil remain jujl and fr-mfor all that, if the Foundarion of our Reafons Mdsgood^ and if the Church of KomQ be ouilty of the Errors^ Idolatry, and Tyranny whereof ire nccafe her. But I conceived, i. That it was mil becoming a ChriJliaf$to undertake the defence of Innocence, oppreffed and overborn by the blackejl Ca lumnies the Devil could ever invent. 2. That ive jhould be ungrateful torvards thofe rvhofe Suffe* rings for Chrijl have been fo beneficial to his Church, jhould we not take care to jujlifie their Memory, when we fee itfo malicioufly bef pattered and torn ■ 3 . 7 hat tfiju/t/fe the Waldenfes Albigenfes, is indeed to de- fend the Reformation and Reformers-, they having fo long before usy with an exemplary Courage endeavoured to pre' ferve the ancient Chrijlian Religion, which the Church of Rome all this while has endeavoured to aboli/h, by fib- fiitutinga BaJiardandfuppofititi$usChriJ}iMnity injiead thereof Whilft the Minijlers of the Church of Rome think ft te follow his Conduct, who was a Liar and Mnr- therer from the beginning \ Innocence ought at leaji to have leave to defend her f elf again fi their Calumnies, whiljl fhe willingly refigns to God the vengeance of the In'yiftice and Violence ofthofe who have opprejl her,
'Tis not my defgn here to write the whole Hijlory of the Waldenfes 4;?^ Albigsnles ; that has teen done already in fever al parts, by four or five famom Authors, whofe 'Books are in all hands ; / mean ChalTagnon, Perrin, the mofl learned Archbifljop of Armagli, Giles Legei", tind Morland. If any thing may be added to their Writings, it is concerniug the Original of thofe Chur-
The PREFACE ^
ches^ their condition before the Twelfth Century, and their total ruine about ttfo or three years ay^o.
Tts for thofe that live w the Neighbourhood 0/ Pied- mont, and who have received into their bofom the mife' rable Remains of thofe fa fare and fo ancient Churches^
^ to f re ferve the memory oj {0 dreadful a Def elation.
ihofe alfo that their Piety and %jal will })romft them to I e arch with all the exalinefs fojfible^ for y ha' mayferve to continue the Sequel of the Hijlory of the Churches of the V. lie ys of Vitdmont^ fince the time where Morland and {.(^gej- end their Works. J am perfnaded alJo,that thofe >vho have undertaken to write an,accotint of the ruin of the Churches of ¥v2J\Cdvill not forget to fet down the particulars of that Perfecution^which has dejiroyd thefiou- rifhing Flocks of the Province of \j2ingi\cdoc^ a Country where the Reformation met with fo eafie a Reception at frjly becaufe of the Remainders of the Doclrin of the A Ibigenfes, who had dwelt there for fo log a time.
What I undertake in thefe my Refeciions^ is only this'. To fet down the true AntK^uity of both thefe Churches^ who were fo famous in the Thirteenth Century, becaufe of the oppofition they made f-gainjl the Ccrruptions which the^<:>\x\\^\Church had introduced in matters of Faith, Wor^jip, and the Government of the Church. And as they then maintained., That they derived their Original from the Apoflles, fo I hope to make out, 1 hat in fo doing they advanced nothing whish is not exactly conf&r- mable^to the Hiftory of the Ages paji, from the time of the Apoflles, to the Thirteenth Century. This is that I fhall endeavour., by making out the Succeffion of thefe Churche-s, aswellwtth refpe^ to their Do '^lrin and Worfhip, as n'ith refpecl to their Minifiry.
As this Defjgn will engage me in the dif&ftffion of
T ^ great number of Authors, v ho have lived from the time of th Jpojlles to the faid Thirteenth Century ; fo
if
The PREFACE.
ft mil be difficult to give fo Smooth a form to thefe Ob- fervntionsy as might be expeSied in a coHtimed Hijlory. In this cafe it is unavoidable y but the Difcourfe will prove here and. there dry and rugged, what pains Joever may be taken to the contrary. Bnt to make amends forthify we may fromife that the Judicious Reader , who is only tn qncjl of truth J will fnd abundantly wherewith to fatisjie himfelf by examining the Matters of Fa^ fet down in thefe Objervatwns.
I /hall treat of the Hijlory of each of thefe Churches in particular y andobferve much the fame Method in the one as the others And am not without hope, that the Remarks I fljall make, will ferve to confound the inju- fiice of thofey who though they know that what the Pro- teftants believe and praBtfe, is truly Apoflolical, ceafe not to wrangle and prevaricate, upon pretence that we cannot (hew t hem atty Church before the Reformation, or at leaft before the Twelfth Century, which has abfolutely defended the f tme Opinions as we do. This alfo will be of ufeto jlrengthen the f aith t?/ Proteft^nts, who wHl perceive from thence, that God, according to his Pro- wife, hath never left himfelf without Wttnefs, as ha- ving preferved in the bofom of thefe two Churches, mofi lllujlrious Profejfors of the Chrijlian Religion, which they held in the f^me Purity with which their Predecejfors had received this precious Pledge from the hand ofthofe ApoftoUcdl Men, who at frjl planted thefe Churches a,' ■mong the Alpes and Pyrenaian Mountains, tBat they might be expofed to the view of four or five Kjngdoms all at once. I begin with the Churches fj/ Italy .
SOME
SOME REMARKS
UPON THE
Ecclefiaftical Hiftory
Of the Ancient
Ctiutc]^ of peDmottt
C H A p. I.
Concerning the Firfi ^ife and Original of the Churches of Italy.
BY Italj, I do not underftand here the feveral Countries which, at this day , bear that name, but only the Seven Provinces to which that name was given, by way of diftindion , and which conftituted a particular Government, being particu- larly under the care of the Lieutenant of the Wertern PriBtorian Prefe(5t. Thefe Provinces were LlgurU , ^mi-
/ia, FUminia^ Venetia, the Alpes , both Cottian and Greek^^
and Rhoetia, or the Country of the Grifons. Tliere were three Legions amongft the Troops of the Empire, whicli peculiarly had the name of hulicl^, becaufe probably at firfl they had been raifed in that Diocefs ; whereof MiUn was
B the
2 ^'S^marks upji the
the capital City, and die place of Refidence of the Lieute- nanr, we have juft now mentioned. An. 51. n. 54. Baremns takes ir for ail undoubted trutlii That St. B^r- raitM,. the famous (Companion of Sr. Paul in the Work of the Miniftry^ was the firft Founder of the Church of .'^ila-fj, and of the Churches of Li^ttria, which he referrs to the year n of our Saviour Jefus Chrift 5 that is, to the 49 year, if we reditie his Chronology- In defending this his Opinion, he grounds himfelf. on very fure Traditions, as he reckons upon the Records of tlie Church of A^i- ian, and upon the Teftimonies of many Authors. Vghel- Im is of the fame mind, and Bifimoyn'ms , who iiath writ- ten the Hiftory of that Church, from the beginning there- of, and fexs down- all he could get togjathec for fupport of this Opiniofii. But to fpeak my fenfe plainly concer- ning this Opinion o^SAromus, and' tliofe that follow him therein j I believe they have abufed themfelves by fol- lowing late Authorities, and fuch as cannot make out fo antient a matter. All this fo fure Tradition, and thefe Monuments of the Church oi' Milan owe their Rife to the foolilh Vanity, which the Emulation of the JVefiem Pre- lates, for precedency and jurisdi(5tion, has given birth to, lince the VIll. Century : fndeed, fincc that time, there is fcarcely a confiderable Church in Italy, France^ Sfa'w , or E>iglandy that did not challenge fome Apoftle, or Difciple of the Apoflles, for their Founder. jLirurg.pamcl. I acknowledge, That the Liturgy, which bears the n^me P^- 385. Qf s,-^ Amhrofe, fuppofes St. Barnaboi to have been the firft Bifhop of Milnrt but tliat alone is fuffkient to make it appear, That that Liturgy, as well as others of the fame nature, hach fuffered great alterations, fince its firft re- ception in that Diocefs. The later Ages iiave made a great part of ti ieir Piety to cbnlift in inventing thefe Fa- ble- and the ignorance and blind zeal of People hatli prompted them to entertain impertinent Legends as Articles of Faith, whereof th.e leaft footftep is not to be found in the firft Monuments of Antiquity. The Learnedft men of die Church of /i<?»f<? have, in a manner, wholiy banillied
thefe
Ancmt Qhnrch of Piedmonc.
3
thefe Apoftollcal Originals into the Lnnd of Fable?, from whence they all proceeded at Hrft-, thbr-gh fome fooner, otliers later, yet all of them fince the Vlll. Century •, as we have hinted. Baronius therefore ought t^have called to mind here that Judicious Maxim , with r&fereiice to • Hiftory, which he himfelf alledgeth €tk\\\\tiQ, Qtiod fm amtquo Amhore dicitury contemnitur i Whatfoever is aflerted without the teftimony of fome ancient Author , ought to be defpifed.
Though it is plain, I might draw fome advantage in the fequel of my difcourfe, from the confeflion of Baronins and other Authors that have writ the Originals of the Chur- ches of L'l^urtaj yet I fhall take heed of making ufe of it, my aim being not to gain any thing by the ignorance or fabuloufnefs of our Adverfary, hut exactly to fearch out Truth. Accordingly I find, i.That the ancient Ecciefia- ftical Hiftory doth not give us the leafl: hint, that ever St. Barnabas preached in Italy, properly fo called. Seve- ral Authors, as Origen and St. Chrj/ofiome, give not him the Eufeb.hift.
fame allotment that the later Hiftoriaus of Milan have done. ^- ^- i. I find it was a thing wholly unknown in the time of
St. Iretttfts and TertHlUan^ as alio CO Pope Imccent the Firft, De Prasfcripr.
in the beginning of. the Fifth Century, ^dlj^ I do not ?37'^ find that any of the Authors who lived in that Diocefs, ^^J^^ as St. Amhrofe, S:. Muxmus , and others , have ever fet forth the Glory of this Apoftolical Foundation of the
Churcll of Milan by Sr. Bam.ibas. 4/T, Petrus Dami.inws
might alone have ferved to corteil tiVis erroneous Opi- nion of Baronius: for being fent to perfwade the Church of Milan to fubmit to that of Rome, he doth not at all take notice of the Clergy of Milan, pretending to dtk^nd from Sr. BamabM 5 'but maintains to their Face, opufc5.p.52. that they had received tl-fe Gotpel from the Billiops of the Church of Rome. There is . no man of any Judg- ment, who is never fo little verfed in the Hiflory of the Church, on wliom his Remarks wilt not make a greater imprelTion, than all thofe Fables oiv which Baremns, and
B ^ others
4 ^'m.irks upon the
others like him, have built, in cider to eftablifli their pre- tended Tradition.
I ain not ignorant , that fince the Thirteenth Century, Raytierius reports, That the Churches of the wuldenfes main- tain'd , that they were Apoftolical Churches : but the word y^pofiolical muft then be taken in the fenfe Tertullim gives it in his Book of Prefcriptions, which I have juft:
now alledged, Nafientes ex matricibus Jpofiolkis depittantHr
ut foboles ApoftoUcarum Ecclefiaruw. Indeed, they are never the lefs Apoftolical, becaufe they did not receive tlie Do- drine of the Gofpel immediately from the Apoftles them- felves. It is fufficient to make them deferve the name of Afoftolicaly that they received the Dodrine of the Apoftles, as a pledge from the liand of their firft Difciples, which they preferved fo very tenderly throughout the following Ages.
It is hard to determine whether it was in the firft Century that thefe Apoftolical men planted the Chriftian Religion at AdUan, and the Diocefs thereunto belonging v or whether it were done in the fecond Century ^ forafmuch as Milan was a confiderable City in thofe Primitive times, and we find that the Churches of Liom Vienna wtxQ already famous in the fecond Age , by reafon of their Martyrs, Apoflolick men having firft of all preached in the capital Cities, that- the Gofpel from thence, as the head Spring, might diffufe it felf throughout tlie whole Diocefs, and fo facilitate the propagation thereof. I am very much inclined to believe, either that the fame Preachers who came from Greece, out of the bofom of the Apofiolick- Church, to plant the Faith amongft the Gauls, did alfo cultivate the Diocefs of Milan^ that belonged to Gallia. Cifalptna : or, Tiiat the Difciples of the Apoflles St. Peter and St. P^W, who for their Mafter Jefus Chrill had con- quered the Cities neighbouring to Rme^pmtiid their Vidlo- ries as far as Milan and its Diocefs.
I don't think any man can precifely define the time of» their preaching, thofe firft Difciples having been much more:
careful
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
careful to preach the Gofpel, than to wrife the Hillory of it. For, we cannot relie much upon what they tell us concerning the firft Succefibrs of St. Bamdoi at A-flLv:, no more than we can upon that which they affert , That St. BarnabM was the Founder of that Church. Laft- ]y, I do not think it necelTary to fhew , ( as fome refor- med Divines do) That the BagmAa^ of whom mention is made in tiie time of Dioclefian^ were the Predeceflbrs of the fvaldenfesy and tliat they were both Chriftians and Martyrs. It is true, that they build this their Opinion upon the Martyrdom of Sr. Maurkr, and of the The'Mm Legion, which feems to be confirmed by the life of SlBh- liile>iHSj publifhed by chlffietins at the end of BeJe. But this Foundation is of no ftrength. The Martyrdome of the Thihan Legion, is no more than a ridiculous Fable, unknown to all the ancient Hiftorians of the Church 5 publilhed by fome Impoftor, under the name of St. E»chg- rifts : and the Life of St. Babolenus^ is a ridiculous Legend, being no waies fit to confirm fo great an adion of that antiquity. We need only read what is fet down by thofe ancient Authors, who make mention of thefe i?4^W4r,and it will be found, that we cannot with reafon make Chriftians of them.
But, however it may be, and though we fliould acknow- ledge, that the Church of Milan was founded by the care of the Succefibrs of St. Peter and St. Paul at Rome • yet it is of importance to obferve,_that this can give no Right to the Bifliop of Rome, over him of Milan, no more than St. Poljcarf acquired any Right over the feveral Dioceffes, amongft the Gaules , whofe Churches were founded by thofe whom he had fent abroad to preach the GofpeL Pope Innocent the Firft complains, in his Epiftle to Dece»- tius, That the Biftiops of his own Province did not follow the Cuftoms of the Church of Rome. If this happened in his own Province, which without doubt had been conver- ted i)y the endeavours of his PredeceHors we may - very well judge, that the firft Preachers of Milan and its Dio' cefe, had not fubjeded MiUn to theBillwp of Rome.
6
(^marks upon the
This is acknowledged by Pope the Second, who owns in his Apology for the Romifh Church, written in the Year i4>7. that before the Council of Nice^ fmall regard was had to the Bifhop of Rome. It is very neceflary tliat this truth (liould be folidly proved, which accordingly I de- fign to do in the Sequel of this Work j and to fhew tlie in- dependence of that Diocefe on the Bifliops of K^me ^ My bufinefs at prefent is to lay down the Belief and VVorfhip of thofe Churches, which were planted by the Difciples of the Apoftles, and will be the Subjed of the following - Chapters.
CHAP. II.
Ti?e State of the Chrift'mn ^Itgion in the "Di^ ocefs of Italy, wit'd the end of the Fourth Centwy.
FOrafmuch as we have fcarce any Author of this Dlocefs, during the Three hundred and fifty firft Yeai-s after the Birth of Jefus Chrift, whofe Writings are (iiil in being 5 it will be impofTible for us to give an account of the State of the Chriftian Religion in that Diocefs, any other way than by confidering the ftate of the Neighbouring Dior ce0es, and moft other. Churches during that interval.' But with this alTiftance we may be able to fupply tliewanc of thofe Authors, whofe nfiemory Time hatli buried in Obli- vion, or wliofc Writings have been deftroyed by Perfecu^ tions or by Barbarifnis.
V\^e cannot doubt but that the Principal Articles of tlieir Faith, were contained in the ApQftles Creed, which tjiougli it were not written by the Apoliile$, yet .was received witii a general approbation, as appears from what Teriniiioit and
Sc./rr-
Ancient Church of Piedmoar.
St.Iremm rellus. Neither did they, without doubr, own any other Tradition, befides rliat of StJr€n<tus, that no- thing ought CO be laid down for certain truth, but wliat Jefus Chrift hath uught, or the ApoJiles written, and leftr to the Apoftolical Churches as a Sacred Depcftttm.
'Tis undoubtedly (ure, that this was the In{^ru(5lion, which was given to the Catecwmeni, who after private jnfl:rU(5tions were earneftly exhorted to read the Writings of the Evangelifts and Apoftles, to confirm and advance themfelves in the knowledge of the Truths of the Chri.- iHan Religion. And it is as fure that the Strangei-s, who came with this Profelfnn, were received as Bre- thren, and they lookt upon as Hereticks who advanced any Dodrine contrary to the Abridgment of the Chriftian Eaith.
The Bifhops when they preached, took the Hoi f Scri- pture for the Subjed of their Sermon; they explained the Myfteries thereof. The Priefts -and Deacons did as much afterwards, by order of the Bifliops, in the feveral places where they were fetle'd ^ the one as well as the other, being called to their Offices by the confenc of the People, without which their Miniftry was not acknowledged, or owned.
They admitted the Catechumenl, after an exad infirrudion, and baptized them on Eaji^er-day and whitfundAy^ and pre- pared them for the receiving of chat Sacrament, by long continued Fafts, which were prefcribed them, and which the Church obferved with them, to witnefs to them the concern they took in their Converfion.
The Catechumem did not affirt at the Celebration of the Eucharift, but were admitted to it, after that they had received Baptifm, and before tivir, were to make confelTion of their fins, in token A their Contrition.
It was not till fome time after the Apoftles,- yea even till after rhe Second Century, that anointings were added to\ the Ceremony of Baptifm , as well before as after the receiving of it; which was the charge of the Bidiops, ^vho gjive the Clirifm to the new Baptized, together \vich
the
8
Remarks upon the
the Impofition of hands. The new- baptized were clothed in white, eight days after their Baptifm before which fhey gave them Salt to tafle, and Milk and Hony to drink. Thus by little and little did they ftufFout this Holy Cere- mony, as if it were come too plain and homely out of the hands of our Saviour and his Apoftles.
They received the Lord s Supper , immediately after Baptifm, and the People offered Bread and Wine on the Table whereof they communicated. All that were pre- fenc, were obliged to communicate. The Deacons pro- claimed the Surfum Corda, which was a fufficient hint that they were to feek Chrift with their hearts in Heaven, and that they lookt upon that Ceremony as a Commemoration. . Both Men and Women received the Sacrament in their hands, without any adoration exhibited toir^ and they com- municated all under both kinds.
We don't find that they prayed ^ to any , but God through Jefus Chrift i They prayed to him for the Penitents, for Believers, for all the nece/fities of the Church and the World, for the Converfion of the Heathens, Jews and Hereticks, for the Emperours and for the Governments They bleflfed God for the Triumphant Death of the Mar- tyrs ; and in procefs of time they prayed for the Dead, that God would be pleafed to make them Partakers, of the firft Refurredion, w'hich was not till after the Dodrine of die Temporal Reign of One thoufand Years was in- troduced
They carried the Eucharift to the Sick, and thofe that ^vere abfenr, and they called it the Viaticfim-^ a name which would better have fuited with Extreme Un(5tion, had that been the laft Sacrament of the Church.
The Bifliops were every one of them Heads of their Churches, but they adled nothing without the confent of the Clergy of their Cliurch, and the People- The Priefts adminiftred the lefter Churches, but fo as that their behaviour , as well as their ordination , depended on ttie BiOiop and his Clergy , who exercifed Difcipline upon tlie Delinquents. They were the Bilhops Counfel,
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
9
they preached, they baptized, they celebrated the Eucha- rift, they governed the Parilhes, as well thofe that were in the City, as in the Country j They had Deacons, who expounded alio the Gofpel, who diftributed the Eucharift, who carried it to thofe that were abfenc, who baptized, and who fometimes, in lefs confiderable places, had the overfight of Churches. They were ordinarily thofe that vifited the Sick and Prifoners, and that took care of the temporal concerns of the Church.
In procefs of time the number of Church- Officers was multiplied, there were Sub-deacons, Acolythi, Rea- ders, Exorcifts, Chorifters, Porters and Men that buried the Dead-, all thefe were reduced under the title of Church-Officers ; whereas before, the Bifhops and Priefts performed the duty of Exorcifts, which confifted only in praying orer the heads of thofe that were believed to be pof- fefled of the Devil, or , which were overtaken with mala- dies that were looked upon as Poflfeffions. The Diaco- nefles who were of Apoftolical Inftitution , and received the impofition of hands, and who together with the Vir- gins and Widows, made, as it were, a part of the Clergy, were employed to inftrud the Women in their HoufeS; to vifit the Prifoners, and to prepare and difpofe thofe of their own Sex for the reception of Baptifm.
They made a very exadt Scrutiny into the manners and knowledge of thofe, that were admitted into the num- ber of the Clergy but it was not required of them in fome places, to forbear the company of their Wives, in order to their admiffion, until the beginning of the Fourth Century j neither was it approved' of by the Coun- cil of Nice, in the Year Three hundred twenty five, which left them at Liberty in that refped. In procefs of time they rarely admitted any to Orders that were married, except ihey made a Vow to abftain from their Wives. Pope SiH- dus was one of the firft that endeavoured to introduce the ufage of Ecclefiaftical Celibacy, and to make it pafs into a Law for his Diocefs.
C The
lO
Remarks upon the
The Church had at thefirft, divided fins into two forts: there were fins, which whofoever was found guilty of, were excommunicated for ever •■, thefe were Idolatry, iMurther and Adultery the others did not exclude the Perfons guilty for ever, from being reconciled to the Church, but only ]aid a neceffity upon them of doing publick Penance, at the Church-Gate-, which at R:i\ was done with Jefs feverity, during the two fir ft Centuries-, but afterwards was made fubjed to more ftrid and fevere Rules, and continued for fome years together, the Church requiring thefe precauti- ons, the better to bealTuredof the Sincerity of their Con- vcrfion. The intercefTion of Martyrs and ConfelTors, or the apparent danger of Death wherein the Penitents were fallen, obliged the Churcii to remit fomewh^t of the feverity of thefe Rules, which was called Indulgence.
The refpedt they had for Confeilbrs and for Martyrs, gave them a great Authority, though n-^ny times they were only Women or Laicks : oftentimes by their Sollicitations Peace was granted to Penitents, efpecially if tliey were any way related to them. The Memory of their Death was celebrated with thankfgivings to God for their Triumph, Avhich commemoration was renewed every Year. Their Bodies were buried very carefully and the Church-yards being often the moft fecure places for the aflemblies of Chrr- ftians, they celebrated the Eucharift in the fame places, and upon their Tombs. They boafted of their Communion 5 and, from an Heathenifli conceit, which crept in during the Fourth Century , they confidered them as prefent, and joining their Prayers with the Church, for the Salvation of tliofe, who reforted to their Graves. The Veneration they had for their Reliques, was carried fo far, after the midft of the Fourth Century, that in divers places they lighted Lamps, and Wax Candles on their Tombs, and brought thither Bread and Wine, to eat and drink at their Graves, and celebrate a kind of Feafc in honour of them, ce-!ff. ub. 6. St. Afffii» In his Confelfions obferves that his Mother, -•2. willing to obferve this >^/nV^/-' Cuflom at , . was reproved tlierefore by St. Aixhrofe, as being a Hearheniili,
Cuftom,
Anc'mn Church of Piedmont. 1 1
Cuftom, and that {he acqulefced in the Bidiops detei- minacion. ^
In the Fourtli Century Jmages began to be introduced into fome Churches, vU. The Pictures of Martyrs .- but they knew nothing yet of painting the Deity, or of giving the Images any Religious worfliip.
