Innocent, acting with his usual Prudence and Circumspection, in his Answer to the above-mentioned Letters, declared, that he admitted the Bishops of both Parties to his Communion, from which he could exclude no Man till he was lawfully judged and condemned; and that therefore, to compose all Differences, and leave no room for Complaints on either Side, it was fit a Council should be assembled, consisting of the Western as well as the Eastern Bishops. The other Bishops of Italy, to whom Chrysostom had written, returned much the same Answer[1414], following therein the Advice, which Chrysostom himself had given to the Bishops of his Party; viz. that they should communicate with his Enemies, to prevent Divisions in the Church, but not sign his Condemnation, because he did not think himself guilty[1415]. Innocent’s Answer to Theophilus was in Words to the same Effect. His Letter to Chrysostom was carried into the East by Demetrius Bishop of Pessinus, who took care to shew it every-where, to the end it might be every-where known, that the Roman Church still communicated with that holy Bishop[1416].
A few Days after Innocent had answered Chrysostom’s Letter, Petrus,
one of Theophilus’s Presbyters, and Martyrius Deacon of the
Church of Constantinople, arrived at Rome, with Letters from Theophilus,
and the Acts of Chrysostom’s Deposition by the Council ad
Quercum. From these it appeared, that the Council had consisted of
Thirty-six Bishops, whereof Twenty-nine were Egyptians, and over
these Theophilus had, as their Metropolitan, too great an Influence;
that Chrysostom had been condemned without being heard, and that
nothing had been laid to his Charge, deserving so severe and exemplary
a Punishment. |Innocent's Answer to Theophilus.| Innocent therefore, having read them, with the
utmost Indignation, answered Theophilus in a few Words; that he
was determined, as he had notified to him by his former Letter, to
communicate both with him and his Brother John; that he could
by no means depart from the Communion of the latter, till he was
lawfully judged and condemned; that a Council was to be soon
held, before which it was incumbent upon Theophilus to make good
his Charge, and the Steps he had hitherto taken, by the Canons and
Decrees of the Council of Nice, since the Roman Church admitted
no others[1417]. |Letters from the
Bishops of Chry-
sostom’s Party to
Innocent.| With this Letter Petrus and Martyrius returned to Constantinople,
whence arrived at Rome, soon after their Departure from
that City, Theoctecnus, a Presbyter of the Church of Constantinople,
and one of Chrysostom’s Friends, with Letters from Twenty-five Bishops,
informing Innocent, that Chrysostom had been driven a Second
time from his See; that he had been conducted by a Band of Soldiers
to Cucusus, and confined to that Place; and that the great
Church had been consumed by Fire, the very Day he was carried out
of Constantinople. Innocent was greatly affected with this Account,
and shed many Tears in reading it. But as these Troubles and Disorders
were fomented by some great Men at the Court either of
Arcadius or Honorius, and a Misunderstanding was then subsisting
between the Two Brothers, or their Ministers, he concluded, that his
Endeavours towards the restoring of Peace and Unity would prove
unsuccessful, and might even blow the Fire, which already burnt
with so much Violence, into a greater Flame. |Who sends Letters
of Communion to them.| On these Considerations
he wisely forbore making any Application for the present to
Honorius, and only sent Letters of Communion to Chrysostom, and
the Bishops, who had espoused his Cause[1418]. |Letters from Acacius
to Innocent.| These Letters were delivered
to Theoctecnus, who was scarce gone, when one Paternus,
who styled himself a Presbyter of the Church of Constantinople, arrived
at Rome, with Letters from Acacius, who had been intruded
into the See of Constantinople, and from some other Bishops of his
Party, charging Chrysostom with setting Fire to the Basilic or Great
Church. So barefaced a Calumny provoked Innocent to such a Degree,
that he would neither hear Paternus, nor return an Answer to
the Letters he had brought.
