fancy, and especially with persons convicted or suspected of schism or apostasy, to invalidate oaths or vows of all descriptions. General councils arrogated the same authority, and practised the same infernal principle. Universal harmony, without a breath of opposition, prevailed on this topic through papal Christendom. This abomination, therefore, in all its frightful deformity, constituted an integral part of Popery. The Reformation, on this subject, commenced a new era. The deformity of the papal system remained, in a great measure, unnoticed amid the starless night of the dark ages, and even in the dim twilight which dawned on the world at the revival of letters. The hideous spectre, associated with kindred horrors and concealed in congenial obscurity, escaped for a long time the execration of man. But the light of the Reformation exposed the monster in all its frightfulness. The Bible began to shed its lustre through the world. The beams of the Sun of Righteousness, reflected from the Book of God, poured a flood of moral radiance over the earth. Man opened his eyes, and the foul spirits of darkness fled. Intellectual light shed its rays through the mental gloom of the votary of Popery, as well as the patron of Protestantism. The abettors of Romanism, in the general diffusion of scriptural information and rational philosophy, felt ashamed of ancient absurdity; and have, in con sequence, disowned or modified several tenets of their religion, which were embraced, with unshaken fidelity, by their orthodox ancestors. The six universities of Louvain, Douay, Paris, Alcala, Valladolid, and Salamanca, which, in their reply to Pitt's questions, disowned the king-deposing power, disavowed also the oath-annulling and faith-violating maxim. The Romish committee of Ireland, in 1792, in the name of all their Popish countrymen, represented the lat ter principle, as worthy of unqualified reprobation and destructive of all morality and religion. The Irish bishops, Murray, Doyle and Kelly, in their examination before the British Commons in 1826, disclaimed all such sentiments with becoming and utter indignation, which was followed at the Maynooth examination by the deprecation of Crotty, Slevin and M'Hale.* This, at the present day, seems to be the avowal of all, even those of the Romish communion, except perhaps a few apostles of Jesuitism. This change is an edifying specimen. of the boasted immutability of Romanism, and one of the triumphs of the Reformation, by which it was produced. The universal renunciation of the hateful maxim is a trophy of the great revolution, which Doyle, in a late publication, has denominated the grand apostasy. * Com. Report, 175, 227, 243, 659. Crotty, 89. Slevin, 258. M'Hale, 288. O'Leary, 77, 85. PERSECUTION BY THE ROMAN CHURCH. THE popedom raised to the supremacy in church and state, challenged a controlling power over the partisans of heresy, schism, and apostasy, as well as over kings. The sovereign pontiffs, in the madness of ambition and despotism, affected the dominion over all mankind, and called the arm of the civil magistracy to their aid, in order to enforce their pretensions. Schismatics and heretics, accordingly, though separated from the Romish communion, are reckoned subject to its authority, as rebels and deserters are amenable to the civil and military laws of their country. The traitor may be punished by the state for his perfidy: and the apostate, in like manner, may, from the church, undergo excommunication and anathemas. He may even, according to Aquinas, Dens, and the University of Salamanca, followed by that of Valladolid, be compelled by arms to return to the profession of Catholicism. This assumption of power and authority has given rise, as might be expected, to long and sanguinary persecutions. Christendom, on the subject of perseention, has witnessed three distinct periods. One commenced with the era of Redemption, and ended at the accession of Constantine, the first Christian emperor. During this period, Christians disavowed all persecution both in theory and action. The second period extended from Constantine till the Reformation. This long lapse of years was more or less characterized by continual intolerance and persecution. The third period occupies the time which has intervened between the Reformation and the present day. This interval has been diversified by many jarring opinions on the topic of persecution, the rights of conscience, and religious liberty. The world saw more than three ages pass, from the era of Christianity till the accession of Constantine, before its professors disgraced their religion by the persecution of heathenism or heresy. Intolerance is a manifest innovation on the usage of antiquity, and one of the variations of Romanism. The ancients, Du Pin remarks, "inflicted no ecclesiastical punishment but excommunication, and