Section 7
1 Josias Simler, Scripta veterum latina, de una persona et
duabus naturis Domini et Servatoris nostri Iesu Christi, adversus Nestorium, Eutychen et Acephalos olim aedita
… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger, 1571). A longer version of this chapter has been published as
‘Josias Simler and the Fathers: The “Scripta veterum latina” (1571)’, in Zwingliana 38 (2011), pp.
67–152.
2 Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 61, 7.
3 William P. Stephens, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), pp. 113–17; Peter Opitz, Heinrich Bullinger als Theologe. Eine Studie zu den
‘Dekaden’ (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2004), pp. 189–91.
4 Hans Christian Brandy, Die späte Christologie des Johannes
Brenz (Tübingen: Mohr, 1991) (Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 80), pp. 175–8.
5 Brandy, Die späte Christologie, pp. 45–68.
6 Heinrich Bullinger, Ad Testamentum D. Ioannis Brentii,
nuper contra Zvinglianos publicatum, responsio brevis… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger, 1571)
(Heinrich Bullinger Bibliographie, vol. 1, ed. Joachim Staedtke [Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich,
1972] [cited HBBibl I], no. 569).
7 Fernand Aubert et al. (eds), Correspondance de Théodore de
Bèze (Geneva: Droz, 1960ff.), vol. 12, p. 29 (no. 818).
8 See Paul Strawn, ‘Cyril of Alexandria as a Source for Martin
Chemnitz’, in David C. Steinmetz (ed.), Die Patristik in der Bibelexegese des 16. Jahrhunderts
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1999), pp. 205–30 (225–7).
9 Theodor Mahlmann (ed.), Johannes Brenz: Die
christologischen Schriften (Tübingen: Mohr, 1981), pp. 212, 228, 296, 324.
10 Heinrich Bullinger, Fundamentum firmum, cui tuto fidelis
quivis inniti potest, hoc praesertim difficili seculo, quo dissidiis doctorumque adversariis scriptis omnia
conturbata sunt, positum ad institutionem et consolationem simplicium… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the
Elder, 1563) (HBBibl I, no. 425), fols 117v–21r; Heinrich Bullinger, Repetitio et dilucidior explicatio
consensus veteris orthodoxae catholicaeque Christi Ecclesiae in doctrina prophetica et apostolica, de inconfusis
proprietatibus naturarum Christi Domini, in una indivisa persona permanentibus… (Zurich: Christoph
Froschauer the Elder, 1564) (HBBibl I, no. 427), fols 28r–30v.
11 On this controversy, see Mark Taplin, The Italian
Reformers and the Zurich Church, c. 1540–1620 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003) (St Andrews Studies in Reformation
History), pp. 171–81.
12 Josias Simler, Responsio ad maledicum Francisci Stancari
Mantuani librum adversus Tigurinae ecclesiae ministros, de Trinitate et Mediatore Domino nostro Iesu
Christo… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Elder, 1563), fols 7r–v.
13 Simler, Responsio, fols 33v–44v.
14 Simler, Responsio, fols 10r, 29v–30r.
15 George Huntston Williams, The Radical Reformation,
3rd ed. (Kirkville, MO: The Sixteenth Century Journal Publ., 1992), pp. 1023–50; Taplin, Italian
Reformers, pp. 182–8.
16 Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp. 199–203.
17 Josias Simler, De aeterno Dei filio domino et servatore
nostro Iesu Christo, et de Spiritu sancto, adversus veteres et novos Antitrinitarios, id est Arianos, Tritheitas,
Samosatenianos, et Pneumatomachos, libri quatuor… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger, 1568), fols
278v–82r. Simler notes that the antitrinitarianism of some ‘tritheists’ was coupled with a monophysite
Christology. See ibid., fols 110r, 152r–6v.
18 On this work, see Irena Backus, Historical Method and
Confessional Identity in the Era of the Reformation (1378–1615) (Leiden: Brill, 2003) (Studies in Medieval
and Reformation Thought 94), pp. 173–83. Initially, Beza had planned a comprehensive refutation of ‘omnes
adversus ipsam Christi personam excitatas haereses’, but after receiving a copy of De aeterno he
abandoned this project, on the grounds that Simler had dealt satisfactorily with all such errors
(Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 9, p. 141 [no. 631]; ibid., vol. 10, p. 226 [no. 716]; ibid.,
vol. 11, p. 190 [no. 782]).
