Skip to main content

Full text of "The Pope and the Council"

See other formats 


mm 


L^- 


^  6ia 


2)C^/ 


Columbia  ©nttoem'tp 
mtl)eCttpof3^mifark 


LIBRARY 


9^^C^.,^^rAK. 


THE   POPE   AND   THE    COUNCIL 


^ 


1c  -    ^    oSUo    Q.cr>*JCV-<N^. 


RIVINGTONS 

ILonllon Waterloo  Place. 

©rfort) High  Street. 

(TamtirilJgc Trinity  Street. 


'^^I^x/^'^'^^    '^^^A^/^>(^ 


THE    POPE 


AND    THE    COUNCIL 


B  Y    J-.A.  N  TJ  S  !\/^'k^;^^t'^^^  ^  J-  X 


AUTHORIZED    TRANSLATION    FROM   THE    GERMAN 


SECOND  EDITION 


PtIVINGTONS 

ILontiort,  ©iforti,  anti  Cambritise 

SCRIBNER,  WELFORD  AND  CO.,  NEW  YORK 
18G9. 

{All  riijhts  reserin/.] 


«     «    t   t 
t     •       • 


/^^t  ;J-^-Jt/-, 


,    ^l/OA-A^ 


'^^ 


^    3  G 


EDINBURGH  :   T.  CONSTABLE, 
PKINrKK  TO  THE  QUBEN,  AND  TO  THE  UNIVERSITY. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGF. 

Notice  by  Translator,    .             .             .             .             •  ix 

Preface,   .......  xiii 

Introduction — 

Jesuit  Programme  for  tlie  Council,          ...  1 

Kecent  Provincial  Synods  on  Papal  Infallibility,              .  5 

Method  of  Proceedings  pre-arranged,      ...  6 

CHAPTER  I. 

MAKING  THE  SYLLABUS  DOGMATIC 

Sclirader's  AfiSrmative  Statement  of  the  Propositions,         .  9 

(1.)  Coercive  Power  of  the  Church,              ...  9 
(2.)  Political  Supremacy  of  tlie  Popes,        .              .              .13 

(3.)  Revision  of  History,    .              .              .              .              .  15 

(4.)  Freedom  of  Conscience  and  Persecution,          .              .  16 

(5.)  Modern  Civilisation  and  Constitutionalism  condemned,  20 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  XEW  DOGMA  ABOUT  MARY,          .                  .                  .            "      .  34 


vi  Table  of  Contents. 

CHAPTER  III. 

PAPAL    INPALLTBILITY. 

PAGE 

Sect.  1.  —  Ultramontanism,  ....  37 

Sect.  2. — Consequences  of  the  Dogma  of  Infallibility,  .  45 

Sect.  3. — Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes,  .  51 

Seci'.  4. — The  Verdict  of  History  on  the  Position  of  Bishops 

of  Rome  in  the  Ancient  Church,  .  .  63 

Sect.  5. — The  Primacy   in   the  Ancient  Constitution   of  the 

Church,  .  .  .  .  .  77 

Sect.  Q.—  The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers  on  the  Primacy,       .  86 

Sect.  7. — Forgeries — 

The  Isidorian  Decretals,  .  .  .  94 

Forgeries  of  tlie  Hildebrandine  Era,    .  .  100 

Earlier  Koman  Fabrications,    .  .  .  122 

The  Liber  Pontificalis,  .  .  .  128 

The  Donation  of  Constantine,  .  .  131 

Donations  of  Pepin  and  Charlemagne,  .  135 

The  Decretum  of  Gratian,        .  .  .  142 

Sect.  8. — Progress  of  Papal  Poiver  in  the  Tivelfth  and  Thir- 
teenth Centuries,  .  .  .  .  151 
Sect.  9. — Papal  Encroachments  on  Episcopal  Rights — 

Legates,  .  .  .  .  .164 

Exemptions  and  Dispensations,  .  .  165 

The  Pallium,  .  .  .  .  .167 

Plenitudo  Potestatis,    .  .  .  .169 

Appeals  to  Eome,         .  .  .  .172 

Papal  Patronage,  .  .  .  .175 


Table  of  Cojitents. 


Reservations, 

The  Oatli  of  Obedience, 

Interference  with  Diocesan  Administration  and 

its  Results, 
Sect.  10. — Personal  Attitude  of  the  Popes, 
Sect.  11. — Relation  of  Popes  to  Councils  in  the  Middle  Ages 
Sect.  12. — Neglect  of  Theology  at  Pome,    . 
Sect.  13. — The  College  of  Cardinals, 
Sect.  14. — The  *'  Curia,''''  .... 
Skct.  15. — The  Judgments  of  Contemporaries, 
Sect.  16. —  The  Inquisition, 
Sect.  17. — Trials  for  Witchcraft,  . 
Sect.  18. — Dominican  Forgeries  and  their  Results, 
Sect.  19. — Paj^al  Infallibility  Disputed, 
Sect.  20. — Fresh  Forgeries, 

Sect.  21. — Interdicts,         .... 
Sect.  22. —  The  Schism  of  the  Antipopes,    . 
Sect.  23. — The  Council  of  Constance, 
Sect.  24. — The  Council  of  Basle,    . 
Sect.  25. —  The  Union  luith  the  Greek  Church, 
Sect.  26. — The  Papal  Reaction,     . 
Sect.  27. —  Temper  and  Circumstances  of  the  Fifteenth  ('entury. 
Sect.  '2S.^  The  Ojjening  of  the  Sixteenth  Century— 

The  Fifth  Lateran  Synod,      . 

Security  of  the  Curia, 

The  Roman  Chancery, 

Conecte  and  Savonarola, 
Sect.  29. —  The  State  of  Contemporary  Opinion, 


yii 

PACK 

176 
176 


177 

181 

190 

199 

205 

215 

223 

235 

249 

261 

271 

278 

289 

292 

298 

308 

319 

327 

337 

347 
349 
351 
353 
355 


via 


Tabic  of  Contents. 


Sect.  30. — The  Council  of  Trent  and  its  Results,    . 
Sect.  31. — Papal  InfallihilUty  formulized  into  a  Doctrine- 

Italian  Theologians,  . 

Admissions  made  by  Infallibilists, 

Eull  of  Paul  IV.,  Cum  ex  Apostolatus  officio, 

Ball,  In  Coend  Domini, 

The  Jesuit  Divines,    . 

Eellarmine,    .... 

Corruptions  of  the  Breviary, 

Tiie  Roman  Martyrology  corrupted,  . 

The  Isidorian  Forgeries  maintained. 

Definitions  ex  cathedra. 

Sect.  32. — Tlte  InfalllUlity  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Popes 
compared — 

Infallibility  of  the  Church,    . 

Infallibility  of  the  Pope, 

Moral  Effect  of  the  Theory  on  the  Popes, 
Sect.  33. —  'Vhat  is  meant  hy  a  Free  Council, 


PAGK 

365 


371 
377 
382 
384 
387 
390 
396 
399 
401 
403 


411 
412 
414 
419 


NOTICE  BY  THE  TRANSLATOR. 

TT  will  be  obvious  at  a  glance  to  the  reader,  that  this 
-■-  work  emanates  from  Catholic  authorship,  and  dis- 
cusses the  great  religious  crisis  through  which  theChurcli 
and  tlie  world  are  now  passing  from  a  Catholic,  though 
a  "  liberal  Catholic,"  point  of  view.  That  it  bears  evi- 
dence of  no  common  attainments  and  grasp  of  mind  a 
very  cursory  examination  will  suffice  to  show.  An 
English  translation  is  offered  to  the  public  under  the 
belief  that  there  are  very  many  in  this  country,  as  well 
Protestants  as  Catholics,  who  will  gladly  avail  them- 
selves of  an  opportunity  of  learning,  on  the  most  direct 
authority,  how  tlie  grave  questions  which  just  now 
agitate  the  Churcli  are  regarded  by  the  members  of  a 
school,  morally  if  not  numerically  strong,  within  her 
pale,  who  yield  indeed  to  none  in  their  loyal  devotion 


X  Notice  by  the  Translator. 

to  Catholic  trutli,  but  are  unable  to  identify  its  interests 
with  the  advance  of  Ultramontanism,  or  rather,  who 
cannot  but  recognise  between  the  two  an  antithesis 
which  the  Church  history  of  the  last  thousand  years 
too  eloquently  attests,  and  to  which  present  facts,  no 
less  than  past  experience,  give  all  the  significance  of  a 
solemn  warning  it  would  be  worse  than  unwisdom  to 
ignore. 

Two  rival  tendencies,  alien  alike  in  their  principles 
and  their  aims,  which  have  long  been  silently  develop- 
ing themselves,  are  now  contending  for  the  mastery 
within  the  bosom  of  the  Church,  like  the  unborn  babes 
in  Eebekah's  womb,  and  it  is  simply  a  truism  to  assert 
that  every  section  of  our  divided  Christendom  is  inter- 
ested in  the  result  of  the  struGj^le.  We  live  in  an  age 
powerful  beyond  all  that  have  gone  before  for  good  and  for 
evil,  penetrated  perhaps  more  deeply  than  controversial- 
ists are  willing  to  admit  by  Christian  sentiment,  but  also 
presenting  in  too  many  quarters  a  spectacle  unprece- 
dented in  modern  history,  of  fixed  and  deliberate  anta- 
gonism to  the  dogmas  of  the  Christian  creed.  Not  only 
the  world  of  sense,  but  of  supernatural  revelation,   is 


Notice  by  the  Translator.  xi 

delivered  over  to  the  disputations  of  men.  At  sucli  a 
moment,  it  is  j)roposed,  amid  the  fervid  acclamations 
of  one  party,  the  earnest  and  sorrowful  ju'otests  of 
another,  the  careless  acquiescence  or  sullen  indiffer- 
ence of  a  host  of  nominal  believers,  and  the  triumphant 
sneers  of  an  amused  but  unbelieving  outside  world,  to 
erect  Papal  Infallibility  into  an  article— and"  therefore 
inevitably  the  cardinal  article — of  the  Catholic  faith. 
Under  a  profound  sense  of  the  range  and  gravity  of  the 
issues  involved  this  work  was  written,  and  with  a  simi- 
lar feeling,  which  each  day's  experience  only  deepens, 
it  has  been  translated.  Man's  necessity,  we  know,  is 
God's  opportunity,  and  even  at  the  eleventh  hour  He 
may  stretch  forth  His  arm  to  save  His  menaced  and 
afflicted  Church.  "  Oculi  omnium  in  Te  sperant,  Domine, 
et  Tu  das  escam  illorum  in  tempore  opportune." 

We  cannot,  indeed,  forget  that  two  years  elapsed 
before  the  oecumenical  pretensions  of  the  Latrocinmm 
of  Ephesus  were  formally  superseded,  and  that  for  more 
than  twenty  the  Church  lay,  technically  at  least,  under 
the  reproach  of  heresy  inflicted  on  her  by  the  Council 
of  Pdmini,  to  w^hich  St.  Jerome  gave  expression  in  the 


xii  Notice  by  the  Translato7\ 

well-known  words,  "  niiindus  niiratus  est  se  esse  Aria- 
num."  Meanwhile,  it  behoves  us  to  possess  our  souls 
in  patience,  as  knowing  that  the  Church  is  greater  than 
any  parties  or  individuals  who  for  the  moment  may 
usurp  her  functions  and  prostitute  her  awful  name,  and 
that,  come  what  will,  truth  must  ultimately  prevail. 

It  may  be  well  to  add  that  the  substance  of  the 
earlier  portion  of  this  volume  appeared  in  a  series  of 
articles  on  "  The  Council  and  the  Civilta,"  published 
during  last  March  in  the  Allgevicme  Zeitung^  which 
attracted  very  general  attention  on  the  Continent.  But 
the  whole  subject  is  here  worked  out  in  detail,  and 
with  constant  reference  to  the  original  authorities  for 
every  statement  that  is  dwelt  upon. 

1  See  Allg.  Z.  for  March  10-15,  1869. 
Sept.  10,  1S69. 


P REFA  C E. 

THE  immediate  object  of  this  work  is  to  investigate 
by  the  light  of  history  those  questions  which,  we 
are  credibly  iniormed,  are  to  be  decided  at  the  QEcu- 
menical  Council  already  announced.  And  as  we  have 
endeavoured  to  fulfil  this  task  by  direct  reference  to 
original  authorities,  it  is  not  perhaps  too  much  to  hope 
that  our  labours  will  attract  attention  in  scientific 
circles,  and  serve  as  a  contribution  to  Ecclesiastical 
History.  But  this  work  aims  also  at  something  more 
than  the  mere  calm  and  aimless  exhibition  of  histori- 
cal events  ;  the  reader  will  readily  perceive  that  it  has 
a  far  wider  scope,  and  deals  with  ecclesiastical  politics, 
— in  one  word,  that  it  is  a  pleading  for  very  life,  an 
appeal  to  the  thinkers  among  believing  Christians,  a 
protest  based  on  history  against  a  menacing  future, 
against  the  programme  of  a  powerful  coalition,  at  one 
time  openly  proclaimed,  at  another  more  darkly  insi- 


xiv  Preface, 

nuated,  and  which  thousands  of  busy  hands  are  daily 
and  hourly  employed  in  carrying  out. 

We  have  written  under  a  deep  sense  of  anxiety  in 
presence  of  a  serious  danger,  threatening  primarily  the 
internal  condition  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  then — 
as  is  inevitable  with  what  affects  a  corporation  includ- 
ing 180  millions  of  men — destined  to  assume  vaster 
dimensions,  and  take  the  shape  of  a  great  social  pro- 
blem, which  cannot  be  without  its  influence  on  eccle- 
siastical communities  and  nations  outside  the  Catholic 
Church. 

This  danger  does  not  date  from  yesterday,  and  did 
not  begin  with  the  proclamation  of  the  Council.  For 
some  twenty- four  years  the  reactionary  movement  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  which  is  now  swollen  to  a  mighty 
torrent,  has  been  manifesting  itself,  and  now  it  is  pre- 
paring, like  an  advancing  flood-tide,  to  take  possession 
of  the  whole  organic  life  of  the  Church  by  means  of  this 
Council. 

We — and  the  plural  must  not  here  be  imderstood 
figuratively,  but  literally — we  confess  to  entertaining 
that  view  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  her  mission 
which  its  opponents  designate  by  that  much-abused 
term,  so  convenient  in  its  vagueness  for  polemical  pur- 


Preface.  xv 

poses — Liberal;  a  term  in  the  worst  repute  with  all 
uncompromising  adherents  of  the  Court  of  Eome  and  of 
the  Jesuits — two  powers  intimately  allied, — and  never 
mentioned  by  them  without  bitterness.  We  are  of 
their  opinion  who  are  persuaded,  first,  that  the  Catholic 
Church,  far  from  assuming  an  hostile  and  suspicious 
attitude  towards  the  principles  of  political,  intellectual, 
and  religious  freedom  and  independence  of  judgment, 
in  so  far  as  they  are  capable  of  a  Christian  interpreta- 
tion, or  rather  are  dii*ectly  derived  from  the  letter  and 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  ought,  on  the  contrary,  to  be  in 
positive  accord  with  them,  and  to  exercise  a  constant 
purifying  and  ennobling  influence  on  their  develop- 
ment ;  secondly,  that  a  great  and  searching  reformation 
of  the  Church  is  necessary  and  inevitable,  however 
long  it  may  be  evaded. 

To  us  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  Papacy  are  by  no 
means  convertible  terms,  and  therefore,  while  in  out- 
ward communion  with  them,  we  are  inwardly  separated 
by  a  great  gulf  from  those  whose  ideal  of  the  Church 
is  an  universal  empire  spiritually,  and,  where  it  is  pos- 
sible, physically,  ruled  by  a  single  monarch,— an  empire 
of  force  and  oppression,  where  the  spiritual  authority 
is  aided  by  the  secular  arm  in  summarily  suppressing 


xvi  Preface. 

every  movement  it  dislikes.  In  a  word,  v^e  reject  that 
doctrine  and  idea  of  the  Church  which  has  for  years 
been  commended  by  the  organ  of  the  Eoman  Jesuits  as 
alone  true,  as  the  sole  remaining  anchor  of  deliverance 
for  the  perishing  human  race. 

It  will  more  precisely  indicate  our  point  of  view  if 
we  quote  the  words  of  a  man  regarded  in  his  lifetime 
as  the  ornament  and  pride  of  the  German  clergy,  the 
Cardinal  and  Prince  Bishop  Diepenbrock,  who  was 
himself  the  pupil  of  the  ever-memorable  Sailer,  and 
shared  his  sentiments.  Diepenbrock  replied  to  the 
reforming  suggestions  of  his  friend  Passavant,  involving 
an  alteration  in  the  hierarchy,  a  softening  of  the  sharp 
distinction  between  clergy  and  laity,  a  co-operation  of 
the  people  in  Church-government,  and  a  transformation 
of  the  Eoman  Court,  by  saying  that  "  only  in  this  way 
can  health  be  restored  to  the  general  body,  and  earthly 
conditions  be  elevated  and  ennobled,  which  is  a  task 
that  Christianity  must  accomplish  ;  only  thus,  by  deve- 
loping and  quickening  the  constitution  and  doctrine  of 
the  Church,. can  the  questionings  and  aspirations  this 
remarkable  age  of  ours  is  everywhere  seething  with 
obtain  their  rest  and  satisfaction." 

"  It  is  true,  indeed,"  he  added,  "  that  the  ultra  party 


Preface.  xvli 

in  the  Church  hopes  to  reach  its  goal  by  an  opposite 
road.  But  such  a  return  to  the  past  is  an  impossibility  in 
history.  The  Middle  Ages  are  left  behind  once  for  all, 
and  nothing  but  a  fata  morgana  can  make  them  hover 
like  a  possible  future  before  the  lively  imagination  of 
and  his  allies.  The  necessity  of  a  complete  re- 
novation of  the  Church  is  already  dawning  on  the  vision 
of  all  who  think  without  prejudice,  while  to  the  few 
only  its  nature  and  method  are  as  clear  as  the  thing 
itself.  To  speak  out  such  ideas  openly  I  hold  to  be  a 
sort  of  duty  of  charity  towards  mankind."  ^ 

It  would  be  easy  to  quote  from  the  writings  of 
Giigler,  Gorres,  Eckstein,  Francis  Baader,  and  Mohler 
— to  mention  only  the  departed — a  series  of  testimonies 
to  prove  that  the  most  gifted  and  enlightened  among 
German  CathoHcs  have  entertained  the  same  or  kin- 
dred views. 

Diepenbrock  only  lived  to  witness  the  first  tentative 
approaches  of  that  Ultramontanism  which  he  has  de- 
scribed. What  appeared  in  his  time  as  an  isolated  and 
half-unconscious  tendency,  has  since  grown  up  into  a 
powerful  party,  with  clearly  ascertained  objects,  which 
has  gained  a  firm  footing  through  the  wide  ramifications 

1  See  Letters  published  in  Passavant's  Nachlass  {Remains),  p.  87. 
h 


xviii  Preface. 

of  the  Jesuit  Order,  and  enlists  the  energetic  services 
of  a  constantly  increasing  body  of  fellow-labourers  in 
the  clergy  educated  at  the  Jesuit  College  in  Eome. 

As  it  had  become  necessary  to  assail  this  party,  which 
carries  on  its  plans  either  in  ignorance  of  Church  history 
or  by  deliberately  falsifying  it,  we  were  obliged  to  distin- 
guish the  primacy  as  it  existed  in  the  ancient  Church 
from  its  later  form,  and  we  could  not  therefore  avoid 
bringing  forward  in  this  connexion  a  very  dark  side  of 
the  history  of  the  Papacy.  Every  one  who  examines 
the  internal  relations  of  Church  history  will  be  con- 
strained to  acknowledge  that,  since  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury, there  has  been  no  period  of  it  on  which  a  Chris- 
tian student  can  dweU  with  unmixed  satisfaction ;  and 
as  he  endeavours  to  get  at  the  bottom  of  the  causes 
underlying  that  unmistakable  decay  of  Church  life,  con- 
stantly getting  a  deeper  hold,  and  more  widely  spreading, 
he  will  always  be  brought  back  to  the  distortion  and 
transformation  of  the  Primacy  as  the  ultimate  root  of 
the  evil.  If  the  Primacy  is  on  the  one  hand  a  source  of 
strength  to  the  Catholic  Church,  yet  on  the  other  hand 
it  cannot  be  denied  that,  when  one  looks  at  it  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  ancient  Church— from  the  Apostolic 
age  tiU  about  815,— the  Papacy,  such  as  it  has  become, 


Preface.  xix 

presents  the  appearance  of  a  disfiguring,  sickly,  and 
choking  excrescence  on  the  organization  of  the  Church, 
hindering  and  decomposing  the  action  of  its  vital 
powers,  and  bringing  manifold  diseases  in  its  train. 
And  now,  when  for  many  years  preparations  have  been 
going  on  for  effecting  the  final  completion  of  the  sys- 
tem which  lies  at  the  root  of  the  present  incongruities 
in  the  Church,  and  surrounding  it  with  an  impregnable 
bulwark  by  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility,  it  becomes  the 
duty  of  every  one  who  wishes  well  to  the  Church  and 
to  society,  to  which  it  supplies  an  element  of  life,  to 
try,  according  to  the  measure  of  his  knowledge  and 
working  power,  what  can  yet  be  done  to  ward  off  so 
fatal  a  catastrophe. 

"VVe  do  not  conceal  from  ourselves  that  the  charge  of 
a  radical  aversion  to  the  Papacy  will  be  brought  from 
more  than  one  quarter  against  this  book  and  its  authors. 
Their  number  is  legion  at  the  present  day,  for  whom 
the  scriptural  saying,  "  Meliora  sunt  vulnera  diligentis 
quam  fraudulenta  oscula  odientis,"  has  no  meaning,  and 
who  cannot  comprehend  how  a  man  can  at  once  love 
and  honour  an  institution,  and  yet  expose  its  weak 
points,  denounce  its  faults,  and  purposely  exhibit  their 
mischievous  results.      In  their   opinion,  things  of  the 


XX  Preface. 

kind  should  be  carefully  hushed  up,  or  only  apologeti- 
cally referred  to.  And  for  some  time  past  this  way  of 
looking  at  matters  has  been  designated  "  piety."  It  is 
therefore  pious  to  believe  gladly  and  readily  fables  and 
falsehoods  which  have  been  invented  for  certain  ends 
connected  with  religion,  or  are  clothed  in  a  religious 
dress;  it  is  pious  either  wholly  to  deny  the  injuries 
and  abuses  of  the  Church's  life,  and  the  perversities  in 
her  government,  or,  when  this  is  impracticable,  to  do 
one's  utmost  to  defend  them,  and  to  gain  them  the  cre- 
dit of  being  due  to  good  motives,  or,  at  least,  of  having 
a  tolerable  side.  The  absence  of  such  a  disposition  is 
visited  in  ecclesiastical  circles  with  the  reproach  of  im- 
piety— a  reproach  which,  accordingly,  our  work  is  sure 
not  to  escape.  But  we  do  not  acknowledge  the- jus- 
tice of  this  view ;  we  consider  it,  indeed,  a  commend- 
able piety  to  maintain  silence  about  the  personal  in- 
firmities or  errors  of  a  man  in  high  position,  or  even  at 
the  head  of  the  Church,  or  at  least  to  deal  gently  with 
them,  but  we  think  it  a  complete  misapplication  of  the 
term  when  it  is  called  a,  duty  of  piety  to  conceal  or 
colour  historical  facts  and  faulty  institutions.  On  the 
contrary,  we  believe  our  piety  owes  its  first  duties  to  the 
Divine  institution  of  the  Church  and  to  the  truth,  and 


Preface,  xxl 

it  is  precisely  this  piety  whicli  constrains  ns  to  oppose, 
frankly  and  decisively,  every  disfigurement  or  disturb- 
ance either  of  the  one  or  the  other.  And  we  hold  it  the 
more  imperative  on  us  to  come  forward,  when  not  only 
hereditary  evils  are  not  to  be  got  rid  of,  but  are  actually 
to  be  increased  by  new  abuses,  and  that  too  at  a  time 
when  the  falling  away  from  Christianity  has  become  so 
general  and  cuts  so  deep — partly  for  this  very  reason, 
that,  under  the  mass  of  rubbish  it  is  overlaid  with,  its 
eternal,  divine,  and  saving  germ  is  hidden  from  the 
short-sighted  gaze  of  the  present  generation.  In  proof 
that  herein  ^ve  are  but  acting  in  the  spirit  of  the 
Church,  we  can  appeal  to  sayings,  the  one  of  a  Pope, 
the  other  of  a  highly-venerated  saint.  Innocent  in. 
said,  "Falsitas  sub  velamine  sanctitatis  tolerari  non 
debet,"  and  St.  Bernard  declares,  "  Melius  est  ut  scan- 
dalum  oriatur  quam  Veritas  relinquatur." 

Every  faithful  Catholic  is  convinced — and  to  tlmt  con- 
viction the  authors  of  this  book  profess  their  adherence 
— that  the  primacy  rests  on  Divine  appointment.  The 
Church  from  the  first  was  founded  upon  it,  and  the  Lord 
of  the  Church  ordained  its  type  in  the  person  of  Peter. 
It  has  therefore,  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  developed 
itself  up  to  a  certain  point,  but  on  this  has  followed,  since 


xxii  Preface. 

the  mnth  century,  a  further  development— artificial  and 
■  sickly  rather  than  sound  and  natural — of  the  Primacy 
into  the  Papacy,  a  transformation  more  than  a  develop- 
ment, the  consequcDces  of  which  have  been  the  splitting 
up  of  the  previously  united  CLurch  into  three  great 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  divided  and  at  enmity  with  each 
other.  The  ancient  Church  found  the  need  of  a  centre 
of  unity,  of  a  bishop  possessed  of  primatial  authority,  to 
whom  the  oppressed  might  turn,  and  by  whose  powerful 
intercession  they  might  obtain  justice.  But  when  the 
presidency  in  the  Church  became  an  empire,  when  in 
]Dlace  of  the  first  bishop  deliberating  and  deciding  in 
union  with  his  "  brethren  "  on  the  affairs  of  the  Church, 
and  setting  them  the  example  of  submission  to  her  laws, 
was  substituted  the  despotic  rule  of  an  absolute  mon- 
arch, then  the  unity  of  the  Church,  so  firmly  secured  be- 
fore, was  broken  up.  When  we  inquire  for  definite,  fixed, 
and  universally  acknowledged  rights,  exercised  equally 
throughout  the  whole  Church  during  the  first  Christian 
centuries  by  the  bishop  of  Ptome,  as  holding  the  primacy, 
we  seem  to  lose  sight  of  him  again,  for  of  the  privileges 
afterwards  obtained  or  laid  claim  to  by  the  Popes  not  one 
can  be  traced  up  to  the  earliest  times,  and  pointed  to 
as  a  right  uninterruptedly  and  everywhere  exercised. 


Preface,  xxiii 

But  we  meet  with  abundant  facts  wliicli  prove  unmis- 
takeably  that  the  Eoman  bishops  not  only  believed 
themselves  to  be  in  possession  of  a  Divine  right,  and 
acted  accordingly,  but  that  this  right  was  actually 
recognised  by  others.  And  if  it  was  often  affirmed,  as 
by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  that  the  Eoman  Church 
had  received  its  privileges  from  the  Fathers,  we  shall 
have  to  consider  that  the  Primacy  itself,  the  first  rank 
among  Churches,  was  not  given  to  it  by  any  Synod  at 
any  fixed  time,  but  had  always  existed  since  the  time  of 
the  Apostles,  and  that  to  any  heathen  who  asked  which 
among  their  Churches  was  the  first  and  principal  one, 
whose  voice  and  testimony  had  the  greatest  weight  and 
influence,  every  Christian  would  have  answered  at  once 
that  it  was  the  Eoman  Church,  where  the  two  chief 
Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  sealed  their  testimony  with 
their  blood,  just  as  Irenseus  has  expressed  it. 

But  we  shall  be  obliged  to  allow  that  the  form  which 
this  Primacy  took  depended  on  the  concessions  of  the 
particular  local  Churches,  and  was  never  therefore  the 
same  everywhere,  acting  within  certain  fixed  limits 
prescribed  by  law.  No  one  acquainted  with  Church ' 
history  will  choose  to  affirm  that  the  Popes  ever  exer- 
cised a  fixed  primatial  right,  in  the  same  way  in  Africa 


xxiv  Preface. 

as  in  Egypt,  in  Gaul  as  in  Mesopotamia;  and  the 
well-known  fact  speaks  clearly  enough  for  itself,  that 
throughout  the  whole  ancient  canon  law,  whether  in 
the  collections  preserved  in  the  Eastern  or  the  Western 
Church,  there  is  no  mention  of  Papal  rights,  or  any  re  - 
ference  to  a  legally  defined  action  of  the  bishop  of  Eome 
in  other  Churches,  with  the  single  exception  of  the 
canon  of  Sardica,  which  never  obtained  universally  even 
in  the  West. 

A  good  illustration  of  this  relation  of  the  Primacy  to 
the  Church  is  afforded  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  in 
451.  The  position  of  Pope  Leo,  though  he  was  not 
present,  is  evidently  a  very  high  and  influential  one ; 
more  honour  was  shown  to  him  and  his  Church  than 
had  been  ever  shown  at  any  Synod  to  any  other  bishop, 
and  his  legates  presided  with  great  authority  at  this 
most  numerous  of  the  ancient  assemblies  of  the  Church. 
Meanwhile  matters  came  at  last  to  a  point,  where  the 
Council  maintained,  and  eventually,  after  long  opposi- 
tion on  the  side  of  Eome,  carried  out  its  own  will  against 
the  legates,  and  the  instructions  they  had  received 
from  Leo.^ 


1  In  the  account  of  patristic  teaching  on  the  Koman  primacy  given 
below  (pp.  87  siiq.),  there  is  no  mention  made  of  one  important  name,  St. 


Preface.  xxv 

In  this  book  the  first  attempt  has  been  made  to 
give  a  history  of  the  hypothesis  of  Papal  Infallibility 
from  its  first  beginnings  to  the  end  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  when  it  appears  in  its  complete  form.  That 
hypothesis,  late  as  was  the  date  of  its  invention,  and 
though  for  a  long  time  it  met  with  strenuous  opposi- 
tion, will  yet  always  have  numerous  adherents,  if  it 
is  to  remain  for  the  future  in  its  former  condition  of 
a  mere  theological  opinion,  for  it  is  recommended  by 
its  convenience  and  facility  of  application.  It  seems 
to  attain,  by  the  shortest  road,  in  the  simplest  way, 
and  with  least  waste  of  time,  what  the  ancient  Church 
expended  so  much  trouble  upon,  with  so  many  appli- 
ances, and  for  so  long  a  time.     But,  if  once  generally 

Jerome's.  As  the  omission  might  be  considered  intentional,  we  take  this 
opportunity  of  making  some  remarks  on  him.  His  letters  to  Pope  Damasus 
of  375  {Opp.  ed.  Vallarsi,  i.  39),  were  written  under  the  pressure  of  his 
distress  in  Syria  from  the  charge  of  heresy  ;  he  was  unwilling  to  use  the 
received  expression,  "three  hypostases,"  instead  of  "three  persons,"  and 
was  therefore  accused  of  Sabellianism.  He  then  urged  the  Pope,  with 
courtly  and  high-soundiug  professions  of  unconditional  submission  to  his 
authority,  but,  at  the  same  time,  in  a  strictly  menacing  tone,  to  pronounce 
upon  this  term  in  the  sense  needed  for  justifying  him.  In  fact,  he  gave  St. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  to  whom  he  sent  his  profession  of  faith,  as  high  a  place 
as  the  Pope.  But  Cyril,  with  good  ground,  thought  the  case  a  suspicious 
one,  and  gave  him  no  answer.  St.  Jerome's  well-known  saying,  "Inter 
duodecim  unus  eligitur,  ut  capite  constituto  schisniatis  tolleretur  occasio," 
gives  the  most  pointed  expression  to  the  view  then  entertained  by  the 
faithful  of  the  nature  of  the  Primacy,  only  the  notions  current  in  our  day 
of  tlie  privileges  involved  in  this  description  of  it  are  more  extensive  than 
was  then  the  case. 


xxvi  Preface, 

accepted  as  a  rule  of  faith,  it  becomes  not  only  a  soft 
cushion  on  which  the  wearied  or  perplexed  mind,  as  well 
of  the  layman  as  of  the  theologian,  may  repose  softly,  and 
abandon  itself  to  undisturbed  slumber,  but  it  also  supplies 
to  the  intellectual  world  in  religious  matters  what  our 
steam  conveyances  and  electrical  wires  supply  to  the  ma- 
terial world  in  the  savin<]^  of  time  and  labour.  Nothinir 
could  be  more  economical  or  better  adapted  to  save  study 
and  intellectual  toil  even  for  Eome  herself ;  for  the  in- 
evitable result  of  the  principle  would  speedily  bring  us 
to  this  point,  that  the  essence  of  Infallibility  consists  in 
the  Pope's  signature  to  a  decree  hastily  drawn  up  by  a 
congregation  or  a  single  theologian.  The  remark  has 
frequently  been  made  that  it  is  chiefly  converts,  with 
little  theological  cultivation,  but  plenty  of  youthful 
zeal,  who  surrender  themselves  in  willing  and  joyful 
mental  slavery  to  the  infallible  ruler  of  souls  ;  rejoicing 
and  deeming  themselves  fortunate  to  have  a  master, 
visible,  palpable,  and  easily  inquired  of.  Christ  seems 
to  them  so  exalted  and  so  distant,  the  Church  so  large 
and  wide,  so  many-sided  in  its  opinions,  and  so  silent 
on  many  points  people  would  like  to  know  about.  How 
much  easier  to  get  a  dogmatic  decision  from  a  Pope  by 
the  proper  amount  of  pressure  !     We  may  call  to  mind, 


Preface.  xxvii 

in  tliis  connexion,  the  decisions  of  Alexander  vii.  in 
favour  of  the  newly  discovered  doctrine  of  attrition,  the 
decrees  of  Clement  xi.  and  Benedict  xiii.,  and  the 
powers  which  have  thereby  been  called  into  operation. 

But  if  raising  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility  into  an 
article  of  faith  must,  on  the  one  hand,  cripple  all  intel- 
lectual movement  and  scientific  activity  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  it  would,  on  the  other  hand,  build  up  a  new 
wall  of  partition,  and  that  the  strongest  and  most  im- 
penetrable of  all,  between  that  Church  and  the  religious 
communities  separated  from  her.  We  must  renounce 
that  dearest  hope  which  no  Christian  can  banish  from 
his  breast,  the  hope  of  a  future  reunion  of  the  divided 
Churches  both  of  the  East  and  the  West.  For  no  one 
who  is  moderately  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the 
Eastern  Church  and  of  the  Protestant  bodies,  will  seri- 
ously hold  it  to  be  conceivable  that  a  time  can  ever 
come  in  which  even  any  considerable  portion  of  these 
Churches  will  subject  itself,  of  its  own  free-will,  to  the 
arbitrary  power  of  a  single  man,  stretched,  as  it  would  be, 
through  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility,  even  beyond  its  pre- 
sent proportions.  Only  when  a  universal  conflagration 
of  libraries  had  destroyed  all  historical  documents,  when 
Easterns  and  Westerns  knew  no  more  of  their  own  early 


xxvili  Preface, 

history  than  the  Maories  in  New  Zealand  know  of  theirs 
now,  and  when,  by  a  miracle,  great  nations  had  abjured 
their  whole  intellectual  character  and  habits  of  thought, 
— then,  and  not  till  then,  would  such  a  submission  be 
possible. 

What  was  it  that  gave  the  Councils  of  Constance  and 
Basle,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  so  constraining  an  autho- 
rity and  such  a  lasting  influence  on  the  condition  of  the 
Church  ?  It  was  the  power  of  public  opinion  which 
backed  them  up.  And  if  at  this  day  a  strong  and 
unanimous  public  opinion,  at  once  positive  in  its  faith 
and  firm  in  its  resistance  to  the  realization  of  the  Ultra- 
montane scheme,  were  awakened  and  openly  proclaimed 
in  Europe,  or  even  in  Germany  only,  then,  in  spite  of 
the  utterances,  so  suggestive  of  gloomy  forebodings,  of  the 
Bishops  of  Mayence,  St.  Polten,  and  Mechlin,  the  present 
danger  would  happily  pass  away.  We  have  attempted  in 
this  work  to  contribute  to  the  awakening  and  direction 
of  such  a  public  opinion.  It  may,  perchance,  produce 
no  more  permanent  effect  than  a  stone  thrown  into  the 
water,  which  makes  a  momentary  ripple  on  the  surface, 
and  then  leaves  all  as  it  was  before  ;  but  yet  it  may  act 
like  a  net  cast  into  the  sea,  which  brings  in  a  rich 
draught  of  fishes. 


Preface.  xxix 

For  many  reasons  no  names  of  authors  are  placed  on 
our  title-page.  We  consider  tliat  a  work  so  entirely 
made  np  of  facts,  and  supporting  all  its  statements  by 
reference  to  the  original  authorities,  must  and  can  speak 
for  itself,  without  needing  any  names  attached  to  it. 
"We  are  anxious  that  the  reader's  attention  should  be 
exclusively  concentrated  on  the  matter  itself,  and  that, 
in  the  event  of  its  evoking  controversy,  no  opportu- 
nity should  be  given  for  transferring  the  dispute  from 
the  sphere  of  objective  and  scientific  investigation  of 
the  weighty  questions  under  review,  conducted  with 
dignity  and  calmness,  into  the  alien  region  of  venomous 
personal  defamation  and  invective. 

July  31,  18G9. 


INTRODUCTION, 

THE  veil  wliicli  has  hitherto  hung  over  the  prepara- 
tions and  intention  of  the  great  General  Council 
is  already  lifted. 

The  Clvilta  Cattolica  of  6th  February  published  the 
following  remarkable  article,  in  the  form  of  a  com- 
munication from  France  : — "  The  liberal  Catholics  are 
afraid  the  Council  may  proclaim  the  doctrines  of  the 
Syllabus  and  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope,  but  they  do 
not  give  up  the  hope  tliat  it  may  modify  or  interpret 
certain  statements  of  the  Syllabus  in  a  sense  favourable 
to  their  own  ideas,  and  that  the  question  of  Infallibility 
will  either  not  be  mooted  or  not  decided.  The  true 
Catholics,  who  are  the  great  majority  of  the  faithful, 
entertain  opposite  hopes.  They  wish  the  Council  to 
promulgate  the  doctrines  of  the  Syllabus.  In  any  case, 
the  Council  could  put  out  in  a  positive  form,  and  with 
the  requisite  developments,  the  negative  statements  of 
the  Syllabus,  and  thereby  quite  set  aside  the  misappre- 

A 


2  Introduction. 

tensions  which  exist  about  some  of  them.  Catholics 
will  accept  with  delight  the  proclamation  of  the  Pope's 
dogmatic  infallibility.  Every  one  knows  that  he  him- 
self is  not  disposed  to  take  the  initiative  in  a  matter 
so  directly  concerning  himself;  but  it  is  lioped  that  his 
infallibility  will  be  defined  unanimously,  by  acclama- 
tion, by  the  mouth  of  the  assembled  Fathers,  under  the 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Finally,  many  Catholics 
wish  the  Council  to  crown  the  many  honours  the  Church 
has  bestowed  on  the  all-blessed  Virgin  by  promulgating 
her  glorious  assumption  into  heaven  as  a  dogma."  It 
is  said  before,  that  "  Catholics  believe  the  Council  will 
be  of  short  duration,  like  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (ie., 
that  it  will  only  last  three  weeks).  It  is  believed  that 
the  Bishops  will  be  so  united  on  the  main  points,  that 
the  minority,  however  willing,  will  not  be  able  to  make 
any  prolonged  ojjposition." 

In  a  later  issue  of  the  Civilta  similar  wishes  are  put 
into  the  mouth  of  the  Belgian  Catholics,  "  who  are  not 
only  devoted  body  and  soul  to  the  interests  of  the  Church 
and  the  Holy  See,  but  submit  without  hesitation  to  all 
doctrinal  decisions  of  the  Holy  See."  They  hope,  among 
other  things,  that  the  Council  will  once  for  all  put  an 
end  to  the  division  among  Catholics,  by  striking  a  de- 


Inirodiictioii.  3 

cisive  blow  at  the  spirit  and  doctrines  of  Liberalism, 
and  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  infallibility  and 
supremacy  over  a  General  Council  will  be  defined. 
The  Belgian  correspondent  is  no  less  emphatic  in  re- 
pudiating the  tolerably  opposite  desires  of  the  so-called 
liberal  Catholics.  These,  who  number  many  of  the 
younger  clergy  among  their  ranks,  and  wdio  have  not 
completely  submitted  to  the  teaching  of  the  Encyclical 
and  Syllabus,  maintain  that  political  questions  do  not 
belong  to  the  Popes,  and  some  of  them  have  violently 
distorted  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus  in  tlieir  own 
sense."^  Their  blindness,  to  say  nothing  worse,  is  so 
great,  that  they  either  expect  opposite  decisions  to  these, 
or  an  interpretation  in  their  own  sense. 

We  shall  not  be  wrong  in  taking  these  correspon- 
dents' articles  of  the  Ci'cilta,  which  are,  perhaps,  to  be 
followed  by  others  from  other  parts  of  the  Catholic 
world,  as  something  more  than  feelers  merely  to  ascer- 
tain whether  things  are  ripe  for  the  dogmatic  surprises 
already  prepared.  No  !  these  zealots  are  not  accus- 
tomed to  pay  the  very  slightest  regard  to  the  mental 
disposition    of   their    age.      In   these   communications 

^  [This  seems  to  refer  to  the  Pastoral  of  the  Bishop  of  Orleans,  Dupan- 
loup.— Tr.] 


4  Introditctioii. 

about  the  wishes  and  hopes  of  Catholics,  which  take 
the  innocent  form  of  petitions  to  the  Holy  See,  we 
have  significant  hints  of  what  the  Council  is  expected 
to  do ;  significant  hints,  first  to  the  Bishops  to  acquaint 
themselves  with  their  duty,  and  abstain  from  useless 
opposition ;  and  next,  to  the  rest  of  the  Catholic  w^orld 
to  prepare  itself  for  the  approaching  "  announcements  of 
the  Holy  Ghost." 

The  Civilta,  written  by  Roman  Jesuits,  and  com- 
mended some  years  ago  in  a  Papal  Brief  as  the  purest 
journalistic  organ  of  true  Church  doctrine,  may  be 
regarded  as  in  some  sense  the  Moniteur  of  the  Court 
of  Eome.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  in  all  im- 
portant questions  its  thoughts  are  identical  with  those 
of  the  chief  head,  and  of  many  other  "  heads,"  in  Rome. 
Its  lofty  tone  and  arrogant  handling  of  all  opponents 
correspond  to  this  official  character.  Its  articles  often 
read  like  Papal  Bulls  spun  out.  One  could  not  there- 
fore desire  a  more  trustworthy  authority  as  to  the  aims 
of  Rome  in  convoking  this  Council. 

Nor  are  other  instructive  signs  w^anting  besides  the 
statements  of  the  Civilta.  The  Jesuits  have  been 
active  for  some  time  past  in  founding  confraternities 
which  bind  themselves  to  hold  and  propagate  Papal 


Introdicctio7i.  5 

Infallibility  as  an  article  of  faitli.  For  the  same  object 
the  institution  of  Provincial  Synods  has  been  revived 
during  the  last  ten  years,  under  stringent  and  repeated 
exhortations  from  Eome.  And  it  may  be  seen  from 
the  published  acts  of  those  held  both  in  and  out  of 
Germany,  that  the  question  of  Papal  Infallibility  and 
of  the  theses  of  the  Syllabus  has  been  laid  before 
them.  The  Jesuit  Schneemann  reports  that  the  Pro- 
vincial Synods  of  Cologne,  Colocsa,  Utrecht,  and  those 
held  in  Xorth  America,  have  accepted  Papal  Infalli- 
bility.-^ He  observes  that  "these  Synodal  affirmations 
of  Papal  Infallibility,  revised  at  Eome,  are  important  as 
showing  that,  though  as  yet  no  formal  article  of  faith, 
it  is  in  the  eyes  of  Eome,  and  of  the  Bishops,  an  in- 
dubitable truth.  Por  Provincial  Synods  are  strictly 
forbidden  to  decide  controverted  points  of  belief"  We 
may  safely  assume,  on  such  good  authority,  that  these 
decisions  were  not  waited  for  at  Eome,  but  were  sent 
from  Eome  to  the  Provincial  Synods  for  approval. 
The  answ^ers  could  have  been  known  beforehand  in 
the  present  state  of  things  in  the  Church ;  they  will 
be  produced  in  the  Council  as  proofs  of  the  belief  of 
the  majority  of  Catholic  Bishops,  and  to  give  the  ap- 

^  Literarischcr  Handweiser,  1867,  pp.  439  scq. 


6  IntrodiLciioii. 

pearance  of  the  definition  of  Papal  Infallibility  not 
being  so  exclusively  the  work  of  the  Jesuits,  an  ap- 
pearance Pius  IX.  was  anxious  to  avoid  in  the  case  of 
the  Immaculate  Conception.  It  appears,  by  a  letter  of 
Plir's  from  Eome,  that  he  yielded  quite  unexpectedly 
in  that  case  to  Cardinal  Eauscher's  demand  for  strikinof 
out  of  the  Bull  some  of  the  irrelevant  proofs  alleged, 
because,  as  he  said,  this  must  be  endured,  though  a 
humiliation  for  Eome,  that  people  might  not  say  every- 
thing depended  on  the  Jesuits.-^ 

We  know  on  good  authority  that  the  whole  plan  of 
the  campaign  for  fixing  the  Infallibility  dogma  is  already 
mapped  out.  An  English  Prelate — we  could  name  him — 
'has  undertaken  at  the  commencement  of  proceedings  to 
direct  a  humble  prayer  to  the  Holy  Father  to  raise  the 
opinion  of  his  infallibility  to  the  dignity  of  a  dogma. 
The  Jesuits  and  their  Eoman  allies  hope  that  the 
majority  of  the  Bishops  present,  who  have  been  already 
primed  for  the  occasion,  will  accede  by  acclamation  to 
this  petition,  and  the  Holy  Father  will  gladly  yield  to 

1  Briefe  aus  Rom  (InnslDruck,  1864),  p.  25 :— "  The  Holy  Father  has 
found  this  criticism  of  a  stranger  (viz.  Eauscher)  very  unpleasant,  and 
said—'  Questa  e  una  mortificazione  per  Eoma,  ma  e  bisogno  di  soffrirla, 
affinche  non  si  dica,  che  tutto  sia  dipendente  dai  Gesuiti."  [Flir  was 
Pvector  of  the  German  Church  at  Rome,  and  Auditor  of  the  Rota.  His 
Letters  are  reviewed  in  the  Saturday  Review  for  May  28,  1864.— Tr.] 


Introduction.  7 

the  pressure  coming  on  him  spontaneously,  and,  as  it 
were,  through  a  sudden  and  irresistible  inspiration  from 
on  high,  and  so  the  new  dogma  will  be  settled  at  one 
sitting,  without  further  examination,  as  by  the  stroke 
of  a  magician's  wand.  As  the  Eoman  people  are  told 
after  a  Conclave,  Hcibemus  Papam,  on  the  evening  of 
this  memorable  sitting  the  news  will  go  forth  to  the 
whole  Catholic  world,  Hctbemiis  Papam  infallibilem. 
And  before  this  newly  risen  and  bright  sun  of  divine 
truth,  all  the  ghosts  of  false  science  and  forms  of 
modern  civilisation  will  be  scared  away  for  ever. 

Meanwhile,  to  keep  to  the  articles  of  the  Cimlta 
already  quoted,  it  is  clear  from  them  that  the  Council 
is  summoned  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  satisfying  the 
darling  wishes  of  the  Jesuits  and  that  part  of  the  Curia 
which  is  led  by  them. 

We  propose  to  examine  these  theories  in  the  follow- 
ing order : — first  we  shall  take  the  Syllabus  and  what 
concerns  it;  then  we  shall  briefly  discuss  the  new 
dogma  about  Mary ;  and  lastly  we  shall  set  the  dogma 
of  Papal  Infallibility  in  the  light  of  history. 


CHAPTEE   I. 

MAKING  THE  SYLLABUS  DOGMATIC. 

rriHE  articles  of  the  Syllabus — such,  we  are  told,  is 
-^  one  of  the  urgent  wishes  of  true  Catholics — are 
to  be  defined  by  the  Council  in  the  form  of  positive 
dogmas.  The  Church  will  thus  be  enriched  with  a 
considerable  number  of  new  articles  of  faith,  hitherto 
unheard  of  or  abundantly  contradicted ;  but  when  once 
Papal  Infallibility  has  become  matter  of  faith,  this  will 
be  only  the  first  fruits  of  a  far  richer  harvest  in  the 
future.  The  extent  of  the  Catholic  Church  will  thereby 
be  gradually  narrowed,  perhaps  till  it  presents  the 
spectacle  once  offered  to  the  world  by  a  Pope,  Peter 
de  Luna,  Benedict  xm.,  who  from  his  castle  of  Peniscola 
condemned  the  whole  of  Christendom  which  refused  to 
acknowledge  him,  and  finally,  when  the  Council  of 
Constance  had  solemnly  deposed  him  (1417),  and  the 
number  of  his  adherents  was  reduced  to  a  few  indivi  - 
duals,  declared — "The  whole  Church  is  assembled  in 


The  Syllabus.  9 

Peniscola,  not  in  Constance,  as  once  the  whole  human 
race  was  collected  in  Noah's  ark."  But  this  will  give 
them  little  concern  ;  nay,  the  more  the  educated  classes 
are  forced  out  of  the  Church,  the  easier  will  it  be  for 
Loyola's  steersmen  to  guide  the  ship,  and  reduce  the 
true  flock  that  still  remains  in  it  to  more  complete 
subjection.  Catholicism,  hitherto  regarded  as  a  uni- 
versal religion,  would,  by  a  notable  irony  of  its  fate, 
be  transformed  into  the  precise  opposite  of  what  its 
name  and  notion  imports.  As  the  assembled  Bisliops 
are  to  exercise  their  power  of  formulating  dogmas  on 
the  contents  of  the  Syllabus,  they  have  only  to  set 
their  conciliar  seal  on  a  work  already  prepared  to 
their  hand  by  the  Vienna  Jesuit,  Schrader.-^  He  has 
already  turned  the  negative  statements  of  the  Syllabus 
into  affirmatives,  and  so  we  can,  without  trouble,  anti- 
cipate the  decisions  of  the  Council  on  this  matter. 
And,  as  it  is  to  last  only  three  weeks,  from  and  after 
29th  December  1869  the  Eoman  Catholic  world  will  be 
enriched  by  the  following  truths,  and  will  have  to  ac- 
cept, on  peril  of  salvation,  the  following  principles  : — 
(1.)  The  Church  has  the  right  of  emj)loying  external 

^  Ber  Pahst  unci  die  modernen  Ideen.     Heft  ii.  Die  Encyclica.  Wien, 
1865. 


lo  The  Sy Habits, 

coercion ;  slie  has  direct  and  indirect  temporal  power, 
iMestatem  temiporaUm  as  distinguished  from  spiritualem, 
or,  in  ecclesiastical  language,  power  of  civil  and  corporal 
punishment.^  Schrader  himself  intimates  that  this  is 
meant  when  he  says,  "  It  is  not  only  minds  that  are 
under  the  power  of  the  Church."  ^  His  fellow-Jesuit, 
Schneemann,  speaks  out  clearly  and  roundly  enough  on 
this  point :  "  As  the  Church  has  an  external  jurisdiction 
she  can  impose  temporal  punishments,  and  not  only 
deprive  the  guilty  of  spiritual  privileges.  .  .  .  The  love 
of  earthly  things,  which  injures  the  Church's  order, 
obviously  cannot  be  effectively  put  down  by  merely 
spiritual  punishments.  It  is  little  affected  by  them. 
If  that  order  is  to  be  avenged  on  what  has  injured  it,  if 
that  is  to  suffer  which  has  enjoyed  the  sin,  temporal  and 
sensible  punishments  must  be  employed."  Among  these 
Schneemann  reckons  fines,  imprisonment,  scourging,  and 
banishment,  and  he  is  but  endorsing  an  article  in  the 
Givilta,Del  potere  coattivo  della  Cliiesa,  which  maintains 
the  necessity  of  the  Church  visiting  her  opponents  with 

1  The  Syllabus  condemns  the  following  propositions :  "  Ecclesia  vis 
iufei-endi^  potestatem  non  habet,  neque  potestateni  ullam  temporalem, 
(lirectam  aut  indirectam"  (24).  "Pra^ter  potestatem  episcopatui  inhseren- 
tem,  alia  ei  attributa  est  temporalis  potestas  a  civili  impevio  vel  expresse  vel 
tacite  concessa,  revocanda  propterea,  cum  libuerit,  a  civili  imperio"  (25). 

2  Der  Pabst,  p.  6i. 


The  Syllabtis.  ii 

fines,  fasts,  imprisonment,  and  scourging,  because  with- 
out this  external  power  the  Church  could  not  last  to 
the  end  of  the  world.  She  herself  is  to  fix  the  limits  of 
this  power,  and  he  is  a  rebel  against  God  who  denies  it. 
Schneemann  does  not  conceal  his  grief  that  the  present 
world  is  so  far  gone  from  the  apprehension  and  appli- 
cation of  these  wholesome  truths  :  "  We  see  that  the 
State  does  not  always  fulfil  its  duties  towards  the 
Church  according  to  the  divine  idea,  and,  let  us  add, 
cannot  always  fulfil  them,  through  the  wickedncoS  of 
men.  And  thus  the  Church's  rights  in  inflicting  tem- 
poral punishment  and  the  use  of  physical  force  are  re- 
duced to  a  minimum."  ^ 

It  was  from  the  spirit  here  manifested  that  Pius  ix. 
in  1851  censured  the  teaching  of  the  canonist  Nuytz  in 
Turin,  because  he  allowed  only  the  power  of  spiritual 
punishment  to  the  Church.^  And  in  the  Concordat 
made  in  1863  with  the  Eepublics  of  South  America,  it 

1  Schneemaim's  Die  Tcirchliche  Gewalt  unci  Hire  Trilger  forms  vol.  vii.  of 
the  Stimmen  aus  Maria  Laach  (Freiburg,  1867).  The  passages  quoted  are 
from  pp.  18,  41.  The  article  of  the  Civiltd  referred  to  appeared  in  1854, 
vol.  vii.  p.  603.  It  is  said  expressly  of  the  Churcl)  that  against  those  "  che 
ricusano  la  soggezione  dello  spirito,  operi  per  via  di  castighi  temporali, 
multandoli  nelle  sostanze,  maurandoli  con  privazioni  e  digiuni,  aflligendoli 
con  carcere  e  battiture."  The  other  references  to  the  Civiltd  are  from  vol. 
vui.  pp.  42,  279-282. 

2  The  works  censured  are  Juris  Ecclesiastici  Instit.  and  l7i  Jus  Eccles. 
Univ.  Tractat. 


12  The  Syllabus. 

is  laid  down  in  Article  8  tliat  the  civil  authorities  are 
absolutely  bound  to  execute  every  penalty  decreed  by  tlie 
spiritual  courts.  In  a  statement  addressed  by  Pius  ix.  to 
Count  Duval  de  Beaulieu,  published  in  the  Allgemeine 
Zeitung  of  November  13, 18G4,  the  power  of  the  Church 
over  the  government  of  civil  society,  and  its  direct 
jurisdiction  in  temporal  matters,  is  expressly  guarded. 

It  follows  that  they  are  greatly  mistaken  w^ho  suppose 
that  the  Biblical  and  old  Christian  spirit  has  prevailed 
in  the  Church  over  the  mediaeval  notion  of  her  beins^ 
an  institution  with  coercive  power  to  imprison,  hang, 
and  burn.  On  the  contrary,  these  doctrines  are  to 
receive  fresh  sanction  from  a  General  Council,  and  that 
pet  theory  of  the  Popes — that  they  could  force  kings  and 
magistrates,  by  excommunication  and  its  consequences, 
to  carry  out  their  sentences  of  confiscation,  imprison- 
ment, and  death — is  now  to  become  an  infallible  dogma. 
It  follows  that  not  only  is  the  old  institution  of  the 
Inquisition  justified,  but  it  is  recommended  as  an  urgent 
necessity  in  view  of  the  unbelief  of  the  present  age. 
The  Civilta  has  long  since  described  it  as  "  a  sublime 
spectacle  of   social  perfection;"^    and  the  two  recent 

^  In  1855,  vol.  i.  p.  55,  the  Inquisition  is  called  ''tin  sublime  spettacolo 
clella  perfezioue  sociale." 


The  Syllables.  .  13 

canonizations  and  beatifications  of  inquisitors,  following 
in  rapid  succession,  gain  in  this  connexion  a  new  and 
remarkable  significance. 

(2.)  According  to  Sclirader's  afiirmative  statement 
of  the  twenty-third  proposition  of  the  Syllabus,  the 
Popes  have  never  exceeded  the  bounds  of  their  power 
or  usurped  the  rights  of  princes.-^  All  Catholics  must 
for  the  future  acknowledge,  and  all  teachers  of  civil 
law  and  theology  must  maintain,  that  the  Popes  can 
still  depose  kings  at  their  will,  and  give  away  whole 
kingdoms  and  nations  at  their  good  pleasure. 

When,  for  instance,  Martin  iv.  placed  King  Pedro  of 
Araojon  under  excommunication  and  interdict  for  makino- 
good  his  hereditary  claim  to  Sicily  after  the  rising  of 
the  Sicilians  against  the  tyranny  of  Charles  I.  (in  1282), 
and  then  promised  indulgences  for  all  their  sins  to 
those  who  fought  with  him  and  Charles  against  Pedro, 
and  finally  declared  his  kingdom  forfeit,  and  made  it 
over  for  a  yearly  tribute  to  Charles  of  Yalois — a  step 
which  cost  the  two  kings  of  Prance  and  Aragon  their 
life,  and  the  French  the  loss  of  an  army,^ — this  was  not, 

1  The  Syllabus  condemns  the  following  proposition  (23),  "Eomani  Pon- 
tifices  et  Concilia  CEcumenica  a  limitibus  sujb  potestatis  recesserunt,  jura 
Principum  iisurparuut."     Cf.  Schrader,  ut  sup.  p.  63. 

2  See  Raynald.  Annul.  Eccles.  (ed.  Mansi),  vol.  iii.  pp.  183-4.  The  Bull  of 
Martin  iv.  against  Peter  of  Aragon  runs  thus  :  "  Regnum  Aragoniai  cffiter- 


14  The  Syllables. 

as  the  world  in  its  false  enlightenment  has  hitherto 
supposed,  a  violent  usurpation,  but  the  application  of  a 
divine  right  which  every  Pope  still  possesses  in  full, 
though  prudence  may  require  that  for  the  moment,  and 
perhaps  for  some  time  to  come,  they  should  let  it  lie 
dormant,  and  adopt  meantime  a  waiting  attitude. 

Pope  Clement  iv.,  in  1265,  after  selling  millions  of 
South  Italians  to  Charles  of  Anjou  for  a  yearly  tribute 
of  eight  hundred  ounces  of  gold,  declared  that  he  would 
be  excommunicated  if  the  first  payment  was  deferred 
beyond  the  appointed  term,  and  that  for  the  second 
neglect  the  whole  nation  would  incur  interdict,  i.e.,  be 
deprived  of  sacraments  and  divine  worship.-^ 

asqiie  terras  Eegis  ipsius  exponentes,  lit  sequitur,  ipsimi  Petrum  regem 
Aragonum  eisdera  regno  et  terris  regioqiie  lionore  sententialiter,  justitia 
exigente,  privamus  ;  et  privantes  exponimus  eaclem  occupanda  Catliolicis, 
de  quibus  et  proiit  Sedes  Apostolica  duxeiit  providendum,  in  dictis  regno 
et  terris  ejusdem  Ecclesife  Romante  jure  salvo."  The  Pope  required  of 
Charles  of  Anjou,  "quingentas  libras  parvorum  Turonensium  "  as  Papal 
tribute,  and  for  this  consideration  had  a  crusade  preached  against  Peter, 
with  the  following  promise  (1283) :  "Omnibus  Christi  fidelibus  qui  contra 
Uegem  Aragonise  nobis,  Ecclesise  vel  Ptegi  Sicilise  astiterint,  si  eos  projiterea 
in  conflictu  mori  contigerit,  illam  peccatorum  suorum,  de  quibus  corde 
contriti  et  ore  professi  fueriut,  veniam  indulgemus  qu33  transfretantibus  in 
terrae  sanctoe  subsidium  consueverit. "  It  is  noteworthy  that  Martin  iv. 
compelled  several  German  churches  (Liege,  Metz,  Verdun,  Basle)  to  x>^y 
a  tenth  of  all  ecclesiastical  property  to  France  for  carrying  on  this  war. 
When  Ptudolph  of  Ilapsburg  reclaimed  vigorously  against  so  unheard  of  a 
demand,  Martin's  successor,  Honorius  iv.,  exhorted  him  "to  submit 
patiently  to  the  exaction  out  of  reverence  for  the  Papal  See."  Raynald. 
ut  sup.  pp.  600-1. 

1  Raynald.  p.  162.     "Quod  si  in  secundo  termino  infra  subsequentes 


The  Syllabus.  15 

Nevertheless,  the  Bishops  of  the  future  Council  are  to 
make  it  an  article  of  faith  that  the  Pope  did  not  thereby 
exceed  the  limits  of  his  power  ;  in  other  words,  that  he 
could  at  his  mere  caprice,  and  for  purely  political  or 
pecuniary  ends,  deprive  millions  of  innocent  men  of 
what,  according  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church,  are  the 
necessary  means  of  salvation. 

(3.)  If  the  Council  executes  the  programme  of  the 
Civiltct,  it  will  also  undertake  a  correction  of  the  hitherto 
prevalent  estimate  of  history.  "We  now  read  in  all 
historical  books  and  systems  of  Church  law  that  the 
immunities  of  the  clergy  {e.g.,  the  privilegium  fori,  the 
unrestricted  right  of  acquiring  property,  and  exemption 
from  civil  functions)  were  gradually  conceded  to  the 
Church  by  the  Eoman  emperors  and  later  kings,  and 
have  therefore  a  civil  origin.  This  will  be  characterized 
as  heresy."^ 

Those  also  will  become  guilty  of  heresy  who  write  or 
teach  that  the  extravagant  pretensions  of  the  Popes 
contributed  to  the  separation  of  the  Eastern  and  Western 
Churches,  though  this  may  be  discovered   in   official 

duos  menses  eundem  censum  sine  diminutione  qualibet  non  persolveritis, 
to.tum  regnum  ac  tota  terra  predicta  ecclesiastico  erunt  supposita  inter- 
dicto." 

1  The  Syllabus  condemns  the  prop,  (30),  "Ecclesise  et  personarum 
ecclesiasticarum  immunitas  a  jure  civili  ortum  habuit." 


1 6  The  Syllables. 

documents  from  the  twelfth  to  the  sixteenth  century, 
and  the  avowals  of  a  number  of  contemporary  authori- 
ties.-^ 

In  prospect  of  such  decrees  all  Catholic  writers  on 
Law  or  History  should  be  urgently  advised  to  publish 
their  works  before  30th  December  1869  ;  for  from  thence- 
forward, "  magnus  ab  integro  sseclorum  nascitur  ordo," 
and  only  Jesuits  or  their  pupils  will  be  called  or 
qualified,  without  savour  of  heresy,  to  write  on  secular 
or  Church  history,  civil  law,  politics,  canon  law,  etc. 
There  will  at  least  be  required  for  literary  and  academical 
work  a  flexibility  and  elastic  versatility  of  spirit  and 
pen  hitherto  confined  to  journalism. 

(4.)  Still  more  dangerous  will  be  the  questions  of 
freedom  of  conscience,  and  persecution,  when  once  the 
propositions  of  the  Syllabus  are  made  articles  of  faith, 
according  to  the  will  of  the  Jesuits  and  the  Bishops 
acting  under  their  guidance. 

The  Syllabus  condemns  the  whole  existing  view  of 
the  rights  of  conscience  and  religious  faith  and  profes- 
sion :  it  is  a  wicked  error  to  admit  Protestants  to  equal 
political  rights  with  Catholics,  or  to  allow  Protestant 

1  It  condemns  proposition  38,  "  Divisioni  EcclesiiB  in  Orientalem  atque 
Occidentalem  Romanorum  Pontificum  arbitria  contulerunt." 


The  Syllables.  17 

immigrants  the  free  use  of  their  worship  -}  on  the  con- 
trary, to  coerce  and  suppress  them  is  a  sacred  duty, 
when  it  has  become  possible,  as  the  Jesuit  Fathers  and 
their  adherents  teach.  Till  then,  Schneemann^  says,  the 
Churcli  will,  of  course,  act  with  the  greatest  prudence 
in  the  use  of  her  temporal  and  physical  power,  accord- 
ing to  altered  circumstances,  and  will  not  therefore  at 
present  adopt  her  entire  mediseval  policy. 

The  inevitable  result  of  this  is  to  pro^^agate,  from 
generation  to  generation,  lies,  hypocrisy,  and  deceit  by 
wholesale ;  but  that  is  the  lesser  evil.  For  freedom  of 
opinion  and  worship  produces,  according  to  the  Syllabus, 
profligacy  and  the  pest  of  indifferentism.  That,  too,  is 
to  become  an  article  of  faith,  and  the  future  commenta- 
tors on  the  decrees  of  the  Council  will  have  to  confirm 
its  truth  by  reference  to  the  actual  condition  of  the 
nations  which  have  these  liberties.  They  will  point  to 
tlie  Germans,  the  English,  the  French,  and  the  Belgians 

1  It  condeinris  proj).  77,  "^tate  hac  nostra  non  amplius  expedit  reli- 
gionera  Catholicam  haberi  tanquam  unicam  status  religionem,  cseteris 
quibuscnnque  cultibus  exclusis  ;" — prop.  78,  "Hinc  laudabiliter  in  qui- 
busdam  Catbolici  noniinis  regionibns  lege  cantum  est,  nt  hominibus  illuc 
immigrantibus  liceat  publicum  proprii  cujusque  cultua  exercitiun;  habere  ; " 
— prop.  79,  "  Eniinvero  falsum  est  civileni  cujusque  cultils  libertatem, 
itemque  plenam  potestatem  omnibus  attributam  quaslibet  opiniunes  cogi- 
tationesque  palam  publicequemanit'estandi,  conducere  ad  populorum  mores 
animosque  facilius  corrumpendos  ac  indifferentismi  pestem  propagandam. " 

2  Schneemann,  ut  suiyru,  p.  30. 


1 8  The  Syllabus. 

as  the  most  profligate  of  men,  while  the  Neapolitans, 
Spaniards,  and  inhabitants  of  the  Eoman  States,  with 
whom  the  exclusive  system  flourishes,  or  did  till  quite 
lately,  are  a  brilliant  model  of  virtue  among  all  nations 
of  the  earth.  To  speak  seriously,  the  contest  inaugur- 
ated by  the  Encyclical  of  1864  will  have  to  be  carried 
out  with  the  free  use  of  every  available  Church  wea- 
pon,— a  contest  against  the  common  sentiment  and  moral 
sense  of  every  civilized  people,  and  all  the  institutions 
that  have  grown  out  of  them. 

It  is  but  a  few  years  since  Ketteler,  Bishop  of 
Mayence,  in  a  widespread  work  praised  by  all  the 
Catholic  journals  of  the  day,  undertook  to  show  the 
moderation,  tolerance,  and  self-restraint  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church  in  its  relations  with  the  State  and  the 
separate  Churches.  He  insists  that  the  Church  so 
thoroughly  respects  freedom  of  conscience  as  to  repu- 
diate all  outward  coercion  of  those  beyond  her  pale  as 
immoral  and  utterly  unlawful ;  that  nothing  is  further 
from  her  mind  than  to  employ  any  physical  force  against 
those  who,  as  being  baptized,  are  her  members ;  that 
she  must  leave  it  entirely  to  their  own  freest  determi- 
nation whether  they  will  accept  her  faith  ;  and  that  it  is 
absurd  for  Protestants  to  suppose  they  have  any  need  to 


The  Syllabus.  19 

fear  a  forcible  conversion,  etc.  etc.^  How  far  these  state- 
ments can  be  verified  by  history  is  indeed  very  doubtful. 
Meanwhile  the  Bishop  is  instructed  by  tlie  Syllabus 
and  its  commentator,  Schrader,  that  he  has  fallen  into 
that  forbidden  liberalism  which  is,  according  to  the 
Eoman  view,  one  of  the  grossest  errors  of  the  day,  and 
that  it  was  by  special  indulgence  of  Eome  that  his 
book  was  not  put  on  the  Index.  What  a  light  this 
throws  on  the  condition  of  tlie  Church,  and  what  an 
unworthy  mental  slavery  the  Eoman  Jesuit  party 
threatens  foreign  Catholics  with  is  thus  made  clear 
enough  !  An  illustrious  bishop  speaks,  amid  universal 
applause,  without  a  syllable  of  dissent  from  his  fellow- 
bishops,  on  those  grave  questions,  upon  the  right  an- 
swer to  which  the  legal  position  and  beneficial  action  of 
the  Church  in  our  days  in  large  measure  depends.  And 
now,  a  few  years  afterwards,  the  Pope,  without  indeed 
naming  him,  condemns  his  doctrine,  and  the  very  people 
who  applauded  the  bishop's  book  applaud  the  Encyclical 
with  yet  profounder  homage,  and  are  convinced  that 
what  they  took  for  white  is  black.  Ketteler,  who  knows 
well  enough  that  the  m^ain  object  of  the  Syllabus  is  to 
exalt  principles  at  first  only  applied  to  the  condition 

1  Freiheit,  Autoriicit,  und  Kirche,  Mainz,  1862. 


20  The  Syllalms. 

and  circumstances  of  a  particular  country  into  universal 
articles  of  faith,  tried  to  save  himself  by  the  pitiful 
evasion  that  these  articles  of  the  Syllabus  do  not  con- 
tain a  general  principle,  but  only  one  applicable  to 
certain  countries,  especially  Spain.^  It  appears,  then, 
that  our  bishops,  our  theologians  and  preachers,  and 
our  people,  did  not  know  what  the  true  doctrine  of  the 
Catholic  Church  is,  but  only  those  monks  and  monsi- 
gnori,  especially  the  Jesuits,  who  compose  the  Eoman 
Congregations,  and  who  have  now  for  the  first  time 
since  the  Encyclical  of  Gregory  xvi.  opened  the  hitherto 
jealously  closed  fountains  of  knowledge.  And  thus 
the  sinc^ular  fact  has  come  to  licfht  that  the  Catholic 
nations  have  for  a  long  time  been  thoroughly  heterodox, 
and  that  their  appointed  teachers  have  helped  on  the 
error,  and  sworn  to  Constitutions  moulded  in  utterly 
vicious  principles  and  laid  under  ban  of  Eome. 

(5.)  The  Syllabus  closes  with  the  notorious  assertion 
that  "  they  are  in  damnable  error  who  regard  the 
reconciliation  of  the  Pope  with  modern  civilisation  as 
possible  or  desirable."^ 

Every  existing  Constitution  in  Europe,  with  the  sole 

1  Deutsdilaitd  nach  dem  Kriege,  Mainz,  3867,  cap.  12. 

*^  The  Syllabus  condemns  prop.  80,  "  Romanus  Pontifex  potest  ac  debet 
cum  progressu  cum  liberalismo  et  cum  recenti  civilisatione  sese  reconcili- 
are  et  componere." 


The  Syllables.  21 

exception  of  Eussia  and  tlie  Eoman  States,  is  an  outgrowth 
of  this  modern  civilisation.  Freedom  of  religious 
profession,  worship,  and  teaching,  freedom  of  political 
rights  and  duties  before  the  la\y, — these,  with  the 
people's  right  of  taxing  themselves,  and  taking  a  part 
in  legislation  and  municipal  self-government,  are  the 
dominant  jjrinciples  and  ideas  which  interpenetrate  all 
existing  Constitutions,  and  they  are  so  closely  connected, 
and  so  sustain  each  other,  that  where  some  of  them  are 
conceded,  the  rest  inevitably  follow.  But  an  opposite 
course  has  been  steadily  pursued  in  the  Church  for  cen- 
turies, especially  since  the  pseudo-Isidorian  decretals; 
the  hierarchical  system  has  become  more  and  more 
built  up  into  an  unlimited  oligarchical  absolutism,  and 
a  constantly  growing  and  encroaching  bureaucratic 
centralization  has  killed  out  all  the  old  Church-life  in 
its  harmonious  disposition  and  synodal  self-government, 
or  turned  it  into  a  mere  empty  form. 

Thus  Church  and  State  are  like  two  parallel  streams, 
one  flowing  north,  the  other  south.  The  modern  civil 
Constitutions,  and  the  efforts  for  self-government  and 
the  limitation  of  arbitrary  royal  power,  are  in  the  strong- 
est contradiction  to  Ultramontanism,  the  very  kernel 
and  ruling  principle  of  which  is  the  consolidation  of 


2  2  The  Syllables. 

absolutism  in  the  Cliurch.  But  State  and  Cliurch  are 
intimately  connected;  they  act  and  react  on  one  an- 
other, and  it  is  inevitable  that  the  political  views  and 
tendencies  of  a  nation  should  sooner  or  later  influence 
it  in  Church  matters  also. 

Hence  the  profound  hatred,  at  the  bottom  of  the  soul 
of  every  genuine  ultramontane,  of  free  institutions  and 
the  whole  constitutional  system.  The  Givilta  not  long 
since  gave  pointed  utterance  to  it : — "  Christian  States 
have  ceased  to  exist ;  human  society  is  again  become 
heathen,  and  is  like  an  earthly  body  with  no  breath 
from  heaven.  But  with  God  nothing  is  impossible ;  he 
can  quicken  the  dry  bones,  as  in  Ezekiel's  vision.  The 
political  power,  parliaments,  voting  urns,  civil  marriages, 
are  dry  bones.  The  universities  are  not  only  dry,  but 
stinking  bones,  so  great  is  the  stench  that  rises  from 
their  deadly  and  pestilential  teaching.  But  these  bones 
can  be  recalled  to  life  if  they  hear  God's  word  and 
receive  His  law,  which  is  proclaimed  to  them  by  the 
supreme  and  infallible  doctor,  the  Pope."-^ 

Let  us  remember  that  the  noble  mother  of  Euro- 
pean Constitutions,  the    English   Magna  Charta,  was 

^  Vol.  iii.  pp.  265  seq.,  1868.  "  Ossa,  non  pur  aride,  ma  fetenti  le 
imiversita,  tanto  e  il  puzzo,  clie  n'esce  di  dottrine  conompitrici  e  pesti- 
ferL" 


The  Syllabus.  23 

visited  with  the  severest  anger  of  Pope  Innocent  in., 
who  understood  its  importance  well  enough.  He  saw 
therein  a  contempt  for  the  Apostolic  See,  a  curtailing  of 
royal  prerogatives,  and  a  disgrace  to  the  English  nation; 
he  therefore  pronounced  it  null  and  void,  and  excom- 
municated the  English  barons  who  obtained  it.-^  We  may 
readily  do  Pius  ix.  and  his  Jesuit  counsellors,  who  are 
notoriously  the  authors  of  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus, 
the  justice  of  admitting  that  they  have  done  in  1864 
what  Innocent  in  1215  was  prophet  enough  to  consider 
for  the  interests  of  the  Church.  What  was  then  a  weak 
and  tender  sapling  has  grown,  in  spite  of  the  curse  ot 
the  most  powerful  of  all  the  Popes,  into  a  mighty  tree, 
overshadowing  half  the  world,  and  is  blest  with  bloom- 


1  The  Bull  (Aug,  15,  1215)  runs  thus  :— "  Nos  tantfe  indignitatis  auda- 
ciam  dissimulare  nolentes,  in  apostolicte  sedis  contemptum,  regal  is  juris 
dispendium,  Anglicauce  gentis  opprobrium  et  grave  periculum  totius 
negotii  crucifixi  (quod  utique  iramineret,  nisi  per  auctoritatem  nostram 
revocarentur  omnia,  quJB  a  tanto  Principe  cruce  signato  totaliter  sunt 
extorta,  etiam  ipso  volente  ilia  servari) :  ex  parte  Dei  omnipotentis,  Patris 
et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  sancti,  auctoritate  quoque  beatorum  Petri  et  Pauli 
Apostolorum  ejus,  ac  nostra,  de  communi  fratrum  nostrorum  consilio, 
compositionem  hujusmodi  reprobamus  penitus  et  damnamus  ;  sub  inter- 
minatione  anathematis  prohibentes,  ne  dictus  Rex  earn  observare  pra?- 
sumat,  aut  Barones  cum  complicibus  suis  ipsam  exigant  observari :  tarn 
chartam  quam  obligationes  seu  cautiones,  quoecunque  pro  ipsa  vel  de  ipsa 
sunt  facta},  irritantes  penitus,  aut  cassantes,  ut  nullo  unquam  tempore 
aliquamhabeantfirmitatem." — Rymer, /octZera,  etc.  (ed.  Clarke),  i.  p.  135. 
Innocent  sent  a  similar  document  to  the  English  barons,  and  when  they 
took  no  heed  of  it  the  ban  and  interdict  folloAved. 


24  The  Syllabus. 

ins  children  and  children's  children.  And  so,  too,  its 
latest  offspring,  the  Austrian  Constitution, — which  a 
far  feebler  successor  of  Innocent  has  stigmatized  as 
an  "  unspeakable  abomination"  (infanda  sane), — may 
rest  in  peace,  and  appeal  confidently  to  the  world's 
verdict  on  the  world's  history.  And  the  more  so,  since 
this  very  successor  was  not  ashamed,  a  year  or  two  ago, 
to  have  the  question  asked  in  London,  whether  he  too 
might  not  find  a  residence  in  the  motherland  of  those 
"  demoralizing"  laws  of  freedom. 

Eome  has  shown  herself  no  less  hostile  to  the  French 
than  to  the  English  Constitution.  In  1824,  Leo  xii. 
addressed  a  letter  to  Louis  xviii,  pointing  out  the 
badness  of  the  French  Constitution,  and  urgently  press- 
ing him  to  expunge  from  the  charter  those  articles  which 
savoured  of  liberalism.^  When  Charles  x.  tried  to 
change  the  Constitution  by  the  ordinances  of  July  1830, 
every  one  gave  the  blame  to  his  episcopal  advisers,  and 
especially  his  confessor.  Cardinal  Latil.  The  fall  of 
the  Bourbons  was  the  result.  Soon  after  the  establish- 
ment of  the  new  Belgian  Constitution  in  1832,  Gregory 
XVI.  issued  his  famous  Encyclical,  recently  used  and 
confirmed  by  Pius  ix.,   which  pronounces  freedom  of 

1  See  Artaud  de  Moutor,  Hist.  Leo  XII.  (Paris,  18i3),  vol.  i.  p.  2Useq. 


The  Syllabus.  25 

conscience  an  insane  folly,  and  freedom  of  tlie  press  a 
pestiferous  error,  wliicli  cannot  be  sufficiently  detested. 
The  immediate  consequence  was  the  rise  of  a  liberal 
party  in  Belgium,  at  internecine  feud  with  the  Catholic 
party.  The  contest  still  goes  on,  after  nearly  forty 
years;  the  schism  has  groAvn  ever  wider  and  deeper, 
and  the  hatred  fiercer  between  them,  and,  as  Ultramon- 
tanism  makes  every  understanding  or  compromise  be- 
tween them  impossible,  the  political  controversy  has 
merged  in  a  systematic  attacking  and  undermining  of 
all  positive  religion.  The  Belgian  Catholics  have  never 
been  able  to  meet  the  reproach  of  being  necessarily 
enemies  to  a  Constitution  condemned  as  wicked  by  the 
Pope,  and  that  all  their  assurances  of  loyalty  and  con- 
scientious respect  for  the  fundamental  law  of  the  country 
are  mere  hypocrisy.  And  thus,  with  all  the  religious- 
ness of  the  people,  the  liberal  and  anti-religious  party 
is  constantly  gaining  ground,  while  the  Catholic  party, 
divided  against  itself  by  the  split  between  ultramon- 
tanes  and  liberals  (i  e..  Catholics  true  to  the  Constitution), 
is  no  longer  competent  to  form  any  available  Cabinet, 
The  attempt  of  the  Congress  of  Malines  in  18G3  was 
wrecked ;  the  Syllabus  has  pronounced  sentence  of 
death  on  its  programme,  so  eloquently   set  forth  by 


26  The  Sy Habits. 

Montalembert,  for  reconciling  the  Church  with  civil 
freedom. 

In  the  United  States,  Catholics  cannot  form  a  politi- 
cal party.  There,  too,  as  an  American  bishop  has  as- 
sured us,  their  situation  is  most  unfavourable  as  regards 
political  influence  and  admission  to  office,  because  it 
is  always  cast  in  their  teeth  by  Protestants  that  they 
hnd  their  principles  in  Papal  pronouncements,  and  can- 
not therefore  honestly  accept  the  common  liberties  and 
obligations  of  a  free  State,  but  always  cherish  an  arriere 
pmsee  that  if  ever  they  become  strong  enough  they 
will  upset  the  Constitution. 

In  Italy,  the  Papal  Government  has  used  every  effort 
to  deter  Austria  and  the  other  Italian  sovereigns  from 
granting  parliamentary  and  free  municipal  institutions. 
The  documents  proving  this  are  to  be  seen  in  print. 
The  Ptoman  Court  declared  that  it  could  not  suffer  even 
the  very  mildest  forms  of  parliamentary  government  in 
its  neighbourhood,  on  account  of  the   bad  example.-^ 

1  Prince  Schwarzenberg  reported  this  in  1850  to  Baron  Hugel  in  Flo- 
rence. As  the  document  is  not  well  known  north  of  the  Alps,  we  give  the 
passage.  The  whole  letter  will  be  found  in  a  book  printed  by  Gennarelli 
at  Florence  in  1862—''  Le  Dottrine  civili  e  religiose  della  Gorte  di  Roma," 
p.  72.  It  says,  in  reference  to  the  Tuscan  Constitution  of  1848,  "  Le 
gouvemement  pontifical  avoue,  que  ses  repugnances  a  cet  egard  se  fondent 
aussi  sur  des  motifs,  qui  lui  sont  plus  particuliers.  II  ne  cherche  nulle- 
ment  a  dissimuler,  que,  force  com  me  il  est,  a  devoir  reconnoitre  et  pro- 


The  Syllabus.  27 

The  mild  and  just  Grand-Duke  Leopold  of  Tuscany 
was  compelled  against  his  will,  under  pressure  from 
Eome,  to  abolish  that  article  of  the  Constitution  which 
asserted  the  equality  of  all  citizens  before  the  law, 
without  distinction  of  religion,  because  the  Pope  de- 
clared that  it  could  not  be  promulgated  "  tiita  con- 
scientid."^  Under  the  same  influence  the  Jewish 
physicians  in  Tuscany  were  first  in  1852  forbidden  to 
practise,  as  they  had  long  been  allowed  to  do.  Who 
can  wonder,  after  this,  at  the  hatred  of  the  Italians 
towards  the  Papacy  as  it  now  is,  or  think  any  permanent 
peace  possible  between  Italy  and  such  a  hierarchy  as 
this? 

That  the  Bavarian  Constitution,  with  its  equality  of 
religious  confessions,  and  of  all  citizens  before  the  law, 
is  looked  on  with  an  evil  eye  at  Eome,  is  sufficiently 
shown  by  the  constant  reproaches  of  the  Curia  since 

clamer  tout  regime  parleinentaire  comme  directement  menagant  pour  le 
libre  exercice  clii  pouvoir  spirituel,  il  ne  sauroit  voir  sans  alarme  se  pro- 
pager  et  se  consolider  autour  de  lui  non  seulement  des  principes  constitu- 
tioiinels  imposes  originairenient  par  la  revolution,  mais  encore  des  formes 
representatives  2'>lus  viitigees,  dont  la  contagion  lui  semble  non  moins  in- 
evitable et  desastreuse  dans  I'interieur  des  etats,"  etc.  In  other  words, 
**  Our  absolutist  system,  supported  by  the  Inquisition,  the  strictest  cen- 
sorship, the  suppression  of  all  literature,  the  privileged  exemption  of  the 
clergy,  and  arbitrary  power  of  bishops,  cannot  endure  any  other  than 
absolutist  governments  in  Italy." 
^  Gennarelli,  ut  supra,  pp.  78,  scq. 


28  The  Syllabtts. 

1818.-^  And  finally,  the  Austrian  Constitution  has 
drawn  on  itself  the  curse  of  the  Vatican.  In  the  Allo- 
cution of  2 2d  June  1868  we  read — 

"  By  our  apostolic  authority  we  reject  and  condemn 
the  above-mentioned  (new  Austrian)  laws  in  general, 
and  in  particular  all  that  has  been  ordered,  done,  or 
enacted  in  these  and  in  otlier  things  against  the  rights 
of  the  Church  by  the  Austrian  Government  or  its  sub- 
ordinates ;  by  the  same  authority  w^e  declare  these  laws 
and  their  consequences  to  have  been,  and  to  be  for  the 
future,  null  and  void  {nulliusqiie  rdboris  fuisse  ac  fore). 
We  exhort  and  adjure  their  authors,  especially  those 
who  call  themselves  Catholics,  and  all  who  have  dared 
to  propose,  to  accept,  to  approve,  and  to  execute  them, 
to  remember  the  censures  and  spiritual  penalties  incurred 
ipso  facto,  according  to  the  apostolical  constitutions  and 
decrees  of  the  CEcumenical  Councils,  by  those  wdio  violate 
the  rights  of  the  Church." 

By  this  sentence  the  whole  legislature  and  executive 
of  Austria  is  placed  under  ban,  with  the  Emperor  Francis 
Joseph  at  its  head,  and  the  Austrians  may  be  thankful 
that  the  whole  territories  of  the  empire  are  not  placed 

1  See,  for  these,  Concordat  unci  Constitutions  Eid  der  Kathol.  in  Dayern 
(Augsburg,  1847),  pp.  244  seq. 


The  Syllabus.  29 

under  interdict,  according  to  the  earlier  precedent  put  in 
practice  the  last  time  against  Venice  (160G). 

Pius  IX.  condemns  the  Austrian  Constitution  for 
making  Catholics  bury  the  bodies  of  heretics  in  their 
cemeteries  where  they  have  none  of  their  own,  and  he 
considers  it  "  abominable"  {ahominahilis),  because  it 
allows  Protestants  and  Jews  to  erect  educational  insti- 
tutions. He  seems  to  have  quite  forgotten  that  similar 
laws  have  long  prevailed  elsewhere  without  opposition 
from  Pome. 

If  the  will  of  the  Civilta  is  accomplished,  the  Bishops 
will  solemnly  condemn,  by  implication,  next  December, 
the  Constitutions  of  the  countries  they  live  in,  and  the 
laws  wdiich  they,  or  many  of  them,  have  sworn  to  ob- 
serve, and  will  bind  themselves  to  use  all  their  efforts 
for  the  abolition  of  those  laws  and  the  overthrow  of  the 
Constitutions.  This  will  not,  of  course,  be  so  openly 
stated  ;  the  Civilta  and  its  allies  will  say,  what  has 
often  been  said  since  18G4,  that  the  Church  must  ob- 
serve for  a  time  a  prudent  economy,  and  must  so  far 
take  account  of  circumstances  and  accomplished  facts, 
as,  without  any  modification  of  her  real  principles,  to 
pay  a  certain  external  deference  to  them.  Tlie  Bishops 
do  well  to  endure  the  lesser  evil,  as  long  as  open  resist- 


30  The  Syllabus, 

ance  would  lead  to  worse  consequences,  and  prejudice 
the  interests  of  tlie  Cliurcli.  But  this  submission,  or 
rather  silence  and  endurance,  is  only  provisional,  and 
simply  means  that  the  lesser  evil  must  be  chosen  in 
preference  to  a  contest  with  no  present  prospect  of 
success. 

As  soon  as  the  situation  changes,  and  there  is  a 
hope  of  contending  successfully  against  free  laws,  the 
attitude  of  the  bishops  and  clergy  changes  too.  Then, 
as  the  Court  of  Eome  and  the  Jesuits  teach,  every  oath 
taken  to  a  Constitution  in  general  or  to  particular  laws 
loses  its  force.  The  oft-quoted  saying  of  the  apostle, 
that  we  must  obey  God  rather  than  man,  means,  in  the 
Jesuit  gloss,  that  we  must  obey  the  Pope,  as  God's 
representative  on  earth,  and  the  infallible  interpreter  of 
His  will,  rather  than  any  civil  authority  or  laws.  There- 
fore Innocent  x.,  in  his  Bull  of  20th  November  1648, 
"  Zdns  clomus  Dei,"  which  condemns  the  Peace  of  West- 
phalia as  "  null  and  void,  and  of  no  effect  or  authority 
for  past,  present,  or  future,"  expressly  adds,  that  no  one, 
though  he  had  sworn  to  observe  the  Peace,  is  bound 
to   keep  his    oath.-^      It  was    chiefly  those  conditions 

^  The  passage  referred  to  runs  as  follows  :— "Motu  proprio,  ac  ex  certa 
scieutia  et    matura  cleliberatione   nostris,    deque  Apostolicae   potestatis 


The  Syllabus.  31 

of  the  Westphalian  Peace  which  secured  to  Protes- 
tants the  free  exercise  of  their  religion,  and  admission 
to  civil  offices,  that  filled  the  Pope,  as  he  said,  with 
profound  grief  {cum  intimo  doloris  sensu).  And  this 
sentence  was  adhered  to,  for  in  1789  Pius  vi.  declared 
that  the  Church  had  never  admitted  the  Westphalian 
Peace,  "Pacem  Westphahcam  Ecclesia  nungiiam  prohavit." 
Thus  again  in  1805,  Pius  VIL,  in  writing  to  his  nuncio 
at  Venice,  upholds  the  punishments  imposed  by  Inno- 
cent III.  for  heresy,  viz.,  confiscation  of  property  for 
private  persons,  and  the  relaxation  of  all  obligations  of 
tribute  and  subjection  to  heretical  princes ;  and  he  only 
regrets  that  we  are  fallen  on  such  evil  days,  and  the 
Bride  of  Christ  is  so  humbled,  that  it  is  neither  possible 
to  carry  out,  nor  even  of  any  avail  to  recall,  these  holy 
maxims,  and  she  cannot  exercise  a  righteous  severity 
against  the  enemies  of  the  faith.-^ 

These  "  holy  maxims,"  then,  are  allowed  for  a  while 

plenitudine,  prsedictos  alterius  seu  utriusqiie  Pacis  linjusmodi  articulos 
caeteraque  in  dictis  Instrumentis  contenta  ....  ipso  jure  nulla,  irrita, 
invalida,  injusta,  damnata,  reprobata,  inania,  viribusque  et  effectn  vana 
omnia  fuisse,  esse  et  in  perpetuo  fore ;  neminemque  ad  illorum  et  cujus 
libet  eonim  etiamsi  juraniento  vallata  sint,  observantiam  teneri  .... 
decernimus  et  declaramus," — Magnum  Bullar.  Roman,  t.  v.  p.  iQQ  seq. 
Luxemb.  1727. 

1  The  Italian  text  of  the  letter  is  given  in  Essai  sur  la  Puissance  Temp, 
des  Fapes  (Paris,  1818),  vol.  ii.  p.  320. 


32  TJie  Syllabus. 

to  lie  dormant,  though,  according  to  the  Jesuit  plan  of 
the  campaign,  they  are  to  be  raised  at  the  approaching 
Council  to  the  dignity  of  irreversible  dogmas  through 
the  assertion  of  Papal  Infallibility.  Better  times  must 
be  waited  for,  when  the  Church  (that  is,  the  Court  of 
Eome)  shall  be  raised  once  more  from  the  dust,  and 
seated  on  the  throne  of  her  universal,  world-wide,  spi- 
ritual sovereignty. 

But  here  "the  true  Catholics"  are  divided  into  two 
parties.  The  one  party,  which  is  sufticiently  educated 
to  understand  something  of  the  spirit  and  tendencies  of 
the  age,  cherishes  no  illusions  as  to  the  possibility,  or 
at  least  the  near  approach,  of  a  thousand  years'  reign 
of  absolute  Papal  dominion,  and  therefore  despairs  of 
humanity,  which  in  its  scornful  blindness  has  rejected 
its  last  anchor  of  hope.  The  age  we  live  in  is  the  dark 
age  of  Antichristian  dominion,  the  age  of  wailing  and 
woe  which  is  to  precede  the  appearance  of  the  bodily 
Antichrist  for  two  years  and  a  half,  after  which  comes 
the  end  of  all  things  and  the  general  judgment.  This 
party  was  represented  in  Bavaria  by  a  learned  and 
influential  ecclesiastic,  now  dead,  who  gave  it  expres- 
sion in  a  pastoral  of  the  present  Cardinal  Eeisach/      It 

1  [WindiscLraann,  Vicar- General  of  Cardinal  Eeisach  when  Arcliljisliop 


The  Syllabus. 


00 


simply  means :  As  history  does  not  go  our  way,  there 
shall  he  no  more  history,  or,  in  other  words,  the  world 
must  come  to  an  end,  because  our  system  is  not  carried 
out.  As  their  wisdom  is  at  fault,  they  presume  the 
wisdom  of  Providence  is  exhausted  also  !  Men  of  this 
school  think  a  Council  so  near  the  end  of  the  world 
superfluous,  or  at  Lest  only  last  w^arning,  given  to  men 
rather  in  wrath  than  in  mercy. 

The  other  party,  and  the  Jesuits  at  their  head,  see  in 
the  Council  the  last  star  of  hope,  and  expect  that,  when 
Papal  Infallibility  and  the  articles  of  the  Syllabus  have 
been  proclaimed,  mankind  will  bow  down  its  proud 
neck,  like  the  royal  Sicambrian,  Clovis,  and  will  burn 
what  it  adored  before,  and  adore  what  it  burnt. 

A  holy  bishop,  Francis  of  Sales,  often  expressed  his 
dislike  of  writings  which  deal  with  political  questions, 
such  as  the  indirect  power  of  the  Pope  over  princes, 
and  thought  with  good  reason  that,  in  an  age  when 
the  Church  has  so  many  open  enemies,  such  questions 
should  not  be  mooted.^  But  St.  Prancis  of  Sales  is  no 
authority  for  the  Jesuits. 

of  Municli,  one  of  the  few  very  learned  men  modern  Ultramontanism  has 
produced. — Tr.] 
1  Q^uvres,  xi.  406. 


CHAPTEE  II. 

THE  NEW  DOGMA  ABOUT  MAEY. 

IN  comparison  with  the  principles  involved  in  sanc- 
tioning the  Syllabus,  the  new  dogma  i^roposed 
about  Mary  is  harmless  enough.  No  one  indeed  can 
comprehend  the  urgent  need  for  it  only  a  few  years 
after  Pius  ix.  lias  solemnly  proclaimed  the  Immaculate 
Conception  as  a  revealed  truth.  But  there  never  seems 
to  be  enough  done  for  the  glorification  of  Mary.  It  is 
worth  while,  however,  to  take  note  of  this  second  exhi- 
bition of  the  characteristic  contempt  of  the  Jesuits  for 
the  tradition  of  the  ancient  Churcli. 

Neither  the  New  Testament  nor  the  Patristic  writings 
tell  us  anything  about  the  destiny  of  the  Holy  Virgin 
after  the  death  of  Christ.  Two  apocryphal  works  of 
the. fourth  or  fifth  century— one  ascribed  to  St.  John, 
the  other  to  Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis— are  the  earliest 
authorities  for  the  tradition  about  her  bodily  assump- 


The  Assicmption. 


oo 


tion.-^  It  is  contained  also  in  the  pseudo-Dionysius ; 
lie  and  Gregory  of  Tours  brought  it  into  the  Western 
Church.^  But  centuries  passed  before  it  found  any 
recognition.  Even  the  Martyrology  of  Usuard,  used  in 
the  Eoman  Church  in  the  ninth  century,  confined  itself 
to  the  statement  that  nothing  was  known  of  the  manner 
of  the  holy  Virgin's  death  and  the  subsequent  condi- 
tion of  her  body  :  "  Plus  eligebat  sobrietas  Ecclesise  cum 
pietate  nescire,  quam  aliquid  frivolum  et  apocryphum 
inde  tenendo  docere."^  If  this  floating  tradition  too  is 
made  into  a  dogma  under  Jesuit  inspiration,  it  may 
easily  be  foreseen  that  the  Order — I'appetit  vient  en 
mangeant — will  bestow  many  a  jewel  hereafter  on  the 
dogma-thirsting  world,  out  of  the  rich  treasures  of  its 
traditions  and  pet  theological  doctrines.  There  is,  for 
instance,  the  doctrine  of  Prohahilism,  which  lies  quite 
as  near  its  heart  as  the  Syllabus  and  Papal  Infallibility, 
and  which  has  stood  it  in  such  excellent  stead  in  prac- 
tice.^ What  a  glorious  justification  it  would  be  for  an 
Order  which  has  been  so  widely  blamed,  if  the  Council 

^  Ei's  Tr}v  KoL/j.r]aiv  t^s  vTrepaylas  AecnrolvTjs,  and  De  Transitu  JIarice. 