never employed the civil authority against the abettors of heresy and rebellion." Du Pin has been followed by Giannon, Mariana, Moreri, and Du Hamel. The Messiah, the apostles, and the fathers for several ages, opposed, in word and deed, all compulsion and persecution. The Son of man came not to destroy but to save the lives of men. This he stated to his apostles, when, in mistaken zeal, they wished, like Elias, to command fire from heaven to consume the Samaritans, who, actuated by the spirit of party, were hostile to the Jews. His empire, he declared, is spiritual; and is not, like paganism, Popery, or Islamism, to be established or enlarged by the roar of artillery, the din of battle, or the horrors of war. When Peter struck Malchus, Jesus healed the wound, and condemned, in emphatical language, the use of the sword in the defence of his kingdom. No two characters, indeed, ever displayed a more striking contrast than the Messiah and an inquisitor. The Messiah was clothed in mercy. The inquisitor was drenched in blood. The tear of compassion stained the cheek of the divine Saviour. The storm of vengeance infuriated the face of the inquisitorial tormentor. The Son of God on earth was always persecuted; but never retaliated. His ardent petitions, on the contrary, ascended to heaven, supplicating pity for his enemies' weakness, and pardon for their sins. The apostles walked in the footsteps of their divine master. The inspired heralds of the gospel recommended their message by holiness and miracles, accompanied with the influence of divine energy. Persecution from the powers of earth and hell, from demons and men, was their predicted destiny. But these messengers of peace, when execrated, blessed, and when persecuted, showed no wish for retaliation; but, in submission to their master's precept, returned good for evil. The fathers, for several ages, copied 1 the example of their Lord and the apostles. The ancients, Du Pin observes, "taught with unanimous consent the unlawfulness of compulsion and punishment in religion." The sentiments of Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Bernard on this topic are worthy of transcription and imitation. "Christians," says Origen, "should not use the sword." Religion, according to Tertullian," does not compel religion." According to Cyprian, "the king of Zion alone has authority to break the earthen vessels; nor can any claim the power which the Father hath given to the Son." Lactantius, in the following statement, is still more full and explicit, "Coercion and injury are unnecessary, for religion cannot be forced. Barbarity and piety are far different; nor can truth be conjoined with violence or justice with cruelty. Religion is to be defended, not by killing, but by dying: not by inhumanity, but by patience." Bernard, at a later date, enjoins, in similar language, the same toleration. "Faith is conveyed by persuasion, not by constraint. The patrons of heresy are to be assailed, not by arms, but by arguments. Attack them with the word, but not with the sword.' Du Pin has shown that the ideas of Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Bernard, were entertained by Gregory, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Augustine, Damian, and Anselm. The second period, from Constantine till the Reformation, was characterized more or less, by uninterrupted persecution and constraint, as the former was by toleration and liberty. This emperor's proselytism to Christianity, in the beginning of the fourth century, commenced a new era in the Christian commonwealth. The church, in his reign, obtained a new establishment: and the civil power began to sanction the ecclesiastical authority. The magistracy learned to act in unison with the clergy. The emperor, however, was not a persecutor of paganism. He extended to heathenism the toleration which he withheld from heresy. The prudent monarch, unwilling to alarm pagan suspicion, advanced with slow and cautions steps to undermine the irregular and decayed fabric of gentilism. He condemned, indeed, the arts of divination, silenced the oracles of polytheism which had been convicted of fraud and falsehood, and demolished the temples of Phoenicia, which, in the face of day, displayed all the abominations of prostitution to the honour of Venus. But he tolerated the priests, the immolations, and the worship of the Grecian and Roman gods of antiquity. Constans and Constantius imitated the example of Constantine. Facts and monuments still remain, to attest the public exercise of idolatry during their whole reign. Many temples were respected or at least spared: and the patrons of paganism, by permission or connivance, enjoyed, notwithstanding the imperial laws, the luxury of sacrifices, processions, and festivals. The emperors continued to bestow the honours of the army and the state