That we may not commit the error of attributing to the holy mother
absurdities which she repudiates, we will inquire what are her
pretensions before arraigning her reason or justice in making them. An
unequivocal answer to this inquiry may ba obtained from the import
of her titles, from the bulls of her popes, from the canons of her
councils, and from the assertions of her acknowledged authorities. Some
of the pope's accredited titles are the following: "The Father of all
Fathers;" "The Chief High Priest and Prince of God;" "The Regent of the
House of the Lord;" "The Oracle of Religion;" "Our Most Holy Lord God;"
"Our Lord God the Pope;" "The Divine Majesty;" "The Victorious God and
Man in the See of Rome;" "The Lamb of God that taketh away the sins
of the world;" "The Bearer of Eternal Life;" "The Most Holy Father;"
"Priest of the World;" "God's Vicar General on Earth;" "The Most High
and Mighty God on Earth;" "More than God," &c, &c.
"Pius V., our reigning pope, is prince over all nations and kingdoms,
and he has power to pluck up, scatter, plant, ruin and build."--_Canon
of the Council of Trent._
"All mortals are judged by the pope, and the pope by nobody."--_Lateran
Canon_.
"It is necessary to salvation that all Christians be subject to the
pope."--_Pope Boniface VIII_
"Ireland, and all the isles on which Christ, the holy sun of
righteousness hath shone, do belong to the patrimony of. St. Peter and
the holy Catholic Church"--_Bull of Pope Adrian_.
"He (the pope) alone has the right to assume empire. All nations must
kiss his feet. His name is the only one to be uttered in the churches.
It is the only name in the world. He has the right to depose emperors.
No council can call itself general without the consent of the pope. No
chapter, no book can be reputed canonical without his authority. No one
can invalidate his sentence; he can abrogate those of all others. He
cannot be judged by any. All persons whatsoever are forbidden to condemn
him who is called to the apostolic chair. The Church of Rome is never
wrong, and will never fall into error. Every Roman pontiff when ordained
becomes holy."--_Bull of Gregory VII_.
"The pope is supreme over all the world, may impose taxes, and destroy
crowns and castles for the preservation of Christianity."--_St. Thomas
Aquinas_.
"The supremacy of the pope over all persons and things is the main
substance of Christianity."--Bellarmine.
"The pope is crowned with a triple crown, and is constituted over his
(God's) hand to regulate concerning all inferiors; he opens heaven,
sends the guilty to hell, confirms emperors, and orders the clerical
orders."--_Antonius of Florence, Dist. 40, Si Papa_.
"The pope is the only Vicar of God; his power is over all the world,
Pagan as well as Christian, the only Vicar of God, who has supreme power
and empire over all princes and kings of the earth."--_Blareus, De Rom,.
Eccl., Art. 5, sec. 19_.
"The pope has supreme power over kings and Christian princes; he may
remove them from office, and in their place put others."--_Browns, De
Rom. Pontiff, Cap. 46, p. 62_.
"The pope is the Lord of the whole world. The pope has temporal power;
his temporal power is most eminent. All other powers depend on the
pope."--_Marcinus, Jure Princep. Pom., Lib. 2, cap. 1, 2_.
"The pope is divine monarch, supreme emperor and king. Hence the pope
is crowned with a triple crown, as King of heaven, of earth, and of
hell. He is also above angels; so that if it were possible that angels
could err from the faith, they could be judged and excommunicated by the
pope."--_Feraris in Papa, Art. 11, No. 10_.
"The vicar of God in the place of God, remits to man the debt of a
plighted promise."--_Dens._ 4, 134.
"The pope can do all things that he wishes to do, and is empowered by
God to do all things that he himself can."--_Tiba_.
"The pope can transubstantiate sin into duty, and duty into
sin."--_Durand_.
"The bishop of Rome cannot even sin without being
praised.''--_Moscovius_.
"God's tribunal and the pope's tribunal are the same."--_Moscovius_.
From the loftiness of these pretensions, we are involuntarily impelled
to look to the holy fathers for corresponding principles, character and
conduct. If they possess the moral attributes of the deity, they must
possess also his physical attributes; and if they possess his physical
attributes, they can much easier create some world out of nothing over
which to domineer, than they can create a claim to all the crowns,
riches, and territory of the earth, out of the patrimony of St. Peter,
who was never worth a cent. If, indeed, the pope's tribunal and God's
tribunal are the same; if he above all in heaven would be the proper
judge, and anathematizer of angels, should any of them fall; if he can
annul the obligation of any oath which man is under to his maker, then
he must be the associate judge of God Almighty, equal to him in dignity,
superior to him in jurisdiction, and supereminent to him in authority.
