tumultuously to the conclave, and demanded that an Italian should be made pope. The cardinals, terrified by this uproar, chose Urban VI., a Neapolitan. Some of the cardinals withdrew from Rome to Fondi, where they elected to the pontificate Robert, count of Geneva, who took the name of Clement VIII., and declared the election of Urban unlawful, because they were compelled by violence to the choice. Which of these two was the lawful pope is to this day doubtful; nor will the records and writings alleged by the contending parties decide. the controversy. Urban remained at Rome, and Clement took up his residence at Avignon. Thus the union of the Latin Church under one head was destroyed, and succeeded by that deplorable schism, known by the name of the Great Western Schism. "Christendom was divided," says Du Pin, the Roman Catholic: "divers kingdoms continued under the obedience of Urban, and others acknowledged Clement. This caused a bloody schism in the church. Urban joined the spiritual arms to the temporal to subdue them, (the followers of Clement,) and ordered a process to be made against Queen Jane, the earl of Fondi, the Ursini, and the other followers of Clement; and declared them to have forfeited their estates, their lands, their goods, and their dignities, and to be incapable to enjoy them. He declared Clement likewise the antipope, and his cardinals schismatics, and deprived them of all kinds of dignities and benefices. These reciprocal condemnations caused great disorders through all Christendom, each of the two haying their partisans, who made war one upon another, and endeavoured to deprive each other of the benefits and dignities obtained from the pope whom they acknowledged; insomuch that the benefices were for a booty, and seized by such as found themselves the strongest. The popes bestowed them on those that sued for them, though undeserving, and being not of age, only to enlarge the number of their creatures, or else they sold them to supply their wants. Impunity reigned everywhere; there was no such thing as order or obedience, and the church was in dreadful confusion. Italy was the part of the world which suffered the most, because this was the place where the partisans of the two popes had most liberty. Urban, to make himself sole master, and to put in execution the judgment he had given against Queen Jane, gave away her kingdom to Charles, duke of Duras, a kinsman of the queen's, and called him out of Hungary, where he then was, to come and take the possession. When he had arrived at Rome he crowned him king of Sicily, after he had obliged him to give the dutchies of Capua and Melphi to him, and divers other earldoms to his nephew, Francis Regnano, surnamed Butillo. But because this prince wanted money to undertake an enterprise so considerable as was the conquest of Sicily, the pope pawned the goods of the churches in the city of Rome, and sold the chalices, crosses, and other ornaments to make up a round sum, which he gave him.”*

On the death of Urban, in 1389, the Italian cardinals chose for his successor at Rome Boniface IX. "Boniface augmented the revenues considerably, and the temporal authority of popes, and heaped together great riches in the time of his papacy. If we may credit Thierri of Niem, a cotemporary author, one of his domestics, he made a public merchandise of benefices at the beginning of his popedom, and after* Du Pin, Ecc. Hist., cent. xiv, ch. iv, vol. ii, pp. 509, 510.

ward, willing to palliate it, he the first settled the annates, that is to say, the right of receiving the first year's revenues of bishoprics and abbies which became vacant, and the dates for all sorts of benefices void by death, which he granted to different persons at the same time for money. He revoked all grants of reversions, to make new ones, invented particular clauses of provisions, which annulled all the former. He granted all sorts of dispensations for money. His court was full of apostate monks, whom he made his officers, or provided with employments and benefices. For money he gave license to the friarsinendicants to quit their order and convent, and to enjoy benefices. He fully settled the sovereign and immediate dominion of the popes over the city of Rome."

On the death of Clement, which happened in the year 1394, Benedict XII. or XIII. was chosen pope by the French cardinals. Though before his election he took an oath to vacate the popedom, provided the cardinals desired it, yet after he was chosen he refused to do so at their request, and thus perjured himself. The Gallican Church, displeased at the proceedings on both sides, withdrew obedience from both popes in 1397, at a council held at Paris.

On the death of Boniface, the Roman party, in 1404, chose Innocent VII., who was succeeded in 1406 by Gregory XII.

The cardinals of Gregory and eight or nine of the cardinals of Bene. dict called a council, to meet at Pisa. The council excommunicated both these popes for schism, perjury, and contumacy, and elected Alexander V. But the decrees of the council were treated with contempt by both the pontiffs, each of whom performed the functions of the papacy in his respective bounds. Thus the western church was divided into three great factions by three contending popes, who loaded each other with curses, calumnies, and excommunications.

