nothing but by invasion and conquest, for which, with all her advantages, she is very ill furnished. That Spain and Portugal, therefore, as civil powers, are of any weight in the balance of Europe, they owe more to the discernment, the vigilance, and the virtue of others, than to their own. From what has been said we may remark, by the way, the injustice there is in so connecting or associating the Romish religion with the inquisition as to conclude, that to be a Romanist, and to be a friend to that tribunal, denote one and the same thing. The case is so far otherwise, that we are, on the best grounds, warranted to affirm, that nine-tenths of that communion detest the inquisition as much as we do. And of this the most irrefragable evidences have been given in France, in Germany, and even in Italy itself. How they should have the inconsistency, notwithstanding this, to acknowledge a power as from God, which has found it necessary to recur to expedients so manifestly from hell, so subversive of every principle of sound morality and religion, can be regarded only as one of those contradictions for which human characters, both in individuals and in nations, are often so remarkable. That the policy of Rome bears the marks, not of the wisdom which is from above, which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and of good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy, but of that which flows from a very different source, and is earthly, sensual, devilish, is so manifest, that the person who needs to be convinced of it seems to be beyond the power of argument and reason. Upon the whole, how amazingly different, nay, how perfectly opposite, in disposition, in maxims, and in effects, are the spirit of primitive Christianity and the spirit of modern Rome? Let any considerate and ingenuous mind impartially examine and say, Are heaven and hell, Christ and Belial, more adverse than the pictures I have, in this discourse and the preceding, exhibited to your view? Let it be observed also, that these are not caricatures drawn by enemies, but the genuine features, as exhibited in the works of their own authors. LECTURE XXVII. I HAVE now given you some account of the rise and progress of the spirit of persecution in the church, and have particularly traced the origin, and unfolded the constitution, of that dreadful tribunal the inquisition. Ye must have perceived, that, in every thing which relates to the procedure of that court, there is an unrelenting barbarity, which bids defiance to all the principles of justice; and as, in all respects, it is without example in past ages, so I hope it will remain without a parallel in future. The favourers of ecclesiastic tyranny, sensible of the horrid appearance which the rapacity as well as the ferocity of this tribunal exhibits, and the very unfavourable conclusion it suggests to the discerning, have put their ingenuity to the rack to devise reasons, or what may with their votaries for reasons, in support of it. pass According to Fra Paolo, in his account of the inquisition of Venice, amongst other peculiarities of the holy office in that state, which were, I may say, extorted by the secular from the ecclesiastic power, one is, that they do not admit the confiscation of the property of the accused, whether he be present and convicted, or declared contumacious and condemned in absence; but appoint, that his estate, both real and personal, shall go to his lawful heirs, as though he had died a natural death. He says, very justly, in vindication of this article, that it is always pernicious to mingle pecuniary matters with what concerns religion, which ought to proceed solely from a view to the glory of God: For when men see, that the zeal of the judges, in consigning heretics to the flames, is the sure means of procuring great acquisitions of worldly pelf, it will be impossible to prevent their being scandalized, or to persuade them, however true, that the service of God was the sole, or even the primary motive. He adds, the court of Rome never ceases, on every occurrence, to blame this Venetian ordinance, reckoning, that the moderation enjoined by the most serene republic reproaches the Roman ordinance with excessive severity. That, says he, which their partisans maintain in public in defence of their own practice is, that heresy is treason against the divine Majesty, which it is proper to avenge more severely than treason committed against a human creature; and that therefore it is a perversion of order, when he who offends man receives a greater punishment than he who offends God: Now, treason against man is punished with the confiscation of goods; much more then ought treason against God, a crime always incurred by heresy, to be so punished. : I shall give you this author's answer, rendered literally from his own words, in a work written in Italian, published at Venice, a Roman Catholic state, and composed by order of the Doge, the chief magistrate of the republic, to whom it is dedicated. And I desire you farther to take notice, that the author is not only a Roman Catholic, but a priest, nay, a friar. When this is considered, you will be surprised much more at what he controverts with the advocates of papal despotism, than at what he yields to them. "This argument," says he, "more specious than solid, is as a shadow without a body for it would condemn their own constitutions, which pardon heresy, the first time, upon being recanted; whereas treason against the sovereign is not, on any terms, pardoned even the first time; whence it would