mine what are called the liberties of the Gallic church and the Jesuits were their principal coadjutors in this business. But to these machinations very strong opposition was made, both by the parliament of Paris, and by the very able writers, Edmund Richer, John Launoy, Peter de Marca, Natalis Alexander, Lewis Ellies du Pin, and others; who had the courage to bring forward the opinions of their fathers, some with more spirit and erudition, and others with less, and to confirm them with new arguments and authorities. The court, indeed, did not always reward these protectors of their country according to their merits; nay, frequently showed itself opposed to them, with a view to please the angry and menacing pontiff: yet this afforded little advantage to the papal cause. The French kings, it seems, would rather have their rights silently maintained than publicly defended with noise and war, in open declarations and disputations: nor did they esteem it below their dignity to temporize occasionally; and to pretend great reverence for the mandates and edicts of the pontiffs, in order more easily to obtain from them the objects of their wishes. But if they perceived the Romish prelates taking advantage of this complaisance to extend their authority, they remembered that they were kings of the French, that is, of a nation for a long time most impatient of Romish servitude. This is abundantly confirmed by the contests of Lewis XIV. with the pontiffs". ["It was with a view to this that Voltaire, speaking of the manner in which the court of France maintains its prerogatives against the Roman pontiff, says, pleasantly, that the king of France kisses the pope's feet, and ties up his hands." Mac.] Many, both of the Lutherans and Reformed, and they men of great merit and learning, lament the augmentation of the Romish power in France during this century, and the gradual corruption of the minds of both the noblesse and the clergy, by the prevalence of Italian notions respecting the papal power, which the ancient French people viewed with abhorrence and from this they infer, that the famous liberties of the Gallic church were much abridged in this century, by the influence, principally, of : the Jesuits. Into these views they are led, partly by certain measures of the French monarchs, which have the appearance of greatly subserving the wishes of the pontiffs; and partly by the numberless declamations of the Jansenists, and other recent French writers, who lament that the ancient glory has departed from the French nation, that the edicts of the popes are held in immense veneration, that the Jesuits have imbued the minds of the monarchs, and of the leading men in the government, with excessive attachment to the Romish views, that vigilance is used against all those who wish to see the opinions of their ancestors prevail, that the tribunal of the Inquisition is gradually introduced, and other things of this sort. But I am persuaded that more reliance is § 22. The first of these occurred in the time of Alexander VII., and originated from the temerity of the pontiff's Corsican placed on these representations than ought to be; and that the rights of the French people are still in the same state as formerly: nor am I able in any measure to discern those triumphs of the pontiffs over the French, which many excellent men with the French, who are too indignant, especially the Jansenists and the Appellants, think they can clearly see. As the general policy of the French government is much more artful and crafty, in the present age; so the machinations of the pontiffs are thwarted, in more silent and artful methods, than in the preceding more rude age. The same conflict is kept up as before; but it is now managed in a very different way. And this new and politic course does not meet the views of many of the French, who are of an ardent temperament, and who think they ought to contend in open manly warfare, in the manner of their fathers. Hence those sighs and lamentations over the rights of the nation invaded and almost annihilated by the craftiness of the Jesuits. If these persons could check those passions, with which Frenchmen are so prone to be agitated, and would carefully examine the history of their country, they would certainly learn, that their liberties are not extinct; nor are they neglected by their monarchs, but are only maintained with more caution and foresight. France, I am aware, is full of persons who basely flatter the pontiffs, and seem inclined to become slaves for the sake of gain or of honours. But the number of such was no less, formerly, than it is now; as might be proved by numberless examples. Nor is it common for states to be ruled and governed by such characters. The Jesuits are in high authority; and they sometimes cause things to be done which cannot but be grievous to the friends of the ancient Gallic liberties: but things of this sort occurred also in those times when there were no Jesuits: and on the other hand, very many things occur, continually, which are most adverse to the wishes of the Jesuits, and which undoubtedly give much disquietude to the pontiffs. Those who contend learnedly for the opinions of their ancestors, sometimes scarcely escape without punishment: those who dispute with warmth, not unfrequently suffer for it, and are either imprisoned, or sent into exile: and the most modest writers receive no reward for their labours. True; it is so. Yet the cause which these men defend, is not disapproved of, nor is it deserted; but their manner of supporting it is disliked. For the monarchs and their friends, in reality, choose to have the machinations