In the mean time a most cruel Persecution was railed at Constantinople, against Chrysostom’s Friends, refusing to communicate with Acacius, Theophilus, and Porphyrius, who had intruded himself into the vacant See of Antioch, and, in Defiance of the Canons, maintained, by Force of Arms, the Dignity he had usurped. This Persecution was carried on under a Christian Emperor, with as much Cruelty as any had ever been under the most inveterate Enemies of the Christian Name. The Pretence they made use of was to discover the Authors of the late Fire; and as the Imperial Officers chiefly suspected, or pretended to suspect, Chrysostom’s Friends, Optatus, who was then Prefect or Governor of Constantinople, and a Pagan, laid hold of that Opportunity to vent upon them the implacable Hatred he bore to the Religion they professed. Many therefore, without Distinction of Sex or Condition, were, by his Orders, dragged to the public Gaols, and confined there to Dungeons; others tormented with such Barbarity as to expire on the Rack; and great Numbers, after having undergone repeated Tortures, stript of all their Effects, and banished to the most remote and desolate Places of the Empire.
At the same time the Emperor Arcadius, strangely prepossessed
against Chrysostom, and those of his Communion, caused Two Edicts
to be published; the one directed to the Governors of the Provinces,
whom he strictly injoined not to suffer, in their respective Jurisdictions,
any private Assemblies or Meetings of Persons, who, despising the
Churches, worshiped elsewhere, lest they should seem to communicate
with the most Reverend Prelates of the holy Law, Arsacius, Theophilus,
and Porphyrius. The other commanded such Bishops as refused
to communicate with them, to be driven from their Sees, and
their Effects to be seized. The Persecution, which still raged, though
it was soon after stopt at the Remonstrances of Studius the Præfectus
Prætorio, and the Severity, with which the Two Imperial Edicts
were put in Execution, drove great Numbers, both of the Clergy and
Laity, from Constantinople, and the Provinces subject to Arcadius.
Among the former were Cyriacus Bishop of Synnada, Eulysius of Apamea
in Bithynia, Palladius of Helenopolis, Germanus a Presbyter,
and Cassianus a Deacon, who afterwards embraced the Monastic Life,
and became famous for his Ascetic Writings. |Several Bishops, and
the whole Clergy of
Constantinople, write
to Innocent.| Eulysius brought Letters
to Innocent from Fifteen Bishops of Chrysostom’s Communion, acquainting
him with the deplorable State of the Constantinopolitan
Church, and one from Anysius of Thessalonica, declaring, that in
the present unhappy Divisions he had resolved to conform intirely
to the Sentiments of the Roman Church. Germanus and Cassianus
likewise delivered Letters to Innocent, written in the Name of the
whole Clergy of Constantinople, and giving him an Account of the
Persecution that still raged, and of the cruel Treatment their Bishop
had met with[1419]. |His Answer to the
Clergy.| Innocent, in his Answer to this Letter, expresses, in
the most pathetic Terms, his Concern for the unhappy State of that
Church, and their Sufferings; he encourages them to bear, with Patience,
their present Tribulation and Afflictions, nay, and with Joy, since it is for
the sake of Justice they suffer, and are thus persecuted; he complains of
the undue Deposition of his Collegue, and Installation of another in
his Life-time, which he shows to be against the Canons of the Council
of Nice, the only Canons admitted and obeyed by the Roman Church:
he concludes with informing them, that as he had always thought it
necessary, that an Oecumenical Council should assemble, he had long
considered, and was still considering, by what Means it might be
assembled, since a Council, and nothing else, could appease so violent
a Storm, and restore to the Church the so much wished for Tranquillity[1420].
