4^ ^'w o. w IMAGE EVAUiATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) ^^^^ <<^ ^< 7a 1.0 lii«|28 ■10 1^ I.I ^ m ^ us, 2.5 120 1.8 1.25 1.4 1 6 « f,,, ^ ► 3 s^""' %'^' ^ C»^ Photographic Sciences Corporation \ «^ ^ :\ \ ^R> V O^ ^. ^'■ rv 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^-1 u "^ <- J^^ C/j CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques w^V^f Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquas The Instituta has attemptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagas in tha raproduction, or which may significantly changa tha usual mathod of filming, ara checkad baiow. □ Colourad covars/ Couvartura da couleur |~n Covers damaged/ D D □ D n n n Couverture endommagde Cov4*rs restored <£nd/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculAe La titre de couverture manque Cover title missir^v/ La titre de couve Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiquas en couleur I I Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue cr black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleuc Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planohaa et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli4 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge iniirieura Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissant dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti film^as. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmantairas; L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'ii lui a iti possible de se procurer. Las details de cet exemplaire qui sont paut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithoda normaie de filmage sont indiquis ci-dessous. T1 tc r~n Coloured pages/ D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdas et/ou pelliculies Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages dicolories, tachaties ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages ditachies Showthrough/ Transparence |~~] Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de {'impression Includes supplementary material/ Compiend du material supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slip^. tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Las pages totalement ou partieilement obscurcies par un feuillet d'arrata. une pelure, etc., cnt 6t^ filmdes A nouveau de facon a Gbtenir la meilleure image possible. T P o fi b tl si o fi •i o T 8 T ^ d a b rl r( n This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked bolow/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X \j 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X Th« copy fiim«d h«r« has b««n reproduced thanks to tha ganarosity of: Morisset Library University of Ottawa Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha baat quality poaaibia considaring tha condition and itigibility of tha original copy and in icaaping with tha filming contract spacificationa. L'axampiaira filmA fut raproduit grica i la ginArositi da: Bibliothdque Morisset University d'Ottawa Laa imagaa suivantaa ont 6t4 raproduitas avac la plua grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattati da l'axampiaira fiimA, at Bn conformitA avac laa conditions du contrat da filmaga. Original copiaa in printed paper covers ara filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies ara filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illuatratad impraa- sion, and ending on the laat page with a printed or illustrated impression. Lss exemplairaa originaux dont la couverture en papier eat imprimte sont filmte an commanpant par la premier plat at an terminant soit par la darniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second plat, salon le cas. Tous laa autras axempleires originaux sont fllmte en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration at an terminant par la darniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain tha symbol —i»>( meaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plataa, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one expoaura are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many framea aa required. The following diagrams illuatrata the method: Un das symboles suivants apparattra sur la darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: l« symbols «»• signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartaa. planchea, tableaux, etc.. peuvent Atre filmte A des taux da rMuction diff Grants. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seui clichA, il est filmA it partir de ^'angle supirieur gauche, de gauche k droite, et de haut an bee. en prenant la nombre d'imagea ndcassaira. Les diagrammas suivants illustrant la mithoda. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^4 I' / •«»>?"' M THE ^^ fl i f 1 f ■j h •' ^ , M Eh M ■f t M V D ^ 0'' assumes a tone of pHv for his tt^t^- *"'' ■■?P'^se"t» the patrons of ProtestanW ^ ob StSe sSrfn- ■ ^' "PP^-^ '^' kindness S candor th^tcrbit'dfo^rbTsyst^r'''-^'^"' •=""'"'■" ->''^'" anco°"'Si^'w*' '°-'y r™'» "f i-dignation and dett- undtTmbrdtL""'? "*"'" m;3unden.t„Jd ; an5 in^^inuaST.^ England, on this, as on.eyery other topic of theoloav nm duced many distinguished authors. Jewef Cartwrigh 1^^^^^^^ fhptl^ ^^^^«^' ^^o^g a crowd of othei;, appear eminent ff; their learning and mdustiy. Jewel's reply to HardLTZugh via PllEFACE. published shortly after the Reformation, is a most triumnhant refutation of Popish errors. Cartwri^ht appeared in rirena "ut^rtSl'r^.?' '^^ Rh^misftranslatoi. Lir notators btillmgfleet, m his numerous works, has written on nearly all the topics of distinction between the Romirand Re formed ; and on each has displaced vast stores of erudition and amazing powers of discriminatren. Barrow assailed he^Cal supremacy; whio the depth of his learning, and the exten^of his genius, enabled him to exhaust the subject. He hrcol ected aiid arranged almost all that has been said on the ques- tion of the Roman pontiff's ecclesiastical sovereignty ^ Ireland, m her Ussher, boaats of a champion, wto in this con- troversy was in himself an host. He had^ead aU the Fathers and could draw at will, on these depots of antiquity He pos- sessed the deepest acquaintance with sacred litTrature and ecclesiastical history. Jhe mass of his collections hi since h^ day. supphed the pen of many a needv, but thankless' pwLfy His age wa^an era of discussion ; and. in his occasion^ wS tev M tt'"^ artillery against the various tZ of l-opery. All these errors are, m a compendious review dis- sected and exposed, in his answer to an Irish JeS ^hich may be considered as a condensation of all his arguments against the Romish superstition. The reply w^ h'f ^"1 artiUery which hke a skilful general, he brought forward a^inst his most formidable eneSy, whilst the superioriry of his tactics and position enabled him to sweep the field ^ .„! •i'^Ti ''^''^"''^ ^^' produced many firm disputants on each side of the question. 5rhe popish cause in England haS been sustained, but with a feeble hand, by Milner Butler an^ the notorious Cobbett. These, again,' hJve C opposed bv Southey, PhiUpotts, Townsend, and M'Gavin. MiE ' End of Controversy.' affected in title and weak in argument, is one of the siUiest productions that ever gained popularity He affects citing the Fathers, whom he either never^ead or desi^ edly misrepresents. His chief resources, indeed, are mi3 ment and misquotation. His logic con ists in bold ^sTrSon and noisy bravado. His publication, which was to end^ontro- versy ha^ been answered by Grier, Digby, and. in many occa- sional animadversions, by M'Gavin. ^ Butler, imitating the insinuating and imposing manner of Bossuet, affects plainness and simplicity; md reprTseSts the Snf nirof ™-"'^P^5 fonn of- R^a^^m in theTos? engt- Uiurch. Phillpotts again, m a letter, and Townsend in his •Accusations of History,' answered Butler, who fn return! PREFACE. IX addressed his 'Vindication' toTownsend, in reply to the ' Accusa rw'V^Vf *?'• '^l'' ^t''^ "^ '^''^ auth^oJ^TgeneraUs the want of facts and authorities, though, in many respects ihoy discover research and ability ^ respects, Cobbett's 'History of the Reformation ' is one continued tissue of undisguised falseliood, collected, not from the records of tbie fmw'?f f ' ^«P'^"« «^^«« «f »"« own invention. Truth itself cnaracter, and, like a good man seen n bad company becomes nS hi h"'' '"^"'""Z (?^[ ^^' fabrications desLe^'no ^S name) hm been exposed with admirable precision, by M'Gavin of Glasgow, in his 'Vindication of the Refirmation ' The Scot- amusTnf ' H?V''S ™'"J "^ '^' ^"^^^^ ^'^^"^^^^^ ^^ ^4' amusing. He handles, turns, anatomises, and exposes the slippery changeling, with a facility which astonishes. Cd with 2w '^^J''' ^i^^^'^.en^^rtains. All the English autbVs accustomed transformations cannot enable him to elude the unmerciful grasp of the Scotchman, who seizes him i all his varying shapes, pursues him through all his mazy windings coif^h^*^-'^? ^.t^-^'y ^^ '^^ ^^ loathsomeness^ till heT: comes the object of derision and disgust. M'Gavin's dissection rinrut f '*^7^'''' '" ^ «™°g P^^'^^' ^^ ^iew, the supe- riority of sense and honesty over misrepresentation and effront- ' Sn 7 1 *" ^f • ^^,^'« Pi-otestant, seems, indeed, not to have been deeply read in the Fathers or in Christian antiquity : but he possesses sense and discrimination, which triumphed over the sophisms and misconstructions of the adversary Ireland, at the present day, has, on these topics, produced its full quota of controversy. The field has been tkten, for Ro- ^1?"!' ^ m^'^^^'.^f "^' ^^g"i^e. '^"d a few othera of the same class. The Popish prelacy, who were questioned before the Parliamentaiy Committees in London, displayed superior tact and infomation. Their answers exhibited great talents SLTrn^?**^,V^°S^^"' ^^«^^°' ^«^Hale, feenny, Hig- gins, Kelly, Curtis, Murray, and Laffan, evinced at least equll cleycrness at Maynooth, before the commissioners of Irish edu- cation. These are certainly most accomplished sophists and pr^tised m the arts of Jesuitism. The l/aynooth examination was conducted with great ability, and the answers which were elicited, excel in the eyasion of difficulty, the advocacy of error, and the glossing of absurdity. The battle for Protestantism has been fought, with more or less success by Ouseley, Digby, Grier, Jackson, Pope, Phelan, iLlnngton, Stuart, and a few other champions of the Reforma- tion. Stuarts work is entitled to particular attention. The PREFACE. are supposed, in some de^JZ >.! ^4 *"?'?' ""^ divinity, prepossession TheTritv ?^ ^t ^^^"fl»enced by interest or proach these discuss onJwSl! 'T*^'^'^' ^^^ '"^^'^^n^d to ap- man is entitled to all thfrPatrS f t \ '.u •^^^. ^'"^^^^^^'^^^ %- confer. But Stua^-tWorrpoTselrs ^^^^^^ circumstance ca^n thing 9f an adventitious dLrintion Thl ^T '^^T""' *° ^^^ embrace all the aues+ionT nf^ . ^ author's disquisitions agitated between rCm^nTSSd" The Y? '^^^ are clear, and the arguments conclusivp Th. J ! ^^^^ments interweaves in the work nrp nn^i Jhe facts, which he correct. The author'SdueermanvT^^ ''' are recorded in ecclesiastic«l hLf ^ of the transactions, which on the public theat Tf th w S' ^Lle'ht' ^^ ^P^^^ men and their actions are dfstTnmilhr^^^^^^ ft\ °^T^<^^o\«.on former publi^ions on thisZbiPPfi' ''"•''^f ^"^ excellence of render Ly future' "odu't ot^n^SC^^^ deed, who have opposed the superstrtTon ^nf R "*^°''ii '^- The author's plaisi &r 1!^. t„ " t '''°'" P'='*<'mg works. according to its ab^ttorHsi; M '"It*^ ^^*^*- Catholicism, tion ; wa! derivedtom th Me^sf^^^ taught by the Fathers, Td t p oL^t b ^ the Apostles, nion of the present dav wif hnnf „ i^l^ ' j" . P^P^^^ commu- The design of th?s workTi fn 1 ^.f ''"' diminution, or change, claim. The ubiecUsIhe d?vp T '^'. groundlessness of such^a oils among Jhemiolteswitt^^^^^^^^^^^^ ««"«- and Fathers; Td these'fluctu«f inT ""^''^^'T ^'T ^^^ ^P^^^les of the supersSns whth Zv^^^'^' ^"ustrated by the history deformed^he ^e^'^-:^y:^^ «i-PHcity. an3 The variety of opinions, which have l^en entert.inod by PREFACE. XI ?.Tf\ 55.^''':!,''°'''^""*'' °^^ principal topic of detail Papists have differed m the interpretation of Scripture and in the dogmas of religion, as widely as any Protestants. Doctors, pontiffs, and synods have maintained jarring statements, and in consequence, exchanged reciprocal anathemas. The spiritual artillery, on these occasions, was always brought forward and carried, not indeed death, but damnation into the adverse ranks rinaf^''"?' in the end, was often employed to preach the Gospel enforce^ the truth, or, at least, to decide the victory Pnnpr^' v.""? ^^'^ ''''''^^^^ ^'^ related in the ' Variations of hX2[}.A ? y^ngli"g8 of obscure theologians, and the o&/ "^f^-"^ difference among authors of celebrity, are omitted as tedious and uninteresting. The detail, if every nimute variation were recounted, would be endless. The his- r.«S ?tif 1- ^^ ^" th^doctrinal and moral alterations of mis- named Catholicism would write, not a light octavo, but many ponderous folios, which would require mSch unnecessary time labor, expense, and patience. The work which is now offered to the world will, It ,s presumed, be sufficient in quantity whatever may be its quality, to gratify the curiosity of the reader, and answer the end of its publication . rSr^ • "If '^^^''"f ^^T. *^^ ■^P"^*^^^ and Fathers also claim a place m this work. The Romish system is shewn to possess neither Scriptural nor Traditional authority. This in one re- spect, will evince the disagreement of Papists with each other Ihese claim the inspired and ecclesiastical writers of antiquity and appeal to their works, which, in the Romish account, are, m doctnne, popish and not protestant. The sacred canon is by the opponents of protestantism, acknowledged, and which IS no easy task IS to be interpreted according to the unanLous consent of the Fathers. A display of their variations fZ these standards, which papists recognise, will, in one way, evince then disagreement among themselves, and, at the same time erthrow their pretensions to antiquity. The history of papal superstitions traces the introduction of these innovations into Christendom. The annals of these opin- ions, teaching their recession from primeval simplicity, will also hew the time and occasion of their adoption. The steps whkh o P«vll P^ ""?• P^-r a^:t,«a^«f»% ni^rked ; and these additions to eaily Christianity will appear to be the inventions of men 1 heir commencement was small and their growth gradual." W tfff°' «"ow-ball. which rolls down the mountai?, is at nrst trifling; but accumulates as it sweeps the lofty range of steeps, till, at leneth. the miVhfv ma«« r-Lcf]^.. ;„ %:^l_ appals the spectator, mocks opposition, and overwhelms in ruin xn PREFACE. the vineyard, the village or the city. Superstition, in like manner, unperceived in the beginning, augments in its progress. Ihe fancy, the fears, or the interests of men supply continual accessions, till the frowning monster affrights the mind and oppresses the conscience. Such was the rise and progress of Komanism. A religion, boasting unchangeableuess, received continual accretions of superstition and absurdity, till it became a heterogeneous composition of Gentilism and Christianitv united to many abominations, unknown in the annals of mv- thology and paganism. The history of these innovations will expose their novelty, and di.scover their aberrations from the original simplicity of the Gospel. ,u ^?P^Til '"^ 'i^ ^?'^*^t *"'"°"' ^''^^^^y ^0 maturity, occupied all the lengthened period from the age of the Apostles till the last Lateran Council This includes the long lapse of time from Paul of Tarsus to Leo the Tenth. Paul saw the incipient workings of 'the Mystery of Iniquity.' The twilight theh be- gan, which advsueeu iu slow progress, to midnight darkness Superstition, which is so congenial with the human mind, was added to superstition, and absurdity to absurdity. Filth col- lected The Roman hierarchs, amidst alternate success and defeat struggled hard for civil and ecclesiastical sovereiffnty Leo, Gregory, Innocent, and Boniface, in their several davs advanced the papacy, on the ruins of episcopacy and royalty bishops and kings. These celebrated pontiffs /ugmented the papal authority and encroached on prelatic and regal power Leo the Tenth, in the sixteenth century, saw the mighty plan completed. The Lateran Assembly, under his presidency, conferred on the pope a full authority over all councils, which in consequence of this synodal decision, he was vested with the arbitrary power of convoking, transferring, and dissolving at pleasure This concession subjected .synodal aristocracy to pontihcal despotism; and, in consequence, extinguished all episcopal freedom. The same convention embodiedfin its acts, the bull of Boniface the Eighth against Philip the French king '' Ihis transaction subjugated royal prerogative and popular privi- lege to pontifical tyranny. The .synod had only to advance another step and the work of wickedness was consummated, xhis was soon effected The infallible bishops addres,sed the infalhble pontiff as God.'^ The successor of the Galilean hsherman was represented as a Terrestrial Deity; while he received with complacency and without reluctance the appella- 1 Du Pin, 31. 148. Crabb, .3. GOG. i Du Piu .3. ■^ D.'U8 in Terris, Bin. 9. ,54. 148. PREFACE. Xlll tion of blasphemy. Leo then fulfilled the prediction of Paul, and ' as God shewed himself that he was God.' ' The man of sin, the son of perdition,' whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming was revealed. Popery, appalling the nations with its lurid terrors, stood confessed in Ul its horrid frightfulness and deformity. But the age, that witnessed the maturity of Romanism, be- held its declension. Leo, who presided in the Lateran council, saw the advances of Luther, Zuinglius, and Calvin, who ush- ered in the Reformation. The God of the Lateran lost the half uf his dominions by the friar of Wirtemberg, the canton of Zurich, and the pastor of Geneva. Leo lived to curse Luther, and view whole nations rejecting the usurped authority of the papacy. Mystic Babylon must, in this manner, continue to fall, till at last it shrink and disappear before the light of the Gospel, the energy of truth, and the predictions of heaven. This work is designed to employ against popery, the argu- ment which the celebrated Bossuet wielded with ingenuity, but without success, against protestantism. The reformers disa- greed in a few unimportant points of divinity. Their disagree- ment, however, was rather in discipline than in faith or morality. These dissensions the slippery Bossuet collected; and what was witnting in fact, he supplied from the fountain of liis own teeniing imagination. The discordancy, partly real but chiefly fjmciful, the bishop represented as inconsistent with truth and demonstrative of falsehood. The 'Variations of Popery' are in- tended to retort Bossuet's argument. The striking diversity, exhibited in Romanism, presents a wide field for retaliation and' will supply copious reprisals. The author of this production, however, would, unlike the Romish advocate, adhere to facts and avoid the Jesuitical bishop's misrepresentations. Bossuet's design, in his famous work, is difl^cult to ascertain. He was a man of discernment. He must therefore have known, that the weapon, which he wielded against the Reformatio ,, might be made to recoil with tremendous eH'ect on his own s\ . - tem. His acquaintance with ecclesiastical history might h:. \e informed him, that the variations of popery were a thousand times more numerous than those of protestantism. His argu- ment, therefore, is much stronger against himself than against his adversary. This, one would think, might have taught the polemic, for his own sake, to spare his controversial details. Bossuet's argument is, in another respect, more injuric- s to himself than to the enemy. The Romish coiiununion cljiimp. infallibility. The reformed prefer no such ridiculous preten- xiv PKEPACE. ,-n fiTo' ""?*!*' therefore, differ in circumstantials and a^ee m fiindamentals. might err and return to the truth C m?cv loZT- '"^^' '^' '^'^^- T^« i«"Putation of dtZ bTL u"^' '"'■ * S^®** rneaame, a harmless aUe^tion . But error, or change m a communion, claiming inerrabiH^ 3 uuchangeability, is fatal. Its numerous vJSnsiSdt Z'^'V^ v^^^ ite pretensions to unity andliuSbTlity FaSl «n5'p*'' • r *^i' ™^ ^^^' ^i*!^ ^ f«^ excptirns tlfe t^tl ^T'^^ ^"*^°'"- Protestant historians and th^o! 'i^e Ponk^"" r*'^' ^^!; °"ly i^ "tatters of minorTmport- ' SshdocCCT"" '"^^' V^^ °^^^« ^«^dines8, c?e^t popish doctoi-s ; and these are easily supplied. Many annalists honor^fThT""*"" ^T' ^^^^ °"We«ts connectTdS tt wn^?K Sfu P^P^*"^', ^^^^" » candor which is highly nraise- flcS^whiWh' "^*^^"^-¥e ingenuousness, hfvfrEd dTalt^rfioL. 'tk'"'^-""^' "^^^ ^^^'"^f'^l preyarication, have dealt in fiction. The communion which produced a Baronius aBellamine,aMaimbourg, and a Binius,^can boast of a Du One noZb'''' ^,J^"^^H«' ^^^^o, and 'a Guicciardint another^ Thp T • ''' 'M"^ *^^« performance, confuted from another. Theologian, m this manner, is opposed to theologian pope to pope, and council to council. A Launoy and a dS ^upply materials for a refutation of a Bai JSJ ^nd a Belkr" Tnd a Lvm jf^'^^'P^^'^^^ the errors of a Pallayincfno ; Knius \;Z' ■ ^""^ instances, rectify the mistakes of a Binius. Eugemus condemned and excommunicated what ^e s1l"S!l?,r^ ^?^r^^: Clement and BenedicT, in nne style and with great deyotion, anathematised Boniface feomm^tidT'^- J^?«-n-^« of Pisa, Constance and en^e an^ thi r f f'* "^^^^ l"'^^^"*^ «" *^^«« ^^ ^Jons, Flor- the warnf nni ^^'"^J. I^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^ Italian schools, in ttie war of opimon and theology, conflict in determined knd jirnSr;nT?h"''r • ^'^ '^ ^-^ *^« MoltHew the itt indlV -A ^ Dominican as professed enemies. The facil- & anoth;rP.\^^^^^^ any one popish diyine may be confS of Rom«S!^ i^'*"';""! '*"^'°^ P°^»t of yiew, the diyei^ity ot Komanism. A protestant, skilled in popish doctors and w'SSa'nYcrun'il^ll^'^^^ *^^ -^-tation^Lny p^ptTCm Thi^n^v 1 ' ""^^'^ adyersary's own communion. RomaniZ ^yif '' ,T ^I-^^-'^ ^"^ "^^'^^^ ^^^ deformity of IntTrSVnrft ^7.^'J-^^i^?,*^ dissemble his sentiments, interested for the good of his fellow-men of eyery nersuasion bVLroToTfl^tr'' '^ "t^' ^^^^^«-g abTuTdftyTZ mrdeSwl-?^ ri'^ P^S''^°" °" ^^^^rig the praise ot modem liberalism. He Icnows the woe pronounced against such \ PHEFACE. XV strength, and ^??t'Hrl/u"r 'K ''^"■«'' *« health, has Ln foSo M '"^'tera^y of tho malady, reaaSn indeed, in the matprifll« c.f ^^\.i,.v:u • ? ™® confidence, tL^t^ZT iflS"? ""«^9« tion. The ricW ccJo^ ^ body without a sonlwant/attnw: . offend the eye o?Lto^ J'f*°"'. f "'"'?ty »i^ '>— i" -^''^l- --f '"■^- fulness of Him that fiUeth all in all ; '-that Church which INTRODl/CTION. XXVll embraces the whole body of the elect, and none others. This assumption nowhere warranted by the Scriptures of truth has forced the Church of Rome into many jretences. Among these we may specify the Sanctity with which Rome seeks hy- pocritically to clothe herself; the Apostolicity, or conformity m doctrine, discipline, government and worship to the New Tes- tament Church, which she vainly endeavors to evince ; and the Latholicity which by excommunicating and anathematising all who will not acknowledge her sway and bend'before her bastard sceptre, she has sought to secure— as some claimani- to the thrones ot Eastern climes seek to secure their crowns— by the extermination of all rivals. 'Tis true that Christ's Church on earth shall continue through- out all generations. 'Tis true that it is not possible to deceive the elect so as to iniperil their salvation. But it is also true that these true members of Christ's body are often God's hidden ones, invisible to the world or even to the Prophets ot the Lord ; as were the seven thousand who never bowed the knee to Baal in those defective times, when Eliiah be- wailed that he only was left faithful to the God of Israel And it IS also true they are subject to imperfection both in knowledge and service. There is in Scripture no more foun- dation for the assurance that all the visible associations of Lhnsts people shall hold on all points precisely the same views and be united under the same visible organisation, as that all the members m the same visible organisation shall possess per- cisely the same graces and in precisely the same degree Nay the indications of Scripture instruct us differently. Truth essen- tial to salvation with a greater or less degi-ee of clearness and tuiness IS common to all the saved. But in some that faith may be but as a grain of mustard seed ; and the prayer of the disciples will ever be a fit supplication for the church on earth Lord increase our faith !' Rome has sought most inconsistently to deny the Scriptural distinction between essentials and non- essentials ; and yet no church on earth has had more to do with such distinctions. Five years ago the dogma of Papal infallibility was not an essential to salvation. Now to doubt or deny this dog- ma is to be damned. Now it is not c/e./idc— essential to salvation —to believe that the dogma of infallibility extends beyond ex- cathedra definitions concerning faith and morals. The next council, nay the Pope himself, may by ex-cathedra definition ex- tend faith and morals so as explicitly to comprehend all human aflfairs. But he who holds Christ the head,finnly believes His word . . .,pi.,t. ,,i nim tta ohe pimcipie or me is a member of the Church of Christ, though disowned by Pope, bishops councils, synods, or any visible organisation calling itself the xxviii INTRODUCTION, Church of Christ, Union to Christ made by failh brings life eternal, and not any visible relationship whatsoever. The Reformed Churches differ from the Church of Rome, not in the existence of such distinction as that between essentials and non-essentials, but as to the basis on which this distinction rests, whether on Scripture or the dogmas of the Church. All Scripture truth is essential in the sense that wanting any part of it, the man of God could not be perfect. But every part of Scripture *s not essential to life or salvation. It is for saints on earth the Apostle prays, 'the very God of peace sanctify you wholly.' All who truly believe in what Scripture sets foi'th as essential to life are true members of Christ's redeemed Church. In regard to non-essentials, they may be divided in opinion and separated because of such division into different visible organi- sations. Nowhere does Scripture make salvation to depend upon outward and visible relationships. Now upon this subject, vital to a right appreciation and a clear understanding of the conten- tions of the Church of Christ with the Church of Rome, Dr. . Edgar brings to bear against the latter an overwhelming amount of adverse testimony. He abundantly proves that Rome's claims to unity and infallibility are historically unfounded as well as scripturally untrue. That on this subject the Protean varia- tions of her faith and the cliameleon changes of her views, render the confusion of her testimony chaotic. In regard to each leading variation of Romish faith, he shews that this divergence is due to the departure of Rome, 1st. from Scripture doctrine ; 2nd. from the early Fathers ; 3rd. from the expressed views of some of the wisest and best within her own pale ; frequently at the very time at which such divergence became dogma — stereotyped by the fiat of Rome's Infallibility. Rome claims, as we have said, subjection from all existing professing Christian churches, and from every member in these churches. To substantiate this claim she must shew, and by her attempts to do it confesses she must shew : 1. Scripture foundation for the Supremacy and Infallibility of Peter ; 2. That Supremacy and Infallibility were not personal and temporary, but officially given to Peter to be transmitted by him to his successors, and 3. That Peter was de facto Bishop of Rome, and did transmit to his successors. Bishops of Rome, Supremacy and Infallibility To fail in cmy 0)16 of these three items she fails altogether. ' Now Dr. Edgar in this volume beyond all historic cavil conclusively proves : A INTRODUCTION. XXIX 1. That Scripture upon the Supremacy and Infallibility of mer IS not only a silent, but an adverse witness ; and that this IS both confessed and proved by the abundant testimony ot many of Rome's own chosen authorities. 2. That the early Bishops of Rome never received such bupremacy and Infallibility as Rome claims for them ; that they lor centuries never, claimed such; that their early position in the Church of Christ and the independence of other churches are utterly inconsistent with any such claim; and that for centuries such claim was unheard of, and by distinguished Roman bishops and learned authorities explicitlv disavowed. Supremacy and Infallibility were of slow growth and when they did appear after the lapse of centuries, it was with such opposition as proves such claim to be ' earthly sensual devilish/ No Supreme and InfalUble authority did the early Christian Church acknowledge, but the Holy Spirit speaking m His word ; and we may add \. (3) There is no evidence to prove that Peter was at any time Bishop of Rome, or ever set his foot on European soil. Contemporary testimony— the history of the Apostle's life as given by himself, or sketched by his contemporaries, never once hints that he was Bishop of Rome, or ever re- sided or even visited there. We are told of o'.hers being in Kome, but no mention of Peter. Paul testi£«^s that at his first answer no man stood by him, but the Lord stood by him. Feter was not m Rome then. By Paul was the Epistle to the Romans written and not by Peter, showing clearly that the Church ot Rome was not under Peter's care. Paul in Rome writes epistles to other churches, sending to them the greetings of the Saints with him ; but Peter is not with him there or then Peter writes to Asiatic not to European Christians, and dates his letters not from Rome as the seat of his supposed bishopric, but from Babylon. Nor did Peter's special work lead him to Rome. He was the Apostle of the Circumcision, as Faul was of the Uncircumcision. Peter was apostle to those of the Jewish faith and of Hebrew descent ; Paul went to the trentiles, whose centre was the imperial city of Rome. Paul testified that Peter was fallible and recognised in him no supremacy. In fact the evidence for supremacy and infalli- bility is rather in favor of Paul; for Paul withstood Peter to the face because he was to be blamed. In the council of Jerusalem Peter had no supremacy, he did not even preside there, l^r. Jidgar m this volume is full upon this controversy ; he shews that tno, n.".ass.{r^£: -^ "^ — - ^ ' » • . . •'— „^ cs ^ . - vvnicn moaerii Rome appeals were understood for centuries, not as she interprets £l ' XXX INTRODUCTION. them, but as Protestants understand them, and as many within her own pale understood them, until she excommunicated all who did not agree with her. Dr. Edgar sets this subject forth in ♦^^Iie light of Sciipture and of history with great i Iness, clearness, and completeness down to his own time. Since then Rome has introduced a new variation, has made another advance towards absolute sway. The discussion of this last development receives in this volume brief, but exact and trustworthy treatment at the hands of one in every way competent in this depai-tment. This addition with the subjoined notice of the Papal Encyclical by which Pius the IX., in A.D. 1864), announced and decreed the ImmacuLiie Con- ception of the Virgin Mary, makes this treatise one for the present time, and a complete manual of the variations of the Church of Rome— a church not Catholic — not even Roman Catholic ; but in deed and in truth, both historically and lite- rally, ' The Papacy,' the Church of ' Our Lord God, the Pope.' It has always seemed to the writer that the most vital varia- tions of the Papacy from Scriptural Christianity, and on which she irreconcileably differs from Protestantism are those of Supremacy and Infallibility. Allow this dual claim and everything Rome demands must be conceded. Overthrow these dogmas and Rome is Anti-christ. The events of this eighth decade of the nineteenth century have revived the discussion of this vital and fundamental ques- tion. 'Tis true the contention has taken a secular rather than a spiritual course, but the greater question of spiritual truth as against Romish error is sure to emerge. Here we have Rome's cljosen arena for the final conflict. Here now must the battle with Rome be fought and won. The defender of Scripture truth could seek no fairer field and no more hope- ful conflict. The very citadel itself invites attack— with de- termination here to do or die, the enemy shouts defiance. Td conquer here is to leave no enemy in European Christendom, whose name or fame can indicate serious opposition. So far vic- tory sides with truth. Mr. Gladstone has proved himself more than a match for Dr. J. H. Newman, Cardinal Manning, and a host of minor men. His ' Expostulation ' has brought out as present Variations of Infallibility (I.) Old Catholicism, represented by Dollingei and others ; (2.) Minimism, supported by Dr. J. H. Newman ; (3.) Gallicanisra, revealing on its ban- ner the names of Doyle, Murray, and Crolly and lately Lords Acton and Camoys, allied to the Old Catholics of Germany and Switzerland; (4.) Gallico- Qltramontanism, a transition "VI T vv^ttucti u} Liuiu jLicriiUK U.I1U ^auoii Uakiey; and (o.) uitra- montanism pure, with its rew Cardinal (Manning) and the V INTRODUCTION. ^^^^^^ othera spake without auftority 1.0 boTnIT *°'''/'S^'' ^'"* the Pope should be dea^t^th K k^'P'""*"^^ '^^J«^*« "^^ which tiiPv l,\"a +il u ^ "^^^ *^® Governments under Po^ejaSfer^^^^^^^^^ representative of the and French liStn^"^? '5 *^.''"^^°^«^ the English Germans in fS durlTthVE^^^^^^^ ^"^^^ --• -d to say, the spiritual suEs^ off J p"""-^^.'''*^ ™= that is to GovernmeXaJe to hpt5/S ^T ^^^^"g^^der Protestant rantee h^ve t^e Gove^menW ^^^^ P^^^^' ^^'' ^^- of Infallibilitv-Xh^nTh?!^!, Ti"^? the proposed limits shall define thL S Lnd h^ow W ^"i* V'^^ fTt ' ^^^ made be binding ?!«' T ^ow long shall such definitions if Controversy in somroTar^rs is in h '^f^y'^'^VossMe. some extent not undese^el^f decried t?^^' ""f ^' ^"'^ ^" ducted as only to enS^r s rife wt ™^^ ^ -'^ '^^^ wie sceptical and contemptuous hostility of Athens. In XXXll INTRODUCTION. bonds for the gospel's sake, he pleaded before royal Agrippa, and at the court of the imperial Csesar, By him the gos- pel must be preached whether men will hear or whether they will forbear. Peter, for the same gospel's sake, dared the wrath and defied the intolerance of the Jewish Sanhe- drim. Opposition to existing errors consigns him to prison and direct divine intervention miracles his deliverance, only that he may more boldly prosecute his heaven-assigned prose- lytising task. The meek spirit of the disciple 'whom Jesus loved,' emboldened by divine grace, quails not before the foes of Christ's truth and cause, though his faithfulness consigns him to the banishment of the sea-girt Patmos. Apostolic times were signally times of controversy. And He who maketh the wrath of man to praise Him amidst the confusion of the nations and the contentions of the .ichools, established His king- dom and extended His church. The glorious reformation of the sixteenth century too was cradled in controversy. ' A dog barks fiercely ' said the learned Calvin, ' when its master is attacked; and shall I hold my peace when they attack my Lord and my God ? ' The Papacy has now flung down the gauntlet at the feet of the Princes of Europe. Never since the times of the Great Gre- g(^ry has she been so weak in Christendom ; and yet out of her very weakness does she seek to make herself strong. The in- dependence of nations is assailed and the civil liberties of the peoples are threatened. The secular power is to be cowed and coerced into alliance that her spiritual supremacy may be secured. May the God of all grace increase the faith of His church on earth, and enable the blood-bought freemen of the Lord to add to their ' faith ' both ' virtue ' well to war, and ' knowledge,' wisely to discern the signs of the times ! J, Gardner Robb. Toronto, 10th May, 1875. INTRODUCTION. \ CHAPTER I. THE UNITY OP PROTESTANTISM. HARMONr or THE RKFORMED CONFEHSIOWb -,» LUTHERANI8M-P0P,8H D VERSITT O^ TR^L.f''""-°"''«"BSTANTIATrON OV VARIBTY-SECTARIANiaM-POOLEBT OF ROM.v,?^'''''''''*""'' -WSOIPLINARIAN STNOn-ANTIQUITr OF PROTESTANTISM PrntJ"^ ™^ ASS-DECISION OF A ROMAN antisni. These tomcat , n„l Jul .^'"'i ""'"'">'»' Protest- with fond occSiom Tf 3^tit r"""'^."^ P'P"' ^"Pe'^MUon manism, according t^itefrfe^risSP'"' "k^, '"""='''■ «"" old as Ohristianitl ProSn^ir "toX. Lltt™*""' '^■"' 18 fluctuatincr as faJsphonH ov,^ '"u. dccoraing to its enemies, The Bishop o°f CJfnL^Vt^.ea^tVtert^'^taTf""' of Protestant sm," and collected ^!ih T^- ■ ."^""ations its real or imagin,„y aUerS . ' li^StTof tlletZ' *" tion, in the statements of fhw nn+u • /^ * *"® Reforma- bility. ProtestantLtJnt^tt";rptrd1^?ts'^"^^^^ into jarrmg systems, and appeared in the nation, n? "f '"f^^^^' 'n many diversified forms But 1m?!i^ f ^'H^^*^^^. distinguished theolog ans rTnoundnl he ? '''"'■ """i ""^'^ of men, and the muddv stream?nf ? '5?,.™" «»»mandraents the same spirit and dlf C\h1 s' t'Znt^"' ^" """''-^ fes:iltf°SL™& t™SdTS,r™"'"'^'''^™- of the Reformation • and all 1n^ HJff . ^^^ commencement in the main, the sTme truth ' TweWe'^of ^h^'^^' T'''''' tions of belief were issnod in \h! ^ T ^''^''^ ^^P^^i" Thesewere the Albur. TetraDoliTr'p ^^TV' ^^*^^^^- rnian^ Wittemberg, lala^n^. Htrv^^^F^^^^^^^^ ;«id ocottish confessions All i^h^c^ ' .-•"•'-;", ^riugiish, Oho„efs Collection ; a™d\avt\rawSgS'td^'c-«S4" 34 INTRODUCTION. Sleidan, Seckendorf, Brandt, Bossuet, Maimbourg, Moreri, and Du Pin, according to their diversified prepossessions and designs. The Augsburg or Augustan Confession is the production of Melancthon, and was reviewed and approved by Luther. The Elector of Saxony, attended by a few of the German Princes, presented it in 1530 to the Emperor of Germany at the Diet of Augsburg. This confessional manifesto, which was read in the Augustan Congress, received its name from the place of its presentation ; and became the standard of Luthferanism, through Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. The work has been criticised with the pen of prejudice by Maimbourg, and abridged with impartiality by Seckendorf, Sleidan, Paolo, Moreri, and Du Pin.' The Tetrapolitan, like the Augustan Confession, was, in 1530, presented to his Imperial Majesty, at the Diet of Augsburg, by a Deputation from Strasbourg, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau. The ambassadors, on this occasion, represented these four cities, and, from this circumstance, this public document took its appellation. This compendium was compiled by Bucer and Capito, and approved by the Senate of Strasbourg. The compilation has been epitomised, with his usual fairness, by Du Pin, from whom it extorted a flattering eulogy. This writing, says the Sorbonnist, is composed with much subtlety and address. Everyarticle is supported by scriptural authority, and expressed in a manner calculated to impose on the reader. ^ The Bohemian, the Saxon, the Wittemberg, the Polish, and the Palatine, soon followed the Augustan Confession. The Bo- hemian or Waldensian Formulary was compiled from older records, and presented, in 1535, to the Emperor Ferdinand, by the nobility of Bohemia. The Saxon, in 1551, was issued in the Synod of Wittemberg, approved by the Protestant Clergy of Saxony, Misnia, and Pomerania, .sanctioned by the Princes of Brandenburg and Mansfelt, and presented, the same year, to the Council of Trent. The Wittemberg, composed by Brent, was published in 1552. The Polish was formed in the General Synod of Sendomir, in 1570, and recognised through Poland, Lithuania, and Samogitia. Frederic the Third, the Elector Palatine, in 1576, issued a Formulary, in which he conveyed an exposition of his own faith. ^ The Helvetian Confession was issued in 1536, at Basil, in a iMez. 4. 566. Uhouet, 3. Boss. 1. 98. Sleid. 1. 284. Secken. 151. Paolo, 1. 89. Du Pin, 3. 207. Moreri, 2. 561. '■« Chouet, 215. Du Pin, 3. 207. 209. Boss. I. 98. Sleid. 1. 285. Seeken, 198. a Chouet, 4. 140, 201. Alex. 17. 405. Hossuet, 1. 410. Du Pin, 3. »ia9. Moreri, 2. 562. INTRODUCTION. tons of the nati^rlCtrftlierwTaf; *'""/ ^^« ^" ' en arged and improved was aLinnV.ru f °?® "*^^- This, extorted an unwi/lingeu'log;eXL£,^t^^^^^^^^ 1560. and The Swiss Confession, accordinrto VhT 1 ^''''''P ^^ ^^aux. compendiums of the sarne kinSVhich he h /'' '^'^'^ '^" ""^^'^ and precision. The theolocrianrS R„ ^ "^.f ^"' ^'^ P^«i"ne.s8 memorable occasion, not oX prom u^'nl' i *?f-^"'""' "" *his wondeH.1 to teli, made even ^^ "o^lt i^LTinSfe^,:^' soo^^ZS^of^^^^^^^^^^^ drawn up in a national synod at Paris L?.? ^^^'^^^^ ^^s presented it to Charles the Ninth n /hi i. ^'^''' ^" ^^^l- Has public document was coSd ?n the n"i^"^ '^ ^°>'««>'- Rochelle, and signed by the O, Zn f xt "*^^'«nt^l council of Henry the Fourth, by Jondd, fc °^N™re, by her son and recognised by the reformed ofThe Vr^7' ^"-^ '^'^ 'y^od, has given it in Latin, and £ va] ^n F "'i' ^'^i""- ^^«»efc Belgic, written in French in Afii 1 /• ^"^^- ^he Dutch or 1581, was confirmed in a Nationfl ^^ / • ?"*'h *^»^ ^atin in was edited in the Synod of L ndo„^f^^ ''?• .'^^^^ English authority of the Queen in I^tT Th?s fS TA^Pf"^ ^^ *^*^ for the purpose of removing d s ension /nH ^^^!'^' Published was approved by the dignifi^ed and fn^^rf 1^'°'"°*^'"^ harmony, by her Majesty Queen E iSeth TharF""^^ f"^ subscribed abridged by Du Pin Severll clf • *^*^''n^"la is foithfully in different times. Knox in iZo'T" '^V'^ ^" ^cotlanj ratified by parliament. Th s howevTP^?^?"^' ""^''^ ^«« provisional and temporary and sunk In ^"^ *'^^^'''' ^^^'^ ^^ly ance of the Formulary comSed -^I W ' • '^ ''*' °" ^'^« '-^PP^ar was approved by the General It ^i""^'-"'' '''"'^' ^" i^*^, was ratified by t^he Scott^rpldL^l'^^^^^^^^^^ '^^O wm-d avowed by the people^ ''™*'"^^<^^^^nburgh, and after- -S^r^hLtlaZLTrtr "? ""' «■»"«<' *o the Reformed of the ^e,»7Emo^nkZT' " "?" '"'""*ed. The 36 INTRODUCTION. t Luther, Melancthon, Bucer; by the academy of Wittembei^, hj the Lutherans and Zuinglians, and indeed by all the friends of Protestantism/ The Polish was recommended by the Wal- densians and Lutherans. The Dutch was subscribed by the French National Synod of Figeac; and the French by the Reformed of the Netherlands. The Swiss, united to each other in mind and communion, declared themselves undivided from the Reformed of other nations of Christendom; and their con- fession was signed by the Protestants of Germany, Hungary, Poland, France, Belgium, England, and Scotland. These confessional systems comprised all the topics of theo- logy. Faith and morality were discussed with precision and perepicuity. God, the Trinity, predestination, creation, provi- dence, sin, duty, redemption, regeneration, justification, adop- tion, sanctification, baptism, communion, death, resurrection, and immortality, all these subjects and many others were com- prehended in these publications. The truth and duty of reli- gion were, in these concise expositions, explained in a clear and satisfactory manner. These doctrinal compilations represented the theology of a vast population. Protestantism pervaded Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Poland, Gei-many, Transylvania, Hungary, Switzerland, France, Holland, England, Ireland, and Scotland ; and visited the continents of Asia, Africa, and America. The extensive territory, in this manner, from the Atlantic to the Euxine, and from the Icy Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea, witnessed the light of the Reforjnation, which, propagated at succeeding times by missionary zeal, reached the African and Asian continents, and crossing the interposing ocean,illuminated the transatlantic shores in a world unknown to the ancients. The harmony of these declarations of belief is truly surpris- ing, and constitutes an extraordinaiy event in the history of man. The annals of religion and philosophy supply no other example of such agreement. The several nations, let it be recollected, acted, on these occasions, in an independent manner, without concert or collusion. The one had no power or authority to control the other. The clergy and laity, besides, were numer- ous and scattered over a wide territory. The transaction, in its whole progress, manifested the finger of Heaven, and the overruling providence of God. The Reformed, indeed, had the one common standard of revelation. Directed by this cri- terion, the early patrons of Protestantism formed their faith, ' Tj'.ithsniH banc ValdenHiam Bohetnorum oo!ifessio!ieni^ftT>prob-vvit', IRaTm^fiiri laudrarant Melancton et Bucerius. Alex. 17. 406. Chouet, 3, 4, 12. Du Pin, 3. 253. Boas. 1. XV. Aymon, 1.5145, 157, 300. \ UTTRODnCTIOH. 87 fe»on», Ly. Paolo "ffj^d^n" ^3^" 7""'';-'"' ^°" awSd asenwlkv ^™»'"r .conWeray, whii sbnsaffi>rdod R>Mu«f » i^v,'- . T '^"P'""*"'™. These discus- been for thk t^nt wWeC't h' '"P'^ '"""'P''- «'"' " -ot m„';ro;"e™td''"'^h^ ?"»««»■»«■. W:v:r hL'Teen often in the beltf of ™i -'^"^^«^'i^°« f«J Zuinglians both agreed Wg D„ Pi,,, s,eidta„«'leet'ntrC°dt?hthe^S were ™ild and^ conciliutinl ev™'°,f '''"!i '^'""•'''"« '^ ^"*«^' commodation, saTdJhe Reformer i^^A^ <"'r'*«°"' An ac- fraternal and formal untnTni eftT.^J^rT^ ' *• ''. """'S''' " fill and amiable concoJd' All .,; """^ "?'"'"' P'^"'- of thp T,3 ^? "• ^ confession was issued on the subiects -e of the article, ^^U.l'X^l^^:^,^^^^^^^^^ \ i lii 38 INTRODUCTION. works, the civil magistracy, and future judgment, and sub- scribed with the utmost harmony by Luther, Zuinghus, and the other theologians. The Zuinglian communion never accounted the Lutheran peculiarity a sufficient reason for schism or disaffection. This, they professed on many occasions. The French Reformed, in the National Synod of Charenton, acknowledged, in express terms, the purity of the Lutheran faith and worship. This as- sembly, in 1631, declared, says Aymon, the Lutheran commu- nion sound ill the fundamentals of religion, and free from super- stition and idolatry. A meeting of the two denominations m 1661, at Cassel, professed their reciprocal esteem ; and, though a formal union was not constituted, expressed their mutual wil- lingness for co-operation and cordiality. The Lutherans and Calvinists of Hungary, Transylvania, and Poland, in 1570, in the synod of Sendomir, acknowledged the orthodoxy ot^ each other's faith, and formed a treaty of friendship and unity/ . The mutual friendship entertained by the Reformed of Ger- many, France, and Switzerland terminated, among those of Hungary, Transylvania, and Poland, in a formal ecclesiastical union. This was gloriously eff'ected at Sendomir in 1570. A synod of Hungarian, Transylvanian, and Polish Calvinists and Lutherans met at that city, acknowledged the conformity of their mutual faith to truth and revelation, formed themselves into one body, and resolved on reciprocal co-operation against the partisans of Romanism and sectarianism. Agreed m doc- trine, the synod, in the genuine spirit of religious liberty, left each church to the enjoyment of it5 own discipline and forms. , This noble and happy compact was confirmed in the synod of Posen held in the same year ; and in those of Cracow, Petro- cow,* and Breslau in 1573, 1578, and 1583. Two branches of the Reformed, who had differed in one non-essential, concurred, in this manner, to form one ecclesiastical communion, and to bury in eternal oblivion, all the conflicting elements of faction and animosity.- The formal junction, which bigotry had prevented, was, m 1817, effected through Prussia and Germany. The Calvinists modified the severity of predestination, and the Lutherans renounced the absurdity of consubstantiation ; and both de- nominations, after a candid explanation, could see no remaining ground of schism. The two, in consequence, united into one body. Lutheranism and Calvinism, through the Prussian and German dominions, were amalgamated, and both distinctions I Aymon, 2. 501. Du Pin, 3.699. 2 Tliuan. 2. 778. INTRODUCTION. gg darling doctrine of SnIltenSn """'"« *° ™^''y' ">''' Ijrregoiy the Seventh, presidinff in 1078 with nil hw infoii- bihty, in a Roman Synod of one hu Xd .n 1 fiffi • u etwed Zv p'°"'t'°r"'^ *'' "^-"-P""' P-sencrare here ZuiSian. t^tl,! 'f ""' *™/ "'«" tl"" declaration. The ex^sirnofCeX/orrdX^R*''""'- .?°^™'™''' 'plf. """ '"J"'""^ ''>'"'° H-'y' Roman, Aro'toUc 138. ^ ^ "''*' ' "'""^ ^•"'P"^ *>* sanguinem (Jhristi adesse. Seckend corpus, at veru. sang^uinorcrris\^"&,.'a,^L\l.l^:t"l82"^'^^'^ ^^'"*^ 40 INTRODUCTION. Synod, headed by his infallibility. Mabillon acknowledges the Berengarian creed's ambiguity and insufficiency.* The con- temporary patrons of the corporal presence held the same opin- ion as Mabillon, and insisted on the substitution of an unequiv- ocal and explicit confession, and the insertion of the epithet 'substantial.' This accordingly was effected next year. A new creed was issued, acknowledging a substantial change in the sacramental elements after con£.ecration.* Pius the Fourth followed the footsteps of Gregory. This Pontiff in 1560, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, offered to con- firm the English Book of Common Pihyer, containing the Thirty-nine articles and the Litany, if the British Sovereign would acknowledge the Pontifical supremacy, and the British nation join the Romish Communion.^ The English Articles reject Transubstantiation. The religion of England under Eliza- beth, Mageoghegan would insinuate, though without reason, was composed of Lutheranism and Calvinism; but certainly contained nothing of Transubstantiation. Pius wrote a letter to the Qu uo, which, in the most friendly st; le, professed an anxiety for her eternal welfare, and the establishment of her ^yal dignity. This epistle, with the overtures for union, was transmitted by Parpalio, the Pope's nuncio. Martinengo was commissioned by his Holine.ss, the same year, to negotiate a similar treaty. But the terms were refused by the Queen and the nation. Martinengo was not even allowed to land in Britain, but was stopped in the Netherlands.* Du Pin and the Sorbonne copied the example of Gregory and Pius, and proposed at least to modify the doctrine of Tran- substantiation. Wake in London and Du Pin in Paris com- menced an epistolary correspondence, on the subject of a union between the English and the French churches. The French doctor proposed to the English bishop to omit the word Tran- substantiation, and profess a real change of the bread and wine into the Lord's body and blood. This modification, which would satisfy many Protestants, was a new modelling of the Trentine council's definition. The proposal was conveyed in Du Pin's ■ )l 1 Sub his veri corporis et sanguinis verbis requivoea latere non immerito cre- deretur. Mabil. 5. 125.— Berengariusbrevem fideisusi formulam, sed insuflS- citntem ediderat. Mabillon. 5. 139. ' Berengariua explicationem fidei formulam subscribere coactus est. Vox sub- stantialiter ultima; Berengarianae fidei professioni inserta est. Mabil. 5. l.'',9. 3 Qu'il confirmeroit le livre de la Pnere Commune. Le livre de la Priere Commune est une espece de Rituel on Breviaire, qui contient les trente-neuf anticles de la religion pretendue rtiform^e, avec la for.nule despri^res. Mageo- ghe^n, 3. 379, .380, 381. Cart. 8. 393.— Heylin, 303.— Strype. 1. 228. ' iransitas negaturt. Alexander, 23. 230. IVe iiujus quidem sedis ad ipsam, hac de causa, nuncios in Angliam trajicere perraiserit. Mageogh. 3. 412 s If INTRODUCTION, 41 CommonUorium The plan, however, was not merely the act ot i)u Pin. The conditions of a coalition were read, and after due consideration, approved by the Sorbonnian faculty, so cele- brated for Its erudition, wisdom, and CathoUcism ' These Roman hierarchs and a French university were willing on tTe rtroT^f'^^ '''^'^''y Tranlubstantil^nfanS Tr TJT>. Py^' 'r ^^^^^q^^nce, need not exult or won- tion tLnt wht'.f •"^^'"^•'' ^^^ 9fl^^"^^^« ^^i«««d a disposi- tion tounite, while their opmions on Consubstantiation disncrreed trcoXonT"'" ^'^^^ "^'^''''''^ long consideration, ^came The unity of the Reformed, it may be observed, was restricted to faith and morality. Considerable diversity exX in disd- phne and ceremonies.^ But these, all admit are un^ssentkl and ThfLdpZaiSt: IZ^ o1 Trl^eTrXctd ffr''' and in part of Ireland ; while the^te'aXftlTe^t^'I^^S only so far as consistent with regal authority. Almost every celebrated schoolman in the Ro£ish Communion became the founder of a particular denomination, distingu^red bTHecu! ScarDSifr/?' ^'^T^f *• The AVstinSn^S- SSeriZ wTfF f "f ^''/"'.^^^ Benedictines, were all Characterized by different rites, discipline, and ceremonies antism M«r' 5"^''^-' ^T ^'^""^^^'^ ^^'^^^ '^' ^ise of Protest- ArSsm ^3, ^\"«"^P^.t^o«« appeared after the Reformation. Arianism, Swedenborgianisra, Flagellism, Southcottianism and The X7' n '-''''^ *^^"' Portentous and fantasti;lads Ihe clamor of Arianism, ti.o nonsense of Sweden bordanism ^:::^::^'SFrJ^^^'^-^-^' ^- tended tsLTa Slic 'tZr'!," '^r^"?^ ^^^'"^^ ''^S^' ''- the Tys o7apos: c^nturv LTckPd^ff- ^''''^f'J^- flourished in the second centuiy attacked the errors of his day, and his work on tbk S ni": in'thif ""il? "' ?^^- Jh-^ errors"in"the daVs of iTtf o'r ' fiu■^ ^''''''*^ <^^nt^ry, had increased to eighty, and m the tinae of Philaster, to an hundred and fifty. Their number ystrsl'V:S"' 7;f' ^J- P-g-s of Lie; aJS systems equalled those of the moderns in extravagance. Schism and heresy prevailed to a more alarming extent, before than 42 INTRODUCTION. since the eatablishraent of Protestantism in its present form. Later are but a revival of former errors and delusions, which flourished at a distant period, and, preserved from oblivion by the historian, swell the folios of ecclesiastical antiquity. These illusions, however, the Reformers never countenanced but, on the contrary, opposed. Luther and Calvin withstood the many deviations from truth and propriety, which appeared m their day, and which since that period have, in various forms infested Christendom. The Saxon Reformer exerted all his authority against the error and fury of Anabaptism in Ger- many ; and was imitated in his opposition to turbulence by the Swiss, French, English, and Scottish Reformers, Zuinglius Calvin, Cranmer, and Knox. The Romish priesthood and people, on the contrary, have, in every age, fostered fanaticism and absurdity. Every foolery of sectarianism, which, though unconnected with Protestantism, arose since the Reformation, and disgraced religion, has nestled m the bosom of Popery, and been cherished by its priesthood and people. Arianism, an affiliated branch of Socinianism, claims the honor of antiquity, and was patronized by Liberius, and by the councils of Sirmium, Seleucia, and Ariminum. The extravagance of Montanism. as Tertullian relates, was patron- ized by the contemporary Pope and rivalled the fanaticism of Swedenborgianisin. The Pontiff, says Godeau, gave Mon- tanus letters of peace, which showed that he had been admitted to his communion.* His Holiness, says Rhenan, Montanizod. Victor, says Bruys, approved the prophesying of Montanus, Priscilla, and Maximilla. The mania of Joanna Southcott in modern times is eclipsed by the dreams of Beata, Clara, and Nativity. Beata, of Cuenza, in Spain, was born in the end of the eight- eenth century in poverty and obscurity. But she aspired, not- withstanding, to the character and celebrity of a Roman saint : and, for effecting her purpose, she invented a most extraordinary ^tion, which, she said, was revealed to her by the Son of God. Her body, she declared, as was indicated to her by special reve- lation, was transubstantiated into the substance of onr Lord's body. Beata's blasphemy created no less discussion in Spain than Joanna's in England. The Spanish priests and monks divided on the absurdity. Some maintained its possibility, and some its impossibility; and the one party wondered at the iSocrat. IV 21, 22. Theod. 11. 39,40.Spon. 173. XL Du Pin, 347. Bruy. 1. 112. Tertul. 501. ^ 2 T,e Pape \m avoitdoirmi IcUrca pacinques, qui moutroieiit qu'il lavoit adraia en sa communion. Godeau. 1. 436. Bruy. I. 40. INTRODUCTION. 43 other's unbelief. A few, indeed, it appears, were the accom- c' St "Sf "•• ^"' ""^^ "^' ^ *^- ^"P- of theTown cieduhty. Beatas visionary votaries, believing her flesh and inThew"f ™!f •"''• '}' '"^^*^^^« °^ tl- Messiah pro eeded in their foly and impiety, to adore Uie impostor Her saeer ll^S^enlZroIri ^^"^-^«^J-^ - pS^ocetion. an/S" iigntea tdpeis to the churches and through the strppf ^ • wl.iU these shameful exhibitions were accompaSed with prostrS ine conseciated host. The woman, indeed, was as ffood i divi my as sacramental pastry. Beata's claim in alt itTridiculous" inconsistency, was as rational in itself; and supported by as strong evidence, as the tale of Transubskntiation.^ The clLy and laity of Spain backing in the sunshine of infallib ilitv and SXtSr a f '? 'T'"^ ^/^?^^^' ™ -o leL Sle to aeeeption than a few fanatics m England fruidpd hv fl^^i,. ^^„ unlettered and inf^ituated minds ^ ^ ^^'' ^'^'' the^mmrL^^^".'^' ^!'' ^'•!."™^"^ *'^^" ^«^t^> aspired only to the name and di.stmction of a prophetess; and her claims like those of many other impostors, soon obtained geneml (f;edit veSof '^I?lnd[ "'r^" '^T" '^^ ^--raf to;i:s of fon' leavfher bed f .p n^ w "" P"''^^^^^. ^^'^^<^^«"' ^^^d unable to leave hei bed, the prophetess was visited by the most distin gmshed citizens of the Spanish capital, wh J accounted them . selves honored in being admitted into her presence The si^k mplored her mediation with God, for the cu Je of their disorders tnS^l:2t^ 'T""^ ^"^r ^"P,P"^^^^d ^^g'^t to direct them m then legal decisions, from the holy prophetess Clara uttered her responses in the true Delphic style,^in^e a Priestess God^o iV.r^ '" tJ^\T"podand^nder^he afflatus of U" God, 01 like a seer, who beheld futurity through the visions of mspiration She was destined, she announced,Va 'pec a?caU of he spin, to become a capuchin nun ; but wanted tChealth S^^Sfblirr^^^^ ^" ^ ^^"^^t^r^d community Mis infallibility. Pope Pius the Seventh, in a special brief ner- bi hop of'ToleX"^" T^ ^v'^'^r ""''''' ^«" ALnasiu.sXh- Dishop ot loledo. The Vicar General of God .rranted the holv prophetic nun a dispensation from a cloistered bfe an' a se^ questered community. Miss Clara, in this manner wL a" tow ledged by the head of the Romish Church, while MhrSouthcoTf" W.US disowned by every Protestant communi y. T„ alt^^^^^^^^ the permission of his infallibility, wa.s erected op,,osite her bed Ma.s W.S often said in her bed-i-oom, and the sa^ rament Teftfn ' Llorente, 558. —-rff^ 44 INTRODUCTION. her chamber as in a sacred repository. Clara communicated every day, and pretended to her followers that she took no food but the consecrated bread. This delusion lasted for several years. But the inquisition at last, on the strength of some information, interfered in 1802, in its usual rude manner, and spoiled the play.' The punishments, however, contrary to custom, were mild. This was, perhaps, the only act of justice which the holy office ever attempted, and the only good of which its agents were ever guilty. The Revelations of sister Nativity, with all their ridiculous folly, have been recommended in glowing and unqualified lan- guage by Rayment, Hodson, Bruning, and Milner. This pro- phetess, if she had little brains, had, it seems, clear eyes and good ears. She saw, on one occasion, in the hands of the offici- ating priest at the consecration of the wafer, a little child, living and clothed with light. The child, eager to be received, or in other words eaten, spoke, with an infantile voice, and desired to be swallowed. She had the pleasure of seeing, at another time, an infant in the host, with extended arms and bleeding at every limb. All nature, on the day of the procession, she per- ceived sensible of a present deity and manifesting joy. The flowers, on that auspicious day, blew with brighter beauty, and the anthems of angels mixed with the hosannas of men. The very dust becoming animated, danced in the sepulchre of the saint with exultation, and in the cemetery of the sinner shud- dered with terror. The French prophetess also amused her leisure hours in the nunnery, with the agreeable exei-cise of self-flagellation. The use of the disciplining whip, unknown, say Du Pin and Boileau, to all antiquity, began in the end of the eleventh century. The novelty was eagerly embraced by a community which boasts of its unchangeability. The inhuman absurdity has been advo- cated by Baronius, Spondanus, Pullus, Gerson, and the Roman Breviary. Baronius, the great champion of Romanism, fol- lowed by Spondanus, calls flagellation ' a laudable usage.''' This satisfaction. Cardinal Pullus admits, is rough, but, in proportion to its severity, is, he has discovered, ' the more acceptable to God.'^ Gerson, in the council of Constance in 1417, though he condemned the absurdi^^y in its grosser forms, recommended the custom, when under the control of a superior, and executed by another with moderation, and without ostentation or effusion 1 Llorente, 559. ">■ Ille laudabilis usus, ut pcenitentiae causa, fideles verberibus seipsos afficerent ■lft£6ljis. SiioTi lOi^l^ TIT ' Satisfactio aspera, tamen, et tanto Deo gratior. Pull, in Boileau, 227. INTRODUCTION. Af. on the disciplinarian whin are rend nr. n,„V ,■ i T, canonized iiagellators. The work conWniti H "'' "^ ""r tion» is authorized by three PontZlnT "?" ^"""."''nda- utmost unannnity b,^l,eThde:o™\„ „"^S;t:^ fore,, m all its ndiculousnes., possesses the stnct^f tS nio^j-xr^errctsrwrtt'ra'^f''^'™"^ laboured the luckless backs of the prnitenS crim-nl}', "™' *"; women, oven of the highest ran'lt sS TtCobilttv ,.0litan, the bishop, the prilkXto^kt^ttr^^^^ n the painful and disgusting extravagance ^ f W;,rai tI"^ " m 1056 brought it into fashron,aniKS p'rd J Antll^r' Maria, Margaret. Hedwig, Hi degard Tnd fvl? i ' ^^ el«". all, men and women, beef 'canoS foUoted £ pie and lacerated their backs for the goorof thersoul "' The Roman Breviary, already mentioned, edited W thrPP Popes, commends many of its saints for the r tppv and frt quen application of the whip to their naked backs sllf" flagellation, according to Pontifical authority, became in thlv hands, the sanctified means of superior holinesr Thf«: '^,*^^'^ tains the celebrated namesof XaS Canut^rFrn?-^ "''^i'^''" atus, Bernard, Franciscus. Tere^r^andXS Indian apostle, wielded against his own flol ■ ^>^^^er, the body to subnussion by frequent self-flagellation.' Rp^ the skilful application of the sancruinnrv U^h <7 i"- .1'..^ flesh to the s|;irit.- Bernardi; K Ss, a,ti BeiS' S^ ahie.eSti^l:J^;xu^ri:^^^^^^^^^ ' Flagellatio iiat. judicio .siinprlnri'. o.- .,Vr —„- ii sanguine. Gorsor, 'm Labb 'l6 1 loi ' ""^"'^^J". ^t osteuUtioiie, et sine i III f('! 46 INTRODUCTION. tian means of holy torment. ' She often applied the bloody lash.' This, however, did not satisfy her saintship. She also, in addition, ' rolled herself on thorns;' and by this means, says the Breviary, the Holy Nun, blasphemous to tell, 'was accus- tomed to converse with God.' Her carcass, however, it seems, enjoys, since her death, the benefit of these macerations; and' ' circumfused in a fragrant fluid, remains, till the present day, the undecayed object of worship." The church, that retains such senseless and ridiculous absurdity, in a publication, reviewed by Pius, Clement, and UrTjan, may cease to reproach Protest- antism with the acts of a few mistaken fanatics or moon-struck maniacs, wlio, whatever name they may assume, are disowned by every reformed denomination in Christendom. Dominic, Hedwig, and Margaret merit particular attention in the annals of flagellation. Dominic of tlie iron cuirass seems to have been t^e great patron and example of this discipline. He showed himself no mercy, and whipped, on one occasion, till his face, livid and gory, could not be recognised. This scourcring was accompanied with psalm-singing.^ The music of the v'oice and the cracking of the whip mingled, during the operation, in delightful variety. Dominic, in the use of the whip, had the honor of making several improvements, which, in magnitude and utility, may be reckoned with those of Copernicu.s, Flainstced, Newton, and La Place. He taught flagellators to lash with both hands, and, consequently, to do double execution.'' The skilful operator, by this means could, in a given time, peel twice as much super- abundant skin from his back, and discharge twice as much useless blood from his veins. He obliged the world also with the invention of knotted scourges. This discovery also facili- tated the flaying of the shoulders, and enabled a skilful hand to mangle the flesh in fine style for the good of the soul. Hedwig, and Margaret, though of the softer sex, rivalled Dominic in this noble art. Hedwig was Duchess of Silesia and Great Poland. She often walked during the frost and cold, till she might be traced by the blood dropping from her feet on the ' Xavier ferreis in se flagellia ita smvit, ut saepe copioso cruore difflueret Brev. Rom. G04. Canutus corpus suum jejuniis, ciliciis, et Hagellis castigavit. Brev. Rom. 648. Francisca corpus suum crebris riagellis in scrvitutem redigere iugiter sataee- bat. Brev. Rom. 710. = j o e Regulatus flagellis camem intra aubjectiouem spiritus continebit. Brev. 787. Bernardinus flagellis delicatum corpus affligens. Brev. Rom, 801. Teresia asperrimis flagellis sajpe cruciaret. Aliquando inter spinas volutaret «c Deuni alloqui solita. Ejus corpus usque ad banc diem incorruptum, odorato Iiquore circumfusum, colitur. Brev. Rom. 104,3. - I'saltaria Integra recitabantur. Boileau, c. 7. ^ Se utraque manu affatim diverberasse. Boileau, 185. INTRODUCTION. had by force, t: re„7ve "t T d HnT't,'?- u ?^'^°°'- the torn veins. The DucheL W„l^ ' T^'^'h ^'"""' '""" * but rather rough, .neans of sa„c"Sl Sf'"'-?"/? """""• by the tears which she shed anJ h! tj T' ?"'''*«'"'«"oul she inflicted with a knotted jih. ^ ^' ^^ ""^ ""^ "''"^ Margaret, daughter to the Kin» „f ii cloth and an iron girdle She ,21 """S*"')'' ■"""'e a hair- number of stripes,1>ut n,ade the nuSLt ™ h °'^ ">' "™'" dlnary quantity, which c«ii««l o„ t S.' °" ''<='' ""» extraor- her fleshes horror struektteweeninl "" ""y"'™ "' ""«< f™"' tion still augmenting duri„„ th^h^f '"^""""r ■"' Her devo- whole body -with thf blows^J^ wW ^ ""'"l^. ^h" 'acerated her tho"„lnj%SSri„t™"£„7''wf '' --'-'P"-*" whether fr„n,I tasteTr'ttuml te, ! »^ '° "■" "'S''^^''^ facihtate his intended fla^ ^^^ ^^ked probability excite very pleSi' *>"^''^ ^* ^^^ '^^t in all to allay her pas.sion ^ ^ ^ ^ - "nations, tended, it appears, A nobTen^;4t;^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^--^ and end. person, foi-thi purpose proUlv S '''^.'r^' *1^''"'^«^ her lovely and in this cap^tivLJLVdSV^^ ''^^'"' '^™^^ visit to her sw\un afte? heTa' in bed « tt ';/"' V/ insensible and unkind. A la4 of ^si • . *i"' ^^""^« ^as front and rear to her naked bettv v nT '. '?'?' administered and expelled from hi "apartmrt ^ H ^^''^ ^' ^"^^''^ P^^^ity Bernardin was tempted in^h^t, ' ^^^e-s^ck shepherdess.' ^ «ame means. A Sen of S^f ™ '^■''^/"^ preserved by the and, as soon ts C'Zrld ZTthJT^ ^'^.'' ^''^'^''''■' equivocal language, declared the nh^ . ^/"u ?^^ ^^«"' ^^ ""- nardin, says the % or/ a^cordiL to H "^ ^'' ^"^itation. Ber- y, according to divme suggestion, desired ;Sfc^-^-e.tparW. A„p,,,eO. 2J7. ^ Audilly, 770 " o a"!'",', "*""' 7.^ ^ ' '™'"*'' vibicibus conscribUlavit. Boileau Boii;at'2]rTuiritg::roS Bcapuhs diduxit. Boileauf 218. ' J"^^'^'^'^"^ femoribue, clupibiTs! ac •"'?fT;.'^:^Y?'T>™'* ■^^--i^^^w' 48 INTKODUCTION. I ill the woman to undress.' Flagellators, indeed, on those occasions, generally chose to exhibit in the costume of Adam and Eve, and, by this means, contrived to add indecency to folly.* The lady, accordingly, on the intimation of his will, and misunderstanding his design, immediately complied. But she was soon disagree- ably undeceived. Contrary to her expectations, and probably to her desire, he began to apply his whip, which he used with gieat freedom, till she was tired of his company and civility. This flagellation was not peculiar to men and women. Satan, it seems, enjoyed his own share of the amusement. This, on one occasion, says Tisen and after him Boileau, was bestowed on his infernal majesty by Saint Juliana.' Her sister nuns, on this emergency, heard a dreadful noise in Juliana's apartment. This, on examination, was found to proceed from her conflict with Beelzebub. Her saintship engaged his devilship in 9, pitched battle in her own chamber. But Satan, for once, was overmatched and foiled. The saintess seized the demon in her hands, and thrashed him with all her might. Juliana then threw Belial on the earth, trampled him with her feet, and lacerated him with sarcasms. Satan, if accounts may be credited, has sometimes taken the liberty of whipping saints. Coleta,for in- stance was, according to the Roman Breviary, often compli- mented in this way. Her saintship frequently felt the effects of the infernal lash. But Juliana, for once, repaid Satan with interest for all his former impoliteness and incivility. The sainted heroine, it appears, fought with her tongue as well as witL her fists and feet.* This weapon she had at command, and she embraced the opportunity of treating the Devil to a few specimens of her eloquence. Dunstan, the English saint, showed still greater severity than Juliana. The Devil at one time assumed the form of a bear, and attacked the saint. Satan, in commencing hostilities, gaped and showed his teeth ; but, it appears, could not bite. He contrived, however, to seize Dunstan's pastoral staff" in his paws, and attempted to drag this ensign of office to himself But this, Dunstan was not disposed tamely to resign. He chose rather to retain the weapon, and to use it as an instrument of war against his diabolical assailant. He accordingly applied it to Belial's back with such dexterity and eflfect, that the enemy was soon put to flight. The conqueror, also, like a skilful general, ' Ut se yeatibus nudaret ; nee mulier distulit. Boileau. 216. Sarius, 272. ^ Nudatis corporibus, et omni Btamine spoliatis, palam et in conspectu homi- num se flagellare. Boileau, 222. 3 Tisen, 60. Boileau, 270. * D»monem, quern manibus comprehensum, quanti poterat caedebat. In ter- ram deinde prostratuHi, pedibus obtorcbat, iaccrabat saroasmiB. Boileau, 27 0. Btw. Rom. 700. \ INTRODUCTION. ^^^"^'^r^Zr^^^^^^^^ the routed adve^ar,, continued his miliCfopemtT^^^^^^ three pieces on the vaJqSTevi," ^" ^"^' *^" ^"^^^^^ '^ still zt2z "att rrT:roti;"T^-f'.^^^"^ - ^^ -«^ to put his head tCuT^TZ^^^J' P?!'^-^^^ *^« assurance purpose of tempting ?he saint Bum? ?""'*r'? ^^"' ^^^^ t^« him his nose, which it 8eems\.nT / ' *^^'"'''' ** intrusion cost saintship heated a pal f iTin the T^T 'T^'"'- "^'^ holy rage, seized Beelzebub's noMV?n+K ^''^^ 'l"^ '-actuated with saint then pulled in and itLi •? •! ^^^ ^^'^^^ forceps. Th^ nose gave waj : a^d Satan whn/ ^''!^' P^"^'^ «"t, till the tion, yelled lii a fty andTwrnrnTK^ the comfortable opera- es^ped with the losso^f'hlfolftt;"^;ttn" ^ D^^^^^^^^^^^ the prominence of his farp h^A f,^ i^?" "^"^ i>QyA though if he had been at Sterne's promonT^^ heen nearly a^ large =as tinguished eversince bv the flnT ^P?- "««««' has been'dis- This .story is firavel v toW K n u"^''^^ ^'^ "^^^^ emunctories » historians^ ^ ^ ^°^^ ^^ ^^^«^"' I^^^"lph, and other popish in wSt' tSedXief 0?^"^' ^'^"^^^^^ ^ P---» whips in their hands ardSedfh"^''''^',^^7u™"^^^^«'i ^^th streamed from the wounds A sL ^^ ^l^^.f^^^ks till blood at the annual return of the Lent? «^^»h,t.on is presented assembled at a certTiu place IZTT ^^"l "^ '^" conditions are given to the opemtors ' Thp T T^^'' '"^^^ ^''' ^^e work, alarm bell announcSr^om^^tfofn are extinguished. An tims of superstition aXrie^croffTl, '"T'^f ™"^t. The vic- their unfortunate shSder J^'l^"''. P[^ ^^^f^ng, and flay gedy, but the groans of thl .plf ,^'"^ 'l heard during thetra- cracking of whiles a^d the c an wTf'w' '' T^^'^ ^''^ *'^« very harmoniou5;,at least a very Sfn^^^^^^^^ '^ "^^ a comfortable operation, produdnTof .? °''^''^"''"t. The coriation, continues nearlvnnl?.^ course an agreeable ex- and instrumentarsySinv ofZ''''''T"^^^ ^''^ the vocal These «,Ufu, ^^'tll^'lSt^S^^ .™itM['"o";£,°%t '-'*■ - Su't.iW.„„ite«, „„„.,„„ ,1 ^70. Le Sueur, 4. 157. "^ ^"n^icaneis innotesceret. Ranulph, vi p D '^«,,. K'ffii^f!ewvmw:'w 50 INTRODUCTION. I fi III been recorded bv Baron Grimm with the greatest exactness, from renorts taken on the spot by Condamine and Caatel! These shocking and degrading transactions, countenanced by several of the Roman clergy, were continued for upwards of twenty years in the capital of his Most Christian Majesty. The convulsionaries were Popish fanatics, who pretended to extra- ordinary visitations of the Spirit. During these visitations, the enthusiasts of this school fell into convulsions, or, at their own request, suffered crucifixion or some other punidhment.^ Rachel and Felicit(l, two pupils of the sisterhood, were ac- tresses in the tragedy. These two maniacs suffered crucifixion, for the purpose, they said, of exhibiting a lively image of the Saviour's passion. Each was nailed to a wooden cross through the hands and feet, and remained in this situation for more than three hours. During this time, the sisters slumbered in a beatific ecstacy, uttered abundance of infantile nonsense, and addressed the spectators in lisping accents and all the silly baby- ism of the nursery. The nails at length were drawn ; and the sisters, after their wounds were washed and bandaged, sat down to a repast in the apartment, and pretended that the ope- ration was attended with no pain, but with transporting plea- sure. They both, indeed, had, with wonderful self-command, anppressed all audible indications of torment by groans or murmurs. Visible marks, however, betrayed their inward misery. Their agony, especially at the drawing of the nails, appeared by various contortions, writhings, and other unequiv- ocal tokens of internal distress. A second exhibition consisted in the crucifixion of Fanny and Mary. Condamine, who was a spectator, on the occasion, took his description from life. Fanny suflfered with the great- est heroism. She remained three hours nailed to the cross, and was shifted, during thi. period, into a great variety of postures. But Mary wanted faith or fortitude. She shuddered at the fas- tening of nails, and, in less than an hour, shouted for relief. She was, accordingly, taken from the cross, and carried out of the chamber in a state of insensibility. This tragedy was succeeded by a comedy, Sister Frances announced that God had commanded her on that day to burn the gown off her back, for the spiritual edification of herself and the spectators. Fire, accordingly, was, after a great deal of grimacing, set to her skirts. But her saintship, instead of ex- periencing consolation and delight, screamed with terror and yelled like a fury. Water, therefore, was poured on her petti- Middletou, 3. 100. iidinburgh Kf!iriew fci September, 1814, INTRODUCTION. coats, and her ladvshin hnlf.., ^ j utterly ashamed of the^Sr '^ ^^^ half-drowned, and apartment. ^ exhibition, was carried into another indled'tT vut:L',^: ^r"*^'"-" ^^l^ -nvulsionarian worship tion mi,ht. tonoronTSS"^ ''^"^ ' ''' ^^- "-o^' the scale of rationality "^''^^^^^^ seem not very high in was as hax-monious. a7d the wotthioTti, "^ .'t "^^ ^"«^^"« " a;s in the Fea^t of the Ass, ceSmteV/ ""^^'^'^/^^^onMe Galilean church, at Beauvais in R. ! ' T '°r ^^^' ^^ the this ceremony had. by theTr ' 1 ^r"^^" ^^^ ^"^nds of that an ass was the conveUr V'*^ ''r'"^^<^' discovered they fled foranasylumfromSdintoS'\''^' '^^^^' ^^en therefore, was appointed forXl ^''P*- ^•" '^stitution, anddeliverance/indthesowTf ^'""'"^'''^^'^^ "^ the flight and devotion.' ^ solemnity was ^ pattern of rationality some Zt'rrnlfoltrl^tXf^^^^ ^^'X ^ho.from ish beauty. The girl, bed Lened S & '"'^ ^^^^unted a Jew- ass covered with "a cloth oTl^^^^^ The ass, accompanied with a vf./ n «"Perbly caparisoned, was led from the cathedral L thP n TT ^^ /^^^^gy knd laity The girl, who represented tL moXr .fp'S °^^'- ^^^«P^«»' ass, was conducted in solemn T ■ ^^ .^^'^' ^^^^^ on the Itself, and placed with t^eZn J '"''''''! '""^ ^^^ sanctuary began with^eat pomp anTfht "'^' i''^ ^^^^^- High ma^ shipper on the occS^C tau^LT'iT^",™ ^ ^^^^^^ ™- at certain intervals, vrhire a hynm „' ^ '^ ^^"^^ ^°^'^^' was sung in his pkise. The^^oiv h^ ^^^ ^"""^^.^^^^ Cange.is a model for eleaance «n,S ^.™''' recorded by l>u a translation of four st^S "f fhf ''^°?^°- '^^^ fo^o^'ing is «tyle; though no verstnTan eaua^^^^^^^^ t^' ^^ '^^ ^i^<^««?«n the inimitable original. ^ *^^ subhmity and sense of An5 straw and h^y tooTptmy^^* ^^''' AnS straw and h'ay to/'TptSy'''^'^ ^^««' S^f.>«« '^as bom and br3d ^th Vnr ftcigu ao liiy assy, °S cars ; ' ^" ^^"^g^' 3- 426. Velly. 2. 537. 52 INTRODUCTION. : :' And yet he the Lord of asses appears. Grin, Father Ass, and you shall get ^ass, And straw and hay too in plenty. The Ass excels the hind at a leap, Heigh-ho, my assy, And faster than hound or hare can trot. Bray, Father Ass, and you shall have grass, And straw and hay too in plenty, i The worship concluded with a braying-match between the clergy and laity in honor of the ass. The officiating priest turned to the people, and in a fine treble voice and with great devotion, brayed three times like an ass, whose fair repre.senta- tivehe was ; while the people, imitating his example in thanking God, brayed three times in concert. Shades of Montanus, Southcott, and Swedenborg, hide your diminished heads ! Attempt not to vie with the extravagancy of Romanism. Your wildest ravings, your loudest nonsense,' your most eccentric aberrations have been outrivaJled by an inftillible church. The ridiculousness of the asinine ceremony was equalled, if not surpassed, by the decision of a Roman Synod. His Infalli- bility, Bonifiice the Fourth, presided on the occasion. The acts of the council were published from a manuscript in the Vatican, by Holstenius, and have been inserted in the works of Du Pin and Labbd. The holy Roman Council condemned an opinion, which, it appears, had prevailed in England, f at monks, because dead to the world, are incapable of receivir )rdinati()n or per- forming the sacerdotal or episcopal function... The sacred synod, under the immediate su peri n tendency of his Holiness, proved by the soundest logic, that monks are angels, and therefore proper ministers of the Gospel. The synodal dialectics supply a beautiful specimen of syllogistic reasoning. An angel, in Greek, said his Inftillibility and the learned Fathens, is, in the Latin language, called a messenger. But monks are angels, and therefore monks are messengers. Monks are demonstrated to be angels, by a very simple and satisfactory process. All animals with six wings are angels. But monks have six wings, ' Orientis partibus, Adventavit asinus Pulcher et fortissimus, Sarcinis aptissimus. Hez, Sire Asnes, car chantez, Belle bouche rechignez Vous aurez du foin assez, Et de I'avoine a plantez. Lentus erat pedibus, Nisi foret baculus, Et eum in cluuibus Bun^T'trret icultiiiK ^"z, Sire Asnes, etc. » * • * ' ;ce magnis auribus k'Ubjugalis tilius Asinus egregius Asinorum Dominus, Hez, Sire Asnes, etc. Saltu vincit hinnulos, Damas et capreolos, Super dromedarios, Velox Madianeos. Hes, Sire Asnes, etc. Du Cauge, ,3. 426, 427. ween the ng priest ^ith great presenta- thanking lontanus, heads ! t). Your eccentric ;h. ualled, if is Infalli- The acts Vatican, ■ Du Pin opinion, , because n or per- ;d synod, !, proved therefore s supply ingei, in s, in the gels, and irated to ^s. All X wings, 7. INTRODUCTION. ^o oo and therefore monks are anafk tk^ • ^ , . ll eviaced in a most ZLCf:raIn!rTLJ\V^^''^'"' the arras two and tha A^+r.^^-^- "^f""^^- ^^e cowl forms two have six wT„d eo'^aueSlv"" ""^'i ^°^^' "'"^f"™ demonstrated' The'annalS?,^*- ? ''"S''?' "''''"'> ™ <» be whole range of PritesS Cl^ltrdom aZd 'f'' ""•".'«'> "-e reason, JtheirsuSnTt *" ''°«™'^"' »f forgery. The and illogical argu3t ? iTei hr''"'\ ^"'"'"y- barbarism! with BSman cZoils are r»rt» ''v'°5''"''""'^')>'^i»ted Sense, found in an ancS rvnodJ' "T'' "' "' genuineness. great way U, prove its ™;p„sTtS LS:""S*' ,7™',^. «» ," lection of councils if fha r.^v "''^"^^^^ss- -i ne unwieldy col- a great measure %1'tr^rtle'''''' """'r'"'''' """"«, in and unmeanin.. bS "^ tI^ ^^ ™r- and presmt a wide vt,Sstt-iS^^ ism. Poperv, i« the Wutl „f ' ' '^ "°™"y »' Protestant- of antiqu^ty^' but ProtsS,, ' heluZah!? Re? ^^.^'"^ Ihe one oriOTnated wifh fi.„ .c ;. il V, ^"^ JKetormation, the other w^ tuth" ^d ^1^^^^^^ ^-^^^^ of the Gospel ; but Su^'S'is3 j^S::^r-*' ^^ "!] ^"*-- «f *-^h. remotest period of fj Tn the'd f I'"' '"^ .^^g^^^t^d in the antediluvian world Ind-?n IS- ^ ^'' ^""-^ Profanity of the dent to Italian Popery crrisda^^^^^ ^-^^'^^ed long^vntece- and Paganism, and^h^Chrtkn"^^^^^^^^ J"^-«™ Roman mythology itveiation by the Grecian and be'f kn^lfeSi,^-r -us, it is g.nted, have the Christian Chirch l^s eis^ed fv ^'?J^ Promulgation; and the Christian era. The Gositr w^^^ ^he commencement, of planted by their Divine A u t or ^^^,f ««'^"»«d and a church tinned, or son. timeL^:il7^-™n:;;:^^^^^^ couuitur alas .iuas. Naceniotal./a ""i<,if,T^ " ''"■''• "'^^™"8 ; et ilhid (uio corniis tur. Labb. 6. 1358. Be.la; 7,8 ' *"' '""?.",t\?*^"« -"™i" ^eli voSn A^u iin, J. ,. Bruy. 1. 4lo. -an I jjif'i'jij.'.ww'iff U piftBP 54 INTRODUCTION. muddy influx of human folly and superstition. The friends of Protestantism, therefore, should be prepared to show that their religion is no novelty ; but existed from the origination of Chris- tianity, and before the Papacy or the Reformation. Protestantism comprises three things. These are the Name, the Faith, and the Church, or, in other terms, the Appellation, the Profession, and the People. The name, all admit, is, in this acceptation, a novelty, which originated in the sixteenth century and as late as the days of Luther. The patrons of the Reformation in Germany protested, in 1529, against the unjust decision of the Diet of Spires, and, in consequence, were called Protestants.^ An old institutioTi, therefore, came to be distin- guished by a new appellation. Protestantism, in its modern and ecclesiastical application, began to signify Christianity. But changing a sign does not change the signification. Britain, according to the ancient appellation, is now called England, without any change in the territory. The ancients called that Hibemia which the moderns call Ireland. France was formerly named Gaul, and Columbia lately Terra Firma ; whilst these divisions of the European and American continents, notwithstanding their new designations, remain the same. Boniface the Third was not transubstantiated into another man, when, according to Baronius, he assumed the new appellation of Universal Bishop. The modern Popes, on their elevation to the papal chair, change their names ; but, as all confess, retain their identity. Catholicism, according to the primitive designa- tion, began in this manner to be denominated Protestantism, for the purpose of distinguishing the simplicity of Christianity from the superstition of Romanism. But the name, in itself, is unimportant. The sign is nothing compared with the signification. The antiquity of the Protest- ant Faith is easily shown. The theology of the Reformed is found in the Bible, in the fathers, in the primitive creeds, and in the early councils. Protestantism is contained in the word of God. The sacred volume is the great repository of the Re- formed faith. The religion, therefore, which is written with sun-beams in the New Testament, the earliest monument of Christianity, the great treasury of revealed truth, cannot with any propriety be denominated a novelty. The trutlis of Revelation and the theology of Protestantism are contained in tlie early Fathers. These authors indeed, ac- cording to the usual reckoning, include a vast range. The ec- clesiastical writers, from Clemens to Bernard, from the Bishop Alex. 4. 566. Mageog. 2 243. INTRODUCTION. g^ of Eome to the MonW nf n}^'^ eleven hundred years haJl ul^f''''' «?«^P™ing a period of works, immediatdv nftprfi, ^" denominated Father^ TK^ir fectedwitrpoper? 1^ htV^""' '\^'''-' ^^^'^ '^ - -' age, added to thegatherinVlT '?^ ^''^*'°'' ^^ «««^ foUowing mulated. The hlth and Ld of R '"'°^- ^^Pfstition accu^ system of delusion, or, " th^Man of Tn' ' •'"" nf-'1-^' *"^ '^' was completed. The post mt^Zl .u ' '",^" ^'' dimensions, safety and without reS be onn • ^'^'i'?' *^^"^°^^' ^^^^ ^^h or rot with the lumbTand L^^^^^^^^^^^ '^ *^^ ^/*i-«' ^ rust But the ante-Nicene F^ihtJ f--^-. ^ **^.*^usand years, in all its grand dSf^raS^^^^^^ These, too, it must be observed -o.!^ ^' promment traits, and, therefore, display no unlrl? ! ""^"jPired and fallible, things contained in ?heir worK "^ '^^^t^'^ °^ ^'''^^- ^any ish and Reformed, sS as the Mm '^^^"^.1^ ^'^^ by theRom- the Lord's Supper' to7„?aVts a^ tr'"'^' '-^^^^^i^^^tion of of souls from d'eath till tL r^LdL tI™''"'^ '^P^^^*^^>^ ranee of the Fathers havp bl!!, f ; 7^® ^^^^^^ ^-^d igno- Du Pin, the frienrof Roism tT ^^^^^^ ^y Erasmuslnd says Erasmus, such as OriZ r?-i n ''''''''^''^ commentators, Chrysostom, Jerome Vn f A '- ^''^^^"•^' ^thanasius, Cyril failings, ign^raSr. ' re fli"^"'^T' >^^« "^^^ subject to Pin mitkef a similar con'es^tP sf "^"'''^'^^^ '"^ ^^^^^«' ^u Doctor, were frequent r the first ^"-^rs, says the Parisian rejected. The ancients hi I . ^^^.' ^^""^ ^^^^ since been cumstantiaJs thr4 heva^arr^l'' ™'^ ^". *^™« ^^^ i» ^i^- however, of the ant-NfLe^SV'' Tl^'''^'' ^^' ^^^^^s, distinguished by tLir^^en^^^^^^^ ^^^^ been confessions of Irenrus^OrSen TT^ir''' Chnstendom. The and Lucian, as well aftLTofTeVS^^^^^^^^ ?regory, which still remain thn„o4, J i ' ^^"deia,and Ant och, All these agree in suScewffll'r"' T '^"^"^ ^^^^^^ox diately after the Reformati;.n I ^^/=°"f*^«t"' ^^^^^^ ^"^"^e- Proteiants to the prertX"' "^ '^ ''^" ^^""^^^ The doctrinal definitions of the first six general councils, 5. 'm'^Du Ix Y'S''^" '^"°^^^-*' - --ullis hallucinati sunt. Eraam. .56 INTRODUCTION. which were held at Nice, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Constanti- nople, have been adopted into the Reformed theology. The Nicene and Byzantine councils declared the divinity of the Son and Spirit, in opposition to Arianism and Macedonianism. The Ephesian, Chalcedonian, and Byzantine synods taught the unity of the Son's person and the duality of His nature and will, in contradistinction to Nestorianism, Eutychianism, and Monothe- litism. AU these promulgated the piinciples of Protestantism, and are lasting monuments of its antiquity. A })erson being asked where Protestantism was before the Reformation, replied by asking in turn, where the inquirer's face wa.s that morning before it was washed. The reply was just. Dirt could constitute no part of the human countenance ; and washing, which would remove the filth, could neither change the lineaments of the human visage nor destroy its identity. The features by the cleansing application, instead of alteration, would only resume their natural appearance. The superstition of Romanism, in like manner, formed no part of Christianity ; and the Reformation, which expunged the filth of adulteration, neither new modelled the form, nor curtailed the substance of the native and genuine system. The pollutiois of many ages, indeed, were dismissed; but the primitive con- stitution remained. The heterogeneous and foreign accretions, which might be confounded but not amalgamated with the pri- mary elements, were exploded ; and deformity and misrepre- sentation gave place to simplicity and truth. Popeiy may be compared to a field of wheat overrun with weeds. The weeds, in this case, are only obnoxious intruders which injure the useful gi-ain. The wheat may remain and advance to maturity with accelerated vegetation, when the weeds, which impede its growth, ai-e eradicated. The super- stition of Romanism, in the same manner, like an exotic and ruining weed, defoimed the Gospel and counteracted its utility. The Reformers, therefore, zealous for the iionor of religion and truth, and actuated with the love of God and man, proceeded with skill and resolution, to separate Popish inventions from divine revelation, and exhibited the latter to the admiring world in all its striking attraction and symmetry. But nothing, perhaps, presents a more striking image of Po])ery than a person laboring under a dreadful disorder; while the same person, restored to vigorous health, will afford a lively emblem of Protestantism. The malady, let it be sup- posed, has deranged the whole animal economy. Appetite and strength fail, and are succeeded by languor and debility. The disease, which works within, appears in all its disgusting ettects I ••'r"-"^ INTRODUCTION. -^ ^^o:':tiTZi^^^^^^^^ e.ae^tion paleness, swelling, quence, exhibits amassof deforni,-Hr%u^''^^^'"^°'^' ^° ^'^n^^" affords a striking picture Tvo^X The Patient, in thisstate. mean time, exerts his professional rkilJA.'' Z?^^''^'^''' '"^ ^^^ arrest the progress of disease and rf .^l^T^ applications whole human%ystem C;v nfof r^*' the functions of the puration,and pL SremoveKv n^''"""'''-'^'''''"^'"^ ^"P" the lancet, regimen. Seine and ""^P''^""^ application of reviving stream^beginrtoC with it's ,?'",'• 7^.^ ^ood, in pulse, in healthy movements Z hit '^' "^V^^ velocity, and the larity. Debility and "ecav liv. \ '''^\ '^' ^^^ustomed regu- beauty. The healthy sSt^n thi '^^ ^' ''^"^' ^^•^«'"' ^^^ of Protestantism ; and S rV fnvvn ^^^' F''^'^""^^ ^ Portrait physician. Religion by their sST! "'?^ '^' Part^f the the adventitious IndaccumuLldf '^^Ji!^."^' ^as divested of years, and restored trftsnativt n,''-r^.^'^'""' "^^^ <^^«^^«^^d invigorated with strength an 1 ado™"M"f''^^"^ ^^ health, however, does not, on tlie Xn of irellTh ) ^''"'^- ^r*^«"<^' son or lose his identity: neither dopVp)--'^'''"^ ^"°*^^^'' P^r- to its original state, /han^T ts n "fnf " k''"'"'^' ^^^" ^^^"^^d The faithful existedT/^t ^ '^^*'''"*^^^''^^^^y• faith ; and the people 1; w^^^^ f™^'^« -«" -« the unconnected wi h the Rom? h anH t-P^'r^'^'f " ^^'^ ^^"^^^^^s abonunations of PoperyTr tof^f "'J^'^.^^^Sfhe most obnoxious truths, the principles of Sw^' ''' ""^K^^"' ^^^"^ ^^^^ing times, numerousind AouhS^^^^^^ '^'^ P""^i^'>e the Greeks, the Nelrkn th? M T "^"'^ **^^ Waldensians. and the Syrians. ''°' '''"'' *'^^ Monophysites, the Armenians. denT'ntr^TLTaCs^J^ '^^« the theatre of Wal- various appellation's But tht' .^^^.^^"V^^^re distinguished by were Waifensiarm. A^hiUiaTi^^lP::^^-^'- however, though called bf sever iln"^^ ^hese. origin and one common faith iZf vi? f^ ^'"^ ^"^ ^^^^^^O" . Albigensianism, inTed H^^^^^^^^ "^ Protestantism. ^«m and Arianism Calumnv oZ^^l!'- 'm"''1 "* Manichean- mon from the Popis^i Z f,f 1, "' ^''''^ ^'''' ^^^^^ ^^^Y com- persecuted denomiSn'of ChnS ^^- unfounded, and has been refuted bv pf 1.' ^^iputation is Peyran, and Mnreri Moreri 7h .„ T ^f '■^^"' ^^snage, Usher, has vindicated the Albi^ers • n ?, ■ ^ - -^^ Romanism generosity and eHect' ^TmJ ") ^"^°^^^ *'"^^ ^'^^^ slander with ect. Ihis charge, according to Moreri, may '.Moreri, 1. 234. .58 INTRODUCTION. ii I be refuted from the silence of original records; the admission of Popish historians ; and the testimony of Albigensian confessions. The original monuments, such as the Chronicle of Tolosa, the testimony of Bernard, Guido, and the Councils of Tours and Lavaur, m 1163 and 1213, contain no trace of this allegation. The Tolosan Chronicle contains an account of the processes against the Albigensians signed by the Inquisitors, and, in many instances, by the Bishops; but no mention is made of Albigensian Manicheanism or of Arianism. A similar silence is preserved by Bernard and Guido, a.s well as by the synods of Tolosa, Tours, and Lavaur, that brought several accusations against this people.' The same appears from Popish admissions. The Albigen- sians, according to ^neas Sylvius, Alexander, and Thuanus, were a branch of the Waldensians, who, all admit, were un- tainted with the Manichean or Arian heresy .^ The Albigensians, says Alexander, ' did not err on the Trinity,' and, therefore, were not Arians.^ Bruys, Henry, Osca, and Arnold, who were the chiefsof this denomination, were neveraccused of these errors. Moreri, on this subject, quotes the admissions of Mabillon, Tillet, Serrus, Vignier, Guaguin, and Marca, in vindication of these injured people.^ All these testify that the Albigensians differ little in doctrine from the Waldensians and the Reformed, who, all confess, were free from Arianism. This calumny is repelled by the Albigensian Confessions. Several of these remain. One is preserved in Leger. The Treatise on Antichrist, written in 1120 before the days of Waldo, contains an outline of the Albigensian theology. Gra- verol also possessed an ancient manuscrint, which detailed the persecutions of the Inquisition against c he professors of Albi- gensianism. The Confession of Osca, who belonged to this denomination, is still extant, and contains an outline of Protes- tantism. The Albigensians, who were accused before the coun- cil of Lombez, made, in the synod, a public profession of their faith. All these records reject the Manichean and Arian errors, and include, in the essentials, the faith of the Reformation. The accused, at Lombez, professed their belief in one God in 1 Bened. 14. Labb. 12. 1284. et 13. 841. Du Pin, 2, 32. 2 Ab ecclesia Catholica recedentes, impiam Waldensium sectam atque insanam o^^o^o' b"*" '^'^- ^y^^- °- ^^- Albigenses Waldensium esse progeniem. Alex. M 268. Pauperes Lugdunenses, Albigei dicti aunt. Thuan. 1.222. Du Pin, 1, a Non hi circa Trinitatis fidem erraverint. Alexan. 20. 269. Mabil, .3. 456. * lis etoient daus les mfimes seiitimens que les Reformez. Leura sentimens ■ ^toient les mfimes que ceux, qui ont ^t^ renouvellez par Wiclef et par Luther. Moreri, 1. 235. lis n'y avoient pas grande difiference dfi doctrine entre Its Albicenis et V.".v.= dois. Vignier, 3. 233. ^ INTRODUCTION. three persons, the Father Son ar^A Qr.,- •* 59 and therefore dis- A {ew~Mrr^iol7 "" ""T f ^ ^anicheanism.> • against the^RifL'n^^^^^^^^ --pi-d founded by the Inquisitor. tT. consequence, were con- ascribed the error of he one tl fb '7."''^ r""^"^^' ^^^^^^^^^^ during the hottest perlut?o„s of th'^^ aTk" ^''^"'•^"^i"^ ™te distinguished from the M«nS!. ^^^^Jbigensians, whom he Dominican persecutor and wrote in ff t"^;^"^^' .^"^^« ^-'^ ^ The antiquity of the wJw ^^ ^.^^"'^^ Chronicle/' nerus the Dominican '«+>!• 7»^densianism, says Rai- accordingtormeTom thftLTorS^^^^ ^"^^= ""^ ^^^«^^d' others, from the 4ys of the apo£i''t^^ testimony of an Inquisitor in tbS? 7 .i.^^"^ is the reluctant thatWa|e«^^^^^^^ Hegrants dat?d^hltr ™^/:J, it dT .'^4 ^'"^^ ^^--ler, munion from the pL^^crof Si vest^T "Lo' ''b' ^r ^«\Com-' the reign of Constan ine they rec^ard ^s .i^,^.^'^^^ Nourished in ism, at this period ceased to h^ol '?,^^^er founder. Roman- tants of the valleys left fb^n ^%^^"«tiamty, and the inhabi- shepherds lived for a lon^ln f^ communion. These simple cesses of the AlpTne retfeS^n ^^^^^^^ and error. ^ ^'^^^'' °PP^«*^d to Popish superstition They ifad wlZ;^jfiTol°^'''^T^'''^''f(^^"'>t^«'>om. their extirpation "nstanaing tlio Papal exertions for This .eet,,ay, Nangis, .ere infinite in number , appeared, mmmmmmmm 60 INTRODUCTION. says RaineruH, m nearly every country; multiplied, says San- derus, through all lands; infected, says Cfesarius, a thousand cities, and spread their contagion, says Ciaconius, through al- , most the.whole Latin world. Scarcely any region, says Gret- zer, remained free and untainted from this pestilence ^ The Waldensians, says Popliner, spread, not only through France but also through nearly all the European coasts, and appeared m Gaul, Spain, England, Scotland, Italy, Germany, Bohemia Saxony, Poland, and Lithuania.^ Matthew Paris represents this people as spread through Bulgaria, Croatia, Dalmatia. Spain, and Germany. Their number, according to Benedict was prodigious in France, England, Piedmont, Sicily, Calabria,' foJand Bohemia, Saxony, Pomerania, Germany, Livonia, Sar- matia, Constantinople, Philadelphia, and Bulgaria » Thuanus and Moreri represent the Waldensians as dispersed through Germany, Poland, Livonia, Italy, Apulia, Calabria, and Provence.* Persecuted by the Inquisition, this simple people fled into Eng and, Switzerland, Germany, France, Bohemia, I'oland, and Piedmont, and became, says Newburg like the sand of the sea, without number in Gaul, Spain, Italy, and Germany.^ '' ^^T^h^ Diocese of Passau, it was computed, contained forty Waldensian schools and eighty thousand Waldensian poi)ula- tion." 1 he Albigensian errors, accoj-ding to Daniel, infected all Languedoc and corrupted the nobility and the populace.^ The Komish temples, according to Bernard, were left without people the people without pastors, and the pastors without respect.« Ihe number of the Albigensians appears from the army which 1 Inlinitus erat numerus. Nangis, An. 1207. Dacherv. .3. 22 b ere enim nulla est terra, in qua ha;c secta non sit. Rain. c. 4. Per omne. Srar" V f /'' T^rS ''""/T"'' ^"- I"^^'^^™"* "^V^'^'^d mille Stes Ccssar. V . 21. lotum fere Latinum orbeni infecisse. Ciacon. 525 Vix aiiqua regio, ab hac peste, immunis et intacta, remansit. Gretz. c. 1. Poplin h 7" ' ^^^^"^ '^'^ ^*'^'" P^"" "°^^' P^°« Europe oras. Alhi!^"n?"'^' '°.,^'"^".« Bulgaronnn, Croati.-K, et Dalmatian. M. Paris, 306. Albigenses in partibus Hispanu-e et illis regionibus invaluerunt. M. Paris 381 e laT^rr'T^Aif*"'^''"''"^"'.'^" P'*^"'""*' ^l*"^!'* ^'^i"!^. laCalabre, p'ouUle et la Hoheme. L Allemagne, (jui n en etoit pas moi.is remplie Bened. 2. 243-248 ..J T-"" ^^"""'"'^ni «t barinatiani, et inde in Livoniam' usque ad extremum consPd r"l>""*r"""'«'"*P*' -^^^ ^" ^'^l'*^'" P'-o^'^'^t^ i" Apulia etCalXS XX Vn S V 1 '^?)?"1^V" F'^^'^T'^ ""^f^ lo"s incultis et asperi.latuit. Thuan. AAVU. 8. VI. 16. lis sen retira un bon nombre en Andeterre en Boheme en Pologne, et dans les valleies de Piemont. Moreri 84/'^'*^"^^' ^"^ ^olxi^me, h^clltZTf- ^'*"'r' "i^P^iif • It'^l'f. Oermania;que provinciis turn multi hac peste intecti esse dicuntur, ut secundum prophetam, niultiplicati esse suuer numerum arena^ videantur. Labb. 13. 284. Newburg ^/''J'gP^'^^^'e^^^'^^Per J Lomputatfe sunt scholse in diocresi Passaviensi. 40 Rain c' 3 .IP Nnw!"""'"" ^^'°T- •"^'^«t«tout ^^ Languedoc, et autani corrompu reanrit de Noblesse, que celui du peuple. Daniel, 3, 510. ^ SHIP plebe, plebessine sacerdote. iieruard. Ep. 240. ' B-a-^ilica^ INTRODUCTION. ^, warriors who. under the holy banne^^^^ ofT'' ''"* ^^^'"^« combat the heretics of Lan^ueic W^l^i • T'"' """^^^ *<> according to his partial relaC withstood foT" ^'^^\'^' ^^«" years, the vigilance of Pontiffs th^ntf ^u-T"" ^'^'^ ^"^^^^«d monarchs, and the magnanS'tv 'f w^ '^ ^^^' "^ church in the west, as^nuch at theTnfiTP '• ""it ^"^"''^^ *^>« heterodox army of the Alb^^^t adds th^ H-^'^""' ?^' nearly on one occasion, overwhein edth. t i historian, had cross. Any other hero buT itntfort if B^^^r r'"' ""^ '^' believed, would have desnairpH nf ' Benedict may be conquests. The chrrcKu XposT^^^^^ '^'".'^""^ ^"^ tears, and groans ; while the AlCns ans in ^™ "'^l^ P'^^^'"^' cipation. hoped to establish her s^^o^ r^ubs of R^^""' ^^"*^- Waldensian sm was in anfipuif; of Romanism. Protestantism, ma^a^es before ^hpR ^f "^''T "^ '^' P"r««<^ fullest sense, has, withthe utmost 'iT^'"^- , ^^''> ^^ ^^^ by many cotemporarv aL r.!.« ?? ^^""^i! >^^ ^^^"^^l^dged attached"^ to RomaS The on ?"^. historians who were with the ReformTfS m-w be "h '''"i*^ "^^^^ Waldensian and admissions, Jr^l'^wlltt:^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ Bohemi^r,e^tedr~^~-^^ ,}^^^:^tl-^-!;;^'^^ ^ «. ^2s- 100, 214. «ylv. c. 35 Non esse obeS *J"po US^ ""g-'- - e' non extare Furgatorium; sanctos non attendfrp^r .= Iiululgentias nihil valere: indicta non esse servanda et alia. Rtavu"''2-?5T'uHf ?'*"'= ^'''^ ^' J«J"'»a centre ses c,5r,5moDies, centre ses dogmas ir«tn;;n.'^'[*'?'*'°**=°'i^'-«l'4li8e, Is disent que le purgatoire est une faWe o, . U "* '^ hi^rarchie en derision Illusion que I'invocation des sa nts au ' hLu ^f T P"'''" ^^^ '""rts est une blesse, Gaufnd.2. 458. lis rejettStTe cdte Jp'^ ' ^•^"'•%™ages est une foi des cBuvres les induJgenees, les tSLLp, If '"'T'' ^^ Purgatoire, m^rite le c61.bat des pr^tres Mo^ri 1 23^ Fp,^' Z'""' ^ '"^"catio" des saints, et etncem esse; monasticamvitameccisi^sen^^^^^^^^ vota: ignem purgatorium, solemnesSrVr-^ ^"^ ^^»*""'»mes8e: vanaillius rum, ac pro mortuis propitiatSm sX'iTf °™'" "'''''''^' ""1*"^ «ancto- Auncularem confessionem pr^rsus tolhS n T"** ^"'«- ^huan. 1. 221 ecclesia. Indulgeutias contCnZt TW ?°f"* imagines esse toUendas ali transubstantiatiouetlPpurgaTre dis?ntT^^^^ ^^"''' '^^^- IJ«nioyent]a ne servent de rien aux L^l.l.H' x?t"*1.^''^ ^'^^ pn^res et suffrages des viv«.ns m^t '/!;^'P"sant toutes lesTradit'ions 'de l'p!ill«^"^''"'''' ^"''""'^ autoritd au f^tea et des Jeunes. eoname au«si 5e I'^xl^f rcul'^TSiofa^^S"'^ '^^ ' 62 INTRO::UCTION. Swif^ confession extreme unction, invocation of saints praver for the dead, and the use of oil and chrism in bapt sm ^piJ vius represents the Christians of the vaUeys as oTposTd to the' samt-invocation. The Waldensians, says Gaufridus in his his ory of Provence disseminated their poison till the orSn of T.utheranism. and derided the Romish hierarchy, dogmas rHuV^^ purjatory, samt-in vocation, image-worship, and pmyeT'for he dead Serrus and Marca, quoted by Moreri rneiS h1 W i densmnrejectionofthesupVLacy.trLfuSSon;^ nduJgences, px]grm,ages, festivals, tradition, imaie"wor^S id S5 ^^tt^'t' intercession of saints merif of 3 and celibacy of the clergy Thuanus details their disclaTS of the Romish church, pontiff, festivals, mass, monkery PuZ^ tory, worship of samts, and prayer for the dead : and More fnd Sog,f "" a similar statement on the subject of WaldeLian The following is an outline of Alexander's impartial state ment which he learned So, .nnist supports by tre tTs imony tfv^^T^YT:^'''^. R^^^^rus,Seysel, Bernard, PilchdS and Ebrardus de Bethunia. • The text of the Sacred Scriptures' 1. to be i^eceived in opposition to traditions and commente The Pope IS the head of all errors. The sacraments are onlv two. Baptism and the Lord's Supper Banttm T« n.f k ^ utely necessary for salvation. EubstTt^LZn^^l^ r.' poral pi-esence is unscriptural. Penance, matrimony conkrma tion, extreme unction, and holy orders ai^e no sacranfents The" church erred,'when it enjoined the celibacy of the clergy ^s sensations, indulgences, relics, canonizations, vigils, fastf festt vaJs, purgatory, altars, consecrations, incensing prfce^s^^^^^^^ exorcisms, holy water, sacerdotal vestments, annSil^confesS' r W ^^'^-^'^''T^'".^ ^""^^' and saint-invocaW all S the Waldensians despised and rejected. Remission of sin is Tbp W u l"?"". ^^''^ ^^^''^^^f ^« not to be worshipped The Waldensians had just thoughts of God and Jesus and himfrV" ^Ir^^^'Z opinion,''were Trinitarkns. Sneru^ ArTan sm n ^T "^ '}' blasphemy of Manicheanis m ami siHon nn ^^'"'*^^/ Pf t«r« are to be ordained by the impo tte neoni'^ ri ^"^ ^.ld^'\besides, should be chosen to govern the people.^ Ihe Parisian doctor's portrait of Waldensrinism presents a picture of Protestantism tkken from life. sacramentase crSenSn"*; te„!!*r'J'"'",«r'-?r"m caput. Duo tantuin '" '•'^.•■<^p'..r,maiiici,cucaanstiani. Baptismum, ipsos INTRODUCTION. ■LUIS approbation of th, w^H "* """w confonnlH, j / '"'*• ment of th" Rofi ° !^'''''<""'»n confession „t^.V ""'' ^""^'''s According Joaufrtr^'^h V T^ ""S'"- - th^aS?'' the learn nff di<^ini^ \ \'^^ Lutherans anf] (\.)- ■.^^^^^^- "jans, and fonTuTt rtc'r'' ""^ "-^fc'y'Tr'' cation XeireifT P/''*°m"o <^7/^»™».'? 13«4. Tl,i, dinand Th;« .fi u .-^'^^emian nobilif v ^-; .1 ^^ documents, oant. Ecclesiam errasspri?^^ ''*"'• Matrinioninrr. *• ^oenitentiam Jr t^m unctionis extrem , J-'- ^*"*' *=»« calibSm,^' «a9'-amentum esse n^/. 64 INTRODUCTION. Melancthon.' CEcolompadius, Beza, and Bullinger, also recog- nised these people, though despised and pei-secuted, as a consti- tuent part of the great Christian Commonwealth. The Luther- ans and Zuinglians, in this manner, acknowledged the Walden- sians as Christians, and their faith as the truth of the Gospel. The Waldensians also published a Confession in the reign of Francis the First. This, in 1544!, was followed by another, which, in lo51, was transmitted to the French King and re.-id in the Parisian Parliament. All these are in strict harmony with Reformed Theology ; and all breathe the spirit and teach the truths of Christianity.* This same people, as late as in 1819, in a confession found among the manuscripts of Peyran, declared their adherence to the doctrines of the churches of England, Netherlands, Germany, Prussia, Switzerland, Polmd, and Hungary ; and entreated these communions and others settled in America, to regard them, though few and destitute, as members of the same ecclesiastical body. The sanctity of Waldensian morality corresponded with the purity of the Waldensian faith. Tiie piety, benevolence, inno- cence, and holiness of this people have challenged the esteem and extorted the approbation of friend and foe, of the protestant, the papist, and even the inquisitor. Many partisans of popery have concurred with the patrons jf protestantism in thcii- eulogy. The following character of this people is taken from Rainems, Seysel, Lewis, Hagec, Alexander, Labbd, Gjiufrid, and Thuanus. Rainerus, quoted by Alexander, ' admits their show of piety and integrity before men.' This is pretty well for a Dominican inquisitor, who discovered, howeviu-, that Waldensian piety was mere dissimulation. But Rainerus also acknowledges ' their sobriety, modesty, chastity, and temperance, with their aversion to taverns, balls, vanity, anger, scurrility, detraction, levity, swearing, and falsehood. He grants their attention, men ' Quod nunc, quoque, Calvinistre nostri faciunt. Alex. 17. 375. Lutherus banc Valdensium Boliemorum Confessionem approbavit. Alex. 17. Henericiens et Vaudois tenoient ii peu pr^s les mftmes dogmes que lea Calvinis- tes. Mezeray, 2. 577. Les Lutb^riens et les Calvinistes commenc6rent h, louer leurmanierede vivre ; leur ddsint^ressement, leurs lumiores. On commenfa 4 les consulter comme des oracles sur les points de la religion. Gaufrid. 2. 458. Leur doctrine 3st confonne k celle des R^formez, dans les principaux articles. Moreri, 8, 48. Tillet croit qu'ils 6toient dans les mfimes sentimens que les R^formez. Serres declare que leurs sentimens ^toient les nidmes que ceux qui ont ^t^ renouvellez par Wiclif et par Luther. Moreri, 1. 235. Evenswyn dit que les Albigeois ^toient dans les memes sentimens que les R^formez. Marca parle des Albigeois k peu pres de la memelmaniere que les R^formez. Moreri, 1. 235. Praifatus efet honorifiee Lutheriia. Alev 17 dnii snR =< D\i Pin, 3. 250. Thuan. 2. 82. Benedict, 26a INTRODUCTION. •their superiority, both to Of an/f'^v '^^ «^««rted who wore professe.-.s of CathSm" W ^'' ot^or .subjects, siniplicfcy of habits and theirXw Tni^f ".*'^''. '^^'"'^^ '*hei; evor. his penetration enabled h m ovll^ • ^'. "''^"^' ^^'^^. ^ow- •niscreancy.' His eyes must h u-« b '"^'^^ *^ ^'««'^^«»- ' their m.screancy throu/suc dLtincuishaT ^^^..^^^^r to discern Alexander portrays Hheir 22? on IT'^^I^^^^ ^"^ Pi«ty. live, ,f possible, in peace with ffi nen ..n l wu^""" ""^°^i«'^' *« avoid revenge, judicial litigatt n 1<1 3 "it ^" ™' *^™^ ^"^ company of the wicked.' Alexander nl ^^^.^^^Id. and the densians from the calumny of Ebrard 7''^'"^*^^ *^« ^al- accused them of avarice, Wdness all^ ?"'■""' ^^« ^^d like Rainerus and Hagec. allows the wTJ i "^^^^^^ity. Labb^, show of p ety.' The Tp^,;/ T ^aWensians ' a pretendorl -d th 'ii/^^.J^-^J-uit of co^^^^^^^ Cmufridusmentions ' their industrvwhlf ^''''™'' ^^ ^^^^^ts. cultivated the lands and SelJth;'''\'"P'r^"^'^°"«r. rhuanus records 'their detesSn nf ."^^lonal revenue.' ■scurrdity, litigation, sedition itonv I ^T'^' ^^P'-^^ations, divination, sacrilege, theft and 3' '"''rr'^^^^^' ^^"'"edom chastity, which they accounto^ o f^" i ^^ mentions their vation of manners. tirC^ti l^f le" ^ 'T^' '^^^^ -^^^- ^n wntmg. and their skill in French "^ a l '' ^''f',' e^Pertness found among them but if mw- " ^ ^""^ ''^"^d scarcely be -th j^adiness. give^^l^ 7^^ -th' ti^f'T '''''' ^th the utmost punctualitv nmi •/ ^^ribute. they paid -.1 wa, the, ,i4arg:ft'4' £ l^S^fnlf ^S"^ vamtates. Ab ira se^ cohibett fc "'^'^ ^""*- °«° ^ cCeaHec J!f,**' levitate, mendapin of ; "'"®"'^- t^avent a scurriUtatP ,io+.„ i- ^ *"aa 66 INTRODUCTION. The Waldensians, notwithstanding the sanguinary persecu- tions of Romanism, still exist, and still are persecuted in their native valleys. A population of twenty thousand always remain, and exhibit, to an admiring world, all the grandeur of truth and all the beauty of holiness. Their relics stiil show what they have been, and they continue unaltered amid the revolution of ages. The world has changed around this sacred society ; while its principles and practice, through all the vicissitudes of time, live immutably the same. The Waldeosian church, though despised by the Roman hierarchy, illuminated, in this manner, the dark ages ; and appears, in a more enlightened period, the clearest drop in the ocean of truth, and shines the brightest constellation in the firmament of holiness ; sparkles the richest gem in the diadem of Immanuel, and blooms the fairest flower in the garden of God. Romanism, renounced, in this manner, in the West by the Waldenses, was opposed in the East by the Greeks, Nestoriaus, Jacobites, Armenians, and Syrians, The Greeks occupy European Turkey and the Mediterranean Islands; and are dispersed, though in fewer numbers, through Mesopotamia, Syria, Cilicia, Palestine, Georgia and Mingrelia. The religion , of the Greek Church is also the religion of European and Asiatic Russia, comprehending a territory more extensive than the empire of Alexander or Tamerlane. The Greeks, as they possess an extensive country, comprehend a numerous people. The patriarch of Constantinople, says Allatius, quoted by Thomassin, governed, in the eleventh century, sixty-five Metro- politans and more than six hundred bishops.^ The Greeks, indeed, agree not with modern Protestants in all things. Some of the Orientals had drunk more and some less from the muddy fountain of human invention, according to the period of their connexion with the Romish communion. The Greeks continued longest in conjunction with the Latins ; and, in consequence, have imbibed most corruption. The assimi- lation indeed between the Greek and Latin communions is, in many points, close : d striking. The Greeks, however, concur to a man in opposing Papal usurpation and tyranny ; in denying that the Romish is the true church; and in condemning the dogmas of Popinarum frequentationem prohibebant. Alex. 17. 389. Prcetenta specie -• pietatis. Labbeus, 13. 285. lis s'appliquerent ii cultiver la terre avec tant d'industrie, que les Seigneurs en augmenterent eonsidiirablement leurs revenus. Gaufride, 2. 458, Omnem a se ac auis cretibus iniquitatem eliminare illicitas dejerationes perjuria, diras, imprecationes, contumelias, rixas, seditiones. &c. Thuan. 2. 85, 89, 91. . , , . ' Le Patriarche de Constantinople dominoit encore h soixante-cinq Mt^tropoli- INTRODUCTION. 67 tion of the fifbir The GrJt^^' ^^^ ^««trictin^ thTdr^ut" pent ff and all the Latin^SLr^sT^'K*^^ ^0^ and heresy. Prateolus, FisW m?' ^ ^^^^""^ °^ ^^^^ism cent, BelJarmine «nrl a '\^^®^' J»lore, Renaudot Guidn T».! purgatory S^ the ufcr '^^« ^^« Greckn d Ltli^^^^^^^ rejection of confirmation ^nd^^^^^^^^^ Simon; while their belief in the dTr' "t!?'*^^^ ^« testified by eating an both kinds is decL d b v Si^l^^^^^io^ of communY Thevenot and Le Bruges teS S n °".' ^^^teolus, and More ga^ry the pontificaU^^rSc^ Indt',^^ P''^-^^"^ ^° -^ PU- The Greeks have shewed St rp J T"'"?'^^ ^^^ ^'^e kind.' nes, , beyond aU the .fcher 0?2l V^T P^'^""^^ unwiUiL- fica supremacy. Matthew Sten° ''^f "^^^^^g^ the pontf- cealed host lity, on all occasS to Rn '"- ^^''' ^P«^ ^^ con- Phemy against its sacrameX 'tS^ ^'"^.'i'''"' ^""^ ^^^'^ bias- honored the Latins with ?he nfme ^o^' V^« Grecian Emperor, and this seems to have been tL?r In ' ""^ ""^^^ but of dotrs • partisans of popery. ThrOreTkr """^ ^PP""^*^^^'^ for all fhe detest the Latins, re baptize tb,' 'T ^"" ^^*^«ran Council comm i,„^ and -ash t^h^ altaron^^,"^r!^.F ^x?'"^* *« S celebrate mass, and which k, TL • ^'? ,*^^^ ^««^ish cWv \Ils ne reconnoissfinf r,..„. .,. , ' ^i^*^*^^ agnoscunt. JRenamInf 9 inr t , *'^"™ 'ocum, quern ni,r,/o7 • ^ ^ ''*'"uni 68 INTRODUCTION. to disbelieve transubstantiation. Sir John Chardin, while on his travels in Mingrelia, asked a priest, if the sacramental bread and wine became the body and blood of our Lord. The priest, on the occasion, laughed, as if the question had been intended in raillery. The simple Mingrelian, in the exercise of common sense, could not understand how the Mediator between God and man could be compressed into a loaf, or why he should descend from heaven to earth.' The Nestorians overspread Asiatic Turkey, Arabia, Persia, Tartary, India, and China. Their number and extent will appear from the statements of Cosmas, Vitricius, Canisius, Polo, Paris, Godeau, and Thomassin. Cosmas, in Montfaucon, repre- sented the Nestorian churches, in the sixth century, as infinite or unnumbered. Vitricius records the numerical superiority of the Nestorians and Jacobites over the Greeks and Romans. Canisius, from an old author, gives a similar statement. Polo, the Venetian, who remained seventeen years in Tartary, and was employed by the Cham on many important commissions, testifies the dissemination of Nestorianism through Tartary, China, and the empire of the Mogols. Matthew Paris relates the spread of the Nestorian heresy tli rough India, the kingdom of Prester John, and the nations lying nearer the East. Godeau mentions the extension of Nestorianism through the East, and its penetration into the extremity of India, where it remains to the present day. Thomassin attests its ditfusion through India, Persia, and Tartary, and its multiplication in the North and East, nearly to infinity,- The Jacobites or Monophysites are divided into the Asiatics and Africans. The Asiatics are dift'used through Syria, Meso- potamia, and Armenia ; and the Africans through Egyi)t, Nu- bia, and Abyssinia. The vast number of this denomination, and the extensive territory which they have occupied, may be shown from the relations of Vitricius, Paris, Canisius, and Thomassin. Vitricius recor^ls the dissemination of the Monophysite con- tagion through move than fort}^ kingdoms. The Patriarch of 1 Chardin, 1. 100. 2 Eccleaiie infinittu sunt. Montfaucon, 2. 179. Oiientalem regionem, pro magna parte, infecit. Canisius, 4. 43.3. Qui cum Jacobinis, plures esse dicuntur, quam Latini et (Jra'ci. Vitricius 1. 76. Les Nestoriens avoient plusieurs ('glises dans la Tiirtarie, dans le pais des Mogols, et dans la Chine. Thorn. 1 . 4. I'art 4. Nestoriana hierusis per ludiam Majorem, et regnum sacerdotis Johannis, et pur regna niagia proxima orienti dilatatur. M. Paris, 425. II se r(5i)andit dans tout rOrient, etpi^netra jusqu'aux extremitt^s dea ludes. Godeau, 3. .354. Ilss'cten- dirent jusc^ues dans Ics Indes, la Perse, etla Tartaric. Thorn. 2. 20. Part IV. lis a'v multipli6rentpresf)ue al'infini vers I'Orientet le Nord. Thom. 1. 375. Bavle. 3.' 2079. - - - INTRODUCTION. gQ salem, Mosul, DaiBa^c^s Ssrind cfots^^ ''T of Alexandria and Abyssinia pr^e.Sdes oTr E^.vn'' Sll""''^ and Nubia.1 Abyssinia boasts « PK^r *^P*' ^<^hiopia, wding to thi., docuLnvX w^ d'" rtrrz' tiiict Irom our Lord in natnrp Knf fU^ • ^" XT- , ' ■""/'^/" nature, Dut the saiae in nower and pffl cacy His body is broken, but only by fiith ' Ar. aI • • " tniwlioi Shrift nf "^r, '=""™''*^''' '"'» 'l"' ^J body et omnes regioneB usqie in In 1km' nS ' '"'" ^^^P'-"" Occupaverunt Nubi^ partem ^thopia3 et piures re^^nes u '4 i "indkm ( -T'"'*^ ^*^P*°' '"''«°'^™ sjdent. Can.8ius, 4.^433. CeL secL -KV^?"nl"f !^l".!r' ^"™' V^^ara regnapos- ^ Sacramentum uuegrum, tam clerici q„am aic , acci^nt Drees 525 70 INTRODUCTION. The Nestorians were said to divide the person of the Son» and the Jacobites to confound His natures. But this contro- versy, as the ablest and most candid theologians and historians admit, was a dispute about words. This is the opinion of the Protestant historians, Mosheim, Bayle, Basnage, La Croze, Jalonsky, and Buchanan. Many Romish as well as Reformed critics entertained the same opinion. This was the judgment of Simon, Bruys, Assemanni, Tournefort, Gelasius, Thomassin, and Godeau. Nestorianism, says Simon, ig only a nominal heresy, and the controversy originated in a mutual misunder- standing. Bruys, Assemanni, Tournefort, and Gelasius speak to the same purpose. Thomassin calls the Jacobites, Arme- nians, Copts, and Abyssinians, Derai-Eutychians, who rejected the extravagant imaginations of the original Monophysites. Modern relations, says this author, show that the Jacobites confounded not the godhead and manhood of the Messiah, but represented these as forming one person, witliuut confusion, in the Son, as soul and body in man. The Abyssinians, who are a branch of the Monophysites, disbelieve, says Godeau, any commixture of Deity and humanity in the Son of God.^ The \rmenians are scattered through Armenia, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, Persia, India, Cyprus, Poland, Turkey, Tran- sylvania, Hungary, and Russia. Julfa, in the suburbs of Ispa- han, is, say Renaudot and Chardin, entirely inhabited by this denomination. This colony amounted to 30,000 persons. Abbas, the Persian monarch, contemporary with Elizabeth of England, invited, says Walsh, the Armenians to settle in his dominions, where he gave them every protection. Twenty thousand families were placed in the province of Guilam. Forty thousand reside in India, and carry on a great part of the inland trade. Two hundred thousand of them remain in Constantinople, in the adjoining villages, and on the Bosphorus.^ The Armenian merchants are distinguished for their industry, frugality, activity, and opulence. Fixing their settlements in every principal city and emporium of Asia, the Armenians, says lis ccmmunient sous lea deux especes. Ila iicpraticjuent ni la confirmation, ni I'extrfime ouction. (Jodeau, 1. 275. De Puigatorio nil credunt. Canis. 4. 4.34. Les Jacobites ne croveut ])as le pur- gatoire. Moreri, 8. 4'29. Christe, sicut in pane et vino naturBBSunt a te diatincta?, in virtute ct poteutis idem sunt tecum, t^orpus frangimus, sed tantum per lidem. Gedd. 1 Coiifessiones peccatoruni suorum.non sacerdotibus, sed soli JJeo latentt laciunt. Vitricius, 1. 76. Bruce V. 12. 1 Basic, 2077. Simon, c. 9. Bruys, 1. 207. Assem. 291. Tourn. 2. 297. Gel. de duob. Thorn. 2. 21. (iodeau.I. 275. ''Abbas Magnus ArmenorumJulfaj nrope Isnahanam. nrdnniam p.nnHtif.ni*-. ntn Renaud. 2. 370. (Jhard, 2. 97. ' ' ' INTRODUCTION. 71 Buchanan are the general merchants of the Ea«t, and in con- stant motion between Canton and Constantinopi; Calcutta Madras, and Bombay have each an Armenian cLrch. Tour-' nefort extols their civility, politeness, probity, sense, wealth, wS'n 7 '""'^'^'f^S disposition. Godeau reckons the m^ than nor^'TT^^A '^' "^ '^' ^™^"^'^" P^^^^^^^s, at more than loOO. The Armenian patriarch of Antioch, says Otho supermtends more than a thousand bishops, and is In consequence, called Universal. He governs savs VitrJp ,w ir tCr " '''' ''"?^^^ nietropo1i;arwit\TheT;tuS CI «1I ^7/' ^'"''"t'^ *° Thomassin. many churches Armell.^ ' '"^ ^^'^P^^^'"^^^' Persia, Caramania, and This denomination, beyond all the Christians in Central Asia have repe led Mahometan and Romish superstitions True to theirSr.^vl''R T'"'''^'- '^ ^""^'"'y- P^-e«eiving the Bible, their Uith, says Buchanan, is a transcript of biblical purity Purofi rT""' ''"^T n.' .«"Pr«"^4, Transubstantiation, menlf Z' l^";^'^;^^^^^^' ^^^erical Celibacy, the Seven Sacra- Tace thp J ^^"""H' .^h^r^'^r of the Sacraments to confer hn^Ti'JX ""^T.^V'f''^ « Vigils and Festivals, and the with- who loi ^h " ^'""^ '^' ^""''y- ^^''^ ^-e-baptism of papists iTnS.T "''■'?"'''"'?' r ^^*^^<^i^>ned by Godeau and More, L 'W '"^'^'T' fJ^'' '^P^"^'^^ ^^^i^h they entertain of f^lS T^ and ot Romanism. The uncatholicism and w1 S ^'""^"'rU .^^'!'*^''^' '^> «^^y« More, one of their pro- fessed dogmas. Their disbelief of the real presence in the Communion, except in sign and similitude, is acknowledged by ™-^'f "^f '."^^^ -^''f- ^^'^^"" ^*^">^1 «f purgatory and S whflp N- ^T^ u '^^^'^''^'^ by Godeau, MorerandCani- Arrn'pnlfn V w'- ^'"'T^^' ^^"^ Spondanus proclaim the ^ccordir ,^^^^^Tr^^ ^'^'^ f- '"^^?-^«^-«hip. The^ Armenians, according to Godeau, ordain only married men to the priest- hood, and detract from the Sacraments the power of^ cop- iernng grace. Theyenot attests their rejectioS of purgatory ,i,...„ }..... t- ^i\"Lius c i. llsocciipent pioseutemeut plusieurs iinV-^ IS la M.5sopota.>n.,, !a IVrse, La ( .'.aramanie, et dJs n. 1. 4. inirt4. Spoil. 1145. IV. dans tout roi-ieiit, dan deux Anuc-niea. Tiioni. i. i. part 4. Spo, lis rtbaptizent lea CatiK.li.iues Koniai aga- "ises ios US (jui viennent k leur communion. [p 72 INTRODUCTION. • K u^ /''i^'' Christians who agree in faith with the Reformed, inhabit India, where Travancore and Malabar constitute their chief settlements These had occupied Western India from the earliest ages, and had never heard of Romanism or the Papacy 1 11 Vasco De Gama arrived at Cochin in the beginnincr of the sixteenth century. The infernal spirit of Poperf and per ecu! lZn"V7.'^f this ancient chuU, and diltuS the tran- quillity of 12(0 years.^ The Syrians on the sea-coa^t yielded for a time, to the s orm. But the inland inhabitants, inLpport of their ancient religion, braved all the terrors of the inquisition with unshaken resolution. H^^^ii^iu" The Syrians constitute a numerous church. Godeau reckons the feynan population of Comorin, Coutan, Cran<^anor Malabar and Nega-oatam at 16,000 families; or 70,000 MviduaV S ciiVof CocWn '■' ^^''^^' ^''^''''^' *^^ ^''^' ^^'^ "^'^^^^ ^"d ^^^ The antiquity of the Syrian Church reaches beyond that of Nestorianism, Jacobitism, or Armenianism, and this appears u the purity and simplicity of their theology. Godeau Admits heir reading of the New Testament in the Syrian tongu'in Uieir churches; and heir rejection of extreme unction, image- well as Thomas, quoted by Renaudot, neither believe purga- torial fare nor pray for the dead. These Indian Christians, sals CaSl ;if 1 T '.•*^' communion in Syriac, and reckon says i^anisius, all the Latins excommunicated •* But tke Synod of Diamper, in which Menez, Archbishop of reuSstir Go L 1 Q7^, la pr.5senee rMle du corps de Jesus Christen TsiZTGniAn n 99 K "T'n^ «* ^^nguis Christi, sed tantumin simi iti.dine EuSsti^ sub DaS« ?t'i""* '"' ^"'T '^^"^^ ^"'•P'^^ '•^"li**^'- •" Sacramento lis reietteift 1?n,Fr.^f;,- "^"P^"^,'" «"b vini specietus contineri. More, 62. 1 L'oss. 6. 83. ' persomfes'"' nT en'atn1f""'° T '''''' "]'"" ^r"^««' "» ^' «°''-^"'« «* rHr ° -,,-."" ■ ^ *'Xtr@me-(Jnotion, ni des imaj^es des - -. j^u,., pr. tr-. ; mvuiciii; sc maner uue iois. U- I-T.-aveau Testament se IirTRODU( 'TION. 73 IS statements. ' The BTbtlo i,? T- "? -""PP'^ tl"* MloWing Roman pontiff, and S^^^" rc^^Srf Ih p"'''?'™' "^""^ The Son of God confer. .>rl\^ 11 1,^. ^* ^^'^^ Papal communion, tolic fellows. ThTRomis^^^^^^ T ^'"^^ ^^^^« ^^' ^P^^' and fallen into he,^' 'Thrprrr.J'V"'""^"*^^^ *^^ ^^^^^ falsehood, which was Lnpoll^f ^^^^^ogy ^s a system of armsand'enaet^eX Jf-ffti^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ by the the Lord, not in realitv b f "n ^^^^amental elements are but in efficacy Xn MeL T'^Pf^'^f ' ^^ ^^ «"bstance the people cried 'Aw.v 11^ .1"™^^^°^*^^ ^^ Chn|ais,andlnot^TrshTpLd!;^-^ ^'^"^-^^-^ ^e a.^ n^enl^^'Th^lyriat^^^^^^ extreme unction are no sacra- regarded it, XTLtLdt^^^ -ily as superfluoLTnrieLX^^^^^^^ P^^' ^^^ Syrian clerffvadmins'' ^" ^" ''^ tained a church whiVh wT' i ' ^l""i t^°^e immemorial, con- but which held tt "nkriovyii to the rest of Christendom the EuropeufnatnsTv%h''t^^^^ ^'""^ ^^^" professedS sixteenth^centmy was p^^^^^^^^ ^^^^'^' ^^ ^^^^ i« received, at thi' m^sent hi^f ^^ ^"*^'' '^^'^ Calvin, and New World. ^ ^^' ^'^ "^ ^^'^'^^ P^»'<^ ^^ the Old and senW loTr^^^ttrei"^^^^^ denominations that dis- partisans of Romanism wh? ™^' ""^""^ numerous than the Papacy shone in aUraWr' T"' *'• *^^ Reformation, the which is its v.,Vi hli ^ ?^; ^^P*"''^' '"^tead of universality than a fi^;^ IT, of"ci3fndor '' Th" wT ^"^^^^ ^^ ^^^ East were crowded hv ff. The West and especially the and ^CrdiW LuLt^^^^ the Romish despotism aity. ^superstition and error, indeed, except among torem unius debere DastoW >ilf Lt, u ?^ *^*^^* ^"''^P^^identem, nee pas- Bubjectum non esse Ror^^^XnSor VoSlf P^*™'-«ham BabyloniS ecclesiam nihil omnino differre ab e^^' „uam «anpT^^^"f*° ^'*'"° ^^^'''^"^ '° obrem Petri successores non excede^e ?n l^ri^^.f *'^"' *^"' *^"°*"1^' ' q"'^^- Romanam a fide excidisae; RomanoSiScSf^f "^'"'T' '^""«- "■ "'^'^^''^ sectl^^tg^S!:^^^^^^^^^ et ab eo distingui non ccBlo existit. In Eucharistia tantummodo f 'hrlr "1*' T"^"^' 1"°^ ^^^""^ i^^ corpus et sanguinem continen CoS ^. ^t ^^'^"t«'«. "o«i autem verum Imagines venerandas non esse utnote'i .if; • . • ultenus idola esse impie docetur nep In fi ^'''^'^' ^* ™munda. Imagines Matrin^onium non e se sSa^S ^t' '"^ ""'^''^'- ^^°««*^*' «• ^0^ 47 matKH.is usu notitiaqne populus cSianS V.,? • ^'^'l ?»«««• Hactenus confir- superrtnam, nee necessa4m hLtenus Sam^7 Di«3eeseos caruerit. Bern tenus in hoc episcopatu nullus fuen"t ^.. ' * "°" ^'^^"^ dicerent. Hac- Nullade eoseltisqueeffeetu et efficacrL'"^^^^^^^ ^'''''"'^ Unetionis. babita fuit. Pra^ceptum hujusraodi S.fol ^ . 'P'^"^ mstitutione, notitia hoe episcopatu. sLi off "^rt Ka^S r^ in sede, aut nullus fuit, aut Eccleaii S^f^ 'l^u"° "^'l"^ '° ^ae episcopali Presbyteri matrimon a contSebant ^itZ "^^f ."^^e eonsentaneus esset, an vidua, an prima uxor efi«P?;« .^a ""* ^abebatur ratio, an virgo 36, 65e 72 T-j «Q .?n ,." VL^^^'^*' ansecunda, an etiam tertia. Co"»-* « 1-/. INTRODUCTION. yg '^^^'^^'t'^'Z^^^^^ nation, and Darkness, within its dom Lnnf^ '^'^^ uncontrolled sway, darkness 'the people BTthe Tu'^ ^^' ^^^ ^"^ 8^°«« rous, held up, iA the Western wnriy^^^^^^^^^ ^^^« n"«>«- through thr'surroundint^bsTurS 'and" U^ '^^^"}"^. l^^^^ warming beams, the mini oTman^; The oTnT'f p'.^- 'f? '^ more numerous than the W«Un« '^' / ,? ^"ental Christians, about minor matters of wS^^^^^^^^^^ hrmness and unanimity, trtyrani ^nT"""^' ^PP"'^«^' ^i^i> manism. All these, overspreading f^ t corruptions of Ru- world and resisting the Sr ' fi "^ / *^''^^'''' ^'"^ ^^^^em outnumbered the sons of F^ £f ' ""^ pontifical despotism, far sons of European superstition and Popery TBK TARIaTIONS of POPERY. CHAPTER 11. POPES. ™K.Kc"™"'7aHUTI0NS-^^^^^^^^^^ SUCCK«stON-H,STORICAL VARIATIONS- aiLVBRlUS ANn VIRGIUUH fopmL,,. ™^ I'APAOY-LIBERIUS AND FELIX- VKSTER, JOHN AND OrST ap Jln,"^' ^^''^'l^^' ^^D BTEPHBN-BENEDICT, HIL- TINE SCHISM^fooTRmT vTrSv^^'^^"'' HCHI8M- BASILIAN AND FLOREN- AND H0NORIUS-VIg"uus_7oJ'J^ '^^^^^^ Z07AMVS, THEODORA .VND MAHOZIA-JOHr'^nZ /A J'""'''''"''"~^''''^^ "^ ^"^ PAPACY- -ALEXANDER-JUU™iLErPKTuZfD"oNTIF^^^^^ The pontifical succession is attended with more difficulty than the quadrature of the circle or the lor.gitude at ,sea The one S ottrftT h' P-plexit, to the annalist and the divine tha^ t 1 T.T^ f^^ geometrician and the navigator. Theouadra- inv^ ijln; ^ ^ ?''i"''''^'^"- ^"* ^^^ P"l«^l succession mocks inquiry^' ' '"'' ' '''''^ ^'"^^ ^'''"^ ^'^*'"'" *^ ^" T.iJ^^- "^^^^"1,^^ on this topic arises from the variations of the historians and electors, and from the faith and morality of the dwled in ^L^'^r^ ' ^?^ ^^" "^'^^"^■^' ^'^ ^hi^^y instances, disagreed m their choice of an ecclesiastical sovereign. Many lit f^«P«« ^"^braced heresy and perpetrated immorality : and ^oce^SiT^^^^^ ?"^f the problem of their legftimate succession an historical and moral impossibility. the W^i'P^T^ a profound silence on the subject of the hrst Roman Bishop. This honour, indeed, if such it be ButtLnT''^ TA^'""' .^?^^ '""''^''''^ «« the Apostle Peter! show th?t thf ' ^!l'' 'P'^'^ '^""^*' ^^^"^ ^">^ g"<^d authority less that Lw^'P'"'*^' ^^ '^'' ? *^^ Roman capital, and stiU vis t to fh'f o^ "■''"" ? i?r ^^ ,^^'^"^*^^- The evidence of his visit to that city is not historical but traditional. History for vers^l W^ fer the alleged event, presents on this topic an uni- mo^y 0^1^^:;^ ^^ ^^PP^^^ ^-- ^^^ -^ -P-- testi. POPES. 77 A single hint on this subject is not afforded by Peter himself nor by his inspired companions. Luke, James, Jude, PaJand nfiLcrn?t-t'' '" ^^^ /P^^tolary productions mentions Paul wro?e a IctttT'^J/'p^'"'^' ^P^^^-'W or supremacy! I'm! wrote a letter to the Romans; and, from the Roman citv ??mothv «nVp?f ''^'"'' S^^^'^^^^' Philippians, cXssiant Timothy, and Philemon He sends salutations to various Ro- man friends, such as Priscilla, Aquila, Epsenetus, Ma^ Andro- nicus, Junia, and Ampl a^ : but forgets"^ Simon the^supposed Roman hierarch. Writing from Rome to the ColossLans he mentions Tychicus Onesimus, Aristarchus, Marcus Sus Epaphra«, Luke and Demas, who had afforded himconsoSon but, strange to tell, neglects the sovereign pontiff TddreS Timo hy from the Roman city, Paul%f%arsus remember? Eubulus Pudens, Linus, and Claudia ; but overlooks the Ro- man bishop. No man, except Luke, stood with P^il at his hrst answer or at he nearer approach of dissolution.^ His apos- tolic hohness could not then have been in his own diocese and should have been prosecuted for non-residence. His infalliMlitv perhaps, hke some of his successors, had made an exa^^^^^^^^ for amusement to Avignon. Luke also is silent on thT heme' John, who published his gospel after the other Evangelists ™id his Revelation at the close of the first centuixraintaL; "n this agitated subject, a profound and provoking silence The omission is continued by the apostolic men. Clemens Barnabas, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp. Not one of allThese deigns to mention a matter of such stupendous impor ance to Chris endon.. Clemens, in particular, might have been ex- pected to i^cord such an event. He was r^Roman bishop and interested m a pecuhar manner, in the dig lity of the Roman See. An apostohc predecessor, besides, w1.uld have refieSed honor on his successor in the hierarchy. He mentions h^ pretended predecessor indeed ; but omits any allusion to hi^ journey to Rome, or hs occupation of the pontifical throne The fiction of Peter's visit to the metropolis of the world began to obtam credit about the end of the second cenTurv Jrenc^^us. trusting to the prattlement of Papias oi to common report recorded the tradition ; and was afterwards fdlowecX Tertulhan Hippolytus. Origen. Cyprian, Epiphanius Ithan asms, Ephraim Lactantius, JeroiVe, Chry ostom Irtbfu; Prudentius, Theodoret, Orosius, Prospeif Cyril E^seb us se^mirdouSrt; r t^'^''^''- ''''' ''^'^^' ^"it: : seemed doubtful to Eusebius. He introduces it as something reported, but not certain. The relation, to the father Tf eS ' Rom. XVT. Onlnaa TV O 'r;„ ttt ^ Iren. III. 3. Maimb:22; Bruy.' iTlO.' Spon. 44. X. BeU. II. 3. Euseb. II. 25. tiWj 78 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. siastical history, was a mere hearsay. Bede, on this subiect uses a similar expression, which corroWates this interpretaSn Zt ^ f '?T!E' S^^^'' ^^cording to the British annaT ist having founded th« Roman church, is said to have conse- crated his successor.' « "a,vo cuuse- The evidence of the tale may be reduced to small compass report The Apostle, according to Baronius. Binius. and Labb/ • came to Rome in the reign of Claudius, in the y;ar 45 and Iren8eus,at the close of the second century, relates thesuu posed transacrtion.^ A hundred and fifty years thereS elapsed, from the occurrence of the alleged event 1 11 theTme of Its record The cotemporary and succeeding autho^ f^l century and a half, such as Luke, Paul, John^ Clemens Bar nabas, Herm^, Ignatius, and Polycarp who detail Peter's biography and who were interested in the supposed fact sav no ^ing of the tradition. The intervening his orians between Peter and Iren«.us are on this topic silent as the grave The belief of such a story requires Popish prejudice and infatua! Simon, however, even if he were at the Roman city could not have been the Roman bishop. The Episcopacy 'in its proper sense, is, a^ Chrysostom, Giannon, and Du Pin have observed, incompatible with the Apostleship. A Sshon^s authority, say Chrysostom and Giannon, ' is Luted to a cX wnrn'3"%,^^\^^ fr'^''' «omn^i«sion Extends to the thole bulated the pnncipa paits of the earth, and were confined To no p ace or city.- This constituted one distinction between the apostohc and episcopal functions. The Apostles founded and organised churches, and then consigned their suS- tvidency to fixed and ordinary pastors. The one formedTn army of conquest for the forma^tion of ecclesiastical kingdoms and the other an army of possession for the purpose of oc^u-' pation and government. * ^ 'Hiis statement corresponds with the details of Irenc-eus Ruffinus, Eusebius, and the author of the Apostolic cTstf raS'n Tir' "'"' ''VT"^ '' ^^^^«" ^^ ^he tntaTn of tradition. These represent Linus as the first Roman bishoD who, succeeded by Anacletus and Clemens, exeicled the Roman prelacy; while Peter and Paul executed the Chit an Apostleship. Peter and Paul, says L-em.us, having founded 2 IriT 1 ^^""/'rh t'/^' «"«^^««°''«"' consecrasse perhibetur. Beda, V 4 S. An. EccL 2^ GiaS li"" ^'' ''''''" ^^ *^"^ ^'^""'^^^r une nouvelle POPES. 79 the Roman church, committed its episcopacy to Linus who was succeeded by Anacletus and Semens.' Linus Clelus and Clemens says KutHnn , in the Qementin S,?Jitions edited by Cotelen..v W.V. Roman bishops during PeSufe that he might fu^.' his apostolic commission.'^ iccordiniTto Easebms. Linus v ^ V. first Roman bishop who wal M- Ipwed m successioa ., ;> ocletus and Clemens.' 3 ^Thea^ost bTshTto'pauT ;:d" ' ''-' ?'T'^°" f I;--' *^e fiM R^an succeSion aZV " Jl^^^^^^^^ «^ ^^^^^^> the second in TerThelxcUion of^VVe ta" the firs^R '''''VI'''- and Clemei. Cletus, or An:d:tu"lctdef d^W^^^^^^^^^^^ tohcage as the ordinary overseers of the church while C and Peter accomplished their extraordinary mission , The episcopacy of Linus, Anacletus, and Clemens was incompatible with that of Simon in the same ci y Had h^ been bishop, the consecration of another during hifife would have been a violation of the ecclesiastical canofs o? antiruTtv The ancients, to a man. deprecated the idea of two Saric superintendents in one city. Giberi. has collected seTen^canons of this kind, issued by Clemens. Hilary, and Pascal and W ti?f FaTei^ in te^fburthT ^"' ^^e^Lata^r^C^lS ratners in the tourth canon, compared a city with twn bishops to a monster with two heads. The Nicene and Latemn synods were general and therefore, accordinrto both the Italian and French schools, were vested with iafalUbility No instance indeed can, in all antiquity be Droduopd of Zr. bishops ruling in conjunction in the same city ' .J ITr""",'^/ .*^^ ^^""^^ advocates on this question is remarkable only for ite siUiness. Bellarmine's arguments on this tppic are like to those of a person, who in the^ manner of Swift, wished, m solemn irony, to ridicule the whole storv He IS so weak one can hardly think him serious A sudd^ sition which, If true, should be supported by evidence the most" indisputable, is aa destitute of historical testimony as the visTons of fancy, the tales of romance, or the fictions of fliry-land A specimen of Bellarmine's reasoning may amuse the re»Ld«r Babylon, from which Peter wrote, waf, BeTCre t wetl as .'J^l '° "^'*^*« ^""t "nt Episcopi. Labb. 2. 38. B.,o in „.. .;„:..x- .. gSIt!" °™"'"*"'" "*"' *"'^'"°*"'- ^Pi^'^opi. Labb/ 7:397. "etTsr^! Ill 80 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Maimbourg gravely affirms, the Roman capital : and in sup- port of his opmion he cites Jerome and Bade, who seem on this subject t<) have possessed about as much sense as Bellar- mme. Paul found Christians at Rome on his arrival at that city ; and the learned Jesuit could not, for l:is Ufe, discover how- this could have been the case had Peter not been at the capital of the world/ Peter's victory at Rome over Simon the magician the Cardinal alleges, proves his point ; and indeed the Apostle s conflict with the magician and his Roman episco- pacy are attended with equal probability. Both rest bn the same authority of tradition. But the ridiculousness of the ma- gician s exploits, who rose in the air by the power of sorcery and fell by the pi^ayer of Peter, and broke his leg, overth.'ovvs its probabihty. The airy and ridiculous fabrication of the necromancers achievements falls, like their fabled author and buries in its rums the silly fiction of the Apostle's Roman episcopacy. ^ "But the whole accounts of this event are as discordant as they are silly The partisans of this opinion diflfer in the time of the Apostohc pontiffs arrival and stay in the Roman capital Jerome, Eusebius, Binius, Orosius, Labbeus, Spond^nus' Onuphnus, Nauclerus, Petavius, Bede, Bruys, Baronius, and Valesius send Peter to Rome in the reign of Claudius These however, disagree in the year ; the second, third, fourth, thir- teenth, and fourteenth years of the Emperor's reign be:no- assigned by different authors, for the era of this important event feimon, says Jerome, having preached to the Jews of Pontus" CaJatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, i^roceeded to Rome in the second year of Claudius, and held the sacerdotal chair twenty-five years. Lactantius, Origen, Balusius, and Pagius fix his arrive at the Roman metropolis to the reign of Nero But thes- too differ as to the year. The length of Peter's epis- copacy is also disputed. Twenty-three, twenty-five, twentv- seven, and twenty-nine years have been reckoned by various chronologers for its duration.^ This discordance of opinion is the natural consequence of deficiency of evidence. Contempo rary historians, indeed, say no more of the Apostle Peter's jour ney toRome than of Baron Munchausen's excursion to the moon Many fictions of the same kind have been imposed on men" and obtamed a temporary belief Geoffrey of Monmouth's story ot the Trojan Brutus is well known. The Encdish Ar thur, and the French Roland were accounted real heroes, and 9n' %?9«^^^''*Tf ^^'^To*' siJ'etrusuon fuit Rorufe ? Bell. I. 551. Maimb. M. Acts 28. 15. Peter 5. 13. Alex, 1 511 c V'B?ri M^l ^^'f'-c^- .f-^t^^''- 2- 130. Beda, 17. Bruy. 1. 7. Lactan. •c. J. ±5iu. 1. 24. Labb. 1. 64. Maimb. 16. POPES. 81 presented a popular theme for the poet, the novelist, and the historian. The whole story of the Apostle's Roman episcor.acy seems to have originated with the garrulous Papias, and to have been founded on equal authority with these legends. The Popedoms of _ Peter and Joan display Wonderful" similarity Joan s accession remained unmeritioned for two hundred years after her death when the fiction, says Florimond, was attested by Mariana. The reign of the Popess was afterwards related by thirty Komish authors, and circulated through all Christendom without contradiction, for five hundred yeaw, till the era of the Reformation. The Popedoms of Peter and Joan, in the view of every unprejudiced mind, possess equal crerlibility. The earliest ecclesiastical historians, differim^ in this man ner, on the subject of the first Pope, show the utmost discord- ance on the topic of his successors. Iren^us, Eusebius Eni- phanius, Jeronie, Theodoret, Optatus, Augustine, and the'apos- tohc constitutions place Linus immediately after Peter Ter tulhan, Jerome, and the Latins, in general, place Clemens immediately after the Apostle. Jerome, however in sheer inconsistency, gives this honor, in his catalogue of ecclesiastical authoi-s, to Linus. Cossart could not determine whether Linus Clemens or some other was the second Roman Pontiff He also admits the uncertainty of the Pontifical succession Clemens, accordmg to Tertullian, was ordained by Peter ' Linus' according to the apostolic constitutions, was ordained by Paul' Linus, however, at the present day, is, by Greeks and Latins" accounted the second Roman Pontiff. The succession of the Roman hierarchs, exclusive of Peter m the hrst century, acconling (o Augusdn.-, Optatus, Damasus' and the apostolic 'Constitutions, was Linus, Clemens, and Ana- cletus ; but, according to Irenaeus, Eusebius, Jerome, and Alex- ander, was Linus Anacletu.s, and Clemens. The arrangen,ent of Epiphanius, Nicephorus, Ruffinu:^, and Prosper, is, Lums Cletus, mid Clemens: whilst that of Anastasius, Platina, More' Binius, Crabbe, Labh^ and Cossart, is Linus, Cletus, Clemens' and Anacletus. Cletus, who is inserted by others, i.s omitted by Augustine, Optatus, Damasus and the apostolic constitutions Baronius, Bellarmine, Pagius, Godeau. and Petavius reckon Uetus and Anacletus two ditfeient pontiffs. Cotelerius, Fleury Baillet, and Alexander account the.se two names for the same person. Bruys and Cossart confess, that whether Cletus and Anacletus were identical or distinct, is doubtful or unknown.'^ Th^T- ^r^' \ ^"'^''- "^- 21- Epipban. II. XXVII. Jer.un, 4. 107 12« Theo.1. ,n iim. 4. Optatus, II. Aug Ep. 101. Con. Ap. Vll. 4ti Tertu 21- " mPet. Crabb. I. 30. Coss. 1. C. Bell. II. 5. Uoileau, 1. 369 '^'^'^^^t. F 82 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. 11 The variations of historians in this manner, have introduced confusion into the annals of the Roman pontiffs. Petavius con- fesses their doubtfulness till the time of Victor, and Bruys, th© impossibility of discovering the fact. The most eagle-eyed writers, says Cossart, cannot, amid the darkness of these ages, elicit a shadow of truth or certainty in the Papal succession.' This diversity appeai-s, indeed, in the history of the Popedom, during the early, the middle, and the modem ages. The par- tisans of Romanism boast of an uninterrupted and unbroken succession in the sovereign Pontiffs and in the Holy See. But this is all empty bravado. The fond conceit shuns the light ; and vanishes, on examination, like the dream of the morning. Each historian, ancient and modern, has his own catalogue of Popes, and scarcely two agree. The rolls of the Pontiffs, supplied by the annalists of the papacy, are more numerous than all the denominations which have affected the appellation of Protestantism. Such are a few of the historical variations on this topic, and the consequent disorder and uncertainty. Electoral variations have produced similar difficulty. The electors, differing in their objects as the historians in their de- tails, have caused many schisms in the papacy. These, Baro- nius reckons at twenty-six. Onuphrius mentions thirty, which is the common estimation. A detailed account of all these would be tedious. Some are more and some less important, and, therefore, in proportion to their moment, claim a mere allusion or a circumstantial history. The following observa- tions will refer to the second, seventh, thirteenth, nineteenth, twenty-ninth, and thirtieth schisms. The second schism in the papacy began in the ecclesiastical reigns of Liberius and Felix, and lasted about three years. Liberius, who was lawful bishop, and who, for a time, opposed Arianism, was banished in 355 to Berea, by the Emperor Con- stantius. Felix, in the meantime, was, by the Arian faction, elected in the room of Liberius, and ordained by Fpictetus, Basil, and Aoasius. Liberius, afterwards, weary of exile, signed the Arian creed, and was recalled from "banishment and restored to the Popedom. His return was followed by sanguinary battles between the two contending factions. The clergy ware murdered in the very churches. Felix, however, with his party, was at length overthrown, and forced to yield. Fluxa et dubia, quae do summis pontificibus ad Victorcm usque traduntur. Fetav. 2. 130. II e?t impossible de docouvrir la v«riW. Bruy. 1.27. Nee in tanta BiBculorum caligiue, oculatissimi quique scriptoras quidquam indicare potuennt, ex quo veritatis umbra saltern aliqua appareat, iNec certi quidquam •tatui posse arbitror de illorum ordine et Buccessiono. Cossart, 1.1. fr.'VvfftifM I ".1";!^^ jy^^- ■T^^^.j^.ia ^?a".— ; .. SCHISMS IN THE PAPACY. 83 He retired to his estate on the road to Ponto, where, at the end of seven years, he died.' The several claims of these two Arians to the papacy have caused great diversity of opinion between the ancients and the moderns. Liberius, though guilty of Arianism, was supported by legitimacy of election and ordination. Felix, on the con- trary, was obtruded in an irregular manner by the Arian party (jodeau represents his ordination as surpassing all belief and compares the ceremony on the occasion to the 'abomination of Antichrist. > Felix had sworn to resist the intrusion of another bishop during the life of Liberius. His holiness, therefore, in accepting the Popedom, was guilty of perjury. His Infalli- bihty according to Socrates and Jerome, was an Arian ; and according to Theodoret, Ruffinus, Baronius, Spondanus, Go- deau, Alexander, and Moreri, communicated with the Arians, and condemned Athanasius. All the ancients, among whom are Jerome, Optatus, Augustine, Athanasius, and Prosper fol- lowed m modern days, by Panvinius, Bona, Moreri, Lupus, and F eury, reject his claim to the Papacy. Athanasius calls his hohness 'a monster, raised to the Roman hierarchy, by the malice of Antichrist.'' These two Arians, nevertheless, are, at the present day, Ro- man saints. Their names are on the roll of canonization ; and the legality and validity of their Popedom are maintained by the papal community. The Arian Liberius is the object of Romish worship. The devout papist, according to the Roman missal and breviary, on this saint's festival, addresses his Arian Infallibihty as ' the light of the holy church, and the lover of the Divine law, whom God loved and clothed with the robe of glory,' while supplication is made for ' pardon of all sin, through his merits and intercession.'* Similar blasphemy and idolatry are addressed to Felix, who, in the days of antiquity, was ac- counted an Arian, a perjurer, an antichristian monster and abomination, shunned by all the Roman people like contagion but who is now reckoned a saint and a martyr. His saintship, however, had nearly lost his seat in heaven in 1 582, when the keys, for the purpose of reforming the Roman Calendar, were 'transferred from Peter to Baronius. Doubts were entertaineJ .v „Iie perjured Arian's title to heaven. Gre- gory the Thirteentii, however, judging it uncourteojs to 1 Socrat. T" 5. .Teromo. 4. 124. Platina. 44. 2 Une iir.» ., M., I'abominalidn de I'AntichriBt, Oodeau. 2. W sAthan. ud ciol Labb. 2 991. Spon. .357. XVII. et 355. X. Socrat. II. 37. Kuftn. 1. Theod. II. 17. Bruy. 1.123. Alex. 7. 20. Moreri. 4. 42 ,, .^J"^ "itercedentibus meritis ah omnibus nos absolve peccatis, Miss. Rom i . XIV. Brev. Rom. P. XXXV, 84 THE VARIATIONS On I'Oi-^RT. uncanonize his holiness, and turn him out of heaven without a fair trial, appointed Baronius as counsel for the prosecution, and Santorio for the defence. Santorio, unable to answer the' arguments of Baronius, prayed to his client the departed Pon- tiff for assistance. The timely interposition of a miracle, accordmgly, came to the aid of his feeble advocacy. Felix was just goin^ to descend, like a falling star, from heaven, when a marble cofhn was discoveied in the Basilic of Cosmas and Daraian, with this inscription : ' The body of Saint Felix, who condemned Constantius.' This phenomenon, which Moreri calls a fable, and Bruys a cheat, silenced, as might be ex- pected, all opposition. Te Dkum was sung for the triumph of truth ; and the perjured Arian Vicar-General of God was declared worthy the honors ot martyrdom— canonization and worship.i The seventh schism distinguished the spiritual reigns of Sil- verius and Vigilius. Silverius, in 536, was elected by simony. He bribed Theodatus, who, says Anastasius, threatened to put all who should oppose him to the sword.^ His election, Godeau admits, was owing to the power of the Gothic king, rather than to the authority of the Roman clergy. His ordination, in con- sequence, was the effect of fear and violence.' The election and ordination of Silverius, therefore, according to a Bull of Julius and a canon of the Lateran Council, was illegal and invalid. Julius the Second pronounced the nullity of an election effected by simony, and declared the candidate an apostate, a thief, a robber, a heresiarch, a magician, a pagan, and a publican. The elected, in this case, might be prosecuted for heresy, and deposed by the secular arm ; while the electors were to be deprived of their possessions and dignity. The Lateran Council, in which Nicholas the Second presided, de- creed the invalidity of an election obtained by simony, the favor of the powerful, or the cabals of the i)eopIe or soldiery. Possession of the Papacy, procuied in this way, exposed the intruder, as a felon, to deposition by the clergy and laity .^ These regulations abrogated the claims of Silverius to the Pontifical throne. Silverius, who obtained the Popedom by simony, was, in a short time, .supplanted by Vigilius. who also gained the same dignity by similar means. His stratagems were aided by the machiuations of Theodora and Belisarius. Theodora the Em- press was friendly to Monophysitism, and hostile to the council 1 Spon. 357. XVIII. Labb. 2.993. '■' Gladio puniretur. Anastasius, 21. 3 Onlinato Silverio sub vi et nietu, Anastasius, 21, < Is non ApostolicuB. sed Apo.staticus liceatque cardinalibub, clericis, laicis Ilium ut prfedonem anathematizarc. Uaranza, 51. Platiiia, 146 SCHISMS IN THE PAPACY. 85 of Chalcedon. Her aim was the degradation of Mennas, the Byzantine patriarch, who adhered to the Chalcedonian faith ; and the restoration of Anthimus, Theodosius, and Severus,' who had been deposed for their attachment to the Monophysite heresy. Theodorn applied to Silverius for the execution of her design, and w^s rofijsed. She then turned her attention to Vigilius; ar ' oiFered him seven hundred pieces of gold and the Papp-i^, to effect her intention. The offer was accepted. The En I ■? then suborned Belisarius, at Rome, to expel the refr,u:jry Silverius, and raise the complying Vigilius to the Papal chair. The General, influenced by the Empress and aided by his wife Antonia, obeyed. He scrupled, indeed, at first; but on reflection, like a prudent casuist, complied. Two hundred pieces of gold, which he received from Vigilius, had, in all probability, a happy effect in reconciling his conscience,' such as it was, to his work. False witnesses" were suborned against Silverius. These accused the Pontiff of a design to betray the city to the Goths. He was banished, in consequ'ence, to Palmaria, where, according to Liberatus, he died of hunger, but, according to Procopius, by assassination. The degi-ada- tion of Silverius was followed by the promotion of Vigilius, who assumed the Pontifical authority. The enactments of Julius and the Lateran Council condemn Vigilius as well as Silverius.' The election and ordination of Vigilius were invalid, prior to the death of Silverius. Two PontiflTs, according to the canons, could not, at the same time, occupy the Papal chair. Ordination into a full See, l)esides, was condemned by the Nicean Council. Baronius, Binius, and Maimbourg, indeed, pretend that Vigilius, on the dissolution of his competitor," re- signed, and was again elected- Nothing of the kind, how- ever, is mentioned by any c(jtemporary historian. No monu- ment of his abdication, says Alexander, is extant." The annalist and the collector of councils, therefore, must have got the news by inspiratiim Procopius, on the contrary, dates the election of Vigilius immediately after the banishment of Sil- verius, and Liberatus, on the next day. Du Pin and Pagius, accordingly, with their usual candor, reject the tale of rc- elertion, and found the title of Vigilius on his general reception in (vhristendom.'' The simony of the two rivals betrays the canonical illegiti- macy of their election. The occupatiim of the Episcopal chair iaodeau4 204 Bin. 4. 141. Bruy. 1. 315. Platina, 68. Procop. 1.25. ^ Baron. .'540. IV. Bin. 4. 142. Maimb. 60. •' Quod si Vigilius abdicavit, ex nullo mouu!»ient'< habetur. Alex 12 32 Procopius, 281. Libera, c. 22. Du Pin, 1. ^1,2 Bruy. 1.330. ritfi 86 THE VAKIATIONS OF POPERY. W his predecessor, besides, destroyed the title of Viffilius Si!..r'^\>f^^T^^^^?°'.^? ^^"^"y «°"^d affect his cEs' p W another obstacle in his way. His history forms an ^nl interrupted tissue of enormity and abomination. He wL fo"r K^filr^J ' f^etou^ness perfidy, prostitution of religio^ for selfish ends and mockery of both God and man. He k&ed his secretary with the blow of a club. He whipped hifnephew to death and wa. accessory to the assassination of Si?veriur His conduct with Theodora, Belisarius, Justinian, and the fifth general council, showed him to be a miser and a traitor regardless of religion and honor, of God and man.> ' Ihe thirteenth schism disgraced the Papacy of Formosus and Sergius. Formosus, in 893, gained the Pontifical throne by bribery. His infallibility, therefore, by the Bulls of Nicho- ks and Julius, forfeited aU claim to the Ecclesiastical supremacy He was Bishop of Porto, and therefore was incapLiS' according to the canons, to become Bishop of Rome. He had rted'and 'b ^ .the Eighth, by whom he hid been excommunt cated and banished, never to revisit the Roman metropolis His hohness. therefore, was guilty of perjury. k?Sr h contrary to another canon, had recoursejn his extremi rwhen the Sergian party opposed his election, to the aid of Amflf the Gothic king. His Majesty's authority, however, though uncanonical, was successful. Sergius. bis rival. whosE cSs were supported by a Roman faction, was expelled bvrov"l power; and Fon^osus retained possession of fhe Pap^^ sove reignty till the day of his death.^ ^ But an extraordinary scene was exhibited by his successor Stephen who succeeded in 896. raged with u/examp"ed fu?y against the memory and remains of Formosus. Solon a hea^ evLf fbt'rr'p'? !J^" '' ^^^^^^ *^« Athenians ?; speak evil of the dead. But the vicar-general of God outraged in this respect, the laws of earth and heaven. Stephen unearthed the mouldering body of Formosus. which, robed in Pont fical omamente, he placed before a Roman Council tLrhe had ^srnnbled He then asked the lifeless pontiff, why bdnf & Se/°Th'e'b f'' ""T^r '\'''' '--«' usuTpeSTh? Tb^nLrff J .""^y probably made no unnecessary reply ksheadfd fi'"" "^''%'u *?.^ bloated corpse, and amputate^d desSd of , >«"!'''• ^^/ disinterred and mutilated carcaas. despoiled of Its dress and mangled in a shocking manner he threw without any funeral honors or solemnity into the Tber He rescmded his acts, and declared his ordinations irregS » Platina, 68. »Alex. 15. 82. Bruya, 2. 186. Baron. 897. 1. SCHISMS IN THE PAPACY. 87 and invalid.^ Such was the atrocity perpetrated by the Stephen's sentence, however, was afterwards repealed by his .uccessor^. John the Tenth, on his accession, assembled a synod Stenhrj;^' ^fTu ^} P^^^'^^^' condemned the aTts of Stephen, and re-e.tablished the ordinations of Formosus But Johns decisions again were destined to proclaim the variatb^ 1 tS ^"\^.'«Pl^y ^\^ notability of earthly things. SeS the Third, on his promotion to the Roman Hierarchf caUed a tr:lTrnf oV^:rrusf ^°^^-^^ -- niore%ntl1eS chr?ridThe d3 'h ''"'^ ^^'P^'"' ^^' ^^°^^^«^ «f *^^ «eP«l- ^npnt Th« p '' miscreancy met with condign punish- ment. The Romans, unable to bear his ruffianism excelled his holiness from the hierarchy. He was then immured in a dungeon, loaded with chains, and finally strangled. He entered 7hif fX"'' ^^^'f '^i'^' "^^ ^^'^ ^^' ^J-^^rved by the ro^e This father and teacher of all Christians, was,' says Bruvs 'as Ignorant a« he was wicked.' This head of the Church and oneafnTng 3 ^'^ "^"^ unacquainted with the first elements Omitting the intermediate distractions in the Papacy the mneteenth schism deformed the ecclesiastical reigns^oT W diet Silvester, and Joha Benedict was son to Alberic Count ^n Jhpr^i.' '''"^' '"^ ^^•^^' "^^ '^'^'^ ^« *he pontifical throne m the tenth or, some say, in the twelfth year ^f his age His pollution. His days were spent in debauchery. He dealt savs Benno in sorcery, and sacrificed to Demons * ' ^ buch was the miscreant, who, for ten years, was according the popish system, the head of the Church, theTdge of con? ZSn°''rRn"''^.^" questions of fkith/the^n^of inspiration A Roman faction, however, in 1044, headed bv the Sfs Ivest^' '"'^ w f'^'i'"' ^"^ «ubstiked Sitt ±5ut Silvesters reign lasted only a short time. The Tuscan di^ "Vnet ? ™'"'^^' «W Silvester and restored Bene- dict. Benedict again soon resigned in favour of John. He was induced to retire, to avoid the public odium caused by his m^ Bruy. 2. 193. Platina, 126. Petav, 1. 407. ' Luitb. 1. 8. Spon. 897. II Bin. 7. 162. . -. Spon. 900. II. Baron. 900. V. Bruvs 2 1Q4 * Spon. 1033. II. Du Pin. 2. 206. Bmy ^oT" Bin. 7. 222. 88 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Ihe conduct of Benedict, Silvester and John exl bfted on the occasion, an extraordinary spectacle Tliei, .nttnoi ' jnent^d ..cessions were n^i tl^ W sSing S'/lfS: greatest co,„|,eL „„ e 4i ll red''S"',f ' "°?'''' "'^ money, v-luch, acceding to Platina. .a.i™Ze1,„es''r.S; 1. T'..ntilic.t 4 Je.„. Sy " ' "li "?1 E"'f '"/,"»;'' *"""• '' '*!« non, VII. 5. An. Ecd. IM.? ""'"•'"'"'». «'»■' donni au plus offraiil. Oi,„. n.i™7 ■ ,fcSf 'trr-fr'tx Tiiso"''''''''"'"' '■•"" «•""«'"'" GREAT WEST1IRN SCHISM. 89 roy of heaven. ' «"«cession and was on earth the vice^ niri^J.^lfvrsionrfr '"^'T' "^^''^ constituted the twenty- of Ur b n Z f ^^7^'P^^'^'"' ^''oubled the ecclesiastical rei^s Thi^ i^t wTn }nT.7« ' "^'"W^' ^'^'"^"^" ^^^^ Benedict hal a centuvv wfr ? ^.f «' ^^jd distracted Christendom for n,ut acentu y w th atrocity and revolution.^ The nanal court having continued at Avignon for seventy years was ^Jesfored to Rome by Gregory the Eleventli Thi i restored at his death in 1^7^ f^ J^ieventh. 1 he conclave proceeding Ind feadn; shou d ' 1? "'T '^''^T' ^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^'^'^J '^^n- But cti,f„. o F ,n^-' ' " ^'Volitan. or, some say, a Pisan ^;pariirraX~ -' ^^■^^ - «»- Urban and Clement divided Christendom Th. nu u bv Italv Por*no.^i n ' tT^ , Vvhfin was recogn sed bet ill ^ . H'^^"^^lt asserted its neutrality.- Arracron at fii-st iie^tated, but soon recognised Urban • on.i oft * . \^ ,; Ce schisme dura plus de .50 ans. Aforerv .3 4-,4 2.54. ^armntil,u.s, et neutralitatem amplJxantibus. Alox. 20. 90 THE VABIATIONS OF POPERY. n I ill pontiff Joanna, the Neapolitan queen, received Clement with particu ar honors. His holiness, on the occasion, had his sacred foot well kissed. The queen began the august cere- MONY : and her majesty's holy example wa« foUowed with great elegance and edification by the Neapolitan barons, knights, ladies and gentlemen, such as Margaret, Agnes, Otho, Robertus and Durazzo. Urban, in return, as a token of his pontifical friendship, deposed Joanr 'i from her royalty, despoiled her of her kingdom and recommended her soul to the devil.' Two powerful and contending factions, in this manner, divided the papacy, and distracted the Latin communion .J ^!^'''" ^^l^^i dissension, animosity, demoralization, and war through theEuropean nations ; and especially through Itay, France Spam and Germany. Kings and clergy formed ecclesiastical factions, according to the dictates of faith or fancy. 1 he pontiffs pursued their several interests, often without policy and always without principle. The pontifical conscience eva- porated m ambition and malignity. The kings, in general, dictated the belief of the priesthood and laity, who followed the faith or faction, the principles or party of their sovereign Christendom, in consequence, was demoralized. Paper and ink says Niem would fail to recount the cabals and iniquity of the rival pontiffs, who were hardened in obduracy, and full of the machinations of Satan. High and low, prince and people, abjured all shame and fear of God. The belligerents, who waged the war, carried it on by unchristian machinations, which dis- graced reason and man. The arms used on the occasion were excommumcation, anathemas, deposition, perjury, prevarication, duplicity proscription, saints, miracles, revelations, dreams visions, the rack, the stiletto, and the dagger* Urban and his electors had the honor of opening the cam- paign. These commenced hostilities with a free use of their spiritual artillery. The cardinals declared the nullity of Urban's appointment and enjoined his speedy abdication. But his in- fallibility had no relish for either the declaration or the iniunc- ' tion ; and resolved to retain his dignity. The sacred college m their extremity, had recourse to excommunication. The ecclesia^iiical artillery was well served on the occasion, and launched their anathemas with singular precision ; but, never- theless, without effect. His holiness, in addition to these exe- crations, was, by his own electors, found guilty of apostacy usurpation, intrusion, dissemination of heresy and enmity to religion and truth." ■' ' ^bb. 15. 940. Bruy. 3, 535. 639. 657. Du Pin 2 509 Cosa q fi^o fiS« ■^ Bruy. 3. 651. Daniel, 5. 238. '^ Br^.y^t 5^ dS; I w". So8 GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 91 His infallibility soon returned these compliments. The plenipotentiary of heaven wa^ gifted with a signal facility in hurling excommunications and fulminated his anathemas wih singular practical skill. He was enabled, in conseque^cl to repay the conclave's congratulation with due interest He anathematized his electors, whom he called sons of per.lition and heresy, a nursery of scandal and treachery, vJho were gudty of apostacy, conspiracy, treason, blasphemy raSne sacrilege, contumacy, pride and calumny Their cSd re S after deal!, his inftillibility by a judicia^l sentence. depnyH Christian bunal. The persons who should consign ueir life- less bodies to the grave with funereal honors, he also excom municated till with the hands which administeieS the sepXhrd solemnity they should unearth the mouldering flesh, and cL jlLTSiTL^^''''''' '^''^ ^^- theUec'rated sT^ Seven of his cardiiii .s, whom he suspected of a consniraor against his life, he punished with a moi4 cruel sentence ^ The accused were men of merit and of a literary character ; whilst the accusation was unsupported by any evidence. But his holiness, outraging reason and common sense, pretended to a special revelation of their guilt. He also, in def/ance of mercy and justice, put the aleged conspirators to the rack to extort a confession. The tortures which they endured were beyond description; but no guilt was acknowledged. The unfeeling pontiff, in hardened insensibility, amidst the groans of hf agonizing sufferers, counted his beads in cold blood, and en! couraged the executioners in the work of torment His nephew, unreproved, laughed aloud at sight of the" horrid The'^oni-fT l''\""^?P^' T.^^ afterwards suffered death N^n^i ? ^^"^ ^T!^f 'I ^'' ^'S^^ fr«°^ Nocera and the Neapolitan army, and left the unburied body for the flesh to ,^^7n „ L- ^fT^^"'^^^.. according to common report, he thrust mto sacks, and threw into the sea. Two, says Calle^icio, were beheaded with an axe. The headless bodies were fried in an oven and then reduced to powder. This, kept in bags was earned ^before Urban to terrify others from\ similfr c^^ The holy pontiffs next encountered each other in the war of excommunication. Urban and Clement, says Alexlnder iiurled mutual execrations and anathemas.' ' These vicegerents > Labb. 15. 942, 944. Giannon, XXIII. 4. aJf r ^^J.^*^- Bruy^. 547. Giannon, XXIV 1 Mutuas diras, execratiwies, et anathematum fulmina ab Tlrbanr. «f ri mente, vibrata. Alex. 20. 254. Bruy. 3. 615. ''"™'°*' ^^ ^rbano et Cle^ ..r.. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET {MT-3) /. ^t% •^^'.V ^ ii^ ^^^ '^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 l^|2.8 1^ lis 2.2 2.0 i.8 U ill 1.6 V] <^ /^ 'c>l c^: e-l > ^/i '> > :V ^^ ''^ w '/ Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 B ^ :^ iV K% 92 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ■! 