TORONTO *L SHERATON MEMORIAL LIBRARY EASTER, 1906 Shelf No. Register No. fl PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. BY THE SAME AUTHOR. THE LIFE OF VALENTIN ALBERTI, D.D., Professor of Divinity, six times Rector of the University of Leipzig (1635-1697.) With Portrait. Small 4to. Printed on hand made paper with wide margin, xx. 128 pages. Cloth, bevelled edges. 55. "Alberti was an active and vigorous controversialist, and was engaged in contests with Puffendorf, Bossuet, Bellarmine, and other theologians and philosophers of note." Church Quarterly Review. "In every way a scholar worthy to be kept in memory. The work is well got up in the antique style, with an admirable portrait, and deserves a niche in every theological library." Record. IGNATIAN DIFFICULTIES AND HISTORIC DOUBTS. Letters to the Very Rev. the Dean of Peter borough. 2 parts. 8vo. 25 and 12 pp. Sewed, is. 6d. " It would be difficult to add to the argumentative force or the felicitous expression of the argument. Into further considerations as to the Ignatian Epistles, such as the comparative value of the different recensions, we need not now enter. They may possibly occupy the attention of critics for some time to come ; but as to the Medicajan and any other version containing the episcopal passages, Mr. Jenkins, following in the wake of other critics, may, as it seems to me, be regarded as having given them their final and unanswerable quietus. For the future they must be consigned in company with the forged Decretals and similar hierarchical impostures into that large limbo of ecclesiastical unveracities whence they ought never to have been permitted to emerge. 1 The Academy. " An able and thoughtful production." Theological Monthly. " Brings forward with much skill and power the arguments against the Ignatian authorship in the endeavour to prove that the letters are quite incompatible with a writing of the second century." The Ecclesi astical Chronicle. D. NUTT, 270 STRAND. PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE A REVIEW OF THE COMMENTARY ON THE SCRIPTURES THOMAS D E VI O, CARDINAL OK ST. XYS1 US, COMMONLY CALLED CARDINAL CAJETAN. HY ItOBEKT C. JENKINS, M.A., RKCTOR OF LYMIJTGK, HON. CANON OF CANTERBURY, AND HON. CURATOR OF THE LIBRARY OF LAMHETH PALACE. Komauae ruinae pars, cjuainvis et rerum omnium, in direptione et personal! captivitate fuerim, Conmu-ntarios quos inchoaveram perfeci." CLEMENTI VII.. P.K. THOMAS DE Vio, CAJETAN us. LONDON: DAVID NUTT, 270 STKAND. 1891. TO THK RIGHT HONORABLE AND MOST REVEREND EDWAHD WHITE BENSON, D.D. LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. PREFACE. MOKE than fifty years have passed away since I first became acquainted with the Commentary of Cardinal Cajetan on the Epistles of St. Paul, and was led to detect in his remarkable defence of the doctrine of Justification by Faith in his Exposition on the third chapter of the Romans the source from which our Reformers derived their definition of that doctrine in the " Homily on the Salvation of Mankind." The ignorance which then almost universally prevailed in regard to the life and labours of the great Cardinal of Gaeta (whose local name is often inconveniently confounded with the personal name of the Cardinals of the Gaetani family), was well exemplified by the actual horror which the late Bishop Blom field expressed when I cited his Commentaries among those which I had read before my ordination. " Cardinal Cajetan Cardinal Cajetan ?" he exclaimed "What could have induced you to have recourse to such a viii PREFACE. writer ?" He expressed a similar amazement when I mentioned Estius also as a valuable aid in the study of the Apostolic Epistles. I satisfied his mind by assuring him that I did not consult such authorities on controversial matters, though I might well have urged the fact, which will appear to the reader of the following pages, that in many such questions Cajetan is far nearer to the Church of England than to the Church of Rome and that he is the most important re presentative we possess of the Church of the transition period that pre-Tridentine interval of about twenty years in which the controverted doctrines were rather in a state of fusion than in that inflexible rigidity, to which they were re duced by the Spanish and Italian majority in the Council. The rude Latin of the Vulgate had not in the days of Cajetan superseded the languages of the original ; and he was not afraid of dealing with its errors in a very summary way. The ignorance of Hebrew and Greek which prevailed universally in the Council, and the knowledge that the mediaeval theology of the Latin Church was founded upon the Vulgate, whose errors were imbedded in the writings of the western divines, conspired to efiect the canonisation of St Jerome s version, and indeed to make it a necessity. At PREFACE. ix the period of the Lateran Council, in 1860, which established the doctrine of the Immaculate Con ception, I published a translation of the remarkable treatise against that dogma which was drawn up by Cajetan for the previous Council of the same name by the command of Leo X., with a brief introduction in which an outline was given of the life of the Cardinal, and of the freedom with which he broke away from the traditional mysticism of the mediaeval interpreters. I observed in regard to his greatest exegetical work : "In his com mentary on the Epistles of St. Paul, the mind of this great man came out in all its natural freedom. His exposition of the doctrine of Justification in the Romans (transferred almost word for word to the Homily of our Church, On the Salva tion of all Mankind ) ; his declaration on the Corinthians in favour of the use of the vernacular language in the public services of the Church his opinion on confession before the Communion, on the celibacy of the priesthood as not of divine obligation, on the mass as merely a commemorative sacrifice, and on many other points ; his denial that the sixth chapter of St. John relates formally to the Eucharist, or that St. James refers in his fifth chapter either to Auricular Confession or to Extreme Unction his larger views of the Church, x PREFACE. and significant observation on Saint worship as illustrated at the burial of Stephen ; finally, his noble protest against those very corruptions which had awakened the zeal of Luther, have not only taken away the reproach of his earlier life, but established his reputation as one of the founders of that literal interpretation of the Scripture which was developed more fully by Erasmus and has been handed down ever since even in the Roman Church." That lie would have taken part in the reformation of that church on the lines laid down in the celebrated " Council of the Cardinals " addressed to Pope Paul III. and signed by his patron, Cardinal Oaraffa, and his friends and colleagues, Sadolet, Contarini and Pole, though he did not live to share their work, is proved from the active part he took in the election of Adrian VI. who confessed in his famous in structions to his legate Chieregato that all the ills of the Church had originated at its head, and that from thence they flowed down to all its members " Curia haec, uncle forte omne hoc malum processit } a noble confession which had he lived, might have made the Council of Trent unnecessary, by carrying out the great moral reformation of which Cardinal Contarini said in his treatise against Luther : " Non est PREFACE. xi opus concilio, non disputationibus et syllogismis opus est tan turn bona voluntate, charitate erga Deum et proximum, animi humilitate opus est."* In his letter on the Council addressed to Mgr. Galeazzo Fiorimondo da Sessa, Bishop of Aquino, he proposes that all the bishops who are called to the Council should be strictly examined in life and doctrine, and if unworthy should be set aside. All who have gained their offices through the favour of Princes or by ambition, or by admission to offices in Rome (per entrate d offitii in Roma) or through wicked arts should be removed. If this were done he predicts the speedy return to the Church of all Christian people. How little his prayers were fulfilled is too evident from the history of the Council, as it is given us by its most ardent advocates and in its official documents as we read them in the great collection of Le Plat. The Commentaries of Cajetan are scarce and not easily procured, and they are moreover entombed in large folios, a circumstance which renders them inaccessible to the general reader, and even if accessible very inconvenient. Hence the writer of these lines has endeavoured to lay the more important portions of them before the general public, to satisfy the needs of those who may have * Confut. Art. Lutheri ap. finem. xii PREFACE but little time to explore them in the original, and also to offer an invitation to those who have time and opportunity to give them a more perfect examination. With the earnest desire that his work may have this result, he ventures to apply to his far humbler labours the words of the preface of Cajetan " Ego jam senex, non novitatis sed veritatis solius amore allectus, opus hoc aggredior . ... ad accendendum aliorum mentes erga sacras Scripturas. Det Dominus Jesus Christus ut assequar intent um." CONTENTS. I. INTRODUCTORY . . i II. THE COMMENTARY ON THE PENTATEUCH . . .15 III. THE HISTORICAL BOOKS AND THE PSA.LMS ... 22 IV. THE COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPELS. ST. MATTHEW. 33 IV. (PART n.) THE GOSPELS OF ST. MARK AND ST. LUKK. 44 V. THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN 51 VI. THE COMMENTARY ON THE ACTS AND THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE ROMANS 63 VII. THE COMMENTARY ON THE CORINTHIANS 81 VIII. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 94 IX. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES 103 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. CHAPTER I. | INTRODUCTORY. THE opening scene of the Reformation, at Augs burg, in which Cardinal Cajetan was the most promi nent, and to the outward eye the most imposing figure, has thrown into so deep a shade, both the earlier and later life of that remarkable man, that few are aware that the " New Learning " had no less marked an influence upon his own doctrine than it had upon the reformed churches ; that it had in fact transformed him from a mere Decretalist, a servus natus Pontifids (a title he once gave to the Church itself) into a devoted student, and learned commentator on the Scriptures a rival or rather fellow-worker with Luther in a field which then was being reopened even in the Eoman Church. The history of the eventful conference with Luther, of which we have two co-ordinate descriptions, one by his brother-in-law the Chancellor Rlihl, of Wittemberg,* and the * Dr. Johann Riihl was Chancellor of the Cardinal Elector of Mentz, 2 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. other apparently drawn up by himself after his return, so convincingly proves the weakness of the cause of which the Cardinal was the advocate, that we can hardly wonder that the Roman Church has with its usual prudence forborne to publish its own version of it. Cajetan had gone to Augs burg in the belief that his profound learning and skill as a Decretalist would give him an easy victory over an Augustinian Monk, whose only learning he supposed to consist of a few authorities of the great Father whom his Order claimed as its first founder. The few Scriptural authorities which he thought might probably be referred to, he believed himself to be able, by his dialectical skill to meet successfully, and even to turn to his own account. On his arrival at Augsburg he be gan the composition of the treatise on Indulgences, which forms the sixteenth of his " Opuscula," first printed at Lyons in 1568 (pp. 97-105.) It was his custom to date these productions, and we are able therefore to find that it was written between the 7th of October and the isth (1518), the former date being also that of Luther s depar ture from Nllrnberg to Augsburg, while the and represented the Counts of Mansfeldt in the Reichstag at Niirnberg in 1532. He was the brother-in-law of Luther, and was with him in the meeting with Cardinal Cajetan, and wrote the narrative of the con ference. The grandmother of the writer, Johanna Regina Riihl, was among his descendants, and a portrait of him was once in the possession of her family, which had flourished long in the free city of Heilbronn. INTRODUCTORY. 3 second fell on the day before the presentation of his protest to the Cardinal. That the manner of the latter was imperious, and even impetuous, is proved by the impression it left on the members of the Court of Rome at the time. In a remark able letter of Cardinal Campeggio, in the Vatican Library, published recently by Lammer (Mon. Vat. Frib. Brisg., 1861, p. 31), Cardinal Wolsey is described as saying to the Legate, " Most rever end lord, beware lest, as through the harshness and severity of one Cardinal, the greatest part of Germany fell from the Holy See and from the faith, it may be said that another Cardinal gave the same occasion to England." The legation of Cajetan to Germany was on all hands admitted to be a deplorable failure, nor can we wonder that no defence or report of it was attempted by the Court of Rome. For we are able to see in the treatise on Indulgences, written during the stay of the Cardinal at Augsburg, the course of argu ment he employed, and the entire reliance he placed upon the wretched " extravagant " Uni- genitus, while his attempts to explain away the clearest words of Scripture by the most subtle distinctions cannot be characterised by any other term than that of unconscious dishonesty. We cannot but give this marvellous exposition in his own words, for no translation would be adequate to express it. 4 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. " Dominus dicit curn feceritis ornnia quaecumque praecepero vobis, dicite, quod debuimus fecimus, servi inutiles sumus. Ubi vides quod dicendo quod debuimus fecimus, monstrat eos implesse mandata sufficienter, alioquin non fecerunt quod debuerunt ; nam debuerunt sufficienter implere. Non est antem verum, servum qui fecit quod debuit inutilem citra fecisse ; quoniam si citra fecisset jam non fecisset quod debuisset. Sed verum est, quod est ut sic non supererogavit ; et propterea inu- tilis dicitur, qui enim non facit nisi quod debet inutilis dicitur. Unde ex istii authoritate nihil aliud habetur nisi quod sancti ex hoc quod impleverunt praecepta Christ! non superero- gaverunt, cum quo stat, et quod sufficienter man data Christ! implere potuerunt, et supererogare, et sic non solum fecerint quod debuerunt sed essent servi inutiles in domo Domini." This is a sample of the incomprehensible jargon which the Legate in the pride of his Italian subtlety opposed to the irresistible arguments of the less cultured Teuton who appealed boldly " to the law and to the testimony." The argument that even the martyrs claimed to have no merits of supererogation is met by the bold assertion that they have " dum plus patiuntur voluntarie quam pro peccatis suis debeant " (" Opusc." p. 99.) The same kind of argument which he had produced in defence of the autocracy of the Papacy in his INTRODUCTORY. 5 earlier life was now adopted in defence of the greatest and most flagrant abuse which has ever defaced and degraded the Church. The loss of temper which too often follows the defeat in argument betrayed the Legate into that parting exclamation, " Go from me, and never see my face until you bring your retractation," words recalling those of Pharaoh to Moses, "Get thee from me, take heed to thyself, see my face no more." The great Reformer might well have replied with Moses, " Thou hast spoken well. I will see thy face again no more." For he never again saw the Legate, and the Church of the Scriptures went forth out of the Egyptian darkness of the Decre- talists never to return into it again. Nay more, it brought even the Church of Home itself into o those better pastures which it had entered upon, and the learned of the Church of Eome, the Sadolets, the Seripandi, the Contarini, and our own Cardinal Pole, following the teaching of Erasmus, and the pioneers of the " New Learn ing," passed away from the husks of the old scholastic divinity, and the extravagances of Decretalism to the study of the Word of God. But with the single exception of Erasmus, not one of the new commentators on the Scriptures was fully equipped for so great a work. Ignorance of the languages in which the Scriptures were written, and a blind reliance upon the text of the 6 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. Vulgate which that ignorance necessitated, placed the divines of that day in a position of disadvan tage and seriously detracted from the success of their work. Even in the Council of Trent some thirty-five years after, there was found hardly a divine (not to say a bishop, for such was out of the question) who understood Hebrew, and few indeed that understood Greek. And as this kind of learning was in the hands of the Jews or heretics, whose works not even the most elevated member of the Council was permitted to read without a licence, it may well be conceived that the Decretalists, under the skilful generalship of the Jesuit Laynez, regained the ground they had lost during the period intervening between the opening scene of the Reformation and the assembly of the Council of Trent, a sufficient reason for the reactionary policy which the Council adopted, and for the stereotyping of doctrines scarcely settled even by the Schoolmen, and still left to be the battle-field of the religious orders. For it can never be too confidently affirmed that the doctrines laid down at Trent did not represent the faith of the Western Church cis it was explained by its most authoritative expositors but a few years before its assembly. If any one doubt this, let him read the "Catechism" of Cardinal Contarini drawn up for the use of that very Cardinal who became afterwards president of the Council of INTRODUCTORY. 7 Trent, Morone the writings of Cardinal Pole, the sermon of Bishop Tonstal on Palin Sunday, 1538, before King Henry VIII. , and other testimonies too numerous to reckon. To these we may well add the name of Thomas de Vio Cardinal Cajetan, who, unlike his contemporaries, prepared himself for the anxious work of an expositor of the Scrip tures by devoting all his later years to the study of their original languages, casting off the fetters of his earlier education, and proving that the great lesson of his German legation, however fruitless in its results to the Church, and ineffectual in its object of reuniting its now divided members, had borne good and lasting fruit in his own doctrine and in his own life had enabled him to surrender the Decretals, both the spurious and authentic ones, and to devote himself wholly to the work of expounding the Scriptures in their literal and obvious sense, and with the same freedom from traditional interpre tation by which the reformed commentators gave them so new a beauty and so clear a light. Mindful of the example of St. Jerome, who studied Hebrew under a Jew, then the only competent teacher, the Cardinal availed himself of the learned Jews in Home, paying with great liberality for their instruction. The light which was thus thrown upon the ancient Scriptures enabled him to see how vain it was to cramp and $ PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. distort and often to destroy their meaning by accepting the interpretation of the ancient doctors, whose ignorance of the languages in which the sacred books were written, and servile depen dence on the Septuagint or the Vulgate, dis qualified them for the work of exposition, and who, being unable to find the literal meaning, were compelled to have recourse to mystical and symbolical methods. In the preface of his Com mentary on the Pentateuch he thus vindicates the freedom of interpretation which had so long been trammeled by artificial and scholastic rules, and maintains the right of private judgment against the bondage of ecclesiastical tradition : " I entreat all my readers not too suddenly to repudiate anything, but to weigh everything by the Holy Scripture, by the truth of the Christian faith and by the evidence and customs of the Catholic Church. And if sometimes a new sense should appear, agreeable to the sacred text and not contrary to the doctrine of the Church, although it be opposed to the whole stream of sacred doctors, that they will show themselves to be just censors. Let them remember to give every one his due, and that to the authors of Holy Scripture alone is reserved this prerogative that we believe their writings to be true because they wrote them : but as Augustine saith, Others I so read that, howsoever they excelled in holiness INTRODUCTORY. 