Abridgment of Ecclesiastical Laws
(7.) Again, Sir Ed. Coke in the forementioned place affirms, that it appears by Bracton, Briton, Fleta, Stanford and all the Books of the Common Law, that he who is duly convicted of Heresy, shall be burnt to death. Mir. c. 4. de Majesty. Bract. ubi sup. Britt. c. 9. Fleta. l. 1. c. 35. Reg. F. N. B. 269. But the Ecclesiastical Judge cannot (as he says) at this day commit the person that is convict of Heresy, to the Sheriff (albeit he be present) to be burnt; but must have the Kings Writ De Haeretieo Comburendo according to the Common Law. F. N. B. 269. Rot. Par. 2 H. 4. nu. 29. Sautries Case. Bre. de haeret. Combur. per Reg. & Council. in Parliam. The reason Sir Ed. Coke gives, wherefore Heresy is so extremely and fearfully punished is, for that Gravius est aeternam quam Temporalem Laedere Majestatem: And Haeresis est lepra animae. . The party duly convicted of Heresy, may recall and abjure his Opinion, and thereby save his life, but a relapse is fatal. And if the Heretic will not (says he) after conviction abjure, he may by force of the said Writ be burnt without abjuration . 2 H. 4 Rot. Parl. N. 24. A Writ was issued by the advice of the Lord's Temporal in Parliament to the Sheriffs of London, and subscribed per ipsum regem & concilium in Parliamento, by which the Sheriffs were commanded to burn William Sautre, who had been before condemned for a relapsed Heretic by the Archbishop of Canterbury Apostolicae sedis Legatum, and other Suffragans, and all the Clergy of that Province, in Concilio suo Provinciali Congregat. juris ordine. Note 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Proviso, that such as have Jurisdiction by Letters Patents, shall not have power to Judge Heresy but in such Cases as have been before adjudged, &c. or such as shall hereafter be ordered, judged, and determined to be Heresy by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm, with the assent of the Clergy in their Convocation, as aforesaid. Before a man shall be adjudged an Heretic, he ought to be convicted by the Provincial Synod, for the Common Law doth not take notice what is heresy. If an Heretic convict shall after abjuration relapse into the same or any other Heresy, and thereof be convict again, the Writ De Hoeretico Comburendo may be directed to the Sheriff after the party is delivered by the Clergy unto the secular power. And by the Statute of 2 H. 4. c. 15. Every Bishop in his own Diocese might (as aforesaid) convict a man of Heresy, and upon another conviction after abjuration, might by the Sheriff proceed unto comburation. But that Statute is repealed by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 14. vid. co. lib. 12. in a Case of Heresy. Note 2 Ma. tit. Heresy. Brook per omnes Justiciarios & Baker & Hare. The Archbishop in his Province, in the Convocation, may and doth use to convict Heresy, by the Common Law, and then to put them convicted into Lay-hands, and then by the Writ De Haeretico Comburendo they were burnt; but because it was troublesome to call a Convocation, It was ordained by the Statute 2 H. 4. cap. 15. That every Bishop in his Diocese might convict Heretics. And if the Sheriff was present, he might deliver such to be burnt without the Writ aforesaid; but if the Sheriff were absent, or he were to be burnt in another County, then the said Writ ought to be had, who are Heretics, vid. 11. H. 7. Book of Entries, fo. 319. vid. Doctor and Stu. lib. 2. cap. 29. Cosin. 48. 2. 1 & 2. P. & M cap. 6. Also 3 F. N. B. fo. 269. And the Writ in the Register proves this directly. 4 Bracton. l. 3. cap. 9. fo. 123, 124. And it is also true, that every Ordinary may convent any Heretic or Schismatic before him pro salute animae, and may degrade him, and enjoin him penance according to Ecclesiastical Law; but upon such conviction the party shall not he burnt. Note (says the Lord Coke in the same place) that the makers of the Act of 1 Eliz. were in doubt what shall be deemed Heresy or Schism, &c. and therefore the Statute of 10 Eliz. provides, that nothing shall be deemed Heresy, but what had been so determined by one of the four General Councils, the word of God, or Parliament. vid. Fox in Ed. 6. and Briton. 5 Ed. 1. lib. 1. cap. 17. and with this agrees the Statute, 2 H. 5. cap. 7. 23 H. 7. 9. 25 H. 8. c. 14. The proceedings in the commencement and end was altered by the Statute of 25 H. 8. Then came the Statute 1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. and that repealed 5 R. 2. 2 H. 5. and 26 H. 8. and the 2 H. 4. and by general words all Statutes concerning matter of Religion; then the 1 & 2. P. & M. cap. 6. Revived the 2. H. 4. by which the 25. H. 8. lost it's force, the Act 1 and 2 P and M. cap. 8. expressly repealed. 21 H. 8. 23. H. 8. 24. H. 8. 27. H. 8. but the 25. H. 8. cap. 14. was not repealed, being repealed before by the 1. Ed. 6. yet in the end of that long Act there is a general clause sufficient of itself to repeal the Act 25. H. cap. 14. without more: Then the 1. Eliz. cap. 1. repeals the 1 and 2 P. and M. except some Branches; and in the same Act it is enacted, that all other Statutes repealed by the said Act of Repeal 1 and 2 P. and M. and not in this Act specially revived, shall remain repealed. But the 25. H. 8. cap. 14. was not particularly revived, and therefore remains repealed. And after the said Statute 1. Eliz. repeals the Act 1 and 2 P. and M. of reviving of three Acts for punishment of Heresies; so that now at Common Law (according to the Lord Coke ) none can be burnt for Heresy, but by Conviction at a Convocation. After this, viz. Hill. 9. Jac. the Attorney and Solicitor consulted with him whether at this day, upon Conviction of an Heretic before the Ordinary, the Writ de Haeretico Comburendo lieth, and it seemed to him to be clear that it did not, for the Reason and Authorities that he had reported Trin. 9. Jac. before. But after, they consulting also with Fleming Chief Justice, Tanfield Chief Baron, and Williams and Crook Justices: And they, upon the report of Dr. Cosins, and some Presidents in Queen Elizabeth's time, certified the King that the said Writ lieth .
(8.) Since the Devil in his Serpentine Policy first negotiated the Fall of Man, there have ever been such as have gone forth, like the lying Spirit in Ahab's false Prophets, whereby many, as he was, are deceived to their own Ruin; these are the Devils Emissaries, Active in sowing Tares among the Wheat, whom we commonly call Heretics, a Black Catalogue whereof in an Alphabetical Method here follows.
Acatiani and Semi-Arriani, they held that the Son was a Creature made by the Father, and that Christ was like to the Father in Will but not in Substance. This Heresy began by Acatius (not the Eutychian ) Bishop, and Successor to Eusebius in Cesaria; and was condemned in the Council of Seleucia.
Acephali, so called because they had neither Bishop nor Priest for their Head, and were Branches of the Eutychian Heresy. They rejected the Council of chalcedon, and denied the two Natures of Christ. They despised all Congregations and the Sacraments.
Adamiani, so called from their going naked in their Assemblies (in imitation of Adam in his Innocency) to which Estate they said Christ had restored Mankind. They condemned Marriage and had Women in common, with whom they lay promiscuously after the Light put out. They held that we ought not to pray to God, because he knows our wants without Prayer: And called their Assemblies that Paradise which God had promised to the Blessed. They had their Conventicles in subterrancan places, called Hypacausta, because that under the place of their Meetings, a Furance of Fire was kindled to warm the same, where they unclothed themselves when they entered into it, and stood naked, both Men and Women, in imitation of Adam and Eve before the Fall. This Heresy was first broach'd by one Prodicus a Gnostic. There was also the Heresy of Adamites, promiscuous in their Lusts, begun or rather revived by a Picard of Gallo-Belgium in the year 1341.
AEtius, a Syrian of Antioch, and Priest of that Church, successor to Arius, to whose Errors he added, and was degraded, and went into Cicilia, where he published them, and was banished by the Emperor, and recalled by Julian in hatred to the Christians. He held (besides Arianism ) that God was comprehensible, and that Christ was unlike the Father in all things, and spake uncouth things of the Trinity, and was justly called an Atheist. He was condemned in the Seleucian Council in the year 359. and confuted by Epiphanius.
Agnoetae, they held that the Divine Nature of Christ was ignorant of some things, as of the day of Judgment, and denied perfection of knowledge to the Son of God in his Divine Nature.
Almaricani, from Almaricus of Carnotum in France, who uttered Blasphemous opinions concerning God, that he was the Essence of all Creatures, and the Soul of Heaven, and that all Creatures should be converted into the Substance of God again: These Heretics approved of all Uncleaness under the Veil of Chastity.
Alogi, they rejected the Gospel, and the Revelation of St. John; saying that they were written by Cerinthus, and denied Christ to be the Word, as also his Divinity.
Angelici, These Heretics were Angel-Worshippers; Epiphanius who speaks of them, better knew their Name than the original of their Sect.
Anomaei, a Branch of the Stock of the Arians; the principal Authors were Acatius, Eunomius, and AEtius. This was in the fourth Century; Sozom. l. 4. c. 22.
Anthropomorphitae, these Heretics were the Disciples of the Andeani an. 370. and revived their Heresy, so called of Audaeus a Syrian, who lived in the end of Arius his time. They Blasphemously held that God had a body like unto Man. That Darkness, Fire, and Water were Eternal. They refused the congregation of the Orthodox Church & admitted grievous Sinners to the Communion without Repentance.
Antidicomarianitae, these supposed that after the Nativity of our Lord, the Virgin Mary accompanied with her Husband Joseph, and did bear Children to him. August. de haeres. of which opinion was Helvidius. It is said, that the opinion of the Fathers of the Church was, that as no man did lie in the Sepulcher wherein Christ was buried, before him: So in the Womb wherein he was conceived, no man was conceived after him; and that the Fathers by the words in the Apostolic Symbol understood, that he was born of Mary a perpetual Virgin; And that by the Brethren of our Lord in the Holy Scriptures, is meant (as is generally held) the Kinsmen of the Lord according to the Flesh.
Antrinitarians were those Heretics who denied the Blessed Trinity.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , these were a Branch from the Root of Eutyches; They supposed that the Flesh of Christ was void of all kind of Human Infirmity. The Emperor Justinian was said to be tainted with this Heresy in his old age, by bearing so much with the Emperess Theodora, to the great Advance of Eutyches his Error.
Apelles, a Disciple of Marcion, yet could not agree with his Master in all things, for he agreed that Christ had a true Body, but not made of the Substance of the Virgin Mary, but of the four Elements, and that after his Resurrection he dissolved into the four Elements, and then returned to Heaven from whence he came Epiphan.
Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea in Syria, so Ruffin. l. 2. c. 20. yet it is said of him, that missing of a Bishopric he fell into these Heresies, viz. That Christ had not Human Flesh from the Virgin, but from Heaven: That he had a Human body but not a Soul: Confounding the Persons in the Trinity: That Christ had no Human Will: That Souls begat Souls: That after the Resurrection, all the Ceremonies of the Law should take place among the Godly.
Apostolici, these Heretics condemned Marriage, and held the Apostles to be all unmarried: They made all things to be common: They used Apocryphal Books for Gospel: They refused to receive those into the Church who had lapsed after Baptism: They would not have Possessions, but rejoiced in voluntary Poverty: and gave Sentence against themselves that they were unclean, because they were procreated by Marriage.
Aquarii, these were certain Heretics, who instead of Wine received Water in the Holy Sacrament. This was in the days of Cyprian.
Arius, a Lybian, and a Priest or Presbyter of Alexandria, he said that Christ was neither God, nor Eternal, but an excellent Creature created before all Creatures: That he assumed only a Body, but not the Soul of a man: That the Holy Ghost was a Creature of a Creature, viz. of the Son: He Rebaptized, and perverted the order of Baptism: He used the Trisagion thus, Gloria Patri, per Filium, in Spiritu Sancto: He denied the Son of God to be begotten of the Substance of the Father, but that he was a Creature, and made of things not existent, and that there was a time wherein the Son was not: He was condemned in the Nicene Council, and banished by the Emperor Constatine.
Armenii, so called of the Province, where their Heresies raged, by the means of Euchanius called Mantacunes: They denied, that Christ assumed his Humanity from the Virgin Mary: They celebrated the Passover after the Custom of the Jews: They held a Quaternity, and that the Divinty suffered.
Artemon, Bishop of Bostra in Arabia, denied the Divinity of Christ, and affirmed that he was not existent before he took Flesh from the Virgin. This was in the third Century.
Artotyritae, they were of the Sect of the Pepusians, and added Cheese to the Bread in the Sacrament.
Assitae, these were Heretics who carried about with them new vessels, to represent that they were vessels filled with the new Wine of the Gospel.
Badesianistae, these were but a Branch of the Heresy of the Valentinians and Gnostics, who denied the Resurrection; these Heretics were in the third Century.
Basilides, an Egyptian of Alexandria; he held fond Opinions concerning the Creation and number of Heavens: that not Christ but Simon of Cyrene was Crucified: That it was lawful to deny Christ in time of persecution, and to have Idols: that no Sins but such as are unwittingly committed should be pardoned: That Faith was natural: That Prophesies came not from God but Angels: And that there was no Resurrection.
Beryllus Bishop of Bostra, he was orthodox at the first, but afterwards held that the Soul died with the Body, and both rose again together: That Christ was not before his Nativity. Origen reclaimed him, These Heresies were condemned in the Arabian Council. An. 249.
Caini, so called of the special worship they attributed to Cain: The reverenced Esau, Core, the Sodomites, yea and Judas himself, as Authors of man's Salvation: They denied the Resurrection of the Body: rejected the Law, and worshipped evil Angels. Tertullian and Epiphanius say, that these Heretics arose from the Nicholaitans, but Irenaeus says they sprung out of the Valentinians.
Carpocrates of Alexandria in Egypt, he held that Christ was mere man, and born of Joseph and Mary: he held also the transmigration of Souls; also that the Devil created the World, and denied the Resurrection. These damnable Heresies did spread in Egypt, Asia, and Rome under the name of Gnostics: he lived incontinently with Marcellina, one of his own Sect, his Son Epiphanes succeeded him in this diabolical Heresy, and (after him) Prodicus the Author of the Adamites. The followers of Carpecrates had in secret places Images of Gold and Silver, which they called the Images of Jesus, and therewithal the Images of Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle, all which they worshipped. So that the worshipping of Images, and the adoration of the Image of Jesus, seems to be a Custom borrowed rather from the old Heretics, than from the ancient Fathers of the first Three hundred years. Epiph. contra Haeres.