'i of God cursed one another indeed with sincere devotion. His holiness at Rome hailed his holiness at Avignon with direful unprecations : and the Christian and polite salutation was returned with equal piety and fervor. The thunder of ana- thern;.s, almost without interruption, continued, in redoubled volleys and recipn^cal peals, to roar between the Tiber and the Rhone. Ihe rival vice-gods, in the language of Pope Paul, unsatisfied with mutual excommunications, proceeded with distinguished ability to draw full-length portraits <.f each other. Lach denominated his fellow a son of Belial; and described, with graphic skill, his fntichristianitv, schism, heresy, thievery despotism and treachery. These heads of the church might have spared their execrations, but they certainly did themselves justice in the representations of their moral characters. The delineation.s, sketched by the pencil of truth, possess all the merit of pictures taken from life. Urban having, in thi« manner, excommunicated his com- petitor, proceeded to the excommunication of several kin^s who withstood his authority. He anathematized Clement and all his adlierents, which included the sovereigns of the oppo- sition. He bestowed a jinrticular share of his maledictions on J(>hn, Lewis, Joanna and Charles of Castile, Anjou and Naples. He declared John a son of iniquity, and guilty of apostac3', treason, conspiracy, schism and heresy. He then pronounced his deposition and deprivation of his dignity and kingdom, ab- solved his vassals from their oath of fidelity, and forbade all, on pain of personal excommunication and national interdict, to admit the degraded Prince into any city or country. He pronounced a similar sentence against Lewis, on whom Clement had bestowed the crown of Naples. He declared this sove- reign accursed, guilty of schism and heresy, and published a cru.sade, granting plenary indulgence to all who would arm against his majesty.^ Joanna, Queen of Naples, received a full jiroportion of the bierarchs maledictions. His holiness declared her Majesty accursed and deposed, guilty of treason and heresy, and pro- hibited all obedience of this Princess, under the penalty of ex- communication of person and interdict of the community. He next freed her vassals from their fealty, transferred her king- dom to Charles, and her soul to Satan. Charles, on whom Urban had bestowed the kingdom of Naples, soon met a similar destiny. This Prince had been the Pontitt s chief patron and friend. The king's friendship, how- ever, the hierarch, in a short time, requited with anathemas 1 Bruy. .-{. 539, 541. Giannon, XXIII. 5. et XXIV. 1. GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 93 and degradation. The attachment, indeed, between Charles and Urban was the mercenary combination of two ruffians for mutual self-interest, against the unoffending Neapolitan Queen whom the miscreants oetrayed and murdered. Eut a quarrel between the two assassins, as might be expected, soon ensued 1 he Pontiff, then, in requital of former kindness, erected a cross lighted tapers, interdicted the kingdom, cursed the kins and consigned his Majesty, soul and body, to the devil This effusion of pontiHcal gratitude was followed with dreadful re- prisals. Charles tormented the clergy who acknowledged Urban as j3ope, and off ered ten thousand florins of gold for his head, dead or alive. He led an army against UrbTin, and be- sieged him, amid the inroads of famine and fear, in the castle of_ Nocera. Four times a day the terrified Pope from his window, cursed the hostile army with ' bell, book, and candle- light. He bestowed absolution on all who should maim any of the enemy ; and on all who would come to his aid, he con- ferred the crusading indulgence granted to those who marched to the Ho y Land. Urban in a wonderful manner, escaped, and Charles was afterwards assassinated in Hunc/arv The holy Pontiff rejoiced in the violent death of the Neapolitan king The blood-stained instrument of murder, which wa.s presented to his infallibility, red with the enemy's gore, excited in the vicar-general of God a Hendish smile.^ These are a few specimens of Urban's ability in the Pontifi- caUccomplishment of cursing Urban, in this art, v hich is a matter of great importance in a good Pope, seems to have ex- celled Clement. Both, indeed, showed splendid talents in this edifying department, which is an essential qualification in a plenipotentiary of heaven. But Urban, in this part of a Pope's duty, eclipsed lus rival and carried this practical science to perfection. These mutual maledictions, with which the competitors attempted to maintain their several pretensions, were .-^'mport- ed in the rear by another species of ecclesiastical artillerv • such as miracles, visions, dreams, and revelations. Each faction was supplied with these in copious profusion. Peter and Catharine appeared for Urban. Peter was a Franciscan and filmed for sanctity, miracles, and celestial visions; Catharine • of bienna, a Dominican virgin, who has been raised to the honors of samtship, appeared for his Roman infallibility She supported her patron with all the influence of her sanctity, and wrote a bad letter to the French king in his favor Vincent and Peter declared for Clement. Vuic'ent, a Domi;Ln, be" ides 1 Bruy. 3. 550. 553. I P; i I) 94 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. heavenly visions, and miraculous powers, had, according to ac- counts, proselyted multitudes of the Jews and Waldences But Vincent, in the enr^, deserted his French holiness, and called him, m saintly language, a schismatic and a heretic. Peter, the cardinal of Luxembourg, who adhered to Clement, was m equal odor of sanctity and superior to all in the manu- facturmg of miracles. Forty-two dead men, at one cast, revived at his tomb. Many others, of each sex and of the same sancti- fied class, supported each party. ' Many holy men and women,* said Urban's advocate in the council of Modena in 1380,' had revelations for his Roman holiness.' His French infallibility's party was also prolific in prophets, prophetesses, and wonders. All these, in favor of their several patrons, saw visions, uttered revelations, wrought miracles, and dreamed dreams.' The evils which the schism had long inflicted on Christendom, at length induced men to think of some remedy. The distrac- tions extended through all the European nations, and were at- tended with dreadful effects. The charities of life, in the un- social divisions, were discarded, and men's minds wound up to fury and madness. Society seemed to be unhinged. War, excited by the rival pontiffs and their several partisans, desola- ted the kingdoms of the Latin communion, and especially France and Italy. Treachery, cabal, massacre, assassination robbery and piracy reigned through the nations. These evils' in loud appeal, called for the extinction of the schism in which these disorders had originated. The end indeed was the wish of all. The European kmo-- doms were unanimous for the termination of division and the return of tranquillity. The means for effecting the end were the only subject of disputation. The difficulty consisted in the discovery of a remedy. Three ways were proposed for the ex- tinction of the schism. These were cession, arbitration, and a general council. Cession consisted in the voluntary resigna- tion of the rivals for the election of another, who should be ac- knowledged by all Christendom. Arbitration consisted in as- certaining by competent judges, which of the two competitors was the true vicar-general of God. A general council would, by a judicial sentence, depose both, and elect a third whose claim would obtain universal recognition. The difficulty of assembling a general council, and the utter impossibility of de- ciding by arbitration on the claims of the reigning Pontifts, militated, in the general opinion, against each of these means.' Cession therefore was at first the commonly adopted remedy. 1 Alex. 20. 255. et 24. 476, 479. Mea. 3. 235, Bruy. 3, 561. Duniel. 5. 237 Cossart, 3. 632. Andill. 861, j . . e . o. ^^, GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 95 Resignation and degradation were the onlj plans, which in fact were attempted. These means, which alone were attended with moral possibility, were adopted by the French church and the Pisan and Constantian councils. The French favored the method of cession. This plan was suggested by the Parisian university, which, in that age, had obtained a liigh character for learning and Catholicism This faculty proposed the renunciation of the French and Roman hierarchs ; and, in this proposal, confessed the difficulty of dis- crimination. The Sorbonne, supported by the Galilean Church unable to decide between Benedict and Gregory required both to resign. The design, after some discussion, was seconded by the king, the nobility, the clergy, and the people. The method ot abdication was also approved and supported by the Dukes of Lerry, Orleans, and Burgundy, who governed the nation during the indisposition of the king. A majority of the Euro- pean kingdoms concurred with the French nation. A few indeed, such as Portugal and the northern nations, refused their co-operation. But the abdication of the contending pontiffs was recommended by England, Bohemia, Hungary, Navarre, Arragon, Castile, and Si^"'- .' This attempt, however, was defeated by the selfish obstinacy of the t^o competitors. These, to frustrate the scheme, used all kinds of chicanery, practised per iry, and issued anathemas and execrations. Speech, said a French wit, was given, not to dis- cover, but to conceal our sentiments. This observation was exemplified m Innocent, Gregory and Benedict. These viceroys of heaven had sworn to relinquish their several claims, for the good of the church and the tranquiUization of Christendom, iiutthe pontificial perjurers violated their oaths to retain their power, and wounded conscience, if they had any. to gratify ambition.^ The church, therefore, had. for several yekrs, two iar- ring heads, and God two perjured vicars-general. All description f '«ehold these impostors added to perjury. Their ambition and selfishness caused their perpetration of any enormity, and their submission to any baseness, which might enable them, for a tew months, to hold their precarious authority The subtraction of obedience from Benedict by the French wa,s the consequence of his shufiling and obstinacy. This mea- sure, which, like that of cession, was suggested by the Parisian university, consisted in the rejection of his infallibility's autho- rity. Ihe King, at the instance of the Sorbonne faculty called ' Dan. .5. .337, .181. Du Pin, 2. 512. Labb. 1.5. 1003. 1080. 1081. C„s. 3. 695. Daniel, 5. 431. m 96 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. an assembly of the bishops, abbots, and universities of the kingdom ; and the meeting was also attended by the Dukes of Berry, Orleans, Burgundy, and Bourbon. The council, indeed, on this occasion were divided. The Duke of Orleans, the uni- versity of Toulouse, and the bishops of Toui-s and Le Puy, were against subtraction. The majority, however, recommemJed the pioposed measure ; and a totil rejection of pontifical authority was published. Benedict's cardinals, also, except Boniface and Pampeluna, approved the decision of the French assembly, and advised the French sovereign to declare the pontiff, from his disregard of his oath, guilty of schism and heresy.' The French nation, however, in 1403, in the vacillation of its councils, repealed the neutrality and restored obedience. The neutrality had lasted five years, from its commencement in 1398. Its abrogation was chiefly owing to the agency and cabals of the Duke of Orleans, who was opposed, but without success, by the Dukes of Berry and Burgundy. The cardinals also were reconciled to Benedict, and the re-establishment of his authority was advocated by the universities of Orleans, Angert,, Montpellier, and Toulouse. The King, cajoled by the artifice of Orleans, ordered the recognition of obedience.'' But this recognition was temporajy. The French, remark- able for their fickleness, enjoyed, on this occasion, all the charms of variety. An assembly of the French prelacy declared again in favor of neutrality ; and his majesty, in 1408, commanded the nation to disown the authority of both Benedict and Gre- gory. The example of France was followed by Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, and indeed by the majority of the European nations. Benedict, in the mean t'me, issued a bull of excom- munication againstall who countenanced the neutrality, whether cardinal or king, interdicted the nation, and absolved the sub- jects from the oath of fidelity. A copy c his precious manifesto the pontiff transmitted to the king, who treated it with merited contempt. Benedict and Gregory, in the midst of these scenes of animo- sity, retired 'n 1408 from Avignon and Rome to Arragon and Aquileia, where, having convened councils, these rival vice- gods encountered each other, as usual, with cursing and anathemas. His Italian infallibility, in the synod of Aquileia, condemned, as illegal, the electic n of Clement and Benedict, and sanctioned, as canonical, that of Urban, Boniface and k t* 1 Du Pin, 2. 512. Daniel, 5. 378. Labb. 15. 1072. * Boss. 2. 100. Daniel, 5. 40r), 406. Bruy. 3. 620. Cosa. 3. 77'. ' Daniel, 6. 414. Giannon. XXIV. 6. Cossort, 3. 771. ^ GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 97 Innocent. He then condemned and annulled all Benedict's ordinations and promotions. His French infallibility, in the council of Arragon, reversed the picture. Having forbidden all obedience, and dissolved all obligations to his rival, he annulled his ordinations and promotions. Gregory convicted Benedict of schism, heresy, contumacy, and perjury. Benedict convicted Gregory of dishonesty, baseness, impiety, abomina- tion, audacity, temerity, blasphemy, schism, and heresy ' The perverse and unrelenting obstinacy of the two pontiffs caused the desertion of their respective cardinals These weary of such prevarication, fled to the city of Pisa, to concert some plan for the extermination of the schism and the restora- tion of unity. The convocation of a general council appeared the only remedy. The Italian and French cardinals, therefore now united, wrote circular letters to the kings and prelacy of Christendom, summoning an oecumenical assembly for the extirpation of division and the establishment of union » Ihe Pisan council, in 140.9, unable to ascertain whether Gregory or Benedict was the canonical head of the church proceeded by deposition and election, the holy fathers inca- pable of determining the right or title, used, says Maimbourg, not their knowledge but their power ;' and having dismissed Gregory and Benedict, appointed Alexander. Gregory and Benedict were summoned to appear, and, on refusal, were in the third session, convicted of contumacy. The Pisans repre- senting the universal church, and vested with supreme authority proceeded without ceremony, in the nineteenth session, to the work of degradation.3 Their definitive sentence against the i^ ranch and Italian viceroys of heaven is a curiosity, and worthy of eternal remembrance. The Pisans began with characterizing themselves as holy and general, representing the universal church ; and then de- clared his French and Italian holiness guilty of schism, heresy, error, perjury, incorrigibleness, contumacy, pertinacity, iniquity' violation of vows, scandalization of the holy, universal church ot God, and unworthy of all power and dignity. The charac- ter of these plenipotentiaries of heaven, if not very good is certainly pretty extensive. The sacred synod then deprived Gregory and Benedict of the papacy, and forbade all Christians onpamof excommunication, notwithstanding any oath of fidelity' to obey the ex-pontiffs, or lend them counsel or favor.' The papacy being vacated by the sentence of deposition, the 1 Cossart, 3. 381, 382. Du Pin. 2. 6. Labb. 15. 1107. Giann. XXIV. 6. Bruy. 3. 655. Du Pin. 2. 515. Labb. 15. 1123, 1229. Du Pin. 3. 3, 5. *Dacery 1. 847. Bruy. 3. 671. Labb. 15. 1131, 1139 G 98 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. V > next step was to elect a supreme pontiff. This task, the coun- cil, in the nineteenth session, performed by the French and Italian cardinals, formed into one sacred college. The conclave, with cordial unanimity, elected the Cardinal of Milan, who assumed the appellation of Alexander the Fifth. He i»resid(.'d in the ensuing session, and ratified the acts of the cardinals and general council. The Pisan council, however, notwithstanding its alleged uni- versality, did not extinguish the schism. The decision of the synod, and election of the conclave only furnished a third claimant for the pontifical chair. The universality and authority of the Pisan assembly were, by many, rejected ; and Christen- dom was divided between Gregory, Benedict, and Alexander. Gregory was obeyed by Germany, Naples, and Hungary ; while Benedict was recognised by Scotland, Spain, Armagnac, and Foix. Alexander was acknowledged, as supreme spiritual director, by the other European nations. The schism, there- fore, still continued. The Latin communion was divided between three ecclesiastical chiefs, who continued to distract the western church. .. The inefficiency of the Pisan attempt required the convocation of another general council, whose energy might be better directed and more successful.' This remedy was, in 1414, supplied by the assembly of Constance. The Constantian council, like the Pisan, proceeded by depo- sition and election ; and confessed, in consequence, like its predecessor, its inability to discriminate between the compara- tive right and claims of the two competitors. John the Twenty- third had succeeded to Alexander the Fifth. The rival pontiffs were, at that time, Gregory, Benedict, and John. Gregory and Benedict, though obeyed by Scotland, Spain, Hungary, Naples, and Germany, were under the sentence of synodical deposition. John, on the contrary, was recognised, even by the Constantian council, as the lawful ecclesiastical sovereign of Christendom. The Constantians, though they admitted the legitimacy of John's election, and the legality of his title, requii-ed him to resign for the good of the church and the extinction of schism. The pontiff, knowing the power and resolution of the council, professed comnliance ; and, in the second session, confirmed his declaration, in case of Gregory's and Benedict's cession, with an oath. This obligation, however, he endeavored to evade. Degradation from his ecclesiastical elevation presented a dreadful mortification to his ambition, and he fled, in conse- quence, from Constance, with the fond, but disappointed 1 Giannon, XXIV. 6. Labb. 16. 495. Bruy. 4. 7. Bossuet, 2. 101. GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 99 erpectation of escaping his destiny. Gregory and Benedict were also guilty of violating their oath.' The church, therefore, at this time, had three perjured heads, and the Messiah three perjured vicars-general. The council, seeing no other alternative, resolved to depose John for imraorality. The character, indeed, of this plenipo- tentiary of heaven was a stain on reason, a blot on Christianity and a disgrace to man. The sacred synod, in the twelfth ses- sion, convicted his holiness of schism, heresy, incorrigibleness, simony, impiety, immodesty, unchastity, fornication, adultery, incest, sodomy, rape, piracy, lying, robbery, murder, perjury and infidelity. The holy fathers then pronounced sentence of deposition, and absolved the faithful from their oath of fealty.' Gregory, seeing the necessity, abdicated. His infallibility, in defiance of his oath, and though deposed by the Pisan coun- cil, had retained the pontifical dignity ; but was in the end, and in old age, forced to make this concession. Malatesta, Lord of Rimini, in Gregory's name renounced the papacy, with all its honors and dignity. John and Gregory, notwithstanding their frightful character, as sketched by the Pisan and Constantian synods, were raised to the cardinal dignity. The two councils had blazoned their immorality in strong and appalling colors, and pronounced both unworthy of any dignity. Martin, however, promoted John to the cardinalship. The Constantian fathers, in the seventeenth session, and in the true spirit of inconsistency, placed Gregory next to the Roman pontift', and advanced him to the episcopal, legatine, and cardinal dignity, with all its emoluments and authority. "Benedict, though importuned by the council of Constance and V ^ King of the Romans to resign, resolved to retain the pontiticuj dignity, and retired, with this determination, to Paniscola, a strong castle on the sea-coast of V^alentia. The old dotard, however, was deserted by all the European states ; but, till his death, continued, twice a day, to excommunicate the rebel nations that had abandoned his righteous cause. The council, in the mean time, pronounced his sentence of deposition, and convicted him of schism, heresy, error, pertinacity, incorrigibility, and perjury, and declared him unworthy of all rank or title." Martin was raised to the papacy and his elevation terminated a schism, which, for half a century, had divided and demoralized the nations of Western Chris- tendom. The pontifical succession, it is clear, was, during this schism, Labb. 16 142. 148. Du Pin. ,S. 14. Labb. 16. 178. 221. Coss. 4. 90, 110. Du Pin. 3. 14. Labb. 10. 277, 681, 715. Cossart, 3. 881. et 4. 81. Du Pin, 3. 5- 119- 100 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. interrupted. The l.nk.s of the chain were lost, or so confused that human ingenuity can never Hnd their phvce, nor human penetration discover their arrangement. Their disentanglement may defy all the art of man and all the sophistry of Jesuitism The election ot Urban or Clement must have been uncanonical" and his papacy unlawful : and the succe.wsois of the unlawful pontiff must have shared in his illegality. Clement and Bene- dict commanded the obedience of nearly the h«lf of Western rnr!;^' . ""I'n"^ ^^^ the remainder obeyed Urban. Boniface, Innocent, and Gregory. One division mu.st have recognised the authority of a usurper and an impostor. The church dispersed could not ascertain the true vicar- general of Jesus, and hence its divisions. All the erudition of the Parisian university and the Spanish nation was unavailing, 1 he French and Spanish doctors, in the assemblies of Paris and Medina in 1381. examined the several claims of the com- petitors with erudition and ability. The question was treated by the canonists and theologians of Spain, France, and Italy with freedom and impartiality. But Spanish, Fn^nch and Italian ingenuity on this subject was useless. The PisaA and Constantian councils, in all their holiness and infallibility were says Daniel, equally nonplused. These, notwithstanding their pretensions to divine direction, could depose, but could not discriminate ; and were forced to u.se, not their information or wisdom, but their power and authority.' The inspired fathers could, in their own opinion, depose all the claimants, but could not ascertain the right or title of any. This conduct was a plain confession of their inaV>ility to disc(;ver the canonical head of the church and vicar-general of God. Moderns, in this part ot ecclesiastical history, are at an equal loss with contempo- rary authors and councils. ^ The impracticability of ascertaining the rightful pontiff has been admitted by the ablest critics and theologians of Roman- ism, suca as Gerson, Antoninus, Bellarn.ine, Andillv, Maimbourrr Alexander, Mezeray. Daniel, and Moreri.'^ Gerson admits 1 Alexander, 24. 466, 467. Daniel, .5. 227. Est varietas opini.muui Doct.inun, et inter doctissiinos et prohatissimos ei ntraque parte Gers.-n, in Alex. 24.474. I'entissin.os viros nacra SaH.na et jure canonico habuit utraque pars, ac et.am religiossnnos viros, et etiam mfra Ilex 2!%"" LT.T'IT r P"^"^M"«^«tio ilia decidi. 'Antonin c [. Alex M. 477. ^ec potuit facile pra-dicari qms eorum verus et leyitiiuus esset Pontifex. cum non deceastnt singulis doctissuni patruni. Bell IV*' 4 L'affW |tant obscure etdifficded'elle n'.eme, i.'a po.nt'encore 6t/ d^ci d^e An'Sv davecles Anti-Papes. Maiml.. I. Bruy. 3. 515. Adeo obscurlerant et dubiacontendentiuni jura, ut post multas virorum doctissiniorum d ssertationeS plurimosque tractatus ed.tos. oognosci non posset qui^ esset veruB et legitimus Pontifex Alex 24 444 (in na ;.,., ' ^V ce diwm Mp7 -i 9^1 rf * ■ ," * jamais pu vuider ce aemeie. Mez. 3. 23o. De tres eavans hommes, et des sainte GREAT WESTERN SCHISM. 101 the reasonableness of doubt, and the variety of opinions amoni? the m(Kst learned and approved doctors on the several clainia ot the rival pontiffs.' Antoninus acknowledires ' the unsettled state of the controversy, notwithstanding each parly's shining miracles and the advocacy of pious men, deei)ly skilled in hacred Writ and in canon law.' Bellarmine mentions 'the learned patrons which supported the several competitors, and the dithculty of determining the true and lawful i)ontiff. Andilly agrees with Gerson, Antoninus, and Bellannine. Ho gi-ants the obscurity and difficulty of the <|uestion, which has not yet been decided. Maimbourg, on the Western Schism, states the moral impossibility of ascertaining the rightful pope' and relates the support which each faction received from civilians, theologians, and universities, and even from saints, and miracles. Alexander, after an impartial and profound ex- amination comes to the same conclusion. He shows the im- practicabi ity of ascertaining the true and legitimate pontiff, notwithstanding the dissertations and books published on the subject by the most learned men.' Each party, in the state- ment of Mezeray, 'had the advocacy of distinguished person- ages saints, revelations, and miracles; and all these could not decide the contest. Daniel and Moreri confess, on this topic, the jarring and contradictory opinion of saints, as well as of lavvyers theologians and doctors, and the unwillingness or in- ability of the church, as.sembled afterwards in the council of Constance, to discriminate among the several competitors the true vicar-general of God and ecclesiastical sovereign of Christ- endom, binular concessions have been made by Giannone, Bruys Panormitan, Ealusius, Zabarella, Surius, Turrecrema and a long train of other divines and critics. The Basilian and Florentine schism, which was the thirtieth in the jnapacy, troubled the spiritual reign of Eugenius and • This contest presented the edifying spectacle of two popes clothed in supremacy, and two councils vested with in- fallibility, hurling mutual anathemas and excommunications Martin, who had been cho.sen by the Constantian Convention, had departed, and been succeeded by Condalmerio, who as- sumed the name of Eugenius. The council of Basil deposed Eugenius and substituted Felix. Eugenius assembled the "iTe^ne'vmff *^^'.'r '^'''"'- L'^gUse aasembl^e, dans le concile de Con- stance, ne voilflt point 1 examiner. Daniel, 5. 227. Le droit des deux nartia su^tLr'/lS""^''^^?'''^* ">'^^° ^^« ^«- cOt^sdetrUstaus urE^^ suites, de c(^-16bres theologiens, et dc grands Docteurs- Moreri 7 172 Les Sl't:rT"454.""" *"" P"*""" "^•^^^"^ parleursdelioeetparleur 102 THE VAIIIATIONS OF POPERY. £ Of Balu'^^^''"'''' """^ excommunicated Felix and the council The council of Basil met anno 1431, The holy fathers in the second session, decreed the Hupcriorlty of a^eneml a?' n undTrain" f "^^ T'''''''' •'! '^"' ^^^'^ ^^« ^^ P -Jiff under pain of condign punishment, to obey the svnn «1 The buli., however, contained no terror for the coundl Th« of refusal, to pronounce his holiness guilty ot-rntumacv Th! denodMoT "f,2" -""""y ™? r'^"' » P'-o'»'J« •"> sentence of of tie mn„X ^K ?' enactment in 1430, de,)rived him (L^ "^f.^' ''* seitence agiiinst God's vicarieneral hi the church 8 representatives is a curiosity. TherneraTc,^™,^7 ra..,^no'r;Z'd12i^ Xe-^ ^^the": » Alex. Jd. 39. Bruy. 4. 115. Du Pin, 3. 27. -■W" BASILIAN AND FLORLNTIWE 8CHISM. 108 Condalmerio from the papacy, abrogated all his constitutions and ordinations, absolved the faithful from their obedience, oaths, oblifjations, and fidelity ; and prohibited the obedience of all, even bishops, patriarchs, cardinals, emperors and kings, under privation of all honor and possessions.' The Basilians, having cashiered one vice-god, appointed another. The person selected for this dignity was Amadeus, duke of Savoy. This prince had governed his hereditary realms for forty years. The ability which, during this revolving period, he had displayed, rendered him the delight of his peo- ple, and the admiration of the age. He was accounted a Solomon for wisdom, and made arbiter of differences among kirgs, who consulted him on the most important affairs. He possessed a philosophical cast of mind, a love of repose, and a contempt for worldly grandeur. Weary of a throne, which, to so many, is the ot»ject of ambition, and disgusted probably with the bustle and tumult of life, Amadeus resigned the ducal administration to his sons, and resolved to embrace t' seclusion of a hermit. He chose for the [)lace of his retreat ihe beautiful villa of Ripaille, on the banks of the lake of Geneva. This solitude possessed the advantage of air, water, wood, meadow, vineyards, and all that could contribute to rural beauty. Ama- deus, in this sequestered spot, built a hermitage and enclosed a park, which he supplied with deer. Accompanied in his retreat by a few domestics, and supporting his aged limbs on a crooked and knotty staff, he spent his days far from the noise and bu.sy scenes of the world, in innocence and piety. A de- putation arrived at this retirement, conveying the triple crown and other trappings of the papacy. The ducal hermit accepted, with reluctance and tears, and after much entreaty, the insignia of" powei' and authority. Western Christendom, amidst the unity of Romanism, had then two universal bishops, and two universal coun^^ils.* Eugenius and Felix, with the Florentine and Basilian synods, divided the Latin communion, except a few states which assumed an attitude of neutrality. The two rival pontiffs and councils soon began the work of mutual excommunication. Eugenius hailed Felix, on his pro- motion to the pontifical throne, with imprecation and obloquy. He welcomed his brother, says Poggio his secretary, to his new dignity with the appellations of Mahomet, heretic, schismatic, antipope, Cerberus, the golden call", the abomination of deso- lation erected in the tem[)le of God, a monster that had lisen to trouble the church and destroy the faith, and who, willing 1 Bruy. 4. 126. Du Pin, 3. 39. Dan. 6, 167. Boss. 2, 167. ^ Labb. 17. 395. Dan 6. 168. Boss. 2. 177. Alex. 25. 540. Sylv. c. XLTII. 104 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. 'a ,^nlr ^ A overthrow a single state but unhinge the whole universe had resigned humanity, assumed the mannerrof a wild bojust, and crowned the inionity of his r)ast lifrifv /k mostfrightfulimpiety.^ His ini:.dibi[ity, anu ig tt S . it I hshments discovered in thi« salutation a suneHor - eniusZ celebrated for thus taent in his answers to Leo and HenT'the Roman pontitf and the English king, was in this red emeat wlien compared with his holiness, a mere ninny '*''"^^'"^"*' i^ugonius congratulated the council of Basil with simil-ir complinieuts and benedictions. This asseuihly he I lied Ick he,M^s tools, madmen, barbarian.s, wild beasts, ali™^^^^^ wretches, persecutors, miscreants, schismatics, h;ret c "v^ 7 bonds, run^igates, apostates, rebels, monsters, cri.n naN ' a 0^1 ' sp.mcy a.1 mnovation, a defbrmity, a conventicle cSwii^^ed W annv ^ '"'"'^^' • "^'^^T ' ^^'^^''^^•^^>'' '"'^<^^I'i»ations. b^ 1 «SS>S'f;S: "•r«-'=-ity' *'-y> nuulness, and thl d ^ t H . ■ f /'^^•^«^»^^"d, error, scandal, poison, pestilence deso- lation, unrighteousness, and iniquity ^ ''^ii^me, atso- Having sketched the character of the holy fathers with so lesMoia skill, to annul their acts, and pionounce their sentence ch rge of his pastoral duty, and actuated with .^al for God ftoui thr.r ', ^7''''T1 •'^^^^'^'"'^^ '^"<1 ^^" accursed impS tium the churcli, despoiled the Basilian doctors, bishops uch bi hops, and car.hnals of all honor, office, benefice and dit' ^y^ olas denominated Eugenius the supreme head of the church and vicar-general of Jesus. But Felix whom he excommunicated with all his adherents, he designated the patron of schism, heresy, and ini(iuity. The dukedom of Savoy, his holiness, by apostolic authority, transferred to Charles the ^^rench king, to bring the poijulation back to the sheepfold. Ihis plemi)otentiary of heaven then proclaimed a crusade agiiinst the duke and his subjects. He admonished the French king to assume the sign of the cross, and to act in this enter- pn/e with energy. He exhorted the faithful to join the French aiiiiy ; jind for their encouragement, his holiness, supported by the mercy of the Omnipotent God, and the authority of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, granted the crusading army a full pardon of all their sins, and, at the resurrection of the just tlie enjoyment of eternal life.^ P'elix and the Basilians, however, did not take all this kind- ness for nothing. The holy fathers, with their pontiff at their head, returned the Florentine benedictions with spirit and i)iety Their jspiiitual artillery hurled back the imprecations and re- pai< tiieir competitor's anathemas. The Basilians, with devout coi'hality, nulliHed the Florentine council, and rescinded all its acts.' The Basilijui congress indeed cursed, as usual, in a masterly style. But P^^li.x, through some defect of intellect or education, was miserably defective in this pontifical accom- plishment. His genius, in the noble art of launching execra- tions, was far inferior to that of Eugenius and Nicholas, who, from nature or cuitivation, ])ossessed splendid talents for the papal duty of cursing. He did well afterwards to resign the Oil Pin, 3. 28. Bruy._4. 130. Lal.b. 18. Olo, 1205-1384. •-'Labb. HI. 4 (.'osn 2G1 Labb. 18. 1305. Biay. 4. 130. Dii Pin. 3. 42. iiiij 106 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. office for which his inability for clothing imprecations in suit- for ^hnn^"'^'' T'^r'i ^"^ ""«^- ^'^»e1=ouncil were to bW of the S ql ""^ ^^''' vice-gods, however, for tlie honor Felivin ?.^f !l "^^'^ incompetent in this useful attainment, ^eiix, in latter days, seems to have been the only one who in this respect, disgraced his dignity. ^ ' the nati^oiT'^Th.*^" ^'^^J^- .^"/. P^P'^^™ communicated to to thei- dll r ^/re divided into three fractions, according to theu declaration for Eugenius, Felix, or neutrality. Thi iTun Xn'l.^'^r'^'^' '^'""^^ branded with mutual^excom! nium.ation had their several obediences among the people leZ'Tr^-'^^l'^'TT ^^"^^^"^'^ declared for EuS: Frinra?d r'f ^^^ /^*'^^' ^P^""' ^^^^"g^l' ^^d Scotland. veTTn shl ° """^^'^^"^^^^^"^^ '^' council of Basil ; and iTniZ ''heer inconsistency, rejected Felix and adhered to Eu- Cenius bn U ' 'f''P' '' ^'\}^'^^' "«t only declared for on,nT ' \\^^ ?.'^^'*^>^' *^ssembled in a national council, ex- Swed" in uf;^f'- P^,"^^^^"', ^'^'-^"^^^ ^"^--^^^ -otives, Felix, hovvever, commanded a respectable minority He wis IckrJwl.S ^T' P^^'^'^^'^"'^' '^"d Savoy. His authorit^ Ind Poh\^ J ^'i ^^ .?'"^ universities of Fiance, Germa.iy and Cracow ^Th ^^^ "^ ^ ^^ ^-n«. Vienna Erfurt, Colonii round ritanS o^Fdix^^ ^^' ^^'^^^^^^^^^ ^''^ ^^"'^^ Det?to,r«^'/''""- "? •' ?"'^ ^r^y' disclaimed both the com- Et ali'tv Tf '''''^' ^'^i'^^^]^'^ dissensions, an armed neutral ty. Jts suspension tf obedience commenced in 1438 Son lel'ontril 1^""'" ^"""^ '^'' P^^^«^' ^'^ P^^^'^^^^-d -d people contrived, in some way or other, to do without a pope« nonHHT".'i "^ this occasion, anticipated, onthe subje^c^ of in tne xieioimation. dorforl'n',^;^"''''^''' r^^'?' ^''^^ distracted western Christen- dom for about ten years, terminated in 1449. This was effected by the resignation of Felix, at the earnest entreaty of ktgs councds, and people. Amadeus, unlike Urban, Boniface, Innt cent Gregory, Clement, and Benedict, who were rivals in the great western schism, abdicated with promptitude and fticility.^ ' Labb. 18. UQi] Labb. 18. 18'"''"^-^ "^^^ electoral variations, the"r records of H J" ^f '''''''''' .J^' '^ ^^ntury, differed in disagreed [nthell "^ ''';'"'"' ^'"^^ ^^'^^^^^•^' ^^ "^^^"7 eases. alsoCeJ fr t K^'i^r A^^^^^ Several of the pontiffs' church who mf.; n- T 1 '^ ni^Uonty. All the heads of the fev^ of tL nw 1 f-^ ^^TK> "^'*^^ "^"^ ^<^ enun)erated. A ulh as Viclor ^''^^V^^"'^';?^''. ^^^^vever, may be n^entioned ; John. ' ^''P^^'"' ^'^^"""^^ II'^""^-^^^- Vigilius, and Molt'^s^ HS'frrr?'"™ P-tronized tanus P,WWir "^^'il^^' ity,«PPioved the prophecies of Mon- Smmunon n/"^ Maxinulla, admitted these fanatic, to hs V,-,.f^,' -^ pontitt, had been condemned by the chur.-h validity of baptism admnustered by any hereticd denomination ' Bell. IV. 8. Bruy. 1. 40. Tertull. 501. Du Pin, 346. Godeau, 436. Spon. 173. n. ■ « l ^» lj|^| M )) t^il li ■'■sti'pi^m:--; - ■ DOCTRINAL VARIATIONS. 109 His infallibility's language, according to Cyprian, Firmiliau, and the plain signification of the words, taught the efficacy of the baptismal ceremony in any form, even without the name of the Trinity.' The cotemporary partisans of heresy, indeed, except the Novatians, who were out of the question, rejected the deity of the Son and the Spirit, and, therefore, in this insti- tution, omitted the names of these two divine persons. Their t'ornis, in the celebration of this sacrament, were, as appears from Irenaius, distinguished for their ridiculousness and absurd- ity. Persons, however, who had been baptized in any heretical «*^"^y> «oon retracted, .nd shifteS The r;ontiff t\l7'''^ ''""'' ^^ *''" <^^^"'^^^" of Chalcedon. Ihe pontiff, in 0.39, in a communication to the Emperor '• C>-prian, Ep. 75. Bruv. 1. 65. Challenor. 5. Labb. 1. 1452. et 2. 42. Maimb. 98. 99. Bin. 1. 20. DOCTRINAL VARIATIONS. Ill Justi»ian and the patriarch Mennas, disclaimed Eutychianism, and excommunicated all its partisans.^ His avowal of Jacobitism, indeed, was during the life of his rival Silverius, when, instead of being lawful pastor, Vigilius, according to Bellarmine, Baronius, and Godeau, was only an illegal intruder, who had obtained the ecclesiastical sovereignty by violence and simony.* The usurper, however, even then held the whole administration of the papacy; and, after the death of his competitor, made four different and jarring con- fessions of faith on the subject of the three chapters, which contained the writings of Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus. Vigilius, in 54)7, opposed Justinian's edict, which condemned the works of these three authors.^ The emperor, in 545, had issued a constitution, in which he anathematized Ibas, Theo- doret, and Theodorus, and condemned their productions, on account of their execrable heresy and blasphetn)^. The impe- rial proclamation was subscribed by Mennas, Zoilos, Ephraim, and Peter, ]>atriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem ; and by the oriental suffragans, who followed the footsteps of their superiors. liis holiness, however, on his arival in the imperial city, in 547, refused to sign the imperial edict. He declared the condemnation of the three chapters derogatory to the council of Chalcedon, and, in consequence, excommunicated the Grecian clergy, and anathematized all who condemned Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus. His inftiUibility's hostility to the rcyal manifesto, however, was temporary. His holiness, in 548, published a bull, which he called his judgment, and which condemned, in the strongest and most express terms, tlie works of Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus. These productions, according to this decision, con- tained many things contrary to the right faith, and tending to the establishment of impiety and Nestorianism. Vigilius, there- fore, anathematized the publications, the authors, and their abettors. Alexander and Godeau, on this occasion, acknow- ledged the inconsistency of his infallibility's judgment with his former decision.* Godeau 's observation is worthy of remark. The pontiff's compliance with the emperor, .says the historian, was a prudent accommodation to the malignity of the times.'* 1 Liberat. c. XXII. Orodeau, 4. 203. 208. Vigil. Ep. IV. V. * Bell. IV. 11. Godeau, 4. 206. Biun. 4. 400. ^ Damnationi primum obstitit. Alex. 12. 33. Godeau, 4. 229. Theoph. 152. * Ilia postmodum judicato damnavit. Alexaud. 12. 33. Maimb. 67. Labb. 6. 23, 177. O'ctoit uii j;:gcmcut ciiuiriiirc au jjremier, qu u avou si lortrmeni B0ut6nu ctwi- tre I'Einpereur, et coiitre les ^v^ues Orientaux. Godeau, 4. 233. 5 Prudent accommodement in, la malignite du temps. Godeau, 4. 233. T^' !■ 112 III THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. The badness of the times, in the good bishop's mind, juHified the Pope's discretion and versatility. The Latin clergy, however, liad a different opinion of the pontifical judgment. These, to a man, forsook Vigilius : Dacius Sebastian, Rusti,;us, and Facundus, with the Illyrians, Dal- matians, and Africans, viewed the decision a.s the subversion of the Chalcedonian faith, and the establishment of Eutychianism on the ruins of Catholicism. Facundus openly ttixed his holi- ness with pievarication and perfidy*' His infiiUibility, ever changing, i'lsued, in 553, in a council of sixteen bishops and three deacons, a constitution which over- threw his judgment. Vigiliu.s, in this constitution, disapproved of sixty extracts from Theodorus, in the bad acceptation in which they had been taken ; but prohibited the condemnation of his person. He could not, he said, by his own sentence, condemn Theodorus nor allow him to be condemned by any.' The pontiff, at the same time, declared the Catholicism of the works, and forbade all anathematizing of the persons of Theo- doret and Ibas. His supremacy ordained and decreed, that^ nothing should be done or attempted to the injury or detraction of Tiieodoret, who signed, without hesitation, the Chalcedonian definition, and consented with ready devotion to Leo's letter. He decided and commanded, that the judgment of the Chalce- donian fathers, who declared the orthodoxy of Ibas, should remain, without addition or diminution. All this was in direct contradiction, as the tilth general council showed, to his judg- ment, in which he had condemned the heresy of the three chapters, and anathematized the persons of their authors and adv(»cates. This constitution, however, notwithstandiug its in- consistency with his former declaration, the pontiff sanctioned by his apostolic authority, and interdicted all of every ecclesias- tical dignity, from writing, sjieaking, i)ublishing, or teachincr any thing against his pontifical decision.* * The sixth and last detour of Vigilius was his confirmation of the fifth general council, which condemned and anathematized Ibas, Theodoret, Theodorus, and their works, for impiety, wick- edness, blas|)hemy, madness, hei'esy, and Nestorianism'. The following is a specimen of the infallible assembly's condemna- tion of the three chapters and their authors, which the holy lathers, ms usual, bellowed in loud vociferation. 'Anathema to Theodorus. Satan composed his confession. The Ephesian council anathematized its author. Theodorus renounced the gospel. Anathema to all who do not anathematize Theodorus. 'Godean, 4. 211. Bruy. in Vigil. Labb. 5. 1350- 1.360. Maimb. G3. DOCTRINAL VARIATIONS. 113 Theodoret's works contain blasphemy and impiety against the right faith and the Ephesian council. The epistle of Ibas is, in all things, contrary to the Chalcedonian definition and the true faith*. The epistle contains heresy. The whole epistle is blas- phemy. Whosoever does not anathematize it is a heretic. Ana- thema to Theodoras, Nestorius, and Ibas.' All this, notwith- standing his constitution in behalf of Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus, his infallibility approved and confirmed.* His holiness did not stop with a simple confirmation of the fifth general council He, also, like the Ecumenical Synod, vented a noisy torrent of obloquy against the departed souls of Ibaa, Theodoret and Theodorus, when their flesh was resolved into dust and their bones were mouldering in the tomb. He condemned and anathematized Theodoret and Theodorus, whose works, according to his infallibility, contained impiety and many things against the right faith and the Ephesian council' A similar sentence he pronounced against Ibas, his works, and all who believed or defended their impiety. The papacy of Vigilius presents a scene of fluctuation un- known in the annals of Protestantism. The vicar-general of God, the head of the church, and the father and teacher of all Christians shifted his ground six times. He sanctioned Euty- chianism and afterwards retracted. He withstood Justinian's edict, and, in his celebrated judgment, afterwards recanted. The changeling pontiff", in his constitution, shielded Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus, and afterwards confirmed the general council, which condemned these authors for blasphemy and heresy. His infallibillity's condemnation of the three chapters was opposed by the whole Latin commmnion. The Africans, lUyrians, Dal- matians, and many other churches withdrew from his commu- nion, and accused him of overthrowing the council of Chalcedon and establishing Monophysitism. A general council of the Grecian prelacy, in the mean time, condemned the Pope's constitution and the declaration of the Latin clergy ; and this council's sentence, amid the universal distraction of Christendom, was established by Pope Vigilius, and afterwards by Pelagius, Gregory, Nicholas, and Leo.^ John the Twenty -second was another of these pontiffs, who was distinguished for patronizing heresy. ' This father and teacher of all Christians ' denied the admission of disem- bodied souls into the beatific vision of God, during their inter- mediate state between death and the resurrection. The spirits of the iust, indeed, he believed, entereri at de.^itK on tbA f^t ?nj( I Labb. 6. 66, 130, 197, 199, .310. Godeau, 4. 265, 268. « Labb. 6. 241, 244 Bruy. 1. 228. * Godeau, 4. 233. Bruy. 1. 327. H 114 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. ment of happiness and the contemplation of the Son's glorified humanity. But the vision of Jehovah and the perfection of felicity, according to this head of the church, are deferred till the day of general judgment.' This dogma his supremacy taught by sermons, letters, and legat:ons. Me preached the heresy in public, according to Balu- sius, ttaynal and Maimbourg, in three sermons in succession, and caused It to be maintained by cardinals, prelates, and doctors » He transmitted letters in all directions, especially through the French nation, m support of his theory. He sent two theolo- gians on a mission to the Parisian faculty, to effect the pro- selytism of that literary seminary to his system. John, says Adrian the Sixth, quoted by Launoy, 'publicly tiiught and declared his innovation, and enjoined its belief on all men '» Nangis has transmitted a similar statement. He endeavored in this manner, says Du Pin, • to spread his error and dissemi- nate a universal heresy through the whole church.'* x-i?^^^"mu'^^'^?'-*^^'^^P®^"^^^''^"' however, soon met decided hos- tility. Ihe citizens of Avignon, indeed, in which John resided maintained a profound silence. This, in some, arose from fear' and, in some, from favor. A few believed and countenanced the innovation. Many disbelieved ; but, at the same time, con- ceaed their disapprobation through terror of the pontiff's power and tyranny. The king and the Parisian university, however were not to be affrighted. Philip, in 133!, assembled the • ^ .,•?'•, •Y.^'^.^P''^^''^'^ *^^ controversy and condemned his infallibility s faith a.s a falsehood and a heresy. These doctors defined, that the souls of the faithful come at death to the naked, clear, beatific, intuitive, and immediate vision of the essence of the divine and blessed Trinity. Many doctors con- curred with the Parisians in opposition to the pontiff Gobelin called his infjillibilityan old dotard. AlHaco denominated John's theory an error ; while Gerson characterized it as a falsehood, fhilip, theJ^rench monarch, proclaimed its condemnation bv the sound of a trumpet.'^ The statements and rea-sons of the university and of other .divines were unavailing. His infallibility was proof against Parisian dialectics. But the French king was an abler logician and his reasoning, m consequence, possessed more efficiency.' ' ^" Pin. 352. Alex. 22. 451. Maimb. 1.30. 2 II 1 enaeigna publiquement. II la prficha luimdme. II obligea, par son ex- Maat'b. 13L ''^"''' P'^'**' ^^ '* '""'■' '* 1«« docteurs! ^ irsoutenTr. 'Publicedocuit, declaravit. et abomnihn«»*on«...i T»,aj,^„„u t„_ , -o^. * JoanneB PapaXXII. errorem de beatitudine animi'.' quamipse diu t;nuertt pnbhce pradicaverat. Nangis. Ann. 1334. Dachery,3:97 ""^enuerat, » Bruy. 3. 420, 422. Cossart, 4. 434. Maimb. 132. Gobelin, o. LXXI MORAL VARIATIONS. 115 The royal argument, on the occasion, was composed of fire. His most Christian Majesty threatened, if the pontiff did not retract, to rpast his Supremacy in the flames.' This tangible and sen- sible argument, always conclusive and convincing, was calcu- lated for the meridian of his infallibility's intellect. This luminous application, therefore, soon connected the premises with the conclusion, brightened John's ideas, and convinced hin), in a short time, of his error. The clearness of the threatened' lire communicated light to his infallibility's understanding. His holiness, though enamoured of heresy, was not, it appears, am- bitious of martyrdom. He chose to retract, therefore, rather than be burned alive. His infallibility, accordingly, just before he expired, read his recantation and declared his orthodoxy, on the subject of the beatific vision and the enjoyment of the deity. Bellarmine and Labbd deny John's heterodoxy.^ These en- deavor to excuse the pontiff, but by different means. Bellar- mine grounds his vindication on the silence of the church on this topic, when John published his opinion. No synodical or authoritative definition, declaring the soul's enjoyment of the beatific vision before the resurrection, preceded the papal de- cision, which therefore was no heresy. Heresy then is no heresy, according to the cardinal, but truth, prior to the sentence of the church. John's opinion, Bellarmine admits, is now hetero- doxy ; but, on its original promulgation, was orthodoxy. Truth, it seems, can, by an ecclesiastical definition, be transubstantiated into error, and Catholicism into heresy, even in an unchangeable church distinguished for its unity. The popish communion can effect the transubstantiation of doctrinal propositions, as well as of the sacremental elements. John's faith, sayS Labb^, was taught by Irenaeus, Lactan tins, and other orthodox fathers/ This is a noble excuse indeed, and calculated to display, in a strong light, the unity of Romanism. The faith of primitive saints and orthodox fathers is, it seems, become heresy. Labb^ attempts to acquit John by arraigning Irenseus and Lac- tantius. The legitimate conclusion from the premises i.s, that Irenseus, Lactantius and John, were all three infected with error. Moral, as well as historical, electoral, and doctrinal variations diversified and disfigured the popedom. Sanctity characterized the early Roman bishops, and degeneracy their successors. Linus, Anacletus, Clemens, and many of a later period were distinguished by piety, benevolence, holiness, and humility. ' Rex rogum ipsi intentans ne revocarit er I BeU. 1. 780. Labb. 15. 147. Alex. 22 Labb. 15. T47 Cassant, 4. 437. errorem. 456. Alex. 22. 461. 116 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Some deviations and defects might appear, marking the infirmity and the imperfection of man. The Roman pastors, however, who, during the earlier daya of Christianity, did not, in moral character, aspire to excellence, aimed at decency ; and few, for a long series of years, sunk below mediocrity. But the Roman hierarchs of the middle and succeeding ages exhibited a melancholy change. Their lives displayed all the variations of impiety, malevolence, inhumanity, ambition, debauchery, gluttony, sensuality, deism, and atheism. Gregory the Great seems to have led the way in the career of villany. This celebrated pontiff haa been characterized as worse than his predecessors and better than his successors, or, in other terms, as the last good and the first bad pope. The flood-gates of moral pollution appear, in the tenth century, to have been set wide open, and inundations of all impurity poured on the Chris- tian world through the channel of the Roman hierarchy. Awful and melancholy indeed is the picture of the popedom at this era, drawn, as it haa been, by its warmest friends ; such as Platina, Petavius, Luitprand, Genebrard, Baronius, Hermann, Barclay, Binius, Giannone, Vignier, Labbd, and Du Pin! Platina calls these pontiffs monsters. Fifty popes, says Gene- brard, in 150 years, from John the Eighth till Leo the Ninth, entirely degenerated from the sanctity of their ancestors, and were apostatical rather than apostolical.* Thirty pontiffs resigned in the tenth century: and the successor, in each mstance, seemed demoralized even beyond his predecessor. Baronius, in his Annals of the Tenth Century, seems to labour for language to express the base degeneracy of the popes and the frightful defonnity of the popedom. Many shocking mon- sters, says the annalist, intruded into the pontifical chair, who were guilty of robbery, assassination, simony, dissipation, tyranny, sacrilege, perjury, and all kinds of miscreancy. Can- didates, destitute of every requisite qualification, were promoted to the papal chair ; while all the canons and traditions of anti- quity were contemned and outraged The church, says Gian- none, was then in a shocking disorder m; a ..haos of iriionity. Some, says Barclay, crept into the : ,,) n ' y stealth; while others broke in by violence, and defiled the holy chair with the filthiest immorality.'' ' Per MinoB fere 150. Pontifices circiter quinquaginta a loanue scilicet VIII. usque ad Le^nem IX virtute majorum proreus defecerint, apostatici potiusquain apostohci, Geneb. IV. Platina, 128. Du Pin, 2. 156. Bruy. 2. 208. T ,!"[.""* horrendain earn monstra intruserunt, Spon. 900. I. et 908. Ill L 4gl.se dto!tplnng6.^d.-iRSHn chaos d'impictcs. An. Eccl. 334. Giauuou. Vll. O. Sanctissimam Cathedrar. moribus iniquitatissimis fcedavisse. Barclay, 36 c 4 UnvoyoitaloranondesPape8,mai8de8mon8tre8. An. Eccl. 345. Giannon.vil.s! PROFTJGACY OF JOHN THE TWELFTH. 117 The electors and the elected, during this period, appear, as might be ex{)ected, to have been kindred spirits. The electors were neither the clergy nor people, but two courtesans, Theodora and Marozia,nH.therand daughter, women distinguished by their beauty, and at the same time, though of senatorial family, notorious for their prostitution. These polluted patrons of licentiousness, according to their pleasure, passion, whim, or caprice, elected popes, collated bishoiJS, disposed of dioceses, and indeed assumed, in a great measure, the whole administra- tion of the Church. The Roman See, become the prey of avarice and ambition, was given to the highest bidder.' These vile harlots, according to folly or fancy, obtruded their filthy gallants or spurious offspring on the pontifical throne. Theodora, having conceived a violent but base passion for John the Tenth, raised her gallant to the papacy. The pontiff, like his patron, was an example of sensuality ; and was afterwards, in 924, at the instigation of Marozia, deposed, and, in all pro- bability, strangled by Wido, Marquis of Tuscany. Marozia was mistress to Sergius the Third, who treated the dead body of Formosus with such indignity. She brought her pontifical paramour a son ; and this hopeful scion of illegitimacy and the popedom was, by his precious mother, promoted to the vice- ferency of heaven. His conduct was worthy of his genealogy, [ewas thrown, however, into prison byAlberic, Marozia's son by Adelbert, where he died of grief, or, some say, by assassina- tion.^ The person who can believe in the validity of such elections, and the authority of such pontiffs, must possess an extraordinary supply of faith, or rather of credulity. A person desirous of painting scenes of atrocity and filth might, in the history of the popedom, find ample materials of gratification. A mass of moral impurity might be collected from the Roman hierarchy, sufficient to crowd the pages of folios, and glut all the demons of pollution and malevolence. But delineations of this kind afford no pleasing task. The facts, therefore, on this topic shall be supplied with a sparing hand. A few specimens, however, are necessary, and shall be selected from the biography of John, Boniface, Gregory, Sixtus, Alex- ander, Julius, and Leo. John the Twelfth ascended the papal throne in 955, in the eighteenth year of his age. His youthful days were charac- terized by barbarity and pollution. He surpassed all his prede- 1 Le 8i6ge deRome 6toit donn^ au plusoffrant. Giannon.VII. 5. Ann Eccl.345. '^ Spon. 929. I. et 933. 1. Giannon. VII. 5. 6. Luitprand, \I. 13. Petaviua, I. 418 L'infame iiieodora fit elire pour Papc, Ic plus dcclat^ de Sca amans, qiu fut appel6 Jean X. Baronius 6crit, qu'alors Rome (Stoit sans Pape. An. Eccl. 345. Giannon. VII, 5. I ai 118 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. cessors says Platina in debauchery. His holiness, in a Roman synod, before Otho the Great, was found guilty of blasphemy perjury, profanation, impiety, simony, sacrilege, adultery, incest constupration, and murder. He swore allegiance to Otho. and afterwards revolted to his enemy. Ordination, which he often bartered for money, he conferred on a deacon in a stable, and on a boy ten years old by constituting him a bishop. He killed Jonn, a sub-deacon, by emasculation, Benedict by putting out his eyes, and, in the wantonness of cruelty, amputated the nose of one cardinal, and the hand of another. He drank a health to the devil invoked Jupiter and Venus, lived in public adul- tery with the Roman matrons, and committed incest with Ste- phaaia his fathers concubine. The Lateran palace, formerly the habitation of purity, he converted into a sink of infamy and prostitution. Fear of violation from Peter's successor deterred female pilgrims^ maids matrons, and widows, from visiting svrn7/''"^- ^? \"f^"^bmty, when summoned to attend the synod to answer for these charges, refused; but excommunicated the council in the name of Almighty God. The clergy and were ilSd tf T?i ^'' ^'^^t l"^ ^''^y'"^' ^^ '^'^ accifsations 7}TuT^ ? !' ^u''\^^'''y ^'}^^^ ^^ accursed, and placed on Uie left hand at the day of judgment. The pontifical villain II^UT J"^ *c' ^°™"" "°"'^^^^- ^"t he afterward re" gained ^,he Holy See; and, being caught in adultery w^ killed, says Luitprand by the devil, or, more probably! by Z injured hasband. John, says Bellarmine. ' was nearly the wick! edest of the popes." Some of the vice-gods, therefore the cardinal suggests, surpassed his holiness in miscreancy Bonifiice the Seventh, who seized the papal chair in 974 murdered his predecessor and successor. Historians represent him as the ba.sest and wickedest of mankind. Baronius calls him a thief; a imscreant, and a murderer, -who is to be reckoned no among the Roman pontiffs, but among the notorious robS of the age. Gerbert and Vignier characterize this vice-god La monster who surpassed all mankind in miscreancy.'^ Pi'omi^ed by Boniface, Crescentius strangled Benedict the Sixth Boni- ^ces predecessor and placed Boniface on the papal chair ' But the Roman citizens, provoked with the pontiff's atrocity deposed him from his dignity, and expellod llim from the city CHARACTER OF GREGORY THE SEVENTH. 119 The exiled pontiff, however, was not, it appears, ambitious of travelling in the '..rain of poverty. The treasury of the Vatican was rifled by this apostolical robber, and its sacred ornaments and vessels conveyed by his holy hands to Constantinople. Benedict the Seventh was, by universal suffrage, substituted in his stead. He held the papacy nine years, in opposition to Boniface, and was succeeded by Jchn the Fourteenth. Boni- face, in the mean time, having sold the spoils of tlie Vatican, and amassed a vast sum of money, returned to Rome. This treasure he expended in the bribery of his partisans, who, by main violence, replaced the ruffian, in 985, on the pontifical throne. John, who had succeeded during his absence, he im- jnisoned in the castle of St. Angelo, where, in four months after, he died of starvation and misery. But even the death of his rival could not satiate the vengeance of Boniface. John's cold, pale, stiffened, emaciated corpse was placed at the door of the castle, and there, in all its ghastly and haggard frightfulness, exposed to the public gaze. But the murderer did not long survive this insult on the dead. He died suddenly, and his naked carcass, mangled and lacerated by his former partisans, to whom he had become odious, was, with the utmost indignity, dragged through the streets. Gregory the Seventh, who obtained the papacy in 1073, waa another pontifical patron of iniquity. He was elected on the day of his predecessor's funeral, by the populace and soldiery, through force and bribery, without the concurrence of the em- peror or the clergy. Desiderius, abbot of Monte Cassino, on this head, accused Hildebrand to his face of precipitation. He obtained the supremacy, in the general opinion, by gross simony.' He had the hypocrisy or hardihood, nevertheless, to pretend that the dignity was obtruded on him against his will. Benno has sketched the character of this pontiff' in strong colors. This cardinal accused his holiness of simony, sacri- lege, epicurism, magic, sorcery, treason, impiety and murder. The Italians of Lombardy drew nearly as frightful a portrait of his sui)remacy. These represented his holiness as having gained the pontifical dignity by simony, and stained it by assassination and adultery. The councils of Worms and Brescia depicted his character with great precision. The council of Worms, comprehending forty-six of the German prelacy, met in 1070, and preferred numerous imputations against Gregory. This synod found his holiness guilty of usurpation, simony, apostacy, treason, schism, ' Du Pin, 2. 210, 215. Bruy. 2. 427. 120 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. i^-^IS!i^l!^Sir^t1r' «<'-' tence of depositL^ alins/ w! '''^"""^- ^f^egoiy's sen- sans of pope^rTi^ thrirsent^C^anT^"'^ *° ^^^ P^'-^i" the limifs^of 'UtificTaSi'tT' "CS: stf w' '^^^".' Brescia, therefore haH n r-ir.U \ "' "v^/atners ot Worms and a^sump^ion and exerdse of i fpl] ^^^^^^^^^ Gregory in his Boniface eqS fhe diWo? ""^'^"«^'^"tional power. arts of villany These arf A? ''?^''.' ^''^"'y ^» ^»1 ^be any. ihese arts he practised on his predecessor ' Ubb. 12. 517. Cofis^rf, 9 ij Ao «_ „ ._. ^ A^abb. 12. 64K. Alexande'r. "l8. 402. ""'^' '" ''^^' '^^^'^- ^^- '^^- CHARACTER OF GREGORY THE SEVENTH. 121 Celestin, a silly old dotard, who, prior to Boniface, placed on the pontifical throne, and clothed with infallibility, governed Chris- tendom. He had been a visionary monk, who, in his mountain cave, mistook his own dreams for inspii-ation, and the whistling of the winds for the accents of divine revelation, and spent his useless days in vain contemplation and in the unrelenting maceration of his body. He considered his body, says Alliaco, as a domestic enemy. He would descend into a pit during the cold and snow, and remain till his clothes would be frozen. He wore a knotted hair-cloth which mangled his flesh, till it some- times corrupted and produced worms. This visionary, in his fanaticism, was transferred from a mountain cavern of Apulia to the holy chair of St. Peter ; and his election, says Alexander, ' was the effect of divine afflatus.' * Cardinal Cajetan, afterwards Boniface the Eighth, was, in the mean time, ambitious of the popedom. He formed a plan, in consequence, to induce Celestin to resign, that he might be substituted in his stead. Knowing Celestin's superstition, he spoke through a tube during the stillness of the night to the pontiff, and enjoined him to resign the papacy. The voice of the impostor Celestin mistook for the warning of an angel, and, in obedience to the command, renounced his authority. His reasons for abdication are a curiosity. He resigned on account of debility of body, defect of information, and the malignity of the people. Boniface, who in 1294 was chosen in his place, imprisoned the old man with such circumstances of severity as caused his death.^ The character of Boniface was placed in a striking point of view by Nogaret and Du Plessis. The pontiff had offended Philip the Fair, King of France, by his bulls of deposition issued against that monarch. His majesty, in consequence, called two con- ventions of the three estates of the French nation. Nogaret and l)u Plessis, in these meetings, accused Boniface of usurpation, simony, ambition, avarice, church-robbery, extortion, tyranny, impiety, abomination, blasphemy, heresy, infidelity, murder, and the sin for which Sodom was consumed. His infallibility repre- sented the gospel as a medley of truth and falsehood, and denied the doctrine of transubstantiation, the Trinity, the incarnation, and the immortality of the soul. The soul of man, his holiness, affirmed, was the same as a beast's ; and he believed no more in the Virgin Mary than in an ass, nor in her son than in the foal of an ass.^ > Clestinus simplex erat. Eberhard, Au. 1290. Bruy. 3. 302. Andilly, 806. Aiex. 20. 140. Cauiaius, 4. 223. 2 Bruy. 3. 307. Mariana, 3. 266. ^ Les hommea ont les m6meB ames que les bfites. L'Evangile enseigne plus- I Hill 122 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. im. These accusations were not mere hearsay, but supported on authentic and unquestionable evidence. Fourteen witnesses, men of credibility, deposed to their truth. Nogaret and Du Plessis offered to prove all these allegations before a general council. But Benedict and Clement, successors to Boniface, shrunk from the task of vindicating their predecessor ; or, conscious of his guilt, spun out the time of the trial by various interruptions, without coming to any conclusion.^ The simplicity of Celestin and the subtlety of Boniface made both unhappy. Superstition made Celestin a self-tormentor ; while his silliness, united indeod with superstition, rendered him the easy victim of Boniface. The understanding and infidelity of Boniface were just sufficient to pull destruction on his own head. The ambition of Boniface was as fatal to its possessor, as the submission of Celestin. Boniface, on his disappointment, died, gnawing his fingers, and knocking his head against the wall like one in desperation. He entered the papacy, it has been said, like a fox, reigned like a lion, and died like a dog. John the Twenty-third seems, if possible, to have exceeded all his predecessors in enormity. This pontiff moved in an ex- tensive field of action, and discovered, during his whole career, the deepest depravity. The atrocity of his life was ascei-tained and published by the general council of Constance, after a tedi- ous trial and the examination of many witnesses. Thirty-seven were examined on only one part of the imputations. Many of these were bishops and doctors in law and theology, and all were men of probity and intelligence. His holiness, therefore, was convicted on the best authority, and indeed confessed his own criminality. The allegations against his infallibility were of two kinds. One respected faith and the other morality. His infallibility, in the former, was convicted of schism, heresy, deism, infidelity, heathenism, and profanity. He fostered schism, by refusing to resign the popedom for the sake of unity. He rejected all the ieurs veritez, et plusieurs menaonges. La doctrine de la Trimtii est fausse, I'en- fantement d'une vierge est impossible, I'incarnation du file de Dieu ridicule aussi bien que la trauaubstautiation. Je ne crois plus eu elle qu'ea une anesae, ni h son Fils, qu'au poulain d'une anesse. Bruy. 3. 346. Du Puv, 529. Alex. 22. 319,327. Boaa. I. 278. PapaB Bonifacio multa imposuerent enormia, puta hajresim, simoniam, et homocidia, Trivet. Ann. 1303. Dachery, 228. Kex Fraucorum osaa Uonifacii petiit ad conburandum, tanquam hseretici. Trivet. Ann, 1306. Dachery, 3, 231. Eberhard, Anno. 1303. Caniaiua, 4. 228. ' Daniel. 4. 4m. Du Pin, 2. 494. Audiena Rex Franciae Philippua a pluribua fide dignia peraonia, Papam Boni- facium detestandis infectum criminibua diverai-sque h»RreHihns irrfifitiim NTan- gis, Ann. 1303. Dachery, 3. 56. Nogaretus i.bjecta crimina diem innovavit, eaque legitime probare so ofFerene. Nangis, Ann. 1309. Dachery, 3. 62. Daniel. 4. 456. 1 CHARACTER OF JOHN THE TWENTY-THIRD. 123 truths of the gospel and all the doctrines of Christianity. He- denied the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, and the responsibility of man. The human spirit, according to this head of the church, is, like that of the brute creation, ex- . tinguished at death. Agreeable to his belief, or rather unbelief, he disregarded all the institutions of revealed religion. These principles, he held with the utmost pertinacity. According to the language of the Constantian assembly, his infallibility, actuated by the devil, pertinaciously said, asserted, dogma- tized, and maintained before sundry bishops and other men of integrity, that man, like the irrational animals, became at death extinct both in soul and body.* The other imputations respected morality. The list of alle- gations contained seventy particulars. But twenty were sup- pressed for the honour of the apostolic see. John, says Labb^, ' was convicted of forty crimes.''* The Constantian fathers found his holiness guilty of simony, piracy, exaction, barbarity, robbery, massacre, murder, lying, perjury, fornication, adultery, incest, constupration, and sodomy ; and characterized his su- premacy as the oppressor of the poor, the persecutor of the just, the pillar of iniquity, the column of simony, the slave of sensu- ality, the alien of virtue, the dregs of afjostacy, the inventor of malevolence, the mirror of infamy, and to finish the climax, an incarnated devil. The' accusation, says iSiiem, 'contained all mortal sins and an infinity of abominations.' His simony, according to the council, appeared in the way in which he obtained the cardinalship, the popedom, and sold indulgences. He gained the cardinal and pontifical dignities by bribery and violence. He extorted vast sums by the trafiic of indulgences in several cities, such as Utrecht, Mechlin, and Antwerp. He practised piracy with a high hand, during the war between Ladislas and Lewis, for the kingdom of Naples. His exactions, on many occasions, were attended with massacre and inhumanity. His treatment of the citizens of Bologna and Rome will supply a specimen of his cruelty and extortions. He exercised legatine authority for some time in Bologna, and nearly depopulated the city by barbarity, injustice, tyranny, rapine, dilapidation and murder. He oppressed Rome and dissipated the patrimony of Peter. He augmented former imposts and invented new ones, and then abandoned the capital to be pillaged and sacked by the enemy. His desertion exposed the women to the brutality of the soldiery, and the men to spoliation, imprisonment, assassination, and galley-slavery. He 1 Labb. 16. 178. Bruya, 4. 41. Du Piu, .>. 13. Crabb. 2. 1050. Bin, 7. 1036. - Criminibus quadraginta convictus. Labb. 16. 1378. et 16. 154. 124 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. poisoned Alexander his predecessor, and Daniel who was his physician. His conduct, through life, evinced incorrigibility pertinacity, obduracy, lying, treachery, falsehood, perjury, and a diabolical spirit.^ f j j> His youth as spent in aefileraent and impudicity. He passed his nights m debauchery and his days in sleep. He violated married women and deflowered holy nuns. Three hundred of these devoted virgins were the unwilling victims of his licen- tiousness. He wa.s guilty of incest with three maiden sisters and with his brother's wife. He gratified his unnatural lust on a mother and her son ; while the father with diflSculty escaped He perpetrated the .sin of Sodom on many youths, of which one contracting in consequence a mortal malady, died, the martvr ot pollution and iniquity .^ Such was the pontitf, who, according to the Florentine coun- cil, was ' the vicar-general of God, the head of the church, and the lather and teacher of all Christians.' His holiness, it would appear, was indeed the father of a great many, though perhaps his offspring were not all Christians. The council of Constance indeed deposed John from the papacy. But Pope Martin after- ward raised him to the cardinalship, and treated him with the same honour and respect as the rest of the sacred college. His remains, after death, were honourably interred in John's church. John with all his miscreancy, was elevated to a dignity second only to the pontifical supremacy. Jerome and Huss, notwith- standing their sanctity, were, by an unerring council, tried without justice and burned without mercy. Sixtus the Fourth, who was elected in 1471, walked in the tootsteps of his predecessors, Gregory, Boniface, and John. Ihis pontift has, with reason, been accused of murder aud debauchery. He conspired for the assassination of Julian and Laurentius, two of the Medicean family. He engaged Pazzi whowas chief of the faction, which, in Florence, was hostile to the Medici, in the stratagem. Pazzi was supported in the diabolical attempt by Riario, Montesecco, Salvian, and Poggio The conspirators, who were many, attacked Julian and Lauren- tius during mass on Sunday. Julian was killed. Laurentius fled wounded to the vestry, where he was saved from the fury of the assassins. The Medicean faction, in the mean time Labb. 16. 154, 158, 184. Bniy. 4. 3. Lenfant 1. 281. Multos juvenes destruxit in posterio^bus, quonun unus in fluxu sainrainis tlllT' H '°i ?*ooo' ^'T^'"f '''''°''®'' ^* cognovit matrem, et filium, et pater vix evasit. Hard. 4. 22S T,..nfan i oon Tr^i.-,;i. -i-; -^ ) ^",7* ouide amfereet du fils, et. que le p6re avoit eu de la peine u^cLpperises cnminels d68irs. Bruy. 4. 49, Labb. 16, 163. Bin. 7. 1035 ^cnapperases CHARACTER OF JOHN THE TWENTY-THIRD. 125 mustered and assailed the conspirators, on whom they took an ample and summary vengeance.' Sixtus patronized debauchery as well as murder. His holi- ness, for this worthy purpose, established brothels extraordinary in Rome. His infallibility, in consequence, became head, not only of the church, but also of the stews. He presided with ability and applause in two important departments, and was the vicar-general of God and of Venus. These seminaries of pollu- tion, it seems, brought a great accession to the ecclesiastical revenue. The goddesses, who were worshiped in these temple?, paid a weekly tax from the wages of iniquity to the viceroy of heaven. The sacred treasury, by this means, received from this apostolic tribute an annual augmentation of 20,000 ducats. His supremacy himself, was it seems, a regular and steady customer in his new commercial establishments. He nightly worshiped, with great zeal and devotion, in these pontifical fanes which he had erected to the Cytherean goddess.^ Part of the tribute, therefore, from these schools of the Grecian divinity, his holi- ness, as was right, expended on the premises. Alexander the Sixth, in the common opinion, surpassed all his predecessors in atrocity. This monster, whom humanity disowns, seems to have excelled all his rivals in the arena of villany,and outstripped every competitor on the stadium of mis- creancy. Sannazarius compared Alexander to Nero, Caligula, and Heliogabalus : and Pope, in his celebrated Essay on Man, likened Borgia, which was the family name, to Cataline. This pontiff, according to contemporary historians, was actuated, to measureless excess, with vanity, ambition, cruelty, covetousness, rapacity and sensuality, and void of all faith, honor, sincerity, truth, fidelity, decency, religion, shame, modesty and compunc- tion. ' His debauchery, perfidy, ambition, malice, inhumanity, and irreligion,' says Daniel, ' made him the execration of all Europe.' Rome, under his administration and by his example, became the sink offilthiness, the headquarters of atrocity, and the hotbed of prostitution, murder, and robbery.'' Hypocrisy formed one trait in his early character. His youth, indeed, evinced to men of discernment symptoms of basenfjss and degeneracy. But he possessed, in a high degree, 1 Bavle, 2598. Bruy. 4. 241. Moreri, 8. 304. 2 Agrippa, c. LXIV. Bruy. 4. 260. Bayle, 3. 2602. Sannazarius ilium cum Caligulia confert, cum Nerombus et Heliogabalis. Sann. II. Montfaucon, Monum. 4. 86. Les d^bordemens publics, les perfidies, I'ambition d(5meiur(5e, I'avarice insa- f;-v,i« i» n...,.>ii+A rirrolirrinn flti avnipnt. fait robifit dn 1 execratiou de toute I'Europe. Daniel, 7, 84. , . • ^ Mulieribus maxima addictus. Nee noctu tutum per urbem iter, nee mter- diu extra urbem. Roma jam carnificia facta erat. Alex. 23. 113. 126 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the art of concealment from common observation. His dissimu- lation appeared, in a particular manner, on his appointment to the cardinalship. He walked with downcast eyes, affected devotion and humility, and preached repentance and sanctity. He imposed by these arts, on the populace, who compared him to Job, Moses and Solomon. But depravity lurked under this specious display ; and broke out, in secret, in sensuality and incest. He formed an illicit connection with a widow who resided at Rome, and with her two daughters. His passions, irregular and brutal, could find gratification only in enormity. His licentiousness, after the widow's death, drove him to the incestuous enjoyment of her daughter, the notorious and infamous Vannoza. Slie became his mistress, after her mother's decease. His holiness in the pursuit of variety and the perpetration of atrocity, afterward formed a criminal connection with his own daughter, the witty, the learned, the gay and the abandoned Lucretia. She was mistress to her own father and brother. Pontanus, in con- sequence, represented Lucretia as Alexander's daughter, wife, and daughter-in-law.* Peter's palace, in this manner, became a scene of debauchery and abomination. Simony and assassination were as prominent in Alexander's character as incest and debauchery. He purchased the papacy, and afterwards for remuneration and to glut his rapacity, he sold its offices and preferment. He first bought, it has been said, and then sold, the keys, the altar, and the Saviour. He murdered the majority of the cardinals who raised him to the popedom, and seized their estates. He had a fjimily of spurious sons and daughters, and for the aggrandizement of these chil- dren of illegitimacy, he exposed to sale all things sacred and profane, and violated and outraged all the laws of 'God and man.* His death was the consequence of an attempt to poison the rich cardinals for the sake of their possessions. Alexander and Borgia, father and son, actuated with this design, invited the SRC»-ed College to a sum[)tuous banquet near the fountain in the delightful garden of Belvidere. Poisoned wine was pre- pared for the unsuspecting guests. But the poisoned cup was, by mistake, handed to the father and son, who drank without knowing their danger. Borgia's constitution, for a time over- came the virulence of the poison. But Alexander soon died by the stratagem he had prepared for the murder of his friends.* 1 Alexandri filia, nupta, nnrus. Ponfans in Bruy. 4, 280. 'Moreri, 1. 270. ^ Labb. 19. 523, Mont, Monum. 4. 84. PROFLIGATE CONDUCT OF ALEXANDER THE SIXTH. 127 Julius the Second succeeded Alexander in the papacy and in iniquity. His holiness was guilty of simony, chicanery, per- jury, thievery, empoisonnient, assassination, drunkenness, im- pudicity, and sodomy. He bribed the cardinals to raise him to the popedom ; and employed, on the occasion, all kinds of falsehood and trickery. He swore to convoke a general council, and violated his oath.' His infallibility's drunkenness was proverbial. He was ' mighty to drink wine.* He practised incontinency as well as inebriation, and the effects of this crime shattered his consti- tution. One of his historians represents his holiness as all corroded with the disease which, in the judgment of God, often attends this kind of tilthiness. The atrocity for which Sodom was consumed with fire from heaven is also reckoned among his deeds of pollution and excess.^ His ingratitude and enmity to the French nation formed one dark feature in his character. The French king protected him against Alexander who sought his ruin. The French nation was his asylum in the time of danger and in the day of distress. This friendship he afterwards repaid with detestation, because Lewis patronized the convocation of a general council. Julius offered rewards to any person who would kill p. Frenchman. One of these rewards was of an extraordinary, or rather among the popes of an ordinary kind. He granted a pardon of all sins to any person who would murder only an individual of the French nation. The vicegerent of heaven conferred the for- given* ss of all sin, as a compensation for perpretating the shocking crime of assassination.^ Leo the Tenth, in 1513, succeeded Julius in the popedom and in enormity. This pontiff has been accused of atheism, and of calling the Gospel, in the presence of Cardinal Bembo, a fable. Mirandula, who mentions a pope that denied God, is, by some, supposed to have referred to Leo. His holiness, says Jovius, was reckoned guilty of sodomy with his chamberlains. These reports, however, are uncertain. But Leo, beyond all question, was addicted to pleasure, luxury, idleness, ambition, unchastity, and sensuality beyond all bounds of decency ; and spent whole days in the company of musicians and buffoons.* Seventeen of the Roman pontifiFs were perjurers. These were Felix, Formosus, John, Gregory, Pascal, Clement, John, » Alex. 23. 118. Bruy. 4. 371. Caranza, 602. ^ Tout rong(5 de v^role. Bray. 4. 371. Zuing. 140. Duobus nobilissimi gen- ens adoleBceutibuB stuDruin intulerit. Wolf. 2. 21. 3Hotman, UO. ' „ ,.. , •• j * Non caruit etiam infamia, quod parum honeste nonnullos e cubiculanw ada- mare. Jo v. 192. Bruy. 4. 417. Guiccia. XIV. 128 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Boniface, Innocent, Gregory, Benedict, John, Eugenius, Paul Innocent, Julius, and Paul. Felix and the rest of the Roman clergy swore to acknowledge no other pontiff during the life of Libenus, whom the emperor had banished. The clergy not- withstanding, immediately after, while Liberius survived elected Felix to that dignity, which, without hesitation, he accepted. A perjured Roman bishop then presided amonff the perjured Roman clergy. Formosus was deposed and excommunicated by Pope John who made him swear never again to enter his bishopric or the Roman city. Pope Martin, in the way of his profession, and with great facility, dissolved the oath and restored Formosus to his dignity. The obligation having, in this manner, undergone a chymical analysis in the pontifical laboratory, Formosus re- turned with a good conscience and with great propriety to his episcopal seat, and, in the end, to the Roman See.^ John the Twelfth, in 957, swore fealty to Otho on the body of Peter This solemn obligation, his holiness afterward violated and revolted to Adalbert, the Emperor's enemy." Gregory the Seventh took an oath, inconsistent with the acceptance of the Pontifical dignity with which he was afterwards vested. The council of Worms, in consequence, in 1076, declared his holi- ness guilty of peijury. Gregory, besides, made Rodolph of Gerinany break the oath of fidelity which he had taken to the Emperor Henry.* Pascal the Second, in till, granted to Henry, on oath, the right of investiture, and promised never to excommunicate the Emperor. Pascal, afterward in a synod of the Lateran, excom- municated Henry. His hoUness excused his conduct and pacified his conscience by an extraordinary specimen of casuistry. I forswore, said his infallibility, the excommunica- tion of his majesty by myself, but not by a council. Bravo i Pope Pascal Clement the Fifth, in 1307, engaged on oath to Phihp the Fair, to condemn the memory and burn the bones of Boniface the Eighth. This obligation, his holiness violated John the Twenty-second, in 1316, swore to cardinal Napoleon to mount neither horse nor mule till he had established the Holy See at Rome. His holiness, however, established his apostolic court, not at Rome, but at Avignon. He satisfied his conscience by sailing instead of riding, and substituted a ' Clerici juraverunt quod nullum alium eusceperunt. Plurimi periuravemnt Crabb. 1. 347. Du Pin, 1. 190. Prosper, 292 perjuraverunt, 2 Alex. 15. 88. Bruy. 1. 187. Luitp. VI. 6. " V" '•• -^ ^- rrn^i.t dc iiucjiLc. nruy. 2. 24*. Joauues Poiitilei immemor juraraenti prsestiti, Adelberto se conjunxit. Labb 11 879 ' *Du Pin, 2.214. Labb. 12. 616. Giannon. X. 5. PERJURED PONTIFFS. 129 ship for a land conveyance. John's casuistry waa nearly as good as Pascal's.' Boniface, Innocent, Gregory, Benedict, and John engaged on oath to resign the Papacy ; but, on being required to fulfil the obligation, these viceroys of heaven refused. The oaths, on the occasion, were of the most solemn kind. Innocent swore on the holy Evangelists ; and Gregory, in the name of God, Lady Mary, the Apostles, and all the celestial court. Benedict swore on the gospels and the wood of the Cross. The oaths were attended with dreadful imprecations. The attempt of these vice-godi. to evade the accomplishment of their engagements presents a scene of equivocation and chicanery, which is un- equalled perhaps in the annals of the world. Benedict, said the Parisian University, endeavored to escape by a forced in- terpretation, contrary to the intention of the obligation. Gregory and Benedict, s&ya Giannone, swore and then shuffled about the performance, and, according to Alexander, resolved to re- tain their dignity contraiy to the sanctity of a solemn oath. Gregory and Benedict, however, on this occasion, discovered some candor. Gregory, said the council of Pisa, contrary to his obligation, declared publicly and frequently, that the way of cession was unjust and diabolical, and, in this, he agreed with Benedict. Gregory, Benedict, and John were, in the councils of Pisa and Constance, condemned for perjury.- Eugenius the Fourth, in 1439, was condemned in the council of Basil for perjury. Paul the Second, as well as Innocent the Eighth, bound himself by oath, to certain regulations, and afterwards disregarded his engagement. Julius the Second took an oath on the gospels, binding himself to call a general council ; but afterward deteri-ed the fulfilment of the treaty. The breach of his obligation occasioned the convocation of the .second council of Pisa. Paul the Fourth, in 1-556, before the seventh month of his Papacy, created seven cardinals, though he had sworn in the conclave before his election, to add only four to the sacred college for two years after his accession. Seventeen popes, it aj)pears, at the least, were foresworn.^ The 1 Bruy. 2. 580. et .3. 360, 390. Du Pin, 2. 281. ■i Dixit Gregorius publico et frequenter, quod via cessionis erat mala, injusta, et diabolica, contra juramenta, congruens in his cum Benedicto. Lab)). 15. 1202. Du Pin, 3. 16. Juramentis per Joanne:n Papani super hoc factis deviativum. Labb. 16. 142. Contra eorum juramenta et vuta, Labb. 15. 1131. Giannon. XXIV. 6. Bruy. 3. 600. Platina. 246. In dignitate retinenda, contra jura- menti solemnis religionem. Alex. 24. 441. Continuata perjuriorum serie, non magis postreina quam priora ejus promissa servavit. Labb, 15. 1331. •' Synodo, juramentum violatum occasiouem dedit. Alexander. 33. 118. Jules oublia bientdt ses sermens. Mariana, 5. 718. Boss. 3. 81. Carranza, 602. Paolo 2. 27. Bruy. 4. 223, 619. Choisi, 8. 275. I 130 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. church, therefore, had seventeen perjured heads, and God, seven- teen perjured vicars-general. These heretical and abandoned pontiffs, according to many eminent partisans of Romanism, were not true heads of the church or vicars of Jesus. This was the opinion of Jacobatius, Leo, Mirandula, Baronius, Du Pin, Oiannone and Oeoffry. Jacobatius declares ' the election of a heretic for a pope to be null.'' Pope Lt30 the Great, writing to Julian, excludes all who deny the faith from the pale of the church. These, says the Roman hierarch, as ' they reject the doctrines of the gospel, are no members of the ecclesiastical body.' The partisan of heresy, therefore, unfit, according to Leo, for being a member, is much more incapable of being the head. Mirandula men- tions one Roman pontiff who, in the excess of infidelity, disbe- lieved the immortality of the soul ; and another, who, excelling in absurdity, denied the existence of God. These, the noble author maintains, ' could be no popes.' The ruffians who were raised to the Papacy by Theodora and Marozia, Baronius de- clares, 'were no popes, but monsters;' and the church, on these occasions, was, according to the Cardinal, ' without any earthly head.' Boniface the Seventh, who, says Baronius, ' was a thief, a miscreant, and a murderer, is to be ranked, not among the popes, but among the notorious robbers of the age.' Du Pin and Giannone, the popish Sorbonnist and Civilian, quote and approve the sentence of Baronius, the Roman Cardinal. The pope, says Geoffry, ' if he depart from the faith, is no pastor.'^ The spiritual reign of these sovereign ruffians must have created several interruptions in the popedom,- and destroyed many necessary links in the boasted chain of the pontifical suc- cession. The concatenated series of the Roman hierarchs, therefore, with the unbroken continuity of the sacerdotal au- thority, is in the admission even of Romish doctors, a celebrated nonentity. •Papa haereticuB, tanquam separatus ab ecclesia, non est papa, et eloctio de eo facta erit nulla. Jacob. HI. p. 107. '•* Bell. II. 30. Canus, IV. 2. Bin. 3. 7. Miran. th. 4. Turrecrema, IV 20 Spon. 900. I. et 985. II. Du Pin, 2. 156. Giannon. VII. 6. ' • ■ Baronius 6crit, qu'alors Rome (5toit sans Pape. On ne voyoit alors plus de» ra^es, mais des monatres. Giannon. VII. 5. Si exorbitaverit a fide, jam non est pastor. Oeof. Ep. 194. .\pol. 385. ■ i! CHAPTER III. COUNCILS. TH«EB 8T3TB1I8— ITALIAN 9Y8TRM RECKONS THE OENERAL COUNCILS AT EIOHTIEN— TBMPORARY REJECTION OF THE HECONU, THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH, SEVENTH, AND TWELFTH GENERAL COUNCILS— CIBALPINE OR FRENCH SCHOOL REJECTS THE 0O0N0II.8 OF LYONS, FLORENCE, LATER.VN, AND TRENT— ADOPTS THOSE OP PISA, CONSTANCE, BASIL, AND THE SECOND OP PISA— SYSTEM OF A THIRD PARTY- UNIVERSALITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS- ITS CONDITIONS— LEGALITY OP GENERAL COUNCILS— ITS CONt "^lONS -CONVOCATION, PRESIDENCY, AND CONFIRMATION- MEMBERS— UNANIMITY— FREEDOM. The general councils in ecclesiastical history are as uncertain as the Roman pontiffs. The succession of the popes and the enumeration of the synods are attended with similar difficulty, and have occasioned similar diversity of opinion. Gibert ad- mits ' the uncertainty of the western oecumenical councils.' Moreri grants ' the disagreement of authors in their enumeration. One reckons more and another less ; whilst some account those universal and approved, which others regard as provincial, na- tional, or condemned.'' A full detail of popish variety indeed would, on this topic, fill folios. This, however, is unnecessary. A statement of each individual's peculiar notions, on this, or indeed on any other subject, would be tedious and useless. The opinions entertained on this question, not merely by a few persons, but by an influential party, are worthy of observation ; and these only, in the following pages, shall be detailed. Three jarring and numerous factions have, on the subject of general councils, divided and agitated the Romish communion. One party reckons the general councils at eighteen. A second faction counts the same number, but adopts different councils. These reject the councils of Lyons, Florence, Lateran, and Trent; and adopt, in their stead, those of Pisa, Constance, Basil, and the second of Pisa. A third division omits the ' Numerus Conciliorum Generalium, in Occidente habitorum, est incertus. Gibert, 1. 76. Tous lea auteurs ne conviennent pas du nombre des conciles g6ne- raux ; iea uub eu comptent plus, les autres moins. Lcs una en reconuoissent de gen^raux approuv6z, que les aiitres regardent ou cornme non g^n^raux, ou comnie non approuvez. Moreri, 3. 539. 132 VARIATIONS OF POPERY. f: !' whole or a part of the councils which intervened between the eighth and sixteenth of these general conventions. The whole of these arc omitted by Clement, Abrahamus, and Pole, ind a part by Sixtus, Carranza, Silvius, and the council of Constance. One party in the popish communion reckons the general councils at eighteen. Of the o, five met respectively at Ephesus, Chalcedon, Vienna, Florence, and Trent ; two convened at Nicaea, two at Lyons, four at Constantinople, and five at the Lateran. The patrons of this enumeration are, in general, the Italian faction, headed by the pope, and maintaining his temporal as well as his spiritual authority. Baronius and Bellarmine in particular, have patronized this scheme with learning and abiUty, but with a total disregard of all honor and honesty. Bellarmine, besides the eighteen which are approved, reckons eight general councils which are reprobated, and six which are partly admitted and partly rejected. One, which is the Pisan — strange to tell — is neither adopted nor proscribed. Bellarmine's distinctions and decisions indeed are badly calculated to establish the authority of councils. His hair-breadth distinctions and arbitrary decisions, on the contrary, tend only to overthrow all confidence in his determinations and in universal councils.' All^ the eighteen, however, were not accounted valid or unerring on their first publication. Six, marked now with the seal of approbation and infallibility, were, for a long series of time, in whole or in part, rejcted by a part or by the whole of Christendom. These are the second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh, and twelfth general councils. The canons of the second, according to Alexander and Thomassin, were not re- ceived by the Latins till the Lateran council in 1215, a period of 834 years after their promulgation. Its faith, indeed, in opposition to Macedonianism, corresponded with that of the .vesterns, and was, in consequence, admitted by Damasus, Gelasius, and Gregory. Its creed, however, was recognised only on the authority of divine itvelation and ancient faith. Leo rejected its canons. Sim])licius and Felix, enumerating the councils which they acknowledged, mention only those of Nicsea, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. Gregory the Great declared that the Roman church possessed neither the acts nor canons of the Byzantine assembly, though his infallibility, in glorious inconsistency, elsewhere affirmed that he esteemed the four wcumenical councils of Nicaea, Ei)hesus, Constantinople, and Chalcedon as the four gospels.'-* 1 BeUar. I. 5-7 2 Alex. 7. 23.^. 9. 155. Thorn. 2.15. Pithou, 29. Crabb. I. 991. Godeau. 4. 498. Moreri, 3, 592. '■ ^'■^^ establishment of idolatry by anJ the^S €& Te ot^t V^ ^f ^-" emperor and Frankfortian councils showed ?^ """"^'^ ""'^^ *^^ ^^^isian unequivocal terms. T^e cou„^?Af F ''Tf'f ^t' ^^^^^^^ ^^ presentation of the western Xvl / ^'^^^^^^ exhibited a re- and Germany ; anramountS^^ Srto^thte'H^'t'f '^^ ' cordmg to Alexander. ' the French did nofl f"^''^- • ^^- reckon the second Nicene amon J^ fK ' l"" ^°™^^ <^™es, Frankfortians, say Avent^'n H H ^'"'/^i '^"""^«-' The the decisions of t^he fllse GrpSn"'' T-'^ ?'^^"^' ^^^^^^^^ed worship. Ivo and Ahnon «T '^°^^ '" ^^^^^^ ^^ ™age. NicholL and AdrL X Jivtl'tr;"'"^'' '^'' convention, other eighty years af eT thp nT.' °"^ f,venty-five and the general councils' The nI. ' assembly, reckon only six eluded by thesrponS ^1^^/%'^'''^'''^ ^^« «- no better name wZinihLl ""^ '^'''*''^' ^^^^ ^^ <^eserves years, a mere cSTynod anTo'f'no'" 'i' ' '^^"^ ^^ its merits, it seems, -rew witlflff J° ^'"?'^^ authority But the patrons of EomrnTsnrand fdoT^' """f "' '^'^^'^^ ^^ *™«. contemptible junto S the attribuJf? ^'^'" 5° ^"^^«<^ ^^^ and infallibility -attributes of universality, holiness, LaS:„7:,r'if i» trsi ^--"- -v^"^ -' ^' «- known. This celebrateH pJf- 7 T™' "««'ere.onfTlT' T^^ '\' magistracy, clergy, and royal couLil. 7oih7^tt^l ^' T'"''^^"' """^"^ of reformation as unfriendly to the privileges and usages of the Belgian dominions These rS d'wth 'T^ ^"^^"^"- — <^*--> if the council we published without any restriction. Its publication, therefore TanowTdTlff r'^-" ^-^-^^i-' tha?its reception would De allowed to effect no innovation in the laws and customs of he provinces. I^ie Duke of Alba, the NeapoHufn v c^roy in lll^Z^^.fJ^'' ''"""^ ^" '^' ^^-Vo^^^-- dominion^ of fepain, with simikr provisions against all innovation.'^ Its faith rv«"nf'f'';' ^' ^^1? '^'•'^^^^^ f^«"^ P^^^t of Ireland, hroulh t ;/t?J V"" i"'; Pf •^^^"r'^^'tary evidence, is admitted matrlLv fr. ^^'^^^^^ T^ '^^ discipline. Its canons on The rv^-n^ill K r'^^'' ^«^^«b>^i"ed only a partial reception. Ihe piovincial bishops assembled for the purpose of del bera- wh! Ton b'd f' Ir*-%^.--Pli- would b'e useful Thi^ t^ th.t pftLf '"'-^T'^^ 1' ''^'^'^y P"^li*ed a declaration taldftvfn f? I" ''f .-^fP.'^' '"^"^ *^^ annunciation gave it aSs?^ Z ^."Jr"^' t 'V^-' J""l^i«tion. Those who decided against its utility, omitted its publication ; and the Trentine 3o"itv"%rett' '"".''^ -i'"^*^ '' ^^-^ ecclesSicJ autnoiity. The holy council, in this manner, was subiected to a par la exclusion even from the Island of Sain s. The Emerald nrela V f '"J°^' ''^^^•^^ P"^"' ^^''^'''^ ^^"°"«' ^Wch th^^rSsh prelacy, in some provinces, accounted and declared useless. Oiaiinon, XXXIII. 3. Paolo, 2. 685. 81e vin, 226. o, 2. C8G. Gibert, 1. 146. RECEPTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 141 The friends of the reformation in Germany detested the faith of Trent, and the friends of Romanism disliked its discipline. The Emperor, indeed, allowed it a formal reception in his do- minions. But the admission, clogged as it was with many restrictions, was rather nominal than real. Its recognition was by no means uniform ; and those who acknowledged its authority interpreted its canons as they pleased.' The French in thin manner, dismissing the councils of Lyons, Florence, Lateran, and Trent, adopt those of Pisa, Constance. Bas'.l, and the second of Pisa. The French, says Moreri, ' recognise, as general, the council of Pisa, Constance, and Basil.'^ The Pisan assembly in 140!) has occasioned a variety of opinions. Some have denied its universality. Its name is not found among the eighteen approved by the Italians ; and its authority has been rejected by Cajetan, Antoninus, Sanderus and Raynald. Antoninus endeavors to throw contempt on this assembly by calling it an unlawful conventicle. The statement of Petavius, respecting this congress is amusing. The Pisan assembly, says this author, was, as it were, a general council.^ Bellarmine characterizes it as neither approved nor condemned.* This champion of Romanism and his partisans cannot decide, whether this equivocal convention should be stamped with the seal of infallibility or marked with the signature of reprobation. Its decisions are consigned, according to this celebrated polemic and his minions, to flr ' on the ocean of uncertainty, and to be treated with esteem or contempt at the suggestion of cajjrice or partiality. The unfortunate synod, which no person, in Bellar- mine's system, is either to own or disown, is left, like a peace- ful and insulated .state, without any alliance, either offensive or defensive, among belligerent powers, to defend its own frontiers or to maintain an ai-med neutrality. Bellarmine, however, had reasons for his moderation or indeci.sion. The Pisans depo.sed Gregory and Benedict for heresy and schism, and elected Alex- ander, who has been recognised as the rightful pontiff' and a uecessaiy link in the unbroken chain of the pontifical succession. Bellarmine, had he approved the Pisan assembly, would, con- trary to his principles, have admitted the supremacy of ai general council and its authority to degrade a Roman pontiff". Had the cardinal disapproved, he would have acknowledged the invali- dity of Alexander's election, and dismissed God's vicar-general 1 Paolo, 2. 697. ■i En France, on reconnoit pour generaux les Oonciles de Constance, de Pise et de Bale. Moreri, 3. 539. ■' IMsauuni, tanquam Geueraie couvociituiii oardiualibus. Fecfcavius, 2. 249. Cajetan, c. XI. Antonius. c. V, Sanderus, VIIl. * Generale nee approbatum,nec reprobatum, videtur esse Concilium PLsanum Bell. 1. 8. ' ' 142 THE VAUIATI0N8 OF POPERY. from the series of the pontifical succession. The Jesuit, there- fore, like an honest man, had recourse to an expedient and left the Pisans to their liberty. The French, however, dissenting from Bellarminism, claim the Fisan assembly as their ally : and acknowledge its univer- sahty and authority, which have been advocated by Du Pin Moreri, Alexander, and other histoiians. These authors record Its convocation from all Christendom, and confirmation by Pone Alexander.' •' ^ The universality of the Constantian council is maintained in the 1 rench school. A variety of conflicting opinions, indeed has been entertained on the ecumenicitv of this assembly' liosius and Cotton would allow it neither a total nor a partial generality. Cardinal Cantarin excluded it from his compendium of councils, and Pope Sixtus from his paintings and inscriptions in the Vatican. The Florentian and Lateran conventions reprobated its definition of the superiority of a council above a pope. Its authority is disregarded in Spain, Portugal, and the nations under their control. The Italians in the council of 1 rent represented it as in part approved and in part condemned and the Italian system on this subject has been adopted by J3ellarmine, Canus, Cajetan andDuval. Baptista, in the Tren- tine assemby, extolled the Constantian, says Paolo, above all other councils. The French, in the same synod.declared it general in all Its sessions from beginning to end ; and thi.s declaration has been repeated by Lorrain, Launoy, Alexander, Moreri . Carranza, and Du Pin. The Constantian council, says Alex- ander, represented the universal church, and among the French IS accounted general in all its parts,' Pope Martin confirmed it and, by his sanction, sealed it with infallibility " „. 1 ^Tu^ ^'^.?^ ''^f recognised the Basilian council as general. Ihe Basilians have met with much opposition and much support, with many enemies and many friends Popes and councils, supported by many critics and theologians, such as Bellarmme Turrecrema, Cajetan, Sanderus, Rayna?d,Bzovius and Duvai^ declaimed with fury against its authority, and execrated Its decisions. Eugenius the Fourth assailed it with red hot anathemas, and cursed its assembled fathers, in Colonel Bath s elegant style, with ' great dignity of expression and em- phasis of judgment. The sacred synod, though execrated were loth to be m debt, and made a suitable return The holy fathers declared his infallibility guilty of contumacy, I a" ^'}'>, fP- ^*J"'-e". 3. 539. Alex. 24, 551. o.„tfiur A,e?°rs« sur^?: -•s-^i- «rvr™i: RECEPTION OF THE COUNCILS OF PISA AND CONSTANCE, 143 pertinacity, rebellion, incorrigibility, disobedience, simony, schism, heresy, desertion from the faith, violation of the canons] scandalization of the church, and unworthy of any title, rank, honor, or dignity. Leo the Tenth called this assembly, in contempt, a conventicle. Its name, says Paolo, was detested at Trent, as schismatical and destitute of universality and authority.' The council, nevertheless, execrated as it was by popes and councils, and exploded by divines, was confirmed by Nicholas the Fifth, and received through the extensive territory and numerous churches of France aud Germany. The sanction of Nicholas, it seems, notwithstanding the course of cursing it endured from Eugenius, vested it with infallibility. The French contemplate it with peculiar esteem, and regard its rival of Florence as a conventicle. The Sorbonnists, such as Richerius, Du Pin, Launoy, and Alexander, have, with argument and eloquence, maintained its cecumenicity, and their approval has been repeated by Moreri and even Carranza.- The French also acknowledge the second of Pisa, in opposi- tion to the fifth of the Lateran. Julius the Second delighted in war, practised cruelty on the cardinals, excommunicated Lewis the French king, and absolved his subjects from the oath of fidelity. A few of the cardinals, in consequence, separated from the pontiff; and, patronized by Maximilian, the German emperor, and Lewis, the French monarch, summoned a council, in 1511 at Pisa. Julius, in opposition, opened a council, in 1512, at the Lateran. These two conventions, as might be expected, did not treat each other with excess of politeness. Julius characterized the Pisans as a scandal, a pestilence, a convention of the devil, a congregation of wretches, an assembly of malignants, whose head was Satan, the father of falsehood and schism ; and found the sacred synod guilty of obstinacy, i-ebellion, conspiracy, audacity, treason, temerity, abomination', sacrilege, senselessness, fraudulence, dissimulation, contumacy, sedition, schism, and heresy. His infallibility having, with such graphic precision, drawn their character, proceeded, without any ceremony, to pronounce their sentence of excom- munication. Unsatisfied with his sentence against the refractory convention, the vicar-general of God interdicted Pisa, Milan, and Lyons, where the synod was allowed to meet.' The Pisans, overflowing with gratitude, and ready at com- pliment and benediction, retaliated in fine style. The holy '' ^^f 25. 127. Crab. 3. 965. Moreri, 2. iOO. Beii. III. 10. Faolo, VI. and VII. L'Eglise Gallicane a tenu ce concile pour oecumenique. Milletot 572 ^ Du Pin, 405. Alex 25. 408. Bruys, 4.400. Daniel, 6. 153. Carranza, 579. ■* Labb. 19. 570. 572—577. Cos«. 5. 356, 357. 360. 144 THK VARIATIONS OF POPERY. fathers declared the vicar-general of Jesus guilty of contumacy, schism, incorrigibility, obduracy, perjury, and indeed all villany. The sacred synod, to these compliments, added a benediction couched in very flattering language. This consisted in sus- pending the viceroy of heaven from the administration of the popedom, and prohibiting all obedience of the clergy and laity of Christendom. This sentence, in all its rigour, was actually enforced through the French nation. Lewis connnanded his subjects, both clergy and laity, to withdraw all submission. But the martial Julius, in the mean time, who had excom- municated Lewis, died, and the sensual Leo succeeded. Lewis, therefore, in 1513, witlidrew his support from the Pisans, and submitted to the authority of Leo and the Laterans. Maximi- lian also discountenanced the Pisan convention, which, in con- .sequence, disbanded. But this variation of the French sovereign was not lasting. The French monarchs afterwards returned to the council of Pisa. Its acts, in ](J12, were published from the library of his most Christian majesty, and its authorit}', in opposition to that of the Lateran, which had always been obnoxious to the French parliament and clergy, was again acknowledged.' Such, on the subject of councils, is the variation between the French and Italian schools. The French reject four councils, those of Lyons, Florence, Lateran, and Trent, which the Italians admit ; and admit four, those of Pisa, Constance, Basil, and the second of Pisa, which the others reject. A third })arty in the Romish Church reject the whole or a part of the councils, which, in the Italian system, occur from the eighth at Constantinople to the sixteenth at Florence. All these were retrenched by Abrahamus, Clement, and Pole. The edi- tion of the Florentian synod, published by Abrahamus, reckons it the eighth general council. The editor, therefore, expunges the Byzantine council and the seven following. The extermi- nation of the eighth, says Launoy, was in accordance with several Greeks and Latins.'^ The edition of Abrahamus was approved by Clement the Seventh, who stamped it with the seal of his infallibility. Baronius, nevertheless, followed by Binius and Labb^, has found the editor guilty of audacity, ignorance, temerity, and falsehood.'' Pole, Jn the synod of Lambeth, in 1 Inveterate nella simonia et ne' costumi infami et perduto. Guicciardin, i. 275 Endurcy en simonie et en erreurs infames et damnables, il ue pouvoit etre capa- ble de gouverner la Papaute. It (5toit notoirement incorrigible au scandale uni- versel de tout la Chrestientii. Vignier. 3. 867- Mariana, 5.767. Moreri,3. 558. eto 72. Alex. 25. 27. Bruys, 4. <»«1. 'i Fuisse Graicos et Latinos, ciui octavam synodum c uumero generaliuui syno- dorum expunxeriat. Launoy, 4 224. et 5. 233. 3 Magna interpretis temerita e, et audacia, sicut et imperitia factum est Bin . 7. 1038. Labb. 10. 996. Wilkii . 4. 122, 126. THE RECEPTION OF COUNCILS. \U 1556, adopted the same enumeration, and denominated the Florentian assembly the eighth general council.' This was transacted in an English synod, and, therefore, was the general opinion of the English clergy in the reign of Queen Mary. Pole, notwithstanding, in noble inconsistency, recognised the cecunie- nicity of the fourth and fifth of the Lateran, and the second of Lyons. This system proscribed the eight general councils which met at Constantinople, Lateran, Lyons, and Vienna. Cardinal Cantarin's account differs little from that of Abra- hamus, Clement, and Pole. The cardinal, in 1662, in his summary of councils, addressed to Paul the Third, reckons the Byzantine the eighth, and the Florentian the ninth general council. He therefore omits two of Lyons, four of the Lat- eran, and those of Vienna, Pisa, Con ;*^ !oe, and Basil; and excludes ten which have been owned by i ,^ French and Italian schools. Sixtus, Carranza, Silvius, and the Constantian synod omit part of the councils, which intervened between the eighth and sixteenth. Sixtus the Fifth, in 1588, erected paintings and in- scriptions of the general councils in the Vatican. These omit the first and second of the Lateran, which, destitute of canons, have no paintings or inscriptions in the Vatican.* These two, therefore, are discarded by a celebrated pontiff at the head- (^uarters of Romanism. Carranza and Silvius omit the first, second, and third of the Lateran as void of authority, or un- worthy of attention. Bellarmiho admits the mutilation of their acts and the imperfection of their history. The ecclesiastical annals, according to Gibert, have recorded only the definitions of the council of Vienna, the constitutions of the first and second of Lyons, and the canons of the four former of the Lateran. The Constantian assembly, reckoning in all only eleven, men- tions but three, which assembled at the Lateran, Lyons, and Vienna, between the Byzantine and Florentian conventions. The Constantians, therefore, exclude the five which met at the Lateran, Lyons, and Pisa. The pontiff elect, according to the Constantian assembly in its thirty-ninth session, was, in the presence of the electors, required to profess his faith in these eleven general councils, and especially in the eight which assembled at Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon.* Had the Constantians, who omitted five, exterminated the whole of these councils from the annaL of time, the holy fathers ■ In Octava General! Synodo Florentiaj sub Eugenio. Labb. 20. 1018. 1021. 2 On n'a point les canons de ces deux cono-iles-, et ils n'ont "oint de tableau, ni d'insoription dans le Vatiian. Moreri, 3. 539. " * 3 Gibert, 1. 98. Crabb. 2. i. 55. Alex. 21. 505. Sancta octo universalia concilia immutilata servare. Labb. 16. 703. 1046. ■''«a :n THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. would have conferred a distinguished favor on the world, and merited the lasting thanks of mankind. The critics and historians of Romanism, varying in this man- ner in the enumeration of the general councils, vary also about their universality. Some condition or peculiarity should distin- guish a general from a diocesan, a provincial, or a national synod. This characteristic distinction, however, has never been ascertained. The attempt, indeed, has been made by Bellar- mine, Binius, Carranza, Jacobatius, Holden, Lupus, Arsdekin, Fabulottus, Panormitan, Bosius, and Martinon. But their requisitions differ from each other and from the facts of the councils. The theory of each is at variance with the rest or inapplicable to the councils, the universality of which is ad- mitted. One party, would leave the decision to the })ope. These reckon it the prerogative of the Roman pontiff to determine on the universality and sufficiency of a general council. This condition has been advocated by Panormitan, Martinon, and Jacobatius.' But its application to the acknowledged general councils would cause the partial or total, the temporary or per- manent explosion of six, which have been admitted into the Italian or French systems. The popes, for a long lapsje of time, rejected all the canons of the second at Constantin^Ie, and have never recognised the t^ nty-eighth canon of Chalcedon. Vigilius, for some time, wit! ood the fifth oecumenical .synod, and his acquiescence was, at last, extorted by banishment.' The council of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, applauded by the French school, deposed Gregory, Benedict, John, and Eugenius. A second class, to constitute a synodal universality, require the attendance of the pope, patriarchs, and metropolitans, together with subsequent general reception.^ This requisition has been advocated by Bosius and Paolo, and is in discordancy with the system of Martinon and Jacobatius, as well as that of Bellarmine, Binius, Carranza, Canus, Gibert, Lupus, Fabu- lottus. Its application would exclude many of the oecumenical synods. The Roma i lierarch attended the second and fifth neither in person no jy proxy. The patriarchs were present in neither the third, tourth, nor seventh, nor in any of the ten western councils. The Ephesian and Chalcedonian synods » Pontificis est declarare, an congregatio generalis sufficienter. Martinou Disput. V. § 7. Maimb. c. VII. Anton, c. V. XXXI. Posset nunierus episco'- porum.cum quibus tenendumest concilium relinquiarbitrio Papiu. Jocobatius, 11. Concilium geuerale necessario non Dotest. <)uandn Papa tali con'iciena Synodua con vocata est a Constantino. Alex. 7, 122. et 8. 82.— Hoc concilium a>cumeuicumfuit a Theodosio seniore convocatum, inconsulto Damaso Komano Pontifice. Alexander, 9. 79.— Synodus cecumcnioa P^phesina convocata est a Theodoaio. Alex.^ 2. 218.— Marcianus Synodum IV. convocavit. Alex and . 2. 305. — Constantinua Synodum Sextam convocavit. Alexsind. 1.^. 2.S7 "leptimaSynodusaConstaiitinoet Irene Augustisconvocataest. Alexand 14 .o''3 » Launoy ad Ludov. 4. 22. et ad Voell. 4. 108. et ad Bray. 4. 191. etadMalat.' 4. 207, 223. Daniel, 5. 444 PRESIDENCY OF COUNCILS. 161 synods, presided in person or by representation, and proposed the matter, prescribed the form, and regulated the discussions of such conventions.' The sovereign pontiff, according to Mariana, Gibert, Maimbourg, and Godeau, did not appear either in person or by proxy, in the second, fifth, or Pisan assembly. Timotheus and Eutychius, says Alexander, presided in the Byzantine conventions under the emperors Theodosius and Justinian. Photius attributes the presidency of the seventh creneral council to Tarasius.* * The first councils, says Du Pin, ' were not confirmed by the popes.' The pontiffs, on the contrary, opposed the canons of the second and fourth, which conferred rank and jurisdiction on the Byzantine patriarch. Vigilius withstood the fifth with all his pontifical authority. Petavius's representation of this hierarch's versatility is a curiosity. His infallibility, says this historian, ' proscribed, and then confirmed the fifth universal council. He afterward again disclaimed, and finally declared its legitimacy."'' i i f The weneral conventions, from that of the Lateran to tliat of Trent, were held in the west, and enjoyed the distinguished honor of pontifical convocation, presidency, and ratification. This })eriod embraced the ten Latin universal councils. The Roman empire was then divided into many smaller states, whose sovereigns, actuated with petty ambition and engaged in mutual opposition and rivalry, could not agree about ecclesias- tical conventions. The pope, in this emergency, assumed the prerogative of convocation and presidency. He convened the cler^^y and arrogated the power, which had been exercised by the "emperor, and which, in the hands of the hierarch, became an engine of pontifical aggrandisement and despotism.' A variety of opinions have been entertained, with respect to the persons who should form a general council. A few would admit laymen ; while many would exclude all but the clergy. Some would t. strict decisive suffrage to the prelacy, and others would extend it to the priesthood. The former was the usage of antiquity. The latter obtained in some of the councils in 1 Tribus primis conciliis generalibus non pr.-efuit. Du Pin, 337- Cusan, III. 16 11 n'ait preside au premier Concile de Constantinople. II es* ti""^ certain nu'il ne convoqua pas le cinqui6me, et n'y prdsida point. Maimb. 4i. Mmc concilio prrefuit Timotheus. Alexand. 7. '234. Concilio Qumto Maimb. 42. Huic iBcumenico Mariana, 1. 521. Gi- prieTuit feutyctiius. Alexand. 12 574. Paolo, 1. 2l3. Gibert, 1. 66. 68. Godeau, 4. 274. Photius, 57. ^ Prima Concilia a Poutificibus confirmata minime sunt. Uu rin, a^i. bert 1 102. Sedes Apostolica nunc usque contradicit, quod a synodo hrmatum est. Liberatua, c. Xlll. Illam primum respuit Vigilius, demde assension^e Hrmavit, postea repudiavit iteruni. Deuique legitimam ussae proiesBUS vo„. Petavius, 2. 137. , . „ .„„ ' Gibert, 1. 70. Paolo, 1. 215. Moren, 3. 539. 152 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Bl: :i more modem days. Panormitan would restrict membership in a general council to the pope and prelacy, to the exclusion of the laity.' Varying in this way about the number of councils, the Romish doctors vary also respecting the manner of synodal decision, borne would decide by a majority ; while others would require unanimity as a condition of legitimacy. One faction, patronized bjjellarmme account a majority, if sanctioned by pontifical ratification, sufficient for conferring validity. A second party countenanced by Du Pin, Canus, Salmeron, Cusan, and Panor- mitan, would demand unanimity, for bestowing legitimation on a council and validity on its decisions.^ The requisition of unanimity would, in fact, explode the majority of all the eighteen general councils. A few indeed have been unanimous, but many divided. The Nicene, By- zantme, Ephesian, and Chalcedonian synods contained factions that favored Arianism, Macedonianism, Nestorianism, Euty- ohianism, and Monothelitism. Mighty controversy, say both Jiusebius and Socrates, arose at Nicsea, and was maintained with pertinacity. But these sons of heresy were, in general exterminated by deposition, banishment, murder or some other way of legal ratiocination and evangelical discipline' The patrons of idolatry in the second assembly of Nicjea, anticipated all opposition to their intended enactments by rejecting all who would not execrate the natrons of Iconoclasm. The ten western councils were under the control of the Koman pontiff. His power, combined with ignorance and the inquisition, succeeded in ii (/reat measure, in silencing opposition and commanding unanimity. But occasional symptoms of rebeUion against the vicar-general of God appeared, notwith- standing general submission, even in western Christendom No assembly civil or ecclesiastical, ever showed less unity than the council of Trent. Theologian opposed theologian, and bishop withstood bishop, in persevering impertinence and contention Ihe iJominican fought with the Franciscan in an endless and provoking war of rancor and nonsense. The French and bfianish encountered the Italians, with inferior numbers, in- deed, but with far supeiior reason and eloquence. All this appears in the details of Paolo, Du Pin, and even Pallavicino ihe Irentine contest and decision on original sin may be given 1 Crotty, 83. Alex. 10. 341. Lenfan. 1. 107. Anton, c. V. Du Pin, 3 9 Puu^m' 1^42'^''"^^ constituitur a papa et epiacopis, et sic nihil dicit de laicii! yi faut qu'ciic passe du couseutement unanime. Du Pin, Doct. ch 1 3 fi A^^i'^TiAo ,n^*^*"''' ^^'»"^ Plurimorum judicium oportere. Canus, VI e. Apol. 1. 103-105. 3 Euaebius, III. 13. Socrates 1. 8. WANT OF UNANIMITY IN COUNCILS. 153 as a specimen of Trentine contention and senseless animosity. The bishops, learned in general in the law, but unskilled in divinity, were utterly confounded by the distinctions, scholas- ticism, and puzzling diversity of opinion which prevailed among the theologians. The composition of the canons was over- whelmed with inextricable difficulty. The persons employed in this task could not comprise every opinion, or avoid the hazard of creating a schism.^ The discord of the Trentine fathers became, in the French nation, the subject of witticism and mockery. The contentions of the French synod of Melun, preparatory to that of Trent, afforded a striking prelude and specimen of the noisy and numerous altercations which were afterwards displayed in the latter assembly. The French king convened the Parisian doctors at Melun, for the purpose of arranging the dogmas of faith, which, on the assembling of the general council, were to be proposed for discussion. The Parisians, however, could agree on nothing. These, adhering to a church which boasts of extensive unity, squabbled and contended on the topics of the sacraments, the Concordat, the Pragmatic Sanction, and the Constantian and Basilian councils^ without meaning or end. Each, however, without being disconcerted by their dis- cord, would have his own opinion made an article of faith. The king, in consequence, had to dissolve the council v/ithout coming to any conclusion.^ A scene of equal dissension is not to be found in all the annals of Protestantism. Freedom of discussion and suffrage is, according to unanimous consent, a necessary condition of synodal legitimacy. Authors, the most adverse in other things, agree in the requisition of liberty. This, in an ecclesiastical assembly, was the demand of the ancients, such as Hilary, Athanasius, Basil, Facundus, as well as of the moderns, such as Richerius, Canus, and Duval. No council, says Facundas, was ever known, under compulsion, to subscribe any thing but falsehood.^ Freedom of speech was one of the conditions of a general ecclesiastical assembly required by the council of Basil. This freedom, it has been admitted, is destroyed, not only by deposition and banishment, 1 Les ^v6ques embarrasses par une si grande variety d'opinions, ne savoient quel jugement porter. II y avoit une si grande variety de sentimens des th^olo- giens, ils ne croyoient pas qu'il Mt possible, ni de d^tinir la chose ni de condanmer quelqu'une de ces opinions, sans courir le risque de causer quelque schisme. Paolo, 1, 281. Les disputes se r6veillferent avec tant de force, que les legata eurent beaucoup de peine k les apaiser. Paolo, 2. 282. Du Pin, 3. 426. 2 lis etoient aussi partagez sur I'article des sacremens. Chacun vouloit fair© niuiser h"'Ii opinion nour un dosme de foi. Ils ne Durent convenir d'autre cbose. Paolo, 1. 177.178.' 3 Nunquam coactum concilium, nisi falaitati, subscripsit. Facundus, XII. 3. Oibert, 1. 7 i Amb. in Luc. 6. 154 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. but also by threats, bribery, gifts, favors, faction, simony, party, money, and influence. The favor of the emperor was, by Ambrosius, considered subversive of synodal liberty. Thraldom or servility may arise from any thing that may bias the mind or influence the vote. The application of this requisition would explode all the general councils that ever met in Christendom. All these were swayed by hope, fear, reward, or punishment, or influenced, more or less, by faction or favor, menace or money. The eighteen councils were controlled by the Roman emperor or the Roman pontiff! The eight oecumenical councils celebrated in the east were influenced by imperial power. The emperors, in person or by representation, presided as judges in the Grecian conventions, and moulded them into any form they pleased.' None of these ecclesiastical meetings was ever known to resist the will of its sovereigns, but adhered, with undeviating uni- formity, to the duty of unlimited and unqualified submission. Constantme's m.anagement of the Nicene assembly, the most respectable of all that have been called general, is recorded by Eusebius and Socrates. He gained some, say these historians, by reason and some by supplication. Some he praised and some he blamed ; and, by these means, succeeded, with a few exceptions, in effecting an unanimity.^ Such are the effects of imperial arguments. A few, however, preferred their conscience or their system to royal favor, and were banished or deposed for error and contumacy. Ai-ius, Eusebius, and Theognis, having for some time felt the blessed effects of these logical and s«^riptural arguments, subscribed and were restored. Maris, Theognis, and Eusebius, says Philostorgius, declared in self- condemnation, that, influenced by terror, they had signed hete- rodoxy. The easterns and westerns were as accommodating to the Arian Constantius as to the Trinitarian Constantine. Con- stantius, forsaking the Trinitarian system, adopted Arianism ; and the Greeks and Latins, whether united or separated, complied with the imperial humor, and signed, like dutiful subjects, the Arian and Semi-Arian confessions of Sirmium, Seleucia, Milan, and Ariminum. The oriental and occidental prelacy, united at Sirmium in one of the most numerous coun- cils that ever met, subscribed, in compliance with their sover- eigns, in Arian creed, which, as Du Pin has shown, was signed by his infallibility Pope Liberius. The Greeks, consisting of 1 Ces sortes d'assemblees furent dirigees par les Princes. Paolo. 1. 21.?., - UoWris an((>t\oyias (Tvviaraufvris. Eusebius, de vita Constantini, III. 13. Tous /ifv avixiruBuv, rovs 5e km Svaairwv ro Xoyif : toui Sc «u KfyovTas cirawuv. Socrat 1 8. Philostorgius, 1, 10. WANT OF FREEDOM IN COUNCILS. 155 Arians and Semi-Arians, assembled at Seleucia, framed, after a long and bitter altercation, an Arian and Semi-Anan con- fession. These two the holy bishops referred, not to Libenus but to Constantius, not to the pontiff but to the emperor, for his approbation and sanction. The Emperor, rejectmg both, produced one of an Arian stamp, which had been composed at Nicseaand subscribed at Ariminum ; and this, the sacred synod with the most obliging condescension unanimously adopted. The Latins, at Milan and Ariminum, followed the footsteps of the Greeks. The world, says Jerome on this occasion, groaned and wondered at its .tVrianism ; and all in compliance with its sovereign. . The annals of image worship, as well as the history ot Arian- isra, show the control which the Roman emperors exercised over the consciences and the faith of their subjects, clergy and laity. The emperor Constantine, the enemy of idolatry and the patron of idonoclasm, called a numerous synod at Constan- tinople ; and the bishops, adopting the faith of their prince, anathematized all those who adored the works of the pencil or cliisel. But the empress Irene, the votary of images and super- stition, assembled the second Nicene council, which is the seventh general, and the holy fathers, proselyted by imperial arguments, cursed, in long and loud execrations, all the sons and daughters of iconoclasm. The western emperor, in hosti- lity to image woi-ship, called, at Frankfort, a council of t^i"^® hundred bishops, who represented the whole western church, and who overthrew the Nicene enactment in favour of idolatry. The imperial power in the oriental synods prevailed against the pontifical authority. The emperor's influence was para- mount to the pontiffs. The pope, in several councils, sum- moned all his energv and influence in opposition to the emperor, but without success. Papal imbecility, compared with imperial power, appeared in the second, third, fourth, and fifth general councils. The second and fourth councils elevated the Byzan- tine patriarch to a pitch of honor and jurisdiction, offensive, in a high degree, to the Roman pontiff. The second conferred on the Constantinopolitan chief an honorary primacy, next to the Roman hierarch ; and the fourth, in its twenty-eighth canon, granted equality of honor, and added the jurisdiction of Asia, Pontus, and Thracia. These honors, bestowed on a rival, the pope, as might be expected, resisted with all his might and authority. Lucentius, the pope's vicar at Chalcedon on this 1 Bin. 1. 479. Du Pin, in Lib. Hil. in Syn. Jcrom. in Chron. » Theoph. 285. Zonaras, 2. 85. Bruy. 1. 554. Crabb. 2. 599. Bruy, 1. 584. Carranzft, 490. Mabillon, 2. 289. 156 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. occasion, complained, in open court, of faction and compulsion. The bishops, said he, in the sixteenth session, 'are circum- vented and forced to subscribe canons, to which they have not consented' But pontifical exertion was vain, when opposed to imperial power. Lucentius protested.' But the obnoxious canon, nevertheless, was inserted in the i;ode of the church, and obtained validity through Christendom. The Ephe&ian synod affords another proof of the prevalence of the emperor and the weakness of the pontiff This assem- bly, indeed, shows the happy effects both of pecuniary and imperial dialectics. The council of Ephesus, according to Ibas, was corrupted by the gold of Cyril. The saint, says the bishop, ' gained the ears of all by the poison which blinds the eyes of the wise.'* John and Cyril, indeed, headed two rival and jarring cabals. Each issued its creed, and api)ealed, not to the Roman pontiff, but to the Roman emperor, for the orthodoxy of its faith. His infallibility, on the occasion, was not even consulted. Theodosius, at st, seemed favorable to the Nestorian faction. He afterward veered round to Cyril's party ; and the change, it appears, was owing to the efficiency of pecuniary logic. Cyril, says Acacius, bribed Scholasticus a courtier, who in- fluenced the mind of Theodosius. The emperor, not the pon- tiff, confirmed the synodal decision and stamped the faith of Cyril with the seal of orthodoxy.^ Justinian, in like manner, in the fifth general council, pre- vailed against Vigilius. This assembly, indeed, enjoyed no freedom, and showed no deference to the pontift'. Liberatus, Lupus, and Eustathius have adduced weighty imputations against its validity. According to Liberatus, the council, whose subject of discussion was the silly productions of Ibas, Theo- doret, and Theodoras, was convened by the machinations of Theodorus of Csesarea, and was swayed by his influence with Justinian and Theodora, the emperor and empress. The episcopal courtier was an enthusiastic admirer of Origen, and a concealed partisan of Monophysitism. The fanciful theologian was his darling author, and the heretical theology was his de- voted system. He was, in consequence, an enemy to Theodo- rus of Mopsuestia, who had written against Origen, and to the council of Chalcedon, which had approved his works, contained in the celebrated three chapters, the mighty topic*of imperial animadversion and synodal reprehension. The Caesarean dig- 1 Qua circumventione cum Sanctis episcopis gestum sit, ut non conacriptiB •anonibus subscribere aint fioaoti, Orahb, L 938. Lucentiua fut r^duit k fairs mne protestation contre ce qui s'^toit fait en cela. Godea. 3. 500, 503 ' Aures omnium veneno obcsecanti oculos sapientium obtinuit. Labb. 6. 131. *Godeau, 3. 310. Labb. 3. 574. Liberatus, c. VI. Evag. 1. 5. Lupus, c. XLl. WANT OF FREEDOM IN COUNCILS. 157 nitary, however, notwithstanding his heterodoxy, found means of ingratiating himself with the emperor and empress. He in- sinuatedhimself into the royal favor and ruled the royal councils. This influence he used for the discredit of the Chalcedonian synod and the condemnation of the Mf^psuestian critic. He persuaded Justinian to issue an edict against the writings of Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodorus, which had been sanctioned at Chalc Jon. These writers, Pontius, an African bishoj), in a letter to Vigilius, represents as the authors whom the holy synod of Chalcedon had received.' The emperor, also, actuated by his counsellor's suggestions, called an oecumenical council for the confirmation of his edict, and the condemnation of the ob- noxious publications. This assembly, according to Liberatus, a contemporary historian, acknowledged the charms of the im- perial gold, and submission to the imperial will. The emperor, says the Carthaginian deacon, ' prevailed on the occasion, by bribery and banishment. He enriched those who promoted hia designs and banished all who resisted.'^ The allegations of Liberatus have been repeated by Lupus and Eustathius. According to Lupus, ' Justinian became a Dioclesian, and the Grecian prelacy became the tools of his im- perial despotism.'^ ' All things,' says Eustathius, ' were effected by violence.' Certain it is, however these things be determined, that the Roman pontiff" opposed the Roman emperor and the universal council in all its sessions. But the sovereign and th'fe fatheis proceeded in the synodal decisions, without hesitation or delay. Vigilius refused to sign the sentence of the council. But his majesty compelled his in- fallibility, unwilling as be \Sas, to confirm decisions which his holiness hated, and to sanction enactments, against which, in the most solemn manner, he had protested. A convention, assembled in this manner by stratagem, disputing about nothing, corrupted by the emperor, repealing the decision of a former general council, and acting in unrelenting hostility to the vicar- general of God, constituted the fifth general, unerring, holy Roman council. The eight eastern councils, in this manner, were subject to the control of the Roman emperor ; and the western, in the same way were swayed by the authority of the Roman pontiff". The pope became as arbitrary and despotic among the Latins, > Les auteurs, que le saint concile de Chalc^doine avoit re9U8. Godeau, 4. 230. ■■' Consentientes episcopi in Trium damnationem Capitulorum muneribus dita- U«ri4— )!■ «-£i1 w%r^*^ n^-natini-ianiaa /^ctnnaifi • in AYiliiiiTI iniRftl RUTlt. Tjibprfl.r.iin n. t^niiiftATf Yt-i s».f». ..w..., -^ — ^ . 1- — » '-. , — XXIV. Crabb. 2. 121. ' In hac synodo, Jnatinanua Diocletianum indicerat : ejus afifectibus serviebant omnes Graecorum episcopi. Lupus, 1. 737. Bruy. 1. 330. 158 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. as the emperor had been among the Greeks. This servility of the Westerns hjis been delineated with the pencil of truth, by Gibert, Giannone, Du Pin, and Richerius.' According to Oibert, ' the pontiffs, in these conventions, did as they pleased.' The Roman hieiarchs, says Du Pin, ' esUiblished, in the twelfth century, their sovereignty in the Roman city, and their inde- pendence of the Roman emperor ; and even assumed the right of conferring the imperial crown. Their power over the state and the magistracy was attended with additional authority and jurisdiction over the church and clergy. Councils were con- vened by their summons, and the synodal constitutions were their productions. The popes were the authors of the eccle- siastical canons, to which the prelacy only gave their assent. The assembly merely sanctioned the will of the hierarch.' The councils, in the twelfth century, were according to Giannone, ' called by the pontiff, who, in these meetings, made such regu- lations as were conducive to his own grandeur, while the as- sembled bishops only consented.' Richerius writes in the same strain as Du Pin, Gibert, and Giannone. Synodal liberty, according to this author, ' departed with the elevation of Gregory the Seventh to the papacy. This patron of ecclesiastical despotism, contrary to the custom of more than a thousand years, compelled the clergy of Christen- dom to swear fidelity to the Roman See : and this stretch of papal power, in a short time, introduced spiritual slavery.' The pontiffs, according to the same historian, 'continued, from the accession of Gregory till the council of Constance, embracing a period of 340 years, to assume the authority of framing canons and definitions at the Vatican, and then summoned servile synods to sanction their arbitrary and oppressive dictations.' A similar statement, in reference to the oath of fidelity to the pope, is given by Gibert and Pithou in their editions of the canon-law. In Gibert's statements 'bishops should swear fideli- ty to the pope,' and in Pithou's ' all who, in the present day, receive any dignity from the pope, take an oath of fidelity to his holiness. '2 Pius the Fourth, in the Confession of Faith which, in 1564, he annexed to the Council of Trent, exacts an oath of the same kind. According to this bull, issued by the pope and received by the prelacy, all the beneficed clergy in the Romish communion, ' promise and swear obedience to the 1 Pontificem in iis feoisse quidquid libuit. Gibert, 1. 100. Du Pin, Cen. XII c. XX. Giannon. XIV. ,3. Kich. c. 38. 2 Episcopi Papa debent iusjurandum. Gibert, -3, ?06> Hodie omnes accipientea dignitatem a Papa sibi jurat. Pithou, 107. Romano Pontifici veram obedientiam spondee ac juro. Labb. 20. 22? Barclay, 11. c. 2. ' WANT OF FREEDOM IN COUNCILS. 159 Roman pontiff.' This obligation, it is plain, is inconsistent with freedom or independence. This servility and compulsion appeared in all the ten Latin councils, and in none more than in the council of Trent. The Trentines were under tho control of the Roman court. His holiness filled the council with hungry and pensioned Italians, who voted as he pleased. The Ittilians, in this assembly, amounted to one hundred and eighty-seven ; while those of other nations mustered only eighty. The French, Spanish, and Germans, indeed, endeavored to maintain the freedom of the assembly ; but were overwhelmed by numbers. The French and Spanish, however, both confessed the thraldom of the synod. The Cardinal de Lon-aine complained of papal influ- ence. Lausac, the French ambassador, declared that the Roman court wa.s master in the council and opposed the reformation. Claudius, a French Trentine theologian, said, in a letter to Espensaeus, ' you would die with grief, if you should see the villany which is here perpetrated for the purpose of evading a reformation.'' The Spanish declared that the council contained more than forty, who received monthly pensions from the Roman court. Richerius as well as Paolo admits the utter absence of all liberty in the Council of Trent. I Pro dolore, mortuus es, si ea vidisses qua; ad cludendam reformaticnem, infanda patrantur. Claud. Ep. ad Espcn. Paolo. II. V. VI. A la tenue d'un eoncile libre, celui de Trente ne I'^tant pas. Paol. 1. 216. et 2. 416. CHAPTER IV. SUPIiEMACY. TOCR VARIATIONS— POPE'S PRBSIDENOY— HIS SOVEREIGNTY OR DESPOTISM— HIS SUPPOSED EQUALITY WITH GoD— HIS ALLEOESD SUPERIORITY TO GOD— SCRIP- TURAL PROOF— TRADITIONAL EVIDENCE— ORIGINAL STATE OF THE ROMAN CHURCH —CAUSES OF ITS PRIMACY— EMINENCE OP THE CITY— FALSE DECRETALS- MISSION* -OPPOSITION PROM ASIA, AFRICA, FRANCE, SPAIN, ENGLAND, AND JRELAND UNI- VERSAL BISHOP— USURPATIONS OP NICHOLAS, JOHN, GHEGOHY, INNOCENT, AND BONIFACE. The Supremacy is, by the patrons of Romanism, uniformly ascribed to the pope. This title the partisans of popery use to represent the Roman hierarchy superiority in the church. But the authority attached to this dignity remains to the present day undecided. Opinions on this topic have floated at freedom, unfixed by any acknowledged standard, and uncontrolled by any recognised decision. The Romish doctors, in consequence, have, on the pontifical supremacy, roved at random through all the gradations and forms of diversified and conflicting systems. These systems are many, and, as might be expected, are distinguished in many instances by trifling and evanescent shades of discrimination. A full enumeration would be end- less, and, at the same time, is useless. The chief variations on this topic may be reduced to four. One confers a mere presi- dency ; d the second an unlimited sovereignty on the Roman pontiff. The third makes the pope equal— and the fourth superior to God. One variety restricts the Roman pontiff to a mere presidency, similar to the moderator's ir. the Scottish assembly, or the pro- locutor's in the English convocation. The first among his equals, he is not the church's master, but its minister. Such are the statements of Du Pin, Rigaltius, Filaster, Gibert, and Paolo.' ' Petrum inter Apostolos primurn locum obtinuisse. Du Pin, 313. Premium esse Houianum PontificGm, Ou Pin 33!?, Non imperium, iion dominatum, non potentatum, sed primurn locum. Du Pin, 314. Lc Pape lui-m6ine n'est que le premier entre lea pretres, Lenfant, 1. 107. :^^ VAltlATIONS IN THE PAPAL SUPREMACY. 161 The pontiff, says Du Pin, 'like Peter among the Apostles, obtains the first place. The pontiff has no powe? over the church, but the church, on the contrary, over the pontiff' The Roman hierarch says Rigaltius, quoted by Du Pin, 'possesses not iuris- diction, dominion or sovereignty, but the first place.' Cardinal 1 ilaster, in the council of Constance, and without any opposition reckoned 'he pope only the first among the priests' The pope says Gibert, 'is only the first of the bishops.' The Roman hierarch, according to Paolo, ' is chief, not in authority buUn fore, Du Pin observes, is only a primac of order and unity • eteiyi't^'' " necessary for the efficien y and co-operation ":,? This primacy authorizes a general superintendence, allows the possessor to watch over the faith and morality of the who e caTor^'^h '"^ '" 'f'''' "'' °^^^™«« «f '^^ ecclesialtS canons. The power, however, is executive, not legislative • and of kws'' "tH ' ^^^:.r1"r'' ^i "^'^'^y '' thfenforcement ot laws. The pontiff s doctrinal definitions and moral ijistruc- dernZ'nT''^""' '^, ^''' ^^^"^'^' ^"*^^l«d *« attention -but depend on their general reception for their validity. The pon- tifical primacy or, as some say, monarchy, is, according to this system, limited by prelatical aristocrac/ The episcopacy in other words, restricts the popedom. The Roman pontS k inferior to a general council, by which he may, for Wesv o^ immorality, be tried and deposed, and which dole's not neda- rily require his summons, presidency, or confirmation ; though these may on some occasions, be a matter of convenience The patrons of this system deprecate the papal claims to infallibility and view with detestation all the Roman hierarch's pr™ ons to the deposition of kings, the transferring of kiiSdoms and Z absolution of subjects from the oath of fidelity ^ ' ^ Ihe French have patronized this system on the subiect of tha papal pnrnacy^ The Galilean chu4 maintains tS plan of o the Italian school The same views have been entertained by the university of Paris, followed by those of Anglers Organs Bononia, Louvain, Herford. Cracow, and Coloml The Sor- bonne, m several instances, pronounced the contrary opinion Aliud non sit Papa quam episcoporum primus. Gibert. 3 336 pi^'^S" '' '^''""P°'' P'^"'" «™*^"'" «^*"^^'^*' pSaus hfter pares. De Le Pape est imnistre de I'tSgliae ; U n'en est pas le maltre. Apol 2 82 162 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. a heresy.^ The same scheme has been supported by many distinguished theologians, such as Gerson, Cusan, Tostatus, Aliaco, Vittoria, Richerius, Soto, Dionysius, Launoy, Driedo, Pluen, Filaster, Vigorius, Marca, and Du Pin ; and these, again, have been followed by the Roman pontiffs, Pius, Julius, Siri- cius, Zozimus, Celestine, Sixtus, Gregory, Eugenius, Innocent, and Adrian.'^ A similar subordination of the papal power was patronized by the councils of Pisa, Constarae, and Basil. The Pisans declared the superiority of a general council over the Roman pontiff; degraded Benedict and Gregory and elected Alexander." The Constantians, treading in the footsteps of the Pisans, defined, in the fourth session, the subjection of a pope to a council, and denounced condign punishment on all persons, of every state and dignity, even the papal, who should disobey the sjmodaj enactments.* The Basilians, in their second session, renewed the decision of Constance with its penalty against all transgressors. The council of Basil, besides, in its thirty-third session, declared the superiority of a general council to a Roman hierarch, and its incapability of being dissolved, prorogued, or transferred against its consent, to be truths of the Catholic faith. Pertinacity in the denial of these truths, the holy unerring fathers pronounced a heresy. The inferiority of a pope to an universal synod, and his incompetency to order its dissolution, adjournment, or translation are, according to an infallible council, doctrines of Catholicism, and respect not dis- cipline but the faith.^ A second variety allows the pope an unlimited sovereignty. The abettors of this system, overstepping the bounds of mode- ration, would exalt the primacy into a despotism. The pope- dom, according to these speculators, is a monarchy, unlimited by democracy or aristocracy, by the laity or the clergy. The Roman pontiff's power is civil as well as ecclesiastical, extend- ing both to the church and the state ; and legislative as well as executive, comprehending in its measureless range both the making and enforcing of laws. He is clothed with uncontrolled authority over the church, the clergy, councils, and kings. He 1 Qui decent contrarium, hsereticos esse censet. Du Tin, 421. L'^glise Gal- licane a approuv^ le decret de la superiority des conciles sur les Papes. Milletot, 572. ^ 2 Launoy, 1. 295, 314. Du Pin, 442. Fabulottus, c. 2. 3 Concilium generalc universam reprsesentans ccclesiam esse suDerius Pan*. Du Pin, 404. if * Cui quilibet cujuscumque status vel dignitatis, etiam si papalis existat, obire tenetur. Labb. 16. 73. Summum pontincem subesse conciliis generalibus. Gibort, 2. 7. Ooatiart, 4 113. 6 Est Veritas fidei Catholicse. Veritatibus duabus prredictis pertinaciter repugnans est censendus hsereticus. Labb. 17. 236, 390. II nuirite d'dtre cens6 h6r6tiquo. Bruy. 4. 126. Du Pin, 3. 38. Hotman, 321, 322. SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 163 has a right, both in a legislative and executive capacity, to govern the universal church, and to ordain, judge, suspend, and depose bishops, metropolitans, and patriarchs through Christen- dom. These receive their authority from the pope, as he re- ceives his from God. He possesses a superiority over general councils, which, for legitimation and validity, require pontifical convocation, presidency, and ratification. He is the supreme judge of controversy, and, in this capacity, receives appeals from the whole church. He is vested with temporal as well as sj)iritual authority ; and may depose sovereigns, transfer king- doms, and absolve subjects from the oath of fealty. His chief ])rerogative is infallibility. The Roman pontiff, unlike other frail mortals, is, at least in his official sentences, which he pro- nounces from the chair, exempted from all possibility of error or mistake.' Such is the monstrous system of the Italian school on the papal supremacy. The Transalpine faction, who are depend- ant and servile minions of the Roman court, clothe the pontiff with all this superhuman power and authority. This party has been supported m these views by Jesuits, canonists, theologians, popes and councils. The votaries of Jesuitism, dispersed through the world, have advocated the unlimited authority of the popedom, with their accustomed erudition and sophistry. The canonists, such as Gratian and Pithou, have, in general, been friends to the plenitude of pontifical jurisdiction and des- potism. These have been supported by an host of theologians and schoolmen, such as Baronius,Bellarmine, Binius, Turrecrema, Sanderus, Perron, Pighius, Carranza, Fabulottus, Lainez, Jacoba- tius, Arsdekin, Antonius, Canus, Cajetan, Aquinas, Turrianno, Lupus, Campeggiu, and Bonaventura. The Roman hierarchs, as might be expected, have, in general, maintained the papal power. Celestine, Gelasius, Leo, Nicholas, Gregory, Urban, Pascal, Boniface, Clement, and Paul supported their overgrown tyranny with peculiar resolution and energy. Gregory the Seventh subjected, not only the church but the state, and monopolized both civil and ecclesias- tical power. Boniface the Eighth taught the necessity of sub- mission to the pontiff for the attainment of salvation. Paul the Fourth seems to have been a model of pontifical ambition, arro- gance, haughtiness, and tyranny. His infallibility contemned » Du Pin, 333. Bell. IV. 1, 15, et 6. Gibert, 3. 36, 487, Cajetan, c, I. Extrav. 52, 101. Labb. 18. 1428. Fabul. c. IT. Sub ratione regmiuis monarchici. Dens, 2. 147. In Papa residet suprema EccleBiam Christus inatituerit instar regni, in quaunus, oeeteris imperit. Labb. ao. 670. Papa est Dominus temporalis totius orbis. Barclay, 17 164 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. the authority of councils and kings. The papal power, he maintained, was unbounded and above all synods ; and this, he called an article of faith ; and the contrary, he denominated a heresy.* His holiness declared himself the successor of one who had deposed emperors and kings, and superior to princes whom he would not acknowledge as his companions, but use as his footstool. This vain glory, these empty boasts, his infalli- bility enforced with the stamp of his foot and the thunder of his apostolic voice. The Italian system, on the supremacy, was patronized also by the councils of Florence, Lateran, and Trent. Eugenius, in the Florentine Convention and with its approbation, declared, in the thirteenth session, the superiority of the pope to a council, whose enactments he was authorized by his apostolic prerogative to change or repeal. The pontifical dissolution or translation of a council, he declared, is no heresy, notwithstand- ing the contrary sentence of the Basilian assembly, whose acts, he affirmed, were unjust and foolish, and contrary to the laws of God and man. The Florentines vested his infallibility with the vicegerency of God, and authority to teach all Christians, and the supremacy over the whole world .^ The fifth council of the Lateran clothed Leo with equal power. This convention decreed the superiority of the Roman pontiff over all councils, and his full power and right of synodal convocation, translation, and dissolution. This assembly also renewed the bull of Boniface, which declared the subjection of all Christians to the Roman pontiff necessary for salvation,' The council of Trent, on this subject, was not so explicit as those of Florence and the Lateran. The French and i;ipanish, in this synod, withstood the Italians, and prevented the free expression of Ultramontane servility. The council, howe/er, in its fourteenth session, ascribed to the pope ' the supreme power in the universal church.'* The pontiff, said Cardillus to the Trentine fathers, without any disclaimer, ' holds, as a mor- tal God, the place of Christ on earth, and cannot be judged by 1 C'6toit un article de foi, et que de dire le contraire ($toit une h6r6sie. Paolo, 2. 27. Labb. 19. 968. 2 Constat synodum pontifici esse inferiorem. Labb. 18. 1320. Papa est super potestatem ecclesiffl universalis et concilii generalis. Cajetan, 1. 10. Dissolutionem sive translationem concilii hseresim noa pertinero. Labb. 18. 1321. Romanum Pontificem in universum orbem tenere primatum, et verum Christi vicarium existere. Labb. 18. 526, 1152. • ibert, 1. 93. ' Solum Romanum Pontificem, tanqiiam auctoi'itateni super omnia concilia habentem, tam conciliorum dicendorum, transferendorum, dissolvendorum plenum jus et potestatem habere. Labb. 19. 967. Bruys, 4. 806. Du Pin 430. * Pro suorema notestate sibi in eoclesia univeraa tradita. Labb 20. flfi Gibflrt. 1. 181. Dens, 8.' 232. Ib Christi vicem gerit in terris, tanquam mortalis Deus : nerali Pontifex judicari potest. Cardil. in Labb. 20. 671. neque a concilio ge- SUPPOSED EQUALITY OF THE, POPE WITH GOD. 165 a general council.' This avowal is inconsistent with Cisalpine liberality and independence. The French, therefore, in this manner, oppose the Italians on the topic of papal supremacy. These two schools are, on this question, at open war. Theologian withstands theolo- gian. Gerson, Alliaco, Richerius, Lavmoy, Almain, Paolo, Marca, Du Pin, Carron, and Walsh, encounter Baronius, Bellarmine, Binius, Carranza, Turiano, Turrecrema, Arsdekin, Cajetan, Aquinas, and Bonaventura. The universities of Paris, Anglers, Orleans, Toulouse, Bononia, Louvain, Cracow, Cologne, and Herford may be pitted against the schoolmen, the Jesuits, and the Roman court. Pope charges pope, in dreadful affray. Damasus, Felix, Siricius, Celestine, and Pius lead their phalanx against the squadrons of Leo, Gregory, Urban, Nicholas, Pascal, Paul, and Sixtus. General councils stand in array against general councils. The Pisans, Constan- tians, and Basilians wage war against the Florentines, Laterans, and Trentines ; and hurl mutual anathemas from their spiritual artillery. A third variety would raise the pope to an equality with God. The Italian school, one would expect, confers a power on the Roman hierarch calculated to satisfy the highest ambition. But the transalpine system does not terminate the progression. A third description of flatterers have proceeded to greater ex- travagancy, and vested his holiness with ampler prerogatives. These, in the exorbitance of papal adulation, have insulted rea- son, outraged common sense, and ascended, in their impious progress, through all the gradations of blasphemy. Pretended Christians have ascribed that Divinity to the Roman pontiff, which the Pagans attributed to the Roman emperors. Bomitian, addressing his subjects in his proclamation, signed himself their ' Lord God.' Caligula arrogated the name of ' the Greatest and Best God ; ' while Sapor, the Persian monarch, affected, with more modesty, to be only ' the Brother of the Sun and Moon.'* This blasphemy has been imitated by the minions of his Roman infallibility. The pope, says the gloss of the canon law, ' is not a man.' This awkward compliment is intended to place his holiness above humanity. According to Turrecrema and Bar- clay, ' some DOCTORLINGS wish, in their adulation, to equal the pontiff to God.' These, says Gerson, quoted by Carron and Giannone, ' esteem the pope a God, who has all power in heaven and earth.' The sainted Bernard affirms that, ' none, except God, is like the pope, either in heaven or on earth.'' ^ Suetonius, 322, 555. " Papa non est homo. Sext. Deoret. L. I. Tit. VI. c. 18, Doctorculi volant adulandoeoB quasi sequiparareDeo.BarcIay,219. Turrecrem. 166 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. The name and the works of God have been appropriated to the pope, by <,heologians, canonists, popes, and councils. Gratian, Pithou, Durand, Jacobatius, Musso, Gibert, Gregory, Nicholas, Innocrnt, the canon law, and the Lateran council have complimented his holiness with the name of deity, or bestowed on him the vicegerency of heaven. Pithou, Gibert, Durand, Jacobatius, Musso, and Gratian, on the authority of the canon law, style the pontiff the Almighty's vicegerent, 'who occupies the place, not of a mere man, but of the true God.* According to Gregory the Second, 'The whole Western Nations reckoned Peter a terrestrial God,' and the Roman ])ontiff, of course, suc- ceeds to the title and the estate. This blasphemy, Gratian copied into the canon law. ' The emperor Constantine,' says Nicholas the First, ' conferred the appellation of God on the pope, who, therefore, being God, cannot be judged by man.' According to Innocent the Third, ' the pope holds the place of the true God.' The canon law, in the gloss, denominates the Roman hierarch, ' our Lord God.' The canonists, in general reckon the pope the one God, who hath all power, human and divine, in heaven and in earth. Marcellus in the Lateran council and with its full approbation, called Julius, ' God on earth." This was the act of a general council, and therefore, in the popish account, is the decision of infallibility. The works as well as the name of God have been ascribed to the pope, by Innocent, Jacobatius, Durand, Decius, Lainez, the canon law, and the Lateran council. ' The pope and the Lord,' in the statement of Innocent, Jacobatius and Decius, * form the same tribunal, so that, sin excepted, the pope can do nearly all that God can do.' Jacobatius, in his modesty, uses the qualifying expression nearly, which Decius, with more ef- frontery, rejects as unnecessary. The pontiff, say Jacobatius and Durand, ' possesses a plenitude of power, and none dare say to him, any more than to God, Lord, what dost thou ? He can change the nature of things, and make nothing out of some- thing and something out of nothing.' These are not the mere Q. II. Estiment Papam unicum Deum esse qui habet potestatem omnem iu ccbIo et in terra. Carron, 34. Giannon. X. 12. Prseter Deum, non est similia ei nee in ccelo, nee in terra. Bernard, 1725. 2. Thess. II. 4. 1 Papa vicem non puri hominis, sed veri Dei, gerens in terra. Jacob. VII Barclay, 222. Pithou, 29. Decret. I. Tit. VII. c. III. Papa locum Dei tenet in terris. Gibert, 2. 9. Durand. 1. 51. Omnia Occidentis regna, velut Deum terrestrem habent. Labb. 8. 666. Bruy. 2. 100. Constantino Deum appellatum, cum nee posse Deum ab hominibus judicf.vi inanifestum est. Labb, 9. 1572. Dominus Deus noster Papa. Extrav. Tit. XI V^. c. IV. Walsh, p. IX. Deus in terris. Labb. 19. 731. Bin. 9. 54. Canonistaj dicunt, Papam esse uuum Deum, qui habet potestatem omnem in cc-it) •t iu terra. Potestatem omnem ot i 'ivinam et humanam Papa tribuunt B&icby, 2, 4, 220. ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF THE POPE TO GOD. 167 imaginations of Jacobatius, Durand, and Decius ; but are found, in all their absurdity, in the canon law, which attributes to the pope, the irresponsibility oi the Creator, tho divine power of performing the works of God, and making something out of nothing. The po] , aeording to Lainez at the council of Trent, ' has the power of dispensing with all laws, and the same authority as tlio Lord.' This, exclaimed Hugo, 'is a scandal and impiety which equals a mortal to the immortal, and a man to God.' An archbishop, in the last Lateran synod, called Julius ' prince of the world :' and another orator styled Leo, ' the possessor oi all power in heaven and in earth, who presi- ded over all the kingdoms of the globe.' This blasphemy, the holy, uneiiing, Roman council heard without any disapproba- tion, and the pontiff with unmingled complacency. The man of sin til II ' sat in the temple of God, and .showed himself that he was God.' ' Some popes,' says Coquille, ' have allowed then. selves to be called omnipotent.'' A fourth varieoy, on this subject, makes the Pope superior to God. Equality with the Almighty, it might have been expected, would have satiated the ambition of the pontiffand satisfied the sycophancy of his minions. But this was not the giddiest step in the scale of blasphemy. The superiority of the pope over the Creator, has been boldly and unblushingly maintained by pontiffs, theologians, canonists, and councils. According to Cardinal Zabarella, ' the pontiffs, in their arro- gance, assumed the accomplishment of all they pleased, even un- lawful things, and thus raised their power above the law of God.' The canon law declares that, ' the Pope, in the pleni- tude of his i)ower, is above right, can change the substantial nature of things, and transform unlawful into lawful.''' Bellar- mine's statement is of a similar kind. The cardinal affirms that ' the Pope can transubstantiate sin into duty, and duty into sin.' He can, says the canon law, ' dispense with right.' Stephen, archbishop of Petraca, in his senseless parasitism and blasphemy, declared, in the council of the Lateran, that 1 Papa etChristus faciunt idem consistorium, ita quod, excepto peccato, potest Papa fere omnia facere, quee potest Deus. Jacob. III. Papsenullusaudeat discere, Domine, cur ita facis ? JExtrav. Tit. IV. c. II. Sicut Deo dici non potest, cur ita facis ? Ita nee in iis, qua; sunt juris positivi, Papse potest dici cur hoc facia ? Jacob. III. De aliquo facit nihil, mutando etiam rei naturam. De nihilo, aliquid facit. Durand, 1. 50. Extrav. De Tran. c 1. q. 6. Coram te, hoo est, coram totius orbis principe. Labb. 19. 700. Tibi data est,' omnis potestas, in ccelo et in terra. Super omnia regna mundi sedens. Labb. 19. 920, 927. Du Pin. 3. 602. 2. Thess. 11. 4. Au(>un8 ont endur6 d'etre appellez omnipotens. Coquille, 408. • Pontifices multa aibi arrogaverunt, et omnia se posse existiment, et quidcjuid liberit, etiam illicita ; sicque supra Dei prseceptum potestatem illam extendisse. Zabarel. de Schism. Thuan. 6. 397- Habet plenitudinem potestantis, et supra jus est. Gibert, 2, 103. Immutat substantialem rei naturam puta faciendo de illegitimo, legitimum. Durand, 1. 50. 168 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Leo possessed ' power above all powers, both in heaven and in earth.'' The son of perdition then ' exalted himself above all that is called God.' This brazen blasphemy passed in a general council, and is, therefore, in all its revolting absurdity, stamped with the seal of Roman infallibility. But the chief prerogative of the Roman hierarch seems to be his power of creating the Creator.'' Pascal and Urban plumed themselves on this attribute, which, according to their own account, raised them above all subjection to earthly sovereigns, This, however, is a communicable perfect-on, and, m consequence, is become common to all the sacerdotal confra- ternity. His holiness keeps a transfer office at the Vatican, in which he can make over this prerogative to all his deputies through Christendom. These, in consequence, can make and eat, create and swallow, whole thousands of pastry-gods every day. But these deities, in the opinion of their makers, are per- haps not new gods, but merely new editions of the old one. Those who would restrict his infallibility to a presidency, and those who would exalt his dignity to a sovereignty, contending with one another, have also to contend with such as maintain his equality or superiority to God. The two latter descriptions, indeed, seem to be divided by a thin partition. Having elevated a sinful mortal to an equality with Jehovah, the remaining task of conferring a superiority was easy. But both vary from the French and Italian schools, as well as from reason and common sense. Such are a few of the opinions, which speculators have enter- tained of the pope's jurisdiction and authority. These opinions have not been confined to empty speculation ; but have, as far as possible, been realized in action on the wide, theatre of Christen- dom, and before the public gaze of an astonished world. The Roman hierarchy has, in reality passed through all the grada- tion of humility, pride, power, despotism, and blasjjhemy. The friends of Romanism differ as much in the proof of the supremacy as in its extent and signification. The pontiffs and their minions, about * i.e beginning of thefifth century, fabricated an extraordinary story about Pope Peter's Roman episcopacy and ecclesiastical supremacy ; and his transmission of all this honor and jurisdiction to his pontifical successors. The tale, if arranged with judgment and written with elegance, would 1 Si Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, et virtutes, malas. Bellarmin, IV. 5. Possumus supra JUS dispensare. Deoret. Greg. HI. 8. IV. Extrav. Coram. 208. Potestas supra omnes potestates tarn coeli. auamterrae. Labb. 19. 024 ■■ Deum cuncta creantem creent.' Hoveden, 268. Labb. 19. 