If the pope can transubstantiate sin into duty and duty into sin, he
can annihilate all distinction between right and wrong, and convert the
worship of God into a sin, and the adoration of himself into a duty. But
these extraordinary pretensions, if unsupported by irrefragable proofs
of divine power and virtue; if the administrative abilities of the popes
have not transcended those of infinite wisdom and goodness; and if their
monarchy is not such a just embodiment of unquestionable and universally
accepted principles as has produced and maintained among their subjects
on earth a degree of peace, order, and concord superior to that which
subsists among the angels in heaven, then are their pretensions not only
presumptuous but ridiculous, not only arrogant but blasphemous; denying
the existence of God by claiming equality with him, contemning his
authority by usurping his prerogatives, and trampling under foot his
name and character, by presuming to exercise a superior degree of
executive and judicial authority.
In selecting a person among mortals capable of filling a throne so
exalted above the thrones of earth and heaven, we perceive the great
embarrassment under which those must have labored on whom the difficult
task was devolved. They claim, however to have succeeded by the aid of
divine inspiration, although it cannot be denied that the persons whom
they have selected were in general the weakest and most corrupt men of
their age.
In the course of time and experience it became the custom of the
bishops, on the demise of a pope, to recommend to the suffrages of
the college of cardinals a suitable person for his successor. As the
populace claimed and enjoyed the prerogative of confirming or rejecting
the choice of the bishops, and as nobles, from selfish and ambitious
motives, often interfered in the proceedings, the papal elections were
always scenes of excitement, and sometimes of disorder. The jealousy of
emperors interfered in the matter, also, claiming the right to arbitrate
between rival candidates, to interdict the consecration of any pope
elect until the forms of his election should be inspected by their
deputies, and approved by themselves, and to convene synods for the
purpose of trying any of the holy fathers who should be charged with
criminal conduct, and to punishing such of them as should be found
guilty. But the despotism of the church, naturally increasing with her
power, enabled her eventually to relieve herself of these unpleasant
restrictions, to assert independence of the secular powers, and to
maintain it by force of arms. This papal triumph removing the wholesome
check which had hitherto restrained and softened the violence of
episcopal ambition, left the claims of rival candidates for the
vicarship of Christ to be disputed by the anathemas of the clergy and
the frenzy of the mob. The knell of a pope's death became the tocsin of
war, and the election of his successor a bloody struggle for political
interest. Rival aspirants appeared in the ecclesiastical arena;
acrimonious contests ensued; adherents were bought; competitors
insulted; votes extorted by threats; Rome polluted with blood; and the
peace of Christendom endangered. To defeat a hostile or elect a friendly
candidate, nobles and princes would appeal to the passions of the mob,
and excite them to ungovernable fury. Emperors would interpose not only
in the election, but in the administration of a pope. They often
obliged the inspired college to select such a candidate as suited their
interest; sometimes they prevented, and at other times anticipated
its action. Through the influence and intrigues of two royal harlots,
Theodora and Marozia, the chair of St. Peter was filled with their
lovers. Pope John XII., when he was eighteen years old, and Pope
Benedict IX., when he was twelve years, were, through the wealth and
power of those prostitutes, elevated to the papal dignity. Pope John XII
was deposed for ingratitude and treachery by the Emperor Otho I.,
who caused the inspired college to elect Leo VII., and placed him by
military force on the apostolic throne. Pope John XIII. was elected by
the inspired college at the command of Otho II., Pope Clement II. at the
command of Henry III., and Pope Clement III. at the Command of Henry
IV. Clement II. was elected to displace Benedict IX., Clement III. to
displace Gregory VII., Boniface I. to displace Dioscorus, and Martin
V. to displace John XXII., Gregory XII. and Benedict XII. three
cotemporaneous holy fathers. The antagonistic al popes would mutually
denounce each other as anti-popes, and tax their ingenuity to effect
each other's destruction. Benedict XII. disposed of his rival by
violence; John XIV. incarcerated his in a dungeon, in which he starved
to death.
Besides the rivalship which infuriated opposing candidates, and the
intermeddling of princes in their elections in order to secure a pliant
instrument for their political designs, the inspired college itself
was often rent into revengeful and irreconcilable factions. So violent
sometimes were these conflicts, that the college became divided into two
parties, each of which proceeded to separate churches, and electing its
favorite, presented him to the people as having been chosen by divine
inspiration. Two antagonistical popes thus being elected in accordance
with papal usages, divine inspiration, and canonical law, it became
difficult, without the aid of another inspired college, to determine
which of the two popes was the genuine holy father. Sometimes this
question was decided by priority in the moment of an election; sometimes
popular sanction or imperial preference resolved the difficulty; and
at other times different sections of Christendom arriving at opposite
conclusions, supported different popes. At one period two popes divided
the patrimony of St. Peter, the one reigning over one portion of it,
and the other over another; and at another time three popes asserted
jurisdiction over it. These rival holy fathers would incessantly
encounter one another with bulls, anathemas, and swords; and invoking
foreign arms in their support would distract, not only Rome, but all
Europe, with their irreconcilable controversies.