on Christians and heathens: whilst wealth and honour, in many instances, patronized the declining institutions of polytheism. Julian's reign was characterized by apostasy, and Jovian's by brevity. Valentinian was the friend of toleration. The persecution of paganism commenced in the reign of Gratian, and continued through the reigns of Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius. Gratian and Theodosius were influenced by Ambrosius, Archbishop of Milan: and the clergy, in general, misapplied the laws of the Jewish theocracy and the transactions of the Jewish annals, for the unchristian and base purpose of awakening the demon of persecution against the mouldering remains of Grecian and Roman superstition. Gratian abolished the pretensions of the pagan pontiff, the honours of the priests and vestals, transferred their revenues to the use of the church, the state, and the army, and dissolved the ancient fabric of polytheism, which had dishonoured humanity for the lengthened period of eleven hundred years. Theodosius finished the work of destruction which Gratian had begun. He issued ediets of proscription against eastern and western gentilism. Cynegius, Jovius, and Gaudentius were commissioned to close the temples, destroy the instruments of idolatry, and confiscate the consecrated property. Heavy fines were imposed on the use of frankincense and libations. The temples of the gods were afterwards demolished. The fairest structures of antiquity, the splendid and beautiful monuments of Grecian architecture were, by mistaken and barba⚫rian zeal, levelled with the dust. The saintified Martin of Tours in Gaul, marched at the head of its tattered monks to the demolition of the fanes, the idols, and the consecrated groves of his extensive diocese. Martin's example was followed by Marcellus of Syria, whom Theodorus calls divine, and by Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria. A few of these grand edifices, however, were spared by the venality or the taste of the civil or ecclesiastical governors. The Carthaginian temple of the celestial Venus was converted into a Christian church; and a similar consecration rescued from ruin the majestic dome of the Roman pantheon.* Gentilism, by these means, was, in the reign of Arcadius and Honorius, expelled from the Roman territory. Theodosius, who was distinguished by his zeal for the extermination of polytheism, questioned whether, in his time, a single pagan remained in the empire. Its ruin affords, perhaps, the only example in the annals of time of the total extirpation of an ancient and popular superstition, and presents, in this point of view, a singular event in the history of the human mind.t But the friend of Christianity and his species must, in many instances, lament the means by which the end was effected. Paganism was, indeed, an unwieldy and hideous system of abomination and folly: and its destruction, by lawful means, must have been the wish of every friend of God and man. But the means, in this case, often dishonoured the end. Coercion, in general, was substituted for conviction, and terror for the gospel. One blushes to read of a Symmachus and a Libanius, two heathen orators, pleading for reason and persuasion in the propagation of religion; whilst a Theodosius and an Ambrosius, a Christian emperor and Theoph. 49. Codex Theod. 6. 266–274. Bisciola, 318. Cod. Theod. 6. 277-283. a Christian bishop, urge violence and constraint. The whole scene opens a melancholy but striking prospect of human nature. The Christians, while few and powerless, deprecated the unhallowed weapons of persecution wielded with such fury by the pagans. But the situation of the two is no sooner reversed, than the heathens, who were the former partisans of intolerance, recommend forbearance; and the Christians, the former advocates of toleration, assume the unholy arms of proscription. The hostility of the secular arm under the emperors was not restricted to gentilism. Heresy, as well as heathenism, became the object of imperial persecution. Constantine, till he was perverted by the tuition of the clergy, seems to have possessed correct views of religious liberty and the rights of conscience. The imperial edict of Milan, conceived in the genuine spirit of liberality, was the great charter of toleration, which conferred the privilege of choosing his own religion on each individual of the Roman world.The beauty of this fair picture, however, as usual, was fading and transitory. Its mild features were soon dashed with traits of harshness and severity. The emperor, influenced by his ecclesiastical tutors, imbibed the maxims of illiberality, and learned to punish men for consulting their own reason in the concerns of their own souls. Sovereigns, according to the sacerdotal theology of the day, acted in a twofold capacity; as Christians and as