Cathari, they professed themselves purer than others, and held Rebaptizing those who sinned after Baptism, condemned second Marriage, and refused to receive those who had lapsed in time of persecution. The founder of these Cathari was Novatus, ordained Priest of Rome by Cornelius, upon his repulse in a Bishopric.
Cerdon of Syria, from whence he went to Rome, and in the time of Higinus broached these blasphemous heresies, viz. That there were two God's, one good, who was the Father of Christ, and another severe and bad, and this Created the World. This Cerdon, as also Marcion, were the Authors of the Opinion of two God's, or two Beginnings: he denied the Resurrection of the Body, and invented a new Baptism after a man hath been Baptized a second and third time: he held that Christ was neither born of the Virgin Mary, or suffered really, with many other Blasphemies against him: he rejected the Law, and often seigned to recant, but in the end was Excommunicated, having lived in Rome Eight and thirty years.
Cerinthus, a circumcised Jew, contemporary with Ebion, he affirmed that the World was not Created by God, but by an inferior power: That Christ was born after the manner of men, of Joseph and Mary, denying her Virginity: he divided Jesus from Christ, saying that Christ descended upon Jesus at his Baptism in the form of a Dove: That Jesus, not Christ, suffered and rose again: That there was a necessity of Circumcision, and that Life Eternal should be at Jerusalem, where all Earthly pleasures should endure One thousand years. The report is, that St. John finding him in a Bath, departed thence saying, that it was a Miracle that the Bath fell not down while Cerinthus was in it. This Heresy began at Antioch, and spread over Asia and Syria; but this Name lasted not, though Carpocras and Samosatenus continued the heresy.
Chiliastae or Millenarii, their Author was Papias Bishop of Hierapolis, whose Heresy was a Branch of that of Cerinthus, in that point that Christ would raise the Godly first, and live a thousand years with them on the Earth. This Heresy was afterwards maintained by Nepos, an Egyptian Bishop, Two hundred thirty one years after Christ 's Passion.
Circumcelliones, They were the most reprobate Branch of the Donatists: they would throw themselves headlong from high places, or cast themselves into fire or water, and counted it Martyrdom. Aug. de Haeres.
Colarbasus, he was Marcus the Magicians Fellow Disciple, and held that men's Lives and Actions were ruled by Seven Planets, and divided Jesus and Christ into two distinct persons.
Collyridiani, they offered Divine honor to the Virgin Mary, and Sacrificed to her as to the Queen of Heaven, they worshipped her with Divine adoration, and offered to her little Pasties baked. Epiphan.
Coluthiani, they denied that any evil, either of sin or punishment was of God.
Donatists, from Donatus a Priest of Carthage, who missing the Bishopric he would have had, did discontentedly fall into these heresies, viz. That the true Church was nowhere but with him and his Disciples: that obedience to God's precepts ought to be voluntary and not compulsive: That no Heretics ought to be punished by the Magistrate: he measured the effects of the Sacrament by the Minister, not by the Author: He Rebaptized, used Incantations, and boasted of Revelations: he held the Son to be less than the Father, and the Holy Ghost less than the Son: His followers slew as many opposites to their Sect as they could: he was at last Bishop of Numidia.
Ebioni, from Ebion a Samaritan, their Founder, or from Ebion [Hebraice ] Poor, they having made themselves so by distributing their Goods in Alms. They denied the Divinity of Christ, rejected St. Paul's Epistles and all the Gospel except St. Matthew; and held themselves bound to observe the Law of Moses as necessary to Eternal Life. Euseb.
Elcesai, of Elcesai their Founder, they were also called Sampsei: They opposed the Virginity of the Virgin Mary, and held that there were two Christ's, one inferior born of her, the other superior; also that the Spirit was Sister to Christ: They adored water as a God: held it Lawful to become Apostates in time of persecution, and approved of one only. Apocryphal Book made by themselves. They sprang from Ebion the Heretic.
Enchratitae, so called because they abstained from Wine, eating of Flesh, and living Creatures: they condemned Marriage, and blasphemed the Epistles of St. Paul; The Author of this Sect was Tatianus a Syrian. Euseb. l. 4. c. 28.
Euchitae, they held Baptism unprofitable.
Eunomius, Bishop of Syricum, an Arian, he added to the heresies of AEetius, that the Holy Ghost was Created by the Son, and that Christ assumed only a human Body, and not a Soul, he was confuted by St. Basil.
Eutyches, Abbot of Constantinople, confuting Nestorius, fell himself into other errors, and confounded the two natures of Christ, making him (after his union) to have but the Divine nature only, and held that he assumed nothing but Human from the Divine: He affirmed also that the Divine nature was passable, and that Christ was rather Deified than God; he was condemned in the Council of Chalcedon.
Felix Bishop of Vrgel on the Pyrenean hills, he held that Christ in his Human nature was the Adopted Son of God; he was condemned for Heresy at Ratisbon; hence came the Foeliciani.
Floriani from Florinus or Florianus a Priest of Rome, he held that God Created all Creatures and things in an evil state, and celebrated the Passover after the manner of the Jews.
Fratricelli, they were of Opinion, that a man might in this world attain to a state of such perfection that he might be altogether without sin, and that he who had attained thereto, was neither under subjection to Civil nor Spiritual Governors, but was freed from all subjection to mortal men, and that they had no need of Prayer or Fasting. These were in the thirteenth Century, and now also in this seventeenth Century are everywhere to be found among us, though under another appellation.
Gazareni, called also Patereni, and Gazari, these were certain Heretics about Toulouse in France in the thirteenth Century, who held that married men were not in a State of Grace, and could not be saved; This Opinion was condemned by the Council of Lateran.
Gnostics, they assumed that Name from the knowledge and learning which they proudly conceived they had above all others: They held (besides those heresies of the Carpocratians ) many other fond Opinions concerning the Creation by Angels; and affirmed that every faithful man had two Souls, that there were two God's, one good and the other bad: They distinguished Jesus from Christ: and held that Christ was eighteen months upon Earth after his Resurrection. There were divers sorts of this Sect.
Godescalchus, one of the Netherlands, about the year eight hundred forty nine, perniciously held, that those who were predestinated unto life by a decree of God's predestination, were necessitated to do well: and those who were predestinated to condemnation, were necessitated by a Decree of God to do evil.
Helsesaitae, the same with those formerly called Elcesai, otherwise called Sampsaei, they mixed the Religion of the Jews, Gentiles, and Christians together: they rejected the Writings of the Apostle Paul: and affirmed that a man who denieth the Lord with his mouth in the time of persecution, if so be he adhered to the Faith in his heart, he had committed no sin: they carried about with them a singular Book, which they said was sent down from Heaven, and promised remission of sins to every man that would hearken to the words of that Book; these were of the third Century. Epiphan. contr. haeres. 2. & Comment. Func. in Chron.
Hermiani, they sprung from Hermogenes an African, and held that the Mass whereof the World was created, was coeternal with God: That Angels created men's Souls: That Christ ascending, left his human flesh in the Son: They denied the Resurrection, and received not Baptism by water.
Hieracitae, of Hierax an Egyptian of Leontopolis, he spake of the Father as of two lights, differing in substance: damned Marriage: denied the Resurrection: excluded Children from Heaven: held that Melchizedek was the Holy Ghost: and that Paradise was no Earthly place.
Jacobitae of Jacob a Syrian, called Zanzalus, for his poverty: They received the heresy of Eutyches.
Jovinianus, a Roman, he held all sins to be equal: denied the Virginity of the Virgin Mary: Contemned Fasting, and all Spiritual exercises: and held that men did not sin after Baptism:
Lucianistae and Apelliani, so called from Lucianus and Apelles, Disciples of Marcion.
Lucifer Bishop of Calaris in Sardinia, he diabolically held, that man's Body was formed by the Devil: That a Christian might kill himself, to be quit of the burden of the flesh, and allowed but part of the Old Testament.
Luciferniani, it is supposed that these were not from the former, but from another Lucifer, for some say, that these were rather but Schismatics than Heretics, and only held, that Faith was a Weapon of Contentions, and not of Heresies. Theod. Compen. Haeres. Sozom. lib. 5. cap. 13.
Lombardians for want of another Name, for in the time of the Emperor Albert in Lombardy near to Navarre, there were a Sect of Heretics, who under color of Religion and Charity made all things common, and women in like manner moved men to carnal conjunction, alleging it to be a deed of charity. This was in the fourteenth century. Imp. Hist. pag. 522.
Macedoniani, of Macedonius the Arian Bishop of Costantinople; They were sometimes Semi-Arians, at other times Arians, and sometimes orthodox, but never constant. They held that Christ was not of the same essence with the Father, but only like to him: And that the Holy Ghost was not God, but God's Minister, and a Creature not eternal.
Manes a Persian, otherwise called Manichaeus in Dioclesians time, Author of the Manichees, he was a devilish crack-braind fellow, and chose to himself twelve Disciples, and composed his heresies out of divers others: He blasphemously affirmed himself to be the Holy Ghost: he held two beginnings, the one good the other evil: rejected the Old Testament, and mangled the New: denied Christ's Divinity, and his real Passion, and the Resurrection of the Body: Condemned Marriage, Alms, and Baptism: he most blasphemously said that Christ was the Serpent that deceived Eve: that Christ's Body was fixed in the Stars: That he redeemed Souls: he forged many things about the Creation: he worshipped the Sun and Moon as God's: attributed two Souls to every man: he ascribed sin not to the free will of man, and his natural defection voluntary, from the Estate of the first Creation, but to necessity, because man's Body was made of the substance of the prince of darkness: with other fond and blasphemous heresies. One Scythianus a Sarazen Merchant infused these Heresies into him. Warranes King of Persia hearing of his fame, sent for him to cure his sick son, who died under his hands; whereupon he cast him into Prison, from whence he made his escape into Mesopotamia; but there the said King retook him, slead him, filled his skin full of chaff, and caused it to be set up before the Gates of the City in Mesopotamia. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 30. & Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 22. Eccle. hist.
Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra, the Metropolis of Galatia, he held blasphemous Opinions against the Trinity, and denied the Divinity of Christ.
Marcion, the Disciple of the Heretic Cerdon: he held (besides Cerdons heresies) that Christ was not the Son of God: he held likewise the transmigration of Souls: That War was not lawful though on just occasion: he condemned Marriage: rejected the Old Testament: Forbad eating of flesh, and allowed of Rebaptizing ( toties quoties ) as oft as men fell and repented, Polycarpus called this Marcion Primogenitus diaboli,
Marcus a Magician, of whom came the M •• citae: he invented a new form of Baptism, viz. In the Name of the unknown Father of all things, and in the Name of the verity the Mother of all things, and in the Name of him who descended upon Jesus: he held that Christ suffered not, nor assumed a Body: he defiled the Sacrament, and was a man of a very filthy life: he denied the Resurrection of the Body, and supposed that Salvation belonged only to the Soul.
Melchisedechiani, the Author of these Heretics was Theodatus Disciple to Theodatus the Currier: he held that Melchizedek was made by God greater than Christ; whose Divinity they also denied, and magnified Melchizedek above Christ.
Menander, Disciple and Contempory with Simon Magus, a Samaritan and a Sorcerer, and Author of the Gnostics; he held with Simon about the Creation by Angels, and affirmed that he was sent from Heaven to save the World; and that by virtue of his Baptism men should not die nor grow old; but the success not answering his promise, his heresy fell of itself. Epiph. Euseb. Aug. & Theod. lib. 4 cap. 11.
Meletiani from Meletius a Bishop of Thebaida, he was deposed for sacrificing to Idols. This was in the fourth Century.
Messaliani, they worshipped God, but not in three persons, and held that God might be seen with corporeal eyes: that the Devil ruled our actions. They attributed Salvation to Prayer totally: they contemned Christ's Passion, and the Sacraments, Alms, and a laborious life, and tolerated Perjury to promote Religion.
Metangismonitae, they held that the Son was in the Father, as a lesser Vessel comprehended in a greater: That God had a Body, and in the Divine essence was something greater and something lesser. Aug. out of Philaster.
Monophysitae, whose Author was Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria, they were also called Theopaschitae and Monothelites, who denied not directly the two Natures of Christ, but only affirmed that after the union of the Natures, there was only one will and one operation in Christ; they attributed the Divine Nature only to Christ; These were a branch of the Eutychian Heretics.
Montanus of Phrygia, Author of the Cataphryges, he affirmed himself to be the holy Spirit, he called himself the Holy Spirit, whom Christ sent to instruct his Disciples in all truth: He said that the Spirit fell but little upon the Apostles, and fully upon himself: He instituted Laws concerning fasting, condemned second Marriage, allowed Incest, confounded the persons in the Trinity, and baked man's Blood with the Bread of the Eucharist: He seduced two women Priscilla and Maximilla to leave their Husbands, and to be his Prophetesses.
Nazareni, they styled themselves so, because that before the Name of Christians began, that Name was the most honorable among Christ's Disciples: They confessed Christ, but withal held a necessity of observing the Law, and framed strange things of Ouria or Nauria (Noah 's Wife, as they would have it) or Vesta: They had many Gospels (as they called them) and boasted much of Revelations and Visions: They held that the Soul of a Man, of a Beast, and of a Plant were all of one Substance. These Heretics continued till after the time of Epiphanius, who reporteth that the Jews so hated them, that they prayed twice a day against them. Epiph. Aug. Theodor. Isodor.
Nepotiani, from Nepos, a Bishop in Egypt, about the year 264. They affirmed that at the latter Day the Godly should rise before the Wicked, and should live with Christ a thousand years in abundance of all earthly Pleasures. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 24.
Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, he spake against the personal Union of Christ 's Divine and Human Nature, for he held that Christ had two several Persons, but not two Wills: That the Son of God in Christ, was but an Assistant to the Son of the Virgin Mary, whom he would not have to be called the Mother of God, but only the Mother of Christ. Euag. l. 1. c. 7. He held that the Humanity in Christ was made equal with the Deity or Divine Nature. He was condemned in the general Council of Ephesus, and died in Banishment, his Blasphemous Tongue being first eaten with Worms, which rotted in his mouth.
Nicholatiae, from Nicholas a Deacon of Antioch, chosen by the Apostles to look to the Poor, who being suspected to be jealous of his fair Wife, did (to clear himself) proffer her to any of the Brethren that would Marry her: Whereupon they took occasion to live promiscuously, making their Wives Common; and held that it was lawful to eat things offered to Idols: That Darkness and Light begat the World, of which were born Angels and Devils, and of them Men. This Heresy continued not long in this Name, but was polished and revived by the Gnostics and Vaentinians. Clem. Alex. & Strom. 3. Act. 6. & Euseb.
