The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 6 · Chapter 9
CHAP. 9. Of the Epiſtles of the Biſhops of Africa (of whom St. Auſtin was one) to Innocent the firſt Biſhop of Rome. And that our Cardinal labours without ground to draw them to his advantage.
ALL that was ſaid before, is not contradicted by the Epiſtles of the African Biſhops of St. Auſtins time to Innocent the firſt Biſhop of Rome, which the Cardinal muſtereth up ſo often, making a great flouriſh with them, alledging the ſame teſtimonies above fifty times. For either he hoped not that the Reader would read his whole book, or he believed that they wanted memory. But theſe Epiſtles are rather againſt then for the Popes primacy.
Among Auſtins Epiſtles, the 90. is an Epiſtle of the Biſhops of the Province of Carthage to Innocent: Whereby they repreſent to him, what they have done againſt the Hereticks, Pelagius and Celeſtius: And fearing leſt that the Biſhop of Rome ſhould ſupport them, and receive them to his communion(a)Zozimus Innocents ſucceſſor, maintained for a time Pelagius and Celeſtius. His Epiſtles to that ſubject are to be ſeen in Baronius. Anno 417. (as it happened ſoon after) they deſire him to joyn with them, and approving what they had done to help them with his authority. The humbleſt words which they uſe, and of which our Adverſaries labour to take advantage, are theſe,(b)Hoc itaque geſtum, Domine frater ſancte, charitati tuae intimandum duximus, ut ſtatutis noſtrae mediocritatis etiam Apoſtolicae ſedis adhibeatur authoritas. Sir and holy brother, We thought fit to make known to your charity that which was done, that to the ordinances made by our mediocrity the authority of the Apoſtolick See may be joyned. This place ſaith nothing that can ſerve the Cardinals turn. Theſe Fathers, indeed, ſpeak of the authority of the Biſhop of Rome. But whoſoever hath ſome authority, is not therefore Head of the Univerſal Church. In that time the authority of Auſtin was great, yea greater then that of Innocent; yet he did not for that challenge any ſuperiority over his brethren and colleagues. As for the title of Apoſtolick See, it was common to many other Biſhops. Thus Sozom. book 1. cap. 16.(c)foreign, &c. In that Council [of Nice] among the Biſhops that held the Apoſtolick Sees, Macarius Biſhop of Jeruſalem, Euſtathius Biſhop of Antioch upon the river Orontes, and Alexander near Maeotides paludes, did meet. Ruffinus book 2. ch. 21.(d)Apud Alexandriam Timotheus, in Hie…oſolymis Johannes, Apoſtolicas reparant ſedes. In Alexandria Timothy, in Jeruſalem John, repair the Apoſtolick Sees. (e)foreign.Cyrillus alſo is called Prelat of the Apoſtolick See, that is of Jeruſalem, in the 4. book, ch. 24. of Sozomenus. Theodoret in the 5. book, ch. 9. calls the Church of Antioch (f)foreign.the moſt antient and wholly Apoſtolical Church. And Baſil in the 55. Epiſtle, ſaith that(g)foreign. Ambroſe Biſhop of Milan was called to the Apoſtolical precedence. And Auſtin himſelf in the 162. Epiſtle, ſpeaks of the Apoſtolick Sees in the plural, ſaying that Cecilian might reſerve his cauſe to the judgement of Apoſtolick Sees, Hierom goes further, ſaying that(h)Hieron. Epiſt. ad Evagrium. Omnes ſunt ſucceſſores Apoſtolorum. all Biſhops whereſoever they be, are ſucceſſors of the Apoſtles. And Tertullian in his book of Preſcriptions, ch. 20.(i)Sic omnes primae, omnes Apoſtolicae, dum unam omnium probant unitatem communicatio pacis, & appellatio fraternitatis, & conteſſeratio hoſpitalitatis, quae jura non alia ratio regit quam ejuſdem Sacramenti una traditio. ſaith that all Churches pure in doctrine, and joyned together by the bond of peace and of the ſame doctrine, are all firſt Apoſtolical. And ch. 21. he calls all the Churches founded by the Apoſtles immediately originales & matrices.