Two Presbyters in the mean time came to Rome from the East, Domitianus
of Constantinople, and Vallagus of Nisibis in Mesopotamia, and
brought with them the original Acts, which they had purchased with
a large Sum of the Imperial Officers, containing an authentic Detail
of the Cruelties which some Women of Quality had been made to endure
for not communicating with Arsacius, and the Bishops of his
Faction. |Innocent applies to
Honorius;| With these the good Bishop was so deeply affected, that he
could no longer forbear applying to Honorius, who, at his Request,
writ immediately to Arcadius a very pressing and friendly Letter in
favour of Chrysostom, and those of his Communion. At the same time
he issued an Order for convening a Council of the Western Bishops,
who, meeting soon after at Rome, drew up an Address, which they
sent to Ravenna, where the Emperor then was, earnestly intreating
him to interpose anew his good Offices with his Brother Arcadius,
that an Oecumenical Council might be allowed to assemble at Thessalonica,
in order to compose the present Differences, which had already
produced a Misunderstanding between the Eastern and Western
Churches, and might in the End bring on an intire Separation. |who writes to Arcad-
ius.| Honorius,
in Compliance with their Request, writ a Third Letter to
Arcadius (for he had, it seems, written already a Second), and at the
same time one to Innocent, desiring him to appoint Five Bishops, Two
Presbyters of the Roman Church, and One Deacon, to carry his Letter
into the East, thinking that such a Legation would add no small
Weight to his Mediation. The Letter to Arcadius was in the following
Terms:
“This is the Third time I write to your Meekness (ad Mansuetudinem tuam) intreating you to correct and rectify the iniquitous Proceedings that have been carried on against John Bishop of Constantinople. But nothing, I find, has been hitherto done in his Behalf. Having therefore much at Heart the Peace of the Church, which will be attended with that of our Empire, I write to you anew by these holy Bishops and Presbyters, earnestly desiring you to command the Eastern Bishops to assemble at Thessalonica. The Western Bishops have sent Five of their Body, Two Presbyters of the Roman Church, and One Deacon, all Men of the strictest Equity, and quite free from the Byass of Favour and Hatred. These I beg you would receive with that Regard which is due to their Rank and Merit: If they find John to have been justly deposed, they may separate me from his Communion; and you from the Communion of the Orientals, if it appears that he has been unjustly deposed. The Western Bishops have very plainly expressed their Sentiments, in the many Letters they have written to me on the Subject of the present Dispute. Of these I send you Two, the one from the Bishop of Rome, the other from the Bishop of Aquileia; and with them the rest agree. One thing I must above all beg of your Meekness; that you oblige Theophilus of Alexandria to assist at the Council, how averse soever he may be to it; for he is said to be the first and chief Author of the present Calamities. Thus the Synod, meeting with no Delays or Obstructions, will restore Peace and Tranquillity in our Days[1421].”
With these Letters the Legates set out from Rome, attended by the
above-mentioned Prelates Demetrius, Cyriacus, Eulysius, and Palladius;
and, sailing for Greece, put in at Athens, with a Design to
pursue their Voyage to Thessalonica, having Letters from Innocent to
Anysius Bishop of that City. But at Athens they were, to their great
Surprize, stopt and detained by a Military Tribune, who let them
know, that they must not touch at Thessalonica; and at the same time
appointed a Centurion as a Guard over them, strictly injoining him
not to suffer them, under any Pretence whatsoever, to approach that
City. Soon after the Tribune parted them, and, putting them on
board Two Vessels, ordered the Mariners to convey them strait to Constantinople.
Anysius communicated with Chrysostom, as I have observed
above; and it was, without all doubt, on this Consideration
that the Legates were not allowed to set foot in his Diocese. |The hard Usage they
met with on their
Journey,| They
arrived at Constantinople the Third Day after they had left Athens,
but starved with Hunger; for the Tribune had neither supplied them
with Provisions when they embarked, nor allowed them Time to
supply themselves; so that they had tasted no Kind of Victuals during
the Three Days they were at Sea. |and at Constant-
inople.| On their Arrival at Constantinople,
they were not suffered to come ashore there, but ordered to a Castle
on the Thracian Coast called Athyra, where they were all closely confined,
the Legates in one common Room, and the other Bishops in so
many separate Cells. As the People of Constantinople were most zealously
attached to Chrysostom, the Emperor apprehended, and with a
great deal of Reason, that their entering the City, and conversing
publicly there, might be attended with uncommon Disturbances and
Commotions; and therefore thought it adviseable to keep them at a
Distance, and under Confinement. They had not been long thus confined,
when they were ordered, they knew not by whom, to deliver
the Letters they had brought. But neither by this Person, whoever
he was, nor by several others, who were successively sent on the same
Errand, could they be prevailed upon to part with them, alleging,
that Letters from an Emperor ought to be delivered to none but an
Emperor.