Noetius, of Smyrna Disciple to Montanus, he called himself Moses, and held but one person in the Trinity: He being convented, abjured his Heresy; but afterwards being ambitious of a Name, relapsed and dispersed it, and when he died, was cast out unburied, as not worthy thereof.
Novatus, ordained a Priest of Rome by Cornelius, he was the Founder of the foresaid Heretics the Cathari: He held that such as had fallen in time of persecution, were not to be restored to the Fellowship of the Church, albeit they repented thereof.
Ophitae, of 〈◊〉 a Serpent, whom they worshipped, affirming most Blasphemously that Christ was the Serpent which deceived Eve: they denied Christ 's Humanity, and the Resurrection; They held also a Blasphemous opinion concerning the Sacrament: This Sect was a Branch of the Valentinians, and continued till after the time of Justinian the first.
Origeniani and Turpes, of one Origen a Gnostic, who drew his Heresy from Epiphanes Son to the Heretic Carpocras: They prohibited Marriage, but committed fornication and all Filthiness, and rejected some Books of the Old and New Testament, which made against them. Some say they were soul and filthy Beasts, not abhorring Whoredom but Procreation of Children, to the end they might seem chaste, not unlike unto Onan whom the Lord slew. They were also called Origenistae, because they defended the Books of Origen, who were Theodorus Ascidas Bishop of Caesaria-Cappadocia, and the Monks of Nova Lawra. There were of these Heretics also in the sixth Century.
Palmerius, the Chronologer, he was burnt for his Heretical Opinions concerning Angels.
Papias Bishop of Hierapolis, he was St. John 's Disciple, yet afterwards became the Author of the Sect of the Chiliasts or Millenaries, whose Heresy was a Branch of that of Cerinthus, in that point, that Christ should raise the Godly first, and live a thousand years with them on earth.
Patalorynchitae, a Foolish People who counted it Religion to stop their breath with their fingers, and not to utter any intelligible speech.
Patareni and Gazareni, these Heretics did hold that married men could not be saved.
Paterniani or Patriciniani and Venustiani, they were called by the first Name, of Paternus their Founder, and by the last, of their lascivious behavior: They held that the lower Parts of Man were not made by God but by the Devil; others say that they affirmed that the whole Body of Man was formed by the Devil, and •• t by God.
Paulus Samosatenus, so called of Sam • sata the Metropolis of Comagena, where he was Born: He held that the word was not in Christ, otherwise than in the Prophets: That Christ was not the word, and denied his Divinity: He Baptized not in Christ 's Name.
Pelagius Brito, whose Followers were Julianus and Coelestius, in the days of Arcadius or Honorius; this Pelagius was a Roman Monk, born in Armorica or Little Britain, who with his Disciple Coelestius spread his Heresies over almost all Countries, viz. That Adam had died though he had not sinned: That his Sin did only hurt himself, and not others but in his Example: That Lust and Concupiscence, which is naturally in us, is Good, and nothing in it whereof we need be ashamed: That Infants neither have nor draw original Sin from their Parents: That the Infants of the Faithful, though not Baptized, shall be saved, but shall remain without the Kingdom of God: That men have free Will sufficient to do Good, without the Grace of God: That Men by nature were able to fulfil the whole Law of God. Howbeit more easily and better if they were supported by the Grace of God: They denied original Sin, and said that the posterity of Adam were Sinners by imitation of Adam's Sin, but had not received Sin by carnal Propagation: That Children had no need to be baptized for Remission of Sins, and that the godly Fathers in Scripture, when they confessed their Sins, they did it rather for example of Humility, than for necessity, or guilt of Sin. These Heresies have in all ages been confuted by many Learned and Eminent Divines and were condemned by many Councils, specially in the Council of Carthage.
Pepusiani, they were of Pepuza, a Town of Phrygia, between Galatia and Cappadocia; they held (beside other Heresies of Montanus ) that Pepuza was the Heavenly Jerusalem mentioned by St. Paul, Heb. 12. and in the Revelation c. 2. 1.
Petrus Abelardus, a French man, he held vile things concerning the Blessed Trinity, that the Holy Spirit was the Soul of the World, and that he was not of the Substance of the Father. This was in the twelfth Century.
Photinus Bishop of Syrmium in Illyria, a Disciple to Marcellus: he held that Christ 's Kingdom was not everlasting, began at his birth, and should end at the day of Judgment. He was condemned in the Council of Sardis. Socrat. Eccles. Hist. lib. 2. cap. 9.
Praxeas, he was Author of the Monarchici and Patrispassiani; he held that God the Father only suffered.
Priscilianistae, from Priscilianus, a man of Noble birth in Spain: he confounded the Persons in the Trinity: Held fond opinions concerning the Creation: That Mans Soul was of the same Essence with God: That Man's life was ruled by the Planets: That Perjury and Lying were lawful, to hide a Mans Religion: He forbad eating of Flesh, and condemned Marriage, but allowed Fornication, and renewed the Heresy of the Gnostics; this was in the days of the Emperor Gratianus and Valentinian; he was executed at Trevers as a Sorcerer. Hist. Magd. Cent. 4. c. 11.
Proclinianitae, of one Proclus, who (besides other Heresies of the Seleuciani ) held that Christ was not come in the Flesh.
Quartodecimani, they held that Easter was to be observed on the fourteenth Moon; and upon what day soever that Moon happened (though Sunday) they fasted: They refused to admit and receive those who had lapsed after Baptism.
Sabellius an African, he and his followers confessed, that there was but one God only, but they denied that there were three distinct Persons in that one Godhead: They not only confounded, but took away the Persons in the Trinity: He was the Founder of the Photinean 's Heresy: They were called Patrispassiani, because their Opinion imported that the Father suffered; this Sabellius was for his Heresy excommunicated.
Samosatenus, Bishop of Antioch, he denied the Divinity of the Son of God, affirming that Christ obtained the Name of the Son of God through his virtuous Behaviour and patient Suffering, but that he was not naturally and truly the Son of God, begotten of the Substance of the Father: He abrogated the Psalms sung in the Church, and hired Women there to sing his own Praises: He was deposed by a Council at Antioch, and excommunicated by all the Christian Churches in the World. This was (as some affirm) not in the second but third Century.
Suturniani, from one Saturnine of Antioch, who with Basilides the Egyptian, shared the Heresy of Simon in two parts; this Saturnine held that his Disciples, though living dissolutely, might be saved by faith in him: That the World and Man were Created by seven Angels praeter voluntatem Dei: That Christ 's Body was phantastical: That there was one God of the Jews, another of the Christians: That at the Beginning a Good and a Bad man were created, and that from the Good came good men, and from the Bad came evil men: That Marriage was a doctrine of Devils: That men must abstain from things that had life: That some of the Old Prophets were of the Devil: and lastly they denied the Resurrection of the Body.
Secundiani, of Secundus, who was the Cheif Disciple of Valentinian the Heretic, and held all his Heresies, and allowed his Followers all filthiness of Life.
Seleuciani or Hermiani from Seleucius and Hermias, they most abominably held, that the Mass whereof God created the Elements was Coeternal with himself: That the Angels, not God, created the Souls of Men. That Christ in his Ascension unclothed himself of the Flesh of Man, and left it in the Globe of the Sun: They received not Baptism by Water: They denied the Resurrection of the Body, supposing that by new Generations, one succeeding another, that is performed which in Scripture is written concerning the Resurrection.
Sethitae, another Branch of Valentinian in Egypt: They held that Angels begat men in the beginning: They attributed to Seth the Honor due to our Savior, and denied the Resurrection of the Body.
Severus, Successor to Apelles in the School of Marcion, his Heresies were spread in East Syria: They forbad the use of Wine: rejected the Old Testament and the Prophets, using Apocryphal Books of their own: Denied the Resurrection: Ascribed the Creation to Angels. Detested Women as works of the Devil: and used Magic.
Simon Magus, said to be the Father of Heretics, he was Magician and an Hypocrite, though Baptized by Philip the Apostle: he spread his heresies at Rome, where he grew so famous, that the people erected an Image to him with this Inscription, Simony deo Sancto: he most blasphemously affirmed himself to be true God: That the World was Created by Angels: he denied that Christ was either come or suffered: he denied also the Resurrection of the Body: he brought in the promiscuous use of women, and used the company of one Helena, whom he blasphemously gave out to be the Holy Ghost, and that he begat Angels of her: he taught his Disciples to worship Images, his own Image, and the Image of Helena, who accompanied him from Asia to Rome: he attempted to show his power in flying, and with a fall broke his Thigh, and died miserably.— Iren. l. 1. c. 30. Aug. Epiph. Theod.
Swenkfeldius, born in Silesia, he held that the outward Ministry of the Word and Sacraments was not necessary to eternal life, because that by the illumination of God's holy Spirit, without the Ministry of the word, men might be saved.
Tatian, he held that Adam was damned, called Marriage Fornication, prohibited eating of flesh and drinking of wine, he held many God's, denied Christ to be born of David's Seed, and condemned the Law of Moses; he was Author of the Euchratitae.
Theodatus, a Cataphrygian, a poor Currier of Constantinople, he held that Christ was but man, and begotten by man; besides which blasphemy he altered the Gospel according to his own fancy. The Theodatiani denied the Divinity of Christ, for when Theodatus having in time of persecution denied Jesus Christ, was reproved for the same, he answered, that he denied not God, but Man, signifying thereby, that Christ was only Man, and not God manifested in our Nature.
Theopaschitae, they held that the Divinity of Christ suffered. This Heresy lasted long, and was maintained afterward by Eutyches and Dioscorus.
Triformiani, they held the Divine Nature one and the same in the three persons together, but imperfect in the several persons.
Tritheitae, they held that the Nature and Essence of God was threefold, and not one and the same. Johannes Grammaticus (called Philoponus ) was the Founder of this heresy.
Valentinian, an Egyptian, he held plurality of God's, of both Sexes: a multitude of Heavens and Eternities: that Christ assumed nothing from the Virgin, but passed through her as by a Pipe: That he saved Souls only: That the World was made by evil Angels: he denied the Resurrection: despised good works, as unprofitable, and lived of things sacrificed to Idols. Against him Irenaeus wrote Five Books.
Valesii, of one Valens an Arabian; They held that none could be saved, but such as made themselves Eunuchs, detested Marriage, but allowed all filthy Acts, yet gelded themselves.
Venustiani, so called of their lascivious behavior; They were the same Heretics that were called Paterniani from Paternus their Founder, and held the same blasphemous and damnable Heresy.
Vigilantius, an Apostate Monk, he declined Churches, and condemned Virginity, and Spiritual exercises. St. Jerome wrote against him.
(9.) All these Heretics do commonly pass under the notion of Christian Heretics, whereas in truth they may more properly be termed Antichristian; yet they are styled Christian Heretics in distinction to the Jewish Heretics, of which sort were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Hessees, the Galilaeans, the Hemerobaptists, the Nazaraeans, the Ossens, the Sampsaeans, the Massalians, the Herodians, the Genites, the Merissaeans, the Coelicolae, the Ophitae or Serpentines, the Caiani, the Sethiani, the Heliognosti, the Frogworshippers, the Accaronites, the Thamuzites, the Samaritans, with many others, out of which, or some of them, came that cursed Brood of Heretics which poisoned a great part of the World in the succeeding Generations,
The Pharisees (from Phares, division, or separation, because they would be accounted Separatists from all others , attributed all things to Fate; they believed that God disposed all things, but the Starrs helped, yet so as Free Will was left in the hand of Man. They held Transmigration of good Souls, or going into other Bodies; they conceived that he which kept most of the Commandments, although he transgressed in some, was just before God, with innumerable Pharisaical, Proud and Hypocritical conceits and actions.
The Sadducees (either from Sedec, Justice, because they were fevere and rigorous in Judgment ; or of one Sadoch, the first Inventer of their Heresy ; or from both ;) These Sadducees were called Minim or Minei, that is Heretics. They interpreted the Scriptures after their own Sense, and rejected Traditions; they denied a future Reward, and consequently the Resurrection; they denied also the subsistence Spiritual; they cooped up God in Heaven, without all beholding of evil; They denied Spirit altogether; for they held God to be corporeal ; the Soul to die with the Body; the denied Angels and Devils; they ascribed good and evil to a man's Free Will.
The Hessees, Essees, or Essens (either from a word which signifieth Rest, or Quietness, and Silence or Isaiah quasi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Holy . They are placed by Pliny on the West of the Dead Sea a people solitary, without women, without Money, they make no weapon of Warr, nor meddle with Merchandize; they have no servants, but are all both free and mutually servants to each other; they live perpetually chaste, counting continence and contentment great Virtues; they swear not at all, and have all things Common; they avoid pleasures and riches as sins; they marry nor, yet do not deny the lawfulness of Marriage, but the honesty of Women; they shun Oil and Neatness, yet always wear a white Garment; they neither buy nor sell, but mutually communicate; they were worshippers of the Sun, for before the Sun riseth, they speak of no worldly matter, but celebrate certain Prayers, as praying him to rise; they hate an Oath no less than Perjury; they keep the Books of their own Opinions, and the names of the Angels; they give no Sentence of Judgment, being fewer than one hundred ; they will not so much as purge Nature on the Sabbath, for fear of profaning it thereby .
The Galilaeans, their Doctrine was, that only God was to be accounted their Lord and Prince, and would rather endure any the most exquisite Tortures, than call any mortal man their Lord; in other things they agreed with the Pharisees .
The Hemerobaptists, so called from their being baptized or washed every day at all times of the year; they were in their Doctrine of the Resurrection, and in Infidelity like unto the Sadducees; in other things they differed not from the Scribes and Pharisees .
The Nazaraeans, they would not eat anything which had life, and held it unlawful to eat Flesh: They disallowed the five Books of Moses: They placed all Righteousness in Carnal Observations: And professing to imitate Sampson, they nourished the hair of their head, placing all their Virtue therein .
The Ossens were an Issue of the Ancient Essens, holding some things of theirs, as concerning the worshipping of Angels, and of the Sun, adding thereto other Heresies of their own .
The Sampsaeans would not admit either the Apostles or the Prophets: They worshipped Water, esteeming it as a God, believing that life is from thence .
The Massalians were a Slip of the Essees, but after by Marriage with some Pseudochristians, of Jewish became Christian Heretics .