Wherefore Gregorius Turonenſis in the 4. book of his Hiſtory, ch. 26. makes no difficulty to call the See of the Biſhop of Tours the Apoſtolick See: For there the Legats ſent from Tours to King Heribert ſpeak thus,(k)Salve rex glorioſe; ſedes enim Apoſtolica eminentiae tuae ſalutem mittit uberrimam. God ſave the glorious King; the Apoſtolick See ſends moſt ample greeting to thine excellency. And Sidonius Apollinarii in the 4. Epiſtle of the 6. book, writes thus to Lupus Biſhop of Troyes, whom he calls Sir Pope, (l)Praeter officium quod incomparabiliter eminenti tuo Apoſtolatui ſine fine debetur.Beſides the duty which is perpetually due unto thine Apoſtleſhip, which is incomparably eminent. And in the 1. Epiſtle he ſaith, Lupus(m)In Apoſtolica ſede novem cum decurſa quinquennia. had paſt already nine times five years in the Apoſtolick See, that is, he had been Biſhop 45. years. The ſame title he giveth to the Biſhop of Vaiſon (n)Ad Apoſtolatus tui pleniorem notitiam accedo.in the 6. book Epiſt. 7. and in the 7. book Epiſt 4.
To return to the Epiſtle of the African Biſhops, one cannot ſee that the Biſhops of the Province of Carthage by that addreſs to Innocent ſubject their judgement unto his, or that they ſuſpend their judgement till Innocent hath pronounced his, or that they acknowledge him Head of the univerſal Church.
That which moved them to write to Innocent, was, their fear that Innocent ſhould undertake the defence of Pelagius and Celeſtius againſt them; and their fear was juſtified by the event, his ſucceſſor Zozimus having for a time laboured to excuſe Celeſtius who was fled to him. The words of the Epiſtle ſhew their fear; for they ſpeak as having underſtood that Innocent held Pelagius to have been juſtly abſolved by the Synod of Paleſtina. (o)Si ergo Pelagius Epiſcopalibus geſtis quae in Oriente confecta dicuntur, etiam tuae venerationi juſte viſus fuerit abſolutus, error tamen ipſe, & impietas quae tam multos habet aſſertores per diverſa diſperſos, etiam authoritate Apoſtolicae ſedis anathematizanda eſt.If then (ſay they) your reverence eſteemeth that Pelagius was juſtly abſolved by the Epiſcopal acts, which are ſaid to have been made in the Eaſt; yet the erroneous doctrine and the impiety which hath ſo many aſſertors ſcattered in many places, ought to be anathematized by the authority of the Apoſtolick See. As if they ſaid, If thou wilt favour the perſon of Pelagius, at the leaſt thou muſt condemn the hereſie which is put to his charge. And in the 95. Epiſtle Auſtin and his colleagues ſay, that ſome that favoured Pelagius, affirmed that they did it by the perſwaſion of Innocent.
To that Epiſtle the anſwer of Innocent is added, which hath this clauſe put in the title in many editions;(p)Audivimus eſſe in urbe Romae ubi ille diu vixit, nonnullos qui diverſis cauſis ei faveant, quidam ſcilicet, quia vos …alia perſuaſiſſe perhibent. Innocent the Roman Pope anſwereth this Epiſtle. (q)This clauſe is put out in the Edition of Nivelle at Paris 1571.In this Epiſtle we find wanting the ſtyle, the ſpirit and the learning convenient to ſo great a Prelat. And that Epiſtle is juſtly thus branded on the forehead, for the ſtyle of it, ridiculous, barbarous, and vainly puft up.
