more affronts, more sackings and devastations than any other great city in Europe hath been. And therefore, that after the glory of the empire is departed from it, it should still retain a power to give to all the empires and kingdoms of the world a supreme magistrate to whom they are bound to submit and obey in all those things which concern the salvation of their souls and their hopes in the next world, is so very irrational, that less than the most clear evidence that it is the will of God it shall be so can never convince mankind that they ought to consent thereunto. From the time that the manner of elections was taken notice of, sometimes the Pope was chosen by the clergy and people of Rome, and sometimes by the clergy alone: and when there were scandalous elections made upon which schisms ensued, sometimes the Emperor, sometimes the Kings of Italy, and sometimes the Exarch, regulated those consentions, and settled such a Pope as they thought fit; sometimes appointing them to choose such a man, and sometimes that none should be admitted to be Pope until, upon notice given to the Emperor, his election should be con firmed or approved by him. Nor was there any form prescribed or accustomed for those elections till the year one thousand and sixty, when Pope Nicholas the Second (whose own election might well have been questioned, he being chosen upon a schism when Benedict the Tenth pretended to be Pope and continued so nine months, and then waved the contest and returned to his bishopric of Velitri,) made a decree that from thenceforth the election of the Pope should be only in the Cardinals.'

When Constantine made profession of Christianity, the Popes began to assume some importance: but a long period. elapsed before they obtained that universal domination which they afterward arrogated; and it is worthy of remark that they did not arrive at full power till Pepin, King of France, had given the exarchat of Ravenna to the church. By this donation, which was confirmed by Charlemagne with other privileges, the Popes became temporal sovereigns: but, in lieu of these benefits, the right of approving, and consequently of disapproving, the election of the Bishops of Rome was conceded to the Emperor; which shews the state of the Papal power at that period. Every thing, however, was in train to favour its usurpations. The ignorance and dissentions which prevailed in Europe gave to the clergy great privileges; they became a third estate; and the Roman Pontiff wished to be considered as their supreme head. Yet it is evident that universal submission to the Pope was not for ages a doctrine of the Catholic church. Even in the reign of William the Conqueror, ecclesiastical laws (says Lord C., p. 100,101.) were altered or changed without any reference to the Pope; and Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, then took upon him,' without authority from Rome, to canonize Adelmus.

Appeals

Appeals to the supposed successors of St. Peter having grown into practice on the Continent, the Popes, on the slightest occasions, fulminated their thunders against Emperors and Kings, and placed whole kingdoms under their interdicts. Offended that he was not consulted on a royal marriage, John XIX. put all France under an interdiction; and such were the superstitious alarms of the multitude, that the people generally submitted themselves with that humility, that all the domestic servants of the King (excepting two or three) abandoned him, and they cast whatever was taken from his table to the dogs; there being no man, however poor, who would eat any of the meat which he had touched.' (P. 105.)

We are next called to notice the excommunication of the Emperor, by Gregory VII., (Hildebrand,) who ascended the Papal chair A. D. 1075; the affair of Thomas à Becket; the Crusades, &c.; and to shew how lofty were the pretensions of the see of Rome, Lord C. copies parts of two bulls issued by Innocent III., one of which contains these words; « Ad bonorem et gloriam Apostolica sedis, quam constitutam super gentes et regna;" and the other has expressions still more pointed: "Sic ad firmamentum universalis ecclesia, quæ cœli nemine nuncupatur, duas magnas instituit dignitates, majorem quæ quasi diebus animabus præesset, et minorem quæ quasi noctibus præesset corporibus, quæ sunt Pontificialis authoritas et Regalis potestas."