The Herodians thought Herod to be the Messias, and entered into society for costs and charges in Common, to be bestowed on Sacrifices and other Solemnities, wherewith they honored Herod alive and dead .
The Genites or Genists stood upon their Stock and Kindred, because in the Babylonish captivity, or after, they married not strange Wives, and therefore boast themselves of the purity of Abraham 's seed .
The Merissaeans or Merists were (as the name imports) sprinklers of their Holy Water; they made a division of the Scriptures, and received only some part thereof .
The Coelicoli were also an Off-spring of the Essees, and from these proceeded the Massalians, they were Jews, though they corruptly embraced Christianity; and being baptized, revolted to their former Judaism, and retained the Rites of these Coelicolae, or Heaven-worshippers; they had their places of prayer abroad in the open air .
The Ophitae or Serpentines worshipped a Serpent, saying, that he first procured us the knowledge of Good and Evil, for which God envied him, and cast him from the first Heaven into the second, whence they expect his coming, esteeming him some virtue of God, and to be worshipped,
The Caiani, which commend Cain for Fratricide, saying that Cain was made of the power of the Devil, Abel of another power, but the greatest power was in Cain to slay Abel .
The Sethiani were worshippers of Seth the Son of Adam, who affirmed, that two men being created in the beginning, and the Angels dissenting, the Feminine power prevailed in Heaven (for with them they held are Males and Females, God's and Goddesses) Eve perceiving that, brought forth Seth, and placed in him a Spirit of great power, that the adversaries power might be destroyed. Of Seth they held, that Christ should come of his Stock; yea some of them conceived him to be the very Christ .
The Heliognosti were such as worshipped the Sun, and held that the Sun knew all the things of God, and yielded all necessaries to men.
The Frogg-worshippers were such as held, that worship was due to those croaking Creatures, thereby thinking to appease Divine Wrath, which in Phara • h 's time brought Frogs upon the Land of Egypt.
The Accaronites were such as held that worship was to be performed unto a Flye, and did worship it accordingly; probably for the same blind reason that others of them worshipped Frogs; for Divine Wrath was executed by the one as well as by the other.
The Thamuzites, of Thamuz, the Son of a heathen King; they held that his image was to be worshipped and abroed; accordingly the Jewish Women that were bewitched with this Heresy, worshiped this image of Thamuz with Tears and continual Sacrifices; and held further that Pharaoh which ruled in Egypt in Moses his time, was of that Name.
The Samaritans were those Jewish Heretics, who held (especially the Cuthaeans among them) an abstinence from pollution by the Dead, or Bones, the Slain, & the Sepulchers; they held washing their bodies & changing their vestments, when they enter into the Synagogue; they held such Heretical opinions, that the other Jews would have no dealings with them; they held that only the five Books of Moses were Canonical Scripture, the rest they recived not; they held that neither the Trinity, nor the Resurrection was to be acknowledged; they washed themselves with Urine, when they came from any stranger, being thereby (as they held) polluted; they held themselves prophan'd by the touch of one of another Faith; & therefore if they touched one of another Nation, they div'd themselves, garments and all in Water; they held a dead Corps in abomination presently . If they met a Jew, or Christian, they said Touch me not . They call themselves Men which belong to the Blessed Hill. They abstained from things that have life, and some of them from Marriage. One Dosithens a Samaritan is supposed to be the first Founder of the Samaritam Heresies, and the first among them that rejected the Prophets, as not having spoken by the Holy Ghost . There were four sects of Samaritan Heretics, according to Epiphanius, each of them holding their different Heresies in some respects, and having in other respects certain Heretical Tenants common to them all. By all which premisses it is most evident, that the Prince of Darkness, and the Father of Lyes hath had in all Ages, Nations, and Churches, his Emissaries to infect them with Heretical and Blasphemous Erros, but the Gates or Power of Hell to this day never could, nor to Eternity ever shall prevail against the Truth.
CHAP. XLI.
Of Councils, Synods, and Convocations.
- 1. The several kinds of Councils and Synods.
- 2. What Canons in force in the Realm of Primo. Ed. 6. Also how the Canons entitled Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum became abortive.
- 3. That part of the Canon Law, is part of the Law of England.
- 4. Convocation in England, what how, and by what Authority, and for what ends convened; also of what Members it doth consist; with the Authority thereof.
- 5. Convocations and Provincial Synods of very great Antiquity in England; have been ever called by the Kings Writ; their Privileges.
- 6. The Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions may not be repugnant either to the Kings Prerogative, or to the Laws, Statutes, or Customs of this Realm.
- 7. Lindwood 's Method of Provincial Synods in this Realm, and under what Archbishops.
- 8. The four several kinds of Councils and Synods in general.
- 9. A compendious Catalogue thereof, when and where held, by and under whom convened, with the principal matters therein treated and determined.
(1.) OF Councils or Synods there are four kinds, viz. (1) Oecumenical, as being called out divers Nations. (2) National, as out of divers Provinces, both these kinds of Councils or Synods were ever assembled by Imperial, Regal, or Papal Authority. (3). Provincial, as out of divers Dioceses, convened by Metropolitans or Patriarchs. (4) Diocesan, as out of one Diocese only, assembled by the Bishop thereof. The frequent celebration of Synods the Council of Basil calls praecipuam agri Domini culturam Touching Synods vid. Duar. de Sacr. Eccl. minist. et benefic.
(2.) In the Reign of King Hen. 8. the Bishops and Clergy in the Convocation an. 1532. obliged themselves neither to make nor execute any Canons or Constitutions Ecclesiastical, but as they were thereto enabled by the Kings Authority; it was by them desired, by him assented unto, and confirmed in Parliament, that all such Canons and Constitutions Synodal and Provincial, as were before in use, and neither repugnant to the word of God, the Kings prerogative Royal, or the known Laws of the Land, should remain in force until a Review thereof were made by 30 persons of the Kings appointment; which Review not having been made from that time to the first year of King Edward 6. All the said old Canons and Constitutions so restrained and qualified, did then still remain in force, as before they were. For this consult the Act of Parliament of 25 H. 8. c. 1. And in the Third year of the said King Edward 6. there passed an Act in Parliament, For enabling the King to nominate Eight Bishops, and as many Temporal Lord's, and Sixteen Members of the Lower House of Parliament, for Reviewing of such Canons and Constitutions, as remained in force by virtue of the Statute made in the 25th year of King H. 8. and fitting them for the use of the Church in all times succeeding. According to which Act the King directed a Commission to Archbishop Cranmer, and the rest of the Persons whom he thought fit to nominate to that employment; and afterwards appointed a Sub-Committee of Eight persons to prepare the Work and make it ready for the rest, that it might be dispatched with the more expedition: which said Eight persons were the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Goodrick Bishop of Eli, Dr. Cox the Kings Almoner, Peter Martyr Dr. in Divinity, William May and Rowland Taylor Drs. of Laws, John Lucas and Richard Goodrick Esquires; by whom the Work was undertaken and digested, fashioned according to the method of the Roman Decretals, and called by the name of Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, &c But not being Commissionated hereunto till the Eleventh of November in the year 1551. they either wanted time to Communicate to the chief Commissioners, by whom it was to be presented to the King, or found the King encumber'd with more weighty Affairs, than to attend the perusal thereof. And so the King dying before he had given life unto it by his Royal Assent and Signiture, the design miscarried: and never since thought fit to be resumed in the following Times by any of those who have had the Government of the Church, or were concerned in the honor and safety thereof.
(3.) It is asserted by good Authority, That if the Canon Law be made part of the Law of this Realm, then it is as much the Law of the Land, and as well, and by the same Authority, as any other part of the Law of the Land. Likewise in the Case of Shute against Higden, touching Voidance of a Former Benefice by being Admitted and Instituted into a Second, and that by the Ancient Canon Law received in this Kingdom, This (says the same Authority) is the Law of the Kingdom in such cases And in the Case of Hill against Good the same Author doth further assert, That a Lawful Canon is the Law of the Kingdom, as well as an Act of Parliament: And whatever is the Law of the Kingdom, is as much the Law, as anything else is so; for what is Law, doth not suscipere magis & minus Which Premises, though they may seem, yet are not inconsistent with what Sr. Ed. Coke says, viz. That the Laws of England are not derived from any Forein Law, either Canon, Civil, or other, but a special Law appropriated to this Kingdom ; That it may be said of its Law as of its situation, Et penitus toto divisos Orbo Britannos.
(4) Convocation is the highest Ecclesiastical Court or Assembly, called and convened in time of Parliament by the Kings Writ, directed to the Archbishops, consisting of all the Clergy of both Provinces, either Personally or Representatively present, in the Upper House of the Archbishops and Bishops, and the Lower House of the other Clergy or their Proctors, chosen and appointed to appear for Cathedral or other Collegiate Churches, and for the Common Clergy of every Diocese, with a Prolocutor of each House, and President of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury, to consult of matters Ecclesiastical, and thereon to Treat, Agree, Consent, and Conclude (as occasion requires) on certain Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical, to be ratified and confirmed by the Royal Assent . They were Anciently called Church-gemote. Int. Leges H. 1. c. 8. The Convocation is under the power and Authority of the King, 21 Ed. 4. 45. b. Assembled only by the Kings Writ. 13 Ed. 3. Rot. Parl. M. 1. vid. Stat. 25 H. 8. c. 19. The King having directed his Writ (therein assigning the time and place) to each of the Archbishops to the effect aforesaid, the Archbishop of Canterbury doth thereupon direct his Letters to the Bishop of London, as his Dean, Lindw. Provin. Sec. 1. de Poenis. ver. Tanquam in Gloss. First Citing himself peremptorily, then willing him to Cite in like manner all the Bishops, Deans, Archdeacons, Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, and generally all the Clergy of his Province to the Place at the day in the said Writ prefixed, withal directing that one Proctor for every Cathedral or Collegiate Church, and two for the other Clergy of each Diocese may suffice. In pursuance whereof the Bishop of London directs his Letters accordingly, willing them to certify the Archbishop the Names of all such as shall be so Monished by them, in a Schedule annexed to their Letters Certificatory; whereupon the Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, and the other Churches having Elected their Proctors, it is certified to the Bishop, who makes due Returns thereof; which method is likewise observed in the other Province of York. It is said, That these Proctors anciently had Place and Vote in the Lower House of Parliament ; a good expedient for the maintenance and preservation of the Liberties of the Church. The Prolocutor of the Lower House of Convocation, is immediately at the first Assembly by the motion of the Bishops, chosen by that Lower House, and presented to the Bishops as their Prolocutor, by whom they intend to deliver their Resolutions to the higher House, and to have their own House specially ordered and governed: His Office is to cause the Clerk to call the Names of the Members of that House, as oft as he shall see cause; likewise to see all things propounded to be read by him, to gather the Suffrages or Votes, and the like. Trin. 8 Jac. It was Resolved by the two Chief Justices, and divers other Justices at a Committee before the Lord's of Parliament, concerning the Authority of a Convocation, (1) That a Convocation cannot Assemble without the Assent of the King. (2) That after their Assembling, they cannot confer to constitute any Canons without License del Roy. (3) When upon Conference they conclude any Canons, yet they cannot execute any of them without the Royal Assent. (4) They cannot execute any after Royal Assent, but with these Limitations, viz. (1) That they be not against the Kings Prerogative: (2) Nor against Statute Law: (3) Nor against the Common Law: (4) Nor against the Customs of the Realm. All which appears by 25 H. 8. c. 19. 19. Ed. 3. Title Quare non Admisit, 7. 10. H. 7. 17. Merton, cap. 9.—By 2 H. 6. 13. a Convocation may make Constitutions to bind the Spiritualty, because they all in person or by Representation are present, but not the Temporalty. Q. And 21 Ed. 4. 47. the Convocation is Spiritual, and so are all their Constitutions. Vid. The Records in Turri, 18 H. 8. 8 Ed. 1. 25 Ed. 1. 11 Ed. 2. 15 Ed. 2. Prohibitio Regis ne Clerus in Congregatione sua, &c. attemptet contra jus seu Coronam, &c. By which it appears, that they can do nothing against the Law of the Land, or the Kings Prerogative.
(5.) The word [ Convocation ] and the word [ Synod ] are rather words of two Languages, than things of two significations; for although, they have different derivations, the former from the Latin, the other from the Greek, yet in effect they both center in the same thing. Convocation à Convocando, because they are called together by the Kings Writ. It is of very great Antiquity according to Sir Edward Coke, who mentions out of Mr. Bede and other Authors and ancient Records, such as were nigh a thousand years since, and more expressly of one great Synod held by Austin's Assembling the Britain Bishops in Council, An. 686. . And affirms, That the Clergy was never Assembled or called together at a Convocation, but by the Kings Writ . And in the year 727. there was a Convocation of the Clergy, called Magna Servorum Dei frequentia . It was by the assistance and authority of Ethelbert, the first Christian King of Kent, that Austin called the aforesaid Assembly of the British Bishops, and Doctors, that had retained the Doctrine of the Gospel, to be held in the borders of the Victians and West-Saxons, about Southampton, as supposed, to which resorted (as Mr. Bede says) Seven Bishops, and many other Learned Divines; but this Synod or Convocation suddenly brake up without anything done or resolved . This Assembly was convened for determining the time for the Celebration of Easter; touching which the Controversy continuing no less than 90 years after, was at last concluded at another Convocation purposely called at Whitby by the Authority of Oswy King of Northumberland, and whereof the Reverend Cedda, newly Consecrated Bishop, was Prolocutor, and King Oswy himself present at the Assembly . Likewise about the year 1172. at Cassils in Ireland a Convocation was held by Authority of King H. 2. soon after he had Conquered that Island, which Convocation was for the Reformation of the Irish Church, where amongst many other Constitutions it was Decreed, That all the Church-Lands, and all their Possessions, should be altogether free from the Exaction of Secular men, and that from thenceforth all Divine things should be handled in every part of Ireland in such sort, as the Church of England handleth them . Likewise about the year 1175. at London a Synod or Convocation was held, at which King H. 2. was present, where among other Canons and Constitutions, it was both by Authority of the King and Synod decreed, That every Patron taking a Reward for any Presentation should forever lose the Patronage thereof . Which together with other Canons then made for the better government of the Church of England, were Published by Richard Archbishop of Canterbury, with the Kings Assent . Likewise a Provincial Synod was held at Oxford by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury under King H. 3. about the year 1222. for Reformation of the Clergy , with many others, in subordination to the Laws of the Land. One special Privilege of the Convocation appears by 8 H. 6. cap. 1. All the Clergy from henceforth to be called to the Convocation by the Kings Writ, and their Servants and Familiars shall forever hereafter fully use and enjoy such liberty and Immunity in coming, tarrying, and returning, as the Great men and Commonalty of the Realm of England, called or to be called to the Kings Parliament, have used or ought to have or enjoy. 8 H. 6. In Parliamento Statutum est, ut Praelati atque Clerici, c • rumque Famulatus, cum ad Synodos accesserint, iisdem Privilegiis ac Immunitatibus gaudeant, quibus Milites & Burgenses Parliamenti. Ant. Brit. fo. 284. nu. 30.