2  De  Nom.  Div.  3.     De  Glor.  Mart.  i.  4. 

»  Usuard,  Marlyrol.  18  Kal.  Sept. 

4  [The  lax  system  of  Jesuit  casuistry  exposed  in  the  Provincial  Letters 
of  Pascal.  Innocent  xr.  condemned  some  of  the  extremer  forms  of  it. 
-Tk.J 


36  The  Asstmiptioit, 

were  to  be  so  accommodating  as  to  set  its  seal  to  this 
doctrine  too  as  an  article  of  faith  ! 

We  know  that  the  Order  expects  another  important 
service  from  the  Council,  viz.,  that  the  gymnasia  and 
schools  of  higher  education  should  be  placed  in  its 
hands,  as  being  specially  called  and  fitted  for  the  work, 
and  that  the  Bishops  should  engage,  wherever  they 
have  the  power,  to  hand  over  these  establishments  to 
the  Fathers  of  the  Society.  It  is  therefore  extremely 
desirable,  nay  necessary,  that  that  ever-gaping  wound 
in  the  reputation  of  the  Order — its  moral  system — 
should  be  healed  by  a  decree  of  the  Council. 


CHAPTEE   III. 

PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY. 
§  I. — Ultramontanism. 

IT  is  the  fundamental  principle  of  tlie  Ultramon- 
tane view  that  when  we  speak  of  the  Church, 
its  rights  and  its  action,  we  always  mean  the  Pope,  and 
the  Pope  only.  "  When  we  speak  of  the  Church,  wo 
mean  the  Pope,"  says  the  Jesuit  Gretser,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  seventeenth  century.  Professor  at  Ingold- 
stadt,  and  one  of  the  most  learned  theologians  of  the 
Order.  Taken  by  itself,  as  the  community  of  believers, 
clergy,  and  bishops,  the  Church,  according  to  Cardinal 
Cajetan — the  classical  theologian  of  the  Pioman  Court 
— is  the  slave  {serva)  of  the  Pope.  Neither  in  its  whole 
nor  its  parts  (National  Churches)  can  it  desire,  strive 
for,  approve,  or  disapprove,  anything  not  in  absolute 
accordance  with  the  Papal  will  and  pleasure.     In  an 


38  Papal  Infallibility. 

article  of  the  Civilta,  entitled  "  The  Pope  the  Father  of 
the  Faithful,"  we  read  as  follows  : — 

"  It  is  not  enough  for  the  people  only  to  know  that 
the  Pope  is  the  head  of  the  Church  and  the  Bishops  ; 
they  must  also  understand  that  their  ov/n  faith  and  re- 
ligious life  flow  from  him  ;  that  in  him  is  the  bond 
which  unites  Catholics  to  one  another,  and  tlie  power 
which  strengthens  and  the  light  which  guides  them ; 
that  he  is  the  dispenser  of  spiritual  graces,  the  giver  of 
the  benefits  of  religion,  the  upholder  of  justice,  and  the 
protector  of  the  oppressed.  And  still  this  is  not  enough ; 
it  is  further  requisite  to  refute  the  accusations  directed 
against  the  Pope  by  the  impious  and  the  Protestants, 
and  to  show  how  serviceable  the  Papacy  and  the  Pope 
have  at  all  times  been  to  civil  society,  to  the  Italian 
people,  to  families,  and  to  individuals,  even  in  regard  to 
their  temporal  interests."-^ 

1  Civ.  1867,  vol.  xii.  pp.  86  seq.  —  "  Non  basta  clie  il  popolo  sappia  essere 
(il  Papa)  il  capo  della  chiesa  e  del  vescovi :  bisogna  che  intenda  da  In.i  de- 
rivare  la  propria  fede,  da  lui  la  propria  vita  religiosa,  in  lui  resiedere  il 
vincolo  che  iinisce  insieme  i  cattolici,  la  forza  cbe  li  convalida,  la  guida  che 
li  dirige  :  lui  essere  il  dispensiere  delle  grazie  spiritual!,  lui  il  promotore 
dei  beneficii  che  la  religioue  impartisce,  lui  il  conservatore  della  giustizia, 
lui  il  protettore  degli  oppress!.  Ne  cio  solo  basta  ;  si  richiede  di  piu  che 
dileguinsi  le  accuse  lanciate  coutro  del  Papa  dagli  empii  e  dai  protestanti, 
8  che  dimostrisi  quanto  benefico  alle  societa  civili,  ai  popoli  italiani,  alle 
famiglie  e  agli  individvii^  cziando  in  ordine  agl'  interessi  temporali  sia  stato 
in  ogni  tempo  il  Papato  e  il  Papa." 


UltrainontanisDi.  39 

It  was  St.  Jerome's  reproach  to  the  Pelagians  that, 
according  to  their  theory,  God  had,  as  it  were,  w^ound 
up  a  watch  once  for  all,  and  then  gone  to  sleep  because 
there  was  nothing  more  for  Him  to  do.      Here  we  have 
the  Jesuit  supplement  to  this  view.     God  has  gone  to 
sleep  because  in  His  place  His  ever  w^akeful  and  infal- 
lible Vicar  on  earth  rules,  as  lord  of  the  world,  and  dis- 
penser of  grace  and  of  punishment.      St.  Paul's  saying, 
"  In  him  w^e  live,  and  move,  and  are,"  is  transferred  to  the 
Pope.     Pew  even  of  the  Italian  canonists  of  the  fifteenth 
century  could  screw  themselves  up  to  this  point,  those 
greedy  place-hunters  and  sycophants,  who  were  blamed 
even  in  Piome  as  mainly  responsible  for  the  corruption 
of  the  Church  caused  by  the  Popes.     Under  the  lead  of 
the  new  Order  of  the  sixteenth  century  all  hitherto  said 
and  done  for  the  exaltation  of  the  Papal  dignity  was 
thrown  into  the  background.     We  owe  it  to  Bellarmine 
and  other  Jesuits  that  in  some  documents  the  Pope  is 
expressly  designated   "Vice-God."      The   Givilta,  too, 
after  asserting  that  all  the  treasures  of  divine  revelation, 
of  truth,  righteousness,  and  the  gifts  of  God,  are  in  the 
Pope's  hand,  who  is  their  sole  dispenser  and  guardian, 
comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Pope  carries  on  Christ's 
work  on  earth,  and  is  in  relation  to  us  what  Christ 


40  Papal  Infallibility, 

would  be  if  He  was  still  visibly  present  to  rule  His 
ChurcL^  It  is  but  one  step  from  this  to  declare  the 
Pope  an  incarnation  of  God.^ 

Ultramontanism,  then,  is  essentially  Papalism,  and 
its  starting-point  is  that  the  Pope  is  infallible  in 
all  doctrinal  decisions,  not  only  on  matters  of  faith, 
but  in  the  domain  of  ethics,  on  the  relations  of  religion 
to  society,  of  Church  to  State,  and  even  on  State  insti- 
tutions, and  that  every  such  decision  claims  unlimited 
and  unreserved  submission  in  word  and  deed  from  all 
Catholics.  On  this  view  the  power  of  the  Pope  over 
the  Church  is  purely  monarchical,  and  neither  knows 
nor  tolerates  any  limits.  He  is  to  be  sole  and  absolute 
master;  all  beside  him  are  his  plenipotentiaries  and 
servants,  and  are,  in  fact,  whether  mediately  or  imme- 
diately, the  mere  executors  of  his  orders,  whose  powers 


1  Vol.  iii.  p.  259,  1868.  ''I  tesoridi  qiiesta  revelazione,  tesori  di  verita, 
tesori  di  giustizia,  tesori  di  carismi,  vennero  da  Dio  depositati  in  terra  nelle 
niani  di  un  xiomo,  clie  ne  e  solo  dispensiero  e  cnstode  .  .  .  quest'  nomo  e  il 
Papa.  Cio  evidentemente  e  racchiuso  nella  sua  stessa  appellazioiie  di  Vi- 
cario  di  Christo.  Imperocche  se  egli  sostiene  in  terra  le  veci  di  Christo, 
vuol  dire  che  egli  continua  nel  mondo  1' opera  di  Christo  ;  ed  e  rispetto  a 
noi  cio  che  sarebbe  esso  Christo,  se  per  se  medesimo  e  Adsibilmente  quaggiu 
governasse  la  chiesa." 

2  [Compare  with  this  Pusey's  Eirenicon,  p.  327  :  "  One  recently  returned 
from  Rome  had  the  impression  that  '  some  of  the  extreme  Ultramontanes, 
if  they  do  not  say  so  in  so  many  words,  imply  a  quasi-hypostatic  union  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  with  each  successive  Pope.'  The  accurate  writer  who  re- 
ported this  to  me  observed  in  answer,  '  This  seems  to  vie  to  he  Llamaism.^ " 
-Tr.1 


Ultrainontanis77i.  41 

lie  can  restrict  or  cancel  at  his  pleasure.  On  TJltramon- 
taue  principles  tlie  Church  is  in  a  normal  and  flourish- 
ing condition  in  proportion  as  it  is  ruled,  administered, 
supervised,  and  regulated,  down  to  the  minutest  details, 
in  all  its  branches  and  national  boundaries,  from  Eome. 
Eome  is  to  act  as  a  gigantic  machine  of  ecclesiastical 
administration,  a  Briareus  with  a  hundred  arms,  which 
finally  decides  everything,  which  reaches  everywhere 
with  its  denunciations,  censures,  and  manifold  means 
of  repression,  and  secures  a  rigid  uniformity.  For  the 
Church-ideal  of  the  Ultramontanes  is  the  Romanizing 
of  all  particular  Churches,  and  above  all  the  suppression 
of  every  shred  of  individuality  in  National  Churches.^ 
Nay,  more,  they  consider  it  the  conscientious  duty  of 
all  nations  to  mould  themselves,  to  the  utmost  of  their 
power,  into  the  specifically  clerico -Italian  fashion  of 
thinking  and  feeling.  How  should  they  not,  when  the 
Civilta  says  roundly,  "  As  the  Jews  were  formerly  God's 
people,  so  are  the  Romans  under  the  New  Covenant. 
They  have  a  supernatural  dignity"  ?" 

^  [" Ronianisiii,"  ''Romanize,"  etc.,  are  used  by  German  writers  not  as 
synonymous  terms  with  Roman  Catliolicism,  etc.,  but  for  the  Romanist  or 
Ultramontane  party  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.— Tr.] 

2  Vol.  iii.  p.  11,  1862.  "  Sopranaturale  essendo  11  fine,  per  cui  Iddio 
conserva  lo  stato  Romano,  sopranaturale  in  qualche  modo  si  vedra  essere 
la  dignita  di  questo  popolo."  These  praises  of  the  so-called  Roman  people, 
which  no  longer  exists— for  the  population  of  Rome  is  a  mere  fluctuating 


42  Papal  Infallibility. 

The  Ultramontane  knows  nothing  higiier  than  the 
breath  and  law  of  Eome.  For  him  Eome  is  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal address  and  inquiry- office,  or  rather  a  standing  oracle 
— the  Civilta  calls  the  Pope  summum  oraculum, — which 
can  give  at  once  an  infallible  solution  of  every  doubt, 
speculative  or  practical.  While  others  are  guided  in  their 
judgment  on  facts  and  events  by  the  moral  and  religious 
sentiment  developed  in  their  Church-life,  with  Ultra- 
montanes  the  authority  of  Eome  and  the  typical  ex- 
ample of  Eoman  morals  and  customs  are  the  embodiment 
of  the  moral  and  ecclesiastical  law.  If  Jewish  parents 
are  forcibly  robbed  of  their  child  in  Eome,  that  he  may 
be  brought  up  a  Christian,  the  Ultramontane  finds  it 
quite  in  order  that  natural  human  rights  should  yield  to 
the  ordinances  of  Eome,  however  late  devised,  although 
theologians  used  to  maintain  that  in  this  case  the  law 
of  Nature  is  the  law  of  God,  and  therefore  above  any 
mere  human  and  ecclesiastical  ordinance.  If  the  Inqui- 
sition still  proclaims  excommunication  in  the  States  of 

medley  of  Italians,  and  especially  Italian  clerics,  from  all  parts  of  the 
Peninsula—  seem  to  be  phrases  brought  up  from  a  former  age.  Thus,  for 
example,  in  1626,  Carrerio,  Provost  and  Professor  at  Padua,  says,  "  The 
Italians  are  exalted  above  all  nations  by  the  special  grace  of  God,  who 
gives  them  in  the  Pope  a  spiritual  monarch,  who  has  put  down  from  their 
thrones  great  kings  and  yet  mightier  emperors,  and  set  others  in  their 
place,  to  whom  the  greatest  kingdoms  have  long  paid  tribute,  as  they  do 
to  no  other,  and  who  dispenses  such  riches  to  his  courtiers  that  no  king  or 
emperor  has  ever  had  so  much  to  give." 


Ultrainontanism.  43 

tlie  Clmrcli  against  every  son  and  daughter  if  they  omit 
to  denounce  their  parents,  and  get  them  put  into  prison 
for  using  flesh  or  milk  on  a  fast-day,  or  reading  a  book 
on  the  Index,  the  Eomanist  is  prepared  to  justify  this 
too.  If  the  Eoman  Government,  by  its  lottery,  openly 
conducted  by  priests,  fosters  the  passion  for  gambling, 
and  produces  the  ruin  of  whole  families,  the  Civiltcu 
composes  an  apology  for  the  lottery,  although  Alexan- 
der VII.  and  Benedict  xiii.  forbade  it  under  pain  of  ex- 
communication. If  in  Eome,  clergymen  (the  so-called 
prdi  di  'piazzci)  stand  in  the  public  j^laces  till  some  one 
hires  them  for  a  mass,  this  gives  no  more  offence  to  the 
Eomanist  than  the  sale  of  indulgence-bills  ;  and  so  the 
Eoman  commissionaires,  after  showing  visitors  the  vari- 
ous sights  of  the  place,  finally  point  out  this  spectacle  to 
them.  He  thinks  it  at  least  very  excusable  that  the  very 
utmost  is  got  out  of  dispensations  and  indulgences  as  a 
mine  of  pecuniary  profit ;  that,  for  instance,  the  indul- 
gences of  "  privileged  altars"  are  sold  to  certain  churches 
at  a  scudo  apiece,  thus  giving  occasion  to  the  grossest 
superstition  about  the  delivery  of  souls  from  Purga- 
tory ;  that  certain  marriage  dispensations  are  granted  to 
the  wealthy  for  a  high  price,  which  are  denied  to  the 
poorer  ;  that  some  kinds  of  matrimonial  causes  are  car- 


44  Papal  Infallibility. 

ried  to  Eome,  against  the  express  stipulation  of  treaties, 
and  the  citizens  thereby  subjected  to  protracted  and 
costly  processes, — as  happened  not  long  since  in  a 
German  State,  when  this  new  encroachment  seemed  to 
the  local  bishops  so  strong  a  case,  that  they  made  ener- 
getic representations  at  Eome  on  the  subject,  which 
resulted  in  the  demand  being  given  up  for  a  while,  and 
the  question  being  allowed  to  be  settled  on  the  spot. 

Eome  on  her  part  omits  no  means  of  confirming  the 
whole  Catholic  world  in  this  clerico-ltalian  manner  of 
thinking  and  feeling.  More  than  nine-tenths  of  the 
Eoman  congregations  and  tribunals  are  composed  of 
Italians,  and  they  regulate  everything  through  their 
precepts  and  decisions,  spun  out  into  the  minutest  and 
most  frivolous  detail,  and  issued  in  the  name  of  the 
Pope.  Every  breath  of  religious  life  is  to  be  drawn  by 
Italian  rule.  Bishoprics  out  of  Italy  are  to  be  filled, 
as  far  as  possible,  by  men  who  have  got  the  CathoHc 
mind  in  Eome,  or  who  at  least  have  been  trained  by 
the  Jesuits  or  their  pupils. 

The  more  questions  any  country  or  diocese  refers  to 
Eome — the  more  dispensations,  indulgences,  altar  privi- 
leges, consecrated  objects,  and  the  like,  it  receives  from 
Eome — the  more  presents  of  money  it  sends  there, — so 


Ultramontanism.  45 

much  the  higher  praise  it  gets  for  piety  and  genuine 
Catholic  sentiment.  What  is  called  Catholicity  can 
only  be  attained  in  the  eyes  of  the  Court  of  Rome  by 
every  one  translating  himself  and  his  ideas,  on  every 
subject  that  has  any  connexion  with  religion,  into 
Italian.  If,  in  points  where  the  Italian  form  or  view, 
or  practice  or  manner  of  devotion,  conflicts  with  their 
national  feeling,  or  is  being  forced  into  the  place  of 
what  is  native  and  suits  them  better,  Germans  or 
Frenchmen  or  Englishmen  repudiate  the  foreign  use, 
they  are  said  to  be  on  a  wrong  road,  they  are  not 
"  genuine  Catholics,"  but  only  liberal  Catholics ;  for  so 
the  Society  of  Jesus  distinguishes  what  we  should  call 
"  Ultramontane,"  or  simply  "  CathoHc." 


§  II. — Consequences  of  the  Dogma. 

The  root  of  the  whole  Ultramontane  habit  of  mind 
is  the  personal  infallibility  of  the  Pope,  and  accordingly 
the  Jesuits  declare  it  to  be  the  wish  of  true  Catholics 
that  this  dogma  should  be  defined  at  the  forthcoming 
Council.  If  this  desire  is  accomplished,  a  new  prin- 
ciple of  immeasurable  importance,  both  retrospective 
and  prospective,  will"be  established — a  principle  which, 
when  once  irrevocably  fixed,  wiU  extend  its  dominion 


4<5  Papal  Infallibility, 

over  men's  minds  more  and  more,  till  it  has   coerced 
tEem  into  subjection  to  every  Papal  pronouncement  in 

"matters  of  religion,  morals,  politics,  and  social  science. 

Tor  it  will  be  idle  to  talk'  any  more  of  tlie  Pope's 
encroaching  on  a  foreign  domain ;  he,  and  he  alone7 
as  being  infallible,  will  have  the  right  of  determining 
the  limits  of  his  teaching  and  action  at  his  own  good 
pleasure,  and  every  such  determination  will  bear  the 
stamp  of  infallibility.  When  once  the  narrow  adherence^ 
of  many  Catholic  theologians  to  the  ancient  tradition 
and  the  Church  of  the  first  six  centuries  is  happily 
broken  through,  the  pedantic  horror  of  new  dogmas 
completely  got  rid  of,  and  the  well-known  canon  of  St. 
Vincent,  "  Quod  semper,  quod  ubique,  quod  ab  omnibus," 
which  is  still  respected  here  and  there,  set  aside— then 
every  Pope,  however  ignorant  of  theology,  will  be  free_ 
to  make  what  use  he  likes  of  his  power  of  dogmatic__ 
creativeness,  and  to  erect  his  own  thoughts  into  the 
common  belief,  binding  on  the  whole  Church.  We  i^y 
adyi^edly,  "however  ignorant  he  may  be  of  thee  logy," 
for  Tihe  Jesuit  theologians  have  already  foreseeli  ihis 
contingency  as  being  not  an  unusual  one  with  Popes, 
and'^ne  of  them,  Professor  Erbermann  of  Mayende',  has 
observed — ''  A  thoroughly  ignorant  Pope  may  very  well 


Conscqicences  of  the  Dogma.  47 

^^ba-inMlible,  for  God  has  before  now  pointed  ont  the 
'^'right  road  by  the  mouth  of  a  speaking  ass."^  But, 
after  Infallibility  has  been  made  into  a  dogma,  whoever 
dares  to  question  the  plenary  authority  of  any  new 
article  of  faith  coined  in  the  Vatican  mint,  will  incur, 
according  to  the  Jesuits,  excommunication  in  this  world 
and  everlasting  damnation  in  the  next.  Councils  will 
for  the  future  be  superfluous;  the  Bishops  will  no 
doubt  be  assembled  in  Eome  now  and  then  to  swell 
the"pomp  of  a  Papal  canonization  or  some  other  grand 
ceremony,  but  they  will  have  nothing  more  to  do  with 
dogmas.  If  they-  wish  to  confirm  a  Papal  decision, 
itself  the  result  of  direct  Divine  inspiration — as,  e.g., 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  after  careful  examination, 
sanctioned  J>he  dogmatic  letter  of  Pope  Leo  I., — this 
would  be  bringing  lanterns  to  aid  the  light  of  the  noon- 
day sun.  The  form  hitherto  used  by  the  Bishopsjn^ 
subscrTblng"  the  doctrinal  decisions  of  Councils,  dcfiniens 
sicbscrijm,  would  for  the.  future  be  a  blasphemy. 

Papal  Infallibility,  once  defined  as  a  dogma,  wiU  give 
the  impulse  to  a  theological,  ecclesiastical,  and  even 

1  Ireiiic  Cathol.  (Mogxint.  1645),  cap.  vi.  p.  97  :  "  Quomodo  hinc  mfertur, 
nos  fidem  salutemque  nostram  ab  unico  tali  homiue  suspendere  et  non 
potius  ab  eo,  qui  novit  etiam  per  asinum  loquentem  dirigere  iter  nos- 
trum." 


48  Papal  Infallibility, 

political  revolution,  the  nature  of  whicli  very  few — and 
"^^least  of  all  those  who  are  urging  it  on — have  clearly 
~~  realized,  and  no  hand  of  man  will  be  able  to  stay  its 
course.      In  Eome  itself  the  saying  will  be  verified, 
"  Thou  wilt  shudder  thyself  at  thy  likeness  to  God." 
/     In  the  next  place,  the  newly-coined  article  of  faith 
-  will  inevitably  take  root  as  the  foundation  and  corner- 
]  stone  of  the  whole  Eoraan  Catholic  edifice.     The  whole 
activity  of  theologians  will  be  concentrated  on  the  one 
point  of  ascertaining  whether  or  not  a  Papal  decision 
can  be  quoted  for  any  given  doctrine,  and  in  labour- 
ing to  discover  and  amass  proof  for  it  from  liistory  and 
literature.     Every  other  authority  will  pale  beside  the 
living  oracle  on  the  Tiber,  which  speaks  with  plenary 

inspiration,  and  can  always  be  appealed  to.        . ^ 

What  use  in  tedious  investigations  of  Scripture,  what 
use  in  wasting  time  on  the  difficult  study  of  tradition, 
which  requires  so  many  kinds  of  preliminary  know- 
ledge, when  a  single  utterance  of  the  infallible  Pope 
may  shatter  at  a  breath  the  labours  of  half  a  lifetime, 
and  a  telegraphic  message  to  Eome  will  get  an  answer 
in  a  few  hours  or  a  few  days,  which  becomes  an  axiom 
and  article  of  faith  ?  On  one  side  the  work  of  theolo- 
gians will  be  greatly  simplified,  while  on  the  other  it 


Co7iseque7ices  of  the  Dogma.  49 

becomes  harder  and  more  extensive.  A  single  comma 
in  a  single  Bull  (of  Pius  v.  against  Baius)  has  before 
now  led  to  endless  disputes,  because  it  is  doubtful 
whether  it  should  precede  or  follow  certain  words,  and 
the  whole  dogmatic  meaning  of  the  Bull  depends  on  its 
position.  But  the  dispute,  which  has  gone  on  three 
centuries,  can  never  be  settled  now,  not  even  by  examin- 
ing the  original  document  at  Eome,  which  is  written, 
according  to  the  old  custom,  without  punctuation.  And 
how  will  it  be  in  the  future  ?  The  Eabbis  say,  "  On 
every  apostrophe  in  the  Bible  hang  whole  mountains  of 
hidden  sense,"  and  this  will  apply  equally  to  Papal 
Bulls ;  and  thus  theology,  in  the  hands  of  the  Ultra- 
montane school,  which  will  alone  prevail,  promises  to 
become  more  and  more  Talmudical. 

To  prove  the  dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  from  Church 
history  nothing  less  is  required  than  a  complete  falsi- 
fication of  it.  The  declarations  of  Popes  which  con- 
tradict the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  or  contradict  each 
other  (as  the  same  Pope  sometimes  contradicts  himself), 
will  have  to  be  twisted  into  agreement,  so  as  to  show 
that  their  heterodox  or  mutually  destructive  enuncia- 
tions are  at  bottom  sound  doctrine,  or,  when  a  little 
has  been  subtracted  from  one  dictum  and  added  to  the 


50  Papal  Infallibility, 

other,  are  not  really  contradictory,  and  mean  tlie  same 
thing.     And  here  future  theologians  will  have  to  get 
well  indoctrinated  in  the  Eabbinical  school ;  and  indeed 
they  will  find  a  good  deal  of  valuable  matter  ready  to 
their  hand  in  the  Jesuit  casuists.     These  last,  mean- 
time, will  be  their  best  teachers  in  the  skilful  mani- 
pulation of  history.     They  never  had  any  particular 
difficulty  in  manufacturing  Church  history ;  they  have 
already  performed  the  most  incredible  feats   in  that 
line.     Not  to  speak  now  of  their  zeal  for  the  discovery 
and  dissemination  of  apocryphal  tales  of  miracles  and 
lives  of  saints,  of  which  the  Catholic  world  owes  to 
them   so   many,  we  will  merely  refer  here   to   their 
huge    falsification   of  Spanish  Church-history.     They 
have  provided  Spain  with  a  wholly  new  history,  in 
accordance  with  the  interests  of  their  Order,  as  well  as 
the  national  wish,  and  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception;  and  this  could  only  be  accomj^lished  by 
the  Jesuit,  Eoman  De  la  Higuera,  inventing  chronicles 
and  archseological  records,  with  the  necessary  appur- 
tenance of  relics,  the  genuineness  of  which  had  to  be 
proved  by  a  miracle  brought  forward  for  this  express 
purpose. 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.    5 1 

§  III. — Errors  and  Coniraclidions  of  the  Popes. 

It  is  necessary  for  illustrating  the  question  of  Infalli- 
bility to  recall  some  of  the  historical  difiiculties  it  is 
beset  with. 

Innocent  I.  and  Gelasius  L,  the  former  ^Yriting  to  the 
Council  of  Milevis,  the  latter  in  his  epistle  to  the 
Bishops  of  Picenum,  declared  it  to  be  so  indispensable 
for  infants  to  receive  communion,  that  those  who  die 
without  it  go  straight  to  hell.-^  A  thousand  years  later 
the  Council  of  Trent  anathematized  this  doctrine. 

It  is  the  constant  teaching  of  the  Church  that  ordi- 
nation received  from  a  bishop,  quite  irrespectively  of 
his  personal  worthiness  or  unworthiness,  is  valid  and 
indelible.  Putting  aside  Baptism,  the  whole  security 
of  the  sacraments  rests  on  this  principle  of  faith,  and 
re-ordination  has  always  been  opposed  in  the  Church 
as  a  crime  and  a  profanation  of  the  sacrament.  Only 
in  Eome,  during  the  devastation  which  the  endless 
wars  of  Goths  and  Lombards  inflicted  on  Central  Italy, 
there  was  a  collapse  of  all  learning  and  tlieology,  which 
disturbed  and  distorted  the  dogmatic  tradition.  Since 
the  eiglith   century,  the  ordinations  of  certain  Popes 

1  S.  Aug.  Oxip.  ii.  640;  Condi.  Coll.  (ed.  LabLo),  iv.  1178. 


5  2  Papal  Infallibility, 

began  to  be  annulled,  and  the  bishops  and  priests 
ordained  by  tbem  were  compelled  to  be  re-ordained. 
This  occurred  first  in  769,  when  Constantine  IL,  who 
had  got  possession  of  the  Papal  chair  by  force  of  arms, 
and  kept  it  for  thirteen  months,  was  blinded,  and 
deposed  at  a  Synod,  and  all  his  ordinations  pronounced 
invalid. 

But  the  strongest  case  occurred  at  the  end  of  the 
ninth  century,  after  the  death  of  Pope  Formosus,  when 
the  repeated  rejection  of  his  ordinations  threw  the  whole 
Italian  Church  into  the  greatest  confusion,  and  produced 
a  general  uncertainty  as  to  whether  there  were  any  valid 
sacraments  in  Italy.  Auxilius,  who  was  a  contemporary, 
said  that  through  this  universal  rejection  and  repetition 
of  orders  ("  ordinatio,  exordinatio,  et  superordinatio") 
matters  had  come  to  such  a  pass  in  Eome,  that  for 
twenty  years  the  Christian  religion  had  been  interrupted 
and  extinguished  in  Italy.  Popes  and  Synods  decided 
in  glaring  contradiction  to  one  another,  now  for,  now 
against,  the  validity  of  the  ordinations,  and  it  was  self- 
evident  that  in  Eome  all  sure  knowledge  on  the  doc- 
trine of  ordination  was  lost.  At  the  end  of  his  second 
work,  Auxilius,  speaking  in  the  name  of  those  numer- 
ous priests  and  bishops  whose  ecclesiastical  status  was 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.    53 

called  in  question  by  the  decisions  of  Stephen  vii.  and 
Sergius  iii.,  demanded  the  strict  investigation  of  a 
General  Council,  as  the  only  authority  capable  of  solv- 
ing the  complication  introduced  by  the  Popes.^ 

But  the  Council  never  met,  and  the  dogmatic  uncer- 
tainty and  confusion  in  Eome  continued.  In  the  middle 
of  the  eleventh  century  the  great  contest  against  Simony, 
which  was  then  thought  equivalent  to  heresy,  broke 
out,  and  the  ordinations  of  a  simoniacal  bishop  were 
pronounced  invalid.  Leo  ix.  re-ordained  a  number  of 
persons  on  this  ground,  as  Peter  Damiani  relates." 
Gregory  vii.,  at  his  fifth  Ptoman  Synod,  made  the  inva- 
lidity of  all  simoniacal  ordinations  a  rule,  and  the  prin- 
ciple, confirmed  by  Urban  ii.,  that  a  simoniacal  bishop 
can  give  nothing  in  ordination,  because  he  has  nothing, 
passed  into  the  Decretum  of  Gratian.^ 

In  these  cases  it  is  obvious  that  doctrine  and  practice 
were  most  intimately  connected.  It  w^as  only  from 
their  holding  a  false,  and,  in  its  consequences,  most 
injurious,  notion  of  the  force  and  nature  of  this  sacra- 
ment, that  the  Popes  acted  as  they  did,  and  if  they  had 
then  been  generally  considered  infallible,  a  hopeless 

1  Mabillon,  Analeda  (Paris,  1723),  p.  39. 

2  Petri  Damiani  Opusc.  p.  419.  3  Caus.  i.  Q.  7.  c.  24. 


54  Papal  Infallibility. 

confusion  must  Lave  been  introduced,   not  only  into 
Italy,  but  the  whole  Church. 

I  In  contrast  to  Pope  Pelagius,  who  had  declared,  with 
the  whole  Eastern  and  Western  Church,  the  indispen- 
sable necessity  of  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity  in  Bap- 
^  tism,  Nicolas  i.  assured  the  Bulgarians  that  baptism 
in.  the  name  of  Christ  alone  was  quite  sufficient,  and 
thus  exposed  the  Christians  there  to  the  danger  of  an 

i  invalid  baptism.  The  same  Pope  declared  confirmation 
administered  by  priests,  according  to  the  Greek  usage 
from  remote  antiquity,  invalid,  and  ordered  those  so 
confirmed  to  be  confirmed  anew  by  a  bishop,  thereby 
denying  to  the  whole  Eastern  Church  the  possession  of 
a  sacrament,  and  laying  the  foundation  of  the  bitter 
estrangement  which  led  to  a  permanent  division.-^ 

Stephen  ii.  (iii.)  allowed  marriage  wdth  a  slave  girl 
to  be  dissolved,  and  a  new  one  contracted,  whereas  all 
previous  Popes  had  pronounced  such  marriages  indis- 
soluble.^ He  also  declared  baptism,  in  case  of  neces- 
sity, valid  when  administered  with  wine.^ 

Celestine  iii.  tried  to  loosen  the  marriage  tie  by  de- 
claring it  dissolved  if  either  party  became  heretical. 
Innocent   ill.  annulled  this  decision,  and  Hadrian  vi. 

1  Condi.  Coll.  (ed.  Labbe),  vi.  5i8.  2  75.  yi  1550.  3  7^.  yi.  1652. 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.     5  5 

called  Celestine  a  heretic  for  giving  it.  This  decision 
was  afterwards  expunged  from  the  MS.  collections  of 
Papal  decrees,  but  the  Spanish  theologian  Alphonsus 
de  Castro  had  seen  it  there.-^ 

The  Capernaite  doctrine,  that  Christ's  body  is  sen- 
sibly (sensualitcr)  touched  by  the  hands  and  broken  by 
the  teeth  in  the  Eucharist — an  error  rejected  by  the 
whole  Church,  and  contradicting  the  impassibility  of 
His  body, — was  affirmed  by  Nicolas  11.  at  the  Synod  of 
Eome  in  1059,  and  Berengar  compelled  to  acknowledge 
it.  Lanfranc  reproaches  Berengar  with  afterwards  want- 
ing to  make  Cardinal  Humbert,  instead  of  the  Pope, 
responsible  for  this  doctrine.^ 

Innocent  in.,  in  order  to  exhibit  the  Papal  power  in 
the  fullest  splendour  of  its  divine  omnipotence,  invented 
the  new  doctrine  that  the  spiritual  bond  which  unites 
a  bishop  to  his  diocese  is  firmer  and  more  indissoluble 
than  the  "  carnal "  bond,  as  he  called  it,  between  man 
and  wife,  and  that  God  alone  can  loose  it,  viz.,  translate 
a  bishop  from  one  see  to  another.  But  as  the  Pope  is 
the  representative  of  the  true  God  on  earth,  he  and  he 
alone  can  dissolve  this  holy  and  indissoluble  bond,  not 

^Adv.  Hot.  (ed.  Paris),  1565.     Cf.  Melcli.  Canus,  p.  210. 
2  Lanfranc,  iJe  Euch.  c.  3  (ed.  Migne),  p.  412. 


56  Papal  Infallibility. 

by  human  but  divine  authority,  and  it  is  God,  not  man, 
who  looses  it.-^  The  obvious  and  direct  corollary,  that 
the  Pope  can  also  dissolve  the  less  firm  and  holy  bond 
of  marriasje.  Innocent,  as  we  have  seen,  overlooked,  for 
he  solemnly  condemned  Celestine  iii.'s  decision  on 
that  point ;  and  thus  he  unwittingly  involved  himself 
in  a  contradiction.  Many  canonists  have  accepted  this 
as  the  legitimate  consequence  of  his  teaching. 

Innocent  betrayed  his  utter  ignorance  of  theology, 
when  he  declared  that  the  Fifth  Book  of  Moses,  being 
called  Deuteronomy,  or  the  Second  Book  of  the  Law, 
must  bind  the  Christian  Church,  which  is  the  second 
Church.^  This  great  Pope  seems  never  to  have  read 
Deuteronomy,  or  he  could  hardly  have  fallen  into  the 
blunder  of  supposing,  e.g.,  that  the  Old  Testament  prohi- 
bitions of  particular  kinds  of  food,  the  burnt- offerings, 
the  harsh  penal  code  and  bloody  laws  of  war,  the  prohibi- 
tions of  woollen  and  linen  garments,  etc.,  were  to  be  again 
made  obligatory  on  Christians.  And  as  the  Jews  were 
allowed  in  Deuteronomy  to  put  away  a  wife  who  dis- 
pleased them,  and  take  another.  Innocent  ran  the  risk 

1  Decretal  "Z)e  Transl.  Einsc."  c.  2,  3,  4.  This  -svas  to  introduce  a 
new  article  of  faith.  The  Church  had  not  known  for  centuries  that  resig- 
nations,  depositions,  and  translations  of  bishops,  belonged  by  divine  right 
to  the  Pope. 

2  Decretal  "  Quijilii  sint  legitimi"  c.  13. 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.     57 

of  falling  himself  into  a  greater  error  about  marriage 
than  Celestine  ill. 

Great  light  is  thrown  on  this  question  by  the  history 
of  the  alternate  approbations  and  persecutions  of  the 
Franciscan  Order  by  the  Popes. 

Nicolas  III.,  in  the  decretal  ''Exiit  qui  seminat^'  gave 
an  exposition  of  the  rule  of  St.  Francis,  and  affirmed  the 
renunciation  of  all  personal  or  corporate  property  to  be 
holy  and  meritorious  ;  that  Christ  Himself  had  taught, 
and  by  His  example  confirmed  it,  and  also  the  first 
founders  of  the  Church.  The  Franciscans  therefore  were 
to  have  the  use  only,  not  the  possession,  of  property ; 
the  possession  he  adjudged  to  belong  to  the  Eoman 
Church.  He  expressly  added  that  this  exposition  of  the 
rule  of  St.  Francis  was  to  have  permanent  force,  and, 
like  every  other  constitution  or  decretal,  to  be  used  in 
the  schools  and  literally  interpreted.  He  forbade, 
under  pain  of  excommunication,  all  glosses  against  the 
literal  sense.  There  can  be  no  shadow  of  doubt  that 
Nicolas  meant  in  this  decree  to  issue  a  solemn  decision 
on  a  matter  of  faith.  It  is  not  addressed  to  the  Fran- 
ciscan Order  only,  but  to  the  schools  {i.e.,  universities) 
and  the  whole  Church. 

Clement  v.,  in  the   decretal  "  Exivi  dc  Paradiso" 


5  8  Papal  Infallibility . 

renewed  the  ordinance  assigning  the  property  of  Fran- 
ciscans to  the  Eoman  Church ;  and  John  xxii.,  in  the 
Bull  "  Quonondam"  declared  this  ordinance  of  Nicolas 
III.  and  Clement  v.  to  be  salutary,  clear,  and  of  force. 
But  no  sooner  did  John  come  into  conflict  with  the 
Order,  partly  in  his  attempts  to  limit  their  ludicrous 
excesses  in  the  exhibition  of  Evangelical  poverty,  partly 
from  the  strong  denunciations  of  the  corruption  of  the 
Papal  Court,  and  loud  demands  for  a  reformation  in  the 
Church,  which  issued  from  the  bosom  of  the  Franciscan 
Order,  than  he  began  gradually,  and  as  far  as  he  could 
without  prejudicing  his  authority,  to  undermine  the 
constitution  of  Mcolas  III.  First,  he  removed  the  ex- 
communication for  all  non-literal  interpretations  of  the 
Franciscan  rule,  and  then  attacked  certain  of  its  details. 
IMeanwhile  the  strife  grew  fiercer ;  the  "  Spirituals,"  in 
union  with  Louis  of  Bavaria,  began  to  brand  John  as  a 
heretic,  and  he,  in  a  new  Bull,  declared  the  distinction  be- 
tween use  and  possession  impossible,  neither  serviceable 
for  the  Church  nor  for  Christian  perfection,  and  finally 
rejected  the  doctrine  of  his  predecessor,  that  Christ  and 
the  Apostles  were  in  w^ord  and  deed  patterns  of  the 
Franciscan  ideal  of  poverty,  as  heretical,  and  hostile  to 
the  Catliolic  faith. 


Er7^ors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.     59 

And  thus  the  perplexing  spectacle  was  afforded  the 
Church  of  one  Pope  iineqiuvocally  charging  another  with 
false  doctrine.     What  Nicolas  in.  and  Clement  v.  had 
solemnly  commended  as  right  and  holy,  their  successor 
branded,  as  solemnly,  as  noxious  and  wrong.     The  Tran- 
ciscans  repeated  the  charge  of  heresy  against  John  xxii. 
with  the  more  emphasis,  "since  what  the  Popes  had  once 
defined  in  faith  and  morals,  through  the  keys  of  wisdom, 
their  successors  could  not  call  in  question."-^  John  con- 
demned the  writings  of  D'Olive,  and  several  more  of  their 
theologians,  and  handed  over  the  whole  community  of  the 
"  Spirituals,"  or  Pratricelli,  as  the  advocates  of  extreme 
poverty  w^ere  called,  to  the  Inquisition.     Between  1316 
and  1352,  114  of  them  were  burnt, — mart3rrs  to  their 
misconception  of  Evangelical  poverty  and  Papal  infalli- 
bility; for  they  were  among  the  first  champions  of  that 
theory,  then  still  new  in  the  Church.     After  long  and 
bitter  persecutions,  Sixtus  IV.  at  last  made  some  satis- 
faction to  the  "  Spirituals,"  by  letting  the  works  of  their 
prophet  and  theologian,  D'Olive,  be  re-examined,  and, 
in  contradiction  to  the  sentence  of  John  xxii.,  declared 
orthodox.     Later  Popes  resumed  possession  of  the  pro- 
perty of  the  Franciscans,  which  John  had  repudiated. 

1  Cf.  Bossuet,  Defens.  Declarat. — QCuvres,  xviii.  pp.  339  seq.  Liege,  1768. 


6o  Papal  Infallibility. 

One  of  the  most  comprehensive,  dogmatic  documents 
ever  issued  by  a  Pope  is  the  decree  of  Eugenius  iv.  "  to 
the  Armenians,"  dated  2 2d  ISrovemberl439,  three  months 
after  the  Council  of  Florence  was  brought  to  an  end  by 
the  departure  of  the  Greeks.  It  is  a  confession  of  faith 
of  the  Eoman  Church,  intended  to  serve  as  a  rule  of 
doctrine  and  practice  for  the  Armenians,  on  those  points 
they  had  previously  differed  about.  The  dogmas  of 
the  Unity  of  the  Divine  Nature,  the  Trinity,  the  In- 
carnation, and  the  Seven  Sacraments,  are  expounded, 
and  the  Pope  moreover  asserts  that  the  decree  thus 
solemnly  issued  has  received  the  sanction  of  the  Council, 
that  is,  of  the  Italian  bishops  whom  he  had  detained  in 
Florence. 

If  this  decree  of  the  Pope  were  really  a  rule  of 
faith,  the  Eastern  Church  would  have  only  four  sacra- 
ments instead  of  seven ;  the  Western  Church  would  for 
at  least  eight  centuries  have  been  deprived  of  three 
sacraments,  and  of  one,  the  want  of  which  would  make 
all  the  rest,  with  one  exception,  invalid.  Eugenius  iv. 
determines  in  this  decree  tlie  form  and  matter,  the  sub- 
stance, of  the  sacraments,  or  of  those  things  on  the 
presence  or  absence  of  which  the  existence  of  the  sacra- 
ment itself  depends,  according  to  the  universal  doctrine 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.    6 1 

of  the  Cliurcli.  He  gives  a  form  of  Confirmation  which 
never  existed  in  one-half  of  the  Church,  and  first  came 
into  use  in  the  other  after  the  tenth  century.  So  again 
with  Penance.  AVhat  is  given  as  the  essential  form  of 
the  sacrament  was  unknown  in  the  Western  Church  for 
eleven  hundred  years,  and  never  known  in  the  Greek. 
And  when  the  touching  the  sacred  vessels,  and  the 
words  accompanying  the  rite,  are  given  as  the  form  and 
matter  of  Ordination,  it  follows  that  the  Latin  Church 
for  a  thousand  years  had  neither  priests  nor  bishops — 
nay,  like  the  Greek  Church,  which  never  adopted  this 
usage,  possesses  to  this  hour  neither  priests  nor  bishops, 
and  consequently  no  sacraments  except  Baptism,  and 
perhaps  Marriage.-^ 

It  is  noteworthy  that  this  decree — with  which  Papal 
Infallibility  or  the  whole  hierarchy  and  the  sacraments 
of  the  Church  stand  or  fall — is  cited,  refuted,  and 
appealed  to  by  all  dogmatic  writers,  but  that  the  adhe- 
rents of  Papal  Infallibility  have  never  meddled  with  it. 
Neither  Bellarmine,  nor  Charlas,  nor  Aguirre,  nor  Orsi, 

1  Cf.  Denzinger,  Enchirid.  Syvibol.  etDefinit.  (Wirceb.  1854),  pp.  200  sc^. 
But  Denzinger,  in  order  to  conceal  the  purely  dogmatic  character  of  this 
famous  decree,  has  omitted  the  first  x>a-rt,  on  the  Trinity  and  Incarnation, 
whicli  is  given  in  Raynaldus's  Annals,  1439.  [The  same  conspicuously 
untenable  explanation  was  adopted  in  the  Dublin  Hevieio  for  January 
1866.-TR.J 


62  Papal  Infallibility. 

nor  the  otlier  apologists  of  the  Eoman  Court,  troubled 
themselves  with  it. 

After  the  Papal  claim  to  infallibility  had  taken  a 
more  definite  shape  at  Eome,  Sixtus  v.  himself  brought 
it  again  into  jeopardy  by  his  edition  of  the  Bible.  The 
Council  of  Trent  had  pronounced  St.  Jerome's  version 
authentic  for  the  Western  Church,  but  there  was  no 
authentic  edition  of  the  Latin  Bible  sanctioned  by  the 
Church.  Sixtus  V.  undertook  to  provide  one,  which 
appeared,  garnished  with  the  stereotyped  forms  of  ana- 
thema and  penal  enactments.  His  Bull  declared  that  this 
edition,  corrected  by  his  own  hand,  must  be  received  and 
used  by  everybody  as  the  only  true  and  genuine  one, 
under  pain  of  excommunication,  every  change,  even  of 
a  single  word,  being  forbidden  under  anathema. 

But  it  soon  appeared  that  it  was  full  of  blunders, 
some  two  thousand  of  them  introduced  by  the  Pope 
himself.  It  was  said  the  Bible  of  Sixtus  v.  must 
be  publicly  prohibited.  But  Bellarmine  advised  that 
the  peril  Sixtus  had  brought  the  Church  into  should  be 
hushed  up  as  far  as  possible ;  all  the  copies  were  to  be 
called  in,  and  the  corrected  Bible  printed  anew,  under 
the  name  of  Sixtus  v.,  with  a  statement  in  the  Preface 
that  the  errors  had  crept  in  through  the  fault  of  the 


Errors  and  Contradictions  of  the  Popes.     63 

compositors  and  the  carelessness  of  others.  Bellarmine 
himself  was  commissioned  to  give  circulation  to  these 
lies,  to  which  the  new  Pope  gave  his  name,  by  compos- 
ing the  Preface.  In  his  Autobiography  this  Jesuit  and 
Cardinal  congratulates  himself  on  having  thus  requited 
Sixtus  with  good  for  evil ;  for  the  Pope  had  put  his 
great  work  on  Controversies  on  the  Index,  because  he 
had  not  maintained  the  direct,  but  only  the  indirect, 
dominion  of  the  Pope  over  the  whole  world.  And  now 
followed  a  fresh  mishap.  The  Autobiography,  which  was 
kept  in  the  archives  of  the  Eoman  Jesuits,  got  known 
in  Ptome  through  several  transcripts.  On  this  Cardinal 
Azzolini  urged  that,  as  Bellarmine  had  insulted  three 
Popes  and  exhibited  two  as  liars,  viz.,  Gregory  xiv. 
and  Clement  viii.,  his  work  should  be  suppressed  and 
burnt,  and  the  strictest  secrecy  inculcated  about  it.^ 

§  lY.—The  Verdict  of  History. 
Some  explanation  is  imperatively  needed  of  the  strange 
phenomenon,  that  an  opinion  according  to  which  Christ 

1  For,  thought  Azzolini,  what  shall  we  say,  if  our  adversaries  infer 
"  Papa  potest  falli  in  exponenda  Ecclesioe  S.  Scriptura  "— the  Pope  can  err 
in  expounding  Scripture— naj^,  hath  erred,  "  non  solum  in  exponendo  sed 
in  ea  multa  perperam  mutando,"  not  only  in  expounding  it,  but  in  making 
many  wrong  changes  in  the  text  l.—  Voto  ndla  causa  della  Beatif.  del  Card. 
Bellarm.  (Ferrara,  1761),  p.  40. 


64  Papal  Infallibility. 

has  made  the  Pope  of  the  day  the  one  vehicle  of  His  in- 
spirations, the  pillar  and  exclusive  organ  of  Divine  truth, 
without  whom  the  Church  is  like  a  body  without  a  soul, 
deprived  of  the  power  of  vision,  and  unable  to  deter- 
mine any  point  of  faith — that  such  an  opinion,  which 
is  for  the  future  to  be  a  sort  of  dogmatic  Atlas  carrying 
the  whole  edifice  of  faith  and  morals  on  its  shoulders, 
should  have  first  been  certainly  ascertained  in  the  year 
of  grace  1869,  but  is  from  henceforth  to  be  placed  as  a 
primary  article  of  faith  at  the  head  of  every  catechism. 
Eor  thirteen  centuries  an  incomprehensible  silence 
on  this  fundamental  article  reigned  throughout  the 
whole  Church  and  her  literature.  None  of  the  ancient 
confessions  of  faith,  no  catechism,  none  of  the  patristic 
writings  composed  for  the  instruction  of  the  people, 
contain  a  syllable  about  the  Pope,  still  less  any  hint 
that  all  certainty  of  faith  and  doctrine  depends  on  him. 
For  the  first  thousand  years  of  Church  history  not  a 
question  of  doctrine  w^as  finally  decided  by  the  Pope. 
The  Eoman  bishops  took  no  part  in  the  commotions 
which  the  numerous  Gnostic  sects,  the  Montanists  and 
Chiliasts,  produced  in  the  early  Church,  nor  can  a  single 
dogmatic  decree  issued  by  one  of  them  be  found  during 
the  first  four  centuries,  nor  a  trace  of  the  existence  of  any. 


The  Verdict  of  History.  65 

Even  the  controversy  about  Christ  kindled  by  Paul  of 
Samosata,  which  occupied  the  whole  Eastern  Church  for 
a  long  time,  and  necessitated  the  assembling  of  several 
Councils,  was  terminated  without  the  Pope  taking  any 
part  in  it.  So  again  in  the  chain  of  controversies  and  dis- 
cussions connected  with  the  names  of  Theodotus,  Arte- 
mon,  Noetus,  Sabellius,  Beryllus,  and  Lucian  of  Antioch, 
which  troubled  the  whole  Church,  and  extended  over 
nearly  150  years,  there  is  no  proof  that  the  Eoman 
bishops  acted  beyond  the  limits  of  their  own  local 
Church,  or  accomplished  any  dogmatic  result.  The  only 
exception  is  the  dogmatic  treatise  of  the  Pioman  bishop 
Dionysius,  following  a  Synod  held  at  Eome  in  262,  de- 
nouncing and  rejecting  Sabellianism  and  the  opposite 
method  of  expression  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria.  This 
document,  if  any  authority  had  been  ascribed  to  it,  was 
W' ell  fitted  in  itself  to  cut  short,  or  rather  strangle  ai  its 
birth,  the  long  Arian  disturbance ;  but  it  was  not  known 
out  of  Alexandria,  and  exercised  no  influence  whatever  on 
the  later  course  of  the  controversy.  It  is  only  know^n 
from  the  fragments  quoted  afterwards  by  Athanasius. 

In  three  controversies  during  this  early  period  the 
■  Eoman  Church  took  an  active  part, — the  question  about 
'  Easter,  about  heretical  baptism,  and  about  the  peni- 

E 


66  Papal  Infallibility. 

tential  discipline.  In  all  three  the  Popes  were  unable  to 
carry  out  their  own  will  and  view  and  practice,  and  the 
-  other  Churches  maintained  their  different  usage  with- 
out its  leading  to  any  permanent  division.  Pope  Victor's 
attempt  to  compel  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor  to  adopt 
the  Ptoman  usage,  by  excluding  them  from  his  com- 
munion, proved  a  failure. 

The  dispute  about  the  stricter  or  milder  administra- 
tion of  penance,  and  as  to  whether  certain  heinous  sins 
should  exclude  from  communion  for  life,  lasted  a  long 
time  in  the  Church  of  Eome,  as  elsewhere.  There  is 
no  trace  found  of  any  attempt  to  force  other  Churches 
to  adopt  the  principles  received  at  Eome  ;  and  even  in 
the  fourth  century,  the  Spanish  Synod  of  Elvira  estab- 
lished rules  ditfering  widely  from  the  Eoman.  This 
difference  had  an  intimate  relation  to  dogma. 

The  dispute  about  heretical  baptism,  in  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  had  a  still  more  clearly  dogmatic  char- 
acter, for  the  whole  Church  doctrine  of  the  efficacy  and 
conditions  of  sacramental  grace  was  involved.  Yet  the 
opposition  of  Pope  Stephen  to  the  doctrine,  confirmed 
at  several  African  and  Asiatic  Synods,  against  the 
validity  of  schismatical  baptism,  remained  wholly  in- 
operative.    Stephen  went  so  far  as  to  exclude  those 


The  Verdict  of  History.  67 

Chiirclies  from  his  commnnion,  but  he  only  drew  down 
sharp  censures  on  his  unlawful  arrogance.  Both  St. 
Cyprian  and  Firmilian  of  Cesarea  denied  his  having  any 
right  to  dictate  a  doctrine  to  other  bishops  and  Churches. 
And  the  other  Eastern  Churches,  too,  which  were  not 
directly  mixed  up  in  the  dispute,  retained  their  own 
practice  for  a  long  time,  quite  undisturbed  by  the 
Roman  theory.  Later  on,  St.  Augustine,  looking  back 
at  this  dispute,  maintains  that  the  pronouncement  of 
Stephen,  categorical  as  it  was,  was  no  decision  of  the 
Church,  and  that  St.  Cyprian  and  the  Africans  were 
therefore  justified  in  rejecting  it ;  he  says  the  real  obli- 
gation of  conforming  to  a  common  practice  originated 
with  the  decree  of  a  great  {^Unarimn)  Council,  meaning 
the  Council  of  Aries  in  314.-^ 

In  the  Arian  disputes,  which  engaged  and  disturbed 
the  Church  beyond  all  others  for  above  half  a  century, 
and  were  discussed  in  more  than  fifty  Synods,  the  Eoman 
See  for  a  long  time  remained  passive.  Through  tlie 
long  episcopate  of  Pope  Silvester  (314-335)  there  is  no 
document  or  sign  of  doctrinal  activity,  any  more  than 

^  Aug.,  Be  Bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  0pp.  (ed.  Benedict.)  ix.  pp.  98-111.  The 
advocates  of  Papal  Infallibility  are  obliged  to  give  up  St.  Augustine.  Orsi 
formally  rebulces  hiin,  and  Bellarmine  {De  Ecclcs.  i.  4)  thinks  he  perhaps 
spoke  a  falsehood. 


6S  Papal  hifallibility. 

from  all  his  predecessors  from  269  to  314.  Julius  and 
Liberius  (337-366)  were  the  first  to  take  part  in  the 
course  of  events,  but  they  only  increased  the  uncer- 
tainty. Julius  pronounced  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  an 
avowed  Sabellian,  orthodox  at  his  Eoman  Synod ;  and 
Liberius  purchased  his  return  from  exile  from  the  Em- 
peror by  condemning  Athanasius,  and  subscribing  an 
Arian  creed.  "  Anathema  to  thee,  Liberius  !"  was  then 
the  cry  of  zealous  Catholic  bishops  like  Hilary  of 
Poitiers.  This  apostasy  of  Liberius  sufficed,  through 
the  whole  of  the  middle  ages,  for  a  proof  that  Popes 
could  fall  into  heresy  as  well  as  other  people. 

Later  on,  and  especially  after  the  unfortunate  issue 
of  the  Synods  of  Milan,  Sirmium,  Pdmini,  and  Seleucia, 
when  men's  confidence  in  this  method  of  securing  sound 
definitions  was  greatly  shaken,  and  St.  Jerome  wrote 
that  the  world  was  amazed  to  find  itself  Arian — then,  if 
ever,  we  might  expect  that  Christians  and  Churches 
would  resort  in  their  perplexity  from  all  parts  of  the 
empire  to  the  Eoman  See  for  aid  and  counsel,  as  the 
one  anchor  of  salvation  and  rock  of  orthodoxy;  but 
nothing  of  the  kind  took  place ;  so  far  from  it,  that  in 
all  the  treatises  and  discussions  consequent  on  the 
Synods  of  Ptimini  and  Seleucia  in  359,  the  Pope's  name 


The  Verdict  of  History.  69 

's  never  once  mentioned.  The  first  sign  of  life  lie  gave 
was  some  years  afterwards,  when  he  adopted  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  Synod  of  Alexandria  against  the  bishops 
who  fell  at  Pdmini.-^ 

During  all  the  fourth  century  Councils  alone  decided 
dogmatic  questions.  If  the  Bishop  of  Eome  was  ever 
appealed  to  for  a  decision,  it  was  understood  that  he 
was  desired  to  call  a  Synod  to  decide  the  point  at  issue. 
At  the  second  (Ecumenical  Council  in  381,  which  decreed 
the  most  important  definition  of  faith  since  the  Nicene, 
by  first  formulizing  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Church  of  Eome  was  not  represented  at  all ;  only  the 
decrees  were  communicated  to  it  as  to  other  Churches. 
Two  Eoman  Synods,  under  Damasus,  about  378,  did 
indeed  anathematize  certain  errors  without  naming  their 
authors;  but  Pope  Siricius  (384-398)  declined  to  pro- 
nounce on  the  false  doctrine  of  a  bishop  (Bonosus), 
when  requested  to  do  so,  on  the  ground  that  he  had  no 
right,  and  must  await  the  sentence  of  the  bishops  of  the 
province,  "  to  make  it  the  rule  of  his  own."^  He  con- 
demned the  teaching  of  Jovinian,  which  originated  in 
Eome  itself,  but  only  through  the  means  of  a  Synod. 

A  greater  share  fell  to  the  Popes  in  the  Pelagian  con- 

1  Epist.  Pontif.  (ed.  Const.)  p.  448.  2  7^.  p.  579, 


JO  Papal  Infallibility. 

troversies,  which  chiefly  concerned  the  West,  than  in 
previous  ones.  Innocent  I.,  when  invoked  by  the 
Africans,  after  five  years  of  disputing,  had  sanctioned 
the  decrees  of  their  two  Synods  of  Milevis  and  Carthage 
(417),  and  pronounced  a  work  of  Pelagius  heretical,  so 
that  St.  Augustine  said,  in  a  sermon,  "  The  matter  is 
nov/  ended." -^  But  he  deceived  himself,  for  the  strife 
was  only  fairly  begun,  and  it  was  not  ended  till  many 
years  later,  by  the  decision  of  the  (Ecumenical  Council 
of  Ephesus  in  431.  Meanwhile  Pope  Zosimus  spoke 
on  the  Pelagian  doctrine  in  a  very  different  fashion 
from  his  immediate  predecessor.  Innocent.  He  bestowed 
high  commendation  on  the  profession  of  faith  of  Celes- 
tius,  who  w^as  accused  before  him  of  the  heresy,  though 
it  contained  an  open  denial  of  Original  Sin,  and  severely 
rebuked  the  African  bishops,  who  had  made  the  com- 
plaint, for  accusing  so  orthodox  a  person  of  heresy.  It 
was  only  after  they  had  addressed  an  energetic  letter  to 
Zosimus,  telling  him  that  they  adhered  to  their  decision, 
and  that  he  was  mistaken,  and  after  they  had  again 
anathematized  the  teaching  of  Pelagius  and  Celestius, 
at  a  Council  held  at  Carthage,  that  the  Pope  assented 
to  their  judgment. 

1  Sermo  131,  c.  10.     O^p.  (ed.  Antwerp)  v.  449. 


The  Verdict  of  History.  7 1 

But  St.  Augustine's  saying,  quoted  above,  lias  been  al- 
leged in  proof  of  his  accepting  Papal  Infallibility,  which, 
in  dealing  with  the  baptismal  controversy,  he  so  often 
and  so  pointedly  repudiates.  Such  a  notion  was  utterly 
foreign  to  his  mind.  The  Pelagian  system  was  in  his 
eyes  so  manifest  and  deadly  an  error  {ci^erta  'per nicies), 
that  there  seemed  to  him  no  need  even  of  a  Synod  to 
condemn  it.^  The  two  African  Synods,  and  the  Pope's 
assent  to  their  decrees,  appeared  to  him  more  than 
enough,  and  so  the  matter  might  be  regarded  as  at  an 
end.  That  a  Ptoman  judgment  in  itself  was  not  con- 
clusive, but  that  a  ''Concilium  plenarmm"  was  neces- 
sary for  that  purpose,  he  had  himself  emphatically 
maintained;  and  the  conduct  of  Pope  Zosimus  could 
only  confirm  his  opinion. 

A  new  chapter  in  the  dogmatic  action  of  the  Popes 
opens  with  the  year  430,  which  was  the  starting-point  of 
the  controversies  on  the  Incarnation  and  the  relation  of 
the  two  natures  in  Christ,  which  lasted  on  to  the  close 
of  the  seventh  century.  Pope  Celestine's  condemnation 
of  Nestorius  was  superseded  by  the  Emperor's  convoking 
a  General  Council  at  Ephesus  in  431,  where  it  was  sub- 
mitted to  examination,  and  approved.    When  the  Euty- 

1  Conir.  Ei).  Pelag.  i.  4,  c.  ult. 


72  Papal  Infallibility. 

cliian  controversy  arose,  the  letter  of  Leo  the  Great  to 
Flavian  appeared  in  449,  and  this  was  the  first  dogmatic 
writing  of  a  Pope  which  found  acceptance  both  in  East 
and  West,  but  not  until  it  had  been  examined  at  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon.  Leo  himself  acknowledged  that 
his  treatise  could  not  become  a  rule  of  faith  till  it  was 
confirmed  by  the  bishops.-^ 

Pope  Yigilius  was  less  happy  in  the  dispute  about 
the  "  Three  Chapters  " — the  writings  of  Theodore,  Theo- 
doret,  and  Ibas,  which  were  held  to  be  Nestorian, — which 
he  first  pronounced  orthodox  in  546,  then  condemned 
the  next  year,  and  thus  again  reversed  this  sentence  in 
deference  to  the  Western  bishops,  and  then  came  into 
conflict  with  the  Pifth  General  Council,  which  excom- 
municated him.  Finally,  he  submitted  to  the  judgment 
of  the  Council,  declaring  that  he  had  unfortunately  been  a 
tool  in  the  hands  of  Satan,  who  labours  for  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Church,  and  had  thus  been  divided  from  his 
colleagues,  but  God  had  now  enlightened  him.^  Thus  he 
thrice  contradicted  himself :  first  he  anathematized  those 
who  condemned  the  Three  Chapters  as  erroneous  ;  then 
he  anathematized  those  who  held  them  to  be  orthodox, 

1  Leonis  Ep.  ad  Episc.  Gall.    See  Mansi,  Concil.  vi.  ISl. 

2  See  his  letter  to  the  Patriarch  Eutychius.  Cf.  De  Marca,  Dissert. 
(Paris,  1669),  p.  45. 


The  Verdict  of  History.  73 

as  he  had  just  before  himself  held  them  to  be ;  soon  after 
he  condemned  the  condemnation  of  the  Three  Chapters ; 
and  lastly,  the  Emperor  and  Conncil  triumphed  again 
over  the  fickle  Pope.  A  long  schism  in  the  West  was 
the  consequence.  Whole  National  Churches — Africa, 
North  Italy,  Illyria — broke  off  communion  with  the 
Popes,  whom  they  accused  of  having  sacrificed  the 
faith  and  authority  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  by 
condemning  the  Three  Chapters.  Pelagius  i,  Vigilius's 
successor,  whose  orthodoxy  was  on  this  ground  sus- 
pected by  the  Prankish  king,  Childebert,  and  the  bishops 
of  Gaul,  never  dreamt  of  claiming  immunity  from 
error,  but  excused  himself  in  all  directions.  He  laid 
before  Childebert  a  public  profession  of  his  faith,  and 
declared  himself,  before  the  bishops  of  Tuscany,  ready 
to  give  to  every  one  an  account  of  his  faith. 

Often  and  earnestly  as  the  Popes  exhorted  separated 
bishops  and  Churches  to  return  to  communion  with 
Pome,  they  never  appealed  to  any  peculiar  authority  or 
exemption  from  error  in  the  Eoman  See. 

The  Monoth elite  controversy,  growing  out  of  the  as- 
sertion that  Christ  had  not  two  wills,  a  human  and  a 
Divine,  but  one  Divine  will  only,  led  to  the  General 
Synod  of  Constantinople  in  680.     At  the  beginning  of 


74  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  controversy,  Pope  Honorius  I.,  when  questioned  by 
three  Patriarchs,  had  spoken  entirely  in  favour  of  the 
heretical  doctrine  in  letters  addressed  to  them,  and  had 
thereby  powerfully  aided  the  new  sect.     Later  on,  in 
649,  Pope  Martin,  with  a  Synod  of  105  bishops  from 
Southern  and  Central  Italy,  condemned  Monothelism. 
But  the  sentence  of  a  Pope  and  a  small  Synod  had  no 
binding  authority  then,  and  the  Emperor  Constantine 
found  it  necessary  to  summon  a  General  Council  to 
settle  the  question.     It  was  foreseen  that  Pope  Hon- 
orius I.,  who  had  hitherto  been  protected  by  silence, 
must  share  the  fate  of  the  other  chief  authors  of  the 
heresy  at  this  Council.    He  was,  in  fact,  condemned  for 
heresy  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  and  not  a  single 
voice,  not  even  of  the  Papal  legates  who  were  present, 
was  raised  in  his  defence.     His  dogmatic  writings  were 
committed  to  the  flames  as  heretical.     The  Popes  sub- 
mitted to  the  inevitable ;  they  subscribed  the  anathema, 
and  themselves  undertook  to  see  that  the  "heretic" 
Honorius   was   condemned    in   the   West   as   well   as 
throughout  the  East,  and  his  name  struck  out  of  the 
Liturgy.     This  one  fact — that  a  Great  Council,  univer- 
sally received  afterwards  without  hesitation  through- 
out the  Church,  and  presided  over  by  Papal  legates, 


The  Verdict  of  History.  75 

pronounced  the  dogmatic  decision  of  a  Pope  heretical, 
and  anathematized  him  by  name  as  a  heretic — is  a 
proof,  clear  as  the  sim  at  noonday,  that  the  notion  of 
any  peculiar  enlightenment  or  inerrancy  of  the  Popes 
was  then  utterly  unknown  to  the  whole  Church.  The 
only  resource  of  the  defenders  of  Papal  Infallibility, 
since  Torquemada  and  Bellarmine,  has  been  to  attack 
the  Acts  of  the  Council  as  spurious,  and  maintain  that 
they  are  a  wholesale  forgery  of  the  Greeks.  The  Jesuits 
clung  tenaciously  to  this  notion  till  the  middle  of  the 
last  century.  Since  it  has  had  to  be  abandoned,  the 
device  has  been  to  try  and  torture  the  words  of  Honorius 
into  a  sort  of  orthodox  sense.  But  whatever  comes  of 
that,  nothing  can  alter  the  fact,  that  at  the  time  both 
Councils  and  Popes  were  convinced  of  the  falhbility 
of  the  Pope. 

A  century  later.  Pope  Hadrian  i.  vainly  endeavoured 
to  get  the  decrees  of  the  second  Mcene  Council  on 
Image  Worship,  which  he  had  approved,  received  by 
Charles  the  Great  and  his  bishops.  The  great  assembly 
at  Frankfort  in  794,  and  the  Caroline  books,  rejected 
and  attacked  these  decrees,  and  Hadrian  did  not  ven- 
ture to  offer  more  than  verbal  opposition.  In  824  the 
bishops  assembled  in  synod   at  Paris   spoke  without 


^(y  Papal  Infallibility, 

remorse  of  the  "  absurdities  "  (absona)  of  Pope  Hadrian, 
who,  they  said,  had  commanded  an  heretical  worship 
of  images.^ 

No  less  light  is  thrown  on  the  relations  of  Western 
bishops  to  the  Pope  by  the  Predestinarian  controversy 
occasioned  by  the  monk  Gottschalk,  and  prolonged  for 
ten  years  at  Synods  and  in  various  writings.  The  first 
prelates  of  the  day,  Hincmar,  Ehabanus,  Amnio,  Pru- 
dentius,  Wenilo,  and  others,  took  opposite  sides.  Synod 
contended  against  Synod,  and  there  seemed  no  possi- 
bility of  coming  to  an  agreement.  Yet  it  never  occurred 
to  any  one  to  appeal  to  the  Pope's  sentence,  ready  as  he 
was  to  interpose  in  the  affairs  of  the  Prankish  Church ; 
only  at  the  last  Gottschalk  himself  made  an  unsuc- 
cessful attempt  to  get  his  hard  fate  mitigated  by  the 
Pope. 

Up  to  the  time  of  the  Isidorian  decretals  no  serious 
attempt  w^as  made  anywhere  to  introduce  the  neo- 
Ptoman  theory  of  Infallibility.  The  Popes  did  not  dream 
of  laying  claim  to  such  a  privilege.  Their  relation  to 
the  Church  had  to  be  fundamentally  revolutionized, 
and  the  idea  of  the  Primacy  altered,  before  there  could 
be  any  room  for  this  doctrine  to  grow  up  ;  after  that  it 

^  Mansi,  Condi,  xiv.  415  seq. 


The  Verdict  of  History.  77 

developed  itself  by  a  sort  of  logical  sequence,  but  very 
slowly,  being  at  issue  with  notorious  liistorical  facts. 

§  V. — Tlie  Ancient  Constitution  of  the  Church. 

To  get  a  view  of  the  enormous  difference  in  the  posi- 
tion and  action  of  the  Primacy,  as  it  was  in  the  Eoman 
Empire,  and  as  it  became  in  the  later  middle  ages,  it  is 
enough  to  point  out  the  following  facts  : — 

(1.)  The  Popes  took  no  part  in  convoking  Councils. 
All  Great  Councils,  to  which  bishops  came  from  differ- 
ent countries,  were  convoked  by  the  Emperors,  nor 
were  the  Popes  ever  consulted  about  it  beforehand.  If 
they  thought  a  General  Council  necessary,  they  had  to 
petition  the  Imperial  Court,  as  Innocent  did  in  the 
matter  of  St.  Chrysostom,  and  Leo  after  the  Synod  of 
449  '}  and  then  they  did  not  always  prevail,  as  both 
the  Popes  just  named  learnt  by  experience. 

(2.)  They  were  not  always  allowed  to  preside,  per- 
sonally or  by  deputy,  at  the  Great  Councils,  though  no 
one  denied  them  the  first  rank  in  the  Church.  At 
Nice,  at  the  two  Councils  of  Ephesus  in  431  and  449, 
and  at  the  Fifth  General  Council  in  553,  others  pre- 
sided; only  at  Chalcedon  in  451,  and  Constantinople  in 

1  [The  *' Latrocinium"  of  Eijliesus.— Tii.] 


78  Papal  Infallibility. 

680,  did  the  Papal  legates  preside.  And  it  is  clear  that 
the  Popes  did  not  claim  this  as  their  exclusive  right, 
from  the  conduct  of  Leo  I.  in  sending  his  legates  to 
Ephesus,  although  he  knew  that  the  Emperor  had 
named,  not  him,  but  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  to 
preside. 

(3.)  Neither  the  dogmatic  nor  the  disciplinary  deci- 
sions of  these  Councils  required  Papal  confirmation,  for 
their  force  and  authority  depended  on  the  consent  of 
the  Church,  as  expressed  in  the  Synod,  and  afterwards 
in  the  fact  of  its  being  generally  received.  The  con- 
firmation of  the  Nicene  Council  by  Pope  Silvester  was 
afterwards  invented  at  Ptome,  because  facts  would  not 
square  with  the  newly  devised  theory. 

(4.)  For  the  first  thousand  years  no  Pope  ever  issued 
a  doctrinal  decision  intended  for  and  addressed  to  the 
whole  Church.  Their  doctrinal  pronouncements,  if  de- 
signed to  condemn  new  heresies,  were  always  submitted 
to  a  Synod,  or  were  answers  to  inquiries  from  one  or 
more  bishops.  They  only  became  a  standard  of  faith 
after  bemg  read,  examined,  and  ajDproved  at  an  O^lcume- 
nical  Council. 

(5.)  The  Popes  possessed  none  of  the  three  powers 
which  are  the  proper  attributes  of  sovereignty,  neither 


Ancient  Constit2Uion  of  the  Church.        79 

the  legislative,  the  administrative,  nor  the  judicial.  The 
Council  of  Sardica,  in  343,  gave  them,  indeed,  a  handle 
for  the  attempt  to  usurp  the  latter.  Here  it  was  decreed 
for  the  first  time,  and  as  a  personal  privilege  to  the  then 
Pope,  Julius,  that  he  should  be  authorized  to  appoint 
judges  for  a  bishop  in  the  second  instance  to  hear  the 
cause  on  the  spot,  with  the  assistance  of  a  Eoman  legate, 
and,  in  the  event  of  a  further  appeal,  to  pronounce  sen- 
tence himself.  But  this  regulation  was  received  neither 
by  the  Eastern  Church  nor  the  African,  never  observed 
by  the  former,  and  steadily  rejected  by  the  latter,  and 
it  never  came  into  full  force  anywhere  till  after  the 
Isidorian  decretals  were  fabricated.  The  African  bishops 
wrote  to  Pope  Boniface  l,  in  41 9,  "  We  are  resolved  not 
to  admit  this  arrogant  claim."  ^ 

The  Popes  at  that  time  made  no  attempt  to  exercise 
legislative  power.  Por  a  long  time,  according  to  their 
own  statement,  no  canons  but  those  of  the  first  Nicene 
Council  obtained  in  the  West,  in  the  East  only  the 
canons  of  Eastern  Synods.  Declarations  or  ordinances 
issued  by  Popes  in  reply  to  questions  of  particular 
bishops  could  not  be  regarded  as  general  laws  of  the 

1  Ejiist.  Fontif.  (ed.  Coust.),  P-  113  :— "  Non  sumus  jam  istum  typlium 
uassurL" 


8o  Papal  Infallibility. 

Cliurcli,  for  the  simple  reason  that  they  were  only 
known  to  particular  bishops  and  Churches.  The  spread 
of  the  Dionysian  writings,  with  the  second  part  com- 
posed of  Papal  documents,  after  the  sixth  century,  began 
gradually  to  pioneer  the  way  for  the  notion  that  certain 
decretals  of  the  Eoman  bishops  had  the  force  of  law,  but 
their  authority  was  still  limited,  as  in  the  Spanish 
Church,  to  those  issued  by  Koman  Synods,  or  else  was 
made  dependent  on  their  express  acceptance  by  National 
Churches.  Even  if  the  Popes  had  attempted  at  that  time 
to  exercise  a  formal  government  over  the  Church,  the 
thing  was  a  sheer  impossibility.  Government  cannot  be 
carried  on  by  occasional  Synods,  and  there  was  no  other 
means  of  governing.  The  Popes  would  have  required  a 
court,  a  system  of  clerical  officials,  congregations,  and 
the  like,  but  nothing  of  the  kind  was  remotely  dreamt 
of  The  Eoman  clergy  were  organized  just  like  every 
other  ;  for  all  the  offices  and  functions  undertaken  later, 
and  still  discharged  by  the  court,  there  was  then  neither 
need  nor  occasion. 

(6.)  Nobody  thought  of  getting  dispensations  from 
Church  laws  from  the  Eoman  bishops,  nor  was  a  single 
tax  or  tribute  paid  to  the  Eoman  See,  for  no  court  as  yet 
existed.      To  make  laws  which  could  be  dispensed  for 


Ancient  ConstitiUion  of  the  CJnuxh.        8i 

money  would  have  appeared  both  a  folly  and  a  crime. 
The  power  of  the  keys,  or  of  binding  and  loosing,  was 
universally  held  to  belong  to  the  other  bishops  just  as 
much  as  to  the  bishop  of  Kome. 

(7.)  The  bishops  of  Eome  could  exclude  neither  indi- 
viduals nor  Churches  from  the  communion  of  the  Church 
Universal.  They  could  withdraw  their  own  Church  from 
communion  with  particular  bishops  or  Churches,  and 
they  often  did  so,  but  this  in  nowise  affected  their  rela- 
tion to  other  bishops  or  Churches,  as  was  shown,  among 
other  instances,  by  the  long  Antiochene  schism  from 
361  to  413.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  they  admitted 
into  their  own  communion  one  excommunicated  by  other 
Churches,  this  did  not  bring  him  into  communion  with 
any  other  Church. 

(8.)  For  a  long  time  nothing  was  known  in  Eome  of 
definite  rights  bequeathed  by  Peter  to  his  successors. 
Nothing  but  a  care  for  the  weal  of  the  Church,  and  the 
duty  of  watching  over  the  observance  of  the  canons, 
was  ascribed  to  them.  Only  after  the  Sardican  Council, 
and  in  reliance  solely  on  It,  or  the  iSTicene,  which  was 
designedly  confounded  with  it,  was  a  right  of  hearing  ap- 
peals laid  claim  to.  Innocent  I.  himself  (402-417),  who 
tried  to  give  the  widest  extent  to  the  Sardican  canon,  and 

F 


82  Papal  Infallibility. 

claimed,  on  the  strength  of  it,  a  right  to  interpose  in  all 
graver  Church  questions,  grounded  his  claim  entirely  on 
"  the  Fathers  "  and  the  Synod.  So,  too,  with  Zosimus 
(417-418), — it  was  the  Fathers  who  had  given  the  See 
of  Eome  the  privilege  of  final  decision  in  appeals.-^  But 
soon  afterwards,  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  the  Eoman 
legates  declared  that  Peter,  to  whom  Christ  gave  the 
power  of  binding  and  loosing,  lives  and  judges  in  his  suc- 
cessors.^ No  one  put  forward  this  plea  more  frequently 
or  more  energetically  than  Leo  I.  But  when  the  Coun- 
cil of  Chalcedon  declared,  in  its  famous  twenty-eighth 
canon,  that  it  was  the  Fathers  who  adjudged  the  primacy 
to  Eome,  and  that  too  on  account  of  the  political  dignity 
of  the  city,  Leo  did  not  venture  to  contradict  them,  though 
he  strenuously  resisted  the  main  purport  of  the  canon, 
which  raised  the  See  of  Constantinople  to  the  first  rank 
after  the  Eoman,  and  to  equal  rights.  It  was  not  the 
degradation  of  the  Eoman  See,  but  only  the  injury  done 
to  the  Eastern  Patriarchs  and  the  Nicene  canon,  which, 
according  to  his  own  assurance,  was  the  ground  of  his 
refusing  his  assent  to  the  canon  of  Chalcedon.^     He 

1  Mansi,  Condi,  iv.  366.  2  /j.  iy.  1296. 

3  The  sixth  Nicene  canon,  referring  to  the  rights  of  the  Roman  See  over 
part  of  the  Italian  Church,  had  given  the  same  rights  to  the  bishops  of 
Alexandiia  and  Antioch  over  their  own  Patriarchates. 


Aficient  Cofistitution  of  the  CJuirch.        83 

had,  indeed,  some  years  before,  induced  the  Emperor 
Yalentinian  ill.  to  issue  an  edict  in  favour  of  the  See  of 
Eome,  which  subjected  all  the  bishops  of  the  then  very 
reduced  Western  empire  (strictly  only  those  of  Italy  and 
Gaul)  to  the  Pope,  and  which,  had  it  obtained  full  force, 
would  have  changed  the  whole  constitution  of  the  West- 
ern Church.  This  edict  names,  besides  the  canon  of 
Sardica,  and  the  greatness  of  the  cit}^,  "  the  merit  of  St. 
Peter,"  as  the  first  ground  for  so  comprehensive  a  power, 
which  the  bishops  were  to  be  compelled  by  the  imperial 
officers  to  bow  to.  But  when  Leo  had  to  deal  with 
Byzantium  and  the  East,  he  no  longer  dared  to  plead  tliis 
argument, — which  would  alone  have  proved  the  hated 
twenty- eighth  canon  of  Chalcedon  to  be  null  and  void, 
— but  preferred  to  appeal  to  the  Mcene  Council,  utterly 
untenable  as  his  inferences  from  the  sixth  canon  must 
have  appeared  to  the  Greeks.  The  opposition  of  his 
successors  was  equally  fruitless.  The  canon  took  full 
effect,  and  from  that  day  to  this  has  determined  the 
form  and  constitution  of  the  Eastern  Church,  and  its 
view  of  the  prerogatives  of  Eome. 

(9.)  What  was  afterwards  called  the  Papal  system, 
when  first  proclaimed  in  words  only,  was  repudiated 
with  horror  by  that  best  and  greatest  of  Popes,  Gregory 


84  Papal  Infallibiliiy. 

the  Great.  On  this  theory  the  Pope  has  the  plenitude 
of  power,  all  other  bishops  are  only  his  servants  and 
auxiliaries,  from  him  all  power  is  derived,  and  he  is 
concurrent  ordinary  in  every  diocese.  So  Gregory  un- 
derstood the  title  of  "  (Ecumenical  Patriarch,"  and  would 
not  endure  that  so  "  wicked  and  blasphemous  a  title  " 
should  be  given  to  himself  or  any  one  else.^ 

(10.)  There  are  many  National  Churches  which  were 
never  under  Eome,  and  never  even  had  any  intercourse 
by  letter  with  Eome,  without  this  being  considered  a 
defect,  or  causing  any  difficulty  about  Church  com- 
munion. Such  an  autonomous  Church,  always  in- 
dependent of  Eome,  was  the  most  ancient  of  those 
founded  beyond  the  limits  of  the  empire,  the  Armenian, 
wherein  the  primatial  dignity  descended  for  a  long 
time  in  the  family  of  the  national  apostle,  Gregory  the 
Illuminator.  The  great  Syro-Persian  Church  in  Meso- 
potamia, and  the  western  part  of  the  kingdom  of  the 
Sassanidse,  with  its  thousands  of  martyrs,  was  from  the 
first,  and  always  remained,  equally  free  from  any  in- 
fluence of  Eome.  In  its  records  and  its  rich  litera- 
ture we  find  no  trace  of  the  arm  of  Eome  havincj 
reached  there.     The  same  holds  good  of  the  Ethiopian 

1  Lib.  V.  El).  18  ad  Joann;  Lib.  viii.  Ep.  30  ad  Euloj.  etc. 


Ancient  Constitution  of  the  Church.       85 

or  Abyssinian  Cluircli,  wliicli  was  indeed  united  to  the 
See  of  Alexandria,  but  wherein  nothing,  except  perhaps 
a  distant  echo,  was  heard  of  the  claims  of  Eome.  In 
the  West,  the  Irish  and  the  ancient  British  Church 
remained  for  centuries  autonomous,  and  under  no  sort 
of  influence  of  Eome. 

If  we  put  into  a  positive  form  this  negative  account 
of  the  position  of  the  ancient  Popes,  we  get  the  follow- 
ing picture  of  the  organization  of  the  ancient  Church  : — 
Without  prejudice  to  its  agreement  with  the  Church 
Universal  in  all  essential  points,  every  Church  manages 
its  own  affairs  with  perfect  freedom  and  independence, 
and  maintains  its  own  traditional  usages  and  discipline, 
all  questions  not  concerning  the  whole  Church,  or  of 
primary  importance,  being  settled  on  the  spot.  The 
Church  is  organized  in  dioceses,  provinces,  patriarchates 
(National  Churches  were  added  afterwards  in  the  West), 
with  the  bishop  of  Eome  at  the  head  as  first  Patriarch, 
the  Centre  and  Eepresentative  of  unity,  and,  as  such, 
the  bond  between  East  and  West,  between  the  Churches 
of  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  tongue,  the  chief  watcher  and 
guardian  of  the,  as  yet  very  few,  common  laws  of  the 
Church, — for  a  long  time  only  the  Mcene ;  but  he  does 
not  encroach  on  the  rights  of  patriarchs,  metropolitans, 


86  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  bishops.  Laws  and  articles  of  faith,  of  nniversal 
obligation,  are  issued  only  by  the  whole  Church,  con- 
centrated and  represented  at  an  QEcumenical  Council. 

§  yi. — The,  Teaching  of  the  Fathers. 

Wliat  has  now  become  a  rule  in  dogmatic  works — to 
give  a  separate  "treatise"  or  "locus"  to  the  Pope — • 
came  in  with  Aquinas,  the  first  theologian  wlio,  on 
grounds  to  be  explained  presently,  made  the  doctrine 
of  the  Pope  a  formal  part  of  dogmatic  theology,  i.e.,  of 
the  Scholastic,  and  it  thus  dates  from  1274.  Since 
then  every  doctrinal  treatise  has  its  section  on  the 
"  Primacy,"  and  since  Melchior  Canus  (about  1550)  more 
especially,  but  in  a  shorter  form  with  Aquinas,  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  Pope's  authority  in  matters  of  faith. 
With  the  Jesuit  theologians  (compare,  e.g.,  among 
living  writers,  Passagiia,  Schrader,  Weninger,  etc.),  the 
monarchical  authority  and  magisterial  power  of  the 
Pope  is  the  chief  article  on  which  all  the  rest  depends, 
and  which  comes  before  all  in  weight  and  fundamental 
significance.  And  rightly  so,  if  the  Pope  is  infallible 
in  his  decisions ;  for  then  every  authority  in  the 
Church,  that  of  Councils  included,  is  a  mere  derivation 
from  his,  and  all  certainty  of  faith  rests  ultimately  on 


The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers.  87 

him  and  his  divine  prerogative  of  being  the  vehicle  of 
a  permanent  Divine  inspiration.  Every  Christian  must 
say  :  "  I  believe  this  or  that  article  of  faith,  because  I 
believe  in  the  Pope's  infallibility,  and  because  the 
Pope  has  decided  it,  or  has  ratified  the  decision  and 
teaching  of  others." 

And  now  compare  with  this  the  silence  of  the 
ancient  Church.  In  the  first  three  centuries,  St. 
Irenseus  is  the  only  writer  who  connects  the  superiority 
of  the  Eoman  Church  with  doctrine ;  but  he  places  this 
superiority,  rightly  understood,  only  in  its  antiquity, 
its  double  apostolical  origin,  and  in  the  circumstance 
of  the  pure  tradition  being  guarded  and  maintained 
there  through  the  constant  concourse  of  the  faithful 
from  all  countries.  Tertulliau,  Cyprian,-^  Lactantius, 
know  nothing  of  special  Papal  prerogative,  or  of  any 
higher  or  supreme  right  of  deciding  in  matter  of  doc- 
trine. In  the  writings  of  the  Greek  doctors,  Eusebius, 
St.  Athanasius,  St.  Basil  the  Great,^  the  two  Gregories, 


^  On  the  famous  interpolation  in  Cyprian's  De  Unit.  Eccles.  see  later. 

2  St.  Basil  {0pp.  ed.  Bened.  iii.  301,  Ejyp.  239  and  214)  has  expressed 
most  strongly  his  contempt  for  the  writings  of  the  Popes,  "  those  insolent 
and  i)uffed  up  Occidentals,  who  would  only  sanction  false  doctrine,'*  He 
says  he  would  not  receive  their  letters  if  they  fell  from  heaven.  He  was 
provoked  by  the  support  given  at  Rome  to  the  open  Sabellianisni  of  Mar- 
cellus  and  the  unsettling  of  the  Antiochene  Church. 


88  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  St.  Epiphanius,  tliere  is  not  one  word  of  any  pre- 
rogatives of  the  Eoman  bishop.  The  most  copious  of 
the  Greek  Fathers,  St.  Chrysostom,  is  wholly  silent  on 
the  subject,  and  so  are  the  two  Cyrils ;  equally  silent  are 
the  Latins,  Hilary,  Pacian,  Zeno,  Lucifer,  Sulpicius,  and 
St.  Ambrose.  Even  the  Eoman  writer  Ursinus  (about 
440),  in  defending  the  Eoman  view  of  re-baptism, 
avoids — perhaps  cannot  venture  upon  any  appeal  to 
— the  authority  of  the  Eoman  Church,  as  final,  or  even 
of  especial  weight  I"^ 

St.  Augustine  has  ^vritten  more  on  the  Church,  its 
unity  and  authority,  than  all  the  other  Fathers  put 
together.  Yet,  from  all  his  numerous  works,  filling  ten 
folios,  only  one  sentence,  in  one  letter,  can  be  quoted, 
where  he  says  that  the  principality  of  the  Apostolic 
Chair  has  always  been  in  Eome,^ — which  could,  of 
course,  be  said  then  with  equal  truth  of  Antioch, 
Jerusalem,  and  Alexandria.  Any  reader  of  his  Pastoral 
•  Letter  to  the  separated  Donatists  on  the  Unity  of  the 
Church,  must  find  it  inexplicable,  on  the  Jesuit  theory, 
that  in  these  seventy- five  chapters  there  is  not  a  single 

^  That  he  is  the  author  is  clear  from  the  all  but  contemporary  statement 
of  Gennadius,  and  the  oldest  MS.  See  Bennettis,  Privileyia  M.  P.  Via- 
dicata  (Romoe,  1756),  ii.  274. 

2  E_p.  43,  Ojjp.  (Antwerp),  ii.  Qd. 


The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers.  89 

word  on  the  necessity  of  communion  with  Eome  as  the 
centre  of  unity.  He  urges  all  sorts  of  arguments  to 
show  that  the  Donatists  are  bound  to  return  to  the 
Church,  but  of  the  Papal  Chair,  as  one  of  them,  he 
knows  nothing.  So  again  with  the  famous  Commoni- 
torium  of  St.  Vincent  of  Lerins,  composed  in  434.  If 
the  view  of  Eoman  infallibility  had  existed  anywhere 
in  the  Church  at  that  time,  it  could  not  have  been 
possibly  passed  over  in  a  book  exclusively  concerned 
with  the  question  of  the  means  for  ascertaining  the 
genuine  Christian  doctrine.  But  the  author  keeps  to 
the  three  notes  of  universality,  permanence,  and  con- 
sent, and  to  the  CEcumenical  Councils.  Even  Pope 
Pelagius  I.  praises  St.  Augustine  for  "being  mindful 
of  the  divine  doctrine  which  places  the  foundation  of 
the  Church  in  the  Apostolical  Sees,  and  teaching  that 
they  are  schismatics  who  separate  themselves  from  the 
communion  of  these  Apostolical  Sees!'  -^  This  Pope  (555- 
560),  then,  knows  nothing  of  any  exclusive  teaching 
privilege  of  Eome,  but  only  of  the  necessity  of  adlier- 
ing  in  disputed  questions  of  faith  to  the  Apostolical 
Churches — Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem,  as  well 
as  Ptome.^ 

1  Mansi,  Concil.  ix.  71t).  *  lb.  iz.  732. 


90  Papal  Infallibility. 

Moreover,  we  have  writings  or  statements  about  the 
ranks  of  the  hierarchy  in  the  ancient  Church,  and  the 
Papal  dignity  is  never  named  as  one  of  them,  or  men- 
tioned as  anything  existing  apart  in  the  Church.  In  the 
writings  of  the  Areopagite,  composed  at  the  end  of  the 
fifth  century,  on  the  hierarchy,  only  bisliops,  presbyters, 
and  deacons  are  mentioned.  In  63 1,  the  famous  Spanish 
theologian,  Isidore  of  Seville,  describes  all  the  grades  of 
the  hierarchy,  and  divides  bishops  into  four  ranks — 
Patriarchs,  Archbishops,  Metropolitans,  and  Bishops. 
Gratian  incorporated  this  long  chapter  from  Isidore 
into  his  Decretum,  strange  as  it  must  have  appeared  to 
him  that  the  first  and  highest  office  should  not  be 
named  at  all.  As  late  as  789  the  Spanish  Abbot 
Beatus  gives  the  same  account ;  he  too  knows  no 
higher  office  in  the  Church  than  Patriarchs,  of  whom 
he  calls  the  Eoman  the  first.-^ 

There  is  another  fact  the  infallibilist  will  find  it 
impossible  to  explain.  We  have  a  copious  literature  on 
the  Christian  sects  and  heresies  of  the  first  six  centu- 
ries,— Irenseus,  Hippolytus,  Epiphanius,  Philastrius,  St. 
Augustine,  and,  later,  Leontius  and  Timotheus,  have 
left  us  accounts  of  them  to  the  number  of  eighty,  but 

1  Eeati  Comment,  in  Apoc.  (Matlr.  1776),  p.  99. 


The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers.  9 1 

not  a  single  one  is  reproached  with  rejecting  the  Pope's 
authority  iu  matters  of  faith,  while  Aerius,  e.g.,  is  re- 
proached with  denying  the  episcopate  as  a  grade  of  the 
hierarchy.  Had  the  mot  d'orclre  been  given  for  centu- 
ries to  observe  a  dead  silence  on  this,  in  the  Ultramon- 
tane view,  articulus  stantis  ml  cadcntis  Ecclcsice  ? 

All  this  is  intelligible  enough,  if  we  look  at  the 
patristic  interpretation  of  the  words  of  Christ  to  St. 
Peter.  Of  all  the  Fathers  who  interpret  these  passages 
in  the  Gospels  (Matt.  xvi.  18,  John  xxi.  17),  not  a  single 
one  ap^plics  tJievb  to  the  Roman  hisJiojys  as  Peter's  suc- 
cessors. How  many  Fathers  have  busied  themselves 
with  these  texts,  yet  nob  one  of  them  whose  commen- 
taries we  possess — Origen,  Chrysostom,  Hilary,  Augus- 
tine, Cyril,  Theodoret,  and  those  whose  interpretations 
are  collected  in  catenas, — has  dropped  the  faintest  hint 
that  the  primacy  of  Eome  is  the  consequence  of  the 
commission  and  promise  to  Peter !  ISTot  one  of  them 
has  explained  the  rock  or  foundation  on  which  Christ 
would  build  His  Church  of  the  office  given  to  Peter  to 
be  transmitted  to  his  successors,  but  they  understood 
by  it  either  Christ  Himself,  or  Peter's  confession  of  faith 
in  Christ;  often  both  together.  Or  else  they  thought 
Peter  was  the  foundation  equally  with  all  the  other 


92  Papal  Infallibility. 

Apostles,  the  Twelve  being  together  the  foundation-stones 
of  the  Church  (Apoc.  xxi.  14).  The  Fathers  could  the 
less  recognise  in  the  power  of  the  keys,  and  the  power 
of  binding  and  loosing,  any  special  prerogative  or  lord- 
ship of  the  Eoman  bishop,  inasmuch  as — what  is  ob- 
vious to  any  one  at  first  sight — they  did  not  regard  a 
power  first  given  to  Peter,  and  afterwards  conferred  in 
precisely  the  same  words  on  all  the  Apostles,  as  any- 
thing peculiar  to  him,  or  hereditary  in  the  line  of  Eoman 
bishops,  and  they  held  the  symbol  of  the  keys  as  mean- 
ing just  the  same  as  the  figurative  expression  of  binding 
and  loosing.-^ 

Every  one  knows  the  one  classical  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture on  which  the  edifice  of  Papal  Infallibility  has  been 
reared :  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy  faith  fail  not : 
and  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren."^ 
But  these  words  manifestly  refer  only  to  Peter  person- 
ally, to  his  denial  of  Christ  and  his  conversion ;  he  is 
told  that  he,  whose  failure  of  faith  would  be  only  of 

1  Dollinger  might  therefore  have  spared  himself  the  trouble  of  trying  to 
show  that  the  power  of  the  keys  differs  from  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing,  so  that  the  former  extended  over  the  whole  Church,  and  passed 
to  Peter's  successors  {First  Age  of  the  Church,  pp.  29,  30,  2d  ed.)  This 
contradicts  all  the  patristic  interpretations,  and  the  exegetical  tradition 
of  the  Church. 

2  Luke  xxii.  32. 


The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers.  93 

sliort  duration,  is  to  vstrengthen  the  other  Apostles,  whose 
faith  would  likewise  waver.  It  is  directly  against  the 
sense  of  the  passage,  which  speaks  simply  of  faith,  first 
wavering,  and  then  to  be  confirmed  in  the  Messianic 
dignity  of  Christ,  to  find  in  it  a  promise  of  future  infal- 
libility to  a  succession  of  Popes,  just  because  they  hold 
the  office  Peter  first  held  in  the  Eoman  Church.  ISTo 
single  writer  to  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  dreamt 
of  such  an  interpretation ;  all  without  exception — and 
there  are  eighteen  of  them — explain  it  simply  as  a 
prayer  of  Christ  that  his  Apostle  might  not  wholly  suc- 
cumb, and  lose  his  faith  entirely  in  his  approaching 
trial.  The  first  to  find  in  it  a  promise  of  privileges  to 
the  Church  of  Pome  w^as  Pope  Agatho  in  680,  when 
trying  to  avert  the  threatened  condemnation  of  his  pre- 
decessor, Honorius,  through  w-hom  the  Eoman  Church 
had  lost  its  boasted  privilege  of  doctrinal  purity. 

Now,  the  Tridentine  profession  of  faith,  imposed  on 
the  clergy  since  Pius  iv.,  contains  a  vow  never  to  inter- 
pret Holy  Scripture  otherwise  than  in  accord  with  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers — that  is,  the  great 
Church  doctors  of  the  first  six  centuries,  for  Gregory 
the  Great,  who  died  in  604,  was  the  last  of  the  Fathers ; 
every  bishop  and  theologian  therefore  breaks  liis  oath 


94  Papal  Infallibility. 

when  he  interprets  the  passage  in  question  of  a  gift  of 
infallibility  promised  by  Christ  to  the  Popes. 