As they continued firm and unshaken in this Resolution, one Valerian,
a Military Tribune, was at last called in, and ordered to employ
the Rhetoric peculiar to his Profession, since no other could prevail.
|The Letters taken
from them by Force.| Valerian accordingly, after a short Preamble, proceeded to
Violence; and, seizing them, took the Letters by Force, having in
the Struggle wounded one of the Bishops in the Hand. The next
Day they were visited by a Person, who, without acquainting them
who he was, or by whom sent, offered them a very considerable Sum,
on condition they would communicate with Atticus, who, upon the
Death of Arsacius, had, by the Bishops of his Faction, been intruded
in his room. |They are put on board
a leaky Vessel;| Upon their rejecting, as they did, with the utmost Indignation,
this Offer, Valerian, who was present, conducted them
under a strong Guard to the Sea-side, and there put them on board
an old leaky Vessel, having first, with a large Bribe, prevailed upon
the Commander, as they were informed, to engage his Word, that
they should not outlive that Voyage. |but arrive safe in
Italy.| They outlived it however, and,
having reached Lampsacus, they embarked on board another Vessel,
which landed them safe at Otranto. As for the Eastern Bishops who
had attended them from Rome, viz. Cyriacus, Eulysius, Palladius,
and Demetrius, after having been some time kept under close Confinement
at Athyra, they were banished to the most remote and abandoned
Places of the Empire. The other Bishops, who refused to
communicate with Atticus, Theophilus, and Porphyrius, fared no
better, being in like manner either driven into Banishment, or obliged
to abscond, and, under the Disguise of Mechanics, earn their Livelihood
by the meanest Professions. Many perished in the Places of their
Exile for want of Necessaries; and others were so cruelly harassed,
nay, and barbarously beaten, by the merciless Soldiery, appointed to
conduct them, that they died on the Road[1422]. Such were the wretched
Effects of that unchristian Principle of Persecution being lawful to
punish Error in religious Disputes, which all Sects of Christians then
held, and all suffered by in their Turns, as the different Parties
among them got the Civil Magistrate and Force on their Side.
Honorius, being informed of the base Treatment the Legates had met with, though vested with the sacred Character of Embassadors, was so provoked at such a notorious Violation of the Right of Nations, that he resolved to make War on his Brother, and revenge it by Force of Arms. But from this Resolution he was diverted by a threatened Invasion of the Barbarians, and the seasonable Discovery of the famous Stilicho’s Treachery, which obliged him to keep all his Troops in Italy, or the adjoining Provinces. As for Innocent, finding the Mediation of Honorius, which he had procured, prove unsuccessful, and no other Means left of affording the least Relief to Chrysostom and the other persecuted Bishops, he resolved to make known to the World his Abhorrence of the Evils, which it was not in his Power to redress; and accordingly separated himself from the Communion of Atticus, Theophilus, and Porphyrius, as the chief Authors of the present Calamities[1423].
