VIII. 1540. Pope Damasus reciteth up a great number of bishops of Rome, Henry who were priests' sons; as, Sylverius, A.D. 536; Deodatus, about the year 614; Adrian II., about the year 867; Felix III., about A.D. the year 483; Osius; Agapetus, A.D. 535; Gelasius, A.D. 492; Boniface, A.D.418; Theodore (whose father was bishop of Jerusalem), about the year 642; John X., A. D. 914; John XV., the son of Leo, a priest, about the year 985; Richard, archdeacon of Coventry; Henry, archdeacon of Huntingdon; Volusianus, bishop of Carthage; Thomas, archbishop of York, son of Sampson, bishop of Worcester.2 And how many other bishops and priests in other countries, besides these bishops of Rome, might be annexed to this catalogue, if our leisure were such as to make a whole bead-roll of them all! In the mean time the words of cardinal Sylvius, afterwards bishop of Rome, are not to be forgotten, which he wrote to a certain friend of his, who, after his orders taken, was disposed to marriage. Το whom the aforesaid Sylvius answereth again in these words following:3 "We believe that you, in so doing, follow no sinister counsel, in that you choose to be married, when otherwise you are not able to live chaste. Albeit this counsel should have come into your head before that you entered into ecclesiastical orders: but we are not all gods, to foresee before what shall happen hereafter. Now, forasmuch as the matter and case standeth so, that you are not able to resist the law, better it is to marry than to burn," &c. All the premises well considered, it shall suffice, I trust, though no more were said, to prove that this general law and prohibition of priests' marriage, pretended to be so ancient, is of no such great time, nor long continuance of years, as they make it, but rather to be a late devised doctrine, gendered by the monks, and grounded upon no reason, law, or Scripture; but that certain who be repiners against the truth, do rack and wrest a few places out of the doctors, and two or three councils, for their pretensed purpose: whose objections and blind cavillations, I, as professing here but to write stories, refer to the further discussion of divines, in whose books this matter is more at large to be sought and searched. In the mean season, so much as appertaineth to the searching of times and antiquity, and to the conservation of such acts and monuments as are behoveable for the church, I thought hereunto not unprofitable to be adjoined, a certain epistle learned and ancient, of Volusianus, bishop some time of Carthage, tending to the defence of priests' lawful wedlock, which Æneas Sylvius, in Descriptione Germaniæ; also Illyricus in Catalogo ; and Melancthon, Lib. de Conjugio, do father upon Hulderic, bishop of Augsburg, in the time of pope Nicholas II.8 But as I find it in an old written example, sent by John Bale to Matthew, archbishop of Canterbury, as it is joined in the same book, so it beareth also the same title and name of Volusianus, bishop of Carthage; joining also 6 (1) Osius.' No such bishop of Rome, but Foxe has had authority. See the note (Corr. Rom.) to cap. ii. dist. 56.; p. 77 of the Corpus Juris Canonici' (fol. Par. 1687).—ED. (2) Ex Vicelio, De Sacrificio Missæ. (3) Credimus te uti non insulso consilio, si, cum nequeas continere, conjugium quæris: quamvis id prius cogitandum fuerat, antequam initiareris sacris ordinibus. Sed non sumus dii omnes, qui futura prospicere valeamus. Quando huc ventum est, ut legi carnis resistere nequeas, melius est nubere quàm uri.' Ex Ænea Sylvio. Epist. 307. [See p. 809, Opera Omnia, (Basil. 1571.)-ED.] (4) Æneas Sylvius, Opera Omnia, Basil. 1571, p. 1058.-ED. (5) See pp. 972 to 984. Edit. 1608.-ED. (6) See p. 172. Pars. II. Witeb. 1601.-ED. (7) Hulderic bishop of Augsburg about A.D. 900. VIII. Henry withal another Latin epistle (with the English), which perhaps hath not been seen in print before. The copies of both which epistles in A. D. Latin, as being pertinent to the purpose present, hereunder ensue, in form of a note.1 1540. (1) The Epistle in Latin of Volusianus, or, as some think, of Hulderic, Bishop of Augsburg, in Pope Nicholas, against the forbidding of Priests' Marriage. Epistola Volusiani Carthaginensis Episcopi ad Nicolaum Romanorum Episcopum. Hæc est rescriptio Volusiani Carthaginensis Episcopi, in qua Papæ Nicolao, De Continentia Clericorum, non justè, sed impiè, nec canonicè sed indiscretè tractanti, ita respondit. Nicolao Domino et Patri, pervigili sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ Provisori, Volusianus, solo nomine Episcopus, amorem ut filius, timorem ut servus. Cum tua, O Pater et Domine, decreta super clericorum continentiâ nuper mihi transmissa à discretione invenirem aliena, timor me turbavit cum tristitia: timor quidem-propter hoc,quod dicitur pastoris sententiam, sive justam sive injustam, timendam esse; timebam enim infirmis Scripturæ auditoribus, qui vel justæ vix obediunt sententiæ, ne, injustam conculcantes liberè, oneroso imo importabili pastoris præcepto prævaricatione se obligarent: tristitia verò vel compassio-dum considerabam, qua ratione membra cavere possent, capite suo tam gravi morbo laborante. Quid enim gravius, quid totius ecclesiæ compassione dignius, quam te, summæ sedis pontificem, ad quem totius ecclesiæ spectat examen, à sancta discretione vel minimum exorbitare? Non parum quippe ab hac deviasti, cum clericos, quos ob continentiam conjugii monere debebas, ad hanc imperiosa quadam violentia cogi volebas. Nunquid enim meritò communi omnium sapientum judicio hæc est violentia, cum contra evangelicam institutionem, ac Sancti Spiritus dictationem, ad privata aliquis decreta cogitur exequenda? Cum ergo plurima Veteris ac Novi Testamenti suppetant exempla, sanctam (ut nosti) discretionem docentia, tuæ rogo ne grave sit paternitati, vel pauca ex pluribus huic paginæ interseri. Dominus quidem in veteri lege sacerdoti conjugium constituit, quod illi postmodum interdixisse non legitur. Sed idem in evangelio loquitur [Matt. xix.]: Sunt eunuchi, qui se castraverunt propter regnum coelorum, sed non omnes hoc verbum capiunt: qui potest capere, capiat. Quapropter apostolus quoque ait [1Cor.vii.]: De virginibus præceptum Domini non habeo, consilium autem do. Qui etiam, juxta prædictum Domini, non omnes hoc consilium capere posse considerans, sed multos ejusdem consilii assentatores, hominibus non Deo falsa specie continentiæ placere volentes, graviora videns committere, patrum scilicet uxores subagitare, masculorum ac pecudum amplexus non abhorrere; ne morbi hujus aspersione ad usque pestilentiam convalescente nimium status labefactetur ecclesiæ totius, Propter fornicationem, dixit, unusquisque suam uxorem habeat. Quod specialiter ad laicos pertinere iidem mentiuntur hypocritæ: qui licet in quovis sanctissimo ordine constituti, alienis tamen uxoribus non dubitant abuti. Et quod flendo cernimus, omnes in supradictis sæviunt sceleribus. Hi nimirum non rectè Scripturam intellexerunt, cujus mammillam quia durius pressere, sanguinem pro lacte biberunt. Nam illud apostolicum, Unusquisque suam habeat uxorem, nullum excipit vere, nisi professorem continentiæ, vel eum qui de continuanda in Domino virginitate prefixit. Quod nihilominus tuam, Pater venerande, condecet strenuitatem, ut omnem, qui tibi manu vel ore votum faciens continentiæ postea voluerit apostatare, aut ad votum exequendum ex debito constringas, aut ab omni ordine canonica autoritate deponas; et ut hoc viriliter implere sufficias, me omnesque mei ordinis viros adjutores habebis non pigros. Verum ut hujus voti nescios omninò scias non esse cogendos, audi apostolum dicentem ad Timotheum: Oportet (inquit) episcopum irreprehensibilem esse, unius uxoris virum. Quam sententiam ne quis ad solam ecclesiam verteret, subjunxit, Qui autem domui suæ præesse nescit, quomodo ecclesiæ Dei diligentiam habebit? Similitèr, inquit, diaconi sint unius uxoris viri, qui filiis suis benè præsint, et suis domibus. Hanc autem uxorem à sacerdote benedicendam esse, Sancti Sylvestri papæ decretis scio te sufficienter doctum esse. His et hujusmodi sanctæ Scripturæ sententiis Regulæ clericorum scriptor non immeritò concordans ait: Clericus sit pudicus, aut certè unius matrimonii vinculo foederatus. Ex quibus omnibus veracitèr colligit quòd episcopus et diaconus reprehensibiles notantur, si in mulieribus multis dividuntur. Si verò unam sub obtentu religionis abjiciunt, utrumque, scilicet episcopum et diaconum sine graduum differentia, hæ canonica damnat sententia: Episcopus aut presbyter uxorem propriam nequaquam sub obtentu religionis abjiciat, si verò rejecerit, excommunicetur; et si perseveraverit, dejiciatur. Sanctus quoque Augustinus, sanctæ discretionis non inscius: Nullum (inquit) tam grave facinus est, quin admittendum sit, ut devitetur pejus. Legimus præterea in secundo Tripartitæ Ecclesiasticæ Historiæ libro, quòd cum synodus Nicæna hæc eadem vellet sancire decreto, ut videlicet episcopi, presbyteri, diaconi, post consecrationem à propriis uxoribus vel omnino