governors. Considered as Christians, kings, in their personal character, should believe the truth as well as practise duty, which, as governors, and in their official relation, they should enforce on their subjects.Offences against man, according to these clerical casuists, were less criminal than against God. Theft and murder, of course, were less heinous than schism and heresy. The edicts of emperors, in consequence, came to be substituted for the gospel of God. Error, according to these theologians, was to be remedied by proscription; which, according to common sense, may produce hypocrisy, but can never enlighten the understanding or subdue the heart. Constantine, therefore, in conformity with this new or rather old plan of instruction and proselytism, issued two penal laws against heresy; and was followed, in the hopeful project, by Valentinian, Gratian, Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius. Theodosius published fifteen, Arcadius twelve, and Honorius no less than eighteen of these inhuman and anti-christian statutes. These are recorded in the Theodosian and Justinian codes, to the eternal infamy of their priestly and imperial authors.* The chief victims of persecution, during this period, were the Arians, Mani.cheans, Priscillianists, and Paulicians. Valentinian, Gratian, and Theodosius overwhelmed Arianism with destruction, and clothed Trinitarianism with triumph. The Arians, however, under Constantius and Valens, Roman emperors, and Genseric and Hunneric, Vandal kings, retaliated, in their turn, in dreadful inhumanity and vengeance. Valentinian fined the Manichean doctors and interdicted the Manichean assemblies. Theodosius exposed them to infamy and deprived them of the rights of citizens. Constantine, Gratian, Maximus, and Honorius harassed and ruined the factions of Donatism, Priscillianism, and Pelagianism. The Paulicians were persecuted in the most dreadful manner, during the reigns of Constans, Constantine, Justinian, Leo, Michael, and Theodora. Ammianus, a heathen historian, and Chrysostom, a Roman saint, compare the mutual enmity of Christians at this time, to the fury of wild beasts.t Heresy, during this period, was punished with more or less severity, according to the offender's supposed criminality or obstinacy. The penalty was banishment, fine, confiscation, infamy, disqualification of buying and selling, or incapacity of civil and military honour. The Roman code contained no law, sentencing persons guilty of heresy to death. Capital punishments, indeed, in some instances, were inflicted. This was the Theoph. 42. 45, 46. Codex Theod. XVI. Tit. 5. p. 104-190. † Codex Theod. 6. 113, 115, 120, 123.— Godeau, 3. 9, 67. Cod. Theod. 6. 5, 10, 130, 146. Codex Justin. I. p. 71, 75, 88. Ammian. XXII. 5. Chrysos. 10. 632. Hom. 27. case with the unhappy Priscillian and some of his partisans, who were prosecuted by the inquisitorial Ithacius and sentenced by the usurping Maximus. But Maximus, on this occasion, exercised an illegal authority as he had usurped the imperial power. The unlawful and unhallowed transaction displayed the baseness of the prosecutor and the tyranny of the emperor. The few that suffered capital punishment for sectarianism were, in general, also guilty or supposed to be guilty of treason or rebellion.* The Roman laws, on the topic of persecution, continued in this state till the year 800, and in the eastern empire till its dissolution in 1453 by the Ottomans. An important change happened about the commencement of the ninth century. This consisted of the great eastern schism. The Greek and Latin churches were rent asunder, and ceased to be governed by mutual laws. A new era, on the subject of heresy and its punishment, began at this time in the west, and lasted till the year 1100 of our redemption, comprehending a lapse of 300 years. This period was distinguished by superstition, ignorance, insurrection, revolution, and confusion. Sectarianism, in the European nations, seemed, for three centuries, to be nearly extinguished. Egyptian darkness reigned and triumphed over learning and morality. The world sunk into a literary lethargy: and, in the language of some historians, slept the sleep of orthodoxy. Learning, philosophy, religion, error, and sectarianism, reposed in inactivity, or fled from the view, amidst the wide and debasing dominion of ignorance, immorality, and superstition, which superseded the use of the inquisitor and crusader.t The revival of sectarianism followed the revival of letters. Many denominations of this kind appeared, in the beginning of the twelfth century, among the European nations, such as the Paulicians, Catharians, Henricians, Waldenses, and Albigenses. The Waldenses and Albigenses were the most numerous and raCo * Giannon, XV. 4. Sulp. Sev. II. 49. dex. Theod. 6. 160, 161. † Moreri, 5. 129. Giannon, XV. 4. Velly, 3.431. |