19 Simon Rageth and Oskar Vasella, ‘Die Autobiographie des
Täufers Georg Frell von Chur’, in Zwingliana 7/7 (1942), pp. 444–69; Nicole Peduzzi, ‘Der Gantnerhandel
im Licht des Verfolgungsberichts des Bündner Buchbinders Georg Frell’, in Zwingliana 34 (2007), pp.
61–94.
20 Emanuele Fiume, Scipione Lentolo (1525–1599): ‘Quotidie
laborans in evangelii causa’ (Torino: Claudiana, 2003), pp. 138–43; Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp.
227–33.
21 Erich Wenneker, ‘Heinrich Bullinger und der Gantnerhandel in
Chur (1570–1574)’, in Zwingliana 24 (1997), pp. 95–115.
22 Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 61, fols 343r–8r. For a fuller
analysis, see Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp. 235–7.
23 Rudolf Gwalther, Die Menschwerdung deβ waarenn ewigen und
eingebornen Suns Gottes unsers Herren Jesu Christi erklärt und uβgelegt in sechs predigen, diser zyt allerley
Secten nützlich zuoläsen… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger, 1571), fols 6v–7v. See Taplin,
Italian Reformers, pp. 242–4.
24 Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 59, fol. 410r.
25 Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp. 245–6.
26 On these prefaces, see Massimo Firpo, Antitrinitari
nell’Europa orientale del ’500: Nuovi testi di Szymon Budny, Niccolò Paruta e Iacopo Paleologo (Florence: La
nuova Italia editrice, 1977), pp. 1–8; Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp. 195–6, 247–9.
27 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols *3r, *5v.
28 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols *5r, **6v.
29 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. **6v.
30 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols *3v, **6v.
31 Silvio’s tract may have been passed on to him by Bullinger; he
also possessed a copy of Scipione Lentolo’s refutation of the work, the Responsio orthodoxa (Fiume,
Lentolo, pp. 171–2). In a letter to the Bürgermeisters of Chur, Ambrosius Marti and Stefan
Willy, Simler describes the Scripta veterum as his riposte to complaints received ‘muntlich und
schrifftlich’ about the edict and the ‘groβe tyranny’ of subscription (Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 46,
348–51). See Taplin, Italian Reformers, p. 248, n. 144.
32 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. **6r.
33 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols **6r–v.
34 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols *3v–*4r. Simler refers
to Augustine’s work De correctione Donatistarum (letter 185).
35 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. **6r. Cf. Hilary of
Poitiers, De synodis (Patrologiae cursus completus [Series Latina], ed. Jacques-Paul Migne [cited PL],
vol. 10, 479–546) 63.
36 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. **6r. Cf. Irenaeus of
Lyon, Adversus haereses, ed. W. Wigan Harvey, 2 vols (Cambridge 1857) (Patrologiae cursus completus
[Series Graeca], ed. Jacques-Paul Migne, [cited PG], vol. 7, 433–1225), 1:10, 1.
37 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. **6v.
38 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. *2v.
39 Opera B. Fulgentii Aphri, Episcopi Ruspensis, theologi
antiqui. Nuper in vetustissimo codice apud Germanos inventa, obsoletis et Langobardicis literis conscripta. Antea
nunquam impressa… (Hagenau: Thomas Anshelm, 1520), fols 35r–67r; Basilius Heroldt, Haeresiologia, hoc
est, opus veterum tam Graecorum quam Latinorum Theologorum, per quos omnes, quae per Catholicam Christi Ecclesiam
grassatae sunt, haereses confutantur… (Basel: Heinrich Petri, 1556), pp. 48–94.
40 Opera B. Fulgentii Aphri, fols 1r–25r (the works of
Fulgentius and Maxentius are paginated separately); Monumenta S. Patrum Orthodoxographa hoc est, theologiae
sacrosanctae ac syncerioris fidei Doctores, numero circiter LXXXV…, 3 vols (Basel: Heinrich Petri, 1569),
vol. 1, pp. 47–61; vol. 3, pp. 2028–63. I have not had an opportunity to inspect Heroldt’s edition.
41 Ioannis Cassiani viri dissertisimi, de incarnatione Domini
libri VII. iam recens aediti… (Basel: Andreas Cratander, 1534).
42 B. Vigilii martyris et episcopi Tridentini opera…
(Cologne: Arnold Birckmann the Elder, 1555). See Backus, Historical Method, pp. 183–94.
