CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS. Page 7, line 3 from bottom, for D'Espence read d'Espense. 24, 1. 9, for in their favour read in favour of the heretics. 42, 1. 2, for they read the fathers. 62, 1. 10 from bottom, for lectures read lecturers. 65, 1. 8, for they continue read the writer continues. 102, 1. 11, for ourselves read themselves. 121, 1. 12 from bottom, for legate read legates. 149, 1. 2, after debated add one. 158, 1. 17 from bottom, for this read their. 160, 1. 6 from bottom, for (;) put (,). 161, 1. 5 from bottom, for traditions read tradition. 175, 1. 2, after to add make it. 186, 1. 2 from bottom, for Glories read Glorier. 264, top of the page, respecting the calumny against Beza. Calumnies, or untruths uttered in vituperation of heretics, are not charged upon Romanists by Protestants alone. Hear how one of their own communion, and an honest one, speaks of them. All which being true'the subject is the case of the most respectable deserter of the Roman communion, Dr. Andrew Sall,-'it were worth the while to consider, 'what it is hurries on our Catholic Writers generally to such exorbi'tant Passions, and barbarous Language (besides many downright 'Lies and meer Calumnies often) against all those that leave our Church? These are the words of PETER WALSH, of St. Francis's Order, Professor of Divinity, in the second of his Four Letters, &c. Printed 1686, page 69. Let the reader ponder the charge, of DOWNRIGHT LIES, and MERE CALUMNIES, and GENERALLY thus brought against assumed Catholics by one far better than the greater part of them! Dr. O'CONOR would furnish matter not less disgraceful to the veracity of a portion, and a large one too, of his own church. See his Historical Address passim. 268, 1. 3 from bottom, for Havera read Haveva. 273, to end of first Note add. At all events the number must be under 19. 280, 1. 19, for Lara read Luna. 315, 1. 9, for this read those of the present. 318, first paragraph of the Note in that page. The argument there represented is precisely the same as that which is adduced by Manuel Rodriguez in his Explicacion de la Bulla de la Cruzada, foll. 71, 72, to prove that the Pope has a right to grant Indulgences of a Thousand years, (de mil años.) Manuel is rigid in requiring due qualificatio.. in the recipient of the Indulgence, and insists, notwithstanding the frequent wording of the instrument, that pœna only, and not culpa, are included in the remission. He adduces other testimonies in corroboration of his main argument. 318, 1. 9, after is add from the legates. 334. The book, which, in referring to the review of it at the close of the article-Reserved Cases-I have designated too figuratively as an edition of the Garden of the Soul, is properly entitled The Catholic's Prayer Book, &c., by Rev. John Fletcher, and patronized in particular by that mollifier, and betrayer, of Roman Catholicity, the Vicar Apostolic of the Western District. In referring to Fra Paolo Sarpi's Letters in the Preface, the author was obliged at the time to depend upon the translation into English by the Rev. Edward Brown, who certainly wrote Latin better than English: but the extract given is sufficiently correct and intelligible. It is remarkable, that among the Papal Medals there is not extant one struck with decisive reference to the Council of Trent. Those with the legend on the reverse, TU AUTEM IDEM IPSE ES, of the two pontiffs reigning at the commencement and close of the Council; and the TUI SECTATOR of the last, are perfectly doubtful.-See the works of Bonanni and Venuti. MEMOIRS OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. INTRODUCTION. MOST of the historians of the Council of Trent take their commencement from the decisive and formidable resistance made by the Augustine monk, Martin Luther, to the authority and impositions of the Bishop of Rome. That resistance was, in the first instance, very respectful and measured. Nothing is more remarkable than, that in a letter to his own friends, two years after what may be called his passage of the Rubicon, his opposition to the abuse in the sale of indulgences, he makes the distinction, in favour of Rome, between its court and its church; the latter of which he characterizes as the purest marriage-bed of Christ, the mother of churches, the spiritual mistress of the world, the spouse of Christ, the daughter of God, the terror of hell, the victory over the flesh, in fine, whose all things, and she Christ's.