Hist, eccles. 1. 70, n. 4.—Otho Frising. de Gert. Frider. Anoborb. 1. 2, c. 21.—Vit. Adrioni ed À card. Arrag.

Otho Frising. de Oert. Frid. 1.2, c. 14,15,20.—Radev. de Gert. Frid. 1.1, c. 11.—Bossnet’s Def. Gull Church. 1.3, e« 18.

Radevic. 1. 1, c. 8, 9, 10.

Concilior. vol. x. p. 1144.

Concilior, vol. 10, p. 1145.

Radev. Gest. Frider. 1.1, c. 16.

Radev. 1. 17, c. 23.

Concilior. vol. 10, p. 1147.

Ana. eccles. ann. 1158. 76.—According to Bossuet, this letter of Adrian IV. alone, is requisite to annihilate all the conclusions which the Ultramontanes pretend to deduce from the ceremony of the coronation of kings.

Radev.l. 2. c. 1—15.

Lib. 2. c. 18*

App. p. 562.

Concilior vol. 10.

Ego dixi: Dii estis et filii Excelsi omnes Ps. 81. r. 6.

Abb. Ursperg. Chron. p. 221.

Vit Alex. III. edit, a card. Arrag. p. 468.—Acerbug Rfp-rena, p. 1151.—-Baron. Ann. eccles. Anji. 1167, s. 11.

Matth. Paris. Hist. mag. p. 82, 83, 101, 104.—Collier's Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1, s. 12.—Concil. Magnse Britann. vol. 1. p. 434.—EpistolÆ et Vita ThomÆ Cantuar. &c. Brux. 1682, vol. 2. in 4to.—Natalis Alex. sec. 12, diss. 10, p. 833.—Telly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3, p. 181, 198.

Maratori’s Antiquit Ital. med. Ævi. vol. 4, p. 249.— Orig. Guelph, vol. 2, p. 479.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3, p. 327.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3, p. 327.

Frasche.

Ann. eccles. ann. 1191.

Ann. d'ltal. ann. 1191.

Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 76, n. 14,1. 76, n. 6.

Ibid. 1. 76, n 9.

Ibid. 1. 76, n, 10.

Ego... nottim facio universil ad quos litterÆ prÉsentes pervenerint, quod ego domino meo Ph. illustri regi Franco rum consului, ut neque pacem neque treugam faciat regi Anglis, per violentiam y el per coactionem domini papÆ aut alicujus paps. Quod si dominus papa eidam domino regi super hoc aliquam faceret violentiam aut coactionem, concessi domino regi tanquam domino meo ligio et creantavi super omnia qus ab eo teneo, quod ego super hoc ei essem in auxilium de toto posse meo. Acts drawn up in this form in the names of Renaud count of Boulogne, Raoul count of Soissons, and of Odo duke of Burgundy, are to be found in the Chamber of Charters, all under the date of 1202.

Eccles. Hist 76 m. 60; 1. 79, no. 8.

Bofisuet, Defens. eler. Gallie. 1. 3. c..21.

Innoc. 3. Epist. 1. 15. ep. 77.—Rymer Act. pub. vol. 1, p. 67.

Velly's Hist, of France, vol. 3. pa. 472.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3. pm 468, 475.

“Spiro qua l'ultimo fiato l’autorita degli Augusti in Roms.” Muratori, Annals of Italy, win. 1198.

Hist, eccles. 1. 76. n. 2.; Innoc. III, Epist 1. 8. ep. 69.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3, p. 430, 468.

Concilior, vol. 11, p. 142,—Director. Inquis. part 1,c. 2.

Ionoc. III. Serm. de consec. pontif. op. yoI. i. p. 180.

Fleury's eccles. Hist 1. 77, n. 62.

Thom. Cantiprat. in vita St. Lutg. virg. apud Surium 16 Jan.—Raynald. ad. ann. 1216.

Hist, eccles. 1. 77, n. 62.

Fleury’s eccles. Hist. 1. 79, n. 21.