9 and doctrine, I do not believe their writings to be true, merely because they composed them. Let none therefore take offence at a new sense of the Scripture, because it is in disagreement with the ancient doctors, but scrutinise the text and context more closely, and if it fits them, let him praise God who has not tied up the exposition of the Scripture to the rule of the ancient doctors, but to that of the entire Scripture itself, under the judgment of the Catholic Church. Otherwise all hope would be taken from us and our suc cessors of expounding the Scripture unless we were (so to speak) to transfer them from one book to another (de libro in quinternum). I, though already an old man inspired by the love of truth only and not novelty, address myself to this work as an offering to Almighty God in order to stimulate the minds of others towards the Holy Scriptures. May the Lord Jesus Christ grant that I may obtain my object. I intend to expound the text according to the Hebrew verity, where- ever a difference occurs between the Vulgate and the Hebrew reading. For the text of Moses himself and not that of his interpreter has to be expounded. For the Hebrew and not the Greek or Latin interpretation is authoritative, which we are compelled to embrace and which all the faithful do embrace." The result of this twofold transition from the io PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. Decretalists to the Scriptures is apparent through every part of the commentary of the Cardinal from the Pentateuch to the last of the apostolical epistles, for the Revelations he wisely forbears to interpret, confessing himself unable to discover its direct or literal meaning. A single instance of the change effected in his mind during the interval between the conference at Augsburg and the work of his Commentary,* and unquestionably originated by the appeal of Luther to the Scriptures, may enable the reader to estimate its larger results. We have already seen his interpretation in the earlier day of Luke xvii. io. Let us now set against it the later view which he gives of it in his commentary on this passage : " Si servando ornnia praecepta sumus inutiles nee habemus unde superbiamus quid sentiendum de nobis ipsis est, qui non omnia servamus, qui nmltorum rei sumus ? Sed quid de nobis dico ? quum nullus dicere possit quod debebam feci nisi exemptus est a dicendo ( Dimitte nobis debita nostra. Quod ergo dicitur cum feceritis omnia non ideo dicitur quod facturi essent omnia ; sed quod si etiam facerent omnia praecepta, recog- noscant se servos inutiles ; ut a fortiori recognos- cant se minus quam inutiles, hoc est debitores et reos multorum quae debebant seu debent facere." We find here no " works of supererogation." * i.e., between 1518 and 1524-34, INTRODUCTORY. 1 1 As no one could say the Lord s Prayer who claimed to have done such works, the saints who (unless they disobeyed the Lord s injunction) must have said it, are included in the general insufficiency ; and the treasury created or imagined by the author of the extravagant Unigenitus passes away for ever in other words, the Papal bank stops pay ment. The later doctrine of the Cardinal became at last so strong a conviction that he denounces the merchandise of Indulgences as bringing its agents under the ban of St. Peter himself. Com menting 011 the w 7 ords (2 Pet. ii. 3), " And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you," he writes : " Not fur removed from such as these are the preachers of gain, who abuse the devotion of the Christian people for money who ignorantly and rashly dare to preach that, by paying a carline or ducat for a so-called plenary indulgence, they will be in the same state as a newly-baptised person ; arid in like manner that they can free a soul from purgatory. For these are monsters, and make merchandise of Christian people. The Christian religion knows no such figments, but they are the inventions of those who through covetousness with feigned words make merchandise of Chris tians, abusing them for gain." Writing on i Cor. xvi. i, he denounces the same abuse in these words : 12 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. " This traffic blackens and discredits not a little the Christian Church, which is full of it in the form of indulgences, crusades, hospitalia, &c." Yet this was the abuse against which the theses of Luther were published, and in defence of which the Cardinal was employed at Augsburg. It cannot but be interesting to all who value the importance of an independent witness a witness holding so high a rank in the very camp and court of Rome, born and brought up in that court a kind of " fils du regiment " to carry on his examination of the Commentary of Cajetan, in its bearing upon the other controversies which were so fatally rending the Western Church. It will be obvious that the adoption of a " new meaning opposed to the whole stream of sacred doctors," must involve the rejection even of the decisions of the Popes themselves, who were an important part of that stream, while the claim of the Scriptures to be their own interpreters subject only to the law of the whole Church, and the denial of the authority of translations, not except ing the Canonised Vulgate, gives scope to that higher criticism, whose reign was just opening in the Church. The pre-Eeformation exegesis (if it deserved the name) was truly a pouring from one book into another, as Cajetan well describes it. Augustine, Jerome, and an admixture of other writers in different proportions were poured into INTRODUCTORY. 13 the pages of Peter Lombard, and from thence were transfused into the voluminous pages of Aquinas, Bona ventura, and the later Schoolmen, to be again diluted, until the true meaning of the text of Scripture was lost, or at least fatally deteriorated and corrupted. Erasmus had led the way out of this endless maze of subtleties and trivialities, and the boldness with which his example was followed by Cajetan, exposed him to almost as much abuse as had been heaped upon Luther, for releasing the Scriptures from the Scholastic bonds. He was attacked by Ambrosius Catharinus, a monk of the same Dominican order to which he had belonged, O the very year after his death, in a special treatise addressed to the " General of the Order and the other Fathers and Masters" of it. Just before his death, he had been charged with certain errors by the theologians of Paris, to whom he replied in the fifteenth and last tractate of the third book of his " Opuscula." The date given to this piece, December 29, 1534, is erroneous, as the Cardinal died on the 9th of September in that year. The work of his opponent, who had dared not to encounter in life one who could have so easily crushed him, is so far valuable to us, as it forms a useful index to many of those passages in which Cajetan had advocated the earlier doctrines and practices of the Church against the corruptions of later times, and had vindicated the " liberty of 14 PKE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. prophesying," by freely examining into the authen ticity and authority of certain doubtful and dis puted passages, and especially in denying the canon ical authority of the Apocrypha. It is difficult to estimate what might have been the influence of Cajetan on the future of the Roman Church had he survived to take part in the Council of Trent. The three greatest ornaments of that Church passed away before its assembly, Sadolet, Conta- rini, and zEgidius of Viterbo, not to speak of many of the principal bishops who lived during the transition period. Cardinal Pole, who was pre sent in the Council as Legate, left it in disgust after its rejection of the ancient doctrine on Justi fication, and Seripandi, the brightest ornament of its later history, died in the Council the last defender of the Augustinian doctrine of grace against the new theory of the Jesuits, which developed into the fatal bull Unigenitus in a later day. But Cajetan had long before passed away to a better world ; and we may well apostrophise him in the words of one of his most devoted friends and admirers :* " Felix 6 nimium felix, nimiuinque beat us Mortalem exutus vitam nunc denique vives Et fructum vita innocua; sine fine frueris." * Job. Uapt. Flavins. CHAPTER II. THE COMMENTARY ON THE PENTATEUCH. THE Cardinal gave in the very opening of his work proof of his release from the chains of a traditional interpretation, and the stereotyped exegesis of the Schoolmen. Hence Catharinus charges him with the twofold crime of destroying the historical sense, and also setting at nought the allegorical one charges which seem to refute one another. The ground of his accusation seems to be the fact that Cajetan gives an allegorical interpretation to some of the prehistoric portions of the sacred narrative which the previous inter preters had turned into historic facts, while in other places where they have allegorised, he has asserted a literal meaning. The former charge was naturally brought against every attempt to give a reasonable explanation of what appeared inexplicable on natural or moral grounds, or by its comparison with other parts of the divine revelation. Thus he held that the days of the creation were not d<*ys in an ordinary sense, but an allegorical 1 6 PRE-TRIDENTIXE DOCTRINE. representation of successive periods, in which he merely followed St. Augustine and other early commentators. In like manner he held the de scription of the formation of Eve out of the rib of Adam to be allegorical, and to have a meta phorical meaning. In his treatment of the conversation between the serpent and the woman he adopts the same method of interpretation. " It was not (he writes) a spoken discourse, but an inward suggestion by which the devil began to insinuate (serpere) with his poisonous reflection. And this is to be under stood of the entire conversation between the serpent and the woman. For these metaphorical mean ings are not only sober according to the Scripture, but are not a little useful to the profession of the Christian faith, especially in the presence of the wise of this world, for perceiving that such things are not to be understood and believed literally but metaphorically, they do not reject the state ments about the rib of Adam and the serpent ns fables, but reverence them as mysteries, and thus are led more easily to embrace the things of faith. Nor is any handle given hereby to inter pret other things metaphorically for such things do not, like these, contain the proofs that they should be metaphorically understood." This is a sufficient answer to the charge advanced by Catharinus. It is almost needless to say that, as THE PENTATEUCH. 17 an intelligent student of the Hebrew text, Cajetan rejected at once the feminine in that much- vexed passage, "He shall bruise thy head "- " He saith not this of the woman, but of her seed" Ipswn conteret caput tuum. Consistently with his inter pretation of the temptation he attaches a meta phorical meaning to the cherubim with the flaming sword, though to the similar representa tion of the destroying angel in Chron. xxi., he attaches a literal meaning. He appears generally to follow the rule of Maimonides (Moreh Nevochim, ii. c. 47.) Em ploy your reason and you will be able to discern what is said allegorically, figuratively, or hyper- bolically, and what is meant literally, exactly, according to the original meaning of the words." His preliminary disquisition on the names of the Deity and their special import and significance, is an approach to the higher criticism of a later age. He divests himself of the traditional view that the Trinity is involved in the plural Eloliim and of the co-ordinate notion that the spirit which moved upon the face of the waters was the Holy Spirit, and without attempting to account for the successive uses of El, Elohim, Jehovah or Jehovah- Elohim by creating Elohistic and Jehovistic waiters, he explains their uses according to the facts or words with which they were specially * Trans, by Dr. Friedliinder, vol. ii. p. 221. Ii i8 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE connected. In works simply of creative power or providential direction, he rinds that Elohim, a w r ord of power is adopted while in the relations of God with the chosen people, his covenant name of Jehovah or Jehovah- Elohim is employed. On every occasion in which the Divine Being is named, he expressly mentions which of the several terms is selected, and why. With his adversary Catharinus it was an unpardonable error that he destroyed one of the chief supports of the Mass, in his explanation of the offering of Melchisedeck. " There is no mention here (he writes) of any sacrifice or oblation, but of bringing forth, or bringing out, which, as Josephus saith, was done to refresh the conquerors." In the narrative of the death of Jacob his Hebrew studies enabled him to see the error into which the adoption of the LXX. reading led the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews the ground work unfortunately of a still greater error in the age of the second Nicene council in which the passage was quoted in defence of the image- worship which then unhappily reintroduced into Chris tianity the idolatry of the heathen world. Cajetan reads, as our own version does, that the Patriarch gathered up his feet on the bed and died. To sit up and worship, leaning on a staff, is certainly an unusual position for a dying man. The rest of the narrative of Genesis as well as THE PENTATEUCH. 19 that of Exodus is treated historically, and does not present any features of special interest. The commentary on the second commandment is severe in its prohibition of any kind of reverence being paid to images, either inwardly or outwardly, Pope Marcellinus, who sacrificed to idols from fear, being specially mentioned as falling under the latter sin. The exposition of Leviticus is literal, and pre sents no remarkable feature, unless it be the dis cussion on the prohibited degrees of marriage, in regard to one of which, that of the successive marriage with two brothers, Cajetan had taken so decided a part. His letter to Henry VIII. and brief treatise on this subject is not the least interesting of his lesser works. Most of the pro hibitions he alleges to be rather against the positive than the natural law. The exposition of the Book of Numbers, in which moral and doctrinal teaching might have been more readily intro duced, is like that of Leviticus, purely literal and critical. Cajetan had not proposed to do more in this part of his Commentary than to clear up the text, and set the Hebrew original against the very imperfect and often erroneous translation of the Vulgate. This, in the eyes of Catharinus, is one of his greatest sins, almost greater than his rejection of a traditional interpretation of the text. Yet with a strange inconsistency he con- 20 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. demns the Cardinal for accepting the opinions of St. Jerome in regard to the authenticity of certain books of the New Testament as well as of the entire Apocrypha which Jerome removes from the authoritative books of the Canon. His diver gence from the Vulgate in his commentary on the Psalms is so great that he offers a new version of the whole Psalter, and prefixes to his own trans lation of the Hebrew text that of the Vulgate, from which it differs as greatly as our authorised version does from the translation which still holds its place in our Prayer-book. In the history of Balaam s journey Cajetan appears not quite satisfied in accepting it in a strictly literal sense. He supposes an angel to have spoken by the mouth of the ass, who is a mere instrument for expressing words which it could not possibly understand. The passage is curious: " Nee sis adeo rudis, ut putes per hoc colloquium inter asinam et Bilham, intellixisse asinam verba quae dicebat. Angelico siquidem ministerio formabatur verba asinino ore ; quae asina ipsa non intelligebat, quasi asina intelligeret et tueretur causam pro- priam." Here he might with more reason have availed himself of the allegorical interpretation, unless (which appears still more reasonable) he adopted the view of Maimonides, that the whole narrative represented the vision of Balaam : THE PENTATEUCH. 21 " That which happened to Balaam on the way, and the speaking of the ass, took place in a pro phetic vision." (Moreh Nevoch. ii. c. 42.) The commentary on Deuteronomy is as strictly literal as those on Exodus and Leviticus, nor is there any attempt to give a mystical view of the sacri ficial system of the Jewish Church in connection with the Christian sacraments, as was usual in the mediaeval commentators. CHAPTER III. THE HISTORICAL BOOKS AND THE PSALMS. IN his treatment of the historical books of the Old Testament, the Cardinal confines himself throughout to a literal meaning and to a textual criticism. He does not even attempt to explain or to extenuate in any degree from the strict interpretation even of the miracles of the Book of Joshua, merely observing that the standing still of the sun " was the greatest miracle that had ever happened up to that time." The ignorance of astronomy which then reigned was enough to account for the absence of any attempt at expla nation of what must, from the very character of the " Book of Jasher," from which it was taken, be simply the poetical description of a day preternaturally (or at least beyond ordinary experience) lengthened according to the will oi God. He did not perceive, though his Hebrew knowledge might have here guided him, that the " Book of that righteous man " (Sepher haijaschar) refers to a panegyrical narrative of the wars of Joshua^ as the same term does afterwards to a * o. Hilliger Disp. de Libro Kecti, Lips. 1714, s. vii. THE HISTORICAL BOOKS. 23 like history of the wars of David (II. Sam. i. 18). The commentary on the historical books from Joshua to the second of Chronicles was written between the close of 15 30 and the early part of 1532. That on Ezra was carried on during the severe illness which gave warning of his approach ing end. The commentary on Nehemiah and Esther was finished on the i9th of July in the same year. The exposition of the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes was not completed until the 23rd of June 1534. The last months of the life of the Cardinal were devoted to the preparation for the Commentary on Isaiah, in which he evidently designed to pass from the mere literal to t.ae doctrinal and Messianic interpretation of the Prophecy, as the fragment we have of it contain ing the exposition of three chapters only, indi cates. The closing words of the editor give us a touching notice of the failure of his design : " Finis commentariorum in Isaiam Prophetam quae morte prreventus auctor ad calcern non perduxit." But a coincidence still more affecting occurs in regard to its closing words. At the period of the sacking of Home by the l)uke of Bourbon the Cardinal was deprived of all that he possessed, and made further to pay a large sum for his ransom, which reduced him to such extreme poverty that he was compelled to borrow clothing 24 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. from a Spaniard, by name Garcia Manriquez, in order that he might appear in Rome decently appareled. In this state of penury his great Commentary was carried on calmly and uninter ruptedly, and almost its last words were on the text of Isaiah iii. : "A man shall take hold of the brother of the house of his father, saying, Thou hast clothing, be thou our ruler and let this ruin be under thy hand In that day he shall swear, saying, I will not be a healer ; for in my house is neither bread nor clothing, make me not a ruler of the people." " Vide (he writes) magnitudinem paupertatis, requirunt in rectorem quia habet indumentum .... Ecce inopiam requisiti et renuentis principatum." His own state of cruel privation must have risen sadly before him on contemplating so strange a parallel, and his life and Commentary close together with strange suggestiveness at this picture of his greatest and last affliction. The little that remained to him of his fortune, which must have been ample in his earlier days, he left to the poor of Christ, and was wont to say at the close of his life, " Scis Domine exiguum supellectilem pauperibus dari." Alas ! that so few cardinals, so few bishops or ministers of any Christian Church could ever say the same ! The mortal remains of this great and good man rest under the pavement of the vestibule of the Church of " St. Maria supra Minervam," where was THE HISTORICAL BOOKS 25 once the simple inscription perhaps it is there no more " Thomas de Vio Cajetanus Card, Si Sixti, Sacri Ordinis Praedicatorum." Few and simple words, suggestive of a life which after its early trials and reverses shrank from human applause, and willingly merged one of the highest titles of earthly dignity in the higher title of a preacher of the Word of God a servant of Him " whom (as the great Gregory writes) to serve is to reign " " cui servire regnare est" But we have been led away by the touching features of his closing life from the instructive les sons of his Commentary, and must say a few words on one of his greatest works, his "Commentary on the Psalms." He observes (in his dedication of it to Clement VII.) that no one had hitherto attempted to explain the Psalter according to the literal sense, inasmuch as all who had expounded it previously dwelt only on the mystical meaning. From its constant use in the services of the Church he held that its literal sense ought to be made clearer and more evident. He devoted three years to this important work, w^hich involved the necessity of a new translation, in which (at the sacrifice of all the laws of Latin construction) he exhibited word for word the Hebrew text. ic Curavi (he writes) ut de verbo ad verbum textum haberem Psalterii qualem habent Hebraei." 