§  VII. — Forgeries. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  century  no  change  had 
taken  place  in  the  constitution  of  the  Church  as  we 
have  described  it,  and  especially  none  as  to  the  autho- 
rity for  deciding  matters  of  faith.  When  the  Frankish 
bishops  came  to  Leo  iii.,  he  assured  them  that,  far  from 
setting  himself  above  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  in  381, 
who  made  the  additions  to  the  Mcene  Creed,  he  did  not 
venture  to  put  himself  on  a  par  with  them,  and  there- 
fore refused  to  sanction  the  interpolation  of  Filioque 
into  the  Creed.^ 

But  in  the  middle  of  that  century— about  845— arose 
the  huge  fabrication  of  the  Isidorian  decretals,  which 
had  results  far  beyond  what  its  author  contemplated, 
and  gradually,  but  surely,  changed  the  whole  constitu- 
tion and  government  of  the  Church.  It  would  be 
difficult  to  find  in  aU  history  a  second  instance  of  so 
successful,  and  yet  so  clumsy  a  forgery.  Tor  three  cen- 
turies past  it  has  been  exposed,  yet  the  principles  it 
introduced  and  brought  into  practice  have  taken  such 

^  ConciL  Gall.  (ed.  Sirmondi)  ii.  256. 


Forgeries.  95 

deep  root  in  the  soil  of  tlie  Church,  and  have  so  grown 
into  her  life,  that  the  exposure  of  the  fraud  has  pro- 
duced no  result  in  shaking  the  dominant  system. 

About  a  hundred  pretended  decrees  of  the  earliest 
Popes,  together  with  certain  spurious  writings  of  other 
Church  dignitaries  and  acts  of  Synods,  were  then  fabri- 
cated in  the  west  of  Gaul,  and  eagerly  seized  upon  by 
Pope  Nicolas  i.  at  Eome,  to  be  used  as  genuine  docu- 
ments in  support  of  the  new  claims  put  forward  by  him- 
self and  his  successors.  The  immediate  object  of  the 
compiler  of  this  forgery  was  to  protect  bishops  against 
their  metropolitans  and  other  authorities,  so  as  to  secure 
absolute  impunity,  and  the  exclusion  of  all  influence  of 
the  secular  power.  This  end  was  to  be  gained  through 
such  an  immense  extension  of  the  Papal  power,  that,  as 
these  princixjles  gradually  penetrated  the  Church,  and 
were  followed  out  into  their  consequences,  she  neces- 
sarily assumed  the  form  of  an  absolute  monarchy  sub- 
jected to  the  arbitrary  power  of  a  single  individual, 
and  the  foundation  of  the  edifice  of  Papal  Infallibility 
was  already  laid — first,  by  the  principle  that  the 
decrees  of  every  Council  require  Papal  confirmation ; 
secondly,  by  the  assertion  that  the  fulness  of  power, 
even  in  matters  of  faith,  resides  in  the  Pope  alone,  who 


g6  Papal  Infallibility. 

is  bisliop  of  the  universal  Church,  while  the  other 
bisliops  are  his  servants. 

ISTow,  if  the  Pope  is  really  the  bishop  of  the  whole 
Church,  so  that  every  other  bishop  is  his  servant,  he, 
who  is  the  sole  and  legitimate  mouth  of  the  Church, 
ought  to  be  infallible.  If  the  decrees  of  Councils  are 
invalid  without  Papal  confirmation,  the  divine  attesta- 
tion of  a  doctrine  undeniably  rests  in  the  last  resort  on 
the  word  of  one  man,  and  the  notion  of  the  absolute 
power  of  that  one  man  over  the  whole  Church  includes 
that  of  his  infallibility,  as  the  shell  contains  the  kernel. 
With  perfect  consistency,  therefore,  the  pseudo-Isidore 
makes  his  early  Popes  say :  "  The  Eoman  Church  re- 
mains to  the  end  free  from  stain  of  heresy."^ 

Formerly  all  learned  students  of  ecclesiastical  anti- 
quity and  canon-law — men  like  De  Marca,  Baluze, 
Constant,  Gibert,  Berardi,  Zallwein,  etc. — were  agreed 
that  the  change  introduced  by  tlie  pseudo-Isidore  was  a 
substantial  one,  that  it  displaced  the  old  system  of 
Church  government  and  brought  in  the  new.  Modern 
writers  have  maintained  that  the  compiler  of  the  forgery 
only  meant  to  codify  the  existing  state  of  things,  and 

1  E]).  Lucii  in  Hinschius'  ed.  of  Decretals,  p.  179.  Cf.  p.  206.  The 
same  statement  is  put  into  the  mouth  of  Marcus  and  Felix  I. 


Forgeries. 


97 


give  it  a  formal  status,  and  that  the  same  development 
would  have  taken  place  without  his  trick.i  The  truth 
is: — 

First,  Before  his  fabrication  many  very  efficacious 
forgeries  had  won  a  ojradual  recognition  at  Eome  since 
the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century ;  and  on  them  was 
based  the  maxim  that  the  Pope,  as  supreme  in  the 
Church,  could  be  judged  by  no  man. 

Secondly,  The  Isidorian  doctrine  contradicted  itself, 
for  it  aimed  at  two  things  which  were  mutually  incom- 
patible,— the  complete  independence  and  impunity  of 
bishops  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  advancement  of  Papal 
power  on  the  other.  The  first  point  it  sought  to  effect 
by  such  strange  and  unpractical  rules  that  they  never 
attained  any  real  vitality,  while,  on  the  contrary,  the 
principles  about  the  power  of  the  Eoman  See  w-orked 
their  way,  and  became  dominant  under  favourable 
circumstances,  but  with  a  result  greatly  opposed  to  the 
views  of  Isidore,  by  bringing  the  bishops  into  complete 
subjection  to  Piome.  But  that  the  pseudo-Isidorian 
principles  eventually  revolutionized  the  whole  consti- 
tution of  the  Church,  and  introduced  a  new  system  in 

1  So  Walter,  Phillips^  Schulte,  Pachniann,  among  canonists,  autlDolIinger 
in  his  Church  History  (ii.  41-43),  on  grounds  betraying  a  very  imperfect 
knowledge  of  the  decretals. 

G 


98  Papal  hifallibiliiy. 

place  of  the  old, — on  that  point  there  can  be  no  contro- 
versy among  candid  historians. 

At  the  time  when  the  forged  decretals  began  to  be 
widely  known,  the  See  of  Eome  was  occupied  by  Nico- 
las I.  (858-867),  a  Pope  who  exceeded  all  his  prede- 
cessors in  the  audacity  of  his  designs.  Favoured  and 
protected  by  the  break-up  of  the  empire  of  Charles  the 
Great,  he  met  East  and  West  alike  with  the  firm  resolu- 
tion of  pressing  to  the  uttermost  every  claim  of  any  one 
of  his  predecessors,  and  pushing  the  limits  of  the  Eoman 
supremacy  to  the  point  of  absolute  monarchy.  By  a  bold 
but  non-natural  torturing  of  a  single  word  against  the 
sense  of  a  whole  code  of  law,  he  managed  to  give  a  turn 
to  a  canon  of  a  General  Council,  excluding  all  appeals 
to  Eome,  as  though  it  opened  to  the  whole  clergy  in  East 
and  West  a  right  of  appeal  to  Eome,  and  made  the  Pope 
the  supreme  judge  of  all  bishops  and  clergy  of  the  whole 
world.-^  He  wrote  this  to  the  Eastern  Emperor,  to  the 
Prankish  king,  Charles,  and  to  all  the  Prankish  bishops.^ 
And  he  referred  the  Orientals,  and  so  sharp -sighted  a 

1  Canon  17  of  Chcilcedon,  which  speaks  of  ajipeals  to  the  ''primas 
dioceseos,"  i.e.,  one  of  the  Eastern  patriarchs,  not  a  civil  ruler,  as  Baxmann 
thinks  {Poliiik  der  Pdhste,  ii.  13).  Nicolas  said  the  singular  meant  the 
plural,  "dioceseon,"  and  that  the  "primate"  meant  the  Pope,— a  notion 
which  would  not  seem  worth  a  reply  in  Constantinople. 

2  Mansi,  Condi,  v.  202,  688,  694. 


Forgeries.  99 

man  as  Photius,  to  those  fabrications  fathered  on  Popes 
Silvester  and  Sixtus,  which  were  thenceforth  used  for 
centuries,  and  gained  the  Roman  Church  the  oft-repeated 
reproach  from  the  Greeks,  of  being  the  native  home  of 
inventions  and  falsifications  of  documents.  Soon  after, 
receiving  the  new  implements  forged  in  the  Isidorian 
workshop  (about  863  or  864),  Nicolas  met  the  doubts 
of  the  Frankish  bishops  with  the  assurance  that  the 
Pioman  Church  had  long  preserved  all  those  documents 
with  honour  in  her  archives,  and  that  every  writing  of 
a  Pope,  even  if  not  part  of  the  Dionysian  collection  of 
canons,  was  binding  on  the  whole  Church.^  In  a  Synod 
at  Piome  in  863  he  had  accordingly  anathematized  all 
who  should  refuse  to  receive  the  teaching  or  ordinances 
of  a  Pope.^  If,  indeed,  all  Papal  utterances  were  a 
rule  for  the  whole  Church,  and  all  decrees  of  Councils 
dependent  on  the  Pope's  good  pleasure, — as  Nicolas 
asserted  on  the  strength  of  the  Isidorian  forgery, — then 
there  would  be  but  one  step  further  to  the  promulgation 
of  Papal  Infallibility,  though  it  has  been  long  delayed. 
It  was  thought  enough  to  repeat  from  time  to  time  that 
the  Eoman  Church  keeps  the  faith  pure,  and  is  free  from 
every  stain. 

1  Mansi,  Condi,  xv,  695.  2  Harduin,  Concil.  v.  574. 


lOO  Papal  hifallibiliiy. 

Nearly  three  centuries  passed  before  the  seed  sown 
produced  its  full  harvest.  For  almost  two  hundred 
years,  from  the  death  of  Nicolas  I.  to  the  time  of  Leo  ix., 
the  Eoman  See  was  in  a  condition  which  did  not  allow 
of  any  systematic  acquisition  and  enforcement  of  new  or 
extended  rights.  For  above  sixty  years  (883-955)  the 
Eoman  Church  was  enslaved  and  degraded,  while  the 
Apostolic  See  became  the  prey  and  the  plaything  of  rival 
factions  of  the  nobles,  and  for  a  long  time  of  ambitious 
and  profligate  women.  It  was  only  renovated  for  a  brief 
interval  (997-1003)  in  the  persons  of  Gregory  v.  and 
Silvester  ii.,  by  the  influence  of  the  Saxon  emperor. 
Then  the  Papacy  sank  back  into  utter  confusion  and 
moral  impotence ;  the  Tuscan  Counts  made  it  hereditary 
in  their  family;  again  and  again  dissolute  boys,  like 
John  XII.  and  Benedict  ix.,  occupied  and  disgraced  the 
Apostolic  throne,  which  was  now  bought  and  sold  like 
a  piece  of  merchandise,  and  at  last  three  Popes  fought 
for  the  tiara,  until  the  Emperor  Henry  ill.  put  an  end 
to  the  scandal  by  elevating  a  German  bishop  to  the  See 
of  Eome. 

With  Leo  ix.  (1048-1054)  was  inaugurated  a  new  era 
of  the  Papacy,  which  may  be  called  the  Hildebrandine. 
Within  sixty  years,  through  the  contest  with  kings. 


Forgeries,  i  o  i 

bishops,  and  clergy,  against  simony,  clerical  marriage, 
and  investiture,  the  Eoman  See  had  risen  to  a  height  of 
power  even  Nicolas  I.  never  aspired  to.  A  large  and 
powerful  party,  stronger  than  that  which  two  hundred 
years  before  had  undertaken  to  carry  through  the 
Isidorian  forgery,  had  been  labouring  since  the  middle 
of  the  eleventh  century,  with  all  its  might,  to  weld  the 
States  of  Europe  into  a  theocratic  priest- kingdom,  with 
the  Pope  as  its  head.  The  urgent  need  of  reform  in 
the  Church  helped  on  the  growth  of  the  spiritual 
monarchy,  and  again  the  purification  of  the  Church 
seemed  to  need  such  a  concentration  and  increase  of 
ecclesiastical  power.  In  Prance  this  party  was  sup- 
ported by  the  most  influential  spiritual  corporation  of 
the  time,  the  Congregation  of  Cluny.  In  Italy,  men  like 
Peter  Damiani,  Bishop  Anselm  of  Lucca,  Humbert, 
Deusdedit,  and  above  all  Hildebrand, — who  w^as  the  life 
and  soul  of  the  enterprise, — helped  on  the  new  system, 
though  some  of  them,  as  Damiani  and  Hildebrand, 
differed  widely  both  in  theory  and  practice. 

It  has  not  perhaps  been  sufficiently  observed  that  Gre- 
gory VII.  is  in  fact  the  only  one  of  all  the  Popes  who  set 
himself  with  clear  and  deliberate  purpose  to  introduce 
a  new  constitution  of  the  Church,  and  by  new  means. 


I02  Papal  Infallibility. 

He  regarded  himself  not  merely  as  the  reformer  of  the 
Church,  but  as  the  di\diiely  commissioned  founder  of  a 
wholly  new  order  of  things,  fond  as  he  was  of  appealing 
to  his  predecessors.  Mcolas  i.  alone  approaches  him  in 
this,  but  none  of  the  later  Popes,  all  of  whom,  even  the 
boldest,  have  but  filled  in  the  outline  he  sketched. 

Gregory  saw  from  the  first  that  Synods  regularly  held 
by  the  Popes,  and  new  codes  of  Church  law,  were  the 
means  for  introducing  the  new  system.  Synods  had 
been  held,  at  his  suggestion,  by  Leo  ix.  and  his 
successors,  and  he  himself  carried  on  the  work  in 
those  assembled  after  1073.  But  only  Popes  and 
their  legates  were  henceforth  to  hold  Synods  ;  in  every 
other  form  the  institution  was  to  disappear.  Gregory 
collected  about  him  by  degrees  the  right  men  for  elabo- 
rating his  system  of  Church  law.  Anselm  of  Lucca, 
nephew  of  Pope  Alexander  ii.,  compiled  the  most  im- 
portant and  comprehensive  work,  at  his  command, 
between  1080  and  1086.  Anselm  maybe  called  the 
founder  of  the  new  Gregorian  system  of  Church  law, 
first,  by  extracting  and  putting  into  convenient  working 
shape  everything  in  the  Isidorian  forgeries  serviceable 
for  tlie  Papal  absolutism ;  next,  by  altering  the  law  of 
the  Church,  throunh  a  tissue  of  fresh  inventions  and 


Forgeries.  103 

interpolations,  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of 
his  party  and  the  stand-point  of  Gregory.^  Then  came 
Deusdedit,  whom  Gregory  made  a  Cardinal,  with  some 
more  inventions.  At  the  same  time  Bonizo  compiled  his 
work,  the  main  object  of  which  was  to  exalt  the  Papal 
prerogatives.  The  forty  propositions  or  titles  of  this  part 
of  his  work  correspond  entirely  to  Gregory's  Dictatus 
and  the  materials  supplied  by  Anselm  and  Deusdedit.^ 
The  last  great  work  of  the  Gregorians  (before  Gratian) 
was  the  Polycarpus  of  Cardinal  Gregory  of  Pavia  (before 
1118),  which  almost  always  adheres  to  Anselm  in  its 
falsifications.^ 

The  Preface  of  Deusdedit  to  his  work  is  the  pro- 
gramme of  the  whole  school  whose  labours  were  at 
length  crowned  with  such  complete  success.*  The 
Eoman  Church,  says  the  Cardinal,  is  the  mother  of  all 
Churches,  for  Peter  first  founded  the  Patriarchal  Sees 
of  the  East,  and  tlien  gave  bishops  to  all  the  cities  of 

1  The  contents  of  the  Anselmian  collection  are  known  from  the  list  of 
chapters  in  the  Sincilegium  Rom.  (ed.  Mai,  vi. ) ;  from  Antonius  Augustinns, 
Epitome  Juris  Pontif.  (Paris,  16il) ;  and  from  the  citations  of  Pithou  in  the 
Paris  edition  of  Gratian,  1686. 

2  Nova  Patrum  Biblioth.  (ed.  Mai),  vii.  3,  43. 

3  Ivo  of  Chartres,  though  a  contemporary  of  Cardinal  Gregory,  cannot 
be  reckoned  among  the  Gregorian  canonists.  Much  as  he  was  influenced 
in  his  compilations  by  Isidore,  and  sometimes  by  Anselm,  still  in  certain 
important  articles  he  held  to  the  old  Church  law. 

*  It  is  found  in  Memorie  del  Card.  Passionei  (Roma,  1762),  p.  30. 


1 04  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  West.  Councils  cannot  be  held  without  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  Pope,  according  to  the  decisions  of  the 
318  Fathers  at  Nice.  The  Eonian  clergy  rule  with- 
out tlie  Pope,  when  the  See  is  vacant,  and  therefore 
Cyprian  and  the  Africans  humbly  submitted  to  their 
decisions  before  tlie  election  of  Cornelius — a  pet  crot- 
chet of  the  Cardinal's,  which  Anselm,  who  was  not  a 
Cardinal,  did  not  adopt.  He  adds,  that  he  writes  in 
order  to  confirm  the  authority  of  Pome  and  the  liberty 
of  the  Church  against  its  assailants,  and  maintains  that 
the  testimonies  he  has  collected  disprove  all  objections, 
on  the  principle  that  the  lesser  must  always  yield  to 
the  greater — i.e.,  the  authority  of  Councils  and  Fathers 
to  the  Pope.  With  this  one  axiom — which  not  only 
opened  the  door  wide  for  the  Isidorian  decretals,  but 
prevented  any  attempt  to  moderate  their  system  by  an 
appeal  to  the  ancient  canons — the  revolution  in  the 
Church  was  accomplished  in  the  simplest  and  least 
troublesome  manner. 

Clearly  and  cautiously  as  the  Gregorian  party  went 
to  work,  they  lived  in  a  world  of  dreams  and  illusions 
about  the  past  and  about  remote  countries.  They  could 
not  escape  the  imperative  necessity  of  demonstrating 
their  new  system  to  have  been  the  constant  practice  of 


Forgeries.  105 

the  Cliurch,  and  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  dis- 
tinguish where  involuntary  delusion  merged  into  con- 
scious deceit.  Whatever  present  exigencies  required 
was  selected  from  the  mythical  stores  at  their  com- 
mand hastily  and  recklessly ;  then  fresh  inventions  were 
added,  and  soon  every  claim  of  Eome  could  be  shown 
to  have  a  legitimate  foundation  in  existing  records  and 
decrees. 

It  is  so  far  true  to  say,  that  without  the  pseudo- 
Isidore  there  would  have  been  no  Gregory  vii.,  that  the 
Isidorian  forgeries  were  the  broad  fouudation  the 
Gregorians  built  upon.  But  the  first  object  of  Isidore 
was  to  secure  the  impunity  of  bishops,  whereas  the 
Roman  party — which  for  a  long  time  had  a  majority  of 
the  bishops  against  it — wanted  to  introduce  a  state  of 
tilings  where  the  Popes  or  their  legates  could  sum- 
marily depose  bishops,  intimidate  them,  and  reduce 
them  to  complete  subjection  to  every  Papal  command. 
The  newly  invented  doctrines  about  the  deposing 
power  contributed  to  this  end.  In  a  word,  a  new  his- 
tory and  a  new  civil  and  canon  law  was  required,  and 
both  had  to  be  obtained  by  improving  on  the  Isidorian 
principles  with  new  forgeries.  The  correction  of  his- 
tory was  to  some  extent  provided  for  in  Germany  by 


1 06  Papa  I  Infallibility. 

the  monk  Bernold,  and  in  Italy  by  the  zealous  Grego- 
rian Bonizo,  Bishop  of  Piacenza,  who  tried,  among  other 
things,  to  get  rid  of  the  coronation  of  Charles  the 
Great.^  Their  other  assistants  had  to  invent  or  adapt 
historical  facts  for  party  purposes,  for  their  new  codes 
of  Church  law  innovated  largely  on  ancient  Church 
history.  Gregory  himself  had  his  own  little  stock 
of  fabricated  or  distorted  facts  to  support  pretensions 
and  undertakings  which  seemed  to  his  contemporaries 
strange  and  unauthorized.  It  was,  for  instance,  an 
axiomatic  fact  with  him  that  Pope  Innocent  i.  excom- 
municated the  Emperor  Arcadius,  that  Pope  Zachary 
deposed  the  Prankish  king  Childeric,  and  that  Gregory 
the  Great  threatened  to  depose  the  kings  who  should 
rob  a  hospice  at  Autun.^  He  treated  the  Donation  of 
Constantine  as  a  valuable  and  important  document ;  it 
gave  him  a  right  over  Corsica  and  Sardinia.^  His  pupil 
Leo  IX.  used  it  against  the  Greeks,  and  his  friend  Peter 
Damiani  against  Germany ;  Anselm  and  Deusdedit  as- 
signed it  a  prominent  place  in  their  legal  books. 

1  See  Jaffe's  Introduction  to  his  edition  of  Bonitho  in  Momnnenta  Ore- 
gor.,  pp.  596  seq. 

2  He  appealed  to  a  recently  forged  document  in  Autuu,  which  Launoi 
{0pp.  V.  p.  ii.  445)  has  dissected. 

3  Dollinger  is  mistaken  in  saying  {Pahstfahdn,  p.  84)   that  Gregory 
never  appealed  to  it. 


Forgeries.  107 

At  the  same  time,  Gregory  thought  it  most  import- 
ant, with  all  his  legislative  activity  and  lofty  claims 
and  high-handed  measures,  not  to  seem  too  much  of  an 
innovator  and  despot ;  he  constantly  affirmed  that  he 
only  wished  to  restore  the  ancient  laws  of  the  Church, 
and  abolish  late  abuses.  When  he  drew  out  the  whole 
system  of  Papal  omnipotence  in  twenty-seven  theses  in 
his  Didatus,  these  theses  were  partly  mere  repetitions 
or  corollaries  of  the  Isidorian  decretals ;  partly  he  and 
his  friends  and  allies  sought  to  give  them  the  appear- 
ance of  tradition  and  antiquity  by  new  fictions.-^ 

Gregory's  chief  work  is  his  letter  to  Bishop  Hermann 
of  Metz,  designed  to  prove  how  w^ell  grounded  is  the 
Pope's  dominion  over  emperors  and  kings,  and  his  right 
to  depose  them  in  cases  of  necessity.  In  this  he 
showed  his  adherents  how  to  manipulate  facts  and 
texts,  by  twisting  a  passage  in  a  letter  of  Pope  Gelasius 
to  the  Emperor  Anastasius  so  skilfully,  by  means  of 
omissions  and  arbitrary  collocations,  as  to  make  Gela- 
sius say  just  the  opposite  of  what  he  really  said, — viz., 
that  kings  are  absolutely  and  universally  subject  to 
the  Pope,  whereas  what  he  did  say  was,  that  the  rulers 

1  As  to  this  Didatus  being  liis  own  woi-k,  and  an  authentic  part  of  the 
Register  edited  by  himself,  see  Giesebrecht,  Gesetzgeb.  der  Jioin.  Kirche., 
Munchner  hist.  Jahrbuch,  1866,  p.  149. 


1 08  Papal  Iiifallibility. 

of  the  Chiircli  are  always  subject  to  the  laws  of  the 
emperors,  only  disclaiming  the  interference  of  the 
secular  power  in  questions  of  faith  and  the  sacraments.^ 
How  what  w^as  a  falsification  to  begin  with  was  falsi- 
fied again  in  the  interests  of  the  new  system,  and  accen- 
tuated to  serve  the  cause  of  ecclesiastical  despotism, 
may  be  seen  from  the  eleventh  canon  of  Causa  25, 
Q.  1,  in  Gratian.  The  Council  of  Toledo  in  646  had 
excommunicated  the  Spanish  priests  who  took  part  in 
the  rebellion  against  the  King,  and  included  the  King 
himself  in  the  anathema  if  he  violated  this  censure 
(liujus  canonis  censuram).  Out  of  this  Isidore  made, 
two  hundred  years  afterwards,  the  following : — The 
anathema  applied  to  all  kings  w^ho  violated  any  canon 
binding  under  censure,  or  allowed  it  to  be  violated 
by  others;  and  this  he  put  into  the  mouth  of  Pope 
Hadrian.^  In  the  new  text-books  compiled  by  Anselm, 
Deusdedit,  and  Gregory  of  Pavia,  the  (pretended)  de- 
crees of  the  Popes  were  put  in  place  of  the  canons  of 
Councils,  and  this  supplied  just  what  was  wanted — a 
system  of  ancient  Church  law  to  justify  the  procedures 
of  Gregory  vii.  and  Urban  11.  against  the  princes  of 
their  own  day — and  a  Pope  would  never  lack  some  pre- 

1  Registr.  (ed.  Jaffe),  p.  457.        ^  Ca2-)p.  Angilmm.  p.  7G9  (eel.  Hinsch.) 


Forgeries.  1 09 

text  for  threatening  excommunication,  with  all  its  con- 
sequences.'^ 

Gregory  borrowed  one  main  pillar  of  his  system  from 
the  False  Decretals.  Isidore  had  made  Pope  Julius 
(about  338)  write  to  the  Eastern  bishops, — "  The  Church 
of  Eome,  by  a  singular  privilege,  has  the  right  of  open- 
ing and  shutting  the  gates  of  heaven  to  whom  she 
wilL"  ^  On  this  Gregory  built  his  scheme  of  dominion.^ 
How  should  not  he  be  able  to  judge  on  earth,  on  whose 
will  hung  the  salvation  or  damnation  of  men  ?  The 
passage  was  made  into  a  special  decree  or  chapter  in 
the  new  codes.^  The  typical  formula  of  binding  and 
loosing  had  become  an  inexhaustible  treasure -chamber 
of  rights  and  claims.  The  Gregorians  used  it  as  a 
charm  to  put  them  in  possession  of  everything  worth 
having.  If  Gregory — who  was  notoriously  the  first  to 
undertake  dethroning  kings — wanted  to  dej^ose  the 
German  Emperor,  he  said,  "  To  me  is  given  power  to 
bind  and  loose  on  earth  and  in  heaven."^     Were  sub- 

1  The  monlc  Beruold,  in  liis  Apol.  contr.  Schismat,  written  in  1US7 
(Ussermaun,  ed.  p.  361),  fabricates  "  Apostolicas  Sedis  statuta." 

2  Decret.  x^seudo-Is.  (ed.  Hinscli.),  p.  464. 

3  Monum.  Grerjor.  (ed.  Jafte),  p.  445. 

4  By  Deusdedit ;  see  Galland.  Syll.  ii.  745  ;  by  Anselm,  Maii  Sjncil. 
Rovi.  vi.  317.  23 ;  by  Bonizo,  Maii  Pat.  Nov.  Liblioth.  vii.  3,  47 ;  Gre- 
gory's Polycaiyus,  i.  4,  tit.  34. 

^  See  the  form  in  Mausi,  xx.  467. 


no  Papal  Infallibility. 

jects  to  be  absolved  from  their  oatbs  of  allegiance  ? — 
wliicli  lie  was  also  the  first  to  attempt, — he  did  it  by 
virtue  of  his  power  to  loose.  Did  he  want  to  dispose 
of  other  people's  property  ?  he  declared,  as  at  his  Eoman 
Synod  of  1080, — "  We  desire  to  show  the  world  that  we 
can  give  or  take  away  at  our  will  kingdoms,  duchies, 
earldoms,  in  a  w^ord,  the  possessions  of  all  men;  for 
w^e  can  bind  and  loose."-'  In  the  same  way  a  saying 
ascribed  to  Constantine,  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  in  a 
legend  recorded  by  Eufinus,  was  amplified  till  it  was 
fashioned  into  a  perfect  mine  of  high-flying  pretensions. 
Constantine,  according  to  this  fable,  when  the  written 
accusations  of  the  bishops  against  each  other  were  laid 
before  him,  burned  them,  saying,  in  allusion  to  a  verse  of 
the  Psalter,  that  the  bishops  were  gods,  and  no  man 
could  dare  to  judge  them.  Nicolas  i.  quoted  this  to 
the  Emperor  Michael.^  Anselm  adopted  the  story  into 
his  collection,  Gratian  followed,  and  Gregory  himself 
found  in  it  clear  evidence  that  he,  the  Pope,  the  bishop 
of  bishops,  stood  in  unapproachable  majesty  over  all 
monarchs  of  the  earth.  For,  as  the  passage  stood  in 
Anselm  and  Gratian,  it  was  the  Pope  whom  Constan- 

1  Mansi,  xx.  536,  *'  Quia  si  potestis  in  coclo  ligare  et  solvere,  potestis  in 
terra  imperia  .  .  .  et  onniium  hominum  possessiones  jiro  meritis  tollere 
unicuique  et  concedere."  ^  Mansi,  xv.  215. 


Foro-erics.  1 1 1 


i> 


tine  called  a  god,  and  so  it  has  been  understood  and 
explained  ever  since.^ 

A  man  like  Gregory  vii.,  little  familiar  as  he  was  with 
theological  questions,  must  have  held  the  prerogative  of 
Infallibility  the  most  precious  jewel  of  his  crown.  His 
claims  to  universal  dominion,  to  the  deposing  power, 
and  the  right  of  dispensing  subjects  from  their  oaths, 
all  rested  ultimately  on  liis  own  authority.  All  was 
to  be  believed  because  he,  the  infallible  Tope,  affirmed  it. 
Accordingly,  stronger  proofs  and  testimonies  than  Isidore 
supplied  had  to  be  found  for  this  infallibility  of  his. 

Pope  Agatho  had  said  at  a  Eoman  Synod,  in  680, 
that  all  the  English  bishops  were  to  observe  the  ordi- 
nances made  in  former  Eoman  Synods  for  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  Church.^  Cardinal  Deusdedit  made  this  into  a 
decree  issued  by  Agatho  to  all  bishops  in  the  world, 
saying  they  must  receive  all  Papal  orders  as  though 
attested  by  the  very  voice  of  Peter,  and  therefore,  of 
course,  infallible.^      One  of  the  boldest  falsifications  the 

1  IHst.  96,  97.  "  Satis  evidenter  ostcnditin-  a  sseculari  potestate  nee 
ligari  prorsus  nee  solvi  posse  Pontificevi,  quern  constat  a  pio  Pnncipe  Con- 
stantino Deuvi  appcllatum,  nee  posse  Deum  ab  hominibus  judicari  niaiii- 
festum  est." 

2  Labbe,  Condi,  vi.  580. 

3  It  occurs  in  the  same  spurious  form  in  Gregory's  Polycnrpus,  Ivo's 
Collection,  and— which  was,  of  course,  <iuite  conclusive— in  Gratian's 
Decretum,  Dist.  19,  c.  2. 


1 1 2  Papal  Infallibility. 

Gregorians  allowed  themselves  occurs  first  in  Anselm's,^ 
and  then  in  Cardinal  Gregory's  works,  from  w^hom  Gra- 
tian  borrowed  it.  St.  Augustine  had  said  that  all  those 
canonical  writings  (of  the  Bible)  were  pre-eminently 
attested,  wdiich  Apostolical  Churches  had  first  received 
and  possessed.  He  meant  the  Churches  of  Corinth, 
Ephesus,  etc.  The  passage  was  corrupted  into, — "  Those 
Epistles  belong  to  canonical  writings  which  the  Holy  See 
has  issued ;"  and  thus  it  came  to  pass  that  the  media3val 
theologians  and  canonists,  who  generally  derived  their 
whole  knowledge  of  the  Fathers  from  the  passages  col- 
lected by  Peter  Lombard  and  Gratian,  really  believed  that 
St.  Augustine  had  put  the  decretal  letters  of  Popes  on  a 
par  with  Scripture.^  When  Cardinal  Turrecremata,  about 
1450,  and  Cardinal  Cajetan,  about  1516,  put  the  Infalli- 
bility doctrine  into  formal  shape,  they  too  relied  on 
the  clear  testimony  of  St.  Augustine,  which  left  no 
doubt  that  the  first  theologian  of  the  ancient  Church 
had  declared  every  Papal  utterance  to  be  as  free  from 
error  as  the  Apostolical  Epistles.^ 

1  See  Pithou's  ed.  of  Gratian.     Cf.  Grat.  Bist.  19,  c.  6. 

2  The  title  of  tlie  canon  in  Gratian  i»s,  ''  luter  canonicas  Scriptiiras 
decretalcs  epistolae  annuinerantur." 

3  Turrecremata,  *S'?^??i;?ia  de  Ecd.  P.  ii. ;  Cajetan,  De  Primal.  Moni.  c.  14. 
Alphonsus  de  Castro  lias  exposed  the  whole  forgery  in  his  work  A  do.  Hceres. 
(Paris,  1565)  i.  11. 


Forgeries.  1 1 3 

Tliat  Papal  Infallibility  might  be  more  firmly  believed, 
personal  sanctity  was  also  ascribed  to  every  Pope. 
This  notion  was  first  invented  by  Ennodius,  deacon  and 
secretary  of  Pope  Symmachus,  who  wrote  in  503  to 
defend  him  against  certain  charges.  The  Popes,  he 
said,  must  be  held  to  inherit  innocence  and  sanctity 
from  Peter.-^  Isidore  eagerly  seized  on  this,  and  in- 
vented two  Roman  Synods,  which  had  unanimously  ap- 
proved and  subscribed  the  w^ork  of  Ennodius.^  Gregory 
vii.  made  this  holiness  of  all  Popes,  wdiich  he  said  he  had 
personal  experience  of,  the  foundation  of  his  claim  to 
universal  dominion.^  Every  sovereign,  he  said,  how- 
ever good  before,  becomes  corrupted  by  the  use  of  power, 
whereas  every  rightly  appointed  Pope^  becomes  a  saint 
through  the  imputed  merits  of  St.  Peter.  Even  an 
exorcist^  among  the  clergy,  he  added,  is  higher  and  more 
powerful  than  every  secular  monarch,  for  he  casts  out 
devils,  whose  slaves  evil  princes  are.  This  doctrine  of 
the  personal  sanctity  of  every  Pope,  put  forward  by  the 
Gregorians,  and  by   Gregory  vii.  himself,  as   a  claim 

'  Liher  Apol.,  0pp.  (Sirmondi)  i.  1621. 
"  Decret.  pseudo-lddor.  (ed.  Hinsch.),  pp.  675,  seq. 
3  Ep.  viii.  21  (Jaffe),  p.  463. 

•i  This  proviso  was  meant  to  cover  the  frequent  cases  of  such  evil  Popes 
as,  e.g.,  John  xii.  and  Benedict  ix. 
5  [One  of  the  lower  ranks  of  the  Catholic  clergy.— Te.] 

II 


114  Papal  InfaUlbility. 

made  by  Pope  Symmachus,  was  adopted  into  the  codes 
of  canon  law.  But  as  notorious  facts,  and  the  crimes 
and  excesses  of  many  Popes,  which  no  denials  could  get 
rid  of,  were  in  glaring  contradiction  to  it,  a  supplemen- 
tary theory  had  to  be  invented,  which  Cardinal  Deus- 
dedit  published  under  the  venerated  name  of  St.  Boniface, 
the  apostle  of  Germany.  It  was  to  this  effect : — Even 
if  a  Pope  is  so  bad  that  he  drags  down  whole  nations  to 
hell  with  him  in  troops,  nobody  can  rebuke  him ;  for 
he  who  judges  all  can  be  judged  of  no  man;  the  only 
exception  is  in  case  of  his  swerving  from  the  faith.  That 
this  could  have  been  written  nowhere  but  in  Eome,  and 
certainly  not  by  St.  Boniface,  is  self-evident.  There  were 
no  "  innumerable  nations"  in  his  day  for  the  Pope  to  drag 
down  into  hell  with  him  like  slaves.  The  words  imply 
past  experience  of  many  profligate  Popes,  and  a  period 
of  enormously  extended  Papal  power  over  the  nations, 
and  were  clearly  invented  after  the  pontificate  of  Bene- 
dict IX.  Gratian  has,  of  course,  adopted  them  from 
Deusdedit.-^ 

The  Gregorian  doctrine  since  1080  then  is,  that  every 
Pope,  lawfully  appointed,  and  not  thrust  in  by  force, 
is  holy  and  infallible.     But  his  holiness  is  imputed,  not 

1  BisL  40,  c.  53. 


Forgeries.  1 1 5 

inherent,  so  that  if  he  have  no  merits  of  his  own,  he 
inherits  those  of  his  predecessor  St.  Peter.  Notwith- 
standing his  holiness,  he  may  drag  countless  troops  of 
men  down  to  hell,  and  none  of  them  may  withstand  or 
warn  him;  notwithstanding  his  infallibility,  he  may 
become  an  apostate,  and  then  he  may  be  resisted.  Pro- 
bably the  later  distinction  between  his  official  or  ex 
cathcdrd  infallibility  and  his  personal  denial  of  the 
faith  w^as  implied  here. 

Gregory  vii.  seems  to  have  sincerely  believed  that 
his  infallibility  was  already  acknowledged  throughout 
the  Christian  world,  even  in  the  East.  He  wrote  to 
the  Emperor  Henry,  "  The  Greek  Church  is  fallen  away, 
and  the  Armenians  also  liave  lost  the  right  faith,  but," 
he  adds,  "  all  the  Easterns  await  from  St.  Peter  (viz., 
from  me)  the  decision  on  their  various  opinions,  and  at 
this  time  will  the  promise  of  Peter's  confirming  his 
brethren  be  fulfilled."^  He  wanted  then  (in  1074)  to 
go  at  the  head  of  a  great  army  to  Constantinople,  and 
there  to  hold  his  solemn  judgment  in  matters  of  faith, 
for  he  does  not  seem  to  have  counted  on  the  voluntary 
submission  of  the  Greeks  ;  instead  of  which  he  contented 
himself  with  plunging  Germany  and  Italy  into  a  religious 

^  Ep.  ii.  31,  p.  45  (Jaffe). 


1 1 6  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  civil  war,  the  end  of  which  he  did  not  live  to  see. 
All  history  proves,  he  says,  how  clearly  holiness  is  con- 
nected with  infallibility  in  the  Popes.  While  there  are  at 
most  only  a  few  kings  or  emperors  who  have  been  holy, 
out  of  153  Popes  100  have  not  only  been  holy,  but 
have  reached  the  highest  grade  of  sanctity."^  And  the 
Gregorians  disseminated  the  fable,  which  even  the 
well-known  annals  of  the  Popes  contradicted,  that  of 
the  thirty  before  Constantine  all  but  one  were  martyrs.^ 
The  Gregorians  busied  themselves  greatly  with  the 
rectification  of  Papal  history,  and  as  the  apostasy  of 
Liberius — copied  from  St  Jerome's  Chronicle  into  so 
many  historical  works — was  not  easy  to  reconcile  with 
Papal  infallibility  and  sanctity,  Anselm  adopted  into 
his  codex  the  earlier  fable,  that  Liberius,  when  exiled, 
had  ordained  Felix  his  successor,  by  advice  of  the 
Roman  clergy,  and  abdicated,  so  that  his  subsequent 
apostasy  did  not  matter.^ 

If  every  Pope  is  holy  and  infallible,  then,  according 
to  the  Gregorian  view,  all  Christendom  must  tremble 
before  him,  as  before  an  Asiatic  despot  whose  disfavour 
is  death.     Accordingly,  Anselm  and  Cardinal  Gregory 

^  Ep.  viii.  21,  p.  463  (Jaffe), 

^  Bonizo,  Pair.  Nov.  Blbl.  vii.  3,  37  (ed.  Mai). 

^  Sclielstrate  {Antiq.  Illustr.  i.  45G)  quotes  the  passage  frcm  Anselm. 


Forp'erics. 


<b 


extracted  passages  from  older  forgeries,  especially  from 
a  spurious  speech  of  St.  Peter,  to  the  effect  that  no  one 
should  hold  intercourse  with  a  man  under  the  Pope's 
displeasure.-^  Like  the  successive  strata  of  the  earth 
covering  one  another,  so  layer  after  layer  of  forgeries 
and  fabrications  was  piled  up  in  the  Church.  This 
shows  itself  most  conspicuously  in  the  great  Church 
question  of  Synods,  where  the  two  contradictory  views 
of  the  self-government  and  administration  of  the 
Church  by  Councils,  and  of  the  absolute  sovereignty  of 
the  Pope  and  Court  of  Ptome  over  the  whole  Church, 
were  at  issue.  In  342,  Pope  Julius  had  written  to  the 
Eastern  Bishops,  who  had  confirmed  the  deposition  of 
St.  Athanasius  at  the  Synod  of  Antioch,  that  they 
should  not  have  acted  for  themselves  in  a  matter  affect- 
ing the  whole  Church,  but,  according  to  ecclesiastical 
custom,  in  union  with  "  all  of  us,"  i.e.,  the  bishops  of 
the  West.^  Socrates,  who  v/elcomed  an  opportunity  of 
pointing  out  the  ambition  of  the  Eoman  Churcli,^  had 
twisted  this  into  Julius  saying  that  nothing  could  be 
decided  without  the  bishop  of  Piome.     His  Latin  trans- 

1  See  Gratian,  T)ist.  93,  c.  i. 

2  Ep.  Rom.  Pont.  (ed.  Constant),  p.  386. 

3  Thus  he  observes  (vii.  11)  that  the  Roman  See,  like  the  Alexandrian, 
had  for  some  time  advanced  to  dominion  {dvvaaTeia)  over  the  priesthood. 


1 1 8  Papal  Infallibility, 

lator,  Epiphanius  the  Italian,  al)Out  500,  went  a  step 
further,  and  made  the  Pope  say  that  no  Council  could 
be  held  without  his  consent.^  Isidore  worked  up  these 
materials,  and  made  Pope  Julius  write,  in  two  spuri- 
ous epistles,  that  the  Apostles  and  the  Nicene  Council 
had  said  no  Council  could  be  held  without  the  Pope's 
injunction.  And  thus  Anselm  and  the  other  Gregorian 
canonists  could  quote  a  whole  string  of  primitive  de- 
crees resting  Councils  and  all  their  decisions  on  the 
arbitrament  of  the  Pope,  and  Gratian  has  borrowed  the 
whole  of  his  seventeenth  Distinction  from  Anselm. 

Even  this  was  not  enough.  Not  only  were  Councils 
to  be  made  dependent,  but  the  institution  itself,  as  it 
had  existed  for  nine  hundred  years,  was  to  be  abolished. 
As  the  kings  who  had  become  absolute  in  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries  could  no  longer  endure  any 
representative  assemblies,  so  the  Papacy,  when  it  wished 
to  become  absolute,  found  that  Synods  of  particular 
National  Churches  were  better  out  of  the  way  altogether. 
Eor  it  was  only  in  and  by  means  of  Synods  of  parti- 
cular districts,  provinces,  and  National  Churches,  that  a 
healthy  and  somewhat  independent  Church  life  could 
spread  and  maintain  itself     These  had  therefore  to  be 

1  Bist.  Trip.  i.  4,  9. 


Forgeries.  119 

put  an  end  to,  or  at  least  broken  np  and  made  so  diffi- 
cult that  they  could  only  proceed  at  the  beck  of  Eome. 
The  following  forgery  was  used  for  the  purpose  : — 

The  opponents  of  Pope  Symmachus,  in  503,  in  order 
to  show^  that  they  could  assemble  in  Eome  without 
him-,  had  affirmed  that  the  annual  Provincial  Synods 
prescribed  by  the  Church  would  not  lose  their  force 
merely  because  the  Pope  was  not  present  at  them. 
Ennodius,  in  his  defence  of  Symmachus,  replied  that 
weighty  causes  {causae  majores)  were  by  the  canon  of 
Sardica  reserved  to  the  Pope.  That  was  itself  a  mis- 
representation, long  current  in  Eome ;  the  canon  only 
gave  a  right  of  appeal  to  Eome  for  bishops.  Anselm 
of  Lucca,  and  Cardinal  Gregory,  and  Gratian  after  him, 
made  out  of  this  the  following  decree  of  Pope  Sym- 
machus— "  The  Provincial  Councils  ordered  by  the  can- 
ons to  be  held  annually,  have  lost  their  validity  from 
the  Pope  not  being  present  at  them."  And  the  title 
of  the  decree  is,  "  Provincial  Synods  without  the  Pope's 
presence  have  no  force"  {pondere  carent)}  And  thus 
an  ecclesiastical  revolution  was  brought  about  in  three 
lines. 

But  a  formal   prohibition  of  all   Synods  was   still 

1  List.  17,  c.  6. 


I20  Papal  hifallibility. 

wanted,  and  this  was   attained  by  Anselm,  Cardinal 

Gregory,  and  Gratian  after  them,  making  Pope  Gregory 

the  Great  declare  that  no  one  ever  had  been,  or  ever 

would  be,  permitted  to  hold  a  particular  (not  (Ecumenical) 

Synod.^     The  fraud  lay  in  converting  what  Pelagius  i. 

had  said,  in  the  particular  case  of  the  schism  of  Aquileia, 

of  a  Council  assembled  against  the  Fifth  CEcumenical, 

into  a  general  prohibition  issued  by  Gregory  i.  against  all 

Synods,  while,  by  changing  the  plural  into  the  singular, 

a  reference  to  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  Churches 

of  Alexandria  and  Antioch  was  altered  into  an  exalia  ■ 

tion  of  Papal  authority.^     And  thus  the  double   end 

was  attained  of  putting  down  all  meetings  of  bishops 

as  in  itself  an  illegal  act  of  presumption,  and  at  the 

same  time  bringing  out  prominently  the  plenitude  of 

the  Papal  power,  which  could  even  withdraw  from  all 

Christendom  the  apostolical  institution  of  Synods  at  its 

wilL 

But  Isidore's  chief  contribution  to  the  designs   of 

'  Gre^^ory  vii.  was  by  his  inventions  about  the  effect 

of  excommunication,  for  this,  in  the  extended   sense 

~  given  it  by  Gregory,  was  the  sharpest  weapon  in  the 


1  Becrct.  Dist.  17,  c.  4. 

-  Cf.  on  tliis  and  other  falsifications,  Berardi,  Gratian.  Can.  ii.  489. 


Forgeries.  121 

struggle  for  Papal  domination.  Isidore  had  made  the 
earliest  Popes  assert  that  no  speech  ever  could  be  held 
with  an  excommunicated  man,  whence  Gregory  and  his 
allies  inferred  that  this  applied  also  to  kings  and  em- 
perors, and  that  nobody  could,  even  in  matters  of 
business,  hold  any  intercourse  with  them  if  excommu- 
nicated, so  that  they  were  no  longer  fit  to  reign,  and 
must  be  deposed.  By  this  extension  of  the  idea,  wholly 
unknown  to  the  ancient  Church,  and  destructive  of  the 
entire  original  character  of  the  institution,  an  enormous 
instrument  of  power  was  created,  which  not  only  might 
be  abused,  but  was  itself  a  standing  abuse,  a  confusion  of 
things  human  and  divine,  and  a  perpetual  source  of  civil 
disturbance  and  division.  Bossuet  has  admitted  that 
it  was  a  false  doctrine  which  Gregory  introduced  into 
the  Church,  by  altering  and  distorting  the  notion  of 
excommunication.-^  Gregory  himself  must  have  known 
he  was  the  first  to  make  the  claim,  and  that  even  in  the 
Isidorian  decretals  there  was  nothing  like  it,  yet  at 
the  Synod  of  1078^  he  grounded  it  exclusively  on  the 
statutes  of  his  predecessors.  To  make  their  spiritual 
arms  irresistible,  the   Gregorians  also  borrowed   from 

^  Defens.  Declar.  pars.  1.  1,  3.  c.  7. 

=*  Ivo  and  Gratian,  for  the  misfortune  of  Europe,  received  this  into  their 
codes  (c.  15,  qu.  6.  4). 


1 2  2  Papal  Infallibility. 

Isidore  an  alleged  rule  of  Pope  Urban  i.,  addressed  to 
all  bishops,  that  even  an  unjust  excommunication  by  a 
bishop  must  be  respected,  and  nobody  could  receive  the 
condemned  man.-^ 

If  we  look  at  the  whole  Papal  system  of  universal 
monarchy,  as  it  has  been  gradually  built  up  during 
seven  centuries,  and  is  now  being  energetically  pushed 
on  to  its  final  completion,  we  can  clearly  distinguish 
the  separate  stones  the  building  is  composed  of.  Por 
a  long  time  all  that  was  done  was  to  interpret  the  canon 
of  Sardica  so  as  to  extend  the  appellant  jurisdiction  of 
the  Pope  to  whatever  could  be  brought  under  the  gene- 
ral and  elastic  term  of  "  greater  causes."  But  from  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century  the  Papal  pretensions  had 
advanced  to  a  point  beyond  this,  in  consequence  of  the 
attitude  assumed  by  Leo  and  Gelasius,  and  from  that 
time  began  a  course  of  systematic  fabrications,  some- 
times manufactured  in  Eome,  sometimes  originating 
elsewdiere,  but  adopted  and  utilized  there. 

The  conduct  of  the  Popes  since  Innocent  I.  and 
Zosimus,  in  constantly  quoting  the  Sardican  canon  on 
appeals  as  a  canon  of  Nice,  cannot  be  exactly  ascribed 
to  conscious  fraud — the  arrangement  of  their  collection 

1  Thus  Auselm  aud  Card.  Gregory,  and  tlieu  Gratiau,  c.  11,  qu.  3.  27. 


Fovircries. 


^> 


of  canons  misled  them.  There  was  more  deliberate 
purpose  in  inserting  in  the  Roman  manuscript  of  the 
sixth  iSricene  canon,  "  The  Eoman  Church  always  had  the 
primacy,"  of  which  there  is  no  syllable  in  the  original, — 
a  fraud  exposed  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  to  the  con- 
fusion of  the  Eoman  legates,  by  reading  the  original.^ 

Towards  the  end  of  the  fifth  and  beginning  of  the"' 
sixth  century,  the  process  of  forgeries  and  fictions  in 
the  interests  of  Eome  was  actively  carried  on  there. 
Then  began  the  compilation  of  spurious  acts  of  Eoman 
martyrs,  which  was  continued  for  some  centuries,  and 
which  modern  criticism,  even  at  Eome,  has  been  obliged 
to  give  up,  as,  for  instance,  is  done  by  Papebroch,  Euinart, 
Orsi,  and  Saccarelli.  The  fabulous  story  of  the  conver- 
sion and  baptism  of  Constantino  was  invented  to  glorify 
the  Church  of  Eome,  and  make  Pope  Silvester  appear  a 
worker  of  miracles.  Then  the  inviolability  of  the  Pope 
had  to  be  established,  and  the  principle  that  he  cannot 
be  judged  by  any  human  tribunal,  but  only  by  himself 
For  four  years  before  514  Eome  was  the  scene  of  a 
bloody  strife  about  this  question ;  the  adherents  of 
Symmachus  and  his  opponent  Laurentius  murdered  one 
another  in  the  streets,  and  the  Arian  Goth,  King  Theo- 

^  Maiisi,  Condi,  vii.  44-i. 


1 24  Papal  Infallibility. 

doric,  was  as  little  acceptable  as  a  judge  as  the  Emperor, 
who  was  hated  in  Eome.  So  the  acts  of  the  Council 
of  Sinuessa  and  the  legend  of  Pope  Marcellinus  were 
invented,  and  the  "  Constitution  of  Silvester,"  viz.,  the 
decision  of  a  Synod  of  284  bishops,  pretended  to  have 
been  held  by  him  in  321  at  Eome,  evidently  compiled 
while  the  bloody  scenes  in  which  clerics  were  mur- 
dered or  executed  for  their  crimes  were  fresh  in  men's 
minds.  There  again  the  principle  was  inculcated  that 
no  one  can  judge  the  first  See.-^ 

Some  other  records  were  fabricated  at  Eome  in  the 
same  barbarous  Latin,  such  as  the  Gcsta  LiheriL  desisfned 
to  confirm  the  legend  of  Constantine's  baptism  at  Eome, 
and  to  represent  Pope  Liberius  as  purified  from  his 
heresy  by  repentance,  and  graced  by  a  divine  miracle. 
Of  the  same  stamp  were  the  Gesta  of  Pope  Xystus  ill.  and 
the  History  of  Polychronius,  where  the  Pope  is  accused, 
but  the  condemnation  of  his  accuser  follows,  as  also  of 
the  accuser  of  the  fabulous  Polychronius,  Bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem. These  fabrications  of  the  beginning  of  the  sixth 
century,  which  all  belong  to  the  same  class,  had  a  refer- 
ence also  to  the  attitude  of  Eome  towards  the  Church 
of  Constantinople.     It  was  the  period  of  the  long  inter- 

1  Append,  ad  Ejpp.  Pont.  Rom..  (ecL  Constant),  pp.  3S  seq. 


Forgeries.  125 

ruption  of  communion  between  East  and  West  caused 
by  the  Henoticon  (484-519),  when  Felix  11.  even  sum- 
moned the  Patriarch  Acacius  to  Eome,  and  Pope  Gela- 
sius,  about  495,  for  the  first  time  insulted  the  Greeks 
and  their  twenty-eighth  canon  of  Chalcedon,  by  affirm- 
ing that  every  Council  must  be  confirmed  and  every 
Church  judged  by  Piome,  but  she  can  be  judged  by 
none.  It  was  not  by  canons,  as  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon affirmed,  but  by  the  word  of  Christ,  that  she  re- 
ceived the  primacy.-^  In  this  he  went  beyond  all  the  claims 
of  his  predecessors.  Thence  came  the  fictions  manufac- 
tured at  Pome  after  his  death, — a  letter  of  the  Nicene 
Council  praying  Pope  Silvester  for  its  confirmation,  and 
the  confirmation  given  by  Silvester  and  a  Eoman  Synod  ; 
the  declaration  in  the  acts  of  Xystus  iii.  that  the  Em- 
peror had  convoked  the  Council  by  the  Pope's  authority ; 
the  History  of  Polychronius,  exhibiting  the  Pope,  as 
early  as  435,  sitting  in  judgment  on  an  Eastern  Patriarch ; 
and  lastly,  the  fabulous  history  of  the  Synod  held 
by  Silvester,  which  adopted  Gelasius's  saying  about  the 
divine  origin  of  the  Eoman  primacy,  and  confirmed  the 
order  of  precedence  of  the  Churches  of  Alexandria  and 
Antioch  next  after  Eome,  making  no  mention  of  Con- 

1  Mausi,  viii.  51. 


126  Papal  Infallibility. 

stantinople,  and  thus  upsetting  the  canons  of  381  and 
451,  which  gave  her  the  precedence.^ 

While  this  tendency  to  forging  documents  was  so 
strong  in  Eome,  it  is  remarkable  that  for  a  thousand 
years  no  attempt  was  made  there  to  form  a  collection  of 
canons  of  her  own,  such  as  the  Easterns  had  as  early  as 
the  fifth  century,  clearly  because  for  a  long  time  Eome 
took  so  very  little  part  in  ecclesiastical  legislation.  No 
doubt  constant  appeal  was  made  to  the  canons  of 
Councils,  and  Eome  professed  her  resolve  to  secure 
their  observance  with  all  her  might,  and  by  her  conspi- 
cuous example ;  but  the  canon  she  had  chiefly  at  heart 
was  the  third  of  Sardica,  and  the  Sardican  canons  were 
never  received  at  all  in  the  East.^  AVhen  Dionysius 
gave  the  Eoman  Cliurch  her  first  tolerably  comprehen- 
sive collection  of  canons,  viz.,  his  translation  of  the 
Greek  canons,  with  the  African  and  Sardican,  more 
than  twenty  Synods  had  been  held  in  Eome  since  313, 
but  there  were  no  records  of  them  to  be  found. 

^  These  documents  are  printed  from  MSS.  of  tlie  eighth  century  in 
Amort's  Elementa  Juris  Canon,  ii.  432-486. 

2  Dionysius  Exiguus  observes  this  in  the  Preface  to  the  second  edition 
of  his  Collection,  prepared  by  command  of  Pope  Hormisdas.  See  Andres, 
Lettera  a  Q.  Morelli  (Parma,  1802),  p.  m.  It  will  be  seen  that  there  was 
always  a  quarrel  about  the  Nicene  canons,  and  one  party  wished  to  replace 
them  (probably  the  sixth  canon)  by  others.  This  points  to  the  decisions  of 
Silvester  and  his  Synod,  mentioned  above. 


Forgeries.  1 2  7 

Towards  the  end  of  the  sixth  century  a  fabrication 
was  undertaken  in  Eome,  the  full  effect  of  which  did 
not  appear  till  long  afterwards.  The  famous  passage  in 
St.  Cyprian's  book  on  the  Unity  of  the  Church  was 
adorned,  in  Pope  Pelagius  ii.'s  letter  to  the  Istrian 
bishops,  with  such  additions  as  the  Eoman  pretensions 
required.  St.  Cyprian  said  that  all  the  Apostles  had 
received  from  Christ  equal  power  and  authority  with 
Peter,  and  this  was  too  glaring  a  contradiction  of  the 
theory  set  up  since  the  time  of  Gelasius.  So  the  fol- 
lowing w^ords  were  interpolated  :  "  The  primacy  was 
given  to  Peter  to  show  the  unity  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  chair.  How  can  he  believe  himself  to  be  in  the 
Church  w^ho  forsakes  the  chair  of  Peter,  on  which  the 
Church  is  built  ?"^  The  varjdng  judgments  of  the 
later  Eoman  clergy  on  Cyprian,  w^ho  had  up  to  his 
death  been  a  decided  opponent  of  Eome,  seem  to  have 
had  an  influence  on  this  interpolation.  He  was  at 
first  almost  the  only  foreign  martyr  whose  annual 
feast  "was  kept  in  Eome ;  but  after  Gelasius  had  included 
his  writings  in  a  list  of  works  rejected  by  the  Church, 
it  became  necessary  to  find  some  way  of  reconciling  the 

1  Cf.  the  notes  of  Rigaiilt,  Baluze,  and  KraLinger,  to  tlicir  editions  of 
CypTi'an. 


128  Papal  Infallibility. 

high  reverence  accorded  to  the  man  with  the  disapproval 
of  his  writings.  This  seems  to  have  led  to  the  interpo- 
lation, so  that  the  first  rank  among  orthodox  Fathers 
was  assigned  to  Cyprian  in  the  revised  edition  of  the 
catalogue  of  Gelasius,  in  direct  contradiction  to  the 
passage  in  the  same  decree  placing  him  among 
"  apocryphal,"  viz.,  rejected  authors.'^  But  as  Cyprian's 
writings  had  not  spread  from  Eome,  but  had  long 
been  much  read  in  the  Gallican  and  ]N"orth  Italian 
Churches,  the  additions  did  not  get  into  the  manu- 
scripts. 

Earlier  than  this  an  interpolation  of  the  old  catalogue 
of  Eoman  bishops  had  been  undertaken  for  a  definite  pur- 
pose, and  thus  the  foundation  was  laid  of  the  Lihe^r  Pon- 
tificcdis^  afterwards  enlarged.     It  exists  in  Schelstrate's 

1  When  in  later  times  Cyprian  was  edited  at  Eome  by  Manntius  in  1563, 
the  Koman  censors  insisted  on  the  interpolated  passages  being  retained, 
thongh  not  found  in  the  MSS.,  as  the  editor.  Latino  Latini,  complains  in  his 
Letters  (Viterbii,  1667,  ii.  109).  The  minister,  Cardinal  Fleury,  made  the 
same  condition  for  the  Paris  edition  of  Baluze.  See  Chiniac,  Histoire  cles 
Capitul.  (Paris,  1772),  p.  226.  The  minister  named  a  commission  to  decide 
whether  the  interpolations  erased  by  Baluze,  and  expunged  from  every 
critical  edition,  should  be  printed,  but  Fleury  Avas  Cardinal  as  well  as 
minister,  and  "  a  moins  que  de  vouloir  se  faire  une  querelle  d'etat  avec 
Eome  imperieuse,  il  falloit  que  le  passage  fut  restitue,  parceque  en  le  lais- 
sant  supprime  en  vertu  d'une  decision  ministerielle,  il  auroit  semble  qu'on 
vouloit  porter  atteinte  a  la  priniaute  Eomaine.  Le  passage  fut  restitue  par 
le  moyen  d'un  carton." 

2  The  Liber  Pontificalis,  or  Anastasius  (falsely  so  called),  was  usually 
quoted  as  a  work  of  Pope  Damasus  in  the  middle  ages. 


ForgeiHes.  129 

edition,  in  its  original  form,  of  about  530.-^  The  second 
edition,  and  continuation  to  the  time  of  Conon  (687) 
written  about  730,  and  afterwards  brouo-ht  down  to  724 
by  the  same  hand,  is  based  on  contemporary  records  for 
the  sixth  and  seventh  century.  It  is  the  first  edition 
of  530  which  is  chiefly  to  be  reckoned  as  a  calculated 
forgery,  and  an  important  link  in  the  chain  of  Eonian 
inventions  and  interpolations.  It  is  all  composed  in 
the  barbarous  and  ungrammatical  Latin  common  to  the 
Eoman  fabrications  of  the  sixth  century.^  The  objects 
were — first,  to  attest  the  mass  of  spurious  acts  of  Eoman 
martyrs,  and  the  reiterated  statements  that  the  earliest 
Popes  had  appointed  a  number  of  notaries  to  compile  these 
acts,  and  seven  deacons  to  superintend  them  ;  secondly, 
to  confirm  the  existing  legends  of  Popes  and  Emperors, — 
such  as  the  Eoman  baptism  of  Constantino,  the  stories 
about  Silvester,  Felix,  and  Liberius,  Xystus  ill.,  and  the 
like  ;  tliirdly,  to  assign  a  greater  antiquity  to  some  later 
liturgical  usages  ;  fourthly,  to  exhibit  the  Popes  as  legis- 
lators for  the  whole  Church,  although,  apart  from  the 
liturgical  directions  ascribed  to  them,  and  the  constantly 

1  He  has  collated  the  two  editions  in  his  Antiq.  Eccl.  Rom.  1693, 
i.  402-495  ;  in  parallel  columns. 

^  See  the  careful  analysis  of  the  whole  work  in  Piper's  Einleitung  in 
die  Monum.  Thcol.  (Gotha,  1867),  pp.  315-349. 


1 30    .  Papal  Infallibility, 

recurring  assertion  that  tliey  had  marked  out  the  parishes 
and  the  hierarchical  grades  of  the  clergy  in  Eome,  no 
particular  ordinances  of  theirs  could  be  quoted,  and  people 
had  to  be  content  with  stating  generally  that  Damasus 
or  Gelasius  or  Hilary  had  made  a  law  binding  the  whole 
Church.^  In  the  later  and  more  historical  portion  (from 
440  to  530)  the  Pope  is  specially  represented  as  teacher 
of  doctrine  and  supreme  judge,  with  a  view  to  the  Greeks. 
In  the  first  edition  every  historical  notice,  except  about 
buildings,  sacred  offerings,  and  cemeteries,  is  false  :  the 
author's  statements  about  the  fortunes  and  acts  of  par- 
ticular Popes  never  agree  with  what  is  known  of  their 
history,  but  rather  contradict  it,  sometimes  glaringly ; 
and  thus  we  must  regard  as  fabulous  even  what  cannot 
be  proved  such  from  sources  now  accessible  to  us,  for 
there  is  almost  always  an  obvious  design.^ 

The  fictions  of  the  Liher  Pontijicalis  had  a  far-reach- 
ing influence  after  they  became  known,  and  were  used — 

1  The  phrase  "  fecit  Constitutum  de  omni  Ecclesia"  is  repeated  on  nearly 
every  page,  but  what  the  ordinance  was  is  never  specified,  while  the  pre- 
tended liturgical  appointments  are  always  precisely  expressed. 

2  The  Liber  Pontijicalis  has  been  critically  examined  by  Tillemont,  and 
'  more  fully  by  Coustant,  and  its  gross  anachronisms  proved,  so  that  there 

-  can  be  no  doubt  about  its  fabulous  character,  and  it  gives  one  the  impres- 

-  sion  throughout  of  deliberate  fraud.    Clearly  the  compilers  had  no  historical 

-  or  documentary  evidence.     The  first  enlargement  of  the  Liberian  catalogue 
reached  almost  to  Damasus,  and  must  have  been  composed  early  in  the 


Forgeries.  1 3 1 

first  by  Bede  about  710— in  the  rest  of  the  West.  They 
supplied  the  basis  for  the  notion  of  the  Popes  having 
constantly  acted  from  the  first  as  legislators  of  the  whole 
Church,  and  they  greatly  helped  on  the  later  fabrication 
of  Isidore,  who  incorporated  these  records  of  Papal 
enactments  into  his  decretals,  and  thereby  gave  them 
an  appearance  of. being  genuine.  This  agreement  of 
the  forged  decretals  with  the  annals  of  the  Popes  is 
what  gave  the  former  so  long  a  hold  on  public  belief. 

After  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century,  the  famous 
Donation  of  Constantine  was  concocted  at  Eome.  It  is 
based  on  the  earlier  fifth-century  legend  of  his  cure  from 
leprosy,  and  baptism  by  Pope  Silvester,  which  is  re- 
peated at  length,  and  the  Emperor  is  said,  out  of  grati- 
tude, to  have  bestowed  Italy  and  the  western  provinces 
on  the  Pope,  and  also  to  have  made  many  regulations 
about  the  honorary  prerogatives  and  dress  of  the  Eoman 
clergy.^     The  Pope  is,  moreover,  represented  as  lord 

sixth  century.  The  two  letters  of  Damasus  and  Jerome  were  invented  for 
it,  according  to  which  Damasus  collected  and  sent  to  St.  Jerome  what  could 
be  found  of  the  biographies  of  the  Popes.  In  a  second  and  altered  edition, 
some  twenty  years  later,  about  536,  was  added  the  list  of  Popes  from  Da- 
masus to  Felix  IV.  This  last  part,  from  440,  is  historical,  but  strongly 
coloured,  and  garnished  with  fables  devised  in  the  interest  of  Eome. 

1  The  "western  X)rovinces"  must  not  be  understood  of  Gaul,  Spain,  etc. 
The  phrase  is  used  for  the  northern  parts  of  the  Peninsula— Lombardy, 
Venetia,  and  Istria,— which  do  not  properly  belong  to  Roman  Italy. 


132  Papal  Infallibility, 

and  master  of  all  bishops,  and  having  autliority  over 
the  four  great  thrones  of  Antioch,  Alexandria,  Constan- 
tinople, and  Jerusalem. 

The  forgery  betrayed  its  Eoman  authorship  in  every 
line;  it  is  self-evident  that  a  cleric  of  the  Lateran 
Church  was  the  composer.  The  document  was  obvi- 
ously intended  to  be  shown  to  the  Prankish  king, 
Pepin,  and  must  have  been  compiled  just  before  754. 
Constantine  relates  in  it  how  he  served  the  Pope  as  his 
oToom,  and  led  his  horse  some  distance.  This  induced 
Pepin  to  offer  the  Pope  a  homage,  so  foreign  to  Prankish 
ideas,  and  the  Pope  told  him  from  the  first  that  he 
expected,  not  a  gift,  but  restitution  from  him  and  his 
•  Pranks.^  The  first  reference  to  this  gift  of  Constantine 
occurs  in  Hadrian's  letter  to  Charles  the  Great  in  777, 
where  he  tells  him  that,  as  the  new  Constantine,  he  has 


1  There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  Koman  origin  of  the  "  Donation." 
The  Jesuit  Cantel  has  rightly  recognised  this  in  his  Hist  Metrop.  Urh.  p.  195. 
He  thinks  a  Roman  subdeacon,  John,  was  the  author.  The  document  had  a 
threefokl  object,— against  the  Longobards,  who  were  threatening  Rome, 
against  the  Greeks,  who  would  acknowledge  no  supremacy  of  the  Roman 
See  over  their  Church,  and  with  a  view  to  the  Franks.  The  attempt  of  the 
Jesuits  in  the  Civiltd  to  make  a  Frank  the  author,  simply  because  ^neas 
of  Paris  and  Ado  of  Vienne  mention  the  gift  in  the  ninth  century,  is  not 
worth  serious  notice  ;  it  refutes  itself.  There  is  the  closest  agreement  in 
style  and  idea  between  the  "Donation"  and  contemporary  Roman  docu- 
ments, esi^ecially  the  Consiitution  Pauli  I.  (Harduin,  Condi,  iii.  1999  seq.) 
and  the  Ejnstola  S.  Petri,  compiled  in  753  or  754.    The  phrase  "  Ccncinnatio 


Foro^erics. 


00 


indeed  given  the  Churcli  what  is  her  own,  but  that  he 
has  more  of  the  old  Imperial  endowments  to  restore  to 
her.  The  Popes  had  already  been  accustomed,  for  several 
years,  since  752,  to  speak,  not  of  gifts,  but  restitutions, 
in  their  letters ;  the  Italian  towns  and  provinces  were 
to  be  restored,  sometimes  to  St.  Peter,  sometimes  to  the 
Eoman  republic.^  Such  language  first  became  intelli- 
gible when  the  Donation  of  Constantine  was  brought 
forward  to  show  that  the  Pope  was  the  rightful  pos- 
sessor as  heir  of  the  Ptoman  Csesars  in  Italy ;  for,  he 
beino-  at  once  the  successor  of  Peter  and  of  Constantine, 

o 

what  was  given  to  the  Eoman  Ptepublic  was  given  to 
Peter,  and  vice  versa.  In  this  way  it  was  made  clear  to 
Pepin  that  he  had  simply  to  reject  the  demands  of  the 
Greek  Imperial  Court  about  the  restoration  of  its  terri- 
tory as  unauthorized. 

It  would   indeed   be   incomprehensible   how   Pepin 

hiTTiinarium,"  used  only  in  Pni^al  letters  of  that  date,  and  in  the  Consti- 
tutum  and  Donatio,  betrays  a  Roman  hand.  So  does  the  form  of  impreca- 
tion and  threat  of  hell-torments,  found  also  in  the  Constitutum  and  Ejns- 
tola  S.  Petri,  and  the  term  "  Satrapce,"  wholly  foreign  to  the  West,  and 
found  only  in  the  "Donation,"  and  in  contemporary  Papal  letters.  See 
Cenni,  Moiium.  Dominat.  Pontif.  i.  154. 

1  "Exarchatum  Ravennae  et  rei-publicse  jura  sen  loca  reddere"  is  the 
phrase  in  the  Liber  Pontif.  See  Le  Cointe,  A  nnnl.  Eccl.  Franc,  v.  424. 
Again,  in  the  letter  of  Pope  Stephen  we  read,  ''  per  Donationis  paginam 
civitates  et  loca  .  .  .  rcstituenda  confirmastis."  And  so  constantly  when 
the  Exarchate  and  Pentapolis  are  suoken  of. 


1 3  4  Papa  I  In  fa  llibility . 

could  have  been  induced  to  give  the  Exarchate,  with 
twenty  towns,  to  the  Pope,  who  never  possessed  it, 
and  thereby  to  draw  on  himself  the  enmity  of  the  still 
powerful  Imperial  Court,  merely  that  the  lamps  in  the 
Eoman  churches  might  be  furnished  with  oiV  had  he 
not  been  shown  that  the  Pope  had  a  right  to  it  by  the 
gift  of  Constantine,  and  terrified  by  the  threat  of  ven- 
geance from  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  if  his  property 
should  be  withheld.  There  was  no  fear  of  such  docu- 
ments as  the  Epistle  of  Peter  and  the  Donation  of  Con- 
stantine being  critically  examined  at  the  warlike  Court 
of  Pepin.  Men  who  might  be  written  to  that  their 
bodies  and  souls  would  be  eternally  lacerated  and  tor- 
mented in  hell  if  they  did  not  fight  against  the  enemies 
of  the  Church,  believed  readily  enough  that  Constantine 
had  given  Italy  to  Pope  Silvester.  Those  were  days  of 
darkness  in  Erance,  and,  in  the  complete  extinction  of 
all  learning,  there  was  not  a  single  man  about  Pepin 
whose  sharpsightedness  the  Eoman  agents  had  reason 
to  dread.^ 

One  is   tempted  to  ascribe  to  the  same  hand  the 
Epistle  of  St.  Peter  to  his  "  adopted  son"  the  King  of 

1  This  was  always  given  in  the  covetous  begging-letters  of  the  Popes  as 
their  main  ground  for  demanding  the  gifts  of  land  they  wished  for. 

2  See  the  Benedictine  Jlist.  Lit.  de  la  France,  iv.  3. 


Forgeries.  135 

the  Franks,  which  appeared  also  at  this  moment  of  great 
danger  and  distress,  as  well  as  of  lofty  hopes  and  preten- 
sions,— a  fabrication  which  for  strangeness  and  audacit)'' 
has  never  been  exceeded.  Entreating  and  promising 
victory,  and  then  again  threatening  the  pains  of  hell, 
the  Prince  of  the  Apostles  adjures  the  Franks  to  deli- 
ver Eome  and  the  Eoman  Church.  The  Epistle  really 
went  from  Eome  to  the  Erankish  kim:^dom,  and  seems 
to  have  produced  its  effect  there .-^ 

Twenty  years  later  the  need  was  felt  at  Eome  of  a 
more  extensive  invention  or  interpolation.  Pepin  had 
given  the  Pope  the  Exarchate,  taken  away  from  the 
Longobards,  with  Eavenna  for  its  capital,  and  twenty 
other  towns  of  the  Emilia,  Elaminia,  and  Pentapolis,  or 
the  triangle  of  coast  between  Bologna,  Comacchio,  and 
Ancona.^  More  he  had  been  unable  to  give,  for  this 
was  all  the  territory  the  Longobards  had  shortly  before 
acquired,  and  were  now  obliged  to  give  up.  In  774 
Pepin's  son,  Charles  the  Great,  after  taking  Pavia,  be- 
came king  of  the  Longobardic  territory,  stretching  far 
southwards.     ISTo  more  could  be  said  about  the  gift  of 

1  It  was  incorporated  in  the  official  collection  of  the  Codex  Carolinus. 
Cf.  Cenni,  op.  cit.  150. 

2  This  is  clear  from  the  enumerations  in  the  Liber  Pontlf.  and  the  notice 
in  Leo  of  Ostia.  See  Le  Cointe,  v.  484,  and  Mock,  De  Donat.  d  Car.  M. 
oblatd,  PI).  8  seq. 


1 36  Papal  Infallibility. 

Constantine  ;  Charles  would  have  had  at  once  to  abdi- 
cate. Moreover,  a  strong  Italian  sovereign  was  wanted 
at  Eome,  who  from  his  own  part  of  the  peninsula  could 
also  keep  the  Papal  dominions  in  subjection ;  at  the 
same  time,  the  Eoman  lust  for  land  and  subjects  and 
revenues  was  not  long  satisfied  with  the  Exarchate 
and  its  belongings.  So  a  document  was  laid  before  the 
King  in  Eome,  professing  to  be  his  father's  gift  or 
promise  (jpromissio)  of  Kiersy.  He  renewed  it,  as  it 
was  shown  him,  and  gave  away  thereby  the  greater  part 
of  Italy,  including  a  good  deal  that  did  not  belong  to 
him;  for  the  document,  as  quoted  in  Adrian's  Bio- 
graphy, specifies  as  territories  to  be  assigned  to  the 
Popes  all  Corsica,  Venetia,  and  Istria,  Luni,  Monselice, 
Parma,  Eeggio,  Mantua,  the  duchies  of  Spoleto  and 
Benevento,  and  the  Exarchate.-^ 

It  has  seemed  to  every  one  mysterious  and  inexplicable 
that  Charlemagne  should  have  made  so  comprehensive 
a  gift,  leaving  himself  but  little  of  his  Italian  kingdom 
Accordingly  Muratori,  Sugenheim,  Hegel,  Gregorovius, 
and  Niehues  have  either  declared  the  passage  spurious, 
or  accused  the  Papal  biographer  of  falsehood ;  else,  ob- 
serves Niehues,  we  must  accuse  Charles  of  consciously 

1  Lib.  Poiitif.  (ed  Vignol.)  ii.  193. 


Forgeries,  137 

indorsing  a  perjury,  and  Adrian  of  a  cowardly  negli- 
gence.^ Abel  thinks  the  suspicions  against  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  passage  are  strong,  but  not  conclusive,  and 
contents  himself  with  assuming  that  the  gift  was  really 
equal  to  Pepin's,  but  was  very  limited.^  Lastly,  Mock 
accepts  the  extent  of  the  gift,  but  rejects  its  equality  to 
Pepin's,  and  therefore  the  truth  of  Adrian's  Biography ; 
and  Baxmann,  the  latest  authority,  leaves  all  uncertain.^ 
In  short,  no  one  has  succeeded  in  unravelling  the  secret. 
But  the  thing  explains  itself  when  we  compare  the 
twice  printed  and  wholly  fabulous  document,^  profess- 
ing to  be  the  pact  or  bond  of  Pepin,  and  which  really 
describes  the  geographical  extent  of  the  gift  as  it  is 
stated  in  Adrian's  Biography,  only  with  the  addition 
of  more  names  of  towns.  This  document  is  closely 
related  to  the  Donation  of  Constantine.  Like  Constan- 
tino, Pepin  gives  an  express  account  of  his  relations  to 
the  Pope  as  an  explanation  to  the  Greeks  and  Lombards 
of  his  gifts,  and  disclaims  for  himself  and  his  successors 
all  interest  in  the  alienated  territories,  except  the  right 

1  Oeschichte  des  Verlulltn.  zwischen  Kaiserthiim  und  Pahsthum.  i.  565. 
'^  Forschungen  zur  deutschen  Geschichte,  i.  469  seq.     Jahrbuch,  i.  131. 

3  Politik  der  Pahste.  1.  277. 

4  Fantuzzi,  Monum.  Puivennati.  vi.  264  ;  Troya,  Codice  diplom.  Longo- 
hard.  (Napoli,  1854),  iv.  503  seq.  Troya  thinks  the  document  genuine, 
which  is  unintelli'dble  in  a  man  of  his  infomiatiou. 


1 38  Papal  Infallibility. 

of  having  prayers  offered  for  the  rest  of  their  souls,  and 
the  title  of  a  Eonian  patrician ;  for  those  territories  were 
become  the  lawful  property  of  the  Pope  through  so 
many  imperial  deeds  of  gift.  For  this  document, 
obviously  composed  in  the  style  of  the  Donation  of 
Constantine  and  the  Roman  biographies  of  Popes,  it  is 
difficult  to  assign  any  other  origin  or  object  than  the 
purpose  of  having  it  laid  before  Charlemagne  '^  and  it 
shows  how  he  was  induced  to  make  a  promise  he  found 
it  impossible  to  keep ;  for  he  henceforth  vigorously  with- 
stood the  perpetually  renewed  demands  of  the  Popes, 
and  made  the  counter  requisition  that  Piome  should 
prove  its  title  to  each  particular  domain  separately. 

There  have  unquestionably  been  some  falsifications 
in  the  privileges  granted  to  the  Pioman  See  by  Em- 
perors later  than  Charles  the  Great,  though  they  do 
not  go  so  far  as  has  often  been  maintained.  The  pact 
or  gift  of  Louis  the  Pious  in  817  bears  internal  signs 
of  genuineness,  but  has  evidently  been  interpolated.^ 

1  It  must  else  have  been  meant  for  the  eye  of  one  of  the  later  Carlovin- 
gians.  Clearly  it  was  designed  for  the  eye  of  a  Frankish  king,  and  after 
the  establishment  of  the  empire  Pepin's  disclaimer  of  reserving  any  power 
in  the  alienated  dominions  would  have  no  further  object.  "We  must  there- 
fore hold  to  Charles  the  Great,  and  the  date  of  774,  and  attribute  the 
wrong  name  of  the  Pope  to  the  igiiorance  of  a  later  copyist. 

2  It  has  been  held  as  a  pure  invention  by  most  scholars,  as  Pagi,  Mura- 
tori,  Beretto,  Le  Bret,  Pertz,  Gregorovius,  Baxmann,  and  lastly,  that  great 


Forgeries,  139 

It  makes  the  Emperor  give  the  islands  of  Corsica,  Sar- 
dinia, and  Sicily,  with  the  opposite  coasts,  and  all  Tus- 
cany and  Spoleto,  to  Pope  Pascal  It  is  needless  to 
observe  that  if  Louis  had  really  partly  given  and  partly 
confirmed  to  the  Pope  the  greater  part  of  Italy  in  this 
elastic  and  unlimited  fashion,  the  whole  subsequent 
history  of  the  Papacy  to  Gregory  vii.  would  be  an 
insoluble  riddle ;  for  the  Popes  neither  possessed  nor 
once  claimed  those  territories,  which  together  make  up 
a  large  kingdom.  InnDcent  iii.  was  the  first  to  main- 
tain that  all  Tuscany  belonged  to  the  Popes;  no  one 
did  so  before  him.  Gregory  vii.  first  claimed  the  duchy 
of  Spoleto.  The  falsification  certainly  took  place  to- 
wards the  end  of  the  eleventh  century,  when  matters 
were  managed  so  actively  and  astutely  at  Eome ;  for 
Gregory  vii.  was  also  the  first  to  claim  Sardinia,  but  he 
takes  occasion  to  observe  that  the  Sardinians  have 
hitherto  had  no  relations  with  the  Ptoman  See,  or  rather, 
as  he  thinks,  have  become  as  much  strangers  to  it, 
through  the  negligence  of  his  predecessors,  as  the  people 
at  the  ends  of  the  earth.^  Urban  ii.,  indeed,  in  1091, 
proved  that  Corsica  was  a  Papal  fief,  not  merely  from 

master  in  the  criticism  of  the  Caroline  documents,  Sickel,  Avhile  Mariul 
{Nuovo  Esame,  etc.,  Roma,  1822)  and  Gfrorer  defend  it  as  genuine, 
1  Epist  i.  29. 


140  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  gift  of  Louis  or  Charlemagne,  but  from  the  Dona- 
tion of  Constantine,  which,  as  then  interpreted,  assigned 
to  Pope  Silvester  all  islands  of  the  West,  including  the 
Balearic  Isles,  and  even  Ireland.  So  again  with  the 
privileges  of  the  Emperors  Otho  I.  in  962,  and  Henry  ii. 
in  1020.  The  documents  are  in  both  cases  genuine,  or 
copies  of  genuine  ones,  in  the  main,  but  the  statement 
of  the  Lihe^T  Pontificalis  about  Charlemagne's  Donation 
was  manifestly  interpolated  wholesale  afterwards.^ 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Countess  Matilda,  who 
was  entirely  under  the  influence  of  Gregory  vii.  and 
Anselm  of  Lucca,  gave  Liguria  and  Tuscany  to  the 
Eoman  See  in  1077.^  When  we  remember  that  Gre- 
gory VII.,  in  1081,  required  of  the  pretender  Eudolph  an 
oath  that  he  would  restore  the  lands  and  revenues 
which  Constantine  and  Charlemagne  had  given  to  St. 
Peter,^  that  Leo  ix.  had  already  solemnly  appealed  to 
the  Donation  of  Constantine,  and  that  Matilda's  ad- 
viser, Anselm,  had  inserted  this  Donation  in  his  Codex, 
we  may  easily  judge  what  document  was  used  to  con- 


1  Cf.  Watterich,  Vitce  Pont.  i.  45 ;  Hefele,  Concil.  Geschichte,  iv.  580 ; 
Beitrdge,  i.  255. 

2  Leo  Cassinensis  in  Pertz,  Monwn.  Gem.  ix.  738.     Liguria  means  the 
Lombardic  duchies  belonging  to  Matilda. 

3  E2K  viii.  8.  26. 


Forgeries.  141 

vince  her  tliat  she  was  obliged  in  conscience  to  make 
so  extensive  an  abdication  or  restitution. 

We  cannot  suppose  that  such  a  man  as  Gregory  vii. 
would  consciously  take  part  in  these  fabrications,  but, 
in  his  unlimited  credulity  and  eager  desire  for  territory 
and  dominion,  he  appealed  to  the  first  forged  document 
that  came  to  hand  as  a  solid  proof.  Thus,  in  1081, 
he  affirmed  that,  according  to  the  documents  preserved 
in  the  archives  of  St.  Peter's,  Charles  the  Great  had 
made  the  wdiole  of  Gaul  tributary  to  the  Eoman  Church, 
and  given  to  her  all  Saxony.^  A  document  forged  at 
Eome  in  the  tenth  or  eleventh  century  is  undoubtedly 
referred  to,  which  may  be  found  in  Torrigio.^  Cliarles 
there  calls  himself  Emperor  in  the  year  797,  and  his 
kingdoms  are  Trancia,  Aquitania,  and  Gaul ;  Alcuin  is 
his  Chancellor,  and  each  of  his  kingdoms  is  to  pay  an 
annual  tribute  of  400  pounds  to  Eome. 

We  have  put  forward  these  facts  about  the  deeds  of 
gift,  because  they  set  in  a  clear  light  the  line  habitually 
followed  at  Eome  from  the  sixth  to  the  twelfth  century, 

1  Ep.  viii.  23. 

2  Le  Grotte  Vaticane  (Roma,  1639),  pp-  505-510.  As  Acts  of  the  Martyrs 
had  been  fabricated  tbere  earlier,  so,  from  the  tenth  century,  false  docu- 
ments were  fabricated  Avholesale  at  Rome,  as  the  monographs  about  parti- 
cular Roman  churches  prove.  So  the  first  document  of  570  Mariui  quotes 
{Papiri  Dij)lom.,  Roma,  1805)  is  an  invention.     See  Jaflfe,  licjesta,  p.  933. 


142  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  because  tlieir  authors  are  undoubtedly  the  very 
persons  chargeable  with  the  fictions  undertaken  in  the 
interests  of  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  We  shall  now 
continue  our  enumeration  and  examination  of  the  for- 
geries by  which  the  whole  constitution  of  the  Church 
was  gradually  changed. 

The  pseudo-Isidorian  forgery  of  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  has  been  already  mentioned.  Eome,  as 
we  have  seen,  had  no  part  in  that,  though  she  after- 
wards took  full  advantage  of  it  for  extending  her  power, 
the  substance  of  these  forgeries  being  incorporated  into 
the  canonical  collections  of  the  Gregorian  party. 

The  most  potent  instrument  of  the  new  Papal  system 
was  Gratian's  Decretiim,  which  issued  about  the  middle 
of  the  twelfth  century  from  the  first  school  of  Law  in 
Europe,  the  juristic  teacher  of  the  whole  of  Western 
Christendom,  Bologna.  In  this  work  the  Isidorian 
forgeries  were  combined  with  those  of  the  Gregorian 
writers,  Deusdedit,  Anselm,  Gregory  of  Pavia,  and 
with  Gratian's  own  additions.  His  work  displaced  all 
the  older  collections  of  canon  law,  and  became  the 
manual  and  repertory,  not  for  canonists  only,  but  for  the 
scholastic  theologians,  who,  for  the  most  part,  derived 
all  their  knowledsje  of  Fathers  and  Councils  from  it. 


Forgeries.  143 

No  book  lias  ever  come  near  it  in  its  influence  in  the 
Church,  although  there  is  scarcely  another  so  chokefull 
of  Rross  errors,  both  intentional  and  unintentional  Not 
only  Anselm,  Deusdeclit,  and  Cardinal  Gregory,  whose 
works  had  little  circulation,  but  also  the  German  Bur- 
kard  (or  his  assistant,  the  Abbot  Olbert)  had  pioneered 
the  way  for  Gratian.  Burkard  had  not  only  made  copious 
use  of  the  Isidorian  fictions  in  his  Collection,  compiled 
between  1012  and  1024,  but  had  also  ascribed  the  eccle- 
siastical decisions  in  the  capitularies  to  various  Popes, 
so  that  from  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century  the 
erroneous  notion  took  rise  that  the  free  determinations 
of  Prankish  Synods  in  the  ninth  century  were  the 
autocratic  commands  of  Popes.  All  these  fabrications 
— the  rich  liarvest  of  three  centuries — Gratian  inserted 
in  good  faith  into  his  collection,  but  he  also  added, 
knowingly  and  deliberately,  a  number  of  fresh  corrup- 
tions, all  in  the  spirit  and  interest  of  the  Papal  system. 
It  may  be  shown  by  certain  examples,  going  deep 
into  the  development  of  the  new  Church  system,  how 
Gratian  the  Italian  forwarded  by  his  own  interpola- 
tions the  grand  national  scheme  of  making  the  whole 
Christian  world,  in  a  certain  sense,  the  domain  of  the 
Italian  clergy,  through  the  Papacy.     The  German  and 


1 44  Papal  Infallibility, 

West  Frankisli  bishops  had  already  bowed  to  the  Isi- 
dorian  decretals.  Their  influence  is  shown  in  tlie  deci- 
sions of  the  German  N"ational  Synod  at  Tribur  in  895. 
We  may  see  here  how  deeply  the  pseudo-Isidore,  wdth 
the  imperial  dignity  of  his  Popes,  and  their  dictatorial 
commands,  had  penetrated  into  the  very  lifeblood  of  the 
German  hierarchy.  It  came  to  this,  that  the  bishops  had 
bound  themselves  most  closely  to  King  Arnulf,  who  was 
present,  and  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  Synod,  and 
that  he,  desiring  the  imperial  crown,  which  had  already 
once  allured  him  into  Italy,  could  only  obtain  it  by  the 
favour  of  Pope  Pormosus.  So  they  decided  that,  though 
the  yoke  of  Eome  should  become  intolerable,  it  ought 
to  be  borne  with  pious  resignation. 

How  often  has  this  saying  been  repeated  since  !  It 
was  ascribed  to  Charles  the  Great,  just  as  Constantine 
is  affirmed  to  have  called  the  Pope  a  God.  And  since 
Gratian  adopted  it  as  a  capitulary  of  Charles,  and 
stamped  it  as  a  universal  canon,^  it  became  the  current 
view  up  to  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Constance,  albeit 
sometimes  contradicted  in  act,  that  it  is  a  duty  to  endure 
the  unendurable  if  Eome  imposes  it. 

The  corruption  of  the  thirty-sixth  canon  of  the 
1  Dist.  19.  c.  3. 


Forgeries.  145 

(Ecumenical  Council  of  692  is  Gratian's  own  doing.^ 
It  renewed  the  canon  of  Chalcedon  (451),  which  gave 
the  Patriarch  of  New  Eome,  or  Constantinople,  equal 
rights  with  the  Eoman  Patriarch.  Gratian,  by  a  change 
of  two  w^ords,  gives  it  a  precisely  opposite  sense,  and 
suppresses  the  reference  to  the  canon  of  Chalcedon. 
He  also  reduces  the  five  Patriarchs  to  four ;  for  the 
ancient  equality  of  position  of  the  Eoman  bishop  and 
the  four  chief  bishops  of  the  East  was  now  to  disappear, 
though  even  the  Gregorians,  as,  e.g.,  Anselm,  had  treated 
him  as  one  of  the  Patriarchs.^  There  was  no  longer 
any  room  for  the  patriarchal  dignity  of  the  Eoman  See  ; 
he  who  had  drawn  to  himself  every  conceivable  right 
in  the  Church  could  hardly  exercise  a  particular  patri- 
archal power  in  one  portion  of  it.  The  plenary  powers 
of  the  Pope  were  become  a  mare,  magnum,  within  which 
there  could  be  no  sea  or  lake  of  special  privileges.^  This 
showed  itseK  conspicuously  in  reference  to  the  provinces 
of  Eastern   Illyricum, — Macedonia,   Thessaly,   Epirus, 

1  Bist.  22.  6.  The  Eoman  correctors  have  substituted  "nee  non"  for 
Gratian's  fabrication  of  "  non  tamen,"  which  was  left  for  400  years. 

2  Anselui  and  Deusdedit  set  aside  the  famous  decree  of  Nicolas  ii.,  giv- 
ing the  German  Emperor  the  right  of  confirming  Papal  elections,  on  the 
ground  that  one  patriarch,  the  Roman,  could  not  annul  the  decision  of  five 
patriarchs  at  Constantinople. 

3  The  numberless  privileges  accorded  by  Popes  to  the  Mendicant  Orders 
were  afterwards  called  a  "  mare  magnum." 


146  Papal  Lifallibility, 

Dardania, — whicli  were  before  under  the  patriarchal 
jurisdiction  of  the  Eoman  bishop,  so  that  the  metropo- 
litan of  Thessalonica  was  appointed  his  vicar  over  them. 
The  Emperor  Leo,  the  Isaurian,  separated  those  provinces 
from  Eome  about  730,  and  they  now  belonged  to  the 
patriarchate  of  Constantinople.  There  was  a  long  dis- 
pute about  it ;  the  perpetually  renewed  demands  of  the 
Popes  gained  no  attention  at  Constantinople  till  the 
establishment  of  the  Latin  Empire  there  in  1204  gave 
them  power  for  the  moment  in  these  Eastern  lands 
also.  And  it  is  significant  that  Innocent  ill.,  far  from 
attempting  to  resume  his  ancient  patriarchal  rights  there, 
made  the  Bishop  of  Tornobus  Patriarch, — an  ephemeral 
creation,  soon  to  be  again  extinguished.^ 

The  canon  of  the  African  Synod, — that  immoveable 
stumblingblock  of  all  Papalists, — which  forbids  any 
appeal  beyond  the  seas,  i.e.,  to  Eome,  Gratian  adapted 
to  the  service  of  the  new  system  by  an  addition  which 
made  the  Synod  affirm  precisely  what  it  denies.  If 
Isidore  undertook  by  his  fabrications  to  annul  the  old 
law  forbidding  bishops  being  moved  from  one  see  to 
another,  Gratian,  following  Anselm  and  Cardinal  Gre- 
gory, improved  on  this  by  a  fresh  forgery,  appropriating 

1  Le  Quien,  Oriens  Christ,  i.  96-98  ;  ii.  24,  25. 


Forgeries,  147 

to  the  Pope  alone  the  right  of  transLation.^  One  of  the 
most  important  of  his  additions,  and  also  an  evidence  of 
the  wide  divergence  between  the  old  and  new  Church 
law,  is  the  chapter — also  based  on  Anselm,  Deusdedit, 
and  Cardinal  Gregory — which  elaborated  a  system  of 
religious  persecution.^  While,  on  the  one  hand,  by  fal- 
sifying a  canon  quoted  by  Ivo  and  Burkard,  he  makes 
Gregory  the  Great  order  that  the  Church  should  protect 
homicides  and  murderers  ;^  on  the  other  hand,  he  takes 
great  pains  to  inculcate,  in  a  long  series  of  canons,  that 
it  is  lawful,  nay,  a  duty,  to  constrain  men  to  goodness, 
and  therefore  to  faith,  and  to  what  was  then  reckoned 
matter  of  faith,  by  all  means  of  physical  compulsion, 
and  particularly  to  torture  and  execute  heretics,  and 
confiscate  their  property.  In  this  he  went  beyond  the 
Gregorian  canonists.  He  does  not  fail  to  urge  that 
Urban  ii.  had  declared  any  one  who  should  kill  an  ex- 
communicated person,  out  of  zeal  to  the  Church,  to  be 
by  no  means  a  murderer,  and  hence  draws  the  general 
conclusion  that  it  is  clear  the  "  bad  " — all  who  are  de- 
clared "  bad  "  by  the  Church  authorities — are  not  only 
to  be  scourged,  but  executed. 

Still  worse  things  may  be  found  in  the  work  of  the 

1  Cans.  7.  Q.  i.  34.  2  Q^^^s.  23.  Q.  iv.  4,  5.  3  c'aws.  23.  Q.  v.  7. 


148  Papal  Infallibility. 

Bolognese  monk,  whicli,  througli  tlie  instrumentality  of 
the  Curia,  became  the  manual  and  canonical  code  of  the 
West,  to  the  scandal  of  religion  and  the  Church,  and 
this  medley,  not  of  simple,  but  complicated  and  multi- 
plied forgeries,  was  rich  in  materials  containing  the 
germ  of  future  developments,  and  cutting  deep  in  their 
consequences  into  both  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
life  of  the  AVest.  So  was  it  with  the  idea  of  heresy, 
which  even  then  was  fashioned  into  a  two-edged  sword, 
and  veritable  instrument  of  ecclesiastical  domination. 
Pope  Nicolas  I.  had  afi&rmed,  in  his  letter  to  the  Greek 
Emperor  Michael,  that  by  the  sixth  canon  of  the  CEcu- 
menical  Council  of  381  (the  first  of  Constantinople), 
which  he  grossly  distorted,  schismatics  and  excom- 
municated men  were  to  be  treated  as  heretics.  Anselm 
and  Gratian  embodied  this  statement  in  their  new 
codes  ;^  so  that  at  the  very  time  when  heresy  was 
stamped  as  a  capital  offence,  the  term  received  a  terrible 
and  unlimited  extension,  as  indeed  everything  had  been 
done  by  earlier  fabrications  to  make  heretics  of  all  who 
dared  to  disobey  a  Papal  command,  or  speak  against  a 
Papal  decision  on  doctrine. 

The  earlier  Gregorians  had  not  laid  down  so  clearly 
and  nakedly  as  Gratian,  that  in  his  unlimited  superi- 

i  Cans.  4.  Q.  i.  c.  2. 


