the Firft-Ambrofe has taught me the great diftance there is between the empire and the priesthood!

We have already obferved that ecclefiaftics ought to be honoured: but modefty, and even humility, fhould characterise them: and does it become them to forget it in their own conduct, while they preach it to others? I would not mention a vain ceremonial, were it not attended with very material confequences, from the pride with which it infpires many priefts, and the impreffions it may make on the minds of the people. It is effentially neceffary to good order, that fubjects should behold none in fociety fo refpectable as their fovereign, and, next to him, thofe on whom he has devolved a part of his authority.

$151.

Ecclefiaftics have not stopped in fo fair a path. Not contented with rendering themselves independent with refpect to their 6. Independence. functions, by the aid of the court of Rome, they have even Immuniattempted to withdraw themfelves entirely, and in every refpect, ties. from all subjection to the political authority. There have been times when an ecclefiaftic could not be brought before a secular tribunal for any crime whatsoever. The canon law declares expressly, It is indecent for laymen to judge a churchman †. The Fopes Paul III. Pius V. and Urban VIII. excommunicated all lay judges who should prefume to undertake the trial of ecclefiaftics. Even the bishops of France have not been afraid to say on several occafions, that they did not depend on any temporal prince; and, in 1656, the general affembly of the French clergy had the affurance to use the following expreffions-" The decree of council having been read, was disapproved by the affembly, be-. cause it leaves the king judge over the bifhops, and feems to fubject their immunities to his judges t. There are decrees of the popes that excommunicate whoever imprisons a bishop. According to the principles of the church of Rome, a prince has not the power of punishing an ecclefiaftic with death, though a rebel, or a malefactor;-he must first apply to the ecclefiaftical power; and the latter will, if it thinks proper, deliver up the culprit to the secular arm, after having degraded him §. History affords

us

The Congregation of Immunities has decided that the cognisance of caufes against ecclefiaftics, even for the crime of high treafon, exclufively belongs to the fpiritual court:-"Cognitio caufe contra ecclefiafticos, etiam pro delicto læfæ majeftatis, feri debet a judice ecclefiaftico." Ricci Synopf. Decret. et Refol. S. Congreg. Immunit p. 105.A conflitution of pope Urban VI. pronounces those fovereigns or magiftrates guilty of facrilege, who fhall banish an ecclefiaftic from their territories, and declares them to have ipfo facto incurred the fentence of excommunication. Cap. II. De Foro Compet. in VII.- -To this immun ty may be added the indulgence fhewn by the ecclefiaftical tribunals to the clergy, on whom they never inflicted any but flight punishments, even for the most atrocious crimes. The dreadful diforders that arofe from this caufe at length produced their own remedy in France, where the clergy were at length fubjected to the temporal jurifdiction for all tranfgreffions that are injurious to fociety. See PAPON Arrêts Notables. Book I. tit V. Act 34.

+ Indecorum eft laïcos homines viros ecclefiafticos judicare. Can. in nona actione 23. XVI. q. 7.

See the Statement of Falls on the Syftem of the Independence of Bishops.

In the year 1725, a parish-pricft, of the canton of Lucerne, having refufed

§ 152.

nity of

church

us a thousand examples of bishops who remained unpunished, or were but flightly chaftifed, for crimes for which nobles of the highest rank forfeited their lives. John de Braganza, king of Portugal, juftly inflicted the penalty of death on thofe noblemen who had confpired his deftruction; but he did not dare to put to death the archbishop of Braga, the author of that deteftable plot *.

For an entire body of men, numerous and powerful, to ftand beyond the reach of the public authority, and be dependent on a foreign court, is an entire fubverfion of order in the republic, and a manifeft diminution of the fovereignty. This is a mortal ftab given to fociety, whofe very effence it is that every citizen fhould be fubject to the public authority. Indeed the immunity which the clergy arrogate to themselves in this refpect, is fo inimical to the natural and neceffary rights of a nation, that the king himself has not the power of granting it. But churchmen will tell us they derive this immunity from God himself: but till they have furnished fome proof of their pretenfions, let us adhere to this certain principle, that God defires the fafety of states, and not that which will only be productive of diforder and destruction to them.

The fame immunity is claimed for the poffeffions of the church. Immu- The ftate might, no doubt, exempt thofe poffeffions from every fpecies of tax at a time when they were scarcely fufficient for poffeffions. the fupport of the ecclefiaftics: but, for that favour, these men ought to be indebted to the public authority alone, which has always a right to revoke it, whenever the welfare of the ftate makes it neceffary. It being one of the fundamental and effential laws of every fociety, that, in cafe of neceflity, the wealth of all the members ought to contribute proportionally to