43 Heroldt, Haeresiologia, pp. 761–98.
44 Monumenta, vol. 1, pp. 41–5; Concilia omnia, tam
generalia, quam particularia, ab apostolorum temporibus in hunc usque diem a sanctissimis patribus
celebrata…, 2 vols (Cologne: Peter Quentel, 1538), vol. 1, fols 347v–9v; 388v–92v.
45 Concilia omnia, vol. 1, fols 571v–7r; Sichardus,
Antidotum contra diversas omnium fere seculorum hæreses… (Basel: Heinrich Petri, 1528), fols 230v–7v,
246r–74v; Heroldt, Haeresiologia, pp. 683–97, 707–61.
46 Bullinger, Tractatio, fols 28r–v; Fundamentum
firmum, fols 129v, 138r–v; Peter Martyr Vermigli, Dialogus de utraque in Christo natura… (Zurich:
Christoph Froschauer the Elder, 1561), fols 37v–38r, 16r–17r. On Bullinger’s use of Fulgentius in the
Decades, see Opitz, Bullinger, p. 190.
47 HBBibl I, no. 113.
48 See Emidio Campi et al. (eds), Heinrich Bullinger:
Schriften, 7 vols (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2004/07), vol. 3, pp. 44, 176–7; ibid., vol. 4, pp.
534–5; Bullinger, De conciliis, fols 99r–100r; Bullinger, Tractatio, fols 25v–6r, 28r; Heinrich
Bullinger, Responsio qua ostenditur sententiam de coelo… ex sancta Scriptura et beatis Patribus propositam,
adversaria D. Ioannis Brentii sententia non esse eversam… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Elder, 1562)
(HBBibl I, no. 422), fols 67v, 71r, 72r, 79v; Bullinger, Ad Testamentum, fols 26r, 29r–v; Vermigli,
Dialogus, fols 12v, 33r–v, 42r–3v, 68v–9r, 104v–6r. The Lutheran Andreae, by contrast, mocks Vigilius as
‘Dormilius’ (Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 12, p. 82, no. 13). For Simler’s response, see
Scripta veterum, fol. 111r.
49 Heinrich Bullinger Briefwechsel, ed. Ulrich Gäbler et
al. (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 1973ff.) [cited HBBW], vol. 9, pp. 167–8 (no. 1283).
50 Patrick T.R. Gray, The Defence of Chalcedon in the
East (451–553) (Leiden: Brill, 1979) (Studies in the History of Christian Thought 20); Theologische
Realenzyklopädie, eds Gerhard Krause and Gerhard Müller, 36 vols (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977–2004), vol. 24,
pp. 289–96.
51 Evagrius’ work (together with the earlier ecclesiastical
histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Theodoret and Sozomen) was available to Simler in the Latin translation by
Wolfgang Musculus (Basel: Jerome Froben the Elder and Nikolaus Episcopius the Elder, 1549; reprinted 1554, 1557,
1562). For details, see Martin Wallraff, ‘Die Rezeption der spätantiken Kirchengeschichtswerke im 16.
Jahrhundert’, in Leif Grane et al. (eds), Auctoritas Patrum II: Neue Beiträge zur Rezeption der Kirchenväter
im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert (Mainz: Zabern, 1998), pp. 223–60.
52 Excerpts from this work had been published by Beatus Rhenanus
in 1535; a full Latin translation, by Johannes Lange, appeared in 1553, with further editions in 1555, 1560 and
1561. See Günter Gentz, Die Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus und ihre Quellen:
Nachgelassene Untersuchungen, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1966), pp. 3, 207; Wallraff,
‘Kirchengeschichtswerke’, pp. 224–5, n. 10.
53 Bilingual editions of these histories had been published in
1557 (Zonaras) and 1566 (Cedrenus).
54 For details, see James V. Mehl, ‘The First Printed Editions of
the History of Church Councils’, in Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 18 (1986), pp. 128–43; Benjamin De
Troeyer, Bio-Bibliographia Franciscana Neerlandica Saeculi XVI, 2 vols (Nieuwkoop: de Graaf, 1969), vol.
1, pp. 163–7; vol. 2, pp. 63–8.
55 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 208r.
56 Latin translations of these works had been published by
Wolfgang Musculus. See Operum divi Cyrilli Alexandrini episcopi tomi quatuor, quorum postremus nunc recens
accedit, ex graecis manuscriptis exemplaribus fideliter latinitate donatus, 4 vols (Basel: Johannes Herwagen
the Elder, 1546), vol. 4, pp. 142–219. The full contents of Musculus’ edition are listed in Simler,
Bibliotheca instituta et collecta primum a Conrado Gesnero… (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger,
1574), p. 153.