960. Elev^s k cet iionneur supreme de cr6er le Cr^ateur. Bruy. 2. 535. ALLEQBD SUPERIORITY OF THE POPE TO OOD. 169 make an entertaining religious novel ; but as destitute of evi- dence as Roderic Random, Tristram Shandy, or the Seven Champions of Christendom. The fiction too has been composed by bungling and tasteless authors. The plot is far inferior to that of Don Quixote or Tom Jones. The characters, emblazoned with ridiculous and legendary miracles, the offspring of credu- lity and tradition, bear no resemblance to probability ; whilst the language, in which it has been uniformly couched, is un- polished and repulsive. The machinery is such as might be expected in a romance of the dark ages. Simon a magician is introduced, accompanied with Helen a goddess, who had been taken from the Tyrian brothels, and who had been transformed from a courtezan into a divinity. This man had, by the arts of necromancy, obtained an infamous notoriety; and the Apostle, it would appear, was conducted to Rome for the purpose of withstanding the en- chanter. The new pope was opposed to the old conjuror. Simon, before the emperor Nero and the whole city, flew into the air. But Peter kneeling invoked Jesus ; and the devil, in consequence, who had aided the magician's flight, struck with terror at the sacred name, let his emissary fall and break his leg.* One stone, in the Roman capital, retains, to the present day, the print of Peter's knee where he prayed, and another, the blood of Simon where he fell ! The hero of this theological romance is the alleged Pope Peter. His supremacy is the basis of the whole superstructure. This ecclesiastical sovereign is the main-spring which puts into motion the entire machinery ; and the busy actors in the scene, accordingly, have endeavored, as well as they can, to sr^pport the illusion with some kind of evidence. The proof, such as it is, these doctors extort from the phraseology of the Messiah transmitted by the sacred historian Matthew.'* Our Lord, say these theologians, built, according to the state- ment of Matthew, his church on Peter, whom, by this charter, he constituted his plenipotentiary on earth. His authority de- volves in succession on all the Roman pontiffs, and, of course, on Liberius, Zosimus, Honorius, Vigilius, John, Boniface, and Alexander, who have been immortalized by heresy or villany. Matthew's relation is convey ed in metaphorical language, and has given rise to a variety of interpretations. Different exposi- tors, even among Romish critics, explain the Rock, mentioned by the inspired historian, in various senses. The diversity of these opinions is freely admitted by Launoy, Du Pin, Calmet, and Maldonet. All these confess the vPtrietv of opinions on this » Cyril, 88. Cateoh. vi. > Matth. xvi. 18. M 170 THE VAHIATIONS OF POPERY. passage of Revelation/ Launoy, followed by Du Pin, Calmet and Maimbourg, distinguish the interpretations on this part of sacred '"• - i into four classes, according as they make the foun- d&tv.r In hp i.ier; the Apostles; Peter's confession; or Jesus lir.iiell. h.i. h class boasts the authority of popes, saints, and other commentators. One class refers the rock or foundation, mentioned by the in- spued historian, to Peter. These support their opinion by seventeen fathers or theologians who entertained this interpre- tation ; among whom v/ere Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrosius Jeroiue, Augustine, Cyril, Ba,sil, Epiphanius, Gre- gory, and Theophylact. These, in modern times, were followed by Bai-onius, Calmet, Binius, Maldonat and Alexander. Pope Leo the First i)atronized the same opinion. Fontidinius and Cardillus, in the Council of Trent, advocated this explanation, without any contradiction ; and, therefore, it appears, expressed the mind of that assembly.^ A second class interpret the rock or foundation to signify the Apostles. This exposition has been embraced by theologians, saints and councils. It was adopted bv Origen, Theodoret, larasius, Etherius, Theophylact, and Pascasius. The same was admitted by Du Pin, Calmet, Alexander, Cusan, Launoy, aiid Maldonat, as well as by the saints Cyprian, Jerome, r^^V' ^y^' Ambrosius, Chrysostom, and Augustine^* This signification of the word was also sanctioned by the general councils of Constance and Basil. Gerson delivered a statement to this purpose in the general council of Constance, m a speech made by its authority, and published by its com- mand. The same was taught in the general council of Basil, by Its president Julian, in his celebrated speech delivered before the unerring assembly in the name of the Catholic Church, for the purpose of proselyting the Bohemians. Pa- normitan^ in this synod, followed Julian in the same strain, stating that ' Jesus gave no greater power to Peter than to the } Ab intei-pretibus et Sanctis patribus varie exponitur. Du Pin, 304. LeP diver- V DePrim 1 s"^^*"''^^^^^"^^^*^^^'^^*^^' ^''*^™^*' ^^- ^^- Maimbourg, c. -'Launoy, adVoel. Du Pin, Diss. IV. Maiden, in Matt. xiv.De Launoy, 17. Prim V^^IO*^^ ^^'*^*'°°* auctores laudat huic interpretationi consentientes. De Princeps Apostolorum Petre, eujus humeris banc molem ecclesiffi Christus im- posuit. Fontid. in Labb. 20. 658. Cujus fundamentum Petrus est. Super hunc Petrum, tanquam supra firmam petrum. Chnstus sedificavit ecclesiam suam. Cardill. in Labb. 20. 668, 671. 3 Launoy 2. 11. Du Pin. Diss. IV. Maldon. in Matt. xvi. Apostoli omnes. «q"9 jure, fuermt ecclesiae fundamenta. Alex. 1. 283. Nihil dictum est ad Petrum, quod etiam aliis dictum non sit. Cusan 11 ^ ious les Apotres en sont ies fondemens. Ualmet, 18. 363. Eph. ii, 20. Rer! ALLEGED SUPERI»)RITY OP THE POPE TO GOD. 171 other apostles.' Neither pope nor council, on any of these oc- casions, remonstrated or showed any opposition. The infallible fathers acquiesced in silent consent, and, in this way, according to Launoy, Dens, and other popish doctors, conveyed their approbation.^ A third class interpret the rock or foundation to signify Peter's faith or confession. This signification, according to Launoy, Du Pin, Bellarmine, Maimbourg, Calmet, and Maldo- nat, has been maintained by theologians, saints, popes, and coun- cils. Launoy and Du Pin reckon forty-four fathers and popish authors who held this opinion ; and the roll might be enlarged to any extent. Amongst these were Eusebius, Beda, Theodoret, Damascen, Theophylact, Odo, Ragusa, Alphonsus, Pole, Jonas, Eckius, and Erasmus. A long train of saints might be added, such as Hilary, Ambrosius, Gregory, Chrysostom, Cyril, Augustine, and Aquinas. The popes are Leo, Felix, IJormisdas, Gregory, Nicholas, John, Stephen, Innocent, Urban, Alexan- der, and the two Hadrians. These facts have been admitted even by Bellarmine and Maimbourg, as well as by Calmet and Maldonat. Anno 825, Jonas, Bishop of Orleans, ascribed this explanation to nearly all ecclesiastical writers ; and none, said the celebrated Eckius so late as 1525, deny this interpretation. Erasmus not only accounted Peter's faith or profession the foundation, ' but wondered that any person would wrest the passage to signify the Roman pontiff.'* 1 In apostolorum et prophetarum doctrinis fundata est. Gerson in Labb, 16. 1315. In Apocalypsi dicitur, murum civitatis descendentis de Coelo, quse est eoclesia, habere fundamenta duodecim apostolorum et Agni. Orat. Praesed. in Labb. 17. 696. Nee in hoc, majorem potestatem dedit Petro quam caeteris apostolis simul. Panorm in Cassant, 4. 1405. Cum a synodo admittatur, pro synodi doctrina haberi merito potest et debet. Launoy, 2. 30- SuflScit consensus tacitus. Facere, in hoc casu, est consentire. Dens. 2. 129. 2 Launoy, 2. 18. Du Pin, 305. < almet et Maldon. in Matt. xvi. 18. Maim- bourg, 0. 6- Idem alterius istius interpretationis patronos 44 patres aut scriptores ecclesi- asticos laudat. Du Pin, 2. Bellarminus, ut expositionem tertiam, banc veterum patrum testimoniis posse, fateatur. Launoy, 2. 51. II y en a d'autres, qui les ont entendues de cette c616bre confession. Maim- bourg, c 6. Hano confessionem portae infenii non tenebunt. Leo I. Serm. II. Super ista confession! tedificabo ecclesiam meam. Felix III. Ep. adZenon. Labb. 5. 166. Apostoli fidem secuti sunt. Horm, in Comm. In petra ecclesiaj, hoc est, in confessione Beati Petri. Greg. I. in Labb. 6. 872, Super solidam fidem apostolorum principis. Nich. 1. ad Mich, super solidam confessionis petram, suam Dominus fabricavit ecclesiam. .lohn viii. ad Petrum, Ecclesia fundata super firmam petram apostoli, videlicet Petri confessionem. Steph. 6. JKp, 2, Super banc petram sedificabo ecclesiam : petram utique tirmi- tatt'm fidei. Inno. II. ad Epis. Supra petram fidei fundavit. Urban III. ad Arch. 172 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Peter's faith or confession is the foundation, also, according to the general councils of Niceea, Constantinople, Constance, Basil, and the Lateran. Pope Hadrian, in a letter to the empress Irene, read and received with acclamation in the second general council of Nicsea, gave this interpretation. The same pontiffs letter to Tarasius, containing a similar statement, was read in this synod, and admitted with equal approbation. A similar reception attended the letters of Germanus, concur- ring with Hadrian, in this unerring assembly. All the bishops approved. The eighth general council of Constantinople ac- cepted Pope Nicholas* Epistle to Photius, which avowed the same opinion. The Constantian theologians, in their censure of Wicklifficism,read and sanctioned in the council of Constance, likewise explained the expression to denote ' the rock of faith.' The council of Basil, through Julian and Ragusa, its advocates against the Bohemian heresy, was equally express in maintaining this exposition, which had been avowed at ^ictea, Constantino- ple, and Constance. The foundation or rock in these famed orations, ' is faith, on which the Creator built the church, and which sustains the superstructure.' The council of the Lateran concurred nvith that of Basil. Peter, said Archbishop Ste- phanus, addressing Pope Leo in the tenth session of the fifth general council of the Lateran, ' confessed the Catholic Apos- tolic faith, ordained by the eternal Father and the eternal Son for the foundation of the Church.' The holy pontiff and the holy fathers, in silent approbation, admitted the unquestioned truth, which, sanctioned by the five general councils of JSiciea, Constantinople, Constance, Basil and the Lateran, was, there- fore, on five several occasions, emblazoned with the insignia of infallibility.! ^ Promeruit confiteri fidem, super quam fundatur ecclesia. Hadrian T. ad Con. In confessionis petra. Hadrian IV. ad Fred. Labb. 8. 747 Cyril 2 593 Hilary, 77. . ^ . . . Ad annum DCCCXXV. Jonas expositionem tertiam traditoribus ecclesise pcene omnibus tribuit. Launoy, 2. 51, Ad annum MDXXV. Eckius earn a nemine negari pugnat. Launoy, 2, 51. Miror esse, qui locum hunc detorqueant ad Romanum Pontificem. Erasm' 6. 88, 92. 1 Promeruit confiteri fidem, supra quam fundatur ecclesia. Fides nostra est petra super quam Christus sEdificavit suam ecclesiam. Germ, ad Thom Labb 8.747,770,951,1193,1303. Du Pin, 2, 34, 35. Christns supra soliditatem fidei suam sanctam dignatus est stabilire ecclesiam. Nich. Photio. Labb. 10. 539. lUam ipse solus Christus fundavit, et super petram fidei mox nascentis erexit. Theol. Constan. iu Labb. 16, 868, 870. Canisius, 4. 765. Fides est fundamentum in domo mea. Hoc autem fidei fundamentum firmiter Bustentet ajdificium. Super banc petram, videlicet fidei, sedificabo ecclesiam meam. Labb. 17, 686, 692, 693. Crabb. 3. 294. CnriRtufl rnoTAvif. nrn fidpi nuaivi ^v\ciA /./\nfr.e.at.£i f..r.«*f ^4. ...•., : /^i._!_ .---- —_^^ ._....__ ^ .J— «i.. .^,.,.,.,...,......,1.., I •t.jiair, T3if Suprauuttiii Ipat: v^iiris' tus fundavit suam ecclesiam. Ragg. in Labb. 17. 896. Fidem Catholicam et apostolicam ab cetemo Patre pro cetemo Filio ordinatam fundamentum ecclesia?, confessus est. Orat. Steph. in Labb. 19. 921. ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF THE POPE TO GOD. 173 A foiir^b r'ass make Christ himself the rock or foundation. This ox| laii .tion also has been patronized by theologians, sa' its, p ■ y i, and councils. Launoy enumerates sixteen fathers or ' opisb doctors of this description ; and the list might be va V 111' eased. Among the fathers and doctors are Origen, T^uset ^''heodoret, Beda, Paulinus, Dungal, Etherius, Raban, Tarasiv ', Auselm, Theophylact, Lombard, Ragusa, Lyra, Pole, anH T: tal>lus. The saints are Cyprian, Cyril, Jerome, Augus- tin, uiid Aquinas, as well as many more that might be men- tioned. The popes are Celestine, Innocent, Pius, Alexander, Hadrian, Nicholas, and Leo ; and to these might be added many other Roman pontiffs.* The rock or foundation, say also the general councils of Nicsea, Constantinople, Basil, and Trent, was the Lord. This was expressed in Pope Hadrian's letter to Tarasius, which was read and received in the second Nicean council ; and in the speech of Epiphanius to the same assembly. The same was declared in a letter of Pope Nicholas to Michael, which was read without any declamation in the eighth general council that met at Constantinople. The Baailian council concurred with those of Nicsea and Constantinople. This assembly, through Julian and Ragusa, its advocates for Catholicism against the Bohemian heresy, also sanctioned this interpretation. The general council of Trent followed in the same path. Fragus in this synod, declared without any disclamation, that ' the church was builded on the living stone, the firm and divine rock.'" This interpretation, therefore, giving the honor to the Messiah, was, in four general councils, marked with the seal of synodal infallibility. Augustine's language on this question is, in several places, very strong and emphatical. He makes a distinction between 1 Laun. ad VeoU. Du Pin, 305. Theophylact, 2. 186. Lyra, 6. 52. Can- isius, 2. 298. De Launoi sexdecim numerat patres eeu ecclesiasticos auctores aic hunc tex- tnm exponentea. De Prim 2. Chriatus qui eat petra. Cyprian, Ep. 63. Awtoj uv h 0c/i(Aios. Cyril, 2. 612. Fundamentum unua eat Dominus. Jerom. c. 7- Peira Chriatus eat. Jerom 3. 1430. Aug. Ret. T. 21. Chriafcua eat eccleaise fundamentum. Aquin. 2.6. Ant! 6. De aeipaa veritate dicente, auper hanc petram. Celeat. III. ad Lin. Labb. 13. 702. Petra erat Chriatus. Inn. Serm. II. Super firmam pevram, qute erat Christua. Piua. II. de Great. Launoy, 2. 45. Labb. 8. 770 et 10. 529. De Prim 14. In fundament© quod eat Christua. Leo 9. ad Mich. Labb. 11. 1323. * Chriatua fundamentum est. Had. I. ad Taraa. Labb. 8. 770. 1268. A ftrmitate petrae, quae Chriatua est. Nicolai EpistolaadMichaelemlmp. in Labb. 10. 529. Chriatus Jesus hujusasdificii basis et fundamentum fieri dignatus est. Fundata est haec sacroaancta mea domus super petram Christi vivam. Julian in Labb. 17. 692, C93. Crabb. S. 293, 294. retra significabat Christum. Juauues de KaKus. in Labb. 17. 821. Canisius, 4. 469. Super vivum saxum firmamque et Divinam petram conatruota. Orat. Frajr. Labb. 20. 332. * 174 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPEEV. the word which, m the English version, is translated Peter and that which IS rendered Rock. The two terms, indeed both in the original and in the vulgate, in the Greek and in the Latin are different in form and signification. Augustine, accordin^dv' as Jirasmus has remarked, applies the word rock, not to Peter' but to Christ. Jesus, observes the saint, ' said not thoii art the rock, but thou art Peter. The rock was Christ whom Peter confessed." Maldonat characterizes this distinction by the epithet, silly and ridiculous. But the distinction, whether silly or solid, is the work, not of a Protestant commentator but 01 a Roman saint. ' The interpretation of the third class was adopted by Luther The Saxon reformer, therefore, notwithstanding his herosv' was supported in his opinion by saints, poi.es. and -reneral councils. Calvin embraced the internretation of the^lourtli class. _ His opinion, therefore, like Luther's, was patronized l.v the highest authority m the Romish communion. Luther and Calvin therefore, if they were mistaken, erred, even in popish estimation, m good company ; and their explanations flow in the same channel with the stream of antiquity. These four expositions, seemingly at variance, may all sav Launoy and Du Pm, be .shown to agree. The two forme'r are the same m sense, and so are the two latter. The meanino- of both the foregoing, signifying the Apostles, is. in no respect in- consistent with the acceptation of both the ensuino- when -is sumed to denote the Lord. Account the Apostles the subordi- nate, and the Lord the supreme foundation, and the whole tram of doctors, saints, pontiffs, and councils, however they may appear to differ, will, in reality, immediately be reconciled The first and second interpretations, says Launoy and Du Pin, are the same in sense. The two, differing in appearance rather than in reality, may easily be reconciled. The commen- tators, who represent Simon as the foundation, do not exclude his apostolic companions. None of the ancients characterized Peter as the only foundation. Those who ascribe to him this honor, never ma single instance, attribute it exclusively to him alone, but refer it. m common, to the 'whole apostolic college Both explanations, accordingly, were patronized by Origen Cy }.iian, Jerome, and Augustine. Cyprian, at an early penod' de- clared that ' our Lord conferred equal power on all the Apostles who, m this respect, were certainly the same as Peter ;' and the J Noil enim dictum est illi, tu es petra, sed tu es Petrus. Petra autem erat ChnstuBquemconfassusSimon Aug. Ret. 121. Non supra petramTodS es, sed supra petrain quam confessus os. August 8erm 270 Pet'raEr^m. tsS^'''^''' "'^"" ^*''° P'*'^" '^^ accommodat Christo, non ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF THE POPE TO GOD. 175 •saint has been followed in more modem times by PanOmitan Alexander, Launo.y, Du Pin, Maldonat, Cusan^ and CaS' says John, 'the names oT^heVeZlt^.l^^^^^^^^ metaphorical and prophetic lanffual of Sli . ' •" *^^ emblem of the extrkordinary cSxSn whfch t w'°"' •' ■ ^^ anes executed as the primar^ hera'dso? The tspeT "^UlT sacred college, therefore, are represented L ihfT ^ N *^^. the new Jerusalem, which, in tE Master's n.^?"''^!,^'""^ spiritual kingdom, Was, by their unitfdpvlf- !' T^ ""^ ^'' The apostles, says Du Pin^weii cUWl ttf f '''':^ ?• ' '''™^- count of their piomulgatfonoTthfioleHnd'f'r "''""' "" ^^- of the church. » ^ "^ i^ne gospel and their government The third and fourth interpretations as well is fh^ fi. . ^ second, are the same in sense.' The two, Wh tlev S^"^^ expression, agree like thp nih^r^ f ,„ /'""u^n tney clitter in candid professors of Por>erro? Launov Du - '''^'^:!'^*^^ "^ others of the same description ' ManyTlin^s n;""' '''"^. "^^"^ cik as the preceding statements swSrowffl bo«i fo""- da^ons plainly manifesting their conVictioroRhlrl to These observations, in clear terms, show the ideiHtl nf fi?" two former, as well as of the fwo u\J!.- i ^'^f^^^W of the the identical meanim. of both ?he nl'"; ''^''*"^T^- ^"<^ a,)Ostles, and of both the fol Wit Cn.''^4''¥"^^^^ '^' no respect inconsistent or contrSorv t£ •^''•^'.'''" ^^ and subordinate, and the oth r™^^^^^ Ks a distinction, not merely of protesS origin 7^! ^^ ^^'^ by popish authority. Dens t^hr^.^a urv^n?'R ^^^''-^^^^ed dariing of the popish prelacy in reland "don .^r'"''^V*"^ a ..ila.; distinction^ Th^e 0^^^^:^^^^^^ Apostolis omnibus parem potestatem tribuat. Cyprian 107 Tm.8 les Ap6ties en sont les fondeniens. Calmet 18 361 T„hK .« ,..« - Tertia et quarta expoHitio reipsa conveniunt. Uunov 2 ^ ^^- *^^^- AbiBtaexpositione, non multumabluunt ii oui PH-rr? T^* ^'\ urn quem Petrus erat confesaus. Du Pin '.3% ]jf ^-^^'^terpretantur ChriBt- 176 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. delivered in the council of Constance, and armed with all its unerring authority, discriminated, on this topic, in the same manner. Many doctors, saints, popes, and councils, as appears from the preceding statements, have admitted both foundations, but certainly, in accordance with the foregoing discrimination' in a different sense, accounting the one subordinate, and the' other supreme. Pope Leo the Ninth represents the church as built on the rock, which is Emmanuel, as well as on Peter or Cephas. Foss\is, Archbishop of Reginum, in the council of Trent, and countenanced with at least its tacit consent, referred the rock or foundation to Christ, to faith, and to Peter. The pontiff and the prelate, on this occasion, must have intended to distinguish between the apostolic and mediatorial foundations. All these authors, therefore, as Launoy remarks, may, in this manner, be reconciled with themselves, as well as with reason and revelation.' The donation of the keys, nientioned by Matthew, and ad- duced in proof of the supremacy by Baronius, Bellarmine, Binius, and their party, affords another topic of diversified opinion among the friends of Romanism. This argument, if it deserve the name, forms one of the most pitiful sophisms that ever dis- graced the pages of controversy. The keys, conveying the power of binding and loosing, of remitting and retaining sin were, according to the ancients und many moderns, given to all the apostles and to all Christians who belong to the ecclesi- astical community. This has been shown, beyond all question, by the warmest friends of the Papacy, such as Du Pin, Calmet' Maldonat. and Alexander. The proof of the donation of the keys to the whole apostolic college and to the whole Christian commonwealth, has been collected by Du Pin and Maldonat. The Sorbonnist and the Jesuit declare the unanimity of the ancients on this opinion.-' Du Pin, for the exposition, instances the saints Cyprian, Jerome, Ambrosius, Augustin, Leo, Ful- gentius, and the fathers Tertullian, Optatus, Gaudentius, Theophylact, Eucharius, Beda, Raban, Hincmar, and Odo. * Solu8 Christus est quidem fundameutum ossentiale et primarium. Petrus est fundamentum secunaarium in Christo fundatum. Dens, 2. 149. Ad unum caput primarium Christum, et vicarium summum Pontificem Ger- son in Labb. 16. 1.315. Ecclesia super petram, id est Christum, et super Petrum vel Cepham ledificata Leo ad Mich. Labb. 11. 1323. Ad Christum et ad fidem, quam Petrus confessus est, refertiur, ut nisi ad Pet- rum ipsum referri etiam intelligas, diminute credes et prope nihil Foss in Labb. 20.529. "«. " Si auctores illi omnes inter se componantur, ut antea, conponi facile Dossunt Launoy, 2, 51. r r • 2 Antiqui, unanimi consensu, tradunt, claves istas, in persona Petri, toti ecclesiaj datas. Du Pin, 308. Omnes veteres auctores decent, dicentes. claves omnibus datas fuisse. Maldonat, 340. ALLEGED SUrERIORITY OF THE POPE TO GOD. 177 Maldonat specifies, for the same interpretation, the names of Chrysostom, Ambrosius, Origen, and Theoph^lact cXet for this opimon, enumerates Cvprian Aimn\ifn n • ^^^^^^' Theophylact; while Alexander'^SSnfofr;^^^^ brosms, and Augustin.^ The svat^m thnr-J^ r^ W ^' extorted from all theSrous v^^^^^ monuments of Christian antinm-fv \f , . diversified the Romish communirhave^ent Jtai^pT^J'"'^^ °^'^^™^ "^ such as Lyra, Du Pi^ Sm^ MoU /^td' '^""^ '^"*^^en^«' Moreri. Fa^ Pole, and e? rtL SSs .XT^^^''^""^''''' has been advocated by Gerson Cusan .nrT , «^rpeP"^^<^^ of the keys, therefore"; beinrcomm n', TotldtZlr on an ^ vidua no peculiar jurisdiction or authority '''' '''^'- superlative silliness and impert nence sTS 1 " '^f!"^'' '" the book of inspiration, are SesTed to a^Hhe n^storor'r ' '" and extraordinary^ „f the Christian eommoZS Teiuf Sf and Peter concur m en o ning this dnfv » q,-^ • - , ' ^^^^' a.sting„ished herald o^the i<^S fll^ .^Z^IT:^ ^-^^ in P.. xviii._Eccl„i„ «Uv\T„i?r£m d" "■.™t' "•^''T'i ^"''>'»- Caus 94 li, I n "r**""". '*^''^P}''> ecclesiam aauctam sicuiiipavit i ,-1. Laus. /.i. i^u. I. Uaeteris Aposto s data- sunt clavpa aHv 1 ', ''*^"' Lea pudsages, si l'«n consulte rexDlication n In ^ .^^' ''^^''- ^ •^•'^1 sent i toua les apfltres et k toute l^gTise 7 40 °°'"* ^'^ P^'^«' » "^^dres- Auctontaa h»c non eat conceaaa perron.' «oU Petri, sed ipai ecclesi^. F-. ^ Labb °2o! %l''''™ ''""°*"'-' '^ °**«'-- P'^torea omnee pertinear.t. . £lir^Z'!/f S^^«"'- - ^-- Oe -ire quo les clefs ont m donn.ea 1. abb. 20: 961. • ^ """'^"^"^ paatorea omnee pertineant. Polus in Vt?;Y'i?upt'^r/l' ^"^--•47. Johnxx^Mr. .«^,,28. 2. L 178 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ordinary extent, in proclaiming salvation to the Jews. Paul, however, was inferior to none in the evangelical transcendency of exertion and success. This statement is corroborated by the authority of Ambrosius, Chrysostom, Augustin, and Basil, who are quoted for this purpose by Du Pin.' The evangelists, therefore, make no mention of the supremacy, and the other sacred penmen are guilty of the same omission. Nothing of the kind is to be found in the works of Luke, Paul, James, Peter, Jude, or John. Luke mentions the election of Matthias and the deacons, the mission to Samaria, and the council of Jerusalem.'' Pope Peter, however, in none of these, claimed or exercised any superiority. The apostolic pontiff, on no occasion, issued a single bull or launched a solitary ana- thema. Paul, in his fourteen epistolary ()roductions, supplies no proof of the supremacy ; but the contrary. He declares, in unquali- fied language, his own equality, and disclaims the imputation of inferiority. He reproved Cephas in strong terms, for tempo- rizing dissimulation in his treatment of the Christian converts from Judaism and Gentilism. He addressed a long letter to the Roman Christians. He transmitted salutations from many inferinj- names, but neglected the Roman pontilf who reigned in the Roman capital. The Christian missionary, with all his erudition, seems not to have known his holiness, who, it would appear, had no name in the apostolic vocabulary. He mentions the civil governor ; but neglects the sacerdotal viceroy. He is mindful of the emperor ; but unmindful of the pope.'* This was very uncourteous. The pupil of Gamaliel might have imbibed some Rabbinical learning, and the citizen of Tarsus might have acquired some Grecian literature. But he must have been wofuUy defective in politeness. Paul, however, did not, after all, speak evil of this dignity. His apostleshi[) only forgot to say any thing of his spiritual majesty, Mdio then wielded through Christendom, all the vicegerency of ecclesiastical omnipotence. Pope Peter has obliged the world with two ecclesiastical pub- lications. The sovereign pontiff, in these official annunciations, might have been exi)ected to mention his vice-iegal authority, if it were only for the purpose of enforcing his commands. But the viceroy of heaven preserves, on this topic, a vexatious and provoking silence. He discovers not one solitary or cheering 1 Suscepit Petrus, seel et uobiscum eas auscepit. Amb de Uign. c. xxx. EipTjToi irpos iKaarov Vw- Chrysostom, 7- 749 Non ipso Petro, sed in corpore auo, ait, pasce oves meas. Augus. de Agon. c. XXX. Tlaai rots f inferior Petro. Amb. 11. Ulos et electio pares et labor similes, et finis feci; itquales Leo, iSerni. 8. i Paulus Apostoloruni maximus. Origen, Hoin. 3. Kara UavAow /xei/ ovStis tan. Chrysostom, 11. 200. Caput etfectus est nationum, quia obtinuit totiusecclesin principatum. (iregory, IV. ,5. ^ Iren. III. 3. Cyprian, Ep. 55 Bell. II. 15. Du Pin, 314. Alex. I. 294. SUPREMACY ASCRIBED TO OTHER SEES, BESIDES ROME. 188 Hame care on all, as on the particular church that was entrusted to his inspection by our common Lord. ' Basil who, with such kindness, had promoted Athanasius to a general episcopacy, con- fers, with equal condescension, the same honor on Miletius, }»atriarch of Antioch. ' Miletius,' according to the Roman saint, * ])resided over the whole church.' Constantine appropriated the government of the church and the superintendence of the fiiith to himself ' God,' said the emperor, ' hath appointed me to the chief command in the church, and to maintain the purity and integrity of the faith.' This assumption of ecclesiastical authority was addressed to the Roman pontiff without oppo- sition, and afterward read in the sixth general council with •uni- versal approbation. The im|)erial theology, therefore, was stumped with the broad seal of synodal and pontifical infalli- bility. Paulus, the Byzantine patriarch, when dying, when the parting spirit is supposed to catch a brighter ray from heaven, ascribed the jurisdiction of the whole ecclesiastical community tf» the empress Irene. ' The grand flock of Jesus,' said the departing patriarch, ' is attached to the imperial dignity." His dving speech, which committed the superintendency of the Christian commonwealth to a woman, was received with general aiil)lause, and has been transmitted to posterity as a specimen vcrTavrivoviro\ei (KK^riaia iraauv tuv a.?0^a>i) fiTTi K«pa\ri. Justin. Cod. iT 129. Dioenesis Exarcham adeat, vel Impe- nalis urbia Constantinopolia thronum, et apud eum litiget. Labb- 4 1086. < 184 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Still more emphatical. ' Antioch/ says the Byzantine patriarch 18 beyond every other city the dearest to the Son of God' This metropohs bestowed the designation which is beyond even the city of Romulus, and which confers the primacy or presi- dency Gregory, Justinian, and the council of Chalcedoncon- lerredthe ecclesiastical sovereignty on the Constantinopolitan bee. Gregory called this city 'the eye of the worid, and the emporium of the common faith.' According to the emperor ^ Justinian 'the Constantinopolitan church was the head of all others. Justinian was an emperor, a legislator, a philosopher, and a theologian, and renowned for learning and wisdom His information and opportunity must have secured him from mis- taking, and his integrity and veracity from misrepresenting the opmions entertained, in his day, on this topic. The council of ChaJcedon, in its ninth canon, granted a general right of receiv- ing and deciding appeals to the Byzantine See. A suffragan according to the Chalcedonian decision, 'might appeal from the Metropolitan to the Exarch, and from the Exarch, for a final sentence, to the Constantinopolitan patriarch.' The Chalcedonian canon so annoyed Nicholas the First that he had recourse, m his distress, to an extraordinarv or rather to an ordinary remedy. His holiness explained the canon by writing nonsense ; and in this ingenious manner and by this simple process, removed the difficulty. Diocese, said Nicholas ^, by a figure of speech, used for dioceses and the diocesan Exarch, m this canon, signifies the Roman pontiff.' His infal- libility s explanation is very sensible, and must have been very satisfactory to himself and his friends. The Roman Church in its early days, unlike the same society m the time ot Nicholas, was characterized by humility All its members, according to the primeval records, could meet in one house. The whole society, on the first day of the week, assem- bled in the same place, and communicated at one table. ' Cor- nehus the Roman bishop read all public letters,' says Cyprian ' to his numerous and holy flock.'^ On the death of Anterus' 'all the brethren met in the church to elect a successor, and the whole people with promptitude and unanimity, declared the eligibility of Fabian.'^ The pastor's superintendoncy extended from the highest to the lowest concerns of the fold, from the rich and the free to the inmate of indigence and the subject of slavery. He was entirely 1 Quantum si perhibuisset Dioeceseon. Labb 9 1331 CypSrBT59''''"l39*'^"^ amplissimffi plebi legere te semper literas nostras. '^Ad(\iays Du Pin, gained the precedence, ' because Rome was the chief city,' Giannone also ascribes the rank of the Roman patriarch to the same cause. ' The ecclesiastical,' says he, formed itself on the civil government, and the Roman city may boast of being chief in religion, as formerly in the empire and the universe. The innovation was so natural that any other event would have been a kind of miracle.''' The dependence of the bishop's dignity on the eminency of 1 Ad cujuB formam ecclesia constitutaest. Du Pin, 23. L'^glise «st 6tablie dans I'empire. Giannon. II. 8. Mezeray, 5, 464. Thomasain I. 12. An. Ecol. 56. 2 Quia Romana urbs erat prima. *Du Pin, 335. Parce qu'il avoit son si^ge dans la Capitale de I'univers. Giannon, III. 6. Une esp6ce de miracle. Giannon I 8. An. Eocl. 56 142. IMAGE FVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) // "^'S {•/ '< r% .n:« ^ :/ u.. f/- 1.0 I.I 1.25 |50 '""^^ 1.4 M M 1.6 V] /^ ^^ c% 0% '\ /A Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 186 THfi VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the city appeared, in striking colors, in the original obscurity and future greatness of the Byzantine hierarch^ This bTshop 0? Th^ir^Brth' the n^etropolitan of Heraclea and e3 ?L fr. •• 1 ^. *\^ suffragan, when Constantinople became the imperial city, became a patriarch. The second general counci lin its third canon, raised the Constantinopolitfn See tha7of rT ^^.^"^^'^^ V^ Alexandria, and placed^t next to roval oitv TV, T • ^?:"«^^ntinople was new Rome and the royal city The patriarch, in consequence, usurped the juris- diction of Asia, Pontus, and Thracia. The fiurth general council, m its twenty-eighth canon, conferred equal ecclesiasti- cal privileges on the Byzantine and Roman Sees ' Ihe usurpation of the papal hierarch was aided, with singular efficiency by the publication of the false decretals. Thifcol- ection, about the year 800, was ushered into the world as the work of the early pontiffs. All the authority assumed by mo^ fn thirv.T' '^ '?• ' ^n?^'^-' ^''''^'^ '' '^'^ predecessors werP bv^A f ^"\T^'"' Christianity. A Linus and a Clemens were, by this author, represented as claiming the supremacy and wielding the power afterward arrogated by a Boniface or an Innocent^ Any pontiff, however arbitrary^or ambit ous could, from this store, plead a precedent for any act of usurpa-' tion or despotism. "^ ^ This fabrication which promoted pontifical domination, displays in a strong hght the variations of Romanism The for- gery was countenanced by the sovereign pontiffs, and urged by Nicholas the First against the French prelacy.^ Its genuine- ness and authenticity, indeed, from the ninth century till the reformation, were generally admitted; and its authority sus- n^X^ f r"^%*^;'i! J'^^-i"^ «f superstition and credulity, the nughty fabric of the pontifical supremacy. An age, enveloped in darkness and monkery, and void of letters and philosophy was incapable of detecting the imposture, though executed with a vulgar and bungling hand. Turriano and Binius, even in modern times, have maintained its authenticity The dawn of the reformation however, exposed the cheat, in all its clumsy and misshapen deformity. ' Its anachronisms and contradictions betrayed the silly and stupid fiction.' Its forgery has been admitted by Bellarmine, Baronius, Erasmus, Peta'vius, Thomas- sin, Pagius, Giannone, Perron, Fleury, Marca, Du Pin, and I Dm Pin, 132.et 2. 486. Giannon, V.6.' Ar1niV>nf!''*Tr ,^P'\*"^f • *"?imJ Pontificps avide arripuerunt. Du Pin 132 Adnitinte Nicolao I, et cseteris Romania Pontificibus. Labb. 1. 79 SEJECTION OF PAPAL SUPREMACY IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES. 187 Labbeus. Du Pin calls the collection a medley. : Labbeus calls it ' a deformity, which can be disguised by no art or coloring." The forgery remains a lasting monument of the barbarism and superstition of the period of its reception and authority. The domination of the papacy was, also, promoted by mis- sions to the kingdoms of Paganism. The vast wealth and rich domains of the Roman See, both in Italy and the adjacent islands, enabled the pontiff to support missions on an extensive scale through the European kingdoms, for the purpose of pro- selytisra. These exertions displayed the Roman hierarch's zeal, and their success promoted his aggi-andizement. The churches, established in this way, acknowledged a dependence on the see by which they had been planted. Romanism, from the ninth till the fourteenth century, was extended over Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Bohemia, Den- mark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Livonia, Prussia, and the Orkney Islands. A few of the missionaries sent to these nations were actuated by piety, accompanied indeed with weakness and superstition. These visited the abodes of idolatry and polytheism in the midst of danger and privation, to communi- cate the light of the gospel. But many of these nations were proselyted by missions of a different description. Violence and compulsion were often substituted for persuasion and Chris- tianity. The Pagans of Poland, Prussia, and Livonia were dragooned into popery by military dialectics. The martial apostles, who invaded these nations under the standard of the (1 OSS, were attached only to their own interest, and the Roman pontiff's domination and tyranny.^ The popedom was enlarged by the accession of the northern nations, which, converted by Li: tin missions, submitted to papal jurisdiction, and swelled the glory of the Romish communion. The p.ipal yoke, received in this manner by the proselyted nations of the north, Wiis rejected with resolution by the Asiatic, African, and European kingdoms who had professed Chris- tianity. The Asians despised Victor's denunciations on the subject of the paschal solemnity. The Africans contemned Stephen's excommunication, on the topic of heretical baptism. The prelacy of Africa, amounting to 225 bishops, forbade, in, 418, on pain of excommunication, all appeals beyond the sea.' This canon they renewed in 426 ; while Faustinus, who repre- 1 Adeo defonnes videntur, ut nulla arte, nulla cerusaa, aut purpurisso fucari possint. Labb. 2. 78. Bellarmin, II. 14. Alex. 2. 218. 2 Alex. 14. 321. Gibbon, c. LV. Giannon, III. 6. Bruy. 2. 259. 3 Ad transmarina qui pu- averit appellandum, a nuUo inter Africam in commu- nionem suscipiatur. Crabb I, 517. Du Pin, 143. Socrates, V. 22. Euseb. V, 21. 188 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. sented the pope in the council, blustered, vapored, threatened and stonned, but all in vain. The bishops contemned his furv, issued their canons, and, with steady unanimity, repelled papal aggression. The usurpations of the popedom were also long withstood by several of the European nations, such as France, Spain, Eng- land, and Ireland. These continued, for ages, to repress Roman despotism with vigor and effect. Gaul or France opposed pontifical encroachment, and maintained metropolitical authority with the utmost resolution. The synod of Lyons, in 567, directed all dissensions among the clergy to be terminated in a provincial council. Gregory the Fourth, in the beginning of the ninth century, pretended to excommunicate the French prelacy, who, inclined to retaliation, threatened to excommuni- cate Gregory. Hincm^^r, the celebrated French bishop and statesman, wrote, in 865, the famous epistle, in which he ex- ploded the novelty of the Decretals and advocated the canons of Nicaea and Sardica. The French, says Du Pin, maintained, in the tenth century, the ancient discipline and interdicted appeals. The Metropolitans preserved their rights inviolated, 'till beyond the twelfth century.'^ This, Du Pin shows from the works of Alcuin, the council of Laodicea, and the Epistles of Nicholas, John, Stephen, Gregory, and Urban. Spain remained free of pontifical domination till the begin- ning of the ninth century. The Spanish prelacy and nobility, under the protection of the king iind independent of foreign control, continued, prior to the Moorish conquest, to conduct the administration of the Spanish church. Provincial councils, says Du Pin, in the end of the sixth century, judged the Spanish prelacy without an appeal. Arnolf, Bishop of Orleans, even at the close of the tenth century, declared, in the council of Rheims, without contradiction, that the Spanish church dis- claimed the authority of the Roman pontiff.^ Britain continued independent of papal authority, till the end of the sixth century. The English, dissenting from the Romish institutions and communion, disclaimed the papal supremacy. Baronius himself, practised in all the arts of evasion and chicanery,*admits, on this occasion, a long and dreadful schism. The British, says Bede, differed from the Roman Christians in the celebration of baptism, the paschal solemnity, 'and in many other things.' The points of dif- ference, according to the Anglo-Saxon historian, were not few, but many. Augustine gave the same statement as Bede. The « ^d duodocimum useque aseculum et amplius. Du Pin, 66. 130, 133, et 2. 191. * In Hispania quoque vigebat, etiam sub G'^gorio, vetus ilia disciplina, ut msffi Epiaooporum synodi ProvincirJis judicio finirentur. Du Pin, 131, et 2. 176. causffi PAPAL SUPREMACY REJEC3TED IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND. 189 English, says the Roman missionary, 'acted, in many respects contrary tK) the Roman usage.'^ ' Bede's report has been corroborated by Goscelin, Ranulph and Mahnsbury. The Britons, says Goscelin, ' differed in their ecclesiastical ntual from the common observance of all other churches; while, formed in hostile array, and opposing the request and admonition of Augustine, they pronounced their own usages, superior even to those of pontifical authority. '» Ranulph's statement is of a similar description. Augustine observes this historian, 'admonished the British clergy to correct some errors, and promised, if they would concur with him in evangelizing the English, he would patiently tolerate their other mistakes. This offer, however, these refractory spirits wholly contemned.'* Malmsbuiy'a language is stiU stronger than Ranulph's These islanders, says this annalist, ' preferred their own to the Roman traditions, and to some other tenets of Catholicism ■ and persisted in their opinions with pertinacity. The time of observing the paschal festival formed one principal point of controversy between thft Roman missionary and tlie British clergy The Britons, as well as the Scots, who on this topic diflered from the Roman traditions, obstinately refused to adniit the Roman usage. In this, hey manifested the utmost in- flexibihty. When the English afterward, in the synod of Whitby, in 664, determined; in conformity with foreign pre- scription, to change the day of celebration, the Scottish clergy left England. On this occasion, Colman, bishop of the Nor- thumbrians, seeing, says Bede, 'his doctrine slighted and his seoK despised, returned to Scotland.'* The Britons, in consequence, disclaimed the supremacy of Gregory and the episcopacy of Augustine, whom the pontiff had commissioned as a missionary and archbishop in England Augustine, on this topic, conferred with Dinoth, accompanied by seven British bishops and several Bangorian monks at Augustine's oak on the frontiers of the Anglo-Saxons. Augus- tine, on this occasion, recommended an acknowledgment of the papal supremacy. Dinoth, speaking for the English 'pro- fessed himself, his fellows, and the nation, attached 'to all 1 In multis quidem nostr* oonsuetudini contraria geritis. Beda. II 3 Per pluraecclesia8tic8Bcastitatietpacicontrariagenmt. Beda, 203. Spon 604 VlII «,Lf "S ^^""^ repugnant verum etiam suos usus omnibus praeeminentiores bancti Papffi Eluthem auctontate pronunciant. GosoeUn, c. 24. Wharton 2 65 V^iLM°601^'^*^"**^*°^*"''°^*°°"**'®°*' ^P«'°°^no8P«merent. Ranulph; * Suia potiuB ^uam Romanis obsecundarent traditionibus etpluraouidem alia catholioa. Pertinacem controversiam ferebant. Malmsbury, V. P ^9 Colman, videns spretMn suam doctrinam, sectamque esse des'pectam.' in Scot tiam regreaguB est. Beda. III. 26. i i~ <«ui, m acoi- ssss^ ■■^■■•W"!" 190 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. V I Christians, by the bonds of love and charity. This subjection, he said, the British were ready to pay to the pontiff and to every Christian ; but were unacquainted with any other sub- mission, which they owed to the person whom Augustine called the pope.'' Dinoth and his companions, though men of learn- ing in their day, seem to have known nothing of the Roman hierarch. The English bishops, at the end of the sixth cen- tury, had ever heard of God's vicar-general on earth ; and what was nearly as bad, cared no more about his infallibility after his name had been mentioned, than about any other man. Dinoth also informed Augustine, that the British church was governed by the bishop of Cterleon, and, therefore, had no need of the Roman missionary's service or superintendency. The obstinate people refused the archbishop ready provided for them by his Roman holiness. Augustine reasoned and remon- strated, but in vain. His auditors, who, according to Bede, preferred their own traditions to the universal church, were deaf to entreaty and reproof. Ireland maintained its independency still longer than Eng- land. This nation rejected the papal supremacy and indeed all foreign domination, till its conquest by Henry at the end of the twelfth century. The Scottish and Irish communions, B-.x- ronius admits, were involved in the same schism. Bede accuses the Irish of fostering hatred to Romanism, and of entertaining a heterodox profession. Laurentius, Justus, and Mellitus iu 614, in their epistolary communication to the Irish clergy and laity, identified the Hibernian with the British church. Dagan, an Irish bishop, refused to eat, sit in company, or remain under the roof with the Roman bishops.'^ Ireland, for many ages, was a school of learning for the Eu- ropean nations ; and she maintained her independency, and repressed the incursions of foreign control jring the days of her literary glory. But the Danish army invaded the kingdom, slew her sons, wasted her fields, and demolished her colleges. Darkness, literary and moral, succeeded, and prepared the way for Romanism. The dissensions of the native sovereigns aug- mented the misery of the distracted nation, and facilitated the progress of popery. King Henry, patronized by Pope Adrian, 1 Aliam obedientiam quam banc non scio debitam ei quern vos nominatis Pa- pain. Sed obedientiam banc sumus nos parati dare et solvere ei et cuique Christ- iano. Beda, 716. Bruys, 1. 371. MaWon, 1. 279, 280. 2 Romanam consuetudinem odin babuerunt. Beda, 702. Professionem minus eccleBiasticam in multis esse cognovit. Beda, II. 4. .Spon 604. VIII. Daganus episcopus ad nos veniens, non solum cibum nobisoum, sed nee in eodem boepitio, quo vescebamur, sumere voluit. Beda, 83, 702. Ecclesiae Romanee de singulis domibus annuatim tmius denarii pensare. Tri- vettus, An. 1155. Daohery, 3. 151. TITLE OF UNIVERSAL BISHOP CONFERRED BY PHOCAS. 191 completed the system of pontifical subjugation. The vicar- general of God transferred the whole island to the monarch of England for many pious ends ; and especially for the pay- ment of an annual tax of one penny from each family to the holy Roman See. The usurpations of the papacy, therefore, were effected by gradual innovation. Several nations, in defiance of pontifical claims and ambition, maintained their freedom for many ages. The progress of Roman encroachment.s, was, for many years, very slow, though supported by the energy of Leo, Gregory' Nicholas, John, Innocent and Boniface. Leo the Great^ indeed, seems to have felt all the activity of genius and am- bition ; and he attempted in consequence, by many skilful and rapid movements, to enlarge the circle of his power. He pointed his spiritual artillery against the Gallican Church, but was repelled with resolution and success. His ecclesiastical tactics, though well concerted, were in the main unsuccessful ; and papal usurpation made little progress through any part of Christendom, till the accession of Gregory in the end of the sixth century. The sainted Gregory was distinguished, not by his learning or integrity, but by his ambition and activity. His works are void of literary taste, and his life was a tissue of superstition, priestcraft, monkery, intolerance, formality, and dissimulation.' He niaintained a continual correspondence with kings ; and as occasion dictated, employed, with temporising versatility, the language of devotion or flattery. His great aim was to repress the Byzantine patriarch, and to exalt the Roman pontiff. During Gregory's reign, the Constantinopolitan patriarch, actu- ated by a silly, vanity and countenanced by the Emperor Mau- riciua, assumed the title of universal bishop. This appellation, noisy and empty, was unattended by any new accession of power. But the sounding distinction, unmeaning as it was in itself, and suitable, as the emperor seems to have thought it, to the bishop of the imperial city, awoke Gregory's jealousy and hostility. His holiness, accordingly, pronounced the dignity vain-glorious, proud, profanp, impious, execrable, heretical, blasphemous, diabolical, and antichristian : and endeavored, .with unremitting activity, to rouse all the powers of the earth for its extinction. His saintship, had the spirit of prophecy been among the number of his accomplishmenta, would, in all probability, have spoken with more caution about a title afterwards arrogated by his successors. The usurper of this appellation, according to Gregory, was the harbinger and herald of Antichrist. His infallibility, of course, in designating 192 THE VARUTIONS OF POPERY. the pope Antichrist, had the honor of anticipating Luther near a thousand years. Mauricius refused to take the title of universal bishop from the Byzantine patriarch. But the emperor's reign soon termi- nated in the rebellion of Phocas, a centurion who assassinated the royal family and seized the imperial throne. The usurper, on this occasion, was a monster of inhumanity. Some tyrants have been cruel from policy ; but Phocas seems to have been actuated with unalloyed disinterested malignity, unconnected with any end except the gratification of a malevolent and infer- nal mind. He massacred five of his predecessor's sons before the eyes of the father, whom he reserved to th^ last that he might be a spectator of his family's destruction. The youngest boy's nurse endeavored to substitute her own child in the place of the emperor's. Mauricius, however, discovered and pre- vented the design, and delivered the royal infant to the execu- tioner. This noble action extorted tears from the eyes of all the other spectators, but made no impression on the tyrant. The assassination of the emperor's brother and the chief patri- cians followed. The empress Constantina and the princesses were next, by the most solemn oaths and promises of safety, allured from their asylum in a church, and fell the helpless victims of relentless fury. Phocas was deformed in body as well as in mind. His aspect inspired terror ; and he was void of genius, learning, truth, honor, or humanity, and the slave of drunkenness, impudicity, licentiousness, and cruelty.* This demon of inhumanity, however, became the object of his infallibility's unqualified flattery, for the promotion of pro- jects of ambition and despotism. His holiness hailed the miscreant's accession in strains suited only to the .advent of the Messiah. The hierarch celebrated the piety and benignity of the assassin, and welcomed the successful rebellion of the usurper as the joy of heaven and earth,* His saintship, in fond anticipation, grasped the title of universal bishop as the reward of his prostituted adulation and blasphemy. But death arrested his career, and prevented the transfer of the disputed and envied honor. Gregory's ambition and ability, however, succeeded in extending the limits and advancing the authority of the pope- dom. . Claims, hitherto disputed or half-preferred, assumed under his superintendence a more definite form ; while nations, too ignorant to compare precedents or examine principles, yielded to his reputation and ability. Gregory's successors, for nearly one hundred and fifty years, seem to have obtained no material accessions of ecclesiastical 1 Spon. 602. VI. Godeau, 6. 43. Bruy. 1. 402, 400. ' Pontifex Phocam oradelisBiinam muitis laudibus extalit. Da Pin. 279. raUBPATION OF THE POPES, ,53 tine patriarch, and enMed ?U„ ^^KlJP T'^^" ^y^^' tiff.' Some modern nuhlio«f ,-^,^1 ^ P^^^^^y on the Roman pon- to this transacdon Cd ^v °^^ this epoch. But this 1 ZZ ^® Pf P^' supremacy fron, feet much less a marked erin^firv"^^^ '^T' ^^'^ "« ^^^^ing . ^-f .ofthena..ati:n^Ve;;qu^^^^^^^^^^^^^ tS^^ historians are silent on this topic Th«;.l .^ '^^ sole credit of Baronius who o?i n^/ ! ft-'"'' ''^^^^ °^ <^he well as his partiality, S n^ authoritv P f ^'' °^^ P^-^ second faction seat inerrabilitv in thpp^ ^^"""^''^ P°"<^^^ ^ a general council. A thtd Ja s t^tlt^ representative or union of the church, virtual and i^nrt ^^/^P^^^^g'-^tive to a terms, to a general council beaded bTZ'^R^'''''' "'' ^'^ ^^her iourth division, rejecting the other svsW n ""f? P""*^^" ^ exemption from error onlv to fWi!^?' i^^''^''^ m attributing embracing the whol^^'oty^rofeS cw"7? ^^^^^^^^ One party place infiII,-v;,-i,-+\, • f^ , ' ^^^^SY and laity. pontiff..'^ rU may be S ^tl" it.f "'"' r*"'' <»• «»">» *rgy. placed under the infl, ence of l"^''™' '^^^ IWi« abject s„b„i.i„„ in thi, o^ij^ Thet ^SeThroS 1!)6 THK VARIATION8 OF POPERY. ■ff detinitions of the supreme hiemrch on faith and nioralH as the divine oraclcM of infallibility. This system, in ,'11 its absurdity, has been patronized by theologians, popes and councils. Many Romish doctors have entertained this opinion, such as Baronius, Bellarnnne, Bimus, Camvnai, Pighius, Turrecrema, Canus, Pole, Duval, Lamez, Aquinas, Cajetan, Pole, Fabulottus, and Palaviciiio. SeTeral pontiffs, as might bo expected, have been found in the sauie ranks; 'such as Pascal, Pius, Leo, Pelagius. Boniface, and Gregory.' These, and many others who have joined the same standard, form a numerous and influential faction in the bt)som of the papacy. Bellarmine, Duval and Arsdekin, indeed, have represented this as the common sentiment entertained by all popish theologians of distinction.'^ This system seems also to have been embraced by the councils of Florence, Lateran, and Trent. These conventions conferred on the pontiff' an authority above all councils. The pontifical, therefore, is superior to synodal authority, and according to the Florentine and Lateran decisions, must possess infalhbility. The Lateran synod, besides, renewed and approved the bull of Boniface the Eighth, which declared subjection to the Roman pontiff" necessary to all for salvation. ' The pope,' said CardiUus in the council of Trent, without contradiction, is so supplied with the divine aid and light of the Holy Spirit, that he cannot err to a degree of scandal, in deftning faith or enacting general laws ' These councils were general, and accounted a repre- sentation of the whole church. The belief of pontifical exemption from error, therefore, was not confined to a mere party but extended to the whole communion. The infallibility of the Roman pontiff", maintained in this manner by theologians, popes, and councils, has also been rejected by similar authority. Doctors, pontiffs, synods, and indeed all antiquity, have denied the inerrabihty of his Roman holiness. The absurdity has been disclaimed by Gerson, Launoy, Almain, Richerius, Alliaco, Victoria, Tostatus, Lyra, Alphonsus, Marca. Du Pin, Bossuet, and many other Romish divines Many popes also have disowned this preroga+- /e, such as Daraasus, Celestin, Pius, Gelasius, Innocent, Eugenius, 1 Bell. IV. 2. Fabul. c. 8. Carou, c. 18. Du Pin, 336. Labb. 18. 1427. Maimbourg, 56. , , , » j i • i 1 1 q 3 Hffic doctrina communiB est inter omnes notse theologos. Arsdekin, 1 US. 3 Arsdekin, 1. 114, 118. Du Pin, 3. 148. Crabb, 3. 697. Labb. 9. 968. Romanum pontificem, neque in rebus fidei definiendis neque etiam m con- dendis ledbus ceneralibus, usquam sic errare posse, ut scandalo sit aliis. isam in his rebus perpetuo illi adest Spiritus Sancti patrocinium lumenque pivinum, quo ejus mens copiose admodum illustrata, velut nianu ducatur. CardiU.in Labb. 20. 1177. PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY. 197 TjZ ', K ''"'• ^^" ^'"'^^^ '•'^«^'^« ^'^V^ode this claim. Thebe superhuman pretensions have been also rejected by the general councils of Pisa, ConsUmce. and Basil ^ The a-ssertors of pontifical infallibility, outraging common sense an' ^P'"^' i« superior to the pope and supreme judge of controversy. The pontiff in auOiorit/'' '"''' '■' '"'•*''^ *' deposition by the same This is the system of the French or Cisalpine school. The Galhcan church has distinguished itself, in every age, by its opi'l'sition to pontihcal usurpation and tyranny. ThI pontiff's authority, in consequence, never obtained the same prevalence ilnil.'IS '''' '"' '^^^^7l*'ther nations of Christendom, and his nfalhbdity is one of those claims which the French school eer acknowledged. Hs liability to error, even on questions ol taith. has accordintrlv been nmii'^-'noo,! ' ^' i . ^ - ingiy th lestF ron';ii 202,' Kem'S! s;"*""*''""" ^'''> probabilem. Angkrle, 180, 18L Slenn, 201, - Du Pin.'s, 283. Gibert, 2. 7. Crabb. 1. 1018. Carranza, 565. 200 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. divines, such as Launoy, Gerson, Almain, Richerius,Maimbourg, Marca, Bbssuet, and Du Pin. These doctors have been sup- f lorted by many French universities, such as Paris, Angiers, Toulouse, and Orleans, which have been followed by those of Louvain, Herford, Cologne, Cracow, and Vienna. Many pontiffs also, such as Damasus, Celestine, Felix, Adrian, Gelasius, Leo, iTinocent, and Eugenius, admitting their own liability to error, have referred infallibility to a general council' The general councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basil enacted a similar decision. These proceeded, without any ceremony, to the demolition of pontifical supremacy and inerrability. All this is contained in the superiority of a council to the pope, as established by these synods, as well as by their deposition of Benedict, Gregory, John, and Eugenius. These pontiffs, the YAthers of Pisa, Constance, and Basil found guilty of contumacy, incorrigibility, simony, perjury, schism, and heresy, and founded synodal authority on the ruins of papal presumption and despotism. The Basilians, in express terms, declared the pope's fallibility, and, in many instances, his actual heresy. Some of the supreme pontiffs, said these legislators,- 'have fallen inio heresy and error. The pope may and often does err. History and experience show, that the pope, though the head and chief, has often been guilty of error.'" These quotations are plain and expressive of the council's sentiments on the Roman hierarch's pretended exemption from the connnon weak- ness of humanity. The French, in this manner, are opposed to the Italian school. Theologian is opposed to theologian, pope to pope, university to university, and council to council. The council of the Lateran, in a particular manner, contradicts the council of Basil. Leo, in the former assembly, and with its entire approbation, declared his certain knowledge both of right and fact. The latter congress, in tlie plainest language, admitted the pope's fallibility and actual heresy. A third class ascribe infallibility to Maimbourg, c. 6. Bell. IV. 2. Caron, c. 18. Kenney, 398. :lf' 202 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, though ratified by Alexander. Martin, and Nicholas. A fourth division in the Romish communion, rejecting the other systems, persist in attributing exemption from error only to the church collective or dispersed, embracing the general body ot Christian professors. These, disclaiming pontifical and synodal infallibility as well as both united, patronize ecclesiastical inerrability. The partisans of this theory, how- ever, are few, compared with the other Actions. The system notwithstanding, can boast of several patrons of celebrity, such as Panormitan, Mirandula, and Alliaco.' Panormitan, the tamous canonist, was one of the advocates of this theory touncils. according to this author, may err and have erred. \^ll^^^J^^r^f church, he adds, ' comprehends the a.ssembly of • 1-11 -1 y,^ ' ^""^ ^^^^ ^'^ ^^^ church which is invested with mtaliil^ility. Mirar)dula adopted the opinion of Panormitan ±le represents the second council of Ephesus as general and lawful, which nevertheless, 'betrayed the faith.' Alliaco's statement on this head, in the council of Constance, is remark- l\ . .^ ^^^^'^rved that ' a general council, according to celebrated doctors, may err, not only in fact, but also in right, and what is more, in the faith.' He delivered the statement as the opinion of many. The declaration, besides, was made in an assembly containing about a thou.sand of the clergy, and constituting a rej-resentation of the whole church, with general approbation and consent. This party, dissenting from pontifical and synodal inftillibility, ditter also among themselves and are subdivided into two .sections. One subdivision placesunliability to error ir the clerjiv dispersed through Christendom. The laity, according to this speculation, have nothing to do but obey the clergy and be •sate Ihe other subdivision reckons the laity amontj the participators of infollibility. Clergy and laity, according to this supposition, form one sacred society, which, though dispersed tnrough Christendom, and subject to mistake in an individual capacity, IS, in a collective sense, rai.sed above the possibility ot error in the faith. • Such is tlie diversity of opinions in the Romish communion, on a theory, which has disgraced man, and insulted human reason. Ihese observati(ms shall now be concluded with a digression on the absurdity and on the impossibility of this 'Totaecclesia errare non potest. Panormitan, a. 1, N, 2) P140 Ecclesii universalis non !..,t.>st ernire. p.a,..orTi,itan de Jiid No 4 ' ^^cUesia ^ihilornimus in evemonem H.lei agitatum. Mirandula, Th 4 fn.f """!."'? '"'*^'""'' ^"'^t"''<-'«. generale concilium potest errare non solum in facto, s..d etiam in jure, etquod majus est, in Hde. H^ard. 2. 201 Lenf aLt 1 Tt ' ABSURDITY OF ECCLESIASTICAL INFALLIBILITY. 203 infallibiUty Its absurdity may be shown from the intellectual weakness of man and the moral deformity which has disfigured the Roman pontiffs, the general councils, and the papal com- munion. ^ '^ The intellectual weakness of man shows, in the clearest light, tlie absurdity of the claim. Human reason, weak in its opera- tions and deceived by passion, selfishness, ignorance, and pre- possession, IS open to the inroads of error. Facts testify its fallibility. The annals of the world proclaim, in loud and unequivocal accents, the certainty of this humbling truth The history of Romanism, and its diversity of opinions not- withstanding it.s boasted unity, teach the same fact The man who first claimed or afterwards assumed the superhuman at- tribute must have possessed an impregnable effrontery. Lia- bility to error, indeed, with respect to each individual in ordi- nary situations is universally admitted. But a whole is equal to Its parts Fallible individuals, therefore, though united in one convention or society, can never form an infaTlible council or an infallible church, The absurdity of this arrogant claim may be shown from the morn deformity Avhich, f^-om age to age, has disfigured the Roman pontiffs, the general councils, and the papal communion. The moral character of the popes proclaims a loud negation against their infallibility. Many of these hierarchs carried miscreancy to an unenvied perfection, and excelled, in this respect, all inen recorded in the annals of time. A John, a Benedict, and an Alexander seem to have i^een born to show now far human nature could pro3eed in degeneracy, and, in this department, outshme a Nero, a Domitiai" and a Caligula. Several popes in the tenth century owed their dignity to Marozia and Theodora, two celebrated courtezans, who raised their gal ants to the pontifical throne and vested them with pontifical infallibility.' Fifty of these viceroys of heaven ac cording to Genebrard, degenerated, for one hundred and fiftv years, fi-om the integrity of their ancestors, and were apostatical lather than apostolical. Genebrard, Platina, Stella, and even Baronius,caIl them monsters, portends, thieves, robbers, assassins, magicians, mur.lerers, barbarians, and perjurers. No less than seventeen of God s vicars-general were guilty of perjury. Panal .•tml3ition, usurpat.on, persecution, domination, exconnnunica- uons, interdict.s, and deposition of kings have filled the earth with war and desolation. 204 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. The general councils, like the Roman pontiffs, were a sti-rma on religion and man. Many of these conventions, in po hTof respectability, were inferior to a modern cock-fight ^M-bait- h!;. ^'^Sory mzmnzen, who is a Roman saint, has described these scenes with he pencil of truth and with the hand of a masten I n^veiV says the Grecian bishop, permits some sa^ntsh?n>. I '^"'^''''' T^ ^'^''•"^^^«' «° should man." Hia foJn La fnn P' I" "''^^^, *^ ^^"^ ^« ^^^ ^^^ality. Simple W^'r^^T ™°'H^'^' however, v/ould exclude these courtezans from the interior of the city, and confine them to the suburbs to serve as sewei^ f,o carry away the filth. He would even in hisrigor forbid these professional ladies the use of robes orna^ ims useful and pure speculation, the sacred synod heard with rnrsanSfT. ^^' ^-ly fathers, in thel superior s^se and sanctity could easily perceive the utility and reasonable- ness of the scheme, and could not, in politeness ob ect ?o the arguments which their champion wielded with such triumphant effects against the advocate of heresy ^^rmmpnant th Jh^fTr'^". f ^^5^^' ^^"'^"^' ^"^ the Lateran. patronized the hateful and degrading doctrine of materialism. Angels and souls, the Nicaeans represented as corporeal. The angels of creS'l*^' T'.'- '' T""' 'I '^' N^«--" doctors are^t be credited possess bodies, though of a refined, thin, subtile and attenuated descript on. ThesI angelical and men a for ns the earned metaphysicians admitted, were composed of a substance h3r b^''^^ *^r '^' ^""'^^ ^''^ '' "-•^«' and less fim tnnL ^ r'^'l, ^^''-^.u^' '^""^ ' ^^t nevertheless materia? tan^ble and visible. The council of Vienna improved on that of Nicasa. The holy infallible fathers of Vienna declared the t?. f"nf r^f '^ '^^ '^r ^">*^"^^' ^'^t ^^«° essentially and in Itself of the true and perfect form of the body. The rational and mtellectual mind, therefore, in this system,Vssesse a rterial and corporeal shape, limbs, features, feet and hands and has Slrr ^''"t'' ^^r^' ^''''^'^' ^^d thickness ThS faith Th«' ^'T'^ '^^°^ i?'"^d' ^" ^^'-''^ ^^^ ^^^ the true faith. This doctrine, according to the same authority is Catholicism, and the contrary is heresy. The Lateran council in tharfh. br^''"' -^"^r? '^' ^^ennese definition, and decrteS that the human spirit, truly, essentially, and in itself, exists in the form of the human frame.^ Three holy universal councils 1 7' ^s"/^"" ™«^«*"<^it'\« fie rebua humanis, turbaveris omnia libidinibus Labb n,expertesetiuvisibUes,verumTeni]co;pore';;i^^^^^^^^^ IMMORALITY OF THE BOMISH CHURCH. 209 in this maimer, patronized the materialism which was afterward obtrudfci on the worid by a Pridstley, a Voltaire and a Hume. The Romish communion was as demoralized as the Roman pontiffs or the general councils. During the six hundred years that preceded the reformation, the papal communion, clergy and laity, were, in the account of their own historians, sunk into the lowest depths of vice and abomination. A rapid view of this period, from the tenth till the sixteenth century, sketched by the warmest partisans of the papacy, will show the truth and justice of this imputation. The tenth century has been portrayed by the pencil of Sabellicus, Stella, Baronius, Giannone, and Du Pin. Stupor and fovgetfulness of morals invaded the minds of men. AH virtue fled from the pontiff and the people. This whole period was characterized by obduracy and an inundation of overflow- ing wickedness. The Romish church was filthy and deformed, and the abomination of desolation was erected in the temple of God. Holiness had escaped from the world, and God seemed to have forgotten His church, which was overwhelmed in a chaos of impiety.* The eleventh century has been described by Gulielmus, Paris, Spondanus and Baronius. Gulielmus portrays the scene in dark and frightful colors. 'Faith was not found on earth. All flesh had corrupted their way. Justice, equity, virtue] sobriety, and the fear of God perished, and were succeeded by violence, fraud, stratagem, malevolence, circumvention, luxury drunkenness, and debauchery. All kinds of abomination and incest were committed without shame or punishment.' The colors used by Paris are equally black and shocking. ' The nobility,' says the English historian, ' were the slaves of gluttony and sensuality. All, in common, passed their days and nights in protracted drunkenness. Men provoked surfeit by voracious- ness, and vomit by ebriety.' The outlines of Spondanus and Baronius correspond with those of Gulielmus and Paris. ' Piety and holiness,' these historians confess, ' had fled from the earth, whilst irregularity and iniquity among all, and, in an especial manner, among the clergy, every where reigned. The sacra- ments, in many parts of Christendom, ceased to be dispensed. cumferentiam habeiit. Nemo, vel angelos, vel animos dixerit incorDoreos Cur ranza, 478. Labb. 8. 1446. Aiiima rationalis non sit forma corporis humani perse et essentialiter tanauain haereticus sit censendus. Carranza, 560. Du Pin, 2. 545. . >i ««" Ilia humani corporis existat. Carranza, 604. Labb. 19. 812. Bin. 8. 928 1 Stupor et amentia qujedam oblivioque morum invaserunt hominuin animoa babelhcus.^IL Quis non putarit Deum oblitum ecclesia suae. Spon. 908. III! vrtntingeiitabominatiouem dcsoiationis in tomplo. Barou, 900. 1. L" ^glise^toit dans un ^tat pitoyable, defigur6e par les plus grands d^sordres, et ploSc^e dans un chaos d impiet^s. Giannon, VII. 5. Du Pin, 2, 156. Bniy 2 316 N 21U THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. i The few men of piety, from the prospect of atrocity, thought that the reign of Antichrist had commenced, and that the worid was hastening to its end.'' The twelfth and thirteenth ages were similar in their morals, and have been described by Morlaix, Honorius, and Bernaid. According to the two former, ' Piety and religion seemed to bid adieu to man ; and for these were substituted treachery, fraud, impurity, rapine, schism, quarrels, war and assassination. The throne of the beast seemed to be fixed among the clergy, who neglected God, stained the priesthood with impurity, demoralized the people with their hypocrisy, denied the Lord by their works, and rejected the revelation which God gave for the salvation of man.'" But Bernard's sketch of this period is the fullest and most hideous. The saint, addressing the clergy, and witnessing what he saw, loads the canvas with the darkest colors. ' The clergy,' .said the monk of Clairvaux, ' are called pastors, but in reality are plunderers, who, unsatisfied with the fleece, thirst for the blood of the flock ; and merit the appellation not of shepherds but of traitors, who do not feed but slay and devour the sheep. The Saviour's reproach, scourges, nails, spear, and cross, all these, his ministers, who serve Antichrist, melt in the furnace of covetousness and expend on the acquisition of filthy gain, differing from Judas only in the magnitude of the sum for which they sell their master. The degenerate ecclesiastics, prompted by avarice, dare for gain even to barter assassination, adultery, incest, fornication, sacrilege, and perjury. Their extortions, they lavish on pomp and folly. These patrons of humility appear at home amiJ royal furniture, and exhibit abroad in meretricious finery and theatrical dress. Sumptuous food, splendid cups, overflowing cellars, drunken banquets, accom- panied with the lyre and the violin, are the means by which these ministers of the cross evince their self denial and in- difference to the world."* ^ Fides deficerit, et Domini timor erat de mirlio sullatus. Perierat de rebus, jiistitia et wquitate subacta, violentiadomiuiba .'i ■ ii. |»( pulis, Fraus, dolus, et circumventio late involverant universa. Fide? nc'i n.vin.nbatur supr te-'-am. Omnis caro corruperat viam suam. Bell. Sar- Optimates guise et veneri servientes, in cuui^L.;..., et inttjr uxorios complexus. Potabatur ab omnibus in commune, et tam dies quam noctes, in hoc studio pro- ductte sunt. In cibis urgebant crapulam, in potibus vomicam irritabant. Paris 5,1001. Spon. 1001. 11. Bruy. 2. 316. '■^ Lafraude, I'impurett^, les rajMncs, hsschismes, les querelles, lesguerres, les trahisons, les homicides sont en vogue. Adieu la piete et la religion. Morlaix, in Bruy. 2. 547. Tourne toi vers le clerge, tu y verras la tente de la BSte. Us negligent le service Divin. Us souLUent le sacerdoce par leurs impuretez, seduiseut le peuple par ■ Iciif Lypucrisic, rcnicnt Dicu par icurs cuuvrcs. Honor, in Eray. 2. 547. 3 Dicemini pastores, cum sitis raptores. Sititis enim sanguinem. Non sunt r^^^p^'FPSWWflP JtL. IPIIilliiiJi.Wll^^if IJ'-lfJWM'^P" IMMORALITY OF THE ROMISH CHURCH. 211 Bernards picture of the priesthood is certainly not compli- mentary : and his character of the laity is of the same unflatter- ing desc. iption. Accordmg to this saint, ' the putri.l cont.iLnou had in his day. crept through the whole body of the church and the malady was inward and could not be healed. The actions of the prelacy in secret were too ^ross for expression,' and the saint, therefore left the midniglt miscreancy in ite native and congenial darkness.^ j ^ The moral traits of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries have been delineated by the bold but faithful pens of Allinco Petrarch, Mariana, iEgidius, Mirandulo. and Fordun." AUiaco's' description is very striking and significant. 'The church' said the cardinal, ' is come to such a state, that it is worthy of being governed only by reprobates.' Petrarch, without any hesitation, calls Rome, 'Babylon, the Great Whore, the school of error, and the temple of heresy.' The court of Avignon he pronounced 'the sink and sewer of all vice, and the fouse of hardship and misery ;• while he lamented, in general, 'the dereliction of all piety, charity, faith, shame, sanctity, integrity lustice. honesty, candor, humanity, and fear of God ' .„f r'^ «"«rmity, according to Mariana, 'had passed into a custom and law. and wa^ committed without fear. Shame and modesty were banished, while^ by a monstrous irregularity, Te most dreadful outrages perfidy, and treason were better theTnS'' ^^°. w )i'^^^''\ V^"^- The wickedness of tfie pontitt descended to the people =* re^ltrZu t ^l^'^^T '! ^ar"^-f ^"^^"g- ' I^icentiousness fn fndLl if I "^ of atrocity, like an impetuous ton-ent, inundated the church, and like a pestilence, infected nearly all Its members. Irregularity, ignorance, ambition, unchastity hbertinism, and impurity triumphed ; while the plains of Italy were drenched in blood and strewed with the dead. Violence rapine, adultery, incest, and all the pestilence of viUany, con- founded all things sacred and profane '* paatores sed traditores. Ministri Chriati aunt, et serviunt Antichristo Vpnrln nf St bote mftri'nT*"""' ^^'^"^^^*^' ^^^J""° Be™a"d ItIsS KiiJo T 1 Fi*pda tabes per omne oorpua ecclesiai. lateatina et insan^ Beinarlft ''='''"""• ^""^ '"'"^ '" occulto^fiunt ab epiacopia, tu^'e eat dTcere. pXarXfin Bru;i 470f "'' ^" P"^^'"'' ^" '''''^''''' ^" «°^* »^^^«- «^L!!f l?^"f ^'■*°^^ ^"™°^ ^*°'^'^* presque poussez en coutume et en loi On lea commettoit sans crainte. La hontn nt. \ T.nd»"- ^f-.;o„* u.ri:-. . ^°'- ^^ j®,^ rejjlement monstrueux, les plnsfnoirs att^nvata; ks peyfidierkaTrkhisons ^taieni mieux r^compens^es que ne I'^toient les vertus les VsTclkSef Mari^^^^^^^ * Vidimus vim, rapinas^adult'jria. incestus, omnem denique acelerum pestem 212 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY, Mirandula's picture, to the following effect, is equally hideous. ' Men abandoned religion, shame, modesty, and justice. Piety degenerated into superstition. All ranks sinned with open effrontery. Virtue was often accounted vice, and vice honored for virtue. The sacred temples were governed by pimps and Garymedes, stained with the sin of Sodom. Parents encouraged their sons in the vile pollution. The retreats, formerly sacred to unspotted virgins, were converted into brothels, and the haunts of obscenity and abomination. Money, intended for sacred purposes, was lavished on the filthiest pleasures, while the perpetrators of the defilement, instead of being ashamed, gloried in the profanation.' Fordun, in his sketch of the fourteenth century, has loaded the canvas with the same dark colors.^ ' Inferiors,' say the historians, ' devoted themselves to malediction and perjury, to rioting and drunkenness, to fornication and adultery, and to other shocking crimes. Su- periors studied, night and day, to oppress their underlings in every possible manner, to seize their possessions, and to devise new imposts and exactions.' The sixteenth century has been depicted by Antonius. He addressed the fiithers and senators assembled at Trent, while he delinoated in such black colors the hideous portrait of the passing day. The orator, on the occasion, stated, while he lamented, the general ' depravation of manners, the turpitude of vice, the contempt of the sacraments, the solicitude of earthly things, and the forge tfulness of celestial good and of all Chris- tian piety. Each succeeding day witnessed a deterioration in devotion, divine grace. Christian virtue, and other spiritual attainments. No age had ever seen more tribunals and less justice ; more senators and less care of the commonwealth ; m«re indigence and less charity ; or greater riches and fewer alms. This neglect of justice and aims was attended with public adultery, rape, rapine, exaction, taxation, oppression, drunkenness, gluttony, pomp of dress, superfluity of expense, contamination of luxury, and effusion of Christian blood. Women displayed lasciviousness and effrontery ; youth, dis- ita sacra profanaque miscere omnia. Labb. 19. 670. Bruy. 4. 3G5. Mariana, 5, 770. 1 Sacras oedes et templa lenonibiis et catamitis commissa. Virginibus olim dicata, plerisqiie in urbibus septa in meretricias fornices et obsciena latibula fu- isse converpa. Spurcissimis voiuptatibus et impendeant, ct impeudisse glori- entiir. Mirandula, in Rosco, 6. 08. La plupart des pr<51at8 n'ont presqiie plus ni religion, ni pudeur, ni modestie. La justice est cbang(5e en brigandage, la piete a prtsove dtig^nerci en superstition ; du vice on fait une vertu. Mirand. inBruv. 4. *>7. Inferiores jam vacant maledictionibusetperjuriis, comessionibus et ebrietati- bus, fornicationibus et adttlteriis, ac aliis horrenis peccatis. Superiores vero stu- dent, uocte et die, circumvenire subditos suos omnibus modis quibua possunt, ut anferant eorum bona et inducant novas subtilitates, adinventiones, et exac- tiones. Fordun, XIV. 39. ..* IMMORALITY OF THE BOMISH CHURCH. 213 order and ir subordination; and age, impiety and folly ; while never had there, in all ranks, appeared less honor, virtue, modesty and fear of God, or more licentiousness, abuse, and exorbitance of sensuality. The pastor was without vigilance, the preacher without works, the law without subjection, the people without obedience, the monk without devotion, the rich without humility, the female without compassion, the young without discipline, and every Christian without religion. The wicked were exalted and the good depressed. Virtue was despised, and vice, in its stead, reigned in the world. Usury, fraud, adulteiy, fornication, enmity, revenge, and blasphemy, enjoyed distinction ; while worldly and perverse men, being encouraged and congratulated in their wickedness, boasted of their villany.'^ The conclusion from these statements has been drawn by Gerson, Mandruccio, Cervino, Pole, and Monte. Gerson, in the council of Constance, represented ' as ridiculous, the preten- sions of a man to bind and to loose in heaven and in earth, who is guilty of simony, falsehood, exaction, pride, and fornification,' and, in one word, worse than a demon. A person of such character, according to this authority, is unfit to exercise dis- cipline ; and much less therefore entitled to the attribute of infallibility. ' The Holy Spirit,' said Cardinal Mandruccio, in the council of Trent, ' will not dwell in men Avho are vessels of impurity ; and from such, therefore, no right judgment can be expected on questions of faith.' His speech, which was pre- 1 Depravatos hominum mores, vitiorum omnium turpitudinem, sacramen- torum dcspectus, solam curam terrenorum et ctt'lesiium bonorum ; totiusque Christians pietatis oblivionem consideremus. In Divinis gratiis, in Christianis virtutibus, et devotione, et cwteris spiritual ibus bonis, in dies magis semper deficere, et ad deterlora prolabi videantur. Nam ubi unquam tot fuerunt in easculo, tribunalia, et minor justitia ? Ubi unquam tot senatores et magistra- tus, et minor cura reipublicje ? Ubi major pau))crum multitudo, et minor divi- tum pietas ? et ubi majorea divitia', et pauciores fuerunt eleemosynaj ? Labb. 20. 1217--1219. Taceo publica adulteria, stupra, rapinas. Praetereo tantam ChristianiB san- guinis effusionem, indebitaa exactiones, vectagalia, gratis supuraddita, et iiinu- meras hujuscemodi oppressiones. Pr.x>mitto etiam superbam vestium pompam, supervacaneous ultra statut dicentium suniptus, ebrietates, crapulas, et enor- mes luxuria; fffiditates, quales a saaculo non fuere. Quia nunquam foemineus sexus lasoivior et inverecundior, nunquam juventus efl'ra?natior et iudisciplina- tior ; et nur.qnam indevotior et insapientior senoctus, atque, in suinma, nunquam minor fuitin omnibus Dei timor honestas, virtus et modestia, et nunquam major inomnistatu, carnia libertaa, abusioct exorbitantia. Nam qu;e ninjor iiimundo, exorbitantia, et abusio excogitari potest quam pastor sine vii'lLiiitia, praidica- tor sine operibus, judex sine requitate, leges sine obsorvantia, populus sine obedientia, religioaus sine devotione, dives sine verecuiulia, taulier sine miseri- cordia, jiivenis sine disciplina, senex sine prudentia, et Christianua quiaque SIIt6 ruligiOiie, jjOni OppiltuunLUF, Ct ilBpii eXtiKHntttr, ''irv'.Kr?B *i"-pTC.''.Tt..^U', et vitia, pro eis, in mundo regnant. Usune, frar.des, adiilteria, fornicationes, inimicitite, vindictaj, blasphdmise, etidgenus reliqua. notasumt ; iiiquibus nmn- daniet perversi homines, Bon solum excusantur, seilhi'^antur, cum malefcceriut, et exultant in rebus peasimis. Labb. 20. 1219 — 122:5. 214 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. i% 1 meditated, met with no opposition from any in the asaemhlv Cervino, Pole and Monte/ ^presiding in the^sIL syrd "Sl^' legatme authority, declared that tht clergy, if they Csev^ed in sm 'would in vain call on the ^^ly Spiint/"^ T^e Tdea indeed that such popes, councils, or church should be influ: enced by the Spirit of God. and exempted by this means from error, is a.i outrageous insult on all common sense. man sWd''.r?'''"i^ ^ given why God, in his goodness to man, should confer doctrinal and withhold moral infallibitv Impeccability .a duty is as valuable in itself, and as nece sa^ for he perfection of the human character, as inerrabil t? in S Holiness, in scriptural language, is enjoined on man with as unmitigated rigor as truth. Criminality, in manners is L Revelation, represented as equally hateful to God and dctZ mental to man, as mistake in judgment. The Deity is '"f Z:\Z"^t'^'\''^'''^^^'''lr'y> -d 'without hoLL no man shall see the Lord.'^ Moral apostasy is, indeed in manv ScSr wK ^^-" d-trinalLor.^Th; oneTsZeTZ invincible while the other is always voluntary. But no fd^nitSSr/' " f ';'i"''^^ impeccability, o^^ has ilson to Claim inlal bihty. God does not keep man either in a SZ tJL't^^'r "^^T'^' 'r ^^'^°^ ^' Pracdctand "nl^ presumption, therefore, will conclude, that he keeps any from misapprehension in belief or theory ^ ^ ins!!latron';'L"?r"'^^^^-^V- f i"f^!".bility, without individual inspiration and the special interposition of heaven in each case IS as clear as its improbability or absurdity. God, by hisextm- ordinary interference extended to each peLn, could^o doubt preserve all men from error, and convey with un.leWatlnl ce*: npH&-^ knowledge of the truth. His power of bestowing this X nil J at'"' ^2!"T""'''^^^^ *^'^ ^'^^^ *^*" G^«d to men. un.ler The Fnlti ^7.^f^^"«"t' ^-ithout any liability to mistake. Ihe Holy Spirit, in these instances, acted in a supernatural manner on each individual's mind ; which, in coiluence became the certain channel of Divine tru^h. to the Jew sh theocracy, and the Christian commonwealth But infallibility, though it may be conferred in an extraordi- nary or miraculous way by God to man, cannot be transferred by ordinary or common means from man to man. God could mspu-e men with a certain knowledge of his will; but these tPnr^' fv! f P^^/'i^ c^o«e bien ridicule, qu'un homme eimoniariue, avare men- m L,entan. .^ ^ • ^.^^}^^ Esprit ne pouvoit habit«r en nos vases s'ils n'etoient ^Habak. i. 13. Heb. xii. 14. MORAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFALLIBILITY. 215 ticrain could not inspire others with a certainty of understanding their oracles without any possibiUty of misapprehension A person who is himself uninspired may misinterpret the dictates of inspiration. This liability to misapprehension was exempli- fied in both the Jewish and Christian revelations. Many J ews misunderstood the Jewish prophets. The misapplication ot scriptural truth, at the advent of the Messiah, was so gross that they rejected his person and authority. The Christian apostles, prior to the effusion of the Spirit, mistook, on several occasions, the clear language of Immanuel; and these apostolical heralds of the gospel, though afterwards guided into ' all truth, have been misapprehended in many instances by the various denom- inations of Christendom. a ni. • Papal bulls and synodal canons, like the Jewish and L.hns- tian revelations, are liable to misconception by uninspired or fallible interpreters. Suppose infallibility to reside in the pope. Suppose the pontiff, through divine illumination, to deliyei' the truth with unerring certainty, and, contrary to custom, with the utmost perspicuity. Admit that the pontifical bulls, spoken from the chair, are the fruits of divine influence and the decla- rations of heaven. Each of the clergy and laity, notwithstand- ing, even according to the popish system, is falhbie. ine patrons of iiif^illibility, in a collective capacity, gi-ant that the several individuals, taken separately, may err; borne ot the clergy therefore, may misunderstand and therefore misinterpret the Romish bulls to the people. But suppose each of the cierg-, in his separate capacity, to understand and explain thepontitt s communications with the utmost precision and with certain exemption from error ; the laity, nevertheless, if uninspired or fallible, may misapprehend the explanation of the clergy, and, in consequence, embrace heresy. The papal instructions, therefore, though true in themselves, may be perverted in ttieir transmission through a fallible medium to the people. Or suppose infalUbility to reside in a council, and the synodal canons to declare the truth with the utmost certainty and without any possibility of mistake. The canons, when circula- ted through Christendom, are liable to misapprehension from some of the clergy or laity, if each is not inspired or infallible in his interpretation. An individual, who, according to popish principles, is not unerring, cannot be certain he has interpreted any svnodal decision in its proper and right sense. A clergyman, if he mistake the meaning, will lead his flock aijtray._ A ia„^«r, ;f fniiiWo in ai^r»rpbfiTision. raav misconceive the signi- fication of any instruction issued either by synoda or papal authority. Each individual, in short, must be an infallible judge 216 THE TARIATIONS OF POPERY. i ii \ of controversy, or, from misapprehension, he may be deceived, and there is an end to the infallibility of the church. Many instances of the clergy as well as of the laity, mistaking the meaning of synodal definitions, might be adduced. Exam- ples of this kind are afforded by the councils of Chalcedon and Trent, two of the most celebrated synods in the annals of the church. The council of Chalcedon, according to the general explanation, taught the belief of only two substances or natures, the human and the divine, in the Son of God. The fifteenth council of Toledo, notwithstanding, enumerated three substances in Immanuel, and quoted the Chalcedonian definition, for its authority.' The Spanish clergy, therefore, and through them the Spanish people, put a wrong construction, according to the usual interpretation, on the general council of Chalcedon. Contradictory explanations were also imposed on some of the Trentine canons, the last infallible assembly that blessed the world with its orthodoxy or cursed it with its nonsense. Soto, a Dominican, and Vega, a Franciscan, interpreted the decisions of the_ sixth session on original sin, grace, and justification according to their several peculiar systems. Soto published three books on nature and grace and Vega fifteen books on the same subject. Each of these productions was printed in 1548, and intended as a commentary on the canons of Trent. Their varying and often contradictory statements are both founded, the authors pretend, on the definitions of the universal council. This contrariety of opinion was not confined to Soto and Vega. The Trentine fathers were divided into several factions on the exposition of their own decisions.-' The same synod affords another example of the same kind. The council, in the sixth session, declared that ministerial intention, actual or virtual, is necessary to confer validity on a sacrament. This sentence, Contarinus opposed in the synod with warmth ; and a year after, notwithstanding the perspicuity of the synodal definition, wrote a book to show that the Tren- tine assembly was of his opinion, and that their c^non should be understood in his sense.'' Pontifical as well as synodal definitions have been misunder- stood and subjected to contradictory interpretations. The bull Unigenitus, issued by Clement the Eleventh, affords an instance ' Ecce tres in una Chriati persona substantias, secundum Chalcedonense con- cilium. Labb. 8. 13. 2 Ces deux th(5olo^ens non seulement differassent de sentiment dans piesque touB les articles, mais que dans plusieurs m6me, ils enseignaasent una doctnne p~demment contraif e. Faulo, 1. -l."0. Du Fin, 3. 446. Mem. Sur rrede&tLu- 172. Les autres en ont parl6 avec la mfime diversity. Paolo, 1 . 340. Un 6crit pour prouver que le concile avoit ^to de son avis. Paolo, 1. 389. Morery, 2. 207. MORAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFALLIBILITY. 217 of this kind. The French and Italians, the Jesuits and the Jansenists explained the papal constitution according to their several humors and prepossessions. The accommodating document, according to some, was pointed against the Thomists, but, according to others, against the abettors of Calvinism. Many maintained its obscurity, or candidly admitted their inability to understand this puzzle. The astonished pontiff, in the meantime, wondered at- the people's blindness or perversity. Men, he was satisfied, must have lost their reason or shut their eyes, to become insensible to the dazzling light, which, clear as noonday, radiated from the bright emanation of hia brain. Popes and councils, in this manner, may be misreprct-ented, and their definitions, even if true in themselves as the dictates of heaven, are no infallible security against error in men who are liable to mistake their meaning. Each of the clergy and laity would require preternatural aid, to understand their instructions with certainty. Every individual, subject to error, may annex heterodox significations to the dictations of the sovereign pontiffs and general councils, as well as to the inspired volume. « Very different opinions, accordingly, have been tortured from the synodical canons and the sacred penmen. Sound doctrine, both written and verbal, may be perverted by erroneous interpretation. Water, though clear in the fountain, may contract impurity as it flows uhrougli muddy channels lo the reservoir. Truth in like manner may bt misrepresented or misunderstood in its transmission, in various ways, and through diversified mediums, to the minds of men. The friend of protestantism, because fallible, may misinterpret revelation, and therefore is liable to mistake. The professor of Romanism, who is also fallible, may, it is plain, misunderstand the church and therefore fall into error. Infallibility, therefore, or the preservation of all, clergy and laity, from error, would require a continued miracle and personal inspiration extended to every age and to every individual in the (Jhristian commonwealth. > La BuUe souffre lea explications les plus oppos^ea. Apol. 2. 264. A regard de la bulle de Clement XL, lea una I'entendent d'une fa^on et les autres de I'autre. On la tire comme on peut pour la faire plier b. sea senti- mens, etc. Apol. 1. 131, 132. Une bulle qui lui paroiasoit plua claire que le jour. Apol. 1. 259. iiiliiiMi ■MMAiii • .' ilii : CHAPTER VI. DEPOSITION OP KINGS. FRENCH SYSTEM— ITALIAN SYSTEM -ORiaiNAL STATE OP THE CHRISTIAN COMMON- WEALTH—PONTIFICAL ROYALTY— ATTEMPTS AT DEPOSITION OF KINGS— ORKOORY AND LEO— ZACHARY AND CHILDERIC— CONTINENTAL DEPOSITIONS- GUEOORY CLEMENT, BONIFACE, .VND JULIUS DETHRONE HENRY, LEWIS, PHILIP, AND LEWIS —BRITISH DEPOSITIONS— ADRIAN TRANSFERS IRELAND TO HENRY— INNOCENT PAUL, AND PIUS, PRONOUNCE SENTENCE OP DEGRADATION AGAINST JOHN, HENUY.' AND ELIZABETH— SYNODAL DEPOSITIONS— COUNCILS OF THE LATERAN, LYONS VIENNA, PISA, CONSTANCE, BASIL, LATERAN, AND TRENT— MODERN OPINIONS- EFFECTS OF THE REFORMATION. The French and Italian schools vary on the civil power of the Roman pontiff, as well as on his spiritual authority. The French deny his political or regal jurisdiction, except perhaps m the ecclesiastical states of Italy, over which, in consequence of Pepin's donation, he has obtained dominion. Pontifical deposition of kings and domination through the nations of Christendom, the Cisalpines to a man hold in detestation.^ This system has been supported with great learning and ability by the French theologians ; such as Gerson, Launoy, Almain, Marca, Maimbourg, Bossuet, and Du Pin. The Parisian parliament and university distinguished this view of the subject by their persevei'ing and powerful advocacy. The Parisian senate, in 1610, proscribed Bellarmine's Treatise against Barclay, on the temporal power of the pope. The whole French clergy, in 1682, assembled at Paris, and recog- nized this as the belief of the Gallican church ; and their decision has been embraced by the moderate and rational friends of Romanism throuh the several nations o f Chris- tendom.* The Italians, and all who abet their slavish system, counte- nance the pope's political power, even beyond the papal regalia, and support his assumed authority over emperors and kings. 1 Bell. 1. Sil. Maimb. 260. Du Pin, 433. 2 Gibert 2 513. Maimb. c. 30. Anglad. 156. Thuan. 5. 241. Grotty, 70. Itahabe^declaratic cleri Gallicani, Anno 1682, quam sequuntur plures exteri. ITALIAN SYSTEM. 219 The Roman hierarch, according to this theory, presides by divine right in the state as well as in the church. He possesses autho- rity to transfer kingdoms, dethrone sovereigns for heresy, and absolve their subjects from the oath of lidelity.' The partisans of the Italian school are divided into two fac- tions. One party allows the pope no ^direct power over the state or over kings. He is not, according to this theory, the lord of the whole world. He possesses no jurisdiction over the realms of paganism or infidelity. But he is vested with an indirect power over the temporal monarchs and the political institutions of Christendom. The supreme pontiff can, for the good of the church and the salvation of souls, enact and repeal civil laws, erect kingdoms, transfer thrones, depose emperors and kings, and rescind, by divine right and spiritual authority, the obligations of vassals to their sovereigns. This, Bellarmine represents as the common opinion of all the friends of Roman- ism. This system has been advocated by Baronius, Bellarmine, Binius, Carranza, Perron, Turrecrema, Pighius, Walden, San- derus, Cajetan, and Vittoria. Many pontiffs, also, since the days of Gregory the Seventh, as well as several provincial and general councils, have patronized the same absurdity.'^ A second faction vest the pontiflE' with still ampler prerogatives and greater power. These characterize the pope as the lord of the whole world, who presides, with divine and uncontrolled authority, over all the nations of Christendom and infidelity. His power, according to this system, is direct in civil as well as ecclesiastical affairs. He wields, at once, the temporal and spiritual swords. He is clothed with civil and ecclesiastical sovereignty, which places him above all earthly monarchs, whom he is authorized, in his unerring judgment and unlimited power, to degrade from their dignity and to remove from their dominions. This scheme has, with brazen effrontery, been maintained by many doctors and pontiff's, and, in general, by the Canonists and Jesuits. The last council of the Lateran, also, in some of its declarations and enactments, seems to have favored the same monstrous theory.^ Christendom, on this topic, has witnessed four variations, und fluctuated through as many diversified periods. One period embraced a protracted lapse of about 700 years, from the era of our redemption till the accession of Gregory the Second. Chria- 1 Bell. V. 1. Daniel, 4. 402. Maimb. 2G(). Dens, 2. 164. ^Bellarmin, V. 1. Maimtourg, c. 20. Charon, 31. •• rsGii. 1. Szv, uu rm. -, .t-:o. J^abu. iv, i-v- riiu. v. li-. (Jninem vim regiam omniumque reruni, quae in terris sunt, potestatem et dominium datum esse Romano Pontifici jure Divino. Barclay, 7. Canonists dicunt, papam directe dominium temporale totius orbia a Christo »ccepis»e. Barclay, 95. iiliiMiiliiiiii iMIiiii f ( ill' I ' 'i"i ! I ' "SO 220 THE VAllIATIOXS OF POPERY, tians, during this tin.e, all professed and practised unconditional loyalty. A period of dissension and rivalry, between the mitre and the diadem, between royalty and the papacy, then suc- ceeded, continued nearly four hundred years, from Gregory the Second till Gregory the Seventh, and terminated in the defeat of regal sovereignty and the triumph of pontifical domination. , The supremacy of thS popedom and the debasement of kingly majesty, according to Lessius, an ultra advocate of Romanism, next ensued, and continued for a period of near five hundred years after Gregory, till the dawn of the Reformation, when the meridian splendor of papal glory began to decline. The fourth period, from the rise of Protestantism till the present day, comprehends about three hundred years, during which the pontifical pretensions have gradually receded, and the regal claims have revived. The first and third periods were distin- guished for their unanimity : the former for the monarchy of kings, and the latter for the sovereignty of pontiffs. The second and fourth were days of contention between the church and the state, between the authority of popes, and the power of kings. The church, for seven hundred years after its establishment was distinguished for its loyalty and submission to the civil magistracy. The Christian commonwealth for more than three hundred years, from Jesus to Constantine, existed in poverty and without power or ostentation. Joseph and Jesus were humble artizans of Nazareth. The Son of Man, who came to pour contempt on human glory, had not where to lay his head. The original heralds of the gospel, apostles, evangelists, and pastors, were, like their master, void of wordly rank or influ- ence. The voluntary oblations tf the faithful were chiefly divided among this humble ministry, and the poor, the sick, the distressed, the aged, the stranger, the prisoner, the orphan, and the widow. The Cliristian society, indeed, during the reign of the heathen empeiors, might, by concealment and connivance, possess some landed property. But these possessions were trifling and precarious ; and, at the same time, liable to be seized by a rapacious magistracy.* The Roman Bishop, participat- ing in the general indigence, and destitute of civil authority or wordly power, was subject to persecution and obscurity. The situation of the church, at the accession of Constantine,^ ' Giannon. II. 8. Maimb. c. 27. John xvii. 16. Luke xii. 14. Rom. xiii. 1. II y avoit plus de sept cent ana, que la seule puissance spirituelle dea clefs faisoit reverer la inajeste du saint siege. Vertot, i. Jusqu'au r^gue du Grand ( 'rmatantin, lea succeaaeura de St. Pierre n'en avoient h^rit^ que aes chatnea et des pera^cutiona, souvent termin^es par le niartyre. Vertot, 2. ORIGINAL STATE OF THK CHRISTIAN COMMONWEALTH. 221 underwent an important change. The emperor, by the edict of Milan, gave legal security to the temporal possessions of the Christian republic. The Christians recovered the land forfeited nnder Dioclesian, and obtained a title to all the property which they had enjoyed by the connivance of the Roman magistracy. A second edict, in 321, granted a liberty of bequeathing pro- perty to the church ; while the emperor showed an example of Uberality, and lavished wealth on the clergy with an unsparing hand. , . ,^ , The imperial munificence attracted many imitators, whose donations, during life and especially at the hour of death, flowed into the ecclesiastical treasury in copious streams. The women, in particular, displayed on the occasion the utmost profusion. The Roman matrons rivalled each other in this pecuniary devotion. The clergy, indeed, in this respect, prevailed so much with female credulity, that Valentinian was obliged to enact a law, forbidding monks or ecclesiastics to accept any donation or legacy from maids, matrons, orphans, or widows. Womanish simplicity, the emperor wished to prevent from bemg deluded by priestly policy. The northern barbarians, who, had overrun the Roman empire, might indeed, be less enlightened , but they were even more lavish in their generosity. The adoration of Hessus, Odin, and Terasius, these rough warriors left in the fastnesses and forests of the north ; but they retained, in a great measure,, their barbarianism and superstition. The credulity and veneration of these hardy veterans for the hierarchy, seemed to invite imposture. Rapacious, but lavish; dissolute, but devotional, these proselyted sons of heathenism, poured torrents of wealth into the channels of the church. The Roman Bishops, from Constantine to Pepin, enjoyed an exuberance of this liberality. Tlie grandeur and opulence of the church in the imperial city, in a few years after Christianity obtained a legal establishment, became truly astonishing. Am- mianus, a pagan, an impartial and a contemporary historian, has described the pontiffs aflluence and ostentation. The hierarch enjoyed the stateliest chariots, the gayest attire, and the finest entertainments. He surpassed kings in splendor and magnifi- cence. His lu:.ury, pride, vanity, and sensuality formed a contrast to the provincial bishops, who approved themselves to the eternal God by their temperance, frugality, simplicity, plainness, and modesty.' Christianity, at this time, had been eJitAblished by law only about fifty years. The Roman See, in 1 Ammianus, XXVII, 3. Thomasin, III. 1. Giannon, IV. i2. Les Papes, depuis I'empire du Grand Constantm, avoieut acquis uue grande . consideration dans Rome et dans toute I'ltalie. Vertot, 10. iU I j'i 222 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. that period, had emerged from obscurity, mounted to earthly grandeur, and obtained afterwards in the seventh century, an ample patrimony through Italy, France, and Africa. But ambition is never satisfied ; and his infallibility, sur- rounded with wealth and grandeur, affected royalty, and aspired to be numbered among kings. This dignity was bestowed on these viceroys of heaven by the French monarchs Pepin and Carolus. The Lombards, taking advantage of the seditions in Italy, occasioned by the imperial edicts of Leo and Constantino against image-worship, seized the Grecian provinces subject to the exarch of Ravenna. Astolf, King of Lombardy, elated with these new accessions to his dominions, formed the i)roject of subduing the Roman city, its territory, and indeed all Italy. The city was summoned to acknowledge his sovereignty, and the sword of destruction was unsheathed to exact the penalty of disobedience. The Romans, in this emergency, solicited the interposition of Pepin, whose hand, in war or in friendship, was never lifted in vain. Actuated by the call of religion, policy, gratitude, and glory, the French monarch mustered an army, scaled the Alps, descended on the plains of Italy, marched on the capital, defeated the enemy, and compelled Astolf in 754, m a solemn treaty, to surrender Ravenna, Pentapolis, and the Roman dukedom, to the Roman pontiff and his sacerdotal successors.' Astolf, however, on the departure of Pepin, retracted his engagement. Stephen again applied to Pepin ; and personi- fying Peter himself, assured the French king, that dead in body, he was alive in spirit, and summoned the monarch to obey the founder and guardian of the Roman See. The virgin, the angels, the saints, the martyr.s, and all the host of heaven, if credit may be attached to his holiness, urged the request and would reward the obligation. Victory and paradise, he prom- ised, would crown the enterprise ; while damnation would be the penalty of suffering his tomb, his temple, and his people, to fall into the possession of the enemy. These arguments, in the eighth century, could not fail. Pepin again crossed the Alps, and obliged Astolf to fulfil the violated treaty. Carolus, the son of Pepin, afterward confirmed the grant of his prede- cessor, consisting of Ravenna, Pentapolis, or the March of Ancona, and the Roman dukedom; and, according to the general opinion, added the duchy of Spoleto, completing, by this cession, the present circle of the ecclesiastical states, and forming an extensive territory in the midland region of Italy.^ 1 Labb. 8. 388, 370. AnasUsiuB, 44. Giannon, V. i. Vertot 30 41 ■i Bray I. 562. Giannon, V. 4. et VI. 1. Labb. 8. 376. Vertot, 78 ' Si vous voulez sauver vos amos ct vos corps du feu eterneJ, vous aurez ensuite la vie ^ternelle. Vertot, 54. PONTIFICAL ROYALTY. 229 This splendid donation raised the pontiff to royalty. The world, for the first time, saw a bishop vested with the preroga- tives of a prince and ranked among the sovereigns of the earth. His holiness added a temporal to a spiritual kingdom. The hiorarch, in this manner, united principality to priesthood, the crown to the mitre, and the sceptre to the keys. The vicegerent of Jesus, who declared his kingdom not of this world and refused a diadem, grasped with avidity at regal honors and temporal dominion. Satan, said Passavan with equal truth and severity, tendered this earth and all its glory to Immanuel ; but met with a peremptory rejection. The Devil afterwards made the same overture to the pope, who accepted the offer with thanks, and with the annexed condition of worshipping the prince of dark- ness. The observation unites all the keenness of sarcasm, and the energy of truth.' The Roman hierarchs, however, during these seven revolving ages, professed unqualified submission to the Roman emperors ; and, though often persecuted, attempted neither anathemas nor deposition. Gelasius, Gregory, Agatho, and Leo, manifested obedience and even servility to the imperial authority. The persecuting emperors, for three hundred years after the era of redemption, experienced nothing but passive obedience from the Christian priesthood and people, Liberius and Damasus launched no anathemas against the Arian Constantius and Valens. Felix and Gelasius fulminated no excommunications against Zeno, who discountenanced Catholicism and favored heresy. Julian, notwithstanding his apostasy, escaped pontifical degradation. Vitalian even honored Constans, the patron of error, who banished Martin and tortured Maximus. Gregory, little indeed to his credit, eulogized Phocas, the assassin of Mauricius and his helpless family.'^ The Gothic kings, not- withstanding their stratagems and invasion of the ecclesiastical patrimony, reigned without molestation in Italy. The second period of papal pretension, which entered with Gregory the Second in the beginning of the eighth century, introduced dissension and rivalry between the Roman emperors and the Roman pontiffs, which lasted above three hundred years. The Popes advanced to the deposition of kings with slow and gradual, but firm and steady steps. Their first essay, in this hazardous, enterprise, showed their usual caution. The wary hierarchs began the career of ambition by using their spiritual authority in the encouragement of subjects to rebel against their sovereigns. The prudent chiefs stimulated others to the depo- 1 Du Pin, 279, 468. Caron. 114. Maimbourg, c. 29. ■^ Les Papea obeiaaoient alors a des roia, ou iimdeles ou Ariens. Vertot, 3. 224 THE VAMATIONS OP POPERY. sition of civil governors ; but attempted nothing, in this perilous project, in their own name. Specimens of this kin4 were afforded by Gregory and Zachary in France and Italy. Gregory encouraged the Italians to rebel against Leo. The eastern emperor, in 726, issued an edict in favor of Iconoclasm. The Roman pontiff, in return, proceeded, according tothe Greek historians Theophanes, Cedrenus, Zonaraa, Nicephorus, and Glycas, to excommunicate his Grecian majesty. The Greeks have been followed by the Transalpine Latins, Baronius, Bellar- mine, Sigonius, Perron, and AUatius. Gregory's excommuni- cation of Leo, however, has, with reason, been rejected by the critics of the French school, Launoy, Alexander, Marca, Bossuet, Giannone, Caron, and Du Pin. The event is unmentioned or opposed by Gregory, John Damascen, Paulus, Diaconius, Anastasius, and other Latin historians. The hierarch, however, fomented a revolt amongst the Romans, Venetians, Lombards, and other Italians. Subjects, his holiness taught, could not in conscience contribute taxes to a heretical prince. The people, in consequence, rose in arms for the protection of the pontiff and the faith, disclaimed all fealty to the emperor, and refused to pay tribute.* Italy, in this manner, was, by papal treason, severed from the eastern emperor. Gregory's success encouraged Zachary, Childeric, the French king, was, in 751, deposed for inefKciency, and Pepin, mayor of the palace, crowned for his activity and achievements ; and through the casuistry of Zachary, who occupied the Roman See, which was esteemed, in the eighth century, the seminary of all virtue and sanctity. The ultra partisans of Romanism main- tain that the diadem was transferred from Cliilderic to Pepin by the pontiff's supremacy, and not by his casusistry. Eginhard, indeed, says Childeric was dethroned by the command of Zachary, and Pepin crowned by his authority.^ Similar ex- pressions have been used by Regino, Aimon, Marian, Sigebert, Otho, -^milius, and Ado. Launoy, Caron, and Du Pin think that this phraseology signifies only the papal advice and recom- mendation. The Roman pontiff's authority, however, influ- enced the French nation, and decided the destiny of the French king, who was hurled from the throne and inmiured in a monas- tery. The Pope, also, dissolved the oath of fidelity, which Pepin and the French nation had taken to Childeric, and which, for the gratification of ambition, they had violated.^ 1 lis ne pouvoient en conscience payer des tribute k un prince h^r^tique. Vertot, 13. Giannon, II. 4. Bray. I. 520. Labb. 8. 163. Mezeray, 1. 198 Giannon. V. 1. Caron, 32. Du Pin, 508. '<< Per auctoritatem Romani Pontificis. Eginhard, in Carol.— Papa unuidavit Pepino. Kegino, II. Mezeray, I. 209 Aimon, IV. 61. 3 Zacharias omnes Francigenas a juramento fidelitatis absolvit. Caron, c. IX. Du Pin, 513. ATTEMPTS OF PUPES TO DEPOSE KINGS. 225 The third period, in the annals of papal deposition of empe • rors and kings, began with Gregory the Seventh, and lasted till the declension of the papacy at the commencement of the re- formation. This protracted series of about five hundred years was marked by pontifical sovereignty and regal debasement During this time, the Roman vicegerents of heaven, shining in meridian splendor and appearing in all their glory, continued, according to the dictates of interest or passion, to dethrone sovereigns, transfer kingdoms, and control the governments of the world. Each vicar-general of God in succession, with hardly any exception, proceeded, on his accession to the chair of the Galilean fisherman, to hurl his anathemas, issue his interdicts, and degrade kings. The history of these transactions would fill folios. A few continental examples may be supplied from the annals of Gregory, Clement, Boniface, and Julius, who deposed Henry, Lewis, Philip, and Lewis. A few British in- stances may be seiocted from the history of Adrian, Innocent, Paul, and Pius, in their treatment of Henry, John, Henry, and' Elizabeth. ^ Gregory and Clement deposed Henry and Lewis, two Ger- man emperors; and Boniface and Julius degraded Philip and Lewis, two French kings. Gregory the Seventh, who succeeded to the papal throne in 1073, was, according to Otho, Panvinius, and the Leodian clergy, the first Pope, who, in the fury of am- bition, attempted the degradation of civil potentates. I have often, says Otho, ' read the deeds of the Roman emperors, and never found any, prior to Henry, whom papal usurpation de- prived of his kingdom or dignity.' Henry, says Panvinius ' was the first whom pontifical ambition divested of his kingdom or empire.' Hildebrand, according to the Leodian clergy, ' first lifted the sacerdotal lance against the royal diadem.'^' Similar statements have been made by Benno, Waltram, Tiithemius, Gotofred, Cuspinian, Masson, Helmold, and Giannone. Gregory had not only the honor of commencement in this field, but also of bringing the system to perfection. His infal- libility excelled his predecessors and eclipsed all his successors in the noble art, which he had the glory to invent. His holi- ness pointed his sarcasms against the institution of regal gov- ernment, as well as against its royal administration. The dignity itself, his infallibility declared, ' was the invention of laymen who were unacquainted with God.' Monarchy, which he represented as a stratagem of Satan and ushered into the 1 Hildebrandu8 primus l^vavit sacerdotalem lanceam contra diadema reiris Crabb, 2. 814. Du Pin, 476. Caron, 90. Milletot, 524. O 226 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. world by infernal agency, reigns over men, his holiness dis- covered, in blind ambition and intolerable presumption and in the perpetration of rapine, pride, perfidy, homicide, an.t every atrocity. Kings, who are void of religion, Gregory charac- terized as ' the body and members of the devil.'^ Sovereigns, accordingl)^ he treated a,s his vassals. The necks of all, he alleged, should submit to the clergy, and much more to the hierarch, whom the supreme Divinity had appointed to preside over the clergy. He degraded Basilas, the Polish king, and Nicephorus, the Grecian emperor. The viceroy of Heaven, in the wantonness of ambition and fury, menaced the French and English sovereigns, and, indeed, all the European* poten- tates with degradation. But Gregory's treatment of Henry, the emperor, affords the most striking display of his tyranny. This denunciation was issued in two Roman councils, and presents the most frightful combination of dissimulation, blasphemy, arrogance, folly, super- stition, and fury that ever outraged reason or insulted man. The papacy he represented as forced on his acceptance, and received with sighs and tears ; though ambitioii, it is well known, was the ruling passion of his soul. He forced his way, in the general opinion, to the papal throne through murder and perfidy, and certainly by hasty and hypocritical machinations. Henry and his partisans he denominated ' wild beasts and members of the devil.' Assuming the authority of Almighty God even in an act of enormity, this plenipotentiary of heaven proceeded ' for the honor and protection of the church, to depose Henry from the government of Germany and Italy, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.' The sentence was accompanied with shocking execrations. His holiness, ' relying on the divine mercy, cursed the emperor by the autho- rity of the Almighty, with whom he joined Jesus, i'eter, Paul, and Lady Mary, the mother of God.' Henry's subjects, Gre- gory absolved from the oath of fidelity, and transferred his dominions to Rodolphus, to whom he granted the pardon of all sin, and apostolic benediction in time and eternity. A Roman council of one hundred and ten bishops, in which Gregory presided, urged their head, by their importunity, to pass this sentence, which was afterwards confirmed by Victor, Urban, Pascal, Gelasius, and Calixtus in the synods of Beneventum, Placentia, Rome, Colonia, and Rheims.^ * Dignitas a sfficularibus etiam Deum icnorantibus inventa. Mundi principe fi;AV.r.i^ \4d.sliGet n-mfanf a Labb. 12i 409. — MembTii sunt Ds^monuni. Illi diaboli corpus sunt. Labb. 12.501. — Membra diaboli consurrexere, et manus suas in me conjectere. Platin. 152. Daniel. .^, 106. 2 Labb. 12, 599, 600, 639. Platina, 152. Giannon. X. 5. Alex. 18, 295, 338. DEPOSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL SOVEREiaNS. 227 His infallibility's curse, however, did not consume Henry nor did his blessing preserve Rodolphus. His apostolic bene- diction, which he pronounced on Rodolphus, was of little use m time, whatever it might effect in eternity. The usurper fell in battle against the emperor.^ Holding up his hand, which had been wounded in the engagement, to his captains, 'you see, said the dying warrior, ' this hand with which I swore al- legiance to Henry. But Gregory induced me to break my oath and usurp an unmerited honor. I have received this mortal wound in the hand, with which I violated my obligation.' That martyr of ambition, treason, perjury, and pontifical domination, made this confession and expired. Many of the Italian, German, and French prelacy in the mean time supported Henry against Gregory. The emperor mustered a party, and summoned the councils of Worms, Mentz, and Brescia against the pontiff. The council of Worms accused his holiness of perjury, innovation, and too great familiarity with the Countess Matilda. The synod of Brescia deposed the head of the church, for simony, perjury, sacrilege, obstinacy, perverseness, scandal, sorcery, necromancy, infidelity, heresy, and Berengarianism.'^ Henry, in this manner, enjoyed the sweets of evangelical retaliation, and returned, according to the old law, a tooth for a tooth, or deposition for deposition. Clement deposed the Emperor Lewis, as Gregory had de- graded the Emperor Henry. Lewis indeed was excommunicated by the pontiffs John, Benedict, and Clement. The emperor, on his election, had not submitted to be crowned by the pope, or plastered with the hierarch's holy oil. John the Twenty- second, therefore, according to custom, excommunicated Lewis. The pope fulminated red hot anathemas and execrations against the emperor, as a patron of schism and heresy. Benedict con- firmed John's sentence, and divested Lewis of the imperial dignity, which, according to his infallibility, devolved on the pontiff as the viceroy of heaven. Clement the Sixth degraded Lewis in 1344, and ordered the election of another emperor.'' Lewis, however, though excommunicated and cursed, protes- ted against the papal sentence, and appealed to a general coun- cil. He declared that the imperial dignity, with which he was vested by election, depended on God and not on the pontiff, who possessed no authority in temporals. He even retorted John's deposition, and raised Nicholas, in opposition, to the pontifical throne. The emperor, in his hostility to the refrac- tory pontiffs, was supported by the German electors. His I Helmold, o. 29. Albert ad Ann. 1080. Giannon. X I Caron,126. Du Pin, 2. 216, 217. Giannon. X. 5. 3 Labb. 15, 148, 419. Du Pin, 552. Dan. 4. 66. Caron, 30. 6. Coquille, 416. 228 THE VARUTIONS OF POPERY. majesty also consulted the universities of Germany, France, and Italy, especially those of Bononia and Paris, on the lawfulness and validity ot the papal denunciations. These all agreed that the acts and enactments of John against Lewis were contrary to Christian simplicity and divine philosophy.^ Boniface and Julius deposed Philip and Lewis, French kings, as Gregory and Clement had degroded Henry and Lewis, Ger- man emperors. Boniface was a man of profound capacity, and of extensive information in the ©ivil and canon law. Ambi- tion was the ruling passion of his soul ; and seemed, in him, to be without any bounds or limits. He hurled his anathemas in every direction against all who opposed the mad projects of his measureless ambition. Philip the Fair, the French king, who withstood his usurpations, was, in consequence, visited by the papal denunciations. Boniface, in proper form and with due solemnity, excommunicated the king, interdicted his king- dom, freed his subjects from their allegiance, and declared the eovemment of the French nation to have devolved on the Roman pontiff.'* The French king and nation, however, refused to acquiesce in the pontiff's decision or submit to his temporal authority, Boniface declared that Philip was subject to the holy see in temporals as well as in spirituals ; and that the contrary was heresy. Philip replied, that he was subject to none in tempo- rals; and that the contrary was madness. The prince, on this occasion, addressed the pontiff, not as his holiness, but as his foolishness. The Parisian parliament burnt the papal bulls. The French, consisting of the nobility, the clergy, and the mag- istracy, convened by the kin-', rejected his claims and confirmed their civil and eccJesiastical immunity. The vicar-general of God was assailed in turn, and found guilty of simony, murder, usury, incest, adultery, heresy, and atheism. The majesty of the Church, says Mariana, ' was, by an unprecedented atrocity, violated in the person of the pope.'^ His infallibility, mad- dened by the outrage, died of grief and desperation. Julius excommunicated Lewis, as Boniface had anathemat- ized Philip. His supremacy, in 151,0 in due and proper form, deposed the king, interdicted the nation, rescinded the people's oath of fealty, and transferred the kingdom to any successful invader. He anathematized the GaDican clergy, the 1 Acta et dogmata Joannis adversus Cffisarem, Christiaure simplicitati et Di- vine philoaophiaj repugnare. Aventinus, VII. Caron, 44. Du Pin 2, 502 2 Labb. 14. 1222. Dan. 4. 380. Marian. 3. .SOfi. T)ii Pin KfiO Mo,^,.^' 3 Par un attentat inoui, la majesty de I'^glise fut violt^e en la pereonne du Pape Boniface VIII. Mariana, 3, 304. Du Pin,' 2. 490. ^. DEPOSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL SOVEREIGNS. 229 Snnif °-/'f? ^^*"',a^d %on«. and all the sovereigns who ho.o? «t1 •^' ^:r'\ ""P"^"'^- ^«^«' though a man of ir/fi? P/^*^' *^' plenipotentiary of heaven ^ax^cursed in dreadful anathemas and imprecations. The king of Navarre, the French sovereign's ally, his holiness honored with simiW compliments and benedictions, and his kingdoms with equal tokens of pontifical charity and benevolence ' ^ Lewis withstood Julius, as Philip had resisted Boniface. He convoked a general assembly of the French clergy at Tours rTXf'rtif '^ the nullity of unjust excommunlLions, the wffhrlrfwf W'"''*'^"^ usurpation, and the lawfulness of withdrawing obedience, m case of aggression, from the Roman bee Patronized by his most Christian majesty, the council of Pi a afterwards translated to Milan and Lyons, convicted his .,? npr.r/>,^'T'^' f^^^'T' !^?«"^gibility, and obduraxjy, and suspended him from the administration of the papacy; and his suspension, m the French nation, was authorised by the French king and government.'' ^ These are a few specimens of continental depositions. But the Roman pontiffs also extended their usurpations to the Bntish Islands, and assumed the sovereignty of England and vTT A ^-"^'T ^^^^f™d Ireland to Henry ; while Innocent, Paul and Pius deposed John, Henry, and Elizabeth. Adrian the Fourth, who arrogated the power of transferring kingdoms was a striking example of the vicissitudes of human lite, and the presumption of many who rise from penury to power. Born m England, and the child of indigence and obscu- rity, he was subject, 'u early life, to aU the hardships which march in the train of poverty. He lived in an English abbey, spent his juvemle days m drudgery, and subsisted! during his youth, on alms supplied by the cold hand of charity. Elevated, m the revolution of human affairs, to the pontifical dignity, he displayed aU the arrogance which often attends a sudden tmn- sition from meanness to celebrity. He compelled the Emperor J^redenck Barbarossa to officiate as his equerry. His imperial majesty, m the sight of all his army, had the honor of holding the stirrup for his pontifical h< liness.« His infallibiUty, also, ^ the viceroy of heaven, bestowed Ireland on Henry the Second, king of England. Henry's petition on the occasion and Adrian's pant are the two corapletest specimens of hypocrisy and the two foulest perversions of religion, to cloak ambition and \ n^*'«. ^\^^^- ^I^aniel, 7. 5. Marian, 5, 710, 711, 749, 787, 3 ^" ^'°' 2?*;„ '^*'"°° 184. Labb. 19. 558. Daniel, 7. 214 230 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. avarice, the love of power and money, that the annals of nations afford. Henry, in 1155, despatched messengers to Adrian, requesting his infallibility's permission to invade Ireland. His design, the English sovereign pretended, was to exterminate the seeds of immorality, and turn the brutal Irish, who were Christians only in name, to the faith and to the way of truth.' Adrian's reply was complaisant, and fraught with the grossest dissimulation and ambition. He pronounced his apbstoiic benediction on Hemy, whom* he styled his dearest son, who, on account of his resolu- tion to conquer Ireland, would obtain glory on earth and felicity in heaven. Fame and heaven, in the apostolic manifesto, were to be the recompense of bloodshed and usurpation. The reduc- tion of Ireland and the murder of its inhabitants, his holiness represented as the means of enlarging the bounds of the church, teaching the truths of Christianity to a barbarous and unlettered people, and eradicating the tares of vice from the garden of God. All this, in his infallibility's statement, would tend to the honor of God and the salvation of souls. His holiness, anxious in this manner for the salvation of men, was also mind- ful of another important consideration. He had the recollec- tion to stipulate for Peter's pence, which was an annual tax from each family.* This fruit of Henry's military mission, which Adrian repeats in his apostolic bull, seems to have been conge- nial with his infallibility's devotion, and gratifying, in a par- ticular manner, to his pontifical piety. The pontiff, like a holy humble successor of the Galilean ^fesherman, reminds the English monarch of his right to bestow Ireland on Henry. This island, his infallibility discovered, and all others which have been enlightened by the sun of righteousness and shown evidence of their Christianity, belonged to the Roman pontiff. Adrian, who, it appears, had a respectable domain, considered Henrj'^'s application for apostolic sanction to his expedition, as an earnest of victory. Adrian's bull was confirmed by Alexander the Third. The Irish clergy also met at Waterford, submitted to the papal dictation, and took an oath of fidelitj^ to Henry and his successors. Mageoghegan and Caron, the friends of Romanism, have both condemned the bull of Adrian, which transferred Ireland to Henry,^ Adrian's sentence, says Mageoghegan, ' violated 1 Homines illos bestiales ad fidem et viam reducere veritatis. Paris, 91. 2 De singulus domibus, annuam unius denarii Beato Petro velle solvere pensionem. Labb. 13 14. 15. Mageogh. 1. 439, et 2. 12. Spon. 1152. III. — ... ^^^ ^ — ..... .,„ .„..,;.„.,,, i...\! viH^iif ttxuiiiaiuixi Ltuitrr oruiii entur, ut a Deo sempiternse mercedis fructum consequi merearis. Trivettus. Ann. 1155. Dachery, 3. 151. 8 Mageogh. 1. 440. Caron, c. 13. ADRIAN TRANSFERS IRELAND TO HENRY II. 231 the rights of nations and the most sacred laws of men, under the specious pretext of religion and reformation. Ireland was blotted from the map of nations and consigned to the loss of freedom, without a tribunal and without a crimo.' The historian represents Henry, who undt"took to reform the brutal Irish, ' as a man of perfidy, superstition, selfishness, and debauchery, and void of gratitude, goodness, and religion.' ' Adrian's bull,' says Caron, ' proclaims the author a tyrant and a transgressor of the law of nations and equity.' Innocent divested John of England, as Adrian had vested Henry with Ireland. Innocent the Third, says Orleans, might boast of striking nearly all the crowned heads with anathemas. The Koman pontifl" opened the campaign against the British sovereign by a national interdict. This, which he published in 1208, presents to the eye of superstition an awful spectacle. All the institutions of religion were suspended, except Baptism, Confession, and the Viaticum in the last extremity. The churches were closed. The images of the saints were laid on the ground, and the bells ceased to toll. The dead, borne from the towns, were, without ceremony or funeral solemnity, depo- sited in pits or buried, like dogs, in the highways.* The interdict being found ineffectual, John, in 1209, was excommunicated. All were forbidden to hold any communica- tion with the king at table, in council, or even in conversation. His deposition followed in 1212. Innocent, in a consistory of the sacred college, and in accordance with their unanimous advice, declared John's dethronement, the recision of his people's oath of allegiance, and the transfer of the kingdom to Philip, the French monarch. The English sovereign was denoimced as the public enemy of God.'^ The French king was encouraged to take possession of the English realm. His holiness exhorted all Christians in the British and French States to rally round the standard of Philip ; and offered a pardon of all sins as an Induce- ment to engage in the holy expedition. He granted the sol- diery of the pious enterprise the same remission as the pilgrims who visited the sacred sepulchre, or the crusaders who marched for the recovery of the Holy Land. The British nobility and people were invited to rebellion ; and ' the English barons rejoiced in being freed from the obligation of fi elity.'* Philip's piety and ambition were kindled by the prospect of obtaining ' Corpora quoque defunctorum cle civitatibus et villis efferebantur, et more canuin,in biviiset fossatis sine orationibus et sacerdotuin ministerio sepelieban- tur. M. Paris, 217. Polyd. Virg. 271. Orleans, 1. 118- - Tanquam Dei publioum hoetem persequantur. Poly. Virgil. XV. Orleans, 1. 119. 3 Lea Seigneurs ravis de m voir absous de leur sennent de fidelity. Dan. 3. 562, 554. 232 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the expiation of sin, and the possession of a kingdom. He mustered an army, equipped a fleet of one himdred sail, and only waited a favoring gale to swell the canvas and waft his army to the British shores. The thunder of the Vatican, the disaffection of the English, and especially the armament of the French king, alarmed the British sovereign and shook his resolution. He submitted to all the despotic demands of the pontiff. British independence struck to Roman tyranny. John, in an assembly of the English nobihty and clergy, took the crown from his head, delivered it, m token of subjection, to Pandolphus the pope's nuncio, from whom the king condescended to receive this emblem of royalty .1 The monarch confirmed his submission with an oath. These transactions completed the degradation of majesty. This important day witnessed the debasement of the British sove- reign, and the vas.salage of the British nation. Pandolphus, in consequence, who was vested with legatine authority, counter- manded Philip's expedition. Philip bad only been the tool of Innocent's despotism ; and his agency, when John submitted, became unnecessary. Paul the Third, in 1535, issued sentence of deposition against Henry the Eighth, in retaliation for the British sovereign's rejection of the pontifical authority. Henry, indeed, according to Mageoghegan and Du Pin, ' was guilty, not of heresy, but merely of schism. He changed nothing in the faith. His majesty, without any discrimination, persecuted the partisans of popery and protestantism. The Reformation, indeed, in England, had not appeared under Henry. This revolution was reserved for the following reign.'^ But Henry withdrew from the papal jurisdiction, and, in consequence, was exposed to papal execration. Paul excommunicated and deposed Henry, interdicted the nation, and absolved his subjects from their oath of allegiance. He transferred the kingdom to any successful invader, and prohibited all communication with the English naonarch. He deprived the king of Christian burial, and con- signed the sovereign, and his friends, accomplices, and adherents to anathemas, maledictions, and everlasting destruction. ' Paul,' says Paolo, ' excommunicated, anathematized, cursed, and con- demned Henry to eternal damnation." He stigmatized his 1 Diadema capiti ademptum Pandolpho legato tradit, nunquam id ipse aut haeredes acceptun, nisi a Pontifico Romano. Polydorus Virgilius, 273. IVI. Paris 211. Daniel 3. 556. Orleans, 1. 121. Concedimus Deo et nostro Papse Inno- centio ejusque succes oribus totum regnum Anglite et totum regnum Hiberniaj proredemptionepeccatorumnostrorum. Trivettus, Am. 1213. Dachery, 3.183.' La rtiforme ne s'^toitpas encore montr(5e k dcconvert smis Hfln" VTTT rto+t^ revolution etoit reservee au regne suivant. Le Roi netoit que schismati que. Mageoghegan, 2. 310.— Nihil quidem in fide rautans. Du Pin, 568. 3 Eos anathematis, maledictionis, et damnationis sitemiE muc'rone percutimus. DEPOSITIONS OF HENRY VIII. AND QUEEN ELIZABETH. 253 posterity by Queen Anna, with illegitimacy and incapacity of succession to the crown ; while he delivered his partisans to slavery. The English clergy, his holiness commanded to leave the kingdom, and admonished the nobility to arm in rebellion against the king. He annulled every treaty between Henry and other princes. He enjoined the clergy to publish the excommunication ; and, with the standard of the cross, to ring the bells on the occasion, and then extinguish the candles. All who opposed, according to his infallibility, ' incurred the indignation of Almighty God, and the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.' Pius deposed Elizabeth, as Innocent and Paul had degraded John and Henry. His holiness, in 1570, ' anathematized her majesty as a professor and patron of heresy, despoiled the English queen of all dominion and dignity, and freed the British nation from all subjection and fidelity.' His irfallibity's im- precations, according to Gabutius, took effect on the British sovereign. ' The queen of England,' says the historian of Pius the Fifth, 'exchanged, in l(i03, an impious life for eternal death.'i The Roman pontifi'also intrigued for the temporal destruction of the English queen, whom he had excommunicated. This he attempted by rebellion and invasion, and through the agency of Rodolpho and the Spanish King. Rodolpho, a Florentine merchant who resided at London, employed, in his zeal for Romanism, a variety of stratagems for exciting an insurrection in England. Many partisans of popery and some nominal friends of protestantism, actuated by ambition or a desire of innovation, entered into the conspiracy. This, according to Gabutius, ' was an evidence of their piety.' The m vjority of the nobility, headed by the Duke of Norfolk, engaged, through the activity of Rodolpho, in this combination for an insurrec- tion.'' The rebels were to be supported by a Spanish army of Cherub. 2, 704. II avoit excommuni6, anathematiad, maudit, condamn^ i la damnation ^temelle. Paol. I. 166. Labb. 19. 1203. Mageogh. 2. 310. Du Pin. 568. Alex. 93. 174. Paulus, III Henricum rogno acdominiis omnibus privatum denunciat, et loca omnia, in c|uibu8 rei- merit, ecclesiastico aubjicit interdicto. Henrici vassallos et subditos a juramento fidelitatia absolvit. Alex. 24. 20. 1 Ipsam Angliae regno omnique alio dominio dignitate, privilegio, privatumde- claravit, omneaque ac aingulos ejua subditos a juramento fidelitatis absolvit, latos in eos qui dlius legibus et mandatia parerent anathemate ; quam consti- tutionem, Gregorius XIII. et Sixtus V. innovarunt et conlirmarunt. Alex. 24. 435. Mageogh. 3. 412, 413. Impiam vitam cum sempitema morte commu- taverit. Gabutius. 102. Mageogh. 3. 409. Thuan, 2. 770. '' Incolarum animos ad Eiizabethoe perditionem, rebellione facta, commoveret. Anglorum in Elizabetham pie conspirantium studia foveret. Rodulfus negotium eo perduxit, ut pars major optimatum in Elizabetham conspiraret. Gabut. 103. n 234 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. 10,000 men from the Netherlands, under the command of the Duke of Alva. But the vigilance of Cecil, Elizabeth's Secretary, frustrated the machinations of Rodolpho and AJva. The designs of Pius were afterward pursued by Gregory, Sixtus, and Clement. Gregory the Thirteenth, in 1580, sent his apostolic benediction to the Irish rebels, who, according to his infallibility, were, in the war with the English, fighting against the friends of heresy and the enemies of God. The pontiff accompanied this benediction to the Irish army with a plenary pardon of all sins, as to the crusaders who marched for the recovery of the Holy Land. He supported his benediction aiid remission with a levy of 2000 men raised in the Ecclesias- tical states. Sixtus the Fifth also fulminated anathemas and deposition against Elizabeth ; and urged Spain to second his maledictions by military expeditions to Ireland. Clement the luighth, in 1600, loaded Oviedo and La Cerda, whom Philip the Spanish king had despatched to Ireland, with crusading indul- gences to all who would arm in defence of the faith.' The Spanish king, induced by the Roman Pontiff, sent two expeditions to Ireland, under Lerda and Aquilla, with arms, ammunition, men, and money. The university of Salamanca, in the meantime, as well as that of Valladolid, celebrated for learning and Catholicism, deliberated, in 1603, on the lawful- ness of the war waged by the Irish against the English. The Salamancan theologians, after mature consideration, decided in favor of its legality, and of supporting the army of the faith under the command of O'Neal, prince of Tyrone, against the queen of England. The learned doctors, at the same time, determined against the lawfulness of njsisting O'Neal, who was the defender of Catholicism against heresy. The warriors of the faith, according to the Spanish univf rsity, were sowing right- eousness and would reap an eternal recompense ; while those who supported the English committed a mortal sin, and would suffer, if they persisted, the reward of iniquity. This sentence proceeded on the principle, which the Salamancans assumed as certain, that the Roman pontiff had a right to use the secular arm ag:ainst the deserters of the faith and the impugners of Catholicism.' The university of Valladolid agreed with that of Salamanca ; and both, on the occasion, differed from their modern reply in 1778 to Pitt the British statesman. The Roman Pontiffs, in these and various other instances, 1 Mageogh. 3. 437, 542, 549. Thuan. 4. 531. 2 Magno cum merit.o et spe maxima retributionis astsmse. M."."co£?h " 595 Stafford, 285. Tanquam certum est accipiendum, posse Romanum Pontificem tidei desertores. et eos, qui Catholioam religionem oppugnant, armis comneUere Mageogh. 3. 595, Slavm, 193. rr s , r- lis^ * DETHRONEMENT OF KINGS TAUGHT BY THE POPES. 236 shewed, in practical illustration, their assumption of temporal authority. But these viceroys of heaven also taught what they practised ; and inculcated the theory in their bulls, as well as the execution in fact The partisans of the French system indeed have, with the assistance of shuflBling and sophistry, endeavored to explain this principle out of the pontifical decre- tals. Doctor Slavin, in the Maynooth examination, has, on this topic, exhibited a world of quibbling, chicanery, and Jesuitism. The learned doctor, with admirable dexterity, plays the artillery of misrepresentation and hair-breadth distinctions. He main- tains that no pope, speaking from the chair, ever proposed this doctrine to the church, to be believed as revealed and held a» an article of faith. Doctor Higgins, on the same occasion, and with more candor and dogmatism than Slavin, asserted, that no pontiff defined, for the belief of the faithful, that the ponti- fical power of dethroning kings was founded on divine right.^ These misrepresentations and evasions, however, will vanish before a plain unvarnished statement of facts. These facts may be supplied from the bulls and definitions of Gregory, Boniface, Paul, Pius, and Sixtus. Gregory taught the principle of the dethronement of kings, with as much decision and in as unequivocal a manner as ne wielded the exercise. His infallibility, in a Roman council in 1076, decreed that the power of binding and loosing in heaven and earth, which ex tided to temporals as well as to spirituals, and by which he deposed the emperor Henry, was given to the pontiff by God. Gregory, in consequence, degraded his imperial majesty in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The sentence, he pronounced in council, and therefore in an official capacity. He acted, he declared, by the authority of God, and therefore by divine right.'^ Gregory afterwards vindicated his conduct in a letter to Her- man, who requested information on this subject. The act, he said, ' was warranted by many certain scriptural proofs,' and quoted, as a specimen, the words of Jesus conferring the power of the keys. He represented, ' the Holy Fathers as agreeing in his favor with one spirit and with one voice.' The contrary opinion his holiness called madness, fatuity, impudence, and idolatry. Those who opposed, he styled wild beasts, the body of Satan, and members of the devil and antichrist.^ Philip, the ' Slavin, 189. Higgins, 275. 2 Labb. 12. 498, 499, 6(K), 637, 638, 639. Dman. 1. 46. 3 Hujus rei, tam multa et certissima documenta in sacrarum scripturarum . -•_•- : J. t^ -J TJ lV4~ti. -...; 1C paguiis rcptiriuutai'. Tjrrcj;. au. iiciui. irjctlf. at I. xrj- Sancti patrea in hoc consentientes, et (juasi uno spiritu, et una voce concor- dantes. Labb. 12. 498. — Contra iilorum insaniam, qui iiefando ore garriunt. — Pro magna fatuitate. Scelus idololatriee incurrunt. Labb. 12. 380, 497, 498. mmmmmimmm mmmm. 236 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. French monarch whose soul and kingdom, Gregoiy affirmed, were in the pontiff's power, his holiness denominated a raven- an^dThfClVShT '^'''' '"' ''^ ^^^"^ ^'^°'^' ^^"^-' ..^.""^^^f followed the footetepsof Gregory. The Roman pontiff, SJ!i J'/r^^"" ^'',^"" ^^^'"'* ^^^'P' '^elds, according to the words of the Gospel, two swords, the spiritual and the temporal. He who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of the pope, misunderstands the words of our Lord.' His infallibiUty applies to the pope, the language of Jeremiah, ' I have set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms.' This power, con- tinues his holiness, 'is not human, but rather divine, and was conferred by divine authority on Peter for himself and his suc- S^' f ^«' *h5,refore who resists this power, resists the insti- tution of God. The subjection of all men to the Roman pontiff is whoUy necessary for salvation.' All this the pontiff declared, asserted, pronounced, and defined." ^.^^^^?'i**'°i''"''^' ^"^^ ^^""^^ ^^"^'^ *l^at the pontiff, in these words, defines the pope's temporal power from the chair, and proposes It, as an article of faith, to the whole church. Accord- ing to Gibert, Boniface defined that the earthly is subject to the spiritual power, so that the former may, by the latter, be 'Zn !?1^''^ ^y?rthrown.' 'Boniface,' says Maimbourg. proposed the pontifical sovereignty over all earthly kingdom!, m temporals as weU as m spirituals, to all as an article of faith necessary for salvation.' ' Boniface,' according to Caron, 'de- fined from the chair, that the French king w^ subject to the Roman pontiff m temporals as in spirituals.' Durand, accord- ingly, states, agreeably to the canon law, that 'the pontiff by swords'^^"'''''"'' ""^ ^°'^' ^^^^^ ^""^^ *^^ temporal and spiritual Paul and Pius, in their bulls against Henry and Elizabeth, represented themselves as ' the vicegerents of God,' who gave M?X:rrun^?i5ie?ntr&b. l^,t^i -^^" Bunt-Membra diab^li. DoL^f constft,^ /« temporalem gladium esse negat, male verbum attendit iJonuni . constitui te hodie super gentes et regna. Ore Divino Petro data STre'shtrDTo^dTaT'^"?- ^•"if'J^^' 'git-fhuicpotest^TDefsLordt natae resistit, Dei ordmatiom resistit. Extrav. Comm. I. 8. I » JJomfacius VIII. definit, terrenara poteatatem spirituali ita subdi ut ilia possit ab ista mstitui et destitui. Gibert, 2. 513 ^^""^^ "* ^'''^' "* »^'* Bomface propose k tous les fiddles, comme un article de foi. dont la nr<5an.» eat; ucucBsaire a salut. Alaimbourg, 129 ' >.abS^i*,^'°/**'°*'^^'',^''^^*^«'*'''^- C"o°- °- II- Papa utrumque gladium habet, scilicet, temporalem et spiritualem, ex commissione Dei. Dumi. 1 51 PAPAL POWER OF DEPOSING MADE AN ABTICLE OF FAITH. 237 the pontiffs the sovereignty above kings, and set them, in the language of Jeremiah, 'over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build and to plant.' Sixtus, also, in his bull against Henry of Navarre, boasted of ' the immense power of the eternal king conferred on Peter and his successors, who in consequence could, not by human but divine institution, cast from their thrones the most powerful monarchs as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer.'^ These are a few specimens of the temporal authority which the Roman viceroys of heaven assumed over earthly kings. These insults on royalty were not the mere acts of the Roman pontiffs. Pontifical deposition of kings was sanctioned by eight general, holy, apostolic, Roman councils. These were the councils of the Lateran, Lyons, Vienna, Pisa, Constance, Basil, Lateran, and Trent. The fourth council of the Lateran, in its third canon, enacted formal regulations for the dethronement of refractory kings. The offending sovereign, according to these regulations, 'is first to be excommunicated by his metropolitan and suflft-agans; and, if he should afterward persist in his contumacy for a year, the Roman pontiff, the vicegerent of God, is empowered to degrade the obstinate monarch, absolve his subjects from their fealty, and transfer his dominions to any adventurer, who may invade his territory and become the champion of Catholicism.' ^ This assembly consisted of about 1,300 members. The Greek and the Roman emperors attended, and many other sovereigns in person or by their ambassadors. All these potentates, in the true spirit of servility and superstition, consented, under certain conditions, to degradation by his Roman supremacy. This enactment was indeed the debasement of majesty. The general council of Lyons pronounced sentence of depo- sition against Frederic the Second. This emperor was tho object of many papal denunciations, and was cursed by Honorius, Gregory, and Innocent. Honorius anathematized and deposed Frederic, and freed his subjects from their oath of fidelity. Gregory the Ninth, says Heinricius and Du Pin, 'proclaimed a holy war against Frederic, and cursed him with all possible 1 Cherub, 2. 704. Jerem. I. 10. Mageogh. 3. 409. Thuan. 4. 301. Sixtus dixit, se supremam in omnes reges et principes universaj terrao, cuuc- tosque populos, gentes, et uationes, non humana sea Dirina institutione sibi traclitam potestatem obtinere. Barclay, 101. c. 13. Regna et principatus, cui et quando voluerit, dare vel auferre possit. Barclay,?. ^ Vassaios ab ejus tidelitate, denunciat absolutos, et terram exponat catho- licis occupandam, qui earn possideant. Binius, 8. 807. Labb. 13. 833. Alex. 21. 599. Du Pin, 571. wmgm. 238 TEE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. solemnity.' ' ' His holiness/ says Paris, ' consigned his majesty to the devil for destruction.'' His infallibility's sentence, in- deed, is a beautiful and perfect specimen of pontifical execration. His holiness, seven times in succession and nearly in a breath, excommunicated and anathematized his imperial majesty, ' in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,' and absolved his subjects from their oath of fidelity. The emperor, however, did not take all the hierarch's kindness and compliments for nothing. His majesty, in return and in the overflowings of gratitude to his benefactor, called his holiness, ' Balaam, Anti- christ, the Prince of Darkness, and the great dragon that deceives the nations.' ^ Innocent the Fourth, in 1245, in the general council of Lyons, repeated this sentence of degradation. His infallibility's denun- ciation, on the occasion, was a master-piece of abuse and impre- cation. The pontiff compared the emperor, ' to Pharaoh and to a serpent, and accused his majesty of iniqaity, sacrilege, treachery, profaneness, perjury, assassination, adultery, schism, heresy, and church-robbery.' Having in these polite and flattering terms characterized his sovereign as an emissary of Satan, his holiness proceeded, without hesitation and in the language of blasphemy, to represent himself, as 'the vicegerent of God, to whom, in the person of Peter, was committed the power of binding and loos- ing, and who therefore postiessed authority over emperors and kings.' The emperor's dethronement being pronounced by the viceroy of heaven, was, according to his infallibility, 'from God himself* His denunciations, hurling Frederic from all honor and dignity, his supremacy thundered in full council, and with such vociferation and fury, that he filled the whole audience with astonishment and dismay. The emperor's vassals, absolved from all fealty, his holiness prohibited, by apostolic authority and on pain of excommunication, to obey Frederic, or to lend the fallen monarch any aid or favor. This sentence was pronounced 'in full synod, after mature and diligent deliberation, and with the consent of the holy coun- cil.'« Du Pin, indeed, forgetful of his usual candor, has recourse 1 Cum quanta potest solemnitate devovet. Du Pin, 547. Giannon. XVII. 1. Paris, 470. Heinricius, Ann. 1227. Canisius, 4. 181. 2 Dominus Papa Satanae dederit in Perditicnem. M. Paris, 542. Omnes qui ei fidelitatis juramento tennntur, decemendo ab observatione juramenti hujua- modi absolutes. Heinricius, Ann 1227. Canisius. 4. 183. » C'est le grand Dragon, qui s^duit TUnivers, rAnteohrist, un autre Balaam, etun Prince de T^nfebres. Bruy. 3. 192. * Ipsum velut hostem ecclesi» privandi imperio condemnavit. Trivettus. Ann. 1245. Dachery, 3. 193. Bm. 8. 852. Alex. 21. 733. if/jum. ^ Cum sacrosancto concilio, del beratione praehabita matura et diligenti. P 651. Labb. 14. 61. ns. SYNODAL DEPOSITIONS OF SOVEREIGNS. 239 on this occatuon to Jesuitism ; and represents the pontifical sentence as hasty, and the sole act of Innocent. This is a gioss misstatement. Thaddeus, the emperor's advocate, wa« allowed to plead his cause, and the sentence was deferred for several days for the purpose of affording his majesty an opportunity ot personal attendance. The prelacy, in the synodal denunciation, concurred with the portiff. ' The pope and the bishops, sitting in^council, lighted tapevs, and thundered,' says Paris, 'in frightful fulminations against the emperor.*' Frederic, therefore, had the honor to be not only dethroned, but also excommunicated and cursed with candle light in a universal, infallible, holy, Roman council. This testimony of Paris is corroborated by Martin and Nangis.'' The sentence on the atrocious Frederic was, says Nangis, pronounced after ' ;' 'r^ent previous delibera- tion with the assembled prelacy.' In;; :ent, says Pope Martin, ' denounced the notorious Frederic at Lyons with the approba- tion of the council.' , The general council of Lyons issued another canon of a similar kind, but of a more general application. ' Any prince or other person, civil or ecclesiastical, who becomes principal or accessory to the assassination of a Christian, or who defends or conceals the assassins,' incurs, according to this assembly in its canon on homicide, 'the sentence of excommunication and deposition from all honor and dignity.'^ This canon is not, like the sentence against Frederic, restricted to an individual ; but extends to all sovereign- who are guilty of a certain crime. The Pope decreed this enactment in proper form, and with the approbation of the holy general council. The general council of Vienna, in 1311, under the presidency of Clement, declared that ' the emperor was bound to the Pope, from whom he received unction and coronation, by an oath of fealty.V This, in other words, was to proclaim the emperor the subject or vassal of the papacy. Former emperors, according to the assembly of Vienna, had submitted to this obligation, which still, according to the same infallible authority, ' retained its validity.'* His holiness, on the occasion, also reminded his majesty of the superiority which the pontiff, beyond all doubt, 1 Dominus Papa et prcelati, assidentes concilio, candelis acceusia, in indictum imperatorem Fredericum terribiJiterfulgurarunt. Paris, 652. Giann. XVII. 3. ^ Diligenti deliberatione praehabita cum Drselatis ibidem congregatis super nefandia Frederici. Nangis, Ann. 1045 Dachery, 3 35. Innocentius, memoratum Fredericum in concilio Lugdunensi, eodem appro- bante, concilio denunoiavit. Dachery, 3, 684. 3 Saori approbatione concilii, statuimus, ut depositionis incurrat sententiam. * Declaramua ilia juramenta praadicta iidelitatis existere. Pithon, 356. Bin. 8. 909. Clem. L. II. Tit. 9 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. possessed in the empire, and which, in the person of Peter, he had received from the King of Kings. ' The grandest emperors and kings,' Clement declared, ' owed subjection to the eccle- siastical power which was derived from God.'' The general council of Pisa, in its fifteenth session, forbade all Christians of every order and dignity, even emperors and kings, to obey Benedict or Gregory, or to afford these degraded pontiffs council or favor. All who disobeyed this injunction, though clothed with regal or imperial authority, the Pisans sentenced to excommunication and the other punishments awarded by the divine precepts and sacred canons.'^ The general council of Constance, in its fourteenth session, condemned all, whether emperors or kings, who should annoy the synod or violate its canons, to perpetual infamy, the ban of the empire, and the spoliation of all regal and imperial autho- rity. "The same infallible assembly, in its seventeenth session, excommunicated and deposed all persons, whether clergy or laity, bishops or cardinals, princes or kings, who should throw any obstacle or molestation in the way of the emperor Sigis- mond in his journey to Arragon, to confer with king Ferdinand for the extinction of schism in the church. This enactment roused the indignation even of the Jesuit Maimbourg, who styled it an insult on all sovereigns, especially the French king, through whose dominions Sigis' nd had to pass. Du Pin on this topic, instead of his accust< ed candor, musters an array of shuffling and misrepresentati, though otherwise unconcerned, are excommunicated and sentenced to eternal malediction.* The same synod, in its twenty-fourth session, anathematized the temporal lords of every rank and condition, who compel their vassals or any other persons to marry. Eight infallible councils in this manner, sanctioned a principle, incompatible with politi- cal government, fraught with war and perjury, and calculated to unhinge and disorganize all civil society. All the beneficed clergy in the Romish communion are, according to the bull of Pius the Fourth, sworn to all these, councils and canons. The following is contained in their oath. ' I receive and profess all that the sacred canons and general councils have delivered, defined, and declared ; and I shall endeavor, to the utmost of my power, to cause the same to be held, taught, and preached. This I promise, vow, and swear, so help me God and these Holy Gospels.'* Any person who 1 Labb. 17, '-1. Crabb. 3. 120. » Labb. 1&. 726. Bin. 9. 153. Labb. 19. 96C. 3 SynoduB regem excommunicat et Drivat ea civitate an lorn in nnA/Jnolli oonj' mittendi copiam fecent. 'J'huan. 6. 241. Du Pin, 3.645. PaoK VIIL * Spectatores excommunicationis ac perpetuBB maiedictionis vinc"lo toaeantur Labb. 20. 192. Omnia a sacris canonibui et oecumemcia oonoilii.i triklit.., djfini« ., w' d«clar»tc, r 242 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. should infringe or contradict this declaration, will and com- mandment, incurs, according to his infallibility, the indignation of Almighty God, and the blessed apostles Peter and Paul. The reformation introduced the fourth era on this subject of the deposing power. Protestantism, from its infancy, avowed its hostility to this principle in all its forms. A struggle, there- fore, on this topic, has existed for three hundred years between the 'spirit of Protestantism and the ambition of the Papacy. 'T^he Roman Pontiffs, for a long period after the check which the reformation gave their usurpation, continued to prefer their claims, and to indulge, with fond and lingering attachment, in dreams of former greatness. These patrons of spiritual domi- nations persisted in fulminating their anathemas with great resolution, indeed, but little terror. The denunciations which had been hurled with more efficiency by a Gregory and a Boniface, were wielded, but without effect, by a Paul, a Pius, and a Sixtus. „ , x v ^u Paul Pius, and Sixtus, even after the commencement ot the reformation, thundered deposition against Henry and Elizabeth of England and Henry of Navar.e. Paul the Fifth, in 1567, issued the bull in C(E,na. This, says Giannone, overthrows the sovereignty of kings, subverts regal sovereignty, and sub- iects political government to the power of the papacy. His infallibility in this publication excommunicated, by wholesale, all monarchs who countenanced heresy, as well as all who, without special licence from the apostolic see, exact, m their own dominions, new taxes and customs. The excommunica- tion which, according to his Supremacy's directions, is published every year, extends to all the Protestant sovereigns in the world His holiness also enacted ecclesiastical laws against civil government, which, if carried into full execution, would overturn all regal authority and transfer all causes to episcopal iurisdiction.^ This bull, his holiness ordered to be published on Holy Thursday and to become the law of all Chnstendom Paul the Fifth, in 1609, issued a bull, forbidding the English who were attached to Romanism to take the oath of allegiance, which had been prescribed by the king and contained a dis- avowal of the deposing maxim. The oath, according to his in- fallibility, comprehended many things inimical to the faith and to salvation. Bellarmine, on the occasion, subsidized the pon- tiff, and, in support of his theory, quoted Basil, Gregory, Leo, inrluWtanter reciDio atque profiteer. lUis quorum cura ad me, in munere meo, Bnectabit. teneri, doceri', et prsedicari, quauium m me ent, curaiuruni, ;;gi; lucm KdeoNoveo, ac juri. §ic me Deus adjuvet. et h«c sanota Dei evaugelu*. Labb. 20. 222. , „, 1 Giamion. XX3^I1I. 4. Maimb. 83. PAPAL BULL AGAINST OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO JAMES I. 24$ Alan, Cajetan, Sixtus, Mendoza, Sanderus, and Pedrezza. The king wrote an apology for the oath ; and the Pope called the royal publication heretical, and subjected its reader to excom- munication. But his infallibility's anathemas were vain.^ Many took the prescribed oath ; and the Parisian university, in defiance of pontifical denunciations, declared it lawful. Paul the Fifth also canonized Gregory the Seventh, and in- serted an office in the Roman breviary for the day of his festi- val. This eulogizes Gregory's dethronement of Henry, as an act of piety and heroism. The following are extracts from the work of blasphemy. ' Gregory shone like the sun in the house of God. He deprived Henry of his kingdom, and freed his vassals from their fealty. All the earth is full of his doctrine. He has departed to heaven. Enable us, by his example and advocacy, to overcome all adversity. May he intercede for the Bins of the people.'" Alexander the Seventh introduced this office, in all its senselessness and impiety, into the Roman basilics. Clement the Eleventh, in 1704, recommended it to the Cistercians, and, in 1710, to the Benedictines. The impiety was approved by Benedict the Thirteenth, and retains its place in the Roman breviary, though rejected by most European nations.' Pius the Seventh, so late as 1809, excommunicated and ana- thematized Bonaparte. His holiness, in the nineteenth century, proceeded, though in captivity, to pronounce against the empe- ror sentence of excommunication, and all the punishments in- flicted by the sacred canons, the apostolic constitutions, and the general councils. His anathemas, which were pointless as Priam's dart, Pius hurled from his spiritual artillery against Napoleon, on account of his military occupation of the ecclesi- astical states.* No pope or council has ever disclaimed the powor of de- throning kings, though time and experience have suggested caution in its ase. This fact, Crotty, Anglade, and Slevin ad- mitted in their examination at Maynooth." Many of the pon- tiffs, knowing the inutility of avowing the claim, have wisely allowed it to sleep in oblivion and inactivity, till occasion may 1 Thuan. CXXXVin. 12. Du Pin, 670. Thuau. 6. 425. J" Da nobis ejus exemplo et intercessione omnia adversantia fortiter snperare. Sieut sol eflFulsit in domo Dei. Henricum regno privavit atque subditos popu- los fidb ei data liberavit. Migravit in coelum. Onmis terra doctrina ejus repleta est. Ipse intercedat pro peccatis omnium populonim. Bruy. 2. 491 493. Crottv. 85. Bre. Rom. fi 7. Offinia Prnnria '7R — 77 » Cons. Miscel. 35. 197, 244. ^ ' * Pie V II. lan^a une buUe d'excommunication centre les auteum, faut«urn,et ex<5cuteurs des violences excretes centre le saint-siege. Graviire, 471. * Crotty, 84. Anglade, 182. Slavin, 200. Sfe ('ift?ai5i>iif'r''*it6«?»8F- ' 244 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. I awake its slumbering energy. But no express renunciation of S prerogative haslver issued from the Vatican. The councils also like the pontiffs, have, in no instance since the eleventh century, disavowed the assumed right of degrading monarchs^ Anothe^fact is worthy of observation. The Conpgation of the Index has never condemned the works of Bellarmme, Ba- ronius Perron, Lessius and other authors, who have supported this claim of the papacy with devoted advocacy. The expur- gatorian index has given no quarter to the P^^rons of heresy, whose literary works have been mangled, mutilated, and con- demned. But the society, which, in cases of schism and protes- tantism, has proceeded with inquisitorial zeal, has unitormly treated the abettors of the deposing power with unusual tor- bearance and courtesy. The authority of the Roman pontiff to dethrone sovereigns, however, since the days of Luther and Calvin has declined. The general opinion, says Anglade, even in popish Christendom except the papal states, is against this principle The usur- pation has been denied or deprecated by some of the boldest partisans of Catholicism. Two reasons, however which sufficiently account for this fact, may be assigned for the disa- vowal. One reason arises from the utter want of power to enforce the claim. According to Aquinas ' the church, in its infancy, tolerated the faithful to obey Juhan, through want of powto repress earthly princes.' The loyalty of the pristme Llesia^tical community, clergy and laity, saints, confessors and martyrs, the angelic doctor resolves into weakness^ Bellarmine, foUowing Aquinas, ' represents inability, as the rLon, which prevented the Christians from deposing Nero, Diocletian, Julian, and Valens."