Forgeries.  149 

ority  to  all  law,  the  Pope  stands  on  an  equality  with  the 
Son  of  God.  Gratian  says  that,  as  Christ  submitted  to 
the  law  on  earth,  though  in  truth  he  was  its  Lord,  so 
the  Pope  is  high  above  all  laws  of  the  Church,  and  can 
dispose  of  them  as  he  will,  since  they  derive  all  their 
force  from  him  alone.-^  This  became,  and  chiefly  through 
Gratian's  influence,  the  prevalent  doctrine  of  the  Curia, 
so  that  even  after  the  great  reforming  Councils,  Eugenius 
IV.,  in  1439,  answered  King  Charles  vii.,  when  he  ap- 
pealed to  the  laws  of  the  Church,  that  it  was  simply 
ludicrous  to  come  with  such  an  appeal  to  the  Pope, 
who  remits,  suspends,  changes,  or  annuls  these  laws  at 
his  good  pleasure.^ 

In  the  fifty  years  between  the  appearance  of  Gratian's 
Becretum  and  the  pontificate  of  the  most  powerful  of 
the  Popes,  Innocent  ill.,  the  Papal  system,  such  as  it 
had  become  in  its  three  stages  of  development,  tlirough 
the  pseudo- Isidore,  the  Gregorian  school,  and  Gratian, 
worked  its  way  to  complete  dominion.  In  the  Eoman 
courts  Gratian's  Code  was  acted  upon — at  Bologna  it 
was  taught;  even  the  Emperor  Frederick  i.  had  his 
son  Henry  vi.  instructed  in  the  Decretum  and  Eoman 
law.^     The  whole  decretal  legislation  from  1159  to  1320 

1  Cans.  25.  Q.  i.  c.  11,  12, 16.  ^  Raynald,  anno  1439,  37. 

3  Cf.  Bdhuier,  Diss,  de  Deer.  Grat.  in  Pref.  to  liis  Corp.  Jur.  Can.  p.  xvii. 


1 5  o  Papal  Infallibility. 

is  built  upon  the  foundation  of  Gratian.  The  same  is 
true  of  Aquinas's  dogmatic  theology  on  all  kindred 
points,  as,  indeed,  the  whole  scholastic  system  in  ques- 
tions of  Church  constitution  was  modelled  on  the 
favourite  science  of  the  clergy  of  the  period,  Jurisprud- 
ence, as  interpreted  by  Gratian,  Eaymund,  and  the  other 
compilers  of  decretals.  The  theologians  borrowed  theory, 
texts,  and  proofs,  alike  from  these  compilations.  As 
early  as  the  twelfth  century,  in  quoting  a  passage  from 
Gratian,  the  Popes  used  to  say,  it  was  "m  sacris 
canonihus"  or  "m  decretis!'^  And  about  1570,  the 
Eoman  correctors  of  the  Decretwn,  appointed  by  three 
Popes,  said  the  work  was  intrusted  to  them,  that  the 
authority  of  this  most  useful  and  weighty  Codex  might 
not  be  weakened.^  So  high  stood  the  character  of  this 
work,  saturated  through  and  through  as  it  is  with  de- 
ceit and  error  and  forgeries,  which,  like  a  great  wedge 
driven  into  the  fabric  of  the  Church,  gradually  loosened, 
disjointed,  and  disintegrated  the  whole  of  its  ancient 
order,  not,  indeed,  without  putting  another,  and,  in  its 
way,  very  strong  constitution  in  its  place. 

1  Thus  Alex.  in.  {Deer.  c.  6  de  Despons.  inpub.),  Clem.  in.  {De,  Jure 
Patron,  o.  25),  and  Innoc.  in.,  cite  Gratian  with  the  words,  "in  corpora 

decretorum." 
^  '*Ne  hujusce  utilissimi  et  gravissimi  Codicis  vacillaret  auctoritas." 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  1 5 1 

§  VIII.  Progress  of  the  Papal  Power. 
Alexander  III.  (1159-81)  and  Innocent  m.  (1198-1216) 
were  the  chief  authors  of  the  development  of  the  new 
system,  and  creators  of  the  decretal  canon  law,  through  the 
number  of  their  edicts,  and  the  unity  and  coherence  of 
their  policy,  based  on  one  fundamental  idea.  The  notion 
is  more  prominent  with  Innocent  than  even  with  Gre- 
gory VII.,  that  the  Pope  is  God's  locum  icnens  on  earth, 
set  to  watch  over  the  social,  political,  and  religious  con- 
dition of  mankind,  like  a  Divine  Providence,  as  chief 
overseer  and  lord,  who  must  put  down  all  opposition. 
The  radical  principle  with  him,  as  with  Gregory,  is  that 
all  rank  and  authority  not  held  by  priests  is  an  incon- 
gruity in  the  Divine  plan  of  the  world,  introduced 
through  human  foUy  and  sinfulness,  while  the  priesthood 
is,  properly  speaking,  the  sole  ordinance  and  institution 
of  God.-^  Gregory  had  declared,  of  course  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  Gospel  teaching  about  the  Divine 
institution  of  government,  that  the  royal  power  was  set 
up  at  the  instigation  of  Satan,  by  persons  ignorant  of 
God,  and  full  of  crimes,  out  of  mere  lust  of  dominion, 
whereas  before  men  had  been  equal.^ 

^  See  Ep.  adJoan.  Angl.  Reg.  in  Rymer's  Foedera  Reg.  Angl.  i.  1,  119, 
"  Institutum  fuit  sacerdotium  per  ordinationem  Divinam,  regnum  autem 
per  extortionem  humanam,"  etc. 

-  Epist.  lilj.  viii.  Ep  21 :  "  Quis  nesciat,  reges  et  duces  ab  iis  habiiisse 


I  5  2  Papal  hifallibility. 

New  means  of  influence  accrued  to  the  Eoman  See 
through  the  Crusades,  and  the  consequent  change  in 
the  system  of  penance  and  indulgences,  the  privileges 
awarded  to  Crusaders,  and  the  leadership  in  these  holy 
wars,  which,  as  a  matter  of  course,  devolved  on  the 
Popes.  The  same  end  was  served  by  the  military 
Orders,  which  acknowledged  the  Pope  as  their  only 
superior;  the  constant  union  with  France,  clergy  as 
well  as  kings  (before  1300);  and  still  more  by  the 
intellectual  power  the  Papal  monarchy  derived  from  the 
two  great  Universities — Bologna,  the  school  of  Papal 
canon  law,  and  Paris,  the  home  of  scholasticism,  which 
was  more  and  more  lending  itself  to  the  Papal  system. 
But,  above  all,  from  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  the  new  Eeligious  Orders  of  Mendicants,  which 
swarmed  over  the  whole  Christian  world — Franciscans, 
Dominicans,  Augustinians,  and  Carmelites,  especially 
the  two  first — were  the  strongest  pillars  and  supports 
of  this  monarchy.  After  the  Isidorian  decretals  and 
Gratian,  the  introduction  of  these  Orders,  with  their 
rigid  monarchical  organization,  was  the  third  great  lever 
whereby  the  old  Church  system,  resting  on  the  grada - 

principium,  qui  Deum  ignorantes,  superbia,  rapinis,  perfidia,  homicidiis 
postremo  imiversis  pene  sceleribus,  mundi  priucipe  diabolo  videlicet  agi- 
tante,  dominari  csec^  cupiditate  et  intolerabili  prsesumtione  affectaverunt !" 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Poiver.  1 5  3 

tion  of  bishops,  presbyteries,  and  parish  priests,  was  - 
undermined  and  destroyed.  Completely  under  Roman 
control,  and  acting  everywhere  as  Papal  delegates,  wholly 
independent  of  bishops,  with  plenary  power  to  encroach 
on  the  rights  of  parish  priests,  these  monks  set  up  their 
own  churches  in  the  Church,  laboured  for  the  honour 
and  greatness  of  their  Order,  and  for  the  Papal  authority 
onw^hich  their  prerogatives  rested.  We  may  say  that 
that  authority  was  literally  doubled  through  their  means. 
They  became  masters  of  literature,  of  the  pulpits,  and 
of  the  university  chairs  ;  they  travelled  about  as  Papal 
tax-gatherers  and  preachers  of  indulgences,  with  plenary 
power,  even  of  inflicting  excommunication.  And  thus 
the  spiritual  campaign  organized  at  Rome  was  carried 
into  every  village,  and  the  parish  clergy  generally  suc- 
cumbed to  the  ]\Iendicants,  armed  as  they  were  with 
privileges  from  head  to  heel.  Por  they  possessed  and 
used  the  effective  expedients  of  easy  absolution,  and 
new  devotions  and  methods  of  salvation,  invented  by 
themselves,  to  which  the  parish  priests  had  nothing  to 
oppose,  while  their  isolation  made  every  attempt  at  open 
resistance  on  their  part  useless.  They  could  compel 
both  priest  and  people,  by  excommunication,  to  hear 
them  preach  the  Papal  indulgences,  and  could  absolve 


1 54  Papal  Infallibility. 

from  reserved  sins  in  the  confessional.  Bisliops  and 
priests  felt  their  impotence  against  the  new  power  of 
these  monks,  strengthened  by  the  Inquisition,  and  had, 
however  indignantly,  to  bend  under  the  yoke  laid  on 
their  necks  by  two  powers  irresistible  in  their  union. 

If  Gregory  vii.  supported  his  new  claims,  his  political 
lordship  and  subjugation  of  the  monarchy,  on  falsehoods, 
not  indeed  of  his  own  coining,  Innocent  ill.  went  further 
in  this  direction,  and  dealt  with  history  as  with  the  Bible, 
according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  case.  He  invented 
the  story  that  the  Empire  had  been  transferred  from 
the  Greeks  to  the  Franks  by  a  Papal  sentence ;  ^  and 
thence  inferred  that  the  German  princes  derived  their 
right  of  electing  the  Emperor  from  the  Pope  only,  and 
asserted  that  he  had  the  right  of  rejecting  their  nominee. 
Later  Papal  authors  have  transformed  these  assertions 
into  historical  facts  invented  by  themselves. 

One  of  Gregory  vil's  maxims,  ascribing  personal 
holiness  to  every  rightly  elected  Pope,  was  suffered  to 
drop.  There  was  danger  of  the  want  of  holiness  sug- 
gesting the  invalidity  of  the  election,  and  therefore  the 
decretal  books,  while  upholding  the  rest  of  Gregory's 
postulates,  were   silent   about  this.     Moreover,   every 

1  Be  Elect  c.  34. 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  155 

one  knew  and  said  that  simony,  which  was  generally 
treated  as  heresy,  was  rampant  in  the  Eoman  Court, 
and  that  taking  bribes  for  benefices  and  legal  proceed- 
ings was  a  daily  occurrence  with  the  Popes  and  Car- 
dinals. The  charge  of  heresy  going  on  under  the  very 
eyes  of  the  Pope,  and  with  his  express  or  tacit  consent 
could  not  be  answered,  and  was  constantly  urged,  till 
the  canonists  hit  upon  the  resource  of  maintaining  that 
what  was  simony  in  others  was  not  simony  in  the 
Pope,  because  he  is  superior  to  law,  and  everything  in 
the  Church  is  his  property,  which  he  can  deal  with  as 
he  wilL^ 

The  Gregorian  system  required  the  most  complete 
immunity  of  the  whole  clergy  from  the  secular  power 
and  civil  courts.  It  served  to  create  an  immense  army, 
exclusively  belonging  to  the  Pope,  and  widely  separated 
by  common  caste  feeling  and  caste  interests  from  the 
lay  world.  Every  clergyman  was  to  recognise  but  one 
lord  and  ruler,  the  Pope,  who  disposed  of  him  indirectly, 
through  the  bishops,  who  were  bound  by  oath  to  himself, 
or  directly,  in  cases  of  exemption,  and  used  him  as  a 

1  Thus  the  canonist  John  of  God,  about  1245,  quotes  and  repudiates  the 
statement,  "  Lex  Julia  dicit  quod  apud  Romara  simonia  non  coniniittitur" 
{De  Pce.n.  D.  Papce).  See  excerpts  in  Theodori  Pcenitent.  (ed.  Petit.)  Paris, 
1677.     There  was  a  long  controversy  about  it. 


1 5  6  Papal  Infallibility. 

tool  for  the  execution  of  liis  commands.  Gratian  lias 
adapted  his  Codex  to  these  views,  partly  by  means  of 
the  pseudo-Isidorian  fabrications,  partly  by  later  corrup- 
tions of  his  own  and  the  Gregorian s.-^  The  Papal  pre- 
scriptions in  the  code  of  decretals,  completely  establish 
the  principle  that  clerics  are  exempt  from  secular  courts, 
and  that  by  Divine  ordinance.^  The  Popes  added  that 
no  cleric  could  renounce  this  privilege,  as  it  belonged 
to  the  whole  Church. 

One  would  have  supposed  there  would  be  no  further 
need  for  so  perilous  an  instrument  as  falsification  of  texts, 
when  all  that  was  required  for  the  development  of 
Papal  domination  in  Church  and  State  could  easily  be 
built  on  the  strong  and  broad  foundation  of  Gratian' s 
Decretum.  And  yet  the  same  method  was  still  pursued, 
and  that  too  with  texts  of  Scripture.  Innocent  IIL 
wished  to  make  Deuteronomy  a  code  for  Christians,  that 
he  might  get  Bible  authority  for  his  doctrine  of  Papal 
power  over  life  and  death ;  but  for  that  the  words  had 
to  be  altered.     It  is  there  said  that  an  Israelite  may 

^  Thus  (Caus.  ii.  Q.  i.  c.  5)  he  has  expunged  the  words  of  a  law  of  Theo- 
dosius  confining  the  exemption  to  spiritual  matters,  and  thereby  wholly 
altered  it.  So  (ib.  c.  5)  he  changed  the  words  "  sine  scientia  Pontificis  " 
into  "sine  licentia,"  to  make  the  civil  authority  over  clerics  dependent  on 
delegation  from  the  bishops. 

2  Deer,  de  Judic.  c.  4,  8,  10 ;  De  Foro  Compct.  c.  i.  2.  Q.  12,  13. 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  1 5  7 

appeal  to  the  high  priest  and  chief  judge,  and  if  he 
does  not  abide  by  their  sentence  shall  be  put  to  death.^ 
Innocent,  by  a  slight  interpolation  in  the  text  of  the 
Vulgate,  made  this  into  a  statement  that  whoever  does 
not  submit  to  the  decision  of  the  high  priest  (whose 
place  the  Pope  occupies  under  the  New  Covenant)  is 
to  be  sentenced  by  the  judge  to  execution.^  And  Leo  X. 
quoted  the  passage  with  the  same  corruption,  in  a  Bull 
of  his,  giving  a  false  reference  to  the  Book  of  Kings 
instead  of  Deuteronomy,  to  prove  that  whoever  dis- 
obeyed the  Pope  must  be  put  to  death.^ 

Innocent  went  beyond  Gratian,  above  all,  in  fixing 
the  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  State  and  secular 
princes.  He  taught  that  the  Papal  power  is  to  the 
imperial  and  royal  as  the  sun  to  the  moon,  which  last 
has  only  a  borrowed  light,  or  the  soul  to  the  body, 
which  exists  not  for  itself,  but  only  to  be  the  slave  of 
the  soul,  and  the  two  swords  (Luke  xxii.  38)  are  a 
symbol  of  the  ecclesiastical  and  secular  power,  both  of 
which  belong  to  the  Pope,  but  he  wields  one  himself 
and  intrusts  the  other  to  princes  to  use  at  his  behest,  and 


1  Dent.  xvii.  12. 

3  Deer.  Per  Venerahilem,  "Qui  filii  sint  legitimi,"  4.  17. 

3  Pastor  JEternus,  Harcluin,  Concil.  ix.  1826. 


1 58  Papal  Infallibility . 

for  the  service  of  the  Church.^  In  his  famous  decretal 
l^ovit,  Innocent  was  the  first  to  lay  down  the  theory, 
often  repeated  by  later  Popes,  that  wherever  a  serious 
sin  has  been  committed,  or  is  charged  by  one  party  on 
the  other,  it  behoves  the  Pope  to  interpose  with  his 
judgment,  to  punish,  and  to  annul  the  decisions  of  the 
civil  tribunal.^  The  principle  this  newly  devised  claim 
is  based  upon  must  apply  to  every  clergyman,  parish 
priest,  or  bishop,  within  his  own  sphere,  and  a  general 
domination  of  clergy  over  laity  would  follow,  as  in 
Thibet;  the  Popes,  however,  claimed  the  right  for 
themselves  alone.  Moreover  there  accrued  to  the  Popes 
new  and  unlimited  powers,  exalting  them  over  princes, 
peoples,  and  courts  of  justice,  beyond  what  any  mortal 
had  yet  enjoyed,  from  the  so-called  "Evangelical 
denunciation."  It  means  that  by  asserting  that  it  is 
a  sin  on  the  part  of  the  defendant  not  to  admit  the 
right  of  the  plaintiff,  any  cause  can  be  brought  before 
the  Pope,  if  he  chooses  to  meddle  with  it, — before  a 
judge,  that  is,  who  is  reponsible  to  God  alone.^ 

1  Innoc.  III.  in  c,  6,  Be  Majorit.  ct  Ohecl.,  D.  i.  33.     Gregory  vii.  had 
before  used  the  symbol  of  the  two  heavenly  luminaries,  Ep.  acl  Guil. 


2  C.  13  de  Judic.  D.  2.  1.     It  belongs  to  the  Pope  "  de  quocunque  peccato 
corripere  quemlibet  Christianum." 

3  The  chief  authority  is  Decret.  c.  13,  De  Judic.  ii.  i. 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  159 

All  roads  at  tliat  time  led  to  Eome.  Whichever  of 
the  Isidorio- Gregorian  maxims  one  started  from,  the 
result  was  the  same.  Either  it  was  said  the  right  of  the 
Church  is  alone  Divine,  and  therefore  takes  precedence 
of  all  other  rights,  but  in  the  Church  the  Pope  is  the 
fountain  and  possessor  of  all  rights,  and  thus  every  one 
is  absolutely  subject  to  him ;  or,  the  Pope  is  the  ruler  of 
souls,  but  the  body  is  the  mere  vassal  and  instrument 
of  the  soul, — therefore  the  Pope  is  also  supreme  over 
bodies,  with  power  of  life  and  death.  And  again,  who- 
ever disobeys  a  Papal  command  shows  thereby  that  he 
holds  wrong  notions  about  the  extent  of  Papal  power, 
and  the  irresistible  force  of  Papal  commands  and  pro 
hibitions,  and  thus  he  incurs  at  least  vehement  sus- 
picion of  heresy,  and  must  answer  for  his  orthodoxy 
before  the  Holy  Office. 

The  very  names  the  Popes  assumed  or  accepted  mark 
the  broad  division  between  the  earlier  and  new  Gre- 
gorian Papacy.  To  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  they 
had  called  themselves  Vicars  of  Peter,  but  since  Inno- 
cent III.  this  title  was  superseded  by  Vicar  of  Clnist.-^ 
In  fact  the  gulf  between  the  position  and  rights  of  a 
Gregory  i.  and  the  pretensions  and  plenary  power  of  a 

^  Beugnot,  iicri2>tor.  Rerum  Gallic,  x.  Prof.  47. 


1 60  Papal  Infallibility. 

Gregory  ix.,  or  between  600  and  1230,  is  as  wide  as 
from  Peter  to  Christ.  All  bishops  had  formerly  been 
styled  representatives  of  Christ,  but  when  the  Pope 
laid  claim  to  this  title,  it  meant — "  I  am  the  represen- 
tative on  earth  of  the  Almighty,  and  my  power  stands 
high  above  all  earthly  power  and  limitations,  in  me 
and  through  me  is  the  Church  free," — according  to  the 
mediseval  clerical  view  of  Church  freedom,  which  re- 
garded the  Church  as  free  only  if  omnipotent,  and  the 
Church  in  the  last  resort  as  simply  meaning  the  Pope. 

Gregory  ix.  went  stiU  further  in  his  assertion  of  an 
absolute  domination  over  the  State,  when  he  declared, 
on  the  strength  of  the  forged  Donation  of  Constantine, 
that  the  Pope  is  properly  lord  and  master  of  the  whole 
world,  things  as  wxU  as  persons,  so  that  his  predeces- 
sors had  only  in  some  sense  delegated  their  power  to 
emperors  and  kings,  but  had  relinquished  nothing  of 
the  substance  of  their  jurisdiction.-^  Innocent  iv. 
claimed,  as  self-evident,  the  same  direct  dominion  over 
•  the  world,  and  all  that  is  in  it,  only  that  he  proclaimed 
in  yet  stronger  terms  the  absolute  universal  supremacy 
of  the  Popes,  and  the  union  of  the  two  supreme  powers 

1  See  Hiiillard  BrehoUes,  Godex  dipl.  Frieder.  ii.  iv.  921.     "  Ut  in  uni- 
verso  mundo  rerum  obtineret  et  corporum  principatum. " 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  1 6 1 

in  one  hand.  He  tliouglit  it  false  to  say  that  Constan- 
tino had  given  secular  power  to  the  Papal  Chair,  for  this 
it  possessed  from  the  nature  of  the  case  and  directly  from 
Christ,  who  founded  a  kingdom,  and  gave  to  Peter  the 
keys  both  of  earthly  and  heavenly  sovereignty.  Secu- 
lar power  was  only  so  far  legitimate  as  secular  princes 
used  it  by  commission  from  the  Pope.  Constantine 
had  in  truth  only  given  back  to  the  Church  part  of 
what  was  hers  from  the  beginning,  and  what  he  had 
no  right  to  hold.  If  possible,  he  spoke  even  more  dis- 
paragingly than  Gregory  vii.  of  the  origin  of  secular 
princedoms  and  their  possessors.  Innocent  iv.  supple- 
mented the  hierarchical  organization  by  adding  a  link 
hitherto  wanting  to  the  papal  chain,  when  he  esta- 
blished the  principle  that  every  cleric  must  obey  the 
Pope,  even  if  he  commands  what  is  wrong,  for  no  one 
can  judge  him.  The  only  exception  was  if  the  com- 
mand involved  heresy  or  tended  to  the  destruction  of 
the  whole  Church.-^     Boniface  viii.  gave  a  dogmatic  and 

1  Comment,  in  Decretal.  Francof.  1570,  555.  Innocent  wrote  this  com- 
mentary as  Pope.  He  has  openly  told  us  what  amount  of  Christian  cul- 
ture and  knowledge,  both  for  clergy  and  laity,  suits  the  Papal  system. 
It  is  enough,  he  says,  for  the  laity  to  know  that  there  is  a  God  who  re- 
wards the  good,  and,  for  the  rest,  to  believe  implicitly  what  the  Cliurch 
believes.  Bishops  and  pastors  must  distinctly  know  the  articles  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed ;  the  other  clergy  need  not  know  more  than  the  laity,  and 
also  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  made  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar. — Com- 


1 6  2  Papal  Infallibility . 

biblical  foundation  to  the  doctrine  of  the  universality 
of  papal  dominion  in  bis  Bull,  Unam  Sandam,  where 
he  condemns  the  independence  of  the  civil  power  in  its 
own  sphere  as  Manicheism.  He  affirms  that  the  Pope 
is  judge  over  all  secular  matters  where  sin  is  involved, 
and  holds  the  two  swords,  one  to  be  used  by  himself, 
the  other  by  kings  and  warriors,  but  at  his  beck  and 
by  his  permission ;  that  he  judges  all,  but  is  judged  by 
none,  being  responsible  to  God  only ;  and  that  whoever 
denies  this  subjection  of  every  human  being  to  the 
Pope  cannot  be  saved.  His  violent  perversion  of  the 
clearest  texts  of  Scripture  in  support  of  these  claims 
was  matter  of  astonishment  and  mockery  even  at  the 
time.-^ 

After  the  removal  of  the  Papal  See  to  Avignon,  when 
the  Curia  had  become  French  both  in  its  ^personnel 
and  its  political  line,  the  juristic  dogmatism  of  the 
Popes  was  applied  principally  to  the  empire,  and  for 
centuries  the  steady  aim  of  their  policy  was  to  break 
the  imperial  power  in  Germany  and  Italy  and  dissolve 

ment.  in  Deer.  2.  Naturally,  therefore,  the  laity  were  forbidden  to  read 
the  Bible  in  their  own  tongue,  and,  if  they  conversed  publicly  or  privately 
on  matters  of  faith,  incurred  excommunication  by  a  Bull  of  Alexander  iv., 
and  after  a  year  became  amenable  to  the  Inquisition. — Sext.  Dec.  5,  2. 

1  See  the  writings  of  contemtDorarv  French  jurists  and  theologians  in 
Dupuy's  collection. 


Progress  of  the  Papal  Power.  163 

its  unity.    Clement  v.  declared  "by  apostolical  authority"  - 
that  every  emperor  must  take  an  actual  oath  of  obedi- 
ence to  the  Pope,  so  that  he  might  form  no  alliance  with 
any  sovereign  suspected  by  him.'^ 

The  Popes  even  insisted  to  the  Greek  emperors  and 
patriarchs  on  the  undoubted  truth  of  faith  that  all  ful- 
ness of  spiritual  and  secular  power,  at  least  in  Christen- 
dom, belonged  to  them.  Thus  Gregory  ix.  and  Gregory  x. 
"We  know  this,"  said  the  latter,  "from  reading  the  Gos- 
pel" Innocent  iii.  wrote  to  the  Patriarch  of  Constantin- 
ople that  "Christ  has  committed  the  whole  world  to  the 
government  of  the  Popes."  And  he  gives,  as  conclusive 
evidence  of  this,  that  Peter  once  walked  on  the  sea, 
— the  sea  signifying  the  nations, — whence  it  is  clear 
that  his  successors  are  entitled  to  rule  the  nations.^ 

One  of  the  most  far-reaching  principles  gradually 
developed  from  the  Gregorian  system  was,  that  every 
baptized  man  becomes  thereby  a  subject  of  the  Pope, 
and  must  remain  such  all  his  life,  whether  he  will  or 
no.  Every  Christian,  even  though  baptized  outside 
the  papal  communion,  is  not  only  therefore  subject  to 
all  papal  laws  (though  invincible  ignorance  may  be  a 

1  Clementin.  de  Jirrcj.     Tit.  9,  p.  1058  (ed.  Bohmer). 

2  Innoc.  III.  lib.  ii.  209,  ac?  Patr.  Constantin.     ''Dominus  Petro  non 
solum  xmiversam  Ecclesiam,  sed  totum  reliquit  saeculum  gubernandum." 


164  Papal  Infallibility. 

conceivable  excuse  in  particular  cases),  but  the  Pope 
can  call  him  to  account  and  punish  him  for  every  grave 
sin,  and  this  may  extend  to  the  penalty  of  death.  For, 
in  the  first  place,  all  disobedience  to  a  papal  command 
is  either  heresy  or  proximate  heresy ;  and,  moreover,  the 
Pope  can  excommunicate  him  for  his  offences,  and  if  he 
does  not  submit  and  receive  absolution  within  a  year, 
he  is  declared  a  heretic,  and  incurs  death  and  con- 
fiscation of  his  goods. 


§  IX. — Pajpal  Encroachments  on  Episcopal  RigMs. 

In  order  completely  to  subvert  the  old  constitution 
of  the  Church  and  the  regular  administration  of  dioceses 
by  bishops,  the  institution  of  Legates  was  brought  in 
.  from  Hildebrand's  time.  Sometimes  with  a  general  com- 
mission to  visit  Churches,  sometimes  for  a  special 
emergency,  but  always  invested  with  unlimited  powers, 
and  determined  to  bring  back  considerable  sums  of 
money  over  the  Alps,  the  legates  traversed  different 
countries  surrounded  by  a  troop  of  greedy  Italians,  and 
armed  against  opposition  by  ban  and  interdict,  and  held 
forced  synods,  the  decrees  of  which  they  themselves 
dictated.      Contemporaries    in    their   alarm   compared 


Encroachments  071  Bishops ;  Dispensations.    165 

the  appearance  of  these  legates  to  physical  calamities, 
hailstrokes  or  pestilence.^  Complaints  and  appeals 
to  Eome  availed  nothing,  for  it  was  a  fixed  principle 
with  the  Popes  to  uphold  the  authority  of  their 
legate. 

The  Pope  in  the  new  system  is  not  only  the  chief,  . 
but  is  in  fact  the  sole  legislator  of  the  Church.  He,  " 
as  Boniface  viii.  expressed  it,  carries  all  rights  in  the 
shrine  of  his  breast,  and  draws  out  thence  from  time 
to  time  what  he  thinks  the  needs  of  the  world  and 
Church  require.  And  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  a 
single  Pope  of  the  thirteenth  or  fourteenth  century, 
an  Innocent  IIL,  Gregory  IX.,  or  John  xxii.,  has  made 
more  laws  than  fifty  Popes  of  an  earlier  period  put 
together.  The  notions  about  the  plenary  powers  of 
the  Caesars  prevalent  in  the  latter  days  of  the  Eoman 
empire  had  their  influence  here,  and  the  Popes  called 
their  acts  by  the  same  name  as  the  Cesarean  laws, 
Eescripts  and  Decrees.  And  as  the  Pope  makes  laws 
by  his  supreme  authority,  so  too  he  can  wholly  or 
temporarily  suspend  them  ;  thus  he,  and  he  alone,  can 
dispense  with  Church  laws,  whether  canons  of  Councils 

1  Cf.  e.^r.,  Johann.  Sarisb.  0pp.  (ed.  Giles),  iii.  331.  Polycrat.  5,  16: 
*'  Ita  debaccliaiitur  ac  si  ad  Ecclesiam  fiagellandaiii  egressus  sit  Satan  a  facie 
Domini." — Petri  Blesensis  epist.  ap.  Baron,  a.  1193,  2  fl". 


1 66  Papal  Infallibility. 

or  decrees  of  Popes.  The  customary  limitation — that 
he  cannot  dispense  with  the  law  of  God — was  frequently- 
superseded  by  the  canonists,  especially  since  Innocent 
ni,  by  his  declaration  about  marriage,  and  the  yet  holier 
bond  between  a  bishop  and  his  diocese,  which  the  Pope 
can  dissolve  at  his  good  pleasure,  prepared  the  way  for 
the  belief  that  it  is  not  beyond  papal  power  to  dispense 
with  some  at  least  of  the  laws  of  God. 

Whenever  the  Pope  issued  a  new  law  the  Curia 
reckoned  what  the  necessary  dispensations  would  bring 
in,  and  many  laws  were  unmistakably  framed  with  a 
view  to  the  purchase  of  dispensations.  So  too  with 
exemptions  from  episcopal  jurisdiction;  every  exempted 
corporation  or  monastery  had  to  pay  a  yearly  tribute  to 
the  See  of  Eome,  whose  interest  it  was  to  thwart  and 
restrain  episcopal  authority  whenever  it  tried  to  act. 
And  thus  a  bishop  who  took  in  hand  the  administration 
of  his  diocese  in  good  earnest  found  himself  cramped  at 
every  step,  surrounded,  as  it  w^ere,  in  his  own  country 
by  hostile  fortresses  closed  against  him,  and  in  perpetual 
danger  of  incurring  suspension  or  excommunication,  or 
being  cited  to  Eome  for  violating  some  papal  privilege  ; 
for  every  college  and  convent  watched  jealously  over  its 
own  privileges  and  exemptions,  and  regarded  the  bishops 


Encroachments  on  Bishops ;  the  Pallium.     167 

as  its  natural  enemies.  And  as  bishops  and  corpora-  ■ 
tions  were  in  mutual  hostility,  so  the  parochial  clergy 
found  opponents  and  dangerous  rivals  in  the  richly 
privileged  Mendicant  Orders,  who  were  indefatigable  in 
their  attempts  to  appropriate  the  lucrative  functions  of 
the  priesthood,  and  to  decoy  the  people  from  the  parish 
churches  into  their  own.  The  members  of  the  Curia, 
as  John  of  Salisbury  remarks,  had  one  common  view  : 
whoever  did  not  agree  to  their  doctrines  was  either  a 
heretic  or  a  schismatic.-^  The  Curia  wanted  to  be  in- 
fallible even  before  the  Popes  made  that  claim.  They 
thought  this  shield  indispensable  for  carrying  on  their 
business. 

The  Popes  made  their  first  experience  with  the  Pal- 
lium of  the  irresistible  charm,  which  signs  of  honour, 
decorations,  titles,  distinctions  in  the  colour  and  cut 
of  a  garment,  have  for  ordinary  men,  and  especially 
clerics,  and  thus  learnt  what  effective  instruments  of 
power  they  might  become.  Prom  the  fifth  century  the 
Popes  had  bestowed  the  pall  on  archbishops  named 
as  vicars  of  their  patriarchal  rights,  and  in  the  eighth 
it  began  also  to  be  given  to  metropolitans,  although 

1  Polycrat.  6,  24.  0pp.  (ed.  Giles),  iv.  61.  "  Qui  a  doctrina  vestra  dis- 
seutit,  aut  haereticus  aut  schismaticus  est." 


1 68  Papal  In  fallibility, 

these  last  hesitated  to  receive  it  on  the  conditions 
offered  by  Eome,  as  was  proved  by  the  attitude  of  the 
Frankish  archbishops  towards  the  thoroughly  Eoman- 
izing  Boniface.-'-  On  the  strength  of  the  pseudo-Isi- 
dorian  fabrications,  which  exercised  a  most  destructive 
influence  on  metropolitan  rights,  the  Popes  who  became 
founders  of  the  new  system — Nicolas  I.,  John  viii., 
Gregory  vii. — insisted  that  a  metropolitan  could  per- 
form no  ecclesiastical  function  before  receiving  this 
ornament.  The  next  step  was  to  ascribe  a  secret  and 
mystical  power  to  it,  and  when  Paschal  ii.,  and  all  the 
Popes  after  him,  and  the  Decretals  maintained  that  the 
fulness  of  high  priestly  office  was  attached  to  it,  it 
inevitably  followed  that  this  of&ce  is  an  outflow  of  the 
papal  plenary  power,  so  far  as  it  extends.  Meanwhile 
this  notion  of  metropolitan  jurisdiction  being  delegated 
from  the  Pope  was  developed  in  contradiction  to  facts ; 
for  the  Popes  had  appropriated  to  themselves  the 
weightiest  and  most  valuable  rights  of  metropolitans, 
and  did  this  still  more  after  the  beginning  of  the  thir- 
teenth century ;  and  next  they  began  to  give  the  pall  to 
some  bishops  avowedly  as  a  mere  ornament,  and  without 
any  single  right  being  attached  to  it.     But  as  a  means 

1  Bonif.  E^ist.  (ed.  Serarius) ;  Ep.  141,  142,  pp.  211,  212. 


Eitcroachmeitis  ;  Ptcnihido  Potestatis.      169 

for  reducing  metropolitans  to  complete  dependence  on 
Eome,  sealed  moreover  by  an  oath  of  obedience,  it  quite 
answered  its  end.  Gregory  vii.  altered  the  previous  form 
into  a  regular  oath  of  vassalage,  so  that  the  relation  was 
one  of  personal  loyalty,  and  the  terms  of  the  oath  were 
borrowed  from  oaths  of  civil  fealty.-^ 

The  next  thing  was  to  mould  the  bishops  by  a  vow  > 
of  obedience  into  pliant  tools  of  the  Eoman  sovereignty,  ■ 
and  guard  against  any  danger  of  opposition  on  their 
part  to  the  expanding  schemes  and  claims  of  the  Curia. 
For  a  long  time  bishops  were  much  better  off  than 
metropolitans,  for  in  the  thirteenth  century  they  still 
received  their  confirmation — which  in  the  ancient 
Church  was  not  separated  from  ordination — from  the 
metropolitan,  wdiile  the  latter  had  to  buy  the  pall  and 
the  accompanying  license  to  exercise  this  office  at  a 
high  price  from  Eome.^ 

Innocent  III.  grounded  on  a  misrepresentation  of  a 
passage  of  Leo  i.'s  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Thessalonica, 
whom  he  had  made  his  vicar,  saying,  that  he  had  com- 
mitted to  him  part  of  his  responsibility,  and  on  one 

1  The  "  Regulse  Patrura,"  which  the  metropolitan  previously  swore  to 
observe,  was  changed  into  "  Regalia  S.  Petri." 

2  In  the  fifteenth  century,  German  archbishops  liad  to  pay  20,000  florins 
[£1600],  equivalent  to  ten  times  that  sum  now,  for  the  pallium. 


1 70  Papal  Infallibility. 

of  the  Isidorian  fabrications,  the  principle  that  the 
Pope  alone  has  plenary  jurisdiction  in  the  Church, 
while  all  bishops  are  merely  his  assistants  for  such 
portions  of  his  duty  as  he  pleases  to  intrust  to  them. 
This  may  be  said  to  be  the  completion  of  the  papal 
system.  It  reduces  all  bishops  to  mere  helpers,  to 
whom  the  Pope  assigns  such  share  of  his  rights  as 
he  finds  good,  whence  he  can  also  assume  to  himself 
at  his  arbitrary  will  such  of  their  ancient  rights  as  he 
pleases.-^ 

And  now  the  term  "  Universal  Bishop,"  used  by  the 
Pope,  gained  its  true  significance.  Though  rejected  even 
by  Leo.  ix.,  it  described  quite  correctly  the  Pope's  posi- 
tion as  understood  at  Piome  since  the  beginning  of  the 
thirteenth  century.  In  the  ancient  sense  of  the  word 
there  were  no  more  any  bishops,  but  only  delegates  and 
vicars  of  the  Pope. 

A  number  of  rights  never  thought  of  by  the  ancient 
Popes  followed  as  a  matter  of  course.  There  was  no 
need  of  particular  laws  or  papal  reservations  in  many 
cases ;  it  was  enough  to  draw  the  necessary  consequences 
from  the  Isidorian  or  Gregorian  fabrications  and  inter- 
polations.    It  seemed  self-evident  that  the  Pope  alone 

1  Innoc  in.  Ejp.  i.  350 ;  Decret.  Greg.  3.  8. 


Enc7'oachinents ;  Plenittcdo  Potestatis.      1 7 1 

could  appoint  and  depose  bishops,  could  interfere  always 
and  directly  in  their  dioceses  by  the  exercise  of  a  con- 
current jurisdiction,  and  bring  any  cases  before  his 
own  Court.  Innocent  IIL,  as  we  have  seen,  claimed  a 
special  Divine  revelation  for  the  Pope's  right  of  depos- 
ing bishops.  It  has  been  charged  against  him  as  a 
wicked  error  and  capricious  invention;  but  we  must 
remember  that,  when  he  had  persuaded  himself  and 
others  that  every  Pope  possesses  the  fulness  of  juris- 
diction, and  is  absolute  ruler  of  the  whole  Church,  not 
by  concession  of  the  Church,  but  by  Divine  appoint- 
ment, he  might  fairly  assume  a  Divine  right  to  dispose 
of  his  bishops  as  an  absolute  monarch  disposes  of  his 
officials.  And,  in  fact,  some  bishops  soon  began  to 
subscribe  themselves  as  such  "by  the  favour  of  the 
Papal  See." 

Whatever  relics  of  freedom  had  hitherto  been  preserved 
from  the  ancient  Church  were  now  trampled  and  rooted 
out.  No  one  had  doubted  before  that  a  bishop  could  re- 
sign his  office  when  he  felt  unequal  to  its  duties.  This 
was  usually  done  at  Provincial  Synods.  But  from  the 
time  of  Gratian  and  Innocent  III.,  the  new  principle,  that 
only  the  Pope  can  dissolve  the  bond  between  a  bishop 
and  his  Church,  was  extended  to  the  case  of  resignation 


172  Papal  Infallibility. 

also.-^  And  then  came  the  further  requirement,  made 
into  a  rule  by  John  xxii,,  that  sees  vacated  by  resigna- 
tion lapsed  to  the  Pope. 

Again,  the  appeals  encouraged  in  every  way  by  the 
Popes,  and  the  ready  grants  of  dispensations,  paved  the 
way  for  their  acquiring  one  of  the  most  important  rights, 
in  the  appointment  of  bishops.  As  the  pseudo-Isidore 
had  given  an  unprecedented  extension  and  impetus 
to  appeals  to  Eome,  the  new  Decretal  legislation  since 
Alexander  iii.  was  specially  adapted  for  multiplying 
and  encouraging  appeals  to  the  Curia.  Alexander 
linew  well  what  he  was  about  when  he  declared  appeals, 
which  hung  like  a  Damocles'  sword  over  the  head  of 
every  bishop,  to  be  the  most  important  of  his  rights. 
Some  thirteen  new  articles  in  the  Decretals  ^  provided 
for  the  Curia  being  occupied  annually  with  thousands 
of  processes,  which  often  extended  over  many  years, 
bringing  in  a  rich  harvest  to  the  officials,  and  filling  the 
streets  and  also  the  churchyards  of  Piome.  And  a  further 
point  was  secured  by  this,  for  the  bishops  and  arch- 
deacons, impeded  and  disabled  by  the  endless  number 
of  Papal  exemptions  and  privileges,  lost  all  desire  to 

1  D.  de  Translat.  c.  2  (1,  7). 

2  They  are  quoted  in  Die  Geschichte  der  Ajppel.  von  Geistl.  Gerichtsliof. 
Frankfort,  1788,  p.  127  sciq. 


Encroachments  on  Bishops  ;  Appeals.      173 

take  Chiircli  discipline  in  hand,  and  thereby  involve 
themselves  in  tedious  and  costly  processes  at  Eome. 
And  thus  the  anarchy  in  dioceses  and  wild  demoraliza-  . 
tion  of  the  clergy  reached  a  point  one  cannot  read  of 
without  horror  in  contemporary  writers.  When  appeals 
came  to  Eome  on  disputed  presentations  to  benefices  or 
episcopal  elections,  the  Popes  often  took  occasion  to 
oust  both  the  rival  claimants,  and  appoint  a  third  per- 
son. Abbot  Conrad  of  Lichtenau  says, — "  There  is  no 
bishopric  or  spiritual  dignity  or  parish  that  is  not 
made  the  subject  of  a  process  at  Eome,  and  woe  to  him 
who  comes  empty-handed  !  Eejoice,  mother  Eome,  at 
the  crimes  of  thy  sons,  for  they  are  thy  gain ;  to  thee 
flows  all  the  gold  and  silver ;  thou  art  become  mistress 
of  the  world  through  the  badness,  not  the  piety,  of 
mankind."-^ 

Xo  people  suffered  more  from  these  appeals  and 
processes  than  the  Germans.  After  the  Concordat  of 
Worms  (1122),  the  Popes  had  gradually  managed  to 
exclude  the  German  emperors  from  all  share  in  episcopal 
appointments,  and  practically  to  nullify  the  Concordat. 
And  then,  partly  from  the  circumstances  of  the  German 
dioceses,  partly  from  the  new  Papal  enactments,  most 

1  Chron.  p.  £21. 


1 74  Papal  Infallibility. 

elections  came  to  be  disputed,  and  a  handle  was  given  to 
one  party  or  the  other  for  an  appeal  to  Eome,  which  was 
taken  full  advantage  of.  The  candidates  or  their  proc- 
tors had  to  waste  years  in  Eome,  and  either  died  there 
or  carried  home  with  them  nothing  but  debts,  disease, 
and  a  vivid  impression  of  the  dominant  corruption  there. 
The  Popes  could  now  dispose  as  they  liked  of  the  German 
archbishops  and  their  votes  for  the  empire ;  for  besides 
the  pallium,  the  heavy  tax,  and  the  oath  of  obedience, 
they  had  the  Eoman  debts  and  censures  to  fear,  in  case 
of  insolvency,  and  this  constrained  them  to  follow  the 
Pope's  guidance  even  in  secular  matters,  supposing  the 
oath  they  had  sworn  was  not  sufficient  to  make  them 
into  mere  machines  of  the  will  of  the  Curia.  These  facts 
alone  explain  the  elections  of  Henry  Ptaspo  in  1246, 
William  of  Holland  in  1247,  Eichard  and  Alphonsus  in 
1257,  and  the  miserable  interregnum  from  1256  to  1273. 
Only  in  this  way  could  the  ruin  of  the  Hohenstaufen 
House  have  been  accomplished,  and  Germany  have 
been  kept  in  the  state  of  weakness  and  division  required 
for  the  French  and  Angiovine  interest,  and  the  policy 
of  the  French  Popes,  Urban  iv.,  Clement  iv.,  and 
Martin  iv. 

During  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  the 


Encroachments  on  Bishops ;  Pati^onage.     175 

Popes  made  gigantic  strides  in  the  acquisition  of  new 
rights  and  the  suppression  of  other  peoples'.  Innocent 
III.  had  recognised  the  right  of  archbishops  to  confirm 
and  ordain  their  suffragans/  but  Nicolas  iii.  (1280)  re- 
served their  confirmation  to  the  Pope.  In  the  ancient 
Church  it  was  held  uncanonical  for  a  Pope  or  Patriarch 
to  make  appointments  or  bestow  benefices  out  of  his 
own  district.  The  Popes  began  their  meddling  in  the 
matter  only  by  begging  recommendations  of  favourites  of 
their  own,  and  without  specifying  any  particular  benefice. 
So  was  it  still  in  the  twelfth  century.  But  soon  these 
recommendations  took  the  form  of  mandates.  Italians, 
nephews  and  favourites  of  the  Popes,  persons  who  had 
aided  them  in  the  controversies  of  the  day,  or  suffered 
in  their  interest,  were  to  be  provided  for,  enriched,  and 
indemnified  in  foreign  countries.  PJghts  of  patronage 
were  not  respected  if  they  stood  in  the  way ;  the  Papal 
lawyer  knew  how  to  manage  that,  often  through  means 
of  Papal  executors  appointed  for  the  purpose.  This 
caused  loud  discontent  in  national  Churches ;  protests 
were  made  even  at  the  Synod  of  Lyons  in  1245.  Mean- 
while the  Popes  had  another  gate  open  for  attaining 
rights  of  patronage.     A  great  number  of  bishops  and 

1  D.  Be  Elect,  c.  11,  20,  28  (1,  6). 


I  '](i  Papal  hifallibility. 

prelates  were  drawn  to  Eome  and  detained  there  by 
processes  spun  out  interminably.  They  died  off  by 
shoals  in  that  unhealthy  city,  the  home  of  fevers,  as 
Peter  Damiani  calls  it,  and  now  suddenly  a  new  Papal 
right  was  devised,  of  giving  away  all  benefices  vacated 
by  tlie  death  or  resignation  of  their  occupants  at  Ptome. 
Clement  iv.  announced  it  to  the  world  in  1266,  while  at 
the  same  time  broadly  affirming  the  right  of  the  Pope 
to  give  away  all  Church  offices  without  distinction.-* 

Then  came  the  reservations  of  the  French  Popes  at 
Avignon.  They  reserved  to  themselves  a  certain  num- 
ber of  bishoprics,  which,  however,  in  Prance  they  often 
had  to  bestow  according  to  the  pleasure  of  the  king.  At 
the  same  time  commendams  were  introduced,  whereby 
they  sometimes  gave  abbacies  to  secular  priests,  and 
other  Church  dignities  to  laymen. 

The  oath  of  obedience  or  vassalage  the  bishops  had 
now  to  take  to  the  Pope  was  understood  as  binding 
them  to  unconditional  subjection  in  political  as  well 
as  ecclesiastical  matters,  whence  Innocent  iii.  de- 
clared the  German  bishops  perjured  who  acknowledged 
any  other  emperor  than  Otho  whom  he  had  chosen.^ 
It  was  by  means  of  this  oath  that  the  Popes  carried  the 

1  ^ext.  Deer.  3,  4.  2.  2  Registr.  de  Necj.  Imix  Ep.  68. 


Encroachments  on  Bishops.  177 

exclusion  of  the  Hohenstaufen  from  the  throne.^  Accord- 
ing to  Pius  II.,  a  bishop  "broke  his  oath  who  uttered  any 
truth  inconvenient  for  the  Pope,  and  he  rec[uired  the 
Archbishop  of  ^layence  by  virtue  of  it  to  convoke  no 
imperial  parliament  without  the  Pope's  consent.^ 

Thus  the  Eoman  Court  became  the  universal  heir  of 
all  former  authorities  and  institutions  in  the  Church. 
It  had  appropriated  the  rights  of  metropolitans,  synods, 
bishops,  national  Churches,  and  besides  that,  the  powers 
formerly  exercised  by  the  emperors  and  Prankish  kings, 
in  ecclesiastical  matters.  The  inevitable  consequence 
was  to  cripple  the  pastoral,  whether  parochial  or  diocesan 
administration  throughout  the  Church,  and  introduce  a 
general  state  of  religious  disease  and  decay,  bishops  and 
parish  priests  withdrawing  more  and  more  from  their 
pastoral  charges.  This  gave  an  immense  lift  to  monas- 
ticism,  with  its  strongly  organized  centralization,  and 
the  great  religious  communities  became  the  centres  of 
all  active  Church  life.  The  exemptions  and  other  privi- 
leges, only  to  be  obtained  at  Pome,  bound  them  closely 
to  the  Papacy,  whose  great  support  they  were  well 
known  to  be  against  the  bishops.  Leo  x.  assembled 
a  commission,  composed  of  members  of  the  Eeligious 

1  Kaynald.  AnnoX.  a.  120G,  13  ;  Leibnit.  Prodr.  Cod.  Jur.  Gent.  i.  11,  12. 

2  Gobellin,  Comm.  Pii  IL,  05,  143. 

M 


178  Papal  Infallibility, 

Orders  in  Eome,  to  consult  on  the  means  for  forwarding 
papal  interests  and  their  own  against  their  common 
enemies,  the  bishops/  "  For,"  says  Pallavicini,  "  every 
monarchical  Government  must  have  a  select  body  of 
subalterns  in  every  province  of  the  kingdom  not  subject 
to  the  immediate  local  authorities;  hence  exemptions."^ 
Tlie  monks  were  the  willing  and  devoted  servants  and 
agents  of  the  Eoman  Court  against  the  bishops,^  who 
were  looked  upon  and  treated  as  its  born  enemies. 

At  no  time  or  place  has  the  contradiction  been  so 
glaring  between  theory  and  practice,  principles  and 
proceedings,  as  during  those  centuries  at  Eome  and 
Avignon.  The  Popes  condemned  all  taking  of  interest, 
but  the  most  elaborate  banking  business  was  carried  on 
under  their  very  eyes,  and  in  close  connexion  with  the 
Curia,  who  would  have  lost  the  breath  of  life,  if  the 
Florentine  and  Siennese  capitalists  and  brokers  had  not 
advanced  the  required  sums  at  usurious  interest  to  the 
prelates,  place-hunters,  and  numberless  litigants.  The 
papal  bankers  were  a  protected  and  privileged  class, 
while  everywhere  else  their  fellows  were  under  the  ban, 

^  Bzovius,  Annal.  Eccl.  xix.  a.  1516. 

2  Storia  del  Condi,  di  Trento,  12,  13.  8, 

3  Bossuet  says,  "  La  conr  de  Eome  regardant  les  eveqiies  comme  ses 
ennemis,  n'a  plus  mis  sa  confiance  et  ses  esperances  que  daus  cette  multi- 
tude d' exempts." — CEuvres,  xxi.  461,     Ed.  de  Liege,  1768. 


Encroachments  on  Bishops.  lyg 

and  collected  their  debts  and  interest  without  mercy 
under  shelter  of  Papal  censures.-^  As  early  as  the 
twelfth  century  the  Curia  had  made  the  discovery, 
which  they  were  already  reaping  the  fruits  of  in  the  thir- 
teenth, that  it  was  greatly  for  their  interest  to  have  a 
number  of  bishops,  dioceses,  and  beneficiaries  in  their 
debt  all  over  Europe,  who  were  all  the  more  pliant  the 
more  easily  they  could  be  held  to  payment  by  excom- 
munication, and  by  putting  on  the  screw  of  interest,  at 
a  time  when  ready  money  could  generally  be  procured 
with  difficulty  only,  and  at  an  enormous  interest.  Thus 
Cardinal  Nicolas  Tudeschi,  the  first  canonist  of  his  day, 
observes  that  the  Church  dignities  were  so  loaded  with 
excessive  imposts  and  extortions  that  they  were  always 
subject  to  debts,  and  nothing  of  their  revenues  was  avail- 
able for  religious  purposes."  Cardinal  Zabarella  saw 
clearly  enough  that  the  root  of  the  ecclesiastical  cor- 
ruption was  the  doctrine  of  legal  sycophants  about  the 
papal  omnipotence,  whereby  they  had  persuaded  the 
Popes  that  they  could  do  whatever  they  liked.     "  So 

1  Cf.  Bihlioth.  de  VEcole  de  Chartres,  19e  annee  (Paris  1S5S),  p.  118,  and 
Peter  Dubois'  account,  about  1306  ("De  Recup.  Terras  Sanctai,"  Bongars, 
Gesta  Dei  per  Francos,  ii.  315),  of  how  one  had  to  borrow  many  thou- 
sands "  sub  gravibus  usuris  ab  illis  qui  publice  Papce  mercatores  vocantur  " 
to  spend  on  the  Pope  and  Cardinals, 

^  Tract  de  Concil.  Basil,  in  Prafjmatica  Sanctio  (ed.  Paris,  16'3G),  p.  913. 


I  So  Papal  Infallibility. 

completely  has  the  Pope  destroyed  all  rights  of  all  lesser 
Churches  that  their  bishops  are  as  good  as  non-exist- 
ent."-^ Chancellor  Gerson  says,  still  more  emphatically, 
"  In  consequence  of  clerical  avarice,  simony,  and  the 
greed  and  lust  of  power  of  the  Popes,  the  authority  of 
bishops  and  inferior  Church  officers  is  completely  done 
away  with,  so  that  they  look  like  mere  pictures  in  the 
Church,  and  are  almost  superfluous."^  The  Bishop  of 
Lisieux  observes  later  how  the  whole  constitution  of  the 
Church  is  in  a  state  of  dissolution,  and  everything  has 
long  been  full  of  quarrels  and  divisions  through  the 
conduct  of  the  Popes.^  And  the  Church,  torn  to  pieces 
with  discontents  and  dissensions,  made  the  impression 
on  thinking  men  like  Gerson,  Pelayo,  d'Ailly,  Zabarella, 
and  others,  of  having  become  "  brutal,"  a  hard  prison- 
house,  where  only  dungeon-air  could  be  breathed,  and 
therefore  full  of  hypocrisy  and  pretence.  The  Vene- 
tian Sanuto,  in  1327,  reckoned  that  half  the  Christian 
world  was  under  excommunication,  including  the  most 
devoted  servants  of  the  Popes,  so  lavish  had  they 
been  in  the  use  of  ban  and  interdict  since  1071/    Epis- 

1  De  Schismatihus  (ed.  Schardius),  pp.  560,  5G1. 

2  0pp.  (ed.  Dupin),  ii.  p.  1,  174. 

3  lu  a  letter  to  Louis  xi.     See  Durand  de  Maillane,  Liberies  de  VEglise 
Gallicane,  iii.  6,  61,  sqq. 

*  Epist.  ap.  Bongars.  Gesta  Dei  per  Francos,  ii.  310. 


Encroachincnts  on  Bishops.  1 8 1 

copal  officials,  archdeacons,  and  all  who  could  then  ex- 
communicate, followed  the  papal  example  in  this  respect. 
They  considered  the  Eoman  Church  their  model,  and 
inferred  that  they  should  not  be  niggardly  in  the  use 
of  such  weapons.  And  if,  as  often  happened,  bishops 
themselves  were  suspended  or  excommunicated,  simply 
for  being  unwilling  or  unable  to  pay  the  legates  their 
journey  money,  why  should  laymen  fare  better  ?  Thus 
it  came  to  pass,  as  Dubois  said  in  1300,  that  at  every 
sitting  of  the  episcopal  officials  in  France  more  than 
10,000  souls  were  thrust  out  of  the  way  of  salvation 
into  the  hands  of  Satan ;  ^  and  in  every  parish,  thirty, 
forty,  or  even  seventy  persons  were  excommunicated  on 
the  slenderest  pretexts.  Absolution  from  censures  could 
indeed  be  purchased,  but  an  exorbitant  price  wa?^  often 
demanded.^ 

§  X. — The  Personal  A  ttitudc  of  the  Po'pes. 

The  means  used  by  the  Popes  to  secure  obedience, 
and  break  the  force  of  opposition  among  people,  princes, 
or  clergy,  were  always  violent.  Tlie  interdict  which 
suddenly  robbed  millions,  the  whole  population  of  a 

1  Memoires  de  VAcacl.  des  Inscript.  (1855),  xviii.  458. 

2  See  the  episcopal  memorial  drawn  wn  for  the  General  Council  of  1311, 
Bzovius,  Annul.  Ecd.  ann.  1311,  p.  1C3  (ed.  Colon.) 


1 8  2  Papal  Infallibility. 

country, — often  for  trifling  causes  wliicli  tliey  had  no- 
thing to  do  with  themselves, — of  Divine  worship  and 
sacraments,  was  no  longer  sufficient.  The  Popes  de- 
clared families,  cities,  and  states  outlawed,  and  gave 
them  up  to  plunder  and  slavery,  as,  for  instance,  Cle- 
ment V.  did  with  Venice,  or  excommunicated  them,  like 
Gregory  xi.,  to  the  seventh  generation,  or  they  had  whole 
cities  destroyed  from  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  the  in- 
habitants transported, — the  fate  Boniface  viii.  deter- 
mined on  for  Palestrina. 

It  is  a  psychological  marvel  how  this  unnatural  theory 
of  a  priestly  domination,  embracing  the  whole  world, 
controlling  and  subjugating  the  whole  of  life,  could 
ever  have  become  established.  It  would  have  required 
superhuman  capacities  and  Divine  attributes  to  wield 
such  a  power  even  in  the  most  imperfect  way  wdth 
some  regard  to  equity  and  justice,  and  conscientious 
and  really  religious  men  would  have  been  tormented, 
nay,  utterly  crushed,  under  the  sense  of  its  rightfulness 
and  the  corresponding  obligations  it  involved.  There 
was  indeed  no  want  of  modest  phraseology ;  every  Pope 
asserts  in  the  customary  language  that  his  merit  and 


1  Verci,  Sioria  delta  Marca  Trivirj.  iii.  87. 
'  Ojpere  di  S.  Cat.  de  Siena,  ii.  160. 


Personal  A  ttitiLcle  of  Popes.  183 

capacities  are  unequal  to  the  dignity  and  burden,  but  for 
all  that,  tlieir  constant  endeavour  for  centuries  to  increase 
their  already  excessive  power  is  a  proof  that  no  need 
for  restricting  themselves  was  usually  realized.  There 
have  been  kings  who  said  they  would  not  be  absolute 
rulers  if  they  could.  So  the  Popes  of  the  first  centuries 
could  say,  We  desire  not  to  rule  over  canons  and  coun- 
cils, but  to  be  ruled  by  them.  But  since  Nicolas  i,  and 
especially  since  Gregory  VIL,  the  principle  was  avowed 
that  the  Pope  is  lord  of  canons  and  councils  ;  the  law 
is  not  his  will,  but  his  will  is  law.  In  numberless 
cases,  of  course,  his  will  was  simply  the  custom  and 
practical  tradition  of  the  Curia,  and  the  Pope,  the 
mightiest  ruler  in  the  world,  was  in  one  sense  the  most 
limited  since  the  eleventh  century,  for  he  could  only  act 
as  the  temporary  depositary  of  this  capital  of  power,  a 
steward  who  ought  to  increase,  but  must  never  suffer  it 
to  be  diminished.  The  strongest  will  must  succumb 
before  the  quiet,  passive,  but  energetic  resistance  of  a 
corporation  bound  together  by  common  interests,  work- 
ing by  a  common  rule,  and  striving  for  a  common  end  ; 
how  much  more  the  good  intentions  of  individual  Popes, 
generally  of  great  age  when  elected,  who  saw  but  a  few 
years  of  work  before  them,  and  knew  by  long  experience 


1 84  Papal  Iiifallibility. 

the  firmness  of  that  serried  phalanx  of  officials  surround- 
ing them,  whose  opposition  soon  reduced  them  to  a  mere 
trunk  without  arms  or  feet.  And  thus  it  came  to  pass 
that,  w^hile  those  at  a  distance  felt  and  said  that  the 
proverbial  shortness  of  Popes'  lives  was  a  providential 
dispensation  to  save  the  Church  from  utter  ruin,-^  the 
Popes  admitted  that  they  felt  themselves  the  most  un- 
fortunate of  men.  Thus  Adrian  iy.  was  driven  to  the 
melancholy  avowal  that  no  condition  is  so  pitiable  as  a 
Pope's,  whose  throne  is  planted  thick  with  thorns,  and 
his  destiny  only  bitterness,  with  a  heavy  weight  pressing 
on  his  shoulders. 

It  was  this  consciousness  of  supreme  power  in  theory, 
and  of  lamentable  slavery  and  dependence  on  a  purely 
selfish  Court  in  practice,  combined  with  a  feeling  of  the 
curse  that  must  rest  on  such  an  administrative  machine, 
composed  of  clerical  parasites  and  vampires,  which  ex- 
torted the  complaint  uttered  by  Mcolas  v.  before  two 
Carthusian  monks,  that  no  man  in  the  world  was  more 
wretched  and  unhappy  than  he  was,  that  nobody  who 
came  near  him  told  him  the  truth,  and  that  his  Italians 
were  insatiable,^  etc.    Still  later,  Marcellus  ii.  exclaimed, 


1  Job.  Sarisb.  Polyc.  6.  24  ;  Opx>.  iv.  60  (ed.  Giles). 

2  Vespas,  Vita  Nicol.  v,  in  Muratori,  Scrijjt.  Rer.  Ital.  xxv.  286. 


Personal  A  tlititde  of  Popes.  185 

luidor  a  similar  feeling  of  anguish,  that  he  did  not  see 
how  a  Pope  could  be  saved/ 

One  may  say  without  exaggeration,  that  the  indivi- 
dual Popes  did  not  know  the  whole  extent  of  their 
power,  it  was  so  immense.  IMore  than  a  century's 
legislation,  steadily  directed  to  the  one  end  of  self- 
aggrandizement,  from  the  Bictatus  of  Gregory  to  the 
latest  articles  of  the  Extravagantes,  had  so  well  pro- 
vided for  every  contingency,  that  a  Pope  could  never 
be  at  a  loss  for  some  legitimate  plea  for  interference, 
however  purely  secular  the  point  at  issue  might  be. 
By  the  formula,  "  non  obstante,"  etc.,  the  Pope's  right 
was  secured  of  suspending  for  that  particular  case  any 
papal  law  which  chanced  to  conflict  with  the  interests 
of  the  Curia.  The  wdiole  legislation  of  the  ancient 
Church  was  gradually  abrogated,  or  sometimes  changed 
into  the  precise  opposite.  The  papal  decretals  had 
devoured  the  decisions  of  councils,  like  Pharaoh's  seven 
lean  kine.  "What  had  become  of  the  Mcene,  Chalce- 
donian,  and  African  canons  ?  Like  half-buried  tomb- 
stones in  a  deserted  churchyard,  scattered  fragments  of 
this  older  order  cropped  up  here  and  there.  "  It  is 
clear  as  the  noonday  sun,"  said  Chancellor  Gerson,  the 

1  Pollidor.  ViL  Marc.  II.,  132  (Roma,  1744). 


1 86  Papal  Infallibility. 

most  learned  theologian  and  warmest  friend  of  the 
Church  in  that  age,  "  that  the  ordinances  of  the  four  first 
and  subsequent  General  Councils  have  been  metamor- 
phosed and  exposed  to  mockery  and  oblivion  through  the 
ever-increasing  avarice  of  Popes,  Cardinals,  and  Prelates, 
through  the  unjust  constitutions  of  the  papal  Court,  the 
rules  of  the  Chancery,  and  the  dispensations,  absolutions, 
and  indulgences  granted  from  lust  of  domination."^ 

To  the  Popes,  not  to  the  German  emperors,  belongs  the 
title  "  semper  Augustus"  as  formerly  understood.  They 
are  "  always  aggrandizers  of  the  kingdom,"  i.e.,  of  their 
own.  They  became  such  under  the  sincere  conviction, 
cherished  from  earliest  youth,  that  the  welfare  of  the 
whole  Church  and  Christian  world  depended  on  their 
power  being  great  and  irresistible ;  that  their  right 
and  power,  and  theirs  alone,  was  truly  divine,  and 
therefore  unlimited,  because  no  mere  earthly  right  could 
limit  an  authority  given  from  heaven.  And  we  must 
recognise  the  sincerity  of  this  conviction,  by  which  the 
Popes  were  thoroughly  possessed,  even  when  it  drove 
them  to  the  use  of  crooked  means,  to  falsification,  for- 
gery, and  misrepresentation. 

Everytliing  which  Popes  had  formerly  shrunk  from  or 

1  Tract,  de  Ref.  Eccl.  in  Cone.  Univ.  c.  17. 


Personal  A  ttititde  of  Popes,  187 

avoided,  or  been  cautioned  against,  tliey  now  eagerly 
seized  uj)on.  Gregory  the  Great  had  complained  that, 
under  the  pressure  of  business,  his  mind  could  not  rise 
to  higher  things.-^  Even  Alexander  IL,  in  1066,  when 
the  great  centralization  movement  was  just  beginning, 
said  that  for  five  years  he  had  scarcely  been  able  to  pay 
any  attention  to  the  internal  affairs  of  his  OAvn  special 
flock,  the  Church  of  the  city  of  Eome,  still  less  of 
foreign  Churches.^  Early  Church  history  was  one  long 
warning  for  the  Popes  not  to  mix  themselves  up  with 
the  affairs  of  foreign  Churches,  and  want  to  decide 
from  a  distance  on  one-sided  and  partial  information. 
Every  one  in  the  ancient  Church,  the  Popes  included, 
was  persuaded  that  nothing  is  more  injurious  in  Church 
matters  than  decisions  made  at  a  distance,  in  ignorance 
of  local  circumstances.  As  a  rule  they  made  mistakes, 
and  involved  themselves  in  humiliations  and  contradic- 
tory judgments.  So  it  was  with  Basilides  in  Spain, 
Hilary  of  Aries  in  Gaul,  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  Eusta- 
thius  of  Sebaste,  Meletius  at  Antioch,  with  Eros  and 
Lazarus,  and  with  Apiarius  in  Africa ;  constantly  the 
Popes  made  rash  mistakes,  and  were  deceived,  imposed 

^  Greg.  M.  Ejy.  i.  1 ;  vii.  25.  5. 

*  Bouquet,  S>cript.  Rer.  Gall.  xiv.  543. 


I SS  Papal  Infallibility, 

upon,  and  misled  tlirough  their  hurried  or  importunate 
action.  And  constantly  had  the  wisdom  of  the  Nicene 
decision  heen  commended,  that  everything  should  be 
examined  and  decided  on  the  spot.  The  Popes  and 
Gregorians  were  ready  enough,  indeed,  to  appeal  to  the 
ISTicene  canon,  but  they  appealed  to  the  spurious  one. 
And  if,  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  the  Popes 
only  interfered  with  the  concerns  of  foreign  Churches 
now  and  then  at  long  intervals,  and  in  the  same  way  as 
the  bishops  of  other  apostolical  sees,  such  cases  oc- 
curred now  by  thousands  in  one  year,  and  every  new 
reservation  was  a  copious  source  of  emolument,  so  that 
Bishop  Alvaro  Pelayo  tells  us  that  whenever  he  entered 
the  apartments  of  the  Eoman  Court  clergy,  he  found 
them  occupied  in  counting  up  the  gold  coin  which  lay 
there  in  heaps.-^ 

Every  opportunity  of  extending  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Curia  was  welcome.  Nothing  was  too  insignificant. 
Exemptions  and  privileges  were  so  managed  that  fresh 
grants  became  constantly  necessary.  Thus,  e.g.,  the  im- 
munity from  episcopal  censures  granted  beforehand  to 
individuals  and  whole  colleges  wa&  an  inexhaustible 
source  of  revenue.     And  the  bishoi>s  on  their  side  were 

*  Be  Planctu  Ecd.  ii.  29. 


Personal  Attitude  of  Popes.  1 89 

compelled  to  procure  papal  privileges,  at  least  to  enable 
them  to  guard  their  property  with    censures  against 
holders    of  Koman   privileges;    the   Bishop    of   Laon 
obtained  such  a  privilege  from  Urban  iv.^     So  far  was 
the  principle,  "  divide  et  impera,"  carried  at  Eome,  that  - 
even  cathedral  chapters,  who  are  supposed  to  be  the  - 
immediate  counsellors  and  presbytery  of  the  bishop,  - 
were  armed  with  privileges  and  exemptions  against  him,  - 
and  he  against  them.     If  we  look  at  the  huge  number 
of  Papal  privileges  conferred  in  the  thirteenth  century 
on  one  national  Church  only,  the  French,  we  cannot 
but  marvel  at  the  slavish  spirit  of  the  bishops,  who 
dared  not  move  an  inch  without  sanction  from  Eome, 
as  well  as  at  the  utter  insignificance  of  the  objects  for 
which  special  authorization  or  dispensation  from  Eome 
was  thought  necessary.     If  a  monastery  wanted  leave 
for  the  sick  to  eat  meat,  or  the  inmates  to  talk  at  dinner, 
a  permission  from  the  Pope  was  required.     Above  all, 
bishops,  convents,  and  individuals  needed  to  protect 
themselves  by  Papal  privileges  against  the  censures  and 
spiritual  methods  of  extortion  employed  so  prodigally 
by  the  Legates.^ 

1  Gallia  Christ,  vi.  instr.  308. 

2  A  clear  idea  of  these  may  be  formed  from  inspecting  Brequigny's  and 
Pardessus'  Tables  Chronologiques,  1230-1300,  a.d. 


1 9  o  Papal  In  fa  Uibility, 

§  XI. — Tlic  Relation  of  Popes  to  Councils. 

Hitherto  the  Church  had  known  but  one  means  of 
protection  against  internal  corruption,  that  of  Councils. 
But  the  attitude  towards  Councils  taken  up  by  the 
Popes  since  Gregory  vii.  made  this  too  unavailing. 
Councils  were  perverted,  as  we  shall  see,  into  mere  tools 
of  Papal  domination,  and  reduced  to  a  condition  of 
undignified  servitude,  which  made  them  mere  shadows 
of  the  Councils  of  tlie  ancient  Church. 

All  synods  counted  as  oecumenical,  and  whose  decrees 
had  force  throughout  the  universal  Church,  were  held 
during  the  first  nine  centuries  in  the  East, — at  ISTicoea, 
Ephesus,  Chalcedon,  and  Constantinople.  During  that 
period  the  Popes  had  never  once  made  the  attempt  to 
gather  about  them  a  great  synod  of  bishops  from  differ  • 
ent  countries.  Two  centuries  followed,  the  tenth  and 
eleventh,  without  any  great  synod.  In  1123,  immedi- 
ately after  the  close  of  the  Investiture  controversy,  and 
to  confirm  and  seal  the  great  victory  won  through  tlie 
Gregorian  system,  Calixtus  ii.  assembled  a  numerous 
synod,  afterwards  called  CEcumenical  (the  first  Lateran) 
at  which,  very  significantly,  twice  as  many  abbots  as 
bishops  (GOO  to  300)  were  present.     No  contemporary 


Relation  of  Popes  lo  Councils.  191 

tells  us  aiiytliiiig  of  this  lirst  general  assembly  of  the 
West;  it  passed  unnoticed,  and  left  no  trace  hchind. 
The  Tope  jn-oraulgated  at  it  certain  laws  on  suboi-dinate 
points — simony,  clerical  niarria^^es,  and  the  Truce  of 
God.  There  is  no  sign  oF  any  action  on  the  part  of  the 
bishops ;  they  seem  to  have  been  summoned  merely  as 
a  foil  to  the  Papacy,  for  this  was  the  first  example  of  a 
council  professing  to  be  oecumenical,  where  not  the 
Council,  as  for  a  thousand  years,  but  the  ro[te  published 
the  decrees  in  his  own  name.^ 

Sixteen  years  later,  in  1139,  Innocent  li.  assembled  a 
second  CEcumenical  Synod,  again  at  liome  (the  second 
Lateran).  Once  more  the  bishops  appeared  as  mere 
passive  witnesses  to  hear  the  I'ope's  lofty  commands, 
and  to  see  him  tear,  witli  words  of  abuse,  the  pastoral 
staff  from  the  hand  and  the  pallium  from  tlie  shoulders 
of  prelates  ordained  by  his  rival,  Pierleon(\" 

More  serious  and  eventful  was  the  third  of  these 
Ptoman  Church  assemblies,  held  in  1 1 70  by  Alexander  iii. 
(the  third  Lateran).  Tiiere  were  but  three  sessions,  and 
the  Poi)e  published  the  tweuty- seven  canons  he  had  put 

1  *' Anctoritritc  scdis  apostolicio  proliilieiiiiis"  in  (iist  cuioii.  ll;iriliiiii, 
fundi,  vi.  ii.  1111. 

2  Ilarduiii,  i.  c.  1211.  [ricrlooiie  \va3  tlio  aiiti-pdiie  Aiiaclctu.s  ir.— 
Tu.] 


1 9  2  Papal  Infallibility, 

before  tliem  as  enacted  "witlitlie  consent  of  the  Synod." 
So  completely  did  the  world  regard  these  assemblies  as 
mere  arrangements  for  the  solemn  promulgation  of  papal 
commands,  that  the  Emperor  described  the  third  Lateran 
Synod  in  a  document  as  "  the  Council  of  the  Supreme 
Pontiff."^ 

Any  free  deliberation  in  presence  of  an  Innocent  iii., 
when  in  1215  he  summoned  453  bishops  to  the  fourth 
Lateran  Council,  was  not  to  be  thought  of  From  the 
standpoint  of  the  Popes  at  that  time,  the  only  business  of 
bishops  at  a  Council  must  be  to  inform  the  Pope  of  the 
condition  of  their  dioceses,  to  give  him  their  advice,  and 
form  a  picturesque  background  for  the  solemn  promul- 
gation of  his  decrees.  Perhaps  the  greatest  number  of 
bishops  ever  seen  at  a  Western  Council  were  present, 
besides  ambassadors  of  sovereigns.  Innocent  had  his 
decrees  read  to  them,^  and  after  listening  in  silence  they 
were  allowed  to  give  their  assent.^  When  they  wished 
to  return  home,  the  Pope  forbade  them  until  they  had 
paid  him  large  sums   of  money,  which   they  had  to 

1  See  Trouillart,  Dociim.  de  Bdle,  i.  3S9,—  "  In  generali  Concilio  sumnii 
Pontificis  .  .  .  judicatura  est." 

2  See  Matt.  Paris,  Eist.  Angl.  ann.  1215.  "  Recitata  sunt  in  pleno  Con- 
cilio, capitula  70." 

3  We  know  the  decisions  only  from  their  appearing  in  different  parts  of 
Gregory  IX. 's  decretal  book  under  the  heading,  "  Innocentius  iii.  in  Concil. 
Lat." 


Relation  of  Popes  to  Coitncils.  193 

borrow  at  high  interest  from  the  brokers  of  the  papal 
Court/ 

The  one  act  of  the  first  Council  of  Lyons  in  1245 
worthy  of  record,  was  the  deposition  of  Frederick  ii.  by 
Innocent  iv.  with  144  bishops,  chiefly  Spanish  and 
French.-  In  this  affair  of  such  high  importance  to 
Italy  and  Germany,  these  two  nations  were  either  not 
at  all,  or  very  inadequately,  represented ;  it  was  an 
assembly  chiefly  composed  of  prelates  from  foreign 
nations  which  supported  the  Pope  in  his  procedure,  and 
allowed  itself  thus  to  help  him  in  meddling  with  the 
concerns  of  Italy  and  Germany.  The  right  of  deposing 
the  Emperor,  and  thereby  plunging  Germany  and  Italy 
into  confusion  and  a  long  civil  war,  was  again  proved 
by  the  fables  to  which  Gregory  vii.  had  before  ap- 

1  Matt.  Paris,  Hist.  Minor,  Lond.  ]S66,  ii.  17G. 

2  We  learn  from  from  Raynaldus  {A^mal.  ann.  1245,  i.)  that  Innocent  only 
summoned  the  Archbishop  of  Sens  with  his  sutiragans,  the  King  of  France, 
and  a  number  of  English  bishops.  Raynaldus,  who  had  the  papal  Register, 
with  all  the  documents  before  him,  could  not  disclose  more.  The  German 
prelates,  who  had  come  to  Lyons,  departed  shortly  before  the  opening  of 
the  Council,  limocent  therefore  avoided  calling  it  a  General  Council ;  and 
it  is  a  proof  of  the  unhistorical  and  unscientific  character  of  so  many  theo- 
logical manuals,  that  they  usually  cite  this  as  an  (Ecumenical  Council, 
though  it  has  no  claim  on  the  conditions  they  themselves  give  to  lieiug 
such.  Still  more  glaringly  is  this  true  of  the  Council  of  Vienne  in  1311,  to 
which  Clement  V.  himself  said,  that  he  had  only  summoned  certain  selected 
bishops.— See  his  Letter  to  the  Emperor  Henry  iii.  in  Raynald.  Annul. 
ann.  1311. 

N 


194  Papal  Infallibility. 

pealed,  viz.,  that  Pope  Innocent  had  excommunicated 
the  Emperor  Arcadius,  and  Pope  Anastasiiis  hpd  not 
only  excommunicated  the  Emperor  Anastasius,  but 
deprived  him  of  his  empire.-^  The  natural  inference 
was,  that  the  Popes  could  do  to  a  German  Emperor 
what  they  had  done  to  the  Greek  Emperor  at  Constan- 
tinople. This  time  again  the  bishops  and  abbots  had 
to  pay  or  promise  the  Pope  large  sums  for  carrying  on 
his  war  against  the  Emperor,  and  thus  to  burden  their 
churches  and  convents  with  heavy  debts.^ 

The  second  Synod  of  Lyons,  counted  as  the  sixth 
(Ecumenical  Council  of  i^Oi^  West,  at  which  500  bishops 
and  twice  as  many  abbots  assembled  in  1274,  was  con- 
voked by  the  best  Pope  of  that  age,  who,  had  it  only 
been  possible,  would  gladly  ha.ve  repaired  the  mischief 
done  by  the  policy  of  his  predecessors — Gregory  x. 
But  even  he  did  not  venture  to  restore  the  old  forms  of 
Councils,  necessary  and  helpful  as  they  w^ould  have 
been  for  effecting  a  reformation  of  the  desolated  and 
disjointed  Church.  The  union  with  the  Greek  Church 
was  a  mere  formal  act  concluded  without  any  delibera- 
tion, and  broke  up  again  in  a  few  years.     Eor  the  rest, 

1  See  the  official  historian  of  the  Curia,  Nicolas  of  Curbio,  Vita  Innoc. 
IV.  in  Baluze,  Miscell.  i.  108,  ed.  Mansi. 

2  For  fuller  particulars,  cf.  Tilleniont,  Vie  cle  S.  Louis,  iii.  83. 


Relation  of  Popes  to  Councils.  195 

it  is  impossible  to  say  what  decrees  the  Pope  had 
published  at  the  Council,  for  the  thirty-one  articles 
found  in  the  papal  Decretals,  under  the  title,  "  Gregory 
X.  at  the  Synod  of  Lyons,"-^  were  partly  promulgated 
during  the  Council,  and  partly  afterwards,  as  the  Pope 
himself  declares.^  Of  the  intended  reform  of  the  Church 
nothing  was  effected. 

As  the  deposition  of  the  Emperor  Frederick  was  the 
one  event  of  the  first  Synod  of  Lyons,  so  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  Templars  was  the  one  result  of  the  Synod 
of  Vienne  in  1311.  When  at  that  Synod,  to  which  he 
only  admitted  bishops  previously  selected  by  himself, 
Clement  v.  observed  that  a  majority  was  favourable 
disposed  towards  the  Order  of  Templars,  he  ordered 
a  cleric  to  proclaim,  that  any  bishop  who  spoke  a 
word  without  being  first  asked  for  his  opinion  by  the 
Pope,  would  incur  the  greater  excommunication.  And 
thereupon  he  announced  that,  "  by  the  plenitude  of  his 
power,"  he  annihilated  the  Order,  although  he  could 
not  abolish  it  on  the  strength  of  th6  criminal  charo-es 
brought  against  it.  But  Clement  himself  was  a  m.ere 
tool  of  the  French  King  ;  to  accommodate  him  he  had 
ordered  his  inquisitors  everywhere  to  extort  confessions 

1  Sextus  Decretal.  2  Harduin,  Concil.  vii.  705. 


196  Papal  Infallibility. 

from  the  ill-fated  Knights -Templars  by  torture.  And 
yet  he  must  have  known  before  the  Council  met,  that 
the  result  of  the  investigation  did  not  justify  the  penal 
abolition  of  the  Order.  All  he  gained  by  it  was,  that 
the  King  allowed  him  to  put  a  stop  to  the  process 
against  his  predecessor  Boniface  viii.,  which  was  a 
source .  of  pain,  anxiety,  shame,  and  humiliation  for 
Clement  and  the  Papacy  generally  ;  for  if  Boniface  had 
been  condemned  on  the  charge  of  heresy  and  unbelief 
brought  against  him  by  King  Philip,  all  his  acts  would 
have  become  null  and  void,  and  a  terrible  confusion  in 
the  Church  must  have  followed.  "  This  assemblage," 
says  the  contemporary  writer,  Walter  of  Hemingburgh, 
"  cannot  be  called  a  Council,  for  the  Pope  did  every- 
thing out  of  his  own  head,  so  that  the  Council  neither 
answered  nor  assented."^  The  servitude  of  bishops 
and  degradation  of  Councils  could  go  no  further.  And 
now  came  a  change  for  which  the  Great  Schism  pre- 
pared the  way. 

After  the  deposition  of  the  last  German  Emperor 
who  deserved  the  name,  July  17,  1245,  the  Papacy  be- 
came the  prey  for  French  and  Italians  to  quarrel  over. 
In  the  long  contest  of  Popes  and  anti-popes,  the  old 

1  Chrcm.  Walt,  de  Hemiugb.    Lond.  1849,  ii.  293. 


Relatio7i  of  Popes  to  Coioicils.  1 9  7 

weapons  by  which  the  Papacy  had  acquired  its  gigantic 
power  became  somewhat  blunted  ;  the  nations  rebelled. 
A  different  spirit  and  different  principles  prevailed  at 
the  fifteenth  century  Councils  of  Pisa,  Constance,  and 
Basle,  and  the  preponderance  of  Italian  bishops  was 
broken  by  new  regulations.  Even  at  the  Synod  of 
Florence  in  1439,  the  forms  of  the  ancient  Councils  and 
free  discussion  had  to  be  allowed  on  account  of  the 
Greeks,  and  the  mere  dictation  and  promulgation  of 
decrees  previously  prepared  in  the  papal  Curia  had  to 
be  abandoned. 

Soon,  however,  better  days  for  the  Curia  returned. . 
Julius  II.  inaugurated,  and  Leo  x.  concluded,  tlie  fifth 
Lateran  Synod  with  about  fifty-three  Italian  bishops  and 
a  number  of  cardinals  (1512-17).  That  such  an  assem- 
blage is  no  representation  of  the  whole  Church,  that  it 
sounds  like  a  mockery  to  put  it  on  a  par  with  the 
Synods  of  Nicsea,  Chalcedon,  and  Constantinople  at  a 
time  when,  by  the  admission  of  a  bishop  who  was  pre- 
sent, there  were  not  four  capable  men  among  the  200 
l)isliops  uf  Italy,  is  evident  to  the  blindest  eye.  Julius 
showed  his  appreciation  of  it,  when  he  had  a  decree 
laid  before  it  at  the  third  session  forbiddincj  the  annual 
market  hitherto  held  at  Lyons,  and  transferring  it  to 


1 9  8  Papal  Infallibility. 

Geneva.^  Prior  Kilian  Leib  of  Eebdorf  expresses  won- 
der in  his  annals  at  this  being  called  a  General  Coun- 
cil, at  which  hardly  any  one  was  present  besides  the 
usual  attendants  of  the  Court,  and  nothing  of  import- 
ance was  done.^  The  papal  decrees  published  there  w^ere, 
however,  far  from  unimportant.  On  the  contrary,  a  de- 
cree was  issued  exceeding  in  weight  and  significance  any 
l^ublished  in  former  Eoman  Councils,  viz.,  Leo  x.'s  Bull, 
Pastor  jEternus,  in  which,  while  abolishing  the  Prag- 
matic Sanction  in  Prance,  he  declares  as  a  dogma  that 
"  the  Pope  has  full  and  unlimited  authority  over  Coun- 
cils ;  he  can  at  his  good  pleasure  summon,  remove,  or 
dissolve  them."  The  proofs  for  this  cited  in  the  Bull 
are  all  spurious  or  irrelevant.  Earlier  and  later  fictions, 
partly  borrowed  from  the  pseudo- Isidore,  are  quoted  to 
show  that  the  ancient  Councils  were  under  the  absolute 
authority  of  the  Pope,  that  even  the  Nicene  Council 
supplicated  him  for  the  confirmation  of  its  decrees,  etc. 
The  long  deduction,  in  which  every  statement  would  be 
a  lie,  if  the  compiler  could  be  credited  with  any  know- 
ledge of  Church  history,  closes  with  the  renewal  of 
Boniface  viil's  Bull,  Unam  Sandam. 

1  Condi,  ed.  Labbe,  xiv.  82.  ^  ggg  Aretin's  Beitrdge,  vii.  624. 


Theological  Sticdy  at  Rome,  199 

§  XII. — Theological  Study  at  Rome. 

It  may  seem  strange  that  since  the  new  system  of 
Church  government  centralized  at  Eome  had  come  into 
vogue,  and  the  Councils  had  pretty  weU  lost  their 
importance,  the  Popes  should  not  have  thought  of 
estabhshing  a  theological  school  in  Eome  at  the  seat 
of  the  Curia.  The  profound  ignorance  of  the  Eoman 
clergy,  and  their  incapacity  forjudging  theological  ques- 
tions, was  proverbial.  As  early  as  the  end  of  the 
seventh  century.  Pope  Agatho  had  to  make  the  humi- 
liating confession  to  the  Greeks,  that  the  right  interpre- 
tation of  Holy  Scripture  could  not  be  found  with  the 
Eoman  clergy,  who  had  to  work  with  their  hands  for 
their  support.  They  could  do  no  more  than  preserve 
the  traditions  handed  down  from  the  ancient  Councils 
and  Popes.^  The  Greeks,  who  were  better  versed  in 
Biblical  studies,  might  well  ascribe  to  this  ignorance, 
admitted  by  the  Popes,  the  interpreting  the  prayer  of 
Christ  for  St.  Peter  (Luke  xxii.  32)  in  a  sense  which 
had  never  occurred  to  any  one  before,  and  which  clearly 
had  but  one  object,  viz.,  to  secure  authority  in  doctrinal 
matters  to  the  Eoman  Church,  in  spite  of  the  undeni- 

1  Harduiu,  Concil.  iii.  1073. 


200  Papal  Infallibility, 

aWe  rudeness  and  ignorance  of  its  clergy.  Their  defects 
in  learning  and  knowledge  had  to  be  supplied  by 
special  Divine  inspiration.  Gregory  ii.  speaks,  fifty  years 
later,  as  modestly  as  Pope  Agatho.  Otho  of  Yercelli,  in 
the  tenth  century,  and  Gerbert  in  the  eleventh,  expressed 
themselves  strongly  about  this  theological  ignorance  of 
the  Eoman  clergy.^  But  since  Gratian's  time  juris- 
prudence became  the  queen  of  sciences ;  exegesis  of 
Holy  Scripture,  and  study  of  tradition  and  the  Fathers 
were  dropped,  for  they  would  have  led  to  suspicious  results 
and  dangerous  disclosures,  and  would  eventually  have 
exposed  the  evil  contradictions  between  the  old  and  new 
law  of  the  Church.  The  new  codes  of  canon  law,  Gratian, 
the  decretals,  and  the  Eoman  imperial  law,  were  studied  ; 
and,  accordingly.  Innocent  iv.  established  a  school  of  law 
in  Eome,  leaving  theology  to  the  distant  Paris.  Theology 
was  never  extensively  prosecuted  at  Eome,  or  with  any 
result,  nor  did  those  who  wished  to  study  it  go  there  dur- 
ing the  Middle  Ages.  Among  the  cardinals  there  were 
always  at  least  twenty  jurists  to  one  theologian;  and  here- 
in the  Giiria  was  genuinely  Italian,  or  Italy  genuinely 
Eoman ;  for  though  from  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 

^  Pertz,  Monnm.  iii.  675. 

^  Mali,   Nova   Coll.   vi.    ii.  60.     "In  tanta  Ecclesia  vix  nnns  posset 
reperiri,  quin  vel  illiteratus,  vel  simoniacus,  vel  esset  concubinarius." 


Theological  Stttdy  at  Rome.  20 1 

century  there  had  be-u   an  emulation  in  establishing 
universities,  it  was  never  theology,  but  jurisprudence 
and  medicine,  that  was  thought  of.     Although  they  had 
some  great  theologians  to  show,  as  Aquinas,  Bonaven- 
ture,  iEgidius  Colonna,  the  Italians  gladly  left  the  care 
of  theology  to  the  French,  English,  and  Germans,  and 
such   of  them  as  desired  to  become  theologians,  like 
those  just   named,   had    to   seek  their  education   and 
sphere  of  work  abroad.     Dante  says  of  his  countrymen 
that  they  only  study  the  Decretals,-  and  neglect   the 
Gospels  and   the   Fathers.     And   among   Italians   the 
Koman  clergy  did  least  for  the  cultivation  of  theological 
science.-^ 

The  Popes  were  the  more  ready  to  abdicate  all  influ- 
ence through  the  cultivation  of  science,  since  so  many 
other  means  of  action  were  open  to  them,  and  such  as 
could  not  in  the  long-run  bear  scientific  examination. 
Moreover,  they  had  the  new  Eeligious  Orders  of  Domini- 
cans and  Minorites  for  that  work,  who,  acting  under  the 
most  stringent  censure  and  discipline  of  Eome,  exercised 
throuo'h  their  own  Generals,  and  beinc^  accustomed  to 
identify  the  interests  of  their  own  Order  with  those  of  the 

1  Kei^niont  observes  {Oeschichte  der  Stadt  Rom,  ii.  678)  that  the  intellec- 
tual productiveness  of  Home  was  at  best  very  slight. 


202  Papal  Infallibility. 

Curia,  had  given  every  guarantee  that  they  would  repu- 
diate whatever  did  not  subserve  the  newKoman  system. 
It  was  from  the  bosom  of  these  Orders,  especially  the 
Dominicans,  that  the  Curia  selected  its  official  court 
theologian— for  one  at  least  it  was  obliged  to  have — the 
IMaster  of  the  Sacred  Palace. 

And  thus,  as  Eoger  Bacon  and  contemporary  writers 
generally  state,  juristic  science,  and  not  theology,  was 
the  sure  road  to  Church  dignities  and  preferment.  For 
theology,  as  conducted  by  the  school  of  St.  Anselm  of 
Canterbury,  Abailard,  Bernard,  Eobert  Pullus,  Hugh  and 
Eichard  of  St.  Victor,  and  the  other  scholastics  before 
Aquinas,  had  done  nothing  directly  for  strengthening 
the  papal  dominion  over  the  world  and  establishing  the 
Gregorian  system.  Nowhere  in  the  writings  of  these 
theologians  is  there  any  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of 
Church  authority  on  the  basis  of  the  papal  system. 
The  dealings  with  the  Greeks,  before  and  after  the 
Synod  of  Lyons  in  1274,  and  the  newly  discovered  spuri- 
ous testimonies  of  Greek  Fathers  and  Councils,  as  well  as 
Gregory  ix.'s  collection  of  Decretals,  first  introduced  it  into 
theology.  The  jurists  were  the  first  to  prostitute  their 
science  to  an  instrument  of  flattery,  and  it  was  not  till 
after  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century  that  the  theolo- 


Theological  Study  at  Rome.  203 

gians  followed  them  in  the  same  path.  Those  who  took 
that  line  belonged  mostly  to  the  great  Mendicant  Orders, 
who  had  the  most  urgent  reasons  for  advancing  rather 
than  depreciating  the  plenary  papal  jurisdiction,  to 
which  they  owed  the  privileges  and  exemptions  so 
lavishly  bestowed  on  them  ;  and  if  any  of  their  members 
had  written  in  an  opposite  sense,  they  would  have  been 
sure  soon  to  find  themselves  in  the  convent  prison. 
Only  men  in  so  extraordinary  and  abnormal  a  position 
as  Occam  and  other  "  Spirituals,"  could  be  influenced 
in  a  contrary  direction ;  and  such  writers,  as  we  see  in 
the  case  of  the  acute  Marsilio  of  Padua,  could  find  no 
certain  track  in  the  maze  of  forgeries  and  fictions,  though 
they  saw  through  some  of  tlicm.-^ 

To  this  jurisprudence,  viz.,  the  corrupt  system  of 
canon  law  perverted  into  an  instrument  of  despotism, 
and  to  the  Papacy,  the  wretched  state  of  moral  and  re- 
ligious degradation  throughout  Western  Christendom  was 
generally  ascribed.    By  the  united  streams  flowing  from 


1  [Mavsilio  of  Padua,  a  famous  jurist,  wrote  a  hook  called  "  Defence  of 
the  Faith  against  the  Usurped  Jurisdiction  of  the  Eonian  Pontilf,"  which 
had  the  distinction  of  being  the  hrst  work  condemned  in  a  papal  Bull, 
issued  by  John  xxii.  in  1327.  It  was  answered  in  the  Summa  of  Agostino 
Trionfo  of  Ancona  (dedicated  to  John  xxii.),  an  Augustinian  friar,  who 
maintained  the  Pope's  absolute  jurisdiction  over  the  whole  world.  Chris- 
tian or  Pagan,  and  over  Purgatory. — Tr.] 


204  Papal  Infallibility. 

these  two  fountains— both,  up  to  1305,  Italian — the 
Bolognese  School  of  Law  and  the  Curia — men  said  the 
w^hole  world  was  poisoned.  "  It  is  the  jurists,"  according 
to  Eoger  Bacon,  "who  now  rule  the  Church,  and  torment 
and  perplex  Christians  with  processes  endlessly  spun 
out."^  And,  in  fact,  the  most  powerful  Popes,  such  as 
Innocent  in.  and  Innocent  iv.,  Clement  iv.  and  Boniface 
viiL,  attained  as  jurists  the  highest  dignity  and  sove- 
reignty over  the  world.  Bacon  thought  the  only  remedy 
was  for  canon  law  to  become  more  theological  or 
Biblical.  He  saw  a  source  of  corruption,  just  as  Dante 
did,  in  the  papal  Decretals,  and  the  precedence  over 
Holy  Scripture  assigned  to  them.^ 

We  see  how  deep  that  remarkable  man,  Eoger  Bacon, 
saw  into  the  causes  of  corruption  which  were  hidden 
from  most  of  his  contemporaries,  although  he,  like  all 
the  rest,  could  only  form  conjectures,  and  could  not 
gain  that  clear  insight  which  was  impossible  without 
historical  and  critical  information  unattainable  in  his 
day.  But  he  believed,  and  many  for  forty  years  (since 
1225)  had  been  hoping  with  him,  that  a  purification  of 
the  Church  was  approaching,  through  the  means  of  a 
God-fearing  Pope,  and,  perhaps,  with  the  co-operation 

1  0]?us  Tert  ed.  Brewer,  1859,  p.  84.  2  Paradiso  ix.  136-8. 


Theological  Study  at  Rome.  205 

of  a  good  emperor,  consisting  essentially  in  a  tliorougli 
reform  of  the  system  of  Church  law.^ 

§  XIIL— TAe  QolUge,  of  Cardinals. 
The  two  main  pillars  of  the  new  Papacy,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  the  two  institutions  which  knew  how  to 
fetter  the  Popes  themselves,  and  make  them  subservi- 
ent to  their  own  interests,  were  the  College  of  Cardinals 
and  the  Curia.  In  proportion  as  the  rupture,  partly 
conscious,  partly  unconscious,  between  the  Papacy  and 
the  old  Church  order  and  legislation  was  consummated, 
the  College  or  Senate  of  Cardinals  took  shape,  and  in 
1059,  when  the  right  of  papal  election  was  transferred  to 
it, became  a  body  of  electors.^  Through  the  Legations,  and 
their  share  in  the  administration  of  what  had  become 

1  Rog.  Bacon,  Compend.  Stud.  ed.  Brewer,  pp.  339-403.  "  Totus  clerus 
vacat  superljise,  luxuria3,  avaritife,"  etc.  Here,  too,  he  dwells  on  the  decay 
of  all  learning  for  forty  years  past,  attributing  it  principally  to  the  cor- 
ruption of  Church  law. 

2  [Before  1059,  the  right  of  election  resided  in  the  whole  body  of  Roman 
clergy,  down  to  the  acolytes,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  magistrates  and 
the  citizens.  Nicolas  ir.,  acting  under  Hildebrand's  advice,  issued  a  Bull 
conferring  the  elective  franchise  exclusively  on  the  College  of  Cardinals, 
reserving,  however,  to  the  German  Emperor  the  right  of  confirmation.  By 
a  Bull  of  Alexander  ill.,  in  the  third  Lateran  Council  (1179),  two-thirds  of 
the  votes  were  required  for  a  valid  election,  and  this  regulation  is  still  in 
force.  See  Cartwright's  Papal  Conclaves,  pp.  11-16,  and  cf.  Hemans's 
Medmval  Christianity,  pp.  73,  101,  where  the  Bull  of  Nicolas  is  quoted 
at  length.  The  forms  to  be  observed  in  Conclave,  still  in  force,  were  fixed 
by  a  constitution  of  Gregory  x.  in  the  Second  Council  of  Lyons,  1272. 
— Cartwright,  pp.  20  seq.;  Hemans,  pp.  362-3.— Tr.] 