In order to abate the calamity of the papal elections, Pope Alexander
III., chosen in 1179, abolished the mode of electing a pope in which
the clergy and people participated, and invested the sole right in the
college of cardinals. This expedient prevented the frequency of double
elections, and their tumultuous and bloody schisms. But still the
disorderly elements which shook the church could not be entirely
eradicated without the abolishment of the papal throne. The passions and
private interests of the members of the sacred college; their wish
to secure the honors and emoluments of an independent reign; their
insidious machinations to become popes themselves; often deprived
the church, under the new electoral method, of the benefits of a holy
father. An interregnum of months, sometimes of years, would ensue
between the death of a pope and the election of his successor, while
disgraceful negotiations were always visible. Pope Clement IV. promised
the crown of both of the Sicilies to Charles of Anjou, on condition that
he would use his influence with the inspired college in favor of his
election to the papal throne; and Pope Boniface VIII., after expending
large sums of money on an election, excommunicated the obstinate
cardinals who had refused to vote for him.
The ambition and corruption of the cardinals having kept the papal
throne vacant for three years previous to the election of Gregory X., he
issued a bull in 1265, requiring the members of the college to assemble
in Rome nine days after the demise of a pope, and after taking an oath
to abjure all previous understanding, to retire with a single attendant
into a common apartment, and to remain there until they should be able
to agree on a choice. If within three days the influence of the Holy
Ghost should not be sufficiently powerful to enable them to arrive at a
canonical agreement, the luxury of their repast was to be abridged to
a single dish at dinner and supper; and if within eight days these
privations should still be insufficient to quicken the divine influence
on the grossness of human nature, the cardinals were then condemned to
subsist on a small allowance of bread, water and wine. The stimulus
of this regimen has seldom failed to produce a speedy and harmonious
agreement.
But the corruption of the Holy See was the growth of ages, and had
carefully been systematized by the hand of experienced craft. It could
not therefore be entirely eradicated by any modification in the papal
electoral forms; although improvements might be introduced, making them
the occasion of less scandal. The fact that an attendant on a cardinal
during the session of an electoral college is worth an independent
fortune, is significant of the corrupt machinations by which the holy
fathers continue still to be elected. The bull of Pope Gregory X.
has, indeed, prevented the former frequency of schisms, but it was
insufficient to prevent one of seventy years' duration, which occurred
on the death of Pope Benedict XI, in 1348. The inspired college having
assembled in accordance with the requirements of the canon, sworn to
abjure all previous understanding, became, nevertheless, divided on
the question whether a Frenchman or an Italian should be elected as
the vicar of Christ. Two-thirds of the cardinals were in favor of a
Frenchman, but a mob of thirty thousand Romans preferred an Italian.
"Death or an Italian Pope," shouted an infuriated crowd, as it gathered
around the Vatican, and made preparations for burning any of the
inspired college who should vote for a French candidate; while the
cathedral bells, in harmony with the discordant clamor of the
mob, pealed forth an ominous warning. Under the terror of these
intimidations, the inspired college submitted to the wishes of the mob;
and electing Urban VI., an Italian, and presenting him to the populace
declared, according to usage, that they had been inspired to choose
him through the influence of the Holy Ghost. The disappointed cardinals
disguised their mortification under the warmest congratulations to the
newly elected pope, but gratified their secret malice by entering into
clandestine negotiation with Philip IV., King of France, and stipulating
with him to accommodate his interest by electing a pope in the place of
Urban, who should conform to his wishes in all things. After having by
flattery, and professions of friendship and allegiance, sufficiently
deceived the vicar of Christ, they retired to Fundi, and,
excommunicating him, elected Pope Clement in his place. The papal
monarchy hence became divided into two antagonistical bodies, the one
having its capitol at Rome, the other at Avignon in France.
The aspirants to the dignity of the vicarship of Christ endeavored, in
general, to obtain its holy honors by the employment of artifice and
intrigue. They were ready to flatter any power, assume any semblance,
agree to any terms, and profess any sentiment that promised to favor
their design. At the council of Constance, Pope Martin V. advocated the
most liberal ecclesiastical reforms, but recanted his heresy as soon as
he obtained the triple crown. Pope Alexander VI. was elected by
bribing Cardinals Cibo, Spozza and Rearis. Pope Alexander VII., while a
cardinal, assumed the semblance of great humility and sanctity, but no
sooner had he become a successor of St. Peter, than he threw off the
cumbrous mask by which he gained the honor, and openly began a course
of dissipation and luxurious indulgence. Sixtus VI. played a deep and
crafty game to win the papal crown. In order to deceive the cardinals he
assumed the appearance of an infirm old man, deaf, blind, and scarcely
able to hobble on a crutch; and who desired nothing but obscurity,
devotion and repose. By the agency of the confessional he correctly
informed himself of the wishes of princes and the secret designs
of cardinals. Under a mask of profound dissimulation he gained the
confidence of kings and nobles, and evaded the scrutiny of cardinals.
