A N
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY,
IN TWO VOLUMES.
BY JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, LL.D. F.R.S.
DJDST THOU NOT SOW GOOD SEED IN THY FIELD? WHENCE
THEN HATH IT TARES?
MATT. XIII. 27.
VOL. II.
BIRMINGHAM:
PRINTED BY PIERCY AND JONES, FOR J. JOHNSON,
NO. 72, ST PAUL'S CHURCH YARD, LONDON.
B\
CONTENTS
O F
THE SECOND VOLUME.
PART VI. PAGE.
CT'H E hiftory of opinions relating to the
Lord's Supper. \
SECTION I.
'The hiftory of the Eucharift till after the
time of Auftin. 3
SECTION II.
The hiftory of the Eucharift from the time
of Auftin, to that of Pafchaftus. 23
SECTION III.
'The hiftory of the Eucharift from the time
of Pafchajius to the reformation. 36
SECTION IV.
Of the recovery of the genuine chriftian doc-
trine concerning the Lord's Supper. 58
PART VII.
'The hiftory of opinions relating to Baptifm. 66
SEC T'l ON I.
Of the opinions and practices of the chriftians
relating to Baptifm till the reformation. 79
SECTION II.
'The ft ate of opinions concerning Baptifm
Jince the reformation. t 91
a2 APPENDIX
IV.
CONTENTS.
APPENDIX TO PARTS VI, AND VII.
Containing the hiftory of the other Sacraments
bejides Baptifm and the Lord's Supper. 95
PART VIII.
A hiftory of the changes that have been made
in the method of conducing Public Wor-
Jhip. 105
SECTION I.
Of Churches and Jome things belonging to
them. ' 1 06
SECTION II.
Of Ceremonies in general and other things
relating to Public Worjhip. 114
SECTION III.
Of the proper parts of Public Worjhip. 119
SECTION IV.
Of FeftivalS) &V. in the chriftian Church.. 128
PART IX.
The hiftory of Church Difcipline. 139
SECTION I.
The hiftory of Church Difcipline in the time
of the chrijlian Fathers. 140
SECTION II.
Of the ft ate of Church Difcipline in the dark
ages, and, till the reformation. 148
SECTION III.
Of the method of enforcing Church Cenfures,
or the hiftory of perfection till the time
cf Auftin. 1 66
SECTION
CONTENTS, v.
SECTION IV.
Of the methods of enforcing ecclefiajtlcal Cen-
fures from the time of Aujtin to the re-
formation, and afterwards by the Ca-
tholics. 1-8
SECTION y.
Of perfection by Prot eft ants 191
SECTION VI.
The hiftory of mi/lakes concerning Moral
PART X.
The hiftory of Minifters in the chriftian
Churchy and efpecially of Bijhops. 227
SECTION I.
The hiftory of chriftian Minifters till the fall
of the JFeJtern Empire. 228
SECTION II.
The hiftory of the Clergy from the fall of
the Roman Empire in the Weft, to the re-
formation. 249
PART XL
The hiftory of the Papal Power. 280
SECTION I.
Of the ftate of the Papal Power till the
time of Charlemaigne. 283
SECTION II.
The hiftory of the Papal Power from the time
of Charlemaigne to the Reformation. 299
APPENDIX I. TO PARTS X. AND XI.
The hiftory of Councils. 336
2 SECTION
Yl.
CONTENTS.
APPENDIX II. TO PARTS X. AND XI,
Of the authority of the Secular Powers
or the Civil Magijlrate y in matters of
Religion. 34^
APPENDIX III. TO PARTS X. AND XI.
Of the authority of 'Tradition, and of the
Scriptures, &C. 362
PART XII.
<be biftory of the Monajlic Life. 37 8
SECTION I.
Of the Monajlic Life, till the fall of the
Wejlern Empire* 383
SECTION II.
^he hiftory of the Monks after the fall
of the Weftern Empire. 389
PART XIII.
The hi/lory of Church Revenues. 416
SECTION I.
*The hijlory of Church Revenues, till the
fall of the Weftern Empire. 41-7
SECTION II.
fhe hijlory of Church Revenues after the
fall of the Weftern Empire. . 424
THE GENERAL CONCLUSION,
PART I. CONTAINING,
Conjiderations addrejfed to Unbelievers, and
efpecially to Mr. Gibbon. > 440
SECTION.
CONTENTS. vii.
PART II. CONTAINING,
Confiderations addreffed to the advocates for
the frefent civil eftablijhments of Chrifti-
anity, and efpecially Eijhop Hurd. 467
APPENDIX, CONTAINING
A Summary View of the Evidence for the
primitive Chriftians holding the Doftrine
of the ftmple Humanity of Chrift. 485
ERRATA VOL. II.
Page 68, 1. 6, read Mark vii. 4.
14.8, 1. 12, (b) for Paul read James.
182, L II, for penances read penalties.
223, 1. 12, (b) for facrifice read facrament.
371, 1. 16, for y read yr.
CORRECTIONS VOL. II,
P. 64, 1. 14, read many Dijenters have.
66, 1. i, read 'was, perhaps.
355, I. 12, dele on earth.
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART VI.
The Hiftory of Opinion,* relating to the Lord's
Supper.
INTRODUCTION.
/" AHERE is nothing in the whole hiftory that
A I have undertaken to write, Ib extraor-
dinary as the abufes that have been introduced
into the rite of the Lord's Jupper. Nothing can
be imagined more fimple in its original infti-
tution, or lefs liable to mifapprehenfion cr abufej
and yet, in no inftance whatever, has the de-
pravation of the original doctrine and cuftom
proceeded to a greater height, or had more fe-
rious confequences.
In allufion, perhaps, to the feftival of the pair-
over, our Lord appointed his difciples to eat
VOL. II. A bread
1 'fbe Hiftory of Opinions
bread and drink wine in remembrance of him ;
in-forming them that the bread reprefented his
body, which was going to be broken, and the
wine his blood, which was about to be fried
for them ; and we are informed by the apoftle
Paul, that this rite is to continue in the chriftian
church till our Lord's fecond coming. Far-
ther than this we are not informed in the New
Teftament. We only find that the cuftom was
certainly kept up, and that the chrifrians of the
primitive times probably concluded the public
worfhip of every Lord's day, with the celebra-
tion of it. As the rite was peculiar to chriftians,
the celebration of it, was of courfe, in common
with joining habitually in the public worlhip of
chriftians, an open declaration of a man's be-
ing a chriftian, and more fo indeed, than any
other vifible circumftance ; becaufe other perfons
might occafionally attend the public worfhip
of chriftians, without bearing any proper part in
it themfelves.
Let us now fee what additions have been made
to this fimple inftitution, in feveral periods, from
the primitive times to our own. And for this
purpofe it will be moft convenient to divide the
whole hiftory into four parts ; the firft from the
age of the apoftles to that of Auftin, including
his time, and that of the great men who were
his cotemporaries j the fecond extending from
that period to the time of Pafchafius > the third,
from
relating to the Lord's Supper. 3
from him to the reformation ; and the fourth,
from that time to the prefent.
In writing the hiftory of this fubjec~b, in each of
the periods, I fhall firft note the changes of opi-
nion with refpect to the Lord's fupper itfelf,
together with the change of language which took
place in confequence of it. I fhall then give
an account of the fuperftitious practices that
were grounded on thofe opinions; and laftly, I
lhall relate what particulars I have met with re-
lating to the manner of celebration.
SECTION I.
The Hijlory of the Eucharijl till after the Time
of Aujlin.
THE firft new idea which was fuperadded
to the original notion of the Lord's fup-
per, was that of its being a facrament, or an oath
to be true to a leader. For the wordfacrament is
not to be found in the fcriptures, but was after-
wards borrowed from the Latin tongue^ in which it
fignified the oath which a Roman foldier took
to his general. Thusy in the firft century, Pliny
reports, that the chriftians were wont to meet
together before it was light, and to bind them-
felves by a facrament. This I would obferve,
is but a fmall deviation from the original idea
A 2 of
4 The Hiftory of Opinions
of the Lord's flipper ; and though it be not the
fame with the true idea of it, as before explain-
ed, yet it cannot be faid to be contrary to it.
Afterwards the word facrament came to be ufed
by chriftian writers in a very loofe manner, for
every thing that was looked upon to be folemn
or myfterious ; and indeed, as bifliop Hoadley
obferves, for almoft every thing relating to re-
ligion.
The next idea which was added to the primi-
tive notion of the Lord's fupper was of a much
more alarming nature, and had a long train of
the worft confequences. This was the con-
fidering of this inftitution as a myflery. And,
indeed, the chriftians affedted very early to
call this rite, one of the myfteries of our holy
religion. By the term myftery was meant, ori-
ginally, the more fecret parts of the heathen
worfhip, to which feleft perfons only were ad-
mitted, and thofe under an oath of fecrecy.
Thofe myfteries were alfo called initiations -, thofc
who were initiated were fuppofed to be pure
and holy, while thofe who were not initiated
were confidered as impure and profane; and
by thefe myfteries the heathens were more at-
tached to- their religion than by any other
circumftance whatever. This made the firft
chriftians (many of whom were firft converted
from heathenifm, and who could not all at
once, diveft themfelves of their fondnels for
pomp and myftery) wifli to have fomething
of
relating to the Lord's Supper. 5
of this nature, which was fo ftriking and cap-
tivating, in the chriftian religion -, and the rite
of the Lord's fupper foon ftruck them, as
what might eafily anfwer this purpofe.
When this new idea was introduced,
they, in confequence of it, began to exclude
all who did not partake of the ordinance,
from being prefent at the celebration of it.
Thofe who did not communicate, were not
even allowed to know the method and
manner in which it was adminiftered. Ter-
tullian, who wrote at the end of the fecond
century, feems to allude to this practice. " Pi-
" ous initiations," he fays*, " drive away the
" profane, and it is of the very nature of
" myfteries to be concealed as thofe of Ceres
cc in Samothrace," but as he is there defend-
ing the chriftians from the charge of pra&ifmg
abominable rites in fecret, he may only mean
that, on the fuppofition of fuch practices, no
perfon could reveal them, their enemies not
being prefent, and they would hardly do it
themfelves. Indeed, it is moil probable that
this cuftom of concealing the myfteries did not
take place till the middle of the third cen-
tury f. After this time, the council of Alex-
andria reproached the Arians with difplaying
the holy myfteries before the catechumens, and
even the pagans, whereas <c that which is holy"
* Apol, cap. 7. Opera, p. 8. f Larroche, p. 125.
. A 3 they
6 ffie Hiftory of Opinions
they fay, " fhould not be caft to the dogs, nor
" pearls before fwine*." In the fourth century
it was ufual to call the eucharift a tremendous
myftery, a dreadful fokmnity, and terrible to
Angels.
Another new idea annexed to the eucharift
was that of its being a Jacrifice; and this too
was in compliance with the prejudices of the
Jews and heathens, who in the early ages ufed
to reproach the chriftians with having no fa-
crifices or oblations in their religion. We foon
find, however, that this language was adopted
by them, and applied to the Lord's fupper.
This language is particularly ufed by Cyprian,
and in general the Lord's fupper was called
an euchariftical Jacrifae, though, in fa<5b, they
only confidered it as a memorial of the facri-
fice of Chrift, or of his death upon the crofs.
It is evident, from the nature of the thing,
that neither baptifm nor the Lord's fupper ope-
rate as a charm, or produce any immediate ef- .
feel upon the mind, befides imprefling it with
proper fentiments and affections, fuch as be-
come chriftians, and fuch as are naturally ex-
cited by the ufe of thefe fymbols. But we
find, in very early ages," that both baptifm
and the Lord's fupper were imagined to
* Sueur, A. D. 333.
ope-
relating to the Lord's Supper. 7
operate in a different and more direct me-
thod, fo that the ufe of them was fuppofed
to depend upon the mere aft of adminiftra-
tion. Both Juftin Martyr and Irenseus thought
that where was fuch a fanftification of the
elements that there was a divine virtue in them.
This idea of there being a real virtue in
the elements of bread and wine, after they
were confecrated, or fet apart for this parti-
cular purpofe, opened a door to endlefs fu-
perflitions, and fome of a very dangerous kind;
as chriftians were led by it to put thefe merely
external rites in the place of moral virtue, which
alone has the power of fanctifying the heart,
and making men acceptable in the fight of
God. After this we are not furprized to find
(and it appears as early as the lecond century)
that both baptifm and the Lord's fupper were
thought to be necejfary to Jalvation,
It is too early to look for the notion of
the tranfmutation of the bread and wine into the
real body and blood of Chrift, but we find even
in this early age language fo highly figurative
(calling the fymbols by the' name of the things
reprefented by them) as very much contributed
to produce this opinion in after ages. It was
the cuftom with the early Fathers to fay that
the bread and wine faffed into the body and
blood of Chrift, and even that they are tranj-
elemented into them. They alfo ufe other ex-
A 4 prefilons
8 *Tbe Hlftory of Opinions
prefiions to the fame purpofe; meaning, how-
ever, by them, nothing more than that a di-
vine virtue was communicated to them *.
" We do not confider," fays Juftin Martyrf,
" this bread and wine as common bread and
" wine. For, as Jefus Chrift was made fleih,
1 f and had fleih and blood to procure our fal-
" vation, fo we learn that this aliment, over
" which prayers have been made, is changed,
" and that by which our flefh and blood are
" nourifhed is the body and blood of Jefus Chrift.
fc For the evangelifts teach us that Jefus Chrift
" took bread, and laid this is my body. He
" alfo took the wine and faid this is my blood"
Tertuliian, however, fays, that by the words,
this is my body, we are to underftand the figure
of my body.
The language of Cyril of Jerufalem on this
fiibjedt is peculiarly ftrong, and might very
well miflead his hearers, whatever ideas he
himfelf might annex to it. He fays to the
young communicants J, '* Since Chrift has faid,
" this is my body, who can deny it ? Since he
(C has faid this is my blood, who can fay it
<c is not fo? He formerly changed water in-
tf to wine, and is he not worthy to be be-
" lieved, when he fays that he has changed
* Larroche, p. 221. f Edit. Thirlby, p. 96.
Opera, p. 408. J Cat. 413. Opera, p. 292.
the
.relating to the Lord's Supper. 9
" the wine into his blood. Wherefore let us,
" with full affurance of faith take the body
" and blood of Chrift. For under the form
" of bread the body is given to them, and
" under the form of wine his blood." He
then tells his pupils they muft not judge of
this by their fenfes, but by faith.
This writer carried his idea of the fan&ity
of the confecrated elements fo far, as not to
allow that they ever went into the excrements
of the body j maintaining that they entered
wholly into the fubftance of the communicants ;
and Chryibftom fupported this opinion, by the
companion of wax, which is confumed in the
fire, without leaving afhes or foot*. This was
going very far indeed for fo early an age.
About two hundred years after Chrift, chrif-
tians applied their thoughts very much to the
giving of myftical fignifications to the facra-
mems, as they were alfo fond of myftical in-
terpretations of fcripture. Among other al-
lufions, a happy one enough was this, that
the facramental bread, being compofed of ma-
ny grains of wheat, and the wine being made
of many grapes, reprefented the body of the
chriftian church, which was compofed of ma-
ny believers, united into one fociety. Cyprian
was the firft who advanced that by the wine
* Bafnage Hiftoire des eglifes reformers, vol. i. p. 135,
was
I o The Hi/lory of Opinions
was meant the , blood of Chrift, and by the
water (which they always at that time ufed to
mix with the wine) the chrijlian people ; and
that by the mixture of them the union between
Chrift and his people was reprefented. This
idea continued a long time in the church. But
fome fuppofed that this water and i^tnc were
a memorial of the water and Mood, which
iffued from the fide of Chrift, when he was
pierced with the fpear, as he hung on the
crofs *.
It was a natural confequence of this fuper-
ftitious refpeft for the euchariftical elements,
that many perfons began to be afraid of com-
municating. Accordingly we find that, whereas
originally, all chriftians who were baptized, and
not under fentence of excommunication, received
the Lord's iupper, yet in the time of Chry-
foftom, fo many abftained from this part of
the fervice, that he was obliged to reprove
them for it with great feverity ; and various
methods were taken to engage them to attend
When the bread was .called the body of
Chrift, the cloth which covered it was ufually
called the cloth of the body, and was confidered
as intitled to fome particular refpeft. And we
find that Optatus reproached the Donatifts, that
* Larroche, p. 5-
they
relating to the Lord's Supper. n
they had taken away theie body-cloths, and
that they had wafhed them as if they had been
dirty. Alfo, Victor of Vita, complained that
Proculus (the executioner of the cruelties of Gen-
feric, king of the Vandals, againft the catholics)
had ma^Je fhirts and drawers of them. This
body-cloth was to be of very fine linen, and not
of filk, or of purple, nor of any coloured fluff,
agreeable to an order made by pope Silvefter,
or, as fome fay, pope Eufebius. Jerom treating
of the eucharift calls the table on which it was
celebrated a myflical table, whofe very utenfils and
facred coverings were not to be confidered as
things inanimate, and void of fenfe, or to have
no fanctity, but to be worfhipped with the larne
majefty as the body and blood of our Lordf.
In the fourth century the Lord's {upper was
celebrated fometimes at the tombs of the mar-
tyrs, and at funerals ; which cuftom gave rife to
the mafies which 'were afterwards performed in
honour of the faints, and for the dead. Alfo,
in many places, about the fame time, the bread
and wine were held up to the view of the people,
before they were diftributed, that they might be
feen and contemplated with religious refpect ;
from which the adoration of the fymbols was af-
terwards derived.
f Midcjleton's Introductory Difcourfe, p. 57.
Towards
L2 The Hijlory of Opinions
Towards the end of the fourth century it was
thought wrong to commit the blood of Chrift to
ib frail a thing as glafs. Jerom reproaches a
bifliop of Thouloufe with this ; he being a rich
man, and able to afford a better vefTel, and more
proper for the purpofe .
As the primitive chriftians confidered their
joint-partaking of the Lord's fupper as a bond
of union among themfelves, it was natural to
fend part of the elements to thofe perfons whofc
infirm ftate of health, or neceflary avocations,
would not allow them to be prefent. For the fame
reafon confecrated bread was alfo fent to the
neighbouring, and often to diftant parifhes, as a
token of brotherly communion. This they did,
particularly at the feaft of Eafter ; and provided
no fuperfHtious ufe had been made of it, there
feems to have been little to complain of inthecuf-
tom. However, the council of Laodicea thought
proper to forbid this fending out of the elements,
as a cuflom borrowed from the Jews and the he-
retics. But pope Innocent, who lived a century
after, ftill continued to fend the confecrated
bread to the neighbouring parilhes J.
But the greateft abufe that was made of this
cuftom was in confequence of the confecrated
elements being thought to be of ufe to the fick,
in a medicinal way, and to be a means of pre-
Larroche, p. 53. J Bafnage, vol. i. p. in.
ferving
relating to the Lord's Supper. ij
ferving perfons in journies, and upon voyages j
and as perfons might not always have carried
home with them enough for thefe ufes, it was
the cuftom for the priefts to keep a quantity of
the confecrated bread to diftribute occafionally,
as it might be wanted. Auftin fays, C If any
tf one fall fick, let him receive the body and
<c blood of Chrift, and let him keep a part of
(f this little body, that he may find the ac-
Cf complifhment of what St. James fays, Let
" thofe who are Jick go to the church to receive
" ftrength of body*." This fame Father alib
mentions a woman who hud made a plaiiter of
the facramental bread for a fore eye.
Some of the antient chriftians ufed to bury the
facramental bread together with the dead , think-
ing, no doubt, that it would be of as much ufe
to them in that long journey, as it had been in
other fhorter ones. However, in a council held
at Carthage in 41 9, this practice was condemned;
but it appears that the cuftom was not wholly
laid afide at the end of the eighth century,
though it had been prohibited again by the fixth
general council in 691. The reafon was, that
to bury thefe facred elements was now thought
to be a profanation of them ; fo that a cuftom
which took its rife from one degree of fuperfti-
tion, wa& abolifhed by a greater degree of it;
* Bafnage, vol. 1, p. 161. Larroche, p. 6.
/
and
14 We Hiftory of Opinions
and of this we fliall have other inftances in the
courfe of this hiftory.
Having thus noted the changes in the doctrine
of the eucharift, and the fuperftitious practices
which in thefe early times were derived from the
erroneous opinions of chriftians on the fubject, I
(hall now relate what I have been able to collect
concerning the manner in which it was admi-
niftered.
In the firft place it cannot be denied that in
the primitive times, all thofe who were clafled
among the faithful received the eucharift every
Lord's day. After reading the fcriptures, and
the expofition of them, or the fermon, at which
others might attend, they proceeded to the pub-
lic prayer, in which the audience bore their part,
at leaft by faying occafionally, Amen, and the
fervice conftantly clofed with the celebration
of the eucharift. We even find that young
children, and indeed infants, communicated.
This was clearly the cafe in the time of Cyprian.
The cuftom continued in the weftern church till
near the time of the reformation, and it is ftill the
practice of the eaftern churches, and of every
other part of the chriftian world that was never
fubject to the fee of Rome.
The different clafles of chriftians in the pri-
mitive times as they refpected the Lord's fupper,
were as follows. There were four orders of the
catechumens.
relating to the Lord's Supper. 15
catechumens. The firft were inftrufted at their
own houfesj the fecond heard the expofition in
the church, the third attended the public prayer,
and the fourth were thofe who were completely
ready for baptifm, for till that time they did not
attend the celebration of the eucharifb, but were
formally difmified at what is called Miffa Cate-
chumenorum, as the final difmiflion of the afTem-
bly was called Miffa Fi.delium *.
The primitive chriftians communicated after
fupper, but the cuftom of celebrating it in the
morning, was frequent in the church in the time
of Tertullian, in confequence, no doubt, of a
fuperftitious reverence for the elements, which
led them to think that it was wrong to eat any
thing before they partook of them, but it was
Hill ufu|.l to communicate in the evening on Ho-
ly Thurfday. Chryibftom being charged with
giving the eucharift to fome perfons after a rc-
paft, faid, ff If I have done it, let my name
" be blotted from the catalogue of bifhops,
" and let me not be reckoned among the
" orthodox ."
It having been cuftomary with the Jews
whenever they made a folemn appearance be-
fore God, to bring fome oblations; thefe chrif-
tians whenever they affembled for public wor-
fhip (which they alib confidered as an appear-
* Sueur, A. D. 216. Bafnage, vol. i. p. 132.
ing
1 6 ' ?be Hiftory of Opinions
ing before God, and efpecially in the more
fblemn part of the fervice, the adminiftration
of the eucharift) brought with them a quantity
of bread and wine, and efpecially the firft fruits
of their corn and grapes. Of thefe offerings,
or oblations, as they then affected to call them,
a part was referved for the eucharift, and part
alfo was eaten afterwards in common, in what
they called their Agates, or love feafts, but
the remainder was appropriated to the main-
tenance of the minifters, and of the poor. Be-
fides bread and wine, it was the cuftom to
offer many other things of value at the fame
time. But at length they limitted the obla-
tions which were made on this particular occa-
fion to bread and wine only; and afterwards
they ufually made for this purpofe one great
loaf, or cake, which they faid reprefented the
unity of the church, and which was broken in
public, and diftributed to as many as commu-
nicated. In the fourth century fome churches
fubftituted what they called eulogies, or holy
bread, for the bread of the Lord's fupper *.
The antients in general believed that the
water was mixed with the wine in our Savi-
our's own adminiftration of the eucharift, and
therefore they did the fame. This mixture of
water with the wine is mentioned by Tertul-
lian, and Cyprian pretends that it was of fin-
* Bafnage, vol. i. p. 112.
gular
relating to the Lord's Supper. 17
gular ufe. We find that fome chriftians com-
municated with water only, from which they
were called Aquarians. Thefe were not only
Manicheans, who abhorred wine, but alfo others
who were in the fcheme of mortifying the flefh
by abftaining from marriage, and the ufe of
flefh meat, as well as of wine.
When the elements began to be confidered
in a fuperftitious light, as fomething more than
mere bread and wine, there muft have been a
time when they imagined that this change took
place j and in the early ages it was fuppofed
to be made by the prayer which preceded the
administration, and not by any particular form of
words ; and this is the idea that the Greek
church ftill retains concerning confecration. But
Afterwards, though it is not eafy to determine
when, the change was fuppofed to take place as
the prieft was pronouncing the words 'This is my
body, in Latin, hoc eft corpus Meum\ as if there
had been fome peculiar virtue in the found of
thofe wordsj when pronounced by a perfon du-
ly qualified to ufe them. Thus alfo the hea-
thens imagined that the prefence of the invifible
divinity was made to dwell in an image by the
prieft pronouncing fome form of words, which
was termed confe crating them.
The euchariftical elements being now con-
iidered as fomething holy, it was natural to
VOL. II. B fuppofo
1 8 The Hiftory of Opinions-
fuppofe that a degree of holinefs belonged alfo
to the table on which the fervice was performed,
and therefore that it ought to be prepared by
fome ceremony, for this holy purpofe. Gregory
Nyflfen, the fame whofe eloquence on the fub-
je6t of the euchariil has been recited already,
is faid to have been the firft who performed any
ceremony of this kind. It was about the fourth
century, as is generally agreed, that places of
worfhip began to be confecrated, though in fome
very fimple manner, and it was then forbidden
to celebrate the Lord's fupper except in con-
fecrated places. When churches were built with
more magnificence, under Conftantine, there was
a particular place called the fanftuary, where the
table or altar flood.
Lights in the day-time were ufual in many
ceremonies in the heathen religion, whence an
idea of chearfulnefs, and of facrednefs alfo, was
annexed to them, and the chriftians of thofe
ages were but too ready to adopt the religious cuf-
toms of the heathens, partly from their own attach-
ment to them, and alfo with a view to make
their religion more inviting to the pagans. The
cuftom of ufmg wax-lights at the eucharift, in
particular, probably began in the time of Auftin,
in the fifth century. For, in the time of Gre-
gory the firft, they were ufed at baptifmj and
Ifidore of Seville, who was cotemporary with
Gregory, fpeaks of it as a thing eftablifhed.
" Thole," fays he, " who in Greek are called
relating to the Lord's Supper. 19
" Acolytes, are in Latin called link-bearers, be-
f< caufe they carry lights when the gofpel is
<f readj or, when the facrifice is offered, not to
tc diflipate darknefs, but to exprefs joy, to de-
" clare, under the type of corporeal light, the
" light fpoken of in the gofpel." In blefling
thefe torches and flambeaus, they faid, " O Jefus
" Chrift blefs this wax, we befeech thee, that it
" may receive of thee fuch a power and bene-
" diction, that, in all places where it fhall be
" lighted and fet, the devil may tremble and fly
" for fear, and may no more attempt to moleft
" or feduce thofe who ferve thee*." It muft
be obferved that this cuftom of ufmg lights at
the celebration of the eucharift began in the Eaft
a little after the time of Gregory Nazianzen.
The blerTing of the bread and wine ufed by our
Saviour himfelf was probably nothing more than
a very ihort prayer, fuch as we commonly ufe
before meat. But when the adminiftration of the
eucharift dame to be a principal part of folemn
religious worfhip, it is probable that the prayer
which preceded it, and from which the whole
fervice got the name of Eucharift was of
fome length, efpecially as we do not find that
prayer was ufed in any other part of the fervice.
In the third century it is particularly obferved,
that the prayers which preceded the celebration
of the eucharift were confiderably lengthened, as
* Larroche, p. 537.
B i well
2o The Hiftory of Opinions
well as that the folemrrity and pomp with which
it was adminiftered were increased ; and that at
this time perfons in a ftate of penitence, and
others, were excluded from it, in imitation of
the heathen myfteries.
It was the cuftom within this period to afk
forgivenefs of one another, as well as to give
the ki/s of peace, or charity, before communion,
the men killing the men, and the women the
women. They alfo ufed to kifs the hand of the
prieft. This cuftom of afking pardon before com-
municating was ufed in France in the nth cen-
tury *.
At firft the deacons generally adminiftered
the elements, but in the fourth council of Car-
thage, they were only fuffered to admin ifter in
cafes of necefiity. Afterwards they adminiftered
the cup only, while the prieft who celebrated
gave the bread. Sometimes women ferved on
this occafion, and though it was forbidden by-
pope Gelafius, the practice continued in many
places till the tenth century f.
Cyril of Jerufalem, at the end of the fourth
century, exhorted his communicants to receive
the bread by fupporting the right hand with the
left, alfo to receive it in the hollow of the hand,
and to take care that no crumb of it fell to the
* Larroche, p. izo. f Ib. 123.
ground,,
relating to the Lord's Supper. c>l
ground; and that in receiving the wine, they
Jhould approach it with the body a little bowed,
in token of veneration. The fixth general coun-
cil ordered that the hand fhould be held in the
form of a crofs. It was the cuftom in the time
of Jerom, to kifs the bread ; and in the liturgy
of Chryfoftom, ufed by the Greeks, it is directed
that he who receives the elements Ihould kifs
the hand of the deacon from whom he receives
them*. It is needlefs to note the progrefs of
fuperftition in all thefe obfervanees.
When the fervice was ended, the congregation
was difmiffed by the prieft, faying Ite, Mi/a eft ;
which Polidore Virgil acknowledges was alfo the
form of difmifiing the idolatrous fervices of the
pagans f. There was likewife, as was obferved
before, a formal difmifiion of the catechumens,
before they proceeded to the celebration of the
eucharift, in the fame words, and from this term
mijfa the whole fervice came afterwards to be
called by that name, which by corruption is in the
Englifh language mafs.
The primitive chriftians did frequently eat
in common, before the celebration of the Lord's
fupper. To this kind of entertainment, to which
every perfon brought what he thought proper,
they gave the name of dgape, or Iwe-faft ; and
it is thought to be alluded to in the epif-
* Larroche, p. 119. f Sueur, A. D. p. 398.
B 3 ties
22 fhe Htftory of Opinions
tl<js of Peter and Jude, 2 Pet. ii. 13. Jude xii.
This cuftom, however, of eating in common hav-
ing been abufed, it was forbidden by the council
of Laodicea in 360. But before this time, when
it began to be thought improper to eat any thing
before the eucharift, this feafl was omitted till
after the celebration*.
Such was the progrefs of fuperftition in this
age of the church, which abounded with men
of learning and writers. We are not to expect
a reformation of thefe abufes, in the next period
of grofs darknefs, and while the fame caufes of
corruption, and efpecially a fondnefs for pagan
cuftoms, and a willingnefs to gain over the pa-
gans by adopting them, continued and increaf-
ed. We have now feen how the pagan notion
of myfterieSy together with that of a Janftifying
power in the elements themfelves, contributed to
introduce a train of fuperftitious practices into
the chriftian church j but we muft go much deep-
er into this fuperftition in the two following pe-
riods, with lefs pleafing profpects than in the laft.
We have feen the fliades of the evening clofe up-
on us ; we muft now prepare to pafs through the
darknefs of the night, but with the hope that,
as we come nearer to our own times, the day light
will vifit us again.
* Mofheim, Vol. i. p. 104.
SECTION
relating to the Lord's Suffer.
SECTION II. ,
The Hiftory of the Eucharift from the Time of
Avftin to that of Pafchafius.
IN this period we find a very confiderable
advance towards the doctrine of tranjubftan-
tiation, which was afterwards eftablifhed in the
weftern church -, but the firft great ftep towards
it, as well as almoft all the abules of which
an account is given in the laft fection, wa$
made in the Eaft, where Anaftafius, a monk
of Mount Sinai (in a treatife againft fome he-
retics who aflerted that the body of Chrift was
impaflible) faid that the elements of the Lord's
fuppcr were the true body and blood of Chrift j
for that when Chrift inftituted the eucharift he
did not fay, this is the type or antitype of my
body, but my body. This is evidently a lan-
guage unknown to all the antients, when they
f^Doke not rhetorically but gravely on the fub-
jeft; and yet, on the whole, it is certain that
he did not mean fo much as was afterwards
imderftood by that mode of fpeaking*.
But John Damafcenus, another monk, and
a celebrated writer in the Eaft, not only fol-
lowed Anaftafius in his language, but made
* Sueur, A. D. 637.
B 4 a real
$4 The Hiftory of Opinions
a r.eal change in the ideas annexed to it; fay-
ing that, " when fome have called the bread
" and wine figures or figns of the body and
" blood of Chrift, as Bafil, they fpake of them
" not after confecration, but before the obla-
<f tion was confecrated." " Jefus," he fays, " has
" joined to the bread and wine his own divini-
" ty, and made them to be his body and blood."
He illuftrates this in the following manner.
f< Ifaiah faw a lighted coal; now a lighted coal
Cf is not mere wood, but wood joined to fire;
" fo the bread of the facrament is not mere
c f bread, but bread joined to the divinity, and
<c the body united to the divinity is not one
<c and the fame nature, but the nature of the
" body is one, and that of the divinity united
" to it another f. In the fecond council of
Nice, when it was urged on one fide that Chrift
had no other image than the facrament a it was
argued by the council, that the facrament af-
ter confecration was no image, but properly
his body and blood J. This has been the faith
of the Greek church ever fince the time of this
Damafcenus, who wrote in the beginning of the
eighth century j and his name is as great an
authority in the eaftern church, as that of
Thomas Aquinas was afterwards in the weftern,
In reality, the Greeks muft confider the eu-
chariftical elements as another body of Chrijl,
f Larroche, p. 367.
t Taylor on the Grand Apoiiacy, p. 160.
tQ
relating to the Lord's Supper. 25
to which his foul, or his divinity, bears tjie
lame relation that it did to the body which
he had when on earth, and with which he
afcended to heaven. They muft fuppofe that
there is, as it were, a multiplication of bo-
dies to the fame foul. No real change, how-
ever, is by them fuppofed to be made in the
fubftance of the bread and winej only from
being mere bread and wine, it becomes a
new body and blood to Chrift.
Whether this new opinion fpread into the
Weft does not diftinctly appear, and the two
churches had not, at that time, much commu-
nication with each other. But from the fame
general caufes the idea of fomething myftical
and facred in the euchariftical elements kept
advancing in the Weft, as well as in the Eaft j
and they were confidered as bearing fome pe-
culiar relation to Chrift; who was, therefore,
thought to be, in fome extraordinary manner,
prefent with them, but in what manner, they
had not perhaps any diftindt idea.
When the euchariftical elements were con-
fidered as fo peculiarly facred, we are not fur-
prized to find that many methods were ufed
to prevent the lofs, or wafte of them. Among
other methods, they began, pretty early in this
period, to take the bread dipped in the con-
fecrated wine. This was particularly noticed
in the nth council of Toledo in 675, and
2(5 The Hiflory of Opinions
in. another at Braga in Gallicia, in which &
decree was made to put a Hop to this prac-
tice; but ftill it was allowed that the eucha-
rift might be adminiftered to fick perfons and
young children in this manner. The Armenians
ftill receive the eucharifl in this way, and the
Mofcovites take the bread and wine together
in a fpoon*.
I have obferved that, in the former period,
it was ufual for the communicants to carry
forne of the confecrated bread home with them,
and to take it with them when they went on
a journey; but in the council of Saragofla, with-
in the. prefent period, they who did not eat
the bread at the time of communicating were
anathematized. Thus a greater degree of fu-
perftition put an end to a practice which had
been introduced by a lefs degree of it. How-
ever, the practice of confecrating a great quan-
tity of bread was kept up; and in the time
of Charlemaigne exprefs directions were given
for keeping it, in order to communicate the
fick J. This confecrated bread, it had been the
cuftom to keep in a clofe cheft, in the church;
but at a council of Tours, in 567, it was or-
dered that the boft (as it was then called)
fhould be kept not in a cheft, but under the
title of the crofs, to excite the. devotion of
the people||.
* Larroche, p. 146. J Ib. p, 167. J| Sueur, A, D. 567.
Among
relating to tie Lord's Supper. 27
Among other fuperftitious cuftoms within this
period, we find that fometimes the confecrated
wine was mixed with ink, in order to fign writ-
ings of a peculiarly folemn nature. Thus pope
Theodore, in the feventh century, figned the con^
demnation and deposition of Pyrrhus the Mono-
thelite j it was ufed at the condemnation of Pho-
tius by the Fathers of the council of Conftantino-
ple in 869; and Charles the bald, and Bernard
count of Barcelona alfo figned a treaty with the
facramental wine in 844. It is evident, how-
ever, from this very abufe of the euchariftical
elements, that they were not at that time fup-
pofed to be the real body and blood of Chrift j
for, fmce they have been thought to be fo, it
would be deemed a great profanation to make
any fuch ufe of them.
It is not denied that, originally, the cele-
bration of the Lord's fupper was a part of the
public worfhip, in which all the congregation
of the faithful joined; but in the church of
Rome at prefent the prieft alone communicates
in general, while the congregation are mere fpec-
tators of what he is doing, and only join in the
prayers. This was occafioned by the fuperftitious
veneration for the elements, from which was natu-
rally derived an idea of fome particular prepara-
tion being neceflary for the receiving of them.
The firft notice that we find of this kind of mafs
was about the year 700 ; but we have fecn that,
even in the time of Chryfoftom, the people in
general
28 The Hi/lory of Opinions
general began to decline communion ; but in
the time of Charlemaigne the priefts were for-
bidden to celebrate mafs alone ; and pope Sorer
ordained that no perfon fhould celebrate mafs,
unlefs the prieft made a third *. Among other
accufations of John XII 3 he was charged with
celebrating mafs without communion |.
No laws, however, could long check the tor-
rent of this abufe. It being imagined that the
celebration of the mafs was offering the mod
acceptable facrifice to God, which would avail
for the pardon of fin, and for redeeming fouls
out of purgatory, large fums of money were
given and bequeathed to the priefts for this pur-
pofe, which proved a fource of immenfe wealth
to them. But this abufe was much increafed
when monks were allowed, by pope Gregory, to
do the office of priefts. This order of men had
much leifure for the purpofe, and an idea of pe-
culiar fanftity was annexed to their character in
the minds of the common people.
To the monks may be attributed the origin of
private chapels, and the multiplication of altars
in churches for celebrating feveral mafles at the
fame time. For, according to antient cuftom,
it was not lawful to fay more than one mafs, at
which all afilftedj and it was a thing unheard of
that any perfon fhould celebrate mafs on the
* Larrpche, p, 126. f Sueur, A. D. 963.
fame
relating to the Lord's Supper. 29
fame day, upon the fame altar, a cuftom which
is ftill obferved in the eaftern churches. For
the Greeks have but one altar in one church,
nor do we find the mention of any more in
the weftern church till the eighth century. But
m the time of Adrian the firft, who lived to-
wards the end of the eighth century, there i$
mention made of the great altar to diftinguifli it
from others in the fame church. Whenever the
phrafe occurs in any period prior to this, by
altars we are to, underftand the tombs of the mar-
tyr s> which are often fo called f. The firft men-
tion that we have of the eucharift being cele-
brated more than once in the courfe of the fame
day, in any church, is in the fifth century, when
Leo the firft ordered it on great feftival days,
when the crowds were fo great that the churches
could not contain thofe that reforted to them.
To induce the common people to continue
their offerings after they ceafed to communicate,
they were given to underftand, that provided
they kept up that cuftom, the fervice would
ftill be ufeful to themj and inftead of a real
communion with bread and wine duly confe-
crated, the priefts gave them a kind of fubftitute
for it, and a thing of a much lefs awful nature,
viz. bread, over which they prayed, and to which
they gave the name of hallowed bread. This
was about the year 700 .
p. 47 . Hill, of ar.tient ceremonies,, p. 88.
10
30 tte Hiftory of Opinions
It was in confequence of few perfons ofFering
themfelves to communion, that the priefts got
a habit of fpeaking in a very low voice, a cuftom
which was afterv/ards continued through fuper-
ftition. This is faid to have begun about the
end of the tenth century , and fome fay that it
proceeded from a report that God had pu-
nifhed with fudden death fome fhepherds, who
fung the words of confecration in the fields *.
Having noted thefe general abufes, refpecting
the eucharift, I fhall now confider the method
in which it was adminiflered, going over the
different parts of the fervice for that purpofe ;
and we fhall find traces enow of fuperftition every
ftep that we take.
As there is nothing prefcribed in the New
Teftament concerning the order of public wor-
fhip, or the- mode of celebrating the Lord's fup-
per, different churches fell naturally into dif-
ferent methods with refpect to them, as we fee
in what remains of feveral of the antient litur-
gies. That of moft churches had probably been
gradually altered, efpccially as mens ideas with
refpect to the nature of the fervice itfelf had
changed. The prefent canon of the mafs, as it
is now ufed in the church of Rome, was, for
the moft part, compofed by Gregory the great,
who made more alterations in it than any of
* Larroche, p. -9.
his
relating to the Lord's Supper. 31
his predeceflbrs. He introduced into it many
pompous ceremonies, but it was feveral centu-
ries before this canon was adopted by all the
members of the Latin church. In 699, pope
Sergius added to the canon of the mafs, that
while the prieft is breaking the bread, he fhould
fmg three times Lamb of God who taketh away
the fins of the world, have mercy upon us- y but
that at the third time, inftead of the words have
mercy upon us, he fhould fay, grant us peace*.
Since the celebration of the eucharift was
now confidered as a proper facrijice, the table
on which it was offered came of courfe to be
an altar; and as altars in the Jewilh church,
and among the pagans, were confecrated, the
chriftian altars muft be fo too. The firft men-
tion that is made of the confecration of al-
tars (more than was obferved to have been
done by Gregory Nyffenus) is in the council of
Agde in 506, when they were ordered to be
confecrated both by chrifm and by the bene-
diction of the prieft. In the ninth century
they added water to the chrifm, and incenfe,
and other things. They alfo confecrated three
table cloths of feveral faihions, and a kind of
veil of feveral colours, according to the dif-
ferent days, &c.
* Sueur. Larroche, p. 49.
In
32 fbe Hiftory of Opinion*
In order to be better entitled to the name
of altars, and to correfpond to the altars in
the Jewifh and pagan religions, all the wooden
tables were removed, and all altars were or-
dered to be made of ftone. And it was far-
ther alledged, in favour of this cuftom, that
Jefus Chrift is called the corner ft one ^ and foun-
dation of the church. This inftitution is afcrib-
ed to Silvefter; but the decree is not found.
It was a council of Epaone in 517, that for-
bad the confecration of altars, unlefs they were
made of ftone*.
To the due confecration of altars it is now
requifite that there fhould be relics in them;
but this was far from being the cafe originally.
For a council in the feventh century ordered
that altars fhould not be confecrated in any
place where a body had been interred f. The
laft thing which I (hall obferve in refpect to altars
is, that Bede is the firft who makes any mention
of portable ones.
It was the cuftom in all this period not
only to make ule of lights, though in the day
time, during the celebration of the eucharift,
but of incenje alfo; and both thefe appendages
were borrowed from the heathen facrifices, and
were firft adopted by the Greeks, and fo early
* Bafnage, vol. i. p. 47. f Ib. p. 48.
as
relating to tbe Lord's Supper. 33
as the middle of the fifth century; mention
being then made of affembling the church by
flambeaus and perfumes. But it is not faid that
this was for the celebration of the eucharift in
particular *.
Originally, the bread that was u fed for the ce-
lebration of the Lord's fupper, was fuch as was
prefented among other offerings on the occafion.
Afterwards it was the cuftom to make one great
loaf or cake, to fupply all the communicants j
and this was broken at the time of the celebra-
tion, and diftributed in fmall pieces to the com-
municants. But this cuftom being attended
with fome lofs, fome priefts in Spain began
about the feventh century, to prepare the eucha-
riftical bread in a different manner, baking fmall
round pieces on purpofe, that there might not
be occafion to break it at all. But this inno-
vation was not generally approved, and it was
exprefsly forbidden by the council of Toledo in
693 . In time, however, the increafmg fuper-
ftition of the age got the better of this regula-
tion, and the cuftom of making fmall round
wafers for the purpofe of communion at length
became univerfal in the church.
It was the cuftom in the primitive church, as
I have already obferved, to give what is called
* Larroche, p. 526. Ib. p. 36,
VOL, II. C the
34 Vbe Hiftory of Opinions
the kifs of peace, or of charity, immediately be-
fore communion. This, in time, was thought
to be an indecent practice, and therefore ought
to have been laid afide altogether. However,
Leo the third, at the end of the ninth century,
changed this cuftom for that of Idfling a plate of
lilver or copper, with the figure of a crofs
upon it, or the relic of fome faint after the con-
fecration of the elements *.
In the fifth century it was the cuftom for men
to receive the bread with their naked hands, and
the women (who perhaps did not expofe their
hands naked) in a clean cloth, which obtained
the name of Dominica. Afterwards, in the farther
progrefs of fuperftition, it came to be the cuftom
to receive it in vefiels of gold, &c. but this was
forbidden in the fixth general council in 680, and
they were again ordered to receive it with the
hand. It has been already obferved that glajs
was thought to be too brittle a thing to receive
the holy elements. Glafs veflels, however, con-
tinued to be made ufe of, fo that it was thought
neceflary to forbid the ufe of them in a council
held at Rheims under Charlemaigne -, and in
another council, held in the year 895, wooden
veflels were forbidden to be ufed for that pur-
pofe j and at prefent the Latin church does not
fuffer the confecration to be made in any thing
but in a chalice of gold, or lilver, or at leaft of
* Hill of antient Ceremonies, p. 90. f Larroche, p. 555.
pew-
relating to the Lord's Supper. 35
pewter; and a council held at Albi, in 1254,
commands all churches, the yearly rent of
which amounts to fifteen French livres, to have
a filver chalice *.
In the primitive times we find no mention
of any particular pofition of the body, as more pro-
per than any other for receiving the Lord's fup-
per; but as fuperftition kept gaining ground,
the Eaft began to be held peculiarly facred, as it
always had been held by the heathens, who wor-
fhipped with their faces turned that way; and
about the year 536, Pope Vigilius ordered that
thofe who celebrated mafs ftiould always direct
their faces towards the Eaft f .
We fee the effects of fuperftition as well in
the method of difpofmg of what remained of the
confecrated elements, as in the ufe of them.
Some churches ufed to burn all that remained
after communion. This was the cuftom at Jeru-
falem, and it is fo with the Greeks at prefent ; at
leaft, fays FleuryJ, they are reproached with it.
At Conftantinople it was formerly eaten by young
fcholars, fent from the fchool for that purpofe,
as is related by Evagrius, who wrote at the end
of the fixth century. The council of Toledo, in
693, left it to the liberty of each particular
church, either to keep what remained of the
* Larroche, p. 53. f Hiftory of antient ceremonies,
p. 76. J A. D. 1054.
C 2 con-
^6 The Htftory of Opinions
confecrated elements, or to eat it; but, in the
latter cafe, it was ordained that the quantity
confecrated fhould be moderate, that it might
not opprefs the flomachs of thofe who were
appointed to take it. But, in whatever man-
ner they difpofed of thefe facred elements, it
was the cuftom not to leave any of them till the
next day *.
One would imagine that we had feen fuperftition
enough in this one article of chriftian faith and
practice within this period ; but we fnall find
much greater abufes in the next; and notwith-
ftanding the greater light of the prefent age,
they continue unreformed in the church of Rome
to this day.
SECT ION III.
'The Uiftory of the Eucharift, from the 'Time of
Pafchafius to the Reformation.
WE are now arrived to the moft diftin-
guifhed asra in the hiftory of the eu-
charift; after having feen how much the eucha-
riftical elements in this age of darknefs had
gained in point of Jacrednejs and folemnity, and
how aweful a thing the act of communicating
Larroche, p. 171.
was
relating to the Lord's Supper. 37
was generally apprehended to be ; fo that com-
monly the prieft alone communicated, and the
people very feldom, except at the time of the
greater feftivals, and efpecially at Eafter.
This was in confequence of the people in
general being imprelTed with a confufed notion
that the euchariltical elements were, in fome
fenfe or other, the body and blood of Chrift, and
therefore that Chrift himfelf was prefent in them.
But in what manner he was prefent they feem to
have had no clear idea. This general notion,
however, paved the way for the capital addition
that was made to the do&rine of the eucharift
by Pafchafius Radbert, a monk of Corbie in
France, who undertook to explain the manner
in which the body of Chrift is prefent in the
eucharift.
This he did in a treatife publifhed in the year
8 1 8, in which he maintained that not only the
bread and wine were changed, by confederation,
into the real body and blood of Chrift; but
that it was the fame body that had been born
of the virgin Mary, and that had been crucified
and raifed from the dead. It was in fupport
of this opinion that he wrote the two books on
the delivery of the virgin Mary y which I had oc-
cafion to mention before ; in which he main-
tained, that it was performed in a miraculous
manner, without any opening of the womb*.
* Sueur, A. D. 818.
C 3 . ThV
38 The Hijlory of Opinions
This opinion Pafchafius himfelf fecms to have
been fenfible was bold and novel. For the ftrft
time that he mentions it, after calling the eucha-
riftical elements the body of Chrift in general,
he adds, " and to fay fomething more furpri-
*' fing and wonderful (Ut mirabilius loquar} it
<c is no other flefli than that which was born
" of the virgin Mary, which fuffered upon the
" crofs, and which was raifed from the
* c crave*."
D
Not depending intirely upon the reajons
which he was able to alledge in favour of fo
extraordinary an opinion, he likewife pro-
duced in fupport of it, what was no uncommon
thing with the monks, and what had no fmall
weight with the common people, in that igno-
rant age, namely an apparition, which for its
fmgular curiofity, and as a fpecimen of the
impofitions of thofe times, I fhall relate.
A prieft whofe name was Plecgills officiating
at the tomb of St. Ninus, wifhed, out of love,
and not infidelity, to fee the body of Jefus
Chrift; and falling upon his knees, he afked
of God the favour to fee the nature of the body
of Jefus Chrift, in this myftery, and to hold
in his hands the form of that little child which
the virgin had borne in her lap ; when an angel
cried to him, " Get up, quickly, and look at
* Sueur, A. D. 818.
" the
relating to the Lord's Supper. 39
fc the infant, which that holy woman hath car-
" ried, for he is cloathed in his corporeal ha-
tc bit." The priefl declared, that being quite
terrified he looked up, and faw upon the altar
the child that Simeon had held in his arms,
that the angel told him he might not only fee
but touch the child, and that accordingly he took
him and prefied the breaft of the child to his
own, and after embracing him frequently, he
kirTed the God, joining his lips to the lips of
Jefus Chrift. After this he replaced the beau-
tiful limbs of the God upon the altar, praying
to God that he might refume his former figure,
and that he had fcarcely ftnifhed his prayer, when
rifing from the ground, he found that the body
of Jefus Chrift was reflored to its former figure,
as he had requefted*.
Notwithftanding this miracle, and every thing
elfe that Pafchafius could alledge in favour of
his doctrine, it excited great aftonifhment, and
was oppofed by many perfons of learning and
eminence. Among others, the emperor Charles
the Bald was much offended at it, and by his
particular order, the famous Bertram or Rattram,
wrote againft the new opinion of Pafchafius, and
at the fame time againft his peculiar notion con-
cerning the delivery of the virgin.
In confequence of this, the doctrine of Paf-
chafius, though publifhed in the ninth century,
* Sueur A. D. 818.
C 4 does
40 The Hiftory of Opinions
does not appear to have gained many advocates
till the eleventh, when it was oppofed by Beren-
ger archdeacon of the church of Angers in France,
(whom I mentioned before as one of the moft
eminent fcholars of his age) and his writings
on this fubject made a great impreffion on the
minds of many ; fo that though no lefs than
ten or twelve councils were held on this fub-
ject, in all of which the doctrine of Berenger
was condemned, Matthew of Weftminfter fays,
that it had infected almoft all France, Italy, and
England ; and though, when he was threatened,
he was weak enough to fign a recantation of his
opinion, he certainly died in the belief of it.
Berenger was followed by Peter and Henry de
Bruis, whofe difciples were called Petrobrujfians,
and by the Albigenfes in general ; who in the
twelfth century feparated from the church of
Rome. Arnold of Breflia alfo taught the fame
doctrine in Italy, and for this, and his declaim-
ing againft the church of Rome in general, he
was burned at Rome, in 1155 *.
It is remarkable that for two centuries the
popes did not interfere in the controverfy about
Pafchafius. Moft probably they thought with
his adverfaries; and as very few joined him at
firft, and he was openly oppofed by the learned
men of the age, it feemed as if his opinion would
have died away of itfelf. As foon, however, as
* Larroche, p, 473.,
it
relating to the Lord's Supper. 41
it was perceived that the doctrine went down
with the common people, and that it promifed
to give a high idea of the dignity and power of
the priefthood, the popes were ready enough to
enforce it by their decrees, as we have feen in
the cafe of Berenger. It was not, however, till
the beginning of the thirteenth century that this
doctrine was made an article of faith, viz. by a
decree of Innocent the third, at the council of
Lateran, in 1215, the term tranfubftantiation hav-
ing been firft ufed by Stephen bifhop of Autun,
in the beginning of the twelfth century.
Even notwithftanding this decree, feveral di-
vines openly maintained a different opinion,
thinking it fufficient to acknowledge the real
prefence, though they explained the manner of
it differently from Innocent, and the followers of
Pafchafius ; and John, furnamed Pungens Afinus>
a doctor of the univerfity of Paris, fubftituted
the word confubftant'tation inftead of tranfubftan-
tiation, towards the conclufion of this century *%
Others fay that he maintained the affumption of
the confecrated bread by the divinity. How-
ever, he did not deny that the fubftance of the
bread and wine remained in the elements; and
yet the faculty at Paris did not condemn his opi-
nion, but declared that both this, and the com-
mon doctrine of tranfubftantiation, were proba-
ble ways of making the body of Chrift exift in
the facrament.
* Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 106.
As
42 27><? Iliftory of Opinions
As the monks had contributed greatly to the
eftablilhment of alinolr every other corruption of
chriftianity, they were no lefs active in promot-
ing this. Among others, the name of Odo, bi-
fhop of Clugni in France, in the tenth century,
is mentioned as having been of eminent ufe on
this occafion. Indeed, another Odo, archbi-
Ihop of Canterbury, of that age, is likewife faid
to have been a great promoter of it. But there
does not appear to have been any public act in
favour of the doctrine of tranfubftantiation in
England, before the council of Oxford which
condemned WicklifFe.
We cannot be furprifed, that the circumftance
of all the known properties of bread and wine
remaining in the euchariftical elements after con-
fecration, fhould not a little embarrafs the ad-
vocates for the change of them into real fiefh
and blood. On this account, Innocent the
third acknowledged that, after confecration,
there did remain in the elements a certain $a-
neity and t uineity y as he called them, which fa-
tisfied hunger and thirft. But afterwards they
who maintained that the confecrated hofl retain-
ed the nature of bread, and nourifhed the body,
and efpecially that any part of it was turned in-
to excrement, were, in denfion, called Stercorarifts,
This term of reproach fhews in what abhorrence
all thofe who did not aflent to this new doctrine
were then held. If ridicule and contempt were
a proper teft of truth, I doubt not but that thofe
who
relating to the Lord's Supper. 43
who defended the abfurd doctrine of tranfubftan-
tion would have had the advantage of the argu-
ment. Proteftants would now only laugh at
being called Stercorarifts, but at that time the
laugh would probably not have been with us,
but againft us. That was not an age of experi-
ment, or it might have been eafily decided,
viz. by giving a man nothing but confecrated
bread, whether it turned to nourifhment and ex-
crement or not j but the very propofal would
have been deemed impious, and might have been
very hazardous to the propofer.
Considering the great difficulty of forming any
conception concerning this converfion of the
bread and wine into real fleiri and blood, it is
no wonder that many doubts fhould have been
ftarted, and different opinions ihould have been held
concerning it > and that they fhould even conti-
nue to be held, notwithftanding the moft autho-
ritative decifions refpecting it. Peter Lombard,
cotemporary with Stephen of Autun above men-
tioned, approved of this doctrine of tranfubftan-
tiation, but could not determine of what kind the
change was j whether it was only formal, or Jub-
ftantial, that is, whether it affected the fenfible
properties of the elements, or the real fubitance
of them*.
It was allb a queftion whether the water (which
it was always the cuftom to mix with the, wine
* Larroche, p. 183.
before
44 We Hiftory of Opinions
before confecration) was changed immediately
into the blood of Chrift, or whether it was
changed into wine firft. Pafchafius himfelf had
afferted the former, but after long debates it was
determined by Innocent the third, and the fchool-
men fupported him in it, that the water is chang-
ed into wine before it is changed into the blood
of Chrift. See Bafnage's Hiftoire des Eglifes
Reformers, vol. iii. p. 68 1, where this and other
difficulties on the fame fubje<5t are particularly
confidered. It is fufficient for my purpofe to
give a fpecimen of them.
In this, and feveral other refpefts, a confidera-
ble latitude of opinion was formerly allowed in
the church of Rome j and indeed the do6trine of
tranjubftantiation did not properly become an ar-
ticle of faith before it was made to be fo by the
council of Trent. The cardinal D'Ailli, at the
council of Conftance, fpoke of the doctrine of
tranfubftantiation as an opinion only, and faid that
it could not be clearly inferred from the fcrip-
tures, that the fubftance of bread did not re-
main in the facrament j*.
At the council of Trent, the Francifcans main-
tained that the body of Chrift defcended from
heaven, in order to be changed into the form,
of bread and wine, though it did not quit its for-
mer place, whereas the Dominicans faid, that Je-
fus Chrift did not come from any other place,
f Larroche, p. 492.
but
relating to the Lord's Supper. 45
but that he was formed in the hoft, the fubftance
of the bread being changed into that of his bo-
dy. The council did not decide this queftion,
but in their decrees made ufe of fuch terms as
both parties might adopt .
When the great difficulty of one fmgle conver-
fion of any particular quantity of bread and wine
into the body and blood of Chrift was got over,
one would imagine that another difficulty, no lefs
infuperable, would have occurred, with refpeft to
the multitude of confecrations performed in dif-
ferent places at the fame time. But Guimond,
who wrote againft Berenger, in 1075, made no-
thing of thefe, or of ftill greater difficulties.
" Every feparate part," fays he, " of the eu-
<f charift is the whole body of Chrift. It is giv-
" en entire to all the faithful. They all receive
Cf it equally. Though it fhould be celebrated a
<c thoufand times at once, it is the fame indivifi-
" ble body of Chrift. It is only tofenfe that a
tc fmgle part of the hoft appears lefs than the
<c whole, but our fenfes often deceive us. It is
<c acknowledged that there is a difficulty in com-
f( prehending this, but there is no difficulty in be-
" lieving it. The only queftion is, whether God
" has been willing to make this change? It is
" like the voice of a fmgle man, which all the
" audience hears entire." He exhorts heretics
to yield to the truth, becaufe, fays he, " we are
Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 669.
" not
46 The Hiftory of Opinions
" not now contending for victory, as in the
" fchools, or for any temporal intereft, as in the
" fecular courts. In this difpute nothing lefs is
" depending than eternal life 7."
When it was objected to Guimond, that the
rats fometimes eat the confecrated bread, he re-
plied, that either the fenfes were deceived, or the
body of Chrift did not fuffer any more in the rat,
than in the fepulchre, or that the devil put real
bread into it, on which men and rats might feed J.
The language in which fome of the popifh
priefts have boafted of the power which this doc-
trine of tranfubflantiation gives them, would ex-
cite the greateft ridicule, if there was not a mix-
ture of impiety with the abfurdity of it. cc On
" our altars," fay fome of them, ff Jefus Chrift
" obeys all the world. He obeys the prieft, let
" him be where he will, at every hour, at his
" fimple word. They carry him whither they
<f pleafe. He goes into the mouth of the wick-
" ed as well as of the righteous. He makes no
" refiftance, he does not hefitate one moment. "
Some priefts boafted that they had even more
power than the blefTed virgin, becaufe they could
create their creator whenever they pleafed j
whereas Ihe had conceived him but once||.
f Fleury. J Bafnage,vol. 2. p. 120.
$ Ib. vol. i. p. 26. || Ib. vol. 2. p. 423.
So
relating to the Lord's Supper. 47
So much is made to depend on the power and
will of the pricft, with refpeft to the eucharift,
and the facraments in general, in the church of
Rome, as, I fhould think, muft occafion a good
deal of anxiety on the part of thofe who receive
them. For they believe that the efficacy of all
the facraments depends upon the intention of
Kim that adminiflers them. This is exprefsly
determined in a decree of pope Eugenius ; and
at the council of Trent an anathema was
pronounced on thofe who denied it. This is
even carried fo far, that in one of the rubrics of
the Mifial, it is given as a rule, that if the
prieft who goes to confecrate twelve hofts,
fliould have a general intention to leave out
one of them it will affect them all *. Luther
mentions fome priefls at Rome, who acknow-
ledged that infcead of pronouncing the proper
words of confecration, only laid to themfelves,
Bread thou art, and bread thou /halt remain f.
All the difputes about the nature of the eu-
chariftical elements were not confined to the
weftern church, in this period ; for at the be-
ginning of the thirteenth century the Greeks were
much agitated about this fubjecl:; fome affirm-
ing that the myfteries> as they called them, were
incorruptible, while others maintained that they
were not : when Zonaras, a Greek friar, hap-
* Burneton the Articles, p. 370. f Bafnage, vol. 3.
p. 687.
pily
48 5T2><? Hiflory of Opinions
pily found out a middle way, which Ihewed no
lefs ingenuity than had been diiplayed on the
fame fubjecl by many of the monks or fchoolmen
in the Weft. The confecrated bread, he faid,
was the flefh of Chrift, as dead, and therefore
corruptible ; but that after it was eaten, and
thereby gone, as it were, into the fepulchre
it became incorruptible ; becaufe the body of
our Lord did not remain long dead and buried,
but rofe again J.
The doctrine of tranfubftantiation was the
caufe of a great variety of new ceremonies
and inftitutions in the church of Rome. Hence,
among other things, thofe rich and fplendid re-
ceptacles which were formed for the refidence
of God, under this new fhape, and the lamps
and other precious ornaments that were defigned
to beautify this habitation of the deity; and
hence the cuftom of carrying about this divine
bread in folemn pomp, through the public ftreets,
when it is to be adminiftered to fick and dying
perfons, with many other ceremonies of a like
nature. But what crowns the whole was the
feftival of the holy Jacrament,
This was an inftitution of Urban the fourth,
in 1264, on the pretended revelation of one Juliana,
a woman of Liege, who faid that it was fhewed
.J Larroche, p. 494.
her
relating to the Lord's Supper. 49
her from heaven, that this particular feftival day
of the holy eucharift, had always been in the
councils of the fovereign Trinity $ but that now
the time of revealing it to men was come. In
the decree of Urban it is laid, " this feftival
Cf day properly belongs to the facrament, be-
<f caufe there is no faint but what has his proper
<f feftival ; that this is intended to confound the
" unbelief and extravagance of heretics, and to
<c repair all the faults that men might be guilty of
" in other marfes *." This feftival is attended
with a proceffion, in which the hoft is carried
in great pomp and magnificence. No lefs a per-
fon than Thomas Aquinas compofed the office
for this great folemnity.
Notwithftanding all this pomp and fplendor,
which feldom fail to have charms for the bulk of
mankind, this decree of Urban was not univer-
fally obfervedj and therefore it was confirmed
by another bull of Clement the fifth. But when
the minds of men were a little enlightened after
the reformation by Luther, this folemnity be-
came the topic of much ridicule. On this ac-
count Catharine of Medicis wro'te to the pope
in 1561, as Thuanus informs us, to requeft the
abolition of this feftival, becaufe it was the oc-
cafion of much fcandal, and was not at all ne-
ceflary. \t may not be amifs to give a more
particular account of fome of the other new
fuperftitions mentioned above.
* Larroche, p, 581,
D It
50 Tbe Hiftory of Opinions
It was towards the end of the fixth century that
the elevation of the hoft was firft practifed in the
eaftern church j but then it was intended to
reprefent the elevation of Chrift upon the crofs,
and was made immediately before the commu-
nion ; and there is no mention of this ce-
remony in the weftern church before the ele-
venth century. But then it immediately followed
the confecration, though no adoration is faid
to have been intended by this ceremony till the
thirteenth century, when it was exprefsly ap-
pointed in the conftitutions of Honorius the
, third and Gregory the ninth ; the latter of whom
in 1227, ordered the ringing of a bell, to warn
the people to fall down on their knees and adore
the confecrated hoft*. This, however, feems
to have been done before by Guy Pare, the
pope's legate in Germany ; who, when he was
at Cologne, in 1201, ordered, that when the
hoft was elevated in the celebration of the mafs,
the people fhould proftrate themfelves in the
church at the found of a bell f.
The ceremony of carrying the hoft in procef-
fion to communicate the fick, feems to have
been firft ufed in this country. For, at the
end of the twelfth century, Hubert archbifhop
of Canterbury, and legate of pope Celeftine,
held a fynod at York, in which, among other
things, he commanded that when any fick per-
* Larroche, p. 102. f Hiftoire des papes, vol. 3.
p. Ijl.
foiu
relating to the Lord's Supper. 51
Tons were to receive the communion, the prieft
himfelf fhould carry the hoft, cloathed with his
proper habits, and with lights borne before it,
fuitable to fo great a facramentf. We are alfo
informed that, in the beginning of the thirteenth
century, Odo, bifhop of Paris, in one of his fy-
nods, made feveral conftitutions relating to the
facrament; as about the manner of carrying it to the
fick, of the adoration of the perfons who fhould
meet it, of keeping it in the beft part of the al-
tar, of locking it up fafe ; with feveral precau-
tions in cafe it fhoukl happen that any part of
the confecrated elements fhould fall to the
ground, or any fly or fpider fhould fall into the
wine.
Confidering how folemn a thing the bufinefs.
of communicating was made, in confequence of the
doctrine of tranfubftantiation, we do not wonder
that it was ordered by the council of Trent that,
how contrite foever a finner fhould feel himfelf,
he fhould not approach the holy eucharift with-
out having made his Jacramental confej/ion> nor at
the folemnity which the receiving of the com-
munion gave to an oath. This appeared, when
pope Gregory the feventh, propofed to the em-
peror Henry, who was charged with many
crimes, to exculpate himfelf, by taking one part
of a confecrated hoft, while he himfelf fhould
take the other. This propoial ftaggered the em-
f Larrochc, p. 483. Ib. p. 484.
D 2 peror
$2 The Hiftory of Opinions
peror fo much, that he defired the affair to be re-
ferred to a general council *. But we are more
furprifed that, upon any occafion whatever, any
perfon fhould be permitted to eat before he re-
ceived the communion ; and yet, application be-
ing made to the pope on the part of the king of
France, in 1722, that he might take fome nou-
rifliment before he received the communion, on
the day of his confecration, as it was thought
that he would not be able to go through the fa-
tigue of the ceremony without it, the requeft
was granted. It muft be prefumed, however,
that no other than the pope himfelf could have
given fo great a difpenfation f.
It was owing to the great awfulnefs of the real
maffes, and the many ceremonies that were ne-
ceffary to be obferved in the celebration of them,
that, for four or five hundred years, what are called
dry maffes (or the ceremonies of the mafs without
the confecration of the elements) were much ufed
in the church of Rome. They were more efpe-
cially ufed by gentlemen who went a hunting
early in the morning, or returned late, or when
a new married couple wanted to receive benedic-
tion, &c. St. Louis often ufed this ceremony
on board his veffel, and it ferved for a confola-
tion to pilgrims, when they had no opportunity
of having real maffes in their return from the
Holy Land, Thefe dry maffes were fo common
* Fleury, A, D, 1077. f Hill, des Tapes, vol. 5. p. 499.
at
relating to the Lord's Supper. 53
at one time, that there was a rubric in the Ro-
mifh ritual prepared for them. But the refor-
mation opening mens eyes upon the fubject, Eo
cius confefied that what had been practifed fo
long was, in truth, an impiety and blafphemy
againft God. The council of Trent did not,
however, correct the abufe ; but the bifhops fince
that time have abolifhed it by degrees, and now
it is only ufed on Good Fridays, and during
ftorms at fea f.
We fee the farther progrefs of fuperftition in
the various methods that were devifed in order
to prevent the wafte or abufe of the confecrated
elements, which increafed after the doctrine of
tranfubftantiation. In the tenth century the
priefts began to put the bread into the mouths
of the communicants, and in the eleventh they
began, in fome churches, to ufe little hofts, like
wafers, made round, white, and very thin; but
this was not till after the condemnation of Be-
renger, and was difliked by many at that time;
and the former cuftom of breaking the bread
into little pieces, and alfo that of giving the
bread fteeped in the wine were ftilJ ufed in many
places, till near the end of the twelfth century,
after which the ufe of thin wafers became uni-
verfal.
At length, in order to leave the leaft room for
\vafte or abufe poflible, the cuftom of communi-
f Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 686.
D 3 eating
54 We Hiftory of Opinions
eating the laity with the bread only was introduc-
ed ; and the doctrine of tranfubftantiation made
this practice much eafier than it could otherwife
have been. For it being now agreed that the
confecrated bread was the whole body of Chrift,
it contained the blood of courfe; and confequent-
ly the wine, which was the blood only, became
fuperfluous.
Thomas Aquinas defended the cuftom of com-
municating with the bread only, but he fays that
it was not obferved in all churches ; and the laity
in many places, in order to prevent the fpilling
of the wine, or as they called it, the blood of
Chrift (againft which they were always mofl par-
ticularly cautioned) fucked it through quills, or
filver pipes, which were fattened to their chalices
for that purpofe. But at length, and efpecially
from the cuftom of giving the bread fteeped in
the wine, came by degrees, the cuftom of com-
munion in one kind only, without any exprefs au-
thority for the purpofe, in almoft all the weftern
churches, till it was eftablifhed by the council of
Conftance, in 1415. But the cuftom of commu-
nicating in both kinds was ftill praclifed in /eve-
ral places, and the pope himfelf is faid at one
time to have adminiftered the wine to the dea-
cons and minifters of the altar, and to other
perfons of eminent piety, whom he thought
worthy of fo great a gift.
The
relating to the Lord's Supper. 55
The council of Trent confirmed that of Con-
ftance, but left it to the pope to grant the ufe
of the cup to thofe whom he ihould think pro-
per. Accordingly Pius the fourth granted the
communion in both kinds to thofe who Ihould
demand it, provided they proferTed to believe
as the church did in other refpects *. The Bo-
hemians alfo were allowed, with the pope's con-
fen t, to make ufe of the cup.
The high reverence for the eucharift, which
was produced by the doctrine of tranfubftan-
tiation, made a change in the poflure of re-
ceiving it. For till the thirteenth century, all
perfons had communicated ftanding, but about
that time the cuftom of receiving it kneeling
came into ufe, and this is continued ever fince
in the church of Rome, and from that in the
church of England. Frequent communion alfo
was now no more to be expected, and indeed
fo early as the tenth century, Ratherius bifhop
of Verona was obliged to order his priefts
to warn believers to come four times a year to
the communion f, and now the catholics are not
required to communicate more than once a year,
and this is generally at Eafter.
There are various other fuperflitious practices re -
fpecling the eucharift in the church of Rome, the
origin of which it is not eafy to trace. There
* Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 679. f Larroche, p. 137^
D 4 are
56 tfhe Hiflory of Opinions
ar fix feveral forts of veftments belonging to the
officiating prieft, and eight or nine to the bifhop,
and there is not one of them but has fome
myfterious fignification, and a correfponding fe-
parate confecration ; not to mention the dif-^
ferent colours of them, and the different oc-
cafions on which they are ufed ; and they are
all fo necefiary, that the fmalleft variation in
the ritual 3 makes the mafles be deemed im-
perfed.
As I obferved before, that two mafles muft
not be celebrated on the fame altar in the courfe
of one day, and even a pried cannot officiate at
any altar when a bilhop has done it before him,
they are now multiplied exceedingly. The maf-
fes alfo are reckoned defective, unlefs the altar
be covered with three cloths, confecrated by the
bilhop, the laft of which muft be longer than
the other; and it muft, after all, be covered with
a fluff of fome particular colour, according to
the feftival on which it is ufed. But the altar
muft be ftripped of all its ornaments on Good
Friday, for reafons which may be feen in Baf-
nage vol. i. p. 48. together with many other
fuperftitious obfervances relating to the eucha-
rift, which I do not think it worth while to
recite.
In the eleventh century there arofe violent
debates between the Greek and Latin churches
on account of the former ufing unleavened bread
in
relating to the Lord's Supper. 57
in the celebration of the eucharift. Such, how-
ever, it is very evident, inuft have been the
bread that our Saviour himlelf made life of in
the inftitution, as there was no leaven to be
had during the whole feafon of pafibverj and
at length the Latin church conformed to this
cuftom.
Confidering the many grofs abufes which
prevailed with refpect to the Lord's fupper,
after the time of Pafchafius, it is no wonder
thar we meet with fome perfons who laid it
afide altogether. This was the cafe with the
Paulicians in the ninth century, who confider-
ed both baptifm and the Lord's fupper as fome-
thing figurative and parabolical*. This was
alfo the cafe with fome perfons in France, in
the beginning of the eleventh century, and they
were condemned at the fynods of Orleans, and
again at Arras in 1025 . Alfo in the twelfth
century, one Tanchelin perfuaded the people
of Antwerp, and other per Tons in Flanders,
that receiving the Lord's fupper was not ne-
ceffary to falvation. But indeed this he might
do, without wifhing them to omit the celebra-
tion of it altogether.
As little can we wonder that unbelievers
fhould take advantage of fuch a doctrine as this,
to treat the chriftian religion with contempt.
* Mofheim, vol. z. p. 178. Flcury.
AverroeSj
58 Sfifo Hijiory of Opinions
Averroes, the great free-thinker of his age, faid
that Judaifm was the religion of children, and Ma-
hometan ifm that of hogs ; but he knew no feel:
fo foolifh and abfurd as that of the chriftians,
\vho adored what they eatf.
SECTION IV.
Of the Recovery of the genuine Cbrijtian Doffrinc
concerning the Lord's Supper.
AS the corruption of this doftrine took place
very early in the chriftian church, and
proceeded farther than any other, fo it was with
great difficulty rectified ; and indeed it is in
general but very imperfectly done to this day,
efpecially in the eftablifhed reformed churches.
The minds of the reformers, in general, were
imprerTed with an idea of fomething peculiarly
myiterious and awful in the nature of the eu-
charift, as well as with a firm perfuafion con-
cerning the divinity of Chrift.