26 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. His view of the authorship of the Psalms, every one of which (with the exception of the Mosaic goth Psalm) he attributes to David, compels him to regard those Psalms, which were evidently written during and after the Captivity, as pro phecies uttered by David of the woes which were to fall upon his people. Thus, on the Psalm " When the Lord turned the captivity of Sion," he writes: The subsequent history established the truth of this prophecy/ When, however, he arrived at the 13 7th Psalm, "By the waters of Babylon," he appears either to have altered his mind, or at least to rind it impossible to account for so vivid a description of the afflictions of the captivity, by a mere prophetic anticipation. His constant view of the Messianic character of the principal Psalms, and the manner in which he applies them to Christ, leads him somewhat beyond the strict limits of a literal interpreta tion, and of the exclusively historical meaning he had given to the earlier part of his Commentary. In a sketch like this, it is impossible to follow our author step by step through a work of such magnitude or to do more than convey to the reader an idea of the principles and method of its con struction. It will be enough therefore to refer to those passages which have an immediate bearing upon Christianity, and illustrate the manner in which he connects the former and the latter THE HISTORICAL BOOKS. 27 revelation. The foremost of these passages and the most important from its forming one of the great utterances of the Cross is the opening of the 2 2nd Psalm, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? " &c. On this he writes : " You might perchance understand that this dereliction has a simple and absolute meaning, which is not true and is not intended, the dereliction meaning merely the not interposing to prevent the passion and death ; and hence he adds, and art so far, that is, not from me, but from my salvation, from suffering and death. Observe here that he describes this dereliction not as a desertion, but the standing at a distance, saying, and art so far off/ in order to show that God was standing far away, that is, not preserving from the passion and death." The 2ist Psalm he refers to the glorious reign of the Messiah, and quotes a passage from the Targum to show that it was thus considered by the Jews themselves. From the 4oth to the 5 oth Psalm, the Commentary gives us an almost unin terrupted view of the advent and life of the Messiah ; but here, as in most other portions of his work, the author unconsciously departs from the literal into the spiritual or mystical sense, without which a prophetic writing would be aimless and profitless. Although in the opening of his Commentary he 28 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. declares that the Psalms were put together in no proper order or arrangement, arguing from the closing words of the 72nd Psalm, " The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended," which seem to conflict with his assignment of the whole col lection to David, yet he notes certain connections between the Psalms in their present order, as, for instance, between the closing words of the 4oth and the opening verse of the 4ist, "I am poor and needy, yet the Lord thinketh upon me," &c., which he treats as the appeal of human nature to God for help and salvation. He supposes the answer of God to be given in the words of the following Psalm, "Blessed is he that considereth the poor," &c., and to be fulfilled in Christ, who came as the friend of the poor and needy, inviting such to come to him. This idea he carries out in the remaining part of the Psalm, not without considerable beauty of illustration and appropriateness. The two follow ing Psalms he regards as describing the misery of Israel in the captivity, while in the 44th he conceives the Church of Christ in its early per secutions appealing to God for help, and calling to remembrance the great deliverance he had given to his people in an earlier day : " We have heard with our ears, and our fathers have declared unto us." Such an interpretation cannot be termed other than mystical, but without similar methods THE HISTORICAL BOOKS. 29 the connection between the two dispensations would be fatally disturbed. In the 45th Psalm, we are led again to the Messianic reign and the victories and glories which were to attend it. The Hebrew- Latin which is given here as conveying the literal meaning is more than usually defiant of the laws of grammar. And here we may observe that in most of the Psalms the author recognises a kind of dialogue kept up between two or more parties, a feature which is too much neglected by our later writers. Sometimes the effect is striking and gives a new beauty to the poem ; in other cases it is somewhat strained, as in this Psalm, in which the last verse, " I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations," is supposed to be a prophetic dis closure of the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles, and the discovery of the name of Christ to be made to all the world. He supposes the Apostles to be made by Christ " princes in all lands " (v. 16). " Christus constituit apostolos in principes, ipsi em* c runt memoriam non sui sed Christi." The 46th Psalm he represents as a conversation between the Prophet and the Messiah, the tenth verse introducing the claim of the latter, which is responded to by the prophet in the eleventh. In the following Psalm the Prophet, representing the Church, calls all mankind to the praise of God. 30 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. The 47th Psalm opens the future worship of the Messiah in the new city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem. The 49th is held to describe the state of the Church under the government of the Messiah, the cessation of the legal sacrifices, and the substitution for them of the offerings of prayer and praise. From the soth to the 68th Psalm, the literal sense is restricted to the purely historical. The latter Psalm suggests a difficulty, as it is clearly Messianic in its ultimate sense, from the passage " Thou art gone up on high," &c., which St. Paul expressly interprets of the Ascension. The Cardinal regards this application as made in the mystical and not in the literal sense, as the entire scope of the Psalm is the providential care of Israel, as proved not only in their passage into the promised land, but also their preservation therein in peace and plenty. The 69th Psalm is, of course, interpreted in its most literal Messianic meaning, as also the 9ist, which is represented as a dialogue between the Prophet, the Messiah, and God. The 96th, 9/th, and 9 8th are also treated as Messianic; as also the lOQth on the authority of St. Peter and from its prophetic allusion to the betrayal of Judas. The Melchisedechian passage in the following Psalm places it in the same class. In his com mentary hereupon the Cardinal considers Melchise- THE HISTORICAL BOOKS. 31 deck to be rather the dynastic name of the kings of Jerusalem than a mere personal one, corre sponding to Pharaoh or Caesar a name equivalent to the parallel one of Adonisedech. The 1 1 ith and 1 1 2th Psalms he terms, in the words of St. Jerome, Alphabetical Psalms, the initial letters of the half verses following those of the alphabet. This would certainly indicate from its more elaborate and fanciful character a much later age than that of David, in which the alliteration and rhythm was rather carried on in the ideas and sentiments of the poem, than in the mere pur suit of an alliterative ingenuity. The same may be said of that most beautiful and artistic of all the Psalms, the iiQth, in which every separate division not only begins with a single letter of the alphabet, but every word in each division is similarly distinguished. We have given here only the faint outline of a work, which even in our own day may claim an important rank among the commentaries on the Psalms, but which in the earlier day in which it was produced may be said to surpass in learning and solid judgment every contemporary work with the single exception of the Commentaries of Erasmus, who was the pioneer of the literal and natural interpretation of the Scriptures. The Cardinal closes his work in the Spirit and in the words of the final Psalm, " Let everything that 3 2 PKE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. hath breath praise the Lord ; praise ye the Lord ;" adding, " And yet again be praise to God, for He hath granted me through His grace alone to bring this Commentary to its close. Written at Rome in the Easter celebration, in the year of our Lord 1527, and in my fifty-ninth year." CHAPTER IV. THE COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPELS. ST. MATTHEW. HAVING completed his Commentary on the Psalms, the Cardinal addressed himself to the still greater work of the exposition of the Gospels. Dismiss ing on several grounds the idea that St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew, he enters into a long disquisition on the difficult subject of the genealogy of our Lord. The fact that the pedigree is traced through Joseph, he regards as a necessary consequence of the legal status of Christ which needed the line of the putative father to be distinctly represented. He considers the Blessed Virgin to have been de scended from David through the female line only, asserting that this satisfies the description of her origin from the seed of David. For this he is fiercely attacked by Catharinus, though the precedent of the daughters of Zelopehad shows that the representation of a family might be claimed through a female as well as a male descent. 34 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. In the circumstances surrounding the nativity he surrenders at once all the needless and sense less miracles, which the devotees of a later age have gathered around that great event and shows that the order of nature was not disturbed in any of the incidents attending the birth of Christ. For this again he is severely rebuked by his pertinacious adversary, who with his usual zeal strives to be more Eoman than Borne itself. On the perpetual Virginity of Mary, however, he makes a firm stand, adopting many of the rea sons of St. Jerome against Helvidius. The ex pression, "And knew her not until," &c., he confesses to be ambiguous, and capable of a double interpretation, but shows that Matthew, as he was undertaking to write a history of our Lord only, and not of the Virgin Mary, was not careful to guard against misconceptions ; and both in that place, and in the description of Christ as the first-born Son, used the ordinary conven tional terms, without anticipating any contro versy arising out of them. The primogenitus may at the same time be unigenitus as it is in Hebrews i. 6. The silence of the Evangelist in regard to the earlier years of Christ, which the apocryphal gos pels have filled up with so strange a series of wonders, is urged as a proof that his life was THE GOSPELS. 35 spent in the ordinary manner communis fuit illius conversatio. The " baptism of repentance " preached by the Baptist, he shows most emphatically to represent not penance, but repentance ; and this is the uni form meaning he assigns to poenitentia wherever it occurs. The narrative of the temptation enables the writer to show how entirely and exclusively he rested upon the written word as against a mere traditional authority, a fact of which his whole Commentary gives conclusive proof. Our Lord s repeated words, It is written are thus commented upon, "Let us learn from hence that our arms are the Holy Scriptures, wherefore Jesus conquers all these temptations with the Holy Scriptures alone, that he might teach us to fight and con quer in the same way. For nothing could allure us to evil if we were to consult the Holy Scriptures, and thus direct our actions and omissions. * Passing on from the Temptation to the Sermon on the Mount, our attention is first arrested by the interpretation of the words, "Blessed are the poor in Spirit." The word poor he translates mendicos, which he affirms to be the meaning of the original. This change of term gives him occasion to show that Jesus, though poor, was 36 PRE-TRIDEXTINE DOCTRINE. never in any sense mendicant, which he proves by the fact that he is described as giving rather than receiving alms and from the mission of the apostles to the villages to buy food, &c. " Hence he concludes that our Lord did not in clude himself or His Apostles under the class of mendicants/ For this home-thrust at the men dicant orders, Catharinus most bitterly rebukes him. But though our Lord, without doubt, received offerings from those who were able to o contribute them, we certainly discover no trace of begging for them ; nor any resemblance be tween the mendicant orders of a later day, and the apostolic body which was supported like its successors by the voluntary offerings of the faith ful. But the Cardinal affirms further that the " poor in spirit " possess a very different quali fication from that of mere beggars. He shows indeed that individuals may become thus poor in spirit, but denies the blessing to colleges or bodies of men, and shows that Christ pronounced this blessedness in the case of individuals, and not societies or colleges. This exclusion from it of Franciscans, Dominicans, and other such orders subjects him to the charge of " agreeing with the heretics at this point." Well might he have replied with our Lord that c< wisdom is justified in her children." THE GOSPELS. 37 The exposition of the Lord s Prayer which occurs in the following chapter is most clear and practical, and worthy of the commonsense and intelligence of the author. He substitutes for the word supersubstantialem, which brings in the eucharistical sense of the Roman interpreters, the word quotidianum ; observing, at the same time, " the order of the petitions compels me to under stand this one, not of the bread of the body but of the soul," in which he includes every kind of spiritual support, the " divine word, work, and sacrament, and in a word, everything ,which supports and gives growth to the soul." The deprecation, " Deliver us from evil," he refers to every kind of evil, and to evil in the abstract. The doxology he considers to be an addition to the original prayer, of a later date herein agree ing with some modern critics. The charge to be " not over-careful for the things of the morrow," leads him to observe that " only the kind of care which, according to right reason, belongs to the future and not the present, is here precluded. Hence the care which belongs to the present time of making provision for the future, even though it be for years to come/ he regards "as not a care for the morrow, but for the present time. As for instance, Joseph s care to collect corn for providing against the seven years famine, which 38 PRE-TEINENTINE DOCTRINE. was a present and not a future care since it was incumbent upon any one knowing such an event to be coming, to make immediate provision for it." " Hence also (he adds) it is not carefulness for the morrow to make provision even for annual supports." In his commentary on the words of Christ to Peter, after duly maintaining according to his official obligation the Roman supremacy, he makes several qualifications and limitations, which greatly contrast with his uncompromising assertion of the claims of the Papacy in the days of Leo X. " The kingdom ofliearen" " He saith not of the king doms of this world. . . . All the authority of Peter has respect to the kingdom of heaven, to the government of the world in the interest of the heavenly kingdom (in ordine ad regnum ccelorum), of the salvation of souls, of all those things by which the kingdom of heaven is served and increased among men, which it is plain are spiritual objects only." A still more suggestive passage follows, " Whatsoever tlwu slialt bind upon earth" "The power of Peter," he con tinues, " is limited to binding or loosing the things on earth, in distinction to those which are under the earth, that is, in hell or in purgatory. For these, as they are beyond the knowledge of Peter, for he cannot know the rights of such cases (causas THE GOSPELS. 39 eorum) so are exempt from his jurisdiction. For they have passed from the tribunal of the Militant Church to the tribunal of Jesus Christ reigning in heaven." Here in one sentence he resigns the whole treasury of purgatorial indulgences and virtually recognises the justice of the theses of the great reformer, against which he argued but a few years before at Augsburg. But a still more remarkable passage follows : " We can and ought to gather from this (the binding and loosing power) that Peter does not bind on earth accord ing to his own will (ad libitum) but then only, when the bond is ratified in heaven and in like manner that he does not loose on earth, unless his loosing is ratified in heaven. Otherwise, the heavenly court (ccelestis curia) would be com pelled to approve voluntary and even bad bindings and loosings of Peter, which would not only be foolish but blasphemous." Here again in a single utterance he destroys the doctrine of Papal infal libility, and implies the " motus proprius " and the " plenitudo potestatis " to be a blasphemous fiction ; enabling every one who is aggrieved by the earthly tribunal to appeal to the heavenly one, as did the Gallican Church in its better days, and the Jansenists until they were crushed by that temporal power which Cajetan altogether re nounces for the Church. The commentary on 40 PKE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. the i gth chapter is chiefly remarkable for the statement that divorce, a vinculo matrimonii, in the single instance to which our Lord restricts it, is lawful and a subsequent marriage legitimate. In the same chapter he expresses his views in regard to vows of monastic obedience, remarking that our Lord " enjoined no vow upon the young man who desired to attain to perfection, because its attainment consists not in vows but in works of perfection. Religious vows are laudable, but it is not by their profession, but by works in which we imitate Christ, that we obtain perfection. In finite in the present day is the number of those who acquire the state of perfection by professing religious vows ; but few indeed are they who seek to be perfect by imitating Christ in his humility, patience, meekness, charity." We pass on to the commentary on the institution of the Last Supper, in which are several points to be specially noted. He begins by affirming that the Sacrament was instituted during the eating of the supper, first to remove the error of those who deny the Eucharist to persons who are not fasting, and next to teach us that our temperance at meals ought to be so great as to make us fit for its reception even while supping or after supper. He then alleges that Jesus blessing of the bread was a blessing of praise and not a blessing of consecration. Herein he is THE GOSPELS. 41 strongly corroborated by the Passover prayers in the Jewish Church, in which the blessing is entirely one of thanksgiving and not of setting apart the object blessed by an act of consecration. He then shows that the Eucharist could not be designed for infants (to whom it was in later ages adminis tered), inasmuch as it could not be said to them " take, eat," for they could neither take nor eat it. From this it appears that he would hardly sanction the now prevalent usage, in which the communi cant receives in his hand, instead of taking with his fingers, the consecrated bread. He supposes that the distance at which our Lord was placed from the disciples would not have made it easy for Him to distribute the broken bread to every one at the table any more than to deliver the cup into their hands. " I should rather believe," he writes, " that as he gave the wine to the disciples in one cup, so he delivered the bread in one paten to them all, having first broken it in twelve pieces." This would certainly agree with the Jewish tradi tion of the Passover rite, which was undoubtedly followed by our Lord in His new institution. After a somewhat long defence of transubstantia- tiori, he fails to note the obvious fact that the description of the wine as the "fruit of the vine" after its consecration is as much a disproof of the miraculous change as the words " this is my blood " could possibly be a proof of it, and expresses his 42 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. concurrence with those who hold that Judas had gone out before the Eucharistic distribution. His view of the character of the fallen apostle is far less severe than that of most other commentators. He conceives that Judas never intended to deliver our Lord to death, but believed that he would (as Pilate at first proposed) be merely scourged and dismissed ; and that finding that he was con demned to death, he so bitterly repented of his act as to destroy himself. On the dream of the wife of Pilate he writes : " Observe that no one, either male or female, offered a single word in favour of Jesus during the whole season of the Passion except the wife of Pilate and Pilate himself, though neither of them believed in Jesus, being both Gentiles ; and neither was instigated by others to act in behalf of Jesus, but the wife was induced by a dream, and Pilate from the sense of justice, and the knowledge of the envy of the rulers." The reference to prophecy, " They parted my garments among them," the Cardinal considers (from its absence from many Greek MSS.) to be doubtfully ascribed to Matthew. The last words of the Gospel, " Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world," lead him to observe, " We need not therefore fear that the Christian faith will ever be extinguished, for it will always remain in some of the true disciples THE GOSPELS. 