They made the Sign of the Crofs on all occafions, as if it had been an Abridgment of the Profeffion of Chriftianity, amongft the Heathens, or a powerful Weapon againit the Devils.
They did not bury any at firft, but in the Church-yards, afterwards they began to bury in places adjoyning to the Church, and at la(t in the Churciies rhemfelves. And it was in thofe Church yards, ever fince the Third Century, that they celebrated the Sacrament of the Eucharift, to render thanks to God for tl\e deliverance of thofe, whofe deceafe had been commendabl" and praife worthy.
In the Fourth Century they confecraced Churches but to God alone, j'td dif^inguilb.ed them from thofe places, where the Bodies of Martyi'^ vere buried.
They read only in the Chur.hes the Canonical Scriptures, with the refpedt due unto 'he Word of God to which they aftervvards joyned fome Hynms compofed by fome Men of great renown, and the iiiffeiings of Martyis, whofe exam- ples were of ufe to confirm the Faith of the Church.
The People fang in rheir AQ'emblies the Pfalms of David, and this was the moft ordinary exercife of Believers when they met together, before day, and at other hours fee apart for publick Ads of Piety.
They almoft continually concluded the Sacrament of the Lord's-Supper, with Feafts of Charity, to comfort the Poor, and to entertain Brodierly Unity • amongii Be- lievers. At the breaking up of theie Feafts, they gave Alms, which were employed for the mai^itenance of the Poor, and the Clergy, who had no other incomes, until that Conflantinc had embraced the Chriftiaii Religion.
The/
(Remarks upon the
They celebrated Fafts that were very different as to their duration foine ending after Three of the Clock in the Afternoon, feme lafting the whole day,biit all of tliem con- firted in a total abftinence from meat and drink. Some of ihefe Fafts ^^•ere kepr every week, on Wedaefday and Friday 5 rb.e Church of Rome fafted al fo on Saturday. Thefe days of farting iiaving not been inflituted by the Authority of the Apqftles, according to the general confent of Antient Chrifti:.ns , and every one ufing them with great Li- berty.
The Body of the Chriftian Churches continued united togethei:by theBond of one and the fame Faith, and by the mutual cares every Bifliop took to keep up the fame Zeal for the Purity of Manners, as for that of Faith* If there happened any difference, the Bilhops and the Prieft of tlie fame Province affembled, and determined the matter, without any Appeal : and it was not till the midft of the Fourth Century, when die DiocelTes were better formed, that the Council of SardUa granted to Pope JhHw, Bifbop of Rome, the priviledge of examining afrefh allcaufes that had been determined in the Provincial Synods *, which however never took full effe<5l, all rht Greeks, and a great part of the Latim having rejected that Canon. The Bilhops of Reme endeavoured to attribute and prefer ve to themfcives this Authority, though they could never bring it about, but by means of the favour of the Emperours Theodofm, at the end of the Fourth Age, and of Vale»timatt the Third, in the midft of the Fifth Age.
This was the general ftate of the Cburdi, whilfl under the Heathen Periecutions, and after having endured the Furies of Arianifm, which almoft wholly laid herwafle, during the Fourth Century. On which occafion I defire the Reader to obferve,
Firjf, That the moft pare of the humane conilitutions T liave mentioned, were not obferved widi that Rigour, with which Rome impofeththem atprefent.
Seccmlj, That fome part of thofe. Church-Orders have been changed 2nd abolilhed in proccfs of time.
Thirdij,
Jnaent Church of Piedmont. 1 1
Thirti/j, That a confiderable part of thefe Cuftoms, un- known to Scripture, liad their rife from a delign the Chri- ftians had, of accommodating tliemfelves to the notions of the fcTvs and te^thens.
Fcurth/jy That the Opinions amongft the Antient Qiri- ftians upon many Quedions of Divinity being very dif- ferent, they made ufe of great forbearance one with an- other, as long as they did but agree in matters of Faith.
Fifth/;, That although they received not Men, excom- municated for fcandalous manners in another Diocefs notwithftanding the Excommunications of one Diocefs, did not hinder, but that thofe who could prove the in- juftice thereof, might communicate with thofe, whom the Bifliops of another Diocefs had Excommunicated.
Sixthly^ That every Diocefs was lookt upon, as being independent of all other Authority ; fo that what refpecS foever they might have for the Apoftolical Churches, yet did not they think themfelves obliged to follow them, in cafe they were perfwaded, that they had violated the Purity of the Faiti
And now having made thefe general Obfervations, which are to be applied to the ftate of the Diocefs of Italy in particular, we lhall proceed to what farther in- formation we can get from thofe Authors who have wrote and lived in this Diocefs.
CHAP.
^marks upon the
CHAP. III.
Opinions of Authors of theViocefs of Italy, in the Fourth Qenturyy conctrmn^ nutters of Faith and Worfnp. .
FOrafmucii as the Doflors of the Roman Church generally acknowledge that the Church of this DIocefs conti- nued pure until the Fourth Century, and that it enjoyed the Communion of the Pope of Rome\ it will not be needful particularly to examine, what was the Faith of that Diocefs, about the Articles which the Church of Rome rejeds or receives in common with -Proteftants. Our bufinefs, to fpeak properly, being only to enquire concern- ing thofe Articles and ways of worrt^p, which the Church of Rome confiders, as making a part of their Religion, and which the Proteftants reject, as being more proper to corrupt, than perfed it. If it be then certain and evident s that the Believers of tliat Diocefs, were either altogether
ignorant of, -or formally rejected ihofe Articles of Faith and tiiat worfliip, which the Church of Rome prefcribes to its People, and which (lie impofeth on the reft of the World under pain of Damnation it will moft evidently appear by this, that thefe Believers were not of theRo- milli Religion, but that in refped of their Faith and Worfliip, they were true Proteftants.
And of this it is eafie to convince an unprejudiced Reader, by examining Century after Century the writings of the Ecclefiaftical Authors of tliat Diccefe. I begin with St. Anibrofe^ who died Anno 397. after having poffefs'd the See of Milan T\\enty three Years. This great Man (whole Elogy is (ec down by Cajpodore in three words
when hecaiis him r7rr»r;/r/J £pif(opttm, /Ircem FUei, Oratcrem
■C^tklicuwj the Billlop of Virtues, the Caftie of Faith,
Jficie)it Church of Piedmont.
the Catholick Orator) can inform us, whether or no bis Diocefs embraced" thofe Maxims which the Proteftnnts in conformity wirli the T^.-'Jcxfcsj do condemn in the Church
If we deC\re to know what he believed coacerning the Fulnefs and Sufficiency of the Scripture, he maintains, That there we are to learn that which makes the Object of our Faith becaufe therein the Faclier, rhs Son, the Prophets and the Apoftles, fatisfieand aiifvvcr the Qucitions of De--
lievers. Lit?, l. de fide^adGratiaiO^c. ^.
Would you know, according to what Standard h.e be-' liev'd the Verhons of the Scripture ouglit to be exami- ned ? He will anfwer you , That it mud be by the Ori- ginal. Llb.z. de Splr. S.QcLp.6. & dei>jcarnat, .C2i\\S.
If the Scripture, fecms any where obfcure, What is to be done in this Cafe, according to his Judgment ? We are to compare the fiveral paflages, Et-aperietur,(3iith he, »o« alio, fed a Dei verbo and it (liall be opened to thee, noc from another, but {jmx\ tlie Word of God, in PI Mm 1 1 8. Sfrm. 8,
' See here one of his Maxims, concerning what is main- tained" at this day, about the Succeffion of the Biiliop of 'Rome, to the^vights of St. Peter : thofe who have not the Faith of F^rfrjneither can they pretend to the Inheritance of Peter, lib. i. de Poemt. "r. 6. And indeed, How could he -have fpoke otherwife, after the Apoftafie ofZ/^m^^ tothe Herefie of the y^r<^?«/ ? Neither do we find him acknow- ledging any other Rock of the Church, belides jefusChrift, or other Foundation of the Church, but the true Faith for fo he exprelleth himfelf in Luc. i. c. c^. & lib. Ef4. 32.,
He confiders the Juftification of a Sinner, as confining in the Remidion of Sins, De Jacoh. & vita beat a, lib. I. c. 5, (5, and in other places. *
He leaves no room for the Merit of Works, and main- rains, That all our Glory confifts in the Remlffion of our Offences. De Bono Mortis, c.z. .
i6
^marks upon the
He maintains, That the alone Sufferings of JefusChrift are the means of our Juftificaiion, without any concurrence of o\ir own good Works : Ecce Aj^ms Dei qui toHit peccata Mmdi, & idee nemo glorietur in operihus, qttitt nemo faSlis fuis jufiifcabitur' Behold the Lamb of Gtd, vhich takes av^ay the Sins tf the JVorld, and there/ere let no man glory in his hVork^s , becanfe no man (hall be jufti^ed bj his orvn doings^ Epift. 71. Lib. 9.
Would you know whether St. Ambrofe did believe the Seven Sacraments, as docs the Church of Rome 5 you need only call to mind, that St. Attgnfiin, who had been his Difciple , own'd only two, f j*. Baptifm^ and tlie Snffer of the Lord.
He took care to diftinguifh that which is vifibly done, from that which is invifibly celebrated 5 fo far was he from tying Grace to tlie Sacraments themfelves, as the Church of Rome does. Epifi. de fpiritn SanElo^ lib. 3.
cap. II.
Let any one judge, whether he did believe the Real Prefence of J e s u s Christ in tHPEucharift, when he wrote thefe words, in Luc. lib. 10. r. 24. Seek, thofe things which are on high^ where fefus Chrift is feated at the right -hand of
God. And, left we fliould believe. That it is rather the Duty of the Eyes, than of the Soul he here fpeaks of ;
He adds. Savour the things that are on high, and not thofe that
are $n the Earth. So then, it is not On the Earth , nor in the Earth, nor according to the Flelh, that yve muft feek him, if we would find him. Laftly, Stephen did not look for Chrift upon Earth Stephen touched him, becaufe he fought him in Heaven. Jefus Chrift is prcfent, ac- cording to the manner of our feeking liim.
'Tis well known, that in his time the Church commu- nicated under two kinds ■• Belides, he overthrows the poflibilicy of a Body exifting in more places at once : He maintains. That the Gofpel has only the hnage, and not the 1 ruth ^ and in feveral places he explodes the Car- nal Manducation, which the Church of Rome admits of.
This makes it very evident, that he knew nothing of the Saciiiice of the Mafs: indeed, he formally oppofcs
the
Jncient Church of Piedmont.
the fame, and maintains,//^, i.de Office. Thatfincc his Paffion, he offers up himfelf only by way of reprefentation, as being really and in truth in Heaven, where , as our Advocate, he intercedes for us.
If we read the Death of St. Amhrofe, related by Pauli- r.ns in his Life, we fhall find nothing there, either of Con- feffion, or of Adoration of the Eucharift, when he received ic, or of Extream Undion pradis'd there > no more than at the deatli of a true Proteftant.
Would we know his Thoughts concerning the Reli- gious Worfhip of Creatures, he is the Author of this Ma- xim , That we may not ferve any Creature, a Foundation to prove, that Jefus Chrift is God, becaufc the Scripture teaches us, that we ought to worfliip him. T>e fde ad Gra- tian. lib. i, r. 7. And 'tis with refped to the fame that he proves. That the Holy Ghoft is God, becaufe he has Tem- ples. DeSplr. San^ojik 3. c. 1 3. As to the ufe of Images in Religious Worfhip,.fee how eloquently he exprefles himfelf,
de fhga feculi^c. Hu/y Rachel hid the Images , that is to faj, the Church or Wifdom^ hetAufe the Church docs mt own the vain Reprefentations and Figures of Irr.ages. He tells yOU , that
Helen worfhipt Jefus Chrift , and not the Wood of his Crofs, which flie had found; for that is a Pagan Errour, and a Vanity of Ungodly Men , Cone, de obitn Theodofii. He maintains, T hat it is pure Paganifm to worftiip Stones, and to implore the afTiflance of Images, that have no un- derftanding, lib. i.de ogic. c. i6.
Do we fuppofe he attributed to Minifters the power of pardoning Sins ? We m.ay undeceive cur felves, by hearing him delrver himfelf like a Proteftant, thus: Menaford their
Minijlry for the Remijjion of Sins, bat do net c-xercife the Right if anjf Potrer-, they pray, but God pardons, j. 3. de fpir.fan^o, C. 1 8.
'He a^Ter-ts, That the Miniftry may be in the hands of Hereticks, and this without corrupting the Faith of the People, the Ears of the People being more wife than the Mouth of the Preachers 5 as happened at the time whet\ Arianifm feemed to prcvail. In Pf^l. liS. fcrm. ly.
D ' He
Remarks u^on tl^e
He fees dov\'n for a certain Maxim, That we are bound* to feparace our felves from a Church that rejeds the Faith, and does not poflefi the Foundation of the Preaching of the- Apoftles. L!h, 6. M Lficam, cap.^.
We uiay fee, riiat lie was wholly eftrangcd from that Maxim which tlie^Papifls have maintain'd (hefe lart 600 years, Tliat the Church hath the Power of depoling a Prince who is turn'd Heretick for he maintains , That the Church has rio other Arms but Prayers and Rt moaftran- ces, or at the moft Excommunications. r4.B./'.p.i2. I pafs on to Phllaflrius }:>\^o^ o{ Brcfcia, contemi-Wary with St. Amdrofe, from wilofe Writings we riiay gather ihefe following particulars. He did not believe that the Church of Rome could authorize the Canon of Scripture, as the Gfofs maintains for lie alferts, That the Apoftles and their SucceHbrsdetei min'd the number of ti^eCanonical Books, which only ought to be read in the Qmrch. i -<tr. 4c.
It is plain, he did not believe the Church of Rome to be exempt from Error, if he minded what lie faid-, bc- caufe, H^<-ref. 41, lie reje(5ls as Heretical the Opinion of thofe who held the Epiftle to the Hebrews to have been writ
by Barndoi, by Clemens Romams , or by St. Zwi^^f, which had
given occafion to make the Authority thereof, fu{l)e(5ted and doubtful in the Roman Church, which rejeded the fame. As we may fee by the Teftimony of St. Jerome.
He did not believe, that it belong'd only-to the Giurch of Borne ro condemn Herefies, which power ll^ arrogates to lier ftlf at this day; becaufe he obferves, concerning feveral Hcrefie<;, That the particular Billiops or Counciis of the Diocefs, where the Herefiefirft appeared, had right to condem.n them.
So little did he think , that it was the Right of the Church of Rome only to canonize the Veriions of Scripture by her Authority , that he fixeth the Brand of Herefie upon the Opinion of thofe who did not receive the Ver- lion of the Septu4gi;jt ^ whercas it was the only Verfion the Church adnaitted of in his time, H^ref. 8^,50. One may
Jncicnt Church of PieJmoiK.
'9
fee by this whether he was like to liave rejected tlie fame upon the Popes det erniin.uion.
We catinoc find tliat lie believ'd Tranfubftantiationjfor giving an account of the Herefie of the Artotyrites, who ce- lebrated the Eucharirt with Bread and Cheele, he doth nor, to condemn them, make ufe of the Ilea Ions which a Tranlubrtantiator might Iiav'e alledged , Hoiref. 27. And we ought to make the fame Reflection on the loth. Here- (ie of the Ai{uani, who celebrated t!ie Eucharift v^ith ^A'a- cer only, which at leaft they might defend by way of Con- comitance-, but miglit, on the other hand, be raoreftrongiy attack'd, by the Idolatry which would have been committed by adoring the Water in the Sacrament.
He would never have imployed in defence of the Real Prcfence, the Aifls of St. Andr.rp, which they now adays object to us, to eftablilh the Carnal Prefence of Jefus Chrift, forafmuch as he maintains, H^ef. 40. that thofe Acts had been feigned by the Manichees.
W^e hnd not, when he fpeaksof Jetins, Haref. 25-, that he lookt upon his Opinion againft Prayers for the Dead, to be an Herefie.
It is evident, he did not approve of the Principles ofldol- worlliippers, becaufe he calls their Opinion an Herefe, who thought that man was the Image of God, according to his Body,and not according to his Soul. Hxref. 49.
It appears from Ht^-f/^ J 3. that he did no: admit of the Komiili Divinity, concerning the Punilhments properly fo called, which God, fay they, makes his Children to fuflfer during the courfe of this life.
He lays it down for a Rule, Hxref. 60, 61, That the Chri. /flan Faith is more ancient than the fem/h 5 which can no longer now be maintained, fince the Church of Rome has been pleafed to add fo many Articles to the Creed, and incroducediiTtoits Worlliip fo many Pradices contrary to the Law of God- He declares exprefly^ That the Sacrifice of the Church is a Sacrifice of Bread in My/kerifm chrifii, to be a Myfte- 3 ry of JefusChrift. fi^eref. ^6.
D i He
>
20
^tUArks upon the
He was fo fenfible with the Proteftants, that the Chil- dren of Believers have a Right to the Covenant , that he iiuintains, H^:ref. 69 That formerly the Patriarchs, Judges, and other Believers, were fandtified in their Mothers Belly. A Doctrine which has fo extreamly difgufted the Romipj Cenfors, that they thought fit to guard the Margent with
a Cc.Hte lege.
He aderts, H^tref. 74. That he who call'd upon the Fa- ther, before Chrift^s coming in the Flefh, was thereby freed from the condemnation of the Wicked 5 which does not feem to agree very well with the Popifli Do(Srine of a himhus Patrum or elfe it mufl: be owned, Tiiatthe Lirnbtu muft take place as well under the New Teftament, as under the old : becaufe he makes ufe of the words of Jefus Chrift, or, atleaft,makesaplain allufionto them.
He overthrows the Do6trine of Merit, in maintaining, H^ref. 77. That it is by the fole Mercy of Jefus Chrift we are faved, mn vh-me & jfi/litia condigm, not by any condign Virtue and Righteoufnefs of our own.
It does not appear that he own d a Purgatory, fuch as the Romanifis do, becaufe, Hrfrf/; 73.he faith, That the Soul of Man i whether good or bad, whether godly or ungodly, is conducted by an Angel to its appointed place, there to re- ceive according to what he has done in this Life. It is evi- dent from the Epiftle of St. Gaudemim to BemvoUs , that he . believed a Fire, through which the moft Righteous, even the Apoftles and Bleffed Virgin her felf, were to pafs, at the end of the World : Which Opinion has been fince reje(5led in the wefi.
It appears from H^r^-/: 5)7. That the number of Fafts was very fmall in his time •, he takes notice only of four, that of
Chrifi?va6j Epiphanjy Eajier, and Whitfumde^ befides that of
Lent, the reft were left to the Devotion of Believers And there is great probability that thefe Fafts were only obferved ©n the Eves before the Communion.
True it is, that he fpeaks of a local defcent of the Soul of our Saviour Jefus Chrift into Hell, haref. 22. butinHx- ref.7^. he terms their Opinion an Herefie, who maintain,
Thac
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
2:1;
That afcer his Death he defcended into Hell, and preached, the Gofpel, that the Souls there receiving the fame,mightbe iaved : Which was the Opinion of moft of the Ancients, both before and after him. Whence' we may judge, whether- this Article, about wb.ich fo much pains-has been taken to explain it in a good fence, was a Doctrine which the Apo-^- files had left in the Church or, whether it was not drawn, from fomepaflages of Scripture, ill underftood in the Second Century, as we affert, bccaufe the Fathers did not at all times, in all places, and with all agree therein 5 which is the. Charaifterofa Dodrine truly Catholick, according to the.
famous Maxim of rwcemius Llrinenfts.
And, forafmuch as St. Gaudentlus fucceeded PhiUfir'iHSy whom he calls a moft Apoftolical Man, 'tis no wonder to find him fo dofely following his fteps h for we find him every where of the fame opinion with St. Gafidentius, in the points he treats of-, as I iiave already made it appear from hisEpi- file to Benevolus ; for. Writing to him a confolatory Letter,, upon oceafion of his Sicknefs, he treats the matter altogether like a Proteftant, without mingling any Popifli Notions- therewith, fuch as are, the conlidering of the Afflictions of Believers, as puniihments and fatisfadions God exacts from * them as a Judge •, as may be feen in that Epiftle. It is true^ that amongfl: other things he obferves. That they ferve alfa to leflen the force of the purgative fire of the laft Judgment. But I have (hewed what he meant by that, and the fame is, acknowledged by the Learned of the Roman Church. He ' lays down two things in the fame Epiftle, the one is, That the Bofom of Abraham fignifies Eternal Life, ^^ hicb does no fervice to the Popiili Polemical Writers •■, the other is. That neither Angels nor Mea know the Secrets of Confci- ence, that being the Priviledge of God only •■, which Maxim wholly overthrows the Invocation of Angels, as well as the Authority the Priefts arrogate to themfelves of pardoning Sins, as Judges. But we'll pafs on to his Sermons, and inr ftance in fume other of his Opinions.
He tells us plainly in his fijft Sermon, That we fhallnoc cat the true Mama, which is Jeius Chrift, till after the
21^
^marks upon the
Refurredion in Heaven, where we fliall drink of the Roek, which is Jefus Chrift, cleaving to the feet of that immacu- late Lamb. Is this the Language of a man that believes the Carnal Prefence ?
Ihe whole of his fecond Sermon is fpent in explaining the Doctrine of the Euchaiift, where at the firft he lays down, That the Figure is not tb,e Truth, but an imitation of it. He faith, Jefus Chrift has fnffered death for all men, and that he feeds them in all the Ciiurches But how ? In
r)tyflerio j^anis vim reficit immolatus .vivificat creditus 5 Here" frejheth^ beiytg efered tip in the A^yflery of Bread and Wine 5 and
quickens^ being believed on : So that he is Only offered up in figure, and not truly, and only quickens thofe that believe bis Word. And he explains himfelf, by declaring, That the Do(5trine of Jefus Chrift is the Flelli of that immaculate ■Lamb, the whole body of the Scriptures containing rlie Son of God. He explains that Phrafe To receive the Bo- dy cf tke Son of God , by receiving with the Mouth the Myftery of the Body and Blood of the Lord. He maintains, That it was of the confecrated Bread that Jefus Chrift faid, ^ Thli is my Body 5 which, according to the Dodors of Rome^ overthrows Tranfubftantiation. Laftly, he maintains. That Jefus Chrift made choice of the Bread and Wine, to make them the Sacraments of his Body and Blood, that riiere miglic be no Blood in this new Sacrifice, and to figure the Body of the Church, which iscompofed of many Be- lievers, as the Bread is made up of many Grains. Can any thing be faid more contrary to the Maxims of the 'Church of ^ome >
In iiis third Sermon he afTerts, That the Church refem- bles the Moon, which encreafes in times of Peace, and de- creafeth in times of Perfecution that (lie decreafeth with frefped to her fulnefs, but not with refpedl to her bright- nels. He feems after her fulnefs, to which (lie was arrived, to fbrefee her wain and decreafe, which he had already had a view of, during the Reign ol Arlanifm.