Wickliffe was late in fettling his notion about
the Lord's fupper; fo that, in different parts
of his writings, he contradicts himfelf on this
fubje&J. John Hufs believed the doctrine of
tranfubftantiation and the' real prefence ; but
in anfwer to a perfon who had faid that a
t Memoires pour la vie de Petrarch, vol. 3. p. 760.
J Gilpin's life of him, p. 65,
prieft,
relating to the Lord's Supper. $9
prieft, after his confecration, was the Father of
God, and the creator of Gad's body, he wrote
a treatife to prove that Jefus Chrift is the au-
thor of the tranfubftantiation, and the pried
only the minifter of it*.
It is remarkable, that with refpect to moft of
the reformers from popery in the fixteenth cen-
tury, the article of the eucharift was the laft in
which they gained any clear light, the doctrine
of tranfubftantiation being that which they
parted with with peculiar reluctance, and in
all public difputations their popifh adverfaries
had more advantage with refpect to this than
to any other fubject. They advanced to the
conferences with the utmoft boldnefs when this
was to be the fubject of their difputation, hav-
ing the prejudices of their audience, and in a
great meafure, thole that were their adverfa-
ries too, on their fide,
Though Luther rejected tranfubftantiation,
he neverthelefs retained the doctrine of the
real prejence of the body of Chrift in the eu-
charift ; believing that even the body of Chrift
might be omniprefent, as well as his divinity;
and in the Lutheran Form of concord, which they
made the terms of communion with them, this
article was inferted. Luther, in his attempts
* Lenfant's Hiitory of the Council of Conftance,
yol. i. p. 432.
to
6a The Hiftory of Opinions
to explain his doftrine on the fubjecl: of the
eucharift (which, to diftinguifh it from that of
the papifts, he called confubftantiation) faid that
as in a red hot iron, two diftindt fubftances,
the iron and the fire are united, fo is the body
of Chrift joined with the bread in the eucharift*.
Some Lutherans maintained, that all the pro-
perties of the divine nature were communicated
to the human nature of Chrift, and conlequently
its omniprefence, by the hypoftatical union be-
tween themf. But thefe were more rigid than
Luther himfelf, and it is fuppofed that being
convinced by the reafons of Melanchton, he
would have entertained the opinion of the other
reformers on this fubjecl:, if death had not pre-
vented himj. Carolftadt, Luther's colleague,
maintained that the bread and wine were no
other than figns or fymbols t defigned to excite
in the minds ofchriftians the remembrance of
the fufferings and death of Chrift, and of the
benefits which arife from them .
It is remarkable that Zuinglius was much
more rational than Luther on this fubjecl:. For
he, like Carolftadt, confidered the bread and
wine as no more than figns and fymbols of the
body and blood of Chrift, and that we derive no
benefit from the eucharift, except what arifes
from the recollection of the merits of Chrift ||.
* Mofneim, vol. 3. p 331. f Ib. vol. 4. p. 75.
t Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 331. Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 331.
j| Molheiip, vol. 4. p. 76.
He
relating to the Lord's Supper. 61
He would not even allow the minifters of the
church the power of excluding flagitious mem-
bers from church communion, but left all pu-
nifhment to the civil magiftrate *. Upon the
whole, Zuinglius feems to have thought as ra-
tionally on the fubje<5t of the eucharift as Soci-
nus, who alfo confidered it merely as a comme-
moration of the death of Chrift.
Calvin was much lefs rational. For he fup-
pofed that a certain divine virtue or efficacy was
communicated by Chrift, together with the bread
and winef. And he not only excluded vicious
perfons from communion, but likewife procured
their banifhment from the city .
We have a remarkable example of the confi-
dence of the catholics on the fubjedt of the eucha-
rift in the famous conference of PoifTy, in 1561,
held in the prefence of Charles the ninth, and Ca-
tharine of Medicis, in the court of France, be-
tween a number of popifli and proteftant divines,
of whom the cardinal of Lorraine was the princi-
pal on the fide of the catholics, and Beza on that
of the proteftants. The cardinal, in his fpeech on
this fubjecl:, fays, " We muft always oppofe thefe
" wofds of Chrift, This is my body, to all argu-
" mentations, judgments, and fpeculations of the
" underftanding. They will be fire and thun-
tc der to all confciences. Let us believe the
* Mofheim, vol. 4. p. 1 15. f Ib P- 79- Ib. P- J J 5'
c Lord,
6 2 The Uiftory of Opinions
" Lord> and obey him in all things, and placfesj
" let us not contradict him, becaufe what he teUs
" us feems abfurd, improper, and contrary to our
" fenfes and thought. Let his word overcome
c< every thing, and be unto us, as it is, the moft
" precious thing. This it becomes us to do
" every where, but efpecially in the holy myfte-
" ries. Let us not look only to the things we
" fee, but let us obferve his word, for his word
" is infallible, and cannot be falfe or deceive
" us. On the contrary, our fenfes are eafily
" impofed upon, and deceive us often. Since
" then he has faid this is my body, let us not
* c doubt of it, but believe, obey, and look upon
" him with the eyes of our underftanding, &c *."
On moft other fubjecls the popifh advocates ra-
ther declined the conteft, but in this they thought
they could triumph. This conference ended
as all others in thofe days did, without giving
any fatisfaftion to either party. The cardinal
himfelf would have confented to an article on
this fubject fufficiently agreeable to the Luthe-
ran doctrine, viz. That the fubftance of the bo-
dy and blood of Chrift is in the eucharift; but
his brethren would not admit of it, think-
ing it captious and heretical f.
It is the doctrine both of the church of Eng-
land, and of the eftablifhment in Scotland, that
* Laval's Hiftory of the Reformation in France, vol.
i. p. 536. t Ib. p. 583,
fomc
relating to tie Lord's Supper. 63
fome peculiar divine virtue is communicated with
the euchariftical elements, when they are pro-
perly received, and therefore more preparation
is enjoined for receiving this ordinance, than for
attending public worfhip in general* In the
twenty-fifth article of the church of England it
is faid, that " facraments ordained by Chrift, be
" not only badges or tokens of chriftian mens
" profeffion, but rather they be mens certain
" fure witnefles, and effectual figns of grace,
" and God's good will towards us, by the which
" he does work invifibly in us, and doth not
" only quicken, but alfo ftrengthen and confirm
" our faith in him."
In the AffemUys catechifm, a facrament is de-
fined to be " an holy ordinance, inftituted by
"Chrift; wherein, by fenfible figns, Chrift and
* c the benefits of the new covenant, are repre-
" fented, fealed, and applied to believers." The
Lord's fupper in particular is faid to be " a
" facrament, wherein, by giving bread and wine,
ff according to Chrift's appointment, his death is
" fhewed forth, and the worthy receivers are not
" after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by
" faith, made partakers of his body and blood, with
" all its benefits, to their fpiritual nourifhment,
" and ' growth in grace." Agreeably to thefe
ideas, it is there faid that, " it is required of
" them who would worthily partake of the
<f Lord's lupper, that they examine themfelves,
" of their knowledge to difcern the Lord's bo-
" dv,
^4 fbe Hiftory of Opinions
" dy, of their faith to feed upon him, of their
" repentance, love* and new obedience, left,
" coming unworthily, they eat and drink judg-
" ment to themfelves."
This article of fuperftitiori has great hold on
the minds of Diflenters in general, the Independ-
ants requiring before admiflion to communion,
an account of what they call an experience in
religion, or the evidence of a man's having had
what they deem to be a miraculous 'work of
grace upon his foul j fo that they can have
reafon to think that he is one of the eleff, and
that he will not fall away. And on this ac-
count they have days of preparation for receiv-
ing the Lord's fupper, and they do not confider
any perfon to be properly qualified to adminift-
er either this ordinance, or baptifm, till he has
been regularly ordained, though they have no
objection to his preaching all his life, if he plea-
fes, without that .ceremony, or to attending up-
on his miniftry in all other refpects.
It can alfo be from nothing but the remains
of fuperftition, that the number of communi-
cants, even among the mod liberal of the Dif-
fenters, i$ very fmall, feldom exceeding one '
in ten of the congregation; and very few as .
yet bring their children to communion. On
^this fubject Mr. Pierce wrote a very valuable
tract, which has led many perfons to think fa- \
vourably of the practice, as the only effectual
method
relating to the Lord's Supper. 65
method of fecuring the attendance of chriftians
in general, when they are grown up.
I would only advife the deferring of com-
munion till the children be of a proper age to
be brought to attend other parts of public wor-
fhip, and till they can be made to join in the
celebration with decency, fo as to give no of-
fence to others. This being a part of public
worfhip, there cannot, I think, be any reafon
for making them communicate at an earlier age ;
and to make them do it at any period before
it be properly an act of their own, will equally
fecure their attendance afterwards, which is the
object to be aimed at. It is having had no
particular fixed time for beginning to commu-
nicate, that has been the reafon of its being fo
generally neglected as it has been with us. I flat-
ter myfelf, however, that in due time, we-
ftiall think rationally on this, as* well as on
other fubjects relating to chriftianity, and that
our practice will correfpond with our fenti-
ments.
VOL. II.
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART VII.
Hiftory of Opinions relating to BAPTISM.
INTRODUCTION.
THE rite of baptifm was firft practiled by
John, whofe commiffion from God, was
to baptize unto repentance all who Ihould pro-
fefs themfelves to be his difciples. Our Saviour
himfelf was baptized, and probably all the
apoftles, who, by his directions, baptized others,
even in his life time j and in his giving his com-
miffion to them, he commanded them to baptize,
as well as difciple all nations. Accordingly we
find, in the book of Acts, that all who were
converted to chriftianity, Jews as well as Gen-
tiles, were received into the chriftian church
by baptifm 3 and at that time this rite appears
to have been generally, though probably not
always
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 67
always, performed by dipping the whole body
in water.
As this rite is ufually called the baptijm of
repentance, it was probably intended to repre-
fent the purity of heart and life which was re-
quired of all who profeffed themfelves to be
chriftians; and therefore a declaration of faith
in Chrift, and alfo of repentance, was always
made by thofe who prefented themfelves to be
baptized, at leaft if it was required of them,
Nothing more, therefore, feems to have been
meant by baptifm originally, than a folemn de-
claration of a man's being a chriftian, and of
his refolution to live as becomes one ; and very
far was it from being imagined, that there was
any peculiar virtue in the rite itfelf. It was
confidered as laying a man under obligation
to a virtuous and holy life, as the profeflion
of chriftianity neceflarily does, but not as of
itfelf making any perfon holy.
It is certain, that in very early times, there
is no particular mention made of any perfon
being baptized by fyrinkling only, or a partial
application of water to the bodyj but as on
the other hand, the dipping of the whole body
is not exprefsly prefcribed, and the moral emblem
is the fame, viz. that of channejs or -purity,
produced by the ufe of water, we feem to be
.at liberty to apply the water either to the
whole body, or to a part of it, as circumftan-
E 2 ces
68 fbe Hijlory of
ces fhall make it convenient. The Greek wore!
GrJ certainly does not always imply a dip-
ping of the whole body in water. For it is
applied to that kind of wafhing which the Pha-
rifees required before eating. See Luke xi. 38.
vii. 4. We read in the fame evangelift of the
baptifm not only of cups, pots, and brazen veflels,
but alfo of couches. Alfo, as in the Old Tefta-
ment we often read of Jprinkling with water, as-
Num. xix. 13. 1 8. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. and it is re-
ferred to in the New, Heb. ix. 19. where we read,
And Mofes Jprinkled both the book of the Law, and
all the people ; I think it moft probable, that
when great numbers were baptized at the fame
rime, the water was applied in this manner, the
practice being fufficiently familiar to Jews.
In the three firft centuries it was not un-
common to baptize perfons at the hour of death,
and in this cafe they certainly did not dip the
whole body. Epiphanius fpeaksf of a Jew-
ifti patriarch being baptized by a chriftian, who
was introduced in the difguife of a phyfician,
on account of his being unwilling that his re-
lations fhould know it -, and the water was
brought by a fervant, as if it had been for fome
other purpofe. Whether the flory be true or
falfe, it equally fhews that the minds of chrifti-
ans in that age, were not fhocked at the idea
ef baptizing in a manner which mufl have been
'\ Hasr. xxx. Opera, vol. i. p. 128.
nearly
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 69
nearly as it is now ufed, and that fuch was
deemed a fufncient baptifm. It is faid, indeed,
by fbme*, that the Eunomians made this change
in the rite of baptifm; thinking it indecent
to plunge perfons over-head in water, and ef-
pecially naked ; and that they therefore only
uncovered them as far as the breaft, and then
poured the water upon their heads. But as
the Eunomians were a branch of the Arians, it
is not probable that the catholics, as they were
called, would adopt the cuftom from them.
Befides, if the practice of immerfion had always
been thought abfolutely necefTary to baptifm,
it is not probable that the chriftians of that
age would have ever departed from it. As
fuperftition increafed, we fhall have evidence
enough, that they were more ready to add than
to diminijh, with refpect to every thing that was
of a ceremonial nature.
It has been much debated whether infants
were confidered as proper fubjecls for baptifm
in the primitive church. Now, befides, that
we are not able to trace the origin of infant
baptifm, and therefore are neceffarily car-
ried back into the age of the apoftles for it, a
controverfy arofe pretty early in the chriftian
church, which would naturally have led fome
perfons to deny the antiquity of the practice,
if they could -, and confidering the ftate of opi-
* See Jortm's Remarks, vol. 2. p, 282.
E nions
70 ?he Hijlory of
nions and practices with refpect to things of
a fimilar nature, it is natural to fuppofe that
the primitive chriftians would baptize infants
as well as adult perfons.
With refpect to this fubject, I cannot think that
writers have attended fo much as they ought to
have done to the power of a matter of a family ("the
p atria fotefias) in the Eaft, and particularly have
not confidered how far his own character and
profeffion ufually affected his wife, his children,
and his fervants, and indeed every thing that
belonged to him. When the Ninevites repent-
ed, they made even their cattle to faft, and
wear fackcloth, as well as themfelves ; not that
they could confider their cattle as having any
occafion to repent, but they did it in order to
exprefs, in a ftronger manner, their own humi-
liation and contrition*.
Agreeably to thefe prevailing ideas, though
circumcifion was a religious rite, inftituted as a
fymbol of the covenant between God and the
defcendants of Abraham by Ifaac and Jacob, yet
not only was Ifhmael circumcifed, but alfo all
the flaves of Abraham, who had no intereft
whatever in the promifes made to him. The
application of this rite, therefore, to Ifhmacl,
and to the flaves of Abraham, was no more than
a neceflary appendage to the circumcifion of
Abraham himfelf, as mailer of the family. It
* See Jonah, iii. 7. S.
was
Opinions relating to Eaptifm. 71
was his own aft only, and therefore the con-
fent of Ifhmael or of the (laves cannot be fup~
pofed to have been in the ledft degree necefiary.
From the fame fact we muft alfo conclude that
circumcifion, as fuch, could not exprefs any
intereft that the fubjects of it had in the things
fignified by it ; for then Ifhmael and the flaves
of Abraham would have had an equal intereft in
them.
There can be no doubt but that when the
Jews in future ages made converts to their reli-
gion, they obliged every mailer of a family both
to fubmit to this rite himfelf, and likewife to
fee that all his houfhold, or all that depended
upon him, did the fame. For the fame reafon,
whatever other rite had been enjoined them,
and whatever it had exprefTed, the fame people
would, no doubt, have applied it in the fame
indifcriminate manner, to the matter of the fa-
mily, and to all his houfhold. It was natural
therefore, for the apoftles, and other Jews, on
the inflitution of baptifm, to apply it to infants^
as well as to adults, as a token of the profef-
fion of chriftianity by the mafter of the family
only ; and this they would do without confi*
dering it as a fubftitute for circumcifion, and
fucceeding in the place of it, which it is never
faid to do in the fcriptures, though fome have
been led by fome circumftances of refemblance
in the two rites to imagine that this was the cafe.
According to the general ideas, and the eftab-
E 4 lifhed
72 Me Hijlory of
liflied cuftom of the Jews and other Afiatics, in
fimilar cafes, they would not have thought of
adopting any other practice than that of infant
baptifm, without particular directions.
Accordingly, we find in the fcriptures, that
the jailor, on profefiing his faith in Chrift, was
baptifed, be and all his, Acts xvi. 33 -, and that
Lydia was baptifed and all her houjhold, Ver. 15.
Now it is certain that to a Jew thefe phrafes
would convey the idea of the children, at lead,
if not of the domeftic flaves, having been bap-
tized, as well as the head of the family. A
Roman alfo could not have underftood them to
imply lefs than all who were fubject to what was
called the p atria poteftas.
It alfo appears to me to be very evident from
ccclefiaftical hiftory, and the writings of the
chriftian Fathers, that infant baptifm was the
uniform practice of the primitive chriftians, and
continued to be fo till, along with other fuper-
ftitious notions, they got the idea of the efficacy
of baptifm asfuch to wafh away fins, and con-
fequently of the peculiar fafety of dying pre-
fently after they were baptized, before any frefh
guilt could be contracted. Now an argument
derived from the uniform practice of the primi-
tive chriftians cannot but be allowed to have
confiderable weight, as an evidence of its having
been a practice of the apoftolical times, and
"having the fanction of apoftolical authority.
it
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 73
it is from the evidence of tradition only, de-
duced from the uninterrupted practice of the
chriftian churches, that we now fet apart not
the feventh but the firft day of the week, for
the purpole of public worfhip. There is no
exprefs authority for this in the New Tefla-
in ent.
Tertullian indeed, advifes to defer baptifm
till perfons be of age to be chriftians, left it
fliould bring their fponfors into danger; alledging
alfo *, that their innocent age had no need to
haften to the remiflion of fins. But he no
where infmuates that infant baptifm was not
even the univerfal cuftom of his time, or that
it had been an innovation-, which, in pleading
againft it, he might naturally have been ex-
pected to infift upon. He was only offended
at the too great readinefs with which all per-
fons were admitted to baptifm, when fome of
them were afterwards a difgrace to their pro-,
feffion. He therefore advifes to defer it in all
cafes, and in that of infants alfo.
If we trace the progrefs of this affair, a littlq
farther, we ihall find that when, by the preva-
lence of the liberal fentiments of chriftianity,
more account was made of Jlaves, as being of
the fame fpecies with their mafters, and equally
interested with them in the privileges and pro-
* DC Baptifmo, {"eft. 18. Opera, p. 231.
mifes
74 ?be Hljtory of
mifes of the gofpel, and efpecially when, in con-
fequence of this, they acquired more civil rights,
and were allowed to act for themfelves more
than they had done, they were confidered as
having religious interefts of their own. Indeed,
in the time of the Romans, flaves, being of
different nations, were allowed (agreeably to the
genius of the pagan fyftem) to practife fome of
their peculiar religious rites ; and a great many
of the firft chriftian converts were (laves ; their
matters, at that time, not finding themfelves or
their intereft affected by it, and therefore not
taking any umbrage at it.
It happened, alib, that the power of a father
over his children was much lefs in thefe nor-
thern nations of Europe, than it was in the Eaft,
or among the Romans, with whom, likewife, it
fenfibly declined. On this account, and alfo
becaufe, from the very firft promulgation of
,chriftianity it could not but be manifest, that
perfons were interefted in it, as individuals ', and
not as members of families, or focieties, I make
no doubt, but that, in general, if there were
adult children or flaves in a family, at the time
that the mafter profefled himfelf a chriftian, they
were not baptized without their own confent ;
but no confideration, that can be fuppofed to
have occured either to Jews or Romans, could
have led them to make the fame exception in
favour of infants.
Confidering
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 7$
Confidering how very different are the ideas
and cuftoms of thefe times, and thefe parts of
the world, from thofe which prevailed among
the Jews, when baptifm was inftituted, the pe-
culiar reafons for applying it to infants have, in
a great meafure, ceafed. But ftill, as the prac-
tice is of apoftolical authority, it appears to me,
that no innovation ought to be made in it by
any power whatever j but that we ought rather
to preferve thofe ideas which originally gave a
propriety to it, efpecially when there is nothing
unnatural in them. For my own part, I endea-
vour to adhere to the primitive ideas above-men-
tioned, and therefore I confider the baptizing of
my children, not as directly implying that they
have any intereft in it, or in the things fignified
by it, but as a part of my own profeflion of
chriflianity, and confequently as an obligation
which, as fuch, I am under, to educate my chil-
dren, and alfo to inftruct my fervants, in the
principles of the chriftian religion. In this view
of the ordinance of baptifm, infants are indirect-
ly interefted in it, whether they adhere to the
profeflion of chriftianity, and thereby fecure the
blefiings of it when they become adults, fo as to
think and act for themfelves, or not.
It is pofiible, that, at this time, and in thefe
parts of the world, we may not fee fo much rea-
fon for any pofitive inftitutions; but with the Jews,
and indeed throughout all the Eaft, nothing is
more common thaji to exprefs fentiments and
purpofcs
76 'The Uiflory of
purpofes by appropriated actions. Now wafh-
ing with water fo naturally expreflbs purity of
heart, and is a thing fo agreeable in itfelf, efpe-
ctally in hot countries, that we cannot wonder it
fhould be made choice of to denote the profef-
fion of a religion which brings men under the
ftricteft obligations to repent and reform their
lives ; and particularly that John the Baptift,
whofe immediate bufmefs it was to preach re-
pentance, (hould be directed to enjoin it.
Whether baptifm be of earlier antiquity than
John the Baptift, I have not been able to fatisfy
myfelf. Maimonides, and the earlieft Jewifh
writers, fpeak of folemn baptifm as a neceiTary
attendant on circumcifion, whenever any new
converts were made to their religion, and alfo as
a practice that was immemorial among them.
But whether it was tacitly implied in the origi-
nal inftitution of circumcifion, or whether it had
been adopted afterwards, as naturally exprefiive
of the new converts cleanfing themfelves from
the impurities of their former ftate of heathen-
ifm, it was probably the cuftom of the Jews in
the time of our Saviour.
If this was the cafe, and the Jews did both
circumcife and baptize all that were capable of
it, when families were converted to their relir
gion, there was both the lefs reafon for explain-
ing the nature and the ufe of the rite on the firft
mention of it, or for defcribing more particular-
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 77
ly than has been done, who were the proper fub-
jects of baptifm. And we may rather fuppofe
that our Lord would have exprefsly reftricted the
application of it to adult perfons, if he had in-
tended that the prevailing cuftom fhould be al-
tered. Confequently, when a m after of a family
was converted to chriftianity, he would, of courfe,
be required to baptize all his houfhold, and con-
fider himfelf as bound to inftruct them in the
principles of the religion that he profefTed.
If any controverfy was ever calculated to bring
a fact of this nature to light, it was that of Pela-
gius and Auftin about original fin, in which the
latter maintained that baptifm was necefiary to
walh it away; the fecond fpiritual birth counter-
acting the effects of the firft carnal birth. Now
.the utmoft that Pelagius appears to have replied
on this fubject was, that infant baptifm was not
neceffary. But he did not pretend to fay that
the practice was riot then univerfal, or that it had
not always been fo. Nay Auftin fays*, that it
was agreed between him and his opponent, that
infants ought to be baptized, and that they dif-
fered only about the reafon why they were to be
baptized.
We alfo find no trace of its being thought that
the baptifm of either the mafter of a family, or of his
houfhold, on their firft profeilion of chriftianity ?
* De VerhJJ Apoftoli Ssrmo, 13. Opera, vol. 10. p. 318.
might
7 8 ?he Hijlory of
might fuffice for their defcendants ; and though
the Jews did not repeat that baptifm which ac-
companied circumcifion, yet the circumcifion it-
felf was repeated on every male, fo that if the
chriftians in the primitive times had been influ-
enced by any analogies between the Jewifh re-
ligion and their own, they would rather have
been led to repeat the rite of baptifm with re-
fpect to their children, than to difcontinue it.
Laftly, I am not able to interpret i Cor. vii.
14, The unbelieving hujband is Janffified by the
wife, or elje were the children unclean, but now
they are holy, more naturally than by fuppofmg,
that, as by holy the Jews meant devoted to God>
fo by a child being holy, they meant that it had a
right to the ceremonies of their holy religion.
As therefore a child born of one Jewifh parent
had a right to circumcifion, fo a child born of
one chriftian parent had a right to baptifm. In-,
deed, I do nor fee what other rational meaning
can be afligned to the holinejs of a child.
It is remarkable that the chriftians in Abyfli-
nia repeat their baptifm annually, on the feftival
of Epiphany*.
* Geddej's Church Hillory of Ethiopia, p. 33.
SECTION
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 79
SECT ION I.
Of the Opinions and Practices of the Chriftians re-
lating to Baptifm till the Reformation.
THERE is this Difference with refped
to the corruptions of the rite of bap-
tifm, and thofe of the Lord's fupper, that though
they both began about the fame time, and thofe
relating to baptifm were perhaps the earlier of
the two, and the progrefs of fuperftition in con-
fequence of this corruption, was rather more ra-
pid in the firft century of chriftianity, it was by
no means fo afterwards. For after the time of
thofe who are more properly called Fathers^ we
find no material alteration in the rite of baptifm
itfelf (though the bufmefs of confirmation grew
out of it) whereas we have feen that the molr
material additions were made to the doclrine of
the eucharift fo late as the ninth century.
In the age immediately following that of the
apoftles, we find that baptifm and regeneration
were ufed as fynonymous terms; and whereas,
originally, the pardon of fin was fuppofed to be
the confequence of that reformation of life which
was only promifed at baptifm, it was now imagin-
ed that there was fomething in the rite itfelf,, to
which that grace was annexed 3 and in general it
feems
So The Hijtory of
feems to have been imagined that
virtue was in the water ^ and in no other part of
the ordinance as adminiflered by the prieft.
Tertullian fays, that the holy fpirit was always
given in baptifm ; and yet he exprefsly denied
that it was bellowed by the laying on of hands.
This writer fays farther, that the fpirit of God de-
fcends upon the water of baptifm, like a dove.
Cyprian adds that the adorable Trinity is ineffa-
bly in baptifm. Paulinus fays, that the water
conceives and contains God; Chryfoftom, that
the water ceafes to be what it was before, and is
not fit for drinking, but is proper for fanftifying.
He fays*, that the chriftian baptifm is fuperior
to that of John, in that his was the baptifm of
repentance, but had not the power of 'forgiving fin.
And Auftin adds, that it touches the body and
purifies the heart f.
Chriftians having now got the idea that bap-
tifm wafhed away fin, a field was opened for
much feducing eloquence on the fubjecl:,
which could not fail to confirm and increafe the
prevailing fuperftition. Chryfoftom, fpeaking of
baptifm, fays, " When you are come to the bed
" of the holy fpirit, to the portico of grace, to
" the dreadful and defirable bath, throw your-
* Horn. 24. Opera, vol. i. p. 312.
f Bafnage Hiltoiredes Eg!i$s Reformees, vol. i. p. 138.
felve.s
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 81
** felves upon the ground, as prifoners before a
king*.
Superflitious practices, fimilar to thofe which
followed the corruption of the doctrine of the
eucharift, did not fail to accompany this undue
reverence for the water of baptifm. We find
that in the third century the noviciates returned
from baptifm adorned with crowns, and cloath-
ed with white garments, in token of their victory
over fin and the world. If they fcrupled eating
before they received the eucharift, they made a
greater fcruple of waftiing after baptifm. They
would not do it till the end of the .week j and
immediately after baptifm they wiped the bodies
of the catechumens left a drop of the facramental
water fhould fall to the ground. They went to
church on the Sunday to put off their white gar-
ments, and to receive what was called the ab-
lution.
It was even believed that a miracle was wrought
on the water that was drawn on the day of Epi-
phany, becaufe Jefus Chrift had been baptized
at that time. They carried it with refpect to
their houfes after it had been confecrated; it
was kept with care, and Chryfoftom faid that it
would keep fweet many years f. This water
was even given inftead of the eucharift, to peni-
tents who were not entirely reconciled to the
* Bafnage, vol. i. p. 139. f Horn. 24. Op. vol. i. p. 311.
VOL. II. F church s
82 fbe Hijtory of
church; and Auftin fays, the catechumens among
other means are fanctified by it. " The water,"
he fays, " is holy, though it be not the body of
" Chrift. It is more holy than the other aii-
" ments, becaufe it is a facrament." He fays,
at the fame time, that the catechumens are fanc-
tified by the iign of the crofs, and by the impo-
fition of hands, which had alfo been made appen-
dages of baptifm at that time f. It appears by
a pafiage in Auftin, that the African chriftians
ufually called baptifm falvation, and the eucha-
rift life, preferring the former to the latter.
When once it was imagined that a perfon
newly baptized was cleanfed from all fin, it is no
wonder that many perfons deferred this fandify-
ing rite as long as poffible, even till they ap-
prehended that they were at the point of death.
We find cafes of this kind at the beginning of
the third century. Conftantine the Great, was
not baptized till he was at the laft gafp, and in
this he was followed by his fon Conftantius ; and
two of his other fons Conftantine and Conftans,
were killed before they were baptized.
When baptifm was adminiftered to perfons
near the point of death, the patient muft gene-
rally have been in bed, and confequently the cere-
mony could not have been performed by immerficn- y
and it appears in the hiftory of Novatian that this
f De Peccatorum Meritis. lib. 4, cap. 26. Opera, vol.
7. p. 711.
was
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 83
was actually the cafe. On thefe occafions, the
unftion, and other ceremonies which had been
added to the fimple rite of baptifm, were omit-
ted j but they were performed afterwards, if the
fick perfon recovered. We even find that, ra-
ther than omit baptifm entirely, it was ufual to
baptize perfons who were actually dead. Epi-
phanius, Chryfoilom, and Theodorit, obferve,
that this cuftom prevailed in fome places in
their timef.
After the age of Juftin Martyr we find many
additions made to the rite of baptifm. It was
then the cuftom to give the perfon baptized milk
and honey, and to abftain from wafhing all the
remainder of the day, for which Tertullian fays
they had no authority from the fcripture, but on-
ly from tradition. They alfo added unElion and
the impofttion of hands j the unction, probably, re-
ferring, in a fymbolical manner, to their prepa-
ration for a fpiritual combat; and in apply-
ing the oil the prieil touched the head or the
forehead in the form of a crofs. Tertullian is
the firft who mentions the figning with the
fign of the crofsy but only as ufed in private,
and not in public worfhip; and he particular-
ly defcribes the cuftom of baptizing without
mentioning it. Indeed, it .does not appear to
have been ufed in baptifm till the latter end of the
fourth or fifth century j but then we find great
virtue afcribed to it. Lactantius, who lived in
f Bafnage, vol. i. p. 137.
2 the
84 $be Hijlory of
the beginning of the fourth century, fays, the de-
vil cannot approach thole who have the heaven-
ly mark of the crofs upon them, as an impreg-
nable fortrefs to defend them*; but he does not
fay it was ufed in baptifm.
After the council of Nice chriftians added to bap-
tifm the ceremonies of exorcifm, and adjurations,
to make evil fpirits depart from the perfons to be
baptized. They made feveral fignings with the
crofs, they ufed to light candles, they gave ialt to
the baptized perfon to tafte, and the prieft
touched his mouth and ears with fpittle, and alfo
blew and fpit upon his face. At that time alfo
baptized perfons were made to wear white gar-
ments till the Sunday following as was mention-
ed above. They had alfo various other ceremo-
nies, fome of which are now abolifhed, though
others of them remain in the church of Rome to
this day. Blowing in the face, putting fait in the
mouth, giving milk and honey, and alfo kitting the
baptized perfons, and making them abftain for fome
time from wine, are now no longer in ufe. The
reafon of thefe ceremonies may be pretty eafily
conceived. I fhall, therefore, only obferve, that
the fait was ufed as a fymbol of purity and wif-
dom j and that exorcifm took its rife from the
Platonic notion that evil daemons hovered over
human fouls, feducing them to fin.
* Inft lib. 4. cap. 27. p. 439.
In
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 85
In a decree of the council of Laodicea, held in
the year 364, mention is made of two anoint-
ings, one with fimple oil before baptifm, and
the other with ointment (/*$) after baptifm;
and it is there exprefTed, that the firft unction
was for the participation of the holy fpirit, that
the water was a fymbol of death, and that the
ointment, which was applied with the fign of the
crofs, was for the feal of the covenant*. This
latter unction we fhall find was afterwards referv-
ed for the bifhops, and became the fubject of a
diftinct facramenr in the church of Rome, called
Confirmation.
Originally the bifhop only, or the priefls by
his permiflion, adminiitered baptifm ; as, with
his leave, they alfo performed any other of
of his functions j but it appears from Tertullian
that, in his time, laymen had, in fome cafes,
the power of baptizing. This baptifm, how-r
ever, we may be allured, required the confir-
mation of the bifhop, and would not be allowed
but in cafe of necefiity, as at the feeming ap-
proach of death, &c. At a fynod at Elvira, in
306, it was allowed that a layman, provided
he had not been married a fecond time, might
baptize catechumens in cafe of neceffityj but
it was ordered that, if they furvived, they
fhould be brought to the bifhop for the impo-
fition of hands. Afterwards, when the bounds
* Sueur, A. D. 364^
F 3 of
86 We Hiftory of
of the church were much enlarged, the bufmefs
of baptizing was left almoft entirely to the
priefts, or the country bilhops, and the biihops
of great fees only confirmed afterwards.
Great doubts were railed in early times about
the validity of baptifm as adminiftered by he-
retics. Tertullian, before he became a Mon-
tanift, wrote a treatife to prove that heretics,
not having the fame God, or the fame Chrift,
with the orthodox, their baptifm was not valid.
Cyprian called a fynod at Carthage, in which it
was determined, that no baptifm was valid out
of the catholic church, and therefore, that thofe
who had been heretics fhould be re-baptized.
But Stephen, the bifliop of Rome, did not ap-
prove of this decifion, and by degrees his opi-
nion, which continued to be that of the church
of Rome, became every where prevalent. In-
deed, when fo much ftrefs was laid on bap-
tifm itfelf, it would have introduced endlefs
anxiety if much doubt had remained about the
power of administering it.
Having given this account of the corruption
of the doctrine of baptifm, and the principal
abufes and fuperftitions with refpeft to the prac-
tice of it, I fhall go over what farther relates
to the fubject according to the order of admi-
niftration.
When
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 87
When chriftians, from a fondnefs for the rites
and ceremonies of paganifm, and a defire to
engage the refpect of their heathen acquaintance
for the religion which they had embraced, began
to adopt fome of the maxims and rites of their
old religion, they feem to have been more parti-
cularly ftruck with what related to the myfteries,
or the more fecret rites of the pagan religion,
to which only few perfons were admitted, and
thofe under a folemn oath of fecrecy. In con-
fequence of this difpofition, both the pofitive
inftitutions of chriftianity, Baptifm and the
Lord's fupper, were converted into myfteries,
chriftians affecting great fecrecy with refpedt to
the mode of adminiftering them, and no per-
fon could then be admitted to attend the whole
of the public worfhip before he was baptized - s
but all who were clafled with the Catechumens
were difmiffed before the celebration of the
eucharift, which clofed the fervice.
Farther, thofe who were admitted to the heathen
myfteries had certain Jigns, or fymbols, delivered
to them, by which they might know each
other, fo that by declaring them they might
be admitted into any temple, and to the fecret
worfnip and rites of that God whofe fymbols
they had received. In imitation of this, it oc-
curred to the chriftians to make a fimilar ufe of
the Apoftles creed, or that fhort declaration of
faith which it had been ufual to require of per-
fons before they were baptized. This creed,
F 4 there-
8 IrJd Eijlory of
therefore, (which does not appear to have been
publifhed, and indeed was altered from time to
time, as particular herefies arofe in the church,)
they now began to call a fymbol, affecting to
conceal it from the pagans, and not revealing
it even to the catechumens themfelves, except
juft before they were baptized ; and then it was
delivered to them as a fymbol by which they
were to know one another.
Cyprian fays, that the Jacrament of faith, that
is the creed, was not to be prophaned or di-
vulged, for which he cites two texts, the one
Proverbs xxiii. 9, Speak not In the ears of a fool,
for he will dejpife the wifdom of thy word ; and
the other, Matthew vii. 6. Give not that which
is holy unto the dogs, neither caft ye your pearls
before Jwine, &c. Ambrofe moft pathetically
exhorts to the utmoft vigilance, to conceal the
chriftian myfteries, and in particular to be very
careful not by incautioufnefs to reveal the fe-
crets of the creed, or the Lord's prayer. This
laft appears very extraordinary, as the Lord's
prayer is contained in the gofpels, where it
might be feen by any perfon *.
In the fecond century baptifm was performed
publicly only twice in the year, viz. on Eafter
and Whit-funday. In the fame age Jponfors,
or Godfathers, were introduced to anfwer for
* Hiftory of the Apoftles Creed, p. 20.
adult
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 89
adult perfons, though they were afterwards ad-
mitted in the baptifm of infants f. This, Mr.
Daille fays, was not done till the fourth cen-
tury.
It fhould feem, from the Acls of the apoftles,
that it was fufficient to the ceremony of baptifm,
to fay / baptize into the name of Jefus Chrift.
But we foon find that the form of words ufed,
Matthew xxviii. 19. was ftrictly adhered to, at
lead in the third century, viz. / baptize thee in
the name of the Father^ the Son, and the Holy
Ghoft. It appears, however, that at the time
of J-jftin Martyr, they did not always confine
themfelves to thefe particular words, but fome-
times added others by way of explanation. For
though thefe precife words occur in one account
of baptifm by this writer Jj in another he fpeaks
of baptifm, " Into the name of Jefus Chrift, who
" was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and into the
<f name of the holy Spirit, who foretold by the
" holy prophets every thing relating to Chrift ||."
But perhaps this explanation might be only in-
tended for the ufe of his readers, and not given
by him, as a form of words that was ufed in
the adminiftration of baptifm itfelf.
We find very little mention made of bap-
tifm, from the time of thofe who were gene-
f Mofheim, vol. i. p. 172. J Edit. Thi'rlby, p. 89,
|| P. 91.
rally
90 The Hi/lory of
rally called Fathers, that is, from the age of
Auftin, to the reformation. Indeed I have
hardly met with any thing on the fubjefl worth
reciting.
It foon became a maxim, that as baptifm
was a facrament that was to be uied only once,
it was exceedingly wrong to rebaptize any per-
fon 3 and it is pleafant to obferve the precaution
that pope Boniface hit upon to prevent this
in dubious cafes. In his ftatutes, or inftruc-
tions he fays, " They whofe baptifm is dubious,
" ought without fcruple to be baptized, with
fc this proteftation, / do not rebaptize tbee, but
<c if thou art not baptized, I baptize thee, &c."
This is the firft example that I have found
of conditional baptifm*.
From the earlieft account of the ordinance,
we find that children received the Lord's fup-
per, and that baptifm always preceded com-
munion. In a book of divine offices, written
as fome think in the eleventh century, it is or-
dained that care be taken that young children
receive no food after baptifm, and that they
do not even give them fuck without neceffity,
till after they have participated of the body of
Chriftf.
* Jortin's Remarks, vol. 4. p. 462.
f Larroche, p. 129.
SECTION
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 91
SECTION II.
The State of Opinions concerning Baptifm fmce
the Reformation.
IT is remarkable that though the Waldenfes
always pra&ifed infant baptifm*, many of
the Albigenfes, if not all of them, held that
baptifm ought to be confined to adults. This
was the opinion of the Petrobruffians , and alfo
of Berengerf.
Wickliffe thought baptifm to be neceflary to
falvation. " The prieft," he fays, " in bap-
" tifm adminifters only the token or fign, but
<c God, who is the prieft and bifhop of our
<c fouls, adminifters the fpiritual gracej." And
Luther not only retained the rite of baptifm,
but even die ceremony of exorcifm. At leaft,
this was retained in the greateft part of the
Lutheran churches Jj.
It appeared, however, prefently after the re-
formation by Luther, that great numbers had
been well prepared to follow him, and even
to go farther than he did. Very many had
been fo much fcandalized with the abufes of
baptifm, and the Lord's fupper efpecially, as
* Leger's Hiftoire, p. 65. Bafnage, vol. 2. p. 140.
4- Fleury, A. D. 1050. J Gilpin's Life of him, p. 64.
|| Moiheim, vol. 4. p. 58.
to
52 . tfbe Hiftory of
to reject them, either in whole, or in part.
baptifm of Jnfants was very generally thought
to be irrational, and therefore it was adminiftered
only to adults. Moft of thofe who rejected the
doctrine of the divinity of Chrift, were of this
perfuafion, as was Socinus himfelf. Indeed, he
and fome otherSj thought that the rite of bap-
tifm was only to be ufed when perfons were
converted to chriflianity from fome other reli-
gion, and was not to be applied to any who
were born of chriftian parents. It does not
appear, however, that thofe who held this opi-
nion ever formed a feparate feet, or that their
numbers were confiderable ; but thofe who re-
jected infant baptifm were then, and flill are,
very numerous.
It happened that many of thofe who held
this opinion entertained fome very wild notions,
efpecially that of the reign of Chrift, or of the
faints, upon earth, independent of any fecular
power ; and they made an attempt to fet up a mo-
narchy of this kind at Munfter in Weftphalia,
which they feized upon for that purpofe in the
year 1534. But an end was foon put to this
delufion, and an odium very unjuftly remained
upon all thofe who retained nothing but their
doctrine concerning baptifm. At prefent, thofe
who are called Baptifts are as peaceable as any
other chriftians. In Holland they are called
Mennonitesy from Menno, a very confiderable
perfon among them; and thefe have adopted
the
Opinions relating to Baptijm. 93
the pacific principles of the Quakers in Eng-
land. In this country the Baptifts are very
numerous. The greateft part of them are called
particular Baptifts, from their holding the doc-
trine of particular election j but there are a few
ibcieties of them who are called general Baptifts>
from their holding the doctrine of general re-
demption.
The church of England retains the baptifm
of infants, and alfo the ufe of the fign of the
crofs, and of godfathers. It alfo admits of
baptifm by women, a cuftom derived from the
opinion of the indifpenfable neceffity of baptifm
to falvation. " We do not," fays bifhop Bur-
net, <c annul this cuftom, though we condemn
" it." And indeed it is the language of the
public forms of the church of England, that
baptifm is neceffary to falvation. In the thirty
nine articles we find the doclrine of an invi-
fible work of God accompanying baptifm, a
well as the Lord's fupper ; and in the church
catechifm it is faid that by baptifm a perfon
becomes a child of Gcd, and an inheritor of ths
kingdom of heaven.
The do&rine of the church of Scotland is of
a piece with this. For baptifm is faid, in their
confeflion of faith, to be " a fign or feal of the
^ covenant of grace, of perfons ingrafting
cc into Chrift, of regeneration, of rernifiion of
<c fins, cc." But the efficacy of baptifm is there
faid
94 The Eiftory of
faid not to be <c tied to that moment of time
tc wherein it is adminiftered j yet notwithftand-
" ing by the right ufe of this ordinance, the
" grace promifed is not only offered, but re-
" ally exhibited and conferred, by the Holy
(C Ghoft, to fuch, whether of age or infants, as
" that grace belongs to, according to the coun-
" cil of God's own will, in his appointed time."
The DiiTenters of the Calviniftic perfuafion in
England, may pofiibly retain the opinion of
fome fpiritual grace accompanying baptifm,
though I rather think it is not at prefent held
by them. Nothing, however, of it is retained
by thofe who are called rational Di/fenters.
They confider the baptifm of adult perfons as
the mode of taking upon them the chriftian
profefiion ; and that when it is applied to in-
fants, an obligation is acknowledged by the
parents to educate their children in the prin-
ciples of the chriftian religion. Many of them
lay fo little ftrefs upon it, that I imagine they
would make no great difficulty of deferring it
to adult age, or indeed of omitting it intirely
in chriftian families; but they do not think it
of importance enough to make any new fec~l in
the chriftian church on account of it or to aft
otherwife than their anceftors have done before
them, in a matter of fo great indifference. The
Quakers make no ufe either of this rite, or of
the Lord's fupper.
AN
A N
APPENDIX
T O
PARTS VI. AND VII.
CONTAINING,
?be Hiftory of the other Sacraments befides Bap-
tifm and the Lord's Supper.
AFTER it was imagined that there was
fome divine virtue accompanying the ad-
miniftration of baptifm and the Lord's fupper,
and thefe two rites had obtained the name of fa-
craments, which only prieft? regularly ordained
had the power of adminiftering with effecl: ; other
things, by degrees, obtained the fanie name;
fome fpiritual grace being fuppofed to accom-
pany them, and this contributed to extend the
power and enlarge the province of the prieft-
hood. At length Jive other ceremonies, befides
baptifm and the Lord's fupper, came to be rank-
ed in the fame clafs with them.
Peter Lombard, in the twelfth century, is the
firft who mentions Jeven facraments. It is
fuppofed that from the expreflion of \hz feven jpi-
rits of God, in the book of the Revelations, there
came to be a notion of the feven-fold operation
of the fpirit. But whether this was the true ori-
gin
96 The Hi/lory of
gin of /even facraments, in preference to any
Other number, or whether it was ufed as an ar-
gument in fupport of an opinion already formed,
I have not found; nor indeed is the matter of
importance enough to make much enquiry about
it. Eugenius is the firft pope who mentions
thefe feven facraments, in his inflruSAons to the
Armenians, which is publilhed along with the
decrees of the council of Florence ; and the whole
doctrine concerning them was finally fettled by
the council of Trent*.
The five additional facraments are, confirma-
tion , -penance, holy orders, matrimony, and ex-
treme unElion. It is, however, with great diffi-
culty that the papifts bring all thefe things
within the defcription of njacrament ; as they fay
that, in order to conRitute one, there muft be
fome matter, correfponding to water in baptifm,
and -bread and wine in the Lord's flipper (which
were a pattern for the reft) and alfo a Jet form
cf words, correfponding to / baptize tbce in the
name of the Father, &c. for baptifm, and to
the words, This is my body, for the Lord's fupper.
The inward and Spiritual grace was fome di-
vine influence which they fuppofed to follow the
due application of this matter of the facraments,
and the proper words accompanying the admini-
ftration of them.
* Burnet on the Articles, p. 335.
I (hall
Opinions relating to Baptifm. 97
I fhall give a general account of all thefe dif-
ferent facraments, though the fubjects of fome
of them will be treated more 'fully in other
places of this work.
From the Jecond unftion> which was originally
an appendage to the rite of baptifm, another dif-
tinct facrament was made, and called confirmation.
The church of Rome, in the time of pope
Sylvefter, had two unctions of chrifm (a com-
pofition of olive oil, and. balm, opobalfamum)
one on the breaft, by the prieft, and the other
on the forehead by the bifhop. But, from the
time of Gregory the third, the priefls had been
allowed to anoint on the forehead, and Honore
of Autun, a writer of the twelfth century, in-
forms us, that after the prieft had anointed
the head, it was covered with a mitre, which
.was worn eight days, at the end of which it was
taken off, and then the bifhop anointed the fore-
head with the chrifm. From this time the
church of Rome, feeing that the unction of
the bifhop was different from that of the prieft,
and performed at a different time, made of it a
facrament diftinct from baptifm, and called it
confirmation, which can only be adminiftered by
the biihop. The firft exprefs inftitution of th!s
facrament is in the decree of pope Eugenius,
in I439> in which he fays, " the fecond facra-
" ment is confirmation, the matter of which is
" chrifm blefTed by the bifhop, and though the
VOL. II. -G prieft
98 The IUJtory of
" priefl may give the other unction, the bifliop
" only can confer this *.
'In adifiiniftering confirmation in the church of
Rome, the bifhop applies the chrifm to the
forehead, pronouncing thefe words, " I fign
" thee with the lign of the crofs, and confirm
" thee with the anointing of falvation, in the
<c name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
" the Holy Ghoft.
In the church of England the rite of confir-
mation is preferved, though it is not held to be
a facrament. Alfo the ufe of chrifm is omitted,
but the ceremony can only be performed by the
bifhop, who puts his hand upon the head of the
perfons to be confirmed, and prays for the in-
fluence of the Holy Spirit upon them, faying,
" We have now laid on our hands to certify
<c them by this fign, of thy favour, and gra-
<f cious goodnefs."
This is evidently a remainder of the popifh.
facrament of confirmation. But there is no more
authority for this remainder, than for any thing
that is omitted in the ceremony. Bifhop Burnet,
and other advocates for the doctrine and difci-
pline of the church of England, alledge in fa-
vour of it the conduct of the apoftles, who
put their hands upon the heads of thofe who
Sueur, A. D. 416. Burnet on the articles, p. 336.
had
Opinions relating to Baptijm. 99
had been converted and baptized, and thereby
imparted to them the gift of the holy fpirit, or
a power of working miracles. But, befides that
no fuch power is now pretended to be conferred,
this impofition of hands was the province of the
apoftles only, and riot that of a bifhop. This
cuftom of referving the impofition of hands af-
ter baptifm, to be performed by the bifhop alone,
feems to have been begun in the time of Jerom,
but he himfelf did not think that the holy fpirit
was given by the impofition of the hands of the
bifhop only; and he fays, they are not to be la-
mented, who, being baptized by prefbyters or
deacons, in little villages, and caftles, have died
before they were vifited by bifhops. Hilary
fays that prefbyters confirmed in Egypt, if the
bifhop was not prefent. The fame alfo was de-
termined by the council of Orange *.
The origin of penance, which is a fecond ad-
ditional facrament now enjoined by the church
of Rome, will be examined in its proper place.
It is now confidered as a facrament, in confe-
quence of the confejjion and \hzpenance that is en-
joined, being together the matter of the facra-
ment ; and the words of the prieft, / abfolve tbee
from thy fins, in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghoft, is the form of it.
After this, the fpiritual grace, or the remiflion of
* Picrce's Vindication, p. 474.
G 2 fins,
ioo I'he Hiftory of
fins, is held to be conferred. The mention of
thefe things at this day, is a fufficient expofmg
of them.
The church of England retains fomething
of rhis facrament alfo, though without the
name of one. For, in the rules of confeffing
the fick, the prieft is directed in certain cafes
to pronounce an abfolution ; and in the daily
prayers of the church, after the confeflion, which
begins the fervice, fomething like abfolution is
pronounced. In this the compilers of the
Englifli liturgy followed the method of the
popifh fervice; and at the time of the refor-
mation it might ferve to make the more igno-
rant of the people believe that, notwithftanding
a change in other refpecls, the fame things inju.1-
flance were to be had in both the communions.
The next Tacrament is holy orders, the matter
of which is the delivery of the veffels, ufed in the
celebration of the eucharift, from the bifliop to
the prieft, giving him a power cc to offer facri-
ff fices to God, and to celebrate maffes for the
" living and the dead," adding, as in all the other
facraments in the name of the Father^ and of the
Son y and of the Holy Ghoft. This ceremony
was not ufed till after the twelfth century, but
then this facrament of Orders was held to be a
thing diftincl: from the office of Priefthood in ge-
neral, which is faid to be conferred by the bifhop
pronouncing thefe words, Receive the Holy Ghoft.
Whoje
Opinions relating to Baptifm. i-oi
Whofe fins ye remit, they are remitted, and whofe
fins ye retain, they are retained. The impofiticxn
of hands by the bifhops and prefbyters is alfo
kept up among the catholics -, but it .is not per-
formed, as formerly, during the pronouncing of
any prayer, fo that it is become a mere dumb
(hew. The prayer which accompanied the ce-
remony of impofition of hands, is, indeed, ftill
ufed, but not during the impofition.
In confequence of this new facrament, the ca-
tholics now fay, that their priefts have two kinds
of power, viz. that of confccrating, and that of
abfolvmg ; that they are ordained to the one by
the laying on of the hands of the bifhop, when
he fays, Receive ye the Holy Ghofl, and to the
other by the delivery of the veflels ; and they
make the bifhop and the prieft laying on their
hands jointly, to be only their declaring, by way
of fuffrage, that fuch a perfon ought to be or-
dained *.
The third facrament peculiar to the church of
Rome, is matrimony, the inward conjent of the par-
ties being fuppofed to be the matter of it, and
the form is, the prieft folemnly declaring them to
be man and wife, in the name of the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghoft. But if the inward con-
fent of the parties be necefiary to marriage, as a
facrament, there muft be great uncertainty in it.
* Burnet on the Articles, p. 354, &c.
G 3 One
102. he Hiftory of
One confiderable inconvenience that refulted
from making marriage a facrament was, that the
bond was held to be indifToluble. In confe-
quence of this, a fentence of divorce in the ec-
clefiaflical court, is only what is called with us,
a divorce a menja et thoro, but does not im-
power the parties to marry again, which is a
kind of divorce unknown in any age or country
before. The innocent perfon, however, was al-
lowed to marry again by the popes Gregory and
Zachary, and even in a fynod held at Rome in
the tenth century. The doctrine of the abfolute
indiflblubility of marriage, even for adultery, was
not finally fettled till the council of Trent y.
The laft additional facrament of the church of
Rome, is extreme unffion, fo called from its being
ufed only on the near approach of death. The
form of this facrament, they fay, is the applica-
tion of olive oil, blefied by the bifhop, to all the
five fenfes, ufmg thefe words, f< By this facred
<f unction may God grant thee his mercy, in
'" whatsoever thou haft offended, by fight, hear-
" ing, fmelling, tafting, and touching;" the
prieft applying the oil to each of the fenfes, as
he pronounces the name of it.
The firft mention that is made of this ceremo-
ny is by pope Innocent. Sacred oil, indeed, was
held in great veneration fo early as the fourth
f Burnet on the Articles, p. 360.
century,
Opinions relating to Eaptifm. 103
century, and efteemed as an univerfal remedy,
for which purpofe it was either prepared and dif-
penfed by priefts and monks, or was taken from
the lamps which were kept burning before the
relics of the martyrs. But in none of the
lives of the faints before the ninth century, is
there any mention made of their receiving ex-
treme unction, though their deaths are fometimes
particularly related, and their receiving the eu-
charift is often mentioned. But from the fe-
venth century to the twelfth, they began to ufe
this anointing of the fick, and a peculiar office
was made for it ; but the prayer that was ufed in
it plainly (hews that it was with a view to their
recovery, for which purpofe it is frill ufed in
the Greek church; and no doubt they fupport
the credit of it with many reports, of which
fome may be true, of perlbns who had recovered
upon ufmg it.
But becaufe it failed fo often, that the credit
of this rite was in danger of fuffering much in
the efteem of the world, they began, in the tenth
century, to fay that it did good to the/0#/, even
when the body was not the better for it, and
then they applied it to the feveral parts of the
body, after having originally applied it to the
difeafed parts only. In this manner was the rite
performed in the eleventh century.. In the
twelfth the prayers that had been made before for
the foul of the fick perfon, though only as a part
of the office (the pardon of fin being fuppofed to
04 be
IO4 Vbe Hiftory of, &c.
be preparatory to their recovery) came to be con-
fidered as the moft eflential part of it. After
this, the fchoolmen brought it into fhape, and
then it was decreed to be a facrament by pope
Eugenius ; and it was finally eftablifhed at the
council of Trent*.
Notwithftanding the novelty, and apparent
abfurdity of thefe five additional iacraments,
Wickliffe acknowledged all the feven ; defining
a facrament to be a vifible token of Jomething in-
vifible. He even faw nothing unfcriptural in
extreme unftionf.
It is much to be wifhed, that as thefe five
additional facraments are now univerfally aban-
doned in all the reformed churches, chriftians
would rectify their notions concerning the re-
maining two, and not confider them, as they
did in the times of popifli darknefs, to be outward
and vifible figns of inward andjpiritual grace. For
that will always encourage the laying an im-
proper ftrefs upon them, to the undervaluing
of that good difpofition of mind, and thofe good
works, which alone can recommend us to the
favour of God, and to which only his efpecial
grace and favour is annexed.
* Burnet on the Articles p. 365.
f Gilpin's Life of him, p. 66.
PART
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
o F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART VIII.
A Hiftory of the Changes that have been made iti
the Method of conducing PUBLIC WORSHIP.
INTRODUCTION.
THE fubjecl: of this part of my work is
no very important article in the hiftory
of the corruptions of chriftianity, becaufe mere
forms are but of little confequence in religion,
except when they are put in the place of fome-
thing more fubftantial > and indeed too much
of this will be found to have been the cafe in
this bufmefs. It will, however, be a matter of
curiofity to many perfons, to fee what changes
have been made from time to time in the forms
of chriftian worfhip; and therefore I did not
omit to note fuch particulars concerning it,
as
ic6 Hiftory of the Changes in the
as happened to fall in my way, but without
giving myfelf much trouble to look for them.
It will feem, that in general, the fame fpi-
rit dictated thefe variations, that led to other
things of more importance to the effentials of
religion. I fnall begin with a few obfervations
on the buildings in which chriftian aflfemblies
were held, their appurtenances, &c.
SECTION I.
Of Churches, and feme Things belonging to
them.
AT firft chriftians could have no places to
aflfemble in but large rooms in private
houfes ; and when they began to erect buildings
for the purpofe, it is moft probable they were
fuch as the Jews made ufe of for their fyna-
gogues ; their manner of conducting public
worlhip, as well as their regulations for the go-
vernment of churches, being copied from the
Jews; and as far as appears nothing more fim-
ple, or more proper, could have been adopted
for the purpofe.
Of the buildings themfelves we know but lit-
tle. The names that were originally given to
thefe places of affembly, were the fame as thofeof
the Jewifh fynagogues, viz. uJ.^* or wptw^ai that
is
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 107
is, houfes of prayer ; but afterwards they were
called x.^axa, and in Latin dominica, whence
came the German word Thorn, and the Flemifh
and Englifli words Church and Kirk. Thefe
buildings were not called temples till the time of
Conftantine. But about that time, in imita-
tion of the pagans, they called the magnificent
buildings which were then erected for the pur-
pofe of public worfhip by that name. And
thefe being generally made to enclofe the tombs
of martyrs, thefe tombs were called altars y
on account of their bearing fome refemblance
to the altars of the heathen temples. And from
this came the cuftom, at the end of the fourth
century, of putting bones and other relics of
martyrs in all thofe places which were ufed for
the celebration of the Lord's fupper, inftead of
the wooden tables, which were at firft ufed for that
purpofe*.
When Conftantine ordered the chriftian
churches to be rebuilt ; it was done with great
pomp ; and before they were ufed for the pur-
pofe of public worfhip, fome ceremony of con-
Jecration, began to be ufed. But at firft no-
thing more was done for that purpofe, befides
finging of pfalms, preaching, and receiving the
Lord's fupper, that is, nothing more, in fact,
than going through the ufual forms of public
worfhip, but probably with greater folemnity
* Sueur A. D. 211,
and
io8 Hijiory of the Changes in the
and devotion, followed by feafting, and other
marks of feftivity ; and it foon became the
cuftom to repeat this feftivity on the fame day
annually.
In 538, it appears, that the dedications of
churches were fometimes made by fprinkling
of holy water. For in that year pope Vigilius
fays that this ceremony was not neceffary; it
being fufficient for the confecration of churches
to celebrate the eucharifl, and depofit relics in
them. But in 60 1, pope Gregory exprefsly or-
dered that holy water Ihould be added. In
816, a fynod was held at Canterbury, in which,
befides thefe things, it was ordered that the
images of the faints, whofe names the churches
bore, fhould be painted upon the wall. From
the year 1150 they added the fignature of the
crofs, and other figures on the pavement and
walls ; and afterwards they traced on the pave-
ment the Greek and Latin alphabet, in the
form of a crofs ; and laftly they added the li-
tany of the virgin Mary and other faints f.
That fome ceremony, or fome peculiar fo-
lemnity, fhould be ufed on the firft making
ufe of any building deftined for the purpofe of
public worfhip, is natural, and certainly not im-
proper, provided nothing more be implied in
itj befides folemnly fetting it apart for that par-
f Sueur A. D. 335.
ticular
Method of conducing Public Wtorjhip. 109
ticular and valuable purpofe ; and we find that
folemn confecrations were made of the temple of
Jerufalem, and of every thing belonging to the
Jewifh religion. But the ceremonies above men-
tioned, fhew that,fome peculiar virtue was afcrib-
cd to them, and that it was fuppoled they impart-
ed a character of peculiar fanctity to the building
itfelf. And that the bells in them (which ferved
no other purpofe originally, befides that of call-
ing the people together) ihould have any form
of confecration in churches is a little extraordi-
nary. This, however, was done with much fo-
lemnity by John the thirteenth in 968.
There having been caft at that time a larger
bell than had ever been made before for the
church of Lateran ac Rome, this pope fprink-
led it with holy water, Cf blefled it, and confe-
<{ crated it to God with holy ceremonies," from
which is come the cuftom of confecrating all
bells ufed in churches, and which the common
people call baptizing them. Upon this occa-
fion they pray that when the bell fhall found
they may be delivered from the ambufhes of
their enemies, from apparitions, tempefts, thun-
der, wounds, and every evil fpirit. During
the fervice, which is a very long one, they
make many afperfions of holy water, and feve-
ral unctions on the bells, both within and with-
out ; and at each unction they pray that the
bell may be " fanclified and confecrated, in the
" name of the Father, of the Son,, and of the
Holy
no Hiftcry of tbe Changes in the
{C Holy Spirit, to the honour of Emanuel, and
<c under the patronage of fuch or fuch a
faint f.
The idea of this ceremony, as almoft of every
other that was ufed by chriftians, was adopted-
from the pagan ritual, in which there was a fo-
lemn confecration of every inflrument ufed in
their worfhip. And indeed there were con-
fecrations for the fame purpofe of every thing
that was made ufe of in the worfhip of the
Jews. But nothing in the heathen ritual can
equal the abfurdity of this confecration of bells.
For befides what is obferved before, in order
to make this ceremony a more proper laptijm,
(a name that was firft moft probably given to it
by the vulgar, from the fprinkling of the bell
with holy water) godfathers and godmothers
were appointed on this occafion, to anfwer
queftions inftead of the bell ; and they pray
that God would give the bell his Holy Spi-
rit, that it may be fanctified for the purpofes
above mentioned, and efpecially for driving away
witches, and evil fpirits, and preventing tem-
pefts in the air, which were fuppofed to be
caufed by thofe fpirits. The bell had alfo a
name given to it as in baptifm. I fhall pro-
ceed to mention other things which fuperfti-
tion has introduced into chriftian churches, and
f Sueur A. D. 968. Moflieim, vol. 2. p. 350.
efpecially
Method of conducing Public Worfoip. \ \ i
efpecially fuch as were borrowed from the pa-
gan worfhip.
In popifli churches the firft * thing that we
are ftruck with is a veflel of what is called
holy water, into which thofe who enter dip their
ringer, and then mark their foreheads with the
fign of the crofs. This holy water, there can
be no doubt, came from the lujlral water of
the pagans, as indeed learned catholics allow.
This water was alfo placed at the entrance of
the heathen temples, and thofe who entered
were fprinkled with it. The firft exprefs men-
tion made of holy water among chriftians is
in an epiftle of Vigilius bifhop of Rome, writ-
ten in 538, in fpeaking of the confecration of
churches, as was mentioned above ; though fome
have thought that to have been holy water which
Synefius mentions, as placed at the entrance of
the churches, for the purpofe of wafliing their
hands before prayer*. Middleton farther ob-
ferves, that the compofition of this holy water
is the fame with that of the heathens, viz. com-
mon fait and water ; and alfo that the form of
the afpergillum, or ajperforijetn, is much the fame
with that which was formerly ufed by the pa-
gansf.
A fondnefs for the Jign of the crofs was one
of the firft fuperftitions of chriftians. It was
* Sueur, A. D. 457, f Letters from Rome, p. 138.
probably
112 Hi/lory of the Changes in the
probably firft ufed by way of diftinguifriing
themfelves from the heathens, or to Ihew the
heathens that they were not afhamed of that with
which they were moil reproached, viz. the cru-
cifixion of their matter. From this conftant
ufe of it they began to imagine that there was
fome peculiar virtue in the thing itfelf. They
alfo imagined it to be alluded to in many paf-
fages of the Old Teftament, and various rites
of the Jewiih religion, and they were alfo plea-
fed to find the traces of it every where elfe.
Hence came the cuftom of marking themfelves
with it, which is faid to have been firft done
by the Valentinians, and then by the Monta-
nifts, of whom was Tertullian, who makes great
boaft of it. But it does not appear to have
been ufed -in the public offices of religion in
the three firft centuries, or that crofies, made of
wood or metal, were ever ufed till it was ima-
gined that Helena, the mother of Conftantine,-
had difcovered the true crofs in 326*.
Burning wax lights in the day time was ufed
in many heathen ceremonies, for which they
are ridiculed by Laftantius. f< The heathens,"
fays he, <c light up candles to God, as if he
tc lived in the dark ; and do not they deferve
<f to pafs for madmen, who offer lamps to the
<c author and giver of light ? " But not long
after this, thefe very wax lights were introdu-
ced into chriftian worfhip.
* Larroche, p. 538.
Another
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 113
Another thing that was noted by the early
chriftians, as peculiar to the pagans, was incenfe.
But fo early as the third century, we find this al-
fo made ufe of in chriftian churches. And Mid-
dleton fays, that even the thuribulum itfelf was
taken into the fervice of the chriftian altar, toge-
ther with the incenfe. They are mentioned by
Ambrofe and Chryfoftom, as in common ufe,
both in the eaftern and weftern churches in their
timef. But both wax lights and incenfe were
firft introduced into the eaftern churches, and
from them were adopted in the Weft.
Laftly, procejfions, which are conducted with
great folemnity by the papifts, were alfo copied
from the heathen worfhip. Among the Romans
they were inftituted by Numa, and both in the
pagan and popifh procefiions, the chief fnagif-
trates often affifted J .
f Middleton's Letters, p. 237. J Ib. p. 189.
VOL. II. H SECTION
H4 Hiftojy of the Changes in -the
SECTION II.
Of Ceremonies in general, and other Things rela-
ting to Public Worjhif.
HAVING made the preceding obfervations
on the places in which the public wor-
Ihip of chriftians was performed, and fome other
things and circumltances belonging to them j
I proceed to give an account of what was tran-
fa&ed within the place ; but firft I fhall make
a few general remarks on modes and forms in
chriftian worihip.
We may take it for granted, that originally
chriftians had no proper ceremonies in their wor-
ihip. But after the fign of the crofs, wax lights,
and incenfe were introduced, the ceremonial of
chriftian worfhip came to be as complex as that
of the pagan worihip' had been. So much pro-
grefs had been made in thefe things in the time
of Auftin, that he complained of it j faying that
the church was fo full of ceremonial obfervan-
ces, that the condition of the Jews under the
Law was much more fupportable. But the church,
he fays, amidft much ftraw and tares bears many
things*. But fo much were ceremonies mul-
* Epift. 119. Cap. 19. Opera, vol. 2. p. 577.
tiplied
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 115
tiplied before the ninth century, that large trea-
tifes were then written to explain them.
There not being in the early ages of the
church any power that could enforce uniform-
ity in the methods of worfliip, it happened un-
avoidably, that different cuftoms got eftablifli-
ed in different places. Hence every church of
note had its peculiar ritual, which was adopted
by all the churches that depended upon it - t
and thofe of the Eaft differed very considerably
from thofe of the Weft.
The weftern church was loaded with ceremo-
nies chiefly by Gregory the Great, in the fixth
century. He had great fertility of invention
in this refpecl:, and eloquence to recommend
his inventions j but he did not impofe them up-
on others, though perhaps for want of power.
Almoft every pope in the next century added
fomething new to the antient rites and infti-
tutions; and in the time of Charlemaigne,
they were propagated through all the Latin
churches.
No perfon urged this bufmefs fo much as
Gregory the feventh, efpecially with rcfpcdt to
Spain, where he met with the greateft oppofition
from the attachment of the people to their an-
tient Gothic or Mofarabic liturgy. But the
pope carried his point at laft, notwithstanding
two very remarkable decifions in favour of the
H 2 Gothic
i 1 6 Hiftory of the Changes in the
Gothic liturgy, at the appointment of the nobles
at Caftile. They firft ordered two champi-
ons to fight, one for each of them, when he
that was for the Gothic ritual proved to be vic-
torious. They then threw both the Miffals into
the fire, when the Roman was confumed, and
the Gothic, they fay, was taken out unhurt.
Such was the method of determining moft dif-
putes in thofe days, viz by an appeal, as they
thought, to God, either by the fword,. or fomc
kind of ordealy depending upon a divine inter-
pofition in the refult of it.
At length, however, the Roman ritual was
univerfally ufed in the weftern church. And
the Englifli reformers, inftead of framing a new
liturgy, had recourfe to the offices of the church
of Rome, leaving out what was moft offenfive.
There can be no doubt, but that originally, all
the parts of.public worfliip were performed in
the language that was beft underftood by the
affembly; and as the Latin tongue was beft
underftood by the generality of chriftians in the
Weft, this, of courfe, was generally, if not uni-
verfally ufed. But after the irruption of the
northern nations, the knowledge of this lan-
guage was much lefs. general,, and in the tenth
or eleventh century it was hardly underftood at
all. But from this time the ufe of the Latin
tongue was continued for other reafons.
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 117
In thofe dark ages the clergy affected to keep
the people in ignorance, and in a ftate of de-
pendence upon themfelves, and wilhed to make
them think that the whole bufmefs of reconci-
ling men to God was in their hands. The
fcriptures were likewiie kept from the people,
and the whole fervice was fo loaded with cere-
monies, that it had the appearance of a charm,
the whole fecret and virtue of which, was in
the breaft of the prieft ; and to continue the
fervice in an unknown tongue contributed great-
ly to the imprefiion which they wifhed to make.
The Latin tongue flill continues to be ufed in
all the Roman catholic churches, notwithftand-
ing feveral attempts have been made to reme-
dy this great and glaring evil,
It is not, however, peculiar to the church of
Rome. For it is faid that a veneration for anti-
quity induces the Egyptian chriftians to ufe the
Coptic language in their churches. Alfo the
Jacobites and Neftorians ufe the Syriac language,
and the Abyflinians the old Ethiopic, though all
thefe languages have long fmce become obfoJete
and unintelligible to the multitude*. The
Greeks alfo celebrate the Lord's fupper in an-
fjent Greek; but this is fufficiently underflood
by the common people, the modern Greek not
being very different from it.
* Mofheim, vql. 2. p. 34.3.
H 3 The
i- 1 8 Hiftory cf the Changes in the
The habits of the clergy could not, originally,
have been any thing but the ufual drefs of their
refpective countries. But it not being thought de-
cent for perfons of fuch grave characters as the
clergy, to follow new cuftoms and fafhions, they
retained their old flowing garments, after the nor-
thern nations had introduced the ufe of fhort ones.
But befides this, the habits of the pagan priefts,
which had always been different from thofe of
other perfons, at the time of their officiating,
were probably imitated by the chriftian clergy,
though I cannot fay that I have met with any
particular account of it.
We find, however, that the clergy were diftin-
guifhed by their habits, while they were officiat-
ing, in the time of Sylvefter, when mention is
made of Dalmatics for the deacons, and of a cer-
tain cloth with which their left hand was to be
covered. The fourth canon of the council of
Carthage prefcribed the ufe of the cope in read-
ing the gofpel, and at the time of the oblation
only. And Gregory the Great invented new
fafhioned habits, like thofe defcribed in the cere-
monial law of the Jews*.
* Laroche, p. 539. Hiftory of Antient Ceremonies, p. 82.
SECTION
Method of conducing Public Worjhi-j). 119
SECT ION III.
Of tie proper Parts of Public Worjhip.
ORIGINALLY chriftians met to read the
fcriptures, to explain them, or to preach,
to fing pfalms, to pray, and to adminifter the
Lord's fupper. The creed was made ufe of only
at baptifm, when it was taught to all the catechu-
mens, who were probably made to recite it after
the perfon who adminiftered the ordinance. Af-
terwards, when articles of faith were more attend-
ed to, and it behoved all the bifhops to take
care to prevent the growth of herefy, creeds be-
gan to be recited by the whole aflembly. That
this was the true reafon of the prefent practice, is
evident from its being the Nicene creed, and not
that of the apoftles, as it is called, that was firfl
ufed for this purpofe. It was alfo firft introduc-
ed by Timothy, bifhop of Conftantinople, who
did it in order to make Macedonius, who reject-
ed that creed, more odious to the people. This
was in the reign of the emperor Anaftafius, who
died in 521. About this time this creed was alfo
repeated in the church of Antioch every time the
Lord's fupper was adminiftered.
Before this time it had been the cuftom to re-
peat the creed only the day preceding Good
Friday, when catechizing was more folemnly
performed, in order to the celebration of baptifm
H 4 on
I2O Hiftory of tloe Changes in the
on the Eafter Sunday following. The repetition
of it on that day was firft appointed by the coun-
cil of Laodicea. But the conftant reading of
the creed did not take place in the Weft till
about 590, when it was ordered by the council
of Toledo, in imitation of the eaftern churches.
At this time it was the Nicene creed only that
was made ufe of, and for fome time it feemed to
eclipfe that of the apoftles j but afterwards this
latter creed recovered its credit*.
It will be jnft worth while to mention a few
particulars concerning the pofture of the prieft
and people, during the celebration of the. par-
ticular parts of public worftiip.
The ufual pofture of praying had been ftand-*
ing or kneeling, or to exprefs great felf-abafe-
ment and humility, proftration ; but a canon had
been made (for what reafon 1 have not inquired)
to forbid the practice of kneeling on Sundays
from Eafter to Whitfuntide, which gave rife to
the term ftations. This, however, was not ap-
proved by the church of RomeJ. When the
fcriptures were read, it is probable that the peo-
ple fat; but in time it became a cuftom for the
people to ftand while the gojpel was reading.
And it is faid that Anaftafius, bifhop of Rome,
who died in 402, ordered the priefts to ftand up,
* Hiftory of the Apoftles Creed, p. 44. &c.
J Hiftory of Ancient Ceremonies, p. 17.
and
Method of conducing Public Worfo'ty. 121
and incline their heads a little, while they read-
the gofpel*.
All the heathens contrived their temples fo
that they fhould pray with their faces towards
the Eaft. This was introduced into chriftian
worfhip about the time of Jerom, though it was
not then generally approved of. Pope Leo the
Great condemned this cuftom, becaufe it was
much ufed by the Manicheansf. By degrees,
however, the cuftom of looking towards the
Eaft during the repetition of the creed became
univerfal, and likewife the lowing at the name of
Jefus, in the repetition of it. This practice was
countenanced by the literal interpretation of
Phil. ii. 10. At the name of Jefus every knee Jh all
bow. This, however, was thought to be fo very
idle a fuperftition, that it was almoft univerfally
laid aiide at the reformation. But it is generally
practifed in the church of England ; and bifhop
Laud feverely puniflied thofe who did not con-
form to this ceremony in his time.
