Page images
PDF
EPUB

horn, or the Papacy; and for this plain reason; the empire revived, or once more became a beast, by giving up the saints into the hand of its little horn: and this it assuredly did, not by encreasing the territorial possessions of the horn (for partial temporal dominion does not confer the power of general persecution,) but by conferring upon him spiritual supremacy. Precisely at the time then when the papal horn was declared to be universal bishop and supreme head of the Church, the saints were given up into his hand. He then first acquired the power of general persecution. Though he might not immediately begin to exercise that power by wearing out the saints of the Most High, it was then undoubtedly first conferred upon him.

years

The true key then to fixing the date of the 1260 is that furnished us by the prophet himself. We have neither to concern ourselves with the rise of the papal horn abstractedly, nor yet with its attaining to the summit of its temporal power: we have simply to inquire when the saints were first given up into his hand, and when the old pagan beast revived by setting up a catholic spiritual idolatrous tyrant in the Church.

*

In the West, the year 604 beheld the death of Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome. The pontificate of this good man, for I cannot but consider him as a good man tinctured as his piety was with the growing superstition of the age, was remarkable for his protestation against universal episcopacy by whomsoever assumed, and for his censure of the idolatrous veneration of images then creeping fast into the Church. Great as the power of the Roman archiepiscopal see then was, the sentiments of Gregory on the important question of catholic supremacy are worthy of our particular attention, inasmuch as

* See the testimony born to his virtues even by Mr. Gibbon, though he feebly attempts to ridicule his piety on account of the superstition with which it was undoubtedly alloyed. (Hist. of Decline and Fall, Vol. vm. p. 168, 169.) It may not be improper here to observe, that much real piety may subsist, both along with the will-worship of superstition, provided it grow not to such a height as utterly to choke the good seed of the word; and along with the eccentric reveries of enthusiasm, provided they do not exchange their harmlessly ridiculous cast of countenance for the Satyr's mask of avowed licentiousness and open profaneness. But the co-existence of religion and infidelity is impossible: a religious infidel is a contradiction in

terms.

they differ so very essentially from those of his successors. "I speak it confidently," says he, "that, whosoever calleth himself universal bishop, or desireth to be so called, in the pride of his heart he doth forerun Antichrist."* Accordingly, when the Bishop of Constantinople accepted this presumptuous title, which in his case was a mere title never acted upon, the observation made by Gregory respecting it was, "By this pride of his what thing else is signified, but that the time of Antichrist is now at hand "+ Respecting the introduction of images into churches, which proved at length the fruitful source of popish demonolatry, Gregory's conduct shews indeed, that his judgment in that particular was erroneous; but effectually demonstrates nevertheless, that he expressly reprobated the idolatrous veneration of saints and angels. Serenus of Marseilles, finding that some of the people had begun to adore the images which were originally placed in the churches merely as memorials, very wisely broke them in pieces: but this laudable action of his gave so much offence to the superstitious part of his congregation, that many of them withdrew from his communion. Gregory, hearing of the unhappy dissension, wrote to Serenus, advising him to conciliate the affections of his people by permitting them to retain their images, which might (he observed) be considered as a sort of instructive books for the illiterate; but, at the same time, along with this permission to caution them most seriously against paying the least adoration to them. Events have shewn, that the Bishop of Marseilles judged more wisely than Gregory but it is evident, that image-wor

• Ergo fidenter dico, quod quisquis se universalem sacerdotem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua Antichristum præ currit. Lib. vi. Epist. 30. cited by Bp. Newton.) The accuracy of this declaration of Gregory is not unworthy of our notice. He does not say, that the person, who assumes the title of Universal Bishop, is Antichrist bimself; but only that he is the precursor of Antichrist. Gregory then conjectured, and he conjectured rightly, that the assumption of universal episcopacy was the leading badge of the commencement of the little horn's tyranny: but, not attending to the prediction that this tyranny should continue 1260 years, he fancied that the reign of Antichrist was close at hand. Hence he both wrote, preached, and (we may add) lived, under the firm persuasion that the end of the world was fast approaching.

+ Ex hac ejus superbia quid aliud, nisi propinqua jam esse Antichristi tempora, designatur? Lib. iv. Epist. 34. cited by Bp. Newton.

ship had not in his time been formally established by the authority of the Roman pontiff.

Gregory was succeeded by Sabinianus, whose short pontificate was remarkable only for rapine and extortion, for a systematic grinding of the faces of the poor, and for mean abuse of the memory of his liberal predecessor. But, though the individual Sabinianus was a wicked man, the saints were not as yet formally delivered into the hand of the little horn, nor was idolatry as yet openly established in the Church: consequently the 1260 days had not then commenced, nor had the Roman beast revived by publicly relapsing into the abominations of paganism.