abstinerent, vel gradum deponerent; surgens in medio Paphnutius (ex illis martyribus quos Maximus imperator, oculis eorum dextris evulsis et sinistris suris incisis, damnavit) contradixit, honorabiles confessus nuptias, ac castitatem esse dicens connubium cum propria uxore; persuasitque concilio ne talem ponerent legem, gravem asserens esse causam, quæ aut ipsis aut eorum conjugibus occasio fornicationis existeret. Et hæc quidem Paphnutius, licet nuptiarum expers, exposuit; synodusque ejus sententiam laudavit, et nihil ex hac parte sancivit, sed hoc in uniuscujusque voluntate, non in necessitate dimisit. Sunt verò aliqui qui S. Gregorium suæ sectæ sumunt adjutorem; quorum quidem temeritatem rideo, ignorantiam doleo. Ignorant enim, quòd periculosum hujus hæresis decretum à S. Gregorio factum, condigno pœnitentiæ fructu postmodum ab eodem sit purgatum. Quippe cum die quadam in vivarium suum propter pisces misisset, et allata inde plus quam sex millia infantum capita videret, intima mox ductus pœnitentia ingemuit, et factum à se de abstinentia decretum tantæ cædis causam confessus, condigno illud, ut dixi, pænitentiæ fructu purgavit: suoque decreto prorsus damnato, apostolicum illud laudavit consilium; Melius est nubere, quam uri [1 Cor. vii.]: addens ex sua parte, Melius est nubere, quàm mortis occasionem præbere. Hunc forsitan rei eventum si illi mecum legissent, non tam temere, credo, judicarent, Dominicum saltem timentes præceptum: Nolite judicare, ut non judicemini [Matt. vii.]. Inde Paulus dicit, Tu quis ea. qui Judicas alienum servum? suo Domino stat, aut cadit. Stabit autem; potens est enim Dominus Notes upon the same. (b.) Can. Apoa. v. (a.) Scripturæ perperam intellectæ. Durius premendo sanguis elicitur. (c.) If this rule of St. Austin be true, better it is for the papists to admit the marriage of priests, then that adultery and other like inconveniences should follow, as they do. As touching the antiquity of the first epistle,' it appeareth by the Henry copy which I have seen and received, of the above-named Matthew, statuere illum. [Rom. xiv.] Cesset ergo sanctitas tua cogere, quos tantum deberet admonere; ne Illud quoque rogamus eos attendere, quod Dominus dicit de muliere; Qui sine peccato est Hic est autem, si diligenter inspiciatur, totus eorum manipulus zizaniæ, totus eventus insaniæ, ut dum clerici licita unius mulieris consortia, Pharisaico devicti (quod absit) furore, relinquere cogantur, fornicationis et adulterii et aliarum pravitatum turpissimi ministri ab ipsis efficiantur, qui hanc in ecclesia Dei hæresim sicut cæci duces cæcorum machinantur: ut videlicet illud impleatur quod psalmista [Psalm lxix] eis, utpote doctoribus erroris, taliter imprecatur: Obscurentur oculi eorum ne videant, etc. Quia ergo nemo, qui te, ò apostolice, novit, ignorat, quod, si tu per tui decreti sententiam tantam futuram esse pestilentiam solite discretionis claritate perspexisses, nunquam quorumlibet tam pravis suggestionibus consensisses: debitæ tibi subjectionis fidelitate consulimus, ut vel nunc ad tanti scandali ab Ecclesia Dei propulsionem evigiles; et qua nosti discretionis disciplina Pharisaicam ab ovili Dei extirpes doctrinam, ne scilicet unica Domini Sulamitis,2 adulterinis diutius usa maritis, gentem sanctam, regale sacerdotium, per irrecuperabile à sponso, Christo videlicet, avellat divortium: dum nemo sine castimonia, non tantùm in virginali flore sed etiam in conjugali habita conjunctione, visurus sit Dominum nostrum; qui cum Deo patre et Spiritu Sancto vivit et regnat per omnia sæcula sæculorum, Amen. (d.) Turpis papistrorum vox. (e.) Christus legem non solvit, sed competentes legis ministros exigit. VIII. A. D. 1540. Henry archbishop of Canterbury, to be of an old and ancient writing, both by the form of the characters, and by the wearing of the parchment, A. D. almost consumed by length of years and time. 1540. And as concerning the author thereof, the superscription (if it be true) plainly declareth it to be the epistle of Volusianus, bishop of Carthage: albeit, heretofore, it hath commonly been taken and alleged by the name of Hulderic, bishop of Augsburg, and partly appeareth to be so, both by the testimony of Eneas Sylvius, in Descriptione Germaniæ, who, in the said treatise, affirmeth that Hulderic, bishop of Augsburg, did constantly resist the pope, abolishing the marriage of priests, &c. and also by the record of Illyricus; testifying that the said epistle not only remaineth yet to this day in old monuments, but also that he himself