authority, healing the irregularity of the intrusion. It is remarkable that both Felix and Vigilius, whilst occupying the See, maintained the faith, although their intrusion took place under heretical influence.

No doubt can be thrown on the succession from the long intervals of time which sometimes occurred between the reigns of two Popes. In an institution like the Church, which is perpetual, and yet is governed by an individual, holding the place of Christ, there must be some interval between the members of the series of governors; but this does not constitute a moral interruption, unless it be an enormous space of time, such as completely severs one from the other, according to the common judgment of mankind. Two years and nine months of vacancy occurred after the death of Clement IV., which was the greatest interval; since the learned do not admit the correctness of the statement that a vacancy of three years and eight months occurred after the death of Marcellinus. Even this space of time could form no difficulty, in a series continued throughout ages. In truth, the interval was generally much shorter than it appears, for when the custom prevailed of seeking the confirmation of the election and by the emperor, the See was deemed vacant until the imperial assent was obtained, and the consecration performed, although the Pope elect, aided by some of the chief clergy, governed the Church from the day of his election.

The long absence of the Popes from Rome, in the fourteenth century, when during nearly 70 years they resided at Avignon in France, forms no chasm in the succession, since the title and power of a bishop do not depend on the place of his residence. The Popes who resided at Avignon, were chosen to succeed those who held the place of Peter, and were truly Bishops of Rome, which they governed by a cardinal Vicar, and were consequently pastors of the whole fold of Christ.

Simoniacal elections were declared by many Popes to be utterly null; yet if in any case simony was practised, as is believed to have occurred in the election of Roderic Borgia, the subsequent acquiescence of the Church healed the defect, and gave the necessary jurisdiction. The same may be said of Popes, who, by the violence of potentates, were placed on the chair of Peter, as unfortunately took place in the tenth century.

The simplicity of some writers once gave currency to a ridiculous fable, which is now universally exploded by learned men, Protestants as well as Catholics, and among others by the learned Calvinist Blondell. Some interpolated copies of the chronicle of Marian Scotus, composed in the eleventh century, state that an English woman who had

passed her early life in disguise at the schools of Athens, was chosen to succeed Leo IV., in the middle of the ninth century, and for two years, five months, and four days, kept the secret of her sex, until she was overtaken by the pains of labor in a public procession! This illconcocted tale of Pope Joan is wanting in the best copies of the work of Scotus, and is inconsistent with the statements of the contemporary writers, and with the chronological series of the Popes. On the death of Pope Leo IV. which took place on the 17th July, 855, Benedict III. was immediately chosen to succeed him, and was consecrated on the 1st September of the same year which leaves no room for the heroine of the tale. It is not necessary for me to account for its origin, which some, not without probability, ascribe to the pusillanimity, or effeminacy of some real occupant of the See, which may have been thus satirized by the people :-the tale was afterwards adopted by credulous writers.

A ceremony formerly practised, at least since the year 1191, on occasion of taking possession of the basilic of St. John of Lateran, but discontinued since the pontificate of Leo X., received from the ingenuity of the enemies of the Holy See an explanation calculated to give coloring to the fable of a female having sat on the Pontifical chair. I cannot notice the precaution alleged to be adopted against the recurrence of the supposed mistake; but I shall simply state the true object of the ceremony. The Pope was placed on a low chair of stone, in front of the portico of that Church, and the chanters sang, in the mean time, the verse of the Psalmist: "Raising up the needy from the earth, and lifting up the poor out of the dunghill, that He may place him with the princes of His people." From the allusion which this verse contains the chair was popularly styled stercora. ria; and fancy added what credulity easily adopted. The lowly position of the Pontiff was intended to signify his condition before his elevation to the eminence which he occupies as prince of the people of God. This was obviously the sole end and meaning of the rite.

Although the fable of Pope Joan has been utterly exploded, some still refer to it for mere annoyance, not reflecting that what could not take place in the Catholic Church, except by an incredible imposture, has really been seen in the Anglican establishment, by a natural consequence of the principles on which the Papal authority was rejected. It was maintained that the Sovereign is of right the head of the Church in his dominions; but as if to put to shame the abettors of the new system, God permitted that on the death of Henry VIII. a boy, and afterwards two women in succession, should sway the British sceptre.

Mary had the modesty and good sense to recede from the indelicate position in which the law placed her on the death of Edward; but Elizabeth boldly asserted her ecclesiastical supremacy, and made prelates tremble in her presence.* Archbishop Whitgift was threatened with a præmunire for some theological decision made without her leave.