(6.) The Jurisdiction of the Convocation in this Realm, though relating to matters merely Spiritual and Ecclesiastical, yet is subordinate to the established Laws of the Land; it being Provided by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 19. That no Canons, Constitutions, or Ordinances shall be made or put in execution within this Realm by Authority of the Convocation of the Clergy, repugnant to the Prerogative Royal, or to the Customs, Laws, or Statutes of this Realm. To the same effect was that of 9 Ed. 1. Rot. Parl. Memb. 6. Inhibitio Archiepiscopo, & omnibus Episcopis, & aliis Praelatis apud Lambeth Conventuris, ne aliquid statuant in praejudicium Regis, Coronam, vel dignitatem. For although the Archbishop and the Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy of his Province, Assembled in a Synod, have power to make Constitutions in Spiritual things, yet they ought to be Assembled by Authority of the King, and to have (as aforesaid) his Royal Assent to their Constitutions; which being had and obtained, the Canons of the Church, made by the Convocation and the King, without Parliament, shall bind in all matters Ecclesiastical, as well as an Act of Parliament, as was Resolved in Bird and Smiths Case . Although the Saxons, who founded and endowed most of our Churches, and made many good Laws in reference to the Jurisdiction power, and privileges thereof; yet the Royal Prerogative, with the Laws and Customs of the Realm, were ever so preserved, as not to be invaded thereby: King AEthelbert the first Saxon King, King Ina, AEthelstane, Edmund, Edgar, and King Kanute, all these made Laws in favor of the Church, but none of them ever entrenched on the Prerogative of the Crown, or on the Laws, or Customs of the Realm; nor any of those ancient Church-Laws ever made without the Supreme Authority to ratify and confirm the same.
(7.) The Laws and Constitutions whereby the Ecclesiastical Government is supported, and the Church of England governed, are the General Canons made by General Councils, also the Arbitria Sanctorum Patrum, the Decrees of several Archbishops and Bishops, the Ancient Constitutions made in our several Provincial Synods, either by the Legates Otho and Othobon, or by several Archbishops of Canterbury. All which by the 25 H. 8. are in force in England, so far as they are not repugnant to the Kings Prerogative, the Laws and Customs of England. Also the Canons made in Convocations of Later times, as Primo Jacobi Regis, and confirmed by his Regal Authority: Also in some Statutes Enacted by Parliament touching Ecclesiastical affairs; together with divers Customs not written, but in use beyond the memory of Man; and where these fail, the Civil Law takes place. Among the Britain Councils (according to Bishop Prideaux his Synopsis of Councils, Edit. 5.) those amongst the rest are of most remark, viz. At Winchester, in King Edgars time under Dunstane: at Oxford, by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury: at Claringdon under King Henry the Second. The Council under King Edward the 6 th. in which the 39 Articles of the English Confession was concluded and confirmed. The Synod under the same King, from which we receive the English Liturgy which now we have, composed by Seven Bishops and Four Doctors, and confirmed by the public consent of the Church, which (as also the said 39 Articles) the succeeding Princes, Queen Eliz. King James, and King Charles, ratified and commended to Posterity. At London a Synod, in which 141 Canons or Constitutions, relating to the pious and peaceable Government of the Church, presented to King James by the Synod, and confirmed by his Regal Authority: and at Perth in Scotland, where were Articles concerning Administring the Sacrament to the Sick, Private Baptism where Necessity requires, Confirmation, admitting Festivals, Kneeling at the Receiving the Sacrament, and an allowance of Venerable Customs. But de Council. Britain. vid. D. Spelman. The Ancient Canons of the Church and Provincial Constitutions of this Realm of England, were according to Lindwood the Canonist (who, being Dean of the Arches, compiled and explained the same in the time of King H. 6.) made in this order or method, and under these Archbishops of Canterbury, viz. The Canons or Constitutions
1. Of Stephen Langton, Cardinal, Archbishop of Canterbury, in the Council at Oxford, in the year of our Lord 1222, who distinguished the Bible into Chapters.
2. Of Otho, Cardinal, the Popes Legate in Anno 1236. on whose Constitutions John de Athon Dr. of Laws, and one of the Canons of Lincoln, did comment or gloss.
3. Of Boniface Archbishop of Cant. 1260.
4. Of Othobon, Cardinal of St. Adrian, and Legate of the Apostolical Chair; on whose Constitutions the said John de Athon did likewise Glossematize. His Canons were made at London in Anno 1268.
5. Of John Peckham, Archbishop of Canterbury; at a Synod held at Reding, An. 1279.
6. Of the same Peckham, at a Synod held at Lambeth, An. 1281.
7. Of Robert Winchelse, Archbishop of Canterbury, An. 1305.
8. Of Walter Reynold, Archbishop of Canterbury, at a Synod held at Oxford, An. 1322. These Constitutions in some Books are ascribed to Simon Mepham, but erroneously; for the date of these Constitutions being An. 1322. the said Walter Reynold (according to the Chronicle) died in An. 1327. and was succeeded by Simon Mepham.
9. Of Simon Mepham Archbishop of Cant. An. 1328.
10. Of John Stradford, Archbishop, An. 13...
11. Of Simon Islepe, Archbishop, An. 1362.
12. Of Simon Sudbury, Archbishop, An. 1378.
13. Of Tho. Arundel, Archbishop, at a Synod or Council held at Oxford, An. 1408.
14. Of Henry Chichley, Archbishop, An. 1415.
15. Of Edmond, Archbishop of Canterbury.
16. Of Richard, Archbishop of Canterbury.
The Dates of the Canons or Constitutions of these Two last Lindwood makes no mention, by reason of the uncertainty thereof; but withal says, it is clear, That Richard did immediately succeed the foresaid Stephen Langton, and the said Edmond succeeded Richard. Lindw. de Poen. c. ad haec. & infra, in verb. Mimime admittatur. If so, then it was most probably Richard Wethershed, who was Archbishop of Canterbury, An. 1229. And St. Edmond Chancellor of Oxford, who was Archbishop of Canterbury, An. 1234. .
(8.) Councils were either General, or Oecumenical from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , whereunto Commissioners by the Emperors Authority were sent from all quarters of the World, where Christ hath been preached: Or National: or Provincial: or Particular, by Bullenger called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; such were the Councils of Gangra, Neo-caesarea, and many others, commonly Assembled by Patriarchs and Bishops in some particular place of a Country. The ends of these Councils chiefly were, either for the suppression of Heresies, the decision of Controversies, the appeasing of Schisms, or the Ordaining of Canons and Constitutions for decency of Order in the Church. Vid. AElfrici Canones ad Wulfinum Episcopum. Can. 33. where it is said, That there were Four Synods for the defense of the True Faith against those Heretics, who belched out their Blasphemies against the Holy Trinity, and the Human Nature of our Savior; the First whereof was at Nice: another after that at Constantinople, consisting of a hundred and fifty Bishops: the Third at Ephesus, of two hundred Bishops: the Fourth at Chalcedon, where many hundreds of Bishops were present; and they all with an unanimous Consent confirmed all those Decrees which were made in the Nicene Council. These Four Synods (says the said Canon) are so to be observed by the Church of Christ, ut Quatuor Christi Codices. There were many other Synods about the same time, but these Four were of the best Authority.
At Jerusalem in the First Century the Apostles, Elders, and Brethren held a Council against some Pharisees touching Circumcision, in the Fourth year of the Reign of the Emperor Claudius. The Apostles celebrated also certain Councils for the substituting of Matthias in the place of Judas, Act. 1. For the Election of Seven Deacons— Act. 6. For not pressing the Ceremonial Law, Act. 15. 11 For the toleration of some Legal Observations only for a time, Act. 21. 18. To these some will have to be added a Meeting by the Apostles, wherein was composed the Apostles Creed. Also another Assembly of the Apostles, which did obtrude to the Church 85 Canons under the notion of the Apostles Authority, concerning which there are various Controversies. In this Century there were also Two Synods summoned in Asia, for the Reformation of the Churches, and Consecration of Bishops, at which John the Evangelist was present. Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 20.
At Ancyra in Galatia in the Second Century was Assembled a Synod of divers Bishops, wherein the Figments of Montanus were confuted. In this Synod Montanus was Excommunicated, and his Heresy condemned. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 14. In this Century, viz. An. 195. Six several Synods were held about the Observation of Easter, viz. At Rome in Victors time: at Cesarea in Palestine: at Pontus: in France, where Irenaeus was chief: in Ostroena and at Ephesus. In all which Synods it is observed, That the Bishop of Rome had no more Authority than the other Bishops. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 23.
In the Third Century there were Eight or Nine Synods of Remark, viz. At Bastra, where Beryllus was confuted by Origen: at Rome in the time of Fabianus, where the Schism of Novatus was removed: another at Rome in the time of Cornelius, wherein Novatus the Heretic was condemned: at Antioch, where Novatus was condemned again: at Carthage, which erred about the Re-baptizing of Heretics: at Iconium, for receiving of Heretics after Repentance: at Antioch again, where Samosatenus was condemned; this was about the Twelfth year of Galienus: Another at the same place under Aurelianus, where he was condemned again, and deprived of his Church. And at Sinuessa, consisting of 300 Bishops, where Marcellinus Bishop of Rome was condemned for denying Christ, and sacrificing to Idols. Tom. 1. Council.
At Ancyra in the Fourth Century, about the year 308 were assembled Bishops of divers Provinces, to constitute a form of Ecclesiastical Discipline, according to which they who had Sacrificed to Idols in time of Persecution, were to be received again upon their Repentance. In this Council also it was Ordained, That Chorepiscopi, that is, Country-Bishops, or Vicarii Episcoporum, should abstain from Ordination of Elders and Deacons, and from usurping of dominion over the Preaching Elders, who were in Cities. This Council was subscribed by Eighteen Bishops.
At Nicaea in Bithynia, Assembled by the Authority of Constantine the Great, a General Council, consisting of 318 Bishops: The exact time when it began Historians do not agree, some conceive it was A. D. 325. So Hillar. Socort. l. 2. c. 29. Others, 359. So Baron. N. 27. Others, 330. and others refer the year to 333. But Eusebius computeth it to be in the Twentieth year of Constantine's Reign. It was also in the time of Julius the First, and Silvester, Popes. Three things especially are reported to be condemned by this Famous Council. 1. The Arian Heresy, Blasphemously denying to Son to be Co-eternal and Co-essential with the Father. 2. The dissent of the Eastern from the Western Christians about the celebration of the Passover, in a manner different from the Jewish Custom; and it was concluded in this Council, That the Feast of Easter should be kept on the Lord's Day, and not on the Fourteenth day of the First Month of the Jews called Nisan. 3. The Schismatical dissensions of the Melitians and Novatians. In this Council the Emperor burnt all the Accusations which the Bishops brought against each other, as unworthy to be seen. Of this Council it is anciently Recorded, That Constantine Imperator congregavit in Nicaea Civitate 318. Episcopos ex omnibus Nationibus ad Confirmandum fidem Catholicam. Ita in Tertio Can. AElfrici ad Wulfin. Episcop.
At Tyrus in the Fourth Century was convened a National Council by Constantine the Emperor, in the Thirtieth year of his Reign, wherein were 60 Bishops from Egypt, Libya, Asia, and Europe; the major part whereof were Arians, who charging Athanasius with false Accusations, deposed him in his absence; whose Deposition Arsenias subscribed with the same hand, which the Arians alleged was cut off by Athanasius.
At Gangra in Paphlagonia about the year 324. were assembled about Sixteen Fathers; in which Council were damned the heretical Opinions of Eustathius, who admiring the Monastic life, or favoring the heresy of Eucratitae and the Manichaeans, spake against Marriage, and eating of Flesh, and damned the public Congregations for the Service of God in Temples, saying, a man could not be saved unless he forsook all his Possessions.
About this time there was a Council at Antiochia, wherein the Arians deposed Eustatius. As also a Council at Arles, wherein Cecilianus was absolved from the Accusation of the Donatists.
At Eliberis in Spain in the time of Constantine's Reign, were assembled 19 Bishops and 36 Presbyters. Among the 81 Canons made in this Synod, it was Ordained in the 36 Canon, That nothing that is worshipped should be Pictured on a Wall; and that in Private Houses no Idols should be found.
At Carthage, the First Council there (wherein St. Cyprian, with the Advice of many other Bishops of Numidia, Libya, and other parts of Africa, Ordained those who were Baptized by Heretics, to be Rebaptized) was not held under the Reign of Constantine, for that St. Cyprian was Martyred in Valexians days, the Eighth Persecuting Emperor; but the first Council of Carthage held in Constantine's days, was that wherein the Donatists condemned Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage, whose innocence was made afterwards to appear.
At Antioch, the First Council there was held by Arians under the Reign of Constantine, Son of Constantine, in the year 340 or 344. This being one of the Councils, which either determine Heretical Opinions, or raise up Schisms and Troubles to the dispersing of the Christian Flock, doth not undeservedly pass under the name or notion of one of the Rejected Councils. To this Assembly resorted 90 Bishops, under pretence of Dedicating the Church of Antioch, built by Constantine, when in truth their principal design was to eject Athanasius out of his Chair, and to subvert that System of Faith, which was set down in the Nicene Council. This Council of Antioch is to be distinguished from Five others which Bellarmine reckons; Longus also doth name this, and mentions other Councils of Antioch. But this Council is refer'd to the time of Constantine, and Julius the First. Athanasius being restored from Banishment by Constantine, the Son of Constantine the Great, the Arians declare it to be unlawful, because the same Authority which did eject, must restore: This matter therefore being refer'd to Pope Julius, he Summons the Synod to appear at Rome. But the Eusebians, chief of the Heretics, that they might avoid this, did without much difficulty seduce Constantius to be at the Consecration of the Magnificent Temple built by Constantine the Great at Antioch: where were met about 90 Bishops, as aforesaid, 30 whereof being Arians, the favor and Authority of the Emperor, against the double Suffrages of the Orthodox procured the condemning of Restored Athanasius. It is said of this Council, That they did set forth a Form of Belief so intermixed with Truth and Error, that he which is heedful lest he be deceived, in his greatest warlness can scarcely be safe; for by the omission of what might establish the Truth, they weaken that which they undertake to maintain. To this Council probably may be refer'd Two other Councils, which some report to have been held also at Antioch about the year 348. the former whereof was occasioned by the favor, which Julius Bishop of Rome shown to Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria, and other Bishops. In the other the Arians did set forth a new Sum of their Faith, which being sent to the Bishops of Italy, was refused by them, adhering to that of the Nicene Council.