to appear before the fupreme council, was, for his contumacy, banished from the canton. Hereupon, his diocefan, the bishop of Conftance, had the affurance to write to the council that they had infringed the ecclefiaftical immunities,-that "it is unlawful to fubject the minifters of God to the decifions of the temporal power." In these pretenfions, he was fanctioned by the approbation of the pope's nuncio and the court of Rome. But the council of Lucerne firmly fapported the rights of fovereignty, and-without engaging with the bishop in a controverfy which would have been derogatory to their dignity,-answered him "Your Lordship quotes various paffages from the writings of the fathers, which we, on our fide, might alfo quote in our own favour, if it were necessary, or if there was queftion of deciding the conteft by dint of quotations. But let your Lordship reft affured that we have a right to fummon before us a priest, our natural fubject, who encroaches on our prerogatives,-to point out to him his error, to exhort him to a reform of his conduct,-and, in confequence of his obftinate difobedience after repeated citations, to banish him from our dominions, We have not the least doubt that this right belongs to us; and we are determined to defend it. And indeed it ought not to be propofed to any fovereign to appear as party in a conteft with a refractory fubject like him,-to refer the cause to the decifion of a third party, whoever he be, and run the risk of being condemned to tolerate in the state a perfon of fuch character, with what dignity foever he might be invefted," &c. The bishop of Conftance had proceeded fo far as to affert, in his letter t the canton, dated December 18, 1725, that churchmen, as foon as they have received holy orders, ceafe to be natural subjects, and are thus released from the bondage in which they lived before. Memorial on the Dispute be tween the Pope and the Canton of Lucerne, p. 65.

* Revolutions of Portugal.

the

the common neceffities,--the prince himself cannot, of his own authority, grant a total exemption to a very numerous and rich body, without being guilty of extreme injuftice to the reft of his fubjects, on whom, in confequence of that exemption, the whole weight of the burthen will fall.

The poffeffions of the church are fo far from being entitled to an exemption on account of their being confecrated to God, that, on the contrary, it is for that very reason they ought to be taken the first for the use and safety of the state. For nothing is more agreeable to the common Father of mankind than to fave a ftate from ruin. God himself having no need of any thing, the confecration of wealth to him is but a dedication of it to fuch ufes as fhall be agreeable to him. Befides, a great part of the revenues of the church, by the confeffion of the clergy themselves, is defined for the poor. When the state is in neceflity, it is doubtlefs the firft and principal pauper, and the most worthy of affiftance. We may extend this principle even to the moft common cases, and safely affert that to fupply a part of the current expenses of the ftate from the revenues of the church, and thus take fo much from the weight of the people's burthen, is really giving a part of thofe revenues to the poor, according to their original deftination. But it is really contrary to religion and the intentions of the founders, to waste in pomp, luxury, and epicurifm, thofe revenues that ought to be confecrated to the relief of the poor *.

munication

Not satisfied however with rendering themselves independent, $153. the ecclefiaftics undertook to bring mankind under their domi- 8. Excomnion; and indeed they had reafon to defpife the stupid mortals of men ia who fuffered them to proceed in their plan. Excommunication office. was a formidable weapon among ignorant and fuperftitious men, who neither knew how to keep it within its proper bounds. nor to distinguish between the use and the abuse of it. Hence arofe diforders, which have prevailed even in fome protestant countries. Churchmen have prefumed, by their own authority alone, to excommunicate men in high employments, magiftrates whofe functions were daily ufeful to fociety, and have boldly afferted that thofe officers of the ftate, being ftruck with the thunders of the church, could no longer difcharge the duty of their pofts. What a perverfion of order and realon! What! fhall not a nation be allowed to intruft its affairs, its happiness, its repose and safety, to the hands of those whom it deems the moft skilful and the moft worthy of that truft? Shall the power of a churchman, whenever he pleafes, deprive the ftate of its wifeft conductors, of its firmeft fupports, and rob the prince of his molt faithful fervants? So abfurd a pretenfion has been condemned by princes, and even by prelates, refpectable for their character and judgment. We read in the 171ft letter of Ives de Chartres, to the archbishop of Sens, that the royal capi

§ 154.

tularies (conformably to the thirteenth canon of the twelfth council of Toledo, held in the year 681) enjoined the priests to admit to their conversation all thofe whom the king's majefty had received into favour, or entertained at his table, though they had been excommunicated by them, or by others,-in order that the church might not appear to reject or condemn those whom the king was pleased to employ in his fervice *.