In that Epiſtle Innocent ſpeaks like a Maſter, and receiveth the honour which the African Biſhops had done him, to impart unto him what they had done againſt Pelagius, as a ſubmiſſion of ſubjects and inferiour Judges, ſubmitting their judgement to the authority of the Roman See, to which (if he may be believed) the knowledge of all things belonged. Which power nevertheleſs he groundeth not upon the Word of God, but upon(r)Patrum inſtituta. the inſtitution of the Fathers. Already the Biſhops of Rome as well as thoſe of Alexandria and Antioch, wanted no pride, and would ſpread their Feathers like Peacocks, aſpiring to raiſe themſelves, although their power was very little out of their Patriarchate: And I wonder how M. du Perron made no conſcience to fill his book with a thouſand of the like allegations, taken from the Epiſtles and Decretals of Popes, where they aſcribe to themſelves far more power then they had really.
The next Epiſtle, which is the 92. among St. Auſtins Epiſtles, is an Epiſtle of the Milevitan Council in Numidia to Innocent Biſhop of Rome: Where there is not one word ſounding the language of ſubjects to their Superiour. And whereas that Milevitan Council is the ſame that makes that excellent Canon, whereby it is prohibited upon pain of excommunication to appeal from Africa to Rome, yet theſe Fathers make no mention of that, writing to the Biſhop of Rome. They make no excuſe about it, as not bound to give him account of that or any of their actions: But fearing that he ſhould favour Pelagius, whom they had condemned, they deſire him to joyn with them, and to aſſiſt them with his authority. In that Epiſtle is found that text which our Cardinal inculcates and repeats ſo often:(ſ)Sed arbitramur, adjuvante miſericordiâ Domini qui te & regere conſulentem, & orantem exaudire dignatur, authoritati ſanctitatis tuae de ſanctarum Scripturarum authoritate depromptae facilius eos qui tam perverſa ſentiunt, eſſe ceſſuros. We believe with the mercy of the Lord, who is pleaſed to govern you when you conſult him, and to hear you when you pray to him, that they that hold ſuch perverſe and pernicious tenets, will more eaſily yield to the authority of your Holineſs drawn out of the holy Scriptures. But in that there is nothing that can ſerve to eſtabliſh the Popes primacy over the Church of the whole World; and there is nothing there but may be ſaid to any faithful Paſtour. For the authority of the leaſt Paſtours it founded in the Scriptures. Obſerve that the word depromptae, drawn, which this Epiſtle chuſeth rather to uſe then fundatae, grounded, ſheweth the meaning of theſe Fathers to be, that if Innocent will take the pains to write againſt the Pelagians, they ſhall more eaſily yield to the authority of the texts, which he ſhall draw out of the holy Scriptures.
To theſe Letters Innocent anſwereth in an arrogant and barbarous way: Wherefore alſo that Epiſtle is ſtigmatized in the forehead like the other. For there is in the title, Ejuſdem genii epiſtola eſt, This Epiſtle is endited by the ſame Spirit as the former. There he commendeth the Fathers of the Milevitan Council for ſubmitting themſelves unto him, for acknowledging his authority, and for coming to draw an Anſwer from the Apoſtolical ſpring. And truly the Fathers of the Milevitan Council foreſaw that he would make a wrong uſe of the honour which they deferred unto him, knowing the preſumptuous humor of that Prelat; for in their Letters theſe words, are found,(t)Ut nobis potius ad culpam negligentiae valeat, ſi apud tuam venerationem quae pro Eccleſia ſuggerenda ſunt tacuerimus, quàm ea tu poſſis vel faſtidioſe, vel negligenter accipere. It would ſerve rather to make us guilty of negligence, if we were ſilent to your reverence of thoſe things which ought to be repreſented to you for the good of the Church [by repreſenting them to you] to make you receive them diſdainfully or negligently. For by making a ſhew that they fear