At Sardis in Illyricum in the year 351. by the Command of Constantius and his Brother Constance a great National Council was Assembled, consisting of 376 Bishops, whereof Three hundred were from the West, and Seventy six from the East, from Thirty five Provinces in all. The Three hundred Western Bishops confirmed the Nicene Creed, to this end, That Athanasius, who was Banished Rome for the space of Three years, should be restored to his Place at Alexandria; but the other Seventy six Arians meeting at Philippolis confirmed Arianism under the Title of the Council of Sardis. In this Council by reason of the Arian Faction, and from thence forward, were added different Affections to different Opinions. In this Council, which is commonly called an Appendix to the First Nicene Council, were ratified 21 Canons under Pope Julius.
At Sirmium in Illyria in the year 356. by Command of the Emperor Constantius a Council was held, where were present besides Eastern, Three hundred Western Bishops and upwards for the hearing and deciding the Cause of Photios, who complained to the Emperor that he was unjustly condemned at the Synod of Sardis, although he had preached that Christ was mere man, and inferior to his Mother. This Council at Sirmium so groaned under the Arian Tyranny of Constantius, that the Supremacy and Presidentship of Pope Liberius dared not to appear; Photios Bishop of Sirmium having renewed the Heresies of Sabellius and Samosatenus: Of this Council (saith Longus ) there is nothing extant besides Three Forms of Belief, which are found in Binius. In this Synod there was a hot Dispute between Basilius Bishop of Ancyra, an Arian Heretic, and the said Photios a Sabellian Heretic.
At Milan in the year 355. at the instance of the Arians a Council consisting of Three hundred of the Occidental Bishops at the command of Constantius was Assembled, who (after that the Emperor Constance was slain by Magnentius ) had the whole Sovereignty both of the East and West in his hands. This Council was convened partly for ratification of the Sentence pronounced against Athanasius at Tyrus, and partly for subversion of the Nicene Faith, but prevailed in neither. In this Council the Emperor himself was President, Liberius being Pope; I (saith the Emperor in this Council) am an Accuser of Athanasius. The Western Catholic Bishops there present (for there were few Eastern) promised to consent to the Arians, if they would first subscribe to the Nicene Creed. But Valence and Vrsacius, the chief Leaders of that Faction withstood them. Then followed the degrading of the Bishops, and the corrupt Ecclesiastical determination. This was effected especially that they might allure Liberius Bishop of Rome, either by Gifts or Threats to their way, who is reported thus Heroically to have Answered the Emperor (who had judged him to be Banished to Thrace, and offered him the charge of his Journey) viz. Thou hast robbed the Churches of the Earth, and now offerest to me Condemned an Indigent an Alms; Go first and become a Christian thyself.
At Ariminum in Italy about the year 363. was held a National Council, consisting of more than Four hundred Western Bishops, under the Emperor Constantius in the 22 d year of his Reign, at the motion of the Arians, to whose Opinions the said Emperor was flexible enough; but the major part of the said Bishops rejecting the motions made in favor of the Arian Error, touching the Son of God, adhered closely to the Nicene Faith. This Ariminum is (it seems) Famous for Two Councils; the one Orthodox, and lawfully called, which is that aforementioned. The other Heretical and Tyrannical, craftily called by the Arians under the notion of the Council held at Ariminum, that this False one might extinguish the True one; whereof the greater part determined the Nicene Creed punctually to be observed, and the Sons equality with the Father in Essence to be asserted: The Decrees of the Synod at Sirmium to be rejected: and Vrsacius and Valence with the Arians, their Followers, to be Excommunicated.
At Seleucia in Isauria, which lies between Lycania and Cilcia, whence Paul and Barnabas sailed to Cyprus, Act. 13. 4. was a Council of 160 Oriental Bishops, held the same year wherein the said National Council of Ariminum was held, viz. An. 363. The business of this Council, procured (as the former) by the Arians, was much prevented by a Contest arising touching precedency of Debates, as whether the matter of Faith, or the Lives of such as were to be accused, should first fall under Examination. At this time there being Convened at Ariminum 600 Bishops (according to Bellarmine out of the Chron. of Jerome ) of which the Eastern Heterodox being overpowr'd both in Number and Arguments by the Orthodox, the Emperor Constantius removes them unto Seleucia in Isauria aforesaid. Here the Acatians altogether reject Consubstantiality, the Semi-Arians admit it in their sense: In this diffention the Semi-Arians prevail, and determine, That the Form of Faith composed at the Dedication at Antioch, should be retained and subscribed unto; but they ejected the dissenting Acatians or Arians from their places.
At Constantinople, where the Acatians remained after the Council at Seleucia, were Assembled by them about 50 Bishops out of Bythinia and other adjacent parts. In this Synod they confirmed the Sum of Faith read in the Council of Ariminum.
At Antioch in the 25 th year of Constantius his Reign another Council was Convened, with design or ordering matters so, that for the time to come no man should call the Son of God Consubstantial with the Father, nor yet of a different substance from the Father; but neither in this Council could the Arians perfect their intended purpose of inventing a new Sum of Faith.
At Laodicea, not that Laodicea nigh Antioch in Syria, but at Laodicea the Metropolis of Phyrgia, and one of the Seven Churches of Asia, to which John in his Banishment wrote from Patmos, At this Laedicea a Synod was assembled about the year 368. wherein nothing was determined concerning matters of Faith, only the Worshipping of Angels was damned as an horrible Idolatry, and a forsaking of Christ; also the Books of the Canonical Scriptures were particularly set forth, wherein no mention was made of the Books of the Maccabees, of Ecclesiasticus, or other Apocryphal Books.
In Illyricum about the year 370 under the Emperors Valentinian and Valens, not yet infected with the Arian Heresy, was held a Council, wherein the Nicene Faith had confirmation and allowance.
At Lampsacum nigh the Hellespont under the Emperor Valens was a Synod of Macedonian Heretics, who ratified the Council of Seleucia, and damned that of Constantinople by the Acatians.
At Rome under the Emperor Valentinian in the West, Damasus Bishop of Rome Convened a Council, wherein was confirmed the Nicene Faith.
At Constantinople in the year 383 under Theodosius the Emperor, was a General Council held, consisting of 150 Bishops, whereof 36 were infected with the Macedonian Heresy, which blasphemously held the Holy Ghost to be a Creature, a Minister and Servant, not Consubstantial with the Father and the Son. From this Council the said Heretics having withdrawn themselves; they which remained in Council damned the Heresy of Macedonius, and confirmed the Nicene Faith, with ampliation of that part of the Symbol which concerned the Holy Ghost, in this manner, viz. I believe in the Holy Spirit our Lord, Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, and with the Father and the Son is to be worshipped and glorified. This Council was held under Gratian and Theodosius the Great, and Damasus. They condemned and discharged Macedonius Bishop of Constantinople, for his perfidious opposing the Deity of the Holy Ghost, together with Maximus Cynicus by reason of his Doctrine against Discipline. The Emperor null'd all Confessions, except that of those who acknowledged Christ Coessential with the Father, which our present Liturgy retains under the name of the Nicene Creed. It is thought that Gregory Nazianzen compiled it, according to the sense of the Synod.
At Constantinople under Theodosius another Council was held, whence a Synodick Letter was sent to the Bishops then Conven'd at Rome, declaring the troubles they sustained by Heretics; and as to matters of Discipline recommended unto them the Canons of the Council of Nice.
At Constantinople in the Fifth year of Theodosius his Reign, a great National Council was again Conven'd, wherein the Heretics were divided among themselves touching what Credit they should give in matters of Faith to the Fathers that preceded their time; whereupon that good Emperor rent in pieces the Sums of the Arian, Eunomian, and Macedonian Faith, and Ordained the Homousian Faith only to take place.
At Carthage the Second Council was assembled under Theodosius, nigh the time of the foresaid General Council held at Constantinople, wherein the Nicene Faith was confirmed, abstinence from Matrimonial Society with Infidels and Heretics recommended to Ecclesiastical persons.
At Nice there was another Council An. 181. under Constantine, which wholly restored the Images and Statues of Irene, together with the Relics formerly broken in pieces by Leo Isaurus his Grandfather, and Constantine Copronymus his Great Grandfather, the business being chiefly promoted by Gregory the Second and the Third, together with Adrian the First, and Tarasius Patriarch of Constantinople. There met at this Council (which is one of the Greek or Eastern Oecumenical Councils) 350 Bishops, who with the said Tarasius President of the said Council, by 22 Canons condemned Image-breakers for Heretics. Bellarmine and Baronius imagine, that this Synod was condemned by the Fathers at the Council of Franckfort under Charles the Great, which yet is denied by Binius, Surius, and others, according to Longus, pag. 632.
At Carthage a Third Council was Assembled in the year 399, at which Augustine Bishop of Hippo was present, wherein it was ( inter alia ) Ordained, That the Bishop of Rome should be called the Bishop of the First Seat, but not the High Priest, or the Prince of Priests. Likewise, That nothing except the holy Canonical Scriptures should be read in Churches under the notion of Holy Books.
At Carthage a Fourth National Council was held under the Reign of Honorius about the year 401. consisting of 214 Bishops, at which Augustine Bishop of Hippo was also present, and wherein were nigh as many Canons made as were Bishops assembled; wherein among other things it was Ordained, That a Bishop should admit no man to a Spiritual Office without Advice of the Clergy; nor pronounce any Sentence without such Advice: That Refusers to pay unto the Church the Oblations of persons Deceased, should be Excommunicated. Whereby it appears, That Oblationes Defunctorum were not Soul-Masses said for the Dead, but Charity by way of Testamental Legacies.
At Cyprus under the Reigns of Arcadius and Honorius was Assembled a Council by Epiphanius. And at Alexandria by Theophilus, under pretence of damning the Books of Origen. Also at Constantinople by the malice of Eudoxia, the Wife of Arcadius the Emperor, to depose John Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople.
At Carthage about the year 419. a Fifth Council was held, wherein the Opinions of Pelagius and Coelestius were damned as Heretical; and whereby it was Declared, That the Adoration of Relics was at this time the Custom of Ethnics, and Appointed, That Supplication should be made to the Emperors; That such Relics as were found in Images, Groves, and Trees, or elsewhere, should be abolished.
At Toledo in Spain under the Reigns of Arcadius and Honorius, was a Council assembled for Confirmation of the Nicene Council, and refutation of some Errors.
At Melevitum in Numidia was Assembled under the Reign of Arcadius a Council, whereof St. Augustine was President; which was Assembled chiefly to finish the work begun at the Fifth Council of Carthage, in condemning the Heresies of Pelagius and Coelestius, concerning the power of Mans Nature, not supported by the Grace of God, and Free Will of Man to do good of it self; as also to inhibit Appeals to Bishops beyond Sea, on pain of being secluded from the Communion of all African Bishops.
At Carthage in the year 402 under Honorius and Theodosius the Second; a National Council of 217 Bishops was assembled, which continued for the space of Six years: The business of this Council was prevented by a Controversy happening between them and the Bishops of Rome, who successively endeavored (but not successfully) to persuade the African Bishops, that they were under the Sovereignty and Jurisdiction of the Bishops of Rome; to whom this Council would not allow of any Appeal from the Bishops of Africa.
At Bagaia in Africa about the year 433. certain Donatists to the Number of 310 assembled themselves in Council, chiefly for the deposition of Maximinianus, Bishop of Bagaia, whom they Deposed and Accursed, because he had renounced their Heresy, and had recovered many others from the Error of that way.
At Ephesus in the year 434. and in the Eighth year of the Reign of Theodosius the Second, by some called Theodosius the Younger, was a General Council assembled against the Heretic Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople; which Council consisted of above Two hundred Bishops, by Command from the Emperor: By which Council Nostorius, for his Heresy in denying the Son of the Virgin Mary to be God, and consequently the Personal Union of the Divine and Human Nature of Christ, was Banished to Oasis. This was the first General Council of Ephesus, promoted by Celestine the First, wherein Two hundred Bishops (as aforesaid) condemned Nestorius together with Carisius his flattering Presbyter, who instead of Two Natures acknowledged divers Persons in Christ, and therefore pleaded that the Blessed Virgin Mary should be styled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 only, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . In this Council Cyrillus of Alexandria is recorded President, whom Nestorius, being piously and brotherly invited to a better Opinion proudly contemned, and having craftily allured John of Antioch to his party, Anathematiz'd him and the Council, who had formerly Anathematiz'd him. The matter being related to the Emperor, and thoroughly understood, Cyrillus and his are cleared, but Nestorius with his party is Banished (as aforesaid) to Oasis, a Sandy Habitation, where like another Cain (says a Modern Historian) roving here and there, Blaspheming, at length his Tongue being consumed and eaten up by Worms, he breathed out his last. There are (it seems) two Copies of this Council, the First observing Eight, the Second Thirteen Canons, which are comprehended in the Anathema's of Cyrillus. The Massilianites, termed also Euchites and Enthusiasts, were condemned by this Council, and thereby the integrity of the Nicene Creed confirmed.
At Ephesus under Theodosius the Second was likewise a Particular Council assembled by Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, who condemned Eutyches an Abbot of Constantinople, for Affirming, That in Christ, after the Union of the Divine and Human Natures, there were no longer Two Natures; which absurd Opinion Flavianus damned as Heretical. So that the occasion of this Second Council of Ephesus, An. 449. was this Eutyches, an Archimandrite of Constantinople, who after Manes and Apollinaris denied the Flesh of Christ to be like ours, but affirmed, that falling from heaven like the Rays of the Sun, it penetrated the Virgins womb. And so he denied that Two Natures were in Christ Incarnate; but asserted, that his Flesh was changed into his Divinity: for which he was (as aforesaid) condemned by Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople, and Eusebius Bishop of Doril, and others their Associates; yet by the help of Chrysaphius the Eunuch, and Eudoxia the Empress, whom he had seduced, he prevailed with Theodosius, that the matter might be determined by a Famous Synod; for which reason this at Ephesus by the Emperors Authority was called, where 128 Bishops met, Dioscorus of Alexandria being President, one so full of Eutychianism, that Eutyches is absolved, and the reclaimers forced (says the Historian) to subscribe by Club-Arguments. Flavianus opposing it, was so suriously trodden upon, that three days after he died; besides, many very Learned Bishops discharged of their Places; yet not long after all this was dashed in pieces by the most Famous Council of Chalcedon.