43 of Jesus to the end of the world." He had doubtless in view that great apostasy which the Jesuit teaching, in its establishment of a trium phant church reigning over ever} 7 kingdom of the world, so systematically excludes from its system. CHAPTER IV. (PART II.) THE GOSPELS OF ST. MARK AND ST. LUKE. THE Gospel of St. Mark contains so few diversi ties of importance from that of St. Matthew that we naturally expect its commentary to exhibit the same resemblance to that whose most inter esting features we have already represented to the reader. The Cardinal accepts the general view that St. Mark wrote in Greek, though the tradition of the Latin original, supported as it is by the Latin- isms occurring in the text, ought not to have been so summarily dismissed. He observes first that St. Mark s design, as it is limited to the public life and teaching of Christ, precludes his entering upon the history of its earlier wonders and of the beautiful incidents which opened his life upon earth. In this we see the corroboration of that ancient and universal tradition that St. Mark s object was to record rather the preaching of St. Peter at Alexandria than those incidents which related to the earlier and more private life of Jesus. On the words " the Sabbath is made for man" THE GOSPELS. 45 it is observed, " For man that is, for his spiritual utility. For days and places are only hallowed that man may be hallowed in mind and body, not man for days and places (et non e con verso). For the sanctification of inanimate things is ordained for the sanctification of man." On the words " they anointed the sick with oil," &c. (chap. vi.)he writes: "This anointing ought not to be understood as the sacramental, or extreme unction which the Church uses, but a kind of beginning (initium quoddam). In his commentary on St. James Epistle (v. 14) he refers to this apostolic practice with the same object, showing that it has no connection with the rite of extreme unction, and that St. James makes no reference to such a practice in that much disputed passage. There is little difference between the commentary on this gospel and that on St. Matthew, to which it makes frequent reference, nor is there anything requiring special notice until we arrive at the last chapter, which, in common with most of the early and all the later critics, the author considers to lie under so much suspicion as not to be of the same firm authority as the rest of St. Mark s narrative. At the same time he regards the chapter as " not altogether a later addition, unless another which it represents has been lost." How ever, his adversary, Catharinus, with his usual dishonesty, suppresses this part of the Cardinal s 46 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. statement, in order to fix upon him the charge of rejecting a necessary portion of the gospel on a mere suspicion. The promise of the signs which were to follow those who believe greatly increases the difficulty of regarding this chapter as perfectly authentic, and these Catharinus admits are to be understood not temporally and literally, but spiritually, a large concession for one who accepted the doctrine of the continuance of miraculous agency in the Church to make. Cajetan observes truly that these are rather the gifts of faith than the signs or tokens of it. They are what the Roman divines of late termed charismata or gratiae gratis datae extraordinary and not ordinary results of faith. He interprets sitting "on the right hand of God" to indicate the quiet and undisputed reign of Christ as having entered upon the greatest portion of his inheritance. We pass on to the Commentary on St. Luke, in which our interest is first awakened in the treat ment of the Salutation of the Blessed Virgin. Here the strong view the Cardinal entertained in regard to the doctrine of the Immaculate Con ception, whose adoption he succeeded in preventing during the sitting of the Lateran Council under Leo X., and which forms the subject of one of the most remarkable treatises, appears in brief but emphatic words. He describes the Virgin as THE GOSPELS. 47 gloriosa " on account of the gifts of divine grace which she must have accordingly received not from the moment of her conception, but of her birth into the world. He interprets the words of the angel, " Blessed art thou among women " as imprecatory rather than declaratory, meaning rather " Blessed be thou among women " an explanation better suited to the words of the Virgin, " All generations shall call me blessed," in asmuch as the declaratory form would be applic able only to her contemporaries and to her own generation. The cousinship of Elizabeth and Mary presents some difficulty to the mind of the Cardinal. He writes : " It is certain that this cousinship existed, but uncertain in what manner. For we have no certain genealogies of them in both male and female line. This, however, we do know, from the Holy Scripture, that the House of David intermarried with the house of Aaron. For the wife of the Priest Jehoiada was sister of Ahaziah, King of Judah. Hence the fact that Elizabeth was of the tribe of Levi and the Blessed Virgin of the tribe of Judah would not be inconsistent with the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth." On the words " Blessed art thou among women," &c., he notes the limitation of the blessing of the Virgin to her own sex, while the blessing of Christ is unlimited and extends to all mankind. 48 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. The " lowliness of his handmaiden " in the Vulgate translated humilitas as though it expressed the virtue of humility instead of the lowness of her position in the world he restores to its mean ing in the original, for which he is again severely attacked by Catharinus. On the passage (Luke x.), "The harvest is plenteous, but the labourers are few, he observes : " He saith not the preachers but the labourers are few that we may understand that there are few who prove themselves preachers by their works, although many preach in the exercise of the voice." The beautiful contrast of the active and con templative life in Martha and Mary he draws out with great clearness and effect, concluding that the perfect life involves both these states, alleging that St. Peter in the Acts claims both as belong ing to his office when he says, " But we will give ourselves to prayer" (i.e., to the contemplative life), " and to the preaching of the word " (i.e., the active life). The promise of the growth of the Holy Spirit to those who ask it of the Father (chap, xi.) gives occasion for this reflection: "You see, judicious reader, that there is no need here of glosses. For this is an infallible promise according to the meaning of the context, and contains all the con ditions necessary for the acquisition of the Holy THE GOSPEL OF ST. LUKE. 49 Spirit viz., to pray with the mind, to seek in the deed, and to persevere in both." On the words, " If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother " &c. (Luke xiv.), he observes that " we are not to understand them absolutely, but only in so far as the love of parents is a hindrance to our adhesion to Christ. For grace does not destroy but perfects nature" If he had applied this last principle to the doctrine of transubstantiation which destroys nature to supply its place with altogether a different one, he would have followed Berengarius in his final reply to Lanfranc, in which he proves that the substance of the bread remains, the consecration only adding grace to the nature of the element. We have already seen the Cardinal s renunciation of works of supererogation in his commentary on Luke xvii. 10. On the words which foreshowed the fall of Peter (Luke xxii. 32), " When them art converted, strengthen thy brethren," he remarks : " Observe here that he wishes Peter to regard o the rest of the apostles as brethren and not subjects (non subditos sed fratres) " foreshowing and enjoining not an office of ruling, but of con firming them in faith, hope, and charity." This draws forth the strongest objurgations from Catharinus, who sees in it the assertion that the Papal claim to domination is simply a usurpation. 5 o PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. On the breaking of the bread after the resurrec tion the Cardinal puts forth the singular opinion that there must have been something miraculous in the manner in which our Lord was accustomed to break bread, " quod frangebat panem manibus sicut alii incidunt cultello." Whether this strange idea was original or derived I am unable to dis cover. The Commentary on St. Luke was com pleted on Jan. 25, 1528, and, like the previous ones, in his native town of Gaeta CHAPTER V. THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. THE Fourth Gospel gives a much wider scope to the Cardinal s labours, and enables him to extend some portions of his Commentary almost into dis quisitions. On the first chapter and its great disclosure of the Incarnation he naturally dwells at unusual length, but we pass over the less im portant portion of his exposition to devote our attention to the crowning revelation, " The Word was made flesh " " He saith not here the Word was made (or created), but the Word was made flesh. And since the Word of GOD is incapable of any change, we must understand hereby that the Word, without any change in its nature " (absque quacumque sui mutatione) " was made flesh. No alteration, no mixing of the two, no con version into the Word is here signified. For the word is not changed by any alteration so as to be come flesh. Nor is any mixture of the Word with the flesh interposed, nor is the Word turned into flesh. These might rather be called dreams than doctrines, since it is clear that the Word which 52 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. was in the beginning with God is unchangeable. Truly, therefore, and properly, and yet without any change in itself the Word is made flesh." After much more to the same purpose he adds : " And if these words are considered with perspicacity (by which it is signified that the word, remaining in its full integrity was made flesh, not fleshly), it will appear that the evangelist excludes in this making every manner by which one thing which already exists becomes another. Thus, the air which becomes water ceases to be air. A man who is white already cannot be said to become white." No intelligent reader can fail to see that the Cardinal in this passage has unconsciously given us the most convincing argument that could be produced against the doctrine of transubstantia- tion. If for the Word we substitute the bread (or elements of the sacrament) and for the flesh, the body and blood of Christ, the result would be simply this. Neither is the bread turned into the body by a miraculous annihilation of the substance (which is transubstantiation) nor the bread mixed (or united) with the body of Christ by impanation (as Rupert of Deutz held), or by consubstantiation as Luther taught. The union is between grace and nature (as Cajetan had already taught), neither of which destroys the other. Berengarius in his final and crushing reply to Lanfranc (a document THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 53 whose existence was unknown until Leasing dis covered it in the Ducal Library at Wolfenblittel, and the brothers Vischer produced it in its entirety at Berlin in 1834) alleged the parallel between John i. 14 and Matt. xxvi. 26 in these words : " Verbum caro assumpsit quod non erat, non amittens quod erat ; et panis consecratus, in altari amisit vilitatem, arnisit inefficaciam, non amisit naturae proprietatem, cui naturae quasi loco, quasi fundamento dignitas divinitus augeretur et effi- cacia." * In the same manner he anticipates Cajetan s conclusion in the words : " Const at omne quod consecretur, omne cui a Deo benedicatur, non absumi, non auferri, non destrui, sed manere, et in melius quam erat necessario provehi," and quotes from St. Ambrose the similitude, "tu eras, sed eras vetus creatura ; postquam consecratus es, nova creatura factus es, ut sicut manente subjecto anirnae et corporis, in novam mutatus est aliquis creaturam " ita rnanentibus subjectis suis mu- tentur panis et vinum in corpus et sanguinem Christ " (p. 248). But while the Cardinal appears to be unconscious of the bearing of the passage, " The Word was made flesh," upon the Eucharistical doctrine of his Church, he makes a voluntary concession to the advocates of a more spiritual interpretation of the * Berengarii de Sacni Coenu adv. Lanfranc, p. 98. Ed. Berol.. 1834. 54 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. words of the institution in his commentary on the sixth chapter, which had till then been regarded one of the mainstays of the dogma of transubstan- tiation. His treatment of the whole subject brings down upon him the fullest measure of indignation from Catharinus. Yet Catharinus himself has a beautiful passage on the contrast between the outward and the inward, the material and spiritual reception of the sacrament while thus denouncing Cajetan. " Comprimebatur Christus a turba, nihil proderat caro ilia compre- mentibus. Eadem caro, immo fimbria vestimenti a muliere sensibiliter tangitur ; exivit virtus et sanavit. Quare ? quia illi carnaliter solum tange- bant, at mulier tetigit fide. Idcirco audit Fides tua te salvam fecit/ non dicit tactus ille sensibilis sed fides." Surely this is as much as though he admitted that ct the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper is Faith." (Art. xxviii.) Cajetan lays down first the prin ciple that " the entire discourse in its direct in tention (sermo formalis) does not relate to the sacrament, or to the res sacramenti (the matter or outward part of the sacrament) but to the fountain of the sacrament (fons sacramenti) which he shows to be the death and sacrifice of Christ. Secondly, he shows that, if applied to the sacra- * Anibros. Catharinus con. Cajetan, p. 168 (Paris, 1535). THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 55 merit, its meaning is limited to those who par take of it spiritually. The primary meaning he states thus : " The sense is, unless ye feed on the death of the Son of Man as meat and drink ye have no spiritual life in you. And this sense (he adds) is the true one and is the obvious (or necessary) intention. It is the true one, since unless the soul of man so believes in the death of Christ as to be sustained by it as by food, and be made glad by it as by drink, it has no life of grace in it. It is, moreover, the necessary in tention, because the separation of the flesh and blood manifestly explains the death of Christ, in which the flesh and the blood were separated, and also because He expressly says, * my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world/ by which he clearly describes his death." The secondary or eucharistic meaning he shows must be consistent with this primary one, and must refer to faith in the sacrament as the memorial of the death of Christ ; according to the words of the Apostle, " As often as ye eat of this bread and drink of this cup ye do show forth the death of Christ," &c. The third interpretation which relates to the reception of the sacrament, he limits to the spiritual reception, and here he endeavours to escape from the dilemma in which the Roman expositors flud themselves by the denial of the cup to the laity, and to meet the argument of the 56 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. Bohemians who, having received from the Roman Church the eucharistical interpretation of the entire discourse, used the words " except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood ye have no life in you," so successfully even before the Council of Trent, as to compel the Court of Rome to make some temporary and local con cession of the cup to the laity.* He concludes, however : " It clearly appears that the discourse in its literal sense does not relate to the eating and drinking the sacrament of the Eucharist, but to the eating and drinking the death of Christ .... by saying he who eateth me shall live by me he shows that to eat is to have life, and truly this is so, since to feed on the death of Christ is to have eternal life." In direct contradiction to the theory of Car dinal Wiseman, in his famous Lectures, that there is a transition in the discourse of Christ at the 43t,n verse, Cajetan observes. "Remember that this discourse, as it begins with bread so ends with bread " (a pane incepit, ad panem redit). Much in the same manner, and in the same * Cajetan charges the Bohemians with the re-introduction of the practice of administering the Eucharist to infants. Zorn, in his learned " Historia Eucharistiae Infantiuny proves that this allegation is false as regards the Hussites proper, and is only true of the branch of the later Calixtines. The usage prevailed anciently over the whole Church, as Zorn has largely proved (pp. 81, 91, 146, 402, &c.). Its entire abrogation shows that the Church recognised faith, of which infants are incapable, as a necessary qualification for the reception of the Eucharist. THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 57 spirit Cajetan had already interpreted the inter view of our Lord with the Samaritan woman in the fourth chapter. And, indeed, His discourse on that occasion might be applied to baptism in the same manner in which that in the sixth chapter is applied to the Eucharist and might for the same reason be proved inapplicable, for eternal life is the promise annexed both to the water given by Christ, and to the bread with which he com pares himself. And as the result in both cases is purely spiritual, the causes which led to it must be so too. The observation of the Cardinal on the words, " The hour cometh," c., as addressed by our Lord to the woman, is significant : " He foreshows the future period of grace of the New Testament abrogating both places, yea, every place." " Neither in this mountain," here one of them is excluded; "nor in Jerusalem," here the temple-worship is excluded ; and through these two exclusions, every other place is excluded. He seems to take no account of Roman pilgrim ages, Jubilees, privileged places or privileged altars. If the claim of Jerusalem is disallowed far more would these be. For the worshippers of the Father in spirit and in truth have every place as their temple, and bring the living temple into every place of their worhip. Passing on to the eighth chapter, Cajetan holds with St. Jerome that the incident of the woman 58 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. taken in adultery is not sufficiently authentic to be accepted as a part of the Gospel, although read in the Church as such. For this of course he receives the severest reprehension from his critic, who does not however venture to carry back the censure to the real culprit. The question of the Jews (xii. 34) : " How sayest thou the Son of Man must be lifted up ?" leads to the observation, " It appears hence that Jesus said many things of which the Evangelists have only gathered some sentences Christ merely says, I, if I be lifted up ; the insertion by the multitude, " the Son of Man must be lifted up," turns the conditional statement into a positive and specific one. On the words, "or that He should give some thing to the poor" (xiii. 29), the Cardinal renews his argument against the mendicant orders with even additional force. From the whole of his Commentary on the Gospels, and especially from that on St. John, it is clear that Cajetan held a strong doctrine on the subject of predesti nation, and regarded only the predestined to life as the " flock" and sheep of Christ. The words, u Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you," (xv. 1 6) give him occasion to point to the doctrine of election, and in pursuit of the simi litude of the vine and its branches to observe : " While in the vine it is clear that the vine pro- THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHX. 