PART II. The ancient Britons and Scots persisted long in CENT. VII. the maintenance of their religious liberty; and neither the threats nor promises of the legates of Rome could engage them to submit to the decrees and authority of the ambitious pontiff, as appears manifestly from the testimony of Bede. The churches of Gaul and Spain attributed as much authority to the bishop of Rome, as they thought suitable to their own dignity, and consistent with their interests; nay, even in Italy, his supreme authority was obstinately rejected, since the bishop of Ravenna, and other prelates, refused an implicit submission to his orders. Beside all this, multitudes of private persons expressed publicly, and without the least hesitation, their abhorrence of the vices, and particularly of the lordly ambition of the Roman pontiffs; and it is highly probable, that the valdenses or vaudois had already, in this century, retired into the vallies of Piedmont, that they might be more at their liberty to oppose the tyran, ny of those imperious prelates.' clergy. III. The progress of vice among the subordinate Vices of the rulers and ministers of the church was, at this time, truly deplorable; neither bishops, presbyters, deacons, nor even the cloistered monks, were exempt from the general contagion, as appears from the unanimous confession of all the writers of this century that are worthy of credit. In those very places that were consecrated to the advancement of piety, and the service of God, there was little else to be seen than ghostly ambition, insatiable avarice, pious frauds, intolerable pride, and a supercilious contempt of the natural rights of the people, with many other vices still more enormous. There reigned also in many places the most bitter dissen, *See Geddes's Miscellaneous Tracts, tom. ii. p, 6. 1 See Antoine Leger's Histoire des Eglises Vaudoises, livr. i, p. 15, VOL. II. 22 PART 11. CENT. VII. sions between the bishops and the monks. The former had employed the greedy hands of the latter to augment the episcopal treasure, and to draw contributions from all parts to support them in their luxury, and the indulgence of their lusts. The monks perceiving this, and also unwilling to serve the bishops in such a dishonourable character, fled for refuge to the emperors and princes, under whose civil jurisdiction they lived; and afterward, for their further security, had recourse to the protection of the Roman pontiff." This protection they readily obtained, and the imperious pontiffs, always fond of exerting their authority, exempted, by degrees, the monastic orders from the jurisdiction of the bishops. The monks, in return for this important service, devoted themselves wholly to advance the interests, and to maintain the dignity of the bishop of Rome. They made his cause their own, and represented him as a sort of god to the ignorant multitude, over whom they had gained a prodigious ascendant by the notion that generally prevailed of the sanctity of the monastic order. It is at the same time to be observed, that this immunity of the monks was a fruitful source of licentiousness and disorder, and occasioned the greatest part of the vices with which they were afterward so justly charged. Such, at least, is the judgment of the best writers upon this subject." The state of IV. In the mean time the monks were every the monks. where in high repute, and their cause was accompanied with the most surprising success, particularly among the Latins, through the protection and See Launoii Assertio inquisitionis in Chartam Immunitatis S. Germani, opp. tom. iii. pars i. p. 50. Baluzii Miscellan. tom. ii. p. 159, tom. iv. p. 108. Muratorii Antiq. Italic. tom. ii. p. 944, 949. See Launoii Examen privilegii S. Germani, tom, iii. part i. p. 282. Wilkins's Concilia Magne Britanniæ, tom. i. p. 43, 44, 49, &c. PART II. favour of the Roman pontiff, and their pharisaical CENT. VII. affectation of uncommon piety and devotion. The heads of families, striving to surpass each other in their zeal for the propagation and advancement of monkery, dedicated their children to God, by shutting them up in convents, and devoting them to a solitary life, which they looked upon as the highest felicity; nor did they fail to send with these innocent victims a rich dowry. Abandoned profligates, who had passed their days in the most enormous pursuits, and whose guilty consciences filled them with terror and remorse, were comforted with the delusive hopes of obtaining