At Berytus in Phoenicia was held a Council about this time, where in the Cause of Ibas Bishop of Edessa, whom Dioscorus had deposed, was revived, and himself justified and absolved.
At Agatha in France was a Council held, wherein nothing was more remarkable, than that they had liberty to meet together by the Command of Alaricus King of Goths, who at that time had the Sovereignty in that parr of France called Gaul Norbonensis; whence it appears, That Councils both General and National, were in all Countries Convened by the Authority of Sovereign Princes.
At Chalcedon in Bythinia in the year 455. and in the Fourth year of Marcianus the Emperor was a General Council, at which was present in person the Emperor, and 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers from most parts of the World. In this Council Dioscorns Bishop of Alexandria, together with Eutyches and Juvenalis Bishops at Jerusalem, was condemned as an Heretic, for absolving the Heretic Eutyches in the Council at Ephesus, and acting other Crimes, whereof he was then accused. In this Council it was Ordained, That men should believe, that the Natures of Christ, albeit that they were united, yet were they not confounded, as Eutyches had Heretically affirmed. Also in this Council it was Ordained, That Anatelius Bishop of Constantinople and his Successors, should have the chief Dignity next unto the Chair of Rome. This Council was called by the said Emperor Martianus against the said Eutyches, Abbot of Constantinople, and his Champion Dioscorus of Alexandria; the suppositious Acts of the Council held at Ephesus were condemned by this Council, those of Ephesus being in favor of Eutyches, who affirmed one only Nature to be in Christ, viz. his Divine Nature, after his Incarnation. It is not clear or certain, who was President of this Council of Chalcedon, excepting the Emperor, and Judges Moderators: The matters thereof were for the most part by favoring parties between Leo the First of Rome, and Anatholius Patriarch of Constantinople.
At Ravenna in the Sixth Century, was a Council Assembled by occasion of the Schism happening on the Election of Symmachus to the See of Rome, whose Competitor was Laurentius, afterwards made Bishop of Nuceria. In Symmachus his time were no less than Six Councils held at Rome, all Convened by Authority of Theodoricus King of Goths, who then Reigned in Italy, and all of little importance, otherwise than the Endeavors that then were for the Supremacy, whereat they aimed.
At Valentia in Spain were assembled Two Councils, called Herdense and Valentinum, both very obscure Councils, there being in the one but Eight Bishops present, and only Six in the other. In the First of these, Marriage was prohibited the time of Lent, and three weeks before the Feast of St. John the Baptist, and during the time between Advent and Epiphany.
At Sidon in the Twentieth year of the Emperor Anastasius a National Council of 80 Bishops was Assembled, by the procurement of Xenaeas Bishop of Hierapolis, for undoing the Council of Chalcedon, which as far as in them lay, they did accordingly.
At Aurelia, that is, Orleans in France in the 22 d year of Anastasius, and under the Reign of Clodoveus King of France, were convened 32 Bishops, on purpose to settle some Order in Ecclesiastical Discipline, which by reason of the irruption of Barbarous people into the Country of France, had been brought into great disorder.
At Gerunda and Caesaraugusta in Spain were Two Councils under Theodoricus King of Goths then Reigning in Spain. In the former of these were only Seven Bishops convened, who made some Constitutions, chiefly about Baptism: In the latter were Eleven Bishops, and they in opposition to Supersitition and the Manichaean Heretics, prohibited Fasting on the Lord's day.
At Rome in the Sixth Century, by the Mandate of Theodoricus King of Goths, Reigning in Italy, a Council was Assembled by Hormisda Bishop of Rome, wherein the Error of Eutyches is damned de novo, and Ambassadors sent to the Emperor Anastasius, and to the Bishop of Constantinople, to divert them from that Error.
At Constantinople in the same Century under the Emperor Justinus was another Council convened, wherein many great Accusations were exhibited against Severus Bishop of Antioch, who was then condemned of Heresy, and afterwards Banished by the Emperor.
At Toledo in the same Century was a Second Council assembled, partly for renewing Ancient Constitutions, and partly for making New in order to Ecclesiastical Discipline. By the first Canon of this Second Council of Toledo, Marriage was tolerated to such of the Clergy, as on their initiation to that Function protested that they had not the gift of Continency.
At Constantinople in the year 532. under Justinian was another Council consisting of One hundred Sixty five Bishops, Menes being President, or rather his Successor, Eutychius Patriarch of Constantinople; but Pope Vigilius, who came to Constantinople to Summon the Emperor, yet would not himself be present at the Council, lest a seeming yielding to Eutychius might be prejudicial to his Supremacy. The Emperor endeavored to reconcile the Eutychians and the Orthodox for the Public Tranquillity, and therefore would have revoked the Articles concerning the condemning of Theodorus of Mopsuesta, and of Theodoret against Cyrillus that was Anathematized. But the Western Churches with Pope Vigilius constantly opposed it, and confirming not only the Decrees Anathematizing those Heretics with their Heresies of former Councils, but also of Chalcedon. The Errors of Origen also expunged, which either denied the Divinity of Christ, or the Resurrection of the Body, or affirmed the Restitution of Reprohates and Devils. Consult concering this Council, Zonar. in vit. Justinian. If this be that Council which some report to have been at Constantinople under the Emperor Justinian in the year 551. there appears above Twenty years difference in computation of Time. This Council is said to have been occasioned chiefly for pacifying the Controversy between Eustochius Bishop of Jerusalem, and Theodorus Ascidas Bishop of Cesarea Cappadocia, touching Origen's Books and Tenets, as also for the determination of other Contentious Disputations. In this Council a Question was moved, Whether men that were dead, might lawfully be Cursed and Excommunicated? To which it was Answered, That as J • sias not only punished Idolatrous Priests while they were alive, but also opened the Graves of them that were dead, to dishonor them after their death, who had dishonored God in their life time: Even so, the Memorials of men might be accursed after their death, who had disturbed the Church of Christ in their life.
At Orleans under Childebertus King of France were frequent Meetings and Assemblies of Bishops, the 2, 3, 4, 5 Councils, whereby many Constitutions were made prohibiting Marriage to Priests; and in the Fourth Canon of the Second Council Simony was damned.
At Overnie in France under Theodobertus King of France, the Bishops who were present at the Councils of Orleans, did assemble and Ordained, That no man should presume to the Office of a Bishop by Favor, but by Merit.
At Tours under Aribertus King of France a Council was held, wherein Provision was made against such Poor as wandered out of their Parishes. In this Council several Constitutions also were made relating to Bishops and the other Clergy in reference to Marriage.
At Paris a Council was held, wherein order was taken concerning the Admission of Bishops to their Offices, and that not to be by favor, but with the consent of the Clergy and People.
At Toledo Assembled a Council of 62 Bishops, where Recaredus King of Spain, and the whole Nation of the West-Goths in Spain renounced the Arian heresy.
At Constantinople under the Reign of Maruitius a Council was held, for trying the Cause of Gregorius Bishop of Antioch accused of Incest, but declared to be Innocent, and his Accuser scourged with Rods, and Banished.
At Matiscon about the time of Pelagius the Second, a Council was held, wherein Command was given, That none of the Clergy should Cite another, having a Spiritual Office, before a Secular Judge. And that she who is the Wife of a man that becomes a Bishop or a Presbyter, should after such Dignity become his Sister, and he be changed into a Brother.
At Matiscon another Council was Convened under Gunthranns King of France in the 24 th year of his Reign, wherein it was Ordained, That Children should be Baptized at Easter and Whitsuntide; and that Secular men should reverence the Clergy.
At Rome in the year 595, and in the Thirteenth year of the Reign of the Emperor Maurice, was a Council assembled of 24 Bishops and 34 Presbyters, wherein the first Four General Councils were confirmed; and that for Ordination of men in Spiritual, no Reward should be given or taken.
Before the Conclusion of this Sixth Century, and precedent to the Councils last mentioned, there were some other Councils of less moment, such as Concilium Gradense, Braccarense, Lataranense, Lugdunense, Pictaviense, & Metense, which being for the most part employed chiefly in damning Old Heresies, and in contentious Disputations, are here omitted.
At Rome in the year 607. under Phocas the Emperor, a Council of 72 Bishops, 30 Presbyters, and 3 Deacons, was Assembled. In this Council the privilege of Supremacy given by Phocas to the Roman Church was published. And in the Eighth, that is, the last year of Phocas, Boniface the Fourth assembled another Council at Rome, wherein he gave power to the Monks to Preach, Administer Sacraments, hear Confessions, to Bind and Loose, and associate them in equal Authority with the Clergy.
At Braga or Bracara in Portugal, An. 610. under the Reign of Gundemarus King of Gethes assembled some Bishops of Gallicia, Lusitania, and of the Province of Lucensis, whereby it was Ordained, That every Bishop should visit the Churches of his Diocese; That they should receive no Rewards for Ordination of the Clergy; And that a Church built for Gain, and Contribution of the People, redounding to the advantage of the Builder, should not be Consecrated.
At Auxerre in France, An. 613. assembled a number of Abbots and Presbyters, with one Bishop and three Deacons. In this Synod they damned Sorcery, made many Superstitious Constitutions, as touching Masses, Burials, Marriages, Prohibition of Meats, &c.
At Hispalis, commonly called Civil La grand, in Spain, in the year 634. and in the 24 th year of the Emperor Heraclius, a Council was assembled by Isidorus Bishop of Hispalis, at the Command of King Sisebutus, for suppression of the Heresy of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a Branch of the Eutychian heresy, and for the decision of some Questions touching the Bounds of their Dioceses.
At Toledo in Spain, An. 639. under the Reign of Sisenandus King of Spain, by the Kings Command were more than 70 Bishops and Presbyters Conven'd upon occasion of diversity of Ceremonies and Discipline in that Kingdom. This was the Fourth Council at Toledo.
At Toledo in the First year of Chintilla King of the Goths, about the time of the Emperor Heraclions Reign, a Fifth Council was held, convened by Eugenius Bishop of Toledo. In this Council nothing considerable was done, but in reference to Annual Litanies, and the appointment of Supplications for the King.
At Rome in the year 652. was a Council convened by Martinus Pope, consisting of more than 100 Bishops, occasioned by the Error of the Monothelites, obstinately maintained by Paulus of Constantinople, and countenanced by the impious Edict of the Emperor Constance. The Constitutions and Decrees made in this Council tended to condemn those that denied the Trinity, the Divine Unity in the Divine Nature, the Manifestation of the Second Person of the Trinity, and his Sufferings in the Flesh.
At Toledo in the year 653. a Sixth Council was held, consisting of Fifty two Bishops, whereof Eugenius Bishop of Toledo was President. The occasion whereof was the Renovation of Old Heresies, and Contradiction to precedent Councils. The Fourth Canon of this Council is against Simony, and the Eighteenth is against Rebellion.
At Toledo in the year 662. a Seventh Council is held, of 4 Archbishops, 50 Bishops and many Presbyters. The First Canon of this Council is against Sedition and Treason. By the Fourth Canon it is forbidden, That Bishops in their Visitations should extort, or oppress their Churches.
At Quinisext (so termed by Balsemon ) the same year, viz. 662. was held a Council, which by Bede and many others is accounted an Erroneous Synod; it was convened under Justinian the Second and Pope Sergius, wherein the Fathers thought fit to supply the defect of the Fifth and Sixth precedent Synods in reference to manners and Ecclesiastical Discipline, for which reason they ratified 102 Canons, in the Trullo of the Imperial Palace, whence they are called Trullans. These are rejected by such Latins, whose consent went not to the stablishment thereof, specially not empowr'd and authorized thereto by the Pope. In the 36 th Canon thereof the Patriarch of Constantinople is equalled to the Roman, and in the 13 th Canon Matrimony is granted to the Clergy.
At Chalon in Burgandy by the Command of Clodoveus K. of France a Council of 44 Bishops assembled, wherein the Canons of the Nicene Council had great approbation; And it was Forbidden, That Two Bishops should be Ordained in one City; and Decreed, That no Secular work should be done on the Lord's Day.
At Rome in the time of Constantine Pogonatus Emperor under the Popedom of Agatho was held a Council, wherein it was Declared by the Suffrages of 125 Bishops, That Two wills and Two operations were to be acknowledged in Christ; and the Defenders of the Heresy of the Monothelites were condemned.
At Toledo in the year 671. an Eighth Council of 52 Bishops was assembled, wherein were high Debates concerning Perjury; At last it was Resolved, That no Necessity obligeth a man to perform an unlawful Oath. In this Council Marriage was utterly forbidden to Bishops, and eating of Flesh in Lent.
At Toledo in the year 673. and in the Seventh year of Recesuvindus King of Goths, and by his Command, were convened 16 Bishops, which was the Ninth Council at that place; and in which several Canons were made touching the Discipline of the Church.
At Toledo in the Eighth year of the said Kings Reign was the Tenth Council, consisting of 21 Bishops, who made some Decrees touching certain Festivals, and others relating to the Clergy, and removed Protamius Bishop of Bracara from his Office, being convict of Adultery.
At Toledo in the Seventh year of Bamba King of Goths 19 Bishops and Seven Abbots were assembled by the Kings Command, wherein several Canons were made concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline.
At Bracara a Second Council was held (the first according to Caranza, ) wherein many old Opinions of the Priscilianists and Manichaeans concerning Prohibition of Marriage and Meats are condemned, together with the Heresies of Samosatenus, Photinus, Cerdon, and Marcion: And in the 30 th Canon of this Council it was Ordained, That no Poesie should be Sung in the Church, except the Psalter of the Old Testament.
At Bracara in Spain in the time of Bombas King of Goths another Synod of Eight Bishops was assembled, wherein the Nicene Faith is again rehearsed. In the Fifth Canon of this Synod it is Ordained, That upon Festival days Relics enclosed in an Ark, shall be born on the Shoulders of the Levites, as the Ark of God in the Old Testament was accustomed to be born.