of the pontiffs resisted, without noise and clamour, rather than by publications and disputation, which often produce parties in a nation, excite the passions of men, disturb the public peace, and exasperate the pontiffs and alienate them from the French nation. At the same time, the public teachers are at full liberty to instil into their pupils the ancient principles of the nation, and to explain fully in the schools those views, by which the Romish lust of power has usually been for ages repressed. Some things take place, which are inconsistent with these principles; and restraint is laid upon those who think it very hard to depart from the customs and practices of their fathers; yet this is almost never done, unless either necessity, or the prospect of some great advantage, warrants it. Besides, the public authorities take good care that the pontiff's shall derive no great benefit from such condescensions to them. That this was the fact, in the affair of the Bull Unigenitus, in which many things occurred not agreeing with the ancient customs and opinions of the French, will be readily seen by those who will examine carefully the whole transaction, and compare the public decisions with the actual state of the country. It was judged best, frequently to admit a less evil, in order to avoid a greater. In short, the kings of France are wont to treat the sovereign pontiff as the ancient heroes, who descended into the infernal regions, treated the dog Cerberus, that guarded the gate of that dark world, (no offence is in guards; who, in the year 1662, ventured to insult the king's ambassador, the marquis Crequi and his lady, at the instigation, as it is reported, of Alexander's nephew. The French monarch determined to avenge the insult by a war: but on the pope's imploring his mercy, he granted him peace, in 1664, at Pisa, on the following conditions, among others: that he should send his nephew to Paris to ask pardon, and that he should brand the Corsican nation with infamy by a public edict, and erect a pillar in the Farnesian market, on which this crime and the punishment of it should be inscribed, for future generations. But this contest of the king was not so much with the pontiff, as head of the church, as with Alexander, considered as a prince and a temporal sovereign'. With the pontiff in his proper character the monarch had controversy in 1678 and the following years, when Innocent XI. filled the Romish see. The subject of this controversy was the right which the French call Régale; according to which, when a bishop dies, the king is allowed to collect and enjoy the revenues of the see, and in some respects to act in the place of bishop until the see is filled by the accession of a new bishop. Lewis wished to subject all the sees in his kingdom to this right but Innocent would not permit it, determining that the king's power in this particular should extend to no more sees than formerly. This contest was carried on with great passion on both sides. To the many admonitions and epistles of the pontiff the king opposed severe laws and mandates: and when the pope refused his approbation to the bishops appointed by the king, the latter, by his regal authority, caused them to be inducted into office; thus showing publicly that the Gallic church could get along without a pope. On the other hand, tended by this comparison,) sometimes throwing him a cake, when he growled, and sometimes awing him with their brandished swords, as occasion and circumstances demanded; and both for the same object, namely, that they might freely march on in their chosen way. These remarks I thought proper to extend thus far, lest those who read the bitter complaints and declamations of the Jansenists and Appellants, should put entire confidence in them; which many Protestants have done, and particularly those who are not well acquainted with the world. 1 See Jo. Wolfg. Jaeger's Historia Eccles. sæcul. xvii. decenn. vii. lib. ii. cap. ii. p. 180, &c. Voltaire's Siècle de Louis XIV. tom. i. p. 131, &c. The French also published some tracts, in which the history of this contest was related. Mémoires de la Reine Christine, tom. ii. p. 72, &c. [Jo. Gifford's History of France, vol. iv. p. 379. Tr.] the high-spirited and persevering pontiff denounced the vengeance of heaven against the king; and omitted nothing which might show that the ancient power of the pontiffs was not yet. extinct. The king, offended by this resolute behaviour, in the year 1682, assembled that famous convention of his bishops at Paris, in which the ancient opinions of the French respecting the power of the pontiff, as being exclusively spiritual, and inferior to that of councils, were stated in four propositions, adopted, confirmed, and set forth as the perpetual rule for all the clergy as well as for the schools. But Innocent received 2 See Jo. Henry Heidegger's Historia Papatus, period vii. § cccxli, &c. p. 555. Voltaire, Siècle de Louis XIV. tom. ii. p. 210, and numerous others, who either professedly, or incidentally, treat of the right of Régale, and the disputes that grew out of it. Henry Noris discusses very copiously the history of the origin and progress of this right, in his Istoria delle Investiture Ecclésiastique, p. 547, &c. in his Opp. vol. v. [See also Gilbert Burnet, in his History of the rights of Princes in the disposing of Ecclesiastical Benefices and Church lands, relating chiefly to the pretensions of the crown of France to the Régale, and the late contests with the court of Rome; London, 1682. 