* . j. . a ^^^ The Christian commonwealth, m its early state, soared tar above all such meanness and hypocrisy. But the Popish com- munity, for near 300 years, have acted on the prudent but un- principled maxims of Aquinas and Bellarmine. The Reforma- tion detached nearly half the European nations from the do- mination of the Romish superstition, and, by this means, enfeebled its power. Protestantism, in strength, soon became a formidable rival of popery ; and the two religions, the Romish and the Reformed, now divide Christendom m nearly equal proportions. The defection of so many states has. in a great measure, rendered Rome's spiritual artiUery useless, and spoiled 1 Anglade, 158. . . , .t--j. _-i.— i-*-™. +->«~.nnH nrinninflU a HVplpsiam in sua novitAte, nonaum aabuuai. i;uttr=t.t.i,^... ~....-— -- r--.--r_ JuiianLfet Valentem.idf^^^^ deficerant vires temporales Chmtiams. BeU. V. 7. EFFECTS OF THE REFORMATION ON THE DEPOSING POWER. 245 her anathemas of nearly all their terrora. Kings have become wiser, and learned to contemn ecclesiastical denunciations. Rome, therefore, according to her usual policy, has ceased to claim an authority which she can no longer exercise with suc- cess. But raise her to her former elevation, and, ancient ambition returning with reviving power, she would reassume the attitude, in which she once launched the thunders of ex- communication, affrighted monarchs, interdicted nations, and wielded all the destinies of man. A second reason for the renunciation of this maxim -arises from the effects of the reformation on public opinion. These effects are not to be estimated merely by their influence on those who have embraced the protestant communion ; but on those also, who, though they disclaim the name, have imbibed something of its spirit. Many, at the present day, remaining still in the bosom of the Romish communion, have been rea- soned or ridiculed out of some of its loftiest pretensions. Senti- ments, in consequence, may, on this subject, be now uttered with safety, which would formerly have been attended with danger. Answers from Alcala, Valladolid, and Salamanca, similar to those returned in our day to the celebrated questions of Pitt, would, in the sixteenth century, have thrown the doors of the Spanish inquisition wide open for the reception of theii authors. The light of the reformation exposed the misshapen fabric of papal superstition, in all its frightful deformity, to the gaze of the world ; whilst the champions of protestantism pointed their heaviest artillery against the mighty mass, and carried destruction into its frowning battlements, which threatened the subversion of political government and the dis- organization of civil society. Its defenders, in consequence, abandoned these holds, wh.oh they found untenable by all their spiritual tactics and artillery. The king-deposing power of the papacy, however, is never likely to relurn. The days of its glory, in all probability, have, on this usurped claim, for ever departed. Kings, in general, even in the times of literary and religious darkness, resisted this usurpation ; and often, especially in France, with decided success. Monarchs, even in the middle ages, frequently con- temned the thunder of excommunication fulminated from the Vatican. Those, therefore, who successfally contended for their rights in a period of gross superstition, will hardly permit a resumption of pontifical usurpation when philosophy and the reformation have poured a flood of light over Christen- dom. Prophecy, on the contrary, teaches, in clear terms, thai Rome will fall under the detestation and fury of regal autho- 246 ' THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. rity. Kings, in the strong language of Revelation, ' shall hate her, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh and burn her with fire.' The sovereigns of the earth, it would appear, will be made instrumental in overthrowing the ecclesiastical despotism, the fulminations of whose spiritual artillery often shook the thrones of the world and made monarchs tremble. CHAPTER VII. PERSECUTION. PMTliNBIONS OP THE PAP ACT— THREE PKKI0D8— FIRST PERIOD : RHL1OI0U8 LIBHR- TT— SECOND PERIOD : PERSECUTION OF PAGANISM— PERSECUTION OP HBRBSI— PER3E0UTINO KINGS, SAINTS, THEOLOGIANS, POPES, AND 0OUNC1L8— OROSADM AGAINST THE ALBIGENSES— INQUISITION— THIRD PERIOD : PERSECUTING DOCTORS, POPES, COUNCILS, AND KINGS —PERSECUTIONS IN GERMANY, NETHERLANDS, SPAIN, ■ FRANCE, AND ENGLAND— DIVERSITY OF SYSTEMS- POPISH DISAVOWAL OF P«B- 8B0UTI0N— MODERN OPINIONS. The popedom, raised to the supremacy in church and state, challenged a controlling power over the partisans of heresy, schism and apostasy, as well as over kings. The sovereign pontiffs, in the madness of ambition and despotism, affected the dominion over all mankind, and called the arm of the civil magistracy to their aid, to enforce their pretensions. Schisma- tics and heretics, accordingly, though separated from the Romish communion, are reckoned subject to its authority, as rebels and deserters are amenable to the civil and military laws of their country. The traitor may be punished by the state for his perfidy; and the apostate, in like manner, may, from the church, undergo excommunication and anathemas.* • He may even, according to Aquinas, Dens, and the university of Sala- manca, followed by that of Valladolid, be compelled by anns to return to the profession of Catholicism.* This assumption of power and authority has given rise, as might be expected, to long and sanguinary persecutions. Christendom, on the subject of persecution, has witnessed three distinct periods. One commenced with the era of Re- demption, and ended at the accession of Constantine, the first » Neque illi magis ad ecclesiam spectant, quam transfugee ad exercitum perti- neant, a quo deficerunt. Non negandum tamen quin in ecclesiee potestate sint. Cat. Trid. 54. Slavin, 216, 217. Kenney, 399. Ecclesia in eos, juriBdictioneim habet. Dens, 2, 80. » Posse Romanum Pontificem fidei desertores, armia compellere.^ Mageog. 3. 395. Hoiretici sunt etiam corporaiiter couipeileDdi. Aquin. 2, 42. haErotici 8unt compellendi, ut fidem teneant. Aquinas, IT. 10. VIII. Cogi poasuiit, etiam poenis corporalibus, ut revertantur ad fidem. Dens, 2. 80. '"^ 248 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Christian emperor. During this period, Christians disavowed all persecution both in theory and action. The second period extended from Constantine till the Reformation. This long lapse of years was more or less characterized by continual in- tolerance and persecution. The third period occupies the time which has intervened between the Reformation and the present day. This interval has been diversified by many jarring opinions on the tbpic of persecution, the rights of conscience, and religious liberty. The world saw more than three ages pass, from the era of Christianity till the accession of Constantine, before its profes- sors disgraced their religion by the persecution of heathenism ^r heresj'. Intolerance is a manifest innovation on the u^age of antiquity, and one of the variations of Romanism, The ancients, Du ^n remarks, 'inflicted no ecclesiastical punish- ment but excommunication, and never employed the civil authority against the abettors of heresy and rebellion.' Du Pia has been followed by Giannone, Mariana, Moreri, and Du Hamel.^ The Messiah, the apostles, and the fathers for several ages, opposed, in word and deed, all compulsion and persecution. The Son of Man came not to destroy but to save the lives of men. This he stated to his apostles, when, in mistaken zeal, they wished, like Elias, to command fire from heaven to con- sume the Samaritans, who, actuated by the spirit of party, were hostile to the Jews. His empire, he declared, is spiritual ; and is not, like Paganism, Popery, or Islamism, to be established or enlarged by the roar of artillery, the din of battle, or the horrors of war. When Peter struck Malchus, Jesus healed the wound, and condemned, in emphatical language, the use of the sword in the defence of his kingdom.^ No two characters, indeed, ever displayed a more striking contrast than the Messiah and an inquisitor. The Messiah was clothed in mercy. The inquisitor was drenched in blood. The tear of compassion stained the cheek of the divine Savior. The storm of vengeance infuriated the ftice of the inquisitorial tormentor. The Son of God on earth was always persecuted ; but never retaliated. His ardent petitions, on the contrary, ascended to heaven, supplicating pity for his enemies' weakness and pardon for their sins. The apostles walked in the footsteps of their divine Master. 1 Inauditum certe est apud antiques quemquam alia quam excommunicationis aut depositionis poena fuisse ab ecclesia mulctatum. Du Pin, 448. Multia annis, eeclesia civili autcoritate adversus hsereticos et rebelles minime usa est. Du Pin, 449. Giannon. XV. 4. Mariana, 4. 365. Moreri, 5,li!y. Du Hamel, 691. 2 Matt, xxxvi. 51, 52. Mark xiv. 47. Luke ix. 56, and xxii. 51. John xyiii. 10, 36. r^ RELIGIOUS LIBERTY OF THE FIRST TQREE CENTURIES. 24.^ The inspired heralds of the gospel recommended their message by holiness and miracles, accompanied with the influence of divine energy. Persecution from the powers of earth and hell, from demons and men, was their predicted destiny. But these messengers of peace, when execrated, blessed, and when perse- cuted, showed no wish for retaliation ; but, in submission to their Master's precept, returned good for evil. The fathers, for several ages, copied the example of their Lord and the apostles. The ancients, Du Pin observes, 'taught with unanimous consent the unlawfulness of compulsion and punishment in religion.'^ The sentiments of Origen, Ter- tuUian, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Bernard on this topic are worthy of transcription and imitation. Christians, says Origen, ' should not use the sword.' Religion, according to Tertullian, 'does not compel religion.' According to Cyprian, 'the King of Zion alone has authority to break the earth^ vessels ; nor can any claim the power which the Father hath given to the Son.' Lactantius, in the following statement, is still more full and explicit, ' Coercion and injury are unnecessary, for religion cannot be forced. Barbarity and piety are far different; nor can truth be conjoined with violence or justice with cruelty. Reli- gion is to be defended, not by killing, but by dying ; not by inhumanity, but by patience.' Bernard, at a later date, enjoins, in similar language, the same toleration. ' Faith is conveyed by persuasion, not by constraint. The patrons of heresy are to be assailed, not by arms, but by arguments. Attack them, but with the word, not with the sword.'" Du Pm has shown that the ideas of Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Bernard were entertained by Gregory, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Augustine, Damian, and Anselm. The second period, from Constantino till the Reformation, was characterized, more or less, by uninterrupted persecution and constraint, as the former was by toleration and hberty. This emperor's proselytism to Christianity, in the beginning of the fourth century, commenced a new era in the Christian commonwealth. The church, in his reign, obtained a new 1 Sancti Patres, unanimi consensu decent ecclesiam carere omni gladio mate- riali ad homines cogendos et punieudos. Du Pin, 450. • ok vr 2 Adversus neniinem, gladio uti debemus. Ongen, in Matt. xxvi. 25. JNec religionis eat cogere religionem. Tertul. ad Scap. 69. Fictiha vasa confrin- eere Domino soU concessum est cui et virgaferrea data est. Nee q"»squam sihi quod soli filio Pater tribuit, vindicare potest. Cyprian, 100. Ep 54. ISon est opus vi et injuria quia religio cogi non potest. Longe diversa sunt carnihcina et pietas; nee potest aut Veritas cum vi, aut justitia cum crudelitate conjungi. Defendenda enim religio est non occidendo sed monendo, non saevitia, sed^pa- tientia. Lactan. V. 19. Fides suadeiida, non imponcnda. xjcruaru, ;uu. Haeretici capiantur, dico non armis, sed argumentis. Aggredere eos sed verbo, non ferro. Bernard, 885. Serm. 64. F* 250 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. establishment; and the civil power began to sanction the ecclesiastical authority. The magistracy learned to act in unison with the clergy. The emperor, however, was not a persecutor of Paganism. He extended to Heathenism the tol- eration which he withheld from heresy. The prudent monarch, unwilling to alarm Pagan suspicion, advanced with slow and cautious steps to undermine the irregular and decayed fabric otgentilism. He condemned indeed the arts of divination, silenced the oracles of Polytheism which had been convicted ot fraud and falsehood, and demolished the temples of Phoenicia. Which, m the face of day, displayed all the abominations of prostitution to the honor of Venus. But he tolerated the priests, the immolations, and the worship of the Grecian and noman gods of antiquity.' Coustans and Constantius imitated the example of Constan- tme. J^acts Snd monuments still remain, to attest the public exercise of idolatry during their whole reign. Many temples were respected, o- at least spared; and the patrons of Pagan- ism, by permissia or connivance, enjoyed, notwithstanding the imperial laws, the luxury of sacrifices, processions, and festi- vals. Ihe emperors continued to bestow the honors of the army and the state on Christians and Heathens ; whilst wealth and honor, m many instances, patronized the declining institu- tions of Polytheism." ^ Julian's reign was characterized by apostasy, and Jovian's brevity. Valentmian was the friend of toleration. The perse- cution of Paganism commenced in the reign of Gratian, and continued through the reigns of Theodosius, Arcadius, and Jlonorius. Gratian and Theodosius were influenced by Ambro- sius Archbishop of Milan : and the clergy, in general, misap- plied the laws of the Jewish theocracy and the transactions of the Jewish annals, for the unchristian and base purpose of awakening the demon of persecution against the mouldering remains of Grecian and Roman superstition. Gratian abolished the pretensions of the Pagan pontiff, the honors of the priests and vestals, transferred their revenues to the use of the church, the state, and the army, and dissolved the ancient fabric of Polytheism, which had dishonored humanity for the length- ened period of eleven hundred years. Theodosius finished the work of destruction which Gratian had begun. He issued edicts of proscription against eastern and western gentilism. Cynegius, Jovius, and Gaudentius were commissioned to close the temples, destroy the instruments of 1 ^T^'J-}^ ^"«^^- Vi*- Con. II. 56, 60. Gibbon, c. 21. 22. Cod. Tbeod. XVI. Tit. 5. Gibbon, c. 28. PERSECUTION OF PAGANISM. 251 idolatry, and confiscate the consecrated property. Heavy fines were imposed on the use of frankincense and libations. The temples of the gods were afterwards demolished. The fairest structures of antiquity, the splendid and beautiful monuments of Grecian architecture, were, by mistaken and barbarian zeal, levelled with the dust. The sainted Martin, of Tours in Gaul, marched at the head of its tattered monks to the demoli- tion of thp fanes, the idols, and the consecrated groves of his extensive diocese. Martin's example was followed by Mar- cellus of Syria, whom Theodorus calls divine, and by Thoophi- lus, patriarch of Alexandria. A few of these grand edifices, however, were spared by the venality or the taste of the civil or ecclesiastical governors. The Carthaginian temple of the celestial Venus was converted into a Christian church ; and a simple consecration rescued from ruin the majestic dome of the Roman pantheon.' Gentilism, by these means, was, in the reign of Arcadius and Honorius, expelled from the Roman territory. Theodo- sius who was distinguished by his zeal for the extermination of Polytheism, questioned whether, in his time, a single Pagan remained in the empire. Its ruin affords perhaps the only example in the annals of time of the total extirpation of an ancient and popular superstition, and presents, in this point of view, a singular event in the history of the human mind." But the friend of Christianity and his species must, in many instances, lament the means by which the end was effected. Paganism was indeed an unwieldy and hideous system of abomination and folly : and its destruction, by lawful means, must have been the wish of every friend of God and man. But the means, in this case, often dishonoured the end. Coercion, in general, was substituted for conviction, and terror for the gospel. One blushes to read of a Symmachus and a Libanius, two heathen orators, pleading for reason and persua- sion in the propagation of religion ; whilst a Theodosius and an Ambrosius, a Christian emperor and a Christian bishop, urge violence and constraint. The whole scene opens a melancholy but striking prospect of human nature. The Christians, while few and powerless, deprecated the unhal- lowed weapons of persecution wielded with such fury by the Pagans. But the situation of the two is no sooner reversed, than the heathens, who were the former partisans of intoler- ance, recommend forbearance ; and the Christians, the fornier advocates of toleration, assume the unholy arms of proscrip- • Theoph. 49. Codex Theod. 6. 266—274. Giannon. III. 6. Godeav.. 3. 361. » Biaciola, 318. Cod. Theod. 6. 277—283. 252 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ■j j ■ j ^^^9^B ' 1 ij The hostility of the secular arm under the Emperors was not restricted to Gentiiism. Heresy, as well as heathenism, became the object of imperial persecution. Constjintine, till he was perverted by the tuition of the clergy, seems to have possesned correct views of religious liberty and the rights of conscience. The imperial edict of Milan conceived in the genuine spirit of liberality, was the greAt charter of toleration which conferred the privilege of choosing his own religion on each, individual of the Roman world. The beauty of this fair picture, however, as usual, was fading and transitory. Its mild features were Boon dashed with traits of harshness and severity. The empe- ror, influenced by his ecclesiastical tutors, imbibed the maxims of illiberality, and learned to punish men for consulting their own reason in the concerns of their own souls. Sovereigns, according to the sacerdotal theology of the day, acted in a two-fold capacity ; as Christians and as governors. Considered as Christians, kings in their personal character, should believe the truth as well as practise duty, which, as governors and in their official relation, they should enforce on their subjects. Offences against man, according to these clerical casuists, were less criminal' than against God. Theft and murder, of course, were less heinous than schism and heresy. The edicts of emperors, in consequence, came to be substituted for the gospel of God. Error, according to these theologians, was to be remedied by proscription ; which, according to com- mon sense, may produce hypocrisy, but can never enlighten the understanding or subduethe heart. Constantino, therefore, in conformity with this new, or rather old plan of instruction and proselytism, issued two penal laws against heresy ; and was followed in the hopeful project, by Valentinian, Gratian, Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius. Theodosius published fifteen, Arcadius twelve, and Honorius no less than eighteen of these inhuman and antichistian statutes. These are recorded in the Theodosian and Justinian codes, to the eternal infamy of the priestly and imperial authors.' The chief victims of persecution, during this period, were the Arians, Manicheans, Priscillianists, and Paulicians. Valenti- nian, Gratian, and Theodosius overwhelmed Arianism with de- struction, and clothed Trinitarianism with triumph. The Arians, however, under Constantius and Valens, Roman empe- rors, and Genseric and Hunneric, Vandal kings, retaliated, in their turn, in dreadful inhumanity and vengeance. Valenti- nian fined the Manichean doctors and interdicted the Mani- chean assemblies. Theodosius exposed them to infamy and 1 Theoph. 42, 45, 46. Codex Theod. XVI. Tit. 5. p. 104—190. '-jmt. \ PERSECUTION OF HERESY. 253 deprived them of the rights of citizens. Constantine, Oratian, Maximus, and Honoriua harassed and ruined the factions of bonatism, Priscillianism, and Pelagianism. The Paulicians were persecuted in the most dreadful manner, during the reigns of Constans, Constantine, Justinian, Leo, Michael, and Theodora. Ammianus, a heathen historian, and Chrysostom, a Roman saint, compare the mutual enmity of Christians at this time, to the fury of wild beasts.* Heresy, during this period, was punished ^ vith more or less severity, according to the offender's supposed criminality or obstinacy. The penalty was banishment, fine, confiscation, infamy, disqualification of buying and selling, or incapacity oi civil and military honor. The Roman code contained no law, sentencing persons guilty of heresy to death. Capital punish- ments, indeed, in some instances, were inflicted. This was the case with the unhappy Priscillian and some of his partisans, who were prosecuted by the inquisitorial Ithacius and sentenced by the usurping Maximus. But Maximus, on this occasion, exercised an illegal authority, as he had usurped the imperial power. The unlawful and unhallowed transaction displayed the baseness of the prosecutor and the tyranny of the emperor. The few that suffered capital punishment for sectarianism were, in general, also guilty or supposed to be guilty of treason or rebellion." The Roman laws, on the topic of persecution, continued in this state till the year 800, and in the eastern empire till its dissolution in 1453 by the Ottomans. An important change happened about the commencement of the ninth century. This consisted of the great eastern schism. The Greek and Latin churches were ront asunder and ceased to be governed by mutual laws. A new era, on the subject of heresy and its punishment, began at this time in the west, and lasted till the year 1100 of our redemption, comprehending a lapse of JJOO years. This period was distinguished by superstition, ignorance, insurrection, revolution, and confusion. Sectarianism, in the European nations, seemed, for three centuries, to be nearly extinguished. Egyptian darkness reigned and triumphed over learning and morality. The world sunk into a literary leth- argy ; and, in the language of some historians, slept the sleep of orthodoxy. Learning, philosophy, religious error, and secta- rianism reposed in inactivity, or fled from the view, amidst the 1 Codex Theod. 6. 113, 115, 120, 123. Godeau, 3. 9, 67. Cod. Theod. 6. 5, If) ipn lAci cirsrif^- j-iRtin. I. ■p. 71, 75. 88. NnUas infeataa hominibuBDestias, ut 'sunt'sibi ferales plerique Christianorum. Ammian. XXII. 5, KaOa'Kfp eripia a« Moreri. 6. 129. Giannon. XV. 4. VeUy, 3. 431. 2 Giannon, XV. 4. V i\ PERSECUTION OF HERESY. 265 oath of exculpation, were accounted guilty. Princes were admomshed to purify their dominions from heretical perversity; and, if they refused, their land might without hesitation be seized by the champions of Catholicism.^ This was the first law that made heresy a capital offence. The emperor also patronized the inquisition, and protected its agents of torture and malevolence. Lewis, in 1228, issued similar enactments. He published laws for the extirpation of heresy, and enjoined their execution on the barons and bailiffs.' He reudered the patrons and pro- tectors of error incapable of giving testimony, making a will, or succeeding to any honor or emolument. T' o sainted monarch encouraged the work of death, and in the language of Pope Innocent, diffused through the crusading army ' the natural and hereditary piety of the French kings.' He forced Raymond, Count of Toulouse, to undertake the extermination of heresy from his dominions, without sp. ing vassal or friend. Alfonso, king of Arragon, and several others copied the example of Frederic and Lewis.^ The emperors were sworn to exterminate heretics. The emperor Henry, according to Clement, in the council of Vienna took an oath, obliging his majesty to eradicate the professors and protectors of heterodoxy. A similar obligation" was im- posed on the emperor of Germany, even after the dawn of the Reformation. He was bound by a solemn oath to extirpate, even at the hazard of his life and dominions, all whom the pontiff condemned.^ Saints and pontiffs, in these deeds of inhumanity, imitated emperors and kings. Lewis, who enacted such statutes of cruelty, was a saint as well as a sovereign. Aquinas was actuated with the same demon of malevolence, and breathed the same spirit of barbarity. ' Heretics,' the angelic doctor declares, ' may not only be excommunicated but justly killed. Such, the church consigns to the secular arm, to be extermina- ted from the world by death.'* Dominic, Osma, Arnold, 1 Hi sunt lupi rapaces. Hi sunt angeli pessimi. Hi sunt filii pravitatum, a patre nequitise et f raudis auctore. Hi colubri, hi serpentes, qui latenter videntur inserpere. Debitse ultionis in eos gladium exeramus : decernimus, ut vivi in con- spectu hominum comburantur. Labb. 14. 25, 26. Du Pin 2. 486 ^Labb. 13. 1231. Velly, 4 134. Gibert, 1. 15. * Omnem hsBresim, schisma, et haereticos quoslibet fautores, receptatores, et defensores ipsoram exterminaret. Clem. II. Tit. 9. Bruy. 3. 373. Les Princes, et encore plus lea Empereurs, qui en font des sermens si solennels, itant ^troitement obligee sous peine des censures, d'extirper ccux que les papea ont condamnez, et d'y employer jusqu'i leurs 6tata et mSme leur vie. Paol. 1. * Hseretici possuntnon solum excommunicari, sedet juste occidi.....,Eccle8ia relinquit eum judici sjeculari mundo extermiuandum per mortem. Aquinas II " III." *° r 1 11 p. 48. /■• 256 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Conrad, Rainer, Guy, Castelnau, Guido, Rodolf, and a long train of saints and doctors might be named, who, for supporting the work of murder and extermination, were raised to the honors of canonization. The pontiffs, like the kings and saints, encouraged, with all their influenfce, the system of persecution and cruelty. Urban, Alexander, Lucius, Innocent, Clement, Honorius, and Martin gained an infamous notoriety for their ruthless and unre- lenting enactments against the part' sans of Albigensianism, Waldensianism, and Wickliffism. Urban the Second, in 1090, decided that the person, who, inflamed with zeal for Catholi- cism, should slay any of the excommunicated, was not guilty of murder.^ The assassination of a man under the sentence of excommunication, his infallibility accounted only a venial crima His holiness must have excelled in the knowledge of casuistry. His morality, however, Bruys characterized by the epithets diabolical and infernal.' Lucius the Third fulminated red-hot anathemas against the Waldenses, as well as against their protectors and patrons, and consigned them to the secular arm, to undergo condign vengeance in proportion to their criminality. Innocent the Fourth sanctioned the enactments of Frederic, which sentenced the partisans of error and apostasy to be burned alive. He commanded the house in which an Albigensian had been sheltered to be razed from the founda- tion. All these viceroys of heaven concurred in consigning to infamy any who should give the apostate from the faith either counsel or favor ; and in driving the magistracy to execute the sanguinary statutes, by interdicts and excommunication. The crusaders against the Albigenses enjoyed the same indulgences as those who marched to the Holy Land. Supported by the mercy of Omnipotent God and the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, Innocent" granted these lioly waniors a full pardon of all sin, and eternal salvation in heaven.' Provincial and national council, breathed the same spirit of persecution, as kings and pontiffs. These were many. But the most sanguinary of them met at Toledo, Oxford, Avignon, Tours, Lavaur, Montpellier, Narbonne, Albi, and Tolosa, Anno 630 ; the national council of Toledo, in its third canon, promulgated an enactment for the expulsion of all Jews from Spain, and for the permission of none in the kingdom but the I 1 Non enim eos homicidas arbitramur, quos adversus exoommunicatos, zelo Catholic83 matris ardentes, aliquis eorutn trucidasse contingent. Fithou, 324. 2 Bruy. 2, 5<)8, 3 Flenam peccaminam veniam indulgemuB, et in retributione justorum Balutia aeterase pollicemur augmentum. Labb. 14, 64. Bened. 1. 73. et 2. 232. Bruy. 3. 13. Du Pin, 2. 336. Labb. 13. 643. et 14. 23. PERSECUTION OF THE WALDENSES AND OTHERS. 257 professors of Romanism.^ This holy assembly made the king on his accession, swear to tolerate no heretical subjects in the Spanish dominions. The sovereign who should violate this oath, and all his accomplices, would, according to the sacred synod, ' be accursed in the sight of the everlasting God and become the fuel of eternal fire.' This sentence, the holy fathers represented ' as pleasing to God.' Spain, at an early date, began those proscriptions, which she has continued to the present day. ^^i,^^®,T?"'^^^^ of Oxford, in IIGO, condemned more than thirty ot the Waldenses who had emigrated from Gascony to Eng- land, and consigned these unhappy sufferers to the secular arm Henry the Second ordered them, man and woman, to be pub- licly whipped, branded on the cheek with a red-hot iron and driven half-naked out of the city ; while all were forbid to grant these wretched people hospitality or consolation. None therefore showed the condemned the least pity. The winter raged m all its severity, and the Waldenses in consequence perishof! of cold and hunger.^ The councils of Tours, Lavaur, Albi, Narbonne, Beziers, and lolosa issued various enactments of outlawry and extermina- tion against the Albigenses and Waldenses. These, according to the sentence of those sacred synods, were excommunicated every Sunday and festival ; while, to add solemnity and horror to the scene, the bells were rung and the candles extinguished. An inquisitorial deputation of the clergy and laity was commissioned for the detection of heresy and its partisans. The barons and the magistracy were sworn to exterminate heretical pollution from their lands. The barons who throutrh fear or favor should neglect the work of destruction, forfeited their estates, which were transferred to the active and ruthless agents of extirpation. The magistracy, who were remiss, were stripped of their office and property.^ All were forbidden to hold any commerce in buying or 1 Hanc promulgamus Deo placituram senteutiam. Inter reliqua sacramenta. pollicitus fuerit, nullum non catholicum permittere in suo regno degere. Teme- ratorhujusextiteritpromissi sit anathema, maranatha, in conspectu sempitemi Dei, et pabulum efficiatur ignis asterni. Carranza, 376. Crabb. 2. 211. Godea. 5. 157. 2 Prfficepit hiereticae infamise characterem frontibus eorum inuri ; et spectante populo, virgiscoercitos, urbe expelli, districte prohibens, ne quiseos vel hospitio recipere, yel aliquo solatio confovere, pr.-eaumeret. . . .Algoiis intolerantia (liyems quippe erat), nemine velexiguum misericordire impendente. misere in- terierunt. Labb. 13. 287, 288. Neubrig. 11. 13. Spelman, 2. 60. 3 Excommumcentur in ecclesiis, pulsatis campania et extinctia candeUa. Labh. i. las. UouuHoa iocorum ae iliis detegendis solicitoa esse, et illorum latibula destruere ; fautores hsereticorum terrse suaa jactura et aliis pcenis plecti. Bail- Uvum, qui exterminandis hroreticia operam non dederit, boms auis etmaristratu exui. Alex. 20. 1667. Du Pin, 2. 415. Labb. 13. 1237. Marian. 2. 707. Q y 258 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. J! selling with these sectarians, that, deprived of the consolations of humanity, they might, according to the council of Tours. ' be compelled to renounce their error.' No person was allowed to afford them succor or protection. The house, in which the Albigensian sheltered his head, was, as if contaminated with his presence, to be demolished and the ground confiscated. , The grave itself could not defend the heretical tenants of its cold domain from the fury of the inquisitor. The body or the bones of the Albigenses that slept in the dust were to be disin- terred, and the mouldering remains committed, m impotent and unavailing vengeance, to the ilames.^ The council of Tolosa, in 1229, waged war on this occasion against the Bible as well as against heresy. The sacred syno^ I strictly forbade the laity to possess the books of the Old and New testament in the vernacular idiom. A layman, in the language of the holy lathers, might perhaps keep a Psalm-book, a breviary, or the hours of holy Mary ; but no Bible.'' This, Velly admits, was the first prohibition of the kind. Twelve revolving ages from the commencement of Christianity had rolled their ample course over the world, and no assembly ot men had dared to interdict the book of God. But a synod, m a communion boasting unchangeability, arrogated at length the authority of repealing the enactment of heaven and the practice of twelve hundred years. These provincial synods were sanctioned by general councils ; which therefore were blessed with infallibility. These com- prehended four of the Lateran, and those of Constance and Sienna. Anno 1139, the second council of the Lateran, in its twenty-third canon, excommunicated and condemned the heretics of the day who affected a show of piety. These, the infallible assembly commanded the civil powers to suppress and consigned their protectors also to the same condemnation The third general council of the Lateran issued a canon ot a similar kind ; but of greater rigor and severity. This unerring assembly, in its twenty -seventh canon, and suppOTted by the mercy of God and the authority of Peter and Paul excommunicated on Sundays and festivals, the Cathari ot 1 Nee in venditione aut emptione aliqua cum eis oranino commercium habea- tur, ut solatio saltern humanitatis amisso ab errore vit^o suib '•e«iP>fcere compel^ lantur.Labb. 13. 303. B^ned. I. 47. 5'2. Domum in qua fueut inventus h^ereticus dirui, et fundum confiBcari. Alex. 20. 667. ' H=.- ci ^xhun^ntur et eorum cadavera sive ossa publice comburantur, Labb. 14. -oU. Alex. .s. o/j. 2 Ne Uici libros veteris aut novi testanienti permittantur. Ne sacros ibros in linguam vulgarem translatoa habeant, arctissime prohibet ^ynodus. Labb^ 13. 1239. Alex. 20. 005. Mcz. 2. 310. Aucun ]^ arms ; whilst the cord, by which he was suspended, entered the J Deus, qui ecclesiam tuam beati Domiiiici eonfessoris tui illumiuare clignatus est meritis et doctrinis, concedeut ejus interc(?S8ione, temporalibus nou destitua- tur auxiliis. Miss. Rom. 4(!8. Brov. Kom. IWO. •-' L.abh. 1 1230. et 14. 153. Velly, 4. 132. Uellon. e. 2. Mariana, 4. 302. •' Mariana 4. 302, 303. Moreri, n. l.'iO. l)ill,,)i, c. 3. Giannoii. XXXII. 5. CRUELTIES OF THE INQUISITION. 269 flesh and lacerated the tortured nerves. Heavy weights were frequently, in this case, appended to the feet, and when the prisoner was raised from the earth by the arms, strained the whole frame, and caused a general luxation of the shattered system. The cord was sometimes twisted round the naked arms and legs, till it penetrated to the bone through the ruptured flesh and bleeding veins.' This application of the rack, without evidence, caused many to be tortured who had never committed the sin of here-sy. A young lady, who was incarcerated in the dungeon of the inqui- sition at the same time with the celebi'ated Bohorquia, will supply an instance of this kind. This victim of inquisitorial brutality, notwithstanding her admitted attachment to Roman- ism, enduT'ed the rack till all the members of her body were rent asunder by the infernal machinery of the holy oftice. An interval of some days succeeded, till she began, notwithstanding such inhumanity, to recover. She was then taken back to the infliction of similar barbarity. Small cords were twisted round her naked arms, legs, and thighs, till they cut through the flesh to t^e bone ; and blood, in co})ious torrents, streamed from the lacerated veins. Eight days after, she died of her wounds, and was translated from the dungeons of the in(juisition to the glory of heaven. The celebrated Orobio endured the rack for the sin of Judaism. Hi.s descrijition of the transaction is frightful. The place of execution was a subterranean vault lighted with a dim lamp. His hands and feet were bound ro\ind with cords, which were drawn by an engine made for the [lurpose, till they divided the flesh to the excoriated bone. His hands and feet .swelled, and blood burst, in copious eflusion, from his nails as well as from his wounded limbs. He was then set at liberty, and left Spain, the scene of perstoution and misery.'"' The convicted were sentenced to an ACT of FAITH. The ecclesiastical authority transferred the condemned to the secular arm, and the clergy in the mean v ime, in mockery of mercj^, supplicated the magistracy in a hypo nitical prayer, to shew com- passion to the intended victim of barbarity. But the magistracy, who, through pity, should have deferred the execution, would, by the relentless clergy, have been coraiielbd by excommuni- cation to proceed in the work of death. The heretic, dressed in a yellow coat variegated with pictures of dogs, serpents, flames, and devils, was then led to the place of execution) tied to the stake, and committed, amid the joyful acclamations of the populace, to- the flames. Such has been the death of 1 Limborch, iv. 29. Moreri, 6. 7. Limborch, 323. ■^^^jjjgggggf^l^ 270 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. myriads. Torquemada, on being made Inquisitor-General, burned alive, to signalize his promotion to the holy office, no less than t'vo thousand of these ' sons of heresy.'^ The inquisition, in all its horrors, was founded and fostered by the whole Romish church or popish hierarchy. Several popish kingdoms indeed deprecated and expelled this enemy of religion and man. The only places in which this tribunal, prior to the reformation, obtained a permanent establishment, were Languedoc, and in modei-n times Spain, Portugal, and Goa. The holy office, with all its apparatus of inquisitors, qualificators, familiars, jailors, dungeons, racks, and other engines of torture, was driven, with indignation and ignominy, out of the Netherlands, Hungary, France, Germany, Poland, and even Italy. The Neapolitans and Romans expelled the inhuman nuisance with determine'l resolution. Spain itself, notwithstanding its red-hot persecutions, witnessed a scene of a similar kind. The citizens of Cordova, on one occasion, lose in insurrection against this infernal tribunal, stormed the palace of the inquisition, pillaged its apartments, and im- prisoned the jailor.'-' All this opposition, however, was the work, not of the priest- hood, but of the people. The populace dreaded its horrors, deprecated its cruelty, and therefore [irevented its establish- ment. The clergy, on the concnry, have, with all their influence, encouraged the institution in al) its inhumanity. The pope and the prelacy, who, in the Romish .system, are the church and possess infallibility, have, with the utmost unan- imity, declared in favor of the holy office. No Roman pontiff or popish council has ever condenmed this foul blot on pre- tended Catholicism, this gross insult on reason and man. The inquisition, beyond all other institutions that ever appeared in the world, evidences the deei)8st malignancy of human nature. Nothing, in all the annals of time, ever exhib- ited so appalling and hateful a view of fiiUen and degenerate man. demoralized to the lowest ebb of perversity by Romanism and the popedom. No tribunal, equally regardless of justice and humanity, ever raised its frightful form in all the dominions of Heathenism or Mahometanism, Judaism or Christianity. The misanthropist, in the contemplation of the holy offi-^e, may find continual and unfailing fuel for his malevolence. He may see, in its victim, the wretchedest suti'erer that ever drained the cup of misery ; and in the inquisitor, the hatefuUest ' On le faisoit publiquement brftler vif. Mariana, 4. 362, .365. Dellon. c. 28. Moreri, 5. 130 ■^ Mariana, 5. ^^n, 572. Giannon. XXXII. 5. Thuan. I. 788. Paolo, 1. 444. et 2. 57, 566. PERSECUTING ROMISH DOCTORS AND POPES. 271 object, Satan not exempted, that ever defiled or disgraced the creation of God. No person, in a future world, would own an inquisitor, who dies in the spirit of his profession, but the devil, and no place would receive him but hell. Such is a faint view of the persecutions which distracted Christendom, from the accession of Constantine till the era of the Reformation. The third period occupies the time which intervened between the Reformation and the present day. This long series of years displays great variety. Its commencement was marked by persecution, which was afterwards repressed by the diffusion of letters, the Light of Revelation, and the influence of Protestantism. The popish clergy and kings wielded the civil and ecclesias- tical power against the Reformation, during its rise and pro- rrress. The whole Romish hierarchy, through the agency of theologians, popes, and councils, labored in the work of perse- cution. The theologians and historians, who have prostituted their pen for the unworthy purpose, have been many. From this multitude may be selected Benedict, Mariana, Bellarmine, Dens, the college of Rheims, and the universities of Salamanca and Valladolid. Benedict the Dominican, in his history of the Albigenses, approves of all the inhumanity of the holy office and the holy wars. The inquisitor and the crusader are the themes of his unqualified applause. Mariana the Jesuit, in his history of Spain, has, like Benedict, eulogized persecutions and the mqui- sition; though these, he admits, 'are innovtitions on Chris- tianity.' The historian recommends ' tire and sword, when mild means are unavailing and useless. A wise severity, m such cases, is the sovereign remedy.'^ Bellarmine's statements, as well as those of Dens, on tuis subject, are distinguished by their ridiculousness and barbarity. He urges, in the stronoest terms, the eradication of heiet :i, when it can be effected ^vith safety. Freedom of faith, in his system, tends to the injury of the individual and of society ; r.^d the abetto-s of heterodoxy therefore are, for the honor of reli- : Ion. to be delivered to the secular arm and consigned to le ua.n ^^. The cardinal would burn the body for the gv., f the soul The prudent Jesuit, however, would aUo\.- uvou the advocates of heresy to live, when, owing to their strength and number, an appeal to arms would be attended with danger to the friends of orthodoxy. The apost'-^s, he contends, ' >. 'puained from calling in the seculai- arm only oecause there were, in their 1 II faut recourir au fer et au feu dans les maux oii lea remedes lents aont inutiles. Une sage siWeritO ust le rem^'de souverain. Aj.ia;.-^na, 2. OBb. 272 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. day, no Christian princes.' This, in all its horrors, ho represents as the common sentiment of all the patrons of Catholicism.' His arguments, in favor of his system, are a burlesque on rea.son antl common sense. Dens, patronized by the Romish clergy in Ireland, follows Bellarmine. He would punish notorious abet- tors of heresy with confiscation of property, exile, imprisonment, death, and deprivation of Christian burial. 'Such fiilsifiers of the faith and troubleis of the community,' says the precious Divine, 'justly suffer deatli in the same manner as those who counterfeit money and disturb the state.' This, he argues, from the Divine command to slay the Jewish false prophets, and from the condemnation of Huss in the council of Constance. The college of Rheims commended the same remedy. These doctors, in their annotations, maintain that the good should tolerate the wicked, when, in consecjuence of the latter's strength, punishment would be attended with danger. But heresy or any other evil, when its destruction could be effected with safety, should, according to this precious exposition, be suppressed and its authoi-s exterminated. Such is the instruc- tion, conveyed in a popular connnentary on the gos|)el of peace and good will to man. The university of Salamanca followed the college of Rheims. The doctors of this seminary, in 1603, maintained 't^ie Roman pontiff's right to compel, by arms, the sons of apostasy and the o))pone"nts of Catholicism.' The theory taught at Salamanca, was also inculcated by the pro- fessors of Valladolid.- These are a few specimens of the pojiish divines, who have abetted the extirpation of heresy by violence and the inquisi- tion. The list might be augmented to almost any extent. Immense indeed is the numbei- of Romish doctors, who, in the advocacy of persecution, 'have wearied eloquence and ex- hausted learning.' Pontiffs, as well as theologians, have enjoined persecution. This practical lesson has, for a thousand years, been uniformly taught in the school of the popedom. The viceroys of heaven have, for this long succession of ages, acted on the same Satanic system. From these pontifical persecutors, since the 1 Libertas credendi perniciosa est. Libros ha^reticorum jure interdici ot exuri. Bell. De Laic. 111. 18. Huss asaeruit, iion liccre lijereticum incorrigibilem tradere seculari potestati et permitterc comburcndum. Coutrarium docent omnes Oatholici. Boll. III. 20. J]colesia, zelo ^lalutis animarum, eos perse- quitur. Sunt procul dubio extirpandi. Bellarmin. 1. 136S. HiEi-etici notorii prr.'antur aepultura ecclesiastica. Bona eorum temporalia sunt Jv;80 jure oonliscata. ExiHo, carcere, &c.,raeritoatfciuntur. Falsarii pecuuias vel ai rempublicain turbantfis, justa morte puniuntur : ergo etiam hajretici, qui sunt falRj'.rii fidei et rempublicam graviter perturbant. Dens, 2, 88, 89. 2 Rheim. Testam. in Matth, XIII. 29. Mageogh. 3. 595. n PERSECUTION OF PROTESTANTS BY CHARLES V. 273 reformation, may, aa a specimen, be selected the names of Leo Adrian, Paul, and Pius, ' Leo, in a bull issued in 1520, ordered all to shun Luther and his adherents. His holiness commanded sovereigns to chase the abettors of Lutheranism out of their dominions. Adrian, W 15j2, deprecated the spread of Lutheranism, and admon- :..hed prmces and people against the toleration of this abomina- tion ; and, if mild methods should be unavailing, to emplov fire and faggot.^ ^ ^ Paul the Fourth distinguished himself by his recommenda- tion of the inquisition for the extermination of heresy. This tribunal, his infallibility accounted the sheet-anchor of the papacy, and the chief battery for the overthrow of heresy. The pontiff reckoned the gospel, with all its divine institutions as nothing, compared with the holy office for the defence of the u^ u^t ^f"^ ^^ "^^*- ^^^ ^"^P®1 '^^y support the church, but the inquisition is the proper instrument to protect the popedom. The inquisition, accordingly, was the darling theme of his supremacy's thoughts. He conferred additional authority on the sacred institution, and recommended it to the cardinals and his successors with his parting breath.* When the cold hand of death was pressing on his lips, and the soul just going to appear before its God, he enjoined the use of the inquisition, and expired, recommending murder and inhumanity. These enactments of doctors and pontiffs were supported by the canons of councils. The council of Lyons, in 1527, com- manded the sufiragans to make diligent inquiry after the disseminators of heresy, and to appeal, when nece isarv, to the secular arm. Anno 1528, the council of Sens lis prirent plaisir .'i couper les parties secretes. Varillas, I. 203. 2 Pueri multi item rapti, et ad nefandam libidinem satiandam ad miseram cap- tivitatem abducti. Thuan. 2. 228. Jjes dames furent expos(5es nues h la risee publique, avec des comes enfoncees dans les parties que le pudeur defend de nommer. Varillas, 1. 203. Productis mulierum cadaveribus, et in eorum pudenda boum cornibus, et saxis, ac stipiti- busad ludibrium injectis. Tliuan. 2. 228. Exudante passim per urbem cruore. Thuan. 31. 11. 3 Bossuet. Abr(5g. XYIL Daniel, 8. 727-740. Mezeray, 5. 151-162. Davila, V. Mezeray, .5. 151-102. ■• II ddchargea sur les ( 'alvinistes. Sully. 1. 34. Le Roi tiroit sur eux lui-rnCme avec de longues arquebuses, et crioit de toute sa force, 'Tuez, tuez.' Dan. 8. 731. Mezeray, 5. 155. Davila, V. MASSACRES OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW. 279 M The tocain, at midnight, tolled the signal of destruction. The assailants spared neither old nor young, man nor woman. The carnage lasted .seven days. Mezeray reckons the killed, in Paris, during this time, at 5000, Bossuet at more than 6000, and Davila at 10,000, among whom were five or six hundred gentlemen. The Seine was covered with the dead which floated on its surface, and the city was one great butchery and flowed with human blood. The court was heaped with the slain, on which the king and queen gazed, not with horror, but with delight. Her majesty unblushingly foiisted her eyes on the spectacle of thousands of men, ex| osed naked, and lying wounded and frightful in the pale livery of death.' The king went to see the body of Admiral Coligny, which was dragged by the populace through the streets ; and remarked, in unfeel- ing witticism, that the ' smell of a dead enemy was agreeable.* Th( tragedy was not confined to Paris, but extended, in genera., through the French nation. Special messengers were, on the preceding day, despatched in all directions, ordering a general massacre of the Huguenots. The carnage, in conse- quence, was made through neai-ly all the provinces, and espe- cially in Meaux, Troyes, Orleans, Nevers, Lyons, Toulouse, Bordeaux, and Rouen. Twenty-five or thirty thousand, accord- ing to Bossuet and Mezeray, perished in different places. Davila estimates the slain at 40,000, and Sully at 70,000. Many were thrown into the rivers, which, floating the corp.ses on the waves, carried horror and infection to all the country, which they watered with their streams. The reason of this waste of life was enmity to heresy or protestantism. A few indeed suggested the pretence of a con- spiracy. But this, even Bossuet grants, every person knew to be a mere pretence. The populace, tutored by the priesthood, accounted themselves, in shedding heretical blood, ' the agents of Divine justice,' and engaged ' in d. ig God sei-vice.'^ The king accompanied with the queen and princes of the blood, and all the French court, went to the Parliament, and acknowledged that all these sanguinary transactions were done by his autho- rity. ' The parliament publicly eulogised the king's wisdom,' which had ett'ected the efl'usion of so nmch heretical blood. His 1 Tout le quarticr ruisseloit de sang. La cour etoit pleine de corps morts, que le lloi et la Reine regardoient, non seuleinent sans horreur, maia avec plaisir. Toutes les rues de la ville ii'ttoient plus ceo fa'mina", nequaquam crudeli spectaculo eas absterrento, ouriosis oculis luidorum corpora inverecunde intuebantur. Thuau. 3. 131. '■! Les Catholiques se regard^rent coninie lea ex^cuteurs de la justice de Dieu. Daniel, 8. 738. Thuan. 3. 149. ■^'iU ^. IMAGE EVAI UATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // // '^ 1.0 I.I L25 yo ■■■ 1.4 la 22 1.6 *^N*'^ ^^ C?^ 7» Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14380 (716) 872-4$03 ^ ^^ i\^ \ 6^ 6 ^ 280 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. majesty also went to mass, and returned solemn thanks to God lor the glorious victory obtained over heresy. He ordered medals to be coined to perpetuate its memory. A medal ac- S'vn?! fcr^T^Sr^Sr ^^^ purpose with thisinscription, PIETY J xl • '^V^.TIC!E.' Piety, forsooth, propelled to murder, and the immolation of forty thousand people was an act of jus- tice. Piety and justice, it seems, aroused to deeds of cruelty the idea of which afterwards, says Sully, caused even the inhu- man perpetrator Charles, in spite of himself, to shudder. The carnage, sanctioned in this manner by the French king parliament, and people, wa« also approved by the pope and the Koman court. Rome ' from her hatred of heresy, received the newo with unspeakable joy. The pope went in procession to the church of Saint Lewis, to render thanks to God for the happy victory.' His legate in France felicitated his most Christian majesty m the pontiff's name, ' and praised the exploit so long meditated and so happily executed, for the good of religion. The massacre, says Mezeray, ' was extolled before the king as the triumph of the church.'^ Spain rejoiced also in the tragedy as the defeat of protestant- ism. Ihis nation has ever shown itself the friend of the papacy and the deadly enemy of the Reformation ; and this spirit, on this occasion, appeared in the joy manifested by the Spanish people for the murder of the French Huguenots. England, like Germany, France, Spain, and the Netherlands was the scene of persecution and martyrdom. Philip and Mary who exercised the royal authority in the British nation, issued a commission for ' the burning of heretics.' The queen, in this manifesto, 'professed her resolution to support justice and Catholicism, and to eradicate error and heresy : and ordered her heretical subjects, therefore, to be committed before the people to the flames.' This, her majesty alleged, would shew her detestation of heterodoxy, and serve as an example to other Christians, to shun the contagion of heresy.'' Orleans acknowledges Mary's rigor, and her execution of B*Sl*!,f ''''n*'^* tf^'^rT- ^\ ^* ^'■'■'PP^'' "'^^ "^'^'^'^"^ ^ I'occasion de la Saint ?^rS^. Ti^- Tf'u\ ^^^\ "^P^f ^^°''" "«i solenuellement la mcBse pour remercier Dieu de la belle victoire obtenue sur I'heresie, et commands de fabri- querdeBm^daillespourenconserverlamemoire. Mezeray, .5. 160. II fremissoit malgre lui, au r«5cit de mille traits de cruaut6. Sully 1 33 uluussou 2 La haine de I'luiresie les fit recevoir agreablement k Rome. On se reiouit aussi en Lspagne. Bossuet, 4. 545. La Cour de Rome et Ic Conseil d'Espajine eurent une joye md.c.ble de la Saint Barthelemi. Le Pape alia en procession t 1 eghse de Saint Louis, rendre graces .1 Dieu d'un si heureux success, et Ton fit le l'62 SuF*" fSi '"'*'"" ^°"^ ^^ "°™ ^^ Triomphe de I'Eglise. Mezeray. 5. ■' Ha-reticos jnxta legem, ignis incendio comburi debere ; priucipimus. quod wTlMn^'"'!?? ^ '^"* committi, et in eodem igne realiter comburi facias. POPISH PERSECUTIONS IN ENGLAND. 281 many on account of their protestantism. In this, he discovers, the queen followed her own genius rather than the spirit of the church, by which he means the popedom. This historian, nevertheless, represents Mary as 'worthy of eternal remem- brance for her seal.'^ Such is his character of a woman who was a modern Theodora, and never obliged the world but when she died. Her death was the only favor she ever con- ferred on her unfortunate and persecuted subjects. Popish persecution raged, in this manner, from the com- mencement of the Reformation till its establishment. The flow of this overwhelming tide began at the accession of Constantine to the throne of the Roman empire ; and, having prevailed for a long period, gradually ebbed after the era of protestantism. The popedom, on this topic, was compelled, though with reluctance and inconsistency, to vary its profession and practice. A change was effected in an unchangeable communion. Some symptoms of the old disease indeed still appear. The spirit, like latent heat, is inactive rather than extinguished. But the general cry is for liberality or even latitudinarianism. The shout, even among the advocates of Romanism, is in favor of religious liberty, unfettered con- science, and universal toleration. The inquisition of Spain and Portugal, with all its apparatus of racks, wheels, and gibbets, has lost its efficacy, and its palace at Goa is in ruins. The bright sun of India enlightens its late dungeons, 7hich are now inhabited, not by the victim of popish persecution, but by 'the owl, the dragon, and the wild beast of the desert.' This change has, in some measure, been influenced by the diffusion of literature and the Reformation. The darkness of the middle ages has fled before the light of modem science ; and with it, in part, has disappeared priestcraft and supersti- tion. Philosophy has improved, and its light continues to gain on the empire of darkness. Protestantism has circulated the Book of God, and shed its radiancy over a benighted world. The advances of literature and revelation have been unfavor- able to the leign of intolerance and the inquisition. But the chief causes of this change in the papacy are the preponderance of protestantism and the policy of popery. The Reformation, in its liberalizing principles, is established over a great part of Christendom. Its friends have become nearly equal to its opponents in number, and far superior in intelli- gence and activity. Rome, therefore, though she has not ex- pressly disavowed her former claims, has according to her 1 Reine digne d'une m^moire (iternelle, par son z61e. mourir un grand nombrc. Orleans, VIII. P 174, 175. On en fit, en effet, 282 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ancient policy, allowed these lofty pretensions to slumber for a time in inactivity, and yielded, though with reluctant and awkward submission, to the progress of science, the light of revelation, and the strength of protestantism. A late discovery has shewn the deceitfulness of all popish pretences to liberality, both on the continent and in Ireland. Dens, a doctor of Louvain, published a system of theology in 1758, and in some of the succeeding years. This work, fraught with the most revolting principles of persecution, awards to the patrons of heresy, confiscation of goods, banishment from the country, confinement in prison, infliction of death, and depri- vation of Christian burial. Falsifiers of the Faith, like forgers of money and disturbers of the state, this author would, accord- ing to the sainted Thomas, consign to death as the proper and merited penalty of their offence. This, he argues from the sentence of the Jewish false prophets, and from the condemna- tion of Huss in the general council of Constance.* This production, in all its horror and deformity, was dedi- cated to Cardinal Philippus, and recommended to Christendom by the approbation of the University of Louvain, which vouched for its ' orthodox faith and its Christian morality.' It was ushered into the world with the permission of superiors, and the full sanction of episcopal authority. Its circulation on the continent was, even in the nineteenth century, impeded by no Romish reclamation, nor by the appalling terrors of the expurgatorian index. The popish clergy and people, in silent consent or avowed approbation, acknowledged, in whole and in part, its Catholicism and morality.^ The University of Louvain, on this occasion, exhibited a beautiful specimen of Jesuitism. A few years after its appro- bation of Dens' Theology, Pitt, the British statesman, asked this same university, as well as those of Salamanca and Valladolid, whether persecution were a principle of Romanism. The astonished doctors, insulted at the question, and burning with ardor to obliterate the foul stain, branded the insinuation with a loud and deep negation. The former, in this case, copied the example of the latter. The divines of Salamanca and Valladolid, questioned on the same subject in 1603, in 1 An hseretici recte puniuntur morte ? Respondet S. Thomas affirmative ; (luia falsariipecuniaa velalii rempublicam turbantes juste morte puniuntur : ergoetiam hasretici qui aunt falsarii ficlei et rempublicam graviter perturbant. Confiraiatur ex eo quod Dens in veteri lege jusserit occidi falsos Prophetas. Idem probatur ex condemnatione articuli 14, Joan. Huss in Concilio Coustan- tiensi. Dens, 2. 88, 89. Hseretici notorii privantur sepultura ecclesiastica. Buna. &c. Dens, 2. 88. 2 Dens, 4. 3. Eas reperi nihil continere a fide orthodoxa et moribus Christ- ianis alienum. Dens, 5. 1. Home's Protest. Mem. 95, SO. PERSECUTING PRINCIPLES OF DENS' THEOLOGY. 283 reference to the war waged by the Irish against the English in the reign of queen Elizabeth, patronized the principle of perse- cution, which, in their answer to Pitt, they proscribed.^ Such, on the European continent, where the candor and consistency of the popish clergj'^, who, in this manner adapted their move- nients, like skilful generals, to the evolutions of the enemy, and suited their tactics to the emergency of the occasion. This complete body of theology, unconfined to the continent, was, in a special manner, extended to Ireland. The popish prelacy, in 1808, met, says Coyne and Wise, in Dublin, and unanimously agreed that this book was the best work, and safest guide in theology for the Irish clergy. Coyne, in coiise- quence, was ordered to publish a large edition, for circulation among the prelacy and priesthood of the kingdom,^ The work was dedicated to Doctor Murray, Titular Arch- bishop of Dublin. The same prelate also sanctioned an addi- tional volume, which was afterwards annexed to the performance with his approbation. Murray, Doyle, Keating, and Kinsella made it the conference book for the Romish clergy of Leinster. The popish ordo or director- for five successive years, had its questions for conference ai ranged as they occurred in Dens, and were, of course, to be decided by his high authority. The Romish episcopacy, in this wry, made this author their standard of theology to direct the Irish prelacy and priesthood in casuistry and speculation.* Dens, therefore, possesses, with them, the same authority on popish theology as Blackstone with us on the British Constitution, or the Bible on the princi- ples of protestantism. Accompanied with such powerful recommendations, the work as might be expected, obtained extensive circulation. The college of Maynooth, indeed, did not raise Dens, to a text book. This honor was reserved for Bailly. But this seminary received Dens as a work of reference. His theology lay in the library, ready, at any time, for consultation. Doctov Murphy's academy in Cork had fifty or sixty copies for the use of the seminary and the diocesan clergy.* The precious production, indeed, has found its way into the hands of almost every priest in the kingdom, and forms the holy fountain from which he draws the pure waters of the sanctuary. The days of persecution, notwithstanding, will, in all proba- 1 Tanquam certum eat accipiendum, posse Romanum Pontificem fidei desert- ores, et eos qui Catholicam religionem oppugnant, armis compellere. Mageofh. 3. 595. Slevin, 193. ^ 2 Coyne, Catal. 6, 7. Wyse, Hist. Cath. Ass. App. N. 7. Home's Protest. Mem. 95. Reverendissimo in Deo, Patri ac Domino, Danieli Murray, &c. Dens, I. 1. Coyne, 7. Heme, 95, 96. ■« Home, 95, 96. 284 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. bility, never return to dishonor Christianity and curse mankind. The inquisition, with all itsengmes of torment and destruction, may rest forever in inactivity. The Inquisitor may exercise his malevolence, and vent his ferocity in long and deep execra- tions against the growing light of philosophy and the reforma- tion ; but will never more regale his ears with the groans of the tortured victim, or feast his eyes in witnessing an Act of Faith. The popedom may regret its departed power. The Roman pontiff and hierarchy may indulge in dreams of future greatness, prefer vain prayers for the restoration of persecution, or, in bitter lamentation, weep over the ashes of the inquisition. But these hopes, supplications, and tears, in all likelihood, will, for ever, be unavailing. Rome's spiritual artillery is, in a great measure, become useless ; and the secular arm no longer, as formerly, enforces ecclesiastical denunciation, or consigns the abettors of heresy to the flames. CHAPTER VIII. INVALIDATION OF OATHS. VIOLATION OP FAITH- THEOLOGIANS, POPES, AND COUNCILS— PONTIFICAL MAXIMS— PONTIFIOAI. ACTIONS— COUNCILS OP HOME AND DIAMPEB — OOHNOILS OP THE LATERAN, LYONS, PISA, CONSTANCE, AND BASIL — BRA AND INPLUBNOB OP THE BBFOHMATION. The Roman pontiffs, unsatisfied with the sovereignty over kings and heretics, aimed, with measureless ambition, at loftier pretensions and more extensive domination. These vice-gods extended their usurpation into the moral world and invaded the empire of heaven. Tl\e power of dissolving the obligation of vows, promises, oaths, and indeed all engagements, especially those injurious to the church, and those made with the patrons of heresy, was, in daring blasphemy, arrogated by those vice- gerents of God. This involves the shocking maxim, that faith, contrary to ecclesiastical utility, may be violated with heretics. The popedom, in challenging and exercising this authority, has disturbed the relations which the Deity established in His ra- tional creation, and grasped at claims which tend to unhinge civil society, and disorganize the moral world. Christendom, on this topic, has witnessed three variations. The early Christians disclaimed, in loud indignation, the idea of perfidy. Fidelity to contracts constituted a distinguished trait in the Christianity of antiquity. A second era commenced with the dark ages. Faithlessness, accompanied with all its foul train, entered on the extinction of literature and philosophy, and became one of the filthy elements of Romish superstition. The abomination, under the patronage of the papacy, flourished till the rise of protestantism. The reformation formed a third era, and poured a flood of light, which detected the demon of insincerity and exposed it to the detestation of the world. Fidelity to all engagements constituted one grand character- istic of primeval Christianity. Violation of oaths and promises is, beyond all question, an innovation on the Christianity of antiquity, and forms one of the variations of Romanism. The attachment to truth and the faithfulness to compacts, evinced 286 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. by the ancient Christians, were proverbial. The Christian profossion, in the days of antiquity, was marked by a loftj' sincerity, which disdained all falsehood, dissimulation, subter- fuge, and chicanery. Death, say Justin and Tertullian, would have been more welcome than the violation of a solemn promise. A Roman bishop, in those days of purity, would have met an application for absolution from an oath with holy indignation ; and the humblest of his flock, who should have been supposed capable of desiring such a dispensation, would have viewed the imputation sis an insult on his understanding and profession. But the period of purity passed, and the days of degeneracy, at the era of the dark ages, entered. The mystery of iniquit}', in process of time, and as Paul of Tarsus had foretold, began to work. Christianity, by adulteration, degenerated into Romanism, and the popedom became the hot-bed of all abomi- nation. Dispensations for violating the sanctity of oaths formed perhaps the most frightful feature in the moral deformi+v of popery. This shocking maxim was, for many ages, sanc- tioned by theologians, canonists, popes, councils, and the whole Romish communion. The theologians and canonists, who have inculcrtad this frightful maxim, are many. A few may be selected as a specimen. Such were Bailly, Dens, Cajetan, Aquinas, Ber- nard, the Parisian univei'sity, and the French clergy. Bailly, in the class-book used in the Maynooth seminary, ascribes to ' the church a power of dispensing in vows and oaths.'' This the author attempts to show from the words of Revelation, which confer the prerogative of the keys in binding and loosing, and which, he concludes, being general, signify not only the power of absolving from sin, but also from promises and oaths. The moral theologian, in this manner, abuses the inspired language for the vilest purpose, and represents his shocking assumption as taught in the Bible and as an article of faith. The church, in this hopeful proposition, means the Roman pontiff, whom the canon law characterizes as the inter- preter of an oath. Dens, in his theology, the modern standard of Catholicism in Ireland, authorizes this maxim.'^ The dispensation of a vow, ' Existit in ecclesia potestas dispensandi in votis et juramentis. Bailly, 2. 140, Maynooth Report, 283. Declaratio juramenti seu interpretatio, cum de ipso dubitatur, pertinet ad Papain. Gibert, 3. 512. 2 Superior, tanquam vicarius Dei, vice et nomine Dei, remittit homini debitum promissionis factau. Dens, 4. 134,135. Debet respondere se nescire earn, et, si opus est, idem juramento confirmare. Talis confessarius interrogatur ut homo, et respondet ut homo, Jam autem non scit ut homo illam veritatem, quamvis sciat ut Deus. Dens, 6. 219. I VIOLATION OF FAITH TAUOHT BY ROMISH DOCTORS. 287 iL-\ says this criterion of truth, 'is its relaxation by a lawful su- perior in the place of God, from a just cause. The superior, as the vicar of God in the place of God, remits to a man the debt of a plighted promise. God's acceptance, by this dispen- sation, ceases : for it is dispensed in God's name.' The precious divine, in this manner, puts man in the stead of God, and enables a creature to dissolve the obligation of a vow. A confessor, the same doctor avers, ' should assert his igno- i-ance of the truths which he knows only by sacramental con- fession, and confirm his assertion, if necessary, by oath. Such facts he is to conceal, though the life or safety of a man or the destruction of the state, depended on the disclosure.' The reason, in this case, is as extraordinary as the doctrine. ' The confessor is questioned and answers as a man. This truth, however he knows not as man but as God ; ' and, therefore — which was to be proved — he is not guilty of falsehood or I'erjury. Cajetan teaches the same maxim. According to the cardi- nal, ' the sentence of excommunication for apostasy from the faith is no sooner pronounced against a king, than, in fact, his subjects are free from his dominion and oath.'' Aquinas, though a saint, and worshipped in the popish com- munion on the bended knee, maintains the same shocking principle. He recommends the same Satanic maxim to sub- jects, whose sovereign becomes an advocate of heresy. Ac- cording to his angelic saintship, ' when a king is excommuni- cated for apostasy, his vassals are in fact, immediately freed from his dominion and from their oath of fealty,: for a heretic cannot govern the faithful.' Su i a prince is to be deprived of unthority, and his subjects freed from the obligation of allegi- ance. This is the doctrine of a man adored by the patrons of Romanism for his sanctity. He enjoined the breach of faith and the violation of a sworn engagement ; and is cited for authority on this point by Dens, the idol of the popish prelacy in Ireland.^ Bernard, the celebrated glossator on the canon-law, advances the same principle. A debtor, says the canonist of Parma, ' though sworn to pay, may refuse the claim of a creditor who falls into heresy or under excommunication.' According to the same authority, ' the debtor's oath implies the tacit condi- ' Quam cito aliquia per sententiam denunciatur excommunicatus propter apostasiam a fide, ipso facto, ejusjsubditi sunt absoluti a dominie et juramento. Cajetan in Aquin. 2, 50. 2 Quam cito aliquia per sententiam denunciatur excommunicatus, propter apostasiam a fide, ipso facto ejus subditi a dominio ct juramento fidelitatis ejus liberati sunt, quod subditis fidelibus dominari non possit. Aquinas, 2. 50. 288 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. tion that the creditor, to be entitled to payment, should remain in a state in which communication with him would be lawful,'' The Parisian University in 1589, consisting of sixty doctors, declared the French entirely freed from their oath of allegiance to their king, Henry the Third, and authorized to take aims against their sovereign, on account of his opposition to Catholi- cism.' The French clergy, in 1577, even after the reformation, taught the same infernal maxim. The Huguenots ' insisted on the faith which the French nation had plighted in a solemn treaty. The Romish theologians, on the contrary, rejected the plea, and contended in their sermons and public writings, that a prince is not bound to keep faith with the partisans of heresy.' These advocates of treachery and perjury pleaded, on the occasion, the precedent of the Constantian council, which, in opposition to a safe-conduct, had sa-crificed Huss and Jerome to the demon of popery.^ This atrocious maxim was taught by popes, as well as by theologians. A numerous train of pontiffs might be named, who, in word and in deed, disseminated this principle. These viceroys of heaven, indeed, for many ages, engaged, with hardly an exception, in violating faith, both in theory and 'a practice. From this mass may, for the sake of exemplifying the theory, be selected Gregory, Urban, Paul, Alexander, Clement, Benedict, and Innocent. Gregory, in 1080, asserted his authority to dissolve the oath of fealty.* His infallibility supported his assertion by proofs, or pretended proofs, from scripture and tradition. This au- thority, his holiness alleged, was conveyed in the power of the keys, consisting in binding and loosing, and confirmed by the unanimous consent of the fathers. The contrary opinion he represented as madness and idolatry. Urban, in 1090, followed the example of Gregory. Subjects, he declared, ' are by no authority bound to observe the fealty which they swear to a Christian prince, who withstands God ' Licet non solvat, non incidit in pcenam, et in eodem modo, si per juramen- tum : in ilia obligatione et juramento tacite subintelligetur, si talis permanserit, cui communicare liceat. Greg. 9. Decret. L. 5. Tit. 7. c 16. Maynooth Report, 261. 2 Populum jurejurando solutum esse. Thuan. 4. 690. Les Fran9oi3 4toient efifectiveraent deli^s du serment de fidelit6. Maimbourg, 299. Daniel, 2, 349. 3 Proteatantss fidem datain urgerent. Contra theologi nostri disputabant, et jam apcrto capite, in concionibus et evulgatis scriptis, ad fidem sectariis servandam non obligare principem contendebant. Thuan. 3. 524. < Contra illorum insaniam, qui, nefando ore, garriunt, auctoritatem sanctae et Apostolicse sedis non potuisse quemquam a sacramento Melitatis ejus absol- vere. Labb. 12. 380, 439, 497. II VIOLATIONS OF OATHS TAUGHT AND PRACTISED BY POPES. 289 and the saints and contemns their precepts.*' The pontiff ac- coiclmgly prohibited Count Hugo's soldiery, though Tnder the obligation of an oath, to obey their sovereign Gregory the Ninth, in 1229, followed the footsteps of his predecessors According to his infallibility, 'none should keep taith with the person who opposes God and the saints.'^ Gre- gory on this account, declared the Emperor Frederic's vassals freed from their oath of fidelity. v««»ttiB • Voij'^i^^ Sixth imitated Gregory the Ninth. This pontiff. ^Lilr^'^J^K ''.T,*^^*-!^^"^''^^™""^' of anvkind, even when thnn^ i*^w ^' 7u^^ P"''*'"' ^""'^^y "^ ««^i«"» or heresy, Ind ?oi™^ ^ ^ ^^ their apostasy, are in themselves unlawful i^-^^\^^u J?T*^' .'" P^i' absolved himself from an oath which he had taken in the Conclave. His holiness had sworn to make only four cardinals ; but violated his obligation His supremacy declared that the pontiff could not be bound, or his authority limited, even by an oath. The contrary, he charac- terized. 'as a manifest heresy.'* ^"aiiit P^l the Fifth canonized Gregory the Seventh, and inserted an oftce m the Roman breviary, praising his holiness for free- ing the emperor Henry's subjects from the oath of fidelity." His absolution, as well as the deposition of the emperor, the l)ontiff represents a^ an act of piety and heroism. Paul's enact- ment in this transaction, was sanctioned by Alexander. Cle- ment, and Benedict. Innocent the Tenth declared that ' the Roman pontiff could mvalidate cml contracts, promises or oaths, made by the friends ot Catholicism with the patrons of heresy.'« A denial of this proposition his infallibility styled heresy ; and those who re- jected the idea of papal dispensation, incurred, according to his iiohness, the penalty prescribed by the .sacred canons and iipostohc constitutions against those who impugn the pontifical authority in questions of faith. ^ The Roman pontiffs taught this diabolical doctrine, not only >PiK!f "^ also by example. The practice of annulling et eSum nSZ^n'^!!! '^\"^*'''»r ^'i^^P* J"''''^"*' ^«« ''J"^'!"^ Sanctis adversati\ Decrercaur L5 Qut^t'o! ° '=°^"'^'^»t"^ auctoritatepersolvere. Pithou,260: Bruy!ri8.r*' ^"'^ ^^'^^' *^'^""*' ''^ ''^"' '^''^ ^'''^^'"^ ^ ^'^" «* ^ ««« ^"'^ts- efrllii ^Z'^J'^^^^/f ** °"™ li"J«sp"tiihffiretiei3 seu schismaticis, postquam tales lamJm Tn :.h^l ^''^'T''' '^'^^'^ «* iP«o jure nulla-, (etsi forte ante ipsorum ; Le contraire dtoit une ht^rdsie manifesto. Paolo 2 27 ■ ^ubditos populos fideei data liberavit. Bruy. 2. 492.' Crottv. 85 auod Wott?2y ' P™™?^^'*' ^'^1 J"ramenta catholicorum cum hareticis ac quod hrerctici smt, per pontihcem enervari possint. Caron, 14 S wmmmmmm 290 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. oaths and breaking faith waa exemplified byZachary, Gregory, Innocent, Honorius, Clement, Urban, Eugenius, Clement, Paul, and Pius, a.s the theory had been taught by G.egory, Urban, Paul, Alexander, Clement, Benedict, and Innocent. Pope Ztichary, in 745, annulled the French nation's oath of fealty to king Childeric, and Stephen, Zachary's successor, afterward dissolved Poj)ir.'s allegiance to the French monarch.' Gregory, in 1078, ' absolved all from their fidelity, who were bound by oatli to persons excounnunicated,' This sweeping and infernal sentence, his holiness, according to his own ac- count, pronounced ' in accofdance with the statutes of his sacred predecessors and in virtue of fiis a[)ostolic authority.''' Innocent, in 1215, 'freed all that were bound to those who had fallen into heresy from all fealty, homage, and obedience.'* His infallibitys dispensation extended to tlie dissolution of obligation and security of all kinds. Honorius, in 1220, freed the king of Hungary from all obli- gations in some alienations of his kingdom, which his majesty had made, and which he had sworn to fulfil. These, it appears, were prejudicial to the state and dishonorable to the sovereign. His holiness, however, soon contrived a remedy, which was distinguished by its facility and efficiency. The vicar-general of God, in the fulness of apostolic authority, ' demolished the royal oath, and commanded the revocation of these alienations.'' Clement, in 1306, emancipated Edward, king of England, from a solemn oath in confirmation of the great charter. ' The English monarch had taken this obligation in 1258 on the holy evangelists/ and the ceremony was performed with an aflfecting solemnity and awful imprecations of perdition in case of violation or infringement. The Koman viceroy of heaven, however, soon removed these uneasy bonds, and furnished his British majesty with a ready licence for the breach of faith and the commission of perjury. The pontiff published a bull, 'granting the kinp absolution from his oath.'* The absolution, 1 Zacharias omnes BVancigenas a juramento fidelitatis absolvit. Labb, 12. 500. Pithou, 260. Pepinus a Stephano papa a fidelitatis sacramento absolvitur. Otho, V. 23. Bossuet, 1. 49. 2 Eos qui excommunicatis fidelitate aut sacremento constricti sunt, Apostolica auctoritate a sacramento absolvimus. Pithou, 260. Caus. 15. Q. 6. ^Absolutes senoverinta debito fidelitatis, hominis,ettotiuBobsequii,quicunque lapsismanifeste in hferesim, aliquo pacto, quacunque firmitate vallate, tenebantur adstricti. Pithou, 241. L. 5. T. 7. * Nos eidemregi diriginius-scripta nostra .utalienationes priEdictas.non obstante juramento, studeat re vocare. Greg. 9. L. 2. Tit. 24. c. .S.3. Pithou, ill. fi Henri etEdouard jurerent I'observation sur les t5vangilcs. Orleans. 5. 163. Le Pape lui donnoit I'absolution du serment. Bruy. 3. 358. Collier, 1 . 400. Rexcoactusest praestare sacramentum. Trivettus, Ann, 1258. Obtinebatrex a Domino papa absolutionem a juramento. Trivettus, Ann. 1306. Dachery, 3. 196, 230. /^ v^f VIOLATJONS OF OATHS TAUOHT AND PRACTISED BY POPES. 2j)l for greater comfort, waa supported in the rear by an excommu- nication pronounced against all who should observe such an 0(1 th. Urban imit»ited Clement. This plenipotentiary of heaven, m 1.307, m the admini.stration of his spiritual vicegerency trans- nutted absolution to .some Frenchmen, who had been Uken prisoners by a gang of maraud'-r, who infested the French na- tion, and had sworn all whom they rolea.sed, to remit a sum of money as the price of their liberation.' His holiness, however having heard of the traiusaction, not only repealed the treaty' but with the whole weight of his pontifical autority ' dissolved the oath and interdicted the i)ayment of the ransom.' Eugenius the Fourth reaped laurels in this field, and outshone many of his rivals m the skilful management of the oath-annul- ling process. His holiness, who wielded his prerogative in this way toward Piccininoand in nullifying the Bohemian compacts was followed m this latter tran.saction by Pope Pius Eu- genius, in 1444, also induced Ladislaus, King of Hur'mry to break his treaty with the Sultan Amuiath, though jonfiraied by the solemn oaths of the king and the sultan on the gospel and the koran. His holiness, on this occasion, introduced a variety into the system established for the encouragement of perjury, by executing his plan by proxy. Julian, clothed with legatine authority, mustered all his eloquence to effect the design ; and represented, in strong colors, the criminality of observing a trfeaty, so prejudicial to the public safety and so inimical to the holy faith. The pontiff's vicegerent, in solemn mockery, dispensed with the oath, which, being sworn with infidels, was, like thoae with heretics, a mere nullity 'I absolve you,' said the representative of the representative of God, ' from perjury, and I sanctify your arms. Follow my footsteps m the paih of glory and salvation. Dismiss your scrupulosity, and devolve on my head the sin and the punish- ment. The sultan, it is said, displayed a copy of the violated treaty, the monument of papal perfidy, in the front of battle implored the protection of the God of truth, and caUed aloud on the prophet Jesus to avenge the mockery of his religion and authority. The faith of Islamism excelled the casuistry of popery. ^ The perjurers, whom Moreri calls Christians, 'falsi- fied their oath,' took arms against the Turks, and were defeated on the plains of Varna.^ i I^e Pape envoia aux prisonniers I'absolution du aerment. Daniel. 5. 145 foi Mnr«rf' 'f %Qn "«''' P*'" f """'^'.^^^g** ^^^ ^^P^ Eug6ueIV. faussferent leur toi. Moreri 1. 390. Sismond. 9. 196. Canisius, 4. 462. Lenfant, 2. 164 Le Cardinal 1 en dispensoit par l'autorit6 du siege Apostolique. Amurkth s'es- Xy. "vSnen.T692: ^^™*' ''^"^"*' ""^^ *°° ^'"P^^ ^''^'^'^ 'i^^ ^ ^'^^^^ 292 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Ml Clement, in 1526, absolved Francis II. the French king from a treaty which he had formed in S^ .in.' The Emperor of Germany had taken his Christian majesty a prisoner in the battle of Pavia, and carried him to Madrid. The conditions of his engagement, which were disadvantageous, Francis confirmed by an oath. This engagement, however, the pontiff, by his . apostolic power, soon dissolved, for the purpose of gaining the French king as an ally in a holy confederacy, which his infalli- bility had organized against the German emperor. The con- vention, though ratified by a solemn oath, soon yielded to apostolic power, and, more especially, as its annihilation con- duced to ecclesiastical utility. Pope Paul III., in 1535, ' forbade all sovereigns, on pain of excommunication, to lend any aid, under pretext of any obli- gation or oath, to Henry VIII, King of England.' His holiness also ' absolved all princes from all such promises and engage- mea.6.'^ Pius IV. treated Elizabeth as Paul had treated Henry. ' His holiness annulled the oath of allegiance, which had been sworn to her majesty, by her subjects.' This consti- tution Gregory XIII. and Sixtus V. renewed and confirmed.^ Henry and Elizabeth had patronized schism or heresy, and therefore forfeited all claim to enjoy the conditions of plighted faith. Councils, as well as pontiffs, encouraged this principle of faithlessness. Some of these synods were provincial and some general. Among the provincial councils, which countenanced or practised this maxim were those of Rome, Lateran, and Diamper. A Roman Council, in 103t), absolved Edward the Confessor, King of England, from a vow which he had made to visit the City of Rome and the tombs of the holy apostles. The fulfil- ment of his engagement, it seems, was inconvenient to his sainted majesty, and contrary to the wish of the British nation. But Leo the Ninth and a Roman Council soon supplied a remedy. His holiness presided in this assembly, which eulo- gized Edward's piety, and in a few moments and with great facility disannulled his majesty's troublesome vow.^ Gregory VII., in 1076, in a Roman synod, absolved all Oliris- tians from their oath of fealty to the Emperor Horny, who, in liis infal'ibility's elegant language, had become a member of the ' Le Pfvpo dt'livra lo roi rlu scrincnt qu'il avoit prete on Espagne. Paol. 1 . 63. -' Henric' vassalos et subditos a juramento lidelitatia absolvit. Cum Henrico, confrederationes, contractus, pacta, et conventa omnia, quovis modo stabilita, irrita facit et nulla. Alex, 24. 420. ^ * )imies ac sinmilos ejii." Miiiiditos a iuramonto JidolitatiH .ihsnlyit. l.atn in ens qui illius logibus ac mandatia parcrent, anatliemate. Aloxandoi-, 23. 425. Bruv' 4. 502. ' y * Sa Saintete, qni y prcsidoit, lui donna I'absolution de Jon va^u. Andilly. 568. VIOLATIONS OF OATHS BY POPISH COUNCILS. 293 ris- devil, and an enemy to the vicar-general of God.' He also interdicted all persons from obeying Heniy, as king, notwith- standing their oath. This sentence the pontiff", with the appro- bation of the council, pronounced as the plenipotentiary of heaven, ' who possessed the power of binding and ioosino- iu the name of Almighty God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.' A council of the Lateran, in 1112, freed Pascal the Roman pontrff" from an oath which he had sworn on the consecrated host, on the subject of investitures and excommunication. This obligation, in all its terrors, the holy assembly, with the utmost unanimity, 'condemned and annulled.'- This decision, the isacred synod, in their own statement, ' pronounced by canonical authority and by the judgment of the Holy Spirit' These patrons of perjury, in the annunciation of this infernal sentence, pretended, in the language of blasphemy, to the inspiration of heaven. Gregory the Ninth, in 1228, convened a Roman council, consisting of the bishops of Lombardy, Tuscany, and Apulia, and, with the approbation of this assembly, absolved, from their oath, all who had sworn fealty to Frederic the Roman Emperor. The sacred synod issued this sentence, because, according to its own statement, no person is obliged to keep faith with a Christian prince when he gainsays God and the saints.^ The pontiff; on this occasion, declared, in council, that ' he pro- ceedetl against the emperor, na against one who was guilty of heresy and who des|)ised the keys of the church.' The synodal decision contains a direct and unmitigated avowal of the dia- bolical maxim, that no ftiith should be kept with persons guilty of heresy or of rebellion against the popedom. The synod of Diamper, in India, issued a decision of the same kind. This assembly, in 1599, under the presidency of Menez, invalidated the oaths that those Indian Christians had taken against changing Syrianism for Po])ery, or receiving their clergy from the Roman pontiff' instead of the Babylonian patriarch. Such cbligations, the holy council pronounced pestilentiai and void, and the kee|)ing of then) an impiety and temerity .< The sacred synod, in this maiinei-, could, 'by a skdful use of their spiiitual artillery, exterminate obligations and oaths by wholesale. The encouragement to faithlessness and perjury was not ^ Onines (^hristianos a vinculo jurainonti absolvo. Labb. 12. GIK). ■^ Judicio Sancti Sjjiritus ilainnuimis. Irrituni os.se juclicainus, atciue omnino castraiims. ^ Labb. l'_'. 11G5. Hruy. 2. f)80. Platina, in Pascal. ■ (»,i nVst poiiit oblij.,; do -aider la foi, que Ton a juic ei iiii ijiiucc CLcestit-ii, quaud il s oppose i'l l.)icu et a ses saints. Hruy. 3. 179. l.abb. 13. 114, 1223 ^ Dcclarat Syiiodus juranienta hujusmodi nulla prorsus et irrita. Cossart. o. 51. ' 294 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY, confined to provincial synods, but extended to universal coun- cils. Six of these general ecclesiastical conventions patronized, in word or deed, by precept or example, violation of engage- ment and breach of trust. These were the universal councils of the Lateran, Lyons, Pisa, Constance, and Basil. The third general council of the Lateran, superintended by Alexander and clothed with infallibility, taught this principle in word and deed. The unerring fathers, in the sixteenth canon, styled ' an oath contrary to ecclesiastical utility, not an oath, but perjury.'' The pontiffs, whose province it is to explain oaths and vo\/s, always confounded ecclesiastical utility with pontifical aggrandizement. Obligations, therefore, which mili- tated against the interest or grandeur of the papacy, soon has- tened to their dissolution. The Lateran convention, in its twenty-seventh canon, exemplified its own theory, and disen- gaged, from their oath of fidelity, the vassals of the barons and lords who embraced or protected the heresy of Albigensianism.'"' These princes patronized heresy, and their subjects, therefore, were not bound to keep faith with such sovereigns, or to yield them fealty or obedience. This language is unequivocal, and supersedes, by its perspicuity and precision, the necessity of any comment. The fourth general council of the Lateran, in 1215, issued an enactment of the same kind. This infallible assembly, in its third canon, 'freed the subjects of such sovereigns as embraced heresy from their fealty.'^ The temporal lord, who refused to purify his dominions from heretical pollution, not only forfeited the allegiance of his vassals, but his title to his estate, which, in consequence, might be seized by any orthodox ad- venturer. Heresy, therefore, according to this unerring con- gress, rescinds the obligation of fidelity, cancels the right of property, and warrants the violation of faith. The general council of Lyons absolved the Emperor Frederic's vassals from their oatn of fealty.^ The synod in their own way, convicted the emperor of schism, heresy, and church-robbery. His criminality, therefore, according to the unerring council, warrai.ced a breach of faith, and a di.ssolution of the subjects' oath of obedience. Innocent, who presided on the occasion, represented himself as the viceroy of heaven, on whom God, 1 Non jurameuta, sed perjuria potius aunt diceuda, quiL> contra utilitatem ec* clesiasticam attentautur. Pith. 110. Labb. 13. 426. Gibert, 3. 504. 2 Relaxatos se noverint a debito fidelitatis et hominii, et totius obsequii. Labb. 13. 431. 3 Vassalos ab ejus lidelitatc denuncict absolutos. Bin. 8. 807. Labb. 13. 034 . * Omnes qui ei jurameuto. tidelitatis tenontur adstricti a juramento hujus- niodi prirpetuo absolventes. Labb. 14. 52. Binn. 8. 852. Paris, 651, 652. Giannon. XVIII. 3. VIOLATIONS OF OATHS BY POPISH COUNCILS. 295 in in the person of the Galilean fisherman, had conferred the keys of his kingdom, and vested with the power of binding and loosing. The council concurred with the pontiff. The pope and the prelacy, says Paris, ' lighted tapers and thundered, in frightfiil fulminations, against his imperial majesty.' The testi- mony of Paris is corroborated by Nangis and pope Martin.^ The general council of Pisa imitated those of the Lateran and Lyons. This assembly, in its fifteenth session, released all Christians from their oath of fidelity to Benedict and Gregory, and forbade all men, notwithstanding any obligation, to obey the rival pontiffs, whom the holy fathers, by a sum- mary process, convicted of perjury, contumacy, incorrigibility, schism, and heresy.'^ The sacred synod, in this instance, assumed the power of dissolving sworn engagements, and of warranting all Christendom to break faith with two viceroys of heaven, who, according to the synodal sentence, were guilty of schism and heresy. The general council of Constance, on this topic, outstripped all competition and gained an infamous celebrity, in recom- mending and exemplifying treacheiy, the demolition of oaths, and unfaithfulness to engagements. The holy assembly having convicted John, though a lawful pope, of simony, schism, heresy, infidelity, murder, perjury, fornication, adultery, rape, incest, sodomy, and a few other trifling frailties of a similar kind, deposed his holiness, and emancipated all Christians from their oath of obedience to his supremacy. ^ His infallibility, in the mean time, notwithstanding his simony, schism, heresy, perjury, murder, incest, and sodomy, exercised his prerogative of dissolving oaths as well as the council. The holy fathers had sworn to conceal from the pontiff their plans for his degradation. The trusty prelacy, however, notwithstanding their obligation to secrecy, revealed all, during the night, to his holiness. John, by this means, had the satisfaction of discov- ering the machinations of his judges, and of inducing the infallible bishops to perjury. The pontiff, however, by his sovereign authority, and by the power of the keys, soon dis- annulled these obligations, and delivered the perjured traitors, who composed the sacred synod, from their oath of secrecy. ' Diligeuti deliberatione prsehabita cum prrelatis ibidem congregatis super nefandis Frederici. Nangis, Ann. 1045. Dachery, 3. .35. Innocentius, memoratum Fredericum in coucilio Ludgunensi, eodem appro- bante concilio denunciavit. Dachery, .3. 684, 2 Nonobstante quocunque fidelitatis juramento. Labb. 15. 1138. Alex. 24. 573. Dachery, 1. 847. .1 Universes tit singulos Christianos ab ejus obedientia, fidelitate, et j aramento, ."ibaolutos deeiariiis. ^-ilex, 24. G20. i Les d^gageant par son autorit^ souveraine des sermens qu'ils avoient faits de ne rien rcSveler. Bruy. 4. 40. Labb. 16. 233. VTVp'tt'AnAiii-ffiiai^iiBTi; .' 296 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. I M The pontiff shewed the council, that he could demolish oaths as weU as his faithless accusers, who ' represented the whole church and had met in the spirit of God.' The Constantians, in the twentieth session, freed the vassals of Frederic, Duke of Austria, from their oath of fealty. The thirty-seventh session was distinguished by disentangling all Christians from their oath of fidelity, however taken, to Poije Benedict, and forbidding any to obey him on pain of the pen- alty annexed to schism and heresy.' The sacred synod, in its forty-first session, annulled and execrated all conventions and oatns, which might militate against the freedom and efficiencv 01 the pending election. This council's treatment of Huss and Jerome constituted the rnost revolting instance of its treachery. The martyrdom of these celebrated friends, indeed, was one of the most glarino-, undisguised, and disgusting specimens of pei-fidy ever ex- hibited to the gaze of an a,-,tonished world or recorded for the execration of posterity. John Huss was summoned to the city of Constance on a charge of heresy. His safety, durino' his journey, his stay, and his return, was guaranteed by I safe-conduct from the Emperor Sigismund, addressed to all civil and ecclesiistical governors in his dominions. Huss obeyed the summons. Plighted faith, however, could, in those days, confer no security on a man accused of heresy. Huss was tried and condemned by an ecclesiastical tribunal, which m its holy zeal, ' devoted his soul to the infernal devils,' and dehyered his body to the secular arm ; which, notwithstandino- the imperial promise of protection and in defiance of all justice and humanity, committed the victim of its own perfidy to thr flames.2 This harbinger of the reformation suffered marty.-- dom with the emperor's safe-conduct in his hand. He died as he had lived, like a Christian hero. He endured the punish- ment with unparalleled magnanimity, and, in the triumph of faith and the ecstacy of divine love, ' sung hymns to God.' while the mouldering flesh was consumed from his bones, till the immortal spirit ascended from the funeral pile and soared to heaven.'' Jerome,_ also, trepanned by the mockery of a safe-conduct from the faithless synod, shared the same destiny. This man, » Omnes Chriatianos ab ejus obedieatia atque juramentis absolvit. Coss. 4 81. Labb. 16. 3(»'J, (Wl, 714. 2 Animam tuam dcvovenius diabolis infernis. Lenfan. 1. 409. 3 Hi,8s monta sur Ic bilchei , avec une grande intrtipidite, et il mourut en chan- tant des Psaumes. Moreri, 4. 221. , - r---'-- ■''••'•■'■••'""• "itv-.-v tiiie rt-aijidtiuii 3i ■actcriiuncc. ii pratiqua le dehors de tons lea Actes quo suggere la devotion la plus ,=olide. ?Sa terveur redoubloit lorsqu'il apper9ut lo fiainbcau. Hist, du Widif. 2, 127, 128. VIOLATIONS OF OATHS BY POPISH COUNCILS. 297 distinguished for his friendship and eloquence, came to Con- stance, tor the generous purpose of supporting his earh- companion, and died with heroism, in the fire whifh had con- sumed his friend Huss and Jerome, says ^neas Sylvius, afterward Pope Pius the Second, ' discovered no symptom of weakness went to punishment as to a festival, and sung hymns nUhe midst of the flames and without interruption till the last "Doctor Murray, Ti^tular Archbishop of Dublin, has, in his examination before the British Commons, endeavored by hh usua misrepresentations and sophistry, to exculpate Si^smund and the synod from the imputation of faithlessness. The task was Herculean, but the bishop's arguments are silly. Murray like Phaeton, failed ma bold attempt. The imperial safe-conl duct, says the doctor, following Becanus, Maimbourg, and Alex- ander, was only a passport, like those granted to travelers on the European continent, to hinder interruption or molestation on the way; but, by no means, to prevent the execution of justice, in case of a legal conviction. The archbishop's state- ment IS as faithless as the emperor's safe-conduct or the synod's sentence. The emperor's promised protection to Huss, 'extended not only to his going and stay, but also to his RETURN.' The return ot this victim of treachery was intercepted by the faggot and the stake, trying obstacles, indeed, but good enough for a heretic. The emperor^s safe-conduct, says the Popish aSthor of the history of Wickhffism, 'wa.s, in its terms, clear, general, absolute, and without reserve.'^ The council was accessory to the emperor's treachery. The sate-conduct, indeed, was not binding on the Constantian clergy These were not a party to the agreement, and possessed, at least a canonical and admitted power of pronouncing on the theoloffv of the accused. An ecclesiastical court was the proper tribunal tor deciding an ecclesiastical question. The Constantian fathers therefore, according to the oinnion of the age, mi^ht, with propriety have tried the Catholicism of Huss, and on^evidence declared him guilty of heresy and obstinacy. But this did not satisty the holy synod, who advised and sanctioned Sigismund's aulune fvrl^f '"'" '"P^""!: f """™.° ^ "" ^^^^'''' " "^ l^"^ "^^c^appa jamais d rnt6m,t i: 1 '"•'"''^' "'* ^^ '"i'""^.''" ^"^^''^««°- Au milieu do.s rtammes, ils Uiantueiitdeshymiiesjusqu'audorniersoupir. Moreri, 4. 232. 8vlv c 36 Vui les ayoieut accompagnez leur avoient oui chanter jusqu'au dernier soupir de leur vie las louanges de Dieu. Hist, du VVielif 2 u ucrnier soupu 26(» '"'''' '*'"'''' """'■''"• *"* '''''^'^'' ^^^''•■^ permittatis. Alexander, 25, 2,58, De le laisser librement et sftrfittient iiasHor r1o,np,,,...r ='"rr-'+fr -f — ^ .vioien, 4. ZU Du Pin, 3. 92. Lcs termes etoient evidens, uendraux absolus Rep"'"°' ''''"■'"■ "^'*°^''' '^" Wickliffianisme, 98. 'llaimb 215 Sn! 298 THK VARIATIONS OF POPERY. breach of faith, and, by this means, became partakers in his perfidy. But Huss, says Murray, suffered in Constance, a free city, over the laws of which Sigisraund had no control. The emperor, he concludes, could not have prevented the Constantian Act of Faith. This is another shameful misrepresentation. The bishop, in his statement, breaks faith with history as much as the em- peror did with Huss. The emperor made no attempt to oppose the synod. His majesty, on the contrary, protested, that rather than support the Heresiarch in his error and obstinacy, he would kindle the fire with his own hands. The sentence, accordingly was executed by imperial authority. The council consigned the prisoner to the emperor, and the emperor to the Duke of Bavaria, who delivered him to the executioner.* Sigismund, it appears, possessed power ; but instead of using it for the pro- tection of Huss, he exerted it for his punishment. He could not, inde>id, have annulled the prisoner's sentence of heresy ; but he co\'ld have granted him life and liberty, till the expira- tion of his safe-conduct, as Charles V. did to Luther. But the council's sanction of the oath-annulling and faith- violating system depends, by no means, on the contents of the emperor's safe-conduct or his treatment of Huss. Murray, if he even could have vindicated Sigismund, would have effected just nothing with respect to the council. The holy ruffians, at Constance, avowed the shocking maxim with fearlessness and without disguise, both by their deputation to the emperor and by their declarations in council. The deputation sent to the emperor, for the purpose of con- certing a plan for the safety and convenience of the council's future deliberations, maintained this principle. These gave his majesty to understand, that the council had authority to disen- gage him from a legal promise, when pledged to a person guilty of heresy. This is attested by Dachery, an eye-witness, in his German history of the Constantian council. The deputation, says this historian, ' in a long speech, persuaded the emperor, that by decretal authority, he should not keep faith with a man accused of heresy"^ Nauclerus, who lived shortly after the council, testifies nearly the same thing. The emperor himself entertained this opinion of the deputation's sentiments. His majesty, addressing Huss at his last examination, declared ' that some thought he had no right to afford any protection to a man iLenfan. 1. 82, 318. Du Pin, 3. 94. Bruy. 4. 66. Hist, du Wicklif . 126. - Csesar, quasi tcnorc dccrctalium, Husso fidciii dateiii prsstare non teneie- tur multis verbis persuasus, Husso et Bohemis Salvi Conductus fidem fregit. Lenfant, 1. 82. VIOLATION OF OATHS BY POPISH COUNCILS. .299 convicted or even suspected of heresy.' The deputation, on this occasion, must have known and represented the opinion of the synod, which acquiesced, without any contradiction, in this statement, and which, had the emperor been mistaken, should have corrected the error, Huss was a victim to the malevolent passions of the council, and the superstition and perfidy of the emperor. The faith -violating maxim was avowed, not only by the de- putation, but also by the council. The infallible assembly, boldly, roundly, and expressly declared, that ' no faith or pro- mise, prejudicial to Catholicism, was to be kept with John Huss by natural, divine, or human law.'^ Prejudicial to Catholicism, in this case, could signify no infraction on the faith of the church ; but merely the permission of a man convicted of heresy, to escape with his life. Faith, therefore, according to the council, should be violated rather than allow a heretic to live. The synod of Basil, however, and the diet of Worms thought otherwise, when they suffered the Bohemians and Luther, under the protection of a safe-conduct, to withdraw from the council and the diet, and return in safety* to their own country. The sacred synod, unsatisfied with this frightful declaration, issued, in its nineteenth session, another enactment of a similar kind, but expressed in more general tenr'.s and capable of more extensive application. According to these patrons of perfidy, ' no safe-conduct, disadvantageous to the faith or jurisdiction of the church, though granted by emperor or king, and ratified by the most solemn obligations, can be any protection to per- sons convicted of heresy. Persons suspected of defection from the faith, may be tried by the proper ecclesiastical judges, and, if convicted and persisting in error, may be punished though they attended the tribunal relying on a safe-conduct, and otherwise would not have appeared.'^ This declaration, it is plain, contains a formal sanction of the atrocious principle. Alexander, followed by Murray, Crotty, and Higgins, endeavors to vindicate the council and the emperor, by distributing the condemnation and execution of Huss between the synodal and royal authority.* The council, in the exercise of its ecclesiastical jui-isdiction, convicted the accused of heresy, 1 NonnuUi dicant, nos de jure ei non poase patrocinari, qui aut hoeretlcuB, aut de hagreai aliqua suspectus. Hard. 4. 397. Lenfant, 1. 492. 2 Nee aliqua sibi fides, aut proinissio de jure naturali, Divino, aut humano, fuerit in prsBJudicium CatholiccB fidei observanda. Labbeud, 16. 292. 3 Salvo dicto conductu non obstante, liceat judici competenti ecclesijistico de ejusmodi peraonarum erronbus incjuirere, et alias contra eos dcbite procedere, eosdemque punire. Labbeus, 16. 301. Alex. 25. 255. Crabb. 2, 1111. ' Alex. 25. 256. Murray, 660. Crotty, 88. Higgins, 271. 300 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. and the emperor, accoi-ding to the laws of the state, execute ^^' a* le^t, a party in that assembly, pleaded the precedent of synodal and imperial treachery at the Constantian a»ssembly, in favor of breaking faith with Luther.' This showed their opinion of the council. Charles V., howerer, ])0ssessed more integrity than Sigismund, ' and was resolved not to blush with his predecessor. '^ The Elector Palatine suppoitedthe emperor; and their united authority defeated the intended design of treachery. The councils of Basil and Trent, in the safe-conducts granted to the Bohemians and Germans, admitted the same tact. The Basiliaas, in their safe-conduct to the Bohemians, disclaimed all intention of fallacy or deception, open or con- cealed, prejudicial to the public faith, founded on any authority, power, right, law, canon, or council, especially those of Con- stance or Sienna. The Trentine safe-conduct to the German Protestants is to the same effect." Both these documents, proceeding from general councils, reject, for themselves, the Constantian precedent of treachery, and, in so doing, grant its existence. The general council of Basil copied the bad example, issued at the Lateran, at Lyons, Pisa, and Constance. This unerring assembly, in its fourth session, invalidated all oaths and obliga- tions, which might prevent any .person from coming to the council.* Attendance, at Basil, it was alleged, would tend to ecclesiastical utility, and to this end oven at the expense of perjury, every sacred and sworn engagement had to yield. The sacred synod, in its thirty-fourth session, deposed Eugenius tor simony, perjury, schism, and lieresy, and absolved alj > Qui appi'ouvant cc qui s'titoit fait .'i Constance, disoiont ciu'on nc devoit jpoint lui garder la foi. Paolo. 1. 28. i p® "^7i-'"x pas rmigir avec Sigismond, mon predcccsscur. Lcnfant, 1. 404. - Fromittentes sine fraude ct quolibet dolo, quod noiumus uti aliqui auctori- tate, vol potentia, jure, statute, vol privilegio legum vel canonum et quorum- cumque concilioruin, spccialitcr Constantiensis in aliciuod prcujudioium salvo comUictui. Bin. 8. 25, et 9. 398. Crabb. 3. 17. Labb. 17. 244. et20. 120. >" quis piTcte.'stu cujnscunque jurameiai, vul obligationis, aut promis- sionis, se ab accessu ad concilium dispensatum existimaret. Alex. 25. 321 Crabb. 3. 19. '--t:^'' '"'it'^ri?^ " "'nf'v.'^T'^^"'* 302 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Christmns from their sworn obedience to his Supremacy.' The pontiff was guilty of heterodoxy, and therefore, unworthy of good faith, ana became a proper object of treachery. The holy fathers, in the thirty-seventh session, condemned and annulled all compacts and oaths, which might obstruct the election of a sovereign pontiff.'' This was clever and like men determined to do business. This maxim, in this manner, prior to the reformation, ob- tained general reception in the popish communion. The Roman hierarchs, as the viceroys of heaven, continued, according to interest or fancy, and especially with persons convicted or sus- pected of schism or a[)0sta8y, to invalidate oaths or vows of all descriptions. General councils arrogated the same autho- rity, practised the same infernal principle. Universal har- mony, without a breath of opposition, prevailed on this topic through papal Christendom. This abomination, therefore, in all its frightful deformity, constituted an integi'al part of popery. The reformation on this subject, commenced a new era. The deformity of the papal system remained, in a great mea- sure, unnoticed amid the starless night of the dark ages, and even in the dim twilight which dawned on the world at the revival of letters. The hideous spectre, associated with kindred horrors and concealed in congenial obscurity, escaped for a long time, the execration of man. But the light of the reformation exposed the monster in all its frightfulness. The Bible began to shed its lustre through the world. The beams of the Sun of Righteousness, reflected from the book of God, poured a flood of moral radiance over the earth. Man opened his eyes, and the foul spirits of darkness fled. Intellectual light shed its rays through the mental gloom of the votary of popery, as well as the patron of Protestantism. The abettors of Romanism, in the general diffusion of scrip- tural information and rational philosophy, felt ashamed of ancient absurdity; and have, in consequence, disowned or modified several tenets of their religion, which were embraced, with unshaken fidelity, by their orthodox ancestors. The six universities of Louvain, Douay, Paris, Alcala, Valladolid, and Salamanca, which, in their reply to Pitt's questions, disowned the king-deposing power, disavowed also the oath-annulling and faith -violating maxim. The Romish Committee of Ireland in 1792, in the name of aU their popish countrymen, represen- 1 Omnes Christicolas ab ipsius obedientia, fidelitate, ac juramentie absolvit. Labb. 17. 391. Urabb. 3. 107, 2 Promissionea, obligationes, juramenta, in adversum hujus electionis, damnat reprobat, et annuUat. Crabb. 3. 109. Labb. 16. 395. \ VIOLATION OF OATHS BY POPISH COUNCILS. 803 ted the latter principle, as worthy of unqualified reprobation and destructive of all morality and religion. The Irish bishops, Murray Doyle, and Kelly, in their examination before the ^ritish Commons in 1826, disclaimed all such sentiments with becommg and utter indignation, which was followed at the Ym^u'^ examination by the deprecation of Crotty, Slavin, and M'Hale.' This at the present day seems to be the avowal of all, even those of the Romish communion, except perhaps a few apostles of Jesuitism. , . ™^.^i*°g® ^» ^^ edifying specimen of the boasted immuta- bihty of Romanism, and one of the triumphs of the Reformation, by which it wa.s produced. The universal renunciation of the hateful maxim is a trophy of the great revolution, which Doyle, in a late publication, has denominated the grand apostasy. O'lS?; T^^85' ^^^' ^' ^^' ^^^' ^''°"^' ^^- ^^''^"'' ^^^' ^'^'^^' 2^®- li CHAPTER IX. ARIANISM. TRINITARIANI8M OF ANTIQIUTY— OUIOIN OP THE ARIAN HYSTBM— ALEXANDRTAN AND BITHYNIAN COUNCILS— NICENB AND TYRIAN OOUNCILH— 8EMI-ARIANI8M— .\JJTIO0HAN AND ROMAN COUNCILS— 8ABDI0AN, ARLE8IAN, MILAN, AND 8IRMIAN COUNCILS— LIBERIU8— FELIX— ARMENIAN, 8ELEUCIAN, AND BYZANTINE COUNCILS — STATE OP CHRISTENDOM— VARIETY OF CONFESSIONS. Trinitarianism, though without system or settled phraseology, was the faith of Christian antiquity. This doctrine indeed was not confined to Judaism or Christianity ; but maj', in a disfigured and uncouth semblance, be discovered in the annals of gentilism and philosophy. The Persian, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman, and Scandinavian mythologies exhibit some faint traces, some distorted features of this mystery, conveyed, no doubt, through the defective and muddy channels of tradition. The same in a misshapen form, appears in the Orphic theology, and in the Zoroastrian, Pythagorean, and Platonic philosophy. The system which tradition in broken hints and caricatured representation insinuated, was declared, in plain language, bj- revelation, and received, in full confidence, by Christian faith. The early Christians, however, unpractised in speculation, were satisfied with acknowledging the essential unity and per- .sonal distinctions of the Supreme Being. The manner of the identity and personality, the unity and distinction of Father. Son, and Spirit, had, in agi-eat measure, escaprd the vain re- .«earch of refinement and presumption. Philosuj;; v 'Itiving the lap.se of three ages after the introduction of ^'lir; ..j^ ly, had not, to any considerable extent, dared, on thi,, ..a'.joct, u) theo- rize or define. The confidence of man, in those days of.sim- })licit}'', had not attem])ted to obtrude on the arcan;i of heaven. The i-elations of paternal, filial, and processional deity escaped, in this manner, the eye of vain curiosity, and remained, in con- sequence, undefined, undisputed, and unexi)lained. No deter- mined or dictatorial expressions being prescribed by synodal or imperial authority, the unfettered freedom of antiquity ascribed to the several divine persons in the Godhead, all the perfections OHIOIN OF THE ARIAN SYSTEM. 305 '>f Deity. This liberty, indeed, WA« .iiifriendly to precision of lan^age; and many plnase.s, accordingly, were used by the ancients on thi.s subject which are unmarked with accuracy, iho hostihty of horesiarchs first taught the necessity of discri- mination and exactr.e.ss of diction, on this as on other topics of Arius, about the year 317, was. on this question, the first r« If. ??•''•' ^'"^'^ °^ anti,.uity, whose erroJ obtained exten- Arfpmr P ? vx7^' ""^^.''^ ^^^^ important consequences, i fb^r^' ^*'" • ^'^T'.^''^ "" ^'^ ^^^^^ speculators, indeed, had on ths topic, broached some novel opinions. These however were ocal and soon checked. But Arianism, like contrgTon spread h rough Christendom : and was malignant in its nfturo and lasting in its consequences. This heresy originated in Alexandria. The patriarch of that city, whose name was Alexander, discoursino" nerhaos with ostentation, on the Trinity. a.scribed cons ubstaritiaS; and e^iia I. y to the Son. Anus, actuated, says Theodoret. with envy and ambition, oppo.sed this theory. Epiphanius represents fhT^ml ^^>«„'j"empt, as mHuenced by Satan and inspired by the afflatus of the Devil. Alexander's theology seemed o Arius^ ^o destroy the unity of God and the distinc^tion of Father and' Epiphanius has drawn a masterly and striking portrait of Anus. His stature was tall and his aspect melancholy. His whole person, like the wily serpent, seemed formed for decep- tion. His dress was simple and pleasing ; whilst his address arid conversation, on the first interview, were mild and winnincr His prepossessing manner was calculated to captivate the mind by the fascinations of gentleness and insinuation. Sozomen and S .crates represent Arius as an able dialectician, and a formida- ble champion in the thorny field of controversy * His opinion,s, on the topic of the Trinity, differed widely from the generality of his tellow Christians. The Son, according to his view was a created being, formed in time out of nothin ounteract the supreme authority of the general Nicene coun- cil. Ih.s assembly, which was convened by the emperor in .335 consisted of about sixty of the eastern episcopacy Athanasms, who was compelled to apt.ear as a orimin,! with about forty Egyptians. Dionysius, with the imperial guards, was commissioned to prevent commotion or border The Arian faction was led by Eusebius of Cfesarea with passion and tyranny. The whole scene combined th^ ndsv fury of a mob and the appalling horrors of anlnqulS/ Athanasius, notwithstanding, with admirable dexterity ex poS the injustice of th^ council and vindicated his own fnnocence lu^dtSTv^hll'^'^^'TT'-'^-"^^'^^' ^--^^^ ^"- ""n murdered by the bravoes of Arianism, had not the soldiery rescued the intended victim from assassination. He embarked synod, m his absence, did not forget to pronounce sentence of excommunication and banishraeni •'«"tence ot The Anti-trinitarians, soon after the Nicene council sniitinfo tmg to the Nicenians, asserted his similarity.^ Arianism ndeed, in the multiplicity of its several forms, occupies aH S immense space between Socmianism, which holds the Son't S TCt''^'^' Trinitarianism, which maintats His W deity, rh is intermediate distance seems to have been filled by the Anti-trinitarian systems of the fpurth centuiy L t ey GodK'ThrA^'" ''''^f'r '' '''' ^^-'^-i person" S Uodhead The Arians and Semi-Arians, however, wrandinir about the similarity and dissimilarity, showed thi utmost opposition and hatred to each other, as well asTfthe Nicenians who contended for the consubstantiality i^icenians thp AnffnT-""^'"''"/!;"'^ Trinitarians soon came to action, in Itmb dlTor^^ Roman synods. Julius, the Roman pontif? assembled a Roman council of Hfty Italian bishops, in which cJ^T \r' '^'^"'""^ ^"^ ••^'^'"^t^^d ^^ communion. The Greeks, m the mean time, assembled at Antioch, and opened 2. m """"'"■ ^^' ^^■'^- f^^^odA. 30. Alex. 7. m. Godeau, '' Epiph. n. 73. P. 485. Alex. 7. 95. 308 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. a battery against the enemy/ These, amounting to ninety, degraded Athanasius, and issued three Semi-Arian creeds, which differing in other particulars, concurred in rejecting the consiibstantiality. The council of Sardica, in 347, declared i r Athanasius and Trinitarianism, and was opposed by that of Philippopolis in Thracia. The Sardican assembly consisted of about 300 of the Latins, and the other of about seventy of the Greeks. The hostile councils encountered each other with their spiritual artillery, and hurled .he thunders of mutual excommunication. The Latins at Sardica cursed and degraded the Arians with great devotion. The Greeks at Philippopolis, retorting the imprecations with equal piety, condemned the consubstantiality, and excommunicated Athanasius the Alexandrian patriarch, Julius the Roman pontiff, and their whole party. Athanasius. in this manner, stigmatised in the east as a sinner, was revered in the west as a saint. Accounted the patron of heresy among the Greeks, he was reckoned, among the Latins, the champion of Catholicism. Having devoted each other to Satan with mutual satisfaction, the pious episcopacy pioceeded to the secondary task of enacting forms of faith. The western pre- lacy were content with the Nicene confession. The oriental clergy published an ambiguous creed faintly tinged with Semi- arianism.'' The Sardican council was the last stand which the Latins, during the reign of Constantius, made for Athanasius and Trinitarianism. The Greeks, who were mostly Arians, were joined by the Latins, and both in concert, in the councils of Aries, Milan, Sirmium, Arirainum, Seleucia, and Con.stantino- ple, condemned Athanasius t.nd supported Arianism. The Synod of Aries, in 353, commenced hostilit'es against consubstantiality and its Alexandrian phampion. Constantius had long, with the utmost anxiety, wished the western prelacy to condemn the Alexandrian metropjlitan. But the emperor, on account of his enemy's popularity, and the reviving Ireedom of the Roman government, proceeded with caution and diffi- culty. The Latins met at Aries, where Marcellus and Vincent, who, from their capacity and experience, were expected to maintain the dignity of their legation, represented the Roman hierarch. Valens and Ursacius, who were veterans in faction, led the Arian and Lnperial party ; and succeeded by the superiority of their tactics and the influence of their sovereign, in procuring the condemnation of Athanasius.^ ' Socrat. 11. 7. Rin. 1, .'ilO AIpy. 7 l.^il OnHpflii. % 20 *Theod. 11. 8. Socrat. 11. 20. Bin. 1. 5,58. Alex. 7. 153. Bin. 1. 589. Labh. 2. 82.3. Bruys, 1. 115. Bruys. 1. 112. COU^•CTLS OF SARDICA, ARLES, AND MILAN. 309 ,T\^,f ^"°^, ^f Aries was, in 355, succeeded by that of Milan, and attended with similar consequences. This convention summoned by Constantius, consisted of about 300 of the western and a few of the oriental clergy. The assembly which m number appears to have equalled the Nicene councU seemed, at first, to favor the Nicene faith and its intrS defender. Dionysius, Eusebius, Lucifer, and Hilarv made a vigorous, though an unsuccessful stand, 'fiut tfe inLTty of the bishops was gradually undermined by the sophistr? of the Arians and the solicitation of the emperor, who gratffied nis revenge at the expense of his dignity, and exposid his own passions while he influenced those%f^the cfergr Reason and truth were silenced by the clamors of a venll majoriV The Arians were admitted to communion, and the hero of Trinita- mnisrn wa.s, with all due solemnity, condemned by the formal judgment of western as well as eastern Christendom fV, J f Q-""'*^"' ^^^'■^^^ and Milan were corroborated by those of Sirmium. The Sirmian assembly, convoked by the emperor and celebrated, in the annals of antiquity, conslted .ays Sozomen,' of both Greeks and Latins; and, therefore Tn the usual acceptation of the term, was a general council The westerns, according to Binius, amounted to more than three hundred, and the easteras, in all probability, were equally numerous. The fathers of Sirmium' must haVe beenTbout double those of ISic^a.'^ The assembly seems to have had sev- eral sessions at considerable intervals, and its chronology ha.s been adjusted by Petavius and Valesius. ^^ The Sirmians emitted three forms of faith. The first in r!L fcl^e^onsubstantiality, but contains no express decla- ration agamst the divinity of the Son. This exposition which Athana.sius accounted Arian, Gelasius, Hilary and FacunduH reckoned Trinitarian.' The eastern and western champions of the faith differed, in this manner, on the ortllodoxy of a creed, issued by a numerous council and confirmed by 1 Roman pontia Athanasius condemned, as heresy, a conlt- Po.l?^r^- ^^^"'^' '''T''%^ intherearbyhis^ufdlibiUty, Pope GelaBius, approved as Catholicism. This was an admU I ibje display of unity. The second formulary of Sirmium in .30/ contains pure Arianism, The consubstantiajity and 'C ,-n /' "" f celebrated confession, are rejected, and the &on, in honor and glory, represented as inferior to the Father. ■ t'^' l^'i?' /"cnit. 2. 36. Bin. 1. 289. Labb. 2. 827 Athanasi rP -tin., r*''"^*'" """ '"M^robat, imo censet Catholicam. Sed ab SIO THE TARIATIONS OF POPERY. who alone possesses the attributes of eternity, invisibility, and immortality. The third, which was afterward adopted in the Armenian synod, is Semi-Arian. Rejecting the consubstanti- ality, as unscriptui-al, it asserts the similarity of the Son. The second Sirmian confession was confirmed by Pope Libe- rius. Baronius, Alexander, Binius, and Juenin indeed have labored hard to show that the creed which Liberius signed, was not the second, but the first of Sirmium, which, according to Hilary, was orthodox.' But the unanimous testimony of history is agjiinst this opinion. Du Pin has stated the transactions, on this occasion, with his usual candor and accuracy. The Ro- man bishop, according to this author, subscribed the second of Sirmium, which was Arian, while an exile at Berea, and the first of the same city, which was Semi-Arian, afterwards at the place in which it was issued. ' All antiquity, with one consent, admits the certainty of this Pontiff's subscription to an Arian creed, and speaks of his fall as an apostasy from the faith."- Du Pin's statement and the Arianism of the Sirmian confession, which Liberius signed, has been attested by Liberius, Hilary, Athanasius, Jerome, Philostorgius, Damasus, Anasta#sius, and Sozomen. Liberius himself, in his epistle to his oriental clergy, declared, that he signed, at Berea, the confession which was presented to him by Demophilus, a decided and zealous partisan of Ari- anism. Demophilus, the Roman pontift" writes, ' explained the Sirmian faith, which Liberius, with a willing mind, afterward subscribed.' He avers, in the same production, that ' he agreed with the oriental bisho[)s,' M^ho were notoriously Arian, ' in all things.'"' The sainted Hilary calls Liberius a prevaricator, designates the confession issued at Sirmium, proposed by Demophilus, and signed by the i)ontiff, ' the Arian perfidy,' and launches ' three anathemas against his holiness and his companions, who wei'e all heretics.'^ Hilary's account shows, in the clearest terms, that it was not the first Sirmian formulary which Liberius signed. This, Hilary accounted orthodox, and therefore would not denominate it a perfidy. Athanasius confirms the relation of Hilary and the apostasy «of Liberius, 'who, through fear of death, subscril)ed.' Jerome ' Spon. 357. XIIl. Alex. 7. 117. Bin. 1. 576. 'Omnes antiqui, uno ore, de lapsu Liberii, velut ,„ Athanasius, ad .SoL-Solicita- >.c ac tregit et ad subseriptiouem hieresios oompiilit. Jeroui. 4 124 Libe- niis titdio victus exihi et in ha^retica pravitate subscribens. Jeroui in Chron fv T"!^ ■'f"'"? '^'"' "'"'P''.""' *"" Ml" xai Kara yi rov Mavaaiov xmoypwiiai. Philos' iv.,1 UberiusoonsensitConstaiitioha>retiuo. Anastasius, 11, Bin 1 ,576 «:8io- '^■roamootioKoyfiv tin, uvai rw narpi rov wov o)jLop. pertidi;" cor eiiais.",!-, Eusel--. in Brev. Rom. Liberius consensiterrori Arianorum. Cusan, II. 5. ("aron 87 ijbenus m illaui pravitati'm subaeripsissit. Areolus in (.'aron, 96, 312 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. His supremacy's fall from Trinitarianism, indeed, Is attested by all antiquity and by all the moderns, who have any preten- Bions to candor or honesty. The -dlation has been denied only by a few men, such as Baronius and Bellarmine, whose days were spent in the worthy task of concealing or pervert- ing the truth. These, utterly destitute of historical authority, have endeavored to puzzle the subject by misrepresentation and chicanery. Baronius maintains the orthodoxy of the Sirmian confession signed by the Roman pontiff. The annalist, on this topic, has the honor to differ from the saints and his- torians of antiquity, such as Hilary, Athanasius, Jerome, Damasus, and Sozomen. His infallibihty, according to Bel- larmine, encouraged Aiianism only in external action ; while his mind, ' that noble seat of thought,' remained the unspotted citadel of genuine Catholicism. This was very clear and sensible in the Jesuit, who seems to have been nearly as good at distinc- tions as Walter Shandy. The pontiffs vindicators, such as Baronius, Bellarmine, Binius, Juenin, Faber, Dens, and Bossuet, who deny his Aiianism', admit his condemnation of Athanasius,his communion with the Arians, and his omission of the consubstantiality. Thes« errors, which are acknowledged, amount, in reality, to a pro- fession of Arianism and aa immolation of the truth. The cause of Athanasius, says Maimbourg, ' was inseparable from the faith which ho defended.' The condemnation of the Trinita- LiberiuB ^tant tombe en h^rdsie. Mezeray. .")6I. Concile de Sirmium ayant dres8(5 une profession de foi en faveurde I'arianisuio Libera y souscrivit. Brnys, ]. 118. ' Liberius subscripsit Arianoruni tidei professioui. Petavius, 2. 134. Liberius eut la foiblef se de souscrire ^l une formule de foi dresst^e k Sirmium avec beaucoup d'artilice par ies Ariens. Avocat, 2. 67. Legimus Liberium Arianae pravitati subscripsisse. Gerson inCossant, 3. 1156 Liberius souscrivit k la doctrine des Ariens. Vignier, 3. 879. Liberius tfedio victus exilii, in hwretica privitate subscribens. Marian, in trabb. 1. 347. Liberius Papa Ariana- pertidite consensit. Alvarus, II. 10. bub Constantio Imperatore Ariano machinante, Liberio prwsule similiter hieretico. Beda, 3. 326. Marty. 19. Calend. Sept. Arianus, ut quidam scribunt, est factus. .SabelJ. Enn. 7. L. 8. Lib6re souscrivit TArianisme. Gerson in Lenf an. Pisa, 1. 286. Liberius reversus ab exilio, hareticis favet. Regin. 1. De Liberio Pape, constat fuisse Arianum. Alphonsus. I. 4. Caron 96 Vere Arianus fuit. t'aron.c. 18. ' Quilibet homo potest errare in tide, et effiei hwreticus : sicut de multis sum- mis. Pontificibus legimus ut de Liberio, Tostatus, in Laun. ad Metay 16 On ne pent nier qu'ils ne fussent hert^tiques. Godeau, 2. 286. Liberius fidei formula} hwretica? subKcriiKit, T)ii Pin 134'' Liberius approuva solenneilemfnt I'Arianisme tombe'r dans I'ablme de I'h^r.- sit. Maimbourg, c. 10. COUNCILS OP ARIMINUM AND SELEUCLA. S13 rian chief, according to Godeau and Moreri, ' was tantanjouot to the condemnation of Catholicism.'' The Papal church, therefore, in its representation at 8ir- mium, through the oriental and occidental communions was in this manner, guilty of genei-al apostasy. Its head and its mem- bers, or the Roman pontiff and his clergy, conspired through eastern and western Christendom, against Catholicism, and fell into heresy. The defection extended to the Greeks and Latins and was sanctioned by the pope. No fact, in all antiquit\ is better attested than this event, in which all the cotempoiary historians concur, without a single discord to interrupt the general harmony. The world, on this occa.sion, was blessed with two cotem- porary Arian Pontiffs. During the expatriation of Liberius *elix was raised to the Papacy, and remains to the present day a saint and a martyr of Romanism. This Hierarch, notwith- standing, was, without any lawful election, ordained by Arian bishops, communicated with the Arian party, embraced sar bocrates and Jerome, the Arian heresy, and violated a solemn oath which, with the rest of the Roman clergy, he had taken to acknowledge no other bishop while Liberius lived. Atha- uasius, the champion of Trinitarianism, was so ungenteel as to style this saint, ' a monster, raised to the Papacy by the malice of Antichrist.'* The church, at this time, had two Arian heads, and God had two heretical vicars-general. One viceroy of hea,ven was guilty of Arianism, and the other, both of Arianism and perjury. Baronius and Bellarmine should have informed Christendom, which of these vice-gods, or whether both pos- sessed the attributft of infallibility. ' The councils of Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople fol- lowed the defection of Liberiu.s, and displayed, in a striking point of view, the versatility of the Papal communion and the triumph of the Arian heresy. Constantius had designed to call a general council, for the great, but impracticable purpose cf effecting unanimity of faith through all the precincts of eastern and western Christendom; and Arianism, in the emperor's intention, was to be the standard of uniformity. His majesty however, was diverted, probably by the intrigues of the Ariaas' from the resolution of convening the Greeks and Latins in oiiJ assembly. Two councils, tlierefore, one in the east and the (.odeau, 5, 286. Moreri, .5. 154. iMaiirbourg, IV. Bellarmin, IV. 9. Bin 1 5');} Athr^aTir Den^'o^lfi""' ^"''"'^ communicaRse et subscripsisse daninati.;uj. ,i/nn!T%''''-'^"*i* ""^^'^V"'/*" tl'Athaiiasccommunia avecles Ariens.et sousc.i Tit uiie confession de fo, oi\ la foi de Nic<5e etoit snpprimee. Bossuet, Opus 2 .54i -Athan. ad Sol. Theod. 11. 17. Socrat. II. 37. Sozomen, IV II lira's.. 314 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. other in the west, were appointed to meet at the same time. The westerns were instructed to meet at Ariminum and the easterns at Seleucia. The Ariminian council, which met in 359, consisted of 400, or, as some say, 600 western bishops, from Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain, and Illyricum.' The Arian party, in this convention, was small, amounting only to about 80 ; but was led by Valens and Ursacius, who trained under the Eusebian banners in the ecclesiastical wars of the east, had been practised in faction and popular discussion, which gave them a superiority over the undisciplined ecclesias- tical soldiery of the west. The council, at first, assumed a high tone of orthodoxy. The consubstantiality was retained, the Nicene faith confirmed, and the Arian heresy condemned wit.i the usual anathemas. The Ariminians, unsatisfied with the condemnation of Arianism, proceeded next to point their spiritual artillery against its par- tisans.^ These were sacrificed to the interests of the Nicene theology, and hurled from their episcopal thrones, as an immo- lation to the offended genius of Trinitarianism. But the end of this asf^embly disgraced the beginning. Ursa- cius and Valens, experienced in wordy war and skilled in syno- dal tactics, rallied their flying forces, and charged the victorious enemy with menace and sophistry. These veterans summoned to their aid, the authority of tlie emperor and the control of the Prefect, who was commissioned to banish the refractory, if they did not exceed fifteen. The chicanery of the Semi-Arian faction embarra.ssed, confounded, and, at last, deceived the ignorance or simplicity of the Latin prelacy, who, by fraud and intimida- tion, yielded to the enemy, and surrendered the palladium of the Nicenian faith. The authority of Constantius, the influence of Taurus, the stratagems of Ursacius and Valens, the dread of banishment, the distress of hunger and cold, extorted the reluctant subscription of the Ariminian Fathers to a Semi-Arian form of faith, which established the similarity of the Son, but suppressed the consubstantiality. The suppression, however, did not satisfy the Semi-Arian party. An addition was sub- joined, declaring ' the Son unlike other creatures.' This plainly implied that the Son is a created being, though of a superior order and a peculiar kind. The western clergy, in thi.'< manner were bubbled out of their religion. All, says Prosper, 'condemned, through treachery, ■ the ancient faith', and sub- scribed the perfidy of Ariminum.'' The crafty dexterity of ' Theod. II. 18. Epiph. I. 870. Hilary, 428. Alex. 7. 180. Godeau, 2. 296. 'Theod. II. 1(5. Labbeus, 2. SOfi, 912, Paolo, 2 106. Juenin. 3. 71. ' Synodus apud Ariminum et Seleuciam Isaurife facta, in qua antiqua patrum fides decern primo legatorum dehinc omnium proditione damnata est. Prosper, 1. 42.3. Socrat. II. 87. Sozomen, IV. 19. VARIETY OF CONFESSIONS. 315 the Semi-Arians gulled the silly simplicity or gross ignorance of the Trinitarians, who, according to their own story, soon repented. Arianism, said the French chancellor at Poissy, was established by the general council of Ariminum. The eastern clergy, in the mean time, met at Seleucia, and exhibited a scene of confusion, fury, tumult, animosity, and nonsense, calculated to excite the scorn of the infidel and the pity ©f the wise. Xazianzen calls this assembly ' the tower of Babel and the council of Caiaphas.' An hundred and sixty bishops attended. The Semi-Arians amounted to about one hundred and five, the Arians to forty, and the Trinitarians to fifteen ; Leonas, the Quajstor, attended, as the Emperor's deputy, to prevent tumult. . The Arian.s and Semi-Arians commenced furious debates on the Son's similarity, dissimilarity, and con- substantiality. Dissension and animosity arose to such a height, that Leonas withdrew, telling the noisy ecclesiastics, that his presence was not necessary to enable them to wrangle and scold. The Semi-Arian creed of Antioch, however, was,°on the motion of Sylvan, recognised and subscribed ; and the Arians withdrew from the assembly. The Arians and a deputation from the Semi-Arians afterwards appeared at court, to plead their cause before the emperor, who obliged both to sign the last Sirrnian confession, which, dropping the consubstantiality, es- tablished the similarity of the Son in all things.' The Byzantine synod, which met in IM), confirmed the last Sirmian cot fession. This assembly consisted of fifty bishops of Bythinia, Avho were the abettors of Arianism. All these, though Arians, adopted the Sirmian formulary, which sanc- tioned ' the similarity of the Son in all things.' This, these dissemblers did to HatteiHhe emperor, who patronized this sys- tem. All other forms of belief were condemned, the Acts of the Seleuoian synod repealed, and the chief patrons of the Semi- Arian heresy deposed.' The Arians, supported by the emperor, continued the perse- cution of the Nicene faith, till the world, in general, became Arian. The contagion of heresy, like a desolating pestilence, spread through the wide extent of eastern and western Chris- tendom. The melanch'/iy tale has, among others, been attested by Sozomen, Jerome, Basil, Augustine, Vincentius, Prosper, JBeda, Baronius, and Lfibbeus.' ' Godeau, 2. 302. Nazianzen, Or, 21. Labheus, 2. 91o. Sozomen, IV 22 Soerat. ir. 39, 4(). Alux. 7. 18S. - Sonrat: II. 41. l^abbe'.'.-S. 3, "2 .T;!rr,;Ti '• ""' E50K64 Tore 5ia rov tuu ^aaiKfws ipofiov, amToKri Kat Svais oixo(ppovtiv ittpi t» ior^tM. Sozomen, IV. l(i. Ingemuit totus orbis, et Arianum se e.sse luiratus est ' .(erom. adv. Lueif. 4. .300. n\r,v oXi-ywp ayav. Nazian Or. 21. E.so To-yvaaw 816 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ' The east and west,' says Sozonien, ' seemed, through fear of Constantius, to agree in faith.' Arianism, all know, was the faith produced by dread of the emperor. ' The whole world,' says the sainted Jerome, ' groaned and wondered to find itself become Arian.' Gregory's relation is still more circumstantial and melancholy. All, says this celebrated author, ' except a very few whom obscurity protected,or whose resolution, through divine strength^was proof against temptation and danger, tem- porised, yielded to the emperor, and betrayed the faith.' Some he adds, ' were chiefs of the impiety, and some were circum- vented by threats, gain, ignorance, or flattery. The rightful guardians of the faith, actuated by hope or fear, became it» persecutors. Few were found, who did not sign with their hands what they condemned in their hearts ; while many, who . had been accounted invincible, were overcome. The faithful, without distinction, were degraded and banished.' The sub- scription of the Byzantine confession was an indispensable iiualification for obtaining and retaining the ei)iscopal dignity. Basil, on the occasion, uses still stronger language than Gre- gory. He represents the church as reduced to that ' completa desperation, which he calls its dissolution.' According to Au- gustine, ' the church, as it were, perished from the earth. Nearly all the world fell from the apostolic faith. Among .six hundred and fifty bishops, were found scarcely seven, who obeyed God rather than the emperor, and who would neither condemn Athanasius nor deny the Trinity. The Latins, accor- ding to Vincentius, ' yielded almost all to force or fraud, and the poison of Arianism contaminated, not merely a few, but nearly the whole world.' ' Nearly all the churches in the whole world,' says Prosper, 'were, in the name of peace and the emperor, polluted with the communion of the Arians.' The councils of Ariminum and Seleucia, which embraced the eastern and western prelacy, all, tavruv fpxu^|.f6a. vavrfKr} \ri\vTai irapa (KKhriaia. Basil, ep 82. ad Athan. 3. 173. Tanquam perierit eoclesia de orbe terrarum. August. Ep. 93. L'(iglise etoit p^rie. Apol. 1.100. Dilapso a fide Apostolorum omni pene mundo. De sei- centis et quinquaginta, ut fertur, episcopis vix septem invent! sunt, quibus cariora essent Dei pnt'cepta quain regis, videlicet ut nee in Athanasii damna ■ tionem convenirent, nee Trinitatis coufeasionem negarent. Augubtin, contra Jul. 10. 919. Arianorum vencnum non jamportiunculamquandani, sed pene orbem totum contaminaverat, adeo ut prope ounctis Latini sermonis episcopis, partim vii. partim fraude, caligo quaidem mentibus offunderetur. Vincent. Com. 644. Omnea pene ecclesiiB, toto orbe sub nomine pacis et regis, Arianorum consortio polluuntur. Prosper, Chron. 1.423. Ariana vesania, corrupto orbe to- to, banc etiam inaulam veneno sui infecit erroris. Non solum orbis totius, sed et ;__.-i „»,.i„„;;„ -o,,-.,.-!*- Ru.lo 1 S Fpro fimiipH ptiisnoiii in fraudem sunt inducti, ut Occidentalea Ariminensi illi formube, ita Onentales aubscnberent. Barod. in Bisciola. 2.S(). Omiies pene totius orbis antistites metu exilii et tor uientorum per vim, induxerunt. Labbeua. 2. 912. ECCLESIASTICAL DISSENSIONS. 317 through treachery, condemned the ancient faith. The Arimi- man confession, the sjiint denominated ' the Arimlnian perfidy ' The Anan madne.s.s, says the English historian Bede, ' cor- rupted the whole continent, openedf a way for the pestilence beyond the ocean, and shed its poison on the British and othei- western islands.' Baronius calls ArianLsm, in this age, ' the fallacy, into which were led almost all the eastern and western clergy who suh- scribed the Ariminian confession.' Labbeus, in his 'statement concurs with Baronius. He represents ' all the prelacy of the whole world, except a few, as yielding, on this occa-sion, to the tear or exile or torment.' Ananism, in this manner, was sanctioned by the Papal church, virtual, representative, and dispersed, or, in other • w(jrds, by the Roman pontiff, a general council, and the col- lective clergy of Christendom. Poi)e Liberius confirmed an Arian creed, issued by the general council of Sirmium. The synods of Ariminum and Seleucia, comprehending both the Greeks and the Latins, copied the example of Sirmium. The Constantinopolitan confession, which was the same as the Ariminian and Sirmian, which were both Semi-Arian was cir- culated through the east and west, and signed by the clercry dispersed through the Roman empire. The Romish church professes to receive the doctrines, approved, in general, by the hpiscopacy, a,s,sembled in council or scattered throucrh the worid. Ananism was established in both these ways, and the Romish communion therefore became Arian in its head and in Its menribers, or, in other words, in the pope and in the clergy 1 he boasted unity of Romanism was gloriously displayed by the diversified councils and confessions of the fourth cen- tury. Popery, on that as on every other occasion, eclipsed Protestantism in the manufacture of creeds. Forty-five coun- cils, says Jortin, were held in the fourth century. Of these thirteen were against Arianism, fifteen for that heresy, and seventeen for Semi- Arianism. The roads were crowded with bishops thronging to synods, and the travelling expenses, which were defrayed by the emperor, exhausted the public funds 1 hese exhibitions became the sneer of the heathen, who were Amused to behold men, who, from infancy, had been educated in Christianity, and appointed to instruct others in that religion, hastening, in this manner, to distant places and convention's for tiie purpose of ascertaining their belief. Socrates reckons nine Arian creeds, which, in significant .language, he calls a labyrinth. The Sirmi.an eonfeftsion, vAnch Jortin, 3. 100, Ammian. XXV. Athan. de Syn. 318 THE VARIATION 3 OF POPERY. i I contained one t)f the nine, was signed by the Roman pontiff, and the majority of these innovations was subscribed W the western as well as by the eastern prelacy. Fleury mak* tlie Arian confessions sixteen, \ind Tillemont eighteen. Petavius reckons the public creeds at eleven. Fourteen forms of faith, says Juenin, were published in fourteen years, by those who rejected the Nicene theology.' Eight of these are mentioned by Socrates, and the rest by Athanasius, Hilary, and Kpiphanius. Hilary seems to have l)een the severest satirist, in this age, on the variations of Popei'y. Our faith, says the Roman saint, ' varies as our wills, and our creeds are diversified as our man • ners. Confessions are formed and interpreted according to fancy. We publish annual and monthly creeds concerning God We repent and defend our decisions, and pronounce anathemas on those whom we have defended. Our mutual dissensions have caused our mutual ruin.'- Hilary was surely an ungrate- ful son of canonization. Gregory Nazianzen, who equalled Hilary in sanctity and surpassed him in moderation and genius, treats the janing pre- lacy of his day with similar freedom and severity. The Byzan- tine patriarch lamented the misery of the Christian community, which, torn with divisions, contended about the most useless and trivial questions. He compared the contentions of the clergy in synods, 'to the noisy and discordant cackling of geese and cranes.''' He resigned his dignity and retired from the city and council of Constantinople, through an aversion to the alter- cations and enmity of the ecclesiastics who, by their discord, had dishonored their profession, and ' changed the kingdom of heaven into an image of chaos.' 1 Socrat. II. 41. Spon. 359. VIII. Fleury, XIV. Bisciola, .320. Tilleia. 6. 477. Juenin, .3.72. Petav. VI. 4. Epiph. H. 7.3. 2 Tot nunc fides existere, quot voluntates ; et tot nobis doctrinas esse, quot mores. Fides scribuntur. ut volunnis, autitaut volumus, intelliguntur. Incerto doctrinarumvento vagaraur. Annuasatque menstruas de Deo Fides decemimud. Decretis pcenitemus, defendimus, defenses, anathematizanius. Mordientea ift- ▼icem, jam absumpti sumus ab invicem. Hilary, ad Oonstan. .308. sGreg.lOr. I. Carm. X. Orat. 32. CHAPTER X. EUTYCniANISM. HUTI0HIANI8M A VERBAL HERB8Y-ITB ' PRIOR EXlSTKNOB-BrZANTINE rntivr., ■PHE8IAN OOUNOIL-CHALCBDONIAN COUNOIL-STATr OF MONOPHYs^TIH« A^^ THE COUNCIL OP CHALCKDON-ZBKo's HKNOTICON-VAkL^Y OP opi^N^"" THAT K1)KT-JAC0UINI8M-I)18TRACTED STATE OP CHRISTENUOM ^"^^"^^^ "" The Son of God, in the Geology of Christian antiquity, united m one person, both deity and humanity. The Christians, in the days of simphcity and prior to the introduction of refine- ment and speculation, accounted the Mediator perfect God and perfect man. His divinity was acknowledged in opposition to Arianism ; and his humanity, consisting in a real body and a rational soul, in contradiction to Gnosticism and ApoUinarian- ism Godhead and manhood, according to the same faith and contrary to the alleged error of Nestorianism, subsisted in the unity ot his person. The simplicity of the faithful, in the early ages was satisfied with the plain untheorized fact without vainly attempting to investigate the manner of the union be- tween the divinity and humanity. All human knowledge may be resolved into a few facts evi denced by human or divine testimony. Reason, in a few in- stances, may discover their causes and consequences which agam are known to man only as facts. The manner,' inscru- table to man, is removed beyond the ken of the human mind and cognizable only by the boundlessness of divine omniscience' An acorn is evolved into an oak. But the mode of accomplish- ment is unknown to man. The human eye cannot trace the operation through all its curious and wonderful transformations in the mazy labyrinth of nature, and in the dark laboratory and hidden recesses of vegetation. The soul, unacquainted with the manner of its union with the body and the mutual action ot matter and mind, may decline philosophizing on the incar- nation of the Son and the union of Godhead and manhood in immanuel. The ancients therefore showed their wisdom in uvoiuiiig speculation on a truth, the certainty of which, to their great joy, they had learned from revelation i! ri-20 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. But the days of simi)licity passed and the age of speculation arrived. Men, under the mask of devotion, differed and fought about what they did not understand. The Eutychain contm vers}', wliich exemplified these observations and which was the occa.sion of shocking animosity, br-gan in the year 448. Euty- ohes, from whom this party took it,- name, was Abbot or Su[)erior of a Byzantine convent of 300 monks, in which he had re- mained for seventy years. This recluse seems, in his cell, to have spent a life of sanctity ; and he boasted of having grown hoai in combating error and defending the truth. His un- derstanding and literary attainments have been represented as below mediocrity. Leo, the Roman hierarch, calls Eutyches an old senseless dotard. Petavius reflects on his stupidity.' But these aspersions seem to have been the offspi-ing of preposses- sion and enmity. The supposed Heresiarch, if a judgment )uay be formed from the records of history, showed no imbecil- ity of mind either in word or action. He displayed, on the contrary, before the Byzantine and Chalcedonian councils, a fund of sense and modesty, which might have awakened the envy of his persecutors. He resolved indeed to rest his faith only on the Bible, as a firmer foundation than the fatheis.' This was unpardonable, and evinced shocking and incurable stupidity. This celebrated innovator, however, as he had been some times a,ccounted, seemed to confound the natures of the Son, as Nestoriu.s had appeared to divide his person. He was accused 'A' denying our Lord's liumanity, as Arius had denied his divinity, and of renewing the errors of Gnosticism and Apol- linarianism. He believed, said some of his opponents, that the humanity was absorbed by the. divinity as a drop is over- whelmed in the ocean. Godoau, un.satisfied with accusing the Heresiarch with other errors, has, by a curious process of reasoning, endeavored to add Nestorianism, though this, in general, was accounted the oj)posite heresy. These statements, liowever, he rejected with indignation. He used language, indeed, which, from its inaccuracy, seemed to imply that the 8(jn of God, after his incarnation, possessed but one nature ; and that he was not consubstantial with man in his humanity , as he was consubstantial with God in his deity. Eutychian- ism, as refined and explained by FuUo and Xenias, was de- nominated Monopliysitism. These, though they maintained the ' Qui sui nominis ha>resim condidit. Victor, 321. Leo. adFlav. et ad Fast. Labb. 4. 790, 1214. Bin. 3. 10 104 10, 4-05, 418. I'etav. I. 14. Alex. 10. 321. ' Solao scripturas seotari, tauquam iirimorea Fatrum expositionibua. 10. 325. Godeau, H. Alex. EUTYCHIANISM A VERBAL HERESY. 82f. unity of the Son's nature, admitte.l that this unitv was two-told and compounded, and rejected the idea of change or c.Xs rl nz'^7 ii V"f ^'""'T''^' Thi.s denominatk>n. fro.n Ja ! ! or Zanzal, its restorer, the grandeur of whose views sunns ^,1 the obscurity of his station, was called Jacobites ^ Lutychianistn was only a nominal or verbal" heresv Th.^ controversy, Uirough all its stages and in all it furv w- .. its'lZ'r' ^rr^"^ '^r^'^"'^^ - ^^e mean ng7a w -d Its author, though he said that Jesus, before the hypo fit .,1 umon, possessed two natures, and after it onlv 'me S m K^d at the same time, that he was perfect God am Ineif' t ,tn withou confusion of the godhead and manhood C Unathe matized the partisans of Manicheanism and ApdlinL^an it SmiHpT; '^ '^^rr'^^ -^" CJ^^^loedon, anathen, itS fl X admitted transmuation or commixion of divinity and humanrtv" co^^^Sli^rli^^-rai^-^^ t t^pi^pri^yoflangmigei.^ tianity. ihe diction of Catho c sm, indeed on fbiv fn,.;,. 4- P essTon This ,f n^'"'"''''' ^T''^ ^"'>^ ^^'' '^'' ^'^""^ "f --- Buch- nan M '' 'r -"i ^f "f°^' ^"^ ^''''''' ^I^^^l>eim, and Buchanan. Many Romish theologians also, all indeed who >ssess candor and moderation, have entertained the same v I w Gelasius Thomassm, Tournefort, Simon, Petavius A Limn' Bruys, Alphonsus and VasHUesius, all the partisans of Wm rsm, have declared in favor of this opinion -^ The JacoWtes r Monophysites, says Gelasius and after him Thomas in .ult-'. from behevmg, hat the godhead, in the Son, is l.le dej r con founded with the manhood. Deity and hum-mifv ,, fi au^iors. accorcUng to the ^Ionophyit: sysIZ S'o^^^^^J: and person in Jesus as soul and body in man, while each re a in^ jts proper distinctions. The Armenians, who ai^at ifdi f he Jacobies disclaim, says Tournefort, the imputation of con ounding the divine and human nature, which me d t ic aTd ascribe the misunderstanding between themselves >uu e ot er Christian denominations to the poverty of their lan-ma^ Fu tychianism says Simon, uses indeed too strong language B t the distinction arose from the various acceptations of the tenn! ■' Gelasius do Diia>i Tli-""""-;!- f ' T, , tav. 1.14 AHSHinaii o 907 u ' "^, ' ""™°'"''''' "' -'''. 6imon, c. 9. Pe- t>« Pin, 094 ' • ^^' ^'■"y- '• ■-^"- '^J^"' •'• '-297, 300. Th'om. 2. 2L U i i 322 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. nature and person, and might easily be reconciled with Catho- licism. The Monophysite expression, according to Petavius, may be understood in an orthodox sense. Alphonsus, Vasque- sius, and Asseman have delivered similar statements. Euty- ches, says Bruys, differed from the orthodox only in his man- ner of expi-ession, and was condemned only because he was misunderstood. Gregory, the Monophysite metropolitan, who was also a theologian, philosopher, poet, physician, and histo- rian, accounted the Jacobite a mere verbal controversy. Gregory's view of this supposed heresy appears from the Byzantine conference between the Severians and Hypatius under Justinian ; and again, in a still clearer light, from the confession of faith, which the Armenian patriarch sent to the emperor Manuel. Monophysitism, however, whether real or verbal, wavS no novelty. Similar expressions, as Theorian, Eutyches, Diosco- rus, Eustathius, Damascen, the Orientals, and Severians showed, had been used by Athanasius, Cyril, Gr< ;'ory, Dionysius, and Nazianzen, who are Roman saints ; and by Felix and Julius, who were Roman pontiffs.* Athaaasius and Cyril, said Theo- rian, the advocate of Catholicism in 1169, used the expression ' one incarnated nature of the Word.' Eutyches, in the council of Chalcedon, said, ' I have read the works of Cyril, Athana- sius, and other f'thers, who ascribed two natures to the Son before the union, but after it only one.' Writing to Leo, he represented Julius saying, that divinity and humanity in Im- manuel after the incarnation, formed, like soul and body in man, but one nature. The comparison of soul and body, on this question, seems to have been a fa^ > rite among the ancients. Nazianzen used it in nearly the same diction as Julius. Dios- corus, in the council of Chalcedon, said, ' I have the repeated attestations of Athanasius, Gregory, and Cyril for only one na- ture in Jesus after the union, and these kept, not in a negligent or careless manner, but in books, Eustathius, bishop of Bery- tus, on this tojiic, displayed signal confidence and resolution. 1 UnaiiD(uaturam sermonia incamatam. Cossart, 2. 580,581. Du Pin, 1. 659. EutychdS dixit, ego legi scripta beati Cyrilli, et sanctorum patrum, et sancti Athanasii, quoniam ex duabu? quidem naturis dixerunt ante adunationem, post adunationem, non jam duas> naturas, sed unam naturam dixeiunt. Bin. 3. 124. Labb. 6. 436. Alex. 10. 371. Liberatus, c. 11. Naturce quidem dure, Deus ct homo, qucmadmodum ct anima et corpus. Nazia . ad Cledon. Bin. 3. 182. Labb, 4. 954. Verisimile est, non ease Cyrilli. Bell. III. 4. Damas. III. 6. Beato Cyrillo et beato Athanasio Alexandrince civitatis episcopis, Felice etiam et •lulio Romanaj ecclesiiB, Gregorio quin etiam et Dionysio, unam naturam Dei \ erbi deuemeuUbua poat uuiiiouemhus oumeu transgrcBsi illi, postunitionem prse- sumpseruntduaanaturasprajdicare. Labb.5.912. Bin. 3. 93, 94, 97. Du Pin, 1. 694. .3^' EUTYCHIAi^ISM A VERBAL HERESY. 333 SLrna\te'^^^^^^^ -,^-or of < one in- Eustathius interrupted them and ZJ- ^'''"? ^^ ^'P''^'^' ^^^" the assembly said 'if T !^' • 1 T'"'"^ '°^« ^he middle of Anathematize Cyrli andVaS ar/h^^l^'.^^l ^^^'^^'^ ^'^^ nature, indeed/sa^s Du Rn t. ""^^r*^- • ^^^ incarnated phrase with Cyril ^ ^'''' ™ ^ ^^^o^ite and frequent the'^sTmrkint^oTthana^^^^^^^ f^^' ^-^«a^e of author, though an adherent of R."^'- ^"^ ^azianzen. This Monophysite%xprisionst the Z'''''''' ^^f '^*^^ ^^' "«« ^^ Bellar'miie, indeed with espect to CrHlT^^'"'""'^. '^^'^^^^ forgery. The Cardinal, however doefnnf ^"*' ^ '"'^^^^"^ ^^ folsification even in Cyil'^ works Z ^ -^^^l ^ certainty of lihood of interpolation^ L tl^tuthfr ST h? " "^ \"^" acknowledges the genuineness of fhJ'i ' *^® ^*™® ^^"^^' Athanasius and mfzian^n '"^"^^' attributed to ro^^t^^tS:^!'^'^^ -^d ThraciansatChalcedon. sills and Cyril ^rxthe belief of 7' • ' ^^''''''^ ^'^^ ^^hana- Word.' The Severkns fn tL R "^«^™ted nature of t .e under Justinian, TSt^J ilnSr^yrfel^^'^^^ advocate of CatholiS Tl7, !' ''"' ^^-^ ^^'^^^«"' ^^ *he .or its supposed autho? from cu J, IL '='""^^'".'""™'. Eusebius of Dorylieum whnT./v, ™ , «'":oramunication. and friendship itHS at;eX'::;:Ldrnd1„l" ■""■"''"^' hr.d become acquainted witb h!: ^^^^ ' ^^ •onsequence I^ostulated and eS vorld f n K^'^^'S- ' °' ^^Wsions, ex- eiror and impiety. But these e±^^ '"^^ Wf^"' ^^^ unavailing. He then arr^if^.H T" . ^l"""' ^er^%less an^ C-nstantinople,'n whicrFlwhn ^"f /«\^T«y i" aTotfncil 5 The EutychL errrnomii J^ir '^''^ "^^^l"^^ ''^y' P^^^^ded. zeal against heresv ' Th^ n K'T' "^'^^'^ "^^ ^''^y «y«od's ration^f h s opSn rose in t?,. U°P'' °^ ^'"^ author's decla- ^•^•11 chorus TheT devotion J;"'""!*^^ -"P^^^" ^"^ ^'"'^ed in ;H,afhPn-'" „,„: ^^l^J'^T ?.evaP'>rated m noisy and rpn^nfod ing power l^wt^Zs^^S^^^ their cursing ani bellow- 1 . iwite, says Liberatus, imprecated anathemas on 324 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the fleresiarch.' The sacred synod rose to their feet, to enable themselves, in an erect posture, to do justice to their devotion and to their lungs in uttering their pious ejaculations. Eutyches was declared guilty of heresy and blasphemy ; and the sacred synod, in the excess of Christian charity and com- passion, sighed and wept for his total apostasy. The holy men, in one breath, cursed, and sighed, and wept, and excom- municated. Their tune, it seems, exhibited sufficient variety. Sighs of pity mingled with yells of execration. The melody, which must have resembled the harmony of the spheres, could not fail to gratify all who had an ear for music. The holy council, after a reasonable expenditure of sighs, tears, lamen- tations, and anathemas, de])rived the impious heresiarch of the sacerdotal dignity, ecclesiastical communion, and the govern- ment of his monastery. He was anathematized for holding the faith of the pontifical Felix and Julius, as well as of the sainted Cyril, Gregory, Athanasius, and Nazianzen. The Ephesian council, in 449, completely reversed the Con- stantinopolitan decision. The second council of Ephesus was convened by the Emperor Theodosius, who favored Monophy- sitism ; and, according to the summons, consisted of ten Metro- politans, and ten suffragans frpm the six oriental dioceses of Egypt, Thracia, Pontus, Antioch, Asia, and Illyricum. A few others were admitted by special favor. Barsumas the Syrian was invited to represent the monks. Julian and Hilary sat as vicars of Leo the Roman hierarch. The whole asseuably, in consequence, numbered about 150. Dioscorus, the Alexandrian patriarch, presided. Elpidius and Eulogius, as protectors and guardians of the convention, were commissioned by Theodosius to prevent uproar and confusion, and to induce the assembly to act with proper deliberation.^ This synod, from its total disregard of all justice and equity, has been called the Ephesian latrocinium or gang of felons. The application, indeed, has not been misplaced. The Ei)he- sian cabal affords as distinguished a display of ruffianism as ever disgraced humanity. Villany, however, was not peculiar to this ecolesiastical convention. Many others possessed equal merit of the same kind, and are equally entitled to the same honorable distinction. The battle and bloodshed, which afterwards ensued, did not commence during the preceding transactions of the assembly. The campaign, did not open while faith was the topic of discus- 1 Exurgeus a^ucta syuoilu.s damavil, iliceus, abatiiema ipsi. Liberatus, c. i I . Theoph. 69. Zouaras, XIII. 23. Alex. 10. 322. Godea. 3. 407. Bin. 3. 125. '^ Evag. 1. 9, 0. IBin. 3. 5. Alex. 10. 253. 346. Oodea. 3. 415. Moreri, 3. 209 BYZANTINE DECREE REVERSED BY THE EPHESIAN COUNCIL. 325 sion. The utmost unanimity prevailed on the subject of Mono- physitism; and Dioscorus, on this question, found all intimida- tion and compulsion unnecessary. The sacred synod joined with one consent and in holy fervor, in cursing the enemies ot JLutychianism and the heresy of two natures : and piously praymg that Eusebius, who had opposed their system, might be hewn asunder, burnt alive, and, as he would divide be divided. Dioscorus desired those who could not roar, to hold up their hands in anathematizing the heresy of Flavian All as one man, yelled anathemas, and in loud execration and fury' vented their imprecations, that those who should divide the Son ot Crod might be torn and massacred.' Dioscorus, even in the council of Chalcedon, proclaimed, without hesitation or dismay the unanimity of the Ephesian assembly. The orientals, indeed at Uiaicedoii, disclaimed, through fear, these exclamations which the Egyptians, with more consistency and resolution even then avowed. These things, exclaimed the Egyptians' we then said and now say.' Eutyches, in the Ephesian synod' was declared orthodox, reinstated in the sacerdotal dignity and restored to ecclesiastical communion ; while his firmness and intrepidity, m support of the faith, were extolled in the highest strains of fulsome flattery. All this was transacted with accla- mation and unanimity, and without force or intimidation No objections were made even by Flavian, Julian, or Hilary The Byzantine patriarch and the Roman legates viewed, with tacit or avowed consent, the establishment of Eutychianism and its authors restoration to the priesthood and ecclesiastical com- munion. But the scene changed, when Dioscorus attempted to depose 1^ lavian. Discord then succeeded to harmony, and compulsion to freedom Many of the bishops, and especially those of Ihracia, Pontus, and Asia, could not, without regret, witness the degradation of the Byzantine patriarch ; and ventured, With the utmost submission, to supplicate Dioscorus in fovor of ilav-ian. Julian and Hilary, say Victor and Theodoret. op- pc.sed the sentence of deposition with unshaken resolution. But Dioscorus, in reply to these supplications and expostulations appealed to Elipidius and Eulogius. The doors, b- their com- mand, were oi)ened, and the Proconsul of Asia e tered sur- rounded with a detachment of 300 soldiery armed with 'clubs and swords, followed by a crowd of monks, inaccessible to Hi l,> "if"'' •' oinnis aynodua. Ha'c universalis synodus sic aapit. Sancta synodus rtixit.siqmsdicitduo, sitaiiathenia. Bin. 3. 121. Labb. 4. 931 1012 1018 , '}} .*!"" separate eos qui dicuut duas naturas. Qui dicunt duas.' dividitn in. ti.-riicn;c, ejlcite. Ak-x.j 1.294. " "~ soSr" Bail's: {^"'GoZ^iir *'"""• '*'^"** ^^°°''" ^'''' ^°'^- ^ % s 326 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEBY. V f reason or mercy, and accoutred with bludgeons, the usual wea- pons of such militia. Hostilities soon commenced. Terror and confusion reigned. The trembling bishops, unambitious of martyrdom, hid behind the altar, crept under the benches, and, concealed in corners, seemed to envy the mouse the shel- ter of the wall. A few who refused to sign a blank paper, afterward filled with Flavian's condemnation, were inhumanly beaten.^ These arguments, though perhaps not satisfactory, were tangible and convincing to the holy fathers, who, Julian and Hilary excepted, all subscribed. Flavian, however, as might be expected, continued to object to his own condemnation, and, in consequence, was reviled and trampled. Dioscorus distinguished himself, according to Zonaras, Theophanes, Evagrius, and Binius, in cruelty to the aged patriarch. The president, on the occasion, shewed great science, and played his hands and feet with a precision, which, even in the days of modern improvement, would have delighted any amateur of the fancy. Dioscorus, says Zonaras, leaped, hke a wild ass, on Flavian, and kicked the aoly man's breast with his heels and struck his jaws with his fist.'