2o6  Papal  Infallibility. 

ail  unlimited  sovereignty,  the  cardinals  rapidly  rose  to 
a  height  from  which  they  looked  down  on  the  bishops, 
who,  as  late  as  the  eleventh  century,  took  precedence 
of  them  in  Councils.  While  the  new  system  of 
Papalism  was  yet  in  its  birth-throes,  in  1054,  the  car- 
dinal-bishops claimed  precedence  of  archbishops;  but 
in  1196  the  archbishops  still  always  took  precedence  of 
them.  At  the  Synod  of  Lyons,  in  1245,  the  precedence 
of  all  cardinals,  even  presbyters  and  deacons,  to  all  the 
bishops  of  the  Christian  world  was  first  fixed,  and  never 
afterwards  disputed.  By  degrees  it  came  to  this,  that 
bishops  could  only  venture  to  speak  to  cardinals  on  their 
knees,  and  were  treated  by  them  as  servants.-*- 

It  was  not  without  set  purpose  that  the  Gregorians, 
Anselm  and  Gregory  of  Padua,  and  Gratian  after  them, 
had  incorporated  into  their  codes  those  passages  of  St. 
Jerome  which  affirm  the  original  equality  of  bishops  and 
presbyters,  and  reduce  the  superiority  of  bishops  to 
mere  customary  law.  These  short-sighted  architects 
of  the  papal  system  did  not  perceive  that  they  were 
thereby  laying  the  axe  to  the  root  of  the  Eoman 
Primacy;   all  they  wanted  was  to  pave  the  way  for 

1  See  an  anonymoixs  French  writing  of  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
given  in  Paulin  Paris,  Manuscr.  Franc,  vi.  265. 


The  College  of  Caj'dinals.  207 

the  superiority  of  cardinals,  and  with  it  the  domination 
of  the  Curia,  and  to  build  up  the  papal  system  on  the 
ruins  of  the  ancient  episcopal  system.  As  their  views 
of  the  Church  and  the  hierarchy  were  drawn  exclusively 
from  Gratian,  bishops  towards  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century  were  brought  to  allow  themselves  to  be  made 
cardinal-presbyters,  and  even  to  regard  as  a  promotion 
this  degradation  of  the  Episcopate  to  the  Presbyterate, 
which  in  the  first  centuries  of  the  Church  would  have 
been  thought  a  monstrosity.  In  the  palmy  days  of 
exemptions,  of  the  overthrow  of  all  ancient  Church 
laws,  and  the  loosening  of  the  diocesan  tie,  at  a  time 
when  the  parochial  system  was  torn  to  pieces  by  the 
strolling  mendicant  monks,  this  too  became  j^art  of 
the  system. 

The  rival  principles  of  a  cardinal  oligarchy  and  of 
papal  absolutism  were  long  trembling  in  the  balance  in 
the  Roman  Church.  There  were  Popes  like  ]\Iartin  iv. 
and  Clement  v.  who  carried  out  their  French  policy 
against  the  resistance  of  the  Italian  cardinals;  Popes 
before  whom  the  cardinals  scarcely  dared  to  lift  their 
eyes  or  utter  a  word,  like  Boniface  viii.  and  Paul  iv. ; 
Popes  who  put  to  death  their  cardinals,  like  Urban  vi., 
Alexander  vi.,  and  Leo  x.     But,  as  a  rule,  the  College 


2o8  Papal  Infallibility. 

of  Cardinals,  to  which  the  Pope  owed  his  election,  and 
which  preserved  the  interests  and  traditions  of  the 
papal  system,  took  the  lead.  They  took  care  that  the 
Popes  should  give  up  nothing  of  the  accepted  principles 
or  let  drop  any  particle  of  the  plenary  authority  Eome 
had  gained,  and  took  in  fact,  as  well  as  in  theory,  their  full 
part  in  the  government  of  the  Church.  They  contrived 
to  make  the  Popes  in  many  cases  the  mere  executive 
of  their  will.  The  later  and  still  prevalent  device,  of 
carrying  out  plans  the  majority  are  opposed  to  with  the 
aid  of  two  or  three  cardinals  like-minded  with  the  Pope, 
and  without  consulting  the  College,  was  hardly  adopted 
in  the  thirteenth  century,  or  only  under  Martin  iv.  But 
Boniface  viiL,  Clement  v.,  and  John  xxii.,  and  the  Popes 
after  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  nearly  ail 
understood  and  adopted  it  energetically,  and  the  more 
securely  as  they  held  the  greater  part  of  the  body  in 
their  hands,  through  the  dispensation  of  benefices  and 
emoluments. 

The  struggle  between  absolute  monarchy  and 
oligarchy  lasted  really  for  two  centuries.  The  car- 
dinals wanted  the  Pope  to  be  absolute  and  omnipo- 
tent in  his  external  rule  over  national  Churches,  but 
they  sought  to  bind  him  by  conditions  at  the  time  of 


TJie  College  of  Cai'dinals.  209 

election,  and  by  a  recognised  share  in  tlie  government 
in  the  name  of  the  Curia.  Innocent  vi.,  in  1353,  had 
repudiated  any  such  conditions,  on  the  ground  that  tlie 
papal  power  bestowed  by  God  in  all  its  plenitude 
could  not  be  limited.  But  the  attempt  was  constantly 
renewed.  A  series  of  articles  was  put  forward  in  con- 
clave, which  the  new  Pope,  immediately  after  his  elec- 
tion, and  before  consecration,  swore  to  observe,  partly 
drawn  up  in  the  interests  of  the  cardinals,  as,  e.g.,  for 
a  participation  of  revenues  between  the  Pope  and  car- 
dinals, and  their  being  irremoveable,  partly  with  a  view 
of  restricting  the  worst  acts  of  extravagance  and  arbi- 
trary power  on  the  part  of  the  Popes,  by  requiring  the 
assent  of  the  cardinals.  Eugenius  iv.  confirmed  these 
articles  without  thereby  really  binding  himself.^  Pius 
II.  took  a  similar  oath,  and  sw^ore  to  reform  the  Eoman 
Ctiria.  It  was  an  urgent  necessity  to  keep  secret  these 
capitulations,  which  in  themselves  presented  a  gloomy 
picture  of  the  misgovernment  of  the  Church,  as  the  Popes 
of  that  age,  in  addition  to  all  the  other  bitter  complaints 
against  them,  would  have  been  charged  on  all  sides  with 
perj  ury.  Pius  ii.,  in  spite  of  the  articles  he  had  sworn  to, 
acted  just  as  arbitrarily  as  his  predecessors.   Nevertheless 

1  Raynald.  Annal.  aim.  1431. 
O 


2 1  o  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  oatli  imposed  on  Paul  ii.  in  conclave  in  1464  included 
still  more  articles.  He  was  to  have  them  read  in  public 
once  a  month,  and  to  allow  the  cardinals  to  assemble 
twice  a  year  to  discuss  how  the  Pope  had  kept  his 
oath.  Paul  soon  discovered,  and  was  told  by  his  flatterers, 
that  his  papal  freedom  was  too  much  limited,  and  ac- 
cordingly broke  his  oath,  and  compelled  or  induced  the 
cardinals  to  subscribe  a  new  and  entirely  changed  capitu- 
lation, without  reading  it.  He  dragged  back  Bessarion, 
who  was  escaping  from  the  room,  and  enforced  his 
signature  by  the  threat  of  excommunication.  He  re- 
warded the  cardinals  with  a  new  head-dress,  a  silk 
cap,  besides  a  scarlet  cape,  hitherto  only  worn  by  the 
Popes.-^  This  occurrence  did  not  prevent  them  from 
again  devising  a  capitulation,  on  the  death  of  Sixtus  IV. 
(1484),  for  the  new  Pope  to  swear  to ;  it  provided  afresh 
for  the  advantage  and  enrichment  of  the  cardinals  at 
the  expense  of  Church  discipline  and  order.  Inno- 
cent VIII.  took — and  broke  it.^ 

The  same  farce  was  enacted  with  Julius  ii.  in  1503. 
The  Popes  swore  to  summon  an  (Ecumenical  Council  at 
the  earliest  opportunity,  and  so  the  controversy  went 

1  Card.  Jacobi  Papiens.     Comment.  Francof.  1614,  p.  ?>12. 

2  Ptaynald.  Annal.  aim.  1484.  28. 


The  College  of  Cardinals,  2  1 1 

on  repeating  itseK  for  nearly  a  century,  the  cardinals 
wanting  a  larger  share  in  Church  government  and 
emoluments,  the  Popes  refusing  to  stint  themselves  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  their  despotic  power.  The 
victory  at  last,  as  was  inevitable,  remained  with  the 
Popes,  and  in  the  course  of  the  sixteenth  century  the 
cardinals  lost  again  the  rights  they  had  hitherto  main- 
tained, and  were  reduced  simply  to  advisers,  whom  the  - 
Pope  might  consult  or  not  as  he  pleased,  but  whose 
opinions  could  not  bind  him. 

It  seemed  like  a  Nemesis,  that  the  Popes,  who  since 
Gergory  vil's  time  were  so  ingenious  in  inventing  oaths 
to  entangle  men's  consciences  and  bring  everything 
under  their  own  power,  now  themselves  took  oaths, 
wdiich  they  regularly  broke.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  a 
riddle  how  the  very  cardinals  who  elected  a  Sixtus  iv., 
an  Innocent  viii.,  and  an  Alexander  vi.,  one  after  the 
other,  and  thereby  broke  their  own  oaths,  could  sup- 
pose a  Pope  would  be  really  withheld,  by  swearing  to 
certain  conditions  at  his  election,  from  the  seductions 
of  absolute  power.  It  was  perhaps  the  lesser  evil  that 
the  Popes  eventually  triumphed,  for  the  despotism  of 
an  oligarchy  is  apt  to  be  more  oppressive  than  that  of 
a  single  individual. 


2 1 2  Papal  Infallibility. 

Unquestionably  the  influence  over  Cliurcli  life  ex- 
ercised by  the  cardinals  was  mainly  an  injurious  one. 
The  institution  was  a  later  artificial  creation,  a  foreign 
and  disturbing  element  newly  interpolated,  a  thousand 
years  after  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  into  the  origi- 
nal hierarchy  based  on  the  ordinance  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles.  The  cardinals  wanted  to  excel  the  wealthiest 
bishops  in  expenditure,  pomp,  and  number  of  servants, 
and  Eome  and  the  environs  did  not  supply  means  for 
this.  They  wanted  to  provide  their  nephews  and 
friends  with  benefices,  and  to  enrich  their  families.  In 
their  interest,  and  to  satisfy  their  wants,  the  order  of  the 
Church  had  to  be  disintegrated,  heaping  incompatible 
of&ces  on  one  person  to  be  allowed,^  and  the  system  of 
increasing  the  revenues  of  the  GvLvia  by  simony  to  be 
constantly  extended.  It  was  they  who  lived  and  bat- 
tened on  the  grasping  corruption  of  the  Church.^  Before 
the  thirteenth  century  there  were  only  two  examples  of 
the  union  of  the  cardinalate  with  foreign  bishoprics,  but 
under  Innocent  iv.  (1250)  it  became  common,  and  thus  the 
Eoman  Church  supplied  the  precedent  of  the  contempt 

1  This  was  carried  so  far  in  the  fourteenth  century  that  one  cardinal 
held  five  hundred  benefices.  Cf.  "  De  corrupto  Eccles.  statu,"  Lydius' 
edition  of  Werke  Clemang.  1614,  p.  15, 

2  Alv.  Pelag.  De  Planet.  Eccl.  ii.  16,  f.  52. 


The  College  of  Cardinals,  2 1 3 

and  neglect  of  official  duties.  Jacob  of  Yitry  tliouglit, 
even  in  his  day,  the  revenues  of  the  whole  of  France  were 
insufficient  for  the  expenditure  of  the  cardinals.-^  The 
great  Schism,  from  1378  to  1429,  was  ascribed  by  Western 
Christendom  solely  to  their  greed  and  lust  of  power. 

In  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  the 
cardinals  sometimes  elected  Popes  not  of  their  own 
body,  but  this  never  occurred  after  the  middle  of  the 
fifteenth.  During  all  the  twelfth  and  the  first  half 
of  the  thirteenth  century  papal  elections  took  place 
within  a  few  days  of  the  decease  of  the  last  Pope, 
but  after  the  Papacy  had  reached  the  summit  of  its 
power,  and  the  Pope  was  regarded  as  the  spouse  of 
the  Church,  widowed  by  his  death,  long  vacancies, 
sometimes  of  years,  became  common.  It  seemed  as  if 
the  cardinals  wanted  to  show  the  world  by  a  rare  irony 
how  easily  the  Church  could  get  on  without  him  from 
whom,  in  the  new  theory,  all  her  authority  was  derived. 
Thus  Celestine  iv.  was  elected  after  a  vacancy  of  two 
years,  Gregory  x.  after  three,  Nicolas  iv.  after  one.  Two 
years  and  three  months  elapsed  between  his  death  and 
the  election  of  Celestine  v.  There  was  a  vacancy  of 
eleven  months  after  the  death  of  Benedict  XL,  and  of 

1  Ada  SanU-  Bollaud.  23  Juu.  p.  G75. 


214 


Papal  Infallibility. 


two  years  and  four  mouths  after  Cleuaeut  v.,  aud  the 
Christiau  world  had  to  get  accustouied  to  every  couclave 
beiug  the  theatre  of  intrigues  and  quarrels  between  the 
French  and  Italian  nations,  which  fought  for  the  pos- 
session of  the  Papacy,  till  at  last  the  Trench  acquired 
exclusive  possession  of  it. 

The  German  nation  was  practically  excluded  from 
the  College  of  Cardinals  at  that  time.  The  German 
Popes,  from  104G  to  1059,  made  no  German  cardinals. 
During  the  contest  of  the  Papacy  against  the  Salic  and 
Hohenstaufen  emperors,  some  Germans  who  declared 
themselves  against  the  Emperor  were  made  cardinals ; 
as  Cuno,  Cardinal-bishop  of  Prteneste  in  1114,  who,  more 
papal  than  the  Popes,  filled  all  Germany  with  excom- 
munications in  his  ofi6.ce  of  Legate.  After  him  there 
is  the  Cluniac,  Gerhard,  and  Ditwein  in  1134.  Then 
Conrad  of  Wittelsbach,  and  Siegfried  of  Eppenstein,  were 
appointed  on  account  of  their  hostility  to  the  Hohen- 
staufen, and  Conrad  of  Urach  by  Honorius  ill.  After 
him,  the  only  German  cardinal  in  the  thirteenth 
century  is  Oliverius  of  Paderborn,  and  then,  for  above 
a  century  and  a  half,  no  German  enjoyed  the  dignity. 
We  must  remember  that  every  German  would  lean  to 
the   imperial   side,  and   this,  especially    after   French 


The  College  of  Cardinals,  2 1 5 

policy  became  dominant  in  the  Curia,  would  secure 
their  exclusion.  Urban  VL,  in  1379,  when  repudiated 
by  the  French  and  in  the  extremest  distress,  was  the 
next  to  name  some  German  cardinals. 

§  HIV.— The  Curia. 
If  we  describe  the  great  change  which  took  place  be- 
tween the  end  of  the  eleventh  century  and  about  1130,  in 
the  space  of  some  forty  years,  by  saying  that  the  Roman 
Church  became  the  Roman  Court,  this  indicates  a  phe- 
nomenon of  world-wide  historical  interest  in  its  enor- 
mous consequences.  The  distinction  between  a  Church 
and  a  Court  is  in  truth  a  very  great  one.  By  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem,  or  Alexandria,  or  Ephesus,  or  Eome,  or 
Carthage,  had  always  been  understood  a  Christian 
people  united  with  their  bishop  and  presbyters,  a  com- 
munity of  clergy  and  laity  bound  together  by  the  ties 
of  brotherhood.^  Ordinary  matters  were  settled  in  the 
permanent  synod  of  the  bishop  and  his  clergy ;  weightier 
and  extraordinary  matters  in  a  council  composed  of  the 
neighbouring  bishops.  In  such  a  Church  there  were 
laymen   bishops    and  priests   teaching  and  dispensing 

1  Thus  in  the  well-known  definition  of  St.  Cyprian  {E2).  C9),  "  Ecclcsia 
est  sacerdoti  plebs  adunata  et  pastori  grex  adhc.eren3." 


2 1 6  Papal  Infallibilify. 

sacraments,  but  no  legal  functionaries.  Such  a  Church 
could  never  become  a  court  as  long  as  the  ecclesi- 
astical spirit  and  usage  prevailed.  But  now  what  used 
to  be  called  the  Eoman  Church  had  become  a  Court, 
that  is  to  say,  an  arena  of  rival  litigants  ;  a  chancery 
of  writers,  notaries,  and  tax-gatherers,  where  transac- 
tions about  privileges,  dispensations,  exemptions,  etc., 
were  carried  on,  and  suitors  went  with  petitions  from 
door  to  door ;  a  rallying-point  for  clerical  place-hunters 
from  every  nation  of  Europe.  In  earlier  days  those  who 
were  ordained  for  the  divine  service  in  Eome  and  the 
Eoman  Church  had  managed  the  business  which  its  supe- 
rior rank  rendered  necessary.  Weightier  matters  were 
settled  at  synods  comprising  the  bishops  of  the  province, 
and  a  few  persons  suf&ced  for  so  limited  a  circle  of  affairs 
as  is  indicated  by  the  official  collection  of  formularies, 
the  LihcT  Bmrnus,  so  late  as  the  beginning  of  the  eighth 
century.  What  a  complete  difference  after  the  Worms 
Concordat  of  1 1 2  2,  and  still  more  after  Gratian !  In  com- 
parison with  the  enormous  mass  of  business,  processes, 
graces,  indulgences,  absolutions,  commands,  and  de- 
cisions addressed  to  the  remotest  countries  of  Europe, 
and  even  to  Asia,  the  functions  of  the  local  Church 
service  sunk  into  insignificance,  and  a  troop  of  some 


The  Curia.  217 

Imndreds  of  persons  was  required  whose  home  was  the 
Curia,  and  their  ambition  to  rise  in  it,  and  whose  constant 
aim  was  to  contrive  fresh  financial  transactions,  to  mul- 
tiply taxes,  and  enlarge  the  profits  that  accrued  to  them 
and  the  papal  treasury,  which  was  always  in  want. 
Secure  and  unassailable  in  the  service  of  such  a  power, 
the  officials  of  the  Curia  did  not  trouble  themselves 
about  tlie  hatred  and  contempt  of  the  world  which 
had  been  made  tributary  to  them.  "  Oderint,  dum 
metuant."-^  The  warnings  of  the  most  enlightened 
men  were  vain.  Early  in  the  twelfth  century,  the  great 
danger  this  change  of  the  Eoman  Church  into  a  Court 
must  bring  upon  the  Christian  world  had  been  seen 
through  by  men  like  Gerhoch  of  Eeigersberg,  St.  Ber- 
nard, John  of  Salisbury,  Peter  of  Blois,  and  almost  all 
in  that  age  whose  mind  we  are  still  acquainted  with.^ 

1  What  giant  strides  centralization  had  made,  and  tlie  consequent  in- 
crease of  the  business  of  tlie  Curia,  may  be  illustrated  from  the  case  of  a 
single  official.  About  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century  there  was  but 
one  "  Auditor  Canierse."  About  137",  twenty  auditors  were  hardly  enough 
for  the  Pope  alone,  and  every  cardinal  had  several  besides.  Cf.  Baluze 
and  Mansi,  Miscel.  1.  479.  It  is  mentioned  here  that  imder  Gregory  xi. 
seven  bishops  were  at  one  time  under  excommunication,  simply  for  not 
having  paid  the  "  servitia"  for  the  decree  of  provisions. 

-  Gerhoch  observes  in  his  letter  to  Eugenius  irr.,  about  1150,  "De  cor- 
rupto  Ecclesie  statu"  (Baluz.  Miscel.  v.  63),  as  something  new  and 
deplorable,  "quod nunc dicitur  Curia  Romana  quod  antea  dicebatur  Eccle- 
sia  Romana."  In  his  woi-k,  written  some  fifteen  years  later,  De  Investi- 
gationc  Autichristi,  he  painted  in  darker  colours  the  disintegration  of  the 


2 1 8  Papal  Infallibility. 

Jacob  of  Vitiy,  who  subsequently  became  a  cardinal, 
after  making  some  stay  at  the  Court,  perceived,  as  lie 
writes  to  his  friend  (12 16),  that  it  had  lost  every  vestige 
of  real  Church  spirit,  and  its  members  busied  them- 
selves solely  with  politics,  litigation,  and  processes,  and 
never  breathed  a  syllable  about  spiritual  concerns.^ 

Among  the  bishops  of  Innocent  iv.'s  time  there  w^as 
not  one  more  highly  honoured  and  admired  than  Gros- 
tete.  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  nor  one  for  a  long  time  more 
devoted  to  the  Pope.  Dominated  by  Gratian  and  the 
Gregorian  system,  he  supposed  his  episcopal  jurisdic- 
tion was  simply  intrusted  to  him  as  a  derivation  from 
the  papal.  But  the  corruptions,  which  like  a  poisonous 
miasma  penetrated  from  the  Guria  into  every  portion 
of  the  Church,  the  gross  hypocrisy  exhibited  in  declar- 
ing the  taking  of  interest  a  mortal  sin,  while  the  papal 
usurers  and  brokers  exhausted  the  churches  and  corpora- 
tions in  all  countries  w^th  usurious  imposts,  and,  begin- 
ning from  London,  had  made  every  English  bishopric 

Clnirch  through  exemptions  bought  at  Rome,  and  the  greed  of  the  Romans 
Cf .  A  rchiv.  far  osterreich.  Geschichlsquellen,  xx.  140  seq.  He  variously  sup 
plements  and  confirms  St.  Bernard's  complaints  about  the  disorder  at  Rome 
1  Saint  Genois,  Sur  les  Lettres  inedites  de  Jacques  de  Vitry,  Bruxelles 
1846,  p.  31.—  "  Cum  autem  aliquanto  tempore  fuissem  in  curia,  multa  in 
veni  spiritui  meo  contraria,  adeo  enim  circa  saecularia  et  temporalia,  circa 
reges  et  regna,  circa  lites  et  jurgia  occupati  erant,  quod  vix  de  spirituali- 
bus  aliquid  loqui  permittebant." 


The  Curia.  2 1 9 

tributary  to  them  ;  this  and  a  great  deal  more  led  him 
shortly  before  his  death  to  reproach  the  Pope  with  his 
tyrannical  conduct  in  a  letter  sharply  warning  him  to 
repent ;  and  he  still  prophesied,  when  on  his  deathbed, 
that  the  Egyptian  bondage,  to  which  the  whole  Church 
had  been  degraded  by  the  Eoman  Curia,  would  become 
yet  worse.'^ 

Somewhat  later,  when  Pope  Mcolas  III.  wanted  to 
make  John  of  Parma,  General  of  the  Minorites,  whom 
Pius  IV.  beatified  in  1777,  a  cardinal,  he  declined,  say- 
ing : — "  The  Eoman  Church  hardly  concerns  itself  with 
anything  but  wars  and  juggleries  ('  triiffce ') ;  for  the  sal- 
vation of  souls  it  takes  no  care,"  The  Pope  answered, 
sighing,    "We    are    so    accustomed    to    these    things 

1  Epist.  Roherti  O.,  ed.  Luard,  p.  432,  Loud.  1861 ;  Matt.  Par.,  Hist. 
Angl.  p.  586,  Paris  1644.  — [There  is  a  airious  story  told  in  the  Liber 
Monasteriide3Ielsd{ecl.  E.  A.  Bond,  vol.  ii.  London,  1867,  in  the  Master  of 
the  Rolls'  Series)  which  illustrates  the  contemporary  view  of  the  sulyect  in 
England,  as  to  why  "St.  Robert  Grostete,"  as  the  monastic  chronicler 
calls  him,  was  not  canonized.  It  is  said  that,  being  summoned  to  Rome 
by  Innocent  iv.  and  excommunicated,  he  appealed  from  the  judgment  of 
the  Pope  to  the  tribunal  of  Christ,  and  two  years  after  his  death  appeared 
by  night  to  Innocent,  in  full  pontificals,  saying,  "  Arise,  wretched  man, 
and  come  to  judgment,"  and  struck  him  Avitli  his  pastoral  staff.  In  the 
morning  the  bed  was  found  covered  with  blood  and  the  Pope  dead.  "And 
therefore,"  adds  the  chronicler,  "the  Curia  would  not  let  him  be  canonized, 
although  he  was  honoured  by  illustrious  miracles."  Cf.  for  another  ver 
sion  of  the  story,  IMilman's  Lat.  Christ,  vi.  293.  It  is  true  that  Grostete 
excited  the  Pope's  anger  by  refusing  to  confer  a  rich  canonry  at  Lincoln  oa 
his  nephew,  a  young  boy  {jouerulus),  but  not  true  that  he  was  excommuui- 
cated.-TB.] 


2  2  o  Papal  Infallibility. 

that   we   tliink    everything  we   say  and  do   is   really 
beneficial."  ^ 

From  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century  the  whole  secu- 
lar and  religious  literature  of  Europe  grew  more  and  more 
hostile  to  the  Pa^Dacy  and  the  Curia.  German  as  well 
as  Provencal  poetry,  historians  as  well  as  theologians — 
none  of  them  as  a  rule  attack  the  authority  or  rights  of 
the  Pope,  but  they  all  abound  in  sharp  denunciations  and 
bitter  complaints  of  the  decay  of  the  Church  occasioned 
by  Ptome,  the  demoralization  of  the  clergy  corrupted  by 
the  Curia,  the  simony  of  an  ecclesiastical  court  where 
every  stroke  of  a  pen,  and  every  transaction,  has  its 
price,  where  benefices,  dispensations,  licenses,  absolu- 
tions, indulgences,  and  privileges  are  bought  like  so  much 
merchandise.  St.  Hildegard,  that  famous  prophetess 
on  the  PJiine,  highly  honoured  by  Popes  and  Emperors, 
predicted  of  the  Popes,  as  early  as  1170,— "They  seize 
upon  us,  like  ravening  beasts,  with  their  power  of  bind- 
ing and  loosing,  and  through  them  the  whole  Church 
is  withered.  They  desire  to  subjugate  the  kingdoms  of 
the  world,  but  the  nations  will  rise  against  them  and 
the  too  rich  and  haughty  clergy,  whose  property  they 
will  reduce  to  its  right  limits.     The  pride  of  the  Popes, 

^  Salimbeue,  in  Aflo's  Yit.  del  B.  Giov.  di  Panna,  1777,  p.   169. 


The  Curia.  2  2 1 

who  no  longer  observe  any  religion,  will  be  brought 
low  ;  Rome  and  its  immediate  neighbourhood  will  alone 
be  left  to  tliem,  partly  in  consequence  of  wars,  partly 
by  the  common  agreement  of  the  States."  ^ 

More  cutting  and  more  terrible  sound  the  words  of 
the  northern  prophetess,  St.  Bridget,  who  lived  in  Eome 
some  two  centuries  later.  It  has  not  prejudiced  the 
high  reverence  felt  for  her  visions,  universally  regarded 
as  inspired,  and  defended  in  an  express  treatise  by 
Cardinal  Torquemada,  that  they  contain  the  most  vivid 
pictures  of  the  corruption  of  the  Papal  See  and  its 
Court,  and  their  mischievous  influence  on  the  Church. 
She  calls  the  Pope  worse  than  Lucifer,  a  murderer  of 
the  souls  intrusted  to  him,  wlio  condemns  the  innocent 
and  sells  the  elect  for  filthy  lucre.^ 

Every  one  told  the  same  tale.  Bishops  and  abbots 
had  to  exhaust  and  denude  their  churches  and  estab- 
lishments to  satisfy  the  greed  of  the  court  officials  and 
get  their  causes  settled.^  They  bid  against  each  other 
in  bribery.     Every  one,  from  doorkeeper  to  Pope,  had 


^  This  remarkable  prophecy,  with  many  more  of  St.  Hildegard's,  is  in  the 
collections  of  Baluze  and  Mansi,  Miscel.  ii.  444-447. 

2  Revel,  i.  c.  41,  p.  49,  cf.  iv.  c.  49,  p.  211. 

3  Bishop  Stephen  of  Tournay,  in  1192,  said,  "Romano  plumbo  nudantur 
cclesise."— yi/>.  16. 


2  2  2  Papal  Injallibility. 

to  be  paid  and  fee'd,  or  the  case  was  lost.  It  may  be 
seen  from  the  accounts  of  ambassadors,  e.g.,  of  the  de- 
puties sent  in  1292  from  the  Commune  of  Bruges,  that 
giving  once  was  not  enough,  but  the  fee  had  to  be  con- 
stantly repeated  as  long  as  the  process  lasted.-^  The 
cardinals'  and  Popes'  nephews  were  quite  inordinately 
insatiable.  The  jurist,  Peter  Dubois,  thought  it  a  mis- 
fortune for  the  whole  of  Christendom  that  the  cardinals 
found  themselves  compelled  to  live  by  robbery,  as  their 
benefices  were  not  productive  enough.  The  upshot  was, 
that  poor  men  could  neither  hope  to  gain  preferment 
nor  could  keep  it,  and  bishops  entered  on  their  office 
already  loaded  with  heavy  debts,  which  were  further 
augmented  by  the  annates  introduced  in  the  fourteenth 
century. 

In  the  eleventh  century  there  was  an  energetic  move- 
ment throughout  the  whole  Church  with  a  view  to 
putting  an  end  to  the  sale  of  benefices  at  royal  courts, 
but  now  the  Eoman  Court  had  made  simony  the 
supreme  power  everywhere.  The  little  finger  of  the 
Curia  pressed  more  heavily  on  the  churches  than  ever 

1  They  may  be  found  in  Kervyn  of  Lettenhove,  Hist,  de  Flanclre,  ii,  589. 
Again  Herculano  {Hist,  de  Portugcd)  cites  from  the  Codex  Vatican.  3457, 
a  bill  of  the  Archbishop  of  Bruges,  showing  that  he  paid  through  the 
Pk,oman  bankers  the  sura  of  3000  florins  to  nineteen  cardinals  in  1226. 


The  Curia.  223 

the  arm  of  kings.  No  oue  "knew  what  remedy  to  suggest ; 
complaints  and  reproaches  were  disregarded,  and  synods 
were  powerless  and  condemned  to  silence  in  the  absence 
of  the  Pope  or  his  legates.  Every  cleric  excused  his 
simonaical  conduct  by  the  example  of  the  Eoman  Church. 
It  was  the  common  saying,  that  every  one  was  taught 
from  youth  upwards  to  look  on  the  Eoman  Church  as  the 
mistress  of  doctrine  and  the  bright  example  for  all  other 
Churches;  that  what  she  approved  and  ojoenly  practised 
others  must  also  approve  and  copy,  and  that  they  might 
on  their  side  make  their  profits  out  of  spiritual  minis- 
tries and  sacraments  who  had  dearly  bought  the  right 
to  do  so  at  Eome  with  their  benefices,  and  who,  indeed, 
could  in  no  other  way  pay  off  the  debts  incurred  there. 

§  XV. — The  Judgments  of  Contemjooraries. 

Bishop  Durandus  of  Mende  contemplates  the  Church 
of  his  age  from  many  points  of  view,  especially  its  con- 
dition in  1310  in  Italy  and  the  south  of  France,  but 
he  is  always  brought  back  to  the  one  crying  evil,  and 
source  of  so  many  corruptions,  the  papal  Court.  "  It  is  that 
Court,"  he  says,  "  which  has  drawn  all  tilings  to  itself, 
and  is  in  danger  of  losing  all.  It  is  always  sending  out 
into  the  various  dioceses  immoral  clerks,  provided  with 


2  24  Papal  Infallibility. 

benefices,  whom  the  bishops  are  obliged  obediently  to 
receive,  while  they  have  no  persons  fit  for  the  work 
of  the  Church.  It  is  continually  extorting  large  sums 
from  prelates,  to  be  shared  between  the  Pope  and  his 
cardinals,  and  by  this  simony  is  corrupting  the  Uni- 
versal Church  to  the  utmost  of  its  power.  While  the 
Curia  goes  on  in  this  way,  all  remedies  for  the  Church 
are  vain."-^  He  then  enumerates  the  most  necessary 
reforms,  without  which  the  Church  must  sink  deeper 
and  deeper  in  corruption,  but  they  cut,  in  fact,  at  the 
roots  of  the  whole  papal  system  as  it  had  existed  for 
200  years,  and  therefore  his  book  produced  no  effect 
worth  mentioning,  though  the  Pope  asked  for  it,  and 
it  was  laid  before  the  Council  of  Yienne. 

^  Durandus  says  the  Roman  Chtirch  is  reviled  in  every  country. 
Every  one  is  ashamed  of  her,  and  charges  her  vt'ith  corrupting  the  whole 
clergy,  whose  immorality  has  exposed  them  to  universal  hatred.  It  is  the 
faultof  the  Cwna,  he  says,  "ut  .  .  .  inde  tota  Ecclesia  vilipendatur  et  quasi 
coutemptui  haloeatur."— Trac^.  de  modo  Gen.  Condi,  celeb.  (Paris,  1761), 
p.  300.  He,  at  the  same  time,  differs  widely  in  his  devotion  to  the  Pope 
from  his  contemporaries  Pelayo  and  Trionfo,  He  maintains  the  Pope's 
absolute  dominion  over  monarchs,  and  insists  on  the  Donation  of  Constan- 
stine,  and  the  rights  that  flow  from  it.  But  he  desiderates  a  certain  decen- 
tralization. He  wants  the  Curia,  which  has  absorbed  all  Church  rights 
and  jurisdiction,  to  give  back  some  of  them,  and  restore  to  national  Churches 
and  bishops  some  freedom  of  action.  See  Tract,  {ut  sup.),  p.  294,  where 
he  says  the  Pioman  Court  understands  "  omnia  traham  ad  Me  Ipsum"  as 
authorizing  its  appropriating  the  rights  of  all  others  exclusively  to  itself. 
One  would  like  to  know  whether  this  book,  wliich  holds  up  to  the  Pojie 
and  cardinals,  as  in  a  mirror,  so  terrible  a  reflection  of  their  misdeeds  and 
iniquitous  acts  against  the  Church,  was  ever  read  in  Avignon. 


Contemporary  Jtidgnients,  225 

One  of  the  Frencli  Popes,  Urban  v.,  who  had  some 
good  instincts,  acknowledged  the  misery  and  corruption 
of  the  Church,  and  thought  (in  1368)  the  cessation  of 
Councils  was  the  main  cause  of  the  mischief.^  But  he 
did  not  perceive,  or  at  least  did  not  say,  that  this  was 
the  fault  of  his  i^redecessors,  whose  systematic  policy 
had  brought  matters  to  such  a  pass  that  it  was  partly 
impossible  and  partly  useless  to  hold  Councils.  This 
state  of  things  led  theologians,  who  wished  to  use  Bib- 
lical language,  to  appropriate  involuntarily  the  sayings 
of  Old  Testament  prophets  on  the  corruptions  of  their 
people,  and  to  describe  the  Church  of  the  day  as  the 
venal  harlot  whose  shame  God  would  shortly  uncover 
in  sight  of  all  men.  Nicolas  Oresme,  Bishop  of  Lisieux, 
for  instance,  does  so  in  an  address  before  Urban  v.  and 
the  cardinals  at  Avignon  in  1363.^  Great,  indeed,  must 
have  been  the  evil,  when  even  bishops  applied  such 
expressions  and  metaphois  to  the  Church  and  the  Papal 
See  ;  which  coincided  with  those  used  by  the  sectaries 
of  the  time,  and  bordered  closely  on  suspicious  inferences 
as  to  their  right  of  separating  from  so  terribly  corrupt 
an  institution. 

AVhen  we  read  all  these  accusations  and  these  descrip- 

1  Condi,  (ed.  Labbe),  xi.  195S.        "  Bro^^al,  Fasc.  Rev.  Expet.  ii.  487. 
P 


2  26  Papal  Infallibility. 

tions,  agreeing  in  the  main,  of  the  Curia  and  the  Papal 
administration — and  the  strongest  things  are  invariably 
said  by  eye-witnesses, — and  observe  how  the  impressions 
and  experiences  of  all  classes  are  the  same,  we  can 
understand  how  the  Apocalyptic  images  and  their  ful- 
filment in  Eome  and  in  the  Curia  occurred  to  every 
mind.  The  transference  of  power  from  Italians  to 
Frenchmen,  through  the  removal  of  the  Curia  to  Avig- 
non, and  the  succession  of  French  Popes  who  appointed 
for  the  most  part  cardinals  of  their  own  nation  only,  led 
to  no  important  change.  Only  the  Italians  then  became 
as  keen- sighted  as  others  in  detecting  the  corruption  of 
the  Church,  for  the  Papacy,  with  all  its  endless  resources 
for  the  enrichment  of  so  many  Italian  families,  had 
slipped  out  of  their  grasp.  They  felt  what  Italy,  or 
rather  what  "  the  Latin  race,"  had  thereby  lost,  for  as  yet 
there  was  no  Italian  but  only  a  Latin  national  senti- 
ment. Lombardy  was  half  German.  The  inhabitants 
of  Tuscany  and  the  States  of  the  Church  believed  them- 
selves the  genuine  and  only  rightful  descendants  of 
the  old  Ptomans,  and  entitled,  as  such,  to  rule  the  world 
through  the  Papacy,  which  was  their  appanage;  and 
thus  Dante  urges  them  in  his  letters  not  to  endure 
any  longer  that    the    fame   and  honour  of  the  Latin 


Con  temporary  ytidgmen  is.  227 

name  should  be  disgraced  by  the  avarice  of  the  Gascons^ 
(Clement  v.  and  John  xxii.)  Even  a  man  like  St. 
Bonaventure,  whom  the  Popes  had  loaded  with  honours, 
and  who  was  bound  by  the  closest  ties  to  Eome  as  a 
cardinal  and  General  of  his  Order,  did  not  hesitate  in 
his  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse  to  declare  Eome  to 
be  the  harlot  who  makes  kings  and  nations  drunk  with 
the  wine  of  her  whoredoms.  For  in  Eome,  he  said, 
(Jhurch  dignities  were  bought  and  sold,  there  did  the 
princes  and  rulers  of  the  Church  assemble,  dishonouring 
God  by  their  incontinence,  adherents  of  Satan,  and 
plunderers  of  the  flock  of  Christ.  He  adds  that  the 
prelates,  corrupted  by  Eome,  infect  the  clergy  with  their 
vices ;  and  the  clergy,  by  their  evil  example  of  avarice 
and  profligacy,  poison  and  lead  to  perdition  the  whole 
Christian  people.^  If  the  General  of  the  Order  spoke 
thus  of  the  Eoman  Court,  we  may  easily  comprehend 
how  its  stricter  members,  the  "  Spirituals,"  went  further 
still,  and  called  the  Curia  the  utterly  corrupt  "  carnal 
Church,"  and  predicted  a  great  renewal  and  purifica- 
tion through  a  holy  Pope,  the  Fa'pa  AngelicuSj  long 
looked  for,  but  never  willing  to  appear. 

1  Epist.  ed.  Torsi,  Livomo,  1843,  p.  90. 

2  Opcr.  Omn.  Supplem.  suh  ar(sp.  Clem.  xiv.  Tricl.  1773,  ii.  729,  755, 
S15.     Cr.  Apol.  contra  eos  (pii  Qi'd.  Min.  aversantur,  Q.  1, 


2  2  8  Papal  Infallibility . 

It  was  not,  therefore,  as  was  commonly  said,  from 
the  blindness  of  Ghibelline  party  spirit  that  Dante  too 
applied  to  the  Popes  the  Apocalyptic  prophecy  of  the 
harlot  on  the  seven  hills  who  is  drunk  with  the  blood 
of  men,  and  seduces  princes  and  peoples ;  he  had  read 
St.  Bonaventure,  and  puts  directly  into  his  mouth  in 
Paradise  the  denunciation  on  the  covetous  policy  of  the 
Court  of  Eome.-^  It  had  occurred  to  him,  as  to  others, 
that  the  Papacy  was  in  fact  the  hostile  power  which 
weakened  and  unsettled  the  Empire,  and  was  promoting 
its  fall,  and  was  thus  furthering  and  hastening  the 
appearance  of  Antichrist,  who  was  held  in  check  by 
the  continuance  of  the  Empire.  And  why  should 
Dante  scruple  to  speak  out,  when  almost  at  the  same 
time  a  bishop  and  official  of  the  Papal  Court,  Alvaro 
Pelayo,  pointed,  from  long  personal  experience  and 
observation,  to  the  very  details  which  showed  the 
fulfilment  of  St.  John's  prophecy  of  the  harlot  in  the 
then  condition  of  the  Papacy?^  Yet  the  whole  of 
his  great  work  is  devoted  to  proving  that  the  Papacy 

1  Parad.  xii.  91-94. 

*  Pelayo  says  {Be  Planet.  Eccl.  ii.  28)  "Ecclesia,"  but  the  context  shows 
that  the  Court  of  Avignon  is  meant ;  and  he  says  afterwards  (37),  "  Con- 
sidering the  Papal  Court  has  filled  the  whole  Church  -with  simony,  and  the 
consequent  corruption  of  religion,  it  is  natural  enough  the  heretics  should 
call  the  Church  the  whore." 


Contemporary  J' udgmcnts.  229 

is  the  power  ordained  by  God  to  rule  absolutely  the 
world  and  the  Church.  It  is  very  instructive  to  ob- 
serve how  this  man,  while  examining  the  condition  of 
the  Church  from  every  side,  and  painting  it  in  lively 
colours,  is  obliged  again  and  again  to  confess  that  it  is 
the  Papal  See  itself,  and  that  alone,  which  has  infected 
the  whole  Church  with  the  poison  of  its  avarice,  its 
ambition,  and  its  pride;  that  the  clergy  had  become 
bitterly  hated  for  their  vices  by  the  whole  lay  world, 
and  that  the  Eoman  Court  was  mainly  responsible  for 
their  corruption.  All  this  is  conspicuous  on  almost 
every  page  of  his  work.  He  observes  that  tlie  bad 
example  given  by  the  Popes  is  universally  followed,  and 
the  prelates  say,  "  The  Pope  does  so,  and  why  not  we?" 
Thus  the  whole  Church  is  turned,  as  it  were,  into  blood, 
and  there  is  an  universal  darkening  of  head  and  mem- 
bers.-^ But  if  the  reader  expects  Pelayo  to  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  old  order  in  the  Church  should  be 
restored  as  far  as  possible,  and  a  limit  be  set  to  tliis 
unlimited  despotism,  he  will  find  himself  greatly  mis- 
taken. He  holds  to  the  principle  that  the  Pope  is 
God's  representative  on  earth,  and  that  one   can   no 

1  Be  Planet.  Eccl.  ii.  48,  49.  The  work  Avas  written  in  1329.  The 
author  says  that  even  right-minded  jieople  no  longer  dare  to  utter  the  truth 
because  of  the  persecution  it  wouhl  entail.   Yet  he  became  Bibhop  of  Silva. 


230  Papal  Infallibility. 

more  dream  of  setting  limits  to  his  power,  than  any- 
body, or  the  whole  Christian  world,  would  undertake 
to  limit  the  omnipotence  of  God. 

His  contemporary,  Agostino  Trionfo  of  Ancona,  an 
Augustinian  monk,  who  wrote  his  Summa  on  the 
Church  by  command  of  John  xxii,  had  already  dis- 
covered a  new  kingdom  for  the  Pope  to  rule  over.  It 
had  been  said  before  that  the  power  of  God's  vicar  ex- 
tended over  two  realms,  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly, 
meaning  by  the  latter  that  the  Pope  could  open  or  close 
heaven  at  his  pleasure.  Prom  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century  a  third  realm  was  added,  the  empire  over 
which  was  assigned  to  the  Pope  by  the  theologians  of 
the  Curia — Purgatory.  Trionfo,  commissioned  by  John 
XXII.  to  expound  the  rights  of  the  Pope,  showed  that,  as 
the  dispenser  of  the  merits  of  Christ,  he  could  empty 
Purgatory  at  one  stroke,  by  his  Indulgences,  of  all  the 
souls  detained  there,  on  the  sole  condition  that  some- 
body fulfilled  the  rules  laid  down  for  gaining  those 
indulgences  ;  he  advises  the  Pope,  however,  not  to 
do  this.-^  Only  those  of  the  unbaptized,  whom  God 
by  His  extraordinary  mercy  placed  in  purgatory,  were 
not  amenable  there  to  the  Pope's  jurisdiction.     Trionfo 

1  Summa  de  Pot.  EccL,  Eomec,  1584,  p.  193. 


Contanporary  J iidgmcnts.  231 

observes  rightly  enough  that  he  believes  the  Pope's 
power  is  so  immeasurably  great,  that  no  Pope  can  ever 
know  the  full  extent  of  it."^ 

Petrarch,  who   for  years  had  closely  observed  the  . 
Owria,  saw  and  felt,  somewhat  later  (1350),  like   St. 
Bonaventure,  Dante,  and  Pelayo.      In  his  eyes,  too,  it 
is  the  Apocalyptic  woman   drunken  with  blood,  the 
seducer  of  Christians,  and  plague  of  the  human  race. 
His  descriptions  are  so  frightful,  that  one  would  sup-  . 
pose  them  the  exaggerations  of  hatred,  were  they  not  • 
confirmed  by  all  his  contemporaries.^     The  letter  of  the  - 
Augustinian   monk   of  Florence,   Luigi   jMarsigli,   Pe- 
trarch's friend  and  pupil,  is  quite  as  outspoken  about 
the    Papal    Court,    which    no    longer    ruled   through 
hypocrisy — so    openly   did   it   flaunt    its   vices — but 
only  through  the  dread  inspired  by  its  interdicts  and 
excommunications.^ 

For  four  centuries,  from  all  nations  and  in  all  tongues,  . 

1  ''  Nee  credo  quod  Papa  possit  scire  totum  quod  potest  facere  per  poten- 
tiam  suam."  Sucli  tilings  were  written  in  1320  at  tlie  Pope's  command, 
and  in  15S4,  when  tliis  work,  which  exhibits  the  Church  as  a  dwarf  with  a 
giant's  head,  was  republished  by  the  Papal  sacristan  Fivizani,  Gregory  xni. 
accepted  the  dedication. 

2  Epist.  sine  Titulo.  0pp.  ii.  719. 

3  Lettera  del  Ven.  Maestro  L.  M.  contro  i  vizi  della  Corte  del  Papa, 
Geneva,  1859.  He  calls  the  cardinals  "  avari,  dissoluti,  importuni,  e 
sfacciati  Limogini,"  most  of  them  being  of  the  province  of  Limousin,  and 
the  Curia  at  this  time  entirely  in  their  hands. 


232  Papal  Infallibility. 

were  thousandfold  accusations  raised  against  the  ambi- 
tion, tyranny,  and  greed  of  the  Popes,  their  profanation  of 
holy  things,  and  their  making  all  the  nations  of  Christen- 
dom the  prey  of  their  rapacity ;  and,  what  is  still  more 
surprising,  in  all  this  long  period  no  one  attempted  to 
refute  these  charges,  or  to  represent  them  as  calumnies 
or  even  exaggerations.  The  Eoman  Court,  indeed, 
always  found  champions  of  its  rights,  knowing,  as  it  did 
so  well,  how  to  reward  them  for  their  services.  The  later 
scholasticism  moulded  on  Sfc.  Thomas,  the  copious  litera- 
ture of  canon  law,  and  the  host  of  decretalists  on  the 
side  of  the  Curia, — Italians  first,  and  then  from  1305  to 
1375  from  the  south  of  France, — who  fought  and  wrote 
for  the  Papacy  as  their  special  and  eminently  profitable 
subject,  never  yielded  an  inch  of  the  enormous  jurisdic- 
tion it  had  already  acquired,  but  were  always  spinning 
out  fresh  corollaries  of  its  previously  acknowledged 
rights.  During  the  long  period  from  1230  to  1520  the 
parasites  of  the  Eoman  Court  ruled  and  cultivated  the 
domain  of  canon  law  as  interpreters  of  the  new  codes : 
or,  in  the  scriptural  language  of  the  cardinals  who  com- 
posed the  Opinion  of  1538,  the  Popes  heaped  up  for 
themselves  teachers  after  their   lusts,  havinq;   itchinj^ 

^  O  CD 

ears,   to    invent   cunning    devices    for   building   up   a 


Contemporary  Judgments.  233 

system  whicli  made  it  lawful  for  the  Pope  to  do  exactly 
what  he  pleased.^ 

Nevertheless,  not  one  of  all  this  multitude  undertook 
the  defence  of  the  Popes  and  their  government  against 
the  flood  of  reproaches  and  accusations  which  rolled  up 
from  all  sides  upon  them,  nor  one  of  the  theologians 
and  practical  Church  writers  ;  all  confined  themselves 
to  the  question  of  legitimate  right.  They  insist  conti- 
nually that  the  first  See  can  be  judged  by  no  man,  that 
"none  may  dare  say  to  the  most  reprobate  and  mischiev- 
ous of  Popes,  "A"\^iy  dost  thou  do  so?"  One  must 
endure  anything  silently  and  patiently,  bending  humbly 
beneath  the  rod.  That  is  all  they  have  to  say ;  only 
now  and  then  the  indignation  of  the  secular  and  married 
jurists,  who  could  not  hold  benefices,  broke  out  against 
the  clergy,  who  reserved  all  the  good  things  of  this  world 
to  themselves.  Or  they  intimated  the  ground  of  their 
silence  and  connivance,  like  Bartolo,  who  said,  "  As  we 
live  in  the  territory  of  the  (Eoman)  Church,  we  affirm 
the  Donation  of  Constantine  to  be  valid." 

1  Consil.  Delect.  Card.  p.  106,  in  Durandus,  Tract,  cle  Modo  Concil. 
Paris,  1671 ;  "  ut  eorum  studio  et  calliditate  inveniretur  ratio,  qua  liceret  id 
quod  liberet."  The  Opinion  was  drawn  up  by  Cardinal  Caraffa,  with  the  as- 
sistance of  the  most  respected  men  in  Italy,  but  when  he  became  Pope 
Paul  IV.  he  had  the  Consilium  put  on  the  Index.  There  have  not  been 
wanting  persons  who  regarded  it  as  an  act  of  heroism  for  a  Pope  to  put 
himself  on  the  Index. 


2  34  Papal  Infallibility. 

But  the  strength  of  a  power  like  the  papal  must  rest 
ultimately  on  public  opinion ;  only  while  contemporaries 
are  convinced  of  its  legitimacy,  and  believe  that  its  use 
really  rests  on  a  higher  will,  can  it  maintain  itself.  In 
the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  no  one  in  Europe 
knew  or  even  suspected  the  true  state  of  the  case ;  no 
one  was  able  to  distinguish  between  the  original  germ 
of  the  primacy  in  the  apostolic  age  and  that  colossal 
monarchy  which  presented  itself  before  the  deluded 
eyes  of  men  as  a  work  that  came  ready-made  from  the 
hand  of  God.  The  notion  that  manifold  forgeries  and 
inventions  had  co-operated  with  favourable  circum- 
stances to  foster  its  growth,  would  have  been  generally 
rejected  as  blasphemy.  They  grumbled  at  the  use  the 
Popes  made  of  their  power,  but  did  not  question  their 
right  to  it,  and  the  obedience  paid  was  more  willing 
than  enforced.  At  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, and  after  the  commencement  of  the  Great  Schism, 
a  few  men,  like  Gerson,  D'Ailly,  and  Zabarella,  began 
to  open  their  eyes  gradually  to  the  truth,  as  they  com- 
pared the  existing  state  of  the  law  with  the  ancient 
canons.  They  saw  there  must  have  been  a  portentous 
revolution  somewhere,  but  how  or  when  it  happened 
they  were  still  ignorant. 


The  Inquisiiion.  235 

§  XVI. — The  Inquisition. 

A  wholly  new  institution  and  mighty  organization 
had  been  introduced  to  make  the  papal  system  irresis- 
tible, to  impede  any  disclosure  of  its  rotten  foundations, 
and  to  bring  the  infallibility  theory  into  full  possession : 
it  was  the  Inquisition. 

Through  the  influence  of  Gratian,  who  chiefly  fol- 
lowed Ivo  of  Chartres,  and  through  the  legislation  and 
unwearied  activity  of  the  Popes  and  their  legates  since 
1183,  the  view  of  the  ancient  Church  on  the  treatment 
of  the  heterodox  had  been  for  a  long  period  completely 
superseded,  and  the  principle  made  dominant  that  every 
departure  from  the  teaching  of  the  Church,  and  every 
important  opposition  to  any  ecclesiastical  ordinances, 
must  be  punished  with  death,  and  the  most  cruel  of 
deaths,  by  fire. 

The  earlier  laws  of  the  Eoman  Emperors  had  distin- 
guished between  heresies,  and  only  imposed  severe  pen- 
alties on  some  on  account  of  their  moral  enormity,  but 
this  distinction  was  given  up  after  the  time  of  Lucius 
III.,  in  1 1 84.  Complete  apostasy  from  the  Christian  faith, 
or  a  difference  on  some  minor  point,  was  all  the  same. 
Either  was  heresy,  and  to  be   punished  with  death. 


236  Papal  Infallibility. 

The  Waldenses,  the  Poor  Men  of  Lyons,  who  at  first  did 
but  claim  the  right  of  preaching,  although  laymen,  and 
who  with  more  f^entle  treatment  would  never  have  formed 
themselves  into  a  hostile  sect,  were  dealt  with  just  like 
the  Cathari,  who  were  separated  by  a  broad  gulf  from 
Catholics.  Innocent  ill.  declared  the  mere  refusal  to 
swear,  and  the  opinion  that  oaths  were  unlawful,  a 
heresy  worthy  of  death,^  and  directed  that  whoever 
differed  in  any  respect  from  the  common  way  of  life  of 
the  multitude,  should  be  treated  as  a  heretic. 

Both  the  initiation  and  carrying  out  of  this  new  prin- 
ciple must  be  ascribed  to  the  Popes  alone.  There  was 
nothing  in  the  literature  of  the  time  to  pave  the  way  for 
it.  It  was  not  till  the  practice  had  been  systematized 
and  carried  out  in  many  places,  that  scholastic  theo- 
logy undertook  its  justification.^  In  the  ancient  Church, 
when  a  bishop  had  become  implicated  in  the  capital 
punishment  of  a  heretic,  only  as  accuser,  he  was  sepa- 

1  Condi,  (ed.  Labbe)  xi.  152. 

2  Thus  St.  Thomas  [Summa.  ii.  9,  11,  art.  3,  4)  tries  to  prove  from  the 
symbolic  names  given  them  in  Scripture,  that  heretics  sliould  be  put  to 
death.  Thus,  e.g.,  heretics  are  called  "thieves"  and  "wolves,"  but  we 
hang  thieves  and  kill  wolves.  Again,  he  calls  heretics  sons  of  Satan,  and 
thinks  they  should  share  even  on  earth  the  fate  of  their  father,  i.e.,  be 
burnt.  He  observes,  on  the  apostle's  saying  that  a  heretic  is  to  be  avoided 
after  two  admonitions,  that  this  avoidance  is  best  accomplished  by  execut- 
ing him.  For  tlie  Relapsed  he  thinks  all  instruction  is  useless,  and  they 
should  be  at  once  burnt. 


The  Inquisition.  237 

rated  from  the  communion  of  his  brethren,  as  Idacius 
and  Ithacius  were  by  St.  Martin  and  St.  Ambrose  in  385. 
It  was  the  Popes  who  compelled  bishops  and  priests 
to  condemn  the  heterodox  to  torture,  confiscation  of 
their  goods,  imprisonment,  and  death,  and  to  enforce  the 
execution  of  this  sentence  on  the  civil  authorities,  under 
pain  of  excommunication.  From  1200  to  1500  the 
long  series  of  Papal  ordinances  on  the  Inquisition,  ever 
increasing  in  severity  and  cruelty,  and  their  whole 
policy  towards  heresy,  runs  on  without  a  break.  It 
is  a  rigidly  consistent  system  of  legislation ;  every  Pope 
confirms  and  improves  upon  the  devices  of  his  prede- 
cessor. All  is  directed  to  the  one  end,  of  completely 
uprooting  every  difference  of  belief,  and  very  soon  the 
principle  came  to  be  openly  asserted  that  the  mere 
thouglit,  without  having  betrayed  itself  by  outward 
sign,  was  penal.  It  was  only  the  absolute  dictation  of 
the  Popes,  and  the  notion  of  their  infallibility  in  all 
questions  of  Evangelical  morality,  that  made  the  Chris- 
tian world,  silently  and  without  reclamation,  admit  the 
code  of  the  Inquisition,  which  contradicted  the  simplest 
principles  of  Christian  justice  and  love  to  our  neigh- 
bour, and  would  have  been  rejected  with  universal 
horror  in  the  ancient  Church.     As  late  as  the  eleventh, 


238  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  first  half  of  the  twelfth  century,  the  most  influen- 
tial voices  in  the  Church  were  raised  to  protest  against 
the  execution  of  heretics.  Men,  like  Bishop  Wazo  of 
Liege,-^  Bishop  Hildebert  of  Le  Mans,  Eupert  of  Deutz, 
and  St.  Bernard,  pointed  out  that  Christ  had  expressly 
forbidden  the  line  of  conduct  afterwards  prescribed  by 
the  Popes,  and  that  it  could  only  multiply  hypocrites 
and  confirm  and  increase  the  hatred  of  mankind  against 
a  bloodthirsty  and  persecuting  Church  and  clergy. 

It  is  only  the  resolve  to  foster  and  develop  the  Infalli- 
bility theory  at  any  cost  that  can  explain  the  fact  of 
not  one  Pope  in  the  long  line  from  Lucius  ill.  down- 
wards having  swerved  from  this  policy.  Men  of  gentler 
views  and  milder  character,  like  Honorius  III.,  Gregory 
X.,  and  Celestine  v.,  would  else  certainly  have  mitigated 
the  severity  of  the  maxims  of  their  predecessors,  and 
put  some  restraint  on  the  unlimited  and  arbitrary 
power  the  Popes  had  placed  in  the  hands  of  fanatical 
and  greedy  inquisitors ;  for  there  was  no  want  of  com- 
plaints against  the  inquisitors,  who  often  used  their 
office  for  extorting  money,  and  made  the  tribunal  of  the 
faith  into  a  finance  estabhshment.  The  Poj)es  were 
overwhelmed  with  complaints  and  petitions  for  redress 

1  See  Martene  and  Duranclus,  Ampliss.  Coll.  iv.  898,  sqq. 


The  Inqiiisitioii.  239 

— Clement  v.  mentions  tliem;^  but  neither  he  nor  a 
single  Pope  before  or  after  him  substantially  diminished 
the  power  of  the  Inquisition,  or  in  any  way  softened 
its  Draconian  code;  on  the  contrary,  the  Ciiria  was 
always  requiring  greater  strictness  and  energy,  and  the 
Popes  suffered  the  inquisitors,  without  a  word  of  opposi- 
tion, to  formulize  their  cunning  in  bringing  their  vic- 
tims to  the  stake,  into  the  regular  system  of  deceit  and 
treacherous  outwitting  of  the  accused,  that  may  be  seen 
in  the  work  of  Eymerich  the  Dominican,  adopted  and 
disseminated  by  the  Curia} 

It  was  Papal  legates  who  induced  Louis  IX.,  when 
barely  fourteen  years  old,  to  make  the  cruel  law  which 
punished  aU  heterodoxy  with  death.^  The  Emperor 
Frederick  IL,  busied  in  crushing  the  Guelphs  in  Italy, 
had,  during  the  period  when  everything  depended  on  his 
securing  the  goodwill  or  the  neutrality  of  the  Popes,  who 

^  Constit.  Clementin.  Tit.  3.  De  Hseret. ;  "  Multomm  querela  Sedis 
Apostolicae  probavit  auditiim,"  etc.  Yet  all  previous  and  subsequent  Bulls 
of  the  Popes  only  urged  the  inquisitors  to  a  "  justa  severitas." 

^  Direct.  Inquis.  (composed  at  Avignon  in  1376)  Venet.  1607.  [Several 
extracts  from  Eymerich  may  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to  Dr.  Harris 
Rule's  History  of  the  Inquisition.'] 

3  On  April  12,  1229,  the  treaty  was  concluded  at  Paris,  with  the  concur- 
rence of  two  Papal  legates,  which  robbed  Count  Raymond  of  Toulouse  ol 
the  greater  part  of  his  possessions ;  and  on  April  14  appeared  the  law, 
enacted  immediately  for  these  territories  of  Langi;edoc  and  Provence,  which 
Papal  policy  had  torn  from  their  possessor,  and  given  to  the  Crown  of 
France.— Vaissette,  Hist.  Oen.  de  Langued.  (Paris,  1737),  iii.  374  seg. 


240  Papal  Infallibility 

were  tlireatening  and  pressing  on  him,  issued  those 
barbarous  laws  against  heretics  in  1224,  1238,  and  1239, 
punishing  them  with  burning  and  confiscation  of  goods, 
depriving  them  of  every  legal  remedy,  and  imposing 
severe  penalties  even  on  their  friends  and  patrons. 
Innocent  iv.  repeatedly  confirmed  these  laws  also,  and 
herein  the  later  Popes  followed  him,  who  constantly 
referred  to  them,  and  inculcated  their  fulfilment,  point- 
ing out  that  Frederick  ii.,  that  great  enemy  of  the  Church, 
was  under  her  obedience  when  he  issued  them.  A  Papal 
vice-legate,  Peter  of  Collemedio,  was  the  first  to  promul- 
gate Louis's  law  in  Languedoc ;  and  it  was  again  the  Papal 
legate,  the  Cardinal  of  St.  Angelo,  who,  on  entering  Tou- 
louse that  year,  at  the  head  of  an  army,  introduced  the 
Inquisition  there.^  In  1231,  and  the  following  years, 
inquisitors,  delegated  by  the  Pope,  Conrad  of  Marburg 
and  the  Dominican  Dorso,  were  raging  in  Germany, 
Ptobert,  surnamed  le  Bougre,  in  France.  And  now 
Gregory  ix.,  in  1233,  handed  over  the  office  in  perma- 
nence to  the  Dominicans,  but  always  to  be  exercised  in 
the  name,  and  by  authority  of,  the  Pope.^ 

The  binding  force  of  the  laws  against  heretics  lay  not 

1  Vaissette,  iii.  382. 

2  No  Lisliop,  observes  the  Jesuit  Salelles,  lias  named  even  one  inqnisitor, 
only  tlie  Pope  does  that.— i>e  Mat.  Trihunal  S.  Ingids.  (Romse,  1651),  1.  81. 


The  Inqinsitioii.  241 

in  the  authority  of  secular  princes,  but  in  the  sovereign 
dominion  of  life  and  death  over  all  Christians,  claimed 
by  the  Popes  as  God's  representatives  on  earth.-^  Every 
prince  or  civil  magistrate,  according  to  the  constant  doc- 
trine of  the  Court  of  Eome,  was  to  be  compelled  simply 
to  carry  out  the  sentence  of  the  inquisitors,  by  the  fol- 
lowing process  :  first,  the  magistrates  were  themselves 
excommunicated  on  their  refusal,  and  then  all  who  held 
intercourse  with  them.  If  this  was  not  enough,  the 
city  was  laid  under  interdict.  If  resistance  was  still 
prolonged,  the  officials  were  deprived  of  their  posts, 
and,  when  all  these  means  w^ere  exhaus  .ed,  the  city  was 
deprived  of  intercourse  with  other  cities,  and  its  bishop's 
see  removed.  Thus  Eymerich  in  the  fourteenth,  and 
Cardinal  Albizzi  in  the  seventeenth  century,  describe 
the  process  as  drawn  out  by  the  Popes  for  the  judges  in 
questions  of  faith.  Only  the  latter  measure,  Eymerich 
thinks,  ought  to  be  left  to  the  Pope  himself.^ 

The  practice  of  the  Inquisition,  as  time  went  on. 


^  As  Innocent  iii.  expressly  states  it,  "  non  puri  hominis  sed  veri  Dei 
vicemgerens. " 

2  Director,  p.  432 ;  Rispost.  aW  Hist,  del  Inquis.  Romse,  p.  104.  In 
this  one  case  the  Papal  legislation  was  really  softened,  for  Boniface  viu, 
had  ordered  that  magistrates  who  refused  to  execute  the  condemned  should, 
if  they  remained  a  year  under  excommunication,  then  be  themselves  treated 
as  heretics,  and  burnt. 

Q 


242  Papal  Infallibility. 

became  further  and  furtlier  removed  from  all  principles 
of  justice  and  equity.  Innocent  iv.  especially  occupied 
himself  (1243-1254)  in  increasing  its  power  and  sever- 
ity; he  directed  the  application  of  the  torture,  which 
Alexander  iv.,  Clement  iv.,  and  Calixtus  iii.  approved. 
The  tribunal,  as  carried  on  in  all  important  points 
down  to  the  fourteenth  century,  and  described  in 
Eymerich's  classical  work,  presents  a  phenomenon  sin- 
gular in  human  history.  Here  mere  suspicion  suf- 
€ced  for  the  application  of  torture ;  it  was  by  an  act 
of  grace  that  you  were  imprisoned  for  life  between 
four  narrow  walls,  and  fed  on  bread  and  water,  and  it 
was  a  conscientious  obligation  for  a  son  to  give  up  his 
own  father  to  torture,  perpetual  imprisonment,  or  the 
stake.  Here  the  accused  was  not  allowed  to  know  the 
names  of  his  accusers,  and  all  means  of  legal  protection 
were  withheld  from  him ;  there  was  no  right  of  appeal, 
and  no  aid  of  legal  adviser  allowed  him.  Any 
lawyer  who  undertook  his  cause  would  have  incurred 
excommunication.  Two  witnesses  were  enough  to  secure 
conviction,  and  even  the  depositions  of  those  refused  a 
hearing  in  all  other  trials,  either  from  personal  enmity 
to  the  accused,  or  on  account  of  public  infamy,  such  as 
perjurers,  panders,  and  malefactors,  were  admitted.    The 


The  Inquisition,  243 

inquisitor  was  forbidden  to  sliow  any  pity ;  torture  in 
its  severest  form  was  the  usual  means  of  extorting  con- 
fessions. No  recantation  or  assurance  of  orthodoxy  could 
save  the  accused ;  he  was  allowed  confession,  absolution, 
and  communion,  and  his  profession  of  repentance  and 
change  of  mind  was  accepted  in  foro  sacramenti,  but  he 
was  told  at  the  same  time  that  it  would  not  be  accepted 
judicially,  and  he  must  die  if  he  were  a  relapsed  heretic. 
Lastly,  to  fill  up  the  measure,  his  innocent  family  was 
deprived  of  its  property  by  legal  confiscation,  half  of  it 
passing  into  the  Papal  treasury,  the  other  half  into  the 
hands  of  the  inquisitors.^  Life  only,  said  Innocent  iii., 
was  to  be  left  to  the  sons  of  misbelievers,  and  that  as 
an  act  of  mercy.  They  were  therefore  made  incapable 
of  civil  offices  and  dignities. 

The  civil  authorities  had  to  build  and  keep  up  the 
prisons,  to  provide  wood  for  the  burnings,  and  to  carry 
out  the  sentences  of  the  Holy  Office.     If  they  refused 

1  Calderini  {Be  Hceret,  Venet.  1571,  p.  98),  writing  in  1330,  appeals  to 
the  directions  of  Benedict  xi.  that  all  the  confiscated  property  should  go 
into  the  Papal  treasury.  The  manual  of  the  Inquisition,  composed  later, 
at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  (ed.  Venet.  1588,  p.  270),  says, 
*'  Inquisitores  .  .  .  dicunt  quod  Romana  Ecclesia  vult,  quod  dimidia  dic- 
torum  bonorum  assignetur  suse  camerae."  And  the  famous  jurist,  Felino 
Sandei,  bishop  of  Lucca  in  1499,  says,  in  his  Commeniar.  in  Decret.  (De 
Off.  Ord.  in  cap.  irref.),  ''Per  Extravagantes  pontificios  bona  hoereticorum 
divlduntur  inter  Romanam  Ecclesiam,  episcopum  et  inquisitorem." 


244  Papal  Infallibility. 

tliese  menial  services,  or  wanted  to  take  cognizance  first 
of  the  grounds  of  the  sentence,  they  incurred  excommu- 
nication, and  if  they  did  not  repent  and  submit  within 
a  year,  they  fell  themselves  nnder  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Inquisition  on  suspicion  of  heresy.  But  the  inquisitors 
derived  their  whole  power  from  the  Pope;^  they  were 
his  dele^^ates.  and  no  one  was  ever  condemned  to  torture 
or  the  stake  but  in  his  name  and  by  his  general  or 
special  order.  This  began  in  11 83  with  Lucius  ill.  direct- 
ing a  number  of  heretics  to  be  burnt  in  Flanders  by  his 
legate,  the  Archbishop  of  Eheims,  and  was  continued 
for  centuries  afterwards  with  terrible  consistency.^ 
And  thus  it  came  to  pass  that  perhaps  more  execu- 
tions took  place  in  the  name  and  by  command  of  the 
Popes  of  that  period  than  in  the  name  of  any  civil 
ruler. 

In  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  the  num- 
ber of  decisions  on  points  of  faith  received  throughout 
the  Church  was  small  as  compared  with  the  period  after 
the  Council  of  Trent,  and  the  inquisitors  had  therefore 
full  scope  for  the  exercise  of  their  own  judgment  as  to 

1  The  constitution  of  Benedict  Xi.,  quoted  by  Calderini,  assures  the 
inquisitors  the)^  are  "  absoluti  a  poena  et  a  culpa"  by  Papal  favour,  through 
the  privilege  of  Clement  iv.,  and  enjoy  all  the  same  rights  as  the  Crusaders. 

2  Pagi,  Critic,  in  Baron,  a.  1183. 


The  Inquisition.  245 

what  was  heretical,  and  used  the  frightful  power  left  to 
them  over  the  life  and  death  of  men  simply  according 
to  their  pleasure,  for  from  their  sentence  there  was  no 
appeal.  And  as  they  almost  always  belonged  to  one  or 
other  of  the  two  jMendicant  Orders,  whose  great  object 
was  the  furthering  of  the  Papal  system,  they  took  the 
teaching  of  the  Pope,  so  far  as  they  knew  it,  as  the 
safest  and  simplest  criterion  of  the  true  faith.  And  as 
the  great  majority  of  the  inquisitors  were  Dominicans, 
it  is  self-evident  that,  as  Thomists,  they  would  adopt 
this  convenient  and  easy  test.  Wlioever  contradicted  a 
Papal  decision,  or  knowingly  disobeyed  a  Papal  com- 
mand, thereby  incurred  the  guilt  of  heresy,  and  was 
handed  over  to  the  secular  power  to  be  put  to  death. 
The  Popes  themselves  had  long  since  laid  down  this 
principle.  "  Whoever  does  not  agree  with  the  Apostolic 
See,"  says  Paschal  11.,  making  a  (spurious)  citation  from 
St.  Ambrose,  "  is  without  any  doubt  a  heretic."-^  And 
when  the  Archbishop  of  Mayence  complained  of  the 
Concordat  being  violated  by  the  Pope,  Calixtus  ill.  an- 
swered him,  in  1457,  that  he  must  know  this  was  an 
attack  on  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  and  that  he  thereby 
committed  a  flagT?ant  crime   of  heresy,  and    incurred 

1  Martene,  Thesaur.  Anecdot  i.  338. 


2  46  Papal  In/a llibility. 

the  penalties  prescribed  for  it  by  divine  and  human 
laws.-^ 

That  contradicting  the  Pope  was  treated  and  punished 
as  heresy  was  shown  in  the  most  pointed  way,  when  the 
Minorites,  who,  as  genuine  disciples  of  St.  Francis,  wished 
to  observe  the  rule  of  poverty  in  all  its  strictness,  were 
condemned.  John  of  Belna,  the  inquisitor  at  Carcas- 
sonne, appealed  to  the  most  famous  canonist  of  that 
time,  Henry  of  Segusio,  who  had  declared  that  he  is  a 
heretic  who  does  not  receive  Papal  decrees,  and  that  he 
lapses  into  heathenism  who  refuses  to  obey  the  Papal 
See.^  As  we  said  before,  a  number  of  the  "  Spirituals  " 
paid  with  their  lives  for  disputing  the  right  of  John  xxii. 
to  upset  their  rule  and  the  Bull  of  his  predecessor,  Nico- 
las iii.^  No  Council  had  condemned  their  opinion ;  it 
was  only  Papal  authority,  and  in  this  case  the  authority 
of  the  reigning  Pope,  on  the  strength  of  which  they  were 
sentenced  to  the  stake,  and  it  went  against  all  natural 
feeling  to  ascribe  possibility  of  error  to  an  authority 
which  it  was  a  capital  offence  to  reject.  Jurists  and 
theologians  who  were  building  up  the  rights  of  the 
Inquisition  went  further  still.      Ambrose  of  Vignate 

^  Raynald.  Annal.  ann.  1457,  p.  49. 

2  "Peccatum  Paganitatis  incurrit." — Baluze  and  Mansi,  Miscell.  ii.  275. 

3  Tract,  de  Hcer.  (Roma,  1581),  f.  11. 


The  Inqiiisitioii.  247 

(who  wrote  about  1460)  declares  him  to  be  a  heretic  who 
thinks  of  the  sacraments  otherwise  than  the  Eoman 
Church,  so  that  if  a  theologian  had  then  raised  his  voice 
against  the  recent  decree  of  Eugenius  iv.  to  the  Arme- 
nians, and  the  errors  contained  in  it,  he  would  have 
incurred  sentence  of  death. 

As  in  the  thirteenth  century,  so  it  was  still  in  the 
sixteenth.  Cornelius  Agrippa  describes  the  conduct  of 
the  inquisitors  in  his  time,  about  1530,  as  follows  :  "  The 
inquisitors  act  entirely  by  the  rule  of  the  canon  law  and 
the  Papal  decretals,  as  if  it  was  impossible  for  a  Pope  to 
err.  They  neither  go  by  Scripture  nor  the  tradition  of 
the  Fathers.  The  Fathers,  they  say,  can  err  and  mis- 
lead, but  the  Eoman  Church,  whose  head  the  Pope  is, 
cannot  err.  They  accept  as  a  rule  of  faith  the  teaching 
of  the  Curia,  and  the  only  question  they  ask  the  accused 
is,  whether  he  believes  in  the  Eoman  Church.  If  he 
says  Yes,  they  say,  '  The  Church  condemns  this  proposi- 
tion— recant  it.'  If  he  refuses,  he  is  handed  over  to  the 
secular  power  to  be  burnt." -^ 

In  the  long  strife  of  Guelphs  and  Ghibellines,  inquisi- 
tors and  trials  for  heresy  were  among  the  means  con- 
stantly employed  by  the  Popes  to  crush  tlie  opponents  of 

1  Le  Vanit.  Scient.  c.  m.-  Hagcecomit.  16G2,  p.  444. 


248  Papal  Infallibility. 

their  policy  and  of  the  Angiovine  preponderance.  The 
Bolognese  jurist,  Calderini,  maintains  that  whoever  de- 
spises Papal  decretals  is  a  heretic,  for  he  thereby  seems 
to  contemn  the  power  of  the  keys.  That  might  be 
applied  to  every  Ghibelline.-^  Thus  Innocent  iv.,  in  1248, 
declared  his  great  Guelphic  enemy,  Ezzelino,  a  heretic. 
In  vain  did  he  give  assurance,  through  an  ambassador,  of 
the  purity  of  his  faith,  and  offer  to  swear  to  it ;  Innocent 
stuck  to  his  point,  that  Ezzelino  was  one  of  the  Paterines 
(a  new  Gnostic  sect),  without  being  able  to  bring  forward 
even  any  plausible  ground  for  the  charge.^  John  xxii. 
made  still  more  copious  use  of  the  same  means,  partly  for 
carrying  out  his  own  territorial  claims,  partly  in  support 
of  the  rule  of  King  Eobert  in  Italy.  On  this  ground  the 
Margraves  Einaldo  and  Obizzo  of  Este,  zealous  Catholics, 
and  never  Ghibellines,  but  Guelphs,  found  themselves 
suddenly  declared  heretics  by  the  Pope  in  1320,  and 
subjected  to  a  process  of  the  Inquisition.^  Two  years 
afterwards  the  same  thing  happened  to  the  whole  of  the 
stanchly  Ghibelline  house  of  the  Visconti  at  Milan  ;  a 
Papal  Bull  announced  to  them  that  they  were  heretics, 

1  Tractat.  Novus  Aureus  et  Solemn,  de  Hceret.  (Venet.  1571),  f.  5.     Cal- 
derini, adopted  son  of  the  famous  Giovanni  d' Andrea,  wrote  about  1330. 

2  Verci,  Storia  degli  Ecelini,  ii.  258. 

3  Muratori,  Annali,  xii.  138  (Milano,  1819). 


The  Impiisition.  249 

and   condemned  all  tlieir   adherents   and   subjects   to 
slavery.^      Similar  cases  occurred  repeatedly. 

When  the  Popes  themselves  made  such  a  use  of 
their  judicial  power  in  matters  of  faith,  when  Nicolas 
III.  is  reproached  by  his  contemporaries  with  enriching 
his  family  through  the  plunder  extorted  by  means  of 
the  Inquisition,  one  cannot  be  much  surprised  to  find 
the  inquisitors  so  habitually  using  their  office  for  pur- 
poses of  extortion,  as  Alvaro  Pelayo  complains.  Clem- 
ent v.,  however,  declared  that  an  inquisitor,  "  simply 
following  his  conscience,"  has  full  power  to  imprison, 
and  even  put  into  irons,  any  one  he  pleases.^ 

§  l^NW.—Trials  for  Witchcraft 
Wlien  we  affirm  that  the  whole  treatment  of  witch- 
craft, as  it  existed  from  the  thirteenth  to  the  sixteenth 
century,  ^vas  partly  the  direct,  partly  the  indirect,  result 
of  the  belief  in  the  irrefragable  authority  of  the  Pope, 
this  will  perhaps  sound  like  a  paradox,  and  yet  it  is  not 
difficult  to  show  that  such  is  certainly  the  case. 

For  many  centuries  the  relics  of  heathen  misbelief, 
and  the  popular  notions  about  diabolical  agency,  noc- 
turnal meetings  with  demons,  enchantments,  and  witch- 

1  Miiratori,  op.  cit.  150.  «  clement  de  Hoeret.  c.  "  Multorum." 


250  Papal  Infallibility, 

craft,  were  viewed  and  treated  as  a  folly  inconsis- 
teut  with  Christian  belief.  Many  Councils  directed 
that  penance  should  be  imposed  on  women  addicted  to 
this  delusion.  A  canon,  adopted  into  the  collections  of 
Eegino,  Burkard,  Ivo,  and  Gratian,  and  always  appealed 
to,  ordered  the  people  to  be  instructed  on  the  nonentity 
of  witchcraft,  and  its  incompatibility  with  the  Chris- 
tian faith.-^  It  was  long  looked  upon  as  a  wicked  and 
unchristian  error,  as  something  heretical,  to  attribute 
superhuman  powers  and  effects  to  the  aid  of  demons. 
In  the  eleventh  century  it  was  still  considered  a  hein- 
ous sin  merely  to  believe  in  enchantments  and  the 
tricks  of  professors  of  witchcraft,  as  may  be  seen  from 
Burkard  and  the  penitentiaries.  No  one  could  then 
anticipate  a  time  when  the  Popes  would  acknowledge 
this  belief  in  their  Bulls,  and  direct  their  subordinates 
to  condemn  thousands  of  men  to  death  on  the  strength 
of  it. 

There  is  no  trace  of  any  belief  in  diabolical  sorcery 
to  be  found  throughout  the  liturgical  literature  of  the 

1  Tliis  canon  got  into  Gratian's  Decretuvi  as  a  canon  of  Ancyra,  through 
a  mistake  of  Burkard' s,  who  took  it  from  Regino,  but  misinterpreted  the 
reference,  as  though  this  passage  also  came  from  the  Ancyran  canon.  See 
Berardi,  Gratian.  Can.  i.  40  ;  Regino  (ed.  Wassersahleben),  p.  354.  Regino 
has  compiled  his  chapter  371  from  passages  in  the  pseudo-Augustinian 
writing,  De  Spiritu  et  Animd,  with  some  additions. 


Trials  for  Witchcraft.  251 

ancient  Eoman  Church.     Even  in  the  twelfth  century 
John  of  Salisbury  reckons  the  various  kinds  of  belief 
in  majiic  amon^j  fables  and  illusions.     But  at  that  time 
the  writings  of  the  Cistercians  and  Dominicans,  filled 
with  visions,  legends,  and  miracles,  began  to  spread  in 
the  Church, — writings  such  as  the  compilations  of  Csesa- 
rius  of  Heisterbach,  Thomas  of  Cantimpre,  Stephen  of 
Bourbon,  and  the  like.     At  the  same  time,  the  prin- 
ciple became  more  and  more  definitely  laid  down  that 
there  were  miracles  among  the  numerous  heretical  sects, 
which  could  only  be  Satanic.     And  to  this  was  added 
a  notion  wholly  unknown  in  earlier  times.     As  the 
legend  of  Theophilus  spread  in  the  West,  the  notion 
got  into  vogue  that  men  could  make  a  compact  with 
Satan,  securing  them  many  enjoyments  and  the  posses- 
sion of  preternatural  powers.^     Csesarius  and  Vincent 
of  Beauvais  brought  the  first  reports  of  such  compacts 
being  actually  made,  and  soon  the  official  Papal  his- 
torians themselves,  IMartin  the  Pole  and  others,  related 
that  a  Pope,  Silvester  11.,  had  really  attained  the  high- 

1  The  story  of  the  sorcerer  Theophilus,  "  qui  diabolo  homagium  fecit  et 
per  diabolum  ad  quod  volebat  promotus  erat,"  appeared  so  important, 
that  Martin  the  Pole  and  Leo  of  Orvieto  embodied  it  in  their  abridgments 
of  Papal  and  Imperial  history.  And  from  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury there  are  constant  charges  of  persons,  as,  e.g.,  the  Bishop  of  Coven- 
try in  1301,  doing  homage  to  the  devil. 


252  Papa  I  In/a  llibility. 

est  dignity  in  the  Cliurcli  tlirougli  a  compact  with 
Satan. 

Hardly  was  the  Inquisition  established  by  the  Popes, 
and  the  first  inquisitors,  acting  under  Papal  commission, 
in  full  work  in  Germany  and  Prance,  than  heresy  came 
to  be  mixed  up  with  sorcery  or  Satan-worship.  The 
Dominican  theologians  seized  on  an  incidental  expres- 
sion of  St.  Augustine,  used  in  mere  blind  credulity,  in 
order  to  spin  out  a  theory  of  impure  commerce  between 
human  beings  and  demons,  and  children  born  of  the 
incubus}  Aquinas  became  the  master  and  oracle  of 
this  new  doctrine ;  ^  and  soon  it  was  not  safe  even  to 
dispute  the  dark  delusion. 

In  a  Bull  of  1231  Gregory  ix.  ordered  the  secular 
sword  to  be  unsheathed  in  Germany  against  the  newly 
discovered  heretical  abomination  of  which  his  inquisi- 
tors had  informed  him.^  He  related  with  full  belief 
nocturnal  meetings,  where  the  devil  appeared  in  the 
form  of  a  toad,  a  pale  spectre,  and  a  black  tom-cat,  and 


1  De  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  23.  He  afterwards  confessed  himself,  in  reference  to 
a  similar  statement  [Retract,  ii.  30),  *'se  rem  dixisse  occultissimam  anda- 
ciori  asseveratione  quam  dehiierit." 

2  Summa,  Pars.  i.  Q.  51,  art.  3,  6. 

3  Cf.  Mansi,  Condi,  xxiii.  323  ;  Ripoll.  Bullar.  Ord.  Proecl.  i.  52.  Tlie 
Bull  was  wrongly  referred  to  the  Stedinger,  as  Schumacher  shows.  Die 
Stedinger,  pp.  225  sqq. 


Trials  for  Witchcraft.  253 

wicked  abominations  were  practised.  The  Pope  owed 
this  information  principally  to  Conrad  of  Marburg,  who 
had  every  one  burnt  who  did  not  admit  that  he  had 
touched  the  toad,  and  kissed  the  lean  white  man  and 
the  tom-cat.^  In  the  south  of  France,  the  inquisitors, 
somewhat  later,  made  similar  discoveries;  in  1275  a 
woman  of  sixty  was  burnt  there  for  sexual  intercourse 
with  Satan. 

It  was  chiefly  the  introduction  of  torture  by  Innocent 
IV.  into  trials  for  heresy,  which  helped  to  establish  this 
idea  by  procuring  aU  the  requisite  confessions.  When 
Clement  v.  named  inquisitors  for  the  trial  of  the  Knights- 
Templars,  they  soon  extorted  confessions  at  Nimes  by 
torture,  that  the  devil  had  appeared  as  a  black  tom-cat 
in  their  nightly  meetings,  and  demons  in  the  form  of 
women  had  committed  fornication  with  them  after  the 
lights  were  extinguished.^  About  1330,  John  xxii. 
ordered  in  a  Bull,  couched  in  general  terms,  that  all  who 
meddled  with  sorcery  (the  enumeration  of  such  acts  is 

1  So  says  Archbishop  Siegfried  of  Mayence,  in  his  letter  to  the  Pope 
{Alhericus,  anu.  1233,  p.  5U,  ed.  Leibnit.)  The  Jesuit  Spee,  in  his  well- 
known  Cautio  Crimin.  dnb.  23,  n.  5,  has  rightly  observed  that  it  was  the 
Papal  inquisitors  who  naturalized  the  notion  in  Germany :— "  Vereri  in- 
cipio,  inio  stcpe  ante  sum  veritus,  ne  prsedicti  inquisitores  omnem  hanc 
sagarum  multitudinem  primum  in  Germaniam  importarint  torturis  suis 
tarn  indiscretis,  imo,  inquam  verissime,  discretis  et  divisis." 

^  Menard,  Bisi.  de  Nimes,  Preuves  (Paris,  1750),  i.  211. 


2  54  Papal  Infallibility. 

very  comprehensive)  sliould  be  punished,  like  heretics, 
with  the  exception  of  confiscation  of  their  goods.-^ 

From  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  par- 
ticularly after  Innocent  viii.  had  issued  his  Bull  on 
witchcraft,  the  trials,  which  had  before  been  compara- 
tively few,  began  to  be  much  more  numerous.  At  first 
the  inquisitors,  who  had  had  their  hands  quite  free  since 
the  Bull  of  Pope  John,  took  the  opinion  of  jurists.  The 
most  renowned  jurist  of  his  age,  Bartolo,  about  1350,  de- 
cided for  death  by  fire.^  This  decision,  which  inaugurated 
the  regular  burning  of  witches,  is  very  remarkable.  Here 
we  plainly  see  the  mischief  done  by  the  crude,  material- 
istic, hierarchical  interpretation  of  the  Bible  by  the 
Popes  and  their  juristic  and  theological  parasites.  It  lay 
in  applying  what  Christ  and  the  Apostles  had  spoken, 
in  Oriental  imagery,  describing  the  spiritual  by  sensible 
figures,  to  worldly  dominion  and  compulsory  power  over 
the  lives  and  property  of  men.  St.  Paul's  statement 
that  "  the  spiritual  man  judges  all  things,"  was  under- 
stood, and  explained  in  the  Bull  Unam  Smidam,  to 
mean  that  the  Pope  is  the  supreme  judge  of  nations 
and  kings.     When  Jeremiah  describes  his  prophetic 

1  Cf.  Binsfield,  Traxt.  cle  Confess.  Malef.  (Trevir.  1596),  p.  760. 
"  Ziletti,  Consil.  Meet.  1577,  i.  8. 


Trials  for  Witchcraft.  'i§l 

office  of  denouncing  the  judgments  of  God,  in  Oriental 
language,  as  a  commission  to  destroy  and  lay  waste,  the 
Pope  interprets  this  of  the  power  conferred  on  him  by 
God  to  destroy  and  uproot  what  and  whom  he  will. 
When  it  is  said  in  the  Psalms,  of  the  future  Messianic 
King,  that  he  shall  rule  the  heathen  with  a  rod  of  iron, 
this  was  taken  to  prove  the  right  and  duty  of  the  Popes 
to  introduce  the  Inquisition  with  its  capital  penalties. 
Thus  the  Papal  jurists  corrupted  theology,  and  the 
Papal  theologians  jurisprudence.  And  in  the  same 
spirit  altogether  the  jurists  declared,  like  Bartolo  in  his  • 
decision,  that  a  witch  must  be  burnt,  because  Christ  • 
says  that  he  that  abideth  not  in  communion  with  Him 
is  cast  out  as  a  rotten  branch  to  be  burnt. 

In  the  work  of  Eymerich  sorcery  and  witchcraft  is 
treated  as  an  undoubted  reality,  coming  under  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Inquisition.  The  limits  between  the 
lawful  use  of  pretended  magical  powers,  and  the  magic 
forbidden  under  penalty  of  death,  long  remained  mut- 
able and  uncertain.  In  a  Bull  of  1471,  Sixtus  iv. 
reserved  to  himself,  as  an  exclusive  prerogative  of  the  - 
Pope,  the  fabrication  and  engraving  of  the  waxen  lambs  ■ 
used  as  a  preservative  against  enchantments.  According 
to  him,  their  touch  bestowed,  besides  remission  of  sin. 


^^j  Papal  Infallibility, 

security  against  fire,  sIiipAvreck,  lightning,  and  hail- 
stones. And  soon  after  the  Pope  had  thus  himself 
encouraged  the  crude  superstition  of  the  people,  Inno- 
cent VIII.  in  1484  issued  his  Bull  on  witchcraft,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  laity  and  clergy  in  some  German  dioceses 
having  opposed  and  endeavoured  to  thwart  the  inquisi- 
tors appointed  for  the  prosecution  of  sorcerers.  In  this 
Bull  the  Pope  repeatedly  expresses  his  belief  in  the 
possibility  of  sexual  intercourse  with  demons  as  "  in- 
cubi "  and  "  succubi,"  of  women  and  animals  when 
pregnant,  fruits,  vineyards,  storehouses,  and  fields  being 
injured  through  sorcery,  of  men  and  beasts  being  tor- 
mented, and  men  and  women  rendered  impotent.  He 
then  complains  of  the  hindrances  thrown  in  the  way  of 
the  inquisitors  he  had  sent  to  put  down  such  wickedness, 
by  these  prying  clerics  and  laymen,  who  want  to  know 
more  than  is  necessary,-"-  and  arms  them  with  fresh 
powers.  The  inquisitors  were  Sprenger,  the  author  of 
the  notorious  Witches'  Hammer,  and  Institoris.  In  like 
manner,  Alexander  vi,,  Leo  x.,  Julius  ii.,  Adrian  vi.,  and 
other  Popes,  for  more  than  a  century  after  Innocent 
viiL,  gave  an  ecclesiastical  sanction  to  this  delusion  by 
their  directions  for  the  prosecution  of  magic. 

1  "  Qusereutes  plura  sapere  quam  oporteat." 


Trials f 07'  U^itchcraft.  257 

Theology  held  itself  bound  to  follow  the  precedent 
of  its  great  master,  St.  Thomas,  by  indorsing  the 
greatest  absurdities  of  this  belief  in  witchcraft.  The 
main  difficulty  was  only  how  to  evade  the  force  of 
the  canon  Gratian  had  cited  from  Eegino,  which  every 
one  took  for  an  ordinance  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra, 
whereby  the  Church  had,  as  early  as  314,  declared  the 
new  doctrine  about  the  works  of  Satan  and  his  wor- 
shippers to  be  an  error  and  denial  of  Christian  truth, 
and  had  thus  by  anticipation  described  Popes  and  in- 
quisitors as  heretics.  Most  persons  consoled  themselves 
with  the  consideration  that  anyhow  the  Pope's  autho- 
rity stood  higher,  or  that  a  different  kind  of  witches 
was  intended.  "  So  many  have  been  executed  already," 
says  the  Dominican  inquisitor,  Bernard  Eategno,  about 
1510,  "  and  the  Popes  have  allowed  it."  -^  Some  Minor- 
ites, however,  maintained  belief  in  the  reality  of  witch- 
craft to  be  a  folly  and  a  heresy,  as,  for  instance,  did 
Samuel  Cassini  and  Alfonso  Spina,  and  the  latter 
thought  the  inquisitors  had  witches  burnt  simply  on 
account  of  that  belief.^  But  the  Popes  and  the  Do- 
minicans   maintained    the    reality    of    the    diabolical 

^  Bern.  Comensis,  Lucern.  Inquis.  (Romoe,  1584),  p.  Hi. 
2  Fortalit.  Fidci  (Paris,  1511),  f.  365. 


258  Papal  In/a llibility. 

agency,  and  thus  the  tAVO  views  stood  out  in  sliarp  con- 
trast in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries.    A  man 
mi^ht  at  the  same  time  be  condemned  as  a  heretic  in 
Spain  for  affirming,  and  in  Italy  for  denying,  the  reality 
of  the  witches'  nightly  rides.   But  by  degrees  tlie  three- 
fold authority  of  the  Popes,  of  Aquinas,  and   of  the 
powerful  Dominican  Order,  prevailed,  and  all  contradic- 
tion was  put  to  silence.     The  teaching  of  the  Domini 
cans,  Nider,  Jacquier,  Dodo,  and  the  two  leading  Papal 
theologians,  Bartholomew  Spina  and  Silvester  Mazzo- 
lini  (Prierias),  on  sorcery  and  witchcraft,  had  all  the 
weight  of  Papal  approbation.     Spina  expressly  stated 
that  the  truth  and  reality  of  the  Witches'  Sabbath,  with 
its  horrors  and  wonders,  rested  on  the  authority  of  the 
infallible  Pope,  in  whose  name  and  by  whose  commis- 
sion the  inquisitors  tried  the  accused.     And  as  some 
jurists  appealed  to  the  pretended  canon  of  the  Council 
of  Ancyra,  in  Gratian's  Decretuin,  on  behalf  of  the  vic- 
tims sacrificed  in  shoals  to  this  fanatical  folly  in  Italy, 
Spina  did  not  hesitate  to  declare  that  the  authority  of 
the  Council,  which  had  pronounced  all  this  to  be  a 
pure  delusion,  must  succumb  to  the  authority  of  the 
Pope.^     So,  too,  the  Jesuit  Delrio  appealed,  in  vindication 

1  Malleus  Malefic.  Apol.  Prima  (Francof.  1588),  ii.  652-653. 


Trials  for  Witchcraft.  259 

of  this  whole  system  of  superstition,  to  the  sentences  of 
the  Popes  on  sorcerers  and  witches,  wdiich  proved  that 
they  did  not  regard  their  wild  vagaries  as  illusions,  but 
as  sober  realities.  "  This,"  he  continues,  "  is  the  opinion 
of  all  ecclesiastical  tribunals  in  Italy,  Spain,  Germany, 
and  France,  and  all  inquisitors  have  followed  it  in 
practice.  This  therefore  is  the  oj^inion  and  sentence 
of  the  Church,  and  to  dissent  from  it  is  a  sign  of  a 
heart  not  sincerely  Catholic,  and  savours  of  heresy."  ^ 

Every  literary  attempt  of  physicians,  jurists,  natural- 
ists, and  theologians,  to  throw  any  light  on  the  matter, 
and  explain  the  natural  causes  of  the  supposed  diaboli- 
cal phenomena,  w^as  put  down  by  the  Eoman  censure, 
so  far  as  its  power  reached.  For  a  century,  all  works 
written  in  this  sense  were  placed  on  tlie  Index,  as  hap- 
pened in  the  case  of  the  w^orks  of  Weier,  Godelmann, 
Wolfhart  or  Lycosthenes,  Agrippa,  Servin,  Delia  Porta, 
and  others.  On  the  other  hand,  all  attempts  w^ere  vain 
to  get  the  Jesuit  Delrio's  most  pernicious  handbook  of 
sorcery,  which  served  as  a  guide  for  the  judges,  cen- 
sured. Whoever  dared  to  express  doubts  on  the  sub- 
ject, or  to  expose  the  delusion,  had  to  recant  and  admit 
that  he  had  spoken  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Evil 

^  .Dis/icis.  Mag.  i.  16. 


2  6o  Papal  Infallibility. 