The excommunications pronounced against the fovereigns 9. And of themselves, and accompanied with the abfolution of their fubfovereigns themfelves. jects from their oaths of allegiance, put the finishing ftroke to this enormous abufe; and it is almoft incredible that nations fhould have fuffered fuch odious procedures. We have flightly touched on this fubject in §§ 145 and 146. The thirteenth century gives ftriking inftances of it. Otho IV. for endeavouring to oblige feveral provinces of Italy to fubmit to the laws of the empire, was excommunicated and deprived of the empire by Innocent III. and his fubjects abfolved from their oath of allegiance. Finally, this unfortunate emperor, being abandoned by the princes, was obliged to refign the crown to Frederic II. John, king of England, endeavouring to maintain the rights of his kingdom in the election of an archbishop of Canterbury, found himself exposed to the audacious enterprises of the fame pope. Innocent excommunicated the king,-laid the whole kingdom under an interdict,-had the prefumption to declare John unworthy of the throne, and to abfolve his fubjects from their oath of fidelity: he ftirred up the clergy against him,excited his fubjects to rebel,-folicited the king of France. to take up arms to dethrone him,-publishing at the fame time a crufade againft him, as he would have done against the Saracens. The king of England at first appeared determined to defend himself with vigour: but foon lofing courage, he suffered himfelf to be brought to fuch an excefs of infamy, as to refign his kingdoms into the hands of the pope's legate, to receive them back from him, and hold them as a fief of the church, on condition of paying tribute f.

The popes were not the only perfons guilty of fuch enormities: there have also been councils who bore a part in them. That of Lyons, fummoned by Innocent IV. in the year 1245, had the audacity to cite the emperor Frederic II. to appear before them in order to exculpate himself from the charges brought against him,-threatening him with the thunders of the church if he failed to do it. That great prince did not give himself much trouble about fo irregular a proceeding. He faid, "that the pope aimed at rendering himfelf both a judge and a fovereign; "but that, from all antiquity, the emperors themselves had "called councils, where the popes and prelates rendered to "them, as to their fovereigns, the refpect and obedience that

*See Letters on the Pretenfions of the Clergy.

Matthew Paris.-Turretin. Compend. Hift. Ecclef, Secul. X¡II.

was

"was their due." The emperor, however, thinking it neceffary to yield a little to the fuperftition of the times, condefcended to fend ambassadors to the council, to defend his caufe: but this did not prevent the pope from excommunicating him, and declaring him deprived of the crown. Frederic, like a man of a fuperior genius, laughed at the empty thunders of the Vatican, and proved himself able to preferve the crown in fpite of the election of Henry, Landgrave of Thuringia, whom the ecclefiaftical electors, and many bifhops, had prefumed to declare king of the Romans,-but who obtained little more by that election, than the ridiculous title of king of the priests.

I fhould never have done, were I to accumulate examples: but those I have already quoted are but too many for the honour of humanity. It is an humiliating fight to behold the excefs of folly to which fuperftition had reduced the nations of Europe in thofe unhappy times t.

felves, and

By means of the fame fpiritual arms, the clergy drew every $155. thing to themselves, ufurped the authority of the tribunals, and to. The clergy difturbed the course of juftice. They claimed a right to take drawing. cognisance of all caufes, on account of fin, of which (fays Inno- every thing cent Ill.) every man of fenfe muft know that the cognisance be- to longs to our miniftry. In the year 1329, the prelates of France disturbing had the affurance to tell king Philip de Valois, that, to prevent the order caufes of any kind from being brought before the ecclefiaftical of justice. courts, was depriving the church of all its rights, omnia ecclefiarum jura tollere §. And accordingly it was their aim to have to themselves the decifion of all difputes. They boldly oppofed the civil authority, and made themselves feared by proceeding in the way of excommunication. It even happened fometimes, that, as diocefes were not always confined to the extent of the

HEISS's Hiftory of the Empire, Book II. Chap. XVI.

+ Sovereigns were fometimes found, who, without confidering future confequences, favoured the papal encroachments when they were likely to prove advantageous to their own interefts. Thus Louis VIII. king of France, wishing to invade the territories of the count of Touloufe, under pretence of making war on the Albigenfes, requested of the pope, among other things, "that he would iffue a bull, declaring that the two Raymonds, father and fon, together with all their adherents, afiociates, and allies, had been and were deprived of all their poffeffions." VELLY's Hift. of France. Vol V. p. 33. Of a fimilar nature to the preceding, is the following remarkable fact. Pope Martin IV. excommunicated Peter, king of Arragon,-declared that he had forfeited his kingdom, all his Lands, and even the regal dignity,-and pronounced his fubjects abfolved from their oaths of allegiance. He even excommunicated all who fhould acknowledge him as king, or perform towards him any of the duties of a fubject. He then offered Arragon and Catalonia to the count de Valois, fecond fon of Philip the Bold, on condition that he and his fucceffors fhould acknowledge themselves vaffais of the holy fee, take an oath of fealty to the pope, and pay him a yearly tribute. The king o France affembled the barons and prelates of his kingdom to deliberate on the pope's offer; and they advised him to accept it :-" Strange blindnets of kings and their counfellors!" exclaims, with good reason, a modern hiftorian: "they did not perceive, that, by thus accepting kingdoms from the hands of the pope, they ftrengthened and established his pretenfions to the right of depofing themselves." VELLY's Hift. of France. Vol. VI. p. 190,

In cap. Novit. de Judiciis.

See Leibnitii Codex Juris Gent. Diplomat. Dipl. LXVII. § 9.

political