Concilior. vol. 11, p. 340, 346, 357.

Matt Paris, ann. 1239, p. 444.—Daniels, Hist, of France, vol. 3. p. 210.—Bossuet Def. Cler. Gall. 1. 4. c. 6.

Judex, judicium, clerus, sponsalia, crimen.

Velly, vol. iv. p. 306, 307.

Matt. Paris, p. 600.

While Innocent was at Lyons, some prebends of the church of this city became vacant, and he attempted to bestow them, in the plenitude of his authority, on foreigners, his relatives; but the people, and even the clergy of Lyons, resisted him to his face, and compelled him to relinquish this undertaking.

Matt. Paris, p. 697. Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. iv. p. 469.—La Chaise’s Hist, of St Louis, p. 449.

Hist. Eccles. 1. 83. n. 40.

Hist. Eccles. 1. 83, n. 25—26.

Fleury's Ecclesiastical Hist. 1. 82. n. 28. He relates also, 1. 83, n. 43, the reproaches which Robert Greathead, bishop of Lincoln, a learned and pious prelate, addressed to the Court of Rome, and particularly to Innocent IV. “The pope has not been ashamed to annul the constitutions of his predecessors, with a Non obstante: in which he evinces too great a contempt for them, and gives a precedent for disregarding his own. Although many popes have al-ready afflicted the church, this pope has reduced it to a greater degree of bondage, principally by the usurers he has introduced into England, and who are worse than the Jews. Besides, he has directed the friars preachers and the friars minors, when administering to the dying, to persuade them to bequeath by will their property for the succour of the Holy Land, in order to defraud the heirs of their wealth whether they should live or die. He sells crusaders to the laity as formerly sheep and oxen were sold in the temple, and measures the indulgence by the money which they bestow towards the crusade: furthermore the pope commands the prelates by his letters, to provide such a one with a benÈfice, according as he may wish to purchase, although he be a foreigner, illiterate, in every respect unworthy, or ignorant of the language of the country: so that he can neither preach nor hear confessions, neither relieve the poor nor receive the traveller, as he is not a resident.” Fleury adds, that Robert Greathead enlarged on the views of the court of Rome, especially its avarice and dissoluteness. “To swallow up every thing, it drew to itself the wealth of those who died intestate; and in order to pillage with the less restraint, it divided the plunder with the king. The bishop of Lincoln still more laments that the pope employed, in the collection of his extortions, the mendicant friars, learned and virtuous men, thus abusing their obedience by compelling them to mix with that world they had left; he sent them into England with great power as legates in disguise, not being allowed to send there in form and openly unless the king requested it.” Such were, says Fleury, the complaints of the bishop of Lincoln, too sharp indeed, but too well founded, as appears by the writings of the period, even by the epistles of the popes.

Matt. Paris, p. 713,—Velly’s History of France, vol. v. p. 102—100.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. v. p. 193—197.

Hist. Univ. Paris, vol. iii. p. 365.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. v. p. 326—345.

Vita Corradini, mors Caroli; mors Corradini, vita Caroli. Giannone, Istoria di Napoli. 19, c. 4.

“Nothing proves better,” says a modern author, “the influence of superstition......than the number of crusades preached by order of Clement IV. A crusade into Spain against the Moors, whom they wished to exterminate; a crusade into Hungary, Bohemia and elsewhere, against the Tartars, whose incursions they dreaded; a crusade in favor of the Teutonic knights, against the Pagans of Livonia, of Prussia and of Courland, over whom they Wished to reign; a crusade into England against the barons, whom Henry III. could not subject; a crusade into France and into Italy, to deprive the house of Swabia of the kingdom of Naples and Sicily; a general crusade for the conquest of the Holy Land. The crusaders were often opposed; they were loosed from the obligation to the one, when pressed to the execution of another; indulgences were distributed at the will of the pope; the expenses of the war exhausted kingdoms, and the pope’s bulls kindled flames throughout Europe.” — Millot's Elements of General History.—Mod. Hist. vol. ii. p. 184, 186.