Singing feems always to have been a part of
the public worlhip of chriftians, and followed the
reading of the icriptures. They fung either the
pfalms of David, or hymns of their own compo-
fmg. But the former, Moflieim fays, were only
received among chriftian hymns in the fourth
* Sueur, A. D. 402. f Ib. A. D. 443.
century.
1-22 Hiftory of the Changes in the
century. The finging of thefe pfalms, or hymns,
was alfo very common with them in their own
houfes, in the courfe of the week. But the me-
thod of finging by antifhony or anthem, that is,
one part of the congregation, as the clergy, fing-
ing one verfe, and the reft, or the people, fing-
ing another, is faid to have been introduced
about the middle of the fourth century, into the
church of Antioch, by Flavianus and Diodorus,
and into the church of Conftantinople by Chry-
foftom*.
This method of finging was introduced into
the church of Rome by Celeftine in 418. Af-
terwards, Gregory the Great compofed an Anti-
phoniary for the whole year, with verficles, or re-
fponfes for every day of it. He then appointed
the college or choir of finging men, to chant the
office f. In the fifth century it was the cuftom
in fome places, to keep up the exercifes offing-
ing both day and night, different fets of perfons
continually relieving each other J.
Mufical inftruments were not introduced into
churches till the thirteenth or fourteenth century.
Thomas Aquinas fays, the church does not ufe
mufical inftruments to praife God, left fhe fhould
feem tojudaize||. But in 1312, Marinus Sanu-
* Sueur A. D. 398. Pierce's Vindication, p. 390.
f-. Hiftory of Antient Ceremonies, p. 81.
I Moflieim, vol. i. p. 397, || Pierce's Vindicat. p. 385. 395.
tus
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 1 23
tus introduced organs into churches^ ; and they
have been much ufed ever fince, though there
have always been perfons in all eftablifhments, as
well as in particular fects, who preferred a more
fimple mode of worfhip; and even, admitting
that mufic might afiift in exciting devotional
feelings, did not chufe that, in general, they
fhould depend upon that mechanical afliftance.
In the primitive churches preaching was no-
thing more than the expofition of the fcriptures,
a portion of which was always read in the courfe
of the fervice. Origen is faid to have been the
firft who did this in a more copious and diffufive
manner, explaining the fcripture in an allegorical
way; and by this means introduced longer fer-
mons than had been ufual \ .
When heathen philofophers and rhetoricians
were converted to chriitianity, they introduced
their cuftom of haranguing on particular fubjefts,
and particular occafions, and carefully premedi-
tated or precompofed their fermons; fometimes
prefixing to their difcourfes fhort texts of fcrip-
ture, probably that they might not pafs too fud-
denly from the old method of interpreting the fa-
cred writings, and fometimes omitting them. In
this ftyle are the fermons of Chryfoftom, confiding
of fuch kind of eloquence as the Greeks and Ro-
Jortin's Remarks, vol. 5. p. 569.
,f Moiheim, vol. i. p. 235.
mans
J24 Hiftory of the Changes in the
mans were fond of difplay ing, when they haran-
gued the populace, or pleaded at the bar.
So far did chriftian preachers in thofe times
depart from the fimplicity of the gofpel, and fo
little were they influenced by the fpirit of chrifti-
anity, that, in imitation of the Grecian orators,
fome of them even hired perfons to clap their
hands, and exprefs their applaufe by other gef-
tures and vociferations at proper intervals, on
fignals previouily concerted between them and
the preacher, or his particular friends.
Thefe fet harangues were only occafional, and
were by no means delivered every Lord's day,
in every chriftian church; and in the dark ages,
few perfons being qualified to preach, fermons
became very fcarce. At this day the Roman ca-
tholics meet only, in general, to hear prayers, and
to celebrate mafs. They have no fermons, ex-
cept in Lent, on certain feftivals, and on fome
other particular occafions. It is more particu-
larly obferved, that it was in the ninth century
that the bilhops and priefts ceafed to inftruct the
people by fermons as they had done before f .
. Charlemaigne, rinding the clergy abfolutely
incapable of inftrucling the people by fermons of
their own, or of explaining, with perfpicuity and
judgment, thofe portions of fcripture which are
. f Sueur, A. D. 853.
diftingnifhecf
Method of conducing Public Worfoip. 125
diftinguiftied in the ritual by the name of Epiftle
and Gofpely ordered Paulus Diaconus and Alcuin
to compile, from the antient doctors of the
church. Homilies, or difcourfes upon the epiilles
and gofpels, which a ftupid and ignorant fet of
priefts were to commit to memory, and recite to
the people. This gave rife to that famous col-
lection, which went by the title of the Homiliariuiw
of Charlemaigne j and which, being followed as a
model by many productions of the fame kind,
compofed by private perfons, contributed much
to nourifh the indolence, fays Mofheim, and to
perpetuate the ignorance, of a worthlefs clergy f..
In this, however, as well as in his other regu^-
lations refpecting the church, he certainly had the
beft intentions ; and in thofe times it is proba-
ble that nothing better could have been done.
A fcheme of this kind was adopted in England
when the prefent book of homilies was compiled,
and appointed to be read in churches.
Before the reformation, after the preacher had
.named and opened his text, he called the peo-
ple to go to their prayers, telling them what
they were to pray for. " Ye fliall pray," fays he,
c< for the king, for the pope, for the holy ca-
" tholic church, &c." after which all the peo-
ple went over their beads in filencej and the
minifter kneeling down, did the fame. They
would befides lay a pater nofter, Ave Maria, Deits
f Vol. 2. p. Si.
nrijtrsatur
ia6 Hiftory of the Changes in the
mifereatur noftri 3 Domine Jalvum fac regem, Glo-*
ria patrij &c. and then the fermon proceeded*.
The manner in which moft of the Englifli cler-
gy pray in the pulpit before fermon is Hill the
fame; and is what they call bidding prayers, or
an exhortation to pray for fuch and fuch things.
But then no time is allowed for the prayers that
are fo ordered.
In the primitive church the public prayers fol-
lowed the fermon, and preceded the celebration
of the Lord's fupper j and it is evident, from ma-
ny circumftances, that at firft all thefe prayers
were delivered without book, and were fuch as
the bifhop, or the prieft who officiated, could
prepare himfelf. Juftin Martyr fays, that the
prefident of the aflembly offered prayers and
thankfgivings, as he was able, (o<m &/ JI).
Origen alfo fays, " We pray according to our
" abilities ;" and Tertullian, " We pray to
<e God without a monitor, becaufe our prayers
" flow from our own minds." Bafil gives an
inftance of a variation in his prayer, for which
he was blamed by feme, as being inconfiftent
with himfelf .
In time, however, partly in order to avoid di-
verfity of opinions, and in part, alfo, that the con-
gregation might not be offended by prayers pre-
pared by perfons who were not capable of doing
* Neale's Hift, vol. i , p. 33. Pierce's Vindication p. 429.
it
Method of conducing Public Worship. 127
it with propriety, it came to be the cuftom to
compofe the prayers before-hand, and to fubmit
them to the approbation of the principal perfons
in the church. This was particularly ordered at
the third council of Carthage *.
At the council of Laodicea, held in 364, the
fame prayers were ordered to be ufed morning
and evening ; but, in general, every bifliop or-
dered what prayers he thought proper, till about
the time of Auftin ; when it was ordered that, to
prevent herefy, no prayers fhould be ufed but by
common advice. Thus in time a great variety
of liturgies, or forms of celebrating public wor-
fhip, were in ufe in different provinces, and diffe-
rent fees. The firft mention we find of thefe
liturgies is towards the end of the fourth cen-
tury J.
In early times, though the officiating minifter
delivered the prayers, the people were not intire-
ly filent ; for they made fmall interlocutions or re-
fponf&s, as Lift up your hearts. We lift them up.
unto the Lord, mentioned by Cyprian. The
Lord be with you , and with thy fpirit, in the time
of Chryfoftomf.
The laft circumflance that I fhall notice, re-
lating to the forms of public worfhip, is that in
* Sueur, A. D. 397. J Neale's Hift. vol. i , p. 37.
f Pierce's Vindication, p. 426.
the
.128 Hiftory of the Changes in the
the primitive church, where the fervice always
ended with communion, there was recited a roll,
in which the names of the more eminent faints of
the catholic church, and of the holy bifhops,
martyrs, or confeflbrs, of every particular church,
were regiftered. This was an honourable remem-
brance of fuch as had died in the chriftian faith.
But when the foundnefs of any perfon's faith was
queftioned, his name was not read till that dif-
ficulty was removed. Chryfoftom having been
expelled from the church of Conftantinople, it
was a long time before his name was inferted
in this roll. This was the cuftom, by which as
I have obferved before, provifion was made for
excommunicating perfons even after their death.
SECTION IV.
OfFeftivals, &c. in the chrifttan Church.
THE primitive chriftians had no feftivals be-
fides Sunday, on which they always met
for public worfhip, as may be inferred from Juf-
tin Martyr. This day Conftantine ordered to be
obferved as a day of reft from labour ; but huf-
bandmen were allowed to cultivate the earth on
that dayj. By degrees, however, in imitation
of the Jews or heathens, but chiefly the latter,
J Sueur, A. D. 320,
chriftians
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 129
chriftians came to have as many annual feftivals
as the heathens themfelves. Of the principal
of thefe I fhall give a general account.
The firft that was obferved by chriftians was Ea-
fter, on the time of the Jewifh pafTover, being the
anniverfary of our Saviour's fufFerings, death, and
refurre&ion. Originally, however, this was pro-
bably a feftival, and refpefted the refurreftion
of our Saviour only ; but afterwards they be-
gan to keep a faft, on the anniverfary of the
crucifixion ; but it was a long time before this
faft was extended, as it now is, to the whole
feafon of Lent, or forty days before Eafter.
The primitive chriftians ufed, indeed, to join
fafting to prayer upon extraordinary occafions ;
but this was always voluntary, and thofe who
intirely omitted it were not cenfured. The firft
perfon who is faid to have laid down any ex-
prefs rules for fafting, was Montanus, who was
remarkable for his rigour in other refpefts.
However, a faft on the anniverfary of Chrift's
crucifixion, or what we call Good Friday^ is of
very great antiquity j but both the time, and
the degree of fafting, was originally very va-
rious, depending upon each perfon's particular
fancy. Irenseus fays, that fome perfons fafted
before Eafter one day, fome two, and fome
more; but that the unity of the faith was
maintained notwithftanding that variety.
VOL. II. I By
i jo IJiftory of the Changes in the
By fading the antients always meant abftain-
ing from meat and drink, from morning till
evening; and what Tertullian and others call
ftations, or half fafts, were thofe days on which
they aflembled for prayer in the morning, and
continued that exercife till three in the after-
noon, when they received the Lord's fnpper.
They never fafted on a Saturday or Sunday, and
even thought it a crime to do fo, except on the
Saturday before Eafter-day, on which they ce-
lebrated the refurreclion of Chrift ; becaufe, du-
ring that time, they faid, the bridegroom was
taken from them.
Becaufe the time that our Saviour lay in the
grave was about forty hours, this fail was called
Quarantana or Quadragejjima, and by contrac-
tion Quarejme> and Carejme or Car erne, which
is the French term for Lent. Another reafon
for failing at this particular time, was, that ma-
ny perfons were then preparing for baptifm, and
others for communion, which, as fuperftition pre-
vailed, was frequented more generally, and at-
tended upon with more folemnity, on that day.
Even the Montanifts only failed two weeks
in the year ; and in thefe they exccpted Satur-
days and Sundays f. Lent was firft confined to
a certain number of days in the fourth century.
At this time, however, abftinence from flefh and
f Svjeur, A. D. 206.
wine
Method of conducing Public Wor]hij>. 131
wine was by many judged fufficient for the pur-
pofe of fading, and from this time it prevailed
in the weftern church *. Soon after the time
of Tertullian, chriftians began to obferve Wed-
nefdays and Fridays for the purpofe of fading j
and they kept thefe fafts all the year, except be-
tween Eafter aud Pentecoft, in which time they
neither faded nor kneeled in churches. In 416,
Innocent the firft ordered that the people fhould
fad on Saturdays 5 but the Greeks and all the
Ead paid no regard to this ordinance f.
At the time of the council of Nice, the week
before Eader was called Quarantana^ or Lent ;
though fome obferved more days, and fome fewer
at pleafure ; but within forty years after this
council, Lent was extended to three weeks J.
Durandus tells us that Lent was counted to
begin on that which is now the fird Sunday in
Lent, and to end on Eader eve, which time
containing forty two days, if you take out of
them the (ix Sundays on which it was held to
be unlawful to fad, there will remain only thirty
fix days ; and therefore, that the number of
forty days which Chrid faded might be com-
pleted, Gregory the Great added to Lent four
days of the week preceding, viz. that which we
call ^fo IVedneJday^ and the three days following
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 324. f Sueur, A. D. 391
j Ib. A. D. 325. 364.
it;
132 Hiftory of tie Changes in the
it; fo that our prefent Lent is a fuperftitions
imitation of our Saviour's faft of forty days*.
Before the council of Nice, there had been
a great difference between the eaftern and wef-
tern churches about the time of keeping Eafter,
the chriftians in the Eaft following the cuftom
of the Jews, with whom the day on which the
Pafchal lamb was killed was always the four-
teenth of their month Nifan, on whatever day
of the week it happened to fall ; but with the
Latins Eafter-day had always been the Sunday fol-
lowing, being the anniverfary of our Saviour's
rerurredion. At the council of Nice the cuf-
tom of the Latin church was eftablifhed , and
as aftronomy was more cultivated in Egypt,
it was given in charge to the bifhop of Alex-
andria, to publifh to the other churches the pro-
per time of keeping Eafter, by what were call-
ed Pafchal epiftles. For the fame purpofe af-
terwards the Golden number was invented f.
Pentecoft was a Jewifli feftival, celebrated
fifty days after the pafTover; and being like-
wife diftinguiflied in the chriftian hiftory by the
defcent of the holy fpirit, it was obferved next
after Eafter -, and, as far as appears, about the
time of Tertullian. We call it Whitjuntide. Thefe
* Hiftory of Popery, vol. i. p. 186.
t Hift. of Antient Ceremonies, p. 44.
are
Method of conducing Public Worjhip. 133
are the only great feftivals that chriftians were
not at liberty to fix where they pleafed. All
the other feftivals they fixed at thofe times of
the year which the pagans ufed to obferve with
the greateft folemnity, with a view to facilitate
their converfion to chriftianity.
The feaft of Chriftmas t in commemoration of
the nativity of Chrift, is mentioned by Chry-
foftom as unknown at Antioch till within ten
years of the time of his writing ; and therefore
he concluded that it had lately been introdu-
ced from Rome*. It was thought to be firft
obierved by the followers of Bafilides, and from
them to have been adopted by the orthodox, in the
fourth century, when the feftival of Cbrijl's bap-
tifm was introduced ; in confecjuence of which
this feaft of the nativity was removed from the
fixth of January, to the twenty fifth of Decem-
ber : the former retaining the name of the Epi-
phany , which feaft only, and not that of the
nativity, is obfcrved in the Eaftf.
Feftivals in honour of the apoftles and mar-
tyrs are all of late date, none of them earlier
than the time of Conftantine, when magnificent
temples were built round the tombs of fome
of their martyrs , and then the feftivals were
* Bafnage Hiftoire des eglifes Reformees, vol. i. p. 280.
f Pierce's Vindication, p. 510.
I 3 only
1 34 lliftory of tbe Changes in the
only held at the places where they were fup-
pofed to have fuffered.
Vigils were the afTemblies of the antient
chriftians by night, in the time of perfecution,
when they durft not meet in the day-time.
Afterwards they were obferved before Eafter,
but they were kept not as feafts, which was
done afterwards, but as fafts, as appears from
Tertullian.
The feaft of AJcenfion was obferved about the
time of Auftin. The feaft of Circumc ifion is firft
mentioned by Maximus Taurinenfis, who flou-
rifhed in 450; and the feaft of Purification was
perhaps inftituted in the ninth century . The
feaft of Advent is of no earlier authority than that
of Innocent the third, in the thirteenth century ;
and the Vigils of the grea': feftivals are all later
than the tenth century f.
It was Mamert, bifliop of Vienne in Gaul,
who, about 463, firft inftituted the faft of Ro-
gation, that is, the prayers that are made three
days before the feaft of Afcenfion, that is, the
Monday, Tuefday, and Wednefday before Holy
Thurfday; which was exprefsly contrary to the
order eftablifhed in the antient church, forbid-
ding all fafting between Eafter and Pentecoft.
This faft of Rogation was generally received in
Pierce's Vindication, p. 512. &c. f Sueur, A. D. 392.
the
-Method of conducing Public Worfhif. 135
the Weft prefently after the time of this Ma-
inert*. The bifhop of Vence added the pro-
ceflions to them, in imitation of the Luflrationes
Ambervales of the heathens, which were made
round their fields, in order to render them fruit-
ful ; and thefe were attended with much intempe-
rance and diforder ; being made, no doubt, in
all reipects, after the pagan manner.
Alcinus Avitus, who fucceeded Hefychius, the
immediate fuccefibr of Mamert, in the church of
Vienne, defcribes the occafion of inftituting this
fail in his homily on the Rogation. He there
fays that the city of Vienne had fuffered much
by fire, thunder florins, earthquakes, extraordi-
nary noifes in the night, prodigies, figns in
the heavens, wild beafts, and other calamities;
that on this the bifliop of the city ordered the
people to faft three days with prayer and repent-
ance, that, by the example of the Ninevites, they
might avert the judgments of God. He fays that
thereupon the anger of God was appeafed, and
that in commemoration of it Mamert ordered this
faft to be obferved every year. His example
was foon followed, firft by the church of Cler-
mont in Auvergne, then by all their neigh-
bours, and afterwards throughout all Gaul. In
801, Leo the third confirmed this faft, and made
it univerfalf.
* Sueur, A. D. 392.- \ Ib. A. D. 462. 463.
I 4 The
136 Hifory of the Changes in the
The faft of Ember IVeeks^ or Jejunia guafuffr
temporum, was probably inftituted a little before
Leo the Great, in the middle of the fifth centu-
ry*. But others think that it is not quite cer-
tain that he fpeaks of it. Some fay that pope
Gelafius having ordered that the ordination of
priefts and deacons fhould be on the four weeks
of Ember, or ember days, viz. the Wednefday,
Friday, and Saturday after the firft Sunday in
Lent, after Whitfunday, after the fourteenth of
September, and the thirteenth of December, and
this ceremony being always conducted with faft-
ing and prayer, it came to be a cuftom to faft
at that time f.
It was upon the idea of the fpiritual benefit
that would arife from vifiting the church of St.
Peter at Rome, and alfo in imitation of the
Jewiih jubilee, and the fecular games among
the Romans, that the popilh Jubilee is found-
ed. This feftival, which is celebrated with
the utmoft pomp and magnificence, was inftitut-
ed by Boniface the eighth, in the year 1300, in
confequence, as it is faid, of a rumour, the ori-
gin of which is not known, which was fpread
among the inhabitants of Rome, in 1299, that
all who within the limits of the following year,
fhould vifit the church of St. Peter, would re-
ceive the remiflion of all their fins, and that this
privilege would be annexed to the fame obferv-
ance every hundredth year.
* Pierce's Vindication, p. 529. Sueur, A. D. 392.
f Hill, of Antient Ceremonies, p. 67.
The
Method of conducing Public ftforjbip. 137
The fuccefibrs of Boniface added a number of
new rites and inventions to this fuperftitious in-
ftitution, and finding by experience that it ad-
ded luftre to the church of Rome, and increafed
its revenue, they made its return more frequent.
In 1350, Clement the fixth ordered that the jubi-
lee fliould be celebrated every fifty years, on pre-
tence that the Jews did the like, and Paul the
fecond, in the fifteenth century, reduced the
term to twenty-five years. This year of jubilee
is called a holy year -, but, as the author of the
Hiftoire des papes obferves, it Ihould rather be
called the year of facrilege, impiety, debauch,
and fuperflitionj.
Many of thefe feftivals have been retained by
the reformers, efpecially thofe of Eafter, Whit-
funtide, and Chriftmas, and, like the papifts,
they obfcrve them with more ftrictnefs than they
do the Sundays.
Our eftablifhed church has by no means thrown
oft" the popifh fuperftition with refpect to faft-
ing. The faft days in the church of England,
are all the Fridays in the year, except Chriftmas
day, all the days in Lent, which, befides Fridays,
are thirty-three, fix more in the Ember weeks,
three Rogation days, and the thirtieth of Janu-
ary. The fum of all the feftival days is thirty-
one. And if to thefe we add the ninety-five faft
j Vol. 5. p.. 409.
days
138 Hiftory of tbe Changes, 6ff.
days, fifty-two Sundays, and twenty-nine faints
days, all the days in a year appropriated to reli-
gious exercifes, befides vigils, will be one hun-
dred and feventy-eight ; and making allowance
for fome of them interfering with others, they
will be about one hundred and feventyf.
In fo little efteem, however, are thefe obferv-
ances held by the more enlightened members of the
eftablifhed church, that there can be no doubt
but that when any reformation takes place, a great
retrenchment will be made in this article.
Pierce 's Vindication, p. 508 1
T H
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART IX.
The Hiftory of CHURCH DISCIPLINE.
THE INTRODUCTION.
f e 'A H E changes which the difcipline of the
i chriftian church underwent from the time
of the apcftles to the reformation, were as great,
and of as much importance, in practice, as the
changes in any other article relating to chriftian-
ity. From being highly favourable to good con-
duct, the eftablifhed maxims of it came at length
to be a cover for every kind of immorality, to
thofe who chofe to avail themfelves of them. On
this account I have given a good deal of atten-
tion to the iubje<5t
To many perfons, I doubt not, this will be as
interefting an object as any thing in the hiftory
of
140 rfhe Hiftory of
of chriftianity, and to introduce it in this place
will make the eafieft connection between the two
great divifions of my work, I mean the corrup-
tions of doftrme, and the abufes of power in the
chriftian church. It will alfo ferve to fhew in
what manner thefe departures from the chriftian
fyftem promoted each other.
SECTION 1.
The Hiftory of Clour cb Difcifline in the lime of
the chriftian Fathers.
IN the purer ages of the church, the offences
which gave public fcandal were few; but
when they did happen, they were animadverted
upon with great rigour. For as many enormi-
ties were laid to the charge of chriftians, they
were exceedingly felicitous to give no juft caufe
of obloquy. It is, indeed, probable, that fome
time after the apoftolic age, the morals of the
chriftians in general were more ftrift, than we
find, by the writings of the apoftlcs, they were
in their own times. Nor is it to be wondered
at, when we confider that the whole body of the
gentile chriftians, being then newly converted from
heathenifm, muft have retained many of their
former habits, or have eafily relapfed into them.
Afterwards, moft of the cafes of fcandal we
meet with relate to the behaviour of chriftians
Church Difcipline. 141
in the time of perfecution, from which many
Shrunk or fled, in a manner that was exceeding-
ly and juftly difapproved by the more fevere.
Confequently, after a perfecution, there was
much to do about the re-admifflon to the privi-
leges of church communion, of thofe who repent-
ed of their weaknefs ; and it \vas a great part of
the bufmefs of the councils in the fourth and
fifth centuries (which was after the eftablilhment
of chriftianity) to fettle rules concerning the de-
grees of penance, and the method of receiving
penitents into the church. Indeed, befides the
cafes of thofe who had fhrunk from perfecution,
the governors of chriftian churches at that time
muft have had many offences of other kinds to
animadvert upon ; confidering that chriftianity
had then the countenance of the civil powers,
and therefore that people of all ranks, and of all
characters, would naturally crowd into it. On
thefe accounts they found it necefTary to have a
very regular fyftem of difcipline.
In general, we find that about the third and
fourth centuries, chriftians diftinguifhed four or-
ders of penitents. The firft flood at the en-
trance of the church, begging in the moft earneft
manner the prayers of all that went in. The fe-
cond were admitted to enter, and to hear the lec-
tures that were given to the catechumens, and the
expofition of the fcriptures, but they were dif-
mified, together with the catechumens, before the
celebration of the encharift. The third lay pro-
ftrate
142 Sfifo Hiftory of
ftrate in a certain place in the church, covered
with fackcloth, and after receiving the benedic-
tion of the bifhop, and the impofition of hands,
were alfo difmiffed before the celebration of the
eucharift. The fourth order attended that cele-
bration, but did not partake of it. Penitents
having paflfed through all thefe orders, were ad-
mitted to communion by the impofition of the
hands of the bifhop, or of a prieft, in the pre-
fence of the whole congregation*,
If any perfons relapfed into the fame fault for
which they had been excommunicated, or exclu-
ded from the congregation of the faithful, they
were not re-admitted to communion, except in
the article of death ; but towards the end of
the feventh century the antient difcipline began
to be relaxed in this refpect, and they admit-
ted perfons to communion after a fecond of-
fence. In all times there were fome crimes
for which no repentance could make atonement,
fo that perfons who had been once guilty of
them could never be admitted to the peace and
communion of the church. Thefe were mur-
der, adultery, and apoftacy. In this manner, at
leaft, were thefe crimes ftigmatized, in many
churches.
But about the third century pope Zephyrinus
began to relax a little of this difcipline, admit-
* Sueur, A, D. 213.
ting
Church Difcipline. 143
ting adulterers to communion after fome years
of penance, in which he was vehemently oppo-
fed by Tertullian. However, in the time of
Cyprian, the penalties impofed by the bifhop,
which were always a public appearance for a
certain time in the character of penitents, were
often relaxed, or abridged, at the entreaty of
the confeffbrs, or thofe who had been deftined
to martyrdom j and this was called indulgence, of
the abufe of which we ftiall fee enough in a
later period. But at this time there was not
much to complain of in this bufmefs, except
the improper interference of thefe confefibrs, and
the too great influence which they were allow-
ed to have in fuch cafes.
Equally innocent was the bufinefs of confeffion*
as it was firft begun ; but we fee in the courfe
of this hiftory, that it is no uncommon thing
for an innocent beginning to lead to a fatal
cataftrophe. The apoftle Paul exhorts chriftians
to confefs their fins one to another ; and our Savi-
our aflures us that we muft forgive, as we hope
to be forgiven. Upon this was grounded the
cuftom of the primitive churches, to require
every perfon who was excommunicated, to make
a public confefllon of his guilt before he was
re-admitted to chriftian communion. In fomc
cafes, alfo, a public confeflion prevented ex-
communication. It was, likewife, the cuftom
for many confcientious perfons to confefs their
private fins to fome of the priefts in whom they
could
144 Me Hijtory of
could put the greateft confidence, and whofe
advice and prayers they wifhed to have ; and
what was at firft a voluntary thing, was after-
wards, but indeed long afterwards, impofed as
a pofitive duty.
Confefiion was alfo much encouraged by another
circumflance. Many canons made a difference
in the degree and time of penance, between thofe
who had accufed themfelves, and thole againft
whom their crimes were proved. Many perlbns,
therefore, to prevent the feverer penalty, came
of their own accord to confefs their fins; and
this was much encouraged, and the virtue of it
magnified by the writers of thofe times. This
confefiion was, originally, always made in
public, but fome inconveniences being found
to attend this (efpecially when the crimes affect-
ed other perfons, or the ftate) a 'private con-
fefiion was appointed inftead of it. In this cafe
the bifhop either attended himfelf, or appointed
fome particular prieft, who from this office got
the title of penitentiary prieft, to receive thefe
confeflions.
The difficulty of re-admifiion to the privileges
of church communion was, in general, very great,
and the penances impofed were exceedingly ri-
gorous, and this, in the end, was one great caufe
of the total relaxation of all difcipline.
Novatian
Church Difcipline. 145
Novatian particularly diftinguifhed himfelf by
refufing to admit to communion any who had
been guilty of the greater crimes, efpecially that
of apoftacy, leaving them to the judgment of
God only. This arofe from the rigour of Ter-
tullian and the Montanifts ; and it is obferva-
ble that the church of Rome {till keeps up this
rigorous difcipline in cafes of berefy, the
relapjed being delivered to the fecular arm,
Without being admitted to penance.
It was ordained by the council of Nice,
that thofe who apoftatized before baptifm fhould
not be admitted to the communion of the church
till after three years of penance, but if they
had been of the faithful, the penance was to
continue feven years*. Bafil decided that for
the crime of fornication, a man ought to do pe-
nance four years. Others for the fame offence
impofed a penance of nine years, and for adul-
tery eighteen years f.
Hitherto we have feen nothing but rigour,
and the relaxation did not begin by lefifening
the time of penance (except in thofe cafes in
which the confeflbrs had improperly interfered)
but firft in the manner of making the confeffion,
then in the place of penance, and laftly in the
commutation of it.
* Sueur, A. D. 325-
f Bafnage Hiftoire cles Eglifes Reformees, vol. I. p. 189.
VOL. II. K After
146 The -Hi/lory of
After the perfecution under the emperor De-
cius, the orthodox bifhops, Socrates fays, ap-
pointed that the penitents fhould make their
confeflions to one particular pried, and that
they fhould make a public confeffion of fuch
things only as fhould be thought proper for pub-
lic hearing. This cuflom continued in the
eailern church till the year 390, when Ne6la-
rius the bifhop of Conftantinople abolilhed the
office of penitentiary priefts, on account of a wo-
man having been enticed to commit adultery
with a deacon of the church, whilft fhe flayed to
perform the duties of failing and prayer, which
had been enjoined her. From this time all
confeflions, public and private, feem to have
been difcontinued in the Greek church , and at
this day, it is faid, that the Greeks make con-
fcfiion to God only.
In the weftern church public confefTion con-
tinued till the fifth century, but at that time thofe
offenders who had been ufed to make public
confeflion of their crimes, were allowed by Leo
the Great to confefs them privately, to a prieft
appointed for that purpofe. By this means a
great reftraint upon vice was taken away, and
the change was as pleafing to the finner, as it
was advantageous to the priefls in feveral ref-
pecls. Of this many perfons at that time were
fufficiently aware ; and we find that in 590, a
council held at Toledo forbad confeflion to be
made
Church Difciplinc. 147
made privately to a prieft, and ordered that it
fhould be made according to the antient canons.
To confefllon in private foon fucceeded the
doing penance in private, which was another
great ftep towards the ruin of the antient dif-
cipline, which required, indeed, to be moderated,
but in a different manner. In the fifth century,
however, penitents were fuflfered to do penance
fecretly in fome monaftery, Qr other private place,
in the prefence of a few perfons, at the difcre -
tion of the bifliop, or of the confeflbrs, after
which abfolution alfo was given in private. This
was the only method which they ventured to
take with thofe who would not fubmit to the
eftablifhed rules of the church. But in the fe-
venth century, all public penance for fecret fins
was quite taken away, and Theodore archbifhop
of Canterbury is faid to have been the firft of
all the bifhops of the weftern church who efta-
blifhed this rule*.
Had chriftians contented themfelves with ad-
monilhing and finally excommunicating thofe
who were guilty of notorious crimes, and with
requiring public confefllon, with reftitution in
cafe of injuftice, and left all private offences to
every man's own confcience, no inconvenience
would have arilen from their difcipline. But
by urging too much the importance of confef-
* Burnet on the Articles, p. 346.
K 2 fion
I4& The Hiftory of
fion, and by introducing corporeal aufterides,
as fafting, &c. as a proper mode of penance,"
and then changing thefe for alms, and in fact
for money, in a future period, paved the way
for the utter ruin of all good difcipline; and
at length brought it to be much worfe than a
ftate of no difcipline at all. However, we have
yet feen but the firft fteps in this fatal progrels.
SECTION II.
Of the State of Church Difcipline in the dark
and till the Reformation.
WE have feen feveral fymptoms of the
change and decay of difcipline in the
laft period; but in this we fhall fee the total
ruin of it, in confequence of the increafed ope-
ration of the fame caufes, and the introduction
of feveral new ones.
After the introduction of private confejfion, it
was complained by a council held at Challons,
in 813, that perfons did not confefs their offen-
ces fully, but only in part ; and therefore they
ordered, that the prieft fhould make particu-
lar inquiry, under fuch heads as were thought
to include the principal vices that men were
addicted to. At this time, however, confeflion
was
Church D if a f line. 149
was not reckoned necefTary to falvation, and was
not made in order to obtain abfolution of the
prieft, but to inform perfons how they ought to
conduct themfelves with refpect to God, in order
to obtain pardon of him ; and therefore the
Fathers of this council fay that confefiion to God
purges fin, but confeflion to the prieft teaches
how fins are purged*.
This bufinefs of confeflion to priefts, before
it was held to be of untverfal obligation, gave
rife to a new kind of cafuiftry, which confifted
in afcertaining the nature of all kinds of crimes,
and in proportioning the penalties to each.
This improvement is afcribed to Theodore,
archbifliop of Canterbury, above mentioned,
who, in a work intitled the Penitential, regulated
the whole bufinefs of penance, diftinguifhing the
different kinds of crimes, and prefcribing forms
of confolation, exhortation, and abfolution, adap-
ted to each particular cafe. From Britain thefe
regulations were foon introduced into all the
weftern provinces, and the Penitential of The-
odore became a pattern for other works of the
fame nature. But in the next century this bu-
finefs greatly declined, and gave way to the
doctrine of indulgences f,
However, what is now properly called auricu-
lar confejjion was not fully eftabliihed, and made
Sneur, A f D. 813. f Molheim, vol. 2. p, 26.
K 3 f
150 The Hiftory of
of univerfal obligation, before the thirteenth cen-
tury, when Innocent the third appointed it by
his own authority, in a Lateran council. This
do<5trine, as it is now received in the church ot
Rome, requires not only a general acknowledge-
ment, but a particular enumeration of fins, and
of follies ; and is appointed to be made to a pro-
per prieft once at lead every year, by all perlbns
who are arrived at years of difcretion. Before
this law of Innocent, feveral doctors had confi-
dered confefiion as a duty of divine authority,
but it was not publickly received as a doctrine of
the church. This law occafioned the introduc-
tion of a number of new injunctions and ritesf.
It being notorious to all perfons, that all ufe-
ful church difcipline was loft at the time of the
reformation, it was thought proper at the coun-
cil of Trent to do, or at leaft to feem to do
fomething in the bufmefs; and therefore it was
ordered that fcandalous offenders fhould do pub-
lic penance, according to the antient canons, and
that the bifhops fhould be judges of it. But
things had gone on fo long in a different train,
that it does not appear that any thing was done
in confequence of it.
Together with this change in the bufinefs of
confefiion, other caufes were at the fame time
operating to the corruption of church dilcipline,
f Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 94. 290.
but
Church Difcipline. 151
but nothing contributed to it more than the ftrefs
which was then laid upon many things foreign to
real virtue, and which were made to take the
place of it. Of this nature were the cuftomary
devotions of thofe days, confifting in the fre-
quent repetition of certain prayers, in bodily au-
fterities, in pilgrimages, in alms to the poor, and
donations to the church, &c. Thefe were things
that could be afcertained, fo that it might be
known with certainty whether the party had con-
formed to the penalty or not; whereas a change
of heart and of character was a thing of a lefs
obvious nature, and indeed not much attended
to by the generality of confeflbrs at that time.
About the end of the eighth century the com-
mutation of penances began, and inftead of the
antient feverities, vocal prayers came to be all
that was enjoined, fo many Paters (or repetitions
of the Lord's prayer) were held to be equiva-
lent to fo many days fading, &c. and the rich
were allowed to buy off their penances by giv-
ing alms. Alfo the getting many mafies to be
faid was thought to be a mode of devotion by
which God was fo much honoured, that the com-
mutation of penance for mafies was much prac-
tifed. Pilgrimages and wars came on after-
wards f.
f Burnet on the Articles, p. 346.
K 4 The
152 Vbt Hiftory of
The immediate caufe of this commutation of
penances was the impofiibility of performing
them, according to the canons of the church;
fmce, in many cafes it required more time than the
term of human life. For inftance, a ten years
penance being enjoined fpr a murder, a man
who had committed twenty murders, muft have
done penance two hundred years ; and there-
fore fome other kind of penance was judged
ablblutely neceflary; and the perfon who was
chiefly inftrumental in fettling the commutations
of penance was one Dominic, who communi-
cated them to the celebrated Peter Damiani,
whofe authority in the age in which he lived
was very great.
By them it was determined that a hundred
years of penance might be compenfated by twen-
ty repetitions of the pfalter, accompanied with
difcipline, that is, the ufe of the whip on the na-
ked fkin. The computation was made in the
following manner. Three thoufand ftrokes with
the whip were judged to be equivalent to a year
of penance, and a thoufand blows were to be gi-
ven in the courfe of repeating ten pfalms. Con-
fequently, all the pfalms, which are one hundred
and fifty, were equivalent to five years of pe-
nance, and therefore twenty pfalters to one hun-
dred years. It is amufing enough at this day,
and in a proteftant country, to read that Domi-
nic eafily difpatched this tafk in fix days, and
thus difcharged fome offenders for whom he had
undertaken
Church DifcipHrig. 1^3
undertaken to do it. Once at the beginning of
Lent, he defired Damiani to impofc upon him a
thouiand years of penance, and he very nearly
finifhed it before the end of the fame Lent. Da-
miani alfo impofed upon the archbifhop of Milan
a penance of an hundred years, which he redeem-
ed by a fum of money to be paid annually *.
Though Peter Damiani was the great advocate
for this fyftem of penance, he did not deny the
novelty of it j".
Fleury acknowledges that when the penances
were made impoffible, on account of the multi-
tude of them, they were obliged to have recourfe
to compenfations, and eftimations, fuch as
thefe repetitions of pfalms, bowings, fcourg-
ings, alms, pilgrimages, &c. things, as he
obferves, that might be performed without con-
verfion. However, in a national council in Eng-
land, held in 747, penances performed by others
were forbidden J. This enormity was too great
to be admitted even in theie ignorant and licen-
tious ages ; but it muft have gained fome con-
fiderable ground before it was checked by pub-
lic authority.
The monks becoming confeflbrs contributed
greatly to the ruin of ecclefiaftical difciplinc.
They, knowing nothing of the antient canons,
* Fleury, A. D. 1059. f Ib. vol. 13. p. 100.
t Ib. p. 43.
introduced
154 ?be Hiftory of
introduced a certain cafuijlry by which many
crimes were excufed, and abfolution was made
eafy in all cafes ; no perfons being ever refufed,
or put off, after ever fo many relapfes. This re-
laxed cafuiftry is the moft prevalent in thofe
countries in which the inquifition is eftablifhed ;
where, if a perfon does not make his confefiion,
and confequently receive his abfolution, regular-
ly, he is excommunicated, and at length declared
fufpefted of herefy, and profecuted according to
law*.
Another thing that greatly promoted the ruin
of difcipline, and the encouragement of licenti-
oufnefs, in the middle ages, was the protection
given to criminals who took refuge in churches,
which was a cuftom borrowed from paganifm ;
this right of AJylum being transferred from the
heathen temples to chriftian churches by the firft
chriftian emperors. In the barbarous times of
antiquity, the rights of bofpitalily were held fo
facred, that it was even deemed wrong to give
up to public juftice a criminal who had thrown
himfelf under the protection of any perfon who
was capable of fcreening him. This privilege
was, of courfe, extended to the temples, which
were confidered as the houfes of their Gods ; and
fo facred was it efteemed, that, in cafes of the
greateft criminality, all that it was thought law-
ful to do, was to take off the roof of the temple,
* Fleury's eighth Difcourfe, p. 42.
and
Church DiJcipHne. 15$
and leave the wretch who had taken refuge in it
to perifh with hunger and the inclemency of the
weather.
The abufe of this rite of afylum, when it was
transferred to chriftian churches, was complained
of by Chryfoftom, who perfuaded the emperor
to revoke the privileges which had been granted
by his predeceffors. But they were reftored,
extended, and eftablifhed afterwards, efpeciaily
by Boniface the fifth, in the feventh century*,
and were the fubjecl: of great complaints in ma-
ny countries, efpeciaily in England, where the
churches and church-yards were in a manner
crowded with debtors and criminals of all kinds.
Complaint being made on this fubjecT: in the
time of Henry the feventh, the pope ordered
that if any perfon who had taken refuge in an
afylum fhould leave it, and commit a new crime,
or repeat his old one, he fhould be deprived
of the privilege . It muft be obferved, that
croffes on the public road, and various other
things and places, which had the reputation of
beingfacred, had, by degrees, got this privilege
of afylum, as well as churches. In later times,
any criminal was fafe from the purfuit of jui-
tice within the precincts of the palace of any
cardinal i but Urban V. reformed that abufef.
* Molheim, vol. 2. p. 28
Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 273.
f Meraoires pour la vie de Petrarch, vol. 3. p. 676.
Among
156 We Hiftory of
Among the Jews the privilege of afylum was
a wife inftitution, and came in aid of the prin-
ciple of juftice ; as it only protected a perfon
who pleaded that he had killed another inadver-
tently, fo that the relations of the deceafed could
not hurt him, till a regular inquiry had been
made into the fact ; but he was delivered up
to juftice if it appeared that the murder was a
wilful one. Befides, this afylum was not grant-
ed to the temple in particular, but to certain
towns, moft conveniently fituated for that pur-
pofe, in different parts of the country.
Another fburce of great corruption in difci-
pline was the abufe of pilgrimages. Thefe
were undertaken at firft out of curiofity, or a
natural reverence for any place that had been
diftinguilhed by important tranfaftions. They
began to be common about the fourth cen-
tury, and it appears by the writers of that
time, that fome weak people then valued them-
felves on having feen fuch places, and imagin-
ed that their prayers would be more favour-
ably heard there than elfewhere. But in later
times much more ftrefs was laid upon thefe
things, and in the eighth century pilgrimages
began to be enjoined by way of penance, and
at length the pilgrimage was often a warlike
expedition into the Holy Land, or fervice in
fome other of the wars in which the ambition
of the popes was interefted. By this means
atll the ufe even of the pilgrimage itfelf, as a
penance
Church Difcipline. 157
penance, was wholly loft. For, as Mr. Fleury
obferves, a penitent marching alone was much
more free from temptation to fin than one who
went to the wars in company ; and fome of
thefe penitents even took dogs and horfes along
with them, that they might take the diverfion
of hunting in thefe expeditions*.
Solitary pilgrimages were, however, much in
fafhion, and we find fome very rigorous ones
fubmitted to by perfons of great eminence in
thofe fuperftitious times ; when it was a maxim,
that nothing contributed fo much to the health
of the foul, as the mortification of the body.
In 997, an emperor of Germany by the advice
of the monks went bare-foot to mount Garganus,
famous for the fuppofed prefence of the arch-
angel Michael, as a penance.
Before the eighth century it had been the cuf-
tom to confine penitents near the churches, where
they had no opportunity of relapfing into their
offences; but in this century pilgrimages, and ef-
pecially diftant ones., began to be enjoined under
the idea that penitents fhould lead a vagabond
life, like Cain. This, however, was foon abufed;
as, under this pretence, penitents wandered about
naked, and loaded with irons, and therefore it
was forbidden in the time of Charlemaigne. But
ftill it was the cuftom to impofe upon penitents
* Fleury's fixth Difcourfe, p. zj.
pilgrimages
158 fbe Hi/lory of
pilgrimages of eftablifhed reputation, efpeci-
ally that to the Holy Land, to which there
was a conftant refort from all parts of Europe.
This was the foundation of the Crujades *.
Of all the confequences of the Crufades, the
moft important to religion was the difcontinu-
ance which they occafioned of the antient canon-
ical penance. For a man who was not able to
ferve in the Crufades was allowed to have the
fame benefit by contributing to the expences of
thofe who did. Though the Crufades are over,
the canonical penances are not returned J.
Fleury alfo obferves, that -plenary indulgences
had their origin with the Crufades -, for till then
it had never been known that by any Jingle work
the fmner was held to be difcharged from all the
temporal ptmifhments that might be due from the
juftice of God. Commutations of penance for
pilgrimages to Rome, Compoftella, or Jerufa-
lem, had been in ufe before, and to them, he
fays, the Crufades added the dangers of warf.
Befides the wars againft the Mahometans, the
Crufaders, in the courfe of their expeditions, had
frequent differences with the Greek emperor;
and then the prefervation of the Roman empire
againft the fchifmatical Greeks was held to be as
meritorious as fighting againft the Turks them-
* Fleury, vol. 13. p. 22.
I Ib. p. 29. | Ib. fixth. Difcourfe, p. 6.
felves
Church Difiipline. 159
felves; and this merit was foon applied to all
wars which the popes efteemed to be of import-
ance to religion, especially thofe againft heretics,
as the Albigenfes in France*.
t>
As it was the abufe of indulgences that was the
immediate caufe of the reformation by Luther, it
may be worth while to go a little back to con-
fider the rife and progrefs of them. It has been
obferved in a former period, that all that was
meant by indulgences in the primitive times, was
the relaxation of penance in particular cafes, ef-
pec.ially at the intercefllon of the confefibrs.
From this fmall beginning, the nature of it being
at length quite changed, the abufe grew to be fo
enormous, that it could no longer be fupported ;
and the fall of it occafioned the downfall of a
great part of the papal power.
As an exprefiion of penitence and humiliation,
a variety of penances, and fome of them of a
painful and whimfical nature, had been introduc-
ed into the difcipline of the church. At firft
they were voluntary, but afterwards they were
impofed, and could not be difpenfed with but by
the leave of the bifhop, who often fold difpenfa-
tions or indulgences, and thereby raifed great
fums of money. In the twelfth century the
popes, obferving what a fource of gain this was
to the bilhops, limited their power, and by de-
* Fleury's fixth Difcourfe, p, 16.
degrees
160 ?bc tHjiory of
grees drew the whole bufinefs of indulgences ttf
Rome. And after remitting the temporal pains
and penalties to which fmners had been fubject-
ed, they went at length fo far as to pretend to
abolifli the punifhment due to wickednefs in a
future ftate.
To complete this bufmefs, a book of rates was
publifhed, in which the iums that were to be
paid into the apoftolical chamber for abfolution
for particular crimes were precifely ftated* This
practice entirely fet afide the ufe of the books
called Penitential*, in which the penances annex-
ed to each crime were regiftered.
So long as nothing was pretended to be re-
mitted but the temporal penances which it had
been ufual to enjoin for certain offences, no great
alarm was given, and no particular reafon was
thought neceflfary for the change ; the payment
of a fum of money being a temporal evil, as welt
as bearing a number of lafhes, or walking bare-
foot, &c. and this commutation was admitted
with more eafe, as it was pretended, that all the
treafure raifed by this means was applied to fa-
ered ufes, and the benefit of the church. But
when the popes pretended to remit the future
punifhment of fin, and to abfolve from the
guilt of it, fome other foundation was neceflary j
and this they pretended to find in the vail ftock
of merit which had accrued to the church from
the good works of faints and martyrs, befides
what
Church D if dp line. 161
what were necefTary to infure their own falvation.
Thefe pretended merits flill belonged to the
church, and formed a treajure, which the popes
had the power of difpenfing. This doctrine was
greatly improved and reduced into a fyftem by
Thomas Aquinas. And afterwards, to the me-
rits of the faints and martyrs were added, thofe
of Chrift, as increafing the treafure of the
church.
Among other things advanced by cardinal
Cajetan in fupport of the doctrine of indulgen-
ces, in his controverfy with Luther on the fub-
ject, he faid, that one drop of Chrift's blood
being fufficient to redeem the whole human race,
the remaining quantity that was fhed in the gar-
den, and upon the crofs, was left as a legacy
to the church, to form a treafure, from which
indulgences were to be drawn, and adminiftered
by the Roman pontiffs*.
Though in this fomething may be allowed
to the heat of controverfy, the doctrine itfelf
had a fandtion of a much higher authority. For
Leo the tenth, in 1518, decreed that the popes
had the power of remitting both the crime and
the punifhment of fin, the crime by the facra-
ment of penance, and the temporal punifhment
by indulgences., the benefit of which extended
to the dead as well as to the living j and that
* Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 311.
VOL. II. L thefe
1 62 'The Hiflory of
thefe indulgences are 'drawn from the fupera-
bundance of the merits of Jefus Chrift and the
faints, of which treafure the pope is the dif-
penfer*.
This Leo the tenth, whofe extravagance and
expences had no bounds, had recourfe to thefe
indulgences, among other methods of recruit-
ing his exhaufted finances j and in the publica-
tion of them he promifed the forgivenefs of all
fins, paft, prefent, or to come; and however
enormous was their nature. Thefe he fold by
wholefale to thofe who endeavoured to make the
moll of them j fo that pafllng, like other com-
modities, from one hand to another, they were
even hawked about in the flreets by the com-
mon pedlars, who ufed the fame artifices to
raife the price of thefe commodities, as of any
other in which they dealt.
One Texel, a Dominican friar, particularly
diftinguifhed himfelf in pufliing the fale of thefe
indulgences. Among other things, in the fer-
mons and fpeeches which he made on this oc-
cafion, he ufed to fay, that, if a man had even
lain with the mother of God, he was able, with
the pope's power, to pardon the crime ; and he
boafted that he had faved more fouls from hell by
thefe indulgences, than St. Peter had converted
* Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 407.
to
Church Difcjpline. 163
to chriftianity by all his preaching*. There
would be no end of reciting the blafphemous
pretenfions of the venders of thefe indulgences,
with refpect to the enormity of crimes, the num-
ber of perfons benefited by them, or the time
to which they extended. Biihop Burnet had
ieen an indulgence which extended to ten thou-
fand years. Sometimes indulgences were affixed
to particular churches and altars, and to parti-
cular times or days, chiefly to the year of Ju-
bilee. They are alfo affixed to fuch things as
may be carried about with a perfon, as Agnus
Dei's, to medals, rofaries, or fcapularies. They
are alfo affixed to fome prayers, the devout re-
petition of them being a means of procuring great
indulgences. The granting of all thefe is left
intirely to the difcretion of the popef.
Such fcandalous excefTes as thefe excited the
indignation of Luther, who firft preached againft
the abufe of indulgences only, then, in confe-
quence of meeting with oppofition, againfl in-
dulgences themfelves, and at length againft the
papal power which granted them.
Before this time the council of Conftance had,
in fome meafure, reftrained the abufe of indul-
gences, and particularly had made void all thofe
that had been granted during the fchifm J. But
* Moftieim, vol. 3. p. 304. f Burnet on the Articles, p. 282.
J Lcnfant, vol. i. p. 433.
L 2 it
1 64 We Uiftory of
it appears, that, notwithftanding thefe reftraints,,
the abufes were greater than ever in the time ol
Leo the tenth.
The council of Trent allowed of indulgences
in general terms, but forbad the felling of them,
and referred the whole to the difcretion of the
pope ; fo that, upon the whole, the abufe was
eftablifhed by this council. But though the re-
formation may not have produced any formal
decifions in the church of Rome againftthe abule
of indulgences fo as to affect the doftrine of them,
the pra&ice has been much moderated; and at
prefent it does not appear that much more ftrefs
is laid upon fuch things by catholics in general,
than by proteftants themfelves.
Some remains of the doctrine of indulgences
are retained in the church of England, in which
the bifhops have a power of difpenfmg with the
marriage of perfons more near a kin than the
law allows ; which is, in fad, to excufe what
they themfelves call the crime of inceft. But there
is fomething much more unjuftifiable in the pow-
er of abfolution, or an authoritative declaration of
the forgivenefs of fin, which is alfo retained from
the church of Rome. For after confeflion,
the prieft is directed to abfoive a fick perfon in
this form of words. " Our Lord Jefus Chrift,
<f who has left power to his church to abfoive
" all finners who truly repent and believe in
" him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine
C offences;
Church Difcipline. 16$
c offences ; and by his authority committed to
" me, I abfolve thee from all thy fin, in the
" name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
" the Holy Ghoft." This is exaftly a popifh
abfolution, and is therefore liable to all the ob-
jections to which popifh abfolutions and indul-
gences are liable. One that is not in prieft's or-
ders cannot pronounce this abfolution.
Whatever was meant by the power of abfolu-
tion communicated by Chrift to the apoftles,
there is nothing faid in the New Teftament of
its being committed to the ordinary minifters of
the church, fo that it muft have been confined
to the apoftles only \ and we have no example
even of their exercifing any fuch authority as the
church of Rome, or that of England pretends to.
It is in vain to apologize for this form of abfo-
lution, by faying that the pardon of fin is only
promifed to the penitent, for then what occafion
was there for mentioning any power committed
to the clergyman with refpecl: to the abfolution,
unlefs he be at leaft fuppofed to know the heart,
and thereby be enabled to judge with certainty
whether any perfon be a true penitent, and a
proper object of mercy, or not. If the form has
any meaning at all, it muft imply that it is in
the power of the prieft to abfolve, or not to ab-
folve, as he lliall think proper, which is certainly
great prefumption and impiety.
L 3 In
166 STfc Hiflory of
In many other relpedls the difcipline of the
church of England is very imperfect, and the
wifeft members of her communion, as well as
thofe among the papifts, lament the evil without
feeing any profpecl: of a remedy. The bufinefs
of auricular confeflion, and alfo that of private
penance, is entirely abolifhed; but the bijhops
courts remain, which by mixing things of a civil
with thofe of an ecclefiaftical nature, are of great
diflervice to both. And whereas by the rules of
thefe courts, public penance is enjoined for cer-
tain offences, perfons are allowed to commute
them for fums of money.
SECTION III.
Of the Method of enforcing Church Cenfures, or the
Hiflory of Perfecution, till the Time of Auftin.
HAVING traced the general courfe of church
difcipline, in all its changes, from the time
of the apoftles to the reformation, it may not be
amifs to go over the fame ground once more,
with a view to confider the methods that have
been from time to time taken, in order to en-
force the cenfures of the church , and in this we
fliall have occafion to lament, among other
things, the moft horrid abufe of both ecclefiafti-
cal and civil power; while men were continually
attempting to do by force what it is not in the
power
Church Difcipline. 167
power of force to do, viz. to guide the con-
fcience, or even to compel an outward conformi-
ty, in large bodies of people, to the fame reli-
gious profeflion. Of this interference of the ci-
vil power in the bufmefs of religion, we fhall fee
the firft fteps in this period, in which a great de-
viation was made from the admirable fimplicity
of the rules laid down by our Saviour.
In order to prevent the progrefs of vice, and
in any cafe to preferve the reputation of chriftian
focieties, our Lord laid down a moft excellent
rule, as a general instruction for the conduct of
his difciples; namely, firft to admonifh an offend-
ing brother in the moft private and prudent man-
ner. If that was not effectual, one or two more
were to give their fanction to the reproof; if that
failed, the cafe was to come under the cognizance
of the whole congregation ; and if the offender
proved obftinate and refractory in this laft in-
ftance, he was to be expelled from the fociety, in
confequence of which the church was difcharged
from all farther attention to his conduct, and he
was confidered in the fame light as if he had ne-
ver belonged to it. Such, and fo admirably
fimple, and well adapted to its end, was the fyf-
tem ofdifcipline in the conftitution of the chrif-
tian church 5 and for fome time it was ftrictly
adhered to, and the effects of it were great and
happy. By this means chriftians effectually
watched over one another in love, exhorting one an-
ether daily y and not Juffering fin in each other.
L 4 Thus
i 68 <fbe Hijiory of
Thus alfo by forming regular bodies, they
became more firmly united and attached to one
another, and their zeal for the common caufe
was greatly increafed.
Befides admonition and reproof, private and
public, the primitive chriftians had no method
of enforcirig the obfervance of chriftian duties.
If this failed, nothing remained but excommunica-
'tion, or cutting off the vicious or refractory
member from any vifible relation to them, or
connection with them. And, indeed, confider-
ing the valuable advantages refuking to every
particular member from the reft of the body, a
formal exclufion, and as it neceffarily muft have
been, an ignominious exclufion, from a chriftian
fociety, could not but have been regarded, even
without any fuperftition, as a very awful thing.
It was generally concluded, that the cenfures
of the church, pafTed in a folemn and unanimous
manner, would be ratified at the tribunal of
Chrift at the laft day ; fo that a perfon cut off
from the communion of the church here, would
be excluded from heaven hereafter. And, in-
deed, if a man's conduct were fuch as expofed
him to this cenfure of his fellow chriftians, of
whofe kindnefs and affection he had abundant
experience, and when they were under no bias
or prejudice in giving their judgment, it is
probable that it would be juft, and therefore
be ratified in heaven ; and we may prefume that,
in
Church Difcipline.
in the primitive times this was generally the
cafe i though it muft be acknowledged that even
a whole church may judge uncharitably and rafh-
ly, and in this cafe their cenfures certainly will
not be ratified at the righteous tribunal of God.
Excommunications became much more dread-
ful, when, in the progrefs of fuperftition, the
participation of religious rites, and efpecially
that of the Lord's fupper, came to be confider-
ed as a necefiary qualification for the favour of
God' and the happinefs of heaven, an opinion
which prevailed in very early times.
Whatever was the caufe> the effett of church
cenfures in thofe times was very extraordinary.
It was cuftomary, as we have feen, for perfons
under fentence of excommunication to attend at
the doors of the churcli with all the marks of the
deepeft dejection and contrition, intreating the
minifters and people with tears in their eyes, and
earneftly begging their prayers, and reftoration
to the peace of the church.
Perfons the moft diftinguifhed for their wealth
and power were indifcriminately fubjecl: to thefe
church cenfures, and had no other method of be-
ing reflored to communion-, but by the fame hu-
miliation and contrition that was expected from
the meaneft perfon in the fociety. When Philip
the governor of Egypt, would have entered a
chriftian church, after the commiffion of fome
crime.
iy o 1'be tfijtory of
crime, the bifhop forbad him till he fird made
corifeflion of his fin, and parTed through the or-
der of penitents, a fentence which, we are told,
he willingly fubmitted to. Even the emperor
Theodofius the Great, was excommunicated by
Ambrofe the bifhop of Milan, for a barbarous
flaughter of the Theflalonians ; and that great
prince fubmitted to a penance of eight months,
and was not received into the church till after the
mod humble confefllon of his offence, and giv-
ing the mod "undeniable proof of his fincerity.
I muft add, that whenever a perfon was excom-
municated in any particular church, it was gene-
rally deemed wrong to admit him to communion
in any other. Sometimes, however, neighbour-
ing churches, being well acquainted with the
caufe of excommunication, and not approving of
it, received into their communion the perfons ib
ftigmatized. And when the regular fubordinati-
on of one church to another was eftablifhed, it
was cuftomary for the excommunicated perfon
to appeal from the fentence of his particular
church to a higher tribunal. Many of thefe
appeals were made to the church of Rome, from
other churches not regularly fubordinate to it,
which laid the firft foundation of the exorbitant
power of that church.
When chriftians began to debate about opini-
ons, and to divide and fubdivide themfelves on
that account, it is to be lamented, but not to be
wondered
Church Dijcipline. 171
wondered at, that they laid an undue firefs on
what they deemed to be the right faith, and that
they fhould apply church cenfures in order to
prevent the fpreading of heretical opinions; with-
out waiting till they could judge by obfervation
what effect fuch opinions had on the temper and
general conduct of men, and indeed without con-
fidering that influence at all. The firft remark^-
able abufe of the power of excommunication in
this way is by no means fuch as recommends it,
being fuch as would now be deemed the moft
frivolous and unjuftifiable that can well be ima-
gined. For on the account of nothing more
than a difference of opinion and practice with re-
fpect to the time of celebrating Eafter, Victor,
bifhop of Rome, excommunicated at once ali
the eaftern churches. But this was reckoned a
moft daring piece of infolence -and arrogance, for
which he was feverely reproved by other bifhops ;
nor, indeed, was any regard paid to the cenfure.
It muft be obferved that, in confequence of ap-
peals being made from inferior churches to the
patriarchal ones, thefe took upon them to extend
their excommunications beyond the limits of
their acknowledged jurrfdiction, viz. to all who
held any obnoxious opinion or practice. Perfons
thus cenfured often formed feparate churches,
and in return excommunicated thofe who had
excommunicated them.
In this ftate of mutual hoflility things often
continued a long time, till the influence of an
emperor,
ij 2 tfbe Hiftory of
emperor, or feme other foreign circumitance, de-
termined the difpute in favour of one of them,
which was thenceforth deemed the orthodox fide
of the queftion, whilft the other was condemned
as heretical. It is well known that the Arians
and Athanafians were in this manner reputed or-
thodox by turns ; as both had the fanction of
councils and emperors in their favour; till, in
confequence of mere fadion, and the authority
of the emperors, the party of Athanafius prevail-
ed at laft.
The firft inftance that we meet with of the ufe
of actual force, or rather of a defire to make ufe
of it, by a chriftian church, was in the proceedings
againft Paul bifliop of Samofata ; when, at thd
requeft of a chriftian fynod, the heathen empe-
ror Aurelian, expelled him from the epifcopal
houfe*. Indeed, having been depofed from his
office, if that had been done by competent au-
thority, namely, that of his own diocefe, he could
not be faid to have any right to the emoluments
of it, and therefore his keeping pofleflion of the
epifcopal houfe was an at of violence on his
fide.
But as foon as the empire became what is call-
ed chriftian, we have examples enow of the in-
terference of civil power in matters of religion j
and we foon find inftances of the abufe of excom-
* Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p. 7.
munication,
Church Difcipline. 173
munkation, and the addition of civil incapacities
annexed to that ecclefiaftical cenfure. In a
council held at Ptolemais in Cyrene, Andronicus
the prefect was excommunicated, and it was ex-
prcfled in the fentence, that no temple of God
fhould be open unto him, that no one fhould fa-
lute him during his life, and that he fhould not
be buried after his death f.
The emperor Conilantine, befides banifliing
Arius himfelf, ordering his writings to be burnt,
and forbidding any perfons to conceal him under
pain of death, deprived many of thofe who were
declared heretics of the privileges which he had
granted to chriftians in general, and befides im-
pofmg ones upon them, forbad their arTernblies,
and demolifhed their places of worfhip. On the
other hand, the emperor Conftantius banifhed the
orthodox biihops becaufe they would not con-
demn Athanafius. Neftorius was banifhed by
Theodofius, in whofe reign perfecution for the
fake of religion made greater advances than in
any other within this period. He certainly
imagined he made a right ufe of the power with
which God had entrufted him, by employing it
in eftablilhing what he thought to be the ortho-
dox faith, without ever reflecting on the impro-
priety of fuch a means with refpecl to fuch an
end.
\ Sueur, A. D. 411.
Immedi-
1 74 Vb* Hifiory of
Immediately upon his baptifin, which, accord-
ing to the fuperflitious notions which influenced
many perfons of that age, he had deferred till his
life was in danger by ficknefs, he publifhed a de-
cree commanding that, " in order that all his
" fubjects fhould make profeffion of the fame
<c religion which the divine apoftle Peter taught
fc the Romans, the doctrine of the Trinity
" fhould be embraced by thofe who would be
cc called catholics; that all others," whom he
fays he judged to be mad, tc fhonld bear the
" infamous name of heretics y and that their af-
tc femblies fhould not be called churches, re-
" ferving their farther puniihment in the firft
<c place to the vengeance of heaven, and after-
<c wards to the movements with which God
f fhould infpire him*." In confequence, I
fuppofe, of one of thefe movements, three years
after this edict, he publifhed another, forbidding
the Arians to hold their affemblies in cities.
He, however, was not the perfon who was in-
fpired with the glorious thought of fentencing
all heretics to be burned alive. This was re-
ferved for a more advanced ftate of the chriflian
church.
It was of a fon of Theodofius, viz. the eaftern
emperor Honorius, that the authority of perfecuti-
on to death was obtained, by four bifhops fent from
Carthage for that purpofe in 4105 and the edict
extended to all who differed ever fo little from
* Sueur, A. D. 378.
the
Church DifcipUne. iy$
the catholic faith f. But it does not appear that
this fanguinary decree was carried into execution.
Notwithftanding all the hardfhips which the
chriflians had lately fufFered from the pagans,
and the juft remonftrances they had made on the
fubjecl:, no fooner were they in poffeffion of the
fame power, than they were too ready to make
a fimilar ufe of it; and inftead of (hewing the
world the contraft of a truly chriftian fpirit,
they were eager to retaliate upon their enemies,
whom they now had at their mercy. But at
firft the number of the pagans was too great
to make very violent proceedings at all prudent.
As the chrhTians increafed in number, the pa-
gans were foon laid under great redactions.
In the year 346, it was decreed that all the
heathen temples in cities fhould be fhut up,
but that thofe in the villages fhould not be med-
dled with ; the chriftians having increafed more
in the cities, and fuperftition, as might be ex-
pected, retaining its hold of the minds of men
much longer in the villages, where they had iefs
intercourfe with Grangers, and confequently Iefs
opportunity of receiving information. It was in
this ftate of things that the heathens began to be
diftinguifhed by the name of Pagans (Pagani)
that is, inhabitants of villages. In the year 382,
thefe pagans were laid under farther reftrictions :
^ Taylor on the grand Apoftacy, p. 131.
for
1-j 6 The Hi/lory of
for though they were allowed to frequent their
temples as ufual, they were not fuffered to make
any facrifices there. At the fame time, however,
the clandeftine affemblies of the Manjcheans were
abfolutely forbidden.
Even the more learned chriftians, who might
have been expected, by reflections upon the paft,
to have fcen things in a jufter light, and to have
entertained more liberal fentiments, foon became
the advocates for the interference of civil power
in matters. of religion. Auftin, the oracle of the
church in his own time, and ftill more fo after his
death, confelTed that he had formerly been of
opinion that heretics fhould not be harrafied by
cai holies, but rather allured by all kinds of gen-
tje methods ; yet afterwards he changed his opi-
nion, having learned by experience, that the
laws made by the emperors againft heretics had
proved the happy occafion of their converfion*.
His whole Epftle to Vincentius, where we learn
this, is well worth reading, as being perhaps the
firft piece in which the ufe of force in matters
of religion is pleaded for. He certainly meant
well by it.
As one great fource of information is by means
of books, all thofe whofe wilh it has been to pre-
vent the fpreading of any particular opinion,
have generally done every thing in their power
* Opera, Vol. 2. p. 174.
to
Church Difdpline. 177
to fupprefs the books that recommend it. The
heathens made frequent attempts to compel the
chriftians to give up their facred books ; but
the firft example of any thing of this kind by
chriftians (except what is mentioned above con-
cerning the writings of Arius) was exhibited
by Theodofius, who in 448 made a law, by which
it was ordered, that all the books, the doclrine
of which was not conformable to the councils
of Nice and Ephefus, and alfo to the decifions
of Cyril, fhould be deftroyed, and the con-
cealers of them put to death. Afterwards pope
Gelafius, in a council held at Rome in 494,
fpecified the books which the church of Rome
rejected, but without laying any penalty on
thofe who fliould read them*.
So far thofe who were in pofiefiion of power,
and who were inftigated by bigotry, went in
thefe early times. We Ihall fee a much great-
er extenfion of this, as well as of every other
method of preventing and extirpating herefy,
in the following period.
* Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p. 24.
VOL. II. M SECTION
178 fbe Hijlory of
SECTION IV.
Of the Methods of enforcing ecclefiaftical Cenfures
from the Time of Auftin to the Reformation
and afterwards, by the Catholics.
WE are now launching into what has been
properly enough called the dark age of
this weftern part of the world , and we ihall
not be furprifed to find bigotry and violence keep
pace with ignorance, and that they ftiould not be
lefTened but by the increafe of knowledge, and
but very (lowly even then.
As, upon the converfion of the barbarous na-
tions to chriftianity, the bifhops became fome
of the moft confiderable land owners, in con-
fequence of which they had a right to fit in
their parliaments, to hold courts, and even to
ferve in the wars, there neceffarily arofe an un-
natural mixture of civil and ecclefiaftical power,
the fame perlbns ferving in both capacities.
Since all public concerns, of a fpiritual as well
as of a temporal nature, were frequently dif-
cufled in thefe parliaments, or afiemblies of the
ftates, regulations of all kinds, ecclefiaftical as
well as others, were enforced by civil penalties.
By this means compulfory penances were in-
troduced in the feventh century, when we find
proofs
Church Difcipline. 179
proofs of their being in Spain. There the bifh-
ops, rinding offenders refufing to fubmit to pe-
nance, complained to their parliament, and re-
quefted their princes to interpofe their tempo-
ral power. The punilhments that were enjoin-
ed in this manner, were prohibitions to eat flefh,
to wear linen, to mount a horfe, &cf. It
would have been happy if civil power had pro-
ceeded no farther than this in matters of reli-
gion, and had extended to no other cafes.
\
In this period the fentence of excommunica-
tion became a much more dreadful thing than
it had been before, and a proportionably greater
folemnity was added to the forms of it. The
moft folemn part of the new ceremonial was
the extinction of lamps or candles, by throw-
ing them on the ground, with a folemn impre-
cation, that the perfon againft whom the ex-
communication was pronounced, might in like
manner, be extinguifhed, or deilroyed by the
judgment of God. And becaufe the people
were fummoned to attend this ceremony by the
found of a bell, and the curfes accompanying
the excommunication were recited out of a book,
while the perlon who pronounced them flood
on fome balcony or ftage, from which he would
throw down his lights, we have the phrafe of
curfing by bell, book, and candle. The firft ex-
ample of excommunication by throwing down
f Fleury, vol. 13. p. 44.
M 2 lighted
i8o <be Hijlory of
lighted lamps was at Rheims, about the year
900, when the bifhops excommunicated fome
murderers in this manner*.
"\\hen herefies fprung up in the church, and
there were many other offenders who were out
of the reach of church power, it came to be
the cuftom to pronounce thefe curfes againft
them on certain days of the year, and we find
Thurfday before Eafter made choice of for this
purpofe. Thus we read that John the twenty
fecond, according to the cuftom of the church
of Rome, on the Thurfday before Eafter, pub-
liflied a bull, by which he excommunicated the
poor of Lyons (or the Albigenfes) the Arnold-
ifts, and all heretics in general, the Corfairs,
the fajfifiers of apoftolical bulls, and all who
ufurped the city of Rome, or the patrimony of
St. Pcter|.
At length fentences of general excommuni-
cation becoming frequent (every decretal,
though the fubject of it was ever fo trifling,
denouncing this fentence againft all who ftiould
difobey it) and confequendy whole clafies of
men, and fometimes whole communities, fall-
ing under thofe cenfures, they came to be def-
pifed and loft their effect^
* Jortin's Remarks, vol. 4. p. 518.
f Hiltoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 12.
Fleury's tenth DIfcourfe, p. 65.
Leonardo
Church Difciptine. 181
Leonardo Aretino, who wrote before the re-
formation, obferves, in his hiftory of Florence,
book iv. p. 77, that when the citizens had
been ufed to the papal cenfures, they did not
much regard the interdicts they were laid un-
der; efpecially as they obferved that they were
not decreed for any good realbn, but depend-
ed on the will of thofe who had moft influence
with the popes. And in the year 1377, when
the city was laid under an interdict, public
orders were given to the clergy to pay no re-
gard to it*.
When the paflions of ecclefiaftics were much
interefted, they were not content with mere
church cenfures ; but, having the fandion of the
civil power, they annexed the moft dreadful ci-
vil penalties to their excommunications. Thefe
were eafily introduced after the Roman empire
became chriftian, and in many of the imperial
conftitutions made after that event, we find va-
rious civil difqualifications, fome of which were
mentioned in the former period, added to the
cenfures of the church. But the whole fyftem
of this mixed ecclefiaftical and civil polity re-
ceived frefh and ftronger fanftlons upon the
conversion of the Germans, Goths, Celts, and
other northern nations. Thefe people had been
ufed to excommunication in their own pagan
religions ; and the confequence of it had always
* P. 172.
M 3 been
1 82 The Hi/lory of
been the moft dreadful civil penalties and dif-
abilities. Among the Gauls excommunicated
perfons had been looked upon as wicked and
fcandalous wretches ; all people avoided their
company, they were not allowed the benefits of
the courts of juftice, nor were they admitted to
any poft of honour or profit in the community.
Of this prejudice of the people the chriftian
priefts willingly took advantage, as by this
means they could overawe thofe who defpifed
mere church cenfures. Civil penances for offen-
ces againft the church were increafed by degrees,
till herefy came to be confidered as a crime
of fo heinous a nature, that burning alive was de-
creed to be, of all others, the mod proper punifh-
ment of it. We do not, indeed, wonder to find
that, of all crimes, the church, which had fo
much at ftake, fhould be moft alarmed at that of
bereft, and therefore fhould apply what might be
thought to be the moft effectual remedy, and the
moft likely to terrify thofe who fhould be ex-
pofed to it.
It is, however, curious enough to obferve that,
as there could be no pretence for ecclefiaftics,
as fucb, having recourfe to civil penalties, or,
according to the ufual phrafe, making ufe of the
temporal Jword ; whenever it was thought necef-
fary that any criminals againft the church fhould
be punifhed with death, they were folemnly
delivered over to the civil power. In the coun-
cil
Church DiJ 'dp line 183
cil of La'-eran in 1179, which was before any
heretics were punifhed with death, it is faid that,
" though the church rejects bloody executions,
" it may nevertheless be aided by the laws of
tf chriftian princes, and that the fear of corpo-
tc real punifhments often makes perfons have re-
<c courfe to Spiritual remedies*." And to this
day the court of Inquifition not only Solemnly
delivers over to the civil power all thofe who are
deftined to fuffer death, but even formally re-
commends them to mercy, where it is certainly
not the wifh of thofe who exprefs this concern
for them, that they fhould find any.
Among other methods of trying whether a
perfon was a heretic, we find, in thcfe dark ages,
one of the ordeals of the northern nations, and
the fame that till of late years, was thought to
be the proper teft of witchcraft in this country.
For, in the perfecution of the Albigenfes, in or-
der to know whether a perfon was a heretic,
thofe who fufpected him threw him into water,
on the fuppofition that, if he was a heretic, the
devil within him being lighter than the water,
would prevent his finkingj-. But, as I have ob-
ferved before, the punifliment that was thought
to be the moft proper for herefy, was burning
alive s and indeed this was the firft capital pu-
* Hiitoire des Papes, vol. 3. p. 90.
f Bafnage Hiftoire des Eglifes Reformees, vol. 2. p. 229.