CHAP.
Jncient Church of Pkdmonr.
C H A P. I V.
Qoncernmg the Faith of th Churches of tJ?e Diocefs of Italy, during the Fifth Century*
ONe of the moft illuflrlous Witnefles we have of the Belief of the Qiurches of Italy, at the beginning of th^ Fifth Age, is Presby ter Aquileia.
As for the Rule of Faith, which is the Scripture , Rufi' nus fets down a Catalogue of the Books of Holy Writ, the fame that is at prefent received by the Proteftants, calling the Books that we reject Apocryphal*, a^ud Cypr, p. 552, & SS3' which is an evident mark, that the Church of Italy made a more accurate diftindion of tiie Canonical Books from the Apocryphal, than the Ciiurch of Eome at that time did. So that Rnfihus, in this refped, knew more than Innocent I. who began to confound the Canonical Wri- tings, by a mixture of the Apocryphal.
As for the Creed, which is an Abridgment of the Ar- ticles of oar- belief, we cannot meet with a more Ortho- dox Explication of it, than is that of Rnfinits ; and, would to God the Ciuirch of Rome, would keep to that, for then we ihould be foon agreed, at leafi:, in Co doing flie would not propofe any thing to Chriftians, u hich was not owned for the Creed of the Ancient Church ^ whereas fince She has added new Articles, altogether unknown to Ruf^ffr, and the Bilhops of that Diocefs. In a word , we may fay it is moft certain, that there is as much difference be- tween this Treacife of RHfms and the Catechifm of the Council ofTVf^f, as there is between the Catechifm of the Proteftants and that of tiie Papifts.
I own, That Rafims in this Explication of the Cree J aflercs a local defcent of Jefus Chrift into Hell : But we are to ob- fetve, that though already in his time this was lookt upon asaa Article of F^icli , yet the Fachers> as well thofe that
^4
^marks upon the
went before, as thofe that followed after, had fuch diffe- rent notions concerning it, that the Church of tae-, which at this day follows one of thofe Opinions, but had not that Article in her Symbol , in Rufinus his time can fcarcely draw any advantage from thence, except only againft thofe who hold, that this Article is only an allegorical Explication
of the Article, He was hurled.
v^.. 8. But however , we may obferve, that Rufimis exprefly notes, at the beginning of this his Expofition of the Creed, That Believers received the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ' with an extraordinary refpedt, maxima cum ohfervmia , but not worihipping it, as • the Church of Rome does at this day.
Though W^e have no remains of St. Chromatins Bifhop of '^qui/eia, fave only fome Commentaries and Homilies - yet from thence we are fufficienily informed how far his Divi- nity dilfer'd from that which is now profeffed by the Church of Rome. He plainly aflerts the perfpicuity of the Scriptures, "when he accufes the Hercticks and Jews of darkening it by their perverfe Explicationsi Serm. 2. pag. i6i. Accordingly he alfo maintains, That the Lord's Prayer contains all things iiecefiary to Salvation, p. 175. which is not very agreeable to the Palate of the Doftors of Rome, who furnilli us with a far greatei' number. He afferts. That the Prifon from whence there is no coming out until the laft Farthing be paid, is Hell, ■ which does nor at all fuit with Popifti Purgatory, 1 66. Con- formably tathis, he lays down, That the Afflidions which iiappen to the Faithful, are either to corred their Defers, or to try their Faith, or to prepare them for Glory •■> not a word concerning the life the Roman Ciiurch puts them to, viz:,, for the expiation of Sin,and for a facisfacflion properly fo called.He acknowledges indeed, that the Chrijiian Chunh is typified by aCicy* fituated upon a Mountain^ but we do not find him concluoing from thence its equal vilibility, no more than St. Ambrofe. We arc not to forget here, that St. Chromatins hadfo little deference for the Authority of the Church of ri?ow, that Rtifims having been condemned by Pope Anafta- :fins, becaufe he feemed to favour the Origenifis^ St. Chromatins
Ajicient Church of Piedmont.
took no notice of this Proceeding, but received him to his Communion, as before an abundant Teftimony that the Thunderbolts of Rome, at that time, reached no further than the ten Provinces in fubjedion to the Pope, St. C hromatius's Biflioprick being without them, and confequently, that he did not own the Pope for the t^ead of the Church, out of whofe Communion Salvation was not to be hoped for.
He plainly aflcrts, That Marriage is fo wholly diflblved by Adultery, that it is lawful for the innocent Party to marry again. Which was the Opinion of the Romifli Church till after the Tenth Century, f.i6S. A. B. He maintains it to be a piece of Impiety, to fwear by any Creatures ; which is-not the Faith of Rme at this day, fug. 1 65>. A. He owns no other Union in the Church, but the Unity of the Catholic '< Faith, ihid. /». 1 5 8. We find, by all his Exprefli- ons, that the Carnal Prefence was unknown to him : Firft, He propofeth Jefus Chrifl as the Meat and Drink of the Believer, that comes hungry to it. Cone. i. 157. Second- ly, he holds, That a change is made when tx eo qnod fuit
inaUam ffeciemgeneratur ^ out of that which waS before, 2 thing of another kind is generated. Thirdly, He applies, fag. 174. our daily Bread to the Body of Jefus Cbrift, but he confiders it fpiritually, which makes it appear what no- tion he had of the Manducation or eating of it, and that the expreflion he ufeth of a cor fore Domini fefarari, fignifies nothing elfe but the exclufion from the Sacrament.
Moreover, if we find, that he has been a Guide of the M'aldenfef, towards truth, it will not be amifs withal to ob- ferve, that he feems to have fuggefied to them a wrong un- derflanding of the Scripture. For this great man maintains, That theGofpel abfolutely forbids fwearing, fag. \6Z. and the Letter of Scripture fo far impoied upon him, that he pretends we are obliged, according to the Law of Jefus Chrifl, to offer the other cheek to him that has already ftruck us,^I5<?,&♦7o.
Nice 04 Bilbop of AquHeia, who lived Amo 420. has a very remarkable expreffion in his Book ad Virginem Uf- ptm^ which wc find in the Works of St, Ambrofe, Stick,
E clofe
^marks upon the
clofe to the exercife of RepentaKce, till the end of thy life, and never think ofoht^ining Pardon ab Immano die, becattfe he who has made thee make this Promife, has deceived thee. As thou hafl froperly finned againfi the Lerd^ fo feek. thy Remedy only at his hands.. It is
evident, that thefe words either are the Expreflions of a downright Novatian, which we cannot fufped him of, after the many Teftimonies we have of his foundnefs in the Faith, or that they reprefent a very different notion from what has been entertained at Rome, fince their efpoufing the Secret of Auricular Confeflion, and the prieftly power of pardoning Sins, as Judges properly fo called.
Tlie remaining part of this Century was terribly agitated by the Difputes raifed upon occafion. of Nejloriaaifm and Eutychianifm, infomuch as the Bifliops were all divided, and the Council of Chalcedon was unable to appeafe their Differences. The Diocefs of Italy was at the fame time ra- vaged by the i^^ms. AttiU rafed A^uileia^ deflroyed Milan, Pavia, and divers other places. Some years after, od'jacer invaded the faid Diocefs j and not long after, the Goths mar- ched through it under the Command o( Theodoric{, fo that fcarcely was there any place left for learned men to write, during the inundation of thefe barbarous Nations. - Procted. we therefore to die following Century..
CHAP.
Ancient Qnirch of Piedmont.
27
CHAP. V. •
Olmtom of the Churches of Italy, chnn^^ the ' Sixth Century.
ON E of the fii-ft that can give us any Information herein, is Lauremius^ who was tranflated from the Billioprick of NovAra to that of MiUn^ about the year jo/. We have three of his Pieces, which he preached upon his return to his See, after the deftru^^lion of MlUn^ and his own Banilhment.
The firft is a Sermon upon the Cam^mp? Woman, his delign therein being to adminifter comfort to repenting Sinners, and to affure them of the eafinefs of God s Mercy. Mtblllon, who publillied them, tells us as much. I Hiall fee down fome of his Propofitions or Dotftrines which he bor- rowed from St. Chrjfoftom. •
I. He requires nothing as neceffary for the Remiflion of Sin, five only a lively corapundtion, without fo much as one word of the Priefts Abfolution, fn^. 24. [ Sed Mas, feci pec-
cata TMu/ta Qr magna. Et q^nis efl de homlmb^u qui non peccet ? ^
Th die •, erravi fuper omnes homines, fufficit mihi in Sdcrificio ifi*
confelfi$. Die tn prins iniquhates tuoi, ut jnfiificeris : csgnofce
qmmam peceatores 5 habe trifiitiam cum c$nverteris \ efto Jl
defperatus & moejlus, fe d <^ lachryrnxs compunSlus ejfnyide Nimquid
ialiud aliqaidfuit in Meretrice, qUitm Uchrymarum effHjio} C?" ^.v
hac profufione invenit prijidium, O' accept a (idnci.-i acceffJt adfo>i-
tern Don;inumJefnm.'] ' But thou wilt fay, I have Committed ' many and great Sins ; , And who is there amongfl men 'that linneth not ? Siy thou, 1 have linned beyond^all 'men, this confelllon is fufficient to me, for a Sacrifice. ' Do tliou firfl: declare thy Iniquities, that thou maift be ' iuftified acknowledge thy feif to be a Sinner : be full of ' forrow in this thy Converfion ^ yea, be grieved, and as * without hope: moreover, pour forth Tens of compundt-
E 3. ' on;
i8
^marks upon the
' on. Do you find ought elfe in her that had been a com- ' mon Harlot, but (hedoing of Tears, and by this her weeping
* flie found helpi and having received confidence, flie drew ' near to tlie Fountain, our Lord Jefus.
He anfwers the unvvorthinefs of Sinners in thcfe words,
P^S- ^S' C qmmodo Aufa efi mulier Legis ignant^ tarn im- qna , Jic abrufte accedere ad fotttem falutis ? Non fetiit fa- cobuntf non rogavit fohannem , non acceffn ad Fetrnm \ fed hoc intermittens, quid dicit } Non efi mi hi necejfariw fide- jujfor : Sufcifit in fe fcenitentia fAtrocinium, & fola curritj tenet enm in voce ac dicit ^ miferere mei Domine fili Da- vid. . Ideo defcendifti , ideo carnem f»fcej>ifii, nt & ego lequar
ad te & cum fiducia fetam, &c7\ " But how durft a Woman
* ignorant of the Law, andbefides fo wicked, fo abruptly
* draw near to the fountain of Salvation ? flie did not in-
* treat James, nor ask fohn, neither came (he to Peter [ to ' fpeak for her.] But leaving all this, what faith flic ? I
* have no need of a Sponfor. And taking upon her felf
* die patronage of her own Repentance, fhe runs to him
* alone, flops him with, her Voice, and faith, Lord have 'mercy upon me, thou Son of David, Therefore it is that ' thou cameft down [to us,] therefore thou tookeft Fldh
* upon thee, that even I alfo might fpeak to thee , and ' with confidence ask of tlice, &c. See here a very exadt imitation of St. Chryfoflme, after NeBarhs had taken away the ufe of Poenitentiary Priefts.
It is worth our taking notice how he fpeaks. of Prayers
without attention, f^^. 3 J. \_Smt multiqmdem qui intrant in Ecclejiam, & firepmt in tratione, confuse atque intemperata voce differgunt verba fua, & 'S^^ff^ fofas ohliti fmt omnia. Hi fmt qui lahiis hinnimt, & corde non concifimt. Si ttt iffe diHa tua & freces ignoras 5 quomodo te exaudit Deftsf] * There be many ' indeed that come into the Church, and make a noife in
* Prayer, fcattering their words widi a confufed and rude
* bawling, who as foon as they are got abroad, quite forget
* all. Thefe are they who neigh with their Mouths . without
* conceiving in their Hearts. If thou thy felf doft not know ! what thou fayeft or prayeft^ow fhall God hear thee ? From
whence
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
^9
w hence we may eafily judge, how he would have approved of praying in an unknown Tongue, which neceffarily de- ftroys Attention.
As concerning, the place where we ought to pray, that wc may be heard, he exprefleth himfelf in this manner, as if he had defigned to furnifh the ivaldenfes with an anfwer, pag 35. [Grandis ferms efl mifereremei Dem y brevis qmdemfek virtttte fltnus. Nam & fi forts fucf is ^ dama & dtc, tftiferere mei Dens. C/ama, yion voce, fed mente 5 mm tacentes exandit Dens. Nec tarn IccHs qusntUKj quantum f erf us. Hieremias in Car cere confortatur 5 Daniel inter Leones exnltat 5 tres fueri in for » nace tripudiant^ Job nudus fuh Divo triumphatj Paradifum de Cruce Latro invenit. Quid ergo fifueris in publico foro > Or a intra te. Noli quarere locum, locus ipfe f /, ibi ubifueris tra. Si fueris 'fM Balnea, era, & ibi templum efi.'] 'This is a great WOrd,
* Lord have mercy upon me ^ (hort indeed, bijt full of virtue. 'For though thou art abroad, yet cry and fay, Lord have
* mercy upon me. Cry, not with thy voice, but with thy
* mind, for God hears even thofe that are filent j neither ' does he regard the place where, but our mind and atten-
* tion in Prayer. Jeremiah receives comfort in the Dun-
* geon ; Daniel rejoiceth in the Lyons Den j the three
* Young- men leap in the midft of the fiery Furnace 5 Job
* naked and de/litute, triumphs in the open Air s the Thief
* finds a Paradife upon the Crofs. What therefore though
* thou art in the publick Market ? pray within thy felf 5
* don't feek for another place,thou thy felf art a places wherefc-
* ever therefore thou art, there pray. If thou be in the
* Bath, pray there, for there alfo is the Ciiurch. And, p. 37.
{Nun quid homo eft Dens^ut laker e quaratur per loca diver fa ? Deus eft qui adeft ubiquc} Si quaris hominem, dicitur tibi noM eft hie, aut non illic vac at : non eft fic in caufa Dei; hoc taut um eft ut di- cof, miferere mei 'Deus, & ipfe prope eft ut te liber et, & adhuc ' loquente te dicity ecce adfum."] ' What ! is God a Man then
* that thou muft take pains to feek him in feveral pla-
* ces ? 'Tis God who is prefcnt every where. If indeed *thouchanceft to look for a man, thou art anfwered, He
* is not here, or he is not at leifure : but the Cafe is noc
^marks uf^on the
' lb w ich God. Do thou only fay, Lord have mercy upon ' me, -and he is near thee to deliver thee, and whilfl thou arc '>et rpeaking, faith to thee, Behold here am f.
The fecond Homily publillied in BMothecaTatrum, T 3. utterly overthrows the pretended Tribunal of Penance,
fAg. [_ Mox ut afcendifii de fonte, veflitus es vefig alha^ & unElus es unguent 0 A^yflko faSia efl fu^er te invocatio , (jr venh fufer te tKiv-A lirtus , eiuum vas mvum hac mv<t ferfudit do^rlna, exinde teipfam tihi ftatnit judicem & arbltrnrri. ~\
' As foon as thou art come. up fl-om the Fountain, tliou arc ' clothed with white Raiment, and anointed with the Myfti- ' cal Ointment ■■, Prayers have been made over tiiee, and ' the threefold Virtue is come upon thee •, after that thy new ' veffel is once fill'd wit!i this new Dodrine, thenceforward ' he has conftituted thee a judge and difpofer for thy ' 'felf.
In th.e third* Homily, which treats of Alms, he makes
ufe of this ExprefTlOn, Q /« fordMe Chriflus femel tinEins^ fanHificAvh aquas^ in pauperihw antem femper ntaaet^ & af- fidue ahhiit crimina largiemum.'] ' Chrift being once dipt in
' ih^Kivt: Jordan, thereby fandified the Waters-, but he ' always abides in the Poor, and continually wartieth away ' the fins of thofe that give to them. This notion of the Prefence of Jefus Chrifl: in the Poor, fufficiently makes out the fenfe of the Fathers, when they fpeak of the Prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift-, efpecially if wejoyn with it, that exprelTion of his fecond Homily, f. 117. B. [_^fpergesme
a'.^uk filii tui facro [anguine mixt'a.'\ ' Thou wilt fprinklc
' me with the Water mingled with the Holy Blood of 'thy Son.
The Opinions of Ennodim, Billiop of Pat^ia, . are evident in feveral of his Works, wc lhall inftance the following places.
We £nd in the Life of Sr. Epiphaninf Billiop of Pjivia, W! it by Envodivs^ 2l reprefentation of the manner how that Billiop did celebrate the Eucharift, wliich makes it apparenc how far he was from adoring the Eucharift as. his God. fuK^is pedihm ufque ad CvnfHmmationem n>)jtici operis flare
Ancnt Clrmh of Piedmont.
fe dehere cottftititit^ ha ttt humsre vefligiorum locum [nptm de- fingeret^ & hrgc affkitntihHS indicAret. * He had purpofed
*wich himfeif, (iith he, always to ftand flil], wich his Feet
* together, till he had finiflied that Myftical Work, fo that
* the moifture of his footfteps, deciphred the place of his ' ftanding, and might be feen by thofe who were at a con- ' fiderable diftance. It is but too vifible here, that St. Bp^hA- tj'ius and Ennodiui knew nothing of thofe proftrations,which now areufed before the Sacrament ^becaufe the one of them prefcribed this conftant form to himfeif, in celebrating the Eucharift ; and the other commends him for it, as a Mark of his Piety.
At the end of the faid Life , Enmdita gives us an ac- count of the Death of Sc. Epiphamw, much like that of a Proteftant Bifhop. He had only this word in his
Mouth, Mi hi vivere Chriftyts efi^ & mori lucrum^ To me tO
live is Chrift, and to die is gain. He was heard to re- peat nothing but Pfalms of Confolation, fuch as the- 88. Pfalm ^ and he breached his lafl in thefe words, /« ma- nui tfias Domine commendo Spiritttm meumy Into tiiy hands,. O Lord, I commend my Spirit taken out of Pfalm 30. He tells us in plain terms, That his Soul returned to Hea- ven, Ad fedem fnant caelefiis Anima remeavit ; his heavenly SouI - returned to its own place. All which ferves to make out that Prayer for the Dead, had not as yet the be- lief of Purgatory for its foundation, as it hath at this day.
And it was in- the fame mind that he compos'd the- Epitaph of St. Vi^cr, Billiop of Noarre, where we read > thefe Verfes
Hie reddens tumuUs cimres, ad celfa vocatus SpiriiHS, atherea congandet lucidns arce
Having bequeath'd hisDuft toDuft, His Soul is call'd on high; Tliere bright and glorious, to partake Thole Joys which never die.
AQd-:'
3^
^marks uj)on the
And forafmuch as we fee chat he in divers places com-- mends Sc. Jmbrofe and his SuccefTors for Orthodox Bi- fhops, I (hall not trouble my felf to quote any more of his Writings s and the rather becaufe the moft part of his ! Works were Letters or Poems relating rather to outward affairs, than any matters of Religion.
I know they are wont to cite a Paffage of Enmd'ms, 10 prove that the Pope cannot be judged by any one but God. We find nothing more frequent fince the time of Gratinn and the Canonifts, than to quote thefe words of his Apology for Symmachas ; Altorum homimm caufas ^DcHs voluit per homines term'wari^ fed. Roman<t fedis prtfuUm^ ffto, fine qnafiione, refervavit arhitrio. ' Other Mens cafes
*God was willing (hould be determined by Men, buc * as for the Biihop of Ktme , he has referyed his cafe *for his own Cognizance, without expofiog it to a Judi- *cial Tryal. But they fignifie nothing lefs, than what they feem to exprefs thus feparate from the reft of the Difcourfe. VJ\\z.iEnnodms by thefe terms would declare, is : (imply this, That Pope SymmachHs his Adverfaries, not having been able to convince him of the horrible Crime? "whereof they had accufed him before King Theodonc^znd afterwards before the Synod aflembled by Theadoric, for examining his Accufation, his cafe had been remitted to the Judgment of God as was cuftomary, when perfons could not be convided by the ordinary courfe of Judicia- ry proceedings. De Lamcry hath fo folidly proved that this was EmodiHs his meaning, though of a long time it hath been difguifed, that there is no need to infift further upon it. T.i.Epifi.9.
Dacins, BiQiop of Mila»y has left fo little in writing, that it may feem needlefs to fpeak of it j only it may be to the purpDfe to obferve the Carriage of fafiiman towards him, who finding him at ConflantinopU, would make him (as well as the Pope's Referendary; fubfcribc the Edid which he had publifhed : which (hews that he lookc upon himfelf, as the Head of a Diocefs. which was asexemipc and feparate from the Pope of Emes Jurifdi(^ion, as the
Dioccfes
/indent Qhurch of Piedmont.
Diocefes of the Patriarchs of the Eaft ^vere. BAromus ad
Annum ^^6, ^. 46.
In the Year $90. the Bifliops of Italy and of the Orifons^ to die number of Nine, rejeded the Communion of the Pope, as of an Heretick, who had conlenred to the abolifliing of the Council of Chalctdon, confenting undei^ Jufiiman to the Condemnation of the Three Chapters, as may be feen from their Letter to the Emperor Mau- ritius ^ fee down by Baromus^ ad h. Annum ». 29., That Emperour having ordered them to be prefent at the Coun- cil of Bmt^ they were difpenfed with by the fame Em- perour, upon their protefting that they could not com- municate with Pope Gregffry the Firft. This Schifm had already continued from the Year 5^3. and lafted near as long after 5 fo little were they perfvraded at that time of the Popes infallibility, that to loie Communion with them, was to lofe the Communion of the Church, or that they held their Ordinations from the hand of the Popes, and from the Bifhops fubjedtcd to their Jurifdidiion. Let us proceed now to the Belief of the following Century.
CHAP. VL
Opinms of the Diocefs of Italy, dw'mg the' Seventh Century,
I Know only of two or three Authors that can inftru^l us in this matter, the one is Biihopof Ravenna^
who flourifhed in the midft of the VII. Century the other Manfuetusy Bifllop of Milan^ ^^ho flouriflied towards the end of it, vU. from the Year 677. Of the firit of thefe we have an Epiftle againf^ the Momhelites, which has been infected in the Council of Lateran, under ^^^rr/w the Firft,
P in
^e?mirks ufon the
in tlie Year 649. AH:. 1. Of the fccond we have an Epiftic to the Emperour Confluntlne^ f-t down in the fame Council. The Union of them both, with tl^ Billiops of Rome, for the defence of the Faith againft the MonothelUes, is a ftrong alTurance of theit purity in the Faith. Their Opinions are thefe that follow.