Note upon P. Daniel’s History of France, vol. iv. p. 563

Concilior. vol. ii. Proofs of the liberties of the Gall. Church, vol. i. pt. 2. p. 28, 60, 66, 76,—pt. 3, p. 41, and, Real's Science of Government, vol. vii. p. 72.

Bossuet Def. Cler. Gall. 1. iii. c. 33, 24, 35.

For the manners and religious opinions of this pope, see the pieces published by Dupuy. p. 523—560 of the Hist, of the dispute between Boniface and Philip the Fair. Many witnesses depose, that Boniface spoke with derision of the sacraments, of the mysteries, of the gospel, and even of the immortality of the soul. "We must," he said, "speak like the people, but we need not think like them.”

4th Disc, on Ecclesiastical History, no. 11.

De Consider. 1. 4, p 4, 5.

10. Villani. 1. 8, c. 101—Pfeffel. abr. chr. Hist, of Germany, ann. 1308.—Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 7, p. 393, 395

Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 92, n. 8.

Baluz. Vit. Avenion. vol. 1, p. 69,—Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 91, n. 33.

HenriÇi. Vn. Iter, Ital. vol. 9. Rer. Italic, p. 703.

Baluz. Vit Pap. Avenion. v. 1. p, 164—Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 82. p. 25.

BrÛler.—Millot’s Hist. of France, v. 2, p. 84.

Villaret’s Hist, of France, t. 8, p. 234-253.—Henault’s Abr. Chron. of Hist, of France, ann. 1329, et 1330.

Fltury’s Eccles. Hist, 1. 93, n. 4.12.

Eccles. Hist. 1. 94. n. 39.

Pfeffel ann. 1338.

Fleury’s Eccl. Hist. 1. 94, n. 611.

Eedw. Hiat 1,96, a. 13,

Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 9 6,n.9.

Innocent VI. sent Philip de Cabassole into Germany, to raise the tenth penny on all the ecclesiastical revenues. The following were the complaints of the Germans at the news of this exaction: “The Romans have always looked on Germany as a mine of gold, and have invented various ways of exhausting it. What does the pope give to this kingdom but letters and words? Let him be master of all the benefices as far as the collation; but let him relinquish their revenue to those who do the duty of them. We send money enough into Italy for various merchandize, and to Avignon for our children, who study there or stand for benefices, without mentioning their having to purchase them. None of you are ignorant, my lords, that every year large sums of money are taken from Germany to the pope's court, for the confirmation of prelates, the obtaining of benefices, the prosecution of suits and appeals to the Holy See; for dispensations, absolutions, indulgences, privileges, and other favours. At all times the archbishops confirmed the elections of their suffragan bishops. It is pope John XXII. alone who, in our time, has taken this right from them by violence. And yet this pope further demands of the clergy, a new and unheard of subsidy; threatening with censures those who will not give it, or who oppose it. Check this evil in its outset, and do not permit the establishment of this shameful servitude.” Vita 2, Lrnoc. VI. and Bahiz. Vit. Pap. A veiv. 1. p. 350.

Petrarc. Op. Epist. s. tit 7. 8.10. 11.16.—Three sonnets against the Roman Coart—Et, De Vita Solitar. 1.3. 4. c. 3.

Urban V. when dying, expressed these words: “I firmly believe all that the Holy Catholic Church holds and teaches; and if I ever advanced doctrines contrary to the church I retract and subject them to its censure." Here is one pope, says Fleury, who did not think himself infallible.—Eccles. Hist. 1. 97, n. 18.

Hist, of France, vol. xii. p. 270,271.

Eccles. Hist. 1. 99. n.-26.

Ibid. n. 26, 27,28.

“The Verger’s dream,” one of the most ancient monuments of French literature and of the liberties of the Gallican Church, occupies the half of a folio volume, in the collection of proofs of, and treatises on these liberties.

Theodor, de Niem. ap. Vonder Hart. vol. ii. p. 389.

L'Enfant's Hist, of Coun. of Constance, 1. 2, p. 184.

