Abbildungen der Seite

which, from the beginning of the present century, has penetrated more and more into the Galilean Church, until it has almost completely pervaded it,—that ultramontanism, through which a Lamennais was lost to the Church, if not to religion itself, which unconsciously fettered a Lacordaire, and caused a life of activity and success to set in the gloom of disappointment, and owing to which Pero Hyacinthe, the successor of Lacordaire in the French pulpit, has abandoned his native country and is lying under threat of excommunication.

M. de Pressense is a Protestant, but his Protestant standpoint has not raised him high enough to regard the question of Church and State cleared of the mists in which it presents itself to one who studies it in connection with the conditions of the State Church in France. From the ideas which are formed by such a study, the conception of a national Church, the only true form of an Establishment, is wholly wanting. By a national Church, we mean a Church which is in ideal completely, and in reality more or less approximately, co-extensiva with the nation. In France no such Church has ever existed. For the ecclesiastical body, which has always had the preponderance in numbers and influence in that country, is but a part of a larger Church, embracing many nations, and owns tho supremacy of a foreign head. The constitutional Church, towards the close of its distinctive career, when the larger measure of sufferance which it experienced at the hands of tho revolutionary government gave it the vantage ground in tho general revival of Christianity which was taking place in France, approaches more nearly to the ideal of a national Church than any other ecclesiastical body in France has ever done. It contained the germs of nationality ; but before these germs could come to maturity, they were, as we have seen, arrested by the Concordat.

There is another feature which combines with that, which we have already mentioned, to give an unlovely aspect to the idea of a union of Church and State in the eyes of a Frenchman. We mean the unsatisfactory character of the French civil administration. During the portion of his country's history, over which M. de Pressense extends his review of the relations between religion and the State in France, the administration of the latter was marked by grievous shortcomings throughout, and at times by glaring faults. The same must be said of the period which has since intervened. At the time at which he wrote the work before us, he could truly lament:—

"The very soul of France is bound and garottcd in the fatal administrative net-work which encloses it on every side, and permits neither political thought nor religious belief freely to show themselves in the open day by speech or association."

But let the fault be laid where it is due, and let not the principle of Church and State be taxed with the defects of the Napoleonic regime. It is as unreasonable to condemn the principle of Church and State because it has practically worked ill in France, as to reject the idea of a monarchical form of government, on account of the oppression which has been inflicted upon that country by Imperialism. If there be faults in the Church and faults in the State, we cannot look for advantage in the union of the two; but let not M. de Pressense on that account charge that union with a failure for which both the uniting bodies are in their measure answerable.

In the foregoing review we have endeavoured to point out a true lesson to be drawn from the history of the Gallican Church subsequent to the outbreak of the Revolution of 1789, as opposed to the lesson which M. de Pressense would found upon it. We have seen, in the case of France, that the interference of a foreign prelate with the spiritual concerns of a people has been in the past fraught with danger both to the religious and to the civil interests of the nation. All Roman Catholic countries are, by their Papal connection, rendered continually liable to a similar danger—a danger which it only requires a combination of circumstances, such as that which occurred at the French Revolution, to convert into a cause of misfortune and ruin. Who can say how much that danger will be magnified if the dogmas respecting the personal infallibility of the Pope, and his jurisdiction over the governments and nations of Christendom, proposed for the acceptance of the approaching Council at Rome, be adopted by the Roman Catholic world? Already has the prospect caused uneasiness and alarm to the Government of one continental nation which professes spiritual allegiance to the Papal see,* and led to an exhibition of ecclesiastical insubordination on the part of the most gifted ecclesiastical orator of another. And no wonder: for the new pretensions of the Papacy are such that the enforcement of them would shake to their foundations the civil institutions of no inconsiderable portion of mankind. We admit that such an enforcement would involve the not very probable conjunction of two hypotheses—the recognition of those pretensions, and a serious attempt to carry them into practice; but the enormity of the aspirations of the see of Rome is not diminished by the apparent improbability of their realisation. It will be from no want of effort in that direction on the part of the now dominant Ultramontane section of the Papal Church, if the whole of Roman Catholic Europe does not shortly present the spec

• Sue Iho Questions recently addressed by the Bavarian Government to the Theological Professors of the University of Munich.

tacle which was seen in Revolutionary France—the spectacle of a people who, confounding the due restraints of religion with the foreign yoke sought to be imposed simultaneously upon them, throw off the former in their anxiety to be rid of the latter, and impatient of the irrational tyranny of one who calls himself the Vicar of Christ, rebel against the sovereignty of Christ Himself, and rush into avowed infidelity.



[Continuedfrom No. 383, page 835.)

Fifth and Later Centuries.

We have been occupied hitherto with monuments the date of which can only be approximately determined, but of which (with the exception, perhaps, of the last described) there are the strongest reasons for believing that they are, at any rate, antecedent1 to the year 400 A.d. We proceed now to consider some later monuments, the date of which can be determined much more exactly. And as introductory to this part of our subject, we will quote a very significant sentence from Dr. Northcote himself. Speaking of the difference between the earlier and the later representations of " St. Joseph," he states that the later artists (from the fifth century2 onwards) probably followed legends concerning him which occur in the Apocryphal Gospels, especially that which bears the name of St. James the Less, and those on the birth of Mary and infancy of our Saviour. "These legends had been quoted by St. Epiphanius, St. Gregory