Baronius, thinking it inconsistent with the Dignity of his High Pontiff thus tamely to bear with the insulting Conduct of Arcadius, would fain persuade us, that, after he had tried in vain all other Methods of bringing the Emperor, and the Empress Eudoxia, to a Sense of their Duty, he at last thought himself obliged to thunder against both the tremendous Sentence of Excommunication, cutting them off as rotten Members from the Body of the Faithful committed to his Care and Direction. To prove this, he produces several Letters from Innocent to Arcadius, and from Arcadius to Innocent, transcribed partly from Gennadius, Glycas, and Nicephorus, and partly from the Vatican Manuscripts[1424]. To enter into a critical Examination of those Pieces, would be wasting Time, and tiring the Reader to no Purpose. I shall therefore content myself with Three Observations, each of them sufficient, in my Opinion, to make the World reject them all as mere Forgeries. In the first place, the Silence of the Historians, who writ at that Time, touching so remarkable and unprecedented an Event as the Excommunication of an Emperor and an Empress, is an unanswerable Confutation of every Proof that can be alleged to support the Authenticity of the pretended Letters. For who can imagine, that the Writers, who flourished then, and have transmitted to us most minute Accounts of far less important Transactions both Civil and Ecclesiastical, would have passed this over in Silence? In the Second place, Eudoxia is supposed, in all those Letters, to have outlived Chrysostom; whereas it is certain, that she died in 404, four Years before him. Lastly, In the above-mentioned Letter, Arcadius is all along supposed to have repented, and changed his Conduct towards Chrysostom, to have persecuted his Enemies as he had formerly done his Friends, and to have chiefly vented his Resentment on the first Author of all the Disturbances, the Empress, who thereupon, out of Grief, Rage, and Despair, fell into a dangerous Malady[1425]. But of all this not the least Hint is to be met with in Palladius, who writ in the last Days of the Life and Reign of Arcadius; nay, that Historian speaks of the Friends of Chrysostom as Men still under the Emperor’s Displeasure, and feeling the dreadful Effects of it in the inhospitable Places, to which they had been formerly confined.
From the Conduct of Chrysostom on this Occasion, the Roman-Catholic Divines have taken a great deal of Pains to prove, that the Custom of appealing to the See of Rome obtained in his Time; that he actually appealed to that See; and consequently, that the Prerogative of receiving Appeals from all Parts, and finally deciding all Controversies, claimed by the Bishops of Rome, was then acknowleged even in the East. Nothing surely but the utmost Distress for want of other Instances to prove their Assertion, could have tempted them to make use of this; since, from the Conduct of Chrysostom on this very Occasion, nay, and from that of Innocent too, if set in their true Light, it may be undeniably made out, that this pretended Prerogative was utterly unknown to both. The Fact stand thus, and thus it is related by the Historians, who have transmitted it to us: Chrysostom is unjustly accused; the Bishop of Alexandria takes upon him to inquire into his Conduct; assembles a Council, consisting chiefly of Egyptian Bishops, and summons Chrysostom to appear before them: Chrysostom pays no Regard to the Summons, protests against it, and will not allow the Bishops assembled to have any Power or Authority over him, since it had been ordained by the Canons of the Church, that the Affairs of the Provinces should be regulated by the Bishops of the Provinces; and it was consequently very incongruous, that the Bishops of Thrace should be judged by those of Egypt[1426]. No Regard is had to his Protest, none to the Canons upon which it was grounded: he is summoned anew; and, not appearing within the limited Time, is judged, condemned, and deposed. From this Sentence he appeals to a lawful Council; but, being, notwithstanding his Appeal, driven from his See, he recurs at last to the Western Bishops, namely, to Innocent of Rome, Venerius of Milan, and Chromatius of Aquileia, intreating them not to abandon him in his Distress, nor exclude him from their Communion[1427], but to procure by all means the assembling of a General Council, in order to restore the Church to her former Tranquillity.
Such was the Conduct of Chrysostom: and, from this Conduct, does it not manifestly appear, that Chrysostom was an utter Stranger to the pretended Power in the Bishops of Rome of receiving Appeals from all other Tribunals, and finally determining all Controversies? Who can think, that, had he been acquainted with such a Prerogative, he would, when so unjustly oppressed, have appealed to a Council, which, he was well apprised, would meet with great Obstructions, when he had, ready at hand, a more certain and easy Method of finding Relief? Had he been satisfied, that Innocent had such a Privilege, is it likely he would have written to him on so urgent an Occasion, without taking the least Notice of it; that he would have contented himself with only intreating him to procure the assembling of a General Council? Should a Bishop now, apprehending himself injured by a National or Provincial Synod, appeal, not to the Pope, but, as Chrysostom did, to a General Council, he would, by such an Appeal, draw upon himself the Indignation of the Roman See: for it would be thence concluded, and no Conclusion can be more natural, that he did not acknowlege the Power of receiving Appeals claimed by that See.