Invect. in Joann. 1. 23. p. 6.

Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 103, n. 46.

Theodor. Niem. Invect. p. 8.

We must observe, said the president Henault, that in 1441 the king issued a declaration respecting the pragmatic sanction, implying that his design and that of the assembly at Bourges, was, that the arrangement made between Eugene IV. and his ambassadors should take effect from the day of the date of this pragmatic, without any regard to the date of the Basle decree, issued before the date of the pragmatic; and from this it is concluded, that the decrees of general councils, as respects discipline, have no force in France until after they have received authority from the edicts of our kings.—Ab. Chron. of Hist, of France, ann. 1438.

"Never did individual,” says Mezerai, “labour more to reduce the power of the popes within tbe limits of the canons than Eneas Sylvius; and never did pope endeavour more to extend it beyond the bounds of right and of reason, than the same man when he became Pius II.”—Abr. Chron. vol. i. pt. 2, p. 436.

Proofs of the Liberty of the Gallican Church, vol. i. p. 2, pa. 40.

Pii secundi pontificis maximi, ad illustrem Mahumetem Turcarum imperatorem, epistola. Tarvisii, Garard de Flandria. 1475, in 4to. We read in fol. 4 and 3: “Parva res omnium qui hodie Vaint, maximum et potentissimum et cla-rissimum te reddere potest QuÆris quid sit? Non est inventa difficiles neque procul quÆrenda; ubique gentium reperitur: id est, aquÆ parexillium quo baptizeris. Id si feceris, non erit in orbe princeps qui te glori superet aut tequare potenti valeat. Nos te Graecoram et Orientis imperatorem appellabimus Et sicut nostri antecessories, Stephanas, Adrianas, Leo, ad versas Haistulphum et Desi-deritun, gentes LongobardÆ reges, Pipinum et Karolum Magnum accersiverunt, et liberati de manu tyrannicÂ, imperium À Groecis ad ipsos liberatores transtulerunt, ita et nos in ecclesiÆ necessitatibus patrocinio tuo uteramur, et vicem redderemus beneficii accepti.”

Art of verifying Dates, vol. i, p. 337.—‘ Formosus’ implies ‘handsome.’

Muratori’s Annals of Italy, vol., ix. p. 508.

Art of verifying Dates, vol. i. p. 327.

He said, his courage would never support him in commiting such a crime in a church, and adding to his treason sacrilege.—Machiavellii's History of Flortnce, 1. 8.

Ang. Politian. De Hist, coryurat. PactianÆ comment.— Don Bossi, chron. ann. 1478.—Machiav. Hist, of Flor. 1. 8.— Ammir. Hist. Flor. vol. iii. p. 118, &c.—Valori, Vita Laurent. Med.—Fabr. Vit. ejusdem.—Muratori’s Annals of Italy, years 1478, 1479, &c.

“About this time, 1512, says Flecher, pope Julius piqued against France and her allies, abusing the power which God had given him, and making religion subservient to his own particular passions, went to such lengths as to excommunicate kings and strip them of their kingdoms. The greatness of Louis XII. secured him from these exactions, and France, supported by her internal force, feared neither the violence of the pope, nor the ambition of those who would have taken ad-vantage of it to attack this crown. The evil fell on John d’Albret, king of Navarre, who, not being sufficiently provident to secure himself from surprise, nor powerful enough to defend himself against an armed neighbour, watchful of every opportunity to aggrandize his kingdom, had been ex-communicated because he had united with the king of France, and was finally driven from his states, under the pretence that he had contributed to the convocation and continuance of the council held at Pisa against the Holy See. Ferdinand, in virtue of this bull of excommunication, which it is believed the pope had secretly conveyed to him before he had fulminated it, caused his troops to advance quietly, and put himself in a position to attack the king of Navarre, with whom he was living on good terms, and who suspected nothing. He knew in his conscience he was about committing " an injustice, and doubted not he would be reproached with his invasion: on this account he sent to desire Cardinal Ximenes might come to him in Logrogne, where he was, in order to sanction by his presence, at least in the eyes of his subjects, a war which in other respects had no just grounds.” Life of Cardinal Ximenes, pa. 358, 359. Ed. of 1693.