59 daces the branches, and not the branches the vine, the contrary appears in civil (or political) societies. For the people choose the king, not the king the people, and so in other orders. Accordingly to exclude this view and to declare in fact, and in a literal sense, what he had already declared metaphorically, he adduces this third lesson to the end that the disciples might continue in his love. The first he alleges from the fruit of joy ; the second from that of friendship ; the third from the benefit of their election. In these, taken altogether, he manifests the truth that their union with Jesus does not originate from themselves, but from Jesus alone : " Ye have not chosen me/ he saith, as a people would choose their king, or an army their general, or disciples their master, but I have chosen you/ And lest you should err in believing that this union springs from chance or circumstance he adds, "but I have chosen you/ that is, both by an eternal and a temporal election." He follows up this view of election to a singular result in his commentary on the charge to Peter, " Feed my sheep" (xxi. i 5-17), and alleges that as the sheep and lambs represent the predes tinated to life, the pastoral rule of Peter extends only to the elect, and not to any who are not thus fore-ordained. The obvious consequences which would follow 60 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. from this theory, to the Papal authority and its claim over all mankind both in spiritual and tem poral things, awakens the most serious alarm in the mind of Catharinus. He denounces the doc trine as " false and perilous. For if the care given to Peter only extends to the predestinate, truly he would not have it over others, which is false and heretical moreover, we should not know, nor would he know who or how manv were com mitted to his charge, for he would not know who were predestinated. Moreover, the binding and loosing power which was given him explicitly by the Lord would fail him altogether." The reason though plausible is hardly sufficient, for the knowledge given to Peter extended far beyond an ordinary human knowledge, and enabled him to recognise those who were truly called ; a privi lege which could not extend to his alleged suc cessors, and the binding and loosing power had been already so limited by the Cardinal (on Matt, xvi. 19) as to adapt it in some degree at least to the strange limitation which we are now consider ing. In illustration of this latter passage we may fall back upon the final commission of Christ to the Apostles, and the power of retaining or remitting sin which is there given them (xx. 23). Cajetan supposes that the gift of the Holy Ghost was specially bestowed in relation to the sacra ment of Penance, " in which the sacramental act THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 61 requires in the minister the direction of the Holy Spirit, and an internal judgment of sin. And if any should ask how can I know that the Holy Ghost moves me to retain or to remit, the reply is obvious that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and of the fear of the Lord, and according as every one of these conditions is observed or not, viz., wisdom, counsel and the like, we may reasonably conclude that the penitent may be either absolved or not absolved." He proposes here as great a difficulty as he had already done in regard to the predestinate. For how shall either the confessed or the confessor feel satisfied that all the condi tions on which the gift of the Holy Ghost is promised, have been complied with. One fatal condition, which in that day only existed in a doubtful appendix to the Council of Florence, viz., the necessity of intention both in the minister and receiver of the sacraments, had not then the stereotyped authority which the Council of Trent assigned to it. In the endeavour to give to the priesthood a superhuman authority, and to make his will like the "I wills " of Christ, that fatal doctrine has cut away the ground from their feet and made the very existence of the ijnurch dependent upon a supposition which can never assume the solidity of a fact, or the sanction of an established truth. 62 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. We have already observed that the frequent mistranslations of the Vulgate are as frequently corrected by the Cardinal, to the great grief of Catharinus, who dedicates an entire chapter to his pathetic remonstrance. In the last chapter of St. John, one of these mistranslations, and one of the most unaccountable of them is amended " Sic eum volo manere donee veniam,"- instead of " Si eum volo," &c., the absurdity of which error mu^t be apparent from the fact that it would be a con tradiction of the verses that follow, and a fatal misrepresentation of the entire incident. Yet Sixtus V. in his authoritative edition preserves the false reading as he does every other. CHAPTER VT. THE COMMENTARY ON THE ACTS AND THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE ROMANS. THE commentary of the Cardinal on the Acts of the Apostles is little more than an explanatory paraphrase. Nothing indicative of the state of Christianity in the Apostolic age as contrasted with that of later ages occurs in it, except perhaps the single passage on the burial of Stephen, of which he observes on the words " And devout men carried Stephen to his burial " (viii. 2), " It appears from this that the festival of martyrs (solemnitates martyruni) had not begun in that primitive Church. For they did not dedicate a martyr s celebration (martyrium) to Stephen, but made great lamentation over him, taking care of his body after the Hebrew manner." One other suggestive passage we may note, that, namely, on the offer of money to Peter by Simon Magus, where the Cardinal touches upon the delicate subject whether the guilt of simony attaches to the purchase of the Cardinalate, which many of the more lax moralists of the fifteenth 64 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. century held, from its mixed civil and religious character, to be capable of sale without incurring the guilt of simony. He holds of course the stricter view, which the Constitution of Julius II. , " Cum tarn divino" had already so rigidly en forced (A.D. 1505). The very necessity of this stringent law gave sad and significant proof of the extent to which simony had reigned in the Church of Rome, and the number of offices and dignities which had been filled simoniacally. The contemporary commentator upon it, Gam- marus, gives us proofs that the very author of the decree had mounted the Papal throne through simony, and intimates that it was promulgated as a kind of atonement for this notorious guilt. On the words in xix. 18, "Many came and confessed and showed their deeds," he observes, " As the repentant persons came to John the Baptist confessing their sins, in the same manner these are described as confessing their sins, without doubt generally or publicly, for neither was a sacramental confession, but merely the profession of repentance for their past lives." The closing words of Cajetan s exposition of the Acts are an indication that he did not attach much importance to the legendary history of St. Peter and St. Paul which represents their later years. Of all that followed the two years in which he received the faithful in his own house the Cardinal THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 65 professes an entire ignorance. " Quid postea secu- tum sit, nescitur ; nisi quantum ex Epistolis Pauli conjicere licet." We approach now the most important and the most doctrinal portion of his Commentary, that on the Epistles of St. Paul, the first which the writer of this summary became acquainted with, and which gave him the great inducement to examine its earlier divisions. This part of the work is dedicated to the Emperor Charles the Fifth. The examination of the earlier portion of the Commentary enabled us to see the comparative freedom of the pre-Tridentine writers from the fetters of a traditional interpretation, not older in most ca,ses than the mediaeval theology which was re-imposed upon the Church by the stereotyped laws of Trent. Neither the great Churches of Northern and Central Europe nor the Eastern Churches were represented in that assembly, while the Gallican Church, the "first daughter of the Church," struggled but feebly for life under the leadership of the Cardinal of Lorraine, whose constant protests fell fruitlessly upon the dead wall of Spanish and Italian Ultramontanism. All the greatest men of the Italian Church had passed away, with the single exception of Cardinal Seripandi, who died in the Council ; the last con tender for the ancient doctrine of the Church on justification by faith, and of the auxilia gratiae E 66 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. of the Augustinian School. Cajetan, Contarini, Sadolet, ^Egidius of Viterbo, and all the great luminaries of the Church of Italy during the renaissance of theological learning had passed away from the scene. Pole alone survived to take part in the opening sessions of the Council, but when he saw that the doctrine of Justification was being corrupted by the Jesuit faction, and the ancient teachings of the Church on grace deter minedly set aside, he left the assembly in disgust and never appeared in it again. The only great testimony which survived in the Council was the admirable letter of Cardinal Contarini, by which, " being dead, he yet spake." In the hands of his nephew, Julius Contarini, it was so formidable a weapon that at one time it threatened to divide the Council almost as perilously as did the conten tion of the Spanish bishops on the " residence of the bishops by divine right." A MS. treatise, which has never been published, by Giacomo Giacomelli, Bishop of Belcastro, who was present in the earlier sessions of the Council, dedicated to Cardinal Farnese, and now in the possession of the writer, opens with the following statement : " Superioribus diebus cum (ut te non latet) de impii justificatione in sancta hac Tridentina Synodo ageretur, ut quid de ea sentiendum foret tandem aliquando statuere- mus, fuere quidam (non oportet nominare quen- quam) eruditi viri, meo judicio et diserti, qui summa THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 67 nobis contentione, summaque eloquentia persua- dere conati sunt, opera iiostra qua.mlibet in gratia patrata, quamlibet a charitate einanantia longe abesse ab eo, ut sufficiant, et quae satisfaciant legi Dei, et quae gloriam mereantur ; nisi ad justitiam Christi, ad misericordiarn Patris novo quodam rnodo, nescio unde eruto, confugiamus. Manca enim ipsa nostra opera esse et debilia quainvis a divina gratia fulciantur. Ipsis propterea non fidendum. A Christi meritis, a sola justitia Christi opem et auxiliurn implorandum. Appellabantque hanc justitiam, justitiam imputatam, ut quam nobis imputari si servandi sumus atque attribui opus sit. Hanc suam opinionem summa (ut aiebam) contentione, multis ac undecumque accersitis rationibus tutabantur . . . . et tamen inventi sunt qui in pleno senatu pro ilia opinione tan- quam pro aris et focis (ut dicitur) dimicarent. . , . Erat iiempe negotium Justifications post diutur- nam et in synodo, et seorsum a synodo discepta- tionem eo denique perlatum ut niliil praeterea superesset quam ut supremam acciperet manum. Ecce tibi nova jurgia, novae lites Justitia imputata in medium prosilit nova pompa et apparatu intro- ducta."* In a later passage he refers to the famous letter of Cardinal Contarini in defence of the doctrine he * The original words have been quoted that there might be no charge of suppression or mutilation in the translation of them. 68 PRE-TKIDENTIXE DOCTRINE. is impugning, " cpistola quae uLicumque circum- fertur"* indicating* the great influence which the name of that noblest of the ornaments of the Roman Church in the Reformation period still possessed, and that not only with the subordinate members of the Council, but with Seripandi and Pole, and even with its last president, Cardinal Moron e, for whose use in his diocese of Bologna Contarini had written his beautiful catechism of Christian doctrine, the most perfect picture we possess of pre-Tridentine doctrine and of the faith of Rome before its corruption by the Jesuits under the overwhelming influence of Laynez. The ignorance of the Council when it entered upon the subject was plainly admitted by Cardinal Cervinus (afterwards MarcellusII.),the Pro-Legate, as the representative of Cardinal del Monte, the first Legate, who observed that " though the ancient Schoolmen wrote copiously on the ques tion of original sin, they wrote but sparingly on Justification," and that therefore their light must be derived from the writers who for the last twenty years had opposed the writings of Luther. This confession of weakness, which indicated that one of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity had * This letter, which the Lyons Edition of his works in 1571 gives in its integrity, was so mutilated by the Jesuit editors in the later edition, published at Venice, that the Cardinal is ingeniously made to express the very contrary doctrine to that he is really advocating. By an artifice worthy of the "Society," the paging of the former edition is preserved in order to conceal from the reader the omissions made in the text. THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 69 had no place in the religious teaching of the Tridentine Fathers, whose only enlightenment could be found in the polemical writers of modern date, Cardinal Pacecco supplemented by admitting that " not only the ancient divines had treated this question in a more contracted form, but that even in the ancient Councils it had never been venti lated or defined. Wherefore it ought to be dis cussed and defined by the present one." It would appear from this candid admission that the doc trine of Justification, lost to the Roman. Church during the Middle Ages, had now to be discovered, or rather disinterred, from the closed pages oi the Scripture, and that, at the end of the sixteenth century. But as the auxilia gratiae are as yet unsettled by that Church, though the discussion of them before the Popes fills hundreds of folio pages, we ought perhaps to excuse the Legate for so honest a confession of neglect.* The Italian and Spanish bishops at Trent seemed to have heard as little of the doctrine as the disciples at Ephesus had of the Holy Ghost (Acts xix. 2), though they might have learned it as fully in the Epistles of St. Paul, as the Ephesians learned the doctrine of the Holy Ghost from the personal teaching of the same Apostle. Cajetau had learned it there, and his Commentary on the * Le Plat, Mon. C. T. torn. iii. p. 430. Serry, Hist. Congreg. de Auxiliis Gratiae, Ven. 1740. yo PRE-TKIDEXTINE DOCTRINE. Romans shows that he at least was not of the number of those who wrote sparingly upon it or failed to give it the most exalted rank in the teachings of the Church. From these introduc tory considerations, which will prepare the reader for the marked contrast in which his doctrine stands with the Tridentine definitions and decrees, we proceed to an examination of the Commentary itself. And to show this contrast more remark ably we will place the words of Cajetan in juxta position with those of our own Homily on the Salvation of Mankind which I was led to observe, now fifty-five years since, were taken almost verbatim from the Commentary of the Cardinal, whose works were well known to, and often quoted by, our reformers. The words of the latter will be given in their original form that there may be no suspicion of any attempt at adaptation. Cajetan in Rom. c. Hi. v. 24. Homily on Salvation. Adverte quod in hoc quod In our justification is not homines ex peccatoribus fiunt only God s mercy and grace, justi concurrunt gratia Dei et but also His justice. And, justitia Dei. Ita quod non although this justification be concurrit sola gratia, quae tune free to us, yet it cometh not sola concurreret quando Deus so freely to us that there is remitteret peccata sine aliqud no ransom paid for it at all. solutione. Sed hoc Deus nuii- quam fecit aut facit. Sed gratiae suae inserit justitiam suam quam toties Apostolus noininat Justitiam Dei. THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 7 At si contra hoc instetur, quod haec duo sibi invicem ad- versantur, scilicet quod sinius justificati gratis per gratiam Dei, et quod simus justificati per redeniptionem quae est in Ohristo Jesu. Nam si per re- demptionem ergo non gratis, et si per gratiam ergo non per justitiam redemptionis. Solu- tio est, quod scriptura sacra non dicit nos justificari per solam gratiam sed per gratiam simul et justitiam, sed utram- que Dei Et adverte tria " PER " at- tulisse apostolum in hae sen- tentia. Primum dicendo per gratiam ipsius, secundum per redemptionem, et tertium per fidem redemptionis ; ut intel- ligamus ad justificandum nos concurrere, primum ex parte Dei gratiam, deinde ex parte JesuChristi justitiam redemp tionis, et demum ex parte nostri fidem in sanguine Jesu Christi. Et gratia quidem primum tenet locum, utpote etiam causa secundi et tertii. .... Fides donum Dei est et non creaturae (in c. X.). Arbitramur igitur justificari hominem per fidem sine oper- ibus legis justificantibus. Non But here may man s reason be astonied, reasoning after this fashion. If a ransom be paid for our redemption, then it is not given us freely. For a prisoner that paid his ran som is not let go freely This reason is satisfied by the great wisdom of God in this mystery of our redemption, who hath so tempered his jus tice and mercy together, and with his mercy hath joined his upright and equal justice (gratiae suae inserit justitiam suam, ut supr.). In these foresaid places the Apostle toucheth specially three things which must go together in our justification. Upon God s part His great mercy and grace, upon Christ s part jus tice that is, the satisfaction of God s justice by the offering of his body and upon our part true and lively faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, which yet is not ours, but God working in us. The grace of God doth not shut out the justice of God in our justification, but only shut- 72 PEE-TRIDENTIXE DOCTRINE. enim intendit excludere opera teth out the justice of man legis Non intendit ex- that is to say, the justice of chulere ab executione sed a our works Faith doth justificatione not shut out repentance, hope, love, dread, &c.,but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying That Cajetan held with Contarini, Pole, and the learned and influential minority at Trent the doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ which St. Bernard so eloquently vindicated in an earlier day, and of which the Bishop of Bel- castro was willingly or rather stolidly ignorant, appears from his commentary on the passage (his faith) " was imputed unto him for righteousness " (iv. 22).* Having first corrected the Vulgate reading by substituting imputation for reputation, he observes that the former word better describes the ascribing or attributing a work to another than does the latter. " In the doctrine that faith was imputed for righteousness it is signified that righteousness is not conferred of debt or of merit/ The opening of the fifth chapter, which describes the fruits of justification, is treated by the Cardinal in a very lucid and practical manner. He observes that * The excellent commentary of Cardinal Seripandi on the Galatians, with the interesting questions he raises at its close, may well be com pared with the words of Cajetan on Rom. iii. His 29th Question, " de justificationis initio, proyressu etfine, exemplo Abrahae" excellently repre sents the evangelical view for which he contended at Trent. THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 73 these fruits are four in number, including first, peace with God and access to Him by faith ; secondly, the rejoicing in the hope of the glory of God ; thirdly, the glorying in tribulations ; and, lastly, joy in God through Jesus Christ (verse 1 1) on all which results of a justification by faith he dwells with his usual clearness and skill. " The first good," he writes, " arising to the justified is peace with God ; to this is added a threefold glorification ; first, in the hope of the glory of God ; secondly, in glorying in afflictions ; and, thirdly, in God." On the i8th verse he writes: "From this doctrine of St. Paul you see that original sin is common to all men, and hereby even to infants, for otherwise the sin of Adam would be more powerful than the righteousness of Christ, because the former would extend to infants and not the latter,* the opposite of which Paul teaches manifestly. And mark this as an argument for infant baptism." From a passage in the following chapter in which baptism is likened to a burial with Christ it would appear that baptism by immersion was then generally practised. " Ex sepultura declarat mortem, ex ritu baptizandi ; quia scilicet qui baptizatur sub aqua ponitur. ; * This argument had already been strongly urged by St. Bernard against Abailard, in the celebrated passage in which he uses the terra imputation " in connection with the righteousness of Christ. 