M 4 nifhment
1 84 ?be Hiftory of
nifhment that was decreed for it. There was
not, however, any proper capital punifhment for
herefy, till the year 1215, when it was appointed
by the fourth council of Lateran, that all here-
tics fhould be delivered over to the civil magif-
trate to be burned.
Why this peculiarly dreadful punifhment, of
all others, Ihould have been thought the mod
proper for herefy, it is not eafy to fay. Pofiibly
the crime was thought to be fo dreadful and con-
tagious, that it was determined, as far as pofii-
ble, to deftroy and annihilate even the body .of
the heretic, left it fhould taint the earth, the fea,
or the air. The church of Rome, having once
employed this horrid engine, found it fo well
adapted to the reft of her fyftem, and fo necef-
fary to enforce a regard to decrees not recom-
mended by reafon or argument, that fhe had fre-
quent recourfe to it; and though this was the
greateft of all abufes of ecclefiaftical authority,
it was retained, along with other corruptions of
chriftianity, by moft of the firft reformers.
The burning of heretics was not, however, the
firft kind of perfecution which the church of
Rome employed to fubdue her enemies j and re-
eourfe was not had to this, till other methods,
and even feveral of a very violent kind, had been
tried without effect. The firft object that roufed
the fanguinary difpofition of the court of Rome,
was
Church Difciplitie. 185
was the herefies, as they were called, of the Wal-
denfes, and of the Albigenfes, the former of
whom inhabited fome of the mountainous parts
of the Alps, and the latter the fouthern provinces
of France.
Thefe people were dreadfully perfecuted by
Innocent the third, who firft prohibited all man-
ner of intercourfe or communication with them,
confiscated their goods, difmherited their chil-
dren, deftroyed their houfes, denied them the. rite
of fepulture, and gave their accufers one third of
their effects. But in 1198, he erected the court
of InquifitioHy the object of which was the utter
extirpation of them, in which Dominic was the
chief actor. Afterwards he publifhed Crufades
againft them, promifing all who would engage in
that war, the fame indulgences that had been
granted to thofe who engaged in the expeditions
for the recovery of the Holy Land. In confe-
quence of this, great multitudes of them were de-
ftroyed with all manner of cruelties.
This war, or rathermafTacre, continued near forty
years, and a million of men are fuppofed to have
loft their lives in it. And of thefe, it is faid,
there were three hundred thoufand of the Cru-
faders themfelves *. However, the confequence
of this perfecution was the fame with that of
* Hiltoire des Papes, vol. 3. p. 16.
moft
1 86 The Hijtory of
moft others; the reprobated opinion being far-
ther diffeminated by this means. Particularly,
the kings of England, and the earls of Thou-
loufe (who had been the heads of the Albigen-
fes) being related, many of them came over into
England, where great numbers embraced their
opinions. They were afterwards imbibed by
Wickliffe, and from him they pafled into Bohe-
mia.
Perhaps the mod horrible and perfidious of
any fingle ad of barbarity, committed by the pa-
pifts, was the maffacre of the proteftants in Pa-
ris, on the eve of St. Bartholomew, in 1563;
when the Hngonots (as the proteftants in France
are called) were lulled afleep by all the forms of
pacification, and an attempt was made to rife
upon them, and deftroy them all in one night.
In Paris, and fome other towns, it took effect,
and great numbers were maffacred when they
were altogether unapprehenfive of danger. Had
this happened in a popular tumult, it would have
been more excufeable; but it was not only a moft
deliberate act of perfidy, concerted long before
the time of execution, but the king himfelf,
Charles the ninth, bore a part in it, firing upon
his own fubjects from his window ; and pope Gre-
gory the thirteenth gave folemn thanks to God
for this maffacre in the church of St. Louis, whi-
ther he himfelf went in procefllon. The guns of
St. Angelo were alfo fired, and bonfires were
made
Church Difcipline. 187
made in the ftreets of Rome upon the occa-
fion*.
The court of Rome has even employed the
fame bloody methods to extirpate herefies that
arofe among the catholics themfelves, thofe who
maintained them adhering to the popifh fyftem in
general. This was the cafe with refpect to fome
Francifcans in the fourteenth century, who main-
tained, that neither Chrift, nor the apoftles, had
any perfonal property. This mod innocent opi-
nion was mod vehemently oppofed by the Do-
minicans; and John the twenty-fecond, in 1324,
pronounced it to be a peftilential, erroneous,
damnable, and blafphemous doctrine, fubverfive
of the catholic faith ; and he declared all thofe
who adhered to it obftinate heretics, and rebels
againft the church. In confequence of this mer-
cilefs decree, great numbers of thofe poor Fran-
cifcans were apprehended by the Dominican in-
quifitors, and committed to the flames f.
It would be unjuft, however, to fuppofe that
all the members of the catholic churchy as it is
called, have been equally bent on the extirpa-
tion of heretics by thefe violent methods. At
all times there have been advocates for mode-
ration among very zealous papifts. Thomas
Aquinas, who for many centuries was efteemed
the bulwark of the popifli caufe, fnainrained
* Hilloire des Papes, vol. 5. p. 25.
t Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 178.
that
i88 Tve Hiftory of
that religion ought not to be extended by force ;
alledging that no perfon can believe as he would,
and that the will fhould not be forced*. There
were alfo thoie who remonftrated very ftrongly
againft all the perfecutions of the proteftants
by the papifts, elpecially thofe of Phillip the
fecond of Spain, as well as thofe of Louis the
fourteenth of Fiance. And there is reafon to
believe that the minds of the catholics in ge-
neral are now fo much enlightened, partly by
reflection, but chiefly by experience, that they
would no more act the fame things over again,
than the proteftants would, who, as will be feen
in the next fection, were guilty of almotl as
great excefles in proportion to the extent of their
power.
As we are naturally more interefted in our
own hiftory, I fhall mention a few more par-
ticulars concerning the progrefs of perfecution
in this country. There were no penal ftatutes
againft herefy, enacted by the authority of an
Englilh parliament, before the fifth year of Ri-
chard the fecond, in 1382; when it was ap-
pointed, that heretics fhould be kept in prifon
cc till they juftified themfelves according to
" law, and the reafon of holy church." The
commitment was to be the rule for the chan-
cellor, after the bifhop had prefented the name
of the offender.
* Fleury's fixth Difcourfe, p. 32.
Afterwards
Church Difcipline. 189
Afterwards Henry the fourth, in order to
gain the good will of the clergy, procured an
a6b, in the fecond year of his reign, 1400, by
which convicted heretics might be imprifoned
and confined at the difcretion of the diocefan,
or of his commifTary, and thofe who re-
fufcd to abjure, or who relapfed, were to be
burnt to death in fome confpicuous place be-
fore the people. By this law all heretics were
lefc to the mercy of the bifliops in the fpiritua]
courts, who might imprifon them or put them to
death, without prefentment or trial by a jury,
as was the practice in all other criminal cafes.
The reign of his fon Henry the fifth, whofe
intereft it was to keep things quiet at home,
by obliging the clergy, while he was carrying
on his wars abroad, was very unfavourable to
free inquiry. In the beginning of his reign
1414, an a<5t was made againft the Lollards
or Wickliffites, by which it was decreed that they
fhould forfeit all their lands and goods to the
king. In this reign, however, it was that the
writ de h<eretico comburendo was 5 fiued from the
chancery ; by which it feems that the heretics
were taken again into the king's protection.
But this does not appear to have been necefTary,
or at lead to have been practifed, for no fuch
writs are to be found upon the rolls before the
reign of Henry the eighth. By virtue of thefe
ilatmes, the clergy exercifed numberlefs cruel-
ties upon the people, there being hundreds of
examples
190 The Hi/lory of
examples of perfons imprifoned, and probably
pur to death, by them*.
The prohibition of books was an evil that
wis greatly increafed after the reformation,
though it began before. There were rigorous
edicts againfl the writings of Wickl'iffe and John
Hufs. But Leo the tenth renewed them in
condemning the propofitions of Luther, and
all the books that bore his name. He made a
decree that no book fhould be publifhed in
Rome, or in any other city or diocefe, before
it had been approved by an officer appointed
for that purpofe j and he was the firft who made
any decree of this nature f. The popes that
fucceeded him, forbad under pain of excom-
munication, the reading of all the books of
heretics j and in order to diftinguifh them, Phil-
lip the fecond ordered the Spanifh inquifition
to print a catalogue of them, which Paul the
fourth alfo did at Rome ; at the fame time
ordering them to be burnt J. In 1597, Cle-
ment the eighth publilhed another catalogue of
books prohibited, and among them was Junius's
tranflation of the Old Teftament, and Beza's
of the New, though the former might, at the
difcretion of the bifhop, be granted to learned
men.
* Neale's Hiftory of the Puritans, vol. i, p. 5.
f Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 389.
J Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 465. Hiftoire des Papes, vol.
4. p. 634.
SECTION
Church Difctpline. igi
SECTION V.
Of Perfection by Proteftanls,
I HAVE already obferved, that this fanguin-
ary method of propagating and eftablifhing
religion was adopted, together with other po-
pifli maxims by the reformers ; and alas, the
hiftory of all reformed countries bears too ftrong
evidence of it.
In the wars of Bohemia, both the proteftants
and papifts agreed that it was lawful to ex-
tirpate with fire and fword, all enemies of the
true religion. The proteftants acknowledged
that heretics were worthy of capital punifhment,
but they denied that John Huls was a heretic.
Zifka, the general of the Hufiites, fell upon
the feel: of the Beghards in 1421, and put fome
of them to the fword, and condemned the reft
to the flames, a punilhment which they bore
with the mod chearful fortitude \.
Luther had no idea of the impropriety of civil
penalties to enforce the true religion. He only
objected to the putting heretics to death, but ap-
proved of their being confined, as madmen. He
perfuaded the elector of Saxony not to tolerate
f Mofheim, vol. 3. .p. 261. 274.
the
i^l 'fbe ITiflory of
the followers of Zuinglius, merely becaufe he did
not believe the real pretence of Chrift in the eu-
charift -, and the Lutheran lawyers condemned to
death Peter Poflellus for being a Zuinglian.
They alfo put to death feveral anabaptifts*. It
was not till towards the end of the feventeenth
century that the Lutherans adopted the leading
maxim which, Mofheim fays, had been peculiar
to the Arminians, that no good fubjeft was juft-
ly punifhable by the magiftrates for his religious
opinions f.
Mofheim alfo fays, that Zuinglius is faid to
have attributed to the civil magiftrate fuch an
cxtenfive power in ecclefiaflical affairs, as is in-
confiftent with the effence and genius of religi-
on J. He condemned an anabaptifl to be drown-
ed, with this cruel infult, >ui iterum mergit mer-
gatur ; He that dips a Jecond time, let him be dip-
Calvin went upon the fame plan, perfecuting
many worthy perfons, and even procuring Serve-
tus to be burned alive for writing againft the
dodrine of the Trinity. He alfo wrote a trea-
tife in order to prove the lawfulnefs of putting
heretics to death -, and in one of his letters he
fays, " Since the papifts, in order to vindicate
f e their own fuperftitions, cruelly fhed innocent
* Chandler's Hiftory of Perfecution, p. 311.
f Vol. 4. p. 440 t Ib. 3-p. 320.
Chandler's Hift. of Pcrfecution, p. 328.
blood^
Church Dijripline. 1 93
" blood, it is a fhame that a chriftian ma-
ff giftrate fhould have no courage at all in the
<{ defence of certain truth." Even Melancthon,
though efteemed to be of a mild and moderate
temper, approved of the death of Servetus *.
After the reformation in England, the laws
againil heretics were not relaxed, but the pro-
ceedings were appointed to be regular, as in
other criminal cafes. Thus it was enacted in
1534, that heretics fhould be proceeded againft
upon prefentment by a jury, or ori the oath of
two witnefles at leaftf.
When the new liturgy was confirmed by act
of parliament in the reign of Edward the fixth,
in 1548, it was ordered that fuch of the cler-
gy as refufed to conform to it, fhould, upon
the firft conviction, fuffer fix months imprifon-
menr, and forfeit a year's income of their bene-
fices j for the fecond offence they fhould forfeit
all their church preferments, and fuffer a year's
imprifonmerit; arid for the third offence impri-
fonment for life. They who fhould write or
print any thing againfl the book were fined ten
pounds for the firft offence, twenty for the fe-
cond, with forfeiture of all their goods ; and
Imprifonment for life for the third J.
* Chandler's Hift. p. 321. 323.
f Neale's Hift. p. 10. J Ib. p. 39.
VOL. II. N Cranmer
194. fhe Hiftory of
Cranmer, whilft he was a Lutheran, confented
to the burning of John Lambert and Ann
Afkew, for thofe very doctrines for which he
himfelf fuffered afterwards ; and when he was
a facramentarian he was the caufe of the death
of Joan Bocher, an Arian, importuning the young
king Edward the fixth, to fign the death war-
rant j and he is faidto have done it with great
reluctance, faying, with tears in his eyes, that
if he did wrong, it was in fubmiffion to his
authority (Cranmer's) and that he fhould anfwer
to God for it.
Many were the feverities under which the
Puritans laboured in the reign of queen Eliza-
beth, and the princes of the Stuart family;
and the Prefbyterians were but too ready to
act with a. high hand in their turn, in the Ihort
time that they were in power; but they were
ibon repaid with intereft on the reftoration. At
the revolution they obtained pretty good terms,
but flill all thofe who could not fubfcribe the
doctrinal articles of the church of England re-
mained fubject to the fame penalties as before,
and a new and fevere law was made againft
the Anti-trinitarians. This law, which fubjects
the offender to confifcation of goods and im-
prifonment for life, if he perlifts in acting con-
trary to the law, ftill remains in force, though
many other hardfhips under which Diffenters
formerly laboured have lately been removed.
The
Church Difdpline. ig$
The perfecution of the Remonftrants by the
Calviniftic party in Holland was as rancorous
in the mode of carrying it on, as any of the
popifh perfecutions, though the penalties did
not extend beyond banifhment.
All the proteftant churches have been too
ready to impofe their own faith upon others,
and to bind all their pofterity to believe as they
did. But the mod remarkable public act of
this kind occurs in the hiftory of the proteftant
church in France. At a fynod held in 1612,
it was decreed, that they who take holy orders
fhould take this oath, ft I whofe name is here
" under written, do receive and approve the con-
" fefiion of faith of the reformed churches in
<c this kingdom, and alfo promife to perfevere
" in it until death, and to believe and teach
" agreeably thereunto*." In another decree,
pafTed in 1620, they adopt the decrees of the
iynod of Dort, promifmg to perfevere in that faith
all their lives, and to defend it to the utmoft of
their power f. Is it to be regretted that a
church, the principles of which were fo narrow
and intolerant, fhould, in the courfe of divine
providence, be fuppreffed? It is to be hoped
that when it fhall feem fit to the fame wife
providence to revive the proteftant intereft in
that country, it will be more liberal, and more
* Quick's Synodicon, vol. i. p. 348. f Ib. vol. z. p. 38.
N 2 defer ving
196 ?be Hiftory of
deferving of the name of a reformed chrifiian
church.
There is too great a mixture of civil penal-
ties in the ordinary difcipline of the church of
England to this day. According to her ca-
nons, every perfon who maintains any thing
contrary to the doctrine or rites of the church,
or the authority by which they are enforced,
is declared to be ipfo fatto excommunicated.
Many other offences, which are properly civil,
are deemed to be of a fpiritual nature, and
are punifhed by excommunication j which is
two-fold, the greater and the lefs. The lat-
ter only excludes a man from the facrament,
and communion in the divine offices; but the
greater excommunication cuts a man off from
all commerce with chriflians in temporal af-
fairs ; fo that, if the orders of the church
were univerfally and ftriclly obferved, the poor
wretch muft neceffarily perifh ; fmce no per-
fon in the nation might fell him food, raiment,
or any convenience whatever.
SECTION
Church Difcipline. 197
i
SECTION VI.
The Hiftory of Miftakes concerning moral Virtue.
NOT only did the chriftian church adopt
very wrong and pernicious maxims of
church difcipline, but chriftians have alfo adopt-
ed very falfe and hurtful notions concerning mo-
ral virtue itfelf, which is the end of all dif-
cipline ; and it may be ufeful to take a gene-
ral view of thefe corruptions, as well as of others.
According to the genuine doctrine of reafon
and revelation, nothing is of any avail to recom-
mend a man to the favour of God, and to infure
his future happinefs, befides good difpofitions of
mind, and a habit and conduct of life agreeable
to them. This is the religion of nature, and
likewife that of the Old and New Teftaments.
But the religion of the heathen world, and that
of many of the Jews, in the time of our Savi-
our, was of a quite different ftamp. The hea-
thens, having ncne but low notions of their
Gods, had no idea of recommending themfelves
to their favour, but by the punctual obfervance
of certain rites, ceremonies, and modes of wor-
fhip, which at beft had no relation to moral
virtue, and often confifted in the moft horrid
and fhameful violation of the plaineft natural
duties.
N 3 The
198 fhe Iliftory of
The pharifaical Jews, alfo, overlooking the
excellent nature of the moral precepts of their
Law, and the perfect character of the great being
whom they were taught to worfhip, and directed
to refemble, attached themfelves wholly to ritual
obfervances. Upon thefe, and on their relation
to their anceftor Abraham, they chiefly depend-
ed for infuring to themfelves the favour of God,
to the utter exclufion of all the gentile world,
whatever might be their characters in a moral
refpcd.
Our Lord and his apoftles took every oppor-
tunity of oppofing this fundamental corruption
of genuine religion, and recalled mens attention
to their hearts and lives. And one would have
thought that, by the abolition of all the peculiar
rites of the Jewifh law, and appointing none in
their place (befides baptifm and the Lord's fup-
per, which are exceedingly fimple, and have ob-
vious moral ufes) an effectual bar would have
been put in the way of the old fuperftitions.
But human nature being the fame, and mens dif-
like to moral virtue operating as before, and
making them ready to adopt fuperftitious ob-
fervances as a compenfation for it, pretences and
modes were not long wanting ; and at length pro-
per moral virtue was as effectually excluded in
the chriftian religion, as ever it had been in cor-
rupt Judaifm, or heathenifm itfelf -, and as great
ftrefs was laid upon things that bore no relation
to moral virtue, but were, in fact, inconfiftent
with
Church Difcipline. 199
with it, and fubverfive of it, as had ever been
done by the mod fuperftitious and mifmformed
of mankind.
Did not both the moft authentic hiftory, and
even the prefent ftate of religion in the church
of Rome, furnifh fufficient vouchers of this, it
would not, in the prefent enlightened age, be
even credible, that fuch practices as I fhall be
obliged to mention, could ever have been ufed
by chriftians, as methods of recommending them-
ielves to God.
We find that in early times an undue ftrefs
was laid upon the ordinances of baptifm and the
Lord's Jupper, as if thefe rites themfdves, when
duly adminiftered (to which their being admini-
ftered by a perfon regularly ordained for the
purpofe was confidered as necefTary) imparted
fomefpiritual grace. Thus baptifm was fuppof-
ed to walh away all pail fins i and the ac~b of
communion to impart fome other fecret virtue,
by which a title to the blefilngs of the gofpel
was fecured to the communicant. On this ac-
count, many perfons who profefled themfelves
to be chriftians, deferred baptifm till late in life,
or even to the hour of death, that they might
leave the world with the greater certainty of all
their fins being forgiven, and before any new
guilt could be contracted.
N 4- Thofe
200 Ike Hiftory of
Thofe of the early Fathers who afcribed the
leaft to the rite of baptifm, fuppofed that by it
was done away whatever inconvenience mankind
had been fubje<5ted to in confequence of the fall
of Adam -, fo that they made a great difference
between the cafe of thofe children who died bap-
tized, and thofe who died unbaptized ; and the
virtue that was afcribed to the Lord's fupper was
the foundation of all the fuperfHtions refpe&ing
that ordinance, of which an account has already
been given.
When moral virtue had been once afcribed to
any corporeal action, inftituted by divine ap-
pointment, chriftians were led by degrees to ima-
gine that a fimilar virtue might be communicat-
ed by other actions, or figns, not of divine ap-
pointment, but bearing fome relation to religion.
This fuperftitious ufe was firft made of thejign
of the crofs, which, as has been obferved, was
nfed originally with great innocence, perhaps as
a private mark of diftin&ion between the chrift-
ians and heathens, in the time of perfecutionj
or, in peaceable times, to ftiew the heathens that
they were not afhamed of that very circumftance
with which they reproached them the moft, viz,
the crucifixion of their mafter.
We firft hear of this ceremony among the
Montanifts; and Tertullian, who became a Mon-
tanift, makes great boaft of it. In the beginning
of any bufinefs, fays he, going our, coming in,
drefiing,
Church Difciplms. 2OI
drefiing, wafhing, eating, lighting candles, go-
ing to bed, fitting down, or whatever we do, we
fign our forehead with the fign of the crofs *,
In the third century we find the fign of the
crofs in ftill more general ufe, it being thought
to be a defence againft enchantments and evil
fpirits ; and no chriftian undertook any thing of
moment without it. The ufe of this fign was
brought more into fafhion by the emperor Con-
ftantine, who, it is faid, made ufe of it as his im-
perial banner, or ftandard. And fo high did
this fign of the crofs rife in eftimation, in later
ages, that the papifts maintain that the crofs, and
even the fign of the crofs, is to be adored with
the worfhip which they call Latria> or that of
the higheft kindf.
After the fign of the crofs, a fanctifying vir-
tue was afcribed to holy water, or fait and water,
fuch as the heathens had ufed in their purifica-
tions, confecrated by a bifhop. An extraordi-
nary power was alfo afcribed to lights burning
in the day-time, to the ufe of incenfe, to the re-
lics of the faints, and to their images -, and as the
fuperftitious veneration for the real eucharift,
produced a mock one, fo it probably occasioned
another fuperftition, fomething fimilar to it, viz.
the making of little waxen images of a lamb,
* De Corona, cap. 4. Opera, p. 102.
f Mofheim, voL i. p. 202. 205. 238.
which
2O2, 'The Htjlory of
which were either invented or much improved
by pope Urban the fixth. The pope alone has
the power of confecrating them, and that in the
firft year only of his popedom, and in every fe-
venth year afterwards. In the fervice on this oc-
cafion, which may be feen in the Hiflory of Po-
peiy, vol. 3, p. 531, thefe Agnus D<?/'s, as they
are called, are faid to be blefffi ift&JanBifieil, fo
as cc by honouring and worfhipping them, we
<e thy fervants may have our crimes wafhed
" off, the fpots of our fins wiped away, pardons
" may be procured, graces beflowed, that at the
" laft, with thy faints and elect, we may merit
tc to receive eternal life."
Still greater virtue was afcribed to pilgrimages
to vifit particular churches and places, which
were reputed holy, on account of their having
been the refort of holy perfons, or the theatre of
holy actions, &c. and a fimilar virtue has been
afcribed to the attendance on particular ceremo-
nies. In 1071, the pope promifed indulgence
for all fin confefled by thofe who fhould affift at
the dedication of a church at mount Caflm, or
who fhould come to the new church during the
octave ; which, Fleury fays, brought an aftonifh-
ing concourfe of people, fo that not only the mo-
naftery, and the town, but even the neighbouring
country was filled with them. Sixtus the fourth,
in 1476, granted indulgences, by an exprefs and
particular act, to thofe who fhould devoutly ce-
lebrate an annual feftival in honour of the imma-
culate
Church Dijciplinc. 203
culate conception of the virgin Mary*. This
fuperftitious ufe of pilgrimages was likewife the
foundation of all the Jubilees which have been
celebrated at Rome, of which an account has
been given among the fefti-vals that have been
introduced into the chriftian church.
All the popifh facraments are likewife certain
ceremonies, to the ufe of which the members of
the catholic church afcribe a fupernatural and
fanctifying effect upon the mind ; and they fup-
pofe them to have that weight and influence with
the divine being, which nothing but real virtue,
or good difpofitions of mind, can ever have.
If things quite foreign to virtue have never-
thelefs been put in the place of it, we fliall not
wonder that actions of real value in themfelves,
and which, when. proceeding from a right difpo-
fition of mind, are real virtues, ihould have been
much magnified, and that the actions themfelves
fhould have been imagined to be meritorious,
even independently of the proper ftate of mind.
Thus, fmce giving to the needy, or being li-
beral for any ufeful purpofe, is generally a teft of
virtue, it is no wonder that, in all ages, it has, by
many perfons, been fubftituted in the place of it.
And, notwithstanding the fcrong cautions on this
head in the New Teftament, efpecially the apoitle
* Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 271.
Paul
04 Vhe Hiftory of
Paul's faying that he might give all his goods to feed
the poor, and yet be dellitute of charity, or bro-
therly love, this fpurious kind of virtue was never
made more account of, than in the corrupt ages
of the chriftian church ; when an open traffic, as
it were, was kept up between earth and heaven ;
there being nothing of a fpiritual nature that they
did not imagine might be bought with money.
In the eighth century, Mofheim fays f, a notion
prevailed, that future punifhment might be pre-
vented by donations to religious ufes ; and there-
fore few wills were made in which fomething was
not bequeathed to the church. For, of all pious
ufes, in the difpofal of wealth, the church (which
as it was then always understood, meant the clergy
or the monks} was univerfally deemed a better ob-
ject than the poor. Hence that amazing accu-
mulation of wealth, which nearly threatened the
utter extinction of all merely civil property.
Obvious as we now think the nature of vir-
tue to be, and fully fatisfied as we are, that
the nature and excellency of it confifts in its
tendency to make men happy, in the pofleflion
of their own minds, and in all their relations;
fo grofsly has its nature been miftaken, that
cot only have things intirely foreign to it been
fubftituted in its place, as thofe above-mentioned,
but even things that have no other effect than
t Vol. s. p. 60.
to
Church Difcipline. 20$
to give pain, and make men miferable. This
moft abfurd and fpurious kind of virtue began
very early in the chriftian church; and in pro-
cefs of time the aufterities to which chriftiana
voluntarily fubjedlcd themfelves, in order to make
their peace with God, and fecure their future
happinefs, almoft exceed belief.
It has been obferved before, that the firft
corruptions of chriftianity were derived from
heathenifm, and efpecially from the principles
of the Oriental philofophy; and there are
fimilar aufterities at this very day among the
Hindoos. Their notion that the foul is a
diftindt fubftance from the body, and that the
latter is only a prifon and clog to the former,
naturally leads them to extenuate and mortify
the body, in order to exalt and purify the foul.
Hence came the idea of the great ufe and value
of fading, of abftinence from marriage, and
of voluntary pain and torture ; till at length it
became a maxim, that the man who could con-
trive to make himfelf the moft miferable here,
fecures to himfelf the greateft fhare of happi-
nefs hereafter. As the principle which led to
all this fyftem came from the Eaft, we are not
furpiifed to find the ftrft traces of it ia thofe
feels of chriftian heretics who borrowed their
leading fentiments more immediately from the
principles of the Oriental philofophy.
The
206 ne Hijtory of
The Gnoftics, confidcring matter and mate-
rial bodies as the iburce of all evil, were no
friends to marriage, becaufe it was a means of
multiplying corporeal beings; and upon the fame
principle they alfo objected to the doctrine of
the refurrection of the body, and its future re-
union with the immortal fpirit* . Marcion alfo,
adopting the principles of the Oriental philofo-
phy, prohibited marriage, the ufe of wine, and
flefh meats, and all external comforts of life, in
order to mortify the body, and call off the mind
from the allurements of fenfe. Of the fame
nature was the doctrine of Bardefanes, Tatian 3
and many others f.
Some of the heathen philofophers in the wef-
tern world had been ufed, from the fame prin-
ciple, to exercife ftrange feverities upon them-
felves and their difciples, from the days of Py-
thagoras, to thofe of Lucian, who introduces the
philofopher Nigrinus as condemning fuch prac-
tices, and obferving that they had occafioned
the death of feveral perfons J. The Greek phi-
lofophers had alfo a particular drefs, and many
of them affected to appear rough, mean, and
dirty. The chriftian monks imitated thefe old
philofophers in their garb and appearance, and
they were alfo often cenfured for the fame pride
and contentious fpirit ||.
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 109. f Ib. p. 178. 180.
J Jortin's P.emarks, vol. 3. p. 23. || Ib. p. 26.
To
Church Dijciplihe. 207
To vindicate the doctrine of corporeal aufte-
rity, it was pretended, in the fecond century,
that Chrift eftablifhed a double rule of chrifti-
anity and virtue, the one more fublime than
the other, for thofe who wifhed to attain to
greater perfection. Thefe thought that it was
incumbent on them to extenuate and humble
the body, by fading, watching, and labour,
and to refrain from wine, flefli meat, matrimony,
and commerce .
Great ftrefs was alfo laid, both by the eaflern
and weftern philofophers, on contempt at ion> to
which Jotitude was favourable. By thus ex-
cluding themfelves from the world, and medi-
tating intenfely on fublime fubjects, they thought
they could raiie the foul above all external ob-
jects, and advance its preparation for a better
and more fpiritual ftate hereafter. Many chrifti-
ans, therefore, and efpec'ially thole who had been
addicted to the Platonic philofophy, before their
converfion, were exceedingly fond of thefe ex-
ercifes. And this notion, though more liberal than
the former, which led them to torment and mor-
tify the body, naturally led them to be very
inattentive to it, leeking the cultivation of the
mindy and the knowledge of truth, in a fancied
abftraction from all fenfible objects. In this
ftate of contemplation, joined to folitude and
abftinence, it is no wonder that they were open
J Mpfheim, vol. I. p. 157.
to
o8 The Hi/lory of
to many illufions -, fancying themfelves to b
infpired in the lame manner as the heathen pro-
phets and prophetefTes had fancied themlelves
to be, and as madmen, are frill generally ima-
gined to be in the Eaft. Thefe pretenfions to
infpiration were moil common among the Mon-
tanifts, who were alfo moft remarkable for their
aufterities.
In the third century, in which the doctrine
of Plato prevailed much, we find that marriage,
though permitted to all priefls, as well as other
perfons, was thought to be unfit for thofe who
afpired after great degrees of fanctity and pu-
rity ; it being fuppofed to fubject them to the
power of evil daemons, and on this account ma-
ny people wifhed to have their clergy unmar-
ried f. Origen, who was much addicted to
Platonifm, gave into the myftic theology, and
recommended the peculiar practices of the hea-
then myftics, founded on the notion that filence,
tranquility, and folitude, accompanied with acts
of mortification, which exhauft the body, were
the means of exalting the foul.
The perverfions of the fenfe of fcfipture by
which thefe unnatural practices were fupported
are aftonifhing. Jerom, writing againft mar-
riage, calls thofe who are in that ftate veffels
of dijhonour ; and to them he applies the faying
f- Moftieim, vol. i. p. 218.
Of
Church Difripline. 209
of Paul, *fbey that are in the flejh cannot pleafe
God.
The laws alfo of chriftian emperors foon be-
gan to favour thefe maxims. Conftantine re-
voked all the laws that made celibacy infamous
among the antient Romans, and made it to be
confidered as honourable*.
I muft now proceed to mention various other
aufterities, which poor deluded mortals, whom
1 am afhamed to call chriftians, inflicted upon
themfelves, vainly imagining to merit heaven
by them, for themfelves and others. In this
I fhall, in general, obferve the order of time in
which I find an account of them in ecclefiaftical
hiftory ; obferving that the fa<5bs I mention are
but a fmall fpecimen of the kind, but they may
ferve to give us an idea of the general fentiments
and fpirit that prevailed in the dark ages of the
church.
Some of the Myftics of the fifth century not
only lived among the wild beafts, but alfo af-
ter their manner. They ran naked through the
defart with a furious afpeft. They fed on grafs
and wild herbs, avoided the fight and conver-
fation of men, remamed motionlefs in certain
places for feveral years, expofed to the rigour
Sueur, A. D, 320.
VOL. II. O and
21 o ke Hiftory of
and inclemency of the feafons ; and towards the
conclufion of their lives, fhut themfelves up in
narrow and miferable huts. All this was con-
fidered as true piety, the only method of ren-
dering the Deity propitious to them ; and by
this means they attracted the higheft veneration
of the deluded multitude. One Simeon, a Sy-
rian, in order perhaps to climb as near to hea-
ven as he could, patted thirty feven years of
his wretched life upon five pillars, of fix, twelve,
twenty-two, thirty-fix, and laftly forty cubits
high. Others followed his example, being call-
ed Stilites by the Greeks, and Sanfticolumtiares, or
Pillar Saints, by the Latins; and, of all the in-
ftances of fuperftitious frenzy, none were held
in higher veneration than this, and the prac-
tice continued in the Eaft till the twelfth cen-
tury*.
Among the popifh pilgrims there is a fpe-
cies called Palmers, from a bough of palm which
they carry with them. Thefe have no home,
or place of refidence, but travel and beg their
bread till they obtain what they call the
palm, or a complete victory over their fins by
death f.
Many of the rules to which the monaftic or-
ders are fubject are extremely rigorous. Ste-
* Molheim, vol. i. p. 391.
f Hiftory of Popery, vol. i. p. 212.
phen
Church Difcipline. fin
phen a nobleman of Auvergne, who inftituted
the order of Grand-montam, with the permiffion
of Gregory the feventh, forbad his monks the
ufe of fiefh meat even in ficknefs, and impofed
upon them the obfervance of a folemn and un-
interrupted filence*.
The hermits of Luceola in Umbria were not
allowed any thing of fat in the preparation of
their vegetables. They ate only raw herbs, ex-
cept on Sundays and Thurfdays. On ether days
they ate nothing but bread and water, and were
continually employed in prayer or labour. They
kept a ftridt filence all the week, and on Sun-
days only fpake to one another between vefpers
and complines j and in their cells they had no
covering for their feet or legs.
The perfons the moft diftinguifhed in eccle-
fiaftical hiftory for their bodily auflerities and
religious exercifes, were Dominic, who was
one of thefe hermits, and Peter Damiani who
was his fpiritual guide, both of whom were men-
tioned above. This Dominic for many years
had next to his (kin an iron coat of mail, which
he never put off but for the fake of flagellation.
Tie feldom pafled a day without chanting two
pfalters, at the fame time whipping himfelf with
both his hands j and yet this was his time of
greateft relaxation. For in Lent, and while he
Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 308.
O? was
ail tfbe Hiftory of
was performing penance for other perfons, he
would repeat at leaft three pfalters a day, whip-
ping himfelf at the fame time. He would of-
ten repeat two pfalters without any interval be-
tween them, without even fitting down, or ceaf-
ing for one moment to whip himfelf.
Peter Damiani afking him one day if he
could kneel with his coat of mail 3 he faid,
When I am well I make a hundred genuflections
every fifteenth pfalm, which is a thoufand in
the whole pfalter; and one time he told his
matter that he had gone through the pfalter
eight times in one day and night ; and at ano-
ther time, trying his utmoft, he repeated it
twelve times, and as far as the pfalm which
begins with Beati Quorum of the thirteenth.
And in repeating the pfalter he did not flop
at the hundred and fifty pfalms, but added to
them the canticles, the hymns, the creed of St.
Athanafius, and the litanies, which are to be
found at the end of the old pfalters. His fall-
ing and his coat of mail made his fkin as black
as a negroe, and befides this he wore four iron
rings, two on his thighs, and two on his legs,
to which he afterwards added four others; and
befides this iron Ihirt he had another under him
to fleep upon. Notwithftanding thefe feverities,
he died very old on the fourteenth of October,
1062, which day is dedicated to his honour
in the calendar of the church of Rome*. The
* Fleury, vol. 13. p. 99.
auflerities
Church Difcipline. 213
aufterities of Peter Damiani were fimilar to
thefe, and an account of them may be feen in
the fame hiftorian*.
In the thirteenth century there arofe in
a fed that was called the Flagellants, or whippers,
and it was propagated from thence over all the
countries of Europe. They ran about in pro-
mifcuous multitudes, of both fexes, of all ranks
and ages, both in public places, and in defarts,
with whips in their hands, lalhing their naked
bodies with the greateft feverity, fhrieking dread-
fully, and looking up to heaven with an air of
horror and diftra&ion j and this they 'did to ob-
tain the divine mercy for themfelves and others;
For they maintained that this whipping was of
equal virtue with baptifm, and the other facra-
ments, and that the forgivenefs of all fin was to
be obtained by it from God, even without the
merits of Jefus Chrift. Thefe people attracted
the efteem and veneration not only of the popu-
lace, but of their rulers alfo; but being after-
wards joined by a turbulent and furious rabble,
they fell into difcreditf.
The Janfenifts carried their aufterities fo far>
that they called thofe perfons who put an end to
their own lives by their exceflive abftinence or
labour, the facred viffims of repentance, and faid
that they had been conjumed by the fire of divine
* Fleury, p. 205, &c. f Molheim, vol. 3, p, 95. zc6.
O 3 love
214 22^ Hijlory of
love. By thefe fufferings they thought to ap-
peafe the anger of the Divine Being, and to
bring down blefiings upon themfelves, their
friends, and the church. The famous Abbe
de Paris put himfelf to a mod painful death, de-
priving himfelf of almoft all the bleflings of life,
in order to fatisfy, as he thought, the juftice of
an incenfed God *.
So famous was the devout nunnery of Port
Royal in the fields, that multitudes of perfons
crowded to live in its neighbourhood, and to imi-
tate the manners of thofe nuns j and this in fo late
a period as the feventeenth century. The end that
they had in view was, by filence, hunger, thirft,
prayer, bodily labour, watching, and other volun-
tary acts of felf-denial, to efface the guilt of their
fins, and to remove the pollution of their fouls,
whether derived from natural corruption, or evil
habits. Many perfons, illuftrious by their birth
and fortunes, chofe this mode of life f.
Dr. Middleton mentions a practice ftill kept
up at Rome, which is equally fhocking on ac-
count of its cruelty and abfurdity. " In one of
" their proceffions, in the time of Lent, I faw,"
fays he, " that ridiculous penance of the Fla-
(f gellants, or felf-whippers, who march with
" whips in their hands, and lafh themfelves as
" they go along upon the bare back, till it is all
.Moftieim, vol.4, P- 3 8 *- t * b - P- 3 8 S-
covered
Church Difcipline. 215
tc covered with blood, in the fame manner as th
" fanatical priefts of Bellona, or the Syrian god-
" defs, as well as the votaries of Ifis, ufed to
" flafli and cut themfelves of old j a mad piece
<f of difcipline, which we find frequently men*
* { tioned, and as often ridiculed, by the antient
" writers."
" But," fays he, " they have another exercife
" of the fame kind, and in the fame feafon of
" Lent, which, under the notion of penance, is
" ftill a more abfurd mockery of all religion.
" For on a certain day, appointed annually for
cc this difcipline, men of all conditions afiemblc
" towards the evening in one of the churches,
* f where whips, or lalhes made of cords, are pro-
" vided, and diftributed to every perfon prefent;
" and after they are all ferved, and a fhort office
<f of devotion performed, the candles being put
" out, on the ringing of a little bell, the whole
<( company begin to ftrip, and whip themfelves
ff near an hour j during which time the church
" is, as it were, a hell, nothing being heard but
" the noife of lathes and chains, mixed with the
<c groans of thefe felf-tormentors. The candles
" being lighted at the tinkling of a fecond bell,
" they all appear in their proper drefs*."
Befides the idea of tormenting the body for the
good of the foul, the Platonifts efpecially, as I
* Letters from Rome, p. 190, &c.
O 4 have
2l6 "The Hiftory of
have obferved above, had a notion of exalting
the foul by contemplation ; fancying that the mind
contained within itfelf the elements of all know-
ledge, and that they were beft drawn forth by
looking within ; and alfo that communion with
God was beft kept up by an abftraction of the
mind from all corporeal things. Thefe notions
chiefly gave rife to what is generally called myj-
1icifm y with which the minds of the early monks
were much tinctured, and which, more or lefs,
affected moft of thofe who had recourfe to bodily
aufterities. But others, without taking any par-
ticular pains to torment the body, gave them-
felves almoft wholly to contemplation.
This turn of mind, giving great fcope for the
flights of fancy, produced very different effects
on different perfons; and in fome it operated as
an antidote to the vulgar fuperftition of the
church of Rome, in which hardly any thing was
attended to for many ages befides mere bodily ex-
ercifes. For though the ideas of the Myflics
were very confufed, they had a notion of the ne-
ceflity of aiming at fomething of inward purity y
diftinct from all ritual obfervances. Nay thefe
notions led fome of them (feeing the abufe that
had been made of pofitive rites) to renounce
them all together, even thofe of divine appoint-
ment, as baptifm and the Lord's fupper.
Moflieim fays, that, if any fpark of real piety
fubfifted during the reign of papal fuperftition,
it
Church Difcipline. 2 17
it was among the Myftics, who, renouncing the
learning of the fchools, and the ceremonies of
external vvorlhip, exhorted their followers to aim
at nothing but internal fanctity of heart and com-
munion with God, the center and fource of ho-
linefs and perfection. Hence the Myftics were
loved and refpected by many perfons who had a
ferious fenfe of religion ; but he adds, they joined
much fuperftition with their reveries*.
On fome perfons thefe notions had a very un-
favourable effect. In the thirteenth century there
was formed a fociety called the brethren andfifters
ofthefreefpirity called by the Germans Beghards
or BegatSy a name which had been ufually given
to thofe who made a profeflion of extraordinary
piety. In France they were Beghines. They
went from place to place, begging their bread,
and neglecting all kinds of labour, as obftacles
to divine contemplation. They maintained that
every man, by the power of meditation, and call-
ing off his mind from fenfible objects, might be
united to the Deity in an ineffable manner, fo as
to become part of the godhead, in the fame
fenfe in which Chrift was, and thereby become
free from all obligation to laws human or divine.
In confequence of this, they treated all the ordi-
nances of the gofpel with contempt, as of no ufe
to ferfeff men. Some of thefe poor wretches
* Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 302.
were
2i 8 The Hiftory of
were burnt in the inquifition, and endured vari-
ous other perfections f.
We even find fome who carried their notion
of the abftraction of the mind from the body to
iuch a degree, that they fancied that when the
mind had attained to a certain pitch of perfec-
tion by means of contemplation, no act in which
the body only was concerned could affect it,
fo that they might indulge themfelves in any
fenfual pleafure without contracting the lead de-
filement of foul. The confequences of this opi-
nion could not but be exceedingly pernicious.
Some of the fpiritual brethren in Flanders
(and who, as Mofheim fays, were patronized by
feveral of the reformed churches) maintained that
the Deity was the fole operating caufe in the
mind of man, and the immediate author of all
human actions j and confequently that the dif-
tinction of good and evil was groundlefs, that re-
ligion confided in the union of the foul with
God, attained by contemplation and elevation
of mind, and that when this was gained, all in-
dulgence of the appetites and paflions was
perfectly innocent J. Margaret Poretta, who
made a fhining figure amongft the Beghards, and
who was burnt at Paris in 1310, wrote an elabo-
rate treatife, to prove that the foul, when abforb-
ed in the love of Gpd, is free from the reftraint
t Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 124. % Ib. vol. 4. p. 103.
Of
Church Difcipline. 2 1 9
of every law, and may freely gratify all its natu-
ral appetites without contracting any guilt ..
Thefe licentious maxims were afcribed by the
Jefuits, but probably without reafon, to the
Quietifts in general, a feet which arofe in 1686,
and gave great difturbance to the court of Rome.
The inquifition put many of thefe feclaries in
prifon, and among others Molinos who was one
of the chief of them, and they put him to the
torture in order to difcover his accomplices.
Letters were alfo written to all the bifhops of
Italy to exhort them not to fuffer Quietifm to take
root in their diocefes. But notwithftanding this,
the feel made fuch progrefs in a Ihort time, by
the external marks of mortification, devotion,
contemplation, abftraclion of mind, and a pre-
tended intimate union with God, that many per-
fons of condition adopted their fentiments ; and
even fome cardinals were infected by them. On
this the popes and the Jefuits exerted themfelves
fo much, that in a general congregation of the
inquifition, Molinos was condemned to perpetual
imprifonment, and to renounce his opinions^.
This feet made great progrefs in Italy in 1696,
and increafed notwithftanding all the oppofition
which was made to it. The pious Fenelon,
archbifhop of Cambray, gave into this vifionary
Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 202.
J Hiftoire des Papes, voJ. 5. p. 381.
fyftem
220 The Hiftory of
fyftem, and his humility and excellent difpofitkm
appeared, together with his weaknefs of mind^
and bigoted attachment to the church of Rome,
in his readinefs to recant, and condemn his own
writings when they were cenfured by the pope.
Madame Bourignon was a woman who dif-
tinguiflied herfelf much by an attachment to the
fame fyftem. She maintained that the chriftian
religion confifted neither in knowledge nor in
practice, but in a certain internal feeling, or di-
vine impulfe, that arifes immediately from com-
munion with God*.
Something fimilar to the principles of the
Quietifts are thofe of the Quakers in England ;
who, though they are far from fubftituting any
thing in the place of virtue, yet expect fuperna-
tural illumination and afiiftance, to enlighten the
mind, and to form it to virtue. They maintain
that there is concealed in the minds of all men, a
certain portion of the fame light or wifdom, that
exifts in the fupreme being, which is drawn forth
by felf converfe and contemplation. This divine
light they ufually call the internal word, or Cbrifi
within. But many of the modern Quakers make
this hidden principle to be nothing more than
that of natural confcience, or reafon ; though in
this they certainly depart from the genuine prin-
ciples of their anceftors, on which their feel: was
* Mofheim, vol. 5. f>. 65.
founded.
Church Dtjciplitie. 221
founded. The primitive Quakers (even as the
more rigid among them at prefcnt do) certainly
pretended to fpeak and ad by the fame kind of m-
fpiration by which the apoftles themfelves acted,
and therefore they made no greater account of
the apoftolical writings, or of the fcriptures in
general, than of their own fuggeftions.
As the laft effort of human ingenuity and de*
pravity, I fhall give a Ihort account of the fo-
phiftical cafuiftry of the Jefuits ; a religious or-
der which arofe after the reformation, and which
was for fome time efteemed to be the great bul-
wark of the papal power, but is now, in conftf-
quence of their becoming fufpected by the civil
powers, happily abolifhed.
They employed all the force of their fubtle
diftinctions to fap the foundations of moral-
ity, in order to accommodate themfelves to
princes, and great men, who generally chofe
their confeflbrs from their body ; and in procefs
of time they opened a door to all forts of licen-
tioufnefs. Among other things, they reprefented
it as a matter of indifference what motives deter-
mined the actions of men; and taught that there is
no fin in tranfgrefiing a divine law that is not fully
known to a perfon, or the true meaning of which
is not perfectly underftood by him, or that is not
even prefent to his mind at the time of action.
They alfo maintained that an opinion or precept
may be followed with a good conference, if it
had
222 The Hiftory of
had been taught by any one doctor of confide-
rable reputation, even though it be contrary to
the judgment of him that follows it, and even of
him that recommends it. This they called the
doctrine of probability.
They alfo held what they called the doctrine
of pbilofophical fin, according to which an action
that is repugnant to the dictates of reafon might
not be offenfive to the Deity. They held that
wicked actions might be innocently performed,
if perfons could, in their own mind, connect a
good end with them, or as they exprefied it di-
rett their intentions right. Thus a man who kills
his neighbour in a duel would be acquitted by
them, if, at the time, he had turned his thoughts
from the principle of revenge, to that of honour,
&c. Agreeably to this, they even held that an
oath might be taken with mental additions and
reiervations. This, however, does not agree
with their being charged with paying no atten-
tion to the motives with which actions are per-
formed j but it agrees very well with their main-
taining that the facraments produced their effect
by their own virtue, and immediate operation, or
what they called opus operatum. But it cannot
be fuppofed that all thefe maxims were held with
perfect uniformity by them all J ,
The folly and wickednefs of thefe maxims
were admirably expofed by the famous Pafchal,
J Molheim, vol. 3, p. 468, vol. 4, p. 355, &c.
in
Church Difcipline. 223
in his Provincial Letters, which, for their excel-
lent compofition, and good fenfe, were read with
the utmoft avidity, and the higheft approbation
through all Europe ; in confequence of which
their doctrines were univerfally exploded, and
held in the greateft abhorrence by all men. In-
deed the extreme odioufnefs of them contributed
not a little to the downfall of the order.
It is a dangerous maxim, not of the Jefuits
only, but of the divines of the church of Rome
in general, to diftinguifti between contrition and
attrition ; allowing great merit even to the lat-
ter, though it confifts of any kind of forrow on
the account of fin, even for the lofs or difgrace
that it brings upon a man, without any refolu-
tion to fin no more. Such a forrow as this, they
fay, makes the facrifice of penance effectual.
This was fettled at the council of Trent, though
the proreftants thought that it ftruck at the root
of all religion and virtue J.
But the moft flagrant inftance of immorality
with which the church of Rome is charged, is
the holding that no faith is to be kept with he-
retics i and upon this principle the council of
Conftance acted, when the fafe conduct which
the emperor Sigifmond had given to John Hufs
the Bohemian reformer, was declared to be in-
valid, as given to an heretic, on which he was
J Burnet on the Articles, p. 348.
arrefled
224 Me Hijtory of
arrefted and condemned to the flames. From
this time it was the opinion of many in the
church of Rome, that no promife made to an
heretic is binding.
Pope Eugenius authorized Uladillaus king of
Hungary, to break a folemn treaty with Amu-
rath emperor of the Turks, which ended, as it
might be wifhed that fuch horrible prevarication
might always end. The Turk carried a copy
of the treaty into the field of battle, and difplay-
ing it in the beginning of the engagement, pro-
nounced aloud, " Behold, O Jefus, thefe are the
" covenants which thy chriftians fwearing by thy
" name, made with me. Now, therefore, if
<f thou art a God, revenge thefe injuries to me,
" and to thyfelf, upon their perfidious heads."
The confequence was, that the Turks being ex-
ceedingly exafperated, and the chriftians difpirit-
ed, the latter were put to flight j and both the
king and the cardinal who had urged him to
break the peace, and who was along with him,
were killed upon the fpot.
I have not found any public or general decla-
ration on the fubject of keeping no faith with
heretics, but that of Clement the ninth, who, in.
his Atts, printed at Rome in 1724, exprefsly
declares that all promifes or ftipulations made in
favour of proteftants, are entirely null and void,
whenever they are prejudicial to the catholic faith,
the falvation of fouls, or to any rights of the
church ;
Church Discipline. 225
church; even though fuch engagements have
been often ratified, and confirmed by oath.
I have no doubt, however, but that the ca-
tholics of this day would reject this doctrine with
as much abhorrence as proteftants themfelves ;
and indeed if it had not been a general opinion
with them, that oaths and fubfcriptions prefcrib-
ed by proteftants were binding, no reafon
can be given why they fhould not have taken the
oaths which have been employed in this country
to prevent them from enjoying the advantages
of other fubjects ; and yet in all the time fince
the government of this country has been pro-
teftant, no fuch infrance has been produced.
The catholics have univerfally fubmitted to their
exclufion from all places of honour and profit,
the payment of double taxes, &rc. &c. without
ever endeavouring to relieve themfelves by a
declaration or oath, which the proteftants fay
they would not confider as .binding, and for
the violation of which they might, it is faid be at
leaft fure of obtaining an abfolution at Rome. But
even there, it is very probable, that no fuel*
abfolution would now be given,
It is to be hoped, that in many other ref-
pects, catholics do not lay the ftrefs they have
been formerly taught to do on things foreign
to real virtue, that is, to good difpofitions of
mind, and a gqod conduct in life; as it is to
VOL. II. P be
216 The Hijiory of
be lamented, that many proteftants are far from
being free from all fuperftition in thefe refpetls.
But now that the minds of men feem to be
fo well opened to the admifiion of religious truth
in general, errors fo fundamental as thefe which
relate to morality will hardly remain long with-
out redrefs. It will be happy if the reformation
ofchriftians in doftrine and difcipline be followed
by a fuitable reformation in pra&ice.
THE
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART X.
Hift&ry of Mnifters in the Chriftlan Church,
and efpecially of BISHOPS.
THE INTRODUCTION.
THE chriftian church was ferved originally
(exclufive of the apoftles and other tem-
porary officers) by Elders and Deacons only ;
the former being appointed for fpiritual matters,
and the latter for civil affairs. They were
all chofen by the people, and were ordained to
their office by prayer, which, when it was made
on the behalf of any particular perfon, was in
early times always accompanied with the im-
pofition of hands. For the fake of order in con-
ducting any bufinefs that concerned the whole
fociety, one of the elders was made frefident or
P 2 moderator
228 The Hijiory of Mlmjlers
moderator in their aflemblies, but without any
more power than that of having a fingle vote
with the reft of his brethren. From this fim-
ple conftitution, it is. certainly aftonilhing to
confider how thefe fervants of the church came
in time to be the lords of it, and of the world ;
and it is curious to obferve the various fteps by
which this change was made.
SECTION I.
The Hiftory of Chrlftlan Mlmjlers till the Fail
of the tVeJlern Empire.
THE firft change in the conftitution of the
primitive churches was making the moft
diftinguifhed of the elders to be conftant pre-
ftdenty or moderator, in their aflemblies, and
appropriating to him the title of (t*m) or
bijhopj which had before been common to all
the prefbyters or elders, but without giving
him any peculiar power or authority.
Since the firft chriftian converts were almoft
wholly from the common ranks of life, there
could be no great difference in their qualifica-
tions for any office, except what natural good
fenfe, or age and experience, might give to
fome more than to others. In this ftate of
things, it is evident that none of them could
have
in the Chriftian Church. 229
have been educated with a view to any em-
ployment of this kind. But it was foon found
expedient, and efpecially on account of the con-
troverfies which they had with Jews and hea-
thens, as well as among themfelves, that their
public inftructors, and efpecially thefe bifliops,
fhould be men of fome learnings and accord-
ingly fchools were creeled, in very early times,
in which young men were inftructed in fuch
branches of knowledge, as were found to be
moft ufeful to them in the difcharge of their
minifterial duties. Antient writers fay that the
apoftle John eftablilhed a fchool, or academy of
this kind at Ephefus. However, that which
was afterwards eftabliihed at Alexandria in Egypt,
called the catechetic fchool, formed upon the
plan of thofe of the Greek philofophers, was
particularly famous.
A better education, and fuperior fitnefs for
the more confpicuous duties of chriftian focie-
ties, in expounding the fcriptures, giving various
inftruftion, public prayer, &c. would naturally
create a greater difference than had been known
before between chriftian minifters and the peo-
ple, and for the fame reafon between the bifhops
and the elders j and power and influence ne-
ver fail to accompany fuperior qualifications.
But it was feveral centuries before the common
people ceafed to have votes in ever)'' thing that
related to the whole fociety.
P 7 The
230 The Hiftofy of Minifters
The firft great change in the conftitution of
the chriftian church was the exaltation of the
prefbyters into the rank of biftiops in churches;
which was, in fact, an annihilation of that im-
portant order of men, and threw the govern-
ment of a church into the hands of one perfon.
The manner in which this change took place
was gradual and eafy. Whenever the number
of converts in any place became too great for
them to aflfemble with convenience in one boild-
ing, they erected other places of public worlhip j
but confidering thefe not as new and diftinct
churches, but as branches of the old one, in or-
der to preferve the connection with the mother
church, they did not ordain a new bifhop, but
had all the miniflerial duty done either by fome
of the former prefbyters, or by new ones or-
dained for that purpofe.
In this train things went en till at length the
mother church, or fome of the dependent church-
es, fending out more colonies, and to greater
diftances, the bifhop of the mother church (be-
ing the only perfon in the diftrict who bore that
name) came to be a diocefan bijhop y whofe el-
ders and deacons prefided in all the feparare
and dependent churches. Very few elders alfo
remained in the mother church, becaufe none
were now ordained to that office, except fuch
as lived by the miniftry. The church of Rome
muft have been in this ftate at the beginning
of
in the Chriftian Church. 231
of the fourth century, when Marullus divided
it (that is, all the chriftians in Rome) into twen-
ty five parifhes, appointing one prieft for each of
them, to inftruct the people, and to adminifter
the facraments. It was the cuftom for the bifhop
to fend a part of the confecrated bread, after
the adminiftration of the eucharift, to each of
thefe dependent churches*.
Sometimes, however, when new churches
were erected in places at a diftance from any
capital town, they were governed by new made
bifhops, prefbyters, and deacons, like the ori-
ginal churches. Beaufobre faysf, that he be-
lieves one cannot find an inftance fo early as
the middle of the third century of a church
governed by a fmgle prefbyter. Thefe country
bifhops, called choroepifcopi, made but a poor
figure in comparifon with the opulence and fplen-
dour of the city bifhops. But before they were
generally abolifhed, which was in the fourth
century, their rank and power were very much
diminifhed, In a council held at Antioch, in
341, thefe country bifhops were forbidden to
ordain priefts or deacons, and had only the
power of appointing perfons to inferior offices
in the church. By degrees the country bifhops
were intirely abolifhed (though not in all pla-
ces till fo late as the tenth century) when rural
deans and arch priefts were inflituted in their
* Sueur A. D. 307. 313-
f Hift. of Manicheifme, vol. i. p. 113.
P 4 place.
23 2 The 'Hijiory of Minijiers
placef. After this the fyftem of diocefan epif-
copacy was fully eftablifhed. There were bifh-
ops in capital towns only, and all the churches
within their diftricts were governed by prefby-
ters, or deacons under them.
As the diftinction between bifhops and pref-
byters has been the fubject of much controverfy
between the advocates for the church of England
and the Diflenters, I fhall produce a few more
authorities to prove that originally they were the
fame order of men.
At firft the oldeft of the prefbyters Succeeded
of courfe to the place of prefident among them.
But this ceafed to be the cafe even in the age of
the apoftles, when the prefident was chofen by
the plurality of votes, and then the title of HJhop,
which before had been common to all the prefby-
ters, was appropriated to him. This, fays Sueur,
was in the time of Hyginus J.
In the age of Cyprian, when diftinctions were
made among the bifhops themfelves, and when
he himfelf was the metropolitan of the whole
province, and one who was a ftrenuous advocate
for the power and dignity of the clergy, it ap-
pears that even this metropolitan bifhop had no
more authority than to aflemble the clergy of
his province, to prefidc in their councils, and to
f Sueur, A. D. 341, 439. J A. D. 142.
admonifh
in the Chriftian Church. 233
admonifh his brethren. There was no act of a
fpiritual nature that was peculiar to himfelf ; and
in his abfence from the church, during his perfe-
cution, every part of his office was difcharged by
his prefbyters.
Chryfoftom fays f , that when the apoftle Paul
gave orders to Titus to ordain elders in every
city, he meant bifhops. For, fays he, he would
not have the whole ifland of Crete committed to
one man, but that every perfon fhould have and
mind his own proper cure j for fo the labour
would be eafier to him, and the people to be
governed would have more care taken of them.
For their teachers would not run about to govern
many churches, but would attend to the ruling of
one only, and fo keep it: in good order. Theo-
phylacl: alfo interprets the paflfage in the fame
manner, faying, that each city was to have its
own paftor, and that by prejbyters in this place
the apoftle meant fajkops^. Occumenius and
'Theodorit likewife fay that the apoftle did not
commit the charge of that large ifland to one
man , and yet it is not fo large as fome of our
diocefes.
Jerom, on the epiftle to Titus, fays, that among
the antients, priefts and bilhops were the fame i
but that by degrees the care of a church was
f In Titum 1. 5. Opera vol. 10. p. 1700'.
I Pierce's Vindication, p. 375. Ib. p. 343.
given
234 Vb ff Hi/lory of Minifies
given to one perfon, in order to prevent diflen-
tion. This he proves at large from many paff-
ages in the New Teilament. Let the bilhops
know, fays he, that they are above the priefts
more by cuftom, than by the appointment of
Chrift*. The fame learned Father alfo fays
that, at the beginning, churches were governed
by the common council of prefbyters, like an
ariftocracy j but afterwards the fuperintendency
was given to one of the prefbyters, who was then
called the bifhop, and who governed the church,
but ftill with the council of the prefbyters f.
At firft bifhops were appointed by the whole
congregation, confifting of clergy and laity> as
they were afterwards called, nor did any church
apply to the neighbouring bilhops to afilft at the
ordination. Irenasus was ordained by priefts on-
ly, and fuch was the general cuftom of the church
of Alexandria till the beginning of the fourth
century . Cyprian alfo fays that it belonged to
the people chiefly to chufe worthy paftors, and
to refufe the unworthy.
Afterwards, when a new bifhop was chofen in
any church, it came to be the cuftom to invite
the neighbouring bilhops to attend, and affift on
the occafion ; and while this was voluntary on
both fides, there was a decency and propriety in
* Opera, vol. 6. p. 198. f Anecdote?, p. 24, 54.
Bafnage Hiftoire de$ Eglifes Reformee*, vol. 3. p. 25.
it;
in the Chrijlian Church, 235
it; as it fhewed the readinefs of the neighbour-
ing bifhops to receive the new one as a friend and
brother. But this innocent cuftom had bad con-
fequences, as the attendance of the neighbouring
bifhops on the occafion, from being cuftomary,
came to be confidered as necejfary ; and as a con-
fiderable number had ufually attended, it came
to be a rule, that it could not be done without the
concurrence of three, one of whom laid his hand
on the head of the new biftiop, when he was re-
commended to the blefling of God by prayer.
In the third century this was always done by the
metropolitan biihop ; at lead it was never done
without his confent or order. The fecond coun-
cil of Nice ordered that bifhops fhould be chofen
by other bifhops. But in the Weft the people
preferved their right of choofing their bifhops till
after the reign of Charlemaigne and his fons ; and
it was not taken from them till the council of
Avignon in 1050*.
The ufual ceremony in appointing a biihop was
the impojition of hands, which, as I have obferved,
was originally nothing more than a gefture which
was always made nfe of when prayer was" made
for any particular perfon. What is impofition of
hands, fays Auftin, but the prayer that is made
over the perfon f. Accordingly we find that this
ceremony was not always thought neceflary. For
* Bafnage Hiftoire des Eglifes Reformers, voL 3. p. 24.
f De baptifmo contra Donatiftas lib. 3. cap. 16. Opera,
vol. 7, p. 410.
mftead
236 The Hijiory of Minifters
inftead of impofing hands on the bifliops of Alex-
andria, they only placed them on their chair, a
cuftom which continued many centuries f.
Though bifhops were originally no other than
prefbyters, the manner of their ordination being
the fame, and the prefbyters difcharging every
part of the office of bifhop , no fooner was the
diftinction between them eftablifhed, than the
bifliops began to appropriate certain functions to
themfelves. It appears by the aft of the third
council of Carthage, that whereas before prieils
"had the power of affigning the time of public pe-
nance, and of giving abfolution, as alfo of con-
fecrating virgins, and of making the chrifrrr (or
that mixture of oil and balm with which one of
the unctions at baptifm was made) without the
advice of the bifhop, all thefe things were for-
bidden by thefe canons, and given to the bi-
Ihops J. But the principal thing by which the
bifhops were diilinguiflied afterwards was the
power of confirming the baptized, when that
chrifm was applied.
After the reign of Adrian, wlrcn Jerufalem was
titterly deftroyed, and the Jews difperfed, an opi-
nion began to prevail among chriftians, that their
minifters fucceeded to the characters, rights, and
privileges of the Jewifh priefthood ; and this was
another fource of honour and profit to the clergy,
f Bafnage, vol. 3> p. 29. I Sueur, A. D. 397.
Upon
in the Chriftian Cburcb. 237
Upon this the prefbyters aflumed the ftile and
rank of priefts, bifhops that of bigb priefts, and
deacons that of Levites f.
The principal occafion of the great diftinclion
that was made between the clergy and the peo-
ple, between the bifhops and the prefbyters, and
alfo among the bifhops themfelyes, was their af-
fembling in fynods, to deliberate about affairs
of common concern, a cuftom which began about
the middle of the fecond century ; for it cannot
be traced any higher. By this means the power
of the clergy was confiderably augmented, and
the privileges of the people diminished. For
though at firft thefe bifhops, afTembled in convo-
cation, acknowledged themfelves to be no more
than the deputies of the people, they foon drop-
ped that ftile, and made decrees by their own au-
thority, and at length claimed a power of pre-
fcribing both in matters of faith and of difci-
pline.
For the more orderly holding of thefe afTem-
blies, fome one biihop in a large diftri<5b was em-
ployed by common conlent to fummon them,
and to prefide in them ; and this being generally
the biihop of the metropolis, or the city in which
the civil governor refided, he was called the me-
tropolitan or archbijhop. The term Archbifhop
was firft ufed by Athanafius, afterwards by Epi-
f Molheim, vol. i. p. 146.
phanius
238 &be Hiftory of Minijlers
phanius, and from the year 430 it was common
in the church*.
When the clergy of feveral provinces aflem-
bled, they appointed officers with a more extenfive
jurifdiction, and called them Patriarchs, or Pri-
mates. This laft term was not ufed before the
time of Leo the firft. That of pairiarcb was firft
ufed by the Montanifts, and in time came to be
applied to the five principal fees of Rome, Con-
ftantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerufalemf.
Thefe patriarchs were diftinguifhed by particular
rights and privileges. They alfo confecrated the
bifhops of their refpe&ive provinces. They af-
fembled them yearly in council, and all impor-
tant controversies were referred to their decifion,
cfpecially where the bifhops were concerned j and
they appointed vicars, or deputies, to a<5t for
them in the remoter provinces. Several places,
however, in the fifth century maintained their in-
dependence on thefe patriarchs; and both the
emperors and the general councils were obftacles
in the way of their ambition .
Many of thefe abufes were promoted by the
conftitutions of Conftantine, who was the firft
perfon that affembled a general council, to which
all the bifhops of the chriftian world were invit-
ed. Having made a new divifion of the empire
* Sueur, A. D. 81. f Ib.
Moiheim, vol. i. p. 372.
for
in the Chriftian Church. 239
for civil purpofes, he adapted the external go-
vernment of the church to it. When this divi-
fion was completed, thofe who make the corref-
pondence between the civil and ecclefiaftical go-
vernments the moft exact, fay that the bijhops cor-
refponded to thofe magiftrates who prefided over
fmgle cities ; the metropolitan^ or archbijhop, to
the proconfuls or prefidents of provinces, com-
prehending feveral cities; the primates to the em-
peror's vicars, or lieutenants, each of whom go-
verned in one of the thirteen great diocefes, into
which the whole empire was divided ; and the
patriarchs to the prefetti pr*torii, each of whom
had feveral diocefes under them. But it is not
probable that this fubdivifion was ever exactly
obferved. However, the government of the
church anfwered much more exactly to the go-
vernment of the flate in the Eaft than in the
Weft ; and in the weftern parts of Africa there
was little or no correfpondence between them*.
In confequence of this arrangement, a bifliop
in a metropolitan city acquired the power of or-
daining and depofing the bifhops of the cities de-
pendent upon his metropolis, and alfo of termi-
nating their differences and providing for their
wants in general. But this power was not abfo-
lute ; fmce the metropolitan could do nothing
without the confent of the bifhops of the pro-
vince. There were alfo fome bilhops who had
* Anecdotes, p. 75.
only
34Q 7*^ Hiftory of MiniJIers
only the title of metropolitan, without any pow-
er annexed to it*.
As the metropolitans followed the rank of
their- metropolis, fo the patriarchs or Exarchs,
as they were fometimes called, followed the con-
dition of the capital cities of their diocefe. Thus
AS Antioch was the capital city of the Eaft, con-
taining fifteen provinces, the bifhop of that
city exercifed a jurifdiflion over all the metro-
politans, having a power of aflembling the coun-
cils of the diocefes, &cj. Conftantinople be-
ing made the feat of the empire, the bifhop of
it, not content with the title of metropolitan, or
even of Exarch, was firfl honoured with that of
Patriarch as more expreflive of dignity and pre-
eminence , and thence he took occafion to give
a greater extent to his patriarchate, fo as to en-
croach upon the province of the patriarch of
Rpmef.
As the higher clergy rofe above the inferior,
fo thefe were not wanting to themfelves, bur
magnified their refpective offices in proportion.
In the fourth century thofe preibyters and dea-
cons who filled the firft ftations of thofe orders,
obtained the name of arch-prejl>yters> and arch-
deaconsy and alfo obtained more power than the
reft of their brethren . It was a confiderable
* Anecdotes p. 63. J Ib. p. 65. f Ib p. 73.
Mofheiiii, vol. i. p. zcjo.
time
in the Chriftian Church. *
rime, however, before the offices of priefts and
deacons came to be confounded as they now
are in many refpects. But when there was pe-
culiar profit or honour in any of the functions
of deacons or archdeacons, they were occafion-
ally beftowed upon the priefts, who retained
the name of the lower office. An inftance of
this we have not only in the prefent office of
archdeacon in the church of England, but in the
deans and chapters of cathedral churches.
In confequence of all thefe changes, there
did not remain, at the conclufion of the fourth
century, fo much as a fhadow of the antient
conftitution of the chriftian church ; the pri-
vileges of the prefbyters and people having been
ufurped by the bifhbps, who did not fail to
aflume the ftate and dignity fuited to their new
diftinctions. Indeed, long before this time, and
even before the empire became chriftian, a fpi-
rit of pride and ambition, that very fpirit againft
which our Saviour fo frequently and earneftly
cautioned his difciples, had got faft hold of
many of the chriftian bifhops. We find in the
writings of Cyprian, that in his time many
biflbops aflumed great ftate, with fplendid en-
figns of power, as a princely throne, furrounded
with officers, &c. The prefbyters and deacons
alfo imitated them in fome meafuxe ; and this
laft order, being above the offices to which they
were originally appointed, had them done by
VOL, II. inferior
<4 We Hijlory of Minifters
inferior officers created on purpofe, as doorkeep-
ers, readers, grave diggers, &c.
The pride of the bifhops was fo great in the
fourth century, and they fet themfelves fo much
higher than the priefts, that j^Erius, a Semiarian,
and a great reformer, thought it neceflary to
urge among his principal tenets, that bifhops
were not diftinguiflied from prefbyters by any
divine right j but that, according to the New
Teftament, their office and authority was
intirely the fame. His doctrine in general, by
which he endeavoured to bring the difcipline
of the church to its priftine ftate, excited
much diflurbance in feveral provinces of Afia
Minor*.
The wealth and power of the bifhops of the
greater fees were foon very confiderable, fo as
to make them refemble princes. Pretextatus,
defigned conful, being prefled to embrace
chriftianity, faid, according to Marcellirrus,
" Make me bifhop of Rome, and I will be-
<c come a chriftian." And yet the propriety
of the clergy in general having no independent
fortunes, as well as their not enriching their
families out of the revenues of the church, was
very evident in thofe times. Conftantine pro-
hibited by an edict any rich man to enter into
the church. Jerom was of opinion that none
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 314.
Of
in the Chriftian Church< 243
of the clergy fhould have any property of their
own y and Auftin admitted none into his church
who did not firft difpofe of all their goods.
He did not, however, think this abfolutely ne r
ceffiiry, but only for their greater perfection*.
Sometimes the revenues of a church were
not fufficient for the maintenance of the cler-
gy j and in that cafe it was not thought impro-
per that they fhould contribute to their own
maintenance by their labour. In fome cafes
this was exprefsly enjoined. Thus the fourth
council of Carthage, held in 389, ordered the
clergy and monks to gain their livelihood by
forne trade, provided it did not divert them from
the duties of their office f.
It was very early thought to be of great im-
portance that the clergy fhould have no fecular
care that would engage much of their thoughts,
and attention. The apoftolical canons, which,
though fpurious, were written in the fourth cen-
tury, order that bifhops fhould not meddle with
the adminiftration of public affairs ; and that if
they did, they fhould be depofed. The fame
orders were given by the councils of Chalcedon,
Carthage, Ments, &c. Nay, it appears by the
letters of Cyprian, that a clergyman could not
even be a guardian or truftee to a child. With
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 24.
f Sueur, A. D. 389.
2 this
244 c fl' e Hijlory of Miniflers
this view Conftantine exempted the clergy from
all public and civil employments. But for the
fake of gain, the clergy of thofe times were too
ready to undertake any office or employment
whatever. Chryfoftom laments that ecclefiaf-
tics, abandoning the care of fouls, became ftew-
ards and farmers of taxes, employments unbe-
coming their holy miniftry. Bifhops, he faid,
fhould have nothing but food and raiment, that
they may not have their defires draw^i after
worldly things*.
But at the fame time that Conftantine and
other empeiors releafed the clergy from all ob-
ligation to duties of a civil nature, they gave
them fecular bufmefs in another way, viz. by en-
forcing the rules of church difcipline, and by
giving the biftiops the cognizance of all ecciefi-
aftical affairs, and ecclefiaftical perfons, fuch as
had before been brought to the fecular judges ,
and Juftinian greatly enlarged this kind of au-
thority f. The clergy having thus tafted of ci-
vil power, foon got a fondnefs for it, which re-
quired to be reftrained. So early as the middle
of the fifth century, it was complained that the
bifhops wifhed to extend their juriidiction, and in
452, Valentinian the third made a law, declaring
that a bifhop had no power to judge even the
clergy, but with their own confent J.
In i Tim. v. 17. Opera, vol. 10. p. 1605.
Sueur, A. D. 356. f Anecdotes, p. 125.
J Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p. 9.
In
in the Chrljlian Church. 245
In this age, and 'indeed much later, it was far
from being thought improper that the general re-
gulation of ecclefiaftical matters ftiould be in the
hands of the fupreme civil power. Ccnftantine
made many laws in ecclefiaftical matters, as con-
cerning the age, the qualification, and duties of
the clergy; and Juftinian added many more.
Appeals were made to the emperors againft the
injuftice of the fynods. They received them,
and appointed fuch bifhops to hear and try the
caufes, as happened to be about the court. The
emperors called feveral councils, they even fet
in them, and confirmed their decrees.- This was
the conftant practice of the Roman emperors,
both in the Eaft and in the Weft ; and when the
empire was divided into many lefTer fovereign-
ties, thofe petty princes continued to aft the fame
part.
Though the regulations eftablifhed by the
clergy were numerous in the time of Conftan-
tine, they contained nothing that could juftly
excite the jealoufy of the emperors; becaufe it
was then univerfally agreed, that the emperors
ought to regulate the ecclefiaftical difcipline.
One book of the Theodofian code is wholly em-
ployed on regulations refpecting the perfons and
goods of ecclefiaftics*.
* Anecdotes, p. 99.
