Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

three places. For he elevated the see in which he condescended to rest, and to finish his present life. He decorated the see, to which he sent his disciple the evangelist, and he established the see, in which, although he intended to leave it, he sat for seven years. Since therefore the see is of one and is one, over which three bishops preside by divine authority, whatsoever good I bear of you, I ascribe to myself. And if you hear any good of me, number it among your merits, because we are all one in' him who says, that all should be one, as thou, O Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may be

one

in us.-In the Eulogy to the Bishop of Alexand. epist. 40, book 7, indict. 15, tom. 2, p. 887. (Paris, 1705.)

Images to be Used, but not to be Worshipped. The dispersed sons of the church are to be called together, and you must show them by the testimony of Scripture, that it is not law ful to worship any-thing that is made by hands : for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. And then you must add that you were offended, and had ordered the images to be broken, because you saw that they had passed into the worshipping of the pictures of figures, which were made for the edification of the unskilled people in order that they who were ignorant of letters by looking at the description might learn what had been done; and you must say to them, If you desire to have them in the church for that instruction for which formerly images were made, I allow that to take place in every possible way; and explain to them that the sight of the story which was testified by the suspended picture did not displease, but that worship only which was unduly shown lo pictures. And by these words soothing their minds, bring them back to concord with you. Moreover, if any one desires to make images, by no means forbid him to do it, but by every means forbid the worshipping of images.- Register of Letters, book 11, indict. 4, p. 1100, epist. 13. To Serenus, Bishop of Marseilles. (Bened, 'edit. Paris, 1705.)

The Maccabees not in the Canon of Scripture. Concerning which thing we do nothing irregularly, if we addyce a testimony from the books, which although not canonical are published for the edification of the people. For Eleazar wounding an

When the testimony of the council of Laodicea and the Fathers is brought forward to show that the Roman canon differs from that of the primitive church, Romanists appeal to the council of Carthage and to two later Roman councils, which included the Apocrypha in the canon : and they pretend that at first the cauon of the Old Testament was not ascertained, but that it was afterwards settled by these councils. Not to insist however upon the absurdity of the notion that the Jews were ignorant of their own canon, or that the same uncertainty was attached to the canon of

Old as to

at of the New Testament in the first ages of the church, we here find a learned pope, subsequently to the council of Carthage and the Roman councils, numbering the Maccabees among the books that are not canonical.

Ipse enim sublimavit sedem in qua etiam quiescere et præsentem vitam finire dignatus est. Ipse decoravit sedem, in qua evangelistam discipulum misit. Ipse firmavit sedem in quâ septem annis, quamvis, discessurus, sedit. Cùm ergo unius atque una sit sedes, cui ex auctoritate divina tres nunc episcopi præsident, quicquid ego de vobis boni audio, hoc mihi imputo. Si quid de me boni auditis, hoc vestris meritis imputate, quia in illo unum sumus, qui ait, ut omnes unum sint, sicut et tu Pater in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi in nobis unum sint.-Eulogio Episcopo Alexand. epist. 40, lib. 7, indict. 15, tom. 2, p. 887. (Parisiis, 1705.)

Convocandi enim sunt dispersi ecclesiæ filii, eisque Scripturæ sacræ est testimoniis ostendendum, quia omne manufactum adorari non licet; quoniam scriptum est, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies. Ac deinde subjungendum quia picturas imaginum, quæ

ad ædificationem imperiti populi fuerint factæ, ut nescientes litteras, ipsam historiam intendentes, quid actum sit, discerent, quia transisse in adorationem videras, idcircò commotus es, ut eas imagines frangi præciperes. Atque eis dicendum, si ad hanc instructionem, ad quam imagines antiquitùs factæ sunt, habere vultis in ecclesia, eas modis omnibus et fieri et haberi permitto. Atque indica quod non tibi ipsa visio historiæ, quæ pictura teste pendebatur, displicuerit, sed illa adoratio, quæ picturis fuerat incompetenter exbibita. Atque in his verbis eorum mentes demulcens, eos ad concordiam tuam

Et si quis imagines facere voluerit, minimè prohibe, adorari verd imagines, omnibus modis veta.- Registri Epist. lib. 11, indict. 4, p. 1100, epist. 13. Ad Serenum Massiliensem Episcopum. Bened. edit. (Parisiis, 1705.)

revoca.

De quâ re non inordinatè facimus, si ex libris licet non canonicis, sed tamen ad ædificationem plebis editis, testimonium proferamus. Eleazar namque in prælio elephanteni feriens, stravit, sed sub ipso

elephant in battle, slew him, but fell under bim whom he had destroyed.-Morals, book 19, on 39th chap. of Job. (Edit. as above.)

