'^' * 
 
 , 
 
 
 '*' 
 
 " ' 
 
 ' • 
 
 '' i .', 
 
 
 
 .!.•• 
 
 . 
 
 
 ■ ;^ 
 
 >' 
 
 ' •* * * . 
 
 
 .. * 
 
 .'•-5' ' 
 
 :; k'' ' 
 
 '(•■' 
 
 '. 
 
 ^%'W..'' 
 
 :.v ■ ' 
 
 ■*•* * 
 
 ^^'■S\-- 
 
 
 '' "" •< 
 
 .. r <! 
 
 
 . •;'•'. ■' 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 V -V. 
 
 
 
 - ?: . 
 
 
 
 . k . ' 
 
 
 '>■'■ 
 
 ■^':' 
 
 
 
 .■.-•,*■■ 
 
 
 
 ■ .?- 
 
 V 
 
 .. ■ z ■ 
 
 
FffTEEN YEAI^ ffl Tp CHDI^CH OF \m 
 
 An Examination ok 
 
 priest?, Dope?, and Council? 
 
 BY 
 
 R.KV. S. K. CALHOUN 
 
 " Magna est Veritas et Prevalebit.' 
 
 " Ubi Fides Vera est 
 Ibi Ecclesia est." 
 
 — Jerome. 
 
 LOWELL, MASS.: 
 Vox PoPULi Press: S. W. Huse & Co., 130 Central Street. 
 
 1886. 
 
l.^ 
 
 
 /7 /^^^ 
 
DEDICATION 
 
 ^■ niuimiMiiiiniiL gQ Henry Norwell, Esq., — It is with great 
 I satisfaction that I mention your name the first 
 j among the many to whom I dedicate this 
 ^i iiiiiiiHiiiiiiHiiiHHiii il book. I owe this to you as a token of grati- 
 tude for the help and kindness which more than once I 
 received at your hands, years ago when a stranger in the 
 city of Boston. And the respect and esteem I entertain 
 for you will plead my apology for venturing to dedicate 
 to you this earnest, honest, and it is hoped not unsuc- 
 cessful, attempt to vindicate the true Church from all 
 alliance or identity with the Roman system. 
 
 To the Freemasons, Independent Order of Odd Fel- 
 lows, and Knights of Pythias, of the United States of 
 America, I dedicate this book, also. 
 
 In compliance with the Encyclical letter of Pope Leo 
 XIII, the Pastoral letter of the Archbishop of Toulouse, 
 published in the Semaine Catholique, and intended for 
 his entire diocese, contains the following extracts : — - 
 
 1, "The necessity to combat Freemasonry is the principal work 
 for all Catholics. 
 
 2, "The rapid and continually-increasing progress of the evil is 
 a daily source of cruel anxiety to all well-thinking people. 
 
 3, "The time for barren recriminations and useless complaints 
 has passed by; that for action has arrived. 
 
4 DEDICATION. 
 
 4. " His Holiness, the Sovereign Pontiff, has denounced the 
 source of evil, indicated the enemy, and it is a duty for all Cath- 
 olics to rush forward to the destruction of Masonry, to unmask 
 their hypocrisy, to make known their ravages, to unveil their ac- 
 complices, to enlighten their dupes; at a word, to prepare them- 
 selves against Freemasonry for a struggle to the knife." 
 
 I know that Freemasonry alone, among all the grand 
 associations of men, has assumed the noble and generous 
 task of holding up, over a long series of unfortunate and 
 bloody centuries, the torch of toleration and of true brother- 
 hood ; that Odd Fellowship stands for liberty, equality, 
 and fraternity; that Knights of Pythias have no fellow- 
 ship with the ignorance, prejudice, superstition, Jesuitism, 
 and clericalism of the Roman system. And we invite all 
 good men to assist us and testify that we have never 
 hurled anathemas against any one, and that our kindly 
 fraternities are certainly nearer to God than their in- 
 human and ridiculous papal infallibility. 
 
 There is an intrinsic value and a divine excellence in 
 the principle of secrecy: '^ Est et fideli tuta silentio mcrcesj' 
 — "For faithful silence, also, there is a sure reward." 
 
 LODGE CERTIFICATE. 
 
 "Greeting: — We, the Master and Wardens of Independence 
 Lodge, No. 10, Free and Accepted Masons, constituted under 
 ^ a Charter from the M. W. Grand Lodge of the State of Ver- 
 ;d mont. Do Certify, that our Worthy Brother, Rev. S. F. Calhoun, 
 2 has been regularly initiated as an Entered Apprentice, passed 
 J to the Degree of Fell Craft, and raised to the Sublime Degree 
 "^ of Master Mason, and is distinguished for his zeal and fidelity 
 to the Craft. We do therefore recommend that he be received 
 ^ and acknowledged as such by all true and accepted Freemasons, 
 in wheresoever dispersed. 
 
 " In Testimony Whereof, We have granted him this Certifi- 
 cate under our hands and the seal of the Lodge, having first 
 
DEDICATION. 
 
 ^ caused our Worthy Brother to sign his name on the margin, 
 
 ^ this first day of March, A. D. 1886, A. L. 5886. 
 '^ «G. A. KIMBALL, Worshipfnl Master, 
 
 "i^ [seal] "R. a. parks, Senior Warden. 
 
 " GEORGE THOMAS, Junior Warden, 
 "D. S. WELLS, Secretary:' 
 
 " This is to Certify, That Independence Lodge, No. 10, is a le- 
 gally-constituted Lodge, working under the jurisdiction of the Most 
 Worshipful Grand Lodge of Vermont. April 22, A. L. 5886. 
 
 "SAMUEL M. READ, Grand Secretary:' 
 
 CHAPTER CERTIFICATE. 
 
 ''Greeting: — We, the Presiding Officers of Farmers Chapter, 
 "^ No. 9, Royal Arch Masons, constituted under a Warrant from 
 ^ the Grand Chapter of the State of Vermont, Do hereby Certify, 
 X that our Worthy Companion, Rev. S. F. Calhoun, has been regu- 
 ^ larly Exalted to the Sublime Degree of Royal Arch, and do 
 (J therefore commend him to the kindness and protection of all 
 • Royal Arch Masons, wherever dispersed. 
 
 " In Testimony Whereof, We have granted this Certificate 
 ^ under our hands and the seal of the Chapter, having first caused 
 ^ our Worthy Companion to sign his name on the margin, this 
 ^ twenty-second day of March, A. D. 1886. 
 
 '^ "Attest: F. N. MANCHESTER, High Priest. 
 
 S. [seal] "GEORGE A. GROSSMAN, King. 
 
 j^ "EBEN J. BLISS, Scftbe. 
 
 "R. F. KIDDER, Secretary:' 
 
 ^^ This is to Certify, That Farmers Chapter, No. 9, at Brandon, 
 is a legally-constituted Chapter, under the jurisdiction of the Most 
 Excellent Grand Chapter of Vermont. A. L. 5886, A. I. 2416, 
 A. D. 1886. 
 
 "EXCELLENT WILLIAM H. S. WHITCOMB, 
 
 " Grand Secretary." 
 
DEDICATION. 
 
 COMMANDERY CERTIFICATE. 
 
 " Greeting : — To all Knights Templar throughout the Globe, 
 We, the Eminent Commander, Generalissimo, and Captain Gen- 
 • eral of the Commandery of Knights Templar and the Append- 
 ►-J ant Orders, holden in Middlebury, State of Vermont, U. S. A., 
 O hereby certify that our trusty and well-beloved Companion Sir 
 2 Knight, Rev. S. F. Calhoun, has been regularly created and 
 < dubbed a Knight of the Red Cross, Knight Templar, and Knight 
 ^ of Malta of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, and as such we 
 \^ cordially recommend him to the favor and protection of all true 
 ^ and courteous Knights of our Order, wherever dispersed. 
 
 " Given under our hands and the seal of Mount Calvary Com- 
 ^ mandery, at Middlebur}'', this twenty-second day of March, 1886. 
 "^ We have also caused our Companion Sir Knight to sign his 
 *^ name in the margin. 
 
 ^ "W. C. BRADBURY, Eminent Commafider. 
 
 ig [seal] "G. a. KIMBALL, Generalissimo. 
 
 "F. N. MANCHESTER^ Captain Getieral. 
 
 • "Attest: Peter F. Goodrich, Recorder. ^^ 
 
 " Grand Commandery of Knights Templar of Vermont : Thad. 
 M. Chapman, R. E. Commander. Be it known, that Mount Cal- 
 vary Commanderyj No. i, situated in Middlebur}^, is of regular 
 standing under our jurisdiction. Burlington, April 6, A. D. 1886. 
 
 •'Attest: W. C. BRADBURY, Recorder. 
 
 LODGfi CERTIFICATE, 
 
 " This is to Certify, That Brother Rev. S. F. Calhoun was ad- 
 mitted by card a member of Lowell Lodge, No. 95, Independent 
 Order of Odd Fellows, Lowell, Mass., on the tenth day of April, 
 1874. Attest : 
 
 "JAMES F. McKISSOCK, Noble Grand. 
 [seal] "GEO. H. RICHARDSON, Recording Secretary."" 
 
DEDICATION. 
 
 ENCAMPMENT CERTIFICATE. 
 
 "This is to Certify, That Brother S. F. Calhoun was made a 
 member of Otter Creek Encampment, No. 7, Independent Order 
 of Odd Fellows, May 13, 1886, that he has attained the Third 
 Degree, and is at present a member in good standing of the above 
 Encampment. Rutland, Vt., July 6, 1886. 
 
 « FRANK M. MELLOR, Chief Priest. 
 [seal] "THEO. J. MOORE, Scribe:' 
 
 To the Rev. James B. Dunn, d. d.', and the Clergy 
 
 OF THE GREAT PrOTESTANT ChURCH IN AMERICA, I alsO 
 
 dedicate this book. 
 
 You have in your hands the moral power to form pub- 
 lic opinion respecting what is being done by the Roman 
 system in this country. Priest Hecker, chief of the 
 Paulist Fathers of New York city, declares "that there 
 is to be ere long a State religion, in this country, and 
 that religion is to be Roman Catholic." Bishop O'Connor 
 has said, "Religious liberty is merely endured till the 
 opposite can be carried into effect without peril to the 
 Catholic world." Pope Pius IX anathematized "those who 
 assert liberty of conscience and religious worship, and also 
 all such as maintain that the Church may not employ 
 force." And yet the Protestant clergy sleep, and the 
 Protestant Church has ceased to protest. In the Ver- 
 mont Chronicle of April 23, 1886, the following article 
 and editorial comments appeared: — 
 
 "ARE PROTESTANTS HERETICS? 
 
 " BY REV. S. F. CALHOUN. 
 
 ^* I have just read, in the Chronicle of April 2d, an article on 
 * Insufficient Information,' in which Archbishop Carrigan, of New 
 York, is represented as saying to Rev. John Miller, of Princeton, 
 N. J., that * outside the Church there is no salvation ' applied to 
 Catholics and not to Protestants. If the Archbishop uttered this 
 sentiment, what did he mean when he took the oath that every 
 
8 DEDICATION. 
 
 Archbishop in the Roman Catholic Church takes when he receives 
 the pallium, and which will be found in the Pontificale Romanuml 
 One clause of the oath is as follows: — 
 
 "'Heretics [that is, Protestants], Schismatics [that is, members of the Greek 
 Church that separated, as they say, from Rome], and Rebels against our Lord or 
 aforesaid successors, I will persecute and attack to the utmost of my power.* 
 
 "What said Baronius, whom Archbishop Carrigan accepts as a 
 Roman Catholic historian ? — 
 
 " * This all assent to, so that no one dissents who does not by such disagree- 
 ment cut himself off from the Church.' — Bar. anno i,ojj, S. 14, Vol. XI, 
 Rome, 160J. 
 
 '*Then Pope Bonifice VIII has a decree in the Canon Law: — 
 
 " * Moreover, we declare, assert, define, and pronounce it to be of necessity 
 to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.' — 
 Extrav. Comm., lib. I, tit. 8, p. 1,160. Pars 2. Ldps. i8jg. 
 
 *' Five successive Popes, — Innocent III, Honorius III, Gregory 
 IX, Innocent IV, and Alexander IV, — decreed the extermination 
 of heretics: — 
 
 " * But because Luther escaped with impunity, CEcolampadius, Zwingle, Carl- 
 stadtj and the Anabaptists, — the worst of all heretics, — dared to go abroad in 
 public and vent their heresies.' -- Cap. XII, p. 126. 
 
 " Pope Gregory IX inserted in his Decretals the satorious decree 
 of the Fourth Lateran Council : — 
 
 " * We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy exalting itself against 
 that holy, orthodox, and Catholic faith which we have above set forth, con- 
 demning all heretics, by whatever names they may be denominated, having in- 
 deed different faces, but tails tied together, because they all agree in the same 
 folly.' 
 
 " Perhaps the Archbishop believed he was conforming to the 
 Canon Law, on the principle set forth by Pope Gregory IX, by 
 answering the Rev. John Miller as he did : — 
 
 "'An oath contrary to the Utility of the Church is not to be observed.' — 
 Decret. Greg. IX, lib. 2, etc. 
 
 " ' Not only it is lawful, but it is often more conducive to the glory of God 
 and the utility of your neighbor, to cover the faith than to confess it.' 
 
 " The Archbishop's answer, then, is in direct opposition to his 
 own oath and the teachings of Popes and Roman Catholic histo- 
 rians. I have no pretensions to greater acumen, or to a juster ap- 
 preciation of the Roman Church, than the editor of the Chronicle 
 or my brethren in the ministry, but having long and laboriously 
 studied this subject, it seems to me that the Archbishop's reply is 
 
DEDICATION. 9 
 
 not to be trusted. I have just completed a manuscript, entitled 
 " Fifteen Years in the Church of Rome — An Examination of 
 Priests, Popes, and Councils,' and some time during the present 
 month it will be in the hands of the publisher, which covers this 
 entire question. The incident of boyhood to which the editor refers 
 has in it more of humanity than zeal for the Roman Church, and 
 then this whole matter is not one of persons, but of principles. 
 That was no time to consult the Church, the mass, purgatory, and 
 the Virgin Mary, but to act, as the excellent editor says, in neigh- 
 borly kindness." 
 
 "COMMENTS BY THE EDITOR. 
 
 " It is doubtless true that the view presented by the writer of 
 the above article, so far as the recorded declarations of the Roman 
 Catholic Church for generations past are concerned, is correct. She 
 has said many harsh things against * heretics and schismatics,' 
 and by her anathemas shut the doors of heaven against them. 
 But the world moves. Human opinions change. Mediaeval expres- 
 sions of thought and formulated systems of the past are too strait 
 to contain the broadening views that have come from the continu- 
 ous study of God's Word. The Roman Catholic Church, iron- 
 bound as it has been, feels the expanding and softening influences 
 of Christian light and love. It is slowly changing. It will never 
 send forth such fearful anathemas as it has in the past. Though 
 it has not publicly repudiated its past bigotry, the change going 
 on in its body can be seen in many of its utterances. The un- 
 qualified statements of Archbishop Carrigan in answer to Mr. 
 Miller's inquiries show the drift of opinion in many of the more 
 enlightened of the Catholic clergy. Much as we lament what 
 seems to us the bigotry and unscripturalness of the Roman Cath- 
 olic system, we rejoice to notice any indications of a change for 
 the better within its fold." 
 
 I can only say that the good, kind, and large-hearted 
 editor of the Vermont Chronicle is very much mistaken. 
 "Rome is tolerant only where she is helpless." It is the 
 same system now in this Nineteenth century that it was 
 in the Sixteenth. Its spirit is the same; its doctrines are 
 the same ; its methods are the same as when Huss, 
 Zwingle, Luther, Calvin^ and Knox fought it with right- 
 
lO DEDICATION. 
 
 eous and fearless courage. We should remember the 
 words of the great English statesman, Gladstone: "Rome 
 requires a convert who joins her to forfeit his moral and 
 mental freedom, and place his loyalty and civil duty at 
 the mercy of another." Also of Lafayette: "If ever the 
 liberty of the American Republic is destroyed, it will be 
 the work of Roman Catholic priests." American Roman- 
 ism to-day is the same as Spanish Romanism or Italian 
 Romanism was in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth centuries. 
 The society of Jesuits as it exists now in the United 
 States is the same, in its aims and methods, that it was 
 in the Fourteenth century. It is the same old-timed or- 
 ganization working through its disguised emissaries, agents, 
 and conspirators, by intrigue, bribery, hypocrisy, and crime, 
 into every department of American society. A. J. Grover 
 says, "It would not be more incredible than many of the 
 Jesuit assassinations in Europe in the Fourteenth and 
 Fifteenth centuries, which so startled the nations then, to 
 suppose that the Protestant President Garfield owes his 
 death, indirectly, to the Jesuits." Father Chiniquy, in his 
 "Fifty Years in the Church of Rome," pages 668-735, 
 gives pretty strong evidence that Abraham Lincoln was 
 killed by a Romanist; by a Jesuit and a conspiracy of 
 Jesuits, and is fully believed by those who have been 
 best informed of the facts concerning the methods of the 
 Jesuits of the Roman hierarchy. Mrs. Surratt was also 
 a slave of Roman priests. D. Harold was a Romanist, 
 probably a Jesuit ; and he no doubt fled to Europe and 
 found friends, cover, and employment among the members 
 of that order. Every minister of the Gospel should try 
 to inspire public opinion, not with bigotry, or prejudice, 
 or revenge, but with faithful, Protestant principles, and 
 then we need have no doubt of the ultimate issue. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 |ni iiiijiiiiiiiiiumijiiij i|HE nature of the opposition that the Roman 
 I Clergy make to Biblical Christianity proves its 
 I truth in the main, — proves the consciousness 
 
 ■?T( iiiiiiiiiiiiiii i iiiiiiiiii il of a real claim of God in it. No doubt they 
 
 have attacked Paganism as false. They have resisted Mo- 
 hammedanism with great zeal. But the constant and de* 
 termined opposition of the Roman Priesthood, the close 
 and sifting examination the Bible has gone through for 
 ages, the anxious research for errors or contradictions 
 within, prove unmistakably the animus of the Roman 
 Church. Those not immediately under the influence of 
 Mohammedanism are satisfied that it is false, and leave 
 it there ; but this intense opposition to the Bible contin- 
 ues, is repeated and renewed. History is called in to aid. 
 Antiquity, style, manuscripts of all kinds, contradictory tra- 
 ditions of the Fathers, absurd writings of so-called heretics, 
 — nothing is left undone to find something to discredit it. 
 It is doubtless true that of recent years there has been 
 an apparent increase of Roman power and influence in 
 America. It is also true that in the United States the 
 membership of the Roman Church has of late years largely 
 increased. Nor can it be doubted that the Roman Clergy 
 are making almost superhuman efforts to regain in the 
 New World what they have lost in the Old. And yet, it 
 
12 PREFACE. 
 
 is no less true that, taking a wide and comprehensive 
 view over the entire world, the influence of the Roman 
 Church is steadily and surely diminishing ; and that the 
 power of Leo XIII, of the present day, compared with 
 that of Leo X or Gregory VII (Hildebrand), of the Mid- 
 dle Ages, is but a pigmy compared with a giant. Then 
 the Pope could hurl the mightiest monarchs from their 
 thrones ; now he is not able to retain his own, nor to 
 keep under that spirit of liberty which has burst forth 
 and driven him from his tottering throne, and delivered 
 many oppressed and priest-ridden subjects from his unwel- 
 come and superstitious rule. 
 
 Fifteen years* experience in the Roman Church has 
 given me remarkable opportunities to pursue a calm and 
 comprehensive study of its ecclesiastical history. I have 
 sketched here the historical state of the Roman Clergy, 
 the lives of the Popes their leaders, and the contradic- 
 tions of their Ecumenical Councils. I know pretty well, 
 in theory and practice, what Romanism is; and the his- 
 tory of the Popes is open to every one; but those who 
 know what the Roman Church has once been, are best able 
 to appreciate what she now is. The Inquisition, the St. 
 Bartholomew and the Waldensean massacres are a matter of 
 history. "The end justifies the means" is still the spirit 
 of Romanism in Spain, Mexico, and Ireland. The Irish 
 people suffer vastly more from Roman despotism than 
 from English landlordism. And while I have the deepest 
 sympathy for the Irish in their present struggle against 
 English oppression, I can not help feeling that the agita- 
 tion is more for Rome rule than Home rule. But Roman- 
 ism is dangerous in America as well as in Europe. It 
 opposes the public schools, controls elections, appropriates 
 vast sums of money from the public treasuries, and owns 
 
PREFACE. 13 
 
 property aggregating about two billions of dollars (;^2,ooo,- 
 000,000). The peculiar dogma of allegiance to the temporal 
 power of the Pope is hostile to the principles of the 
 Republic. Cardinal McCloskey confessed "that the Roman 
 Catholics of the United States are as strongly devoted 
 to the sustenance and maintenance of the temporal power 
 of the Holy Father as Catholics in any part of the world ; 
 and if it should be necessary to prove it by acts, they are 
 ready to do so." 
 
 Although there may be an apparent sincerity and purity 
 and patriotism on the part of many Roman Catholic 
 priests, yet neither they nor their utterances have any 
 power to modify the system of which they form a part. 
 The indifference, listlessness, and drowsiness of American 
 citizens incapacitates them from realizing the antagonisms 
 of Romanism and Republicanism, and to successfully com- 
 bat the threatening attitude of Romanist authorities that 
 might at some future time flame forth into civil war, 
 conspiracy, or revolution. The victory of Romanism in- 
 volves the defeat of Liberty, and there is no compromise 
 between the one and the other. There is no harmony 
 between them, and the only safeguard is "Eternal Vig- 
 ilance." The following oath, which is taken by every 
 Roman Catholic bishop, should open the eyes of all 
 Americans. I will give it in Latin and English: — 
 
 "Ego,N,,ElectusEcclesiaeN., "I, N., Elect of the Church of 
 
 ab hac hora autea fidelis et obe- N., from henceforward will be faith- 
 
 diens ero B. Petro Apostolo, ful and obedient to St. Peter the 
 
 Sanctasque Romanae Ecclesiae, Apostle, and to the Holy Roman 
 
 et Domino nostro, Domino N. Church, and to our Lord, the Lord 
 
 Papae N. suisque successoribus N., Pope N., and to his successors 
 
 canonice intrantibus. canonically coming in. 
 
 " Non ero in consilio, aut con- " I will neither advise, consent, 
 
 sensu, vel facto, ut vitam per- nor do any thing that may lose life or 
 
14 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 dant, aut membrum ; seu capi- 
 antur mala captione ; aut in eos 
 manus quo modo libet ingeran- 
 tur; vel injuriae alliquee inferan- 
 tur ; quovis quffisito colore. 
 
 " Consilium vero quod mihi 
 creditare sunt, per se, aut Nun- 
 cios suos, seu literas, ad eorum 
 damnum, me sciente nemini pan- 
 dam. 
 
 " Papatum Romanum et Reg- 
 ulia Sancti Petri adjutor eis ero 
 ad defendendum et retuiendum, 
 salvo meo ordine, contra omnem 
 hominem. Legatum Apostolicae 
 Sedis in eundo et redeundo hon- 
 orifice tractabo, et in suis neces' 
 siatibus adjuvabo. 
 
 ''Jura, honores, privilegia, et 
 auctoritatem Sanctae Romanae 
 Ecelesiae, Domini nostri Papa 
 et successorum prsedictorum 
 conservare, defendere, augere, 
 promovere curabo. 
 
 " Neque ero in consilio, vel 
 facto, seu tractatu in quibus con- 
 tra ipsum Dominum nostrum, vel 
 e and em Romanum Ecclesiam 
 aliqua sinistra vel praejudico alia 
 personarum, juris, honoris, status 
 et potestatis, eorum machinen- 
 tur. Et si talia a quibus cunque 
 tractari vel procurari novero, im- 
 pediam hoc pro posse, et quanto 
 citius potero significabo eidem 
 Domino nostro, vel alteri per 
 quem possit ad ipsius notitiam 
 pervenire. 
 
 '' Regulas Sanctorum Patrum, 
 deer eta, ordinationes, seu dis- 
 positiones, reservationes, provi- 
 
 member, or that their persons may 
 be seized, or hands anywise laid 
 upon them, or any injuries offered 
 to them, under any pretense what- 
 soever. 
 
 *' The counsel which they shall 
 entrust me withal, by themselves, 
 their messengers, or letters, I will 
 not knowingly reveal to any, to their 
 prejudice. 
 
 " I will help them to defend and 
 keep the Roman Papacy, and the 
 Royalties of St. Peter, saving my 
 order, against all men. The legate 
 of the Apostolic See, going and 
 coming, I will honorably treat and 
 help in his necessities. 
 
 <^ The rights, honors, privileges, 
 and authority of the Holy Roman. 
 Church, of our Lord the Pope, and 
 his aforesaid successors, I will en- 
 deavor to preserve, defend, increase, 
 and advance, 
 
 " I will not be in any counsel, 
 action, or treaty in which shall be 
 plotted against our said Lord, 
 and the said Roman Church, any- 
 thing to the hurt or prejudice of 
 their persons, right, honor, state, or 
 power j and if I shall know any such 
 thing to be treated or agitated by 
 any whatsoever, I will hinder it to 
 my power; and as soon as I can 
 well signify it to our said Lord, or 
 to some other by whom it may come 
 to his knowledge. 
 
 " The rules of the Holy Fathers, 
 the Apostolic decrees, ordinances 
 or disposals, reservations, provi- 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 15 
 
 siones, et mandata Apostolica 
 totis viribus observabo^ et faci- 
 am ab aliis observari. 
 
 " Haereticos, Schismaticos, et 
 Rebelles eidem Domino nostro 
 vel successoribus praedictis pro 
 posse persequar et impugnabo. 
 
 "Vocatus ad Synodum veni- 
 am, nisi praepeditus fuero canon- 
 ica praepeditione. 
 
 " Apostolorum limina singulis 
 trienniis personaliter per me ip- 
 sum visitabo, et Domino nostro 
 ac successoribus praefatis ratio- 
 nem reddam de toto meo pastor- 
 ali officio ac de rebus omnibus 
 ad meae Ecclesiae statum, ad 
 cleri, et populi disciplinam, anni- 
 arum denique quae mese fides tra- 
 ditae sunt, salutem quovis modo 
 pertinentibus, et vicissim manda- 
 ta Apostolica humiliter recipiam 
 et quam diligentissime exequor. 
 
 " Quod si legitimo impedimen- 
 to detentus fuero praefata omnia 
 ad implebo per certum. Nun tium 
 ad hoc speciale mandatum hab- 
 entem de gremio mei capituli ; 
 aut alium in dignitate Ecclesias- 
 tica constitutum, seu alias per- 
 sonatum habentem ; aut his mihi 
 deficientibus per dicecessanum 
 sacerdotem ; et clero deficiente 
 omnino per aliquem alium Pres- 
 byterum saecularum vel regula- 
 rem spectatae probitatis et reli- 
 gionis de super dictis omnibus 
 plena instructum, 
 
 " De hujusmodo autem imped- 
 imento docebo per legitimas pro- 
 bationes ad Sanctas Romanae Ec- 
 
 sions, and mandates, I will observe 
 with all my might, and cause to be 
 observed by others. 
 
 " Heretics, schismatics, and reb- 
 els to our said Lord, or his aforesaid 
 successors, I will to my utmost 
 power persecute and wage war with. 
 
 " I will come to a Council when 
 I am called, unless I be hindered 
 by a canonical impediment. 
 
 " I will by myself in person visit 
 the threshold of the Apostles every 
 three years; and give an account 
 to our Lord and his aforesaid suc- 
 cessors of all my pastoral office, 
 and of all things anywise belong- 
 ing to the state of my Church, to 
 the discipline of my clergy and peo- 
 ple, and lastly to the salvation of 
 souls committed to my trust ; and 
 will in like manner humbly receive 
 and diligently execute the Apos- 
 tolic commands. 
 
 " And if I be detained by a law- 
 ful impediment, I will perform all 
 the things aforesaid by a certain 
 messenger hereto specially empow- 
 ered, a member of my chapter, or 
 some other in ecclesiastical dignity 
 or else having a personage ; or in 
 default of these, by a priest of the 
 diocese ; or in default of one of the 
 clergy ( of the diocese ), by some 
 other secular or regular priest of 
 approved integrity and religion, 
 fully instructed in all things above 
 mentioned. 
 
 " And such impediment I will 
 make out by lawful proofs to be 
 transmitted by the aforesaid mes- 
 
l6 PREFACE. 
 
 clesiae Cardinalem Proponentem senger to the Cardinal proponent 
 
 in Congregatione Sacri Concilii of the Holy Roman Catholic 
 
 per supra dictum Nuntium trans- Church in the Congregation of the 
 
 mittendas. Sacred Council. 
 
 "Possessionesveroadmensam "The possessions belonging to 
 
 meam pertinentes non vendam, my table I will neither sell, nor give 
 
 nee donabo neque impignorabo, away, nor mortgage, nor grant 
 
 nee de novo infendabo vel aliquo anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, 
 
 modo alienabo, etiam cum con- no not even with the consent of the 
 
 sensu Capituli EcclesiaB meee, chapter of my church, without con- 
 
 inconsulto Romano Pontifico. suiting the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 " Et si ad aliquam alienatio- " And if I shall make any alien- 
 nem devenero, poenas in quadam ation, I will thereby incur the pen- 
 super hoc edita constitutione alties contained in a certain consti- 
 contentas eo ipso incurrer§ volo. tution put forth about this matter. 
 
 " Sic me Deus adjuvet §t haec ** So help me God and these 
 
 Sancta Dei Evangelia." Holy Gospels of God." 
 
 • — ''^ Fontificale Jiomanum" pp. 5g-6j. 
 
 This oath itself proves the wickedness of the Roman 
 system. It repudiates all temporal power, except that of 
 the Pope, and claims the power to "persecute heretics." 
 It takes from Romanists moral responsibility, and makes 
 it the duty of bishops to cover up crimes committed by 
 Romanists. It binds the Roman Catholic citizen to al- 
 legiance to a foreign potentate superior to the allegiance 
 he owes to the United States, or any government under 
 which he may live. It is obedience to Pope first — all 
 other obligations afterwards, if at all. Ought a man who 
 has taken such an oath to be allowed to become a citizen 
 of this Republic.^ The Pope says Republicanism, free 
 thought, the separation of Church and State, free schools, 
 the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence, are 
 heresies to be put down. But the principles, aims, and 
 purposes of Protestantism do harmonize perfectly with the 
 spirit and tendency of the American Republic, and are the 
 inspirer of modern civilization. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 PERSONAL STATEMENT OF THE SUBJECT. 
 
 ( a. ) Church Authority. 
 
 {b.) Church History — The Fathers. 
 
 ( c. ) Biblical Christianity. 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 
 CATHOLICITY AND UNITY. 
 
 ( a. ) The Greek and Protestant Schism. 
 ( b. ) The Reformation. 
 ( c. ) Internal Divisions. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 TRADITIONS. 
 
 ( a. ) The Virgin Mary. 
 
 ( b. ) Prayers for the Dead. 
 
 ( c. ) Purgatory. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 HOLINESS. 
 
 ( a. ) Saints. 
 
 ( b. ) Miracles. 
 
 ( c. ) The Confessional. 
 
 2 
 
1 8 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE PRIESTHOOD. 
 
 ( a. ) Primitive Priesthood — Secular and Drunken. 
 
 ( b. ) Medieval Priesthood — Celibacy and Fornication. 
 
 ( c. ) Modern Priesthood — Simony, or Money-getting. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE POPES — 366-1886. 
 
 {a.) The Popes and the Italian Nobles — 887-1000. 
 (3.) The Popes and the German Emperors — 1002-1300, 
 (c.) The Popes and the French Protectorate — 1309-1870. 
 
 CHAPTER VH. 
 
 GENERAL COUNCILS. 
 
 (a.) Imperial (Eastern) Councils, I-VIII— 325-869. 
 
 (3.) Papal (Western) Councils, IX-XV— 1123-1311. 
 
 (f. ) Reforming (Prelatic) Councils, XVI-XIX — 14 14-1563. 
 
 (</. ) The Vatican Council, XX — 1869-1870. 
 
 CHAPTER Vni. 
 
 PAPAL INFALLIBILITY AND EX CATHEDRA. 
 
 ( a. ) The Consent of the Church Universal with the Pope. 
 
 ( b. ) The Pope and the Whole Church Represented in a General 
 
 Council. 
 ( c. ) The Pope Speaking Ex Cathedra. 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 A. — List of Church Fathers. 
 .5. — List of Roman Pontiffs. 
 C. — List of General Councils. 
 
Fifteen Years in the Church of Rome. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PERSONAL STATEMENT OF THE SUBJECT. 
 
 ^ iiiiiiiHiiimiiiiiiiiiiiii lHE Roman Catholic Church is a sensuous 
 
 religion, filling the imagination with gorgeous 
 ceremonies, noble buildings, fine music, and 
 linTii iiHiiiiiiiHiiii ^i stately processions. The Roman Church feeds 
 the imagination with legends and the poetry of antiquity, 
 and accepts for the mass of its votaries full association 
 with the world. Roman Catholicism has penetrated into 
 all lands, and still exerts sway over nations and lan- 
 guages, differing both in climate and race. She has 
 touching services, immemorial traditions, dogma from first 
 to last marvellous with the boldest assumption; a hie- 
 rarchy graduating from the boy acolyte to the octoge- 
 narian Pope ; and religious orders of endless observances 
 and aspirations. Such, in substance, were the arguments 
 and influences that drew me to it, and for fifteen years 
 retained me in it. But gradually the conviction dawned 
 upon me, that this wondrous system, such as it existed 
 in the past and such as it exists to-day, was a colossal 
 lie, a gigantic fraud, and a superhuman imposture. Do not 
 
20 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 suppose that I arrived, or could have arrived, at such a 
 conclusion at once; all my tenderer feelings recoiled from 
 it. I looked at the hosts of excellent men and women 
 in all ages that have belonged, and still cleave to it ; 
 and could they all have been the victims of such a 
 delusion.? But gradually this all seemed capable of being 
 consistently explained. They seemed to have joined the 
 Roman Catholic Church, not only pledged never to find 
 fault with it, but to see with its eyes, hear with its 
 ears, understand with its understanding, and stand or fall 
 by its judgment. Their argument, I presume, would be that 
 the Church of Rome claims to be infallible; that they sub- 
 mitted themselves to it as such, in the fullest confidence 
 that its decisions can never mislead them ; that they are 
 God's voice speaking to them, which they are bound, at the 
 peril of their salvation, never to mistrust, much less dis- 
 pute. The Church of Rome claims to be infallible, and 
 anybody who concedes, is dearer to her than anybody 
 who disputes, her claim. ^* Sanciam Catholicam et apostoli- 
 cam Romanam Ecclesiamy omnium ecclesiarum matrem et 
 magistramy agnosco'' — a mediaeval phrase, of which I knew 
 the full historical value, was what Romanists gave their 
 adhesion before infallibility was decreed by the Vatican 
 Council. 
 
 If the Roman Church is really infallible, I feel she 
 will stand much more searching criticism than I can give 
 to her. For I consider after the extreme vigor with which 
 the claims of the Protestant Church have been examined 
 by us all, it would be the height of disingenuousness in 
 us to shut our eyes to any weak points of the Roman 
 system that men and women are embracing in preference, 
 should any such exist. I felt years ago that if I found 
 the claims of the Church of Rome to be thoroughly in 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 21 
 
 accordance with facts, I should ev6r afterwards regard her 
 with tenfold reverence from having verified them myself. 
 If they were true, analysis, impartially conducted, could 
 only confirm them; if they were false to any extent, or 
 exaggerated, I conceiA'-e that we are bound in common 
 honesty to tell the world we were deceived to that extent. 
 I have resided in various countries where it was dom- 
 inant, and have studied its worship in town and country, 
 and have set myself to work to improve my previous 
 knowledge of its history in past ages. All this has been 
 my constant employment for many years; so that I can 
 not be said to have drawn my conclusions hastily. The 
 conviction impressed upon me by what I have heard and 
 seen in Ireland, France, Spain, Italy, and Canada, is that 
 Protestant Christianity is the only good and genuine and 
 beneficial religion. Protestantism has its weak as well as 
 its strong side: its shortcomings historically traceable to 
 the sins of our forefathers in no small degree.^ Among 
 the strong points attributable to its influences are a 
 strong love of honesty in intention, of truthfulness in 
 language, and of uprightness and manliness in conduct,, 
 and a still stronger abhorrence of falsehood and treachery 
 to engagements in every form. Its virtues belong mostly 
 to the practical and domestic order. Its weak points are 
 too great self-reliance, too much disposition to criticise, 
 and too little faith in the unseen. As a general rule, 
 Roman Catholics are weak where Protestants are strongest, 
 and strong where Protestants fail. Such results are due 
 to the system in each case, showing imperfections in 
 each. Roman Catholics may be compared with Prot- 
 
 1 I hope, at no distant day, to give to the reader my impressions 
 of Protestantism, the practical workings of the Protestant Church, and 
 my personal experience with members of local Churches. 
 
22 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 estants as boys brought up at a private school, or else 
 at home, with boys brought up at a public school in 
 America. Roman Catholics may be compared with Prot- 
 estants as men educated at the universities of Paris, 
 Munich, or Padua, with men educated at Harvard, Yale, 
 or Princeton. And the vast difference between the moral 
 tone of society in Protestant and Roman countries I 
 attribute to the superiority of Protestantism and the in- 
 herent goodness of its claims. 
 
 Taking this for my guide, I have been engaged con- 
 stantly in instituting comparisons between members of the 
 Protestant Church and members of the Church of Rome 
 generally, and between my former and my present self in 
 particular; and the result in each case has been to 
 confirm me in the belief that the notion of the Roman 
 Church exercising any greater influence upon the heart 
 and life than the Protestant Church, is not merely pre- 
 posterous, but as contrary, both to faith and fact. What 
 people say of those generally who have become Roman 
 Catholics is, that they have deteriorated as a body, rather 
 than advanced. And as far as my own experience goes, 
 it is quite true; but still, I believe that Christian quality 
 is possible in the Roman system, according to the dis- 
 positions of those who frequent it. I have found Roman 
 Catholics — I mean the educated classes — all that in gen- 
 eral estimate members of a Christian Church should be: 
 God-serving, charitable, conscientious, refined, intelligent; 
 and I could discover nothing idolatrous or superstitious 
 in their worship, nor any thing at variance with first 
 principles in their daily life. But afterwards, when I 
 came to ask myself the question. Are these, then, the 
 only true Christians that you have ever known in life.? 
 I can scarce describe the recoil that it occasioned in me ! 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 23 
 
 If the Protestant Church is only a sham, and the Roman 
 Church, without exception, a reality, how comes it that 
 Roman Catholics are not incomparably more exalted char- 
 acters than Protestants; or that Roman Catholic countries 
 are not incomparably more penetrated to the core with 
 Christianity than Protestant America or England? In 
 Spain there is early Mass most mornings of the week, 
 but you seldom, if ever, see any but women at it, and 
 these rarely more than from ten to twenty. But on Sun- 
 day, at High Mass, the Church, as a general thing, is 
 well filled with men and women; but the only spark of 
 devotion you ever witness is, now and then you might 
 see parties of four or five women sitting outside their 
 doors, in the cool of the evening, reciting their chaplet. 
 If the priest is affable and intelligent, and seems anxious 
 to promote education, he is too much mixed up in the 
 secular affairs of his parish to give much attention to it. 
 
 The honors of the priest's house are always done by 
 one who goes by the name of his "eugina"; but she is 
 neither his wife nor any relation to him. You can only, 
 therefore, account for the average respect that is paid 
 him on the supposition that such things are not uncom- 
 mon. Altogether we feel strongly that there is certainly 
 not so much Christianity in Spain as in America; that 
 the Americans here are better educated and more intelli- 
 gent in their devotions, beyond comparison, than these 
 specimens of Spain; and that the minister here could not 
 have a woman sitting at the head of his table, who is 
 neither his wife nor his relation. Yet this is a country 
 that has remained exclusively Roman Catholic since its 
 release from the Moors. 
 
 In France the Sundays are the great days for parties 
 and hunting, and keen sportsmen find it no small act of 
 
24 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 self-denial to forego the latter. The principal actors in 
 the ^^chasse'' will enter church, leaving their guns, dogs, 
 and game in the porch, just in time to save Mass; and 
 before the service is finished, they disappear and resume 
 their sport. And surely there can be no doubt but that 
 we do things in reality better in America a hundredfold, 
 notwithstanding that appearances are kept up here. In 
 Italy, in most parts of the country, church-going is con- 
 fined to Mass on Sundays, high or low, — low when any 
 of the family communicates, which is never oftener than 
 once a month ; High Mass otherwise. And when Mass 
 is over, everybody meets, gossips, and promenades up 
 and down the streets till the carriages are ready to take 
 them home. Well, we have some of this custom here in 
 America, in country districts, but with this difference, — 
 that most respectable people go to church twice on 
 Sundays, and some of them likewise to a prayer and 
 conference meeting during the week. 
 