74 PKE-TRIDEXTINE DOCTRINE. The last verse of the chapter gives him occasion to make a new and most emphatic renunciation of human merit. " The gift of God is eternal life" &c. " He does not say that the wages of righteousness is eternal life, but the gift of God is eternal life, in order that we might understand that it is not of our own merits but the free gift of God that we obtain the end of eternal life. Wherefore he adds f In Jesus Christ our Lord. Here, then, is the merit, here is the righteousness whose wage is eternal life ; to us, however, it is the gift of God for the sake of Jesus Christ/ We now arrive at that most difficult stage of the long and closely connected argument of this epistle, the seventh chapter, which has exercised the skill of so many commentators in every period and in every division of the Church. The Cardinal, rightly regarding the obvious connection it has with the fifth chapter, in which the fall of man in A darn is so impressively contrasted with his rising again in Christ, describes the Mosaic law as inter posed between these two great periods in the his tory of mankind in order to give a divine revelation on the nature and the effects of sin. On the passage " I had not known sin but by the law," he shows that the apostle refers to sin as the transgression of the law of God in contrast to the mere law of man. " For murder," he writes, " and similar sins, nay, even inward sins were known to mankind as THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 75 appears by the works of trie Philosophers. But they knew not sin according to the chief reason of its guilt, which is its offence against God, nor ac cording to the reason of its penalty, which is its deserving eternal death." Coveting, as a sin of the mind and heart, the apostle alleges to have become a sin only through the prohibition of the law. By *m the Cardinal considers him to mean the fomes peccati, the desire and lust after sin, which St. Paul describes as working in him all manner of concupiscence. For without the law this desire would be dead. The passage, " I was alive with out the law once," he refers to the first state of man before a positive law had been given by God. But when that prohibitory law was proclaimed, the desire of sin revived, that is, the death to sin was broken and sin regained its life. And thus the new commandment which was designed to bring life re sulted in death, through the weakness of the nature on which it was imposed. The struggle of the two principles in the soul of man arises out of this first incapacity, a struggle which is described as terminating in the triumph of the grace of God through Christ, who has delivered man from the body of death which weighed him down and placed him in the glorious liberty of the sons of God. Such is the brief outline of the Cardinal s view of this difficult chapter, as far as I am able to understand it. For his language is often obscure from its 76 PRE-THIDENTINE DOCTRINE. colloquial style and scholastic subtleties, and would naturally be more so in an argument which has baffled so many endeavours to clear it up. We pass on to the ninth chapter, which presents scarcely less difficult a problem, that on predestination and election, which has occasioned such irreconcilable differences of doctrine and opinion from the earliest period of the history of the Church. On this point the Cardinal has displayed a singular judgment and moderation, and presents another point of contact with the doctrine of the Church of England. Though differently worded and not exhibiting the close affinity which we observed between his definition of justification and our own Homily on the Salva tion of Mankind, the doctrinal resemblance is equally clear and the via media which both pre serve is characteristic of the wise moderation of our own reformers as well as of Cajetan himself. We cannot withhold from the reader the passage in its entirety, as it could not be summarised with detracting from its force and value. "But before we proceed further it occurs to us to respond to the curiosity of men on the subject of predestination and reprobation. For they say, If I am of the number of the elect, it is the same thing as saying that I am saved ; in like manner, if I am of the number of the reprobate, it is the same thing as though I were condemned. " I answer that, we can speak in two manners on this curious THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 77 question either beginning from those things which belong to the part of God and coming down to our selves, or conversely beginning with those things which belong to ourselves, and ascending to God. If we begin from God, we profess first that God has from eternity chosen severally this and that man according to his good pleasure ; secondly, that this election will infallibly (I say not necessarily) have its effect namely, his salvation. But beginning from ourselves, we profess first, that every one possesses a free will to choose good or evil ; secondly, that every one doing as much as lies in him towards obtaining eternal life will be saved by divine grace. In what manner, however, and by what connecting means the ascending and descending chains are linked together does not appear. For in the as cending line there fails the link uniting this liberty and security of ours with the eternity and immuta bility of the divine election which implies the sal vation of the elect only. And in like manner, descending from the eternal, immutable, and effectual divine election, the link is wanting con necting it with our own free will and security. And hence it is no wonder that we fail to quiet the minds of those who inquire and draw unbecom ing consequences from the doctrine. Such as that, let a man do what he will the election is sure to take place, and the like horrible conclusions. To relieve curiosity I affirm that these things are 78 PRE-TKIDENTINE DOCTRINE. truths in regard to divine election or reprobation, but not truths which stand alone, but are asso ciated with other truths on our own part viz., that we have a free will and that by doing our own duty (faciendo quod ex nobis est) we shall be saved by divine grace, and, according to our own deserts, shall be either saved or lost. And when you object to this, Join these truths together/ I reply, I know that truth is not contrary to truth, but know not how to join them, even as I cannot explain the mystery of the Trinity nor the immor tality of the soul ; nor how the Word was made Hesh, and the like truths which I nevertheless believe. And as I believe the other mysteries of faith so I believe these mysteries of predestination and reprobation. It is mine only to hold what I know certainly viz., to use rny free will and all the other gifts which God has granted me with all diligence to the attainment of eternal life, and to wait to learn in the heavenly country the mys tery of divine election at present unknown to me, and all other mysteries of faith. This ignorance quiets my mind." Passing to the tenth chapter, the Cardinal has this comment on the words, "Faith cometh by hearing," &c. "Observe that faith (as is said in Eph. ii.) is the gift of God and not of the crea ture, in so far as it represents the will to believe, and the act of faith itself. But as far as relates THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 79 to the explanation of the things to be believed, faith cometh by hearing. For by hearing the doctrine of the Gospel we learn what is to be believed definitely. Hence, Cornelius the cen turion, through the gift of God, believing in Him, sent for Peter and learned from him the definition of the things to be believed (quae sunt nobis de terminate credenda). . . . and hearing by the word of God. This hearing is derived from the word of God revealed to the Prophets and Apos tles, so that from first to last faith is described as derived from the word of God, and not of men. Whence by no human authority can new articles of faith be introduced ; but only those explained which were revealed through the word of God to the Prophets and Apostles." We cannot but believe that the Cardinal had in view in these words the attempt to enforce upon the Church the dogma of the Immaculate Concep tion which he so energetically denounced, and whose acceptance by the Lateran Council under Leo X., he succeeded in preventing. The doc trine he here puts forth is however equally applicable to the numerous inventions with which the Church of Rome has at once complicated, and debased the simple and primitive religion of Christ. Cardinal Pole, in his " Book on the Council," alleges in the same spirit as that of his early colleagues, that the "kingdoms and nations ought 8o PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. to hear the faith of Peter explained by his suc cessors in the same manner in which it was ex plained by Peter himself to the first-fruits of the Gentiles." 1 But what then would become of the bulls, constitutions, and " extravagants," and of the " plenitude potestatis " of the spiritual and temporal power ? * DC Concilio, Quaestio 56. Le Plat, torn. iii. p. 338. CHAPTER VII. THE COMMENTARY ON THE CORINTHIANS. THE Epistles to the Corinthians, unlike that to the Homans which carries on a connected argu ment on the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, have rather the usual character of such communi cations, and present the different subjects as they appear in succession to the mind of the Apostle. The occasion however on which the former of the Epistles was written, and the schisms and errors of doctrine and practice which had so painfully disturbed the Church of Corinth, led the Apostle into many subjects of special interest, and enable us to see in it more clearly than in any other of his writings, the external features of the Primi tive Church, and the simplicity of its ritual and government. These the Cardinal does not attempt to dissemble or to explain away. The simple ritual with which the Eucharist was then cele brated so closely resembling its Passover proto type the use in it of a language understood by the people the absence of the more elaborate F 82 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. antiphonal methods of a later age, all these features are honestly recognised and depicted, to the great grief and indignation of his pertinacious adversary, Catharinus. The transitional state in which the doctrine and practice of the Eucharist appears in the pre-Tridentine writers of the more advanced school of thought is very conspicuous in the con fusion which reigns in many of their statements, and in their over- anxiety to rescue their belief in Transubstantiation from the gross conceptions of the Schoolmen, and the consequences into which they were not ashamed to follow it up. The fiction of an absolute presence in the Eucharist from its repulsive and revolting consequences led many even in the days of Aquinas to believe that in the case of the wicked and unworthy commu nicant, the elements ceased to be the body of Christ, and no sooner touched his lips than they returned to their former state.* Innocent III., the inventor of Transubstantia tion answers in like manner the question whether a mouse can receive the body of Christ if it eats the sacrament, by supposing that in that case the place of the consecrated host is supplied again by the si na pie element, so that the bread is in a manner transubstantiated back again, f But what " :: ~ Aquinat. Summa Theol., p. iii. q. 80, art. iii. f Innocent III., de Sacro Altaris Mysterio, 1. iv. c. n. THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 83 could we not expect from one who wrote these words of his new discovery, " Sic ergo creatura quotidie fit creator." * Can we wonder that the great philosopher, Averroes exclaimed, " Quoniam hi Christiani man- ducant Deum quern adorantt sit anima mea cum philosophis." Cajetan makes but two divisions of communi cants, those who communicate sacramentally only, and those who communicate both sacramentally and spiritually. But he holds the absolute presence in both cases. He shows that in the Primitive Church the breaking of the bread was an essen tial part of the rite, and evidently disapproves of the disuse of it in the Roman Church. He asserts the Eucharist to be a sacrifice, on the ground of the twenty-first verse of the tenth chapter, where the table of the Lord is contrasted with the table of devils forgetful that there is no idea of sacrifice in either member of the com parison, but only of the participation of the things which had been offered, after their sacrifice. He supposes that on the anniversary of the Last Supper, the faithful met together in a representa tive feast, which was carried on at first with great solemnity but afterwards was corrupted by abuses. He vindicates against the Latin form of o " Id. 1. iv. c. 19. f Concil. TricL, can. i. de Transubst. 84 PRE-TRIDEXTINE DOCTRINE. consecration the use by the Greek Church of the words " this is my body which is broken for you," instead of only " given for you," defending the former term on the ground of St. Paul s tradi tion. He shows how far better it would depict the body "which was scourged, pierced by the nails, fixed on the Cross, and at last broken by the spear of the soldier." The limited idea which he attaches to the Eucharist as a sacrifice appears from his remarkable definition of it : " Praecipiens Eucharistiam, non solum praecipit Hoc facite, sed adjungit, in meam memoriam, ut intelligamus non tantum sacrameritum sed sacrificium praecipi. Hostiae siquidem ct sacrifleia sunt quae in me mo riam jiunt." His view hereupon will more clearly appear in his Commentary on the Hebrews where he explains his idea of the Missal sacrifice at greater length. On the twelfth chapter, v. 13, " We have been all made to drink into one spirit" he remarks: " Consider these words of Paul, and reflect that in so far as Christians are members of the body of Christ, in that same degree they are generated by the same spirit, and are nourished by the same spirit. Otherwise they are members of the body of Christ only sacrament ally." The difference between a spiritual faith and a mere sacramental one is here clearly defined. Passing on to the fourteenth chapter, v. 14, THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 85 " For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful," the Cardinal writes : " Experience teaches us that when any one ignorant of Latin is moved by the Holy Spirit to pray in Latin (for instance, to say the Psalm 6 Miserere mei Deus ) his spirit, that is his feel ings pray (for he is warmed with devotion towards God and to the spiritual grace of remission of sins), but his mind, that is his intellect, does not meditate upon the sense of the words he is utter ing, he does not contemplate the things signified by them, he does not penetrate into their meaning, and hence the mind, so far as it can penetrate the meaning of the things which he speaks while praying, is without its proper fruit, which is the feeding on the meaning and signification of the prayer/ Following up this train of thought he ventures to affirm : " We ought to learn from this that it would be more desirable that divine services (the canonical hours and masses) should be said intelligibly without musical melody, than so as to be not understood." Observing how the use of organs often drowned the voices of the singers, he concludes, u Haec omnia magis extranea. sunt quam decem millia vorborum in lingua." He had already observed on the eleventh chapter (v. 4), "At the time of this Epistle that 86 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. , manner of public prayer had not been introduced which now prevails in the temples of God by which prayer is given in alternate choirs, but one pronounced the common prayer for all, the rest remaining silent. And I think that the same was once the case in the psalmody of the Monks, that one read the psalm, the rest remain ing silent." Proceeding to the Second Epistle to the Corin thians we find a remarkable passage illustrative of the nature and principles of the Gospel and the direct teaching of the Holy Spirit by which every separate Christian is able to carry out the laws of the better covenant. On the words, " Ye are manifestly declared to be the Epistle of Christ ministered by us," the Cardinal observes : " The meaning of the passage is this : Ye are the Epistle, dictated by Christ, written by Christ, receiving its title from Christ, and signifying Christ. For whatever we have within us of spiritual faith, hope, and charity, Christ dictates and writes not in another s, but in His own name, and Christ Himself is He who is believed in, who is hoped for, who is loved by us. The Corinthians there fore are deservedly called the Commendatory Epistle of St. Paul, whereof Christ is the author and matter, ministered by us, or rather subminis- tered" This explanation leads him to describe the nature of the Christian ministry as subordi- THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 87 nated to Christ. Even the idea of subministra- tion seems to him at first sight to be presumptuous, as though man could become a delegate to write thus in the hearts of his fellow-men, as subminis- tering to the Holy Ghost ; but he proceeds to show that he is qualified for this arduous work by the freely bestowed gifts of God. " Shutting out all presumption, the Apostle declares that in fact God makes them fit to give manifestation of His spirit as he had said already, ( ministered by us, written by the Spirit of the living God. He concludes in these words : " You may gather from this, judicious reader, that the nature of the New Testament consists of those things which are im printed in the minds of men by Christ through the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us ; evangelical men subministering to us the things to be believed in, hoped for, loved, wrought, or avoided." If this truly evangelical doctrine had been maintained in the Church of Eome in the day of the Reformation, there would have been little ground for the departure of all the more religious and intellectual of the nations of Europe from her communion. In modern Romanism, however, no ministration, far less subministration, is admitted in the government of the Church. It is an abso lute autocracy in which the headship of Christ is hidden and lost, in which faith is written, not on the fleshly tables of the heart, or by the Christ 88 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. Himself, but engraved by the Pope in his own name, and not in Christ s, upon the " tables of stone " of bulls and constitutions by his own " mere motion" and in the "plenitude of his power." Though he cannot bestow the grace of faith, or the gift of the Holy Spirit, he invents new condi tions of the Gospel by the imposition of new and unintelligible dogmas, and makes the mere out ward acceptance of them the qualification for the kingdom instead of the living faith of Christ, exercised in the full freedom of the eternal and unchangeable Gospel. Yet that faith (as Cajetan writes) is "dictated and written by Christ" as His living Epistle in our hearts, " in His own name and not another s." And He is "both the author and the subject of it." Of all who receive Him now, even as of all who received Him at first, it is written infallibly that " to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in His name." No Pope or Church upon earth can ever deprive them of this power or of this heritage, confirmed as it is by that supreme promise, " They shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." The Commentary on the Galatians is little more than a paraphrase and explanation of the text ; even the " withstanding of St. Peter to the face " by St. Paul being passed over with but little com ment. Cardinal Seripandi, in one of his questions THE EPISTLES TO T.HE CORINTHIANS. 89 on the Epistle to the Galatians a work we have already cited devotes much pains in the endea vour to explain, or rather explain away, its bear ing on the Petrine claims. The Commentary on the Ephesians gives, as might be expected from its text, the fullest corro- boration of the method of salvation laid down in the Commentary on the Eomans, but with greater brevity. In the Commentary on the Philippians we find scarcely anything beyond that literal interpreta tion by which the Cardinal endeavoured to make plain to the reader the obvious sense of the words. One passage is noticeable, in which he refers, but very doubtfully, to the Letters of Ignatius on the question whether St. Paul as well as St. Peter was a married man, which, though not actually proved by the words of the Apostle, he holds to be yet very probable xi epistolis Ignatii datur fides. Until we arrive at the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians we find little or no break in the paraphrastic explanations of the text which were designed to clear up its literal meaning. The prophecy of the coming of Antichrist in the second chapter of this Epistle the writer refers to the breaking up of the Ptoman Empire, which he believes to be the falling away or apostasy which is to bring in the reign of Antichrist. 