*' But this view could not be expected to last. The very principle of the original opposition possessed a character which, unless it produced. repentance and reformation in the object reprobated, would are * Quare et ego horum Theologorum laicorum exemplo pulcherrimo, longissime, latissime, profundissime distinguo inter Romanam Ecclesiam et Romanam Curiam. Illam scio purissimum esse thalamum Christi, matrem Ecclesiarum, dominam mundi, sed spiritu, id est, vitiorum, non rerum mundi, sponsam Christi, filiam Dei, terrorem inferni, victoriam carnis; et quid dicam? cujus sunt omnia. Epistt. tom. i. fol. 136. ed. Berlin. 1579. This epistle, although without a date, is assigned to the year 1519. There are subsequent epistles which contain the same distinction, and use nearly the same language. B naturally and almost necessarily issue in a general opposition to the whole system, the spirit as well as body, of the papacy; and that would assume, as it proceeded, an attitude and strength which it would be in vain to attempt to put down by force. An irresistible providence urged on its own purposes independently of the consciousness or unconsciousness of its agents; and the very uncertainty in the power resisted, whether the nascent rebellion might not be smothered by expedients short of extreme ones, produced a hesitation and inaction which favoured the progress of the movement to such a degree as to render all future measures to resist its impetuosity hopeless. The progressive triumph of what we call the Reformation was now secure. The seminal cause therefore of the Council of Trent is justly considered to be, the public remonstrance of Luther against the venal indulgences issued by the pontiff Leo X, in the year 1517. The Venetian historian accordingly, and of course the Roman one, his pursuer, start from the same point. In this they did but follow, we may presume, the example of preceding manuscript histories, as well as the general opinion. But of this insurrection against the corruption and tyranny of Rome there were still earlier and urgent causes. The latter part of the fourteenth century witnessed a schism in the papacy, which brought upon it much disgrace even in its own world. The eyes of even the most devoted subjects of the Roman see were opened by the scandalous spectacle of the opposition and warfare of the heads of their religion-rival chief pastors of the church, successors of the apostles, vicars of Jesus Christ on earth, hurling their anathemas at each other like children of the Evil one. And it is well if each party had not cause to be believed. But the effect, and a natural one, was, that a reformation in the church, a reformation both in the head and the members, was loudly called for by even the papal world. In answer to this call was assembled the first general council of Pisa, in 1409, which assuming to decide on the subject of faith as well as of schism, in its sixteenth session deposed To the two concurrent and hostile popes of the time, not only as schismatics, but as heretics-the heads of the infallible church heretics, and condemned as such by a council!and in their place substituted another. This did but aggravate the evil and scandal; for the sentence being despised by the deposed pontiffs, the church had then three heads instead of two, and they mutually hostile. abolish, not the triple crown, but the three heads who contended to wear it, and to expel from the throne of the universal church the spiritual Cerberus which had usurped authority over it, a general council was convened at Constance, which assuming sovereign authority, and expressly the right of effecting a reformation* of the church, as that of Pisa had done before, both in the head and the members, deposed the whole apostolic triumvirate, and gave the spiritual monarchy of Rome to a man of their own choice and creation, Martin V, who with all his successors in a line, whether broken or unbroken, to the present time, derive their sole title to the rank and office of vicars of Christ upon earth to a council, which at the same time decreed itself, and in act assumed to be, superior to the pope; or they have no title at all. The newly elected pope took care to perform little or none of his engagements to reformation. Another council was convoked, as had been provided for, after the time stipulated for enforcing the neglected reformation had elapsed, at Basil, in 1423. Its express and professed objects were two: the union of the Greek and Latin churches, and the reformation of the church in its head and members. Its history has been recorded by a member with so much fidelity, that when, as afterwards, he mounted the apostolic chair, he felt himself reduced to the humiliation of publicly retracting and condemning what he had written; and the work stands in * Sess. iv. and v. The two are put together; for the reader must know, that some shuffling was resorted to by the pontifical agents to smother, if not prevent, the clause concerning reformation of the head and members. See Lenfant's History of the Council. |