 But Roman Catholics say that the Protestant opposition 
 to Romanism was caused by political motives in Henry 
 VIII's time, than which nothing can be more unfounded. 
 Henry VIII burnt people for giving up his Six Articles, 
 which were essentially Popish, though he would not ac- 
 cept the Pope's supremacy. The Reformation in England 
 was set on foot by Edward VI, as to authority; and by 
 martyrs, of whom Henry VIII burned many, as to indi- 
 vidual protest. I am convinced, after reading ecclesiastical 
 history through as a Roman Catholic, that there never 
 was a more justifiable revolt from authority than the 
 revolt we call the Reformation. The revolt of the United 
 States of America from the authority of England was no 
 more just than was the revolt of Protestantism from 
 Romanism. And no Protestant should ever dream of 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 2$ 
 
 transferring his allegiance to Roman Catholicism, any more 
 than any citizen of the United States, in his sober senses, 
 should ever dream of transferring his own principle to 
 the English government. 
 
 I know the Roman system. I have known it and 
 walked in it for years. I have fasted in Lent so as to 
 be weak in body at the end of it; I ate no meat on 
 week days, and nothing till evening on Wednesdays, Fri- 
 days, and Saturdays, and then only a little bread, or 
 nothing; I observed strictly the weekly fasts and what- 
 ever was imposed through penance ; I held that Luther 
 and Zwingle and Wickliffe and their followers were 
 heretics ; I was taught to hate Protestantism ; so that to 
 receive a Protestant without abjuration of error was suffi- 
 cient almost, if not quite, to oblige a person to leave 
 the church, and was what finally led me from it. It did 
 much to shatter my faith in Romanism. What delivered 
 me from this whole system was a study of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews. I could not, for the Roman priesthood, 
 give up the Priesthood of Christ, which I found to be 
 irreconcilable. Transubstantiation, Purgatory, the worship 
 of the Virgin and the Saints, Indulgences, the repeated 
 Sacrifice of the Mass as an expiation for the sins of the 
 living and the dead, the supremacy and infallibility of 
 the Pope, — none of these, or other principles and dogmas 
 of Rome, could I find anywhere in the Bible. 
 
 CHURCH AUTHORITY. 
 
 Romanism has no divine foundation of divine faith ; it 
 is from beginning to end denied. It has dogmas im- 
 mensely important, and they are fundamental dogmas, but 
 no divine ground of faith. The soul that has faith in 
 God, has what the soul needs and craves after. It is 
 
26 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 not looking about for safety, for it is safe in Him and 
 through Him ; not in self-confidence, but trusting the 
 Good Shepherd. It does not slight the Sacraments, but 
 is thankful for them; nor the ministry of men whom the 
 Lord has sent. It blesses God heartily for all these 
 things where it enjoys them, but it possesses the sub- 
 stance of all in Christ, — eternal life. It has peace and 
 rest of heart in Him. When a Roman Catholic, I either 
 possessed Christian faith, or I did not. If I did, my 
 position was false; if I did not, any one can understand 
 why I turned Protestant. I had nothing. I had authority 
 (seemingly), but not faith in God. I believed in transub- 
 stantiation, because I received it on authority. I believed 
 that the Roman Catholic Church was the oracle of God. 
 The sacraments, absolution, and celibacy passed muster 
 with all the rest, and I declared it to be a part of the 
 original revelation. But this is no true faith in God; it 
 is acquiescence in authority, and after all it is accrediting 
 Rome for a fact. Rome says I can not believe in Chris- 
 tianity but on the authority of the Church. But how am 
 I to believe in the Church.? The first Christians could 
 not. Antiquity, Catholicity, and Succession did not exist. 
 They were called on to believe in Christ alone. There 
 was no Church, and all ecclesiastical authority was against 
 Him. The foundation of the first Christian's faith is dif- 
 ferent, on the Romanist system, from mine. Their faith 
 could not be founded, and was not to be founded, on 
 the Church ; nor could it be with heathens now, for they 
 do not recognize the Church. It is said that there is 
 special grace for them ; so heathens have special grace, 
 which Christians can not have. And if, as believing in 
 God, I seek, not Christianity, but honestly what Church 
 is the best one, it is said I must begin by owning the 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 2/ 
 
 authority of that Church. But this is absurd on the face 
 of it, for what I want to know is, Has it authority.? Is 
 it the true Church.? The Church rests chiefly on the 
 doctrine of tradition: "To learn doctrine we must have 
 recourse to the catechisms and creeds, and after learning 
 from them the doctrines of Christianity, the inquirer must 
 verify them from Scripture." The first Christians cer- 
 tainly did not learn from creeds or catechisms, for there 
 were none to learn them from; and now a parent, as 
 well as a catechism, a friend, a minister, may have taught 
 us, or the Bible may have done so. The Bible is the 
 only standard. The fallacy of the statement is in this: 
 that catechisms and creeds are here introduced, not as 
 teaching, but as an authority, — that is, the Church is. 
 We have received the truth from them, as truth, without 
 saying so. Let it be true or false, it is a deceitful 
 presentation of the matter. A parent, a friend, or a 
 minister, is not an authority. If catechisms and creeds 
 are only means of learning, there are a hundred others. 
 Their authority is at the root of this tradition. 
 
 CHURCH HISTORY — THE FATHERS. 
 
 I took great delight in the study of the Fathers and 
 Church history. There can be no doubt but that the 
 wild vagaries of the Alexandrian Fathers gave rise to 
 the Romish doctrine of angels and celibacy. The doctrine 
 about souls, and angels, and daemons {dainidn) is unques- 
 tionably half Platonic, and reigned among the Alexandrian 
 Fathers. The celibacy of the priesthood undoubtedly arose 
 from Manicheism and Gnosticism, and a semi-Jewish and 
 semi-heathen origin. Philo, the Jewish leader, held that 
 all was full of living beings; the sun, moon, and stars 
 were not only animals, but most pure minds ; that all the 
 
28 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 air, — the space from the moon, the extreme of heaven 
 proper, — to the earth was filled with souls as numerous 
 as the stars; that the higher ones were very pure, and 
 were daemons, — called angels by Moses; the lower ones 
 loved getting down into human bodies ; the root of all 
 the doctrine being the evil of matter. The supreme un- 
 known God, who dwelt in the depths of silence, could 
 have no connection with matter; hence emanations and 
 the Demiurge, an inferior Creator, resulting in Gnosti- 
 cism — the plague of the early Church. 
 
 Platonism, with its emanated daemons, and the Alex- 
 andrian philosophy, divide into the Christian and heathen 
 parties, Clement giving the perfect Christian the name of 
 "Gnostic" (Man of Knowledge). It resulted, in another 
 form, in Arianism, the doctrine more or less of these 
 Alexandrian Ante-Nicene Fathers (not Irenaeus), combated 
 by Athanasius, when it came formally to a head in Arius. 
 Hence, too, arose asceticism. Asceticism began in the 
 Alexandrian Church ; partly, indeed, by persons who fled 
 in the Decian persecution; hence forbidding to marry, not 
 that people might be more devoted, but as evil for the 
 Gnostic, Origen, who was a most attractive and interest- 
 ing man, — his name became the football of passion in the 
 Church. He held that souls were born into different con- 
 ditions in this world, according to their conduct in a 
 previously existing state. He held that the fall was the 
 pure soul of man coming into a body. Men's souls were to 
 work their way back to liberation from matter, — as also 
 Alexandrian and Platonic predecessors and Gnostic contem- 
 poraries held; that was the object of the mission of Christ. 
 
 Now, asceticism proves the effect of this heathenish 
 system of morals. The one great form of asceticism was 
 the clergy abstaining from marriage, under the plea of 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 29 
 
 purity, taking to sleep with them females, with the same 
 pretension to purity, alleging they were free from all evil 
 of mind. This was one form of asceticism, but not the 
 only one. I know they went into the desert. But this 
 shows the nature of it. It was often condemned, but that 
 shows it was a custom; and they had a name, both in 
 Greek and Latin, — suneisaktai (subintroductae), and agapetai 
 (beloved). Irenaeus himself charges the Gnostics with the 
 same practice. And Tertullian, when a Montanist, charges 
 the Catholics with it. 
 
 The Roman body holds celibacy, not only as a matter 
 of discipline, but as apostolic. The Greek Church requires 
 that priests should be married. But a man must be 
 wliolly blinded by imagination, to say celibacy is, as a 
 rule, apostolic. What its enforcement in the' Eleventh 
 century, by Hildebrand, — though never carried through till 
 the end of the Thirteenth, — produced, is well known. 
 And in the Council of Nice, it was formally refused to be 
 made a rule, though it had acquired great influence, and 
 was resisted by Paphnutus, an unmarried bishop, as a 
 snare. 
 
 How has duty to morals fared at the hands of the 
 Roman Church.'* All honor to such men as St. Bernard 
 and Thomas Aquinas, for their candor in denouncing the 
 abuses of the Middle Ages! But still, that system could 
 never have thriven, or become possessed of any such 
 abuses, without their aid or acquiescence. I can not shut 
 my eyes to the fact, that they clung to the system under 
 which they lived, and never dreamt of exchanging it for 
 another, thus proving that it existed in the main, abuses 
 excepted, with their full concurrence. History sets forth 
 unhesitatingly that the Roman system rose to the em- 
 inence which it occupied in the Thirteenth century, when 
 
30 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 at her zenith, most unrighteously, by fraud and force ; by 
 the weapon of the weak and the weapon of the strong, 
 alternately put into her hand, and employed by her as 
 legitimate, for the spread of her own power, to the dis- 
 memberment and destruction of the Church at large. 
 
 BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Protestantism asserted the authority of the Bible and 
 maintained the direct responsibility of each conscience to 
 God alone, as contrasted with the domination of priests. 
 The question with me was, What was to have authority 
 over my conscience: the Bible, or the Clergy and Tradition.? 
 I found that the Protestant principle was the absolute 
 authority of Biblical Christianity, and that each local Church 
 framed its own profession of faith. It was the protest of 
 the conscience against the most horrible system of in- 
 iquity that ever withered and overwhelmed the human 
 conscience. It was not merely negative; there was the 
 positive assertion of common fundamental dogmas, — such 
 as justification by faith, the two sacraments, and other 
 anti-Romanist ones. Protestantism and Christianity had 
 become convertible terms. I am a Christian, and not a 
 Romanist; and if there is anything that I love dearly, — 
 crazily, let it be called, for aught I care, — it is the 
 Christian religion.^ 
 
 There is a passage of Xenophon which says that Per- 
 sian law treated ingratitude as a heinous crime. My own 
 feelings are that no punishment would be too great for 
 
 1 Many years ago, in 1858, when only twelve years old, I was left 
 an orphan in a Roman Catholic school, to go through a preparatory 
 course of instruction before studying for the priesthood. In 1864 I 
 was converted, and after a thorough study of the New Testament, I 
 was led to renounce Roman Catholicism and embrace Protestantism. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 3^ 
 
 me, were Christianity to cease to be my fondest object 
 in life. It alone stands between me and a yawning abyss, 
 to which I can see no end. It alone prevents me, hourly, 
 from cursing the day on which I was born. Go where 
 I will, look where I will, past, present, and future stare 
 me in the face with a picture of doubt and perplexity, 
 of sin and misery, that, but for Christianity, I should not 
 have strength to contemplate, or be able to reconcile with 
 the existence of a just and merciful God. Christianity 
 will not answer all my difficulties; but it answers so 
 many of them, and so satisfactorily, that I can well afford 
 to wait in confidence for the solution of the rest, which it 
 intimates for purposes of my probation are withheld now, 
 which it assumes will be vouchsafed hereafter, — when we 
 ourselves shall, if faithful, be admitted with glorified fac- 
 ulties into visible fellowship with Him, by whom all things 
 were made, to hear them explained. 
 
 Meanwhile, from the experience which I have of it in 
 my own person, and from what I have seen in others, 
 those who have been brought up in it, and those who 
 have never known it, or cast it off, I am morally con- 
 vinced that its influences are of the most humanizing 
 description of any within man's reach ; having a direct 
 tendency to develop all that is high and capable of de- 
 velopment in us, if it had our full co-operation, to a point 
 incredible ; and to eradicate or keep in check all that is 
 debasing in us, but in resisting which our probation con- 
 sists : inspiring us with a desire, based upon the purest 
 motives, to relieve the wants, inequalities, and miseries 
 that we see around us, and making our own homes all 
 the happier, the better ordered, and more respectable, the 
 more we can, each one of us who compose them, regu- 
 late our lives by its precepts. 
 
32 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 CATHOLICITY AND UNITY. 
 
 |,u^g«|S the imagination of men is sought to be filled 
 with an idea of the Catholicity and Unity of 
 the Roman Church, it is needful to turn to 
 ii i iii ii iiii i iiiiiiiiiii ii ' i the facts, that one may know that what is 
 called the Roman Catholic Church was the most divided 
 thing in the world. Its pretension to catholicity is absurd, 
 as probably the majority of Christendom, and certainly the 
 most ancient Churches, are outside its pale. Unity hence 
 fails in its first element. There is no unity now; — nor 
 was there in the Roman body in former times. All the 
 assertions as to the pretended Catholic Church are un- 
 founded. The majority of professing Christians do not 
 belong to Rome. There are one hundred and sixteen 
 millions of Protestants, and I suppose seventy-eight mil- 
 lions of Greeks, besides Arminians and Jacobites in the 
 East, whose numbers are not exactly known, but of which 
 there must be about seven millions, so that in round 
 numbers there are, giving the largest margin, some one 
 hundred and ninety millions connected with Rome, and 
 some two hundred and one millions separate from it. 
 Hence there is no pretension of catholicity. 
 
 As to antiquity, it is that Eastern Christendom is more 
 ancient than Rome. The Buddhists have between four and 
 five hundred millions, and constitute by far the most numer- 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 33 
 
 ous religion in the world. The Mohammedans count some 
 one and seventy millions. They are spreading rapidly in 
 Africa, through having the power in their hands and the 
 prohibition for any Mohammedan to make a slave of an- 
 other. The Brahminical religion counts about two hund- 
 red millions of votaries ; other heathens, perhaps over two 
 hundred millions. This will disabuse the imagination of 
 the idea of the catholic or universal character of Rome. 
 
 Besides this, there are Canada, the West Indies, and a 
 scattered population, which can not very much affect the 
 balance either way. The main numbers are pretty nearly 
 correct ; were there five millions wrong in either, it would 
 not affect the question we are considering. Then, between 
 Turkey, the Austrian possessions, Russia, and the East, 
 the Greeks must number some sixty millions, besides 
 smaller but ancient bodies. So that Christendom not con- 
 nected with Rome numbers some one hundred and sixty 
 or one hundred and seventy millions ; Rome some one 
 hundred and thirty millions. That is a strange way of be- 
 ing catholic, which means universal. The Greek Churches 
 in Asia are more ancient than Rome. Rome was the 
 last founded of which we have any original history, and 
 Greeks, Nestorians, and Jacobites were all separate from 
 Rome, the earliest in the Fifth, and the latest in the 
 Ninth century. They insist on the word catholic, and on 
 their adversaries admitting the term ; this is equally false. 
 The Greeks never call them Catholics, nor intelligent 
 Protestants either; and were it otherwise it would be no 
 more than calling Protestant places of worship ,churches, 
 and theirs and others' chapels. It proves nothing. To 
 use a lawyer's maxim : Allegatio ejtisdem rei cujus disso- 
 lutio petitur^ nil valet. (To allege that as proof which is 
 the thing sought to be disproved has no force.) There 
 
 3 
 
34 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 are the Greek body, the Latin body, the Episcopal body, 
 the Lutheran body, each established in different countries, 
 in America all on the same footing. Catholicity does not 
 exist. 
 
 THE GREEK AND PROTESTANT SCHISM. 
 
 The formal teaching of the Popes, ever since the schism 
 of the Greek Church began till now, has been that the 
 Church is divided as regards her members, and that there 
 are Churches forming part of the Catholic Church, which 
 are, and have been for ages, out of communion with the 
 Roman Church. The Popes, indeed, have never practically 
 said this of any Churches but the Greek, and of the 
 Greek but those communicating with the Patriarch of 
 Constantinople, But in admitting this much, they most 
 unquestionably concede that what we call the Roman 
 Catholic Church has not constituted the whole Church, 
 nor have they themselves consequently spoken at the 
 head of the whole Church since the Greek schism. In 
 general, the action of Rome has been prompt, peremptory, 
 and decisive, almost to a fault ; bold, almost to rashness ; 
 unhesitating, almost to arrogance ; — she seems intent on 
 impressing with nothing so much as her own asserted 
 unity, her utter inability to commit a mistake of any kind, 
 or be in the wrong. 
 
 Contrast this with her extraordinary shiftiness and inde- 
 cision on the added Articles, the old and interpolated 
 clause concerning the "Procession of the Holy Ghost," 
 which caused the Greek schism. When has she ever 
 affirmed them to be doctrinally the same.? What, accord- 
 ing to her, is the exact difference between their respec- 
 tive Churches.? Pope Leo III forbade the use of the 
 interpolated form. His successors winked at it, and ended 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 35 
 
 by adopting it themselves ; still, they doubted about en- 
 forcing it on those who clung to the old form. Gregory 
 X read the letters of the Greeks at the Second Council 
 of Lyons, begging to be excused using the interpolated 
 Article without answering them, — "Because of his extreme 
 bitterness in beholding the rent of the Universal Church, 
 foreshadowed in the net of Peter the fisherman, that brake 
 for the multitude of fishes enclosed. We do not say 
 divided as regards its faith, but notoriously and lamen- 
 tably divided as regards its faithful members." 
 
 Nicolas III went further, and added that "as unity of 
 faith could not consist with diversity jn those that pro- 
 fessed . , , therefore, th^ desire of the Roman Church 
 was, that the added Article should be chanted uniformly 
 with the additional clause by the Greeks as well as the 
 Latins." This was in effect deciding that the old form 
 of the Creed should be superseded ; but it was never car- 
 ried out. When the subject was revived at the Council 
 of Florence, Rome was more diplomatic than she had 
 ever been previously, No Creed at all was recited there, 
 nor was any hint dropped whether both forms conjointly, 
 or one without the other, should be considered the Creed 
 of the Church. ^ 
 
 These various policies having to be reconciled with each 
 other, it was at length ruled by Clement VIIJ and Ben- 
 edict XIV, successively, that the Greeks were no heretics, 
 and that they should still be regarded as menibers of the 
 Roman Church. The representatives of the Greek Church 
 sat in the Council of Florence, debated and subscribed 
 on the san^e terms as the Romau. Pope Eugenius IV 
 told his legates : " It is for the union of the Greek and 
 Roman Church, so long and ardently desired by us, that 
 you are sent." And when he despaired of union he told 
 
36 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the Greeks : " In what shall we be benefited if we fail 
 to unite the Church of God?" What, then, are the con- 
 clusions ensuing from the facts which have been adduced ? 
 First, that Rome has both erred from the faith in point 
 of dogma, and has trifled with it in practice so often, that 
 her conduct has been a stumbling-block to Christendom 
 and occasioned a division of the Greek Church on doc- 
 trinal grounds. Secondly, that by allowing the primitive 
 belief of the Church to be stealthily supplanted by a 
 new belief based upon falsehoods, which she herself ac- 
 cepted without examination, and endeavored to make bind- 
 ing upon others by violence, she has occasioned a division 
 of the Greek and Roman Churches on disciplinary grounds. 
 In other words, that it is to the flagrant unfaithfulness 
 and injustice of her governmental policy, both as regards 
 doctrine and discipline, that secession from her communion 
 has been, and is still, due. Rome became a prey to dis- 
 sension, split into fragments, and had its own belief ques- 
 tioned retributively for its conduct toward the Greek 
 Church, which it trampled on for upholding the original 
 belief of the Church. 
 
 THE REFORMATION. 
 
 When the Greek Church separated from the Roman 
 Church, the Greek constituted the majority by far; but 
 when Protestants separated from Rome, the majority by 
 far sided with Rome. Adding to the Belief of the Church 
 produced the Greek schism, and subtracting from the 
 Belief of the Church the Protestant separation. The 
 Reformation was at once the avenger and logical offspring 
 of the schism between the Greek and Roman. Frederick 
 of Saxony, Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Queen Elizabeth, 
 together with Luther and Wickliffe, prescribed a Belief 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 37 
 
 which Protestants accepted, as much as Charlemagne and 
 Henry II prescribed one which the Greeks rejected. The 
 Roman system might well be supposed to have adopted 
 a more confident tone since the Reformation, but the 
 closer it is scrutinized the further it is seen to be from 
 unhesitating and decisive. Those who had renounced their 
 Communion were invited to the Council of Trent, not to 
 be condemned, but to be heard. 
 
 If Luther was excommunicated twice, the Confession of 
 Augsburg has never as yet been anathematized. It might 
 be said that all this has been the effect of moderation 
 and paternal tenderness on the part of the Popes. One 
 of the most warmly-debated points in modern times has 
 been the power of the Popes and their true relation to 
 the Church. Who can fail to be struck with the absence 
 of any formal assertion on their part, that the terms 
 "Catholic" and "Roman Catholic" are strictly convertible? 
 The fact is, they have never striven to appropriate the 
 term " Catholic " pure and simple to their own Commun- 
 ion, but have commonly called it themselves, and been 
 content that it should be called by others, the Roman 
 Catholic Church, as being its strict and adequate title. 
 No doubt, the teaching of all those who obey them has 
 always been that the Catholic Church has a visible unity 
 upon earth, under the Pope. But all such teaching, read 
 by the light of their own admissions respecting the Greek 
 Church, is seen to be but a declaration of what ought 
 to be, not of what is ; a picture of the ideal or of the 
 primitive, not of the actually existing Church. 
 
 Where, indeed, is the part of Christendom seriously 
 purporting to call itself the Catholic Church in these 
 days.? Protestant or Reformed Episcopal, Presbyterian or 
 Congregational, Methodist, Baptist, or Quaker, — all in 
 
38 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 their degree seem influenced by some hidden spell to 
 abstain from arrogating to themselves, or attributing to 
 each other, the epithet of "Catholic," as it is applied 
 to the Church of Rome. It may seem useless to devote 
 any time to the discussion of a question so apparently 
 unimportant as the growth of a religious denomination; 
 but unnecessary as the examination into religious differ- 
 ences is, on general principles, there is in the present 
 instance a deep foundation in fact for the discussion. 
 Within certain limits it is undoubtedly safe to leave dif- 
 ferences of religious belief to take care of themselves. 
 But we sadly misunderstand the laws of human develop- 
 ment if we suppose that a vast and overshadowing system 
 like Roman Catholicism can be safely passed by in silence 
 and unconcern. What applies to doctrinal differences 
 among Protestant denominations, does not apply to Roman 
 Catholicism. In point of fact, the Roman Catholic Church 
 aims at a spiritual and temporal sovereignty, which sep- 
 arates it in kind no less than in degree from other bodies 
 of the Christian faith. Recognizing no equal, and regard- 
 ing all forms of Protestantism since the Reformation as 
 so many phases of infidelity, Roman Catholicism comes 
 before us, not as a system claiming to be approved ac- 
 cording to its merits, but as a system claiming to be on 
 all subjects a supreme and infallible judge. 
 
 INTERNAL DIVISIONS. 
 
 Roman Catholics allege that they are at unity among 
 themselves. A little body like the Moravians could say 
 as much. I admit that the Roman system is admirably 
 organized, that centralization^ (which was in no way the 
 
 1 This centralizatiori has been very diligently carried out. Not only 
 in early ages was one universal episcopacy insisted on, but in details 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 39 
 
 case in early ages) has been carried out with admirable 
 skill. That its leaders have known how to draw into its 
 effective force the means at its disposal, in an admirable 
 way, as to skill, — that it has used its power over the 
 populations to make kings and the civil power subservient 
 to it, — is all true. Every intelligent man is aware and 
 owns this. But there have been serious divisions within 
 itself, as Gallicanism, Jansenism, Jesuitism, Dominicanism, 
 and Franciscanism. It does not hold on some really 
 important points what its greatest doctors once held ; 
 and as to many of its own dogmas, there have been 
 great changes. The seat of religious authority, in its 
 present form, dates only from the Council of Trent ; 
 and upon the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception 
 the Thomists and Scotists, Dominicans and Franciscans, 
 have been altogether divided. But the Papacy has suc- 
 ceeded in reducing them all to order. Centralized power 
 has prevailed. 
 
 As to infallibility, the Roman creed is not quite ten 
 years old at the present moment, and general councils 
 confirmed by Popes held to be in error. The Immaculate 
 Conception is eighteen or twenty years old, and Transub- 
 stantiation is some six hundred and sixty years. Pope 
 Pius IV added twelve new articles in 1564, and Pope Pius 
 IX two more in 1854 and 1870. Still the Pope has suc- 
 ceeded in bringing all the Roman body into unity of 
 dependence on himself, and he can decree what he likes 
 as a matter of faith, but only for his own body. The 
 
 the process of centralization has been carried on. After canonization 
 
 of saints came in, prelates besides the Pope did it, till a decree of 
 
 a Pope in the Middle Ages appropriated it to the See of Rome. So, 
 
 with indulgences, all prelates gave or sold them. That, too, was ap- 
 propriated to the Pope. 
 
40 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Greeks reject his authority, and the Protestants look with 
 horror on his taking a place which belongs to God only; 
 — that is, the greater part of Christendom. No infallibility 
 can hinder differences so long as the human mind works. 
 The doctrine of the Greeks differs from the doctrines of 
 Rome, the Nestorians differ from both, the Jacobites 
 from all, and the Protestants from the system they have 
 abandoned. 
 
 This only proves that the Roman Church has failed in 
 hindering divisions and maintaining unity. The divisions 
 existed there before Protestants were there. With these 
 divisions the question is. What is the rule to judge which 
 is the right one ? Not the authority of one giving itself 
 as the rule. That is what Rome does. 
 
 Divisions prove the infirmity of human nature, only that 
 it is much more excusable in Protestants just coming out 
 of the dark obscurity and superstition men were immersed 
 in during the Middle Ages than in Greece and Rome, 
 whose common starting point was pure Christianity. And 
 men must not suppose differences do not exist among 
 Romanists. The Dominicans resisted with all their force 
 the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary (lately 
 made by Pope Pius IX a matter of faith), so that there 
 was the most important body of Romanists (till the 
 Jesuits, the inventors and directors of the Inquisition, rose) 
 judges thus of heretical pravity, unsoitnd on what is now 
 declared to be an article of faith. The Augustinians be- 
 lieve in predestination ; the Roman Catholic priests deny 
 it. And so far did these disputes go that the Domini- 
 cans, in the Seventeenth century, charged the Jesuits with 
 maintaining the idolatry of the Chinese in their missions 
 in China. For years the inquiry v/as pursued before the 
 Pope, and the practices sanctioned by the Jesuits at last 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 4^ 
 
 condemned by Pope Clement XI, in 1704.^ The decree 
 was mitigated in 171 5. Now, the allowance of heathen 
 idolatry was a much graver difference than the details 
 on which Protestants differ, while agreeing in fundamental 
 principles. 
 
 Then there is an all-important difference on the subject 
 of authority and infallibility. It is a noticeable circum- 
 stance, that it was the same man, Bossuet, who wrote a 
 crafty book on the variations of Protestants, who led the 
 way in this important variation among Romanists, and 
 defended it against the attacks of Ultramontanes as they 
 are called, — that is, the extreme defenders of the Pope's 
 claims. Ultramontane principles prevail now, but to this 
 day Galilean principles, which deny the Pope's infallibility, 
 hold their ground in France and Germany. Disputes and 
 discussions belong to human nature, and where there is 
 more freedom for it, it appears more openly, as among 
 Protestants. In Rome, though violent, it is more con- 
 nected with intrigues and less exposed to view. Unity 
 and catholicity do not exist. 
 
 But Romanists say that the Protestant system has 
 issued not merely in a multitude of sects, but in ration- 
 alism, so-called, and infidelity. I deny the statement alto- 
 gether. Infidelity is far more general in Roman Catholic 
 countries than in Protestant ones. It is more published, 
 perhaps, in Protestant countries, because there are more 
 intellectual activity and greater freedom. Not only the 
 
 1 The decree of 171 5 allowed the Chinese to continue the worship 
 of their ancestors with gifts and burnings before them, and prostrat- 
 ing themselves, the principal worship of the heathen Chinese. Since 
 China has been opened to Europeans, they have found a great dragon 
 on the altar of a Jesuit church of that day, so that the Chinese 
 could worship that and the host at the same time. 
 
42 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 French Revolution was in a Roman Catholic country, 
 and spread its principles over such, but, in more modern 
 times, when the violent reaction against the Papal system 
 was over, Gregory XVI gives us this account in his 
 encyclical letter of 1832: "We speak, venerable brethren, 
 that which ye behold with your own eyes, which therefore 
 we deplore with united tears. An unrestrained wickedness, 
 a shameless science, a dissolute licentiousness, are triumph- 
 ant. The sanctity of holy things is despised ! " After stat- 
 ing that the Church was exposed to the hatred of the peo- 
 ple, he adds: "The academies and schools resounded in a 
 dreadful manner with new and monstrous opinions, by which 
 the Catholic faith is no longer assailed secretly, but a 
 horrible and impious war is now openly waged against 
 it"; and then refers to attacks on the order of the Church 
 by members of the clergy and associations of them. 
 
 Roman Catholic countries are not more exempt from 
 infidelity than the Protestant. There is no one acquainted 
 with Roman Catholic and Protestant nations but knows 
 that faith and morality are more common in the masses 
 in Protestant than in Roman Catholic nations. Abject 
 superstition — devotion, if they please to call it so — is to 
 be found in the darker parts of the land in Roman 
 Catholic countries, and closely connected, very commonly, 
 with violence and corruption. The Italian brigands are 
 most devout; and in Spain, houses of ill -fame supply the 
 needed certificate of priestly absolution to commercial 
 travelers, who never trouble themselves with priests, when 
 these documents were needed for their journey off the 
 great routes. And no one can have been in Western 
 Papal Europe without knowing the universal spread of in- 
 fidelity, where there was any energy of civilization, and the 
 degradation and corruption which pervade those countries. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 43 
 
 They tell us the true Church is catholic, or universal, 
 in three several respects : as to persons, as to places, and 
 as to times. We are told that it consists of the most 
 numerous body of Christians; that is, it is not universal 
 as to persons. We are told it is more or less diffused 
 wherever Christianity prevails; that is, it is not universal 
 as to places. In fact, in many countries, it is a very 
 small minority. It is said that it constitutes the main 
 stock of Christianity; but if it is only the main stock, 
 it is not catholic. Every one who is acquainted with the 
 facts, knows that unity and catholicity are not to be 
 found embodied anywhere in Christendom. Whoever be 
 right and whoever be wrong, the unity does not exist 
 and the Roman or Latin body is not catholic because it 
 is Roman, and it is so constantly called by Popes and 
 Councils. When it insisted on Rome being supreme, 
 catholicity and unity departed, even in outward form, 
 from Christendom. 
 
44 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 TRADITIONS. 
 
 ISSiSiHE authority of tradition, unwritten or oral 
 I teaching, arose from the controversy which 
 j took place between the Christian Fathers and 
 
 siiiiiiinMiiiMiniiit li the Gnostics, Montanists, and Valentinianists^ 
 of the early centuries. The Gnostics (Men of Knowledge) 
 first contended for some teachings delivered by tradition 
 and not contained in the Bible ; the early Fathers re- 
 sisted this. When tradition was first spoken of by the 
 early Fathers, they used it as a testimony to confirm 
 teaching already in existence, and not as containing any 
 thing new. The Fathers used tradition with a good in- 
 tention, and their practice not only fails altogether as a 
 secure proof, but it condemns the traditions of Rome. 
 And we condemn the Romanists, because all their pecul- 
 iar teachings are novelties, the dates or gradual intro- 
 duction of them being historically demonstrable. Thus, 
 Purgatory was hinted at in the Fifth century; said to be 
 useful for very small sins in the Sixth, and then only 
 gradually grew up. Transubstantiation was never decreed 
 definitely until the Thirteenth century, and the contrary 
 
 ^ The Gnostics, Montanists, and Valentinianists were called heretics. 
 They taught that there were two Gods, — a good and bad one, — and 
 pretended to some secret or concealed doctrine. The Romanist is 
 clearly on the ground the heretics were on. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 45 
 
 was taught by the most famous doctors previously. The 
 saints were prayed for, and not to, for centuries, so that 
 they had to alter the Roman liturgy to suit the change. 
 The Sacrifice of the Mass can be traced from the sacri- 
 fice of praise and thanksgiving (whence the word "Eucha- 
 rist"), but till very late, to its being the real sacrifice 
 of Christ, eflftcacious for the sins of quick and dead, and 
 the liturgy was changed accordingly. Romanists are now 
 in the position of the Gnostics of old, alleging tradition^ 
 for new doctrines, which are not found in the Bible. 
 
 We can appeal to history and prove the introduction 
 of the particular doctrines they insist on, as novelties in 
 the Christian Church. The Romish Church cites the 
 Fathers, and it will be useful in many respects to refer 
 to them. The fact is, the Fathers argued as it suited 
 them at the moment. When the Gnostics pressed them, 
 they flew to tradition. The reasonings of the Fathers 
 will give us the worth of their testimony and how they 
 contradict, not each other merely, but themselves. Clement 
 of Alexandria resisted the Gnostics, who infested the 
 Church. He said to them that there were Christian Gnos- 
 tics, who, by temperance (a human thing) and prudence (a 
 Divine thing) arrived at Gnosis (knowledge), and thus 
 had got higher truths and intelligence to understand 
 what was concealed from vulgar eyes. Clement, after all, 
 was not very famous for orthodoxy. He was saturated 
 with Alexandrian Platonism, and used very awkward lan- 
 
 1 The traditions of the Roman Church fill one hundred and thirty- 
 five immense folios, all in the Latin tongue: one Papal Bulls, in 
 eight volumes; two Decretals, in ten volumes; the Fathers, in thirty- 
 five volumes; the Saints, in fifty-one volumes. The word "tradition" 
 is shamefully abused. Tradition means now what is handed down, 
 unwritten, from one to another. 
 
46 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 guage, so that the famous Romanist doctor, Petau, charges 
 him plainly with not speaking in an orthodox way. 
 
 Cyprian, whom the Romanists pass over quite naturally, 
 strenuously resisted all the pretensions of Rome till the 
 day he was martyred. Pope Stephen of Rome (253), not 
 being able to prove his point against him on a subject 
 of practice and discipline, appealed to tradition. Stephen 
 said: "Let nothing be innovated on what has been handed 
 down" (tradition). Cyprian replied: ** Whence is that tra- 
 dition.^ What obstinacy is that [in the Pope], what 
 presumption, to prefer human tradition to a Divine dis- 
 position, and not to take notice that God is indignant 
 and angry as often as human tradition sets aside and 
 passes by Divine precepts ! " 
 
 The testimony of the early Fathers is unanimous against 
 tradition as being superior to the Bible. Basil (Fourth 
 century) wrote nearly four hundred years after Christ, 
 when superstitions were creeping in and false doctrines 
 had made havoc of the Church. Men used to live in 
 sin, and wait till they were dying, to be baptized, in order 
 to get off quite clear. I do not mean that all did, but 
 adduce the fact to show the corruption that had come 
 in. Basil himself, too, became suspected of heresy. He 
 never would say the Holy Ghost was God. The excuse 
 was, that if he had, he would have been driven from 
 his See, and the heretics would have had all his flock 
 in their power; so he avoided the word, but said what 
 was equivalent. Epiphanius (Fourth century) applies 
 also the authority of tradition only to practice ; namely, 
 that unmarried persons who dedicated themselves to God 
 sinned if they married afterwards, and ought to be ac- 
 cepted as founded on tradition. He is reasoning against 
 those who forbade to marry, and says the Church approved 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 47 
 
 marriage, but admired people not marrying, and then refers 
 to tradition as helpful in understanding the Bible. Ath- 
 anasius, Ambrose, Gregory Nyssa, Jerome, and Augustine 
 used the best grounds they thought they could find, and 
 when heretics. Popes, or councils, pleaded tradition, said 
 all must be proved by the Bible. When religion became 
 a religion of ordinances, the traditions that were in vogue 
 for them became the groundwork of all the Christian 
 system, and the Bible disappeared. Chrysostom urges, with 
 all persevering eloquence and zeal, every body's reading 
 the Bible; saying they were written by poor, uneducated 
 men, on purpose that they might be plain for such, and 
 that laymen occupied in the world had more need to read 
 them than monks or clergy. Augustine says, that if the 
 doctors of the Church go wrong, he is not bound by 
 them ; and this is an additional proof of the uncertainty 
 of tradition. The primacy of St. Peter at Rome and the 
 Invocation of Saints is a question of tradition. The Nes- 
 torians refused to call Mary the mother of God,^ and the 
 Immaculate Conception is nothing but a tradition. 
 
 THE VIRGIN MARY. 
 
 It is the common doctrine that the Virgin has more 
 power in heaven than God, — that the mother can com- 
 mand her son. It is expressly founded on a mother hav- 
 ing pre-eminence and being superior to a son. The words 
 in Latin are " Sequitur quod ipsa benedicta Virgo sit 
 superior Deo " (It follows that the blessed Virgin herself 
 is superior to God). And so it is said that God has 
 reserved the supremacy of justice, but given up to the 
 Virgin the supremacy of grace. Thus, in "The Glories 
 
 1 The heathen, who had rejected the preaching of Christ, gave up 
 their temples in crowds when they had a woman to worship. 
 
48 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 of Mary," by Ligouri, a sinner, after singing the "Hail, 
 Mary," to an image of the Virgin, "saw an infant covered 
 with wounds streaming with blood ... he began to 
 weep; but he saw the infant turning away from him . 
 . . he had recourse to the most holy Virgin, saying: 
 'Mother of Mercy, thy Son rejects me.' The Virgin re- 
 proached him with renewing the Passion of Jesus. But 
 because Mary knows not how to send away disconsolate 
 a soul that has recourse to her, she turned to her Son 
 to ask pardon for that miserable sinner. Jesus still ap- 
 peared unwilling to forgive him ; but the holy Virgin, 
 placing the infant in the niche, prostrated herself before 
 him, saying: 'Son, I will not depart from thy feet till 
 thou dost pardon this sinner.' Jesus then said: 'Mother, 
 I can refuse thee nothing. Thou dost wish me to pardon 
 him; for thy sake I pardon him. Make him come and 
 kiss my wounds.' The sinner came, weeping bitterly, and 
 as he kissed the wounds of the infant, they were healed. 
 In the end, Jesus embraced him in token of his pardon ; 
 the sinner changed his conduct, and afterwards led a holy 
 life, enamored of the most holy Virgin." 
 
 It is for Mary's sake that Christ pardons the sinner. 
 Their excuse is, that "Jesus is the only Mediator of 
 justice between men and God . . . but because men 
 recognize and fear in Him (Jesus Christ) the divine 
 majesty which resides in Him as God, the Lord wished 
 to appoint another advocate, to whom we could have 
 recourse with less fear and with more confidence. This 
 advocate is Mary." There is need, then, of a medium 
 with the Mediator himself ! The images are the living 
 persons; they do not, as falsely alleged, merely recall 
 these. Real idols ! Mercy is in Mary, not in Jesus ! 
 "She knows so well how to appease the Divine justice, 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 49 
 
 by her tender and wise prayers, that God himself blesses 
 her for it, and, as it were, thanks her for thus keeping 
 Him from abandoning them to the chastisements which 
 they deserve!" She is a mediatrix of justice, really, in 
 these stupid follies. 
 
 PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD. 
 
 The early Fathers speak of prayers for the dead, not 
 of Purgatory. The dead were remembered in the sacri- 
 fice of the altar; but this had no possible connection 
 with Purgatory, for they named the patriarchs, apostles, 
 prophets, martyrs, and the Virgin Mary herself. It is a 
 curious fact, that these very prayers for the dead saints 
 were turned into prayers to the saints. These prayers 
 are found in all the ancient liturgies. Thus, in that as- 
 cribed to James: "Remember, Lord, the God of the spirits 
 of all flesh, the orthodox whom we have commemorated 
 and whom we have not commemorated, from righteous 
 Abel unto this day. Give them rest, there, in the land 
 of the living in Thy Kingdom, in the delight of Para- 
 dise, in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, our 
 holy fathers, whence pain, sorrow, and groaning are 
 exiled, where the light of Thy countenance looks down," 
 etc. And St. Chrysostom : " And further, we offer to 
 Thee this reasonable service in behalf of those who have 
 departed in the faith : our ancestors, fathers, patriarchs, 
 preachers, evangelists, confessors, virgins, and every just 
 spirit made perfect in the faith .... especially 
 the most holy, undefiled, excellently laudable, glorious 
 lady, the mother of God and ever Virgin Mary." 
 Epiphanius specially remarks, that Christ alone, as testi- 
 fying to the glory of His person, was not prayed for. 
 