Spirit,  and  was  either  imprisoned  for  life  or  burnt. 
Sucli  a  recantation  tlie  theologian  De  Lure  or  Edeline 
was  compelled  to  make  about  1460  ;  but  it  did  not 
save  him.  AVhen  the  priest  Cornelius  Loos  Callidius 
affirmed,  a  century  later,  that  the  unhappy  w^omen  only 
confessed  under  torture  what  they  had  never  done, 
and  that  thus  gold  and  silver  was  obtained  by  a  new  sort 
of  alchemy  out  of  men's  blood,  the  Papal  Nuncio  impri- 
soned him.  He  had  to  recant,  but  relapsed,  and  after  a 
long  imprisonment  only  escaped  by  his  death  the  fate 
of  his  contemporary  Flade,  the  Treves  counsellor,  who 
was  burnt  for  assailing  the  trials  of  w^itches  on  the 
strength  of  the  so-called  canon  of  Ancyra.-^  As  late  as 
1623,  Gregory  xv.  ordered  that  any  one  who  made  a 
pact  with  Satan,  producing  impotence  in  animals,  or 
injuring  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  should  be  imprisoned 
for  life  by  the  Inquisition.  At  last,  when  these  mis- 
chievous pt-actices  of  the  Inquisition  had  been  carried  on 
for  170  years,  and  countless  victims  had  been  sacrificed 
to  the  fancies  of  the  Popes  and  monhs,  an  instruction  of 
the  Pioman  Inquisition  appeared  in  1657,  containing  the 
shameful  admission  that  for  a  long  time  not  a  single 
process  had  been  rightly  conducted  by  the  inquisitors, 
that  they  had  wickedly  erred  through  their  reckless 

1  Uis'iuis.  Mag.  iii.  58,  227  seq. 


Trials  for  Witchcraft.  261 

application  of  torture  and  other  irregularities,  and  that 
most  dangerous  mistakes  were  still  made  daily  by  them, 
as  by  the  other  spiritual  tribunals,  and  thus  unrighteous 
sentences  of  death  were  passed,  whereupon  certain  miti- 
gations and  precautions  were  enjoined.^  It  is  even  now 
ordered  in  the  Eoman  ritual,  which,  according  to  Papal 
injunction,  is  to  be  inviolably  observed  and  exclusively 
used  by  every  priest,  that  any  one  who  has  swallowed 
charmed  articles  {malcfica  signa  vel  instrumenta)  must 
drive  out  Satan,  who  has  thereby  gained  possession  of 
him,  by  an  emetic.^ 

§  XVIII. — Dominican  Forgeries  and  their  Consequences. 
How"  far  the  principle  that  Eoman  decisions  are  im- 
mutable and  infallible,  had  been  already  introduced, 
by  means  of  the  forgeries  and  fictions  before  referred 
to,  at  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  may 
be  perceived  from  the  French  Bishop  Ivo,  who  has 
adopted  into  his  Decretum  a  copious  store  of  such 
spurious  pieces.  His  logic — and  it  has  been  repeated 
countless  times  since — comes  simply  to  this:  the  Popes 
have  asserted  tliat  this  or  that  prerogative  belongs  to 
them,  Ave  must  therefore  believe  that  they  really  pos- 

1  It  may  be  found  in  Pignatelli,  ConsxCllat.  Noviss.  i.  123 ;  and  without 
any  alterations  in  Cavena,  De  Oflic.  Inquis.,  iu  the  Appendix. 
^  Hit.  Rom.  (ed.  Antwerp,  l(j(J9),  p.  167. 


262  *    Papal  Lifallibiliiy. 

sess  it.  He  observes,  naively  enough,  "  AVe  are  tanght 
by  the  Roman  Church  that  no  one  may  call  in  question 
its  decisions,  therefore  we  must  flee  to  it  for  refuge  from 
itself,  i.e.,  simply  submit;"-^  and  accordingly  it  is  clear 
to  him  that  to  contradict  a  Papal  ordinance  is  heresy. 
This  implies  that  a  bishop  is  orthodox  who  submits  to 
a  Papal  injunction,  though  convinced  that  it  is  pre- 
judicial to  his  Church;  a  heretic,  if  he  opposes  the 
incipient  abuse  or  usurpation.  This  view  involved 
momentous  results  :  it  has  disarmed  the  Church ;  it 
has  caused  the  neglect  of  that  first  principle  of  moral 
and  political  prudence,  that  an  abuse  should  be  resisted 
at  the  beginning,  and  thus  made  the  corruption  in  the 
Church  incurable,  and  the  attempted  reformation  too 
late  when  it  was  at  last  undertaken. 

About  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century  a  new 
and  comprehensive  fabrication  was  effected,  which  was 
not  less  eventful  in  its  results  than  the  pseudo-Isido- 
rian,  though  in  a  different  way.  As  the  one  served  to 
transform  the  constitution  and  canon  law  of  the  Church, 
the  other  penetrated  her  dogmatic  theology  and  ruled 
the  schools. 

In  the  twelfth  and  first  half  of  the  thirteenth  century, 

1  EinsL  159. 


Dojuiiiicaii  Foi'geries :  Resit  If s.  263 

theologians  had  not  occupied  themselves  with  the  doc- 
trine of  Church  authority,  and,  in  some  cases,  had  quite 
remarkably  avoided  pronouncing  on  the  position  of  the 
Pope  in  the  Church.  Hugo  and  Eichard  of  St.  Victor,  the 
compilers  of"  Sentences,"  Piobert  Pulley  n,  Peter  of  Poitiers, 
Peter  Lombard,  and  after  them  Eupert  of  Deutz,  William 
of  Paris,  and  Vincent  of  Beauvais,  refrained  from  enter- 
ing at  all  on  the  subject.  The  true  fathers  of  scholas- 
ticism— Alexander  of  Hales,  Alanus  of  Eyssel,  and  even 
Albertus  Magnus,  the  most  fertile  of  all  theologians  of 
that  period — have  equally  abstained  from  investigating 
it.  Only  in  one  passage,  when  explaining  the  well- 
known  prayer  of  Christ  for  Peter  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel, 
Albert  observes  that  it  implies  that  a  successor  of  Peter 
cannot  wholly  and  finally  {finaliter)  lose  the  faith. 

The  controversy  with  the  Greeks,  which  the  pre- 
sence of  Dominicans  in  the  East  had  again  brought  to 
the  surface,  gave  occasion  for  new  inventions.  To  the 
Greeks,  the  Isidorio- Gregorian  Papacy,  which  the  Domi- 
nicans put  before  them  as  the  sole  genuine  and  saving 
form  of  Church  government,  was  utterly  unknown  and 
incomprehensible.  No  attention  had  been  paid  at  Con- 
stantinople to  such  claims  when  urged  by  Xicolas  I., 
and  in  a  more  developed  form  by  Leo  ix.  and  Gregory  ix. 


264  Papal  Infallibility. 

in  tlieir  letters  to  emperors  and  patriarclis,  nor  does  any 
reply  seem  to  have  been  sent.  In  Eastern  estimation, 
"  the  Patriarch  of  old  Eome"  was  indeed  the  first  of  the 
patriarchs,  to  whom  belonged  the  primacy  in  the  Church, 
provided  he  did  not  render  himself  unworthy  of  it 
through  heterodoxy  ;  but  the  absolute  monarchy  which 
the  emissaries  of  Eome  preached  was  something  wholly 
different.  The  Orientals  held  the  Pope's  action  to  be 
limited  by  the  consent  of  the  other  patriarchs,  in  all 
important  concerns  aftecting  the  whole  Church ;  they 
could  not  conceive  any  arbitrary  and  autocratic  power 
existing  in  the  Church.  Some  special  means  therefore 
had  to  be  found  for  getting  at  them. 

A  Latin  theologian,  probably  a  Dominican,  who  had 
resided  among  the  Greeks,  composed  a  catena  of  spu- 
rious passages  of  Greek  Councils  and  Fathers,  St.  Chry- 
sostom,  the  two  Cyrils,  and  a  pretended  Maximus,  con- 
taining a  dogmatic  basis  for  these  novel  Papal  claims. 
In  1261  it  was  laid  before  Urban  iv.,  who  at  once 
availed  himself  of  the  fabrication  in  his  letter  to  the 
Emperor,  Michael  Palseologus,  discreetly  concealing  the 
names  of  the  witnesses.  He  wanted  to  prove  from  these 
newly  invented  texts,  professedly  eight  hundred  years 
old,  that  "  the  Apostolic  throne"  is  the  sole  authority 


Dominican  Forgc7'ies :  Rcsitlts.  265 

in  doctrinal  matters.^  There  was  this  misfortune  attend- 
ing the  intercourse  of  the  Popes  after  Nicolas  i.  with 
the  Byzantines, — that  they  always  appealed  to  spurious 
testimonies  and  authorities,  which  did  unspeakable 
injury  to  the  cause  of  unity. 

Urban,  evidently  deceived  himself,  sent  the  document 
to  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  who  inserted  the  whole  of  what 
concerned  the  Primacy  into  his  work  against  the  Greeks, 
witliout  the  least  suspicion  of  its  not  being  genuine, — for 
the  doubts  expressed  in  his  letter  to  the  Pope  refer  only 
to  the  passages  on  the  Trinity  and  the  Procession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  At  tlie  same  time,  Buonaccursio,  a  Domi- 
nican residing  in  the  East,  translated  these  passages 
into  Greek  in  his  Thesaurus?  St.  Thomas,  who  knew 
no  Greek,  and,  being  educated  in  the  Gregorian  system, 
derived  all  his  knowledge  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity  from 
Gratian,  found  himself  at  once  in  possession  of  this 
treasure  of  most  weighty  testimonies  from  the  early 
centuries,  which  left  no  doubt  in  his  mind  that  the 
great  Councils  and  most  influential  bishops  and  tlieo- 

1  Raynald.  Annal.  aim.  1263,  61. 

2  The  Dominican  Doto,  who  hroiight  this  work  into  the  West  ahout 
1330,  says  Buonaccursio  made  the  Latin  transLation,  and  collated  it  with 
the  Greek  text.  That,  in  fact,  it  was  composed  in  Latin  and  translated 
into  Greek  has  been  recognised  already  by  Quetif  and  Echard,  Script.  Ord. 
Prcedic.  i.  156  seq. 


266  Papal  Infallibility. 

logians  of  the  fourtli  and  fifth  centuries  had  recognised 
ill  the  Pope  an  infallible  monarch,  who  ruled  the  whole 
Church  with  absolute  power.  He  therefore  did  what 
the  scholastics  had  never  done  before :  he  introduced 
the  doctrine  of  the  Pope  and  his  infallibility,  as  he  got 
it  from  these  spurious  passages,  and  often  in  the  same 
words,  into  the  dogmatic  system  of  the  Scliola, — a  step 
the  gravity  and  momentous  results  of  which  can  hardly 
be  exaggerated. 

AVhat  the  Orientals,  according  to  this  forgery,  are  sup- 
posed to  have  taught  about  the  Primacy  during  the  first 
five  centuries,  and  what  St.  Thomas  developed  still  fur- 
ther on  their  authority,  is  in  substance  as  follows  : — 

Christ  has  conferred  on  Peter  his  own  plenary  autho- 
rity, and  thus  it  is  the  Pope  alone  who  can  command, 
bind,  and  loose.  Every  one  is  under  him  as  though 
he  were  Christ  himself,  and  what  he  decrees  must  be 
obeyed.  Por  "  Christ  is  fully  and  completely  with 
every  Pope  in  sacrament  and  authority."^  The  Apostolic 
See  rules,  ever  remaining  unshaken  in  the  faith  of  Peter, 
while  other  Churches  are  deformed  by  error,  and  thus 
the  Eoman  Church  is  the  sun  from  which  they  all  re- 
ceive their  light.     A  Council  derives  its  whole  autho- 

1  That  is  to  say,  in  a  mysterious  manner,  only  to  be  understood  by  faith. 
An  infallibility  resting  on  inspiration  appears  to  be  intended. 


Dominican  For o-erics  :  RcsilUs.  267 

rity  from  the  Pope  ;  lie  lias  the  right  of  establishing  a 
new  confession  of  faith,  and  whoever  rejects  his  autho- 
rity is  a  heretic,  for  it  belongs  to  him  alone  to  decide  on 
every  doctrinal  question.-^ 

It  was,  then,  on  the  basis  of  fabrications  invented  by 
a  monk  of  his  own  Order,  including  a  canon  of  Chalcedon 
giving  all  bishops  an  unlimited  right  of  appeal  to  the 
Pope,  and  on  the  forgeries  found  in  Gratian,  that  St. 
Thomas  built  up  his  Papal  system,  with  its  two  leading 
principles,  that  the  Pope  is  the  first  infallible  teacher  of 
the  world,  and  the  absolute  ruler  of  the  Church.^  The 
spurious  Cyril  of  Alexandria  is  his  favourite  author  on 
this  subject,  and  he  constantly  quotes  him. 

At  Eome  it  was  perceived  at  once  how  great  was  the 
gain  of  what  had  hitherto  been  taught  only  by  jurists 
and  codes  of  canon  law  becoming  an  integral  part  of 
dogmatic  theology.  John  xxii.,  in  his  delight,  uttered 
his  famous  saying,  that  Thomas  had  worked  as  many 
miracles  as  he  had  written  articles,  and  could  be  canon- 
ized without  any  other  miracles,  and  in  his  Bull  he 
affirmed  that  Thomas  had  not  written  without  a  special 

1  Summa,  ii.  2.  Q.  i.  Art.  10  ;  Q.  xi.  Art.  2,  3. 

2  Tlie  portion  of  his  work  against  the  Greeks  on  the  Primacy  is  derived 
entirely  from  these  fictions.  In  tlie  Paris  Dominican  edition  of  1660,  t.  xx. , 
the  parallel  passages  from  his  other  works  are  marked  in  the  margin. 


268  Papal  Infallibility. 

inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Innocent  vi.  said  that  who- 
ever assailed  his  teaching  incurred  suspicion  of  heresy.-^ 
In  fact,  the  new  Greek  tradition  was  more  necessary 
and  more  prized  in  the  West  than  the  East  at  the  time 
of  its  appearance.  The  Church  had  just  been  flooded 
by  the  stream  of  new  Orders,  who  were  supported 
entirely  on  begging,  the  confessional,  and  the  use  of 
Papal  privileges,  i.e.^  preaching  indulgences,  and  absolv- 
ing from  sins  reserved  to  the  Pope.  In  1215,  at  his 
great  Pioman  synod,^  Innocent  iii.  had  for  the  first  time 
ordered  that  every  Christian  should  confess  once  a  year  to 
his  own  parish  priest,  without  whose  permission  nobody 
coidd  give  absolution.  Soon  afterwards  the  Papal  See 
decided  to  place  the  new  monks  everywhere  at  the  side 
of  the  bishops  and  parish  priests,  as  instruments  w^holly 
devoted  to  it,  and  bearing  its  direct  commission  ;  and 
thus  the  law  of  1215  about  one's  "own  j)arish  priest" 
was  made  inoperative  through  privileges  accorded  to 
these  new  wandering  confessors,  who  gained  their  live- 
lihood chiefly  by  the  confessionaL  But  this  required 
the  theory  of  a  universal  bishop,  acting  by  his  own 
right  throughout  the  whole  Church,  and  holding  con- 
current jurisdiction  with  the   diocesan  bishops.     The 

^  Cf.  Touron,  Vie  cle  S.  Thomas,  p.  [>9d  seq. 
2  [Tlie  fourth  Lateran  Council.- Tu.] 


Dominican  Forgeries:  Results.  269 

title  Gregory  the  Great  had  rejected  with  liorror  was 
now  interpreted  in  its  fullest  sen-:;e,  and  St.  Thomas 
asserted,  on  the  strength  of  his  new  apocryphal  docu- 
ments, that  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  had  given  it  to 
the  Pope.  The  dispute  about  the  privileges  accorded 
to  the  new  Orders  raged  violently  on  many  points. 

Innocent  IV.  tried,  in  1254,  to  protect  the  parish 
priests  against  this  invasion  of  itinerant  monks,  who 
were  always  ready  to  absolve.  It  had  been  repre- 
sented to  him  that  the  penitential  discipline,  sufficiently 
weakened  already  by  the  religious  wars  and  the  indul- 
gences, would  be  utterly  destroyed  in  this  way.  The 
Pope  says  it  has  been  proved  that  the  action  of  the 
parish  priests  is  thoroughly  crippled,  and  all  cure  of 
souls  unsettled,  that  the  people  learn  to  despise  their 
priests,  and  shameful  consequences  ensue,  for  men  are 
absolved  by  a  monk  who  speedily  disappears,  and  per- 
haps is  never  seen  in  the  place  again,  and  go  on  con- 
tentedly in  their  sins.^  But  his  ordinance  that  the 
monks  should  not  enter  the  confessional  without  per- 
mission from  the  parish  priest  was  revoked  by  his 
successor,  Alexander  iv.^     St.   Thomas   wrote   against 


1  See  the  Bull  "Etsi  animarum,"  in  Rajiiald.  Anvnl.  ann.  1254,  p.  70. 
^  Raynald.  ib.  ;  Bula;i  Hist.  Univ.  Paris,  ii.  pp.  315-350. 


2  /O  Papal  Infallibility, 

the  Paris  theologians  who  defended  the  parish  priests 
and  the  previously  existing  order  and  discipline  of  the 
Church ;  he  deduced  from  his  spurious  testimonies  of  St. 
Cyril,  that,  as  regards  obedience,  there  is  no  difference 
between  Christ  and  the  Pope,  and  made  the  Fathers  say 
that  in  fact  the  rulers  of  the  world  {■primaUs  mundi)  obey 
the  Pope  as  though  he  were  Christ.-^  He  can  therefore 
annul  the  ancient  order  of  the  Church  established  by 
Councils,  for  all  Councils  derive  their  authority  solely 
from  him.  And,  on  the  faith  of  the  fabrications  sup- 
plied to  him,  St.  Thomas  appeals  directly  to  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon  for  the  truth  of  his  Papal  absolutism. 

The  victory  of  the  two  Mendicant  Orders  was 
complete,  and  with  it  prevailed  the  view  of  the 
Pope  being  the  real  bishop  in  every  diocese,  the  ordi- 
nary of  the  ordinary,  as  was  said.  But  every  parish 
priest  found  himself  powerless  in  his  own  village  in 
presence  of  a  begging  monk,  dependent  on  the  produce 
of  his  privileges,  and  could  not  guard  against  the 
injury  and  destruction  of  his  pastoral  work,  resulting 
from  Papal  absolutism.  The  bishops,  whose  diocesan 
administration  was  already  complicated  by  the  number 
of  exemptions,  were  obliged  to  give  free  course  to  troops 

1  Ojyusc.  xxxiv.  (ed.  Paris),  xx.  549,  5S0. 


Dominican  Foi'oxries :  Rcsidts. 


^> 


of  new  religious,  with  still  laiger  exemptions,  and  own- 
ing no  obedience  but  to  their  distant  superiors.  Tlie 
result  was  such  that  even  a  cardinal,  Simon  of  Beau- 
lieu,  said  in  France,  in  1283,  that  all  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline was  ruined  by  the  privileges  of  the  Begging  Orders, 
and  that  one  might  well  call  the  Church  a  monster/ 
The  parish  priests  were  then  the  most  powerless  and 
unprotected  of  all  classes  of  the  clergy;  they  had  no 
organ  and  no  representation  for  making  their  com- 
plaints heard.  The  bishops  complained  frequently,  and 
the  University  of  Paris  made  a  long  resistance ;  but  all 
had  to  bow  to  the  united  power  of  the  Popes  and  the 
Mendicants.  The  only  effect  was  to  convince  the  monks 
more  clearly  that  the  Papal  system,  with  its  theory 
of  Infallibility,  was  as  indispensable  and  valuable  to 
them  as  to  the  Curia  itself. 

§  XIX.  Infallibility  Disputed. 
All  the  alleged  grounds  for  Papal  Infallibility,  through 
the  older  Pioman  fabrications,  the  pseudo -Isidore,  the 
Gregorians,  and  Gratian,  and,  finally,  the  Dominican 
forgeries  and  the  theological  authority  of  St.  Thomas, 
were  now  admitted  almost  without  contradiction.     Yet 

^  Hist.  Lit.  de  France,  xxi.  24. 


/^ 


Papal  Infallibility  disputed : 


it  was  not  generally  aclvnowleclged  that  a  Pope  was 
actually  infallible  in  his  pronouncements  on  matters  of 
faith.  In  countries  where  the  Inquisition  was  not  per- 
manently established,  the  contrary  might  be  taught,  and 
for  centuries  opposite  views  on  this  point  prevailed. 
That  the  Eoman  Church  was  divinely  guaranteed  by  a 
special  Providence  against  entire  apostasy  from  the 
faith  was  affirmed  b}^  Guibert  of  Tournay  about  1250/ 
and  Nicolas  of  Lyra,^  and  was  pretty  generally  believed. 
But  then  it  was  always  assumed  that  a  Pope  could  fall 
into  heresy,  and  give  a  wrong  decision  in  weighty 
questions  of  faith,  and  that  he  might  in  that  case  be 
sentenced  and  deposed  by  the  Church.  Besides  the 
history  of  Liberius,  it  was  mainly  the  oft-quoted  canon 
of  Gratian,  ascribed  to  St.  Boniface,  that  supplied  the 
rule  of  judgment  here.^  Even  the  boldest  champions  of 
Papal  absolutism,  men  like  Agostino  Trionfo  and  Alvaro 
Pelayo,  assumed  that  the  Popes  could  err,  and  that 
their  decisions  were  no  certain  criterion.  But  they  also 
held  that  an  heretical  Pope  ifso  facto  ceased  to  be  Pope, 
without  or  before  any  judicial  sentence,  so  that  Councils, 
which  are  the  Church's  judicature,  only  attested  the 

1  De  Offi-z.  Episc.  c.  35,  in  Biblioth.  Max.  ratrum,  t.  xxv. 

^  Ad  Lucam,  xxii.  31.  ^  Si  Pajia,  Dist.  vi.  50. 


Re-ordination.  273 

vacancy  of  the  Papal  throne  as  an  accomplished  fact. 
In  that  case,  according  to  Trionfo,  the  Papal  authority 
resides  in  the  Church,  as  at  a  Pope's  death.-^  So  too, 
Cardinal  Jacob  Fournier,  afterwards  Pope,  thought  that 
Papal  decisions  were  by  no  means  final,  but  might  be 
overruled  by  another  Pope,  and  that  John  xxii.  had  done 
well  in  annulling  the  offensive  and  doctrinally  erroneous 
decision  of  Mcolas  iii.  on  the  poverty  of  Christ,  and  the 
distinction  of  use  and  possession.^  And  Innocent  in. 
had  said  before, — "  For  other  sins  I  acknowledge  no 
judge  but  God,  but  I  can  be  judged  by  the  Church  for 
a  sin  concerning  matters  of  faith." ^  And  Innocent  iv. 
allowed  that  a  Papal  command  containing  anything 
heretical,  or  threatening  destruction  to  the  whole  Church 
system,  was  not  to  be  obeyed,  and  that  a  Pope  might 
err  in  matters  of  faith.*  John  xxii.  had  to  learn,  not 
without  personal  mortification,  that  his  authority  was 
of  little  weight  when  opposed  to  the  dominant  belief, 
and  that  a  simple  recantation  was  his   only  resource. 

1  Sumvm,  V.  6. 

2  See  Eymeric.  Director,  hiqids.  p.  295. 

3  De  Consec.  Poiitif.  Serm.  3.  0pp.  (ed.  Venet.  1578),  p.  194.  But  he 
thinks  God  would  hardly  suffer  a  Pope  to  err  against  tlie  faith. 

4  Comment,  in  Dec.  v.  39,  f.  595.  ''Papa  etiam  potest  errare  in  fide  et 
ideo  non  debet  quis  dicere,  credo  id  quod  credit  Papa,  sed  ilhid  quod  credit 
Ecclesia,  et  sic  dicendo  non  errabit."  The  passage  is  left  in  the  repertory 
of  his  work,  but  has  been  expunged  from  the  text  of  the  later  editions. 


2  74  Papa  I  Infallibility  disp  21  led : 

When  he  preached  at  Avignon  the  doctrine  that  the 
blessed  do  not  enjoy  the  Beatific  Vision  before  the 
general  resurrection,  a  universal  outcry  was  raised  in 
Paris.  The  theologians  drew  up  propositions  declaring 
the  doctrine  to  be  heretical.  The  King  had  it  publicly 
condemned  in  Paris  with  sound  of  trumpets,  and  com- 
manded the  Pope  to  accept  the  judgment  of  the  Paris 
doctors,  who  must  know  what  was  the  true  faith  better 
than  the  spiritual  jurists,  who  understood  little  or 
nothing  of  theology.-^  That  was  the  estimate  long  en- 
tertained of  the  Curia.  No  confidence  was  felt  in  their 
judgment  on  questions  of  dogma  and  theology. 

The  inseparable  connexion  between  Aquinas  and 
Papal  Infallibility  was  shown  in  the  contest  already 
mentioned  between  the  University  of  Paris  and  the 
Dominican  Order,  in  the  person  of  Montson.  The  Do- 
minicans said  that  St.  Thomas's  doctrine  was  in  all  points 
sanctioned  by  the  Popes,  among  others  by  Urban  v.  in  his 
Bull,  addressed  to  the  High  School  of  Toulouse ;  and  thus 
the  Popes  bear  witness  to  St.  Thomas,  and  he  to  the  Popes. 
But  St.  Thomas  teaches,  on  the  authority  of  his  spuri- 

1  As  Cardinal  D'Ailly  stated  it  to  the  assembly  of  the  French  clergy  in 
1406,  the  King's  message  to  the  Pope  was  still  ruder  and  more  peremptory, 
"  qu'il  se  revoquait  ou  qu'il  se  ferait  ardre."  Cf.  Du  Chastenet.  JVouv. 
Hist,  du  Cone,  de  Constance  (Paris,  1718),  Preuves,  p.  153.  Villani, 
brother  was  then  iu  Avignon,  does  not  mention  this. 


Re-ordinatio7i.  275 

ons  Cyril,  that  it  is  enougli  for  tlie  Pope  alone  to  declare 
what  is  matter  of  faith,  and  to  sanction  or  condemn  any 
doctrine.     On  the  other  hand,  the  Faculty  enumerated  - 
a  whole  series  of  errors  in  St.  Thomas,  and  classed  among  - 
them  this  very  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.^     They 
distinctly  call  it  heresy,  it  being  notoriously  the  doc-  - 
trine  of  the  Church  that  there  is  an  appeal  from  a  Pope 
to  a  General  Council,  and  that  every  bishop,  by  divine  ■ 
and  human  right,  is  qualified  to  pronounce  sentence  on 
points  of  faith.    Thus  in  1388  the  dogmatic  infallibility  • 
of  the  Popes  was  repudiated  by  the  first  and  most  influen-  • 
tial  theological  corporation  in  the  Church,  and  the  supe-  ■ 
riority  of  Councils  in  matters  of  faith  expressly  affirmed,  ■ 
though  certainly  no  Paris  theologian  doubted  the  genu-  • 
ineness  of  the  imposing  testimonies  cited  by  St.  Thomas. 
Tlie  Popes  themselves  were  constantly  bringing  their 
dogmatic   authority  afresh  into   suspicion.     The  most 
thorough-going  and  credulous  devotee  of  Ptoman  suprem- 
acy could  not  help  feeling  uneasy  when  he  found  that  the 
Papal  See  was  at  a  loss  for  any  clear  and  well-defined 
principles,  on  one  of  the  gravest  and  most  practically  im- 
portant questions,  involving  all  certainty  of  individual 
and  corporate  religious  life — the  doctrine  of  ordination, 

1  D'Avgentre,  Colled.  Judic.  i.  2,  81. 


276  Papal  Infallibility  disputed: 

that  the  Curiawii^  constantly  fluctuating  on  this  question, 
and  that  it  had  infected  the  ScJiola  with  the  same  uncer- 
tainty since  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  as  may 
be  seen  from  Peter  Lombard.  We  mean  that  since  the 
eighth  century,  as  was  before  said,  ordinations  which 
were  valid  according  to  immutable  laws,  grounded  in 
the  very  nature  of  the  Church  and  the  Sacraments, 
had  been  declared  null  at  Eome,  and  re-ordinations 
performed,  which  had  thrown  the  Italian  Church  into 
the  most  vexatious  confusion  by  the  end  of  the  ninth 
century.  And  again  the  increase  of  simony  had  given 
occasion  to  Popes,  as,  e.g.,  Leo  ix.,  to  annul  a  number  of 
ordinations  at  a  Ptoman  Synod,  and  either  to  solemnize 
or  order  regular  re- ordinations."^  This  was  based  on 
the  double  error  of  supposing  that  simony,  or  procur- 
ing ordination  for  money,  was  heresy,  and  that  heresy 
made  the  ordination  invalid.  The  mischief  done  by 
the  Popes  in  this  way  was  immeasurable,  for  there  were 
but  few  priests  and  bishops  then  throughout  Italy  alto- 
gether free  from  simony,  so  that  millions  of  the  laity 
became  perplexed  about  the  sacraments  they  had  re- 
ceived from  clergy  said  to  be  invalidly  ordained,  and 

^  Petri  Damiani,  02msc.  v.  p.  419.     ''Leo  IX.  plerosque  Simoniacos  et 
male  promotos  tanquam  noviter  ordinavit." 


Re-ordination.  277 

hatred  and  feuds  between  the  people  and  their  pastors 
penetrated  every  village,  nor  was  it  easy  to  find  any  way 
out  of  this  labyrinth  of  universal  religious  doubt  and  in- 
terruption or  destruction  of  the  succession.  Nor  was  this 
all.  The  same  confusion  was  imported  into  Germany 
too,  and  the  ordinations  of  those  bishops  were  declared  to 
be  invalid  whom  the  Popes  had  excommunicated  for  their 
loyalty  to  the  Emperor  Henry  iv.  Thus,  at  the  Synod 
of  Quedlinburg  in  1085,  the  Papal  legate  Otho  annulled 
the  ordinations  of  the  bishops  of  Mayence,  Augsburg, 
and  Coire,  although  Peter  Damiani  had  long  since  raised 
his  voice  against  this  capricious  annulling  of  ordinations 
and  re-ordaining.-^  Otho,  afterwards  Pope  Urban  11.,  de- 
clared that  even  when  there  was  no  simony  in  the  actual 
ordination,  it  was  rendered  invalid  if  performed  by  a 
simoniacal  bishop.^ 

At  a  Synod  at  Piacenza  he  annulled  the  ordinations 
of  his  rival.  Archbishop  Guibert  of  Eavenna,^  cele- 
brated after  his  excommunication  by  Gregory  viL,  and 
thereby  gave  public  evidence   of  another  gross  error, 

1  Bernold.  in  Pertz,  Monum.  vii.  442 ;  Hardiiin,  Condi,  vi.  1.  614. 

2  This  letter  of  Urban  il.  has  puzzled  theologians  who  dislike  seeing  a 
Pope  openly  teach  heresy.  Thus,  e.r/.,  Witasse  {Tract.  Theol.  ed  Venet. 
vi.  81)  says  it  is  "intricatissimus  et  difficillimus  locus."  Wecilo  is  the 
bishop  referred  to. 

^  [Tlie  Antipope  Clement  in.,  elected  at  Brixen  in  lOSO.  — Tii.] 


278  Papal  Infallibility. 

that  the  validity  of  sacraments  is  affected  by  Church 
censures.^  Even  Innocent  ii.  made  a  great  Synod,  the 
second  Conncil  of  Lateran,  an  accomplice  in  his  error 
of  declaring  invalid  the  ordinations  of  "  schismatics,"  i.e., 
of  the  episcopal  adherents  of  Pope  Anacletus,  who  had 
been  elected  by  a  majority  of  the  cardinals,  but  was 
then  dead, — an  act  of  arbitrary  caprice  and  notorious 
heresy,  which  cannot  be  excused,  like  earlier  re-ordina- 
tions, by  the  horror  professedly  felt  for  simony.^  Hence 
it  was  the  Eoman  Church  itself  which,  notwithstanding 
the  protests  raised  from  time  to  time  within  its  bosom 
against  the  terrible  disorder  caused  by  these  ordinations, 
was  again  and  again  falling  into  the  same  error,  and  dis- 
turbing the  consciences  and  belief  of  the  faithful  in  a 
way  that  in  the  ancient  Church  would  have  been  found 
intolerable,  and  against  which  a  remedy  would  soon 
have  been  discovered. 

§  XX. — Frcsli  Forgeries. 
Soon  after  St.  Thomas's  time,  towards  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  there  arose  a  need  for  further  in- 
ventions, this  time  in  the  domain  of  history,  to  sustain 
"  and  further  the  system.     As  the  contradictions  between 

1  Concil.  (ed.  Labbe);  x.  504.  « lb.  p.  1009. 


Fresh  Forgeries:  Historical.  279 

the  older  historical  authorities  and  the  recent  codes  of 
canon  law,  Gratian  and  the  Decretals,  were  obvious  to 
every  one  who  looked  beneath  the  surface,  it  seemed 
desirable  to  represent  the  history  of  the  Popes  and 
Emperors  in  such  a  way  as  to  get  rid  of  those  contra- 
dictions, and  give  an  historical  sanction  to  the  new 
canon  law.  This  task  was  undertaken,  at  the  command 
of  Clement  v.,  by  Martin  of  Troppau,  called  the  Pole, 
owing  to  Mcolas  iii.  having  made  him  Archbishop  of 
Gnesen  in  1275.  He  was  penitentiary  and  chaplain 
to  the  Pope ;  all  jurists  and  canonists  were  said  to 
bind  up  his  book  with  Gratian  and  the  Decretals, 
and  all  theologians  with  the  Bible  history  of  Peter 
Comestor.^  And  this  book  is,  of  all  historical  works  of 
the  middle  ages,  at  once  the  most  popular  and  the  most 
utterly  fabulous.  Many  of  its  fictions  simply  evidence 
the  want  of  any  historical  sense  and  the  miracle-mon- 
gering  credulity  which  had  been  the  rage  since  the 
rise  of  the  Mendicant  Orders  ;  but  many  also  were  in- 
vented with  deliberate  intention.  The  Popes  were  to  be 
exhibited,  as  in  the  Lihcr  Pontificalis,  but   still  more 

1  [Peter  Coniestor,  Chancellor  of  Paris  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, wrote  a  histoiy  extending  from  the  Creation  to  the  birth  of  Christ. 
This  work,  with  the  Sentences  of  Peter  Lombard  and  Gratian's  Decretuni, 
is  said  to  have  made  up  the  average  reading  of  mediaeval  divines.— Tr.] 


2  8o  Papal  Infallibility. 

conspicuously,  as  the  rulers  and  legislators  of  tlie  whole 
Church,  the  pseuclo-Isidorian  fabrications  and  Gratian 
were  to  be  confirmed,  and  history  made  to  reflect  the 
supremacy  of  Popes  over  Emperors.  The  book  indi- 
cates a  great  falling  off  in  historical  composition ;  and 
this  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  general  influence  of 
the  Begging  Monks,  especially  the  Dominicans,  with  their 
insatiable  hankering  after  miracles,  and  their  constant 
endeavour  to  trace  the  Papal  system  to  the  earliest  ages, 
in  materially  obscuring  historical  knowledge,  and  degrad- 
ing it  below  the  level  it  had  attained  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury. The  mere  fact  of  so  miserable  and  thoroughly  men- 
dacious a  book  as  Martin's  gaining  such  universal  cur- 
rency and  influence  is  an  eloquent  proof  of  this  decline. 
The  same  object,  of  adapting  the  history  both  of  the 
Empire  and  the  Church  to  the  Gregorian  system,  was 
followed  by  the  Dominican  Tolomeo  of  Lucca,  Papal 
librarian,  whom  John  xxii.  appointed  in  1318  to  the 
see  of  Torcello.  His  Church  History,  up  to  1313,  is 
much  fuller  than  Martin's  dry  compendium,  and  a  far 
more  spirited  and  artistic  composition.  This  is  true 
also  of  his  continuation  of  the  Political  Treatise  com- 
menced by  Aquinas,^  and  his  Annals  from  the  year 

1  St.  Thomas  only  wrote  the  first  book  of  the  Bq  Reglmine  Principuvi, 


Fresh  Forgeries:  Historical.  281 

1062.  His  principal  work  often  reads  like  a  commen- 
tary on  Gratian  or  the  pseudo-Isidore,  whom,  however, 
he  only  knew  through  Gratian.  The  purport  of  his 
work  for  the  first  twelve  centuries  is  to  mould  the 
fabrications  of  these  two  writers  and  the  Decretals  into 
a  coherent  history.  It  may  suffice  for  an  illustration  of 
his  treatment  of  ancient  Church  history,  to  say  that  he 
describes  Pope  Vigilius  as  holding  the  fifth  Ecumenical 
Council  at  Constantinople  in  sovereign  majesty,  with 
the  hearty  co-operation  of  the  Emperor  Justinian,  who 
manifested  an  entire  devotion  to  him.^  So  was  liistory 
written  at  the  Papal  Court.  One  of  its  main  objects 
was  to  supply  an  historical  basis  for  the  principles  of 
Ptome,  and  her  claims  to  jurisdiction  over  the  German 
empire,  the  elections  to  the  throne,  and  the  emperors. 

At  that  time  the  Papacy  was  gradually  passing  into 
French  hands.  The  institution  of  Legates,  unknown  in 
the  ancient  Church,  but  imported  into  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal system  by  means  of  a  spurious  canon,  and  accounted 
necessary    by    Gratian,^   had    enabled    the    Popes   to 

and  two  chapters  of  the  second.  Tolomeo  completed  the  second,  and  wrote 
the  third  and  fourth  books.     Cf.  Quttif-Echard,  i.  5i3. 

1  Ptol.  Luc.  895-899. 

^  JJist.  94,  c.  2,  with  the  title  "Excommunicetur  qui  legatum  Sedis  Apo- 
stolicse  impedire  tcntaverit."  The  passage  is  from  pseudo-Isidore,  l»ut 
speaks  in  very  general  terms  of  the  episcopal  office,  which  was  not  to  "be 


282  Papal  Infallibility. 

dominate  and  tax  tlie  various  National  Cimrclies,  and 
was  now  in  full  bloom.  The  Popes  had  overtlirown  the 
Hohenstaufen  dynasty,  and  transplanted  a  French 
dynasty  and  French  influence  into  Italy  for  the  sake  of 
the  South  Italian  kingdom.  The  feudal  claim  of  the  I^or- 
mans  was  not  enough  to  legitimatize  this  procedure, 
and  some  other  title  had  to  be  discovered.  Tolomeo 
accordingly  related  that  the  Emperor  Constantine  had 
presented  this  kingdom  to  the  Pope  as  a  "  manuale," 
which  he  could  dispose  of  as  he  pleased.-^  Thus  his 
whole  History  is  thrown  into  the  shape  requisite  for  the 
Curia  and  the  Dominicans  in  1 3 1 3.  He  begins  by  saying 
that  Christ  was  the  first  Pope,  and  keeps  to  that  pro- 
gramme throughout.  The  second  Pope  was  Peter,  who 
founded,  by  his  disciples,  aU  the  principal  churches  in 
Italy  and  Gaul. 

Tolomeo  was  also  the  first  to  disseminate,  in  the  Papal 
interest,  the  fable  about  the  appointment  of  the  Electors 
by  Gregory  v.  in  995.^     This  was  the  complement  of  the 

impeded.  By  omitting  the  word  ''  vestram,"  and  with  the  help  of  Gratian's 
title,  the  Legates  are  represented  as  competent  to  excommunicate  any  one 

1  Ptol.  Liic.  1066. 

2  Not  Trionfo,  as  Friedburg  maintains  {De  Fin.  inter  Eccl.  et  Civit. 
regund.  Judicio,  1861,  p.  25).  Nor  was  the  passage  interpolated  into  St. 
Thomas,  as  he  thinks,  and  the  book  does  not  belong  to  ^Egidius  of  Columna, 
as  Wattenbach  thinks  [Deutschlands  GeschichtsqueZ.  519),  but  the  passage 
is  in  Tolomeo's  continuation.     Quetif  and  Echard  have  already  pointed  out 


Fresh  Forgeries :  Historical.  283 

theory  of  translations  invented  by  Alexander  in.  and 
Innocent  III.  It  was  the  Popes,  according  to  Innocent, 
who  took  the  Empire  from  the  Greeks  and  gave  it  to 
the  Franks,  and  they  did  this  for  their  own  better  pro- 
tection.-^ Charlemagne,  by  command  of  the  Church, 
put  an  end  to  the  empire  of  the  Greeks,  says  Tolomeo.^ 
Boniface  Yiii.  brought  the  German  emperor  Albert  to 
acknowledge  formally  that  the  Popes  had  transferred 
the  Empire ;  that  it  was  they  who  had  conferred  the 
right  of  election  on  certain  princes,  and  given  to  kings 
and  emperors  the  power  of  the  civil  sword.^  And  to 
this  were  added  the  new  claims,  first  put  in  force  by 
Clement  v.,  that  the  Pope  succeeds  during  a  vacancy  to 
the  Imperial  power,  and  that  every  Emperor  is  bound  to 
take  an  oath  of  fealty  to  him, — claims  which  John  xxii. 
acted  upon  in  his  contest  with  the  Emperor  Louis,  and 
from  whence  he  drew  the  further  corollary,  which  he  at 
once  put  into  practice  against  Louis,  that  he,  as  Pope, 
was  administrator  of  the  Empire  during  a  vacancy.^ 
The  Curia  found  Gratian  and  the  Decretals  insufficient 

this  arldition  of  Tolomeo's  to  St.  Tliomas's  work,  and  sho^vTi  that  he  was  the 
lirst  to  disseminate  the  fable,  and  probably  himself  invented  it. 

1  Regisir.  Epp.  29,  62  ;  Uecret.  c.  34,  De  Elect.  1.  6. 

2  Ptol.  Lvc.  974.  3  Raynald.  Annal.  ann.  1303,  8. 

4  Cf.  "Processus  in  Liidovic.  Bav."  in  Martene,  Thes.  Anecd.  ii.  710, 
seq.,  where  a  whole  series  of  fables  and  falsifications,  like  Martin's  and  Tolo' 


284  Papal  Infallibility. 

for  these  purposes,  and  so  to  the  numerous  dass  of 
Papal  Court  jurists  and  Court  theologians,  like  Trionfo 
and  iEgidius  Columna,  must  be  added  the  Court  his- 
torians Martin  and  Tolomeo. 

Besides  these,  special  fictions  were  wanted  to  meet 
the  circumstances  of  particular  countries  and  I^ational 
Churches,  so  as  to  adapt  their  history  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  Papal  system.  This  was  eminently  true  of 
Spain.  The  business  of  cooking  history  was  carried  on 
in  her  case  more  systematically  than  anywhere  else. 
The  ancient  Spanish  Church,  without  ignoring  the 
Eoman  primacy,"^  had  yet  maintained  an  independent 
attitude  towards  it.  Her  Synods,  regularly  held,  exer- 
cised judicial  power  over  bishops  and  metropolitans,  and 
sometimes  opposed  even  Popes  in  questions  of  faith,  as, 
e.g.,  the  Synod  of  Toledo  in  688  subjected  Pope  Bene- 
dict's letter  to  severe  criticism,  and  did  not  scruple  to 
charge  him  with  "barefaced  contradiction  of  the  Fathers." 
At  the  time  of  the  Arabian  invasion,  and  till  towards 
the  end  of  the  eleventh  century,  the  Spanish  Church 

meo's,  are  produced  as  -weapons  against  the  Emperors  and  their  adherents, 
as,  e.g.,  Pope  Innocent's  excomniiinication  of  the  Emperor  Arcadius,  the 
legends  of  Constantino  and  Theodosius,  and  many  more. 

^  Thus  the  most  influential  of  Spanish  prelates  and  theologians,  Isidore 
of  Seville,  in  his  letter  to  the  Duke  Claudius,  asserts  his  subjection  to  the 
Eoman  See  more  emphatically  than  was  usual  with  bishops  of  that  age. 


Fresh  Forgeries :  Historical.  285 

preserved  her  independent  life.-^  Eomau  influences  were  - 
seldom  felt,  and  only  at  long  intervals.  Arclibisliop  ' 
Diego  Gelmirez,  a  zealous  advocate  of  the  Gregorian 
system,  testifies,  at  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century, 
that  no  Spanish  bishop  then  (in  the  previous  century) 
paid  to  the  lioman  Church  tribute  or  obedience,  and 
that  the  Spanish  Church  followed  the  laws  of  Toledo, 
not  of  Eome.^ 

A  change  in  the  interests  of  Eome  was  effected 
through  the  influence  of  the  monks  of  Clugny,  who 
received  abbeys  and  bishoprics,  through  the  action  of 
French  queens,  and  the  policy  of  some  kings  who  were 
seeking  support  at  Kome.  Even  Gregory  vii.  asserted 
that  all  Spain  had  from  ancient  times  been  the  property 
of  the  Popes,  as  he  expected  also  to  be  able  to  demand 
Hungary,  Eussia,  Provence,  and  Saxony.  And  this 
claim  had  one  result,  in  the  suppression  of  the  Mozarabic 
and  substitution  of  the  Eoman  rite  in  1085.  A  French 
Cluniac  monk  became  Archbishop  of  Toledo,  and  for  150 
years,  up  to  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  a  con- 

1  Masdeu,  Hist.  Critic,  de  Es^ixuia,  xiii.  258  sqq.  Here  it  is  observed 
that,  according  to  a  letter  issued  by  Adrian  I.  about  790,  denouncing  certain 
abuses,  there  had  for  two  centuries  been  no  correspondence  of  tlie  Popes 
with  Spain.  Nor  was  there  any  even  in  the  eleventh  century,  before  Gre- 
gory VII. 's  time,  except  on  a  few  unimportant  points. 

2  Hist.  Compost.  253,  in  vol.  xx.  of  Florez'  Es^KGla  Sagrada. 


286  Papal  Infa  llibility. 

stant  struggle  went  on  for  the  subjugation  of  the  Spanish 
Church.  This  was  the  aim  of  the  historical  fictions  first 
perpetrated  by  Bishop  Pelayo  of  Oviedo,  and  then  by 
Bishop  Lucas  of  Tuy.  The  former  adulterated  Sam- 
piro's  Chronicle  by  inventing  an  embassy  of  the  Spanish 
Church  to  John  viii.,  some  decrees  of  that  Pope,  and  a 
Synod  held  by  his  order  at  Oviedo,  besides  other  things.-^ 
More  comprehensive  and  still  more  influential  were 
the  inventions  of  Lucas,  who  thoroughly  corrupted  the 
ancient  history  of  Spain.  In  order  to  give  an  appear- 
ance of  early  and  complete  dependence  on  Eome  to 
the  Spanish  Church,  he  represented  Archbishop  Leander 
as  a  legate  of  the  Pope,  and  falsified  the  whole  history 
of  Isidore,  whom  he  converts  into  a  vicar  of  Pope 
Gregory.^  The  misfortunes  of  Spain  and  the  overthrow 
of  the  Gothic  kingdom  are  explained  by  a  purely  fabu- 
lous history  he  invented  of  King  Witiza,  who  is  said 
to  have  forbidden  the  Spaniards,  on  pain  of  death,  to 
obey  the  Pope.^ 


^  Floi'ez'  EspaTM  Sagrada,  xiv.  440. 

2  Ih.  ix.  203-204. 

2  "  Chronicou  Mundi"  in  Schotti  Hisp.  lllustrat.  iv.  69.  "  Istnd  qnidem 
causa  pereuudi  Hispaniaj  fuit,"  says  Lucas.  The  moral  to  be  drawn  was 
that  the  prosperity  of  Spain  depended  on  obedience  to  the  Pope.  The 
whole  Clironicle,  A\a'itten  about  1236,  is  a  tissue  of  lies,  exceeding  anything 
previously  known,  or  at  least  published,  in  Spain. 


Fresh  Forgeries :  St.  Cyril.  28 7 

In  theology,  from  tlie  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury, the  spurious  passages  of  St.  Cyril  and  forged  canons 
of  Councils  maintained  their  ground,  being  guaranteed 
against  all  suspicion  by  the  authority  of  St.  Thomas. 
Since  the  work  of  Trionfo  in  1320,  up  to  1450,  it  is 
remarkable  that  no  single  new  work  appeared  in  the 
interest  of  the  Papal  system.  But  then  the  contest 
between  the  Council  of  Basle  and  Pope  Eugenius  iv. 
evoked  the  work  of  Cardinal  Torquemada,  besides  some 
others  of  less  importance.  Torquemada's  argument, 
which  was  held  up  to  the  time  of  Bellarmine  to  be  the 
most  conclusive  apology  of  the  Papal  system,  rests  en- 
tirely on  fabrications  later  than  the  pseudo-Isidore,  and 
chiefly  on  the  spurious  passages  of  St.  Cyril.  To  ignore 
the  authority  of  St.  Thomas  is,  according  to  the  Car- 
dinal, bad  enough,  but  to  slight  the  testimony  of  St. 
Cyril  is  intolerable.  The  Pope  is  infallible  ;  all  autho- 
rity of  the  other  bishops  is  borrowed  or  derived  from 
his.  Decisions  of  Councils  without  his  assent  are  null 
and  void.  These  fundamental  principles  of  Torquemada 
are  proved  by  the  spurious  passages  of  Anacletus,  Cle- 
ment, the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  St.  Cyril,  and  a  mass 
of  forged  or  adulterated  testimonies.-^     In  the  times  of 

^  DePoniif.M.  et  Gen.  Condi.  AtLctorit.  (Venet.  15S3),  p.  17  ;  Summa  de 


2SS  Papal  Infallibility, 

Leo  X.  and  Clement  iii.,  the  Cardinals  Thomas  of  Vio, 
or  Cajetan,  and  Jacobazzi,  followed  closely  in  his  foot- 
steps.^ Melchior  Canus  built  firmly  on  the  authority 
of  Cyril,  attested  by  St.  Thomas,  and  so  did  Bellarmine 
and  the  Jesuits  who  followed  him.  The  Dominicans, 
Nicolai,  Le  Quien,  Quetif,  and  Echard,  were  the  first  to 
avow  openly  that  their  master,  St.  Thomas,  had  been 
deceived  by  an  impostor,  and  had  in  his  turn  misled 
the  whole  tribe  of  theologians  and  canonists  who  fol- 
lowed him.^  On  the  other  hand,  the  Jesuits,  including 
even  such  a  scholar  as  Labbe,  while  giving  up  the 
pseudo-Isidorian  decretals,  manifested  their  resolve  still 
to  cling  to  Cyril.^     In  Italy,  as  late  as  1713,  Professor 

Ecd.  (Venet.  l^Gl),  p.  171  ;  Apparat.  super  Deer.  Union.  Grax.  (Venet. 
1581),  p.  366,  and  in  many  other  places, 

1  Opera  (ed.  Serry),  Patav.  734,  p.  194,  "  Cyi-illus  .  .  .  mnlto  eviden- 
tius.  quam  costeri  auctores  liuic  veritati  testimonium  perliibet,"  viz.,  tliat 
the  Pope  is  the  infallible  jiidge  of  doctrine.  Those  who  wish  to  get  a  bird's- 
eye  view  of  the  extent  to  which  the  genuine  tradition  of  Church  authority 
was  still  overlaid  and  obliterated  by  the  rubbish  of  later  inventions  and 
forgeries  -about  1563,  when  the  Loci  of  Canus  appeared,  must  read  the  fifth 
book  of  his  work.  It  is  indeed  still  worse  fifty  years  later  in  this  part  of 
Bellarmine's  work.  The  diff"erence  is  that  Canus  was  honest  in  his  belief, 
which  cannot  be  said  of  Bellarmine. 

2  Le  Quien  speaks  out  with  peculiar  distinctness  on  the  point  in  the 
Preface  to  his  Panoplia  contra  Schisma  Grcccorum,  published  at  Paris  in 
1718  under  the  name  of  Steph.  de  Altimura,  pp.  xv.-xvii. 

3  Cf.  Labbe,  De  Script.  Eccles.  (Paris,  1660),  i.  244,  He  and  Bellar- 
laine  sheltered  themselves  under  the  pretext  that  the  Thesaurus  of  Cyril 
lias  come  to  us  in  a  mutilated  condition;  Dupin,  Ceillier,  Oudin,  and  others 
have  long  since  sliown  the  falsehood  of  this  assertion. 


Fresh  Fo7'ge7'ics :  St,  Cyril.  289 

Andruzzi  of  Bologna  cited  the  most  important  of  the 
interpolations  in  St.  Cyril  as  a  conclusive  argument  in 
his  controversial  treatise  against  the  patriarch  Dosi- 
theus.-^ 

§  XXI. — Interdicts. 

To  all  these  means  for  supporting  the  universal 
supremacy  of  the  Popes,  and  bringing  the  belief  of  their 
infallibility  into  more  general  acceptance,  were  added  ^ 
the  Interdicts  to  which  whole  countries  were  frequently 
subjected.  God's  Vicar  upon  earth,  it  w^as  said,  acts 
like  God,  who  often  includes  many  innocent  persons  in 
the  punishment  of  the  guilty  few ;  who  shall  dare  to 
contradict  him  ?  He  acts  under  Divine  guidance,  and 
his  acts  cannot  be  measured  by  the  rules  of  human 
justice.  And  thus  from  the  Divine  inspiration  which 
guided  their  action  was  inferred  the  doctrinal  infalli- 
bility of  the  Popes,  and  vice,  versa,  just  as  is  the  case 
now  with  the  people,  and  even  the  clergy,  especially  in 
countries  of  the  Latin  race.  The  Popes  had  indeed 
themselves  declared,  in  their  new  code,  in  the  sixth  book 
of  the  Decretals,  that  interdicts  produced  the  most 
injurious  effects  on  the  religion  of  the  people,  strength- 

1   Vetus  (J rvEcia  de  Rom.  Sede praclare  seniiens,  Veuet.  1713,  p.  219. 
T 


290  Papal  Infallibility . 

ening  their  impiety,  eliciting  heresies,  originating 
numberless  dangers  to  souls,  and  depriving  the  Church 
of  her  rightful  dues.-^  But  notwithstanding  this  con- 
fession, they  made  more  copious  use  of  interdicts  than 
ever;  their  proceedings  against  Germany  during  the 
long  struggle  against  the  Emperor  Louis  the  Bavarian 
exceeded,  through  the  long  duration  of  the  interdict, 
anything  that  had  happened  there  before.  It  really 
seemed  as  if  they  wished  to  root  out  from  the  minds  of 
men  the  gospel  teaching  about  the  rights  of  baptized 
Christians,  and  teach  them  instead  to  regard  themselves 
as  mere  herds  of  cattle  belonging  to  the  Pope,  with  no 
will  of  their  own,  or,  as  Alvaro  Pelayo  said,  teach  them 
to  fly  from  his  wrath  to  his  mercy,  which,  however,  had 
been  refused  to  them.  The  results  of  this  conduct  varied 
greatly  according  to  differences  of  national  character. 
While  it  led  some  nations  to  question  more  and  more 
the  Divine  right  of  an  authority  so  horribly  abused,  and 
thus  scattered  seeds  which  bore  fruit  a  century  and  a 
half  later ;  others  were  confirmed  in  the  notion  that 
the  Papacy  is  a  mysterious  power  like  the  Godhead, 
whose  ways  are  unsearchable,  and  which  must  not  be 
too  closely  scrutinized,  but  must   always  be   blindly 

1  Cap.  ult.  de  Excom.  in  Sexto  Deer. 


Interdicts.  291 

trusted  as  being  enlightened  from  on  high,  and  acting 
under  Divine  inspiration. 

Paradoxical  as  it  may  sound,  it  is  an  historical  fact 
that  the  more  suspicious  and  scandalous  the  conduct 
of  the  Popes — with  their  exemptions,  privileges,  indul- 
gences, and  the  like,  and  the  consequent  confusion  in 
the  Churcli — appeared  to  pious  men,  the  more  inclined 
they  felt  to  take  refuge  from  their  own  doubts  and  sus- 
picions in  the  bosom  of  Papal  infallibility.  Tested  by 
simple  Christian  feeling,  they  would  have  been  obliged 
to  condemn  this,  and  much  else,  as  an  abuse  and  heinous 
sin  against  the  Church.  But  that  feeling  had  to  con- 
tend with  the  notion,  instilled  into  them  from  youth, 
that  the  Pope  is  the  lord  and  master  of  the  Church, 
whom  none  may  contradict  or  call  to  account.  This 
may  be  illustrated  by  the  language  of  Peter  Cantor,  as 
early  as  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century.  He  says  tliere 
would  indeed  be  just  reason  to  apprehend  that  the  Papal 
corruptions  might  produce  a  general  separation  from 
the  spiritual  empire  of  Eome,  for  there  is  no  scriptural 
justification  for  them  ;  but  then  it  would  be  sacrilegious 
to  find  fault  with  what  the  Pope  does.  God  suffers  not 
the  Eoman  Church  to  fall  into  any  error,  and  we  must 
assume  that  the  Pope  does  these  things  under  inspira- 


292  Papal  InfalLibiliiy. 

tion  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  virtue  of  which  he  is  in  the 
last  instance  the  sole  ruler  of  the  Church,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  all  others.-^ 

§  XXIL — Tlia,  Scliism  of  the  Antipodes. 

In  the  fourteenth  century,  the  Church  was  brought 
into  a  condition  which  forced  doubts  upon  the  minds  of 
even  the  most  zealous  votaries  of  the  Pa^oal  system. 

The  long  schism  which  for  above  forty  years  pre- 
sented to  the  world  the  novel  spectacle  of  rival  Popes 
mutually  anathematizing  one  another,  and  two  Curias, 
— a  French  one  at  Avignon,  and  an  Italian, — shook  an 
authority  still  commonly  regarded  as  invincible  under 
the  last  Popes  before  1376.  For  the  discomfiture  suf- 
fered by  the  Papacy  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  in 
the  person  of  Boniface  viiL,  was  soon  blotted  out  of 
men's  remembrance  by  the  complete  victory  it  gained 
soon  afterwards  over  Germany  and  the  Emperor  Louis ; 
and  the  practical  effects  of  that  first  humiliation  were 
inconsiderable, — it  left  its  mark  rather  on  the  Schola  and 
the  writings  of  the  French  jurists.  The  wounds  in- 
flicted by  the  persistent  policy  of  the  Popes  for  centuries 
on  the  Empire  and  the  national  unity  of  Germany  long 
continued  to  bleed.     The  German  Church  had  lost  the 

^  Verbum  Abbrev.  (ed,  Galopin),  p.  114. 


The  Great  Sehism. 


293 


very  idea  of  regarding  itself  as  an  organic  wliole  ;  that 
there  had  ever  been  such  a  thing  as  German  National 
Synods  was  utterly  forgotten.  The  experiment  of 
"  divide  et  impera"  had  been  first  tried  upon  the  German 
Church,  and  had  proved  a  complete  success. 

The  Schism  arose  from  the  struggle  between  two  na- 
tions for  the  possession  of  the  Papacy :  the  Italians  wanted 
to  regain  and  the  French  to  keep  it.  And  thus  it  came 
to  pass  that  from  1378  to  1409  Western  Christendom 
was  divided  into  two,  from  1409  to  1415,  into  three, 
Obediences.  A  Neapolitan,  Urban  vi.,  had  been  elected, 
and  his  first  slight  attempt  at  a  reform  gave  immediate 
occasion  to  the  outbreak  of  the  schism.  Soon  after 
entering  on  his  pontificate,  he  excommunicated  the 
Cardinals  who  were  guilty  of  simony.  But  simony  had 
long  been  the  daily  bread  of  the  Eoman  Curia  and 
the  breath  of  its  life ;  without  simony  the  machine 
must  come  to  a  stand- still  and  instantly  fall  to  pieces. 
The  Cardinals  had,  from  their  own  point  of  view, 
ample  ground  for  insisting  on  the  impossibility  of 
subsisting  without  it.  They  accordingly  revolted  from 
Urban  and  elected  Clement  vii.,  a  man  after  their  own 
heart. -^  Nobody  knew  at  the  time  whose  election  was 
the  most  regular,  Urban's  or  Clement's.     Things  had 

^  Thorn,  de  Acern.  Be  Great.  Urhani.     See  I\Iuratori,  iii.  2,  T2.1. 


294  Papal  Infallibility. 

in  fact  occurred  in  both  elections  wliicli  made  tliem 
legally  invalid.  The  attorneys  on  both  sides  urged 
irrefutable  arguments  to  show  that  the  Pope  of  the 
opposite  party  had  no  claim  to  their  recognition. 
There  were  persons  on  both  sides,  since  accounted  as 
Saints  throughout  the  whole  Church,  but  who  then 
anathematized  one  another  :  on  the  French  side,  Peter 
of  Luxemburg  and  Vincent  Ferrer,  on  the  Italian,  Cath- 
erine of  Sienna  and  Catherine  the  Swede.  Meanwhile 
there  were  two  Papal  Courts  and  two  Colleges  of  Car- 
dinals, each  Court  with  diminished  revenues,  and  deter-- 
mined  to  put  on  the  screw  of  extortion  to  the  utmost, — 
each  inexhaustible  in  the  discovery  of  new  methods  of 
making  gain  of  spiritual  things,  and  the  increased 
application  of  those  already  in  use. 

The  situation  was  a  painful  one  for  all  adherents  of 
Papal  infallibility,  who  found  themselves  in  an  inextri- 
cable labyrinth.  Their  belief  necessarily  implied  that 
the  particular  individual  who  is  in  sole  possession  of  all 
truth,  and  bestows  on  the  whole  Church  the  certainty 
of  its  faith,  must  be  always  and  undoubtingly  acknow- 
ledged as  such.  There  can  as  little  be  any  uncer- 
tainty allowed  about  the  person  of  the  right  Pope  as 
about  the  books  of  Scripture.     Yet  every  one  at  that 


The  Great  ScJiisvi.  295 

period  must  at  bottom  have  been  aware  that  the  mere 
accident  of  what  country  he  lived  in  determined  which 
Pope  he  adhered  to,  and  that  all  he  knew  of  his 
Pope's  legitimacy  was  that  half  Christendom  rejected 
it.  Spaniards  and  Frenchmen  believed  in  Clement 
VIL  or  Benedict  xiii,,  Englishmen  and  Italians  in  Ur- 
ban VI.  or  Boniface  IX.  What  was  still  worse,  the 
old  notion,  which  for  centuries  had  been  fostered  by 
the  Popes,  and  often  confirmed  by  them,  of  the  invali- 
dity of  ordinations  and  sacraments  administered  out- 
side the  Papal  communion,  still  widely  prevailed,  espe- 
cially in  Italy.  The  Papal  secretary  Coluccio  Salutato 
paints  in  strong  colours  the  universal  uncertainty  and 
anguish  of  conscience  produced  by  the  schism,  and  his 
own  conclusion  as  a  Papalist  is,  that  as  all  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction  is  derived  from  the  Pope,  and  as  a  Pope 
invalidly  elected  cannot  give  what  he  does  not  himself 
possess,  no  bishops  or  priests  ordained  since  the  death 
of  Gregory  xi.  could  guarantee  the  validity  of  the  sacra- 
ments they  administered.-^  It  followed,  according  to 
him,  that  any  one  who  adored  the  Eucharist  consecrated 
by  a  priest  ordained  in   schism  worshipped  an  idol. 

1  See  his  letter  to  the  Count  Jost  of  Moravia,  in  Martene,  Thcs.  Anecd. 
ii.  1159,  "Quis  nescit  ex  vitiosa  parte  veros  episcopos  esse  non  posse?" 
And  the  point  is  then  further  worked  out. 


296  Papal  Infallibility. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  Western  Christendom.  A 
happier  view  prevailed  in  France,  England,  Germany, 
and  Spain,  than  in  Italy  and  at  the  Papal  Court,  about 
the  conditions  of  valid  ordination  and  administration  of 
sacraments. 

Those  who  had  any  knowledge  of  the  constitution 
of  the  ancient  Church  perceived  now  that  the  con- 
fusion for  which  no  remedy  had  been  discovered  for 
thirty  years,  could  only  be  traced  ultimately  to  the 
development  of  the  Gregorian  system.  A  strong  and 
earnest  desire  was  aroused  for  the  restoration  of  the 
episcopal  system,  so  far  as  it  could  then  be  distinguished 
through  the  accumulated  rubbish  of  fabrications  it  was 
overlaid  with,  and  the  distortions  and  obscuring  of  Church 
history.  It  was  felt  that  the  old  system  would  have  made 
such  a  degradation  and  devastation  as  the  Church  had 
now  experienced  impossible.  The  conviction  grew 
stronger  and  stronger  that  a  General  Council  was  the 
only  effectual  means  for  the  restoration  of  harmony  in 
the  Church,  as  also  for  limiting  Papal  despotism.  Ger- 
mans, like  Henry  of  Langenstein  and  Mcholas  Cusa ; 
Frenchmen  like  D'Ailly,  Gerson,  and  Clemange ;  Italians 
like  ZabareUa;  Spaniards  like  Escobar  and  John  of  Sego- 
via, came,  in  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  and  beginning 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  to  substantially  similar  conclu- 


The  Great  Scfiisui.  297 

sions, — that  the  Church  must  recover  herself,  break  the 
chains  the  Cnrialistic  system  had  fastened  upon  her, 
and  reform  herself  in  her  head  and  her  members.  And 
indeed  for  some  time,  all  who  were  eminent  in  the 
Church  for  intelligence  and  knowledge  had  declared 
themselves  in  favour  of  her  rights,  and  the  rights  of 
free  Councils,  against  the  Papacy.  Even  the  voices  of 
those  who  thought  so  terribly  degenerate  and  misused 
an  institution  as  the  Eoman  See  had  now  become  was 
nevertheless  indispensable,  were  loudly  raised,  but  v/ith- 
out  producing  any  result.  Public  opinion  still  recog- 
nised the  necessity  of  its  existence,  but  also  the  urgent 
need  for  its  limitation  and  purification. 

The  first  attempt  to  bring  about  the  assembling  of  a 
real,  free,  and  independent  Council  succeeded.  Instead 
of  the  mock  Synods  which  had  been  customary  for  the 
last  300  years,  when  the  bishops  only  came  to  hear  the 
Pope's  decrees  read  and  go  home  again,  a  Synod  from . 
all  Europe  was  assembled  at  Pisa  in  1409,  at  which  men 
could  dare  to  speak  openly  and  vote  freely.  It  seemed 
a  great  point  to  contemporaries  that  two  Popes,  Gregory 
XII.  and  Benedict  xiii.,  were  deposed,  and  a  third,  Alex- 
ander III.,  was  elected.  But  these  proceedings  exhausted 
the  strength  of  the  Synod;  the  mere  presence  of  a  Pope, 
with  the  Cardinals  now  ngnin  adhering  to  liim,  though 


298  Papa  I  Infa  llibility. 

he  was  the  creation  of  the  Synod,  prevented  even  the 
attempt  or  beginning  of  a  reformation  of  the  Church. 
The  reforms  conceded  by  Alexander  were  insignificant. 
As  the  other  two  Popes  did  not  submit  to  the  decision 
of  the  Synod,  there  were  now  three  heads  of  the  Church, 
as  before  in  1048,  but  the  Pope  elected  by  the  Council 
received  far  the  most  general  recognition. 

§  XXIII. — The,  Council  of  Constance. 

To  bring  about  the  actual  downfal  of  the  system,  i": 
was  necessary  that  it  should  be  represented  in  the  person 
of  a  Pope  who  was  the  most  worthless  and  infamous  man 
to  be  found  anywhere,  according  to  the  testimony  of  a 
contemporary.-^  This  Pope,  recognised  up  to  the  day  of 
his  deposition  by  the  great  majority  of  Western  Chris- 
tendom, was  Balthasar  Cossa,  John  xxiii.  N'ow  was 
the  first  real  victory  won,  not  only  over  persons,  but 
over  the  Papacy,  and  for  this  was  required  such  an 
assembly  as  was  the  Council  of  Constance  (1414-1418), 
the  most  numerous  ever  seen  in  the  West,  at  which, 
besides  300  bishops,  there  were  present  the  deputies  of 
fifteen  universities,  and  300  doctors,  men  who  were  not 

1  Justinger,  Berner-Chronic.  p.  276.  "  The  worst  and  most  abused  man 
to  be  found,  when  his  badness  had  been  thoroughly  exposed  in  the  Council 
at  Constance." 


Cou7icil  of  Constance.  299 

in  the  ambiguous  position  of  having  to  reform  abuses 
to  which  they  owed  their  own  dignities  and  emoluments. 
And  this  assembly  had  to  introduce  the  new  plan  of 
voting  by  nations  in  place  of  the  old  one  of  voting  by 
individuals,  or  all  would  have  been  wrecked  through 
the  great  number  of  Italian  bishops,  the  majority  of 
whom  considered  it  their  natural  duty  to  uphold  the 
Papal  system,  the  Curia,  and  the  means  of  revenue  thence 
accruing  to  the  Italians.  The  corruption  of  the  Church, 
and  the  demoralization  which  was  its  result,  had  pene- 
trated deeper  in  Italy  than  elsewhere,  and  then,  as 
afterwards,  it  was  remarked,  that  the  Italian  bishops 
were  the  most  steady  opponents  of  every  remedy  and 
reformation. 

With  the  Council  of  Constance  arose  a  star  of  hope 
for  the  German  Church.  WeU  were  it  if  she  had 
possessed  men  capable  of  taking  permanent  advantage 
of  so  favourable  a  situation.  The  new  Emperor,  Sigis- 
mund,  full  of  earnest  zeal  to  help  the  Church  in  her 
sore  distress,  managed  so  skilfully  to  persuade  and  press 
Pope  John,  who  was  threatened  in  Italy,  tliat  he  chose 
the  German  city  of  Constance  for  the  Council,  and  came 
there  himself,  though  not  by  his  own  goodwill.  For 
three  centuries  the  Germans  had  been  thrust  out  by 


300  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  Italians  and  French  from  all  active  part  in  the 
general  affairs  of  the  Church.  They  were  the  nation 
least  responsible,  next  to  the  English,  for  the  evils  of 
the  schism, — for  the  Curia  had  always  been  purely 
French  and  Italian,  and  had  contained  no  single  element 
of  German  representation.  The  German  clergy  were 
more  sinned  against  than  sinning.  It  is  true  that  even 
in  Germany  the  corruption  of  the  Church  had  become 
intolerable,  and  cried  to  Heaven,  but  it  was  no  native 
product  of  the  German  people ;  it  had  been  imported 
from  the  south,  like  a  foreign  pestilence,  and  become 
permanent  through  the  destruction  of  the  organic  life 
of  the  national  Church. 

In  the  famous  decrees  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  sessions, 
the  Council  of  Constance  declared  that  "  every  lawfully 
convoked  Oecumenical  Council  representing  the  Churcli 
derives  its  authority  immediately  from  Christ,  and 
every  one,  the  Pope  included,  is  subject  to  it  in  matters 
of  faith,  in  the  healing  of  schism,  and  the  reformation 
of  the  Church."  The  decree  was  passed  without  a 
single  dissentient  voice, — a  decision  more  eventful  and 
pregnant  in  future  consequences  than  had  been  arrived 
at  by  any  previous  Council,  and  accordant  in  principle 
with  primitive  antiquity, — for  so  the  Church  held  before 


Council  of  Constance,  30 1 

the  appearance  of  the  pseudo-Isidore.  But  at  the  time 
it  iQust  have  looked  like  a  bold  inuovatioii ;  so  strongly 
had  the  current  set  in  the  opposite  direction  for  a 
lengthened  period,  and  so  loftily  had  the  Popes  towered 
above  the  humble  attitude  of  the  silent  and  submissive 
Synods  from  the  third  Lateran  to  the  Council  of  Vienne. 
That  the  Council  had  a  full  rioht  to  call  itself  Q^cumen- 

o 

ical  was  obvious.  The  small  and  divided  fractions  of 
the  other  two  Obediences  could  not  prejudice  its  claims. 
Gregory  xii.  and  Benedict  xiii.  had  been  deserted  by 
their  Cardinals,  and  all  that  could  be  held  to  consti- 
tute the  Eoman  Church  took  part  in  the  Council. 

If  a  Pope  is  subject  to  a  Council  in  matters  of  faitli 
he  is  not  infallible  ;  the  Church,  and  the  Council  which 
represents  it,  inherit  the  promises  of  Christ,  and  not  the 
Pope,  who  may  err  apart  from  a  Council,  and  can  be 
judged  by  it  for  his  error.  This  inference  was  clear 
and  indisputable.  But  it  was  not  the  article  in  the 
decrees  concerning  faith,  but  that  concerning  reforma- 
tion, which  excited  the  suspicion  of  the  Cardinals.  That 
a  Pope  who  became  heretical  fell  under  the  judgment 
of  the  Church,  and  therefore  of  a  Council,  was  the  com- 
monly accepted  and  admitted  theory  since  the  so-called 
canon  of  St.  Boniface  had  been  received  into  the  codes, 


302  Papal  Iiifallibility. 

tlioiigli  it  could  not  really  be  reconciled  with  the  doc- 
trine of  infallibility  assumed  in  the  same  codes  of 
canon  law,  and  disseminated  by  Aquinas.  Yet  the 
Cardinals  dared  not  refuse  their  assent  to  the  decrees 
which  were  so  menacing  to  the  interests  of  the  Curia. 

These  decisions  of  Constance  are  perhaps  the  most 
extraordinary  event  in  the  whole  dogmatic  history  of 
the  Christian  Church.  Their  language  leaves  no  doubt 
that  they  were  understood  to  be  articles  of  faith,  dog- 
matic definitions  of  the  doctrine  of  Church  authority. 
And  they  deny  the  fundamental  position  of  the  Papal 
system,  which  is  thereby  tacitly  but  very  eloquently 
signalized  as  an  error  and  abuse.  Yet  that  system  had 
prevailed  in  the  administration  of  the  Church  for  cen- 
turies, had  been  taught  in  the  canon  law  books  and  the 
schools  of  the  Eeligious  Orders,  especially  by  Thomist 
divines,  and  assumed  or  expressly  affirmed  in  all  pro- 
nouncements and  decisions  of  the  Popes,  the  new 
authorities  for  the  laws  of  the  Church.  And  now  not 
a  voice  was  raised  in  its  favour ;  no  one  opposed  the 
doctrines  of  Constance,  no  one  protested  ! 

But  the  state  of  the  Church  had  become  so  unnatural 
and  monstrous, — the  measure  of  human  infirmity  and 
sinfulness  which   must  be   reckoned   upon   in   every, 


Council  of  Constance.  303 

even  the  best,  community  was  so  largely  exceeded, — 
and  the  habitual  transgression  of  the  laws  of  God  and 
the  ordinances  of  the  ancient  Church  was  so  open  and 
universal,  that  every  one  could  perceive  that  the  whole 
dominant  system,  rather  than  particular  individuals, 
was  responsible  for  this  perversion  of  Church-govern- 
ment into  a  vast  engine  of  finance  and  money- getting, — 
this  transformation  of  a  free  Church  arranging  its  affairs 
by  common  consultation  into  a  subject  empire  under 
absolutist  rule,  and  made  the  prey  of  an  oligarchy. 
^\'Tien  the  Cardinals  said,  in  the  letter  they  addressed 
to  their  Pope,  Gregory  xii.,  in  1408,  that  there  was  no 
soundness  in  the  Church  from  the  sole  of  the  foot  to 
the  crown  of  the  head,-^  they  should  ]iave  added,  if  they 
wished  to  tell  the  whole  truth,  "  It  is  we  and  our  col- 
leagues, and  your  predecessors,  it  is  the  Curia,  who 
have  gone  on  saturating  the  body  of  the  Church  with 
moral  poison,  and  therefore  is  it  now  so  sorely  diseased." 
There  were  certainly  but  few  who  clearly  understood 
all  the  real  causes  as  well  as  the  greatness  of  the 
evil,  but  those  few  spoke  out  distinctly  what  every 
one  dimly  felt.  Eeform  in  the  head  and  the  mem- 
bers was  the  universal  watchword  throughout  Europe, 

1  RajTiald.  Annal.  1408. 


304  Papal  Infallibility. 

and  was  -understood  by  every  one  to  mean  that  the 
head,  the  Papal  See,  needed  reform  first  of  all,  and 
that  only  then  and  thus  would  a  reform  of  the  mem- 
bers be  possible.  It  was  notorious  to  all  that  the  good 
dispositions  of  this  or  that  individual  Pope,  even  if 
they  continued,  were  utterly  powerless,  and  that  refor- 
mation in  the  present  case  meant  an  entire  change  of 
system.  In  face  of  this  evidence  all  tlie  wisdom  of 
both  schools — of  the  canonists  and  the  monkish  theo- 
logians— was  dumb,  built,  as  it  was,  on  rotten  founda- 
tions. They  were  reduced  to  silence,  or  had,  like 
Tudeschi  and  many  Dominicans,  to  assent  to  the  decrees 
of  Constance.  The  public  opinion  of  the  whole  Chris- 
tian world,  directed  and  matured  by  the  discussions 
carried  on  for  the  last  forty  years  at  Paris,  Avignon, 
Eome,  Pisa,  and  the  German  universities,  was  too  strong 
for  them. 

Even  the  new  Pope  elected  at  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance was  obliged  to  declare  himself  in  accord  with 
this  feeling.  He  had  indeed  been  a  zealous  adherent 
of  John  XXIII.,  and  had  only  at  the  last  moment  deserted 
him,  and  given  in  his  adhesion  to  the  Council.  But 
he  was  now  Pope  by  virtue  of  this  deposition  of  his 
predecessor,  which  depended   entirely   on   the   decree 


Coicncil  of  Constance.  305 

passed  at  the  Council,  and  therefore  on  the  Episcopal 
system.  John  had  not  been  deposed  on  account  of  his 
opposition  to  the  Council,  but  only  on  account  of  his 
breaking  his  oath  of  obedience  to  it,  and  his  crimes,  after 
a  formal  investigation.  An  express  confirmation  of  this 
decree  by  jMartin  v.  seemed  at  the  time  not  only  super- 
fluous, but  objectionable.  It  would  have  been  like  a 
son  Avanting  to  attest  the  genuine  paternity  of  his  o\Yn 
father,  for  this  decree  had  made  him  Pope.  Had  he 
wished  to  assail  its  validity  in  any  way  he  would 
have  been  bound  at  once  to  resign,  and  let  the  de]3osed 
Pope  again  take  his  place.  It  was  clear  to  him  that 
he  could  no  longer  act  upon  the  right,  claimed  and 
exercised  by  his  predecessors  for  200  years,  to  be  the 
ruler  of  the  whole  Church  assembled  and  represented 
at  the  Council,  and  he  distinctly  said  this  in  his  Bull 
against  the  doctrine  of  Wicliffe,  where  he  asserted  the 
proposition  that  the  supremacy  of  the  Eoman  Church 
over  the  rest  is  no  part  of  necessary  doctrine,  to  be  an 
error,  because  Wicliffe  understood  by  the  Eoman  the 
■aniversal  Church,  or  a  Council,  or  at  least  denied  the 
primacy  of  the  Pope  over  the  other  particular  Churches.^ 

1  "  Super  alias  ecclesias  particulares,"  i.e.,  no  primacy  over  the  universal 
Church  or  a  general  Council,  in  strict  accordance  with  the  decrees  of  Con- 
stance. So,  again,  in  the  questions  addressed  hy  Martin's  direction  to  the 
Wicliffites  or  Hussites,  they  were  asked  whether  they  believed  the  Pope 

U 


3o6  Papal  Infallibility, 

He  took  occasion  to  declare,  towards  the  end  of  tlie 
Council  of  Constance,  that  he  confirmed  all  its  "  con- 
ciliar  "  decrees,  meaning  by  this  phraseology  to  withhold 
his  approval  from  two  decrees,  on  Annates,  and  on  a  book 
by  the  Dominican  Falkenberg,  not  passed  by  the  Coun- 
cil in  full  session,  but  in  the  congregations  of  certain 
nations.^  The  two  other  Obediences  also,^  in  giving  in 
their  adherence  to  the  Council  afterwards,  assented  to  its 
decrees,  as  is  clearly  shown  by  the  Concordat  of  Nar- 
bonne,  in  the  twentieth  session,  which  enumerated  the 
subjects  coming  within  the  competence  of  the  Council  in 
accordance  with  the  decrees  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  sessions. 
After  the  deposition  of  John  xxiii.,  and  the  resigna- 
tion of  Gregory  XIL,  there  occurred  a  significant  division 
and  struggle  between  the  Latins  and  Germans.  The 
Germans  and  English  wanted  the  reformation  of  the 
Church,  which  was  the  most  important  and  difficult 
task  of  the  Council,  to  be  undertaken  before  proceeding 
■  to  the  election  of  a  new  Pope.  The  experience  of  the 
Council  of  Pisa  had  proved  that  the  election  of  a  new 
Pope  at  once  put  an  end  to  every  scheme  of  reformation. 

to  be  Peter's  successor,  "  habens  siipremam  axictoritatem  in  Ecclesi^  (not 
Ecclesia??i)  Dei,"  and  that  every  General  Council,  including  that  of  Con- 
stance, represents  the  universal  Church. 

1  "Conciliariter"  is  opposed  to  "  nationaliter." 

2  [The  adherents  of  Benedict  XIII.  and  Gregory  xii.— Tr.] 


Council  of  Constance.  307 

But  the  Cardinals,  and  witli  tliem  the  Italians  and  French  - 
— the  latter  from  jealousy  of  the  lofty  position  held  ' 
by  the  German  King  Sigismund, — pressed  for  the  elec- 
tion taking  precedence  of  the  reformation.  Sigismund 
contended  skilfully,  bravely,  and  perseveringiy  for  the 
interests  of  the  Church,  the  Empire,  and  the  German 
people,  who  then  with  good  reason  called  themselves 
"  the  godly,  patient,  humble,  and  yet  not  feeble  nation."^ 
Had  they  been  somewhat  less  patient  and  humble,  and 
had  something  more  of  that  strength  which  union  be- 
stows, the  ecclesiastical  and  national  discomfiture  of 
1417  would  not  have  been  followed  by  the  revolt  of 
1517,  the  religious  division  of  the  nation,  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  and  many  other  disastrous  consequences. 
But  the  Cardinals  and  Latins  carried  the  day  by  gain- 
ing over  the  English,  and  corrupting  some  German 
prelates,  as,  for  instance,  the  Archbishop  of  Pdga,  and 
the  Bishops  of  Coire  and  Leutomischl.^  And  before 
the  new  Pope,  Martin  v.,  had  been  elected  above  a  few 
weeks,  the  Oiiria  and  "  curialism "  were  again  in  the 
ascendant.  The  new  rules  of  the  Chancery,  at  once 
puljlished  by  Martin,  must  have  opened  the  eyes  of  the 
short-sighted  French,  and  have  shown  them  that  in  the 

1  See  De  Hardt,  A  eta  Cone.  Const,  iv.  1-119.  2  /j^  jy^  140^^ 


o 


08  Papal  Infallibility. 


disposal  of  benefices  the  wliole  network  of  abuses  and 
corrupt  trading  upon  patronage  was  to  be  maintained.^ 

Only  a  few  reforming  ordinances  came  into  force; 
tlie  worst  wounds  and  sores  of  the  ecclesiastical  body 
remained  for  the  most  part  untouched.  Martin  under- 
stood how  to  divide  the  nations  by  pursuing  a  dif- 
ferent policy  towards  each.  His  two  Concordats,  with 
the  German  States  and  the  Latin  nations,  chiefly  related 
to  the  possession  of  offices,  and  expressly  reserved  to 
the  Pope  what  a  long  and  universal  experience  had 
proved  to  be  hateful  abuses,  as,  e.g.,  the  annates,  which 
were  so  demoralizing  to  the  character  of  the  clergy,  and 
compelled  them  to  incur  heavy  debts.  And  most  of 
the  articles  were  so  drawn  as  to  leave  open  a  door  for 
the  renewal  of  the  abuse.  In  the  life  and  practice  of 
the  Church,  the  Papal  system,  with  all  its  attendant 
evils,  was  restored. 

§  XXIV.— T/ie  Council  of  Basle. 

The  Episcopal  system,  which  was  the  true  principle 

of  reform,  still  survived  in  the  decrees  of  the  fourth 

and  fifth  sessions  of  Constance,  and  for  a  long  time  no 

one  dared  to  meddle  with  them.     One  other  hope  re- 

1  See  De  Hardt,  A  da  Cone.  Const,  i.  965  seq. 


The  Coiuicil  of  Basle.  309 

mained  :  the  Synod  had  decided  that  another  should  be 
held  after  five  years,  and  that  for  the  future  there  should 
be  an  CEcumenical  Council  every  ten  years.  Here 
ao-ain  Martin  v.  showed  that  he  felt  bound  to  observe 
the  decrees  of  Constance,  for  he  actually  summoned  the 
Council,  in  1423,  to  meet,  first  at  Pavia,  and  then  at 
Sienna.  But  the  moment  any  signs  of  an  attempt  at 
reform  manifested  themselves,  he  dissolved  it,  "on 
account  of  the  fewness  of  those  present."  However, 
shortly  before  his  death,  he  summoned  the  new  Council 
to  meet  at  Basle.  Eugenius  iv.  could  not  avoid  carrying 
out  the  duty  he  had  inherited  from  his  predecessor,  to 
which  he  was  already  pledged  in  conclave.  When  the 
earliest  arrivals  at  Basle  took  place  at  the  appointed  time, 
the  citizens  laughed  at  the  new-comers  as  dreamers,  so 
little  could  they  now  conceive  the  Pope's  being  in  earnest 
in  convoking  the  Council  after  the  course  events  had 
taken  since  1417.^  In  fact,  Eugenius  ordered  the  dis- 
solution of  the  still  scanty  assembly  immediately  after 
its  first  proceedings,  December  18,  1431,  on  the  most 
transparently  frivolous  pretexts,  with  a  view  to  its  resum- 
ing its  sittings  a  year  and  a  half  later  at  Bologna,  under  his 
own  presidency.     And  yet  tlie  need  for  a  Council  had 

1  ^D.  Silv.  Commentar.  de  liehus Basil.  Gestis{ed.  Fea.  Eoni.  1823),  i>.  3'J. 


3 1  o  Papal  Infallibility. 

never  seemed  more  urgent  than  at  tliat   moment,  on 
account  of  the  triumphs  of  the  Hussites.     The  assembly, 
relying  on  the  decrees  of  Constance,  which  had  been  re- 
X^eatedly  promulgated,  remained  united,  and  profited  by 
the  warning  of  the  evil  consequences  resulting  at  Con- 
stance from  the  sharp  division  of  nations  to  frame  a  better 
organization  for  itself,  by  forming  four  deputations,  in 
which  different  nations  and  orders  were  represented. 
And  thus  the  contest  with  the  Pope  began,  at  first 
under   favourable    circumstances,    for    public    opinion 
throughout  Europe  was  already  enlisted  on  the  side  of 
the  Council.     Moreover,  it  received  strong  support  from 
King    Sigismund,  and  Eugenius  found    himself   hard 
pressed  in  Italy,  and  deserted  by  many  Cardinals,  and 
even  by  the  Court  officials,  hundreds  of  whom  had  run 
away  from  him.     In  vain  he  pronounced  excommuni- 
cation against  the  prelates  who  were  on  their  way  to 
Basle.    Letters  of  adhesion  poured  into  Basle  from  kings, 
princes,  and  prelates,  from  bishops  and  universities ;  it 
seemed  as  if  once  again  the  spell  was  broken  whereby  the 
•  Papal  system  had  held  men's  minds  enthralled.  Eugenius 
saw  that  he  must  give  in,and  he  signified  his  assent  to 
the  continuance  of  the  Council  in  liis  Bull  of  February 
4,  1433,  and  named  four  cardinals  to  preside  over  it. 


The  Cozcncil  of  Basle.  311 

Bui  this  Bull,  again,  did  not  satisfy  the  Council,  though 
Eugenius  expressly  declared  that  he  regarded  it  as  having 
never  been  interrupted,  and  thereby  absolutely  retracted 
his  former  decree  for  its  dissolution.  There  was  a  design 
of  suspending  him,  when  Sigismund,  now  become  Em- 
peror, arrived  unexpectedly,  and,  through  his  exertions,  ef- 
fected a  reconciliation  between  the  Pope  and  the  Council 
Eugenius  transcribed  word  for  word  the  form  of  approval 
drawn  up  by  the  Council  in  his  Bull  of  December  1 5, 
1433,  and  recalled  his  three  former  Bulls ;  he  was  now 
ashamed  of  the  third,  in  which  he  had  most  vigorously 
assailed  the  authority  of  the  Council,  and  on  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Papal  system,  and  affirmed  that  he  had 
not  sanctioned  its  publication.^  He  admitted  that  the 
Council  had  been  fully  justified  in  continuing  in  ses- 
sion, and  passing  decrees,  in  spite  of  his  Bull  of  disso- 
lution, and  promised  to  adhere  to  it  "  with  all  zeal  and 
devotion."^  "  We  recall  the  three  Bulls,"  he  said,  "  to 
show  clearly  to  the  world  the  purity  of  our  intentions 
and  sincerity  of  our  devotion  to  the  universal  Church 
and   the   holy   (Ecumenical    Council  of  Basle."     The 

1  The  style  and  tone  of  this  Bull,  Bens  novit,  betray  mimistakeably  th« 
hand  of  the  Papal  Court  theologian,  and  Master  of  the  Palace,  Torquemada, 
■who  was  in  Basle  in  1433,  by  commission  of  the  Pope,  but  seems  soon  after- 
wards to  have  returned  to  him. 

2  Mansi,  Condi,  xxix.  78. 


3 1 2  Papal  Infallibility, 

humiliation  of  the  man  and  the  discomfiture  of  the  sys- 
tem were  complete.  It  was  no  isolated  act  of  conde- 
scension for  the  sake  of  peace,  but  the  most  definite 
and  indubitable  acknowledgment  of  the  superior  autho- 
rity of  the  Council,  and  his  own  subjection  to  it. 

The  Synod  had  from  tlie  first  taken  the  decrees  of 
Constance  on  the  supreme  authority  of  Councils  as  its 
basis,  and  expressly  published  them  anew  as  articles  of 
faith,  which  in  fact  they  were  expressly  declared  to  be 
by  the  Council  of  Constance.  Pope  and  Council  in 
common  enjoined  Western  Christendom  to  believe  these 
doctrines,  and  it  certainly  appeared  incredible  to  every 
one  then  that  a  time  could  ever  come  when  the  attempt 
would  be  made  to  overthrow  them.^ 

Even  in  his  former  Bulls,  condemning  and  annulling 

1  Ultramontanes,  from  Torqneraada  and  Bellarmine  to  Orsi,  have  disco- 
vered but  one  escape  from  this  dilemma,  by  saying  that  Eugenius's  conces- 
sions were  made  under  sheer  pressure  of  fear.  But  he  was  perfectly  free  per- 
sonally. Sigismund  was  at  Basle,  Eugenius  in  Italy,  and  they  corresponded 
by  letter.  If  Eugenius  was  airaid,  it  was  simply  the  conviction  of  the 
whole  Cliurch,  the  public  opinion  of  princes,  clergy,  and  nations,  he  was 
afraid  of.  And  if  this  feeling  is  to  be  called  fear,  then  every  Pope  lives  in  a 
chronic  state  of  fear.  Eugenius  had  ii. "" eed  first  sent  about  his  ambassadors 
to  investigate  the  state  of  opinion.  Ent  v  ''en  the  Religious  Orders,  always 
devoted  to  Rome,  refused  their  services  then.  Gonzalez,  General  of  the 
Jesuits,  who  thought  the  argument  from  ^'ear  too  absurd,  took  refuge  in 
the  pretext  that  Eugenius  sought  to  deceive  the  Council  by  the  ambiguous 
language  of  his  Bull  {De  InfalUb.  Rom.  Pontif.  Romce,  1689,  p.  69.5),— an 
unjust  imputation  on  the  Pope,  for  the  Bull  is  clear  and  unambiguous  from 
beginning  to  end. 


The  Coimcil  of  Basle.  3 1 3 

the  decisions  of  the  Fathers  at  Basle,  Eugenins  had  not 
ventured  to  touch  the  decrees  of  Constance  on  which 
they  were  based,  and  he  had,  moreover,  recognised  the 
second  session,  in  which  those  decrees  were  renewed  ; 
he  had  only  attacked  what  was  done  after  the  issue  of 
his  decree  for  the  dissolution  of  the  Council.  So  com  - 
pletely  and  irrevocably  was  the  Papal  See  bound,  as  we 
must  believe,  to  the  decisions  of  Constance  on  Church 
authority, — for  if  Eugenius  erred  in  confirming  them 
he  was  not  infallible,  and  the  gift  must  rest  with  the 
Council,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  if  he  was  rioht,  his 
subjection  in  matters  of  faith  to  the  Council,  and  there- 
fore his  fallibility,  was  again  affirmed.  Moreover, 
Eugenius  had  maintained  his  right,  as  Pope,  to  dissolve 
or  suspend  any  Council  at  his  pleasure;  this  he  now 
retracted,  and  acknowledged  the  legitimacy  of  a  General 
Council  carried  on  in  defiance  of  a  Papal  decree  for  its 
dissolution. 

For  three  years  and  a  half,  from  the  fourteenth  session 
of  November  7,  1433,  to  the  twenty-fifth  of  May  7,  1437, 
an  external  harmony  at  least  was  maintained  between 
the  Council  and  the  Pope,  as  represented  by  his  legates 
and  by  Cardinal  Caesarini.  The  decrees  of  reform  only 
included  matters  long  since  universally  recognised  as 


3 1 4  Papal  Infallibility. 

necessary,  and  forbade  nothing  wliicli  had  not  been 
regarded  as  a  public  scandal  for  the  Church.  The  regu- 
lar method  of  conferring  spiritual  offices  was  restored, 
reservations  of  elective  benefices  and  reversionary  rights 
in  them  were  abolished,  simony  and  pluralities  were 
forbidden,  some  regulation  and  limitation  of  appeals 
was  introduced,  and  the  frequency  and  severity  of 
interdicts  diminished.  All  this  was  so  reasonable,  so 
just,  and  so  ecclesiastical,  that  it  was  received  with 
general  applause.  The  Synod  acted  so  considerately,  that 
of  the  numerous  rights  claimed  by  the  Popes  in  the  De- 
cretals of  the  CoTfus  Juris,  no  single  one  was  abrogated. 
And  besides,  by  adding  the  exception,  "  for  weighty  and 
prudent  reasons,"  the  Synod  had  left  open  a  wide  door 
for  the  Pope,  notwithstanding  its  prohibitions,  which 
gave  occasion  to  the  University  of  Paris  to  blame  them 
sharply.-^ 

Eugenius  himself  had  declared  his  entire  agreement 
with  the  decrees  of  reformation,  even  after  the  twentieth 
session  of  January  23,  1435,"  and  he  repeated  this  on 
June  15  of  the  same  year  to  the  deputy  of  the  Synod, 
John  of  Brekenstein.^     Yet  he  had  a  oruds^e  a^jainst 


1  Bulcei,  Hist.  Univ.  Paris,  v.  246. 

"  "  Se  Concilii  decreta  semper  suscepisse  et  observasse."    Aug,  Patric. 
Hist.  Condi.  Basil,  c.  46,  in  Labbe,  Concil.  xiii.  1533. 
^  Labbe,  ut  sujna,  p.  SGJ. 


The  Council  of  Basle.  315 

the  Council  for  not  giving  liim  the  means  of  obtaining 
money,  which  he  asserted  his  need  of,  for  abolishing  - 
annates,  and  for  disputing  his  right  to  the  patronage  of  ' 
benefices  reserved  by  tlie  last  Popes.  Before  finally 
breaking  with  them,  he  had  a  charge  brought  against 
the  Council,  through  his  agents,  who  travelled  about  to 
the  different  Courts  furnished  with  secret  instructions, 
that  they  had  appointed  a  President,  and  given  far  too 
sweeping  an  interpretation  to  the  decrees  of  Constance, 
which,  however,  he  had  himself  three  years  before  ac- 
knowledged as  the  true  one.  The  payment  of  annates,  he 
said,  was  an  immemorial  usage — the  fact  being  that  the 
Popes  had  introduced  it  about  forty  years  before,  during 
the  schism.^  His  nuncios  were  further  instructed  that, 
as  the  abuses  of  the  Court  of  Ptome  were  constantly 
cast  in  its  teeth,  and  this  produced  a  great  impression, 
they  should  carry  wdth  them  a  scheme  of  reformation 
of  a  certain  sort,  in  the  shape  of  a  Bull,  to  be  produced 
for  the  edification  of  the  sovereigns,  and  to  shut  the 
mouths  of  accusers.^     They  were  at  the  same  time  fur- 

1  Tlie  annates  anioiinted  to  half,  and  often  more  than  half,  the  annual  in- 
come of  a  see  or  a  benefice,  which  every  fresh  occupant  had  to  pay  once,  and 
to  pay  in  advance,  to  the  Papal  treasury.  This  excluded  all  poorer  men, 
unless  their  families  could  raise  the  money,  from  the  higher  dignities  in 
the  Church,  and  placed  the  clergy  generally  in  the  position  of  having  to 
enter  on  their  posts  under  pressure  of  heavy  debts.  In  some  German 
bishoprics  the  annates  amounted  to  25,000  florins  (£2000). 

a  "  Per  hanc  reformationeni,  etiamsi  usquequa(iue  plena  nou  foret,  mode 


3 1 6  Papal  Infallibility. 

nislied  with  special  powers,  in  foro  conscienticc  (dispen- 
sations and  absolutions),  by  tbe  use  of  wliicli  they 
might  gain  over  the  sovereigns  to  the  Pope.-^ 

The  Council,  on  the  other  hand,  had  some  weak 
points.  Carried  on  and  encouraged  by  the  general 
confidence  and  assent  accorded  to  it,  it  was  under  the 
temptation  of  entering  upon  a  mass  of  details,  processes, 
and  local  concerns,  which  were  brought  before  it  chiefly 
from  France  and  Germany ;  it  got  involved  as  umpire 
in  political  intrigues,  and  made  enemies  here  and  there 
even  among  the  sovereigns.  And  the  final  decision 
naturally  rested  with  them,  when  the  struggles  between 
the  Council  and  the  Pope  broke  out  afresh. 