Against the Judicial Power of the Priests in forgiving Sins. Thou, who alone sparest, who alone forgivest sins. For who cau forgive sins, but God only ?-Erposition 2, on the seven Penitential Psalms.

GELASIUS I.

Certainly the sacraments, which we receive of the body and blood of the Lord are a divine thing, because by these we are made partakers of the divine nature; nevertheless, the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceases not to exist, and assuredly the image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in the performance of the mysteries.-Gelasius concerning the two natures of Christ against Eutyches, quoted by Archbishop Usher in his Reply to a Jesuit.

The Romanists, as usual, desire to invalidate this document by affecting to question whether Pope Gelasius really wrote it. The testimonies however in favour of its authenticity are thus summed up by the learned Dupin, and are decisive.

First, it is found in MSS. joined with the letters of this pope. Secondly, St. Fulgentius, who is a witness beyond exception, cites it as Pope Gelasius's.-(Book concerning 5 Questions in the Deacon Ferrandus's Works, ch. 18), and John 2 uses the testimony of the author as Gelasius's. Thirdly, Gennadius assures us that this pope made a large treatise against Eutyches and Nestorius. Lastly, the

quem extinxit, occubuit.-Greg. Mor. lib. 19, in ch. 39, Beati Job. Bened. edit. Parisiis, 1705.)

Tu qui solus parcis, qui solus peccata dimittis. Quis enim potest peccata dimittere, nisi solus Deus ?-Greg. Expos. 2, in septem Psal. Pænitentes. (Edit. ut supra.)

Vir vitæ venerabilis Stephanus nomine, Valeriæ provinciæ presbyter fuit, hujus nostri Bonifacii diaconi atque dispensatoris ecclesiæ agnatione proximus. Qui quadam die de itinere domum regressus, mancipio suo negligenter loquens præcepit, dicens, Veni, diabole, discalcea me.

Ad cujus vocem mox cæperunt se caligarum corrigiæ in summa velocitate dissolvere, ut apertè constaret, quod ei ipse, qui nominatus fuerat, ad extrahendas diabolus caligas ebedisset.-St. Gregorii Dialogorum, lib. 3, ch. 20, tom. 2. (Edit. ut supra.)

GELASIUS.

Fut ordonné Evêque de Rome, au commencement, de l'un 492.

Certe sacramenta quæ sumimus corporis et sanguinis Christi, divina res est, propter quod et per eadem efficimur consortes naturæ; et tamen esse non desinit substantia vel patura panis et vini. Et certè imago et similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi, jo `actione mysteriorum celebrantur.-Gelasius de duabus naturis in Christo contra Eutychen, citante Usher.

Les critiques on doutè d'abord s'il étoit de ce pape, et Baronius a assuré avec plus de confiance que, personne, qu'il n'en etoit point mais de Gélase de Cyzique. Bellarmin a suivi son jugement.- (After stating their arguments, Dupin continues.)– Tout cela suffit pour faire croire que cet ouvrage est de Gélase de Cyzique, plutôt que de Gélase Evêque de Rome. Néanmoins il y a des preuves convain

style of this treatise demonstrates plainly that it is Pope Gelasius's.5th Century of Christianity.

IGNATIUS.

Breaking one bread, which is the medicine of immortality, the antidote by means of which, we shall not die, but shall live for ever. Letter to the Ephesians. (Oxford, 1708.)

If any one is without the altar, deprive him of the bread of God. Letter to the Ephesians.

Do

you, therefore, resuming long-suffering, re-establish yourselves in faith, which is the flesh of the Lord, and in love* which is the blood of Jesus Christ.Epistle to the Tralesians.

I am the breadcorn of God, and shall be ground by the teeth of beasts, that I may be found the clean bread of Christ.--Epistle to the Romans.

EPIPHANIUS.

Against Saint Worship.

But neither Elias is to be worshipped although he be alive, nor is John to be worshipped. .. Nor is Theela or any one of the saints worshipped. For that ancient error shall not prevail over us to forsake the living God, and to worship the things that are made by Him. For they served and worshipped the creature more than the Creator, and became fools. For if an angel will not be worshipped, how much more will not she who was born of Anna ?--Against

The Romanists are wont to cite a passage from Ignatius, where he speaks figuratively, in favour of transubstantiation; the above extracts are sufficient to nullify it.

« PredošláPokračovať »