Having transformed himself into the semblance of such a convenient tool
as the members of the college desired to place on the apostolic throne,
they chose him unanimously; but repented of it unanimously immediately
afterwards. No sooner had the electoral formalities been con-concluded
than, in the presence of the cardinals, he raised himself from his
former stooping position, contemptuously threw away his crutch, and with
a bounding and vigorous step displayed to the horror consternation of
the sacred college that it had chosen for a holy father, not a pliant
simpleton, but a man of authority, determination, and sagacity. Pope
Celestine was elected solely on account of his ignorance and mental
imbecility. For twenty-seven months the disputes of the cardinals
had kept the papal throne without an incumbent. To conciliate their
differences they finally agreed to elect Celestine, who was celebrated
for his intellectual deficiency and profound ignorance of the world.
When this holy father entered Apulea after his consecration, he
symbolically rode upon an ass. But his incapability of transacting
the ordinary business the Holy See, obliged the sacred college to
reassemble, and endeavor by the aid of the Holy Ghost to select a more
suitable vicar of Christ. It succeeded in electing Boniface VIII., who
possessed more business capacity, but less moral integrity; and who,
standing in mortal dread of his simple and unaspiring predecessor, and
fearing the instability of the apostolic throne while he was at large,
pusillanimously imprisoned him for life.
It is a singular fact that while distant potentates trembled at the
thunders of the Vatican, the subjects of Rome scoffed with impunity at
its insolent pretensions. The tyranny and corruption of the holy fathers
have frequently been met with contempt and insurrection by the populace.
The cardinals have at times been stripped, beaten, and trodden under
foot. The priests have been caught by mobs, which, after digging out
their eyes, and crowning their heads with ludicrous mitres, have sent
them as admonitions to the pope. The sacred processions, headed by the
holy fathers, have been saluted with showers of stones. The vicegerents
of God, while on the apostolic throne, have been seized by the throat,
rudely buffeted, torn from their chair and incarcerated in dungeons.
Laudislaus, King of Naples, whom the pope had entitled "_General of
the Church_" in consideration of services rendered, thrice afterwards
entered Rome as a master, profaned the churches, violated the virgins,
plundered the citizens, and worshipped at the shrine of St. Peter. The
holy fathers, assailed by subjects at home and princes abroad, were
constantly fleeing from the insecure patrimony of St. Peter to find
refuge in France, Anangni, Perugia, Viterbo, or some other locality.
Sometimes they retaliated the insults of their Catholic subjects, and
levied armies to chastise them; and, on one occasion they had, in a
friendly conference, eleven deputies of the people murdered in cold
blood, and their bodies cast into the streets.
When the Holy See was transplanted from Rome to Avignon, the vices,
corruption, and tumults which were characteristic were transplanted
along with it. The same popular insubordination and papal insecurity
prevailed; the people were seditious and the popes insulted. A Catholic
freebooter at the head of his band, once entered Avignon, plundered
the people and churches, compelled the pope and cardinals to ransom
themselves by the payment of an enormous sum of gold, and to absolve him
and his fellow robbers from the guilt of the transaction, and from all
their crime.
Notwithstanding the ostentatious sanctity and gorgeous show with which
the church invests her external form, her throne has never been occupied
by a distinguised paragon of virtue; nor has it, notwithstanding her
liberal indulgence to moral turpitude, often been graced by those whom
she dared to canonize for the purity of their conduct. High principled
and lofty minded men have scorned to aspire to her dignities; and had
they not, they still could not have stooped to the dishonorable means
by which they are to be obtained. With pretensions demoralizing her
officials by destroying their sense of moral accountability, fostering
their vanity, pride and superciliousness, and dissolving all restraints
on the instigations of malice, revenge, cupidity, licentiousness,
duplicity and tyranny, it would be absurdity to expect to find in their
character any exalted degree of moral excellence. Look at those whom the
inspired college has chosen vicegerent of God. Where we might expect to
see the Solons, Cimons, and Catos of the age, we always see despotism,
generally duplicity, and often profligacy and cruelty. Look at Pope
Gregory, the Great. Was he not an aspiring and unscrupulous despot?