At Constantinople in the year 680. in the Twelfth year of the Reign of Constantine Pogonatus a General Council was held, Pope Agatho procuring it by his Legates. In this Council were convened 150 Bishops (they who reckon 270 or 286 do compute the Absent Romans, and others consenting thereto,) the Emperor himself was President. In this Council was discussed the Question touching the Wills and Actions of Christ: Here were condemned the Monothelites, Sergius, Cyrus, Pyrrhus, Peter, Paul, Theodorus, together with Pope Honorius; who in the defense of Eutychianism pleaded, that there was one only Will in Christ. This Council confirmed the Canons, not only of General, but also of Particular foregoing Synods, as of Antioch, Laodicea, and others. It also added, what was to be approved in the Orthodox Writings of the Fathers, as appears by the Second Canon of this Council. Vid. Paul. Diacon. in vit. Constant.
At Toledo the Twelfth Council, consisting of 33 Bishops with some Abbots, and 13 of the Nobility, assembled the first year of the Reign of Euringius, to whom Bombas King of the Goths resigned his Royal Authority, choosing rather to be Shaven than to wear a Crown, and to enter into a Monastery than to fit on the Throne of Majesty. This Council (as to the Confession of Faith ) adhered to the Council of Nice, and confirmed the Acts made in precedent Councils against the Jews. Other Councils there were at Toledo under the Reigns of Euringius and Egista, but not of such Remark, as needs any apology for their omission.
At London in the year 712. under the Saxons Reign a Council was assembled, at which the Popes Legate Boniface, and the chief Prelate of England Brithwaldus was present. The two grand Points treated in this Council, were concerning the Worshipping of Images, and Prohibiting Marriage to persons in Spiritual Orders.
At Constantinople about the same year of 712. a Council was called by the Emperor Philippicus, for the undoing or the Sixth General Council, wherein the Error of the Monothelites was condemned.
At Rome in the year 714. a Council was Assembled by Pope Gregory the Second, whereat two Bishops of Britain were present, Sedulius and Fergustus. Most of the Canons made at this Council did concern Marriage, Masses, S • rceries, and the Mandates of the Apostolic Chair.
At Rome a great Council of 903 Bishops was assembled by Pope Gregory the Third, having received a Mandate from the Emperor Leo for the Abolishing of Images. In this Council was the Emperor Leo Excommunicated, and deprived of his Imperial Dignity, because he had disallowed the Worshipping of Images. Now is the Popes Banner displayed against the Emperor, which is the Forerunner of that Enmity which ensued between the Pope and the Emperors.
In France in the year 742. under the Reign of Charles the Great, Zacharias the First being then Pope, a National Council of the Bishops, Presbyters, and Clergy of France was assembled by Boniface Archbishop of Mainz, according to the Mandate of King Charles. This Council was called for Reformation of Abuses in that Country, or rather to reduce it to a conformity unto the Rites of the Roman Church.
At Constantinople in the year 755. and the Thirteenth year of the Emperor Constantine Copronymus a General Council of 338 Bishops was Assembled by the Emperors Command. In this Council the Worshipping of Images was damned, and the placing of them in Oratories and Temples, as a Custom borrowed from the Pagans was forbidden; yet in the 15 th and 17 th Canons of this Council the Invocation of Saints is allowed. The Council of Constantinople is by some accounted two, which others contract into one, but the distinction (it seems) is manifest, because the first is said to be celebrated under Father Leo Isaurus, An. 730. The Second by Constantius Copronymus in the year 755, as aforesaid. The one opposeth the Worshipping of Images and Relics, on which account both may be esteemed as one, or at least united. The first under Leo discovers Intercession of Saints to be imaginary, and the Worshipping of Images mere Idolatry. Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople, and John Damascene, and others, too much inclined to Images, are deprived of their Dignities. Gregory the Third intercedes for Images in a Roman Anti-Synod, in which he Excommunicated the Eastern with the mark of Heretical Imagebreakers; but this did not terrify the said Constantine Copronymus from declaring himself to be an Image-breaker; but assembled 338 Bishops at Constantinople, as aforesaid, over whom himself was President, and persecuted the Maintainers of Images. Some will have This and the Seventh Council as Ecumenical; but the Romans so abhor'd it, that for this Controversy about Images they denied their Subjection to the Greek Emperors: whenc afterwards ensued the Western and Eastern Division, never to be reconciled. How well the Nicene Council corrected the Errors of this, appears by the Decrees thereof.
At Francfurt in the year 794. a Council was convened, but it is not agreed, whether it was an Ecumenical or Provincial Council; the more Ancient Writers will have it to be Oecumenical, because it was called by Charles the Great, and Adrian the First, and it consisted of at least 300 Bishops; yet the latter Writers will have it Provincial, because it seems not to favor Images. The Reason of the convening of this Council was, because Elipardus Archbishop of Toledo, and Felix Vrgelitanus Bishop of Aurelia or Orleans in France, preached, That Christ was only the Adopted Son of God, which Aquinas refutes 3. part. q. 23. art. 4. But Binius with Longus and others will have it, that this Council or Synod confirmed the Opinion of the 2 d Nicene Council concerning the Adoration of Images, which Bellarmine will not believe, though he wishes it to be true.
At Nice in Bythinia in the year 788. a Council of 350 Bishops was assembled; in which it was Ordained, That the Image of Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of the Saints, should not only be received into places of Adoration, but also should be adored and worshipped.
At Frankford in the year 794. a great Council was assembled by Charles the Great, King of France, partly by reason of the Heretic Felix, who called Christ the Adopted Son of God in his Human Nature, and was condemned in a Council at Ratisbone, An. 742. partly also by reason of great Disputes that were in most places concerning the Worshipping of Images, disallowed in the Council of Constantinople, but allowed in the Second Council of Nice.
At Mainz in the year 813. by the Command of Carolus Magnus, was Assembled a Council of 30 Bishops, 25 Abbots, with a great number of Priests, Monks, Counts, and Judges, about Reformation of the dissolute manners of Ecclesiastical and Laypersons.
At Reims in the same year 813. a Council was Assembled by the Command of Charles the Great, who not only called that Famous Council of Frankford, An. 794. in which the Adoration of Images was condemned, but also about one and the same time, viz. An. 813. appointed Five National Councils to be convened in divers places for Reformation of the Clergy and Laity, viz. at Mainz aforesaid; this at Reims; another at Tours; a Fourth at Chalons; and a Fifth at Aries. In all which no opposition was made to the foresaid Council of Frankford, nor was the Adoration of Images avowed in any of these Councils.
At Tours, An. 813. at the Command (as aforesaid) of the Emperor Carolus Magnus a Council of many Bishops and Abbots was assembled, for the Establishing of Ecclesiastical Discipline in Tours.
At Chalons, An. 813. was the Fourth Council convened the same year under Charles the Great, and by his Command, for the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical state; the Canons whereof for the most part are consonant to those made in the said former Councils under Charles the Great.
At Arles the same year of 813. wherein the Four preceding Councils were held, another was convened by Command of Charles the Great, wherein as to matters of Faith, Church-Discipline, Regulation of the Clergy, Reformation of Manners, &c. the Canons generally agree with those of the said Four preceding Councils.
At Constantinople in the year 871. in the Third year of Basilius Emperor of the East, and under the Reign of Lewis 2. Emperor of the West, a Council was Assembled by Basilius the Emperor against Photios the Patriarch of Constantinople; in which Council he was deposed and Excommunicated, and the Books he wrote against the Bishop of Rome's Supremacy above other Bishops, commanded to be burnt. At this Council the Ambassadors of Pope Adrian the Second were present, and great endeavors used to have all things therein framed to his content. In this Council the Worshipping of Images was again allowed; and it was Commanded, That the Image of Christ should be held in no less reverence than the Books of the Gospel.
At Acciniacum in France a Council consisting of Ten Bishops was convened by Carolus Calvus. In this Council Hincmarus Bishop of Laudunum was deprived of his Office, and his eyes thrust out; but Pope John the 9 th. under the Reign of Carolus Crassus, restored him to his Office, because he appealed from his own Bishop and a Synod in his own Country, to the Chair of Rome.
At Strasburgh in the year 899. and in the Eighth year of the Emperor Arnulphus, 22 Bishops of Germany were assembled. Many of the Constitutions of this Synod (according to Caranza ) are in effect the same with the Canons of former Councils. In the 46 th Canon of this Synod it is Ordained, That a man, whose Wife is Divorced from him by reason of her Adultery, shall not marry again during her life.
At Ravenna in the year 903. a Council of 74 Bishops was convened, whereat was present Carolus Simplex, King of France. In this Council the Acts of Pope Formosus had allowance, and the Decrees of Stephanus the Sixth were condemned and burnt.
At Reims under the said Carolus Simplex a Council was assembled for correcting the abuses of Church-Rents, a great part whereof under pretence of the Kings necessary occasions, was converted by some Courtiers to their own use, against which Fulco Archbishop of Reims declaring his mind freely in Council, was slain by Vinemarus one of the Oppressors at Court; the like not having been known since the Second Council of Ephesus, called a Council of Briggandry, wherein Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople was slain.
At Rome in the time of Otto the First a great Council was assembled against Pope John the 13 th. or as others affirm, Pope John the 12 th. In this Council the Pope was accused of Ordaining a Deacon in a Stable, of Simony, of Adultery, of making the Sacred Palace like a Baudy-House, of Murthering Benedict his Spiritual Father, of Gelding John an Archdeacon, of raising Fire, of drinking to the Devil, of distributing the golden Crosses and Chalices to his Harlots, of imploring help from Jupiter and Venus in his playing at Dice, and of his not Signing himself with the Sign of the Cross.
At Canterbury in the year 975. a Council was Assembled, when Dunstanus was Bishop thereof. The Question that was most in debate at this Council, was concerning Marriage in relation to such persons as were in Spiritual Orders, the which Dunstanus (whether his Crucifix spake True or False, if it spake at all) declared his Judgment against.
At Constantinople under the Reign of Nicephorus Phocas Emperor of the East was a Council convened, by reason of Nicephorus his taking to wise Theophania the Reflict of his Predecesso • Romanus, having been Witness in Baptism to Theophania 's Children; the which so displeased Polyeuchus Patriarch of Constantinople, that for the same he debar'd the said Emperor from Holy things, and so in effect Excommunicated the Emperor of the East.
At Reims, An. 992. in the Ninth year of the Emperor Otto, and in the Fourth of Hugo Capeto King of France a Council was convened against Arnulphus Bishop of Reims for countenancing Duke Charles, who claimed the Crown as next Heir, being Brother to Lotharius. Whereupon Arnulphus was deposed, and denuded of his Episcopal Dignity, who yet afterwards was restored to it again by another Council at Reims, called by Pope John the Thirteenth.
At Arles in the year 1026. and under the Reign of the Emperor Henry the Second, a Council was assembled in order to the appeasing of the wrath of God and his indignation at that time manifested against the greatest part of the whole World.
At Halingnustat in the year 1023. under the Emperor Henry the Second a Council was Assembled, wherein great endeavors were used to make a Conformity and Unity in observation of Ecclesiastical Rites and Ceremonies in Germany; wherein Laws were made concerning the degrees of Consanguinity.
At Triburia, An. 1030. under the Reign of the Emperor Conrade the Second a Council was Assembled, at which the Emperor was present, wherein were made some Constitutions concerning Fasting.
At Sutrium in Italy, An. 1046. under the Reign of the Emperor Henry the Third was an Assembly by the Emperor for the pacifying that grand Schism in the Roman Church, when Three Popes at once contended for the Popedom, viz. Benedict the Ninth, Silvester the Third, and Gregory the Sixth, all which the Emperor and the Council dispoped, and chose one Sindigerus Bishop of Bamberg to be Pope, whom they called Clemens the Second.
At Rome about the year 1050. Leo the Ninth assembled a Council at Rome against Berengarius Deacon at Angiers, who disapproved the Opinion of Transubstantiation, viz. [That after the words of Consecration the substance of Bread evanished, and the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ was in the Sacrament, under the Accidents of Bread and Wine; ] whose Letters touching this matter, not finding Lanfrankus Bishop of Canterbury (to whom they were directed) in Normandy, were delivered to some of the Clergy, who opening the same, sent them to Pope Leo the Ninth, whereupon this Council at Rome was assembled, wherein the said Letters of Berengarius being read, they condemned him (though absent) as an Heretic.
At Vercellis the same year Leo the Ninth assembled another Council against Berengarius.
At Tours in the year 1055. Pope Victor the Second Assembled a Council against Berengarius, who there answered, That he adhered to no particular Opinion of his own, but followed the Common Doctrine of the Universal Church.
At Rome in the year 1059. Pope Nicholaus the Second assembled a Council of 113 Bishops against Berengarius, who submitting himself to the Pope and Councils Correction, they prescribed him a Form of Renunciation of his Error, so there called, which he accepted and recanted, yet afterwards published a Refutation of the same Doctrine. In this Council it was Ordained, That the Election of the Pope should belong to the College of Cardinals.
At Milan, An. 1060. Pope Nicholaus the Second by Petrus Damianus held a Council, wherein the Two chief points debated were touching Simony, and the Error of the Nicholaitans, whereof they counted such Priests guilty as had married Wives, though they did not (as the Nicholaitans ) make them Common.
At Mantua, An. 1066. the Emperor Henry the Fourth assembled a Council for pacifying the Differences in the Roman Church, between Alexander the Second, and Candalus, called Honorius the Second, wherein Alexander was declared Pope, and Candalus pardoned.
At Winchester Pope Alexander the Second by two Cardinals sent into England, Assembled a Council to appease the Troubles of the Church in this Kingdom; wherein they deposed certain Bishops and Abbots, among whom Stigandus Bishop of Canterbury, because he had possessed that Chair, Robert Archbishop thereof being then alive, and because he possessed another Bishopric with it, viz. the Bishopric of Winchester.
At Friburgh (anciently called Tributia ) the Bishops of Germany assembled themselves in a Council, in which they declared the Archbishop of Bremen to be an Enemy to their Country, except he delivered up the young Emperor Henry the Fourth, to be educated according to the Covenant made between the Princes and Bishops of Germany during his Minority.
At Mainz, An. 1069. a Council was assembled in order to a Divorce of the Emperor Henry 4. from his Wife, from which he was dissuaded by the Arguments of Petrus Damianus the Popes Nuncio for that purpose.
At Erfurd, An. 1074. the Bishop of Mainz assembled a Council, in order to an observance of a Command from Pope Gregory 7 th. touching a separation of the Priests within the Bishopric of Mainz from their Wives, or else to depose them from their Offices. By reason whereof, as also by reason of the Bishops exaction of Tithes from Turingia, this Council rose in a tumult and great confusion re infecta.