But Chrysostom, say they, did acknowledge such a Power; for, in
his Letter to Innocent, he intreats him to declare such wicked Proceedings
void and null, and to pronounce all, who had any Share in
them, punishable, according to the Ecclesiastical Laws. But Chrysostom
addresses himself here, not to Innocent alone, as I have already
observed, but to him, in Conjunction with Venerius of Milan, and
Chromatius of Aquileia[1428]; nay, he addresses himself, throughout the
whole Letter, to more Persons than one; and yet Baronius has the
Assurance to style the Letter an Appeal to Innocent[1429]. And why to
him, and not to the other Two, since he writ nothing to him but
what he writ to them? |The Disingenuity of
Bellarmine.| Bellarmine, finding some Expressions in the
above-mentioned Letter, which he thought might be so interpreted
as to favour and countenance the Pretensions of the See of Rome, had
Chrysostom addressed himself to Innocent alone, makes him accordingly,
by altering the Number in the Passage he quotes, address himself
to Innocent alone[N49]; and then concludes, that even the Greeks
acknowleged the Bishop of Rome for their Supreme Judge[1430]. What
must every impartial Man think of a Cause, that wants to be thus defended?
What of those, who thus defend it?
About this time, that is, in the Year 405. Innocent, being consulted by Exuperius[N50] Bishop of Toulouse, concerning some Points of Discipline, answered him by a Decretal, containing the following Decisions: 1. That the Priests and Deacons, who were daily employed in sacrificing or baptizing, were not to be allowed the Use of Matrimony; that those, who were ignorant of the Decretal issued by Syricius, might be forgiven, upon their promising thenceforth to live continent; but, as to the rest, they should, as unworthy of Indulgence, be deposed. The Second Article relates to those, who, after Baptism, had led a wicked or sinful Life, and at the Point of Death desired the Communion. Innocent declares, that to such, according to the antient Discipline of the Church, which was more severe, Repentance was granted, and not the Communion; but, according to the present Practice, both were granted. By Repentance is here meant, according to the most probable Opinion, a Reconciliation with the Church; and, by the Communion, the Eucharist, which the Thirteenth Canon of the Council of Nice commands to be given to all dying Persons who desire it. Some doubted whether it was lawful for a Christian to discharge the Office of a Judge, in criminal Cases. Innocent therefore declares, in the Third Article, that no Penance ought to be imposed upon those who had condemned Criminals to the Rack, or even to Death, the Civil Power having been established by God for the Punishment of Criminals. As Women were, it seems, more frequently punished for Adultery than Men, some imagined that Crime not to be alike punishable in both. This Notion Innocent confutes in the Fourth Article; adding, that Women were more frequently punished, merely because the Husbands were more forward in accusing their Wives, than Wives were in accusing their Husbands. The Fifth Article is a Confirmation of the Third; for it only absolves from all Sins such as are obliged, by their Office, to prosecute or condemn Criminals. The Sixth Article excludes from the Communion of the Church all Men, who, after they have been parted from their Wives, marry other Women; and all Women, who, after they have been parted from their Husbands, marry other Men[N51]. The same Punishment is, by this Article, inflicted on those who marry them, but not on their Parents or Relations, provided they have been no-way accessory to that unlawful Contract. The last Article contains a Catalogue of the Canonical Books of Scripture, the same as are still acknowleged by the Church of Rome as Canonical. In the same Article, some Books are pointed out, that ought to be absolutely condemned and rejected[1431][N52]. These Directions, or Instructions, Innocent pretends to have drawn partly from Scripture, and partly from Tradition; and thanks Exuperius, because he had, by applying to him for a Solution to his Difficulties, engaged him to examine them with Attention, and thereby given him an Opportunity of learning what he had not known before. It is surprising he should have mentioned the Scripture, since the very first Article, debarring for ever married Men from the Use of Matrimony, is an open Contradiction to the Directions given by St. Paul to all married Persons, without Restraint or Distinction; Defraud you not one the other, except it be with Consent for a time, &c. and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your Incontinency[1432].