* "Vè aqui una cosa admirable. Al mismo tiempo que los Protestantes se esforzaban à insultarnos con la disparatada especie de una Papisa, elegida en Roma, ellos erigieron otra Papisa en Inglaterra, constituyendo cabeza de la Iglesia Anglicana à su adorada Reyna." Cartas Eruditas por D. Fr. Benito G. Feyjoó t. v. c. iii. p. 146.

36

422

CHAPTER XXV.

PAPAL ELECTION.

§ 1. Imperial Interposition.

No authority in sacred things was ever acknowledged by the Church to reside in the emperor, even when a Christian, although he was sometimes implored to sustain, by the civil arm, the rights of lawful prelates against ambitious and disorderly men, who endangered or violated public tranquillity. The council of Aquileja besought the emperors Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, to use their authority, and prevent Ursicinus from disturbing Damasus, the legitimate occupant of the See of Peter.* Eulalius, having ambitiously set himself up in opposition to Boniface, the lawful Pope, the emperor Honorius, on the report of Symmachus, ordered Boniface to be banished from the city; but on receiving from the Roman clergy a correct statement of the facts, and being informed of the return of Eulalius, contrary to his command, he gave his support to Boniface. To provide for the tranquillity of the elections, he decreed, that in case of a contested election, both candidates should be banished from the city. This law is said to have been enacted in consequence of an application made by Boniface for some measure to prevent tumults.

Odoacer, king of the Heruli, having in 476 established himself king of Italy, on the death of Simplicius in 483, alleged that the deceased Pontiff had agreed that the Prefect, in the name of the king, should be present at the election of his successor; but the claim was resisted by the clergy, and the supposed concession disregarded as a nullity. Pope Symmachus, chosen in 498, forbad all laymen, even of royal dignity, to interfere in the election; yet Theodoric, king of Italy, in 526, forced Felix IV. on the Roman clergy and senate, who reluctantly acquiesced, on condition that the ancient freedom of election should be thenceforward inviolable. The royal assent, or confirmation of the election was, however, to be sought, which was to follow as a matter

* Conc. Aquil. ep. t. i. conc. Hard. col. 837.

Ibid. col. 1237.

of course, if the proceedings were regular. King Athalaric, successor of Theodoric, required the payment of 3000 crowns of gold on the

occasion.

On the extinction of the Gothic power in Italy in 553, the emperor Justinian exercised the like prerogative of confirming the election, in the person of Pelagius I., chosen in 555. The confirmation was not awaited on the election of Pelagius II. in 578, it being impossible to obtain it, since the city of Rome was actually besieged by the Lombards. It was also neglected in the case of John IV. elected in 640, and of Martin in 649. The tax, which seemed the chief object of the imperial court, was remitted by Constantine Pogonatus in 680; who, in 684, completely restored the ancient freedom of election, not requiring any longer the imperial assent. His successor, Justinian II., renewed the claim in a mitigated form, allowing the exarch of Ravenna to assent in his name, and thus prevent delay. There is no instance of any election being set aside by the emperor, who seems to have regarded the right of confirmation as a mere measure of finance.

The Western emperors soon emulated the prerogatives of those of Constantinople. Louis the Pious in 818 merely required an embassy from the Pope when consecrated. In 824 he sent his son Lothaire to Rome, to terminate the contest which had arisen on the election of Eugenius II., who was opposed by the anti-pope Zizinius; whence the young prince took occasion to publish an imperial edict, requiring that the consecration of the Pope should take place in presence of the imperial ambassadors, if the emperor himself were not present; which regulation is stated by Pagi to have originated with Eugenius himself, and to have been confirmed by John IX. in 898, through an anxiety to prevent tumults, and irregular promotions. The ambassador of Lothaire came to Rome in 827, to examine the election of Gregory IV. and in 855 the decree of election of Benedict III. was forwarded to the imperial court for examination.

The canonical freedom of election was vindicated from time to time by decrees of the Pontiffs. Constantine, an anti-pope, with the aid of armed men, having obtained possession of the See, Stephen IV. in 769, forbad any layman, of any rank whatever, to interfere in papal elections.* Adrian III., in 884, decreed that the elect might be consecrated without the presence of the king, or his ambassadors.

It does not appear that the emperors exercised or claimed any right over the elections, beyond the mere examination of their regularity,

Conc. Rom. act. III. apud Holstenium, in collect. Rom. par. i. p. 260.