did see two exemplars of the same, both pretending the name of the said Hulderic to be the author, notwithstanding this copy, hereunder to be seen, beareth the title, not of Hulderic, bishop of Augsburg, but of Volusianus, bishop of Carthage in Africa; as ye may see by the words of the preamble, saying, This is the rescript of Volusianus, bishop of Carthage, unto pope Nicholas, concerning priests not to be restrained from lawful marriage,' &c. 1 Furthermore, which pope Nicholas this was, to whom these epistles were written, it is not plainly showed in the same; but that by probable conjecture it may be guessed rather to be pope Nicholas II., forasmuch as in his time, priests' marriage began somewhat earnestly to be called in, more than at other times before. Now as touching the English of this first epistle hereunder exhibited, forasmuch as the same is before inserted, we will refer the reader unto the same place:2 wherein if the translation of the English do swerve any thing from the Latin here annexed, the cause was for that the Latin copy which here we have followed, came not before to our hands. 3 (1) Illyricus, in his preamble to this letter, claims it for Hulderic, bishop of Augsburg in the year 859; he states this on the authority of Onuphrius Panvinius, an Augustine monk, in his Chron. Ecclesiastical. He states also, that an anonymous writer, in the year 1595, published a work entitled, Vita Sanct. Udalrici, August. Episcop.,' in which he ascribes this letter to him, while at the same time he confesses that the said Udalricus, or Ulric, was not born till A.D. 890, and was not made bishop till A.D. 923. Much diversity of opinion exists as to the author of these letters; "quæ apud Joan. Foxum, et ad calcem Calixti de conjugio clericorum,' p. 444. edit. Francof. 1653, qui diffuse illius meminit, pp. 358-59. Utraque autem epistoia extat inter MSS. codices Univ. Cantab. num. 1144 in MSS. codicibus Coll. Caii et Gonvilli, codice 80 num. 7 et 8. Et prima etiam ibidem numero 1641 in MSS. codicibus Coll. D. Benedicti cod. 374, num. 8. Ambæ editæ a I. Fox., quas sub Volusiani Carthag. Episc. falso nomine illic latitantes eruit. Utrumque antem opusculum pertinere dubio procul ad Udalricum Augustanum Antistitem, constat ex Bortoldo Constantiensi Presbytero, in Historia rerum sui temporis ab anno 1053, ad an. 1100!" See Oudin. Comment. de. script. Eccles. tom. ii. p. 249; or in Cave. Hist. Eccles. tom. ii. p. 52.-Ed. (2) See vol. ii. p. 11, of this edition.-ED. (3) Another Epistle of the said Volusianus, concerning Marriage not to be restrained from Priests and Ministers of the Church. Cum sub liberi arbitrii potestate creati simus, et non sub lege sed sub gratia [Rom. vi.], qualiter creati sumus vivamus. Vos qui continentiæ legem nobis invitis imponitis, liberi arbitrii nos potestate privatis. Quod nolumus velle, et quod volumus nolle imperatis et imperando cogitis: et legis vinculo, à quo ipsa gratia liberati sumus, nos alligare, et spiritum servitutis iterum in timore accipere, ipsamque gratiam, sine qua nihil facere possumus, omninò evacuare satagitis; ita ut (sicut ait apostolus, Rom. ix. xi.) Ipsa gratia jam non sit gratia, et Dei donum non sit Dei donum; et non ex Deo, sed ex homine, nec ex vocante, sed ex operante; cum idem apostolus dicat, Quia non est volentis neque currentis, sed Dei miserentis. Nam cum sint tria principalia et quasi effectiva, per quæ omnis anima humana capax et compos rationis, quicquid spiritualis boni apprehendere et percipere potest, apprehendit et percipit, et sine quibus nihil prorsus capere possit; liberum arbitrium videlicet, mandatum, et gratia (libero enim arbitrio bona a malis decernimus atque eligimus; mandato ad omnia facienda provocamur ac incitamur; gratia promovemur et adjuvamur) horum omnium tamen gratia domina et magistra et quasi præpotens imperatrix et regina est, ad cujus nutum cætera pendent et ab ea vim et efficaciam expectant, et sine ila nihil prævalent, sed quasi stolida et mortua, sicut materia sine forma, jacent et subjacent. Loco enim materiæ, secundum propositionem aliquam, liberum arbi The Epistle of Volusianus, Bishop of Carthage, for Priests' Marriage. Forasmuch as we are created under the power of free-will, and not under the law, but under grace, let us so live as we are created. You, who lay upon trium possumus accipere non incongruè; gratiam verò, loco forma; mandatum autem, quod agere. (1) What he meaneth here by free-will, he expoundeth plainly in another place. Henry A. D. 1540. |