 4 
 
50 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 St. Gregory, who formed the Roman liturgy, will suffice : 
 "Remember, O Lord, thy servants (male and female) 
 who have preceded us with the sign of faith, and sleep 
 in the sleep of peace. To them, and to all who are at 
 rest {quiescentibus) in Christ, we entreat Thou shouldest 
 grant a place of refreshment and light and peace." Nor 
 is this all. In one of the decretals, after a long dis- 
 cussion whether the water as well as the wine in the 
 Mass is changed into blood. Pope Innocent III replies 
 to another question of the archbishop of Lyons why, 
 when in the ancient liturgies, in a part of the service 
 called the Secreta (where the name of the person in 
 whose honor the Mass was said was mentioned), it ran 
 thus: "Grant, Lord, that this offering may profit the 
 soul of Thy servant, Leo," It was then said: "Grant 
 us, that by the intercession of thy servant, Leo, this 
 oblation may profit us." Pope Innocent tells him that 
 Scripture says that it is injurious to the saints to think 
 they need to be prayed for when they are in life. As 
 to how the change came about, he says nothing; but in 
 looking for glory for the saints, it must be their being 
 honored among men, and refers to St. Augustine's state- 
 ments, — calling it Scripture ; thanksgiving for very good ; 
 prayer for middling good, and solace to middling bad; 
 and tells the archbishop that whether it be so, he leaves 
 to him to investigate. Thus the liturgy was changed. 
 Still, the prayer for rest for those asleep in Christ re- 
 mains. The force of this has been felt, and, in a modern 
 Roman Catholic Prayer Book, approved by the late Arch- 
 bishop Hughes, of New York, it is said to be for souls 
 in Purgatory, though it is expressly for all who rest in 
 Christ — omnibus quiescentibus in Christo. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 5 1 
 
 PURGATORY. 
 
 But the greatest and most influential tradition of the 
 Roman Church is that of Purgatory. The Roman Church 
 teaches that there are two middle places, called Limbo 
 and Purgatory. The doctrine is confused enough. The 
 Hell to which the Saviour descended is said to contain 
 three places : First, Hell proper, where the wicked are 
 tormented ; secondly, the fire of Purgatory ; lastly, a third 
 sort of receptacle is that in which were received the souls 
 of the pious who died before the advent of Christ. These 
 pious souls Christ liberated ; for after all they were kept 
 in painful suspense {stispefisi torquebanttir) and miserable 
 wearisomeness {misera molestia). But here Purgatory is 
 a distinct thing. Christ brought to Heaven, according to 
 the Roman Catholic doctrine, the holy fathers and the 
 other pious souls freed from prison. But then, they do 
 hold that some were suffering the most acute torments, 
 as those in Purgatory do. Alphonsus de Castro and some 
 Roman Catholic bishops admit that there was nothing 
 about Purgatory in the early centuries ; especially the 
 Greek Fathers and the Greek Church deny the doctrine; 
 and passages from Tertullian, Cyprian, Basil, Dionysius, 
 Justin Martyr, Athanasius, Hilary, and Ambrose may be 
 quoted, which plainly set aside Purgatory. Macarius puts 
 the three states: Guilty (the devil) takes it off the holy 
 servant of God ; angels bring them to the Lord with all 
 his soul; He cleanses him in one hour, and takes him 
 unto His bosom and to see light. Thus Athanasius says 
 the first pass out of this world into everlasting rest. 
 Ambrose says wise men desire death as a rest from their 
 labors and an end of their evils. Gregory Nazianzen says: 
 "Nor beyond this night [of this life] is there any puri- 
 fying." So the famous Cyril of Alexandria says : " For He 
 
52 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 delivered His own soul into the hands of His own Father, 
 that we, taking our point of departure in it, and on ac- 
 count of it, may have splendid hopes, firmly feeling and 
 believing that we, having undergone the death of the 
 flesh, shall be in the hands of God, and shall be in a 
 far better state.** Hilary insists on all being settled at 
 death ; for though judgment is to come, still the case is 
 settled in death. There is no putting off or delay, for 
 the day of judgment is the eternal retribution of blessed- 
 ness or punishment ; but the time of death holds each 
 one meanwhile by its own laws. Nor do the Roman 
 Catholics deny that those who go to Purgatory are for- 
 given and justified, and the principle of sin {peccati fomes) 
 is gone. It is penal suffering from God after guilt and 
 sin are wholly gone. I do not give the Fathers as my 
 authority, but as showing the common current belief; for 
 as to the unanimous consent of the Fathers, it is en- 
 tirely out of the question. 
 
 The Romanists teach that there are two kinds of sin 
 — mortal sin, which deserves Hell, and venial sin, which 
 deserves Purgatory. The Roman Catechism of the Council 
 of Trent contains the following: "There is also the fire 
 of Purgatory, in which the souls of just men are purified 
 by a temporary punishment, to qualify them to be ad- 
 mitted into their eternal country, into which nothing de- 
 filing entereth."^ {^^ Proeterea est P^irgatorius ignis^ quo 
 pioriini afiimcB ad definitum tempus cruciatce expiantur, ut 
 eis in ceternam patriam ingresstis patere possit.'') It is 
 
 1 The words of the Catechism are given from J. Donovan's — a pro- 
 fessor at Maynooth college — translation. 
 
 2 The words '■'purgantur'''' and '•'■ expiantur'''' are used for clearing 
 the tormented souls from it, because Heaven can not be defiled. 
 But it shows the mere external character of the remedy of their 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 53 
 
 singular enough, this obscurity and inconsistency of the 
 Catechism of the Council of Trent on this subject. In 
 the article on the Descent into Hell, besides what I have 
 just quoted, after speaking of Purgatory, it is said: "The 
 third kind of abode is that in which were received the 
 souls of the just who died before Christ, and where, with- 
 out experiencing any kind of pain, supported by the blessed 
 hope of redemption, they enjoyed peaceful repose. These 
 pious souls, then, who in the bosom of Abraham were 
 expecting the Saviour, Christ the Lord liberated, descend- 
 ing into Hell." Shortly after, in the same article, it is 
 said, speaking of the descent of the just: "They all 
 descended : some to endure the most acute torments ; 
 others, though exempt from actual pain, yet deprived 
 of the vision of God and of the glory for which they 
 sighed, and consigned to the torture of suspense in 
 painful captivity." Is being consigned to the torture of 
 suspense in painful captivity, peaceful repose in the bosom 
 of Abraham ? 
 
 The fire of Purgatory is the second thing. Limbus 
 Patram is the third kind of abode, where there was no 
 pain, but peaceful repose; yet some were there to endure 
 the most accute torments. In a further passage it is 
 said: "And the souls of the just, on their departure 
 from this life, were borne to the bosom of Abraham ; or, 
 as is still the case with those who require to be freed 
 from the stains of sin, or die indebted to the Divine 
 justice, were purified in the fire of Purgatory." Hence, 
 the souls of the just, who were enjoying peaceful repose 
 
 idea of sin. It looks like quibbling on the Latin word '■^purgor^'' 
 which means to put away, in the way of expiation, and not purging 
 of a soul. Expiantur is a sacrificial word, expressing the removal 
 of what, in any way, offends the gods, or is offensive in their sight. 
 
54 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 in the torture of suspense, must have been perfect souls ; 
 the others were in the fires of Purgatory, as people are 
 now. The Jews' belief is that Abraham descended, from 
 time to time, to deliver souls. Cardinal Bellarmine insists 
 that it is a material fire; — a strange thing for souls to 
 suffer from! — but what is more important, he declares 
 that the element of sin (the fomes peccati) is gone by 
 death, because sensuality is extinguished ; habits, not. But 
 they must soon be gone, too, — nay, at once, though that 
 is not the case in this life, because there will be no 
 contrary and resisting element as there is here; nor is 
 Purgatory for these habits, as adults who die directly 
 after baptism and martyrs do not go there. Yet, neither 
 baptism nor martyrdom destroys them. After reasoning 
 thus, and saying Purgatory was for none of these, he adds: 
 "There remain the penalties of guilt and venial sins, which 
 may properly be called the remains of sins, on which 
 account Purgatory is. But these remains, it is sometimes 
 certain, are purged in death. Sometimes it is certain they 
 are not purged ; sometimes it is doubtful which happens ; 
 and it is most probable they are partly purged and partly 
 not purged."^ I cite this because it is thus clear, from the 
 highest authority of the Roman Catholic Church, that it 
 is not inward spiritual purifying, — for sensuality is ex- 
 tinguished by death, — not even habits, but the penalty of 
 guilt and venial sin. It is strictly penal and satisfactory; 
 and secondly, it is exactly for that ("the remains of sin," 
 
 1 " Restat ergo reatus poenae, et peccata venialia, que proprie dici 
 possunt reliquiae peccatorum, ob quas est Purgatorium. Has autem 
 reliquias aliquando certum est in morte purgari: aliquando certum est 
 non purgari: aliquando dubium est, quid fiat, probabilissimum est, 
 partem purgari, partem non purgari." — Bellarmine De Purg.: Lib. II, 
 Cap. IX, 7. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 55 
 
 which Extreme Unction^ takes away) that men go into 
 Purgatory. 
 
 "The pains of Purgatory," says Bellarmine, "are most 
 horrible {atrocissimce). It can not be said how long they 
 last; they may diminish gradually." This he proves by 
 visions. He enlarges upon the proofs of the horrible pains 
 compared with any thing here. In result for the slightest 
 faults (if Pope Gregory the Great is to be believed), and 
 with no view to purify from lust or sensuality (for that 
 is extinguished), justified, holy souls, in a state of grace, 
 are kept in torment as a mere penal satisfaction. The 
 Roman Catechism would lead us to conclude, that as there 
 were these pious people in Purgatory before Christ de- 
 scended, as well as saints in Abraham's bosom, — though 
 in repose, — tortured by suspense, though sustained by 
 hope (a strange kind of repose), the other pious souls 
 not completely saints tortured horribly in the fire; so 
 when He descended, these last got off to Heaven as well 
 as the saints, properly speaking. We are not told who 
 finished their satisfaction for them, without which they 
 could not be clean. They were better off than those now 
 in Purgatory, any way. These, we are told, must pay 
 the last farthing, or they can not come out thence. Better 
 to have been a Jew, any way, than a Christian. However 
 that may be, it is to be taught that Christ the Lord 
 went down to Hell to liberate from prison those holy 
 fathers and the other pious persons, and brought them to 
 Heaven. Yet, those in Purgatory now enjoy the effects 
 of Christ's expiation, are in a state of grace, and. Cardinal 
 
 ^ "Cujus unctu delicta, si quae sint adhuc expianda, ac peccati re- 
 liquias abstergit." — ConciL Tridentini, Sessio XIV, De Sacr. Ex- 
 trema Unctionis, Cap. II. This is exactly what Bellarmine says 
 souls go to Purgatory for. 
 
56 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Bellarmine tells us, of their salvation, no principle of sin in 
 them ; but there they must stay till they have made satis- 
 faction for their faults. The happier Jews of Old Testa- 
 ment times got clear without doing so ; because what 
 Christ did was to impart the benefit of His Passion to 
 them, of which the Christians who have to stay enjoy 
 the benefit, but only to bring them into Purgatory; for 
 otherwise they would have gone into Hell. They are all 
 strange inventions, and hence confusion. 
 
 But the true source of Purgatory is a mixture of 
 Judaism and Platonism. Roman Catholic authors refer to 
 both as being the same doctrine, in substance, as the 
 Romanist doctrine of Purgatory. No one denies that the 
 modern idea of Purgatory is found no where so clearly 
 stated as in Plato. Cardinal Bellarmine, the Jesuit, and 
 the highest authority in Roman circles, appeals to Plato, 
 Cicero, Virgil, and the Mohammedans, to prove that it 
 is according to natural light. ^ After a pretty elaborate 
 description of Hades, or the infernal regions, Plato says: 
 "These things being so, when those who are departed 
 come to the place where the daimonion carries each,^ 
 first they are distinguished in judgment, both those who 
 have lived well and piously and righteously, and those 
 who have not; and those who have seemed to live 
 in a middle way having come to the Acheron, having as- 
 cended the vehicle for each, they come to the lake, and 
 there they dwell, and being purified and paying the penalty 
 
 i"If Plato (Plato in Georgia), Virgil (^neid I, 6), and other 
 heathens, ancient and modern, as likewise Mahomet (the Koran) and 
 his disciples . . . have embraced this doctrine, it only shows how 
 conformable it is to the dictates of natural religion." 
 
 2 Daimon, with Plato, is an instrument of Divine agency, not bad 
 as such. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 57 
 
 of their unrighteous deeds, they are absolved, if any one 
 has acted unrighteously, and have the rewards of their 
 good deeds, each according to his desert. But those who 
 seem to be incapable of being healed, because of the 
 greatness of their sins, — having committed either many 
 or great sacrileges, or many unrighteous and illegal mur- 
 ders, or whatever else such-like they may be involved in, 
 — these a fitted fate hurries away to Tartarus, whence 
 they never get out; but those who have committed such 
 as may be healed, yet great sins, . . . are kept a year, 
 and, if need be, more, till they obtain release from those 
 they have injured for the wrongs done: for that is the 
 penalty adjudged them. . . . But those who are es- 
 teemed to have excelled as regards living piously, — these, 
 liberated and removed from their places on the earth as 
 from prisons, going away to the pure dwelling place, 
 dwell over the earth. And if these same [those who have 
 been adequately purified by philosophy] live without pain 
 all time hereafter, and come into a better habitation than 
 these, which it is not easy to describe." 
 
 And again, "If a soul depart in this state [a good one] 
 it departs to what is like itself, and invisible — what is 
 divine, immortal, and wise, and coming there, begins to 
 be happy, is freed from the contagion of human ills, and 
 is in the society of the Gods. But if it shall depart 
 contaminated out of the body, it will be, when separated, 
 impure.^ Those who have passed through life justly and 
 piously, when they die, go to the isles of the blessed, to 
 dwell in all happiness, without any evils. But he who 
 has lived unrighteously and without God, will go to the 
 prison of vengeance and punishment which they call Tar- 
 
 1 Plat. Phaed., sects. ii8, 119; Eus. Praep. Ev. (553), Lib. XI, 27 
 to 38, from (568) Georgias, near the end, sects. 164, 168. 
 
58 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 tarus. But they who have committed the worst unright- 
 eousness, and on account of such unrighteousness can 
 not be healed any more, — of these examples are made. 
 These can not, indeed, any longer be helped who are 
 incurable, but they help those who see them, when they 
 see them, for their very great sins suffering most painful 
 and frightful sufferings forever." 
 
 All this was borrowed from Egypt, as different points 
 show, though made up into Grecian philosophy; as in 
 other parts we find him stating the Egyptian doctrine of 
 the transmigration of souls, accompanied with another doc- 
 trine greatly taught afterwards, that the soul existed before 
 and came down to dwell in the body, — two natures mak- 
 ing up one person, as will be found in the places I have 
 quoted from. But, though in a heathen form, we have the 
 Roman doctrine of saints who go to Heaven, the wicked 
 to Hell, and a middle class to Purgatory. So Virgil,^ 
 when ^neas goes down to Hades, he is told by them 
 in Purgatory: "When life leaves with the last light [of 
 day], not yet is every evil over to the unhappy, nor all 
 corporeal infection^ wholly gone ; and it is altogether nec- 
 essary that many things should have grown up as part 
 of ourselves in wonderful ways,^ therefore they are exer- 
 cised with penal torments, and pay the penalty of old 
 evils." And then he speaks of different punishments 
 before they go to Elysium.^ And further, in the Odyssey, 
 
 1 In Dante's "Inferno," Virgil is made to be the poet's "guardian 
 spirit " through the visit. 
 
 2 Or evils ; but Platonic doctrine makes the text, I doubt not, right. 
 
 3 This is also Platonic, and the same is found just before the 
 passage I have quoted from Eusebius. 
 
 * But here, again, there is the Egyptian doctrine of transmigration. 
 This Christianity made them to suppress; the rest they retained. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 59 
 
 souls complain that sacrifices have not been offered for 
 them, to get them out of this place. Plato teaches the' 
 pre-existence of the soul (Phaedo 223) and transmigration. 
 Only true saints, who had kept alone from every snare 
 of corporate existence, went, it is suggested, to God. So 
 did Pythagoras. Philo, the Jew, held the pre-existence of 
 the soul, as Plato, and that the air is full of daimonions 
 up to the moon; and the lower or inferior class were 
 disposed to be earthly and come into bodies. This came 
 from Indian or Egyptian heathenism. And the great early 
 doctors of the Church, — Justin Martyr and Clement of 
 Alexandria, — were educated in Platonism. Origen,^ too, 
 embraced the whole system — transmigration and the re- 
 newal of the whole series of the soul's history in another 
 earth. Jerome and Ruffinus (Latins), and, even in part, 
 Ambrose followed Origen in a good deal, as did Gregory 
 Nyssa and many others in the East. Origen was fol- 
 lowed and defended till the fifth general council. Jerome 
 and Augustine, who hesitated about it all, led in the 
 notions of the Western Church. Augustine was a very bad 
 man, and, undoubtedly, became a truly great man; but 
 Jerome, saint though he be called, had an awful and 
 unsubdued temper, and was abusive and revengeful to 
 the last degree. However, he was a saint for Rome. 
 
 The doctrine of Purgatory had now come in, and soon 
 after, the dark ages, when wickedness, and corruption, 
 and superstition were at their height. They had to make 
 some other way of clearing themselves, and hence pen- 
 ances, and indulgences, and Purgatory. The early, learned 
 Fathers, who imprinted the character of their doctrines 
 
 1 These are the conclusions that Origen came to ; for agreement 
 between the Fathers is the most ridiculous thing in the world to 
 talk of. 
 
6o FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 on the Church, lived at Alexandria. There was the great 
 Christian Catechetical school, and the principal of these 
 Fathers were its masters, as Clement and Origen ; and 
 through these this mixture of Platonism and Judaism 
 flowed into the Church. Plato holds that the flesh is an 
 evil part of the nature, which infects the soul, and that 
 if it has wholly given itself up to vice, it would be given 
 up to punishment for the advantage of others, as an 
 example; if not, but still any had not kept themselves 
 free, they would be punished in Hades for a certain time, 
 proportioned to their unpurged stains ; that there were 
 two instruments for the health of the body, — exercise 
 [gymnastics] and medicine, — and if the first was not suf- 
 ficient, the other was to be applied; that the spots of 
 the soul were like the colors after a wound when com- 
 pletely well; the soul, at the end of its purification and 
 punishment, would be rendered splendid and spotless. 
 That is simply Purgatory. Virgil enlarges a little on it : 
 Besides the torments of Hell, he states the same process 
 of punishment and purification; but he does not quite 
 finish them off then : he sends them to Elysium (a place 
 of blessedness), and then, after a length of time, the 
 hardened spots are wholly gone, and the ethereal soul 
 is left quite pure. Other fictions were added ; the souls, 
 quite pure, according to Plato, went off to the stars, 
 according to their qualities, for they held the stars to be 
 living beings. Hades was placed by them under the earth, 
 and so by Romanists. This doctrine of Purgatory was 
 connected with the famous mysteries of Eleusis. It was 
 signified in the rites (says Plato) that he who was not 
 initiated, and the unperfected in them, would go to Hades 
 and lie in mire; but that the purified and the perfected 
 person, when he departed, would dwell with the Gods. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 6 1 
 
 So they held that there were those who answered to the 
 Romish saints — the heroes who went to Heaven at once 
 and were eternally happy. 
 
 The real source of Purgatory is heathenism and Juda- 
 ism, which were associated at Alexandria, where the first 
 great doctors of the Church lived. At first it took the 
 shape of purifying all completely in eternal fire; but that 
 was not generally accepted. It then took the form of 
 prayer for all, and apportioned to all some punishment, at 
 the least the punishment of loss, — not seeing God; or 
 at any rate, were uncertain, and prayed for all, even for 
 the Virgin Mary, with a view to their speedily seeing the 
 face of God. But the idea of the purging process sur- 
 vived through, and in Augustine's time was a question as 
 to which he doubted, — Jerome speaking with such uncer- 
 tainty, that he is accused of denying eternal punishment. 
 This was in the Fifth century. In the end of the Sixth 
 century, Gregory specifies the purifying very light sins. 
 With schoolmen it was, like other things, formed into an 
 elaborate system; but all this was only in Western 
 Christendom. Greek or Eastern Christendom has never 
 received the doctrine of Purgatory. It is the great doc- 
 trine of Romanism in connection with the Mass. It is 
 to get people out of it that Masses are constantly said. 
 The poverty of the system is shown, that after the use 
 of all the means the Roman system has at its disposal 
 (Absolution, the Viaticum, and Extreme Unction, which 
 wipes off the remains of sin), the faithful have to go to 
 Purgatory to get these remains of sin burned out of 
 them. 
 
62 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 HOLINESS — SAINTS AND MIRACLES. 
 
 jERE I am on painful and dangerous ground, 
 and I feel both the painfulness and the dan- 
 ger. But with the pretensions which are cur- 
 i rent, and the deceitful statements of morbid 
 imaginations as to the Holiness of the Romish body, it 
 becomes necessary that those likely to be deceived should 
 know the truth. Not only is '' corruptio optiini pessima 
 corfuptio,'' but the corruption of Rome was in itself worse 
 than any corruption that ever existed. As the imagination 
 of Roman Catholics is filled with an idea of the Holy 
 Roman Catholic Church, it is needful to turn to facts, 
 that we may know that what is called the Catholic 
 Church was the unholiest thing in the world ; that it had 
 extinguished the truth, put to death the saints, and cor- 
 rupted morals till it became intolerable. It will be alleged 
 that there was always individual sanctity. Now, that there 
 were God's hidden ones in all times is not to be doubted 
 for a moment. Still, it is beyond all question, that the 
 universal unholiness of the professing Church, and the 
 idolatry prevalent in Christendom, exposed those whose 
 consciences were oppressed by what was all around them 
 to fall into the snares laid for them by a corrupt 
 Church. The effect of this was, that Christendom was 
 composed of: first, unholy, iniquitous, and persecuting 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 63 
 
 orthodoxy (a few souls groaning under the state of things, 
 such as St. Bernard, who said, all that remained was for 
 Anti-Christ to come, and others, that he was born already 
 at Rome) ; secondly, of a vast number (for they filled 
 the country from Asia to Spain) who had fallen into 
 Manichean notions, and sought holiness by judging all 
 matter as itself unholy, but whose devoted and blameless 
 walk won the confidence of the population, till they were 
 put down by fire and sword; and thirdly, of a number 
 whose doctrines it is hard to discover, whose constancy 
 and blameless walk astonished conscientious men; and 
 lastly, of others who were counted only schismatics, whose 
 only fault was that they could not own the corruption 
 which reigned around them. One class or another of 
 these was spread all over Europe. It is a sad history, 
 for they were all hunted as wild beasts all over the 
 country, burned and tortured, and it is often hard to 
 ascertain what they really did hold. 
 
 The Inquisition was invented to put them down. Of 
 one large class, the Albigenses and the Waldenses (of 
 whom the former were, as to their leaders at any rate, 
 more or less Manichean), the judgments at Toulouse may 
 be found in the end of Limborch's History of the Inqui- 
 sition.^ There were those inside and outside the Romish 
 
 1 The Records of the Inquisition of Toulouse were published by 
 Limborch. The history of the Albigenses is full of interest. A man, 
 escaped from the Saracens, gave the Gospels and the Epistles of 
 St. Paul to a man who gave him hospitality. A very great awaken- 
 ing took place, and many companies of saints were gathered. The 
 P^astern Emperors attacked them, and unhappily they took arms, and 
 for long years they withstood the Greeks, but retreating into Persia 
 it seems they got infected with Manicheism, which joined with them 
 in rejecting images and superstition. At last, the Emperor made peace 
 with them, and transported them to Bulgaria, as a check against the 
 
64 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 body who sighed and groaned over the abominations that 
 were committed. It is evident by the sentences pro- 
 nounced by the Inquisition itself, that the Waldenses 
 were only schismatics. There were many of whom no 
 certain judgment can be formed, as may be seen by the 
 letter of Everonius of Cologne to Bernard. Those who 
 went to England, led by a certain Gerard, were, says 
 William of Neuberg, sound in substance as to the Su- 
 preme Physician, but rejected Roman superstitions as to 
 the Sacraments.^ The state of professing Christendom 
 was such that it gave occasion for convulsive efforts for 
 good, and for evil under protest of good. Waldo sought 
 what was good; arid somewhat later, such men as Gerard 
 Groot, Thomas a-Kempis, and the fratres vitcB communis; 
 even Wycliffe, Huss, and Jerome ; and, on the other hand, 
 there were the Brethren of the Free Spirit, who were 
 very bad ; Beghards, Beguines, Lollards, whose real char- 
 acter it is often hard to determine. 
 
 But all these (generally persecuted indeed, were they 
 good or evil, if not subject to Rome) did not alter the 
 general state of Christendom, which had in every way 
 
 Northern hordes. Thence they spread through Lombardy to Spain. 
 There were two classes, the Albanenses and the Baioli. The former 
 held two principles, a good and an evil one; the Baioli not. 
 
 1 This all of them were accused of. In a general way they were 
 accused of denying marriage. But it is plain that it was only the 
 Romish sacrament as to it, which they denied, for their wives and 
 widows were spoken of. As those who went to and perished in 
 England, were Germans, and were pronounced sound in faith, proba- 
 bly those at Cologne, and in Germany elsewhere, were also. But it 
 is quite possible some, in breaking loose from the horrible iniquities 
 and superstitions of Rome and Romanists, may have been misled in 
 some points, too, by heresy. Everonius' letter is interesting; there 
 is heart and conscience in it, though he saw them all burnt. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 6$ 
 
 become intolerable, though nobody knew how to mend it. 
 The shameless corruptions of Rome are written on every 
 page of history. Wy cliff e and Huss denounced the state 
 of things, and Wessal was put in prison. The Roman 
 Church refused their testimony to the evil, however 
 notoriously true; Huss was burnt for his pains, by the 
 Council of Constance, after it had pledged its faith to 
 him, because faith was not to be kept with heretics ; and 
 Wycliffe, defended during his life by the Duke of Lan- 
 caster, had his bones dug up and cast away. There were 
 saints found outside of Rome who were generally perse- 
 cuted. The truest saints were hunted down on every 
 side, then burned by Rome's prelates and Inquisition for 
 the truth they held, giving their lives rather than give 
 it up. And as to the kind of saints found in the Roman 
 Church, — those canonized by men, — the Greek Church 
 have a full complement of them, and some of them as far 
 from sanctity as need be, and those among the most 
 famous, too, as St. Cyril, a most violent and unprincipled 
 man; St. Jerome, the bitterest and most unforgiving and 
 abusive ; others, as Cyprian, independent of and opposed 
 to Rome ; or Augustine, who led the way in an African 
 council in excommunicating all who appealed to Rome 
 after they had decided any thing in Africa. 
 
 Rome's pretension to have all the saints may do very 
 well for ignorant people, who know nothing about the 
 matter, but will not do for those who do. If a calendar 
 is a proof, the Greeks have about as full a one as Rome. 
 I do not know if they have St. Veronica. It is a curious 
 history. There was a story, as there are many such, that 
 some woman gave a handkerchief to wipe the face of the 
 blessed Lord on His way to Calvary; and, as a reward, 
 His likeness was in^printed on it, This was copied and 
 
^ FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 sold everywhere in Italy. The word "Veronica" is a cor- 
 ruption of true likeness, and then was taken to be the 
 name of a woman. And she is in the calendar, and 
 worshipped as such ; and the handkerchief exposed to the 
 worship of the multitude at St. Peter's at Rome.^ 
 
 MIRACLES— A WITNESS OF HOLINESS. 
 
 Miracles are regarded in the Roman Church as historical 
 characteristics of holiness. First as to Martin of Tours, 
 the Apostle of Gaul. He lay on ashes, as he was, for 
 his bed, and covered with a sack and the like ; and when 
 he put his foot out of the cell, to go a couple of miles 
 to church, all those possessed with devils in the church 
 showed he was coming, though in different ways, so that 
 the clergy learned thus he was coming. "I saw [I quote 
 from Sulp, Sev., Dialogues, III, 6] one caught up in the 
 air as Martin was coming. Suspended on high, with his 
 hands stretched out, his feet unable to touch the ground, 
 Martin prayed, prostrate in sackcloth and ashes. Then you 
 might see the unhappy men cleansed by their going out 
 in different ways; these, their feet being carried up on 
 high, hang as if from a cloud, and yet their garments not 
 fall down over their face, lest the naked part of their 
 bodies should put people to shame." So in Egypt. Two 
 friends went to see one of the anchorites. An enormous 
 lioness came and sought him, and they all followed her. 
 She took them to a cave, and they saw what was the 
 matter : five cubs were all blind. The anchorite stroked 
 
 1 " Pope Urban erected a statue of the supposed Veronica, and an 
 altar. The superstition is a late one. Mabillon puts the scene in 
 Gethsemane; and Ducange, on the way to Calvary. In 1083 it was 
 alleged to have cured the Emperor Tiberius of leprosy. It is now 
 an object of gorgeous worship at Rome." — Maitland^ Catacombs^ 260. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 6/ 
 
 their eyes, and they saw. Soon after, the lioness brought 
 a skin of some rare wild beast [how acquired we do not 
 learn] to the anchorite, and he took it and wore it. 
 
 Another lived up in Mount Sinai, naked ; and when 
 last seen, he said : " He who was visited by men, could 
 not be by angels." Martin came to a martyr altar, con- 
 secrated by bishops, and frequented by the pious. He 
 suspected, as old priests could not tell whose it really 
 was, and then saw a sordid, fierce ghost on his left. 
 He commanded him to tell his name and deserts ; and 
 he confessed he was a thief, and no martyr ; he in pun- 
 ishment, and the martyr in glory. He met a crowd, which 
 he supposed to be an idolatrous procession with an image. 
 It was really a funeral. At some distance, he lifted up 
 the cross and commanded them to stop and lay down 
 their burden. They could not move, with all their efforts, 
 and at last rolled round with a ridiculous vertigo, and 
 laid down their burden. Finding that it was a funeral, 
 he lifted up his hand and gave them the power of going 
 away and taking the body. This is astonishingly like 
 mesmerism.^ Martin met a furious cow that had gored 
 several persons. She was rushing at him. He told her 
 to stand, and she did; and then saw a devil on her 
 back, and ordered him off ; and he went, and the cow 
 was quiet. Nor was that all. The cow knew very well 
 what had happened, and came and knelt down before 
 Martin; then, on Martin's order, went and found the 
 herd. He was most familiar with demons ; knew when it 
 was Jupiter, when Mercury, who was the most trouble- 
 
 ^ It is related by a Roman Catholic eye-witness, Mr. Hue, that 
 a great tree, said to spring from the hair of Tsougkaba, a Buddhist 
 saint, bears Thibetan characters on every leaf, and no fraud in it. 
 — Voyage dans le Thibet^ Vol. II, Chap. 3. 
 
-68 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 some of all, and specially when he had the saints with him. 
 When Sulpicius Severus went to see him all was harmony, 
 and Martin was talking, and women's voices within, for 
 two hours, while Sulpicius and Gallus were outside. 
 This turned out, as he told them after he came out 
 covered with ashes and filth, to be Agnes, Thecla, and 
 Mary (deceased persons held to be saints). Then all of 
 a sudden a whole lot of devils came, Martin denouncing 
 them by their names. Jove, he said, was a brute and 
 stupid {brutum et habeium). They beset his dying bed. 
 "Why are you standing there, bloody beast.?" he said. 
 "Thou shall find nothing, O fatal one, in me; the bosom 
 of Abraham has received me," and so expired. Yet he 
 had promised pardon to the devil if he repented. The 
 devil was accusing some monks who had sinned after 
 baptism. Martin replied that crimes were purged by the 
 conversation of a better life, and God would pardon; and 
 then said to the devil, if he, as judgment was near, even 
 then left off following after men, and repented of his 
 deeds, he himself trusting in the Lord, promised him the 
 mercy of Christ. I might multiply stories; but this, surely, 
 is enough. He died in .402, or thereabouts. When he 
 dined with the emperor, he gave the cup to the presbyter 
 first, as superior to him. Such was the holiness of this 
 ascetic worker of miracles. 
 
 I may mention another, as showing the character of 
 the miracles and the credulity of men's minds when once 
 this system was given in to. Paulinus, — the same that 
 complains of their mixing drunkenness with their cele- 
 bration of his patron saint, St. Felix, — relates that a 
 countryman had two capital bullocks ; they were stolen ; 
 the countryman sought them in vain ; no marks were to 
 be found where they had been driven. He goes to the 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 69 
 
 said St. Felix, pleads with him to send the bullocks back; 
 that he had trusted him, he really had kept his bullocks, 
 and he was answerable for them; that, as he kept them, 
 he should hold him for being in league with the robber, 
 if he did not bring them back; that he saw and knew 
 all things, and, therefore, could do it, for he knew where 
 they were. He might pardon the robbers, but he must 
 have the bullocks; the pardon belonged to the saint, but 
 the bullocks to himself ; he would not go after them, nor 
 leave the place; he would give up his life on the thresh- 
 old if he did not bring them back ; and so spent the 
 whole day praying. The martyr heard him joyfully, and 
 laughed with the Lord at his reproaches. He helps him. 
 He is thrust away from the face of Felix to shut the 
 doors at night, and goes and lies down in his stable, 
 crying still on the saint ; and frightened by a noise out- 
 side, there are the oxen come home without a guide. 
 It may be said this is only the credulity of a rustic ; 
 but the account is of Paulinus of Nola, — a saint, a prelate, 
 and a correspondent of the famous Augustine. This was 
 the kind of sanctity now introduced. Paulinus' was specially 
 shown in honoring St. Felix. He had festivals in honor 
 of his saint. But this change to honoring saints instead 
 of heathen demigods, thus systematically established, did 
 not change the habits. He deplores the votaries' honoring 
 the saints with drinking bouts. Verum utinam sanis ager- 
 ant hoc gundia votis^ nee sua luminibus miscerant pocula 
 Sanctis} He covered St. Felix's house with holy pictures, 
 
 ^ However, he thinks such joys are to be pardoned, as error creeps 
 into rude minds; nor conscious of so great a fault, fails in piety in 
 fancying amiss the saint's delight in it. (i.) Ignoscendo tamen puto 
 talia parvis. (2.) Gaudia quce ducunt epulis^ quia mentibus error. 
 (3.) Irr£pit rudibus^ nee tantcB conscia culpcs, (4.) Simpiicitas pietate 
 
70 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 that the gaper may drink in sobriety, — forget too much 
 wine. He implores the aid of St. FeUx directly, not 
 even his intercession, for sickness and a bad eye; he 
 calls himself "him that is thine"; he seems to make the 
 saints particularly efficacious wherever a part of their 
 body was. 
 
 It has been remarked by some one, that up to 350 the 
 heathen ridiculed the Christians for worshipping a dead 
 man; after that, for worshipping saints' and martyrs' tombs; 
 and Augustine tells us that, above all, the monks drove 
 a lively trade in relics. Within a few years, it was alleged 
 that the Virgin had visited a little peasant girl on a 
 mountain in France. The local prelate issued a pastoral 
 against it, but it was attractive. The government took it 
 up and proved the fraud in open court ; but then the 
 wind turned round, and Church authorities made a great 
 deal of it, and pilgrimages were made there. In the first 
 life of Ignatius Loyola, by Ribadeneyra, there was no 
 limit of miracles;^ but when Ignatius was to be canonized, 
 
 cadit^ male credula sanctos. (5.) Perfusis balante tnero gaudere sepul- 
 cheris. Paulinus does not approve of this system of holiness ; but it 
 was common, and the system which gave rise to it was approved by 
 Rome, as a system. In the well-known letter to Mellitus, Gregory I 
 desires Augustine not to pull down the temples, if well built, but to 
 sprinkle them with holy water, put relics of saints in them, and as 
 they were accustomed to slaughter many oxen in the sacrifice of 
 demons, the solemnity was to be changed somewhat. 
 
 ^ It is a curious piece of Roman sign-making, and shows what 
 these things are really worth. In Ribadeneyra, the disciple and com- 
 panion of Ignatius himself, we find a long proof in the objection 
 that he did no miracles ; that they were not to be as proofs. He 
 quotes Gregory, saying the proof of sanctity is not in doing signs. 
 Augustine, Chrysostom, Gregory Nazianzen and Nyssa, and Athanasius 
 wrought no miracles. All these are reasons for Ignatius not doing 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. /I 
 
 the account of his life was full of them. Among the 
 rest he raised a hen, accidentally drowned, to life, Xavier 
 invoking him in India, and he remained in absolute celi- 
 bacy ever after; and Xavier routed a great army by his 
 presence. Francis Xavier, being a self-sacrificing man, his 
 life only proves the evil of the system he was in. He 
 carried on his work by the force of the arms of the 
 Portuguese. One of his miracles was Ignatius' miraculous 
 appearance in India, leading the troops and routing the 
 infidels. The first multitude whom he is said to have 
 converted already called themselves Christians, but had been 
 made so by the arms of the Portuguese, without knowing 
 a word of what it meant. They did not understand a 
 word of the Portuguese, nor the Portuguese them. Xavier 
 got some who knew his and their language a little, and 
 translated the creed, the commandments, Lord's prayer, 
 and a supplication to the Virgin ; learned them by heart 
 (though subsequent statements give him the gift of 
 tongues), himself, made them repeat them, and say, "Lord, 
 give me to believe," and then a short word to the Virgin, 
 and then, as sufficiently tested, baptized them. It went 
 so far, both in the conduct and relapses of the converts, 
 that Ignatius himself was dissatisfied. He wrote: "Some- 
 times I baptize a whole city in a day. Much of this 
 success is to be attributed to the Viceroy of India. By his 
 endeavor we have now thirty cities of Christians on this 
 coast. He has lately given 4,000 pieces of gold to those 
 
 any. Two hundred well proved ones were produced for his beatifica- 
 tion, as is stated by the Pere Bonhours, It is a striking thing that, 
 whatever was the reason, Ignatius died without the Sacraments. It 
 is asserted that he died in terror; but it is certain that he died 
 without the Sacraments. 
 
72 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 who, with all diligence, profess the truth in the cities of 
 the Christians." Xavier promoted in the same way the 
 Viceroy's efforts, organizing expeditions, and enforcing the 
 Christians to behold Jesus Christ crucified before their 
 eyes during the battle. And he announced far away from 
 the scene: "Jesus Christ has conquered for us; the enemy 
 is routed with very great slaughter." But he left India in 
 a few years disgusted, and avowing himself useless, went 
 to Japan. 
 
 Now as to some of the miraculous events : One night, 
 as he was praying to the Virgin, the devils attacked him 
 in crowds, and beat him so that he was half dead with 
 the blows, and forced to keep his bed for some days. 
 Ignatius Loyola himself is stated to have been horribly 
 beaten by devils so as to cry out, and another ran in 
 twice to see what was the matter, and then was forbid 
 to come. Xavier spoke so that in one sentence people 
 of ten languages understood him, all at the same time. 
 He sprinkled holy water on them and ordered them to 
 leave and never come back, and so it was. On a voy- 
 age a child fell into the sea. Xavier asked the Moham- 
 medan father if he would believe if his child were restored. 
 He said yes. Three days after, the child appeared on 
 the deck. Neither he nor any one knew whence he came. 
 Again, he gave a chaplet of the Virgin Mary to an in- 
 fidel. The ship was wrecked, and they made a raft ; he 
 thought himself with Xavier, as in ecstasy ; and when 
 he recovered his natural sense, found himself safe on 
 shore and all his companions lost. It is said he raised 
 the dead several times. It is stated he spoke with 
 tongues ; but it is quite certain, both in India and Japan, 
 by his own statement, that he used interpreters to begin 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 73 
 
 his work. His conversions were really none.^ He con- 
 verted a whole island and built churches, in some years, 
 and left ; when gone, through the influence of the chief 
 of another island, the churches were pulled down, and all 
 turned idolaters again. The Portuguese sent an expedition, 
 and they all turned Christians again. That he was a 
 man of indomitable energy and rare courage, is unques- 
 tionable. But all his work in India and Japan, and in gen- 
 eral that of the Jesuits there and in Abyssinia, have come 
 to nothing. Where European dominion has been estab- 
 lished, the Roman Catholic system has continued, as in 
 Brazil and similar countries. 
 
 This is the kind of holiness that the Roman Church 
 has produced. It is impossible to have a more eloquent 
 description of Romish holiness than the efforts to keep 
 Jerome's name among the saints. He sought to over- 
 come his nature, there is no doubt. He fasted exces- 
 sively, lived in grime and filth, did every thing possible to 
 subdue flesh by flesh's efforts, but nature is not over- 
 come thus. Roman Catholics declare that he was very 
 little exact in stating things as they were, following more 
 his own ideas than the truth. These, however, they say, 
 are only the defects of a great genius. But he did not 
 weigh what he said, and, what is to be more regretted, 
 attacked St. Chrysostom ; indeed, whoever he found as an 
 adversary was the basest of men ; he had too great an 
 
 1 In writing to Francis Henry, a missionary desponding in the 
 work, and thinking of leaving: "You profit more tlian you think in 
 preparing infants, diligently obtained, for heaven by baptism; for if 
 you are willing to look round in your mind, you will find that out 
 of the Indians, white or black, few come into heaven but those who 
 depart this life under fourteen years of age, in the innocence of 
 baptism." — Epist. II, 24. 
 