90 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. 61 Sublato dc medio Romano imperio revelabitur ille iniquus" He holds that the followers of Antichrist will remain until the return of Christ, the distinctive characteristics of Antichrist being the acquisition of power, through the possession both of wealth and coercive authority, to which the working of false signs and wonders will be added. By these appliances he will so seduce the minds of men as to make them believe wickedness to be lawful, while by the working of false miracles he will establish his reign. It does not occur to the mind of the Cardinal that the world-wide power which succeeded the breaking up of the Roman Empire was the Papacy ; for he expressly denies that Mahomet could be the Antichrist, inasmuch as he made himself an in spiration of God and not God Himself, whereas Antichrist not only opposes himself to God, but also exalts himself above all that is called God. Had he seen the later works of the Decretalists and the Jesuits, or the bulls of some of the later Popes or, it may be added,, the decrees of the modern Lateran and Vatican Councils, he might have seen how startling was the likeness of the later Popes to the man of sin who was to sit in the temple of God showing himself to be God. On the second chapter of the First Epistle to THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 91 Timothy, verse 5, " There is one God and one mediator between God and man," the Cardinal has this significant observation : " From the fact that there is only one God, it is shown that the care of men devolves upon that one God only. And as he is by nature good, it follows that he must offer to all salvation and the knowledge of the truth. For if there had been many Gods, one might imagine that one God might have the charge of saving some men, and another be charged with saving others. But as there is only one, to that one only belongs the care of all men." And he derives this also from the unity of the Mediator, adding," and one Medi ator betiveen God and man. If there were more mediators between God and man, it might be thought that there was one mediator for some, and another for others ; but from the truth that there is one Mediator between God and man to reconcile man to God, to him alone it devolves to mediate between God and all mankind. It follows that God wills that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, for this very reason, that he has appointed one Mediator between God and man." The Cardinal evidently knew nothing of patron saints, or sainted mediators nor could he have recognised the title of the Virgin Mary as a mediatrix, or the attributes which have been 92 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. robbed from the one God and one Mediator to be heaped with such lavish profusion on her, whose only injunction was this " Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it " and His supreme command was " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve " in which the so-called I atria and the subordinate dulia are both appro priated absolutely and exclusively to God. The mediaeval devotion to patron saints and guardian angels realises in a disguised form the imagination suggested by Cajetan that there is one God to save some, and another to save others ; for if it be urged that these are not the " Gods many" of heathenism, they are certainly the " Lords many," whose invocation is equally forbidden. It would appear from this passage of the Cardinal s Com mentary that he would have never subscribed to the decree of the Council of Trent, which enjoins the invocation of the saints, and meets only with a senseless impie sent ire the charge that such a practice detracts from the honour due to the " one Mediator." A curious confession occurs in the commentary on the third chapter on the passage requiring bishops to be " given to hospitality " " Rara est haec hodic virtus." On the first chapter of the Epistle to Titus, after showing that the bishop and presbyter were THE EPISTLES TO THE CORIXTHIANS. 93 the same in St. Paul s time, " both in degree and office," he adds the significant remark, " How the word presbyter became translated into sacerdos, it is not our present design to inquire." Perhaps the difficulty of the inquiry, as well as its irrelevancy, was the ground of this reticence. CHAPTER VIII. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. THE Commentary on the Hebrews opens with a somewhat long disquisition on its authenticity and authority. Cajetan, though altogether setting aside the authority of St. Jerome as a translator of the Scriptures, recognises his claims as a critic in all questions connected with the authenticity of particular portions of the canon or passages of the text which had been disputed or doubted by the writers of the first centuries. These in clude in the Old Testament the whole of the Apocrypha, and in the New, the story of the woman taken in adultery in St. John s Gospel the greater part of the last chapter of St. Mark and the following entire portions of the Canon, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of St. James, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of St. John, and the Epistle of Jude besides these well-known detached pas sages, the "three heavenly witnesses" (i John v. 7), the appearance of the angel comforting our Lord (Luke xxii. 43), and the doxology at the THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 95 close of the Lord s Prayer. The Apocalypse he does not venture to include in his Commentary confessing himself unable to explain it in a literal sense. " Hxponat," he adds, " cui Deus conces- serit," an act of humility for which he is as severely rebuked by Catharinus, as he is for any of his misdeeds of interpretation. The Epistle to the Hebrews presents without doubt many very diffi cult problems to modern as well as ancient critics. Its very title as an Epistle, its address to the Hebrews by one whose special mission was to the Gentile world, the difference of its style from that of any of the undoubted writings of St. Paul, present preliminary difficulties, which, however explained, must leave traces of their existence in every intelligent mind. Cajetan dwells mostly on the evidence he derives from chap. ii. 3, 4, and from the irrelevance of the quotation in chap. i. 5, " I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son." The former he considers to give proof that the writer derived his doctrine from the Apostles rather than claimed himself to have derived it from Christ. " Confirmed unto us by them that heard him," seems to be impossible words to one who declared that he had seen the Lord himself, that he spoke by direct revelation from God, and. that he derived nothing from those O who had gone before him in the faith. From similar or cognate reasons he rejects the theories 96 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. that Apollos, or Barnabas, or Clement could have composed the epistle, or rather discourse ; for it addressed no particular Church or person, and is more like an exhortation addressed to an entire, though scattered nation. The application to Christ of the words of God to David concerning Solomon (2 Sam. vii. 14, i Chron. xxviii. 6) is certainly very difficult to give a reasonable expla nation of. For the promise, " I will be his father, and he shall be my Son," is inevitably connected with, and indeed forms the complement of that threat, a If he commit iniquity I will chasten him with the rod of men." But Cajetan, far from rejecting the authority of the Epistle, though evidently holding with Erasmus that its claim to be a portion of the Canon rests on the judgment of the Church, treats it throughout in the same spirit, and with the same reverence which mark all the earlier portions of his work. That it was originally written in Greek and not in Hebrew, he proves among other arguments, from its constant use of the Septuagint version, instancing especially chap. ii. 7, " Thou madest him a little lower than the angels" whereas the Hebrew has the word God. Pro ceeding to the fourth chapter he shows that having compared our Lord to Moses as the faithful mes senger of God, the Apostle proceeds to a new comparison of Christ to Aaron, as the High Priest THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 97 of God not merely ministering at an earthly altar as Aaron, but passed into the heavens to intercede for his people. Here he enters upon the chief subject of the Epistle, and approaches the difficult question of the Melchisedechian priesthood. On the third verse of the seventh chapter, " without father, without mother, with out descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God," he writes : " Under this description he is found in the Scriptures, without any recorded (scripto) father, without any recorded mother, without any written genealogy, without beginning of days, for it is not written where he was born, and without end of life, for it is not recorded how long a time he lived. And hence he is compared with the Son of God, who is the King of righteousness and peace, without father as man, and without mother, as God without genealogy, as being without ancestors inasmuch as he is divine having neither beginning of days, nor end of life, as being eternal, and remaining a priest for ever in a positive sense while Melchisedeck remains a priest only negatively ; for he is described to be a priest, and the term of his priesthood is undefined. In every point therefore he is a type of the Son of God." He appears to contrast the priesthood of Aaron which was one of a dynasty, whose succession was carefully recorded with that of Melchisedeck 98 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. concerning whom we read of no predecessors or successors, and whom we see only in a single act, and then hear of no more, as though he had rather a typical than a real priesthood. He holds that " Melchisedeck is preferred to the Levitical priests because the Scripture speaks of their succeeding one another, but speaks not of any successor to Melchisedeck, but only of him as living." He holds that the name "Melchisedeck," like that of Pharaoh or Caesar, is not a personal but a dynastic name. He had already in his Commen tary on Genesis described the offering of Mel chisedeck to Abraham as rather a gift of refresh ment after the battle of the kings than a sacri fice, so that this he had no need to repeat here. He does not dissemble the difficulty which appears in the seventh verse, on which he observes : "It would seem to follow from this payment of tithes by Abraham that Christ also paid them since He was also in the loins of Abraham, and hence Christ would be made less than Melchisedeck. The solution seems to be that all the other de scendants of Abraham were entirely and absolutely derived from him, while Christ in His divine personality came down from heaven, only the per sons of the rest being in the loins of Abraham. The purpose of the Cardinal to treat the whole of the Scriptures literally can hardly be carried out on a portion of Scripture which itself is a THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 99 mystical interpretation of the historical persons and events of the earliest period. On the fourth verse of the ninth chapter he finds it difficult to reconcile the account of the contents of the ark as here given with the words of i Kings viii. 9. " There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel." Here, however, we may reasonably agree with his critic Catharinus, who alleges that the apostle is speaking of what had originally been placed in the ark, not of the contents of it in a later age. He next proceeds to the application of the ancient ritual to the final and completed sacrifice of Christ, which he describes emphatically as noniterata nee iteranda $ed semel. Passing on to the words, "Where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin" (x. 18) he gives us the following remarkable illustration of the pre-Tridentine doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass. " The writer s argument has this tendency ; that from the fact that in the new law there is remission of sins through the ob lation of Christ, there remains now no oblation for sin. For this would do an injury to the offering of Christ as insufficient (minus sufficienti.) Nor let the novice wonder on this account that the sacrifice of the altar is daily offered in the Church of Christ. For this is not a new sacrifice, but ioo PHE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. that same sacrifice which Christ offered is com memorated (commemoratur) according to his own charge, f Do this in remembrance of me. For all the sacraments are nothing else than applica tions of the passion of Christ to the recipients. It is one thing, however, to repeat (iterare) the passion of Christ, and altogether another to repeat the commemoration and application of the passion of Christ. We observe here that he places all the sacraments on the same footing in regard to the sacrifice of Christ ; they are applicatory and commemorative, but no proper sacrificial character is annexed to them. In his treatise on the mass against Luther the Cardinal had made a similar observation : " When it is inferred that it would be unbecoming to establish an offering for sins in the New Testament which has need to be repeated," he claims a concession from his adversary of the whole question, adding "quia non repetitur in Missfi hostia, sed illamet hostia in cruce oblata perse verans immolatitio modo recolitur in qufi- cumque Missa." : He regards the continuance of this offering as an act of continual intercession, as in every prayer of an ordinary kind, and so not derogatory to the propitiatory offering of the cross, adding the " oblation (hostia) of the Eu charist profits (those who receive it) by applying to them the efficacy of the death of Christ." In * Opusc. Lugcl. 1568, p. 287. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 101 this case it has clearly a sacramental rather than a sacrificial character. Cardinal Contarini in his " Christiana Instructio " has exactly the same doctrine on this subject. To the question, " In what manner is the mass a sacrifice 1 " it is replied, " The mass is a sacrifice of praise; it is a sacrifice of thanksgiving ; it is a sacrifice because it is a memorial of that one sacrifice by which Christ offered himself for us to God the Father through the Holy Ghost. It is a sacrifice because it is an offering whereby we offer Christ and his Passion and all the Church through Christ to Almighty God that we may be incorporated in him through Christ as our supreme good." This is the exact doctrine of our Communion Office, and almost in its actual words e.g., " This our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," " a perpetual memory of his precious death." " And here we offer unto thee our souls and bodies to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee," " that all we who are par takers of this Holy Communion may be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction." The closing chapters of the epistle give little oppor tunity for more than explanatory and textual remarks. The final words of the Commentary re assert the doubtful authorship of the work, speak ing of the " genuine epistles of St. Paul, and that which is inscribed to the Hebrews," "germanas Epistolas Pauli et earn quae ad Hebraeos in- 102 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. scribitur." He had already rejected all the other claimants without attempting to fix the author ship on any other. Some have thought that Zenas the lawyer has a strong claim to the authorship, from the supposition that his knowledge of the law and its ritual must have specially qualified him for such a work. CHAPTER IX. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. FOLLOWING St. Jerome, the Cardinal finds great difficulty in assigning the Epistle of St. James to the " brother of the Lord " its opening salutation which differs so greatly from the ordinary apostolic formula placing in his mind a preliminary obstacle to its apostolic origin. The violent abuse which the Roman advocates have heaped upon Luther for entertaining the same doubt stands in strange contrast with the fact that Cajetan s views on the doubtfulness of this and many other parts of the canon have never given him a place in the " Index," or even detracted from his general authority as a divine. The salutation appears to him so brief and secular as to present no point of affinity to those of the other apostles. The reconciliation between the doctrine of St. Paul and St. James on a justifying faith he states in these words. " Consider here, judicious reader, that St. James does not think that faith without works is dead, but holds that faith without works that is, refusing to io 4 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. work, is dead and vain, and does not justify. And he thinks rightly, for faith which is not prepared to work is dead. For from its own nature it worketh by love, as Paul saith. When James therefore alleges the word in Gen. xv. Abraham believed God, he means to say that he believed as one prepared to work. And therefore he saith that in the work of offering up his son the Scripture was fulfilled by Abraham s faith as prepared to work. For it was completed as far as extended to the execution of the greatest work which the faith of Abraham was ready to accom plish. Nor does this sentence contradict the sen tence of Paul to the Romans, where he teaches that man is justified by faith and not by works. Since Paul speaks of works in themselves as distinct from faith and James of works as they are inspired by the Son of God. For both speak truly; Paul, that not by works in themselves, whether moral or ceremonial or judicial we are justified but by the grace of faith ; James, on the other hand, that we are not justified by a sterile faith but by a faith fruitful in works. Hence it appears that their doctrines are not opposed to one another." We pass on to the fifth chapter, the Commen tary upon which draws forth such severe repre hension from Catharinus. . On the words, " Is any sick among you," &c. (v. 14), he observes: "Neither by these words THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 105 themselves nor by their effect do they speak of the sacramental anointing of the Extreme Unction, but rather of the anointing which the Lord Jesus Christ instituted in the gospel, to be exercised by the disciples on the sick. For the text does not say, Is any sick unto death, but generally, is any sick. And the effect is said to be alleviation of the intirm person, and remission of sin is only spoken of conditionally. But extreme unction is only given in articulo mortis, and (as its form shows) tends directly to the remission of sin. Be sides this, James bids many presbyters to be sent for for one sick man, which is quite foreign to the rite of extreme unction." The words which follow, " Confess your sins one to another," are treated with the same freedom, and produce an equal degree of reprobation in the pages of Catharinus. "Nor does this discourse," proceeds the Cardinal, refer to sacramental con fession, as is evident from the words confess to one another. For sacramental confession is not mutual, but made only to priests. It relates to the con fession in which we mutually confess ourselves sinners, in order that we may be prayed for, and to the confession on one side or the other of our errors, in order to our mutual appeasement and reconciliation." We pass on to the Epistles of St. Peter, the former of which only the Cardinal admits to be 106 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. authentic. The second chapter of the first Epistle presents the first opportunity of his exercising his polemical skill. The universal priesthood of Chris tians which is there asserted, and which formed one of the chief grounds of the liberty which Luther had claimed for them, is the first important subject which arrests our attention. "To offer spiritual sacrifices of prayers and holy meditations and spiritual instructions, as also to offer oneself to God as an offering of a sweet-smelling savour, is common to all. There is, however, here no re ference to the priesthood by which the Eucharist is offered." The grand assertion by the Apostle of the dignity of this universal priesthood, " But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood," compels him again to meet the claim of the reformed teachers, arising out of it, which he does by alleg ing that the priesthood here assigned to Christians is not individual, but as a body and an entire people ; that it is " collata populo non ut singulis xed ut universis " that the priesthood and the royalty are assigned respectively to the people and the sacerdotal order. Here as in duty bound he brings in the Pope as the delegate of the people in the royal power, as well