Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

monastery of St. Medard; one from the same to Felix, Bishop of Messina; and many others.

judge to an inferior one. But even although he had not appealed to the holy see, you ought by no means to depose a The object of the author was to extend bishop without our participation, in prethe authority of the pope and the bishops. {judice of so many decretals of our predeWith this view, he lays it down as a prin-cessors; for, if it be by their judgment, ciple, that they can be definitely judged that the writings of other doctors are aponly by the pope; and he often repeats proved or rejected, how much more this maxim, that not only every bishop, { should that be respected which they have but every priest, and, generally, every themselves written, to decide on points of oppressed individual may, in any stage of doctrine and discipline; Some tell you a cause, appeal directly to the pope. He that these decretals are not in the book of likewise considers it as an incontestible canons; yet those same persons, when principle, that no council, not even a pro- they find them favourable to their designs, vincial one, may be held without the per-use both without distinction, and reject mission of the pope.

them only to lessen the power of the holy These decretals, favouring the impunity see. If the decretals of the ancient popes of bishops, and still more the ambitious are to be rejected because they are not pretensions of the popes, were eagerly contained in the book of canons, the adopted by them both. In 861, Rotade, writings of St. Gregory, and the rest of Bishop of Soissons, being deprived of the fathers, must, on the same principle, episcopal communion in a provincial { be rejected also, and even the holy scripcouncil, on account of disobedience, ap-tures themselves.

peals to the pope. Hincmar of Rheims, "You say," the pope continues," that his metropolitan, notwithstanding his ap-judgments upon bishops are not among peal, deposes him in another council, under the pretext that he had afterwards renounced it, and submitted himself to the judgment of the bishops.

the higher causes; we maintain that they are high in proportion as bishops hold a high rank in the church. Will you assert that it is only metropolitan affairs which Pope Nicholas I. being informed of constitute the higher causes? But methis affair, wrote to Hincmar, and blamed tropolitans are not of a different order his proceedings. "You ought," says he, from bishops, and we do not demand dif❝to honour the memory of St. Peter, and ferent witnesses or judges in the one case, await our judgment, even although Ro- from what are usual in the other; we tade had not appealed." And in another therefore require, that causes which inletter on the same matter, he threatens volve either should be reserved for us. Hincmar with excommunication, if he And, finally, can any one be found so does not restore Rotade. That pope did { utterly unreasonable as to say, that all more. Rotade having arrived at Rome, other churches ought to preserve their he declared him acquitted in a council { privileges, and that the Roman church held on Christmas eve, 164; and dis-alone should lose her's?" He concludes missed him to his see with letters. That with ordering them to receive and replace which he addressed to all the bishops is Rotade. worthy of notice, and is as follows:"What you say is absurd, that Rotade, after having appealed to the holy see, changed his language and submitted himself anew to your judgment. Even although he had done so, it would have been your duty to set him right, and teach him that an appeal never lies from a superior {

Pope Adrian, the successor of Nicholas I., seems to have been no less zealous in a similar case relating to Hincmar of Laon. That prelate had rendered himself hateful both to the clergy and people of his diocese, by various acts of injustice and violence. Having been accused before the council of Verberie-at which Hincmar

whom God has appointed to govern the world, have permitted bishops to regulate their affairs according to their ordinances, but they have never been the stewards of bishops; and if you search the records of your predecessors, you will not find that they have ever written to persons in our exalted situation as you have done in the present instance."