If the history of our King John makes a shabby figure in this review of Papal usurpations, the remarks of Lord Clarendon will serve to rescue the credit of the nobles:

Indeed the Popes found not so much tameness any where as in England, nor exercised their jurisdiction any where so wantonly, as in the reign of those two Kings Henry the Second and King John; of which their successors quickly shewed disdain enough, and by degrees freed themselves from a power that knew not how to be moderate. Nor can it be much wondered at, that the Pope should obtain any thing from King John, who had no title to the crown but usurpation, and had so many enemies to contend with in England and in France. To shew that the subjection to the Pope was not of the religion of that time, the most popular ground which the nobility alleged to justify their taking arms against the King was, the conces sions he had made to the Pope. And the King himself in his greatest agonies afterwards, and when he was most perplexed, with much passion said, (as Matthew Paris, who is the best author of that time, reports,)" Since the time I subjected myself and my kingdom to the Church of Rome, nothing hath happened prosperously, but all things contrary to me." So that whatever the Pope got then in England is to be imputed to the guilt and weakness of the King, not to the consent of the time.'

We cannot specify all the instances quoted by this noble author, of sovereigns being deprived of their kingdoms or

E 4

released

released from their most solemn oaths, and of subjects absolved from their allegiance, by the power of the Popes; nor will the detail be necessary to those who are acquainted with the history of European states.

Such arrogance in obscure individuals, who by the choice of ecclesiastics were raised to the pretended chair of St. Peter, could not have been tolerated, had not Europe laboured under the greatest infatuation: but the charm, we should have thought, must have been dissolved by the schism which subsequently broke out even in the popedom itself, when Clement and Urban discharged their spiritual artillery at each other. This schism, observes Lord C., lasted forty years; during which period it was impossible to say which was the true Pope but, from this circumstance, which made the assumed infallibility doubtful, it clearly appears that the Christian religion may be preserved in its integrity without any Pope.' Indeed, the Council of Pisa declared both Popes. to be schismatical. To increase the ridicule of this spiritual farce, a third Pope started up; and the Council of Constance, interfering in this strange contest for infallibility, arrogated a superiority over the Papal see, pronounced all the pretended Popes schismatical, and declared the see to be void. This, however, did not settle the business. For a long period, one set of Popes held their court at Rome and another at Avignon ; and Lord C. reckons that a period of one hundred and ten years elapsed without a peaceable Pope.' (P. 249.)

Contemplating the state of the popedom from the election of Eugenius IV., A.D.1431, to Paul III., A.D.1534, i. e. from the end of the schism to the Reformation, the noble author points to many particulars worthy of notice, and is not sparing in his reflections. He attributes the loss of Constantinople, by which the interests of the Christian church were deeply affected, to that fatal schism which, for so many years, kept all Christian kings divided in the quarrel, and diverted them from being united in any one honourable or generous action for the good of Christianity.' (P. 255.) In conjunction with this subject, he traces the causes and consequences of the separation between the church of Rome and the Greek church.

On the private lives of the Popes, we shall not here comment: but, as Alexander VI. (Borgia) assumed, by a bull dated May 14. 1493, the power of granting the East and West Indies to Ferdinand and Isabella, it may be proper to insert here a sketch of his character:

In the place of Innocent the Eighth, to the universal amazement and scandal of Christianity, the Cardinal Borgia was elected, or declared Pope, with the most infamous circumstances of corruption that

ever accompanied the most secular transaction, and was called Alexander the Sixth; of whom I shall say the less, because his memory is the most odious, and the most blasted by the universal consent of all Catholic writers, who acknowledge him to be an eternal reproach to the holy chair. Monsieur Mezeray thinks he hath sufficiently described him, by saying, that never any Mahometan prince was ever more vicious, more wicked, more infidel than he; and if any one ever surpassed him in all kind of abominations and crimes, it was his bastard son Cæsar Borgia.'