Maui-Hs who ftiles himfelf Servns fervorttm Dely precifely q^ferves, that the Pope had invited him to be prefentac Rome at the Council, but as a Bilhop without his Diocefsj for otherwife he might, as being one of his Suffragans, by his Authority have fummoned hinj thither. And in- deed inftead of going to R«rf3e in Perfon, he fent in his place A^aurusy Bilhop of Cefeua, with one of the Priefts of uMiUn. ihid. pag, 6oi. He declares that the only means of pi eferving the Purity of the Faitli, is, to keep to the Dcdrine of the Apoftles, which the Fathers had fol- lowed, with refpeit had to the fifth General Council. The words he ufeth are thefe, T. 6. ( one. fag. 96. [V»{-
cum ommbus & ftngulare efi Rcdemftorts Dei, ^ Domini noflri "fefu Chrijii concejfufn Remedium ad animArum noftrarum faint eWy fit ea quit fer Apojlolorum fratdicatiortem perceptmusj_ & Patrum doBrinam , proculdubio teneamus. ~\ 'The only
'and particular Remedy granted to all for the Salva- ' tion of our Souls, by God our Redeemer, and the Lord ' Jefus Chrift, is that, without all doubt, we hold faftthe ' things we have received by the preaching of the Apoftles, ' and the Dodrine of the Fathers. He declares that he owns and admits the five General Councils, and that he con- demns that which was held at Ceyjftantlnople in favour of the Momthelites, being fupportedby the Credit of the Emperors.
Aiaxirr.HSj Bilhop of AqyAlei^i, exprefteth the fan^e Opi- nions 5 and moreover exprelly condemns by name the Ma-
mthelite Bifliops, Cjm/, Sergim, Pynhu and p. 97.
Mmft^ctus, in his Epiftle to the Emperor ( onftMtir.e Pa- g@mtus, declares, Firft, That it was Confiamm the Great, who conven'd the Council, of Nice, which at this day is very ftifly contefted by the Church of Rome-^ that the Emperor Tkodofms Q\\k6. together the* fecond Council of
Con fi amino j^lc.
Anc'mt Church of Piedmont.
35
Coyiflantimfle^ and that the Emperor Martianus did the flime with regard to the Council o^Chalcedon, zndff^fttnian to the fifth general Council.
He declares, That the whole Faith of his Church is con- tained in the Apoftles Creeds whereof the ConfefiTion of Faith by him Cent to the Emperor, is only an Explication. Which makes it evident that the Church of Milan, and his Diocefs, under the Reigns of Pertharit and Cmibert, Kings of tlie Lombards , did not own any other Dodrine to belong to the Faith and of neceffary Belief, lave only what was contained in the Apoftles Creed much lefs did his Church own that heap of Dodrines which Pius the Fourth thought good of his own head to fuperadd to it.
True it is that he praifcth the antient Dodlors of the
Church, Leo I. St. Gregory Nfi.3jiati3jen, St. Bafil, Scc ^ic- <^uid hi docuermt, faith Uq, fapuerjint, fr-tdicuvermt^ vel def en- fores extiterunt, mos eortm aBa vel flatuta ornni devotiofje
fufcipimus. ' Whatfoever they have taught, judged, preach- * ed or defended, all that we receive with all devotion. Yet however this is not fo general as it fecms to be, becaufe his words have a particular reference to their Explications concerning the Dodrine of the Trinity, againft the Here- fies of the IV. and V. Century, which was the only mat- ter in queftion then. It is worth our while to take notice of the fingular
Elogy he gives to St. Amhrofe, whom he calls Veneranda Corona Chrifti Confeffor ^mbroftis Mediolanenfis E'.clefic6 Prd-
fd. ' The Venerable Crown of Chrift, Amhofms the Con- feflbr, Bifliop of the Church of MiUfi. What I have here mentioned of Manfuetus is the more confiderable, be- caufe it was done by him prefiding in the Synod of his Diocefs.
Laftly, We may obferve that the Deputies of MAnfuetus^ condemned Homrins, Biftiop of Rome^ ASl. 13. for being a MoKothe/he and the matter at this time is no longer quefti- oned. notwidiftanding Baromns, and fome after him, have endeavoured to make it pafs for doubtful; whence it
F ^ appears
g6 ^marks upm the
_ If
appears that in Itaty they held it for an |nvioIable Maxim : i .
Firfiy Thac the Pope was liable to beconife an He- retick. /
Secondly, That none were to continue in Cfommunion with him, fave only fo far as he continued uhitedto je- fus Chrift, as a true Believer •, fo far were they from fup- pofing themfelves bound to cleave to the Church of Reme, as they would continue in die Communion of our Lord Jefus Chrift.
But though we have but few particular Authors, that might inform us of the Opinions and Worfhip that took place in that Diocefs yet have we fomething that feems more authentick. viz,. The Liturgy which bears the name of St. Amhrnje. And forafmucli as this piece was made ufe of before this Century, and that fince that time it has ferved for a Model of the Devotion of that Diocefs, it will be of fome importance carefully to examine the fame, and the rather becaufe though I fpeak of it only in this place 5 yet. the Obfervations drawn from thence may and ought to be applied to the foregoing Ages, as well as thofe that follow after.
CHAP. VII.
Some ^pefiions upon the Lnur^y of this Diocefsy called the Ambrofian Ltturgy,
ONE of the moft certain ways to be informed, con- cerning the Faith of a Church, is, to confulc her Liturgy. I am not ignorant that what fofephuj Vicecomes tells us, concerning the Antiquity of the Ambrofian Liturgy, ■vi^. Tiiac Sr. Bamdas was the Author of it, that ic was
afterwards
Aicient Church of Piedmont.
afterwards augmented by Merocks-, and laftly, liaving been revifed by St. Amhrofe, it obtained the name of Am- hefiAn, is abfolutely falfe, and fo ridiculous a conceit, that ic is wholly rejeded by Cardinal Bom, Neither am I ignorant that the Miracle related by DnrAndus, Rational. Offic. L, 5-. f.i. as of the Life of St. £«^^w«j, concerning the Ambrv^ ffan Office, is juft fuch another Story which deferves no man- ner'of Credit, notwithftanding that Rifomemius has en- deavoured to maintain ic. But however we cannot deny the truth of what follows.
Firfl, That this Liturgy has the Pfalms, and divers other Texts of Scripture of the ancient Verfion called the
Italick.
Secondly, That waUfrUm Straho, who lived in the midft of the Ninth Century, has cited this Liturgy undejdae name of the Liturgy of St. Amhrofe. Indeed it leems probable, that as feveril Centuries before the Ninth they had in divers Diocefes fixed a form of Divine Service,to be obferved in the refpedtive Churches of the fame Diocefs whereas before, M*. in the Fourth and Fifth Century every Bifliop had the Liberty of prefcribing the form himfelf fothat of Milan^ conform'd to the fame Rule, and the name of St. Amhrofe was made nfe of by Pofterity, as being fo very famous, and be- caufe that St. Ambrefe had probably dictated fcveral of the Colledls therein contained Much in the fame manner, as in the Eaft, they have given the nan^e of the Liturgy of St. Bafil and St. Ckafejtom to the Liturgies which were made ufe of in the Diocefes, where thde great Men once flour ifhed.
'Tistrue, we have not this Liturgy now, preferved to us exadly as it was ufed in the Primitive Centuries : it has been varioufly changed by the raflinefs of thofe who fucceeded thofe Primitive Authors, which has alfo happened to the greateft part of thefe works 5 as is acknowledged by Car- final Bona^ and MabiUon. It is likewife true, that fince the Popes have been Sovereigns of the .Weft, they have by themfelves, or by their Creatures, brought in a vaft number of variations, in the Books of the publick Offices
which
Remarks upon the
which changes have been introduced with more eafe,- lince the Latin began to be lookt upon as a Barbarous Language.
We liave an illuftrious proof h€reof,in the AmhroJ^aH Office, for Good Fry day, where we find a Prayer for the Confe- crating of a Crofs, precedent to its Adoration. For it is certain that Pope Adriav the Fir ft, who lived towards the end of the Eighth Century, declares that the Church did not confecrate any Images : This being a practice that was introduced long after, and we find in the Life of St. Lewis a complaint of that Prince concerning this Subjed whence it appears that thefe Prayers muft needs have been of a very late Date.
We have another example hereof, which cann©t be difputed ; ^ in the Canon, where we find at prefenc
thefe WOroSfkpro quibm tihi ejfer'mui, vel qui tihi offerum :
whereas thofe words fro qmbtis tiV offerimus were foifted in ^. 301' in the Thirteentl>Century,as Hugo Menardus doth ingenuoufly acknowledge upon the Book of the Sacraments o^^i.Gregory. This Addition was made after that the Dodrine of the Sacrifice of the Mafs was received, and indeed it was al- together n^ceflary, fince without it, there .could be no Oblation made by the Prieft in that pretended Sacrifice, which was lookt upon as a Capital inconvenience.
A third proof hereof we have in theFeaft of S.-5^w^-«j',who is accounted the firft Bifhop of MiUn, and to whom they attribute the Curfing of the Heathen Temple at MvUn, whereupon a part thereof fell down, and crufhed feveral of the Idolaters under its rumes, which is a Story drawn from Legends of no ancient ftanding.
But after all, it is eafic to prove that this Liturgy was not at- firft tainted with any of thofe Errors, wherewith it u-as filled in the following Ages, and in particular fince the XII. Century, towards the end of which the Popes took care to change or abrogate all Liturgies whatfoever, that inftead thereof that of Rome might be introduced, following therein the Spirit of Pope AdrUn^ who had bsguo this Work,, being fupporced therein by the favoar
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
39
of the Emperour Charles the Great, who firft introduced this Spirit of change.
Firfi: of all then I maintain that this Liturgy had none of the Confiteor of the Prieft, as we find it at this day in the Roman Milfal, which Confiteor is at this day made to the Bleded Virgin, Angels and Saints, as well as to God. Now it is certain that thi»-cuftom is only of late Ages 5 we have an undoubted proof hereof in the Confiteor fee down by Chrode^andus Bifhop of A^etz , who lived in the time of Pepittj Father of Charles the Great. RejiuU Camnl- corum caf. 18. Ad frimam Clero congregato don ant confejjiones, fttas vlciffim dkentes, confiteor Domino & tibi Frater qaod fec- cavi. ' At the firft Canonical hour the Clergy being af- *ferabled, they make their mutual confeflions, faying,
* I confefs to the Lord, and thee my Brother^ that I have
* finned.
It is neceffary to obferve here,
I. That this Rule, for the moftpart of it, is borrow- ed from that of St. Bemet^ who lived in tlie Popes Diocefs.
zly-, That the fame has been almoft wholly tranfcribed in the Ads of the Council of Aix la Chafelk, in the Year 816.^
3^, That thefe Confeflions to the Virgin, the Angels and Saints, are not found in any of the ancient forms of Confeflion, whereof we have a confiderable number, which may be feen in the Notes of Ihgo Menardus upon the Book of the Sacrament of Si.Gregory^ pag. 11/^. & fe<j.
Secondlj^ I maintain that there was nothing in this Liturgy, which imply'd any direft Invocation of the Sjints,but only it fuppofeth that they intercede for the Church. Wc own, that fince the Fourth Century, the Church has avowedly demanded fcveral favours of God, by the interceflion of Saints but we do not find that ihey prayed diredly to them. It is true there are feveral parages, in this Liturgy, wherein favours are beg- ged of God per preces & merit a SanflorHm, by the Prayers and Merits of the Saints. Bilt the word Merit, then, contains nothing tliat caa offend us, if we take it in the fenfe of the
Primitive-
4®
(^marks upon the
Primitive Church, as fignifying nothing elfe but godlinefs. Thereare athoufand paflages that prove this invincibly, as •well in St. Ambrofe^ as inthofc Authors that have fucceeded him; and in this Liturgy by wmV and to merit the Church <Iid not pretend to obtain by way of Juftice,but only to obtain in general, as when we read in the Roman Office, O Foelix cttlpa qH<e ta-rJtaw meruit falutemi O happy fault, whicli procured {o great Salvation J
Thirdly, I maintain that we find therein no other Oblation of the Bread and Wine to God in the Adion of the Sacra- ment, but the Oblation of the Bread and Wine to the Vrieft who officiated, which even to this day is yet pra(5tifed by fome Men and Women at MiU», according to the account given us thereof by Cardinal Bona and Mabilton-j for othet- wife this was abfolutely impoffible, becaufe die expreffion of proqttil>Moferlmus, pag. 301. made ufe of by the Prieft to denote his a(5lion, was never put into the Roman Miflal until the Thirteenth Century, as Menardutj a learned Bene- <iiBmej doth own. Secondly, Becaufe this notion of offer- ing the Sacrament for a Propitiatory Sacrifice, is a thing even unknown to the moft antienc of the School- itien, as our Divines have fufficiently proved from their filence on that Queftion. And certainly this is fo ftrange a notion, that in confequence of it we muft hold,That Jefus Chrift is facrificed and offered up to himfelf^ for we find in the Prayers of St. J>7felmj falfely attributed to St. Ambroje, thefc expref- jlions, which are veryfingular, fug- 175. Vt offeram tihi Sa-
a ifJcium quod iftfiltuifii, &• offerri prxcept/li in commemorationem tui pro falutenofirA'T fufcipevero ifiud, cjuafo, fumme Detts, di- leFiifflme Jefk Chrifte pro Ecclefta tun fanSia. * That I may of-
' fcr to thee the Sacrifice thou haft inftituted, and com- 'manded to be offered in remembrance of thee, for our Sai-
* vation : Receive it, moft high God, deareft Jefus Chrift,
* we befeech thee for thy Holy Church. It was neceftary for them to change their words, after they had changed their Opinion. It was only the belief of Tranliibftantiation, that made way for the belief of t Sacrifice properly fo ^led, as the Church of Rome believes at this day 5 now it
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
is commonly enough -kncm'n, that the Romifh Church has hatch'd that Article her felf; and the Hiftory of this change is fo exa<5tly fet down, that it is needlefs to make any flop at it.
Femhfy, This Innovation can be demonftratively proved, from this /-'mbrojian Liturgy alone. And not to mention now that it contain'd no office for the Fridays in Le»t, which (hews, that at that time they believed that the receiving of the Sacrament was a breaking of the Faft, upon which ac- count alfo they call it Vitalia alimenta^ Food of life, and whol- ly overthrows the notion of Tranfubftantiation. _ We find there alfo this Prayer for the Poft-Commu- nion, fag. 310. Pignmvita at erne caftentesJoumiUter tt Domitte imfloramus^ ut apofiolicis fulti PAtrociniis , ^Hod in imagine con- tigimtts Sacramenti, ntanifefia percepttone fttmdmus. * Having
' received this pledge of eternal Life, we humbly befeech *thee; O Lord, that being affifted with Apoftolical SufFra- 'ges, what we have now touched in the Image of the
• Sacrament, we may by manifcft perception take and rt
* ceive. This Prayer is found in the MifTal of GeUm^ and in other ancient MifiTals. Now, according to the ob^ fervation of Ratramnns, that which is a Pledge and Image, is fo of another thing different from it felf.
We find there the Communion under both kinds, ^ 207. as well as the prefervation of thofe two kinds, and their mixture, p. 304. in fuch a manner, as quite overthrows the notion of Concomitance received in the Church of
Rome,
We meet there alfo with this Prayer, H^nc eblationem
fufciftas in /nblimi altari tm, per manus Angelorum ttforftm^ fi- cut fnfcipere dignattts es mnnera Pneri tui jufti Abel , &c,
' Receive this Offering on thy high Altar, from the hands ' of thy Angels, as thou waft pleafed to receive the Gifts of ' thy Servant Righteous y^bel, pag. 302, 303. Which Claufes have made the Schoolmen to fweat Blood and Water, in en- deavouring to reconcile them with the notion of the Real PrefencCc
G We
41
(^marks upon the
We find there alfo this Prayer, whjcli abfolutely decides
the qu eft ion , tAiter/te Dew fuff licit er imp lor antes , ttt filim tuns 'jejus Chriftns , qui fe in fine fecuU fuia promijit fideli- bus affuturuMy & prufentii cor for alts Afyfieriisy non deferat qms redemitf majefiatis fu£ bertefciis non relinquat. ' Befceching
' thee, O eternal God, that thy Son Jefus Chrift, who has
* promifed to be with Believers to the end of the world,
* may not forfake thofe he has redeemed, with refpedt of
* the Myfteries •, he may not deprive thofe whom he has
* redeemed, of the Myfteries of his Corporal Prefence, nor
* leave them deftitute of the BlefTmgs of his Majefty. Ic feems evident, that thefe words, the Myfteries of his Bodi- ly Prefence, fignifie plainly, that Jefus Chrift is abfent, with refped to his Flelh, though his body be prefent in its Image, which reprefents it to us.
Lib. de Sa- 'jjs commonly fuppofed from the Teftimony of the Books cram.c. 5. ^^^^^ Sacraments, attributed to St.Jmhrofe, that the Ambrofian
Liturgy had this Claufe : F^c Mohis hanc ehUtionem adfcriftfim^ rationabilem^ acceptakilenij quod efl figura corporis & fanguinis Do-
ti noftri fefu Chrifii. ' Make this Offering to be imputed us, reafonable and acceptable, which is a Figure of the
* Body and Blood of our Lord Jefus Chrift. And in^ deed , though the word Figure be not found now , in Pa- tn^lius his Edition of the Mrofian Liturgy. Neverthelefs, firft, we find, that by a Marginal Note he refers his Rea- der to St. Ambrofe himfelf, de Sacram. lib, cap. 5. Second- ly , Pamelius, in his fixtieth Title, where he fets down the words of Confecration , cites the place of St. Ambrofe. with the w'oxdfigura. Thirdly, We find it fo in the Edi- tion of St Ambrofe printed at Paris ^ in the year ijip*-
the words are thefe: Visfcire quia verbis coelefiibus cm/ecra- tur, accipe que funt verba. Dicit facer dos, fac nobis, inquit, hanc oblationem afcriftam, rationahilem & accept abilem^ quod efi figura corporis ^ fanguinis Domini nojlri Jefu Chrifii. This
paftage has been corrupted in other Editions, but J'afchafius his quoting of it in the year 835. in his Treatife of the Body and Blood of our Lord, confounds the Authors of. this Faliification- But to fpeak the truth, as 1 do not_ be-
Jncient Q?Hrch of Piedmont.
lieve , that chefe Books of the Sacraments, were writ by Sr. Amhrofe , thougli Mabillo^a aflures US , that they have been found at St. Gal, under his name ■, fo neither have I any certainty that this Prayer was taken out of tiie Office or Liturgy of St. Amhrofe. Wiiat paflages I have ah-eady cited, are fufficient to (lisw, that the Carn:il Pre- fence was not then believed by the Diocefs of Italy. They who are willing to examine the (aid Liturgy, will find many other parages in it, that do invincibly confirm tlie fame Truth.
By this we may judge what likelihood there is of finding any thing in this Liturgy, concerning the adoration of the Hoft after Confecration : Indeed, we are fo far from find- ing any fuch thing there, that we meet with no hint there- of even in the Ages after Pafchaftpu-j of which we can give a demonftrative proof, viz,. That whereas at this day ufe , is made of the Adoration of the Holl:, to pro\ e th.e Real Prefence, none of thofe that difputed againft Berengarhis {ox almoft loo years together, did mention one word of that ^xoof, which lliould clearly make onty1\-\itBere»garlusz^d Scotus were Innovators, by oppoling themfelves to a belief 5 which ferv'd for a Foundation toeftabliQi a Wotfliip, which the Church had publickly own d and pradis'd.
I fay nothing here concerning that claufe made ufe of in the Amhrcf.ir. Liturgy, wherein tiiey pray for the Dead, that fleef the fleep of Peace. Thus much is evident, That tliat Prayer is as contrary to the nodon of Purgatory, as thofe we find in xho. Roman Liturgy, asour Audiors and Biondel in particular
have Oie A'ed. The Prayer for the DeaJ^pag. 298, vvllich th.-ft
/./r/vr?; contains,was founded upon ocherPrinciples,than thofe which the Dodors of Roff:e at thiis day admit of 5 as hath been made' out from rhe'^io.rfeffions ot the learned men of th:i£ Communion themltives. The fubflance of thefe Pray- ers is, that Fidelibm vita vifitatur^ non toUitur, & in Timort4 Dei ob{trvatione difmi}is domicilii'.Tn perpetus, fxticitatis accjdiri- r»r. ' As to Believers, their life f by death] isonlychan- ' ged, not tak'en away, and tiiat rite decealed, who have Wived in the obfervance qf ih^; Fear of Ood, do acquire G 1 'a Man-
^marks upon the
* a Manfion of perpetual Felicity ; as we find the words in the Prayer for many Souls, /'.451. Not to infift now, that in the next following Prayer the Bofome of Abraham is taken for the ftate of Glory, which the Church of Rome contradi(5ts and rejeds at prefent.
I own, that in the Amhrofian Litur^^, pag. 341. we find the anointing of the Sick and poflelled Perfons mention'd, but only with reference to the obtaining the RemilTion of their Sins, and their Cure, which cannot be the Roman
XXntllon. We find there this claufe ; Concede infufione SatiEhi ffiritHSy dim tibi flacitam, frdfemls olei confirmes, nobilitefque fnhftant'tAm, tit quicquidex eo in humam genere.tacium fueritj ad naturam tranfeat mo x fu^ernam. ' Grant by the Infufion of
' the Holy Spirit, fo to ftrengthen and enrich the fubflance ' of this prefent Oil , formerly accepted of by thee, that ^ vvhofoever of the Race of Mankind fhall therewith be * touciied, may immediately be exalted to the nature that i» ' from on high.
What we meet with there likewife concerning the Confecration of "the Chrifm ufed in Confirmation, con- tains nothing that can give us much trouble. We acknow- ledge that it is a Ceremony which has been pra<ftis'd fince the fourth Century, as an Appendix to Baptifrnj neither do we look upon that Cereniony as blame-worthy, but only fo far as the Church of Rome has pretended to make a Sacrament of it, properly fo called, and thereby to make a Ceremony, introduc'd by men, equal to that which was-, inftituted by our Lord Jcfus Chrift himfelf. And I have tlie fame thing to fay, concerning the Benediiftion of the Fire, and the Wax Candles at Eajler^ the Benedi6tion of the Fonts, and fome other Ceremonies we meet with there.
Moreover, we find thcrCj astw^jl.as. in the Roman Litur- gy, a Prayer wherein RemiiTion Or Sins is beg'd of God,
calling him non aflimator meriti^ fed ve}n<e domtor 'j Not a re- gnrder of Merit^but a giver of Pardon : Wilich expreffion One
"of the moft famous Schoolmen has lookt upon as abfolutely contrary to the Do6trine of Merit, as it is held at prefent. So likewife, pag, 2^8. we find thefe words, Jniquitates meat
ne
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
refpexeris, fed fola tua wtfericordia mihi profit indigno. ' Do
' not thou regard mine Iniquities, but let thy alone mercy * help me unworthy.
After all, we muft continually remember, that this Piece comes from very fufpeited hands ^ PaweHtu, who is the firft that has printed it, confefleth himfelf to have cut off a great part of it, which he pretends indeed to have done only to avoid Repetition But, it is well known, that thefe fort of Works muft be very exadtly infpeded, to be w-ell alTured of the force of the exprelTions therein contained, and to be able to pafs a certain Judgment concerning them. I re- turn now to the method I have prefcrib'd to my felf
CHAP. VIII. •
Opinions of the Qmrcks of Italy , during the Eighth Century.