[ocr errors]

of Rheims, his uncle and metropolitan, presided he appealed to the pope, and demanded permission to go to Rome. This was refused him. The process against him was merely suspended, and the affair went no farther. But upon new matters of complaint brought against him by Charles the Bald and Hincmar of Rheims, he was cited at first before the council of Attign:, where he appeared, He then adduces two letters of St. and soon afterwards fled; and then be- Gregory, to show with what modesty he fore the council of Douzi, where he re-wrote, not only to the kings of France, newed his appeal, and was deposed. The but to the Exarchs of Italy. "Finally,' council wrote to the pope a synodal letter, { he concludes, "I beg that you will never on the sixth of September, 871, to request more send to me, or to the bishops of my of him a confirmation of the acts which kingdom, similar letters, if you wish that they sent him; but Adrian, far from we should give to what you write that acquiescing in the judgment of the coun- honour and respect which we would wilcil, expressed in the strongest terms his lingly grant it." The bishops of the disapprobation of the condemnation of council of Douzi answered the pope Hincmar; maintaining that, since Hinc-} nearly in the same strain; and, although mar declared before the council that he we have not the entire letter, it appears appealed to the holy see, they ought not that their object in it was to prove that to have pronounced any sentence of con- Hincmar's appeal ought not to be decided demnation upon him. Such were the at Rome, but in France, by judges deleterms used by that pope, in his letter to gated conformably to the canons of the the bishops of the council, as also in that council of Sardis. which he wrote to the king.

The following is the vigorous answer sent by Charles to Adrian :-"Your letters say

"We will and ordain, by apostolical authority, that Hincmar of Laon shall come to Rome and present himself before us, resting upon your supremacy.

These examples are sufficient to show how the popes extended their jurisdiction by the instrumentality of these false decretals; and although Hincmar of Rheims objected to Adrian, that, not being included in the book of canons, they could not subvert the discipline established by the canons which occasioned his being accused, before Pope John VIII., of not admitting the decretals of the popes-he constantly cited these decretals as autho

"We wonder where the writer of this letter discovered that a king, whose duty it is to chastise the guilty and be the avenger of crimes, ought to send to Romerities, in his letters and other writings, and a criminal convicted according to legal forms, and more especially one who, before his deposition, was found guilty, in three councils, of enterprises against the public peace; and who, after his deposition, persisted in his disobedience.

"We are compelled further to tell you, that we, kings of France, born of a royal race, have never yet passed for the deputies of bishops, but for sovereigns of the earth.. And, as St. Leon and the Roman council have said, kings and emperors,

his example was followed by many bishops. At first, those only were admitted which were not contrary to the more recent canons, and afterwards there was less and less scruple.

The councils themselves made use of them. Thus, in that of Rheims, held in 992, the bishops availed themselves of the decretals of Anacletus, of Julius, of Damasis, and other popes, in the cause of Arnoul. Succeeding councils imitated that of Rheims. The popes Gregory VII,

that the collection was not composed till after the pontifical book.

4th. These decretals, in all the citations of scripture passages which they contain, use the version known by the name of "Vulgate," made, or at least re

Urban II., Pascal II., Urban III., and Alexander III., supported the maxims they found in them, persuaded that they constituted the discipline of the flourishing age of the church. Finally, the compilers of the canons-Bouchard of Worms, Yves of Chartres, and Gratian-vised, by St. Jerome. They are, thereintroduced them into their collection. fore, of later date than St. Jerome. After they became publicly taught in the Finally, they are all written in the same schools, and commented upon, all the style, which is very barbarous; and, in polemical and scholastic divines, and all that respect, corresponding to the ignorthe expositors of the canon law, eagerly έ ance of the eighth century: but it is not laid hold of these false decretals to con- by any means probable that all the differfirm the Catholic dogmas, or to establish ent popes, whose names they bear, affected points of discipline, and scattered them that uniformity of style. It may be conprofusely through their works. Icluded with confidence, that all the decretals are from the same hand.

It was not till the sixteenth century, that the first suspicions of their authenticity were excited. Erasmus, and many { others with him, called them in question upon the following grounds :

Besides these general reasons, each of the documents which form Isidore's collection carries with it marks of forgery peculiar to itself, and none of which have col-escaped the keen criticism of David Blondel, to whom we are principally indebted for the light thrown at the present day on this compilation, now no longer known but as "The False Decretals;" but the usages introduced in consequence of it subsist not the less through a considerable portion of Europe.