A kind
246 Fbe Hiftory of Minifters
A kind of ecclefiaftical power was alfo allow-
ed to many rich laymen, as, in many cafes, they
had the appointment of the bifhopsj at leaft they
could not be appointed without their confent.
This right of Patronage was introduced in the
fourth century, to encourage the opulent to erect
a number of churches; which they were the more
induced to do, by having the power of appointing
the minifters who were to officiate in them. And
it was an old heathen opinion, that nations and
provinces were happy, and free from danger, in
proportion to the number of the temples they
contained*.
As it was deemed inconfiflent with the clerical
character to have any fecular concerns, fo in this
age this idea, together with that of the greater
purity of the unmarried flate, made it to be
thought not quite proper for the clergy to have
wives and families, left their thoughts fhould be
diftracled by the cares of this lifej though mar-
riage was not abfolutely prohibited to the priefts.
This rigour was introduced by the Montanifts.
Thefe condemned all fecond marriages, and this
opinion of theirs generally prevailed among
chriftians afterwards ; and not only did they re-
fufe to admit to the priefthood thofe who had
been married twice, but even thole who were
married at all.
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 321.
So
in the Chriftian Church. 247
So much were the minds of chriftians in gene-
ral imprefled with thefe fentiments, at the time
that the empire became chriftian, that it was
propoied at the council of Nice, that the bifhops,
priefts, and deacons, fhould ceafe to cohabit with
the wives which they had married while they
were laymen. But at the inftance of Paphnutius,
a venerable old confeffor, this did not pafs into
a decree ; and therefore thefe Fathers contented
themfelves, with ordering that priefts who were
not already married fhould abftain from it. But
even before this, viz. at a fynod held at Elvira
in Spain, in the year 306, celibacy was abfolute-
ly enjoined to priefts, deacons, and fub-deacons *.
However, notwithftanding thefe regulations, and
every provifion that was made afterwards to fc-
cure the celibacy of the clergy, fupported by the
general opinion of chriftians, the marriage of
priefts was not uncommon in many parts of the
chriftian world, quite down to the reformation.
When learning became lefs common among the
laity in the weftern parts of the world, even the
clergy were often found to be very ignorant j
though it was remarkable that there was more li-
terature at this time in Britain, which had then fuf-
fered lefs by the invafion of barbarous nations,
than in other parts of the empire. When Con-
ftantine had appointed a council at Conftantinople,
Agathon bifhop of Rome, made an apoiogy for
* Sueur A. D. 306.
the
248 be Hiftory of Minifters
the two bifhops whom he fent thither, as his
legates, on account of their want of learnings fay-
ing that, to have had a theologian* he muft have
fent to England *. Even in the Eaft feveral bifh-
ops, at the councils of Ephefus and Chalcedon,
could not write, fo that other perfons figned the
decrees for them f.
It was in part to provide for the better inftruc-
tion of the clergy, and in part alfo as an imitation
of the monaftic life, which rofe in its credit as the
clergy funk in the public efteem ; that firft Eufe-
bius bifhop of Verceil, and after him Auftin, for-
med in his houfe a fociety of ecclefiaftics, who
lived in common, having him, the bifhop, for
their father and mafter; and in time this inftitu-
tion gave rife to the canons and prebends of
cathedral churches J.
* Sueur, A. D. 680. f Jortin's Remarks., vol.4, p. 277,
t Sueur, A. D. 395.
SECTION
in the Chriftian Church. 249
SECTION II.
We Eijtory of the Clergy from the Fall of the Ro-
man Empire< in the Weft, to the Reformation.
IN the former period we have feerj a very confi-
derable departure from the proper character
.of prefbyters or bishops, in thofe who bore that
title ip the chriftian church. But in this we fhall
fee a much greater departure, and through the
increafing ignorance and fuperftition in the laity,
we fhall find fuch a degree of "power aflumed by
the clergy, as was nearly terminating in the entire
fubjection of every thing to their will. But in
the mean time the different orders of thofe who
fuftained a religious character were a check up-
on each other.
In the firft place I fhall repeat what was ob-
ferved with another view in a former part of this
work, viz. that a considerable change took place
in the idea of the powers fuppofed to be given to
priefts by their ordination, and confequently in
the form of ordination. Originally nothing was
neceffary to the conferring of holy orders but
prayer, and the impofition of hands. But in the
tenth and eleventh centuries, after the introduc-
tion of the doctrine of tranlubftantiation, a new
form was obferved, viz. the delivery to the prieft
of the veflels in which the eucharift was celebrated,
witk
250 1'he Hiftory of Minijlers
with a form of words, exprefling the communi-
cation of a power of offering Jacrifices to God, and
of celebrating maffes. Alfo a new benediction
was added, which refpecled the new doctrine of
penance and abfolution. For the bifhop, in lay-
ing on his hands, fays, Receive ye the Holy Ghoft.
Whojefms ye remit they are remitted, and whojeftns
ye retain they are retained. According to the fyf-
tem now received in the church of Rome, the
priefts have two diftinct powers, viz. that of con-
fecrating, and that of abjolving. They are or-
dained to the former by the delivery of the vef-
fels, and to the latter by the bifhop alone laying
on his hands, and -faying, Receive ye the Holy
Ghoft, &c. And it is faid that the bifhop and
priefts laying on their hands jointly, which from
antient cuftom is ftill retained among them, and
which was the only proper ceremony of ordina-
tion, is nothing more than declaring, as by their
fuffrage, that fuch a perfon ought to be or-
dained f'
In the former period we faw that the bifhops
began to reierve to themfelves the power of con-
firming after baptifm. This was fully aflerted
in this period. When the Bulgarians were con-
verted to chriftianity, which wa,s in the ninth cen-
tury, and their priefts had both baptized and
confirmed the new converts, pope Nicholas fent
bifhops among them, with orders to confirm
f Burnet on the Articles, p. 355.
even
in the Chriftian Church. 251
even thofe who had been already confirmed by
the priefts*. However, when the doctrine of
tranfubftantiation was efta'olifhed, it was not pof-
fible that the bifhops, with refpect to their fpiri-
tual power, Ihould ftand higher than the priefts :
for what power can be iuperior to that of mak-
ing a God. And yet we find that the fchoolmen
endeavoured to make the epifcopate to be a
higher degree and extenfion of tfye priefthood.
In this period the priefts aflumed feveral new
badges, or figns of their character, and thefe were
generally borrowed from the heathen ritual.
Thus thejhaven head and Jurplices were borrow-
ed from the Egyptian priefts, and the crofier, or
$ aft oral ftaff> was the lituus of the Roman au-
gurs %.
Now alfo we find what feems to be a quite
new order in the church, but in fact it was only an
extenfion of power in the orders that exifted be-
fore, without any addition to the fpiritual cha-
racter. This is the rank of Cardinal in the
church of Rome. Thefe cardinals, though they
were not heard of in former times, now have the
rank of princes in the church, with the fole pow-
er of choofing the pope. It is about the end of
the fixth century, and efpecially in the letters of
pope Gregory, that we firft meet with the term
* Burnet on the Articles, p. 338.
J Hiftory of Popery, vol. 3, p. 340, 355.
cardinal
252. The Hiftory of Minifters
cardinal priefts and cardinal deacons, but they were
then in many other churches, befides that of
Rome *.
As die term cardinal fignifies chief y or the prinr
dpal, the cardinal priefts in the church of Rome
are fuppofed by fome to have been thofe priefts
whom Marullus, mentioned above, fet over the
twenty-five pariilies into which he divided the
church of Rome, with priefts and deacons under
them, fo that being next in rank to the pope they
jofe in power and wealth as he did. But till
the eleventh century thefe cardinal priefts held no
confiderable rank, and they were not admitted in-
to their councils, till the year 964. Or, though
they might affift at them, and likewife at the
nomination of the popes, as part of the body of
the clergy, they were always named after the
bifhop; but from this time it became the intereft
of the popes to advance their dignity. Still,
however, there remain traces of their former
rank. For the popes never call themfelves
.cardinals, but bifhops. They alfo call bifliops
their brothers, but the cardinals their beloved
children.
It was only in the year 1059 that the cardi-
nals appear to be necefTarily joined with the
clergy in the election of a pope, but about a
hundred years after this they obtained of Alex-
* Anecdotes, p. 222.
andcr
in the Chriftian Church. 253
ander the third that they fhould have the fole
nomination j and fince that time they have been
continually gaining new privileges and digni-
ties. They are now confidered as the pope's
great council, and no oath of fidelity is required
of them. Innocent the fourth in 1 244., ordained
that when the cardinals rode out they fliould
always wear a red hat, to fhew that they were
ready to fried their blood in the caufe of the
church ; and Paul the fecond, about the year
14*- 1, ordained that they fhould wear robes of
fcarlet. Whereas all other perfons, even kings
and emperors, muft kifs the pope's toe, the car-
dinals kifs his hands and mouth. If a cardinal
accidentally meets a criminal going to execution
he has a power of faving his life; and it is faid
that none of them can be condemned for a crime
but by feventy two witneffes if he be a cardinal
bifhop, fixty two if he be a cardinal pried, and
twenty feven if he be a cardinal deacon*. .
In very early times we find a number of in-
ferior offices in the churches, with names fuited
to their bufinefs, as readers, fab-deacons, &c.
None of thefe, however, were confidered as drf-
tin<5t orders of clergy, but the laft is enumera-
ted as fuch by pope Eugenius.
Another order of clergy took its rife in thefe
dark ages, and was fuggefted by the great cor-
* Hiftory of Pcpery, vol. 3, p, 53,
ruption
254 Vbe Hijlory of Minijleri
ruption both of the clergy and the monks in
the feventh century ; when many of the clergy
belonging to great cathedrals formed themfelves
into regular communities, and were called cano-
niciy or canons^ from obferving certain canons
or rules y which were given them by Chrodogang
bifhop of Ments towards the middle of the
feventh century, in imitation of what had before
been done by Eufebius of Verceil, and Auftin
above-mentioned. The rule of Chrodogang
was obferved by all the canons, as that of Be-
nedict by all the monks*.
A regulation was made refpecbing this fub-
je6t in 1059, when, at a council in Rome, it was
ordered that thofe priefts who kept no concu-
bines fhould eat and fleep together, near the
church to which they belonged, and have in
common whatever revenues they had from the
church, ftudying, and living an apoftolical life.
This, fays Fleury, was the origin of the canons
regular. A fimilar order was made by Nicho-
las the fecond in 1063.
The bifhpps were generally at the head of
thefe focieties of clergy, and they were confider-
ed as his (landing council, and during the va-
cancy had the jurifdidlion of the diocefe. But
afterwards abbots, deans, and provofts, &c. were
preferred to that diftin&ion, and feveral of them
* Fleury's eighth Difcourfe, p. 9,
procured
in the Chriftian Church. ice
procured exemptions from any fubjection to the
bifhop. Our Englifh deans and chapters are
intirely independent of the bifhop, and had
their exemption from the bilhop's authority
fecured to them by a provifo in the ftatute of
the twenty fifth of Henry the eighth f. With
us thofe Canons who have no duty whatever
are called Prebends.
Originally bifhops were always chofen by the
people, though they would be naturally much
influenced in their choice by the recommenda-
tion of their prefbyters. But afterwatds thefe
prefbyters fet afide the vote of the people alto-
gether ; and when thefe chapters were formed, it
grew into a cuftom in England, that the priefts
who conftituted them, being always at hand, and
eafy to be afiembled on the deceafe of a bifhop,
fhould choofe him themfelves, without confult-
ing the reft of the*priefts. They ftill have the
fame power nominally, but their choice of a bi-
fhop is always directed by the king.
When the bifliops, in confequence of their be-
coming landholders, came to be of great weight
in the flate, it could not be a matter of indiffer-
ence to the prince who fhould be bifhops. He
would naturally, therefore, intereft himfelf in the
elections. Accordingly, we foon find that the
bifhops of Rome, though they were chofen by
f Pierce's Vindication, p. 381, 384.
the
256 The tiijtory of Minijters
the people, could not be confirmed in their
office without the approbation of the emperor;
and this right in the prince continued undif-
puted for many centuries. The great autho-
rity that Charlemaigne exercifed refpe&ed chief-
ly the election of biftiops, of which he made
himfelf mafter, with the knowledge and confent
of the popes. He did not choofe them himfelf,-
but he retained the right of approving, which
he fignified by delivering to them the paftoral
ftaff and ring which was called the inveftiture,
after which they were confecrated by the neigh-
bouring bifhops. Thus began the rights oj in-
ueftiture) which was a fource of fo much con-
tention afterwards f.
In the eighth general council, in 869, the em-
peror and all fecular princes were forbidden to
meddle with the election of any patriarch, metro-
politan, or bifhop whatever. And at the council
of Bonaventure, in 1687, it was decreed, that if
any emperor, king or other fecular perfon, fhould
prefume to give the inveftiture of a bifhopric,
or any other ecclefiaftical dignity, he fhould be
excommunicated J. But by this time the popes
had not only emancipated themfelves from the
power of the emperor, but had arrogated to
themfelves all power in matters temporal as well
as fpiritual ; and on the fubject of inveftiture,
\ Anecdotes p. 335.
J Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 2. p. 501.
as
in the Chriftian Church. 257
as well as many others, the emperors of Ger-
many, after a ftruggle of many years, were oblig-
ed to yield. In France, however, the nomina-
tion of the biihops was always, in fad, in the
hands of the prince.
When the bifhops were little more than fecular
perfons, it is no wonder, how contrary foever it was
to all the notions of the antients, that bifhoprics
ihould be confidered as other eftates, and in fome
cafes be given, or defcend, to minors. In 925
the pope approved of the appointment of an
infant to be bifhop of Rheims, another perfon
having the adminiftration of it; an example
foon followed by princes, and an evil much com-
plained of by Baronius. In 1478 Sixtus the
fourth, obliged the king of Arragon by giving
the biihopric of Saragofla to a child of fix years
of age ; a pernicious example and unheard of
till then, fays the author of Hiftoire des Papes*.
In this however this writer was miftaken.
This example, pernicious as it is here faid to
have been, has been followed, in one inftance,
by proteftants. For the bifhoprick of Ofna-
burgh, having, like other German bifhoprics,
become a principality, it was agreed after the
reformation, that it Ihould be held alternately
by papifts and proteftants. At prefent it is held
by the fecond fon of the king of England,
* Vol. 4. p. 254.
VOL. II. R who
258 We ttiflory of Minifters
who was appointed to it when he was quite an
infant.
In the eighth century not only v/ere private
pofieffions made over to ecclefiaflics and to mo-
naileries, but royal domains, fuch as ufed to be
held by princes ; by which means they came into
the po0effion of whole provinces, cities, caftles,
and fortrefles, with all the rights and preroga-
tives of fovereignty j and thus churchmen be-
came dukes, counts, and marquifies, and even
commanded armies. The prince thought that
churchmen would be more faithful to him than
fecular perfons, and expected that they would
have more influence over their other vaffals, and
keep them better in fubjection*. This ag-
grandifement of the German bifhops took place
chiefly upon the death of Charles le Gros, when
many of the great fubjects of the empire made
themfelves independent f.
By thefe fteps the greater clergy came to be
entirely fecular men, and to have as much to do
in civil bufmefs of all kinds, as any other mem-
bers of the community. Thus in England it
was far from exciting any wonder, in the days
of popifh darknefs (whatever would have been
thought of it in the time of the apoftles) to fee
bifhops and mitred abbots called to the great
council of the nation, along with the barons;
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 62. f Sueur, A. D. 889.
becaufc
in the Chrijlian Church. 2 eg
becaufe, though churchmen, they actually were
barons. The parliaments of France alfo, about
the middle of the eighth century, were confritu-
ted in the fame manner, the bifhops attending
along with the other grandees.
This great abfurdity in politics, as well as in
religion, remains as a blot in the Englifh confti-
tution to this day, the bifhops being admitted to
have a feat in the houfe of lords, and this evil is
the greater in a conflitution which pretends to
freedom. For certainly thefe bifhops, receiving
their preferment from the court, and having far-
ther expectations from it, will, in general, be
in the intereft of the court, and confequently
enemies to the rights of the people. Ufeful as
this order of men is to the court, the time has
been, when the prefence of the bifhops in the
great council of the nation gave umbrage not
only to the temporal lords, but to the fovereign.
Queen Elizabeth more than once exprefTed her
diflike of the clofe attendance of the biihops at
court and in parliament, and Ihe even threat-
ned to fend them into the country, to mind
their proper bufmefs.
It is not pofilble that any thing fhould be more
foreign to the office of a bifhop than to ferve in
the wars ; and yet even this grofs abufe natu-
rally arofe from clergymen being in pofleffion
of the great fiefs which were held by military
fervice. And the habits of thofe who were made
R 2 bifhops
260 The Hiftory of Minifters
bifhops in thofe times were fuch, as to make
them not wilh to be exempted from that ob-
ligation. In the feventh century, fays Fleury,
barbarians, being admitted into the clergy, in-
troduced their habits of hunting and righting;
and from that time the bifhops pofleffing large
eftates were under obligation to furnifli men for
the defence of it. Charlemaigne excufed the
biihops from ferving in perfon, but required
them to fend their vaflals*. But before his time
fome bifhops diftinguifhed themfelves in the wars
in Italy, and ib early as the year 575 f .
The impropriety of this practice was, how-
ever, foon perceived, and afterwards exprefs
laws were made to prevent biihops from ap-
pearing in the field in perfon. Mezerai fays,
that, at the beginning of the tenth century,
bifhops and abbots notwithftanding the prohibi-
tion of councils, ftrll bore arms, and went to the
wars j and the cuftom continued far into the
third race of the French kings .
The utter incompetency of the bifhops for
the duties of their office, and the turn of the
age in general, contributed to give them the
fame fondnefs for war that other perkms of rank
in the ftate had. And when they could not
aft contrary to the letter of the law, they fome-
times had rccourfe to methods of evading it,
* Fleury, vol. 13. p. 28. f Sueur. Ib. A. D. 989.
which
in the Chriftian Church. 261
which are ridiculous enough. In the thirteenth
century, fays Jortin, in was an axiom, that the
church abhors the fhedding of bjood. There-
fore bifhops and archbifhops went to the battle
armed with clubs, and made no fcruple to
knock down an enemy, and beat and bruife
him to death, though they held it unlawful to
run him through with a Avord*.
At length the laws got the better of this
cuftom, and the clerical character being deemed
an indelible one, in confequence of the fpiritual
powers fuppofed to have been imparted by the
facrament of orders, it was ordained, in a coun-
cil of Rouen, in 1174, that clergymen who had
been depofed fhould not, however, bear arms,
as if they were laymen f.
Originally, bifliops were not only carefully ex-
cluded from all bufmefs of a fecular nature, but
in the exercife of their fpiritual power, they
were much retrained by the civil magiftrates,
even after they became chriftians. Juftinian,
who had a great zeal for the church, forbad the
bifhops to excommunicate any perfon before the
caufe of it had been proved in form; and this was
fo far from giving offence, that pope John the fe-
cond thanked the emperor for his zeal in thefe
refpects J.
* Remarks, vol. 5. p. 388. f Fleury.
J Anecdotes, p. 171.
R 3 But
262 be Hijlory of Minijlers
But in this period we find the biihops not only
exercifing their fpiritual power without the lead
controul, but encroaching greatly on the civil
power, and controuling princes themfelves in the
exercife of their proper authority. To this many
circumftances contributed, but nothing more than
the admifiion of the great clergy to feats in the
afTemblies of the ftate. The ignorance of the
laity alfo gave great power to the clergy. As
thefe were the only people who could read or write
they were univerlally fecretaries, ftewards, trea^
furers ? &c. Hence the word clerk, which origin-
ally fignified a clergyman (clericus) came to de-
note an officer in the law*.
Owing to thefe caufes and to the negligence of
the princes, who were much weakened by their
divifions in the ninth century; the bilhops were
almoft matters of the kingdoms of France and
Germany, difpofing of every thing at their plea-
lure. Though Arnoul, archbiihop of Rheims,
was a traitor, and delerving of the greatefl
punifhment, two kings of France, Hugh and
Robert, did not pretend to have him judged ex-
cept by the clergy, in confequence of which he
ran no rifque with refpect to his life, and could
only have been depofed; and by means of the
popes he was confirmed in his fee, and continued
in it to his death f.
* Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p. iz. 19.
f Sueur, A. D. 99.1.
The
in the Chriftian Church. 263
The Crufades contributed much to the ad-
vancement of the clergy j the Crufaders leaving
their eftates to their management, and fome-
times ielling them, in order to equip ' them-
felves for thofe diftant expeditions f .
The ceremony of consecration^ which was in-
troduced in the middle of the eighth century,
afforded the prieftsa pretence to intermeddle with
the rights of princes. For in putting on the
crown they feemed to give the kingdom on the
part of God; and this ceremony was foon deem-
ed fo neceflary by the fuperftitious people, that
no coronation was deemed valid without it, in
confequence of which the priefts had a real
negative on the claims of kings, and in cafe of
a contefl the party favoured by the clergy was
fure to prevail.
Alfo the confequence of the excommunications
of thole times, which was a cutting off of all
intercourfe between the excommunicated perfons
and the reft of the world, affected the prince as
well as the people. For the man who was not
deemed worthy to tranfacl any civil builnefs, was
certainly unfit to be a king. After the death of
Lpuis the fifth, Charles of Lorrain was the pre-
fumptive heir to the crown df France; but the
clergy, who were then the moft powerful order in
f Hhtoire des Papes, vol. 2. p. 527.
Fleury, vol. 13. p. 30,
R 4 the
264 The Hiftory of Minifters
the ftate, having excommunicated him, he was
reckoned difqualified to wear the crown.
feut the firft remarkable attempt upon the
rights of royalty by priefts, was the depofition of
Vamba king of the Vifigoths in Spain, at the
twelfth council of Toledo* in 68 1. On the pre-
tence of his being a penitent) he had been cloath-
ed with the monaftic habit, though it was un-
known to himfelf, his diforder having made him
infenfible. For the two characters of monk and
king were deemed to be incompatible. The fe-
cond example was that of Louis le Debonaire,
who had likewife been in a ftate of penitence,
after which the bifhops who impoled the pe-
nance, pretended that he could not refume the
royal dignity f. The opinion that bilhops had a
power of depofing kings, made fuch progrefs in
the eighth and ninth centuries, that the kings
themfelves acquiefced in it J.
The primary caufe of the temporal power of
the clergy was the wealth which they acquired
by the liberality of the laity ; which, in thofe fu-
perftitious times, knew no bounds. Donations
for pious ufes were fo profufe, as to threaten the
utter extinction of all merely civil property ; fo
that no effectual check could be put to it, but by
laymen arTuming ecclefiaftical titles, and by de-
grees refuming their property, in the character of
f Fleury, vol. 13. p. 30. J Ibid, feventh Difcourfe, p. 12,
in tie Chriftian Church. 265
lay-impropriations, which has been a fubject of
great complaint to the clergy. This was certain-
ly an abufe and an irregularity ; but one evil is
often made ufe of, in the courfe of divine provi-
dence, to correct another.
The notion that temporal and fpiritual goods
had fuch an affinity, that the one might be pro-
cured by means of the other, could not fail to
operate in favour of the wealth, and confequently
of the temporal power of the clergy. Thefe were
the venders of a valuable commodity, and the
rich laity were the purchafers. And were not
many antient writings and charters, &c. dill ex-
tant, we fhould not believe how nearly the grant
of money and lands to the church, for the good
of mens fouls, approached to the form of a bar-
gain and fale in other cafes. The grants by
which eftates, &c. were made to the church, were
often exprefs ftipulations for the good of their
own fouls, and thofe of others.
Thus when Ethelwolf tithed the kingdom of
England, he faid <f It was for the good of his own
<c foul, and thofe of his anceftors". An act of king
Stephen fays, " I Stephen, by the grace of God,
" king, being defirous of iharing with thofe who
" barter earthly things for heavenly felicity, and
(C moved thereto by the love of God, and for the
" good of my own foul, and of my father and
" mother, and the fouls of all my relations, and
" my royal anceftors ; to wit, of king William
" my
l66 <Tbe Hijlory of Minijlers
tc my grandfather, king Henry my uncle, &c.
(C do, by the advice of my barons, give to God
" and the holy church of St. Peter, and the
" monks thereof, the tythes of all lands, &c*.
Wealth and power generally go hand in hand,
and the one will never fail to introduce the other.
With the clergy it was their fpiritual power that
was the caufe of their wealth, and their wealth
contributed to create their temporal power.
But before the clergy aflumed any proper power
over the laity, they exempted themfelves from
their junfdiclion, which they began to do very
early, and with the confent of the chriftian em-
perors, who did not wifli to fee perfons of an or-
der which they fo much refpefted brought into
the ordinary civil courts. It was therefore only
in extreme cales that any of the clergy were
brought before them. Athalaric, the Gothic
king of Italy, approved of this cuftom f.
Moreover, as the chriftian emperors had a re-
fpect for the clergy, and a confidence in them,
they chofe to extend the effe&s of church cen-
fures -, whereby it was in the power of the clergy
to prevent or punifh many offences of a civil na-
ture, fo that in time all the bifhops had courts of
their own ; and when the popes got power, it was
neceflary that the power of the bifhops fhould
rife in fome proportion to it. Boniface the
* P. 39, t Anecdotes, p. 188.
eighth
in the Chrijlian Church. 267
eighth made a decree by which the bifhops
might at all times have their auditories, and
confequently put the accufed in prifon. But this
was not much regarded, nor had the ecclefiaftics
a prifon before the pontificate of Eugenius the
firft *.
By degrees the dignity of the priefts rofe fo
much higher than that of the temporal powers,
that it was deemed a thing abfolutely intolerable,
that a clergyman fhould be fubjecl to any tem-
poral tribunal ; and as the canon law did not
punifh with death, the clergy enjoyed almoft an
abfolute impunity for the commifiion of any
crime whatever. And in thofe dark and igno-
rant ages, the difpofition of the clergy to vio-
lence, and crimes of every kind, was little, if at
all, lefs than that of the laity. It appears in the
reign of Henry the third of England, that more
than a hundred murders had been committed by
clergymen, whom ' the civil powers could not
bring to jufticef. As to the higher ranks of
the clergy, it was hardly pofiible that they
fhould be punifhed for any crime, on account of
their right of appeal to Rome, and the certainty
of their rinding protection there, efpecially if
they had any difference with their fovereign.
Befides, in thofe times no clergyman could be
punifhed capitally without previous degradation)
* Anecdotes, p. 119.
f Hiftory of Popery, vol. 3. p. 130.
and
68 *fbe Hijlory of Mini/ten
and a. pried could not be degraded but by eight
bifhops, to afiemble whom was a great expence.
In that reign of inperftition, the clergy could
be in no want of plaufible pretences to interpofe
in civil affairs. Among others, they pretended
to have jurifdicYion in all cafes of fin, in confe-
quence of which, fays Fleury, the bifhops made
themfelves judges in all law fuits, and even in
all wars among fovereigns, and in facl: made
themfelves to be the only fovereigns in the
world*. In a council of Narbonne, in 1054,
perfons who refufed to pay their debts were ex-
communicated f. Had church cenfures extend-
ed to no other cafes than thefe, the abufe would
not have been much complained of.
The cafe in which the clergy interfered the
moft was in things relating to marriage. For as
inceft is a fin, they made themfelves judges of the
degrees of relationfhip within which it was law-
ful to contract marriage. And as difpenfations
for marriage within thofe degrees was very gain-
ful, it was their intereft to extend thofe degrees,
that difpenfations might be more frequently
wanted.
Before the time of Juftin the fecond, ecclefi-
aftical canons began to encroach upon the pro-
vince of the fecular power in this refpedl, for-
* Seventh Difcourfe, p. 20. f Fleury, A. D. 1054.
bidding
in the Chrijlian Church. 269
bidding the marriage of coufins, and of the
children of coufins, and introducing a different
method of counting the degrees of relationfhip,
which is not more antient than pope Gregory or
Zachary. According to Fleury, the difference
between the canon and civil law on this iubjeft
arofe about the year 1065, when two degrees in
the civil law were made one by the canon law, the
former counting upwards to the common ancef-
tor, and then down again to the perfons whole
degree of relationfliip was to be determined.
Whereas the cuftom now was to begin with the
common anceftors, and count to the more re-
mote of the two parties. Brothers, therefore,
who, according to the civil law, were in the fe-
cond degree of relationfhip, according ro the ca-
non law were in the firft; and coufins german,
which were in the fourth degree, were by the
canons brought to the fecond, &c *.
Befides this advantageous method of counting
the degrees, the clergy likewife added to the
number of degrees within which it was not lawful
to contraft marriage. Mezerai fays, that about
the end of the tenth century, the degrees. of re-
lationfhip within which marriage was prohibited
were extended to feven, which very much em-
barrafTed fovereign princes, who were generally
related to one another within thole degrees.
* Fleury, vol. 13, p. 147.
Another
270 Trie lliftory of Minijlers
Another method of extending the degrees of
relationfhip was by confidering the relations of
one party, as thole of the other. In 557, a
council at Paris forbad the marriage of a wife's
lifter ; many perfons having then done it, after
the example of king Clotaire, who had married
the fifter of his deceafed wife*. Relation by
adoption was aifb made to have the fame efFe<5t
as that by nature. In 734, the pope not only
advifed to diflblve the marriage of a man with a
woman whofe child he had before adopted, but
to punifti him with deathf. And what will be
thought perhaps more extraordinary, the fpiritual
relationfhip, as it was called, or that of godfather
and godmother, was made to have the fame effecl
as a natural relation of the fame namej.
The number of lawful marriages were alfo re-
duced. Second marriages were foon reckoned
improper, and with refpect to the clergy, abfo-
lutely unlawful, it being foon imagined to be
forbidden by Paul, who fays, a pijhop muft be the
bujband of one wife. Epiphanius mentions a per-
fon who being a widower married a fecond wife,
that he might not be made a pried. Jerom fays
we do not defire. but we allow of fecond mar-
riages . In 901 the patriarch of Conftantinoplc,
refufed to marry the emperor Leo a fourth time,
alledging a law which he himfelf had made, that
* Sueur. f Ibid. J Ibid. A. D. 995.
Le Clerc's Hiftoria Ecclefiaftica, A. D. 158.
no
in the Chriftian Church. 271
no perfon ihould marry more than twice. After
much altercation on the fubject, it was agreed in
902, that third marriages ihould be lawful, but
not fourth *.
It was thought proper in very early times,
that a new married couple fhould have the be-
nedi-flion of the bifhop or a prieft. Thus, in
the fourth council of Carthage, in 398, it was
ordered that the bride and bridegroom fhould
be prefented to a prieft for his benediction, and
that, out of refpe6t to it, they fliould abftain
from commerce the firft night J. This cuftom
of giving the benediction prepared the way for
the clergy being considered as the only perlbns
before whom marriage could be legally contrac-
ted, and the laity were effectually excluded when
matrimony was made one or the feven facraments.
Marriage alfo came under the cognizance of the
clergy by means of the oath which the parties took
to be faithful to each other. For Fleury fays the
clergy included within their jurifdiction every
thing in which oaths were concerned, as well as
where the caufes had any connection with things
fpiritual. Thus on account of the facrament of
marriage, they took cognizance of marriage-
portions, cafes of dowry, of adultery, of legiti-
macy, and alfo of wills ; becaufe it was fuppofed
that the church ought not to be without fome pi-
ous legacy j|.
* Sueur. I Ib. |j Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p. 17.
The
1-J2 'The Hifiory of Minifters
The clergy alfo claimed entire jurifdiftion in
cafes of herefy andfcbifm, and in matters where
the civil law had not interfered, as in refpecl to
ufury and concubinage. And becaufe the crime
of herefy drew after k the lofs of eftates, and of
all civil rights, even with refpeft to the fovereign,
the clergy could always accufe of this crime any
perfon whom they meant to deftroy.; and if the
prince would not fubmit to their fentence, he
was accufed of not believing the power of the
keys, and accufed of herefyf.
The ordinary jurifd i 61; on of the bifivops was
much reflrained by the pope's legates, efpecially
from the eleventh century j and the bifliops,
thus reftrained, endeavoured to extend their ju-
rifdiction at the expence of the lay judges by
three methods, viz. the quality of the perfons,
the nature of the caufes, and the multiplication
of the judges. Boniface the eighth ordained
that laymen fhould have no power over ecclefia-
ftical perfons or goods, and the biihops made as
many clergy as they pleafed, by which means
they drew great numbers from the temporal
jurifdiclion, an abtife which was carried to an
enormous extent. Becaufe widows and orphans
had been protected by the bifhops in early ages,
they now undertook all their caufes, even thofe
of the widows of kings, and thofe of kings
themfelves in their minority. They alfo took
f Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p, 17,
cognizance
in the Chriftian Church. '273
cognizance in all cafes in which lepers were con-
cerned. Laftly, the biftiops multiplied judges,
and thereby extended their jurifdiction, efta-
blifhing their officials in various places befides
the epifcopal city. The archdeacons and chap-
ters alfo did the fame, and all thefe had their
delegates, fubdelegates, and other commirTaries*.
However, in all great caufes, the authority of the
bifhops was much leffened by the number of
appeals to the court of Rome j and afterwards the
Jnquifition alfo encroached upon the jurifdiction
of the bifhops, as well as on that of the or-
dinary judgesf.
A circumftance which contributed not a little
to make the clergy intent upon extending their
authority in the ftate, and to make them formi-
dable in it, was their not being allowed to mar-
ry. In confequence of this, great numbers of
them became lefs attached to their refpeclive
countries, and made the hierarchy alone their
great object. This point, however, was not
eftabliihed without much oppofition. A coun-
cil held at Conftantinople under Juftinian the
fecond gave the priefts leave to marry, though
the popes had enjoined the contrary. Many
priefts had wives even in the Weft about the
year 1000; but in 1074, Gregory the feventh
decreed in council, not only that priefts fhould
abftain from marriage, but that they who had
* Fleury's feventh Difcourfe, p 18. f Ib - P- 2 3-
VQL. II. S wives
274 Vb* Htftory of Minifters
wives fhould either difmifs them, or quit their
office. But even this law was often difre-
garded*.
That the true motive to this, in later ages,
was not a regard to purity, is evident, from its
being no objection to priefts to keep many con-
cubines, even publicly. John Cremenfis, who
eame to England to hold a fynod for the pur-
pofe of prohibiting the marriage of priefts, was
the very night after the council found in bed with
a commom proftitutef. Father Simon fays, that
the priefts being prohibited from marriage, made
no fcruple of keeping concubines J. It was in 970
that a fynod was held at Canterbury, in which it
was decreed that the clergy in England fhould
either part with their wives, or their livings ; q.
law which Dunftan enforced with great rigour.
The priefts, however, were much averfe to this
law, and therefore it was found neceflary to
hold another fynod on this fubjeft at Calne,
four years afterwards, in which it was finally
decided.
With the high rank and the wealth which
the clergy acquired, it is not to be wondered
that they fhould not improve in virtue, heaven-
ly mindednefs, and a careful attention to the
Mofheim, vol. z. p. 284.
f Hiftory of Popery, vol. 3, p. 45.
I On Church Revenues, p. 78.
in the Chriftian Church. 275
duties of their office. Complaints of. their ar-
rogance, avarice, and voluptuoufnefs, are with-
out end; and yet, vicious as the clergy in general
were, they were reverenced almoft to adoration
by the ignorant vulgar of thofe ages. This
arofe, in a great meafure, from the fentiments
and cuftoms of the northern nations before their
converfion to chriftianity ; which in thofe days
confided in nothing more than their being taught
to fay by rote, fome general principles of the
chriftian religion, being baptized, and chang-
ing the objects of their fuperftitious cuftoms.
For thefe were fuffered to continue the fame as
before, only, inftead of being acts of homage
to their heathen deities, they were now taught
to confider them as directed to the popifh
faints.
Now thefe people having been before their
converfion abfolutely enflaved by their priefts,
having never been ufed to undertake any thing,
even in civil or military affairs, without their
counfel; when they became chriftians, they tranf-
ferred the fame fuperftitious deference to their
chriftian priefts ; who, we may be fure, did
nothing to check it*. In the dark ages the
profligacy of the clergy perhaps exceeded that
of the laity, as the facrednefs of their character
gave them a kind of impunity. One Fabricius
complains of the luxury of the clergy in his
* Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 59.
S % time,
sy 6 The Hiftory of Minifttrs
time, towards the end of the tenth century, in
the following terms. They no longer faluted
one another with the title of brother, but that
of inajier -, they would not learn any thing
belonging to their miniftry, but committed the
whole to their vicars. Their ftudy was to have
horfes, cooks, maitres d'hotel, concubines, buf-
foons, and mountebanks; and they applied tq
the emperor for leave to hunt all forts of wild
beafts*.
Nothing, perhaps, can fhew the pride of the
clergy in a ftronger light, than the decrees of the
eighth general council, held at Conftantinople, in
869, in which it was ordered that bifhops fhould
not go before princes, that they fhould not alight
from their mules or horfes, but that they fhould
be confidered as of equal rank with princes, and
emperors ; that if any bifhop fhould live in a
low manner, according to the antient and ruftic
cuftom, he Ihould be depofed for a year ; and
that if the prince was the caufe of it, that prince
fhould be excommunicated for two years. In
the fame council it was decreed that bifhops
only fhould be prefent at councils, and not fe-
cular princes ; for that they ought not to be
even fpectators of fuch things as fometimes hap-
pen to prieftsf. All writers agree in giving
the moft fhocking picture of the depravity of
* Sucur, A. D. 989. t Ib. A. D. 869.
all
in the Chriftian Church. a~7
all ranks of men in the tenth century. Among
others, fee Sueur, A. D. 909.
When the occupation of churchmen and tem-
poral lords differed fo very little, it is natural
to expect that there would be no great difference
in their accomplifhments. In the ninth century
the ignorance of the clergy was fo great, that few
of them could either write or read. But one
reafon of this was that many noblemen and
others, wanting fufficient talents to appear to ad-
vantage in the field, retired into the church, the
great endowments of which were temptations to
them. The eftates of the church were alfo often
openly invaded, and the ignorant fpoilers got pof-
feflion of the benefices -j-.
Britain, being removed from the feat of the
greateft rapine and profligacy, had a greater pro-
portion of learned clergy than the reft of Europe,
in the greateft part of the dark ages , and Ire-
land had perhaps a greater proportion than Bri-
tain, as they had fuffered ftill lefs by the ra-
vages of the barbarians.
The very corrupt ftate of the clergy made the
monks, and their monafteries, of great value to
the chriftian world. With them almoft all the
learning and piety of thofe ages had an afy-
lum, till the approach of better times.
f Moflieim, vol. 2. p. 119,
S 3 In
278 The Hijtory of Minifters
In the church of England there is a three-fold
order of minifters, viz. bifhops, priefts, and dea-
cons. The deacons may baptize and preach, but
not adminifter the Lord's flipper; the priefts may
adminifcer the Lord's fupper, and pronounce abfo-
lution 5 and only the bifhops confirm baptized per-
fons, ordain minifters, and govern the church. The
bifhop's diocefe is confidered as the loweft kind of
a church, and the prefbyters are confidered as his
delegates, or curates. But the firft Englifh re-
formers confidered bifhops and priefts as of the
fame order, and therefore did not require that
thofe who had been ordained by priefts fhould be
ordained again by a bifhop. Wickliffe, who be-
gan the reformation in England, admitted no
more than two degrees, in the minifterial office,
viz. deacons, and prefbyters, or bifhops. Thefe
two, fays he, were known in Paul's time, and
others are the invention of impious pride.
There is alfo another deviation from the pri-
mitive ftate of things in the church of England,
as the people have not in general the choice of
their minifter; and the bifhops are all nominated
by the court. For though the dean and chapter
have the nominal choice, the king fends them an
exprefs order to choofe fuch as he fhall direct.
In the reign of Edward the fourth this abfurd
cuftom was fet afide, and the king himfelf im-
mediately appointed the bifhops; but the old
cuftom was renewed m the reign of queen Eli-
zabeth.
Almoft
in the Chrijlian Church. 279
Almoft all the inferior minifters are chofen by
the bifhops, the chancellor, or fome lay pa-
trons. When a new redtor is to be placed in a
parifh, the patron of the living recommends
whom he pleafes to the bilhop, and the bifhop
has no power to refufe. The rights of patron-
age to livings are openly bought and fold j and
it is not reckoned fimony to buy the next right
of prefentation, provided the living be not void
at the time.
S 4 THE
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY,
PART XI.
Hiftory of the PAPAL POWER.
THE INTRODUCTION.
WHEN we confider, that, originally, the
bifhops of Rome were nothing more than
any other bifhops, that is, the minifters or paf-
tors of a fociety of chriftians, without any power,
even within their own church, befides that of
exhortation and admonition > it is truly aftonifh-
ing that the popes, who are no other than the
fucceflbrs of thofe bifhops, Ihould have obtained
the rank and authority that they have done -, and
it is hardly poffible to conceive how the one
Ihould have arifen from the other. There is not,
indeed, in the whole hiftory of human affairs,
another example of fo great a change in the con-
dition
the Papal Power. sr8i
dition of any order of men whatever, civil or ec-
clefiaftical.
From being in the loweft ft ate of perfecution,
in common with other chriftians, and having
nothing to do with things of a temporal nature,
they came to be the greateft of all perfecutors
themfelvea, and rofe to a greater height of tem-
poral power (and a power eftablifhed on the
voluntary fubjection of the mind) than almoft any
fovereign, the moft defpotic by law or conftitu-
tion, ever attained. And from being mere fubjects
they came to be not only princes, but the moft
imperious lords of their former matters; and their
ecclefiaftical power was ftill more abfolute and
extenfive than their civil power. I fhall en-
deavour to point out the feveral fteps by which
this great change was made.
The ground of the papal pretenfions to power,
in later ages, was the popes being the fucceflbrs of
the apoftle Peter, to whom was delivered by
Chrift the keys of the kingdom of heaven. But
whatever was meant by that expreflion, Peter him-
felf aflfumed no preeminence over the reft of the
apoftles. Paul oppofed him to his face, and fays
that he himfelf was not inferior to the very chiefeft
apoftles. Alfo, though it be probable that Peter
was at Rome, and fuffered martyrdom there, it
is not probable that he was ever the proper biihop
of Rome, or of any particular place; the apoftles
having a general jurifdi&ion over the church at
large
282 The Hiftory of
large, appointing and directing the conduct of
all the bifhops ; an office to which they appoint-
ed no lucceffors at all.
The title of Pope (Papa) which fignifies fa-
ther, was not originally peculiar to the bifhop of
Rome, but in early times was commonly applied
to other bifhops, efpecially in the greater fees.
Thus Cornelius, bifhop of Rome, called Cyprian
the pope of Carthage ; and it was not till about
the beginning of the feventh century, that the
bifhops of Rome appropriated that title to them-
felves.
One of the molt extraordinary circumftances
relating to the papal power, is that, though the
foundations on which it refted were entirely
changed, and thofe pretences on which the great-
eft ftrefs was laid, had not been heard of, or hint-
ed at, for many centuries; yet being continually
urged, in dark ages, they came at length to be
tmiverfally acknowledged, and acquiefced in,
even by thofe princes whofe intereft it was to op-
pofe them. And in time the bufmefs tranfafted
at the court of Rome was fo great and peculiar,
that nothing was more fenfibly felt than the want
of unity in it, during the great fchifm in the pa-
pacy. All Europe was in the deepeft affliction
on the occafion j and inftead of rejoicing in the
divifion of this enormous controuling power, it
was the great object of princes and people, to
unite the church under its one proper head.
Had
the Papal Power. 83
Had the fun been divided, and its light been in
danger of being extinguiflied, the chriitian world
would hardly have been more alarmed than it
was; fo necefiary was the fubjeftion of all chrif-
tians to one Jupreme head of the churchy at that
time, deemed to be. The rife and progrefs of
fuch an amazing power, from fo very low a be-
ginning, is indeed a great object, and well de-
ferves to be confidered with attention.
SECTION I.
Of the State of the Papal Power till the Time of
Charlemaigne.
THE firft caufe of the increafe of power to
the popes was the fame that enlarged the
power of the bifhops of all the great cities of the
empire 3 in confequence of which they had the
power of calling and prefiding in, the afTemblies
of bilhops within the provinces to which the ci-
vil jurifdi&ion of their refpeclive cities extended.
And, by degrees, as has been obferved before,
they had the power of ordaining the bifhops in
their provinces, and a negative on the choice of
the people.
The bifhops of the moft important fees were at
length diftinguifhed by the title of patriarchs , who
had all equal power, and differed only with refpeft
to
284 . &be Hiflory of
rank and precedency ; and in general the bifhop
of Rome was confidered as the firft in rank, out
of refpect to the city in which he prefided. After
the fee of Rome, the preference was given to the
other great fees, in the following order, viz. thofe
of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and
Jerufalem. The churches of Africa do not ap-
pear to have been fubjecl: to any of thefe patri-
archs ; and Cyprian, who was bifhop cf Carthage,
in the third century, had the fame power that the
bifhops of Rome had, viz. to afifemble the bi-
fhops of his province, to prefide in their coun-
cils, and to admonifh his brethren *.
The proper authority of the bifliop of Rorne^
though he was the only perfon in Italy diftin-
guifhed by the title of metropolitan, did not ex-
tend over the whole of Italy, but only the
fouthern parts of it, or thofe provinces which
were called Juburbican, becaufe they were fubjecl:
to the imperial vicar, who refided at Rome,
while all the northern parts were fubjecl: to the
vicar of Italy, as he was called, in temporal
matters ; and to the arch bifhop of Milan in
fpiritualsj the vicar of Italy refiding in Milan f.
But though the power of the bifhops of Rome
had no legal extenfion beyond that of other
patriarchs, they had much more authority and
influence than other bifhops, on account of the
* Mofheim, vol. i. p. 215. f Anecdotes, p. 78.
dignity
we Papal Power. 285
Jignity of their city, which was the capital of
the Roman empire, and likewife on account of
the great wealth and large revenues of that fee.
Moreover, as it had been the cuftom to appeal
to Rome in all great civil cafes, fo if the bifhops
of Rome were only equal to other bifhops of
the great patriarchal fees (and in early times
they were probably fuperior to them in know-
ledge and character) it would be natural, when
differences of opinion arofe, for each party to
wifli to have the fanction of the fee of Rome.
.On thefe accounts appeals were more frequently
made to Rome than to any other place; and
this voluntary deference was afterwards expefted t
and then injifted upon, chriflians in general hav-
ing been by habit difpofed to yield^ to its au-
thority.
The Arian controverfy afforded the bifhops of
Rome feveral opportunities of extending their
power. Athanafius himfelf engaged the protec-
tion of pope Julius ; and it was chiefly by the
influence of the fee of Rome that the trinitarian
doctrine came to be eftablifhed. But before this
time, Victor, bifhop of Rome, interpoied his au-
thority, but without effect, in the controverfy
about the time of keeping Eafter, proceeding fo
far as to excommunicate all the eaftern churches,
becaufe they did not conform to the cuftom of
the weflern church in this refpect. But no re-
gard was paid to his decifion, though afterwards
the
?86 The Hi/lory of
the council of Nice determined the queflion as
he had done.
On this, and on other occafions, the papal pre-
tenfions did not pafs unnoticed, or without op-
pofition. Some fland, though an ineffectual one,
was always made to every encroachment j and
the early popes themfelves, who *began to ufurp
a little, and to convert that into a matter of right,
which had originally been mere courtefy, would
have been fhocked at the idea of a fmall part of
what was done by their fucceffbrs. A number
of decretal epiftles have, indeed, been alledged,
as proofs that the earlieft popes always held and
exercifed a fovereign power in the church. But
thefe were manifeflly forged, as the papifts them-
felves now acknowledge ; and many facts in the
early hiftory of the church, and of the papacy,
prove, inconteftably, that the bifhops of Rome
had no more real power than other metropolitan
bifhops.
In the fixth council of Carthage, it was con-
cluded by the bifhops who compofed it, that
they would not give way to the encroachments
of the bifhops of Rome on their rights and li-
berties, and they gave immediate notice to pope
Celeftine, to forbear fending his officers among
them, " left he fhould feem to introduce the vain
f infolence of the world into the church of
" Chrift." Various other councils alfo made de-
crees to the fame purpofe. But when the patri-
archs
the Papal Power. 2,87
archs of Alexandria and Antioch were opprefTed
by that- of Conftantinople, they had recourfe to
the church of Rome; and by their example in-
ferior biihops appealed thither alfo, when they
were opprefTed by the biihops of Alexandria and
Antioch*. By this means the bifhops of Rome
acquired a confiderable degree of influence even
in the Eafr.
After the prevalence of the Mahometan powers
in Afia and Africa, as there remained only two
rival metropolitans, viz. thofe of Rome and
Conftantinople, they were continually at vari-
ance; and at firft the bifhops of Conftantinople,
where the emperor refided, had the advantage.
Thefe had extended their jurifdiction fo much
before the reign of Juftin, that it comprehended
Illyricum, Epirus, Macedonia, and Achaia. Af-
terwards it extended to Sicily, and many pla-
ces in the fouthern parts of Italy, and they con-
tended with the bifhops of Rome for the fuper-
jntendence of Bulgaria and other countries f.
The three other eaftern patriarchates having
been either abolifhed or much reduced, the
biihops of Conftantinople took occafion from it
to carry their pretenfions to an authority fo much
higher than before, that John, who was chofen
patriarch of Conftantinople in 585, affumed the
title of (Ecumenical or, univerfal bijhop. This
* Moftieim, vol. i. p. 375. f Anecdotes p. 158.
title
a88 ?%e Hiftory of
title was feverely condemned by Gregory the
great, who was then bifhop of Rome, as tending
to diminifh the authority of other bifliops. He
even called it Wafobemy, and a name invented
by the devil; adding, that whoever called him-
felf, or wilhed to be called univerfal bijhop, was
the forerunner of anti-chrift *. Nay, upon this
occafjon, by way of contrafl, he took the title
of Servus Servorum Dei, or Servant of the Ser-
vants of God, and he was the firft pope : who ufed
that ftile in his letters f,
But not more than eighteen years after the
death of this Gregory, viz in 606, Boniface the
third obtained of the emperor Phocas, that the
bifliops of Rome alone fhould, from that time,
have this very title of univerfal bijhop. The
circumftance which made the aflumption of this
title the more odious, befides its having been re-
jecled with fo much indignation by the prede-
ceflbrs of Boniface, was its being granted by one
who had rifen to the empire by the murder of
the preceding emperor Mauritius, his wife,
and all his children ; and who in this manner
courted the friendfhip of the bifhop of Rome,
whole power in the weftern part of the empire
was then very confiderable. For the popes ac-
quired a great acceflion of power, and had much
more influence in all civil affairs, in confequence
of the removal of the feat of empire from Rom?
* Sueur, A. D. 595. f Anecdotes, p. 206.
tie Papal Power. 289
to Constantinople. But they were of much more
confequence after the Lombards fettled in Italy.
For by taking part fometimes with them, and
fometimes with the emperor, they made them-
felves formidable to both, and by this means
their ufurpations pafTed without cenfure.
That the authority of the fees both of
Conftantinople and of Rome arofe from the
dignity of the cities, is evident from this
circumftance, viz. that before the year 381,
the fee of Conftantinople had depended upon
that of Heraclea, which had been the former
metropolis of the province, but from that time
the council ordained, according to the wifhes
of Theodofius, that the bifhops of Conftantinople
fhould hold the principal dignity after that of
the bifhops of Rome*. But afterwards*, viz.
in a council held at Conftantinople, under Juf-
tinian the fecond, it was ordained that the pa-
triarchs of Conftantinople fhould be equal to
thofe of Rome.
It was in the reign of Valentinian the third,
that, by the influence of Leo, the popes gained
the greateft acceflion of power in the Weft,
within the period of which I am now treating.
Before this time the popes had no proper au-
thority beyond the fuburbican provinces f. But
this emperor extended their authority to all the
* Sueur, A. D. 381. f Anecdotes, p. Si.
VOL, II, T bounds
290 ?be Hiftory of
bounds of his empire, even into Gaul, and
ordered that whatever ihould be done in that
country without the authority of the pope, fhouid
have no force *. The bifhops afTembled at
Rome in 378, approved of this augmentation
of the power of the popes .
An opportunity foon offered of making ufe
of this power. For in the year 440, Che-
lidonius, being depofed in Gaul, appealed to
the pope, who received him into communion,
and by the authority of Valentinian reinftated
him. This was the firft encroachment that was
made by the popes on the liberties of the Gal-
lican church f. It was not, however, till a long
time after this, that any direct application was
made to the popes for preferment in France.
Auxanius bifhop of Aries was the firft bifhop
in France who, in the year 543, fent to afk for
the pallium, or the archiepilcopal cloak, from
Rome. His predeceflbr had it without alking
for; and in this cafe the pope anlwered, that
he rnuft firft have the confent of the king of
France J.
After the reign of Valentinian the third, the
bifhops of Rome, rinding their powers enlarged,
and that they had the fuperintendence of all
the churches of the Weft, fent their vicars
* Bafnage, vol. i. p, 243. Molhcim, vol i. p. 287.
f Bafitage, vol. i. p. 243. J Sueur, A. D. 543.
regularly
the Papal Power. 291
regularly into the provinces, whenever there
was the leaft pretence for it, and thus watched
every opportunity of extending their jurifdidtion.
The firft vicars which they eftablifhed were thofe
of Illyricum, and of Theffaly. And the pope
was the more readily acknowledged to be pa-
triarch of all the Weft by the Greeks, as well
as by the Latins ; as the former wiftied to have
the bifliop of Conftantinople to be confidered
as patriarch of all the Eaft*.
In 517, pope Hormifdas appointed bifhops
of the refpe&ive countries his vicars in Gaul,
Spain, and Portugal. They were glad to be fo
honoured, as it gave them a rank above their
brethren ; and by this means the popes greatly
extended their authority in thofe countries .
But before this time, viz. in 453, the popes
began to have fpies and informers at the court
of Conftantinople. Leo recommended one of
them to the emperor, calling him his legate,
appointed by him to folicit at the emperor's
court all things relating to the faith and peace
.of the church, againft the heretics of the age.
This was the beginning of the pope's legates at
Conftantinople. They were afterwards called
* Anecdotes, p. 144. Sueur.
f Jortin's Remarks, vol. 4, p. 298.
T 2 The
292 Slfo Hifiory of
The popes were alfo very attentive to fend
legates into nations newly converted, and there-
by fubjected them to their patriarchate. Thus
the Bulgarians being converted, the pope im-
mediately fent an archbilhop thither, which was
the beginning of the conteft between the patri-
archs of Rome and thofe of Conftantinople*.
After the fall of the weftern empire the popes
found themfelves in a peculiarly favourable litu-
ation for the increafe of their power, the em-
peror being then at a diftance, and therefore
obliged to take fome pains to keep on good
terms with them, in order to keep up his inte-
reftinthe country. Thus Juftinian paid the pope
many compliments, and called the fee of Rome
the chief of all the churches, hoping by this
means to drive the Goths out of Italy .
Alfo the people of Rome, and of the neigh-
bouring diftricls, difliking both the Greeks and
thK northern invaders, and having no other
head, looked up to the popes for protection,
and at length took an oath of allegiance to
Gregory the fecond. But they confidered him
as their chief not as their mafter, meaning to
form a republic, governed by its own lawsf .
* Anecdotes, p. 145. Sueur, A. D. 534.
f Anecdotes, p. 240. 246,
the Papal Power. 293
As the popes extended their power, they be-
gan to provide a broader bafis for it. Leo was
the firft who claimed jurifdiction over other
churches, as fucceflbr to St. Peter; and when it
was decreed at the council of Chalcedon, that
the fee of Conftantinople fhould be fecond to
that of Rome with refpecl to rank, aifigning as
a reafon for it the preeminence of the city, this
pope was much difiatisfied, becaufe his preemi-
nence was not founded on fomething more ftable
than the dignity of the city, and wifhed to have
it reft on the authority of St. Peter, as the
founder of the fee*. From this time we find
this foundation for the authority of the fee of
Rome urged with the greateft confidence; and
what is rrioft extraordinary, it feems never to
have been difputed. In a fynod held at Rome
in 494, Gelafius faid that the church of Rome
ought to be preferred to all others, not on ac-
count of the decrees of councils, but for the
words of our Saviour Jefus Chrift, when he
faid, 'fbou art Peter, and upon this rock will I
build my church f. But there has been much
difpute about this decree, and the meaning of it.
It was fome time, however, before the popes
thought of claiming abiblute infallibility r , as the
fuccefibrs of an infallible apoftle. The firft pope
who feems to have made this claim was Agatho,
\tfho, in an epiftle to the fixth general council,
* Sueur, A. D. 451. f Ibid.
T held
294 The Hiftory of
held at Conftantinople, in 680, faid that the
church of Rome never erred, nor can err in any
point: and that all the conftitutions of the
church of Rome ought to be received as if they
had been delivered by the divine voice of St.
Peter *. But before this time there had not
been wanting perfons who flattered the pride of
the popes by very extravagant encomiums.
Thus in the fifth century Ennodius, a flatterer of
pope Symmachus, maintained that the Roman
pontiff was " conftituted judge in the place of
" God, which he filled as the vicegerent of the
"Moft Highf.
With this increafe of real power and confe-
quence, we may naturally expect additional high-
er titles , and more Splendour-, and in this the popes
were by no means deficient -, and as they ap-
proached to the rank of fovereign princes, they
omitted none of the ufual forms, or fymbols of
royalty. But in this period, as they had not at-
tained to the power, fo they did not aflfume all
the pomp, that they afterwards appeared in.
As the chriflians affected the ceremonies of
the heathen worfhip, the popes were ready
enough to avail themfelves of it, when it might
add to their perfonal dignity. Accordingly as
the office of Pontifex Maximus had been of great
dignity in Rome, and had generally been af-
* Hift. of Popery, rol. 2. p. 5. f Moiheim-vol. i. p. 44^.
fumed
the Papal Power. -295
fumed by the emperors; from the end of the
fourth century, the bifhops of Rome were often
called Pontiffs, and their office the Pontificate.
They were alfo fometimes called fovereign pre-
lates, or fovereign priefts *. But the title of Pi/hop
of bijhops was not given to the pope ferioufly in
the five firft centuries.
The ceremony by which refpecl: is generally
fhewn to the pope is kiffing his toe, which was
alfo done to the Pontifex Maximus of heathen
Rome, and was demanded by Domitian, Digcle-
fian, and fome others of the emperors, who
were likewife chief pontiffs. This civility was
firft fhewn to pope Conftantine the firft, by the
emperor Juftinian the fecond, at Nicomedia.
He did it out of voluntary refpeft, but it was
afterwards claimed as a right even from crowned
he ads j- .
The cuftom of carrying the pope on men's
fhoulders after his election, which feems to have
been borrowed from the cuftom of fome of the
northern nations, in the choice of their chiefs or
princes, was firft ufed by Stephen the fecond.
He alfo had all his bulls y or ediSts, fealed with
lead . Like other fovereigns, the popes even
in this period, made ufe of the plural number
in fpeaking of themlelves. This is faid to have
* Sueur, A. D. 214. f Hift. of Popery, vol. 2. p. 10.
Sueur, A. D. 752.
T 4 been
296 <fte Htftory of
been begun by Boniface the third, about the year
606 ; who, in approving the choice of a bilhop,
ufed the words Volumus et jubemus, we will and
command*. Afterwards the popes proceeded to
affume other titles, and forms, not only of royalty,
but even of divinity., which having been firft
affumed by the princes of the Eaft, were from
them adopted by the Roman emperors, and from
them by the popes. A particular account of
them may be feen in Sueur, A. D. 549.
So early as the fourth century, the bilhops of
"Rome lurpafled all their brethren in riches and
fplendour, which exceedingly dazzled the com-
mon people; and fo great a prize being contend-
ed for, there were often great tumults in Rome
on the election of a pope, attended fometimes
with murder, and violence of all kinds. Many
were killed on both fides in 368, during the con-
tefl between Damafus and Urficinus.
Notwithftanding the power affumed by the
popes, and though in many things they acted ir\-
dependently of the emperor, and even oppofed
him, they were ftill hisfufye&s, and upon fome
occafions he treated them as fuch. The election
of the bifliop of Rome was not deemed valid
without the confent of the emperor, and Jufti-
nian depofed two popes. But when the feat of
empire was removed to Conftantinople, little ac-
* Sueur, A. D. 606.
count
tie Papal Power. 297
count was made of the conient of the emperor ;
though the popes kept up a formal fubmiflion to
the emperors of the Eaft againfl the Lombard
princes till the time of Leo Ifauricus*. And
though, Conftantme Pogonatns releafed the popes
from their ufual payments for their confirma-
tion, he exprefsly retained the right of confir-
mation J.
The Gothic kings of Italy alfo confidered the
popes as their fubjecls. And it appeared in the
difpute between Symmachus and Laurentius, in
501, when Theodoric was king of Italy, that the
popes then acknowledged the authority of the
kings, though they were heretics ; that they re-
quefted of them permiifion to hold national
councils, and that they appealed to them when
they were charged with crimes, and fubmitted to
their judgment. Athalaric, to prevent fuch mif-
chiefs as had been occafioned by former fchifms
at Rome, made a rigorous edict, prefcribing the
manner in which the election of bifhops and rne-
tropolitans Ihould hereafter be made. This
edi6t was drawn up by Caffiodorus, and nobody
confidered this as any attack upon the authority
of the church ||.
The temporal princes under whom the popes
lived, fent for them, as well as other bilhops, and
* Anecdotes, p. 209. \ Walfli's Hift. of the Popes, p. 97.
|| Anecdotes, p, 165,
employed
298 The Hiftory of
employed them in embafiies, whenever they
thought proper to make ufe of them. Pope John
the firft was fent by Theodoric to Conftantino-
ple, to obtain of the emperor Juftinian the firft,
the revocation of an edict, which ordained that
the churches of the Arians fhould be put into
the hands of the catholics J..
When the empire of the Lombards was entire-
ly put an end to in Italy, the nomination of the
popes, at lead the right of confirming them, was
ftill in the hands of the temporal princes. Adri-
an, with his whole fynod, acknowledged this
power in Charlemaigne, and Gregory the fe-
venth was himfelf confirmed in the papacy by
that very emperor whom he afterwards depofed.
Symmachus had the effrontery to maintain to
the emperor Anaftafius, that the dignity of the
pope was fuperior to that of the emperor, as
much as the adminiftration of the things of hea-
ven is above that of the things of the earth, and
that even a common prieft was fuperior to him.
But he was far from alledging this as a reafon
why the popes (hould not be fubject to the em-
peror in things of a temporal nature.
One of th prerogatives to which the popes
now pretend, is the power of fummoning gene-
ral councils, and of prefiding in them. But all
the general councils within the five firft centu~
I Anecdotes, p. 187.
ries
the Papal Power. 299
ries were fummoned by the emperors. Leo the
firft joined with many other bifliops in requeft-
ing the emperor Theodofius to fumnaon a coun-
cil in Italy, but he refufed, becaufe he had be-
fore appointed one in Ephefus. Nor did the
popes, or their legates, prefide in general coun-
cils in early times j but various other bifhops
prefided in them; and in the firft general coun-
cil, viz. that of Nice, Conftantine himfelf was
the principal moderator or director. Speaking
to the bifliops upon that occafion, he faid, f< Ye
<e are bifhops of things within the church., but
<f I am bifhop as to externals."
SECTION I!.
'the Iltflory of the Papal Power from the 'Time of
Charlemaigne to the Reformation.
THE firft thing that I fhall notice in this pe-
riod, is the changes that were made from
time to time with refpecl: to the election of the
popes, and the confirmation of them in their of-
fice. It is certain that for many centuries the
popes could not be confecrated till their ele&ioa
had been approved of by the emperors ; and in
general a fum of money had been given at the
fame time, till it was remitted, as I have'obferv-
ed, by Conftantine PogonatUs. The fame right
of
300 tfke Hiftory of
of confirming the popes was exercifed by the
Goths, by Charlemaigne, and his fucceflbrs the
emperors of Germany. But in 847, Leo the
fourth was chofen pope without the confent of
the emperor, the Romans being then prefled by
the Saracens ; and finding a neceffity of having
a head. However they deferred the confecra-
tion from April to June, waiting for the confent
of the emperor, and they made an apology for it
afterwards.
At length Charles the Bald, having obtained
the imperial dignity by the good offices of the
popes, difcharged them from the obligation of
waiting for the confent of the emperor to their
election. But from the time of Eugenius the
third, who was raifed to the pontificate in 854,
the election of the popes was conducted without
the leaft regard to law, order, or even decency,,
and was generally attended with civil tumults
and diffentions, till the reign of Otho the great,
who put a flop to thofe diforderly proceedings,
and prohibited the election of popes without the
previous knowledge and confent of the emperor ;
and this order was enforced to the conclufion of
the ninth century. Gregory the feventh, however^
taking advantage of the divifions of the em-
pire, emancipated the fee of Rome from this
mark of its fubjection to the empire f.
f Moiheim, vol. 2, p. 121, z<?8, 280.
In
the Papal Power. 301
In early times, the bilhops of Rome, like thofe
of other cities, were chofen by the people, as well
as the clergy. The firft confiderable innovation
that was made in this refpect at Rome, was at a
council held in 1059, under Nicholas the fe-
cond , when it was ordered that, upon the de-
ceafe of a pope, the cardinal bifhops Ihould firft
confider of a proper perfon to fucceed; that they
jfhould then confult with their cardinal clergy,
and then that the reft of the clergy, and alfo the
people fhould give their confent*. But Alexan-
der the third, in the middle of the twelfth cen-
tury, eftablifhed the fole right of election in the
college of cardinals.
After this time the term cardinal was confined
to the feven bifhops within the territory and city
of Rome, who had been ufed to confecrate the
Roman pontiff, and to the prefbyters of the
twenty -eight Roman parifhes. or principal
churches. To appeafe the tumults that were
made by others of the clergy, who were by this
regulation excluded from the privilege of voting,
this Alexander the third conferred the dignity of
cardinals upon feveral more of the fuperior cler-
gy; and to pacify the inferior clergy, he, or fome
of his fucceflbrs, for it is uncertain, made the
chief of them cardinal deacons, giving them
alfo votes in the election. Lucius the third was
the firft pope that was chofen by cardinals onlyj.
* Fleury, J Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 271.
The
302. The Hijtory of
The particular rules that are now obferved in the
dec~rion of a pope were fettled in 1178, and may
befcen in the Hiftoire des Pa$es y vol. 3, p. 88.
I fhall juft add to this article, that the almoft
nniverfal cuftom of the popes changing their
names upon their election, began with Bocco di
Porco, in 884, who changed his name to Ser-
gius, his original name, fignifying Hog's fnout,
being thought unfuitable to his dignity.
It is not eafy to fay whether the fpiritual or
the temporal power of the popes was the more
extravagant, but the temporal power preceded
the fpiritual, and no doubt laid the foundation
for it, though other pretences were alledged.
But there is no great difficulty in making merely
oftenfible pretences to be received, when there is
fufficient power to enforce them ; and it was pre-
fently after the commencement of this period
that the popes acquired that amazing accefilon of
property and power, which placed them on a le-
vel with other princes of Europe.
The firft large accefllon was made from the
fpoils of the Lombards in Italy, with whom
Stephen the fecond had quarrelled, and againft
whom he undertook a journey to France, to
follicit the aid of Pepin king of France, who
promifed that if he fliould drive out the Lom-
bards, he would give the popes the exarchate
of Ravenna, and the Pentapolis. From their
acqiiifition,
the Papal Power. 303
acquifition of the latter, which was made in
774, the popes ceafed to date their letters
by the reigns of the emperors*. This acqui-
fition was evidently made by fuch policy as is
employed by fecular princes to increafe their
dominions. But Stephen, like other artful prin-
ces, was not at a lofs for fome colour of right,
for he pretended that this territory belonged to
him, as being the fpoil of an heretical prince.
For the Lombards, as well as the Goths, were
Arians.
When Charlemaigne afterwards put an entire
end to the empire of the Lombards in Italy, the
whole of the exarchate, the capital of which was
Ravenna, was given to the popes. He was pro-
bably induced to make this large grant of land
to the church of Rome by a pretence, which was
about this time made, that Conftantine the great
had made a fimilar grant of territory to the fame
church ; though it is now univerfally agreed
that this donation of Conilantine was a forgery.
Notwithftanding thefe large grants, both Pepin
and Charlemaigne referved to themfelves the fo-
vereignty of all thefe lands in Italy. But this
was afterwards furrendered to the popes by Lo-
th air the firil f.
The laft acquifition the popes made was that
of the fovereignty of Rome, the inhabitants of
* Anecdotes, p. 25$, 267. t Ib. p. 320 338.
which
304 The Hijlory of
which had always acknowledged the emperor
as their fovereign. But in 1198 the prefect of
Rome received his office from the pope, and
not from the emperor*. From this time the
popes have been as properly independent as any
fovereign princes in Europe.
From the ninth to the thirteenth century, the
wealth or revenues of the pope did not receive
any confiderable addition; but from this time
they were vaftly increafed efpecially under Inno-
cent the third and Nicholas the third, partly by
the events of war, and partly by the munificence
of kings and emperors. Innocent was no fooner
feated in the papal chair, than, befides reducing
to his fubjection the prefect of Rome, as men-
tioned above, he feized upon Ancona, Spoleto,
Afilfi, and feveral other cities, which he pre-
tended had been unjuftly alienated from the
fee of Rome. Nicholas the fourth followed the
example of Innocent, and in 1278 he refufed to
crown Rodolph the firft, before he had con-
firmed, by a folemn treaty, all the pretenfions
of the Roman fee ; and immediately upon that
he feized feveral cities and territories in Italy
which had formerly been annexed to the impe-
rial crown, particularly Romagna and JBologna.
It was under thefe two popes that the fee of
Rome arrived at its higheft degree of grandeur
and opulence J.
* Hiftoire dcs Papes, vol. 3. p. 120.
% Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 32, 33.
Like
the Papal Power. joe
Like other politic princes, the popes gained
thefe advantages chiefly in confequence of divi-
iions in the families of the temporal powers.
The divifions between the kings of France of the
fecond race were more particularly the means
of advancing the power of the popes to its great-
eft height. Thofe who were condemned in
France had recourfe to the holy fee, and al-
ways found protection there. In like manner,
the popes availed themfelves of the conteft be-
tween the emperors Lewis and Charles, about
the middle of the fourteenth century ; in confe-
quence of which the imperial power was quite
loft in Italy, the popes feizing upon fome of
the towns, and others fetting up for themfelves.
The crufades contributed very much to com-
plete the power of the popes, as temporal prin-
ces, and brought bufinefs enough of a civil na-
ture upon their hands. For they had not only
many difpenfations to grant to thofe who could
not go to thofe wars, but they made themfelves
judges of all the differences among thofe prin-
ces that went thither*.
But the ambition of the popes was far from
being fatisfied with the acquifition of an inde-
pendent fovereignty. They foon began to ex-
tend their claims to other territories, and even
to the empire itfelf. For having been accuftonv
* Fleury's lixth Difcourfe, p. 20.
VOL. II. U ed
306 The Hijlory of
ed to crown the emperors, they took advantage
from that circumftance, together with that of
the divifions in the empire, to arrogate to them -
felves the power of deciding who fhould be the
emperor -, and one or other of the candidates was
but too ready to yield to the demands of the
pope, in order to fecure his intereft. In thefe
circumftances John the eighth proclaimed Charles
the Bald emperor in 876, in an aflembly of the
Italian princes at Pavia ; and in the fame man-
ner were his two fucceflbrs chofen. From this
nomination of Charles the Bald, Sigonius fays
that the empire has been a fief of the holy
fee*.
After this viz. in the eleventh century, the
popes afliimed the character of lords of the
univerfe, and arbiters of kingdoms and empires.
Before Leo the ninth no pope claimed this un-
bounded authority of transferring territories and
provinces from their lawful owners. But this
pontiff granted to the Normans, who were fet-
tled in Italy, the lands and territories which
they had already ufurped, or which they (hould
be able to conquer from the Greeks or Sa-
racens f.
Gregory the feventh followed the new maxims,
and carried them farther, openly pretending that,
as pope, he had a right to depofe fovereigns who
* Sueur, A, D. 875 f Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 260.
rebelled
the Papal Power. 307
rebelled againft the church. This he founded
principally upon the power of excommunication.
An excommunicated perfon, he faid, muft, ac-
cording to the rules of the apoftles, be avoided
by every body. A prince, therefore, who is ex-
communicated, muft be abandoned by all the
world, even by his own fubjects. This pope ne-
ver made any formal decifjon of this kind, nor
had he the countenance of any council, but he
acted upon the maxim.
On the other hand, the defenders of the princes
took it fo much for granted, that an excommu-
nicated perfon was fubject to all the above-men-
tioned inconveniences, that they contented them-
felves with faying* that a prince ought not to be
excommunicated ; which, fays Fleury, was giv-
ing the popes a great advantage in the argument.
This pope likewife urged that, fince the clergy
have a right to decide concerning things fpiri-
tual, they have, a fortiori, a right to decide con-
cerning things temporal. The leaft exorcift, he
faid, is above an emperor, fince he commands
daemons; royalty is the work of the devil, being
the effect of human pride j whereas the prieft-
hood is the work of God f.
Some of the pretenfions of this great pontiff
were fo very abfurd, that one would think they
muft have refuted themfelves by the events. In
f Fleury, vol. 13, p. 48.
U a his
308 fbe Hijlory of
his difference with the emperor of Germany, he
fays, ff We bind him by an apoftolical authority,
" not only with refpect to the foul, but to the
cc body. We take from him all profperity in
" this life, and victory from his arms J."
Later popes continued the fame arrogant
claims, and the neceffity of the times too often
induced princes to fubmit to them, though they
had fometimes the fpirit to refill. In 1225, Ho-
norius the third applied to the popes the words
of Jeremiah i. 20, I have Jet thee over the people,
and over kingdoms, to -pluck up and to deftroy,
&c\. In the fourteenth century Boniface the
eighth, in a quarrel with Philip the Fair king
of France, aflerted that Jefus Chrift had granted
a two-fold power to the church, a fpiritual and
a temporal fword ; that he had fubjected the
whole human race to the Roman pontiff, and
that whoever dared to difbelieve this doctrine
were to be deemed heretics, and flood excluded
from all poflibility of falvation. The king be-
ing flill refractory, the pope excommunicated
him, but he appealed to a general council,
and fent a party of men to bring the pope by
force before him. In confequence of this he
was apprehended at Anagni, but the inhabitants
refcued him. He died, however, prefently af-
terwards, of rage and anguifh. His fuccefTor
t Fleury, A. D. 1078.
f Hiftoire des Papes. vol. 3. p. 164.