74 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 idea of his eloquence, shows it, was jealous and envious, 
 so as to wound his greatest friends and alienate them. 
 It is hard not to recognize that he had in his natural 
 character a sourness and bitterness which pained many. 
 He was soon on fire when offended, and did not easily 
 pardon. Are we to say, they ask, if so many saints 
 who have admired him, and the Church who honors him 
 amongst its saints and doctors, have been deluded, a 
 humble son of the Church can not say that St. Ambrose, 
 St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, are excellent models of a 
 perfect virtue to animate us to imitate them } But others 
 have had great sins, as David. We may say, even, that 
 the defects of Jerome are useful, as teaching us what 
 the substance (le fond) of virtue and Christian piety is. 
 For if it consisted in an even and uniform life, in which 
 few faults are committed, one would have to prefer 
 Rufenius to him. But the Church leaves him to God's 
 judgment, and has always had the greatest respect for 
 Jerome. Not the services he has rendered the Church 
 by his labors (he corrected the translation of the Scrip- 
 tures); these are not virtues. Catholic historians can see 
 that in his case his austerities would not do. Doubtless, 
 he says, they were useful to him (which his own account, 
 by the by, does not show, though I do not question their 
 sincerity in seeking to maintain incorruptness in celibacy, 
 which he held the highest of virtues ) ; yet, if we had 
 nothing else to praise in him, we should have reason to 
 fear they had rendered him proud, and had been the 
 cause of that severe and critical spirit which some have 
 blamed in him. They then show what they think proof 
 of what constitutes a saint : First, his love of his soli- 
 tary life and poverty, though he could have enjoyed the 
 favor of Pope Damasus and the wealth of Saint Marcella 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 75 
 
 and Saint Paula, two rich women who admired him 
 greatly; and his fleeing those who honored him, humility 
 which was shown in not exercising the functions of priest 
 for which he had been brought up; his eleemosynary 
 charity and laborious service for others, when he might 
 have been glad to be writing; they like his anger against 
 his heretical adversaries, and his conduct in exalting St. 
 Augustine, when he might have seemed a conspirator, the 
 more so as he had quarreled with him. Jerome's lan- 
 guage, particularly against those who deprecated monkish 
 sanctity, saint and image worship, was regular billingsgate; 
 for that is really the only word to describe it by. The 
 Church makes a saint of him in these words : " The 
 Scripture does not call him alone happy who is without 
 spot and does not sin ; but, moreover, him to whom God 
 does not impute sin, because he hates it by a pure and 
 sincere love of righteousness, and that he covers it by 
 the nuptial robe of Charity, which covers a multitude of 
 sins." 
 
 Another painful question may be asked : Why bring 
 all this failure up, if things are changed ? Is there such 
 vice now } Has the Romish body the " vote of holiness " ? 
 The facts are every thing. It certainly has not. There is 
 no doubt that the light and spiritual energy of the 
 Reformation caused a certain amelioration in Rome ; but 
 I still must say, that where the action is not decidedly 
 felt, it is not changed. Mr. Froude, whose hard-riding 
 imagination had made a picture of mediaeval holiness, was 
 checked by the degeneracy he found in Italy. We have 
 seen what they degenerated from. I have known a good 
 deal by personal experience in several countries, and a 
 good deal more by that of others; and I believe that in 
 principle and practice there is no change, though there 
 
y6 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 may be more concealment. It is thought infidelity is 
 found among Protestants especially. It is a mistake ; 
 more, I believe, in the bosom of what is called Catholi- 
 cism ; but not published, as among those called Protestants. 
 Go to France and Italy, and see the state of men, in 
 towns especially. 
 
 THE CONFESSIONAL. 
 
 Auricular confession, so far as the priests are con- 
 cerned, has three objects in view, viz: First, money; 
 second, secret information ; and third, a substitute for 
 matrimony. The first is a great source of revenue to 
 the Church, by which the contributions of one hundred 
 and ninety millions are poured into the common treasury. 
 It is very largely through the Confessional that marble 
 cathedrals are built, costly altars erected, expensive robes 
 provided, and the vast resources of the papal system in- 
 creased annually almost beyond conception. Millions and 
 millions of dollars are received at Confession every year 
 for Indulgences, Extreme Unction, Baptisms, and Absolu- 
 tions from sin. 
 
 Then, secondly, it is a means of obtaining a 
 knowledge of the secrets of employes and employers, 
 parents and children, husbands and wives, rulers, citizens, 
 and political parties. Here lies the secret of the power 
 possessed by the Roman hierarchy over every department 
 of national, state, and municipal governments. It becomes 
 a secret detective bureau in any great crisis of national 
 election, managing caucuses, influencing congress, and par- 
 alyzing Protestant agencies. There is no privacy of the 
 home no matter how sacred, and no thought or desire 
 of the soul ever so delicate or shameful, but what must 
 be confessed to the priest. And in giving the penitent 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 77 
 
 absolution, the confessor has power to make sins virtues 
 and virtues sins. The six thousand priests hear the con- 
 fession of about every sixth woman, wife, and daughter 
 in the country. They confess to them the secrets of their 
 own hearts, the secrets of their families, their husbands' 
 secrets, and their own secret desires, loves, hopes, and 
 fears. 
 
 And then again, thirdly, the Confessional makes it 
 easier for the priestly confessor to love without entering 
 into the relation of a legally married life. He has abso- 
 lutely in his power the female penitent, her intellect, 
 conscience, and affection. He has a right to say what- 
 ever he sees fit to her, or require her to do, however 
 wicked and abominable in itself. He has command of 
 her fortune, her husband's fortune, and she loves and 
 reveres him, though he may be base and vile, because 
 she thinks he can forgive her sins or make them virtues. 
 When she has much to confess, and is very devotional, 
 and he has much to hear and forgive, the intimacy is 
 necessarily very close. It sometimes happens, oftener than 
 is known, that he discovers that the relationship between 
 her and her husband is not the true relationship of hus- 
 band and wife, and the wickedness and sin which are 
 possible to a priest holding so dangerous a power over 
 superstitious women is enough to make any man shudder 
 at the bare suggestion. Should the real state of things 
 by possibility become known to the husband, he may be 
 too good a Romanigt to make a public scandal. If he 
 should complain to the bishop of the conduct of the 
 priest whose zeal for the holy Catholic Church has been 
 so great, the priest would be removed to another parish. 
 According to Pascal and Chiniquy, very few if any cases 
 of excommunication for immorality can be found. Should 
 
78 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the pious penitent, whose earnest devotion has so often 
 melted into love and tears in the sanctuary of the Con- 
 fessional at the feet of her divine confessor, happen to 
 be an attractive, young, unmarried woman, the result 
 would be the same, minus the complications of a husband 
 and family, and the orphan asylum, for which the black- 
 robed sisters beg so assiduously, instead of the husband, 
 would take the care and education of the children, and 
 the pious penitent would go to a nunnery, or be pro- 
 moted as mistress of a bishop, perhaps, and be supported 
 at the expense of the irresponsible treasury of the Church 
 on the proceeds of the Confessional. 
 
 Father Chiniquy gives cases of this kind exactly. He 
 says: "I solemnly in the presence of God, who ere long 
 will judge me, give my testimony on this grave subject. 
 After twenty-five years' experience at the Confessional, I 
 declare that the confessor himself encounters more terrible 
 dangers when hearing the confessions of refined and 
 highly educated ladies than when listening to those of 
 the humbler class of his female penitents." In this sol- 
 emn manner he gives the confession of a dying priest, 
 and says : " That the number of married and unmarried fe- 
 males the dying priest had heard in the Confessional was 
 about fifteen hundred, of whom he said he had destroyed 
 or scandalized at least one thousand by his questioning 
 them on most depraved things, for the simple pleasure 
 of gratifying his own corrupted heart, without letting 
 them know any thing of his sinful thoughts and criminal 
 desires towards them. But he confessed that he had de- 
 stroyed the purity of ninety-five of those penitents, who 
 had consented to sin with him." Of the Irish Romanists 
 he says : "Why is it that the Irish Roman Catholic peo- 
 ple are so irremediably degraded and clothed in rags } 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 79 
 
 The principal reason is the enslaving of the Irish women 
 by means of the Confessional. Every one knows that the 
 spiritual slavery and degradation of the Irish woman has 
 no bounds. After she has been enslaved and degraded, 
 she in turn has enslaved and degraded her husband and 
 sons. Ireland will be an object of pity; she will be poor, 
 miserable, riotous, blood-thirsty, degraded, so long as she 
 is ruled by the father confessor planted in every parish 
 by the Pope." 
 
 At the Confessional Romanism clutches brain and con- 
 science, and utilizes the piety, passions, and pocket of the 
 penitent to build up and keep up, from century to cen- 
 tury, its system of power and crime. It subjugates and 
 enslaves woman, the mother of men. It corrupts the 
 source of life. It insures the transmission of slavish sub- 
 mission and degradation from mother to sons and daugh- 
 ters; and thus pulls down and holds down to its low 
 level a race, from generation to generation, by degrading 
 the mothers of the race. The generations of conquered, 
 enslaved, subjugated, imbecile women of Catholic Spain, 
 Italy, Ireland, and South America have made the Catholic 
 men of those countries what they are, cringing, degraded, 
 poverty-cursed slaves. And so of every other country 
 where Romanism has had sway. This has been the 
 natural hereditary result. It could not be otherwise. A 
 stream can not rise higher than its fountain. One-sixth 
 of the women in the United States attend the Confes- 
 sional. Rome expects to conquer the republic at the 
 Confessional, by the triumph of the priest over the 
 women. See as authorities, "Pope or President.?" Denis' 
 "Moral Theology," Vol. VL, p. 123. Liguori, Vol. II., p. 
 464, "Gavin on the Popish Church," Rankin's "History 
 of Popes," "Egaris* Variations," Bowling's "History of 
 
8o FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Romanism," and Father Chiniquy's "The Priest, The 
 Woman, and The Confessional." In Peter Denis* "The- 
 ology," the doctrine is distinctly laid down, that a priest 
 may be a libertine without forfeiting his priestly office, 
 even if the fact should become known. (See Denis, Tome 
 v., p. 287.) The author of the "Pope or President" 
 gives pages of facts and examples from the history of 
 Romanism to show that practically Denis' morality is still 
 that of the Roman Church. 
 
 I will now give quotations in Latin, taken from Roman 
 Catholic authorities, for the direction of confessors on 
 what matters to question their penitents. 
 
 Denis, a distinguished Roman Catholic theologian and 
 casuist, wants confessors to question their penitents on 
 the following matters : ^ — 
 
 1. " Peccant uxores, quae susceptum viri semen ejiciunt vel 
 ejicere conantur." — Vol. VII, p. 147. 
 
 2. " Peccant conjuges mortaliter, si, coiDula incepta, cohibeant 
 seminationem. 
 
 3. " Si vir jam seminaverit, dubium fit an femina lethaliter 
 peccat, si se retrahat a seminando; aut peccat lethaliter vir non 
 expectando seminationem uxoris." — Vol. VII, p. iss- 
 
 4. " Peccant conjuges inter se circa actum conjugalom. Debet 
 servari modus, sivi situs ; imo ut non servetur debitum vas, sed 
 copula habeatur in vase praspostero, aliquoque non naturali. Si 
 fiat accedendo a postero, a latere, stando, sedendo, si vir sit 
 succumbus." — Vol. VII, p. 166. 
 
 5. " Impotentia est incapacitas perficiendi, copulum carnalem 
 perfectam cum seminatione viri in vase debito seu, de se, aptam 
 generation^ Vel, ut si mulier sit nimis arcta respectu unius 
 viri, non respectu alterius." — Vol. VII, p. 273. 
 
 6. *' Notatur quod pollutio in mulieribus possit perfici, ita uta 
 semen earum non effluat extra membrum genetale. Judicium istius 
 allegat Billuart, si scilicet mulier sensiat seminis resolutionem 
 
 1 The English translation will be supplied to any responsible per. 
 son on receipt of five dollars. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 8 1 
 
 cum magno voluptatis sensu, qua completa, passio satiatur." — 
 Vol. IV, p. i68. 
 
 7. "Uxor se accusans, in confessione, quod negaverit debitum, 
 interrogetur an ex pleno rigore juris sui id petiverit." — Vol. Vll, 
 p. 168. 
 
 8. "Confessor pcenitentem, qui confitetur se pecasse cum sacer- 
 dote, vel solicitatam ab eo ad turpia, potest interrogare utrum 
 ille sacerdos sit ejus confessarius, an in confessione solitaverit." 
 — Vol. VI, p. sg4. 
 
 St. Liguori. — Other points for examination in the Con- 
 fessional. 
 
 1. "Quaerat an sit semper mortale, si vir imitat pudenda in 
 OS uxoris ? 
 
 "Verius affirma quia, in hoc actu ob calorem oris, adest prox- 
 imum periculum pollutionis, et videtur nova species luxuriae con- 
 tra naturam, dicta irruminatio." 
 
 2. "Eodem modo, Sanchez damnat virum de mortali, qui in 
 actu copulae, immiteret dignitum in vas praeposterum uxoris; quia, 
 ut ait, in hoc actu adest aifectus ad Sodomiam." — Liguori, Vol. 
 VI. P- 935- 
 
 The Right Reverend Burchard, Bishop of Worms, com- 
 posed a book of questions to be put to both sexes. The 
 following to young men: — 
 
 1. "Fecisti solus tecum fornicationem ut quidam facere solunt; 
 ita dico ut ipse tuum membrum virile in manum tuam acciperes, 
 et sic duceres praeputium tuum, et manu propria commoveres, 
 ut sic, per illam delectationem semen projiceres? 
 
 2. "Fornicationem fecisti cum masculo intra coxes; ita dicto ut 
 tuum virile membrum intra coxas alterius mitteres, et sic ag- 
 itando semen f underes ? 
 
 3. "Fecisti fornicationem, ut quidem facere solent, ut tuum 
 virile membrum in lignum perforatum, aut in aliquod hujus modi 
 mitteres, et, sic, per illiam commotionem et delectationem semen 
 projiceres ? 
 
 4. "Fecisti fornicationem contra naturam, id est, cum mascu- 
 lis vel animalibus coire, id est cum equo, cum vacci, vel asina, 
 vel aliquo animali ? " — Vol. I, p. 136. 
 
 6 
 
82 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Questions for women : — 
 
 1. "Fecisti quod qusedem mulieres solent, quodam molimen, 
 aut machinamentum in modum virilis membri ad mensbram tuae 
 voluptatis, et illud lodo verendorum tuorum aut alterius cum 
 aliquibus ligaturis, ut fornicationem facereres cum aliis mulieribus, 
 vel alia eodem instrumento, sive alio tecum? 
 
 2. "Fecisti quod quaedem mulieres facere solent ut jam supra 
 dicto molimine, vel alio aliquo machinamento, tu ipsa in te solam 
 faceres fornicationem? 
 
 3. " Fecisti quod quaedem mulieres facere solent, quando libidi- 
 nem se vexantem exuiquere volunt, quae se conjugunt quasi coire 
 debeant ut possint, et conjugunt invicem puerperia sua, et sic, 
 fricando pruritum illarum extinguere desiderant? 
 
 4. "Fecisti quod quaedem mulieres facere solent, ut suc- 
 cumberes aliquo jumento et illiud jumentum ad coitum quoli- 
 cumque posses ingenio, ut sic coiret tecum ? " 
 
 Debr^yne's questions to young men : — 
 
 "Ad cognos cendum an usque ad pollutionem se tetigerent, 
 quando tempore et quo fine se tetigerint; an tunc quosdam motus 
 in corpore experti fuerint, et per quantum temporis spatium ; 
 an cessantibus tactibus, nihil insolitum et turpe accideret; an non 
 longe majorem in compore voluptatem perceperint in fine tactuum 
 quam in eorum principio ; an tum in fine quando magnam de- 
 lectationem carnalem sensuerunt, omnes motus corporis cessaverint; 
 an non madefacti fuerint?" 
 
 Debreyne's questions for young women : — 
 
 "Quae sese tetegisse fatentur, an non aliquem puritum ex- 
 tinguere entaverint, et utrum pruritus ille cessaverit cam mag- 
 num senserint voluptatem; an tunc, ipsimet tactus cessaverint?" 
 
 The Right Reverend Kenrick, late Bishop of Boston, 
 Mass., has the following among thousands equally bad 
 or worse: — 
 
 "Uxor quae, in usu matrimonii, se vertit, ut non recipiat semen, 
 vel statim post illud acceptum surgit ut expellatur, lethaliter 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 83 
 
 peccat; sed opus non est ut diu resupina jaceat, quum matrix, 
 brevi, semen attrahat, et mox, arctissime clandatur." — Vol. Ill, 
 
 p' sn- 
 
 " Pullae patienti licet se vertere, et conari ut non recipiat 
 semen, quod injuria ei immittiturj sed, exceptum, non licet ex- 
 pellere, quin jam possessionem pacificam habet, et baud absque 
 injuria naturae ejiceretur." — Vol. Ill, p. 317. 
 
 "Conjuges senes plerumque coeunt absque culpa, licet con- 
 tingat semen extra vas effundi; id enim per accidens fit ex 
 infirmitate naturae. Quod si veres adeo sint fractae ut nullo sit 
 seminandi intra vas spes, jam nequeunt jure conjugii uti." — 
 Vol. Ill, p. 317. 
 
84 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE PRIESTHOOD. 
 
 ' ""'"uiiiniiiiiuiiHHE Roman priesthood became an immense sys- 
 tem in the early centuries, by making large 
 
 ;| concessions to pagan usages. The Romans 
 Hiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Tiiiii were passionately fond of festivals and pro- 
 cessions. The Saturnalia and other feasts were at the 
 end of December. Christmas^ was fixed there. The Luper- 
 calia in the end of January; it was a feast of purification. 
 The purification of the Virgin Mary^ was fixed there. 
 St. Peter de Vinculis replaced Augustus Caesar. Christians 
 went to the heathen feasts, as Augustine, Chrysostom, 
 and many others testify. They resisted, as in the case 
 of Pope Gelasius and others ; and when paganism fell and 
 
 1 "The feast now celebrated at Christmas (the very evergreens are 
 Pagan) was the expression of one of the worst principles of heathen- 
 ism — the reproductive power of nature, celebrated at the return of 
 the sun from the winter solstice. The Hindoos celebrate their Utta- 
 rayana at this time ; have their twelve days, sending of presents, and 
 wishing many happy returns. So the heathen Romans, so the Teu- 
 tonic nations." — Wilson'' s Religious Festivals of Hindoos, II, 74. 
 
 2 The influence exercised by the worship of the Virgin was the 
 great element of force made use of by the priesthood to conquer 
 the resistance of the last Pagans. After the Council of Ephesus, 
 which decreed that Mary was the mother of God, we see in Sicily 
 its eight finest Pagan temples become in a very short time churches 
 under the invocation of the Virgin. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 85 
 
 the populations entered in crowds, they gave them Christian 
 festivals, so-called, to replace the heathen ones. It is the 
 establishment of an immense system, — paganizing Chris- 
 tianity, first in doctrines, in Alexandria, then in cere- 
 monies everywhere. 
 
 Gregory Nyssen, in his life of Gregory Thaumaturgus, 
 says: "But when, with the Divine help, that tyranny 
 had been overthrown, and peace had again accepted human 
 life, service towards God, which lay before them, was free 
 to every one, according to his ability ; descending again 
 to the city, and going round the whole district in a circle, 
 he made an appendage for the people everywhere to their 
 divine service. Having instituted the general assemblies 
 for those who had been in the combat of faith, and as 
 they had taken away different persons to different places, 
 the bodies of the martyrs going round in a procession, 
 they celebrated festivities in a yearly anniversary, holding 
 a general assembly to the honor of the martyrs. For, 
 indeed, this was a demonstration of his great wisdom, 
 that, remodelling to a new life, in a mass, the whole gen- 
 eration of his day, set as a charioteer to nature, submitting 
 them securely to the reins of faith and the knowledge of 
 God, — he allowed what was subject to the yoke of faith 
 to caper a little in enjoyment. For, perceiving that the 
 childish and uninstructed mind of the many remained, 
 through bodily hilarity and enjoyments, in the errors of 
 idols; that the principal thing with them should be specially 
 set right, — their looking to God, instead of vain objects, 
 for worship, — he allowed them to make merry at mem- 
 ories [tombs or places consecrated to them] of the martyrs, 
 and to enjoy themselves, and to celebrate festivities, that 
 some time or other their life might be changed to what 
 was more seemly and exact." 
 
86 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 It is said he left only seventeen heathen at his death. 
 This part of the history gives the decay in doctrine and 
 spiritual state, till on the fall of paganism its ceremonies 
 and feasts were deliberately transferred to the Roman 
 Church. Many went on with their heathenism. This was 
 condemned by the hierarchial authorities, but long perse- 
 vered in. Gregory I condemns it in England, but directs, 
 as Gregory Thaumaturgus did, similar feasts among the , 
 professing mass that had been brought in, to keep their 
 fleshly minds contented. 
 
 PRIMITIVE PRIESTHOOD— SECULAR AND DRUNKEN. 
 
 Cyprian (251), when accounting for the Decian perse- 
 cution, says it is only too light a chastisement {^' Exploi'atio 
 potuis quam persecutio videretur'). All were devoted to 
 increasing their patrimony. There was no devoted religion 
 in the priests, no upright faithfulness in ministers, no 
 piety in works, no discipline in morals ; men's beards 
 false, women's faces painted, eyes adulterated from what 
 God had made them, their hair falsely colored, cunning 
 frauds to deceive the hearts of the simple, artful deceit 
 {subdol(B voluntatis) in circumventing brethren, marriage 
 with unbelievers, prostituting to gentiles the members of 
 Christ; not only rash swearing, but perjury, too; despis- 
 ing authority with haughty pretension, to speak evil with 
 poisoned lip one's self ; mutual discord, with pertinacious 
 hatred. Very many bishops, who should be an exhortation 
 and example to others, despising their divinely-committed 
 service {divi7ia procuratione)y make themselves agents {pro- 
 airaiores) of secular affairs, leave their See, desert the 
 people, wandering through others* provinces, hunt after 
 markets for gainful traffic. — De Lapsisy 124. FeWs Oxford 
 edition. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 8/ 
 
 Jerome (394) says: "It is shameful to have to say 
 the priests of idols, buffoons, charioteers, harlots, receive 
 inheritance ; to the clergy and monks alone it is for- 
 bidden by law, and prohibited not by persecutors, but by 
 Christian princes." Nor does he complain of the law, 
 but that they should have deserved it. **The cantery is 
 good, but now the worst is that I should need the can- 
 tery. The provisions of the law are careful and severe, 
 and yet thus avarice is not restrained. The glory of a 
 bishop is to provide for the wants of the poor. The 
 disgrace of all priests is the pursuit of their own wealth. 
 Born in a poor home, and in a rustic hut, who could 
 scarcely satisfy my clamorous stomach with millet and the 
 coarsest bread, I now turn up my nose at the finest flour 
 and honey. I know the kinds and names of fishes. I 
 am thoroughly au fait as to what shore shell-fish are 
 found on. I discern the provinces birds come from, by 
 their savor. I hear, moreover, of the base service of cer- 
 tain to old men and old women without children. They 
 put the chamber-pot beside the bed, take away with their 
 own hand the purulent matter from the stomach and 
 phlegm of the lungs. They are full of fear at the arrival 
 of the physician, and, with trembling lips, inquire if the 
 patient is better; and if the old person is a little more 
 vigorous, they are in danger, and pretending falsely joy, 
 — the mind, inwardly, avaricious, is tortured; for they fear 
 lest they should lose their pains, and compare the living 
 old body to the years of Methuselah. — Epist. ad Nepotia- 
 num /, it: Valarsii. Ed. /, 261. 
 
 Drunkenness, Augustine tells us, was universal. The 
 clergy had lent themselves, he tells us, to the evil habits 
 of heathens, continuing among Christians in order to win 
 and keep them. He did not, — he was a godly, faithful 
 
88 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 man, — but put it down with danger to himself (-Ej^p- 
 XXII, XXIX. Ed, Ben.). It had reigned in other places 
 {Epp. XXII). He would have the Africans set an ex- 
 ample, but at any rate they should follow it. These are 
 his words in Letter XXIX: ''But lest they who pre- 
 ceded us and permitted, or did not dare prohibit, the 
 manifest crimes of the inexperienced multitude, should 
 seem to have some opprobrium cast on them by us, I 
 explained to them by what necessity those things had 
 arisen in the Church [getting drunk in Church at the 
 martyrs' festivals], namely, that when, after so many per- 
 secutions and so vehement, it would be a hindrance, when 
 peace took place, to the crowd of gentiles desirous of 
 coming to the Christian name; that they were accustomed 
 to pass festal days with their idols in abundance of feasts 
 and drunkenness, nor could easily abstain from these very 
 pernicious and yet very ancient pleasures : it seemed to 
 those of old that they should spare for the time this 
 part of infirmity, and celebrate, not with like sacrilege, 
 although with like luxury, other festal days after those 
 which they had relinquished ; that now, bound together 
 as they were by the name of Christ, and subjected to 
 the yoke of so great authority, salutary precepts of so- 
 briety would be delivered to them, which, on account of 
 the honor and fear of him who gave them, they would 
 not be able to resist; as to which it was now time that, 
 as those who did not dare deny their being Christians, 
 they should begin to live according to the will of Christ, 
 and that those things which were yielded to them that 
 they might be Christians, they should reject, now they 
 are so." 
 
 Many said their fathers were good Christians, and did 
 so. However, in that place, Augustine succeeded. But 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 89 
 
 here is a really holy man, — the great light of the West, 
 — alleging that they had deliberately let the people be 
 drunk in honor of the martyrs, that they might not in 
 honor of idols. 
 
 MEDIAEVAL PRIESTHOOD — CELIBACY AND FORNICATION. 
 
 This was the primitive priesthood, ante-Nicene and post- 
 Nicene. From this we pass gradually into the mediaeval. 
 It was a space of nine hundred years, dark — confessedly 
 dark — for the Roman priesthood. In the end of the sec- 
 ond and in the third century, it had become a common 
 habit for the clergy, under pretext of purity, unmarried, 
 to live and sleep with unmarried persons, consecrated also 
 to celibacy as above all passion. Hermas, amongst others, 
 alludes to it thus (the shepherd had commended him to 
 the virgins who were there): "I said, 'Where shall I 
 tarry.?' They replied: 'Thou shalt sleep with us — as a 
 brother, not as a husband; for thou art our brother, and 
 we are ready henceforth to dwell with thee, for thou art 
 very dear to us.' Howbeit, I was ashamed to continue 
 with them. But she that seemed to be chiefest amongst 
 them embraced me and began to kiss me, and so did the 
 rest. When the evening came on, I would forthwith 
 have gone home, but they withheld me, and suffered me 
 not to depart ; therefore I continued with them that night 
 near the same tower. So they spread their linen garments 
 on the ground, and placed me in the middle ; nor did 
 they any thing else — only prayed." 
 
 In 953 Ratherius, Bishop of Verona and Liege, charges 
 the clergy with universal incontinency ; some being many 
 times married, a warrior, perjurer, heretic, gambler, and 
 drunkard. Such a shame to the whole Church could not 
 be a rebuker of others. He says, in his Itinerary {Fleury 
 
90 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 XII, 193), he held a synod to correct this, but the clergy- 
 kept none of the canons. The synods he held were to 
 maintain the canons. There were bigamists, concubine- 
 keepers, conspirators, perjurers, drunkards, usurers. The 
 cause of the ruin of all the people, he says, is the clergy. 
 The ignorance of the clergy was excessive. He says they 
 must learn the three creeds, and be able to read the 
 gospel and certain services. No one was fit to be made 
 a bishop, or to consecrate one. They would not give up 
 their incontinency, and counted the rest for nothing. The 
 Italian clergy despise the canons the most, because they 
 are the most given to impudicity, and minister to this 
 vice by ragouts and excess of wine. 
 
 Damianus, a great friend of Hildebrand (Gregory VII), 
 the strictest of monks, re-establisher, if not inventor, of 
 the Flagellators (self-scourgers), — the able champion of 
 Rome against the emperor, the reducer of Milan (till then 
 independent) to subjection to the Pope, — given up to de- 
 votion to Mary; who gave up his cardinalate and See, 
 to the great pain and offense of Hildebrand, out of piety, 
 — in a book entitled "Liber Gomorrhianus," the name of 
 which betrays its import, addressed to the Pope, com- 
 plains of the way in which the clergy were given up to 
 such crimes, it being alleged they could not depose them 
 for it, as people must have the Sacraments. They com- 
 mitted them, we read, with their own children — I appre- 
 hend, those who came to confession. Pope Leo approved 
 the book. His letter of recommendation is prefixed to it. 
 Damianus refers to canons which gave trifling penances 
 for fornication ; if even with a nun, and habitually, five 
 years* penances. (These canons he alleged to be forged, 
 or of uncertain authority, though amongst the canons.) 
 Damianus demanded the deposition of those guilty of 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 9^ 
 
 these things. The Pope answered, they deserved by the 
 canons to be deposed, but out of clemency he would 
 depose only the most immoral. On which Fleury remarks, 
 "Which leads us to suppose that the numbers of the 
 guilty were too great to treat them with rigor." The 
 next Pope, Alexander II, got the book and hid it, 
 of which Damianus complains bitterly. In the Romish 
 Council of 1059, he wished them to take it up, but it 
 was refused, as likely to produce scandal. — Fleury y XII ^ 
 532 Dupin. 
 
 Already, in 888, in two Councils {Mogunt et Metetis, 
 Hardouin, Vol. F/), the clergy are forbidden to have a 
 mother or sister in the house, though it had been allowed. 
 In the latter case examples of vice had given occasion 
 to it {Con. Mog. Cap. X). Renolf of Soissons gave like 
 orders (889). In the Council of Aenamheuse (1009), con- 
 nection with women is forbidden; but it is added {ci), 
 "but it is worse that some should have two or more, 
 and {non nullus) such an one, although he had sent her 
 off whom he lately had, during her life should marry 
 another." 
 
 In 910 and 927-941, Clugny (that is, the reformation 
 of the monks) began. Before, in the confusion of the 
 empire, laymen and women had the monasteries as inher- 
 itances ; Abbots had their wives, as Campo, who had 
 seven daughters and three sons, and his second, Hilde- 
 brand, and all their monks. Pope Benedict VIII (1012) 
 rages against the licentiousness of the clergy (forbidding 
 marriage), but more because the clergy, who were serfs, 
 had children by free women, and the Church lost her 
 property in serfs. Still he declares, in language which I 
 do not transfer to these pages, the universal and open 
 profligacy of the clergy, more shameless than the laity. 
 
92 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Between the years 1012 and 1014 {Hardouin, Vol. VI). 
 It was at this epoch that the prohibition of the clergy 
 to marry was rigidly enforced, and, as is known, by 
 Hildebrand. The wives were treated as concubines by the 
 Popes ; but they were married, and openly, with ordinary 
 solemnities very often. In England, it appears, few were 
 not, but the kings made them pay for it {Hard. Con. 
 Lo7i. VII, 1147). Lanfranc allowed it; later, Anselm 
 raged against it. It shows the state of the Roman clergy, 
 that many of the synods forbid the children born of the 
 priests inheriting their cures. They gave them as portions 
 even to their daughters. Pope Pascal (died 1118) ordered 
 men on their death-beds to receive the Sacrament from 
 them, rather than from none ; and that their sons should 
 be admitted to the priesthood in England, as almost the 
 major part of the clergy, and the better part were in this 
 case {Pascal's Letter in Hard. VII, 1 804-1 807). In the 
 canon law {Distinctio LXXXI, c. VI) it is said that a 
 clergyman, convicted of having begotten children in the 
 presbytery, is to be deposed. The gloss on this is : " But 
 it is generally said that a clergyman is not to be deposed 
 for simple fornication, because few can be found without 
 that sin." Later again, W. F. Picus, Lord of Mirandola, 
 that is the nephew of the famous Pic de Mirandola, as 
 quoted in a literal extract which I can not verify, not 
 possessing his works, says that priests left the natural 
 use of women, and good boys were given up to them by 
 their parents, and when grown older, then were made 
 priests of. I give it literally, only in Latin : '' Ab illis 
 {sacerdotibus) etiam {prolepudor) foemiiKB abiguntur ad eorum 
 libidines explendas, et meritorii piieri a parentibus co^nmen- 
 dantur et condonantur his, qui ab omni corporis etiam 
 concessa voluptate sese imntaculatos custodire deberent. Hi 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 93 
 
 postea ad sacerdotiorum gradus promoventur octatis flore 
 transacto jam exoletu' This was an address to Pope Leo, 
 in 15 17, the year Luther began the Reformation. The 
 literature of these ages teems with the bitterest reproaches 
 against the clergy, as setting an example of licentious 
 morals, brawls in taverns, unnatural crimes impossible to 
 be quoted, increased by the doctrine of celibacy, a pro- 
 hibition to marry, a measure not, however, fully carried 
 into effect for two centuries, and long resisted in the 
 north, — as in England, Denmark, and Sweden, — the peo- 
 ple often insisting that the priest should have a wife. 
 
 MODERN PRIESTHOOD — THE SIMONY OF THE CLERGY. 
 
 I come now to a later state of things, when simony, 
 or money-getting, became the general practice of the 
 clergy. The bishops received money regularly to allow 
 the priests to keep women. Theodoric, Archbishop of 
 Cologne, ordered the priests to dismiss their concubines, 
 and then took money from the priests for it. In the 
 Council of Paris they complained that money was paid 
 for the concubinage of the clergy, — that they were held 
 in derision, abomination, and reproach by everybody. Just 
 before the Council of Pisa, money was needed to support 
 the claims of two Popes. Clemangis was rector of the 
 University of Paris, the most famous then in the world, 
 the correspondent of Popes and Kings, earnestly seeking 
 the healing of the schism. This led to their using all 
 possible means to make money, — provisions, annates, 
 tenths, exacting in every shape and every way, giving a 
 right to their favorites to a living. He attacks the car- 
 dinals for their pride and insolence ; though drawn from 
 the lowest ranks of the clergy, they had up to about five 
 hundred benefices. The oppression of the bishops was 
 
94 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 intolerable : if any ecclesiastic was put in prison for any 
 great crime, on payment of a certain sum of money he 
 came out as white as snow. 
 
 Then the doctrine of indulgences was a money-getting 
 doctrine. We are told it is only the remission of the 
 temporal punishment of sin. But if a man died with the 
 Sacraments, he never could have any other. It was Pur- 
 gatory that was feared.^ A good Catholic has nothing 
 else to fear; besides, the ignorant masses were not so 
 nice as to this. The terror of sin was on their con- 
 sciences, and the Roman clergy helped them to get rid of 
 this terror by pardons bought with money. It was used 
 to build and adorn churches : farmed out to bankers. A 
 money-tariff was made for sins, or the commutations of 
 them, and thousands of years of Purgatory avoided by 
 paying money. It was a traffic of sin and security as to 
 future sins. The Roman Church had returned to Pagan 
 vices. Corruption had its way in Paganism. But Papal 
 Rome systematized it and made a tariff for sin. 
 
 When St. Peter's was being finished money was raised 
 to finish it by the sale of special indulgences. This was 
 an old expedient, by which the piety of the ignorant had 
 been before that imposed on ; but on the occasion of 
 finishing St. Peter's Cathedral it was resorted to with a 
 recklessness which passed all bounds. Indulgences were 
 issued, as to which there are very pretty theories, 
 but which are allowances to commit sin for money. I 
 know well it is said to be commutation of penance, and 
 shortening consequently the duration of purgatorial pains ; 
 
 1 An Australian merchant recently bequeathed to the priests seven 
 
 thousand dollars " for the deliverance of his soul from Purgatory," 
 
 but the executors refused to pay the money until proof was given 
 that his soul had been released. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 95 
 
 but penance had taken place of the need of holiness, and 
 as a man with the Sacraments would not go to Hell, 
 Purgatory had taken the place of Hell, and when a man 
 wanted to sin he got rid of the Purgatory he was afraid 
 of by paying a sum of money ; he wanted to sin, and 
 paid so much money to do it with impunity. Guilt {culpa) 
 was settled by Sacraments, so that he did not much 
 trouble himself about it ; the pains which remained, about 
 which he did care, by money. Now, too, it was not pro- 
 vided for troubled sinners, but offered everywhere to bold 
 ones who wanted to sin. Each sin had its price. The 
 object was to get money. Grace, or holiness, or any 
 doctrine, no matter which, was not thought of. Albert, 
 brother of Joachim, of Brandenburg, a young, elegant, 
 sumptuous Archbishop of Mayence, and elector, spent 
 more than he could afford, and applied to the Pope for 
 the farming of the indulgences; but he had paid for his 
 pallium, or archepiscopal robe, some thirty thousand florins, 
 and could not have it without ; for the Pope wanted 
 money, and Cardinal Pucci had suggested this means of 
 getting it. The Fuggers were bankers of Augsburg, and 
 Albert owed them money already ; however, the affair 
 seemed a good one, and they advanced the money for 
 the pallium, and became bankers for the indulgence-money. 
 A certain Tetzel, whose life it is said the Elector of 
 Saxony had already saved, when Maximilian was going to 
 put him in a sack and throw him into the Inn, and who 
 had before preached indulgences with success, undertook 
 the matter for Albert. It is stated that he declared that 
 if a person had violated the Virgin Mary, he could give 
 him pardon ; that as soon as the money was in the box, 
 the souls were out of Purgatory. It is certain, from his 
 own statement, that he urged that when a man had 
 
96 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 pardon (plenary remission, says the instruction) for his 
 sins on confession and contrition, which he got on con- 
 fessing them, or undertaking to do it, still for mortal sin 
 there was seven years* penance on earth ; and men com- 
 mitted countless ones, and God knew how long they 
 would be in Purgatory ; and that, save for four cases re- 
 served to the Pope, he could give pardon for every thing 
 now, at any time on confession,^ and plenary at the hour 
 of death, so that they would slip Purgatory altogether 
 for a small sum. As to condemnation, the confession, 
 contrition, and absolution, had put all that out of the 
 question. 
 
 The Jesuit, Maimburg, does not attempt to conceal the 
 iniquity of what was, and had been, going on. Before 
 this indulgences had been largely used to make money — 
 farmed out to questors, who made all the money of them 
 they could. It was one of the charges against Pope 
 John XXIII, giving power to his legate to appoint con- 
 fessors, and free every one from sins, and all the penalty 
 besides, if they paid what they were rated at. Still, 
 Maimburg admits, it went on with Pope Leo all the 
 same ; that Tetzel was employed because he had got in 
 great sums for the Teutonic Knights ; that the agents 
 made people believe they were sure of their salvation, 
 and souls were delivered out of Purgatory as soon as the 
 money was paid ; and as they saw the clerks of these 
 same agents carousing in taverns on their profits, much 
 indignation was created (Maimburg's History of Lutheran- 
 ism, 3d edition, i2mo., Paris, p. 9, et seq.). No doubt 
 
 1 The instructions themselves to Tetzel are in Gerdes' Hist., Ev. 
 Ren., Vol. I, document 9. These say once in life, and in the hour 
 of death, even, for reserved cases ; for others as often as need was. 
 — Sec. 30. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 97 
 
 priests had made money of indulgences before. It was 
 now an habitual resource ; that is, religious iniquity of 
 the profoundest kind. The sale of liberty to sin was the 
 settled practice of the Roman Church, the authorized 
 practice and doctrine of its priests and leaders. It will 
 be said that Tetzel's conduct was a gross abuse. Be it 
 so. To a rightly-constituted mind, the principle is far 
 worse than the abuse. The priests, getting money to 
 build or ornamant a grand church, by a universal com- 
 mutation of godly discipline (if we go no farther) for 
 money, — really for an allowance of all sorts of sin for 
 money, — is worse than the abuses that an ignorant or 
 reckless agent may be guilty of. 
 
 The priesthood, since the Reformation, have been very 
 shrewd and politic, and have managed to get immense 
 sums of money donated to them by almost every govern- 
 ment in Europe and America. In the United States they 
 have accumulated a vast amount of property from the 
 different legislatures, and have drawn thousands of dollars 
 annually from the public treasuries of New York and St. 
 Louis. Under the American Republic the priesthood have 
 increased very rapidly, until there are five thousand nine 
 hundred and eighty-nine priests, with one thousand one 
 hundred and thirty-six students whom they are educating 
 for the priesthood. Besides these there are one cardinal, 
 ten archbishops, fifty-six bishops, one prefect apostolic, 
 one abbot with the title of right reverend, six mitered 
 abbots, — four Benedictine and one Trappist. The Eastern 
 States have a Roman Catholic population of eight hund- 
 red and thirty-six thousand ; the Southern States, eight 
 hundred and eighty-three thousand ; the Middle States, one 
 million nine hundred and ten thousand; and the Western 
 States, two million five hundred and fourteen thousand 
 
 7 
 
98 
 
 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 two hundred and twenty-two. The priesthood have under 
 their control twenty-four seminaries, six hundred and sixty- 
 three colleges and academies, and two thousand two hund- 
 red and forty-six parochial schools, with four hundred and 
 five thousand two hundred and thirty-four pupils. 
 
 During the last twenty years the priesthood have in- 
 creased three thousand seven hundred and fifty-four; in 
 population, three million eight hundred thousand ; and in 
 churches, four thousand and twenty-two, as shown in 
 Sadler's "Catholic Directory" for 1880, by the following 
 figures : — 
 
 Year. 
 