On the death of Alexander, the cardinals who followed him chose John XXII. to be his successor. For the purpose of healing the breach, John, at the instigation of the emperor, Sigismund, called a council to meet in Constance, and also from an expectation that its decrees would be favourable to his interests. The council" commenced its sittings Nov. 1, 1414, for the purpose of putting an end to the schism, and reforming the church in its head and members. They all agreed as to the legality of the Council of Pisa, and yet the greater number were of the opinion that John XXIII. should renounce the pontificate, as well as Gregory and Benedict." This John absolutely refused to do, although he had sworn to do so, if required. John was therefore deposed by the council in 1415, and after having continued with the utmost obstinacy in his opposition, died in 1419, at Florence. Gregory, in the year 1415, resigned to the Council of Constance. About two years after Benedict was deposed by the council, and having persisted in his contumacy, and being forsaken by all, died in 1423. He was succeeded by the choice of the two only cardinals who remained with him by Clement VIII., who resigned in 1429. By this means this schism was abolished after it had lasted fifty-one years, and Martin V. was acknowledged sole and only pope by the whole west. The great end in view by the Councils of Constance and Basil was, the reformation of the church in its head and members. The popes were Du Pin, Ecc. Hist., cent. xiv, ch. iv, vol. ii, p. 511. + Idem, vol. iii, p. 9.

*

looked upon as the head, and the bishops, priests, and monks as the members, both being exceedingly corrupt. Martin opposed the reformation to the utmost. However, five years after the Council of Constance, in consequence of frequent remonstrances by pious persons, he called a council to meet at Pavia, whence it was removed to Sienna, and thence to Basil. He died about the time on which the council met. The council met July 23, 1431, and seriously went about the work of reformation. Eugenius IV. opposed reform by every possible means. For though he at first approved of the assembling of the council, he afterward opposed it. The council deposed Eugenius, who in 1438 collected another council at Ferrara, which was afterward transferred to Florence, and at the second session thundered out an excommunication against the fathers assembled at Basil, and afterward sentenced them to hell and damnation, and declared their acts null and their proceedings unlawful. The council, in 1439, chose Felix V. pope in the place of Eugenius. By this means that deplorable schism which formerly rent the church was again revived, with additional aggravations; for the contest was not only between two rival popes, but also between the contending councils of Basil and Florence. the death of Eugenius, in 1447, Nicholas V. was chosen to succeed him. By the exertions of the king of France, Felix resigned the papal chair, and left Nicholas its undisputed possessor in 1449. Thus this schism, which lasted under two opposing popes for ten years, was terminated.

On

The foregoing accounts of these papal schisms were taken principally from Du Pin's Ecclesiastical History; with the express design of obviating every objection that could be made against Protestant authorities.

The calamities of these times are indescribable. The church had two or three different heads at the same time; each forming plots and pronouncing curses upon his competitors and followers. The princes of Europe were involved in wars on this account. Many lost their lives and fortunes in the struggle. In most places, all sense of religion was lost; and profligacy of manners prevailed almost everywhere, both among clergy and laity. Well meaning people who supposed they must be united with the vicar of Christ were in great perplexity. While many others, who were led to conclude that a visible head was not necessary, committed their salvation to God alone.

Every well disposed person must lament these deplorable schisms and their ruinous consequences. But while we view the sins and errors of our fellow-creatures with proper feelings, we must not forget to learn from them that lesson which they are designed to inculcate. We should learn that the unity professed by the Church of Rome is very defective in its head; and if the head be disordered, the members cannot be thoroughly sound.

13. The limits and extent of the pope's power and jurisdiction is a subject warmly debated in the Church of Rome. That the Holy Scriptures are not the sole standard of theology, the Romanists maintain. They say the church is the supreme authority; but then the authority of the church resolves itself into that of the pope. Yet they are very much divided on this point.

Bellarmine, their great controversialist, enumerates the four follow

ing varieties of opinion among them:-"1. That the pope, even as pope, although he would define any thing with a general council, can be heretical in himself, and teach others heresy, and in fact it so happened. 2. That a pope, even as pope, can be heretical and teach heresy if he would define any thing apart from a general council, and in fact it sometimes so happened. 3. That the pope can in no manner be heretical, nor teach heresy publicly, though he should alone define any thing. 4. That the pope, whether he can be heretic or not, can in no manner define any thing heretical to be believed by the whole church." Our author then expresses the following decision respecting these various opinions : "The first opinion is heretical; the second is not properly heretical, for as yet those who entertain it are tolerated by the church, yet it seems to be very erroneous, and bordering on heresy; the third is probable, but not certain; the fourth is most certain and to be maintained."+

On the temporal power of the pope much controversy has existed among them. Bellarmine says: "The pope as pope, although he hath no merely temporal power, nevertheless hath, in order to promote spiritual good, the supreme power of disposing the temporal goods of all Christians." But the work of Bellarmine had well nigh been condemned by Sixtus V., for ascribing this indirect power to the pope. Certainly Sixtus openly condemned the distinction of indirect temporal power, when, in his bull against Henry III. of France, he says, "that he possessed the supreme power over all princes and kings of the whole earth, and all people, nations, and tribes; and that this power was committed to him, not by human, but divine institution."§