Upon the death of Sabinianus, Boniface the third ascended the papal throne, in the beginning of the year 606 and one of his first acts, an act which took place in this very year 606, was to procure from the tyrannical usurper Phocas a grant of the title of Universal Bishop and Supreme Head of the Church; the identical title, which Gregory only a few years before, and that in the lifetime of Boniface himself, had stigmatized as a badge of the precursor of Antichrist.*

Bp. Newton's Dissert.-Milner's Eccles. Hist.-Bowyer's Lives of the Popes.The account, which Cardinal Baronius gives of this grant, is interesting, because it tallies so exactly with the prophecy. In the spirit of a true Papist he maintains, that de jure the Pope was always the universal bishop, and that Phocas did not so much confer upon him what he did not possess already, as sanction by his imperial authority the undoubted right of the Pope, thus constituting him universal bishop de facto as well as de jure. Now what is this, but, in the language of the prophet, giving the saints into his band; that is to say, decreeing him by imperial authority to be a spiritual sovereign over all Christians, or (as they are constantly termed in the New Testa ment) saints?" Anno Christi 606 to, indictione nona, decimo quinto calendas Martias, ex diacono Pontifex Romanus creatus est Bonifacius ejus nominis tertius.—Quo tempore intercesserunt quædam odiorum fomenta inter eumdem Phocam imperatorem atque Cyriacum patriarcham Constantinopolitanum.-Hinc igitur in Cyriacum Phocas exacerbatus in ejus odium imperiali edicto sancivit, nomen Universalis decere Romanam tantummodo ecclesiam, tanquam quæ caput esset omnium ecclesiarum; solique convenire Romano Pontifici, non autem episcopo Constantinopolitano qua sibi illud usurpare præsumeret. Quod quidem hunc Bonifacium Papam tertium ab imperatore Phoca obtinuisse, cum Anastasius bibliothecarius, tum Paulus Diaconus (De gest. Longobard. L. 4.) tradunt-Sed, quod ad Phocæ edictum attinet, haud eo quidem ipse (quod garriunt novatores) hoc tribuit privilegium ecclesiæ Romanæ, ut in catholica primatum ageret; hunc enim jam ipsam habuisse, semperque exercuisse, ab ipso sui principio, non solum super omnes alios patriarchas orientales, sed et multo magis super omnium novissimum Constantinopolitanum, quam plurimis est superius locis latissimè demonstratum: nec in eo fuit aliquando cum episcopis Constantinopolitanis controversia, quippe qui numquam eumdem primatum in dubium revocârunt; sed in eo tantum, quod ipsi nuper titulum sibi Ecumenici usurpâssent

From this year then it seems most natural to date the 1260 days: for, when the Roman Bishop was appointed Supreme Head of the Church, and when all the churches

(quod Romanis Pontificibus cum ab aliis, tum ab ipsis cuminicis synodis, jure tributum vidimus), et reclamantibus licet iisdem Romanis Pontificibus, conservâssent hactenus favore Mauritii imperatoris. Hanc igitur causam, sententia sua Phocas decidens, eam adjudicavit Romano Pontifici, ut ipse solus, non etiam Constantinopolitanus, diceretur Ecumenicus." Baron. Annal. Eccles. A. D. 606.

Some, I believe, have doubted whether such a grant was ever made by Phocas; but, as it appears to me, without much reason. We know how severely the title of Universal Bishop was reprobated by Pope Gregory at the end of the sixth, and at the beginning of the seventh, century: we know likewise, that the title was borne not long afterwards by the Roman Pontiff, and that it was formally confirmed to him by the second council of Nice in the year 787. Hence we are certain, that it cannot have been assumed very late in the seventh century. Now Baronius tells us, that it was assumed in the year 606, giving for his authorities Anastasius and Paulus Diaconus; the former of whom flourished in the ninth, and the latter in the eighth, century and I can see no reason why we should refuse to credit an assertion, which places the assumption of the title about the very time when we must unavoidably sup pose it to have been assumed. In short, if the account be nothing more than a forgery, it is both one of the most unnecessary and one of the most ill-contrived forgeries that ever was executed : unnecessary, because the Pope had been solemnly declared Universal Bishop by the second council of Nice in the year 787; ill-contrived, because the wily defenders of the Papacy must have departed very far from their wonted subtlety to deduce falsely the grant in question from such an infamous monster as Phocas. Had it never been made by any emperor, and had they been disposed to forge it for the purpose of aggrandizing the Papacy, they would surely have pitched upon a more reputable patron than Phocas; and would have ascribed it (as they did to Constantine, the original grant of St. Peter's patrimony) not to a murderous usurper, but to some emperor, whose character stood high in the christian world. On these grounds, I give credit to the assertions of Paulus Diaconus and Anastasius, neither of whom lived very long after the time when the grant is said to have been made and probably on the same grounds, "the most learned writers, and those who are most remarkable for their knowledge of antiquity," as it is observed by Mosheim," are generally agreed," that the title of Universal Bishop was formally conferred by Phocas upon Boniface. Eccles. Hist. Vol. II. p. 169.