N50. Exuperius was, as we gather from Ausonius, a Native of Bourdeaux, one of the greatest Orators of his Time, and had governed Spain in Quality of Prefect. He afterwards withdrew from the World; embraced the Ecclesiastical State in the Place of his Nativity[1]; and was, for his eminent Virtues, raised to the See of Toulouse. He was chiefly commendable for his Charity to the Poor; though he bestowed the greater Part of it on Objects, perhaps, of all, the least worthy of his Compassion: for, by the Monk Sisennius, he sent considerable Sums into the East, to be distributed there among the Monks of Egypt and Palæstine[2]; which might have been better employed at home, Gaul being then threatened with an Invasion of the Vandals, Alans, and other barbarous Nations; who, accordingly, broke into that Province on the last Day of the Year 406. and made themselves Masters of Toulouse itself. It was, however, this Kindness of Exuperius to the Monks, that chiefly recommended him to Jerom[3], who often mentions him with the greatest Commendations[4], and even inscribed to him his Comment on Zechariah.
3. Idem ibid.
N51. The matrimonial Bond is held, by the Church of Rome, indissoluble, and a Separation only allowed as to Bed and Board, even in Cases of Adultery; whence it follows, that so long as they both live, neither can marry, without being guilty of Adultery. There are, however, some annulling Impediments, as the Canonists style them, that is, Circumstances rendering the Marriage-contract null; and if any of these intervene, and is made to appear, the Parties are then declared not to have been married; and, consequently, free to marry whom they please. Till Innocent’s Time, Men, who had been parted from their Wives convicted of Adultery, were allowed to marry again. This Epiphanius tells us in express Terms; adding, that, agreeably to Scripture (no doubt to Matt. v. 32.), it could be no Crime to marry again; that those who married again were not excluded, on that score, from Life everlasting; and consequently ought not to be excluded from the Communion of the Church[1]. The Scope and Design of Epiphanius, throughout his Work, was to acquaint us with the several Heresies that sprung up in the Church, and to explain, in Opposition to them, the Catholic Doctrines. It must therefore have been deemed a Heresy in his Time, that is, towards the latter End of the Fourth Century, to think the matrimonial Bond indissoluble, even in Cases of Adultery, or to hold it unlawful for a Man to marry again, who had put away his Wife for the Cause of Fornication. But the Heresy became afterwards a Catholic Truth, and the Catholic Truth a Heresy. This Change, however, was not so much owing to Innocent’s Decretal, as to the Two Books, which St. Austin writ about the Year 419. to prove, that it is unlawful for a Husband, who has put away his Wife, even for Adultery, or for a Wife who has been thus put away, to marry again, while both are living. He founds his Opinion on that of St. Paul, The Wife is bound by the Law, as long as her Husband liveth[2]. But, instead of understanding that Passage with the Exception made by our Saviour himself, Whosoever shall put away his Wife, saving for the Cause of Fornication, &c. he endeavours, by many logical Distinctions, and unnatural Interpretations, to remove that Exception, though expressed by the Evangelist in the plainest Terms. He was therein, no doubt, misled, by the groundless, but then reigning, Notion, of an extraordinary Merit annexed to Celibacy; and therefore ends his Word with exhorting the Husbands, who have put away their Wives, to observe Continency, in Imitation of the Ecclesiastics, who observe it (says he) with the greatest Exactness, though it was not by their own Choice that some of them went into Orders. It may be questioned, whether, even then, the Continence of the unmarried Clergy was such as he represents it.
1. Epiph. hæref. 59.
2. 1 Corinth. vii. 39.
N52. These were several Books, styled The Acts of the Apostles, forged by Leucius, Nezocharis, and Leonides, and ascribed by them to some of the Apostles. Leucius was, by Sect, a Manichee, as appears from Austin, who confuted his Books[1]. Nezocharis and Leonides are, by Innocent, styled Philosophers. The Books of Leucius, in the latter End of the present Century, were anew declared Apocryphal by Pope Gelasius: The Books, says he in one of his Decretals, composed by Leucius, a Disciples of the Devil, are all Apocryphal[2].
