Barrow - BX1805 .B3 1852

INTRODIICTION, 19 reason by censures than supplicate him by tears? How did somany popes connive at Theodoric, and other princes professingArianism at their door? Wherefore did not Pope Simplicius or Pope Felix thus punish the Emperor Zeno, the supplanter of the synod of Chalce- don, for which they had so much zeal? Why didneither Pope Felix, nor Pope Gelasius, nor Pope Symmachus, nor Pope Hormisdas, ex- communicate the Emperor Anastasius (yea, did not so much, Pope Gelasius says, as "touch his name"1) for countenancing the oriental bishops in their schism and refractory noncompliance with the papal authority? Those popes did, indeed, clash with that emperor, but theyexpressly deny that they condemned him with others whom he favoured. " We," says Pope Symmachus, "did not excommu- nicate thee, O emperor, but Acacius. If you mingle yourself, you are not excommunicated by us, but byyourself." And, " If the emperor pleases to join himself with those condemned," says Pope Gelasius, " it cannot be imputed to us. "' Wherefore, Baronius does ill [is wrong] in affirming Pope Sym- machus to have anathematized Anastasius;' whereas that pope plainly denied that he hadexcommunicated him, yea, denied it even in those words which are cited to prove it, being rightly read,' for they are corruptly written in Baronius and Binius; ego (which has no sense, or one contradictory to his former assertion) being put for nego, which is good sense, and agreeable to what he and the other popes affirm in relation to that matter. Why do we not read that any pope formally excommunicated (though divers did zealously contradict and oppose) the princes who rejected images? In fine, a noble bishop, above five hundred years ago, said, " I read and read again the records of the Roman kings and emperors, and I nowhere find that any of them before this was excommu- nicated or deprived of his kingdom by the Roman pontiff."' Surely, therefore, the ancient popes either knew not their power, or were very negligent of their duty. Quid sibi vult auteur, quod dixerit imperatora nobis se in religionedamnatum, cum super hac parte decessor meus non solum minime nomen ejus attigerit ? P. Gelas. 1, Ep. iv. 2 Nos te non excommunicavimus, imperator, sed Acacium. Si te misces, non a nobis, sed a te ipso excommunicatus es. P. Symmachus I., Ep. vii. Si isti placet se miscere damnatis, nobis non potest imputari. P. Gelas. I., Ep. iv. 3 Baron., anno 503, § 17. * Dicis quod, mecum conspirante senatu, excommunicaverim te. Ista quidem ego (nego), sed rationabiliter factum a decessoribus meis sine dubio subsequor. P. Sym., Ep. vii. " You say that Iexcommunicated you by the joint consent of the senate. This I deny ; but Iundoubtedly followwhat was, with good reason, done bymy predecessors." s Lego et relego Romanorum regum et imperatorumgesta, et nusquam invenioquen. quam eorum ante hunt a Romano pontifies escommunicatum, vel regno privatum. Otho Frising. Chren., lib. vi. cap. 35.