not that he receive their Letters with pride, they make him a tacit Remonſtrance and exhortation to humility. And in the end of their Letters they ſay that by writing to him, th…y would follow the example of the Biſhops of the Province of Carthage, intimating that they had writ to him what had been done in their Council, not by duty or obligation, but to imitate the example of their neighbours. But Innocent followed rather his humor then their exhortations. And that in the ſame Epiſtle it might appear that the Biſhop of Rome can erre in the Doctrine, Innocent hath, by the way, put in a falſe doctrine; teaching that the Euchariſt [or Lords Supper] is neceſſary unto little children, that they may be ſaved: And there is in the margin, Etiam Romana Eccleſia credidit Euchariſtiam pueris neceſſariam, The Roman Church alſo believed that the Euchariſt is neceſſary to children. Auſtin alſo beareth him this teſtimony, in the firſt book againſt Julian, ch. 2. Innocent (ſaith he) hath defined that little children, unleſs they eat the fleſh of the Son of man, cannot have life. The ſucceſſors of Innocent would not follow his doctrine;(u)Synod. Trid. Seſſ. Can. 5. Si quis dixerit, parvulis antequam ad annos diſcretionis pervenerint, neceſſariam eſse Euchariſtiae communione, an…thema ſit. And the Council of Trent doth condemn and anathematize it by an expreſs Canon, in the 21. Seſſion. Thus the Roman Church hath anathematized that Pope, above eleven hundred years after his death.
There is yet one Epiſtle of five Biſhops of Africa, Auſtin being one of them, to the ſame Innocent, upon the ſame ſubject, that is, about the hereſie of the Pelagians: It is the 95. Epiſtle among thoſe of Auſtin. That Epiſtle is an excellent one, and filled with good doctrine, and reliſheth Auſtin's ſtyle altogether. In that letter there is not one word of ſubmiſſion, nor any mention of the Popes authority. But theſe Fathers endeavour onelyonly to repreſent unto Innocent the true doctrine concerning free will, and concerning grace and nature: declaring the cauſe why they write to him about it, even becauſe they had heard that at Rome many favoured Pelagius, (x)Audivimus enim eſſe in urbe Romae ubi ille diu vixit, nonnullos qui diverſis cauſis ei faveant; quidam ſcilicet quia vos talia perſuaſiſſe perhibent: Plures vero qui eum talia credere non ſentiunt.being perſwaded to it by Innocent. We have heard (ſay they) that in the City of Rome, where he lived long, ſome favour him for diverſe cauſes, ſome give for their reaſon that you have perſwaded them ſo; but moſt believe not that Pelagius holds ſuch tenets. The truth is that they that taxed Innocent of ſavouring Pelagius, did calumniate him; Yet that report being come to Auſtins ears and to his colleagues, moved them to write theſe Letters to Innocent: That was the true reaſon, not to give him an account of their actions. For excepting only the caſe of Pelagius, we do not find that the Biſhops of Africa ever writ to the Biſhop of Rome about the controverſies in the doctrine agitated in Africa, but only to contradict him, as Cyprian did, and the VI. Council of Carthage.
To theſe laſt Letters Innocent anſwers by an Epiſtle, which is the 96. among thoſe of Auſtin, in which he ſpeaks more kindly, and ſets his pride a pin lower: There he ſaith, that he never received any Letter from the Council of Paleſtina, where Pelagius had purged himſelf; and that he had no communication about that. Yet becauſe that Epiſtle is rude and dry, and very far below the worth of the Epiſtle of the African Biſhops; either Auſtin or ſome other that firſt publiſht Auſtins works, have ſet this title in ſcorn over that Epiſtle of Innocent, (y)Innocentius ſuperiori reſpondit ſuo more, ſaevns potius quàm eruditus, & ad damnandum quàm docendum inſtructior.Innocent anſwereth the precedent Epiſtle after his manner, being more violent and peremptory then learned, and more ready to condemn then to teach.