John Lemaire, a contemporary author, made upon the warlike disposition of Julius II. the following observation: “Still shall we declare another wonderful change it is, the Sultan’s graciousness and tractability towards the Very Christian King, compared with the rigour and obstinacy of this modern pope, who, so martial and quarrelsome in his accoutrements, as if it was a duty of his to cause his terrible and warlike arms to be famous, like the great Tamerlane emperor and sultan of the Tartars, wishes always to be engaged in war, which is as becoming to him as for a dirty monk to dance. Unless he shall make some monstrous world to accord with his own ideas: for hogs will ever feed on acorns.”—Preface to the Treatise on Schisms, p. 5. Julius II.

History of Italy. 1. 11. ann. 1513.

Guicciardini’s Hist, of Italy, 1. 12. The King of France promised to aid the pontiff in the acquisition of the kingdom, of Naples, either for the church or for Giuliano his brother.

They have erected a statue to him with this inscription: Optimo, principi. Leoni. X. Joan. Med. Pont. Max. ob. restitutam. restauratamque. urbem. aucta. sacra, bonasq. artes. adscitos. patres, sublatum, vectigal. datumq. congiarium. S.P.Q.R.P.

Hist, of the Variat. 1. I, n. 1, 2, 3.

On this subject observe the remark of Mezerai: "There never was seen go odd an exchange; the pope, who is a spiritual power, takes the temporal to himself, and bestows the spiritual on a temporal prince.”

Ab. Chron. of Hist, of France: remark, particul.

The worst of it was, says Brantome, when they could not agree in their elections, they often came to blows, and cuffed each other with their fists, knocked each other down, wounded nay killed each other......They generally elected him who was the best companion, who loved the girls and was the greatest toper; in short he who was most debauched: others elected, from pity, some wretch of a monk who had been secretly plundering them, or kept his own private purse and starved his poor friars.....The bishops, elected and installed in these great dignities, God knows what lives they led...A dissolute life after dogs, birds, feasts, banquets, clubs, weddings and girls, of whom they kept seraglios...I would add more; but I do not wish to give offence.

Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. xxiii. p. 161, &c.—Gaillard’s Hist, of Francis I. vol. vi. p. 1—120.

This mode of thinking on the pragmatic and concordat was so national, so constant, that in 1789 even the petitions prepared for the sessions of the States general unanimously demanded the abolition of the concordat and restoration of the pragmatic sanction.. Summary of the Petitions, vol. i. p. 33; vol. ii. p. 277; vol. iii. p. 409, 410.

Bossnet. Def. Cler. Gall. Diss. proeria. n. 38. p. 23... The text of Adrian is as follows: “Dico quod, si per Romanam ecclesiam intelligatur caput illius, puta pontifex, certum est quod possit erare, etiam in is quÆ tangunt fidem, herÆsim per suam determinationem aut decretalem docendo: plures enim fuerunt pontifices Romani hÆretici. Idem et novissime fertur de Joanne XXII.” &c. In lib. 4, SententiÆ.

The Italians had no love for this pope: Pallavicini, in his Hist, of the Council of Trent, 1. 2, c. 9, n. 1, says, that Adrian VI. was indeed a very good priest, but a very indifferent pope.

It commences with these words: “Consuererunt Romiani Pontiiicis,” and contains twenty-four paragraphs.

See Appendix.

We shall transcribe in our 2d vol. some of the arguments of Paul and his theologians, to prove that the pope was the “superior” of the emperor.

We here beheld with what immense auxiliaries the clergy had encompassed and enriched their pastoral office. “They had,” says Pasquin, “extended their spiritual jurisdiction over so many matters and affairs, that the suburbs became thrice as large as the city.”—Researches on France, 1. 3, x. 22.

