u

JE

MARSILIUS PATAVINUS, FRANCIS PETRARCH,▾
ROME SAVONAROLA," Abbot JOACHIM, BAPTIST of

every point very sound, as it appeareth in his book of Free Will, and in his Annotations upon the New Testament. In all things he handled, he showed himself rather new fangled, than groundedly learned, as well in grammar and logic, as in divinity."

Indeed, it was hardly fair in JEWELL to adduce VALLA's testimony as that of an orthodox Romanist, if it be true which is reported of himthat his freedom of sentiment on many points of the Romish faith, after forcing him to fly to Naples for the protection of its king Alphonso, himself a noted freethinker, at last procured him a condemnation by the Inquisition to be burned alive, which the royal intercession commuted into a public whipping. Subsequently to this, however, it is allowed that he taught with much reputation at Genoa, Pavia, Milan, and Rome itself, and enjoyed a Canonry in the church of St. John Lateran, at Rome. He first disproved the pretended donation of Rome to the Holy See by Constantine; and the popular error that the Apostles' Creed was composed by the twelve Apostles, each contributing an article. His grammatical and philological writings, and the free spirit of research which all his productions tended to introduce and recommend, contributed greatly to the revival of learning in the sixteenth century of which he has sometimes been called the father.

VALLA was born at Placentia, and died at the age of 50, at Rome, in 1458.]

[MARSILIUS PATAVINUS, i. e. of Padua, taught theology and the canon law at Paris, in the fourteenth century, with great reputation. He was a strenuous maintainer of the independence of the temporal powers against the arrogant pretensions of the Papacy.]

V

[PETRARCH, the famous Italian poet, would be of little value as authority in a theological question. But as a witness to the corruptions of the court of Rome, (in his time held, not at Rome, but at Avignon in France,) his intimate acquaintance with its most eminent members, his long residence in the court itself and its neighbourhood, and above all his ardent though inconsistent attachment to the Papal see, entitle him to great consideration.

PETRARCH was born at Arezzo, in Tuscany, in 1304. Thence his father removed to the papal court at Avignon, on which he became a dependant. The son studied law, but without embracing it as his profession. At the age of twenty-two, he fixed his residence at Vaucluse, a village in the neighbourhood of Avignon. He subsequently travelled in France, the Netherlands, and Germany; and on his return, engaged in the service of Pope John XXII. On Easter-day, April 8, 1341, he was solemnly crowned, as a reward for his poetic talents, at Rome. In 1352 he finally abandoned France, and spent the remainder of his life in different parts of Italy. He died at Arequa, in 1374.

PETRARCH, although principally distinguished by productions wholly inconsistent with the clerical character, was possessed of ecclesiastical preferment, being archdeacon of Parma, and a canon of Padua. His letters testify a deep sense of the corruptions which pervaded the whole ecclesiastical state, and an ardent desire for their removal.]

[SAVONAROLA was indeed, as JEWELL represents him, attached to the Romish faith, in its most important peculiarities: yet he has

x

Mantua, and, before all these, BERNARD the Abbot;

been placed, and not wholly without reason, in the list of Reformers. He was a man of ardent piety, and burning zeal; who saw and detested the abominable vices which were sanctioned and practised by the Church of Rome; and to remove them, did not hesitate to embrace methods which, by their irregularity and contrariety to the Papal powers and pretensions, obtained for him, among Protestants, the reputation of a Reformer and martyr; among Papists the character of a heretic, and a death of torments.

He was born at Ferrara in 1452; partially assumed the vows of the Dominican order of friars at the age of twenty-two; was invited to Florence by Lorenzo de Medici, on account of his celebrity as a preacher, and settled in the Priory of St. Mark in that city, in 1488. His preaching speedily acquired him almost unbounded popularity. In the troubles which followed the death of Lorenzo de Medici, his ardent disposition led him to assume a prominent part; and the influence which his religious zeal had gained him, was turned to the account of an equal zeal in politics. He espoused the cause of liberty, and thus gave a two-fold provocation to the papal power, which was ranked on the side of the Medicean family.

After undergoing the spiritual censures of Rome, and, notwithstanding, acquiring an almost dictatorial power over his fellow citizens, SAVONAROLA was at length destroyed by the fanaticism into which his religious zeal had degenerated. Some Franciscan friars (at all times the bitter enemies of the Dominican order) attacked him from the pulpit as a condemned heretic. A zealous partizan offered to prove his innocence by a miracle-to walk through the flames unhurt, if the Franciscans would submit their accusations to the same test. Strange to say, the challenge was accepted. SAVONAROLA Countenanced the impious proceeding; but on the day of trial, when all things were prepared, insisted that his champion should carry with him into the flames the consecrated wafer-as he termed it, 'the body of CHRIST.' The proposal was regarded as sacrilegious. By a reaction not at all uncommon, the affection of the people suddenly changed to detestation. His enemies took advantage of the revulsion of popular feeling, and hurried him to prison. There, with his champion, and another Dominican friar, he was tortured into a confession of guilt; was condemned; and the next day witnessed his public execution, and the burning of his body in the very fire prepared to prove his miraculous powers.