While pretending to wish to be unknown, did he not employ every device
to become the most notorious man of his age. To pave his way to the
pontifical throne, he devoted his patrimony to the use of convents, and
immured himself in them. By seeming to resist, he secured his election;
and by addressing an artful remonstrance against its confirmation to the
emperor, he removed every obstacle in the way of his consecration. To
disguise more deeply his ambition, he solicited a merchant, whom he
knew could not accommodate him, to convey him secretly from Rome; and,
finally, overacted his part by secreting himself in a wilderness, and
building a fire that his retreat might be discovered. His financial
skill was unquestioned. He induced Recared, King of Spain, to exchange a
great amount of gold and a valuable collection of jewels for a few hairs
of St. John the Baptist, a piece of the true cross, a key which, it was
alleged, contained some grains of a chain with which St. Peter had
been shackled while in a dungeon. He also sanctified the most atrocious
assassination that was, perhaps, ever perpetrated. The Roman legions
having become demoralized, the Emperor Maurice attempted to reduce them
to order by the enforcement of rigorous military discipline. This effort
produced a general dissatisfaction among the troops, which culminated in
the election of Phocus, an obscure soldier, in the place of Maurice. The
emperor, desirous of restoring tranquility to the nation, magnanimously
abdicated the purple. Never having heard of the name of Phocus before,
he inquired of his general who he was. "Alas," replied he, "a great
coward, and I fear will be a murderer." This prophecy was soon
fulfilled. Phocus sent to the private dwelling of Maurice assassins,
who, before the eyes of their father coldly butchered his five sons,
and then consummated the horrible tragedy with the murder of the emperor
himself. After this barbarous act had been perpetrated, Pope
Gregory, although he owed his elevation to the indulgence of Maurice,
complimented Phocus on his good fortune, and rejoiced that his piety and
benignity had raised him to the imperial throne.
From this model pope let us turn to Pope John XII., elected in 956. In
ambition unprincipled, in cruelty inexorable, in dissoluteness cold and
calculating; the annals of history scarcely furnish an equal compound of
moral deformity. Elevated to the papal throne through the influence of
a prostitute, he made the principles of his patroness the maxims of his
conduct. He was a drunkard, a profligate, a blasphemer, and a murderer.
He passed his time in hunting and gambling. He swore by the Pagan
Gods and Goddesses. He lived in public adultery with Roman matrons.
He converted the papal palace into a brothel, and made it a school for
education in the arts of prostitution. His rapes of widows, wives,
and virgins were so frequent, that female pilgrims were deterred from
visiting the tomb of St. Peter, for fear of being violated by the holy
father while kneeling at his shrine, to invoke his aid in the practice
of chastity and piety.
Now advert to Gregory VII., elected in 1075, and see what baseness,
trickery, avarice, and insolence have been consecrated as holy in the
character of a vicar of Christ. Protected from reproach by his claim
to infallibility, he presumed to outrage the sense of common decency
by living with the Countess Matilda under suspicious circumstances; and
conceiting that he was endowed with supreme power over all kings and
governments, and that if they resist his authority he must punish
them, he undertook to dethrone Henry IV., Emperor of Germany and Italy,
because that prince had exercised the right of investiture contrary to
the interdiction of the papal bulls. For this insolent proceed-ure the
emperor determined to depose him, and drive him from Rome. Penetrating
the emperor's design, he attempted to defeat it by buying the adherence
of the Italian populace; but this movement was effectually counterpoised
by the emperor's purchasing the support of the Italian nobility. He
also convened a council at by which Gregory was deposed; and another at
Brisen at which Clement III. was elected. To place Clement in possession
of the papal dignity, Henry formed a coalition with the Emperor Alexius:
to defeat this project Gregory formed an alliance with Robert Guiscard,
Duke of Apulia. The arms of Robert were victorious, and Gregory was
delivered from his perilous situation. But victory sometimes is as
disastrous as defeat. The formidable allies of the holy father, which
success had introduced into the city of Rome, comprehended a numerous
band of Saracens who hated the Christian name and capital, although they
had for money and the license of war been induced to take up arms in
defence of the sacerdotal monarch. A furious sedition happening to
arise in the city among the inhabitants, the Saracens eagerly availed
themselves of the occasion to gratify their hatred of Rome and of
Christianity. They commenced murdering the citizens, plundering
dwellings, profaning churches, and firing buildings; nor was their
revenge satiated until they had, not only depopulated the city, but
reduced the greater portion of it to ashes. This catastrophe completed
the disgrace of Gregory. Finding himself universally detested as
its author, he had to flee for safety to Salerno, leaving Henry to
consummate, without opposition, his design of placing Clement III. upon
the apostolic throne.
From the conduct of this crafty and talented sacerdotal despot, let us
turn a glance at pope Innocent II., elected in 1130. The elevation of
this Pope was the tocsin of a war which, during his administration, kept
Rome and Italy in a state of violent convulsion. The sacred college not
being able canonically to concur in his election, became divided into
two obstinate factions, each of which elected a vicegerent of God;
the one being Pope Innocent II., and the other Pope Anaclitus. Two
implacable despots being thus authorized to claim the papal throne, a
furious holy war was inevitable. Anaclitus having the heavier artillery
drove Innocent from Rome; but France and Germany espousing the cause
of the fugitive, enabled him to secure a sufficient army to effect his
return. He was, nevertheless, obliged to limit his papal jurisdiction to
one portion of the city; his antagonist being too strongly entrenched
in the other to be dislodged. But even from this limited domain he was
again driven by the arms of his formidable rival, and again reinstated
by the forces of the temporal power. The two holy fathers continued to
hate, persecute and anathematize each other, until death settled the
sanguinary controversy by the removal of Anaclitus. Relieved of the
terrors of a powerful adversary, Innocent II. convoked the Lateran
Council, in which one thousand bishops condemned the soul of Anaclitus,
and excommunicated Rogers of Sicily for having supported the schismatic.