In 1580, many French bishops attempted to publish, in their dioceses, the bull “In coena Domini,” but on the complaint of the procureur general, the parliament of Paris ordered the seizure of the temporal revenues of the prelates who should publish this bull, and declared, that any attempt to enforce it would be reputed rebellion and the crime of high treason.

In execution of a decree of the council of Trent, a decree pronounced in 1546, Sixtus published in 1590, an official edition of the Vulgate; and, in a bull which served as a preface, he declares of his personal knowledge, and with the plenitude of his power, that this was the version consecrated by the holy council, commanding every old edition to be corrected by it, forbidding all persons from publishing any not exactly copied from this model, under penalty of the greater excomunication by the act alone. Who would believe that after such a sentence, this edition, which had been waited for forty and four years, should have been suppressed immediately after the death of Sixtus, and replaced, in 1592, by that which bears the name of Clement VIII. Between these two editions they reckon about two thousand variations, the most of which, however, are trifling. But the edition of Clement has prevailed in the catholic church; it is recognised and revered by it as the true Vulgate. We make this remark as one of those tending to prove, that even in matters of doctrine, the general consent of the churches abrogates, or confirms, the decisions of the popes. “We must admit, says Dumarsais, either that Clement was wrong in revising the Bible of Sixtus V.; or, that Sixtus erred in declaring by his bull, that the edition published by his order was very correct and in its purity.” Exposition of the doctrine of the Gallican church, pa. 163 of the 7 vol. of Dumarais works.

Bossuet Def. Clsr. Gall. 1. 3. c. 28.

The 50th article of Pithou is cited in the edition of 1719.

Richlieu rejected the prayers of Urban VIII. who, in his letters to Louis XIII., to the queen, and to Richlieu himself, ceased not to recommend the complete extermination of the Huguenots. “CÆterum, cÙm scias qu cur custodiendi sint victoriarum fructus, ne marcescant, nemo est qui ambigat a te reliquis omnes hÆreticorum in Gallic vine stabulantium propediem profligatum iri.” Urb. VIII. Epis, ad principes, ann. 6. f. 10. Aux. Arch. of the Empire.

The court of Rome, says Dumarsais, fears only those who do not fear her, and concedes only to those who will not concede to her; she has no power but that derived from the weakness of those who are ignorant of their own rights, and who ascribe to her, what she would never have dared to attribute to herself but for their blind deference.—Exp. of the Doctrine of the Gallican Church, v. 228 of 7th vol. of Dumariais’ Works.

Bossuet. Def. Cler. Gall. 1. 4, c. 12.

‘Pastoralis Romani pontificis vigilantia,’ such are the words of the bull ‘In cÆn Domini,’ renewed by Paul; it has thirty articles, that is, six more than the bull ‘Consuevernnt’ of Paul III.

Bossuet. Def. Cler. Gall. 1. 4, c. 16.

Register of Letters from the Secretary of State of Paul V. to the bishop of Montepulciano, nuncio in France, 1613, 1614.—In the Archivet of the Empire.

Bossuet. Def. Cler. Gall. 1. 6, c. 30.

See p. 380.

Qui fu Castro.

Mem. of Cardinal de Retz. vol. 5. p. 177, ed. of 1718. In support of this testimony of Renaldi, in our 2d vol. will be found a secret writing in which Alexander VII. contradicts his own public declarations. This document, of eight pages, is wholly in the hand writing of this pontiff, and is dated by him 18th of February, 1664.

D’Aguesseau says that “the terms of this letter were coached so that it could only be considered as a testimony of the grief of these bishops, in learning the prejudice which this pope entertained with respect to them, in regard to what had passed in the assembly held at Paris in 1682. They did not avow that these pretensions were well founded.” Whatever d’Aguesseau may say about it, the letter of these bishops does them no honour: it will be found in our second volume.

We shall transcribe in vol. 2, the letter of Louis to the pope, announcing that the edict of March, 1632, would not be executed. This letter is dated, as is that of the bishops, on the 14th of Sept 1693.

See page 302.