Having quoted the language of the Popish bulls, and instanced the uneasiness of sovereigns occasioned by a variety of Papal usurpations, Lord C. offers these judicious remarks:

By this that hath been said, it is manifest enough what opinion of, or reverence for, the infallible chair at that Catholic time, Kings, Princes, and Bishops had, both for the ecclesiastical and temporal authority thereof; by their so frequent contemning all his spiritual censures, and their appealing to a future general Council. And there needs no other instance than the authority he usurped in the excommunication of so many sovereign Princes of all degrees; the absolving their subjects from their allegiance and obedience; his interdicting the exercise of their religion in all their dominions; and his conferring "ex plenitudine potestatis" their dominions and territories upon those he favoured more, or upon those who, without any colour of right, would by force invade the same; thereby opening a door to let in all the blood, and rapine, and devastation upon a peaceable Catholic people that could be exercised by the most barbarous and savage enemies and all this upon no other ground or pretence than that they did not wish well to Catholic religion, and were schismatics and heretics; when none of them professed to know any other religion than that which he pretended to be of: nor to be of any church than the same of which he would be thought the head. I say, there needs no other evidence than the insolence, actions, and pretences of Julius the Second, (whose pride and tyranny wiped out the memory of the impieties of Alexander the Sixth,) to convince all Kings, Princes, and States, how insecure their condition and government must be, and how indevoted and unfaithful their subjects may be to them, if the Pope hath such a power over them as he lays claim to, and hath exercised.'

A long account is given, in this part of the work, of the excommunication of Henry VIII.: but with this fact English readers are well acquainted.

The period from the calling to the conclusion of the Council of Trent, or from Paul III. to Pius V., A.D. 1566, is fertile in incidents illustrative of the spirit and tendency of the popedom: but we need advert only to two particulars as specimens ; the first is the institution of the order of the Jesuits, and the second the establishment of the Inquisition; by which, observes Lord C., (p. 373.) the spirit of the Spanish nation was broken, and its understanding darkened.'

Of

Of the celebrated Council of Trent itself, and of its perturbed sittings, ample details are given, and its result is thus summed up:

In this disorder, and almost in the same confusion in which it had been continued, this famous Council of Trent, after it had sat for above the space of eighteen months in continual dissensions, ended in a visible harmony in the month of December, in the year fifteen hundred sixty-three, to the eternal honour of Pius the Fourth; who, it cannot be denied, steered it with wonderful dexterity, and, by the bounty and good influence of his own stars, and the rare accidents which intervened, brought it to such a consistency as bath given more credit, and produced more unity to that Church, than could have been expected either from the debates or the conclusions. The articles were signed by four Legates, two other Cardinals, three Patriarchs, five-and-twenty Archbishops, a hundred sixty-eight Bishops, seven Abbots Benedictines, nine-and-thirty Proctors of the Prelates absent, and seven Generals of Orders; so that the whole subscriptions were of two hundred and fifty-five hands; and, considering the paucity of the number, besides the presumption of imposing rules, and restraining privileges, contrary to the laws and customs of all œcumenical councils, it is no wonder that the same is not received in many Catholic as well as Protestant kingdoms; and still less that the Church of England rejects what the State never admitted, and hath more reverence for the decrees of its own Councils, (which always consist of much greater numbers,) than the subscribers to those articles of Trent amount unto: and if the parts and learning of the subscribers (for all the names of both are easily known) be considered, there will be more men of profound learning and confessed or eminent piety found in the Synod held in that time in our own country, and in all the Synods which have since been held there, than there were at any time in Trent; though it is not denied that there were many of great estimation in letters, and of lives very unblameable; and yet that kind of learning is much improved since that time, and even in that Church, which they will not deny.'

The last two chapters in the historical part of this work include the period from A.D. 1566 to 1670, or from Pius V. to Clement X. Here the excommunication of Elizabeth and the horrid massacre of St. Bartholomew fall under the noble author's review; and he does not forget to remind us that Gregory XIII., who was then in the Papal chair,, no sooner had notice of that barbarous and inhuman massacre, than he went himself in the most solemn procession to the church of St. Lewis in Rome, to thank God for that happy victory.' (P. 427.)

As we proceed in this history, we perceive the sovereigns of Europe asserting their rights against the pretensions of the court of Rome; and, under the pontificate of Gregory XV., we find this court obliged to change its policy, and to relax in its claims. In proof of this important fact, Lord C. remarks, (p. 526.) that, in the republication of the Bullarium (or Collec