57 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 8v, 112r. Simler
received the Vigilius manuscript from François Pithou in August 1570 (Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 60, pp.
572, 585). The following month, his correspondent promised to send a copy of Justinian’s edict ‘quod ex veteribus
membranis descripsi’ (ibid., p. 573). On 23 March 1571, Simler wrote to thank Pithou for these texts, announcing
his intention to publish them with ‘quaedam alia Latinorum scripta de duabus in Christo naturis, una cum
annotationibus’ (Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 46, p. 360).
58 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 195r–6r, 199r–v,
205v–6r, 208v.
59 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 203r, 205r.
60 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 8r. Cf. Joseph Bidez
and Léon Parmentier (eds), The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius, with the Scholia (London: Methuen,
1898) (PG, vol. 86, cols 2415–885) [cited Evag. h.e.], 4:10.
61 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 207v–8r. Cf. Nicephorus
Callistus Xanthopoulus, Historia ecclesiastica (PG, vol. 145, cols 549–1333; vol. 146; vol. 147, cols
9–448) [cited Niceph. h.e.], 18:50.
62 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 15v. For Rota’s
position, see Boethii Opera, fol. a5r. Modern scholarship is in agreement with Simler; see The Loeb
Classical Library, vol. 74, pp. 72–3.
63 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 8v. Cf. Theodor
Bibliander, De summa trinitate et fide catholica… (Basel: Johannes Oporin, 1555), pp. 113–30.
64 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 111v. Cf. Cassander’s
treatment of the issue in Vigilii Opera, fols †*7r–†*8r.
65 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. *2v.
66 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 71v.
67 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 46v.
68 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 48v. Cf. John Cassian,
De incarnatione Domini contra Nestorium libri VII (Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, vol.
17, pp. 233–391; PL, vol. 50, cols 9–272) [cited Cassian. c. Nest.] 2:3.
69 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 168r–v.
70 See, for example, Ecclesiastica Historia, integram
Ecclesiae Christi ideam, quantum ad Locum, Propagationem, Persecutionem, Tranquillitatem, Doctrinam, Hæreses,
Ceremonias, Gubernationem, Schismata, Synodos, Personas, Miracula, Martyria, Religiones extra Ecclesiam, et
statum Imperii politicum attinet, secundum singulas Centurias, perspicuo ordine complectens…, 13 vols
(Basel: Johannes Oporin, 1559–74), vol. 5, p. 1332: ‘Doctrinam de libero arbitrio corrupit, et Pelagii sententiam
amplexus est, ac propagavit’.
71 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 47v.
72 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 49v. Cf. Cassian. c.
Nest. 5:4. In a letter dated 19 September 1571, Beza chided Simler for showing excessive lenience in his
treatment of Cassian (Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 12, p. 186 [no. 861]).
73 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 139v.
74 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 49r–v. Cf. Cassian. c.
Nest. 3:3.
75 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 169r–v.
76 Bullinger, De conciliis, fol. 96v; Bullinger,
Responsio, fol. 58r–v.
77 Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 8, p. 236.
78 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 170r. Cf. Socrates,
Historia ecclesiastica (ed. Günther Christian Hansen [Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1995]; PG, vol. 67, cols
30–842) [cited Socr. h.e.] 7:29; Niceph. h.e. 14:31.
79 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 170v–71r. Cf. Liberatus
of Carthage, Breviarium causae Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum (Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, ed.
Eduard Schwartz et al. [Berlin: de Gruyter, 1927–71], vol. 2/5, pp. 98–141; PL, vol. 68, cols 969–1050) [cited
Liberat.] 2–4; Cassian. c. Nest. 1:2; Socr. h.e. 7:32; Vigilius of Thapsus, Libri quinque contra
Eutychetem (PL, vol. 62, cols 95–154) 5:18.
80 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 171r.
81 Ibid.
82 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 171r, 186v. To support
this claim, Simler quotes extensively from the collection of statements from Nestorius’ sermons submitted to the
Council of Ephesus by Cyril (ibid., fols 172v–3r). These excerpts were published in Crabbe’s edition of conciliar
acta (Concilia omnia, fols 443r–444v; see Friedrich Loofs, Nestoriana. Die Fragmente des
Nestorius [Halle: Niemeyer, 1905], p. 13) and in the Basel Latin edition of Cyril’s works (Operum divi
Cyrilli, vol. 4, pp. 298–303).
