It is wonder to see, how these men abuse the Ecclesiastical histories. Whereas they talk a little before of the sitting of Emperors in general Councils, a man would think, that now also Theodosius had been said to have sitten among Bishops* in some general Council. But there is no such matter.2 Theodosius the Emperor conferred with Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople, how all Christen men might be brought to an unity in Faith. And after that Nectarius had learned of Sisinnius a great Clerk, the best way to be, if all the heads of each Heresy and Sect, might be induced to be judged by the old Fathers and Doctors of the Church: the godly Emperor hearing this advise, caused both the Heretics, and Catholics also, to write each of them such things, as each of them had to say for his Belief. And after prayer made, reading over all the writings,‡ he rejected the Arians, the Macedonians, and the Eunomians, ‡ embracing only their sentence, who agreed upon the Consubstantiality of the Son of God. Here (say these Defenders) Theodosius did not only sit amongest the Bishops, but also ordered the whole arguing of the cause, tearing the papers of the Heretics, and allowing the Judgement of the Catholics. To which objection I make this answer. First, that Theodosius here took counsel of Nectarius the Bishop, and followed it: Secondly, that he intended not to Judge, whether opinion of all the Sects were truer,* but only sought how to rid the Church of controversies. Otherwise he would not only have taken counsel of Nectarius the Catholic Bishop, but also of the Arians, Macedonians, and Eunomians. For he is not a right Judge, that calleth one side only to him, and in judgement is ruled by it. If then it be plain, that the Emperor only consulted with Catholics, it is no less plain,‡ that he sate not Judge upon the Catholics. What did he then? Verily he intended to execute that judgement, which the Bishops had pronounced at Nice, and therefore he conferred only with men of that side. And because he was instructed, that by disputation no good should come, he chose this way, to make all to write their opinions. Not that he minded now to learn his Faith out of their writings, sith he had learned that long before, and professed the same in his Baptism:
It is wonder to see, howe these menne abuse the Ecclesiastical histories. VVhereas thei talke a litle before of the sitting of Emperours in general Councelles, a man would thinke, that now also Theodosius had benne saide to haue sitten among Bishoppes* in some general Councel. But there is no sutche mater.2 Theodosius the Emperour conferred with Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople, howe al Christen men might be brought to an vnitie in Faithe. And after that Nectarius had lerned of Sisinnius a greate Clerke, the best way to be, if al the heades of eche Heresie and Secte, might be induced to be iudged by the olde Fathers and Doctours of the Churche: the godly Emperoure hearing this aduise, caused bothe the Heretikes, and Catholiques also, to write eche of them sutche thinges, as eche of them had to saie for his Belefe. And after praier made, reading ouer al the writinges,‡ he reiected the Arians, the Macedonians, and the Eunomians, ‡ embracing onely thier sentence, who agreed vpon the Consubstantialitie of the sonne of God. Here (saie these Defenders) Theodosius did not onely sitte amongest the Bishoppes, but also ordered the whole arguing of the cause, tearing the papers of the Heretikes, and allowing the Iudgemente of the Catholiques. To whiche obiection I make this answeare. First, that Theodosius here tooke counsel of Nectarius the Bishop, and folowed it: Secondely, that he intended not to Iudge, whether opinion of al the Sectes were truer,* but onely sought howe to ridde the Churche of cōtrouersies. Otherwise he would not onely haue taken counsel of Nectarius the Catholike Bishop, but also of the Arians, Macedonians, and Eunomians. For he is not a right Iudge, that calleth one side onely to him, and in iudgemente is ruled by it. If then it be plaine, that the Emperoure onely consulted with Catholiques, it is no lesse plaine,‡ that he sate not Iudge vpon the Catholiques. VVhat did he then? Verely he entended to execute that iudgement, whiche the Bishops had pronounced at Nice, and therefore he conferred onely with menne of that side. And because he was enstructed, that by disputation no good should come, he chose this way, to make al to write their opiniōs. Not that he minded nowe to lerne his Faithe out of their writinges, sith he had lerned that longe before, and professed the same in his Baptisme:
- *As if a private Councel, were no Councel.As if a priuate Councel, vvere no Councel.
- 2Hist. tripar. lib. 9. ca. 19.
- ‡Fond folly. As though the Emperor could Condemn the Heretics or allow the Catholics, without Judgement.Fonde folie. As though the Emperoure could Condēne the Heretiques or allovve the Catholiques, vvithout Iudgemente.
- *A worthy reason. The Emperor sought means to abandon Heresies: Ergo, He judged not, whether part was the truer.A vvorthy reason. The Emperoure sought meanes to abandon Heresies: Ergo, He iudged not, vvhether parte vvas the truer.
- ‡Untruth, Contrary to the plain story.Vntruthe, Cō trarie to the plaine storie.