The  negotiations  with  the  Greek  Emperor  about  the 
reunion  of  the  Churches  gave  the  Pope  the  desired  pre- 


esset  aliqua,  eorum  ora  obstruerentur,  qui  continue  lacerant  et  carpunt 
Piomanae  Curise  famam — redderenturque  tunc  reges  et  principes  melius 
fedificati  et  niagis  proni  ad  condescendendum  petitionibus  Papoe  et  Car- 
dinalium,"  etc.  Raynald.  Annal.  ann.  1436,  15.  Had  the  Ptoinan  encom- 
iast, who  has  been  so  discreetly  reticent  elsewhere,  gone  to  sleej)  when  he 
let  this  passage  get  into  print  ? 

1  The  Bull  does  not  specify  the  extent  of  graces  of  this  kind,  such  as  were 
used  for  detaching  the  princes  from  the  side  of  the  Council ;  but  they  must 
have  been  very  large;  for  a  century  earlier,  e.g.,  Clement  v.  had  granted 
to  King  John  of  France  and  his  wife  the  privilege  of  being  absolved  by  their 
confessor,  retrospectively  and  prospectively,  from  all  obligations,  engage- 
ments, and  oaths,  which  they  could  not  conveniently  keep.  "  Sacrameuta 
per  vos  praestita  et  per  vos  et  eos  proestanda  in  posterum,  quse  vos  et  illi 
bfcrvare  commode  non  possetis."— D'Achery,  Spicil.  (Paris,  1661),  iv.  275. 


The  Coimcil  of  Basle.  3 1  7 

text  for  setting  up  a  rival  Synod  in  Italy.  He  had 
already  obtained  a  decision  from  the  minority  friendly 
to  him  at  Basle  in  favour  of  removing  into  Italy,  when, 
at  the  end  of  1437,  he  proclaimed  the  adjournment  of 
the  Council,  or  rather,  as  the  event  showed,  the  open- 
ing of  a  new  one  at  Ferrara.  As  the  Greeks  took  his 
side,  and  the  Emperor,  the  Patriarch,  and  the  Bishops  of 
the  Eastern  Church,  really  came  to  Eerrara  (as  after- 
wards to  Elorence),  his  design  succeeded. 

It  was  well  known  at  Basle  that  the  Synod  opened 
on  Italian  soil  would  at  once  be  flooded  by  the  local 
bishops,  the  officials  of  the  CV«7'a,and  the  clerical  vagrants 
and  place-hunters,  and  all  hopes  of  reforming  the 
Church  would  be  lost.  In  fact,  during  the  two  years 
the  Council  sat  at  Eerrara  and  Elorence,  which  the  Pope 
prolonged  to  two  years  more,  until  1442,  after  the 
departure  of  the  Greeks,  not  a  single  genuine  decree  of 
reform  was  framed  or  promulgated. 

Meanwhile  the  breach  between  the  Eathers  of  Basle 
and  the  Pope  was  not  obvious  on  the  surface  from  the 
beginning,  for  Eugenius  worded  his  original  Bull  as 
though  it  were  based  on  that  decree  of  the  minority 
which  professed  to  emanate  from  the  whole  Council, 
and  thus  the  Synod  of  Eerrara  at  first  appeared  to  be 


3 1 8  Papal  hifallibility . 

simply  a  continuation  of  that  at  Basle,  and  its  decrees 
were  supposed  to  form  one  body  with  those  enacted 
there  up  to  the  time  of  the  adjournment  of  the  Synod 
after  the  twenty-fifth  session.  Both  parties  in  the 
meantime  adopted  the  extremest  measures.  The  Synod 
of  Basle,  on  the  strength  of  the  canon  of  Constance, 
declared  it  an  article  of  faith  that  the  authority  of  a 
General  Council  is  higher  than  the  Pope's,  that  none 
can  dissolve  or  remove  it  against  its  will,  and  that 
to  deny  this  is  heresy.  Thereupon  Eugenius  IV.  was 
deposed,  against  the  advice  of  the  Emperor,  and  a  new 
Pope,  Duke  Amadeus  of  Savoy,  chosen,  who  took  the 
name  of  Eelix  v., — a  grievous  mistake  and  presump- 
tion, for  the  horror  of  a  two  or  three  headed  Papacy 
and  an  European  schism  were  still  only  too  fresh  in 
men's  memory.  Moreover,  when  the  Synod  ventured 
on  these  steps,  at  the  instigation  of  its  leader,  Cardinal 
Allemand  of  Aries,  it  had  already  become  insignificant 
in  numbers  and  personal  weight.  It  was  too  like  a 
tumultuous  multitude  composed  partly  of  impure  and 
incongruous  elements,  though  it  manifested  good  dis- 
cipline and  steady  perseverance  under  the  leadership  of 
the  presiding  Cardinal,  whom  it  implicitly  obeyed.^ 

I  To  the  constantly  repeated  cliarge  that  the  few  "bishops  had  been  out- 


The  Union  with  the  G^'eek  Church,       3 19 

§  XXY.—Thc  Union  with  the  Greek  Cliurch. 

Eugenius  had  to  give  up  all  hopes  of  the  non-Italian 
bishops  attending  his  Italian  Council ;  not  one  of  them 
came,  except  that  the  Duke  of  Burgundy  compelled 
two  of  his  Bishops  to  appear.  But  at  Ferrara  and 
Florence  he  at  last  induced  the  Greeks,  after  long 
resistance,  to  accept — to  be  sure  only  for  the  moment — 
those  conditions  of  reconciliation  which  he  insisted  upon, 
and  to  subscribe  the  act  of  union.  The  Emperor,  in 
presence  of  the  threatened  destruction  of  his  capital  and 
the  last  remaining  fragments  of  his  empire,  yielded  at 
last.  One  of  the  main  difficulties  concerned  the  question 
of  the  primacy,  and  that  at  the  moment  was  the  most 
important  point  for  the  Pope,  for  if  he  could  meet  the 
efforts  of  the  Synod  of  Basle  by  producing  the  testi- 
mony of  the  re-united  Eastern  Church  on  his  side,  it 
would  greatly  strengthen  his  case  in  the  public  opinion 
of  the  whole  West.  A  general  recognition  of  the 
Eoman  primacy  was  a  matter  of  course  for  the  Greeks, 
according  to  their  own  tradition,  as  soon  as  the  charge 

voted  by  the  numerous  presbyters,  D'Allemand  might  have  well  replied, 
that  had  bishops  only  voted,  the  will  of  the  Italian  nation  must  have 
always  prevailed,  for  their  bishops  outnumbered  or  equalled  those  of  all 
other  nations. — {Mn.  Silv.  DeConc.  Basil.  1791,  p.  87.) 


3  2  o  Papal  Infallibiliiy. 

against  the  Holy  See  of  having  become  heretical  or 
schismatical  was  disposed  of.  The  Easterns  had  been 
familiar  for  nearly  a  thousand  years  with  the  Patriarchal 
theory,  according  to  which  the  five  Patriarchs,  among 
whom  the  Patriarch  of  old  Eome  was  the  first  and  chief 
in  rank,  stood  at  the  head  of  the  whole  Church,  so 
that  nothing  could  be  separately  decided  on  questions 
of  doctrine  and  the  common  interests  of  the  Church 
without  the  consent  of  all  five  of  them.  But  this  view 
of  the  precedence  of  the  Eoman  "Pope"  (the  Patriarch  of 
Alexandria  had  the  same  title  with  them)  had  at  bottom 
as  little  in  common  with  that  universal  Papal  monarchy 
invented  in  the  AVest  in  845,  and  carried  out  in  practice 
since  1073,  as  the  position  of  a  Venetian  Doge  has  with 
that  of  a  Persian  Shah.  To  the  Greeks,  at  all  events, 
the  notion  of  such  theocratic  sovereignty,  interfering 
forcibly  in  all  the  details  of  the  Church's  life,  and 
systematically  ignoring  all  legal  limitations,  such  as 
existed  in  the  West,  was  strange  and  incomprehen- 
sible. Their  Patriarchs  moved  within  a  far  narrower 
sphere,  and  acted  by  fixed  rules.  The  whole  Papal 
system  of  indulgences  w^as  entirely  unknown  to  them. 
Many  rights  and  means  of  power  gradually  acquired  by 
the  Popes  could  never  have  come  into  use  in  their 


The  Union  luith  the  Gree/c  CImrch.       3  2 1 

simple  system  of  Cliurcli-government.  And  it  was  just 
these  very  claims  of  the  Papal  system  which  for  cen- 
turies had  been  their  main  ground  for  resisting  any 
overtures  for  reunion.  As  early  as  1232  the  Patriarch 
Germanus  had  written  to  the  Cardinals, — "  Your  tyran- 
nical oppression  and  the  extortions  of  the  Pioman 
Church  are  the  cause  of  our  disunion."^  Humbert, 
General  of  the  Dominicans,  made  the  same  statement 
in  the  memorial  he  drew  up  for  the  Council  of  Lyons 
in  1274: — "The  Eoman  Church  knows  only  how  to 
make  the  yoke  she  has  laid  on  men's  shoulders  press 
heavily;  her  extortions,  her  numberless  legates  and 
nuncios,  and  the  multitude  of  her  statutes  and  punish- 
ments, have  deterred  the  Greeks  from  reunion."^  And 
this  was  the  universal  opinion  in  the  West.^  The 
French  clergy  appealed  to  it  in  their  representation  to 
Clement  iv.  in  1266  ;*  and  Bishop  Durandus  of  Mende 
urged  it  upon  Clement  v.^  The  English  Sir  John 
Mandeville  related,  after  his  return  from  the  East,  that 
the  Greeks  had  answered  laconically  to  John  xxii.'s 

1  Matt.  Par.  Hist,  Anrjl.  p.  461.  2  Brown,  Fascic.  ii.  215. 

3  So  Gerhoch  {De  Invest.  Ant ichr.  p.  171)  said  about  1150,  "  Grteci  a 
Romauis  propter  avaritiam,  ut  dicunt,  se  alienaverunt." 

4  Marlot,  Metrop.  Rhemens,  ii,  557,  *'  Quod  propter  ejusmodi  exactiones 
Orientalis  Ecclesia  ab  obedientia  Romance  Ecclesise  recesserit,  patet  om- 
nibus." 5  Tractat.  de  Cone.  p.  69. 


322  Papal  Infallibility. 

demand  for  tlieir  submission,  "Thy  plenary  power 
over  thy  subjects  we  firmly  believe ;  thine  immeasur- 
able pride  we  cannot  endure,  and  thy  greed  we  cannot 
satisfy.  With  thee  is  Satan,  with  us  the  Lord."^  In 
1339,  the  Minorite  John  of  Florence  sent  to  the  East 
by  Benedict  xiii.,  had  an  interview  with  the  Patriarch 
of  Constantinople  and  his  Synod,  and  it  was  again  said 
that  the  cause  of  the  disunion  was  the  insatiable  pride 
of  the  Bishop  of  Kome.^ 

That  notion  of  the  Papacy  according  to  which  all 
Church  authority  is  exercised  by  the  Pope,  and  belongs 
by  inherent  right  to  him  alone,  in  whom  are  centred  all 
the  rights  of  the  episcopate,  was  a  special  stumbling- 
block  to  the  Greeks  ;^  and  if  they  regarded  the  number 
of  oaths  in  use  among  the  Latins  as  unchristian,  the 
demand  that  they  should  take  an  oath  of  obedience  to 
the  Pope  was  doubly  hateful  to  them.  But  the  hope- 
lessness of  their  situation  had  broken  their  spirit ;  they 
were  living  during  the  Council  on  the  alms  of  the  Pope, 
and  could  not  return  home  with  their  work  unaccom- 
plished.    Eugenius  wanted  them  to  acknowledge  his 

1  Ttinerar.  Zv:ollis,  1487,  i.  7. 

2  Joh.  Marignol.  Chronic,  in  Dobner's  Script.  Ter.  Bohem.  ii.  85, 

^  Thus  in  the  Crimen  contra  Eccl.  Lot.,  written  alDOut  1200,  and  fonntl 
in  Coteler,  Monum.  Eccl.  Grxc.  iii.  502,  we  read,  'iva  avveKriKov  tQiv 
aTrdvTOJv  dpxi-^pcct  top  Yldirav.     That  they  could  not  comprehend. 


The  Union  with  the  Greek  Church.      323 

monarchical  power  over  tlie  whole  Church  in  the  form 
usual  in  the  West,  and,  when  the  Papal  theologians 
overwhelmed  them  with  a  mass  of  forged  or  corrupted 
passages  derived  from  the  pseudo- Isidore  and  Gratian, 
they  answered  shortly  and  drily,  "  All  these  canons  are 
apocryphal."^  The  Emperor  said  that  if  the  Pope  in- 
sisted on  this  point,  he  would  depart  with  his  bishops. 
At  last  a  compromise  was  effected;  the  Pope  waived 
his  demand  for  a  recognition  of  his  supremacy  over  the 
Church  "  according  to  Scripture  and  the  sayings  of  the 
saints."^  The  Emperor  had  observed  on  that  point, 
that  the  courtly  rhetoric  to  be  found  in  the  letters  of 
ancient  bishops  and  emperors  could  not  be  transmuted 
into  the  logic  of  strict  law,  and  that  the  canons  of 
Councils  should  rather  be  taken  as  the  rule.  The 
article  was  accordingly  v^^orded  to  this  effect,  that  "  the 
Pope  is  the  vicar  of  Christ,  the  head  of  the  whoki 
Church,  the  Eather  and  teacher  of  all  Christians,  and 
has  full  authority  from  Christ  to  rule  and  feed  the 
Church  in  the  manner  contained  in  the  acts  of  the 
GEcumenical  Councils  and  in  the  Canons."  This  lan- 
guage defined  the  limits  of  the  Papal  authoilty,  and  the 

1  Harduin,  Condi,  ix.  968-974. 

2  This  meant,  as  the  acts  show,  the  strongest  of  the  spurious  passages  in 
pseudo-Isidore  and  St.  Thomas. 


324  Papal  Infallibility, 

rules  for  its  exercise,  and  moreover  reduced  it  within 
sncli  narrow  and  moderate  boundaries  that  Eugenius 
and  his  theologians  would  never  have  agreed  to  it  had 
they  known  the  true  state  of  the  case,  and  not  been 
misled  by  the  old  and  new  forgeries  into  a  very  mis- 
taken estimate  of  the  ancient  Councils,  and  the  position 
the  Pope  occupied  in  them.  The  Greeks  understood 
by  the  (Ecumenical  Councils  those  only  which  were 
held  in  the  East  during  the  first  eight  centuries,  and 
before  the  division  of  the  two  halves  of  the  Church, 
the  Eastern  and  Western,  and  this  was  recognised  at 
Eome  as  self-evident,  so  that  in  the  first  edition  printed 
there,  as  well  as  in  the  Privilcgium  of  Clement  vil., 
and  even  in  the  Eoman  edition  of  1G2G,  the  Council  of 
Florence  is  called  the  eighth  CEcumenical.^  But  in  the 
first  seven  Councils  nothing  was  said  of  any  special 
rights  of  superiority  in  the  Pope  ;  only  his  precedence 
over  all  other  patriarchs  was  recognised  in  the  twenty- 
eighth  canon  of  Chalcedon.  The  appeals,  which  Euge- 
nius wanted,  were  expressly  forbidden  by  the  ancient 
Councils.  But  the  Latins,  to  whose  minds  the  mention 
of  the  ancient  Councils  only  suggested  the  legends  of 

1  [It  is  also  quoted  as  the  eighth  in  Cardinal  Pole's  Reformation  of 
England,  dated  Lambeth,  1556.- Tr.] 


The  Union  ivith  the  Greek  Church.      325 

Silvester,  Julius,  and  Virgilius,  etc.,  and  tlie  spurious 
canons,  thought  they  had  provided  sufficiently  for  the 
interests  of  the  Pope  by  this  formula. 

The  original  Latin  translation  rendered  the  Greek 
text  faithfully,  for  after  the  long  controversy  with  the 
Greeks  over  every  word,  it  had  been  necessary  to  draw 
up  the  decrees  first  in  Greek.  Flavio  Biondo,  the 
Pope's  secretary,  gives  a  correct  version.-^  But  in  the 
Ptoman  edition  of  Abraham  Cretensis,  by  the  unob- 
trusive change  of  a  single  word,  what  the  Greeks  in- 
tended to  have  expressed  by  it  had  disappeared,  viz., 
that  the  prerogatives  attributed  to  the  Pope  are  to  be 
understood  and  exercised  according  to  the  rule  of  tlie 
ancient  Councils.^     By  this  change  the  rule  was  trans- 

1  The  Greek  version  runs,  "  ko.Q''  ov  rpliirov  koX  qv  toTs  TrpaKTiKois  tQv 
olKov/xeuLKUv  avv6d(j]v  koI  iv  tols  iepOLS  Koiuocri  8ia\a/xj3dv€TaL.'^  This  is 
honestly  rendered  in  the  original  Latin  text,  "  quemadmodum  (better  '  juxta 
eura  moduia  qui')  et  in  gestis  (Ecum.  Concil.  et  in  sacris  canonibus  con- 
tinetur."  So  Biondo  quotes  it  in  his  History  (1.  x.  Dec.  3),  and  so  Cardinal 
Marcus  Vigerius,  Bishop  Fisher  of  Rochester,  Eck,  and  Pighius  have  quoted 
it  after  him.  But  the  Dominican  Antoninus  had  already  suljstituted 
"  etiam,"  ["  Continetur"  is,  however,  an  inadequate  rendering,  to  say  the 
least,  of  StaXa/x/SctJ/CTai,  which  rather  means  'Ms  determined"  than  "  is  con- 
tained." See  an  article  on  the  Council  of  Florence  in  the  Union  Review, 
vol.  iv.  pp.  190  sqq.  and  cf.  vol.  iii.  pp.  Qd>Q,  687.— Tr.] 

*  "Quemadmodum  etiam,"  instead  of  "  et—et."  It  is  one  of  the  many 
disingenuous  statements  Orsi  has  made  himself  responsible  for,  when  he 
says  {De  Rom.  Font.  Auctor.  vi.  11),  in  the  teeth  of  the  facts  as  evidenced 
by  the  record  of  proceedings,  that  the  Greek  text  Avas  translated  from  the 
Latin,  which,  however,  had  not  "  etiam "  originally.     His  ignorance  of 


o 


26  Papal  Infallibility. 


formed  into  a  mere  confirmatory  reference,  and  tlie  sense 
of  tlie  passage  became,  tliat  tlie  prerogatives  enume- 
rated there  belonged  to  tlie  Pope,  and  were  also  contained 
in  the  ancient  Councils.  And  the  decree  of  Union 
has  since  been  printed  in  this  corrupted  form  in  the 
collections  of  canons,  and  elsewhere.^ 

After  the  departure  of  the  Greeks,  Eugenius  severely 
denounced  the  Synod  of  Basle  in  his  Bull  issued  from 
Florence,  but  this  censure  only  touched  the  sessions 
held  after  its  prorogation,  and  the  "  false  interpretation 
put  upon  the  decrees  of  Constance."^  In  this  reserved 
and  tortuous  document  he  did  not  venture  to  make 
any  direct  attack  on  the  decrees  of  Constance,  then  so 
highly  reverenced  throughout  the  Christian  world,  but 
he  tried  to  damage  their  credit  by  observing  that  they 

Greek  may  excuse  liim  for  saying,  on  the  authority  of  a  young  man,  that 
KoX — KoX  may  be  translated  by  *'  etiam."  Laiinoy,  Bossuet,  Natalis  Alex- 
ander, De  Marca,  the  Jesuit  Maimbourg,  and  Duguet,  have  long  since 
exposed  the  fraud.  But  in  the  Greek  version,  sent  directly  from  Florence 
by  the  Pope  to  the  King  of  England,  all  the  words  after  "primacy  over 
the  whole  Church"  are  missing,  so  that  there  is  reason  to  suspect  an  inter- 
polation even  in  the  Greek  text.  Brequigny  has  shown  {Memoires  de 
VAcadem.  des  Inscr.  t.  43,  p.  306  sqq.)  how  suspicious  are  all  the  copies  of 
the  decree  of  Union,  nine  in  number,  now  extant,  except  the  British. 
None  of  them  are  original  documents.  The  five  original  copies  have  dis- 
appeared. 

1  [It  is  also  printed  in  some  theological  manuals,  and  often  quoted  for 
controversial  purposes,  with  the  words  about  the  canons  of  Councils  sup- 
pressed altogether.— Tr.] 

2  In  the  Decretal  "  Moyses  Vir  Dei."  Cf.  Condi,  (ed.  Labbe),  xiii. 
1030. 


The  Union  with  the  Greek  Chiireh.       327 

had  been  passed  during  the  time  of  the  schism  by  one 
Obedience  only,  and  after  the  departure  of  Pope  John. 
Yet  it  was  not  the  loss  of  his  infallibility  through  these 
decrees  that  so  deeply  grieved  him.  That  he  had 
already  recognised.  Torquemada  had  made  him  say  in 
the  former  Bull  {Dcus  novit)  that  the  Pope's  sentence 
must  always  take  precedence  of  that  of  a  Council, 
except  in  what  concerned  questions  of  faith,  or  rules 
necessary  for  the  good  of  the  whole  Church,  and  in  that 
case  the  decision  of  the  Council  must  be  preferred.^ 

§  XXVL— TAc  Fa;pal  Reaction. 
The  French  nation  assumed  the  most  dignified  and 
consistent  attitude  in  view  of  the  altered  condition  of 
the  Church  and  the  renewal  of  the  schism.     In  1438  - 
the  Kjng  opened  a  mixed  assembly  of  ecclesiastics  and  - 
laymen  at  Bourges.     The   deputies  both  of  the  Pope  - 
and  the  Council  of  Basle  were  heard,  and  it  was  decided  - 
to  receive  the  decrees  of  the  Council,  with  certain  modi-  - 
fications  required  by  the  circumstances  of  France.    Thus  - 
originated  the  Pragmatic  Sanction  of  Bourges,  which  ■ 
included  the  freedom  of  Church  elections,  the  principle  - 
of  the  superior  authority  of  General  Councils,  and  the  ' 

1  See  Condi.  (eJ  Labbe),  xii.  537. 


328  Papal  Infallibility, 

rejection  of  the  disorderly  proceedings  of  tlie  Curia, 
with  its  expectancies,  reservations,  appeals,  and  mani- 
fold devices  for  extorting  money.  It  was  the  first 
comprehensive  codification  of  what  have  since  been 
called  the  Galilean  Liberties.  Detested  at  Eome,  it 
became  the  butt  for  the  attacks  of  every  Pope  after 
Eugenius  iv.,  until  at  last  Leo  x.  succeeded  in  abolish- 
ing it  by  the  Concordat  of  1517,  in  which  the  Pope  and 
the  King  shared  the  spoils  of  the  French  Church ;  the 
lion's  share  falling,  however,  to  the  King. 

England,  involved  at  the  time  in  political  troubles, 
neglected  to  take  a  side.  Eew  only  would  acknowledge 
the  Savoyard  Pope,  even  if  they  would  not  resolve  on 
giving  up  the  Council.  Alfonso,  King  of  Aragon  and 
Naples,  hitherto  the  main  support  of  the  Council  of 
Basle,  but  who  had  now  been  won  over  by  the  large 
offers  of  the  Pope,  recalled  his  bishops,  and  together 
with  the  Venetians,  who  were  the  countrymen  of 
Eugenius,  was  his  great  support  in  Italy.  The  German 
nation,  under  the  lead  of  the  Electors,  maintained 
neutrality  between  the  Synod  of  Basle  and  the  Pope, 
but  in  a  sense  practically  favourable  to  the  Council ; 
and  they  solemnly  accex^ted  its  decrees  of  reformation 
in  1439   at  the   imperial  Diet  of  Mayence,  v/hereby 


The  Papal  Reaction.  329 

Germany  bound  itself,  like  Prance,  to  the  recognition 
of  the  doctrine  of  Church  authority  laid  down  in  the 
canons  of  Constance.^  There  was  no  man  of  mark  in 
all  Germany  at  that  time  who  expected  any  good  from 
the  Court  of  Eome  for  the  Church  or  for  his  country. 
Most  of  the  clergy,  the  Universities  of  Vienna,  Erfurt, 
Cologne,  Louvain,  and  Cracow,  besides  Paris,^  the 
sovereigns  and  their  counsellors,  and  all  the  people, 
were  for  the  Council  and  its  doctrine  against  the 
Papal  system. 

But  Eugenius  understood  well  how  to  gain  over 
converts  to  his  side,  by  bestowdng  privileges  and  grants 
of  all  kinds,  and  for  this  he  w^as  much  more  favourably 
situated  than  the  Council,  which  was  bound  by  its  own 
principles,  and  the  decrees  it  had  published,  and  had 
little  or  nothing  to  give  in  the  way  of  dispensations, 
privileges,  and  exemptions,  but  w^as  obliged  to  confine 
itself  within  the  limits  of  the  ancient  Church,  wdiile 
Eugenius,  according  to  the  tradition  of  the  Curia, 
was  not  bound  to  the  laws  of  the  Church.  To  the 
Duke  of  Cleves  he  gave  such  important  ecclesiastical 

1  See,  for  the  document  of  acceptance,  Koch,  Sandio  Pragmat.  Germ. 
p.  93. 

2  Lannoy(0/Jj?.  vi.  521  seg.)  has  had  their  judgments  printed  from  Parisian 
manuscripts. 


3  3  o  Papal  Infallibility. 

rights,  at  the  expense  of  the  bishops,  that  he  made  him 
master  of  the  Church  and  the  clergy  of  his  country,  so 
that  it  became  a  proverb,  "  The  Duke  of  Cleves  is  Pope 
in  his  own  land."^  As  early  as  1438,  Eugenius  had 
not  only  deposed  and  anathematized  the  members  of 
the  Council,  but  laid  Basle  under  interdict,  excommuni- 
cated the  municipal  council,  and  required  every  one  to 
j^lunder  the  merchants  who  were  bringing  their  wares 
to  the  city,  because  it  is  written,  "  The  righteous  hath 
spoiled  the  ungodly."  For  a  long  time,  indeed,  his  acts 
produced  no  result ;  there  was  too  strong  a  feeling  in 
favour  of  the  Council,  which  had  shown  so  sincere  a  desire 
to  benefit  the  Church.  For  some  years  the  Electors  va- 
cillated in  their  policy  between  Eome  and  Basle.  At  last 
their  decision  came,  in  1446.  King  Frederick,  acting 
under  the  advice  of  his  secretary,  the  accomplished 
rhetorician  ^neas  Silvio  Piccolomini,  sold  himself  to 
Pope  Eugenius,  who  could  offer  him  more  than  Felix, 
since  the  latter  was  bound  to  the  decisions  of  the  Council. 
The  generous  Eugenius  pledged  himself  to  pay  the  King 
100,000  florins  for  his  journey,  together  with  the  im- 
perial crown,  assigned  tithes  to  him  from  all  the  German 

1  Teschenmacher,  Annal.  Clivice  (Francof,  1729),  p.  294. 
*  Raynald.  Aimed,  anno  1438,  5, 


The  Papal  Reaction.  3  3 1 

benefices,  the  patronage  for  one  vacancy  of  100  bene- 
fices in  liis  hereditary  territories,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  bishops  to  six  dioceses,  and,  finally,  gave  full 
powers  to  his  confessor  to  give  him  twice  a  plenary  ab- 
solution from  all  sins.^  Thereby  the  cause  of  the  Council 
and  of  Church  reformation  was  lost  in  Germany,  and  the 
German  Church  sank  back,  step  by  step,  into  its  former 
bondage,  ^neas  Silvius,  who  had  meanwhile  entered 
the  Papal  service,  bribed  two  ministers  of  the  Elector 
of  Mayence,  who  won  over  their  master  to  the  side  of 
the  Pope.  Thus  the  body  of  German  princes  was 
divided,  and  the  previous  demand  for  a  new  Council 
was  reduced  to  a  mere  petition,  which  people  did  not 
trouble  themselves  about  at  Eome.  The  victory  of 
Eugenius  was  complete.  When  on  his  death-bed  he 
received  the  homage  of  the  German  ambassadors,  the 
event  was  celebrated  (Feb.  7,  1447)  in  Ptome  with  ring- 
ing of  bells  and  bonfires.  Even  the  slight  concessions 
the  Pope  liad  made  to  the  Germans  he  thereupon  at 
once  recalled  in  secret  Bulls,  "  so  far  as  they  contained 
anything  prejudicial  to  the  Papal  See."  A  fortnight 
later  he  died,  after  triumphing  over  the  Council  and 

1  Chmel,  Geschicht.  Friedr.  iv.  (Hamburg,  1839),  ii.  385  ;  Material,  ii. 
195  sqq. 


2)2)2     .  Papal  Infallibiliiy. 

over  Germany ;  but  tlie  means  lie  had  employed  wrung 
from  him  in  his  agony  of  conscience  the  words,  "  0 
Gabriel,  how  much  better  were  it  for  thy  soul's  sal- 
vation hadst  thou  never  become  Cardinal  and  Pope  !'* 
Meanwhile,  however,  he  had  acknowledged  in  his  public 
Bull  the  decrees  of  Constance  on  the  superiority  and 
periodical  convocation  of  Councils.^ 

AYhen  Frederick  ill.,  in  1452,  received  the  imperial 
crown  from  the  hands  of  the  Pope,  ^neas  Silvius  was 
able  to  declare  in  his  name  and  his  presence  that  another 
Emperor  would,  no  doubt,  have  desired  a  Council,  but 
the  Pope  and  the  Cardinals  were  the  best  Council.^ 

The  new  Pope,  Nicolas  v. — that  same  Thomas  of 
Bologna  who  had  been  so  successful  in  his  dealings  with 
King  Frederick — added  a  fresh  conquest  to  the  hard- 
won  victory  of  his  predecessor  in  the  Concordat  of 
Vienna  (of  Feb.  17,  1448),  restoring  to  the  Pope  the 
right  of  appointing  to  a  great  number  of  German  bene- 
fices— a  compact  concluded  with  King  Frederick,  as 
plenipotentiary  of  the  German  princes,  who  came  into 
his  portion  of  the  gains  and  influence  shared  between 
them  and  the  Papal  Court.     The  princes  had  been  the 

1  Raynald.  Annal.  ann.  1447,  4;  Miiller,  Reichstag s-Theatrum,^'^.  347, 
seq.  ;  Kocli,  Sanctio  Pragm.  pp.  81  seq. 

^  -^.ueas  Silvii  Hist.  Fred.  III.  in  Kollar's  Analecta,  ii.  317. 


The  Papal  Reaction.  ^iZZ 

more  readily  won  over  at  an  earlier  period  by  various 
privileges,  because  the  observance  of  the  reforming 
decrees  of  Basle  would  have  considerably  diminished 
their  power  over  the  churches  in  their  dominions.  Not 
long  after  the  compact  had  been  agreed  upon,  Pope 
Calixtus  III.,  in  1457,  declared  to  the  Emperor  that  it 
was  obvious  the  Pope  was  not  bound  by  the  Concordat, 
for  no  agreement  could  bind  or  limit  in  any  way  the 
full  and  free  authority  of  the  Papal  See,  and  if  he  paid 
regard  to  it,  that  was  only  out  of  favour,  friendliness, 
and  tender  affection  for  the  German  nation.-^  And  this 
has  been  a  Ptoman  maxim  from  that  day  forward.  It 
w^as  taught  that  an  authority  like  the  Papal  cannot 
bind  itself,  for  that  would  be  inconsistent  with  its 
plenary  power ;  least  of  all  can  it  lay  an  obligation  on 
future  Popes,  since  all  have  equal  rights,  and  an  equal 
has  no  power  over  his  equal.  The  nation  therefore  is 
bound  by  the  Concordat,  but  not  the  Pope.  And  thus 
the  Bolognese  jurist,  Cataldino  de  Buoncampagni,  who 
wrote  for  the  Pope  against  the  Synod  of  Basle,  had 
already  determined  that  whatever  promises  the  Pope 
might  make,  he  was  never  bound  by  them  in  the  fulness 

1  *'  Quamvis  liberrima  sit  Apostolicre  Sedis  auctoritas  nullisqiie  debcat 
pactionum  vinculis  coer:eri,"  etc.— iEiie.-e  Silvii  Ei)ist.  371,  Oi^i).  (ed.  Basil. 
1551),  840. 


334  Papal  Infallibility. 

of  his  power,  for  as  every  one  is  his  subject,  every  com- 
pact or  engagement  bears  the  character  of  a  gracious 
condescension  only,  and  can,  as  such,  be  at  any  moment 
retracted,-^  and  therefore  the  Pope,  in  spite  of  his  pro- 
mises, was  not  bound  to  the  decrees  of  the  Council.^ 
It  was  roundly  affirmed  in  the  Roman  Court  of  the 
Piota  in  1610,  in  reference  to  the  German  Concordat, 
that  for  the  Pope  and  the  Curia  its  only  validity  was 
as  a  privilege  graciously  bestowed,  and  that  it  had  no 
bindiug  force.^ 

But  the  hatred  and  contempt  of  both  Pope  and  Em- 
peror, which  had  become  deeply  fixed  in  the  minds  of  the 

1  Thus,  e.g.,  says  the  Roman  canonist  and  assessor  of  the  Inquisition, 
Pirro  Corrado,  Praxis  Dispens.  Apost.  de  Concord.  Quaest.  8. 

2  De  Translat.  Concil.  in  Roccaberti's  Biblioth.  Max.  vi.  27.  That 
was  allowed  to  be  again  printed  in  1697,  notwithstanding  the  Roman  cen- 
sorship. It  was  maintained  still  later  by  the  famous  canonist,  Feline 
Sandei,  whom  the  Pope  rewarded  with  bishoprics  for  his  commentary  on 
the  Decretals,  "ad  cap.  xiii.  de  Judiciis." 

3  Nicolarts,  Ad  Concord.  Germ.  Tit.  3.  dub.  3,  §  6.  It  was  the  re- 
ceived doctrine  of  the  Curia,  that  Concordats  could  not  bind  the  Pope. 
Thus  the  Benedictine  Zallwein  {Princip.  Jur.  Eccl.  iv.  300)  says,  "  Passim 
docent  assentatores  Romani  Pontificis  et  curiales  Romani  apud  quos  ipsum 
nomen  Concoi'datorum  pessime  audit."  Hence  all  German  canonists,  with 
the  exception  of  course  of  the  Jesuits,  have  felt  it  necessary  to  prove, 
from  the  laws  of  nations  and  of  the  ancient  Church,  that  a  Pope  is  bound 
to  keep  his  Avord  and  the  engagements  of  his  predecessors.  Thus  Barthel, 
Schramm,  Schrodt,  Diirr,  Schmidt,  Schlor,  Oberhauser,  Zallwein,  etc. 
Benedict  xiv.  himself  alone  declared,  Dec,  14, 1740,  in  a  Brief  to  the  Chapter 
of  Liege,  that  he  did  not  hold  himself  bound  by  the  Concordat.  Cf.  Endres, 
T)e  Libert.  Eccl.  Germ.  1774,  p.  60  ;  Theod.  a  Palude  (Hontheim)  Flares 
Sparsi,  1770,  p.  452 ;  Barthel,  Opusc.  Jurid.  1756,  ii.  373  seq. 


The  Papal  Reaction.  335 

Germans,  broke  out  at  the  Imperial  Diet  at  Frankfort 
in  1454,  and  later,  when  the  question  of  contributions 
for  the  war  against  the  Tarks  was  raised.  Nobody  was 
willing  to  trust  a  word  said  by  them  or  their  ambas- 
sors,  since  the  extortion  of  money  was  the  only  thing 
aimed  at.  "All,"  says  ^neas  Silvius,  who  was  soon  as 
Pope  to  experience  similar  treatment,  "  cursed  the  Em- 
peror and  the  Pope,  and  treated  the  legates  witli  con- 
tempt."^ But  tlie  summoning  of  a  General  Council 
was  still  sometimes  talked  of  at  these  Diets,  and  the 
very  notion  had  become  such  a  bugbear  of  the  Popes, 
that  they  made  it  a  primary  condition  in  their  dealings 
with  some  German  princes,  as,  e.g.,  with  Diether  of 
Isenberg,  that  they  should  never  moot  the  question. 
Meanwhile  every  appeal  to  a  General  Council  was 
promptly  visited  with  excommunication  in  the  most 
decisive  manner  by  Pius  il. 

At  the  close  of  his  life,  the  Emperor  Frederick  seems 
to  have  repented  of  his  share  in  this  work  of  destruc- 
tion. The  instructions  he  gave  his  ambassador  for  the 
Diet  at  Frankfort,  in  1486,  contain  words  to  the  effect 
that  he  knew  what  immense  sums  passed  to  Eome 
in  the  shape  of  annates,  indulgences,  and  the  like,  and 

1  PU  Commeniar.  a  Job.  Gobellin  (Fef.  1614),  p.  22. 


^^6  Papal  Iiifallibility. 

wliat  abject  obedience  and  subjection  to  the  Papal  See 
the  German  nation  had  exhibited,  above  all  others. 
These  services  were  received  thanklessly  and  haaghtily 
by  the  Pope,  Cardinals,  and  Court  officials,  and  the 
German  nation  was  contumeliously  treated  in  all  deal- 
ings, from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  so  that  it  would 
be  aGjainst  the  common  nature  and  reason  of  mankind 
to  endure  such  piteous  treatment  any  longer.  It  was 
therefore  to  be  impressed  on  the  princes  that  they 
should  no  longer  show  obedience  and  submission  to  the 
Pope,  in  order  that  the  German  nation  might  no  more 
be  despised  and  humbled  beyond  all  others."^ 

Felix  (the  Antipope)  was  now  induced  by  the 
French  King  to  resign,  and  was  made  the  chief  Car- 
dinal, with  extensive  jurisdiction  over  several  dioceses. 
The  remnant  of  the  Synod  of  Basle,  which  had  at  last 
been  driven  to  Lausanne,  dissolved  itself,  and  the  Car- 
dinal of  Aries,  that  "adept  in  iniquity  and  son  of 
perdition,"  as  Eugenius  had  termed  him,  was  restored 
without  ever  retracting  any  of  his  principles.  This  did 
not  prevent  Clement  vii.  from  canonizing  him  after  his 
death,  "  since  his  sanctity  had  been  proved  by  miracles, 
and  he  had  always  led  a  heavenly,  chaste,  and  blameless 
life." 

^  Sclilozer,  Briefwechsel,  x.  209. 


Temper  and  Circumstances  of  i^th  Century.  ^2>7 

§  XXVII. — Temper  and  Circumstances  of  the  Fifteenth 
Century, 

Some  time  had  elapsed  after  the  disastrous  year  1446, 
before  it  was  understood  in  Germany  that  all  hope  of 
reforming  the  Church  by  means  of  Councils  was  at  an 
end.  Even  so  late  as  1459,  men  could  not  and  would 
not  believe  in  this  utter  wreck  of  all  schemes  of  re- 
formation. The  Carthusian  Prior,  Vincent  of  Axpach, 
thought  that  if  but  one  king  would  issue  safe-conducts 
for  the  assemblage  of  a  Council  in  his  dominions,  and 
but  one  bishop  were  to  summon  it,  it  would  meet  in 
spite  of  the  reclamations  or  anathemas  of  the  Court  of 
Eome ;  and  that  was  the  last  remaining  hope,  for  the 
experience  of  the  last  fifty  years  proved  that  no  help 
could  be  looked  for  from  the  See  of  Eome.  It  was  a  far 
worse  error  than  the  Hussite  heresy,  to  deprive  the 
Church  of  General  Councils,  which  are  its  best  possession. 
And  Vincent  then  relates  how  Eugenius  succeeded  in 
alluring  over  nearly  all  the  educated  to  his  side  by  the 
offer  of  benefices.-^  An  anonymous  German  writer,  as 
early  as  1443,  had  also  lamented  this  falling  away  of 
the  learned,    such   as   Nicolas  Cusa   and  Archbishop 

^  Pez,  Codex  E2>istol.  iii.  335. 
Y 


JO* 


Papal  Infallibility. 


Tudesclii.  "The  Eoman  harlot  has  so  many  para- 
mours drunk  with  the  wine  of  her  fornications,  that  the 
Bride  of  Christ,  the  Church,  and  the  Council  represent- 
ing her,  scarcely  receive  the  loyal  devotion  of  one 
among  a  thousand.  And  yet  Germany,  in  the  person 
of  its  Emperor,  has  "been  worse  used  by  the  Popes  than 
any  other  kingdom;  the  German  Emperor  alone  was 
compelled,  in  accordance  with  'legendary  and  forged 
decretals,'  to  swear  obedience  to  the  Pope."^ 

At  last,  at  the  very  moment  of  its  dissolution,  the 

much-abused  Synod  of  Basle  had  obtained  a  conspicuous 

satisfaction;  Councils  were  still  held  in  such  high  esteem 

in  Eome,  even  after  the  death  of  Eugenius,  that  the 

•  new  Pope,  Nicolas  v.,  by  advice  of  the  Cardinals,  issued 

■  a  Bull,  declaring  all  documents,  processes,  decrees,  and 

-  censures  of  his  predecessor  against  the  Council  void  and 

-  of  no  effect,  even  though  issued  with  the  approval  of 
the  Council  of  Eerrara  or  Florence,  or  any  other.^ 
They  were  to  be  regarded  as  having  never  existed,  and 
were  expunged  from  the  writings  of  Eugenius  as  com- 

1  Tractat.  missies  March.  Brandenburg.  1443.  See  MSS.  of  vol.  31  of 
Hardtisch  collection  in  the  library  of  Stuttgart.  What  is  said  of  the  de- 
cretals is  surprising  at  that  early  date.  Yet  Nicolas  of  Ciisa  also  had  just 
then  for  the  first  time  recognised  the  spurious  character  of  certain  Isidorian 
decretals. 

2  See  Bull  Tanto  Nos,  in  the  Jesuit  Monod's  Amadeus  Pad/.  (Paris, 

1626),  p.  272. 


Temper  and  Circiniistanees  of  i^tJi  Century.  339 

pletely  as  the  Bulls  of  Boniface  viii.  against  France  and 
the  French  king  had  been  expunged  on  a  former  occa- 
sion by  command  of  Clement  v.-^  And  thus  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  two  reforming  Councils,  on  the  superiority 
of  General  Councils  to  Popes,  completely  triumphed 
after  all ;  the  attempts  of  Eugenius,  acting  under  in- 
spiration of  Cardinal  Torquemada,  to  bring  the  Synod 
of  Constance  into  bad  odour,  were  entirely  foiled,  and 
the  Curia  itself  bowed  to  the  superior  claims  of  a 
General  Council.  As  regards  the  reforming  decrees  of 
the  Fathers  of  Basle,  so  far  as  they  prejudiced  the 
power  and  finances  of  the  Curia,  they  were  surrendered 
to  destruction,  but  the  dogmatic  decisions  of  the  Pope's 
inferiority  to  a  Council,  on  which  they  were  based, 
remained  untouched. 

Pius  II.,  indeed,  who  in  his  former  position  of  rhetori- 
cian and  scholar  had  defended  the  interests  of  the 
Synod  of  Basle,  made  the  most  desperate  attempt  to 
directly  condemn  the  decisions  of  Constance,  which 
hung  like  a  Damocles- sword  over  the  uneasy  lieads  of 
the  Court  ofiicials,  and  disturbed  their  enjoyment  of 
Papal  autocracy.  But  public  opinion  was  too  em- 
phatically on  the  side  of  the  Council,  and  he  not  only 

1  The  Bull  says,  "  Tollimus,  cassamus,  irritamus  et  cancellamus." 


340  Papal  Infallibility, 

did  not  dare  to  go  against  it,  but  on  the  contrary  found  it 
prudent,  in  his  Bull  of  retractation  in  1463,  to  add  ex- 
pressly that  he  acknowledged  the  authority  and  power 
of  an  (Ecumenical  Council,  as  defined  by  the  Council 
of  Constance,  which  he  reverenced,-^ 

But  the  race  of  Torquemadas  was  not  yet  extinct.  By 
degrees  works  appeared  from  the  pens  of  monks  and 
cardinals,  or  those  who  hoped  to  become  such,  designed 
to  raise  the  Papal  system  from  the  humiliation  it  had 
suffered  through  the  Councils.  This  was  not  difficult, 
for  they  had  merely  to  arrange  and  systematize,  in  the 
form  of  axioms  and  deductions,  the  rich  materials 
provided  by  the  forgeries  of  Isidore,  Gratian,  and  St. 
Thomas,  in  order  to  prove  the  groundlessness  of  the 
two  closely  connected  doctrines,  of  the  authority  of 
the  episcopate  and  of  Councils.  In  this  way  originated 
the  writings  of  Capistrano,  Albanus,  Campeggi,  Elisius, 
Marcellus,  and  Lselius  Jordanus,  between  1460  and 
1525.  The  character  of  the  whole  series  may  be  judged 
from  any  one  of  them,  for  one  is  copied  from  another, 
and  the  same  falsified  or  spurious  testimonies,  canons, 
and  statements  of  fact,  are  reproduced  in  all  of  them. 

When  that  holy  and  highly  favoured  soul,  St.  Cathe- 

1  Condi,  (ed.  Labbe),  xiii.  1410. 


Temper  and  Circiunstances  of  i^fh  Century.   341 

rine  of  Sienna,  came  to  Gregory  XL,  she  told  him  that 
she  found  in  the  Court  of  Eome  the  stench  of  infernal 
vices,  and  on  his  replying  that  she  had  only  been  there 
a  few  days,  the  virgin,  humble  as  she  was,  rose  majesti- 
cally, uttering  these  words,  "  I  dare  to  say  that  in  my 
native  city  I  have  found  the  stench  of  the  sins  com- 
mitted in  the  Curia  more  oppressive  than  it  is  to  those 
who  daily  commit  them."-^ 

It  was  the  same  everywhere ;  it  seemed  as  though, 
through  the  state  of  things  gradually  brought  about, 
and  the  dominant  system  in  Eome,  a  new  art  had  been 
discovered  among  men,  of  making  corruption  and  vice 
omnipresent,  and  diffusing  it  like  some  subtle  poison 
from  one  centre  and  workshop,  throughout  every  pore 
of  the  vast  organization  of  the  Church.  Every  one 
who  looked  over  the  Christian  world  for  advice  and 
aid  against  the  general  corruption,  or  who  only  tried 
to  effect  an  improvement  within  his  own  immediate 
sphere,  found  himself  hampered  at  once  by  a  Papal 
ordinance,  and  gave  up  the  attempt  as  hopeless.  Papal 
bulls,  fulminations,  begging  monks,  clerical  place- 
hunters,^    and    inquisitors,    were    everywhere.      Even 

1  Acta  Sanct.  Bolland.  30  April,  p.  891. 

^  "  Curtisanen,"  a  name  given  to  clerical  vagrants  who  came  to  Rome 
to  barter  or  beg  for  benefices.     Wimpheling  has  accurately  described  them. 


342  Papal  Infallibility, 

Erasmus  could  say,  in  his  letter  to  Bishop  Fisher  of 
Eochester,  "  If  Christ  does  not  deliver  His  people  from 
this  multiform  ecclesiastical  tyranny,  the  tyranny  of  the 
Turks  will  at  last  become  less  intolerable."-^ 

And  thus  from  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century 
every  accent  of  hope  disappears  from  the  literature  of 
the  Church,  clearly  as  these  accents  had  again  rung 
out  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  and  about  the  time 
of  the  Synods  of  Constance  and  Basil,  both  in  speech 
and  writing.  Men's  thoughts  could  only  revolve  within 
the  same  narrow  circle — a  reformation  of  the  Church 
is  impossible  as  long  as  the  Court  of  Eome  remains 
what  it  is;  there  every  mischief  is  fostered  and  protected, 
and  thence  it  spreads,  but  there,  unless  by  a  miracle, 
there  is  no  hope  of  reformation.  So  says  the  Abbot 
Jacob  of  Junterberg,  "  A  reformation  of  the  Church  is  to 
me  almost  incredible,  for  first  the  Court  of  Eome  must 
be  reformed,  and  the  course  things  are  taking  shows 
how  difficult  that  is.  Yet  no  nation  so  vehemently 
opposes  reform  as  the  Italian,  and  to  them  all  who 
have  cause  to  fear  it  attach  themselves."^  The  most 
highly  reverenced  theologian  of  the  Netherlands,  "  the 

1  Erasm.  Epp.  vi.  8,  p.  353  (ed.  Londin.  1642). 

*  Be  Sept.  Stat.  Ecd.  about  1450,  in  Walch,  Monum.  ii,  2,  42. 


Temper  and  Circiunstances  of  i^th  Cejitury,  343 

ecstatic  doctor,"  as  he  was  called,  the  Carthusian  Prior 
Dionysius  Eyckel,  related  how  it  was  revealed  to  him 
in  a  vision,  which  he  communicated  to  the  Pope  him- 
self, that  the  w^hole  choir  of  the  blessed  in  heaven  had 
offered  intercessions  for  the  Church  on  earth,  wdiicli 
was  threatened  with  the  severest  judgments,  but  had 
received  answer  that  even  if  the  Pope,  the  cardinals, 
and  the  prelates,  with  the  rest,  swore  in  God's  name, 
that  they  wished  to  reform  themselves,  they  would  be 
perjured ;  from  head  to  foot  there  was  no  soundness  in 
the  Church.^ 

It  was  pretty  generally  felt  that  it  was  with  the  re- 
formation of  the  Church  as  with  the  Ptoman  king  and 
the  Sibylline  books  ;  since  the  seed  of  corruption  sowm 
everywhere  by  the  Curia  had  so  plentifully  sprung  up 
during  the  last  fifty  years,  while  the  Church  made  no 
efforts  for  her  deliverance,  reform  could  only  be  pur- 
chased at  a  much  dearer  price,  and  with  far  less  hope 
of  satisfactory  results.  Many  thought,  like  the  Domi- 
nican Institoris,  about  1484,  "The  world  cries  for  a 
Council,  but  how  can  one  be  obtained  in  the  present 
condition  of  the  heads  of  the  Church  ?  No  human  power 
avails   any  longer   to   reform    the    Church    through  a 

1  Petri  Dorland.  Chron.  Cartus.  (Colon.  1608),  pp.  394-9. 


3 44  Papal  Infallibility. 

Council,  and  God  himself  must  come  to  our  aid  in 
some  way  unknown  to  us."-^ 

The  Germans  at  that  period  looked  with  great  envy  on  ' 
the  Trench,  English,  Scotch,  and  other  nations,  who  were 
not  so  shamefully  abused  and  recklessly  plundered  as 
the  barbarous  but  "humble  and  patient"  Germans,  who 
were  sacrificed  by  their  own  princes,  ^neas  Silvius,  or 
Pius  II.,  had  reminded  them  before,  that,  considering 
their  barbarism,  they  must  account  it  properly  an  honour 
they  had  to  be  thankful  for,  that  the  Court  of  Eome,  in 
virtue  of  its  long  attested  civilizing  mission  for  Germany, 
was  undertaking  their  affairs,  and  indemnifying  itself 
richly  for  the  trouble.^ 

When  the  Elector,  Jacob  of  Treves,  advised  King 
Frederick  to  gain  the  favour  of  the  German  nation  by 
urging  the  new  Pope,  Calixtus  ill.,  to  remedy  their 
giievances,  ^neas  Silvius  persuaded  him  rather  to  unite 
himself  with  the  Pope  than  with  the  German  people  for 
a  common  object,  for,  said  the  Italian,  between  king  and 
people  there  is  an  inextinguishable  hatred,  and  it  is 


1  Cf.  Hottinger,  Rist.  Eccl.  Scec.  xv.  p.  413. 

-  Respons.  et  Repl.  WimjJhel.  ad  jEneam  Silvium,  in  Freher,  Script.  Rer. 
Germ.  (ed.  Struv.)  ii.  686-98.  As  late  as  1516  the  patriotic  Wimpheling 
tliouglit  it  necessary  to  defend  liis  country  and  its  spokesman,  Chancellor 
Martin  M-aier  of  Mayence,  against  the  Siennese  Pope. 


Temper  and  Circumstanees  of  i^th  Century.  345 

therefore  wiser  to  secure  the  favour  of  the  new  Pope 
by  rendering  services  to  him.-^ 

Eome  thus  became  the  great  school  of  iniquity,  where 
a  large  part  of  the  German  and  Italian  clergy  went 
through  their  apprenticeship  as  place-hunters,  and  re- 
turned home  loaded  with  benefices  and  sins,  as  also 
with  absolutions  and  indulgences. 

There  is  something  almost  enigmatical  about  the 
universal  profligacy  of  that  age.  In  whole  dioceses  and 
countries  of  Christian  Europe  clerical  concubinage  was 
so  general  that  it  no  longer  excited  any  surprise  ;  and 
it  might  be  said  of  certain  provinces  that  hardly  one 
clergyman  in  thirty  was  chaste,  while  in  our  own  day 
there  are  countries  where  the  great  majority  of  the 
clergy  are  free  even  from  the  suspicion  of  incontinence. 
This  distinction  is  to  be  explained  by  the  universally 
corrupt  state  of  the  ecclesiastical  administration.  There 
could  be  no  thought  of  any  selection  or  careful  training 
for  the  ministry  where  everything  was  matter  of  sale, 
where  both  ordination  and  preferment  were  bought  and 
begged  in  Eome,  where  the  conscientious,  who  would 
not  be  tainted  with  simony,  had  to  stand  aside,  while 
the  men  of  no  conscience  prospered,  and  rapidly  attained 

1  GoLellin.  Comment.  Pii  ii.  p.  25. 


346  Papal  Infallibility. 

the  higher  positions,  and  the  clerical  profession  was  that 
of  all  others  which  offered  the  easiest  and  idlest  life, 
with  the  largest  privileges  and  the  least  of  corporate 
obligations.  The  Giiria  had  abundantly  provided  for 
the  universal  security  and  impunity  of  the  clergy. 
Where  the  heads  themselves  gave  the  example  of  con- 
tempt for  all  laws,  human  and  divine,  it  could  not  be 
expected  that  their  subordinates  would  submit  to  the 
oppressive  yoke  of  continence,  and  so  the  contagion 
was  sure  to  spread.  Every  one  who  came  from  Eome 
brought  back  word  that  in  the  metropolis  of  Christen- 
dom, and  in  the  bosom  of  the  great  mother  and  mistress 
of  all  Churches,  the  clergy,  with  scarcely  an  exception, 
kept  concubines.-^ 

§  XXVIII. — Tlie  O^ming  of  the  Sixteenth  Century. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  under 
Julius  II.,  events  took  a  turn  which  suggested  an  oppor- 
tunity to  the  Curia  for  recovering  the  ground  they 
had  in  theory  lost.  Louis  xii.  of  France,  and  the 
German    emperor   Maximilian,  who    were  at  political 

1  When  the  vicar  of  Innocent  viii.  wanted  to  forbid  this,  the  Pope  made 
him  withdraw  his  edict,  "propter  quod  talis  efifecta  est  vita  sacerdotum 
et  curialium  ut  vix  reperiatnr  qui  concubinam  non  retineat  vel  saltem 
meretricem."  So  too  the  Koman  annalist,  Infessura,  in  his  diary,  given  iu 
Eccard.  Corjp.  Hist.  ii.  1997. 


The  Opening  of  the  i6lh  Centiny.        347 

enmity  with  the  Popes,  had  recourse  to  the  plan  of 
holding    ecclesiastical    assemblies.       First,    a    French 
National  Synod  was  assembled  at  Tours,  and  then  a 
General  Council  summoned  to  Pisa,  which  being  almost 
entirely  composed  of  French  prelates,  imitated  the  con- 
duct of  the  Council  of  Basle  towards  the  Pope.     The 
quarrel,  as  all  the  world  knew,  was  purely  political, 
regarding  the  sovereignty  in  Italy,  and  thus  the  scheme 
of  the  Council  came  to  nothing.     Julius  11.,  and  Leo.  x. 
after  him,  assembled  their  Lateran  Council,  with  about 
sixty- five  bishops,  in  opposition  to  it.     The  utter  failure 
of  the  attempt  made  at  Pisa  encouraged  the  Curia  in 
its  turn  to  strike  a  blow  at  Councils,  since  during  the 
period  of  increased  confusion  and  uncertainty,  from  1460 
to  1515,  the  names  of  Constance  and  Basle  were  become 
obsolete.     Francis  l.  surrendered  the  Pragmatic  Sanction 
in  return  for  the  Church  patronage  bestowed  upon  him, 
whereby  elections  were  abolished,  and  the  fortunes  of 
the  superior  clergy,  who  aimed  at  dignities  and  bene- 
fices,  were    placed    absolutely   in    the   hands   of    the 
King.     Thus  fell   the  main   support  of  the  authority 
of  the  Council  of  Basle  in  France,  as  it  had  already 
fallen  in  Germany  through  the  Concordat  of  Vienna. 
Maximilian,   herein  a  wortliy  son  of  his  father,  had 


34^  Papal  Infallibility, 

shortly  before  sacrificed  the  Council  of  Pisa,  and  given 
in  his  adherence  to  Julius  ii.  and  the  Lateran  Synod. 
But  in  Eome  the  Curia  seized  the  opportunity  to 
raise  the  clergy,  who  in  France  had  just  been  so  com- 
pletely made  dependent  on  the  favour  of  the  Court,  from 
all  subjection  to  civil  ties,  and  accordingly,  in  the  ninth 
session  of  the  Lateran  Council,  it  was  ruled  by  the  Pope 
and  bishops  that  "  by  divine  as  well  as  human  law  the 
laity  have  no  jurisdiction  over  ecclesiastical  persons." 
This  was  a  confirmation  of  the  former  decree  issued  by 
Innocent  ill.  at  the  Synod  of  1215  (the  fourth  Lateran), 
that  no  cleric  should  take  an  oath  of  fealty  to  the 
princes  of  whom  he  held  his  temporalities.  It  was  next 
declared  to  be  an  obvious  and  notorious  truth,  attested 
by  Scripture,  Fathers,  Popes,  and  Councils,  that  the 
Pope  has  full  authority  over  Councils,  and  can  summon, 
suspend,  or  dissolve  them  at  his  pleasure. 

We  must  presume  that  at  a  period  when  the  most 
complete  theological  barbarism  prevailed  in  Eome  itself, 
and  there  was  nothing  but  scholasticism  as  represented 
by  some  Dominicans  like  Prierio  and  Cajetan,  the  car- 
dinals and  bishops  of  the  day  did  not  even  know  what 
Euc^enius  iv.,  Mcolas  v.,  and  Pius  ii.  had  so  often  de- 
clared.     For  they  could  hardly  have  expected  the  autho- 


The  opening  of  the  i6th  Century.        349 

rity  of  a  Leo  X.,  with  his  hole-and-corner  Council  of 
sixty-five  Italians,  to  outweigh  the  Councils  of  Constance 
and  Basle,  and  the  Popes  above  named,  in  the  public 
opinion  of  Europe.  The  Curia,  however,  were  further 
encouraged  by  their  feeling  of  complete  security,  their 
consciousness  that  whatever  they  undertook,  and  how- 
ever threatening  or  complicated  might  be  the  political 
situation  in  Italy,  they  had  nothing  to  fear  in  Church 
matters.  lN"or  was  this  confidence  disturbed  by  reproaches 
and  accusations,  however  loud ;  and  however  often  the 
cry  for  a  Council  was  raised,  which  always  and  chiefly 
meant  only  a  limitation  of  the  Papacy,  the  Curia  took 
it  quietly.  So  much  stronger  had  the  tie  become  dur- 
ing the  last  hundred  years  which  bound  the  clergy  to 
Eome ;  every  cleric  who  showed  signs  of  rebelling  was 
crushed  at  once,  and  even  the  laity  could  not  escape 
excommunication  and  its  consequences.  Even  the  bold 
Gregory  of  Heimburg  only  found  a  refuge  with  the 
Hussite  King  in  Bohemia,  and  was  at  last  obliged,  even 
there,  to  supplicate  for  absolution  at  Eome,  when  a 
sick  and  broken-down  old  man,  in  \^1'2} 

Yet  the  Christian  world  had  endured,  without  any  re- 
volt worth  noting,  or  even  the  remonstrance  of  a  Synod 

1  Brockliaus,  Gregor.  von  Heimburg  (Leipzig,  1861),  p.  383. 


O0< 


Papal  Ijifallibility, 


being  raised,  the  rule  of  such  Popes  as  Paul  ii.,  Sixtus 
IV.,  Innocent  viii,  and  Alexander  vl,  each  of  whom  had 
striven  to  exceed  the  vices  of  his  predecessor.  Paul  ii., 
according  to  the  expression  of  a  contemporary,  made 
the  Papal  Chair  into  a  sewer  by  his  debaucheries.^ 
The  same  witness  observes  that  he  had  gone  to  Eome 
and  visited  the  various  ecclesiastical  communities,  but 
liad  nowhere  found  a  man  of  really  religious  life. 
What  he  says  of  the  lives  of  the  Popes,  cardinals,  and 
prelates,  is  stronger  still. 

Under  Paul  ii.,  and  still  more  under  Sixtus  v.,  the 
great  clerical  market  was  further  extended,  and  princi- 
palities had  to  be  found  for  nephews,  and  fortunes  for 
natural  sons  and  daughters.  ISTew  offices  w^ere  estab- 
lished in  order  to  sell  tliem,  and  the  cardinalitial 
dignity  was  highly  priced.  Leo  x.  and  Clement  vii. 
sold  a  number  of  cardinal's  hats,  as  the  unbounded 
extravagance  of  the  Medici  had  emptied  even  the  Papal 
treasury,  which  before  was  held  to  be  inexhaustible. 
From  one  end  of  Europe  to  the  other  it  was  again  the 
cry,  "Everything  is  made  merchandise  of  at  Piome." 
That  had  been  said  and  written,  indeed,  in  and  out  of 
Italv,  for  foiir  centuries,  but  now,  at  the  beoinninof  of  the 

1  Attilio  Alessio  of  Arezzo  in  Baluze  and  Mansi,  iv.  519. 


The  Opening  of  the  \6tJi  Cenhiry.       351 

sixteenth,  it  was  the  universal  conviction  that  the 
venality  could  not  before  have  been  carried  on  in  so  gross, 
open,  and  shameless  a  manner  as  it  now  was  before  the 
eyes  of  the  whole  world  ;  the  art  of  turning  everything 
into  money  could  not  have  been  worked  up  to  such 
perfection.  Count  John  Francis  Pico  of  Mirandola, 
who  wrote  a  treatise  on  the  misfortunes  of  Italy  as 
caused  by  Leo  x.,  mentions,  as  a  symptom  of  the  extent 
of  national  demoralization  and  godlessness,  that  now 
ecclesiastical  and  religious  offices  were  put  up  to  for- 
mal and  public  auction  to  the  highest  bidder.^ 

Since  1512  a  fresh  source  of  information  had  been 
added,  in  the  shape  of  an  official  edition,  printed  in 
Eome,  of  the  customary  taxes  in  the  Roman  Chancery 
and  Penitentiary.  It  was  based  throughout  on  the 
Dlder  arrangement  of  taxes,  dating  from  the  time  of 
John  xxiL,  but  it  was  then  kept  secret,  wliereas  it  was 
now   publicly   exposed    for   sale.^      This    publication, 

1  Be  Veris  Calamitaium  Causis  nostrorum  Temporum  (ed.  Colorius 
Cesius  Mutinse,  1860),  p.  24. 

2  The  composition  of  the  Curia  at  the  opening  of  the  sixteenth  centiiiy 
was  very  different  from  what  it  is  now.  A  Provinciale  of  1518,  printed  in 
Eome,  contains,  somewhere  near  the  end,  a  list  of  the  "  officia  Curice." 
Most  of  them  are  marked  "venduntur."  The  purchase  of  such  an  office 
was  the  most  profitable  investment  of  capital,  which,  of  course,  produced 
the  richest  interest.  We  learn  from  this  Provinciale  that  the  referen- 
daries "non  habent  numerum,"  that  there  were  101  sollicitatores,  101 
masters  of  the  archives,  8  writers  of  supplications,  12  registrars,  27  clerks 


352  Papal  Lifallibility. 

which  was  soon  disseminated  in  every  conutiy,  opened 
men's  eyes  everywhere  to  the  huge  mass  of  Eoman 
reservations  and  prohibitions,  as  also  to  the  price  fixed 
for  every  transgression,  and  for  absolution  from  the  worst 
sins— murder,  incest,  and  the  like.  This  tariff  of  the 
Chancery  was  afterwards  supposed  to  be  an  invention 
of  the  enemies  of  the  Papacy,  but  the  repeated  editions 
prepared  under  Papal  sanction  leave  no  doubt  about  the 
matter.^  They  show  the  complete  feeling  of  security  in 
Eome,  and  what  the  Curia  believed  it  could  safely  offer 
to  the  gaze  of  the  world.  Por  the  bitterest  enemy  of  Eome 
could  have  invented  nothing  worse  than  this  exposure 
of  a  mechanism  systematically  developed  for  centuries, 
wherein  laws  seemed  to  be  made  only  for  the  purpose 

of  the  Penitentiary,  81  writers  of  briefs,  104  collector esplumhi,  101  aposto- 
lical clerks.  All  these  offices  were  sold.  There  were  besides  13  proctors 
in  the  "  Aiidientia  Contradictorum"  60  abbreviators  "  de  minori,''  12 
deparco  mujori.  Most  of  these  also  could  be  bought.  We  must  add  12 
Consistorial  advocates,  12  auditors  of  the  Kota,  who  are  said  to  be  de- 
pendent on  gratuities,  10  notaries  under  the  Auditor  Cavierce,  29  secretaries 
and  7  clerics  of  the  Camera,  with  9  notaries.  Think  of  a  well-meaning  Pope 
like  Adrian  vi.  finding  himself  suddenly,  in  his  old  age,  with  the  prospect 
of  only  a  few  years'  reign,  placed  at  the  head  of  this  gigantic  machine, 
constructed  in  every  part  for  money-getting  ;  some  800  persons  all  bent  on 
making  the  most  out  of  the  capital  they  had  bought  their  places  with,  and 
all  together  forming  a  serried  phalanx  united  by  a  common  interest !  A 
feeling  of  hopeless  impotence  to  grapple  with  such  a  condition  of  things 
must  steal  over  the  very  boldest  heart. 

1  They  Avere  afterwards  put  on  the  Index,  with  the  comment,  "  ab  hsere- 
ticis  depravata,"  but  the  editions,  often  indeed  provided  by  Protestants,  do 
not  differ  from  the  authentic  Ptomau  issues  under  Leo  X.  and  Julius  ii. 


opening  of  the  i  (^ih  Century.  353 

of  selling  the  right  to  break  them,  and  both  individuals  - 
and  communities  were  only  allowed  tlie  exercise  of  their  - 
natural  rights  wdien  they  had  paid  for  it.^ 

The  Curia   cared   nothing  for  being    described  by 
writers  as  the  source  of  all  the  corruption  in  Christen- 
dom, the   poisoner    and   plague-spot   of    the   nations. 
There  were  indeed  outbreaks  of  indignation  here  and 
there,  especially  when  the  Curia  attacked  some  favourite 
popular  orator.     When  the  Carmelite  Thomas  Conecte,  - 
who  had  long  been  labouring  in  France,  Flanders,  and 
Italy,  as  a  travelling  missionary,  had  wrought  numberless 
conversions,  and  had  distinguished  himself  by  the  saint- 
liness  of  his  life,  at  last  lashed  the  vices  of  the  Court  of 
Eome,  Eugenius  iv.  had  him  tortured  by  the  Inquisi- 
tion, and  burnt  alive.^     And  as  Eugenius  treated  him, 
Alexander  vi.  treated  Savonarola.     That  famous  orator 
and  theologian  had  called  aloud  for  a  reformation  of 
the  polluted  Church,  and  had  urged  the  sovereigns  to 

1  Thus,  e.g.,  cities  had  to  pay  a  license  at  Rome  for  erecting  a  primary 
school,  and  if  a  school  was  to  be  removed,  a  sum  of  money  had  again  to  be 
paid  for  it.  Nuns  had  to  buy  permission  for  having  two  maid-servants  for 
the  sick.     Cf.  Taxce  Cancellar.  Apost.  (Romse,  1514),  f.  10  seq. 

2  "  Adversus  vitia  Curiae  Romanoe  emergentia  nimio  quia  zelo  declamabat, 
captus  pro  ha^retico  habitus  est  et  ut  talis  combustus."  Cosmas  de  Villiers, 
Biblioth.  Carmel.  Aurelianis  1752,  ii.  814.  His  brother  monk,  Baptista 
Mantuanus  (Z^e  Vitd  Beatd)  pronounces  Thomas  a  martyr,  and  compares 
his  death  with  St.  Laurence's.  Eugenius  is  said  afterwards  on  his  death- 
bed to  have  bitterly  repented  his  share  in  this  deed. 


354  Papal  Infallibility. 

lend  their  aid  to  the  assembling  of  an  CEcnmenical 
Council.  For  that  the  Pope  excommunicated  him, 
and  threatened  Florence  with  an  interdict.  Papal  Com- 
missaries were  sent  there,  and  Savonarola,  with  two 
brethren  of  his  Order,  was  executed  for  heresy,  and 
their  bodies  burnt.  Thus  did  the  crowned  theologian 
overcome  the  simple  preaching  monk, — the  theologian, 
for  Julius  was  that,  in  spite  of  his  children  and  his 
"handmaidens."^  He  had  done,  as  Ptodrigo  Borgia, 
what  was  sure  to  gain  him  the  red  hat ;  he  had,  besides 
a  gloss  on  the  rules  of  the  Chancery,  composed  a  really 
learned  work  in  defence  of  the  universal  monarchy  and 
infallibility  of  the  Popes.^  But  Savonarola,  as  even  his 
enemies  must  admit,  was  not  only  one  of  the  most 
gifted  men  and  best  theologians  of  his  day ;  he  also 
belonged  to  the  most  powerful  of  the  Eeligious  Orders, 
and  had  many  adherents  among  its  members.  And 
thus  he  came  to  be  honoured  as  a  saint  and  martyr  for 
the  truth,  and  other  saints,  like  Philip  Neri  and  Cathe- 
rine Eicci,  bore  witness  to  his  holiness,  and  even  a  later 
Pope,  Benedict  xiv.,  declared  him  worthy  of  canonization.^ 

1  The  expression  is  borrowed  from  Macchiavelli,  "  Tre  sue  famigliari  e 
care  anzelle,  lussuria,  simouia,  e  crudeltade,"  J.  Decennal.  Opere  (ed. 
Fiorent.  1843),  p.  682. 

2  Clypeus  Defcns.  Fid.  S.  Rom.  Eccl.  Argeutor.  1497. 

3  De  Serv.  Dei  Canonis,  iii.  25.  17. 


Contemporary  Testimonies.  355 

§  XXIX.— T/i^  ^taU  of  ContemporaTij  Ojnnion. 
Italy  was  still  more  thoroughly  victimized  to  the  C2C7'ia 
than  Germany,  but  the  Italians  bore  the  burden  more 
easily,  because  the  sums  which  flowed  in  from  aU  parts 
of  tributary  Europe  to  the  Court  of  Eome,  through  a 
hundred  different  channels,  were  again  diffused  from 
Eome,  by  means  of  nepotism,  throughout  the  Peninsula, 
and  most  of  the  cardinals  and  prelates  were  flesh  of 
their  flesh,  and  bone  of  their  bone.  But  the  very  fact 
of  this  close  neighbourhood  and  kinship  made  its  moral 
effects  more  mischievous.  All  thoughtful  Italians  of 
that  age  who  could  make  comparisons,  regarded  their 
nation  as  surpassing  those  of  ISTorthern  Europe  in  corrup- 
tion and  irreligion.  JNIacchiavelli  says  : — "  The  Italians 
are  indebted  to  the  Eoman  Church  and  its  priests 
for  our  having  lost  all  religion  and  devotion  through 
their  bad  examples,  and  having  become  an  unbelieving 
and  evil  people."^  He  adds, — "The  nearer  a  people 
dwells  to  the  Eoman  Court  the  less  religion  it  has. 
AVere  that  Court  set  down  among  the  Swiss,  who  still 
remain  more  pious,  they  too  would  soon  be  corrupted  by 
its  vices."     Nor  was  a  more  favourable  judgment  given 

1  Discorsi,  i.  12,  p.  273,  ed.  18^3. 


3  5  6  Papal  Infallibility. 

by  Maccliiavelli's  fellow- citizen,  Guicciardini,  who  for 
many  years  served  the  Medicean  Popes  in  high  offices, 
administering  their  provinces  and  commanding  their 
army ;  he  observes,  on  Macchiavelli's  words,  that  what- 
ever evil  may  be  said  of  the  Eoman  Court  must  fall  short 
of  its  deserts.-^  What  these  statesmen  say  of  the  moral 
corruption  introduced  into  Italy  by  the  Curia  is  confirmed 
in  their  way  by  the  prelates.  Isidore  Chiari,  Bishop  of 
Foligno,  who  had  opportunities  at  Trent  of  becoming 
thoroughly  acquainted  with  his  episcopal  colleagues,  says 
that,  in  all  Italy,  among  250  bishops,  one  could  scarcely 
find  four  who  even  deserved  the  name  of  spiritual  shep- 
herds, and  really  exercised  their  pastoral  office.  "  If  the 
Italians  are  so  alienated  from  Christianity  that  its  pro- 
fession may  almost  be  said  to  have  died  out  among  us, 
the  fault  lies  with  the  bishops  and  parish  priests,  for 
our  whole  life  is  a  continuous  preaching  of  unbelief."  ^ 

It  is  worth  showing,  that  then,  in  spite  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion, much  could  be  said  in  Italy,  and  many  an  avowal 

^  Oiyere  Inedite,  i.  27  (Firenze,  1857) :—  "  Non  si  j)u6  dire  tanto  malle  della 
corte  Romana  clie  non  meriti  se  ne  dica  piu,  perclie  e  una  infamia,  uno 
esemplo  di  tutti  e  vituperii  e  ohbrobrii  del  mondo."  In  his  Ricordi  Auto- 
biograjici,  he  says  again,  "  A  Roma,  dove  le  cose  vanno  alia  grossa,  ove 
si  corrompe  ognuno,"  etc. — Oi^cre,  x.  166. 

2  The  passage  is  cited  by  Bishop  Lindanus  in  his  Apologet  ad  Gervian. 
(Antwerp.  1568),  p.  19. 


Contemporary  Testimonies,  357 

made,  which  would  not  have  been  tolerated  at  a  later 
period,  when  the  Jesuits  had  got  the  upper  hand,  with 
their  system  of  reticence,  hushing  up,  and  excuses. 
The  Popes  themselves  did  not  shrink  from  making  con- 
fessions which  must  have  offended  the  majority  of  the 
cardinals  and  prelates  of  their  Court  as  highly  indiscreet. 
Adrian  vi.  told  the  Germans,  by  the  mouth  of  his 
legate,  Chieregati,  that  for  years  many  abominations 
had  disgraced  the  See  of  Eome,  and  everything  had 
been  perverted  to  evil ;  from  the  head  corruption  had 
spread  to  the  members,  from  the  Pope  to  the  prelates.^ 
If  there  was  a  well-meaning  bishop  here  and  there  in 
Italy,  he  felt  himself  powerless  the  moment  he  tried  in 
good  earnest  to  undertake  the  administration  of  his 
diocese.  When  Matteo  Giberto,  the  confidant  and 
datary  of  Clement  vii.,  at  last  sought  out  his  diocese  of 
Verona,  he  found  the  city  itself  divided  into  six  dif- 
ferent spiritual  jurisdictions,  and  his  schemes  of  reform 
hopelessly  baffled  in  presence  of  so  many  exemptions." 
His  biographer,  in  describing  the  state  of  Lombordy, 
alleges  that  the  people  knew  neither  the  Lord's  Prayer 
nor  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  a  great  part  of  them  did  not 


1  Raynald.  Anncd.  ann.  1522,  p.  ^%. 

=*  "  Giberti  Vita,"  prefixed  to  liis  Oi)cra  (ed.  Veron.  1733),  p.  xi. 


3  5  S  Papal  Infallibility. 

go  once  a  year  even  to  confession  and  communion,  the 
best  of  them  not  oftener,  as  a  rule. 

One  evidence  of  the  state  of  clergy  and  people  in  Papal 
dioceses  may  be  gathered  from  the  writings  of  Bishop  Isi- 
dore Cliiari,  already  mentioned.  He  found  in  1550  that 
not  above  one  or  two  priests  in  his  diocese  even  knew 
the  words  of  the  sacramental  absolution,  and  all  the  rest 
confused  the  form  of  absolving  from  excommunication 
with  it.  He  had  to  send  teachers  to  instruct  them  how 
to  say  mass  properly.  And  they  had  incurred  pubhc 
contempt  by  their  vices  as  much  as  by  their  ignorance. 
Most  of  the  beneficed  clergy  could  not  even  read.-^  In 
comparison  with  this  state  of  things,  which  the  Curia 
had  produced  in  its  own  immediate  neighbourhood,  the 
condition  of  remoter  countries  was  less  disheartening. 
The  great  diocese  of  Milan,  with  2500  priests,  was  for 
sixty  years  without  a  bishop.  There  was  nothing  in 
the  houses  of  the  clergy  but  arms,  concubines,  and 
children,  and  it  had  passed  into  a  common  proverb 
among  the  people  that  the  priestly  profession  was  the 
surest  road  to  hell.  Here  too  the  use  of  the  sacraments 
had  almost  disappeared.  These  are  some  features  of 
the  terrible  picture  sketched  a  few  years  later  by  tlie 

1  Isidor.  Clar.  Episc.  Fulgent.  In  Serin.  Domini  (A^enet.  156C),  f.  101-125. 


Contemp07'ary  Testimonies.  359 

Milanese  priest,  Giussano,  of  the  condition  of  things 
there.-^ 

When  Leo  x.  was  elected  in  1513,  he  had  a  terrible 
inheritance  to  enter  upon,  which  might  have  made  even 
the  boldest  shudder.  His  predecessors  since  Paul  ii. 
had  done  their  utmost  to  cover  the  Papal  See  with 
infamy,  and  give  up  Italy  to  all  the  horrors  of  endless 
wars.  But  his  first  thought  was  that,  now  he  was  Pope, 
a  life  of  unmixed  enjoyment  had  begun  for  him.^ 

The  Ptoman  prelates  bore  with  great  equanimity  the 
knowledge  that  Eome  and  the  Curia  were  hated  all  the 
world  over.  Giberto,  whom  we  mentioned  before,  fore- 
saw that,  in  the  event  of  war,  the  Germans  "  would 
hasten  hither  in  troops  to  glut  their  natural  hatred 
against  us."  Erasmus  had  repeatedly  told  them  from 
the  first  that  this  hatred  supplied  its  chief  nourishment 
to  the  schism,  daily  increasing  in  strength.     And  the 

1  Be  Vit.  et  Rebios  Gestis  Car.  Borrom.  (ed.  Oltrocchi,  Mediol.  1757), 
p.  69. 

2  "Primo  Pontificatfis  die  maximara  voluptatem  et  cupiditateni  ex- 
pressit,  dum  Florentina  lingua  palam  lioc  enuntiavit :  '  Volo  ut  Pontiticatu 
isto  qiiam  maxime  perfruamur.'  "  His  biographer  adds  that  this  could  only 
be  understood  of  physical  enjoyments  by  any  one  who  knew  him.  The  pas- 
sage is  missing  in  Koscoe  Rossi's  impression  of  Vita  di  Leone  x.  t.  xii., 
but  occurs  in  Cod.  Vat.  3920,  whence  a  friend  copied  it  for  us,  with  the 
following,  Avhich  is  also  omitted  in  Eossi,  "  Ea  tempestate  Romre  sacra 
omnia  venalia  erant,  ac  nulla  habita  religionis  aut  integral  famse  rations 
palam  ad  Poiitificatum  sull'ragia  vendebantur,  omniaque  ambitione  cor- 
rui')ta  erant." 


360  '     Papal  Infallibility. 

facts  spoke  loudly  enough  for  themselves.  Even  so 
thorough-going  a  partisan  as  Cornelio  Musso,  Bishop  of 
Bitonto,  one  of  the  chosen  speakers  at  Trent,  did  not 
shrink  from  saying  that  the  name  of  Eome  was  hated 
by  all  nations,  and  its  friends  could  only  sigh  over  the 
shame  and  contempt  of  the  Eoman  Church.-^  And  if 
at  the  eleventh  hour,  as  might  happen,  the  bishops 
of  a  country  took  counsel  with  a  view  to  stemming 
the  double  tide  of  corruption  and  secession  from  the 
Church,  they  found  again  that  the  Curia  had  cut 
through  the  nerves  and  sinews  of  their  episcopal  power. 
At  the  Synod  held  at  Paris  in  1528  by  the  French 
bishops  of  the  province  of  Sens,  it  had  to  be  actually 
inserted  in  the  canons  that  the  bishops  could  not  so 
much  as  keep  out  the  incompetent  and  unworthy  by 
refusing  them  ordination,  for  the  rejected  candidate 
would  at  once  go  to  Eome  and  get  ordained  there.^ 
Twenty  years  later  the  French  prelates  had  again  to 
protest,  at  an  assembly  held  at  Melun,  against  the 
fatal  encroachments  of  the  Curia,  which  had  sud- 
denly put  in  a  claim  to  dispose  of  the  benefices  in 
Brittany  and  Provence,  and  to  transplant  into  France 
the  whole  simoniacal  abomination  of  reservations,  ex- 

1  Sermones,  ii.  Dom.  v.  Serm.  2.  *  Harduiu,  Cone.  ix.  1953. 


Confeviporary  Testimonies.  361 

pectatives,  and  reversionary  rights,  with  the  endless 
processes  they  led  to,  in  the  teeth  of  the  Concordat  of 
1517,  whereby,  as  the  bishops  told  the  Pope  bitterly 
enough,  all  hope  of  reformation  was  cut  off.-^ 

"When  in  1527  that  judgment  broke  upon  Eome 
which,  like  Eome  itself,  stands  alone  in  history, — when 
the  city  which  time  out  of  mind  had  been  absorbing 
countless  sums  of  money  from  the  whole  West,  was  in 
its  turn  plundered  by  Germans,  Italians,  and  Spaniards, 
and  wrung  dry  like  a  sopping  sponge,  then  at  last  the 
eyes  of  many  were  opened.  That  very  Cajetan  or  De  Yio, 
who  had  been  Leo  x.'s  Court  theologian  and  factotum, 
who  had  been  his  instigator  in  the  disgrace  of  the 
Lateran  Synod,  in  his  decisions  against  Constance  and 
Basle,  in  his  proclamation  of  the  divine  right  of  every 
cleric  to  disobey  his  sovereign,  and  had  lent  his  pen  to 
these  objects — that  same  man  who,  as  legate  in  Ger- 
many, had  embittered  the  Lutheran  business  by  his 
insolence,  and  who  agai^i  had  induced  the  Pope  to  de- 
clare it  a  heresy  to  disapprove  of  burning  heretics^ — 
now  in  1527  wrote,  after  the  capture  of  Pome,  "Justly 
is  the  life  of  the  pastors  of  the  Church  the  object  of 

1  Baluze  and  Mansi,  Miscell.  ii.  297-300. 

2  [One  of  Luther's  propositions,  coiidemned  by  Leo  x.,  is,  "■  Hcereticos 
conilmri  est  contra  cliaritateni  Spiritfis." — Tu.] 


o 


62  Papal  Infallibility 


contempt,  and  their  word  neglected.  We,  the  Eoman 
prelates,  now  experience  this,  who  by  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God  have  been  given  up  as  a  prey,  not  to 
unbelievers,  but  to  Christians,  to  be  robbed  and  impri- 
soned. We  are  become  useless  for  anything  but  exter- 
nal ceremonies  and  the  enjoyment  of  this  world's  goods, 
and  therefore  are  we  trodden  under  foot  and  reduced  to 
bondage."-^ 

\Yhenever  the  influence  of  the  Papacy  on  the 
Church  and  the  religious  administration  of  Eome  was 
discussed  in  colloquies  and  conferences  between  Catho- 
lics and  Protestants  of  that  period,  the  Catholic  spokes- 
men were  obliged  to  declare  :  "  Here  our  apology 
ceases ;  we  are  conquered  here,  and  can  neither  deny 
nor  excuse."  So  spoke  in  1519  Bishop  Berthold  of 
Chiemsee,  Cardinal  Contarini,  the  author  of  the  Eoman 
memorial  of  1538,  the  Abbot  Blosius,  the  French  and 
Belgian  theologians,  Claudius  d'Espense,  Euard  Tapper, 
Gentian  Hervet,  Bishop  Lindanus,  and  John  Hoffmeister. 
There  were  moments  when  even  the  Popes  were  obliged 
to  let  their  most  approved  servants  say  wdiat  in  ordinary 
times  w^ould  have  led  to  a  process  of  the  Inquisition. 
Gaspar  Contarini,  whom  Paul  III.  in  his  need  suddenly 

1  Raynald.  Annul,  ann.  1527,  p-  2. 


Coritemporary  Testivwjiies.  363 

transformed  from  a  secular  statesman  into  a  Cardinal, 
ventured  in  substance  to  tell  the  Pope  that  the  whole 
Papal  system  was  wrong  and  unchristian.  He  said  that 
Luther  had  good  reason  for  writing  his  book  on  the 
Babylonish  Captivity.  ''  Nothing  can  be  devised  more 
opposed  to  the  law  of  Christ,  which  is  a  law  of  freedom, 
than  this  system,  which  subjects  Christians  to  the  Pope, 
who  can  make,  unmake,  and  dispense  laws  at  his  mere 
caprice.  ]N'o  greater  slavery  than  this  could  be  imposed 
on  the  Christian  people."^  Such  utterances  indeed 
produced  no  effect.  Paul  in.  was  not  minded  to  swerve 
a  hair's-breadth  from  his  claim  of  absolute  power,  and 
for  one  Contarini  there  were  always  in  Eome  hundreds 
of  Torquemadas,  Cajetans,  Jacobazzis,  and  Bellarmines. 
The  two  Councils,  the  Lateran  in  1516,  and  the  Tri- 
dentine  in  its  earlier  period,  had  this  point  in  common, 
that  the  speakers  made  avowals  and  charges  so  out- 
spoken and  of  such  overwhelming  force  that  they  cannot 
but  amaze  us.  These  speeches  and  descriptions  reproduce 
in  various  forms  the  same  idea  :  "  We  Cardinals,  Italian 
bishops,  and  officials  of  the  Curia,  are  a  tribe  of  worth- 
less men,  who  have  neglected  our  duties.     We  have  let 

1  Epist.  Duos  ad  Paulum  iv.  (Colon.  1538),  pp.  62  sqq.     Cf.  the  Collec- 
tion of  Le  Plat,  ii.  605. 


3^4  Papal  Infallibility. 

numberless  souls  perish  tlirougli  our  neglect,  w^e  dis- 
grace  our  episcopal  office,  we  are  not  shepherds  but 
wolves,  we  are  the  authors  of  the  corruption  prevalent 
throughout  the  whole  Church,  and  are  in  a  special  sense 
responsible  for  the  decay  of  religion  in  Italy." 

Cardinal  Antonio  Pucci  said  publicly  before  the 
assembly  of  1516,  "  Eome,  the  Eoman  prelates  and 
the  bishops  daily  sent  forth  from  Eome,  are  the  joint 
causes  of  the  manifold  errors  and  corruptions  in  the 
Church;  unless  we  recover  our  good  fame,  which  is 
almost  wholly  lost,  it  is  all  up  with  us."  And  IMatthias 
Ugoni,  Bishop  of  Famagusta,  who  also  took  part  in 
the  Lateran  Synod,  describes  in  his  work  the  contempt 
the  Italian  bishops  had  sunk  into,  so  that  there  was  no 
infamy  men  did  not  attribute  to  them,  while  they  re- 
pelled with  scorn  any  one  who  so  much  as  hinted  at 
the  need  of  reform  and  of  a  true  Council,  as  disturbers  of 
peace,  and  hypocrites.  And  the  worst  that  had  been 
said  before  of  the  Italian  prelacy  was  confirmed  in 
1546  by  the  Papal  legates  at  Trent.  The  German  Pie- 
formers,  when  they  wished  to  paint  for  public  view  the 
heinous  guilt  of  the  Popes  and  Italian  bishops,  had  no 
need  to  do  more  than  transcribe  the  words  of  tlie  le^^ates 
and  many  similar  statements  and  avowals  let  fall  at 


Contemporary  Testimonies.  365 

the  Council.  For  no  words  could  say  more  plainly 
that  the  ruinous  condition  of  the  whole  Church,  the 
dominant  profligacy,  the  applause  with  which  the  ne- 
glected and  dissatisfied  people,  in  utter  perplexity  about 
their  clergy  and  their  Church,  universally  hailed  every 
new  doctrine  or  scheme  of  Church-government,  was 
ultimately  due  to  the  Italian  prelacy,  concentrated  in 
the  Curia,  and  thence  appointed  over  the  dioceses.-^  They 
said  that  all  which  they  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the 
heretics  was  only  a  just  retribution  on  their  vices  and 
crimes,  their  bestowal  of  Church  offices  on  the  un- 
worthy, and  the  like. 

§  XXX. — Tlu  Council  of  Trent,  and  its  Results. 
The  very  first  speech  made  at  the  opening  of  the 
Council  by  Bishop  Coriolano  Martorano,  of  San  Marco, 

1  See  Admonit.  ad  Synodum.  1546,  in  Le  Plat,  Moniim.  Coll.  i.  40. 
"  Horum  malorum  magna  ex  parte  nos  causa  sumus.  Quod  lapsam 
monim  disciplinam  et  abusus  complectitur,  hie  nihil  attinet  diu  investigare, 
quinam  tantorum  malorum  auctores  fuerint,  cum  praiter  nos  ipsos  ne  nomi- 
nare  quidem  ullum  alium  auctorem  possimus."  Cf.  Girolamo  Muzzio's 
Lettre  catoliche  (Venez.  1571),  p.  27,  written  in  1557,  on  the  "  ahominazione 
introdotta  nella  Chiesa."  The  bishops,  themselves  bad  and  incompetent, 
"  danno  la  curu  dell'  anima  alia  feccia  degli  uomiui."  Guicciardini  describes 
in  his  Ricordi  how  a  bishopric  was  bought  at  Kome  for  a  fixed  sum, 
and  this  was  the  usual  provision  for  the  younger  son  of  an  aristocratic 
family.  His  relative,  Kinieri  Guicciardini,  a  bastard,  but  richly  beneficed, 
bought  the  See  of  Cortona  of  the  Pope  for  4000  ducats,  and  with  it  a  dis- 
pensation for  retaining  his  benefices.— O^ere,  x.  59. 


66  Papal  Infallibility. 


created  astonisliment.^  The  picture  lie  drew  of  the 
Italian  cardinals  and  bishops,  their  bloodthirsty  cruelty, 
their  avarice,  their  pride,  and  the  devastation  they  had 
wrought  of  the  Church,  was  perfectly  shocking.  An 
unknown  writer,  who  has  described  this  first  sitting 
in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  thinks  Luther  himself  never 
spoke  more  severely.^  What  he  then  heard  at  Trent 
crave  him  the  notion  that  the  Council  would  not  indeed 
accept  Protestant  doctrine,  but  would  assail  the  Papal 
tyranny  more  energetically  even  than  the  Lutherans. 
How  utterly  was  he  deceived  in  his  ignorance  of  the 
Italian  prelacy  !  But  what  was  then  said  in  Trent  left 
no  doubt  that  the  general  absence  of  the  Italian  bishops 
from  their  dioceses,  most  of  which  had  never  even  seen 
their  chief  pastor,  must' be  regarded  as  fortunate,  strongly 
as  the  Eoman  compilers  of  the  memorial  of  1538,  de- 
signed for  Paul  III,  insisted  on  this  state  of  things  being 
intolerable.^  There  is  a  letter  extant  of  the  famous 
Antonio  Flaminio,  of  1545,  referring  to  the  beginnings 

1  See  Le  Plat,  i.  20  ff. 

2  Fortgesetzte  >Sammlu7ig  von  Theol.  Sachen.  1747,  p.  335. 

3  "  Omnes  fere  pastores  recesserunt  a  suis  gregibus,  commissi  sunt  omnes 
fere  mercenariis  "  (ed.  1G71),  p.  114.  It  was  just  tlie  same  sixty  years  later, 
in  spite  of  the  pretended  reformation  of  Trent.  Bellarmine  says,  in  his 
memorial  to  Clement  viii.,  "  Video  in  Ecclesiis  Italise  desolationem  tantam 
quanta  ante  multos  annos  fortasse  non  fuit  ut  jam  neque  divini  juris  neque 
liumani  residentia  esse  videatur."— Baron.  E^.  et  Opusc.  (Romte,  1770),  iii.  9. 


The  Council  of  Tre^it.  367 

of  the  Council  while  in  process  of  formation.  What, 
he  asked,  will  a  Council,  composed  of  such  monstrous 
bishops,  do  for  the  Church  ?  There  is  nothing  episco- 
pal about  them  except  their  long  robe.  He  knew  of 
but  one  worthy  bishop  in  Italy,  who  was  now  dead, 
Giberto  of  Verona,  but  nothing  was  to  be  hoped  from 
the  existing  body,  who  had  become  bishops  through 
royal  favour,  through  solicitation,  through  purchase  in 
Eome,  through  criminal  arts,  or  after  long  years  spent 
in  the  Curia.  If  any  improvement  was  to  be  effected, 
they  must  all  be  deposed.-^ 

The  appearance  of  some  French  and  Spaniards  at 
Trent  was  enough  at  once  to  convert  the  Italian  bishops 
into  a  herd  of  slavish  sycophants  of  Eome,  acting  simply 
at  the  beck  of  the  legates.  They  quietly  let  themselves 
be  described  as  wretched,  unprincipled  hirelings,  rude  and 
ignorant  men,  without  a  murmur  or  contradiction  inter- 
rupting  the  speaker.  An  Italian  even  ventured  to  say — 
w^hat  would  not  have  been  endured  from  a  Cismontane — 
that  all  the  evils  and  abuses  of  the  Church  came  from 
the  Church  of  Eome.^   But  when  they  had  to  testify  their 

1  See  Quatro  Leitere  di  Gasparo  Contarini  (Firenze,  1558).     Cardiual 
Quirir.i  ascribes  this  letter  to  Flaminio. 

2  Thus,  e.g.,  Antouio  Pucci,  afterwards  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Albano,  at 
the  Lateran  Synod,  called  "  Rome  or  Babylon,  ej  usque  incolas  pastores,  qui 


368  Papal  Infallibility. 

devotion  to  the  Curia,  tliey  rivalled  eacli  other  in  their 
fervid  zeal.  "  The  Italian  bishops,"  says  Pallavicini, 
"  knew  of  no  other  aim  than  the  upholding  of  the 
Apostolic  See  and  its  greatness.  They  thought  that 
in  working  for  its  interests  they  showed  themselves  at 
once  good  Italians  and  good  Christians."^  When,  on 
one  occasion,  a  foreign  bishop  mentioned  an  historical 
fact  which  would  not  fit  in  with  the  Papal  system,  the 
storm  broke  out.  Vosmediano,  Bishop  of  Cadiz,  had 
observed  that  formerly  metropolitans  used  to  ordain  the 
bishops  of  their  provinces  by  virtue  of  their  own 
authority.  Cardinal  Simonetta  promptly  contradicted 
him,  and  then  the  Italian  bishops  raised  a  wild  cry,  and 
put  him  down  by  stamping  and  scraping  wdth  their  feet. 
They  cried  out  that  this  accursed  wretch  must  not 
speak ;  he  should  at  once  be  brought  to  trial.^  That 
was  the  Conciliar  freedom  of  speech  at  Trent ! 

In  Italy,  where  matters  did  not  come,  as  elsewhere, 
to  an  open  breach  of  communion,  and  where  the  great 
mass  of  the  lower  orders  remained  Catholic,  the  better- 
minded  were  seized  with  a  despondency  bordering  on 

quotidie  per  universum  terrarum  orbem  animarum  saluti  pra:;ficiimtur,  tan- 
torum  causam  errorum."— Cowc.  (ed  Labbe),  xiv.  240. 

1  "  Nontendevono  al  altro  oggetto  che  al  sostentamento  ed  alia  gi-andezza 
della  Sede  Apostolica."— *StoWa(ZeZ  Cone,  di  Trento,  v.  425  (ed.  Milan,  1S44). 

2  Psalmsei,  Coll.  Actor.,  in  Le  Plat,  vii.  ii.  92. 


The  Council  of  Trent.  369 

despair.  In  their  speeches  and  writings  about  the  time  of 
the  opening  of  the  Tridentine  Council,  they  spoke  of  the 
decay  of  all  religion,  the  last  agony,  or  the  actual  burial 
of  the  Church,  which  the  bishops  were  to  be  present  at. 
They  call  the  Church  a  corpse  in  process  of  corruption, 
or  a  house  on  fire,  and  almost  reduced  to  ashes.  So  spoke 
Lorenzo  Giustiniani,  Patriarch  of  Venice,  the  Cardinals 
^gidius  of  Viterbo,  and  Antonio  Pucci,  and  several  of  the 
bishops  at  Trent.  That  was  the  impression  made  on  them 
by  the  state  of  things  in  Italy,  where  the  nation  seemed 
to  be  divided  between  unbelief  and  rude  superstition, 
whereas  the  nations  north  of  the  Alps  were  still,  on  the 
whole,  believing,  though  deeply  shaken  in  their  alle- 
giance to  the  Church,  which  presented  itself  to  them  as 
a  tyrannical  mistress,  and  so  terribly  disfigured  and  dis- 
torted that  it  could  hardly  be  recognised.  Socinianism 
was  a  national  product  of  Italy  ;  in  Germany  and  Eng- 
land it  found  no  place. 