Benedict
the Papal Power. 309
Benedict the eleventh, of his own accord, with-
drew the excommunication; but by this time
the papal power had begun to decline*.
When we confider the effects of excommuni-
cation in thofe dark ages, and the acknowledged
power of the popes to direct that dreadful wea-
pon, and alfo to fufpend the exercife of all ec-
clefiaftical functions, than which nothing could
imprefs the minds of men in thofe times with
more terror and confirmation (as they imagined
their everlafting happinels depended on thofe
functions) we cannot wonder either at the ar-
rogance, or the fuccefs of the popes. Robert
king of France, not complying with the pope's
decree reflecting the diflblution of his maniage,
the pope, for the firft time, laid the whole king-
dom under this interdict, forbidding all divine fer-
vice, the ufe of the facraments to the living, and
of burial to the dead. The people, terrified by
this order, yielded fuch implicit obedience, that
even the king's own domeftics abandoned him,
except two or three, and thefe threw to the dogs
every thing that came from his table. No per-
fon even dared to eat out of any vefiel which he
had touched. The king, being reduced to this
difmal (late, was forced to yield, and cancel his
marriage f.
The degree to which the popes fometimes car-
ried their rage was truly dreadful. John the
* Molheim, vol. 3. p. 152. f Sueur, A. D. 998.
U 3 twenty-*
3io 'The Hijlory of
twenty - third not only excommunicated Ladif-
las, king of Bohemia, but publifhed a crufade
againft him ; inviting all chriflian princes to make
war upon him, and feize his dominions. His
bull upon this occafion contained an order to all
patriarchs, bifhops, archbifhops, and prelates, to
publifh every Sunday and feftival day, by the
found of a bell, and with candles lighted, and
then extinguifhed by throwing them upon the
ground, that king Ladiflas was " excommuni-
" cated, perjured, a fchifmatic, a blafphemer, a
" heretic, a relapfe, a favourer of heretics, a
(( traitor, and an enemy of the pope and of the
" church." He alib excommunicated all his
adherents and favourers, till by a return to their
duty they fhould receive abfolution ; and order-
ed that whofoever fhould undertake to bury
Ladiflas, or any of his partifans, fhould be ex-
communicated, and not be abfolved but by
digging up the body with their own hands,
and carrying it out of the place of chriflian
burial j and that the places on which they
Ihould lie fhould be prophane for ever f.
So fully was this temporal power of the popes
eftablifhed, that they alone were thought to have
the right of difpofmg of kingdoms ; and they
were as regularly applied to for that purpofe, as
the temporal courts for titles of nobility, &c.
In 1179, Alexander the third conferred the title
f Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 4. p. 151.
Of
the Papal Power. 3 1 1
of kingy with the enfigns of royalty, upon Al-
phonfo duke of Portugal, who, under the pon-
tificate of Lucius the fecond, had rendered his
province tributary to the Roman fee*. Inno-
cent the third gave a king to the Armenians in
Afia, and in 1204 he made Primiflas duke of
Bohemia king of that country, and Peter the fe-
cond king of Arragon. The title of king of
Ireland was alfo a grant of the pope to our
king Henry the fecond; and when the Portu-
guefe and the Spaniards were purfuing their dif-
coveries and conquefts, the one to the Eaft, and
the other to the Weft, the popes drew the line
that was to regulate all their future claims to do-
minion. Thefe acts of univerfal defpotifm were
beheld with aftonifhment, but with filent and
pafllve obedience, by all the temporal powers of
Europe.
It was in the eleventh century that the power
of the popes may be faid to have been at its
height. They then received the pompous titles
of the mafters of the world, and of univerfal fa-
thers. They prefided every where in the coun-
cils by their legates. They decided in all con-
troverfies concerning religion, or church difci-
pline ; and they maintained the pretended rights
of the church againft the ufurpations of kings
and princes. But this was not done without op-
pofition both from the bifhops, and from the tem-
poral powers .
* Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 403. Ib. 259.
U 4 In
3 1 2, The Hiftory of
In order to preferve this amazing power, it was
necefTary to keep the clergy as dependent as pof-
fible upon themfelves, and as little attached to
their temporal fovereigns. Gregory the feventh
never forbad the clergy to take an oath of alle-
giance to their refpeftive fovereigns ; but this
was done by Urban the fecond, who made an or-
der for that purpofe at the council of Clermont.
To complete the temporal character of the popes,
I fhall in the lad place obferve, that it was com-
mon in the twelfth century to fee them at the
head of armies.
The infolence with which the popes have act-
ed in the height of their power is hardly credi-
ble. Gregory the feventh obliged the emperor
Henry the fourth, whom he had excommunicat-
ed, and who applied for abfolution, to wait three
days before he would admit him; though both
the emperor, the emprefs, and their child, wait-
ed barefoot, in the depth of winter. On the
fourth day he was admitted, and as a token of
his repentance, he refigned his crown into the
hands of the pope, and confeffed himfelf unwor-
thy of the empire, if ever he fhould oppofe his
will for the future ; and he was not abfolved
without very mortifying conditions f.
Adrian the fourth infulted the emperor Barba-
rofla, about the middle of the twelfth century,
t Fleury, A. D. 1077.
for
the Papal Power. 313
for holding him the left ftirrup inftead of the
right, and at length the emperor was compelled
to hold the other (lirrup. The next pope, Alex-
ander the third, trod upon the neck of the fame
emperor, ufmg at the fame time this expreflion
of the pfalnnift, 'Thou Jhalt walk u-pon the lion ana
the adder -, the young lion and the dragon Jhalt thon
trample under foot. Pf. xci. 13.
When Henry the fixth, the next emperor, was
crowned by Celeftine the third, he kneeled be-
fore him as he fat in his pontifical chair, and was
obliged to take the crown from his feetj and
when the pope had kicked it off again, to fhew
his power to depofe him, the cardinals were, at
length, permitted to crown the emperor once
more. This was done to fhew that the imperial
crown depended entirely upon the pope J.
Our own country has not been lefs difgraced
by papal infolence. One of the braveft of our
haughty Norman princes, Henry the fecond,
could not fatisfy the pope with refpect to the
murder of the factious and turbulent prelate
Thomas a Becket (of which, however, he was
not guilty) till he walked barefoot to his tomb,
and was whipped by the monks at Canterbury.
King John was excommunicated, depofed, and
made to receive his crown again, at the hands of
the pope's legate, and to acknowledge himfelf a
vaflfal of the fee of Rome.
J Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 3, p, 112.
In
3 14 fbe Hiftory of
In order to evade the tyranny of the popes, it
was cuftomary, when the times would bear it,
not to difpute their power directly, but to pre-
vent the publication of their bulls. Thus when
Paul the fifth laid the ftate of Venice under an
interdict, they banifhed thofe of the clergy who
complied with the order., and at length the popes
were glad to get Henry the fourth of France to
make their peace with the Venetians, who threat-
ened to break off from their communion *.
The temporal power of the popes, as I have
obferved before, was more antient than the no-
tion of their infallibility. This was not known
in the times of Pepin or Charlemaigne ; and
though councils were not then deemed infalli-
ble, the authority of the pope was held to be fub-
ordinate to that. That councils are infallible was
not pretended till the popes had been deemed
tobefo; the councils attributing to themfelves
what they had taken from the popes J.
With refpect to fpiritual power in general, the
popes derived much advantage from the ideas
of the northern nations in their ftate of Paganifm.
For they confidered the bifhop of Rome in the
fame light in which they had before done their
archdruid, and transferred to him that bound-
lefs reverence with which they had been ufed
to regard the other. Hence the force of the
t Mofhehn, vol. 4. p. 319. J Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 597.
papal
the Papal Power. 315
papal excommunications, which, as under the
druids, deprived a perfon of all the common
rights of humanity *.
However, befides the conftant oppofition of
the Greek church, the overbearing authority of
the fee of Rome was not always fubmitted to,
even in the Weft. It was particularly oppofed
by the church of Milan, which in the former
period had been a metropolitan church, with a
jurifdiclion independent of that of Rome. In
848 Angilbert archbifhop of Milan feparated en-
tirely from the church of Rome, and continued
fo nearly two hundred years. At length, how-
ever, the popes got the better of this, as of every
other oppofition.
It is in the ninth century that we find the
firfl feeds of the doctrine of the popes infallibi-
jiity. Then, at leaft, the popes began to talk in a
higher ftrain than ufual on this fubjeftj maintain-
ing that they could not be judged by any perfon,
and that their decrees, refpe&ing manners, faith,
or difcipline, ought to be preferred even to thofe
of the councils themfelves, if poflible f. The
arguments on which this claim was refted was
the declaration of our Saviour to Peter, that he
would give to him the keys of the kingdom
of heaven ; and becaufe he likewife faid that
he had prayed for him, that his faith fliould
* Meflieira, vol. 2. p. 63. f Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 547.
not
3i 6 The Hiflory of
not fail, it was concluded that all the fucceflbrs
of Peter at Rome would always maintain the
right faith. Weak as this argument is, it was
univerfally acquiefced in, in thofe dark ages ;
and the popes acted upon it as upon a maxim
that could not be difputed. When the biftiop
of Conftantinople was depofed in 86 1, the pope
who had been written to on the occafion, but
not by way of appeal, faid in anfwer, " If they
" ought to be heard who fit in the chair of
" Mofes, how much more they who fit in the
" chair of St. Peter ; " and he maintained that
no bifhop of Conftantinople ought to be de-
pofed without the confent of the pope*,
The authority of the popes having gained
ground, in the manner that has been defcribed
above, the opinion of their infallibility began
to appear undifguifed and undifputed about the
middle of the eleventh century ; Leo the ninth
declaring that the councils, and all the Fathers,
had confidered the church of Rome as the fo-
vereign miftrefs, to which the judgment of all
other churches belonged, and which could be
judged by none ; and that all difficult queftions
ought to be decided by the fuccefTors of St.
Peter, becaufe that church had never erred from
the faith, and would not to the end. This is the
fir ft pope who held this language with fuch firm-
nefs. Gregory the feventh, who fucceeded him,
* Sueur, A. D. 861.
with
the Papal Power. 317
with more folemnity decreed in a council,
that the church of Rome never had erred,
and never will err, according to the teftimony
of the fcriptures, on the ground abovementioned.
Bernard and Thomas Aquinas gave this doc-
trine the great weight of their authority, and
they were followed by all the fchoolmen.
Afterwards, however, feveral of the popes
themfelves, when they had any particular point
to gain, and when the decrees of former popes
were quoted againft them, made no difficulty
of departing from this doctrine. Thus John
the twenty-fecond, in his quarrel with the Fra-
tricelli, who reprefented to him that three of
his predeceflbrs had been of their opinion, an-
fwered that " what had been ill determined by
" one pope and one council, might be correct-
" ed by another, better informed concerning
" the truth." But, except in thefe occafional
deviations, the popes aflerted their infallibility,
and it was generally acquiefced in till the time
of the great fchifm ; when almoft all the chrifti-
an world, feeing the popes facrifice every thing
to their own ambition, dropped the high opi-
nion which they had before entertained of them.
Nor was it poflible to put an end to the fchifm,
without fetting up a council above the popes.
During the time that the doctrine of the pope's
infallibility was generally received, the popes
frequently fpoke as if their decrees had been dic-
tated
ji8 'The Hijlory of
tated by immediate infpiration. Thus popg
John the eighth fays, that he had found that
fuch a thing was the council of God, becaufe
that of a long time it had been revealed, by ce-
leftial infpiration, to his predeceflbr Nicholas *.
Such firm hold had the notion of the infalli-
bility of the popes on the minds of men, that
fbme of the greateft men in the chriftian world,
and even fince the reformation were not able to
fhake it off. Father Paul, the great advocate of
the ftate of Venice againft the ufurpation of the
popes, admitted that they ought to be obeyed in
all matters of doctrine, and what related to the
adminiftration of the facraments f. It is pofli-
ble, however, that he might make this concefllon
by way of argument, while he was difputing
againft their power in things of a temporal na-
ture. But this was not the cafe with the famous
Fenelon, archbilhop of Cambray, who, when his
book was condemned by the pope, publickly de-
clared his entire acquiefcence in the decree. He
even read it himfelf from his own pulpit, and
exhorted the people to refpeft and obey it J.
Originally, as I have frequently obferved, all
bifhops, and the popes themfelves, were chofen
by the people. Afterwards the metropolitans
interfered, and then the princes referved to them-
* Sueur, A. D. 875. f Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 549.
t Molheim, vol. 4. p. 393.
felves
the Papal Power.
felves the right of approbation, and thus all ab-
bots and biihops were chofen till the time of
Henry the third of Germany *. But afterwards
the popes claimed the right of nomination to all
the greater livings ; having made the firft at-
tempts of this kind in France, where they took
advantage of the weaknefs of that monarchy.
They then began to give out, that the biihops of
Rome were appointed by Jefus Chrift to be the
fupreme legiflators of the univerfal church, and
that all other biihops derived their authority
from them. Oppofition was made to thefe
claims, but it was ineffectual; and from the time
of Lewis the Meek, European princes in general
fuffered themfelves to be diverted of all authority
in religious matters.
To gain this point, many memorials, and acts
of former times, were forged m this age, and ef-
pecialiy the famous decretal epiftles, faid to have
been written by the primitive biihops of Rome.
They are generally fathered upon Ifidore bifhop
of Seville, who lived in the fixth century f .
The popes made fo artful an ufe of the weak-
nefs of the French monarchy, that a council held
at Rheims in 991, in which the authority of the
pope had been difputed, is called the laftfighs of
the liberties of the Gallic churchy the biihops of
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 61.
f Moftveun, vol. 2. p. 126.
France
320 be Hi/lory of
France after this allowing the popes a right to de-
pofe them. All the world, fays M. de Marca, was
obliged to fubmit to this new opinion, and
France was at length forced to yield at the be-
ginning of the third race of their kings. The
popes laid all the bifhops who had afTifted at this
council under an interdict, and would not take it
off till every thing was reftored as before the
council *.
But it was in the eleventh century that the
great difpute arofe between the popes and the
emperors of Germany, about the right of /-
veftiture. This confifted, originally, in the
prince, or chief, putting a clergyman into the
pofleflion of any eftate or fief; and was done by
the delivery of a bough, or in fuch other manner
as that in which laymen had been ufually inveft-
cd by the fame perfons. But becaufe, upon the
death of any incumbent, the priefts nfed to deli-
ver the ring and the crofter of the deceafed bi-
fhop (by which the election of a new bilhop had
been ufed to be irrevocably confirmed) to fome
perfon of their own choofing, before the vacancy
was notified to the prince, an order was given
that thofe enfigns of fpiritual power fhould be
tranfmitted to the prince immediately upon the
death of any bifhop, and then he delivered them
to \vhom he pleafed ; after which the fame en-
figns were again folemnly delivered by the me-
* Sucur, A. D, 991.
tropolitan
the Papal Power. 321
tropolitan bifhop. After much contention, and
much war and bloodfhed upon the occafion, it
was compromifed, by the pope's confenting that
the emperor fhould inveft by the delivery of
a fcepter, and not of a ring or crofier, which
were enfigns of a fpiritual authority f. The
principal actor in this great fcene was Gregory the
feventh, who, in a council at Lateran, decided
that if any bifhop received inveftiture from a
layman, both he and the layman fhould be ex-
communicated.
In 1199 the popes pretended to have a right
over all benefices, and that all tranflations from
one fee to another were the efpecial privilege
of the fee of RomeJ. This right, however,
was not fully aflerted before it was done by In-
nocent the third, in the thirteenth century, who
afTumed to himfelf, as pope, the power of dif-
pofing of 'all offices in the church, whether
higher or lower, and of creating bifhops, ab-
bots, and canons, at pleafure. And though
the popes had formerly been flrenuous advo-
cates for the free choice of bifhops, againft the
encroachments of the emperors, this pope, and
many of his fucceflbrs, overturned all thofe
laws of election ; referving to themfelves the
revenues of the richeft benefices, conferring va-
f Mofheim, vol. 2, p. 289
J Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 3. p. 126.
VOL. II. X cant
322 The Hiftory of
cant places upon their clients and creatures,
and often depofing bifhops who had been duly
elected, and fubftituting others with a high hand
in their room. The bifhops, however, oppofed
thefe encroachments, but generally to little pur-
pofe.
Lewis the ninth of France fecured the rights
of the Gallican church in this refpect by a fa-
mous edict, known by the name of the Pragmatic
Janftion. This, however, did not make the
popes renounce their pretenfions, and their
legates acted with all the infolence and tyranny
of their mafters in the countries into which they
were fent i infomuch that Alexander the fourth,
in 1256, made a fevere law againft their frauds
and avarice. But it was eafily evaded by the
credit of their friends at the court of Rome.
At laft Leo the tenth engaged Francis the firfr
to abolifli this Pragmatic fanction, and to fub-
ftitute another body of laws, more favourable
to the popes, called the Concordats; but this
was received with the greateft reluctance and
indignation*.
Another part of the fpiritual power claimed
by the popes is that of granting difpenfations
to do what would otherwife be unlawful -, and
from merely relaxing the feverity of difcipline,
or remitting the penances that had been en-
* Mofheira, vol. 3. p. 31. 32, 290.
joined
the Papal Power. 323
joined for fin (which, in time, made it to be
imagined that they had the power of forgiving
fm itfelf after the commijjion) they eafily patted
to the idea of their having a power to forgive
it, and, which was the fame thing, of their making
it to be no fin, before the commijfion.
It was the wants and the avarice of the popes
that firft led them to grant thefe indulgences.
The popes when they were fettled at Avignon,
not being able to draw fo much as they had
tifed to do from Italy, had recourfe to new me-
thods of getting wealth. They not only fold
indulgences more frequently than formerly, but
difpofed publicly of fcandalous licences of all
forts, at an exceffive price. John the twenty-
fecond was particularly acYive in promoting this
abominable traffic. He enlarged the taxes and
rules of the apoftolical chamber, and made
them more profitable, though he was not the
inventor of them.
The height to which the popes, and their ad-
vocates, carried their pretenfions in this way is
indeed aftonifhing. Innocent the third, about
1198, decreed that out of the plenitude of the
papal power, the pope could " of right, difpenfe
" beyond right ;" and according to other decrees
the popes claimed the power of difpenfing even
againft the apoftles, and the apoftolical canons.
Gratian, the famous canon lawyer, afferted that
all men are to be judged by the pope, but the
X 2 pope
324 ttc Hiflory of
pope himfelf by no man. And cardinal Zabar
fays that the pope may do what he pleafes, even
things unlawful, and that he is thereby more
than God*.
There are too many inftances in hiftory of
the popes reducing thefe pretenfions into prac-
tice, by actually granting difpenfations to do
things morally evil, efpecially to releale per-
fons from the obligation of oaths. In 1042,
Cafimir king of Poland having retired to a
monaftery, deputies were fent to the pope, and
he abfolved him from his vows, and permitted
him to refume the government of his kingdom f.
Celeftine the fecond having required Henry king
of England to re-eftablifh Dunftan in the
archbifhopric of York, and he faying that he
had fwore he never would do it as long as he
lived, the pope anfwered, * f I am pope, if you
" will do what I require, I will abfolve you
" of that oath." The king, however, declined
itj. Henry the fecond of England, having
fworn to fulfil his father's will, obtained an ab-
folution from the pope, and thereupon depri-
ved his brother of his eftates, and reduced him
to a penfion. At the council of Conftance, John
the twenty third drew from many cardinals what
he wanted to know of them, by releafing them
from the oath of fecrecy which they had taken |j.
* Hiftory of Popery, vol. i. p. 10. f Fleury.
t Hiftoije des Papes, vol. z. p. 609, || Ib. vol. 4. p. 40.
The
the Papal Power. 325
The popes have always granted difpenfations to
marry within the prohibited degrees of ronfan-
guinity. Martin the fifth is faid to have given
leave to a man to marry his own lifter.
Another power in fpiritual matters, which has
been claimed by the popes, is thatof canonization,
or the declaring what perfons fhould be deemed
faintSy and the objects of worfhip. In the coun-
cil at Lateran, in 1179, under Alexander the
third, canonization was ranked among " the
" greater and more important caufes, the cog-
" nizance of which belonged to the Roman
" pontiff alone f."
Another prerogative claimed, and long exercifed.
by the popes, and yet moft clearly againft all an-
tient cuftom, was that of calling and prefiding
in all councils ; whereas originally, as I have ob-
ferved, it was the bufmefs of the metropolitan of
each diftricr., and afterwards they were called by
the temporal princes, firft the emperor of Con-
ftantinople, and then other princes in their feveral
ftates. In Germany it had always been the cuftom
for the metropolitans to prefide in their councils;
but in the year 1074 the pope claimed a right of
fending his legates to prefide in themj. And, in
time, this claim, though the novelty of it was eafily
proved, came to be univerfally acquiefced in, and
nothing but the factions of the popes themfelves
f Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 403. J Fleury.
X 3 could
3 16 The Hijtory of
could ever have led the world to think, or act
otherwife. But after the great fchifm in the pope-
dom, in which there were a long time two popes,
and fometimes three, there was an abfolute necef-
fity of calling a council, and giving it a power
of cenfuring, degrading, and making popes.
A new power now being eftablifhed in the
world, viz. that of the popes and the bifhops, a
power governed by maxims unknown to the world
before, a new Jyftem of laws was of courfe, intro-
duced by it. This obtained the name of canon
law, confifting originally of the decrees of general
councils and fynods, and then of the conftitutions
of popes, and decifions made by the court of
Rome. In time thefe laws were collected, and
reduced to a fyftem, and became the object of
ftudy and practice to a new fet of lawyers, as the
Roman civil law had been before.
The firft collection of ecclefiaftical canons was
pubhfhed towards the end of the fourth century,
by Stephen of Ephefus, and it was received with
imiverfal applaufe. The church of Rome made
ufe of this collection till that of Dionyfius Exi-
guus appeared, in the fixth century Thefe canons
had no fanctions of a temporal nature, and there-
fore the councils generally applied to the em-
perors who had afiembled them, to compel the
obfervance of their decrees *.
* Anecdotes, p. 105. 107;
la
the Papal Power. 327
In the feventh century the collection of canons
by Ifidore of Seville was publifhed, compofed of
the councils held in Greece, Africa, France, and
Spain, and alfo of the decretal letters of the popes,
to the time of Zacharias who died in 752.*
This being a dark and ignorant age, all the let-
ters of the popes for the firft four centuries were
forged, and yet the forgery was for many centuries
undifcovered. Thefe decretal letters had no
other object than to extend the power of the popes,
and the dignity of the bifhopsf. The difficulty
of judging bifhops, Fleury fays, was increafed by
thefe decretals -, the power of judging them being
thereby given to the popes, fo that appeals to
Rome became very frequent J.
Gratian, who made a collection of canons
in the twelfth century, went beyond the forged
decretals in two important articles, viz.
the authority of the popes, and the immu-
nities of the clergy. For he maintained that
the popes are not bound by the canons,
and that the clergy cannot be tried by the
laity in any cafes. The conftitutions of the
popes after this compilation of Gratian turned
upon the maxims contained in it ; and yet as
the power of the popes increafed they kicked
away the fcaffbld, by which rhey had been af-
fifted in climbing to this height of power. For
* Anecdotes, p. 293. f Sueur, A. D. 838.
I Seventh Difcourfe, p. 13.
X 4 Father
32S 'The Hijlory of
Father Simon fays that the decrees of Gratian,
are not valued at Rome, nor the books of de-
cretals, but fo far as they fuit their purpofe, the
great principle of the court of Rome being that
the pope is above all law, which was indeed
the great object of Gratian *.
In this country the bilhops were allowed to
have a feparate jurifdiction, according to the
canon law, after the Norman conqueft, and this
continued till it was abridged under Henry the
eighth . Indeed the canon law has never been
directly abolifhed in England, and though a cor-
rection was propofed to be made of it, the
fcheme was never carried into execution. But
it was provided, in 1534, that till fuch a cor-
rection fhould be made, all the canons that were
then received Ihould remain in force, except fuch
as were contrary to the laws and cuftoms of the
realm, or that were to the hurt of the king's
prerogative. And it is perhaps better that the
canon law fhould remain fubject to this reftraint,
than that any new fyftem of the fame kind fhould
be enacted without any controul f . Thefe re-
mains, however, of the canon law have been
gradually going into difufe, and the whole practice
of the Jpiritual courts, in which it is continued,
is now held in univerfal abhorrence and contempt,
On Church Revenues, p. 88.
Hiftory of Popery, vol. 3. p. 70.
f Neal's Hiftory vol. i . p. 1 1 .
The
the Papal Power. 329
The pride and exterior marks of fplendor af-
fumed by the popes, have fufficiently correfponded
to the power which they acquired j and the flat-
teries which theyhave received from their partizans
have fometimes been in the higheft degree abo-
minable and blafphemous.
While the imperial power continued, no mark
ofrefpect was paid to the popes that was not
paid to other bifhops, archbilhops, or patriarchs.
But after they obtained fovereign power, they
obtained likewife the fame titles, and the fame
marks of reverence and refped which had been
claimed by other princes ; and feveral of thefe
ought to have been appropriated to divinity.
The title of bolinefs was often given by one bifhop
to another, but it was appropriated to the bilhop
of Rome about the year 1000 *. The ceremony
of the adoration of the pope, after his election,
was borrowed from Paganifm. This was always
done to the Roman Pontifex Maximus, and it is
done by the cardinals to the pope, feated upon
the altar for that purpofe. The cuftoms of kiffing
the feet, and being carried on mens fhoulders
were alfo borrowed from the Romans or the nor-
thern nations. Dioclefian ordered, by a public
edit, that all perfons (hould proftrate themfelves
before him, and kifs his feetj and for this purpofe
he had a Ihoe ornamented with gold and precious
Clones . It was Gregory the feventh who order-
* Sueur, A. D. 366.
Hift, of Popery, vol. 3. p. 340. Sec.
ed
330 'fhe tiiftory of
ed in council that even princes fliould kifs the
feet of the pope only *. But Valentine is faid to
have been the firft pope whofe feet were killed
after confecration by the cardinals and other
perfons prefent, in 827.
The popes, to Ihew their fuperiority to other
fovereigns, have aflumed a triple crown. At
firft they wore only a bonnet, a little higher than
ufual, very much like the Phrygian mitres, which
were ufed by the priefts of Cybele ; but Clovis
king of France having fent to the church of St.
John of Lateran a crown of gold, with which he
had been prefented by Anaftafius the emperor of
Conftantinople, pope Hormifdas put it on his
tiara. Afterwards Boniface the eighth, in his
quarrels with Philip the Fair, to (hew that things
temporal ought to be fubject to things fpiri-
tual, as a mark of this double authority, ufed
two crowns inftead of one, and to them John
the twenty-fecond added a third, but with what
particular view is not faid .
The ftile that has fometimes been affumed by
the popes, and made ufe of in addrefles to fome
of them, without their declining it, is truly blaf-
phemous. Martin the fourth, having excom-
municated the people of Sicily, would not ab-
folve them till their ambaflador, being proftrate
on the earth, entreated it, faying, O lamb of God,
* Sueur, A. D. 711. Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 3 p. 425.
. who
the Papal Power. 331
who takeft away the fins of the world, grant us thy
peace*. The Fathers of the council of Lateran
laid to pope Leo die tenth, " We refpeft your
" divine majefty, you are the hufband of the
<c church, the prince of the apoftles, the prince
" and king of all the univerfe." They entreat-
ed alfo that he would not let them lofe the fal-
vation, and the life, which he had given them.
Adding, " Thou art the paftor, and the phyfi-
" cian, thou art a God;" and declared that he
had all power in heaven and in earth f. The ca-
nonifts often gave the popes the title of Dominus
Dens nofter, which, indeed, had been aflumed by
Domitian. Paul the fifth caufed his picture to
be affixed to feveral books with this infcription,
Paulo V, vice Deo ; and Sixtus the fourth fuffer-
ed a triumphal arch to be creeled to his honour,
with this infcription :
Oraclo vocis mundi moderaris habenas,
Et merito in terris diceris effe Deus .
A circumftance which fhews the fpirit of the
papacy in a particularly ftrong light, is that Gre-
gory the feventh, the moft ambitious of all the
popes, and who contributed more than any other
to increafe the power and pride of the popedom,
was canonized, and a particular office, or form
of prayer, was compofed to his honour. This
* Hill, of Popery, vol. 3, p. 441. f Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 556.
Hiftory of Popery, vol. i. p. 94.
was
333 'The Hiftory of
was introduced by Alexander the feventh, and was
read in the churches of Rome and other parts of
Europe ; and whatever in his life ought to make
his memorv odious, is recited in this office as an
heroic action. It was alfo authorized by Benedict
the thirteenth. But all Europe were offended at
it.f.
There is no giving one character of a fet of
men fo numerous and fo various as the popes
have been, but, in general, fmce they have be-
come fovereign princes, they have had all the
follies and vices of other fovereign princes, and
have fpent their revenues in the fame manner;
more efpecially (as their power was fhort, and the
office not hereditary) in enriching their families and
dependants. At one period they were, for many
fucceflions, monfters of wickednefs , ufmg every
art, and making no fcruple even of murder, to
gain their ends. A man more abandoned to
vice, of the moft atrocious kinds, than Alexan-
der the fixth, was perhaps never known, and Leo
the tenth, the great patron of learning, was ex-
ceedingly debauched, and probably an atheift.
It muft be acknowledged, however, that many
of the popes have been men who would have
adorned any ftation in life ; being, in the worft
times, patterns of virtue, and actuated by the beft
intentions in the world. But they never had
power to reform their own courts, or to accom-
f Hiftoire des Papes, vol. 2, p. 491. vol. 5, p. 597.
plilh
the Papal Power. 333
plilh the other reformations they projected.
However, time, and the diminution of their
power, has at length done a great deal towards
it; and as the bifhops of Rome fink to the level
of other bifhops in the chriftian church, they
will probably acquire the virtues of their primi-
tive anceftorsj but then they will be no longer
what we now call popes.
It may excite our gratitude for the bleffings of
the reformation, to look back upon the ftate of
this country while it was fubje<3: to the papal
power. The popes leem to have held this coun-
try in a ftate of greater dependence than any
other in Europe. To this the obligations that
William the conqueror, and others of our princes
were under to them, contributed not a little. All
the rights and privileges of the Englifh clergy
were, in fad, in the hands of the pope, who tax-
ed them at his pleafure, and who had the abfo-
lute nomination to all the richeft benefices in.
the country. Thefe were in general filled with
foreigners, efpecially Italians, who never fo much
as faw their diocefes, or the country, but had
their revenues remitted to them abroad; by
which means the country was drained of im-
menfe fums. The popes alfo difpofed even of
the reverfions of the moft lucrative places; fo
that neither the king, nor any other perfon in
England, had any thing to difpofe of in the
church,
This
334 ?be Hijlory of
This was ill brooked by feveral of our Nor-
man princes and lords ; but no redrefs was found
for this evil till the reign of that fpirited prince
Edward the third, who pafled an act called the
flatute of provifors y by which all prefentations to
livings within the kingdom were taken from the
pope, and appointed to be in the king, or his
fubjects. But ftill the popes had confiderable
power, as in the trials of titles to advowfons, and
appeals to the court of Rome. And though,
by the feventh of Richard the fecond, the power
of nomination to benefices without the king's
licence was taken from the popes, they ftill
claimed the benefit of confirmation, of the tran-
flation of bilhops, and of excommunication f.
The interference of the papal power received
another check in the reign of Richard the fe-
cond. For whereas before that time the arch-
bifhops of Canterbury and York might, by vir-
tue of bulls from Rome, aflemble the clergy of
their feveral provinces, at what time and place
they thought fit, without leave from the crown,
and all the canons and conftitutions made in
their fynods were binding without being ratified
by the king ; an act pafled in the fixteenth year
of this reign called premunire, by which it was
enacted, that if any of the clergy obtained any
inftrument from the court of Rome, againft the
king or his crown, or if any perfon fhould re-
J- Neal's Hiftory, vol. i. p. 2.
ceive
the Papal Power.
ceive or execute them, they Ihould be out of
the king's protection, their goods and chattels
fhould be forfeited, and their perfcns impri-
foned.
From this time no convocation of the clergy
could be called without the king's writ, and they
could confult on fuch matters only as he fhould
think proper to lay before them ; but ftill their
canons were binding without the king's affent, till
the act of fupremacy under Henry the eighth. This
prince aiTumed the fole right to the nomination
and confirmation of bifliops; and to the great
mortification of the clergy, he alfo took to him-
felf the firft fruits of all the benefices *.
* Neal's Hiftory, vol. i. p. 10. &c.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX I.
T O
PARTS X. AND XI.
The Hiftory of COUNCILS.
TO the preceding hiftory of the clergy in ge-
neral, and of the bifhops, and popes, in par-
ticular, it may not be amifs to add a feparate ac-
count of the councils, or afTemblies of the bifhops
and clergy, which make a great figure in the
hiftory of the chriftian church. Thefe aflumed
a moft undue authority, and have been one of the
principal fupports of the greateft corruptions of
chriilian doctrine and difcipline.
We find in the book of Acts, that when matters
of confiderable confequence occurred, all the apof-
tles, or as many of them as conveniently could,
affembled, to confult about it, and their decrees
were univerfally received in the chriftian church.
It does not appear, however, that what they re-
folved on thefe occafions was directed by any
immediate infpiration, for that would have fuper-
feded all reafoning and debates upon the fubject,
and confequently all difference of opinion.
Whereas they appear to have debated among
themfelves, on fome of thefe occafions, with a
con-
<fbe Hi/lory of Councils. 337
confiderable degree of warmth. And though
they conclude their advice to the Gentile chrifti-
ans about the obiervance of the Jewifti ceremo-
nies, with faying that itjeemed good to the Holy
Gbofi and to us, they probably only meant, that
they were fully perfuaded that the regulations
which they prefcribed were proper in themfelves,
and therefore agreeable to the mind and will
of God ; being confcious to themfelves that they
were under no improper bias. If they had been
confcious of any particular illumination at that
time, they would probably have mentioned it.
Such, however, was the refpecl: in which the
apoftles were held, that even their advices
had the force of decrees, and in general were
implicitly conformed to,
When the apoflles were dead, it was natu-
ral for the bilhops of particular churches to
afiemble on fimilar occafions j and though they
could not have the authority of the apoftles,
that office becoming extinct with thofe who were
firft appointed to it ; yet, as there>was no higher
authority in the church, had they contented
themfelves with merely giving advice, and con-
fined their decifions to matters of difcipline,
they would hardly have been difputed. But it
has been pretended that general councils, con-
fifting of bifhops afiembled from all parts of
the chriftian world, fucceed to all the power of
the apoftles, and have even abfolute authority
VOL. II. Y in
338 The Hiflory of Councils.
in matters of faith. But an afiembly of ever
fo many bifhops, being only an aflembly of fal-
lible men, can have no juft claim to infallibi-
lity ; nor indeed was this a thing that was pre-
tended to in early times. Our Lord did, indeed,
promife that when two or three of his difciples
were gathered together in his name, he would
be in the midft of them ; but this promife, what-
ever might be meant by it, was not made to
bifhops in particular, and might be claimed by
two or three individuals, as well as by two or
three hundred.
Befides, thofe general councils, the decrees
of which have been urged as of the greatefl au-
thority, were in fact afiemblies of factious men -,
in whofe proceedings there was not even the
appearance of their being influenced by the love
of truth. For they determined juft as the em-
perors, or the popes, who fummoned them, were
pleafed to direct. Accordingly, there are, as
might be expected, many inftances of the de-
crees of fome councils being contrary to thofe
of others ; which could not have been the cafe,
if they had been all guided by the fpirit of
truth.
Though Arianifm was condemned by the
council of Nice, it was eftablifhed at the coun-
cil of Ariminum, which was as much a general
council as the other, and alfo in the councils
of Seleucia and Syrmium. There is alfo a re-
markable
Me Hiftory of Councils. 339
markable inftance of the decrees of councils,
in which the popes themfelves have prefided,
contradicting one another, in thofe of Chalce-
don, and Conftantinople, in 554. For the for-
mer abfolved and juftified Theodorit of Cyr,
and Ibas ofEdefla, and received them into their
body, as orthodox bifhops; whereas "the coun-
cil of Conftantinople, which is ftiled the fifth ge-
neral council, and was approved by the pope,
condemned them as damnable heretics*.
The council of Conftantinople alfo decreed
that images were not to be endured in chriftian
churches, whereas the fecond council of Nice
not only allowed them to be erected, but even
to be worfhipped. In later times, the Lateran
council of Julius the fecond was called for no
other purpofe but to refcind the decrees of the
council of Pifa ; and whereas the council of
Bafil had decreed that a council of bifhops is
above the popes, the Lateran council, under
pope Leo, decreed tha: a pope is above a
council.
Befides, there never has been in fact any
luch thing as a general council. Even the four
firft, which are the moft boafted of, had no
bifhops " from feveral whole provinces in the
chriftian world. And the council of Trent, the
authority of which the papifts make fo much
* Sueur, A. D. 524.
Y 2 account
340 be Hiftory of Councils.
account of, was perhaps the leaft refpeftable of
all the councils. The chief intention of the
crowned heads, who promoted this council was
to reform the abufes in the court of Rome.
But the pope himfelf, by his legates, prefiding
in it, pronounced the proteftants, who appealed
to it, heretics before they were condemned by
that council, and none were allowed to vote
in it but fuch as had taken an oath to the
pope and the church of Rome. There were
hardly fifty bifhops prefent in it, none being
fent from feveral countries. Some that were
there were only titular bifhops, created by the
pope for that purpofe; and fome had Grecian
titles, to make an appearance of the Greek
church confenting to it. It is alfo well known
that nothing was decided in the council with-
out the previous confent of the court of Rome,
and the decrees concluded with an exprefs
falvo of all the authority of the apoftolical
fee.
In fact, the papifts themfelves have found a
variety of methods of evading the force of ge-
neral councils, whenever it has been convenient
for them fo to do -, as if their decifions depend-
ed upon a matter of fa6b, concerning which they
were never pretended to be infallible; alfo if
their proceedings were not in all refpe<5ts re-
gular, and if their decrees were not univerfally
received, as well as if they had not been ap-
proved by the popes. If we may judge concern-
ins:
'The Hiftory of Councils. 341
ing councils by the things that have been de-
creed in them, we fhall be far from being pre-
judiced in their favour j their fandlion having
been pleaded for things the moil repugnant to
reafon and the plained fenfe of fcripture, as has
been fufficiently manifefted in the courfe of this
work.
Councils v/ere moft frequent in the times of
the chriftian emperors at Conftantinople, and of
the chriftian princes of Europe, from the fall
of the Roman empire till towards the end of
the eighth century. But the publication of the
forged decretals of Ifidore at that period made
a great change with refpect to councils, the
jurifdiction of bifhops, and appeals. For coun-
cils became lefs frequent when they could not
be held without the pope's leave ; and the in-
terruption of provincial councils was a great
wound, fays Fleury, to ecclefiaftical jurifdic-
The firft who feems to have maintained the
infallibility of councils is Barlaam, who exhorts
one of his friends to return to the communion
of the church of Rome, becaufe a council at
Lyons, being lawfully afiembled, and having
condemned the errors o the Greeks, he muft
then be confidered as an heretic, cut off from the
church, if he did not fubmit to it. But Occam
* Seventh Difcourfe p. 13.
Y who
34 2 2^tf Hijlory of Councils.
who lived at the fame time, viz. in the four-
teenth century, fpeaks of it as the opinion of
fome doctors only, while others fay this infal-
libility was a privilege of the college of car-
dinals, and others of the pope himfelf. It was a
queftion, however, that did not begin to be
agitated till that time, and it was then difpu-
ted very calmly. It was more openly debated
during the differences between the popes and
the councils ; when the councils fetting them-
felves up above the popes, determined that
themfelves, and not the popes, were appointed
by God to judge in the laft refort concerning
articles of faith. The council of Conftance
made no decifion on this fubjet, but that of
Bafil did ; faying that it was blafphemy to doubt
that the Holy Spirit dictated their refolutions,
decrees, and canons; while the pope and his
council at Florence, declared the contrary, and
it is not yet determined which of thefe was a
lawful council*.
The moft eminent of the catholic writers
themfelves have maintained different opinions
on this fubjec"t, and have been much influen-
ced by the circumftances in which they wrote,
But this was moft remarkably the cafe with
^Eneas Sylvius, who had with great boldnefs
maintained the authority of the council of Bafil
againft Eugenius the fourth ; but being made
* Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 518.
pope
'The Hijlory of Councils. 343
pope (by the name of Pius the fecond) he
publilhed a folemn recantation of all that he
had written upon that fubject ; declaring with-
out fhame or hefitation, that as ^Eneas Sylvius
he was a damnable heretic, but as Pius the
fecond he was an orthodox pontiff*. At pre-
fent the opinion of the infallibility of the pope
being generally given up by the catholics, they
fuppofe the feat of infallibility (for it is an in-
controvertible maxim with them that there muft
be fuch a feat) to be in the councils.
The proteftants themfelves had originally no
difpute about the authority of truly general
councils. Luther appealed to a general coun-
cil regularly aflembled, and engaged to abide
by its decifionf. Calvin maintained in ex-
prefs terms, that the univerfal church is in-
fallible, and that God muft annul his folemn
promifes if it be otherwifej.
At prefent, howeverj it is not, I believe, the
opinion of any proteftant, that any afiembly of
men is infallible. But it is thought by fome to
be lawful and convenient to call fuch an af-
fembly of divines, to determine what fliould
be the articles of faith in particular eftablifhed
churches, or fuch as Ihould have the counte-
* Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 247. f Ib - vol. 3. p. 322.
t Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 499.
Y 4 . nance
344 be Hiftory of Councils.
nance of particular ftates. The fynod of Dort
in Holland made decrees concerning articles
of faith, and proceeded in as rigorous a manner
againft thofe who did not conform to them,
as any popifh fynod or council could have done.
The time is not yet come, though we may
hope that it is approaching, when the abfur-
dity of all interference of power, civil or ec-
clefiaftical in matters of religion fhall be ge-
nerally ^underftood and acknowledged.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX II.
T O
PARTS X. AND XI.
Of the Authority of the Secular Powers, or the
Civil Magiftrate, in Matters of Religion.
WE have feen the daring attempts to intro-
duce an arbitrary authority, fo as to de-
cide concerning articles of faith, as well as con-
cerning matters of difcipline, made firft by the
popes, who were nothing more, originally, than bi-
fhops of the fmgle church of Rome, and afterwards,
by councils, or a number of bifhops and other ec-
clefiaftical perfons. This ufurpation led the way
to another, not indeed fo excefllve in the extent
to which it has been carried, but much more ab-
furd in its nature. The former ufurpations were
of the clergy, who might be fuppofed to have
ftudied, and therefore to have underftood, the
chriftian fyftem ; but the latter is by mere laymen,
who cannot be fuppofed to have given much at-
tention to thefubjecl: of religion, and confequent-
ly muft be very ill prepared to decide authori-
tatively concerning its doctrines or rites. Of
this nature is the ecclefiaftical authority which,
upon the reformation, was transferred from the
popes
346 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
popes to the fecular powers of the different flates
of Europe, and more efpecially that which was
afiumed by the king and parliaments of England,
The Roman emperors, when they became
chriftians, did, indeed, interfere in the bufinefs
of religion j but it was either to confirm the elec-
tion of bifliops (which was foon perceived to be
of confiderable importance to them in civil mat-
ters) or to convoke fynods, or general afTemblies ;
when, as they apprehended, the peace of the
ftate was in danger of being difturbed by he-
refies, and factions in the church. But though
they fometimes figned the decrees of the fynods,
it was never fuppofed that their vote was necef-
fary to the validity of them j and though they re-
gulated the revenues, and other things of an ex-
ternal nature refpefting the church, they never
prefumed to pronounce either by their own fingle
authority, or that of the fenate in conjunction
with them, what was truth or what was falfhood,
what ceremonies ought to be admitted, and what
ought to be rejected, as has been done by the
civil governors of Europe fince the reformation.
Conftantine, who was himfelf prefident, or
moderator in the council of Nice, fpeaking to
the bilhops on that occafion, faid, as was men-
tioned before, " Ye are bifhops of things
" within the church, but I am bilhop as to ex-
" ternals." And long afterwards, when the civil
and ecclefiaftical powers were much more in-
> termixed,
in Matters of Religion. 347
termixed, Charlemaigne, in a letter to the
churches of Spain, fays, concerning the council
which he had held at Franckfort, " I have taken.
" place among the bifhops, both as an auditor,
" and arbitrator. We have leen, and by the grace
" of God we have decreed that which ought firmly
" to be believed*." But though this great prince
fays IVe have decreed, it is not probable that he
himfelf had fo much as a proper vote in the re-
folutions. If he had, he would hardly have called
himfelf an auditor, or an arbitrator, though this
feems to imply his having more power than that
of giving a vote. Though it is not queftioned
that the emperors generally carried their point
with the bifhops, and got them to make what
decrees they pleafed, it was by their interefl
with them, and influence over them, and not by
a proper authority. And during the prevalence
of the papal power, the ftate was fo far from
encroaching upon the church, that ecclefi-
aftics ufurped upon the fecular power, fo as
even to make and depofe kings.
A feries of facts, relating to the ecclefiaftical
hiflory of England, will abundantly confirm what
I have here advanced concerning the ufurpation
of the rights of Chrift, and of God, by the civil
magiftracy of this kingdom.
* Milot's Hift. of France, p. 62.
When
348 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
When Henry the eighth fhook off his depend-
ence upon the pope, in 1531, he was far from
abolifhing their ufurped and anti-chriftian power.
He only transferred it from the pope to himfelf,
claiming the title of Jole and Jupreme head of the
church of England. The abfurdity of acknow-
ledging a layman as fupreme head of an ecclefi-
aftical body, was a thing fo new and ftrange,
that the clergy v/ould not admit it at firft without
this claufe, As far as it is agreeable to the laws of
Chrift. But after a year or two, viz. in 1533,
the att of Jupremacy, as it was called, pafTed the
parliament, and the convocation alfo, without
that claufe.
By this celebrated aft the whole power of re-
forming herefies and errors, in doctrine and wor-
fhip, was transferred from the pope to the king,
without any regard to the rights of fynods, or
councils of clergy; and without giving any liber-
ty to thofe who could not comply with the public
ftandard. This act exprefles that " the kings of
" this realm, and all their fucceflbrs, fhall have
<c full power and authority to vifit, reprefs, re-
<c drefs, reform, order, correct, reftrain, and
" amend, all errors, herefies, abufes, con-
" tempts, and enormities whatfoever they be f."
It was alfo ordered in this reign, that all the ap-
peals which had before been made to Rome,
were to be made to the king's chancery, to be
t NeaTs Hiitory vol. i. p. 8.
determined
in Matters of Religion. 349
determined as the manner now is, by dele-
gates *.
This king, indeed, in his letter to the convoca-
tion at York, affured them that he claimed no-
thing more by the Jupremacy* than what chriftian
princes in primitive times affumed to themfelves
in their own dominions. But the contrary of
this may eafily be demonftrated. For by an a6t
parTed in the thirty-firft year of this reign, it was
enacted, that whatfoever his majefty fhould en-
join in matters of religion, fhould be obeyed by
all his fubjefts. Such language as this was ne-
ver held by any of the chriftian emperors.
The words of Mr. Hooker, who is generally
allowed to be one of the ableft advocates of
the church of England, are very exprefs to this
purpofe. He fays, fc If the whole ecclefiafti-
ce cal ftate francl in need of being vifited and
cc reformed, or when any part of the church
" is infefted with error, fchifm, herefies, &c.
" whatfoever fpiritual power the legates had
" from the fee of Rome, and exercifed in right
" of the pope, for remedying of evil, without
<c violating the laws of God or nature, as much,
<c in every degree have our laws fully granted
* c to the king for ever, whatever he thinks fit
cc to do by ecclefiaftical fynods, or otherwife,
er according to law f."
* Neal's Hift. vol. i. p. 88. f Ib - P- 86
Henry
3 50 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
Henry the eighth, Edward the fixth, queen
Mary, queen Elizabeth, and Charles the firft,
all publifhed inftruftions or injunctions, con-
cerning matters of faith, without the confent
of the clergy in convocation aflfembled, and
enforced them upon the clergy, under the pe-
nalty of premunire. So jealous was queen
Elizabeth of this branch of her prerogative, that
fhe would not fuffer the parliament to pafs any
bill for the amendment or alteration of any of
the ceremonies of the church; it being, as fhe
faid, an invafion of her prerogative. By one
claufe in the aft of uniformity the queen was
empowered, by the advice of her commifiioners or
metropolitans, to ordain and publifh farther cere-
monies and rites ; and had it not been for this
claufe, by which fhe referved a power to make
what alterations fhe thought fit, fhe told arch-
bilhop Parker, that fhe would not have paff-
ed the aft f.
It is not eafy to reconcile thefe claims of
Henry the eighth and queen Elizabeth with that
article of the church of England, which afierts
that the church has authority in controverfies of
faith, if by church be meant the clergy. For the
Englifh clergy, as a body, were fo far from having
any hand in the bufmefs of reformation, that
they oppofed it as far as ever lay in their power.
Befides, if it be granted that this abfolute power
is in the church, the reformation itfelf was un-
lawful, and all that Henry the eighth and our
f Neal's Hiil. vol. i. p. 93.
other
in Matters of Religion. 351
other princes have done in this bufmefs is, by
their own confeffion, unjuftifiable.
After the a6t of fupremacy, there could be no
abfolute necefiity for our kings to confult even
the parliament upon this fubject. Henry, how-
ever, generally chofe to do it, in order to give the
ftronger fanction to his own decifions. Thus the
famous law of they?* articles, commonly called the
bloody ftatute, and which was entitled An aft for
abolijhing diverfity of opinions in certain articles
concerning the chriftian religion, was an act of
parliament, pafled in the year 1538. In this aft
was a ratification of feveral of the moft important
doctrines or articles of popery, and it continued
in force to the end of this king's reign. In a
very Ihort time five hundred perfons were im-
prifoned in confequence of it, among whom was
the famous bilhop Latimer.
This king feems even to have claimed an
infallibility, equal to that which had been arro-
gated by the popes, and to have acted in all re-
fpects as if he had the confciences and the faith of
all his people at his abfolute difpofal. For in
the thirty-fecond year of his reign, it' was enacted
that " All decrees and ordinances, made with
" the king's advice and confirmation, in and
" upon the matters of chriftian faith, and lawful
< c rites and ceremonies, fhall be, in every point
" thereof believed, obeyed, and performed, to
" all intents and purpofes, upon the pains
therein
352 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
" therein comprized, provided nothing be or-
tf dained contrary to the laws of the realm."
And afterwards, when the articles of the church
of England were firfl compiled, which was under
Edward the iixth, in 155!) they were drawn up
by Cranmer and others, and received the fan&ion
of the royal authority in council only, without
being brought to parliament or convocations,
though the title exprefles as muchf.
In the firft year of queen Elizabeth the par-
liament alone eftablifhed the queen's fupremacy
and the Common Prayer, in fpite of great op-
pofition by the bifhops in the houfe of lords -,
and the convocation then fitting, was fo far
from having any hand in thofe acts of refor-
mation, that the members of it prefented to the
parliament feveral propofitions in favour of the
tenets of popery, directly contrary to the pro^
ceedings of parliament.
In the life of Mr. Whifton we have a re-
markable inftance of the very little confequence
which the church of England, as it is general-
ly underftood, is of, in deciding religious con-
troverfies. For when a convocation had fat
upon his writings concerning the doctrine of
the trinity, and pronounced them to be heretical
and dangerous, queen Anne interpofed j and not
choofmg to ratify their fentence, all the pro-
f Neal's Hift, vol. i. p. 50.
ceedings
in Matters of Religion. 353
ceedings came to nothing. Thus, as was ob-
ferved on the occafion, the voice of a woman,
which the apoflle Paul does not allow to be
even heard in the church, had more weight
than that of all the churchmen in a body. Can
thefe things be agreeable to the conftitution of
the gofpel ? Both the clergy and the queen
were interfering in a bufmefs in which they
had no right to meddle; and it is fometimes
pleafant to fee one ufurper checking the vio-
lence of another,
It is remarkable that this claufe in the articles,
by which it is ordained that the churchy and not
the king (who, however, is acknowledged to
be the fupreme head of the church) fhould have
authority in controverfies of faith, was not in
the firft articles compiled by Cranmer, and
which were forty-two in number, but was in-
troduced into them when they were revifed,
and new modelled, in the reign of queen Eli-
zabeth. But nobody can tell why or where-
fore that claufe came to be inferted, it being
manifeftly inconfiftent with other acts of the
legislature, and with the conduct of our prin-
ces according to thofe acts*.
To thefe remarks I fliall add, that feveral of
the mod important acts of fpiritual jurifdiction,
relating to the revenues and difcipline of the
* Neal's Hiftory, vol. i. p. 50.
VOL. II. Z church
354 ty tbe Power of the Civil Magifrate
church of England, are performed by laymen.
For the chancellors, officials, and furrogates, who
pafs cenfures and excommunicate, frequently are,
and by exprefs law always may be, laymen ;
and the bifhops have no power to controul
the proceedings of the courts which go by their
name.
The houfe of Commons, which took up arms
againft Charles the firit, affumed the fame au-
thority in matters of religion that had been
ufurped by the preceding kings. And the
Prefbyterians, of which feet they chiefly con-
fifted, would have enacted fome perfecuting and
ianguinary laws, if they had not been reftrain-
ed by Oliver Cromwell, at the head of the
Independents. Thefe being the fmaller num-
ber, would certainly have been fupprefled by
any ad: of uniformity ; and it is net improba-
ble, that, in confequerice of being in this fitua-
tion, they might fooner than any other fe6t
in this country, hit upon the true chriftian
principle of religious liberty, which entirely ex-
cludes the civil magiftrate from interfering with
it. At the reftoration, the fame church efla-
blifliment, with the fame powers in the king
and in the parliament, was refumed ; and every
thing reverted into the fame channel, or near-
ly the fame, in which they had been in the
reign of queen Elizabeth.
It
in Matters of Religion. 355
It is fomething remarkable, that this glaring
impropriety, of merely civil magiftrates deci-
ding concerning articles of chriftian faith, which
mud neceffarily be undertaken by all civil go-
vernors who prefume to make any eftablifh-
ment of chriftianity (that is, of what they take
to be chriftianity) in any country, fhould not
ftrike more than it generally does ; and that
on this ground only all civil eftablifhments of
chriftianity Ihould not be exploded; fince all
chriftians profefs to acknowledge no Father up-
on earth befides God, and no mafter betides
Chrift, and to ftand faft in the liberty with
which he has made us free. If there be any
meaning in this, it muft be that no human au-
thority fhould be permitted to make that ne-
ceflary to chriftian communion which Chrift has
not made neceflary, but left undetermined, and
confequently indifferent. There are inftances,
however, of this abfurdity having been noticed
in feveral periods of our hiftory, befides that
which I have mentioned, when the claim of
Henry the eighth to be the fupreme head of
the church was firft ftarted.
When the aft of uniformity was pafTed, in
the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth, in 1559,
Heath, archbilliop of York, made an excel-
lent fpeech againft it; obferving that it > ought
to have had the content of the clergy in con-
vocation, before it pafled into a law. cc Not
" only orthodox but even Arian emperors,"
Z 2 fays
356 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
fays he, " ordained that points of faith fhould
<c be examined in councils j and Gallic, by the
" light -of nature, knew that a civil judge
" ought not to meddle with matters of reli-
" gion." But he was over-ruled, the aft which
patted that very day, having vefted that power
in the crown.
When that law was made, in the reign of
William and Mary, which makes it blafphemy,
punifhable with confifcation of goods and im-
prifonment for life, if perfifted in, to deny the
doctrine of the trinity, lord Feverfham, who
had no objection to the doctrine which was to
be guarded by that law, exprefTed his diflike
of the civil magiftrate interfering to guard it,
in very flrong terms. He faid that he ac-
knowledged the houfes of parliament might lay
upon the fubject what taxes they pleafed, and
might even make a kingj but he did not like
the idea of a parliamentary religion, and a par-
liamentary God. Such, however, in fact, is the
eftablifhed religion of this country. It is fuch
a religion as the king, lords, and commons of
this realm have thought proper to make for
themfelves, and to impofe upon the people ;
who certainly ought to judge for themfelves,
in a matter which fo nearly concerns them as
individuals, and of which they are as competent
judges as their fuperiors. Such an ufurped au-
thority as this ought to be oppofed; efpecially
when it is confidered that the power by which
this
in Matters of Religion. 357
this mode of religion is enforced, is precifely the
fame with that of the popes ; having been tranf-
ferred from them to our princes.
Exclufive of every thing contained in the reli-
gion of the church of England, it is chiefly the
authority by which it is enjoined that DifTenters
object to in it. Things in their own nature ever
fo indifferent, are no longer fo, when the autho-
rity by which they are enforced is improper and
boundlefs. It is upon the famejuft maxim that
we always profefs to act in things of a civil na-
ture. A tax of a penny is what no man would
value, of itfelf ; but it would be a justifiable caufe
of a civil war, if our kings only, without the
concurrence of parliament, Ihould prefume to
enforce that tax. Becaufe a tax that begins with
a penny might end in a pound, or extend to a
man's whole property. In like manner, a power
that alters a fingle article of faith, or impofes one
rite, might change the whole fyftem. It was,
therefore, fo far from being the mark of a weak
mind, that it was an evidence of great, juft, and
enlarged views, in the Puritans, to refift, as they
did, the impofition of things in their own nature
indifferent. To have fubmitted, would have
been to acknowledge another fupreme power in
the church befides that of Chrift.
This is the true and folid ground of a diflent
from the church of England. It is declaring, (and
it is the only proper and effectual mode of de-
Z 3 claring)
3 5 8 Of the Power of the Civil Magijlrate
daring) that we will acknowledge no human au~
thority in matters of religion ; but that we will
judge for ourfelves in a bufinefs which fo nearly
concerns us, and not fuffer others to judge for
us ; and that, in the worfhip of God, and what
refpecls our happinefs in a future world, we will
only obey him whofe power extends to that
world, that is, God, and not man.
i
It is, moreover, evidently agreeable to the
maxims of the gofpel, that every chriftian make
an open declaration, both by his words, and by
his conduct:, of what he believes concerning it.
This is mod exprefsly declared to be obligatory
upon us with refpecl: to chnftianity in general.
And for the fame reafon it ought to be extended
to every important diftinction in the profeffion of
chriftianity, and efpecially what relates to the
feat of $ower y or authority in the church of
Chrift. Our Lord hath faid, If any man be
ajhamed of me, and of my words, of him will the
fon of man be afoar.ied, when he comes in his own
glory, and the glory of his father.
Had chriftianity been a fyftem of fpeculative
opinions only, and had not required a conformi-
ty in our practice, and fuch as is vijible to the
world, every degree of periecution might be
avoided. But this, we know, was not the cafe
in the primitive times. All true chriftians then
thought themfelves obliged not to make the lead
concealment of their opinions, whatever they
might
in Matters of Religion. 359
might fuffer in confequence of their profeflion.
In like manner, every proteftant ought to be
declared proteftant, and not deny his principles
by communicating with the idolatrous church of
Rome. And for the very fame reafon every
man who thinks that the church of England
ufurps an undue authority over the confciences
of men, fimilar to that of the church of Rome,
ought to be a declared Diffenter, and feparate
from the eftablifhed church, whatever ridicule, or
perfecution of any kind he may expofe himfelf to
on that account.
If the primitive chriftians, or the firft reformers
from popery, could have been contented with
keeping their opinions to themfelves, while they
conformed to the religion of their country, they
might have avoided all the inconveniencies to
which the public profeflion of their principles
expofed them ; and in this they would have
followed the example of all the heathen phi-
lofophers, whofe maxim it was, to think with the
wife, and aft with the vulgar -, and who ridiculed
the chriftians for not doing the fame. For all
the philofophers held the popular fuperftitions
in the fame contempt with the chriftians them-
felves. But no true chriftian, or proteftant,
will venture to facrifice fo much to their world-
ly eafe and fafety. And were not many of the
prefent members of the church of England either
grofsly ignorant of the nature of religion, in-
attentive to what belonged to it, or govern-
Z 4 ed
360 Of the Power of the Civil Magiftrate
ed by the heathenifh maxim above-mentioned,
they would not dare to countenance by their
concurrence, what they may eafiiy know to be
grofs corruptions of chriftianity, and eipecial-
ly an ufurpation of the rights of God and of
Chrift.
There is another ftate in Europe, in which the
prince afiumes an ecclefiaftical power indepen-
dent of the pope. For the kings of Sicily
pretend to be by birth Legates a latere to the
holy fee, and to have a power of abfolving,
punifhing, and excommunicating all perfons,
even cardinals themfelves, who refide in their
kingdom. They alfo prefide in provincial
councils, and act in all refpects independently
of the court of Rome Their fiyle is Beatifimo
et Jantifimo padre, and they attribute to them-
felves in Sicily the fame power that the popes
have with.refpedt to the reft of the church. The
Sicilians claim this right from a bull of Urban
the fecond, granted in 1097 to Roger the Nor-
man king of Sicily, and to his fucceflbrs. But
the advocates for the court of Rome fay that this
bull was forged, during the long time that the
ifland had no communication with the holy fee.
For it continued ninety years under an interdict,
beginning in 1282. Hence, however, have
arifen violent difputes between the kings of
Sicily and the popes. But to this day the kings
of Sicily exercife that jurifdiction, and are in
fact popes within their own territories. On this
account
in Ma tiers of Religion, 361
account F. Simon fays there are three popes in
Chiiftendom, viz. at Rome, in Sicily, and in
England ; the two laft, however, deriving their
power from the firft, the kings of Sicily by vo-
luntary conceffion, and the kings of England
by force *,
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 116. Moiheim, vcl.
2- P- 231.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX III.
T O
PARTS X. AND XI.
Of the Authority of Tradition, and of the
Scriptures, 6JV.
WE have feen the pretenfions of the popes,
of councils, and alfo of civil magiftrates,
to decide controverfies of faith. It may not be
improper, in the conclufion of this fubject, to
confider two other authorities, viz. thofe of tra-
dition and of thejcripturff. As the Jewilh and
chriftian religions are of divine origin, it be-
hoves us to examine as carefully as we can,
the channels by which thefe divine communica-
tions have been conveyed to us -, and thefe can
be no other than oral tradition, or writing ; and
of thefe the latter is certainly preferable, when-
ever it can be had, provided we have fufficient
evidence that we have the genuine writings of
the infpired prophets themfelves. But in many
cafes, even tradition ought not to be flighted.
Thofe chriftians who were not converted by
the apoftles themfelves, and who lived before the
publication of any of the canonical books of the
New. Teftament, could not have had any other
foundation
and of the Scriptures, &c. 363
foundation for their faith. We ourfelves admit
thefe books to be canonical on no other founda-
tion; and by calling them canonical, we mean no
more than that they are the genuine productions
of thofe perfons whofe names they bear, or of the
times to which they are ufually afcribed; and
therefore they are of themfelves of no authority,
but as the mod indifputable evidence of what it
was that Chrift and the apoftles did teach and
pradlife as from God ; and it cannot be made to
appear that the fame thing may not be fufficient-
ly proved by other means. We obferve the firft,
and not the feventh day of the week, as a day of
reft, contrary to the known cuftoin of the Jews,
which we believe to have been of divine appoint-
ment, upon no other authority than that of tra-
dition i it being fuppofed to have been the inva-
riable cuftom of rhe church from the time of the
apoftles, and ir being impofiible to account for
the origin of the prefent cuftom, and of its being
obferved without the leaft variation in churches
that differ in almoft every thing elfe, but upon
that fuppofition. For we do not find in the New
Teftament, any exprefs order of Chrift, or of the
apoftles, that fuch a change fhould be made.
When, therefore, we fpeak of tradition as an
improper foundation for faith or practice, we
muft mean only pretended, or ill-founded tra-
ditions ; fuch as were alledged by feveral of
thofe who were called heretics in very early
times, or by the church of Rome at prefent.
Bur,
364 Of the Authority of Tradition,
But, in this cafe, we object to the opinions and
practices, not merely becaufe we find no trace of
them in the fcriptures, but becaufe we find no
fufficient authority for them at all.
Some of the antient heretics are faid, by Au-
ftin and others, to have availed themfelves of
this fource of credit ; laying great ftrefs on our
Lord's faying to his difciples, that he had many
things to fay to them 'vhich they were not able
to bear at the time that he was with them, and
pretending that the apoilles themfelves, befides
preaching to all perfons indifcriminately, made a
referve of fome things to be taught more pri-
vately, and only to a few. But there does not
appear to have been any fufficient foundation for
that pretence -, all their teaching having been
public, and nothing concealed from any perfons
who were defirous of being inftrufted. Much
lefs was there any reafon to think that the parti-
cular things which they wifhed to fupport by this
pretence were among the things revealed to thofe
few. Befides, our Lord himfelf feems to have
precluded every pretence of this kind, by telling
his apoftles, that whatever they had heard of him
in private, they (hould proclaim in public. Matt,
x. 26.
The church of Rome has adopted a variety of
cuiloms, and founded many claims, upon this
authority of tradition. But in what was called
the catholic churchy no recourfe was had to tradi-
tion.,
and of the Scriptures, &c. 365
tion, before the fecond council of Nice, in 7 87,
in which the worfhip of images was eftablifhed ;
when many things which had generally been af-
fented to, and practifed before that time, had no
foundation in the fcriptures, or in the reafon of
things. This council, therefore, exprefsly ana-
thematized all thofe who did not receive ecclefi-
aftical traditions, written or unwritten. But the
things which the members of this council alledg-
ed as proper to be received on fuch authority,
are exceedingly fooliih and abfurd.
The authority of the books of the New Tef-
tament, fuppofing them to be genuine, is the
very lame with that of the apofttes themfelves.
But, in very early times, this does not appear to
have been fo great as it came to be afterwards.
Though it was never doubted that Paul was an
infpired apoftle, and received the knowledge he
had of the gofpel from Jefus Chrift himfelf, yet
we find by his own writings, that there were vio-
lent factions againft him all his life, and that his
opinions were by no means implicitly received.
He himfelf is far from infilling that every thing
he afferted was to be received without examina-
tion. On the contrary, the various arguments
he produces in fupport of his aflertions, without
alledging any other authority for them, fhews
that his conclufions were drawn from the pre-
mifes which he alledged, and which he fubmitted
to the examination of his readers. He muft,
therefore, have fuppofed that they would think
themfelves
366 Of the Authority of Tradition,
themfelves at liberty to judge for themfelves ;
and that, as he fubmitted his reafoning to their
examination, they would decide for or againft
him, according as his arguments fhould appear
to them conciufive or inconclufive.
When this apoftle does not reafon at all, but
merely declares that he had his information from
Chrift, we receive it on the credit of a man
whom we fuppofe to have been neither impofed
upon himfelf, nor to have had any intereft in im-
pofing upon others ; and likewife of his being a
perfon whofe authority in general was fupported
by his power of working miracles. Of this
kind is the aecount which he gives us of the
refurrection of the dead, and the change that
will pafs upon the living fubfequent to it -, and
alfo his account of the inftitution of the Lord's
fupper, &c.
Nor was this the cafe of Paul only, who was
peculiarly obnoxious to the Jews^ on account of
his zeal in, preaching the gofpel to the gentiles.
For Peter himfelf, who is called the apoftle of the
eircumcijion, and who was confidered as the very
chief of the apoftles, was not more refpected,
whenever he laid or did any thing that was
thought to be improper. This appeared very
clearly in the cafe of Cornelius, and in the alter-
cation that Paul had with him at Antioch.
On
and of tie Scriptures, 6?V. 367
On the former of thefe occafions, when the
conduct of Peter was arraigned', he vindicated
himfclf, not by afiferting that what he did was
by exprefs direction from heaven (though he
was led to what he did by exprefs revelations
made both to himfelf, and alfo to Cornelius) but
by a fimple narrative of facts, from which they
might themfelves judge, that what he had done
was not without fufficient authority. And even
when all the apoflles were met, to confider of
what was to be done with refpedt to the fuppofed
obligation of the gentile converts to obferve the
Jewifh ceremonies, they feem not to have had any
immediate infpiration. For they reafoned and de-
liberated upon the fubject ; which feems to imply
that there was for fome time a difference of
opinion among them, though they afterwards
concurred in giving the advice that they did,
and in which they concluded that they had the
concurrence of the Holy Spirit.
But even this decree, as it is now generally
called, which had the authority, as we -may fay,
of the whole college of apoftles, does not feem
to have been reliflied by all chriftians ; as we
may infer from the enmity which the Jewifli con-
verts in general bore to Paul, and from the
Nazarenes, or Jewifh chriftians, never making
life of his writings. For though they were not
written in a language which they underftood, it
would not have been more difficult to procure a
tranilation
368 Of the Authority of 'Tradition,
a tranflation of them, than of the gofpel of Mat-
thew, which was alfo probably written in Greek,
Indeed, what is univerfally acknowledged to
have been the ftaffe of the Jewifh chriftians
could not have been true, if they had had the fame
ideas that were afterwards entertained, of the
conftant infpiration of the apoftles and evange-
lifts. A great part of them rejected the account
of our Lord's miraculous conception, and though
they made ufe of the gofpel of Matthew in He-
brew, they omitted the two firft chapters, in
which it is afferted; not, as far as appears,
queftioning their being written by Matthew, but
not thinking the contents of them fufficiently well
founded ; and yet they did not, on account of this
difference of opinion, ceafe to communicate with
one another. Nor does Juftin Martyr, who mentions
their opinion long afterwards, pafs any cenfure
upon them on account of it. He only fays that
he cannot think as they did ; and what is more
remarkable, he does not mention the authority
of Matthew and Luke, as what was decifive
againft them. Thefe Jewifh chriftians would
certainly have treated the gofpel of Luke in the
fame manner as they did that of Matthew, if
they had been acquainted with it, and had
thought proper to make life it of at all.
When the Jewifh church was firft formed,
and indeed fo late as the publication of the
gofpel, many of the difciples would think them-
felves
and of the Scriptures, fcfr. 369
felves as good judges of the hiftory of Chrift, as
the evangelifts themfelves. They did not want
thofe books for their own ufe, and would judge
concerning the contents of them, as they would
concerning other books which implied an appeal
to living witneffes. That the books were gene-
rally received, and not immediately rejected by
thofe to whom they were addreffed, is a proof
that the hiftory which they contained is in the
main authentic, but by no means proves that
every minute circumftance in them is true. In-
deed, the evangelifts varying from one another
in many particulars (which may be feen in the
difiertations prefixed to my Harmony of the gof-
pels) proves that they wrote partly from their
recollection, which might be imperfect in things
of little confequence, and partly from the beft
information which they could collect from other
perfons.
Like other credible hiftorians, all the evange-
lifts agree in the main things, but they differ
exceedingly in the order of their narrative, and
with refpect to incidents of little confe-
quence ; and to contend for any thing more than
this is in effect to injure their credibility. If the
agreement among them had been as exact as
fome pretend, it would have been natural for
the enemies of chriftianity to have faid, that
they muft have been written by combination,
and therefore that the hiftory has not the con-
current teftimony of independent witnefTes ;
VOL. II. A a and
370 Of the Authority of Tradition?
and if the exactnefs contended for cannot be
proved, the authority of the whole mud be
given up.
Befides, what would have been the ufe of
appointing twelve apoftles, or witneffes of the
life and refurrection of Chrift, if their teftimony was
not naturally fufficient to eftablifh the credibility
of the facts ; and what would have fignified even
the original infpiration, unlefs all error in tran-
fcribing, and tranflating, &c. had been prevented,
by the fame miraculous interpolation, in all ages,
and in all nations afterwards. Having written
more largely on this fubject in my Inftitutes of
natural and revealed religion, and alfo in the
preface to my Harmony of the gofpels, to thofc
Works I beg leave to refer any readers with re-
fpect to this fubject. I would alfo refer them
to whatl have written under the fignature of Pauli-
nus in the Theological Repofitcry, in which I think I
have Ihewn, that the apoftle Paul often reafons in-
conclufively, and therefore that he wrote as any
other perfon, of his turn of mind and thinking,
and in his fituation, would have written, with-
out any particular infpiration. Facts, fuch as I
think I have there alledged, are ftubborn things,
and all hypothefesmuft be accommodated to them.
Not only the Nazarenes, but chriftians of
other denominations alfo, rejected feverai of the
books of our New Teftament, and without de-
nying the authenticity of them (for with this
they
and of the Scriptures, &c. 371
they are not, in general, charged) but becaufe
they did not approve of their contents. Thus
the Gnofticks in general made but little ufe of
the canonical books, and pleaded the authority
of tradition, and the Helcefaites, in the time of
the emperor Philip, are faid to have rejected all
the epiftles of Paul, though the authenticity of
them was never queftioned,
When the apoflles were dead, the authority of
their writings would naturally rife, and appeals
would be made to them when controverfies arofe
in the church. And this natural and univerfal
deference to the opinion of the apoftles produced,
I doubt not, at length, the opinion of their in-
fallibility. Their authority was alfo juftly op-
pofed to the many idle traditions that were
pretended to by fome of the early heretics,
and to the fpurious gofpels that were written
after the four had acquired credit. Till that time
there could be no inducement to write others, and
notwithilanding the reception that fome of the
forged gofpels met with in certain places, they
never operated to the difcredit of the four ge-
nuine ones (and indeed they were only written
as fupplemental to them) it appears that they
were eafilydiftinguilhed from the genuine gofpels,
and did not retain any credit long. And what
we are able to collect of them at this day is
enough to fatisfy us, that they were not rejected
without fufficient reafon.
A a 2 The
372. Of the Authority of Tradition,
The Jews, in forming their canon of facred
books, feem in general to have made it a rule
to comprize within their code all books written
by prophets -, and therefore though they had other
books, which they valued, and might think very
ufeful in the conduit of life, they never read them
in their rynagogues. Thefe books were after-
wards called apocbrypbaJ, confifling of pieces of
very different character, partly hiftorical, and
partly moral.
