In the time of Leo there were none of these things. It was a poor,

miserable, ignorant, anarchical, superstitious age. In such an age the

concentration of power in the hands of an intelligent man is always a

public benefit. Certainly it was wielded wisely by Leo, and for

beneficent ends. He established the patristic literature. The writings

of the great Fathers were by him scattered over Europe, and were studied

by the clergy, so far as they were able to study anything. All the great

doctrines of Augustine and Jerome and Athanasius were defended. The

whole Church was made to take the side of orthodoxy, and it remained

orthodox to the times of Bernard and Anselm. Order was restored to the

monasteries; and they so rapidly gained the respect of princes and good

men that they were richly endowed, and provision made in them for the

education of priests. Everywhere cathedral schools were established. The

canon law supplanted in a measure the old customs of the German forests

and the rude legislation of feudal chieftains. When bishops quarrelled

with monasteries or with one another, or even with barons, appeals were

sent to Rome, and justice was decreed. In after times these appeals were

settled on venal principles, but not for centuries. The early Mediaeval

popes were the defenders of justice and equity. And they promoted peace

among quarrelsome barons, as well as Christian truth among divines. They

set aside, to some extent, those irascible and controversial councils

where good and great men were persecuted for heresy. These popes had no

small passions to gratify or to stimulate. They were the conservators of

the peace of Europe, as all reliable historians testify. They were

generally very enlightened men,--the ablest of their times. They

established canons and laws which were based on wisdom, which stood the

test of ages, and which became venerable precedents.

The Catholic polity was only gradually established, sustained by

experience and reason. And that is the reason why it has been so

permanent. It was most admirably adapted to rule the ignorant in ages of

cruelty and crime,--and, I am inclined to think, to rule the ignorant

and superstitious everywhere. Great critics are unanimous in their

praises of that wonderful mechanism which ruled the world for one

thousand years.

Nor did the popes, for several centuries after Leo, grasp the temporal

powers of princes. As political monarchs they were at first poor and

insignificant. The Papacy was not politically a great power until the

time of Hildebrand, nor a rich temporal power till nearly the era of the

Reformation. It was a spiritual power chiefly, just such as it is

destined to become again,--the organizer of religious forces; and, so

far as these are animated by the gospel and reason, they are likely to

have a perpetuated influence. Who can predict the end of a spiritual

empire which shows no signs of decay? It is not half so corrupt as it

was in the time of Boniface VIII., nor half so feeble as in the time of

Leo X. It is more majestic and venerable than in the time of Luther. Nor

are Protestants so bitter and one-sided as they were fifty years ago.

They begin to judge this great power by broader principles; to view it

as it really is,--not as "Antichrist" and the "scarlet mother," but as a

venerable institution, with great abuses, having at heart the interests

of those whom it grinds down and deceives.

But, after all, I do not in this Lecture present the Papacy of the

eleventh century or the nineteenth, but the Papacy of the fifth century,

as organized by Leo. True, its fundamental principles as a government

are the same as then. These principles I do not admire, especially for

an enlightened era. I only palliate them in reference to the wants of a

dark and miserable age, and as a critic insist upon their notable

success in the age that gave them birth.

With these remarks on the regimen, the polity, and the government of the

Church of which Leo laid the foundation, and which he adapted to

barbarous ages, when the Church was still a struggling power and

Christianity itself little better than nominal,--long before it had much

modified the laws or changed the morals of society; long before it had

created a new civilization,--with these remarks, acceptable, it may be,

neither to Catholics nor to Protestants, I turn once more to the man

himself. Can you deny his title to the name of Great? Would you take him

out of the galaxy of illustrious men whom we still call Fathers and

Saints? Even Gibbon praises his exalted character. What would the

Church of the Middle Ages have been without such aims and aspirations?