83 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 186v–7r.
84 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 171v–2r.
85 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 187r.
86 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 171r–v.
87 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 9v, 171v.
88 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 9v.
89 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 171v. In the Polish
trinitarian controversy, the example of Dionysius was used by Simler and other Zurich divines to show how
overzealous defence of one aspect of true doctrine can itself give rise to heresy. See Taplin, Italian
Reformers, pp. 196–7.
90 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 10r. Cf. Joachim
Camerarius, Chronologia secundum Graecorum rationem temporibus expositis, autore Nicephoro archiepiscopo
Constantinopolis … Addita est Narratio … de Synodo Nicaena, nunc denuo edita … (Basel: Johannes
Oporin, 1561), p. 106.
91 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 176r: ‘scripta illius
ostendunt, vir fuit magnus pietate, doctrina, eloquentia, ut merito in Theologia et rebus sacris inter primos
locum obtineat: quando vix alius est, e Graecis praesertim Theologis, qui rationibus et scripturarum testimoniis
fortius haereticos impugnet et prosternat: nullus vero illo totius antiquitatis cognitione instructior, et qui
sua omnia tot Patrum et veteris ecclesiae testimoniis confirmet, id quod legenti dialogos ipsius adversus
Eutychianos [the Eranistes], et Haereticorum fabularum compendium, aliaque eius scripta manifestum est’.
92 Campi et al., Heinrich Bullinger: Schriften, vol. 4,
pp. 527–8, 537–8; Vermigli, Dialogus, fols 5r–v, 8r–9r, 32r, 36v–7r, 40r, 41r–v.
93 Bullinger, De conciliis, fol. 98r; Bergjan,
‘Bullinger’, pp. 152–4.
94 Bullinger, Fundamentum firmum, fol. 81v.
95 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 175v. Cf. Liberat. 6;
Niceph. h.e. 14:35.
96 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 175v-6r.
97 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 176r. Cf. HBBW, vol.
11, pp. 266-7 (no. 1550); Vermigli, Dialogus, fols 34r-6r.
98 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 180r. Cf. Cyril of
Alexandria, Apologeticus contra Theodoretum pro duodecim capitibus (PG, vol. 76, cols 385–452) cited
Cyr. apol. Thdt., cols 394-8.
99 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 180v. Cf. Cyr. apol.
Thdt., cols 399-402.
100 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 181r–v. Cf. Cyril of
Alexandria, Apologeticus pro duodecim capitibus adversus orientales episcopos (PG, vol. 76, cols 315-86)
cited Cyr. apol. orient., cols 327-32; Cyr. apol. Thdt., cols 403-10. See also Scripta veterum, fol.
187v.
101 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 186r. Cf. Cyr. apol.
orient., cols 379-82.
102 Paul B. Clayton, The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrus.
Antiochene Christology from the Council of Ephesus (431) to the Council of Chalcedon (451) (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2007), p. 285.
103 István Pásztori-Kupań, Theodoret
of Cyrus (Abingdon: Routledge, 2006), p. 10; J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 5th ed.
(London: Black, 1977), p. 319.
104 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 187v.
105 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 192r: ‘Error eius
[Eutyches] ex eodem quo Nestorii fonte prolabitur, ut Boetius asserit, nam sicut Nestorius cum arbitraretur
numerum naturarum et personarum sibi mutuo respondere, et unamquanque naturam suam habere hypostasim, ac videret
duas esse in Christo naturas, duplicem quoque credidit esse personam: sic Eutyches cum eadem sentiret, parem esse
naturarum et personarum numerum, in assumptione huius rationis a Nestorio dissensit, et quia videbat unum
Christum unamque eius personam in scripturis proponi, et idem etiam nuper publica concilii Ephesii sententia
confirmatum esse, unam tantum in Christo naturam esse asseruit’. Cf. Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius, De
duabus naturis et una persona Christi adversus Eutychen et Nestorium (PL, vol. 64, cols 1337-54; The
Loeb Classical Library, vol. 74, pp. 72-129), 5.
106 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 179v.
107 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 192v.
108 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 193v. Cf. Evag. h.e.
2:2; Niceph. h.e. 14:47; Bullinger, De conciliis, fol. 101r; Camerarius, Chronologia, p. 114.
109 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 194v. Cf. Liberat. 13;
Evag. h.e. 2:18; Niceph. h.e. 15:30.