Thefe apocryphal books were not much ufed
by chriftians, till they were found to favour fome
fuperftitious opinions and practices, the rife of
which I have already traced, and efpecially the
worfhip of faints. For at the council of Laodi-
cea, in 364, the Hebrew canon was adopted.
But in the third council of Carthage, in 397,
the apochryphal books were admitted, as ca-
nonical and divine, and were therefore allowed
to be read in public, efpecially Ecclefiaflicus,
Wifdom, Tobit, Judith, and the two books of
Maccabees. The popes Innocent, Gelafius, and
Hormifdas confirmed the decrees of this council*.
- The church having afterwards adopted the
verfion of Jerom, which followed the Hebrew
canon, the apocryphal books began to lofe the
authority which they had acquired ; and it was
never fully reeftablifhed, till the council of
* Sueur, A. D. 397. Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 460.
Florence
and of tie Script ures t &c. 373
Florence in 1442 -, and it was then done princi-
pally to give credit to the doctrine of purgatory.
It was for a fimilar reafon that the council
of Trent made a decree to the fame purpofe *.
Alfo, though before the fecond council of Nice
the fcriptures alone were confidered as the
ftandard of faith, it was then decreed, for the
firft time, that they who defpifed traditions
fliould be excommunicated f.
Notwithstanding the apparently little founda-
tion which many of the popifh doctrines have in
the fcriptures, it was very late before any mea-
fures were taken to prevent the common people
from ufmg them. Indeed, in the dark ages,
there was no occafion for any fuch precaution,
few perfons, even among the great and the beft
educated, being able to read at all. The Scla-
vonians, who were converted to chriftianity at
the end of the ninth century, petitioned to have
the fervice in their own language, and it was
granted to them. Pope John the eighth, to
whom the requeft was made, thanked God that
the Sclavonian character had been invented, be-
caule God would be praifed in that language.
He ordered, however, that the gofpels fhould be
read in Latin, but that afterwards they fhould
be interpreted to the people, that they might
underfland them, as was done, he fays, in fome
churches J.
* Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 463. 465. f Ib. p. 488,
t Ib. p. 471.
A a 3 But
374 Of the Authority of Tradition,
But afterwards, Wratiflas king of Bohemia
applying to Gregory the feventh for leave to
Celebrate divine fervice in the fame Sclavonian
tongue, it was abfolutely refufed. For, faid
this pope, after confidering of ir, " it appeared
" that God chofe that the fcripture fhould
" be obfcure in fome places, left if it was
" clear to all the world, it Ihould be defpifed ;
" and alfo lead people into errors, being ill
<c underftood by their ignorance." This, fays
Fleury, was the beginning of fuch prohibi-
tions *.
The practice of the church of Rome at pre-
fent is very various. In Portugal, Spain, Italy,
and in general in all thofe countries in which the
inquifition is eftablilhed, the reading of the
fcriptures is forbidden. France was divided on
this fubject, the Janfenifts allowing ir, and the
Jefuits refufing it. For the council of Trent
having declared the vulgate verfion of the Bi-
ble to be authentic, the Jefuits maintained, that
this was meant to be a prohibition of any other
verfion f.
After the council of Trent this evil was
much increafed. For the bifhops affembled at
Bologna, by order of Julius the third, advi-
fed that the reading of the fcriptures fhould
be permitted as little as pofilble, becaufe the
* A. D. 1080. f Bafnage vol. 3. p. 468.
power
and of the Scriptures, &c. 375
power of the popes had always been the great-
eft when they were the leaft read; alledging that it
was the fcriptures which had raifed the dreadful
temped with which the church was almoft funk,
and that no perfon ought to be permitted to
know more of them than is contained in the
mafs. His fucceflbr profited by this advice,
and put the bible into the catalogue of prohibited
looks*.
The cardinal Cufa, in order to juftify the
condemnation of Wickliffe, in the council of
Conftance, faid that the fcriptures muft be ex-
plained according to the prefent doftrine of
the church ; and that when the inftitutions of
the church change, the explication of the fcrip-
ture fhould change alfo ; and the council of
Trent has decided that traditions ought to be
received with the fame refpeft as the fcrip-
tures, becaufe they have the fame authority f.
So much were the Roman catholics chagrin-
ed at the advantage which Luther, and the
other reformers, derived from the fcriptures,
that, on fome occafions, they ,fpoke of them
with fo much indignation and difrefpecl:, as
is inconfiftent with the belief of their authority,
and of chriftianity itfelf. Prieras, mailer of the
facred palace, writing againft Luther, advances
fhefe two proportions, viz. that the fcriptures
* Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 475- f Ib. p. 489.
A a 4 derive
376 Of the Authority of Tradition,
derive all their authority from the church and
the pope, and that indulgences, being eftablifhed
by the church and by the pope, have a greater
authority than the fcriptures. " How do we
" know," fay fome of thefe writers, cc that the
" books which bear the name of Mofes are his,
" fince we have not the originals, and if we had
" them, there is no perfon who knows the hand
" writing of Mofes ? Befides, how do we know
" that all that Mofes has faid is true? Were
<f the evangelifts witnefles of all that they write ?
" And if they were, might they not be defective
" in memory, or even impofe upon us ? Every
" man is capable of deceiving, and being
" deceived*."
All the popes, however, have not fhewn the
fame dread of the fcriptures. For Sixtus the fifth
caufed an Italian tranflation of the bible to be
publifhed, though the zealous catholics were
much offended at it f.
So much were the minds of all men oppreffed
with a reverence for antiquity, and the traditions
of the church, at the time of the reformation,
that the proteftants were not a little embarrafTed
by it in their controverfy with the catholics;
many of the errors and abufes of popery being
difcovered in the earlieft chriftian writers, after
* Bafnage, vol. 3. p. 455, &c.
f Hiftoire dcs Papes, vol. 5. p. 80.
the
and of the Scriptures, fcta 377
the apoftolical age. But at prefent all proteftants
feem to entertain a juft opinion of fuch authority,
and to think with Chiilingworth, that the bible
alone is the religion of proteftants. We may how-
ever, be very much embarraffed by entertaining
even this opinion in its greateft rigour, as I have
(hewn in the introduction to this appendix.
THfc
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART XII.
Hiftory of the MONASTIC LIFE.
THE INTRODUCTION.
BESIDES thofe minifters of the chriftian
church whofe titles we meet with in the
New Teftament, but whofe powers and prero-
gatives have been prodigioufly increafed from
that time to the prefent, we find that, excepting
the popes alone, no lefs confpicuous a figure was
made by other orders of men, of whom there is not
fo much as the leaft mention in the books of
fcripture, or the writings of the apoftolical age.
I mean the monks, and religious orders of a
fimilar conftitution, which have more or lefs of a
religious character.
The
the Monaftic Life. 379
The fet of opinions which laid the foundation
for the whole bufmefs of monkery, came origi-
nally from the Eaft, and had been adopted by
fome of the Gree-k philofophers, efpecially Plato,
viz. that the foul of man is a fpiritual fubftance,
and that its powers are clogged, and its virtues
impeded, by its connection with the body.
Hence they inferred that the greateft perfection
of mind is attained by the extenuation and mor-
tification of its corporeal incumbrance. This
notion operating with the indolent and melan-
choly turn of many perfons in the fouthern hot
climates of Afia, and efpecially of Egypt, led
them to affect an auftere folitary life, as tieftitute
as poffible of every thing that might pamper the
body, or that is adapted to gratify thofe appetites
and pallions which were fuppofed to have their
feat in the flefh. Hence arofe the notion of the
greater purity and excellency of celibacy, as well
as a fondnefs for a retired and unfocial life,
which has driven fo many perfons in all ages
from the fociety of their brethren, to live either
in abfolute folitude, or with perfons of the fame
gloomy turn \virh themfelves. It is the fame
principle that made eflenes among the Jews,
monks among chriftians, dervifes among Ma-
hometans, and fakirs among Hindoos.
How apt chriftians were to be flruck with
the example of the heathens in this refpect, we
fee in Jerom, who takes notice that paganifm
had many obfervances which, to the reproach
even
,380 T'be Hijtory of
even of chriftians, implied a great ftriftnefs of
manner and difcipline. " Juno," fays he, " has
fc her prieftefles, devoted to one hufband, Vefta
" her perpetual virgins, and other idols their
" priefts alfo, under vows of chaftity *".
The perfecution of chriftians by the heathen
emperors, and confequently the more imminent
hazard that attended living in cities, efpecially
with the incumbrance of families, was another
circumftance that contributed to drive many of
the primitive chriftians into defarts and unfre-
quented places. The irruptions of the northern
nations into the Roman empire had an effect of
the fame kind, making all cities lefs fafe and
comfortable. Moreover, when the great perfe-
cutions were over, and confequently the boafted
crown of martyrdom could not be obtained in a
regular way, many perfons inflicted upon
themfelves a kind of voluntary martyrdom, in
abandoning the world and all the enjoyments of
life. Gregory Nazianzen, celebrating the aufte-
rity of the monks of his country, fays that fome of
them, through an exceffive zeal, killed themfelves,
in order to be releafed from a wicked world f. It
is poflible, however, that they might not directly
kill themfelves, or intend to do it, but only died
in confequence of depriving themfelves of the
irfual comforts of life. It was thefe aufterities,
* Middleton's Letters, p. 238.
J- Jcrtin's Remarks, vol 3. p. 22.
joined
the Mono/tie Life. 381
joined with fuch imaginary revelations^ and inti-
mate communications with heaven, as have ufual-
ly accompanied them, that was the great recom-
mendation of Montanifm. The Montanifts,
Tertullian fays, had the fame rule of faith, but
more fading and lefs marrying, than others *.
Thefe notions, and thefe circumftances con-
curring, particular texts of fcripture were eafily
found that feemed to countenance aufterities in
general, and celibacy in particular ; as that faying
of our Saviour Matt. xix. 1 2. There arejome who
make themf elves Eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's
Jake. He that can receive it, let him receive it ;
and Paul's faying, i Cor. vii. 38. He that giveth
in marriage does welly but he that giveth not in
marriage doth better. Both thefe paffages, how-
ever, probably relate to the times of perfecution,
in which it is either abfolutely neceflary to
abandon the fatisfadion of family relations, and
domeftic fociety, or at leaft in which it is mod
convenient to be free from every atachment of
that kind ; that when men were perfecuted in
one city, they might, with more eafe, and lefs
diftrefs of mind, flee to another.
But on every other occafion marriage is fpoken
of in the moft honourable terms in the fcriptures,
and is, indeed, neceflary for the propagation
of the human fpecies. Befides, Paul makes it
* De Jejuniis, Cap. I. Opera, p. 544.
a mark
382 Vbe Hijlory of
a mark of that man of fin, or antichriftian power t
which was to arife in the latter times, that it was
to forbid to marry, as well as to make ufe of
meats, which God hath created to be received with
thankfgiving. 2 Tim. iv. 3. In fact, thefe
two circumftances greatly contribute to point
out the church of Rome, as the principal feat of
that antichriftian corruption, of which fo much
is faid, and againft which we are fo earneftly
cautioned, in the books of the New Teftament.
Eefides, mens paflions are far from being im-
proved by the long continuance of this mife-
rable and folitary ftate. Inftead of approach-
ing by this means, as they vainly pretended,
to the life of angels, they rather fink them-
felves to the condition of brutes, and fome of
the moft worthlefs or favage kinds. Alfo, living
without labour themfelves (as in time the monks
came: to do) and upon the labour of others,
and without adding to the number or flrength
of the community, they certainly defeat the
great purpofes of their creation, as focial beings ;
and are not only a dead weight upon the com-
munity, but, in many cafes, a real evil and nui- ,
fance, in thofe ftates in which they are efta-
blilhed.
SECTION
tie Mono flic Life. 383
SECTION
Of the Monaftic Life, till the Fall of the
Weflern Empire.
is always fomething uncertain and
JL fabulous in the antiquities of all focieties,
and it is fo in thofe of the monks. The monks
themfelves acknowledge the firft of their order
to have been one Paul, an Egyptian, who in
the feventh perfecution, or about the year 260,
retired into a private cave, where he is faid to
have lived many years, unfeen by any perfon,
till one Anthony found him juft before his
death, put him into his grave, and followed
his example.
This Anthony, finding many others difpofed
to adopt the fame mode of life, reduced them
into fome kind of order; and the regulations
which he made for the monks of Egypt were
foon introduced into Paleftine and Syria by his
difciple Hilarion, into Mefopotamia by Aones
and Eugenius; and into Armenia by Euftachius
bifliop of Sebaftia. From the Eaft this gloomy
inltitution pafTed into the Weft ; Bafil carrying
it into Greece, and Ambrofe into Italy. St.
Martin, the celebrated bifliop of Tours, firft
planted it in Gaul, and his funeral is faid to
have been attended by no lefs than two thoufand
monks
384 tte Hi/lory of
monks. But the weftern monks never attained
the feverity of the eaftern *.
The number of thefe monks in very early times
was fo great, as almoft to exceed belief. Fleury
fays, that in Egypt alone they were computed,
at the end of the fourth century, to exceed
leventy thoufand . With this increafing num-
ber many diforders were neceffarily introduced
among them. At the end of the fourth century
the monks were obferved to be very infolent
and licentious j and having power with the
people, they would fometimes even force cri-
minals from the hands of juftice, as they were
going to execution f' In the time of Auftin
many real or pretended monks went ftrolling
about, as hawkers and pedlars, felling bones and
relics of martyrs .
The increafe of monks was much favoured
by the laws of chriftian princes, and the en-
couragement of the popes, as well as by the
ftrong recommendation of the moft diftinguifhed
v/riters of thofe times. Juftinian made a law
that a fon fhould not be difmherited for. be-
coming a monk contrary to his father's will;
and Jovian appointed that whoever courted a
nun, and enticed her to marry, fhould be put
to death. But this law, being thought too
* Moiheim, vol. i. p. 307. Eighth Difcourfe, p. 8..
f Sueur, A. D. 399.
fevere,
the Monaftic Life. 385
fevere, was afterwards mitigated*. Syricius,
bilhop of Rome, ordered that monks and virgins
who married after their confecration to God
ihould be banifhed from their monafleries, and
confined in private cells j that by their continual
tears they might efface their crime, and become
worthy of communion 'before they died. The
fame pope ordered that bifliops and priefts who
were married, and had any commerce with their
wives, fhculd be degraded from their office .
The language in which the writers of thofe
times recommended a monkifh life was fome-
times Ihocking and blafphemous, efpecially that
of Jerom, who was the greateft advocate for
it in his time. Writing to Euftochium the nun x
he calls her his lady, becaufe fhe was the fpoufe
of Chrift; and he reminds her mother, that fhe
had the honour to be God's mother in
Many women were ambitious of diftinguifh-
ing themfelves by fome of the peculiarities of
the monk.ifli life in thefe early times, devo-
ting themfelves, as they imagined, to God, and
living in virginity, but at firft without form-
ing themfelves into regular communities. Jerom
prevailed upon many women in Rome to em*
brace this kind of life 3 but they continued in
their own houfes, from which they even made
* Jortin's Remarks, vol. 4. p. 27. 38. Sueur A. D. 385.
f Ad. Euftochium Ep. 22. Opera, vol. i. p. 140. 144.
VOL. II. B b vifits*
386 The Hijtory of
vifitsj and it appears by an epitaph which he
wrote for Manilla, that before her there was
no woman of condition in Rome who lived in
this manner ; the common people of thaD city
confidering it as difreputable, on account of
the novelty of the thing *. Thefe early nuns
were only diflinguifhed by wearing a veil, that
was given them by the bifhop of the place.
It was not till the year 567 that queen Radi-
gonda founded the firft monaftery for women
in France, which was confirmed by the council
of Tours f.
No perfect uniformity can be expected in
the cuftoms and modes of living among men,
and leaft of all men whofe imaginations were
fo eccentric as thofe of the monks. According-
ly we find almoft endlefs diftinctions among
them, fome choofing to live in one manner,
and fome in another. And in later times when
they formed themfelves into regular focieties,
and laid themfelves under an abfolute engage-
ment to live according to certain rules, we find
above a hundred kinds of them, who aflumed
different names, generally from their refpe<5t-
ive founders. But thefe divifions and fubdi-
vifions were the -offspring of late ages.
The moft early diftinclion among them was
only that of thofe who lived quite fingle and
* Sueur, A. D. 382. f Ib. 567.
independent,
the Monaftic Life. 387
independent, and thofe who lived in compa-
nies. The latter were called Ccsnolites in Greek,
in Latin Monks (though that term originally de-
noted an abfolutely folitary life) and fometimes
friars . from fratres, freres, brethren y on account
of their living together as brothers, in one family.
Thefe had a prefident called abbot, or father, and
the place where they lived was called a mo-
naftery,
On the other hand, thofe who lived fingle were
often called eremites or hermits, and commonly
frequented caves and defarts. And fome make
a farther diftinction of thefe into Anachorites,
whofe manner of life was (till more favage, li-
ving without tents or cloathing, and only upon
roots, or other fpontaneous productions of the
earth. In Egypt fome were called Sarabites.
Thefe led a wandering life, and maintained them-
felves chiefly by felling relics, and very often
by various kinds of fraud J,
In early times it was not uncommon for per-
fons to pafs from one of thefe modes of life
to the others and in later ages it was fometimes
found to be very advantageous to the revenues
of the fociety, for the monks to become her-
mits for a time, retiring from the monaftery
with the leave of the abbot, Thefe being much
revered by the people, often got rich by their
J Mofheim, vol. i. p. 309.
B b 2 alms,
388 The Hijtory of
alms, and then depofited their treafures in their
monafteries*.
Perfons who live in proteftant countries or
indeed in Roman catholic countries at prefent,
can form no idea of the high refp^ct and reve-
rence with which monks were tieated in early
times. They were univerfally confidcrcd as
beings of a higher rank and order than the reft
of mankind, and even fuperior to the priefts ;
and where-ever they went, or could be found, the
people crowded to them, loading them with
alms, and begging an intereft in their prayers,
In this light, hov/ever, they were regarded in
general. For fome perfons may be found who
thought fenfibly in every age, and conlequently
looked with contempt upon this fpurious kind of
religion, and affectation of extraordinary fanctity.
In the fourth century, when all chriftian coun-
tries fwarmed with monks, we find one who,
though he chofe that mode of life, was fenfible
of the fuperftitious notions that were very preva-
lent with refpect to it, and flrenuoufly remonflra-
ted againft them. ' This was Jovinian, who to-
wards the conclufion of that century taught, firft
at Rome, and afterwards at Milan, that all who,
lived according to the gofpel have an equal title
to the rewards of heaven 3 and confequently that
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 55.
they
the Monajlic Life.
they who patted their days in unfocial celibacy,
and fevere mortifications, were in no refpect
more acceptable in the fight of God than thofe
who lived virtuoufly in the flate of marriage.
But thefe fenfible opinions were condemned, firfl
by the church of Rome, and afterwards by Am-
brofe bilhop of Milan, in a council held in the
year 390. The emperor Honorius feconded the
proceedings of the council, and banifhed Jovi-
nian as an heretic. The famous Jerorri, alfo,
wrote in a very abufive manner againft the trea-
tife of Jovinian, in which he maintained the
above-mentioned opinions.
SECTION II.
$he Hijlory of the Monks after the Fall of the
Weftern Empire. , y
HAVING given the preceding account of
the origin and nature of the monkifh efta-
blifhments, I proceed, in launching out into the
dark ages, to point out the fteps by which thefe
monks attained that amazing power and influence
which they acquired in the later ages, and to
note other remarkable facts in their hiftory,
fliewing both the good and the evil that arofe
from their mftitution.
B b 3 The
390 fhe Hijlory of
The primitive monks, courting folitude, were
equally abftracted from the affairs of the world,
and thofe of the church j and yet, by degrees,
a very confiderable part of the bufmefs in both
departments came to be done by them. The
principal circumftance that favoured their ad-
vancement, and made their introduction into
public life in a manner neceffary, was the great
ignorance of the Jecular clergy. For by this
term the common clergy began to be diftin-
guifhed, on account of their living more after
the manner of the world j while the monks,
on account of their living according to an exact
rule, got the name of regulars, and religious.
The monks fpending a great part of their time
in contemplation, many of them were induced
to give fome attention to letters, and foon at-
tained a manifeft fuperiority over the clergy in
that refpeft -, and the chriftian church was never
without great occafion for learned men.
Several herefies, in particular, fpringing up
in the church, and fome learned monks very
ably oppofmg them, it was found convenient to
draw them from their folitude, and to fettle them
in the fuburbs of cities, and fometimes in the
cities themfelves, that they might be ufeful to
the people. In confequence of this, many
of them, applying to ftudy, got into holy
orders. This was much complained of for
fome time j but being found ufeful to the bifhops
themfelves, both in fpiritual and temporal affairs,
thofe
the Mono/lie Life. 391
thofe bifhops who were fond of a numerous
clergy, and wanted fit men to carry on their
fchemes, gave them confiderable offices; not
imagining that they were encouraging a fet of
men, who would afterwards fupplant them in
their dignities and revenues *.
Originally the monks, being fubject to the
bifhops, could do nothing without their confent.
They could not even choofe their own abbot.
But the election of an abbot being fometimes
appointed by their injlitutiom to be made by the
monks of the community, they firft obtained
from the bifhops the power of choofing their
abbot, according to the tenor of their conftitu-
tions. Afterwards they fometimes got from the
bifhops exemptions from epifcopal jurifdidtion.
But when the popes got the power of granting
fuch exemptions, they commonly gave, or fold,
to the monks as many of them as they pleafed,
fo that their power grew with that of the popes f.
In the feventh century pope Zacharias granted
to the monaftery of mount Cafiin an exemption
from all epifcopal jurifdiction, fo that it was fubje&
to the pope only. Similar exemptions had been
obtained in the preceding century, but they were
very rare. In time they came to be univerfal,
and were even extended to the chapters of re-
gular cathedrals. In return for thofe privileges,
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 35. f Ib< P- 6 5*
B b 4 the
ST$<? Hiftory of
the monks were diftinguifhed by a boundlefs
devotion to the fee of Rome. Thefe ahufes
were checked, but not effectually, by the coun-
cils of Conftance and Trent .
The firft introduction of monks into holy
orders, was by the permiflion which they ob-
tained to have priefts of their own body, for the
purpofe of officiating in their monafteries, to which
there could be no great objection ; it being for
the convenience of the fecular priefts themfelves,
as well as of the monaftery ; and efpecially as,
with refpect to qualification for the office, they
were fuperior to the priefts themfelves. The
firft privilege they obtained of this kind was
from Boniface the third ; but their ecclefiaftical
power was completed, and made equal to that
of the other clergy, by Boniface the fourth, in
606. They could then preach, baptize, hear
confeffions, abfolve, and do every thing that
any prieft could do. Upon this the monks
began to be, in a great meafure, independent of
the bifhops, refufmg to fubmit to their orders,
on the pretence that they were contrary to their
rules of difcipline, and always appealing to the
popes, who were fure to decide in their favour.
The monks, befides theology, ftudied likewife
the canon and civil laws, and alfo medicine;
itudies which they began through charity, but
Anecdotes, p. 298, 303.
which
(be Mono/tie Life. 393
which they continued for intereft. They were
therefore forbidden by Innocent the fecond, in
1131, to ftudy either civil law or medicine.
But in the beginning of the following century
they were allowed to be advocates for the re-
gulars. Thefe things, fays Fleury, brought
them too much into the world*.
The clergy were foon aware of the encroach-
ments of the monks both upon their fpiritual
power, and upon their revenues. But the tide
of popularity was fo ftrongly in their favour,
that all attempts to withftand it were in vain.
At the council of Chalcedon it was ordered that
the monks fhould be wholly under the jurif-
didftion of the bifhops, and meddle with no affairs,
civil or ecclefiaftical, without their permifllon.
But this, and all other regulations for the fame
purpofe, availed nothing, both the popes, and
the rich laity, favouring the monks. When
Gregory the feventh made a law to compel lay-
men to reftore whatever had been in the poflef-
fion of the church, fuch reftitutions were ge-
nerally made either to the cathedral churches,
where the clergy conformed to a regular mo-
naftic life, or to the monafteries, and feldom to
thofe parifli churches to which the eftates had
originally belonged f.
* Eighth Difcourfe, p. 17.
f Simon on Church Revenues, p. 67.
In
394 tte Htftory of
In later times the endowments of monafteries
were equal, if not fuperior, to thofe of the
churches 5 and the influence of the monks with
the popes and the temporal princes being gene-
rally fuperior to that of the clergy, they ufed,
in many places, to claim the tithes, and other
church dues. When churches depended upon
monafteries, they appointed monks to officiate
in them, and appropriated the tithes to the ufe
of the monaftery. Alfo bilhops were often
gained by the monks to fuffer them to put
vicars or curates into churches, which they
pretended to depend upon monafteries J ; and
in other refpects alfo, they encroached upon the
rights of the clergy.
The monks having taken advantage of the
ignorance of the iecular priefts, and having got
the government of many churches committed
to them, it was not eafy to turn them out, and
re-eftablifh the fecular clergy in their places ;
and on this account there happened the greateft
contefts between the canons and the monks, efpe-
cially in England j where the monks had deprived
the canons of their canonfhips, and even obliged
the fecular priefts to turn monks, if they would
enjoy their benefices. All the archbifhops of
Canterbury had been monks from the time of
that Auftin whom Gregory fent into England,
to the reign of Henry the firft. But, at length,
J Simon on Church Revenues, p, 67.
all
the Monajlic Life. 395
all the bifhops in England declared, that they
would have no monk for their primate j and by
degrees they began to take the government of
the church into their own hands J.
In the ninth century many monks were taken
from the mon after ies, and even placed at the
head of armies 3 and monks and abbots frequently
difcharged the functions of ambafladors, and
miniflers of ftate. For upon the very fame ac-
count that the clergy in general were better
qualified for thefe offices than laymen, viz. in
point of learning and addrefs, the regular clergy
had the advantage of the fecular.
o
The monks, and efpecially the mendicant
orders, aflumed fo much, and got fo much power
both fpiritual and temporal into their hands,
fome time before the reformation, that all the
bifhops, clergy, and univerfities in Europe were
engaged in a violent oppofition to them. And
it was in this quarrel that the famous Wickliffe
firft diftinguifhed himfelf, in 1360; and from
fhence he proceeded to attack the pontifical
power itlelf.
Before the Cxth century there was no dif-
tin&ion of orders among monks, but a monk
in one place was received as a monk in any other.
But afterwards they fubdivided themfelves into
J Simon on Church Revenues, p. 74.
focieties,
396 The Htfory of
focieties altogether diftincl: from one another 3
and fo far were they from confidering all monks
as friends and brothers, tliat they often enter-
tained the moil viobnt enmity againfl each
other ; efpecially thofe \vho formed themfelves
on the fame genera) plan, and afterwards divided
from them on tome trifling difference in cuftoms
or habits.
This diftinction of orders began with Benedict
of Nurfia, who in 529 inftituted a new order of
monks, which prefently made a mofl rapid pro-
grefs in the Weft; being particularly favoured
by the church of Rome, to the intereft of which
it was greatly devoted. In the ninth century
this order had Iwallowed up all the other de-
nominations of monks f.
Notwithftanding the extreme profligacy of
the manners of many of thefe monks, their num-
ber and reputation would hardly be credible,
but that the moft authentic hiftory bears tefti-
mony to it. What the number of them was in
Egypt, at a very early period, has been mentioned
already. Prefently afterwards, viz. in the fifth,
century, the monks are faid to have been fo
numerous, that large armies might have been
raifed out of them, without any fenfible diminu-
tion of their body. And yet this was not to be
compared to their numbers in later ages 3 and
f Mofheim, vol. i. p. 449.
almoft
the Monajlic Life.
almoft every century produced new fpecies of
them, and no age abounded rfp.ore v/ith them
than that which immediately preceded the
reformation J.
In the feventh century the heads of rich
families were fond of devoting their children to
this mode of life, and thofe who had lived pro-
fligate lives generally made this their lad refuge,
and then left their eftates to the monafteries. This
was deemed fufficient to cancel all forts of crimes,
and therefore the embracing of this way of life
was fomei::nnes termed zjecond baptijm .
In the eighth and ninth centuries, counts,
dukes, and even kings, abandoned their honours,
and fhut themfelves up in monafteries, under the
notion of devoting themfelves entirely to God.
Several examples of this fanatical extravagance
were exhibited in Italy, France, Germany, Spain,
and England. And others, repenting that they
had not done this in time, put on the monaftic
habit on the approach of death, and chofe to be
buried in it, that they might be confidered as of
the fraternity, and confequently have the benefit
of the prayers of that order.
This moft abject fuperftition continued to the
fifteenth century. For even then we find many
perfons made it an efiential part of their laft
J Moiheim, vol. 3. p. 446, &c.
wills
39$ tte Hijlory of
wills, that their bodies fhould be wrapped in
old Dominican or Francifcan habits, and be in-
terred among the monks of thofe orders *.
It is faid that in all the centuries of chriftiani-
ty together, there were not fo many foundations
of monafteries, both for men and women, or fo
rich and famous, as thofe of the feventh and
eighth centuries, efpecially in France f. And
when monafteries were fo much increafed, we are
not furprized to find complaints of the want of
good difcipiine among them. Accordingly, in
the ninth century, the morals of the monks were
fo bad, that feme reformation was abfolutely ne-
ceflary ; and this was attempted by Benedict, ab-
bot of Aniane, at the inftance of Lewis the Meek.
He firft reformed the monafteries of Aquitaine,
and then thofe of all France, reducing all the
monks, without exception, to the rule of the fa-
mous Benedict of Mount Caffin. This difcipiine
continued in force a certain time, but the effect
of it was extinft in lefs than a century. The fame
emperor alfo favoured the order of Canons, diftri-
buting them through all the provinces of his
empire. He alfo inftituted an order of Canonefes,
which Moiheim fays was the firft female convent
in the chriftian world J.
In the tenth century the monkifh difcipiine,
which had been greatly decayed, was again revi-
f Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 164. f Sueur, A. D. 720.
J Mofheim., vol. 2. p. 128, 130.
ved
the Monafllc Life. 399
ved in fome meafure by the authority of Odo
bifhop of Clugny, whofe rules were adopted by
all the weftern kingdoms in Chriftendom. Thus
we find fuccefiive periods of reformation in the
difcipline of mon after ies. But no fooner was the
new and more auflere kinds of monks eftablilhed,
and got rich, than they became as diflblute as
their predeceflbrs, which called for another revo-
lution in their affairs j and thefe fucceffive pe-
riods of rigour and of diffblutenefs continued quite
down to the reformation,
One of the firft great caufes of this relaxation
of difcipline in the monafteries, was the invafion
of the Normans, whofe ravages fell chiefly upon
the monafteries. For upon this, the monks be-
ing difperfed, and aflembling where and how
they could, the obfcrvance of their rules was im-
pofiible, and many irregularities were introduced.
Something of the fame kind was the confequence
of the great plague in Europe, in 1348, when
many of the monks died, and the remainder dif-
perfed ; and having lived for fome time without
any regard to their rules, they could not without
difficulty be brought to them again.
A more general caufe of the relaxation of dif-
cipline among all the orders of the monks, as
Bernard obferved, was their exemption from epif-
copal jurifdidtion *.
Fleury's Eighth Difcourfe, p. 37.
Another
400 ?be Hijtcry of
Another caufc of the relaxation of their difci-
pline, was the multiplication of prayers and fmg-
ing of pfalms; for they had added many to
thofe prefcribed by Benedict. This, fays Fleury,
left thein no time for labour, of which Benedidt
had ordered feven hours every day. This con-
tempt of bodily labour was introduced by the
northern nations, who were addicted to hunting
and war, but defpifcd agriculture and the arts*.
Mental prayer, he adds, has been much boafted
of by the monks for the lafl five hundred years.
It is, fays he, an idle and equivocal exercife, and
produced at length the error of the Beghards
and Begtiines, which was condemned at the
councils of Vienna f. The original monks, he
fays, were a very different kind of men, and their
difcipline much more proper to produce a real
mortification to the world, and to fupprefs inor-
dinate affections. Theirs was a life of contem-
plation and labour, by which they chiefly fup-
ported themfelves. The antient monks had no
hair cloths, or chains, and there was no mention
of difcipline or flagellation among them.
Bodily labour, this writer obferves, was like-
\vife excluded by the introduction of lay brothers
into monafteries, and this was another means of
the corruption of their manners, the monks being
the matters, and the lay brothers being confidered
as flaves, and an order of perfons much below
* Fleury's Eighth Difc. p. 13. f Ib. p. 44, 45. Ib. p. 6.
them.
the Monaftic Lift, 401
them, and fubfervient to them. John Gualbert
was the firft who inftituted lay brothers, in his mo-
naftery ofValombrofe, founded about 1040. To
thofe lay brothers were prefcribed a certain
number Q pater nofters, at each of their canonical
hours ; and that they might acquit themfelves of
this duty without any omiffion or miftake, they
carried grains of corn, or firings, whence came
the ufe of chaplets. The fame diftindion, he fays,
was afterwards carried into nunneries, though
there was no pretence for it f.
The monaftic orders being almoft all weal-
thy and diflblute in the thirteenth century, the
mendicant or begging friars^ who abfolutely dif-
claimed all property, were then eftablifhed by
Innocent the third, and patronized by fucceed-
ing pontiffs. Thefe increafed fo amazingly,
that they became a burthen both to the people
and to the church itfelf; and at length they
were the occafion of much greater diforders
than thofe which they were introduced to redrefs.
There is a remarkable refemblance, as Mid-
dleton obferves, between thefe mendicant friars,
and the mendicant priefts among the pagans.
The mendicant priefts among the heathens, he
fays, who ufed to travel from houfe to houfe
with facks on their backs, and from an opinion
of their fanftity raifed contributions of money,
t Fleury's eighth Difcourfe, p. 15.
VOL. II. C c &c.
402 The Htjlory of
&c. for the fupport of their fraternities^ were
the pictures of the begging friars, who are
always about the ftreets in the fame habits, and
on the fame errands, and never fail to carry
home with them a good fack full of provifions
for the ufe of their convent*.
Notwithftanding thefe diforders, it muft be
acknowledged that the mendicant friars were
inftituted with the very bed intention, and that
they had for a confiderable time a very good
effect. St. Francis, the founder of this order,
thought his inftitute, by which he forbad his
monks the ufe of gold, filver, or any kind of
property, the pure gofpelj and it was of ufe,
as Fleury obferves, in a very corrupt age, to
recall the idea of chanty and fimple chriftianity,
and to fupply the defe<5t of ordinary paftors;
the greater part of whom were then ignorant or
negligent, and many corrupt and fcandalous f.
The monks of the antient religious orders
fell into great contempt after the introduction
of the Mendicants, who rilled the chairs in
fchools and churches, and by their labours fup-
plied the negligence and incapacity of the priefts
and other paftors. But this contempt excited
* Middleton's Letters, p. 220.
t Eighth Difcourfe, p. 21.
the
the Mono/tic Life. 403
the emulation of the other orders, and made
them apply to matters of literature f.
Afterwards the mendicant friars, on the
pretence of charity, meddled with all affairs,
public and private. They undertook the ex-
ecution of wills, and they even accepted of de-
putations to negociate peace between cities and
princes. The popes frequently employed them,
as perfons intirely devoted to them, and who
travelled at a fmall expcnce ; and fometimes they
made ufe of them in raifing money. But what
diverted them the moft from their proper pro-
feffion was the bufmefs of the inguifition. By
undertaking to manage this court, they were
transformed into magiftrates, with guards and
treafures at their difpofal, and became terrible
to every bodyj.
During three centuries the two fraternities
of Mendicants, the Dominicans, and the Fran-
cifcans governed, with an almoft univerfal and
abfolute fway, both church and ftate, and main-
tained the prerogative of the Roman pontiff,
againft kings, bifliops, and heretics, with in-
credible ardor and fuccefs. They were in thofe
times what the Jefuits were afterwards, the life
and foul of the whole hierarchy. Among other
prerogatives, the popes empowered them to
preach, to hear confeffions, and to pronounce
f Eighth Difcourfe, p. 32. J Ib. p. 27.
C c a abfolutions,
404 We Hiftory of
abfolutions, without any licence from the bifhops,
and even without confulting them. The Fran-
cifcans had the chief management of the fale
of indulgences, and the Dominicans directed
the inquifition.
The amazing credit of religious orders in
general, and the reputation of their founders,
made many perfons ambitious of diftinguifhing
themfelves in the fame way ; and though the
council of Lateran, in 1215, forbad the in-
troduction of any more new religiwsy as they
were called, the decree, as Fleury fays, was
ill obferved. For more were eftablifhed in the
two centuries following, than in all the pre-
ceding f.
Befides the monks, and regulars, there is
another fort of religious perfons, who, accord-
ing to their inftitution, bear the name of St.
John of Jerufalem, from whom are defc ended
the knights of Malta j and fimilar to them were
the knights Templars, and the knights of the
Teutonic order. Thefe orders had their origin
in the time of the crufades, and their firft ob-
ject was to take care of the fick and wounded,
and afterwards to defend them. But they
diftinguifhed themfelves fo much in their mi-
litary capacity, that the order was foon filled
f Eighth Difcourfe, p. ze.
with
the Monajlic Life. 405
with men of a military turn, and at length they
were moft depended upon for any military
fervice. Thus, from their undertaking the de-
fence of their hofpital, they undertook the de-
fence of the Holy Land, and by degrees that
of other chriftian countries againft all Mahome-
tan powers. The knights of St. John were
eftabliihed in 1090, and being driven from the
Holy Land, they retired to Cyprus, then to
Rhodes, and they are now fettled at Malta.
The knights templars were eftabliflicd in
1118, taking their name from their firft houfe,
which flood near the temple in Jerufalem. This
order grew very -rich and powerful, but withal
fo exceedingly vicious, and it is faid atheiftical,
that, becoming obnoxious in France, Italy, and
Spain, the pope was compelled to abolifh the
order in 1312.
Other orders of knighthood, which had fome-
thing of religion in their inftitution, were formed
in feveral parts of Europe, whence arofe what
are called Commanderies> which were originally
the office of taking care of the revenues be-
longing to the military orders, in diftant places.
The members of fome of thefe orders may marry,
and yet enjoy, under the title of Commanders,
the church lands that are appropriated to their
order. Philip the fecond of Spain was, in this
fenfe, the greateft prelate in the church, next to
the pope j becaufe he was the great matter of the
C c 3 three
406 Vke Hijtory of
three military orders of Spain, and enjoyep a
good parr of the tithe of the church within his
territories. The king of Spain, F. Simon, lays,
may always be the richeft beneficiary in his king-
dom ; and by appropriating to his own ufe the
revenues of his 'commanderies alone, may have
enough to live like a king *.
It may not be improper to add, in this place,
that after the deftruction of Jerufalem, many of
the Latins remained ftill in Syria j and retreating
into the receffes of mount Libanus, lived in a
favage manner, and by degrees loft all fenfe both
of religion and humanity f.
The laft order of a religious kind, of which I
think it of any confequence to give an account,
is that of the Jefuifs y which was inftituted by
Ignatius Loyola, and confirmed by the pope,
with a view to heal the wounds which the
church of Rome had received by the reformation,
and to lupply the place of the monks, and efpe-
cially that of the mendicants, who were then funk
into contempt. The Jefuits held a middle rank
between the monks and the fecular clergy, and
approached pretty nearly to the regular canons.
They all took an oath, by which they bound them-
felves to go, without deliberation or delay, where-
ever the pope fliould think fit to fend them. The
On Church Revenues, p. 234.
f Molheim, vol. 3. p. i. 2.
fecrets
tbe Monaftic Life. 407
fecrets of this fociety were not known to all the
Jefuits, nor even to all thofe who were called
frofeffed members, and were diftinguilhed from
thofe who were called fcbolars y but, only to a
few of the oldeft of them, and thofe who were
approved by long experience. The court and
church of Rome derived more afiiftance from
this fingle order, than from all their other emif-
faries and minifters, by their application to learn-
ing, engaging in controverfy, and preaching in
diftant countries, but more efpecially by their
confummate (kill in civil tranfactions, and get-
ting to themfelves almoft the whole bufmefs of
confejjion to crowned heads, and perfons of emi-
nence in the ftate -, a bufmefs which had before
been engroffed by the Dominicans.
The moral maxims of this fociety were fo
dangerous, and fo obnoxious to the temporal
princes (added to the temptation of the wealth
of which they were pofTeffed) that being charged
with many intrigues and crimes of ftate, they
were banifhed, and had their effects confifcated,
firft in Portugal, then in Spain, and afterwards
in France ; and ^t length the pope was obliged
to abolifh the whole order,
I fhall conclude this article with fome par-
ticulars that lead us to think unfavourably, and
others that may incline us to think more favour-
ably of monks in general.
C c 4 The
4oS The Hijlcry of
The religious orders in general have been
the great fupport of the papal power, and of all
the fuperftitions of the church of Rome, in all
ages ; The worfhip of faints, and the fnperfti-
tious veneration for relics, were chiefly pro-
moted by their afliduity, in proclaiming their
virtues every where, and publifhing accounts of
miracles wrought by them, and of revelations in
their favour. They were aifo the great venders
of indulgences, the founders of the inqui-
fition, and the great inftrument of the papal per-
fecutions. The licentioufnefs of the monks was
become proverbial fo early as the fifth century,
and they are faid, in thofe times, to have excited
tumults and feditions in various places.
In fome periods the monks, having an unli-
mitted licence to buy and fell, exercifed their
permifilon with fo little fcruple, that it en-
couraged many great men to ufurp the eflates
of their neighbours j being fure to find purchafers
among the monks. F. Simon relates an inftance
in the abby of Mire in Switzerland, in which the
monk, who compiled the afts of the monaftery,
gives a lift of things which were acquired by
unjuft means, without the lead hint of any ob-
ligation to make reftitution *.
Nothing could exceed the infolence and arro-
gance of the Dominicans and Francifcans.
* On Church Revenues, p. 56.
They
th'e Monaftic Life. 409
They even declared publicly, that they had a
divine impulfe and commiUlon to iiluftrate and
maintain the religion of Jefus Chrift, that the
true method of falvation was revealed to them
alone ; and they boafted of their familiar connec-
tion with the fupreme being, the virgin Mary,
and the faints in glory. By thefe means they
gained fuch an afcendancy over the common
people, that thefe would truft no other but the
Mendicants with the care of their fouls *.
St. Francis imprinted upon himfelf five
wounds, fimilar to thofe of our Saviour, which
his followers aflerted were given him by Chrift
himfelf , and in this they were encouraged by
the mandates of the popes, and by feveral bulls
enjoining the belief of it. They even approved
and recommended an impious treatife entitled
The book of the conformities of St. Francis, com*
pofed in 1383 by a Francifcan of Pifa, in whick
this faint is put on a level with Chrift J.
The Carmelites impofed upon the credulous*
by aflerting that the virgin Mary appeared t6
the general of their order, and gave him a
folemn promife, that the fouls of all thofe who
left the world with the Carmelite cloke or fcapu-
lary upon their fhoulders, (hould be infallibly
preferved from eternal damnation 5 and this im-
pudent fiction found patrons and defenders
* Moftietm, vol. 3. p. 6r. J Ib. p. 169.
among
410 The Hi/lory of
among the pontiffs. Even the late pope Benedict
the fourteenth, who is generally efteemed the
moft candid and fenfible of all the popes, is an
advocate for this grofs impofition *.
It muft, however, be acknowledged, that
notwithftanding the great mifchief that has been
done to the chriftian world by the religious or-
ders, they have, both diredlly and indirectly,
been the occafion of fome good; and though
they were the chief fupport of the papal power,
they neverthelefs contributed fomething to the
diminution of it, and to the reformation.
Such places as monafteries originally were,
though they were abufed by many, muft have
been a very defirable retreat to many others, in
times of war and confufion. And the opportu-
nity of leifure and meditation, with a total ex-
clufion from the world mull have been of great
ufe to thpfe who had been too much immerfed
in the buftie and the vices of it. For notwithftand-
ing the irregularities with which monks in general
were perhaps juftly charged, there muft have
been, in all ages, great numbers who confcienti-
oufly conformed to the rules of them.
There is no period, perhaps, in which the flate
of chriftianity, and of Europe in general, wore a
more unfavourable afpefl than in the fourteenth
century, during the refidence of the popes at
Mofhehn, vol. 3. p. 61.
Avignon ;
the Monaftic Life. 411
Avignon ; and yet Petrarch, who lived in that
age, and who makes heavy and repeated com-
plaints of the vices of it, and efpecially of the
extreme profligacy of the court of Rome, appears
to have had a good opinion of the ftate of many
of the monafteries j and his own brother, who had
been rather diffblute in his youth, retired to one
of them in the very flower of his age 5 and be-
came truly exemplary for his piety, humanity,
and other virtues j which were efpecially con-
fpicuous during the great plague. Indeed the
general credit of the order in all ages cannot be
accounted for on any other fuppofition, than that,
as things then flood, they were, upon the whole,
really ufeful.
Another capital advantage which the chriftian
world always derived from the monks, and which
we enjoy to this day, is the ufe they, were of to
literature in general, both on account of the
monafteries being the principal repofitories of
books, and the monks the copiers of them, and
becaufe, almoft from their firft inflitution, the
monks had a greater fhare of knowledge than
the fecular clergy. In the feventh century the
little learning there was in Europe was, in a
manner, confined to the monafteries, many of
the monks being obliged by their rules to devote
certain hours every day to ftudy; when the
fchools which had been committed to the care
of the bifhops were gone to ruin .
Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 13.
A very
412 Vhc Hiftory of
A very refpectable religious fraternity was
founded in the fifteenth century, confirmed by the
council of Conftance, called the brethren and clerks
of common life. The fchools erected by this
fraternity acquired great reputation. From them
iflued Erafmus of Rotterdam, and other emi-
nent perfons *.
The caufe of literature has alfo been much
indebted to the Jefuits, and more lately to the
Benedictines j the members of both thefe orders
having produced many works of great erudition
and labour, and having employed the revenues of
their focieties to defray the expence of printing
them.
As a proof of the monadic orders having con-
tributed fomething to the reformation, it may be
fufficient to adduce the following facts. The
Dominicans and Francifcans foon quarrelled
about pre-eminence, and they, differed exceed-
ingly amongft themfelves j and thefe differences
among the mendicant orders, as well as the divifi-
on of the popedom, and the mutual excommuni-
cation of the popes and antipopes, gave feveral
mortal blows to the authority of the church of
Rome, and excited in the minds of men a moft
ardent defire of reformation f.
t Moflieim, vol, 3. p. 254. f Ib. p. 62:
The
the Monaftic Life. 413
The Fratricelli, or Fratres Minores, were
monks who, in the fame thirteenth century,
feparated themfelves from the community of
St. Francis, with a view to obferve his rule more
ftridly. They went about cloathed in loathfome
rags, declaiming in all places againft the corrup-
tions of the church of Rome, and the vices of the
popes and biihops. Thefe were perfecuted with
the utmoft virulence by the other Francifcans,
who were countenanced by the popes, and they
continued in this violent ilate of war with the
church of Rome till the reformation, multitudes
of them perifhing in the flames of the inquifition.
Thefe rebellious Francifcans, therefore, deferve
an eminent rank among thofe who prepared the
way for the reformation, exciting in the minds
of the people a juft averfion to the church of
Rome in its then very corrupt flate *.
The original difference of thefe monks with
the pope was perhaps the moft trifling and abfurd
that can well be imagined, viz. the property of
the things that were confumed by them, as bread
and other provifions j they maintaining that they
had not the property, but only the ufe of them.
This difpute was at firft confined to the monks
themfekes, but at length the popes interpofe^,
and John the twenty fecond declaring that obe-
dience is the principal virtue of monks, and pre-
Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 75.
fcrable
414 We Hiftory of
ferable to poverty, they aflerted the contrary,
maintaining that they ought not to obey their
fuperiors when they commanded any thing con-
trary to perfection. John condemning thefe re-
fractory monks, they declared him a heretic by
his own authority. They even went fo far as to
call him Antichrift, and to appeal from his confti-
tution to a future council. At length the revolt
went fo far, that the monks, fupported by the
emperor Lewis of Bavaria, pronounced fentence
of depofition againfl the pope, and fet up another
in his place *.
Since the fifteenth century, in the beginning
of which the difcipline of the monks was exceed-
ingly relaxed, various reformations have been
made, which Mr. Fleury fays, has raifed the cre-
dit of moft of the orders J. But notwithftand-
ing thefe reforms, and though nothing is now
objected to them with refpect to the obfervance
of their rules, they are found to be of fo little
ufe. in the prefent {late of fociety, that it feems to
be the determination of moft of the catholic
powers to abolifh them by degrees; as appears
by the regulations that have been made refpect-
ing the time of admiflion, making it fo late in
life, that very few will not be fo far engaged in
* Fleury's eighth Difcourfe, p. 30, Mofheim, vol. 3. p. 74.
J Eighth Difcourfe, p. 47.
other
the Monaftic Life. 415
other purfuits, as to have no inducement to be-
come monks or nuns ; and the authority of pa-
rents, who often found it convenient to difpofe
of their younger children in this way, is now
generally fet afide. In confequence of this, and
other caufes, which have been operating more
filently ever fince the reformation, the religious
houfes are in general but thinly inhabited.
Some of their revenues have already been di-
verted to other ufes, and fuch is the afpec~b of
things at prefent, and the wants of the feveral
potentates of Europe, that it is juftly to be ap-
prehended, that all the reft will loon lhare the
fame fate.
PART
THE
HISTORY
OF THE
CORRUPTIONS
O F
CHRISTIANITY.
PART XIII.
We Hiftory of CHURCH REVENUES.
THE INTRODUCTION.
IN the preceding parts of this work we have
taken a view of the changes which, in the
courfe of time, have taken place with refpect to
the rank and character of chriftian minifters j by
what fteps it came to pafs, that, from having no
authority whatever, befides what their greater
virtue or ability gave them, and efpecially from
having no dominion over the faith of their fel-
low chriftians, the authority of the bifhops, with
refpeft to articles of faith, as well as matters of
difcipline and worfhip, came to be abfolute and
defpoticj and how, from living inaftateofthe
moft
Church Revenues. 417
rnoft fubmiffive fubje&ion to all the temporal
powers of the world, and keeping as far as pof-
fible from interfering in all civil affairs, they
came to be temporal princes and fovereigns
themfelves, and to controul all the temporal
princes of Europe, even in the exercife of
their civil power. In this part I fhall exhibit
a fimilar view of the changes which have taken
place with refpe<5t to the revenues of the church ;
and fhall fhew by what fteps minifters of the
gofpel, from living on the alms of chriftian fo-
cieties, together with the poor that belonged to
them, came to have independent and even
princely incomes, and to engrofs to themfelves
a very confiderable part of the wealth and even
of the landed property of Europe.
SECTION I.
fbe Eijlory of Church Revenues, till the Fall
of the Weftern Empire.
IN the conftitution of the primitive church
the apoftles followed the cuftom of the Jew-
ifh fynagogues, the members of which contri-
buted every week what they could fpare, and
entrufted it with thofe who diftributed alms.
Like the Jews, alfo, the chriftians fent alms to
diftant places, and gave to thofe who came
from a diftance with proper recommendations.
VOL. II. Dd They
4i 8 <?be Hijlory of
They were fo liberal upon thefe occafions, that
Lucian fays, that to become rich in a fhort time,
a man had nothing to do but to pretend to be"
a chriftian. In thofe times both alms and fti-
pends were often called honoraries. Thus when
Paul bid Timothy honour widows that are wi-
dows indeed, he means rewarding them for
difchargjng particular offices, which in thofe
days widows held in churches. So alfo the
phrafe worthy of double honour fignifies worthy
of a double, or a larger reward.
The church had no other revenues befides
thefe voluntary alms till the time of Conftantine.
Indeed before that time the chriftian churches
were confidered as unlawful affemblies, and there-
fore could no more acquire property, than the
Jewifh fynagogues, or other communities not
authorized by the ftate ; though in the reign
of Marcus Aurelius, the fenate permitting any
perfon to give whatever he pleafed to commu-
nities already formed, the church began, in the
third century, by toleration or connivance, to
poflefs eftates. But under Conftantine chriftian
churches were confidered as refpeftable focie-
ties, and from that time they began to grow
rich. In 321 this emperor made an edicl:, ad-
drefied to the people of Rome, by which he
gave all perfons the liberty of leaving by will
to the churches, and efpecially that of Rome,
whatever they pleafed. He alfo ordained that
what had been taken from the churches in
the
Church Revenues. 419
the perfecution of Dioclefian fhould be reftored
to them, and that the eftates of the martyrs
who had no heirs Ihould be given to the
churches *.
By this means, in time, all churches had what
was called their patrimony, and that of Rome in
the fixth century had a very great one, not only
in Italy, but in other countries ; and to in-
fpire a greater refpeft for thefe patrimonies,
they were denominated by the faints that were
mod refpected in each particular church. Thus
the territories belonging to the church of Rome
were called the patrimony of St. Peter. But
theie patrimonies were, like other eftates, fub-
je6t to the laws of the countries in which they
were J.
Though the bifhops and priefts had originally
no property of their own, but lived upon the
ftock of the church, Cyprian complains that
fome of them, in his time, not content with a
fubfiftence in common, began to live in fepa-
rate houfes of their own, and to have each their
allowance paid in money, daily, monthly, or 1
for a longer time, and this was foon tolerated.
And whereas part of the church ftock had al-
ways been given to the poor, the clergy began
to encroach upon this part, and to appropriate
it almoft wholly to themfelves. That part alfo
* Anecdotes, p. 129. 131, J Ib. p. 231.
D d Q. which
42,0 Vhe Hiftory of
which ufed to be employed in the repairs of
churches, &c. was intercepted in the fame
manner.
All the civil affairs of chriftian focieties were
at firft managed by deacons, but the difpofal
of money, as well as of every thing elfe, was in
the power of the prefbyters, by whofe general di-
rections the deacons acted ; and the bifhops hav-
ing encroached upon the prefbyters in other
things, did not neglect to avail themfelves of
their authority with refpedt to the temporalities
of the church. And fo great was the confidence
which the primitive chriftians repofed in their
bifhops (and with reafon, no doubt, at firft) that
they alone were allowed to fuperintend the
diftribution of the common church ftock to the
inferior clergy, as well as to the poor, according
to the merits or occafions of each individual.
But, in confequence, probably, of fome abufe of
this difcretionary power, we find afterwards, that
not the bifhop alone, but the whole body of the
prefbyters made that diftribution. Still, how-
ever, it cannot but be fuppofed that, the bifhops
having fuperior influence, more would be in their
power in this refpedt, that in that of the prefby-
ters i and thefe, being fubject to the bifhops in
other things, would not choofe to difoblige them
in this.
We do find, however, that when churches
grew very rich, the bifhops often embezzled
the
Church Revenues. 421
the eftates belonging to them. This evil grew
to fo great a height, that at the council of Gan-
gres in Paphlagonia, held in 324, they were al-
lowed to give fome of the church ftock to their
relations, if they were poor, but were prohibited
felling the eftates belonging to their churches,
and were ordered to give an account of their
adminiftration of thele temporalities. And that
the goods which properly belonged to the bifhops
might not be confounded with thofe that be-
longed to the church, every bifhop, upon his
election, was ordered to give an account of his
poflefllons, that he might bequeath them, and
nothing elfe, by will. But ilill the bilhops
abufing the power that was left them, ftewards
were afterwards appointed to take care of the
temporalities of the church, and the bifhops were
confined to the cure of fouls. Thefe ftewards,
however, being at firft ohofen by the bifhops, the
fame abufes were refumed ; and therefore, at the
council of Chalcedon, in 451, the ftewards were
appointed to be chofen by the body of the clergy *.
This office of fteward became fo confiderable
in the church of Conftantinople, that the em-
perors themfelves took the nomination of them,
till Ifaac Cornnenus gave it to the patriarch. The
power of the fteward was not fo great in the
weftern churches, but abufes in them being very
flagrant, a cuftomwas at length adopted, or divid-
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 18.
D d 3 ing
The Hiftory of
ing the church revenues into four parts, of which
one was for the bifhop, another for the reft of
the clergy, the third for the poor, and the fourth
for repairs, or probably a kind of church flock, to
defray any contingent expences*.
This diftribution of the church ftock was the
caufe of great animofities and contentions be-
tween the bifhops and the inferior clergy, in
which the popes were often obliged to interpofe
with their advice and authority ; and Father Si-
mon afcribes to it moft of the diforders which
arofe in the weftern church ; the eaftern, where
that partition was never made, being free from
them. For while no divifion was made, the idea
of the property being in the whole fociety conti-
nued, and conftquently the clergy were confi-
dered as the fervants and beneficiaries of the fo-
ciety at large. But that partition made them
abfolute mafters of their refpective fhares, and
gave them independent property ; and riches and
independence have never been favourable to vir-
tue with the bulk' of mankind, or the bulk of
any order of men whatever.
But thofe corruptions of the clergy which
arofe from the riches of the church began to be
peculiarly confpicuous, when, after the time of
Conftantine, the church, came to be porTefied of
fixed and large revenues. Jerom fays, that the
f Simon on Church Revenues, p. 20. 21.
church
Church Revenues. 423
church had indeed become more rich and pow-
erful under the chriftian emperors, but lefs vir-
tuous; and Chryfoftom fays that the bifhops for-
fook their employments to fell their corn and
wine, and to look after their glebes and farms,
befides fpending much time in law fuits. Auf-
tin was very fenfible of this, and often refufed
inheritances left to his church, giving them to
the lawful heir, and he would never make
any purchafes for the ufe of his church*. Je-
rom fays that the priefls of his time fpared no
tricks or artifices to get the eflates of private
perfons ; and he mentions many low and fordid
offices, to which priefts and monks (looped, in
order to get the favour and the eftates of old
men and women, who had no children f .
The diforders of the clergy muft have been very
great in the time of Jerom, fince the emperors
were then obliged to make many laws to .reflrain
them. In 370 Valentinian made a law to put a
flop to the avarice of the clergy, forbidding
priefls and monks to receive any thing, either by
gift or will, from widows, virgins, or any wo-
men. Twenty years after he made another law,
to forbid deaconefies to give or bequeath their
effects to the clergy, or the monks, or to make
the churches their heirs ; but Theodofius revoked
that ediclj. We may form fome idea of the
* Simon on Church Revenues, p. 17. f Ib. p. 27. 28.
J Anecdotes, p. 133. &c.
D d 4 riches
424 Me Hiftory of
riches of the church of Rome towards the mid-
die of the third century, from this circumftance,
that in that time, according to Eufebius, it main-
tained one thoufand five hundred perfons, wi-
dows, orphans, and poor j and it had then forty-
fix priefts, befides the bifhop and other officers*.
SECTION II.
The Hiftory of Church Revenues after the Fall of
the Weftern Empire.
UPON the invafion of the Roman empire by
the Norman nations, both the ecclefiafti-
cal laws and revenues underwent a great altera-
tion, and upon the whole very favourable to the
church, as a political fyftem, though for fome
time, and in fome cafes, it was unfavourable to
the clergy. For thefe favage conquerors made
little diftindion between the goods of the church
and other property, but diftributed both as they
thought proper, even to laymen ; and children
often fucceeded to their fathers in church livings,
as well as in other eftates. Alfo many eftates
belonging to churches were transferred to mo-
nafteries.
* Hift. Lib, 6. Cap. 43. p. 312.
About
Church Revenues. 425
About this time, however, began the cuftom
.of granting eftates to ecclefiaftical perfons in the
fame manner, and upon the lame terms, as they
had been granted to laymen, viz. for the lives of
particular bifhops or abbots, as we find about
the year 500, under pope Symmachus, but after-
wards to the churches and monafteries in gene-
ral; the ecclefiaftics fwearing fealty and allegi-
ance for them, and rendering the fame fervices
that the lay lords rendered for their eftates.
Hence the term benefice came to be applied to
church livings. For that term was originally
applied to eftates granted to laymen upon con-
dition of military fervice.
In no part of the world were the clergy fo
great gainers by this fyftem as in Germany,
where whole principalines were given to church-
es and monafteries ; whereby bilriops btcame, in
all refpe&s, independent fovereign princes, as
they are at this day. This was chiefly the effect
of the liberaliry of the empeiors of -"he name of
Otho. Churchmen, both bifhops and abbots,
being at this time principally employed in all the
great affairs of ftate, it was no: difficult for them
to obtain whatever they defired of princes.
In thofe times of confufion, when property in
land, and every thing elfe, was very precarious,
many perfons chofe to make over the property
of their eftates to churches and monafteries, ob-
taining from them a leafe for leveral lives.
The
426 The Eiflory of
The property being in the church, it was held
more facred, efpecially after the entire fettlement
of the northern nations in the weftern part of
the Roman empire, and when the rage of con-
queft was over. In thefe circumftances a leafe
for a few lives, on an eafy rent, was of more
value to individuals than the abfolute property.
The pofTeffion of benefices was attended, how-
ever, with one incumbrance, from which the
church did not very foon free itfelf. According
to the antient feudal laws, when a tenant died,
the lord enjoyed the revenues till his fucceffor
was inverted, and had fworn fealty ; and it was
natural that this law fhould affect churchmen as
well as laymen. This, however, interfered with
the antient cuftom of the church. For during
the vacancy of a bifhoprick, the profits were
ufually managed by the clergy and archdeacons,
for the ufe of the future bifhop. But after the
general collation of benefices, the princes firft
demanded the revenues of thofe eftates which
they had granted to the church, and afterwards
of all church livings without diftinction ; and this
was called regale. This right of regale was not
fettled in France in the third race of their kings*,
and was probably firft eftablifhed upon the
agreement between pope Calixtus and the
emperor Henry f .
? Simon on Church Revenues, p. 94. f Ib. p. 98.
Lewis
Church Revenues. 427
Lewis the Young is the firft king of France
who mentions the right of regale, in the year 1161.
And we find in the hiftory of England, that this
right of regale, was eflabliihed in this kingdom
at the fame time that it was in France, and that
it occafioned many troubles heref.
By degrees, however, the eftates which had
been long in the poffeffion of the clergy began
to be confidered as ib much theirs, and the
temper of the times was fo favourable to the
claims of the church, that it was thought wrong
for laymen to meddle with any part of it; and
many princes were induced to relinquilh the right
of regale. The emperor Frederic the fecond re-
mitted this right to the church, as if it had been an
ufurpation; and feveral councils prohibited prin-
ces and other laymen from invading the goods
and revenues of churchmen after their death J.
Afterwards, however, when the popes ufurped
the nomination to ecclefiaftical benefices, they
thought proper to claim what had been the regale^
or the value of one year's income (for to that it
had been reduced, as a medium of what had been
due to the lord during a vacancy) and then this
perquifite was called annates. This claim is
faid to have been firft made by pope Urban the
fixth, and was paid both in England and through-
f Simon on Church Revenues, p. 98. % Ib. p. 100.
out
4 23 We Hi/lory of
out the weftern part of Chriftendom f. In this
country the annates were transferred to the
crov/n in the reign of Henry the eighth, and fo
they continue to this day, except that fmall
livings were releafed from this burthen in the
reign of queen Anne.
Or. account of the benefit accruing to the
popes from thefe annates, they encouraged re-
fignations and the changing of livings among the
clergy. For upon every event of this nature
this tax to themfelves became due. Originally
refignations were made ablblutely, into the hands
of thofe who had a right to difpofe of the bene-
fice, and when it appeared that there was no
lawful reafon for the refignation, it was not ad-
mitted. But afterwards refignations were made
in favor em, or upon condition that the benefice
fliould go to fome perfon in whofe favour it
was made, and with whom a contract had been
made for that purpofe. This cuftom is fo new,
that no mention is made of it in the canon law,
the Decretals, or the Sext. The new canonifts
called the contraclafimoniacal one, and therefore
there is a necefiity for the pope to grant a dif-
penfation for it, he being above all canon
and pofitive law. Nothing derogated more
from the right of ordinaries and patrons than
thefe refignations in favorem ; for by this means
they who pofTefled benefices difpofed of them
f Hift. of Popery, vol 4. p. 37.
as
Church Revenues. 429
as of their own inheritance. By this means
they even defcended in fain '.lies j-.
Another deduction from the value of livings
the clergy fufifered by the popes claiming the
tenth of their value, which was done about the
fame time that annates were demanded. This
they did upon the pretence that the high prieft
among the Jews had a tenth of the tithes which
were paid to the other priefls. Another pre-
tence for making this exaction arofe from the
Crufades. The contributions of thofe who did not
ferve in perlbn being cafual, the popes impofed a
tax upon all ecclefiaftical revenues, and the firft
of the kind was on the occafion of the lofs of
Jerufalem. Afterwards the popes pretended to a
right of difpofing of all ecclefiaftical goods, and
fometiines demanded a twentieth, and even a
tenth, of their revenues, for other purpofes be-
fides the Crufades. They alfo made them over
to the kings, who by this means fhared with the
popes in the plunder of the people J. This
tenth the popes obtained occafionally in England,
from the time of Edward the firft, when the de-
mand was firft made. In the twenty-fixth of
Henry the eighth, an act was made to annex thefe
tenths to the crown for ever : but they were given
to the poor clergy towards an augmentation of
their maintenance by queen Anne, and at the
f Simon on Church Revenues, p. 239,
% Fleury's fixth Difcourfe, p. 19.
fame
43 o The Hi/lory of
fame time all fmall livings were difcharged from
paying them.
The holy wars in the eleventh century were
the caufe of great accefTions of wealth to the
church. Moft of the knights made their wills
before their departure, and never failed to leave
a confiderable lhare of their poflefiions to the
church ; and they built churches and monafteries
with ample endowments at their return, by way
of thankfgiving for their prefcrvation : fo that
whether they returned or not, the church gene-
rally received Ibme permanent advantage from
the expedition.
One of the moft valuable acquifitions to the
revenues of the church, but from the nature of
it the moft impolitic in various refpefts, and the
moft burthenfome to the ftate, is that of tithes.
It is a great difcouragement to the improvement
of land, that a tenth part of the clear produce,
without any deduction for the advanced expence
of railing that produce, fhould go from the cul-
tivator of the land to any other perfon whatever.
It would be far better to lay an equivalent tax
upon all eftates, cultivated or not cultivated.
For then it would operate as a motive to in-
duftry -, whereas the prefent mode of taxation is
a difcouragement to it. Befides, this method of
paying the minifter is a continual fource of dif~
pute between the clergy and the parifhoners,
which is of a moft pernicious nature; making
the
Ckurcb Revenues. 431
the people confider as enemies thofe whom they
ought to refpect as their beft friends, and in
whom they ought to repofe the greateft confidence.
The original reafon for the payment of tithes
was the moft groundlefs imaginable, as it arofe
from confidering chriflian minifters as an order
of men who fucceeded to the rights of the priefts
under the Jewifh law. This idea was obferved
to prevail very much about the time of the utter
defolation of Judea under Adrian. But it was
a long time before there was any idea of claim-
ing thofe tithes as a right. Even the Jews ac-
knowledge that no tithes were paid by them-
felves after the deftruction of the temple. But
about the fifth century laws being made by the
emperor, by which the tenth part of the mines
and quarries were paid to themfelves, and the
lords of the foil; there arofe a cuftom, as fome
fay, of pay ing tithes to the church, which in time
became general j rill from the force of example,
the omiffion of it was deemed reproachful, and
the clergy began to claim them as due to them-
felves by the law of Mofes.
For fome centuries, however, it was ufual to
give tithes to the poor, and for other charitable
purpofes. Thus at a council of Macon, in 586,
it was ordered that a tenth part of the fruits of
the earth Ihould be brought into facred places,
to be employed for the relief of the poor, and
the
43 2 The Hiftory of
the redemption of captives f . By degrees, how-
ever, the clergy excluded the poor, and ap-
propriated the tithes to themfelves. And about
the year 600, tithes, from being eftablifhed as a
cuftom, became in fome inftances legal rights ;
becaufe many efbr.es were bequeathed with an
obligation to pay tithes to particular churches.
When thefe tithes were left to diftant churches,
the priefts of the parifh in which the eftate lay
ufed to complain -, and at length, in the reign of
king John, the pope made a law, ordering that
all tithes fliould be paid to. the parifh prieft,
and after fometime they were levied by law in
all parifhes without exception. At the reforma-
tion though thofe who took the lead in it were
fmcerely difpofed to abolifh tithes, they found
themfelves obliged to continue, and to fecure
them by aft of parliament, in order to conciliate
the minds of the popifh clergy. Thus this moft
intolerable evil continues to this day, whereas
in other proteftant countries, and efpecially in
Holland, the civil magiftrates have adopted a
wifer plan, by allowing their minifters a fixed
ftipend, paid out of the public funds.
The progrefs of fuperftition in the dark ages
fupplied many refources for the augmentation
of the wealth of the clergy. In thofe times the
world was made to believe that by virtue of a
number of mafTes, the recitation of which might
J Sucur.
be
Church Revenues. 433
be purchafed with money, and efpecially with
permanent endowments to churches and monaf-
teries, fouls might be redeemed out of purgatory;
and fcenes of vifions and apparitions, fometimes
of fouls in torment, and fometimes of fouls de-
livered from torment, were publilhed in all places.
Thefe had fo wonderful an effet, that in two or
three centuries church endowments increafed to
fuch a degree, that if the fcandals of the clergy
on the one hand, and the ftatutes of mortmain
on the other, had not reftrained the profufenefs
that mankind had been wrought up to on this
account, it is not eafy to imagine how far it
might have gone, perhaps to the entire fubjection
of the temporality, as Burnet fays, to the fpiritu-
ality f. And it was carefully inculcated by the
priefls, that rights acquired to the church be-
longed to God, and therefore could not be taken
away without facrilege.
It was the fate of this country to fufFer more
from papal ufurpations than almoft any other
part of Chriftendom. One tax to the church of
Rome was peculiar to this country, which was
Peter pence, or a tax of a penny a year for every
houfe in which there were twenty pennyworth of
goods. This was firft granted by Ina king of
the Weft Saxons, about the year 726, for the
eftablifliment and fupport of an Englifli college
f Exposition of the Articles, p. 280.
VOL. II. E e t
434 fb* Hijlory of
at Rome. It was afterwards extended by OfFa
over all Mercia and Eaft Anglia; and in the
days of Athelwolf, though the popes appropri-
ated the profits of this tax to themfelves, it was
extended over all England. It was alfo confirm-
ed by the laws of Canute, of Edward the Con-
feflbr, of William the conqueror, and of feveral
fucceeding princes, though it was long confider-
ed as a. free alms on the part of the nation, and
was often refufed to be paid, efpecially by Ed-
ward the third. However, it was not totally
abolifhed till the reign of Henry the eighth*.
So far did the popifh exactions in this coun-
try, on one account or other, go, that, in the
reign of Henry the third, the popes received
from England more than the king's revenue, or
one hundred and twenty thoufand pounds f. In
1366 the lord chancellor allured the parliament,
that the taxes paid to the pope were five times as
much as the king's revenue J ; and at length the
church is faid to have got poflefiion of one third
of all the landed property in England .
Notwithftanding the ample revenues of many
churches, numbers of the clergy contrived
to make large additions to them, by appropriat-
ing to themfelves the emoluments of feveral
* Mofheim, vol. 2. p. 278.
f Hift. of Popery, vol. 3. p. 60. J Ib. p. 570.
Ib. vol. 5. p. 266.
church
Church Revenues.
church livings; though they could not refide,
and do duty at them all, and nothing could be
more contrary to the natural reafon of things, or
the original conftitution of the chriftian church.
Indeed the maxim that where no duty is done,
no reward is due, was fo obvious, that this was
one of the laft abufes that crept into the
church. But it grew, under various pretences,
to a moft enormous height j though feveral at-
tempts were made, at different times, to leflen
the evil.
About the year 500, when what we now call
benefices came into ufe, it became cuftomary to or-
dain without any title, or defignation to a particu-
lar cure j and many perfons got themfelves ordain-
ed priefts for fecular purpofes. Alfo many pre-
lates wanted to increafe their authority by attach-
ing to themfelves a number of dependants, and
many of the people wanted fpiritual privileges,
in order to exempt them from the jurifdi6lion of
princes. Even bifhops (though this was done
with more caution) were ordained without any
diocefe, except in infidel countries, which they
never vifited j and thefe acted as fubftitutes for
thofe bifhops who were too lazy, or too much
employed in fecular affairs, to do duty them-
felves. This corruption had arifen to a moft
enormous height before the council of Trent.
The confequence of titular ordination was non-
refidence, and where curates were employed the
E e 2 principal
436 $be Hiftory of
principal could follow his other bufinefs. Ac-
cordingly the bifhops in France, and even the
parifh priefts, fubftituting fome poor priefts in
their room, parted much of their time at court.
And if a bifhop could hold one living without
refiding upon it, it was plain that he might hold
two or more, and get them fupplied in the fame
manner.
Titular ordinations, however, which firfr in-
troduced non-refidence, were not the only caufe of
pluralities, which are faid to have had their ori-
gin about the fixth century. Among benefices be-
ftowed upon the churches, fome, as prebends,
&c. had no cure ofjouh annexed to them. Thefe
were judged capable of being held by priefts
who had other livings with cure of fouls. Alfo
parilhes which were not able to maintain a mi-
nifter were allowed to be ferved by another mi-
nifter in the neighbourhood, but a difpenfation
from the pope was neceflary for this purpofe.
By this means, however, the greateft fcandal in
pluralities was practifed. This abufe gave very
great offence, but difpenfations of this kind were
fo neceflary to fupport the dignity of cardinals,
that they were made perpetual in the court of
Rome. The cardinal of Lorrain, who held fome
of the beft benefices in France, and fome in Scot-
land 100, was particularly vehement in his decla-
mation againft pluralities in general, at the coun-
cil of Trent, without imagining that his own
were liable to any objection.
The
Church Revenues* 437
The firft account of any flagrant abufe of plu-
ralities occurs in the year 936, when ManafTeh,
bifhop of Aries, obtained of his relation, Hugh
king of Italy, feveral other bifhopricks, fo that in
all he had four or five at the fame time. Baro-
hius fays, that this was a new and great evil,
which began to ftain the church of God, and by
which it has been wonderfully afflicted .
