"Loca offerunt quid amemus, tempora subripiunt quod ama→ mus, et relinquunt in anima turbas phantasmatum, quibus in aliud atque aliud cupiditas incitetur. Ita fit inquietus et ærumnosus animus. Vocatur ergo ad otium * :" as St. Bernard says, "peace and not glory is to be our object; to be at peace with God, at peace with men, at peace with ourselves +." But these souls being turned aside from human pleasures to divine, in their enthusiasm escaped the notice of the world; for after having once had a glimpse, though but for a moment, of the essence of beauty and all perfection, recalling to mind that reality, they acquired wings; and having acquired them, they endeavoured to fly upwards; but not being able to do so, like a bird looking upwards and despising the things be low, they seemed to be mad: but of all enthusiasms, this was the best, and from the best source. These reflections should lead men of wisdom and candour among the moderns to confess that their previous jealousy of the authority of the Church was unfounded. You are for maintaining the freedom of enquiry, and the right of private judgment. But as you pursue these delusive objects," urbem philosophiæ, mihi crede, proditis, dum castella defenditis;" for while you argue in favour of a freedom aud a right which God has denied to your present condition, you betray that true religion which alone can enable you in this life to approach to the attainment of that right and freedom. As philosophers, men should be among the first to admit the advantage, as Christians, they will perceive the necessity of imposing a restraint on the rash curiosity of those subtle minds which would never rest, destroying their own conceptions, and distracting the faith of others, in attempting to bring down the mysteries of the Deity to the sphere of finite comprehension. Out of this one path, where were the bounds imposed to the natural freedom of the human mind? For let not the precautions of an injudicious po lice, in an age of simplicity, be identified with the philosophy of the Christian Church. And was not the act of submission to faith the surest safeguard which men could possess of their own freedom? Look at the writings of *De Vera Relig. 65. In festo omnium sanctor. v. those who have renounced that submission. Are their minds free? Do they exercise that much prized right of judgment? Are there no passions, no interests, no mean party views to which their reasoning is enslaved ? Watch their course from their statement of historical events, even to their translation of the text of the Holy Scriptures. Was it in exercising this freedom, and even the right of private judgment, if words are to bear their meaning, which made men translate the of the 27th verse of the xith chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, by "and?" No; God alone is free. Therefore, is it well said by St. Augustin, "Hæc voluntas libera tanto erit liberior quanto sanior, tanto autem sanior, quanto divinæ misericordiæ gratiæque subjectior *." In answering the objections of men who opposed themselves, the Church instructed her ministers to make use, like St. Paul, of the weapons of philosophy. Those who were for simplifying the scheme and form of religion, were referred to the book of nature, where a most complicated machinery is made subservient to that life which we can conceive might have cost but a bare fiat. Both in nature and in revelation the problem seems to have been, first to lay down general laws, and then to pursue the solution in strict obedience to those laws. Difficulties in religion there were undoubtedly, but it was not for man to condemn his Creator for placing him in a state where he could not see all things. "This is a hard saying," said the shallow Jews; and God was not pleased to make it plainer. Perhaps, in this life, a more clear knowledge would be incompatible with that degree of love and piety which God vouchsafes to men on earth: so then astonishment was the beginning and end of religion, as well as of the philosophy of the sage. God was born in the flesh, had a virgin for his mother, hung upon a cross, and is present in veiled majesty on every altar of the Church. No one professing the religion of chivalry felt any necessity for his being able to comprehend these facts; no one thought that the difficulties which surround men would be removed by his undertaking, like some profane modern Germans, to account for every thing in the Christian Epist. 157, 8. history by natural principles: No one felt at a loss when "the difficulties" of his religion were objected to him. To state such an objection was to refute it. God and the book of nature, and the heart, had taught men in these ages, that ignorance and reverence belong to their present condition; that astonishment was to be the end of all their wisdom; that astonishment is still the criterion of true philosophy, μάλα γὰρ φιλοσόφου τοῦτο τὸ πάθος, τὸ θαυμά ζειν· οὐ γὰρ ἄλλη ἀρχὴ φιλοσοφίας ἢ αὕτη *. In the very beginning of this research, we said that the religion of chivalry was a religion of motives. "Tout cela n'est compté pour rien sans la foi," said one of the accusers of Jacques Molay, when the latter had concluded an eloquent statement of the heroic virtues of the order of the Temple. The reply of the grand master shewed a deeper wisdom. "Sans la foi," he answered, "rien de tout cela ne peut se supporter." Even Socrates recognized this principle of the Church, saying, "some one will ask what we mean by affirming that they who do justice must also be just, and they who act wisely must be wise. The mistake of the objector lies in supposing