110 Cf. Bullinger, De conciliis, fol. 102r: ‘Congregatis
autem his in templo, medium se inter ipsos collocavit Martianus Imperator, ut disputationes vehementiores et
assertiones Episcoporum quorundam ferventiores modareretur atque compesceret’.
111 For the edict, see Paul Krueger (ed.), Codex
Justinianus (Berlin: Weidmann, 1954), p. 6 (1.1.4). It is reproduced in Bibliander, De summa
trinitate, pp. 32-4.
112 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 173v, 175r, 193r.
113 See John Meyendorff, Imperial Unity and Christian
Divisions: the Church 450-680 A.D. (New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1989), pp. 187-206; R.V.
Sellers, The Council of Chalcedon (London, 1953), pp. 254-301; W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of the
Monophysite Movement: Chapters in the History of the Church in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1972), pp. 143-220.
114 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 197r. Cf. Evag. h.e.
2:5; Niceph. h.e. 15:9.
115 Bibliander, De summa trinitate, pp. 7-12.
116 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 200v.
117 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 200r.
118 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 200v.
119 Ibid.: ‘Quare si controversiae de religione existent, frustra
conciliatio tentatur ambiguis formulis doctrinae in medium propositis, sed ut verus et constans sit ecclesiarum
consensus, oportet ut sententiae de controversis quaestionibus dicantur et proponantur perspicue absque ulla
ambiguitate et sophistica, id ni fiat consensiones fucatae tandem in maiora dissidia abeunt: idque non modo
Zenonis edicti exemplum, sed nostrae quoque aetatis non obscura exempla satis probant’.
120 See, for example, Bibliander, De summa trinitate,
pp. 22-3.
121 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 203r. See the
‘Constitutio sacra Iustiniani imperatoris contra Anthimum, Severum, Petrum et Zoarem’, in Justinian,
Novellae, ed. Rudolf Schoell and Wilhelm Kroll, 6th ed. (Berlin: Weidmann, 1954), pp. 263-9 (no. 42),
reproduced in Bibliander, De summa trinitate, pp. 39-47.
122 Bibliander, De summa trinitate, p. 51.
123 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 8v, 205r. Cf. Evag.
h.e. 4:38-40; Niceph. h.e. 17:29-31.
124 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 204r. Cf. Liberat. 24.
125 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 205v.
126 Iain R. Torrance, Christology after Chalcedon: Severus of
Antioch and Sergius the Monophysite (Norwich: Canterbury Press, 1988), p. 9.
127 Torrance, Christology, p. 16; Sellers,
Chalcedon, p. 262; Meyendorff, Imperial Unity, pp. 251-2.
128 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 207r-v.
129 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 196v-7r.
130 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 198r.
131 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 196v.
132 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 199v.
133 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 200v.
134 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 201r.
135 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 205r. Cf. George
Cedrenus, Compendium historiarum (PG, vol. 121, cols 23-1166; vol. 122, 9-368) [cited Cedren. c.h.] 121,
col. 806; John Zonaras, Epitome historiarum (PG, vol. 134, 39-1414; vol. 135, 9-388), 14:17; Camerarius,
Chronologia, pp. 119-20.
136 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 169v.
137 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 207r. Simler
acknowledges that his sources differ on the precise nature of Eutyches’ error. For example, Evagrius and
Nicephorus attribute to Eutyches the opinion that Christ became incarnate only ‘apparently’, whereas Cedrenus
accuses him of making the divine nature passible. Cf. Evag. h.e. 1:9; Niceph. h.e. 14:47; Cedren. c.h. 121, col.
658.
138 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 201v-2r, 207v-8r. Cf.
Niceph. h.e. 18:49-53; John Damascene, De haeresibus (PG, vol. 94, cols 677-780) [cited Jo. D. haer.],
82-5, 99. See also the descriptions of monophysite and monothelete sects in Ecclesiastica historia, vol.
5, pp. 615-20; vol. 6, pp. 303-7, 311-12; vol. 7, pp. 122-31.
139 Simler, De aeterno, fol. εr; Simler, Assertio
orthodoxae doctrinae de duabus naturis Christi servatoris nostri, opposita blasphemiis et sophismatibus Simonis
Budnaei nuper ab ipso in Lituania evulgatis … (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer the Younger, 1575), fols 4v-5r.
See also Taplin, Italian Reformers, pp. 202-3.
140 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 198r. Cf.
Ecclesiastica historia, vol. 5, p. 989.
141 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 208r.
142 Ecclesiastica historia, vol. 7, pp. 595-653.
143 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 169v.