 1785 . 
 
 1791 . 
 
 1808 . 
 
 1830 . 
 
 1835 . 
 
 1840 . 
 
 1845 . 
 
 1850 . 
 
 i860 . 
 
 1870 . 
 
 1879 . 
 
 1880 . 
 
 
 
 Priests. 
 40 
 
 50 
 
 68 
 
 232 
 
 • 347 
 
 499 
 
 709 
 
 1,081 
 
 2,235 
 
 3,756 
 
 5J50 
 
 . 5,989 
 
 
 
 
 Churches. 
 12 
 
 80 
 230 
 
 272 
 
 454 
 675 
 1,073 
 2.385 
 3,995 
 5,589 
 . 6,407 
 
 
 
 
 Population. 
 80,000 
 
 1,071,800 
 
 1,433,350 
 2,300,000 
 
 6,175,630 
 6,143,222 
 
 Within these last twenty years the priesthood have 
 secured millions of dollars of property in every part of 
 the country, from states, cities, and private individuals. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 99 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF THE POPES— 366-1886. 
 
 ^"""""""""[S i HE absence of the emperors from Rome, and 
 I their presence at Constantinople, made the 
 I Bishop of Rome a post of great importance 
 =ri iiTTMirrfTiiTTiniTiTii I and political power. Its ecclesiastical jurisdic- 
 tion was really comparatively small. It was respected as 
 the See of the Capital, and had a primary rank, which 
 Constantinople contested with it as the new capital. But 
 Augustine, the great Western bishop, and the African 
 Council, forbade appeals to Rome as intolerable. Already 
 in the Fourth century intrigues for the possession of 
 papal power became a source of public trouble. In 366, 
 Pope Liberius died, and contests for the See began. 
 Damasus was elected by a majority, Ursicinus by a large 
 party, and both were consecrated Bishops of Rome. The 
 emperor banished Ursicinus; but his partisans met in 
 the churches they possessed, and refused communion with 
 Damasus. The emperor took away the churches. They 
 met outside Rome, and were banished from the country. 
 In the dispute the parties fought for victory, and a vast 
 number of Christians were killed, even in the churches. 
 But the origin of the violent feud is more important than 
 the feud itself. The Emperor Constans was an Arian 
 persecutor. Liberius had condemned Athanasius, and com- 
 municated with the Arians. When called on to subscribe 
 
100 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 an Arian creed, it appears he repented and recalled his 
 condemnation. The emperor summoned a council at Aries, 
 where the legates of Liberius signed a semi-Arian creed. 
 Afterwards, at the Council of Milan, hesitating, he was 
 banished, and Felix consecrated Pope by an Arian minor- 
 ity. Rome murmured, and Liberius was restored, after 
 three years' exile at Beraea, but signed an Arian creed, 
 which a synod at Sirmio had drawn up, and there were 
 two Popes, one said to be Arian and in communion with 
 Arians (Epictetus of Centuncellae, and Auxentuis of Milan) 
 who had made him Pope; the other who had signed an 
 Arian creed against his conscience. Felix was driven out 
 by the people, who favored Liberius, though the clergy 
 had mainly submitted to Felix. Liberius wrote to the 
 Eastern bishops, who had condemned Athanasius, to de- 
 clare his agreement with them, and that he never agreed 
 with Athanasius.^ Osius, of Cordova, the president of the 
 Council of Nice which condemned Arius, had given way 
 to the emperor before Liberius. Felix is counted among 
 the Popes as Felix II. Damasus was of the Felix party, 
 and hence the riots. It is stated, that in the riots about 
 Felix, which were very great, many were killed; that 
 there were real massacres in baths, streets, and churches, 
 of laity and clergy who favored Felix. 
 
 Zosimus became Pope (417). He formally approved 
 Pelagianism. The synod at Lydda accepted Pelagius' con- 
 fession of faith. Augustine and the African bishops had 
 condemned him. Zosimus reproves them sharply. The 
 
 1 There is some obscurity as to the history. Efforts have been 
 made to screen Liberius, by questioning what Sirmian creed he 
 adopted. But if we are to trust Hilary, there can be no mistake as 
 to Arianism; nor does Tillemont nor Dupin defend him from this 
 accusation, nor Jerome either. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. lOI 
 
 African churches met (418); Pelagius was condemned and 
 anathematized; and they add, if any one presume to ap- 
 peal beyond sea, no one was to receive him into com- 
 munion. There is as to what follows some conflict of 
 dates ; but a decree of the Emperor Honorius was ob - 
 tained, Pelagius and Celestius banished from Rome, and 
 Zosimus then condemned what he had approved, and cut 
 them both off from communion. On the death of Zosi- 
 mus (418), two Popes, Boniface and Eudalius, were elected. 
 Boniface attempted to maintain his place by force. The 
 prefect kept the peace, and reported in favor of Eudalius 
 to the Emperor Honorius. Honorius confirmed Eudalius, 
 and banished Boniface from the city. Boniface maintained 
 his ground outside, and his partisans appealed to Honorius. 
 The emperor cited both before him. The Prefect told 
 him neither could be trusted in their statements. Diffi- 
 culties arose in the decision. Honorius forbade both to 
 go into the city, and sent a bishop for the Easter cere- 
 monies. However, Eudalius went in; his adherents were 
 unharmed. Boniface's adherents, who were of the popu- 
 lace, made a violent attack, and the prefect hardly 
 escaped. But Honorius, glad to terminate the matter, 
 condemned Eudalius for going in, and appointed Boniface. 
 Eudalius was driven out of the city by force. — Baronius' 
 Annals^ 419. 
 
 It was about this time that the Popes alleged forged 
 canons of the Council of Nice to maintain their author- 
 ity in Africa. The African bishops had the records of 
 Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, besides their 
 own, searched ; found they were forged, and refused to 
 submit, reproving Pope Celestine, and denying his right 
 to send his legate. These appeals of evil persons the 
 Popes were constantly receiving as a means of establish- 
 
102 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 ing their authority.^ The letter to Celestine is very strong 
 indeed, Faustinus, the legate's mission, being wholly re- 
 jected. 
 
 Symmachus and Laurentius contended for the papacy 
 (498). It was a violently contested matter. Both were 
 ordained Pope the same day, and they appealed to The- 
 oderic at Ravenna, the Gothic king, an Arian, to decide. 
 As most were for Symmachus, he was to be Pope. He 
 was accused of all sorts of crimes and never was cleared. 
 There was fighting in the streets for a length of time, 
 and many killed and wounded. The only godly man we 
 hear of was on the other side. Symmachus made regula- 
 tions to hinder these contests. In vain, however; for men 
 will be ambitious. The clergy had in other cases sold all 
 the Church's goods, and even the vessels of service, by 
 auctions, for pushing their candidates, so that it had been 
 forbidden by rescripts and laws of the senate. 
 
 Pope Vigilius (540), who was at Constantinople, had 
 demanded the fifth general council in 553, which con- 
 demned three chapters of the fourth council at Chalcedon, 
 (451), then objected to it, and would not assist; was exiled 
 by the emperor, published a constitution condemning the 
 chapters, saying that he did not condemn the Council of 
 Chalcedon (the fourth), on whose authority they rested. 
 The Romans wished him back. The emperor agreed, and 
 said they might have him or Archdeacon Pelagius for 
 Pope, or the latter after Vigilius. They wished Vigilius, 
 and said they would take Pelagius afterwards, and the 
 emperor let him go on his confirming the council which 
 condemned the three chapters. He died in Sicily on the 
 way. Pelagius, who was suspected of poisoning him, suc- 
 
 ^ Hardouin's Councils, I, 934; Prohibition to Appeal, Can., 125; 
 Letter to Boniface, 939; and to Celestine, 947. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. IO3 
 
 ceeded him, publicly declaring his innocence. Vigilius 
 himself had climbed over the wall into the papacy, 
 Belasaris having, by the emperor's orders, sent off 
 Pope Silverius, who would not submit to the emperor's 
 theology, and put in Vigilius. Silverius, however, re- 
 turned. Belasaris gave him up to Vigilius, who sent 
 him to the island of Palmaria, in guard, where he 
 died.i 
 
 Pelagius' own election was very uncertain. Vigilius had 
 promised one thousand dollars to Belasaris and would not 
 pay it. He had at first condemned the three chapters 
 in his judicatum. Therefore the Roman clergy separated 
 from him. The Africans excommunicated him. He, seeing 
 he had condemned a general council to please the em- 
 peror, and that the clergy had turned against him, re- 
 tracted; but, meanwhile, it seems the Roman clergy 
 elected Pelagius, Then Vigilius yielded, and got in favor 
 again, and the emperor told the Romans they might have 
 which they liked, and Pelagius, who came back with 
 Vigilius from Constantinople, certainly joined in ill treat- 
 ing him. Baronius says no day or month is named when 
 he succeeded, and complains bitterly of all this. Vigilius 
 had condemned the Council of Chalcedon, and written to 
 the three other patriarchs (who were heretics according to 
 it), anathematized the doctrines of the Council of Chal- 
 cedon, and Pope Leo, in his famous letter, adopted by 
 it, and renounced communion with those who defended 
 it. Baronius denies the authenticity of these letters, but 
 Pagi and Fleury both admit they are genuine. Silverius 
 was really murdered by want and starvation. " He died 
 of hunger," says Fleury; and, indeed, all historians re- 
 mark that Vigilius was chosen Pope when Silverius was 
 
 1 Fleury, 537-558; Vol. VII, 356, 482; Baronius, sub. an., 538. 
 
I04 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 alive, and never afterwards. Baronius tries to get out of 
 it by supposing Vigilius was re-elected after Silverius' 
 death; but it is merely because it ought to be. Silverius 
 was son of Pope Hormisdas. Vigilius ordained eighty-one 
 bishops. 
 
 Pope Honorius (625) was condemned as a heretic by the 
 sixth oecumenical council (680). Baronius laboriously seeks 
 to prove that Theodoret did it, and left his own name 
 out, and put Honorius' in; but Pagi, his annotator, has, 
 in very few words, and by facts, shown the absurdity of 
 his attempt. Pope Adrian II refers to it, and says 
 heresy was the only ground for resisting thus such a 
 superior authority. He was anathematized also by Pope 
 Leo II. 
 
 The history of papal influence was this: when there 
 were emperors they ruled; but the Pope's influence was 
 growing ecclesiastically, though often resisted. When the 
 empire fell they were the chief influence (except the 
 Arian Goths in Italy), and did pretty freely what they 
 pleased, increasing in power in respect of Constantinople. 
 However, the Gothic kings confirmed them, and interfered, 
 and were appealed to, as we have seen. When, for a 
 time, the Eastern empire recognized Italy, the Popes were 
 servile and submissive to the emperors; could not help 
 it. When these were driven out again, they were op- 
 pressed by Lombards, but established in Rome by the 
 Franks; Charlemagne, however, fully holding his own, and 
 ruling at Rome. Powerful emperors contended for the 
 right of confirmation of Popes and local investiture of 
 prelates ; and the history of the middle ages is the his- 
 tory of this conflict. The Popes raising Italy against 
 them (Guelphs and Ghibellines), and the emperors some- 
 times doing as they pleased ; but the German emperors 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. IO5 
 
 having to contend with subject princes as powerful as 
 themselves, and jealous of them, the Pope and they 
 coalesced against the emperors. The Popes even supported 
 the rebellion of a son against his father, the emperor. 
 In the time of Boniface VIII, they laid their hands on 
 France, but this was more united, and there was a sig- 
 nal failure; the Pope had to give way. The next Pope 
 had his seat at Avignon, under French influence, — the 
 Avignon Popes and the court being degraded to the last 
 degree. At the end they had one Pope at Rome and 
 another at Avignon, this giving rise to the question 
 whether the authority of a council were not superior 
 to that of a Pope and the three councils of Pisa, Basle, 
 Florence, Lausanne, and Constance, which so puzzle 
 Roman Catholic theorists. There was a universal cry for 
 reformation in head and members, always avoided. 
 
 At last came the reformation, which threw the whole 
 power into the Pope's hand, the bishops holding only under 
 him. And though Louis XIV maintained Galilean liberties, 
 as they are called, yet the clergy were simple slaves to 
 the Pope. The Jesuit society sprung up at that time more 
 powerful than the Pope himself, and recovered Southern 
 Germany to popery. 
 
 1 should mention here the history of Pope Joan.^ A 
 woman who had received a learned education at Athens,^ 
 became, it is said. Pope in 855. She is said to have 
 died in childbirth, having been taken with pains of labor 
 in the street, going to the Lateran church; so that the 
 
 ^ Besides Joan, or Joanna, she is also called by different writers 
 Agnes, Margaret, Isabel, Dorothy, Jutta, and Gilberta, or Gerberta. 
 
 2 The papal secretary, Dietrich von Niesn (141 3), professes to give 
 the very school in which she taught, viz.: that of the Greeks, in 
 which St. Augustine taught. 
 
I06 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Popes never pass that way.^ That seems unquestionable, 
 and it is certain that the sex^ of the pontiffs was exam- 
 ined for long years, and the story believed till the time 
 of the Reformation — that is for many centuries. She is 
 put by Platina, who speaks of the story as of uncertain 
 authority, but would not omit it,^ between Leo IV and 
 Benedict III. The circumstances of the woman-pope were 
 published generally until 1540 or 1550; and for centuries 
 no one ever thought of having the story expurgated from 
 works. John Huss, when before the Council of Constance, 
 speaks of the woman-pope,* whose name was Agnes, and 
 who was called Johannes Anglicus. Stephen de Bourbon, 
 a French Dominican, mentions Pope Joan in 1250, and 
 he found it in some chronicle: ^^ Accidit antenii mirabilis 
 audaciuy mio insana, circa ann. Ut dicitur in chronicis. 
 Qucedam mulier literata, et in arte nondi {notandif) edocta, 
 absunto virili kabitu, et viram sefingens, venit Romania et 
 tarn industria, quam literatura accepta^ facta est notarius 
 curies^ post diabolo procurante cardinalis, postea papa. Hcsc 
 impregnata cum ascenderet peperit. Quod cum novisset 
 
 1 '■^Dominus Papa, quum vadit ad Lateranum, eandem viam semper 
 declinatr The avoided street was, moreover, pulled down by Sixtus 
 V, on account of its narrowness. The spot where the catastrophe was 
 said to have taken place is between the Colosseum and St. Clem- 
 ent's.— A^. B. S. 
 
 2 According to Hemmerlin {Dialog, de Nobil. et Rusticis\ the inves- 
 tigation was made by two of the clergy: "^/ dum. invenvientur 
 illcEsi {testiculi), clamabant tangentes alta voce; testiculos habet. Et 
 reclamabant clerus et populus : Deo gratias^ 
 
 ^ '''■ Ne obstinate minimufn et pertinaciter omisisse videar, quod fere 
 omnes affirmant P 1460. 
 
 ^ Huss does not think that the Roman Church has remained im- 
 maculate: '-'■Quomodo ergo ilia Romana Ecclesia, ilia Agnes, Johannes 
 Papa cum collegio semper immaculata permansit, qui peperit.^"" 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 107 
 
 Romana jusiitia, ligatis pedibtis ejus ad pedes equi distracta 
 est extra urbeniy et ad dimidiam leucam. a populo lapidata, 
 et ubi fuit morttca, ibi fuit sepulta, et super lapidem super 
 ea positum scriptus est versiculus. Farce pater patrum 
 papisscB edere partum.'' Martini Poloni writes (1278) that 
 she was Pope for more than two years, became pregnant 
 during a procession, died immediately, and was buried at 
 once. The whole controversy is fully gone into in 
 Basuage VII, 12, and Schrock XXII, 75-110. Baronius 
 and Fleury pass the Joan of Platina over in a suspicious 
 silence, and make Benedict elected on the death of Leo 
 IV. 
 
 THE POPES AND THE ITALIAN NOBLES — 887-1000. 
 
 From d>^'/ the Popes were engaged in the strifes of 
 the Italian nobles, when the power of the empire fell. 
 Another circumstance has to be introduced here. A num- 
 ber of forged decretals were produced at this time, which 
 formed the foundation of the Pope's pretensions subse- 
 quently, — the Isidorean collection. No doubt political 
 circumstances were a means of the Pope's power, but 
 their canonical pretensions leaned on these forged decre- 
 tals. They declare the notable falsehood that all churches 
 had their origin from Rome, — ** A qua omnes ecclesias prin- 
 cipium sumsisse," — and then go on to state its consequent 
 rights. It is said they were written between 829 and 845, 
 appeared at Mentz in the time of Archbishop Antcarius, 
 and alleged to be brought from Spain at the end of the 
 Eighth century or thereabouts. Some think they were 
 forged by Antcarius himself, at Mentz, and that there were 
 some old decretals which gave rise to them, or, as some 
 allege, introduced to accredit the forgeries. At any rate, 
 what gave legal (not political) force to papal authority 
 
I08 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 from this date was the forged Isidorean collection. It is 
 admitted on all hands they are forgeries. They were not 
 detected till the Reformation. Calvin stated it, and fully 
 demonstrated it. Bellarmine says that they are ancient, 
 but does not dare defend them as genuine ; and Baronius 
 gives them up. Hincmar combatted, in 870, the authority 
 of the decrees, but used them, too. However, no one 
 denies their spuriousness, but they served their purpose 
 when wanted. They were used by Pope Nicolas I, in 
 864. After the death of Formosus (897), Boniface took 
 possession of the See, and held it for fifteen days. Stephen 
 VI (VIII 896) drove him out and took possession. He 
 dragged FormosUs out of his tomb, clothed him in pon- 
 tifical robes, and put him on the throne ; charged him 
 with intrusion into the See, stripped him then of his pon- 
 tifical robes, cut off the three fingers which were used to 
 bless with, and had his body thrown into the Tiber, and 
 re-ordained all the clergy he had ordained. Baronius says 
 he should not dare to count him among the Popes, if he 
 had not found it done by those of old. Stephen was put 
 in prison and strangled. Baronius owns he had only the 
 fact of subsequent recognition by the Church to accept 
 such or such a Pope. 
 
 After the death of Stephen, the Roman faction having 
 the upper hand at the time, Romanus was Pope (897) 
 somewhat more than four months. Romanus disappeared. 
 Theodorus was Pope twenty days (897). Benedict IV (900) 
 succeeded, of whom nothing is known ; he seems to have 
 been a respectable man. Leo IV (903) succeeded. After 
 forty days he was driven out and put in prison by Chris- 
 topher (903). He was, after seven months, driven out, 
 put in prison, and obliged to retire to a monastery by 
 Sergius III (904), who was all-powerful, through Adelbert, 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. lOQ 
 
 Marquis of Tuscany. It is to be added that these Popes 
 undid the ordinations of their predecessors, as having no 
 legitimate title. One Auxilius wrote a dialogue, to guard, 
 by decrees and canonical examples, against the intestine 
 discord of the Roman Church. The most powerful and 
 basest harlots ruled at Rome, at whose will Sees were 
 changed, bishops given, and, what is horrible and unutter- 
 able to hear of, their lovers were introduced into the 
 See of Peter, who are only to be written in the cata- 
 logue of Roman pontiffs to mark such times. For who 
 can say that persons, intruded without law in this way 
 by harlots, can be said to be legitimate Roman pontiffs ? 
 The clergy never elected, and yet succession depends 
 upon this ! 
 
 On the death of Lando (913), Theodora, who lived 
 with Adelbert, Marquis of Tuscany, and whose daughter 
 Marozia was concubine of Pope Sergius III, makes John, 
 son of Sergius and Marozia, Pope (John X). Marozia be- 
 came wife of Guido, Marquis of Tuscany. She being 
 angry with his brother Peter, had Peter killed, and John 
 seized and put in a dungeon, where he died, — they say 
 suffocated. The Marquis of Tuscany and Marozia made 
 another of hers, by Pope Sergius III, Pope by the name 
 of John XI ; but Alberic (son of Adelbert, Marquis of 
 Tuscany, by Theodora, not his wife), who ruled at Rome, 
 put John in prison. There he remained three years, and 
 there was no other Pope made. 
 
 In 936, Leo VII became Pope. Octavianus, son of 
 Alberic, was a clergyman ; and as he governed at Rome, 
 made himself Pope John XII, being at the outside not 
 eighteen years old. Though not of an age to be made 
 bishop, or even deacon, he was owned afterwards in the 
 succession, the clergy being supposed to consent, not to 
 
no FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 have schism. However, the emperor, Otho, came to Rome 
 (963) and held a council, which deposed John XII and 
 elected Leo VIII (963). But Otho, having sent away 
 some of his troops, the Romans rose against him and 
 tried to kill him ; but he knew it, and had the advan- 
 tage ; but when the emperor left Leo had to fly, and 
 John XII was Pope again. However, being one night 
 out of Rome with a married woman, he was caught 
 in the act of adultery and had his head smashed, and 
 died without the Sacraments. The Romans chose Ben- 
 edict V Pope (964). Otho came and besieged them, and 
 they were forced to give up Benedict V to him, and 
 Leo VIII re-enters. The emperor committed Benedict V 
 to the keeping of the Archbishop of Hamburg. The 
 emperor held a council at Rome. Benedict appeared ; 
 owned he had sinned ; was stripped of his robes, and his 
 pastoral staff broken ; he had joined in deposing John, 
 and sworn fidelity to Leo. The next Leo was Leo IX. 
 After Leo's death they sent to Otho to know whom he 
 would have, and he sent ambassadors to Rome, and John 
 XIII was chosen. He was followed by Benedict VI (972). 
 He became odious to the Romans. Crescentius, son of 
 Theodora and Pope John X, took him, shut him up, and 
 afterwards strangled him while yet alive. Boniface VIII 
 became Pope. After the death of Benedict VI they drove 
 out Boniface, and Donus became Pope, though some do 
 not count him among the Popes. 
 
 THE POPES AND THE GERMAN EMPERORS — 1002-1 300. 
 
 The German emperors now decided papal elections, and 
 they were more respectable than the Italian nobles. In 
 1002 or 1003 we have John XVI (called also, and com- 
 monly, XVIII) for a few months, and then John XVII 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. HI 
 
 (usually XIX). Crescentius had expelled Gregory V 
 from Rome and made a Greek Pope. The emperor and 
 Gregory V marched together on Rome. But some ser- 
 vants of the emperor, fearing his clemency (John was a 
 favorite at court), followed, and caught the Pope, and put 
 his eyes out, and put him in prison. Benedict VIII 
 (1012) took the See after Sergius IV, but another party 
 chose Gregory VI. But Benedict, being son of the Count 
 of Tusculum, carried the day ; but the party of Gregory 
 VI raised itself, and Benedict fled to the emperor. How- 
 ever, Benedict was restored in less than two years. After 
 Benedict, John, a layman not in orders at all, had 
 the papacy. He was Benedict's brother, another son of 
 the Count of Tusculum. He got the papacy, says Fleury, 
 partly by money — evidently family influence, too. The 
 Patriarch of Constantinople very nearly succeeded in buy- 
 ing the universal papacy of the East. The Romans drove 
 John XIX out, but Conrad, the emperor, came with an 
 army and set him up again ; he died that year ( 1033 ). 
 His nephew, son of Alberic, Count of Tusculum, was 
 made Pope, a boy about twelve years old, by money 
 also, and intrigue, too. Benedict IX (1033) : his wife was 
 infamous, and through his plunderings and murders be- 
 came so odious that the people drove him out. Sylvester 
 III became Pope, but only held it three months. But 
 Benedict, with the Tusculum family, attacked Rome, and 
 was reinstated. But his conduct became insupportable, and 
 he agreed to leave for a sum of money and the papal 
 revenue of England, to follow his pleasures freely ; and 
 they made John Gratin Pope, as Gregory VI (1044). But 
 all three called themselves Popes. Gregory VI gave up 
 the papacy, in a council called to settle matters, as having 
 entered on it unlawfully, — as Benedict was paid to go out. 
 
112 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 The number designating the Pope is constantly uncer- 
 tain, because whether such or such an one was really 
 Pope is uncertain. He who is called John XIX is also 
 called XVII. Benedict is VIII or IX, and so Stephen. 
 But when things are at the worst they mend. The em- 
 peror came, gathered the clergy and nobles of Rome ; 
 they agreed to have things done decently, and the em- 
 peror took up Suidger, Bishop of Bamburg, and he became 
 Clement II (1046). No fit person, it is said, was found 
 in Rome. However, Clement II died in nine months, and 
 Benedict IX came back and held the papacy for nine 
 months, then, as it seems, repented and gave it up. 
 Sylvester went back to his See. What became of Gregory 
 I know not. The emperor sent Poppa, Bishop of Brixia, 
 to be Pope. He lived as Damasus II (1048) twenty-three 
 days, — said to be poisoned, — and Bruno, six months after, 
 in a diet held at Worms, was chosen Pope. A circum- 
 stance is to be noted here. Hildebrand, afterwards 
 Gregory VII, came with Bruno. The Romans had sent 
 to the emperor and asked him to give them a Pope, 
 through dread, it appears, of Benedict ; and after his 
 choice at Worms, Bruno (Leo IX, 1048) came in his 
 pontifical robes. Hildebrand got him to take them off, 
 and be again chosen at Rome. He it was who established 
 the modern papacy. Every one who searches for himself 
 must look to the facts, — not the title of the Pope, — as 
 the succession is so uncertain that VIII in one is IX in 
 the other, and sometimes, as in the Johns, there are 
 three enumerations. 
 
 GREGORY VIL — THE FOUNDER OF MODERN PAPACY. 
 
 The buying and sale of benefices was universal even 
 among the Popes, and immorality the most degraded. The 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 113 
 
 chase and pleasure were their occupations. On the death 
 of Leo IX the Romans sent Hildebrand to the emperor 
 to choose a Pope in Germany; they had no one fit in 
 Rome. ' The emperor assembled a council at Mayence, 
 and Hildebrand got them to choose Gibbard, Bishop 
 of Eichstadt, a near relative to the emperor, who did 
 not wish to lose him. However, he went, kept his 
 bishopric, too, and became Pope. He was very near be- 
 ing poisoned by a subdeacon in the Sacrament, but could 
 not lift the cup. They say another devil openly seized 
 the prisoner. 
 
 Hildebrand was now the soul of the papacy at Rome. 
 A great change took place under Nicolas H (1058). On 
 the death of Stephen VH, the emperor who kept things 
 in order, the Roman nobles, the Alberic family, and 
 others, chose the Bishop of Veletri as Pope Benedict X 
 (1058). The cardinals opposed, but he held the papacy 
 nearly ten months; but Hildebrand got the Bishop of 
 Florence chosen at Florence (1058). When he had arrived, 
 the Romans sent to the emperor, who sanctioned the choice 
 of Florence. This Pope was Nicolas II. He recognized 
 publicly the emperor's rights, but decreed, when Pope, 
 that the cardinals should choose the pope, thus excluding 
 the emperor and the Roman people. This laid the foun- 
 dation of the modern papacy, which was born in Hilde- 
 brand, Gregory VH. Therefore it is I have noticed this 
 part of the history. Alexander H was the first chosen 
 by the cardinals (1061). Another was chosen at Basle, 
 and consecrated through Lombard influence, — Pope Ho- 
 norius. He came to Rome in arms, was at first victorious, 
 but was afterwards beaten, the German princes deserting 
 him to weaken an infant emperor. He was deserted by 
 his soldiers, got into the castle of St. Angelo, was be- 
 
114 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 sieged two years by Alexander, and then fled. But Ho- 
 norius never came up to his claim. 
 
 One great means of the depression of imperial power 
 was, that the Archbishop of Cologne stole away the young 
 emperor from his mother, who had maintained his author- 
 ity, and went over to Pope Alexander's side, so that the 
 emperor was null, though nominally saved. There was a 
 council at Mantua, where the archbishop appeared, as 
 did Alexander, who was charged also with simony, and 
 Honorius. Alexander was recognized Pope, Honorius par- 
 doned, the emperor nominally saved, and some of the 
 German party promoted. The archbishop charged Alex- 
 ander with having despised the emperor's rights. After 
 Alexander, Hildebrand was Pope, as Gregory VII (1073). 
 He decreed absolutely the celibacy of the clergy; was 
 resisted everywhere in the north of Europe, where there 
 was some more respect for morality, but persecuted it 
 earnestly. 
 
 The papal system was now established. From this we 
 notice the dying struggles of the imperial power which 
 had given Rome Popes for near a century. Gregory VII, 
 in his account of the state of the Church, says : "Alone 
 with my mind's eye, I look at the West, South, and 
 North. I scarcely find bishops, legally such by their en- 
 trance and life, who rule the Christian people for the 
 love of Christ, and not secular ambition; and among all 
 secular princes, I know none who put God's honor before 
 their own, and justice before gain. As to those amongst 
 whom I dwell, as I often tell them, Romans, Lombards, 
 and Normans, I denounce them as, in a certain way, 
 worse than Jews and Pagans."^ Gregory VII, having ex- 
 
 ^ As Abbot Transmundus had put out the eyes of some monks 
 accused of rebellion, and torn out the tongue of one of them, De- 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. US 
 
 communicated the emperor, the emperor and his bishops 
 chose Guibert (Clement III) Pope. Gregory would have 
 attacked him at Ravenna with an army. He sought the 
 help of the Normans. The Italians (Lombardy) and Ger- 
 many being for the emperor, the emperor entered Rome, 
 set Clement III on the papal throne. Gregory retired to 
 St. Angelo. The emperor besieged him there. Robert 
 Guiscard, the Norman, freed him, and after staying awhile 
 in Rome, he retired to Salerno, under the protection of 
 the Normans. Gregory VII died at Salerno. The small 
 papal party secretly elected Desiderius Victor III. Clem- 
 ent III returned to Rome; he had been expelled in 
 1089, and came back in 1091. Didier refused to be Pope, 
 and, when chosen, went back to Mount Casino, and would 
 not be ordained, but at last yielded. The Normans and 
 others came to Rome, and turned out Clement III from 
 St. Peter's by force. Still it appears he held the upper 
 hand there, for after the death of Victor III (Didier), 
 Urban, named by him, was chosen at Terracina, under 
 the influence of Mathilde, the great protectress of the 
 popedom then, by a small assembly, forty persons, clergy 
 and laity partly, by proxy, John, Bishop of Porto, having 
 their authority. 
 
 It is important to notice at this part of the history, 
 that what destroyed the power of Clement and the em- 
 peror in Italy was, that Urban got up the crusades 
 through Peter the Hermit, and when that took effect, 
 Clement was rejected. He was driven, it appears, from 
 Rome by the Crusaders. Pope Urban the Second says: 
 
 siderius, Abbot of Casino, put him to penance. Gregory, then cardi- 
 nal, approved the act, got him out of the abbot's hands, gave him 
 an abbacy, and afterwards made a bishop of him. Anything for 
 power. 
 
Il6 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 "Enjoin a measure of suitable satisfaction to those who 
 had killed the excommunicated, for we do not consider 
 those as guilty of homicide who, burning with the zeal 
 of their Catholic mother against the excommunicated, shall 
 have happened to have slain some of them." At this 
 time this was the greater part of Europe. 
 
 The remaining facts of this period may be briefly stated. 
 Pascal II roused the emperor's son against him. That 
 son banished him from Rome, and Gregory VIII was set 
 up as Pope (1187). The Roman Pope died in exile, or 
 two days after his return. Gelasius was elected as Roman 
 Pope, but died in exile also soon after. Calixtus II fol- 
 lowed as Roman Pope. He treats of peace with the em- 
 peror. Gregory VIII was his prisoner. Calixtus was not 
 elected; he was chosen by a few cardinals and clergy, 
 at Cluny, when Gelasius died, as trusted by him. After 
 him the cardinals chose Innocent II. Other cardinals and 
 the people chose Peter, Anacletus II, favored by the 
 laity. Innocent II had to leave Rome, went to France, 
 owned by Bernard, and in general in Europe ; but 
 Anacletus was Pope at Rome. On Anacletus' death, the 
 schism for the moment was ended by St. Bernard's influ- 
 ence. The Emperor Lothair brought back Innocent, but 
 as soon as he was gone Innocent had to go back to 
 Pisa. Gregory was elected in Anacletus' stead as Victor 
 and submitted to Innocent, but the Romans renounced 
 obedience to Innocent. Celestine followed quietly. The 
 next, Lucius, was killed in a rebellion of the Romans, by 
 a blow of a stone, when assaulting the capital. His 
 successor, Eugene, fled from Rome, but returned. Then 
 came Anastasius IV. Adrian IV followed. Then a dis- 
 puted election — Alexander and Victor; Victor given up 
 by the emperor when beaten by the Lombards. Lucius 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 17 
 
 III and Urban III sat at Verona, not at Rome. Lucius 
 fled, being hated and despised by the Romans, who at- 
 tacked his territories, and he finally settled at Verona, 
 when Urban was chosen. From Urban III on to Boni- 
 face VIII, that is, taking in Lucius, from ii8i to 1294, 
 the history of the papacy is that of a worldly power, yet 
 using excommunication as its weapon, contending against 
 the emperors, using both Sicily and Lombardy as their 
 main arms against him, with various success, but in re- 
 sult successful. But it wearied the world, and when Bon- 
 iface VIII attempted to use the acquired power against 
 Philip of France, he signally failed. His successor re- 
 peated his acts. And the next Pope, chosen by French 
 influence, removed to Avignon, in France. 
 
 The most remarkable Pope of this period was Innocent 
 III (1198), who held the fourth Council of Lateran (12 15), 
 when Transubstantiation was for the first time decreed. 
 He established the Inquisition in the crusades , against the 
 Albigenses. We may notice that, the See having been 
 vacant three years through election in intrigues, there 
 was a compromise, and Gregory X made a decree for 
 what is now practised, that the cardinals should be shut 
 up till they chose a Pope. Celestine V (1294) reserved 
 it, and then resigned, as the cardinals were two years 
 and a half before electing him. The person who got 
 Celestine to resign got himself chosen in his place ; it 
 was Boniface VIII (1294). Celestine gives a curious 
 reason to justify his abdication. He says Clement, who 
 was named by St. Peter, resigned, that no Pope might be 
 named by his predecessor. And then Clement came third 
 after Lucius and Anacletus. So St. Peter made a blunder 
 in beginning the matter. It is known the succession of the 
 first three possessors of the See is hopelessly embroiled. 
 
Il8 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 THE POPES AND THE FRENCH PROTECTORATE— 1309-1870. 
 
 From 1309 the Pope lived at Avignon, under French 
 influence and protection, proclaimed his rights over others, 
 and submitted to France. The struggles with the em- 
 peror went on. Lewis set an anti-pope at Rome, Nicolas 
 V, but he was soon given up to his competitor at 
 Avignon. The friar Minorites and Italian cardinals sided 
 with the emperor, who was preparing a general council 
 against the Pope, who meanwhile died. Benedict XII 
 succeeded at Avignon (1334). France would not allow 
 him to make peace with the emperor : he was deprived 
 of the Sacraments by the Pope, but the clergy who would 
 not administer them were banished. But Lewis took 
 ecclesiastical matters in hand, and lost influence. Clement 
 VI succeeded Benedict XII (1242), and anathematized 
 the emperor, and set up an anti-emperor, who was forced 
 to fly. But the conduct of Clement VI, who had de- 
 posed an ecclesiastical elector to gain voices for his anti- 
 emperor, had wearied men of the Popes. Clement VI 
 got the upper hand, but injured the papacy. The electors 
 of the empire met and declared the King of Rome re- 
 ceived his power from electors only. From 1313 to 1316 
 the See was vacant ; the cardinals would not elect. 
 During this time, from the universal corruption and squeez- 
 ing for money, the consciences of good men were rising 
 up against the state of things. Miliez, Matthias von 
 Jannow, both Bohemians before Huss. In England Wyc- 
 liffe (1360). Gregory XI died at Rome, and a Pope was 
 elected in a riot. All was violence and confusion. The 
 cardinals elected another, Clement VII (1378), who went 
 to Avignon, and there were two Popes, who divided 
 Europe between them. Benedict XIII succeeded at Avignon 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. HQ 
 
 (1384), Boniface IX at Rome (1390), and then Gregory 
 
 XII (1406}. This brought on the Council of Pisa, which 
 put down both. The council chose Alexander V (1409). 
 He dissolved the council, and did not reform. 
 
 There were now three Popes. The exaction of money 
 became intolerable, selling of public benefices. It was said 
 it was allowable, as the Pope could not sin in it. This 
 brought on the Council of Pisa, — "a council," says Cardi- 
 nal Bellarmine, "neither manifestly approved nor manifestly 
 condemned." That it was approved, the succeeding Alex- 
 ander, being called VI, shows, for Alexander V was made 
 Pope by that council, and the same circumstance John 
 XXIII (1410), to be confessedly a true Pope, though 
 moderns say no. John XXIII being obliged to fliy, Rome 
 consented to a new council, which met at Constance 
 (1414). Here first they voted by nations. John was de- 
 posed, accused of every sort of horrible crime. He had 
 first fled the council. Gregory XII resigned. Benedict 
 
 XIII remained determined, was deposed, and finally de- 
 serted by all but the Spanish town he lived in. Martin 
 V was elected by all (141 7). The council had formally 
 decreed a council superior to the Pope, and had acted on 
 it. Martin condemned all appeals from Popes, and after 
 a little reformation dissolved the council. It was here 
 John Huss was burnt at the stake, and it was declared 
 that faith was not to be kept with a heretic. He had 
 had letters of safe conduct. Martin confirmed the articles 
 of faith of the Council of Constance. Martin V quar- 
 relled with cardinals. He appointed a council first at 
 Pavia, then at Siena, but which met afterwards at Basle, 
 under Eugenius. But there was no reformation really, and 
 the universal complaint continued. France made regula- 
 tions for herself. Eugene IV succeeded Martin V (143 1). 
 
I20 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 The iniquities with which John XXIII was charged were 
 so dreadful that when presented to the chief men of the 
 Council of Constance they thought it better not to have 
 him called to account ; the Apostolic See would be dis- 
 credited altogether, and all his promotions of ecclesiastics 
 held void. The Council of Constance had ordered that a 
 council should be held within a limited time, and a second 
 within seven years, and these were held in consequence. 
 Eugenius IV, fearing reformation from the first, sought to 
 dissolve the council. The council under his own legate 
 resisted, confirmed the decrees of Constance, that a coun- 
 cil was above the Pope, and could decide so as to subject 
 all, the Pope included, in articles of faith, schism, and 
 reformation. 
 
 The cry was universal, echoed in these councils, for 
 reformation in head and members. The French held a 
 national council to back up the Council of Basle against 
 the Pope's effort, and even the emperor, though yielding 
 to the Pope for a time to get crowned, returned to 
 the council. But this Pope tried it out. It condemned 
 the Pope, and deposed him, and elected Felix V. Mean- 
 while, the council having cited the Pope (1437) to appear 
 before it, he appointed a council at Ferrara, and the two 
 sat together. The Council of Ferrara condemned that of 
 Basle. From Ferrara it was transferred to Florence. The 
 Council of Florence ended in 1442. The Pope appoint- 
 ing one in Rome ; that at Basle, in 1444, appointing one 
 in Germany. Felix V had one at Lausanne, but sub- 
 sequently resigned the papacy on condition of having all 
 his cardinals and promotions to benefices owned, and 
 certain personal privileges. Nicolas V, the other Pope, 
 withdrew all his acts against him and the Council of 
 Basle. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 121 
 
 GALLICAN LIBERTIES AND DECLINE OF THE ^APACY. 
 
 The Pope of Rome had thus seemingly gained uncon- 
 tested supremacy; but the fact that all the respectable 
 clergy had met, condemned deposed Popes, and named 
 others, whose successors all subsequent Popes have been, 
 made their positions very different. All this theologians 
 avoid, if possible, pronouncing a judgment on those coun- 
 cils, even when they held the supremacy of the Pope in 
 the highest way. Bellarmine admits that the Council of Pisa 
 can neither be approved nor condemned. If it be condemned 
 the Pope is not Pope, for the Popes are the successors of 
 the council's nominee ; if it be approved, then a council can 
 depose a Pope. Neither proposition would do. The like 
 is the case of the Council of Constance. That council 
 deposed three Popes, and chose another. But then, it 
 openly declared that a Pope was subject to a general 
 council, and that a council represented the universal 
 Church, and could act in its name, and was infallible ; 
 and it acted on it ; and again, the succession depends 
 on their act. Moreover, Martin V sanctioned the doctrine 
 that a general council represents the whole Church. 
 Bellarmine recognizes the power of a council to settle 
 schism. He refers to Popes Cornelius (251), Symmachus 
 (498), Innocent II (1030), Alexander III (1159), and the 
 Pisa and Constance councils. No remedy, he says, is 
 more powerful than a council. So for false doctrines in 
 Popes, as Marcellinus (296), Damasus (366), Sixtus III 
 (432), Leo III (795), and Leo IV (847). Marcellinus, he 
 says, had to confess it ; and the rest purged themselves. 
 Now, though the Popes had the upper hand, the universal 
 conscience of the Church was roused ; the weightiest, 
 godliest doctors declared there must be reformation in 
 
122 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the head and in the members. This became the universal 
 cry all over Europe ; whenever the Pope went too far 
 there was an appeal to a general council. 
 