^ Theophanes delivers a similar account, and describes the holy patriarch's dexterity in the belligerent application of his hands and feet. Flavian, says Evagrius, was beaten and assassinated, in a wretched manner, by Dioscorus. This, no doubt, was close reasoning, and afforded a specimen of warm and masterly dis- cussion. . The disputants certainly used hard arguments, though perhaps not strictly scriptural. Dioscorus, says Binius, from a bishop became a hangman, and thumped with both feet and fists.' Barsumas, who commanded the Sjo-ian monks, was also very active in effecting the assassination of Flavian. He urged his men or rather monsters to murder. Kill, said the barbarian to his myrmidons, kill Flavian. Blows and kicks, knuckles and fists were, in this manner, applied with address and effect to the Byzantine patriarch by these holy men. His death, three days after, was the natural consequence. The Roman vicars, however, though they had betrayed the faith, made a noble stand for Flavian. These, in the face of danger, protested against the injustice of his sentence ; and mindful, says Godeau, of the pontiff whom they represented, defied the fury of Dioscorus, contemned the insolence of Barsumas, and braved the terrors of death. ' Liberat, c. 12. Bin. .3. 60. Labb. 6. 438. Godea .3. 435. - Oio Tij aypios ovos avaeofiuv b AiooKopos, \ai rm (rrtpvo) av€0nfie tou fvffffiovi txti- voy avSfios, (cai iru^ avTov Kara Ko^fnis runruv. Zonar. 2. 34. Theoph. 69. Evag. II. 2. f B 3 Dioscorus factus ex episcopo carnifex, pugnis calcibusque contendit. Bin. ;{. ii, ol7. LaXib. 4. J413. Alex. 10. 3i. . Godea. 3. 434," 435. VALIDITY OF THE EPHESIAN COUNCIL. 327 The Ephesian council, though rejected by Baronius and Bel- larmme, was general, lawful, and, on the doctrinal question, free and unanimous. Its meeting was caUed and its decisions con- hrmed as usual, by the emperor. The summons was more general and the attendance more numerous than those of many other general councils, such as the fourth of Constantinople and the fifth of the Lateran. The Ephesian fathers, indeed, except Julian and Hilary were easterns. But the same was the case with the second, third, fourth, and fifth general councils ex- cept a few Egyptians at Ephesus, and two Africans and one Persian at Chalcedon. The second, third, and fifth wanted the I'ope s legates, who sat at the second of Ephesus. Its decisions were sanctioned by Theodosius, who, by an edict, subjected all ot the contrary system to banishment and their books to the Hames. The Roman pontiff indeed did not confirm its acts But this cvan be no reason for its rejection by those, who, like the French clergy and the synod of Pisa, Constance, and Basil reckon a council above a Pope. Damasus, besides, rejected ?^.^y f "'''' of Constantinople, and Leo, the twenty-eighth of Chalcedon : while Vigilius confiimed the fifth general council only by compulsion. The condemnation of Flavian, indeed which was a question of discipline, was exacted by the tyranny' of Dioscorus. But the decision in favor of Eutychianism which was a point of faith, passed with freedom, unanimity' and deafening acclamation Less liberty, if possible, was allowed in the preceding Ephesian convention, which, notwith- standing, remains, till this day, a general, apostolic, holy infal- ible council. Mirandula, an advocate of Romanism, admits the legality and, at the same time, the heresy of the second Hipnesian congress.' The Greek and Latin emperors, with the Alexandrian patri- arch and Roman pontiff, were, after the council of Ephesus placed in open hostility. Theodosius and Dioscorus in the east supported Monophysitism with imperial and patriarchal authority. Valentinian and Leo, in the west, patronised the theology, which, on account of its final success, and establish- rnent, had been denominated Catholicism. Tb- Roman and Alexandrian patriarchs, in genius, piety, and determination, were well matched. Both possessed splendid ability, pretended religion and fearless resolution. Leo, at one time, had charac u -f nS'^"^'"''''^ '''^ ^ ^"'^^ adorned with true faith and holiness ■ while Theodoret represented the patriarch as a person, who' tixmg his afiections oh "heaven, despised all worldly grandeur.^ 1 Mirandul. Th. 4. Godeau, 3. 436. ^po^.,u TO,. „up«.a>. T„. Bc,a,A..a.. Theod. 9. 935. Ep. (i(.. Leo ad D^tor 1 !* * 328 THK VARIATIONS OF POPERY. I 1 :i J a ii Leo, however, whatever may have been the case with Theodo- ret, began to alter his mind, and sung to another tune, as soon as his vicars, having escaped from threatened destruction, an- nounced the decision of Ephesus. Hilary and Julian arrived t» tell the melancholy tale of the tyranny of Dioscorus and the iniirtyrdom of Flavian. Leo, on hearing the tragic intelligence, innnediately summoned a Roman synod, and, supported by a faithful trooj) of suffragans, disannulled the Ephesian enact- ments, and launched a red-hot anathema, which winged its fierv course across the Mediterranean, and rebounded from the head of Dioscorus at Alexandria. But Dioscorus was no trembler. He was not a man to be intimidated by the fulminations of Leo's spiritual artillery. He soon jeturned the compliment. He convened hi;.' suffragans in an Alexandrian council, and hurled the thunders of exconnnunication, with interest and without fear, against his infallibility.' But Leo was not to be frightened by the empty flash of an anathema. He had, with- out shrinking, encountered the hostility of Genseiic and Attila, and was not to be dismayed by the spii-itual artillery of Dios- corus. ^ These ecclesiastical engines indeed possess one advan- tage. 'J'heii' explosions, though they may sometimes stun, never slay. These campaigns may be followed with the loss of char- acter, but are not attended with the loss of life. Leo, feeling the inefficiency of excommunication, petitioned Theodosius, heretic as he was, to assemble a general council. The western emperor Valentinian, and the two em})resses Pla- cidia and Eudoxia with sighs and tears, joined in the request. But Theodosius was a Eutychian, and therefoi-e satisfied with the faith of Ephesus. The heretical and hardened emperor, in consequence, rejected the application, regaroless of the suppli- cations of Valentinian and Leo, as well as I ae sighs which rose fiom the orthodox hearts, and the tears which fell from the fair eyes of Placidia and Eudoxia. He had even the obduracy, in a letterto Placidia, to call the blessed Flavian ' the prince of contention.' He represented the Byicantine patriarch, in a let- ter to Valentinian, as guilty of innovation, and suffering due punishment ; and the church, in consequence of his removal, as ^W ing peace and flourishing in truth and tranquillity. Theo- dosius, prior to tlie Ephesian synod, had begged Flavian to be satisfied with the Nicene faith, without pei-plexing his mind with hair-breadth distinctions, which no parson could understand or explain. This was a good advice ; and Flavian, had he ' l>ioscorus, ponens iu ccelum os suum, excommunicationem in sanctum Leo- nem Papam diocavit. Labb. 9. 132S. Bin. 3. 6. Liberal, e. 12. Bisciola. 401 Theo.l. Ep. 125. Godea. 3. 440, 442. THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON CONVENED. 329 enjoyed the liberty of thinking for himself, would have followed It. but the mild patriarch was influenced by more ardent spirits who were unacquainted with moderation and drove every thing to extremity. wo^^l^^^T:??'"/' '" ^l'*^ .'"''''" *'™^' ^^«*i' ^"d J^l^rcian, who was attached to Leo and his system, succeeded. This emperor urged by the pontiff, convened the general council of Chalcedon' ihlll ^Ti ""^^^"^^ly ^'V"t''^'»f d, say historians, six hundred and rlll P^P'- • "^^ ,^*''''' ^'^^'"^"'■' «^-^ «">>' excepted, were Greeks. Pascasinus, Lucentius, and Boniface rei>re.sented Leo the Roman hierarcli. Twenty laymen of consular or senatorial dignity, as royal commissioners, represented the emperor The gospels, which the good bi.shops neither understood nor regarded were, with affected ostentation, placed on a lofty throne in the The Ohalcedonian resembled the Ephesian council in confu- sion, noise, tumult, and a total want of all liberty. Its acts like Its predecessor's, were scenes of uproar and vociferation' which disgraced the (Christian religion and degraded theepisco- wnnlr/?S ^^^^-g'^'deii, a cock-i)it. Or a noisy bedlam would afford a modern some faint idea of the general, infallible, apostolic, holy, Roman, council of Chalcedon. Nothincr was heard, on any particular occasion of excitement, but vocifera- tion, anathemas, execration cursing, and imprecation, bellowed by the several factions, or ,.y the whole synod in mutual or contending fury. A specimen of these denunciations and msults was displayed in the first session, when Tlieodoret who was accounted friendly to Nestorianism, and Dioscorus who had caused the as.sassination of Flavian, entered the assembly Iho Ji-gyptians, Illyrians, and Palestinians shouted till the roof reechoed 'put out Tlieodoret. Put out the master of Nestorius Out with the enemy of God and the blasphemer of His Son' ut out the Jew. Long life to the Empefor and Empress.' 1 he Orientals, Asians, Pontians, and Thracians rei)lied with e^ual uproar, 'put out Dioscorus. Put out the assassin. Put out the Manichean Out with the enemy of heaven and tlie I'dversary of the faith.' The Imperial commissioners, on these occasions, had to inter- hre for the purpose of keeping the peace. These, in stron.v terms, represented such acclamations as unbecoming the er)isco° p:. dignity and useless to each party. Du Pin admits thlt the .nitliority oi the commissioners was necessary to i)revent tlie I Bin. 3. 6. 29. Libcratus, c 12. Labb. «1. 439. -Evag. II. 1. Crabb, 1. 740. Bin. 3. 49. Labb, 4. 1358. Bin. 3. 56. Labb. 4. 886. Godea. 3. 461. Evag. II. 18. Crabb. I. 74.3. 330 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. infallible council from degenerating into a confused and noisy mob. The judges, says Alexander, repressed the tumultuary clamors by their prudence and authority.' The pontifical, and especially the imperial, authority destroyed all freedom of suftVf ge. Marcian influenced the decisions of Chalcedon, with more decency indeed, but with no less certainty than Dioscorus did those of Ephesus. The Chalcedonian council, as a proof of its unity, passed three distinct creeds on the subject of Monojjhysitism ; and all by acclamation. Leo's letter, which he had addressed to Fla- vian, was passed in the second session. The Roman hierareh had transmitted an epistle, on the pending question, to the Byzantine patriarch. This epistolary communication, which has been .styled the column of orthodoxy, had discussed this topic, it has been said, with judgment and [)recisiun. This being recited in the synod, the a.ssembled fothers approved in loud acclamations. The IJlyrians and Palestinians indeed paused, and seemed for a time to doubt. Their scrupulosity, howevei", was .soon removed, and all began to vociferate, 'This is the faith of the fathers. This is the faith of the apostles. This is the faith of the orthodox;. This we all believe. Anathema to the person who disbelieves. Peter speaks by Leo. The apostles thus taught. Cyril thus taught. Cyril for ever. This is the true faith. Leo teaches piety and truth, and those who gainsay are Eutychians.' The infallible fothers, however, if we may judge from their conduct in the fifth session, in which t^^ey thundered acclamations in favor of a Monophysan confes- sion, misunderstood his Roman infallibility. A second confession or definition was passed with reiterated acclamations in the fifth session. This definition, which had been composed with careful deliberation by Anatoliu.s, and declared that the Son of God was composed of two natures, (which implied tbat he possessed the divinity and humanity, prior, though not posterior, to the union or incarnation,) was unqualified Monophysitism, expressed perhaps with some lati- tude or ambiguity. The definition implied that godhead and manhood were, to S{)eak in chemical language, the two distinct elements of which, at the instant of conjunction, a new substance or nature was formed. Two elements, in the laboratory of the chemist, will form a composition by the amalgamation of their constituent principles. The Eutychians and Chalcedonians seem to have entertained an idea, that the humanity and divi- 1 Tumultuarios clamores anctoritate et prudentia sua judicea compescuerunt Alex. 10. 368. -' Epistolam Leonis tanquara columnam orthodoxie fidei suscepenint. Canisiua, 4. G9. Evag. 11. 4. Bin. ;]. 221. Ciabb. 1. SSO. Godeau, .3. 479. ihr^^JISStBa-aim MONOPHYSITISM OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 331 nity of the Son we in some way' of this kind, incorporated at the moment of his incarnation. This notion we» expressed m plain hinguage, in the Chalcedonian definition. The idea is ZLTZtZTry.^ "^"^^^'^ '' Bioscoruswould have sub- fp^l!,nW?''^'^'^''rT''' "^^^'•theless, the three Romans and a few onentas excepted were unanimous in its favor, and sup- s the faith of the fathers He who thinks otherwise is a here- Ih. J^T^^""^ ^2,^"] ^ho forms a different opinion. Put out motW om T' 11' ^^«"'^i«\plea,ses all. lioly Mary is the rffh. ./••«• T^\^PP^r«^' however, by his commissioners, and the pontiff, by his vicars, opposed the council These insisted, that the Son should be said to exist ' in two natures ' Pascasinus, Lucentius, and Boniface, who represented his holi'- S\l'i f^'''"^ '^ ""' "^T?^"" ^PP"^^^' *« ^^^turn to the Roman city and there convene a Roman council for the establishment wifr/v.'"^ ! : '''''^ -'' ^'?^' determination, they were seconded, with the u most pertinac.ty, by the Imperial commissioners The council, notwithstanding, shewed a firm resolution against Th J H^fi -r .^^^"!^^°"' the bishops vociferated, ' pleases all. The definition ,s orthodox. Put out the Nestoriais. Expel the enemies of God. Yesterday the definition pleased all. Let the definiticm be subscribed before the gospels and no fraud practised against the faith. Whoever subscribes not is a heretic. ^X J f^P"/t^^ictated the definition. Let it be signed forth- with. Put out the heretics. Put out the Nestorians. Let the dehmtion be confirmed or we will depart. Whoever will not subscribe may depart. Those who oppose may go to Rome ' «ut the commissioners were determined. "The emperor's sovereign will must be obeyed ; and the council, after a tempo- rary resistance yielded at length to the legatine obstinacy and especially to the imperial power. Many considerations shew the Monophysiti.sm of this Chal- cedonian defimtion and of the Chalcedonian Council. The omission of the definition, in the acts of the council, throws a suspicion on its ortliodoxy. The formulary is omitted in Eva- gnus, Liberatus, Binius, Crabb, and Labbd. The iudffes ..f the council, m an indirect manner, mention its contents, merely tor the purpose of denouncing its heterodoxy. The design was, Alex. 10. .330. Evag. 11. IS. » Eutychea dixit uuionem ex duabus naturia Crabb, 1. 879. Bin. 3. 334. 33? THK VARIATIONS OF POPERY. '■' M no doubt, to keep it out of sight ; a plain indication of its sup- poHod heresy. A conipaiisou of this confession witli those of Eutyches and Dioscorus at Con.stantinoj)le, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, will evince their identity. This of Clialcedon declared, that Jesus was ' of two natures.'' This was the precrise ci-eed of Eutyches and Dio.scorus. Eutyclies, in the Byzantine council, professed his belief, that Clirist was 'of two natures."- Dioscorus avowed a similar profession at Ephesus and lopeated it at Chalcedon.^ The.se Chalcedonian and Eutyehian confessions contained the same faith in the same language. Leo's, and the last of Chal- cedon taught, <»n the contrary, that our Lord existed ' IN two nature^." The opposition of the Senators, Romans, and Orientals, .shewed their conviction of its Eutyehian i.sm. These wielded the Pontifical and Imperial power, and ojipo.sed the definition with obstinacy. Pascasinus, Lucentiu.s, and Boniface, who r.:-presented Leo, resolved to leave Chalcedon, return to Italy, and celebrate a western council for the establishment of the true faith, if this Chalcedonian creed should bo confirmed. T\m resolution was countenanced by the conunissioner.s, who represented the Emperor ; and a few Orientals echoed the declaration.-^ This determination, in strong colors, portrays their opinion of the confession, which they resisted with such warmth and resolution These would have submitted, had the definitjcm, in their mind, contained Catjiolicisni. Godeau and Alexander, two modern zealots for Romanism, admit theambiguity and inadecpiacy of this Chalcedonian defini- tion. The definition, .says Godeau, 'did not, in sufficiently f'xpress terms, condemn the Eutyehian heresy.' According to Alexande)-, many additions were necessary for the overthrow of Eutychianism. The accomplislnnent of this end required a vvved, teaching our Lord's existence, not only of, but ' in two natures ' without confusion, change or division." Godeau, there- foie, acknowledged the ambiguity of the definition, and Alex- ander its inadequacy. Evag. II. 18. Ex duabus habet naturia. Crabb Eutyches dixit etiam ex duabus naturis. Bin. ' O if^os fK Svo (pviTtaiv exd. 1. S80. - Ek Svo (puaanv. Theoph. 69. 3. 120. " Confiteor ex duabus naturis fuisse Dominum. Bin. 3. 123. Labb. 4. 1018. ' Ek ivo (pvcTfan/. Evag. II. 4. Atuv Svo (pvaas \tyfi fifoi tv X^iarm. Labb. 4 1452. Bin. 3. 130. Bin. 3. 336. Labb. 4. 1450. Godeau, 3. 480. Elle ne condemnoit pas assez expiis^^ment I'hc^riSsie naissanto d'Eutyche«. (iKieau, 3. 479. Multa deesse ad profligandam hteresiiT; Eutychianam. Ad id enim satis iion e.s.se, ut Christus ex duabus naturis dice -etur ; sed neuease ut in duabua naturis subsidere diceretur. Alex. 10. 376. CONDUCT OF THE COUNCIL OK CHALCEDON. 333 The Monophysitism of the Chalcodotiiiui Coiinoil, the Ro- mans aii(l a tow Orientals oxcoptod, appears from the obstinacv with which they insistetl on th(3 deHnition, in deHance of Im- perial and Pontifical authority. The Chalcodonian.s, on this occasion, manifested more determination than the clergy, at anv other time, evinced against tlio em[)eror and the pontiff. Tli.- prelatical suttrages, in general, wer" the ready echoes of tli** im[)erial and pontifical will. The Greeks obeyed his majesty, and the Latins seldom di.sobeyed his holiness. But the assem- bled |)relacy, on this momentous occasion, disjjlayed an astonish- ing firmness and constancy. Their determination once with- stood the imperial commissioners, and four times the Roman vicars. These reasoned and remonstrated ; ^i .! those resists 1 and vociferated. The opjjosition was uttftt:.; -n yells, which would have terrified ordinary minds, and commanded obcdiemc on ordinary occasioiis. The dissension, says Alexander, was great, and the shouts tunmltuary. All, says Godeau, cried that ' whosoever should refuse to sign the definition was a heretic' All this obstinacy and outcry were in favor of a creed, which would have been suliscribed by Eutyches, Dioscorus, Mongos, Philoxenus, Fullo, and Zanzel. The Monophysitism of the council also may be evinced from its reasons for the condemnation of Dioscorus. The Alexan- drian Patriarch, said Antolius in full synod and without any to gainsay, 'was not condemned for any error of faith, but for excommunicating Leo, and refusing, when summoned, to attend the council.' The same fact is stated liy Evagrius and Pope Nicholas. Justinian, also, according to Valesius in his annota- tions on Theodorus, declared that Dioscorus was not condemn- ed for any deviation from the faith.'- The Patriarch indeed was charged with a few practical foibles, such as tyranny, extortion, fornication, adultery, murder, and ravishment. He was con- victed of burning houses, lavishing the alms of the faithful on strumpets and buttbons, and admitting the fair Pansophia, in broad day, into the patriarchal bath and palace.* But none accused him of heterodoxy. Heresy was not among the reaaons assigned by the council for his deposition and banish- ment. His faith, therefore, was unsu.'^pected of error, and consonant with the connnon theology. These considerations shew the faith of the Chalcedonians, and the opinion entertained of their definition. ' Tous crierent, que quiconque refuseroit de la signer 6toit her^tique. Godeau, •' Propter ndem non est daumatus Dioscorua. Bin. 6. 505, Dioscorus nun. 00 ullum in fide errorem damnatus fuit. Valesius, 3. 330. •' Bin. 3. 7. 247, 335. Labb. 4. 1447. Alex. 10. 356. Evag. II. 18. THE VARIATIONS OF POPER\ . The Chalcedonian council, at length, were forced by the emperor to sign a third formulary of faith. The former confes- sion had to be resigned, in obedience to his majesty's sovereign command. The emperor in the early days of the church, as the pope at a later period, influenced, at pleasure, the decisions of lioly infallible councils. Theodosius, with fiicility, sustained Monophysitism at Ephesus. Marcian, with equal ease, estab- lished Catholicism at Chalcedon. He ordered eighteen bishops sehicted from the East, Asia, Pontus, Thracia, and Illyria, to meet in the oratory of Euphemia, and compose a confession which might obtain universal approbation. These, accordingly assembled at the place appointed, and, with becoming submission and easy versatility, produced a creed, according to Marcian's imperial directions and Leo's pontifical epistle. This formulary embodied the Nicene, Constantinopolitan, and Ephesian faith, with the letters of Cyril and Leo, and declared that the Son of God, existing ' in two natures,' without confusion or division, was in His Deity, consubstantial with God, and in His humanity, consubstantial with man.' The infallible fathers, for the third time, yelled approbation. This confession was of imperial and pontifical dictation. The emjieror, not the council, at the sugge tion of the pope, pre- scribed the formulary. All this indeec^ Alexander, attached as he was to Romanism, has confessed. '. ,is form of belief, says this author, ' was enjoined by the emperor.'-' Christians there- fore, at the present day, profess, on this topic, a royal creed. Popish and Protestant Christendom has received a form of faith, which, though ti-ue, is imperial, and for which, the Romish and Reformed are indebted to Marcian. The abettors of Romanism would be ready to exult, if, in the annals of the Ref)rmation, they could find an instance of Tacillation equal to that of Chalcedon. The history would be related in all the parade of language. But all the councils of Protestantism afi'ord no exemplification of such versatility and fluctuation. Bossuet, in all t) -ecords of history, and, which is more, in all the treasury of ^ s own imagination, could dis- cover no equal discordancy, du.ing all the transactions which attended the Reformation, in its origin, progress, and esttvblish- ment. But flexibility, in the council, failed to produce unanimity in the church. The infallibility of the Chalcedonian assembly wa^ mocked, and its apostolical or rather imperial faith contemned. 1 Ipse sit perfectus Deus ct perfoctus homo in duabue naturis, sine coiifusione ct; divisioue. Canisius, 1. 69. Liberatus.c. 12. Bin. 3. 336. 340. Crabb. 1 88.-). Labb. 4. 1447. Du Pin, I. 674, - Jussu tandem Imperatoris. Alex, 19. 376. CONDUCT OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 335 The African, Asiatic, and European Monophysite disclaimed the definition of the emperor and the pontiff; and their oppo- sition did not, as usual, evaporate In frothy anathemas, but terminated in battle and carnage. The Chalcedonian prelacy, according to Liberatus, were, when they returned to their sees' torn by an unprecedented schism.' The Egyptians, Thracians', and Palestinians followed Dioscorus ; while the Orientals' Pontians, and Asiatics adhered to Flavian. Romanism was dis- graced by a train of revolutions and mas.sacres, such as never dishonored the Reformation. Schism and heresy extended to all Cliristendom, and embraced, in wide amplitude, Greeks and Latins, emperors, clergy, and populace. Six emperors reigned after the council of Chaleedon, and during the rage of the Monophysan controvfsy. These were Marcian, Leo, Zeno, Basiliscus, Anasta.siu.s, and Ju.stin ; and wore divided between the Eutychian and Chalcedonian faith. Marcian, Leo, and Justin patronised Chalcedonianism ; while Ztmo, Basiliscus, and Aiiastasius, in the general opini(m, coun- tenanced Eutychiani.sm. Marcian convoked the council of Chaleedon, presided in its deliberations, and supported its theology with devoted fidelity and imperial power ; but by the unhallowed instrumentality of violence and i)ersecution. Leo, Marcian's successor, maintained the same system by the same unholy weapons.' Zeno, Basiliscus, and Anastasius have been reckoned, [)erhaps with some unfairness, among the partisans of heresy. Zeno, .luring his whole reign, feigned a regard for Catholicism, and proclaimed himself its protector. But some of his actions seemed to favor Monophysitism ; and his name, in consequence, has, by the partial pen of prejudice and popery, been entered in the black roll of heretics who attempted the subversion of orthodoxy. He issued the Henoticon, protected Acacius, and restorpd the exiled Mongos and FuUo to the patriarchal thrones of Alexan- dria and Antioch. These were crimes never to be foro'iven by tlie narrow mind of bigotry. The transactions provoked the high indignation of Facundus, Baronius, Alexander, Petavius, and Godeau.'^ Baronius represents Zeno as the patron of heresy and perfidy, and the enemy of Catholicism and Christianity. Basiliscus, for the sake of unity and consistency, both denounced and patronised the Synod of Chaleedon and its theology. His majesty, prompted by ^Elurus, issued, on his ' '-^oiasio facta est inter ens, qualis ante nuiiquam contigerat. Liberatus, c. 12. L.ihb. 6. 4H8. - Evag. II. 8. Alex. 10. 398. ' Faeun. XII. 4. Spon. 4v2. III. Alex. 10. 421. I'etav. 1. 320. Godeau, 3. 356. W" 336 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. accession, a circular letter, which approved the councils ot" Nic?ea, Constantinople, and Ephesus, and condemned and anathematized that of Chalcedon, as the occasion of massacie and bloodshed. This precious manifesto was signed by Fullo, Paul, and Ana^tasius of Autioch, Ephesus, and Jerusaiem . and supported, in the rear, by about five hundred of the Asiatic- prelacy. The emperor, in these transactions, was influenced by the empress Zenodia. But his msijesty, varying in this manner from Catholicism, varied, in a short time, from himself, and veered round to orthodoxy. He attempted, by compulsion, to obtain the a[)probation of Acacius. But Acacius opposed lum, being supported by a multitude of n^.onks and women, who pursued the emperor with maledictions. This movement, in a few moments, converted Basiliscus to the true faith. He issued, in consequence, an anticircular edict, rejecting the former, confirming the council of Chalcedon, and anathematizuig Eutyches and all other heresiarchs. His versatility, however, was unavailing. Zeno drove the usurper from the imperial authority, and banished him to Cappadocia, where he died of hunger and cold.' Anastasius succeeded Zeno in 491, and was excommunicated by Symmachus for heresy. The emjieror, however, notwith- ■itanding the anathema, seems, according to Evagrius, neither to have patronized nor opposed Catholicisn. He loved peace and withstood novelty. He protected all his subjects, who were content to worship according to their conscience, without molestation to their fellow-christians. But he repressed inno- vators, who fostered dissension. He ex})eried, in consequence, Euphemius, Flavian, aud Elias, bishops of Constantinople, Antioch, and Jerusalem ; and this incurred the wrath of the po})e and Vitalian. The latter, followed by an army of Huns and barbarians, declared himself the cluvm{)ion of the faith. Actuated with this resolution, the warrior, in the name of the Prince of Peace, depopulated Thiacia, exterminated 05,000 men, and, in bloodshed, established the council of Chalcedon and the faith of Leo.'^ A diversity, similar to this of the emperors, wa.s manifested by the clergy, tlie })0{)ulace, and tlie monks. Dioscorus, in Alexandria, was succeeded by Proterios, the friend of Catholi- cism. But the throne of the new patriarch had to be supported by two thousand armed soldiery; and the Alexandrian populace, on the death of Marcian, assassinated Proterios in the baptistery. 1 Evag. 111. 5, 7. Libtrat. c. 10. Tliouiili. 84. Zuiiaraa, 2. 41. Bisciola, 420. Alex. 10. 418, 420. Godeaa, ,3. 619. Victor. .324. 2 Evag. 111. 35 Liberat. c. 16. Theopb. 107. Alex. 10. 25. Labb. 4. 477. CONDUCT OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON, 337 regardless of the sacred temple and the paschal solemnity The waters of baptism and of the sanctuary were crimsoned with his blood The mangled body, in aU its frightfulness, was, amid insults and mockery, exhibited in the Tetraphylon: and then, covered with wounds, was, in fiendish derision, dragged through the city. The assassins, says Evagrius, shocking to tell, beat the senseless Hmbs, devoured the reeking entrails committed the torn carcass to the flames, and its ashes to the winds.1 The barbarians, though stained with blood, burned through fear of pollution, the chair of the patriarch, and washed the altar on which he had sacrificed with sea-water, as if it had been defiled with his touch or his ministry. ^Elurus, the partisan of Monophysitism, was substituted for Proterios. He was banished to Cherson, or some say, to Oasis by Leo ; but was afterward restored by Basiliscus. He, at last' poisoned himself, being, says the charitable Godeau, 'unworthy of a more honorable executioner.' The one party, after his death elected Mongos, and the other, Timothy, to the patri- archal dignity. Zeno, however, obUged Mongos, who was the partisan of Eutychianism, to yield. But the triumph of the Ohalcedonian party was transitory. Mongos, on the death of Timothy wa.s, by an edict of Zeno and the favor of Acacius appointed his successor.'' ' Palestine in the mean timer became the scene of similar outrage and revolution. Juvenal, the patriarch of Jerusalem was deposed, and Theodosius, a Monophysite, ordained in his place. The new patriarch occupied Jerusalem with an army of felons and outlaws, who in the name of religion and under the mask of zeal, pillaged and murdered. The sepulchre of Immanuel was defiled with blood ; and the gates of the city, which had witnessed these massacres, were, in tumultuary rebellion, guarded against the army of the emperor. These, notwithstanding their inhumanity and rebellion, were counte- nanced by Eudoxia, wife to Theodosius." The empress used or rather abused her royal authority, in support of these san- guuiary zealots for the Monophysite theology. Antioch was occupied by the rival patriarchs Calendion and * ullo. Calendion maintained the Chalcedonian faith, and Fullo the Eutychian theory. Fullo, besides, in unpardonable impiety, added a supplement of his own invention, to the Trisagion, which, in those days of superstition and credulity, was regarded „.nJ!°r!4*5:?_°:'_>*^"°™ ±^ ae^uatarunt, rellquumque corpua igni, cineres .^nrn, ..^^t....^.^^^ ^j,„u '^'"' ^^'- Evag. il. 8. Liberat. o. 15. Alex. 10. 394. Godeau, 3, 656. Viotor, 322. 3 p?arTT°"».^®''r?''°'?!*wP\?°'^^''"' 3- ^23. Labb. 5. 215. Moreri, 8. 136. ^Evag. II. 5. Theoph. 73. Alex. 10. 416. Moreri, 8. 90. Viotor, 322. V 388 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. as the sacred hymn, sung by the holy angels and seraphs that surround the throne of God. Zeno, at first, patronized Calen- dion and banished Fullo. But Calendion, in the end, was sus- pected of favoring the revolt of lUus and Leontius ; and the emperor therefore banished the patriarch to Oasis, and outraged Christianity, says Godeuu, by establishing Fullo.^ The bishops and monks varied like the patriarchs and empe- rors. Many, says Godeau, 'followed the faith of the court rather than that of the Gospel ; and displayed a baseness, unworthy of men who should have been the columns of the truth.' Five hundred bishops signed the encyclical manifesto of Basiliscus ; and, according to their own declaration, ' with willingness and alacrity.' These, again, on the dethronement of Basiliscus and the restoration of Zeno, deprecated the whole transaction, alleged imperial compulsion as a palliation for their crime, and begged par(ion of Acacius for their offence. These rival factions fulminated against each other mutual and unwearied excommunications. The lightning of anathemas continued, in uninterrupted coruscations, to flash throu.r'h the African, Asiatic, and European nations, and to radiate from East to West. The spiritual artillery was admirably served, and, in continued explosions, carried, not death indeed, but damnation in every direction. Proterios, Timothy, Juvenal, and Calendion cursed iElurus,'Mongo8, Theodosius, and Fullo : while ^lurus, Mongos, Theodosius, and Fullo, in grateful re- ciprocation, cursed Proterios, Timothy, Juvenal, and Calendion. Acacius cursed the patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch who were not slow in repaying the compliment. Felix, the Koman pontiff, cursed all by wholesale. Intrenched in the Vatican, the vicar-general of God continued, from his ecclesias- tical battery, to thunder excommunications against Mongos, Fullo, and Acacius.^ Fullo, who abetted Monophysitism and corrupted the Trisa- gion, seems to have been the chief object of these inverted Benedictions. Quinian, in a Sacred Synod, aimed no less than twelve anathemas at Fullo's devoted head. The example was followed by Acacius. The patriarch of Antioch, it seems, had in 483, taken the liberty of writing an epistle full of blas- phemy to the patriarch of Constantinople. The blasphemy caused Acacius, holy man, to shudder. He assembled a council, therefore, and in full synod, condemned, says Labb^, the mad error of the mad patriarch. But the Roman pontiff, » Theoph. 92. Evag. 111. 8. Godeau, 3. 649. Labb. 5. 271. 2Evag. III. 5, 9. Liberatus, c. 10. Alex. 10. 418. Godeau, 3. 620, 3 Evag. III. 5, 6. Theoph. 104. Godea. 3. 649. Spon. 457, 484. IV. Alex. 10. 420. MONOPHYSITISM AFTER THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 339 as was right, excelled even the Byzantine patriarch in a suitable name and in an appropriate sentence, for the impugner of the Chalcedonian faith and the corrupter of the sacred hymn Felix denominated Fullo the first-born of the devil, and, in a holy Koman Council, condemned him as a patron of Arianism babelhanism, impiety, heathenism, and idolatry ' But the hardest, or at least the most signal cursing-match on the occasion, was between Felix and Acacius. The Bvzan- tine hierarch, indeed, had committed nothing to merit the honor of excommunication. He disclaimed, on all occasions, the heresy of Eutychianism. He opposed the Monophysan emperor Basiliscus and his circular edict, with vigor and success He assembled a ConstantinopoUtan synod, and con- demned ^lurus, Fullo, John, and Paul! who were the Mono- physite bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, Apamea, and Ephesus He issued a synodal reprobation of FuUo's addition to the Tnsagion, which, in the opinion of Acacius, was the song of the Cherubim m Heaven. He patronised no heresy; tnd which should have recommended him to mercy he was as Ignorant and superstitious even as his Roman infallibmtv But he signed the Henoticon for the sake of peace, and communi- cated with Fullo without a formal recognition of the council of bhalcedon. These were the ostensible reasons of the pontiff's detestation and anathemas. He urged the equaUty of the Byzantine with the Roman See; and, of course, rejected the pontifical supremacy.^ This was the real reason and the unpardonable sin, for which FeUx honored Acacius with anathemas and degradation. His infallibilitjr's denunciations, however, were, at Con- stantmople, a subject of sheer mockery. Acacius, knowing the ridiculousness of the attempt, received the intelligence of his deposition wi,h perfect contempt; and, nothinl loath, returned the compliment in kind with promptitude and devo- ]'?''■. /,^.?.P^,<^"arch like another Dioscorus, excommunicated his infallibility, and struck his name out of the Dyptics or sacred roll of registry. He then, in his usual manner, and in defiance of Felix, continued his ministry and retained his dignity till the day of his death.^" Acacius was supported against Felix by Zeno, and all the P«+I,^f J?"' '"® insani PuUonis error condemnatus fuit. Labb. 5. 229 230 Petrus pnmogemtus Diaboli filiua. Labb. 5. 166. Le Foulon qu'il aDDeUe 1« his premier-n^ du Diable. Godeau. 3. 650. Biaciola 424 ^ ^^ ^^ - vudurc non aebuie Romana3 EcclesiaB. Labb. 5 246 Evac TTT n fi Liberate. 17. Sppn. 484. IV. Bruy. L 255. Alex, la" 420.^ '' ^• ipse excommunicavit Summum Pontificem Cossart ^ 22 n„; ,r,„o rependens Felieisnomen eraait e diptychTs Petav 1 ' Ik Ad^L~ patrocmante imperatore, remansit sacrificans. Liberat. 3. 18 ' t ■ 340 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. oriental clergy. The emperor, knowing the illegality and injustice of the sentence, held over the patriarch the protecting shield of his royal authority. The Greek clergy, on the same account, contemned the Latin or Roman anathemas, and com- municated with the Byzantine patriarch. Felix, besides, was on this occasion, unfortunate in his own agents. Misenus and Vitalis, whom he had commissioned as his envoys to Constanti- nople against Acacius, joined in communion with the patriarch ; and heard, without disapprobation, the name of Mongos repeated from the sacred registry. Titus, who was afterward despatched on a similar errand, copied the example of Vitalis and Misenus.^ These, in consequence, put Felix to the task of issuing their excommunication, which, however, his infallibity, from his facility in this duty, seems to have thought no trouble. The Roman pontiffs had hitherto patronised the Chalcedo- nian faith, and rejected, with resolution and perseverance, the Monophysite system. Leo had supported the council of Chalcedon, with all his talents and influence. Felix had exhausted himself in cursing all its enemies. But the hierarchs of the apostolic see were soon destined to alter their system, and exemplify the changeableness of all earthly things. Vigilius, who was a Roman pontiff, and Martin, who was a Roman saint, deserted the council of Chalcedon and went over to the camp of the enemy. Vigilius, in 537, was raised to the pontifical throne by the Empress Theodora, on condition that, on his promotion, he would profess Eutychianism, and oncur in restoring Anathe- mus to the patriarchal chair of Constantinople. The new pontiff was faithful to his engagement in the profession of heresy. He condemned the Chaldedonian faith, and declared in favor of Monophysitism. His confession, addressed on this occasion to Theodora and other partisans of heterodoxy, has been preserved by Liberatus.'^ He rejected the dogma of two natures in the Son of God, and repealed the celebrated epistle of Leo. His infallibility then proceeded, in due form and without delay or equivocation, to pronounce an anathema against any person who should confess two forms in the Medi- ator. This was like a man determined to do business. His holiness, in consequence, had the honor of cursing his several predecessors and successors, the holy council of Chalcedon, 1 Evac. III. 21. Spon. 484. ii. Bin. 3. 614. Labb. 5. 246. 2 Viguius suam fidem scripsit ; duas in Christo damnavit naturae ; et resol- venstomum Fapje Leouia aiu dixit, uouduas Cliiibtumcoufitemurnaturas ; sed ex duabus naturis compositum unum filium. Qui dixit in Christo duas formae, anathema sit. Liberat. c. 22. Anathema dicebat iis qui confitentur duas in Onristo naturae Bellarmin. 1. 160. Alex. 10. 429. MONOPHYSITISM AFTER THE COUNCIL OP CHALCEDON. 341 and the majority of the past, present, and future Christian world. Baronius and Binius have endeavored to prove this docu- ment, preserved in Liberatus, a forgery. Godeau doubts its genuineness. But their arguments, which scarcely deserve the name, have been confuted by Bellarmine, Du Pin, and Alexan- der. Liberatus, Victor, and Facundus, cotemporary authors, vouch for its authenticity. Bellarmine admits the heresy of Vigilius ; but consoles himself under the distress occasioned by such an event, with the real or fancied dissimulation of its author, and the illegality of his claim, during the life of his pre- decessor and rival Silyerius, to the papacy. His infallibility's approbation of heresy, according to the cardinal, was all exter- nal profession, while, in his soul, he was the devoted friend of Catholicism. Alexander calls Vigilius ' a hidden traitor.'^ The cardinal and the Sorbonnist, it seems, possessed a faculty of dis- cerning the heart, and discovered the superiority of hypocrisy to heresy. Vigilius, besides, say these authors, could be no true pope prior to the death of Silverius, as two could not reign at the same time. The church, however, has often been blessed with several cotemporary heads, and the Messiah, supplied, on the same occasion, with several vicars-general. Vigilius, what- ever might have been his right when he issued his hopeful con- fession, was, in fact, the sovereign pontiff, and was never again elected or ordained. He occupied the pontifical chair and exercised the pontifical authority, in the administration of ecclesiastical affairs, throughout papal Christendom. The sainted Martin, in 649, followed the footsteps of Vigilius, and, in conjunction with the Lateran synod, decided in favor of Eutychianism. This assemblj^ in which his holiness presided, amounted to one hundred and fifty members, who all, in the fifth canon and with the greatest unanimity, ' condemned every person, who, according to the holy fathers, does not, in truth and propriety, confess one incarnated nature of God the Word.'- The sentence would have satisfied Dioscorus, Mongos, or FuUo. Bellarmine represents the condemnation, pronounced by the holy synod, as equivalent to an anathema. Vi'gilius' decision seems to have been personal. Martin's was synodal. The one was signed only by the author ; while the other was subscribed by one hundred and fifty of the Italian prelacy. ' Dico Vigilium damnasse Catholicam fidem solum exteriori professione, neque ammo haereticus fill*. Bellarmin, 1. 760. Occultus proditor. Alex. 10.429. Bin. 4. 400. Godeau, 4. 20.^. 2 Si quia secundum sanctos patres non confitctur, proprie et secundum verita- tem, unam naturam Dei \"erbi incamatam, condemnatus sit. Bin. 4. 733. Crabb. 2. 234. Labb. 7. 360. Bellarmin, III. 4. I ■. mi 342 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. But Martin, who is a saint, had, like Vigilius, who was little better than a sinner, the distinguished honor of anathematizing every professor of orthodoxy. The council of the Lateran presents a complete contrast to that of Chalcedon. The definition of Chalcedon was suggested by the pope to an orthodox emperor, by whom it was forced, in the midst of noisy opposition, on a reluctant synod. The canon of the Lateran was issued by the pope, in a willing council, in opposition to a heterodox emperor. Marcian patronised Leo and the Chalcedonians. Constans withstood Martin and the Laterans. The one assembly defined a duality of natures in the Son of God. The other declared in favor of his simple unity. This distracted state of the church induced Zeno, prompted, some say, by Acacius, to publish the celebrated Henoticon or edict of union. The emperor's design, in this undertaking, was pacific. He intended to conciliate the partisans of Mono- physitism and Catholicism, and supply an exposition of belief, which each jarring faction, without compromising its principles, might sign. The means, at first sight, seemed calculated to obtain the end. The Henoticon, preserved by Evagrius and Liberatus, was addressed to the Alexandrian, Egyptian, Lybian, and Pentapolitan clergy and laity. This royal edict, having, in the introduction, lamented the dissensions, which had occa- sioned the massacres and bloodshed, which had contaminated earth and air, confirmed the inspired and unstained faith of the Nicene, Constantinopolitan, and Ephesian councils, in opposition to Ai-ianism, Macedonianism, and Nestorianism. The Mediator, according to the imperial theology, and, in agreement with the Chalcedonian definition, without mentioning its authority, is consubstantial with God in His deity, and with man in His humanity ; but at the same time, is not two, but one incarnated God the Word.' This last expression, which, it must be con- fessed, is a little suspicious, has given great offence to Baronius, Godeau, and Petavius, with a shoal of other Romish critics and theologians. But the conclusion of the royal manifesto conveys the fright- fullest sounds of terror to the ear of superstition. Zeno spared Dioscorus from a regard to the Alexandrians ; but anathema- tized all who, at Chalcedon or elsewhere, might have dissented from the imperial confession. His Majesty, though a layman, dared, in this manner, to enact a formulary of fiiith, and excom- municate all the prelacy who dared to refuse subscription. The Henoticon experienced the destiny of all similar attempts, • Eva rvyxavtii' koj ov Svo. Evag. III. 14. Incarnate uno de Trinitate Deo Verbo. Liberatus. c. 18. Alex. 10. 421. Spond. 482. iii. 'V HENOTICON OF THE EMPEROR ZENO. 343 and only augmented the evil which it was designed to remedy. A pacificator is seldom a favorite with man. The royal edict, supported by imperial power, enjoyed, however, a partial and temporary success, and was signed by Acacius, Mongos, FuUo, and indeed by all ]50ssessed of moderation. The Byzantine patriarch and his clergy acknowledged the edict of pacifi^cation : and all those who had professed Monophysitism, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, were received into communion. The Alexandrian patriarch convened a general assembly of the clergy and laity, in which the Henoticon was read and recognised. The pastor, then, Uke a good shepherd, exhorted the flock, united in one faith and baptism, to mutual peace and charity. The easterns, Calendion excepted, followed the footsteps of the Byzantines and Alexandrians. Fullo of Antioch, and even Martyrias of Jerusalem, famed for his sanctity, subscribed the pacific formulary and joined in reciprocal communion. The Henoticon, in this manner, was, under Anastasius in 503, wel- comed by the oriental prelacy, who, to a man, agreed to live in forbearance and tranquillity. But the Henoticon met with very different treatment in occi- dental Christendom. The west, on this topic, varied from the east. Felix, the Roman hierarch, rejected the overture of pacification, and carried every thing to an extremity. Binius has drawn a striking picture of the pontiffs opposition. His holiness proscribed and execrated the Henoticon of the most impious Zeno, who, though a layman, presumed to denounce the council of Chalcedon, enact a rule of faith, prescribe a law to the church, and, stealing the keys of ecclesiastical authority, hurl the anathemas of the hierarchy against all who disclaimed his usurpation and tyranny.' The edict his infallibility de- nominated an impiety ; and he pronounced sentence against all who subscribed it. The western clergy, as well as laity, seem, on this question, to have joined the Roman pontiff. The western hierarch, in this manner, engaged in hostility against the eastern patriarchs, and the Latin against the Grecian clergy. The critics and theologians of Romanism differ as to the or- thodoxy of the Henoticon. The royal manifesto has been re- presented as rank heresy by an array of popish doctors and critics, such as Baronius, Spondanus, Bisciola, Petavius, Binius, Labb^, Moreri, Godeau, and Victor. Baronius characterizes the Henoticon as a tacit repeal of the council of Chalcedon, and ' Proscripsit et execratua est impiissimi Zenonis Henoticon. Hoc impiissi- muiii Hacriicgi Impcratoris cdictnm impictatis seminarium non tantum proscrip- sit, verum etiam subscribentes anathematis sententia condemuavit, 594. Labb. 5. 141. Spon. 483. Ill Bin. 3. 344 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY, m this 18 followed by Spondanus, Bisciola, Petavius, and Mo- reri. Bimus, quoted and approved by Labb^, calls the impenal edict of pacification an impiety. The proclamation of Zeno put Godeau into a dreadful passion. The impious edict, says the historian, not only anathematised the definition ot Chalcedon, the last criterion of truth ; but condemned Euty- chianism only to conceal its approbation of heresy.' This array of doctors has been confronted by others, amona whom are Asseman, Pagius, and Alexander, supported, in thS rear by the schoolmen. These acquit the Henoticon of heresy Assenaan and Pagius represent it as free from error, while according to Alexander, it is free from heresy and gives no sut)- port to Eutychianism.'^ The schoolmen, with all their subtlety and distmctions, could find no blemish in this celebrated docu- ment. An annotator on Evagrius came to the same conclusion, borne, in this manner, accuse, and some acquit the Henoticon of heresy. These, therefore, call Catholicism, what those denominate heresy. Tht blest theologian of the papacy, in this way, cannot discriminate between truth and en-or, and confounds Romanism with heterodoxy. This presents an odd specimen of unity, and a strange proof of the immutabilitv of a system. '' The distracted state of the church, under Anastasius in 491 has been depicted, in bold language, by Evagrius a contempo- rary historian, who witnessed the scenes which he has described The representation, in part, has been transcribed by Alexander.^ All Christendom, in Europe, Asia, and Africa, was, says Evagrius, divided into diversified and jarring factions. One party adhered, with the utmost pertinacity, to the faith of Chalcedon. These deprecated the alteration of a single sylla- ble or even a single letter in the Chalcedonian definition. The opposing faction, on the contrary, rejected and even anathe- matised the faith of Chalcedon. One class patronised the Henoticon with unshaken obstinacy and resolution, while another execrated that edict as the fountain of heresy. The partisans and opponents of Zeno's manifesto, in the mean time, 1 Tacitam immiscuit abrogationem coucilii Chalcedonensia. Spon 482 III in eo tacita inerat concilii Chalcedonensia abrogatio. Peter. I 330 Cet t^dit pronon90it anath6me centre le concile de Chalcedoine. Moreri, 4* 77 Qm- neshferetici, damnata synodo Chalcedonenae, efficerentur. Bisciola" 423 Cet edit impieprononfoit anathSme centre le concile de Chalcedoine, qui Otoit la £«'!S#//-*^t''.'*^°'"*^°o^^°^"- ^'°^^^"' 3- 656. Pour ca^her Pappro reced^ V?ctot''324 "' ^"'°' ^'' ^^'^^t^''""^' ^ catholica^fide 2 Henoticon Zenonis Eutychianam hferesim non adstruere. Alex 10 412 Assem. 1. 34.3. Pagius. 2. 411. . • i^. 3 Alii Zenoms Henotico mordicus adhrerebant, tametsi de una aut de duabus natuns inter se dissiderunt. Alex. 10. 424. Evag. III. 30. DISTRACTED STATE OF THE CHURCH. 345 disagreed about the unity and duality of our Lord, Some, de- ceived by the ambiguity of the imperial confession, aacnbed two natures to the Son of God and others only one. The several factions, amid the Eastern, Western, and African dissensions, refused reciprocal communion. The Easterns would not communicate with the Westerns or Africans ; and these again in return, rejected the communion of the Easterns. Dissension, ai last, advanced even to a greater extremity. The Orientals, among themselves, proceeded to mutual division and excommunication ; while the Europeans and Africans engaged in similar altercation with each other and with strangers. Such was the state of the Latins and Greeks in the end of the fifth century. The annals of the reformation present no scene of equal diversity and anathemas. The patrons of Protestantism have, on some points, differed, but never anathematised Execrations of this kind, the protestant leaves to the papist, as they express a concentrated malevolence and miscreancy m^nsistent with the light and the principles of the reformation'. The popish communion through eastern and western Chris- tendom, exhibited, in this manner, a ridiculous and disgustincr diversity on the subject of Monophysitism. Emperors, popes, and councils clashed in continued anathemas and excommuni- cation. A theory, which had been entertained by the pontiffs *elix and Julius, as well as by the saints Cyril, Gregory Athanasius, and Nazianzen, was, when broached by a monk of Constantmople, stigmatised as a heresy. A Byzantine council amidst curses and execrations, deprived its advocate of the sacerdotal dignity and ecclesiastical communion. The Ephe- sian council, convened by Theodcsius, and containing an hundred and fifty of the eastern^ prelacv, reversed the Con- stantmopolitan decision, declared the alleged heresiarch ortho- dox, and restored him to communion with the priesthood. The general council of Chalcedon repealed the enactments ot Ephesus, and issued three jarring creeds. This assembly clothed with infallibUity, first passed, in loud acclaim, the famed lome of Leo, which has been styled the column of orthodoxy Its second confession, which was clearly the faith of the council consisted of unqualified Monophysitism. Its definition, at last' which was forced on the infallible synod by Leo- and Mar- wan, the pope and the emperor, contained the faith, which, on account of its final triumph and establishment, has been de- nominated Catholicism. All these forms of belief, the holy unerring council adopted in deafening yells and with frightful anrj rciterai.€u anathcmaa. Eastern and western Christendom, notwithstanding the defi- nition of Chalcedon, split into three contending factions. 4 346 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEKY. m Emperors, pontiffs, clergy, and people divided in favor of Eutychianism, the Chaicedonian faith, or Zeno's Henoticon, The emperors Marcian, Leo, and Justin patronised Catholicism. Zeno, Basiliscus, and Anastasius, in the general opinion, coun- tenanced heresv. Leo and Felix, Roman pontiffs, stamped the definition of Chalcedon with the broad seal of their infallibility. Vigilius and Martin affixed the signature of their inerrability to Monophysitism and the simple unity of Emmanuel. The oriental patriarchs, Fullo, Mongos, and iEluros waged a spirit- ual war against Calendion, Proteiios, and Timothy, while the prelacy and populace fought in the ranks of their respective leaders. Latins and Greeks, Europeans and Africans, thun- dered mutual excommunications and anathemas. nil CHAPTER XL MONOTHELITISM. m GENERAL RECEPTION-SUPPORTED BY THE ROMAN EMPEROR, AND BY THE ANTIOCHIAN, ALEXANDRIAN, BYZANTINE, AND ROMAN PATRIARCHS— ITS DEORA- DATION JROM CATHOLICISM TO HERESY- THE ECTHEHI8 OR EXPOSITION— THE EMPEROR AND THE GREEKS AGAINST THE POPE AND THE LATINS— THE TYPE OH FORMULARY-SECOND BATTLE BETWEEN THE GREEKS AND THE LATINS-SECOND TRIUMPH OP MONOTHELITISM-SIXTH GENERAL COUNCIL-TOTAL OVERTHROW OF MONOTHELITISM— ITS PARTIAL REVIVAL— ITS UNIVERSAL AND PINAL EXTINCTION. MONOTHELITISM ascribed only one will and one operation to the Son of God. This will or volition, according to this system, proceeded, not from the humanity, but from the divinity. The patrons of this theology, indeed, disclaimed monophysitism, admitted the Mediator's Godhead and manhood, and attributed to the latter both action and passion, such as volition, motion, thirst, hunger, and pain. But the agency, the partisans of this system referred to the deity, and the mere instrumentality to the humanity, in the same manner as the soul actuates the body. Catholicism, on the contrary, as established by the sixth general council, rejected this unity, and maintained the dogma of two wills and operations. One volition, in this system, belonged to the deity and one to the humanity.' This metaphysical distinction, in which, however, Catholicism seems to use the correctest phraseology, continued, for a long period, to divide Christendom, and, in its progress, to excite dissension, animosity, execration, anathemas, excommunications, massacre, and bloodshed. Alexander traces monothelitism to an infernal origin. ' This heresy,' says the historian, 'burst from hell.'^ Its earthly author, however, as appears ..from Stephen, Bishop of Dora, in the Lateran council under Martin, was Theodoras of Pharan in Palestina, who perhaps, according to Alexander, came from the Tartarian regions or had a commission from Satan. This innovator broached his shocking impiety, as his silly meta- Theoph. 218. Godea. 5. 128. Alex. 13. 23. Bin. 4, 577. et 5. 6. Hoeresis ex inferis erupit. Alex. 13. 27. Labb. 7. 106. 348 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. if >■ i I |!!i I physics have been called, about the year 620. A speculator, who had lived in obscurity, fabricated this new theory, to employ the thoughts or awaken the animosity of emperors, popes, and councils. But neither the obscurity of the author nor the alleged blas- phemy of the system prevented its circulation. Heresy, like pestilence, is contagious; and Monothelitism soon obtained general dissemination, and, by its universal reception, became entitled to assume the boasted name of Catholicism. Greeks and Latins, through oriental and western Christendom, em- braced the innovation, which, in its infancy, was patronised by the Roniiin emperor, and by the Antiochian, Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Roman Patriarchs and Clergy. The emperor Heraclius, anxious to reconcile the Jacobites to Catholicism, and influenced by the opinions of Anastasius, Cyrus, and Sergius, issued an edict in favor of Monothelitism. Depending on the judgment of others, and conversant with military tactics rather than with Christian theology, the royal waiTior lent his_ imperial authority in support of heterodoxy. Godeau accuses Heraclius of ' abandoning the faith, protecting a heresy, and inflicting a mortal wound on Catholicism.' ' Inimical to God and hardened in soul, the emperor,' says Baronius, ' published his exposition to establish an impiety.'' Anastasius, Macedonius, and Macarius, Patriarchs of Antioch, disseminated the Monothelitism, which was patronised by the emperor Heraclius. Anastasius or Athanasius, who had supported Jacobitism as well as Monothelitism, was promoted to the patriarchal throne by the emperor in (330, and retained this dignity for ten years. Macedonius, his successor, favored the same theory. Macarius, who was deposed in the sixth general council, maintained this error with the utmost obsti- nacy. The suffragans of these dignitaries embraced this system, and were followed by the laity without a single murmur of opposition or n imosity.''^ Cyrus followed the example of Anastasius. Promoted to the See of Alexandria, this patriarch in G33, convened, in that city, a great council, which decided in favor of one will and opera- tion and anathematised all who dissented. The decision was received without any oposition by the prelacy as well as the people of the diocese.'* Monothelitism, therefore, became the faith of the Alexandrian as well as the Antiochian See. Sergius concurred with Anastasius and Cyrus. The Byzan- tine patriarch, with the design of giving more weight to his ' Theoph. 218. Zonaras, 2. 6. Godeau, 5, 161. Spon. I. 639. -• Theoph. 218. Cedren. I. 331. Godeau, 5. 128. Moreri, 1. 499. ^ Cedren. I. 332. Bin. 5. 220. Godeau, 5. 138. Spon, II. 633. MONOTHELITISM SUPPORTED BY HONORIIIS. 349 decision, assembled also a council of his suffragans; and all these, with the utmost unanimity, decided in favor of the same speculation. The clergy agreed with their patriarch. Cyrus, some time after, wrote a flattering letter to Sergius ; and praised the Ecthesis of the emperor and the patriarch, which, he said, * was clear as sun -beams/' Monothelitism, in this manner, became the faith of the Greeks. The harmony of the eastern clergy, on this theory, is stated in the celebrated Ecthesis or Exposition. The Oriental prelacy received, with the utmost readiness, a form of belief, which inculcated the dogma of one will. Thi; ' eresy, Godeau admits, ' was maintained by the emperor and thu three oriental patriarchs, poisoned nearly the whole of eastern Christendom, and corrupted the prelacy and the people.' Godeau's state- ment is repeated by Bruys, Maimbourg attests * the concord of the emperor Heraclius, and ae patriarchs Anastasius, Macarius, Cyrus, and Sergius in behalf of this error,' ^ Honorius, the Roman pontiff", next declared in favor of Monothelitism. His infallibility, in two letters written in reply to the Byzantine patriarch, expressed in clear and unequivocal terms, his belief of one will in the Son of God, and his un- qualified assent to the decision of Sergius. His supremacy denied that any of the fathers had taught the doctrine of two wills. He represented the question concerning the operations, as trifling and undecided by Scriptural or Synodal authority. His infallibility's approbation of the opinion, embraced by the Byzantine patriarch, was express, and caused Honorius to be anathema4i.sed with Sergius in the sixth general council, as the follower of that chief of the heresy.' The pontiff"s letter, on this occasion, was dogmatical ; and the sixth general council characterised it by this epithet. His holiness, says Du Pin, ' spoke in this production from the chair, and supported the Monothelan error by a decretal definition.'* His bull was an answer to the Constantinopolitan patriarch, 1 Theoph. 219, Labb. 7. 214. Alex. 13. 32. 2 Exceperunt Patriarchis sedibus prsesules, et gratanter ei consenserunt. Labb. 7. 202. Qui 6toit soustenue par I'Empereur, et lea troia Patriarches d'Orient. Preaque tout I'Orient en fat empoiaonn^. Lea Patriarchea et lea pr6- lata 6tant corrumpua, corrompoient leura troupeaux. Grodeau, 5. 153, 166. L'h^r^sie dea Monoth^litea aouatenue par presnue tout I'Orient, Bruy. 1. 423. Sergiua entreprit de r-^pandre cette h^r^aie danatout I'Orient, II avoit pour lui, C'yrua, Macaire, et Athanaae. II entraina ce pauvre Prince dana cette nouvelle h«5r4aie. Maimb. 108. ^ Unam voluntatem fatemur Domini. Bin. 5. 203. Labb. 7. 962. Hfec nobiscum Praternitaa veatra prsedicat, aicut et nos ea vobiacum unanimiterpraa- dicamus. Tjabb. 7= 966. Sergio et Honorio anathema. Alexander, 13. 303. In omnibua ojua mentem aecutua eat. Labb. 7. 978. Maimbourg, 110. * Monothelitarum errorem decretali epiatola definivit. Du Pin, 349. 352. Bruya, 1. 424, Godeau, 5. 140. BcUarmin, ad Clem. 8. Gam. in Diurn. 350 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. and indeed to the Byzantine and Alexandrian councils, to whom he prescribed the means, which he thought necessary for the unity of the faith and the preservation of Catholicism. His letter also was sanctioned by a Koman Synod. The pontiffs of this age, Bellarmine and Garnier have shown, issued nothing of this kind without the authority of a council. The faith of Honorius therefore was, like that of Cyrus and Sergius, recom- mended by the synodal sentence of the suffrajan clergy. The only opposition to Monothelitism arose from Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem. He convened a council in 633, which condemned this system and decided in ftwor of two wills. He also despatched Stephen, Bishop of Dora, at the head of a solemn deputation to the Roman pontiff, to solicit the condem- nation of the Monothelan theology, as inconsistent with the council of Chalcedon and the faith of antiquity. But his infallibility had already declared for the unity of the Mediator's will. He therefore recommended peace, and obliged the deputation to promise, in name of their patriarch, to forego all discussion on this difficult question. This injunction, which was the offspring of sound wisdom and discretion, and which, had it been always afterward observed, would have prevented much useless discussion and unchristian animosity, was, during the life of Honorius, faithfully obeyed. Sophronius, as well as CyruH and Sergius, preserved, on this subject, a profound silence and remained in inactivity.^ During the five years, therefore, which elapsed from the deputation of Sophronius to Honorius, in 633, till the death of the pontiff in 638, the whole Romish communion, Greeks and Latins, received, by silent or avowed consent, the faith of Monothelitism. A pontifical decision, admitted by the clergy, constitutes, according to Popish theologians, a standard of faith. Such at the Mayncoth examination, was the statement of Grotty, Brown, Sleviu, and Higgins.^ Monothelitism, on this supposi- tion, was, in the beginning of the seventh century, transubstan- tiated into Catholicism. The Greeks, in general, avowed their Monothelitism. Sophronius and his clergy, who at first resisted, concurred, at last, in accordance with the advice of Honorius, in tacit acquiescence. The western hierarch and episcopacy received the same theology without the faintest murmur of hostility. The Pope declared in its favor, and the clergy submitted in cordial unanimity. A breath of discontent was not heard, for five revolving years, through all the wide extent of oriental and western Christendom. A single fact, indicating 1 Theoph. 218. Cedren. 1. 331. Zonaras, 2. 67. Spon. 633. III. Labbeus, G. 1481. '^ May. Report, 78, 154, 259, 274. MONOTHELITISM DECLARED TO BE HERESY. 351 a disbelief of this system, from the publication of the pontiffs letter till his dissolution, could not be culled from all the maga- zines of ecclesiastical history and all the literary monuments of the east and west. The Monothelan theology, therefore, embraced by the clergy of the papal communion, was, by this easy and simple process, transformed into genuine Romanism. According to Godeau, ' Heraclius inflicted a mortal wound on the church.' The Chalcedonian council, says Theophanes, became, on this occasion, a great reproach, ' and the Catholic Church was overthrown.'' Monothelitism, however, which, in the Popedom of Hono- rius, had been elevated into orthodoxy, was, in the vicissitude of human affairs and in the variations of the Roman faith, degraded into heresy. This theology, expelled from the throne of Catholicism, which it had usurped, was, amid sacerdotal and ^ imperial anathemas, consigned, with execration, to the empire of heterodoxy and perdition. Its legitimacy was dis- puted, anr" Hs dynasty, amidst clerical imprecations and bal- derdash, was overthrown. A revolution of this kind, however, was not effected without opposition and animosity. The belligerents, in this war of words, were the Greeks and the Latins. The Pope and the Latins arrayed themselves against the emperor and the Greeks : and each, during the campaign, displayed admirable skill in ecclesiastical tactics. Heraclius, or Sergius in his name, commenced hostilities in 639, by the publication of the Ecthesis or Exposition of the faith. This celebrated edict, having rejected Arianism, Nestorianism, and Eutychianism, proceeded, in express terms, to teach the unity of the Mediator's will and to interdict all controversy on the operations. The unity of the one was defined, and silence enjoined on the other ; while the definition and interdiction were followed by the usual volleys of anathemas.'* This exposition, issued by the emperor, was received by the Oriental patriarchs and prelacy. Monothelitism and the Exposition, approved in this manner, by the emperors and the easterns, were, with horror and execra- tion, condemned by the pope and the westerns. Pope John marshalled his episcopal troops, and, at their head, discharged his spiritual artillery from the Vatican, loaded with curses and anathemas against the Monothelan army of the east. His synodal battery was pointed against Monothelitism and the Exposition. Monothelitism, John in his synod declared to be 1 Heraclius fit une playe mortelle k I'Eglise. Godeau, 5. 16L Ets fxeya ovtidos rjavvoSos XaKKriSovos, /cat fi KaOoKiKij tnKiX-nata TrtpieirfiTf. Theop. 218. - Zonaras, 2. 69. Labb. 6. 1503, et 7. 206. Bin. 4. 696. Alex. 13. 31. 352 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. contrary to the faith, the fathers, and the council of Chalcedon.' The silence enjoined, aa -well as the uliity of will taught in the Ecthesis, offended the pontiff and his clergy. Ecclesiastics, in all ages, seem to have challenged verbal contention as their inalienable prerogative ; and this, at that period, appears to have bcdn their ruling passion. The emperor's interdict, therefore, these noisy polemics deprecated as an invasion of their rights, and as treason against the church and their freedom. The African clergy also declared, with distinguished zeal, against Monothelitism. Colombas, Stephen, and Raparatus, metropolitans of Numidia, Byzaca, and Mauritania, anathema- tised the heresy of one will in their respective councils ; and sent letters to the same effect addressed to the emperor, the pope, and the Byzantine patriarch. Victor also, the Cartha- ginian bishop, despatched Melosus, with a solemn embassy to the Roman hierarch, declaring his promotion, his attachment to the faith of antiquity, and his detestation of the heresy of Monothelitism.^ All this apparatus of edicts, councils, imprecations, anathe- mas, and excommunications, however, produced no decisive effect. The Greeks and the Latins, the partisans of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, held their several systems with unyielding pertinacity. The authority of the emperor and the pope, on this occasion was divided. The emperor, when he exerted his influence, could always command a majority, and often the whole of the clergy. The emperor and pope, when united, could always eflFect unanimity of profession among the conscien- tious bishops. But Heraclius and John, on this occasion, pat- ronised two contending factions ; and his majesty, besides, was not determined. He had been entrapped into Monothelitism by Anastasius, Cyrus, and Sergius, in the full confidence of its orthodoxJ^ But the declaration of the Latins awakened doubts in his mind ; and he remained, therefore, in suspense and inactivity. The balance of victory, in consequence, was sus- pended in equilibrium ; and the holy fathers both of the east and west, expended their curses and their excommunications for nothing. The former battle being indecisive, the Greeks and Latins prepared again for action. The Greeks, indeed, though headed by the emperor, being weary of war, appear, on V '^ occasion, to have been inclined to peace. But the Latins rejected all cessation of arms. The organs of combativeness, in the lan- guage of Spurzheim and phrenology, must have been well I Theoph. 219. Cedren. 2. 332. Petav. 2. 138. Maimb. 111. Labb. 6. 1502. Bm. 4. 734. a Cedren. 2. 332. Theoph. 219. Bruy. 1. 440. Petavius, 1. 379. THE TYPE OR FORMULARY OP CONSTANS. 353 developed in the Western clergy. Their pugnacity, after six- ^TJ,T\' T' Tu^ ««"^e intervals, had suffered no diminution notwithstanding the severity of the former campaign. fi J „\^"'fi^''''" ^^'''^''\P?*f ^^^^g *° inspiration, issued, in ♦ rtl J-T^' *'''''?'';^il ^^S'"^ ^" '^y^^^ *h« Type or Formulary. This edict suggested by Paul, the Byzantine patriarch, having with great perspicuity and without any partiality, explain^ r^lTrfr^l^li'^^-L"".*^."^ contention, and expressed deep [nf 1- f ^*^ n"?.^^"^'^?^ ^^^^^«^« °f ^^^ Christian community interdicted all disputation on the contested topics of the wUl and operations. All discussion of these metaphysical ^ difficult questions was forbidden each party, on pain of Divine ife'''^ """^ l^^^'f indignation. The"^ clergy who sSd offend against the edict of pacification were to be degraded the monks excommunicated, and the nobility deprived of their T^eFo^b ^'Tfi'^. ?' ^y^' differed from ^theEchesis The Ecthesis defined the unity of the will, and enjoined silence 0% on the operations. The Type defined nothing, and pro! hibited all controversy on both these subjects. The Greeks S'S'll^ "" '^t manifesto of pacificatiin, and subm tted with willingness, to the imperial authority ' But the Latins, headed by the pope, and 'disinclined to peace commenced immediate hostilities ; and, from the secreta W the Lateran, hurled anathemas from their spiritual endues against the impiety of the Ecthesis, the atrocity of the T^pe and the heresy of Monothelitism. Pope Martin led the c3e against the emperor and the Greeks. Full of zeal for the faith or rather actuated with the spirit of faction, this pontiff, inb49, assembled m the Lateran, no less th^n 150 bishops collected from Italy and the adjacent islands. This aasemblv more numerous than some general councils, fulminated ex^crl: tions against Monothehtism and the most wicked Type which was published by Constans, and calculated to resffin men from professing the truth or combating error. The saSed synod also thundered imprecations with great spirit and devo- te e'fSn'^W^^t' ^r-^; ^''^^'' ^y^^^^' ^^< -^d all Who entertained their heretical impiety ^ This campaign like the former, was indecisive. Constans showed no partiabty to Monothelitism or to Catholicism , but maintained, on the contrary, an armed neutrality. His onis^ extinction of faction and ammosity. Caliopas, therefore, * Lahh 7 910 Al«- lo o _ ,. „ j^iKfA, lo. o ™lite^iS^5r»^^^ Theoph. 219. 854 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Exarch of Italy, seized Martin by the emperor's orders, and confined this disturber of the peace a whole year in Naxos, an island in the Ai'chipelago or Egean Sea. He was then, after a mock trial and the utmost cruelty, banished to Cherson, where he died.' He suffered with great fortitude and patience, and, in consequence, has, in the Roman communion, obtained the honors of saintship and martyrdom . Martin's punishment tamed the haughty insolence of his successors Eugenius and Vitalian, and taught these pontiffs to respect the imperial authority. These took special care not to imitate their predecessors, John and Martin, in condemning the Type ; but, on the contrary, maintained, during their spiritual reigns, a suspicious and provoking silence and neutrality. The red-hot anathemas, such as John and Martin had thundered from the Vatican against all the patrons of the Ecthesis, the Type, and Monothelitism, got time to cool, and the church and empire, in consequence, enjoyed a temporary peace. Eugenius and Vitalian, it has been alleged, conferred their formal sanction on t^ie emperor's pacific formulary. This has been inferred from the friendship which Constans discovered for these two pontiffs. His majesty enlarged the privileges of the Roman See. He sent Vitalian a copy of the Gospels, orna- mented with gold and jewels of extraordinary magnitude and brilliancy. But thi? sovereign, who wreaked such vengeance on Martin for condf^mning the Type, would not, in so distin- guished a manner, have countenanced Vitalian in the same offence.'' Eugenius and Vitalian, therefore, if they withheld their avowed approbation of the Edict, suspended their open condemnation.' This neutrality was a virtual, if not a formal, submission to the formulary, which was issued merely to prevent discussion and animosity. The Type interdicted controversy, and this interdiction these pontiffs obeyed. This taciturnity, which was execrated by Martin, was a direct compliance with the requisi- tions of Constans. Eugenius and Vitalian sanctioned, by their cessation of hostility, what Theodorus and Martin in two Roman councils, had denounced as heresy inimical to Catholicism.^ Christendom, for a second time, saw all opposition to Monothe- litism entirely abandoned, and his infallibility, ' the universal bishop, the head of the church, and the father and teacher of all Christians, with all his western suffragans, resting, for a 1 Cedren. 2. 332. Bray. 1. 461. Beda, 30. 2 Brays. 1. 4fi?. Labbeus, 7. 457. Beda, Chron. Ann. 671, 3 Theodoras Papa, coucilio congregate, eundeu-^ t vjjutn damnavit. Binius, 4. 572. TtvSfitvop . . . KOTck T^j iKKXriaias aoe$i(rTaTov riwov, Labbeus, 7- 365. Exposuit Typnm ad versus Catholicam fidem, Bedi., .iO. THE SIXTH GENERAL COUNCIL CONVENED. 355 long series of years, in connivance and inactivity. This was plainly the second triumph of Monothelitism. The Monothelan theology if a tota cessatir^n of , d opposition to a doctrine con- stitutes It an article of faith, wm, for the second time, raised to the throne of orthodoxy and Catholicism. Monothelitism however, enjoyed only a precarious and tem- porary reign. The era of its dethronement had nearly made Its appearance on the broad theatre of the world. A revolution which had taken place in the imperial mind, portended its speedy overthrow and dissolution. The emperor Constantino, a de- scendaut of Jeracl-us, and educated in the Monothelite system induced by reason, caprice, interest, passion, whim, fancy' inclination, or some of these diversified motives which actuate the human mmd, abjured the catechism of his infancy, and embraced thr theology which he afterwards raised to the throne of orthodoxy ' His majesty, the warm friend of Catholicism,' says Binius, hastened ro expunge the domestic and hereditar^ stain of his famiy. The royal convert concluded pacific negotiations with the Saracens, and formed a treaty with the pope for the destruction of Monothelitism; and when his majesty and his holiness united against this or any other creed the spirit of prophecy was unnecessary to anticipate its doom! The royal smiles and frowns, seconded by pontifical influence always conveyed instant conviction to episcopal consciences' and reduced jarring systems to unanimity. Constantino, anxious to allay ecclesiastical discord, summoned for this end a general council, which met at Constantinople in the year 680. The bishops of this assembly, in its first session did not exceed forty, though in the end they amounted to 166 The emperor attended by the counsellors of state, presided" and, m the acts of the synod, they are styled the judges These prescribed the subjects, ruled the discussions, collected the sutirages, and indeed conducted the whole machinery of the council Their partiaHty appeared in the first session. Maca- rius patriarch W Antioch, and the representatives of the Roman pontiff, had disputed about a quotation from Cyril of Alexan- clna. Ihis, though couched in the language of metaphysical jargon and unqualified nonsense, equaUy unintelligible and senseless, the judges decided in favor of the party which was now m consequence of imperial patronage, to become orthodox ' me acts of the sixth general council were distinguished bv the speedy proselytism of the Greeks, the condemnation of Macarius and Honorius, and the synodal decision aaain«f .Monothelitism. Georgius of Constantinople was the first°who"^ I Alexander, 13. 47. Maimbourg, 112. Labbeus, 7. 635. 356 THE VARlATIONa OF POPERY. changed by a hasty conversion, recanted his former opinion, and anathematised the dogma of one will and operation. The logic of imperial favor, in an instant, flashed conviction on his mind. The arguments of the monarch bore, no doubt, the imperial stamp, and therefore possessed, beyond question, a sterling value. His conversion was immediately followed by that of all his suffragans. These, imitating their superior, and sensible to the dialectics of their sovereign, cursed, in loud vociferation, all the patrons of Monothelitism.' But Macarius, the Antiochian patriarch, was formed of less yielding materials. He publicly declared in the eighth session, that he would not retract, though, on account of his obstinacy, he should be torn into fragments, and hurled headlong into the sea. This shocking blasphemy awakened all the zeal of the pious bishops, who, in consequence, roared out, ' Cursed be the new Dioscorus. Put out the new Dioscorus. Cursed be the new ApoUinaris. Strip him of his pall.' The sacred synod and Roman sovereign then commanded the pall to be torn off Macarius. Basil, the Cretan, then leaped up, seized the unhappy patriarch, rent the pall from his shoulders ; and, while the council continued cursing, expelled the heretic and his throne, by sheer violence, out of the assembly. The Roman clergy next caught Stephen, the abettor of Macarius, by the shoulders, and threw him, amidst direful execrations, out of the sacred synod.'' The holy fathers, on the occasion, had no mercy on Macarius, Stephen, or their own lungs ; and had it not been for their facility of cursing, acquired by long habit, must have cursed themselves out of breath. The condemnation of his infallibility Pope H'^;'orius, for heresy, formed the most extraordinary act of the sixth general council. This pontiff hud sunk into the cold tomb, and his bones, during a period of half a century, had been mouldering in the dust. But death, the coffin, the shroud, and the grave could not shield his memory from the holy church's anathemas, which were pronounced wita perfect unanimity, and without the least opposition or faintest murmur of meicy.^ The council, in the thirteenth session, having condemned the dogmatic letters of Honorius as conformed to heresy, and con- trary to Catholicism and the faith of the Apostles and the 1 Binius, 5. 88. Alexander. 13. 50. 2 Sanota synodus una cum principe ejus orarium auferri jusserunt a collo ejus, et exiliens Basilius epiacopus Cretensis ecclesise, ejus orarium abstulit, et ana- thematizantes projecerunt eum foris synodum, simulque et Thronum ejus. StfinhftiiUTn -tutem disclniiluiii c'lis cervicibua a sancta a^^nodo olerioi Romani ejicientes expulerant. Anastasius, 30. Labbeus, 7. 590. Bin, 5. 92. 365. Crabb. 2. 319, 321. Caranza, 421. Alex. 13, 52 ^ Honorio ab Orientalibus post mortem anathema sit dictum. Caranza. 422. ACTS OF THE GENERAL COUNCILS. 357 Fathers, anathematised their pontifical author in company with Iheodorus, Cyrus, and Sergius. Honorius was represented as agreeing, m every respect, with Sergius, whose impiety the ?rw ^Ti^™^^- Th««acred synod, in its sixteenth session, repeated these anathemas against the heretical Honorius and ML'^fT^iT'"'''' ?*.^i^g'/n the eighteenth session, condemned Monothehtism and issued their definition of two wills and operations m Emmanuel, the holy fathers again anathematised Honorius'' '^"'' ^''^"'' "^^"^' ^^'''''' ^^^^"'^«. a^d The unerring council, in its eighteenth session, among other compliments, represented his holiness, in company withTheo- ( orus, Sergms, Pyrrhus, Cyrus, and Paul, as an organ of the devil, who had used the pontiff, like the serpent, in bringing death on man in the dissemination of scandal and heresy^ Hi? supremacy, it seems, occupied two important situations. He ^f „*^^,?5*fJ ofSatan and the viceroy of God. Clothed with S xu ,•?' ■ Py^fntine council proclaimed his agency, as a Monothehte, m the dynasty of his infernal majesty. Vested in like manner with infallibility, the Florentian and Laterancoun- cils defined his holiness, as pontiff, the vicar-general of the supernal Emmanuel. Honorius, in this way, w^ promoted to the premiership of both heaven and heU, and, with characteris- tic abihty, conducted the administration of the two dominions. He presided, hke aU other popes, in the kingdom of Jesus, and, at the same time, by special favor in the empire of Beelzebub. Ihe anathemas of the Byzantine assembly were repeated by the seventh and eighth general councils. The seventh, in m Its third session, anathematised and execrated Cyrus, Sergius, Fyrrhus and Honorius, and, in its seventh session, utterid a similar denunciation. The eighth, in its tenth session, also Carius^ anathemas against Honorius, Cyrus, Stephen, and Condemned by these general councils, Honorius was also denounced by six Roman pontiffs and by the old Roman bre- viary He was anathematised for heresy, by Agatho, Nicholas, two Leos, and two Adrians, on a question, says Caron, not of lact, but ot taith. Agatho, says Caranza, excommunicated the heretics Honorius Macarius, Stephen, and Cyrus. Leo the Second and four of his successors confirmed the sixth, seventh, 1 Sequi falsas doctrinas haBreticorum. In omnibus ejus mentem secutus est et ni;^?.%rprn%rtar^^ PviSum %'f,li!'^^'"r"' ™' joluntatem apta reperiens, Theodorum. Sergium. fifn 7 854 ptQ^n T\^*^T.'i"?„- ^^^^•'^- 10S8. Alexander. 13^303 W- ■ K of« ^J^^- ^^^^^- 3- 476, 694. Du Pin, 349. 3 Bin. 5. 819. et 6. 844. Crabb. 2. 403. i i ':! 358 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. and eighth general councils, that had condemned and anathe- matised Honoriub. Lr ■, in his confirmation of the Byzantine council, chaiaciHUH,' "t I/onorius as a traitor to the holy apostolic faith. Th(j old Rom in bieviary also, approved by the Roman pontiffs and used in the Romish worship, attested the condem- nation of Cyrus, Sergius, and Honorius for the error of Monothelitism.* The decisions and anathemas of these councils and pontiffs have, in modern times, cVntv muA [he friends of the papacy. One party, in the face oi this overwhelming evidence, main- tain the hierarch's orthodoxy, while another, in the exercise of common sense and candor, confess his heresy. Baronius, Bellarmine, and Binius, in the genuine spirit of Ultramontane servility, assert his Catholicism. Binius represents flonorius, as free from every stain or suspicion of error. The means, which this faction employ in his vindication, are extraordinary. One party, in this faction, such as Baronius, Bellarmine, Pighius, and Binius, represent the synodal acts of the sixth universal synod as corrupted, and the name of Honorius inserted in the place of Theodoras. This hopeful solution prevailed for some time ; but is now the object of scorn and contempt. The silly conjecture had its day ; but has passed to oblivion with many other variations of popery. The SKandian supposition has been demolished by the overwhelming argu- ments and criticisms of Du Pin, Alexander, Godeau, Launoy, and Maimbourg.^ Another party in this faction, among whom were Turre- crema, Pallavicino, Spondanus, and Arsdekin, admit the genuineness of the acts ; but allege an error in the council. The condemnation of Honorius, according to these critics, was a question, not of faith, but of fact, in which, even a general council may err. Popes and councils, according to these vin- dicators, condemned Honorius; but, in their sentence, were mistaken. The modest critics weigh their own opinion, though void of all evidence, against the decision of pontiffs, councils, and all antiquity.^ His infallibility's vindicators, in their noble enterprise, have displayed a tissue of sophistry, quibbling, misrepresentation, distinctions, nonsense, shuffling, evasion, and chicanery, unrivalled in the annals of controversy. 1 Novimus Honorium Papam, tanquam hfereticum Monothelitam a 3 synodis generalibus, VI, VII, VIII, sicuteta4PontificibuaRomanis, Leone, Agathone, duobus Adriania damnatum esse. Caron. 89. 418. Alex. 13. 311. Maimbourg, 11. Proditione immaculatam fidem subvertere conatus est. Lalib. 7. 1155- et 8. 652. Bin. 5. 307. Moreri, 4. 186. o o oat IT r>_ii Tir ii Tji^ j enn ■»«■_• — ^i. t\n "ri. t>;_ oca Ala— - opuii. uoi. V. jjcii. It. li. jjiu. 1. u/i. ^viulirtu. liu. X/il ^ in, oOu. Aie.\. 13. 302. Godeau. 5. 339. Launoy, 1. 118. 3 Turreorema, IT. 92. Pallav. VU. 4. Arsdek. 1. 127. Bell. IV. 11. Maim- bourg, 120. TEMPORARY REVIVAL OF MONOTHELITISM. 359 A second party, among whom may be reckoned Marca, Orarner, Pagius, Alexander, Godeau, Moreri, Launoy, Bruys, Maimbourg Caron, Canus, Beda, and Du Pin, confess the justice of the pontiff's sentence. This party again is divided into two factions. One of these, supported by the authority of Marca, Gamer, Pagius, Alexander, Godeau, and Moreri, represent Honorius merely as guilty of remissness and inac- tivity, in neglecting to suppress the rising heresy of Monothe- htism. Launoy, Bruys, Caron, Canus, Beda, Maimbourg, and Du Pm have characterised Honorius as guilty of heresy, and have evinced their allegation by a mass of evidence which must command the assent of every unprejudiced mind ' Monothelitism, by the decision of the Byzantine' council received a total overthrow. The Greeks and Latins, through the oriental and western empire, acknowledged, by open or tacit consent, the definition of the Conctantinopolitan assembly The theology of one will and operation, seemed, for a lapse of about thirty-two years, to be extinguished. The Monothelan theory, however, was destined to enioy a temporary revival, in the reign of Philippicus. Justinian, dis- tinguished by his cruelty, was assassinated in the year 712 and Phihppicus raised to the throne. His elevation to the impe- rial dignity, Binius ascribes to the devil and a blind magician The usurper, says Theophanes, had been educated by Stephen a Monothehte, and a pupil of Macarius, the Aiitiochan patriarch and had, from his infancy, imbibed the principles of his tutor.' The magician, who, though blind in mind and body, was it seems, skilled in astrology, foretold the promotion of Philippi- cus, and, should he patronise Monothelitism, the prosperity of his reign. The prophet, however, in this latter circumstance happened to be mistaken. The stars had been unfaithful or the sage astrologer had miscalculated. Philippicus, however believing the impostor's prediction, bound himself by oath to the conditions.'"* Vested with the sovereign authority, the emperor convened a council m Constantinople, for the purpose of overturning Catholicism and substituting Monothelitism. This assembly, which Theophanes calls 'a mad synod,' was, says Binius' attended by numberless oriental bishops, who, according to the same author, were, at the emperor's suggestion, converted in a moment, from orthodoxy to heresy. The proselytism,' on this occasion, was somewhat sudden ; but nothing extraordi- nary. The prelacy of these days possessed an admirable 1 Alex. 13. 320, 423. Caron, 89. 2 Cedren. 1. 353. Godeau, 5. 140. Moreri, 4. 186. Launoy, 1, 118. Bruy, Canus, V. 5. Beda, 31. Maimb. 113. Du Pin, 350. Theoph. 254. Bin. 5. 447. 860 THE VARUTIONS OF POPERY. I versatility of belief and elasticity of conscience; and could generally conform, with accommodating and obliging facility, to the faith of the emperor. Many of ohese holy fathers, who, on this occasion, embraced the imperial religion, had, under Constantino, supported Catholicism, and, again, under Anasta- sius, who succeeded Philippicus, retiuned, with equal ease, to orthodoxy. The sacred synod, therefore, at the nod of the emperor, and with the utmost unanimity, condemned the sixth general council, consigned its acts to the flames, and declared the theology of one will, which many of them had formerly anathematised, the true faith of antiquity. John, whom Philippicus substituted for Cyrus in the see of Constantinople, poisoned, according to Godeau, all the Greeks with heresy. The Eastern clergy abandoned the faith rather than their dignity. The Byzantine conventicle, whose atrocious acts, full of blasphemy, are, says Labbeus, buried with the wicked emperor, and consigned to eternal anathemas, renewed the impiety of Monothelitism.' Philippicus, who was a man of learning, having, on the dis- missal of the council, compiled a confession agreeable to its definition, transmitted it to the several metropolitans, and enjoined it on the clergy on pain of deposition and banishment. A few, unwilling to make the imperial faith and conscience the standard of their own, remonstrated. But these refractoiy spirits were soon removed, and others of greater pliancy were substituted. Monothelitism, in consequence, was again em- braced by all the Greeks, and even by the envoys of the apos- tolic see, who, at that time, resided in the imperial city. The Latins, however, were, for once, less passive or com- plying. The emperor's power in the west had become less arbitrary than in the east. The Roman city, in which the imperial authority had been reduced to a low ebb, was, in a great measure, governed by the Roman pontiff. The pope, therefore, rejected the imperial confession with indignation, and condemned it, in council, as fraught with blasphemy, dictated by the enemy of truth, and calculated to sap the, foundations of Catholicism, the faith of the fathers, and the authority of coun- cils. The Roman populace, unaccustomed to moderation, pro- ceeded to greater extremity. These, in the extravagancy of their zeal, threw the emperor's image from the church, and ex- punged his name from the public liturgy. The infatuated peo- ple proceeded even to oppose the Roman governor, who had been appointed by the heretical emperor. A skirmish, before the palace was the consequence, in which twenty-five were Theoph. 240. Bin. 5. 448. Labb. 1. 130. Spon. 712. ' Zonaras, XIV. VIII. Godeau, 5, 26. 339. FINAL EXTINCTION OF MONOTH ELITISM. 861 The pop?, c'v^ver, dispatched a deputation to with the j'Ofpe) and cross in their hand, to part the the killed. clergy combatants 0', 1 allu" the governor to take possession of the palace.* Philippicus, ^ iU' naean time, prepared to wreak his ven- geance on tiio po I and the people, was, by a conspiracy, driven from the tb ne, and Anastasius, as zealous for orthodoxy as Philippicut' na i noan for heresy, was raised to the imperial dignity. He, accordingly, issued an edict to the metropolitans, commanding the reception of the sixth general council, and the condemnation of all who should reject its decisions, which, he said, had been dictated by the Holy Ghost. The imperial edict met no opposition. The will of the reigning emperor being known, the transition of the Grecian clergy from rank heresy to high orthodoxy was instantaneous. Monothelitism never re- covered this shock, but hastened, by rapid declension, to nearly total extinction. Arianism, Nestorianism, and Monophysitism, survived the anathemas of general councils, and even flourished in the face of opposition. But imperial, papal, and synodal authority, which had formerly been wielded in support of Monothelitism, succeeded, in the vicissitudes of religion, in its suppression, and finally to its almost universal extinction. ' Beda, Chron. Ann. 716. Bray. 1. 512. Alex. 13. 61, 62. 11 if CHAPTER XII. PELAGIANISM. ITS AUTHOR AND DISSEMINATION-PATRONISED BY THE ASIANS-OPPOSED BY THF BrZ0Z™Vs"TNlXf«n\"v'J?r''^"-^"^«°^"" «^ z'^Zmcs-lNSMATiaED OF KPHZfa-DFrSlo^^^^ ^^« OJ'NERAL CODNCIL OF KPHKSl, 8— DECLENSION OF PELAGIANISM— CONTROVERSY IN THE NINTH CPV- lol^^Br'mrclZVLTZ'VJ^^T-'''^ °°"^"^« °^ MEnTa^D QUIERCY AUA1N8T THE COUNCILS OF VALENCE AND LANGRES— MODERN C0NTROVPR«iv— ^^N^REoyir^F'Sf trr^^^^-'*^'™^^ V^BroTQ^ErEL^^O^R^^'^R-^FTEUr"' '''''''' ™^ .ANSENISTS-CONTRO- PELAGIANISM misrepresented man, as Arianism misrepresented Emmanuel, who is both God and man. The whole human family according to the Pelagian system, continues, in its present condition, to possess the same moral power and purity as Adam in a state of innocence. The patrons of this th ' ology deny the fall and recovery of man, and the imputation of sin and righteousness. Grace, which in this theory is the reward ot merit, is. its abettors maintain, wholly unnecessary for the attainment of holiness, which is the offspring of free-will Man m the due exercise of his moral powers, actuated by free-will and unaided by divine influence, may arrive at a moral perfec- tion, beyond the sphere of criminality and condemnation. Adam was created mortal; and death is not the effect of sin but a law of nature.' The design of this impiety was the vain adulation of human ability, for the purpose of superseding the necessity ol divine assistance. The authors of this heresy were Pelagius and Celestius Pela^us was an Englishman, and possessed eloquence and capacity ; but, at the same time, artifice and dissimulation teiestius, his pupil, was a native of Scotland, or, as some sav Ireland. He was educated in the Pelagian school arid attached to the Pelagian system, but excelled his tutor in can- dor and uprightness.' ••' Poly. Virg. 66. Bin. 1. 863, Alex. io. 60. PELAOIANISM PATUONISED BY THE ASIANS. 363 These two companions in error began the dissemination of their opinions in the Roman capital, about the commencement of the fifth century. The publication of the Pelagian theology in the Roman city was, through fear of detection, conducted with caution and in privacy. Retiring from Rome in 410, on the approach of the Goths, the two heresiarchs repaired to Sicily and afterwards to Africa, where they published their sentiments with more freedom. Celestius, for some time, remained in Africa, while Pelagius passed into Asia to Palestine. Pelagian- ism, in this way, was propagated in the European, African, and Asian continents ; and succeeded, says Augustine, far beyond expectation. A spark, says Godeau, ' augmented to a confla- gration, which threatened to consume the Christian common- wealth.'* Pelagianism, like all systems introduced among men, met a diversified reception ; and was alternately praised and blamed, condemned and approved, by popes and councils. Pelagius in Palestine gained the friendship of John, patriarch of Jeru- salem, and yas protected by this chief from the accusations preferred against the heresiarch in the synods of Jerusalem and Diospolis. Orosius, in 415, accused Pelagius of heresy, in a synod or conference at Jerusalem. John, the friend of Pelagius, presided in this assembly. Orosius opposed the authority of Jerome and Augustine to that of Pelagius.' The plea, however, was disregarded. The synod, after some alter- cation, agreed to consult Pope Innocent before they should come to a decision. Heros and Lazarus, in the same year, accused Pelagius before fourteen bishops in the synod of Diospolis or Lydda, a city of Palestine. Eulogius, a metropolitan of Csesarea, presided, and John of Jerusalem occupied the second place. Prlagius was again acquitted. One of his acr-users was detained by sickness, and the other would not abandon his friend in that extremity. The judges were, in a great measure, unacquainted with Latin, and could not understand the book of PeL-igius, which he had published in favor of his system. The accused, besides, showed his usual prevarication and address. He disclaimed some of -his errors, explained others in an orthodox sense, and anathematised all opinions contrary to Catholicism. His the- ology in consequence was approved, and he himself continued in the enjoyment of ecclesiastical communion. Pelagius after- ward boasted that his opinion on the moral powers of man was ' Godea. 3. 118. Phot. cod. 54. Crabb. 1. 470. Aug. Ep. 89. ■i Alex. 10. 155. Aug. 10. 508. 364 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. sanctioned by this synod, which Jerome caUed the pitiful con- vention of BioBpolis.^ ^ Pelagius and his principles in this manner escaped the con- demnation of the Asians ; and even, in a limited sense, obL'ned their approbation. But all his finesse could neither dudTthe vigilance nor escape the activity of the African clergy Celes- tius, the companion and pupil of Pelagius.had, as earl/i the year 412 been condemned and excommunicated in the Carthaginian synod. Aurehus, the Carthaginian bishop, presided on the occasion. The accusation was preferred by Paulinus a deacon, and the sentence of condemnation extended both to tt ^nT\ ^"^ u^ ^^*^°^- ^^" Carthaginian prelacy, amount- ing to sixty-eight, again m 416 anathematised both Pelagius and Celestius and condemned their principles, The Nunridilns also, to the amount of sixty, following the example of th^ Car! thagmians assembled in council at Milevum, expressed their horror of Pelagianism and anathematised its abettors. Augus- tine, also, who swayed the African councils and influefced their decisions declared, in a public manner, against the Pelagian impiety. The whole African episcopacy if this way rr^emrV"""^'^ "'''"'"" '^"' u UiSit J against" ife The Africans, in this manner, in a church bo-^-sting its unvarv- which the latter approved. But diversity of sentiment, on this topic, was not limited to the African and Asian prelacy. Roman The A^;- "'' ^''""'l ''""'^^■^' ^^^P'-'^y^^ «™i^^r discordancy The African clergy transmitted their decisions, on the sub^-ect no JffiTh'"'T' I' ^"P" ^"""^^"* f°^ ^^« approbation. The pontiff, though at one time suspected of countenancing Pela- gianism, proceeded, after some big talk about the dignity of the Apostohc See, to sanction the jSdgment of the MricLs and excommunicated Pelagius, who according to his holiness ' wa led captive by Satan, and unworthy of ecclesiastical communro^ civlsociety or even human life.' Pelagianism. contained n a book which the heresiarch had publfshed, his infallibilit" tSrr\;" ''"''^^°" ^^"^ blasphemy.'^ The African clecisions. in this manner, were corroborated by pontificol unanim [; I I ''^' ""'??^' "^>'^ ■^^^^^^•>^ ^^ deWiked unanimity, declared against the orientals. But Innocent in the mean time died, and was succeeded hy 10:S."j;?om'V'?9 ''''''•'''■ ^"g-t-.2«22.etl0.oi9. AJoxande;, ^^. Crabb. ]. 469, 47.3, 475. Bin. 1. 864. 86C, S69. Godeau. ;}. 147. Alexandor PELAGIANISM APPROVED BY ZOZIMUS, 365 Zozimus ; and this event interrupted the harmony of the Latins, This pontiff threw the whole weight of his infallibility into the scale of the Asians and of Pelagianism against the Africans and orthodoxy. Celestius, condemned by the Carthaginians and Numidians, fled to Ephesus and Constantinople. But the odium of his theology caused his expulsion from both these cities ; and he repaired, in consequence, to the Roman capital, to seek the protection of the Roman pontiflf, who, he knew, seldom rejected the opportunity of extending his jurisdiction and drawing ap{)eals to his tribunal. Celestius, therefore, in full anticipation of success, presented himself before Zozimus, declared his innocence, and deprecated the aspersions which had been circulated to blast his reputation. He SihS presented a confession of faith, which, among other things, contained a rejection of original sin, and, of course, ac- cording to the theology of Romanism and the future profession of Zozimus, an avowal of rank heresy. His sentiments on this subject have been preserved by Augustine. Sin, Celestius said, ' is not conveyed to man by traduction or hereditary transmis- sion. Such an idea is foreign to Catholicism. Sin, on the con- trary, which is the fault, not of our nature, but our will, is not born with man, but is his own act after he (-omes into the world.'^ Such was his statement, as transmitted by a Roman saint of the first magnitude. The heresiarch's denial of man's moral apostasy and original sin iu his confession is also admitted or rather stated by Godeau, Bruys, and Alexander.^ This con- fession, disclaiming the depravation of man, his infallibility r^p- {)roved in a Roman synod, and vouched to the African clergy for its Catholicism. He absolved the heretic and confirmed the heresy. This confirmation did not satisfy his holiness. He accused the African bishops of temerity, and represented all discussions oa grace and original si*^ as empty speculations, proceeding from useless refinement or criminal curiosity.' His holiness also vented his spleen against Heros and Lazarus, who have been eulogised by Augustine and Prosper, and who, witli distinguishr^ zeal and activity, had opposed Pelagianism. • Id asaeveravit > xriveaaiua quod parvulorum neminem obstringat originale pcccatum. Auf;u.°t. bo peccat. Orig. 11. 2. Non Jic:inuB,ut peccatuia ex traduce tirinare videamur, quod longe aCatholir :> aensu alicuuni est Quia Feocatmu mm cum lioinino nascitiir, quod po3tmod;.!.i exercerr.. -M homino, quia non naturo) dolictunj.sed voluntatis esse monstratur. Auk. f -j "jccat. Orig. Ii>. 25;j, 255. Labb. 3. 108. ^11 niuit ouvortement le ptkilu'i origiuel, Godeau, 3. 145. L'aveu qu'il tit dv, sa doctrine sur le p^chd originel me paroit clair et sai« (Equi- voque. Bruys, 1. 181. Pcccatum originale Ciulestius, co libello, negabat. Alex. 10. 166. ■' Inepta certamina, qua; non fflditicant,ex ilia curioditatiB couta,j_;ione protiu.ie. Zozim. ad Aurel. Bin. 1. 877. Labb. 3. 404 Isti turbines ecclasiw vel procelloe. Zozim. ad Aur<;'. Labb. 3 404. m 366 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Zozimus treated both with the bitterest acrimony, and called them pests, whirlwinds, and storms, while he hurled excom- munication, fraught with imprecations and fury, against theii' devoted heads. All this was transacted in a Roman council, which his infallibility had assembled in the Basilic of Clement. The heresy of Celestius, on this occasion, was unequivocal and avowed. He was candid, and used neither concealment nor disguise. His doctrine on original sin, the infallible council of Trent in its fifth session, complimented with an anathema. The Sacred Synod, in its holy denunciation against all who deny original sin, cursed Pope Zozimus with all his infallibility.' The acquital of Celetitius was followed by that of Pelagius. This heresiarch wrote the pontiff a letter, which contained his own vindication, and which was accompanied with a confession of his faith. His opinion, according to Augustine and Zozimus, corresponded with those of Celestius. ' All the good and evil,' said Pelagius in Augustine's statement, 'for which man is praised or blamed, is not bom with him, but performed by him. Man is procreated without sin.''' The confession of Pelagius, says Zozimus, was, in diction and signification, the same as that of Celestius, which denied the apostasy cf the human species. His infallibility, nevertheless, declared himself satis- fied with the Pelagian theology and vouched for its truth and Catholicism. His reply to the African Episcopacy, on the occasion, contained a eulogy on Pelagius and Celestius, an invective against Heros and Lazarus, and a condemnation of the Carthaginian and Numidian councils. The recitation of the Pelagian creed had a curious effect on the Roman clergy, who were present in the council aa well as on the Roman pontiff. The heresy, as it afterwards became, awakened joy and admiration in these holy men, who, on this occasion, could scarcely refrain from weeping. The calumny, which had been circulated against a man of such sound faith as Pelagius, moved the compassion of the Sacred Synod, and had nearly drawn streams of sympathetic tears from their eyes.^ The Roman convention was not the only ecclesiastical assem- bly which, in western Christendom, sanctioned Pelagianism. 1 Labb. 20. 27. 2 Omne bonum et malum, quo vel laudabiles vel vituperabiles aumus, non nobi-. cum oritur sed agitur a nobis. Sine vitio procreamur. August, Pec. Or. 14. P 258. Godea. 3. 155. Labb. 3. 403. InvementZozimum,fidemipsius Pelagii.tanquam veramet catholicam,laudan- tem. Pelagium et Ccelestium putarent orthodoxoa. Facundus vii. 3. Augustin 10. 102. ® ^ Quod sanctorum virorum,qui aderant.gaudium fuit? Qua? admiratio singulo rum ? Vix fletu quidem se et lacrymis temperabant. Labb. 3. 404. Alex. I» 168. Godeau, 3. 156. ' PELAGIANISM APPROVED BY Z0ZIMU8. 367 This hejosy, in 794, was approved by the council of Frankfort, consisting of three hundred bishops from Germany, France, and Italy, assembled by the French monarch, superintended bj^ the Papal Legates, Theophylact and Stephen, and con- firmed bv the Roman pontiff. Mistaking the confession of Pelagi' lor a work of Jerome, this great congress of the Latin ergy stamped the Pelagian creed with the broad seal of their « orobation. Pelagianism, which was then heterodoxy, the iwly synod characterised as the true faith, which, he x^^^ho believes, shall enjoy eternal salvation. The Frankfordians, who represented the whole Latin communion, became Pelagians. The German council confounded the works of Jerome and Pelagius, and could not distinguish between heresy and Catholicism, as the Roman Synod, though superintended by his infallibility, had been unable to discriminate Pelagianism from orthodoxy.^ The Africans, however, were not intimidated by his infalli- bility's threats and indignation ; but, on the contrary, continued their opposition, with resolution and unanimity. The Prelacy of all Africa, to the amount of 214, assembled in 417, and confirmed their former sentence, in opposition to the judgment of Zozimus. This did not satisfy their zeal. These active de- fenders of the faith, to the number of 225, met again in 418, and enacted eight canons against Pelagianism.^ The firmness of the African clergy, indeed, seems to have been the means of preventing the Pelagian theology from becoming the faith of Christendom. Had their zeal yielded to the perversity of his holiness, Pelagianism would, in all probability, have be'iome Catholicism. Heresy might have been transubstantiated iito orthodoxy, and become the divinity of the Greek and L itin communion. But the energy of the African, not the Roman church, overcame every difficulty, and the faith of Augustine, not of Zozimus, prevailed. The patrons of the papacy admit the mistake of Zozimus. These have been forced to grant that the pontiff sanctioned heresy as Catholicism. Augustine, having formed several excuses for Zozimus and his council, insinuates, in the end, ' the prevarication of the Roman clergy.' Zozimus, says Facundus, ' condemned the sentence of his predecessor and the African prelacy, and extolled the faith of Pelagius and Celestius as true Catholicism.' Zozimus, says Godeau in modern times, ' received the confession of Celestius as Catho- licism and its author as orthodox.' The credulous pontiff, ciccording to Alexander, ' accountf'.d the Heresiarch's book Bruys, 1. 183. Voseius, 18. 2 Bin. 1, 883. Bruys, 1, 186, 368 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. orthodox, and formed a high opinion of his Catholicism.' Zozimua, says Caron, ' eired, when he vouched for the ortho- doxy of Pelagianism.' The confession of Celestius, according to Moreri, ' was not entirely exempted from error.' Zozimus, in the statement of Pu Pin, ' pronounced the Catholicism of a heretical creed, and recommended it by letters to the African clergy.'* The Africans, in these scenes of altercation, engaged in mor- tal ccftiflict with the Asians, and Pope Innocent with Pope Zozimus. Church appeared against church, and ^infallibility agrinst infallibity. Zozimus is next to take the field against himself Several reasons contributed to this effect. The Afri- cans continued their opposition with the utmost resolution. Jerome and Augustine, the two greatest luminaries of the Latin communion, and whose judgment influenced Western Chris- tendom, declared openly against his holiness. The Emperor Honorius, also, induced by a deputation from the African Synod in 418, approved its decisions and enacted cruel laws, dated from Ravenna, against the Pelagians, whom the pretorian prefects were, by royal authority, empowered to deprive of their estates and condemn to perpetual banishment.'-' His infallibility, at this crisis, saw his danger and sounded a retreat. His holiness yielded to the storm ; and, facing to the right about, anathematised Pelagius and Celestius, whom he had honored with his approbation and covered with his protection ; while, in the midst of his perplexity, he continued, with ridicu- lous vanity and inconsistency, to boast of his pontifical preroga- tives and authority. This vice-god, in the modest language of Pope Paul, chattered about the pre-eminence of the popedom, and, at the same time, cursed Pelagianism, which he had for- merly sanctioned, with might and main. His infallibility, in a sacred synod of the Roman clergy, condemned the confession of faith which he had approved, confirmed the sentence ©f the Africans which he had rejected, and anathematised the persons whom he had patronised. Pelagianism, which, a few months before, he had dubbed Catholicism, now, by a hasty process, 1 Ex hoc pctius essot preevaricatiouia nota Romanis cler'icis inureuda. August. 10. 4.34. luvenient Zozimum contra Iniioceiitii deceasoris sui scntentiam, (jui primus Pelagianam hwresiin coiKiemnaA'it, fideni ipsius Pelagii ejusque compli- ois C'olestii, tan()uam veram et C'atholicam laudantem, insuper ctiam Airicanos culj)autaiu episcopos. Facund-js, VII. .?. Zoziuie re^ut son livre comme Catholi(jue, et lui comme orthodoxe. (lodea. ,3. 15.3. Zozimus magnam de Pe- lagii ipsmset C.tlestii orthodoxia concepit opinionem. Lihelliim Catholicumex- istimavit. Alex. 19. 167, 169. Zozimus aberravit, cum Cwlestinum Pelagianuni pro Catholico declarasset. Caron. lOO. Qui n'etoit pa., entifirement exempto d'erreur. Moreri, 8. 116. Zozimus Cselestii hiaretici Libellum Catholicum esse pronunciavit. Du Pin, .348 . 2 Alex. 19 18.3. Godeau, 3. 166. PELAGIANI8M CONDEMNED BY THE ASIANS. 869 becftme,in the language of Zozimus, impiety, poison, abomina- tion, oiTor, perversity, execration, pestilence, and heresy. Un- «atisfied with these imprecations, he proceeded, in the fervor of his zeal for orthodoxy, to publish through Christendom circu- lar letters, denouncing anathemas on the Pelagian impiety ^ His hohness, to do him justice, showed himself, on this occa- sion, a profound adept in the Christian art of cursing He formed his anathemas with skill, pointed them with precision and launched them with energy. His infallibility, probably from the proficiency which ho displayed in the evangeh\;al duty ot cursing and for his attachment to injustice and ambitioh during his life, was canonized after his death. He lived a tyrant and died a saint, or rather, by a lucky hit or Baronian blunder acquired the sanctified character after his decease. His carcass artords materials for worship : and indeed, with all his imper- tections. which were many, Zozimus is not the worst article of the kind which has graced the Roman calendar and chal- lenged Roman adoration. The Asians also, like the pope, wheeled to the right about and manfully condemned their former sentences, which thev had pronounced in favor of Pelagius. The heresiarch had been patronised by John and Eulogius, and was afterward denounced by Theodotus and Theodorus. He had been acquitted in the councils of Jerusalem and Diospolis, and was afterwards condemned in those of Antioch and Cilicia. Iheodotus, patriarch of Antioch, assembled a council in that city about the end of the year 418, and without any ceremony condemned Pelagianism and anathematised its unfortunate autiior.^ Theodotus was imitated by Theodorus. This changeling who, like his Roman infallibility, varied his religion with the occasion, had patronised Pelagius and opposed Augustine. But his temponsing versatility induced him, about 420, to convene a synod in Cihcia. in which he abjured his former profession and cenounced his iormer system. The Cilician clergy, with easy aocihty and Christian resignation, copied the obliging politeness of their superior.' Such was the accommodating facility with ttt£S:ti^^^^^^^^ prior faith, and embraced Pelagianism, in conjunction with Nestorianism, was, in 431 denounced by the general council of Ephesus. The Ephesian assembly, being accounted a representation of the whole church, -l !iSf '"a*"^ a Zozimo et haereticorum scelestissimus postea ostenauB fuit Labb *^^- .:^!J«"'*"';.^- ^8- et 10. 263. Prosper, 1.76. Biu. 1. 871. AleJ^ 10 576.' - Merc&tor. c. 3. Coss. i. 298. = Alex. 10. 178. Labb. 3. 498. Labb. 3, 497. Garner, 219. 370 THE VAllIATIONS OF POPERY. '■I its sentence, in consequencfe, was of the highest authority, and gave the Pelagian heresy the finishing blow. Celestine also, the Koman pontiff of the day, exerted all his energy for the exter- mination of the error, which had been patronised by his prede- cessor. Addressing Maximian, the Byzantine patriarch, he characterised Pelagianism as an impiety which deserved no quarter. Its partisans, he admonished the patriarch to expel from human society, lest the impious system, through his lenity, should revive.' These synodal canons and imperial laws were followed by the rapid declension of Pelagianism. An odium, by these means, was thrown on the system, which covered its partisans with sus- picion and unpopularity. Its ejiemies, in consequence, imagined they had effected its destruction. Prosper composed the epi- taph of Pelagianism and Nestorianism, which he denominated mother and daughter, and represented as buried in the same tomb.'^ But the triumph was ideal. A future day witnessed the resurrection of the entombed thaology. The ancient pontiffs, after a lapse of many years, were opposed by their more modem successors. The controversy on grace, free-will, and predestination seemed, for a long period after the declension of Pelagianism, to sleep. Christendom, says Calmet in his Dissertation on predestination, continued, after the council of Orange, to enjoy, on these topics, a peace of three hundred years. But a theological dis- putation, similar to the Pelagian, originated in the ninth cen- tury. Augustine, refuting Pelagian freewill, taught, as Calmet, Godeau, and Mabillon have shown, the doctrine of gratuitous predestination. ' Predestination,' said the African saint, ' is the precursor of grace ; but grace is the donation itself.'^ This theology, insinuated by Augustine, became afterward a fertile source of contest among the French clergy. Gottescalcus and Raban, in this controversy, appeared first in the arena of literary combat. Gottescalcus was a monk and distinguished for learning. He maintained the system of pre- destination, and particular redemption, which, in modern times, has been called Calvinism. He taught the kindred doctrines of election and reprobation. Raban and Hincmar, indeed, represented Gottescalcus as denying free-will and teaching predestination to sin as well as to punishment. This, howevei', was a mere calumny. The monk lejected every insinuation of the kind with the utmost indignation. The wicked, Gottes- ' Bin. 2. 576, 377, f)78. Alex, lu, 182. -Prosp. 1. 114, Bruy. 1. 209. ' Pr»»iestmatio est gratut' praiparatio ; gratia vero jam ipsa donatio. Aug. De Praed. c. 10. Godeau, 6. 368. Calmet, 3. 384. COUNCILS OPPOSED TO COUNCILS. 371 calcus declared, were not compelled by any necessity to perpe- trate immorality, and would be punished only for voluntary transgression.^ ^ Raban, Archbishop of Mentz, opposed Gottescalcus. The archbishop seems to have admitted election ; but denied repro- bation. He acknowledged predestination to life; but not to death; and, like many other polemics, misrepresented his adversary. He wrote to Count Eberard and Bishop Notingus and characterised Gottescalcus as a perverter of religion and a lorgor of heresy.* Gottescalcus and "Raban were not left to single combat • but were supported by some of the ablest theologians and the most celebrated characters of the day. Hincmar, Scotas, and Ama- larius seconded Raban ; whilst Gottescalus was patronised by Remigius, Bertram, Prudentius, Floras, Lupus, and Pope JNicholas. These two factions maintained their own particular views by copious quotations from the fathers, who indeed are a kind of mercenary soldiery, whose aUiance, offensive and defensive, may be obtained by all theological polemics on every topic of ecclesiastical controversy. Gottescalcus and Remigius cited Augustine, Fulgentius, Jerome, Isodorus and Gregory • while Raban and Hincmar quoted Chrysostom, Gennadius' Hilary, Cyprian, Cyril, Beda, and Theodorus. The shock of councils followed the war of theologians. The councils of Mentz and Quiercy appeared against those of Valence and Langres, as Raban, Hincmar, and Scotus had encountered Gottescalcus, Remigius, and Floras. Gottescalcus and his cause were first tried in the council of Mentz in 848. The monk presented his confession of faith, in which he unfolded his system of predestination to this assembly. The synod con- A Tu-^ Gottescalcus for heresy, and sent him to Hincmar Archbishop of Rheims, in whose diocese he had been ordained to the priesthood.^ Gottescalcus was next tried in the council of Quiercy in 849 and convicted of contumacy and heresv. He was, in conse- (juence, deposed by a solemn sentence" from the priesthood and scourged, without mercy, before the emperor and the surrounding prelacy.* Charles was a spectator of this act of inhumanity, and feasted his royal eyes with this refined enter- tainment. The punishment was inflicted with the utmost cruel- ty, so that Gottescalcus, in the agony of torment, threw into ' Du Pin, 2. 52, 53. Calmet, .3. 18G. \ MakUon 2^ 681 Mezeray, 1. 409. Calmet, 3. 484, 480. Godeau, 6. 368. n^'f .'"' -■, ^^- . ^^^^'- •'• l"-*^- MabiUon, 2. 286. Godeau, 6. J32. 11 tut coiidamn(5, comme her(5tique. Calmet, 3. 486. inventus haTeticua et incorrigibih,s. Labb, 9, 1055. Mabillou, 2. 682. '^''^^^^^ nareticus On ie disciplma cruellement. Godeau, 3. 136. 372 THE VAHIATI0N8 OF POPERY. the fire a book which he had written in favor of his system. He was then cast into prison, where he was doomed to suffer the greatest privations. But the decisions of Mentz and Quiercy were afterward re- scinded by those of Valence and Langres. The synod of Valence, composed of the prel&cy from the three provinces of Lyons, Aries, and Vienna, -net in 855, and employed all its authority to sanction the theory of Gottescalcus and overthrow the system of Hincmar. The Valentian fathers accordingly issued six canons, which treated on free-will and predestination, and which established election, reprobation, and particular redemption.' The third canon teaches the predestination of the elect to life, and the predestination of the wicked to death. The fourth represents the decision of Quiercy, in favor of universal re- demption, as a grand error, useless, hurtful, and contrary to the truth. The sacred synod, on these points, professed to follow Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrosius, Jerome, Augustine, and tradition. The Valentians treated Scotus with great severity. His propositions, unfit for pious ears, contained according to these holy bishops, ' a comment of the devil rather than an argument for the truth ; while his silly work, full of confusion, exhibited trifling and foolish fables, calculated to create a disgust for the purity of the faith.'^ His production indeed, on this subject, was a distinguished specimen of folly and extravagance. The council of Valence, according to the statement of Sir- mond, Godeau, Mabillon, and even Hincmar, condemned the faith of Quiercy. The canons of Quiercy, says Sirmond, were exploded by the synod 'of Valence. A similar statement is given by Godeau, Mabillon, and Hincmar himself^ These authors, though attached to Romanism, admit the repugnance of the synod of Valence to those of Mentz and Quiercy. The Valentian council was confirmed by Pope Nicholas. This pontiflf was highly dissatisfied with the condemnation and imprisonment of Gottescalcus. The inhumanity of Hincmar 1 Les t5v6ques y reconnoissent hardiment la predestination des bona h la vie eternelle, et celle des m^chans h la mort (5temelle. Calmet, 3. 420. Fatemur prsedestinationem electorum ad vitam, et prjedestinationem impio- rum ad mortem. Labb. 9. 1151. lis confessent qu'il y a une predestination des impies k la mort eternelle. Godeau, 6. 150. Calmet, 3. 489. MabiUon, 3. 46. Propter inutilitatem, vel etiam noxietatem, et errorem contrarium veritati. Labb. 9, 1152. lis nomment une grande erreur I'opinion de ceux qui disent que le sang de Jesus Christ a it6 r(5pandu pour les impies. Godeau, 6. 150. 2 Commentum Diaboli potius quam argumentum aliquod fidei. Ineptas quses- tiunculas, et aniles pene fabulas, Scottorumque pultes, puritati fidei nauseam inferentes. Mabillon, 3. 46. Labb. 10. 129. 3 Labb, 9. 1162. Godeau, 6. 150. MabiUon, 3. 46. Calmet, 3. 490. DECISION OP THE COUNCIL OP TRENT. 373 and his faction excited the indignation of the hierarch. He cited Hiucmar and Gottescalcus to Rome for the purpose of turther investigation. This, however, Hincmar evaded But l-nidentius transmitted the canons of Valence to Nicholas for contirmation, and these, accordingly, received the sanction of the pontiff.' Confirmed, in this manner, by the authority of the pope, the canons of Valence were also approved by the council of Lan- gres. ihe assembly met in 859, and having consi,lered the Valentian decisions on grace, free-will, and predestination, con- terred on them the full sanction of its authority » The controversy on grace, free-will, and election was little agitated from the ninth till the sixteenth century. The school- men indeed exercised their pens on these different topics, and discussed their knotf subjects with their accustomed subtilitv ■ and their disputation,, on these points exhibited, as usual a great vanety of sense and phraseology.' But these disquisitions were carried on m the secrecy of the schools, rather than on the pubhc theatre of the world; and, in consequence, excited little general interest. The reformation under Luther and Calvin rekindled the con- troversy. Luther had studied the theology of Augustine and Aquinas, and embraced their system. Calvin also adopted the same theory, which represents predestination as entirely gra- tuitous and unconditional, and which, in general, had been patronised in the Latin communion. Many of the Romish theologians, therefore, from their aversion to alleged heresy shitted their ground, and countenanced conditional election toiinded on the foresight of human merit. Calmet acknowledges this variation with the utmost candor. ' This question,' sJys the learned Benedictine, ' has often changed its pha-'^, in the Church. Arsdekm, with equal ingenuousness, makes a similar contession, and admits, on this point, ' a wide diversity of opinion even at this time among the Romish doctors " The one party advocate the unconditional predestination which has since been denominated Calvinism. The other faction, opposing a \ Jf ^*P® ^^^ approuva. Calmet, 3. 490. - Morery, 5. 45. Mabillon, 3. 79. Mabillon, 2. 682. ^Calmet, 3. 491. Bo88uet,'38. Tnt2te^'*'°^*u°^^"^^ ^^ ^^^ P^"' d'unefois dans I'Eglise, Calmet 3. 478. Jr^t T^T^^-^^^}tT' magna est etiam hoc tempore, tententiai-um d sere pantia. Arsdekin, 1. 3G0. Bossuet, 38. Du Pin, 3. 728 BUT lis. fe^ ''"*""^"^ P*™^ '^« tWologiens de I'Eglise Eomaine. Mem. triif ^C'alt?i ffSf^^'^ \^ *^t°'°«^' deThomasd'Aquin, embrassa cette doc- lufwV .*'^'"^^''t°^o^^^'"^'"^»««"*'™ent8. Mem. 155, 156. Ceux qui suivent les sentiments de St. Augustin se fatiguent vainement k muverX ne sent pas Calvinistes. Limiens, 10 72. prouver qu ua IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) / V- ^ ,m./. O ^^ /;^"4 A 1.0 I.I 1.25 Mi ^ IM M U IIIIII.6 7] & /# >^ d^ Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 «7^ >? ^ M u. 374 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the predesj;marian hypothesis, support the system which has since been called Arminianisni. The celebrated council of Trent exemplified the diversity of sentiment which, on this subject, reigned in the Romish com- munity. Ihe Franciscans, in this assembly, opposed the Domi- nicans, and theologian encountered theologian. One party which included the most esteemed doctors, maintained the uncon- aitional and gratuitous predestination ; and, in favor of this opinion quoted the apostolic authority of John and Paul, to whom they added Augustine, Scotus, and Aquinas. Another party accused this system of impiety, making God partial and unjust, subverting free-will, encouraging men in sin, and abandoning them to despair. These conflicting opinions had a neutralising effect on the canons of this convention. The design m their composition, was to satisfy each party ; and the result theretore was an unmeaning compromise. Calmet admits their omission of any decision, on the manner and motives of election and reprobation.' The controversy was continued after the Council of Trent with the bitterest animosity. The Rhemists, Dominicans, and Janse- nists arrayed themselves against the Molinists, Franciscans, and J esuits. The university of Paris opened a battery against those otLouvam and Douay; and the French against the Belgian clergy. The hostile factions, on these occasions, fought their theological battles with shocking violence and fury. The Rhemists, in their annotations, have, in strono- language advocated unconditional election. The elect, say these com- mentators m their observi^ions on Paul to the Romans, Ephe- sians, and Thessalonians, are called according to the good-will or eternal decree of God, and not according to the pui-pose or vnd oi man. The divine foreknowledge is not a mere provision ot human works, influenced by ordinary providence or natural strength ; but comprehends an act of God's will to His elect J^od ha^ predestinated these elect to a conformity with His Son. rhe caU, sanctification, perseverance, and glorification are the ettects of free election and predestination. Jacob was a figure ot the elected, and Esau of the reprobated. God's mercy is displayed on the former, and His justice on the latter. Predes- tination is to be ascribed, not to man's merit, but to God's mercy The Almighty has chosen some as vessels of election, and left others as vessels of wrath to be lost in sin. God has predestinated His people to glory through the merits, not of man, but of His beloved Son. He calls some, by His eternal « Paolo. 1. 332. Du Pin, 3. 438. Calmet, 3. 491. Mem. 164-169. THE DOMINICANS AGAINST THE MOLINISTS. 375 decree, to the faith ; whUe he leaves others to darkness and inndehty.i The principal persons, whose publications and opinions on this subject excited contests, were Molina, Lessius, Hamel Jansenius, and Quesnel. The works of these authors raised dreadful commotions in Spain, Belgium, France, and Italy. The Spanish controversy originated in the publication of Mo- lina s work, on the Concord of Grace and Free-will. The Jesuit Mohna was born at Cuenca in Spain. He became professor of Wieologv at Evora in Portugal, and died at Madrid, anno 1600. His book, which occasioned such angry and useless contentions was published in 1588, and attempted to reconcile divine grace and free-will by a theory which its author called the Middle Science His discovery, when divested of its novel diction, tounded the purposes of God on the divine foresight of the merit and good works of men.^ Molina's work had the honor of being both approved and condemned in an infallible communion. The Dominicans, on this subject, encountered the Jesuits. Attached to the faith of Augustme and Aquinas, as well as mindful of their ancient enmity to the Jesuits, the former society commenced a vigorous attack on Molinism. The Middle Science, these partisans of predestination represented as a system of Pelagianism. The Jesuits, on the contrary, defended Molina's Middle Science, which they extolled as truth and Christianity. The theory which the one called heresy, the other denominated Catholicism. Each party published its theses, brimful of virulence and sarcasm. The two factions vented their indignation with such fury that the king of Spain had to interfere, for the purpose of allaying their mutual rage and keeping the peace ; while all the royal authority was found incompetent entirely to suppress the theological war.' The university of Salamanca, on this speculation, assailed the university of Alcala. The former seminary, in nine propositions, proscribed Molinism. Tho latter, having subjected the work to a rigid examination for a whole year, vouched for its Catho- licism, and conformity to scripture, councils, fathers, and schoolmen.* Of the two learned and orthodox colleges, the I Rhem. Aimob. on Rom. viii. 22, 29, 30, et ix. 10, 14-16, 22. Eph. i. 4. 11. inesB. u. 13. 2Arsdekin, 1. 385. Moreri, 3. 568. et 6. 365. Mem. 219. Lea DommicamB I'attaquferent vivement. Les Jesuites le defendirent de meme. Calmet, 3. 495. Les deux ordres commenc6rent k s'^chauflfer en oo?*§Sc' "° ''°°*™ ^ *"*•*' ^'"°® maniSre scandaleuse. Mem snr Predest. Lea Jesuites sent tr^s-embarrassez k montrer qu'ils ne sont ni Pelaciens ni Demi-Pelagiens. Limiers, 10. 72. * L'universit^ de Salamanque le oensura. Mem. 222, 225. 376 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. TtSrd rr^;^'^ ^^^^^"^ -^^^^ ^^^ «^^- patronised The Inquisition of Spain, on this topic, attacked the Inaui- ani'Free WmT\ The Jatter declareS the Concord of G?aoe dwavs faToriSr f ^^ «^ ^^^^P^^jon of error. But the former always tavorable to the Dominicans, censured a number of propositions, extracted from Molina's' celebrated production^ The Pemnsular inquisitors, the professed enemies of mry ?l^t^''V^ *^' ^""^'^ friend^ of inhumanity and R^mln^ an^' ofe r/ "^"""'^T i^ ""^''^ ^^'y ^«r« the accreted aiid official judges and whose sentence entailed death in all Its horrors, on its devoted victim. ' Two Roman pontiffs, Clement and Paul, next pronoimced different sentences on this question. The concrovZy was ransferred from the holy office to the holy see, and fro7spTfn t w'^esta^WrhTd tb' ?^^''' "'-^ *^^^ °-"P-^ thrponS of thk'cont,/ TV^ Congregation of Helps for the decision ot this contest. This assembly consisted often oonsultors who were the appointed judges, and who met for thefi^t thnlin 1^98. The Dominicans and Jesuits argued their several aSy '^''''^^'''™*^'"' "^^ ^^^i^^d its sentence w[th The Congregation, under his infallibility 's immediate suneri n aS^Z''-T'f.^'''''''' '^'"^^y -'- nlddbS^e^anTcon- demned sixty of his propositions. This decision, in th^ eleventh session, represented the Spanish speculator's sent^ents orpre- Pelagians, and contrary, not only to Augustine and Aquinas but also to sacred writ and the canons of councils ^ ^ ' i-aul the f lilh, who succeeded Qementin 1605 proceeded in Setrmfnadon '^ W^T^ 'T 't P^^^^^^^ HTLTued no determination His design, lest he should offend the French SoriseYIhrr'^ the Jesuits, or the Spanish monarch who pressTn of ^l f T'""''*'' "^V^ ^^" ^^«^«^^^' ^ut the sup- pression of the controversy. His supremacy, therefore after many solemn deliberations, evaded a definitiVe sentence; and ido ex- ia con- Complutensis Univeraitas Molinte Concordiam Tifir ann,™ ,-.,4. • • miini 8ubjecit. Universitatis calculo decSurinTn^n»T"'"T tineri sanam et Catholicam doctrinam? SeEn J 3^^""^ ^"'"''''^ Onuuerronssuspicioneliberata. Arsdekin. l'. 325. 'Calmet 3 49S e,terr°°'*^-P*^'' *°"J«"" favorable auxDominicains Mem Sb Illi ex Molmse Concordia, propositiones aliquasmodo consurareat ArSeSn 1 "Sfi 2 On declaraque le sentiment de Molma, touchantia Drldest.^I^inn ^i^V* -ulement contraire h la doctrine de Saint Th„mTIlPS\'?l'?^^^^^^^ x-v..».„viuc ID ocuuiueuiae ivioima, touchantia nr^destim seulement contraire k la doctrine de Saint Thomas et H « >^!,-n? a * • core ^r^criture aainte. a,,^ H^or«frZ.°:i:?f?'"i.®''^®>'"^^»^^^^^^ THE JESUITS AGAINST THE JAN8EMISTS. 377 advising both to modify their expressions and to abstain from mutual obloquy, left each faction to enjoy its own opinions.^ Each party, in consequence, as might be expected, claimed the victory. The Dominicans averred that the decision, if announced, would have been in their favor ; and this was the general opinion. The Jesuits, on the contrary, shouted triumph, and, patronised by the greater part of European Qiristendom, contemned the en;ipty boasts of the enemy. France and the Netherlands became the scene of this contro- versy, which had raged with such fearful animosity in Spain and Italy. The belligerents, on this occasion, were the Jesuits and Jansenists, as on the former, the Jesuits and Dominicans. The Dominican ardor, through time and the suggestions of prudence, had cooled, and this party, in consequence, had, in general, left the field. But their place was well supplied by the fiery zeal of the Jansenists, who, in the support of their sj^stem, spumed every idea of prudence or caution. These two leading factions soon drew into the vortex of contention, kings, parliaments, pontifis, prelates, doctors, nuns, univp'^ -Hies and councils. The Jansenists, who now in place oi' the Dominicans, entered the arena against the Jesuits, took their name from Jansenius, a bishop in the Romish communion, and a doctor in the Univer- sity of Louvain. His work, which he styled Augustinus, and which treated on grace, free-will, and predestination, was pub- lished at Louvain in 1640. The author, who was celebrated for his learning and piety, undertook to deliver not his own, but Augustine's sentiments on Divine Grace and human imbecility. He even transcribed in many instances his patron's own words. The faith of the Roman saint was, like its author, idolised in the Romish communion. Jansenius, therefore, wished to shield himself under the authority of his mighty name. But the march of events and the sap of time had wrought their accus- tomed changes, and manifested on this topic the mutability of human opinions. Many who revered Augustine's name had renounced his theology, though others still adhered to his ancient system. France and the Netherlands encountered each other on the subject of Jansenism. The latter, in general, embraced this theory, which the former as generally rejected. Pope Urban, but in vain, condemned the work entitled Augustinus, as fraught with several errors. Many misinterpreted his manifesto, and still more disregarded its authority. The doctors of Louvain, like the authors of Port-Royal, persevered in their support of » Paul V. n'avoit encore rien d4cid6. Morery, 3. 568. Litem postea in sus- penso posuit Paulus Papa V. Juenin, 6. 188. Amour, 39, 40. Calmet, 3. 499. Bausset, 2. 320. 878 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. sought an 4lamKKrnWrt^^^^^^ ^^"'^^ ^^^*' The Dutch and Belgian proS;'^ Jro^!'^^ ^^^i^^^'^^^- la.ty. continued in generXnotw^[h,?L?- ""T"""' '^^^^ ^^^ popesa^d inquisition! tTp^^^^^^^^^ ST" ^' tions m this manner varipd «nH ot^. 'f^^^^^^^^- The two na- precincts of an une.^ins™ mmunb? "^"^ '^'^'^' '" *•>« tion of this coSver^ till 16r4'trrTvr''P?:l *^» "^'t*- confined to a Utomiy Cof pofemfcfl ™ ■l'"'*' l' ' J^*"' ''™ All these wer.mIZtlli^^i7°I-}^"''^«,''-''^ eloquence, the deepest detestati?n^orrsu?4m fcrK'' ^'"'"?'^ '"'"' of his satire, rendered the enemrridir£ ''^Hk IT""-"^ Letters written aeainst the l,™t;u ?' 1^ " I^rovmcial models of eloquent and ri*™?? / °*T' "*■ ^y^ Voltaire, liere with the* s^blLTty of XsuTt ^l"™ ^e wit of Mo- exhibits not only the excellm„T„f I' /'=« Production, indeed, the force of reas4 alid Tller^? °' *^'' *"<' ^^'^^ *"" "'»» "J' moreflX\„tmrdelitf„i ^nT'^.-^™*'' ^^P"" "^ " wondPTN ' i^hinh ^^ • ^®^f,^""^ ^md. This consisted in ' Wino- speaJ. and walk dernstmt/to tW '""".^^'^ *" -^^^^ ^^^^ ' credulity, the tr'uth of ]^ti^J'^^Z:a1y2r ''''''' ^^' asS/rvid rp^'eotitcr^'-^ enC^^d, a« well Butamisemble ^aS VlZSv^^^^^^^ ?frf * ^^ ^^'««<^i^«- this faction S who P IS^ °t:f * *^' *'^"' characterised of genius and leamrng tn^^^^ Tl^?^ TvP^^ ^ TS^e .man field of theological contr^J^v f f?^ ^^?'^ ^^°' ^° <^e thehostUeraal' S^SaStin",:;;t.tTrSni: bon sens. Mem. 334. ^^{^^^^^^^^P^^^un moddede netteW, d'iUgmce, et de THE JESUITS AGAINST THE JANSENISTS. 879 and caution, the infatuated men, on this occasion, also attempted miracles to confront those of their opponents ; but were again beaten by the enemy in this kind of manufacture. Their miracu- lous exhibitions only afforded a laugh to the spectator, and exposed their authors to contempt. The prodigies of their rivals alone were in fashion. But these bunglers, as they ap- peared, in jugglery and legerdemain, were supported in the war by kings, popes, anathemas, excommunications, exile, imprison- ment, and the tangible logic of guns, bayonets, and dragoons, when the fulminations of papal bulls followed the shock of theological discussion and miraculous display. This faction, however, notwithstanding their awkwardness in writing and miracles, had, at this time,"" obtained the favor of the Roman pontiff and of the French king and clergy. Their present prosperity in the French kingdom formed a striking contrast with their former adversity. The Parisian faculty of theology, as well as the French church and parliament, opposed this society on its early introduction into France. The faculty, in 1554, accused them of every atrocity, of strife, wrangling, contention, envy, and rebellion, which endanger religion, trouble the church, and tend to destruction rather than to edification, and petitioned the parliament to expel them from the kingdom. The parliament, accordingly, in 1594, banished the whole company from the nation, as enemies of the king, corruptors of youth, and disturbers of the public peace.* But the society afterwards returned, and were patronised by the French king and clergy, as well as by the Eoman pontiff. The French prelacy in consequence, to the number of eighty- eight, favoring Jesuitism and influenced by its partisans, soli- cited his infallibility. Pope Innocent the Tenth, for his official decision on this momentous question of Jansenism. But eleven of the bishops, notwithstanding the unity of the Romish com- munion, varied from their fellows ; and for several reasons which they enumerated, such as the difficulty of the subject, the unfit- ness of the time, and the propriety of allowing a French synod to finish a French controversy, they deprecated papal interfer- ence. But the pontiff complied with the majority, and, in a definitive sentence issued in 1653, denounced Jansenism, which had been reduced to five propositions, as fraught with rashness, impiety, scandal, blasphemy, falsehood, and heresy .^ 1 Querelas, lites, dissidia, contentionee, semulationes, rebelliones, variasque scissuras inducere ; his de causis, banc societatem in religionia negotio pericu- losam videri ; ut quae pacem ecclesise conturbet, et magis ad destructionem quam sedificationem pertineat. Thuanus, 2. 430. lis furent bannls du Roiauine, comme corrupteurs de la jeunesse, perturba- teurs du repoa public, ennemis du roi. Daniel, 10. 64. Limiers, 7. 228. 2 Labb. 21. 1643, 1644. Mem. 318. Moreri, 5. 22. Juenin. 5. 188. Bauaset. 2. 331. Amour, 67. 425. 380 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. intZr^^^i^Ll^'^tr'^l' ^^ ^6H convened and saine was also eanctioredbrhis^^^^^^^^ ^^?T^- ^he authority. The Parisian l?«PnH^ J ^i.^f'*'' '^^J®^*^^ ^oyal the buufbut notKherWc^t-?^ ^^'^^'^ "«^<^ '"^cei^d doctors. notwkhVtandin^ noS T ^ '^'^^^^""ity. Sixty of its pe^edfro.thepo;:tfhe7i^^^^^ P-^«^e^ -d ap. fa«t. and admitted ?wt'/'f"^^'*^^ ^'^^^'^ right and condemnedfbutfnfactw^^^^ Alexander, in 1666 renewed M?, i ^® T^""^ °^ Jansenius. extended it to both righTand ?a f r'' '^^'^^^'^on, and mulaiy in 1665, to be f fgned bv ali th^ Fr^ .^T"^^^ ^ ^^^■ he declared, who should TJl^^if ^^^./.^^nch clergy ; and all of Almighty God an^heTlSXcT^^^^^^ popefs interdictTnd S'rnm^^^^^^^ notwithstanding the royal also followed the examn^P of fKli.- v ""^^ °^ ^''''^• fusion ensued A DroPfi<,« wfi ^'® ^''>P^- I^^eadful con- the refractory prlterTrr'°"'"?S''^ ^^" *^« deposition of their cloS and the fell r ^^"^'"^'^y^I were torn from cenceands'm,«v LTi. T^^'T ™'^ °^^3^ ^^^^ inno- were conveyed to s^^^^^^^ £. "."^ by a squadron of soldiery, object of tS fondera^Lchrnf ' ^f *^ ^.^l^^^ery, once the wi r^ed from the t ndttn ' '"^ "'" '^^^^ ^^^P^«* ^^g-*' wittL?dWpalaluS^^^ the meantime, proceeded, not- sors, InnoceKd ffinder Hi^.T '^' "^'^ '' ^'' P^^^^^^ theological commotbn and w«r f! '"P^««^^?y> ^^ 1668, amid He modified thTformuW TaW« Z'' '^'"i of pacification, dissatisfied clergy tSerleth^nl^'' ^^'^ P'™^*^^*^ *^« own sense, and^o subscXe i^siST'^hr^^^^ signed for the ritrht m «;«L -t '^^^^^"^y- Ihese according y Clement the Tenth, who succeeded in +J,^ j SeS;fA. '^''''- 2^-^643,1644. Moreri, /g" ^^S." s' °4 ^9 " ^;^CWnts'emp,.saadedonnerlapaixU-Eglise. Moreri. 3. 454. Bausset. CONTROVERST ON QUBSNEL's REFLECTIONS. 381 to have countenanced the pacification effected by his prede- cessor. In.iocent the Eleventh, his successor, not only concurred m the act of pacification and in the repeal of Alexander's Constitution and Formulary, but also, notwithstanding papal unanimity probably adopted Jansenism and certainly patro- nised its partisans. His holiness, in the opinion of many embraced their system, though formerly denounced in pontifical anathemas. During his whole papacy he ha under ^in of exemplary punishment.* circulation Onii® r '*? university, that had lauded the Catholicism of C^uesnels work, accepted Clement's consHf,,+Tn« * • xiP same work with blaspheniy aTheresv Tl!« i ' ^^^ ^^^ styled Jansenism a hUT^Sl^re^S Jfth Xlssionth^ ^^S, i JSiseta' ' '"^''^ P"^"^' ^-'^ "^ ^— b- in InsTnT^T^f ^^' !Ti^ P'^^^7' ^^««' ^hi«h met in Paris In^drLlll' Thttnf ^^^P'^P^l/o-^titution withsubmis! Mor«rRlfl??- ■ ™.\oly bishops forbade the reading of the W ^^^^^P^^o^«' ^hich they said contained blasphemy and ho^irwri^runar^^^^^^ rejected the bull. Of those who acct^ '^l^^ added "fch explanations and restrictions as might protect from attaint ?he t.Tk' b""?" ™ **"* PO'itifl™! constitution extended not onlv Thse rn"tC„r°-"' """ ^^^tl-e whole French c^ xnese, on this occasion, were divided in+n +,n.^ f„„4.- ^•'^ ^T/f I and Recusants.' ?he ?orme ^ compSnL^ -t hundred bshops with many of the inferior clergTwerf^^^^^^^^^^ ^veques refuserent d>accep£]a ConstSol lS'sIi^TiT" '"*"' Motri:^r2r^"- «* docteurs a'ont pas voulu yTouscrire'SLs^e'xplication. Li;s!?2.'^lT8V27f*' ^"' "-^t'^t-ti^^B de plusieurs de ces prdats acceptans. 884 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEBY. msed by the pope, the king, and the Jesuits. The latter, including fifteen of the prelacy, and some of the priesthood, were supported, m general, by the parliaments and the people but underwent all Kinds of perHocution from the pontiff and their sovereign. The pope and the monarch, indeecTforced it, in a great measure, on the clergy, the Sorbonne, and the great body of the people, who were influenced by royal threate and promises.' *^ "^ The French varied in the explanation of the bull, as well as in Its mjceptence. Of the acceptants, some received it in purity and simplicity. Such thought it so clear as to need no iLfustra- tion Others accused ^t of obscurity, and accompanied its publication with a worid of explanations and restrictions. The cardinals Bissy and Tencin loudly declared their utter inability umSb^Te » '^'^^^^ '*' '^"^"^^ ^ ''^y' ^"^"'^^ '^ ^^ The Recusants, differing indeed in words, agreed in sense. Harmonious in its condemnation, this party painted its meaning in vaiymg colors. The canva.s, under their hands, uniformly bore the mark of reprobation, and was stamped with the broad seal of heresy Tne Constitution Unigenitus, all these avowed, inflicted a mortal wound on faith and morality, and enveloped in sacnlegious censure, the canons of councils, and even the words of eternal truth. Some reckoned it pointed against Calvinism, and some against the Angelic Doctor Thomas Aquinaa, tor the purpose of overi;hrowing his system. Others thought his infallibility had become a patron of Molina, and intended to support; the theory which had been condemned by pope Clement and the Congregation of Helps. The condemned propositions of Quesnel, on the contrary, were, this faction averred, a faithful expression of CathoUcism, couched, in general as even Languet admitted, in the language of Augustine' Prosper, Fulgentius, and Leo.3 ^ "guswne, 12! 269. ^'^**** *^" '°'*"""^ ^*°'^''* partagez sur son acceptation. Limiers, le motr'^nol^S^^Z' "T'lS" "^^i*^ emploiees. La volenti du Prince a ^t^ ae* ranee et la Sorbonne d'admettre la Constitution. Moreri, 5. 22. 12 ffq^«'^«*'<^t'o°««t« Claire qu'eUe n'a pas besoin d'expli^uition. Limiers, tions! Moren^7 "3 ^ ^''P^°**'''°'' "^"^ ^^^""^^^ modifications et restric hautemp^ w '■^■^''"i''' •'O'P'^elesCardinaux de Bissy et de Tencin, enfaisant hautement profession de ne le pas entendre. Apol. 1 169 "»»»m de mo^air*LSre'?sf°iri2T'^''*''"'°* '"'^*" ^ P*""^'"'« ^«"*«^ ^« *»'«* ^ Les^lOl propositioks sont line fiddle expression de la foi Catholique. Apol. La Bulle souffre les explications les plus oppos^es. AdoI 364 Lea una entendent d'une fa9onetle8 autres de I'autre^^ Apol. 1 Bl . On y atroSS la confirmation du syst^me de Molina. Apolog. 2. 41. ^ COKTROVERSY ON QUESNEL's REFLECTIONS. 385 toSr;S 'aiTthTcord^'^T^^^^.^ their opposition majority of th^' rriisthtd '':^:r:tZs^i:tn§' ^^^ Meaux and Freju" t^ of L S T^ ^^'""'y' ^''^^P' of avow that a hundredthnnLn^ defenders, were compelled to andthatitcoulrno^itSeftre'l^^^^^^^ T' ^'^'^^d aLinst it. at Geneva than in FrTce ' "^'^^ ^^^^^' inlignation urgtdNt^ru&Cfnt r^r '''^ '^^"^•^^^ ^^« P°Pe interdict, proscription baSsh men f ,"f ^"1^'^''^^^°"' ^'^^"'^^/^ Red hot anathemarflasred W ^ ^"^ <^^« ^^tii! ^v6re stigmatized with the nlZ *J-^^^''^''- "^^^ opponents matics, and heretics Some Lrt^ of innovators, rebels, schis- Absolution w^ refused to the rX"?"'^' *°? ^"^« ^^^^^ed. raents to the dyinr The demrHnr*l'^^ ^^^ "^^'^ *^« ««^ra- ebb, wpre frequ^X outralfw^Vi^' '"'''" i^^? ^«^ ^* *^« l«^t solaced with cor^ZT^LlltZnTf' ^".-'"^ ?^ ^^^^ their dissolution. The fury of the n^M '°°»«*'°^«^ ^^^^^ hapless victims beyond the oJecSol^f i ''.?^''S,r P'^^^^d its deprived of ecclesiSalte^^^^^^ Their re,„ainB, ehr. or consigned, with unbaptisT/lnTntno ITuZ& efffct'^nXrnch;";t?o"n''L^^^^^^^ -- *« »>e life, and the Duke of Oriea^' JlT''"''- l/i^. departed this royal declaration therefore^blLTn.T'"^^ ^u'^"^*' ^he receive the Roman buTw;.tupSs 5' tT^ f.'^°^ "? confessor, and an active enemt of ?h r f'^""' *^^ ^S^ loaded with pubUc od urn anTbanished fn r*^ u''^' ™ time and changi^ S the ..pnf ^ f *^.°^°S^' «^^^"g the »"g"ig witn the scene, protested against the bull ment i Gen6ve qu'il ne I'a dt/en FV„n, ^ a ? 1"* P*^ <^*'^ *^a't^ Plus indijme- 5.22. ^ ""^ ""^ ^® "g^^"^ f"rent mterdits et excommunies. Moreri recusauB. Limiers. 12 31X312 Apolog.l.^s';^'""^""''' '* '^"^ '^^^« """'^^ 1«« 386 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. and declared their former decision a forgery, '.'resent declara- tions, through the kingdom, were, on this topic, opposed to for- mer decisions, and all things seemed to change, in a communion which vainly boasts of immutability.* But the pope, in his obstinacy, published apostolic letters, in 1717, separating from his communion all who would not accept the constitution. The Regent resolved, if possible, to restore peace. The papal bull was modified, so as to give general satisfaction. This modification, the parliament, in 1720, registered with the customary reservations ; and a general pacification ensued, which lasted, with few interruptions, till the year 1750.'' New disturbances arose in France, in 1750, on the subject of the Bull Unigenitus. This pontifical edict, though detested by the parli menta and execrated by the people, was cherished with fond attachment by the Archbishop of Paris and many of the prelacy and inferior clergy. This section of the French hierarchy resolved to force the constitution, which was tl^e idol of their hearts, on the people, by refusing the communion and extreme unction to ail who opposed. The clergy obtained the support of the king, Louis the^ Fifteenth. Pope Benedict also, in a circular to the French episcopacy, urged the reception of the Roman manifesto. But the parliament and the people resisted with great resolution. Dreadful confusion ensued. The king tried the strength of the secular arm in alternately banishing and recalling the parliament and some of the most active of the prelacy. The parliament, however, was firm, notwithstanding banishment and the Bastile. The people also resisted the clergy with unshaken determination. The parlia- ment and popular firmness, in the end, gained a victory over the king, the pope, and the clergy, who, after a long and des- perate struggle diversified by alternate triumph and defeat, submitted to a virtual repeal of the obnoxious constitution. Jansenism and Jesuitism soon lost all interest in the tranquillity and transactions which followed. The Jansenists were no longer supported by the pen of an Arnold , a Nicole, a Pascal, and a 1 Louis etant mort, la declaration fut supprimde. Moreri, 7. 13. Volt. 9. 112, 113. Les exiles out ^t^ rappellez. La liberty a ^ti^ rendue aux parlemens et aux ^vfiqueB. Limiers, 12. 311 • La Faculty de Th^ologie de Paris d^clara que Ic dcScret du cinquieme Mars 1714 etoit faux. Moreri, 7. 13. Castel, 320. On les vit opposer h. ces d(5crets des d^orets contraires. Moreri, 7. 13, Les choses ont enti^rement cliange de face. Voili tout d'un coupun grand change- ment. Limiers, 12. 312. Mem. de la R(5gen. 1. 40. 2 Le Pape a fait publierdes Lettres apostoliques, par lesquelles il s(5pare de sa communion tous ceux qui n'ont pas re<;u, ou qui ne re^evront pas a I'avenir, sa constitution. Limiers, 12. 314. Volt. 9. 118, EFFECTS OF THE JAN8ENIST CONTROVERSY. 387 larity. Many, indeed inthTtr^T^ ^^^°g« ^f aU popu- Jansenism. But the denoiSnatfo^ J ' 'f ' • ^ principles of hardly be said to e^ist? '^''' ^ ^ '^^^^^^^ l>ody, can rrJJ\^ '^^T^' t?'^' ^'i **he return of peace sunt in* ^• The losg of credit at the Frenoh nnliS u- T^ /.^**' disrepute. ong enjoyed, wa. attended wth the eon t''^ this faction had the hostility of parliameX flT.,r'''"*'''^ ^^^"^ ^^' the to produce their secret instituHnT ^^1^°^?^"^ ^ere compelled order. This, it w^ fZd oZ'? "^5°*^^^^? ^^' r«les of their aU civil go^ernme^t tSVoTaf^^Lr^^^^^^ ^' contrary, at once, to the safetv nf f k^ u-^ , ® document, the nation, competed their ruin tI^"^ ,f ^ '" '^^ ^^^« ^f and their effects confiscated Th. ?• ^'' 'f ^^^^'^ ^^^^ seized, patronise such a fratemty not on^v^l'^r^^^^^.^^ ^^^^ *^ hut^expened the .hole ^^^i:^:^^^^ inlratnt't^;^^^^^^^^^^^ time, flourished for a Ihort n.T/ T ?^'^^ ^* ^^e same hostile principles in the boslKl' ^"^^^^^^^ed diametricaUy during their continuance S dJ^} ?T T°^°^"«ity, warred display the mutation^ of r!> -^^ ¥*''^^' and then, as if to of Si earthirthtgs sanStTS '"^ '"^'^^ *^^ vicissitudes nation. "^ ^ ' ^''''^ '""^^^ oblivion, or were banished the entered the field, and fouSUti, f tesmen, and parliaments Paigns. The oh Id rose ^ll^^ '"^ ^^' theological cam- against the child Fellow nfl ^''''^^' ^"^ *^« Parent other dreadful suspicfon slnd ZtlTT^r^nf^^^^^^^ ^-'^^ conflicting factions^HL el:>e oJ ,1 /^' '^'""'^ '^ the troubled nations, which wC tl P^^'?''"^ '^^^^^^^^ volume of noi«v .npi^^^^.'^f ® ^^^ ^^^^ne of action. One system which one party tvL 'JZh''''^'J'i ?^ , ^^«^^e^- ^'he called error and Cfv F^h / T'J^^^^^^^^^^^^ na neresy. Mch treated its opponent as the 388 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. abettor of schism and blasphemy, while a deluge of rancor and bitterness, which rent asunder the ties of Christian charity, was poured on insulted Christendom. The channels of philanthropy were closed, and the flood-gates of malevolence, set wide open, discharged their pestilential torrents on dis- toacted man, contending, in many instances, for a shadow. Mutual execration, a weapon unknown in every reformed communion, diversified the popish war, and carried damnation into the adverse ranks. Protestantism, from its rise till the present day, affords no such example of rage and division. Bossuet, aided by learning and exaggeration, could supply no scene of equal vengeance and variety in all the annals of the Reformation. CHAPTER XIII. TRANSUBSTANTIATION. -NOURISHED THE HUMAN ^DT-amf/f^niffJ;^'^^^ "^^^^^ 0™ SUBSTANCE TI0N-CAUSE8 WHICH FACILITATED TI^fNTRoSlON O^.^o'" ^" BEOEN^! -HISTOKY OF TKAN8UBSTANTIATI0N^A8OHASm« ^L''^ THAN8UB8TANTIATI0N into the body and blo«J T„hT, * ''* "" «!« communion, into the souTand d?Sy^f ou^r C T^^T'^'^''^^'' of the sacred elements^S mZdi^t *^ ?^°'' substance and^r st'oXiri't rrTr?- of'^h^e d'd "i in every droD of thp wmp pt^ • ^^^J^'^. ^^ f^e oread, and 24k^SriLruia%ro:^^^^^ Sret^^^ m cruce pependlt. Lanfranc. Domini corpus, quod nSumTi1'rafn?.n r'''"'\*^^>"''*'- ^^^b. 20. S19. 390 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. altars. He is entire in heaven, and, at the same time, entire on the earth. The whole is equal to a part, and a part equal to the whole. The same substance may, at the same time, be in many places, and many substances in the same place. This sacrament, in consequence of these manifold contradictions, is, says Ragusa, ' a display of Almighty power ; ' while Faber calls transubstantiation ' the greatest miracle of omnipotence;'' The species, in this system, exist without a subject. The substance is transformed into flesh and blood, while the acci- dents, such as color, taste, touch, smell, and quantity, still remain. The taste and smell continue without anything tasted or smelled. Color remains; but nothing to which it belongs, and, of course, is the external show of nonentity. Quantity is only the hollow shadow of emptiness. But these ' appearances, notwithstandinpr their want of substance, can, it seems, be eaten, and afford sustenance to man and nourish the human body.^ Such is the usual outline of transubstantiation. The absur- dity resembles the production of some satirist, who wished to ridicule the mystery, or some visionary, who had labored to bring forth nonsoiise. A person feels humbled In having to oppose such inconsistency, and scarcely knows whether to weep over the imbecility of his own species, or to vent his bursting indignation against the impostors, who, lost to all sense of shame, obtruded this mass of contradictions on man. History, in all its ample folios, displays, in the deceiving and the de- ceived, no equal instance of assurance and credulity. This statement of transubstantiation is couched in general terms, in which its patrons seein to hold the same faith. The doctrine, expressed in this manner, obtains the assent of every professor of Romanism. All these agree in principles, but, in many respects, differ in details. This agreement and difference appeared in a striking light, at the celebrated council of Trent. 1 Non solus sub toto, sed totus sub qualibet parte. Canisius, 4. 468. Bin 9 380. Crabb 2. 946. Ubi pirs est corporis, est totum. Gibert, 3. 331. Christus totus et integer sub qualibet particula divisionis perseverat. Canisius, 4. 818. Totus et integer Christus sub panis specie et sub quavis ipsius specie! parte, Item sub vim specie et sub ejus partibus, existit Labb. 20. 32. Idem corpus sit simul in pluribus locis. Faber. 1. 128. Paolo. 1.530. Possunt esse duo corpora quanta et plura in eodem spatio. Faber, 1. 136. Corpus uon expellat prseexistens corpus. Faber. i. 137. Hoc sacramentum continet miraculum maximum quod pertinet ad omnipoten- tiam. Faber, 1. 126. Divina omnipotentia ostenditur. Ragus. in Canisius, 4. 818. 2 In Sacramento altaris, manere accidentia sine subjecto. Faber, 1. 202. Nutrit et saturat eodem modo quo alius panis, Faber, 1. 219. Non sunt sub- stantiae : habent tamen virtutem substantim, Aquinas, iii. 2. 7L A. vi. Les accidens par reparation miraculeuse de la toute-puissance Divine produi- sent les mfimes effets que la substance. Godeau, 6. 378. ROMISH ACCCUNT OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 391 The doctors of that assembly wrangled on this tonic in f^dm,i« and nonsens cal jargon. A^attenfpt wTs m^e^Tut in vaTn pWd "^ TL'dn'' ^°^P^-*-- ^^ the canons'. No^e Ze peace to TJ" J^°^% ^J ?o««equence, had, for the sake of peace, to be propounded in few words and general exnrP-, sions ; and this stratagem effected an ostensib/rSLft^" TrLt ^Z;T n? ^'^^'^''^^' differed at the counc 1 of irent, as they do still, on an essential point of this theorv Satforof%l°^^'Tf *^' 'T"^^^ opinion, maintain he aS bv tW '"^'*'T ^^ ^^" sacramental bread and wine by their conversion into our Lord's body .nd blood The ation'and ^.r^"^*'^'^' ""^P^ ^^ heresy, ^denied this annihil! etments ribT'''- . ^^' '"^-'^^^ ^^ ^^^ sacramental elements, m this system, remains unchanged, while the substance of our tord's body and blood takes^t pice The one succeeds to the room of the other, and both as neither possesses quantity or extension, occupy the same sp;ca^ S^^^^ would appear to trench on heresy, and would reqiire a skUful mt our Lord, saj^ the Franciscans, in passing in this manner from heaven to earth, proceeds not by successive movement HeisL"th^:£T '^""^\ V'^ P^^^^g^ occupies no W: lie 18 on the altar as soon as he -leaves the sky ; or rather he obtains the one position, without departing fr^m the other^ Both factions, at Trent, thought their statemefts very clear and ^ach wondered at the other's nonsense and stupidity The Franciscan faction, if nonsense admit of degree o? comparison IS entitled to the praise of superior absurdity^ The iraTtwo TdoTi r^'^'T- ^"'^^i^* the same timl in the same plale intermediary ^'^"^ '^'^^^S ^'^"^ ^^^^^n to earth, without SldeZr "' '^ "'*""' ^^^"^ *^ «^-i^ the' palm of ^^i'^JL=^^^^ panis. ne,ue e^ Faber,^T 129™*' °°° ^^ P''^''°' ^^' '«*'^ conversionem substantialem. celSrmlTntr^Clt^l?^.!"'^ non plus. par un mouv^nont sue- sans sortir du premier7°iPaoio; "l'sso ''"' '"''" '*'''"^'''" "" """^"^ ^«" r. ^°^"* <^^"8t|fi* prsBsans ibi non per motum localem. Faber iv D 10 P- 128. Non pertransit omnia media. Canisius, 4. 485? 392 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. A third party differ from the Dominicans and Franciscans. The substance of the bread and wine, in the theology of this faction, neither remains, as say the Franciscans, nor changes, according to the Dominicans, but ceases to exist either by anni- hilation, resolution, or corruption. The substance of the sacra- mental elements is reduced to nothing, or, by analysis or putre- foction, returns to its former principles. This opinion, says ' Faber was held by Henry, Cajetan, and many other abettors of Catholicism.* A fourth class, in this unerring and harmonious communion, vanes from all these speculations on the substance of the sacra- mental elements. According to these theorists, the body and blood of Jesus, and something of the bread and wine after con- secration, remains united. Both exist together in the host. This notion was patronised by Innocent the Third, as well as by many other theologians, such as Paris, Rupert, iEeidius. Du- randus, Goffric , Mirandula, and Soto." A fifth division within the precincts of Popery entertains a theory different from all the former. Emmanuel's existence in the host, according to these theologians, is the action of his body, effectively supporting the species. His presence is nothing but the operation of his substance. He is in the species in a spiritual and angelic manner, but not under the modality of quantity .=> His real substantial presence, there- fore, degenerates, in this scheme, into mere spiritual action or operation. Such are the variations of popery on our Lord s sacramental substance in soul and body. But Romish diversity does not end on the topic of substance, which refers to both soul and body, to both matter and mind; but extends to the separate consideration of each, to the distinct state of his corporeal and mental exist- ence in the communion. One division in the papal connexion allows his sacramental body all the chief properties of matter, such as quantity, extension, visibility, motion, and locality : all which a second section deny. A third party ascribes to his soul m the host the principal powers and operations of mind, snch as understanding, will, sensation, passion, and action : while this theory is rejected by a fouriih faction. The chief warriors who fought in these bloodless bactles, were the schoolmem, who have 1 Substantia pania non manet, nee tamen convertitur, sed desinit esro vel per annihilationem, vel per resolutionem, &c. Faber, iv. 3. 2 Panis manet in eucharistia post consecrationem, et tamen simul cum ipso yere est co^us Christi. Aliquod substantise panis et vini remanere. Faber IV, o* p, 183. » Ejus prffisentia nihil aliud esse videtuf quam ejusdcm subsianiiffi actio vel operatic. Faber. i. 133. ON OUR LORD'S SACRAMENTAL SUBSTANCE, 393 displayed admirable skiU and heroism in the alternate attack and defence of subtilised folly and absurdity Drorr^wtrT ^"r'^""" u "^'^'^ ^^^^y •^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^n the chief properties of matter, such as quantity, extension visibility motion, locality and extension. Jesus, Lording JothZspet' lenSrei L^^^^^^^ ^^r^' occupiesVce, and\l brXn H« nnn „i ^t''^^'"' ^^ "^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ed, felt, and broken. He can also be seen, say some, by men on earth or ^^jy' ^ ^^^^^ ^^S\hy spintB in heaven^ This 4rwhich though the more rational, is contrary to the comnSropTnion Sus artEnr*" ""^ ?'^'r '^^^'' BonaventTra, E": dus, and their followers, who charge their opDonentq if nof wi+T, heresy, at least with rashness and absu^diS? ^^' '^ ''^^ ""'^^ A second section in the Romish communion divests our Lord's acramental body of the principal properties of maUer Jesus sesses no locality. He fills no space. He has no narta no SW bl of ^^^^^^^^^^^ - '^ "^* inihe" mo'daty'S- quantity, but of substance, and, m consequence, haa no exten- en toSd'f^?'