follow, that, by their own reasoning, they make less account of offending God than of offending man. But the truth is, that in imposing punishments, respect is had not solely to the heinousness of the transgression, but to the attendant circumstances of the injury done to others, of the baseness wherewith the action was accompanied, or of the malignity of disposition shewn by it. Royal majesty is not injured, unless through the evident malice and intention of the offender; whereas heresy is commonly the effect of ignorance. Hence this almost always merits compassion, that never. Penalties are intended more for an example to others, than for the chastisement of the delinquent. The confiscation of goods for treason terrifies others, who are restrained through love to their offspring, preferring their interest to the gratification of those passions which instigate them against the prince. But in the case of heresy, every one conceives himself incited by spiritual motives, to which all regards to family ought to be postponed. The event demonstrates, that through divine grace this most happy state of Venice, whose clemency gives great and universal satisfaction, remains as free from the tares of heresy, without pillaging any man, as other states where this pillage is made with the utmost rigour. Wherefore, without regard to the rules, examples, or reflections of others, it is proper for us to preserve those usages, of whose utility we are ascertained by experience." Thus far our author. He admits the argument used by Rome to be specious. And so it is, doubtless, to a Roman Catholic. It falls in with his earliest and most rooted prejudices, and suits the mode of reasoning to which he has been habituated from his infancy. To a judicious and consistent protestant it is a palpable sophism, and has as little speciousness as solidity. It is, in effect, the same argument of which I showed the futility in a former discourse, with only the change of the term. There the misapplication was of the word blasphemy; here it is of the word treason. The abuse of the term is in this instance, if possible, still more flagrant than in the other. In treason there is always a malicious design against the life or crown of the sovereign; there is nothing analogous to this in what they call heresy. On the contrary, the principal inducement with the alleged heretic to bear his suffering patiently, is an opinion (which, whether true or false, is genuinely his opinion) that he thereby honours God, does his duty, and discharges his conscience. What they call obstinacy, he cannot avoid considering as perseverance and Christian fortitude, both of which are incumbent and very important duties. A retractation not produced by conviction, but extorted by terror for himself and his children, he does and must consider as a real defection from God, a betraying of the rights of conscience and of the interests of truth, as the vilest hypocrisy and impiety. Nay, it cannot be considered otherwise even by his tormentors themselves, who are always ready to acknowledge the guilt of a false confession, (to which they are doing their utmost to bring the prisoner). At the same time I acknowledge, that there is a sort of treason in heresy; but it is not treason against God, nor is it treason against the state, but it is treason against the priesthood; for whatever calls its infallibility in question, as an avowed difference in religious opinions undoubtedly does, is an attack upon the hierarchy, and consequently subversive of the more than royal pretensions of church authority. This is the true source of that rancour and virulence with which this imaginary crime has been persecuted by Popes and ecclesiastics; and by none more than by those whose whole lives bore witness, that they regarded no more the principles than the precepts of that religion for which they seemed to be inflamed with a zeal so violent. I shall only add on this subject, that if there were no other article, (as there are more than fifty), we should have here sufficient ground for confuting those bold pretensions to constancy and uniformity in religious sentiments, in what is called the catholic church, with which the bishop of Meaux introduces his history of the variations of protestants.* Opinions, on the subject I have been treating, more opposite to those held universally by Christians of the first three centuries, than those openly avowed by the Romish church in later ages, and strenuously supported by her rulers, it would be impossible to conceive. But of this I have given sufficient evidence in the two preceding discourses. The difference is indeed great, in this respect, between Romanists of the two last ages and Christians of the fourth and fifth; but in these there cannot be said to be a direct contrariety. Changes of this kind are always gradual. In regard to the present century, there are some evident symptoms, that, even in Roman Catholic countries, the tide of opinion on these articles begins to turn, and that their notions are becoming daily more favourable to right reason, justice, and humanity. Every sincere protestant will rejoice in the change. But how much, on the other hand, will it prove to such a subject of heartfelt sorrow, when he sees, in any protestant nation, (as sometimes undeniably happens, and of which we had some terrible examples in this very island no farther back than the years seventeen hundred and seventy-nine and eighty), a strong propensity to those very principles which are the surest badge * See the Preface to that Work. |