1st. The decretals contained in the lection of Isidore are not in that of Denis le Petit, who cited none of the decretals of the popes before the time of Siricus. Yet he informs us, that he took extreme care in collecting them. They could not, therefore, have escaped him, if they had existed in the archives of the see of Rome, where he resided. If they were unknown to the holy see, to which they were favourable, they were so to the whole church. The fathers and councils of the eight first centuries have made no mention of them. But how can this universal silence be reconciled with their authenticity?

2nd. These decretals do not all correspond with the state of things existing at the time in which they are supposed to have been written. Not a word is said of the heresies of the three first centuries, nor of other ecclesiastical affairs with which the genuine works of the same period are filled. This proves that they were fabricated afterwards.

3rd. Their dates are almost always false. Their author generally follows the chronology of the pontifical book, which, by Baronius's own confession, is very incorrect. This is a presumptive evidence

DELUGE (UNIVERSAL.)

WE begin with observing that we are believers in the universal deluge, because it is recorded in the holy Hebrew scriptures transmitted to Christians.

We consider it as a miracle: first, because all the facts by which God condescends to interfere in the sacred books are so many miracles.

Secondly, because the sea could not rise fifteen cubits, or one-and-twenty standard feet and a half, above the highest mountains, without leaving its bed dry, and, at the same time, violating all the laws of gravity and the equilibrium of fluids, which would evidently require a miracle.

Thirdly, because, even although it might rise to the height mentioned, the ark could not have contained, according to known physical laws, all the living

things of the earth, together with their be required to accumulate on each other, food, for so long a time; considering merely in order to equal the height of that lions, tigers, panthers, leopards, the mountains. Every successive ocean ounces, rhinoceroses, bears, wolves, hye-would contain all the others, and the last nas, eagles, hawks, kites, vultures, fal- of them all would have a circumference cons, and all carnivorous animals, which containing forty times that of the first. feed on flesh alone, would have died of In order to form this mass of water, it hunger, even after having devoured all would be necessary to create it out of the other species. nothing. In order to withdraw it, it would be necessary to annihilate it.

There was printed some time ago, in an appendix to Pascal's Thoughts, a dissertation of a merchant of Rouen, called { Le Pelletier, in which he proposes a plan for building a vessel in which all kinds { of animals might be included and maintained for the space of a year. It is clear, that this merchant never superintended even a poultry-yard. We cannot but look upon M. Le Pelletier, the architect of the ark, as a visionary, who knew nothing about menageries; and upon the deluge as an adorable miracle, fearful, and incomprehensible to the feeble reason of M. Le Pelletier, as well as to our

own.

Fourthly, because the physical impossibility of a universal deluge, by natural means, can be strictly demonstrated. The demonstration is as follows:

The event of the deluge, then, is a double miracle, and the greatest that has ever manifested the power of the eternal Sovereign of all worlds.

We are exceedingly surprised that some learned men have attributed to this deluge some small shells found in many parts of our continent.

We are still more surprised at what we find under the article DELUGE in the grand Encyclopedia. An author is quoted in it, who says things so very profound that they may be considered as chimerical. This is the first characteristic of Pluche. He proves the possibility of the deluge by the history of the giants who made war against the gods!

:

Briaréus, according to him, is clearly the deluge, for it signifies the loss of seAll the seas cover half the globe. Arenity and in what language does it common measure of their depths near the signify this loss?-In Hebrew. But shores, and in the open ocean, is assumed Briaréus is a Greek word, which means to be five hundred feet. robust: it is not a Hebrew word. Even if, by chance, it had been so, we ought to beware of imitating Bochart, who derives so many Greek, Latin, and even French words from the Hebrew idiom. The Greeks certainly knew no more of the Jewish idiom than of the language of the Chinese.