?"; f'\'\ dimensions. ' He cannot be seen touched felt, tasted or broken. He is motionless or «f least, cannot be moved bv created power ^ «^otionless, or, at deducS *^Orl P^^ff' °^^°y curious conclusions have been deduced. One part of the sacramental elements may enter an- other, without any distinction, and all the parts, by h^tJosusc^D tion, exist m the same place. Emmanuel^ ey;s, as £Tes on theaJtar. are in his hands, and his hands in his feet. ffismou?h IS not more distant from his feet than from his eyes HiTnose 18 not separated from his chin, his neck from hiXlly nor his moved a"Sd'VL'^T'\-''^ ^? ."^^^^"^^-' though tZ' host be bvl^d HP n't.'"'^? ^T^r ^" "^^<^h^^ ^« <^hanged nor as^i^ fhpf ! ''• l^'^d'' ^"^"'' ^^^ r««t«' though he may assume these postures in heaven. However the wafer be turned he cannot be placed with his head above and his feet Wath or on his back or his face.3 This, in all its ridtulousness S S^n' y^®;- P^'«. 1-530. Aquinas. 3. 361. -= Corpus Chneti non est in loco Anninno q qka * n corpus Christi potest vide^prout eftlnrc s'acSento 'Suin t ^"*" de^eu^Taolt if 5^ °'''''''^"' ^^' lesacrement la substance n'oocupe point N!Si°non*^XrtP^*'*l'^*"''^*''«^"«diatinctionepartem Faber 1 136 Corpus Chnsti non habetdifferentias rv,«?tSt A^^J'Jl^^' ^^h sursum caput ait corpus supi- num vel resuDinum .Si in'n^i«"^?.r*' " V' """"' """wa, non esc corpus supi- recumbat. seCrTt ste't S st^re^'ti^*^7a£^^. fl^^.lfiS."'^ ''' "^''^^^ ^"^'^ S94 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. absurdity, is the common opinion, aijd was adopted by the Franciscans as well Ba by Aquinas, Varro, Durandus, iSiaco, Ocham, Soto, Paludan, Bonaventura, Gabriel. Cajetan, and. "^deed, by the generality of popish theologians. A third party ascribes to his soul in the sacrament, all the principal powers and operations of mind. According to these he possesses like other men, life, sense, understanding, will, sensation, and passion. He has the same intellect and sensation on the altar as in heaven. He can, like another human being, see hear, feel, move, act, and suffer. Some have assigned him m this situation, stiU more extraordinary endowments. These make him sometimes sing, and warm the officiating priest's hands, which, in return, warm him in the consecrated elements.' touch was the opinion of the nominalists, as well as of Ocham, Major, bcotus, and their numerous followers. A fourth faction, manifesting the diversity of Romanism, rejects this theory. These strip the Son of God, as he exists m the communion, of inteUect, sensation, action, passion, motion, animal life, and external senses Like a dead body, he is, on the altar incapable of speaking, hearing, seeing, tasting, feeling, and smeUmg. He has spiritual, without corporal life, as the moon has the hght of the sun without its heat. This idea was enteri;ained by Rupert in the twelfth century. Jacobel, in the !!®? \*^®"*'^''^' ®°^braced a similar opinion, which he sup- ported by the authority of Augustine, Jerome, Ambrosius, Anselm, Paschasius, and the schoolmen. This, says Mabillon IS the common opinion held by the schoohnen, and, in general,' by the ancient and modern professors of popery.'* Transubstantiation is a variation from Scriptural antiquity. Ihe absurdity has no foundation in revelation. Its advocates, mdeed, for the support of their opinion, quote our Lord's ad- dress to the citizens of Capernaum, recorded by the sacred his- torian John. The Son of God, on that occasion, mentioned the eating of his flesh, and the drinking of his blood; and some tnends of Romanism, chiefly among the moderns, have pressed this language into the service of their absurd system. The metaphor, used on this occasion, is indeed of that bold , 1 OperatiointeUectuset voluntatis potest inesse Christo utineuchariBtia. Cor- V^^^^oimti est capax harum 8ensa,.ionum et passionum. Faber, 1. 167 Chnstumm sacramento posse videre,canere, audire.et facere etpatiomnia.ause csetenhommeBpatietagere. Ut est in sacramento, posse propriammanum sacerdo- turn calefacei« et ab ipsa califieri. Eaber, 1. 178. 2 Clristum ipsum in hoc sacramento, nuUam posse habere sensationemactivam ne^ue passivim. Est impassibUe naturaliter ipsum habere ahquam actionem vel passionem. Faber, 1. 177, 178. Non aliam vitam esse in corpora Domini quam spiritualem. Mabillon, 4. 662 JNunc plenque theologorum sentiunt, Christum in eucharistia nullas fiTfirn«r« sensuum exteruoium functioneB,sed sacrumejus corpu8,mortuum modo. in sacra- mento existere. Mabillon, 5. 563. Lenfant. 2. 214, . --v-i- * .'T^^PT^^'^'"?^'"""" TRANSUB8TANTIATI0N UN8CRIPTURAL. 395 kind which IS common in the eastern style ; but which is less trequent m western language ; and which, to Europeans, seems earned to the extreme of propriety. Nothing, however, is more usual m the inspired volume, than the representation of mental attention and inteUectual attainments by oral manducation and corporeal nourishment. The actions of the mind are signified by those of the body The soul of the transgressor, says Solo- mon, shall eat violence.' Jeremiah ate the words of God Ezekiel caused his belly to eat 'a roll of a book.' John ate the little book, which was sweet in his mouth, and bitter in his belly. J esus, to the woman of Samaria, spoke of men drinkins iving water, which, as a fountain, would spring up into ever- lasting life He also represented the reception of the Holy bpmt to the Jews, by the act of drinking living water. These are only a few specimens of this kind of speech, taken from Revelation Eating and drinking, therefore, though acts of the body, are often used as metaphors, to signify the operation of the mmd m believing. Common sense, then, whose suggestions are too seldona embraced, would dictate the application of this trope for the interpretation of the Messiah's language in John's gospel Cajetan accordingly avows, that ' our Lord's expres- sion there IS not literal, nor is intended to signify sacramental meat and drink. Augustine and Pius the Second, in their works as weU as Villetan in the Council of Trent, and armed with aU Its authority, represented it as a figure or metaphor ' Ihis metaphorical signification has, in general, been patron- ised m the Komish communion by doctors, saints, popes, and councils Some indeed, to show the diversity of Romanism, have adhered to the literal meaning But these, compared with tlie others, have been few and contemptible. The figurative IS the common interpretation, and has been sanctioned, not only by saints and pontiffs, but also, as shall appear by the general councUs of Constance, Basil, and Trent, in all their infallibility. Mauncius. supported by the authority of the Constantian assem- bly, declared this 'the authentic exposition of holy doctors, and " approved explanations. These commonly understood it to sig- nily not the sacramental, but the spiritual reception of our Lords body and blood.' Ragusa, in the Council of Basil, declined, on account of its tediousness, to enumerate 'the seve- ral doctors who explain it principally and directly to imply spmtual manducation.' Villetan, at Trent, said to the assem- Co/rs,''"'' ^' ^^''' ''^- ^^- ^^^- "• ^- -^"^ '^- ^^' !*• «*^"- 37-39. >'on loquitur ibi Dominus ad literam de sacramentaU cibo et tiotu. C^i^tj.^ ±. o. xracL. z. c. i. • ' ' ' Svffn*fln ^'i«"«t^3. 52. Jesus Christ parloit alorsfigur^ment. ^n. byl. Jip. 130. Est metaphora. Villet. in Labb. 20.615. 396 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ii bled Fathers 'you wiU wonder, I well know, at the singular agreement of all m this interpretation. The uciversal church you may say, haa understood this passage ever since its pro- mulgation, to mean spiritual eating and drinking by a Uving Mauricius, on this occasion, wrote and published by the conamand and authority of the Constantine council. Ragusa spoke under correction of the BasUian assembly, and without any contradiction. Villetan, at Trent, spoke in a general congregation and with its entire approbc.tion. The comments ot these theologians, therefore, have been sanctioned by the threegeneralunerringcouncils; and these, in all their infallibility, together with a multitude of fathers, saints, doctors, and popes supply the following statements. ^ ^ The passage in John's gospel cannot refer to the communion : tor It was not yet instituted. Such is the argument of Cardinal Cajetan and Pope Pius II. ' Our Lord,' says the Cardinal, spoke ot faith; as he had not yet appointed the sacrament. Ihis, Jesus ordained at Jerusalem the night in which he was betrayed According to the pope, « The words whoso eateth and ^keth are not in the future, but in the present time: and the expression, therefore, could not, by anticipation, refer to tuturity. Ihe inspired diction would, on this supposition, relate to a nonentity.^ The language recorded by John will not agree with sacramental communion The instructions of our Lord, on that occasion, wm not quadrate with the opinions entertained, on this topic, by the advocates of transubstantiation. The Son of God sus- pended the possession of eternal life on the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood. This was the condition, without which man could have no life. None can possess spiritual life, unless, in this sense, they eat and drink his body and blood Ihe manducation mentioned by the apostle, is necessary for salyatioa This, if it referred to the sacrament, would exclude all mtants, though partakers of Christian baptism. The suppo- «.lw^°°'**^'', secundum expositiones authenticas sanctorum Doctorum et ap- S^?« S?,!^ ^^°^■'V^!^■■ ,P^ •«*? rnanducatione aut aumptione aacramentali cor- Knl ^"'"''F^^'t' °o°i°tell.giturauctorita8 prWiota, ut decent sane Doctores communiter. Labb. 16. 1141, 1144 , « uu 8nLwf^I!f!L'/"^^°'-^°''*°r!' i°*i"*^ere; qui totum praesens capitulum de cSrus ™'J3^g"*'**'°°® prmcipahter et ex directo exposuerunt. Labi). 17. 934. Miraberis, sat scio, summam omnium concordiam ad hunc sensum. Dicere ir,Jf^W^*Tv.'^^^'^ "^"^""'^ V- ^' «P^*"''" mandicatione et bibitione per Jr*«™^K V" 9*»"s*"m. jam mde esque ab ejus promulgatione fecisse interpre- tatum ab ecclesia umversa. Labb. 20. 615, 616 ^«='i"c TrSr?"^ loquitur de fide. Nondum instituerat sacramentum. Cajetan. T. 2. Le sacrement n'6toit pas encore institufi, Pius II. Ep. 130. 'si^r^-- , Liiiiiiuj)j^)i«| TRANSUBSTANTIATION NOT SUPPORTED BY JOHN, OH. VI. 397 sition therefore, which would involve this exclusion, must, even according to the Romish system, be rejected. Participation in the communion is not, according to the Trentine council in the twenty-first session, necessary for salvation : nor is it to be administered to any till the development of reason This agrees with the statements of Augustine, Bonaventura. Aquinas, Ales, and Cajetan, aa well as those of the general councils of Constance Basil, and Trent. If the communion were necessary for salvation, all who do not partake of that institution, say Augustine, Bonaventura, and Aquinas, 'would be damned. Such could have no life, and, therefore, the words signify spiritual eating by faith and love.' Ales speaks in the same style. The literal sense of this passage, ^ys Cajetan, would destroy the sufficiency of baptism, anS suet an inter' pretation, therefore, is inconsistent with the Christian faith " Ihe comments of the Constantian, Basilian, and Trentine lathers, expressed by Mauricius, Ragusa, and Villetan, are to the same purpose. The passage, taken in the literal accepta- tion, would, according to these infallible commentators, ' teach the necessity of the communion and the insufficiency of baptism. Un this supposition, children, though baptised, would perish, which 18 contrary to the truth. Our Lord, therefore, in John's gospel, points to spintual participation in his flesh and blood by taith of which all who beUeve partake in baptism, and without which neither child nor adnlt can obtain salvation."' The literal sense of this passage, limited salvation to the par- ticipations of oral manducation, extends the blessing to all such persons. This comment, as it would ovei-throw the competencv ot baptism without the communion, so it would establish the competency of the communion without baptism, as weU as Lab?"!^??!™ "^'* ^'' ^"«"«*iii"".8"fficit ergo ad manducandum, credere. Si necesse est a^cedere, parvuli omnes damnarentur. Hoc sacramentum non est Labb 17 9?8. ''■ ^ '*^"" °P'"'°°' ^"'^^^ ^'^^*"^ Sanctus Thomas tiZtt^ ^'F' P°™™ super Joannem,ubi dicit, referendo literam ad manduca- tio^em spmtualem. Qu, autem sic non manducat, non habet vitam Labb. S. Ales arguit, tunc nullus salvaretur, si moreretur ante ejus ausceptionem Prse- d.ctus Doctor dicit quod inteUigitur de manducatione spirituidi et per Sm s™e qua nuilus adultus salvabitur, nee etiam parvulua. labb 17 937 yuia igitur idem est asserere verba ilia Christi, Jo. 6. intelligi de cibi et Dotu verba Ilia uecmteUigi posse de cibootpotu eucharistim. Cajetan. T. 3. T. 12. c. K 1?^ * ^"°^*"«t»a °«n PO^itur sacramentum necessitatis. ffnl^r'^l" .^o'l manducant, et habent tamen vitam in se. Labb. 16. 1142. smguli Christi fideles.dum in baptismate crodentes in Christum eius manduca. mus camem et sanguinem bibimus. Labb, 20. 6TB. ''"^^""^ ®J"« manauca- j^grgycSKl.'^™ 398 THE VABIATIONS OF POPBKY. II Without faith and holiness. He who observes this duty, ' hath ever aatmg life.' Such, however, is contrary even to Romish theology. The unworthy, all admit, have often intruded on this mystery, and partaken to their own condemnation. The metaphorical meanm^, therefore, is necessary to reconcile this ^mu ij ^^^ ^^® avowed principles of popery. The faguratiye interpretation, accordingly, has been adopted by most Romish commentators. This is the exposition of Augustme, Cajetan, and Innocent, as well as of the general councUs of Constance, Basil, and Trent, transmitted m the diction of Mauncius, Ragusa, and Villetan. The Redeemer according to Augustine, ' refers not to the communion : for many receive from the altar and die, and, in receiving, die ' Our Lord, says Cajetan, ' speaks not here of the sacrament: tor he. It IS said, who eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him. But many, it is plain, receive the commamon, and do not dwell in him by faith. This is otten the caae with the unworthy.' Pope Innocent's reasoning 18 to the same purpose. The good as well as the bad, sayl the pontitt, partake in a sacramental manner, the good to sal- vation, and the bad to condemnation. Our Lord, therefore, in John s gospel, refers not to oral participation, but to reception by taith : for, in this manner, the good only eat his body.'» This interpretation was approved by the assembled fathers at Constonce, Basil, and Trent. The reception mentioned in the gospel, ensures everlasting life ; and this, sav the Constantians, 18 not true of sacramental raanducation, wL-ch may take, not in life, but to their own condemnation. You shall not have life, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood with the teeth of faith. Such reception is necessary as baptism. The Basilians, by their orator Ragusa, delivered a similar comment. Sacramental manducation, according to this interpretation, ' does not always give life, nay, often death. mt spiritual manducation always gives life. Jesus, therefoi :, it IS plain, speaks of spiritual reception, because he annexes life to it, which does not always follow, but sometimes rather dei ' from sacramental eating. Many, eating sacramentaUy, are damned ; and many, not eating sacramentaUy, such as children and martyrs, are saved.' Similar is the gloss admitted at Trent John here, said Villetan to the approved synod, ' understands 1 Augustinua, Horn. 23, quam multi de altari accipiunt et moriuntur, et accipi- endo monuntur. Labb. 17. 929. ^ DominuB, Joann.e., non loquitur de eucharistia. Constat autem multos sumere euchMiatiae 8acramentum,et non manere in Christoper fidcm. Cajetan, Tom. II. ^ Ad idem estlnnocentiua in Libro de Officio, ubi ita dicit, comeditur spirituali- TV ' \ n'^^'V Tu'"'; ., ^^IV^^^^ o^eduut corpus Christi soli boni. lnnoce£. Ue Off. IV. 10. ijabb. 17. 933. \ TRAWSUBSTANTIATION NOT SUPPORTED BY JOHN, CH. VI. 899 eating and drinking by fftith. He teaches that all who believe shall not pensh, but have everlaating life.'* These observations, in a negative manner, shew what the scriptural phraseology in this place does not mean. The fol- lowing remarks will teach every unprejudiced mind what the expression does signify. Eating an§ drinking here, in meta- R«Z^ tJ; ' '''% '° .-^^^"^^ lan^age, synonymous with be- lieving. The manducation mentioned by the Son of God tZ^I^fl ^Vr ^"'^^P8 *"^ «^^i°g ^ convertible terms, and to each he annexes the blessing of ' everlasting «;!;i J- ff"- ^^^""^ ^r^'^^ ^"^^ tl^« '^'^^ causes ; and everlasting ife is, according to this phraseology, the conse- quence ofl)elievmg or of eating his flesh and drinting his blood, which, therefore, must signify the same. Jesus cfearly uses them as equivalent expressions. Faith, indeed, in numberless recitations that might be transcribed from revelation, is the gi-ace which IS always attended with salvation. This interpretation is not solely the offspring of Protestan- tasm, but of popery. It is not merelv the child of Luther or Calvin, Cranmer or Knox, but of fathers, doctors, theologians, schoolmen, saints, cardinals, popes, general councils, and the universal church This.was the comment of the fathers Origen, Theophylact, and Bede. Ragusa, in the council of Bisil quoted Ongen as authority for this explanation. * According t^ iheophylact, Chnstians understand the expressio ■ • and are not devourers of flesh.' ^ jression spiritually, . Bede, following Augustine. mterprets the words to signify ' spiritual eating and drinking, eating not with the teeth, but in the heart.'^ Ignatius CVril Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Remigius, and Bernard, who will atterwards occur as saints, are also among the fathers who embraced this explanation. iminer*nnn tS-"'**'*""?''''"^.'? c*™em Filii Hominis.et biberitis ejus san- &ti 'eTit™!*'' '^'*'^ ?v.^°^^'- ^'^^ raanducatio corporis et singuiuia l^imsti est ita necessana sicut baptismus. Labb. 16. 1221. 1222 lis mamWf f^" manducatio non semper dat vitam.immo sicpe mortem. Spiritua- loQu£ nntf «^?^P«,'"/'** ^'tam- Q"od de spirituali manducatione ChristuThfc tarn nn' S1:^"? "*^'«"°*q"^hic de manducatione loquitur, semper adjunrit vi tr8"Senta^^!.rn'^''''^'^*'l'°' 8emper non sequitur.immopotFus morB.%^1. LZ:"^''t^%7^^^t^S^ P"" '* «^artyres,salvatf8unt et salvantur. Intf Uel.'Jaril «? co°8piratione contecedentium capitum quis non facile colligat. et bSZ^ ''°^°*^ spmtualemde Me in Chn^stum manducationem carS :at%':Sart^rrje'^r^^^^^^^ 2 Hoc pntet per auctoritatem Origenis. Labb. 16. 1144. ju joann. vi ... --, ^..j — s, ,, o^rt^. 400 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Ongen, Theophylact, and Bede, have on this topic, been loUowed by p long train of doctors or theologians, such as Mauricius, R^gusa, Villetan, Guerrero, William, Gerson, Jan- senius, Biel, Walden, Tilmann, Stephen, Lindan, and many other theologians, as well as by the schoolmen Lombard, Albert, Aquinas, Ales, and Bonaventura. The same comment was embraced by the saints Ignatius, Cyril, Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustme, Remigms, Bernard, Bonaventura, and Aquinas,* Augustine, in particular, was, as has been shown by Ragusa m the council of Basil, the distinguished patron of this opinion. ' Our Lord,' says this saint, ' seems to command an atrocity. It is, therefore, a figure which is to be understood in a spiritual sense. He is spiritually eaten and drunk. Eat, not with your teeth, but with your heart.. Believe, and you have eaten : for to believe and to eat are the same.' ' This, in numberless places, IS, adds Ragusa, ' the explanation of Augustine, who, in language clearer than the sun or noon-day, explains the passage in Johns gospel to denote spiritual reception by faith.'^ This acceptation of the passage was also adopted by the Car- dmals Bonaventura, Alliaco, Cusan, and Cajetan. Bonaven- tura has been ..keady quoted as a saint, and with him agrees Alliaco. The language, sf.ys Cusan, ' is to be understood, not of visible or sacramental, but of spiritual manducation by faith.' Cajetan, on this part of holy writ, is, if possible, clearer and stronger than Cusan. ' The Lord,' says he, 'speaks of faith P ' }^^o-}o^ ^*a',u^^'^^ "*2- ®* ^7. 926, 928. et20. 615, 616. Cani8ius,4. 533. Paolo, 2. 227. Albertm. 1. 30. De ista manducationo spirituali intelligitur iUud Augustini.quod allecat Mag- ister sententiarum. Labb. 16. 1142. o 'i o e Patet per Albertum super Joannem, ubi dicit referendo literam ad manduca- tionem spiritualem. Labb. 16. 1144. oo.^'^ ^°° ^"'^* "^ terminis propriis Alexander de Ales et Bonaventura. Labb. 17 . Ev moTfi, '(ffriv aapl rov Kvpinv. Ignatius ad Trail. Cotel. 2. 23. EKfivoi firi aKeKOOTfs irvfufiariKODS ruv Keyo/ifvuv (TKavSaKeffdfvefs, poixi(ovt(s on. aapKotftayiav avrovt irporpfwtrai. Cyril, 293. ^rpf(paiv rr)v mcrriv, rr)v (is tavrov. Chrysostom, 8. 227. Horn. 47. Hieronymus diserte dixit, quod est autem manducationem carnis et bibitionem sanguinis Christi Joannis VI. de fide iutelligi debere. Labb. 20. 615. Hfec est profecto vera intentio Augustini et Remigii. Labb. 17. 951. Bernardus dicit, quod est autem manducare ejus carnem et bibore ejussangui- nem, nisi conununicare passionibus ejus. Labb. 17. 951. Illud patet expresse per B. Thomam et per Bonaventuram. Labb. 16. 1144. - Flagitium videtur jubere. Figura est ergo. Augustiu. 3. 52. De Doct. III. 16. Augustmus et glossaexponuut textum latum Domini de spirituali manduca- tione. Labb. 16. 1245. Idem est manducare et bibere quod credere. Canisius, 4. 535. Qui manducat corde, nou qui pi emit dente. Labb. 17. 932. CVede et manducasti. Canisius, 4. 928. Innumerabilia sunt loca Augustini in quibus dictam auctoritatem Joannis 6 . de spirituali manducatione exponit. Labb. Augiistinus sole clarius et luce meridiana in multis locis doclaravit, evangelium Joannis debere intelligi de spirituali manducatione. Labb. 17. 944. m ■ TRANSUBSTANTIATION NOT 8'JPPORTED BY JOHN, CH. VI. 401 The sacrament was not then appointed TV,** rrrr^^A. i ■ and cannot, according to the ]p+/pr k1 / T ^^ "V® P^*'^ ristical meat and drifk '^ '"' ^^ "^^erstood of Eucha- II ^^'ThTson of'on?i"""*^f "^ ^^P^ I^"^^^^'^ I"- and Pius corporated with him bv faith ' Pius th! SA i"^" "^^ "''"^ ?°- spiritual drinking kjfh-*if',°* of sacramental, but of CoSiiTBLt'^Tt,"? T, """■""^^'J l-y t''" General champL of allium aStrt VT "'1 ^''«^^ "» tl>e Bohemian heresy. The hS^oft?. AT' ""' Pj"™"^ "^ *>>« dnnk . to beheve, and to believe'i. tj ^J IJdlk-' The Ep"?" p"^^*'-'"""''' ™'™ - '«™»t^i n.»duo.,i„„,.ed de spiritu^i. .n loquitur i^^o^i:::::^^t^^r^^:^j^i^n Cajetan, Tom. 3. T. 2. c. 1. DefiTle n Laum non^'^'"'"'"""**'^ «^^° ^^P"*"- *'""" -" - • ■ • quin 2 394 sacramentali manauca- 11 ne s'agif. pas li de boire sacreEta em^n/ 1 P'':,^^'?- ^^^^b. ] 7. 933. Ceux cicroyoient cnlui, ceux iTSSent «?.>. ^ '1^ ^°.""" spiritueUemeDt. pouvo:t manger, etc. kn. SyLEp'.ir^Slrfsu'^^S* """"«• ^"^"^ ^7sr*!s-„p-'^iot- Si v?rbr rbtir?i\^s'r ^ ^^^ quoJuttd^rntXVSm^^^^^^ r ? '-Wr aTciden; faciat nem quando crediderunt '*°'^*°'«n*^!^inanducatione. M^ducavenmt c^- nem quando credidprunf R'v, — :— -— v,uc. i«umuu _ __ Bimiii ae crediderunt. Labb. * 17. 931 932™"rn^^o' '^'?g'l'°^'»' f^' ^^"^ f f .*^^i ' *^^ ^^ead after consecraticn, is worthy of being called the Lord's body, though the nature of the bread remams in it.' Theodoret, in his First and .Soc<,nd S'XTfl 'fi i P°'"}^^^ '^^" P^^^^er. 'The Lord,' say. this Sfe^ ^''m'^^*^^ "T^^^ ''^' ^ith the Appellation of his body and blood ; not having changed their nature, but having added grace to nature. The mystic symbols, after consecration, do not change their proper nlture, but remain in F«nLj''""'' f?-'*^T' J°""' ^^^ «Pecie«' According to Facundus an African bishop, 'the sacrament of his body and blood, m the consecrated bread and cup, is denominated his body and blood ; not that the bread is properly his body and f^^'nfW^^r^' ^f,}>'JY'^ they contain in them the rnys- tery ot his body and blood.' ^ The authors of these quotations were men, who, in their dav stood high m erudition and Catholicism. Their theological leai^ng must have secured them from mistaking the opinions of the age on the subject of the sacrament. Their works were widely circulated through Christendom, and their arguments tw!f "'"'"" ^°"t,^*^^^eted or even suspected. These citations, X^kZt£''' ^'^ ^"^^^^^^ ^" ''^ J-^^--^ ^f -ry ^^1 Esse nondesinit substantia vel natura panis et vini. Gelasius. adv. Euty. %l^ ^l TpoT€p«s oveias, Kai rov axvf^aros, mi rov 6<5ow. Theod. 4. 18. S.'i m^HT^f!^' P™i'."^- ^"'•P^s ejus sit pauis et poculum sanguis, sed quod inse m>8tenum corporis e.^us et sanguinis oontineant. Facund. ix. 5. TRANSUBSTANTIATION NOT TAUGHT BY THE FATHERS. 407 pJi^n^! Statements from Gelasius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Facundushaye sadly puzzled and perplexed the partisans of tmnsubstantiatipn. The testimony of Geladus silenced CardLa Cantaren m a disputation at Ratisbon. Cardinal Alan admits Gelasius s and Theodoret's rejection of a substantial change in in fW^"''''^vf^'"'f ?..' \"* ^«^^tains that these two Sone F«.„ni ^^^ ^""braced this heresy. Du Pin, having quoted SStv'' nfl -^^ If'' ^J" '^^''' ^^^ ^ resolution ^of the aifficulty Hardum, Alexander, and Arnold, however, have attempted the arduous task.' The nature or substance ^cidents, which romain unchanged in the sacramental elements. ^„h,w! f ' t'i *^^ ^^"^^ quotation, distinguishing the substance from the accidents, represents the sacramental elements, a^ retaming their former substance and species. The Z^^f% '' T ^^f ™^inated from the species or accidents ; and aU these which he enumerates, remain in the mass without any transmutation. wiuuuut iil^' amwer of these authors shews their skill at transforma- tions. The substance of the sacramental bread, in their hands, becomes, at pleasure, either accidents or tlje body of our Lord .W^l TT "^^"^ ""^^ ^°^y' ^ P"^«*«' transubstantiate the substance of the elements into flesh and blood, but also, as authors, when It served their purpose, into accidents or species. A few words from their mouths could convert the substance of wme into blood, and a few strokes from their pens could meta- SavPd lh%Tt '"'^V^^^''^'- These jugglers should have displayed their extraordinary powers, in transforming accidents into substance as well as substance into accidents f and they would then have exhibited the perfection of their art 1 he ancients represent the bread and wine as conveying nourishment to the human body. Such are the statements of Justin, Irenaeus, and Tertullian.^ ' The sacramental bread and wme, says Justin, 'nourish our flesh and blood by digestion.' According to IrenfBus, 'the consecrated elements increase our 'Fu, if *H."^^n represents ' our flesh as feeding on his body and blood. Ludovicus lived entirely on the host for forty days ; and Catharina subsisted on the same from Ash- Wednesday till Ascension. The consecrated elements therefore are food for the body as well aa for the soul ; and in consequence preserve their own substance. None surely will maintain the impiety, if not 1 Chrysostom, 3. 740. Alex. 19. 569. ou'rl^JlLT'' "V ''"'"'" ''«™/*'^«^«^'!«' rpf and ChaUenor endeavor to evade the difficulty by an extraordinary distinction and supposition.^ Ihese distinguish the substance from the species ; and with the tormer, which is not subject to corruption, would feed the soul ; and with the latter, which some might perhaps think light provision, would sustain the body. The accidents, Aquinas and trodeau make no doubt, may, by an operation of the Almighty, produce ttie same effect as the substance, and nourish the human trame. The angelic doctor confers on the host, ' the efficacy of substance without the reality.' Du Pin and ChaUenor entertain a similar idea. The learned divines, it seems, have discovered a method of fattening men on accidents, such as form, quality taste, smell, color, signs, and appearances. Signs without sig- nihcation, shadow without substance, show without any thing shewn, color without any thing colored, smell without any thing smeUed, present, it appears, an exquisite luxury, and form according to these theological cooks, an excellent sustenance lor the human constitution. Challoner, however, doubtful of this theory, and suspicious of this unsubstantial food, has, by a happy invention, provided a kind ol supernatural meat, if his immaterial diet should happen to be condemned for inefficiency. Some miraculous nourish- ment of a solid kind, he thinks, may be substituted by Omnipo- tence, when, by deglutition and digestion, 'the sacramental spe- cies are changed,' and the sacramental substance is removed. n,.npiJ"°?"*" ^\- *''°"°'* '■"' "'^.™*'' ^^'^ ■■««*"'* '^'^"s I'eucharistie une certaine Labb 29 84" '^'" appaisent la faim et la soif. Innocent, in Bruy. 3. 148. Art^VI ^"'* ^"^^^''"itia. liabent tameu virtutena substant.iaj. Aquin. III. Q. 77. H,wlff '*^^°^ P^"" ^„°P^''"**'on miraculeuse de la toute-puissance divine pro- Ciiaile ' "" 4S "^^^ ^^'^ substance. Godeau, 5. 378. Du Pin, 2. 84. TRANSUBSTANTIATION NOT TAUGHT BY THE FATHERS. 409 Aquinas, Godeau, Du Pin, and ChaUenor, in this manner, rather than renounce a nonsensical system, condescend to talk balder- dash The credulity and blind zeal of Aquinas, Godeau, and Uhallenor indeed prepared these superstitionists for the recep- tion of any absurdity ; and the greater the absurdity the more acceptable to their taste, and the better calculated for the meri- dian of their intellect. But more sense might have been ex- pected from Du Pin, who, on other occasions, shews iudement and discrimination. Mary of the fathers, indeed, have been quoted in favor of transubstantiation. Some of these express themselves in strong language. A person unacquainted with the hyperbolical diction of ecclesiastical antiquity, and the forms of speech used in these days, might be led to suppose that some of the fathers held a doctnne similar to modern transubstantiation. An opinion of thih kind, however, must arise from ixidiscrimination in the reader, and from the exaggeration of the author. The ancients through want of precision, often confounded the sign with the signification. This confu.iioD led them to exaggeration, and to ascribe to the sign what was true only of the signification; and this communionand exaggeration of antiquity have been augmen- ted by the misrepresentations of the moderns, in their garbled and unfair citations. Ignatius and Cyril supply a specimen of such confusion and misstatement. Ignatius, who so nobly faced the horrors of martyrdom, has been characterised as the friend of transub- stantiation. The martyr desired ' the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus, and the drink, which is his blood :' and he mentioned some persons, who, in his day, denied the sacrament to be the flesh of the Saviour. The apparent force of this quotation arises from its want of precision, and its separation from a parallel part of the author s work. Ignatius elsewhere calls ' the gospel, and the faith that comes by the gospel, the flesh of Jesus, and love, his blood.'' A comparison of these two citations removes every difliculty. Cyril afibrds another specimen. According to this saint, ' the Lord's body is given under tlie emblem of bread, and his blood under the emblem of wine. Consider them, therefore, not as mere bread and wine ; for they are the body and blood of Emmanuel.' But the same author ascribes a similar change to the oil, used at that time in baptism. He represents ' the oil of baptism after consecration, not as mere oil, but as the grace of Jesus, 410 THE VABIATI0N8 OF POPERY. as the bread is not mere bread, but the body of our Lord." The argument from these two words, is as conclusive for the bread" baptismal oil as for the eucharistical Cyril aJso represents the manducation of the Son of Man mentioned by John, m a spiritual sense which does not imply the eatmg of human flesh. This communion, he adds, ' consists m receiving the emblems of our Lord's body.' Antiquity furnishes no stronger proofs of transubstantiation, than those of Ignatius and Cyril. But these two saints, when allowed to interpret themselves, disclaim the absurdity. The monster had not appeared in their day. All the monuments of Christian antiquity, m like manner, when rightly understood concur m the rejection of this modern innovation ihe tathers ascribe the same change, the same presence of Jesus, and the same effect upon man, to the watc r of baptism, as to the bread and wine of the Lord's supper. I lis substantial presence m baptism, and the consequent participation of his blood by the baptized is declared by Chrysostom, Cyril, Jerome, Augustine, Fulgentius, Prosper, and Bede.^ Chrysostom represents the baptized as ' clothed in purple gar- ments dyed in the Lord's bldod.' Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, descnbes men as^ 'made partakers of the Saviour's holy flesh Dy noly baptism. Jerome represents Jesus as saying to all Christians, 'ye are baptized in my blood.' ' The eunudi,' says the same saint, ' was baptized in the blood of the Lamb.' Au- pstme, on this subject, is very express. He depicts ' the faith- tul, as participating in our Lord's flesh and bl..ud in baptism.' Ihis IS cited by Fulgentius, and, therefore, sanctioned by his authority. The redeemed,' says Prosper, 'are in baptism, tinged with the blood of Jesus.' ■ Augustine, Prosper, and Bede pour- Xptarov x According to Cynl, water transforms by a divine and ineffable power.' 'Re- generation, says the same author, ' changes into the Son of God ' Gregory s statement is to the same purpose. ' I am changed' says this author, ' into Christ in baptism.' ' The faithful,' say Etherius and Bede ' are transformed into our Lord's members and become his body.' Pope Leo the First is still more express. ^ Receiving the efficacy of celestial food,' says his infallibility, Jlf^^V^Kl ^^fij¥ ra« "ade our flesh. Man, in baptism 18 made the body of Chnst. Our Lord, therefore in the monuments of antiquity, is repre- sented as present in baptism as well as in the communion The water, in the one institution, is represented as changed into blood m the same way as the wine in the other. Man's nature or substance, according to the same authority, is transformed in baptism and regeneration. The person who is renewed and bap- tised IS, in these statements, changed into the nature, body flesh, or substance of the Son of God. The language of the father IS as strong and decided for transubstantiation in baptism as m the communion ; for the corporeal presence in the former as in the latter ; and for the substantial change of man in re- generation as for the elements in the sacrament. The abettors ot the corporeal presence, notwithstanding,with awkward incon- sistency, admit transubstantiation in the communion and reiect It in baptism and regeneration. The truth, however, is, that the use of such language in the literary and ecclesiastical monuments of antiquity was! in gene- ral, the consequence of confovnding the sign with the significa- tion, and ascribing to the former the attributes of the latter Ihe appellation and properties of the Lord'sflesh and blood were by a natural tendency of the human mind, transferred to the bread, the wine, and the water of the two sacramental institu- tions. Ihe change, however, in the elements was considered » T8«p irpoi etuu> Tii/a «o, appTrrov fifTouTroixtnai Svv\^iti>. Cyril. 4. 147. in Jonn J. nfraaroixfiovffairposTovvvwv. Cyril, 6. 474. Dial. III. Xptarov /teTOTrfiroiTjai toi j8oim(r;UOTj. Gregory, orat. 40. In membris ejus transformamus. Nos in illo transformamur. Etherius adv lihpan. I Camsius, 2. 322, 324. Nos ipsius corpus facti sumuP. Fideles fiant corpus Chnsti. Beda, 6. 365. in Cor. x et 5. 509. in Joan. VI. 4 815 S? ^"^^P*'«™**^'«ffi'='at"»"JiO'no corpus Christi. Leo. I. Ep. 23. Labb! I- 412 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. i "T5J' 'I i! ^ii fhJ' ^i!?''^^ u"J T'^^y '^^° ^^^^ and wine altered not their substanoo but hoir signification, not their nature but th" ir 8alem -ThZ ^^ '""f.^^^^^^ ^Y * citation from Cyril of Jeru- salern. The meat of the pomp of Satan,' says the aaint 'is m Its own nature, pure, Wt. l,y the invocation of demons cratirn""^'*^' T ^^°, elements^of comnumioij, before c^S bodn;5birH'%^''''^r'''i^M™ '"^ft«rwa?d become the Ki]T«dm?f n- u'^^'1^^^ ^^" immolations of Gentilism. nof T i^r • ' ?^^' '"'""T^l^'S to Cyril, contract impurity, but not alter their nature, and the elements in the sacranlent might, sSbstn?e''"''''' "^' ^^'' signification, but would retain tLi; JiZrn^n^^^\''^'^V^r^''^'' ^ '^"^ foundation in f h^rinn 1 ecclesia.stical antiquity. Many ages elapsed before aoneared WlT '\^^^^.' '^^^ of darkness and superstition. oF tiT f b« nif ^"""^^ ^^' deformity, however, in thi progress ot time the change of system, and diversity of opinioi, raised at length Its portentous head in Christendom. Several caTes concurred to facilitate its introduction into the church. The Hnn„ V i"l"; ? ^'^%«on<^einplation of emblematical representa- ZfL ;^?^' ^^^^'^^'^".nd the sign with the sigrufication. The work^on Ch '^.^^^t.' 7 ^'^^^^'^^"^e, were o^ften. in ancien? Z^K- . Christian theology, not sufficiently discriminated from he objects which they were intended to notify. The ancieX ITaSThi/w'/'r^ language and boL metaphors i^ celebiating this institution, and in discoursing on it in their tSP;>?'^'''*T- ^''^^^'^omed, on all topifs, to flash and 1 hetonc, these authors, m treating on this mystery, dealt even hS^ ,^^a\" "'?^ .'^^^'' ^" ^"Perlatives and ekaggeratLn nrLenl • .r^^"^^^' ""^^'^ ^^^'^ ^^^ ^^^P^^e^l ^^ the spiritual presence in the communion. S fn, o K^ ^^ r, "^ P"'" t''^ «^^«^« too impalpable and re- ni i t h«^"f .like man, whose soul is embodied in matter. He seeks something, therefore, to attract and engage the exter- nal senses This principle, deep-rooted in human nature has PaZ^r! ^ • f '^' 'i'^'^^ "^^^^ ^^'-^ ^'^'^'<^ -^d dishonored .S' i Tr ' ^"""^ ^^P''^ ^^^'hiP- The idols of Gentilism divin. 1 1 T''''^\'''''- ^^^ •^^^^^' ^^'^S^ blessed with a idXrv J r' ""fr r™^^' ^'^ ^ ^^P^«^^^ "i^»"er, against of h^lfL • %f * Jehovah, and adored Baal and othef gods W fb. • ^^ • T'^r"' "J Ro"i^'ii««^. in like manner, and Cyril, 261. THE INTRODUCTION OF TRANSUBSTANTUTION. 415 -vlnl^J^'-i'w*'? philosophy which had become the reignintr sysera, facihtated the reception of transubst^vntiation. Thi KZ^^'T-^ ^^""^ supposed a primary matter and substanUal torms, which compose the constitution of all things. This pri- mary matter, witliout quantity, quality, figure, ortny propn^tv fit/'/"' "^««"y.«^^ T ^^^^^ «"bsta?tial' forms^Sg?" £ impressed, and to which they might adhere. The forms were mcly useful for the fabncation of transubstantiation. The inter- nal matter or substance, in the papal theology, was in the host changed into flo.h and blood. wTiiJh were incW'in the fom or species of bread and wine. A theological fiction, in thS xr^xr:;i^r°'t^^?'^-^""'^^'^^^^^ ^ philosophical vision , and the philosophy, m mccmsistency, yields only to the t^t^- Transubstantiatio. annexed a feVmotley additions to the airy theory of the Grecian speculator; an^ in conse- quence, became the consummation of absurdity. The climax sacramenT "^ ^" '^'' ^"'^ '^ '^' ''"^'''^^ P^«««"«« i^X The state of the Latin communion, at the introduction of transubstantiation wa^ perhaps the chief reason of its origin, progress and final establishment. The tenth century wa? a period of darkness and superstition. Philosophy seemed to have taken its departure from Christendom, and to have left manS to grovel in a night of ignorance, unenlightened with a single ray ot learning^ Cimmerian clouds overspread the literary horizon and quenched the sun of science. Immorality kept pace wUh Znir'^Tyfi 'f'^'f'^ '^''^^ ^^ *^« priesthood and to the people The flood-gates of moral pollution seemed to have been 8e„ wide open and inundations of all impurity poured on the Christian worid through the channels of the Roman HieraX! Ihe enormity of ihe clergy was faithfully copied by the laity, en? vIVT ''V • S?''' degeneracy, and the popedom appeared one vast deep, frightful, overflowing ocean of corruption, horror and contamination.' Ignorance and immorality are the parents of error and superstition. The mind void of information, and LtiSntttuVdltr''^'' '" '^^"^' '' ^"'"" ^^^ Such TO the mingled ma^s of darkness, depravity, and superstition, which produced the portentous monster of tran- substaiitiation. I^vscasius, in the ninth century, seems to have been the father of this deformity, which he hatched in his melancholy cell. His claim to the honor and improvement of this paradox is admitted by Sirmond. Bellarmine. ar.d Brii-p. * ' Baron. An. 900. Platina, in Bened. Geneb. An. 901 "^ 414 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Pascasius, says Sirmond, ' was the first who, on this question explained the genuine sense of the church.' 'This monk ' according to BeUarmine, ' was the first who, in an express and copious manner, wrote on the truth of the Lord's body and blood. 'Men, says Mabillon, 'were from reading his work led to a more full and profound knowledge of the subject' JJruys candidly confesses that transubstantiation was a discovery ot the nmth cer'ury, and unknown in the darker ages of anti- quity. The celebrated Erasmus entertained a simUar opinion He represents ' the church as late in defining transubstantiation and accounting It enough, during a long period, to believe that the Lords true body was present under the consecrated bread or in any other way." Scotus acknowledges, that transub- stantiation was no article of faith before the council of the Lateran m 1215. The celebrated Arnold, in his perpetuity of the faith, has endeavored to prove the antiquity of transubstantiation from the tranquUhty, which, he says, always reigned on the subject in the church. Its introduction, he alleges, had it been an inno- vation, would have been attended with tremendous opposition The commotion and noise, he seems to think, would have been little inferior to the shock of an earthquake, or the explosion of a world. Arnold's attempt, however, proves ii thing but the ettrontery of its author, who, on this occasion, must have been at a loss for an argument, and presumed much on the reader's ignorance. Mabillon, more candid than Arnold, admits the opposition of many against Pascasius, who ascribed too much to the diyme sacrament. Frudegard, with many others, doubted and with Augustine, understood the words of Institution in a metaphorical sense. These, with the African saint, accounting it shocking to eat the flesh that was born of the virgin, and to drink the blood that w'lis shed on the cross, ' reckoned the con- s^rated elements, the Lord's flesh and blood only in power and eflicacy. 'Some.' says MabiUon. 'assented, and many doubted, bome resisted Pascasius, and many were brought to understand the mystery.'^ Primus auctor qui serio et copiose scripsit de veritate corporis et sanguinis iJomuu. Bel. in Pas. Ex hoclectione ad pkniorum peritionemque ejus tosmi- tionem perducti fuerint. Mabillon, 3. 67. i J s Ledogmedela transubstantiation. ou de «la presence r^elle, ^toit inconnu avant le IX. siecle. Bruy. 2. 349. > Sero transubstantionem definivit ecclesia. Diu satis erat credere sive sub pane consecrato sive quocunque mode adesse verum corpus Christi. Erasm. 6. 696. m Conn. 7. Bellarmin, III. 23. 2 Qui dicunt esse virtutem carnis, non carnem, virtutem sanguinis, non pmi- gumem. Pascasius in Matth. xxvi. Plusieursentendoient.avec Saint Aur^astin. les paroles de 1 institution dans un sens de fiourfi lUnrr ri 7 fis M,.,+f ^„kj ''"at , J^^^^'i^^i- •<• l^?. Pascasius ad Frudegard. Du Pin, 2. 80 Multi ex hoc dubitant. Nonnullis baud placuit quod dixorat. Fatendum esfc Quosaam contra msurrexisse et scripsisse adversus Pascasium. Mabillon, 3 67 PASCASIAN CONTROVERSY ON TRANS UBSTANTIATION. 415 The Pascasian innovation was opposed by nearly all the piety and erudition of the age. A constellation of theologians rose in arms against the absurdity. Raban, Walafrid, Herebald, Pru- dentius, Florus, Scotus, and Bertramn, the ablest theologians of the day, arrayed themselves against the novelty. All these, the literary suns of the age, resisted the Pascasian theology! Raban, Archbishop of Me^itz, who was deeply skilled in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, had a taste for poetry, and was accounted the Glory of Germany, resisted the Pascasian theory with determined hostility. ' Herebald and Raban,' saysMarca, ' wrote against Pascasius, while Pascasius and Raban divided the people into two factionp.'^ Scotus and Bertramn were the most distinguished opposevs of Pascasius. Scotus was eminent for his skill in languages and theology. He was the companion of Carolus, the French sove- reign, who patronised his work against Pascasius. During his whole life, he incurred no suspicion of heresy ; and his work, for two hundred years, circulated through Christendom without any mark of reprobation from pope or council, from clergy or laity.'' Bertramn, like Scotus, replied to Pascasius at the instance of the French king. He was esteemed for his sanctity, and for his profound attainments in science and theology. His book on the body and blood of the Lord, in answer to the Pascasian specu- lation was widely disseminated through the Christian world, and was never during that age, condemned for heresy.^ The free and extensive circulation, which these publications of Scotus and Bertramn obtained without even an insinuation of error, must, to every unprejudiced mind, supply an irrefragable proof of their conformity to the theology of the ninth century. The treatment of Bertramn's work after the Reformation argued little for the unity of Romanism. This production, which, during the dark ages, had lain concealed and unknown, was discovered in 1533, and published by the Protestants of Germany. The Reformed, who rescued it from oblivion, ac- counted it favorable to their system. The Romish reckoned it a work of heresy, and a forgery of (Ecolompadius. This production, though afterwards extolled as the perfection of orthodoxy, was condemned as heretical by a pope, by councils, cardinals, the expurgatorian index, and a whole phalanx of ineologians. Clement the Eight exercised his infallibility on Bertramn's ' Heribaldus et Rabanus statim contrariis adversus Pascasium scriptis cer- tavernnt. Pascasio et Rabano dueibus, fidela?, pop«!.is iu duos veluti faetiones acindebat. Marca, Ep. in Dachery, 3. 853. 2 Du Pin, 2. 87. Dachery, 4. 513. Labb. 11. 1425. 3 Bruys. 2. 38. Morery, 7. 40. 416 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Production, and denounced it, after due examination, for heresy, 'he synod of Treves, for the same reason, interdicted its circu- lation. The general Council of Trent, by its expurgatorian index, pronounced its reprobation and prohibition. This assem- bly, which was clothed with infallibility, had as great a concern in the index, which proscribed Bertramu's work, as in its cate- chism. The sentence, therefore, may be considered as sanc- tioned by its supreme authority. These pontifical and synodal decisions were approved by the cardinals Beiiarmine, Quiroga, Sandoval, Alan, and Perron. The theologians of Louvain, who conducted the Belgic expurgatorian index, submitted the per- formance, which these doctors represented as interpolated, to correction. These censors expunged many of the pretended interpolations, which, in their estimation, contained rank heresy ; and allowed its publicity in this state of mutilation. This sen- tence of error and Protestantism was re-echoed by Turrian, Sixtus, Genebr.ad, Espenceus, Marca, Possevin Claudius,, Valentia. Paris, and Harduin. All these, in concert indeed with 3 whole popish commimion, continued for the exten- ded period of more than one hundred and forty years, to represent Bertramn's treatise as a forgery and full of error and heresy.' But this book, decried in this manner in the popish commu- nion, for heterodoxy, was in process of time, transformed by a sudden revolution in public opinion, into orthodoxy. A church, which boasts its unity and unchangeableness, proceeded, after the lapse of many years, to transubstantiate Bertramn's work, without any useless ceremony, into catholocisn Mabillon, in 1680, by the aid of manuscripts and arguments, evinced, beyond all contradiction, the genuineness of the work ; and endeavored, by partial statements and perverted criticism, to shew its ortho- doxy.'' The learned Benedictine's discovery effected, on this point, a sudden change in Romish Christendom. The book, which, for near a century and a half had been denounced as unsound and supposititious, became all at once, both true and genuine. The church transformed heresy into Catholicism with as much fticility, and in nearly as short a time, as a priest tran- substantiates a wafer into a God. The controversy, for two hundred years after the Pascasian age, seems to have slept. The noisy polemic, on this topic, resigned his pen, and Christendom, entombed in Egyptian darkness, sunk into immorality and superstition. Transubstantiation, in this destitution of literature, continued to gain ground ; till, at last. • Moreri, 7. 40. Possey, 1.'219. ■J Mabillon, 3. 68. Boileau, 8. Be!L I. 1. Du Pin. 2. 8!. 86. TKrriar. I, 22 Dacherj, 4. 17. BEHENGARIAN CONTROVERSY ON TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 417 its pestilential breath infected all orders and ranks of men The priesthood soon perceived its tendency to the advancement of sacerdotal influence and emolument. Their aUeged power of creatmg God excited the veneration and liberality of the admir- mg populace. Miracles were supposed to be wrought bv the consecrated wafer ; and this, opening another source^im^st tion and astonishment, endeared the wonder-working theology to the clergy and laity. The dogma, indeed, is calculated for the meridian of superstition. The idea of a visible deity must be ever welcome to an ignorant crowd. The innovation, be- sides, made no direct or violent attack on the popular prepos- sessions. The error effected no mutilation of the ancient^fafth ■ .hL? Ti! p' ""^ -"^ 13 calculated to become the idol of super- stition. The Pasca^ian theory superinduced the corporeal on the spiritual presence, and tended, not to the diminution but to he augmentation of the fabric of faith, the structure of super- stition, and the mass of mystery. The novelty added a change tio^tn w! fiK^ri'^* ""^"^^^'i ''Y''^^ °^ "«« ^^d ^ig^ific^- tion and was fitted for becoming the food of creduUty 1 he controversy was awakened from the sleep of two hundred years by Berengarius in the eleventh century. This celebrated character was principal in the public school of Tours, and after- ward archdeacon of Angers. He was distinguished, according to I'ans^ for genius learning, piety, charity, holiness, and humi- lity J^oUowmg Bertramn and Scotus on the sacrament he pubhcly, in 1045, opposed Pascasius. Many adopted and many rejected his system. Romanism displayed a diversity of faith inconsistent with modern boa.sts of unity. The clergy and the laity, in the nmth century, united, in general, against Pascasi- anism; but differed, about two hundred years after, about Berengarianism. This shews the progress, which transubstan- tion m this period had made in the spiritual dominions of the popedom. The controversy was agitated in many verbal and written disputations.^ Berengarianism. however, according to cotemporary and succeeding historians, was the general faith of i^ngland, France, and Italy. All France, sa>-s Sigebert, aboun- ded m Berenganans : and the same is repeated by Matthew of Pans and William of Malmesbury. Alan represents the evil as extended not only to France, but also to the neighbourinff nations. The heresy, says Matthew of Westminster, had cor- rupted nearly all the French, Italians, and English.* Berengarianism was denounced, with determined hostility and tremendous anathemas, by the Roman pontiffs. Its author Bertramnus-eri'Escot ;;^ient'if ^raW^^^^ i^ si 418 THE VABIATIONS OF POPERY. was persecuted by Leo, Victor, Nicholaa, and Alexander. He WM compelled tosi... i three different and conflicting confessions, in three Roman Councils under Nicholas and Gregory. Nicholaa, in 1058, convened a council at the Lateran against Berenganus. This assembly consisted of one hundred and thir- teen bishops ; and the patron of the reputed heresy was sum- moned to attend. He complied; and supported his system with a strength of reason and eloquence, which, Sigonius, Leo, and Henry attest, withered all opposition. All shrunk in terror, while the Vatican resounded with the thunder of his oratory. His infallibility urged his clergy to the contest. He endea- vored to rouse his veterans to the battle. But no David ap- peared against this Goliath. No hero of orthodoxy dared in m single combat, to encounter this dreadful son of heresy. His hohness, m this exigency, sent an express for Alberic, a cardinal deacon of great erudition, who, it was hoped, could face thia fearful champion of error.» Alberic, after a warm discussion, solicited a cessation of arms for a week, to employ his pen against the enemy.'* The council, finding the insufficiency of their dialectics, threat- ened the application of more tangible and convincing arguments, which they could wield with more facility. Anathemas, excom- munication, fire, and faggot were brought into requisition. The mention of this kind of logic soon converted Berengarius, who was unambitious of the honor of martyrdom. Humbert was appointed to compose a confession for Berengarius, and executed his task to the satisfaction of his infallibility and the whole council. This formulary declared, that 'the bread and wine on th^ altar are the Lord's real body and blood, which, not only in a sacramental, but also in a sensible manner, are broken by the hands of the priest and ground by the teeth of the faithful.'* His infallibility and his clergy were for submitting the flesh of Emmanuel, when created by their power of transubstantiation, to the action of the teeth, particularly the grinders. His flesh, it appears, is, according to the sacred synod, subject to mastica- ti()n, deglutition, digestion, and all the necessary consequences. His holiness and his council seem to have entertained the same refined sentiments as the ancient citizens of Capernaum, who 1 AfficiebaturomnisGamaejusdoctrina. M.Paris, 12. Scatebat omnia Gallia ejus doctnna. Malm. III. P 63. Omnis pene GaUia ac vicin;,. gentes eo malo quan cmsszme laborarent. Alan, de Euch. 1. 21. Omnes Gallos, Italos, et An- glos suis jam pene corruperat pravitatibus. Weatm. In Ush c 7 TTT ^o.*, """^ °"""*. ^*^^''^* obsistere, Albericua evocabatur ad synodum. Leo. LU. 33. >onerat quiBerengario reaponderet, licet Papa fortiter institiaaot. rr Bin 7 273 Berengano reaiatere valeret. Mabillon, 5. 139. Sigonius " Fidclium dcniibus atteritur. Gibert, 3. 330. Crabb. 2. 766. Labb. 12. 46. Lanfranc, 233. Dachery, 4. 515. Caniaiua, 4. 468. BBRENGAKIAN CONTROVERSY ON TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 419 underetood the Lord's words in a literal sense. Christians a^jcording to the holy Roman council, enjoy a camivarinTe ^crament, similar to the festivals of t\e polite ^nniCs of !:'Z7^no,7^''^\ -j'^ ^^^^-^ rmts':ToKarn Lombard censured the grossness of this confession Simica denounced it, if not interpreted with caution and WenuitvTa tion of the teeth to the species of accidents. The angelic doctors invented a plan, by which the jaws could chew fom SS substaace and masticate color, taste, and smllL The synod of Arras, however, in 1025, denied that 'the Lord's bodv ifcon- C^^^i^'Tf^f «^"^"^ ^y *h« <^«th.' The modems have abandoned the absurdity. Caron characterises the RomTn synod s creed, as a heresy. Challenor warns the commu^S^nt agaiuBt ♦ chewing with the teeth ;' though, in so doW he s^S jecte himself to an anathema of a holy &^an council bv a^'n^r"'''"' 'P-.T'^ of blasphemy and absurdity, issued by a Roman council headed by a Roman pontiff, BerJigarius L m"afn<^r'\t'''^r''"T°^ «^^^^ ^^^^o^e to maintain The profession, however. wa« only hypocrisv and extorted by intimidation. Shielded by the protecKf his ancient patrons, he relapsed into heres/. decLed hSde- testetion of the creed which he had subscribed and c W Wd as th^tZnrflr ^ "^^"'^^ ^' ^^^^^' ^^^ '^^ p«p«"- Berengarius signed a second confession, in the year 1078 Gregory the Seventh assembled a Roman council J^e pS: pose of terminating the controversy. This synod differed Cm the former in its decisions. Gregory and his clergTaUowed fnoThTlhr'^'Tf ^'' ^'^^^^ ^'^^^^^^^^^ and Substitute another. This, in reality, was a virtual, if not a formal con- demnation and repeal of the creed prescribed by Nicholas and his synod, and sanctioned by their authority. This new c^iZ- sion which Berengarius composed and signed, merely signified that the bread and wine, after consecration, became the Lo i's true body and blood.'^ This form of belief might have bin subscribed by Zuinglius, Calvin, Cranmer. or Knox The fhl' K?.^'''' !f M^'^ • *^ ^^'P'^'S, admitted the true presence of the body and blood m the sacrament. Expressions of a similar » Attritio dentium referatur ad speciem. Aauin S ^79 TT«.„ ,~.4.- ^Wi- 420 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. or identical kind may be found in the reformed confessions of Switzerland, France, Strasbourg, Holland, and England.* The Eoman clergy were di\dded in their opinion of this con- fession. One party acknowledged its Catholicism ; while another faction maintained its heresy. The latter insisted on the pre- scription of another creed, which might be free from ambiguity. Its error and inadequacy have, in modern times, been conceded by Alexander, Cossart, and Mabillon. Alexander complains of its trickery, Cossart, like many others, of its heresy, and Mabil- lon of its equivocation and insufficiency.'' Gregory seems to have embraced the same opinions as Beren- garius on the communion. His infallibility declared ' that he entertained no doubt but Berengarius had, on this institution, adopted the scriptural idea, and all that was necessary for the faith of Catholicism.'^ This, in his holiness, was an unequivocal profession of Berengarianism. Pope Gregory was countenanced in his heterodoxy by Lady Mary. His infallibility, actuated by hypocrisy or fanaticism, was accustomed, on every difficult or important emergency, to consult her ladyship. Mary, on this occasion, answered with oracular decision, that ' nothing should be acknowledged on this subject, but what is contained in authentic scripture — against which Berengarius had no objection.'* The mother of God, it appears, a thousand years after her assumption, became a here- tic, opposed transubstantiation, and patronised Berengarianism. This was a sad defection in the queen of heaven and star of the sea. The blessed Virgin should have been transported to purgatory or the inquisition, to atone for her apostasy from the faith. His infallibility, whatever may have become of her ladyship, was, in 1080, condemned for Berengarianism by thirty bishops' in the council of Brescia. This assembly found his holiness guilty of attachment to ' the Berengarian heresy, and calling in question the apostolic truth of the Lord's body and blood. '^ 1 Neque negare volunt verum corpus et sanguinem Christi adefiie. Secken- dorf, 138. Chouet, 67, 109, 110, 120, 204. 2 Pidei professionem edidit subdolis verbis conoaptam, Alex. 18. 246. Qui- dam Catholicam agnoverunt, aed alii latere in ilia veneni aliquid liEercfici. Coss 2. 28. Berengarius brevem fidei suae fomaulam sed insufficieuteui ediderat. Sub his veri corporis et sanguinis verbis jequivoca latere, non immyrito credere- tur. Mabillon, 5. 26, 139. 3 Ego plane te de Christi sacrificio secundum scripturae bane sentire nou dubito. Marten. Thesaur. 4. 108. Fidoi professionem ab inso Berengario editam, ad fideni Catholicam sufficere dixisset Gregorins. Mabiiloii, 5. 140. * Nihil de Christi sacrificio cogitandum, nihil tenendum pi-seter id quod habe- rent authenticae scripturse, contra quas Berengarius nihil sontiret. Mabillon 5. 140. Marten, 4. 108. 5 Catholicam de eucharistia fidem in quaestionem poneret, et Berengarii anti- quus dieoipulus esset. Mabillon. 5. 140. Coss. 2. 48. L.«ibb. 12. 046. s BERENQARIAN CONTROVERSY ON TR>.N SUBSTANTIATION. 421 The vicar-general of God and the queen of Heaven, in this man- ner, patronised a heretic and encouraged one another in hetero- doxy. Gregory's partiality to Berengarianisra appears also from his treatment of its author. He honored him with his friendship, and protected him against his persecutors. He anathematised all who should injure his person or estate, or call him a heretic. He recommended him to the protection of the Bishop of Tours and Angers against the enmity of Count Fulco. He shewed no resentment against his renunciation of his former profession He refused to attempt anything against Berengarius, and left his enemies, who endeavored to overwhelm him with invective and perplex him with sophistry, to fret, and fume, and growl without a remedy or opportunity to gratify their malevolence Gregory, however, importuned by some of the disaffected clergy, who persecuted Berengarius and hated his theology, was induced, notwithstanding his predilection for this author and his system, to summon another council for the final settlement of the controversy. A Roman synod accordingly met in 1079 This assembly consisted of the prelacy from - the adjoining and different other regions,' and therefore represented the faith which, on this topic, was, in the eleventh century, entertained m various nations of the Christian commonwealth, ^i, '^i^ ^°^^ Roman synod, however, displayed, in the Lateran, the head-quarters of Catholicism, the utmost diversity of senti- ment. Some held one opinion, and some another. One party maintained transubstantiation. The other patronised Beren- garianism ; and endeavored, according to the partial accounts ot these transactions, to support their error and deceive them- selves ai.d others with cavils. The majority advocated a sub-' stantial change of the elements in the communion. The minority represented the bread and wine only as signs, and the substan- tial body as sitting at the right hand of God. The disputation continued for three days. The council, in the end, came to an agreement, which, when compared with the two former decisions seems to have been effected by mutual concessions. A confes- sion was imposed on Berengarius, declaring the change in the bread and wme after consecration, to be, not merely sacramental and hgurative, but also true and substantial.'' This confession differed, both by omission and addition, from the former, issued under Nicholas and Gregory in two holy Roman councils. The impiety of breaking the Lord's body with 1 Du Pin, 2. 199. Labb. 12. 8.10. Da^li«r" -i r.u ?P « A^ ^™ tantum,eub8tantiale illudcorpus in dextera. Patris sedens esal : se et alios decipientes quibusdam caviUationibus. Labb. 12. 629. Bin. 7. 488. wgmmm 422 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. the hands and gnnding it with the teeth, enjoined by Nicholw and his clergy in 1059, waa omitted ; and the epithet substantial was added to the pnor formularly enacted in ] 078. This is no convincing proof of unity. The third is a medium between the other two, and seems to have been a compromise for the sake ot peace and harmony. Two factions opposed each other in this ^-Jieological campaign. Each, for the purpose of terminating the war, made concessions ; and the result was a creed inter- mediate between the two previous forms of belief Transubstantiation, after the death of Berengarius, advanced by slow and gradual steps to maturity. Some continued to re- sist Its inroads on the truth of Christian theology. But the majority of the clergy and laity, in the spirit of perveraity and the phrensy c. superstition, adopted the deformitjr. Its patrons however found great difficulty in moulding the monster into torm Many editions of the novelty were circulated through Lhnstendom; and all exhibited the changes of correction and the charms of variety. The council of the Latemn, in 1216 enrolled it among the canons of the Romish communion, and the Lateran decision was confirmed at Constance, and finally estabhshed at Trent.* "^ The partisans of transubstantiation, having by number, if not 1^ reason, defeated the enemy, quarrelled among themselves Ihe foreign war against the adversary was followed by internal sedition among its friends. The subject, indeed, opened a wide held tor refinement and ingenuity. Some believed, some doubted, and some speculated. Lombard could not define whether the transmutation of the sacramental elements was substantial, or formal, or of some other kind. A juinas and Gabriel, says Erasmus, grant the diversity of opinions on this question, even among orthodox theologians. Cajetan admits simUar variations. Guitmond and Algerus, in the eleventh century, mention many variations of opinion circulated on this topic in their day. Some, according to these cotemporary histonans, imagined that the transformation extended only to a part, and some to the whole of the elements. Some allowed a change in the wine of the communion, but such as in the water of baptism. One party fancied that the bread and wine, though changed to the worthy, resumed their own substance when pre- sented to the wicked. Another faction, in the wild wanderings ot imagination and extravagancy, admitted a transmutaion of the bread and wine into flesh and blood ; but not into those of the bon of God. One class alleged the same union between ' the consecrated elements and the Divine Emmanuel m between 1 Crabb. 2. 946. Labb. 18. 519, Bin. 9. 380. Labb. 13. 930. DIVEKSITY OP OPINIONS ON TRANSUBSTANTIATION. .428 his Deity and humanity, or a hypostatical union of the Mediator to the substance of the bread. Another alleged, that not the substance, but the entity remained, but changed into Christ's body. Some believed the digestion and the corraption of the bread and wine ; while others denied this theory. Some specu- lators thought that the metamorphosis was effected by the change of the elements, and some by their annihilation. The creed-makers, on this innovation, seem, according to their taste or fancy, to have embraced impannation, consubstantiation, or transubstantiation. Many of the sage and useful theologians of the day diversified their systems with lofty speculations on the sublime and fragrant topic of stercoranism, with all its attendant and lovely train of grandeur and purity.^ The schoolmen subtilised theory into nonsense and hair- breadth distinctions. These doctors brought all their attenuated discriminations into requisition on this mystery, and divided and subdivided without end or meaning, on the topics of mat- ter, form, substance, and accidents. The real body, according to Scotus, is present by circumscription; but according to Aquinas and his followers, not by circumscription, but by pene- tration, and the modality, not of quantity, but of substance.^ These metaphysicians, of course, knew their own meaning in these 'words of learned length a ^ thundering sound.' Scho- lasticism, indeed, like metaphysics, is a learned and ingenious way of talking nonsense, and of shewing an author's ignorance. The Dominicans and Franciscans, as usual, encountered each other in theological combat on this subject, at the council of Trent. The Dominicans contended, that the substance of the bread is changed by transmutation into the substance of the Lord's body. No new matter, according to this system, is added, but the old transformed. The Franciscans maintained that transubstantiation is effected, not by the conversion of the bread into the Lord's body, but by the recession of the former, and the accession of the latter. The bread, except the species, politely retires, according to this theory, for the purpose of giving place to the flesh of Emmanuel. Dominican and Fran- ciscan enmity, in this manner, evaporated in mutual nonsense and contradiction. The jargon of the two schools on substance, form, matter, u \^^r^?"^^'^^ substantialis, an alterius generis, definire non sufficio. Lom- bard, IV. Nee ipse Thomas, nee lioe recentior Gabriel dissimulant varias theo- logonim, hac de re, fuisse sententias etiam oriihodoxorum. Erasm. 9, 1065. VarisB fuerunt opiniones eruditorum. Caietan, in Aauin. 3. 348 Altrer Prol. Bruy. 2. 398. Du Pin, 2. 203. 204. ^ o^. n . Substantiam et naturam oania hvunatatinn nnim rrhnafn i7aVu>r TV P 1 1 0. a. Alii dixenint, neo substantiam panis manere sed entitatem panis manere ta- men conversam in corpus Christi. Faber, 1. 183. Aquinas, 3. 386. « Aquina. III. 66. V. P. 350, 360, 363. Cjetam in Aquin. 3. 348. Miiaiiiiliilii .424 THE VAHUTIONS OF POPERY. nature, body, quantity., magnitude, locality, annihilation, and ^liZfj T-^'^ '^^' ,^^V"«^o°. represented L contrary Tosed wti i" "f""'^ absurdity. Fo^s of faith were com- Cf ; J ' *^°P5^"?«o«^fhingfrom each, might satisfy both. onr^Jly T'^'i^^''''' I?^^^^^ °«i<^J^er party The general congregation therefore resolved to employ only a few wofds and faXr toTTr ' f V'^'f T'^ as^ossiL, to the Tdea^or Such nn ft • ^^"^f^^r^ ^^ ^^^ ^'^^^^^ contending factions.* buch on the important subject of the sacrament, w& the bar- c^uncifof Trenr^""" ^°^^' ^P^^*^!^^^^. i^f^^Uible, Roman « J!l^t'^T^^^•' "^i^i corporeal presence, jarring in this way, theTr f«?fh p""""'! ^^'' ^^'" ^^°"* ^^^ evidence.^ Some foun^d aSd nn^^Jl ^?^"^^^°" 5 some on tradition; some on miracles ; monl v^nl ^^'"^ ."^ V^'^f .r^*"^- ^^« "^«dern partisans com^ monly endeavour to found their system on scriptural authority The scriptural arguments, on the contrary, were resigned by nS nn k. P-i^ r'.^"'^^i ^""^ ^^^"«' ^^« ^^st their belief not on the Bible, but on the testimony of tradition, and the authority of the church. The majority wish to dr^w their proofs from both scriptural and traditional declarations mi^^r/' ^Vi,'r^J,f \^^^^ "^"^^ ^^ *^^ extraordinary aid of X7^y:' ?1^T^/ ^°^y ^^^ '^l^^d' according to P^asius altar. God, from heaven,' says Binius, ' confuted Berengarius by miracles. ' God,' says Dens, ' hath confirmed this truth by ^fr^^^'p ^'^ n""* '^''^'•''' "^"^^g^* i^ ^^"0"« places and times. Pope Gregory, m 600, convinced a Roman lady by similar means. A Roman matron, when his holiness was cele- brating mass, had the audacity to smile at the idea of calUng a morsel of bread the body of the Lord. The pontiff, pitying the woman s mcredubty, prayed, in conjunction with the peopfe, to God for a sensible manifestation of the mystery, to overcome the woman's unbehef The sacramental bread, iA conseqTenTe! wa^ changed into bloody flesh.'^ The lady, of course? could bZvpH °%'.'*^^:?, *^ ^?, argument of this kind, and immediately believed. This, the silly and superstitious MabiUon considers as a powerful corroboration of the truth Odo, in 960, undeceived, by this means, several unbelieving 53i.%":ru;.l"4Ti'"Labb^°^8^"^"* s-entendre eux.m.n.es. Paolo, 1. TRAN8UBSTANTUTI0N SUPPORTED BY PRETENDED MIRACLEa 426. dergymen Seduced by the spirit of error, some of the cleriry maintained that the bread and wine, even after consecratiS^ bWd'^'^S or^''"°'5' ^^5 \^'\°^y *h« '^Sns of flesh and b ood But Odo prayed, and the host, in consequence, during Wood^'^Tr'r '^"^"^ 'V^' Pr*'« ^^^d«' 'began to dro^ all opposition.^ ''"'"''''''' ""^^ ^' '"^^^ conceived, silenced Wonders of a similar description have sometimes annearpd not to remedy unbelief, but to reward sanctity This^wrthe ca^e with Mary. Hugo and Nativity. These^aints h™ the pleasure during the so emnity of ma«s, to see Jesus in thefor^ ItTvi^fbll^^P^'f'-''' beauty. The child, which siS l^ativity beheld was living and clothed with rays of light • whle eager to be received, or in other terms, swallowed he desired in infantile accents, to be devoured. ThTSculous If not blasphemous tale constitutes part of a ReXion which h^^be^n lately eulogized by Rayment, Hodgson, BruL^nrand thp^nnilL"^*'?!?^ ^^t transubstantiated God are diversified a^ the opinions of his votaries. The Protean God of the Greeks tTdJtToT?' ^'"f Violent mythology and song for hk mul- tiplicity of forms, has been echpsed in his own department bv the popish Deity. All the metamorphoses recorded'n Ov^dian ^ZZ" "n^"^ '.TP"^^^ "V^ '^' transformations of tSs divinity His godship, m his variations in his pre-exis- tent state pnor to his deification, presents a curiouVs^e - men of natural histo^. His materials are enclosed in a wheaten gram, and he blooms in the wheaten field. He imbLs the sap of the earth, sucks the dews of night, and driX the rain of the clouds The future god, by these means ripens to "ancThfs Tir *'r""^ °' '^^"^°- ^^^ fi-1 -d the mTad- vance his deity a few more steps towards his final apotheosis The confectioner moulds this new god into new forms and mtroduceshimtonewacquaint^nces." Re is exhibited t^ the eye m a mass of pastry, composed of flour and water. His chief chemical elements are carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen He Ts however in this state, near his promotion. He is rounded info pi: "dn"d'1 *i' f '^^^' ^"^' ^* *^^ -utterin^ofrSny pnest, wonderful to tell, starts into a god. The new-made Deity is^immediately exhibited for adoration on the bended knee. He is then placed in the mouth, swallowed dowT the throat, and safely lodged in the stomach of his manufactu^r and r"^SP!!^--.f " "^^'' V ^^'^''^^ ^^ -- other wav ae.....„.^ .^ unduxgo a cnemicai analysis, and to be resolved 426 THE VAaUTIONS OF POPERY. into his constituent principles. But his future history and transmigrations may be left to the filthy historian of star- coranism. Transubstantiation, varying, in this manner, from scriptural and ecclesiaatical antiauity, and diversified by the jarring opin- ions of Its patrons and the transformations of its God, varies also from reason and common sense. Nothing, indeed, invented by man ever equalled it in irrationality. The theory presents the last test of human credulity, and the grand consummation .unqualified absurdity. Search the vast range of religion and philosophy ; examine the wide amplitude of folly and superstition ; and you will find no other opinion so utterly in- compatible with reason, so completely fraught with inconsis- tency, and so entirely irreconcileable with common sense. The whole system is like the fairy fiction of some visionary labour- ing with nonsense, some speculator straining to invent an ab- surdity, or some satirist resolved to ridicule the faith of its partisans. Transubstantiation varies from our ideas of matter and the evidences of the senses, while it presents the absurdity of creat- ing the Creator, and the horror of cannibalism in eating an incarnated God. This dogma contradicts all our ideas of mate- rial substances. Matter, it represents as divested of dimension, ngure parts, impenetrability, motion, divisibility, extension, locahty or quantity. Length, breadth, and thickness, accord- m^ to this theology, exist without anything long, broad, or thick. Matter exists without occupying space or time. Sub- stance remains without accidents, and accidents without sub- stance. The same body is in many places at the same time. Jesus, at the same instant, is entire in heaven, on earth, and on thousands of altai-s ; while millions of bodies are but one body. A whole IS equal to a part, and a part equal to a whole. A whole human body is compressed into p. host, and remains entire and undivided in each of ten thousand hosts. The person who can digest all these contradictions, must have an extraor- dinary capacity of faith or credulity. This popish dogma also contradicts the information conveyed °y our senses. Sight, touch, taste, and smell declare flesh and Wood, if this tenet be true, to be bread and wine. No man can see, feel, taste or smell any difference between a consecrated and an unconsecrated wafer. The senses, not merely of one, but of all men, even when neither the organ or medium is indisposed, are, according to this theory, deceived without any possibility of detecting the fallacy. The senses too, in this case, are acting in their own sphere and conversant about their peculiar objects. Manj subjects, such as the Trinity and ihe Incama- ABSURDITY OF THAN8UBSTANTIATI0N. 427 tion, are beyond the graap of our bodily senses, and indeed of human reason^ These are to be judged by the testimony of Itevelation. But bread and wine are material, and level with the view of our organs of peueption. The sacramental elements can be seen, smelled, touched and tasted. Our external organs, say the friends of transubstantion, are. in this institution, deceived in all men, at aU times, and on all occasions. The patrons of this absurdity, driven from all other positions have recourse to the omnipotence of God. Almighty power is a very convenient resource to the abettor of inconsh^" 'cy in the day of difficulty and confusion. This shield, tho u vocate of absurdity opposes to all the assaults of reason and common sense, intrenched behind Onmipotence, he mocks the suggestions of probability and laughs at the artillery of the logician. But even this plea will not support irrationality, or rescue its parti- sans from the grasp of the dialectician. Scriptural language is not to be explained so as to involve a frightful absurdity The patron of the corporeal presence, for the support of his fabrica- tion, modestly requires God to work an inconsistency But in- comprehensibility is to be distinguished from impossibility and mysterj' from contradiction. God works many things incom- prehensible to man; but nothing which, in itself, is con- tradictory. Ommpotence extends only to possibility, and not to inconsistency, to things above, but not contrary to reason. ■' The creation of the Creator, which, accoiding to [Trban Biel, and many others, is implied in this dogma, is another deviation trom common sense, and an inroad into the dominions of blasphemy. 'The hands of the Pontiff,' said Urban in a great Koman Council, 'are raised to an eminence granted to none of the angels, of creating God the Creator of all things, and of offenng him up for the salvation of the whole world' Ihis prerogative, adds the same authority, as it elevates the pope above angels, renders pontifical submission to kings an execration. To all this the Sacred Synod, with the utmost unanmnty, responded. Amen.' Biel extends this power to all priests. *He thai created me,' . says the cardinal, 'gave me, if it be lawful to tell, to create mmselt. Uis hohness not only manufactures his own God but transfers, with the utmost freedom and facility, the same crlv^iT' '^'^^ execrabUe videri, ut manus, quie in tantam eminentiam ex- creveruut, quod nulli aneelorum conces«iim ««* ,,t £,.,.,.„„, *-T-l!._"r_ J. _ SStnT''^V'r''^'^r'P'"7 Pro/alutiVotius muiirDdYatn^^^bt^tt \m:Tm. ^Ltb^m^mrreS* '^"*' ''**•' ^°- ,, 754. Aquin. 3. 397. "' "'■'"" • ""H, ^.x. ;:y. jjiorery 1 CiL^.'^DTNaTurrtermP"*"' ^"^"^"^<1«« -aoatur. Deumcredat esse. 430 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. I endeavored to gild the Cannibalism of Popery.' These admit the horror of feeding on human flesh and blood in their own forms. But the sacramental elements, eay they, appear under the species of bread and wine that conceal the human substance, which, in consequence, becomes, these theologians seem to think, a great delicacy. TJfe statements of these authors present a curious attempt to disguise the grossnesa and inhumanity of eating human flesh. Aimon, in Dachery, represents ' the taste and figure of bread and wine as remaining in the sacrament, to prevent the horror of the communicant.' Similar statements are found in Lan- franc. According to this author, 'The species remain, lest the spectator should be horrified at the sight of raw and bloody flesh. The nature of Jesus is concealed and received for salvation, without the horror which might be excited by blood.* Hugo acknowledges that ' few would approach the communion, if blood should appear in the crp, and the flesh should appear red as in the shambles. Hunger itself, which would be dis- gusted at such bloody food.' Durand admits, that ' human infirmity, unaccustomed to eat man's flesh, would, if the sub- stance were seen, refuse participation.' Aquinas avows ' the horror of swallowing human flesh and blood.' ' The smell, the species, and the ta.ste of bread and wine remain,' says the sainted Bernard, ' to conceal flesh and blood, which, if offered without disguise as meat and drink, might horrify human weakness.' According to Alcuin in Pithou, 'Almighty God 1 Propter sumentium horrorem, sapor panis et vini remanet et fitrura. Aimon. in Dach. 1. 42. Reaervatis ipsamm rerum speciebus, et quibuadam aliis qualitatibus, no perci- pientes cruda et omenta horrerent. Lanfranc, 244. Christi natura contegitur, et sine cruoris horrore a digne sumentibus in salu- tem accepitur. Lanfranc, 248. Si cruor in calice fieret manifestus et si in macello Christi niberet sua caro, rams in terris ille qui hoc non abhorreret. Hugo, de corp. 70. Fragilitas humana, quae suis carnibus non consuevit vesci, ipso visu nihil hauriat, quod horreat. Durand, in Lanfranc, 100. Non est consuetum hominibus, horribilem camem hominis comedere et sangui- nem bibere. Aquin. III. 75. V. P. 357. Odor, species sapor, pondus remanent, ut horror penitus tollatur, ne hamana infirmitas escum carnis et potum sanguinis in sumptione horreret. Bernard, 1682. Consulens omnipotens Deus infirmitati nostrae, qui non habemus usum come- dere camem crudam et sanguinem bibere, fecit ut in pristina remanens forma ilia duo munera. Alcuin in Pithou, 467. Similitudinem preoiosi sanguinis bibis, ut nulliusiiorror cruoris, Pithou, 460. Neque decuisset manducare camem Christi sub propria forma Faber, 1. 127. Si daretur in propria specie et sicut laniatur vel venditur in macello, quod esset horribile. Lyra in Cossart, 4. 457. A communi honinum natura maxime abhorreat humanse camis esca, aut san- guinis potione vesci, sapientissime fecit, ut sanctissimum corpu>4 et sanguis sub earum rerum specie panis et vini nobis administraretur. Cat. Trid. 129. CANNIBALISM OF TKANSUBSTANTIATION. 431 causes the prior form to continue in condescension +« ^\.^ a. -u of man, who is unused to swaUow raw fl^«^^ ^ u? ^^^.^^mJ^ Pf ^^er. says Pithou in Z CairLw tinks tKl ^^" of blood, and therefore no horror is LpJS' the hkeness which Height be ridiculed byTg^s'^^^^^^^^^ and Lyra are to the same Jff£i \ ^ "® ^^^ten^ents of Faber Catechlm, Hhe^Srh'^frd^lotd'a^^t^^^^^ ^.""'^^ the species of bread and wine, on LcouS of Zn^'f """^Z eating and drinking human fl^sh a^d Slood - Th? T''^-''^ rpts^'^^ -sr . - ~e ji:: ats and wine, may aXdWtn n ^^"!?^ .^PPearance of bread reason might excuse the Cannibals^of New TelnS tT' ^y "x:r' '" think w^xA^'i.^ c -4! thi'teeth fc " .T" "■;'. 'f ^"l»»itted to the lotion of rfawj„^%r"^L7oriStr r «r^^^^^^^^^ St flT.f !?' ""■??'• '^'"K '"» contracted for its object might fail at the swallow. But the snbsUnce beins reduced to the size of a wafer is managed with the utmoi facility !5fSS?pT^,*?WPI'*-' ~i' ■i\i. U.li HHMtPRippgP 432 THE VABIATIONS OP POPERY. The whole, when enclosed in the host, goes down the gullet with convenience, ease, and rapidity. Transubstantiation exposes the popish deity to be devoured not only by man, but also by the irrational animals. This divinity may yield a rich repast to mice, rats, vermin, worms, and every reptile that crawls on the earth. The smallest mouse, says Bernard, sometimes gnaws the species of the bread. An event of this kind proselyted Gage, author of the Sui-vey, from Eomanism. A sacrilegious mouse sallied forth, seized, and, in triumph, carried off the wafer God whom the priest had made. The priest alarmed the people, who, distracted like Micah of old about his gods, began to search for the thief that had stolen their Almighty. The malefactor that committed the depreda- tion escaped. The God, however, was found, but mutilated and mouse-eaten. The half-devoured Jehovah was carried in procession about the church amidst joyful and solemn music* The transaction was the means of showing Gage, though a priest, the absurdity of his opinion, and teaching him a more rational system. 1 Bernard, 1683, Gage, 197. Judges, xviii. 24. CHAPTER XIV. COMMUNION IN ONE KIND. ITS CONTRARIETY TO THE CUSTOM of THE ORTP^l^/r'^ A0E3-O0NCESSI0N8- HALP-COMMUNION-COONCIL OP OONSTVVrP ,2^'=''TAL CHRISTIANS-ORIOIN OF C0N8TANT1AN AND BA8IUAN LNONl-INrovtfJi.^^^''~'''''°^«" 0^ THE BLY WITH ITS OWN ENACTMENTS iVgr?^^™.^''™. '''' ™^ ^^'^'"^'' ^SSEM- AND BOHEMIANS-COUNCIL OP TRENT-oStiON ^l^T.^ ™^ MORAVIANS FRANCE, GERMANY, BOHEMIA, POLAND AND HUNoIry! ^RENTINE 0ANON8 IN Communion in one kind, the child of transubstantiation con- w Lrfh ' ^"J^T.''f ^" "^ '^' sacramental bread 'only without the cup to the laity and non-officiating elergy Both elements, indeed, are always consecrated and rece'v/d by the administrator. The sacrificial character of the rnstitution 7the bri'rTl.''^'-^'^^' ^^^"^^^^ *^^ distinct con ecrS m^ uT^ ^^^,*^^ '^'°^' *^ o^^er <^o represent the separation of the body and blood of the immolated victim. The olciat n^ priest participates in both species; but the people onrfonf Thp n!r'''T '?f °.^ ^'""^ '^ ':''''^''^'y ^"^ Scriptural institution W toTwhn'''''''' adm.i^tered both the bread and the wine to all who communicated ; and commanded them to drink as well as to eat. He neither dispensed the sacrament nor authorised its dispensation, under one form ' '^'^^™®^'^' ^^^i and oin."^' ^? '^f " g^fJ^ted. in general, by popish doctors Si. ^ ^ ^"•'^ ^' *^^ admission of P^cal, Ragusa Bellarmme. Erasmus, Gibert, and Cajetan. These a^w pefes-'Ld'?h "T" ^r'^'1? the^acrament under boTh species , and they have been followed, in more modern times Ti^crncil^ofr^' f^^--',^-"--, Du Pin, and MiC: me council of Constance makes a similar concession The Lord, according to this assembly, 'instituted the sacrament, Chalifnor.'k'"- ^* ''• ''^ ''''■ '''■ ^^°^° '''■ ^^ §• "• Gother, c. 21. ' Matt. xxvi. 27. Maik, xiv. 23. 1 Corin. xi. 28 BB 434 THE VAEIATIONS OF POPERY. and iMiimmstered it to his disciples in both elements of bread and wme The admission of the Trentine Synod, which acknov^ledges ' our Lord's administration of each species in the onginal institution,' is to the same purpose.* But these theologians and synods, notwithstanding their concessions have urged the propriety of half-communion Their attempts at proof, however, in which they endeavor to throw obscurity over a plain subject, and to puzzle, when they cannot reason, are of the most awkward and contemptible kind. This cmestion was discussed in a general congregation at Trent : and the arguments used on the occasion supply a specimen of the most egregious sophistry, trifling, and dissension that ever dis- graced the annals of theology. The manna in the wilderness, said these precious divines which,under the Jewish dispensation, prefigured the sacramental bread, was used without wine. The Hebrew, wandering in the desert was destitute of wine, and had to be contented with water from the rock; and, therefore, according to Trentine logic, the sacramental bread, under the Christian establishment IS, Aotwithstandmg Christ's precept and example to the contrary' to be administered without the accompaniment of the cup. One cannot sufficiently admire the clearness and cogency of the Trentine dialectics. ^ The Jewish laity, according to the same theologians, were permitted to eat the flesh of the sacrificed animals ; but not on the occasion, to drink the offered wine. Tl priesthood, on the contrary, were allowed both the meat and drink. The Chris- tian clergy, therefore, according to the infallible fathers, may use both the sacramental elements ; whilst the laity, notwith- standing our Lord's command, are entitled only to one. 1 he Old Testament afforded the sacred synod a third proof and Illustration. Jonathan, when in pursuit of the enemy tasted honey from the top of his st^iff ; but had nothing, on the occasion, to dnnk. The honey which the Hebrew prince found in the wood was unaccompanied with wine; and, therefore, tne bread m the communion is, with respect to the laity and even the non-administering clergy, to be disconnected with the cup.' These and a few other instances that might be added, aftbrd 12 9m "^Cf« ,^'* '^ "^Tk *H'?'° ^°°^° traditum. Pascal, Ep. 32. U Ch^^u^tK ^1°*-'."^ '^"P^'^* specie tradidit Ragusa in Labb. 17.f l/linstUS IDHtltuit sub duDtlCl anflnifl Rail TV A r.-^.i.? x_.-x . ^ Pascal, Ep. 32. Labb. r^^Jof,,.. i^tJi~~i.~ v~i — r."."""i'V^' opcuio trauiaii; Kagusa in Labb. 17.865. 1066 Srt T?^r T^ ^acramenti subtraherent laicis. Era«m. Con. Mod. luoo. ijibert, 3. 331. Cajetan m Aqurn. 3. 393 Chnatus mstituit et suis discipulis administravit subutraque specie, paniset vim, hoc venerabile sacramentnm. T.aKV. i« oiq t».„:_!a ".5 "' P" , ^'^ in paniset vail speciebasimtituit. i:^bb"2o"i22 ' -^^^'"^^ "^ =^'^^^''=«^'^ » Paolo. 2. 206. Estius, L 330. ' " POPISH ARGUMBNTB FOR COMMUNION IN ONE KIND. 435 thri?eX:'d*'r^^^^^^^ j^^temgence ^nlfested by rather more common sense thanKt'''^*" have poBsessed the discussion. The epiLoa^ nitt^ "^^^^^ ^r ^'^ ^^ bythete<^ousbalderdrXoht rboZS^th^^^^ orators. Couraver on Paoln u^^u ^^l y. *h® theological ing weakness o/l?r~'te^SS t' T^^/T ^l^ ^''^'^' doctors. guments used at Trent by the learned ^^'^'':^^^^:^^^^^^^ -.ft "^ *^^ P^P^^^ ohuToh. But assumption is no nrSr tT^ •^^. 'l'^® ^^ ^^^ by Gkirsonai^dBossuet wo^Tifp^i-ff^ P^.^^P^^' «^««^d mandments of men for Te reiektfon ^1' substitute the com- traditiorB of the Je^sh ^bbLr !^ t ^.r^°' ^^ ^^^ ^^^ aone effect' TheS in fhi„ ' ^^'^^*^e word of God of 1-^age -.Jtferconti7:f ;a1tT^^^^ ^^^^^^^ tiiral expre»3iou enjoins the use Af Vk. ^,; ^l"^ *"P- Wty ; Vhile the pS inte7pretatte„ Tfu " "?•• '='<;'»' »"<' pn^thood, to the uLr e^^Z^fZ'Xlo "' " *" ''^ ing tole varietrof Ziimttl. °f . ^"^^^^istration, accord- eriraordinary position theZtin "i ^^'^ ^"^ P^^«««- This b.r a ^„.*- J^_P"^"^"°; ^^® unerring doctors attemnf.«ri t^ ^,^v„. . q..«...a xrom tiie booic of inspiration. The ap"ostle;;"ns >G«r8onmDuI>m,3.49. Bossuet. Expo. §. 17. 436 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the adminiatrators of this institution, ' the ministers of Christ and the sf wards of the mysteries of God.' The sacred synod must have been at a woful loss for an argument, when they adduced this citation, which, instead of supporting, overthrows their whole system. A minister or steward possesses no authority to violate the instructions of his master. His duty, on the contrary, is to execute the commands of his Lord, who has a right to exact obedience. Pope Pascal, accordingly, in reference to this sacrament, declared that ' it is necessary for the faithful servant always to obey his Lord, nor to depart, by a human and novel institution, from the precept and example of Christ his master ; ' and the hierarch, in consequence, en- joined entire communion on the whole church. Similar law.s were enacted by Leo, Gelasius, and Urban.' The salutary directions of these pontiffs, had they been followed, would have prevented a world of superstition. Challenor, Arsdekin, and many other doctors endeavor to remove the difficulty by another process. All to whom the cup, at the time of institution, was presented, were not laymen, but priests ; and the use of the wine by the clergy affords no ex- ample for its distribution to the laity.* But this argument, if it prove any thing, proves too much, and evinces that neither element is to be dispensed to the people. The bread as well as the wine, at the first celebration of this institution, was given only to the apostles ; and Challenor, therefore, might as well infer that the former as that the latter are to be withheld from the laity. The apostles, on this occasion, even on popish principles, represented the people. Their office, when they did not act in a sacerdotal capacity, could give them no title to whole com- munion. The lay communicants and the non-officiating clergy, in this respect are, according to the general councils of Con- stance, Basil, and Trent, precisely on an equality. These councils allow the cup only to the consecrating priest, and with- hold it from the clergy, when they do not administer, as well as from the people. Challenor himself declares that ' no priest, bishop or pope, even on his death-bed, when not saying mass, receives otherwise than in one kind.' Another catechist states that 'there is no priest, though in the most exalted degree, but in private communion, receives as others do, in one kind.' But the apostles, at the appointment of the sacrament, per- formed no official part in the ceremony. The Son of God, in • Necesse eat Dopimo servua fidelis obtemperet, nee ab eo quod Chriatus ..iSjji3t«r ei pKccopis ct gcssit huraaHa ct aovoiia inatitutioue, dioeditur. Labb 12. 199. Du Pin, 2. 286. Mabillon, «. 13. Bin. 7. 507. 2 Challenor, 52. Arsdekin, c. 5. T POPISH ARGUMENTS FOR COMMUNION IN ONE KIND. 437 person, blessed and distributed the elements. He alone there- fore according to the popish usage, was entitled to both'kitids • while the rest, aa they did not consecrate, could, notwithstand- ing their oflice, partake only of one element. The Divine Institutor, therefore, showed little respect for the future councils ot Constance, Basil, and Trent ; or rather, these councils, in their retrospective canons, manifested little deference for the Uivine Institutor. Our Lord, contrary to these sacred synods commanded and exemplified whole communion, with respect to all who partook of the sacrament.' The patrons of half-communion argue from the name, which they suppose, IS sometimes given to this institution in the New lestament. This ordinance, it has been alleged, Luke, in his gospels and in the Acts, calls ' the breaking of bread,' without any mention of the cup.^ But this language, if it refer to the sacrament must be synecdochal. A part must be put for the whole The wine as well as the other element must, even on popish pnnciples, have been consecrated and received, at least by the administrator. Consecration and reception in both kinds IS indispensable, as has been shown by Boileau, Bellar- mme, Bossuet, Challenor, and Milner. Valentia characterised consecration m one kind as sacrilege; and the Jesuit's sentence, Mondolto, an Augustinian, averred at the council of Trent to be consentaneous with all the doctors and the whole church. Ihe person, therefore, who invented this sophism, as well as those who have adopted it, must ha^/e been at a miserable loss tor an argument. Their situation must have been like a drowning man, who, in the moment of desperation and ex- tremity, will catch at a straw or a shadow. Milner and many other advocates of half-communion, argue trom Paul's words to the Corinthians, 'whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup.' This phrase, Milner would render 'whosoever shall eat this bread or drink this cup;' and he accuses protestants of mistranslation. The distributive or, indeed, is the usual version of the original term. But the Alexandrian and Royal manuscripts, as well as the Syriac, Arabic, and ^thiopic versions, and some ancient editions of the Latin Vulgate, agree, according to Bengelius, Wetstein, and Whitby, with our translation. The same may be said of Clemens, Cyril, and Athanasius. The disjunctive, besides, is olten, in Greek, equivalent to the copulative. Mark's expres- sion, • and who gave thee this authority,' is, in Luke, according ' Labb. 17. 370. et 20. 122. Challenor. 55. - Luktj Axiv. 30. Acts ii. 42. et xx. ?. Si enim una species absque altera coiiticiatur, sacnlegium committetur. Boileau, c. 13. Du Pin, 3. 550. BeUar- min. IV. 4..- Challenor, 52. Milner, 316. 438 THB VARUTIONS OF POPEBY. diction "^.1 ""' ^^?,.g*^« *hee this authority.' Matthew's thX'eek%ZJ *h P^°Ph«te.' «. in Lu/e. agreeable to Roma^?iv« ^i^K ^? *^^ prophets.' Paul, addressing the Komans, says, to Abraham or his seed ; ' but to the Galatians ^mprt 7:'l''',^^'tr ^^^ ^^ seed' M^y oZ; wTf i ru ^'""^ might be added The copulative con- rp^i't^TwTf n "'-^ ^^ ^^"^ *° theoSrinthians,Tn the fn^3„L fo"owing verses; and this shows that H«ff r ^ expression is to be taken in the same sense.' host of fatW n, Kf"^' ^^ *^" ^'^^ly ^^'^ "Middle ages. A nost ot lathers might be summoned to testify for the whole one cup says the Grecian saint, 'is presented to aS.' lYcord difid^the'Lord' S' r''"" ^^.^ ^^"^^^''^ '^' communion, divide the Lord s blood among the people ' The authority of Ignatius. Justin, Chrysostom and Jerome * tZftff Vnn'^'^*^^^^^'""^"'^^^^ i^ theChrSancomTo^! wealth for 400 years Their testimony is clear and exTess • such '"J n-^' corroborated by the evidence of many oC such as Dionysius, Iren^us, Cyprian, Cyril, and Augustine' andpS.3'^'''''^''"^"''^PP^^^ f-- Leo.'Gela.ius.Tban; Pope Leo, in 443, commanded the Manicheans, who refused les deux esp^cea s^par'^mTnt ■■ Bru;:2. 593?"""'''' Conner i la communion HALF-COMMUNION NOT KNOWN IN THE EARLY A0E8. 439 but attended the holy mystery to conceal their infidelity j and in consejjuence, were the first that practised half-communion. Their disconformity, by which they were discovered, Leo termed 'sacrilegious dissimulation/ and ordered them to be expelled, by sacerdotal authority, from Christian society. Communion in oue species, which distinguished this sect from other Christians, his holiness accounted a sacrilege worthy of excommunication. Pope Gelasius, on a similar occasion, in 495, used still stronger and more explicit language. These men, said his holi- ness in the end of the fifth century, partook of the sacred body ; but, actuated by superstition, rejected the sacred blood. The hierarch enjoined the entire observance or the entire relinquish- ment of the institution ; because ' the division of one and the sanae mystery could not be effected without great sacrilege.' His infallibility, in prospective anticipation, denounced the future defalcation in the mystery as sacrilege and superstition ; and, by his pontifical authority, enacted that the sacrament should be celebrated in both kinds. Aquinas avers that Gelasius, in this instance, addressed only the clergy. He condescends, however, to give no reason for his assertion. Baronius, on the contrary, admits that the pontiff makes no mention of the clergy, to whom, therefore, the words, which are general, sliould not be confined. The Roman cardi- nal styles the angelic doctor's account a frigid solution of the difficulty. Binius, also differing from Aquinas, represents the pontiff's enactment as a mere temporary expedient, adopted for a short period, on account of the present exigence, and con- trary to former usage, which was afterwards to be resumed. This statement, like the other, is a mere assumption without evidence. The two, disagreeing in opinion, agree in substitut- ing affirmation for proof Cassander grants that the deter- minations of Leo and Gelasius are conclusive for the antiquity of entire communion. The language of these pontiffs, indeed, is general, and cannot, without the utmost violence, be restrict- ed to the priesthood. Urban, in 1095, presiding with his cardinals in the council of Clermont, consisting of 238 bishops, with a multitude of abbots and other persons, followed Leo and Gelasius. This pontiff", in a synod more numerous than the generality of universal coun- cils, commanded * the separate reception of the Lord's body and blood.' According to his infallibility, 'no person, except in case of necessity, is to communicate at the altar, but must partake separately of the bread and wine/ Baronius and Binius suppose that this canon was issued against Berengarius, who, these authors allege, interdicted the use of the cup. 440 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. his prohibition, which 3d^h" ZJTIS »om>.'»nion, and Romish form of di.pe"Sn "^ '"''f-™«""™»n 'nto the .opt'Sm';riretfre„',^iii,r:li5r"'%™r''^ir Erius Caie^i^V'''''''''"n"^ Bellarmine. Baronius. Lyra must possess an abundant stock of effrnnf^r,r ©r "i j thoSV?b.T'°"' "f .oouncils, on this point, correspond with ?L„„-i f ? . "-onstance, Basil, and Trent.' The General C^^ii of Constance, ,n its thirtoenth session, grants tharthe Eccleeiavetusi.imiBtrabatsubdupliciBDecie R«ll TV d va ^ ,• ■ ecclegia sub utraque specie nama «f ,,it.i ^ Bell. IV, 4. Fidelesolun n In primitiva ec^eeia nnnnl.fu V 7'°' communicarunt. Baron. 57. XLIV utra^ue specie., Ca^Sn in Anuin S ^^" r ""^ P°P"'"t «'°^munica,?it sub aucunedi^inctUeir^ioint^enLiVf^^^^^^ <^li8e n'a jamais mis men Dro«^., t«rnr>^r- &^- u ^r r*""^*!^ BpecieiuBus fuit .- fa- Gibert. 3.' 331." TluanTi 25l"' ^ ^ consuetudine. Labb. 20. 122. COMMUNION IN ONE KIND NOT PRACTISED IN THE EAST. 441 faithful, in the primitive church, received this sacrament in eadi kind. Thw lan^uaije is clear, express, and decisive. The general Council of Baail in its thirtieth session acknow- ledged that half-communion was an innovation. The Basilians called this retrenchment ' a rational and praiseworthy custom introduced by the church and holy fathers, and obser-ed for a long lapse of time." The usage, which, in this manner was in- troduced, though at a distant date, into Christendom, was later in its commencement than the era of redemption. The general Council of Trent, in its twenty-first .session ad- mitted the same in still clearer language. According to 'this convention, ' both elements were often used from the beginning of the Christian religion; but, in process of time, this usage was changed, tor just and weighty reasons.' The sacred synod here expressly acknowledges the former use and posterior retrenchment of the sacramental cup. The half-communion of the Latins, varying, in this manner, trom all antiquity, is also a variation from the custom of all other Christians, Eastern and Western, at the present day. Ihe Greeks, Nestorians, Jacobites, Armenians, and Syrians aU these, in word and deed, deprecate the popish mutilation of the sacrament. Some, as the Armenians, use intinction • and others, aa the Greeks, administer the two elements mixed in a spoon. But all consider both as necessary, in some way for the institution. The Western Waldensians agreed on this subject with several oriental denominations; and these again have been followed by the friends of Protestantism, dispersed through the world.' ° The only denomination of antiquity who practised half-com- munion where the Manicheans, from whom the Latins seem to have adopted it. The advocates of Catholicism appear to have copied the error from the adherents of heresy. Leo and Gela- sius in the fifth century denounced the system tis sacrilege and superstition, and excommunicated its partisans." Their succes- sors, at a future day, transferred the heresy, with all its accom- panying anathemas, into the theology of Romanism. The Manicheans and Latins, however, in the rejection of the cup, were actuated by different reasons. The conduct of the one proceeded from deep abhorrence ; but of the other from exces- sive veneration for the sacramental wine. The Manicheans accounted wme the gall of the dragon, and refused to drink Ihe Latins reckoned it the blood of the Messiah, and relin- « ^ ' Eamdem quam reliqui omnes in Qriente Christiani. Renaudot. 2. fiu raolo, u. More, lyy. Godeau. 1. 274, 275. LaSb. 12. 905, 906. "" A sumptione calicis Buperstitiose abstinebaut. Bin. 3. 618. Labb. 5 283 Aquinas, 3. 383. Bruy. 1. 224, 265. 442 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. Seats Th*?r^\^'*' of profanation, effiision or other othJr! w w 1^ ° extremes, in this instance bb in many and w;rl«^^"'°°'"'"°'^° 't *^" °^"^ «^ transubstantiation^ and was the consequence of the superstitious dread or horro^ EmmanuT "^^"^ "^ ^^^"^^ ''''''' '^^^^^ t,loSS 'f The mutilation of the sacrament entered Christendom bv and^'LThT '^P'- Th^«r^P« ^^^ intinction suTtioZ Snmna fh^i T"?''TJ'- ^^^^^^io". which consisted in chppmg the bread m the wine before its presentation to the communicai.t, entered at an early date The councU of Bra«a. m 575 condemned this superstition, which had so soon begun to infest the Christian commonwealth, nlcrobgus elvttr/Z ^'" ^^^'/hich had become frequent in the iWd «. !n 7' T^ Urban m the Council of Qermont. muiSonT ^"^*°'^''* *^*'"«<^ *^^« superstitious mode of com- snr^il'^'S^'^ '^'P ^-u^^ defalcation of the cup consisted in ^htt\ T^ T '^"'"' ^^""^ ^''"^^^^ <^o <^he chalice, through Lred t2^J^' ^^"''' ^^/^^ ^^"* ^'''y ^^^ P^^"«i<^^- These nil !^^ ^u 'TT^'^y ""^^^ °^ «i^^er, L they were the ..'^^^.^f^^S^.'^^^^^^.^^^^^^^^^tical instrument was to prevent the spilling of the Divine fluid, or the irreverent intrusion Sf the men s beards. Its introduction, however, must have thrown n^^I- ""i " r^^^ ''^^'' *^^ ^^°^^ '^«««e. The act of sucking practised in this manner, could only tend to burlesque the institution, provoke the satirist to laugh, and cover the whole ceremony with contempt. The mummlry of the ma^s. indeed has, in every age been a ludicrous spectacle. An apostle or' primitive Christian, coul.^ he lift his head from the ^ave and behold such an exhibition of folly, would be whoUy at a loss to unriddle Its meaning; and, if informed of its design must be ^nf^l^ indignation at the parody on the Divine^rdinance, supers'iton.'" ^ '" ''' '^^"'"'' '"^ ^^^^^"^^^ ^^^^ o^' The era of half-communion can be ascertained with facilitv twlffHr"- ^" 1'^'^' "^ '^ '^PP^^^ i^ *^^ annals of the pT ii ? ''"^- P^,^^«,ding century. Anno 1095, the council of Liermont enjoined the separate dispensation of the bread ,md I ^^h^: ^^ ^* '2. 8.32, 1000. Micrologus, o. 26. MabiUon 6 IS 2. I?r MabaiorAT'^ ?"ir *• -----^*^''- hauriebatu?.- Du Cange. U-. "'• ^^aoiuou. 4. 496. Pugillans quibus eanmiis a nnminio.^ "sM"'^ ^^„L' INTRODUCTION OF COMMUNION IN ONE KIWD. 443' wine to the people. PaBcal, in 1118, enacted a similar regula- tion. Bernard, who flourished in the middle of the twelfth cen- . 7'jT!1*^°/ expressly on the subject of the Lord's supper, stated the form of administration/ which, in his account, 'com- prehended bread and wine, dispensed separately and received by the people. ' The retrenchment, therefore, was unknown in his day. The Saint of Clairvaux, in all his stores of knowledge, bad heard nothmg of this innovation. The integrity of the sacrament in the twelfth century has been acknowledged by Mabillon and Mezeray. Whok )mmu- nion, says MabUlon, flourished without any change in the year •J J, r®, ^^^ *^® introduction of the mutilation in the middle of the twelfth age. But its use, at that time, could ex- tend only to a few instances. Accordinfr to Mezeray, 'the peope communicated in both kinds, in the twelfth century' feunilar concessions have been made by Bona, Caasander, Peta- vius, Marca, Courayer, Valentia, and other Romish authors ' Commumon in one kind was the child of the thirteenth cen- tury. The deformity was ushered into life at this era, and nourished by the belief of transubstantiation, the superstition ot the human mind, and the dread of profaning the supposed blood of God, soon grew from feebld infancy to full maturity Its reception was partial in the beginning of the age; but extended towards its close, through nearly the whole of popish Christendom. ^ ^ Its origin and spread, during this period, appear from the testimony of Bonaventura and Aquinas. Bonaventura, who died m 1274, mentions its introduction •' into some churches ' Aquinas, Bonaventura's contemporary, makes a similar state- ment. According to both these saints, its observance wa« not universal, but restricted, and did not extend to the whole, but only to a part. Marca, in consequence, remarks that ' the use ot one sacramental emblem did not simultaneously invade all the Occidental churches.' Some received it at an earlier and others at a later period. Aquinas, says Marca, waa consulted on the propriety of this usage ; and on his answer in the affir- native, all with emulation embraced the novelty.^ ' Forms prsescriptio in pane et vino. Seorsum panem, seorsum tradens et vmum. Bernard, m Co^n. Dom. 1679. Caro Christi et sanguis, qui in alteri a vrPY°^.""'"°^'""'^,''*'''''l"^ ^1*^°'^ *^^»"° immutabiliter viguisse, anno \\.un r fl""T ""^ »traH".« ^P^^^ie jam desierat medio 8iecul5 duodecimo. Mezera* »fi7q J^^ ««™'»V°t* ?f°'"«? "" *'''"?' '^ sous les deux esp^ces. ^niL"^ ? in.aliquibus ecclesiis servatum, ut solus sacerdos communicet san- gume ; reliqui vero corpore. Bonaven. in John VI. In quibusdam eccleaiia obser- I ■"«** PiUMlinmiiy 444 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. This usage, adopted by the people, was afterward established by the Councils of Constance, Basil, and Trent. ' This reason- able custom, introduced by the church and very long observed,' the General Council of Constance, in its thirteenth session, enacted into a law, and 'denounced all its impugners as heretics, who should be punished by the diocesans, their officials, and the inquisition.'' The space which the council accounted very long from its adoption by the church, was about 200 years. The Constantian council, in its decision, declared the reason- ableness of curtailing the wine in the communion of the laity. These reasons, which are ludicrous rather than convincing, have been enumerated by Gerson, Ragusa, and the council of Trent. The expense of wine sufficient for such multitudes of people ; the danger of spilling it at the altar, or in carrying it it over fields, woods, and mountains, to the sick; the fear of contamination in dirty vessels, or by the touch of the laity; its liability ,to sour and become vinegar, and by this means to occasion idolatry ; its tendency to putrefy and produce flies and worms; the disgust which might arise from so many drinking out of the same cup ; the dread of the holy fluid'"s freezing and becoming ice ; the apprehension of the men's beards dipping in daring and unseemly irreverence into the sacred liquor, which was accounted the blood of Emmanuel; all these reasons and several others, were urged in favor of the retrenchment.' The reasons are better fitted to provoke laughter, than to produce conviction. But the Cardinal of Angelo adduced a reason which is shocking rather than ridiculous. The cardinal, in a Roman consistory, and without any reprehension from his holiness, declared that 'the sacramental wine, if administered to laymen, is poison rather than medicine ; and that the death of the patient would be better than his recovery effected by such a remedy.' Francisco, a Jesuit, urged similar blasphemy in a general congregation at the council of Trent. 'Satan,' the Jesuit averred ; ' was tempting the synod to grant the people a cup of poison, under the appearance of the Lord's blood.'' The enactment of Constance was renewed and confirmed at vatur, ut populo suniendus sanguis non detur. Aquinas, Til. SO. XII. Con- suetudo ilia unius symboli non statim invasit omnes ecclesias oocidentis. Marca, in Labb. 12. 9()5. • Hujusmodi cousuetudo habenda est pro lege, quam non licet reprobare. As- serentes oppositum, tanquam liwretici arcendi sunt, el graviter puniendi per dioecesanos locorum seu officiales eoruni, aut inquisitorcs hajrotioie pravitatis. Labb. 16. 218. •i Ragusa in Labb. 17. 883. Paolo. 2. 212. Du Pin, 3. 552. Arsdckin, 1. 223. 3 TI ne rionnfiroit ia!naisiv)urni^deoinG aux Francois unc-iline re!ii*i!! do •io.isi-.r,. Paolo, 2. 117. Satan faisoit prdsentement presenter au peuple une coupe de poison sous le voile du calice. Paolo, 2. 212. smi, INCONSISTENCY OF THE BASILIAN COUNCIL WITH ITSELF. 44.5 Basil. The general council, in 1437, in its thirtieth session, ' denied the obligation of the laity or non-officiating clergy, by any divine command, to partake in both kinds ; admitted the profitableness of communion, in each way, to the worthy, accor- ding to the institution and observance of the church ; and estab- lished by law the custom of participating in one element.'' The Basilians varied from the Constantian decision. The Con- stantians denounced as heresy, what the Basilians represented • as agreeable to the institution of the church. The former ex-' communicated as obnoxious to punishment and the inquisition those whom the latter described as worthy of communion and salvation. The one authorised as Catholicism, what the other condemned as heresy.' The Basilians differed from themselves, as well as from the Constantians." The sacred synod, notwithstanding their own decision, granted the participation of the cup to the Bohemians and Moravians. This, indeed, became in some measure, a matter of necessity. Mathias, Jacobel, and Huss had, at the hazard of martyi'dom, taught and established whole communion in the kingdom of Bohemia. Determined to maintain their freedom, and headed by Zisca, the ablest general, though blind, that ever took the field, the brave Bohemians withstood all the temporal and spiritual artillery of the popedom ; and extorted by force the concession which was refused to reason. The integrity of the sacrament, which the Basilians allowed the Bohemians, was a violation of their own law, issued in favor of half-communion. This subject, on which the councils of Constance and Basil had decided, came before the council of Trent in its twenty-first session. The Trentine discussion, poll, and canons, on this topic, as delineated by the pens of Paolo and Du Pin, opened a scene of diversity, contention, chicanery, and folly, unequalled in all the. annals of the Reformation, or in the records of any assembly, civil, ecclesiastical, or literary. The Trentine discussion of this question exhibited all the charms of variety. The divines in a general congregation, wrangled in endless altercation, and exhausted the patience of the bishops. A faction of sixty-three doctors opposed the opi- nions of all the rest. The prelates differed like the theologians, Cardinal Mandruccio argued in the council for the restoration of the cup, and was followed by the bishops of Otranto, Praga, Coimbra, Modena, Leria, and Ossimo. The patriarchs of Aquileia, Venice, and Jerusalem, supported the contrary, and 3ivo sub uua apooie, sive Bufa duplici quia commimicet, secundum ordinatio- nem seu observantiam ecclesise, profioit digne communicantibus ad salutem. Labb. 17. 370. « Bruy. 4. 119. ^labb. 17. 1271. Lenfant, 2.42. 446 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Za/i ^n"^ aY ^^' ^'^°P' ^^ ^°'^^'^«' Philadelphia. Lava, JJraga, Leon, Almena, Lugo, and Imola. Fiftv nosapqainJ the greatest inteUigence ani piety, advocated a JtiSTtSf pnmeval usage, fhis the Spanish and Venetians^^ctuated by vanous motives opposed with the utmost obstinacy.' This diversity m the (hscussion was succeeded by eq^al vari- ety m the polL A hundred and foity-six voted. Twenty-nbe Fotlf *^' reBtoratjon of the cup, and thiiiy-eight againstTt Fourteen were for defemng the decision, and tenlr sending a delegation to Gennauy, to investigate the subject. Twe^v- thrp7ekcy.' '^" ^"'''^'" '^ '^^ P^^*^^' ^^^ thirty-one to The majority that voted against the restoration of the cup waa changed into a minority by legatine cabal and finessa The legates who wished to refer afl to the pope, engaged LameUmo aiid Visconto to use their influence for this p^ose tZ fw^K-T''''*'''^- ^^^® patriarchs yielded to the address of the two bisKops, and drew with them the Venetians, who were numerous. Their plans, in consequence, succeeded, and a ^cretionaiy power of granting or refusing the cup to the laity waa vested m the Roman pontiff The mljority of an unerring r^r^'J.\ ""^"^^I' '''"^'^ ^ ^^«^«i^^' ^hich was afterward reversed by a mmonty augmented by intrigue into a majority « .J.^ Trentme canons, notwithstanding the jarring debate and storage were strong and express in favor of half-communion. IheinfaUible assembly declared the lawfuhiess and vaUdity of participation m one species, the illegahty of rejecting the s^o- dal sentence or attributing error to the church, and cu^ed^L UBual. aU who dissented. Divided among themselves, and changing their decisions at the nod of the pontiff or the cabals of the prelacy, the holy synod launched its anathemas.with the mosthberal profusion, against all who should suspect them of error or resist their tyranny.* ^ The popish priesthood and people, dispersed through the ±.uropean nations, were, like those which met at Trent divided m their opmions. Spain and Italy dissented from France, Ger- many, Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary. The Spanish and Ita- lians were against the restoration of the sacramental cup T^ ^^ apphcation for this purpose, the Spanish and Italian cler : / opposed with all theu- oratory and influence in the Roman con- sistory and council of Trent : and even stigmatised the French 1 Paolo, 2. 264, 265. Du Pin, 3. 544—570. 2 Du Pm, 3. 568, 569. « Ecclesia banc consuetudinem sub altera specie communicandUDOToba^f^t pro lege habendam decrevit. Labb. 20, 122, 123. Gibert, 3 331 OPPOSITION TO THE TRENTINB CANONS. 447 fi^^^w ? H°^' fH^y' ^""^ P^^Pl®' on the contrary, insist- ed on the integrity of the sacrament. The king of Fmnce, in 1561, requested this favor for himself and hiTsubiects The petition waa afterward renewed at Trent. The French sover! ^gn supphcated the renewal of the law of Leo aid GeSus The petition indeed, was rejected; but it showed, nevertheless themmd of the motion, on the integrity of the institutioT* ' French ^Sr^^^"^^' ^^u ^W ^"RPorted the motion of the J^rench. The Emperor, the Duke of Bavaria, and the other S^?n °^?«™y^y labored for this purpose bith^n Se Tren- tme council, and afterward at the RomaS court. The E^npe- aXanSsl? ''1^"^^^ represented whole cor^m3>n Silp«f. pf • i-^T^^-^^'^^.^y'^'^g^' A««tria> Moravia, the S«Srf n\?T'.^^^' ^^^^' ^^^«^a' ^d sWabia. AU ^th^^^ ""^ Cathohcism, in these states, which contained tienor^wTT P,0P^*r> ^ged the claims with an impa- counSl of T^^^^^^^^ I'^'^T ^^^ ^^^' °^«^*i°°«d in fhe cause T^L \^ f^^"^ *^' T^ ^^ *^^ ««^«^a^« '^ this cause. These, when aaked for suppUes against the Turks, who TCn^^V'"'^'?'' only Hui^axy,lSralso GeiSyInd The people of Bohemia and Hungaiy showed, if possible stiU more anjiety. This appears from^ the strong but indeS unwanunteble argument which they used to elect their pur- R?f «o T\^' ' V^®?^ ^^^^^' ^°^««d the clergy to dispense the r«IT/ i-f ^ ''^^ ^^ threatening them, if the/^fused, ^S detensible. The use of menace and compulsion, on questions fp,S?r- ,««^.f "ence. .is unscriptural. But the f^t mani- &?hel'end.^ ' knowledge, in their efforts to ob- Such were the variations of Romanism, on the subject of the r.TT^- \f ^''> ^'"^^^^ ^^ immutability, chfugeSand disputed in reckless inconsistency. The usage of jIus his apostles, and antiquity, observed for 1200 yea^, wasTepealed and Trent The change was adopted from the Manicheans who were the partisans of heresy, and whose aversion to the I P^i"' o ?!^' 220, 399. Thuan. 2. 416. DuPin. 3 652 I p*°^' ^- "^- I^" I^i". 3. 622. Thuan. 2. 361 'Paolo. 2. 220. Du Pii., 3. 551, 652, 664. Thuan. 2. 361, 441. Bruy 4 621 448 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. euchanstic cup was denounced by Leo and Gelasius, as saeri We and superatition. The synod of Basil, which confirmed the law ot half-communion, but admitted the utility of reception in both kinds, varied from the assembly of Constance; which consigned the participators in the cup to the inquisitors of heretical pravity. The council of Trent, disputing and divided among themselves, determined by a majority for withholding the cup from the people ; and shortly afterward, changed by papal mtngue, resolved, by another majority, to confer on the Koman pontiff a discretionary power of granting whole com- munion to the laity. The popish clergy and laity dispersed through European Christendom differed about the canons issued, on this question, at Trent. Spain and Italy, in general, condemned whole communion, which was demanded with ardor and anxiety in France, Germany, Bohemia, Poland, Hungary, and several smaller states. CHAPTER X,V. EXTREME UNCTION. VARIATIONS ON ITS EFPBOTS -DISAGREEMENT ON llH IN8TITUTI0N~THP snUTPTnnA, AND POPISH UNCTIONS ART IN THKrn ADMINISTRATOR sZ FORM S.^^T ^^^^^^^-^^OOVEm OF HEALTH THE SORirTURAL END OF ANOlSo^HE 8^^^^ -TR.VDITIONAI, EVIDENCE-HISTORY OF EXTREME UNCTION """"^^'^^ ™^ ^'^^ Extreme unction, in the Popish system, consists in the sacra- mental apphcation of oil to the sick, for the remission of sin. The administrator is a priest or bishop. The subject is the sick, who, to all human appearance, is at the point of death ihe sign IS oil, consecrated by episcopal benediction The form requires the application of the sign to the eyes, ears, nose mouth, hands, feet, and, if the patient be a male, to the reins' accompanied with prayer. ' Popish doctors, notwithstanding their protended unity, vary as Faber Bellarmme, Estius, and Dens have shown, on the eflfect of this unction. Dens has enumeratedno less than ten different opinions, entertained on this point in the Romish com- raumon The chief differences, however, may be reduced to four, which have given rise to four factions in Papal Christen- uom. ^ One faction, patronised by Bonaventura, Fleury, Challenor and the Trent Catechism, reckon the effect of this ceremony' the remission of venial sins. But this opinion has been rejected by others, such as Aquinas, Soto, Valentia, Scotus, Faber, and many modems A second party, supported by Estius, Dens, and the council of Mentz, as well as by other divines, extend Its effects to the dismission of mortal transgressions. This theory, however, has been deprecated by Aquinas, Soto, Valentia, Scotus, Bellarmme, Faber, and many other theolo- gians, because mortal offences are pardoned in baptism and afterwards in penance. A third class include both venial and mortal sins in the effect of this unction. This, according to the interpretation of Estius and Calmet, was the doctrine of tJie council nf Tront wViioV. n^nf^^^^A j-X,:- ,i_ power of cancelling unexpiated and remaining transgressions ihis explanation, therefore, embracing both trifling and heinous cc 450 THE VAllIATIONS OF P(JI>EUY. sins, sins both of frailty and enormity, is clothed by the Tren- tme dictators with all the glorx- of infallibility A fourth description ascribes the effect of this institution neither to venial nor mortal iniquity, but to weakness, infirmity, and the remains of sin. This, which some reckon the common opinion has been sanctioned by Aquinas, Soto, Valentia, i)urandus, and many moderns. But these doctors, differing from others, differ also among them.selves on the meaning attached to the remains of sin. Valentia, in the remains of sin, comprehends aversion to good and inclination to evil; while Bellarmine and others, at the expense of a little incon- sistency, extend it to venial and mortnl ofiences, as well as to sorrow and anxiety.' Popish doctors var- m the institution of this sacrament as well as on its effects. Lombard, and several since his day refers its institution to mere apostolic authority ; while others attribute Its appointment to our Lord, and its promulgation to the apostle James. Some identify this ceremony vvith the anointing mentioned b3' Mark in his gospel. Such were Beda, tajetan, Arsuekin Maldonat, and the Rhemish annotators, as we 1 a^s the Trent Catecihism, and the councils of Milan, Sens and Augsburg. Many, on the contrary, distinguish between the apostolic ceremony recorded by Mark, and the sacramental rite mentioned by James. Such were Jonas. Valentia, Bellar- mine, Faber. and Dens, as well as the councils of Worms Cologne, Florence, and Trent.-' The council of Trent, puzzled and inconsistent, displayed on this occasion, a striking variety. This unerring assembly hum mtelhgunt. Alu dc peceatis inortalium Apostolum exponunt. Ad omnia E^^^-rSe^^: ^^^^*- ^'-»- ' ' • t^Ieury,246. ChaUenor. 113. 3. S5!^^'Fabe"rf2!''25™ '''"'^^" '"■''^°'*"'' = '^^ ^^^ "°" ^'^etur verum. Aquinas, Aquinas, Soto, Valentia, et multi reccntiores asserunt proprium cffectum hujus sacramenti non esse ab„tergere et delere peccata venialla ; sed esse sanare FaSr 2'S,^268 "''"''• ^"" '^""--"i""* Doctores hujus opnS! Peccata mortalia remittit. Dens, 7. 18, Estius, 2. 1145 Non intp]!iait„r de peccato mortali. Faber, 2. 259. inteUigitui Infert Scotus illud non potest intelligi de peccatis mortalibus. Omnes asserunt peccata mortalia dmutti solum per p.pnitentiam. Faber 2 253 261 n.,^*'Ii^'/"!{"i '^"'If t'"""". 'nquit eflectum hujus sacramenti esse peccata, si quas smt, delere, et reb.quias peccati abstergere. Faber 2 260 Dehcta, 81 quK adhuc expianda et peccati reliquias ab'stergit.' Labb. 20 98 ^ Unctiones adhibita^ ah AnnaMi" •>"•• "-""t —or ,— i^-i i-T - %' kvh<>>. o 'JK-? u 1 1 o-'-T'^'V ' "VVi •••"■••^- '^ttcrctmciiiiaics. Dens, V. 2. .^l' '^•J^^l- ^^°^°> ^- ^^7. Jonas, III. 14. Dacherv 1 316 Arsdekin 1. 245. Beda, 5. 693. Labb. 10. 467, and 19. 269. ^ Arsdekm. \ .VRfATIONS IN THE EFFECTS OF EXTBEME UNCTION. 431 had declared that this sacrament was instituted by Jesus and recorded by Mark. But a divine who was present, and who possessed rather more sense than his fellows, remm-ked tl^a? this ceremony could not have been observed at that time 1 the apostles, even according to the Trentine assembly, were not then ^..ests, and were therefore, incapable of adii'nirter! svnod tI^>. T'^ll^'S theologian disconcerted the sacred •synod. 1 he holy lathers, embarrassed by the incoasistencv began to mvent means of disentangling themselves from th^ contradiction. Extreme unction, said the infallible asslbly was not instituted, but merely insinuated in Mark and Xr ward pub ished in James. The institution was! wfth the utniost facility transubstantiated by these theological jugglers nto an insinuation. The holy men insinuated what they Wd to aftrm. The unction of the Evangelist became, in the h;^^ds 13ut the insinuation of the sacred council was, under the auspices of Its authors, destined to make another ' change and It nH IV^" r"'''"^ ^"™- . ^^' '"^^""''^tion wa.s again tmnsub- stantiated into an institution. The council's canon declared extreme unction a true sacrament, instituted by Jesus and transformed the anointing related in the gospel into tie figure of a sacrament. The apostles, it seems, though at that ime no priests, arid incapable of performing this ceremony in reality administered It in metaphor. The Trentine insinuation be^ came a Rhemish trope. The sacrament of the council degen- embleAi '\^" ^""^T'^F '^ '^''' ,annotators, into a ^xere emblem. 1 his, no doubt, was very clever and ingenious, and though a little at variance with many other expositions in the same uncJiangeable communion, removed all difficulty Popish councils and commentators, in this manner, could transform an unction into a metaphor, an institution into an insinuation, and tne insinuation back again into an institution, with as much ease as an alchemist, in his own crazy mind, could transmute copper mto gold, or a priest, in the credulity of superstition could transubstantiate a wafer into a God. Extreme unction is a variation from scriptural unction The ^scriptural and Romish institutions differ in the administration sign, form, subject, and end. The Popish unction rponiv.c, v^J one administrator. This has been defined by Popes Alexander 2. 'l2?- RiveS'c. 7'^''' '• '''• ''"*• '^"'^- ''7- ^•^^- 20- 98. 102. Eetius, 452 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. and Benedict as wejl v U the Trentine council. A solitary pnest unaided and aloa., 'an, with facility and dispatch, per- torm the whole ceremony in all its diversified evolutions, and in ail its modern additions and improvements.' The scriptural unction, recommended by the pen of inspiration, requires, on the contrary, a plurality of administrators. The sick person >yas to ' call for the elders of the church.' The words which signify the anointing and the prnyer are in, the plural number, indicating beyond aU question, the necessity of more than one dispensator. Extreme and Scriptural unctions differ also in their sign The sign of both, indeed, is oil. But the oil of the popish ceremony must be consecrated by a bishop, and the consecra- tion is attended with a world of superstition and chicanery, The Romish institution, celebrated with any other kind of oil, IS invalid. Should the administrator, through mistake, use chrism, he is instructed by the council of Milan to repeat the ceremony, and apply the proper sign. The holy oil only is in this ordinance, possessed of any efficacy. The primeval Christians knew nothing of these superstitions. The use of the ceremony, stated by the sacred historian Mark, was, accord- ing to the council of Trent, prior to the existence of the priestly or episcopal order; and the unguent, therefore, employed at that time, was guiltless of episcopal benediction^ The modern and primitive unctions differ in their form as well as ui their administrator and sign. The form of the I'opish rite, consisting in anointing and prayer, is one continued scene of superstition, balderdash, and indecency. The priest makes the sign of the cross three times on the sick person, in the name of the Trinity. The imposition of the sacerdotal hands, and the invocation of angels, patriarchs, prophets apostles, martyis, confessors, and virgins, are used for the ex- tinction of the power of the devil, and every unclean spirit in Jiepatients members, marrow, and every joint of his limbs. Ihe priest then dips his thumb in the holy ointment, and anoints the sick person in the form of a cross on the eyes ears nose, mouth, hands, and feet. These organs are then wiped with cotton, which is burned, and the ashes for fear of pro- fanation, are thrown into the sacrarium. Even the water with Bin. 8. 866. Non ' Minister hujus sacramenti est sacerdos. Labb 20 101 a pluribus, sed ab uno. Estius, 2. 1142. Dens 7 25 2. m*^r 1r t ^'S^-3 ^^'"•^^'^ '^'^^^^ -* — -• l^-ber, Les Ap6tres n'etoient point encore prfttres. Calmet, Com. 19, 20. I 1. VARIATION BETWEEN SCRIPTURAL AND POPISH UNCTION. 453 which the priest washes his hands is, for the same reason poured into a clean and retired place. ' The administration of this observance adds indecency to superstition. The patient, except in women and monk^, is anointed on the loins or reins, because, says the Roman Ritual, this is the seat of lasciviousness and pleasure.^ This part of the ceremony is of the most revolting description, and is expressed in the language of grossness and indelicacy. The whole scene as represented in their formulas, must, to every mind possessing the leastsensibihty or refinement, present a spectacle of loath- ing and disgust. The ceremony sometimes assumes a truly ridiculous appear- ance. The sacerdotal thumb is the usual instrument in con- veying the greasy application. But when pestUence prevails and contagion threatens, the priest may apply the sacramental oil with a long rod. This he dips, with due gravity, into the blessed fluid ; and standing at a respectful distance to avoid in- tection, he extends his wand, in proper form and in a graceful manner, to the sick whom, to escape danger, he anoints with this simple but useful ecclesiastical machine, instead of his pre- cious thumb. The rod, having by this means administered the sacrament of the dying, and communicated all the virtues of the holy ointment, is burned, and the ashes, with proper attention, cast into some sacred place.'' The simplicity of the Apostolical institution presents a complete contrast to this display of complicated folly, uncountenanced by one hint of revelation or a single monument of Christian antiquity. The Apostolic and Popish unctions differ in the persons to whom they are to be administered. The latter is applied only to those who, in all human appearance, are departing and in consequence, has been called the sacrament of the dying The sacerdotal physician never administers this spiritual prescrip- 1 Intincto pollice in oleo sancto, in niodum crucis uugit i.iKrmum. Sacerclos Saliir "SfLT^of r '"'"'^^'^' ^' ^°'"^"^'^*' «--!- ^-^^^^ III "It Ta^r^ T mTens" 7." .""''" '* "'''*" ''''' ''*'""'^'' ^^^^'^"^ lnL!f?=''?rl"r'^*°*'?""°'P*^'^'^'''^''**^^*- Falser. 2. 254. Renes, velut vo- lSS.'*DS;.tl(r^""*'^'- ^^*- ''"•^- ^^- ««P-ing«inesperardo,.en. kiSTrn'^^Rir Rom as"^"'' ^'^^^^'"^ '" ^""""^"'^ «* ^^« religiosis. Arsde- A«dekinfr378.*^' ^*^'* "*' ^"^'' "^'^°''^* ""^^^ *'"°**' *i"'*"' posteacomburat. ^nl^i^k-f °''°^**"'" ''?'^"' f ^'■°*"' I'^'*^ '°^«°*^- Licet, in eo caau, inungere Ks, a 79, 166^*' ''"^"' ^ P*'*^''* gosaypium oleo sacro imbuuun. 454 THE VAlUATIONa OP POPERY. tu.n while there is any expectation of recovery. The .sacred unction IS always intended as a mittimus to eternity ' Ihe Apostolic unction was admini.'tered to weak (,r iiiHrm persons. Mark and James, indeed, use two different term>' on this subject ; b^it both, according to their deriv,-iti.)n and their usual acceptation, signify ' without strength,' and include all who are in a state of weakness and infirmity. The wcn-ds of the hvangehst and the Apostle never imply that severity of sickness or of pain, which precludes all hopes of recovery, and which, in a short time, commonly issues in death. The expres- sion used by Janies is applied to the woman who had a 'spirit otinhrmity eign teen years, whom Jesus healed in Judea, and to the diseased persons wh(, came to Paul in the island of Mehta and were cured. Those who could visit Jesus and Paul could not be laboring under severe complaints, or such as would indicate a speedy dissolution.'-' But the p-eat and leading distinction between the Scriijtuial and Komish unctions consists in the end or efibct. The effect of the former referred to the body; but of the latter to the soul. I he ancients anointed the infirm for the expulsion of sickness and the restoration of strength. The moderns anoint the dying tor the pardon of sin and the conveyance of grace. The* one used It as a miraculous and temporary remedy for the recovery 01 health ; and the other as an ordinary ami permanent sacra- ment for the attainment of salvation. The design of the primi- tive ceremony was to enable men to live ; but of the inesent superstition to [)reiiare them to die.' The i)opish commur^ion, indeed, l)oth in its ancient and modern rituals, refers, on this topic, to the l)ody as well as to the soul ; and to the recovery of health as well as to the pardon 01 sm But its modern usage displays a .striking aberration Horn the bcriptural mudel. Romanism makes the recovery of health conditional, which revelation makes absolute; and the remission of sins^ absolute, which revelation makes conditional. I he Lord says Jame,s, without any condition, ' will raise him u\K But the recovery, in the Romish theology, is doomed With the condition of expedience. The expiatirm of inioSfty on the contrary, is, in Scriptural language, united with the coadition, ' if he have committed sin.' But forgivenes.s, in the Labb "I's 'r?^,?'"^''*"'".^'' ^"•■°"'' '^f •^"J"^ '"orte ti.netur . 174. -Mark VI. 13. .James, v. 14. Luke, xiii. 11. Acts, xxviii. 9. the unction without any condition. This variation j-uJ perv irsion arc ovidontly intenjod for the purpose ot accon ,. ' ng the statement of revelation to a system ot super^titiv The declaration ot Mark, eom[)iired with the injunction of James, wil cleaviy r'o.v the truth of the i)r()testant interpreta- tion wliich refei> S words to tlie body and the recovery .)f health. The two inspired ;)eninen, it is i)lain, allude to the same ceremony. Both mention the same agents, actions, patients, and effects. This has been shown hy Bede, (Ecumeniu>- Jcnas Lyra, Cajetan, Erasmus, D'Achery, Maldonat, and Arsdekm, as well as by tlie Rhemish aiinotators, and thecouncils ot Alilan, bens, Augsburg, and Trent. The latter assemb'y in all Its mtallibihty, identiHed the history of Mark and the direction of J ames.'- The effect, therefore, of these two identical lites must be the same. The healing of Mark and the upraising of Janies may be reckoned synonymous ex{)ressions. The former, it is clear, refers to recovery from disease and restitution to bodily health This exposition is sanctioned by the authority of Bede, Jonas (Ecumenius, Calmet, Cajetan, and many other popish commen- tators. The statement (^f James, says Cajetan, 'does neither in word nor effect signify sacramental unction, but that ceremony in.stituted by our Lord, and applied by Iiis disciples for the re- covery of the sick.' The cj.rdinal, like Bede, Jonas, (Ecume- nius, and Calmet, delivered the plain meaning of the passage which will approve itself to every unprejudiced mind.'' Let the Romish priest, then, in this way cure the patient, and the Pro- testant has no objection. Let him accomplish the orioinnl design of the scriptural institution, and in this convincing man- ner, shew his power and authority. Let him free the sic°k from the pains of the fever, the dropsy, the consumption, or any other 1 Eatius, 2. 11 1 1 Kit. Horn. fiO. .Jajucs v, 14, 15. 2HocetApo8t.)lisfeoisso ineN-ansrcliolegiimis. Beda, 5. G93. .Ton-,8 iii 14. Uachory, 1. .SHj. ' ' Tovro6iAiTocrjo\oienoiov„. (Eouinen. in loc Ex hoc patut, .mod unctio ex- trema hut mstitiita a Chnsto. Lyra in Mark vi. 13. Cajetaii soutient ijue ce passage ne rogarde (|uo I'onction miraculeuse, dont les ApOtres se servoient pour la giuTison des inalades. }a\c et Maldonat 'e soutiennent. Calmet, 19, 49. Maldonat, 754. Hoc reliotum erat ex prfucepto uvangelico. Erasmus, G. 10.37. Saerameutum extreme unctionia fundatur in Soripturis Maroi 0. Arsdekin 1 245 Bin ^ 197, 619. Crabb. 3. 74(i, 855. Cat. Triden. 1G7. ' Nee ;n verbis nee in effeetu, verba ha'c lofjuuntur de sacramentali unctione extremw unetionis, sed niagis de unctione quam instituit Dominus .Jesus a .liscipulis exercendam in .-egrotis. Cajet. in loco. Faber, 2. 257. Beda, 5 ^9.5. Jonas, ni. 14. Dachery, 1. 31G. On voit le m6me sentiment dans (Ecumenins. Calm. Comm. 24. 7S Cajetanus negat absolute hoc loai, Jacolmm loqui de sacrament'o extreme unctionis. Faber, 2. 257. 456 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. of the ills that attack frail fallen man; and he will, by the triumphs of his art or his faith, disarm all opposition. He may then claim credit for his commission. But the constant applica- tion of a sign, which is never attended with the proper or primitive signification, only renders its author ridiculous The continuation of the means, when the end cannot be effected merely exposes the vain pretender, as weU as his credulous dupes, to merited contempt. This healing of the diseased Uke other miraculous powers granted for promoting the establishment of Christianity was extraordinary and temporary. This, resembling other miracles scarcely survived the apostolic age. The oil, in this respect was similar to the water of Bethesda. This pool, when the descending angel troubled its water, cured the diseased wh(j immediately bathed in its healing wave. But this effect was miraculous^ and transitory. The efficacy was not native or inherent, but supernatural and communicated, and ceased on the cessation of the angelic visits. Bethesda, at the nresent day IS as cureless as any other pool. The effect of unction in like manner, was preternatural and transient. Itsapiilication' accompanied with prayer, can at the present "day effect no' recovery. The use of unction and the use of Bethesda, in tiie nineteenth century, are equally silly. The patient, who sh(.ald seek to dispel disorder in the pool of the holy city, would only meet with a laugh from the passing spectator. His simplicit'x- might excite a smile, but his folly would convey no health ; and the application of oil to the sick, whatever the deceiving and deceived may fancy, is equally ridiculous and absurd The -emission of sin, mentioned by James, might, on a superhcial view, appear to militate against this interpretation which hmits the effect of the ancient ceremony to the recovery ot health. But this difficulty, on a close insi)ection, will vanish ^^^.®^'"f, Pa^^doned through ' the prayer of faith,' were such" as m God s judicial or chastening providence, were punished with sickness. Infirmity, disease, and even death were sometimes intlicted by the Creator, as a punishment or correction for cer- tain ortenoes. This has been granted and indeed proved by Bede, Jonas, Lyra, Estius, and Calniet. God, as these and many other authors attached to Romanism have shown often asm the case of Ananias and Sai)phira, visits flagrant trans- gression with disease and even mortality.' »Multi propter peccata in animo facta, infirmitate autetiam morte pleotun- L .^'''la in Jacob. V. 15. Jonas, III. 14. Dachery, J. 316. nhf;,.!' ^f"?*'''' Pf««:*aetiam corporis plectuntur morte. Ananias et Sap- pmra pumti taerunt subitanea morte pro peccato. Lyra, 6. 52, 217. in Corin. Plurimum caus!« morborum sint peccata. Estius 2 U45 bouvent Dieu punissoit le^ pcches par des maladies. Calm. Com. 24. 81. VARIATION BETWEEN SCRIPTURAL AND POPISH UNCTION. 457 The fact, which these authors have stated, was exemplified and evidtnced in the Corinthians, with respect to whom, as depicted by Paul, many were weak and sickly, and many slept. Our Lord, therefore, in allusion to this truth, said to the man whom he healed of the palsy, ' thy sins be forgiven thee.' He also admonished the man whom he cured of an infirmity at Bethesda, to ' sin no more,' for fear of a severer sentence. These instances show the connection in some cases, between transgression and disorder, as well as between remis- sion and recovery. James, had he meant iniquity in general, need not have used the supposition, ' if he have committed sins.' All, in this respect, are guilty. But only some were visited with a par- ticular malady, on account of a particular crime. He declared, m the expressive language of Estius, that ' the cause, which was iniquity, would be removed, that the effect, which was disease, might cease." The indisposition and the punishment had the relation of cause and effect, and the one was remitted for the removal of the other. All this, however, shows that the institution was intended for lengthening the days of the living, and not, as it has been falsely called, a sacrament de- signed for the use of the dying. Romanism is here guilty of another variation and perversion The inspired penman ascribes the recovery of health and the remission of sin to 'the prayer of faith.' But these effects, the popish theologians attribute to the application of the oint- ment. The prayers, says Fieury, may, in case of necessity, be omitted, and the unction alone used. The moderns depend, for the effect, on the unguent plastered on the patient in the form of a cross. The ancients relied on ' the prayer of faith ' offered with devotion for the recovery of the afflicted and the pardon of sin. This explanation of the Apostolic injunction is open only to one objection. None of the primitive Christians, say Faber and Bellarmine, need, on this supposition, have been subject to mortality. The unction and accompanying prayer of the elders would have saved all from death. This argument, on a slight view, is specious. But its plausibility, on a closer examination, will totally disappear. The objection, if it have any weight, presses as hard on popery as on protestantism. The Romish as well as the Reformed must admit the exist- ence of the healing gifts among the early Christians. Our Lord cured the sick, and even raised the dead. His apostles anomted and healed many. Paul, addressing the Corinthians, mentions ' the gifts of healing,' communicated to the pristine ' Causa romota morbus cesset. Estius. 2. 114.'). 458 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Chii«tians, whose possession of this ext,-,w,linai-y power in^he o^eJryaith, as w^te/SaSXr,:'^''^''' recovered ThisTZ 'T l"'? ''"" " ""'■ ^''^ «" "!'« "'"I^ S3 fl.r ''^'°'^^^' themselves were enabled to .-on,- ncaled the tathei of Publius and others who had diseases in Me'lilunr' He ff 'l'"S^f- ^'T'^"""«' ^'^ ^--d'tk a Melitum. He also advised Timothy to use Avine as an ordi- nary means and an approved medicine for his infi nnity This ■supernatural endowment, therefore, was occas onal . n 1 rio^ -^J^Pe-tion only by the .Permission ^nd^Lt;:^ ot ^od The extraordinary power, sometimes inactive hnd to be called into energy by the l^ivine impulse' ' Tho^J'cmdd tL7f''\ '^-^^^ ^'''''^''''' "^^"tioned by James. tleSniH if%^^^ the healing power only when actuated by ' he irave, on^ Ih ' / " ^''V^-'"' "^ ^^^^^q^ence, is styled tnepiayei oHaith, because it nispired assuran- e of success Jn^ accordingly, in the Englisll version, cSilt^ ^ piayer ertectual, which, according to the original sliould be ^an^a^ed inwrought or inspired.^ This miraci^-wirki ! d^ mountains, and enabled its possessor to expel no.ito- ic men, Clemens, Hermas, Barnaba.s, Ignatius, and PolNcaip lived, and wrote, and departed, without once mentioning the sacrament of the dying. The successors of the apostolic i;icp ' Aijuinas, 3. 4ti7. Cat. Trid. If.t!. l!it. l,,,ni -Challenor, 113. h'leury, 240. 91. E tius, 2. IMn. Calmet. 460 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. TrL Va?k^in1nW' ^^^r/J^^'tullian, Cyprian, Athena- bOras, latian, ±.piphanius, and the apostolic constitutions arp on this theme, equally silent and disobliging The pre^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^aHav? In'^'' ^''' f rcumstantial deliLn sll^ir tof^:' has says Aquinas, made no mention of extreme unction ' wors'an7d^''' '"^^r'!f^, '^' other sacramentsrtheir comnfinton Thr'' T"^""^'' ^'^^'''^^^on. of baptism and the communion. These topics meet the reader's eve in nearlv XffilVoVJ^r '^'^'^^-^ productions. But extr^m^ unctS, wondertul to tell, IS never mentioned. This cereraonv whinh in modern days, remits sin and strengthens the soul Tf tt skSedrth:^"'' 1 "*^" *^^ ^^^^^^ - «^'^d« «f *"« picture Sketched by the pen of antiquity. This was a wofui and vex to^adTS" '" ''' '-''' ''''-- -^ '- P"^ X modl^^s Hel^n Ani^itvT ^"^^7°""'" "^ '^^^' «"«^ ^' Const^.ntine, who'e deat^i H'bfn ' .^^'^^^f^'"' ^^o^ica, and Augustine Ty seem nevp. ^f T^^^^,^^^ ^een transmitted to the present Sr so ,nnT '^7-^ ''T" «noi"ted. Their biographers thesl if k 1 f '^T^l'''' *^" sacrament of the dying. ^ All btsed oS Tb r?*^' '^'^'"''f ^^^'^^"^ theapplication^f th tri4d aP ;,-nJ 1 ^ ^ ""''••';"^ ^°'"^"' ^^ «" probability, con- R, f flf 7 ^"^ ^''^'^''' '^'^'^""^ ^^i"g greased for the journey But the modern saints and sinners of Romanism are nrepaied many rKtt?M r'^t^^y consecrated oil. The lleath of and the^P 1 1 '^^^' ^t\^'f ^'''°^^*^^ ^>' ^'^^^^ ^^^ Butler: Ulster ^fblp 1 '•'^^"^''^' '^T -'^^^'-^^^ complimented with evftl .1. ''''?. S'"^"^""^- T^^« '"odern .saints make their sev ifdil-enf '^^^t'^'V^^'T'' '''"' ^^^^"^^^' ornamented in seven ditteient places, with the cross-streaks of the oilvfianres fomed by the gmceful motion of the sacerdotaUhumb^ ^ ' b.wplp«/TK •' t *^u' ^^r^mony have endeavored to prop the Pope Innocent, who flourished so late as the fifth centurv is tho,r hrst witness. Decentiu,s. bishop of Eugubium n Ual tm iedThT?'.r '^"^ ^"^J"^^*' '' ^«"«"1^ the^pontiff, who,.' turned the following answer. ' The diseased fa thful to whom cS "Thi; oT7 \ ''^"^^f ^' "^^^^ ^^^ ----ted ^il'o ^InT ,, rS.tT*"'''''^"'^^^^ "'^ed not only by priests but also by all Christians, who may anoint not only themsdves 29.' ?'r:^' °"" ^*"* ^^'l"*'" mentionemdeextrema unctione. Aquinas, III. if**! TRADITIONAL EVIDENCE FOR EXTREME UNCTION. 461 but also their friends. But the chrism may not be poured on penitents, for it is a kind of sacrament." The utt'v.- igi orance of Decentius and Innocent, on this sub- i^t, ^rjef: ga,l\y shows the non-existence of extreme unction in the fiftu century. Decentius, a dignified clergyman of Italy : -ew so bttle of the ceremony, that he could not, without in- ': ) iction, administer the pretended sacrament of the dyina ile applied, m his difficulty, to the Pope, the father and teache^r ot all Christians ; and the pontiff, who has been eulogized for gemus and learning by Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostom, and Bellarmine, knew no more of it, except in his own conceit, than the bishop. He called the rite ' a kind of sacrament.' This appellation would have called down on his holiness the anathe- mas of the Trentine council, that pronounced this observance ' a true and proper sacrament.' His infallibility, besides, mis- took the administrator and the sign of this ' kind of sacrament ' Its minister, in his infallibility's hanu3, was not only a priest but every Christian, both for himself and his friends. The lay- man, however, who, in modern times, should make the attempt would, says Faber, ' not only sin, but effect nothing.' The sign,' according to his holiness, was chrism, which, in modern days' IS utterly unfit for this use. This unction, performed now with chrism, is invalid, and the whole process, in this case, must says the council of Milan, be repeated with the proper element! His infallibility's ' kind of sacrament,' administered according to his pontifical directions, would, in modern times, be perfectly useless. Innocent and Decentius, the pontiff and the bisl o'l, were, in reality, strangers to one of the seven sacraments, a id would have needed a fugleman to show the motion of his spiri- tual exercise. Both would have required a modern priest to drill these two raw recruits, and teach them the manoeuvres of sacerdotal duty and the use of ecclesiastical arms.- Bede's testimony, more than 300 year.s later, is similar to Innocent's. 'The sick,' says the English monk, ' is, according to ecclesiastical use, to be anointed with consecrated oil and heated. This is lawful, not only for the pastors, but also, as Innocent liath declared, for all Christians, both for themselves and their friends.'' This only shows that the unction of the sick remained in the same state in the eighth century fis in the fifth, and that • Ue fidelibus ffigrotantibus accijji vel intelligi debere, qui aanoto oleo chris- iJiatis perungi poasunt- Non solum sacerdotibus, sed omnibus uti Christiani.s licet in sua et suorum necessitate inuugendo, Poenitentibus illud fundi uon potest, quia genus est sacramenti, Carranza, 187. I^abb. 3. 6. Jonas iii. 14. Ceat une espuco de sacrement. Bruys. 1.175 - yi laicus attentet, non solum peccat, aod nihil facit. Faber. 2. 254 Labb 18. 550. et 21. .168. Bin. 8. 8(56. et 9. GI9. Crabb. 3. 506. ■' Inlirmi oleo consecrato ungantur a presbyteris, et, oratione oommilitante sanetur, etc. Beda. 5. 693. ,-(*afe 462 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the unction of Romanism wa^ «« li+^i^ i B«i„„., of Innoeont, Z TnEtJ^^^Tllw ""n'r 1' Inn.jcent m ould hnvo noedpc] ^nm.f'^" i , .^- ^^^^ and to teach them the m^<^ll^^^^^^ -perstition ing the sacramentil vlaster BeTeXe^^^^^ covery of health as tl e end or S of At ' '^l*'^«®"^« ^he re- shows that the unction of the 4k L L^ FnT.'^"^',^."^ ^^^"^ wa,s still used for the oii^jinal Tesi. n ^^"/"f^'^h n^onk's time, soul, but to the body ^ ^ ' *"'^ '^^''■'"^' ""^ ^o the to ^f]Z:^±^ t^^^. t:r n ^ '^l '-^ ^''^' the siS^r ?;; th J^^tr:::;^^^ -^£ ^^--^i- of intention. The sivm i-« „^]i /'" ."""^*=' ^^ 'ts primeval spiritual and co;:r„l L.T "\ f S' bv^i-ff f'? " recovered its strencrfh onrl fi.n I v?y ' . ^ ^^'^ supplication, which ooc,lned''o"''™^4" So co^rntnTn'; I "'' "" T tiun of this rite being benoiioial to th«TT . ^T" ?™'''- G^andgooa for thj ,41 llrlL" utS' il'S Si*" only additioTwh ir ho Seln^ ITl^TT "\ ""'"% '^'' hundred years, seen,.s o CSvedfrnrnTl, ■*'''? f ';«''* l>e.^tition consisted in the e|,isco|T ns ' ^t « Tll/T ment and it,, indiscriminate app ication to the inlm Th i^^adn,nis.r„tion had c5.ed to"o";::!:; t'oSJCd^p™:;:? The provincial council of Worms has been added to that nf Chalons, a,s evidence of this sunerstitinn R ?! • f , affords no additional testimony it "even f. ' T'^^^^^ merely embodied Pope InnSs renlv to r'^^ n"^ '^^"" The fathers of Worm^ only a'^l^dTnd' .'pea fdTis^S^^^^^^^ htys decision without preface or explanation TkV 1- . was no better kno^n, and the future sacram^rt h^ 'U^^''^ farther progress than 450 yea^ beforrirthe hY h '"'^' "' The unction still remained a kind ofTcient N T^^'^. >.ars had elapsed from the commencemeTof^^hris& still the |icrament was misunderstood. Dec^ndus W cent, rnd Bede, as well as the councils of Chalon^'and Worms' SS" HISTORY OF EXrRKME CNCTION. 46:i were ignc.rant of the administrator, the .sign, and the end of the ceremony, which the Trentine fathers, of infallible meraorv pronouncea a true and proper sacrament, insinuated by Mark' published by James, and instituted by Emmanuel The history of this innovation is easily traced. Extreme unction in its present form, was the child of the twelfth cen- tury. Ihe monuments of Christian tlicology for eleven hun- dred years mention no ceremony, which, in its varied and unmeariing mummery, corresponds with the unction of Eoman- ism. Ihe patrons of this superstition have rifled the annals ot ecclesiastical history for eleven ages, and have failed in the d^covery of either precept or example for a rite, which, they amrm, was practised as a sacrament in every nation of Christen- dom since the era (>r redemption. The twelfth century, of wliich this tilthy ceremony is the oftspring, was the reign of ignorance and superstition. Science and literature .seemed in di.sgust, to fly from a tasteless and degenerated world. Philosophy refused to shed a single ray on a grovelling race, who hated or BelL ii. 20. Juenin, 4. 414. j^ ^4 '^. "% I 466 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. awakens friendship ; and, in the other, kindles devotion, assists the memory, and communicates instruction. The copy raises the soul, in holy gratitude and piety, to the great exemplar, as time, pamted with its houi-glass, reminds the spectator of its motion and fleetness.' Pictures, in this system, are the books of the unlearned, which, in the unlettered mind, awaken trains of holy thought and meditation. The effigy or painting, which, in this manner, iH the book of the illiterate, is also the ornament of the temple. These partisans of modern refinement seldom use the term worship or adoration, but h«nor, esteem, homage, respect, or veneration. These allow no more respect for the material form, than a Jew would feel for the ark, or the altar, or a Christian for the Bible or the sacramental elements.'' Such, on this topic, is the refined system of many, and among the rest, of Thomassin, Bossuet, Alexander, Juenin, Du Pin, Gother, Challenor, and Lanciano. Statements of this kind are very convenient in the kingdoms of Protestantism and safety ; but the authors were prudent in publishing their opinions at a respectful distance from Spain, Portugal, Goa, and the inqui- sition. The second class honor images with an inferior or imperfect worship. These, however, oflfer no Latria or supreme adora- tion to the pencilled resemblance. This homage thd^ ascribe only to the Almighty. But the copy, they contend, is entitled to veneration, on account of its dedication and similarity to the prototype. This worship, Bellarmine calls imperfect, and Juenin internal or absolute. This faction include a numerous party in the Komish communion, among whom are Bellarmine, Baronius, Estius, Godeau, and Spondanus.^ This class, Bellarmine has shewn, maintain the same system as the second Nicene council. The Niceans represented images as holy, communicating holiness, and entitled to the same vene- ration as the gospels. The infallible synod also condemned those who used pictures only for assisting the memory, and not for adoration.* The Trentine professed to follow the Nicene council. The former, however, seems on this subject to have modified, if not contradicted the latter. The Niceans characterised images as 1 Non quod credatur inesse aliqua Divinitas vel vii-tus, vel quod ab eis sit aliquid petendum, vel quod fiducia in imaginibus sit Agenda. Labb. 20. 171. Bell. II. 20. Juenin, 4. 415. Gother, c. 1. Boss. §. 4. Fleury, 197. Chal- Ion, c. 27. 2 Godeau, 5. 13. Crabb. 3. 748. Personne n'adore le bois. On adore Dieu, et en un certain sens on n'adore que lui seul. Bossuet, Op. 1. 445, 448. 3 Bell. II. 20, 25. Godeau, 5. 512. Labb. 8. 700. * Du Pin, 2. 42. Bell. II. 21. Bin. 5. 530. jr DIFFERENT SYSTEMS OF IMAGE WORSHIP. 467 I;?!L7^'^^ the Trentine a<;counted these painted and sculp- i??h/N"' "^""'^ ^^^r^ ^'^""- '^^ ^-"^Wp and adoratZ of the Nicene assembly are, in the canons of 'Kent, reduced to s^Hf ^r™. ' '5 u-r T^"^"' ^ *"°"''^ the advanced state of literature and philosophy, and to present a more rational view of the subject than the Grecian convention, which issued Its decisions m an age of barbarism and supers?°tin ^"'^^ The third class prefer the same adoration to the representa- tion a^ to the represented. The copy. Uken in connexbn ^^ the pattern, is according to these authors, entitled to e3 veneration, as the royal robe, which adorns a king shares^Jhe honors of majesty. The likeness of God or his Son. rmentel conjunction with t, .original, is therefore the objek of Latria or dmne adoration. The effigy of Lady Mary is to receive samtor the martyr can claim only Dulia or inferior honor and veneration. This honor, however, is only reS Be llarmme. entengled in the intricacy akd absurdity of h£ statements on this topic, extricates himself by hair-breJdth and uruntelhgible distinctions. This is the system S AquinL Cajetan, Bonaventura. Antoninus, Turrecrema TuS Vasquez. and the schoolmen.^ Jurrian, sh^n^L^r''^ communion, in general, ascribes supreme wor- ship to the cross. Aquinas, with the utmost perspicuity and without any equivocation, attributes Latria or sovereign wor ship to the cross a.s well as to our Lord s image. According to the Angehc doctor, 'the cross is to be worshiped with Latria which IS also to be addressed to Jesus and his inmge'^ The schoolmen, m general, supported the same system f i main- tained that 'Latrian Adoration is due to the Ly cross and ?o the image of Immanuel. Similar idolatry is encouraged in the Roman pontifical, mis- sal, breviary and processional. The Pontifical expressly de- clares that 'Latria is due to the cross.' Divine worship in this manner, is addressed to a wooden deity. The missal pubhshed by the authority of Pius. Clement, and Wn!eS The clergy and laity on bended knees to adore the cross.' Ihe whole choir, m the mean time, sing. 'Thy cross, Lord, mLdt-fl.' /°^ V.^\^^°.d of the crosl, the whole world is nnlr-fl^ '^°I' .The breviary, revised and corrected also by pontifical authority, contains the following hymns and petitions T?^^'" ^\^^- Jueiiin, 4. 414. Aquin. iii. 25. IV. P 140 Jiadem adoratione, qua adoratur prototapum. adorandum esse imaeinem Pin« • et SIC imago Christi et Dei adoranda est latria. Faber. 1. 121 S 53!^ IV jr IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 7- ^ // {./ ^% (/. fc ^ 1.0 I.I ',0 11^ IIM 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 -« 6" — ► V] (^ /i ''^A <^ ^^' " ^^^^ ^^' />^ >^ «v# Photographic Sciences Corporation m h #> V Ss -^\' c\ \ ^er and displayed the same perti- was Ignorant that the breaking nfTi,!. reading oi the Bible, by Solomon^- Sr^a^^t^* ^e' S"tS f J?'' """ ^""' J ^ -K^ings, XVUl. 4. -^ IMAGE WORSHIP A VARIATION FROM SCRIPTURE. 471 an unbuilt fabric and under an unformed roof Gregory was a valuable head of the church, a precious vicar-general of God, and a useful teacher of all Christians. His infalibility, notwith- standinpr these and many other blunders of his own, had the hardihood to upbraid the emperor Leo with his ignorance and stupidity. Having characterised the emperor as a mere ninny, his holiness, in his sacerdotal modesty and Christian humility, represented himself as ' an earthly deity.' Image worship is a variation from the Christian as well as from the Jewish revelation. The superstition receives no coun- tenance from the monuments of ecclesiastical antiquity. Pope Adrian, in a letter read and approved in the second Nicene council, could muster only one quotation in the New Testament in favor of idolatry ; and this, his infallibility wtus obliged to pervert to make it answer his purpose. Jpcob, according to his holiness, followed by the Rhemists, 'adored the top of his rod.' The patriarch, on this supposition, must through age have been doting. His adoration, if his infallibility and the Rhemists were not mistaken, was >, dressed to a very humble deity ; and was certainly the offspring of bad taste as well s^ little sense. Adrian, to maintain a silly system, makes an idiot of Jacob. All, however, is the effect of mistranslation and misrepresentation. The patriarch was not a fool; but the Pope, supported in the rear by the Nicene council and the Rhemish annotators, was a knave. Hoary Israel, worn out with age and infirmity, leaned on his staff, whilst, in faith, he adored God and blessed the sons of Joseph. The pontiff, the Niceans, and the Rhemists, unfaithful to the original, have with unblushing impudence and perversity, omitted the pre- position, and, in consequence, made the Hebrew prophet worship the worthless wood, the produce of the soil. The Rhemists besides have, with shameless effrontery, accused the Protestants of mistranslation and corruption of the Greek, which contains the preposition.* The Niceans, varying on this topic from fact and reason, vary also from themselves. Having made the patriarch worship a walking-stick, the infallible fathers wheeled to the right about and denied point-blank that his adoration was addressed to the wood. Jacob, says Adrian approved by the Niceans, worship- ped not the stick, but Joseph." The unerring synod, in sheer ' Jacob summitHtem virgsB filii Joseph deosculatus est. Labb. 8. 754 Bin 5. 558. Hebrews, xi. 21. 2 Non quod virgamillam, sed tenentem earn, in signum dilectionis, adoravit. Crabb. 2. 480. Lignum non adoravit, sed per lignum, Joseph. Labb. 8. 1400. Jacob, in summitate vivgte Joseph adorasse dicitur, non sane ligno ilium cultum exhibens. Labb. 8. 1423. r I 472 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEHY. worship the end oraS' Se lSLT.T"'t.*^.^'"^* '^^ was addressed to his smT. ti„ v . ™ *»' '"» adoration walking-staffVtheoSectofE ^^ '""f" "''• -^P-^nted a idolat.3? to Ja<=oMheItoiti2-diif^''r 'T-"'^* account for the impiety, feob ^ T. ^ '" "*'»■»?'"« »» and Popifh commeltatos S FT't'°S''^''**'»°''«t^^^ •tion ,«^es withThose of A„..n» « ^^ u P"^'«»<^n' '»osIa- praised God on his bed ' ^ ^ Jerusalem, 'Jacob fathers, Jerome, AugustLe TWdoret «n^ p^^' • ^^"'^^^^ ^Jerome translates the HebVw 'Ismel t^lfn ^f\r\'yr^-' the bed, adored God ' AonZkir.T, iu^"^^ **" *^® ^^ad of tine on Paul's wc^-ds ^ren f^^^'tt T'P ' '^ ^"^"«- AquU. in Grig. Hex. 1. 52 Ong. Hex. 1. 52. Calm. 23. IMAGE WORSHIP A VARIATION PROM SCllIFrURE. 473 HMselan. Csesareus, Vatablus, Pagnin, and Montanus, as well as from the Syna<;, Samaritan, and V ulgate. All these represent Jacob as worshipping, leaning on the head of his staff or bed The Vulgate of Genesis, faithful to the Hebrew, inserts the p-eposition ; and the Douay translators accordingly have followed the Latin, and allowed the patriarch to adore, not a rod, but Jehovah. The preposition, which is found in the Oreek Septuagint cited by Paul, is now omitted in the Latin ot the Vulgate ; though used in the days of Augustine in some oi the more correct manuscripts.' The Niceans and Rhemists, clashing with other expositors and translators, disagree witii the ablest Popish commentators, such as Bede, Lyra, Erasmus, Quesnel, and Calmet, who per- mit Jacob to worship the Almighty.'' The patriarch, says Bede, adored God According to Lyra, 'Israel, being old, held a stalt on which he reclined in adoring God. The meaning is not that he adored the top of his staff; but that he adored God leaning on the top of his staff' Christians, says Erasmus^ abhorred, at that time, the adoration of any created object, and kept this honor only for God.' Jacob, says Quesnel, ' wor- shipped God, leaning on his staff' The Jewish prophet, says the learned and judicious Calmet. ' adored God, supported on the end of his staff. He leaned his head on his staff to worship Pope Gregory, who had made Ozias break the brazen serpent before he was born, and David bring it into the temple before it was built, discovered another argument in the New Testa- ment. Jesus said, ' where the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered.' The Lord, says Gregory, was the carcass. Ihe eagles were men of piety, who, according to his infallibility, flew aloft like eagles to Jerusalem, andportrayed Jesus, James, btephen, and the martyrs.^ The portraits, taken as they were from real life, being exhibited to the whole world, men, engaged by the holy representations, forsook the worship of Satan for the worship of these striking likenesses of Jesus, James, and \^t\\'^- '^^^- , ^*™°"- ^ ^°^°- C'a'™- 23. 