that it is with virtue and wisdom, as with arts, in the execution of which all consists; but it is not so here. In these things it is not the same in whatever way they are done, but things are done justly and wisely; first, if he who does them knows what he does; 2dly, if he does it from choice; 3dly, if with firmness and perseverance." So in religion chivalry was taught that actions were only worthy if done for the love of God. Again, with respect to the good or evil of all these practices, religion conveyed its lesson almost in the very words of the same philosopher, saying, "the question is not, whether this or that action, this or that opinion be holy, but what is that holiness through which all holy actions and opinions are holy +; learn what that is, and then looking upon it and using it as a standard, whatever you or any person may do in accordance with it, I may pronounce holy, and whatever is contrary to it must be unholy." Chivalry was taught that this standard was charity. The sophists of this age hold that nothing is of such importance as the interests of society Plato Theætetus + Plato Euthyphro. St. and the affairs of human life, and at the same time they ridicule the opinion that God condescends to be watchful over them. Here we have a striking contrast with the ancient philosophy, and with the religion of chivalry. "Who," says Socrates "that enjoys any sublimity of thought, and can contemplate all time and all substance, can possibly fancy that there is any thing great in human life?" And yet, "it is not possible that a just man, striving as far as possible to be virtuous, should ever be neglected by the gods t." I need not add that this expresses what was taught by religion. Again, "human virtue is not of the body, but of the soul." Could the modern sophist say that? What do they care about the soul so that a man acts honestly? We may conclude of these men, who are the loudest in reviling chivalry and its religion, οὐδέν ἐστι τῶν καλουμένων φιλοσόφων ἀφιλοopúrεpov. And here let us, mark the wisdom and the tenderness of the religion of chivalry, in not disdaining to derive aid from the philosophy of the ancients, and in cherishing hopes respecting their eternal destiny. Augustin, we know, ascribed his first love of wisdom to having read the Hortensius of Cicero, which made Petrarch exclaim, "O virum ineffabilem dignumque quem Cicero ipse pro rostris laudet, cuique publice grates agat, quod inter tam multos ingratos unus velit esse gratissimus §." "I love Cicero," cries Petrarch, and "Cicerones pueri amant inter se ; neque enim vereor ne parum Christianus sim si Ciceronianus fuero. Nihil enim contra Christum Cicero loquitur. Et si quid forte contra Christi doctrinam loqueretur, id unum est quod nec Ciceroni, nec Aristoteli crederem nec Platoni ||." So said Clemens Alexandrinus," As boys fear hobgoblins, many fear the Greek philosophy, as if it would lead them astray, but if they have faith, that is, truth, they may never fear." "In æternum non commovebitur justus," cried David ¶. “The Greek philosophy," he says, "prepares the mind to receive the faith, and upon it truth builds up wisdom **." St. Augustin says, "that Plato and his followers, could they now live, paucis mutatis verbis atque sententiis Chris * Plato de Repub. VI. § Famil. Epist. II. 9. + Ibid. X. Epist. XII. 10. ** Ibid. VII. 3. Aristotle Ethics, I. 13. tiani fierent," as most of the Platonicians have become "Before Christ," says Clemens, "philosophy was neces→ sary to the Greeks for justice, but now it is useful to piety, for God is the author of all good +." "As for the heathen sages," says Roger Bacon, "since God has enlightened their minds in perceiving the truths of philoso phy, it is manifest that their labour is not foreign from divine wisdom. The Count of Stolberg pursues the same line of argument. Men of all orders had this feeling. Even the writers of the chivalrous romances are so charitable, that they always conduct their heathen hero to the waters of baptism; and it is curious to mark the same solicitude dictating various arguments, according to the character of different men. Thus Clemens supposes that our Lord descended into hell to announce the Gospel to the heathen sages; for God could give salvation to all either here or elsewhere; for his power is every where, and always worketh :" and, in the ninth century, a priest of Mayence advanced boldly that Cicero and Virgil would not perish eternally, which gave rise to much discussion. The Church, while it inspires the most enlarged ideas of the divine goodness, warns the faithful from publicly agitating questions beyond the reach of human reason, and on which God has not been pleased to satisfy the curiosity of men. So far, however, one reflection may be suggested, that if men will not embrace the religion of chivalry, it is of infinite importance that they should form their minds from the heathen classics, (I do not say phi losophy, for this would almost conduct them to the sanctuary,) rather than from the infidel writers of the present age, whose principles are opposed to the happiness and good order of the world. Is there any thing more to add? only this once, the objector will return, and ask how is it possible that those ignorant knights, those iron men always in action, should have arrived at the wisdom and spirituality which you have ascribed to them? Alas, learned reader, the facts and examples are before you. God had mercy on these honest, warm, and generous hearts, while the proudly learned were left alone with their De Vera Relig. 7. Stromat. I. 5. § Stromat. VI. 6. Opus Majus, II. 5. |