 France maintained, in what are called the Galilean lib- 
 erties, the doctrine of Constance. The Popes themselves, 
 instead of governing an ignorant and prostrate Europe, 
 whose princes, being divided and jealous of one another, 
 were glad of the Pope's help, while he was himself and 
 one in his purpose and scrupled at no weapons, were 
 now judged by laity and clergy, who were subject to 
 them, and gave themselves up to mere petty local ambi- 
 tion. France and Germany were considerably emancipated 
 in the spirit of men's minds ; deliverance was looked for 
 anxiously, and though disappointed in their hopes of re- 
 dress from the councils, were groaning so much the more, 
 though hopelessly, under the burden. Spain and Portugal 
 were more content, because they liked that title of the 
 Pope which divided the New World between them. But 
 men's spirits craved deliverance, threatened councils, ap- 
 pealed to them, and were ripe for some deliverance. The 
 unheard-of infamies of Alexander VI, and even the crimes 
 and conduct of Sixtus IV and Julius II, only sunk the 
 papacy lower, though none opposed it ; and the shameless 
 sale of indulgences, — practically an allowance to sin, — 
 gave the last blow to man's conscience and opened the 
 door to the testimony of an offended God. 
 
 Nicolas V (1447) arranged matters peaceably with 
 Felix V, the Lausanne Pope, who was, during his life, 
 to be respected as such, though without power. Calixtus 
 IV (1455) followed him. They succeeded in gaining influ- 
 ence in Germany ; but the attempt to arouse the people 
 to a crusade against the Turks utterly failed. Pius II 
 (1458) failed in like attempts; he condemned appeals to 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 123 
 
 a general council, when we see it was become a general 
 thing. This same Pope, as .^neas Sylvius, had been a 
 great adherent of the Council of Basle. Paul II (1464) 
 was arbitrary. 
 
 The cardinals at this time bound themselves all when 
 in conclave, as in the case of Eugenius, to reform the 
 papal court in head and members, hold a council, and 
 to many other points. Eugene confirmed this by a bull. 
 Paul bound himself in the same way, but by a decree 
 rejected it all, and by cajoling and violence forced all 
 the cardinals but one to join him, though some very 
 reluctantly. Platina complains bitterly of his undoing 
 iniquitously all Pius II had done, threatened to complain 
 to kings and princes (for parliaments, universities, kings, 
 and everybody did so then), and have a general council, 
 and got put in prison and in the stocks for his pains. 
 Sixtus IV (1471) succeeded. He occupied himself with 
 low Italian intrigues and conspiracy to advance his family. 
 Innocent VIII (1484) came after him. He was famous 
 for promoting and enriching illegitimate children, though 
 one of the conditions (in conclave) of election was not to 
 do it. He was the subject of pasquinades on this ac- 
 count. Rome, they said, might well call him father. It 
 appears he had seven children while Pope. He received 
 pay from the sultan for keeping a rival brother safe 
 when the Turks were invading Europe. To Alexander 
 VI (1492) one hardly knows how to refer. He is recog- 
 nized to have been, — except it be his own second illegit- 
 imate son, — the most horrible fiend who has come under 
 public notice. A thorough debauchee at all times, so as 
 to attract notice and reproof even at the papal court; 
 elected Pope by bribery and promises, he got rid in one way 
 or another of those who promoted him. His second son killed 
 
124 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 his eldest brother, and the Pope's other favorite, Peroto, 
 who had hid himself in the Pope's mantle, so that the 
 blood spurted up in the Pope's face. France made him 
 Duke of Valentinois, to reward the Pope for his divorce. 
 Alexander made a cardinal of him when quite young, but 
 he left the clerical order to be a prince in Italy. He 
 killed his sister's husband to marry her better. This 
 same sister, when the Pope was away, kept the papal 
 court, and opened the dispatches, consulting the cardinals. 
 She was one of the Pope's five illegitimate children. Her 
 marriage was celebrated with pomp in the Pope's palace. 
 Infessnia's language is bitter to a degree on the occasion, 
 and he declares that the universal corruption of the clergy 
 through Innocent's and Alexander's care of their children 
 made men fear it might reach the monks and people of 
 religion. "Although," he adds, "the monasteries of the 
 city were all but all {quasi omnia) turned into brothels, 
 no one gainsaying it." The current lines on him were, 
 "Alexander sells kings, altars, Christ. He first bought 
 them, he has good right to sell them." Engaged with 
 his second son Borgia in poisoning (as he had poisoned 
 others already) some rich cardinals, to get their money, 
 at a feast prepared for it, he took, being very hot, the 
 poisoned wine and died. 
 
 The very brief pontificate of Pius III (1503) needs no 
 notice. Julius II (1503) was engaged in wars. The car- 
 dinals had all sworn to reform, and have a general council. 
 He was occupied fighting against the Venetians, and after- 
 wards the French. Louis XII had a council at Tours. 
 Germany prepared her griefs, and sought a pragmatic 
 sanction like France. The French council held that the 
 king could renounce allegiance to the Pope. He should 
 keep the decrees of Basle, and appeal to a future council. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 12$ 
 
 If Julius, armed, pronounced sentence upon him or his 
 allies, it would be of no force whatever. The king and 
 emperor summoned a general council at Pisa, but it was 
 mainly composed of French bishops. The Pope convoked 
 another council at the Lateran. The Pisan Council came 
 to nothing, though it deposed the Pope by a decree. A 
 number of cardinals were engaged in it, founded on Julius* 
 promise to have a general council within two years. I 
 only refer to it to show the confusion all was in. The 
 emperor and king of France adhered afterwards to the 
 Lateran Council. Francis I and Leo X (15 13) made a 
 treaty. The Pope by that had again quietly the upper 
 hand. The councils of Constance and Basle, on the first 
 of which the succession of the papacy depends, maintained 
 the authority of councils and bishops. France held 
 strongly to this. The councils of Florence and Lateran V 
 set up the Pope. In result half Europe broke off, and 
 the Pope by the Council of Trent remained absolute in 
 the rest, if we except the Galilean liberties. 
 
 In Leo's time light had come in, the condemning of 
 Popes by councils had weakened confidence; papal author- 
 ity had lost a great deal of its influence, and the exces- 
 sive insult to conscience in Tetzel's sale of indulgences 
 had filled the cup. The princes were angry at their 
 oppression by the Pope; they had long complained, though 
 they had not dared to stir. But when God raised up 
 Luther to show the iniquity of all this, and after some 
 time the want of foundation for the Pope's power, all 
 was providentially prepared. People came to confess to 
 him, guilty of all sorts of crimes. When he insisted on 
 putting practical penance on them, they produced their 
 letters of indulgence, and were easy in their sin. But a 
 protest against Rome could not have been delayed. It 
 
126 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 had been going on at Pisa, at Basle, and at Constance, 
 by legal attempts, by the centum gravanuna, by the com- 
 plaints of Bernard and Messalas, and holy men of times 
 previous to the Reformation. All the difference was, that 
 God then raised up men of sufficient faith to brave the 
 Pope;^ whereas, previously, the reformation had been left 
 to the Popes, and all was worse than ever. The king 
 and bishops of France adhered to the Galilean principles 
 and were in constant collision with all the Popes from 
 Pius IV (1560) to Pius IX (1846). They opposed Roman 
 centralization; rejected the yoke of Ultramontane preten- 
 sions, and held the authority of a general council to be 
 superior to that of the Pope. The great principles of the 
 Galilean Church have been held by Lacordaire, Montalem- 
 bert, Gratry, Affre, Sibour, and Darboy, late Archbishop 
 of Paris. Dr. J. J. I. Von Dollinger, Professors Reusch, 
 Langen, Menzel, and Bishop Reinkens, of Germany, Bishop 
 Herzog, of Switzerland, and P^re Hyacinthe Loyson, of 
 France, in our own day, have attached themselves to the 
 same ideas. These men would not be partisans of Ultra- 
 montane doctrines, and sacrifice their reason in submitting 
 to the arbitrary authority of Pius IX. Pius IX (1846), 
 when compared with Gregory XVI (183 1), was a good 
 man, but not a great man. He commenced by introduc- 
 ing some reforms. Taxes were reduced, political offenders 
 were pardoned, and civil offices were given to laymen, 
 but soon returned to conservatism and absolutism. He 
 framed into dogmas the Immaculate Conception and Papal 
 Infallibility, but by the irresistible force of events he lost 
 his temporal power, and the French protectorate ceased 
 
 1 Luther wrote his famous letter to Pope Leo X (1578), and in 
 company with Melancthon and Staupils began the Reformation in 
 Germany. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 12/ 
 
 with the defeat of Napoleon III at Sedan, in 1870. 
 Pope Leo XIII (1878) is a scholar, theologian, and poet, 
 and like his predecessor, Pius IX, began with reforms. 
 He favors the sciences, and recommends the philosophy 
 of Thomas Aquinas, Albertus Magnus, and other school- 
 men. He possesses great dignity, amiableness of charac- 
 ter, and executive ability; and, though apparently opposed 
 by the Ultramontane Jesuits, he has already made some 
 headway in harmonizing the differences existing between 
 Church and State. He accepted, what Pius IX impotently 
 opposed, the unification of Italy; permitted what Pius IX 
 solemnly forbade, the election of priests by parishes in 
 Switzerland; counselled the Belgian bishops not to oppose 
 the Constitution, and the German bishops to obey the 
 laws of the land. Leo XIII is a very popular Pope, and 
 the indications are that he will bring about a better feel- 
 ing between the papacy and national governments. 
 
128 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE GENERAL COUNCILS — 325-1870. 
 
 j^^^|N the early councils scarce any Western bish- 
 ops were present. The West had not the 
 I mental activity of the East, and they did not 
 
 HI iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii li. raise useless questions as the Easterns did. 
 
 In no one of the first six general councils were a dozen 
 Western bishops ; in many not half that number. Three 
 were found in the first one. A note, said to be of 
 Dionysius Exiguus, says they did not sign at Nice, be- 
 cause they were not suspected of heresy. If this were 
 so, it gives a curious character to the decrees and signa- 
 tures. It was to force the suspected bishops to declare 
 and bind themselves. The number of prelates is uncer- 
 tain; Eusebius says two hundred and fifty. In Hardouin 
 we have three hundred and eighteen names, which after- 
 ward was held to be a mystical number. The late coun- 
 cils were, on the contrary, wholly Western, and of the 
 Latin Church. There were no Easterns. At Florence, 
 Pope Eugenius attempted it, but it was a complete fail- 
 ure. The assent a few Greek prelates did give was 
 utterly repudiated by their Church when they went home. 
 All these late Western councils, save Pisa, Constance, and 
 Basle, were assemblies called and managed by the Popes 
 for their own purposes, with, in general, a vast majority 
 of Italian bishops. Pisa, Constance, and Basle were the 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 29 
 
 fruit of the struggles of the conscience of Christendom 
 against the hopeless wickedness and oppression of the 
 papacy and the Popes. There has been no council since 
 which represented East and West. It was attempted at 
 Sardica, and failed ; they split and held two. The most 
 complete one was Ariminum, under Constantius, whose 
 four hundred bishops undid the work of Nice, but it did 
 not succeed. The Westerns had been dragged in, and 
 afterwards protested. 
 
 I-VIII. IMPERIAL (EASTERN) COUNCILS — 325-869. 
 
 I. The Council at Nice — 325. 
 
 Constantine, the first Christian emperor, meddled, as did 
 his successors, largely in ecclesiastical matters. As a 
 political man, he felt his government hindered by the 
 dissensions of the bishops, which roused the whole Chris- 
 tian world. He took up the Donatist question; he directed 
 certain bishops to hear the same a second time, others 
 to rehear it, and at last heard himself, and put the Don- 
 atists down. Meanwhile, the Arian question or controversy 
 raged in the East. It had spread from Alexandria over 
 the whole Eastern world, and divided the people into two 
 factions. Thereupon the emperor writes a letter, saying 
 the East had been the source of light to the world ; how 
 grieved he was, and so on; that as they were one in 
 faith (Alexander and Arius), they ought to hold their 
 tongues on nice points, and not let such delicate questions 
 go out before the ignorant, and make confusion. But in 
 vain; so he summoned a council at Nice (325), in the 
 hope of settling it. The invitations came from himself, 
 and he provided horses for the bishops to come, or allowed 
 them to use the public posts; had them to meet in the 
 
130 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 palace, and presided himself. A glowing description is 
 given by Eusebius of his coming into the assembly and 
 taking his seat at the head of it. When the bishops had 
 bowed, and said a few complimentary words, he sat down, 
 and the bishops too. Then he made a long harangue to 
 them, and gave liberty of speech afterwards to the bish- 
 ops, soothed them, answered objections, reasoned with 
 them, and brought them, though with difficulty, to some 
 kind of quietness, and got all but five to sign, who were 
 banished. The emperor held thus a strong hand over them; 
 having once made a decision in a council, little or big, 
 he enforced it for peace's sake by his own authority. 
 The orthodox suffered as others, if they were not quiet, 
 Athanasius among the rest. That Constantine convoked 
 and managed the council is beyond all question; Eusebius, 
 Ruffinus, and Epiphanus all agree. That he presided is 
 equally certain; he sat in a little golden seat at the head, 
 the bishops down the sides of the apartment. Alexander 
 of Alexandria, Epiphanus tells us, got him to convoke it. 
 Hosius subscribed first, then the two presbyters sent by 
 Sylvester of Rome, then the rest. 
 
 II. The Council at Constantinople — 381. 
 
 The Second (so called) General Council of Constantinople 
 (381) consisted of one hundred and fifty bishops, called 
 together by the Emperor Theodosius; and the bishops so 
 declare in their letter, which precedes the decrees, and 
 ask expressly the confirmation of the emperor of what 
 they had decreed. They communicated their decrees and 
 canons to the Western bishops in common, then assem- 
 bled at Rome, giving Constantinople the second rank after 
 Rome, but on grounds which refer merely to civil rank 
 in each. They confirm the sixth canon of the Council 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 13 1 
 
 of Nice as to the independence of the larger divisions of 
 the hierarchical system. Their creed is the now-accepted 
 Nicene one, an article forbidden by Pope Leo being 
 added. But the Pope had nothing to say to the council ; 
 the Popes did not accept its canons, but they are re- 
 ceived in the universal church. Baronius seeks to invali- 
 date one, but is corrected by Pagi, who shows it to have 
 been universally received. It is worthy of note here, that 
 the article added to their creed is still rejected by the 
 Greeks, who hold the creed as settled by the Council of 
 Constantinople. And it is further to be remarked, that 
 the General Council of Ephesus forbade any other creed 
 to be proposed to any one, and the great Pope Leo this 
 very article in particular. This added article, which came 
 from Spain and France, is the great subject of division 
 with the Greeks, though they do not believe in Purgatory 
 either, nor, of course, recognize the Popes. Not only did 
 Pope Leo formally forbid its being inserted, but had the 
 Constantinopolitan creed engraved in Greek and Latin on 
 silver plates on this account in the church. 
 
 in. The Council at Ephesus — 431. 
 
 The next Council of Ephesus (431) was convoked, as 
 the previous one, by the emperor; the Pope's representa- 
 tives were in it. But Cyril's violence against Nestorius 
 had left Eutychian sects at Alexandria, and bore its 
 fruits. The Archbishop of Alexandria presided, as before. 
 They beat the poor old Archbishop of Constantinople in 
 such a way that he died of it in a few days, and oth- 
 ers were severely maltreated. Pope Leo condemned 
 Eutychus in the famous epistle to Flavian, too rhetorical 
 for such a subject, aud questionable, I judge, in some 
 expressions, but doubtless a remarkable document, and 
 
132 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 substantially sound, and asked for a council in or near 
 Italy. The emperor refused, but the council first con- 
 vened at Nice, and then removed to Chalcedon, was 
 held (451), which also condemned Eutychus, adopting Leo's 
 statement and Cyril's two letters to Nestorius, on the 
 ground of their intrinsic merits. The legates asked if 
 this and the other councils agree with Leo. The bish- 
 ops answered, Leo agrees with them. There was a great 
 struggle for jurisdiction and rank between Leo and Ana- 
 tolius, the legates having orders to resist all advance in 
 rank of Constantinople. But it was maintained and in- 
 creased to equal dignity and second rank in precedence, 
 and the contested jurisdiction given it, the legates staying 
 away that day, then complaining of its being done; but 
 it was confirmed. Anatolius gave way afterwards in form, 
 but kept his ground in fact. The canon remains in the 
 universal canons, but the Popes would never own it. The 
 Romans were charged with forging part of a canon here 
 to give supremacy to Rome, as they were convicted of 
 it just at this time in Africa, which peremptorily re- 
 jected the pretensions of Rome, and sent off its legate. 
 But what I mainly refer to in the council is this : that 
 Theodore and Ibas were declared sound in the faith, and 
 Leo confirmed twice over the doctrinal decisions of the 
 council. But in the following council, Pope Vigilius first 
 gave a judgment in favor of the three chapters, as it 
 was called; but he had to do with a powerful emperor, 
 who had now reconquered Italy, and he made the Pope 
 come to the council, and finally forc-ed him to sign and 
 confirm its decrees, which condemned the three chapters 
 which Chalcedon had pronounced sound, by which confir- 
 mation, moreover, Baronius says, it became a general 
 council. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 133 
 
 In the Council of Ephesus the Pope acted very ably 
 by his legates, but in which no other Western prelates 
 were present. The emperor had convoked the council, 
 and his commissioner forbade them to meet till all the 
 Eastern prelates were there; but Cyril, and the bishops 
 of his party, drove him out, took possession of all the 
 churches, and settled the matter by condemning Nesto- 
 rius before the Easterns came, Nestorius and his party 
 protesting, but not daring to go. The Easterns, however, 
 did not yield. Cyril was excommunicated and deposed by 
 them; and it was only on Cyril's giving up some points 
 that John of Antioch was reconciled some years later 
 with Cyril, through the emperor's means. The result was, 
 Nestorianism spread through the East, even to China. 
 The emperor gave up Nestorius to have peace, and he 
 was banished. But Leo, in his letter subsequently to 
 Flavian of Constantinople, adopted at the Council of 
 Chalcedon, does not use the word Nestorius objected to — 
 Deipara. The whole course of Cyril was a disgrace to 
 any sober Christian man ; he was the true source of Eutychi- 
 anism, and I judge his soundness very questionable on 
 the Atonement. This third general council was perfectly 
 shameful, and really produced lasting disasters to the 
 Church at large. No one acquainted with history can 
 deny it. It was really the fruit of the Pope's jealousy 
 of Constantinople, and consequent intrigues. Constantino- 
 ple had not been what was called an Apostolic See; was 
 raised to eminence by the importance of the city as the 
 capital. Old Rome could not bear this. These councils 
 rested the pre-eminence of Rome and Constantinople on 
 their being capitals, old and new Rome. And general 
 councils confirmed by Popes have directly contradicted one 
 another. 
 
134 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 IV. The Council at Chalcedon — 451. 
 
 As to the Chalcedon, the fourth general council, the 
 Pope wanted to get one in Italy to condemn Eutychus. 
 The emperor, Theodosius, refused, saying all was settled 
 at Ephesus. So little did Popes call general councils 
 then. His successor was well disposed, but refused peremp- 
 torily to have it in Italy, called it at Nice, and then, in 
 order to manage it better, brought it to Chalcedon, close 
 to Constantinople. His commissioners sat in the council 
 save one day, suppressed the violence of the prelates at 
 the beginning, saying they ought to show a better exam- 
 ple, and made propositions, gave their consent; in fact, 
 presided actively all the time in the council, save one 
 day. On that day, on which they left the prelates to 
 settle about the creed, the council deposed Dioscorus, 
 also Patriarch of Alexandria, for his crimes at the pre- 
 vious Council of Ephesus. On their return the next 
 day, the commissioners said they must answer for it, they 
 had not been there. In truth, their consciences need 
 not have been much burdened. But even as to the creed 
 to be signed, one was proposed. The papal legates op- 
 posed, and said they would go if Pope Leo's letter was 
 not assented to as it was, along with the creeds of Nice 
 and Constantinople. The letter was in point of fact in 
 many respects an admirable one. It was referred to the 
 emperor, who decided what was to be done, and the 
 council stated their views in detail for themselves, though 
 approving Leo's letter, but would give their own defini- 
 tion of faith. Afterwards, Constantinople was put on an 
 equality with Rome, the legates craftily keeping away. 
 They protested on their return, but the bishops main- 
 tained it, and the commissioners declared it had passed, 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 135 
 
 and the council said, "We remain in this judgment." In 
 this Council of Chalcedon, Ibas and Theodoret, favorers 
 of Nestorius' views, were declared orthodox. They publicly 
 recognized the Empress Pulcheria as the person who had 
 put down Nestorius. 
 
 V. The Second Council at Constantinople — 553. 
 
 The Fifth General Council is too plain in its history 
 to need more than the plain statement of facts. There 
 had been a great contest about the merits of Origen, 
 and the monks had been breaking into each others* mon- 
 asteries, and in the course of the disputes which followed 
 blood had been shed in the churches. However, they 
 got the emperor to condemn Origen's doctrine. He was 
 a powerful prince, and recovered Italy and Africa from 
 the barbarians, and liked his own way. A certain Theo- 
 dore of Csesarea, a great favorite with the emperor, was 
 fond of Origen and Eutychianism, and determined to have 
 his revenge, and he engaged Justinian to condemn three 
 persons' writings — Theodore of Mopsuestia,^ Ibas, and The- 
 odoret, all three opposed to Cyril, who had had his way 
 in the Council of Ephesus. These three persons had 
 been pronounced to be in full communion in the Council 
 of Chalcedon, which had rather tended to set up Nesto- 
 rius' reputation again, whom Cyril and the Council of 
 Ephesus had condemned. Justinian published a long de- 
 cree, condemning the three chapters, as the writings of 
 the three prelates above named were called. He had a 
 kind of council, and the Oriental patriarchs and prelates 
 
 1 His writings were greatly read in the East. Cyril tried to get 
 them condemned, but the Easterns absolutely refused. He is said 
 to have been the originator of Nestorianism, and even teacher of 
 Nestorius. 
 
13^ FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 were obliged to condemn them, too. Pope Vigilius con- 
 demned them and excommunicated the patriarch of Con- 
 stantinople, and all who had condemned the three chapters. 
 However, Justinian thought he would be more tractable 
 at Constantinople, and made him come. There, in fact, 
 he joined in communion again with the excommunicated 
 ones, and condemned the three chapters. But then, all 
 the prelates of Illyrica and Africa, in fact, of all the 
 West in general, separated from his communion as un- 
 faithful — a bad business according to modern Romanist 
 'notions. To get out of the scrape, he acceded to the 
 proposal of some of these prelates, of a general council, 
 and withdrew his condemnation of the three chapters, and 
 forbade any resolution till there was a council. The em- 
 peror persecuted him (indeed, he had exiled him and after- 
 wards brought him to Constantinople); he fled to Chal- 
 cedon, and the emperor compromised, and he came back. 
 He then pressed for a council in Italy. That did not 
 suit the emperor, and he refused, but called one at 
 Constantinople. Vigilius would not go there, and he 
 signed his private judgment with eighteen other prelates 
 from the West, while one hundred and sixty or one hun- 
 dred and seventy sat in the council under the emperor's 
 authority. This letter of his, called constitutive, was 
 given to the emperor, but was taken no notice of in the 
 council. To say the truth, it was on the whole the most 
 sensible paper in the whole miserable business, and he 
 forbade, by the authority of the Apostolic See, in any 
 way to contravene what he then pronounced. However, 
 the emperor went on with his council, when, save a very 
 few renegades, there were no Western prelates. The 
 council altogether condemned the three chapters, which 
 was quite different from Pope Vigilius' constitutive letter. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 137 
 
 And Vigilius refused to sign, as he had refused to be 
 present. Justinian banished him again, and he gave way, 
 and signed; and it became thereby, says Baronius, a 
 general council. But universal confusion was the result. 
 The Nestorians established a patriarchate at Seleucia, were 
 favored by the Persians in opposition to the Roman Em- 
 pire, and spread over all the East, Christianity be- 
 coming very nearly the established religion of China at 
 that time. And the Eutychians, raising their head through 
 the activity of a monk, Jacobus, spread too, and the 
 patriarchates of Alexandria and Antioch, such as they 
 are since Mohammedanism overran the East, are in their 
 hands spread as far as India, and have a primate in 
 Abyssinia. Both subsist. Not long ago violent persecu- 
 tions were set on foot against the Nestorians, it is said, 
 at the instigation of the so-called Bishop of Babylon in 
 connection with Rome, the Consul of France. 
 
 VI. The Third Council at Constantinople — 680. 
 
 The Sixth General Council furnishes us with some 
 curious elements as to the progress of church history. 
 Eastern Christendom was always discussing points. Rome 
 was always pushing its power. In the East they got a 
 new point. Christ had only one will, or at any rate His 
 divine and human will coalesced, though He had two 
 natures. The emperor adopted, and Pope Honorius wrote 
 a letter approving it. However, there was a change; 
 the Roman legates opposed it at Constantinople, and one 
 of them, Martin, became Pope ; he then denounced all 
 the holders of it. The then emperor published a rescript, 
 forbidding discussions, and all men to be left in peace. 
 The Pope denounced this as sanctioning evil. The em- 
 peror tried to get hold of him, failed the first time, but 
 
138 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 succeeded the second, and brought him prisoner, and kept 
 him so till he died. The Roman clergy, less staunch 
 than the people, gave way, and elected another Pope, 
 whom the emperor confirmed; he never had confirmed his 
 stem predecessor, Martin. The emperor, who had always 
 maintained his rescript, died, and his successor proposed a 
 conference to settle it. Four Popes had succeeded one 
 another rapidly during his reign, and at last Agathon as- 
 sembled a Western council, at which, however, no prelates 
 from Spain, Britain, or Germany, were present, save one 
 on his own affairs, and three from France. However, 
 they put themselves forward as representing the whole 
 Latin Church. In truth, save Scotland and Ireland, and 
 the north of England, it was at this time pretty well 
 papalized. However, as the council of the Apostolic See, 
 as they say, they condemn the Monothelites, as they were 
 called. Legates went from the Pope to Constantinople, 
 but they were not to discuss, the Pope said, nor a tittle 
 to be altered in the confession. The emperor had re- 
 moved a stiff patriarch, and put in a milder one, and 
 formed an assembly at Constantinople, and ordered Maca- 
 rius, the Patriarch of Antioch, the Monothelite leader, to 
 assemble as many as he could of his party. Thus, besides 
 other prelates, the Eastern patriarchs, or their legates, 
 were present. The West was only represented by the 
 Pope's legates. Macarius was deserted by most of his 
 partisans, who found the tide against him, for the emperor 
 sought peace, though they had pretty well reviled each 
 other. Macarius, however, insisted on the authority of 
 Honorius, of Sergius, previously Patriarch of Constanti- 
 nople, and of Cyrus, Patriarch of Alexandria, but he was 
 all but unanimously deposed and excommunicated. And 
 then followed the strangest result. They condemned all 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 139 
 
 the writings of these heretics, and their memory they 
 anathematized — Theodore of Pharan, author of the mis- 
 chief; Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and two of his 
 successors; Cyrus, Patriarch of Alexandria; Honorius, Pope 
 of Rome, and Macarius of Antioch, and all following them. 
 In the thirteenth session they are declared out of the 
 pale of the Catholic Church; that is, lost forever; and, 
 in the sixteenth session, anathema is pronounced on them 
 as heretics. This council was accepted and confirmed as 
 the Sixth General Council, when the result was notified 
 to him by Leo, the Pope who succeeded to Agathon ; and 
 he anathematizes expressly Pope Honorius and the others. 
 In this Sixth General Council there were at first some 
 thirty or forty bishops, at the end one hundred and sixty. 
 
 VII. The Second Council at Nice — 787. 
 
 The emperor, the Isaurian, who had long known the 
 Arabs, and seen them despise the idolatry of Christendom, 
 had a strong desire to reform the abuses of image-wor- 
 ship. He issued in 726 forbidding them to be worshipped, 
 and the pictures and images were directed to be put high 
 up, but were not ordered to be taken away. But Ger- 
 manus, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and Pope Gregory 
 II opposed vehemently; the Greeks rose in insurrection, 
 and, advancing to Constantinople, were defeated. The 
 emperor now went further, and, in 730, had the images 
 and pictures destroyed. Thence tumults, murder, and re- 
 prisals by the government. Germanus and the Popes 
 sustained their cause by appealing to the most ridiculous 
 fable, which no one believes now — that Christ sent a 
 miraculous picture of himself to Abgarus, King of Edessa — 
 and insulted the emperor in the grossest possible language. 
 His son Constantine called a council in 754 of three 
 
140 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 hundred and thirty-eight bishops of the East, and they 
 condemned images ; they called themselves a general coun- 
 cil. This went on till one Irene, a widow of his son, 
 remained with a young child. She wheeled round, and 
 then three hundred and seventy-seven bishops and the 
 Pope's legates authorized image-worship. This was at the 
 Council of Nice in 787. There were no Western bishops, 
 but the Pope ratified it. But the West were not, after 
 all, such image-worshippers as the Pope. They held to 
 what the great Pope Gregory had written to Serenus of 
 Marseilles, when he had broken images there, which were 
 then coming in — that all worship of them was wrong, but 
 that they might be useful for the ignorant, to recall the 
 mind to those represented by them. Here, then, super- 
 stition had made progress, and the Popes had changed 
 with the times, but it seems the West had not. In the 
 Western Empire, under Charlemagne, the Council of Nice 
 was rejected. First of all, this great founder of the new 
 Western Empire assembled his bishops, and put forth a 
 book in his own name, in which he condemned the Coun- 
 cil of Constantinople, which suppressed all pictures and 
 images, and equally the Council of Nice, which allowed 
 them to be revered and worshipped. He went through 
 the Scriptures and the Fathers, and proved that this 
 worship and reverence was all wrong. But the emperor's 
 and bishops' book goes further. Pope Adrian had sent 
 them the decisions of the Council of Nice, to which they 
 had never been called, and they say, "We receive the six 
 general councils, but we reject with contempt novelties, as 
 also the council held in Bithynia (that is, the so-called 
 Seventh General Council of Nice), to authorize the wor- 
 ship of images, the acts of which, destitute of style and 
 sense, have come to us " ; and then they refute seriously 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. H^ 
 
 all that the Pope had said to the Eastern emperor. They 
 declared that the Council of Nice was not a general one, 
 because it was not gathered from all parts of the Church, 
 and appeal to Gregory the Great's letter to Serenus. 
 
 But this work of the bishops of France and Germany, 
 then one empire, issued in Charlemagne's name, was not 
 all. In 794 he had a council at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
 at which were the Pope's legates and three hundred pre- 
 lates of Germany, France, and Spain, This council refers 
 to the Council of Nice as the Council of the Greeks, and 
 rejects entirely, unanimously, and with contempt, its doc- 
 trine and decision. All this was sent to the Pope. He 
 replies in a long letter on the doctrines, and adds, "We 
 have received the Council of Nice because conformed to 
 the doctrine of St. Gregory (Gregory the Great which 
 was not), fearing the Greeks might return to their error. 
 However, we have yet given no answer to the emperor 
 as to the council." So here we have an alleged general 
 council received by the Pope, disowned publicly by all 
 the West, except Italy, and its doctrine condemned. All 
 the assembled bishops of the West, with the Pope's legates, 
 declare that the Council of Nice was not a general coun- 
 cil, and reject with contempt, unanimously [these are the 
 words], its doctrines and authority; and accordingly it 
 was not, for a great length of time, received in the 
 Western Empire as a general council, and this the Coun- 
 cil of Frankfort was. The Pope's legates were at both. 
 The Pope received and defended Nice, but said he had 
 not written to the emperor, so he only half agreed to 
 Nice, either ; but urged Charlemagne to come and help 
 him to get back his territory, which the Eastern emperor 
 had seized on. Gradually superstition advanced, and Nice 
 was in credit, and Frankfort went down. In Frankfort 
 
142 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the emperor was recognized as president. Louis le Debon- 
 naire's commissioners, prelates of France, condemned the 
 Pope in the matter; and they, as Charlemagne — that is, 
 the Western prelates — had before done, did not admit 
 any council, or the Pope, to be universal or catholic, 
 unless they held the Catholic truth according to the 
 Scriptures and Fathers. Indeed, it is curious enough, for 
 those that cry up the Fathers, that Augustine, a Father 
 of, perhaps, the greatest authority of any in the Western 
 Church, thus speaks of councils, showing how little he 
 thought them an infallible security. All councils, not 
 merely (so-called) general ones, claimed the guidance of 
 the Spirit. After stating that holy canonical Scripture is 
 superior to all writings of bishops: "So," he adds, "they 
 can be corrected by wiser discourse or reproved by 
 councils, if in any thing they have erred from the truth; 
 and councils themselves, in particular districts or prov- 
 inces, are, without any doubt, to yield to the authority 
 of plenary councils, formed out of the whole Christian 
 world ; and prior plenary councils themselves may be 
 amended (emendari) by later ones, when by the experience 
 of things, when that which was shut was opened, and 
 what lay hid is known ; without any inflated arrogance, 
 or any elation of sacrilegious arrogance; without any con- 
 tentions of livid envy; with holy humility, with catholic 
 peace, with Christian charity." — De Bapt. Con. Don. 11^ 3. 
 Now, which was right: the general council, or Gregory 
 the Great, or Gregory III ? What a sea of confusion and 
 contradiction we are in here ! Three hundred and thirty- 
 eight prelates, all of the East, calling themselves a general 
 council, vote against images ; three hundred and seventy- 
 five, with Pope Gregory III, vote for them; three hund- 
 red of the West and the Pope's legates, appealing to 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 143 
 
 Pope Gregory the Great's authority, and following his 
 instructions, condemn both, and then the Pope, and de- 
 clare in the most solemn way that the former council of 
 the two they condemn was no general council at all, but 
 a Greek one, which they reject. The Pope takes easy, 
 because he wants his territory defended. The Greeks con- 
 tended about it for a length of time, — sometimes one, 
 sometimes the other party prevailing. In the Council of 
 Nice there were no Western prelates ; in the Council of 
 Frankfort there were no Eastern. Really, general councils 
 had ceased, if ever they could have been called so, for 
 in none of the first was the West represented by prelates; 
 they were convened by the emperors in the East, to 
 settle heretical disputes. The only exception was the 
 Council of Sardica, and there East and West were so 
 opposed that they separated, and the Easterns sat at 
 Philippopolis, and the Westerns at Sardica. The emperors 
 had always convened the councils up to the present time, 
 and presided in them ; and as soon as there was an 
 emperor in the West, he did the same thing. Nor did 
 the Popes question it; they assist, and the council states 
 that the emperor presided. At this time the English and 
 Irish churches were not under the authority of the Popes 
 at all, nor for long after. 
 
 VIII. The Fourth Council at Constantinople — 869. 
 
 The Eighth General Council is important to us in this 
 respect, that the Greeks held one, the Romans another, 
 for a general council. The Greeks, one in 879, the 
 Romans, one in 869; the latter, with very few prelates 
 and pretended envoys from the patriarchs, condemned 
 Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and set up Ignatius, 
 who had been driven away. The legates of Rome were 
 
144 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 at the former (Greek Council), and it was so far owned 
 by the Pope that he agreed to Photiius being patriarch, 
 Ignatius being now dead; but as Constantinople would 
 not give up Bulgaria to the jurisdiction of Rome, the 
 Pope excommunicated Photius, and he the Pope, and all 
 the pretension to a Catholic Church ceased. The schism 
 between the East and West was complete in the Eighth 
 Council. 
 
 IX-XV. PAPAL (WESTERN) COUNCILS — 1123-1311. 
 
 IX. The First Lateran Council — 11 23. 
 
 The first Council of Lateran was convened under Pope 
 Calixtus II. There being no imperial power of any suf- 
 ficient weight remaining in the West, the Popes held 
 councils of their own and for their own interests. The 
 first general Council of Lateran passed decrees about the 
 Duchy of Benevento belonging to the Pope, and forgave 
 the sins of those who would go to war to recover Jeru- 
 salem from the Saracens. They were Western councils, 
 and entirely under papal influences for some centuries — 
 centuries, as all admit, of utter darkness and wickedness. 
 That is, as long as there were emperors, emperors called 
 the councils (it was first an idea of Constantine's to make 
 peace in the Church) ; and, when emperors ceased to call 
 them, their power being gone, the schism between East 
 and West was complete, and no universal Church ever 
 externally existed since. The East was overrun by the 
 Mohammedans ; the West by darkness and atrocities. 
 
 X-XII. The Second, Third, and Fourth Councils at 
 Lateran — 11 39-1 2 15. 
 The fourth Lateran Council was the most important of 
 these, and was under Pope Innocent III, and at a time 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 145 
 
 when the papal power was at its height. It was a general 
 council of a very particular kind, a large number of Western 
 bishops (four hundred and twelve, it is said) and some eight 
 hundred abbots and priors, and others, such as ambassadors, 
 assisting at it. But there was no consulting about any thing. 
 The Pope had prepared seventy canons or rules, read 
 them out ready-made, and silence was supposed to confirm 
 them. They were simply decrees of Innocent III, graced 
 by the presence of prelates, abbots, and ambassadors. At 
 this council, for the first time, transubstantiation was de- 
 creed to be a church doctrine, and confession required 
 yearly to the parish priest. At this council the horrible 
 iniquities of the Crusade against the Count of Toulouse, 
 who protected his subjects^ the Albigenses, were sanctioned, 
 and the Inquisition began, perfected soon after as a sys- 
 tem by succeeding Popes. 
 
 XIII-XV. The First and Second Councils at Lyons 
 
 AND ViENNE I245-I3II. 
 
 We come now to some important councils, omitting 
 much by which the Pope sought to strengthen his power, 
 ecclesiastical and temporal. The papacy, during the coun- 
 cils of Lyons and Vienne, got so bad that disputes arose 
 in its own circle, and, in 1378, there were two Popes, 
 this state of things lasting about forty years. But this 
 only made matters worse; Europe was divided, and they 
 could only get money from half, and every sort of eccle- 
 siastical corruption and oppression was introduced to have 
 it, which some spent in dissoluteness in their courts, 
 some heaped up. The University of Paris strove to heal 
 the matter, and, after long negotiating and intriguing on 
 all sides, the cardinals of both parties summoned a coun- 
 cil (provincial) at Pisa for March, 1409. The cardinals 
 10 
 
146 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 are a body formed originally of the principal ecclesiastics 
 of Rome of different ranks in the hierarchy by a decree 
 of Pope Nicolas II, in 1059, to elect the Pope, a right 
 enjoyed up to that time by all at Rome, and which had 
 led to all sorts of tumults, violence, and bloodshed, and, 
 to appease the opposition of the rest, added to by Alex- 
 ander III; others have been added to them, and now 
 many out of Rome are named. They form a kind of 
 court to the Pope; they have the highest rank in the 
 papal system, though not necessarily in the episcopacy, as 
 they are from the various orders of the hierarchy. The 
 council deposed both the Popes (Urban VI and Clement 
 VII), and after the cardinals had solemnly engaged them- 
 selves to reform the abuses which existed, Alexander V 
 was elected, the effect of which was that they had three 
 Popes instead of two. 
 
 XVI-XIX. REFORMING (PRELATIC) COUNCILS — 1414-1563. 
 
 XVI. The Council at Constance — 1414-1418. 
 
 Pope Alexander V's successor, John XXIII, was such a 
 horrible monster, and a King Ladislaus, of Naples, whom 
 he had provoked, having forced him to fly from Rome, 
 the emperor took advantage of it to get him to summon 
 a council, which was called for November, 1414, — the 
 famous Council of Constance. Already the state of the 
 popedom and the writings of the famous Gerson had pre- 
 pared men's minds to consider a council superior to a 
 Pope. The Council of Constance declared its superiority 
 to the Pope; tried to get him to resign, which he prom- 
 ised, fearing his conduct was going to be inquired into; 
 evaded, and they deposed him. One of the other two, 
 — for there were three, — Gregory XII, resigned, and the 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 147 
 
 third was deserted; and though he had a kind of suc- 
 cessor, the schism thus ended. But little reformation was 
 effected, the council leaving it to the Pope whom they 
 chose, — Martin V. But it is, as Romanist historians say, 
 the wisdom of Rome to approve nothing at Constance 
 and to change nothing at Constance. It is a kind of 
 bridge, but such a broken one for them, that, though it 
 seems to enable them to cross the river, it is likely to 
 plunge them only more dangerously into it. If the Coun- 
 cil of Constance had not the authority it claims, what 
 becomes of the popedom? They have no right to call 
 any one a Pope; there is no legitimate Pope at all, for 
 the council deposed John XXIII and chose Martin V 
 besides setting aside the two anti-Popes. They have no 
 Popes but those who derive their authority from the 
 Council of Constance. They scarcely recognize the authority 
 of the Council of Constance ; but if it be not a council, 
 the popedom has no legitimate foundation at all. John 
 XXIII confirmed expressly its decrees before he was de- 
 posed, whatever his confirmation was worth. Martin V, 
 though he avoided making any reformation in his court, 
 yet owned the council expressly as a general council. 
 And the famous decree and the setting aside of the 
 Pope were decided in the sessions, so that the decree 
 was confirmed by John XXIII before he was deposed, 
 and by Martin V when he was made Pope. This decree 
 declares that every one, even the Pope, is bound to obey 
 the council, and threatens punishment to the Pope if he 
 does not. 
 