On account of this papal insolence, Robert declared war against Pope
Innocent; and taking him prisoner, obliged him to absolve him from
the sentence of the excommunication, and to invest him with the papal
provinces of Apulia, Capua, and Calibria.
Let us now direct a moment's attention to Pope Innocent III, elected in
1198, who, when receiving the triple crown exclaimed: "The church has
given me a crown as a symbol of temporalities she has conferred on me a
mitre in token of spiritual power;--a mitre for the priesthood; a crown
for the kingdom; making me the vicar of him who bears on his garments
and thighs, 'The King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.'" Inflated with this
popular conceit he imagined that he was supreme prince over all nations
and kingdoms, and that he had a divine light to pluck up, destroy,
scatter, ruin, plant and build whenever a notion happened to inspire his
presumptuous brain. He arbitrarily obliged the prefect of Rome to swear
allegiance to him, demanded royal homage of Marguard of Romagna,
and upon the refusal of that prince to compromise his sov-reignty by
submitting to such unwarrantable dictations, deprived him of the duchy
of Mark Ancona. With a despotic hand he wrung Spoleto from Duke Conrad.
He excommunicated Philip of France for having repudiated his wife,
and obliged him to sue for mercy at his feet. He deposed King John, of
England, for refusing to confirm the election of a bishop; instigated
France to declare war against him, obliged him to resign his kingdom to
the See of Rome, to pay large sums of money for absolution, and to hold
his throne as a papal fief. He exercised an oppressive despotism over
the temporal provinces of Christendom, established inqisisitorial
tribunals, suspended religious worship by interdicts, and urged the
cruel persecution of the Albigenses.
When his military forces were ready for combat, he is said to have
exclaimed: "Sword, sword, whet thyself for vengeance."
Turn from this ornament of the papal throne, and consider the character
and administration of Pope Boniface VIII., elected in 1295. Pliable
and revengeful, presumptuous and ambitious, he sought to make tools of
princes, and slaves of subjects. On his way to the Lateran palace, after
his election, the King of Hungary and the King of Sicily, in token of
their inferior rank, held the bridle of his horse; and with crowns on
their heads waited on him at table as menials. He boldly excommunicated
Philip IV., of France, but cowardly sought to escape the penalty by
taking refuge in the fortress of Anangni. While luxuriating in this
sumptuous retreat, in fancied security, William of Nosgeret surrounded
the palace with three hundred horse, and a scuffle ensued in which the
vicegerent of God was rudely seized by the throat, severely kicked and
cuffed, and cast into prison. A mob, however, soon released him from
confinement. In view of his flagitious and undeniable acts of duplicity,
simony, usurpation and profligacy, King Philip had resolved to summon a
council at Lyons for the purpose of deposing him; but the chastisement
of incarceration which he had undergone so mortified his pride, that
within three days after his liberation he died in a paroxysm of rage and
fury.
Look at the character of Pope Alexander III., elected in 1159, who,
demoralized and misled by papal pretensions, distracted all Europe,
and kept the Holy See in a state of perpetual insurrection. Under the
protection of Frederic I. the anti-popes Victor III., Pascal III., and
Calaxtus III., successively arose against him; repeatedly driving him
from Rome; sometimes to France; sometimes to Anangni; and sometimes to
Venice. But fortune eventually favoring him, he wreaked the heaviest
vengeance on the heads of his antagonists. He obliged Frederic to kiss
his feet, and to hold the stirrup of his horse. He laid Scotland under
an interdict.
He restored the thrones of England and Germany on conditions that
augmented his power. And in the exercise of his apostolic authority gave
the world calamitous proof that ecclesiastical supremacy is incompatible
with the peace of the world.
Regard for an instant the character of Pope Alexander VI., elected in
1523, who perfected in his papal character the dissipation which had
disgraced his youth. His policy, both domestic and foreign, was
base, treacherous and execrable. He undertook to seize on the Italian
provinces by the most cruel and dishonorable methods. He attempted to
extort money from the different sections of Christendom by fraud and
force. He seduced his own daughter; and gave notorious evidence of the
profligacy of his life by five illegitimate children. He conspired
with his son, Cardinal Caesar Borgia, to poison four cardinals, but the
conspirators drinking the poison themselves, became the victims of their
own treachery.