742. Estius, 2. 1049. Houbis 1. 155. Montan. 1. 60. Walton, 1, 214. Aug 3 418 ""u"ig. 2 Adoravit Deum. Beda, 6-811. Quia erat senex, habebat baculum/super hujussummitatemnitebatur, inado- rando Deum. Unde non est inteUigendum, quod adoravit summitatem virgse vel baculi, sed adoravit Deum, innixus super baculum. Lyra, 5. 156 In tantum, eo tempore, abhorrebant ab adorandis ullis rebus creatid. soli Deo hoc honons servantes. Erasm. 6. 1018. ' II adora Dieu, appuy^ sur le bftton. Quesnel, 4. 333. II adora Dieu. appuy6 sur 1'extremit.i de son baton. II pencha la tfite sur eon oaton pour adorer Dieu. Oalmet, 23. 741. 3 Christus autem cadaver. Aquilae, in sublime volantes, reliriosi sunt bomines. Labb. 8. 655. 770. Bin. 5. 503. Matt. xxiv. 28. 474 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ignorance or mistake th^^tL ,^''^®' *<^»' ^"PPosing through kinds of top c7dSrecat^ The se ond N^cene eouncil, on these and unnece^ssaV sSnv The LT^^ T^'"^?' ^^ °*^°^ conteins a momerous 4coverv X^l. — ''^\'^P^ utility rivak fhn«A^f iw ^ ^'o^*^^^^' ^^ importance and rivalry unquabfied perfection which fears no renPfifinn r?K ^ ' . " reserves the name, is unworthy of tion '^hT.f " f ^v'^" inconsistent with in and iveL tion. The second N.cene council collected a vast accunXto Ift no VARIATION PROM ECCLESIASTICAL ANTIQUITY. 475 of this rubbish and have been followed in modem times by Baromus, Bellarmme, Binius, Turriano, Maimbourg, and Alexander, who have transcribed the fictions and embl^oned the lymg wonders' of Evagrius. Nicephorus. Damaacen, and • ^H°1r%*^ ^""^ °f *^r ^"^ «^«^ ^^ ignorance and credulity of the ancient and modern patrons of idolatry Ihe portrait of Jesus, sent to Abgarus. King of Edessa claims the first pbce His Edessan Ljesty, it%eems, s^t Ananias to Judea to draw the Messiah's likeness. This taak the artist attempted, but could not perform, on account of the splendor which radiated from Emmanuel's countenance. toeemg the painters embarrassment, Jesus washed his face and, m a miraculous manner, impressed his sacred and divine hkeness on a hnen cloth which, with the politest attention, he h^ded to Anamas. The Son of God, ^says Pope Gregl^ry, sent Abgarus his glonous face, which the sovereign of Edessa worshipped with great devotion.' This portrait, wonderful to tell, the work of no mortal pencil, the creation of the Divine original was left during a tedious lapse of five hundred years, to slumber on the niche of a waU, from which, after long obUv- wn,itwas re eased by the hand of superstition or cridulity. Ihe unpencilled picture, made without hands, became the pa^adium of the nation's safety, and delivered the Edessans from the arms of the Persians. The sUly fabrication, in reality. unkjaown in the days of Eusebius, was the invention of the SDcth century. The Syrian legend, which adorned the annals 01 superstition and credulity, constituted the panoply of Gregory Damascen, and the second Nicene Co acil ^ ^^ ^ ^'' o I'^^S^f.u^iy- f^7' ^ ^"^^ «^ «*"^er Son, adorned the altar and edified the faithful. Arnold, it seems, in his peregrination! in Jt-alestine, saw an extraordinary Ukeness of her ladyship. This portrait had been drawn on wood, which afterwards, wonderful to tell, was transformed into human mould and assumed a living torn and substance. Flesh grew over the wood of the tablet a^d over the colors of the pencil."^ The incarnated painting began to emit a fragrant oil, which healed the disorder of all kinds ot men. Christians, Jews, and Saracens. The medicinal fluid continued, from age to age, to flow without any diminu- tion either in quantity or effect. John, who was a hermit and who hved in a cave in Palestine twenty miles from Jerusalem, worshipped an image of Lady Mary, with her Son m her arms, before which, in His cell, he ' Sacram «tglorio8am faciem suam ad eum misit. Greg, ad Leo. Labb. 8. 2 P,vT ^^- -^.^W- E^»« IV. 27. Cedren. 1. 140. Bin. 5. 716 476 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. kept a candle always burning. The solitary made frequent peregnnations to Sina. to the m-eat desert, and to Jeru^lem, for the important purpose of adbring the Holy Cross. He was r^Xr 7*^^ o^Jhen^artyi-s; and showing no mercy to ^^sited Theodorus, John, Sergius and Tecla. His joui^ey would, at a time, occupy two, four, or six months; and, during ^nr^Zr^ 'r'T'^^'^.^S' light to the care of her L^dyship^ ^n^W w 'if5*^^''i?? ^?" ^"«" ^^^^'^ darkness.^ The Z^r Tr'"^1:''"^.^??i^" Q"«^" oflleaven to snuff the ^w%^T!:^""''T^r^^ ^?^ ^^^<^^^^d the humble task with great fidelity John on hus return from his holy and useful pilgrimages, found the candle always burning, aid, notwith- standing his long absence, remaining, through her Ladyship's attention, not the least wasted.' ^J}f^/''^^'^i^^ the images of Jesus and Mary, became the tf ♦ ^T '^ ^^^^^^ ''S^"* of miracles. Theodorus, accord- ing to Bede and Godeau, brought the true cross from Jeru- M,lem to Constantinople, and deposited it in the Temple of bophia. This wooden deity was there exhibited on the Thuraday. Friday, and Saturday of Holy-Week, for the adoration of the lY^'Tii -T?',.^"'^.*^^ clergy. The laymen on Thursday adored the jointed divinity, who, in all probability, was worm- «aten, but still perhaps respectable as Priapus. The women, -on Friday, performed the sublime and august ceremony, and the clergy, on Saturday, engaged, with great piety and edifica- tion in the same duty. The god was then locked in a chest, to sleep for the re.t of the year. During the display, and while the Cross lay on the altar, the temple was filled with a wonder- Ifi Z I.. transverse godship, it appears, was, among other attributes, distmguished by the superiority of his smell A Iragrant liquor, also, like oil, which healed all kinds of sickness flowed m copious streams from the knots of the sacred wood, which composed the frame of this clumsy god ' The authority on which the second Nicene council as well as the moderns, Baronius, Bellarmine, Maimbourg, and Alexander rest these accounts, is, as the candid Du Pin has shewn, desti- tute ot authenticity, pertinence, and antiquity. Many of their quotations for evidence are from supposititious productions. v'^K^i.^'"^ '^-^'^^^ *° ^^^' Chiysostom, and Athanasius, which these saints never saw, though cited in their name, by the Niceans, Baronius, and Bellarmine. Some of their author- ities are impertinent as well as apocryphal. Many of the Nicene citations from Basil. Cyril and Gregory, testfry, says 1 iS?' r,^S^ V^hy ^^^Ses, but meriy their use. Labb. 8. 1461. Bin. 5. 718. ^ Beda. 323. Godeau, 5. 137. Horace, Sat. 2. FttlfiTENDED MIRACULOUS PROOFS OP IMAGE WORSHIP. 477 The authorities of the Niceaas, Baronius, Beliarmine, and Alexander areas void of antiquity as of pertinence and authen- ticity. The sacred synod and their copyists could not, for their system, produce the testimony of a single father who lived prior to the fourth century. Their chief vouchers for this su- perstition are Chrysostom, Gregory, Athanaaius, Basil. Cyril, Nilus, Simeon, Sophron, Anastasius, Leontius, Germanus, Damaacen, and Evagrius. Chrysostom, Gregory, Athanasius, and Basil flourished in the fourth century, and the rest in the succeeding ages of Christianity. All these, it is admitted, lived after the introduction of symbolical worship. No author, for three hundred years after the commencement of the Christian era, is quoted. This tedious and lengthened period elapsed without a single individual, in all Christendom, to recommend or exemplify this impiety. The annals of these ages supply not a solitary testimony which ingenuity itself, and much less the stupidity of Gregory, Adrian, and the Nicene prelacy, could pervert into evidence for emblematic adoration. The force of truth extorted confessions to this effect from many popish critics and historians. Many who were attached to Romanism have admitted the exclusion of images in the days of antiquity, notwithstanding the confident, but unfounded assertions of Baronius, Beliarmine, Binius, Turriano. Juenin, Maimbourg, and many more of the same description. From among the number who have made this acknowledgment, may, as a specimen, be selected Petavius, Daniel, Mezeray, Alexan- der, Pagius, Du Pin, Erasmus, Cassander, Gyraldus, Mendoza,. Bruys, Polydorus, Clemangis, and Crinitus. Petavius, Daniel, Mezeray, Alexander, Pagius, and Du Pin grant the scarcity or total want of painted or sculptured representations in primitive times, lest their use should have offended the Jews or tempted the Pagans to idolatry. Erasmus represents men of piety as excluding painted, sculptured, and woven images from Christian temples, till the age of Jerome in the fourth century. Christian, at the commencement of preaching the Gospel, detested, says Cassander, the use and veneration of any likeness in the wor- ship of God. According to Gyraldus, Christians, like the Romans, remained for some time without images. Mendoza, Bruys, Polydorus, and Clemangis make similar admissions. Crinitus reprehends Origen, Lactantius, and some others of the ancients for condemning symbolical worship.^ 1 Imagines, per tria priora ssecula in oratoriia ooUocatas non fuisse, neo fre- quenter etiam in domibus privatis aervatas. Petav. in Juenin, 4. 380. Dana le conunencement de I'^gliae, I'usage dea images n'^toit paa frequent. Dan, 2, 77. o r i Lea peinturea et lea images de relief 6toient fort rarea dans lea ^gliaes avaat Conrtantin le Grand. Mezeray, A\ Clov. 461. ■» -—v 478 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. appeai-8 from Irenw^M AuJu«Hn« Ti^^^'l'^'^- '***^' ^^' «« impiety. The EtS« K '^^"'^ Epiphanius. begun this the^ties of Je^us Stha^l'"'^'"^^^^^^ ^««^" to worship afterwards conied 'nv ^iTn »,• i ^ embiematic worship, waa adored these ilfelrS^on the "tot^fn,^'"' T' ■ 5"!^ Christian commonwealth ^. '?«" ."^'introduction mto the general tiU the end „f h- '^l ■^O'-^t'on, however, was not ^ VixuUum fuiBBeL^iTusum tribl .r^r^^^l^ immediate P«^U8, Ann. 66. Du ^12 43 * Pr'onbus saeculis. Alex. 14. 666. reSS^lJL"^" gudio^obstiieruBt, nequid in^aginum in templo Chrietiano IntempliBnullamferebantiraguiein. Erasm 6 ll«7 ^^Ahquando tempore. inWChriBCaoaiJ^^tiL'Lfuisao.C„^^^^ tiva'Ju'i'oSt'if Sa"* ftSt 'S""'"" '"'««« «^« -««^^''-. - prin^i.' Abstinebant ad tempus. Mendoza. III. 6 Labb 1 ioko ^ Ii^-^-pe.ur«)vouloientra.enerlap£tii?^^^^^^^ ,^^^ ^g Simulachrorum cultum omnes fere reteres patres danmasse. Poly. Virg. VI. ang.*^^'* °?S,^STxT'"" "* "^""^ '° ^^"P"'' -«gi--Ponerentur. Clem- nee inter eccksiie instrWenteZmprSl ! "^i" '" ^*'°^®""« omnibns obtinuit INTRODUCTION OP IMAGES INTO THE CHURCH. 479 tuition of heaven, often adored idols instead of Jehovah. The heathen, forgettrnff the spiritual and invisible Deity, bowed to rn-r't^lT"; '^"^^^f^*^- .The adoration of Gentilism. through ^vfi^i^if^ to embi tic worship, was addressed to nearly every reptile of the earth and every luminary of the sky. The Oinstians, awed by the authority of heaven, were, for morS than three ages, restramed from the headlong impiety. But he PrTaW ^''.T^ burst at length, through le in/uniions of ^L?nf ' t ?• ^"''''^••^ "^t^ ""'^^^^^ ^'^^^^^ into the wide ocean of symbolical and popular superstition. The veneration of the cross and of relics was first introduced. The emblem of redemption or the remains of a saint wore preserved with superstitious devotion Th. portrait or the statue of the sint or ^va^tl^r 'T\T'^^-^V'^/.°'"''^''i'^'"«"^^°^«"'^l«"f holiness or salvation. The painted or sculptured effigy, introduced indeed with caution, was allowed to ^orn the or?^ory SS the Ignorant waxm the frigid, or gratify the preposTesSo of ItuahT ^Ta ^'°i"r- '^^^ new'portrdts and statues though executed m defiance of all ta^te, spread from -east to west gratified the imagination of the superstitious, ornamented the Grecian Temple or Roman Basilic, and finally received th^ adoration of the deluded and degraded votary Symbolical worship, on its introduction, was opposed by Synodal, Episcopal, S'ontifical, and Imperial authoSy. The impiety was interdicted by a synod in the beginning of the fourth r*"II- Jl'J ?"^'^^ "f ^^™ ^^ Spain, about the year 305 decreed, that 'pictures should not be in churches, lest what is worshipped or adored should be painted on walls." The deci- TZ o* -^jv^^' ^hich condemned the superstition, is in direct contradiction to the canons of Nicsa and Trent. The popish theologians have exerted aU their ingenuity to evade this unlucky enactment. Their comments display an amusing diversity ; but an odd specimen of papal unity. Baro- mus and Bosms regard the councU. or at leaat this canon, as a forgery of the Iconoclasts. This imputation is an admission of its hostility to the reigning system of Romanism. The ground- less opinion, however, is now universally exploded, fasquez Sanderus, Turriano, and Bellarmine think that the Spanish pre- la<;y forbade pictures, not on wood or canvas, but on waUs lest they should be defaced by the damp or profaned by the Jews and Pagans. Albaspinaeus and Pay va represent the in- terdiction as restncted to portraits of God. Mendoza. Pagius and Bona would hmit the prohibition to similitudesof the Trinity ' lest that mysterj^ should be divulged to the uninitiated. The 1 Placuit picturaB in ecclesia esse non debere. ne ourwi onlifnr o+ .a,^.^*. • parietibuscfepingatur. Bin. I. 236. Labb^S, L ff ^* ****'~*" "^ 480 THE VARIATIONS OP POPEBY. Spanish episcopacy, according to Alan and Uexander, were atraid ol idolatry which then prevailed in the kingdom. Fleury accounted the canon a mere temporary decision, suited to the times of persecution. This explanation, says Bruys, is calcu- lated to attord a laugh to the adversary.' Carranza, Canus. Petavius, Alexander, Bruys and Du Pin w *•! j-i?^"^"®"®^ and natural signification of the canon: but with different designs. Carranza accuses the Spanish bishops ot error, and Canus of imprudence and impiety, Petavius Alexander Bruys, and Du Pin candidly confess that the primitive discipline still prevailed in Spain, to the exclusion of the use and w orship of the portrait or the statue." This indeed is the plain meaning of the canon; and every other gloss makes the words signify the direct contrary of what they say Emblematic worship, at its introduction, wa» prescribed by episcopal as ^eU as by synodal authority. The Empress Con- stantia sent to Eusebius of Ceesarea for an image of our Lord ^ut the bishop, in return, objected to the painting of either i-mmanuel s divinity or humanity. The Deity, said Eusebius has no form, and the manhood, clothed with Divine glory can- not be represented by the lifeless colors of the pencil) ' The popish critics, in reply to this relation, display their unity by the variety of their answers. Petavius and Alan without any reason, account it a forgeiy of the Iconoclasts! Ihis, however, IS a plain confession of its hostility to symboli- cal adoration. The Nicene council, in reply, called Eusebius an Arian ; though, in the quotation, he acknowledges, in the plainest terms, the Godhead of the Son. Du Pin admits the weakness of the Nicene answer. Alexander, notwithstanding his prepossessions, grants that the Ceesarean Christians ad- hering to primitive simplicity, used in that age no images* Epiphanius, like Eusebius, deprecated the adoration of visible representations. The bishop of Salamis and Metropoli- tan of Cypnis. passing through Anablatha in Palestine, saw the image of Jesus or some saint hanging on a wall before the door of the church. This the bishop rent, and declared such an abuse to be contrary to Scriptural authority, inconsistent with the Christian religion, and unworthy of a professing people Jerome, who translated the letter, which contaiS this relation, and which was written by Epiphanius to John of I Labbeus, 1. 1021. Bosius, XII. 1. Sandems, III. 4. Turrian. I. 2 BeU II. 9. Albasp. c. 36. Mend. III. 5. Alan. IV. 16. FW IX TnJT^liBn^ ^'u,"? P"?*"? ^'*?"^* '" Oratoriia coUocatas non fu'isee. ' Petav. in Juen, 4 -^80. Sublatum fuwse m provincia Boetica imaginum usum et mltum Alexander. 14. 662. DuPin, 1. 59.S. Canus V. 4. LabS. 1. 1052.Xav i ,m,«j :-/ : j: — '■'•■J ••vMiiU, ai;-kHiiv;o- » Theoph. 272. >lex. 14. 68. Barou. An. 726. Pagi. Brev. 528. Maimb 282 w. A ^"'^ disoit aux peupleg qu'ils no pouvoiont en conscience payer destri- lli m P"°°® **^'^*"1"«- V''^^'*» 13. Giannon, V. §. 2. Bruy. 1. 520. S. 484 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. ced 111 his infallibility's dialectics, and issned an enactment enjoining linage-worship, and denouncing iconoclaflm, as pes- tilence and heresy. Gregory the Third foUowed his predeces- sors example. Hishohness, in 732, headed a Roman synod ot ninety-three bishops, who issued a constitution estabUshing the apostolic practice of symbolical worship, and denouncing the protane atrocity of Iconoclasm.^ These western synods, superintended by the Roman pontiff were opposed by an eastern, sanctioned by the Byzantine patriarch and the Grecian emperor. Leo had designed a general council for the decision of this point, which had excited such commotions through Christendom. This, however, was opposed by the pope, and finally relinquished. Constantino, his son aad successor, having subdued the Saracens, Bulgarians, and other barbarians, turned his attention to the ecclesiastical state of the empire. He resolved to assemble a general council for the final settlement ofthe contested topic of Iconoclasm. He axjcordingly summoned the eastern bishops to meet at Constan- tinople, for the purpose of deciding the long-agitated contro- versy. The metropohtans were instructed to hold provincial councils of theu-sum agans for discussion, and for the attainment ot information on the subject of disputation. The imperial directions were obeyed ; and the Grecian pre- lacy, to the amount of 338, met in Constantinople in the year 7o4Ana8tasius being dead, Theodosius, exarch of Asia, and PostiUus, metropolitan of Pamphilia, presided ; and the assem- bled fathers were left free of all imperial control. The session lasted SIX months; during which time, the subject was investi- gated with perseverance and deliberation. The result was as might be expected. The council condemned both the use and the worship of images. Their use was represented both as dan- gerous and hurtful Their worship was stigmatised as the invention of Satan, the sin of idolatry, and the restoration of paganism under the name of Christianity. The adoration of images, the Byzantine Synod pronounced blasphemy. Depo- sition was pronounced againt the clergy, and excommuniatiou against the laity, who should be guilty of the impiety This decision was delivered as founded on the word of God. the definitions of councils the usage of the church, and the faith of the fathers. The chief fathers, whom the Byzantines quoted, were Eusebius, Epiphanius, Amphilochius, and Theodotus.^ Ihe abettors of emblematic substitutions in the worship of God have made the Byzantine synod the mark of insult and obloquy. JDamascen renresfint.fiH it. a? Hpo+i+M*- ^f "-fhr.-^- - - I -- ^^- ■fStjuluauc^ Oi tiutnOxil,y, iLabb. 8. 191. Bin. 5. 460. Labb. 8 217 2Tlieoph. 285, Zonarus, 2. 86. Bruy. 1. 554. IMAGE-WORSHIP CONDEMNED BY THE BYZANTINE COUNCIL. 485 The Niceans and monks accused it of heresy, Judaism, apostasy MahometanJsm, and blasphemy. Labbeus calls it a mad conventicle; whilst Baronius and Rellarmine found it guilty of folly, absurdity, irreligion, and profanity. The By- zantme fathers, says Andilly, ' worshipped the Devil.' These allegations, however, are all slanders. The mutilated acts of the assembly display decided evidence of sense and piety. The Niceans only showed their weakness in their attempts to confute its arguments. No good reason can be alleged against its universality. Its bishops were convened by the emperor ; and were free and unanimous. The patriarchs of Kome,' Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, did not indeed assist either in person or by delegation. But the Roman pontiff assisted neither by personal or deputed authority in the second and fifth general councils. The patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch, and Jerusalem were under the control of the Saracens, and, in consequence, prevented from attending the Byzantine synod. But the Caliphs, in the same manner, hindered these dignitaries from appearing in the second Nicene council, which, nevertheless, was in the end vested with the honor of oecu- menicity.' The emperor, having by rigor and severity repressed the opposition of the monks, who were the great patrons of this superstition, and, in the end, suppressed the whole lazy order, succeeded in establishing the enactments of the Byzantine assembly and restoring the purity of Christian worship. Idol- atry fled from the sanctuary of the church and retired to the caves of the wilderness. Andilly complains that ' the whole world had embraced the heresy of Iconoclasm.'' The oriental or Grecian communion, clergy and laity, submitted to the Con- etantinopolitan decisions, rejected idols, and returned to the simplicity of pristine purity. The ancient and modern partisans of Popery bave exhausted language in abusing the emperor's character, and contended, on this topic, for the palm of scandal and calumny. Theophanes, Cedrenus, Zonaras, Baronius, Alexander, Petavius, Maim bourg, and Labbeus, in their zeal for orthodoxy and in their rivalry of detestation to heresy, have compared Copronymus, while living, to Nero, Domi<;ian, and Diodesian, and consigned him, when dead, to unquenchable fire in the lowest abyss of perdition.^ 1 Labb. 8. 65U. AndiUy, 389. Labb. 8. 648. Du Pin, 2. 36. Alex. 14. 688. 2 Tout le monde avoit embrass^ cette h^r^sie. Andilly, 413. ^_ Tlvpi aafiftnu iraptSoeriv. Theophan. 300. Ad quBB migraiet su^piicia uoii obscure monsiravifc. Labb, 8. (549. iEterno damnatum incendio. Petav. 1. 394. Cedren. 370. Zimaras. 2. 89 Alex. 14. 74. AndiUy, 451. 486 THE VAKIATIONS OF POPERY. depnved saints of their titles. Paul and Peter, Georgius and ?Krfomr'wl?Pr'.' authority, d^ested of SteWp^ latter ma^3 ZZ\t ^' ^T"^^^^^ apostles, and the two latter, martyrs ; and tb- . regulation he extended to the whole canonised confraternity, rfe mother of God heraelf did not Se s'riT hoi;7^^^ ?' P™ 1 involon mtercession, and holy-days of her adyship, whom he renrP- sented as destitute of all power either In heaven or on earth He would not even allow a petition to be preferred or a holv day kept m honour of the queen of heaven. Thirwhkh W ^der caUs execrable blasphemy, waa, to be sure a sho^Lfi sm and a pestilent heresy, for which his name deserved to h! consigned to ignominy and his soul to Satan ' .Jrl ^'°^''^°^ f Constantine and Irene, who succeeded Leo and Copronymus, diversified Christendom w th anothervariation m^oire" tTed^htr^^- • ^"^' ^^^ and alputLd tKifguef of Christopher, Nicetas, Anthemus, and Eudoxas Con9tantine^l sons, for suspidon of conspiracy'. She destroy;d the eyes of her own son with such barbarity that, according to TheophaLf he expired in agony. The sun, avenging the deed of crueSv' sevlrn ' r^ '^' Greek historians, To Withhold his Zyltr IhlTf F' ""^'^^fm deprived of light, wandered (^ the darkened ocean. Heaven, says Moreri^ felt a hoX Z the work of inhumanity. An ambiguity in TheophanTde cred?i''Tp°^'^'™'' r^°^^ '''^' ^^« ^een adopted by th^ S^e^oi^^of ifeT^lir,^^ ^'^! ^-^ '' P'otestan'iism ine son ot Irene, blinded indeed by the maternal tenderness lorgotten by the world. 'No woman,' says Bruvs 'was evf^r less worthy of Ufe than this princes's.' 'Her ambitiT^ says Many, indeed, both Greeks and Latins, have praised Irene's 606.~S^d7;u75r^9. ^^'■■"P^- 3^^- I^«t-v. 1. 396. Moreri. 5. 168. Bruy. 1. IMAGE-WORSHIP PATRONISED BY IRENE. 487 purity, zeal, piety, and constancy. Theodorus and Theophanes extol her virtue and excellence. The Greeks placed her amon^ the saints in their menology ; and, in holy festivity, cele- brate ner anniversary. Hartmann and Binius, m more modem times, flatter her prudence and piety. Alexander lauds ' her reli^on and faith, as worthy of immortal honor,' though her ambition and the blinding of her son, he admits, ' exposed her to reprehension.' Andilly eulogises ' the virtue and devotion of this princess, who soared above the weakness of her sex, and restored the church to its primeval beauty.' Baronius justifies ' the assassination of her son.' He commends ' the inhumanity which arose from zeal for religion.' The annalist ever dares, in shocking and blasphemous misapplication, to abuse scriptural language in support of the atrocity.' The empress, in the prosecution of her plan, began with an act, which in itself may be commendable, but which, in Irene as afterward in the papist, James II. King of England, was only an ostensible step to the accomplishment of a secret design, destructive in the end of the pretended project. She proclaimed liberty of conscience to all her subjects, which, in this deceiver, was only preparatory to the total destruction of all freedom of worship. She next, in furtherance of her scheme, promoted Tarasius her secretary, who was devoted to idols, and who possessed resolution and address, but a layman, to the patri- archal dignity. She summoned a general council for the settlement of the controversy and the restoration of peace. Adrian, the Roman pontiff, delegated two sacerdotal represen- tatives of his holiness. The patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, oppressed by the Saracens, could attend neither in person nor by representation. But two vagabond monks, without any commission, assumed for the occasion their autho- rity ; though undeputed, say Baronius and Godeau, by these oriental prelates.^ The bishops, amounting to three hundred, met at Nicaea, and were all from the eastern empire, which, owing to the incursions of the Saracens and the separation of the western provinces, was exceedingly contracted. No bishops attended from Africa, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, or Britain. The council, after its convention, soon despatched the busi- ness for which it had assembled. Eighteen days of uproar and ' Mulier prudentissima et religiosa. Hartmann, in ^tat. VI. Religione et pietate florentissima mulier. Bin. 5. 583. Atfirpeirfv (vtrffifia. Theoph. 273. Launoy, 4. 227. Ob religionem, fidem et pietatem, immortali laude digna Irene. Alex. 14. Uo. li-tiiiiliy, ■i;)L, opoil. ivi. 1. Lea patriarches ne lea avoient pas proprement d^putaz. Godeau, 5. 597. Baon. Ann. 785. Theophanes, .309. Platina, :07. Bin. 6. 151. Crabb. 2. 458. 488 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. fUl! cursing ended in a definition of faith in favor of idoktrv Painted, woven, and sculptured images o^JeZ A?Lv antZ' Z^dinno'thk T'''' --^y-> -d aiiTj/S,^l^; Tous^ fnd hth™^' enactment, to be erecte/in churches sacred 'ver,«l«.^Tfv? ' ^"^ '^^"'' ^^^«<^' ^oly vestments, and reSn bntrnn^ ^^ ^^''' ^^'^ ^ ^'^ worshipped not with sove- oJ^IZmJa:^- '■r'°«i?^''«^l «"tics ofTmani'sm S obilTn?' ''^' ^,^''^' '/^P^^^«"* *h« Ni«««« convention Sle '^ «^Jf«t of execration, and turn all its arguments into ridi- Mih^lln i statements are found in Du Pin. Moreri, Bruys Mabillon, and many other historians -"^"/s. wh^Zvl^T'"'*' ^-^ «orr«l>orated by the admission of those who deny the genuineness of the Caroline Books, such as couinrr^T'' ^"J?"""?' ^"^ ^^"-^ These critics ac! friend of TpZ T' P"^^r ^r^ ^ forgery, composed by some mend ot Iconoclasm and transmitted bv Charlemaiie in Adrian for refutation. The insinuation o^f foierrhrbeen dS ^^Bt'l'^^''"n'?;•^^'.^"^"^-^ anf is^nowabr. and fln^f the patrons of this opinion grant, that the design Nicet 1,^7-1 *^' ™peml production wa. to overthrow Z J>(icene council and symbolical worsliip The Nicene council, rejected in this manner bv the French wa. also disclaimed by the English. Offa. king^f the S Clans transmitted a copy of its acts to the British clergy who tiont7nJ"r ^7'?r ri^^r^^^^^^'««^d«-»^«ditfdeln'-' whol^oW r^f n ^}t ^'a ^' -^"^ "^""'^^y «f execration by the whole church of God* Alcuin, at the instance of the Ens-Iish episcopacy, confuted the Nicene dogma on scriptural authorMty 7Z7't.^7hi^:\'h!%f%''' ""'''■ J-in.4.396. Alex. 14. 69, 3 BeU. II 15. Sand. II. 5. ■ • Aie^^f °i'J'=°^?.'^^ ^^i e^ecratur. Hoveden. Ann. 792. West Ann 793 Aie.v. ii. ,'o9. apeim. i. 308. ^Contempsorunt atque consentientes condemnaverunt. Labb. 9. 101. Alex. 14. THE SECOND NICENB COUNCIL CONDEMNED AT FRANKFORT. 491 in a work which was afterward presented in their name to Charlemagne the French king. The Nicene council, disclaimed in this manner by the French and British clergy, was, in 794, condemned at Frankfort, by the whole western prelacy. This synod was assembled by the Western emperor from all Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Mid England, and consisted of three hundred bishops with the Roman pontiff's vicars Theophylact and Stephen. The *rankfordian council, Baronius admits was, from its numbers and the presidency of the papal legates, called plenary or general.' ° > t- j Its second canon condemned the definition of the second Nicene council on the worship of images. The Frankfordians called the Nicene the Byzantine council, because it began and ended at Constantmople. In order to reconcile the jarring councils, Alan, Valentia, Vasquez, and Binius, have alleged that the fathers of Frankfort condemned, not the assembly under Irene in favor of image-worship, but the synod under Constan- tme m favour of Iconoclasm. But the supposition is unfounded, and, at the present day, is rejected by the ablest popish cntics. The Frankfordian canon condemns emblematic adoration ; and therefore is in direct hostility to the Nicene definition. This condemnation of the Niceans by the Frank- fordians was maintained by all the contemporary historians, and has been admitted by all the papal authors possessing any candor till the present day. The fact is attested by Eginhard, Hincmar, Adhelm, Ado, Conrad, Regino, Aimon, Herman, and Aventinus, as well as by Mabillon, Bellarmine, Velly, Platma, Baronius, Perron, Cassander, Moreri, and Du Pm.^ ' The second canon of Frankfort ', says Mabillon, ' was enacted against the Byzantine or Nicene Synod of the Greeks, which the French, at that time, did not account universal' because it was composed of the Orientals and not yet received by the Westerns.' According to Bellarmine, ' image-worship and the sixth general council were proscribed at Frankfort.' The Frankfordians, says Velly, 'unanimously rejected the authority and universality of the second Nicean assembly.' The statements of Platina, Baronius, Perron, Cassander, Moreri, and Du Pin, are similar to those of Mabillon, Bellarmine, and Velly. » Bin. 6. 184. Labb. 9. 57. Spon. 704. III. » Secundus est contra novam aynodum Grapcorum ConBtantinopoli habitam, i ®u 1 ''xT*^*, ^^°"n«*a°i Nicsenam, quam Galli tunc pro universali haberi non lerebat. Mabillon, 2. 31 1 . In synodo Francfordiensi esse definitum ut imagines non adorenter. Bellarmin. IT 14. T.00 niroo ,1^ F.-onof-,-* i„»„;„4.4.a i. j).,™_ ^Ji '"^^^ unanime et ddfendirent de le regarder comme (Ecum^nique. Vellv 1 «8. Godeau, 5. 635. Alex. 14. 730, 732. Platina, IO7. Bin. 6. 186. Moreri, li ii 492 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. vS*®!^^. ^''^^*°^' besides condemning the Niceans, 'pro- hibited all kinds of image- worship,' without any exception or lmutation.> The assembly, in the second canon, interdicted this kind of homage, 'mall its forms,' whether denominated respect, honor invocation, worship, or adoration. One indeed can hardly help feeling some pity for Baronius, Alexander. Maunbourg, Pagius, and Juenin, in their attempts to elude the nnquahhed and unsparing prohibition contained in this unyield- ing aiid unmanageable canon. The frrankfordian council also adopted and sanctioned the Caroline Books, which had proscribed every species of symbolical adoration. The Caroline Books besides had approved the sentiments of Gregory the Great, who in his epistle to Serenus. had denounced every description of image-worship. The language of the pontiff, the emperor, and the council on these occasions is so clear and unambiguous, as Sit^ ^ ^ ^^^^^ °^ evasion and chicanery. The Frankfordian Council was followed by the Parisian synod under Lewis in 825. This assembly met at the suggestion ot Michael, the Grecian emperor, by permission of Eugenius, the Roman pontiff, and by the authority of Lewis, the French king. Michael sent a solemn embassy to Lewis, requesting his inter- ference with Eugenius for the settlement of the protracted divi- sions respecting emblematic worship. Lewis interposed his influence, and endeavored to engage Eugenius against the new Idolatry but without success. The Roman hierarch, however, granted the French prelacy the liberty of assembling for the examination of the controversy. A synod therefore met at rans in 825 and consisted of the most learned and judicious If mu ^^"^^.''^^^gy ' «"*^^ as Agobard, Jeremy, Jonas, Fre- cull, Iheodomir, Amalarius, and Dunpal.'' The sacred synod assembled in consultation, decided against the Roman pontiff, the Nicene council, and symbolical adora- tion. Ihe Parisians, it must be confessed, treated Adrian, Ixods vicar-general, with very little ceremony. T^io French episcopacy, in Daniel's statement, ' spoke of the Romai. - , ntif as well as of the Nicene council, with the utmost ' v . >, ' and had the assurance, according to Bruys, Lauoeus, "and Alexander, to charge his infallibillity with ignorance, supersti- tion, inapertmence, indiscretion, absurdity, falsehood, impiety, error, obstinacy, and opposition to the truth.'' This was hardly 1 Sanctissinu Patres nostri omnimodis adorationem et servitutem renuentes a MabiUou, 2. 495. Alex. 14. 749, Bruy 2 9 Jti^ Pafloient avec beaucoup de m^pris de celle que le Pape Adrian I avbit ^cnte quelques ann^es auparavant A rrrnp,5ratrice Ii4ne. " • • mieux le second conoilede Nic^e c^ i le d^fendre contreles Livres Caroiins lepr :'Imp(5ratrice Irfene. Us ne traitoient pag vrage que le luGmo Pape avoit fait pour Dan. 2. 211. DECREE OF THE PARISIAN COUNCIL. 498 civil to the head of the <'hurch, and is calculated to convey no high opinion of French politeness in the ninth centuiy. The Parisian assembly censured the holy, infallible, Nicene synod with equal freedom. The Niceans, these refractory Parisians fount! guilty of presumption, ignorance, error, and superstition. The Cfrecian council also, according to these French critics, tortured revelation and tradition to extort evi- dence in favor of eni)lematic adoration. The Nicene definition was represented as contrary to reason, revelation, and tradition ; and many ptussages, in proof of this allegation, were collected from the fathers and other ecclesiastical monu- ments. The Caroline Books against the Nicene council and sculptured adoration were approved and sanctioned.' The French clergy, it seems, were insensible to Nicene infallibility. The French convention, in unequivocal language, condemned image worship, and in very unflattering terms, ' traced the origin of this pestilential superstition in Italy to ignorance and the wickedest custom.' The Parisian prelacy would allow this plague no better origin than Roman and Italian usage, ignorance, and atrocity. The likeness of the saint, they described as unworthy of adoration, and inferior to the cross and the holy vessels of the sanctuary." The Latins, in this manner, through Germany, France, Spain, England, Ireland, and Scotland, rejected the new form of idol- atry. The French, in particular, resisted the novelty with firmness and freedom. This, in consequence, Sirmond called the French heresy. The impugners of the superstition in France, Mezeray describes as superior in number and erudition. Daniel, following Mezeray, represents the innovation as depre- cated by the more numerous and learned of the French nation. These, in the strongest language, denounced the adoration of images ; though, steering a middle course between their wor- ship and abolition, they permitted their use for the ornament of temples, the instruction of spectators, and the encouragement of devotion. lis jug6rent impies les r^ponaes du Pape. D y a certaines choaes qu'il y a oppoa^ k la verity. Bruy. 2. 9, 10. lenoranter in eodem facto a recto tamite deviaverit. Indiacrete feciase in eo quod auperstitioae eaa adorari jusait. Labb. 9. 645, 646. Eum mseruiaae in eadam epiatola quaedam teatimonia Patrum valde abaona, et ad rem de tua agebatur minime pertinentia. AJex. 14. 749. > Da pass^rent juaqu'ii condaninor le 8cpti6me aynode. Godea. 6. 65. lati non mediocriter erraverunt. Qusedam Scriptnrarum teatimonia et Pat- rum dicta ad suum superatitioaum errorem confirmandum violenter sumpaerunt et eidem auo operi incompetenter aptavarunt. Alex. 14. 749. Ila approu- yferent la censure^ que Charlemagne avoit faite du concile de Nic6e dans les Livres Caioiiua. Bruy. 2. 9. * II ne falloit point permettre le culte dea imagea. Mezeray, 1. 409. Partim veritatis ignorantia, partim pesaimBB conaufttudinia usu, hujua superatitionis pestis in ipaa etiam Italia inoleviaaet. Alex. 14. 7oO. Jueniu, 4. 394. 412. 494 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. we pointed '^^instZ r^'^Z^^.^rXot^^A^^ of IS riiS i° I?''- ''':, ■^^•"ended the destruction ui images ratner tiian their adoration. This deserintion nf cXn ridoi: «n^ ' \'- ^°^' .^^^^"^« ^^*^«^ *han a renuu- of GoS ' ion!; hkl^ ^1 inconsistent with the sincere worship 'entertainprfhl « P Orleans, according to this historian^ a^cornt of JonL ^^^'^^^ ^'^^''' ^^^ «^nie account ot Jonas and Agobard, and relates their hostility to avo4TTn thtT'-^P- -"^r^'^''^' '^'^Sh more modern^ avowed, on this topic, similar sentiments The Frennh S^Zt%f''''''^'^' ^^ ^^^« ^y^^- *^" thfe^d^Se Its^detr'inli^Ff f^^ "\*^' ^.f ' ^^^^'' imageVorship. Its (iest ay, m the East, was less uniform. The pronaa-ation of the impiety among the Greeks, with whom it oSXd w^ for halt a century after as well as before the Nice "e^council T tended with many vicissitudes and variations/ The Empresi Irene had, during the minority of her son Constantine XT bshed the superstition by an ecclesiastical decision whi4 she supported by civil enactments. Idolatry, in consruenle ^inpH Constantine, on obtaining a shadow of -power proceeded S emblematic worship. But Constantine's authority ™ also temporary. The orthodox mother deprived the Wet™ son of his power and his eyes; and, by these means, restored ?he painted, woven, and sculptured gods to aU their glZ TheW adoration, however was destined soon to experience another revolution. Irene, the tender parent and pious empress Sena? ted, and vras enroUed as a saint in the WmeTofcS Menology m which, to the present day, she shines aTlsS of the first magnitude. Nicephorus, her success^? aCed^ general hberty of worship, which, according t^the monk' Churlemagne envoya un Livre centre le culte dea images auPaiJe '0^2; g. VARIATIONS IN THE EAST ON IMAGE-WORSHIP. 495 caused bis temporal and eternal perdition.' Michael's reign was marked by superstition and idolatry ; whilst the mo^s and idols that he patronised were incapable of supporting their votary on the throne. The accession of Leo the Armenian again changed the scene. He assembled a council at Constantinople in the year 814 This synod approved and confirmed the Byzantine council, and, at the same time condemned and anathematised the Nicene convention. The emperor, in consequence, was assailed with all kinds of vituperation and obloquy. A Byzantine synod of 270 bishops called hia majesty the harbinger of antichrist and the fiery oven of blasphemy.'^ The imperial hostility to image- worship, these holy men compared to the fury of a lion roaring m the forest for his prey. Michael, Leo's assassin and successor, granted universal tole- ration, which he hoped would be attended with general tran- quillity. But his clemency only provoked the insolence of the faction that abetted idolatry, who refused to grant the liberty which they claimed. Their fury aroused imperial vengeance. Michael, in 821, called a council to detennine the controversy. But the partisans of the idols, pretending that it was unlawful for the patrons of Catholicism to meet the abettors of heresy, re- fused to attend. The emperor afterward treated the haughty faction with rigor. Michael's timidity, however, mitigated his severity. _ But Theophilus, his son and successor, regardless of fear or pity, was the determined and uncompromising patron of Iconoclasm His energy restored tranquiUity to the state, and banished idolatry m a great measure from the church. The clergy and laity submitted to the imperial authority ; while the eastern and western Christians seemed again to relinquish idola- try.3 The Grecian monks alone in the east, and the Latin pontifi" with his immediate dependents, continued to murmur and support the honor of the idols. Such were the dissensions which raged in Christendom, for a century, on image- worship. This diversity has been admit- ted by Tarasius, Adrian, and Daniel* Tarasius, the Byzan- tine patriarch in 784, lamented the schisms and divisions in the «12. Satius putat abjicere et comminuere. Mabillon, 2. 614. Agobard s'efforce de prouyer qu'il n'est point permia aux Chrestiens d'avoir des images par les- queUes la foi est viol^e. Si les Chrestiem ^toient obligez de les honorer ik anroient plutfit change les simulacres qu'abandnnn^ les idoies. Jonas, ^vflque d Orleans, fut de mfime opinion. Godeau, 5. 612.. Gallicana ecclesia in sua sententia perstitit usque ad finem sseculi noni. Mabillon. 2. 495 1 Crabb, 2. 467. Platina, 107. T ■;-'^*'-"""""' pr.T'..iaraor, cujus 6a Ore sgredltuf igiicuB blasphomljB olibaDUB. Labb. 9. 386, 390. Bin. 6. 232. Cobs. 1. 781. » Bin. 6. 295. Coss. 1. 821. Theod. II. Ep. 86. * Video eoclesiam scisBam et divisam, et nos alias atque aliter loquentes, at •liter eoB OhriBtianos qui in Oriente unius nobiscum sunt fidei, sed et Mb con- 496 THE VABIATIONS OP POPERY. Christian Commonwealth. He represented the Byzantine tZ ,^.^^ ^?:^''^ embraced, on this subject, a different system from the other oriental Christians, and the . .ult, he added, i^tir^,?^ f athemas. Adrian, the Roman pontiff, declared ;1t!\ ^^ ^"^ *«;^he e^iperor, that aU the eastern world on this topic had enod prior to the accession of his Grecian majesty. ^aniel acknowledges the prevalence of this heresy in oriental Chnstendom, a^ well s in the western communion. Amidst this diversity, however, an overwhehning majority, according to the coiffession of Tarasius, Adrian, a?d Daniel, disclaimed the faith of symbolical worship. Image-worship after the revolutions of more than a century, Sn^M ^f ^^^?^.^ll^ *^^ ^^«* ^y ^^^ Empress Theodora rheophilus dymg, eft Theodora his widow guardian of the em- pire during the minority of his son Michael. This delegated power she used for the restoration of idolatry. Her me^ures were bold, summary, and decisive. John, the Byzantine Patri- arch, who was an Iconoclast, Theodora deposed; and Metho- dius, who was an Iconolatrian, she raised to the patriarchal dignity A council, in 842, was assembled at Constantinople, in which Iconoclaam was condemned, and image- worship, in all Its heathenism was sanctioned. John, who had been patri- arch received 200 lashes for being in the right. The punish- ment of the patriarch had a happy effect on the inferio/clergy. The empress knew the proper argument for the occasion, fhe logic ot the lash possessed wonderful efficacy in enlighteninff the episcopal intellects, regulating the prelatic consciences and teaching the proselyted priesthood the duty of idolatry Many who had been the devoted friends of Iconoclasm changed their minds, and anathematised in loud vociferation, the patrons of that heresy. All with unvarying unanimity, shouted for the restoration of the idols. The festival of orthodoxy was mstituted as a trophy of their triumph, and an annual com- memoration .f their victory. A heresy, say the historians of this controversy, was in this manner suppressed, which burst- ing from the portals of hell, had, for a hundred and twenty years, raged against the church of Qod} This superstition was imposed on Christendom, not by syno- dal or ecclesiastical authority, but by civU and imperial despor tism. Only a despicable minority of the clergy had, on any occasion, voted for the impiety. The Christian community, at the accession of Constantine the first Christian emperor, con- sisted, according to Paolo, Holstenius, and Bingham, of 1800 ™te.tj,, habere. UbbT Z "iSr Ti;opi;;e.TS! "'SSriinre* tt IDOLATRY FINALLY ESTABLISHED BY THEODORA. 497 bkhops. One thousand were Greeks and eight hundred Latins, inese must have been much increased under Theodora in the nmth century. But the greatest number that, on any occasion, voted for symbolical worship, amounted only to 360 in the Nicean council. These were all the ecclesiastical troops which Irene could bring to the field in favor of her darling idolatry : and, at a fair calculation, could amount only to abSut a sixth ot the whole, and therefore only a small minority. Three hundred and thirty-eight Grecian bishops under Constantino, voted for Iconoclasm; and only the monks of the east opposed. Ihe Roman Pontiff alone and a few of his mere creatures in the west supported the superstition. All the Latins, these excepted, opposed the impiety But the tendency of idolatry IS headlong and downhill. Man, led by sense and imaginatio^ debghtsin a visible Deity or his effigy, before whom he may bow and prefer his adoration. This tendency of the human mmd prevailed, and idols were introduced in opposition to reason, revelation and common sense. tfV CHAPTER XVII. PURGATORY. TTS SITUATION AND PUNISHMENTS— DESTITUTE OF rsOBIPTDRAL AUTHORITY— AUMIS- SIGNS— 80RIPTUBAL ARQUMBNTS- DESTITUTE OF TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY- ADMISSIONS— PRAYER FOR THE DEAD- PAGAN, JEWISH, AND MAHOMETAN PUROA- TORY— ITS INTRODUCTION INTO THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY— ITS SLOW PR0GBB88- COMPLETED BY THE SCHOOLMEN— FLORENTINE COUNCIL— TRENTINE COUNCIL. Purgatory, in the Romish theology, is a middle place or state, in which departed souls make expiation for venial faults, and for the temporal punishment of mortal sins. Romanism repre- sents sin as venial or mortal, or, in other terms, as trivial or aggravated. Those who depart this life guQty of mortal or ag- gravated sin go direct to heli, from which there is no redemp- tion. Those who die guiltless of venial or trivial sins, and, at the same time, of the temporal penalty of aggravated transgres- sion, go immediately to heaven. But many, belonging to neither of these two classes, are, at the hour of death, obnoxious to the penalty attached to venial faults and the temporal pains of heinous iniquity. These, in purgatory, undergo the due punishment ; and, purified by this means, are admitted into heaven. All mankind, says the Florentine council, consist of saints, sinners, and an intai-mediate class. Saints go to heaven ; sinners go to hell ; and the middling class to pufgatory.* Agreed, in accordance with the councils of Flovenee and Trent, on the existence of a middle state, the Popish theologians differ on the place and medium of punishment. Bellarmine reckons eight variations of opinion on its situation. Augustine, according to Bellarmine and Aquinas, divested this intermediate mansion of all material locality ; and characterised it as a spiri- tual residence for spiritual souls.^ The middle receptacle of .3.476,939. Bin. 9. 322. Arsdekin,!. 1 Labb. 18. 533. et20. 170. Crabb. 227. Paolo, 1. 280. Alex. 9. 352. Tria esse loca, mempe, sanctorum animas esse in Coelo, peccatorum in infer- no. Medium vero locum esse habentium pecoata venialia. Labb. 18. 26. Ad gurgatorium deferuntur justoram animse, obnoxie pcenis temporalibus. 2 Bell. 11. 6. Aquin. 3. 541. Certum est, purgatorium esse aliquem locum corporalem. Faber, 2. 448. SITUATION OF PURGATORY. 499 ITY— AUMI8- lUTHORITY— ITAN PDROA- PR0GRE38— JNCIL. or state, Lilts, and m repre- irivial or ;al or ag- redemp- 1, and, at cansgres- iging to bnoxious iral pains the due ited into msist of heaven ; inee and sologians lUarmine igiistine, 'mediate s a spiri- )tacle of rsdekin.l. 1 in infer- 26. poralibus. lem locum human spirits, the African saint alleged, is an ideal world But this notion, It appears, he afterwards retracted. tV^jT^f TJ^^' '^•^^"J^f^l whether the purgatorial realms are in the hllTif ;r.^'' *^5 "^^^ '. ^° *>« ^^'^"^^ ^*h devik ; n the hell ofthe damned; or m its vicinity.' Chrysostom Grefforv Nyssen, and Furseus, say Bellarmine and Be^, Set S devils m the air between heaven and earth. Chrys^t^m^S Gregory Nyssen however, saints a^ they were, h^ no ^p^r- tunity beyond other mortals of ascertaining the S noTC ^"Jtr^ '"''''^^^ ^*^^^^ ^^y- But /ulceus, in a 4™ mt P^!-f '^P'^*^^^' ^^ *^^^«*«^« ^^d a right to know dee^ o? W ^ P"'^"''^ ""'^^ ^^"- The punishments. "1: fir S !??• ^^^ situation and severity of the pains, in the idea of these speculators, are the same. »,inme The majority, however, make this earth the scene of posthu- mous expiation. Gregory and Damian, with glaring inCs^- tency, lay the scene in different parts of the wSrld, where con- science accuses or where the criminal offended. His infaufbSitv and his saintship could drill a luckless ghost in" any conve3 place such as an icy stream, a warm bath, a flaming civem fnoL "r"f Tr?^^- ^3"J^"^ ^"^ Bellarmine sho^aXoS inclination to the theory of Gregory and Damian ^ Ihe schoolmen place this intermediate state of punishment nf ft! Zf' °^ *^' T'^^' T^^ ^«^^ «^^<^y i° the central regTon 2TJ!^ ^^ 7u '""^ ^Z? ^^^' P«^gato^y> and the limbo of infants and of the fathers The two former, it appears, are in the same neighborhood. 'Purgatory/ says Faber^^'is ^n the brink of hell. 3 The pnson of children is raised above purgatory, say the choolmen and Innocent the Third, so that the flames of the latter come not near the establishment of the former* The Ei^'T^ .^^Jv"'!'^^^^^^ empty atthe descent ofthe Messiah who liberated the Jewish saints. Its dominions, therefore are now uninhabited, and its cities, if it have any. ^re useless and ^352 Eeda, Tli r™" ^^">°''*«™'°. ^«1 i° vicino terramrbtu« loco? Alex! I Greg. Dial! iV. iO. Aquin. 3. 544. In"forJJ«m"i'"f'}™ r® infra viscera terrae. Alex. 9. 352. Habemus Pureatorium nurZn^,^ ""^T P**-'"'^'"' «* puerorum loca subterranea esse. Infe7nuT?t purgatonum sunt loco vicina. Bell. II. 6. Aquin. Ill, 69. VII ^"'^'°"™ ** ad^rit.rite.^Frb^t's. sr' '' '''■ ^^' «"' *«"''' ™ °-*--. ferni'^m T^„**'*'^°**°""°V^^?"°^^ «°^°«' ««* '"^ 'P«« °e°tro terr.B. Ultra in- |ernum et purgatonum est et limbus puerorum, et fuerit limbus sanctorom patrum. L.mbus patrum erat remotus a centro et prope termn.^cu8 SueSm est super purgatonum et infra Umbum sanotorumVtrum. Fab^r 2 4^9 500 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. may fall into ruin. Purgatory, in like manner, will, at the resurrection, be evacuated and fall into s' milar dilapidation.' Gregory the Great, the uni ersal pastor, sanctioned this specu- lation by his unerring authority. Believing this place of tem- porary and eternal punishment to be in the central regions of the earth, his infallibility considered the volcanic eruptions of Vesuvius, iEtna, and Hecla, as flames arising from hell and purgatory, which, according to his holiness, lay in the same neighborhood, in the hollow bosom of the world. These volcanoes, said the Vicar-General of God, are an evidence of the Mediterranean position of the purgatorian prison and the fiery punishment of its inhabitants. Theodoric the Arian king of the Goths, says the viceroy of heaven, was, at the hour of death, seen descending into a flaming gulph in Sicily. Souls, says Surius, appear amid the conflagration and thunders of Hecla, and proclaim their sufferings in the flaming fulminatious of that mountain.^ The medium of punishment is as uncertain as the situation of the place. The general opinion, however, favors the agency of fire. This was the idea entertained by the schoolmen. The Latins, in the council of Florence, maintained, with the utmost perspicuity, the same theory, though in complaisance to the Greeks, the term was omitted in the synodal definition. The Florentines were followed by the sjmod of Diamper, which is received in the Romish communion. The catechism of Trent copied after the schoolmen and the councils of Florence and Diamper. The Cardinal of Warmia and the theologians ap- pointed to frame the Trentine canon, though they resolved to avoid every difficulty, diflfered on the place and medium of pur- gation. Some, like the council of Florence, wished to mention fire as the means of punishment and expiation ; while others re- jected this idea. This disagreement caused the omission of the term, and the substitution of a general expression. But the word was introduced into the catechism of Trent, published by the authority of the council and the agency of the pontiff". The same has been sanctioned by the majority of the popish theolo- gians ; such as Gregory, Aquinas, Surius, and Bellarmine. Bellarmine, however, is doubtful whether the fire is proper or metaphorical.^ Venial impurity, the cardinal thinks, may be 1 Nunc vacuus remanet. Bellarmin. II. 6. Post Judiciuiii novissimum non fore purgatorium. BeUannin. I. 4. Le Purgatoire sera aboli au iour du iueement Calmet, 22. 362. Aquin. 3. 544. J J K '^Greg. Dial. IV. 30. 35. Bell. II. II. Surius, Ann. 1537. 3 Itali fatentur Purgatorium per ignom, TjahK IS. 27. Inter Latinos, certisai- mum est, ignem ilium esse corporeum. Faber, 2. 453. Latini dicentes Purgatorium ignem esse. Bin. 8. 564. Hi, dubio, procul, in supradictoignequDd purgatorium appellarisolet, purgantur. Crabb. 3. 376. Est PRETENDED PUNISHMENTS OF PURGATORY. 501 expunged by the application of allegorical or figurative flames. Many have represented water, accompanied with darkness, tempest, whirlwind, snow, ice, frost, hail, and rain, as the means of purgatorian atonement. Perpetua, in a vision, saw a pond in this land of temporary penalty, though its water was inaccessible to the thirsty inhabitants, whom it only tantalized with illusive mockery. Gregory, the Roman pontiff, soused Pascasius, a Roman deacon, in the warm baths of Angelo, for the expiation of his venial sins. Severinus of Cologne ap- peared to Damian, immersed in a river in which he was steeped, as an abstergent for his trifling contaminations. The water of this country, in the most authentic accounts, is both hot and cold ; and the wretched inhabitants pass in rapid but painful transition from the warm to the frosty element, from the torid to the fHgid zone. The purgatorians enjoy, in succession, the cool and the tepid bath ; and are transferred, without any use- less ceremony, from the icy pond to the boiling caldron.' These a<3counts have been authenticated by travellers, who visited this subterranean empire, and who were privileged to survey all its dismal scenery. Ulysses, Telemachus, and .^neas were admitted to view the arcana of Tartarus ; and Drithelm, Enus, and Thurcal, in like manner, were permitted to explore the secrets of purgatory. The visions of the three latter are recorded in the prose of Bede and Paris, as the gloomy path of the three former had been blazoned in the poetry of Homer, Virgil, and Fenelon. The travels of the heroes, however, were attended with greater difficulty than those of the saints, t'lysses, Telemachus, and ^neas were entangled on their journey, with the encumbrance of the body; while Drithelm, Enus, and Thurcal, unfettered by that re- straint, winged their easy way and expatiated in spirit through purgatory in all its sulphureous walks and roasting furnaces. Drithelm, whose story is related by Bede and Bellarmine, was led on his journey by an angel in shining raiment ; and proceeded, in the company of his guide, towards the rising of the sun. The travellers, at length, arrived in a valley of vast dimensions. This region, to the left, was covered with roasting furnaces, and, to the right, with icy cold, hail, and snow. The whole valley was filled with human souls, which a tempest seemed to toss in all directions. The unhappy spirits, unable Syn. Aquin. Pars. III. Q. Eurgatorius ignis. Cat. Trid. 50. Per ignem aliasque pcenas abluuntar. dam. in Cossart, 6. 20. Paolo, 2. 633. Non sit metaphorice dictus, sed versus ignis corporeus, 70. Art. III. P. 547. In purga^orio sicut etiam in inferno esse poenam ignis. Sive iste ignis accipia tur propne sive metaphorice. Bellarmin, II. 10. »Alex. 9. 393. Gregory, IV. 40. Bellarmin,- II. 6. 502 THE VARUTIONS OF POPERY. ng coW wS « •"' f' ^^"^f * ^«^^' ^^P«d i^^ the shiver- Xh cknnot hp^ r ^""^t ^^^"^ ^^^ *^^ ^^^rching flames Ifim,p?«n,?i e^V^guished. A numberless multftude of Tnd^l Thif "^'T^ "^ *^^ ^^*^«^«« of alternate heat DUotL Lf).^ '• f/'o^l^^g to the angelic conductor who piloted Dnthelm, is the place of chastisement for such ka defer wrwm'arthfrr/" ^ ^^^^ ^^ death. ^ the': mairthrruci. llm« ^ -i"^^^' ^' ^^"^^^^ to heaven: while f\oY.fJ? ^ • ^ *^\^ laboratory of atonement. Fortified bv wotrSnln ^\f-^i« -- NumberSren^'and ToT S'.Yu ^j"^^^"* '''' the earth and transfixed with red-hot ?i3^^ht ' fS^' I'' P^^" ^^?« ^-h^d some ^^Ke^S- J^;I T' • ^ dragons gnawed some with ignited teeth- S oramLin^'"*' P^'T' ^^^^" -i*^ b"^i»1 'tTni: loads ot anaazmg size and teiTor endeavored with ualv l:^s wSrifi^^f'^ni '' "^^^^ Monstrous teforS J^^r? M ^ °^® ^^o™ their mouths, devoured some with his /hJT;^ P°"^? ^"^g i^ sulphureous flaZ:, ^th ir^rhoofe ,t^^^^^ ^-^f ' ^r^^' f ^«' -d heads, o; Z2 and b?eits Sol ^^^^tion through their eyes, nose, jaws, ana oreasts. borne were roasted on spits, fried in oans nr tumbW ^"^•^'''■- ^""^ ^^^^ hurled^headlong nto a fetid CsurfLT^f "^"^""^'/^ ^">^^^««d their^eaS above in^to the cold T' T'^T^ ^^'i!^ *^" «^^^^^' «"«k them again «?!^I .r ®^^™«nt. A sulphureous well, emitting flame and stench, threw up men like sparkling scintUlations. into the a^r and agam received them falling into its burning mouth Thur^ls adventure is also related by Paris Julian wh'> officiated a^ guide on the occasion, lei/the body of ThuTcal ^Beda,V.I2. BaU. I. 7. Paber.2.449. ^ M. Pari«, 83. 180, 270. PRETENDED PUNISHMENTS OP PURGATORY. 503 air, sleeping in bed, and took only the aoul as the companion of his journey to the nether world. He wisely, however, breathed life into the soulless body, lest, in the spirit's absence, it should appear dead. Having settled these necessary preliminary arrangements, the two spiritual travellers departed, at night, from England for purgatory. The two disembodied companions soon winged their aerial way to the middle of the world towards the east, and entered a spacious fabric of wonderful structure. This edifice was the general rendezvous of departed souls, and was built by Jesus the Son of God, at the intercession of Lady Mary, his mother. The palace, of course, had a respectable architect. ^ Many souls in this depSt of spirits, and many beyond the north wall, were marked with spots indicating their venial sins. The apostle Paul sat in the palace at the end of the north wall. The Devil and his guards sat without the wall opposite the apostle. A balance was affixed to the wall between the apostle and the Devil, in which Paul and Satan, with precision and care, weighed the souls. The former had two weights, which were bright and golden ; and the latter two, which, as might be expected, were dark and smoky. When the beam inclined to Beelzebub, the guards threw the soul, wailing and cursing, into a flamy gulph, which of course, was hell. This unceremonious treatment of sinners afforded fine fun to the devils, whose duty, on the occasion, -V /as attended with loud peals of infernal laughter. When the beam inclined to Paul, the apostle introduced the soul through the eastern gate to purgatory, to make compensation for its venial crimes. Purgatory, according to our subterranean traveller, consists of a vast valley between owo walls, the northern and southern. The entrance into this ancient domain is occupied with purga- torian fire ; caldrons, filled with flaming pitch, blazing sulphur, and other fiery materials, boil or roast the souls for the expiation of their sins. These furnaces also exhalea a stench, which was not very pleasing to the olfactory nerves ; and which caused even the disembodied souls that on earth had wallowed in filthy gratifications to cor^gh, hiccup, and sneeze. Having enjoyed the warm bath, tlie souls, for the sake of variety, were introduced into the cold one. The unhappy spirits exemplified the variations of Popery, and passed into a frosty pool, which skirted the eastern extremity of the valley. The water of this pool was icy, salt, and shivering. The spirits, according to their crimes, were immersed in this lake to the knee, the mid- dle, or the necK. iierGoved from this shivcnug situatiou, the sufferer had to undergo another trial. A bridge, studded with sharp nails and thorns with their points turned upwards, had 504 THE VABIATIONS OF POPERY. to be crossed. The souls walked baxe-footed on this rough road and endeavoring to ea«e their feet, leaned on their hanfs and afterwards rolled with the whole b^dy, on the perfbratinfspiW over^ZTh '"^ ^^r^i^^y worked^'their ^aSl tfiLTway spirTteLSlnf fhi- ''• '"^^ ^'ffi«"lty being surmounted the spmte, forgetful of their pain, escaped to heaven.called the mount Perpetua's vision may, for the sake of variety be added f^ the Tartarean travels of Drithelm, Enus, S Unreal Thi^ SiThtfae:' \'"''^^ called' DinocktL. who dTedoJ'a^^ rrthLfv ,5^ ' 'tl ^H ^°y ^^^' ^'^ death going out of a of wh oih J I T' "^'^^ .* ^'^^, ^^^' ^ P^i« colorfand the ulcer eLwe fn wh- hT^"^ ^^ ^/ ""'"^Se. The 'smoky thirsty water wl^ioh hn ' I"^ '^ ■ ^^'^' ^^^^^^^^^^ ^ P^^^ full of tMrsTyThid ' ^'""^ inaccessible, only tantelized the Perpetua knew this prison to be purgatory ; and her nravers thtirTuate' "'^'4'°' ^^\^^^^^^^^^^ tneir usual success. She soon had the pleasure of seeing her d £red h^«V^''"'^' r^, i^y'"^- The malady, Th ch^had TaSean nnof^'' Tt ^'^^'^' P" ^^^ obtained'^^.^cess to the no^nnt ^ i'.?:''^' ^^"™ ^ 8°ld^^ cup, swaUowed copious Pe^ntZ ' t *^'^ F^^y^^' ^^^ ^ «hiid, through the pC • Sshmer'fe"'"''^"^'^^^ ^'^.^^^^'^^^ w^relea^ed^fiim Kiel f ^- *V^ '^ ^^^y clear and satisfactory. The vision presents a graphic description of purgatory, as 7place of Z^ Sre's'ltr^' ""'''' *^?*' ^^^'^^' -^d taLlizi^l water; and' of c WeL XTT 'l?!''"^"? ^'''^''' of heaven^a. a country rlleTt^Syt:?^^^^^^^^^ ^^P^'^^^^' ^^^' ^^ ^-^ ^^^^ trutS fill-r"^ '^''' eulogized by many of the ancients. Its sbns wi S ^'^'""/vf ^'a^'"^^'. ™^""^^ *^"d "" several occa- renorf I^ ^fP^^^^cd by Augustine of sainted memory. The report has also extorted an encomium from Alexander who moreover discovered that those who deny legato™ nlver' pnvileged with such visions. Dreams o/thirffnd the Earned middle state of expiation. He must have been a man of genius lar^Z'^ '"^ ^? ^r '"^^^ '"''^ ^ prodigious discovery.^ BeT larmine sings to the same tune. These holy men says the cardinal, could neither deceive nor be deceived ; a^' thjy pos- 401* ^gJj'^j™*'^|"^^^a""™gandenB. Al«x. 9. 393. Augustin, 5. 1134, et 10. PURGATORY DESTITUTE OF CHRISTIAN AUTHORITY. 505 and, sessed the spirit of discrimination, and were the j)articular friends of God. Such are the visions of purgatory, recorded by Bede, Paris, and Perpetua. The tales are as silly as the Pagan mythology of Charon and his fabled boat. The relation is as ndiculous as any of tlie sarcastic dialogues of Lucian, concerning the ferryman of Tartarus, whicli were designed to ridicule the absurdity of gentilism. The Protestantism and philosophy of modem days have exposed such notions, and made the patrons of Romanism shy in recognising the ridiculous delineations. But the statements, however risible, obtained the undivided belief and unqualified respect of our Popish ancestors. The denial of these details would once have been accounted rank heresy. Bellannine, in later days, swallowed the reports with avidity, in all their revolting fatuity. The moderns, who may choose to reject the tales of folly, will only add another in- stance to the many variations of Po})ery. Purgatory, in all its forihs, is a variation from scriptural authorit3\ Revelation affords it no countenance. No other dogma of Romanism, except image- worship and the invocation of saints, seems to borrow so little support from the Book of Inspiration. The Bible, by certain management and dexterity, may appear to lend some encouragement to transubstantiation and extreme unction. But the ingenuity of man has never been able to discover a single argument for a middle place of purifi- cation, possessing even a shadow of plausibility. The name itself is not in all the Sacred Volume, and the attempts which have been made to find the tenet in its inspired contents have only shown the fatuity of the authors. The Book of God, on these occasions, has been uniformly tortured, for the purpose of extorting acknowledgements of which it is guiltless, and which, without compulsion, it would obstinately deny. The body of an unhap[)y heretic was never more unmercifully man- gled and disjointed in a Spanish inquisition, with the design of forcing confession, than the Book of Divine Revelation, with the intention of compelling it to patronise purgatory. The soul of a venial sinner naver suffered more exquisite torments in purgatory itself, even if its existence were real, for the expiation of venial iniquity, than the language of the inspired volume for proof of a place of posthumous purgation. The uselessnesH of attempting scriptural evidence for this opinion, indeed, has been acknowledged by many popish authors. Many distinguished theologians have, with laudable candor, admitted the silence of Revelation on tins topic ; and among the rest, Earns, Bruys, Courayer, Alphonsus, Fisher, Polydorus, Soto, Perionius, Picherel, Wicelius, Cajetan, and 506 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. hZ:^or>S^:: S^r P?r *?-!, V^m^kmem . matter of fathers, n^or co^nSa' The LT^'A,;^•'^*^^^fr^°' S«"P*"re. according to Bruys ' was ,inlrn!i f .t'\ "'<^e''mediato place, Christians.' Coumyerin hi^T" ^ ^^" '^P"'"^^ ^'^^ ^'•'^'"'^J ' the incorrectness of icribin^^r .*'""' ^'^ ^^'^' ^^"^i^- to tradition. AlpCnTrnvA^I^ '^'T^^^ ^<='^^^^^ this theo^g^/tL^tt^Jee"' t '"^ ^^^^'^^^^^ advocates of proofs, and "4reronIybonp«^'"''?^T^''^ "" its scriptural der explodeslll Benimlo^ J^^ryphal argument. Afexan- the Old and New Teramenf ^K^*'''^' ^°" ^^'' P"^^^^^' ^om admits, is ilbgicj'^ TheSn^K "• .^^^.-^"d this, &Uarmine ceremony, condemns sevent^^rT '>,^^'^"* '^^>' '^^"^^^^^i^" or - reduces hs evide^e to a mlr^^V^" *If"'*'« «i^*ions, and nal's sophistry u^?h learninTand f T" ^' '"""'^^^ *^« ^^''di. ment, which thrfornmrrZf f^^'^T"^*'- ^he single argu- characterises al soph LticaTrr ^ "" ^^P^^trative, tL latter pions of purgator^contri ve ^"^.^f ^^"^'^^^ve. The two cham- from all tendency^rcountenano« ?h^^^ ^''' Revelation lous invention. BoTJLsenoW.- T'!7P*"'^* and ridicu- - bean history ^ deCnstraSvp n T' '""^f^' ^^°<^« *^« ^acca- this book is uncSca an^ " I^T ^*^.^ ^^"^^^ '^^^^' ^ut by the Jews, anT^i for^rlv H k^^^^^^ Bellarmine grants, proof, beside's, taLriomZs^^^^^^^^ The for departed souls which hvLT' "''*^®*^ °" intercession der's. One is anoorvDhS «„i 1 "'ft "S''"' »>"> Alesan- i»g to his ownToSS, &t'iil^;"''™'?^' ^^^- mto soph stry. Calmet inihptS ^ it to favor his system, for One'siphoj;,s wh^the X^wiZTZSh' ''''"' ^'^^'^ IS unfounded: and even if ♦„„ v\.™'*''<' supposition In TBtenbu. do Putoatorio fen, „,,¥.„»■ ^'""° (^""ray- in Piol 2 644 «m. heUmontio. Fi.h.r, Art* laPoS P"™l '°b'' t'^. ™J 1""° '«™- ROMISH ARGUMENTS PROM SCRIPTURE REFUTED. 507 shall afterwards be shown, supplies no evidence for purgatory. Challenor, always insidious and soothing, adduces seven quota- tions, without hinting at their inadequacy or the opposition of ancient fathers or modem theologians.' The ancients, in scriptural interpretation on this subject, differ, even according to Bellarmine, Alexander, and Calmet, as much as the modems. The cardinal, the Sorbonnist, and the benedictine have cited Augustine, Jerome, Gregory, Cyril, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Ambrosius, Ansekn, and Bede. All these have been quoted, and quoted against each other. Bellarmine, Alexander, and Calmet have, at great length and with extraordinary patience, shown that these authors are at utter variance on the inspired proofs for the support of a middle state of purification. The interpretation which one adopts another rejects. One approves the exposi- tion which another condemns.^ The collector of their varia- tions, which, on this question, are nearly past reckoning, would require the learning of Lardner, and their reader tbs patience of Job. The patrons of this system have urged four scriptural quo- tations, which are worthy of attention, and will, on this subject, show the inconsistency and variations of popish advocacy. These proofs are taken from Matthew, Paul, and Peter. The sacred historian Matthew records our Lord's sermon, which mentions a prison, from which the debtor shall not escape till he pay ' the uttermost farthing.' Beliaraiine, Challenor, Milner, and the Rhemists say, this prison is purgatory, which detains the venial transgressor till he satisfy for his trivial impurity. Many Romish saints and commentators, however, give a different explanation. Augustine, Jerome, Bede, Maldonat, and Alexander say, the prison is hell, and the punishment ever- lasting.' Augustine, a saint of superior manufacture, patron- ised this exposition. Jerome, another saint ovei-flowing with gall and superstition, maintained the same opinion. According to the canonised commentator of Palestine, 'The person, who does not, before the end of his life, pay the last farthing, men- 1 Calm. Diet. 3. 746. Alex. 9. 365. 2 Tim. I. 18. OhaUenor, c, 14. » Bellarmiu, I. 4. Alexan. 9. 353. Gal. Com. 12. 361. ^ Semper non exiturum esse c[m semper solvit novissimum quadrantem. Au- gustm. 3. 177. Nunquam solvitur a carcere, qui quadrantem verbi novissimum non solveret ante finem vita). Jerom, 5. 895. et 4. 133. Donee salves pro in- hnito, ponitur sicut alibi 'donee poenam inimicos tuos,' Beda, 5. 12. Via eat hujufl vitaj tempus, career infemus. Nunquam exiturus, quia qui in inferno aunt nunuuam persolvunt. Maldonat, 121. Non significat unde nos exitnros Ijoatea^sed^unquam. Quia cum poenas infinitas pro quolibet mortali peccato • .s.Hsaiv iiaiunati nunquam eas pursolvunt. Nunquam ex ioferni careers exituri sunt de quibus hoc dictum est. Alex. 9. 386. Matt. v. 26. Paal ex I. Corin. XV. 26. Rhem. On Math. v. 25. r\ 608 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. tioned in the words of the inspired penman, will never be released from the prison.' The two Roman saints were tollowed by Bede, an English monk of learning and orthodoxy He makes the term until signify endless duration as in the expression of David, cited by Paul, 'till I put aU your ene- mies under your feet.' Maldonat concurs with Augustine Jerome and Bede. The learned Jesuit interprets the ' prison • u^^i! -^ ^®^^' ^^^^ ^^^^^ *^® debtor, who will be punished with the utmost rigor, will never escape, because he will never pay.' Alexander delivers a similar interpretation, in a more length- ened and detailed form. ' The inspired phraseology,' says this doctor, ' signifies not whence he will afterward depart, but whence he will never depart. The words are spoken of hell, from which the condemned, who undergo the infinite punish- ment of mortal sin, which they can never pay, will never be released.' ^ He quotes David and Paul for illustration and confirmation of his comment. The word until, in Scriptural language, often denotes that the event, to which it refers will never happen. God invited his Son to 'sit at his right hand, till his enemies should become his footstool.' But he will not then leave his seat. The king of Zion will reign till every foe is subdued. But he will not then cease to reign. The raven returned not to Noah, ' till the waters were dried.' But no return succeeded. Apply this to the words of Jesus in Matthew, and all is clear. The person imprisoned, unable to pay, will never be liberated. Augustine quotes the same passages from David and Paul for proof and illustration. The Rhemists against Helvidius, on another part of Matthew's gos- pel, give a similar explanation of the phrase ; and in this manner, furnish arms against themselves. Such is the genuine signification of the passage. Popish commentators, in modern times, may be dissatisfied with the explanation ; and, if they please, call it a heresy. The inter- pretation, however, is not the production of Luther, Zuinglius Calvin, Cranmer, or Knox ; but of Augustine, Jerome, Bede,' Maldonat, and Alexander : two saints, a monk, a Jesuit and a Sorbonnist. The partisans of purgatory argue from another passage in Matthew. Sm against the Holy Ghost, it is said, shall be for- given, 'neither in this world, nor in the world to come.' This the Romish doctors account their strong-hold. This they reckon the impregnable bulwark of their svstem. This Alexander who condemns all other arguments taken from tbp rxew Testament, calls demonstration. Calmet accounts it the mam pillar of the mighty superstructure ; and in this opinion ROMISH ARGUMENTS FROM SCRIPTURE REFUTED. 509 modem Romish commentators, in general, seem to concur.' Sin, say these critics, committed against the Spirit, will not be pardoned 'in the world to come,' and this implies, if it does not express, that some sins will be remitted in a future world. But forgiveness can have no reference to heaven or hell, and, therefore, there must be a middle state of pardon, and this is called purgatory. The least discernment might enable any person to see the futility of this argument. The Romish dogma is a variation from the words of the sacred historian. Matthew mentions forgiveness. But the intermediate state of popery is not a place of pardon, but of punishment and expiation. The venial trans- gressor cannot be released from that prison, till he pay the uttermost farthing. This is plainly no remission. No sin, says Alexander, can be remitted by ordinary law without satisfaction and due punishment. Full expiation is made in the purgatorial state ; and, therefore, there is no remission in the world to come on popish any more than on protestant principles. The irremission of the sin against the Holy Ghost in a future state, does not imply the remission of other sins. The unpar- donableness of one sin infers not the pardonableness of another. The conclusion, in this syllogism, is not contained in the pre- mises. This, Bellarmine had the discernment to see and the candor to confess. He quotes the text, and, from it, concludes the existence of a middle state of pardon, and then, in glorious inconsistency, admits the conclusion to be illogical. The car- dinal, in this instance as in many others, varies from himself. His boasted argument, he grants, as he well might, is a pitiful sophism.^ Mark and Luke have explained Matthew with more consistency than Bellarmine. The two inspired historians say, this kind of blasphemy will never be forgiven, and their lan- guage, which only prejudice could misunderstaT d, is synony- mous with Matthew's, and explodes the silly and unfounded idea of purgatorian remission. The statements of Mark and Luke, as explanatory of Matthew, have been adopted by Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostom, Theo- phylact, Basil, Calmet, and Maldonat.^ This blasphemy, says 1 Matth. xii. 32. Alex. 9. 374. Calm. Diet. 3. 746. '^ Bellarmin, 1. 4 Mark iii. 29. Luke xii. 10. ^ Nonhabet remissionem in aeternum. Aliia verbis et alioloquendi modo eadem ipsa est expressa sentontia. Augustin, 5. 390. Serm. 71. Remitti nobis hoc peccatum omninonon possit. Augustin, ad Bon. 2. 662. NuUo tempore blaa- phemia remittetur. Jerom. 4. 60. Ei/Tau0a KM fKfi SaxreTf StKijv. EmavOa KoKa(ovrM Kai eK«i. Chrysos. 7. 449. ^PratiBaKai eicft nuayprOTjfT'rat, Tll60p}iylact in JVLfttti xii. AirL*~'*^fi?nrTO!' siy&t TW « wii ^" f- ^""""^ sometimes signifies the Jewish estab- hshment and sometimes the Christian dispensation. Matthew m his Gospel, used it m the former senf .. Paul addressiny the Corinthians and Hebrew., takes it in tlie latter acceptS Ihe blasphemy, according to this explanation, would be for- given neither under the Jewish or Christian ecoTomy though the latter was to be an age of mercy ^ i^nougn the^'s^r^-r^f'^'^.i*'"^""''*^^^^^^ ^^^^ also been pressed into ^Trsm WM ft" n^-^^-' '^ r;;^''^^«^y- ^h/ Apostle of larsus taught the Christians of Corinth that the professor '1 W°^V, iTrt^^^' or stubble.' on the foundation thShTs work shal be burnt, shall be saved, yet so as by fire" Th s hre say Bellarmme, Ward, Challenor, the Councifof Sens the Latins m the Council of Florence, and many other advoc2s of ttTSsUt:^ the perpetrator of trifli^ng trangreTsL'^ if been acknowledged in emphatic laVuage, by "t^t^^^^^^^ 1 Lorin. IX. 11. Heb. x. 26. 2 1 Corin. iii. 12. Estiua, 1. 215. Crabb, 3, 747, Jerom, 4. 50. Matth. xxiv. 3. Bell, 1. 4. Challen. 128. \i^. ROMISH ARGUMENTS FROM SCRIPTURE REFUTED. 611 Bellarmine, Alexander, and Estius. BeJlarmine represents it as one of the obscurest, and, at the same time, one of the most useful passages m all revelation. Its obscurity, in Bellarmine's opinion, contributed to its utility.as it enabled the Jesuit, with a little management, to explain it as he pleased. But Alexan- der, with more sense and honesty, has, on account of its want ot perspicuity, rejected it aa a demonstration of purgatory ' ' Its obscurity/says Estius, ' has occasioned many tnd various expositions. This authonty,' observes Faber, ' is very obscure, and variously explained, not only by different fathers and doc' tors, but by the same doctor. Augustine interprets this place m various ways. Bellarmine, Alexander, and Cahnet have collected a copious specimen of the jarring interpretations of expositors on this part of the inspired volume, and their collec- tions afford no very flattering view of the unity of Romanism. The pnncipal significations which have been attached to the apostolic expression are three. Gregory. Augustine, Bernard, and Bede account the fire a metaphor for tribulation or trial in this lite. Ihe Roman pontiff and saints, as well as the English monk, refer the expression to the pains endured not after but betore death ; and so exclude posthumous expiation. Similar •ud m nt 2^ explanation, who makes it signify severe Origen, Ambrosius, Lactantius. Basil, Jerome, and Augus- tine, according to Estius, reckon the language literal, and refer it to the general conflagration on the day of the last iudement • though purgatory, at that peritd, will, according to Belkrmine' be evacuated and left empty. This ancient interpretation has been followed by Lombard, Aquinas, Haimo, Alcuin, and Estius. This party make saint and sinner pass through the fiery ordeal, which will try the work of every one, whether he ^ra if f^^ ■'^^^'' """"J^^ foundation, or wood, hay, and stub- ble But the intermediate place of purgation, in the theology ot Romanism contains only the middling class, who are guilty of venial frailty. o , s, ^j BpHi'ir^9R^* sententia plane ad intelligendum difficUis. Augustin. 6, 124. Tint K • •^""™ V" difficUimis et utilissimis totius ScriptuTO. BeU 15 Locus obscurissimus est, cujus sensum vix assequi liceat. Alex 9 378 Estius 1. 214 Non demonstrative contra hareticol ostendi. Alexander 9 378* «^frr]- "*'^ ^\'^^ ^^^" "''«°"™' «* ^"ri'^ explicationes offer^ntur non solum i diversispatnbus et doctoribus, sed abeodemt)octore. aSSs hSnc locum vanis moclis uiterpretatur. Faber 2 444 ' c Auguaimus nunc Dinl"Tv'^^qQ^V"'!,"^**'fT'w° ««''i« vita adhibito, possit inteUigi. Gretr Dial. IV. 39 i^amdem tribulationem ignem vocat. Aug. C. D XXI 2B* t^ ?^':::^:rJ^^^^''T-f- l^-"'^4H. TgnistrfbuTationis kla.- o. Ji(7. rro severe ludicio Caietanus exnniiit. E"*^^!"- i oifl »«"», ■■ Excepturus sit omnes etiam eos qui aurum et argentum'su^berEedificant fnn 512 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Chryaostom and Theodoret interpret Paul's diction to signify the unquenchable fire of hell, and these two Grecian commen- tators have been followed, says Bellarmine, Cahnet, and Alexander, by Theophylact, Seduiius and Anselm.> This was the opmion of the whole Grecian communion. The Greeks, accordingly, in the council of Florence, represented the fire mentioned by the apostle, not as purgatorian but eternal. Alexander and Erasmus also declare, against the popish exposi- tion of Paul's language ; and display the singular unanimity of Romish commentators. Gregory, Augustine, Bernard, and Bede appear, on this topic, against Origen, Ambrosius, Hilary, Lactantius, Jerome, Lombard, Aquinas, Haimo, Alcuin, and Estius ; and all these against Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophy- lact, Sedulius, and Anselm. Saint encounters .saint, and com- mentator attacks commentator ; and all the.se, formed in deep phalanx, explode from Paul's words the modern fabrication of purgatory. The searching fire, mentioned by the apostle, is not purgato- rian but probatory. Its effect is not to purify but to try. The trial is not of persons, but of works. The persons, in this ordeal, shall be saved ; while the works, if wood, hay, or stub- ble, shall, as the Greeks observed at the council of Florence,; be consumed. The popish purgatory, on the contrary, is not for ''.probation, but expiation, and tries, not the action but the agent, not the work but the worker.'' The scriptural language, in this case, is metaphorical. The foundation and the superstructure, consisting of gold, silver and precious stones, or of wood, hay, and stubble, as well as the scrutinising flame, all these are not literal but figurative. The phrase, ' so as,' it is plain, denotes a comparison. The salvation, which is accomplished so as by fire, is one which, as critics have shown from similar language in sacred and profane authors, is effected with difficulty. Amos, the Hebrew prophet, represents the Jewish nation, who were rescued from imminent danger, ' as a fire-brand plucked out of the burning.' Zacha- riah, another Jewish seer, in the same spirit and in similar style, characterises a person who was delivered from impending destruction, as a. brand snatched ' out of the fire.' Diction of 1 AMwavros fKfii^ nj (pKoyi. Chrysos. II, 243, Horn. 6. 07s vvrpfniaTai Tijy yttv^s ro mp. Theod. 3. 1,34. in 1. Cor. iii. 12. 13. Chrysostome, Th^ophy- lacte, et d'autres Grecs I'expliquent du feu de I'enfer dans lequel les reprouvez demeurent sans pouvoir de mourir. Calm. 22. .363. Ignis ipse non purgator- ms, verum seternum aupplicium sit. Crabb. 3. 377. Theoph. in Conn iii Bell. 1^4. Alex. 9. 378. 381. 2 Nonnulli inter quos Cajetanus dictum putant de opere non de operante. .a.., . . _,,,, Pia quidem opera manent, et non comburantur. Prava vero oomburantur. Ipse permanebit igne, pcEiias luendo o'temas. Libb. 18. 27. ROMISH ARGUMENTS FROM SCRIPTURE REPUTED. 513 a similar kind, Calmet, Wetstein, and other critics have shown, has been used by Livy, Cicero, and Cyprian, for denoting great hazard and difficulty. Paul, in like .nanner, designed to tell us, that he who should blend vain and useless speculations with the truths of the gospel, but should rest, nevertheless, in the main, on the only basis, would, in the end, be saved ; but with the difficulty of a person, who should escape with the possession of his life, but with the loss of his property, from an over- whelming conflagration; or, according to Estius, like the merchant, who should gain the shore with the destruction of his goods, but the preservation of his life, from the tempest of the sea.' Peter has also been quoted in favor of purgatory. ' Our Lord,' says the Galilean fisherman, ' preached to the spirits in prison.' This prison, according to many modern abettors of Romanism, is the intermediate state of souls, into which the Son of God, after his crucifixion and before his resurrection, descended, for the purpose of preaching the gospel to its suffer- ing inmates. The obscurity of the text shows the folly of making it the foundation of any theory. Augustine, Bellarmine, and Estius confess its difficulty, which, as might be expected, has occa- sioned a variety of interpretations. Lorinus, without exhaust- ing the diversity, has enumerated ten difierent expositions. Some, by the prison, understand hell, into which, they allege^ Jesus descended to preach the gospel to pagans and infidels' This interpretation, Calmet and Estius call error and heresy. Some say our Lord preached in the prison both to the good and the bad. Some maintain that he preached only to the good, while others aver that he preached only to the bad, to whom he proclaimed their condemnation." The principal interpretations of this difficult passage are two. The prison, according to one party, is the limbo of the fathers or the bosom of Abraham, into which the Son of God, some time between his crucifixion and resurrection, de- scended to liberate the Jewish saints. This, say Calmet and the Rhemists, was the common opinion of the ancient , : such as Justin, Clemens, Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, .erome, Ambrosius, and Hilary. The schoolmen, at a later period, 1 Quemadmodum mercator non nisi cum jactura reriun suarumquasamat, aec sine dolore ammittit, etempestate maris evadit. Estius, 1. 218. Amos iv 11 2ach. iii. 2. Calm. 22. 363. Wetstein in Conn. ill. 16. ' " ' 2 LocuB hie omnium pene interpretum judicio difficillimus, idemque tam vane expositus. Estius, 2. 1182. Angus, ad Evod. Le Sauveur avoit prfiche m6me au.^ payeiis et aui iufidulus. Calmet, 24. 146. Estius, 2. Ii83. Bell. 1. 416. Quidam solos bonos spiritus intelligunt ; alii solos males, alii denique tam bones quammalos. Estius, 2. 1183. QQ 514 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. adopted the same belief. This interpretation has been followed by the Trent Catechism, the Rhemish annotators, and indeed by the generahty of modem popish theologians. The prison, according to a second party, is hell, in which those who, m the days of Noah, were incredulous; were, in the time of Peter incarcerated for their unbelief' These spirits were prior to the flood, in the body and on earth ; but, in the apostolic age were consigned to the place of endless punish- ment, lo these, Jesus, before their death, preached not in his humanity but in his divinity ; not by his own but by Noah's ministry. He inspired the antediluvian patriarch to preach nghteousness to a degenerated people. He officiated, says hjT'ivr '''?."' Pe^on but by his spirit, which he communica- ted to Noah AugTistme among the ancients, and Aquinas among the schoolmen, were the great patrons of this interpre- tation; and tbe African saint and the angelic doctor have been followed by Bede, Hassel, Calmet, and many other commen- tators both m the Romish and reformed communions.'' Ihe interpretation, which would make the prison to signifv purgatory, IS entirely modem, and was utterly unknown to the ancients The exposition is not to be found in all the ponderous tomes of the fathers. Bellarmine and Alexander, in their la- bored attempts to evince posthumous purgation, omit this pas- sage. Ihe cardinal has adduced many scriptural quotations to prove an unscnptural absurdity ; and the Sorbonnist has endea- vored to support the same supposition from the pages of reve- lation. Both, however, omit the words of Pope Peter The omission is a silent confession of the argument's utter incompe- tency m the opinion of these distinguished authors, and a con- hrmation of itsnoyelty as an evidence of purgatorian purification alter death. Bellarmme's nineteen quotations comprehend all that were alleged for this theory in his dav. Alexander re- viewed all the scnptural proofs, which had been formerly urffed on this controversy. But neither Bellarmine nor Alexander mention this prison of the antediluvians. The citation was pressed into the ranks by some modem scribblers, who were at a loss tor an argument. nitrl^fnf Wf "^^-"^ ^Tr 'r* "* "-^feratur non ad deBcensum Christi ad inferos. 111. vjuffist. 5/ Art. 11. P. 145. Augustin, 2. 679. Ed. 164 Inae anf-P dont^lrl,nli^V°°r??''^"*?'''P''*'^'?*^*- Beda.5.706. Christ par son esprit, dont il remplit Np4, prficha aux hommes incr^dules de ce temns lii rhWat nr£,h» aonc a ces moreduieH, non en personne ni visiblement, mais'par son Esprft'ou'il avoit communique & No^. Catnet, 24. 159. Du Pin, 1. 386 PURGATORY DESTITUTE OF TKIDITIONAL AUTHORITY. 515 infatuated, scribbling! nZ^Vl^JcT"- ^T' -^^^^P* ^ ^^^ gatory. Bede and^Sarm n^ hl.T' ""f ' ^*^ '\^^ P"^' purgafry, and the gaol S2TuehTZlZ'i)t^''' Placed Lu, hood; and our Lord when L^l. I A,^^^^ neighbor- lodging^ of Abraham W and T k'^ ^ ?' subter&nean had pe?haps given the^tCnl oH ' ^^^ ^^''' companions, exhortation.' ^ He miffht Xn hi ^""'^^^^1 ^ ^^U and an paid these suffering ru&rnean.! J^"! '"^ i^' ^^^^^t^' ^^^^ sermon; though a^mLsTmodern T'^ ^fd preached them a would have bfen morbus M But t^Son Th ^' T^^^' appear, was some way or other unacconnf!w •u''^'.'*^ "^^"^^ ing the latter ceremony ""accountably guilty of neglect- tio^TnTSXtniiLt^^^^^^^^^ era, mention any such S tj^^'^^^^ter the Christian cation of souls between death ^5!^!''^''"'''^^^*" «^<^« °^P"ri«- ^^M^Vo^trfT^'^ ' ""'"^" specioien, be selected Auo^Xe Fn J -^ these may, as a Augustine, while he owns^ h^ave^P^^T'l, 1?^ ^P^P^anius.^ qualified and emphaticirLnJrr^'JL -5 ^^"' ^«Jf *« in Un- as unknown to the church anffi'iJ^ *'?^c,^^ ^ ^^''^ P^ace, Ephraim, like AuiisM^e ' aotn^i^ *° tue Sacred Scriptures but disclaims, in^thecWtrr^^^^^^^^^ ITT "^^ ^ ^'^^^ place.' 'To aVoid hell is/ he aver to oh.^ • ^'f "' ' "^^^^^ miss heaven is to enter Lll ' q • . °. ^''^ ^^aven, and to third .egion. Epiphanius adrnif,'"^*"'^^ ^' .^^'^'' *«^«^«« "o or of rep^entanceXr death . "«"«« <>r advantage of piety by mty rd\r1s''^^^^^^^^^ been granted Greek and^Latin ^^^Z^^t ^^^^tS- Est sub terra? vicinus in- gere gehennam, hoc ipsum sit remum ^(bIoS?^^' ^^T ^^'■° "^^«™o- Effu- excidere m gehennam Tntrare. ffiLToTo ^^' q^emadmodum et eo 0.«e ,,. .0,.,,, .„,,,,.„, „^^ Aa.o"/,^;fwo. Epiph. 1. 502. ■ 516 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. the silence of revelation, tradition, and councils. Similar con- cessions have been made by Alphonsus, Fisher, and Polydorus.' The advocates of this dogma do not even pretend to the authority of the earlier fathers ; such as Barnabas, Clemens, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin, Tatian, Ireneeus, Melito, Athenagoras, and Theophilus. Its abettors appeal to no writers, who flourished for 200 years after the Christian era ; nor, if we except those who found their speculation on the illogical argu- ment of prayer for the dead, till the fourth century. These authors had often occasion to treat on the subjects of heaven, hell, death, judgment and the resurrection. Future happiness and misery were frequently, in their works, made to pass in review before the mind of the reader, amid an entire omission of any ttjmporary state of punishment or expiation. Ignatius, addressing the Magnesians, teaches a state of death and of life without the slightest allusion to a middle place. Polycarp wrote on the resurrection ; Athenagoras, the Athenian philoso- pher, composed a whole treatise on the same topic ; and yet neither of these authors betrays a single hint or offers a solitary observation on the subject of purgatory, This theme, so lucrative and notorious in modern times, was unknown to the simple authors and Christians of antiquity. The Latins, on this question, in the council of Florence, quoted for authority Athaiiasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory, Am- brosius, Augustine, Cyril, and Leo. Bellarmine, Alexander, and many other modems refer to tlie same authors.^ But the earliest of these flourished in the end of the fourth century, when error and superstition began their reign, and after a period of nearly four hundred years had elaps' d from the intro- duction of Christianity. These writers, besides, only testify the prevalence of intercession for the dead. But this super- stition,notwithstanding its absurdity, implies, as shall afterward be shown, no middle place of purification between death and the resurrection. Bellarmine, nevertheless, and many who follow his steps, have endeavored to find this theory in the fathers. This they attempt in two ways. One consists in confounding the Orige- nian ordeal with the popish purgatory. Origen, carried on the wings of vain speculation, imagined that all, saint and sinner, prophet, martyr, and confessor, would, after the resurrection at the last judgment, pass through the fire of the general con- flagration.' This passage through the igneous element, in the scheme of the Grecian visionary, would try and purify men as 1 i^_i„x . _ Bsiits, § 9. Aluhoa. viii. Fish. Art. 18. Polydor. viii. 2 Labb. 18. 1149. Bell. 1. 6. Alex. D. 41. 3 Homines omnes igne examinationis iri definit, Huet. 1. 139. Bell. 1. 11. EatiuB, 1. 216. Calm. 22. 362. ADMISSIONS OF KOMISH WRITER& 617 the furnace separates the alloy from the precious metals, such as silver and gold. This chimera, broached by Origen, was adopted by Hilary, Ambrosius, Gregory, Lactantius, Jerome, Ephraim, Basil, and many of the schoolmen. But the ordeal of Origen differs widely from the purgatory of Bellarmme. Origen s scrutiny begins after the general resurrection, and will be accomplished in the universal confla- gration Bellarmine's purgatory begins at the day of death, and will terminate at or before the day of general judg- ment. Its inhabitants will then be translated to heaven, and the habitation left empty. These two states of purgation, therefore, will not exist even at the same time. The one ends before the other begins. Origen's process differs from Bellarmino's also in the persons exposed to the refining operation. The Grecian fanatic's hot bath extends to all, soul and body, good, bad, and indifferent The saint, the sinner, and the middling class, whether guilty of venial or mortal delinquency, must submit, in this specula- tor s system, to the devouring and scrutinising flame. Holy Mary herself must fry, in undistinguished torment, with less exalted mortals. Even her God-bearing ladyship can claim no exemption. The only exception will be Immanuel, who is the Kighteousness of God. The L man superstitionist's labora- tory, on the contrary, is only for the intermediate class, who are bespattered with venial pollution. His furnace, however warm and capacious, will not be allowed to roast the saint, the martyr, or confessor, and, much less, the mother of God. These distinctions will appear from the works of Origen, Hi- kry, Ambrosius, Augustine, Lactantius, Jerome, Ephraim, Basil, Aquinas, Paulinus and Isidorus.' Origen represents all' ^^"^^xT®^"""®"*'""®'" ^^ morte, indigeamus sacramento eluente nos et pur- gante. JVemo enim absque sordibus resurgere potent. Veniendum est omnibus act ignem. Omnes nog venire necesse est ad lUum ignem, etiamsi Paulus sit aliquis yel Petrus. Origen, Horn. 3, 6, 14. An diem judicii concupiBcimus, in quo nobis est ille indefessus obeundus, in quo subeunda sunt gravia ilia expiandee a peccatis animse supplicia ? Beatee Mariffi anunam gladius pertransivit. HUary in Psalm cxviii. P. 856. Hilarius insin- uat etiam, beatam Mariam transire debuisse per ilium ignem. Bellarmin II 1 Igne purgabuntur filii Levi, igne Ezechiel, igne Daniel. Amb. 1. 693.' in Psaim xxxvi. Omnes oportet transire per flammas, sive ille Joannes ait, aive ille sit Petrus. Amb. 1, 1064. in Psalm cxviii. Per judicium purgata novissimum eis quoquc igne mundatis. Augustin, C. D. AA. 26. Justos cum judicaverit etiam igne eos examinabit. Lactan. Vlt 21 Dommus ad ignem judicium vocare se monstrat. Ad sanctos illius pervenit Jerome, 2. 1434. m Amos vii. Transibimus ignem. Per ignem transiturus sit. iipnraim, 91. 441. 1. 4/5. m Esa. IV. 1^8 ille finalis conflagrationis aget in males et bonos. Elementa purgabuntur per Ignem etiam in corporibus electorum. Aquin. III. 74. VIII P. 563,564. 518 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEEY. after the resurrection, as needing and undergoing the purifyin/z flame. He excepte not even Peter and Paul. Hilary subfecti every ipdividual. even Lady Mary, to the burning scrutiny. His saintship transfers even the queen of heaven, without any ceremony, to the rude discipline. Ambrosius, like Origen and HiJaxy urges the necessity of such an examination, and con- sips to the common conflagration, the Jewish Prophets and Chnstan apostles Ezekiel, Daniel, Peter, and Paul. Similar statements mav be found in Augustine, Lactantius, Jerome, H^phraim, Basil, Paulmus and Isidorus. The same system, according to Bellarmine, Calmet, and Estius, was patronised LomS"'^'''"^' ^^^''^' ^"''^®""»' ^cuin, Haimo, and Bellaraiine, on this subject, acts an inconsistent and uncandid part. He first cites Origen, Hilary, Ambrosius, Lactantius, Jerome, and Basil, m favor of his purgatorian theory; and atterward without any hesitation admits and even exposes their error. Ihe Jesuit transubstantiates the Origenian ordeal into the popish purgatory ; and then, in sheer inconsistency, shews, with clear discrimination, the distinction between the two sys- tems and the two kinds of purgation ; and characterises Origen- ism as a misteke, if not a heresy.^ This was to vary from him- selt, and to ^ve up the authority of these authors, whom he Had quoted m support of his darling superstition. HeUarmine^ in these concessions, has been followed, and with reason, by Calmet, Estius, Courayer, and Du Pin.^' Cahnet, in his comment, represents Origen, Hilary, Ambrosius, Lactan- tius, Basil, Rupert. Eucherius, and Alcuin as teaching the ne- ctssity of those who are the most holy4;o pass through the fire to heave^ Estius states the same, and adds the names of Au- gustine, Haimo, Lombard and Aquinas. Courayer on Paolo as well as Du Pin, in his account of these authors, gives a similar representation. Calmet, Estius, Courayer, and Du Pin therefore, like Bellarmine, abandon this argument for an inter- mediate place of expiation. The patrons of Romanism argue also from the prayers, pre- terred by the ancients for the dead, which, they suppose, imply purgatory. The argument, taken from supplication for depar- „J]^*^^°""•n °""®* '«?'^. '"^'^^'' 1"<*<1 °°'i cremarit flamma. Bed proba- vent. JJostrasiJIopungetinigneanimas. Paulinus, 345, 686. 1^1^11^^**^*™ crimina, qua per ignem judicii purgari possunt. Isidorus, c. 13. J^-U* Z, 1. 6t 1. o* •^ Lea unscroyentque toutes les ftmes, mdmes ceUes des plus justes, sortant de ce monde passent par le feu avant que d'arriver au Ciel. Calmet. 22 362 Sril 1 ol^ igms i)robabit omnes. l)e igne novlssimi diei, senserunt veteres.' J!-8tius, 1. 216. Ongenes, Lactance, HUaire, et quelques autres avoient crtl Q« au jo^v,^" jugeuieut, tous seroioni purinez par le feu. Courayer. in ARGUMENT FROM PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD REFUTED. 619 ted souls, has been urged with great confidence but little success. The fact is admitted, but the consequence is denied. The Maccabean history has been cited, to evince the belief of the Jews in purgatorian expiation. But this book is unca- nonical. Its canonicity, doubted, says Bellarmine, by the ancient Christians, was rejected by the Jews, and denied by Cyril Jerome, Hilary, Ruffinus, Gregory, and the council of Laodicea.' This authority, if prejudice were not blind, might decide the controversy. The apocryphal work has a greater want than that of canoni- city, and IS deficient in morality and, in this instance, in mean- ing. The author commends suicide. He eulogised Razis for a bold attempt to kill himself with his sword, rather than fall into the hands of the enemy. This act, the historian calls noble, though contrary to the law of God.'' His reason for praying for the dead is senseless, as his enco- mium on self-assassination is immoral. Judas collected money for this purpose, because ' he was mindful of the resurrection.' Intercession for departed spirits, if the slain should not rise again, would, he said, be 'superfiuous and vain.'" But the resurrection refers to the body; while supplication for the deceased refers to the soul. The body, at death, goes not to purgatory, even according to Romish theology ; but to the tomb, there to wait Lhe summons of the archangel. The immortal spirit, if in a place of punishment, might need the petition of the living ; though the body remain in the grave. The design of mass and supplication for the departed is not to deliver the body from the sepulchre, but the soul from purgatory, which will be entirely unpeoplfed at the resurrection, of which Judas was so mindful. The Jews, who fell in the battle of Idumea, were guilty of idolatry, which is t, mortal sin. The coats of the slain contained things consecrated to the idols of Jamnia. These votive ofier- ings, the unhappy men retained till their death; and must, therefore, as guilty not merely of venial frailty but mortal trans- gression, have been in a place not of temporary, but everlasting punishment; and, therefore, beyond the aid of sacrifice or supplication. The Maccabean historian was as bad a theolo- gian aa a moralist. The modest author, however, makes no high pretensions. He wrote his history, he remarks, according to his ability. This, if well, was as he wished; but if ill, would, he hoped, be excused. He did, it seems, as well as he could, which, no firilin+. IQ oil a rooortnoVvlrt r\«».o/>»^ n.»..U >--■"■ mi_ ? . 1 , — ., . ,y,.,j^j.ti,c^iv ]Jbs.a\ju vruuiu C^pCUi^. X Uiij, IlOW- 1 II Maccab xii. 44. Cyril, 66. Jerom, 5. 141. HUary, 615. Crab. 1. 380. Maccab. xiv. 41. 3 Maccab. xii. 43. 520 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. ever, as the author suggests, is one part of his history, which certainly does not discover the hand of a maater.' The argument, at any rate, is in this case, taken from prayer for the dead, which is inconclusive. Intercessions were prefer- red for the good and the bad, for the saint and the sinner, in the days of antiquity. The supplications, says Courayer in raolo, ' are much more ancient and general than the doctrine t1 Pj^^^^' *^"^ ^^'"6 offered for martyrs and confessors.' The dogma, therefore, being more recent than such supplications, cannot be founded on this basis." The supposition does not necessarily imply a temporary state of punishment, but may be performed for enhancing the eternal joys of the blessed, or alleviating the endless sorrows of those who are sentenced to destruction. The Christian fathers, from the days of Tertullian, who is the first who mentions this custom, prayed for their friends after their departure from this earth and their entrance on a world of spirits. Tertullian, about the end of the second century, . admonished a widow to pray for her late husband, and to commemorate the anniversary of his death. This, however, was after his apostasy to Montanism. But the superstition is natural, and soon, in consequence, became general. The people, oays Eusebius, 'wept at the funeral of Constantine, and sup- plicated God with tears and lamentations for the emperor's soul. Augustine, in a similar manner, prayed for Monica ; and Ambrosius for Valentinian and Theodosius. All this, however, affords no argument for purgatory. The ancient Christians supplicated for those, who, the modems will admit, could not be in a place of purgatorian punishment or pain. Constantine's spirit, while the people prayed, had, says Eusebius 'ascended to its God.' Monica's soul, before Augus- tine * intercessions, was, the saint believed, in heaven. She »l^eady enjoyed what he asked. Valentinian had ascended to the flowery scenes of deUght, while he enjoyed the fruition of eternal life, and borrowed light fromjthe ' Sun of Righteousness.' Theodosius, while Ambrosius petitioned, ' lived in immortal light and lasting tranquillity.' The saint, ne /ertheless, resolved that no day or night should pass without supplications for the deceased and glorified emperor.* » Maccab. xii. 40. et xv. 33. '■^ Ces priferea ^tant bien plus'anciennes et plus gdn^rales que ladoctrine du pur- gatoire puwqu'elles se faisoient pour les ma'-Jiyrs et les confeseeurs. Paolo, 2. 633, Tas tvx<" wep rov fiaaiX«as ^ux>j», awiUioaav rtt ecw. EusebiuB, iv. 71. Tertullian, 501. * npot rov avTov 0tov avf\afi$' should have Lp«cL™/i*%t'"i™TF' '^ich, if wielded with torian prison whinh i««w t„k • "" **" °f ""e puiga- to breathe °eoderato?snhet- '" " """^ ''™ "^""■^^ "««» healthy seat. The ,^sZXu?.a'Z " ™ ^^^^t"' "'' ao.y a«„„.„dati„„!'d„ri„g s^t^Xj. fo^trS for'ttrsis.^'s c^L'stted"" i°r' *^ ''»" - assigned by Cvrii Eninh.r.^, w stated, and the reasons are Thele sunSicaS- if P„ "?; Chrysostom, and Angustine.> ness TdXini h kfemaZi'^'^'l''''''^^ celestial happi- thoaeh intheworST "»'T?- The torments of the guflty mighf irw'a: Mev^^^KitSar '" "1 ^ ««"4*^3: Crby-^tn^S i «• NrsWS? d*d felieity/CfrantJSi ctl r'tte^ZnTZ?"?"' *? intercessions ofTe faithful"^ "' •''" ''^ '^''="'"«<' t-^ ""e ant^«f^.%Kr Wever^r i" ">^ 'f'"- "^ Christian tianfty, mav bTfon^' ;„T7 ' *''°"8'' *^"''"'«<' &»>» Chris- VivnToi uiffflow va, 2iJ.» -r*^of<-*vri tux^. Jipiph. H. 75. d. 911 ncc^fl Aug- 7- '2. 239;- NonTterno'sSicii £1 danV"'''■!\^"'°' fiat da^a'tia Aug. 7. 239. Buppiicio ftnem dando, sed levamen adhibendo. PAGAN AND JEWISH PURGATOHY. 623 Mahometan mythology. A purgatorian region and process obtained a place in the Platonic philosophy, near four hundred years before the commencement of the Christian era. Plato taught this theory in his Phaedo and Gorgias. The Grecian sage divided men into three classes, the good, the bad, and the middling. The good comprised men distinguished for tempe- rance, justice, fortitude, liberality, and truth. Philosophers And legislators, whose wisdom and laws had conferred im- provement and happiness on mankind, were all comprehended in this division. The bad included all who had spent their days in the perpetration of aggravated crimes, such as sacrilege and murder. The middling kind occupied the space between the patrons of sanctity and atrocity ; and their neutrality, at a distance from both extremes, left them open to ^mrgation and amendment. The good, at death, passed, without pain or delay, ' to the islands of the blessed, and to the habitations of unparalleled beauty.' Thr bad, at death, sunk immediately into endless torment in Tartarus. The intermediate descrip- tion, ' purified in Acheron, and punished till their guilt was expiated, were at length admitted to the participation of felicity.'' This fiction, Plato embellished with all the pomp of language and metaphor. The Athenian sage possessed perhaps the greatest luxuriance of imagination 'and elegance of expression which have adorned the annals of philosophy. His theory, in consequence, though chimerical in itself, assumes an interest and borrows a charm from the witchery of its author's style, the grandeur of his conceptions, and the coloring of his fancy. The Grecian philosophy, on this subject, has been decorated with the fascinations of Roman eloquence and poetry. Cicero, in his dream of Scipio, has clothed Plato's speculation with all the beauty of diction. The soul, says the Roman orator, which has wallowed in sensuality, submitted to the dominion of licen- tiousness, and violated the laws of God and man, will not, after its separation from the body, attain happiness, till it shall, for many ages, have been tossed in restless agitation through the world. Virgil has inwoven the Platonic fiction in his immortal iEneid; and represented souls, in the infernal world, as making expiation and obtaining purification by the application of water, wind, and fire.' Such is the dream of Platonic philosophy, Ciceronian elo- quence, and Virgilian veree. The existence of a Purgatorian world, if Plato, Cicero, and Virgil were canonical, could be 1 n. ^r ifiV vi wvjwvt fiKuasx ixfvoi. Plato, Phffid. 84. Aug. 733. Brug. 1. 378. Bell. 1. 7. 2 Cicero, 3. 397. Virgil, ^n. VI. 524 THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. easily evinced. The proofs, omitted in the Jewish and Chris- tian revelations, might be found, with great facility, in the Gre- cian and Roman classics. The topography and polity of the purgatorian empire, which are unmentioned in the sacred annals, are delineated in the heathen poetry and mythology. The T^^'i J'^""^ "^^f ''"y' °^ '^ ^0^1^ l^ave adopted the works- of Plato, Cicero, and Virgil into the canon, instead of the Apo- crypha. Ihese had as good a title to the honor of canonicity as the apocrypha books, and would have supplied irrefragable evidence for posthumous expiation as well as for many other Komish superstitions. The modern superstition, therefore, which has been imposed on the world for Christianity, is no discovery. Platonism, on this topic, anticipated Popery at least a thousand years. The Athenian embodied the fabrication in his philosophical specu- lations, and taught a system, which, on this subject, is similar to Romanism. The absurdity has. with some modifications adapting it to another system, been stolon without being ac- knowledged from heathenism; and appended, like a useless and deforming wen, to the fair form of Christianity. The Jews, like the Pagans, believe in purgatory. The He- brews though after the lapse of many ages, became acquainted with the heathen philosophy. Alexander the Great planted a Jewish colony in Egypt ; and these, mingling with the nations, began, m process of time, to blend the Oriental and Grecian philosophy with the Divine simplicity of their own ancient theology. This perhaps was the channel through which this ancient people received the Pagan notion of clarification after aeath. l he soul, in the modem Jewish system, undergoes this process of expiation for only twelve months after its separation trom the body; and is allowed, during this time, to visit the persons and places on earth, to which during life it was attached, fepints, m this intermediate state, enjoy, on the Sabbath, a tem- porary cessation of punishment. The dead, in this system, rested on the seventh day from pain as the living from labor. Ihe Jewish like the popish purgatorians, obtained consolation ^ miP^^i^^ ?^ *^® intercessions of their friends on earth » Ihe Mussu men adoptedthe idea of purgatorian punishment, in all probability, from the popish and Je\^ish systems. The Arabian impostor formed his theology from Judaism and Popery. Ihe unlettered prophet of Mecca, it is commonly believed, was assisted by an apostatised Christian and a temporising Jew in the composition of the Koran and in the fabrication of Is- lamism. Ihe notion of nosthummis nllr•ifioQ+;r^»> r,„j „* au- commencement of the Hegira. obtained a reception into the 1 Basn. IV. 32. Calm. Diet. 3. 747. Morery, 7. 396. INTRODUCTION OF PURGATORY. 521 ■church and into the synagogue ; and, from them, into Mahom- ^tanism, Gentilism also, in all probability, was, in this amal- gamation of heterogeneous elements, made to contribute a part ; and all again were, as might be expected, modified according to the dictation of prejudice or fancy.' Such, on this question, were the notions of Pagans, Jews, and Mussulmen. A similar appendage was, in the progress of su- perstition, obtruded on Christianity. Augustine seems to have been the first Christian author, who entertained the idea of pu- rifying the Boul while the body lay in the tomb. The African saint, though, in some instances, he evinced judgment and piety, displayed, on many occasions, unqualified and glaring inconsis- tency. His works, which are voluminous, present an odd medley of sense, devotion, folly, recantations, contradictions, a,nd balderdash. ' His opinions on purgatorian punishment exhibit many in- stances of fickleness and incongruity. He declares, in many places, against any intfermediate state after death between heaven and hell. He rejects, in emphatical language, ' the idea of a third place, as unknown to Christians and foreign to reve- lation.' He acknowledges only two habitations, the one of eternal glory and the other of endless misery. Man, he avers, * will appear in the last day of the world as he was in the last day of his life, and will be judged in the same state in which he had died.'^ But the saint, notwithstanding this unequivocal language, is, at other times, full of doubt and difficulty. The subject, he grants, and with truth, is one that he could never clearly under- stand. He admits the salvation of some bj' the fire mentioned by the Apostle. This, however, he sometimes interprets to signify temporal tribulation before death, and sometimes the general conflagration after the resurrection. He generally ex- tends this ordeal to all men without any exception ; and he conjectures, in a few instances, that this fire may, as a tempo- rary purification, be applied to some in the interval between death and the general judgment. This interpretation, however, he offers as a mere hypothetical speculation. He cannot tell ' whether the temporary punishment is here or will be hereafter : or whether it is here that it may hot be hereafter.' The idea, he grants, is a supposition without any proof, and ' unsupported by any canonical authority.' He would not, however, ' contra- dict the presumption, because it might perhaps be the truth.'' 1 Sale, 76. Calmet, 3. 748. Morery, 397. det mundi novissiinus dica ; (^uoniam qualis in die isto quisque moritur, talis in die illo judicabitur. Augustin, ad Hesych. 2. 743. et Hypog. V. 5. P. 40. 3 Eamdem tribulationem ignem vocat. Aug. C. D. XXI. 26. AmboBprobat. 526 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Augustine's doubts show, to a demonstration, the noveltv of «,ceived opimon aa destitute of canonical autCrity • ^^^6^8 would he have acknowledged a heaven and a hell aT at th! X^-3r-trer-«^s^rf:-^-rJS^ ^Zir''°°"'^'''*^y''""^ ^^ -ve™l,ges:'^SeS Augustine's literary and theological celebrity tfindpd +^ fi,. acknowledged superiority w^uld circlr^th rapTdi?/"d' an^sZCrll^JLk':"™^"' -.^endation tLuJh Zt This superstition like many others that grew up in the dark ages wa. promote^d by the barbarism of the Ks iSlv — C'p".? ^"t?^ r^« ^^^"^^ with hords of savages The Goths and Lombards invaded Italy France was subdued by the Franks; while the Vanda f desoTated Spam. The martial but unlettered Saxons from the foreste of Germany wasted the fairest provinces of Britain Smde v^immenan darkness, m consequence, seemed to oversoread the world. Art, science, philosophy, and literature appeared in terror or disgust, to have fled from barbarised mfnTnd fetiaLrTheTd ^'.^" *'^ nionument;"?tr^':Sd onristianity. The clouds of ignorance extended to the Asians hie 649 „f r.«„ iu~" ""^i '" ■""" ^.-'^- '^"'^ '"^ i;.intuin, sivo et iiic et ibi ut non ibi non redargue, quia forsitan verum est. Aug C D XS '. In eis nuUa velut canonica constituitur auctoritas. Aug." Dul 6 XXI. 26, P. ' " 131. 132. SLOW PROGRESS OF PURGATORY. 627 and Africans as weU aa to the Europeans, prepared the world for the reception of any absurdity, and facilitated the proffress 01 superstition. ° The innovation, however, notwithstanding the authority of Augustine and the Vandalism of the age, made slow progress A loose and indetermined idea of temporary punishment and atonement after death, but void of system or consistency, began to float, at random, through the minds of men. The superati- tion, congenial with the human soul, especially when destitute of rehgious and literary attainments, continued, in gradual and tardy advances, to receive new accessions. The notion, in this, crude and indigested state, and augmenting by continual accu- niulations, proceeded to the popedom of Gregory in the end of the sixth century. Gregory, like Augustine, spoke on this theme with striking- indecision. The Roman pontiff and the African saint, discours- ing on vernal frailty and posthumous atonement, wrote with hesitation and inconsistency. His infaUibility, in his annota- tions on Job, disclaims an intermediate state of propitation. Mercy, if once a fault consign to punishment, will not,' says the pontiff, ' afterward return to pardon. A holy or a malignant spirit seizes the soul departing at death from the body and detains it for ever without any change.'^ This, at the present day, would hardly pass for popish orthodoxy. This, in modern times, would, at the Vatican, be accounted little better than Protestantism. His infallibility, however, dares nobly to vary from himself. The annotator and the dialogist are ^ot the same person or, at least, do not teach the same faith. The vicar-general of God, in his dialogues, ' teaches the belief of a purgatorian fire, prior to the general judgment, for trivial offences. '^ This, it must be granted, is one bold step towards modern Romanism. But his holiness is still defective. He mentions trivial failings ; but says nothing of the temporal punishment of mortal delinquency. This, to the sovereign pontiff in the sixth century, was un- known land. His holiness is guilty of another variation from modern Ca- tholicism. He had no common receptacle or common means of punishment, as at the present day, for the luckless souls satis- fying for venial frailty. He consigns the unhappy purgatorians to various places, and refines them sometimes in fire and some- 1 Si semel culpa ad poenam pertrahit, misericordia ulterius ad veniam non reducet. Greg, in Job viii. 10. Humani casus tempore, sive sanctus sive malig- nus spintuB. efirredientem atiimnTn nliuiafra r«' UH (80 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERT. The innovation mentioned in this manner with doubt bv i^ngustine and recommended with inconsistency by Greffor/ ^!Lii. t ^'^^^^"tyi^.their day, continued to spread aS claim the attention and belief of men. The names of the Afri- can and Roman saints were calculated to influence the faith of the Latins, among whom the invention advanced, though with terdv steps to perfection. Its bulk, like that of the Alpine ava- lanche mcreaaedm Its progress. This terror of the Alps as it proceeds on its headlong course, acquires new accessions of nn^S"" "H" '• ^^M ^^^ °P'"^"°' patronised by a saint and a pontiff, received m like manner, continual accretions from con- genial minds. The shallow river, advancing to the main.3ls iJtV '^f'^'^^iy.'^^''^'' ^^^ the recent theory, in a similar way, a^ it flowed down the stream of time, augmented Its dimensions from the unfailing treasuiy of superkition. 1 he progress of the fabrication, however, was slow. Its move- ments to perfection were as tardy as its introduction into Chris- tendom had been late. This opinion, says Courayer, ' did not thTall ZTr ^^r ?^ '\^^'^ ^^^*"^y' Fisher admiS that all the Latins did not apprehend its truth at the same time but by gradual advances. ' The universal church,' he admits knew and received purgatory at a late period." Its belief ob- tamed no general establishment in the Christian commonwealth inR^rf^lA-^^^^V'^^^-- '^^^ council of Aix laChappelle. m 836 decided m direct opposition to posthumous satisfaction or pardon. This synod mentioned ' three ways of punishment for mens sms.' Of these, two are in this life and one Tfter death. Sins said this assembly, ' are, in this world, punished by the repentance or compunction of the transgressor, and bv the correction or chastisement of God. The thi?d, after death IS tremendous and awful, when the judge shall say 'depart from' me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels, j The fathers of this council knew nothing of pur- gatory, and left no room for its expiation. ^. The innovation in 998. obtained an establishment at Cluny wl'; "I r %''^ '""' ^^ archangel, and Baronius th^e brightest star of the age, opened an extensive mart of prayers r^firT'i w *^' T ^^'°"^' ^^*^^^^^ in the purgatorian retoi t. Fulbert s archangel seems, in this department, to have 'ri.l^nl i '^^* PToprement que dans le cinqui6me siecle, que cette opinion a com menc^^ prendre uue forme. Couray. in Paolo 2 644 Npm,fi tSV I omnea sed sensim hujus rei veritatL concerpemnt Purl&^^^^^ SS°\ia ''''^*"°' "'^"'■^^'^ ''"^'''^ ^"^"*- Fish S~h.*lS. 18 "Tribus modis peccata mortalium vindicantur -. Hnnh,,.. ;„ hv vifa • ■^---•- Z°,-if ^'"'^'■**•* .^''*i* ^"^^"^ ^^*^* ^^Ide pertimesJenda et'Te^ibiHs^Qua nonm hoc sed m futuro justissimo Dei judicio fiet ssculo quami" i^st A PUROATORT COMPLETED BY THE SCHOOLMEN. «81 excelled all his predecessors. A few, in several places, had be- gun to retail intercessions for the purgatorians. But Odilo commenced business as a wholesale merchant.* The traffic, no doubt, was as benelicial aa it was benevolent, and gratified at once the selfish and social passions. Odilo's exertions, in his spiritual emporium, gained the grati- tude, if not the money, of Benedict the Eighth. His infalli- bility, notwithstanding his holiness and supremacy in life, had ailer death, the mischance of falling into the place of posthu- mous punishment. His hoHness, however, through the media- tion and masses of the Abbot, escaped from the smoke and fire of purgatory." All this must have been very satisfactory to Benedict, and also, as he died rich, to Odilo. The purgatorian novelty, however, though admitted by many, had not obtained a general reception in the middle of the twelfth century. This is clear from Otho the historian, who was a man of profound erudition and research. This author repre- sents ' some as believing in a purgatorian place situated in the infernal regions, where souls are consigned to darkness or roasted with the fire of expiation." This testimony is very explicit. The opinion was not entertained by all, but asserted by some. The historian, who possessed enlarged information, would never have used such language, had purgatory, in his day, been the common belief of the ecclesiastical community. The peo- ple were divided. Some maintained, and some rejected the dogma of a temporary expiation after death. Those who believed in the posthumous satisfaction could not agree whether the medium of torment was darkness or fire. The innovation, it is plain, had not, in Otho's day, become the general faith of Christendom. Bernard, who flourished in the same age as Otho, could not, with all his saintship, determine whether the posthumous punishment 'was by heat, cold, or some other infliction.'* The speculation of Augustine, Gregory, and Odilo fell, after Otho s time, into the hands of Aquinas and other schoolmen. The angelic doctor and the rest of the confraternity finished the fabric, which others had founded. These, on this subject aa on others, gave the finishing touch to the outline of former 1 Odilonem hoc anno commemorationem omnium defunctorum instituisse • cujus exemplo ad caeteras ecclesias haec institutio promanavit. Mabillon 4* 125. Spon. 1047. II, III. Bruys. 2. 240. "^"", •*• » Vir Dei praecepit, ut pro def uncto pontifice, preces fierent. Mabillon, 4. 312. J Esse apud Inferos locum purgatorium, in quo salvandi vel tenebras tantum •••'no — ' — ^^ — !..„...„ ijju,^ u5/sorqu6iiuux, Quiuam asBcx^iuiii. Otno, Chron. vm. zo. . * Qui in pnrgatono sunt, expectant redemptionem prius cruciandi aut calore igniB, aut ngore frigons, aut alicujus gravitate doloris. Bernard, 1719. 582 THE VARIATIONS OP POPEBY. days, and furmshed the skeleton with sinews, muscles form and color. Their distinctions on this topic exhiWra Xw' Th«i7„TT^T f.r^f'^' metaphysics, and refinemS Ifnln ^ ^^ ^""f ^ ^^' ^^^'^ ^""^ *^« punishment of the pi- gatonan mansions.' ^ The plan, finished in this manner by the schoolmen came before the general council of Florence in'its twenty-fiEeS! m 1438, and received its sanction. This decision Was ratified by pope Eugenms; and the opinion, after a long succession of ♦T, J^ ^'^!'''' ^^^^^^f' Wsed the Latins on this question in the Florentine council, and the discordancy occasLed W aad nonsensical discussions. The Greeks, With impregnablf obstinacy, disclaimed the idea of fiery pain or expration Stlh^T^T'^'r'^l^^*^ '^' desL^of accommoTatS* yielded a httle to the other. The Latins waved the idea of £,S r" ^''- '°^ f' ^'''^''''^ ^^'^ turn, polite?y ai * Tlf ^^P"y^*^°«^ «f. *^« vision of God. A temporary uni^n therefore was formed without sincerity, but soon afterward viola- n -A ^^.^^^^^^^^ disbehef of purgatory has been granted by Guido, Alphonsus. Fisher, More, Prateolus, RenSidot and Simon. Bellarmine himself here suspected the Greeks of heresy ; and supported :s surmises with the authority of Thomas Aquinas, the ax^gehc doctor. The disbelief of this theology was also entertamed by the other oriental denomina- SvriW ^' Abyssmians, Georgians. Armenians, and 'The city of Trent witnessed the last synodal discussion on this topic m a general council. The decision, on that occasion presented an extraordinary demonstration of unity The nre' paction of a formulary was committed, says Paolo, to the cardinal of Warmia and eight bishops, or, according to Pala- vicmo, to five bishops and five divines. These, knSwing the dehcacy of the task, endeavored to avoid every difficulty yet could not agree. Terms says Paolo and Du Pin, could not be found to express each person's mind.* Language, incapa- ble of representing their diversity of opinion. sSnk under the I AQuin. III. 69, 70. P. 644, 547, 565. » Labb. 18. 526. Bin. 8. 668. Crabb, 3. 476 'Bin. 8. 561. Crabb. 3. 376. Coss. 6.20 Bell 1 2 a1t>i,«„ i/ttt r- v A 18 More. 63. P-teol. VII. RenSud'2. f(S* hLnTrB^R 1^37^0- * N'^tant pas possible de trouver des termes pronres 4 exnrim«rir;».;ol. „.: greae cnacun, li valoit mieux nen dire autre'chose sinon que'bonne7ffluvi^« PURQATOBT COMPLETED BY THE SCHOOLMEN. 588 mighty task of enumerating the minute and numberless varia- tions, entertained by a communion which boasts of perfect and exclusive agreement and immutability. This, in variety, out- rivalled the patrons of Protestantism. These, in the utterance of heresy, have sometimes evinced ample want of accordancy ; but never, like the Trentine fathers, exhausted language in stating their jarring notions. The theological vocabulary was always found sufficient to do justice to heretical variety. But the universal, infallible, holy, Roman council, through want of words or harmony, was forced to admit, in general terms, the existence of a middle place, disengaged of all particular cir- cumstantial explanation. This, the council pledged their word, is taught by revelation and tradition, as well as by the mighty assembly of Trent. The holy unerring fathers, however, though they could not agree themselves nor find expression for their clashing speculations, did not forget to curse, with cordi- alitv and devotion, all who dissented from their sovereign decision. The cursing svstem, indeed, was the only thing on which the sacred synod snowed any unanimity. / CHAPTER XVIII. CELIBACY OF THE CLEBOY. MONY-SKCOND PKRIOD OP ^8^07 OPPn«,l?.?' ^'"''•"VBINAOB, AND MATBI- FORNIOATION-PRKFKRENCE OF FOHN^ATTnv !i°^ ^" «B««0RY-T0L1IBATI0N Of -PERMISSION orADuS OB lmA«TTn rlZ "^^"""NY AMONG THK CLBBOT fUOAOY IN KNOLANn 8PA1S n,,n«7wJ ^HK LAITY- mw OF PRIESTLY PBO- mO-^OUNOir^^TL^YONTcONsSi'lNDTufL"'^^^ '"^^''' ""^' ^'^ ISm!^^^ 1 *l' '^'.'?y ^«^' ^^' ^ ^«°? series of time, been established m the Romish communion. Tie bishop, the Driest and the deacon are, in the popish theology, forb dden to ml^' b thrrsSm :r,^^l%^^-ed to thela^V. The insti'S; S n!> Ti, • °^ °f hohcism, IS accounted a sacrament ind therefore the sign and means of grace and holiness. The councU one oflr '*^ twenty-fourth lession, declares this cereZny sTon • all rSr^f ?*"' ^^ ^h eh ^ceordina to its seventh ses^ sion, all real righteousness is begun and augmented ' The Tnd of Pot' p' '¥ '^I'f ^^^-^--' P-blisfed by te com! weU nf vLT ^T ^"*' ^0"^"^^"^ *° *ell, the council as Z^tZ ^^^^""^''"^ prescribes, in sheer inconsistency, a re- nunciation of an institution which conveys true sanctity as a necessary qualification for the priesthood. ^ V ^' ^ nfltl ^^^°,9^^^« f Romanism, however, vary on the decision even ?iS °n ''^''^'^^^"f'^^'^^^^^^ be divine, or human or Ed^^Hnh ^^"- P^'^^ •^^^' P°P^^^ community account he interdiction a divme appointment. These make the prohibition a matter of faith and moral obligation, which, unlike a quest on of mere discipline, neither the pope nor the universal church h"AlZht:r^^- ^~ded by God, and sanctioned by His Almighty fiat, no earthly power can repeal the enactment ateratioT'te '" ''" ^^^^'^"' ""^^ ^^"^^^ ^^ -e^ ^^^^ alteration. This opinion was patronised by Jerome, Epipha- 1 Per eacramenta. omnia vpraina+iti" "pi Jn->--i^ -' j. i^ , reparatur. Bin. 9. '367, 411." Labb W Hr''r;.Ho''''P*''*''^u*'''' ^^^"'"i*^* Bignificare et tribui. Cat. Trid^TsT- AquSi. tm"^S^, 3^- ^J^-^-^^to VARIETT OF SYSTEMS. 0811 nius, Major, Clichtovius, Qabutius, Siricius, and Innocent.' This party, however, waa never considerable either in number or innuence. A second party reckons the celibacy of the cler^ a human constitution. These, in general, esteem the prohibitipn a ques- tion not of faith but of diHcipline, prescribed not by God but by man, and capable of being altered or even rr pealed by human authority. These are numerous, and include the ma- jority of the popish communion ; and the opinion has been patronised by many theologians of influence and learning, such as Aquinas, Cajetan, Soto, Bellannine, Valentia, Bossuet, Du Pin, Gother, Challenor, and Milner. The partisans of this opinion, however, are subdivided into two factions, distinguished by a slight shade of difference. One of these factions accounts the matrimonial interdiction, apos- tolical, established by the inspired heralds of the gospel ; and continued in uninterrupted succession till the present day. This forms a close approximation to the former system ; and seems to have been advocated, with some variation and inconsistency, by Jerome, Chrysostom, Siricius, Innocent, Gregory, Bellar- mine, Godeau, and Thoma&sin.' The other faction reckons the regulation merely ecclesiastical or human, and a matter of mere expediency, and capable of dispensation or recission according to utility. This system has been countenanced by Aquinas, Cajetan, Antonius, and Gratian. The marriage of the clergy, says Gratian, is forbidden neither by evangelical nor by apostolical authority. Similar statements have been made by Aqumas and Cajetan.' A third party account sacerdotal celibacy not only ecclesias- tical or human, but also useless or hurtful. The opposition to the prohibition, even in the bosom of the Romish communion, has in every age been persevering and powerful. This hosti- lity will, in glowing colors, appear in the ensuing details. The privation has been discountenanced by many of the ablest pa- trons of Romanism, such as Panormitan, Erasmus, Durand, Polydorus, Alvarus, and Pius. The celibacy of the clei'gy, says Pius the Second, is supported by strong reasons, tut opposed by stronger. The edicts of Siricius and Innocent, by which the privation was first enforced, were rejected by many of the ' Jerom. adv. Jov. Epiph. II. 48. Majtr, D. 24. Clich. c. 4. Bell, I. 18. Gibort, 1. 109. Gabut. 21. 2 Oette loi est aussi ancienne que r(5glise. Thomasain, 1.43. Anton c "^l. * Non est essentialiter annexum debitum continentiae ordini sacro, sed ex .)ta» tato ecolesiffi. Aquin. II. Q. 88. A. II. P. 311. Potest Summus Pontifex dis- peunare iu mati'imouio cum sacerdote. Nee ratione ncc auutoritatc j)robutur quod, absolute loquendo, sacerdospeccetcontrahendomatrimonium, quin ratio potius et ad oppoBitum ducit. Cajetan. I. 121. Bell. 1. 19. Godea. 2. 154. :'ip llli 586 clergy. THE VARIATIONS OP POPERY. produced a schism mJ^ ^S f''^'^ ^'^ '"^^^^^^^^ *«d rather than submS to foSLlVr ^.^^^«"?f ^^^ priesthood engagements orTelinnSTr 1^.'P^*^«?' violate their conjugal OefiJan eiftpercr ^^^c W ^^^^ tL for a repeal of theXc/m£ ^^«°^' ^ attended with such odtusJr,'^ T'' ^V^^^^^^' ^«^ ^een alisationof man The^nW J/'^^°A-'^''^ ^^ *^^ ^«"^^^- originating in the unn«fnll • ? ?''f.*'*'¥'''*^'^^<^^^a"«hery, coiSmuniol disgraced sa^^^^^^^^^ 5""' -^"^ *^^ ^«^i«^ of civil and'eccEticalhf^^^^^ '""^''^^'^ '^' ^^«-i« from thf JeZf thtct^^^ "^'/'^ ^°-«' ^« '^ ™ation The Jews coTtenaLeTShpfT^^ '" *^^ ^^^ Testament, the Jewish na?Srcontained np^-flf '^^'^ ^^ maidenhood, and cloistered nuns The n«?S^ "either unmatnmonial priests nor were married and ^ni^' ^^^'^^^"^^ Isaac, and Jacob astical autZify anf wirn/''''''1 ^'^^ '^^ ^'^'^ «««le«i- debarred conna^l enioZenr^'^r ^''^E"''V.^"^ ™ ^^^ lator of Israel, wasmSani LJ^^T'-f^'^t^'^'^^^ ^«gi«Ja- of Palestine suTh .?Noah ?n t «^^'"'^^- ^*^" l^-o^J pro?hets Ezekiel, formeStl c^nne^tfonlndlr™"'^?"^^^' ^^^^and and daughters ThTlllti^^l^^t^^'^.^^^^P^'''''^''^^^^'^ same liberty Matrimnn J n^ priesthood were allowed the could hai^betn^aTa ^pel^^^^^^^^ but IT " tlj ^^^^^' sense to a command Ti,^ ^ p«i mission , but amounted m one of Ab.h^^'her^diCnt' :ZVttT'""'', priests succeeded, in conseminn/ ^f *f ^ ^- J. Aaronical administration of the saSotal Lof' ^/^^^-right. to the Erasm. I, 422. PI*. . ' Bruys, 3. 398. .. ,. ^ tina in Pius. 2. Poriio o con " (Jrabb. l'. 417'. "chiysostom, 1. .^'"•L^"^'- D'^Pm.3.336.-622. 268, 568, et 2. 298. BeU, 1. 18. CELIBACY A VARIATION FROM THE JEWISH THEOCRACY. 537 by which, according to the Divine appointment, the priestly office was transmitted to their posterity and successors, who presided m the worship of Jehovah and the religion of Canaan. Sacerdotal celibacy is a variation from the Christian dispen- Bation revealed in the New Testament. The Christian Reve- lation affords express precept and example for the marriage of the clergy. Paul, addressing Timothy and Titus, represents the bishop as ' the husband of one wife.' The same is said of the deacon. Matrimpny, therefore, according to the book of God, does not disqualify for the episcopacy or tht 'eaconship. The inspired penman also characterises 'forbidding to marry ' as ' a doctrine of devils.' The interdiction of the conjugal union, according to apostoUcal authority, emanated not from God but from Satan. The prohibition and its practical conse- quences among the Romish clergy are ivorthy of their author AUwho are acquainted with the annals of sacerdotal celibacy reflect with disgust on an institution, which, in its progress has been marked with scenes of filthiness, that have disgraced ecclesiastical history, the popish priesthood, and our common species. 'Take away honorable wedlock,' says Bernard 'and you will fill the church with fornication, incest, sodomy and all pollution.' Erasmus, wlio was well acquainted with its effects, compared it to a pestilence.* These authors have drawn the evil with the pencil of truth, and emblazoned the canvas with a picture taken from life. The apostles have left examples as well as precepts in favor of matrimony. All the apostles, says Ambrosius, except John and Paul, were married. Simon, whose pretended successors have become the vicegerents of heaven, was a married man, and the sacred historians mention his mother-in-law. Peter and Philip, say Clemens and Eusebius, had children. Paul was married, according to Clemens, Ignatius, and Eusebius ; though the contrary was alleged by Tertullian, HUary, Epiphanius, Jerome, Ambrosius, and Augustine.'' The celibacy of the clergy, varying in this manner from the Christian dispensation, is also a variation from ancient tradi- tion. The interdiction of sacerdotal matrimony is unknown to the oldest monuments of the church, the mouldering fragments of Christian antiquity, and the primeval records of ecclesiastical 1 Tolle de ecclesia honorabile connubium et thorum immaculatum, nonne re- plcB earn concubinariis, incestuosia, seminifluis, mollibus masculorum concubi- joribue, et omni denique genere immundorum? Bernard. Sena. 66 P 763 Tim. III. 2. 12. et IV. 3. Titus, I. 6. Quae pestis aut lues a euperis aut iufernis immitti posait nocentior. Erasm. » Omnes Apostoli, excepto Johanne et Paulo, uxoi-es habuerunt. Amb in 2 Conn u. Mattb. viii. 14. Clem. 535. Strom. 3. Euseb. iii. 30. 31. Calm. X2. 410. 538 THE VARIATIONS OF POPEBF. W«?f f K T*T i *^^ Prohibition is to be found in the lon^ lapse of three hundred years after the era of redemption I^ wannest patrons can produce no testimony of its exCce for three ages after the epoch of the incarnation : nor any indeed possessing the least authority till the days orJeromTand Spiphanius in the end of the fourth century. The monk of Iht^i"""" ,T? '^' i^^^^^P °^ Salamis are t/e first wTtnesses BellaLTnf o^ThT^^^ *'^ ''^^'^^ -^ -"-'^^ iJeiiarmme or Thomassm ; and even their attestation is contra- dictory and inconsistent with cotemporary history. Ihis lengthened period was enlightened and adorned bv a iirrthfs tr''''''i """"^ ^'™'^^ authors ;and an L: £ of ma nl ' %^^- ^''}^T''y *° ^h« unconfined free- thT.LTv T^y- S^ ^^'P^r^d liters were followed by and ?r«r r^^""' ^'^'^^'' ^^^°^«««' B^r^abas, Polycar^J and Ignatius. These again were succeeded by a long train Jf ecclesiastical authors, such as Justin, Iren^i. Qem^ens Sri- S. ^t\^^^'^''> Minucius, Athenagoras, and Cyprian. But connnbil '''f""?*^'"' ^^ r^'^'' ^' ^P^^^d phraseology, fny snnnSi J"'*'"- ^'? "'^ *^" '^^^^^ ' ^^^ <^he omission is n^^ SHh^cently^^^ ^^^'^^^^ ^'^^^ ^' ^^^^^^ --« P"- to' whtrLn?'"?!.' "^^^ °^ antiquity, on the contrary, remain, nnSt^ ol^ ^''" unrestra,ined liberty to form and enjoy the ZSn T W' "?^,^^^«h are conclusiye and abWe all suspicion. A few of these may be subjoined, taken from Dionysius, Clemens, Origen, and the Apostdic cakons. l^ionysius, about the year one hundred and seventy, affords Sav ?r?.r''r"^ *? '}' "^^'^'^S' ^^'^^ pnestho^odThls day. The interesting relation is preserved by Ensebius. Dio- Efshon oTcn'fv*" S"' ^"'^^^'^ ecclesiasLal history, was S- «n/^T . «%^^\ .esteemed for his wisdom and ^frl ' r^ '"? "fK ^?"^"^ hi« ^^l"^b]e labors to his own wrote^o ttT"^;^ '^'^ '' '^^' P^^^« of Christendom ^ wrote to the Lacedemonians, Athenians, Nicomedians Gorti- Ch'^t"?''*"""''^^^,^""^^^^"^' ^°r th^ Purpose oreAforc^g iVt oft . P??i ?u ^'^^''■^" the Gnossians was on the sub? bv iann? °^^^ ''^'^^'^•. ^^">^tus, a Cretan bishop, actuated by Ignorance or presumnt on. inwrl ff,« nannoc,;*.. ^f^.,V„.-_ by ig„o™„ee or fr^{^^, u?grd°ttT^T«a;ZS:S »n the clergy of his diocese. Dionysius. hav- L^Hi^V'^^/ ?u •'"'^ ^^^'^-^ "^ "^« "^ocese. Uionysius, hav- ing heard of the unconstitutional attempt, wrote to the mrr/t^w'^'^tl? ^"{'"^. *^ ^^^'-^'^ the weakness of man, and to lay no such heavy burden on the clergy. Pinytus convinced of his error, bowed to the wise «nH w^ll.fS counsel, and replied to his Corinthian monitorTn strainsof eulogy and admiration. The relation i« conclusive a^inst PROOFS THAT THE CLERGY ANCIENTLY WERE MARRIED. 639 sacerdotal celibacy in the days of the Cretan and Corinthian bishops. Dionysius, famed for superior information on eccle- siastical laws, condemned the injurious and unwarranted inno- vation. Pinytus pleaded no authority for his opinion, and acquiesced in the other's decision without hesitation. Had the interdiction of priestly wedlock been apostolical or even eccle- siastical, and continued in the church in uninterrupted succes- sion from the establishment of Christianity, the one would not have axivised its abolition, or the other have admitted his determination with so much submission.' Clemens, who flourished about the year 200, testifies to the same effect. ' God,' says the catechist of Alexandria, 'allows every man, whether priest, deacon, or layman, to be the hus- band of one wife, and to use matrimony without reprehension. What can the enemy of matrimony say against procreation, when it is permitted to a bishop, that ruleth well his own house, and who governs the church. '^ This is clear and satisfactory. The use, as well as the contract of marriage was, in the begin- ning of the third century, lawful both for the clergy and for the laity. The connubial state and its enjoyments extended in the days of Clemens to the pastor as well as to the flock. Clemens was a man of extensive erudition both in philosophy and the- ology, and therefore could not, on this topic, be mistaken in the existing regulations of his day. Origen, who flourished about the middle of the third century, is another witness. Origen's testimony is quoted by Bellar- mine in favor of sacerdotal celibacy ; but certainly with little judgment. His argument recoils on its author. ' The duties of matrimony,' says Origen, cited by Bellarmine, ' hinder the continual sacrifice, which, it appears to me, should be offered only by such as devote themselves to constant and perpetual continency.'* This evinces just the contrary of what the car- dinal intended. Some who ministered at the altar, according to Origen's words, were married, and he complained that their connubial engagements prevented their due and regular attend- ance on the sacred duty. He does not mention or pretend any ecclesiastical law or injunction, requiring the observation of clerical celibacy. He only speaks his own private opinion as a matter of expediency. His language bears testimony to the fact, that married men, in the third century, ofiiciated at the altar, and to the non-existence of any ecclesiastical canon or 1 Euseb. IV. 23. Niceph. IV. 8. Mendoza, II. 60. 2 Top rrjs fitas yvvaiKos avtpa naw airoStxf-rai, kcu/ nptaPurtpos, v Kav Amkovos, tw XaiKos, av£TriAT]Trrus >a/iui XfW/i^^os- Clem. Alexan. i. 5i52. Tim. liT. 4. 3 Impeditur sacrificium mdeeineiis iis qui conjugalibus necessitatibus serviunt. Und^videtur mihi, quod illius solius est oflfere sacriticium qui indesinenti et per- petuse ae devoverit castitati. Origen. Horn. 23, Bell. I. 1114. 540 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. ■1 usage enforcing clerical abstinence. He pleads only his private judgment in behalf of his opinion. His prepossessions against all nuptial engagements are well known, and prompted him to use a remedy in his own person, contrary to all law, human and divine. He armed himself against temptation, by a mutilation which was interdicted by the twenty-second apos- tolical and first Nicene canons ; and one would expect by self- preservation. This shows the insignificance of his opinion on this, as on other topics of faith and discipline. Bellarmine must have been possessed by the demon of infatuation, when he appealed to Origen's judgment. The fifth apostolical canon is to the same purpose. This enactment ' pronounces excommunication, and, in case of con- tumacy, deposition against the bishop, piiest, or deacon, who, under pretext of religion, puts away his wife.'^ The canon, notwithstanding the scribbling of Binius, plainly supposes cler- ical matrimony and forbids separation. These canons indeed were compiled neither by an apostolic pen nor in an apostolic age. Turriano, it is true, ascribed them to the apostles, Baronius and Bellarmine retained fifty of them, and rejected thirty-five. The ablest critics, however, such as Du Pin, Beveridge, Albaspinseus and Giannone, have regarded them as a collection of canons, selected from synods prior to the council of Nice in 325. This seems to be the true statement. The canons are often cited by the councils and authors of the fourth century. John of Antioch inserted them in his collection in the reign of Justinian, and the emperor himself eulogised them in his sixth Novel ; whilst their authority, at a later date, was acknowledged by Damascen, Photius, and the Seventh General Council.^ The celibacy of the clergy, however, in consequence of the march of superstition, obtained at length in the west, though always rejected in Eastern Christendom. The mind of super- stition seems inclined to ascribe superior holiness to virginity and celibacy, and to venerate abstinence of this kind with blind devotion. Men, therefore, in all ages, have endeavored to draw attention by pretensions to this species of self-denial and its fancied purity, and abstraction from sublunary care and enjoy- ment. Its votaries, in every age, have, by an affect ^ singu- larity and ascetic contempt of pleasure, contrived to a..i.ract the eye of superstition, deceive themselves, or amuse a silly world. This veneration for celibacy has appeared through the nations, and in the systems of Paganism, Heresy, and Komanism. 1 KniHccou-S; vp-I preHbiter; vel diacoriw? uxorfiin suam no eiiciftt Tfili^lonii? prwtextu, sin autem ejiceret segregetur, ct si perseveret deponatur. Labb. 1. 20 Bin. 1. 6. Crabb. 1. 15, 2 Du Fin, c, 10, Gianuon. II. 8. Cotel. 1. 429, 442. CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY REJECTED IN THE EAST. 541 Clerical celibacy is the child, not of religion or Christianity, but of superstition and policy. Austerity of life and abstinence from lawful as well as unlaw- ful gratifications, the heathen accounted the summit of perfec- tion. The Romans, during their profession of Gentilism, though their Pontifex Maximus was a married man, had their vestal virgins, who possessed extraordinary influence and immunity. The Athenian Hierophants, according to Jerome's expression, unmanned themselves by drinking cold hemlock. Becoming priests, they ceased to be men. The Egyptian priesthood observed similar continency. These, says Cheremon the Stoic, quoted by Jerome, were induced, for the purpose of subduing the body, to forego the use of flesh, wine, and every luxury of eating and drinking, which might pamper passion or awaken concupiscence. The priests of Cybele, in like manner, in entering on their office, vanquished the enemy by mutilation. The Gnostic and Manichean systems also declared against matrimony and in favor of celibacy. The Manicheans, indeed, according to Augustine, allowed their auditors, who occupied the second rank, to marry, but refused the same liberty to the Elect, who aimed at the primary honors of purity. The gro- velling many, who were contented with mediocrity, indulged in nuptial enjoyments, whilst the chosen few, who aspired at perfection, renounced these degrading gratifications, and rose to the sublimity of self-denial and spirituality.^ Popery followed the footsteps of heathenism and heresy. The imperfect laity, like the Manichean auditors, may attach themselves to the other sex, and enjoy connubial gratifications. But the clergy and sisterhood, who aim at perfection, must, like the Manichean elect, soar to the grandeur of abstinence and virginity. This admiration of virginity began at an early period of Christianity. Ignatius, who was the companion of the inspired messengers of the Gospel, commenced, in his epistolary address to Polycarp in the beginning of the second century, to eulogise, though in very measured language, the haughty virgins of the day. This affectation of holiness, which was then in its infancy, had presumed to rear its head above unpretending and humble purity. Ignatius was followed by Justin and Athenagoras ; but still in the language of moderation. Their encomiums, however, were general, and had no particular reference to the clergy. Tertullian, led astray by the illusions of Montanism, forsook the moderation of Ignatius, Justin, and Athenagoras, and ex- tolled virginity to the sky. He exhausted language in vilifying > Jerom, 4. 192. Bruyi, 1. 142, Moreri, 4. 142, Augnstin, 1.739et8. 14. 542 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. marriage and praising celibacy. Tertullian, in his flattery of this mock purity, was equalled or excelled by Origen, Chryaos- tom, Augustine, Basil, Ambrosius, Jerome, Syricius, Innocent, and Fulgentius.* These saints and pontiffs represented virginity as the excellence of Christianity, and viewed with admiration the system which Paul of Tarsus, under the inspiration of God, characterised as a ' doctrine of devils.' The reason of this admiration may be worth an investigation. One reason arose from the difficulty of abstinence. Virginity, Jerome admits, ' is difficult and therefore rare.' The Monk of Palestine was a living example of this difficulty. Sitting, the companion of scorpions in a frightful solitude, parched with the rays of the sun, clothed in sackcloth, pale with fasting, and quenching his thirst only from the cold spring, the saint, in his own confession, wept and groaned, while ' his blood boiled with the flames of licentiousness.' Bernard prescribes ' fasting, as a necessary remedy for the wantonness of the flesh and the inflam- mation of the blood.' Chrysostom jmakes similar concessions of difficulty.'' The passion indeed, which prompts the matri- monial union, being necessary for the continuation of the species, has, by the Creator, been deeply planted in the breast, and forms an essential part of the constitution. The prohibition is high treason against the laws of God, and open rebellion against the spring-tide of human nature and the full flow of human affection. An attempt, therefore, to stem the irresistible current must ever recoil with tremendous effect on its authors. * But the affectation of singularity, the show of sanctity, and the pro- fession of extraordinary attainments, which outrage the senti- ments of nature, will, like Phaeton's attempt to drive the chariot of the sun, -attract the gaze of the spectator, gain the applause of superstition, and figure in the annals of the world. Jerome and Chrysostom, quoted by the Rhemists, say that continency may always be obtained by prayer. The attainment, according to the Grecian and Roman saints, is the uniform re- ward of supplication to heaven. Theodolf makes a similar statement. But the allegation of Jerome and Chrysostom as well as Theodolf, is the offspring of inconsistency, and wholly incompatible with their usual sentiments. Chrysostom, like Je- rome, gives, in another place, a different view of the votaries of virginity in his day. Some of these, to counteract the move- ments of the flesh, cased the body in steel, put on sackcloth, ran to the moimtains, spent night and day in fasting, vigils, and in all the rigor ..v severity. Shunning the company of women, * Ignat. c. 5. Cotei. ii. 92. Justin, 22. 2 Sola libidinum incendia bulliebant, Jerome, 4. 90.177. N Msse est, lasciviens caro eorum cerebris frangatur jejuniis. Calor sanguinis iui-'asn lata, ut evadere possit omni indiget custodia. Bernard, 1. 114. Chrysostoviv i. 249. i- PROGRESS OF CLERICAL CELIBACY IN THE ROMISH CHURCH. 543 the whole sex were forbidden access to their solitary retreat. All this self-mortification, however, could scarcely allay the rebellion of their blood.' The relation must convey a singular idea of these victims of superstition, and the manners of the age. The portrait is like the representation of a Lucian or Swift, who, in sarcastic irony, would ridicule the whole transaction ; while it displays, in striking colors, the difficulty of the attempt as well as the folly of the system. The difficulty of continence, if reports may be credited, was not peculiar to Ch i ysontom's day. Succeeding saints felt the arduousness of the mighty attempt. A few instances of this may amuse, as ixeniplified in the lives of Francis, Godric, Ulfric, Aquinas, Benedict, an Irish priest, the Bishop of Sher- burn, and rr ited by Bonaventura, Paris, Malmesbury, Mabil- lon, Ranolf, and the Roman Bruviary. The Seraphic Francis, who flourished in the thirteenth cen- tury, was the father of the Franciscans. The saint, though de- voted to chastity and brimful of the spirit, was, it seems, some- times troubled with the movements of the flesh. An enemy that wrought within was difficult to keep in subjection. His saint- ship, no wever, on these occasions, adopted an effectual way of cooling the internal flame, and allaying the carnal conflict. He stood, in winter, to the neck in a pit full of icy water. One day, being attacked in an extraordinary manner by the demon of sensuality, he stripped naked ; and belabored his unfortunate back with a disciplinarian whip ; and then leaving his cell, he buried his body naked, as it was, in a deep wreath of snow.* The cold bath, the knotted thong, and the snowy bed were necessary for discharging the superabundant caloric of his saintship's constitution. Godric, an English hermit, was troubled with the same com- plaint and had recourse to the same remedy. He was a native of Norfolk, but had visited Jerusalem, wept over the sacred sepulchre, and kissed, in holy devotion, the tomb of Emmanuel, and the monument of ,,redemption. He lived on the banks of the Werus, and was the companion of the bear and the scorpion, which were gentle (and obliging to the man of God. But he had to contend, even in his solitude, with temptation. Satan, assuming the form of a lion or a wolf, endeavored to allure him from his duty. These outward trials, however, were 1 MoMs wtpiyivovrai ttjj koto tiip emOvfiiav fiaviat. Chrysostom. 1. 235. A Deo datur continentia, sed petite et accipietis. Theod. in Dachery, 1. 255. 2 Tl se jettoit souvent en hyver dans une fosse pleine de glace, afin de vaincre parfaitement I'ennemi domestique. Bruy. 3. 151. Etant attaqu6 un jour d'une erande tentation de la chair, il so depouilla et se donna une rude discip- line. Puis il so jetta dans la neige. Morery, 4. 179. .544 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. nothing compared with the inward conflicts, arising from the ferment of concupisceuoe and ' the lusts of the flesh.' He counteracted the rebellion of his blood, however by the rigor of discipline. The cold earth was his only bed, and a stone, which he placed under his head, was his nightly pillow. The herb of the field, and the water of the spring, were his meat and drink, which he used only when compelled by the assaults of hunger and thirst. Clothed in hair-cloth he spent his days in tears and fasting. The hermit, with these applications for keeping the body under, used a sufficiently cooling regimen. During the wintry frost and snow he immersed himself, says his historian, in the stream of the Werus, where, pouring forth prayers and tears, he offered himself a living victim to God.* The flesh, it is likely, after this nightly dip, was discharged of all unnecessary heat and became duly cool. But the Devil, it seems, played some pranks on the hermit, while he was enjoy- ing the cold bath, and freezing his body for the good of his soul. Satan sometimes ran away with Godric's clothes which were on the banks. But Godric terrified Beelzebub with shouts, so that, affrighted, he dropped his hair-cloth garment and fled. A relic of Godric's beard, says Bede, was, after his death, transfen-ed to Durham, and adorned the church of that city. Ulric's history is of a similar kind. He was born near Bristol, and fought the enemies of the human race for twenty- nine years. He was visited, notwithstanding, by the demon of licentiousness. The holy man, in his distress, mplied the remedy of fasting and vigils, and endeavored to subdue the stimulations of the flesh by the regimen of the cold bath. He fasted, till the skin was the only remaining covering of his bones. He nightly descended into a vessel filled with freezing water, and during the hours of darkness, continued, in this comfortable lodging, which constituted his head quarters, to sing the psalms of David." This Christian discipline, in all probability, delivered his veins of all superfluous caloric, and enabled him to practise moderation during the day. Thomas Aquinas, the angelic doctor, required angelic aid to counteract the natural disposition of the mind or rather the flesh. He was born of a noble family, and enjoyed the benefit ' Insultus libidinis laorymis arcebat et jejuniis. Ut carnis incenda superaret cilicio camem domabat asperrimo. Hieme, gelu, et nive ri«enti, nudus flumen mgressus, nocte ibi tota et usque ad collum submeraus, orationes et psalmoi cumlacrynusprofundebat. M. Paris, 114. Beda. 741. 0....-.-...,..,, ,,.,^.^^i.„^„3jy ^.„„^ .„g„j^jjjj(jQg y_ plenum ingida, desoen- dereeolebat, m (juo psalmos Davidicos Domino offerebat, etsic aliquamdiu per- severans, caomis incentiva, cujus accerrimos patiebatur stimulog, mortificabat in ttquis. M. Pans, 89. PROGRESS OF CLERICAL CELIBACY IN THE ROMISH CHURCH. 545 of a Parisian education. His friends opposed, but in vain, his resolution of immuring himself in the retrea+s of monkery. He resisted their attempts with signal success, though, it seems, not always with spiritual weapons. He chased one woman, who opposed his resolution, with a fire-brand. The blessed vouth;i says the Roman breviary, praying on bended knees before the cross, was seized with sleep, and seemed, through a dream, ' to undergo a constriction of a certain part by angels, and lost, from that time forward, all sense of concupiscence.'' His angelic saintship's natural propensity required supernatural power to restrain its fury. The grasp of angels was necessary to allay his carnality and confer continence. Benedict, in his distress, had recourse to a pointed remedy. This saint, like Aquinas, was born of a noble family. He was educated at Rome, and devoted himself wholly to religion or rather to superstition. He lived three years in a deep cave ; and, in his retreat, wrought many miracles. ' He knocked the Devil out of one monk with a blow of his fist, and ' out of another with the lash of a whip.' But Satan, actuated by malice and envious of human happiness, appeared to Benedict in the form of a blackbird, and renewed, in his heart, the image of a woman whom he had seen at Rome. The Devil, in this matter, rekindled the torch of passion, and excited such a con- flagration in the flesh, that the saint nearly yielded to the temp- tation. But he soon, according to Mabillon and the Roman breviary, discovered a remedy. Having undressed himself, ' he rolled his naked body on nettles and thorns, till the lacera- ted carcass, through pain, lost all sense of pleasure.'^ The father of the Benedictines, it appears, had his own difficulty in attempting to allay the ferment of the flesh, notwithstanding the allegations of J erome and Chry sostom. An Irish priest, actuated like Francis, Godric, Ulric, Aquinas, and Benedict, by a carnal propensity, had recourse to a differ- ent remedy. The holy man lived near Patrick's purgatory in Ireland, and spent his days in official duty and in works of charity. Rising early each morning, he walked round the adjoining cemetery, and preferred his orisons for those whose mortal remains there mouldered in the clay, and mingled with their kindred dust. His devotion, however, did not place him beyond the reach of temptation. Satan, envying his happiness 1 Sentire visus est sibi ab angelis constringi lumbos, quo ex tempore omni poatea libidinia eenau caruit. Brev. Rom. 702. ^ Alapa monacho inflicta infestum hospitem cxpulit, quern alias flagello a mo- nauliu vago cicoi;ra.t. Mabiiion, i. 33. liudum se in urtioas ac voprcs tamdiu volutaverit, dum voluptatia senaus dolore penitua opprimeretur. Mabillon, I. 8. Brev. Rom. 724. II 54(1 THK VAIUATIONS OF POPERY. and hating his sanctity, tempted the priest in the form of a beautiful qiri. IWt whs near yielding to the allurement. He led the tmopter into his bed-chamber, when recollecting him- self, he resolved to prevent the sinful gratification for the present and in futurity. He seized a scalpellum, and adopting, like Origen, the remedy of amputation, he incapacitated Himself for such sensuality in time to come.' Adhehn, bishop of SherlMii n, had two ways of subduing the insurrections of the flesh. One consisted in remaining, during the winter, in a river which ran past his monastery. He con- tinued, for nights, immei-sed in this stream, regardless of the icy cold. The frosty bath, in all probability, extracted the superfluous and troublesome warmth from his veins, and stop- l)ed the ebullition of his rebellious blood. But the other remedy seems to have been rather a dangerous experiment. When the pulse began to beat high, his saintship called for a fair virgin, who lay in his bed till he sung the whole order of the Psalms, and overcame, by this means, the i)aroxysm of passion.'' The .sacred music and this beautiful maid, who, notwithstanding her virginity, was very accommodating, soothed the irritation of the flesh, and castigated the oscillations of the pulse, till it beat with philosophical precision and Christian regularity. A second reason for the preference of virginity arose from the supposed pollution of matrimony. Great variety indeed has, on this subject, prevailed among the saints and the theologians of Romanism. Some have represented marriage as a nieans of purity, and some of polhition. Clemens, Augustine, Ambro- sius, Chrysostom, Fulgentius, Harding, and Calmet characterise this Romish sacrament as an institution of holiness, sanctity, honor, and utility. The council of Gangra anathematised all who should reproach wedlock; and this sentence has been incorporated with the canon law.^ Augustine, Chrysostom, Ambrosius, and Fulgentius, however, in self-contradiction, sometimes speak of the matrimonial institution in terms of invective and detestation. 1 Cultruin arripuit et propria membra virilia abscindena, forasprojecit. M Paris, 92. 2 Quando camia sentirefc incentiva, virginem pulchram in auo stratu tamdiu secum retineret, quousque Paalterium ex ordine diceret. Ranolf, 245. Cubilaiia, aliquam fcBuiinam detinebat, quoad camia tepeacente lubrico quieto et immoto discederet aniino. Malniesbury. l.S. Ut vim rebelli coroori concisseret, fonti se humero tenus immergebat. Malm, de vita Adhelm. Wharton, 2. 13. 3 Ayta S( i) ytvfan. Clem. Strom. III. P. 559. Concubitua conjugalia non solum est licitua, verum est utilia et honeatus. Aug. con. Pelag. 16. 270. Munda est conjugia. Amb. 2. 364. in Corin. VII. Aikmos 6 ya/xos. Chrysos. 1. 38. Sancta sunt Christianorum conjugia. Fulg. ad. Gall. Le lit nuptial eat pur et honorable. Calmet, 23. 766. Si quia matrimonium vituperet, et eam quae cum marito auo dormit, ait anathema. Labb. 2. 427. Crabb. 1. 289. Pithou, 42. dl'i VITUPERATIONS OF MATRIMONY BY POPISH DOCTORS. 547 Many saints, doctors, pontiffs, and councils, on the contrary such as Ongen, Jerome, Siricius, Innocent, Bellarmine. Estius Pithou, the canon law the Rhemish annotators, and a party in the council of Trent, have represented this Popish s,u3rament, especially in the clergy, as an appointment ol^ pollution and degradation.' Oiigcn, who is quoted by Pithou, reckoned ' con- jugal intercoufse inconsistent with the presence of the Holy Spirit. Jerome, if possible surpassed Origen in bitterness. The xMonk of Palestine growled at the very name of matrim-n.y, and discharged against the institution, in all its bearings, whole tor- rents o vituperation atid sarcjvsm. Surcharged, S usual, with gall and wormwood, which flowed in copious efflux from his pen. the saint poured vials of wrath on this object of his holy aver- •sion Marriage, accordingto this ca.suist,'efreminates the manly mmd. A man, says the monk, • cannot pray, unless he refrain from conjugal enjoyments.' The duty of a husband is, in his creed incompatible with the duty of a Christian.' This is a sample of his acrimony. Those who would relish a full banquet may read his precious production against Joviuian ' Siricius, the Roman pontiff, called raarriage filthy, and char- acterised married persons, ' as carnal and incapable of pleasing Orod Innocent adopted his predecessor's language and senti- ment, and denounced this Romish sacrament as a contamination Lonjugal cohabitation, says Bellarmine,.is attended with impu- rity, 'and carnahses the whole man. soul and body.' Estius affirms that 'the nui)tial bed immerses the whole soul in car- nality. Gratian and Pithou incorporate, in the canon law, the theology of Origen, which represents the matrimonial sacrament as calculated to quench the spirit. The statements of the Rhe- mists are equally gross and disgusting. Wedlock, according to these dirty annotators, is a continued scene of sensuality and pollution. The marriage of the clergy, or of persons who have made vows of chastity, is, these theologians aver, the worst kind ot fornication. A fa<;tion in the council of Trent characterised raarriage, which they defined to be a sacrament, as 'a state of carnality ;' and these received no reprehensions from the holy unerring assembly. "^ The abettors of Romanism, in this manner, condemn the con- jugal sacrament as an abomination. These theologians, on this »NondaturpriBsentiaSanctiSpiritu3, tempore quo conjugales actus gerun- tur. Ongen, Horn. 6. m Pithou, 383. Animum virilem eLminat K^. 4. 170. Laicus et quicunque hdelis orare non potest, nisi careat officio coniuKaU Jerom. 4. 150, 175. Obscoenis cupiditatibus inhiant. in cam" -"" * ^- plauere non possunt. Siricms ad Him. Crabb. L 417, 450 Prouter "aet^m conjugalem qui hominem reddit totum caraalem. Animam ipsam camalem quodadmodofacit. Bell. 11 8, 19. Conjugalis actus quo animusTuodSX earn, totus unmergitur Estius. 