WE may be informed concerning the ftate of thefe T. 7. CendL Churches, firft, by the Council of ForojuHo, where- P* 1002. in no other Creed is prefcribed to the People, but that of the Apoftles, nor any other Prayer, but the Lord's Prayer 5 by which, in abftaining from wicked Works, men may certainly arrive at Salvation. Secondly , By their Bifliops aiTifting at the Council of Framfort, in the year 794. which was a Synod of the Weftern Church. Patillnm BiQiop of Aqtiileia, who was prefent there, wrote at the fam.e time a Book againft the Dodrine of Foelix Biftiop of Vrgel^ and Eltfandus Bifliop of Toledo, who maintained the Opinions of Nefiorius. It appears, that he wrote this Book by the order of Charles the Great, during the SefTion of that Council, p. ^y,^ He plainly afferts in this writing, Firfi, That the Bifhops ' ^ were conven'd thereby the orders q{ Charles the Great he knew not that it belonged to the Pope alone to regulate
matters
(^marks upon the
matters of Faith, and afifemble Councils .• Secondly^ Thac what -he attributes to the Church, that She cannot be over- come by Herefies, which are the Gates of Hell, has refe- pjp. 5i^.& rence only to thellniverfal Church, very far from atcribu- 3«9- ting this Priviledge to the Popes, as being the Succeflbrs of St. I'eter. Thirdly, That this Council did not exped their Authority from the Pope s Confirmation, (ince they main- tain, That firZ/.v and £//>W«/ ought to be excommunicated fleMridi fynodi judhitm •, upon Judgment pall by a full Council.
I acknowledge, that he feems to give gi eat deference to the Authority of Pope Adrian , when he faith, That the fol- lowers of'Fo'lix and Eli^andm ought to be excommunica- ted with their Matters , Refervato per omma furls Privilegls ftmnn Pontlfcis Domini & Patris mftri , Adriani, frirmt fedis
BeatlJJird Paf<& : ' The rigiitful Priviledges of the High Prieft 'our Lord an^ Father Adrian, the mofl: blefled Pope of ' the principal See. being alwaies referv'd intire. But it is plain, that he makes ufe of this Condelcention for no other reafon, but becaufe Charles the Great had defned him to confult Pope Adrian upon fo important a queftion though indeed the Excommunication being already pronounced, this, after all, could be notjiing more than a Ceremony, or at the moft a wife Precaution, to hinder the Pope from en- gaging himfelf with a bad party.
We have a certain proof hereof from the manner how Paulinpis and the Bi(hops of Italy did agree to condemn the Definitions of the Second Council of Nice, in the year 787, as Idolatrous Definitions, notwithftanding that Pope /i'^irM« had aflifted at that Council by his Legates, and though he did his utmoft endeavours to maintain them. All Authors of the IX. Century, and next follou ing, do unanimoufly teftifie, That the Council of Framfo-.-t, w litre / auHnm and his fellow- Deputies of the Diocefs of Italy were prefent,did condemn the Second Council of Nice, notwithflanding that TheofhjL-M and StephcK the Popes Legates afTifted at ir. Wc may eafily conceive from liencOy what v^'as the Judgment of the Bifliops of Italy^ with reference to the Pope, and
thofe
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
47
xhofe that joiped with him : If they held any Com- munion with the Pope , they did it only with defign to bring him back again to the Truth-, fo that they aded conformably to the Opinion of the Bilhops of Frawe, whicii is exprcft by fo»as Biihop of OrUansy upon the fame occa- fion,//^. I. f<<^. 54°- notwithftanding ]o»as pronoun-
ceth y4»athema 3ig3.m{i thofcthat Worfhip Images *
I fliall fay nothing concerning the Exhoitation which St. PaHlinM addreflcth to the Billiops, towards the end of his Book, that they would pray to God , by the inter- celTion of the Holy Virgin and St. Peter, the firft Paftor of the Church, and of all Saints, and 'by the Suffrages of the Council, to defend the Emperour for we find after all, that this is only a willi founded on this Suppofal , Thar Saints, after death, may pray for the welfare of the Living, which feems probable enough.
We find alfo what was the Do(5lrine of Paulinm Bi- fliop of AqnUeia^ in the Book he wrote againft Faelix Bifhop of Vrgel, at the requeft of Charles the Great. See how he expreffeth himfclf concerning the Eucharift, in his
Dedication to Charles i\\QGxtli,f>Ag. 17 66. &c. initio. He
affirms, That the Eucharift conlifts of Bread he calls it, BhcccIU & farticula pants, a morfel and bit of Bread : He maintains. That it is either Death or Life in the Mouth of him that eats it , according as he hath or hath not Faith ; Than which, nothing could be fpoke more clear, to prove, that the Euchariff is nothing but Bread and Sub- ftance, and that Faith or Incredulity makes all the diffe- rence that is found amongfl: Communicants.
He referrs and applies the Character of Priefi, accor- ding to the Order of A^lchizedeek^, to the Incarnation and Crofs of Jefus Chrift, and not to the Sacrifice of the Mafs. He thunders out Anathemas againft all humane Satisfad:i- ons, maintaining , That the Blood of none of thofe thar have been redeem 'd themfelves, is capable to blot out the leaftSin, and that that is the Priviledge of our Saviour Jefus Gbrifl alone,/'^^..i75>,2.
He.-
48
^marks upon the
He lays ic down as a Rule, that the hun»ne nature in Chrift is fo circumfcribed, as to be only in one place, fag. 1833. Natura »amcjue altera^ hoc «jl hominisj er at in! terra tantHTumodo ^ Altera tthique i» Coelo & in terra^ hoc efi divine. Potfiit ergo quod dm era»t, divinum fc. & hummum aliud in CccU & ul?iquee^e^& aliud in terra folrmmoda. Non tamen potnit ille qui unui erat, filiiu videlicet Dei & hominis^ non totus ubiq-y ejfe^in Cosbpariter & in terra, Vbi<i'^fane totus ^nia nmsefl & omnipotens Deus \ urns idemq'^ omnipotent is Dei, hominis fHins, Humana namq-j mtura non defcendit, nec fuit ihi prittfjuamy in Deam ajfumpta, afcenderet corporaliter in Ccelurn. Filius antem hominis cjuia mus idemq-^ tpfe efl fiHus Dei, & de Coelo defcendit^ mde nmquam difcejferat, & in Coelo erat, cum loqveretttr in ter- ra % & in t err am venit ubi erat, ^ in Ccelum afcenfurus erat per id quod hom« eft, & ibi afcendit ubi erat prittSy per id quod Deus eft. Domini namq'^ fmt verba dicentis *, I^emo afcendit in Caslum, ftifi qui defcendit de Coelo , filius hominis qui eft in Coelo.
* One of his natures, the humane, was only upon Earth: ^* the other, that is, the Divine Nature, was every where,
both in Heaven and on Earth : wherefore, becaufe thefe
* were two natures, viz. the Divine and Humane, the one
* of them could be in Heaven, and every where, and the other
* only on Earth. Yet notwithftanding, he who was the only
* Son both of God and Man, could not bot be wholly every
* where, both in Heaven and on Earth •, whole every where,
* becaufe he is the One, and omnipotent God s one and God
* Almighty, and the one Son of Almighty God and Man.
* For the Humane Nature did not come down from Hea-
* ven, neither was it there, till being taken up to God, it
* afcended corporally into Heaven. And becaufe the Son ^ of Man is one and the fame with the Son of God,
* therefore he came down from Heaven, from whence he
* never departed, and was in Heaven while he fpokehere 'upon Earthy and he came down to the Earth, where he
* was before, and was to afcend into Heaven, as he was ' Man, and as he was Go J, he afcended where he was be- ' fore ; for they are the words of our Lord 5 No Man ^ afcends up into Heaven> but he that came down from
: Heao
Mann Church of Piedmont.
49
' Heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in Heaven. Which is.the fame opinion we find expreft in the Council of Foro- juHo, in the year 791. in which Paulinuf Bilhop of" JqHilelx
preflded. T. 7. Cone. p. I CO I.
He a.Teirs, that in celebrating the Eucharif^, we feed upon the Divine Nature of Jefus Clr.i(t, which cannot be laid, but only with refpedt to Believers, and muit be un- derftood metaphorically •, which plainly lliews what his Belief was concerning the Oral Manducation of the Body
of Jcfus Chnft, p^^. 1836. Vel Cjtia ratione fi adoptivHS films efty qui non manducat Carinem fHii homims, non hihit ejus fan^uittenjy non habet vltam aternam ? Qni manducAt, inquic, weam Carnem^ & hihit meum fan^uinem hahet vitam ateraam, e^o rcf»fcituho eum in novifpmQ die. Caro mea, vere eft cihus^ janguis meus vere eft pot us. R'efujcitandi in nevijjl/yio die potejtas ^ nulli alio ni(i vero permanet Deo, Caro namque ^ fangnls ad hamunam^ per qaarn \\lins homims eft, non ad divinam referri potefl '.laturam. Et tamen fi ille fiUus hsminis cm h tc Caro fanguis efi, pro eo qttod nnm idemq^ fit Dei hominis filim, fi Dens verus non effete caro ejus & fanguis manducantibHS Gr (7ibentih»s fe, nullo modo vitam praflaret aternam. Vnde Qr fo- hannes Evangelifta ait, & fanguis filii ejus lavat nos ah omni pcccato. Jiut cfijns caro & fa-^guis dat vitam manducantibus & bihentihus fe, nifi filii hominis , quern T)eus fignavit Pater^ qui eft verus & omnipotens Filins Dei. Nam ^ panis vivas pro tiobis defcendit de Coelo, qui dat vitam mundo '■, quiq'^ ex e» may:dt(caverit non moritur in diternum : ipfe enim dicit^ Egofam p.tvis vivHS qui de Coelo defcendi. Sic quippe defcendit pants vivMs de Caelo^ qui femper maneb.it in Coelo, ficut filins homi- nis defcendit de Cock, qui qmniam unus idemq:, jrat Filius Dei,
nunqnam defemit Ccclftm. 'Or, How if he be an adopted ' Son only ? Is it faid, that he who doth not eat the Flefli
* of tlie Son of Man, and drink his Blood, hath not eter- ' nal Life? He th.it eats, faicii he, my Flefli. and drinks my 'Blood, hath eternal Life, and I will raife him up at the
* !aft day. My Flefli is Meat indeed, and my Blood is ' Dcink indeed. The power of railing up at tl^.e laft day ' belongs to none, but the true God , for the Flefh and
H 'Blood
5'»
^marks upon the
* Blood cannot be referred to his divine, but to his hu*
* mane Nature, by which he is the Son of Man : And •yet if that Son of Man, whofe this Flefli and Blood is,
* ( for that one and the fame perfon is both the Son of
* God, and the Son of Man) were not true G.^d, his Flefli
* and Blood could not procure eternal Life to thofe that
* eat them. And therefore fohn the Evangelift faith , and
* the blood of his Son cleanfeth us from all Sin. Or,
* whofe Flefh and Blood gives life to thofe that eat and drink
* them, but the Son of Man's, whom God the Father hath
* fealed, who is the true and Almighty Son of God j for
* He, the Bread of Life, is come down from Heaven for *us, who gives life unto the World, and whofoever cats
* thereof mall live for ever : for he himfelf faith, I am
* the Bread of Life that came down from Heaven : for
* this Bread of Life came down from Heaven, which al-
* fo alvvaies ftaid in Heaven, in the fame manner as the
* Son of Man came down from Heaven, who bccaufe he
* isalfo the Son of God, never left Heaven.
We cannot meet with a more Orthodox Explication of the Office of Mediator and Advocate, than that is which he fets down, or a greater precaution than he gives us, not to look upon the Saints as Mediators, p^g. 1 790. -Media- tor tgttur ab eo ejuod mcdinf fit intra utrafq; d^Jfidentinm parteSy
reconciliet ambos in mum, Demi^i, non Paulus A-fediaur^
fed LegatHS fidelis mediateris \ /egationem, ifiquit, fungimur pro Chrifio, reconciliamini Deo. jidvocatus mmq-y efi^ qui jam pro reconciliatis interpellate quemadmodHm idem redemptor mfter fa- cit, cftrn humanam Deo patri, in mitate Dei, homim/q-j perfena, natttram oftendit. Hoc efi enlm Dettm patrem prt nobfs interpel- lare. Joannes nen interpellare, fed ipfftm etiam efe prcpltiationem
f ro peccatis noflris declarat. ' Wherefore he is called the Me-
* diator, becaufe he is a middle perfon between both the . 'difagreeing Parties,and reconciles them together inone,^r.
* Laftly,i'4»/is not a Mediator, but a faithful Ambaflador
* of the Mediator. We are AmbafTadors for Chrift, and ' the Sum of our Amba^ is,Be ye reconciled to God. An Advo- ' cate is owe that intercedes for thofe that are already re-
J conciled.
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
* conciled, even as our Redeemer doth, when he fhews his
* humane Nature to God the Father, in the Unity of his *Perfon, who is God man for this is truly to intercede with
* God the Father for us. Joh» doth not fay that he intercedes *for us, but declares hira to be a propitiation for our 'Sins.
He clearly fhews in the fame place, pag. 1752. that he did not look upon the Saints as Redeemers, but Jefus Chrift alone, according to the fignification of his name 5 fince none of them, who have been redeemed thcmfelves, are
able to blot out Sin. Eten'm omnl^itentis Dei filtuj, omnifotens Lemims mfier^ quia frctio fanguims'fHt nos redemit^ jure redem- ftoTy verus omnium redem^torum vocihus pr<edicatur,»oH inquAmi//e redemptusj quia nunquam captivus j nos vero redem'pti, quiafui- mus caftivi y renundati fuh feccato^ ohligati nimirumin eoChiro- grafho decreti, quod ipfe tulit de medioj delens fanguine fuo^ quod nullius alius redemptorum delere potuit fanguis adfixit iHud, pa/am
triumphans in femetipfo. * For the Son of the Almighty God,
* our Almighty Lord, becaufe he has redeemed us with the
* price of his Blood, is juftly called the true Redeemer, by all
* that are redeemed by him. He, I fay, was not redeemed, 'becaufe he was never captive^ but we are redeemed, who
* were Captives, fold under Sin, and bound by the hand- ' \yiiting that was againft us, which he took away, blot- ^ ting it out with his Blood, which the Blood of no other
* Redeemer could do, and fixed it to his Crofs, openly trium-
* phing over it in himfelf.
It plainly appears, that he had no other notion concerning theobfcurity of Scripture, than we have, by his approaching Foelix, tl-at he had done accorcing to St. Peters Difcourfe concerning the Wricfngs of St. pag. &
1796.
He doth -not own, that the Church was founded on St. Peter, but on Jefus Chrift, pag. 1800, & 180 r. £t licet ejfec primtu in ordlr.e Apojlolcrum, idco tamen aiu filuit^ quia non Do- minus quid an, pro quihtts [olm Pctrw refponjurus erat, fed quid homines de filio hominis afiimarentj exptorare dignatus efi, 'And
' though he were the firfl amongft the Apofiles,yet he did not
H X 'fpeak
^^marks upon the
' fpeak for fome time, becaufe the Lord did not enquire ' what they, for whom only Peter was to anfvver, but whac ' men thought of the Son of Man.
He lays it down as an inviolable Maxim of ChriRianiry, that we cannot believe but in God only, in oppelition to that which is taught by the Church of Rcme.
He wholly overthrows the immaculate Conception of the
Blefled Virgin, pas^. 18085 ad finem. Ipfe cjftlppe folfis ^ finga- lariter de Spritu fanEi-o conceptus^ & natPts ex Virglne, a vulva
fine peccato prodi'it Deus & homo. ' For he alone being in a ' fingular manner, conceived by the Holy Ghoft, and born ' of the Virgin, came forth from the Womb without Sin, * both God and Man.
If any one will take the pains to examine tlie Opinions of this Bilhop, he will find it an hard thing not to take notice that he denies what the Church of Rome affirms, with relation to all thefe Articles-, and that he affirms what ihe Church of Rcrne denies, and whatever colourable Arts may be employed, it will be very hard not to perceive this oppofition through them all.
i jv^in with St. Pau/i»ns ^^quileia, P^tu/.i) VL^cetiMs of tlie
fame Church, who, forafmuch as he was very famous to- wards the end of the Eighth,and about the beginning of the Nintli Century, we have reafon not to pafs over his Opi- nions without fome notice taken of them and the rather doth his Judgment deferve a more particular confideration, becaufe . he was born in Lombardj, was Deacon of tte Church of A<fmleia, whence he was removed by Charier the Great, after his having taken De/ideritis, the la(t King of the Lombards, Prifoner, and was honoured with the Favour of Charles the Qreat. We have feveral of his Pieces, but 3 dial 1 content my felF with two of his Treatifes, the one w hereof is the Life of Sr. Gregory the Great, becaufe the Pjpilts believe they have found in that .Book an invinci- l)le proof for Tranfubltantiation-, the other is, the Col ledti- on of Homilies he made for all the Feftival dales of the year, by the order of Charles the Great, and which that Emperor authorized by his approbation.
Ancient Church of Pied ra one.
5^
He tells us, in the Life of Sc. Gregoyy, Tbat a Roman Li- dy , wlw was us'd co make the Bread her felf, which (lie offer'd for the Communion, fmiling when Sr. Gregory offer 'd a piece of it to her in the Eucharift, St. Gre- roty perceiving it, took back the piece of Bread, and gave it to the Deacon, to keep it till the Communion was over, at which time he demanded of her why (he had laughed-, to which llie anfwered, That it was becaofe he called that the Body of our Lord, uiiich (he knew to be a piece of the fame Bread llie had offered. Whereupon Sc. Gregory made a Sermon to the People, exhorting tliem to beg of God-, that he would be plealed to manifeft that to them, which that unbelieving Woman could not fee vfith the Eyes of Faidi. After Prayer, he draws near to tlie Altar, lifts up the corporal Pall that covered the piece of Bread, and lliews them the top of his litcle finger flain'(i
with Blood, [_.^c mulieri dixit, difce, luy^uam, verhati vel mod» jam credere CQnteft,%nii , fanis qnem ego do, caro meaefl, 0- fan- gtiis nieHS vere efi potus. Sed frafcius conditor rtbfier infirrr/Uiitis nofir<t,ea foteftate, quk cmElA fecit ex nihik^ Cjr corpus fMy {arr.e femper virginis^ operante fancJofpiritu fa^ricavit, pA»em vi mm aqua mix turn, mAnente propria fpeciein cxrngm dr fmgui)um fnum, ad Catholic .".rA precem,ob reparationem mfiram, (pirit((sf<i»6ki
fan^ificatiofje coavertit:'] * and faid to the Womm h Learn.I fay, *from henceforward at ieaft to believe Truch it felf, vvhitii
* faith, TTie bread which I give is myflefh^and my blood is drink, indeed^
' But our Creator forefeeing our weaknefs,by the fame power 'by which he made tlie World of nothing, and m»ad€ 'himfelf a Body by the operation of the Holy Ghoft,. Vof the Flefh of tlie ever Virgin, has by tlie San;^^ifica- ' tion of the holy Spirit, converted the Bread and Wine 'mix'd with Water, ffill .remaining under their own kind, ' into his Fledi and Blood, at the Cacholick Prayer , for ' our Salvation. This done, lie commanded all the People
to beg of Gcd, ut in' formam priflinam facrofanBum reforma- ret mjtfierium , quxtenus mulieri ad fumendum f^iijfet foffibile 5
* that he would change that holy Myftery into the form it 'had before, fo as the Woman jpighc be able to take it
' which.
54
Remarks u^oji the
* which happening accordingly, ftrengthened the Faith of
* that Lady, and of all the People that were prefent.
I fhall not examine at prefent, whether this Hiftory be a Fable or not*, fure it is, that moft of the particulars it contains feem to be of that charader, oratleaft we find none there, vvhofe truth is attcfted by witneffes that lived at the time of St. Gregory, or foon after- But let this be 33 it will, I deny that thefe Miracles , whereof we have (ome other inftances in the Book entituled Fita Patrum, can be of any ufe to confirm the Doctrine of Tranfub- ftantiation •, as MdUlon pretends in the Margin of this Relation, and that confequently Panlus Diacemsy who relates the fame, did not believe Tranfubftantiation.
Firfi, I deny that by the word Species , ever any dhc fpeaking of Bread , underftood any other thing than the Subftance of Brca^. Let them prove to us, that the word Sfectes did ever heret^re fignifie the Accidents only this being a notion which Tranfublhntiation gave birth to fome Ages after that wherein Paulnj Diacoms lived.
Secondly, I deny that from this Apparition we can inferr the Real Prefence 5 we may indeed from thence conclude a Virtual Prefence, but nothing more. The confequence is fo clear, that it hath been acknowledged by the Schoolmen, whilft they were enquiring what might be concluded from thefe kind of Apparitions , of the Flefli of a Child , of Blood in the Eucharift. And indeed, if any fuch thing were to be inferred from thefe Apparitions, we ought alfo to conclude the contrary for, there have been Miracles quite oppofite to thefe now related Fll inftance in a very notable one: A Severia» Heretic^ha-vlng lockt up the Eu- charift, that his Servant, who was a Catholick, had put in his Trunk, as Mofch^s tells us» c 79. he found Ears of Corn in the {lead of it : Was the Subflance of Bread here return'd again, and did it afterwards bring forth Ears of Corn ? Tiiofe of the Romllh Church are very far from believing any fuch thing. We read alfo in the Life of AieUmus Bidiop of Rhimes, that the Eucharift was chan- ged into a Serpent, to puo;[li the Superftition of Marfnty
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
who had preferr'd the keeping of a Faft, to the receiving of the Communion, and that afterwards the faid Serpent was changed into the Eucharift again at the Prayer of Me^ Unins, and was then received by Marfus.