8vo. Tr.] 3 ["This convention was composed of 8 archbishops, 26 bishops, and 38 other clergymen ; who set their names to the four following propositions. I. That God has given to St. Peter, and to his successors, the vicars of Christ, and to the church itself, power in spiritual things, and things pertaining to salvation; but not power in civil and temporal things: Our Lord having said: "My kingdom is not of this world ;" and again: "Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and unto God the things are God's." And therefore that injunction of the apostle stands firm : Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. There is no power but is from God; and the powers that be are ordained of God." Therefore, in temporal things, kings and princes are subject to no ecclesiastical power of God's appointment; neither can they, either directly or indirectly, be deposed by authority of the 66 keys of the church; nor can their subjects be exempted from fidelity and obedience, nor be absolved from their oath of allegiance. And this principle, which is necessary to the public tranquillity, and no less useful to the church than to the state, ought by all means to be held fast, as being consonant to the word of God, to the tradition of the fathers, and to the example of the saints. II. That plenary power in spiritual things so exists in the apostolic see, and in the successors of Peter, the vicars of Christ, that at the same time the decrees of the holy ecumenical council of Constance, approved by the apostolic see, and confirmed by the practice of the Roman pontiffs and of the whole church, and observed by the Gallican church with perpetual veneration, respecting the authority of general councils, as contained in the fourth and fifth sessions, must also be valid, and remain immoveable. Nor does the Gallican church approve of those who infringe upon the force of these decrees, as if they were of dubious authority, or not fully approved, or who pervert the words of the council, by referring them solely to a time of schism. III. Hence, the exercise of the apostolic power is to be tempered by the canons, which the Spirit of God dictated, and which the reverence of the whole world has consecrated. The rules, customs, and regulations received by the Gallic realm and church, are also valid, and the terms of the fathers remain immoveable: and it concerns the majesty of the apostolic see, that statutes and usages confirmed by these this blow also with manly courage. Soon after, this violent contest was followed by another, when Innocent, in the year 1687, deprived the ambassadors resident at Rome, and among others the French ambassador, Lavardin, of the right of asylum; because it often rendered criminals secure of impunity. The king employed all the means his angry feelings could suggest, to induce the pontiff to restore the right he had taken away: but the latter met the king with an open front, and could by no means be persuaded, even to put on the semblance of yielding. This long conflict, which was injurious to both the parties, was at length closed by the death of Innocent. The subsequent pontiffs were more pliable, and therefore more ready to remove the principal causes of contention; yet they were not so careless as to forget the dignity of the Romish see. The right of asylum was abrogated with the consent of the king: the controversy respecting the right of Régale was adjusted by a compromise. The four celebrated propositions consent of so great a see and of such ehurches, should retain their appropriate validity. IV. In questions of faith, likewise, the supreme pontiff has a principal part, and his decrees have reference to all and singular churches; yet his judgment is not incapable of correction, unless it have the assent of the church. These propositions, approved by Lewis XIV, and registered by the Parliament of Paris, on the 23rd of March, 1682, were ordered to be publicly read and expounded in the schools from year to year, and to be subscribed to by all clergymen and professors in the universities. See Jac. Benig. Bossuet's Defensio Declarationis Cleri Gallicani; the documents at the beginning of vol. i. Tr.] These four propositions, which were extremely adverse to his wishes, the pontiff caused to be opposed both publicly and privately. The most distinguished person who defended the cause of the pontiff was cardinal Celestine Sfondrati; who, under the assumed name of Eugene Lombard, published: Regale Sacerdotium Romano Pontifici assertum, et quatuor propositionibus explicatum, 1684. 4to. The form of the types shows that the book VOL. IV. was printed in Switzerland. Next to him in the multitude of Italians, Spaniards, and Germans, who supported the tottering majesty of the pontiff against the French, Nicholas du Bois, a doctor of Louvain, stood conspicuous. He published some books on the subject, which are mentioned by Bossuet. But all these were confuted by the very eloquent bishop of Meaux, Jac. Benign. Bossuet, in a learned work composed by order of the king, but which was not published till long after his death, entitled: Defensio Declarationis celeberrimæ, quam de Potestate Ecclesiastica sanxit Clerus Gallicanus, 19 Martii, 1683, Luxemburgi, 2 vols. 1730. 4to. For the king forbade the publication of the Defence, because, after the death of Innocent, there seemed to be a great prospect of peace; which in fact soon followed. 5 See Jaeger, loc. cit. Decenn. ix. p. 19, &c. The Legatio Lavardini, which was published, 1688. 12mo. But especially Mémoires de la Reine Christine, tom. ii. p. 248, &c. For Christina engaged in this contest, and took sides with the king of France. "See Claude Fleury, Institutio Juris Eccles. Gallici, p. 454, &c. of the Latin translation. H |