pardon, and making atonement for their crimes, by leaving the greatest part of their fortune to some monastic society. Multitudes, impelled by the unnatural dictates of a gloomy superstition, deprived their children of fertile lands and rich patrimonies, in favour of the monks, by whose prayers they hoped to render the Deity propitious. Several ecclesiastics laid down rules for the direction of the monastic orders. Those among the Latins, who undertook this pious task, were Fructuosus, Isidore, Johannes Gerundinensis, and Columba. The rule of discipline prescribed by St. Benedict, was not as yet so universally followed as to exclude all others. writers. v. The writers of this age, who distinguished The Greek themselves by their genius or erudition, were very few in number. Among the Greeks, the first rank is due to Maximus, a monk, who disputed with great obstinacy and warmth against the monothelites, composed some illustrations upon the holy scriptures, and was upon the whole a man of no mean capacity, though unhappy through the impatience and violence of his natural temper. • Gervais, Histoire de l'Abbe Suger, tom. i. p. 9—16. P Lucæ Holstenii Codex Regular. tom. ii. p. 225. CENT. VIL The Latin writers Isychius, bishop of Jerusalem, explained several books of scripture; and left behind nim several Homilies and some productions of less importance. Dorotheus, abbot of Palestine, acquired a considerable name by his Ascetic Dissertations, in which he laid down a plan of monastic life and manners. Antiochus, a monk of Seba in Palestine, and a monk of a very superstitious complexion, composed a Pandect of the holy scriptures, i. e. a summary or system of the christian doctrine, which is by no means worthy of the highest commendation. Sophronius, bishop of Jerusalem, was rendered illustrious, and attracted the veneration of succeeding ages, by the controversies he carried on against those who, at this time, were branded with the name of heretics; and particularly against the monothelites, of whose doctrine he was the first opposer, and also the fomenter of the dispute which it occasioned." There are yet extant several Homilies, attributed to Andrew, bishop of Crete, which are destitute of true piety and eloquence, and which are moreover considered by some writers as entirely spurious. Gregory, sirnamed Pisides, deacon of Constantinople, beside the History of Heraclius and the Avares, composed several poems, and other pieces of too little moment to deserve mention. Theodore, abbot of Raithu, published a book, which is still extant, against those sects who seemed to introduce corrupt innovations into the christian religion by their doctrine relating to the person of Christ. VI. Among the Latin writers, a certain number were distinguished from the rest by their superior abilities. Ildefonse, archbishop of Toledo, was 1 See Simon, Critique de la Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiques de M. Du Pin, tom.i. p. 261. See the Acta Sanctorum, tom. ii. Martii ad d. xi. p. 65. PART II. reputed for his learning; the Spaniards however CENT. VIL attribute to him, without foundation, certain treatises concerning the Virgin Mary." We have yet extant two books of epistles, written by Desiderius, bishop of Cahors, and published by the learned Canisius. Eligius, or Eloi, bishop of Limoges, left behind him several Homilies, and some other productions. Marculf, a Gallic monk, composed two books of ecclesiastical forms, which are highly valuable, as they are extremely proper to give us a just idea of the deplorable state of religion and learning in this century. Aidhelm, an English prelate, composed several poems concerning the christian life, which exhibit but indifferent marks of genius and fancy." Julian Pomerius confuted the Jews, and acquired a name by several other productions, which are neither worthy of much applause nor of utter contempt. To all these we might add Cresconius, whose abridgment of the canons is well known; Fredegarius the historian, and a few others. See the Acta Sanctorum, Januar. tom. ii. p. 535. This prelate certainly deserved a more honourable mention than is here made of him by Dr. Mosheim. His poetical talents were by no means the most distinguishing part of his character. He was pro foundly versed in the Greek, Latin, and Saxon languages. He appeared also with dignity in the paschal controversy, that so long divided the Saxon and British churches. See Collier's Ecclesiastical Hist. vol. i. p. 121. |