In  Germany,  and  generally  on  this  side  the  Alps,  it 
was  long  before  men  grasped  the  idea  of  the  breach  of 
Church  communion  becoming  permanent.  The  general 
feeling  was  still  so  far  Church-like,  that  a  really  free 
Council,  independent  of  Papal  control,  was  confidently 
looked  to  for  at  once  purifying  and  uniting  the  Church, 

2  A 


3  70  Papal  Infallibility 

tlioiTgh  of  course  views  differed  as  to  tlie  conditions  of 
re-union,  according  to  personal  position  and  national 
sentiment.  Here,  as  well  as  in  the  Scandinavian  coun- 
tries, in  England  and  in  the  Netherlands,  a  "bond  fide 
reformation,  by  making  some  concessions  about  the  use 
of  the  chalice  and  clerical  marriage,  above  all,  by  abol- 
ishing the  Papal  system,  might  have  saved  or  restored 
religious  unity.  If  the  more  moderate  Eeformers,  like 
Melanchthon,  would  only  recognise  the  primacy  of  the 
Pope  as  matter  of  human  ordinance,  and  an  institution 
beneficial  to  the  Church,  this  was  chiefly,  as  one  sees 
from  Luther's  statements,  because  in  their  minds  the 
notion  of  the  primacy  had  become  inseparably  identified 
with  its  caricature  in  the  form  of  an  absolute  monarchy, 
which  was  always  held  up  before  their  eyes.  Just  as 
they  could  not  or  would  not  comprehend  the  idea  of 
the  New  Testament  priesthood  and  Eucharistic  Sacri- 
fice, because  both  to  their  minds  assumed  only  the 
shape  to  which  they  had  been  perverted  and  degraded, 
of  a  domination  over  the  laity,  and  a  systematic  traffic 
in  masses,  so  was  it  with  the  primacy.  It  could  not 
but  be  doubly  hateful  and  intolerable  to  them,  both  on 
account  of  the  then  occupants  of  the  office,  and  of  the 
element  of  tyranny  it  contained,  and  the  perception  that 


formulized  into  a  Doclrijie.  371 

it  was  precisely  the  Curia  wliicli  was  the  source  and 
origin  of  corruption  in  the  Church. 

§  XXXI. — The  Theonj  of  Infallibility  forimtllzcd 
into  a  Doctrine. 

It  was  above  all  owing  to  the  Italian  devotion  to 
Eome  that  homage  was  paid  not  only  to  the  Papal 
system,  but  to  the  theory  of  Papal  Infallibility  which 
is  its  consequence.  Prom  the  time  of  Leo  x.  this  doc-  - 
trine  entered  on  a  fresh  phase  of  development.  On  the 
whole,  during  the  long  controversy  between  the  Council 
and  the  Popes  from  1431  tiU  about  1450,  as  to  their 
right  of  superiority,  the  question  of  Papal  authority  in 
matters  of  faith  had  retired  into  the  background.  At 
the  Council  of  Florence,  after  the  Greeks  had  simimarily 
rejected  the  spurious  passages  of  St.  Cyril,  the  subject 
was  not  mooted  again  by  the  Papal  theologians ;  it  was 
understood  that  there  was  no  hope  of  getting  that  claim 
acknowledged  by  the  Greeks.  At  the  Council  of  Basle  it 
was  openly  said,  as  a  matter  of  public  notoriety,  that  the 
Popes,  like  other  people,  were  liable  to  error  in  matters 
of  faith.  The  theologians  of  the  Papal  system,  like 
Torquemada,  the  Minoritic  Capistrano,  and  the  Domini- 
can archbishop  Antoninus,  who  defended  the  pet  doc- 


372  Papal  Infallibility 

trine  of  the  Curia  about  the  superiority  of  Popes  to  Coun- 
cils, between  1440  and  1470,  devised  another  method 
for  exempting  the  Pope  from  subjection  to  a  Council 
in  matters  of  faith,  which  was  afterwards  adopted  by- 
Cardinal  Jacobazzi  also.     They  maintained,  as  Torque- 
mada  expresses  it,  that  the  Pope  can  indeed  lapse  into 
heresy  and  propound  false  doctrine,  but  then  he  is  i'pso 
facto  deposed  by  God  himself  before  any  sentence  of  the 
Church  has  been  passed,  so  that  the  Church  or  Coun- 
cil cannot  judge  him,  but  can  only  announce  the  judg- 
ment of  God ;  and  thus  one  cannot  properly  say  that  a 
Pope  can  become  heretical,  since  he  ceases  to  be  Pope 
at  the  moment  of  passing  from  orthodoxy  to  heterodoxy. 
On  this  principle  they  should  have  said  that  a  bishop 
or  priest  never  becomes  heretical,  and  cannot  be  deposed 
for  heresy,  because  God  has  already  deposed  him  at  the 
moment  of  his  internal  acquiescence  in  a  false  doctrine ; 
for  if  once  such  a  Divine  act  of  deposition  were  to  be 
assumed  before  any  human  intervention,  it  is  impossible 
to  limit  it  to  the  case  of  the  Pope,  and  to  say  that  God  is 
only  so  severe  against  heretical  Popes,  and  milder  towards 
heretical  bishops  and  priests.     A  theory  so  obviously 
devised  to  meet  a  particular  difficulty  could  satisfy 

1  Summa,  iv.  2,  c.  16  f.  388. 


formidized  into  a  Doctrine,  373 

nobody.  Meanwhile  Torquemada  clung  to  this  disco- 
very of  his.  He  repudiates  the  notion  that  God  would 
not  allow  a  Pope  to  define  anything  false.  What  he 
knew  from  Gratian  only  was  enough  to  exclude  this  pre- 
text, but  then  his  opinion  was  that  when  the  Pope  acts 
thus  he  has  ceased  de  jure  to  be  Pope  ;  he  is  therefore 
but  the  corpse  of  a  Pope,  and  the  Church  can  execute 
justice  upon  him  at  her  good  pleasure.  The  contem- 
poraries of  Torquemada,  St.  Antoninus,  Archbishop  of 
Florence,  and  the  canonist,  Antonius  de  Eosellis,  highly 
as  they  exalted  Papal  authority,  ascribed  infallibility 
only  to  the  whole  Church  and  its  representative  Councils. 
Only  in  union  with  the  Church,  and  when  advised  by 
it — by  a  Council — is  the  Pope,  according  to  the  former, 
secured  from  error.^  And  thus  there  was  still  no  Papal 
Infallibility.  The  principle  was  too  firmly  rooted  that 
the  Pope  may  become  heretical,  and  then  the  Church 
or  the  Council  must  first  tell  him  to  abdicate,  and,  if  he 
refuses,  proceed  to  depose  him.  So  Cardinal  Jacobazzi 
has  laid  down.^  And  he  also  applies  the  prayer  of 
Christ  to  the  Church,  and  not  to  the  successor  of 
Peter,^  as  Thomas  Netter  or  Waldensis  had  done  before 

1  Summa,  Theol.  P.  iii.  p.  416. 

2  De  Concilio  (ed.  Paris),  p.  390.  3  lb.  p.  i21. 


374  Papal  Infallibility 

him.-^  Silvester  de  Prierio,  who  was  tlien  Master  of  the 
Palace,  did  not  go  beyond  him.^  "  The  Pope  does  not 
err,"  he  says,  "  when  advised  by  a  Council."  Thomas 
of  Vio  or  Cajetan  was  the  first  to  maintain  Papal  Infal- 
libility in  its  fulness.  It  was  he  who  first  got  the 
authority  of  the  decisions  of  Constance  and  Basle  on 
the  rights  of  Councils,  which  had  been  so  solemnly 
acknowledged  and  attested  by  former  Popes,  assailed  by 
Leo  X.,  although  the  Council  of  Constance  was  not  once 
named,  even  in  the  Pope's  decree  on  the  subject  pro- 
mulgated at  his  Italian  Synod. 

It  was  now  time  to  crown  the  edifice  of  the  Papal 
system  by  putting  into  shape  the  principle  of  Infalli- 
bility, first  sketched  out  by  St.  Thomas  in  reliance  on 
forged  testimonies,  which  is  its  natural  consummation. 
To  the  decrees  of  the  two  Councils  were  opposed  the 
well-known  forgei'ies,  the  spurious  passages  and  canons 
of  Eastern  Fathers  and  Councils.  The  coarsest  and 
most  palpable  of  these  forgeries,  where  St.  Augustine  is 
made  to  identify  the  letters  of  the  Popes  with  canonical 
Scripture,  was  utilized  by  Cajetan  for  his  doctrine.^ 
To  the  fictions  he  had  borrowed  from  St.  Thomas,  he 

1  Doctrince,  ii.  19. 

>  Suinma  Silvestr.  (Rorase,  1516),  verbo  "  Concilium." 

8  Ad  Leon.  X.  De  Div.  Inst.  Pont.  (Romse,  1521),  c.  14. 


formiilized  hi  to  a  DoctriJie.  375 

added  a  new  fraud  of  his  own,  by  mutilating  the 
famous  censure  of  Wicliffe's  teaching  at  the  Council 
of  Constance,  which  was  very  inconvenient  for  him.^ 
Cajetan  was  a  type  of  that  class  of  sycophantic  Court 
divines  afterwards  stigmatized  by  Caraffa  and  the  other 
compilers  of  the  memorial  of  1538,  as  deceivers  of  the 
Pope  through  their  doctrine  of  absolute  supremacy,  and 
authors  of  the  corruption  and  dissolution  of  the  Church. 
He  was  the  inventor  of  that  saying,  which  found  its 
practical  comment  in  the  policy  of  the  Medicean  Popes 
and  their  immediate  successors,  "  The  Catholic  Church 
is  the  born  handmaid  of  the  Pope,"  ^ — he  who  had  seen 
a  Sixtus  IV.,  an  Innocent  viii.,  an  Alexander  VL 

One  cannot  say  that  Cajetan's  new  doctrine  became 
dominant  at  Pome.  It  must  have  seemed  suspicious 
to  many,  if  at  the  same  time  Papal  Infallibility  had  been 
affirmed,  and  the  long  series  of  Papal  Bulls  confirming 
and  fixing  the  chief  dogmatic  decisions  of  Constance 
had  been  declared  erroneous.  Innocent  viii.  had  already, 
in  1486,  acknowledged  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Paris  Uni- 
versity, at  a  time  when  the  theologians  Almain  and 

1  He  suppressed  the  crucial  words  "  (error  est)  si  per  Romanam  Ecclesiam 
intelligat  Universalem  aut  Concilium  Generale." 

2  Apol.  Tractat.  de  Comparat.  Auctorit.  Papoe  et  Condi.  (Romae,  1512), 
c.  1. 


o/' 


Papal  Infallibility 


Johannes  Major  declared  in  its  name  that  it  branded  as 
heresy  the  doctrine  of  the  superiority  of  the  Pope  to  a 
Council,  and  this  was  universally  taught  in  France  and 
Germany.  The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  made  a  similar 
statement  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  without  its  provoking 
any  contradiction.  Adrian  vi.  was  elected  Pope,  al- 
though it  was  notorious  that,  as  professor  of  theology  at 
Louvain,  he  had  maintained  in  his  principal  work  that 
several  Popes  had  been  heretical,  and  that  it  was  cer- 
tainly possible  for  a  Pope  to  establish  a  heresy  by  his 
decisions  or  decretals.-^  The  phenomenon  of  a  Pope 
so  wholly  destitute  of  any  consciousness  of  infallibility 
that  as  Pope  he  had  his  work  denying  it  reprinted  in 
Eome,  was  not  without  its  effect.  Men  could  still 
venture  in  Italy  to  defend  the  authority  and  decrees  of 
the  two  Councils,  and  reject  the  Papal  system  as  un- 
tenable on  historical  and  canonical  grounds.  This  was 
proved  by  the  work  of  Bishop  Ugoni  of  Famagusta, 
which  received  the  commendation  and  assent  of  Paul  iii., 
in  spite  of  his  contradicting  Torquemada,  and  maintain- 
ing the  judicial  authority  of  Councils  over  Popes.^     And 

1  Comment,  in  iv.  Sent.  Q.  de  Confirm.  "  Certum  est  quod  possit  errare, 
hasrersim  per  suam  determinationem  autDecretalem  assereiido."  And  he  saya 
expressly,  "  Evaciiare  intendo  impossibilitatem  errandi,  quam  alii  asserunt." 

2  De  Condi.  M.  Ugonii  Synodia  (Venet.  1568).  The  Pope's  letter  is 
prefixed  to  it. 


formulizedinto  a  Doctrine.  377 

again,  it  is  clear  from  the  whole  contents  of  the  famous  and 
outspoken  memorial  on  the  state  of  the  Church  in  Eome 
and  Italy,  drawn  up  by  the  Cardinals  Caraffa,  Pole, 
Sadolet,  and  Contarini,  with  the  assistance  of  Fregoso, 
Giberto,  Aleandro,  Badia,  and  Cortese,  that  they  had 
very  distinctly  realized  the  ecclesiastical  errors,  mistakes, 
and  false  principles  of  the  Popes,  and  were  by  no  means 
addicted  to  the  hypothesis  of  Papal  Infallibility.  When 
they  describe  the  misery  brought  upon  the  whole  Church 
through  the  blindness  of  the  Popes,  its  desolation,  nay 
downfal,^  caused  by  the  false  doctrines  of  Papal  omni- 
potence and  absolutism,  they  were  certainly  far  from 
supposing  that  Christ  has  bestowed  on  every  Pope  the 
privilege  of  strengthening  his  brethren  by  his  dogmatic 
infallibility,  while  he  is  weakening  and  dismembering 
the  whole  Church  by  his  perverse  ordinances. 

The  very  men  who  were  most  active  in  disseminating 
the  doctrine  of  the  personal  infallibility  of  the  Popes, 
could  not  help  perceiving  that  the  corruptions  and 
abuses  in  the  Church,  which  had  been  introduced  and 
confirmed  by  the  "  infallible  "  Popes  themselves,  were 
still  further  strengthened  by  this  doctrine,  and  every 
attempt  at  improvement  made  more  hopeless.     Cajetan, 

1  "  Collaiisam  in  prseceps  Ecclesiara  Christi." 


378  Papal  Infallibility 

after  he  had  been  rewarded  with  a  cardmal's  hat  for 
his  services  at  the  Lateran  Council,  afterwards,  under 
Adrian  vi., — who  was  open  to  such  representations, — 
becoming  suspicious  of  the  simony  of  the  Curia,  ven- 
tured to  complain  of  the  sale  of  bishoprics  and  bene- 
fices, dispensations  and  indulgences,  which  would  at  last 
lose  all  value.  Thereupon  a  general  feeling  of  indigna- 
tion was  kindled  against  him.  What  folly !  it  was  said, — 
did  he  want  to  turn  Eome  into  an  uninhabited  desert, 
to  reduce  the  Papacy  to  impotence,  and  deprive  the 
Pope,  who  was  so  heavily  involved  in  debt,  of  the  pecu- 
niary resources  indispensable  for  the  discharge  of  his 
office  ?  What  the  Pope  had  a  right  to  give  he  had  a 
right  to  sell.-^  To  protect  Cajetan,  he  was  sent  as  legate 
to  Hungary. 

The  other  patron  of  the  Infallibility  theory,  who 
laboured  hard  to  naturalize  it  in  Belgium,  was  the  Lou- 
vain  theologian,  Paiard  Tapper.  He  returned  from  Trent 
in  1552  cruelly  disillusionized.    He  had  had  a  near  view 

as  his  friend  Bishop  Lindanus  tells  us — of  the  manners 

of  the  Eomans,  and  the  working  of  the  Guria,  exclusively 

1  "  Quid  enim  aliud  esset  quam  vastam  in  Urbe  facere  solitudinem  ?  Pon- 
tificatiim  ad  nihilum  redigere?  .  .  .  Eidiculum  est  quod  gratis  donare 
possis,  id  ii)sum  vendere  non  posse."— Joh.  B.  Flavii,  Be  Vita  Th.  de  Vio 
CoQetani,  prefixed  to  Commentar.  Cajetan  in  S.  Scrijpt.  (Lugd.  1639),  t.  i. 


formulized  into  a  Doctrine.  3  79 

directed  to  filling  up  an  ever  hungry  and  yawning  chasm, 
of  the  hypocrisy  of  the  heads  of  the  Church,  and  the 
venality  of  ecclesiastical  transactions.  He  now  thought 
this  deep-seated  corruption  and  decay  of  the  Church  no 
matter  to  be  disputed  about  with  Protestants,  but  to  be 
deplored. 

The  tliird  of  the  theological  fathers  of  Papal  Infalli-  ■ 
bility  was  Tapper's  contemporary,  the  Spanish  Melchior 
Canus,  who,  like  him,  was  at  the  Council  of  Trent.  - 
His  work  on  theological  principles  and  evidences  was, 
up  to  Bellarmine's  time,  the  great  authority  used  by  all 
infallibilists.  But  his  experience  of  the  effects  of  that 
system  on  the  Popes  and  the  Curia  themselves  is  thus 
summed  up  in  a  later  judgment,  composed  by  command 
of  the  King  of  Spain,  "  He  who  thinks  Ptome  can  be 
healed,  knows  little  of  her ;  the  whole  administration 
of  the  Church  is  there  converted  into  a  great  trading 
business,  a  traffic  forbidden  by  all  laws  human,  natural, 
and  divine."^ 

Out  of  Italy,  the  hypothesis  of  Infallibility  had  but 
few  adherents  even  in  the  sixteenth  century,  tiU  the 
Jesuits   began  to  exercise  a  powerful   influence.      In 

1  This  opinion,  which  had  previously  been  published  in  French  by  Cam- 
pomanes,  may  be  seen  in  Spanish,  in  tlie  new  edition  of  1855,  of  Enzinas. 
Dos  Informaciones,  Appendix,  p.  35. 


380  Papal  Infallibility 

Spain,  the  subjection  of  a  Pope  to  a  Council,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  decrees  of  Constance  and  Basle,  had  been 
maintained,  as  late  as  the  fifteenth  century,  by  the  most 
distinguished  theologian  of  his  country,  Alfonso  Mad- 
rigal, named  Tostado.  The  Spanish  bishop,  Andrew 
Escobar,  went  further  in  the  same  direction.  It  was 
the  Inquisition  which  first  brought  the  doctrine  of  the 
Eoman  Jesuits  into  universal  prevalence  there,  by 
making  all  contradiction  impossible. 

In  Germany,  before  the  Jesuits  had  gained  the  con- 
trol of  the  Universities  and  Courts,  the  theologians,  who 
were  contending  against  Protestantism,  stood  entirely 
on  the  side  of  the  Councils.  They  saw  with  what 
terrible  weapons  the  adoption  of  Papal  Infallibility 
armed  Protestantism  against  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
how  it  robbed  her  of  her  prerogative  of  dogmatic  im- 
mutability. Cochlseus,  Witzel,  and  Bishop  Nausea  of 
Vienna  rejected  it.  "  It  would  be  too  perilous,"  says 
the  latter,  *'  to  make  our  faith  dependent  on  the  judg- 
ment of  a  single  individual ;  the  whole  earth  is  greater 
than  the  city."  ^ 

In  France,  under  the  powerful  influence  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris,  the  belief  in  the  superiority  of  Councils 

1  Rerum  Conciliar.  v.  3. 


foj^nuli zed  into  a  Doctrine.  381 

had  been  universal,  nor  was  it  changed  by  the  aboli- 
tion, against  the  popular  will,  of  the  Pragmatic  Sanction. 
So  much  the  more  devotedly  did  the  Italian  prelates 
proclaim  their  subservience  about  the  time  of  the  Council 
of  Trent.  Bishop  Cornelio  Musso  of  Bitonto  preached 
in  Eome  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans, — "  What  the 
Pope  says  we  must  receive  as  though  spoken  by  God 
himself.  In  Divine  things  we  hold  him  to  be  God; 
in  matters  of  faith  I  had  rather  believe  one  Pope  than 
a  thousand  Augustines,  Jeromes,  or  Gregories."^ 

AVhen  Bellarmine  undertook  to  provide  a  new  basis 
for  the  pet  doctrine  of  Eome,  the  violence  of  the  intel- 
lectual tempest  had  driven  theology  into  new-made 
paths,  and  compelled  theologians  to  adopt  a  different 
method.  The  Eoman  Curia,  encouraged  by  the  success 
of  the  Jesuits,  the  powerful  European  position  of  the 
Spanish  Court,  which  was  thoroughly  devoted  to  it, 
and  the  submission  of  Henry  iv,,  believed  at  that  time 
that  it  could  recover  its  dominion,  at  least  over  the  West. 
The  interdict  launched  against  Venice  showed  what  it 
was  thought  safe  to  venture  upon.  The  favourite  insti- 
tution of  Eome  was  then  again  the  Inquisition,  in  its 
new  and  enlarged  form,  with  the  Congregation  of  the 

1  Condones  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.  p.  606. 


382         Papal  l7ifallibility  formulized : 

Index  affiliated  to  it.  To  be  an  active  inquisitor  was 
the  best  recommendation  and  surest  road  to  attaining 
the  cardinalate,  or  even  the  Papal  throne.  Paul  iv. 
had  declared  the  Inquisition  to  be  the  one  support  of 
the  Papacy  in  Italy.  Two  remarkable  and  important 
documents  show  what  was  now  aimed  at,  and  how  the 
Gregorian  ideas  were  intended  to  be  adapted  to  the 
circumstances  of  Europe  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

Paul  IV.  issued,  with  peculiar  solemnity,  and  directly 
ex  cathedra,  his  Ball,  Cum  ex  Apostolatils  officio.  He 
had  consulted  his  cardinals,  and  obtained  their  sig- 
natures to  it,  and  then  defined,  "  out  of  the  pleni- 
tude of  his  apostolic  power,"  the  following  propo- 
sitions : — 

(1.)  The  Pope,  who  as  "  Pontifex  Maximus"  is  God's 
representative  on  earth,-^  has  full  authority  and  power 
over  nations  and  kingdoms ;  he  judges  all,  and  can  in 
in  this  world  be  judged  by  none. 

(2.)  All  princes  and  monarchs,  as  well  as  bishops, 
as  soon  as  they  fall  into  heresy  or  schism,  without  the 
need  of  any  legal  formality,  are  irrevocably  deposed, 
deprived  for  ever  of  all  rights  of  government,  and  incur 
sentence  of  death.     In  case  of  repentance,  they  are  to 

1  "  Qui  Dei  et  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Cliristi  vices  gerit  in  terris." 


BullofPaul  IV,  383 

be  imprisoned  in  a  monastery,  and  to  do  penance  on 
bread  and  water  for  the  remainder  of  their  life. 

(3.)  None  may  venture  to  give  any  aid  to  an  here- 
tical or  schismatical  prince,  not  even  the  mere  services 
of  common  humanity  ;  any  monarch  who  does  so  for- 
feits his  dominions  and  property,  which  lapse  to  princes 
obedient  to  the  Pope,  on  their  gaining  possession  of 
them. 

(4.)  When  it  is  discovered  that  a  Pope  has  at  any 
previous  time  been  heretically  or  schismatically  minded, 
all  his  subsequent  acts  are  null  and  void. 

Such,  then,  is  this  most  solemn  declaration,  issued  as  . 
late  as  1558,  subscribed  by  the  cardinals,  and  after- 
wards expressly  confirmed  and  renewed  by  Pius  v.,  that 
the  Pope,  by  virtue  of  his  absolute  authority,  can  de- 
pose every  monarch,  hand  over  every  country  to  foreign 
invasion,  deprive  every  one  of  his  property,  and  that 
without  any  legal  formality,  and  not  only  on  account 
of  dissent  from  the  doctrines  approved  at  Ptome,  or 
separation  from  the  Church,  but  for  merely  offering 
an  asylum  to  such  dissidents,  so  that  no  rights  of 
dynasty  or  nation  are  respected,  but  nations  are  to  be 
given  up  to  all  the  horrors  of  a  war  of  conquest.  And 
to  all  this  is   finally  subjoined  the  doctrine,  that  all 


3 84         Papal  Infallibility  for^mclizcd  : 

official  and  sacramental  acts  of  a  Pope  or  Bishop,  who 
has  ever — say  twenty  or  thirty  years  before — been 
heretically  minded  on  any  single  point  of  doctrine,  are 
null  and  void  !  This  last  definition  contains  so  emphatic 
and  flat  a  contradiction  of  the  principles  on  the  validity  of 
sacraments  universally  received  in  the  Church,  although 
mistakes  have  sometimes  been  made  about  it  at  Eome, 
that  they  must  have  seemed  to  theologians  utterly 
incomprehensible.  The  serious  inconveniences  which 
at  former  periods  such  doctrines  had  led  to  in  the 
Church  would  have  been  reproduced  now,  had  not  even 
the  most  decided  adherents  of  the  infallibility  theory,  the 
Jesuit  divines,  shrunk  from  adopting  the  principle  laid 
down  by  this  Pope  and  his  cardinals,  though  Paul  iv. 
threatened  all  who  resisted  his  decrees  with  the  wrath 
of  God.  Bellarmine  himself,  forty  years  later,  said  in 
Eome  itself  that  a  bishop  or  Pope  did  not  lose  his  power 
by  becoming  or  by  having  been  a  concealed  heretic,  or 
everything  would  be  reduced  to  uncertainty,  and  the 
whole  Cliurch  thrown  into  confusion. 

Par  graver  and  more  permanent  consequences  resulted 
from  the  other  document,  the  Bull  In  Ccend  Domini, 
which  the  Popes  had  laboured  at  for  centuries,  and 
which  was   finally  brought   out  in   the  pontificate  of 


Bitll '' In  Coena  Dommiy  385 

Urban  vm.  in  1627.  It  had  appeared  first  in  its  broader 
outlines  under  Gregory  XL  in  1372.  Gregory  xii.,  in 
141 1,  renewed  it,  and  under  Pius  v.,  in  1568,  it  preserved 
its  substantial  identity  with  certain  additions.  Accord- 
ingj  to  his  decision  it  was  to  remain  as  an  eternal  law 
in  Christendom,  and  above  all  to  be  imposed  on  bishops, 
penitentiaries,  and  confessors,  as  a  rule  they  were  to 
impress  in  the  confessional  on  the  consciences  of  the 
faithful.  If  ever  any  document  bore  the  stamp  of  an 
ex  cathedra  decision,  it  is  this,  which  has  been  over  and 
over  again  confirmed  by  so  many  Popes. 

This  Bull  excommunicates  and  curses  all  heretics 
and  schismatics,  as  well  as  all  who  favour  or  defend 
them — all  princes  and  magistrates,  therefore,  who  allow 
the  residence  of  heterodox  persons  in  their  country.  It 
excommunicates  and  curses  all  who  keep  or  print 
the  books  of  heretics  without  Papal  permission,  all — 
whether  private  individuals  or  universities,  or  other 
corporations — who  appeal  from  a  Papal  decree  to  a  future 
General  Council.  It  encroaches  on  the  independence 
and  sovereign  rights  of  States  in  the  imposition  of 
taxes,  the  exercise  of  judicial  authority,  and  the  punish- 
ment of  the  crimes  of  clerics,  by  threatening  with  ex- 
communication and  anathema  those  who  perform  such 

2  B 


386         Papal  Infallibility  form ulized  : 

acts  without  special  Papal  permission ;  and  these  penal- 
ties fall  not  only  on  the  supreme  authorities  of  the 
State,  hut  on  the  whole  body  of  civil  functionaries, 
down  to  scribes,  jailers,  and  executioners.  The  Pope 
alone  can  absolve  from  these  censures,  except  m  articulo 
mortis. 

No  wonder  that  Sovereigns  and  States  resisted  such 
a  manifesto,  forbade  its  publication,  and  declared  it 
null  and  void.  The  French  Parliament  ordered,  in 
1580,  that  all  bishops  and  archbishops  who  promulgated 
the  Bull  should  have  their  goods  confiscated,  and  be 
pronounced  guilty  of  high  treason.  The  bishops  them- 
selves opposed  it  in  the  Netherlands.  Nor  was  the 
King  of  Spain,  who  saw  in  it  an  encroachment  on  his 
rights,  any  readier  to  allow  its  introduction  into  his 
territories,  nor  the  Viceroy  of  Naples.  Eudolph  ii. 
protested  solemnly  against  its  publication  in  Germany, 
and  especially  in  Bohemia.  Nor  could  the  Archbishop 
of  Mayence  be  induced  to  admit  it,  nor  Venice.  But 
the  theologians  and  canonists,  above  all  the  Jesuits, 
inserted  the  Bull  in  their  doctrinal  treatises,  and  wrote 
commentaries  on  it;  many  confessors  went  so  far  as 
to  make  it  a  ground  for  refusing  absolution.  Even  in 
\707,  Clement  xi.  ventured  to  excommunicate  Joseph  II. 


Bull ''  III  Ccena  Dom in /. "  387 

and  all  liis  adherents  on  the  strength  of  this  Bull,  for 
his  proceedings  ahout  Parma  and  Piacenza,  over  which 
Eome  claimed  rights  of  suzerainty;  but  the  Emperor 
strenuously  resisted,  and  the  Pope  had  to  yield.  "When, 
still  later,  in  1768,  Clement  xiii.  once  again  invaded  the 
sovereign  rights  of  the  Duke  of  Parma  hy  excommuni- 
cation, it  caused  a  general  commotion  in  the  Catholic 
States.  Even  so  rigid  a  Catholic  as  Maria  Theresa 
energetically  repulsed  the  Papal  encroachments  from 
Austrian  Lombardy,  and  forbade  the  Bull  being  acted 
upon,  remarking  in  her  edict  that  it  contained  decisions 
unsuited  to  the  priestly  character,  wholly  incapable  of 
justification,  and  very  prejudicial  to  the  royal  power. 
As  this  Bull  was  annually  published  in  Eome  on 
Maundy-Thursday  for  200  years,  the  ambassadors  of 
the  Catholic  Powers  who  were  present  could  each  time 
report  that  their  Sovereigns  and  Governments,  who  did 
not  allow  the  Papal  claims  to  be  carried  out  in  practice, 
had  been  excommunicated  on  that  day.  And  if  it  has 
ceased  to  be  read  out  on  Holy  Thursday,  as  before, 
since  Clement  xiv.'s  time,  still  it  is  always  treated,  as 
Cretineau-Joly  states,  in  the  Eoman  tribunals  and  con- 
gregations, as  having  legal  force. 

It  was  wholly  inconsistent  with  the   character  and 


388  Papal  Infallibility  form 21  lized  : 

objects  of  the  Jesuit  Order  to  acquiesce  in  any  half- 
and-half  views  on  the  question  of  Papal  infallibility,  or, 
like  the  older  infallibilists  from  St.  Thomas  to  Cajetan, 
to  oscillate  between  the  possibility  of  an  heretical  Pope 
and  the  duty  of  unconditional  submission  to  his  deci- 
sions. The  Jesuit  sees  the  perfection  of  piety  in  the 
renunciation  of  one's  own  judgment,  the  passive  sur- 
render of  intelligence  and  will  alike  to  those  whom  he 
recognises  as  his  rulers.  The  sacrifice  of  one's  own 
understanding  to  that  of  another  man  is,  according  to 
the  teaching  of  the  Order,  the  noblest  and  most  accept- 
able sacrifice  a  Christian  can  offer  to  God.^  The  Jesuit 
who  is  entering  upon  his  novitiate  is  at  once  admo- 
nished to  quench  the  light  of  his  understanding  so  far 
as  it  may  interfere  with  blind  obedience.  He  is  there- 
fore to  be  tempted  by  the  novice-master  as  God  tempted 
Abraham.^  In  the  Exercises  it  is  inculcated  that  if 
the  Church  decides  anything  to  be  black  which  to  our 
eyes  looks  white,  we  must  say  that  it  is  black.^  The 
Order   considers   itself   the   most   exact   copy   of   the 

1  "  Obedientia  turn  in  executione,  turn  in  voluntate,  turn  in  intellectu  sit 
in  nobis  semper  omni  ex  parte  perfecta  omnia  justa  esse  nobis  persuadendo, 
omnem  sententiam  ac  judicium  nostrum  contrarium  caeca  quadam  obedi- 
entia Sihnegan(lo."—Instit.  Soc.  Jesu  (Prague,  1757),  i.  408.  Here  come  the 
well-known  comparisons  of  a  corpse  and  of  a  staff. 

2  Instit.  i.  376.  ^  Excrcit.  iSpirit.  (ed.  Keg.  1644),  pp.  290,  291. 


The  Jesitiis.  3S9 

ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  the  General  being  for  it  what 
the  Pope  is  for  the  whole  Church.^  As  the  Jesuit 
obeys  his  General,  every  Christian  should  obey  the 
Pope — as  blindly,  and  with  as  complete  a  sacrifice  of 
his  own  judgment. 

Every  Jesuit  therefore  must  be  the  advocate  of  the 
extremest  absolutism  in  the  Church.  In  his  eyes  every 
restriction  is  an  abomination,  every  legal  ordinance 
attempting  to  maintain  itself  against  any  one  arbitrary 
act  of  the  one  almighty  lord  and  master  is  an  assault 
on  him,  and  matter  of  high  treason.  When  the  Pope 
speaks  on  a  doctrinal  question  every  one  must  sacrifice 
his  understanding  and  submit  blindly,  and  first  of  all 
the  bisho23S,  singly  or  in  union,  as  patterns  to  their 
flocks.  And  yet  this  is  but  little ;  the  Jesuit,  as  the 
most  perfect  being,  makes  the  offering  twice.  He  first 
sacrifices  his  judgment  to  the  Pope,  and  secondly  to  his 
General.  For,  according  to  the  notion  which  had 
haunted  some  minds  previously,  but  was  first  reduced 
to  consistency  by  the  Jesuits,  and  expressed  by  Cardinal 
Pallavicini,  the  collective  Church  is  a  body,  inanimate 
wdien  alone  and  without  the  Pope,  but  informed  by  the 

1  "In  hac  religione  quse  hierarchiam  ecclesiasticam  Tnaxime  iniitatur." 
— Suarez,  Be  Rd.  Soc.  Jesu,  pp.  629,  725. 


3 90  Papal  Infallibility  formulized : 

Pope  witli  a  soul.-^  To  this  soul  therefore,  i.e.,  to  the 
Pope,  belongs  dominion  over  the  whole  Christian  world ; 
he  is  its  monarch  and  lord,  and  his  authority  is 
the  foundation,  the  uniting  bond  and  moving  intelli- 
gence of  all  ecclesiastical  government.^  And  Gregory 
XIV.,  in  his  Bull  of  1591,  recognised  the  pre-eminence 
of  the  Jesuit  Order  as  an  excellent  instrument,  which, 
from  the  despotic  power  of  its  General,  can  the  more 
easily  be  applied  to  various  purposes  by  the  Pope. 

The  Papal  system,  when  raised  to  this  level,  displays 
itself  with  a  perfection  and  consistency  even  Trionfo 
and  Peiayo  had  not  conceived  of.  The  absolutists  of 
the  fourteenth  century  had  not  yet  risen  to  the  idea  of 
the  whole  Christian  world  having  but  one  thinking, 
knowing,  and  willing  soul,  and  that  soul  the  Pope. 
Such  a  notion  could  only  be  formed  in  the  minds  of 
men  who  had  grown  up  under  the  discipline  of  the 
Holy  Office. 

Bellarmine  further  developed  the  ideas  of  Cajetan,  in 
which  he  generally  concurs,  but  he  rejects  decisively 
Cajetan's  hypothesis  of  an  heretical  Pope  being  deposed 

1  "  Non  meriterebbe  piu  la  Chiesa  nome  di  Chiesa,  cioe  di  Conga-egazione, 
mentre  fosse  disgi'egata  per  tante  membra  senza  aver  I'unita  di  un  anima 
che  le  inforinasse  e  le  regesse. "—<S^orm  del  Con.  di  Tr.  i.  103  (ed.  1843). 

2  lb.  i.  107. 


Bellarmiite.  391 

ipso  facto  by  the  judgment  of  God.  An  heretical  Pope 
is  legitimate  so  long  as  the  Church  has  not  deposed  him. 
If  Cajetan  said  the  Church  was  the  handmaid  of  the 
Pope,  BeUarmine  adds  that  whatever  doctrine  it  pleases 
the  Pope  to  prescribe,  the  Church  must  receive ;  there 
can  be  no  question  raised  about  proving  it ;  she  must 
blindly  renounce  all  judgment  of  her  own,  and  firmly 
believe  that  all  the  Pope  teaches  is  absolutely  true,  all 
he  commands  absolutely  good,  and  all  he  forbids  simply 
evil  and  noxious.  Por  the  Pope  can  as  little  err  in 
moral  as  in  dogmatic  questions.  Nay,  he  goes  so  far 
as  to  maintain  that  if  the  Pope  were  to  err  by  prescrib- 
ing sins  and  forbidding  virtues,  the  Church  would  be 
bound  to  consider  sins  good  and  virtues  evil,  unless  she 
chose  to  sin  against  conscience;^  so  that  if  the  Pope 
absolve  the  subjects  of  a  prince  from  their  oath  of  alle- 
giance— which,  according  to  BeUarmine,  he  has  a  full 
right  to  do — the  Church  must  believe  that  what  he 
has  done  is  good,  and  every  Christian  must  hold  it  a 
sin  to  remain  any  longer  loyal  and  obedient  to  his 
sovereign.  In  Bellarmine's  eyes  it  must  have  been  a 
perverse    act   of  presumption   in  Councils  to   submit 

1  "  Si  aiitem  Papa  erraret  prcecipiendo  vitia  vel  prohibendo  virtutes, 
teneretur  Ecclesia  credere  vitia  esse  bona  et  virtutes  mala,  nisi  vellet  contra 
conscientiam  peccare." — De  Rom.  Pont.  iv.  5  (ed.  Paris,  1613),  p.  456. 


392  Papal  Infallibility  formulized : 

Papal  declarations  on  matters  of  faith  to  their  own 
examination.-^ 

After  Cajetan  and  Canus,  Bellarmine  so  widely  ex- 
tended the  range  of  Papal  Infallibility,  and  so  com- 
pletely subordinated  Councils,  and  indeed  the  whole 
Church,  to  the  Pope,  that  only  one  method  of  conceiv- 
ing the  relations  between  them  was  possible.  God  does 
nothing  superfluous.  He  does  not  give  the  Christian 
world  the  infallible  authority  it  requires  tv/ice  over, 
once  to  the  whole  body  of  the  Church,  and  again  speci- 
fically to  the  Pope.  And  as  it  is  certain  that  it  belongs 
to  the  Pope,  it  follows  that  the  Church  has  not  received 
it  for  herself,  but  only  through  the  Pope,  as  an  illumi- 
nation proceeding  from  him  and  residing  in  his  person, 
— in  other  words,  that  active  infallibility  belongs  to 
the  Pope,  and  only  passive  infallibility  to  the  Church. 
Hence,  according  to  the  teaching  of  this  party,  every 
decision  of  a  Council  is  doubtful  till  it  has  received  the 
Papal  confirmation,  which  first  imparts  to  it  complete 
certainty.  On  the  other  hand,  a  Papal  utterance  cannot 
be  confirmed  by  any  earthly  power  or  community, — it 
is  in  itself  of  binding  force  and  divine  certainty. 

The  spurious  character  of  the  Isidorian  decretals  had 

^  [As,  e.g.,  St,  Leo's  Tome  on  the  Incarnation  was  examined  in  detail, 
and  finally  approved  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.     Cf.  s^qtr.  p.  72.— Tr.] 


Bella} 


viine. 


393 


been  exposed  by  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators,  and  no 
one  with  any  knowledge  of  Christian  antiquity  could 
retain  a  doubt  of  their  being  a  later  fabrication.  But 
the  growth  of  the  Papal  system  had  been  so  inseparably 
associated  with  these  forgeries,  that  the  theologians  of 
the  Curia  and  the  Jesuit  Order  were  resolved  to  defend 
them,  and  make  further  use  of  them  for  proving  the 
infallibility  and  monarchy  of  the  Popes.  The  Jesuit 
Turrianus  composed  an  elaborate  apology  for  the  decre- 
tals. Bellarmine  acknowledged  that  without  the  for- 
geries of  the  pseudo-Isidore,  and  of  the  later  anonymous 
Dominican  writers,  it  would  be  impossible  to  make  out 
even  a  semblance  of  traditional  evidence ;  the  three 
leading  authors  of  the  new  doctrine — St.  Thomas,  Caje- 
tan,  and  Melchior  Canus — had  grounded  it  exclusively 
on  these  fictions.  Moreover,  the  new  and  extremely 
vigilant  censorship  had  now  been  established,  and  hopes 
were  entertained  in  Eome  that  by  its  aid  in  suppress- 
ing and  condemning  every  work  which  pointed  out  or 
admitted  that  these  testimonies  were  spurious,  their 
authority  and  influence  might  be  upheld. 

Bellarmine  then  made  copious  use  of  the  Isidorian 
fictions.  To  his  mind,  enlightened  by  these  letters  of 
the  earliest  Popes,  it  is  abundantly  clear  that  all  the 


394         Papal  Infallibility  forniulized : 

principles  of  the  Papal  system  were  in  full  bloom  in  the 
first  and  second  centuries  of  the  Church,  that  Christen- 
dom already  formed  an  absolute  monarchy,  and  that 
even  then  the  Popes  had  exempted  the  clergy  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  civil  courts.-^  St.  Thomas's  favourite  wit- 
ness, the  spurious  Cyril,  is  also  an  invaluable  authority 
with  Bellarmine,  and  he  thinks  the  Greek  text  exists, 
only  it  has  not  yet  been  discovered  and  printed.  What 
Greek  testimonies  for  Papal  monarchy  and  infallibility 
could  have  been  cited  from  the  first  thousand  years  of 
Church  history  if  all  the  forged  or  corrupted  passages 
had  been  set  aside  ? 

It  is  impossible  to  maintain  the  entire  good  faith  and 
sincerity  of  Bellarmine,  for  such  blind  credulity  would 
be  inconceivable  in  a  man  like  him,  the  more  so  as 
Eishton  states  that  he  is  reported  to  have  said  in  his 
lectures  at  Ptome  that  he  considered  the  Isidorian 
decretals  spurious  in  spite  of  Turrianus's  defence  f  and 
in  fact,  in  a  moment  of  forgetfulness,  he  has  distinctly 
hinted,  in  his  great  work  on  the  Pope,  his  disbelief  in 
their  genuineness.^     But  of  course  the  most  transparent 

1  Cf.  especially  Be  Rom.  Pont.  i.  2.  c.  14. 

2  Colloq.  Retinoid,  cum  Harto.  p.  94. 

3  De  P^om.  Pont.  ii.  14,  in  speaking  of  the  second  epistle  of  Calixtiis  and 
Pius.     He  says  he  dares  not  affirm  that  they  are  undoubtedly  genuine. 


Bcllarmine.  395 

fictions  were  welcome  to  liim  if  they  served  the  great 
end  of  supporting  the  ■universal  monarchy  of  the  Pope. 
Even  Pope  Innocent's  letter  excommunicating  the  Em- 
peror Arcadius  was  accredited,  and  the  legend  of  the 
Popes  appointing  the  German  Electors  was  expressly 
vindicated.  This  dishonesty  is  shown  again  in  his 
attempts  to  get  rid  of  the  fact  he  was  perfectly  ac- 
quainted with,  that  the  whole  Church,  with  all  univer- 
sities and  theologians  of  any  weight  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  had  rejected  the  Papal  system  in  its  two  lead- 
ing principles  of  absolute  monarchy  and  infallibility. 
He  knew  from  the  writings  of  Pius  ii.  (^neas  Silvius) 
that  in  his  time  the  superiority  of  Councils  was  the 
dominant  view;^  yet  he  spares  no  pains  to  make  his 
readers  believe  that  this  doctrine  was  represented  only 
by  two  isolated  theologians,  who  were  universally  con- 
demned. 

It  seems  to  have  been  really  believed  in  Eome  that 
the  Curia,  with  the  help  of  the  Inquisition,  which  had 
been  more  effectively  organized  since  Paul  v.'s  time,  and 
the  Index  loroliihitorum  Lihrorum,  could  again  suppress 

^  Jlist.  Cone.  Basil,  p.  773  :  "  Illud  impi'imis  cnpio  notum,  quod 
Romanum  Papam  omiies,  qui  aliquo  uumero  sunt,  Concilio  subjiciunt." 
Only  some,  "  sive  avidi  gloria?,  sive  quod  adulando  i^rcemia  expectant," 
then  defended  the  opposite  opinion,  according  to  ^neas  Silvius. 


39^         Papal  Infallibility  for  miUized : 

criticism  and  Churcli  history,  or  at  least  keep  the  mass 
of  the  clergy  in  ignorance  of  them.  The  Index  was  just 
then  so  rigorously  worked  that  scholars  were  reduced 
to  despair,  and  many  had  to  abandon  their  theological 
studies.  In  Germany,  matters  had  come  to  such  a  pass, 
under  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits  in  1599,  that  Catho- 
lics had  to  give  up  studying  altogether,  for  they  could 
no  longer  venture  to  use  lexicons,  compendiums,  or 
indexes."^  Even  the  bishops  were  forbidden  to  read  any 
book  condemned  at  Eome ;  they  too  were  to  be  kept  in 
ignorance  of  the  true  state  of  things  on  so  many  points 
which  had  been  now  cleared  up.  The  publication  of 
works  revealing  the  very  different  condition  of  the 
Church  and  the  Eoman  See  in  earlier  days,  like  the 
Liber  Diurnus  and  Agnellus'  History  of  the  Bishops  of 
Eavenna,  was  forbidden  under  the  severest  penalties, 
and  impressions  of  them  already  in  print  were  destroyed. 
This  explains  how  it  was  that  in  the  new  edition  of 
the  Breviary  a  whole  series  of  Popes  of  the  first  three 
centuries  was  introduced,  with  proper  offices  and  lec- 
tions, of  whom  no  one  knew  anything,  and  who  have 
left  no  trace  behind  them,  who  are  found  in  none  of  the 

1  Jodocus  Graes  wrote  to  Baronius,  "  Praeter  infinitos  alios  libros  neque 
Lexico  aut  Thesauro  aut  Indice  aliquo  tute  licet  uti," — See  Brief e  des  Car- 
dinals, i.  474  (ed.  Alberic.  Rom.  1759). 


Corncp lions  of  Breviary.  397 

ancient  martyrologies,  and  were  taken  no  particular 
notice  of  in  Rome  for  1500  years.  The  only  ante- 
Xicene  Popes  in  the  ancient  -unreformed  Breviaries 
were  Clement,  Urban,  Marcus,  and  Marcellus.  But 
Bellarmine  and  Baronius  introduced  into  the  new  Bre- 
viary, under  Clement  viii.,  Popes  Zephyrinus,  Soter, 
Cains,  Pius,  Calixtus,  Anacletus,  Pontianus,  and  Eva- 
ristus,  with  lections  taken  from  the  pseudo-Isidorian 
decretals.  The  older  lections,  taken  from  the  legends, 
were  even  turned  out  to  make  room  for  the  pseudo- 
Isidorian,  and  the  clergy  were  obliged  to  nourish  their 
devotion  on  the  reading  of  such  fables  as  that  without 
the  Pope  no  Council  could  be  held,  that  he  is  the  sole 
judge  of  all  bishops,  that  no  clergyman  can  be  cited 
before  a  civil  court,  and  the  like.  And  Cardinal  Baro- 
nius, the  author  of  the  Annals,  co-operated  in  this 
work,  although  he  had  there  spoken  with  indignation 
of  the  fraud  of  the  pseudo-Isidore. 

The  new  Breviary,  moreover,  was  mutilated  as  well 
as  interpolated.  The  name  of  Pope  Honorius  was  struck 
out  of  the  lection  for  Leo  ii.'s  feast,  in  the  passage 
where  his  condemnation  by  the  sixth  GEcumenical 
Council  had  been  related,  for  since  the  Popes  wanted 
to  be  infallible,  this  inconvenient  fact  ought  at  least  to 


398         Papal  Infallibility  for  imdized : 

be  obliterated  from  tlie  memory  of  the  clergy.-'  Even 
the  fable  of  the  apostasy  of  Pope  Marcellinus  and  the 
Synod  of  Sinuessa  was  now  for  the  first  time  incor- 
porated in  full  into  the  Breviary,  in  order  to  keep  con- 
stantly before  the  eyes  of  bishops  and  priests  that  dar- 
ling maxim,  in  support  of  which  so  many  fictions  had 
already  been  invented  at  Eome,  that  no  Council  can 
judge  a  Pope.  Then  the  word  "  souls  "  had  to  be  ex- 
punged from  the  Missal  and  Breviary  in  the  collect  for 
the  feast  of  St.  Peter's  Chair.  It  was  now  held  scan- 
dalous at  Eome,  that  the  ancient  Eoman  Church  should 
have  restricted  Peter's  power  of  binding  to  souls  only, 
whereas  the  full  right  was  claimed  for  the  Pope  to 
bind  bodies  also,  and  to  put  them  to  death.^  One  of 
these  enrichments  of  the  Breviary  was  the  putting 
Satan's  words  to  our  Lord  in  the  Temptation,  "  I  will 
give  thee  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,"  into  the 
mouth  of  Christ,  who  is  made   to    address   them    to 


^  The  Breviaries  we  have  compared  are  a  Eoman  edition  printed  at  Venice 
in  1489,  the  Augsburg  Breviary  printed  in  Venice  in  1519,  and  the  new  re- 
formed edition  printed  at  Antwerp  in  1719. 

^  "  Deus,  qui  B.  Petro  .  .  .  anivias  ligandi  et  solvendi  pontificium  tra- 
didisti"  (Jan.  18,  Fest.  Cath.  S.  Petr.)  "Animas"  \^  now  sti'uck  out. 
In  tlie  old  Eoman  missal  of  the  eleventh  century,  edited  by  Azavedo  in 
1754,  it  occurs  at  p.  188.  Bellarmine  maintained  that  the  reformers  of  the 
Breviary  had  mutilated  this  collect  under  Divine  inspiration,  itc^j?.  ad  Ep. 
de  Monit.  contr.  Venet.  resp.  ad  3.  prop. 


Mar  tyro  logy  corrupted.  399 


Peter.-^  These  forgeries  and  mutilations  in  the  interest 
of  the  Papal  system  were  so  astonishing,  that  the  Vene- 
tian Marsiglio  thought  in  course  of  time  no  faith  would 
be  reposed  in  any  documents  at  all,  and  so  the  Church 
would  be  undermined.^ 

Thus  Baronius  and  Bellarmine  worked  together  to 
pour  out  a  new  stream  of  inventions  and  corruptions  of 
history,  in  the  interest  of  the  Papal  system,  from  Piome, 
over  the  countries  and  Churches  of  the  West  which  had 
retained  their  allegiance  to  her,  or  had  been  forcibly 
reclaimed.  Besides  his  Annals,  which  contain  a  vast 
repertory  of  spurious  passages  and  fictions,  Baronius 
availed  himself  for  this  purpose  of  his  commission  to 
re-edit  the  Eoman  martyrology.  His  object  here  was 
to  attest  the  fables  that  Peter,  as  bishop  of  Eome,  had 
sent  out  bishops  to  the  cities  of  the  West,  and  that  thus 
Eome  was  strictly  the  Mother  Church  of  all  the  rest.  It 
was  merely  stated,  for  instance,  in  the  older  editions  of 
the  Eoman  martyrology,  for  August  5,  that  JMemmius 
was  the  first  bishop  in  Chalons.  Baronius  made  him 
into  a  Eoman  citizen  whom  St.  Peter  had  himself  con- 
secrated for  that  See.    So  again  with  Julian  of  Le  ]\Ians, 


1  Brev.  Rom.  Fest  Petr,  et  Pauli  resp.  ad  lect.  5. 

2  Defens.  contr.  Bellann.  c.  6. 


400  Papal  Infallibility  foinn  ulized : 

on  January  2  7.  Baronius  knew  what  the  ancient  Eoman 
martyrology  was  ignorant  of,  that  St.  Peter  had  conse- 
crated him  to  that  See.  His  treatment  of  Bishop  Diony- 
sius  of  Paris  is  still  more  audacious.  The  oldest  accounts, 
which  were  well  known  to  him,  represented  Dionysius 
as  first  preaching  in  Gaul  after  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  but  Baronius  relates  that  he  was  first  conse- 
crated bishop  of  Athens  by  the  Apostle  Paul,  and  after- 
wards sent  from  Eome  by  Pope  Clement  as  bishop  to 
Gaul.  And  thus  two  points  were  gained  for  Eome : 
first,  it  was  proved  that  the  Pope  could  remove  a 
bishop  appointed  even  by  the  apostle  Paul;  and, 
secondly,  that  Paris  was  the  immediate  spiritual  daugh- 
ter of  Eome.  And  as  with  interpolations  and  inven- 
tions, so  it  fared  with  criticism  at  Eome.  Baronius 
and  Bellarmine  pronounced  all  documents  concerning 
the  sixth  Council  fabricated  or  falsified  which  men- 
tioned the  condemnation  of  Pope  Honorius. 

It  is  clear  that  within  a  few  decades  after  the  spread 
of  the  Jesuit  Order,  the  Infallibility  hypothesis  had  made 
immense  strides.  The  Jesuits  had  from  the  first  made  it 
their  special  business  to  suppress  the  spirit  of  historical 
criticism,  and  the  investigation  of  Church  history.  They 
had  rivalled  one  another  in  taking  under  their  charge 


Martyrology  corrupted,  401 

the  psenclo-Isidorian  decretals,  as  well  as  botli  the 
earlier  and  later  Eoman  fabrications.  Thus  Maldonatus, 
Suarez,  Gretser,  Possevin,  Valentia,  and  others.  That 
same  Turrianus,  who  expressly  defended  the  decretals, 
had  come  to  the  aid  of  the  Eoman  system  with  fresh 
patristic  forgeries,  for  which  he  appealed  to  manuscripts 
no  human  eye  had  seen.  At  the  same  time  the  Jesuit 
Alfonsus  Pisanus  composed  a  purely  apocryphal  history 
of  the  Nicene  Council,  adapted  simply  to  the  exaltation 
of  Papal  authority.  Others,  lil^e  Bellarmine,  Delrio, 
and  Halloix,  defended  the  writings  of  the  pseudo- 
Dionysius  as  genuine ;  Peter  Canisius  produced  forged 
letters  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

But  the  chief  affair  was  the  maintenance  of  the 
authority  of  the  Isidorian  decretals,  Gratian,  and  the 
forgeries  accepted  by  St.  Thomas.  For  a  long  while  no 
one  in  the  Catholic  Church  dared  to  expose  the  latter. 
French  scholars  were  the  first,  about  1660,  to  tell  the 
truth  about  them.  Gratian's  Decretum  had  gained  new 
authority  through  the  revision  and  correction  ordered  by 
the  Popes,  in  the  course  of  which  many  forgeries  must 
doubtless  have  been  detected.  The  pseudo-Isidore  was 
still  for  a  long  time  protected  by  the  Index.  When 
the  famous  canonist,  Contius,  brought  forward  the  evi- 

20 


402         Papal  Infallibility  for  mulized : 

dence  of  its  spuriousness,  the  Preface  in  which  this  is 
contained  was  suppressed  by  the  censorship.  On  the 
appearance  of  the  famous  work  of  Blondel,  which  com- 
pletely dissected  the  pseudo-Isidore,  the  last  doubts 
about  the  true  nature  of  the  fraud  were  exploded.  But 
it  too  was  placed  on  the  Index.  About  the  time  of  the 
Declaration  of  1682/  the  Spanish  Benedictine,  Aguirre, 
made  the  last  attempt  worth  mentioning  to  rehabilitate 
the  pseudo-Isidore.  It  could  now  no  longer  be  denied 
that  with  this  forgery  disappeared  the  whole  historical 
foundation  of  the  Papal  system  for  any  one  acquainted 
with  history.  Aguirre  was  rewarded  with  a  cardinal's 
hat.  But  in  the  course  of  the  eighteenth  century  it 
came  to  be  perceived  at  Eome  that  it  was  impossible  to 
maintain  any  longer  the  genuineness  of  this  compila- 
tion, and  thus  at  last  the  fraud  was  admitted  in  the 
answer  given  by  Pius  vi.,  in  1789,  to  the  demands  of 
the  German  archbishops.  In  recent  times  the  Jesuits 
in  Paris  have  gone  still  further.  Father  Regnon  now 
confesses  that  "  the  impostor  really  gained  his  end,  and 
altered  the  whole  discipline  of  the  Church  as  he  desired, 
but  did  not  hinder  the  universal  decay.  God  blesses 
no  fraud  ;  the  false  decretals  have  done  nothing  but 

1  [The  Declaration  of  the  French  clergy  containing  the  Four  Galilean 
Articles.— Tr.] 


Definitions  **  ex  cathedra!^  403 

mischief."  ^     The  crucial  importance  of  this  admission  - 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  understood  in  the  Order. 

One  difficulty  resulted  from  the  formulization  of  the 
doctrine  of  Infallibility,  for  the  solution  of  which  a 
variety  of  hypotheses  have  been  invented,  without  any 
unanimity  among  theologians  in  accepting  some  one  of 
them  being  secured.  Every  theologian,  on  closer  in- 
spection, found  Papal  decisions  which  contradicted  other 
doctrines  laid  down  by  Popes  or  generally  received  in 
the  Church,  or  which  appeared  to  him  doubtful ;  and  it 
seemed  impossible  to  declare  all  these  to  be  products 
of  an  infallible  authority.  It  became  necessary,  there- 
fore, to  specify  some  distinctive  marks  by  which  a 
really  infallible  decision  of  a  Pope  might  be  recognised, 
or  to  fix  certain  conditions  in  the  absence  of  which  the 
pronouncement  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  infallible.  And 
thus,  since  the  sixteenth  century,  there  grew  up  the 
famous  distinction  of  Papal  decisions  promulgated  ex 
cathedra,  and  therefore  dogmatically,  and  Avithout  any 
possibility  of  error. 

The  distinction  between  a  judgment  pronounced  ex 
cathedra  and  a  merely  occasional  or  casual  utterance 
is,  indeed,  a  perfectly  reasonable  one,  not  only  in  the 

1  Etudes  de  Thiol.,  par  les  PP.  Jesuites  d  Paris,  Nov.  1866. 


404         Papal  Infallibility  fo7n7titlized : 

case  of  the  Pope,  but  of  any  bishop  or  professor.  In 
other  words,  every  one  whose  office  it  is  to  teach  can, 
and  will  at  times,  speak  off-hand  and  loosely  on  dogmatic 
and  ethical  questions,  whereas,  in  his  capacity  of  a  pub- 
lic and  official  teacher,  he  pronounces  deliberately,  and 
with  serious  regard  to  the  consequences  of  his  teaching. 
ISTo  reasonable  man  will  pretend  that  the  remarks  made 
by  a  Pope  in  conversation  are  definitions  of  faith.  But 
beyond  this  the  distinction  has  no  meaning.  When  a 
Pope  speaks  publicly  on  a  point  of  doctrine,  either  of 
his  own  accord,  or  in  answer  to  questions  addressed  to 
him,  he  has  spoken  ex  catlicclrd,  for  he  was  questioned 
as  Pope,  and  successor  of  other  Popes,  and  the  mere 
fact  that  he  has  made  his  declaration  publicly  and  in 
writing  makes  it  an  ex  cathedra  judgment.  This 
holds  good  equally  of  every  bishop.  The  moment 
any  accidental  or  arbitrary  condition  is  fixed  on  which 
the  ex  cathedrd  nature  of  a  Papal  decision  is  to  de- 
pend, we  enter  the  sphere  of  the  private  crotchets  of 
theologians,  such  as  are  wont  to  be  devised  simply  to 
meet  the  difficulties  of  the  system.  Of  such  notions, 
one  is  as  good  as  another ;  they  come  and  go,  and  are 
afterwards  noted  down.  It  is  just  as  if  one  chose  to  say 
afterwards  of  a  physician  who  had  been  consulted,  and 


Decisions  ''  ex  cathedra r  405 

had  given  his  opinion  on  a  disease,  that  he  had  formed 
his  diagnosis  or  prescribed  his  remedies  as  a  private 
person,  and  not  as  a  physician.  As  soon,  therefore,  as 
limitations  are  introduced,  and  the  dogmatic  judgments 
of  the  Popes  are  divided  into  two  classes,  the  ex  cathe- 
drd  and  the  personal  ones,  it  is  obvious  that  the  sole 
ground  for  this  arbitrary  distinction  lies  in  the  fact  that 
there  are  sure  to  be  some  inconvenient  decisions  of 
Popes  which  it  is  desirable  to  except  from  the  privilege 
of  infallibility  generally  asserted  in  other  cases.  Thus, 
for  instance,  Orsi  maintains  that  Honorius  composed 
the  dogmatic  letter  he  issued  in  reply  to  the  Eastern 
Patriarchs,  and  which  was  afterwards  condemned  as 
heretical  by  the  sixth  (Ecumenical  Council,-^  only  as  "  a 
private  teacher,"  but  the  expression  doctor  'privatus,  when 
used  of  a  Pope,  is  like  talking  of  wooden  iron.  Others, 
like  Gonet,  have  pronounced  the  decision  addressed  by 
Mcolas  I.  to  the  Bulgarian  Church,  that  baptism  admi- 
nistered simply  in  the  name  of  Jesus  is  valid,  to  be  a 
judgment  given  by  him  as  a  private  person  only.^ 

Several  theologians  said  that  for  the  Pope  to  be  infal- 
lible, he  must  understand  something-  of  the  tinners  he  is 


1  [Cf.  sxipr.  p.  74.] 

2  Cursus  Theol.  Disput.  I.  No.  105. 


4o6         Papal  Ijifallibility  formulized : 

to  pronounce  sentence  upon  infallibly,  and  it  must 
therefore  be  made  a  condition  of  his  infallibility  that 
he  should  first  have  been  duly  informed  about  the 
matter  in  hand,  and  should  have  consulted  bishops  and 
theologians.  "  I'or  it  is  notorious/'  said  the  Spaniard 
Alphonsus  de  Castro,  "  that  many  of  the  Popes  knew 
nothing  of  grammar,  not  to  speak  of  the  Bible.  But  one 
cannot  decide  on  dogma  without  a  knowledge  of  the 
Bible," ^  That  is  to  say,  the  Pope  is  infallible  when  he 
decides  ex  catlicclrd,  but  that  implies  that  he  should 
first  have  made  careful  inquiry,  and  have  informed 
himself,  and  acquired  certainty  by  his  own  study,  and 
by  consulting  others. 

Others,  especially  Jesuits,  replied  that  the  Church 
would  be  ill  served  with  such  an  infallibility  as  this. 
Most  of  the  Popes  have  attained  this  supreme  dignity  as 
jurists  or  administrators,  or  sons  of  distinguished  families, 
and  would  no  longer  be  able,  even  if  they  wished  it,  to 
prosecute  theological  studies  at  so  advanced  an  age.  Most 
of  them  do  not  even  know  how  to  set  about  it.  The 
spiritual  gift  of  infallibility  must  be  so  regulated  as  to 
enlighten  for  the  moment  even  the  most  ignorant  Pope, 

1  "  Constat  plures  eoram  adeo  illiterates  esse  ut  gi-ammaticam  penitus 
ignorant.  Qui  fit,  ut  Sacras  literas  interpretari  possent  V'—Adversus  Bee- 
reses  (ed.  1539),  f.  8b. 


Decisions  "  ex  cathedral  407 

and  secure  him  from  any  error.  When  a  Pope  pro- 
claims a  doctrine,  when  he  decides  on  dogmatic  and 
moral  questions,  his  decision  is  final,  whether  it  be  the 
result  of  lengthened  deliberation  or  pronounced  at  once. 
The  seat  of  infallibility  is  only  in  the  innermost  work- 
shop of  his  mind.  Why  consult  others,  who  are  liable 
to  error,  while  he  is  not  ?  Why  bring  in  the  feeble  light 
of  a  few  oil-lamps,  when  he  himself  possesses  the  full 
radiance  of  the  spiritual  sunlight  streaming  from  the 
Holy  Ghost  ? 

Bellarmine  most  strictly  limited  the  Papal  prerogative 
of  dogmatic  infallibility.  He  would  know  nothing  in- 
deed of  the  concurrence  of  a  Council,  or  of  consulting 
the  episcopate  ;  only  when  the  Pope  issues  a  decree 
addressed  to  the  whole  Catholic  Church,  or  when  he 
proclaims  a  moral  law  to  the  whole  Church,  is  he  to  be 
held  infallible.^  This  limitation  seemed  rather  to  be 
framed  with  a  view  to  the  future  than  the  past,  for  no 
single  decree  of  a  Pope  addressed  to  the  whole  Church 
is  known  for  the  first  thousand  years  of  Christian  his- 
tory, and  even  after  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries 
the  Popes  usually  decided  at  Councils  on  doctrinal 
questions.    Boniface  viil's  Bull  Unam  Sandam,  in  1303, 

1  De  Fiom.  Pont.  iv.  3,  5.    So  his  fellow-Jesuit,  Eudsemon  Johannes. 


4o8         Papal  Infallibility  form  ulized : 

is  the  first  addressed  to  tlie  whole  Church.  Why  the 
Pope  sliould  be  held  fallible  when  addressing  himself  to 
a  part  of  the  Church,  but  infallible  when  he  addresses 
himself  to  the  whole,  the  Cardinal  has  omitted  to  state. 
His  opinion  therefore  has  been  almost  suffered  to  drop. 

Other  theologians  of  his  Order,  like  Tanner  and 
Compton,  assumed  that  a  Papal  decree  was  to  be  con- 
sidered ex  cathedra  and  infallible  only  when  certain 
formalities  had  been  complied  with,  when  it  had  been 
afi&xed  for  some  time  to  the  door  of  St.  Peter's,  and  in 
the  Campofiore.  But  most  were  not  satisfied  with  this. 
Some,  like  Duval  and  Cellot,  maintained  that  the  Pope 
was  only  infallible  when  he  anathematized  all  who  re- 
jected his  teaching.-^ 

The  general  opinion  was  that  very  little  depended 
on  such  points,  but  yet  they  could  not  make  up  their 
minds  to  affirm  an  absolute  and  simply  unconditional 
infallibility.  The  Jesuits  Prancis  Torreusis  and  Bagot 
thought  the  infallibility  of  a  Papal  decree  could  not  be 
reckoned  on  without  a  Council,  including  at  least  the 
cardinals,  prelates,  and  theologians  resident  at  Eome. 
So,  again,  Driedo,  Lupus,  and  Hosius  wanted  to  make 

1  Duval,  Be  Siipr.  R.  P.  in  Eccl.  Potest.  (Paris,  1614),  Q.  5  ;  Cellot, 
De  Hierarch.  (Rothom.  16-il),  iv.  10. 


Decisions  *'  ex  cathedra!'  409 

infallibility  dependent  at  least  on  a  Council  being  pre- 
viously consulted.  And  hence  arose  a  fresh  controversy, 
as  to  whether  the  assent  of  the  Council  were  required  for 
a  decision  ex  cathedra,  or  whether  it  were  enough  for 
the  Pope  to  hear  the  assembly,  and  then  decide  accord- 
ing to  his  own  good  pleasure.  To  make  the  assent  of 
the  Council  a  condition  were  in  fact  to  overthrow  the 
principle  of  Papal  infallibility.  Why  call  an  assembly 
of  bishops,  said  others,  when  the  cardinals  are  there  for 
that  very  purpose,  who,  as  belonging  to  the  Curia,  out- 
weigh a  whole  host  of  bishops  ?  But  then  a  new  diffi- 
culty came  in, — is  it  of  the  essence  of  an  ex  cathedra 
judgment  that  the  Pope  should  first  take  the  opinions 
of  the  whole  college  of  cardinals  ?  or  does  it  suffice,  as 
Gravina  and  Cherubini  maintain,  if  he  consults  two 
cardinals  only,  and  leaves  the  rest  unnoticed,  among 
whom  he  presumes  a  contrary  opinion  to  prevail  ?  This 
question  has  become  a  crucial  one  since  1713,  when 
Clement  xi.  issued  his  famous  Bull  Unirjenitus,  which 
he  had  drawn  np  with  the  assistance  of  two  cardinals 
only,  like-minded  with  himself  This  gave  the  Jesuits 
a  new  light  on  the  knotty  point  of  how  to  differentiate 
a  definition  of  faith  ex  cathedra.  They  seem  to  have 
perceived  that  it  was  better  to  set  aside  altogether  the 


4IO  Papal  Infallibility. 

conditions  of  a  previous  consultation  and  questioning  of 
others,  and  to  make  the  Pope  alone  the  immediate  organ 
of  the  Divine  Spirit;  but  to  introduce  two  other  limita- 
tions, viz.,  Bellarmine's,  that  his  decree  must  be  addressed 
to  the  whole  Church,  and  Cellot's,  that  he  must  anathe- 
matize all  who  dissent  from  his  teaching.  According 
to  this  doctrine,  which  is  taught  by  Perrone,-^  and  re- 
ceived by  pretty  well  the  whole  Order,  the  Pope  is  liable 
to  err  when  he  addresses  an  instruction  to  the  Prench  or 
German  Church  only,  and,  moreover,  his  infallibility 
becomes  very  questionable  w^henever  he  omits  to  de- 
nounce an  anathema  on  all  dissentients.  JMeanwhile,  as 
Perrone's  theology  has  not  obtained  the  character  of  a 
confession  of  faith  in  the  Church,  nor  even  attained 
equal  authority  with  the  Summa  of  St.  Thomas,  there 
is  no  hope  of  his  exposition  of  the  term  ex  cathedra 
forming  a  common  point  of  agreement.  And  thus, 
notwithstanding  the  immense  importance  ascribed  to  it, 
the  meaning  of  the  term  is  still  among  the  dark  and 
inexplicable  problems  of  dogmatic  theology.  It  remains 
oj^en  to  every  infallibilist  to  make  his  own  definition  of 
an  ex  cathedra  decision  for  his  own  private  use. 

1  Prceled.  Theol  (Lov.  1843),  viii.  497. 


Infallibility  of  the  Church.  4 1 1 

§  XXXII. — Infallibility  of  the  Chmxh  and  the  Po;pes 
compared. 

A  personal  infallibility  evidently  extends  far  beyond 
the  inerrancy  of  a  great  corporation,  like  the  Catholic 
Church,  or  of  a  Council  representing  it.  The  Church 
in  its  totality  is  secured  against  false  doctrine ;  it  will 
not  fall  away  from  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  and  will  not 
repudiate  the  doctrine  it  has  once  received,  and  which  has 
been  handed  down  within  it.  When  a  Council  passes 
sentence  on  doctrine,  it  thereby  gives  testimony  to  its 
truth.  The  bishops  attest,  each  for  his  own  portion  of 
the  Church,  that  a  certain  defined  doctrine  has  hitherto 
been  taught  and  believed  there ;  or  they  bear  witness 
that  the  doctrines  hitherto  believed  involve,  as  their 
logical  and  necessary  consequence,  some  truth  which 
may  not  yet  have  been  expressly  formulized.  As  to 
whether  this  testimony  has  been  rightly  given,  wdiether 
freedom  and  unbiassed  truthfulness  have  prevailed 
among  the  assembled  bishops,— on  that  point  the 
Church  herself  is  the  ultimate  judge,  by  her  acceptance 
or  rejection  of  the  Council  or  its  decision. 

Here,  therefore,  the  certainty  and  infallibility  rest 
entirely  on  the  solid  ground  of  facts.     The  Church  does 


4 1 2  Papal  Infallibility 

not  cjo  on  to  disclose  new  doctrines, — she  does  not  want 
to  create  anything,  but  only  to  protect  and  keep  the 
deposit  she  has  inherited.  The  meaning  of  a  judgment 
passed  by  the  assembled  bishops  is  simply  this, — thus 
have  our  predecessors  believed,  thus  do  we  believe, 
and  thus  will  they  that  come  after  us  believe.  A  great 
community,  a  whole  Chui»ch,  is  not  exposed  to  the 
danger  of  self- exaltation  and  presumptuous  pretensions 
to  special  Divine  illumination.  It  makes  no  attempt 
to  establish  some  particular  subjective  view  or  opinion 
of  its  own.  Being  left  to  itself,  it  naturally  keeps 
within  the  limits  of  the  traditional  faith  which  has 
been  constantly  and  everywhere  received.  But  matters 
assume  a  very  different  shape  when  a  single  indi- 
vidual is  made  the  organ  of  infallibility.  The  whole 
Church,  as  long  as  its  representatives  at  a  Council 
preserve  their  apostolic  independence,  cannot  be  forced 
or  cajoled  into  giving  a  wrong  testimony,  or  proclaim- 
ing the  view  or  doctrine  of  a  particular  school  or  party 
as  the  constant  and  universal  belief  of  all  Catholic 
Christendom  ;  but  an  individual  Pope  is  always  ex- 
posed to  the  danger  of  falling  under  the  influence  of 
sycophants  and  intriguers,  and  thus  being  forced  into 
givinfj  dosrmatic  decisions.      Advantage  is  taken  of  his 


in  its  Infliccnce  on  the  Popes.  4 1 3 

23redilection  for  some  theological  opinion,  or  for  some 
Eeligious  Order  and  its  favourite  doctrines,  or  of  his 
ignorance  of  the  history  of  dogma,  or  of  his  vanity  and 
ambition,  for  signalizing  his  x^ontificate  by  a  memorable 
decision,  and  one  supposed  to  be  in  the  interest  of  the 
Eoman  See,  and  thus  associating  his  name  with  a  great 
dogmatic  event  which  may  constitute  an  epoch  in  the 
Church.  Nor  is  anything  easier  for  a  Pope  than  to  keep 
all  contradiction  at  arm's  length ;  as  a  rule,  no  one  who  is 
not  expressly  consulted  ventures  even  to  make  any  re- 
presentation or  suggest  any  doubts  to  him.  The  flatter- 
ing conviction,  so  welcome  to  the  old  Adam,  grows  up 
easily  within  his  soul,  that  his  wishes  and  thoughts  are 
Divine  inspirations,  that  he  is  under  the  special  grace 
and  guidance  of  Heaven,  and  that  by  virtue  of  his  office 
the  fulness  of  truth  and  knowledge,  as  of  power,  is  his, 
without  effort  of  his  own.  He  will  the  more  believe, 
and  the  more  quickly  catch  at  this  idea,  the  smaller  is 
his  information  and  the  less  suspicion  or  knowledge  he 
has  of  the  doubts  and  difficulties  which  restrain  learned 
theologians  from  adopting  a  particular  doctrinal  opinion. 
And  thus  even  a  well-meaning  Pope  may  come  to  imagine 
that  he  is  far  removed  from  all  self- exaltation,  and  is 
simply  the  humble  organ  of  tlie  Holy  Ghost,  who  speaks 
thron^h  him. 


414  Papal  hifallibility 

One  of  the  Popes  whose  government  is  of  most 
inauspicious  memory,  Innocent  x.,  himself  confessed 
that,  having  been  all  his  life  engaged  in  legal  affairs 
and  processes,  he  understood  nothing  of  theology.  But 
that  did  not  hinder  him  from  originating,  by  his  con- 
demnation of  the  Five  Propositions  on  grace,  a  contro- 
versy which  lasted  above  a  century,  and  has  never 
found  a  solution.^  He  told  the  Bishop  of  Montpellier 
that  he  had  received  so  great  an  enlightenment  of  soul 
from  God,  that  the  sense  of  Holy  Writ  had  become 
clear  to  him,  and  he  had  suddenly  attained  a  compre- 
hension of  the  intricate  subtleties  of  scholasticism. 
The  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  he  expressed  it  to 
another  clergyman  (Aubigni),  had  become  palpable  to 
him.  He  needed  no  Synod,  nor  even  any  advice  of  the 
cardinals,  but  only  the  opinion  of  some  regular  clergy 
selected  by  himself  "  All  this  depends  on  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he  said  to  the  theologians  who 
had  come  to  him  from  Paris.^ 

To  speak  of  a  Pope  of  very  recent  date,  a  statesman 

1  [The  Five  Propositiors,  said  to  be  extracted  from  ZzxiS,^VL?^  Augustinus, 
and  condemned  by  Innoctnt  x.  in  1653.  His  successor,  Alexander  vir., 
pronounced  further,  that  they  were  condemned  *'in  sensu  auctoris,"  which 
gave  rise  to  a  fresh  dispute  about  infallibility  extending  to  "  dogmatic 
facts."    Clement  ix.  somewhat  modified  the  sentence. — Tr.] 

2  "Tutto  questo  dipende  dall'  inspirazione  dello  Spirito  Santo." — 
Arnauld,  (Euvres,  xxii.  p.  210. 


in  its  Influence  on  the  Popes,  415 

resident  in  Eome  related  "that  Gregory  XVL,  in  his 
naive  manner,  enjoyed  his  high  position  on  the  express 
ground  that  he  believed  by  virtue  of  it  he  must  always 
be  in  the  right.  When  Capaccini  discoursed  with  him 
on  financial  affairs,  and  neither  the  refined  and  inge- 
nious statesman  could  convince  his  master,  nor  he 
with  his  home -baked  arguments  convince  his  minister, 
Gregory  used  to  exclaim  from  time  to  time  that  he 
was  Pope,  and  could  not  err,  and  must  know  every- 
thing best."^ 

All  absolute  power  demoralizes  its  possessor.  To 
that  all  history  bears  witness.  And  if  it  be  a  spiritual 
power,  which  rules  men's  consciences,  the  danger  of  self- 
exaltation  is  only  so  much  the  greater,  for  the  posses- 
sion of  such  a  power  exercises  a  specially  treacherous 
fascination,  while  it  is  peculiarly  conducive  to  self- 
deceit, — because  the  lust  of  dominion,  when  it  has  be- 
come a  passion,  is  only  too  easily  in  this  case  excused 
under  the  plea  of  zeal  for  the  salvation  of  others.  And 
if  the  man  into  whose  hands  this  absolute  power  has 
fallen  cherishes  the  further  opinion  that  he  is  infallible, 
and  an  organ  of  the  Holy  Ghost, — if  he  knows  that  a 
decision  of  his  on  moral  and  religious  questions  will  be 

1  rolitische  Briefe  und  Charakt.  (Berlin,  1849),  p.  248. 


4 1 6  Papal  hifallibility 

received  with  tlie  general,  and,  what  is  more,  ex  animo 
submission  of  millions, — it  seems  almost  impossible  that 
his  sobriety  of  mind  should  always  be  proof  against  so  in- 
toxicating a  sense  of  power.  To  this  must  be  added  the 
notion,  sedulously  fostered  by  Eome  for  centuries,  that 
every  conclave  is  the  scene  of  the  eventual  triumph  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  who  guides  the  election  in  spite  of  the 
artifices  of  rival  parties,  and  that  the  newly  elected 
Pope  is  the  special  and  chosen  instrument  of  Divine 
grace  for  carrying  out  the  purposes  of  God  towards  the 
Church  and  the  world.  The  whole  life  of  such  a  man, 
from  the  moment  when  he  is  placed  on  the  altar  to 
receive  the  first  homage  by  the  kissing  of  his  feet,  will 
be  an  unbroken  chain  of  adorations.  Everything  is 
expressly  calculated  for  strengthening  him  in  the  belief 
that  between  himself  and  other  mortals  there  is  an  im- 
passable gulf,  and  when  involved  in  the  cloud  and  fumes 
of  a  perpetual  incense,  the  firmest  character  must  yield 
at  last  to  a  temptation  beyond  human  strength  to  resist. 
It  is  related  of  Marcel]  us  ii.  that  at  his  election  he 
was  full  of  alarm,  lest  that  should  also  happen  in  his 
case,  which  had  been  observed  in  most  of  his  prede- 
cessors, who  had  been  completely  changed  after  their 
accession,  and  had  carried  out  nothing  of  their  previous 


in  its  Injiiience  on  the  Popes.  4 1  7 

good  intentions.  So  injurious,  he  thought,  was  the  in- 
fluence on  a  Pope's  character  of  the  change  of  position, 
the  swarm  of  sycophants,  and  the  spirit  of  partisan- 
ship.^ Even  the  Jesuit  General  Oliva,  about  1G70, 
observes  that  the  character  of  the  newly  elected  Pope  is 
generally  so  deteriorated  by  his  elevation,  that  no  one 
desires  such  an  elevation  for  a  good  man,  and  no  one 
expects  that  the  very  best  cardinal  will  retain  as  Pope 
the  good  and  holy  resolutions  he  cherished  at  the  time 
of  his  accession.^ 

Cardinal  Sadolet,  who  was  his  intimate  friend,  said 
of  Clement  vii.,  that  he  had  the  Bible  constantly  in  his 
hands,  and  thus  entertained  good  resolutions,  yet  his 
pontificate  was  but  a  series  of  mistakes,  a  perpetual 
dodging  to  evade  the  Council  which  he  hated  and  feared. 
Sadolet  is  obliged  to  admit  that  Clement,  "  misled  by 
his  minister,"  departed  widely  from  his  former  charac- 
ter, and  the  goodness  of  his  nature.'^ 

Paul  IV.  (Caraffa)  before  his  election  was  a  warm 
friend  of  Church  reformation,  and  left  the  Papal  Court 
because  there  was  no  hope  of  obtaining  any  help  to- 
wards it  under  Clement  vii.     When  he  became  Pope 

1  Pollidor.  Dc  Vit.  Marcell.  II.  (Rom.  1744),  p.  132. 

2  Lettere  (Bologna,  1705),  ii.  '^14. 

•J  Hpistolce  Sculoleti,  Oviphalii  et  Sturmii  (Argentorati,  153'J),  p,  9. 

2  D 


4 1 8  Papal  Infallibility 

himself  nothinfr  was  to  be  seen  of  his  former  zeal  for 
reforming  the  Church.  At  a  time  when  almost  every 
post  brought  fresh  news  of  the  advance  of  Protestant- 
ism, he  left  the  Church  in  its  helpless  condition;  he 
did  not  so  much  as  think  of  continuing  the  Council 
which  had  for  some  years  been  suspended.  His  chief 
concerns  w^ere  the  advancement  and  enrichment  of  his 
nephews  ;  his  favourite  institution,  the  Inquisition  ;  and 
the  quarrel  with  the  two  only  champions  the  Papal  sys- 
tem then  had,  Charles  v.  and  Philip  ii.,  for  it  is  the  office 
of  the  Papacy  to  tread  under  foot  kings  and  emperors.-^ 
His  contemporary,  Onufrio  Panvinio,  paints  in  the 
most  glaring  colours  the  complete  transformation  which 
took  place  in  Pius  iv.  (John  Angelo  de  Medici,  Pope 
from  1559  to  1565).  Before  his  elevation  he  had  shown 
himself  humane,  tolerant,  beneficent,  gentle,  and  un- 
selfish ;  but  as  Pope  he  was  just  the  reverse — passionate, 
covetous,  and  jealous.  Especially  after  he  had  freed 
himself  from  the  hated  Council  of  Trent,  he  abandoned 
himself  to  vulgar  sensuality  and  lusts,  ate  and  drank 
immoderately,  became  imperious  and  crafty,  and  with- 
drew himself  from  Divine  service  in  the  chapel.^ 

1  Relaz.  di  Bernardo  Navagero,  in  Relazioni  degli  Amhasciadori  Vencti, 
vii.  380. 

2  Pauviu.  Vit.  Pantif.  ])ost  Platinam  (Colon.  1593),  pp.  463,  477.     With 


in  its  htjluence  on  the  Popes.  4 1 9 

So  was  it  afterwards  with  Innocent  x.  (Pamfili),  who 
had  previously  passed  for  a  blameless  and  honest  man, 
but  who  as  Pope  gave  the  world  the  spectacle  of  an 
administration  guided  and  made  pecuniary  capital  out 
of  by  an  imperious  and  covetous  woman,  his  sister.  So 
again  with  Alexander  vii.  (Flavio  Chigi),  who  as  Cardi- 
nal was  an  able  and  gifted  man  of  business,  but  as  Pope 
soon  let  himself  be  readily  persuaded  by  the  fawning 
Jesuit  Oliva  that  it  was  a  mortal  sin  not  to  bring  his 
nephews  to  Eome  and  make  them  rich  and  great. -^  His 
chief  care  was  to  get  rid  of  all  business,  and  lead  an 
easy  and  quiet  life.     Of  later  Popes  we  say  nothing  here. 

§  XXXIII. —  Wliat  is  meant  hj  a  Free  Cou7icil. 
The  experiences  of  the  non- Italian  bishops  at  the 
Council  of  Trent,  its  results,  which  fell  so  far  short  of 
the  reforms  desired  and  expected,  the  conduct  of  Eome 
in  strictly  prohibiting  any  explanations  or  commentaries 
on  the  decrees  of  the  Council  being  written,  and  reserv- 

this  agrees  the  statement  of  the  Venetian  ambassador  Tiepolo,  lielazioni, 
X.  171. 

1  What  has  so  often  been  observed  of  the  Popes,  that  in  audiences  and 
official  intercourse  they  had  behaved  without  any  scruple,  and  Avith  habi- 
tual dissimulation,  the  Florentine  ambassador  expresses  shortly  in  these 
words,  in  his  report  about  Alexander  vii.  :  "  We  liave  a  Pope  who  never 
speaks  a  word  of  truth."— See  the  Chronol.  Hist,  des  Papes  of  the  Bene- 
dictines of  St.  iMuur  (Paris,  1783),  p.  311. 


420  Papal  Infallibility. 

ing  to  herself  the  interpretation  of  them,  while  she 
quietly  shelved  many  of  its  most  important  decisions 
[e.g.,  on  indulgences,  and  many  others),  without  even 
any  semblance  of  carrying  them  out — all  this  led  to 
the  call  for  a  new  Council,  so  often  repeated  previously, 
being  silenced  from  that  time  forward.  In  countries 
subjected  to  the  Inquisition,  the  mere  wish  for  another 
Council  would  have  been  declared  penal,  and  have  ex- 
posed to  danger  those  who  uttered  it.  The  Eoman  See 
had  no  doubt  suffered  considerable  losses  of  privilege 
and  income  in  consequence  of  the  Tridentine  decrees, 
and  still  more  from  the  opposition  of  the  different 
Governments ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  those  decrees,  the 
activity  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  establishment  of  standing 
congregations  and  of  the  nunciatures,  which  had  been 
previously  unknown,  had  very  materially  increased  the 
power  and  influence  of  Eome.  But  at  Eome  Councils 
were  always  held  in  abomination ;  the  very  name  was 
strictly  forbidden  under  penalties  there.  When  in  the 
controversy  about  grace  in  1602  the  Molinists  spoke  of 
its  being  decided  by  a  Council,  the  Dominican  PeSa 
wrote  that  in  Eome  the  word  Council,  at  least  in  matters 
of  dogma,  was  regarded  as  sacrilegious,  and  excom- 
municated.-^ 

^  In  the  letter  in  Serry,  Hist.  Cong,  de  Grat.,  (Antwerp,  1709),  p.  270. 


Freedom  in  CotinciL  421 

And  thus  it  has  come  to  pass  that  three  centuries 
have  elapsed  without  any  earnest  desire  for  a  Council 
making  itself  heard  anywhere — a  thing  wholly  unpre- 
cedented in  the  past  history  of  the  Church.  It  is  com- 
monly taught  in  theological  manuals,  schools,  and  sys- 
tems, that  the  Councils  of  the  Church  are  not  only 
useful  but  necessary.  But  this,  like  so  much  else  in 
the  ordinary  teaching,  was  held  only  in  the  abstract. 
It  was  at  bottom  nniversally  felt  that  Councils  as  little 
fitted  into  a  Church  organized  under  an  absolute  Papal 
monarchy,  as  the  States- General  into  the  monarchy  of 
Louis  XIV.  The  most  faithfid.  interpreter  of  the  Eoman 
view  of  things,  Cardinal  Pallavicini,  put  this  feeling 
into  words,  when  he  said,  "  To  hold  another  Council 
would  be  to  tempt  God,  so  extremely  dangerous  and  so 
threatening  to  the  very  existence  of  the  Church  would 
such  an  assembly  be."  In  that  point,  he  thinks  his 
History  of  the  Council  of  Trent  will  make  the  same  im- 
pression on  the  reader  as  Sarpi's.-^  Even  National 
Synods,  he  says,  the  Popes  have  always  detested.^ 

But  the  chief  reason  why  nobody  any  longer  desired 
a  Council,  lay  in  the  conviction  that,  if  it  met,  the  first 
and  most  essential  condition,  freedom  of  deliberation 
and   voting,   would   be   wanting.      The   latest   history 

1  Storia  del  Cone,  di  Tr.  iv.  p.  331,  ed.  1813.  2  ^  p^  -4^ 


422  Papal  Infallibility. 

showed  this  as  much  as  the  theory.  In  the  Papal 
system,  which  knows  nothing  of  true  bishops  ruling 
independently  by  virtue  of  the  Divine  institution,  but 
only  recognises  subjects  and  vicars  or  officials  of  the 
Pope,  w^ho  exercise  a  power  lent  them  merely  during  his 
pleasure,  there  is  no  room  for  an  assembly  which  would 
be  called  a  Council  in  the  sense  of  the  ancient  Church.-^ 
If  the  bishops  know  the  view  and  will  of  the  Pope  on 
any  question,  it  would  be  presumptuous  and  idle  to 
vote  against  it ;  and  if  they  do  not,  their  first  duty  at 
the  Council  would  be  to  ascertain  it  and  vote  accord- 
ingly. An  oecumenical  assembly  of  the  Church  can 
have  no  existence,  properly  speaking,  in  presence  of  an 
ordinarms  ordinariorum  and  infallible  teacher  of  faith, 
though,  of  course,  the  pomp,  ceremonial,  speeches,  and 
votings  of  a  Council  may  be  displayed  to  the  gaze 
of  the  world.  And  therefore  the  Papal  legates  at 
Trent  used  at  once  to  rebuke  bishops  as  heretics  and 

1  Cardinal  de  Luca  says  {Relat.  Curice  Rom.  Diss.  iv.  n.  10),  it  is  the 
"  opinio  in  hac  Curia  recepta  "  tliat  the  Pope  is  ''  Ordinarius  Ordinariorum, 
habens  nniversurn  mundum  pro  dicecesi,"  so  that  bishops  and  archbishops 
are  only  his  "  officiales,"  or,  as  Benedict  xiv.  observes  {De  Synod.  Dioces. 
X,  14  ;  V.  7),  the  Pope  is  "  in  tota  Ecclesia  proprius  sacerdos — potest  ab 
omni  jurisdictione  episcopi  subtrahere  quamlibet  Ecclesiam."  In  Merlini's 
Beds.  Rot.  Rom.  ed.  1660  (Dec.  830),  we  read,  ''Papa  est  dominus  omnium 
beneficiorum."  In  a  word,  this  system  leaves  nothing  which  can  be  said  to 
belong  to  bishops  of  right.  The  Roman  theory  allows  the  Curia  to  rob 
them,  wholly  or  in  part,  of  their  rights,  to  hand  over  their  rights  to 
others,  etc. 


Freedom  in  Co2incil.  423 

rebels  who  ever  dared  to  express  any  view  of  their  own.^ 
Bishops  who  have  been  obliged  to  swear  "  to  maintain, 
defend,  increase,  and  advance  the  rights,  honours,  privi- 
leges, and  authority  of  their  lord  the  Pope  " — and  every 
bishop  takes  this  oath — cannot  regard  themselves,  or  be 
regarded  by  the  Christian  world,  as  free  members  of  a 
free  Council ;  natural  justice  and  equity  requires  that. 
These  men  neither  will  nor  can  be  held  responsible  for 
decisions  or  omissions  which  do  not  depend  on  them. 
There  have  certainly  been  the  weightiest  reasons  for 
holding  no  Council  for  three  hundred  years,  and  avoid- 
ing such  a  "  useless  hubbub,"  as  the  infallibilist  Car- 
dinal Orsi  calls  Councils.^ 

Complete  and  real  freedom  for  every  one,  freedom 
from  moral  constraint,  from  fear  and  intimidation,  and 
from  corruption,  belongs  to  the  essence  of  a  Council. 
An  assembly  of  men  bound  in  conscience  by  their  oaths 

^  Numberless  instances  of  this  may  be  found  in  the  letters  of  the  Spanish 
ambassador  Vargas,  and  the  autobiography  of  Bishop  Martin  Perez  de 
Ayalas,  in  the  appendix  to  Villanueva,  Vida  Liter,  ii.  420. 

2  Bossuet  has  brought  forward  the  question,  so  often  asked  and  never 
answered  :  to  Avhat  purpose  were  so  many  Councils  held  in  the  Church,  with 
po  much  trouble  and  expense,  if  the  infallible  Popes  could  have  finally  set- 
tled every  doctrinal  controversy  by  a  single  utterance  of  their  own?  To 
this  Orsi  answers,  and  we  have  his  reply  in  Count  de  Maistre's  trans- 
lation, "  Ne  le  demandez  point  aux  Papes  qui  n'ont  jamais  imagine  qu'il 
futbesoin  de  conciles  oecumeniques  pour  reprimer  (les  heresies  d'Arius,  etc.) 
Demandez  le  aux  cnipereurs  qui  ont  absolument  voulu  les  conciles,  qui  les 
ont  convoques,  qui  ont  exige  I'assentiment  des  Papes,  qui  ont  excite  inutile- 
merit  tout  ce  fracas  dans  I'eglise." 


424  Papal  Infallibility. 

to  consider  tlie  maintenance  and  increase  of  Papal 
power  their  main  object/ — men  living  in  fear  of  incur- 
ring the  displeasure  of  the  Curia,  and  with  it  the 
charge  of  perjury,  and  the  most  burdensome  hindrances 
in  the  discharge  of  their  office— cannot  certainly  be 
called  free  in  all  those  questions  which  concern  the 
authority  and  claims  of  the  See  of  Eome,  and  very  few 
at  most  of  the  questions  that  would  have  to  be  dis- 
cussed at  a  Council  do  not  come  under  this  category. 
None  of  our  bishops  have  sworn  to  make  the  good  of 
the  Church  and  of  religion  the  supreme  object  of  their 
actions  and  endeavours ;  the  terms  of  the  oath  provide 
only  for  the  advantage  of  the  Curia.  How  the  oath  is 
understood  at  Eome,  and  to  what  reproaches  a  bishop 
exposes  himself  who  once  chooses  to  follow  his  own 
conviction  against  the  tradition  of  the  Curia,  there  are 
plenty  of  examples  to  show. 

In  Eimini  and  Seleucia  (359),  at  Ephesus  (449)  and 
at  Yienne  (1312),  and  at  many  other  times,  even  at 
Trent,  the.  results  of  a  want  of  real  freedom  have  been 
displayed.     In  early  times,  when  the  Popes  were  as  yet 

1  The  mere  important  passages  of  the  oath  are  :— '''  Jura,  b.onores,  privi- 
legia  et  auctoritatem  S.  Rom.  Ecclesite  Domini  nostri  Papre  et  sucessorum 
praidictorum  conservare,  defendere,  augere  et  promovere  curabo.  .  .  .  Re- 
guhxs  sanctorum  Patrum,  decreta,  ordinationes  seu  dispositiones,  reserva- 
tiones,  provisiones  et  mandata  apostolica  totis  viribus  observabo  et  faciam 
ab  abis  observari." 


Freedom  in  Coitncil.  425 

in  no  position  to  exercise  compulsion  or  intimidation 
upon  Synods,  it  was  the  Emperors  wlio  sometimes 
trenched  too  closely  on  this  freedom.  But  from 
Gregory  vii/s  time  the  weight  of  Papal  power  has 
pressed  ten  times  more  heavily  upon  them  than  ever 
did  the  Imperial  authority.  With  abundant  reason  were 
the  two  demands  urged  throughout  half  Europe  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  in  the  negotiations  about  the  Council, 
— first,  that  it  should  not  be  held  in  Eome,  or  even  in 
Italy,  and  secondly,  that  the  bishops  should  be  absolved 
from  their  oath  of  obedience.  The  recently  proclaimed 
Council  is  to  be  held  not  only  in  Italy,  but  in  Eome 
itself,  and  abeady  Jt  has  ])eHn  aai*oiiDjce.d".that,  as  the 
sixth  Lateran  Council,  it  will  adhere  faithfully  to  the 
fifth.-^  That  is  qu-te  enougli — *.t  meaas  thiri,  that  what- 
ever course  the  Synod  may  take,  one  quality  can  never 
be  predicated  of  it,  aaaiely,  that  it  has  been  a  really 
free  CounciL 

Theologians  and  canonists  declare  that  without  com- 
plete freedom  the  decisions  of  a  Council  are  not  bind- 
ing, and  the  assembly  is  only  a  pseudo-Synod.  Its 
decrees  may  have  to  be  corrected. 

1  [Cf.  suj)r.  pp.  197, 198,  348.] 


2  E 


EDINBURGH  :   T.    CONSTABLE, 
PRINTER  TO  THE  QUEEN,  AND  TO  THE  UNIVERSITY. 


COLUMBIA   UNIVER^T-r 

''^is  book  is 


^,  ^^^    .  jiTi  .  «'taiD 


e)^G 


T>e^\ 


FEB  «    1933