The bull ‘Unigenitus’ is one of those in which the king of France is not designated ‘king of Navarre.’

He contented himself with neutralizing as much as he could, the effects of the resistance of the bishops, and the resolutions of the parliament. The 18th of February 1730, he wrote to the council “that it sufficed in the present circumstances that the essential, that is, the maxims of the kingdom be secured. Prudence requires that we seek not to encrease the evil rather than cure it. The king desires especially that no mention be made of the mandate of the bishop of Auxerre; he ought to know that it was his duty, before its publication, to have made himself acquainted with the intentions of H. M. on so delicate an affair, and have come to concert the mode in which it should have been expounded.”

The 19th of June 1768, he wrote, with his own hands, to Maria Theresa, to implore the assistance of this princess against the other sovereigns of Europe. "Thank God,” said he, “we have resisted with a sacerdotal heart unworthy collusions.”

Def. of the Clergy of France, 1. 8. c. 15.

Can. 4. Council. Hord. vol. 1. Col. 783.

Epist. 7.

Epist. 8.

Epist. ad Episco. Dardan.

Canon 6.

Gonzales de Avila. History of the Antiquities of the city of Salamanca, 1. 3, c. 14.

See page 298. (Ism. Bull.) Libelli duo pro eccl. Lucitanicis: Parisiis in 1655, in 4to.—Narratio...rerum quÆ acci-derant super confirmaodis......episcopis Lusitanie; Ulypsip. 1667, in 4to.

PrÆfat. ad App. Concil. Gall. v. 2.

De concord, sacerd. et imperii.

Discip. Eccles. vol. 2, p. 2,1. 2, c. 8

“The re-establishment of metropolitans in their ancient rights,” says the bishop of Novarra, “confers the means of providing, without any injurious delay, for the vacant churches. It was for this purpose that the famous council of Nice conferred on the metropolitan alone the ordination of bishops: all the succeeding councils have been unwilling to recognize as bishop him who was not ordained by the decree of his metropolitan. The Roman pontiffs themselves have asserted this general doctrine of the church to the year 1051; and it was religiously observed during upwards of a thousand years. The bishop consecrated by the metropolitan and by his suffragans proceeded at once to the government of his church, and was installed by the clergy of the vacant see. Antiquity knew of no canonical institution or oath of fidelity to the Roman pontiffs, to which they would subject the episcopacy in these latter times, and by which they restricted its divine and original authority. Such are the true and invariable principles, is the constant and pure doctrine, of the church.” Address of the bishop of Novara to his His Imperial Highness the prince Viceroy of Italy. Moniteur 11th February 1811. The bishop of Forli professes the same principles. “The ordinary power of bishops,” says he, “is derived immediately from Christ.... In whatsoever place a bishop is to be found, whether at Rome, at Gubbio, at Constantinople, at Reggio, at Alexandria, or at Favi, he has the same character and posseses the same authority. All are equally successors of the apostles, so says St. Jerome.... After the abdication of Necturius, the council of Ephesus wrote to the clergy of Constantinople to take charge of this church, in order to render account thereof to him who by the divine will should be ordained thereto by command of the emperor....For upwards of a thousand years, no canonical investment was known in the church, nor oath of fidelity to the pope; obligations fatal to the ordinary authority of the episcopacy,” &c.—Moniteur, 16 Feb. 1811. “I am perfectly satisfied,” says the bishop of Verona, “that the spiritual jurisdiction which a bishop exercises is derived to him immediately from God, and that he may be placed in his see by the competent power, in virtue of the canonical decrees of the universal church....Bishops are not the vicars of the sovereign pontiff, but the true ordinaries of their dioceses....In the council of Trent, the most learned bishops strongly defended the prerogatives of the episcopacy.”—Moniteur, 1st of March, 1811. The bishop of Verona, whose expressions we have above transcribed, published about thirty years since a volume in 4vo, entitled ‘De Finibus Sacerdotii et Imperii,’ a learned and judicious work which the court of Rome hastened to condemn.—For original see Appendix C.