1 In saying this, we state what is our probability he assigned to a date earlier own helief upon a disputed question; than 600 A.d. The earliest example and we do so the more readily, becauso known to us is the Diptych of Milan, it places us in accord, as to questions of figured and fully described in Bugati, fact, with those Roman controversialists Mcmorio di S. Celso Martire, App. Tav. whose deductions from those facts we i. and ii. The Annuntiation is there impugn. We are glad to he ablo thus represented just as it is described in far to meet them on common ground- the Apocryphal Gospel of St. James But some antiquaries of considerable (Fabricii Codex Apocr. Nov. Test. torn, repute attribute to the fourth and fifth i. p. 91). Another early example (which centuries frescoes which Do Rossi (fol- is probably not earlier than the sixth lowed by Dr. Northcote) considers to be century) is to be seen in the Church of of the second and third. S. Giovannino at S. Maximin in Pro

2 "From the fifth century onwards." vence. The Virgin Mary is thero deWe know of no works of art in the West, scribed as Menoster (Minister) Ecclosiae embodying unmistakably these Apo- Hierusalem.

cryphal legends, which can with any


Nazianzen, and other writers of the fourth century; and allusions to them, or even whole scenes taken from them, occur in the artistic monuments of the fifth and succeeding centuries. Before that time Christian artists seem strictly to have been kept within the limits of the Canonical3 Boohs of Holy Scripture. Afterwards it was probably considered that there was no longer any danger to the integrity of the faith, and greater licence was given both to poets and artists." Thus far Dr. Northcote. Whether this assumed consideration of probabilities was verified in the course of time, our readers will shortly be able to judge.

With thus much of preface, we may now proceed. We are Dow to emerge from the Catacombs, and leave unnoticed those later4 pictures, there existing, whose date cau only be approximately determined; and we proceed to speak of some other monuments, whose date admits of being closely fixed. The objects of which we now speak are the mosaic decorations of churches at Rome and Kavenna, the frescoes on the long-buried walls below the Church of St. Clement at Rome, and one or two others that are less well-known.

Of these monuments, there are some few which date from the early part of the fifth century; and these mosaics, executed, as we know them to have been, under the immediate superintendence of the highest ecclesiastical authorities, in Rome or Ravenna, as the case might be, are, from that circumstance, of especial value as indications of received doctrine. The simple records of family affection, which abound in the Catacombs, picture to us, in their few touching words of love, and faith, and hope, how in very truth, to the humblest Christian, death had been robbed of its sting; how the grave had become the gate of peaceful5 rest; and death, as men deem death, only a blessed sleep6 to them that rest in the Lord. But the elaborate mosaics with which, from the close of the fourth century onwards, so many churches, both of East and West, were decorated, though they lack this personal interest, have a value all their own, as being deliberate expressions of theological belief. They are little less than embodied creeds, reflecting from century to century the prevailing tone of opinion on the part of those of highest authority in the Church. Bearing this in mind, we may proceed now to consider what are the facts presented to us, on examination of the series of monuments of the fifth and later centuries, which immediately succeed, in historical order, those earlier frescoes, of the "Biblical Cycle," in the Catacombs.

* "Canonical" from the Roman point said that could be, on either side, the of view, Dr. Northcoto, of course, moans- main argument of our present paper He is speaking of Canonical Scriptures would be in no way dependent on, or of the Nunc Testament, to the exclusion affected by, the conclusion reached.

of the Apocryphal Gospels, and such 4 "In peace," "received into peace,"

like books, which found circulation in "committed to the ground in peace,"

the West during the fifth century, and "lioth in peace," "rests in pc;uo,"—

were formally condemned by Gelasius, these are recurrent forms in the in

Bishop of Rome, A.n. 495. scriptions of the Catacombs. And here

* Together with these we pass over and them, but of eery rare occurrence, also the "Vetri antichi," the orua- are such expressions as " In pace roquiinented glasses found hero and there in escat" (Aringhi R. S. torn. ii. p. 140). tho Catacombs. Of their date we have 6 The day of death is often "doralready said a few words. A full treat- mitio," "a falling to sloop." Tho same ment of the subject would require a word is often used of the place of treatise in itself. But when all were burial.

Mosaics at Rome and Ravenna from 400 A.d. to 600 A.d.

The character of the elaborate mosaics which date from this period is well described by Seroux d'Agincourt in his "Histoire de l'Art par ses Monuments." [In this case, as in other citations from modern authors, we purposely quote from Roman Catholic writers, as being free from any suspicion of "Protestant prejudice" in what they write.] Describing7 some of the more important mosaics dating from the fifth century, he writes as follows :—" In the mosaics before us, what most deserves praise is the earnestness with which the Christians of that age sought to make art subservient to the greater honour

of God All the pomp of a heavenly triumph is displayed

in the composition of a mosaic in the Church of St. Paul 'extra muros.' It adorns that portion of the interior which was known to Christians as the 'Triumphal Arch.' This was situated, in this instance, as in most of the Basilicas and more important churches, above the principal altar, and formed a majestic termination to the great nave, and was immediately followed by the Arch of the Tribune.8 These two arches, enriched on both sides, both the one and the other, with mosaics, were generally full in view of the faithful as they entered. The Saviour appeared on the Triumphal Arch of this Church in all His glory, seated upon His throne, and receiving the homage and adoration of the inhabitants of heaven. Solio medius consedit avito. It was after such a manner that emperors of Rome, after victories won, found the representation of them reproduced on the triumphal arches erected in their honour by the gratitude of their people."

We would ask our readers to bear these particulars in mind, while noticing the list that follows. It comprises all the mosaics of importance to our present subject, dating from the years 400 to 600 A.d., in the collections of Ciampiuus and Seroux

1 Peinture, Decadence, torn. ii. p. 30. own churches. Accordingly, this arch, 8 By the Arch of the Tribune is and the "Triumphal Arch" above demeant the apse-like termination of tho scribed, aro what would at once meet Roman Basilicas, at what would corre- the eye of worshippers on entering the spond to the "East end" of one of our church, as d'Agincourt observes. Vol. 68.—No. 384. 6 Z

« ZurückWeiter »