 XVII. The Council of Basle and Ferrara-Florence — 
 
 1431-1442. 
 The Council of Constance was the reaction of the uni- 
 versal conscience of Christendom against the state to 
 
148 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 which the wickedness of the Popes had reduced the 
 Church. The Council of Constance had decreed that 
 another council should be held at Pavia. Martin called it. 
 It was removed, on account of the plague, to Sienna; 
 hence, few were there. However, they began to reform, 
 and the Pope ordered the closing of the council. The 
 prelates protested ; it was not to be considered broken 
 up, it would be continued. Basle was the place chosen, 
 the council to be held in seven years. It was held, but 
 soon began to be refractory against the Pope. They re- 
 newed the two decrees of Constance, subjecting the Pope 
 to a council, word for word, and declared they could not 
 be dissolved. This was in the second session. The Pope 
 decreed their dissolution; they rejected it and summoned 
 him. The Pope was in great trouble, by his local wars, 
 and sent legates to say he recognized them as a general 
 council, legitimately continued from the time they had 
 commenced. They received the legates on condition that 
 they swore they approved the decrees of the Council of 
 Constance as to the authority of a general council. The 
 Pope Eugene decreed the removal of the Council of Fer- 
 rara. The council declared the decree of a removal void. 
 The Pope, however, began at Ferrara with some of his 
 own Italian bishops, the Council of Basle remaining where 
 it was. The Council of Basle deposed Pope Eugene after 
 long delay, — the princes seeking some way of peace, — 
 and chose another, — Felix V. The princes remained 
 neutral, and when the Popes censured each other, received 
 the decrees of neither, though many held to the Council 
 of Basle as a legitimate general council, as France and 
 England, and would not own that of Ferrara, and sought 
 to transfer it elsewhere. To this the prelates of Basle 
 agreed. Felix went to Lausanne. Gradually the interests 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 149 
 
 of Eugene gained the upper hand. Eugene's council, 
 already transferred to Florence, was moved to Rome. 
 The Council of Basle dissolved itself, calling a future 
 council at Lyons or Lausanne. Felix and Eugene re- 
 mained Popes. Eugene died; and Nicolas V, at the in- 
 stance of the princes, agreed, if Felix gave up the papacy, 
 to revoke all censures against him and those engaged in 
 the Council of Basle; confirm all its other acts, as well 
 as those of Florence, and make Felix first cardinal and 
 perpetual legate in Germany; and this was accordingly 
 done. Felix, on his part, revoked all his censures and 
 resigned, and thus this schism terminated. 
 
 XVin. The Fifth Lateran Council — 15 12-15 17. 
 
 From 1460 to 15 15 the Councils of Constance and 
 Basle were forgotten. The Roman clergy were delivered 
 from subjection to secular authority, and in the Fifth 
 Lateran Council it was ruled "the laity have no jurisdic- 
 tion over ecclesiastical persons." The council confirmed 
 the decrees issued by Innocent III, at the Fourth Lateran 
 Council of 121 5, that no ecclesiastic should take an oath 
 of fealty to secular princes. It was declared that the 
 Pope had full authority over councils, and could summon, 
 suspend, or dissolve them at his pleasure. The Councils 
 of Constance and Basle had pronounced a council to be 
 above the Pope. France held to this principle in what 
 are called the Galilean liberties. Intelligence was increased, 
 the royal power much greater, by the decay of the feudal 
 system, and the Popes could not play off one prince 
 against another, as they had. They sought to aggrandize 
 their families in Italy. One (for Popes an honest Pope) 
 declared it was impossible to be one, and save your soul. 
 He had been a stickler for the Council of Basle, but 
 
ISO FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 condemned when Pope; appealed to a general council, 
 for these were becoming universal, but he soon died. 
 Paul II undid all he had attempted to do in the way 
 of reform. The Cardinal Antonio Pucci said before the 
 council: "Rome, the Roman prelates, and the bishops 
 daily sent forth from Rome, are the joint causes of the 
 manifold errors and corruptions in the Church. Unless we 
 recover our good fame, which is almost wholly lost, it 
 is all up with us."^ And in the Fifth Lateran Council, 
 Bishop Matthias Ugoni describes in his work the contempt 
 the bishops had sunk into, so that there was no infamy 
 men did not attribute to them, while they repelled with 
 scorn any one who so much as hinted at the need of 
 reform and of a true council, as disturbers of peace, and 
 hypocrites. 
 
 XIX. The Council of Trent — 1 545-1 563. 
 
 The Popes became so wicked and so oppressive and 
 despicable that the clergy at large, in a general council, 
 deposed two of them at Pisa, electing a third, and, as the 
 two did not yield, had three, and then succeeded in 
 deposing all and naming one at the Council of Constance; 
 but he avoided the reformations demanded, and, forced by 
 circumstances, his successor was obliged to yield and hold 
 another council at Basle. The Council of Basle made 
 many reforms ; and then the Pope, alarmed, called the 
 council, first to Ferrara, then to Florence; the council 
 deposed him and named another, and at last, both being 
 tired, and the succeeding Pope conciliatory, he confirmed 
 the decrees of Basle and Florence, and the anti-Pope 
 
 1 Rome or Babylon, ejus que in colas pastores, qui quotidie per 
 universum terrarum orbem anoniarum saluti preficuntur tantorum 
 causam errorumy — Antonio Pucci^ Cardinal; Cone, XIV, 240. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 15^ 
 
 resigned. Since then, at the Fifth Lateran Council and 
 the Council of Trent, and up to the Reformation, the 
 Popes had it pretty much their own way; but their ex- 
 cessive wickedness destroyed respect for them, and the 
 last Pope before the Reformation poisoned himself in 
 seeking to poison his cardinals, to get their money. The 
 Popes, plunging into such wickedness and oppression, 
 roused the clergy, supported by the princes of Europe, to 
 seek to assert the superiority of a council over them, 
 which they confirmed because they could not help it, and 
 evaded as soon as the councils were over. At last, 
 their wickedness, and especially their sale of indul- 
 gences, which was really selling permission to sin, brought 
 about the Reformation, — that is, the breaking loose of 
 half Western Europe from their sway, Eastern Europe 
 having never been under it. This brought on the Council 
 of Trent, which fixed the Romanist deeper in error than 
 ever; gave a deeper character of apostasy from the truth 
 to the Romish Church, and left the separation of Northern 
 Europe where it was. The Council of Trent confirmed 
 the Adoration of the Host, Auricular Confession, Priestly 
 Absolution, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, 
 Holy Orders, and Matrimony. But the Council of Trent 
 failed to decree any reformation; and the selling of par- 
 dons, in the grossest way, to get money to build the 
 cathedral at Rome, and the abominations were such, that 
 God, arousing not princes nor the hierarchy, but simple 
 individuals, brought about the Reformation in Germany 
 and Switzerland. 
 
 XX. THE VATICAN COUNCIL— 1869-1870. 
 
 We have seen that general councils were always called 
 and presided over by the emperor, as long as the East 
 
152 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 had any part in them, and that Popes and councils have 
 striven for authority when they were called and presided 
 over by Popes, but the Vatican Council put an end to 
 this strife by decreeing the Personal Infallibility of Pope 
 Pius IX. Since the Council of Trent, over three centu- 
 ries had elapsed before the Vatican Council was convened 
 in Rome, presided over by Pope Pius IX. It was the 
 most solemn, marvellous, and imposing council ever held 
 in the history of the Roman Church. It was the largest 
 council ever witnessed in Rome, and its pageant was 
 presented with all the pomp and ritual of the Catholic 
 Church. The magnificence of the ceremony, and the im- 
 portant dogma to be decreed, called together seven hund- 
 red and sixty-four prelates,^ forty-nine cardinals, ten 
 patriarchs, four primates, one hundred and five diocesan 
 archbishops, twenty-two archbishops in partibus, four hund- 
 red and twenty-four diocesan bishops, ninety-eight bishops 
 in partibus, and fifty-two abbots and generals of Monastic 
 orders.2 j^e Vatican Council aimed to destroy the civili- 
 zation and progress of the Nineteenth century that threat- 
 ened the foundation of the Roman Church, as the Coun- 
 cil of Trent aimed to check the movements of the 
 
 1 The number entitled to a seat in a General Council is 1,037. 
 (i) Eminentissimi et reverendissimi Domini Rom. Cardinals; {a) ordinis 
 Episcoporum, {b) ordinis Presbyterorum, {c) ordinis Diaconorum, 51 ; 
 (2) Reverendissimi Domini Patriarchi, 11; (3) Reverendissimi Domini 
 Primates, 10; (4) Reverendissimi Domini Archiepiscopi, 166; (5) Rev- 
 erendissimi Domini Episcopi, 740; (6) Abbates nullius dioceseos, 6; 
 (7) Abbates Generales ordinum monasticorum, 23; (8) Generales et 
 Vicarii Generales, 29. 
 
 2 There were some fourteen nations represented in the Council : — 
 Italy, 246; France, 84; Austria and Hungary, 48; Spain, 41; Ger- 
 many, 19; Great Britain, 35; United States, 48; Mexico, 10; Switzer- 
 land, 8; Belgium, 6; Holland, 4; Portugal, 2; Russia, i. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 153 
 
 Protestant reformers of the Sixteenth century. The coun- 
 cil convened December 8, 1869, in the Basilica of the 
 Vatican, and confirmed, first, the Immaculate Conception 
 of the Virgin Mary;^ second, the Quanta Curia, or the 
 papal protest against modern progress and civilization ; ^ 
 and, thirdly, decreed the new dogma of the Personal 
 Infallibility of the Pope. There were two documents 
 before the council, — one from Pio Nono, "Sumus Doc- 
 torus," and one from the bishops, "Supremus Pastorus." 
 The prelates Darboy, of Paris; Matthieu, of Besan^onj 
 Ginoulhiac, of Lyons; Dupanloup, of Orleans; Ketteler, of 
 Mayence; Hefele, of Rottenburg; Scherr, of Munich; Fors- 
 ter, of Breslau; Simon, of Hungary; Rauscher, of Vienna; 
 Schwarzenburg, of Prague ; Strossmayer, of Bosnia ; Hay- 
 nald, of Kalocsa ; MacHale, of Ireland ; Connolly, of Nova 
 Scotia, and Kenrick, of the United States, thought the 
 Pope with the council might be accepted as infallible, and 
 objected to personal infallibility; but the placet of the 
 majority decided the matter, and the following dogma re- 
 ceived the sanction of the council: ** Wherefore we, 
 adhering faithfully to the traditions of the Christian faith 
 
 1 " Satisfacturi propterea communi desiderio jam nunc nuncianus, 
 futurum quando cunque Concilium sub auspiis Dieparae Virginis ab 
 omni labe immunis esse constituendum, et eo aperiendum die, quo 
 insignis hujus privilegii ipsi collati memoria recolitur." 
 
 2(i) Pantheismus, Naturalismus, et Rationalismus Absolutus; (2) Ra- 
 tionalismus Moneratus ; (3) Indifferentismus Latitudinarismus ; (4) So- 
 cialismus, Communismus, Societates Clandestinje, Societates Biblices, 
 Societates Clerico-Liberales ; (5) Errores de Ecclesia Ejusque Juribus J 
 (6) Errores de Societate Civilitum in Se, Turn in Suis ad Ecclesiam 
 Relationibus Spectata; (7) Errores de Ethica Natural! et Christiana; 
 (8) Errores de Matrimonio Christian©; (9) Errores de Civili Romani 
 Pontificis Principatu ; (10) Errores Qui ad Liberalismum Hodiernum 
 Referuntur. 
 
154 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 as we have inherited them, to the glory of God our 
 Saviour, to the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and 
 to the salvation of the Christian peoples, with the 
 approval of the Sacred Council, teach and define it to be 
 a dogma of divine revelation, that the Roman Pontiff, 
 when speaking ex cathedra, that is, as pastor and teacher 
 of all Christians, he defines any doctrine concerning faith 
 and morals as necessary to be held by the universal 
 Church, has promised to him, by the divine assistance in 
 the person of St. Peter, that Infallibility with which the 
 Divine Redeemer willed his Church should be provided 
 in defining a doctrine of faith and morals."^ 
 
 The great work of the Vatican Council was its decree 
 of Papal Infallibility. It met the differences that existed 
 between Ultramontanism and Gallicanism, which lay at the 
 very foundation of papal authority; it did away with 
 the independence of the episcopate, and made it obedient 
 to the primacy; it destroyed liberalism and rationalism in 
 the Roman Church ; it perfected the system of papal 
 supremacy, and it made the doubtful theory of Papal 
 Infallibility an essential article of faith, essential to the 
 salvation of every Roman Catholic. 
 
 1 " Itaque nos traditioni a fidei Christianae exordio perceptae fideliter 
 inherendo. Ad Dei Salvatoris nostra gloriam, religionis Catholicae — 
 exactationem, et Christianorum populorum salutem sacro approbante 
 Concilio, docemus, et divinitatis revelatum dogma esse definimus : 
 Romanum Pontificem, cum ex cathedra loquitor, id est, cum omnium 
 Christianorum Pastoris et Doctoris Munere fungens, pro suprema sua 
 apostolica auctoritate doctrinam de fide vel moribus ab universa Ec- 
 clesia tenendam definit, per assistentiam divinam ipsi in Beato Petro 
 permissam ea Infallibilitate pallere qua divinus Redemptor Ecclesiam 
 suam in definienda doctrina de fide vel moribus instructam esse voluit." 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 155 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 PAPAL INFALLIBILITY AND EX CATHEDRA. 
 
 |ii iniiiMiiiuiiiiiim ijHE first Popes or bishops have always been 
 I held in great horror. The heathen emperors 
 I ruled then; any prominence they might have 
 
 i iiiii i i i iii miiiiiii ii only exposed them to persecution. It is said 
 
 that Popes Cletus, Clement, Evaristus (lOo), Alexander 
 (no), Sixtus (ii6), and Telesphorus (128), were martyrs. 
 This was the bright time for the Roman Pontiffs, but 
 the Roman bishops, under the eye of the Roman author- 
 ities and a bigoted populace, had a large share of the 
 persecution of those times. But afterwards the Roman 
 bishops were not the persecuted, but the persecutors. 
 Superstition and heresy began to invade the Roman 
 Church under the next Pope, Hyginus (138). In his suc- 
 cessor's time, Pope Pius (142), the superstition increased. 
 Hermas, his brother, with whom he is said to have been 
 intimate, wrote pretended visions, full of the worst prac- 
 tice and the worst doctrines, and even blasphemies.^ In 
 his time arose the dispute of the East with Rome, as to 
 
 ^ Hermas is quoted by the book of Roman Pontiffs, — if it be the 
 same, — and the angelic visitation treated as true. Origen, Eusebius, 
 Jerome, and others say he is the one mentioned by Paul, which is 
 merely a mistake. His book is treated as excellent by Irenasus, 
 quoted by Eusebius and Origen, who says some did not value it; 
 Clemens, Alexandrinus, Tertullian when orthodox and Catholic, but 
 
156 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the observance of Easter. The East, alleging the Apos- 
 tle's authority, kept it on the 14th of the month. Pope 
 Victor (185) would have it on the first day of the week, 
 and take the next one to the 14th. Polycarp had come 
 to make peace during the time of Pope Anicetus (151), 
 but Victor refused communion with all the East, and it 
 remained in abeyance till the Council of Nice (325), which 
 decided it should be on the first day of the week. So 
 the day of the week carried it against the day of the 
 month, and the Church was not divided in spite of Vic- 
 tor. It is a curious piece of history, that the Scotch, 
 Irish, and English churches kept Easter as the Asiatics 
 did, and it was centuries after, in 664, that the Roman 
 practice prevailed, after a conference in the north of 
 England. It was the Scotch churches of lona who were 
 not subject to any bishop, but governed by presbyters, 
 who evangelized Germany and Switzerland, and the North, 
 so far as it was done in early years, but it fell under 
 the power of centralizing Rome. The Saxons were evan- 
 gelized from Rome, and the Normans, already in subjec- 
 tion to Rome. But it was from the time of Cyprian 
 only that Rome obtained the title of Peter's Chair. 
 Baronius gives twenty-five years of Peter's holding the 
 See of Rome,^ but all early authors make Linus the first 
 bishop. The first author who makes him bishop is Optatis 
 
 denounced when a Montanist; Athanasius says it is a most useful 
 book; Jerome, following Eusebius, very useful and publicly read in 
 the churches of Greece, but not known among the Latins. Ruffinus 
 says they had it read in churches, but not quoted as authority to 
 establish faith. 
 
 1 It is a remarkable fact, that Papal Infallibility and all ecclesiastical 
 authority refers itself to Peter; the See is Peter's See, and the au- 
 thority is founded on him. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 157 
 
 {De Schis. Don.y Lib. II y 33) in the latter part of the 
 Fourth century. Eusebius simply says that Linus was 
 the first bishop after Peter. He may, perhaps, be con- 
 sidered an earlier testimony than Optatis. They were 
 nearly contemporaneous, and Optatis is the first who ex- 
 plicitly states it. That Peter was twenty-five years Bishop 
 of Rome is a simple absurdity; because (Christ suffered 
 in 34) he was in Jerusalem in 49; in Antioch in 56 or 
 57; and thus he could not by any possibility have been 
 Pope of Rome till about eleven years before his death, 
 6Z or 69, in the time of Nero. The whole thing is a 
 fable upon the face of it; and yet it is from this date in 
 the history of Roman Pontiffs at which it is first called 
 the Chair of Peter, or Peter, Bishop of Rome, and which 
 is the foundation of Papal Infallibility. It is said by 
 Roman Catholic theologians, that the Pope's authoritative 
 decision on matters of faith or infallibility is in the Pope 
 and the whole Church; the consent of the Church univesal 
 with the Pope ; or the Pope and the whole Church repre- 
 sented in a general council ; or the Pope speaking ex 
 cathedra. 
 
 THE CONSENT OF THE CHURCH UNIVERSAL WITH THE POPE. 
 
 As a source of infallibility, the common consent of the 
 Church failed very early in the Church's history. In a 
 very large portion of the Church, if subject to their 
 bishops, they must have differed from the Pope. In the 
 case of the Donatists, the African bishops applied to the 
 Emperor Constantine, and the civil (not infallible) authority 
 interfered to settle it. When the emperor turned Christian, 
 so servile was the Pope, that he, for a time, was the 
 true Pope. And when Constantine called councils and 
 regulated every thing, he was not even baptized ; was so 
 
158 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 only on his death-bed, to be sure to be clear of his 
 sins. The emperors after Constantine became Christian, in 
 profession ; and when the actual emperor was Arian, all 
 the bishops, save a few banished ones, and the Popes were 
 Arian. However, Pope Liberius at first was not, but at 
 last gave way to the emperor, and signed an heretical 
 creed. Liberius returned from exile, — brought back at 
 the intercession of Roman ladies. The emperor wanted 
 both him and Felix to be bishops together, but Felix was 
 driven out by the people. However, he got back again 
 and sought to exercise clerical functions in the city, but 
 was again driven out, and lived on his own estate. He 
 ordained twenty-one presbyters and nineteen bishops. 
 '^'^'' Was he infallible, or not.? What was the infallibility 
 worth here, — two Popes at a time, and one part of the 
 Church holding him to be Pope, and the other not. But 
 this state of things was not changed for the better with 
 the death of Liberius. Damasus, who was chosen to suc- 
 ceed him, had been of Felix' party. This dissatisfied 
 many, and they met and chose Ursinus, who was conse- 
 crated, too. The See of Rome was worth coveting by 
 men who loved ease and luxury. Fine chariots, rich 
 feasts, and regal luxury characterized their life. This is 
 not only the testimony of Ammianus Marcellinus, but 
 Jerome informs us that Praetextatus, a Roman proconsul 
 and of high family, when no longer proconsul, said that 
 if they would make him Bishop of Rome, he would turn 
 Christian directly. Well, there was fighting among the 
 people of Rome as to who should be Pope. Juvenitius, 
 Prefect of Rome, and Julian, Prefect of Provisions, ban- 
 ished Ursinus* party, shut themselves up in a church of 
 Licinus, where he had been consecrated ; and they were 
 attacked there, and one hundred and thirty-seven persons 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 159 
 
 were found killed in the church. The prefect, unable to 
 appease the tumultuary violence, had to go to the country. 
 Ursinus was banished again, and Damasus could amass 
 wealth and leave costly silver vessels to the Church at his 
 death. Ursinus then tried again, but the people would not 
 have him, and Siricius was chosen. And how can any 
 one soberly think that securing power in an office that 
 vied with royalty by fighting and slaughter that mag- 
 istrates could not stop, is a security in matters of faith 
 and a mark of Papal Infallibility.? This closed the Fourth 
 century. 
 
 In the beginning of the Fifth century, the greater part 
 of the clergy and people chose Boniface, and the other 
 part the Archdeacon Eudalius, who was consecrated by 
 the prelate of the See of Ostia, who always regularly 
 consecrated the new pontiff. Boniface was consecrated by 
 others. The prefect wrote to the emperor in favor of 
 Eudalius, who convoked a number of bishops to decide, 
 but there was great division. On a fuller report of the 
 prefect, who said neither was to be trusted, both Boni- 
 face and Eudalius had to stay outside of Rome, and sent 
 another prelate of neither party to celebrate Easter, which 
 was just going on. Boniface had tried to get in, but 
 was, after first driving back the civil officers, driven back 
 by a larger number of them. Eudalius got in and would 
 not leave, on being warned ; but Boniface's friends, armed« 
 attacked Eudalius', who were not. The emperor banished 
 the latter for being in the city against orders, and let 
 Boniface have the See. There were the usual tumults 
 and battery and violence on either side. What kind of 
 infallibility is this ? But towards the end of the same 
 century the difficulty is still greater, and the Church is 
 still divided against the Pope. Symmachus and Laurentius 
 
l60 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 were both elected Popes the same day. Some of the 
 clergy and the people communicated with Symmachus and 
 some with Laurentius. The king decided in favor of 
 Symmachus, and so he remained Pope. King Athelric 
 appointed Boniface II to be Pope, but a majority of the 
 Roman people, wishing to have a Pope of their own, 
 chose Dioscurus, and both were consecrated. But Boni- 
 face was obliged to use every effort to reduce the clergy 
 to subjection, and was never rightly and canonically Pope 
 by the consent of the Church, and, therefore, infallibility 
 failed. 
 
 After the short pontificates of John II and Agapetus, 
 we arrive at a case in which all pretense of infallibility 
 fails. The Emperor of Constantinople was, by means of 
 Belisarius, engaged in the reconquest of Italy, and the 
 king of the Goths, Theodotus, distrustful of influences not 
 his own at Rome. The clergy met to elect a Pope, but 
 he would not allow them to elect the one they desired, 
 but obliged them, under penalty of death, to establish his 
 nominee Pope, which they did. Baronius speaks of their 
 wisdom and divine guidance and approbation, that they 
 all consented to nominate Silverius, whom Theodotus had 
 forced upon them. He was charged with bribing the 
 king, to have him made Pope. It is also said this was 
 a calumny. It is possible; things were in such a state 
 that they were as capable of false accusation as he of 
 bribery. It is the statement of the historian, Anastasius. 
 But he was a Pope, — supposed to be infalHble. The 
 Goths had returned to besiege Rome; Silverius was ac- 
 cused of treachery with the Goths. They at last raised 
 the siege, and Silverius was banished by Belisarius to 
 Patara, Lycia, who took off his vestments and made the 
 clergy elect Vigilius, and Vigilius sat as Pope. Silverius 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. l6l 
 
 went to the emperor, who sent him back to Rome, say- 
 ing, if he had engaged in treacherous correspondence with 
 the Goths, he was not to be reinstated; but if innocent, 
 he should be. But Belisarius delivered him up to Vigilius, 
 and he was sent off to the island of Pontecune, where 
 he died, Vigilius remaining Pope. This is the Pope who 
 had to do with the emperor, and condemned and retracted, 
 and retracted his retraction, and at last was let go by 
 the emperor. Vigilius died, and Pelagius was accused of 
 poisoning him, and could only get two out of the prelates 
 of Italy to consecrate him; all the rest refused. But he 
 purged himself, on oath, and was the next Pope. This 
 is nice work to secure faith in the Pope and give a sure 
 mark to the simple of Papal Infallibility. And why the 
 Bishop of Ostia (who was the regular person to do it), 
 laying his hands on a man chosen to be Peter's suc- 
 cessor at Rome, should convey authority from Peter, it 
 is hard to tell. If Peter had done so, and then his 
 successor, or his successor before his death, and so on 
 (I might not believe it), I could understand it; but it is 
 not so. As the case is, the Pope, who consecrates ever 
 so many prelates, never confers Peter's authority; and a 
 prelate, who has it not, nor any pretension to it, confers 
 it on the Pope. Infallibility here — there is none! 
 
 THE POPE AND THE WHOLE CHURCH REPRESENTED IN A 
 GENERAL COUNCIL. 
 
 The history of councils proves that the Pope of Rome 
 is not an infallible guide in matters of faith and morals. 
 Quod sempeVy quod uhique^ quod ab omnibus creditum est^ 
 is not sustained by history. The history of Arianism 
 clearly proves that this is not so, and that the Pope can 
 not be trusted. What becomes of the rule what was 
 11 
 
l62 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 always, everywhere, and by all, in the case of image- 
 worship? Is it not true that for centuries there were 
 none? The great dogmatist, Petavius, admits that none 
 were used for four hundred years, and gives as a reason 
 that there was danger of their being confounded with the 
 heathens ; but that in the Fifth, when Rome got her 
 liberty, she began to have them openly. Epiphanius, find- 
 ing an image on a curtain in church, tore it with his 
 own hands. He charges their introduction on heretics, 
 as does Augustine, and declares that the Church con- 
 demns such habits. The Council of Eliberius, in Spain, 
 305, decreed that pictures ought not to be in churches. 
 For a length of time they were rejected in the East, and 
 insisted by the Popes ; solemnly in a council of three 
 hundred and thirty-eight prelates at Constantinople in 754; 
 approved by a council of three hundred and fifty, in 787; 
 and condemned in England in 792. 
 
 How are we to learn any thing certain from the con- 
 sent of councils, or hold what is held always, everywhere, 
 and by all ? These are only examples on the most impor- 
 tant points of doctrine and practice. The truth is, that 
 for some hundred years, from the Third to the Seventh 
 centuries, there was an endless war of opinions, and 
 the emperors tried to keep the peace by their own 
 decrees, or by convening councils. Then, if we come 
 down lower, after bitter and prolonged conflict and mutual 
 excommunication, the Greek and Roman, or Eastern and 
 Western, Christendom finally separated in the Tenth cen- 
 tury, and all the most ancient councils condemn the 
 Pope. And where can we get infallibility with the Pope 
 and the whole Church jepresented in council ? 
 
 Passing over John HI, Benedict, Pelagius H, Gregory 
 (a really great man, who just hints at the possibility of 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 63 
 
 a Purgatory for extremely small faults, and who reformed 
 or composed the Roman liturgy), Sabinianus, and others, 
 and come to Honorius, in the Seventh century, where we 
 meet a difficulty of another kind. Honorius, so far from 
 keeping the faith of others, could not, it seems, keep the 
 faith himself. He was formally condemned and anathe- 
 matized by name in the third Council of Constantinople, 
 confirmed by Pope Agathon, and anathematized again by 
 Pope Leo n,^ whence it is formally taught in canon law 
 that the Pope can be judged for heresy. Pope Stephen 
 ordained in his council that only the clergy should elect, 
 and the people then salute him ; that images should be 
 adored, — which was forbidden at Constantinople by a very 
 numerous council, and by a still larger one under Charle- 
 magne, at Frankfort, of several hundred bishops. They con- 
 demned images in the strongest terms, but the adorations 
 and superstitions prevailed. King Pepin gave titles to the 
 clergy, and Charlemagne issued orders for the regulation of 
 the Church and clergy. The Pope's legates were at the 
 Council of Frankfort, where a late cosmopolitan council, 
 which restored the use of images, presided over by the 
 Pope's legates and received by him, was utterly rejected. 
 This was somewhat later, in 794. Octavian or John XH 
 ■first led his troops to war against the Duke of Capua, but 
 was forced to make peace. He wrote to the emperor to 
 deliver him from the violence of the chiefs in Italy. He 
 swore allegiance on the bodies of Peter and Paul, that he 
 would never in any way help the rebellious chiefs, Adel- 
 
 ^ It is expressly taught {Dis. xl, c. 6) that a Pope can be judged 
 for heresy ; and in the gloss also if he is incorrigible and the Church 
 scandalized, for evident crimes, because contumacy is heresy; but that 
 the Church should pray against it much, as its salvation so depends 
 on the Pope. 
 
1 64 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 bert and Bereuges ; but no sooner was the emperor's 
 back turned than he joined Adelbert. The emperor, the 
 prelate of Germany who came with him to Rome, and 
 nearly all those of Italy met in council. The Pope's 
 misdeeds were publicly stated : he consecrated bishops for 
 money (had made one of ten years old), drank wine in 
 honor of the devil, invoked in gambling Jupiter and Venus 
 and other demons, was guilty of incest with his own re- 
 lations and with two sisters, and with various cruelties 
 caused the death of persons that were named. The 
 council deposed him, and chose Leo VIII, who sat as 
 Pope more than a year. Eighty-five prelates or clergy of 
 Rome were assembled in councils, besides Roman nobles. 
 Pope John returned, held a council of twelve bishops, of 
 the Papal States chiefly, and twelve of the clergy of 
 Rome, deposed Leo, who saved himself by flight, broke 
 all his ordinations, perpetrated brutal acts against some 
 who had borne testimony against him, and some three 
 months after, being found committing adultery outside 
 Rome, was killed by the husband, — by the devil, if we 
 believe Luitprand ; and this is infallibility of the Pope, 
 with the Church represented in council ! 
 
 The emperor, tired of all these things, finally trans- 
 ferred the right of electing the Pope from the prelates 
 and councils to the emperor. Gregory VII, the most 
 able and ambitious of all the Popes, had governed Rome, 
 and was seated in the papacy, before his predecessor was 
 buried, some say by soldiers and a host devoted to him; 
 some say the cardinals and people had their part. He 
 sent to the emperor, to say it had been done without 
 his will. He pushed the power of the Pope to absolute 
 dominion over every thing. The emperor, Henry, struggled 
 against his power, and councils were held in Germany. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 165 
 
 In the Council of Bresse, Gregory was deposed, and 
 another chosen, who took the name of Clement III. 
 William, king of England, alone effectively resisted him ; 
 suffered his legates to hold no councils, nor the English 
 and Norman prelates to go to Rome. It was this Greg- 
 ory who laid the foundation of Roman pretensions, — the 
 pride and the shame of the papacy. France, England, 
 and part of Italy owned Alexander III as Pope, but 
 Germany owned Octavian. Both had referred to the 
 emperor to have it decided, who summoned a local coun- 
 cil in Italy to decide who had right. Alexander would 
 not go. Octavian did. The council decided in favor of 
 Octavian, who called himself Victor III. The English 
 and the French, though having long hesitated to pro- 
 nounce because of the emperor, held also local councils, 
 who supported Alexander, and the French councils excom- 
 municated Victor III. The emperor convened a council 
 in Germany, having letters from Denmark, Norway, 
 Hungary, Bohemia, and many prelates besides those 
 present, and then Alexander was excommunicated. Fred- 
 erick, the emperor, proposed putting both down, and the 
 French and English kings met him to settle it. Alexan- 
 der would not go, and nothing was settled ; then Alex- 
 ander held a French council and excommunicated Victor 
 and all his adherents. Now, it is difficult to say who 
 was canonical Pope, but we have half of Christendom own- 
 ing one whom the Romanists do not own, and the sac- 
 raments and the ordinations and councils in a vast extent 
 of country depended on his being real Pope. If ever 
 there was a thing disproved, it is what is ridiculously 
 called Papal Infallibility. If we are to believe the Coun- 
 cil of Pavia, where were fifty archbishops and other pre- 
 lates, with a quantity of abbots of Germany and Italy, 
 
1 66 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 and the deputies of France and England, after seven 
 days' examination of witnesses and deliberations, Victor 
 III alone was duly elected and made Pope. The majority 
 of the cardinals were for Alexander, but the senators 
 were for Victor, and they put Alexander in prison ; but 
 he escaped by the intervention of the people. 
 
 When Gregory XI died at Rome, the Romans insisted 
 on an Italian prelate being made Pope, and attacked the 
 conclave, so that the cardinals were in fear of their lives. 
 The great number of them were French, but of these 
 many were of the country of Limoges, so that they did 
 not act together, as these wanted one of their party, the 
 other Frenchmen not. There were only four Italian car- 
 dinals. It is said that one was made to put his head 
 out of the window, to tell the people to go to St. Peter's, 
 which was taken by the people to mean that they had 
 elected the cardinal of St. Peter's. Meanwhile it was 
 proposed to elect the Archbishop of Bari, who at any 
 rate was an Italian, but not a cardinal ; the French party 
 say he was only elected to pacify the people, with the 
 understanding that he was not to take the papacy, the 
 choice being only made under the influence of fear of 
 the populace, and hence having no validity, and so after- 
 wards they certified the King of France. 
 
 The Italian party, while not denying the clamors and 
 violence, but making them arise later in the affair, in- 
 sisted that the election was regular and valid. Fleury's 
 account gives this color to it. Raynaldus, of course, in- 
 sists that it was free, and urges that the people's leaders 
 went to the window and insisted it should be a Roman, 
 and that the choice of one not a Roman proved that 
 they were free. Some would have made the cardinal of 
 St. Pierre Pope, but he disclaimed it, and the Archbishop 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 6/ 
 
 of Bari was crowned and enthroned in the midst of these 
 tumults. He took the name of Urban VI. But the car- 
 dinals were not content, and under pretext of the hot 
 weather, went to Anagni, and there they chose one of 
 their own body, who became Pope also, under the name 
 of Clement VII, who removed to Avignon. The cardi- 
 nals sent a long account to the King of France, who 
 assembled prelates and doctors ; but not satisfied with 
 this, sent ambassadors to Italy to ascertain the facts, and, 
 on their report, owned Clement to be the true Pope. 
 Spain, after some time, owned him, too. Urban was oc- 
 cupied with politics and fighting in Italy, but he suc- 
 ceeded in maintaining himself as Pope there, and putting 
 down the Clementines tolerably completely, though Jeanne, 
 Queen of Naples, was for Clement, but she lost her 
 kingdom and her life. England and Germany were for 
 Urban, Scotland for Clement, Northern Europe for Urban, 
 but Lorraine, Savoy, and other provinces for Clement. 
 Each Pope condemned and excommunicated the other 
 and his councils. Both consecrated prelates and clergy, 
 so that the idea of securing infallibility and maintaining 
 the Pope in council by it is a simple absurdity. 
 
 If Urban (as Raynaldus and Platina would have it) was 
 Pope, then all France and Spain and other countries were 
 excommunicated out of the pale of the Church, and all 
 their orders invalid, and all they conferred on others null 
 and void. Contemporaries state that the people forced 
 their way into the court of the palace of the council, 
 into which they had been driven with threats by the 
 populace. Bundles of rice-stalks were laid under it to set 
 it on fire, and they threatened to cut down the cardinals 
 if they did not choose a Roman. The heads of that 
 district of Rome came and told them that they must do 
 
l68 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 as the people required, or they would suffer violence. 
 The Archbishop of Ban had been previously in consulta- 
 tion with the cardinals, and though an Italian, being 
 opposed to the Romans, the cardinals thought he would 
 go with them in their views, and was then chosen in a 
 hurr}', as it was thought he would reject it. If so, the 
 temptation was too great. This account seems pretty 
 well authenticated. The Italian cardinals, three at least 
 out of the four, joined the rest at Anagni, where they 
 went, and then to Fondi, to be secure to choose 
 Clement VII. 
 
 The fullest and clearest account of the proceedings of 
 the council, is the first life of Gregory XI, in Balergius, 
 pages 443 and following. Before the council met, according 
 to this account, the Romans had driven the upper orders 
 out of Rome, and introduced a mass of rough country- 
 men ; took possession, that the cardinals might not leave, 
 and when they met, broke in with them. The Banda- 
 renses chiefs of the twelve districts had warned them 
 before, individually, and on going into the council as- 
 sembled them, and said they must elect a Roman, or at 
 least an Italian, or meet with worse ; and the mob filled 
 the palace and room under the hall of the council with 
 weapons and dry reeds, and all night rioted there, vociferat- 
 ing while they were saying the Mass of the Holy Ghost. 
 The cardinals sent the three deans, or chiefs of the three 
 classes of cardinals, the people having insisted on the 
 windows being opened, in the hope of calming them, but 
 in vain, and a second time ; but the people raged violently 
 at the doors, insisting on the nomination of a Roman or 
 Italian. They thus chose Bartholomew, Archbishop of 
 Bari, as he had been present at the Roman consultations 
 to force the choice of a Roman, was a doctor of canon 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 69 
 
 law, and was supposed to be upright. They supposed he 
 would give it up when elected, and there was calm. For 
 the same reason, they had to go through with and crown 
 and enthrone him. The account is by one who favored 
 Clement, but it all hangs perfectly well together, and 
 the main points certain. That they were forced by the 
 populace against their inclination is certain, for they 
 would have desired to go to Avignon. But whether it 
 was sufficient to annul the election of the council is 
 another question. Cardinal Cajetan, Orde Vio, legate to 
 Germany about Luther, reproves those who consider either 
 obedience, so-called, schismatic; declaring that the right of 
 each had been and was doubtful; and what was positive 
 on the point is, that both were deposed as Popes from 
 the papacy, and Martin V confirmed the decree of the 
 Council of Constance, which, by deposing both, recognized 
 both. In this the people will follow their ancestors or 
 prelates. 
 
 This is a strange certainty of infallibility; so uncertain 
 that nobody was bound to say which was true, which, 
 according to the famous Dominican, was contrary to, was 
 necessary to, salvation ; for men were bound to believe 
 there was only one. Much was done by the princes of 
 Europe to put an end to the schism and to get Popes 
 Boniface at Rome (Pope after Urban), and Benedict at 
 Avignon, to abdicate. France withdrew its obedience, and 
 then Castile, to the Pope at Avignon, but rejected Boni- 
 face at Rome. Benedict, at Avignon, was besieged by 
 France, and agreed to abdicate on the Roman Pope doing 
 so. Boniface refused, but would appear before a council. 
 England supported Boniface. Innocent VII followed Boni- 
 face at Rome; Benedict had sent an embassy to Rome, 
 proposing the abdication of both ; Innocent proposed a 
 
I/O FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 council and the cession of the papacy by the Pope. 
 Gregory XII succeeded Innocent ; Benedict proposed coun- 
 cil and refused cession, excommunicating those who ap- 
 proved it ; the King of France burned the bull ; Benedict 
 fled to Genoa, then to Perpignan. Gregory was elected 
 under promise to resign if union could be effected ; Bene- 
 dict protested the same thing. At last the cardinals of 
 both sides met at the Council of Pisa, and then at the 
 Council of Leghorn, and sent a circular-letter, proposing 
 a council as the only means, as the Popes would not 
 yield, and there was such exceeding difficulty as to law 
 and as to fact; and they blame both Popes, as running 
 the Church, and so did the council, going into all the 
 facts, and charging them with bad faith and even collusion. 
 Finally they depose both; take off the excommunications 
 of both, as it was so doubtful who was Pope, and choose 
 Peter of Candia (Alexander V), who confirmed all their 
 acts. 
 
 But Gregory, who kept the south of Italy, and Robert, 
 King of the Romans, and his partisans, and Benedict 
 XIII, who still held fast hold of Spain, kept their ground. 
 Each held a so-called general council, Benedict having 
 one hundred and twenty prelates, but who would come 
 to no conclusion; and sixteen only remained, who decreed 
 he was Pope and was not to yield. Gregory held a coun- 
 cil, but could scarce get any one to come, and fled, 
 through fear of the Venetians, and went to the south of 
 Italy. Each of these condemn the Council of Pisa and 
 their Pope, and each other. The Council of Pisa deposed 
 the two as schismatic, heretic, and as guilty of other 
 crimes, — all the cardinals of both obediences being there 
 save one. A new council was to be held. Now there 
 were three Popes; two doubtful and deposed, and a third 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. I/I 
 
 chosen, but it was alleged unlawfully. And this is so 
 much the case that the highest Roman Catholic authorities 
 are not agreed who was Pope. Raynaldus counts Gregory 
 as Pope all the time, till he gave up at the Council of 
 Constance. Bellarmine says Alexander V must be owned, 
 as the next was Alexander VI. Belthasar Cossa was the 
 leader in the affairs of the Council of Pisa, but would 
 not be Pope, but got Alexander V elected, and governed 
 under him, and then became Pope at his death. 
 