Befides, PanlHs DUccnus himfelf (hews us in his follow- ing Relation, what he would have us to conclude from this fort of Miracles. He tells us, That a great Lord having fent his Ambaffadors to to obtain fome Re- licks of the Apoftles and Martyrs, that St. Gregory^ inftead; of the Relicks they defired, gave them only fome pieces of confecrated Cloth , which he feverally put up into Boxes, anddeliver'd them, unto the AmbafTadors, having firft fealedthe Boxes with his own Seal. And adds. That the Ambafladors being feiz'd with a curiofity, on thei? journey homeward, to know what thofe Boxes contain'd, they had been ftrangcly futprifed upon opening of them, to find nothing there but fome fcraps of Cloth, which mads- them return back to Rome to make their complaint, that inftead of the Bones of Martyrs or Apoftles> they had given them nothing but fon.e bits of Cloth. Upon thefe complaints made by the AmbaflTadors to the Archdeacon 5 St. Greg»rj/ commandeth them to come to Church, and ex* horted the People to pray to God j SluAtentu in hac re dig'
netur afertijfime fic fuam potentiam patefacere, ut quid meredtur fides f evident ius minus creduli G" ignor antes foffint cognofcere-, Et data oratione acceptt cultellum qui temeraverat Jigna, & fufer- 0Atare corporis fan^i Petriy acceptam unam fanni pertionem per medium pungens fecuit, ex qua ftatim fanguis decucurn't, om- nem eandem portiunculam cruentavit. Videntes autem fupra- fcripti Legatarii , ^ tmnei populi ftupendum & arcanum [idei facTA miraculum^ ceciderunt proni in terram^ adorantes Dominum^ dicentes 5 Nirabilis Deus in fanElis fuis^ Deus Jf>tiel, ipfe da^it vir' tutem & fort it fid: nem plehifu£, benedi^us Deus. Et faEio ftlen^ tioj inter alia fJei decumenta ; dixit ad ess Beatns Gregorius, qui ante has Tenerandat reliquiat parvi duxerant : Scitete^ fratres^ qnia in confecratione corporis dr fanguinis Domini nofiri Jefu, cum ob fa:i5iifcationew reliquiarum in honore Apoftolorum vel martyrnm ipfus quibits fpeeialittr a^ignahntur fupra facrofanr
5«
^^marks upon the
Bum alMre Hbamina offevelfmtttr^fem^erUlortim fanguis hos pan-
* That he would be pleafed fo openly to declare liis po- ' wer on this ocafion, that the Unbelievers and the Igno-
* rant might know what Faith is able to effect. And
* Prayer being ended, he took the knife wherewith the Seals
* had been broke open, and laying one of thofe pieces of
* Cloth upon the t 'oly Altar of St. reter, he ftruck the ' Knife through it, from whence immediately Blood giifhed ' forth, which rtained the whole piece of Cloth s where- ' upon the Ambaffadors and all the People beholding ' this aftonifhing and myfterious Miracle of Holy Faith, ' fell flat down with their Faces to the Ground, and wor- ' fliipped the Lord, faying, Wonderful is the Lord in his ' SaintSj the God of Ifrael^ he ftiall give Virtue and Strength
* to his People, blefled be God. And after filence was
* made, amongft other inftru6lions in the Faith, St. Gre- ^ gsry (aid unto them, who before had undervalued thefe ' venerable Relicks, Know ye Brethren, that in confecra- ' ting the Body and Blood of our Lord jefijs Chrift, when
* for the fandification of Relicks in honour of the Apo-
* ftles or Martyrs, vvhofe they were, Drink-offerings were ' offered on the holy Altar, their Blood, which was (hed 'for the Name of Jefus Chrift, ahvaies entered thefe
* pieces of Cloth. This is that tliey call Brandeum, nien- tioned by Slgehert, upon the year 441, when he fays, that St. Leoh^d brought it intorequeft. " True it is, that this Fable is of a fort unknown to all Antiquity j but howe- ver it proves thus much, That thefe Apparitions of Blood in the Ho ft, fuppote bo more than the virtue of the Blood of Jg^js Chrift.
As to the Homilies of the Primitive Fathers, whereof Paului DiaconHs made a Colledlon, 'tis very furprizing to find not fo much as one inferted amongft them, whence we can pick this Dodrinc of the Real Prefence, if he with the Church of his time had conceiv'd this to have been the Do- <Strine of the Primitive Church. We find indeed, in this his Colic6llon (bme Homilies of St. Leo^ FnU 2 , 3, 4. and fome
Chrifli Domini »oflri.
Others,
Ancient Qhurch of Piedmont.
57
others, which treat of th.e Sacrament of the Eucharift, which Jefus Chrift fubftituted inftead of the PafiTover : But we find this matter fo dryly handled in them, that it is hard to conceive how chefe Expreflions of Antiquity could fatisfie a man, who had been ting'd with the Dodrine of
PAfchAflHS.
As for thofe other Romifh Do(5krInes, which at this day are made the leading points of Religion, we may boldly fay, that we can find nothing of them in tliis Collection of Homilies, amongft which there are many of Sc. Ami>roJe Bifliop of Milan, and ^-^at/ww Bifhop of r«r/«, whofe Be- lief we have already given a fufficient account of j the reft of this Collection coniifts for the moft part of the Homilies
of Origen, St. Jerome, St. Anfiin, St. Chrjfofient^ and VCnera
hie Bede, whofc Opinions are well known, there being fcarce any of thefe Authors, whofe Belief has not been reprefented in particular, to make it appear how far they were from concurring with the Opinions of the Church of Rome, about the principal Dodrincs, which at this day are the caufes of the Separation of the Proteftants from thatQiurch.
C H A P. IX.
Oplnious of the Qhurch of Italy during the Ninth Century,
WE are now come to the Ninth Century, wherein after this Dioccfs had been fubjei^t to feveral Princes, it came into the hands of Charier the Great and his SuccelTors. We have already feen how the Prelates of this Diocels , at the Council of Francfort, oppos'd them- felves to Superftition, which then began to gather ftrength. But we (hall perceive this more clearly in the fequel of \
I chis
^marks upon the
this Difcourfe. It cannot be denied, but tliat the ftate of the Church in general was, as it were, wholly overthrown. AngUhertw BlQiop of Mian, gives US a moft fad reprefen- tation of it , in the relation which he gives to Ludovktu Rip-mont. in Fins. ' To our great forrow, faith he, we have found, that hii HiA. • fcarce ou^ht of Holinefe or Sincerity is left in the Church, * and the Corruptions are crept into it which afterwards he inftanceth in particular : and I doubt not but Ita/j had her fl:are of the Infedion. Indeed Superftition could not but encreafe under the flicker of fo profound a negligence of the Paftors, as did then obtain : but the Divine Provi- dence was pleafed to provide a Remedy againft it by means of Claudius Bifliop of Turin. And fince Claudius had a great lhare in defending of the Truth , in this Diocefs of Italj^ where God had placed him , and that by this means he ■ has been extreamly expofed to the Calumnies of the Rop- mifli Party it will be very well worth our pains, to re- prefent here thefe three tilings, his Charader, liis Writings, and his Opinions.
This ClaudtHs was born in Spain, he had been aDifciple of PW/at Bifliop of 'L'rgf/ j he was for fome years in the Court of Ludovieus Pius amongft his Chaplains and being endow- ed with great Talents for a Preacher, when Levpls being advanced to the Empire, he caufed him to be ordained Bifliop of Turin. It will probably be imagined that he had borrowed from Fcellx Biihop of Vrgel, the Companion of Ellpjtndusythe Opinions of Nefloriamfm but whofoever thinks fo, will find himfelf miflaken j for his Character of a great Preacher, which liad procured him the Efleem of the Em- peror, and his long continuance in Lewis s Court, during tl;e Life of Charles the Great, a Court where that Opinion, fince the condemnation of Taelix and EHpmdus, at Francforr, in 7P4, was very much had in deteftation, are fufficient to purge him from any fuch Sufpicion. But over and above all this, his Writings upon the Scripture, fliew him to have been very far from that Opinion for we find in feveral pafTages unqueflionable Evidences of his Ortliodox Judgment in this point. What he faith upon tiie 25 of
SLMat'-
Andmt Qhurch of Piedmonc.
59
St. Matthew ver. 3 1, is decifive in this matter, and yet he exprefleth himfelf moreftrongly, if it be pofTibie, on Aiatt. cli. 22. ver. 2. Neither is it lefs eafie to purge him of another Calumny , which was caft upon him after his death, by Jonai Bilhop of Orle ns, who in his Preface to King Charles the Bald, accufeth him for having endeavoured to revive the Sed of Arius. I thought, at firft, that this was only a fault of the Tranfcriber, who had wric -'Ww for Aer'iHs i but the manner of /oWs exprenTing himfelf has made me retrad my firft conjedure iiowever, it is no lefs eafie to refute this Calumny, than it was to clear him from t!ie firft Sufpicion. In a word, we do not find any thing like it in fo many Books writ by him, and we find tiiac which is contrary to it on Mm. 12. ver. ij. Let them make out to us, that any fuch thing was found amongfthis PcJpers after his death, as ^onM feems to infinuate, and we Ihill believe, tliat JonAs was not over apt to give credit to thofe men, whofe only aim was, to befpatter the Reputati- on of Clattdms, and to make it odious and deteftable to Po- fterity, bscaufe he cried down their Superftitiort and Idola- try. Except they perform this, we muft ftiil look upon this accufation as a meer Calumny.
As for the Works of this Great Man, we may affirm, there were few in his time who took fo much pains to ex- plain the Scripture, or to oppofe themfelves againft the Torrent of Superftition.,
He wrote three Books upon Gemfis^ in the year 8 1 ) . He made a Commentary on St. Matthew, which he pubiiQied the fame year, dedicating it to fuflus Abbot of Chur-
Y'jHX. ^
He* publillied a Commentary upon the Epiftle to the
Galatians, \[\ tl^iC year 8 1 ($, and dedicated it CO Druclcrammss a
famous Abbot, who had exhorted him to write Comments upon all St. Paul's Epiftles.
He wrote a Commentary on the Epiftle to the which he dedicated to Ludovkus Plus, who commanded him ro-^omment upon Sr. P.wts Epiftles, which dedicatory Epi- ftle of his has b^en publlihed by M.ihUh!.
I i He
6o
Remarks upon the
He made a Commentary upon Exedus, in four Books, which he publifhed in the year 821, dedicating them to the
Abbot Theodemirus.
He made alio another on Leviticus ^ w hich he publifhed in the year 823, and dedicated it to the fame Abbot. Oudifi tells us, he hath feen a Commentary of his on the Book of Knthy in a Library in Bainanlt.
Of all thefe his Works, there is nothing printed but his Commentary upon the Epiftle to the Galatia^s. The Moftk.s of St. Germain have his Commentary upon all the Epiftlesin MS. in two Volumes, which were found in' the Library of the Abby of fUary, near Orleans. Jhey have alfo his MS. Commentaries on Leviticus^ which formerly belon- ged to the Library of Sr. Remj at Rheims. As for his Com- mentary on St. Matthew, there are feveral MS. Copies of it in ErjgUnd, as well as elfewhere.
We may judge in what credit and efleem the Dodrine of Claudius was at that time, by the earneftnefs wherewith the Emperor Ludovicus Pius, and the mofl famous Abbots of thofe times, preffed him to explain the Holy Scripture in his Writings. We may alfo conclude the fame from his being promoted to the Epifcopal Dignity in a place, where the Superflition in reference to Images obliged the Empe- ror to provide them with a Billiop that was both learned and vigorous for Jonas ot Orleans caunot diflemble, but that it was upon this very confideration. That the Emperor made a particular choice of Claudius to be cpnfecrated Bifliop of Turin. Moreover, diis See was not an ordinary Bifhoprick, but a very confiderable Metropolis in the Diocefs of Italy ^ but it was not till fome time after that the Title of Archbi- ihops was beflovved upon Metropolitans.
The time wiierein he was advanced to the Epifcopal Dig- nity, is not certainly known. Father le Cdnte conjectures very probably, that it was in the year 8 1 7. But whether that be fo o\ no, fure it is, that Claudius in his Illuflration of the Scripture plainly fhevved him.fclf to be very free from thofe Errors which at this day are in vogue io Romifh Com^ munion.
We
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
61
We need only read his Comn:ientary upon the Epiftle to the GAlatiam, to afTure us, that he every where aflerts the equality of all the Apoftles with St. feter, though the occa- fions fecm'd naturally to engage him to eftabliih the Prima- cy of St. Peter, and that of his pretended Succeffors. This g p ^^-^ we find in ten feveral pafTages of that Commentary he on- rif.r.i.i.-jip, iy declares the Primacy of St. Peter to confift in the ho- 800,801,803, nour he had of founding the Church both amongft the 80^,8015,807, fews and Genti/es, p. 8i ©. And indeed every where through- s°9»8io, 8h out his Writings he maintains, That Jefus Chrift is the only Head of the Church.
He overthrows the Do(5trine of Merits in fuch a manner as overthrows all the nice Diftin^tions of thePapifts on that fubjedt.
He pronounces Anathemas againft Traditions in matter of Religion, fo far was he from giving occafion to others to fufped , that he made them a part of the Objed of his Faith, as the Church of Pme at prcfent doth.
He maintains, That Faith alone faves us, which is the £^ p g^^^ point that fo extreamly provoked the Church of Rome againft Luther, who afferted the fame thing.
He holds the Church to be fubjedt to Error, oppofite ib. p. 829, to what at this day the Romanifts pretend in fo unreafonable a manner.
He denies, That Prayers after Death may be ofanyufe ib. p. 844. to thofe that have demanded them.
He very fmartly iaflit the Superftition and Idolatry, which p. g^a. . then began to be renewed, being fupported by the Autho- rity of the Roman See.
Thefe things we find in his Commentary upon the Epi- ftle to the Galatians s but the other Writings of this great man, Manufcrlpt and Printed , (hew us yet more of his mind. Indeed, we find him giving very publick marks of his Zeal for the Purity of Religion in feveral points. Firft, he propofcth the Do6trine of the Church, in reference to theEucharift, in a manner altogether conformable to the Judgment of Antiquity , following therein the moft illuftrioas Dolors of the Chriftian Church, and (hewing that he was, as to that matter, at the fartheft diftance from the Opinions
whici}
V (B^marks upon the
which PafchaftHs Radbertfts advanced eighteen or nineteen years after thit Claudius had- writ his Commentary upon Sr. Matthew, c iaudlus\ own words, as chey were taken from Lib.?, cap. 14. a IVtS. of Theyer, are thefe :
Ccenantibm autem eis^ accepit fefus famm & bene dixit ac fregit, deditq\ difcipulis fuis, ait^ Accifite C^- Comedite, hoc eft cor- fm meum.Fimtis pafch^ veteris folenmis quce in commemor-AtiQnem a?)- tiq(i<e de JEgypto liber ationis populi Dei agebmtur j tranftit Ad no- vim quodinfaeredemptiortis memori am Eccle[i am frequent Are volebat : - Vt videlicet & pro came agni ac fanguixe fui csrporis fanguimfq--y facr amentum fub ft it ueret^ ipfu/rf-j/e ejje moyiftraret, cul piravit T>omiMw & mn pcenitebit eum : Ttt es facer do s in sternum fecundum ordinem Aielchifedec, Frangit mtem iffe pancm quern dijcipulis porrigit, ut oftendat corporis ftii fraBionem non abfq--, fua fponte ac procuratiofie veyituram '■, fed ficut alibi dicit poteftatem fe habere psnendi animam f uam^(^ poteftatem fe habere iterum fumendi earn, ^uem videlicet panetn certi quoq'^ gratia facramentiy priufquam frangeret benedixit.Qma natMram hnmanam c^jUam pajfurtu ajjumpfitj ipfe una cumpatre & fpiritn fan^o gratia divirid virtutis implevit, Bertedixit partem & fregit, quia hemiyiem affumptum ita mertifuhderc dignatm efl^ ut & divina immortalitatis veraciter ineffe potentiam demonBraret. Ideoq'^velocius etm a morte refufcitandum effe deceret. Et accipiens calicem gratias eglt, & dedit i/lis, dice»s, Bibite ex hoc omnes. Cum apprepinquare paffioni dicitur, accepto pane C2' calice, gratiam egiffe perhibetur; gratias itay^ egit qui ftagtlU (ilien<z iniquitatis fufcepit. Et qui nihil dignum percuffioni exhibuity humiliter in percp.fftone benedi-\it , ZJt hinc videlicet often Jaty quid unufquifque in flagcllo culp-a propri<6 facer e debeat fi ipfe <tqpta- nimiter fl'tgella culp£ portat aliens 3 ut hinc oftendat, quid in cor- reptione faciat fubditw , fi in flagello pofitm patri gratias agit <tqualis. Hie eft enim fanguis mens novi Teftamenti qui pro Multisiejfundetu,- in remiffionem peccatorum. Qtiia panis corpi^s con- frmat , vinum vero (anguinem operatur in came 5 hie ad corpw Chrifli myfttce^ illud refertur ad fanguinem. Verum quia & nos in Chrifto^ & in nobis Chriftum manere oportet, vinum Dominici calicis aqua mifcetur. Atteftante enim Johanne, aqu*. populi funt. Et r,e- cjHc a..uam folam^ neq-^folum vinum , ficut nec g anum frumejtti folum fine admixrione aqu<t & ccnfe^iione^ in panem cuiquam li- cet ojferre^ ne videlicet ablatio talis quaft caput a metnbro Jecernen-
duin
I
Ancient Church of Piedmont. 6t,
dum ffe fig»ificet,& vel Chrlfltim fine noftra redmftionis amore pati potufjfe, vei.nos fine tlUus fajfione falvari ac Patri cjferri pojfe confi/igiit. Quod atttem dicit. Hie eft fangnis mens novi Teftarr.ai- ti, ad diflinElionem refpictt veteris Tefi amentia quod hircorfim & vit filer um eft fangftine dedicatim j dicente inter afpergendHm /egi flat ore ytiic efl fanguis Teftamenti quod mandavit ad vos Deus. Necejfe eft enim exemplaria quidem verorum his mnnd^ri 5 Jpfa autem Cceleftia meiioriliu hoftiis qaam iftis, juxta quod Jipoftolus fer tot Am ad Hehrsos EpiftoUm^ inter Legem diftingnens ^ EvaH' geiiHm, pulcherr'ima expojitione ac plenaria ratione decUrat^ Diet autem vobis non biham amodo de hoc genimine vitis ufq\' in diem ilium cum illud hibam vobifcum mvum in regno Fatris met. Fiter/t five vineam Domini appellatam ejfe fjimgogam, ^ omnijfpar- fim fcriptura & apertius teftatur Ifaias in Cantico de illo cantata^ Vinea^ inquiens, Domini S/tbaoth, Domfu Ifrael eft, De qua ni- mirum vinea Dominus multo tempore bibebat, quamvis pluribus ra- mi/ in amaritudinem vitis allen(g, converfis, quod tamen etfi multis in ilia plebe ex orbitantibus a re5lo fidei itinere non defuere plurimi tets legis tempore, quorum pits cogitationibus fummifque virtHtibus deleEiaretur Deus. i'erum pajfo in carne'Domino ac refur- gente a mortuij^temptts fuit ut legalis ilia &figuralis obfervatio cejfa- ret, at que ea ^ua Jecundum liter am gerebar.tur, in Spiritalem tranflata fenfum , melius in novum Teftamentnm juvante SanSti Spiritm gratia tenerentur. Iturm igitur ad Pajfionem Do- minpu ait^ fam non bibam de hoc genimine vitis ufqne in diem I ilium cum illud bibam vobifcum novum in regno Patris met. jle fi aperte dieat : Non ultra Carnalibm Sjna" gcgx Ceremfr/iiis deleBabor, in qui bits etiam ifta P aft: halls agni facra lecum tenuere pracipuum : aderit enim tempus meji refur- reB:ionis : aderit dies ille cum ipfe in regno Del pofitHS, id eft gloria vit^ immsrtalis fublimafus, de falute populi ejufdem fonte gratict fpiritalis regenerati , novo vobiftum gaudio perfundxr. Item, quod ait, Non bibam amodo de hoc genimine vitis ufqu'e in diem ilium cum illud bibam vobifcum novum in regno Patris mei, vult intelligi hoc vetus ejfe,cum illud novum dicit ; quia ergo de pr> pagine Adam qui vetus homo appelljitnr Corpta fufceperat , quod in pajftone morti traditurus erat : unde etiam per vini Sacramen- tum commendat fanguinem fuum^ quid aliud novum vinum riift immortalHattm rcnovAttn-HJ» corperum intelUgcre dehemus f
64
Remarks upon the
Quod CHtn dicit, Voh'ifcHm bibAm, etiam iffts reftirreEHofim Cor- ftrum ad indaendam Immortalitatcm fremittit. Vobifcnm enlm mr% ad idem tewpus, fed ad eandem t^nevat'tsnem diEtftm^ ac- cifiendHm efl. Nam & ttos dicit Afojldlus refurrexife cum Chriflo tit ffe rei future jam Utitiam fr£fentem ufferat : quod autem de hoc genimine vitis etiam illnd novum ejfe dicit^ Jigmficat utique eadem Corpora refurre^ura fecmdum infiovationem Ccs' leflem., qtid nunc (ecuHdum vetuftatem moritura [u»t. Si har.c vitem de cujtts vetuflate nunc pajponis Calicem bibit, ipfos fu- daos inteRexeris. Significatum efl etiam ipfam getttem ad Cor- fm Chrifli per novitatem vita accejfuram 5 cum ixgre^a plenitudint gentium omnis Ifrael falvwfiet. Et hjmno diSlo exierunt in montem oliveti'j hoc tfi quod in Pfalmo legimus, Edent pauperis & fa- turabunturi & laudabunt Dominum qui requirunt eum : Petefi 4utem & hymnus etiam ilk intelligi qnem Dominns fecundum fohannem patri gratias agens decantabaty in quo & pro feipfo ^ pro DifcipuHs pro eis qui per verbum eorum credituri erant, etevatis ochHs furfum precabatur, Et pulchre Difcipulos facramentis ftti Corporis ac fanguinu imbutos^ &■ hymno pi<c interceftonis patri cemmendatos, in mentem educit olivarumy ut tjpice defignet nos per acceptionem facramentorum fmrum^ perque *pem fuA Intercefftonisj ad altiora virtutum, ut carifmate SanUi SpiritHS in corde perungamur, confcendere debere.