144 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 206v: ‘haec autem
Monothelitica secta postrema est earum quae impia temeritate personam et naturas Christi impugnarunt, dum enim
hoc certamen fervet Sarraceni Aegyptum et Syriam occuparunt, in quibus regionibus Eutychea impietas prorsus
regnabat, et iidem mox Oriente potiti sunt, in quo Nestoriani non pauci numero erant, et simul quoque
Monophysitae seu Eutychiani: atque ut utriusque sectae impietas in Alcoranici delirii sentinam confluxit, ita
regiones quoque ipsae quae protulerunt aluerunt et foverunt haec monstra sub Sarracenorum et Turcarum potestatem
et tyrannidem redactae sunt’.
145 According to Muslim tradition, Mohammed’s prophethood was
recognized while he was still a child by a Christian monk named Baḥīra. Middle Eastern Christians developed a negative version of the tale, which ascribed authorship
of the Qur’an to Baḥīra, rather than the illiterate Mohammed.
See Barbara Roggema, ‘A Christian Reading of the Qur’an: the Legend of Sergius-Baḥīra and its Use of Qur’an and Sīra’, in David
Thomas (ed.), Syrian Christians under Islam: The First Thousand Years (Leiden: Brill, 2001), pp. 57-73.
In Damascene’s De haeresibus, the monk is described as an Arian (Jo. D. haer. 100), but the
Apology of Ps. Al-Kindi – in which he is first given the name Sergius - labels him a Nestorian. Other
writers suggest that Mohammed was assisted by two different monks, identifying the former as a Nestorian and the
latter as variously an Arian or a Jacobite. The legend became widely known in Western Europe from the twelfth
century, when Peter the Venerable commissioned a Latin translation of the Qur’an and other texts relating to
Islam, including the Apology. This Corpus Toletanum formed the basis for Bibliander’s Qur’an
edition, in which the Sergius story is cited as evidence of Nestorian influence on Mohammed. See Machumetis
Saracenorum principis, eiusque successorum vitae, ac doctrina, ipseque Alcoran … (Basel: Johannes Oporin,
1543), fols ß1r, ß2r-v. For Simler’s previous use of the legend, see Simler, De aeterno, fols 283r-v.
146 Scripta veterum, fol. 179r.
147 For details, see Christopher Burchill, The Heidelberg
Antitrinitarians (Baden-Baden: Koerner, 1989) (Bibliotheca bibliographica Aureliana 120; Bibliotheca
dissidentium 11).
148 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. *5r; Zurich
Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 46, p. 350, cited in Taplin, Italian Reformers, p. 249, n. 146.
149 See the passage cited in n. 144 above. Cf. Bullinger, De
conciliis, fol. 107r: ‘Horret sane animus, quoties recogito, quam funestos luctus, quam acerba iurgia, et
quam pestifera schismata, et quanta scandala et vulnera ecclesiae Christi inflixerint Nestoriana (ut iam de
Arianis nihil dicam) Eutychiana ac Monothelitica monstra. Infecti fuerunt hac peste aliquot Graeci Imperatores
qui Episcopos nunc deiecerunt, mox evexerunt, atque ita turbarunt prope Orientem, ut miser populus quo se
verteret aut quid crederet propemodum ignoraret. Debemus sectis illis irreconciliabilique dissidio Machometanam
illam pestem, et quod totus propemodum Oriens a Christo ad Machometum defecit’.
150 Simler, De aeterno, fols ε3r-v, fol. 283v.
151 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. *3v.
152 Backus, Historical Method, p. 338.
153 Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 8, p. 240.
154 Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 11, p. 781.
155 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 178r.
156 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 207r: ‘Postremo si de
sententia Eutychetis ex Synodi Chalcedoniae decreto statuendum est, cum illic asseratur unum et eundem esse Iesum
Christum in duabus naturis ἀσυγχύτως, ἀτρέπτως,hoc est inconfuse et inconvertabiliter,
efficitur Eutychianos docuisse mutationem et confusionem naturarum: neque tantum essentiarum sed multo maxime
proprietatum, unde eodem decreto traditur naturarum differentiam non esse propter unitatem sublatam, sed magis
utraque naturam suam proprietatem servare. Itaque Vigilius et caeteri qui contra Eutychiam haeresim scripserunt,
id maxime elaborarunt ut utrunque naturae proprietatem salvam in Christo ostenderent, credo enim forte illos a
plerisque earum obtinere potuisse ut naturam humanam absque suis proprietatibus in Christo faterentur, primam ut
ita dicam essentiam, nam Eutyches ipse agnoscebat in Christo humanum corpus, et omnes Christum Deum hominemque
fatebantur, consubstantialem patri et nobis quoque consubstantialem, verum potissima controversia fuit de
perfecta natura habente suas proprietates’.