Look at Pope Julius II., elected in 1505, and mark his savage,
ferocious, and warlike character. Ambitious of military renown, he
commanded his army in person, and without regard to the rights of
nations or individuals gratified his lust of power and dominion. In the
prosecution of the interests of the Holy See, he excommunicated the Duke
of Ferrara, gave Navara to Spain, besieged Muandolo, colleagued against
the republic of Venice, and made war upon Louis XII., King of France.
Behold Clement V., elected in 1305, and mark the gross simony,
nepotism, and arrogance which disgraced his administration. Hear him
excommunicating Henry VII. of Germany, and his allies, for his refusing
to mediate between him and Robert; and hear him pronouncing a curse on
the Venitians for their refusing to submit to his dictation; declaring
them infamous, confiscating their gold and war vessels, abolishing their
governmental offices, and absolving the subjects from obedience to the
laws.
Turn to John XXII., elected in 1410, and see if any vice, public or
private, debarred a candidate from the papal throne. In his youth a
pirate, the sanctity of his pontifical character neither restrained nor
concealed the precocious viciousness which he had manifested. Although
he may have amused himself with the popish conceit that a holy father
cannot sin without being praised, yet the Council of Constance, on
the testimony of thirty-seven good Catholic witnesses, found seventy
indictments against him, and degraded him from the papal dignity. Among
the crimes for which he was deposed were simony, murder, rape, sodomy,
and illicit intercourse with his brother s wife, and with three hundred
nuns. This holy father died in jail.
Look at Julius III., elected in 1550, whose unnatural licentiousness
transcending all bounds of decency, sought its gratification with boys,
men, and even cardinals. Hear Sixtus V., in the college of cardinals,
pronouncing a eulogy on the assassinators of Henry III. King of France,
and comparing them with Judith and Eleazer. Hear Alexander I., as he
placed his foot on Frederic, King of Denmark, exclaim: "Thus shalt thou
tread upon the lion and the adder." Hear Pius V., as he excommunicated
Queen Elizabeth, exclaim: "I have this day set thee over the nations,
over the kingdoms, to root out, to pull down, to destroy, to build
up and to throw down." Witness Pope Leo III. abruptly crowning
Charlemagne, and to the astonishment of the world investing him with all
the titles, honors, and regal ornaments of the Caesars. Witness Gregory
IV. fomenting discord between Charlemagne and his sons, then between the
sons themselves, then tampering with the officers of the imperial army,
then absolving them from their oath of allegiance, then uttering to
Louis I., son and successor of Charlemagne, that arrogant assertion:
"Know my chair is above the emperor's throne;" and ultimately see the
design of these atrocious acts, in the claim of the subsequent popes to
the dominion of the Caesars, by virtue of the donation of Charlemagne.
Look at the two hundred and ninety-seven popes that have filled the
papal chair: Twenty-four of them were anti-popes; twenty-six were
deposed; nineteen were compelled to abandon Rome; twenty-eight were kept
on their throne only by foreign intervention; fifty-four were obliged
to rule over foreign parts; sixty-four died by violence; eighteen were
poisoned; one was shut up in a cage; one was strangled; one smothered;
one died by having nails driven in his temples; one by a noose around
his neck; and only one hundred and fifty-three out of the whole number
have proved themselves at all worthy. Read the papal annals; hear the
frequent and atrocious anathemas of the popes; mark the vices that have
continued century after century to disgrace the administrations of
the holy fathers, and say if profane history affords a catalogue
of monarchs so black with crime, so unprincipled in ambition, so
remorseless in revenge. Their pretensions were made not from conscious
right, but to justify intended usurpations. They claimed to be endowed
with power to do whatever God himself could do, in order to forge a
plea for governing the world as despots. They claimed the prerogative of
absolving subjects from their oaths of allegiance, that they might rule
kings with absolute authority. They claimed that they could not sin
without being praised, that they might commit any crime without being
censured. They claimed the ability of transubstantiating sin into duty,
and duty into sin, that they might justify themselves in adopting any
means to obtain an end. They claimed all the authority and holiness of
heaven, that they might be worshipped and feared as Gods. But while they
had the audacity to prefer these claims, it is not a supposable case
that the dullest of them was such a stupendous fool as to believe in
the validity of his own pretensions. With a triple crown on their heads,
with the keys of heaven and hell in their hands, with an assertion on
their lips that they are the king of kings, and the proprietors of
all the thrones, domains, revenues, gold and gems of the earth, they
seriously pretend that they are the successors of St. Peter, an humble
fisherman, who like his master, had not where to lay his head, and whose
patrimony, which they claim to inherit, must have consisted at most
of but an empty purse, a staff, a suit of unfashionable garments, and,
perhaps, some old fishing nets. And while they have been elected by
emperors, by mobs, by arms and clubs, by bribery, and by every species
of corruption, they affirm that they have been chosen by the inspiration
of the Holy Ghost.