* The Apoftles being fate down at Tabic, Jefus Chrift took
* Bread, bleffed and brake it, and gave of it to his Difci-
* pies, faying to them, Take this and eat it, this is my Bo- / dy. The ancient Ceremonies of the Antlent Palfover, ^ which were ufed in memory of the Deliverance of the ^ People of Ifrael being finimed , lie palTeth on to the ^ New, becaufe he would have the fame to be celebrated
* in his Church in commemoration of the Myftery of her ' Redemption, and to fubftitute the Sacrament of his Body
* and of his Blood, inftead of the Flefh and Blood of the
* Pafchal Lamb, and to flievv that it was he himfclf to vifhom ' God had fworn , and fliall never repent of it 5 Thou
* art the Eternal Prieft according to the Order of Melchi- *-^deck. Moreover, he himfelf breaks the Bread which he
* gives to his Difciples, that he might reprefent and make
* it appear, that the breaking of his Body would not be
t con-
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
* contrary to his inclination, or without his willingnefs to 'die: But, as he faith elfevvhere, that he had power to
* give his life, and to deliver it up himfelf, as well as to
* take it again and raife himfelf from the Dead. He blef-
* fed the Bread before he brake it, to affure us, that he ' intended to make a Sacrament of it ; and forafmuch as he ' had taken humane Nature upon him, that he might fuf-
* fer, he with his Father and the Holy Spirit filled the fame
* with the grace of a Virtue which was altogether Divine 5
* and becaufe he was pleafed to fubmit the humane Nature 'he had taken upon him, to Death, he would make it ap-
* pear, that the faid Humanity was pofleft of a true and na-
* tural power to raife itfelf whereby he taught us, That ' the fame would rife more readily from the Dead. And ' taking the Cup, he gave Thanks to his Father, and gave ic
* them to drink, faying, Drink ye all of it. When he
* drew near to the time of his Death and PalTion; it is
* faid, that having taken the Bread and the Cup, he gave
* Thanks to his Eternal Father he therefore who had taken ' upon him to expiate the Iniquities of others, gave Thanks
* to his Father, without having done aify thing that was
* worthy of Death : he bleffeth it with a profound Hu- *mility, at the very time that he faw himfelf loadenwith
* ftripes 3 without doubt to inftrud us, what every one
* of us ought to do when we -find our felves lafhed with
* the whip and fting of our Confcience : For, if he who was
* innocent , endured with meeknefs and tranquillity the
* ftripes due to the Iniquity of others this was to teach ' and inftrud us what he ought to do that is obnoxious,
* when he is corrected for his own TranfgrelTions. If he
* fufFered with an equal mind, the Scourge due for the Sins of ' others, this teaches us v/hat a Subjed ought to do when un- ' der the Divine CorreAions •■, when he who is equal to the ^ Father, gave Thanks to him when under his Scourges.- For
' this is my Bhed of the Net* Teftiiment, which JhalL he jhedfor you 4//,
*/pr the remiJfmofSin-j becaufe he afliires us, that the Bread be-
* comes his Body , and that the Wine doth operate and
* produce his Blood in the Flefh. The Bread reprefents to
* us his Myftical Body, and the Wine is the Symbol of
K Miis
66
Remarks upon the
' his Blood. But, becaufe we muft abide in Chrift, and ' Chrift muft abide in us, we mingle Water with tlie Wine *in the Cup of the Lord. ^ And, as St. wicnefleth, the
* People are Water, and it is not permitted to any body to
* offer Water alone, no more than the Wine alone in ' like manner as it#is forbidden to offer the Grains of 'Wheat, without their being mingled with Water, and
* fo reduced to Bread, for fear left fuch an Oblation might ' fignifie, that the Head ought to be feparated from its ' Members, and that Jefus Chrift could have fuffered,
* without an extreme love and defire of our Redemption ; ' or that this Oblation did not give us ground to believe, ' that wc might be faved, or offered up to his Father ' without the Myftery of his Paflion. As for his faying,
^ This is my Blood of the Nerv Tefiawent, 'tis that we might make
' a diftin(5tion between the new Covenant and the old, ' which was confecrated with the effufion of the Blood of 'Goats and Oxen, as the Lawgiver faid, at thefprinkling 'of if, this is the Blood of the Covenant which God
* has commanded you : For it is neceflary that the Patterns ' of true things, fhould be purified by thefe ; but that ' the Heavenly Places (hould be purified with more ex-
* cellent Sacrifices, according to what the Apoftle S. Pa»i 'declares throughout his whole Epiftle to the tUherfs^
* where he makes a diftindion between the Law and the ' Gofpel. He declares, by an excellent and ample Expli-
' cation. Verily, verilji^this I fay unto yatt-, I will dri/t't^ no wore cf the Vine, till I jhall drinks it new in the Kingdom of mj
Father. ' The wilole Scripture openly declares, That the ' Synagogue is called the Vine of the Lord the Prophet
* Ifaiah Openly fets this forth in his Song, where he fpeaks
' of it in Jhefe words "7 he Boufe o/Ifrael is the Lord's Hne.
' Tis indeed of this Vine that the Lord drank large
* draughts, though many Branches tliereof were infeded
* with the bitternefs of a ftrange Vine-, and though in the ' mean time many of the People are gone aftray from the
* true way of the Faith, yet there were ftill found a great ' many, during the whole time of the Law, who glorified
* God by their holy and godly thouglits, and by ilie Pea- .
Jncient Church of Piedmont. 6^
* (ftice of their Heroical Virtues. But Jefus Chrift hav ing TiitFered intheFlefh that was capable of fuffering, aiid being
' raifed from the Dead, the time is come, that hath put an ' end to thefe legal and figurative obfervations : All thofe 'things that were obferved according to the Letter, have
* been changed into a fpiritual fence, and have been con- ' firmed in the New Teftament by the Grace of the Holy 'Ghoft. Jefus Chrift then going to fuffer, faith, I /haii
drink. «• ff^ore of this fuice of the Vine, until the day that I/hall drink^it n$w with yoH in the Kingdom of my Father. * As if he
' had plainly faid, I will no longer take delight in the car- ' nal Ceremonies of the Synagogue, amongft the number ' of which, the great Feftival of the Pafchai Lamb was
* one of the chiefeft i For, this fhall be the time of my ' Refurrection-^ that very day I Hiall be lifted up to the
* Kingdom of fieaven ■■, that is to fay, to the Kingdom of ' a new life of Immortality 5 I (hall be filled together with ' you, with a new joy for the Salvation of my People, ' which lliall be born again in the Spring of one and the '£:me Grace. In like manner alfo when he faith, I /hall
' mt drinl^ of this juice of the Vine, until the day that I fha.lL ' drink^it new with you in the Kingdom of my Father. He WOuld
'beunderftood of the Old Teftament, when he calls it ' New : And therefore fince he had taken a Body from ' the Family of Adam, who is called the Old Man, and
* that this his Body was' now to be expofed to death 5
' tis for this redfan that by the Sacrament of Wine he recom~
' mends to us his Blood. What are wc to uuderftand by this ' Ne.v Wine, but the Immortality of our Renewed Bo- ' dies ? For when he faith, I will drink it wich you, he
* promifeth to them alfo the Refurredion of their Bodies, ' in order to their being clothed with Immortality. For ' this word Vohifcum with you, muft not be taken as fpo- ' ken of the fame time, but as importing that the Difci- ' pics iTiould in time to come be renewed as weii as
* he. For, doth not the Apoftle fay, that we are all raifed - ' again with Ctirift, that our future Reluirev^lion might af- 'ford us prefent Joy? And whereas he faith of this fuice
'■ of the Vi»e, and calls ic alfo new, th.is for certain fig-
K 2 'nifies
68
^marks upon the
' nifies, that the fame Bodies mud be ralfed again, accor-
* 4ing to the Rules of an altogetlier Heavenly Renovati- ' on, though at prcfent they muft die, according to the
* Old Man. If you underftand the fews by this Vine, from ' the oldnefs of which,he at prefent now drinks the Cup of his 'Paflion^ it hath alfo been fignified to us, That that ' Nation muft approach to the Body of Jefus Chrift, by
* the change of a new life : The whole Houfe ef Ifi-ad Jhall
* he faved, together with all its cem}>aKj, nvhich jhall enter jviph
* them. After they had fung an Hymn, they went to the
* Mount of Olives. This is that which we read in the Pfal-
* mift 5 The Poor Jhall eat and be filled^ and they that feeh^ the
^Lord/hall prai/ehim. This Hymn may be alfo underftood,
* according to the account St. fohn gives of it, to be that which *"JefusChrift fang, when he gave Thanks to his Eternal Fa- rther, wherein he prayed for himfelf, for his Difciples, and
* for all thofe who fliould believe at their preaching. And
* 'tis not without caufe that he leads his Difciples to the 'Mount of Olives, after having fed them with the Sacraments
* of his Body and his Blood, and after his having recommen-
* ded them to his Father , by the Hymn of a ten-
* der interceffion to inform us, without doubt, that it is
* by receiving of the Sacraments, and by the afliftancc of
* his Prayer, that we muft come to the Pofleffion of *Heroical Virtues, and that it is by this means alone, ' that we fliall receive in our Hearts the Un(5lions of tlie 'Holy Spirit.
We find by this Extrad, that he followed the notions of the Primitive Church clofely on this Subje(5t, and that the Church which bordered upon the Mountains of the Alps,did not entertain any Opinions like thofe of Pafchafins. We ought to obferve here, as a thing natural and obvious, that if he endur'd fome Contradiction, upon other Ar- Eicles,yet he never ^^'as impleaded about that of the Eucharift, which fliews that that Truth, at that time, was yet in puflelTion of its own rights,and that thofe who quarrel'd with 'him about other Articles, as, fonas Biftiop of Orleans , Dmgalus and the Abbot Theodemirus^ were of his Opinion about tlie matter of the Eucharift. For feeing his Com- mentary,
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
nientary upon St. Mattherc w as publiflied in the year 8i<r. and that Theodemirus continued ftill his Friend in 813. pref- fmg him to write on the Old Teftament, it is evident that till then nothing had interrupted the good correfpon- dence that was between them
MMllon has publiflied an extra(5l from the end of his Work upon Leviticus dedicated to Abbot Theodemirus^ which fliows the great care that -he took to withdraw ' thofe of his Diocefs, from the hanckering they had after the wor- fliip of Creatures, and the troubles and croflfes he had met with from thofe, who were willing to defend their Superftitions.
' Becaufe you have commanded me to write thefe things, AndeSi. r.u
* I have undertaken it, not as for your Inftrui5tion, but for fag. 35, 37* *your Satisfa(5lion. But it is your duty to judge of it with 38, 19-
' more truth, and to ftir up your felf by your Examples,
* to the pra(5lice of a true Cliarity, which is the moft ex- *cellent of all Virtues. And I afTure my felf, that L
* may moie eafily attain to the pofleffipn of tliat vertue, by
* means of your Prayers, than by any ftrengdi of my own.
* See here, my dear Brother, what I have here anfwered^
* as well as I could, to certain demands you have made-
* of me. And I earneftly defire you on this occafion, that ^if you have difcovered, or can find, for time to come,- 'any thing better, concerning the things about vvhich you
* command me to write unto you, we fliall take it very
* kindly, if you fhall be pleafed to communicate the fam© *tousj for I am naturally more inclin'd to learn, than to
* teach others. For this Beauty of the Eternal Truth-
* and Wifdom ( God grant I may always have a cpnftant.
* will to enjoy her, for the Love of whom have. .airo.
* undertaken this work ) doth not exclude thofe that corner
* unto her, becaufe of the great number of hearers Hie *hath, (he grows not old by length of time, (he minds ■
* not places, (he does dot fuffer her felf to be Qvertakqi» *by night, fhe does not fliut up her (elf ,m 'lliaflo^s,> *and doth not expofe her felf to our Bodily5enfes: She- *is near unto all thofe that turn themfelves. to her, from- *all parts of the World, and who love her indeed, rtieis.
* Eternal
(Remarks u^oji the
Eternal to all (lie is not limited by any places, (lie is eve- ^ ry where : Slic advertifeth abroad , "flie infttads ' vvit!)in , flie changes and converts thofe that behol d
* her : She doth not fufFer her fclf to be violated by ' any perfon. No Man can judge of her, no body can
judge well without her. In this Idea of my Faith, I fe-
* parate all cliange and alteration from Eternity, and in this 'Eternity I difcever no fpace of time, for the (paces of time
* are made up of future and paft motions of things now
* there is nothing paft or future in Eternity : for that
* which pafifeth ceafeth to be, and that which is to come, 'has not yet begun to be: but- as for Eternity it is that
* which is always prefent, nor ever has been, fo as not to *be prefent ftill nor ever fliall be, but foas ftill tocon- ' tinue prefent becaufe it is (he alone that can fay to the 'Spirit of Man, 'Tis I who am the Lord, and 'tis of her
* alone we can fay with truth , he who is Eternal has
* fent me.
* And fince this is the cafe , we are not commanded 'to go to the Creature that we may be happy, ' but to the Creator who alone can conftitute our Blifs ;
* of whom if we entertain other Opinions than we ought ' to have, we involve our felves in a very pernicious Er- ' ror. For as long as we fhall endeavour to come to *that, which is not, or which, fuppofing it to be, yet 'doth not make us happy, we (hall never be able toar-
* rive at a happy life. A Man doth not become happy 'becaufe another isfo, but wlien a Man imitates another, 'that he may become fuch as he is, he defires immedi-
* ately to become happy by the fame means, he finds another 'is become fo, that is, by the enjoyn:;ent of this univer- ' fal and unchangeable truth. Neither can a Man become 'prudent by the Prudence of another, or valiant by 'the valour, or temperate by the temperance, or juft
* by the juftice of another but by forming and fartilon- ' ing his Mind by the immutable Rules and Splendors ' of tiiofe Virtues, which without alteration fhine forth in 'this common univerfal Truth and Wifdom .- In imita-
* tion of whom he formed and fquared his manners, whom
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
* we propofe to our felves as a Pattern to imitate, and
* whom we look upon as a living Copy of that Eternal
* Wifdom. Our will faftning it felf and cleaving to this
* unchangeable and common good, affords the firft and
* great good things Man is capable of, becaufe (lie is a 'certain mean good. But when the will of Man fepa- ' rates it felf from this unchangeable and common good, 'and feeks her own particular good, or directs her felf ' to any outward or inferiour good, flie fins.
After this he quotes an excellent PalTage of St./lufiinj from his Treatife concerning the True Religion. ' Where- ^^;^.ff|l^ ' fore we owe no Religious worlhip to thofe who are 55. 'departed this Life, becaufe they have lived religiouflyj 'we muft not look upon them as perfons that require our ' Adorations and Aomage , bat they defire that he may ' be worthy of our refped, by whom, they being enlighc- ' ned, rejoyce to fee us made partakers of their Piety, *We muft therefore honour them, becaufe they deferve
* to be imitated but we muft not worlliip them with I an ad of Religion. And if they have lived wickedly, ' we do not owe them any refped at ail, in what part
* foever of the World they be. That then which is ho- *nouredbythe higheft Angel, muft alfo be honoured by
* the loweft of Men, becaufe the nature of Man is become ' the loweft, for not having honoured him. For an Aa- 'gel takes not his Wifdom elfewhcre than Man does. 'The Truth. of an Angel, and that of Man, are both 'derived from the fame Fountain, that is from qne and ' the (ame Eternal Truth and Wifdom. For by a pure 'effed of that Eternal Wifdom, it comes to pals that the ' power of God, and that unchangeable Wifdom Confub-
* ftantial and Coeternal with the Father, hath vouch -
* fafed in order to the accompliflTment of the adorable ' Myftery of our Salvation, to take our humane nature •■upon him, that he might teach us, t\\n we owe our ' adorations to him who alone de(erves to be worftiipped 'by all intelligent and rational Creatures. VVe ought 'alfo to believe that thofe good Angds, which are the ^Hioft excellent Miaifters of God, would hive us to
* worlhip
71 (^marks upon the
' worfhip one only God together with them, by the ' alone vifion of whom they are happy. For we are not
* happy in beholding the Angels, neither can that vilion
* ever make us fo, but we (hall be happy by beholding
* the Truth, by means of which we love the Angels, 'and congratulate them. Neither do we envy their hap-
* pinefs, becaufe they are more adtive than we, and be- *cau(e they enjoy the vifion of God, without being mo- Mefted with any trouble*, but rather love them fomuch 'the more, becaufe our hope puts us upon expecting *rqraetbing anfvverable .to thefe their excellencies, from
* him who is the God of us both. Wherefore we ho-
* nour them with our charitable refpe(5ls but no: like 'Slaves ; we build no Temples to them, neither will *theybehonour'd by us in any fuch manner, becaufe they
* know that we whilft we are good, are the Temples of the
* living God. After his quoting of this paflfage fee how he concludes his Work*
* Thefe things are the higheft and ftrongeft myfteries of
* our Faith, and characters moft deeply imprinted in our
* Hearts. In ftanding up for the confirmation and defence *of which truth, I am* become a reproach to my Neigh-
* hours, to that degree, that thofe who fee us do not
* only feoff at us, but point at us, one to another : but
* God the Father of Mercies, and Author of all Confo-
* lations, has comforted us in all our Afflidions, that we
* might be able, in like manner, to comfort tliofe that arc
* prefi: with forrovv and afflitSion we rely upon the Pro-
* tei^ion of him who has armed and fortined us with
* the Armour of Righteoufnefs and of Faith, which is the ' tried Shield for our Eternal Salvation.
He feems in thefe words to allude to the complaints that had been made againft him, at Ludovkus Pinis, Court, for having broke down Images throughout his Diocefs, and for writing, in defence of himfelf, a Treatife againft the adoration of Images, the worfliip of Saints, Pilgrimages, the worfhip of Reliques, with other fuch like Superftitions. And fince the cruel diligence of the Inquifitors, has de- ftroyed this piece, we muft ga^fs at the time wherein he
wrote
Anaent Church of Piedmont.
wrote if, from the account his adverfaries give us there- of, viz, TkeodewiYMs , DungAlus and fonas of Orleans, and
feaich in their Books for his true Opinions, and the Argun:icntshe made ufeof againft the Defenders of Super- ftition.
Dmgalus Wrote in the year 8i8. as appears clearly from what he mentions of the Decree paft in Ludovicw Pitiss his Palace, after the AfTembly of P^ris, in the year 82 J. about the matter of Images, as a thing which hap- pened two years l>efore. In his Book he accufeth Claw tlitts for taking upon him, after ^20. years and more, to reprove thofe things tiiat vr ere paft in continual ufe, as if there had been none before him that ever had any Zeal for Religion from whence it is evident, that CUh- dius wrote fince the year 820. It feems indeed as if he had anfweredthe Abbot Theodemirus after the year 823. who had intimated to him the offence that was taken at his Behaviour and Opinions, which he did fo eflfeiitually as not to have any need to write another Treatife upon the fame Subject.
However 'tis Dfinga'w himfelf who has preferved the Ex- traits of the Apologetical anfwer, which C/^W/Wmade about that time to the Abbot Theodemimss which Apologetick he begins in this manner : ' I have received ( faith he to Theodemirus ) * by a particular bearer thy Letter, with
* the Articles, wholly ftuffed with babling and fooleries. *You declare in thefe Articles, That you iiave been
* troubled that my fame was fpread, not only throughout •all Italy, but alfo in Spain and elfewhere-, as if I had 'formerly, and ftill do preach a new Sedt, contrary to the
* Rules of the Antient Catholick Faith, which is moft ab- *folucely falfe; Neither is it any wonder at all, if the ' Members of Satan talk of me at this rate, who have ' alfo called our Head a Deceiver, one that hath a De- ' vil, cj-c. For I teach no new Sed, as keeping my felf *to the Pure Truth, preaching and publidVing nothing but 'that-, but on the contrary, as -far as in me lies, I have ' reprefled, oppofed,^ caft down and deftroyed, and do */^ill repress, oppofe and deftroy, to the utmoft of my
L * Power,
74 Remarks upon the
*Pwr, all Seels, Schifms, Superftkions and Herefies: 'and (haH never ceafe fa to do, by the alTiftance of God, *as far as I am able: for fince it is exprefly faid, Thou
' Jhah yiot make to. tloy felf the refemhUnce of anj things either
* in Heaven or on Earth, &c. This is not alone to be un- *derftoodof the Images and refemblances of ftrangeGods,
* but alfo of thofeof Celeftial Creatures.
'Thefe kind of People, againft whom we have under- ' taken to defend the Church of God, tell us, if thoa 'write upon the Wall, or dravveft the (mages Peur
* or of Panl, of fupiter, Saturn or of Afercurj ; neither are 'the one of thefe Gods, nor the other Apofiles, and ' neither the one nor the other of them are Men, and ' therefore the name is clianged : and in the mean time
* both tiien and now, the fame ever continues ftili. Sure- -*ly if we ought to worlh'p them, we ought rather to ' worfliip them alive, than as thou haft reprefented them, 'as the pourtraicures of Beafts, or (what is yet more truej
* of Stone or Wood, which have neither life, nor feeling, ' nor reafon : for if we may neither worlliip nor (etvc ' the works of God's hand, how much lefs may v\'e vvor-
* fliip the works of Mens hands , and adore them in ho- ' nour of thofe, whofe refemblances we (ay they are > for ' if the Image you worfliip is not God ( for not only he ' who ferves and honours vifible Images , but alfo what-
* foever Creature elfe, whether heavenly or earthly, whe- 'ther Spiritual or Corporal, he ferves the fame inftead of ' God, and from it he looks for the Salvation of his Soul, ^ which he ought to look for from God alone, and is of
* the number of thofe, of whom the Apoftle faith, Tha: ^ they worfliippcd and ferved the Creature m.ore than the ' Creator. Wherefore doft thou bow to falfe Images, and wherefore like a Have doft thou bend thy Body to pitiful flirines, and to the work of I^lens hands ?
' But mark what the followers of the Falfe Religion and ' Superftition do alledge ^ They fay 'tis in Commemoration ' and in honour of our Saviour that we ferve, iionour and ' adore the Crofs, whom nothing pleafcth in our Saviour, but ' tliat which wasfileafingto the ungodly, zi^. The reproacli
! of
Jncient Church of Piedmont.
* of his Paflfion, and the token of his Death, They witnefs 'I>ereby,thac they perceive only ot him, what the wicked ' law and perceived of him, wliecher Jews or Heathens, who
' do not Ice his Re[urre6tion, and do not co.jfider him, hut • *as altogether fwallowed up of Death, without minding ' what the Apoftie faith, We know Jefus Chrill no longer ' according to the Flelh.
' Grd commands one thing, and thefe People do quite ' [he contrary God commands us to bear our Cro(s, and ' not to worlliip it j but the4"c are all for wordiipping ic, ' whereas they do not bear it at all, neither will they ' bear it either corporally or fpiritually to tcrve God af- ' ter this manner, is to go a whoring from him. For if wc ' ought CO adore the Crofs, becaufe Chrift was fatlned to ' it, liow many other things are there which touched Je-
* fus Chrift, and v. hich he made according to the Flefh > ' Did not he continue nine Months in the Womb of the ' Vii gin ? Why don't they then on the fame fcore wor- ' (hip all that are Virgins , becaufe a Virgin brought
* forth Jefus Chrift? Why don't they adore Mangers, and 'old Clouts, becaufe he was laid in a Manger, and wrapt
* in Swadling-cloaths? Why don't they adore Filber-boats,
* becaufe he flept in one of tliem, and preached to the
* Multitudes, and caufed a Net tobecaft out, wherewith ' was caught a miraculous quantity of Fifli ? Let thera
* adore Affes, becaufe he entered into fc gfalem upon the
* Foal of an Afsj and Lambs, becaufe it is written of
* l>im. Behold the Lamb af God, that taketh away the fns of the
'■World. But thefe fort of Men would rather eat live -* Lambs, than wordiip th?ir Images. Wliy don't they
* worlliip Lions, becaufe he is called the Lion of the Tribe ' of ]Hel.th>-ox Rocks, becaufe it is faid, y^nd the Roc\ was ' Chrift ? ^ or Thorns,becaufe he was crowned with them ? or
* Launces, becaufe one of them pierced his Side ?
' Ail thefe things are ridiculous, rather to be lamented - 'than fet forth in writings but we are forced to fetthem' ' down, m oppofition to Fopls, and to declaim againft ' thofe hearts of Stone, ^ whom the arrows and fencences ' ©f the W ord of Gm cannot pierce, and therefore we
L z * arc
(I{emarks upon the
^ are fam to fling fuch Stones at them. Come to your ^lelves again, ye miferable Tranfgreflfors 5 why are you gone aftray from Truth, and why, being become vain, *are ye fallen in love with Vanity ? Why do you Cru- *cifie again the Son of God, and expofe him to open ' (hame ? and by this means make Souls by troops, to 'become the Companions of Devils, eftranging them 'from their Creator, by the horrible Sacriledgc of your
* Images and likencfTes.and precipitating them into everlafting
* Damnation?