1. Aug. de fide contra Manich.
2. Gelas. in Decretal. de lib. Apocryph.
As the Bishops of Rome had, ever since the time of Damasus, taken upon them to appoint the Bishop of Thessalonica their Vicar for East-Illyricum, Innocent no sooner heard, that Rufus had been promoted to that See, vacant by the Death of Anysius, than he let all the Bishops in those Parts know, by a Circular Letter, probably directed to Rufus himself, that he conferred on him the same Dignity which his Predecessors had conferred on the other Bishops of Thessalonica. He writ, at the same time, a private Letter to Rufus, containing some Instructions relating to the Exercise of his Vicarious Power, and, with them, the Names of the Provinces which he was to govern, as his Vicar and First Primate; but without intrenching, adds Innocent, upon the Rights and Privileges of the Primate or Metropolitan of each Province. In this Letter he takes great Care, that Rufus should not forget he is indebted for such a Power to the See of Rome; for that he frequently repeats, as if he entertained some Jealousy of Rufus, or apprehended that he might claim such a Power, as Bishop of Thessalonica, that City being, according to the Civil Division of the Empire, on which the Ecclesiastical was ingrafted, the Metropolis of East-Illyricum[1433].
The same Year 407. the Emperor Honorius visited the City of
Rome, and continued there till the Month of May of the Year 408.
On the 23d of the following August, Stilicho was killed; and Alaric
the Goth, entering Italy soon after his Death, appeared before Rome,
and laid close Siege to that City in the latter End of the same Year.
As no Provisions could be conveyed into the Place, all the Avenues
being shut up, and well guarded, a Famine soon ensued, and upon
the Famine a Plague, which daily swept off great Numbers of the
Inhabitants. In this Extremity, such of the Senators as still adhered
to the Pagan Superstitions, promising themselves Relief from the Gods
of their Ancestors, resolved to implore their Protection, by solemn
Sacrifices offered up to them in the Capitol, and other public Places
of the City. |The Pagan Super-
stitions connived at by
Innocent.| This Resolution, says Zosimus[1434], they imparted to Innocent,
then Bishop of Rome, who, sacrificing his private Opinion
to the public Welfare, agreed to it, on Condition that the Ceremony
should be privately performed. Of these Sacrifices Sozomen too
takes particular Notice[1435]; but makes no Mention of Innocent; which
has induced some to suspect the Veracity of Zosimus, who was, as is
well known, a sworn Enemy to the Christian Religion. But that
those Sacrifices were performed, is affirmed both by him and Sozomen;
and it is not at all probable, that Pompeianus, who was then Governor
of Rome, and a Christian, would have suffered them, without
the Consent and Approbation of Innocent. However that be, I see
not why Baronius should be so provoked against Zosimus, for making
Innocent thus connive at the superstitious Worship of the Gentiles,
since his Successors have always allowed, and do still allow, even in
Rome itself, the free Exercise of the Jewish Worship.
Rome being reduced to the last Extremity, Deputies were, in the End, sent out to treat with Alaric, who, hearkening to their Proposals, raised the Siege, upon their paying to him Five thousand Pounds Weight of Gold, Thirty thousand of Silver, Four thousand Silk Garments, Three thousand Skins of Purple Dye, and as many Pounds of Pepper. At the same time the Romans engaged to mediate a Peace between him and Honorius: but the Emperor refusing to comply with the Terms that were proposed, though no-ways unreasonable, the Roman Senate sent Two solemn Deputations to Ravenna, where Honorius then resided, to lay before him the Danger to which he exposed the Empire, and persuade him to accept the Conditions offered him both by them and by Alaric. As the First Deputation proved unsuccessful, Innocent, thinking his Presence might give some Weight to the Negotiations, left Rome, and, together with the Deputies, repaired to Ravenna. Thus he escaped the Mortification of seeing the City of Rome taken and plundered by the Barbarians[1436]. For, Honorius still rejecting the Terms of Peace, Alaric returned with his Army before Rome; and, having made himself Master of it on the 24th of August of the Year 410. treated the great Metropolis of the Empire no better, if Jerom may be credited, than the Greeks are said to have treated antient Troy[1437].