In order to their covering both hemispheres to the depth of five hundred feet, not only would an ocean of that depth be necessary over all the land, but a new sea would, in addition, be required to envelope the ocean at present existing, without which the laws of hydrostatics would occasion the dispersion of that The giant Othus is also in Hebrew, acother new mass of water five hundred cording to Pluche, "the derangement feet deep, which should remain covering of the seasons." But it is also a Greek the land. word, which does not signify anything, at Thus, then, two new oceans are re-least, that I know; and even if it did, quisite to cover the terraqueous globe what, let me ask, could it have to do with merely to the depth of five hundred the Hebrew ? feet.

Porphyrion is a shaking of the earth, Supposing the mountains to be only in Hebrew; but in Greek, it is portwenty thousand feet high, forty oceans,phyry. This has nothing to do with the each five hundred feet in height, would deluge.

Mimas is a great rain; for once, he does mention a name which may bear upon the deluge. But in Greek mimas ineans mimic, comedian. There are no means of tracing the deluge of such an origin.

Enceladus, another proof of the deluge in Hebrew; for, according to Pluche, it is the fountain of time; but, unluckily, in Greek it is noise.

Ephialtes, another demonstration of the deluge in Hebrew; for ephialtes, which signifies leaper, oppressor, incubus, in Greek is, according to Pluche, a vast accumulation of clouds.

a race of men in order to drown them, and then substitute in their room a race still viler than the first.

How seven pairs of all kinds of clean animals should come from the four quarters of the globe, together with two pairs of unclean ones, without the wolves devouring the sheep on the way, or the kites the pigeons, &c. &c.

How eight persons could keep in order, feed, and water, such an immense number of inmates, shut up in an ark for nearly two years; for, after the cessation of the deluge, it would be necessary to have food for all these passengers for another year, in consequence of the herbage being so scanty.

But the Greeks, having taken everything from the Hebrews, with whom they were unacquainted, clearly gave to their I am not like M. Pelletier. I admire giants all those names which Pluche ex-everything, and explain nothing. tracts from the Hebrew as well as he can, and all as a memorial of the deluge.

Such is the reasoning of Pluche. It is he who cites the author of the article DELUGE without refuting him. Does he speak seriously, or does he jest? I do not know. All I know is, that there is scarcely a single system to be found at which one can forbear jesting.

DEMOCRACY.

Le pire des états, c'est l'état populaire.

That sway is worst, in which the people rule.

Such is the opinion which Cinna gave Augustus. But on the other hand, Maximus maintains, that

Le pire des états, c'est l'état monarchique.

That sway is worst, in which a monarch rules.

Bayle, in his Philosophical Dictionary, after having repeatedly advocated both sides of the question, gives, under the article of Pericles, a most disgusting picture of democracy, and more particu

I have some apprehension that the article in the grand Encyclopedia, attributed to M. Boulanger, is not serious. In that case, we ask whether it is philosophical. Philosophy is so often deceived, that we shall not venture to de-larly that of Athens. cide against M. Boulanger.

Still less shall we venture to ask what was that abyss which was broken up, or what were the cataracts of heaven which were opened. Isaac Vossius denies the universality of the deluge: "Hoc est piè nugari." Calmet maintains it; informing us, that bodies have no weight in air, but in consequence of their being compressed by air. Calmet was not much of a natural philosopher, and the weight of the air has nothing to do with the deluge. Let us content ourselves with reading and respecting everything in the bible, without comprehending a single word of it.

I do not comprehend how God created

A republican, who is a stanch partisan of democracy, and one of our " proposers of questions," sends us his refutation of Bayle and his apology for Athens. We will adduce his reasons. It is the privilege of every writer to judge the living and the dead; he who thus sits in judgment will be himself judged by others, who, in their turn, will be judged also; and thus, from age to age, all sentences are, according to circumstances, reversed or reformed.

Bayle, then, after some common-place observations, uses these words: “A man would look in vain into the history of Macedon for as much tyranny as he finds in the history of Athens."

« PoprzedniaDalej »