' And as for your reproaching me,that I hinder Men from 'running in Pilgrimage to Rome 1 will fir ft demand of you
* your felf, whether thcu knoweft, that to go to- Rome is
* to repent or do Penance ? if it be fo indeed, why then *haft thou for fo long a time damned fo many Souls,
* whom thou haft kept up in thy Monaftery, and whom 'thou haft taken into it, that they might there do Pe- ' nance, obliging them to ferve thee , inftead of fending
* them to Rome, if it be fo that the way to do Penance,
* be to go to Rome, and yet thou haft hindred them ?
* What have you to fay againft this fentence. That whofo-
* ever fliall lay a Stone of ftumbling, before any of thefe
* little ones, it were better for him, that a Milftone were
* hung about his neck, and he caft into the bottom of *che Sea?
*We know very well that this PafTage of the Gofpel
* is very ill Underftood j Thou art Peter, and nfon this Rock, ^ mil I build my Church, and I will give unto thee the Keys of the
'■Kingdom of Heaven : under the pretence of which words
* the ftupid and ignorant common People, deftitute of all *^ Spiritual knowledge, betake them felves to Rome, in hopes
* of acquiring Eternal Life : for the Miniftry does be- ' long to all the true Superintendents and Paftors of the ' Church, who difcharge the fame, as long as they are in 'this World, and when they have pay'd the debt of
* Death, others fucceed in their places, who enjoy the fame ' Authority and Power.
Return,
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
77
* Return, O ye blind, to your Light, return to him who 'enlightens every Man that coraeth into the Worlds
* all of you, as many as you be, who do not keep only
* to this Light, you walk in Darknefs, and know not 'whither you go 5 for the darknefs has put out your 'Eyes. If we muft believe God when he promifeth,
* how much more when he fwears, and faith, That if
* Noah, Daniel and Job ( that is, if the Saints, whom you 'call upon, were endowed with as great Holinefs, as great ' Righteoufnefs, and as much Merit, as thefe were) 'they (hall neither deliver Son nor Daughter: and 'tis
* for this end he makes this Declaration, viz. That none 'might put their confidence either in the Merits
* or the IntercefiTion of Saint?. Underftand ye this, ye. ^ ' People , without underftanding ? ye Fools, when will
* ye be Wife ? ye who run to Rome, to feek there for the In- ' terceifion of an Apoftle. What think you would St.
^ guflin fay of you, whom we have already fo often- f quoted, &c.
* The fifth thing you reproach me for,is, That it difpleafeth ' thee, that the Apoftolick Lord ' for fo you are pleafed to
* call the late Pope Pafiha' deceafed ) had honoured me ' with this charge j but forafmuch as the word, Apoflolictur dicitHT quaft AfoftoHcfiflos, may intimate as much as the A po- ' ftles Keeper, Know thou, that he only is apoftolick, who ' is the Keeper and Guardian of die Apoftle's Dodrine, and
* not he who boafts himfelf to be feated in the Chair of the 'Apoftle, and In the mean time doth not acquit himfelf of ' the Charge of the Apoftle, for the Lord faich, That the.
* Scrihes and Pharifeei fate in Mofe/s Chair.
Now , becaufc Jona^ of Orleans had no Other Extra(as. out of the Book of Cktidiw, befides thofe tliat had been already refuted by DmgAlus^ a Reclufe of the Abby of- St. Denjis, therefore he confines himfelf to refute the fame Opinions of Claudifis, which he did only in the year 840^ about a year after CUmMus his death whereupon I defire the Reader toconfider, Firjf, That notvvithftanding galhj and fona4 did both write by the order of Kings, and lhat they make mention of a Condemnation of CL'^nditft
78
^marks upon the
paft* in the Palace , yet nothing of all this was abfe to Ihake rhe Reputation of ClaHdhs. He wrote againfl: all ihele Su per i>;r Ions from the year 823, and did not die till the Year 839-, (o that for fiKteen years together, he w as on- ly fee upon by fome particular Perfons, by an obfcure and reciufe ^.lonk, who was a Stranger to Fr4;?fff, and who probably being an Italic, took part with the Church of Roir.e , at that time engaged for the Worlblppers of Idols.
Secondlj^ That the Fathers of the Alfembly of Paris, in the year 8zs, had juftified moll of the Principles maintain d by cUntltus, this great man having been only engaged to carry the matter farther than they, for being nearer to the Diocefs of Rome, he faw the danger fo much the nearer, ia ® which his Flock were, of falling into Idolatry.
Thirdly, That to go to the bottom of the matter, y^gohr-, dus Archbilhop of Lions, pufti'd that Point as far as C/a»- difis himfelf as appears from his Treatife againft Pidures. 'Tis a pleafure to fee how Father Laymud torments him- felf to jufhfie Agobardus, whom the Church of Usns ho- nours as a Saint, though he h?.s made ufe of the lame Ar- guments that C/W»W did, and given large Teftimouies of his being as vigorous an Icomdafl, as ever Claudius was. We may therefore aflert without rafhnefs, Tliat either all the Fetches of Baronlus, and of -F. Raynaud, not fufficienc to keep Agohardfis in the Martyrology of Lions or, that they ferve'very profitably, at the fame time, to enroll CLmdifis in that of the Church of Turin, as a moft holy and moft illuftrious Birtiop, becaufe of his Dodrine, his ardent Piety, and the great care he took to oppofe the Spirit of Superftition , which reign'd fo much at that time.
Fourthly, After all, we may fay, that neither Dungalnsuov foHAs of Orleans, maintained the Opinion of the Church of Rome that was then ; 'jovios makes mention of the Pope's Party, as a Party not wholly cut off from the Commu- nion of the Churcl) but his expreflions are fo (harp, that it appears he had little better Opinion of them. They con- tfcmn all manner of Woi lliip of Images, and (lick clofe to ih.e Decilions of Yrancfort^ in the year 79^^ and Paris 826,
which
Jncient Church of Piedmont.
79
which were diametrically oppoliie to the definitions of the Icenolatrtc or WorOiippers of Images}* and to t.he Prc- tenlions of the Bifliop of Rome^ who had admitted of them.
It was worth our while to take notice of thefe Opini- ons of CUudiMSy and of the manner of his reforming his Diocefsj that we might make it appear, that he laid folid Principles of the Reformation in thofe parts as to feve- ral poifKS. And this was the more neceflary, becaufethe Papifts, as Genebrard in liis Chronology and Rorenco, have owned, That the Vallies of Fhdmont, which did belong* to the BiQioprick of Tarift, preferved the Opinions of CUhSms in the Ninth and Tenth Century.
We ought to obferve two things, which very well deferve an exadrefle<!tion j the fir-(l is, That v^^^/V^m^/ Bifhop of MiUtt, is conftantly repi efented to us by Ripamo»tiHs, by V^^- hsllusj and thofe who have wrote the Hiftory of that Dio- cefs, as one who began to feparate himfelf from the Pope, by a kind of Schifin, which they highly lament, as bordering upon Rebellion, which they own to have lafted above Two Hundred years. But the cafe is not fo as they are pleafed to reprefent it to us, the truth is, That that Prelate preferved his Liberty againft all the Pope's endeavours, wherein he was imitated by his Succeflbrs, who feem to have had no more value than he had for the Decretals of tlie ancient Popes, which were foifted in by the care and Emiflaries of the Roman See, in order to lubmit the Rights and Priviiedges of other Churches to Her.
The fecond is, That tiiough the Emulation which was between the Bilhops of 'i^<7^« znd AquUeia, \us an occahon . of great Gmrerts between them, yet we find, that the Dio- cefs o{ AiiuileU was no more united with that of the Pope, during the time of the Controverfie concerning the Procef- fion, ex utroque [_ from both 3 under AicoUi^s tiie Firfi, and under Photfus. This appears evidently from a Letter of Fhotius, who having received at Cor.fiantim^le a Bi (hop Le- gate from the Archbiihop of Aquileia, wrote an Anfvver as^, ^'j,^-, to him,as to a man who was wholly of his Opinion. Father p. 527. i'* CW^// lias publiflied tills Letter,
CHAR
So
^marks upon the
C HAP. X.
7he Faith of the Churches of Italy in the Tenth Qntury,
FOrafmuch as this Century was generally devoted to Ignorance and Debauchery, and very barren of Au- thors, it will be hard for us to inform our felves any thing in particular concerning the Churches of Italy, except on- ly fo far as we make our conjedures of it, by confidering the condition of other Weftern Churches, which was as- deplorable as can well be imagined. This is owned by the Papifts themfelves, by Caranz^a^ GenehrArdj Baromw, and
torn. 2. spic. many more, who defcribe tius Tenth Century, as a mon- p. i^i.cJ^W. f^fous Age. Indeed, wc can fcarce expert that it Ihould have been better at that time, if we confider the furious Wars that wafted thisDiocefs, as well by reafonofthe Invafionof the Hms, as by the Divifions happening between feveral Princes, who endeavoured to make themfelves Mafters of -that part of Italy, after the death of C/^^r/^/ the Greats
But Providence has prefer ved us two Authors off his Dio- -cefs, the one is Rathtritu, who alone might have been fuffi- cient to inform us very exadlly about the ftate of Italy. This Rather ius Bifllop of l^erona, who from being a Monk in the Abby of Lobe, near to LUge, was advanced to the See of fero'/ta, in the year 918, and being chas'd from dience in 5)132, was made BIlliop of Liege, in the year 954^ and died in974i fo that he was Bilhop during the molt part of the Tenth Century.
Slgebertfti infonns US th.K the Herefie of the Anthrofo- mrphites began to appear again in the Diocefs of Italy, during his Pontiticate. and that he was obliged to write sgainft them. And indeed, we find a large DigrelTion of ■Ratheritu upon this occafion in his firft Sermon of Lett. He obferves, that the Prierts of the Diocefs of (^iceriKA were of -this Opinion, which tliey grounded upon the following
Ancmt Qmrch of Piedmonr.
8i
PafTigcs of Scripture, Pfal. 35.16, 7^0^10.8. and Genef. i, ^6. He acknowledges, that other People of his Diocefs were of the fame opinion, and that they could no otherwife conceive the Exiftence of God. He ingenuoufly confefTeth, that this Belief was grown in the minds of the People, be- caufe in the Pi<ftures and Images th.ey faw God featcd like a King, on a Throne, and the Angels in the lliape of Men with Wings, array 'd in white. Behold here the happy eflfed of Images upon an ignorant People, and what may be expcified from thefe fort of Books which the Prophet Hdak^k. fo
juftly calls The TeMchers of Lies,
He gives us an account in the fame Sermon of a very plea- fant fancy of the People of his Diocefs: They believed that St. Michael the Archangel celebrated the Ma(s of the fe- condFeria, wlience tliey were perfwaded, that the Ma's of St. Michael, called the fecond Feria, was far more excellent than any other Mafs what foe ver. 'Tis worth our obferving, how he confutes this phantaftical Opinion s Fir/t, He main- tains from Reve/. 11. 11. that there is no Temple in Heaven. Secondly, He proves, that the Angels cannot celebrate Mafs, becaufe we ought not to believe, that tlie Angels eat or drink Corporeal Bread and Wine j and that Jefus Chrift is only called the bread of Angels, becaufe they are noarifhed with his Praifes, as with Food. Be it as it will , it appears very plainly, that neither this grofs Peoplc,nor dieir Bilnops, who endeavour'd to difabufe them, were very well inform'd of the Myfteries of the Church of Ro>re:, for otherwife, why doth not this good Biiliop tell his People, that the Angels were not capable of the chiracter of Priefthood ? How could he objeift to them,that the Angels cannot eat or drink corporeal Bread and Wine, Itiit the iubllance of the Body and Blood of Jefus Oirift, which exill therein in the man- ner of a Spirit ? Is it any contradiction to fuppofe, that Spirits may truly receive a Body which exilis after the man- ner of a Spirit ? It is very plain, tliat though, may be, he might have embraced fome of the Hypothefcs of Pafchafms, which through die (lupidity of that People, were fwallowed down by little and litrle, yet he did not know the whole of ir. It was neceflary, tliat Laftfranc, GMitmond^ and
M iliould
8i
^marks upon the
fliould make an end of licking this Bear into Tome ihape, as being but hal f for n^ed by its Author, when at firft it was brought forth.
But not to infift longer on this, I obferve two things, the firft is, That this Author, who had been brought up in a (trange Country, and who probably had brought along with him his notions from thence ; feems in divers points to follow the Dodrine of Pafchafms upon this Queftion. The fecond is, That notwithftanding that, he doth up and. down make ufe of a number of notions and exprelTions, which diredly oppofe and overthrow it. p. 258. On the one hand he tells the Priefts of his Diocefs,
in his Synodical Epiftle, J'aranda cordium mfirorum hahitacu/a, venturo ad ms y per corporis & fanguirtis ftti fuhfl-aMtiam^ Chrifio :
' We ought to prepare the Habitations of our Heart , for ' Chrift, who is to come into us by the Subftance of his Bo- ' dy and Blood.
p. 259. And on the otlier hand, he tells us,_T!iat wicked Prierts eat the Goat and not the Lamb, which is alfo the exprelTion of Odo Clmiacenfis, \^ho lived at the fame time. An alto- gether inconipi ehenfible expreffion in the mouth of a man that believes Tranfubftantiation. J In his Treatife of the Contempt of the Canons, par. i. he
^" ' quotes a Padage of Zeno Biftiop of Verona, which over- throws Tranfubftantiarion. It is found in a Sermon concer- ning/W^^ mdThamar, in thefe words : Omnium ctrrupte vi- venUtim Diaholtu pater eft, 0 cjuam tion manducat verendAm car^ mm Domini, nec bihit ejus f(tngHinem,in quo Diadoias per tri<$ ifia vitia, hoc efi ftiferhiam, hypocrifn atq; InxHriam requiefcit, licet commmicare cum fidelibus videatur. Domino dicer.te, qui mmductit meam caryiem, & bihit meum fangalnem, in me manet, ^ ego in eo. Cum & per CQnver(ionem it a hoc pcjpt refelvi qui in me manet, &■ ego in eo, ipfe manducat carnem meam, & bibit fanguinem meum. In quoenim Deffs manet, ipfe in Deo, quomodo in eo Diabolus dormire poffit non video : dormit vera in eo qui per hypocrijin, vel tUtionem umbrofus & vacuus, per lu.xuriam exijtit hume£lus. jQuid ergo manducat, qttando communicat ? Judicium fi re- fpondes, Apoflolo comives, & intelligere me pariter commones, quia fre eojudicabitur, ideft damnabitur ) quia cum indigntis exifteret^
Chrifii
Ancient Chtinh of Pied m on r.
Chrifti efl anfm carnem manducare^ & fangmnem hlbere j ac pro- ^terea qtiod di;buerat illi fnre fAlvatioy efi faElim dammtie. De fpib(l.ir,tiA vera corporali quam [nmit^ cum ft meet nmc qnaftio, mi- hi nunc quoq'-) ipjihjuar, ita fuccumbo 5 cum (it enim digne fumenti vera caro^ fAnis ticet qued olim f Herat ^videatur & fangMtSy c^uod vtHum •■, ii'.digyie fumenti^ id efi non in Deo manentij quid fit^ ne- dum dicihile^ incogitMle fate r mihi, & ahicra te, ne quAferis^ & prbfundicra te nefcnttatftsfueris, diBum put are hinc quoque mihi.
' The Devil is the Father of all thofe that live wickedly : and, ' O how far is he from eating the venerable Body of our Lord ' and drinking his Blood, in whom the Devil refts, by means *• of thefe three Vices, Pride, Hjpecri/ie, and Luxury, tho&gh ' he nnay feem to communicate with the Faithful ? Our
'Lord telling us, He who eats my fief? and drinkj my bked, abides
' irt me, and I in him : which words may be tranllatcd thus
* He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is chat eats my ' Flcfh and drinks my Blood. For he in whom God abides, ' and he in God, how the Devil can take up his reft in fuch ' an one, I fee not but the Devil doth reft in him, who by ' reafon of Hypocrifie and Pride, is fliadowy and empty, and
* difiblved by Luxury. What then doth fuch an one eat ' when he communicates ? If thou anfwereft fudgment^
* thou agreeft with the Apoftle, and putteft me in mind to ' underftand, that he fliall therefore be judged, that is,con- ' demned, becaufe being unworthy, he durft venture to eac 'Chrift's Fle(h,and drink his Blood •, and therefore that which ' was to have been his Salvation, is become his Damnation. ' But whereas my enquiry at prefent, is, concerning the Bodi- ' ly Subrtancehe receives, Imuft now anfwermy felf, and ' own that liere I am ac a lofs j for fince it is true Flefli to the ' worthy Receiver, though it be the Bread it was before, and
* Blood, which yet is Wine what ic is to the unworthy Re- 'ceiver, that is to him who abides not in God, is fo far, I ' confefs, from being exprelTible, that it is altogether uncon- ' ceivable by mej and therefore in this cafe, 1 ought to take ' that word as fpojte to me, Don't feek after things coo high ' for thee, nor fearch out things coo deep for thee.
U z This
84
Remarks upon the
This feens to be very full, and yet,/*^^?. i8i, he feems to believe with Pafch^fius, that it is the Fielh of JefusChrift, whofoever he be that receives it. But after all, the Good man referrs himfclf to the Belief of St. Chryfoftom, who calls the Sacrament a Spiritual Food, and to that of St. Jaftin^
Tr. 6 1 , & 6 2. Johamem^ vid. fag. 3 04.
Thus in his iirft ^^y^er- Sermon, he fuppofeth, that the Flefh of Jefus Chrift is not received by the Wicked, ^ 310. and in his fourth Sermon on the fame fubjed, he aflerts the contrary,/'^^. 312;
Whatfoever may be his Opinion in this matter, in thofe Wirings I have before produc'd, he feems to have fpoken more plainly in favour of the Real Change of the Eucharift of the Body and Blood of Chriff, in his Epiftle publifliedby D' Jcherj, in the i x Tome of his Spiciiegium-^ but at the fame time he gives this advantage, that he furniflieth us with a new Defender of that figurative fence in the words of the Eucharifl, for he clearly attributes to his Friend, to whom he wrote, that he took the words in no other fence, than as they are underflood by the Proteftants upon which 'tis natural to take notice of Two things, the firfl, That the Difciples of PafchaJiMs have had great trouble to oppofe diretS:- ly the Opinion of St. who lays it down alwaies, That only the Faithful receive the Body of Jefus Chnd. The other Edit. Parif. That GanfridHs J'indocwenfs is perhaps the Hrff who taught p. :77. * clearly (about the year i loo) that the Wilked receive the Body of Chrift as well as the Faithful : againfl the conftanc
Doctrine of St. AuJUh^ TraBr. 2 6. h Johan.
We ought not to forget, that in his Per 'fend'iCMLr Volume,
f.ig. 183, he attributes the force of the Confecration to Pray- er i which the Church of Reme at prefent condemns. ^i^olSozlii, ^'^^) ^^fi^y i^^S^' ^^'^'^^ Communion under both
320', 350. ' kinds was in vogue at that time; as appears from fcveral places of his Works. P- 2(^1. But we are to obferve, concerning this matter, firft, That he exprelly forbids private Mafles. P^a«4, 282, Secondly, That they kept (till the Coftom, not to com- * ^' municate on Fall days, except in the Afternoon, becaufe the
Communion broke the Faft 5 fo little were they of opinion
at
Ancient Church of Piedmont.
ar that time, That theSubftance of the Bread and Wine was, loft and vaniOied by means of the Confecration.
Thirdly, That the cuftom of giving the Eacharift to Lakksy p- in order to carry it to the Sick, was not yet aboliflied, though it began then to be condemned.
It is evident enough how much tiiefe Articles oppofe the Belief of the Church of Rome We may fee, that the Church at that time did not take the Eucharift to be a Sacrifice,fince She believ'd that it could not be celebrated without Com- municants. The Church did not believe it to be only an heap of Accidents, becaufe She belicv'd,that the taking of the Sacrament did break the Faft. The Church of Roryie could not leave the Sacrament in the hands of Lakks^zktx She had once made it the Objed of Iver Adoration.
But let us proceed to other Articles about the Sacraments : Seeing that Ratherius lays down eight deadly Sins, we may guefs from thence, that he was not acquainted with the Seven Sacraments of the Church of Rome, which have a reference to the Seven SinSj as the Modern Divines of thac Communion allure us.
True it is, that he fpeaks of anointing the Sick but as p. ado. of an Undion w hich was adminiftred before the Commu- nion of dying men, which has been prudently altered in the Pontifca/e Romanum, lince they have thought fit to own Extreme Undion for the laft of their Sacraments.
As to Baptiiji, and its necelTity, it appears by his Sy- P- ^^2. nodical Epiftle, that he was againit having the Cufbom abro- gated o{hz^U7\ngon]y on Eafierday cLud fvhlffff»daj, except in cafe of neceffity, that is, danger of Death.
As to the matter of Penance, he would have the Priells invite the People to it, and that they may impofe Penances upon thofe who commit fome fecret Sins j but he referv^s to himfelf the power to impofe Penance upon publick Sin- ners-, which fhews that the ancient Difcipline was yet in practice : And he would have the Priefts of his Diocefs p.^^,^ 2^^^ to be furnilhed with a PoemtentUl^ that they might follow 265. ' the Canons thereof fo far was he from owning them for Abfolutc Judges, who could pronounce without Ap-
86 ^m.irks upon the
He did indeed believe Purgatory, but after another man- ner than the Church of Rome doth ; for he faith exprefly, that it is only for (lighter Sins •, whereas, according to the Papills, it is alfo appointed for the Temporal Pain of Mortal
p. 290. Sins : Purgatorii pcem non efi fiatuta pro crimlnihus fed pro pecca- tis leviorihusy eju£ ntiq-^per lignum^ foenHm & ftipuUm dejtgnan-
tnr : ' The Punifliment of Purgatory is not appointed for ' Crimes, but for lighter Sins, which are intimated by Wood, ' Hay and Stubble.
VVe ftiall now proceed to the examining of fome other Points, the better to inform our felves of the State of this Church oi Italy ^ during the Tenth Cen- tury.
Firfi, They believed that all Bifhops in general were St. Peters SuccefTors. Ratherim is very exprefs in this cafe.
p. 1^4. Petri mnes Epifcopi vicem tenent in Eccleftis. 'All Bifliops
' are Peters Vicegerents in their Churches, ^p<tg. 168, 169^ 173. & lip.
Secortdly, They did not believe that the Pope had power to remove Bifliops from one Bilhoprick to another. The Pag. 171. Tranflation of Rat her ins from the See of Liege, was done by order from the Emperor, and of a Council of Italy, affem- bled at Veyona.
Thirdly, They were very fenfible of the inconvenience of the Sovereignty which the Pope' endeavoured to ufurp 173- over the Church. See what Ratherins fpeaks of it. Si Papa
fit }jequam^ perjures, adulter, vtnator, ehiofta, quid fiet de qua- rimoniis ad ipfptm delates ? Ridehit qnerHlos , favebit ftbi fmiUbtu,
' \{ the Pope fliould prove a wicked Man, perjur'd, an
• Adulterer, a Hunter, a Drunkard what will become of the ' complaints made to him ? He will laugh at thofe that
* complain, and favour thofe that are like himfelf.
Foftrthly, They without fear laugh'd at the Pope's Excom- munications, and his Anathema's, of which he began alrea- dy to be very liberal. Ratherius gives us an inftancc of