as the High Priest of the sacerdotal order " cum suapte nature! convcnit 2)raeesw regibus omnibus et relative ad spiritualia de m disponere" The last sentence seems like a THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 107 souvenir of that earlier teaching which brought on him the censure of the Sorbonne, and the denun ciation of him by the King of France, who charged the University of Paris nostrejille aisnee, to proceed to the condemnation of his work in defence of the Papal autocracy. But old memories revived at the close of his last work, and he doubt less felt the ruling passion strong in death. The thought that he was not only an exalted member of the Court of Eome, but also a Dominican, bound to promote the temporal as well as spiritual in fluence of the Papacy, seems to have returned to him from the distant past, and he closes his great work with somewhat more limited a view of the "glorious liberty of the sons of God" than that with which he had opened it and carried it on. Yet in commenting on the words " Honour all men," c., he writes : The Apostle adds a special precept in regard to the honour due to a king. For there is a special reason for this honour. He assigns, there fore, subjection and honour to the king, that nothing which is his due according to Christian doctrine should be detracted from him." This reads as a saving clause to the unlimited extent which he had assigned to the " regalia Petri" * Cardinal Pole, who, like Contarini, did not think the Cardinalate the greatest of his honours, had too strong a sense of his royal descent to admit any of the temporal claims of the Papacy against kings and rulers. He maintains their rights with great force in his famous treatise "On the Council." io8 PRE-TRIDENTINE DO JTRIXE. The reference to baptism (iii. 2 1 ) the Cardinal limits to adults who alone could have the answer of a good conscience (" effectum habct i.u tuhdto, cooperantc -ipso adulto "). On the passage " Neither as being Lords over God s heritage " (cleros) he writes : " Nee intelligo per cleros eos quos appellamur clericos, sed Christianos omnes ad divinam sortem ascitos." He holds that by "Babylon" (v. 13) Home is designated, " for he saw that Home was op pressed with a confusion both of idols and of immorality." The Second Epistle of Peter he held to be of very doubtful authenticity, but considers that St. Jerome s scepticism regarding it, on account of its difference of style from that of the former, would tell against either epistle with equal force. For either might represent St. Peter s style, and two of the Catholic Epistles claim to be his. But dif ference of style he regards as not a sufficient criterion, as many writings of the same author (as the Registrum of Gregory the Great and his other works) present equal differences. We have already quoted the remarkable passage in the second chapter against Papal indulgences, and pa.ss from thence to the Commentary on St. John s First Epistle. The very slight regard in which auricular con fession was held by the Cardinal has already THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 109 appeared to the reader in his surrender of the only two Scriptural supports which it has in the contro versial writings of the Roman theologians. His idea of the true confessional appears in a direct form in his Commentary on the words (i John ii.) " If we confer our sins," &c. " In contrast to those who say that they have no sin he places those who confess their sins. The discourse re lates to confession either internal or external, by which man acknowledges that he has committed sin. He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins &c. Lest (as many talk) you should think the confession of sin, in order to obtain its remis sion from God, vain, especially from His knowing our sins without our confession of them, John attributes it to the faithfulness of God ; to signify that our confession is of avail to the remission of sins because he is faithful, that is, because God has promised forgiveness to those who confess, and is faithful in keeping His promise, and therefore he makes the condition If we confess, God is faithful. " On the words of St. John which describe the law of love to God and our neighbour as at once u o new and an old Commandment, he writes : "The precept of the love of God and our neigh bour is not a new but an ancient one, but the precept directing the nature of our love (viz., in that manner in which Christ loved us) is a new precept. Hence our Lord saith hereof in the no PRE-TRIDENTIXE DOCTRINE. Gospel, A new commandment give I unto you that ye love one another as I have loved you/ Therefore John speaks here of that new command ment which is true in Jesus Christ, and is true in you as the imitators of Christ. Both command ments John confesses that he has written; first, the old one which is handed down even in the Old Testament; and secondly, the new one which Christ delivered, according to the two things he had pre fixed to them, viz., the love of God and the dwell ing in Christ." On the passage, " He that doeth righteousness is born of God," the Cardinal propounds the follow ing evangelical doctrine : " Our fellowship (socie- tas) with God and Christ is not of any kind whatever, but is contracted by our birth from God. And therefore he saith if you know that God is righteous, you know that every righteous man is born of God ; so that no one is righteous except he be born of God, for the discourse is of Christ in His divine nature, inasmuch as from Him the righteousness of all mankind proceeds. He saith significantly every one who worketh righteousness is Lorn of God, that we may understand that he does not obtain righteousness by his own strength, but by his nativity from Christ. With equal significance he saith, Every one that doeth righteousness/ lest we should think that he is speaking of some fictitious righteousness in our THE G ATHOLIC EPISTLES. in own breasts and not rather of the righteousness o which we do in deed and in truth." It is almost needless to say that the Cardinal regards the much-vexed passage of the thres heavenly witnesses as doubtful, on account of its absence from so many MSS. For this he meets with severe reprehension from his implacable critic. He remarks on the words, "Little children, keep yourselves from idols." To the affirmation that Christ is the true God, he adds the exclusion of the worship of images, as not true gods. As though he had openly said : " We who worship Jesus Christ as the true God and not man ouo-ht o therefore to beware of image- worship." The Second and Third Epistles of St. John, the Cardinal appears, with St. Jerome, to have re garded rather as the work of another John, than of the Evangelist, alleging the authority of Papias. He notes the great diversities both in the Greek text and in the Latin version, but very briefly comments on the former of the epistles, arid merely gives a corrected version of the last. The Epistle of Jude presents still greater difficulties, and the reference in it to the Apocryphal book of Enoch is his greatest stumbling-block ; not so much the mere reference, as the designation of it as a prophecy, which derogates from the dignity of a canonical work. With this brief commentary the entire work of Cajetan closes, the confession ii2 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. that " he is unable to interpret the Apocalypse " literally, and therefore leaves it to him to whom " God may reveal the knowledge of it," giving the last touch to his long and arduous labours. Even this profession of humility, which had it been made by later commentators would have saved the Church from many wild and eccentric inter pretations, failed to secure the respect of Cathari- nus who denounces it with his accustomed in tolerance. In presenting this view of the last and greatest work of one of the noblest members of the Roman Court and Church in the eventful age of the Reformation, the chief design of the writer has been to exhibit a faithful outline of the doctrines of that Church in the transition period, and of the comparative freedom enjoyed by its members before the heavy chains of some hundreds of anathematising canons were forged for them in the Council of Trent. It is easy to conceive how different might have been the tone of the deliberations, and perhaps even the character of the conclusions of the Council, had Cajetan, Contarini, Sadolet, and the Cardinals and divines of an earlier day, survived to take part in its labours. They did not indeed look forward to them with any expectations of their success, and Contarini in his treatise against Luther, but still more energetically in his letter THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 113 to Mgr. Fioribondo da Sessa, Bishop of Aquino, expresses his conviction that the promised Council would do nothing to heal the divisions of the Church or to restore its influence. "These," he holds, " need only a good will, the love of God and man, and humility of mind," for their treat ment. But these qualifications were never found in the Council in any part of its tumultuous history, full as it is of mutual recriminations, arbitrary acts of the legates, and sometimes even scenes of personal violence. Unhappily the years between Cajetan s appearance at Augsburg and the assembly of the Council, were spent in violent controversies conducted on either side with a degree of acrimony and implacability which in days of a higher civilisation it seems hard to realise. With the Eoman Advocates furious personal invectives against Luther and his fol lowers supplied the place of arguments against their doctrines, while the great Eeformer hurled back on his opponents the same materials of an earthly and unholy warfare. But most fatal to every hope of an approximation of the contending parties (not to say their reconciliation, which almost from the first was hopeless) was the haughty treatment by the Council of all the legitimate complaints of the Protestants, and their insulting summons to them as rebels to lay down their arms arid surrender all their rights as Christians, H H4 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. and even as men, to a body consisting of a fana tical majority of Italian and Spanish bishops, " servi nati Pontificis" as Cajetan in his earlier days would have called them ; who outnumbered the representatives of all Europe by more than two hundred members, the great English Church being only represented by a renegade bishop who had no jurisdiction, Germany by only two bishops, Poland and Hungary, each by two, only while Croatia and Moravia had an imaginary repre sentation in a single bishop each, and the shadowy Latin Episcopate in the east numbered six epis copal ghosts, who, as well as the Italian bishops in partibus, having no jurisdiction had no lawful place in the Council, and were mere stipendiaries of the Pope, dependent upon him for their daily bread. Such w T as the constitution of that Council which fixed and in a manner stereotyped the Roman doctrines, on the ridiculous pretence that it represented the Western Church, and in the still more doubtful pretext that it wa,s assembled " in the Holy Ghost." We might well say of such an assembly in the words of Andrew Mar- veil, " I do not think it possible for any Council to be free that is composed out of bishops, and where they only have the decisive voices. Nor is that a free Council which takes away Christian liberty. But as it was founded upon usurpation, so it terminated in imposition." THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 115 But the spirit and life of the Church having been thus crushed out at Trent, authority being substituted for truth, and an abject submission for faith it is easy to see how terribly the down ward impulse must have increased in the course of the Papacy during the period in which the Popes reigned alone, and acquired sufficient strength to enable them to call up shadowy and spectral councils like the Lateran and Vatican assemblies of our own day, to endorse whatever new dogmas they might discover in the plenti- tude of their wisdom and of their power, and publish them as the dictates of the Holy Ghost, under the authority of St. Peter and St. Paul, with the necessary addition u ct nostri" " Quelle sublime autorite," wrote Quesnel on the Bull Uni- genitus ; " d irriter ainsi S. Pierre contre ceux qui rejettent une piece si contraire a son esprit." Yet (and this is not a little remarkable) the writings of Cajetan, notwithstanding the freedom with which he rejects the Apocrypha, and claims a " liberty of prophesying " such as the Roman Church has never admitted in its greatest saints, have never been placed in the Index, though the bitter attack of Catharinus, himself a member of the Council of Trent, and of great influence in Rome, might have well secured for them a place in that Walhalla of sacred and profane literature. The writings of Cajetan, however, needed not this n6 PRE-TRIDENTINE DOCTRINE. posthumous advertisement. Nay, he has a yet more illustrious one in the great work of Pope Benedict XIV., " De Synodo Dicecesana " (1. xiii. c. xix. sect, xxviii.), where he is bravely defended by the Pope against Catharinus. " Catharinum excessisse in censura, turn quia non fideliter Caje- tani sententiam retulerit, turn quia non admodum solide earn impugnaverit, facillime ostenditur." That Cajetan would never have added his name to the subscriptions to the Bull Ineffabilis is clear from his noble vindication of the ancient doctrine of the Church in his authoritative memoir on the Immaculate Conception, drawn up by command of Leo X., which prevented its reception by the Council of Lateran of that earlier day. That he would have resisted the exorbitant claims of the Papacy in the Vatican Council is no less evident from the change which took place in his mind after he had begun the study of the Scriptures, and freed himself from the slavery of the Decretalists. But if at any point more than any other he would have resisted the encroachments of the Jesuits upon the domain of ancient divinity, it would have been on the cardinal one of the auxilia gratiae on which, in common with Con- tarini, Pole, Seripandi, and all the great divines of the Augustinian school, he held the most decided doctrines and admitted no compromise. The Bull Unigenitus would have been met by him with a THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 117 counter-anathema, and he would have denounced it, as the Jansenists did in a later day, as the most dangerous and unchristian document which has ever been published against the ancient faith of the Church opposed no less to the teachings of his great master, Aquinas, than it is to the doc trine of St. Augustine, St. Prosper, St. Fulgentius, and their innumerable followers nor less by the African Councils, and specially by the famous canons of Mile vis. Of the new theology invented and imposed by the ruinous influence of the Jesuits upon the Roman Church, it is truly said by Caramuel de Lobkovicz, one of their most skilled controversialists, " Tota theologia nostra nova est. Non multum temporis perdo in veterum libris legendis ; " while the Abate Zaccaria for the same reason considered the study of the Fathers ridiculous ; for he writes : " Multa in ejusmodi libris exageratius proferuntur, neque id mirum, cum oratoribus omnibus id solemne sit." : The exhaustive history of the congregations " de auxiliis gratiac" by Serry might well prove to any intelligent mind how profitless as well as precarious is the claim of the Popes to infalli bility, confessing as they do in this long discussion, which they were unable to close, their inability to define the most essential and practical of the doc trines of Christianity, or to reconcile the conflict- * r. Atti dell asscmblca tenuta in Firenze 1787, torn. iv. p. 289. nS PRE-TBJDENTINE DOCTRINE. ing theories upon it on the lines of the Scriptural teaching. But the " new theology " of the Roman Church will doubtless have a much fuller and, if possible, more dangerous development in its future history. The manufacture of new doctrines, so recklessly entered upon by Pius IX., is too fascinating a work to be altogether abandoned, though his learned and enlightened successor has wisely sus pended it during his Pontificate. Yet this genera tion may in all probability not pass away before the Assumption of the Virgin, the Immaculate Conception of St. Anne, and the cultus of St. Joseph and of the Holy House of Loreto may be added to the list of new doctrines, to be enforced under the profane sanctions of a Bull claiming the authority of the Almighty and of St. Peter and St. Paul. It is impossible to predict what will be the end of this great apostasy from the truth of God. As the " love " of that truth dies out, and indifference to the truth gathers strength in the world, we cannot but fear that the religion of Christ will approximate more and more to those which it superseded and discredited in the days of its earlier successes, and that the worship of the " Mother of the Gods " on the Vatican Hill which once threatened its very existence in Rome* may * See the preface of the Canon Bianchini to the Vatican edition of Anastasius Bibliothecarius. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 119 again, though more insidiously, darken and distort the worship of "the true God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent." It were well for us to lay to heart the great truth that only in that intelligent and prayerful study of the Scriptures to which Caje- tan devoted his last years can we hope to save our selves from the dangers which are being multiplied around us. To conclude with the wise counsel of the Cardinal on the temptation of our Lord, " Let us learn from hence that our arms are the Holy Scrip tures, for Jesus conquers all these temptations with the Holy Scriptures alone, that he might teach us to fight and conquer in the same way." In all these things " we shall thus be more than conquerors through Him that loved us " (Rom. viii. 37). I KINTKU HY BALLANTYNE, HANSON AND CO. LONDON AND KUINIH KGH DAVID NUTT, 270 STRAND. periodical publications. The Babylonian and Oriental Record, A Magazine of the Antiquities of the East. Edited by Professor TERRIEN DE LACOUPERIK. Monthly. (24 pp.) Large Svo. is. 6d. Yearly Subscription price for the 12 numbers, post free, i2s. 6d. The Jewish Quarterly Review. Edited by J. ABRAHAMS and C. G. MONTEFIORE. Yearly 4 numbers. Each number, 3 or 4 sheets, large Svo. 3s. Yearly subscription price, post f /re, IDS. Above subscription prices are nctt and payable in advance. Ubeolooical anfc BMMlosopbical publications. * before the Title denotes that the Work is by a Roman Catholic Author or Editor. Anselmus (S.). Cur Deus Homo? 121110. 1886. Sewed, is. 6d. ace. Eadmeri vita S. Anselmi. 121110. 1886. Sewed. 4s. Athanasius (S.) on the Incarnation. Edited for the use of Students, with introduction and notes, by the Rev. A. ROBERTSON. Svo. 1882. (xii. 89 pp.) Cloth. 35. The same, Translated by the Rev. A. ROBERTSON. Svo. 1884. Sewed. I?. 6d. Cloth. 2s. 6d. Augustinus (S.). Three Anti-Pelagian Treatises, viz.: De Spiritu et Litcra, De Natura et Gratia, and De Gestis Pelagii. Translated with Analyses by the Rev. F. H. WOODS and the Rev. J. O. JOHNSTON. Crown Svo. 1887. (xxvii. 242 pp.) Cloth, bevelled edges. 45. 6d. Coptic Liturgy. The Rites of the Coptic Church. The Order of Baptism and the Order of Matrimony. Translated from the MSS. by B. T. A. EVETTS. i6mo. 1888. (61 pp.) Hand-made Paper. Sewed. is. Eadmeri vita S. Anselmi. 121110. 1886. Sewed. 25. 6d. King (Rev. C. W.). The Gnostics and their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval. Second Edition. Svo. 1887. (xxiii. 466 pp. 14 full- pnge chromolithographed plates and 19 woodcuts in the text.) Cloth. This edition contains cne-third more text and illustrations than the first ;l IS. edition published in 1864. Malan (Rev. S. C.). Original Documents of the Coptic Church. 6 part?. I2mo. 1872-75. Sewed. IDs. 6d. 1. The Divine Liturgy of St. Mark the Evangelist. 1872. (63 pp.) as. 2. The Calendar of the Coptic Church. 1873. (liv. 91 pp.) 2s. 3. A Short History of the Copts and of their Church. 1873. (iv. 115 pp.) 2s. 6d. 4. The Holy Gospel and Versicles of Sundays and Feast Days, as used in the Coptic Church. 1874. (vii. 82 pp.) 2 s. 5. 6. The Divine Euchologion and the Divine Liturgy of S. Gregory the Theologian. 1875. (vii. 90 pp.) 3 s. The two Holy Sacraments of Baptism and of the Lord s Supper, according to Scripture, Grammar and Faiih, I2mo. iSSi. (v. 272 pp.) Cloth. 35. See also Armenian Liturgy. ^Records of the English Catholics under the Penal Laws. Chiefly Irom the Archives of the See of Westminster. E ihed by Fathers of the Congregation of the London Oratory, with an Historical Intro duction by Rev. T. F. KNOX, D.D. 410. Cloth. I. The first and second Diaries of the College, Douay. With unpublished Documents. 1878. (cviii. 447 pp.) Out of print. 2 los. II. The Letters and Memorials of William Cardinal Allen, 1532-94. 1882. (cxxii. 480 pp.) i ios. . I i 9 ,. 1 1 ,">" " m -- - : - "--*: , " . T . .