 One reason Bellarmine gives for the authority of the 
 council is, that a doubtful Pope is no Pope. Now, in 
 such a state of things, how can we speak of infallibility 
 in Pope and council.^ The Councils of Pisa, Constance, 
 and Basle professedly deposed Popes, — the two former 
 finally succeeding, the latter not, while the latter pro- 
 nounced a council to be superior to the Pope. The 
 Council of Constance confirmed the acts of the Council 
 of Pisa, so that we have the authority of the episcopacy 
 as to the wickedness, heresy, and deposition of both Popes 
 engaged in the schism ; but it consulted without John, 
 and when he fled because of the charges brought against 
 him, they deposed him. The Vatican Council is in conflict 
 with all the early councils which had no Pope, and all 
 those councils which condemned Popes as heretics, and 
 those councils which deposed Popes, — in proclaiming the 
 infallibility of Pope Pius IX. The Council of Nice con- 
 demned Arius, and that of Constantinople absolved him ; 
 the Council of Constantinople condemned the Councils of 
 Nice and Chalcedon, and the Lateran condemned Basle ; 
 the Council of Constantinople declared the elements in the 
 Eucharist images of Christ's body in heaven ; Councils of 
 Lateran and Trent pronounced the fullest transubstantia- 
 tion ; the Councils of Constantinople and Basle asserted 
 
172 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 that councils were superior to the Pope ; the Lateran 
 Council opposed the claim ; and the Vatican Council pro- 
 claimed the worst heresy of all — the Personal InfalUbility 
 of the Pope. 
 
 THE POPE SPEAKING EX CATHEDRA. 
 
 • 
 We will now turn to the other means of infallibility 
 
 (infallible knowledge) in matters of faith and morals. It 
 
 is not possible to think of the first Popes, whoever they 
 
 were, for this is uncertain, as the authorized sources of 
 
 truth ; and if the first chiefs had not this authority, 
 
 its descending to others is all a fiction. But the case 
 
 of the Popes goes further, and without multiplying cases, 
 
 which would carry us too far, there are the plain cases 
 
 of Marcellinus, who was a traditor — that is, gave up the 
 
 Scriptures in persecution and offered incense to the gods ; 
 
 Honorius, who was pubHcly condemned for being a Mon- 
 
 othelite (believing that Christ had but one will), by the 
 
 Sixth General Council, confirmed by the Pope; Pope 
 
 Liberius, who signed a semi-Arian creed. These we will 
 
 notice a little more fully. First, then, there is the case 
 
 of Marcellinus, who, when Pope, offered to idols and 
 
 apostatized from Christ. Bellarmine says he taught nothing 
 
 against the faith nor heretical. But where is the security 
 
 for infallibility.? Bellarmine tells us it is not of much 
 
 consequence if he lost the papacy by it, as he abdicated 
 
 soon after and died a martyr. The poor man's weakness 
 
 may have been graciously forgiven, but we are looking for 
 
 infallibility and security for faith. It is easy to understand 
 
 Bellarmine's motive for making it no matter, because either 
 
 there would have been an apostate Pope, or one deposed 
 
 by a local council for unfaithfulness. But a worshipper of 
 
 idols is a strange security in matters of faith and morals. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 173 
 
 Next, as to Pope Vigilius, in the dispute about what are 
 called the "three chapters," two of which were sanctioned 
 by the great General Council of Chalcedon. In truth, 
 Vigilius was elevated to the See of Rome on purpose to 
 favor Monophysite heresy (maintaining that Christ had 
 but one nature) and restore Anthinus, the heretic, to the 
 See of Constantinople, the empress putting him in by 
 force. When once in, he turned right round, but quailed 
 before the emperor as soon as he got to Constantinople, 
 and intrigued in vain. Then he condemned the three 
 chapters, as the emperor had done. Then, when the 
 Fifth General Council was called, though at Constantinople, 
 he defended the three chapters. The Council of Con- 
 stantinople broke communion with him, and approved the 
 emperor's condemnation of the three chapters; and Vi- 
 gilius, the following year, assented to the decrees of the 
 council, and his successor, Pelagius I, acknowledged the 
 orthodoxy of the council. 
 
 Where is the security for faith anywhere.? The Pope, 
 ex cathedra (officially, from the chair), condemned, ap- 
 proved, and then condemned the same doctrine, — what all 
 held to be a vital question as to the person of Christ. 
 Bellarmine does not contest the letter given by Liberatus, 
 but Baronius does. The facts are plain any way. Pagi 
 adds, in a note, that there can be no doubt of it. "Still," 
 he adds, "that it does not prejudice the Pope's authority, 
 because Silverius was not dead, though deposed, so that 
 Vigilius was not really Pope," — a nice security for faith; 
 a Pope who could not act because he was deposed, and 
 an acting one whose acts, though consecrated, were not 
 valid, because the other was living! Baronius excuses his 
 undoubted heresies on the ground that he was not Pope 
 because the banished Silverius was alive. What a founda- 
 
174 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 tion for faith ! He acted as Pope while Silverius, who 
 had been banished, still lived, and so some say was legit- 
 imate Pope. What was the validity of all the papal acts .^ 
 It is a plain example that the Pope's judgment, ex cath- 
 edruy is just worth nothing at all. 
 
 But, take another example. It can not be denied that 
 Pope Liberius acquiesced in Arianism. He subscribed an 
 Arian creed, and in the largest council ever held (except 
 the Vatican), of some eight hundred prelates, and com- 
 municated with Arius and condemned Athanasius. Bellar- 
 mine says he was deceived by ambiguous terms, but if 
 he was he was no security for faith. The truth is, he 
 did it to free himself from the persecution of an Arian 
 emperor, who sought to unite all by vague expressions. 
 But if Bellarmine is right, and he was deceived, it is 
 just the proof that the Pope is no security for faith, nor 
 indeed, as we have seen, a Pope and council together. 
 To say he did not teach it, when on the solemn discus- 
 sion of the question with the assembled hierarchy he 
 signed the creed, is a miserable subterfuge. Here the 
 Pope and the largest body of prelates ever assembled in 
 council signed and promulgated an Arian creed. 
 
 Now turn to Honorius. Bellarmine labors hard to free 
 him also, but then he can not deny that he was condemned 
 and anathematized as a heretic by not one but two gen- 
 eral councils, the Pope's legates taking part in one case. 
 Bellarmine says they wanted to secure several Eastern 
 patriarchs being anathematized, and so, that they might 
 succeed, threw Honorius in with them. Moreover, the 
 Pope, his successor, undertook he should be anathematized. 
 And then, says Bellarmine, if it can not be denied in 
 the least that the Pope was anathematized, the council 
 made a mistake; but then the Pope's legates were there, and 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 175 
 
 it is accounted as an oecumenical council. So that either 
 the Pope was a heretic, and he was struck out of what 
 were called the Diptychs (those whose names were re- 
 membered in the public service) as unfit to be there, or 
 Pope and council confirmed by him can err. There is 
 no security for faith to be found in them, as this neces- 
 sarily is one of the conditions of infallibility. I might 
 mention a multitude of cases and statements, but I take 
 only notorious cases, which may be found in Bellarmine, 
 who gives a list of cases of alleged failure in infallibility, 
 Baronius, who is not to be trusted without Pagi's cor- 
 rections, and all Church histories. The African bishops 
 maintained their views against the Pope, and the thought 
 of infallibility did not exist then. 
 
 When we come lower down in history, the claims of the 
 Popes increase, and their authority extends ; but the effect 
 was that all the most ancient part of the Church — that 
 is, the East — broke off from them altogether, and remains 
 opposed to Rome to this day. The University of Paris 
 solemnly condemned Pope John XXII for heresy as to 
 the state of souls after death. His history is a little 
 pleasant. The cardinals who had to choose the Pope, 
 several of them being ambitious, would not agree, and at 
 last decided to leave the choice to the one who became 
 John XXII, sure he would choose one of them; but he 
 thought the best thing was to choose himself, and so 
 became John XXII. The Council of Constance charged 
 John XXIII with saying that the soul died with the body; 
 that the soul was not immortal. Now, this shows how 
 little infallibility was supposed to be inherent in the Pope. 
 The Council of Basle says : " Many of the supreme pontiffs 
 are said, and so we read, to have fallen into heresy and 
 error. It is certain that the Pope can err. A council 
 
1/6 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 has often condemned and deposed a Pope, as well on 
 account of faith as morals." When the assembled prelates 
 of Christendom declare that the Popes may, and have, 
 erred in faith and morals, the infallibility of the Pope is 
 no longer a very sure ground. Their claiming it, which, 
 since the Vatican Council, we all know they do, does 
 not give it to them. If the Pope be a sure foundation 
 of faith (a thing not thought of for hundreds of years), 
 God has given a premium to the most horrible wicked- 
 ness that ever disgraced human nature ; for such wickedness 
 characterized the Popes above all men on the earth. We 
 can not, we dare not, with any one who knows history, 
 deny the wickedness of Popes John XXII, of Alexander 
 VI, and many others. Even Pope Gregory VII, who 
 built the grandeur of the papacy, raising it above the 
 empire, and established the celibacy (that is, the cor- 
 ruption of the clergy), died away from his See, having 
 been first deposed by a council of German bishops at 
 Worms, and afterwards condemned as a heretic and sen- 
 tenced to be deposed by the Council of Brixen, and a 
 new Pope chosen (Clement III), who was consecrated at 
 Rome. Now, I attach no authority to their council, or 
 their Pope (though, in supporting the emperor, to whom 
 God gave authority, against the Pope, to whom God gave 
 none, the prelates were right); but what sort of founda- 
 tion for faith and morals is all this? 
 
 I think we have settled the first point : the Pope's 
 infallibility being the source of certainty as to faith and 
 morals ; and the second point, also : that they have con- 
 fessedly erred. In proof of these we have selected cases 
 that have been brought out in history as to the faith ; 
 for it is perfectly well known that plenty believed nothing 
 at all. Marcellinus offered incense to idols, Liberius signed 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 177 
 
 a semi-Arian creed, and Honorius was condemned for 
 being a Monothelite, by a general council, sanctioned by- 
 Pope Agathon. Then Pope Zosimus corrupted, artfully, the 
 canons of the Council of Nice, to found the authority of 
 the See of Rome, and was detected in the East and in 
 Africa. This was a fraud, if not a heresy ; but it was a 
 fraudulently citing as the canons of the Council of Nice 
 what were no part of them, and what was put forward 
 as the foundation of the whole jurisdiction and authority 
 of the Pope. The council of bishops in Africa, in which 
 the famous St. Augustine took part, denied their genuine- 
 ness; sent and got the true Greek copies in the East, 
 and rejected Zosimus' claims ; and the Patriarchs of Con- 
 stantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch, did 'the same thing, 
 sending full copies of the canons of Nice. They were 
 really the canons of the Council of Sardica, and thus 
 attributed the resolutions of a little petty conclave of his 
 own partisans, assembled to give him this power, to the 
 first great general council, in order, fraudulently, to set 
 up that authority of the See of Rome which it now 
 claims ; and Rome has ever since built largely on this 
 fraud. 
 
 It is well to refer a little to this history as elucidating 
 the supremacy and alleged appellative jurisdiction of Rome. 
 Now we can trace the origin of these pretensions by 
 going a little further back. In Cyprian's time (252) two 
 Spanish bishops, guilty of being Libellatic (that is, having 
 received certificates of having owned heathen idols, 
 obtained by money from heathen magistrates, without 
 having really done so ), were deposed by a provin- 
 cial synod of the country. One was readmitted to 
 communion, but not to his See, but went to Rome and 
 complained to Pope Stephen. The Pope, always glad, as 
 12 
 
178 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Popes were, to augment his authority, ordered the 
 Spanish synod to restore both to their Sees. Meanwhile, 
 Cyprian being everywhere known by his activity, the 
 bishops of the synod laid the affair before him. He 
 summoned a local council, and they declared that Stephen 
 had evidently been deceived, and that Basilides and Mar- 
 tialis (the other bishop) had greatly increased their crime 
 by appealing from the local judgment. He declares the 
 judgment he communicated to be conformable to the under- 
 stood practice of the Church. Cyprian, in every respect, 
 maintained the independence of the Episcopate against 
 Rome. He says : " Among us there is no one who will 
 arrogate to himself any authority over those of his own 
 order, or claim to be a bishop of bishops . . . inas- 
 much as every bishop has equal liberty of judging and 
 determining upon all questions that come before him, and 
 can no more be judged by, than he can judge, another. 
 Therefore, it should be our resolution to await the judg- 
 ment of our Lord Jesus Christ, from Whom all our powers 
 to govern His Church are derived, and Who alone has 
 authority to call us to account." — Prologue to judgment 
 of eighty-seven bishops in Council of Carthage, 
 
 So, when Pope Cornelius had received Felicissimus, who 
 had been excommunicated in Africa, Cyprian writes to 
 blame him severely, and says the crime ought to be 
 judged where it is committed, and where the witnesses 
 are, "unless to some few desperate and lost persons the 
 authority of the bishops established in Africa seem to be 
 inferior. Their cause is already taken cognizance of, the 
 sentence already passed on them " ; and declares a special 
 portion of the flock is appropriated to each shepherd, 
 which each is to rule and govern, having to give an 
 account of his acts to God. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 179 
 
 The history of Sardica, which was subsequent to this, 
 was the following : When Athanasius had been condemned 
 by the Councils of Tyre and Antioch, and banished, he 
 first fled to Julius, who held a small assembly at Rome 
 and acquitted him ; then to Treves, and the Emperor 
 Constans got Constantius, emperor of the East, to call 
 a council. This was held at Sardica. Athanasius, whose 
 cause was to be tried, sat there. The Eastern bishops 
 claimed that he should be excluded ; this the others re- 
 fused. The parties were equally divided, and the Eastern 
 prelates seceded ; the Western ones remained. The Eastern 
 half, at Philippopolis, condemned Athanasius ; the Sardicans 
 acquitted him, and then gave, for the first time, an appeal 
 to Rome. These latter canons Zosimus sought to foist on 
 the African bishops as canons of the Council of Nice ; 
 but they were never heard of as being those of a Council 
 of Sardica, as of any authority, nor ever received in any 
 way in the Eastern Church. And note the giving, then, 
 which is what they do expressly in honor of St. Peter, 
 a title to Rome to require a re-examination on the spot 
 in case of an appeal, or to take other measures, proves 
 that he did not possess the right before. It was very 
 convenient to Athanasius, as he had been thus acquitted 
 by Pope Julius and condemned in the East, to set up 
 this power in Rome. This Council of Sardica and its 
 canons were, however, no way recognized in the Church, 
 for three general councils — Constantinople (381), thirty- 
 four years after, Chalcedon (451), Constantinople (681) — 
 all decree what is entirely in opposition to the Sardican, 
 namely: that causes should be heard by the provincial 
 synods, with appeal to the Patriarch to whose jurisdiction 
 they belonged. It was Julius' successor, Liberius, who 
 signed the Arian, or semi-Arian, creed, when Constantius, 
 
l80 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 the Eastern emperor, had all his own way ; and so did 
 Hosius, one of the alleged presidents of the Sardican 
 Council. 
 
 A certain presbyter, Apiarius, had been excommunicated 
 by his bishop and others for ill-conduct. He goes off to 
 Rome. Zosimus pronounces him innocent, and sends Faus- 
 tinus and two others to Africa, to a synod then gathered 
 about it. His messengers were to see Apiarius reinstated, 
 and to urge that any presbyter might appeal to Rome. 
 The African prelates answered there was no such rule in 
 the Church as that. Zosimus' messengers pleaded the canons 
 of the Council of Nice. The prelates said these canons 
 were not in their copies of the canons of the Council of 
 Nice; but they would send to Constantinople, and Alex- 
 andria, and Antioch, the three great Patriarchates, and 
 see. Cyril, of Alexandria, and Atticus, of Constantinople, 
 replied, and it was found that there were no such canons 
 of the Council of Nice at all. Zosimus was now dead, 
 and his successor, Boniface, who pursued the claim, was 
 dead also, and the African prelates wrote to Pope Celes- 
 tine to say that the Council of Nice had committed these 
 things to the Metropolitan, or a local council, or even 
 to a general one. It is worth while, though it be long, 
 to recite what the prelates say in what they call the 
 universal African Council of Carthage : — 
 
 "No determination of the Fathers has ever taken this 
 authority [of judging its own clergy] from the African 
 Church, and the decrees of Nice have openly committed 
 both inferior clergymen and bishops themselves to their 
 Metropolitans ; for they have provided, most prudently and 
 justly, that every matter should be terminated in its own 
 place, where it arose. Nor is it to be thought that to 
 each and every consideration the grace of the Holy Spirit 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. l8l 
 
 will be wanting, by which equity may be prudently re- 
 ceived by the priests of Christ and firmly maintained , 
 especially because it is allowed to every one, if he be 
 offended by the judgment on the charges, to appeal to 
 the councils of his province, or even to a universal one. 
 Unless, perhaps, there be some one who may think that 
 our God may inspire justice, in examining, to a single 
 person, whoever it may be, and deny it to innumerable 
 priests assembled in council . . . For we have not 
 found it established in any synod of the Fathers, that 
 any should be sent as legates of your holiness \^tu(^ sane- 
 titatis a latere^ — the common name since for popish leg- 
 ates]. For that which you formerly transmitted by the 
 same Faustinus, our co-bishop, as on the part of the 
 Nicene Council, in the truer copies of the Council of 
 Nice, which we have received, sent from our co-bishop, 
 Cyril, of the Church of Alexandria, and the venerable 
 Atticus, prelate of Constantinople, from the authentic copies, 
 which also had already been sent by us to Bishop Boni- 
 face of venerable memory, your predecessor, by the hands 
 of Innocent, presbyter, and Marcellus, sub-deacon, by whom 
 they were forwarded to us from them [Cyril and Atticus], 
 — we have not been able to find any thing of the kind. 
 Also, do not think of sending, nor granting upon any of 
 ours requesting it, any of your clergy as executors [agents 
 to enforce decrees], lest we may seem to introduce the 
 smoky pride of this world into the Church of Christ, 
 which offers the light of simplicity and the daylight of 
 holiness to those who desire to see God." 
 
 And then the council declares that Africa could no 
 longer endure the presence of Faustinus, if brotherly 
 charity were to be preserved. Apiarius was already put 
 out. Now here Papal Infallibility is treated with scorn 
 
1 82 FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 by all the African bishops in council; the Popes sending 
 legates declared to be utterly unlawful, and the canons 
 he pleaded as his justification declared to be a fraud, 
 and that he must know it, for they had sent the true 
 ones from Constantinople and Alexandria to his predecessor, 
 Boniface. 
 
 But Zosimus had had some other transactions with 
 these African prelates, among whom was the famous 
 Augustine. Zosimus fully sanctioned the confession of 
 faith of Pelagius, and his teaching. Now here was the 
 very essence of Christian doctrine in question. He re- 
 proves severely the African prelates for condemning him ; 
 owned him and Celestius as in communion. His prede- 
 cessor had totally condemned him just before. The African 
 prelates having done so, and communicated it, as was the 
 custom, to Innocent, he had returned an answer, con- 
 demning and excommunicating the two heretics, and claim- 
 ing, I freely admit, all manner of authority in the case; 
 for the Popes were at this moment striving hard to 
 establish their power, and profited by every opportunity. 
 However, Innocent condemned and excommunicated them 
 by his full authority, ex cathedra. Zosimus, to the said 
 African prelates, declares them sound and in communion. 
 And note, this was on an essential doctrine of the faith. 
 The Africans did not, of course, remonstrate with Inno- 
 cent for agreeing with them ; but Zosimus' pretensions 
 set aside their judgment. They met at Carthage in May, 
 418, Augustine presiding, and condemned and anathema- 
 tized Pelagius and his disciples ; and not content with 
 this, took the opportunity, in the Council of Melevis, of 
 republishing the Nicene canon, and, in their twenty-second, 
 decree that the appeals should be to local synods or 
 Metropolitans; and that if any appealed across the sea 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 83 
 
 (t, e.y to Rome), he should be received into communion 
 in no African church. Zosimus gave way; summoned 
 Celestius, whom the Africans condemned, and condemned 
 him too. So much for the Pope's infallibity and authority. 
 
 It was just at this time that the Pope was seeking to 
 establish his authority over the West ; and succeeded, 
 through a quarrel of two prelates, to do it in the south- 
 east corner of France, and in a measure, in Eastern 
 lUyria, naming the Archbishop of Thessalonica there as 
 "executor," — what the Africans call the introduction of 
 smoky pride into the Church. This had been done already 
 some forty years before, when that country was politically 
 transferred to the Eastern Empire, and the ambitious Popes 
 were afraid it should be ecclesiastically under the influence 
 of Constantinople, the Eastern capital. But all this was 
 ambition, not infallibility; and when there was moral 
 courage, the pretensions of the Pope were entirely rejected 
 as wholly contrary to the canons, as, indeed, they were, 
 before the canons of Nice were made. Thus did Cyprian ; 
 thus Asia Minor, Egypt, and Syria, in his day; thus 
 Spain, thus Irenseus in Gaul; while the Popes have been 
 openly proved both fallible and heretics. In the Councils 
 of Basle and Constance these bodies were openly declared 
 superior to them, and in the last, three Popes (all in- 
 fallible, we are to suppose) were set aside, — one as a 
 heinous monster. 
 
 The Popes themselves have been divided as to infalli- 
 bility. Leo IX was for, and Gregory XIII against, in- 
 fallibility; Innocent III was for, and Vigilius against, 
 transubstantiation ; Pius V declared the breviary correct, 
 and Urbanus VIII declared the breviary of Pius V full 
 of errors; Clement XIV suppressed the Jesuits, as fatal 
 to the Church and society ; Pius VII re-established the 
 
l84 FIFTEEN YEARS IH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 Jesuits, as useful to the Church and society.^ The Gal- 
 ilean Church {i. e., the Roman prelates in France, sum- 
 moned by Louis XIV) declared, publicly, that the decrees 
 of the Council of Constance, which maintained the authority 
 of general councils as superior to the Popes in spiritual 
 matters, are approved and adopted by the Galilean Church, 
 and that the decisions of the Pope in points of faith are 
 not infallible, unless they are accompanied by the consent 
 of the Church. And in promulgating this dogma, the 
 Vatican Council did not, by any means, have the consent 
 of the whole Church. Pope Pius IX was visited by a 
 number of prelatic deputations and requested to modify 
 the dogma ; but being strengthened in his purpose by 
 Jesuitical advisers, he remained steadfast to the end. 
 Bishop Ketteler, of Mayence, besought the Pope, on his 
 knees, to modify the dogma of infallibility. Bishop Stross- 
 mayer, of Bosnia, boldly and fearlessly denounced infalli- 
 bility in open council, amid the greatest opposition and 
 threatening attitude of its members. And even Dr. John 
 
 1 The Jesuits have patronized every superstition that has been in- 
 troduced into the Church for three centuries, and the Jesuits, Bresciani, 
 Pellico, and all (except Father Curci) of any prominence, especially 
 the Spanish Jesuits, have been firm supporters of Papal Infallibility. 
 France has learned a practical lesson of allowing Jesuits to be edu- 
 cators of their youth, and has just banished them from the nation 
 and closed their schools after a few days' grace. They were found 
 to be sowing in the youth of the land the seeds of rebellion, of 
 opposition to the law, and of disobedience to the French Republic. 
 It is said by some that they had a hand in the recent conspiracy 
 and assassination of the monarchs of Europe. We know this was the 
 case in former times. The Jesuit, Malagrida, gave the order to kill 
 John VI of Portugal; the two Jesuits, Garnet and Personio, had charge 
 of the Gunpowder plot; and the Jesuit, Gardiner, was the assassin of 
 Henry IV. Malagrida, Garnet, and Gardiner were hung by the civil law. 
 
EXAMINATION OF POPES AND PRIESTS. 1 85 
 
 Henry Newman, of England, looked upon the passage of 
 infallibility by the Vatican Council with fear and dismay; 
 but all these efforts of the best and most learned men 
 in the Roman Church were counteracted by such eccle- 
 siastics as Cardinal Manning, of London, and Bishop 
 Senestry, of Regensburg. 
 
 Now, if normal infallibility resides in a Pope and oecu- 
 menical council, it is not to be found at all ; for in the 
 early councils they contradicted one another, and in the 
 later ones, the existence of Popes depends on their action 
 without a Pope amongst them. One will tell us the seat 
 of infallibility is in the Pope, ex cathedra; another, the 
 Pope with a council ; another, a council as independent 
 of and above a Pope. And if this last be not held, there 
 is no true Pope to be had. It has been decreed twice, 
 by assembled Christendom, held by universities the most 
 famous in the world, denounced, no doubt, at Rome ; but 
 when we look up their greatest, authority about that 
 council, on which their cause depends, which was con- 
 firmed absolutely by a Pope, we are told it is uncertain 
 — cannot be condemned or approved. There is no known 
 seat of infallibility for a person capable of inquiring. The 
 whole thing is as foreign to truth and common sense as 
 it is possible to be. 
 
 We have seen, then, what the Roman Catholic system 
 has produced, as its own best authors record it, — 
 individual authors teem with reproaches and scorn, — what 
 its Popes were, and what refuge its councils were to the 
 inquiring, restless mind and heart of man. 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 /. LIST OF CHURCH FATHERS AND CONTEM- 
 PORARY WRITERS. 
 
 I. The Apostolic Fathers— 95-180. 
 
 Clement of Rome. 
 Ignatius of Antioch. 
 Polycarp of Smyrna. 
 Barnabas. 
 
 Hermas. 
 Papias. 
 
 2. The Greek Fathers — 180-325. 
 
 Irenaeus. 
 
 Hippolytus. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria. 
 
 Origen. 
 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus. 
 
 GREEK writers. 
 
 Caius. 
 
 Julius Africanus. 
 
 Alexander of Jerusalem. 
 
 Dionysiusof Alexandria. 
 
 Archelaus. 
 
 Alexander of Lycopolis. 
 
 Methodius. 
 
 Peter of Alexandria. 
 
 Alexander of Alexandria. 
 
 3. The Latin Fathers — 180-325. 
 
 Tertullian. 
 Cyprian. 
 
 latin writers. 
 
 Minucius Felix. 
 
 Novatian. 
 
 Arnobius. 
 
 Lactantius. 
 
 Commodianus. 
 
 Victorinus. 
 
 Dionysius of Rome. 
 
 The Post-Nicene Greek 
 Fathers — 325-750. 
 
 Eusebius. 
 
 Athanasius. 
 
 Arius. 
 
 Cyril of Jerusalem. 
 
 Ephraem Syrus. 
 
 Marcellus. 
 
 Basil. 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen. 
 
 Gregory Nyssa. 
 
 Didymus. 
 
 Epiphanius. 
 
 Diodorus of Tarsus. 
 
 Chrysostom. 
 
 Theodore of Mepsuestia. 
 
 Theophilus. 
 
 Cyril of Alexandria. 
 
 Nestorius. 
 
 Theodoret. 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 4. The Post-Nicene Latin 
 Fathers — 325-590. 
 
 Hilary. 
 
 Ambrose. 
 
 Jerome. 
 
 Rufinus. 
 
 Augustine. 
 
 Pelagius. 
 
 Celestius. 
 
 Julianas. 
 
 Marius Mercator. 
 
 John Cassian, 
 
 Vincent of Lerius. 
 
 Prosper of Aquitaine. 
 
 Salvian. 
 
 Hilary of Aries. 
 
 Leo the Great. 
 
 Faustus. 
 
 Caesar of Aries. 
 
 Fulgentius. 
 
 Boethius. 
 
 Dionysius Exiguus. 
 
 Cassiodorus. 
 
 The Protestant Church accepts, for 
 general reference, the following : — 
 
 I. Greek Fathers — zd-bth Century. 
 
 Irenaeus. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria. 
 
 Origen. 
 
 Athanasius. 
 
 Cyril of Alexandria. 
 Basil the Great. 
 Gregory of Nazienzen. 
 Eusebius of Csesarea. 
 Chrysostom. 
 Theodoret. 
 
 2. Latin Fathers. 
 
 Justin Martyr. 
 
 Tertullian. 
 
 Lactantius. 
 
 Cyprian. 
 
 Hilary of Poitiers. 
 
 Ambrose. 
 
 Augustine. 
 
 Jerome. 
 
 Gregory the Great. 
 
 The Roman Catholic Church excludes 
 from the Protestant list — 
 
 Tertullian. 
 
 Origen. 
 
 Eusebius. 
 
 And adds, extending to the Twelfth 
 century — 
 
 John of Damasus. 
 Peter Damian. 
 Anselm. 
 Bernard. 
 
 Thomas Aquinas. 
 Bonaventura. 
 
 //. LIST OF ROMAN PONTIFFS. 
 
 [The figures in the first column indicate Roman Notizie; in the second, Gerarchia Cattolica.] 
 
 R. N. G. c. 
 
 Hyginus 139 154 
 
 Pius I 142 158 
 
 Anicetus 157 167 
 
 Soterus 168 175 
 
 Eleutherius 177 182 
 
 Victor I 198 
 
 Zepherinus 202 203 
 
 Calixtus 217 
 
 Urban I 223 227 
 
 Pontianus 230 233 
 
 
 
 R. N. 
 
 G. C. 
 
 St. Peter .... 
 
 . . 
 
 
 42 
 
 Linus 
 
 
 66 
 
 67 
 
 Cletus 
 
 . 
 
 
 78 
 
 Clement I (Clemens 
 
 Ro- 
 
 
 
 mans) .... 
 
 . . 
 
 91 
 
 90 
 
 Anacletus .... 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 Evaristus .... 
 
 . . 
 
 100 
 
 112 
 
 Alexander I . . . 
 
 . . 
 
 108 
 
 121 
 
 Sixtus I .... 
 
 
 119 
 
 127 
 
 132 
 
 142 
 
 Telesphorus . . . 
 
 . 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 89 
 
 R. N. 
 
 Anterus 235 
 
 Fabian 236 
 
 Cornelius 250 
 
 Lucius (Novatianus) . . 252 
 
 Stephen I 258 
 
 Sixtus II 257 
 
 Dionysius 259 
 
 Felix I 269 
 
 Eutychianus 
 
 Caius 
 
 Marcellinus 
 
 Marcellus I 309 
 
 Eusebius 310 
 
 Melchiades 
 
 Sylvester 
 
 Marcus 
 
 Julius I 337 
 
 Liberius 
 
 Felix II 355 
 
 Damasus 
 
 Siricius 
 
 Anastasius 398 
 
 Innocent I 
 
 Zosimus 
 
 Boniface I (Eulalius) . . 
 
 Celestine I 422 
 
 Sixtus III 
 
 Leo I (the Great) . . . 
 
 Hilary 
 
 Simplicius 
 
 Felix III 
 
 Gelasius I 
 
 Anastasius II . , . . 
 
 Symmachus 
 
 Hormisdas 
 
 John I 
 
 Felix IV 
 
 Boniface II 
 
 John II 533 
 
 Agapetus I 
 
 Sylverius 
 
 Vigilius 
 
 Pelagius I 
 
 John III 
 
 Benedict I (Bonosus) . . 
 
 Pelagius II 
 
 Gregory I (the Great) 
 
 Sabinianus 
 
 Boniface III 
 
 G. C. 
 238 
 240 
 254 
 
 257 
 260 
 261 
 272 
 
 275 
 283 
 296 
 304 
 309 
 3" 
 314 
 336 
 341 
 352 
 Z^Z 
 366 
 384 
 399 
 402 
 
 417 
 418 
 
 423 
 
 432 
 440 
 461 
 468 
 483 
 492 
 496 
 498 
 514 
 523 
 526 
 
 530 
 532 
 535 
 536 
 537 
 555 
 560 
 
 574 
 578 
 590 
 604 
 607 
 
 R, N, 
 
 Boniface IV 
 
 Adeodatus I 
 
 Boniface V 
 
 Honorius I 
 
 See vacant one year and 
 seven months. 
 
 Severinus 
 
 John IV 
 
 Theodorus I 
 
 Martin I 
 
 Eugenius I 654 
 
 Vitalianus 
 
 Adeodatus II .... 
 Donus, or Domnus I . . 
 
 Agathon 
 
 Leo II 
 
 Benedict II 
 
 John V 
 
 Conon 
 
 Sergius I 
 
 John VI 
 
 John VII 
 
 Sisinnius 
 
 Constantine 
 
 Gregory II 
 
 Gregory III 
 
 Zachary 
 
 Stephen II (died before 
 consecration.) . . . 
 
 Stephen III 
 
 Paul I 
 
 Stephen IV 
 
 Adrian t 772 
 
 Leo III 
 
 Stephen V 
 
 Pascal I 
 
 Eugenius II 
 
 Valentinus 
 
 Gregory IV 
 
 Sergius II 
 
 Leo IV 
 
 Benedict III (Anastasius). 
 Nicholas I (the Great). . 
 
 Adrian II 
 
 John VIII 
 
 Marinus I, or Martin II . 
 
 Adrian III 
 
 Stephen VI 
 
 Formosus 
 
 G. c. 
 608 
 615 
 619 
 625 
 
 640 
 640 
 642 
 645 
 657 
 659 
 672 
 676 
 678 
 682 
 684 
 685 
 686 
 687 
 701 
 
 705 
 708 
 708 
 715 
 731 
 741 
 
 752 
 752 
 757 
 768 
 771 
 
 795 
 816 
 817 
 824 
 827 
 827 
 844 
 847 
 855 
 858 
 867 
 872 
 882 
 884 
 885 
 891 
 
190 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 Boniface VI (reigned only 
 eighteen days, not in- 
 cluded among the 
 Popes by Baronius). 
 
 Stephen VII 
 
 Romanus 
 
 Theodorus II .... 
 
 John IX 
 
 Benedict IV 
 
 LeoV 
 
 Christopher 
 
 Sergius III 
 
 Anastasius III .... 
 
 Lando 
 
 John X 
 
 Leo VI 
 
 Stephen VIII . . . . 
 
 John XI 
 
 Leo VII 
 
 Stephen IX .... . 
 
 Marinus II, or Martin III. 
 
 Agapetus II 
 
 John XII 
 
 Benedict V 
 
 John XIII 
 
 Benedict VI 
 
 Donus, or Domnus II . . 
 
 Benedict VII 
 
 John XIV 
 
 Boniface VII 
 
 John XV 
 
 John XVI 
 
 Gregory V 
 
 John XVII 
 
 Sylvester II 
 
 JohnXVIII 
 
 John XIX 
 
 Sergius IV 
 
 Benedict VIII .... 
 
 John XX 
 
 Benedict IX 
 
 Gregory VI 
 
 (Abdicated 1046. Syl- 
 vester III, 1045). 
 
 Clement II 
 
 Damasus II 
 
 (Benedict IX attempts 
 
 to resume the throne.) 
 
 Leo IX 
 
 896 
 896 
 897 
 
 900 
 903 
 903 
 904 
 911 
 
 913 
 914 
 928 
 929 
 931 
 936 
 939 
 943 
 946 
 
 956 
 964 
 
 96s 
 972 
 
 974 
 
 975 
 
 983 
 
 984 
 
 985 
 
 996 
 
 996 
 
 999 
 
 999 
 
 1003 
 
 1003 
 
 1009 
 
 1012 
 
 1024 
 
 1033 
 1044 
 
 1046 
 1048 
 
 1049 
 
 R. N. 
 
 Victor II 
 
 Stephen X 
 
 Benedict X 
 
 Nicholas II 1058 
 
 Alexander II 
 
 Gregory VII 
 
 Victor III 1086 
 
 Urban II 
 
 Pascal II 
 
 Gelasius II 
 
 Calixtns II 
 
 Honorius II 
 
 Innocent II, Anacletus II, 
 and Victor IV . . . 
 
 Celestine II 
 
 Lucius II 
 
 Eugenius III 
 
 Anastasius IV ... . 
 
 Adrian IV 
 
 Alexander III, Victor V, 
 Pascal III, and Ca- 
 lixtus III .... 
 
 Lucius III 
 
 Urban III 
 
 Gregory VIII .... 
 
 Clement III 
 
 Celestine III 
 
 Innocent III 
 
 Honorius III 
 
 Gregory IX 
 
 Celestine IV 
 
 See vacant one year and 
 
 seven months. 
 
 Innocent IV 
 
 Alexander IV .... 
 
 Urban IV 
 
 Clement IV 
 
 See vacant two years 
 
 and nine months. 
 
 Gregory X 
 
 Innocent V 
 
 Adrian V 
 
 John XXI 
 
 Nicholas III 
 
 Martin IV 
 
 Honorius IV 
 
 Nicholas IV 
 
 See vacant two years 
 
 and three months. 
 
 G. c 
 
 105s 
 1057 
 1058 
 1059 
 1061 
 
 1073 
 1087 
 1088 
 1099 
 iiiS 
 1 1 19 
 1 124 
 
 1 130 
 
 1 143 
 
 1 144 
 
 1 145 
 "S3 
 "54 
 
 "59 
 1181 
 1185 
 1 187 
 1 187 
 1191 
 1198 
 1216 
 1227 
 1241 
 
 1243 
 1254 
 1 261 
 1265 
 
 1271 
 1276 
 1276 
 1276 
 1277 
 1281 
 1285 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 191 
 
 Celestine V 
 
 Boniface VIII .... 
 
 Benedict XI 
 
 Clement V 
 
 Seat of the papacy re- 
 moved to Avignon. 
 See vacant two years 
 
 and three months. 
 
 John XXII 
 
 Benedict XII (Nicholas V 
 at Rome) .... 
 
 Clement VI 
 
 Innocent VI 
 
 Urban V 
 
 Gregory XI (throne re- 
 stored to Rome) . . 
 
 Urban VI 
 
 Boniface IX (Benedict 
 XIII at Avignon) . 
 
 Innocent VII 
 
 Gregory XII 
 
 Alexander V 
 
 John XXIII . . . . . 
 
 Martin V 
 
 Eugenius IV (Felix V) . 
 
 Nicholas V 
 
 Calixtus III 
 
 Pius II 
 
 Paul II 
 
 SixtusIV 
 
 Innocent VIII .... 
 
 Alexander VI .... 
 
 Pius III 
 
 Julius II 
 
 Leo X 
 
 Adrian VI 
 
 Clement VII 
 
 1294 
 1294 
 1303 
 1305 
 
 1316 
 
 1334 
 1342 
 1352 
 1362 
 
 1370 
 1378 
 
 1389 
 1404 
 1406 
 1409 
 1410 
 1417 
 1431 
 1447 
 1455 
 1458 
 1464 
 1471 
 1484 
 1492 
 1503 
 1503 
 1513 
 1522 
 
 1523 ! 
 
 Paul III 1534 
 
 Julius III 1550 
 
 Marcellus II 1555 
 
 Paul IV 1555 
 
 Pius IV 1559 
 
 Pius V 1566 
 
 Gregory XIII .... 1572 
 
 SixtusV 1585 
 
 Urban VII 1590 
 
 Gregory XIV . . . , 1590 
 
 Innocent IX 1591 
 
 Clement VIII .... 1592 
 
 Leo XI 1605 
 
 PaulV 1605 
 
 Gregory XV 1621 
 
 Urban VIII 1623 
 
 Innocent X 1644 
 
 Alexander VII .... 1655 
 
 Clement IX 1667 
 
 Clement X 1670 
 
 Innocent XI 1676 
 
 Alexander VIII .... 1689 
 
 Innocent XII 1691 
 
 Clement XI 1700 
 
 Innocent XIII . . ' . 1721 
 
 Benedict XIII .... 1724 
 
 Clement XII 1730 
 
 Benedict XIV .... 1740 
 
 Clement XIII .... 1758 
 
 Clement XIV .... 1769 
 
 Pius VI 1775 
 
 Pius VII 1800 
 
 Leo XII 1823 
 
 Pius VIII 1829 
 
 Gregory XVI 1831 
 
 Pius IX . 1846 
 
 Leo XIII ...... 1877 
 
 ///. LIST OF GENERAL COUNCILS. 
 
 1. Council at Nice 325 
 
 2. Council at Constantinople 381 
 
 3. Council at Ephesus 431 
 
 4. Council at Chalcedon 451 
 
 5. Second Council at Constantinople 553 
 
 6. Third Council at Constantinople 680 
 
192 APPENDICES. 
 
 7. Second Council at Nice 787 
 
 8. Fourth Council at Constantinople 869 
 
 9. First Lateran Council 1123 
 
 10. Second Lateran Council 1139 
 
 11. Third Lateran Council 1179 
 
 12. Fourth Lateran Council 1215 
 
 13. First Council at Lyons ^ . . . 1245 
 
 14. Second Council at Lyons 1274 
 
 15. Council at Vienne 1311 
 
 16. Council at Constance 1414 
 
 17. Council of Basle (till dissolution by the Pope) 1431 
 
 18. Fifth Lateran Council 1512-1517 
 
 19. Council of Trent 1545 
 
 20. The Vatican Council 1869 
 
 The Councils of Pisa (1409) and Florence (1439) are sometimes called Gen- 
 eral Councils. 
 
 The Greek Church receives only the first seven councils, besides that of 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 The Protestant Church receives only the six which directly follow the last 
 named as General Councils, admitting the full authority of none of them. 
 
• * 
 
 
 m^ 
 
 

 I 
 
 f 
 
 'i 
 
 - X 
 
 ;*ir_i|j 
 
 'A3: 
 
 ^m\ 
 
 
 U"* 
 
 m 
 
 ■^. 
 
 4, •«? 
 
 V . .M 
 
 c^\r-- ■'-■'' 
 
 
 ^.''^m 
 
 •J^^t^ 
 
 
 ,# -