:

[ocr errors]

The general agreement of various writers on this point, and the grounds which the Romanists take, are well stated by Dr. Brett from Bp. Carlton's book of jurisdiction, regal, episcopal, and papal, cap. vi. p. 82, 83. Phocas," says he, "fixed Boniface, the third Pope of that name, in that universal pastorship, which the Roman see claims and exercises over the other sees of Christendom at this day and this, as Baronius and Estius, so these following historians assert.—I will begin with Paulus Diaconus, who saith, Phocas statuit sedem ecclesiæ Romanæ ut caput et omnium eclesiarum. Abbas Usburgensis says the same: to wit, that Phocas ordained, that the see of the Roman apostolical church should be the bead of all churches. Platina says, that Boniface III. agrees with them herein, though he declares it in different words: Bonifacius obtinuit a Phoca, ut sedes beati apostoli, quæ est caput omnium ecclesiarum, ita diceretur et baberetur ab omnibus. Blondus saith, Phocas antistitem Romanum principem episcoporum omnium constituit. And Nauclerus saith, Phocas ad universum orbem, dimissa sanctione, constituit, ut Romanæ ecclesiæ, Romanoque Pontifici, omnes urbes ecolėsiæ obedirent. And now our Romanists believe, as others have declared before them, that the Roman chair had this primacy by divine right, antecedent to Phocas's decree, by which he only engaged to make it law in the empire." (Independent power of the Church not Romish, p. 268, 269, 270.) This opinion, which (as I have already observed) exactly accords with the prediction, that the Roman beast should deliver the saints or Cbristians into the hand of his little born, is thus stated by Estius the schoolman. Nec aliud a Phoca imperatore impetravit Bonifacius tertius, quam ut cathedra Romana priVOL. I.

22

were declared to be subject to him in spirituals, the saints were undoubtedly delivered into his hand. Hitherto they had not been necessarily or universally subject to him; henceforth his merciless tyranny armed the secular power against them, and pursued them with implacable animosity to the very ends of the earth. I mean not indeed to say, that he immediately began to exercise this unchristian authority; but now it certainly was, that the saints were delivered into his hand, and placed under his control.

In order, as it were, more decidedly to shew that at this eventful era the 1260 days commenced, and the Roman beast revived, scarcely had a year elapsed from the establishment of this sacerdotal empire, when the very idolatry, which had so lately been opposed by the zeal of Serenus and censured by the piety of Gregory, was publicly authorized by the sovereign pontiff. The ancient Pantheon, formerly the general sink of all the abominations of paganism, was now restored, though under a different name, to its original destination.* The mediatory demons of corrupted Christianity occupied the vacant places of the mediatory demons of the gentiles; and, instead of Jupiter and his kindred deities, the virginmother of Christ and all his martyred saints receive the blind adoration of the revived ten-horned beast. The

matum, qui ei jure divino competebat, imperiali potestate tueretur contra præsumptionem Episcopi Constantinopolitani, qui se palam in suis literis Universalem Episcopum scribebat. (Comment. in senten. L. iv. § 9. Tom. iv. Pars Post. cited by Brett, p. 264.) Protestants have frequently urged to Papists the disgraceful manner in which this grant was made: but they never, on that account, ventured to exchange their patron Phocas for one that would have done them more credit. Thus, when Illyricus maintained against Bellarmine, that Antichrist was born, when Phocas, in the year 606, granted to, the Roman Pontiff, that he should be called the head of the whole church; the Cardinal readily allowed the truth of the premises, but denied the validity of the conclusion. See Brightman. cont. Bellarm. de Antichris. Cap. 3. Fol. 297.

*“ Annus Christi 607 cœptus est ab indictione 10 ma. Quo Bonifacius-ex pres bytero ordinatus est, ejus nominis quartus, Pontifex Romanus die 18 va Sept.-A Phoca Augusto impetravit Pantheon,—Jovi vindici consecratum, quod adhuc intac tum remanserat a demolientibus dæmonum sedes Romanis Christianis: illudque expurgatum ab antiquæ sordibus idololatriæ, in honorem Dei-genetricis Mariæ et omnium sanctorum martyrum consecravit. Narrat hæc Anastasius; quorum etiam meminit Beda." Baron. Annal. Eccles. A. D. 607.

+ Dr. Macleane, in the chronological table affixed to Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, describes this event in the following words: "Here (in the Pantheon) Cybele was succeeded by the Virgin Mary, and the Pagan deities by Christian martyrs. Idolatry still subsisted: but the objects of it were changed.

« PreviousContinue »