On the subject in hand we will give the following quotation from Mosheim: The Jesuits, with their numerous tribe of followers and dependants, all maintain that the pope is infallible; that he is the only visible source of that universal and unlimited power which Christ has granted to the church; and that all bishops and subordinate rulers derive from him alone the authority and jurisdiction with which they are invested; that he is not bound by any laws of the church, nor by any decrees of the councils which compose it, and that he alone is the supreme lawgiver of that sacred community, a lawgiver whose edicts and commands it is in the highest degree criminal to oppose or disobey. Such are the strange sentiments of the Jesuits; but they are very far

* Pontificem etiam ut pontificem, etiamsi cum generali concilio defineret aliquid posse esse hæreticum in se et docere alios hæresin, et de facto aliquando ita accedisse. Secunda. Pontificem etiam ut pontificem posse esse hæreticum, et docere hæresin, si absque generali concilio definiat, et de facto ita aliquando accidisse.

Tertia. Pontificem non posse ullo modo esse hæreticum, non docere publice hæresin, etiamsi solus rem aliquam definiat.

Quarta. Pontificem, sive hæreticus esse possit, sive non, non posse ullo modo definire aliquid hæreticum a tota ecclesia credendum.

+ Prima est hæretica; secunda non est propriè hæretica, nam adhuc videmus ab ecclesia tolerari, qui illam sententiam sequunter, tamen videtur omnino erronea et hæresi proxima; tertia probabilis est, non tam certa; quarta certissima est, et asserenda.— Bellarm., de Pontif. Rom., lib. iv, c. 2. See also Gerhard, de Eccl., sec. 242.

Pontifex, ut pontifex, etsi non habet ullam mere temporalcm potestatem, tamen habet in ordine ad bonum spirituale, summam potestatem, disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum.-Idem, de Pontif., lib. v, c. 6.

Se supremam in omnes reges ac principes universæ tenæ, cunctosque populos, gentes et nationes, non humana sed divina institutione sibi traditam potestatem obtinere.

from being universally adopted. For other doctors of the Church of Rome hold, on the contrary, that the pope is liable to error; that his authority is inferior to that of a general council; that he is bound to obey the commands of the church, and its laws, as they are enacted in the councils that represent it; that these councils have a right to depose him from the papal chair, when he abuses in a flagrant manner the dignity and prerogatives with which he is intrusted; and that, in consequence of these principles, the bishops and other inferior rulers and doctors derive the authority that is annexed to their respective dignities, not from the Roman pontiff, but from Christ himself."*

14. The extent and prerogatives of the church form subjects of debate. The Jesuits extend its borders far and wide. They comprise within it, not only many who live separate from the Church of Rome, but even extend salvation to heathen nations that have no knowledge of Christianity, and consider as true members of the church open transgressors who profess its doctrine. But the adversaries of the Jesuits exclude from all hope of salvation those who are not within the pale of the Church of Rome, and also those who live in its external communion, yet dishonour their profession by a vicious and profligate life. The Jesuits, moreover, not to mention other differences of less moment, assert, that the church can never pronounce an erroneous or unjust decision, either relating to matters of fact, or points of doctrine; while the adverse party judge, that in deciding matters of fact, it is not secured against all possibility of erring.t

15. The Church of Rome has been very much divided respecting the doctrines of grace, predestination, human liberty, and original sin. The Dominicans, Augustins, and Jansenists, with several other doctors, in the main, adopt the doctrine of Augustine, or, as we would say, of Calvin, on these subjects. The Jesuits maintain the opposite side of the question; or they are the Arminians of the Romish Church, who embrace also a considerable portion of Pelagius's creed, especially respecting the depravity of our nature and human liberty. This con troversy was carried on with great animosity and fierceness. The decision of it was committed by Clement VIII., toward the conclusion of the sixteenth century, to a select assembly of learned divines, or a congregation, to speak in the style of Rome.

These arbiters, after having employed several years in deliberating on this critical subject, intimated to the pontiff, plainly enough, that the sentiments of the Dominicans were more conformable to Scripture and the ancient fathers than the opinions of Molina, which were patronized by the Jesuits. The result, however, is not known with certainty; as the death of Clement, in 1605, prevented his pronouncing a decisive The Dominicans assure us, that the pope, had he lived, would have condemned Molina. The Jesuits, on the contrary, maintain that he would have acquitted him publicly from all charge of heresy and error. But it is difficult to determine, as the records are kept with the utmost secrecy at Rome.

sentence.

The subject was resumed in 1605, by the order of Paul V.; and here the mountain was in labour, and brought forth nothing. controversy, instead of being decided, was suppressed; and each party

Ecc. Hist., cent. xvi, sec. iii, No. 32, vol. iii, p. 167.

+ See Mosh., cent. xvi, sec. iii, No. 33, vol. iii, p. 168.

For the