Oh, what a benevolent mission the Papacy performed in its best ages,

mitigating the sorrows of the poor, raising the humble from degradation,

opposing slavery and war, educating the ignorant, scattering the Word of

God, heading off the dreadful tyranny of feudalism, elevating the

learned to offices of trust, shielding the pious from the rapacity of

barons, recognizing man as man, proclaiming Christian equalities,

holding out the hopes of a future life to the penitent believer, and

proclaiming the sovereignty of intelligence over the reign of brute

forces and the rapacity of ungodly men! All this did Leo, and his

immediate successors. And when he superadded to the functions of a great

religious magistrate the virtues of the humblest Christian,--parting

with his magnificent patrimony to feed the poor, and proclaiming (with

an eloquence unusual in his time) the cardinal doctrines of the

Christian faith, and setting himself as an example of the virtues which

he preached,--we concede his claim to be numbered among the great

benefactors of mankind. How much worse Roman Catholicism would have been

but for his august example and authority! How much better to educate the

ignorant people, who have souls to save, by the patristic than by

heathen literature, with all its poison of false philosophies and

corrupting stimulants! Who, more than he and his immediate successors,

taught loyalty to God as the universal Sovereign, and the virtues

generated by a peaceful life,--patriotism, self-denial, and faith? He

was a dictator only as Bernard was, ruling by the power of learning and

sanctity. As an original administrative genius he was scarcely surpassed

by Gregory VII. Above all, he sought to establish faith in the world.

Reason had failed. The old civilization was a dismal mockery of the

aspirations of man. The schools of Athens could make Sophists,

rhetoricians, dialecticians, and sceptics. But the faith of the Fathers

could bring philosophers to the foot of the Cross. What were material

conquests to these conquests of the soul, to this spiritual reign of the

invisible principles of the kingdom of Christ?

So, as the vicegerents of Almighty power, the popes began to reign.

Ridicule not that potent domination. What lessons of human experience,

what great truths of government, what principles of love and wisdom are

interwoven with it! Its growth is more suggestive than the rise of any

temporal empires. It has produced more illustrious men than any European

monarchy. And it aimed to accomplish far grander ends,--even obedience

to the eternal laws which God has decreed for the public and private

lives of men. It is invested with more poetic interest. Its doctors, its

dignitaries, its saints, its heroes, its missions, and its laws rise up

before us in sublime grandeur when seriously contemplated. It failed at

last, when no longer needed. But it was not until its encroachments and

corruptions shocked the reason of the world, and showed a painful

contrast to those virtues which originally sustained it, that earnest

men arose in indignation, and declared that this perverted institution

should no longer be supported by the contributions of more enlightened

ages; that it had become a tyrannical and dangerous government, to be

assailed and broken up. It has not yet passed away. It has survived the

Reformation and the attacks of its countless enemies. How long this

power of blended good and evil will remain we cannot predict. But one

thing we do know,--that the time will come when all governments shall

become the kingdoms of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; and Christian

truth alone shall so permeate all human institutions that the forces of

evil shall be driven forever into the immensity of eternal night.

With the Pontificate of Leo the Great that dark period which we call the

"Middle Ages" may be said to begin. The disintegration of society then

was complete, and the reign of ignorance and superstition had set in.

With the collapse of the old civilization a new power had become a

necessity. If anything marked the Middle Ages it was the reign of

priests and nobles. This reign it will be my object to present in the

Lectures which are to fill the next volume of this Work, together with

subjects closely connected with papal domination and feudal life.

AUTHORITIES.

Works of Leo, edited by Quesnel; Zosimus; Socrates; Theodoret; Fleury's

Ecclesiastical History; Tillemont's Histoire des Empereurs; Gibbon's

Decline and Fall; Beugot's Histoire de la Destruction du Paganism;

Alexander de Saint Chéron's Histoire du Pontificat de Saint Leo le

Grande, et de son Siècle; Dumoulin's Vie et Religion de deux Papes Léon

I. et Grégoire I.; Maimbourg's Histoire du Pontificat de Saint Léon;

Arendt's Leo der Grosse und seine Zeit; Butler's Lives of the Saints;

Neander; Milman's Latin Christianity; Biographie Universelle;

Encyclopaedia Britannica. The Church historians universally praise

this Pope.

Beacon Lights of History, Volume 04: Imperial Antiquity · 第 20 / 20 段