252. Mariage ^toit un 6tat chaiiel. Pa^lo! ^. *4y. Khemists on Conn. vu. 548 THE VARIATIOiVS OF POPERY. • topic, entertained the grosfiest conceptions. Their own filthy ideas rose no higher than the gratification of the mere animal passion, unconnected with refinement or delicacy. Their viewB, on this subject, were detached from all the con-minglings of the understanding and the heart, and from all the endearments of father, mother, and child. Their minds turned only on scenes of gross sensuality, unallied to any moral or sentimental feeling, and insulated from all the reciprocations of friendship or affec- tion. Celibacy and virginity, which were unassociated with these carnal gratifications, and which affected a superiority to their allurements, became, with persons of this disposition, the objects of admiration. Matrimony, however, though it were gross as the concep- tions of these authors, is far purer than their language. The sentiments and phraseology of the Roman saints on virginity are, in point of obscenity, beyond all competition. The diction as well as the ideas of Chiysostom, Jerome, Augustine, and Basil, would call the burning blush of shame into the cheek of a Juvenal, a Horace, an Ovid, oi- a Petronius. Chrysostom, though disgusting, is indeed less filthy than Jerome, Augustine, or Basil. Jerome, bursting with fury against wedlock, follows in the footsteps of Chrysostom, and improves, but the wrong way, on the Grecian's indecency. Augustine, in pollution, excels both Chrysostom and Jerome. But Basil, in impurity, soars above all rivalry, and,* transcending Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augustine, fairly carries off" the palm of filthiness. The unalloyed obscenity of Chrysostom, Jerome,- and Augustine, rises, in the pages of Basil, to concentrated blackguardism. Du Pin con- fesses that Basil's treatise on virginity contains * some pas- sages which may offend nice ears.' Basil's Benedictine editor admits its tendency to sully maiden modesty with images of indecency.* These saints must have had a practical acquaintance with the subject, to which they have done so much justice in description. Speculation, without practice, would never have made them such adepts. Their sanctified contamination is so perfect in its kind, tliat it could not be the oflfspring of mere theory without action. This charge aginst their saintships may be substantiated by many quotations from their works, which, however, shall, for the sake of decency, be left in the obscurity of the original Greek and Latin.^ » Basil, 3. 588. Du Pin, 1. 224. - Mrj (nyxupfurOai rn fit^fi rov iroSov. Chrys. 1. 229. Avri irpo0o\w npotrniirai TVS' (vvofJ.ov fiiiiv, . . , . sv yahiitrif «uAAt> KudiarTjaiy ijfias, CLeysoa. I. 274 de Virg. c. 9. . ErepuBiv ex*' '•'Oj inyas to OKfpfia lu fv Ji/uv, Kai frtpwOtn Kvaaivfi, ChrysOB. Horn. 62. p. 624. PAPAL POLlOr ; 'U8E OP CLERICAL CELIBACY. 549 Dens, in mo ern tir^.i, has outrun Ba«il, and all the saints of antiquity, ov the t-^Adium of blackguardism. This author justly claims t' i »> r of carrying this sublime branch of science to perrectid His theology, in which contamination lives and brea^he8, ■ a trejvsury of filthinesa that can never be surpassed or exVa. . <'l. He ha.s shown an unrivalled genius for impurity ; aud tuture discovery can, in this department of learning, never eclipsb his glory, nor deprive this precious divine of his well-earned fame and merited immortality. The philo80[)hy of Newton has been improved. His astronomy notwithstanding its grandeur, has received many accessions from a Herschel and a La Place. But the sublimated obsce- nity of Dens, finished in its kind, admits of no advancement or progression. This doctor, however, does not bear ' his blushing honors ' alone. The Popish prelacy of Ireland, by adopting his refined speculations to promote the education of the priest- hood, share in his triumphs ; and the inferior clergy who are doomed to study his divinity, will no doubt manifest the value of his system by the superiority of their theological and holy attainments. A third reason for the injunction of sacerdotal celibacy arose from pontifical policy. Cardinal Rodolf, arguing in a Roman consistory in favor of clerical celibacy, affirmed that the priest- hood, if allowed to marry, would transfer their attachment from the pope to their family and prince ; and this would tend to the injury of the ecclesiastical community. The holy see, the car- Creata sunt genitalia, ut gestianius in naturalom copulam. Genitalium hoc est ofiScium ut semper fruantur natura sua, et uxoris ardentissimam gulam for- tuita libido restinguat. Fnistra hoec omnia \'irorum habes si complexu non uteris foeminarum. Jerom. adv. Jovinian. 4. 177. Obstetrix virginis cujusdam integritatem, manu velut explorans dum inspicit, perdidit. Totum commovet 'hominem animi simul affectu cum carnis appetitu conjuncto et permixto, ut ea voluplas sequatur, qua major, in corporis volupta- tibus nulla est, ita ut momento ipsotemporis quo ad ejus perveniturextremum pene omnis acies et quasi vigilia cogitationis obruatur. Seminaret prolem vir, susciperet fcemiiia genitalibus membris, quando id opus esset. Tunc potuisse uteroconjugis, salva integritate, foeminei genitales virile semen immitti, siciit nunc potest eadem integritate salva ex utero virginis fluxus menstrui cruoris emitti. Eadem quippe viapossit illud injici, qua hoc potest ejici. Augustin. de civit. Dei, 1. 18 et XIV. 16, 24, 26. P. 18, 368, 374, 377. AiroKoirfvrw KartcBtv rav SiSuftov, bi rris yovris airo octpvor Kai ixippuv tiri ro Aojwov fioptov SiaKovoi yivourai, nvaai fifv ^era t»)»' TOfiriv avw ii iropin. (fovTit 5« fv rots v((ppois ri)s firiBvutas xdt ttji/ yovriv arois f(a(j)pt(a(rris, otarpeirai Hei' irpos koto- fioKriv rris yafus -q avrip avrtp-^iiaf^aiifi'iiiy rav SiSviiaiv avuOtv rriv yovriv, KUi vpos auupov ivrtvdfv irapairtft.'^ainwv, ou{i7J ftCKtaovros rov avopov SiatpopT)- 6ets T»)v ciriOujUiav KaTafiopaivfrai 'O St ok ex<»i' oBev ro yapya\i( ov Kfvwai). /uo-yil ra rovov inptiiffiv TlapStvos avaSvptro ori an rrjs Koirris aurris ytvo^titoi -lis , uu ua PROGRESS OF CKLIBACY IN THE EAST. 551 with the women whom they had married prior to their ordina- tion.' This usage, which crept into the oriental communion by slow and gradual steps, commenced with a bigoted and super- stitious respect for celibacy and virginity. Superstition, at the introduction of this custom, began to entertain a blind and unmeaning veneration for abstinence in man and woman. The populace, therefore, preferring sacerdotal celibacy, separated in some instances from the communion of the married clergy. The evil, from its magnitude, required a synodal enactment to check its progress. The council of Gangra, therefore, about the year 324, declared ' its esteem for the chaste bond of wed- lock, and anathematised such as left the communion, or refused the benediction f a married priest.''' This assembly deposed Eustathius, of Sebastia, for encouraging this superstition, and for representing the oblations of wedded clergy as an abomina- tion. The Gangran Synod possessed great authority. Its decisions were confirmed by many pontiffs and councils, and were received into the ancient code of the church. The clergy, therefore, like the laity, married, as is attested by Socrates and Nicephorus, and acknowledged by Gratian and Mendoza, and had children. A few might abstain through submission to the prepossessions of the people ; and a few from a supposed sanctity, which, in many instances, the pastor, like the flock, ascribed to celibacy. The superior purity, indeed, which superstition attached to a single life, influenced many of the clergy. The sixth apostolical canon, therefore, to repress this error, excommunicated, and, in case of contumacy, degra- ded the bishop, priest, or deacon, who, under a show of r«4igion, should put away his wife. Those who remained single, how- ever, as the above-mentioned Greek historians relate, acted from the choice of their own mind, and not from the obligation of a law. No canons had been enacted against matrimony or in favor of abstinence. The clergy, Gratian aflSrms, were, at the time of the Gangran council, unfettered by the law of con- tinence. Mendoza admits the liberty, which the eastern priesthood enjoyed, of cohabiting with the women whom they married before their ordination.* Thessaly, Thessalonica, Macedonia, and Achaia, however, became, at an early period, an exception to this regiflation. 1 Pithou, 42. Dist. .31. c. 14. Paolo, 2. 446. ■ Nuptiarum castum vincvilum honoraiiius. Crabb. 1.291. Si quis diacemit (le (ibligationibus non communiuans, quae I'resbyter celebraverit conjugatus, anathema sit. Labb. 2. 438. Bin. 4. 453. Socrat. II. 43. Du Pin, 1. 612. ^ noA\o( yap rourocy tv toi Katpw ttjs firicTKort'ti), koj iraiSas hk ttjj vofitKits ya/xerris irtiroiTjKoffij'. fcjocrat. V. 22. Gratian, D. 31. Pith. 41. Niceph. XII. 34. Labb. 1. 26. 552 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. The obligation of a single life was introduced into these regions by Heliodorus of Tricca.i This bishop, in his youthful days, had composed a work called Ethiopics, which, says Socrates and Nicephorus, proscribed the marriage of the clergy in the diocese under his superintendence. A second step in the progress of sacerdotal celibacy among the Greeks consisted in the interdiction of matrimony after ordination. The Grecian clergy were allowed to cohabit with the women whom they had married while laymen ; but not to enter on the nuptial engagement after ordination. The council of Ancyra about 315, in its tenth canon, allowed only those deacons to marry, who, at their ordination, should declare their constitutional incapacity for abstinence. The ministers of the altar, according to Gratian, were, when this assembly as well as that of Gangra met, free to marry .^ The continence of ecclesiastics had not, at that time, been introduced into Chris- tendom. The council of Neocsesarea, indeed, about this period, ordered the priest, who should form the conjugal contract after ordination, to be deposed. But this was only a small provincial synod, unnoticed and unratified by any ensuing council or pontiff till the middle of the ninth century. The general Nicene council, in its third canon, forbad unmarried ecclesiastics to have any women in their houses except a mother, a sister, or an aunt. This canon, as the words show, was directed against a kind of women, who, as domestics, infested the habitations of the unmarried clergy. The Nicene council was near passing a new law, forbiddino- bishops, priests, and deacons to sleep with the women, whom they had married before their taking of holy orders. This at- tempt, however, was crushed by Paphnutius of Thebais ; a man, who, according to Socrates and Sozomen, was loved of God and had wrought many miracles. He had been a confes- sor in Max'min's persecution, in which, having lost an eye and a leg, he was condemned to the mines. He had led a. life of celibacy, but opposed the enactment of this innovation. * Marriage,' said the confessor with a loud voice, ' is honorable in all, and the use of the nuptial bed is chastity itself Such excess of abstinence would be detrimental to the church, and might, by its rigor in imposing too weighty a burden, become J Socrat. V. 22. Niceph. XII. 34. Mendoza, II. 66. * GrsBci utuiitur uxoribus cum quibus ante sacros ordinea contraxerunt. Canisius, 4. 433. Qiiicumque diaconi constituti, in ipsa constitiitione dixerunt, oportere se uxores ducere, cum non possintsic manerc, ii, si iixorem postea duxerint, sint in ministerio. Labb. I. 1490. Pithoii, 38. L)u I'in, 1. .WS. Nondum erat introducta continentia miuistrorum altaris. Gratian, Dist 28. c. 13. Pithou. 41, Urabb. 1. 201. Bell. I. 19. PROGRESS OF CELIBACY IN THE EAST. 553 fatal to the chastity of men and women. Allow the clergy, according to the ancient tradition, to enjoy the wives which they married before their entrance on the priesthood, and the unmarried after ordination to remain in celibacy.' The council assented, ' and extolled the wisdom of his speech.'^ The speech of Paphnutius, and the concurrence of the coun- cil supply an answer to an unfounded criticism of Challenor. He accuses the Protestant translation of straining the words ot Paul when he represented marriage as honorable in all. Ihe word which unites marriage to the epithet honorable, is omitted in the original, which, according to Challenor, is not indicative but imperative, and should be rendered, ' Let mar- riage be honorable in all.' The English version, however, affrees \7ith the Egyptian confessor and the Nicene council in aU its infallibility. Paphnutius, like Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, or Knox, used the apostolic expression in the reformed a^cepta- tion and the Nicene fathers acclaimed. A host of Romish saints might be mustered, who took the words in the same sense, and applied them in the same manner. CJhallenor ha^ at- tempted several criticisms of a similar kind, which argue little for his learning or his honesty. _ , m • Baronius, Bellarmine, Valesius, Thomassin, and lurnano have endeavored to overthrow the truth of this relation. Ihe attempt, however, is vain. These cavillers could adduce no reason, possessing any validity, to countenance their insinu^ition. The relation is su[)ported by tlie testimony, not only of bocrates and Sozomen, but also of Nicephorus, Suidas, Ivo, Cassiodorus, Gratian, and Gelasius. The fact is admitted in modern times, by Mendoza, Du Pin, and Moreri. Mendoza wonders at the scepticism and hostility of Turriano; and shows, with the utmost perspicuity, not only the truth ot the statement but also the liberty of the oriental clergy, who, at the time of the Nicene council, were untrammelled by the vows of chastity, and, like the laity, were allowed to enjoy the consorts whom they had married pr. *^ their assumption of the sacred office. Du Pm, in his usual ca.^Hor, represents the opposition to the account as arising froiw tiie fear of prejudicing the present discipbne, rathe- than from any solid proof Baronius, says Moreri, ^^'/^^rovr .ts the tvuib of the history, but without foundation, as the law o celib.i'jy had, at that era, obtained no univers-.. establishment in the Eastern communion.'^ yaiJ.ov KfytDv. Socrat. I. 11. Sozom. 1. 23. Labb. 1233 aurov afitaPToy rov Pithou, 42 tag 6l5 IB domi reUnebant, et liberis tanquam seculares oporar.^ dabant. ^ m./I v..^ 11 . 554 THE VAHIATIONS OF POPERY. wiSfthfrir"^ Of Epiphanius and Jerome has been contraste,i witn the relation of Socrates and Sozompn Tho o„«u .^., uncertain ..,«* and. i„ coniquenl wtl/STeSt S tory. Moreri follows in the train of I)n Pm T^aa Smlstiors^'Th-^1' i^^ '"^ -vlniti: m.tance» wandering e„tirely7„" truth "*^' ""'' '" """'^' to uie suDaeacon. J3ut Jerome, his cotemporary extends it onlV tothe deacon ; and Leo, who flourished half a centurv afte^ Epiphamus, was the hrst, who. according to he un^orm testi tTo7 l^hls Sr"^"'p'".^'^ '"i'^'^''^ undorTheTterd ; ILTLa i '• ^i'0"?««'^in, Pithou, Bruys, and Du Pin have ad Fp^^i^^'^.'n ''^ P^"^^.^^- S^^^""« -"d Innocents well! Ferrand and Cresconms in their compilations impose tlTeobli SeV ^n iT^^^ ^"^^ ^'^ ^^«!^T' P"-*«' andTe^ons L^ oesmes, on this topic was not obeyed. Subdeacons in l.i papacy, were allowed to marry even in suburban Sv and f . enjoy connubial society. The fifth Carthalfan cSl in 438 eT ht tst ofTh ^t '"" '\'^P«' P^- '^' «" cZcl" S • wf. ihl I , u^ ^l^'^^' ^" ^^'^ PO"'t. at liberty. Grec.or^■ wastfce farst who enforced the celibacy ofsubdencons and even his enac ments had no retrospective effect bure'lat merely to such as should be afterward ordained'' EpUa^^^^^^^ LT'iS r2rX^rt"u"%oz''"""/ 'o.''- n^r- '''■ ^^- Bell.' ; Epiph .490. et 2'T,ot 'gL!:^^'- ''^ ^" ^"'' '• «''«• reri, 3. 94. ' i^"t'"8, 304. t'odex. 122. Du Pin, 1. 298. Mo- Crabb. 1. 446.^ r.thou, 41 43.' Du l'„, 5' ,!rf*^'-'^« <^l«"«°««d hocnou cogi. Licefc adulter sit licet Bodflmit.m 1;,,.+ «\,.i*li' ' ^n „ _. ~MtS»fJi>^'^i.ii I ; r| ABSURD EULOGIES OF THE VIRGIN MARY. 555 therefore, is, in this instance, convicted of falsehood, and there- fore is unworthy of credit in the rest of his evidence. Epiphanius i. hpf i',^'f'? •'*''t' ^" *''*" "'""'r ''^^^''''^ ""^^ «^*fyi"^' «tyle, calls lier ladyship, heaven, earth, pasture, paradise, breaci. drinl^, manna, oil. wine, cinnamon,, balm, myrrh, frankincense, olive spikenard saffron, gum, a temple, a house, a bedroom, a bride a lamp, a trumpet a mountain, a wilderness, a field, a vine, a floor, a bam. a stable, a manger, a warehouse, a hall, a tower a camp, an army, a kingdom, a priesthood, a bird, a palm, a rose, a river, a pigeon, a garment, a pearl, a candlestick, a table, a crown, a sceptre, a tree, a cedar, a cypress, a reed, a daughter, a sister a mother, a sun, a moon, a star, the city of God the rod of Aaron, the fleece of Gideon, the gate .ff Ezekiel the star of the morning, the fountain of gardens, the and hone ^'""^ "^ promise flowing with milk Such are a few extracts from the balderdash and blasphemv of two fuU-length Roman saints, one of whom, Bellarmine, Valesius Thoma.«sin and Turriano bring as a witness for the perpetual celibacy of the Grecian clergy. His saintship of balamis, as well ji^s of Qairvaux, certainly qualified himself for the presidency of fools, and fairly carried off" the palm of non- sense from Jlontanus, Swedenborg, and Southcott. This notwithstanding, is the man whom the Greek.s and Latins in in their menology and martyrolc.gy, celebrate every year as'»n illustrious confessor. Jerome ha« been summoned a« another witness for the perpe- tual celibacy of the Grecian clergy. Jerome's testimony, how- ever, chishes with that of Epiphanius. Epiphanius alleges the 1 Omnibus firmaiueDtis firmius firmamentum, tu, Domina oum eum aii.ni coe 1 coelorum capere non pot, ra.U, cepisti, et e onc^pieti, le'nS MsXrl aerm. ni. buonim chantas oculonini teuebras exmllit et effLat oafprraa O domina quos tui viderent oculi. Hob ergo uculos ad -o,, donVina "erte et Jeaum benedictum fructum ventiis tui nobis oatende. 6 vent"r mTrXuL torem. O venter desiderabhs, e quo emanavit desiderium mentium Kratianim fluYius, glonse pra>mium. O venter amabibs et dulcedo an^mffi f) S^l^ mentium, inebnato cordium, sanitas peccatorum. O clem^™^.. ' S S blaiidianao, dulci« Osculaudo ! B'-.rnard, Serm. IV. p. I739,"]7,io, IT i'v. " ' SUICIDE OF VIRGINS COMMENDED, 567 authority of ecclesiastical canons in favor of clerical continence, Jerome, on the contrary, refers merely to the usage of his day. Epiphanius extends the prohibition to subdeacons. Jerome comprehends in the interdiction only bishops, pneats, and dea- cons.' These contradictions destroy the evidence of both the bishop of Salainis and the monk of Palestine. Jerome's bias in favor of virginity led the saint into error, which degraded his character and lessened his authority. His declamation against wedlock, in his refutation of Jovinian, in- curred the disapprobation of many ; and, among the /est, <>i Pope Siricius. The murmur was so great that Pamachius his friend endeavored, though in vain, to suppress his writings on this subject. He was accused of countenancing the Manicheans, who, at'least to the elect, entirely proscribed matrimony. He WJis obliged, in consequence, to write an apology. He con- fessed that, on this subject, he had indulged in declamation. His prepossession, on this topic, induced him to reflect on the conjugal duty even in the laity. The layman, says the saint of Palestine, 'cannot pray, who indulges in nuptial enjoyments. The person,' he adds, ' who fulfils the duty of a husband, cannot fulfil that of a Christian."^ His language is a libel on the divine institution, which, in the popish system, is a sacrament. Jerome's prejudices in behalf of virginity caused his approba- tion of suicide and assassination. Many instances might be produced, and, as a specimen, those of the Bseotian, Milesian, and Theban virgins. Two young men, flushed with wine, had, during the night, violated the Bseotian maids, who, unwiUing to survive their virginity, fell by mutual wounds.^" Jerome, on the occasion, is at a loss for expression in favor of the shocking action. He seems to labor for language to utter his admiration of the suicidal deed. , , mu The Milesian maids were still more blameworthy, ihese, lest on the invasion and devastations of the Gauls, they should undergo any indecency from the enemy, escaped from defale- ment by death. ' The heroines,, says Jerome, ' left an example to all virgins of honourable mind to prefer chastity to lite, i he suicide, in all its enormity, challenged the unqualified approba- tion of the Roman saint. , , , n J J- A Theban girl, whom a Macedonian had deflowered, dissem- 1 Epiph. HsBr. 59. Thorn. 1. 135, 136. Jerorn. a, uuo cibum sumere, ac publice degere permittant. Unde meretrices omantur, ecclesije vestantur, pauperes tribulantur. Atto, Ep. Dachery, 1. 439. 3 Les coupables se confesaent h Icara complices, qui ne leur impoeent point de penitences convenablea. Damian in Bruy. 2. 366. Giannon. A. § 1. 664 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY, theatre of the world. Confession and absolution in this way- were, after all, very convenient. The fair penitent had not far to ^0 for pardon, nor for an opportunity of repeating the fault, which might qualify her for another course of confession and remission. Her spiritual father could spare her blushes ; and his memory could supply any deficiency of recollection in the enumeration of her sins. A minute recapitulation of time, place, and other circumstantial trifles would be unnecessary. The rehearsal of the delicious sin might, to both, be very- amusing. The sacrament of confession, in this manner, would, by recalling the transaction to mind, become very edifying, and afford a renewal of the enjoyment. This mode of remission was attended with another advantage, which was a great im- provement on the old plan. The confessor, in the penance which he prescribed on these occasions, exemplified the virtues of compassion and charity. Christian commiseration and sympathy took place of rigor and strictness. The holy father indeed could not be severe on so dear a friend; and the lady could not refuse to be kind again to such an indulgent father. Damian, however, in his want of charity and liberality, saw the transaction in a different light ; and complained in bitter- ness of this laxity of discipline, and the insult on ecclesiastical jurisdiction and on rational piety. This adultery and fornication of the clergy degenerated, in many instances, into incest and other abominations of the grossest kind. Some priests, according to the council of Mentz in 888, ' had sons by their own sisters.'' The council of Nicaea and some other of a later date, through fear of scandal, deprived the clergy of all female company, except a mother, a sister, or an aunt, who, it was reckoned, were beyond all suspicion. But the means intended for prevention were the occasion of more accumulated scandd and more heinous criminality. The interdiction was the introduction to incestuous and unnatural prostitution. The council of Mentz, therefore, in its tenth canon, a« well as other cotemporary and later synods, had to forbid the clergy the society of even their nearest female relations. A third variety for the evasion, or rather for the infraction of these canonical interdictions, was clandestine or avowed matri- mony. Some of the priests, though they could ill afibrd it, wished to keep a conscience. These, of course, would shudder at the commission of fornication or adultery, and had recourse therefore to the honorable institution of heaven for the preven- tion of such pollution. These, intrenched behind the authority of God, withstood the commandments of men. The number of ' Quidam sacerdotum cum propriia soronbus concumbeutes, filiOR ex eis generasaent. Bin. 7. 137. Ubb. 11. 586. OPPOSITION OF THE MARRIED CLERGY TO GREOORY. 565 these continued to inatease in opposition to the decretals of popes, the canons of councils, and the prepossessions of the people. The freqv.ent repetitions of these prohibitions showed theu- inefficacy, and clerical obstinacy. The interdictory councils were aU provincial ; many of them contemptible ; and ecclesiastics continued to marry in despite of their regulations. The priesthood, in general, at the accession of Gregory the Seventh, in defiance of obsolete laws, lived in a state of mat- rimony.^ Such was the state of clerical matrimony, at the accession of Hildebrand, or Gregory the Seventh, to the popedom in 1074. The reign of this hierarch commenced a new era in the annals of sacerdotal celibacy. Gregory enforced celibacy with a high hand among the Latin ecclesiastics ; and was supported in the undertaking by many of the laity. The attempt, however, was long opposed by the priesthood ; and its success termin- ated in the general concubinage and debauchery of the western clergy. . „ Gregory succeeded, to a great extent, in the suppression ol priestly marriage. Several of hi', predecessors had made a similar attempt, but in vain. Stephen, Nicholas, and Alexan- der had labored for this purpose, and failed. But Gregory proceeded in this, as in every other design, with su^rior abil- ity and resolution ; and his efforts were crowned in the end with wonderful success. He summoned a council and issued canons, separating the married clergy from their partners, and forbidding the ordination of any who would not vow perpetual continence. Ke prohibited the laity from hearing mass, when celebrated by a married priest.^ These enactments he enforced with his usual obstinacy and with his usual success. The laity, in general seem to have seconded the efforts of the pontiff. These, in many instances, refused the administration of baptism and the communion from the married clergy. Lay- men administered baptism ; and often trampled the bread and spilled the wine which had been consecrated for sacramental use by married clergymen.^ . The clergy opposed the pontiff with all their might. Ihese, Paris relates, characterized priestly celibacy and continence as ' an innovation and a rash judgment, contrary to the sentence of the holy fathers. One, says the English historian, contended for equity and the other against it ; while the consequence was scandal and division in the church ; so that nt) greater schism was lEpiph. H. 59. Jerom. adv. Vig. Thorn. I. 43. 1 Cown. VII J. 2Bm:7. 473. Bruy. 2. 388, 418. Labb. 12. 547. DuPm,2. 244, 3 Infantei baptizant. Corpus Domini a preabytenB uxoratiB conBecratum pedibuB 8»pe conculcant, et sanguinem Dommi voluntane frequenter m terrain eflfuBdunt. M. Paris, 8. Bin. 7. 288. 566 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. tC^l'fiy«^°^, ^^'^^- P^^fe^"*^ ^^^ *^^^^' historians have transmitted similar accounts. The clergy, says the annalist o?^ m^S'svl^' ""i"'^ *V P^*^^" of fSesy.^nd the S «nl W ^ .1!"' "^^"^ "^y/'olence would compel men to live like nonnZf • : ^t ^^}^''^ ^^^' '" retaliation, accused the an^r^r ^'°"; "^"l,,^ "^r^^ of extraordinary superstition, and greater effrontery than became her sex ' the council of Erford in Germany. The archbishon of IVTmif* rSX'.^- *'^- P-^iffv-q^-d^heasLSi^^^^^^^^^ Thev W?n V'''';?'!i*^f archbishop, chose neither alternative. w.rJ« rif'"''/l^ *?f '" '^'°'^«^° ^i<^^ words, which again were soon foUowed by blows as the more efficient argument The archbishop, m tJie end was so maltreated that he despaired cliyVht ^oSsr'^^' '' ^^^^^^ ^^^ -^-— * ^' iu^^Hnrnf n^^*'' ?^^g«^7^« ^^i"- He projected the sub- jugation of Christendom, and executed his plan with matchless Tnd wtll'd^^ T'"'- ^' 'y^'^'^ '^^ nreans.foul and £^ fr«llT ff '"^ ^''.T' '^''°"'' decretals, threats, violence, arms traud flattery, anathemas, and excommunication. Pretended ■ «Tl'!'nf • *" ""''' '"^'^^ the agents of his ambition. These, in ^3f f Tr''/°^ barbarism, when forgery and nonseAse Fssed for truth and reason, possessed, in the hand of supersti- tion, irresistible power and efficacy. His infallibility's 'lying J™T; '^^^^^ T,« in themselves, were irrefragable, when ad- dressed to an unlettered and superstitions populace. The clergy had to yield to the pontiff, and reason to tyranny ^^ buch was the rigour of ecclesiastical laws in the poL.sh com- munion against sacerdotal matrimony. But this communion which was so severe against wedlock in the clergy, was, in a very extraordinary degree, indulgent to concubinage both in the inlE L -{^V ri^^^.P^f '°°' clergyman or layman, according a wife but a concubine, is not to be repelled from the commu- m' Paris r°ttl'l''i^''H' ?'"'"■?*• contra sanctorum patrumsententiam ha;reSrum et v?«L?'w J''^'^"^^'^ tota factio clericcrum hominem plane cum ea amore infamare^n wSrint^n'-S^ mlv'Vuli^rTnt gB« superstitioms et majoris audacia. quam sJLum Siebrem Leret Car^^^^^^ 2 Exurgentesqui undique assidebant clerici, ita cum verbis confundebant ,-fa ?^81 I tT a""*"';'^^*. '' r*-* ^"'"^"^ ' 'y^'^^ dkessurrSperl^^^^^^ /. -81. Lamb. Ann. 1075. Bruy. 2. 438. Labb. 12. 582, "™'. ^m. llliB CLERICAL FORNICATION PREFERRED TO MATRIMONY. 567 nion, if he be content with one.^ The holy bishops, indeed, in their wisdom, would not allow two women to one man. But any Christian, according to the prelacy of Spain, might, at pleasure, keep either a wife or a mistress. This, no doubt, was very liberal and obliging in the sacred synod. But his holiness pope Leo was not to be outdone by the episcopacy, in complaisance and liberality. His infallibility, the vicar-general of Gk)d, confirmed, in the kindest manner and with the utmost courtesy, the council of Toledo and tho a«t of the Spanish The Toledan canon and its pontifical confirmation were equally wicked and ridiculous. The wickedness of the enact- ment appears in its contrariety to the law of God, and, indeed, in general to the code of all civilised nations. Its ridiculousness is dso apparent. The permission extends to every person or, according to one edition of the sacred canon, to the faithtul, comprising all Christians. The expression, Giannone ha« ob- served, comprehended, at one time, the clergy aa well as the laity ^ A man, at will, might keep a woman of either character, and he might therefore show his taste in this freedom of variety. But the holy legislators would not allow two women to one man. Two, the Spanish fathers thought would be a super- abundance of this species of live stock. But the Christian, whose humor inclined him to an unmarried rather than to a married mistress, might gratify his ta.ste, and, at the same time, continue one of the faithful and be admitted to the communion. Such was the hopeful decision of a Spanish council and a Roman Pontiff; but, ridiculous as it is, this is not aU. Ihe enactment of the council and the pope has been inserted in the Romish body of the Canon Law edited by Gratian and Jr'ithou. Gratian's compilation indeed was a private production, unau- thenticated by any pope. But Pithou published by the com- mand of Gregory the Thirteenth, and his work contains the acknowledged Canon Law of the Roinish church. His edition is accredited by pontifical authority, and recognised through popish Christendom." Fornication therefore is sanctioned by a Spanish council, a Roman pontiff; and the canon law Fornication, in this manner, was, in the clergy, not only tole- rated, but also preferred to matrimony. Many of the popish casuists, such as Costerus, Pighius, Hosius, Campeggio, and those reported by Agrippa, raised whoredom above wedlock in the Hierarchy. Costerus admits that a clergyman sins, it he 1 Christiano habere licitum est unam tantum aut uxorem, aut c^rte loco uxorisconcubinam. Pithou. 47. Bin. 1. 739, 740. Crabb. I. 449. Gianuon. X. 5. Dachery, I. 528. Canisius, 2. 111. > Confirmatum videtur auctontate LeomB ^'^^f .^^^'^^l' pithou, 47. ' (iiannon, Al. ?■ MS TBf: TAKIATI0N8 OF POPERT. commita foniication 1 tat more hemously if he marrv Concubi- na^. the Jesmt gnmts, is sinful ; bit less iS^vatTd )» m^-toms, than m«™^e. Coetem, was foTowTby kIu^ ena^i'Ltrof''cefi£;:^''aTh'ract:5^!tS":'t^ bmage, aecordingly. prior to tUrSZSon, wrft?t„Z» usage, and less offensive in the eyes of the mnMv 3X popnhice thaa clerical matrimony.'^ The ^leCiS, „? ,^! papal communion, indeed, since the days of S.CS cllvt u 5 f l^ *"® ecclesiastical jurisdiction These nrivi leged patrons of prostitution belong to the s^red hlerSv and enjoy therigtt of exemption film secularieSslaJLrind authority. Charles the Seco'nd of Anjou, acc'dlS, ^^^^^^^ o?^H'J«"*^*'J**'/*'°°*'"*'^''*™a*ruao^um. Coat, c 15 autem scire et pec J^^^^^ -te faciant. ho. BIGAMY ALLOWED BY POPE QREGOUY II. 669 that these polluted companions of the clergy should not, like the laity, forfeit the fourth of their possessions.^ The base fornicatress, in this manner, enjoyed, in the perpetration of fiithiness and in the bosom of an infallible church, the ex- emptions and immunity of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. AU this, however, is not the end of the comedy, or rather tragedy. The Roman pontiff and the Roman clergy have, on many occasions, proceeded to deeper enormity and authorised adultery or bigamy. Bossuet has accused Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Adam, Lening, Winfert, and Melanther, of encouraging bigamy in the Landgrave Philip ; and has, in the imputation, been rollowed by Varillas and Arnold. Luther and Melanc- thon erred in their instructions to Philip. But the directions of the reformers, have, in this instance, been misstated and exaggerated by the Bishop of Meaux. Perceiving the obsti- nacy of the Landgrave, seven Theologians, who had patronised the reformation, represented bigamy as less heinous than adultery ; and advised, in this case, the closest secrecy. Ams- dorf and Justus, however, as well as all the other reformers, deprecated even this advice or connivance.^ And Luther learned this theology in the school of the Roman pontiffs and clergy. A few specimens may be selected out of many for illustration. Gregory the Second, in all his infallibility, authorised bigamy, which, in the popish system, is tantamount to adultery. Boni- face, the celebrated Apostle of Germany, had, in 726, inquired of his holiness, whether men, whose wives were not dead, but incapacitated by infirmity, might agn* \ marry. His infalli- bility's reply is worthy of perpetual memory. He recommended continence indeed to such as possessed the gift. But those unendowed with continence, which is a great attainment, might, according to the viceroy of heaven, again marry. This is a precious sample of pontifical casuistry. His infallibility re- solved the difiBculty by sanctioning bigajjay and adultery. Epiphanius, as has been already noticed, had taught the same inconsistency as Gregory ; and the Roman pontiff followed the footsteps of the Grecian saint. Bellarmine, in this caae, is contrary to his avowed system, constrained to granl the igno- rance and error of Gregory.* 1 Au sentiment de tons les Docteurs lea concubines mSmes des prfitres res- BortiflBoient au jugement du fort eccl6siasti(iue. Paol. 1. 133. Non seulement lea eccl^siastiques ^toient exempts de la jurisdiction seculi^re, mats encore leurs families, et mfime leurs concubines, au sentiment detous les Docteurs. Bruy. 4. 498- Giannon. X. § 1. s BoBsnet, VI. Seckendorf, 278. ' Nam quod proposuisti, quod si mulier infirmitate correpta non valuerit debi- tum viro reddere, quid ejus laciat jugalis? Bonum esset si sic permaneret ut absti- nentiie vacaret. Sed quia hoc magnorum est, ille qui se non poterit continore, «70 THE VACATIONS OF POPERY. His holiness, no doubt, was very accommodating. He deser- ves the thanks of all husbands, whose partners are disabled by debility. He was so liberal as to allow the man to judjre when the woman, to whom he is married, is, throulh wn^uTl """^^ ^"""^ ^''*^°"- ^"' therefore, according to Ks infallibility s system, may take a second companion wHen they think proper. Gregory's doctrine, however, is now rank heter- odoxy m the Romish communion. The Council of Trent in l?j r^y *^"'" ,^®^^^°"' <^eclared against the vicar-general of liod Ihe sacred synod, without any ceremony, launched its anathemas against Gregory and his pestilential heresy ; and sent the vicegerent of heaven, eight hundred years after his death, to the abodes of the lost. The Roman pontiff's case was far more aggravated than the German reformers. The Lutheran pastor's opinion related to only one person ; and its author had no more authority than any other individual. The former referred to many and was delivered by the vicar-general of God, the head of the church, and the teacher of all Christians. Gregoiy's decretal was couched in general terms, and may, in its wide extension, com- prehend all men Many have invested its author with the attribute of infallibility ; though the Council of Trent, in fine style, and in the exercise of its inerrability, tossed an anathema at his devoted head. This pontiff's theory was, in 752, adopted by the council ot Vermena or Verbery. Pepin, the French king, with the French prelacy, was present in this assembly, which, say Daniel and Velly, gave a mortal blow to the indissolubility of the matrimonial chain.' The Galilean clergy allowed the privi- lege of repudiation and subsequent wedlock to the person Who should marry a slave, who, before the nuptial ceremony, had pretended to be free. The sacred synod granted the same liberty to the man, whose wife should conspire against his ^ lite or refuse to accompany him to a distant country ; and to the woman whose husband should defile her sister or mother or should, through aversion or impotency, neglect herself! buch were the decisions of a popish synod. These, unlike the Lutheran instructions to the Hessian Landgrave, extended not merely to one but to many. The Saxon reformer, though he erred was, as even the partial Bishop of Meaux might have seen far less g^ailty than a Roman pontiff and a Romish council. Charlemagne, with the contemporary Roman pontiff and nubat magia. Greg. II. Ep. 13. Labb. 8. 178. Bin. 5. 454. Pontificem ex lenorantia lapaum esse, ut hoc loco videtur Gregorius fecisse. BeU IV 12 ' yui donnent de grandes atteintes k I'indissolubilit^ du ma 2. 11. Velly, 1. 387. Labb. 8. 405. Cotel. 1. 88. manage. Daniel, ADULTERY OR BIGAMY PERMITTED TO THE LAITT. 571 French clergy, exemplified the theory of pope Gregory and the Vermerian council. The French sovereign divorced Himil- trud, the daughter of a French nobleman, and married Bertha, a princess of Lombardy. This match, pope Stephen feared, would ally the French and Lombards against the Roman pon- tiff He applied every means therefore, reason, invective, menace, and flattery, to prevent the union. His letter to Charles and Carloman on the occaaion is one of the most senseless, silly, ridiculous, and disgusting monuments of antiquity. His infalli- bility warned the emperor of the pestilential blandishments of woman, which had expelled man from paradise, and entailed death on the human familv. He eulogised the grandeur and celebrity of the Franks, who would be polluted by an alliance with the contemptible, leprous, and stinking Lombards; a nation without faith or religion. He mentioned the indissolu- bility of marriage, and denounced the intended union as a diabolical confederacy. Charles and Carloman he adjured against the pending negotiations by the living God, the day of judgment, and the sacred body of Peter, the prince of the apostles. Any who should disregard his adjuration, he ana- thematised by apostolical authority, banished from the kingdom of heaven, and consigned to the devil to burn in everlasting fire.' The king of Lombardy, however, soon pacified his holiness. He restored some places, which he had taken from the ecclesias- tical states, and this sop soon quieted the pontifical Cerberus. He discontinued his opposition: and talked no more of the allurements of women, the stench of the Lombards, the indis- solubility of marriage, or the thunders of excommunication. Charles was united, in peace, to the princess of Lombardy.^ Bertha, however, like Himiltrud, was soon divorced, to make way for Hildegard, a Suevian princess. Bertha, through infir- mity, was unfit for having children. This debility, the French clergy, like Gregory, reckoned a sufficient reason for repudi- ation. Her impotency, in the ingenuous and honest interpre- tation of the Galilean clergy, was equivalent to death.'' Bertha, a year after her nuptials, was sent to Lombardy, and Hildegard, as queen, placed on the throne. The repudiation, however, of both Bertha and Himiltrud, in the present popish ' A regno Dei alienum, atque cum diabolo setemia incendiis concremandum deputatum. Steph. ad Carol- Labb. 12. 481. Velly, 1. 387. 11 leur represente cette alliance comme rouvrage du Demon, et les Lombards comme une nation m^priaable, perfide, infect^e de la Ifepre. Vertot, 63. 2 On contenta pour adoucir son chagrin de lui faire restituer quelques places. Velly, 1.389. 11 n'est plus un perfide, un l^preux, Vertot, 71. 3 Bertha esset clinica et ad propagandam prolem inhabilis, ideoque judicio episcoporum, earn relictamabillo esse velut mortuam. Porro reddita esset exmorbo penitusimpotenaadconcubitum. Spc 771.111. Velly. 1. 389. Moreri, 2. 299. p «72 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. system, waa invalid ; and the French king, like the Gennan landgrave, had at one time, not merely two but three wives. Baronius, iievertheless, calls Hildegard a princess of exemplary piety. The French episcopacy sanctioned the divorce and consequent iparriage, while Adrian, the contemporary pontiff, the universal bishop, whose duty it was to enforce the obser- vance of the canons through Christendom, expressed not, during the whole transaction, a single hint of disapprobation. Ihe French monarch, unlike the Hessian prince, was, after his death, canonised by pope Pascal ; and many worshipped the imperial saint. Pope Celestine, in the end of the twelfth century, defined heresy to be a reason for the dissolution of marriage, aa Greg- wy and the French clergy had admitted the plea of debility, ihe pefson, according to this pontiff, whose partner in life becomes guilty of heterodoxy, may, an account of this error in faiUi, choose another.' Philip, could he have proved the iandp^vine a heretic, would have had pontifical authority to toansfer his hand and affections to an orthodox companion. Celestine s definition, however, is now, according to the council of Trent, in its twenty-fourth session, a pestilent heresy. Innocent the Fourth sanctioned bigamy, without even the Dlea of heresy. Alphonsus, of Portugal, about 1243, divorced his queen, and espoused the princess Beatrix. The repudiation and nf^ptials were authorised by a bull of his holiness.' The Koman pontiff, remarks Charenton, Mariana's translator, with ainusing simplicity, permitted such transactions at that time with much greater facility than he would at the present day. The popish clergy, in the beginning of the fifteenth century, though superintended by the Roman pontiff, the universal pastor, permitted bigamy in Livonia. A man, says Henry, canon of Worms, was in the Livonian dominions, allowed to have two living wives, and a woman plurality of husbands." The bishop of Meau^, had it agreed with his taste, might have discovered exempUtications of bigamy in his own communion without having recourse to the Reformation. Alexander, following the footsteps of his predecessors, issued J S{m?P"^^**^°"*°^ dispensation of marriage to Ladislaa and Phihp. Ladislas, king of Hungary, divorced Beatrix of Arragon and married Anne of Foix. The separation from the 1 Celestinus definivit per hseresim ita matrimonium solvi, ut Uceat ei aliud 33°^TeT r777 ^""""^ ^"°'" ^'""^"^ ^ haeresim lapsus sit. Alphon. 1. 4. Walsh, 2 II obtint enfin un d6cret du Pape qui d^clara boh manage nul. Marian. 3. 29. In Livoma, vir duas uxores vivas habeat et mulier plures maritos. Hen. i« JLAnian. 1, 53. t! PROFLIGACY OF THE ROMISH PRIESTS. 678 one and the union with the other were, according to Manana, by the express authority of his holiness.' Alexander was as kind to Lewis as he had been to Ladislas. Lewis, the French king, disliked aueen Jeanne, who, it seems, was crooked, infirm, barren, and deformod. He reeolved, therefore, on a separation, which, Daniel remarks, was rather a violent remedy. His majesty, accordingly, divorced Jeanne, and espoused Ann. His infallibility, in the most obliging man- ner, granted a bull of dismission and a dispensation for the desired union. His holiness, however, did not, on this occa- sion, work for nothing. Thirty thousand ducats ; the title and duchy of Valentino, with a revenue of twenty thousand pounds ; the princess Charlotta, sister to the queen of Navarre ; all these, with a few other trifles, which Phili|» gave to Alexander's hopeful son Borgio, were the reward of iniquity. The money and the dukedom, Daniel admits, facilitated the dissolution of marriage. Guicciardini, with more candor, represents the^.e considerations as the sole means of attainment. Lewis, rj^i- withstanding, was, observes Moreri, called the just and the father of his people ; and has been charactelised as religious, chaste, liberal, and the friend of letters.^ • The laxity of Romanism on the one hand, and its privations on the other, introduced shocking impurity into its communion. The interdiction of marriage, and the connivance at concubinage in the priesthood, became the polluted fountains of multiplied abominations, which inundated the popedom and swelled the annals of ecclesiastical history. The clergy forsook the sanc- tuary of wedlock for the sty of fornication and adultery. Gre- gory's enactments, according to Aventinus, afforded signal gratification to the wandering votary of sensuality, who, m the restlessness of unsettled libertinism, relinquished one woman for the sake of a hundred. But men, who were actuated by conscience or a sense of propriety, regarded the innovation as a pestilential heresy which arose to trouble Christendom. The clergy, who resisted Gregory's enactments against mamago, declared that the tendency of such interdictions was to open the flood-gates of filthiness, and give the slackened reins to forni- cation and defilement. Agrippa, in more modem days, draws a similar picture, and represents whoredom as the necessary effect of prohibiting honorable marriage. Polydorus, agreeing with Agrippa and Gregory's clergy, depicts celibacy as calcu- lated to dishonor the priesthood, injure religion, and grieve all good men. Matrimony, he remarks, is far more useful to the Christian commonwealth.^ 1 Le Pape confirma par un bref exprts le divorce de Ladislas. Marian. 5. 299. 2 Dan. 7. 10. Guicia. III. Bmy. 4. 306. Moreri, 5. 246. »Aventin. V. Labb. 12. 647. Bruy. 2.431. Bayle. 1. III. Polyd. V. 4. 674 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. These observations have been verified by sacerdotal profli- gacy m popish Christendom ; as will appear from the frightful relations of Bernard, Agrippa, Henry, Clemangis, and Seze- ray. Bernard the saint of Qairvaux. in the twelfth century admitted and lamented the impropriety of the prelacy and priesthood 'who committed, in secret, such acts of turpitude as would be shameful to express.'' ^ Agrippa accuses the prelacy of taxing the inferior clergy for ibertv to violate the laws of cha,stity. A bishop, on one occa- sion, boaated of having,in his diocese eleven thousand priests who severally paid their superior, every year, a guinea for leave to keep concubin3s.2 Licenses of this kind indeed were com- mon m many of the European kingdoms. Compelled by the enormity of the evil, the council of Basil, at length, in its twentit ,h session, issued a canon interdicting such abomina- ofTod"*" ^''''' '''^''™"''''''*'^*'^" «"^t^e eternal malediction Henry, a Viennan professor of theology and vice-chancellor ot the Parisian university, draws, in the fifteenth century, a sinular portrait.^ His description, copied by Lenfant, extends nfiv P""??' ^^^- ?^^"?«^«' the bishops, the priests, and the monks. He depicted the ignorance, pride, simony, and licen- tiousness of the pontiff, the cardinals, and the prelacy The priests, m his sketch, practised fornication, and the monks wal- iowed m debaucheiy. Cathedrals became dens of thieves while monasteries were erected in taverns and places of prostitution. The dissipation of the clergy, in Henry's estima- hTdels^' corruption of Christendom and the obduracy of Clemangis reckoned the adultery, impurity, and obscenity of the clergy beyond all description. These frebuented the stews and taverns, and spent their whole time in eating, drinkinff revelling, gaming and dancing Surfeited and drunk, theS sacerdotal sensualists fought, shouted, roared, rioted, and blas- phemed God and the saints ; and passed shortly after from the embrace of the harlot to the altar of God. The canons, Uke the priests, were ignorant and drunken. Clemangis, through shame, drew the curtain over the abominations that the nuns » Episcopi et sacerdotes faciunt quae non conveniunt. Quse enim in ocoulto fiunt abepiBcomsturpe estdicere. ^rnard in Con. Rhem ^28 miuiTfaZdi ,T'*.*"™ ,'" '"°''''^*' queudum episcopum habere se undecem XSprfn bS".7" ni"*™'""' "^^ '" '"^^'^'^ *°"«« "" ^"'•«"°' P-'i""*- •^NonnuUi jurisdictionemecclesiasticum habentea. nennnmrina nuspafna n^n- Crabh^'^'s^qf' ^n"* T'" ^^'o^tcunt patientes eos in sua feditate7ord;8cere. i T ^' T ; ^,^^^^y> 1- 757. Bniys, 4. TIT. Mt^reAri^^I^ i^ pretres concubinares, iei des moines debauchez, dea mon- aet res engez en cabarets etheuxde prostitution. Henry in Lenfan. Pisa 1(53 SACERDOTAL PROFLIGACY IN ENGLAND, FRANCE, AND SPAIN. 576 practised in their convents, which he called brothels of licen- tiousness. To veil a woman was in that age to prostitute her.' Mezeray's portrait of clerical profligacy, prior to the reforma- tion, is similar to those of Bernard, Agrippa, Henry, and Cle- mangis. The ecclesiastics, in the statement of the French historian, were nearly all fornicators and drunkards. The clerg}'^ held their offices in taverns, and spent their money in debauchery.* These general details may be corroborated by a particular retrospect of priestly incontinence, before the rise of Protest- antism, in England, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, France, Italy, and Peru. The accounts are furnished in abundance, by the contemporary Popish historians and councils. England, as appears from the relations of Gildas, Fordun, and Paris, drunk deep of the abominations flowing from sacer- dotal celibacy. Gildas, in the sixth century, represents the English priesthood as a confraternity of the filthiest fornicators. The British pastors, according to the historian's account, were the patrons of folly ; and wallowed, like awine, in the sinks of lewdness and gluttony. These men, who should have been examples of holiness, were characterised by drunkenness and impudicity.* Fordun has copied the description of Edgar the English sovereign, from Aildred of Rieval. This is similar to the outline of Gildas. The British monarch, in the tenth century, assembled the British clergy ; and in a speech addressed to the full con- vocation, drew the frightful portrait. These churchmen, his Majesty told them to their face, were lascivious in dress, inso- lent in manner, and filthy in conversation. The time of these heralds of the gospel was devoted to revels, inebriation, de- bauchery, and abomination. Their abodes were the haunts of harlots, and the scenes of the play, the dance, and the song, which, in noisy dissipation, were prolonged till midnight or till morning.* ' Fomices et cauponulaa aeduli frequent, ut potando. commessando, pranais tando, coenitando, tempora vota uonaumunt. Crapulati vero et inebriati pugnant, clamant, tumultuantur, nomen Dei et aanctorum auorum pollutiaaimia labii- execrantur ; aicque tandem compoaiti ex meretricum auarum complexibua ad divinum altare veniunt. Cleman. 26. Lenfan. 1. 70. Par pudeur, il ainie mieux tirer le ridean aur lea abonainationa, que ae commet- teut dana leurs conventa, qu'il appelle dea bordela de Venua. Aujourdhui Toiler une fille c'eat la proatituer. Bruy. 3. 610, 611. 2 Ila tenoient leura bureaux dana dea cabareta. On voyait qu'ils conau- moieut en debauches une partie de I'argent. Paateurs preaque toua concubinairea, ivTognea, uauriera. Mezeray, 4. 490. 3 Sacerdotes habet Bntannia, aed inaipientes, proprii plenitudinem ventris queerentea, et aura libidines votis omnibus impiere cupientea, porcorum more ▼olutantea, Clerici impudici, bilinguea, ebrii. Gildaa, Ep. 23, 38. * In veste lascivia, insolentia in geatu, in verbis turpitudo. Defluunt in com- easationibus et ebrietatibua, in cubilibua et impudicitiia, ut jam domua ulerico- mm putentur proatibula meretricum. Fordun, c, 30, Bruy. 2. 21 9. 576 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Paris, in the eleventh century, at the accession of Gregory the Seventh, gives a report similar to those of Gildas and For- dun. He represents a few as observers of continence. But he characterises the majority as adding incontinence to perjury and multiplied adultery.' Spain was as defiled as England. This is testified by many historians, and, among others, by Alvarus and the councils of Valladolid and Toledo. One fact, noticed by Alvarus, a Spanish author on this subject, conveys a striking idea of the Spanish nation and priesthood. The sons of the Spanish clergy, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, were in number nearly equal to those of the laity.'' The ecclesiastics and their mistresses, it seems, were suflficiently prolific. The clergy, in all likelihood, were as successful in the production of natural progeny as of spiritual ofispring. These priests would rise from the harlot's embrace, and proceed, without delay or even confession, to the altar of God. The testimony of the council of Valladolid, in its seventh canon in 1322, is to the same purpose. The clergy, prodigal of character and salvation, led, according to this assembly, lives of enormity and profligacy in public concubinage. The canon of Valladolid was renewed in 1473, in the council of Toledo. This synod represented the clergy as living in the filthiest atrocity, which rendered them contemptible to the people. Some of the priests, guilty of fornication, feared not to touch the body of the Lord with polluted hands.' The measureless intemperance of the Spanish clergy appears in the history of sacerdotal and monkish solicitation in that kingdom. These solicitors were Spanish monks and priests, who, abusing the privacy of spciumental confession, tempted women, married and unmarried, to a violation of chastity, and, in the language of pope Gregory, 'administered poison instead of medicine.'* This kind of solicitation became so prevalent as to demand pontifical interposition. Its notoriety, accordingly challenged the interference of Pius, Clement, Gregory, Alexan- der, anc' Benedict, who issued their bulls against this kind of aeduction. The publication of the penal enactments showed the extent of the evil. The execution of the Roman mandates was con- > Faucis continenliamobservautiibua.muUisincoiitmentiamperjurio multipli- ciori adulterio cumulantibus. Paris. 8. » On voit presqu'autant d'enfans do cleros que de laiques. lis se levent d'au- pi«8 de leurs concubints pour aller k I'autel. Bruy. 3. 308. Alvar. 11 . 27. ^^^^lericorum noiinulli famae suib prodijaji et salutis, in concubinatu publico vi- ™nj .,ncv:nt- enoniut-er diasoiutaxti. Lsbb. 13. 247. Ciiristi corpuB, saoerdos poUutis manibns tractare non formidat. Labb. 19. 389. Bin. 8. 957. ♦ Pro medicina, venenom porriinint. Cher, a 432. Dens, 3. 412, 413, et 6. 292, 293. BuU. SACERDOTAL PROFLIGACY IJf GERMANY. 677 signed to the inquisitors, who summoned the attendance, at the holy office, of all that could inform against the guilty. The terror of the inquisition commanded obedience. Maids and matrons of the nobility and peasantry, of every rank and situa- tion, crowded to the inquisition. Modesty and shame induced many to go veiled. The alarm awakened jealousy in the mind of many husbands. The fair informers in Seville alone were, according to Gonsalvus and Lorente, so numerous, that all the inquisitors and twenty notaries were insufficient in thirty days, to take their depositions. Thirty additional days had, three several times, to be appointed for the reception of informations. But the multitude of criminals, the jealousy of husbands, and the odium which the discovery threw on auricular confession and the popish priesthood, caused the sacred tribunal to quash the prosecution, and to consign the depositions to oblivion.' The German clergy were as debauched as those of Spain or England. Their overflowing and unrestricted licentiousness appears with transparent evidence in the unsuspicious testimony of German councils, princes, emperors, and clergy. A German council, in 1225, accused the priesthood of un- chastity,^ voluptuousness, and obscenity. Some, addicted to filthy enjoyments, lived in open and avowed concubinage. Some of the clergy as well as the laity committed incest with the holy nuns, and ' wallowing in sensuality, plunged, with slackened reins, into the lake of misery and mud of filthiness."* The council of Cologne, in 1536, characterised the monas- teries, which had formerly been the schools of virtue and the hospitals of the poor, as the taverns of soldiers and ravagers. The nunneries, according to the same authority, had, to say no worse, become the alleged scenes of incontinency. Another council of Cologne, in 1549, convicted the clergy of concubin- age and the monks of whoredom. The sacred synod then prescribed a course of penance to the holy fornicators, ' to mortify the petulance of the flesh. '^ Albert, Duke of Bavaria, in 1562, by Augustine, his ambassa- dor, depicted in glowing colors before the council of Trent, the licentiousness of the German priesthood. The contagion of heresy, the ambassador said, had, on account of sacerdotal pro- fligacy, pervaded the people of Bavaria even to the nobility. A recital of clerical criminality would wound the ear of chastity, iGonaal." 185. Lorent. 355. Limborch. 111. 17. 2 Nonnulli clerici lumbos auos cingulo continentiae, ut accipimus, non prsecin- Kunt. Bin. 8. 834, 835. ObsccEnia voluptatibua inhaintea, concuhinas iiaque ad hft)C tempora pubiice tenuerunt. yuidam relaxatia voluptatum habenis in lacum miaeriae et in lutum fa3ci8 ae immergunt. Labb. 13. 1095, 1098. 3 In diversoria militum ct raptorum. In auapectas de incontinentia domos eaae commutata. Labb. 19. 1.??0, 1384. KK 678 THE VABIATIONS OF POPERY. Debauchery had covered the ecclesiastics with infamy. Ait hundred priests, so general was the contagion, could hardly muster three or four who obeyed the injunctions of chastit}*' The French applauded the ambassador's speech. The council also, by its promoter, joined in the French eulogy, and styled the Duke of Bavaria the bulwark of the popedom. The emperor Ferdinand, though without success, applied to the pope, in 1564, for a repeal of the laws against sacerdotal matrimony. Maximilian also, with many of the German princes, importuned Pius the Fourth for the same purpose. The reason, urged by the emperor was the profligacy of the priest- hood. His majesty declared that among many of the clergy, scarcely one could be found who lived in chastity. All, with hardly an exception, were public fornicators, to the greatest danger of souls and scanda? of the people." A repeal of clerical celibacy, Maximilian stated, would gratify the populace of Bavaria, Bohemia, Silesia, Moravia, Austria, Carinthia, Carniola, and Hungary. All these vast regions would have rejoiced in the restoration of marriage among the clergy. The emperor's application was supported by the popish priest- hood of Germany. These, in maintenance of their petition alleged various reasons. The frailty of man ; the diflSculty of abstinence ; the strength of the passion that prompts to mar- riage ; the permision of clerical wedlock by the Old and New Testament under the Jewish and Christian dispensations ; its use, with few exceptions, by the Apostles ; the instructions of Dionysius to Pinytus ; the decision of the Nicene council suo-- gested by Paphnutius, the usage of the Greeks and Latins 'i the East and West, till the popedom of Calixtus ; all these argu ments, the German ecclesiastics urged for the lawfulness of sacerdotal matrimony. A second rea&on the Germans deduced from clerical profligacy. Fifty priests, these churchmen con- fessed, could with diflSculty afford one, who was not a notorious fornicator, to the oflfence of the people and the injury of piety.' Sacerdotal logic and learning, however, were unavailing, when weighed against pontifical policy and ecclesiastical utility. Switzerland was the scene of similar profligacy. One fact will sufficiently mark the state of this country. The Swiss, prior to the Keformation, compelled every priest to take a concubine of his own, lest he .should attempt tho chastity of virgins or 1 Dont il ne pourroit raconter les crimes sans blesser les oreUles chastes de son auditore. Le clerg^ s'^toit rendu infame par son impudicitd. De cent prfitres il s'en trouvoit i peine trois ou quatre qui u'entretinssent une concubine. Paol n 917 nil v; Q KKl 2 Vix inter multos unus reperiatur, qui castum coelibatum prsestat: nam omnes fere pubhcos esse scortatores. Thuan. 2. 417. Bruy, 4. 681. Gabutius 21 3 De ciquaiite priitres Catholiques, k peine s'en trouvoit il unqui ne fut notoire- ment concubinaire. Paol. 2. 680, 681. Thuan. XXXVI 38 PROFLIGACY OF THE ROMAN CLERGY. 579 matrons. Scandalous indeed must have been the incontinence of the Swiss clergy, when the cantons were necessitated to use such a remedy for protecting women of character. A fact of a similar kind is mentioned by Ciemangis. The laity tolerated the clergy only on condition of their keeping con- cubines.'' This caution was suggested by the married women, who, protected even by this expedient, were not wholly out of danger. The French clergy were as debauched as those of England, Spain, Germany, and Switzerland. All the French ecclesiastics, according to Mezeray's relation, were in a state of extreme ir- regularity. The majority had concubines. Some of the deacons entertained four or five of these female companions. The nuns kept neither their cloisters nor their vows.^ The Italian and Roman clergy appear, of all others, to ha. s been the most licentious. This, in the tenth century, was stated in emphatical language by Ratherius, bishop of Verona. Arnolf, who was an excellent preacher of righteousness, says Platina, was, in the popedom of Honorius, murdered at Rome by the agency of the priesthood, because he inveighed against their incontinence and sensuality. A select council of cardinals and bishops assembled by Paul the Third, in 1538, has drawn a picture of the Roman courte- sans, and the attention paid them by the Roman clergy. These courtesans lived in splendid palaces, walked or rode as matrons through the city, and were attended at noon-day by a train of the clergy and the nobility, the friends of the cardinals.^ The Roman priesthood, in this manner, made a public exhibition of their filthiness and infamy. The Roman pontiffs were often as filthy as their clergy, and exemplified every species of licentiousness and pollution. Some of these hierarchs licensed stews, and raised a tax on these houses of iniquity. These vicegerents of heaven exacted a tribute for the permission of impurity. The pope's marshal, in many instances, received a revenue from the Roman courtesans ; and enriched the sacred treasury with the wages of prostitution. » In ancien 6dit^toit doiin^ par leurs predecesseurs pour obli^er tousles prfetres Jl avoir leur propre concubine, et les empecher par la d atteuter !a pudeur des honnStes femmes. Paol. 1. 32. 2 Laici nen aliter velint presbytenim tolerare, nisi concubinam habeat. Cle- man. De Praesul. 168. Bayle, 2. 1392. 3 Tout le clerge (5toit dans un extreme d^reglement. La pluspart avoient des concubines. II so trouvoit des diacres qui en entretonoient jusqu'A, quatre ou cinque. Les rtSligieuses n'observoient ni leur cloture ni leurs voeux. Mezeray, 1 "63. ' i^Dachery, I. 354. Platina in Hon. 2. Bruy. 2. 208. Du Pin, 2. 165. 5 In hac etiam urbe, meretrices, ut matronee incedunt per urbem, seu mula vehuntur, quas assectantur de media die nobiles familiares cardinaliu.n ckri- cique. Habitant etiam insignes oedcs. Crabb. 3. 823. Coss. 5. 547. 680 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Some of the pontiffs converted the Roman court into a scene of pollution. The Lateran palace, which had been a sanctuary, became a brothel.' A John, a Boniface, a Sixtus, an Alexander, a Julius, and a Leo were notorious for adultery, incest, or the sin of Sodom. A Roman council convicted John the Twelfth of adultery and incest. His holiness committed incest with two sisters. John the Twelfth was imitated, in the career of miscrea,ncy, by John the Twenty-third, as well as by Boniface, Sixtus, Alexander, Julius, and Leo.'^ Gregory, who perfected the system of sacerdotal celibacy, disobeyed his own laws. His infallibility excelled in the theory of chastity rather than in the practice, and could prescribe to others more easily than to himself. He was openly abcused of fornicatio;i, adultery, and incest. The council of Mentz took the liberty of calling his holiness a fornicator. Many, both of the clergy t nd laity, reckoned the vicar-general of God guilty of incest with Matilda, princess of Tuscany, after her repudiation from Godfrey, duke of Lorraine. Binius admits the notoriety of the report, though, without any good reason, he denies its truth. Maimbourg, in modern days, acknowledges Matilda's impru- dence in her devotion to Gregory, who styled the princess his dear daughter.^ Priestly profligacy crossed the Atlantic, and appeared in America as well as on the European continent. The debauch- ery of the Peruvian priesthood has been described in glowing colors by UUoa ; and the picture is frightful. Frailty, remarks this candid author, accompanies man in every nation of the earth ; but seems, in an extraordinary manner, to have debased the monks and clergy of Peru, who surpass every other class in sensuality and libertinism. The men, who, in this country, should be examples of holiness, have degenerated into patterns of impurity. Concubinage flourishes and fattens among these professors of abstinence. Ulloa mentions many instances of this enormity in the Peruvian ecclesiastics. One priest, among the rest, celebrated mass in patriarchal style ; while his fifth mis- tress was seated in the church. He was assisted at the altar by one son, while a brood of his spurious children witnessed the august ceremony.* 1 Son Mar«5chal tiroit un tribut dea femmes prostitutes. Bruy. 3. 374 et 2. 244. Lateranense palatium, sanctorum quondam hospitium, nunc est prostibulum meretricum.g Luitprand, VI. Labb. 11. 881. ^ Viduam Rainarii at Stephanam et Annam viduair. k^uVo. nepte sua abusum esse. Labb. li. S8i, SS2. Thuau. I. 215. Platine. 132. 3 Pontifex Mathildis complexibus furtivis frueretur. Bu . 7. 309. Labb. 12, 232, 272. Un jeu moins de prudence et de discretion, au'elle ne devoit. Maimbourg. Decad. 244. Spon. 1074. IV. * Ulloa, 449, 503, Quar. Rev. 70. 330. PROFLIGACY OF THE COUNCILS OF CONSTANCE AND BASIL. 581 General councils, as well as Eomish pontiffs and popish pnests, outraged the laws, not indeed of celibacy, but of abstineace. This was exemplified in the universal councils of Lyons, Con- stance and Basil. The council of Lyons demoralised the city in which , it was convened. Cardinal Hugo, in a speech to '.he citizens immediately after the dissolution of the sacred 83^uod boasted that Lyons, at the meeting of the assembly, contained two or three stews ; but at its departure, comprehended only one ; which, however, extended without interruption from the eastern to the western gate. The sacred convention, by the per- petration of licentiousness, converted the whole city into one vast, fermenting, pestilential, overflowing sink of accumulated poU'ition. The holy fathers, it appears, were men of business and industry, and did not confine their valuable labors to the study of musty theology. The general council of Constance imitated the incontinence practised at Lyons. Seven hundred public or common women followed in the train of the Constantian fathers. The Vieunan manuscript augments the number of these female attendants, whom it calls vagrant strumpets, to fifteen hundred.'^ This was a reasonable supply for the thousand learned divines that com- posed the infallible assembly. The procuring of these ladies, who, no doubt, were trained to their profession, showed the sacred synod's provident foresight as well as their good taste. Constance might not have "afforded a competent supply ; and- therefore, the thoughtful theologians, mindful of their own com- fort, imported a few hundreds of the sex. The sacerdotal for nicators, it seems, were very liberal to these professional ladies One courtesan, it is said, gained eight hundred florins, an im- mense sum in those days.^ She was treated very differently from John Huss. The reverend debauchees enriched the pros- titute and burned the reformer. These fair companions evinced the holy men's relish for spiritual enjoyments, and refreshed the infallible doctors at night, after being exhausted during the day, by making speeches in the council and burning the heretics Huss and Jerome. ^ i^i i • The general council of Basil taught the theory of falthmess, as those of Lyons and Constance had displayed the practice. Carlery, the champion of Catholicism in this assembly against Nicholas the Bohemian heretic, advocated the propriety of permitting brothels in a city. The speculation, the hero of the faith maintained by the authority of the sainted Jerome, 1436. Brays, iM. Paris. 702. .. ^_ r v -a 2 Mulieres communes quas reperi in domibus UtC. LaDD. lO. 4. 39. Item XVC meretrices vagabundiB. La^^- 16. 1435. . ,. .. ,,„„ 3 Item dicitur quod una meretrixlucrata est Vine florenoB. Labb. 16. Uib 682 THE VARIATIONS OF POPERY. Augustine, Thomas, and Gregory. Simple fornication, the sage and precious divine discovered, does not disturb the common- wealth; and the populace, addicted to voluptuousness and pleasure, are unwilling to abstain. He concluded, therefore, by the most logical deduction, that stews are to be tolerated in a city. This theory the holy fathers heard with silent approbation. The vile atrocity therefore was sanctioned by the holy, unerring, apostolic, Roman council.' 1 Per simplicem fornicationem non turbatur politia, nee plebium multitudinem luaibus, deliciis, voluptatibus deditam, facile eat abstinere. Labb. 17. 980. 988. Canisius, 4, 467. mmm APPENDIX. SrNCE the publication of former editions of this volume, new and startling illustrations have been furnished of the variations of Popery, especially by the promulgation by Pius. IX. of the doctrines of the Immaculate Conception of Mary ; and of the absolute Supremacy and Infallibility of the Popes of Rome. It was formerly permitted to Roman Catholics to receive, to reject, or to question these doctrines, but now they must be received as doctrines de fide, that is, doctrines necessary to be believed in order to salvation. As a matter of fact these doc- trines were, in former times, rejected by many whom Romanists venerate as fathers and saints in the Church ; but now, ac- cording to the decisions of the reigning Pontiff, none can re- ject them except under penalty of eternal perdition. The im- portance of these recent variations of Popery, and especially of the new decisions respecting Papal Supremacy and Infallibility entitle them to be noticed in this volume, and accordingly a brief notice of some particulars respecting them is now subjoined. . . Pope Pius IX. ascended the Papal throne in 1846. He is reputed to be a man of amiable disposition, and, as regards his private character, he is said to be worthy of being classed with the b38t of his predecessors. But he has suffered himself to be guided by Jesuit influences, and under this guidance has adopted a course at once unscriptural and suicidal. One notable example of this was his procedure in regard to the promulgation, as a doctrine de fide, of the dogma of Immacu- late Conception. According to this doctrine, Mary, the mother of Jesus, was, both as regards body and soul, conceived, entirely free from any taint of sin. Previous to the promulgation of this doctrine, which involves in principle one of the leading errors of Pelagianism, Pope Pius sought counsel from the prelates of his Church, respecting the doctrine itself, and re- ■specting the expediency of his proclaiming it^ as an article^ necessary to be believed in order to salvation. The responses oi the prelates disclosed great varieties of opinion. It ^appeared 584 APPENDIX. that the doctnne was now genemlly believed by Romanists : but some leading theologians acknowledged that in the earlv centunes it was rejected by leading Fathers of the Church Many were of opinion that the promulgation of the doctrine as an article de /cfe, would be unwise, inasmuch as it would needlessly preiudice Romanism in the minds of Protestants and advised tUt the matter should be left an open ^tion as It had been left by the council of Tr.nt. On tSe oS hand some prelates were of opinion that not only was thedoc- ^in^rue, tut that it ought to be promulgated as an arSe Frona among the responses unfavorable to the promulgation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, the following are quoted m the Appendix to Dr. Pusey 's Eirenicon. The Arch- bishop of Paris thus wrote,-' I have consulted the gravest men the most able theologians of my diocese. I have lubsequenti; myself exammed and weighed all things before God with thi greatest care. From aJl this has resulted a work of which the conclusions are-(l) In conformity with the principles of theology, tlm Immaculate Conception of the most holy Virgin u not a matter which can be defined as a truth of the Catho- lie faith. and,in no case, can be imposed as a belief obliaatorv under pam of eternal damnation: (2) That anv TSon whatsoever even if the Church or the^ Holy L bdieved ^^^^^^^ Sirnfr^ It, would not be opportuu^e, for itwourdadd nothing to the glory of the Immaculate Virgin, and it might be hurtful to the peace of the Church, and the good of souls es! pecially m my diocese 'The Archbishop of Rouen thSs wrote - nLroffrwI^Q'-^f"^ V°* clearly contained in the de- posit of the Holy Scriptures. I consider that tradition in this re- pect IS wanting m precision and unanimity. Had the tradition ^eencleav,couldS.Anselm,S.Bonaventura^S.BernardS.S^^^^ Bellarmine, and so many others have been ignorant of it?/ consider that the belief of the Immaculate Conception does not century , and that ifneiv beliefs or devotions, favorable to piety and nowise contrary to order, may be wisely tolerated and even encouraged, it is stiU advisable to leave them as free belief™ simple devotiom- The Bishop of Constances thus wrote,- It what was hi herto a mere opinion is to-morrow, at the good pleasure of certain bishops, to be believed dejide under pain of aamnation; if what the S. Council of Trent itself Cas Pallavi cini attests) would not decree, although then controverted and '^ll^iy ^^P^gnedl If what_ Pope Pius V., of holy memorT Oregux-y X\., and Aiexauder Vll, declared to be, nk a dogma, but a mere pious opinion, ivhat might be contradicted without APPENDIX. 585 note of hereay, should be delivered as a doctrine by decree of the present Supreme Pontiff, would not the aforesaid Ration- alists, and all uncatholics take occasion for assailing anew and more fiercely all our doctrines with their impious speeches?' In spite, however, of these and other similar strong protests by prelates of his own Church, Pius IX., in the year 1854, issued a decree requiring all Roman Catholics to believe under pain of eternal damnation the dogma of the Immaculate Con- ception of Mary, the Mother of Jesus — a dogma which other Popes permitted the faithful to question or reject, a doctrine which was rejected by the most distinguished Fathers of the Cliurch, and a doctrine which is not only unwarranted by Scripture, but opposed to its teachings. The monstrous char- acter of this dogma can only be fully understood when taken in connection with other doctrines held by Romanists, accord- ing to which Mary is regarded as co-redemptress of mankind, and the Mediatrix and Dispenser of all grace ; and who is therefore to be venerated and invoked in a manner which can scarcely be distinguished from that in which God himself is venerated and invoked. The proclamation of 1854 is the crowning act by which Mary is exalted to a position of virtual equality with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Not content, however, with exalting Mary to the virtual position of a Divine person in heaven, Pope Pius IX. has as.serted for himself a similar position on earth by the subse- quent declaration of his own Absolute Supremacy and Infalli- bility. His claim to Supremacy and Infallibility was implied in the fact of his proclamation of the Immaculate Conception as an article de fide, without the consent of a general council, and in the face of protests by numerous distinguished dignitaries of his Church. It was further implied in his famous Encyclical of 1864, containing a Syllabus of Errors which, by his own authority, he had condemned in various letters and allocutions during the course of his Pontificate. But the crowning act by which he seated himself in the temple of God, ' showing him- self that he is God,' was perpetrated with the consent of the Vatican Council on the 18th July, 1870. In the year 1867, he announced his intention of calling this Council under the aus- pices of the Virgin Mary, who, as he alleged, had ' crushed the serpent's head and was mighty to destroy alone all the heresies of the world.' By an Encyclical, dated 29th June 1868, the Council was summoned to meet in the Basilica of the Vatican Palace on the festival of the Immaculate Conception (8th Dec), J. .. ^ ^L.„L l„!..II ^ _j purpose, it was well understood that the chief object of call- ing the Council was to secure its assent to a declaration as a fftgy ggeig mHWMwm '^MBSm^^' 586 APPENDIX. articles defide, of the doctrines of the Absolute Supremacy and Infallibility of the Pope. So well was this understood that anticipatory protests were presented by theologians and dig- nitaries of the Church of Rome, especially from Gennany and France ; but these were unheeded. Although the Council, which assembled in 18G9, was, ac- cording to Romanists, an (Ecumenical one, it was not really entitled to be so regarded. It contained no representatives from the eighty-two millions of the Greek Church ; or from the hundred and five millions of the various Protestant Churches. The Greek prelates were indeed invited, but they contemptu- ously declined the invitation. Protestants also were invited to avail themselves of this opportunity of being reconciled to Rome, but were given to understand that they would not bo per- mitted to take part in t\e debates. Half of nominal Christen- dom was thus unrepreseuted. The Council was notwithstanding numerously attended. Of 1049 Romish prelates entitled to seats 719 were actually present. The Roman Catholic populations, however, were by no means fairly represented. Thus, while Italy was represented by 276 members, France had only 84, and Germany only 19 representatives. It is possible that at some future day Romanists may endeavor to extricate them- selves from the fearful dilemma in which the Vatican decrees have involved them, by alleging that the Council of 1869-70 was a packed assembly, and that therefore its decisions cannot be held as binding. This may be the wicket gate by which they shall endeavor to escapj from their embarrassing po- sition. This gate, however, they will find to have been locked and barred by the fact that the Vatican decrees have been already accepted by the prelates and priests of the Church of Rome. Reports of the proceedings of the Council have been fur- nished by various Roman Catholic writers, and particularly in the collection of letters by ' Quirinus.' It appears ' V at ^at little freedom of discussion was allowed. Nevertheless so..u p; latea ventured to give bold expression to their opposition to th uni- versal Supremacy and Infallibility of the Pope Thus, uv. OonoUy, Archbishop of Halifax, Nova Scotia, is reported to have said,— • We bishops h?».ve no right to renounce for ourselves and for our successors, the hereditary and original rights of the episco- pate, and to give up the promise of Christ, " I am with you to the end of the world." But now they want to reduce us to nullities, to tear the noblest jewel from our pontifical breast- plate, to deprive us of the highest prerogatives of our office, and to transform the whole Church, and the bishops with it, into a rabble of blind men, among whom is one alone who sees, so APPENDIX. 587 that they must shut their eyen, and believe what he telk them. Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, is reported to have declared dis- tinctly >^nd repeatedly that a dogmatic decree, not accepted by the whole episcopate, could not have any binding force ; he thus directly opposed the decrees afterwards adopted that, irre- spectively of the consent of the bishops, the decisions of the I 'ope were binding on all Bishop Strossmayer, in a speech of singular power, maintained thtit the doctrine of papal infalli- bility was opposed to the constitution of the Church, to the rights of bishops and councils, and the immutable rule of faith. He quoted the authority of Cyprian and Augustine who re- fused to admit the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome. He shewed that if the personal infallibility of the Pope were ac- knowledged. Councils would be useless, and Bishops would be robl)ed of their rightful authority. He pointed out also the evils which would result from the proposed decree which he alleged was as earnestly desired by the worst enemies of the Church, as by the prelates of the Council who pressed its atloption. Several speeches of a similar character were de- livered by other eminent members of the Council. Many speeches also on the same side were prepared, but from want of time, and other causes, were not delivered. ' On the 13th July, 1870, the vote was taken in secret session on the decrees respecting the Supremacy and Infallibility of the Pope. There were present 601 members, of whom 451 voted ajiproval (Placet), 62 a modified approval (Placet Juxta mo- dum) ; while 88 had the courage to vote disapproval (Non pla- cet). Among those who voted disapproval were the Arch- bishops of Prague, of Vienna, of Paris, of Besancon, of Lyons, of Gran, of Kalosca, ofBreslau, of Munich, Machale of Tuarn, Conolly of Halifax, Kenrick of St. Louis, also Bishops Dupan- loup, Maret, Ketteler, Hefele, and Strossmayer. About 80 or 90 members of the Council, who we^Q in Rome or its neigh- bourhood, abstained from voting. On Sabbath, the 17th July, 56 bishops sent a written protest to the Pope declaring their continued adherence to their negative votes, but intimating that from personal regard to the Holy Father, they did not wish to give an open vote, in his presence, against him ; and that, therefore, they had resolved to leave Rome and return to their flocks. These, therefore, with 60 other dissatisfied Bishops, left Rome the same evening. When a public meeting of the Council was held on the following day (18th July) there were only 535 members present, and all these voted for the absolute Supremacy and Infallibility of the Pope, with the exception of Bishop Riccio of Sicily, and Bishop Fitzgerald of Arkansas, who, however, before the session closed acquiesced 588 APPENDIX. with the majority. On the result of the voting being intimated to the Pope, he rose up in the assembly, and announced his abso^ite Supremacy and Infallibility as doctrines defide— necessary to be believed under pain of eternal damnation. It is said that during the voting and promulgation a storm burst over Rome, and made the Council hall so dark that the Pope could not read the decree of his infallibility without hav- ing a candle brought ; and that the decree was read to an ac- companiment of thunder and lightning — suggestive of the pre- ternatural signs which accompanied the Saviour's crucifixion. It may here also be stated that by a singular providence, as ancient Babylon was taken, while Belshazzar and his princes were engaged in daring acts of profanity and idolatry, so the blasphemous decrees of Pius IX. and his prelates were speedily followed by the capture of the mystic Babylon. Before the Vatican Council was prorogued, Rome was in possession of Victor Emmanuel, and the temporal sovereignty of the Pope is at an end. In the earlier sessions of the Vatican Council various decrees and canons had been adopted and sanctioned respecting God, Revel tion, Faith and Reason, which need not now to be par- ticularly quoted. It is of greater importance to place on record the decree adopted and published in the Session of the 18th July, 1870. The following is the Latin text, with an English translation by Archbishop (now Cardinal) Manning. CONSTITUTIO DOOMATICA PrIMA DE EcciEsiA Chbisti. Edita in Sessiont Qtuirta ISacrosancti CEcumenici Conciiii Vaticani. PIUS EPISCOPUS, SERVUS SERVORUM DEI, SACRO APPROBANTB CONCILIO, AD PEBPETUAM REI MEMOBIAM. Pastor seternus et Episcopua ani- marum nostrarum, ut salutiferum Redemptionis opus perenne redde- ret, sanctam redificare Ecclesiatn de- crevit, in qua veluti in dome Dei vi- ventis fideles omnes unius fidei et caritatis vinculo contii-.crontur. Qua- propter, priusquam clanticaretur, rogavit Patrem non pro Apostolis tantum, sed et pro eis, qui credituri erant per verbun; eoruni in ipsum, ut omnes unum. easent, sicut ipse First Dogmatic Constiution THE Church of Christ, ON Published in the Fourth Session of the hclij (Ecumenical Council of the Va- tican. PIUS BISHOP, SERVANT OF THE SER- VANTS OF GOD, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE SACRED COUNCIL, FOR AX . EVERLASTING REMEMBRANCE. The eternal Pastor and Bishop of our souls, in order to continue for all time the life-giving work of ' his Redemption, determined to build up the holy Church, wherein, as in the house of the living God, all who be- lieve might be united in the bond of one faith and one charity. Where- fore before he entered into his glory, he prayed unto tl^o FjitTier iiot for the Apostles only, but for those also who through their preaching should APPENDIX. 589 Filius et Pater unum sunt. Quem- admodum igitur Apostoloa, quosbibi de mundo elegerat, misit, sicut ipse missus erat a Patre : ita in Ecclesia sua pastores et doctores usque ad consummationem seeculi esse voluit. Ut vero episcopatus ipse unus et in- divisus esset, etper cohserentes sibi invicem sacerdotes credentium mul- titudo universa in fidei et communi- onis unitate conservaretur, beatum Petrum ceteris Apostolis prseponens in ipso instituit perpetuum utrius- que unitatis principium ac visibile fundamentum, super cujus fortitudi- nem setemum extrueretur + mplum, et Ecclesiee coelo inferenda sublimi- tas in hujus fidei firmitate consurge- ret. Et quoniam portse inferi ad evertendam, si fieri posset, Eocle- siam, contra ejus fundamentum di- vinitus positum majori in dies odio undique insurgunt. Nos ad Catho- lici gregis custodiam, incolumitatem, augmentum, necessarium esse judl- camus, sacro approbante Concilio, doctrinam de institutione, perpetui- tate ac natnra sacri Apostolici pri- matus, in quo totius Ecclesise vis ac soliditas consistit, cunctis fidelibus credendam et tenendam, secundum antiquam atque constantem univer- aalis Ecclesiee fidem, proponere, at- que contraries, dominico gregi adeo pemiciosos, errores proscribere et condemnare. come to believe in him, that all might be one even as he the Son and Father are one. As then he sent the Apostles whom he had chosen to him- self from the -vorld, as he hunself had been sent by the Father ; so he willed that there should ever be pas- tors and teachers in his Church to the end of the world. And in order that the Episcopate also might be one and undivided, and that by means of a closely united priesthood the mul- titude of the faithful might be kept secure in the oneness of faith and communion, he set blessed Peter over the rest of the Apostles, and fixed in him the abiding principle of this twofold unity, and its visible foundation, in the strength of which the everlasting temple should arise, and the Church in the firmness of that faith should lift her majestic front to Heaven. And seeing that the gates of hell, with daily increase of hatred, are gathering their strength on every side to upheave the foundation laid by God's own hand, and so, if that might be, to overthrow the Church : we, there- fore, for the preservation, safe-keep- ing, and increase of the Catholic flock, with the approval of the sa- civd Council, do judge it to be ne- cessary to propose to the belief and acceptance of all the faithful, in ac- cordance with the ancient and con- stant faith of the universal Church, the doctrine touching the institii- tion, perpetuity, and nature of the sacred Apostolic Primacy, in which is found the strength and solidity of the entire Church, and at the same time to proscribe and condemn the contrary errors so hurtful to the flock of Christ. Caput I. De Apostolici Primatus in heato Petro bistitutiotie. Docemus itaque et declaramus, juxtaEvangelii testiraonia primatum jurisdictionis in universam Dei Ec- clesiam immediate et directe beato Petro Apostolo promissum atque Chapter I. Of the Institution of the Apostolic Primacy in blessed Peter. We therefore teach and declare that, according to the testimony^ of the Gospel, the primacy ol jurisdic- tion over the universal Church of God was immediately and directly o90 APPENDIX. coUatum a Christo Domino fuisse. Unum enira Simonem, cui jam pri- dem dixerat : Tu vocnberis Cephas, postquam ille suam edidit confessio- nem inquiens : Tu es Christus, Filius Dei vivi, solemiiibus his verbis allo- ciitus est Dominus : Beatus es, Si- mon Bar-Jona, quia caro ct sanguis non revelavit tibi, sed Pator meus, qui in coelis est : et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc Pe- tram sedificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portee inferi non prsevalebunt adver- sus eam : et tibi dabo claves regni ccelorum : et quodcunique ligaveris super terram, erit ligatum et in coe- lis : et quodcumque solveris super terram, erit solutum et in coelis. Atque uni Simoni Petro contulit Jesus post suam resurrectionem summi pastorio et rectoris jurisdic- tionem in totum suum ovile dicens : Pasce agnos meos : Paace oves meas : Huic tam manifestse sacrarum Scrip- turarum doctrinse, ut ab Ecclesia Catholica semper intellecta est, aper- te opponuntur pravas eorum senten- tiae, qui, constitutam a Christo Do- mino in sua Ecclesia regiminis formam pervertentes, negant, solum Petnim prae cfeteris Apostolis, sive seorsum singulis sive omnibus simul, vero proprioque jurisdictionis pri- matu fuisse a Christo instructum ; aut qui affirmant, eundem primatum non immediate directeque ipsi beato Petro, Bed Scclesice, et per hanc illi ut ipsius EcclesieB ministro delatum fuisse. Si quis igitur dixerit, beatum Pe- trum Apoatolum non esse a Christo Domino constitutum Apostoiorum omnium principem et totius Ecclesia militantis visibile caput ; vel eundem honoris tantum, non autem verse i-'-'i'i' •i'lt- juiiaujuaunis priiiiacum ab eodem Domino nostroJesu Chris- to directe et immediate accepisse ; anathema sit. promised and given to blessed Peter the Apostle by < rist the Lord. For it was to Simon alone, to whom he had already said : ' Thou shalt be called Cephas,' that the Lord after the confession made by him, saying: ' Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' addressed these so- lemn words: ' Blessed art thou, Si- mon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood have not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And 1 say to thee that thou art Pe- ter ; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, it shall be bound also in heaven ; and whatso- ever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. *" And it was upon Simon alone that Jesus after his resurrection bestowed the jurisdiction of chief pastor and ruler over all his fold in the words : 'Feed my lambs; feed my sheep.' At open variance with thia clear doc- trine of Holy Scripture as it has beem ever understood by the Catholic Church, are the perverse opinions of those who, while they distort the form of government established by Christ the Lord in his Church, deny that Peter in his single person, pre- ferably to all the other Apostles, whe- ther taken separately or together, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction ; or of those who assert that tlie same primacy was not bestowed immedi- ately and directly upon blessed Pe- ter himself, but upon the Church, and through the Church on Peter as her minister. If any one, therefore, shall say that blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles, and the visible Head ws for the crime of Protestantism, 275. Amadeus, Duke of Savoy, after forty years, resigns his ducal admin- istration to his sons, 103— retires to his villa of Ripaille, ib.— a de- putation sent to him conveying the triple crown, which with reluctance he accepts, ib. AmbrosiuR, St., recommends suicide, 558. Ammianus, his description of the affluence and ostentation of the Roman pontiff, 22i. Amurath, Sultan, defeats Ladislaus, king of Hungary, who had been induced by Eugenius VI. to break his treaty with him, 291 —displays a copy of the violated treaty in the front of the battle, ib. Anabaptism : opposed by Luther and Calvi.., 42— also by the Swiss, French, English, and Scottish Reformers, ib. Anacletus, or Cletus, succeeds Linus in the Roman episcopacy, 78 — but doubtful whether Anacletus and Cletus were identical or dis- tinct, 81. Anastasius, excommunicated for heresy by Symmachus, 336. Angelo, Cardinal, declaration of, that the sacramental wine, if admin- istered to laymen, is poison rather than medicine, 444. Anointing the sick, scriptural end of, 458. Ante-Nicene Fathers, remarks on, 55. i^.ntiquity, in the abstract, no criterion of truth, 53 — papal supre- macy unknown to, 182. Antitrinitarians, several factions of, 307. Antonius, his picture of the sixteenth century, 212. Apostles : founded and organised churches, and then consigned their superintendency to fixed pastors, 78— word ' apostles' inter- preted by some theologians to signify ' the rock,' 170. Apostles' Cieud, general reception of in Christendom, 56. Aquinas, Thomas, his opinion on transubstantiation, 419— methods adopted by him, to preserve himself continent, 544. INDEX. G05 Arbitration, proposed as a means for the extinction of the schism in the papacy, 94. . Arianism : patronised by Liberius, and by the councils ot Sirmiura, Seleucia, and Ariminum, 42— also by Zosirausand Honorius, 110 —heresy originated in Alexandria, 305— its prevalence, 316. Ariminum, council of, its meeting and proceedings, 313-4. Aristotelian philosophy, why it facilitated the reception of transub- stantiation, 413. . , i, Arius, the first innovator on the faith of antiquity, whose error ob- tained extensive circulation, or was attended with important con- sequences, 305— masterly portrait of him by Epiphanius, ib.— is expelled from the church by a council convened by Alexander, the patriarch of Alexandria, and goes to Palestine, 306. Aries, synod of, hostile to consubstantiality, 308. .... Armenians : scattered through Armenia, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, Persia, India, Cyprus, Poland, Turkey, Transylvania, Hungary, and Russia, 70— their merchants distinguished for industry, fru- gality, activity, and opulence, ib.— have repelled Mahometan and Romish superstition beyond all the Christians in Central A-Sia, 71 —their faith a transcript of biblical purity, ib.— invited by Abbas, the Persian monarch, to settle in his dominions, 70. Arnold (Ant.) endeavors to prove the antiquity of transubstantiation, 414 — remark on this attempt, ib. Arnolf, a preacher at Rome, murdered by the agency of the priest- hood, because he inveighed against their incontinence and sensu- ality, 579. . . T. J Ki Ass, absvrd Festival of, celebrated at Beauvais in Burgundy, 51. Assassination, approbation of, by Jerome and Ambrosius, 557-8. Astolf, king of Lombardy, forms the project of subduing Italy, 222 —defeated by Pepin, and compelled to fulfil his treaty with Stephen II. ib. . . Athanasian Creed : its general reception m Christendom, 5D. Athana&ius, supremacy bestowed on him by Gregory and others, 182— compelled to appear before the Tyrian council, 307— vindi- cates his innocence and exposes the injustice of the council, ib.— is r-^scued by the soldiery and escapes, but is excommunicated and banished, ib. „ , ^^ i.- u p 4-u^ Atheism, displayed ia the lives of the Roman hierarchs of the middle and succeeding ages, 116. Augsburg or Augustan Confession, the production of Melancthon, reviewed by Luther, presented in 1530 to the Emperor of Germany, 34— became the standard of Lutheranism through Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, lb. Augustine (St.) taught the doctrine of gratuitous predestination, d70 -Iseems to have been the first Christian author, who entertained the idea of purifying the soul while the body lay in the tomb, 525 — remarka on his works, 525 8. ,, ^ . u- ^ f Q-T-r " Augustine," a work so called, published by Jansenius, object ot, ^77. Auto da Fe, see Faith, posL '1 606 INDEX. Averroes, his opinion of Christians, 429 Avignon : removal of the papal court from, by Gregory XI, 89. B ^tlh^iT"^^'' '' '^' '^""''^ * P^^^'- °f d-P«°«ing in vows and ascribed to^the walr of, as to the teTZ ^nU^ ThVS: Baptista : his portrait of the Constantine council, 307 Barbarossa, Emperor, compelled to officiate a^ 'equerry to Adrian Barsumas, a Syrian, active in the assassination of Flavian. 326 -Barthelemi de Pngnano, see Urban VI ' Bartholomew^ massacre on St. Bartholomew's day, 278-not con- nation %7^9'™r;«d^f '"''"^^ ^" ^^"^^^^ thro'ugh the French nation, 279— medals coined to perpetuate its memory. 280— ao- Z\tX%''''' ''' '''"'" ""^' ib.-SpZ'r|oLsl ^lne°?Sf ttrV^'^'^T^^y '^^ * g«'^«ral council to a Tqu siTs o? f«fth ff '"^ °i*" ^ °^«y *^« ^y'^^dal authority m questions of taith, schism, &c, ib.— two bulls of disaoliiHnn issued against It by Eugenius, ib.-newdissensiorb tween them b.-deposes Condalmeno, ib.-appoints Amadeus, Dukeof Savov' Igai^^IZ^ome t ''^a^A' f °^^4^ S^'^^^*^' U2-decla3 agamsc by some, ib.— called by Leo X. a conventicle 143— an knowledges that half-communion is an innovation 441 inTnn sistency of, with itself, 445-profligacy of 681 ' *^^-^'^^°"- "theZoTrc^f Constantinople, both denounces and patronises the synod of Chalcedon, 335-is driven from the imperial dignitv and cold, Zl^'"^'^'^ *« Cappadocia, where he dies of hunger ^?afn'f°Io^"^"''*^ ^P^''^' ^'P^^'' <^° *^« celebrity of a Roman saint 42-invents a most extraordinary fiction, ib.i-declaringS her body was transubstantiated into the substknce of our Lord's ib.-this absurdity divides the Spanish priests and monks ib- SonT^r^^^'V-*^"^^ '^' '''''^' accompanied wihprosll tion and burning of incense, 43. F'^si^rd Bede, Venerable, remark of, on the unction of the sick. 461 Belgic Confession, see Dutch confession. Belisarius suborned by the empress Theodora, and bribed by Vigilius to expel Silvenus from the papal chair, 85. ^ ^ ' Bellarmine (Rob.), his distinctions and decisions badlv calculated f^ establish the authority of councils, 132-affirmsS the Pot can %T^^^^:^t'^t!l%'^'-^-'y'.^-^ dutyjntosin. 167-urg'es the er.,a.c,.tion •^. ncrcauo, vviiure ic can ba ellected with safetyr271 Benedict, St., his remedy to preserve himself continent, 545 Ztm '^'°'' °f Hildebrand] pope, 981_strangled by Crescen- INDEX. 007 Benedict VII. Pope (975) substituted by universal suffrage in the stead of Boniface VII., 119 — holds the papacy nine years, ib. Benedict [XL Theophylactus] promoted in 1033 to the papacy by simony, 87 — in 1044 is expelled jy a Roman faction, ib.— is restored, ib.— resigns the papacy to John for 1500/. and retires, 88 — weary, however, of privacy, he renews his claim, and seizes by dint of arms on the Lateran, ib. Benno, cardinal, his character of Gregory the Seventh, 119. Berengarius, allowed by Gregory VIII to profess that the bread and wine of the altar after consecration are the true body and blood of our Lord, 39 — opposes Pascasius, 417 — Berengarian controversy, 419. Bernard (St.) afiirms that none, except God, is like the Pope, either in heaven or on earth, 165. Bernardin, his adventure with a female citizen of Sienna, 47. Bertrand de Got, see Clement V. Bertram replies to Pascasius, 415 — different treatment which his work received, ib. Bethesda, pool of, remarks on, 456. Beziers, storming of, 264. Bible, forbidden to the laity, by the council of Tolosa, 258. Biel, cardinal; opinion of, on the creation of the Creator, as implied in transubstantiation, 427-28. Bigamy, allowed by (Gregory the Second, 569. Bohemian Confession, presented in 1535 to the Emperor Ferdinand by the nobility of Bohemia, 34. Bohorquia, a victim of the inquisition, 275. Bonaparte, excommunicated and anathematised by Pius the Seventh, 243. Boniface VII. (Francon) seizes the papal chair in 974, having mur- dered his predecessor and successor, 118 — is deposed and expelled, ib. — replaced on the pontifical throne by bribing his partisans, ib. — imprisons John XIV. who had succeeded during his absence, in the castle of Angelo, where he dies of starvation, 119 — his body exposed by Boniface, ib. — dies suddenly, and his body dragged with indignity through the streets, ib. Boniface VIII. [Cardinal Cajetan] pope, 1294, forms a plan to induce Celestin to resign, succeeds, and is chosen in his stead, 121 — im- prisons him, ib. — his character, 122 — taught the necessity of stib- * mission to the pontiff for the attainment of salvation, 163. Borgia, see Alexander VI. Bossuet, (J. B.) bishop of Meaux, his'misrepresentatiou of Protest- anism, 33 — eulogises the Helvetian Confession of faith, ib. Brazen serpent, remark on, 469, 470. ' Breaking of Bread,' phrase, as used by St. Luke, remark on, 437. Brekespere, (Nicholas) see Adrian IV. Breviary, Roman, approves of self-flagellation, 45. Britain, continued independent of papal authority till the end of the sixth century, 188. hi I'fl €08 INDEX. Brothels, established in Rome by Sixtus the Fourth, 125. Brunon, see Leo. IX. Bucer, accompanies Zuinglius'to the conference at Marpurg 37 Buchanan (Dr.) antiquity of Syrianism acknowledged by 74 Bulls, papal, remarks on the bull 'inCcena' issued in 1567 by Paul the Fifth, 242— a papal bull received by open or tacit assent, and by a majority of the popish clergy, forms a dogma of faith 263— observations on the bull ' Unigenitus,' 216— bull of Paul V. against the oath of allegiance to James the First, 242— bull ^i Vr^^^' transferring Ireland to Henry the Second, 230— opinion of M. Caron on it, 231— of Clement the Fifth, 290. Byzantine synod, proceedings of, in the year 360, 315 Cajetan (cardinal) see Boniface VIII. Calendion, patriarch of Antioch, banishment of, 338. Calvinists, modified the severity of predestination, 38— unite with the Lutherans, ib. Canon law, extends the spirit of persecution even to the dead 274 Canute, king of Denmark, used self-flagellation, 45 ' Caraffa (John Peter) see Paul IV. Carlerius, advocates the propriety of tolerating stews in a city 207 Caroline books, a composition of the French clergy in the name of Charlemagne, 489— their genuineness denied by some, 490 Caron (R.) his opinion of the bull of Adrian IV. transferrins Ireland to Henry the Second, 231. Celestin, a visionary monk, transferred from a mountain cavern of Apulia, to the holy chair of St. Peter, 121— is inducedby Boniface VIII. to resign, is imprisoned by him and dies, ib. Celestius, a Scotchman, or as some say, an Irishman, attached to the Pe agian school, 362— condemned by the Carthaginian prelacy, 364— flies to Ephesus and Constantinople, but is expelled from both these cities, 365— presents himself before Zosimus, and ^ declares his innocence, ib.— is acquitted by Zosimus, 367. Celibacy of the clergy, 534— two parties on the subject, ib.— a varia- tion from the Jewish theocracy, 536— a variation also from ancient tradition, 547— rejected in the East, 540— progress of, in the Romish church, 542— papal policy, cause of, 549— progress of. in the East, 552. iJession of the Papacy, a plan suggested by the Parisian University* to put an end to the schism between the reigning Pontiff's Benedict and Gregory, 95— this, however, defeated by the selfish obstinacy and perjury of the competitors, ib. Chalcedon, general council ot, convened, 329— description of it, ib.— passes three distinct creeds on the subject of monophysitism, 330— conduct of, 333. Charenton, national synod of purity of the Lutheran fait^- and worship acknowledged at, by the French reformed, 38. Charles, king of Naples, his kingdom bestowed upon him by Urban, INDEX. 609 92— quarrel between them, 93— offers a reward for the Pontiff's head, ib.— leads an army against him, and besieges him in the castle of Nocera, ib.— is assassinated in Hungary ib Charles V Emperor of Germany and King of Spain, proscribes Luther, his foUowers, and books, 274— begins the work of perse- cution in Spain, and with his latest breath recommended its com- pletion to his son, Philip the Second, 275. Charles IX. King of France, part he took in the massacre on St. Bartholomew s day, 278— his unfeeUng witticism on seeing the body of Admiral Coligny, 279. s> j Childeric, King of France, deposed in 751, for inefficiency, 224. Christian Common wealtli, original state of, 220. Ciaconia, a Dominican, urges the extermination of heresy, 273, Cicero, his opinion of Christians, 429. Clara, at Madrid, aspires to the distinction of a prophetess, 43— her claims obtain general credit, ib.— feigns a paralytic affection, and IS visited by the most distinguished citizens of the capital, ib.— the sick implore her mediation with God for their cure, and judges supphcate Ught to direct them in their decisions, ib.— announces that by a special call of the Spirit she is destined to become a Capuchin nun, but wants the health and strength necessary for this mode of life, ib.— Pius VII. grants her a dispensation from this, lb.— an altar erected opposite her bed, mass often said in her bed- room, and the sacrament left there as in a sacred repository, ib.— at length, in 1802, mildly punished by the inquisition, 44. Clemens, of Alexandria, testimony of, to the marriage of priests, 539. Clemens II. succeeds Anacletus or Cletus in the Roman episcopacy, Clement V. [Bertrand de Got] pope, 1305, emancipates Edward I. from his oath in confirmation of the great charter, 290 Clement y II. [Robert de Geneve,] pope, 1378— 1394, Christendom divided between him and Urban VI., 89— absolves Francis II., the Frt;ach king, from a treaty which he had formed in Spain, 292. Clement IX. (^Jules de RospigUosi,] pope, 1667, issues an edict of pacification in 1668, modifies the formulary of Alexander VII., and permits the dissatisfied clergy to interpret his predecessor's rescnpt in their own sense, and to subscribe in sincerity, 380— th s modification, called the peace of Clement, continues for 34 years, ib. Clement X. [Emilius Altieri,] pope, 1670, countenances the pacifica- tion of his predecessor, 380. Clement XI. T John Francis Albani,] pope, 1700, overtures the pacifi- cation of Clement IX. and the patronage of Innocent XL, confirms the constitution of Innocent X. and Alexander VII. against Jan- senism, and denounces Quesnel's Reflections, 381. Cletus and Anacletus, doubtful whether they were identical or dis- tinct, 81. Clergy, celibacy of, 534 — a variation from the Jewish theocracy, 536 — and from the Christian dispensation, 537 — also from ancient MM Ill j 610 INDEX. tradition, ib. — proofs that the clergy anciently were married, 538 —celibacy of the clergy rejected in the East, 540— progress of, in the Romish church, 641— papal policy a cause of, 549— progress of in the Bast, 552 — domesticism or sunisactanism, had recourse to by many of the clergy, 661— concubinage of, 563— incest committed by, 564 — clandestine matrimony of, ib. — profligacy of in Germany, 577— in Switzerland, 578— in France, 579— in Italy ib. — in America, 580. Coleta, St., often complimented by Satan with a whipping, 48. Coligny, Admiral, massacred on St. Bartholomew's day, 279 unfeel- ing witticism of the French king on seeing his body, ib. Cologne, council of, how it characterised monasteries and nunneries, 577. Communion in one kind, 433 — popish arguments for, 435 — contrary not only to scriptural institution, but also to the usage of the early and middle ages, 438— not practised in the East, 441— its introduc- tion, 443. Compulsion on questions of religion and conscience unscriptural,447. ' Concord of Grace and Free-will,' by Molina, design of this work, 375 — by whom approved and condemned, ib. Concubinage, and its enormities, "563. Condalmerio, assumes the name of Eugenius, I'Ol — his contest with Felix respecting the papacy, ib — deposed, and all his constitutions abrogated by the council of Basil, 102— induces Ladislaus, Xing of Hungary, to break his treaty with the Sultan Amurath, 291. Confessions of Faith, harmony of those of the Reformers, 33— Variety of, 315 — see also Augsburg or Augustan — Bohemian — Dutch — English — French— Helvetian— Palatine — Polish— Saxon — Scot- tish — Tetrapolitan and Wittemberg Confessions. Confessor, duty of, according to Dens, 287. Confirmation not a sacrament, 73. Congregation of Helps, estabUshed by Clement VI il., 376. Constance, general council of, how characterised by Baptista, one of its own members, 207 — conflicting opinions on its ecumenicity, 142 — proceedings of, 240 — ^profligacy of, 581. Constans, Emperor, issues the Type or Formulary, 353— design of, ib. Constantino, Emperor, confers the appellation of God on the Pope, 166 — gives legal security to the temporal possessions of the Chris- tian republic, 220-'l — the patron of iconoclasm, 155 — supremacy bestowed on him by Gregory and others, 182. Constantius adopts Arianism, 154. Consubstantiality, of the Son, declared by the council of Nice, 306— when the word first came into use, ib. Consubstantiation, absurdity of, deformed for some time Lutheran- ism, 37— -and this opinion the Saxon Reformer retained with obsti- nacy during his whole life. ib. Continence, difficulty of, and instances of remedies pursued to pre- serve it, 543. INDEX. 611 Conviilsionarianism, frightful displays of, 49, 50. Convulsionaries, Popish fanatics, who pretended to extraordinary visitations of the Spirit, 49. Corporeal presence, jarring of the advocates of, 424— light in which it has been viewed by different denominations, 429. Cossa (Balthasar), see John XXIII. Councils : those of Nice, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Constantinople, promulgated the principles of Protestantism, 56— general, in ecclesiastical history as uncertain as the Roman pontiffs, 131— six, marked now with the seal of approbation and infallibility, were for a long series of time in whole or in part rejected by a part or ' by the whole of Christendom, 132— these are, the second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh, and twelfth, ib.— variations in the reception of, 131-139 — and in their universality, 146 — sq. difference respecting then: legality, 149— sq. presidency of, 150— a variety of opinions entertained with respect to the persons who should form a general council, 161— also respecting the manner of syn- odal decision, 152— want of unanimity in councils, 152, 153— and of freedom in, 153, 159— persecuting councils, 259— sq. councils opposed to councils, 371— profligacy of, 581— See also Ariminum, Basil, Cologne, Constance, Lateran, Lyons, Pisa, Seleucia, Trent^ Tyrian, Vienna. Creeds : the Apostolic, Nicene, and Athanasian, generally received in Christendom, 55. Crescentius, instigated by Boi "ice VII., strangles Benedict VI., and places Boniface in the Papal chair, 118. Cross, the, supreme worship to be ascribed to, 467— observation on, 468 — the agent of miracles, 476. Crucifixion : two instances of, in order to exhibit a lively image of the Saviour's passion, 50. Crusade against the Albigenses, 263. Cup, sacramental, use of, to all, enjoyed by the Scriptural expres- sions, 435— restricted to the priesthood by the Popish interpreta- tion, ib. — refused by the Manicheans, 438 — enjoined by Leo Gelasius, and Urban, 438-9— and by Pascal, 440. ' Cursing, specimens of the Pontifical art of, 92. Cyprian, supremacy bestowed on him by Gregory, and others, 182^ D Damian (Cardinal) introduces the practice of self-flagellation, 45. Dead, prayer for the, remarks on, 519. Decretals, false, publication of, about the year 800, aided the' usurpation of the papal hierarchy, 186— this fabrication displays in a strong light the variations of Romanism, ib.— countenanced by the sovereign pontiffs, ib.— its genuineness and authenticity generally admitted from the ninth century till the Reformation -'J. iinu ui aituiiviB rruv xiavc liUUUbliUU iCS lOrgerV, ID. Definitions, pontifical as well as synodal, have been misunderstood and subjected to contradictory interpretations, 216. * Deivirilian operation, what, 347. m 612 INDEX. Demi-Eutychians, who so denominated, 70. Dens, (Dr.) his system of theology fraught with the most revolting principles of persecution, 282 — its Catholicism and morality acknowledged, in whole, and in part, by the Popish clergy and people, 283 — unanimously agreed by the Popish prelacy to be the best work and safest guide for the Irish clergy, ib. — remarks on, 549. Deposition of Kings : difference of opinion respecting the Pope's power of, 218— deposition of continental sovereigns, 219 — made an article of faith, 228. Diamper, synod of : its statement of the distinctions which discrimi- nated Syrianism from Popery, 72, 73 — invalidates the oaths taken by the Indian Christians, 293. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, decisive testimony of, to the marriage of the priesthood in his day, 538. Dioscorus, patriarch of Alexandria, presides in the Ephesian council, 324 — his cruelty to Flavian, 326 — excommunicates Leo, 328 — is anathematised by him, ib. — a few of his practical foibles, 333. Disciplinarian variety : exists among the Eomish as well as the Reformed, 42 — instances of, ib. Disjunctive in Greek often equivalent to the copulative, 437 — in- stances of, 138. Dissensions, ecclesiastical, 317. Dissimilarity of the Son maintained by the Arians, 307. Domesticism or Sunisactanism, recourse had to by many of the clergy, 561. Dominic of the iron cuirass, the great patron and example of self- flagellation, 46 — makes several improvements in it, ib. Dominic, inventor of the inquisition, 266 — well qualified for his oflBce of Inquisitor-General, ib. — proofs of his inhumanity, 267. Dominicans, their dispute with the Jesuits, 376. Drithe^m, story of, as related by Bede and Bellarmine, 601. Duelling, decree of the Council of Trent against, 241. Dulia, or inferior honor and veneration, to be paid to the statues of saints and martyrs, 467. Du Pin, (Dr.) proposes to Dr. Wake to omit the word Transubstan- tiation, and profess a real change of the bread and wine into the Lord's body and blood, 40. Dunstan, (St.) his reported contests with the Devil, 48. Dutch or Belgic Confession, written in French in 1561, and in Dutch and Latin in 1581, confirmed in a national Synod, 1579, 35. E * Ecclesiastical dissensions, 317. Ecthesis or Exposition of Faith, publication of by Heraclius, 351 — rejects Arianism, iisestofiaaiSm, and Eutychiauism, ib. — teaches the unity of the Mediator's will, ib. — and interdicts all controversy on the operations, ib. — received by the oriental patriarchs and INDEX. 618 what it differed from the Type issued by of a Srelacy, ib. — in onstans, 353. Edgar, king of England, his portrait of the British clergy, 575. Edmond, Archbishop of Canterbury, liis curious treatment Parisian lady, who solicited him to unchastity, 47. Edward the Confessor, absolved by a Roman Counsel from a vow which he had made to visit Rome and the tomb:i of the apostles, 292. Election, controversy on, little agitated till the sixteenth century, 373— unconditional, advocated by the Rhemists, 374. Electoral Variations as to the Pontifical succession, 82. Elements, sacramental, accounted signs, figures and emblems, 404 —406— retain their own nature and substance, 406— nourish the human body, 407. Elizabeth, Queen, deposed by Pius the Fourth, 233— oath of allegiance to her annulled by Pius the Fourth, 292. English Confession, edited in the Synod of London in 1562, and printed by the authority of Queen Elizabeth in 1571, 35. Enus, story of, as told by Matthew Paris, 502. Ephesian council, in 449, reverses the Byzantine decree concerning Eutychianism, 324— what this synod has been denominated, ib.— validity of, 327. Epiphanius, remarks on his character as an historian and logician, 554— blunder of, on the subject of matrimony, 555— his silly address to the Virgin Mary, ib. Episcopacy ; in its proper sense, incompatible with the apostleship, 78— a bishop's authority being limited to a city or nation, but an apostle's commission extending to the whole world, ib. Erasmus, (Des.) his opinion of transubstantiation, 414— of half- communion, 440. Eugenius, see Condalmerio. Eusebius of Dorylseum, arraigns Eutyches for heresy, 323— anathe- matised by the council of Ephesus, 324. Eutyches, superior of a Byzantine convent, his faith, 320— originator of Eutychianism, ib. — how characterised by Leo and Petavius, ib. — declared guilty of heresy and blasphemy by a council at Constantinople, 323— pronounced orthodox, and reinstated by the Ephesian synod, 325. • Eutychianism, a verbal heresy, 321 — its prior existence, 322 — denominated Monophysitism, ib. — see Monophysitism. Exposition of Faith, see Ecthesis. Extreme unction, not a sacrament, 72 — variations on its effects, 449 a variation from Scriptural unction, 451 — and from tradition, as well as from Revelation, 459 — traditional evidence for, 460 — history of, 463. F Faith, confesssions of, 33, &c. — act of, convicted, sentenced to, by the Inquisition, 269— violation of, 285— taught by Romish Doctors, 286, &c.— by popes, 288— by councils, 292. 614 INDEX. Faithlessness, one of the filthy elements of Romish superstition, 286. Fanny, Sister, account of her crucifixion, 50. Fathers : who have been denominated, 64 — their errors and igno- rance have been acknowledged by Erasmus and Du Pin, 56 — £ost-Nicene may be consigned to the Vatican, to rot with the lum- er of a thousand years, ib. — ante-Nicene exhibit a view of Pro- testantism in all its prominent traits, ib. * Feed my sheep : ' torture by Bellarmine and others of the admoni- tion, 177. Felicity, Sister, suffers crucifixion for the sake of exhibiting a living image of the Saviour's passion, 60. Felix, Pope, elected by the Arian faction in the room of Liberius, 82— at length ovorthown, retires to his estate at Ponto and dies, 83 — canonised and worshipped, ib. Flagellation, called by Baronius * a laudable usuage,' 44 — recom- mended also by the Roman Breviary and various Pontiffs, 45— adopted by the monks in the time of the crusades, ib. — not peculiar to men and women, but, it seems, Satan himself enjoyed his share of the amusement, 48 — names of those who have used it, 46, sq. Flavian, patriarch of Constantinople, condemned and assassinated for his monophysitism, 326. Florence, council of, rejected by the French, 138. Formosus, in 893 gains the Pontifical thxone by bribery, 86 — guilty of perjury, ib. Formtilary, see Type. Fornication, clerical fornication preferred to matrimony, 567 — practised by pontiffs, councils, and clergy, 577—582. Fortunatian constrains Liberius to the subscription of heresy, 311. Frances, Sister, curious comedy enacted by her of burning the gown off her back, 50. Francis, (St.) plan adopted by, to preserve continence, 543. Francis I., King of France, enacts laws against the French Protest- ants, and causes many Lutherans to suffer martyrdom, he, himself being present at the execution, 275. Francis II., King of France, absolved by Clement VII. from a treaty which he had formed in Spain, 294. Prancisca, (St.) uses frequent self-flagellation, 45. Francon, see Boniface VII. Frankfort, council of, exhibited a representation of the western clergy from England, Italy, France, and Germany, 136. Frederic III., Elector Palatine, issues a formulary in 1576, 34. Free-will controversy on, little agitated from the ninth till the six- teenth century, 373. French clergy, profligacy of, 579. French confession of Faith drawn up at Paris in 1559, 35 — pre- Friar Matthew, his adventure, 47. Fullo, Patriarch of Antioch, impiety of, 337 — maintains the Euty- INDEX. 610 chian theory, ib — adds a supplement to the Triaagion, or sacred, hjrmn, ib. — banished by Zeno, but again restored to his patriarch- ate, 338 — how denominated by Felix, 339. Gage, (Thos.) author of the Survey, what proselyted him from Romanism, 432. Gelasius, Pope, enacts that the sacrament should be celebrated in both kinds, 439, — observation of, on the Manicheans, 438, Geneve, (Robt. de.) see Clement XI. Geoffrey of Monmouth, allusion to his story of the Trojan Brutus, 80. German clergy, profligacy of, 577. God : supposed equality of the Pope with, 165 — T ' works as well aa name ascribed to the Pope, 167 — alleged bii^t_^ ;Aty of the Pope to, 167-177 — His omnipotence had recourse toby the patrons of transubstantiation, 427. Godric, an English hermit, remedy of, to preserve continence, 543. Gottescalcus, a monk distinguished for his learning, maintains the system of predestination, and particular redemption, and of elec- tion and reprobation, 370 — is opposed by Raban (which see), 371 — is tried in the council of Mentz, and condemned for heresy, ib. — is next tried in the council of Quiercy and convicted of con- tumacy and heresy, ib. — is deposed, scourged, and thrown into pri- son, 372. Grace, controversy on, little agitated from the ninth to the sixteenth century, 373. Gratian (John), see Gregory VI. Great Western Schism, began in 1378, and continued for half a cen- tury, 89-101. Greek Church ; its religion that of European and Asiatic Russia, 66 — does not agree in all things with modern Protestants, ib. — as it continued longest in conjunction with the Latin, so it has imbibed most corruption, ib. — opposes, however, Papal usurpation, denies the Romish to be the true church, and condemns the dogmas of purgatory, supererogation, half-communion, human merit, clerical celibacy, prayers for the dead, and restricting the circulation of the Bible, 66-67. Greeks, their dispute with the Latins on monothelitism, 351, sqq. • Gregory II. [Marcel], Pope, 723, introduces dissension between Roman emperors and Roman pontiffs, 194 — authorises bigamy, 529 — errors of, in making David bring the brazen serpent and the holy ark into the Jewish temple, 433— and representing Ozias as the breaker of the brazen serpent, ib. Gregory VI. [John Gratian], 1045, purchases the papacy from Bene- dict, Silvester and John, 88. Gregory VII. [Hildebrand], 1073, obtains the papacy by force and UriUCiy, 11 J Ills •wuoxavt-ci, ii^. J.-ivTn.-t •••••» •» — the subject of transubstantiation, 39— subjected not only the church, but the state, and monopolised both civil and ecclesiasti- 616 INDEX. poteSTs ^Ifr^V %'^ ^^*> .^**«°^Pted the degradation of civil potentates, 225— his description of monarchy ib — asspr^a >,ifl authonty to dissolve the oath of fealty, 288-;bsoWenil Chril rs^^::;^^^ inStr^^^Ss^o^rz-o^j ^1f/7^?u ^"'So^^'l Pope, 1227, declares that none shall keen faith with the person who opposed God and the^nts 28Q Sre^rrott9r' ^" "'^ '^'^^^"^ fealtytoVTet^'ti;; ^'S 5; tP«f%I^g«r]' Pope, 1370, restores the papal court to ^^s!'89 '*" ^'"^^ ^''" ^'"^'^'^^^ *^ Avignon for sevlty ^'slnol^Ts^'""' '""^^^ ^^' °^ *^" contentions of the clergy in synods, 318— resigns and retires through an aversion to the IltPr cations of the ecclesiastics, ib. gSs^' Srif *;^ persecutor, wrote in the Tolosan Chronicle, 59. him, ?78 ' '"' ^'^ ^^ Bartholomew's day entrusted to Htedio, acoompaniee Zuinglius to the conference at Maroure 37 Half-Commmuon, see Communion to one kind. "'^"S' '"• to™''nn^»t.°le^"r '"''*'"'' ^°'""^ "=" self-flagellation ''t;^:'e?°^^;„"&^? S %""' ='*-"^ »'-«^ -■' Henoticon or edict of union, published by Zeno, 342-its design to sXct of ft'ir'""' of Monophysitfsm and Catholtism,1S.- subjectof It, ib.-augments the evil it was designed to remedy oih7do^!r '' "'' "''^' ib-^— sof Opinion asTolS S^v tT't?'^'^ "'/S^ ^,^' f r ^°^*« ^« *^« Calvinists, 63. Henry ii King of England, despatches messengers to Adrian IV toE In^^^''^^'^^'^*'^ ^^^^^« I^^'^"*^' ^hich istareixed to him, 230— his persecution of the Waldenses, 257. s'JrLiil f ^- Z'"*"''^', '°?"^Se8 his taste in viewing the expiring UeZ^tlU^lT?^ r^r'' '\'^' P^°^« °f diss^olution^276 ^ t?on 9V9 ' • ^ England, r 1 draws from the papal jurisdic- Th&d, ib ^^''^"^"^"n^cated .nd deposed, &c., by ^aul the Heraclius, publishes the Ecthesis or Exposition of Faith 361 Heresy, persecution of, 253. ^Sff^^'i ^!f f ««^ion in the Maynooth examination, that no pontiflF defined tor the belief of the faithful, that the pontifi(^ power of dethronmg kings was founded on divine light, 235 Hilary, remark of, on the variety of confessions among the -' — , ,.u.^. oeTcicBu Bauiiai, m tnis age 011 the varia popery, ib. '^ Roman- variations of INDEX. 617 Hildebrand, see Gregory VII. Hincmar, a French bishop, advocates in 865 the canons of Nicea and Sardica, and explodes the novelty of the decretals, 188. Hugolin, see Gregory IX. Holy Ghost, sin against, observations on, 508. Honorius patronised Arianism, Polagianism, and Monothelitism, 110. Host, the, pretended miracles respecting, 425. Huss, John, summoned to the city of Constance on a charge of heresy, 296— his safety and return guaranteed by the Emperor Sigismund,' xb.— was tried, however, condemned and burnt, ib— his magnani- mity, lb. ° Hyperdulia, or intermediate worship, 467. Iconolatrians, a faction of the Greeks, devoted to the use of images, 489. Iconoclasm, edict in favor of, issued in 726, 224. Iconoclasts, a faction of the Greeks, 489. Images, not to be venerated, 73— introduction of, into the church. 478. ' Image-worship, three systems, 466— one allows the use of images, but rejects their worship, ib.— the second honor images with inferior worship, 466— the third prefer the same adoration to the represen- tation as to the represented, 467— different systems of image-'Cvor- ship, 468---image-worship a variation from scriptural authority, and from Jewish and Christian antiquity, 469— also from ecclesiastical antiquity, 474— pretended miraculous proofs of, ib.— progress of, 479-80— opposed by the Emperor Leo, 482— condemned by the Byzantine council, 484— patronised by Irene, 486— variations in the East on, 494. Incest, committal of, by the Romish priests, 564. In Coena, bull of, issued by Paul V. in 1567, subject of, 242, Incomprehensibility to be distinguished from impossibility, 427. India, from time immemorial contained a church which was unknown to the rest of Christendom, V4— and which held the same theology that was promulgated by Luther and Calvin, ib. Indian, parallel between, and Christian, 429. Infallibility : impossibility of, 205— moral impossibility of, 215— ecclesiastical absurdity of, 203— pontifical, its object, 197- its form, 198— its^uncertainty, 199— pontifical and synodal, 201— absurdity of, 203— infallibility would require a continued miracle and per- sonal inspiration, 217. Innocent I., pope, 402, first sent a missionary expedition aerainst the Albigenses, 263. Innocent III. [Card. Lothaire] pope, 1198, discovered the popedom in the book of Genesis, 179— according to him, the firmament men- tioned bv thn JnwisVl lAnriolafnr aifrnifioci fVto /<1i"^^l< ^h r.^A i-U- greater light denotes the pontifical authority, the less, represents the royal power, ib. — seems to outrival Gregory in usurpation and f 618 INDEX, tyranny, 194— obtains the three great objects of his pursuits, sacerdotal sovereignty, regal monarchy, and dominion over kings, lb.— divests King John of England, 231— proclaims a crusade against the Albigenses, 264. Innocent IV., pope, 1243, his treatment of the Albigenses, 256. Innocent X., [Card. Panfilij pope, 1644, declares that the Roman pontiff could invalidate civil contracts or oaths made by the friends of Catholiciom with the patrons of heresy, 289. Innocent XL, [Bened. Odescalchi] pope, 1676, patronises t^e partisans of Jansenism, 381— retracts the decisions of former pontiffs and displays the variations of Romanism, ib. Inquisition, who the inventor of, 266~where first established, 268— admitted all kinds of evidence, ib.— cruelties of, 269— driven out of many kingdoms, 270— encouraged by the Romish clergy, ib.— evidences the deepest malignity of human nature, ib.— accounted by Paul IV. the sheet-anchor of the papacy, 273. Inquisitor, contrast between, and the Messiah, 248, Intinction, a mutilation of the sacrament, of what it consisted, 442. Intolerance, a manifest innovation on the usage of antiquity, and one of the variations of Romanism, 2*8. Irenseus, attacks the errors of his day, 41, Irene, Empress, jurisdiction of the whole ecclesiastical community ascribed to her byPaulus, the Byzantine patriarch, 183— her cruelty and character, 486. Ireland : maintains its independency of the Pope still longer than England, 1 90— rejects the papal supremacy, and indeed all foreign domination, till the end of the twelfth century, ib. — was for many ages a school of learning for the European nations, ib. — but the Danish army invading her, darkness, hterary and moral, succeeded and prepared the way for Romanism, ib.— transferred by Adrian IV. to Henry II., 229. Italian Clergy, profligacy of 579. J. Jacob, different interpretations of his worshipping God, as mentioned in Heb, xi, 26, 471, &o. Jacob or Zanzal, the restorer of the denomination called Jacobites. 321. Jacobites or Monophysites, diffused through Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Egypt, Nubia, and Abyssinia, 68 — reject supremacy, purgatory, transubstantiation, half-communion, auricular confession, extreme unction, the Latin Liturgy, and the seven sacraments, 69 —do not confound the godhead and manhood of the Son, ib., S21 — whence denominated, 320. James I., oath of allegiance to, papal bull against, 243. Jansenists, their dispute with the Jesuits, 377 — effects of their con- troversy, 387, JanHeninn. nnhliRbpa Viia wnrt af.vlorl < Aiimictfina ' ^TT , ^ ..„.„, — J ^ ,„,j ,^.,,, Jerome, trepanned by the mockery of a safe conduct, goes to Constance for the purpose of supporting John Huss, and is, like him, burnt, 296— his heroism, 297. INDEX. 619 Jesuits, in general would extend infallibility both to questions of right and of act, 197— defend Molina's 'Middle Science,' 375— their controversy with the Dominicans, 376— and with the Jansenists, 377-379— sink into disrepute and are expelled from the French kingdom for dishonesty in trade and immorality, 387. Jesus Christ, in the theology of Christian antiquity united in one person, both deity and humanity, 319 — difference of opinion re- specting his natures, 320— see also. Son of God. Joan, Pope, her reign circulated without contradiction till the era of the Reformation, 81. Joanna, Queen of Naples, deposed by Urban, 90 — betrayed and murdered by Charles, King of Naples, and Urban, 93. John XII., (Octavian) pope, 955, surpasses all his predecessors in crime, 117 — is deposed by the Roman council, but afterwards re- gains the Holy See, ib.— being caught in adultery, is killed, ib. John XrV., Pope, 984, succeeds Boniface VII. on the expulsion of the latter, 119 — is, however, imprisoned by Boniface, who had regained the papal chair, and dies of starvation in the castle of Angelo, ib. — his body exposed at the castle gate, ib. John XXII., Pope, 1316, distinguished for patronising heresy, 113 —denied the admission of disembodied souls into the beatific vision of God during their intermediate state between death and the resurrection, ib. — his belief concerning the spirits of the just, ib — sends a mission to the Parisian faculty to effect their prose- lytism to his system, 114. John XXIII., (Balthasar Cossa) Pope, 1410, exceeds all his prede- cessors in enormity, 122— atrocity of hiu life ascertained and published by the general Council of Coastance after i. tedious trial, ib. — his character, 122-123. John, King of England, divested of his kingdom by Innocent the Third, 231 — excommunicated, ib. — submits to the pontiff, and delivers up his crown to Pandolph, the Pope's nuncio, 232. Jonas, (Justus) accompanies Luther to the conference at Marpurg, 37. Juliana (St.), her contest with Satan, 48. Julius II. (1503) succeeds Alexander VI. in the papacy and in ini- quity, 127 — his character, ib. — grants a pardon of all sins to any person who would murder an individual of the French nation, ib. K Keys : donation of tho, mentioned by St. Matthew, adduced by some writers in proof of the supremacy, a topic of diversified opinion among the friends of Romanism, 176 — the ancients, however, and many learned moderns in the Romish communion, ascribe the reception of the keys to the universal church, ib. Kings, deposition of, by popes, 218 — sanctioned by eight Roman Councils, 237 — dethronement of taught by the popes, 235 — made an article of faith, 237. Koran (the), Mohammed assisted in the composition of, by an apos tatised Christian and a temporising Jew, 524. 620 INDEX, II Languedoc, devastation of, by the holy warriors, 265, Lateran, fourth council of, enacted formal regulations for the dethronement of refractory kings, 237— surpassed all its prede- cessors m seventy, 259— freed the subjects of such sovereigns as embraced heresy from their fealty, 294— twelfth general council has, m latter days, occasioned a wonderful diversity of opinion 136— Its canons whence extracted, 137— fifth council of, dis- claimed by the French, 138. Latins, their dispute with the Greeks on Monothelitism and the llixposition of Heraclius, 351, Latria, or supreme adoration, 466— to whom due, according to the schoolmen, 467. Lavaur, storming and taking of, in 1211, horrors attending, 265, Lenzuoh, see Alexander VI. Leo IX,, (Brunon) pope, 1049, represents the church as buUt on the ro^, which IS Emmanuel, as well as on Peter or Cephas, 176, Leo X,, (John de Medici) 1513, pope, succeeds Julius IL in the papacy, and in enormity, 127— orders all to shun Luther and his adherents, 273, Liberius, pope, 352, opposes Arianism for a time, 82— banished by the Emperor Constantius, ib,— signs the Arian creed, and is re- called from banishment, ib.— proofs of his Arianism, 310, Linus: represented by Eusebius, Iren83us, Ruffinus, &c., as the first Koman bishop who exercised the Roman prelacy, 78— at the present day, however, accounted by Greeks and Latins, the second pontiflf, 81, Literature, diffusion of, change effected by, 281, Liturgies, ancient, different forms of prayer contained in them, 521, Lord's Supper, elements accounted signs, figures, and emblems, 404-5— retain their own nature and substance, 406— nourish the human body, 407, Lothaire, Cardinal, see Innocent III, Louvain, University of, a beautiful specimen of its Jesuitism, 282. Lucius III. fulminates anathemas against the Waldenses, 256. Luther, Martin, his pertinacity on the subject of consubstantiatioa awakened a series of noisy, useless disputations, 37— his hostility to Zumglianism often overrated, ib.— his answer to Henry the Eighth, 483. ^ Lutherans: renounce the absurdity of consubstantiation, 38— and unite with the Calvinists, ib. -conference between them and the Zumglians in 1559, at Marpurg, 37. Lyons, general council of, pronounced sentence of deposition against Frederic the Second, 237— absolves his vassals from their oath of fealty, 294— this council rejected by the French, 137— profligacy of, 579. iVl Macarius, patriarch of Antioch, expelled from the sixth general council of Constantinople, as a monothelite, 356. INDEX. 621 Maccabees, book of, uncanonical, and deficient in morality, 519 — observations on, 520. Mageoghegan (Mr.), his opinion of the Bull of Adrian the Fourth, transferring Ireland to Henry the Second, 230. Mahomet, see Mohammed. Manducation of the sacramental elements, 429. Manicheans, the first who practised haJf-communion, 438— expelled by Leo the First, 439— observation of Pope Gelasius on them, ib. Manna, in the wilderness, said by the Romanist divines, in a general congregation at Trent, to prefigure the sacramental bread, 434. Marcel, see Gregory II. Margaret, daughter to the King of Hungary, uses self-flagellation, 47. Mariana, John, eulogises persecutions and the inquisition, 271 — his delineation of the moral traits of the 14th and 15th centuries, 211. Marozia, mistress to Sergius III., with her mother Theodora, assumes in a gieat measure the whole administration of the church, 117. Marpurg, conference in 1529, between the Lutherans and Zuing- lians at, 37. Marriage, its influence on mankind, 550— See also Matrimony. Mary, Sister, sufiers crucifixion, but wanting faith or fortitude, is taken down in less than hour, 50. Mary, Queen of England, professes her resolution to support Catholicism, and to eradicate error and heresy, 280 — her death the only favor she ever conferred on her unfortunate and perse- cuted subjects, 281. Mary, Virgin, absurd eulogies of, 555— invocation, intercession, and holy-days of, proscribed by Constantine, 486 — images of, adorned the altar, and edified the faithful, 475. Mass, mummery of the, a ludicrous spectacle, 442. Materialism, hateful and degrading doctrine of, patronised by the councils of Nice, "Vienna, and the Lateran, 208. Matrimony, no sacrament, 73— among the Israelitish clergy amounted in one sense, to a command, 536 — examples and precepts in favor of, left by the apostles, 537 — vituperation of, by popish doc- tors, 547. Matthew, Friar, his adventure with a young nymph, 47. Meaux, Bishop of, see Bossuet (J. B.) Medici (Catharine de), plans the massacre of St. Bartholomew's day, 278. Medici (John de), see Leo X. Medici (J. A. de), see Pius IV. Melancthon accompanies Luther to the conference at Marpurg, 37. Melun, synod of, fo. what purpose convened, 153. Merindol, massacre of, executed by the president Oppeda, 276. * Middle Science,' a theory by which Molina attempted to reconcile divine grace and free-will, 375. Miletius, supremacy bestowed on him by Gregory and others, 182. Militia of Jesus, who so called, 266— called also the militia of 622 INDEX. • Dominic the warriors of the captain of salvation, in Italy the kmghts of the inquisition, and in Spain the famUiars of the holy office, lb. ' Milennium, exploded both by the Romish and reformed, 56. Mind, actions of the, signified by those of the body, in scripture, 395. Mingrehans, belong to the Greek church, and appear to disbelieve transubstantiation, 67. Miracles, pretended, to support transubstantiation, 424. Mirandula, his picture of the immorality of the Romish church, 212. Missions for the purpose of proselytism, supported on an extensive scale by the Roman pontiff, 187. Mohammed, assisted in the composition of the Koran, it is believed by an apostatised Christian and a temporising Jew, 524. * MoUna (John), publishes his ' Concord of Grace and Free-will ' , J. ,"T:**^®^P^ *^ reconcile divine grace and free-will by 'the Middle Science,' ib Molinism, its Catholicism, &c., vouched for by the university of Alcala, 376— proscribed by the university of Salamanca, ib. Mohnos (John), see Molina. Monasteries, how characterised by the council of Cologne, 577. Monks, absurd demonstration that they are angels, and therefore proper ministers of the gospel, 52— suppression of, 485. Monophysites, or Jacobites, divided into Asiatics and Africans, and dittused through Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Egypt, Nubia, and Abyssinia, 68— their doctrines, 69. Monophysitism, no novelty, 322— only a nominal or verbal heresy, lb.— Its prior existence, ib.— condemned by the Byzantine council 323— approved by the Ephesiar councU, 324— three creeds on the subject of, passed by the couiicU of Chalcedon, 330— state of after the council of Chalcedon, 335. ' Monothelitism, ascribed only one will and one operation to the Son of God, 347— its author, ib. —its general reception, 348— sup- ported by the Roman emperor, and by the Antiochian, Alexan- drian, Byzantine, and Roman patriarchs, ib. et sq.— its degradation from cathohcism to heresy, 351— its second triumph, 355— synodal decision against it by the sixth general councU of Constantinople lb.— Its total overthrow, 359— its temporary revival, ib.— its universal extinction, 361. Montanism, rivals the fanaticism of Swedenborgianism, 42. Montfort, Earl of, army against the Albigenses led by, 264— his character, ib. Moral variations of the popedom, 116. Mussulmen adopted the idea of purgatorian punishment, in all pro- bability, from the popish and Jewish systems, 524. Mythology, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman, and Scandinavian exhibit some faint traces of the Trinity, 304. N Nativity, Sister, Revelations of, recommended by Rayment, Hodson, Brunmg, and Milner, 44— her visions, ib.— self-flagellation the amusement of her leisure hours, ib. I. INDEX. 623 Nestorians: overspread Asiatic Turkey, Arabia, Persia, Tartary, India, and China, 68— their churches represented by Cosmas as infinite or unnumbered, ib.— said to divide the person of the Son, but this controversy a mere dispute about words, 70. Nestorius, accused of denying our Lord's humanity, and of renew- ing the errors of Gnosticism and Apollinarianism, 320. New Jerusalem, its foundations, the names of the twelve apostles, 175. Nicwa, council of the first general council, the most celebrated congress of antiquity, 306— assembled to settle the Trinitarian controversy, ib.— proceedings of the second, 487-8— condemned at Frankfort, 491— decree of the Parisian council respecting. 492-3. ^ ^' Nicea, canons of, advocated by Hincmar, the celebrated French bishop, 188. Nicene Creed : its general reception in Christendom, 55. Nicholas I., pope, 866, his annoyance respecting the Chalcedonian canon relative to appeal, 184— his curious explanation of it, ib. Nicholas V. [Thomas Parentucelli or de Sarzana] pope, 1447, suc- ceeds Eugenius in the Papacy, 105 — denominates him the supreme head of the church, but excommunicates Felix and all his adher- ents, ib. Nunneries, how characterised by the council of Cologne, 577. Nuns of Port Eoyal refused to sign the formulary oi Alexander the Seventh, 380 — treatment they received in consequence, ib. O Oaths, invalidation of, 285— taught and practised by popes, 288, sqq. —and by popish Councils, 292, 293, 297— pontiffs by whom the practice of annulling oath was exemplified, 289. Octavian, see John XII. Odecsalchi, Benedict, see Innocent XI. Odo, undeceives several unbelieving clergymen on the subject of the host, 424. . OEcolampadius, accompanies Zuinglius to the conference at Marpurg, oT. Omnipotence of God, recourse had to, by the patrons of the absurdity of transubstantiation, 427 — omnipotence extends only to possibi- lity, and not to inconsistency, to things above, but not contrary to sense, ib. Oppeda massacres the Waldenses, 276. Orange, massacre of, horrors attending it, 277. Origen, remarks on the ordeal of, 517 — testimony of in favor of sacer- dotal celibacy, 539. Orobio, endured the rack for Judaism, 269. Orphic theology, Triuitarianism appears in a misshapen form in, 304. Osca : his confession, which contains an outline of Protestantism, still Osiander, accompanies Luther to the conference at Marpurg, 37. Oxford, council of, condemns the Waldenses, and consigns them to the secular arm, 267. i 624 INDEX. Paganism, persecution of, 251. Paktine Confession : Frederic III., Elector Palatine, issued in 1576 a Formulary of Faith, 34. Pandolphus, nuncio to Adrian IV., receives the crown from King John as a token of subjection, 232. Panfili, Cardinal, see Innocent X. Papacy : schisms in the, 82, sqq. Papal church guilty of general apostasy, 313— sanctions Arianism, 316. Papal court, removal of from Avignon to Eome, 89. Papal supremacy, four variations of, 160-1— silence of tradition con- cerning, 180— unknown to antiquity, 182— ascribed to other Sees besides Rome, 183— asserted by false decretals, 186— rejection of in various countries, 187. Papias, seems to have originated the whole story of Peter's Koman episcopacy, 81, Paphnutius, of Thebais, character of, and his observation on marriage, Parisian council, decree of, 493, Pascal (Blaise), opinion of Voltaire on his ' Provincial Letters,' 378, Pascal, the Second, perjury of, 128— freed from an oath by a council of the Lateran, 293— enactments of on the administration of the sacrament, 440. Pascasius, the father of the deformity of transubstantiation. 413 Pascasian controvery, 414 — opposed by Scotus and Bertramn, 415. Paschal festival, controversy respecting the observing of, 188. Paul (St.) in his epistles supplies no proof of the supremacy, but on the contrary, 178. Paul III. issues a sentence of deposition against Henry VIII., 232 forbids all sovereigns to lend any aid to him, 292. Paul ly. [John Peter CaraflFa], Pope, 1555, a model of pontifical ambition, arrogance, haughtmess, and tyranny, 163— contemned the authority of councils and kings, ib.— his power unbounded and above all synods, and this he called an article of faith, and the con- trary he denominated a heresy, 164— accounted the inquisition the sheet-anchor of the papacy, and recommends it for the extermina- tion of heresy, 273— absolves himself from an oath, declaring that the pontiflf could not be bound by an oath, 289. Pa,ul v., Pope, in 1567, issued the bull 'in Coena,' 242— in 1609 issued a bull forbidding the English attached to Romanism, to take the oath of allegiance, 242— canonised Gregory the Seventh, 243. Pelagia, of Antioch, escapes persecution by a voluntary death, 558 is eulogised by Ambrosius, ib. __j nr design of, 362 — its author and dissemination, 362, 363 — ^patronised by the Asians, 364 — opposed by the Africans, ib., 367— condemned by Innocent, 364— approved by Zozimus, 365— anathematised by ^ INDEX. 625 him 368— approved by the Franckfordians, 367— condemned by the Asians, 369— denounced by the general council of Ephesus, ib. — Its declension, 370. Pelagius, an Englishman, author of the heresy called Pelaeianism • accused in the synods of Jerusalem and Diospolis, 363 -acquitted in the latter, ib.— anathematised by the Carthaginian prelacy, 364. Penance, an improved species of, 45. Pepin King, aasists Stephen II. against Astolf, King of Lombardy, 222— crowned in 75 1 , King of France, 224. Perjured Pontiffs, list of 127, 130. Perjury, seventeen of the Roman pontiffs guilty of, 127— list of them lb. and sq. Perpetua, her vision, 504. Persecuting councils, 259. Persecution, three periods of, first period, 247— second, 249- third, j371— chief victims of, 252-enjoined by pontiffs, as well as theo- logians, 272— persecution of paganism, 251 -of heresy, 253— per- secutions in Germany, 274— in the Netherlands, 275— Spain ib —in France, ib.— in England, 280. * Peter-pence, what they were, 230. Peter, St. evidence of his visit ta Rome, not historical, but tradi- tional, 76— as not a single hint is afforded on this subject by himself, nor by Luke, James, Jude, Paul, or John, 73— nor is it mentioned by the Apostolic men, Clemens, Barnabas, Hermas, Ignatius, or Polycarp, ib.— the fiction began to obtain credit about the end of the second century, ib.- Irenseus the first who recordda It, lb.— great discordancy as to the length of his episcopacy, 80— story of his episcopacy seems to have originated with Papias 81 Philarge, see Alexander V. Phillip II. king of Spain, kindles the fires of persecution at Vallado- hd and Seville, and consigns the professors of Protestantism to the flames, 275. Philip VI. king of France, threatens to roast pope John XXII. if he do not retract his heresy respecting disembodied souls, 115. ' Philip and Mary issued a commission for the burning of heretics, 280 Phihppicus, emperor of Constantinople, convenes a councU for the purpose of substituting Monothelitism for Catholicism, 359— com- piles a confession, 360— is driven from his throne, ib. Phocas, a centurion, assassinates the royal family and seizes the throne, 192— instances of his cruelty, ib.- is celebrated for his piety and be^ mgnity by Gregory, ib.— title of universal bishop conferred by, ib. Pinytus, Bp. of Crete, urges the necessity of abstinence from matrimony on the clergy of his diocese, but is convinced of his error by Dionysius, Bp. of Corinth, 538. Pisan council, dismiss Gregory and Benedict from the papacy, and appoint Alexander V., 97— forbid all Christiana to obe" thft f-.-Kro former, 240— its universality denied by some, 141— the second council of, acknowledged by tho French in opposition to the fifth of the Lateran, 143. NK 020 INDEX. Pitt, William, question of, to the universities of Louvain, Salamanca, and Valladolid, whether persecution were a principle of Roman- ism, 282. Pius IV. [J. A. de Medici or Medichino] pope, 1559, offers to confirm the English Book of Common Prayer, if Quepn Elizabeth would acknowledge the pontifical supremacy, and the British nation join the Romish communion, 40 — writes to her and professes an anxiety for her eternal welfare, and the establishment of her royal dignity, ib. — his overtures for union refused by the Queen and nation, ib. — deposes and anathematises the Queen, 233 — annuls the oath of allegiance to her, 292. Pius VII. though in captivity, excommunicates and anathematises Bonaparte, 243. Plato, taught the theory of purgatory, 5 23 — remarks on his style, &c.,ib. Platonic philosophy, Trinitarianism, in a misshapen form, appears in, 304. Polish Confession, formed in the General Synod of Sendomir in 1570, and recognised through Poland, Lithuania, and Samogitia, 34. Pontiffs, perjured, list of, 127, 130— profligacy of, 579. Pontifical Infallibility, boasted unity of pretended Catholicism has on this, as on every other question diverged into a medley of jarring opinions and contending systems, 195 — its object, 197 — its form, 198 — its uncertainty, 199. Pontifical maxims, 288. Pontifical royalty, 223. Pontifical succession, difficulty of, whence it arises, 76 — historical variations respecting, 77, sq. — electoral variations on the same subject, 82. sq. Pope, his presidency, 160 — his sovereignity or despotism, 162 — his supposed equality with God, 165 — his alleged superiority to God, 167, sq. — when first raised to royalty, 222. Popery, never embraced by more than a fifth part of Christendom, 74 — may be compared to a field of wheat, overrun with tares, 56 — nothing, perhaps, presents a more striking image of than a person laboring under a di'eadful disorder, ib. Poi)e, see Adrian IV. 229-30— Alexander V. 98— Alexander VI. 125-26— Alexander VII. 380— Anacletus, 78, 81— Benedict VI. 118— Benedict VII. 119— Boniface VII. 118— Boniface VIII. 121, 163— Clemens, 78— Clement VII. 89, 2,92— Clement IX. 380— Clement X. 380— Clement X [. 381— Felix, 82, 84— Greg- ory II. 223— Gregory VI. 89— Gregory VII. 225, 288, 292— Gregory IX. 289, 293— Innocent I. 263— Innocent III. 179, 194, 231, 264— Innocent IV. 256— Innocent X. 289— Innocent XT. 381 —John XII. 117— John XIV. 119— John XXII. 113— John XXITI. 122— Leo IX. 176— Leo X. 273— Liberius, 82, 310— Nicholas I. 184— Nicholas V. 105— Paul III. 232, 292— Paul IV. 163. 289 Pins IV. 40 233 292 Silverius 83. 84. — Silvester. 87 — Sixtus IV. 124— Stephen, 86, 87— Urban 11. 288— Urban VI. 89, 90, 92— Vigilius, 85, 112. INDEX. 627 the reformed of Germany, Posen, Synod of, compact between Prance, &c. confirmed at, 38. PoHt-Nicene Fathers, may, without regret, be consigned to the Vatican to iiist with the lumber of a thousand years, 55 Prayers for the dead, remarks on, 518-argument from, in favor of purgatory, refuted, 519. Predestmation, Kraiuitous taught by St. Augustine, 370-a fertUe source ot contest among the French clergy, IK Priesthood, marriage of, testimonies to, 539. Priests, profligacy of the Romish, 573. Prignano, see Urban VI. Prison, different interpretations of the word, as used by St. Peter 513-14. ' Proterios, patriarch of Alexandria, assassinated by the populace and his mangled body dragged through the city, 336-7. * Irotestant Faith, antiquity of, easily shown, 54. Protestantism, its name originated in the sixteenth century 54— ig contained in the word of God, ib.-its theology to be found in the early fathers ib.— its principles taught in the ecclesiastical pro- ductions of three hundred years after the Christian era, 55— a striking image of, 56. Protestant name, its origin, 54. Protestant theology, contained in the word of God 54 Protestants, persecution of by Charles the Fifth, 274— massacre of the French, 276. Public women, number of, who attended the Constantine Council 207 Purgatory, what it is in the Romish theology, 498— its situation 499 —Its punishments, 500-504- destitute of scriptural authority ^aET^ . ^j^^*'"^' ib.— Romish arguments from Scripture refuted! 507-514— destitute of traditional authority, 515— admissions, ib —formed no part m the faith of Christian antiquity, 522— Pagan and Jewish purgatory, 524- Mahometan, ib.-its introduction. 525— Its slow progress, 527— completed by the schoolmen, 532. Pythagorean philosophy, Trinitarianism appears in a misshapen torm, m, 271. *^ Q Quesnel (Pasquier), remark on his 'Reflections,' 381— controversy on, ib., 382, 483. •' Quinsextan, or TruUan council, enjoins celibacy on bishops, but ■ permits the inferior clergy to marry before ordination, and after- ward to enjoy connubial society, 559. R Raban, archbishop of Mentz, opposes Gottescalcus, 371— seems to have admitted election, but denied reprobation, ib.— acknowledged preaestmatiou Lo life, but not to death, ib.— misrepresents his adversary, and characterises him as a perverter of religion and a forger of heresy, ib. A 628 INDEX. Kachel, Siater, suffers crucifixion in order to exhibit a lively image of the Saviour's passion, 50. Rack, the, used by the Inquisition, 268. Ratranums, see Bertramn. Rocusants, a faction of the French clergy, who condemned the bull Unigenitus, 383, 384. Reformation, the, era and influence of, 302. Reformers, doctrinal unity of, apparent in their confessions of faith, 33. Regeneration, the same substantial change communicated io men in, as to the elements of the communion, 411. Regulatus, a self-flagellator, 45. Religious liberty of the first three centuries, 249. Remission of sin, as mentioned by St. James, remark on, -i56. Revelation, its truths contained in the early fathers, 54. Rheims, college of, remedy commended by, for the extinction of heresy, 272. Rhemists, advocate unconditional election, 344. ' Rock,' a variety of interpretations of the word, 169, sq. Roger (Peter), see Gregory XL Roman ritual extends the spirit of persecution even to the dead, 274. Romanism, its superstition forms no part of Christianity, 56— <^..f.^»• in ¥\ta '- ' — -- -■ : -^-^ «.-.» «.......*... ..J. .4,ii^^.t 5(8 viiv,' Lft- 1 <3T.'ii, xii tilt? theology of Christian antiquity, 319 — his divinity acknowledged in opposition to Arianism, and his humanity in contradiction to 630 INDEX. Gnosticism and ApolHnarianism, ib.— his natures confounded by Eutyches, as his person was divided by Nestorius, 320— opinion of the Jacobites or Monophysites, 321— controversies upon his natures by the councils of Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon, &c., 323-346— one will and one operation ascribed to him by the Monothelites, 347. Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, opposes Monothelitism, 350. Sorbonnian faculty propose to modify the doctrine of transubstantia- tion, 40. Southcott (Joanna), her mania eclipsed by the dreams of Beata, Clara and Nativity, 42. ' Spain, remained free of pontifical dominion till the beginning of the ninth century, 188. Stephen II. applies to King Pepin for assistance against Astolf, Kine of Lombardy, 222. ^ Stephen VI. succeeds Formosus in the papacy in 896, and commits atrocities on his dead body, 86— rescinds his acts and declares his ordinations irregular and invalid, ib.— is immured in a dungeon, and strangled, 87. Stephen, Abp. of Petrarca, his declaration that Leo possessed power above all powers, both in heaven and in earth, 167, 168. Stews, propriety of tolerating, advocated by Carlerius, 207. Suction, the second step to the defalcation of the cup, in the sacra- ment, 442 — its design, ib. Suicide, approbation of, 557— suicide of virgins commended, 558. Sunisactan women, who infested the habitations of the unmarried clergy, canon directed against them, 552. Sunisactanism or domesticism, an evasion of the injunction of clerical celibacy, 561. Superstition, nearly as old as religion, and originated in the remotest period of time, in the darkness and profanity of the antediluvian world, 53. Supremacy, four variations in the papal supremacy, 160, 161— silence of tradition concerning, 180 — unknown to antiquity, 182 — ascribed to other sees, be des Eome, 183— asserted by false decretals, 185 — rejection of, in various countries, 187, sq. Swedenborgianism, fanaticism of, rivalled by the extravagance of Montus, 42. ^ Swiss confession, see Helvetian confession. Switzerland, profligacy of her clergy, 578. ' Symbolical worship, a variation from ecclesiastical antiquity, 474 opposed by synodal, episcopal, pontifical, and imperial authority, 479. Symmachus excommunicates Anastasius for heresy, 336. Syrian Church, its antiquity, 72— purity and simplicity of its theo- logy, ib.— its opposition to popery and agreement with protestant- ism, 73. Syrianism, its antiquity and identity with protestantism acknowledged by Dr. Buchanan, 74. INDl'X. 631 Teresia, merits particular attention for her self-flaffellah'nn i-!n«tances of fluctuationTtl IS" 39, 40-d.versity of opinions on, 423-„nscriptural, 395-3 INDEX. 633 166 539 454 455 177 80 403 supported by John, ch. vL, 397, 401 — nor by Matt, xxvi., 26, 28, 403 — not taught by the Fathers, 409, 411 — its introduction, 413 — Pascasian controversy on, 415 — Berengarian, 417, 422 — supported by pretended miracles, 425 — absurdity of, 427, 28 — its cannibal- ism, 429, 432. Trent : her disciplinarian canons rejected in France and in pai't of Ireland, 41, 140 — and even in Spain admitted only so far as con- sistent with regal authority, 41 — rejection of the council of, 139 — reception of, 141 — council of, patronised persecution, 273 — cate- chism of, remark on, 534 — language used by, concerning the administration of the sacrament, 441 — declaration on extreme unction, 450. Trinitarianism, the faith of Christian antiquity, 304 — and may be discovered in the annals of gentilism and philosophy, ib. — as in the Persian, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman, and Scandinavian mythology, ib. — and in the Orphic theology, and in the Zoroastrian, Pythago- rean, and Platonic philosophy, ib. TruUan, or Quinsextan council, its canon on matrimony, 559. Type or Formulary, issued by the Emperor Constans, 353 — purport of, ib. — in what it differed from the Ecthesis, ib. Tyrian council, pronounces sentence of excommunication and banish- ment against Athanasius, 307. U UUoa (Ant. de), his frightful picture of the Peruvian priesthood, 580. Ulric, history of, and remedy adopted by him, to preserve contin- ence, 544. Unction, extreme, not a sacrament, 73 — of what it consists, 449 — variations in its effects, ib — disagreement on its institution, 450 — a variation from scriptural unction, 451 — form of, 452 — apostolic and popish unctions differ in the persons to whom they are to be administered, 453 — and in the end or effect, 454 — extreme unction a variation from tradition, 459 — traditional evidence for, 461- history of, 463. Unigenitus, observations on the bull issued by Clemens XL, 216. Universal bishop, title of, conferred by Phocas, 191. University, Parisian, 1589, declared the French entirely freed from their oath of allegiance to their king, Henry III., 288. * Until,' in scriptural language, what the word denotes, 508. Urban II. [Eudes or Odo], pope 1088, declares that subjects are by no authority bound to observe the fealty which they swear to a Christian prince who withstands God and the saints, and contemns their precepts, 288 — commands the separate reception of the Lord's bodv and blood, 439. Urban VI. [Bartolomo di Prignano], pope 1378, divides Christendom with Clement, 89 — his summary treatment of seven cardinals, 91 — a few specimens of his ability in the art of cursing, 92. Usurpation of the popes, 193. 00 634 INDEX. Valentinian, Emperor, enactment of a law by, forbidding monks or ecclesiastics to accept any donation or legacy from maids, matrons, o'phans or widows, 221. Variations as to the pontifical succession : historical, 77. sq. — electo- ral, 82. ^ Vienna, general council of, declared that the Emperor was bound to the pope by an oath of fealty, 239. Vigilius [537] assumes the pontifical authority, through simony, 84 — his character, ib. — his papacy presents a scene of fluctuation unknown in the annals of protestantism, 113 — shifted his ground six times, ib. — sanctioned Eutychianism, and afterwards retracted, ib. — withstood Justinian's edict, and afterwards recanted, ib. — shielded Ibas, Theodoret, and Theodoras, and afterwards con- firmed the general council, which condemned them for blasphemy and heresy, ib. Virgin Mary, absurd eulogies of, 555, etc. Virginity, admiration of, when it began, 541 — reason of this, 542 — sCvrnd reason for the preference of, 546. W Wake, Bp., his correspondence with Dr. Du Pin on the subject of an union between the English and 'French Church, 40. Waldensianism, its theatre, Western or European Christendom 57 — its patrons, ib. — its principal branches, ib. — antiquity of beyond all question, 59 — in anticipation, a system of the purest Protestantism many ages before the Reformation, -61 — portrait of, 62. Waldensians, spread through nearly every country, 59, 60 — their bravery, 61 — portrait of them by Alexander, 62 — their confessions show the conformity of their principles to the Reformation, 63 — then: morality corresponded with the purity of their faith, 61— their piety, benevolence, and holiness have extorted the appro- bation of friend and foe, ib. — notwithstanding the persecution of Romanism, still exists, 66 — persecution of them, 257. ^^'ido, Marquis of Tuscany, deposes and, in all probability, strangles Pope John the Tenth, 117. Wine, sacramental, what accounted by the Manicheans, 441 — by the Latins, ib. — why curtailed hy the Constantino Council in the com- munion of the laity, 444 — intinction and suction two r ^e'hods used in partaking it, 442. Wittemberg confession, composed by Brent, published in 1552, 34. X Xavier (Francis), the Indian apostle, uses an iron whip to flagellate himself, 45. INDEX. z 685 Zanzal, or Jacob, restorer of the demonstration called Jacobites 321 Zeno, publishes the Henoticon, 342-his design in doing so ib' tS fielltr' ^"'''^' '^^ ^'^^"*' *^-g?^blind, t^ °;;er took Zon,as^ria^ philosophy. Trinitarianism appears in a misshapen form Zozimus, Pelagianism at first approved by, 365-but aftervrards anathematises Pelagius and Celestius, 368 -a proCnd 2?^ Znwr"^ °^ ?T^' 369-Uved a tyrant and died^sdnt ib ^*^ o?&odv ^d r^T? *' "^''T^' ''29, admit the presence 01 tne body and blood of Jesus m the sacrament, and their recen- tion by those who approach the communion, 39. ^ Zumghans and Lutherans, conference between, at Marpurg, in 1529 oITJ, V^l'^ T *" ^^^ ^"' *^« communion, ib.-but even p:ii?nA:iJrotoT^^^^^^ ^^^ ^'^^^^^' ^^^^^ ^^«*^^ ^ ZumgUus, appears at the conference held at Marpurg in 1529, 37. THE END. THE LIFE, EXTRAORDINARY ADVENTURES, UHTmiMG PERSEVERABOE. AMD nrVALUABLE DISOOVEKIES —OF THB LAMBNTID— DR. LIVINGSTONE, DURING ABOUT THIRTt YEARS TRAVEL IN AFRICA ; BBINO A CONNRCTBD NARRAnVB OP TUB QreaA Exphrer'a Life from his Birth down to tlve Chaing Scenes in Westminster Abbey, in 1874. ONE VOLUME, CROWN OCTAVO, ILLUSTRATED. THICB 2 WO S>OZZ;>lSiS. This volume contains a weU-written Life o( DR. LIVINGSTONE, which has commanded the -warmest approval ol the literary world for years ; Dr. Livingstone's letters to members of Her Majesty's Cabinet, Scientific Men, &c., in England and the United States ; his letters to his own family at home, as well as to his brother in Canada. EVERYBODY'S OWN PHYSICIAN; OR« HOW TO A€