A perfon is faid to hold a church in commeh-
dam, when he is empowered to have the care and
the profits of it till the appointment of another
incumbent. This practice was of great antiqui-
ty, in order to prevent churches receiving any
detriment during a vacancy. But on this pre-
tence livings were afterwards granted for a cer-
tain time, which was made longer and longer, or
till an event which it was known could riot take
place, and at length for life. This was done
by the plenary power of the pope. In this man-
ner Clement the feventh brought pluralities to
perfection, by making his nephew, the cardinal
de Medicis, commendatory univerfal -, granting
him all the vacant benefices in the world, whe-
ther fecular or regular, dignities, parfonages, fim-
ple, or with cure of fouls, for fix months, and
appointing him ufufrudtuary from the firft day
of his pofieflion. In England, in which every
abufe and impofition in eccleTiaftical matters were
carried to their greateft extent, the richeft and
Sueur, A. D. 936.
Eej bcft
438 Me Hijtory of
beft benefices were engrofled by the pope, and
given in commendam to Italians, who never
vifited the country, but employed queftors to
collect their revenues.
Other methods of making pluralities, and dif-
pofing of church revenues, were contrived by
the court of Rome, fuch as proviftons and ex-
emptions, which are hardly worth defcribing,
and felling the reverfion of livings, called ex-
peffatives, as well as livings actually vacant.
The firft attempt that we meet with to check
thefe evils, of pluralities and non-refidence, was
made by Charlemaigne, who made feveral re-
gulations for that purpofe 5 but they were foon
neglected. Several popes alfo, as John the
twenty-fecond, and Clement the fifth, pretended
to reform the fame abufes, but without any real
effect j and by the evafion of them even illiterate
perfons, and children, who were never intended
to take orders, might enjoy benefices *.
The council of Trent pretended to remedy
the evil of pluralities, but they made it worfe
by admitting of penfions, as an equivalent for the
change of benefices and other purpofes. For
thefe came to be granted by the court of Rome
without any confideration, and even to children.
* Pennington on Pluralities, p. 58.
They
Church Revenues. 439
They were alfo more convenient, and made
church preferment a more eafy traffic in many
jefpects. For inftance, refignations were not
deemed valid, unlefs the perfon who refigned
lived twenty days afterwards , whereas a pen/ion
might be transferred at the point of death. Be-
fides it might be turned into ready money,
whereas a benefice could not without fimony *.
It is to be lamented that thefe abufes were
not corrected at the reformation of the church
of England. On the contrary, it is apprehended
that many of them are increafed fince that period>
fo as to exceed what is generally to be found of
that nature in fome Roman Catholic countries.
In confequence of this, though the funds for the
maintenance of the clergy are fufficiently ample,
the inequality in the diftribution of them is
fhameful, and they bear no proportion to the fer-
vices or merit of thofe who receive them. This is
an evil that calls loudly for redrefs, and ftrikes
many perfons who give no attention to articles
of faith, or of difcipline in other refpe&s. Pro-
bably, however, this evil will be tolerated, till
the whole fyftem be reformed, or deftroycd.
But without the ferious reformation of this and
other crying abufes, the utter deftruftion of the
prefent hierarchy mutt, in the natural courfc of
things, be expected.
* F. Paul on Ecclefiaftical Benefices, p. 224.
E C 4. THE
THE GENERAL CONCLUSION.
PART I. CONTAINING,
Confiderations addrejfed to Unbelievers, and efpe-
cially to Mr. GIBBON.
TO confider the fyftem (if it may be called
a Jyftem) of chriftianity a priori, one would
think it very little liable to corruption, or abufe.
The great outline of it is, that the univerfal
parent of mankind commiffioned Jefus Chrift,
to invite men to the practice of virtue, by the
afiurance of his mercy to the penitent, and of
his purpofe to raife to immortal life and happi-
nefs all the virtuous and the good, but to inflict
an adequate punifhment on the wicked. In
proof of this he wrought many miracles, and
after a public execution he rofe again from the
dead. He alfo directed that profelytes to his
religion fhould be admitted by baptifm, and that
his difciples fhould eat bread and drink wine
in commemoration of his death,
Here is nothing that any perfon could imagine
would lead to much fubtle fpeculation, at lead
fuch as could excite much animofity. The
doftrine itfelf is fo plain, that one would think
the learned and the unlearned were upon a level
with refpeft to it. And a perfon unacquainted
with
Concltifion. 441
with the ftate of things at the time of its pro-
mulgation would look in vain for any probable
fource of the monftrous corruptions and abufes
which crept into the fyftem afterwards. Our
Lord, however, and his apoftles, foretold that
there would be a great departure from the truth,
and that fomething would arife in the church
altogether unlike the doctrine which they taught,
and even fubverfive of it.
In reality, however, the caufes of the fucceed-
ing corruptions did then exift ; and accordingly,
without any thing more than their natural ope-
ration, all the abufes rofe to their full height;
and what is more wonderful (till, by the ope-
ration of natural caufes alfo, without any mira-
culous interposition of providence, we fee the
abufes gradually corrected, and chriftianity
recovering its primitive beauty and glory.
The caufes of the corruptions were almoft
wholly contained in the eftablifhed opinions of
the heathen world, and efpecially the philofo-
phical part of it; fo that when thofe heathens
embraced chriftianity they mixed their former
tenets and prejudices with it. Alfo, both Jews
and heathens were fo much fcandalized at the
idea of being the difciples of a man who had
been crucified as a common malefactor, that
chriftians in general were fufficiently difpofed to
adopt any opinion that would moft effectually
wipe away this reproach.
The
442 The General
The opinion of the mental faculties of man
belonging to a fubftance diftinct from his body
or brain, and of this invifible fpiritual part, or
foul, being capable of fubfifting before and after
its union to the body, which had taken the
deepefl root in all the fchools of philolbphy, was
wonderfully calculated to anfwer this purpofe.
For by this means chriftians were enabled to give
to the foul of Chrift what rank they pleafed in
the heavenly regions before his incarnation. On
this principle went the Gnoftics, deriving their
doctrine from the received oriental philofophy.
Afterwards the philofophizing chriftians went
upon another principle, perfonifying the wifdom,
or *y- of God the Father. But this was mere
Platonifm, and therefore cannot be faid to have
been unnatural in their circumftances, though
at length they came, in the natural progrefs of
things, to believe that Chrift was, in power and
glory, equal to God the Father himfelf.
From the fame opinion of a foul diftinct from
the body came the practice of praying, firft for
the dead, and then to them, with a long train of
other abfurd opinions, and fuperftitious practices.
The abufes of the pofttive inftitutions of chrifti-
anity, monftrous as they were, naturally arofe
from the opinion of the purifying and fanctifying
virtue of rites and ceremonies, which was the
very bafis of all the worftiip of the heathens ;
and they were alfo fimilar to the abufes of the
Jewifh
Conclufion. 443
Jewifh religion. We likewife fee the rudiments
of all the monki/h aufterities in the opinions and
practices of the heathens, who thought to purify
and exalt the foul by macerating and mortifying
the body.
As to the abufes in the government of the
church, they are as afily accounted for as
abufes in civil government; worldly minded
men being always ready to lay hold of every
opportunity of increafing their power ; and in the
dark ages too many circumftances concurred to
give the chriftian clergy peculiar advantages
over the laity in this refpect.
Upon the whole, I flatter myfelf that, to an
attentive reader of this work, it will appear,
that the corruption of chriftianity, in every
article of faith or practice, was the natural
confequence of the circumftances in which it
was promulgated j and alfo that its recovery
from thefe corruptions is the natural confequence
of different circumftances. LET UNBELIEVERS,
IF THEY CAN, ACCOUNT AS WELL FOR THE
FIRST RISE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTI-*
ANITY ITSELF. This is a problem, which,
hiftorians and philofophers (bound to believe
that no effect is produced without an adequate
caufe) will find to be of more difficult folu-
tion the more clofely it is attended to.
The
444 Vbe General
The circumftances that Mr. Gibbon enume-
rates as the immediate caufes of the fpread of
chriftianity were themfelves effeffs, and neceffa-
rily required fuch caufes as, I imagine, he would
be unwilling to allow. The revolution pro-
duced by chriftianiiy in the opinions and con-
duct of men, as he himfelf defcribes it, was tru-
ly aftonifhing j and this, he cannot deny, was
produced without the concurrence, nay not-
withftanding the oppofition, of all the civil pow-
ers of the world j and what is perhaps more,
it was oppofed by all the learning, genius, and
wit of the age too. For chriftianity was aflailed
as much by ridicule and reproach as it was by
open perfecution j and, be the fpread of it what
Mr. Gibbon pleafes, he cannot deny that it
kept uniformly gaining ground, taking in alt
descriptions of men without diftinction, before
it had any foreign aid j and what then remain-
ed of the old religions was not fufficient to
occafion any fenfible obftru&ion to the full efta-
blifhment of it. The Jewifh religion alone was
an exception; and this circumftance, together with
the rife of chriftianity among the Jews, are facts
that deferve Mr. Gibbon's particular attention.
Of all mankind, the Jews were the moft un-
likely to fet up any religion, fo different from
their own ; and as unlikely was it that other na-
tions, and efpecially the polite and learned among
them, Ihould receive a religion from Jews, and
thofe
Condufion. 445
.thofe fome of the moft ignorant of that defpifed
nation.
Let Mr. Gibbon recollect his own idea of
the Jews, which feems to be much the fame
with that of Voltaire, and think whether it be
at all probable, that they fliould have originally
invented a religion fo effentially different from
any other in the world, as that which is def-
cribed in the books of Mofes j that the whole
nation Ihould then have adopted without ob-
jection, what they were afterwards fo prone to
abandon for the rites of any of their neighbours ;
or that when, by fevere difcipline, they had
acquired the attachment to it which they are
afterwards known to have done, and which
continues to this day, it be probable they
would have invented, or have adopted another,
which they conceived to be fo different from, and
fubverfive of their own. If they had been fo
fertile of invention, it might have been expect-
ed that they would have flruck out fome other
fince the time of Chrift, a period of near two
thoufand years.
On this fubject Mr. Gibbon fays f, that " in
" contradiction to every known principle of the
" human mind, that fingular people feem to
" have yielded a ftronger and more ready afient
" to the traditions of their remote anceftors, than
f Hiftory, vol. I. p 539.
"to
446 The General
" to the evidence of their own fenfes." A fin-
gular people, indeed, if this was the cafe; for then
they muft not have been men, but beings in the
fhape of men only, though internally conftituted
in fome very different manner. But what facts in
hiftory may not be reprefented as probable or
improbable, on fuch loofe fuppofitions as thefe ?
Such liberties as thefe 1 fhall neither take, nor
grant. Jews are men, and men are beings, whofe
affeclions and actions are fubject to as ftrict rules
as thofe of the animate or inanimate parts of na-
ture. Their conduct, therefore, muft be accounted
for on fuch principles as always have influenced
the conduct of men, and fuch as we obferve Mill
to influence men.
I wiih Mr. Gibbon would confider whether he
does not, in the paflage above quoted, ufe the
word tradition in an improper manner. By tra-
dition we generally mean fomething for which we
have not the evidence of hiftories written at the
time of the events. We never talk of the tradi-
tion of the wars of Julius Casfar, or of his death
in the fenate houfe, nor even of the tradition of
the conquefts of Alexander the Great ; becaufe
there were hiftories of thofe events written at the
time, or fo near to the time, as to be fully within
the memory of thofe who were witnefies of them.
Now Mofes, and the other writers of the Old
Teftament, were as much prefent at the time of
the tranfactions they relate, as the hiftorians of
Julius
Conchifion. 447
Julius Csefar or Alexander. An incautious rea-
der (and there are too many fuch) would be apt
to imagine from Mr. Gibbon's manner of expref-
fing himfelf, that the Jews did not even pre-
tend to have written hiftoriss of the fame age with
the origin of their religion, but that it was in the
fame predicament with what he calls " the elegant
" mythology of Greece and Rome j" whereas, the
fact is, that every tittle of it was committed to
writing at the time. It is generally in fuch an z#-
direEt manner as this, and not by a fair and candid
reprelentation of facts, that unbelievers endeavour
to difcredit the fyftem of revelation.
Let Mr. Gibbon, as an hiftorian, compare the
rife and progrefs of Mahometanifm, with that of
Judaifm, or of chriftianity, and attend to the dif-
ference. Befides the influence of thefword, which
chriftianity certainly had not, Mahometanifm flood
on the bafis of the Jewifh and chriftian revelations.
If thefe had not been firmly believed in the time
of Mahomet, what credit would his religion have
gained ? In thefe circumftances he mud have
invented fome other fyftem, which would have
required vifible miracles of its own, which he
might have found fome difficulty in pafTmg upon
his followers ; though they were in circumftances
far more eafy to be impofed upon than the Jews
or the heathens, in the time of our Saviour. This
was an age of light, and of fufpicion ; the other,
if any, of darknefs and credulity. That chrifti-
anity grew up infilence and obfcurity, as Mr. Gib-.
bon
448 The General
bon fays *, is the very reverfe of the truth. He
could not himfelf imagine circumftances in which
the principal fa6b on which chriftianity is found-
ed fhould be fubje<5t to a more rigid fcrutiny.
Tbefe things, as Paul faid to king Agrippa, were
not done in a earner. Acts xxvi. 26.
It appears to me, that, admitting all the
miraculous events which the evangelical hiftory
aflerts, it was not probable that chriftianity
Ihould have been received with lefs difficulty
than it was ; but without that afiiftance, abfolute-
ly impofiible for it to have been received at all.
Mr. Gibbon reprefents thedifcredit into which
the old religions were fallen, as having made
way for the new one. " So urgent," fays he f,
" on the vulgar is the neceffity of believing,
" that the fall of any fyftem of mythology will
" mod probably be fucceeded by the introduc-
" tion of fome other mode of fuperftition."
But are not the vulgar, men, as well as the learned,
their underftandings being naturally as good and
as various, and certainly fubjecl to the fame laws ;
and neceffity of believing, or pronenefs to belief
is not greater in the one than ' in the other j
but the exprefiion is loofe and inaccurate, and
calculated to impofe on fuperficial readers. Be-
fides, if any fet of men had this property of
f Vol. \, p. 535. t Ib. p. 602.
prone-
Condufion. 449
pronenejs to believe, they muft, to be all of a
piece, have a proportionable unwillingnefs to
quit their belief, at leaft without very fuffici-
ent evidence ; and yet thofe vulgar of all na-
tions, are fuppofed by Mr. Gibbon to have aban-
doned the belief of their own mythology fome
time before chriftianity came, to fupply the va-
cancy. Such vulgar as thofe I fhould think
intitled to the more refpectable appellation of
free thinkers, which with many is fynonymous
to philofophers. And, in fact, it was not with
the vulgar, but with the philofophers, that the
religions of Greece and Rome were fallen into
difcredit. We ought) therefore, to judge of
their cafe by that of the philofophical part of
the world at prefent.
With many of them chriftianity is now rejected ;
but do they, on that account, feem difpofed to
adopt any other mode of religion, or any other
fyftem of mythology in its place? And would
not fuch men as Mr. Hume or Helvetius
among the dead, and Mr. Gibbon himfelf among
the living, examine with fcrupulous exactnefs
the pretenfions of any fyftem of divine revela-
tion, efpecially before he would regulate his
life by it, and go to the ftake for it. And
yet philofophers of antiquity, men of as good
underftanding as Mr. Gibbon, and who, no
doubt, loved life, and the pleafures and ad-
vantages of it, as much as he does, embraced
chriftianity, and died for it.
VOL, II. F f But
450 Vbe General
But befides the urgency of this neceflity of
believing, another caufe of the rapid fpread of
chriftianity, was that it held out to mankind
fomething worth believing. <c When the pro-
" mife of eternal happinefs, : ' he faysf, "was
" propofed to mankind, on condition of adopt-
" ing the faith, and obferving the precepts
<f of the gofpel, it is no wonder that fo ad-
" vantageous an offer fhould be accepted by
" great numbers of every religion, of every
" rank, and of every province in the Roman
" empire."
Now it is certainly no difcredit to chrifti-
anity, that the views it exhibits of a future
flate appeared more rational, and more inviting,
than the accounts of Tartarus and the Elyfian
Jhades. But befides appearing more inviting,
they muft alfo have appeared more credible,
from the general external evidence of the truth
of chriftianity. And here alfo Mr. Gibbon
feems to have been inattentive to the princi-
ples of human nature.
In general, the more extraordinary any event
appears to be, the more evidence we require
of it. It is this confideration that makes more
definite evidence neceflary for a miracle, than
for an ordinary fact ; though it is acknowledged,
that the dejirablenefs of any particular event,
f Hiftory, vol. i. p. 561.
by
Conclufion. 45 1
by interefting our wijhes, will tend to make
us admit it on fomcwhat lefs evidence. The
great advantages, therefore, propofed to men
from any fcheme, efpecially one in which they
were to run fome rifque, and in which they were
to make great facrifices, would not difpofe them
to receive it without evidence. // is too good
news to be true, is a remark perpetually made
by the very vulgar of whom Mr. Gibbon is
fpeaking. When the difciples of our Lord
law him for the firft time after his refurrection,
it is faid (Luke xxiv. 41.) that they believed
not through joy, and when, before this, they
were told by three or four women of character,
and for whom they had the higheft refpect,
that they had themfelves feen him alive, and
had a meflage from him to them, Their words
Jeemed to them as idle tales, and they believed
them not. Ib. ver. n. This was perfectly na-
tural ; and fuch circumftances as thefe are ftrong
internal evidence of the hiftorians defcribing
real facts, and real feelings of the human heart
correfponding to thofe facts.
Befides, how can any man, to ufe Mr. Gib-
bon's own language, adopt the faith of the
gofpel, whatever promifes might be made to
him for fo doing, unlefs its tenets appeared
to him to be reafonable? What would Mr.
Gibbon take to believe the doctrine of the Tri-
nity, or what would he facrifice in this life
for the moft magnificent promife in a future
F f 2 one,
452 *he General
one, made by a perfon whofe ability to make
good that promife he at all fufpecled. Plato's
doctrine of the immortality of the foul was fuf-
ficiendy flattering j but whom was it ever known
to influence, like the chriftian doctrine of a
rejurreftion ? The plain reafon was, that the
latter was propofed with fufficient evidence,
whereas the former was altogether deftitute
of it.
It is amufing enough to obferve how very
differently Mr. Gibbon reprefents the ftate of
the heathen world with refpect to chriftianity,
when he would infmuate an apology for the per-
fecution of the chriftians. " It might be
Cf expected," he fays*, " that they would unite
<f with indignation againft any feet or people,
<c which would feparate itfelf from the ccm-
" munion of mankind, and, claiming the ex-
" clufive privilege of divine knowledge, fhould
<f difclaim every form of worlhip except its
<e own, as impious and idolatrous."
Mr. Gibbon, I fuppofe, never afked himfelf
whether it was natural for the fame kind of
people to be fo very differently affected to-
wards the fame thing. But, unfortunately, his
purpofe required that to account for the ready
reception of chriftianity upon infufficient evi-
dence, fome of thofe heathens muft be furnilhed
with an urgent necejjity of believing any new re-
* Hiftory, vol. I. p. 62?.
ligion
Conclufion. 453
ligion that was propofed to them, efpecially
one that promifed fuch great and glorious things
as chriftianity did ; while, on the other hand,
to account alfo for the very ill reception that
the preachers of chriftianity met with (which
he cannot deny) others of them muft be fur-
niflied with a difpofition to hate and deteft thofe
who pretended to fo much.
I do not know any thing that can help Mr.
Gibbon in this cafe better than the known prin-
ciples of his favourite mythology. As the prefent
race of mankind are derived from the flones
which Deucalion and Pyrrha threw over their
heads (when perhaps they were in too much
hafte to repeople the vacant world) they might
not be fufficiently attentive to the nature of thofe
materials of the future race of mortals, but take
ftones of different degrees of hardnefs. In con-
fequence of this, fonie of them may have been
of a fofter difpofition, and more eafy of belief
than others. Being, therefore, fo differently con-
ftituted, the defcendants of fome of them might
be inftindtive believers, and others inftinftive
perfecutors of thofe believers. They would
then be, of courfe, as hoftile to each other as
thofe men who fprung out of the earth, from
the lowing of the ferpents teeth, in the elegant
mythology of Greece, as the ftory is moft ele-
gantly related by Ovid *.
* I have heard of a young gentleman of a fceptical
.and jocular turn,^taking off his hat to a ftatue of Jupiter
Ffj Befides
454 Vb* ' General
Befides thefe considerations, Mr. Gibbon men-
tions the zeal of the primitive chriftians, and
the ftriftnefs of their difcipline, as caufes of the
fpread of the new religion. But he fhould have
told us whence came that zeal, and that ftri6t-
nefs of difcipline. If no lufficient caufe of it
had appeared, their zeal would have expofed
them to contempt ; and their difcipline would
have difcouraged rather than have invited pro-
felytes.
Any perfon may hold himfelf excufed from
inveftigating the caufes that gave birth to the
opinions of individuals of mankind, on account
of the difficulty aud uncertainty of fuch an in-
veftigation. The fame may, in fome degree,
be faid of particular clafles of men. But chrifti-
anity recommended itfelf to every defcription
of men then exifting, and influenced them not
for a fhort time only, which might be account-
ed for from temporary and local circumftances,
but permanently ; fo as to leave no reafonable
doubt, but that it would have gone on to efta-
blifh itfelf in the world, and to extirpate idol-
atry, if the civil powers had continued to op-
(who makes the moft refpeftable figure in this fyftem of
mythology) and faying, " If ever you come into power
" again, pleafe to remember that I {hewed you refpeft
" when nobody elfe did." Mr. Gibbon, I hope, has
no ferious views in complimenting the religion of Greece
and Rome, meaning to pay his court to the powers that
may be, as others do to thofe that are.
pofe
Conclufion. 455
pofe its progrefs three thoufand, as they did
three hundred years ; and what is more, not-
withftanding the grofs corruptions and abufes
which foon crept into it.
A fact of this kind requires to be accounted
for from the moft obvious principles of hu-
man nature, principles common to all men,
and all clafles of men; and therefore none
but the plaineft and moft cogent caufes of affent,
deferve to be attended to. This aflent to the
truth of chriftianity could only be produced by
fuch evidence as always will, and always ought
to determine the aflent of the human mind.
It is acknowledged that to be a chriftian a
man muft believe fome fa6ts that are of an ex-
traordinary nature, fuch as we have no opportu-
nity of obferving at prefent. But thofe facts
were fo circumftanced, that perfons who cannot
be denied to have had the beft opportunity of
examining the evidence of them, and who, if
they had not been true, had no motive to pay any
regard to them, could not refufe their aflent to
them; that is, it was fuch evidence as we our-
lelves muft have been determined by, if we had
been in their place ; and therefore, if not fully
equivalent to the evidence of our own fenfes at
prefent, is, at lead, all the evidence that, at this
diftance of time, we can have in the cafe. It
goes upon the principle that human nature was
F f 4 the
456 tfhe General
the fame thing then that it is now; and certainly
in all other refpects it appears to be fo.
That miracles are things in themfelves po/iblc,
muft be allowed, fo long as it is evident that
there is in nature a power equal to the working
of them. And certainly the power, principle, or
being, by whatever name it be denominated,
which produced the univerfe, and eftablifhed the
laws of it, is fully equal to any occafional depar-
tures from them. The obje& and ufe of thofe mi-
racles on which the chnflian religion is founded,
is alfo maintained to be confonant to the object
and ufe of the general fyftem of nature, viz. the
production of happinefs. We have nothing,
therefore, to do, but to examine, by the known
rules of eftimating the value of teftimony, whether
there be reafon to think that fuch miracles have
been wrought, or whether the evidence of chrift-
ianity, or of the chriftian hiliory, does not ftand
upon as good ground- as that of any other hiftory
whatever.
Now, though I am far from holding myfelf
out as the champion of chriftianity, againft all
the world, I own I fhall have no objection to
difcufs this fubject with Mr. Gibbon, as an hifio-
rian, and a philofopher. We are only two indi-
viduals, and no other perfons can be bound by
the refult of our difcufiion. But thofe who have
given lefs attention to the fubject than we have
done 3 may be inftructed by it, and be alnfted in
forming
Conclufion. 457
forming their own judgment, according to the
evidence that (hall be laid before them. At lead,
it may be a means of drawing fome degree of
attention to a fubject, which cannot be denied to
be, in the higheft degree, interefting.
Indeed, if any man can fay that it is not an
interefting queftion, whether his exiftence termi-
nate at death, or is to be refumed at a future pe-
riod, and then to continue for ever $ he muft be
of a low and abject mind. To a rational being,
capable of contemplating the wonders of nature,
and of inveftigating the laws of it, and to a be-
ing of a focial difpofition, his exiftence, and the
continuance of his rational faculties, muft be an
objedt of unfpeakable value to him ; and confe-
quently he muft ardently wifh that chriftianity
(which alone brings life and immortality to light}
may be true. For to a philofopher, who forms
his judgment by what he actually obferves, the
doctrine of a foul, capable of fubfifting and ait-
ing when the body is in the grave, will never
give any fatisfaction. To every perfon, there-
fore, who is capable of enjoying his existence,
the chriftian doctrine of a refurre5fion y opens a
glorious and tranfporting profpect.
Voluntarily to fhut one's eyes on fuch a prof-
pect, and really to wifn to fee no more of the
wonders of nature, and of the progrefs of being,
and efpecially of the human race, towards per-
fection, but to hide one's head in everUfcing ob-
fcurity,
45 8 The General
fcurity, niuft be to have a difpofition as grove-
ling, bale, and abject, as that of the loweft of the
brute creation. A man of the leaft elevation
of mind, and of a cultivated and improved under-
ftanding muft, furely, lament fuch a cataftrophe.
The fear might be, that every truly fenfible
and virtuous man would be too ftrongly biafTed
in favour of chriftianity and (if Mr. Gibbon's
obfervation above-mentioned be true) give his
aflent long before he had waited to weigh the
evidence as he ought to do. I do not, however,
wifh Mr. Gibbon to fhew this difpofition. On
the contrary, I wifh to examine every thing with
the greateft rigour, and I will not contend with
him for trifles. With refpect to fome points
which he has laboured, though I am fatisfied
his reprefentations are partial and unfair, I have
no objection to concede almoft all that he con-
tends for; becaufe, though he has taken very li-
berally, he has left me enough.
When the circumftances of the Jews and hea-
then?, at the time of the promulgation of chrifti-
anity, (hall be fufficiently confidered (but to
which it is evident Mr. Gibbon has given but a
flight attention) the reception that this new religi-
on met with among them, and the total fubverfion
of the feveral fyftems of pagan ifm by it, will be
found to be a more extraordinary thing, on the
fuppoiition of the goipel hiftory not being true,
more contrary to the prefent courfe of nature,
and
Condufion. 459
and confequently more improbable, than the hif-
tory of Chrift and the apoftles as contained in the
New Teftament, which makes the whole of the
fubfequent hiftory perfectly eafy and natural.
In fhort, the queftion is, whether Mr. Gibbon,
or myfelf, believe in more numerous, more ex-
traordinary, or more ufelefs miracles. On this
fair, unexceptionable ground I am willing to
meet him.
I alfo fhall not contend with him for quite fo
much as his late antagonifts, members of the
church of England, muft include in the fyftem
of chriftianity. But by abandoning their out-
works, I may perhaps be better able to make an
effectual defence.
My religion does not fuppofe, with bifhop
Hurd, " that the offices in which the godhead
" is employed are either degrading, or imply
" an immoderate and inconceivable condefcen-
" fion*." I fhaJl not urge Mr. Gibbon to
admit, that " a divine perfon, divine in the
" higheft fenfe of the word, defcended from
<c heaven, and fuffered death f, that the di-
" vine nature condefcended to leave the man-
" fions of glory, was made man, dwelled among
<f us, and died for us J."
* See Biftiop Kurd's Sermons, vol. 3. p. 33. f Ib. p. 63.
J That the divine nature of Chrift fhould die, is, furely,
more than Dr. Kurd's chriftian creed obliges him to af-
I fhall
460 'The General
I iliall not pretend, with the fame learned
bifhop, that a third divine perfon gave this fe-
cond divine perfon <c power tocaft out devils, and
" raifed him from the dead*/' Neither fhall
I urge him with " a purpofe to fave and fanc-
" tify men by means that he himfelf can think
<c fanciful or delufive ," and maintain that
Chrift, Cf in virtue of his all atoning death,
" has opened the gates of eternal life to
" the whole race of mortal men j-," which
the bifhop enumerates among " the great
({ things of which Chrift fpake, and the ama-
" zing topics with which he filled his dif-
" courfes J."
fcrt, unlefs he may think that without this, his doctrine
of atonement could not be completed.
f Biihop Hurd's Sermons, vol. 2. p. 337. Ib. vol. 3, p. 33.
f Ib. vol. 3. p. 64.
\ A common reader might perufe our Lord's difcourfes
many times, before he found any fuch topics as thefe, with
which they are here faid to be filled. But I the lefs wonder
at this when I find this writer attempting to prove at large,
that by ivajhing the difctyles feet our Lord meant to teach
the great doclrine of atonement by his blood, and wondering
that Grotius and other commentators mould not fee it
in the fame light. Sermons, vol. i. p. 177, &c.
But I own I am furprized that he mould main-
tain, vol 3. p. 67, that " Chrift fpake by virtue of his
" own eflential right, from himfelf, and in his own
f name, as well as byefpecial appointment of God his Fa-
*' ther," when he himfelf, in the moit unequivocal lan-
" g a g e repeatedly afferts the contrary j as John 5. 30.
I am
Conclufion* 461
I am fenfible that it would be in vain to
urge any external hiftorical evidence of a re-
velation, of which fuch doctrines as thefe fhould
make a part. They are things that no mira-
cles can prove. As foon fhould I propofe to
him the belief of Mahomet's journey to the
third heavens, and all his converfations with
God while a pitcher of water was falling, or
the doctrine of tranfubftantiation, neither of
which are more abfurd, and both of them are
much more innocent.
I am forry, however, to have occafion to
admonifh Mr. Gibbon, that he fhould have
diftinguifhed better than he has done between
chriftianity itfelf, and the corruptions of it. A
ferious chriflian, ftrongly attached to fome par-
ticular tenets, may be excufed if, in reading
ecclefiaftical hiflory, he ihould not make the
proper diftinctions ; but this allowance cannot
be made for fo cool and philofophical a fpec-
tator as Mr. Gibbon.
He fhould not have taken it for granted,
that the doctrine of three perfons in one GoJ,
or the doctrine of atonement for the fins of
I can ofmv owa felf do nothing, ch. 7. 6. My dottrine is not
mine, but his that fent me. ch. 14. 10. The words that I fpeak
to you, I fpeak not of my f elf , but the Father, who d-ivelleth in me,
he doth the 'works. It muft be ftrong bias in favour of a fyf-
tem that can make a perfon overlook fuch texts as thefe.
But even the greateft and belt of men have been nufled in
the fame way,
all
462 The General
all mankind, by the death of one man, were any
parts of the chriftian fyftem ; when, if he had read
the New Teftament for himfelf, he muft have
feen the doctrine of the proper unity of God, and
alfo that of his free mercy to the penitent, in almolt
every page of it. As he does fpeak of the cor-
ruptions of chriftianity, he ihould have examined
farther, both as an hiftorian, and as a man. For
as an individual, he is as much interefted in the
inquiry as any other perfon ; and no inquiry
whatever is fo interefting to any man as this is.
As to what Mr. Gibbon, with a fneer of
triumph, fays f, of cc Plato having 360 years
cc before the chriftian aera, anticipated one of
" the moft furprifing difcoveries of the chriftian
" revelation," and of " the theology of Plato
" having been confirmed with the celeftial pen
" of the laft and moft fublime of the evange-
" lifts, 97 years after that sera j" like all his
other farcafms againft chriftianity, it is found-
ed on ignorance. But he is more excufable
in this than in other cafes, as too many chrifti-
ans have been chargeable with the fame; con-
founding the Logos of Plato with that of John,
and making of it a fecond perfon in the tri-
nity, than which no two things can be more
different, as has been clearly explained by
my excellent and judicious friend Mr. Lind-
fay, efpecially in his Catecbift> in the preface
t Vol. 2. p. 240. 242.
to
Conclufion. 463
to which he has very properly animadverted upon
this paffage of Mr. Gibbon.
Mr. Gibbon has much to learn concerning the
gofpel before he can be properly qualified to
write againft it. Hitherto he feems to have been
acquainted with nothing but the corrupt efta-
blifhments of what is very improperly called
chriftianity j whereas it is incumbent upon him
to read and fludy the New Teftament for him-
felf. There he will find nothing like Platonifm,
but doctrines in every refpect the reverfe of
that fyftem of philofophy, which weak and un-
diftinguifhing chriftians afterwards incorporated
with it.
Had Mr. Gibbon lived in France, Spain, or
Italy, he might, with the fame reafon, have rank-
ed the doctrine of tranfubftantiation, and the wor-
Ihip of faints and angels among the eflentials of
chriftianity, as the doctrines of the trinity and of
atonement.
The friends of genuine, and I will add of ra-
tional chriftianity, have not, however, on the
whole, much reafon to regret that their enemies
have not made thefe diftinctions; fince, by this
means, we have been taught to make them our-
felves j fo that chriftianity is perhaps as much in-
debted to its enemies, as to its friends, for this
important fervice. In their indifcriminate at-
tacks, whatever has been found to be untenable
has
464 fbe General
has been gradually abandoned, and I hope the'
attack will be continued till nothing of the
wretched outworks be left ; and then, I doubt
not, a fafe and impregnable fortrefs will be found
in the center, a fortrefs built upon a rock, againft
which the gates of death will not prevail.
When the prefent crifis is over (and I think
we may fee that the period is not far diftant) that
by means of the objections of unbelievers, and
the attention which, in confequence of it, will be
given to the fubject by believers, chriftianity fhall
be reftored to its primitive purity, the cool and
truly fenfible part of mankind will, in this very
circumftance, perceive an argument for its
truth ; and thus even the corruptions of chrift-
ianity will have anfwered a very valuable pur-
pofe; as having been the means of fupplying
fuch an evidence of its truth, as could not have been
derived from any other circumftance. Let any
other religion be named that ever was fo much
corrupted, and that recovered itfelf from fuch
corruption, and continued to be profefled with
unqueftionable zeal by men of reflection and un-
derftanding, and I {halt look upon it with refpect,
and not reject it without a very particular exa-
mination. The revival of a zeal for the religion
of Greece and Rome under Julian is not to be
compared with the attachment to chriftianity by
inquifitive and learned men in the prefent age.
Let literature and fcience flourifh but one cen-
tury in Afia, and what would be the ftate of Ma-
hometanifm,
Conclufion. 465
home tan ifm, the religion of the Hindoos, or that
of the Tartars, fubject to the Grand Lama ? I
fhould rejoice to hear of fuch a challenge as I
give Mr. Gibbon, being fent from a mahometan
Mufti to the chriftian world.
Should what I call pure chriftianity (the
mod effential articles of which I confider to be
the proper unity of God, and the proper humanity
of Chrift) continue to fpread as it now does, and
as, from the operation of the fame caufes, I have
no doubt but that, in fpite of all oppofition, it will
do, and literature revive among the Jews and
Mahometans (who, it is remarkable, were never
learned and inquifitive, but in an age in which
all the chriftianity they could fee muft have ftruck
them with horror, as a fyftem of abominable and
grofs idolatry, to which their own fyftems are to-
tally repugnant) Should learning and inquiry,
I fay, once more revive among the Jews and Ma
hometans, at the fame time that a great part of
the chriftian world fhould be free from that ido-
latry which has given them fuch juft offence, they
would be much more favourably impreffed with
the idea of chriftianity than they were in former
times.
It, alib, can hardly be fuppofed, but that the
general converfion of the Jews, after a ftate of
fuch long and violent oppofition (which will in
all future time exclude the idea of their having
acted in concert with the chriftians) will be fol-
VOL. II. G g lowed
466 Vbe General
lowed by the converfion of all the thinking part
of the world. And if, before or after this time,
the Jews fhould return to their own country, the
whole will be fuch a manifeft fulfilment of the
prophecies of fcripture, as will leave no reafon-
able colour for infidelity.
In the profpeft of this great and glorious
event I rejoice j and I wifh to contribute a little
towards haftening its approach, both by unfold-
ing the hiftory of chriftianity, with all the cor-
ruptions of it, and fubmitting to the mod rigid
examination whatever I think to be really a part
of it. To this, all the friends of genuine chrifti-
anity will chearfully fay, AMEN.
THE
THE GENERAL CONCLUSION.
P A R T II. CONTAINING,
Confederations addrejfed to tie Advocates for the
prefent Civil Eftablijhments of Cbriftianity,
and especially BISHOP HURD.
AFTER relating, with fo much freedom,
the rife, progrefs, and prefent ftate, of
what I deem to be corruptions of cbriflianity^
and efpecially in the eftablifhed fyftems of it,
all of which I confider as anticbriftian, being
both exceedingly corrupt in their principles, and
fupported by a power totally foreign to that of
the kingdom of Chrift ; I cannot help expref-
fing my earned wilhes, that fomething may be
done by thofe who have influence, to remove
thefe evils, or at lead to palliate them. And I
cannot help confidering thofe prelates who re-
ally have influence in thefe matters as highly
criminal, in this enlightened age, if they are
not apprized of the abufes, and if they do not
ufe their endeavours to rectify them.
It will not be imagined that I have the
lead profpect of being benefited myfelf by any
alteration that can take place in the ecclefiafti-
cal fyftem of my own country. All I wifh,
G g 2 as
468 The General
as a chriftian, from the powers of this world,
is that they would not intermeddle at all in
the bufmefs of religion, and that they would
give no countenance whatever to any mode of
it, my own, or that of others, but ihew fo much
confidence in the principles of what they them-
felves deem to be true religion, as to think it
able to guard itfelf.
But though I have nothing to afk for myfelf,
much may, and ought to be done for thofe
who do not look quite fo far as I do. Many
excellent men among the clergy of the church
of England are exceedingly diftrefTed with the
obligation to fubfcribe what they cannot be-
lieve, and to recite what they utterly condemn ;
and yet their circumftances are fuch, as too
ftrongly tempt them to make the beft of their
fituation, rather than abfolutely flarvc j and
many others are continually prevented from
entering the church by the fame flate of things
in it. Even the guilt of thofe men who are
induced to comply to the difquiet of their
confciences will lie, in a great meafure, at the
door of thofe who could relieve them, if they
were in earneft to do it.
Thofe who have any principle themfelves muft
feel fomething for thofe who find themfelves
obliged by a principle of confcience abfolutely
to abandon their preferment in the church. Ma-
ny and painful muft have been their ftruggles,
before
Conclufion. 469-
before they could bring themfelves to execute a
relblution, which is viewed with wonder and
regret by many of their beft friends, and with
indifference or contempt by the world at large.
But they have refpect to other Jpeftators, at
prefent invifible, but whofe approbation will
hereafter be of more value than all things elfe ;
and while they are confcious that what they
for Jake in this world is for the Jake of Chrift,
and the gofpel 3 Matt. xix. 29. they cannot be
unhappy even now. Few of thefe cafes, it is
probable, come to the hearing of thofe whom
no fuch fcruples difturb*. But while fuch is
the ftate of things in this country, and the cry
for reformation grows louder every day, Woe
unto them that are thus at eaje in our Zion.
Amos vi. i.
If I could for a moment wifh myfelf in the
fituation of thofe prelates who have influence
in the prefent ftate of things in this country
(but, indeed, I am far from confidering their
fituation as an enviable one, thinking my own,
as a Diflenting miniiler, defpicable as I am fen-
fible it muft appear to them, to be in reality
more ufeful, more honourable, and more happy)
it would be to acquire that immortal renown
* In the courfe of the lait fix months only I have heard of
five frem inftances of clergymen who, on account of be-
coming Unitarians, have abandoned either aftual prefer-
ment, or confiderable profpefts in the church. It is pro-
bable there are others that I have not heard of.
G g 3 which
47 o The General
which it is in their power to fecure by promoting
fuch a reformation. But the famefituation would
probably lead me to fee things in the fame
light in which they fee them; and being eafy
myfelf, I might feel as little as they do for
thofe who were ill at eafe under me.
It is, I am fenfible, extremely difficult to
put one's felf exactly in the place of another
perfon, and therefore it is equally difficult to
make proper allowance for the fentiments and
conduct of other perions. But if it be a fitu-
ation that neceflarily leads any fet of men to judge
and act wrong, it fhould be a reafon with thofe
who fee the influence of that fituation, to re-
move the caufe of offence. This work, we
may affure ourfelves, will be done ; and if thofe
in whofe power it now is, be not the proper
inflruments for it, others will be found, in God's
own time, both in Roman catholic countries,
and in this,
The work of reformation is advancing a pace in
feveral Roman catholic countries ; and this will
make it doubly reproachful to us, at lead, not to
keep the lead we have hitherto plumed ourfelves
upon taking, in what relates to religious liberty ',
and to which we muft be fenfible that we owe
much of the honour, and even the flourilhing
ftate of our country.
One
Conclufion. 47 1
One of the worft fymptoms of the prefent
times is, that men of the greateft eminence in
the church, and of the moft unqueftionable abi-
lity, appear to be either wholly indifferent to the
fubjecl:, or, inftead of promoting a farther refor-
mation, employ all their ingenuity to make
men acquiefce in the prefent fyftemj when all
they can urge is fo palpably weak, that it is
barely poflible they ftiould be in earneft \ not
indeed in their wifhes to keep things as they
are, but in thinking their arguments have that
weight in themfelves which they wifh them to
have with others. To fee fuch men as bifhop Hurd
in this clafs of writers, a clafs fo little refpec-
table, when he is qualified to clafs with Til-
lotfon, Hoadley, and Clarke, equally excites
one's pity and indignation.
This truly able writer has all the appear-
ance of being really ferious, in alledging that
the reformers of the church of England were
" as well qualified to judge concerning the
" fyftem of chriftianity as we now are." " They
ff had only," he fays *, < c to copy, or rather
<f to infpecl: the holy fcriptures, which lay
cf open to them as they do to us ," as if
it required nothing more than eyes, capable of
diftinguifhing the words of fcripture, to enter
into their real meaning. But had not the Pa-
pifts, the Lutherans, the Calvinifts, the Ana-
Sermons, vol. i. p. 235.
G g 4 baptifts,
47 2 The General
baptifls, and the Socinians, of the fame age,
eyes, as well as the reformers of the church of
England ? And, I may add, were they not men
of as good underftanding ?
But he addsf, " The fcriptures were taken
" by them for their fole rule of faith ; and there-
" fore what fhould hinder them, when they read
" thofe fcriptures, from feeing as diftin&ly as we
cc do at this day ?" I anfwer, the fame thing,
whatever it is, that makes men interpret the
fcriptures fo differently from the truth at this
day. Was that an age exempt from prejudice ;
or were the reformers in England the only per-
fons fo privileged ? All the claffes of reformers
above enumerated appealed to the fcriptures
alike.
However, it is far from being true that the
Englifh reformers, whatever they might -pretend,
were determined by the authority of fcripture
only. It is evident to moft perfons, though it
may not be fo to bifhop Hurd, that they were
much influenced by the doctrines of the fecond,
the third, and even later centuries. What elfe could
have led them to adopt the Nicene, and efpecial-
ly the Athanafian creed ? This was going far
beyond the canon of the fcriptures. Or fhould
the Englifh reformers have ferioufly propofed to
themfelves to make the fcriptures their only rule,
f Sermons, vol. i. p. 235.
how
Condujion. 473
how was it poffible for them, educated as they
were, in the complicated fyftem of popery, to
read them with unprejudiced eyes ?
But " the reformation," he faysf, Cf was not
" carried on with us in a precipitate, tumultuous
" manner, as it was for the moft part on the cori-
" tinent. On the other hand, it advanced, under
" the eye of the magiftrate, by flow degrees.
" Nay it was more than once checked and kept
" back by him. Hence it came to pafs, that
" there was time allowed for taking the full be-
<f nefit of all the difcoveries made abroad, and for
" ftudying the chief points of controverfy with
<{ care. In fact, between the firft contentions in
<f Germany on account of religion, and the final
<f fettlement of the church of England under
" queen Elizabeth, there was a fpace of near half
'"' a century."
It is obvious to remark, that the very fame en-
comium might have been beftowed upon the
church of England, if it had been fixed in any
of the different periods, in which it W2& fixed (and
which is here called being checked and kept back)
by one prince, or advanced by another, as well as
where it was checked and kept back (for this bifhop
Hurd cannot deny to have been the cafe) by
queen Elizabeth. It would alfo have been
equally applicable to any different eftablifhment
f Sermons, vol. i. p. 24.0,
that
474 Tbf General
that fhould have been made after the reforma-
tion had been moving on a complete half century >
as well as nearly one, or if it had gone on after-
wards (ftill under the controlling eye of the ma-
giftrate) to this day. For why fhould not our
prefent civil governors be as good judges in mat.
ters of religion, as any perfons in the fame fitua-
tions could have been two hundred years ago ?
Juft fo much more time has elapfed fmce <f the firft
" contentions in Germany on account of religi-
< on," and confequently more time would have
been allowed for taking the full benefit of all the
difcoveries that have been made both at home
and abroad, &c. And it cannot be doubted but
that if a new eftablifhment fhould be made at this
day, it would be, in many refpects, confiderably
different from the prefent.
On the other hand, had all our fovereigns after
queen Mary been papifts, and the reformation
never been refumed, a prelent bifhop of
Worcefter might have faid that the experiment
had been tried, and had not anfwered, and that
what had been eftablifhed by the wifdom of ages,
in all the countries of Europe, it could not be fafe
to alter. Befides, what can a chriftian, jealous
for the purity of his religion, expe6b from the
(ontrolling eye of the magiftrate, but fuch a modi-
fication of ir, or fomething bearing its name, as
fhould be thought to be mofl fubfervient to his
own intereft. It does not require the underftand-
ing of bifhop Hurd to fee the full force of this
reply
Comlufan. 475
reply j but it may require a mind lefs fafcinated
by prejudice in favour of long eftabliflied forms.
In one refpe<5b this learned prelate acknow-
ledges f that the Englifli reformers were "not
<c fufficiently enlightened," and that was with re-
fpect to the doctrine of toleration. But he fays ,
ec no peculiar charge of ignorance can be brought
" againft the reformers for mifapprehending a
fc fubje6t not only difficult in itfelf, but perplex-
Cf ed with endlefs prejudices." But furely bifhop
Hurd himfelf will not fay, that the doctrine of
toleration is more difficult in itfelf, or more per-
plexed with prejudices, than the doctrine of the
trinity.
In another cafe, alfo, if he be at all ingenuous,
he muft acknowledge that the Englifh reformers
did not fee quite fo clearly as he himfelf now
does. He fays J, " the chriftian fyftem has been
" reviled by fuch as have feen it through the
" falfe medium of Popifh, or Calviniftic ideas."
Calvinifm, therefore, according to him, is not
true chriftianity. But let any competent judge
of the fubject, read the thirty -nine articles of the
church of England, and fay whether they have
not a ftrong tinge of Calvinifm.
It is not merely from fuch a general expreflion
as that above quoted, that I conclude bifliop
t Sermons, vol. r. p. 24. Jb. f Ib. p. 37.
Hurd
47 6 'The General
Hurd is no friend of Calvinifm. He directly
contradicts the fundamental article of that fyftem
\vhen he fays *, that " a divine perfon," &c. <c in
f< virtue of his all atoning death, has opened the
" gates of eternal life to the whole race of mor-
" tal man."
According to the plaineft fenfe of the articles
of the church of England, the gates of eternal
life are not opened to the whole race of mortal
men , but only to thofe who <c by the everlafling
ff purpofe of God, before the foundations of the
" world were laid, being chofen in Chrift out of
fc mankind, are decreed by his council, fecret to
" us, and are delivered from curfe and damna-
" tionf." It muft be a ftrange latitude of inter-
pretation (for which his lordfhip is an advocate)
that can reconcile thefe two contrary pofitions ;
and yet in the preface to thefe articles it is faid,
" that they were agreed upon for avoiding di-
" verfity of opinions, and eflablifhing confent
" touching true religion." Let Mr. Madan,
Dr. Hurd, and the excellent bifhop of Carlifle,
together with fome unbelievers among the cler-
gy, all fubfcribers to the fame articles, confer to-
gether, and tell us what this confent touching true
religion is.
What reformation can we expect in any im-
portant doctrinal articles of religion, when bilhop
* Sermons, vol. 3. p. 63, f Art. 17.
Hurd
Conclajlon. 477
Hurd exprefles himfelf fo ftrongly, as we have
feen, in favour of the divinity of Chrift, in the high-
eft fenfe of the word; by which he mud mean that
he is fully equal, in power and glory, to the Fa-
ther, whom Chrift himfelf ftiles his Father and
our Father, his God and our God. It was a long
time, as I have fhewn, before any chriftians, after
they contended that Chrift was God, had any idea
of his being fo, except in fome qualified fenfe.
I will venture to fay that no perfon before, or at,
the council of Nice, would have ufed fuch lan-
guage as this of bilhop Hurd,
With refpedt to the doctrine of atonement,
which I think I have proved to be quite a mo-
dern thing, and hardly to have been known be -
fore the reformation, biftiop Hurd fays *, " The
" fcriptures are unintelligible, and language it-
f c felf has no meaning, if the blood of the Lamb
" Jlain has not a true, direct, and proper efficacy,
" confidered in the literal fenfe of bloody in free-
tc ing us from the guilt of fin, or in other words
" from the punifhment of it."
It is irnpoflible, however, not to obferve, that
the papifts ufe the fame language in defence of
the doctrine of tranfubjiantiation, appealing alfo
to the literal fenfe of more texts of fcripture than
one. Befides, how is it poflible that the blood of
any man (and the divinity of Chrift certainly had
f Sermons, vol. i. p. 193.
no
47 S The General
no blood) confidered in a literal fenfe, fhould
cleanfe from fin. Surely there muft be fome-
thing figurative in fuch language as this; and
why fhould the figurative fenfe end juft where
bifhop Hurd would fix it, rather than where So-
cinus would choofe ?
Nay, it fhould feem that, according to bifhop
Hurd, our falvation depends upon the belief of
this novel doftrine of atonement. For I can fee
no other natural interpretation of what he fays*,
" They muft place their entire hope and con-
" fidence in the blood of the covenant, who
would fharc in the bleffmgs of it." If this
is to be underftood according to the literal fenfe
of the words, all the heathen world are excluded
from falvation, as well as Socinians.
To me it appears extraordinary, that a man
of bifhop Hurd's gcod fenfe fhould not be more
daggered than he appears to have been, at the very
manner in which he himfelf defcribes the doc-
trines of the divinity of Chrift, and of atonement
for fin by his death, every fentence, and every
claufe of a fentence, being calculated to excite
aflonifhment ; but I fhall only tranfcribe a pare
of it. After defcribing the gradual unfolding of
the fcheme under the Jewifh difpenfation, he fays,
Sermons, vol. I. p. 194.
At
Condufion. 479
cc At length Jefus Chrift came into the world,
Cf to fulfil and to declare the whole will of God
" on this interefting fubjecl:; and from him, and
ff thofe commiflioned by him, we learn what
" the wifeft men, and even angels had defired
" to look into, and could at moft difcern but im-
** perfectly, through the types and fhadows of
" the patriarchal and Mofaic difpenfations."
Cf The great myftery, now unveiled, was briefly
ff this, that God would only confer this mighty
" privilege at the inftance, as it were, and for
" the fake, of a tranfcendantly divine perfon, his
ef only begotton fon, the fecond perfon in the
" glorious trinity, as we now ftyle him* that
" this divine perfon fhould defcend from heaven,
cf fhould become incarnate, fhould even pour
" out his blood unto death, and by that blood
" fhould wafh away the (lain of guilt. In this
" awfully ftupendous manner, at which reafon
" ftands aghaft, and faith herfelf is half con-
" founded, was the grace of God to man at
" length manifeftedf."
The natural effeft of fuch a paufe of aftonifli-
ment as this, {hould be a clofe examination,
whether a thing that even fupernatural evidence
can barely make credible, did ever take place j
for in all cafes, the rr.ore extraordinary any thing,
any event, or any proportion, is, the more evidence
f Sermo/is, vol. 2. p. 285. &c.
it
480 The General
it requires. And when we confider the true
meaning of the figurative language of fcrip-
ture, it will be found to afifert nothing on this
fubject at which even reafon can Hand aghafr.
Our author himfelf, after enumerating * the
ftrongeft figurative expreflions of the fcriptures
on this fubjeft, as thofe in which the terms re-
demption, ranfom, propitiation, Jacrifice, &c. oc-
cur, clofes the whole with this obfervation.
" Now let men nfe what art they will in
" torturing fuch expreflions as thefe, they will
" hardly prevent our feeing what the plain
" doctrine of fcripture is, viz. That it pleafed
" God to give us eternal life only in his Son,
" and in his Son only as furTering and dying
" for us." All this I readily admit, believing
as firmly as bifhop Hurd can do, that it was
expedient, and neceflary, that fuch a perfon
as Jefus Chrift fhould preach as he did, and
that he fhould die, and rife again, or the end
of the gofpel, in forming men to a happy im-
mortality, could not have been gained. This
is certainly the doctrine of the New Teftament,
but then it is far from being the doctrine of
atonement-, which I think I have fhewn to be a
very different thing from that which was taught
by Chrift and the apoftles, and indeed to have
been unknown for feveral centuries after Chrift.
* Sermons, vol. 2. p. 288,
It
Conclttjion. 48 1
It is no wonder that this writer fhould fay *,
that " no chriftian is bound to a felicitous en-
" quiry into the doctrinal parts of the gofpel j and
* f that very pofilbly his conduct is then moil
tc acceptable, when he looks no farther than to
(C the authority of the gofpel, agreeable to the
Cf known decifion of our Saviour himfelf, Blejfed
" is he who hath not feen> and yet hath believed."
For certainly fuch tenets as thofe above cited
can never be believed on any other terms. Faith
in them mufl be implicit, and without inquiry.
It is rather extraordinary, however, that this
writer did not perceive that the faying which he
quotes of our Saviour relates only to a matter of
faff, of which it was not poffible that more than
a very few perfons could be eye witneffes j
whereas fhe things that he is contending for are
doftrines, of which all perfons at this day are
competent judges, provided they make ufe of
their reafon, and examine the fcriptures for
themfelves. But even the looking no farther
than to the authority of the gofpel for articles
of faith, may make a very felicitous enquiry ab-
folutely neceiTary, confidering how much, and
how long, fome articles of faith have been mif-
reprefented.
In fact, if the learned prelate could fancy him-
felf out of the fetters of his church's creed,
Sermons, vol. 3, p. 52.
VOL. II. H h he
482 fhe General
he might find the very articles which he fo
zealoufly contends for among the " quibbles
" and metaphyfics, which" (with a ftrain of
pleafantry not ufual to him, and indeed rather
uncommon in a fermon) he fays f, " the pagan
" philofophers, when they prerTed into the
te church, in their hafle 3 forgot to leave behind
" them."
But however thefe doctrines came in, to re-
peat the bifhop's own words J, Cf the prefumptous
<f decifions of particular men, or churches^,
" are forwardly taken for the genuine doctrines
" of chriftianity ; and thefe petitions being not
" unfrequently either wholly unintelligible, or
t{ even contrary to the plained reafon, the
" charge of nonfenfe, or of falfehood, is thus
" dextroufly transferred to the gofpel itfelf."
This very juft, and well expreffed obfervation,
I cannot help thinking to be peculiarly appli-
cable to feveral articles of the creed of bifhop
Hurd himfelf, as I think muft be fufficiently
evident from the preceding hiftory.
This writer, not content with what he himfelf
had advanced againft all improvements, or alter-
ations, in the church in which he prefides, quotes
with the higheft approbation what Mr. Burgh,
in his reply to Mr. Lindfey, fays againft the i
f Sermons, vol. 3, p. 205. J Ib. p. 209.
of
Conclufion. 483
of a progrejfive religion -, viz. that " All that the
" bible contains was as perfpicuous to thofe who
ee firft perufed it, after the rejection of the papal
ce yoke, as it can be to us now, or as it can be
" to our pofterity in the fiftieth generation-)-."
This is evidently a mif-ftating of the cafe;
becaufe it is not a progreffive religion, but a
progrejfive reformation of a corrupted religion
that is pleaded for. And as it cannot be de-
nied that the corruption of chriftianity was a
gradual and progreffive thing, can it be fo very
unnatural to expect that the reftoration of it to its
primitive purity fhould be gradual and pro-
grefiive alfo ? If the reformation was not pro-
greflive, why does not this bifhop prefer the
ftate of it under John Hufs and Jerom of Prague
to that of Luther and Cranmer ? He may fay
that they had not then compleatly rejeffed
the papal yoke. But if by papal yoke he meant
all the corruptions of chriftianity contained in
the fyftem of popery, and which had been en-
forced by the authority of the fee of Rome, I
fay, that neither Luther nor Cranmer rejected
the papal yoke ; becaufe their reformations were
partial.
Befides, if we make the fentiments of the
divines of that particular age, which Mr.
Burgh and bilhop Hurd may call the proper
f Sermons, vol. i, p. 244.
H h 2 *ra
484 ^he General
*ra of the reformation, to be our ftandard, why
fliould we adopt thole of Luther or Cranmer,
in preference to thofe of Socinus, or even thofe
of the Anabaptifts of Munfter, who were all of
the fame age ? I know of no reafon but that the
opinions of Luther and Cranmer had the fandlion
of the civil powers, which thofe of Socinus,
and others of the fame age, and who were equally
well qualified to judge for themfelves, had not.
It is nothing but the alliance of the kingdom
of Chrift with the kingdoms of this world (an
alliance which our Lord himfelf expreflly dif-
claimed) that fupports the grofleft corruptions
of chriftianity j and perhaps we muft wait for
the fall of the civil powers before this moft un-
natural alliance be broken. Calamitous, no
doubt, will that time be. But what convulfion
in the political world ought to be a fubjeft of la-
mentation, if it be attended with fo defirable an
event. May the kingdom of God, and of Chrift
(that which I conceive to be intended in the
Lord's prayer) truly and fully come, though all
the kingdoms of the world be removed, in order
to make way for it !
APPENDIX
APPENDIX,
CONTAINING
A Summary Vie} of the Evidence for the primi-
five Chriftians holding the Doffrine of the Jim-
pie Humanity of Chrift*
AS the doctrine held by the primitive church,
and efpecially by the Jewifh chriftians, is
of particular confequence, it may give fatisfaction
to fome of my readers, to fee the evidence for
their holding the doctrine of the fimple hu-
manity of Chnft, ftated in a more concife and
diftincT: manner than it is done in the body of
this work. I ihall, therefore, attempt it in this
place, and take the opportunity of introducing a
few more circumftances relating to it*
i. It is acknowledged by early writers of the
orthodox perfuafion, that two kinds of herefy
exifted in the times of the apoftles, viz. that of
thofe who held that Chrift was fimply a man, and
the other that he was man only in appearance.
Now the apoftle John animadverts with the
greateft feverity upon the latter j and can it be
thought probable that he fhould pafs over the
former without cenfure, if he had thought it to
be an error ?
H h 3 2. Athanafius
486 The General
2. Athanafius is fo far from denying this,
that he endeavours to account for Chrift being
fpoken of as a man only in feveral parts of the
New Teftament, and especially in the book of
Acts, from the apoftles not being willing to
offend the Jews (meaning the Jewifh chriftians)
of thofe times, and that they might bring them
to the belief of the divinity of Chrift by degrees.
He adds that the Jews being in this error (which
he ftates as their believing Chrift to be 4>* &pnns)
drew the Gentiles into it alfo.
3. It is acknowledged by Eufebius and others,
that the antient Unitarians themfelves conftantly
aflerted that their do&rine was the univerfal
opinion of the chriftian church till the time of
Victor.
4. Hegefippus, the firft chriftian hiftorian, him-
felf a Jew, enumerating the herefies of his time,
mentions feveral of the Gnoftic kind, but not
that of Chrift being a mere man. He moreover
fays that, in travelling to Rome, where he arrived
in the time of Anicetus, he found all the churches
that he vifited held the faith which had been
taught by Chrift and the apoftles.
5. Juftin Martyr, who maintains the pre-
exiftence of Chrift, is fo far from calling the
contrary opinion a berefy, that what he fays on
the fubject is evidently an apology for his own.
As
Conclufion, . 487
As Hegefippus was cotemporary with juftin,
he muft have heard at leaft of the doctrine of the
fimple humanity of Chrift; but he might not
have heard much about the opinion of Juftin,
which was different from that of the Gnoftics,
though the pre-exiftence of Chrift was a part of
both.
6. Irenasus, who wrote after Juftin, only calls
the opinion of thofe who held that Chrift was
the fon of Jofeph as well as of Mary a herefy.
He fays nothing of thofe who, believing him to
be a mere man, allowed that he had no human
father.
7. Thofe whom Epiphanius calls Alogi, among
the Gentiles, held that Chrift was merely a
man ; and as they had no peculiar appellation
before his time, and had no feparate affemblies,
it is evident they could not have been diftin-
guifhed as heretics in early times.
3. The firft who held, and difcufled, the doc-
trine of the divinity of Chrift acknowledged that
their opinion was exceedingly unpopular with
the unearned chriftians, and that thefe latter were
pious perfons, who dreaded the doclrine of the
trinity, as thinking that it infringed upon that of
the fupremacy of God the Father.
9. The divinity of Chrift was firft advanc-
ed and urged by thofe who had been heathen
H h 4 philofophcrs,
488 . Tec General
philofophers, and efpecially thofe who were admir-
ers of the doctrine of Plato, who held the opinion
of a Jecond God. Auftin fays* that he confidered
Chrift as no other than a moft excellent man,
and had no fufpicion of the word of God being
incarnate in him, or how " the catholic faith
" differed from the error of Photinus" (the laft of
the proper Unitarians whofe name is come down
to us) till he read the books of Plato j and that
he was afterwards confirmed in his opinion by
reading the fcriptures. Conftantine, in his oration
to the Fathers of the council of Nice J, fpeaks with
commendation of Plato, as having taught the
doctrine of " a fecond God, derived from the
" fupreme God, and fubfervient to his will."
10. There is a pretty eafy gradation in the pro-
grefs of the doctrine of the divinity of Chrift; as
he was firfl thought to be a God in fome quali-
fied fenfe of the word, a diftinguifhed emanation
from the fupreme mind, and then the logos or
wifdom of God perfonified; and it was not till
near four hundred years after Chrift that he was
thought to be properly equal to the Father.
Whereas, on the other hand, it is now pretended,
that the apoftles taught the doctrine of the proper
divinity of Chrift, and yet it cannot be denied that
in the very times of the apoftles, the Jewilh church
ConfelHones, Lib. 7. Cap. 19, &c. t Cap. 9. p. 684.
and
Conclufion. 489
and many of the Gentiles, held the opinion of
his being a mere man. Here the tranfition is
quite fudden, without any gradation at all. This
muft naturally have given the greateft alarm,
fuch as is now given to thofe who are called
orthodoxy by the prefent Socinians; and yet
nothing of this kind can be perceived. Befides,
it was certainly more probable that the chriftians
of thofe times, urged as they were with the mean-
nefs of their mailer, fhould incline to add to> ra-
ther than take from, his natural rank and dignity.
A NOTE RESPECTING VOL 2. p. 184.
I have met with a paflage in a bull of pope John xxi 1 1 .
againft the Wickliffites, quoted by L'Enfant in his hiftory
of the council of Pi/a, vol. 2. p. 98. which fufficiently ex-
plains whence the idea of turning heretics, rather than
putting them to any other kind of death, was borrowed.
He fays, " We ordain that they be publickly burned, in
*' execution of the fentence of our Saviour, John 15. 6.
<l If any man abide not in me, he is caft forth as a branch,
' ' and is 'withered ; and men gather them, and caft them intt
" the fire, and they are burned.' 1
FINIS.
A
CATALOGUE of BOOKS
WRITTEN BY
JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, LL.D. F.R.S.
AND PRINTED FOR-
J. JOHNSON, Bookfeller, No. 72, St. Paul's Church-
Yard, LONDON.
I.>nr^HE Hiftory and Prefent State of ELECTRICITY,
X. with original Experiments, illuftrated with Cop-
per plates, 4th Edition, corrected and enlarged, 410. il. is.
Another Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. 12S.
2. A Familiar Introduction to the Study of ELECTRI.
CITY, 4th Edition, 8vo. 2s. 6d.
3. The Hiftory and Prefent State of Difcoveries relating
to VISION, LIGHT, and COLOURS, 2 vols. 410. illuftrated
with a great Number of Copper-plates, il. us. 6d. in boards.
4. A Familiar Introduction to the Theory 'and Practice
of PERSPECTIVE, with Copper-plates, 2d Edition, 55. in
boards,
5. Experiments and Obfervations on different Kinds of
AIR, with Copper-plates, 2d Edit. 3 vols. i8s. boards.
6. Experiments and Obfervations relating to various
Branches of Natural PHILOSOPHY, with a Continuation of
the Experiments on AIR, 2 vols. izs, in boards.
7. PHILOSOPHICAL EMPIRICISM : Containing Remark*
on a Charge of PI agiarifm refpecting Dr. H- - s, interfperf-
cd with Obfervations relating to different kinds of Air, is. 6d
9. Direction*
BOOKS written ly Dr. PRIESTLEY.
8. Directions for impregnating Water with FIXED AIR,
in order to communicate to it the peculiar Spirit and virtues
of PYRMONT WATER, and other Mineral Waters of a fimi-
lar Nature, is,
N. B . The two preceding pamphlets are included in No. 5.
A New CHART of HISTORY, containing a View of the
principal Revolutions of Empire that have taken Place in
the World ; with a Book defcribing it, containing an Epi-
tome of Univerfal Hiltory, 4th Edition, ios- 6d.
lev A CHART of BIOGRAPHY, with a Book containing
an Explanation of it, and a Catalogue of all the Names in-
ferted in it, 6th Edition, very much improved, los. 6d.
n. The RUDIMENTS of ENGLISH GRAMMAR, adapted
to the Ufe of Schools, is. 6d.
12. The above GRAMMAR, with Notes and Obfervations,
for the Ufe of thofe who have made fome Proficiency in the
Language, 4th Edition, 35.
13. INSTITUTES of Natural and Revealed Religion. Two
Volumes, 8vo. zd Edition. Price los. 6d. in boards.
14. OBSERVATIONS relating to EDUCATION : more ef-
pecially as it refpefts the mind. To which is added, An
Eflay on a Courfe of liberal Education for Civil and Active
Life with Plans of Leftures on, i. The Study of Hiftory
and General Policy. 2. The Hiftory of England. 3. The
Conftitution and Laws of England, 45. fewed.
15. A Courfe of Leftures on ORATORY and CRITICISM.
410. I os. 6d. in boards.
16. An Eflay on the Firft Principles of Government, and
on the Nature of Political, Civil, and Religious LIBERTY,
zd Edition, much enlarged, 45. fewed. In this Edition are.
introduced the Remarks on Church Authority, in Anfwer to
Dr. Balguy, formerly published feparatelj.
17 An
BOOKS written by Dr. PRIESTLEY.
17. An Examination of Dr. REID'S Inquiry into the Hu-
man Mind, on the Principles of Common Senfe, Dr. BEAT-
TIE'S Eflay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, and
Dr. OSWALD'S Appeal to Common Senfe in Behalf of Reli-
gion, 2d. Edit. 53. fewed.
18. HARTLEY'S THEORY of the HUMAN MIND, on the
Principle of the Aflbciation of Ideas, with Effays relating to
the Subjeft of it, 8vo. 53. fewed.
19. DISQUISITIONS relating to MATTER and SPIRIT j
to which is added, the Hiilory of the Philofophical Doftrine
concerning the Origin of the SOUL, and the Nature of
MATTER, with its Influence on Chriftianity, efpecially
with refpeft to the Doctrine of the Pre-exiftence of
Chrilt. Alfo the Doarine of Philofophical Neceffity illuf-
trated. The fecond Edition enlarged and improved, with
Remarks on thofe who have controverted the Principles of
them, 2 Vols. los. 6d. in boards.
20. A FREE DISCUSSION of the Dodlrines of MATERI-
ALISM and|PHiLOsopHicAL NECESSITY, in a Correfpond-
cnce between Dr. PRICE and Dr. PRIESTLEY. To which
are added by Dr. PRIESTLEY, an Introduction, explaining
the Nature of the Controverfy, and Letters to feveral Writers
who have animadverted on his Difquifitions relating to Mat-
ter and Spirit, or his Treatife on Neceffity, Svo 6s. fewed.
21. A Defence of the Doctrine of NECESSITY, in two
Letters to the Rev. Mr. John Palmer, 35.
22. A Letter to JACOB BRYANT, Efq; in Defence of Phi-
lofophical Neceffity, is.
23. The Doctrine of DIVINE INFLUENCE o the Human
Mind, confidered in a Sermon publilhed at the Requeft of
many Pcrfons who have occafionally heard it, is.
The three preceding Articles may be properly bound up with tke
Illustrations of the Doftrine of Philofophical Neceffity.
24. Letters
BOOKS written ly Dr. PRIESTLEY.
24. LETTERS to a Philofophical Unbeliever. Parti. Con-
taining an Examination of the principal Objections to the
Dodlrines of Natural Religion, and efpecially thofe contained
in the Writings of Mr. HUME, 35.
25. ADDITIONAL Letters to a Philofophical Unbeliever,
in Anfwer to Mr. WILLIAM HAMMON, is. 6d.
26. A HARMONY of the Evangelifls in Greek : To which
are prefixed Critical Diflertations in Englilh, 410. 145. boards.
27. A HARMON Y of the Evangelifls in Englijb; with Notes,
and an occafional Paraphrafe for the Ufe of the Unlearned ;
to which are prefixed, Critical Differtations, and a Letter to
the Bifhop of Oflory, 410. 155. in Boards. N. B. Tbofe <v.-ha
are pojjejfed of the Greek Harmony, may have this in Englilh,
without the Critical Diflertations.
28. Three Letters to Dr. NEwcoME,BHhop of Waterford,
on the Duration of our Saviour's Minifbry, 35. 6d.
29. A Free Addrefs to Proteftant Diflenters, on the fub-
jeft of the Lord's Supper, $d Edition with Additions, 2s'.
N. B. The Addition^ to be had alone, is.
30. An Addrefs to Proteftant Diflenters, on the fubjefl of
giving the Lord's .Supper to Children, is.
31. A Free Addrefs to Proteftant Diflenters, on the fub-
jeci of Church Difcipline ; with a preliminary Difcourfe con-
cerning the Spirit of Chriftianity, and the Corruption of it
by falie Notions of Religion, 2s. 6d.
32. A Sermon preached before the Congregation of Pro-
teftant Diflenters, at Mill Hill Chapel, Leeds, May 16,
1773, on Occafion of the Author's refigning his Paftoral
Office among them, is.
33. A
BOOKS written ty Dr. PRIESTLEY.
33. A SERMON preached December 31, 1780, at the New
Meeting in Birmingham, on undertaking the Paftoral Office
in that place, is.
34. TWO DISCOURSES. I. OnHABlTUAtDEVOTIOK.
2. On the DUTY of not LIVING to OURSELVES; both
preached to AfTemblies of Proteftant Diflentlng Minifters,
and publifhed at their requeft. Price is. 6s.
35. A VIEW of the PRINCIPLES and CONDUCT of the
PROTESTANT DISSENTERS, with Refpeft to the Civil and
eccleiiaftical ConiUtution of England, zd Edition, is. 6d.
36. LETTERS to the Author of Remarks on fever al late
publications relative to the Diffenters, in a Letter to DoQor
Priejlhy, is.
37. A LETTER to a LAYMAN, on the Subjeft of Mr.
Lindfey's Propofal for a reformed Englifh Church, on the
Plan of the late Dr. Samuel Clarke, price 6d.
N. B. The preceding nine Pamphlets, No. 29 to 37, may
be had uniformly bound, by giving Orders for Dr. Prieftley's
larger Trafts, 2 vols. Svo. los.
38. A CATECHISM for Children and Young Per fans, 3d
Edition, 3d.
39. A SCRIPTURE CATECHISM, confining of a Series
of Queftions ; with References to the Scriptures, inftead of
Anfwers, 2d Edition, 3d.
40. CONSIDERATIONS for the Ufe of YOUNG MEN,
and the Parents of YOUNG MEN, zd Edition, 2d.
41 A SERIOUS ADDRESS to MASTERS of Families, with
Forms ofj Prayer, 2d. Edition, 6d.
42. A Free Addrefs to Proteftant Diflenters as fuch. By
a Diflenter. A new Edition, enlarged and corrected, is. 6d.
Aa
BOOKS wri;tea by Dr. PRIESTLEY.
An Allowance is made to thofe who buy this Pamphlet to
give away
4V An Appeal to the ferious and candid ProfefTors of
Christianity, on the following Subjects, viz. i. The Ufe of
Reafon in Mattters of Religion. 2. The Power of Man to
do the Will of God. 3. Original Sin. 4. Election and
and Reprobation. 5. The Divinity of Chrifl : and 6. A-
tonement for Sin by the Death of Chrift, a new Edition, to
which is added a concife Hiftory of thofe Doftrir.-es, zd.
44. The Triumph of Truth ; being ?.n Account of the
Trial of Mr. Elwall for Herefy and Blafphemy, at Stafford
Affixes, before Judge Denton, zd Edition, zd.
45. A Familiar llluftration of certain Pafi'ages of Scripture
relating to the fame Subjcdls, 4d. or 3;,. 6d. per dozen,
46. A Free Addrefs to thofe who have petitioned for the
Repeal of the late Act of Parliament in Favour of the Roman
Catholics. Price zd.. or izs. per Hundred to give away.
N. B. The laft nine Trafts may be had all bound together,
by giving Orders for Dr. Prieitly's fmaller Trads, 35. 6d. or
365. per Dozen to thofe nubo buy them to give a-way.
Aifo Publijhed under the Dire Elian of Dr. PRIESTLEY.
THE THEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY:
Confifting of Original Eflays, Hints, Queries, &c. calculated
to promote Religious Knowledge, in 3 Volumes, 8vo.
Prkc 1 8s. in Boatds.
University of California
3N REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
SOUTHERN REGIO
405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388
Return this material to the library
from which it was borrowed.
SEP Z 3 200$)