157 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 72r.
158 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 191r. Cf. Cyr. apol.
orient., cols 367-8.
159 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 191r.
160 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 191v.
161 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 209v. On Hoffman’s
Christology, see Klaus Depperman, Melchior Hoffman: Social Unrest and Apocalyptic Visions in the Age of
Reformation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987), pp. 223-9; Williams, Radical Reformation, pp.
493-5.
162 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 202r, 209v. Cf.
Niceph. h.e. 17:9.
163 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 113r. On
Schwenckfeld’s Christology, see Paul L. Maier, Caspar Schwenckfeld on the Person and Work of Christ: A Study
of Schwenckfeldian Theology at its Core (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1959); Williams, Radical Reformation,
pp. 495-9.
164 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 190r.
165 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 210v. On this point,
see Maier, Schwenckfeld, p. 79.
166 Egli to Simler, 20 August 1571 (Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms.
F 59, fol. 413r): ‘Minus autem moleste ferimus, quod in Ubiquitatis monstro depingendo breviorem te morbus
iniquus fecit: sic enim Papistis nostris minori offensioni futurum speramus’.
167 Zurich Zentralbibliothek, Ms. F 46, pp. 349-50. Cited in
Taplin, Italian Reformers, p. 249, n. 146.
168 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol.*2r.
169 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 140r. Cf. Fulgentius
of Ruspe, Libri tres ad Trasimundum Vandalorum regem (Corpus christianorum: Series Latina, vol.
91, pp. 95-195; PL, vol. 65, cols 223-304) 2:15. The same point is made in the Annotationes for
Maxentius; see Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 72r.
170 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 206v. Cf.
Ecclesiastica Historia, vol. 7, pp. 553-4, where Honorius is classed as a monothelete. On the use of
this example by Protestant writers, see Georg Kreuzer, Die Honoriusfrage im Mittelalter und in der
Neuzeit (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1975) (Päpste und Papsttum 8), pp. 185-90.
171 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 88r. Cf. Pope Gelasius
I, Tractatus de duabus naturis in Christo adversus Eutychem et Nestorium (PL Supplementum vol. 3, cols
763-87) 14.
172 Cassian. c. Nest. 1:5.
173 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 48r.
174 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 170v, 174v.
175 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 169v.
176 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 175v-6r.
177 Josias Simler, De vera Iesu Christi Domini et Servatoris
nostri secundum humanam naturam in his terris praesentia, orthodoxa et brevis expositio … (Zurich: Christoph
Froschauer the Younger, 1574), fols 3r, 5v, 7r.
178 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 179v.
179 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 190r.
180 Ibid. Cf. Protocollum hoc est, Acta Colloquii inter
Palatinos et Wirtebergicos Theologos, de Ubiquitate sive Omnipraesentia corporis Christi … (Heidelberg:
Michael Schirat, 1566), pp. 28, 86-94, 102, 133-4, 136.
181 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 189v.
182 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 188r. Cf. Campi et
al., Heinrich Bullinger: Schriften, vol. 4, p. 538.
183 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 190r. Cf. Johannes
Brenz, Recognitio propheticae et apostolicae de vera maiestate Domini nostri Iesu Christi … (Tübingen:
Ulrich Morhart the Elder, 1564), pp. 40-41. Beza cites the same passages, to similar effect, in his preface to
Christoph Hardesheim’s Refutatio dogmatis de fictitia carnis Christi omnipraesentia (Correspondance
de Théodore de Bèze, vol. 12, pp. 66–7, [no. 828]).
184 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 190v. See also Simler,
De vera praesentia, fols 88r, 96r-7r, 98r.
185 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 191r.
186 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 191r-v.
187 Simler, Scripta veterum, fols 211v-2r.
188 Simler, Scripta veterum, fol. 210v. Cf. Bullinger,
Responsio, fol. 69v. For Melanchthon’s opposition to ubiquitarian Christology, see Irene Dingel,
‘Melanchthon und die Normierung des Bekenntnisses’, in Günter Frank (ed.), Der Theologe Melanchthon
(Stuttgart: Jan Thorbecke, 2000) (Melanchthon-Schriften der Stadt Bretten 5), pp. 195-211 (209-11).