The papal monarchy was neither designed nor calculated to foster the
growth of either truth, reason or virtue. The policy and measures
which it adopted were never intended to correct vice, but to make
it administer to the importance of its power, and the wealth of its
coffers. Its design has always been to reign supreme; and in conformity
with a policy dictated by this design, it has destroyed every virtue
that obtruded an obstacle to the accomplishment of its purposes, and
protected every vice that appeared to favor their success.
Such being the principles of the papal government, it could not be hoped
that the holy fathers would be the friends of truth and reform. In fact
they must have been conscious that a rigid system of reform would have
swept them from their thrones, and doomed many of them to confinement in
the dungeons of a penitentiary. Accordingly we see that while temporal
princes, some clergymen, and numerous laymen loudly demanded reform
in the head and body of the church, the popes strenuously opposed the
project as a dangerous innovation. When summons had been issued
by temporal princes for the assembling of councils for purposes of
reformation, the pontiffs frequently forbid obedience to them. When
circumstances have obliged popes to issue orders for the convocation of
such assemblages, they have rendered them nugatory by neglecting to fix
the time and place to their meeting. When compelled to be more definite
in their conduct and language, they have endeavored, by changing the
time and place for holding a proposed council, to defeat the object
which they were obliged to sanction. When their cautious vacillations
have been summarily arrested, and all the obstacles they had obtruded
removed, and a council for reform had been assembled, they endeavored by
base and corrupt means to control its action, and defeat its usefulness.
When in defiance of papal remonstrances, threats and intrigues,
reformatory decrees have been passed by councils, the popes have-,
nevertheless, attempted to nullify them by evasion, trickery or neglect.
Pope Gregory declared that a council could be useful only under a
Catholic prince. Pius II. forbid an appeal to a council. Julius II.
interdicted the assembling of one after it had been summoned. When
the united voice of princes and subjects compelled Pius VII. to call a
council, he nullified his own summons by neglecting to fit the time for
its meeting. When a critical state of public affairs had led Pope Paul
to imagine that he could shape the proceedings of an inspired council
according to his private interest, he convoked the Council of Trent; but
finding his intrigues inadequate to his ambition, he induced his legates
to exhaust its time in frivolous ceremonies and useless excursions.
When the Council of Pisa obliged Alexander VII. to pledge his word to
prosecute certain specified reforms, he adopted no measure in compliance
with his word. When the Council of Basle enacted decrees of reform, the
artifice of Pope Eugenius rendered them of no avail. When the Council
of Constance, after deposing three rival popes, elected Martin V. in
consideration of the zeal with which he had advocated church reform,
it was soon apparent that his zeal for reform was his ambition to be
elevated to the papal throne, and that it all had expired as soon as his
election was secure. Pope Pius denounced the reforms which Joseph II.,
of Austria, proposed to introduce into his kingdom, and adopted every
expedient to counteract them: When the tyranny and profligacy of the
monastic orders had awakened the indignation of all Christendom, the
vicar of Christ, by means of bulls, anathemas and intrigues, defended
them with ferocious zeal. When the Jesuists were banished from England
for treasonable machinations, from Italy for profligacy, from Portugal
for attempts at assassination, and from the other parts of Europe for
execrable conduct, the popes not only defended, but recommended them as
the most pious and useful members of the church. When the papal throne
was restored by England, a heretic, and Russia, a schismatic, in
conjunction with the Catholic powers, after it had been abolished by
France, the pope, in defiance of the wishes and resolutions of his
liberators, and in violation of the obligations of honor and gratitude,
restored the barbarous inquisition, the obnoxious order of the Jesuists,
and the superstitious practices of the dark ages.
The holy mother, indeed, has given birth to little besides
monstrosities. The features and principles of her offspring cast a dark
suspicion on her chastity. They usually wear the lineament, if not
the cloven foot of the arch-fiend. Ambition, duplicity, treachery,
viciousness, and immorality are deeply featured in their countenances,
and some of them seem to be an incarnation of every crime that could
entitle a human being to be considered as the offspring and heir of
hell. If there were some honorable exceptions, they were like stars on a
stormy night, obscured by the heavy mist through which they shone. Some
popes, it is true, have been great governors; men of great foresight and
enterprise; men who, looking beyond their age, have prepared measures
that have successfully met future exegencies; but their sagacity has
been quickened by ambition and avarice; and their great talents have
been wasted on duplicity and intrigue. The less exceptionable of them
have acknowledged and deplored the corruption of the Holy See; but they
seem to think it is incurable, for their hopes of the future are always
darkened by the recollection of the past. Hence we hear Nicholas V.,
as he bestowed an office on the worthy, say: "Take this, you will not
always have a Nicholas to bestow a gift on the ground of merit."