He was charged with sundry departures from the faith of Rome, but except in the article of justification, they were not proved. His great heresy was his uncompromising opposition to the vices of the clergy and court of Rome.

The death of SAVONAROLA took place in 1498. Several of his compositions have been published, partly during his life, partly after his decease. They contain some valuable devotional matter, with much objectionable fanaticism, in some parts not stopping short of pretensions to inspiration.]

[JOHN BAPTIST MANTUANUS (i. e. of Mantua) attained celebrity among his contemporaries by his Latin poems; which, however, excel rather in length and number, than in any other respect. He was born in 1448, and died in 1516. In many parts of his writings he severely lashes the vices of the clergy of his day.]

have many a time and much complained of it,' giving the world also sometime to understand, that the Bishop of Rome himself (by your leave) is very Antichrist." Whether they speak it truly or falsely, let that go. Sure I am, they speak it plainly. Neither can any man allege, that those authors were LUTHER'S or ZUINGLE'S scholars : for they lived not only certain years, but also certain ages ere ever LUTHER or ZUINGLE's names were heard of.

Sect. 10. And what marvel if the Church were then carried away with errors in that time, specially when neither the Bishop of Rome, who then only ruled the roost, nor almost any other, either did his duty, or once understood what was his duty? For it is hard to be believed, whiles they were idle, and fast asleep, that the devil also all that while either fell asleep, or else continually lay idle. For how they were occupied in the mean time, and with what faithfulness they took care of God's house, though we held our peace, I pray you

y [HARDING objects, that JEWELL's witnesses were not competent, not having lived at Rome, with the exception of VALLA. JEWELL replies: "Howbeit, Bernard the Abbot, that dwelt furthest off, was twice in Rome, and was chief of counsel with Pope Innocent [the Second] in his greatest affairs. Francis Petrarch was made poet in the capitol, and kept Laura his concubine* in the eye of the Pope, and had his most abode in Rome.t Laurentius Valla was Canon of the Cathedral Church in Lateran, and led his life, and died, in Rome. Briefly, S. Bernard only excepted, all the rest were Italians, and dwelt never far from Rome: and as it may appear by the plainness of their speech, understood some of the deepest secrets of the Church of Rome." Defence, p. 412.]

2

["BERNARD saith thus: 'Bestia illa de Apocalypsi,' &c. 'The Beast that is spoken of in the book of Revelations, unto which beast is given a mouth to speak blasphemies, and to keep war against the saints of GOD, is now gotten into Peter's chair, as a lion prepared to his prey.' (Epist. 125. p. 1316. Opp.)-Joachimus Abbas said above three hundred years since: 'Antichristus jampridem natus est Romæ,' &c. 'Antichrist is already born in Rome, and shall advance himself higher in the apostolic see.'-Franciscus Petrarcha likewise saith: 'Rome is the whore of Babylon; the mother of idolatry and fornicathe sanctuary of heresy; and the school of error.' (Epist. 20.)—

tion;

There is no evidence of any criminal intercourse between Petrarch and his Laura, who, if she ever existed, (of which strong doubts are entertained,) was the chaste wife of another man.

JEWELL appears to confound Rome with Avignon, which was the Papal seat in PETRARCH's time, and where the poet'had his most abode.'

6

let them hear BERNARD, their own friend: "The bishops," saith he, "who now have the charge of God's Church, are not teachers, but deceivers: they are not feeders, but beguilers: they are not prelates, but Pilates." These words spake BERNARD of that Bishop who named himself the highest bishop of all, and of the other bishops. likewise which then had the place of government. BERNARD was no Lutheran: BERNARD was no heretic: he had not forsaken the Catholic Church: yet nevertheless he did not let [delay] to call the bishops that then were, 'deceivers,' beguilers,' and 'Pilates.' Now when the people was openly deceived, and Christian men's eyes were craftily bleared, and Pilate sat in judgment place, and condemned CHRIST and CHRIST's members to sword and fire: O good LORD! in what case was CHRIST'S Church then! But yet tell me, of so many, and so gross errors, what one error have these men at any time reformed? Or, what fault have they once acknowledged, and confessed?

But forasmuch as these men avouch the universal possession of the Catholic Church to be their own, and call us heretics, because we agree not in judgment with them; let us know, I beseech you, what proper mark and badge hath that Church of theirs, whereby it may be known to be the Church of God? Ye wis [know] it is not so hard a matter to find out God's Church, if a man will seek it earnestly and diligently, and as he

The Pope himself, for that he saw to whose person and credit these things belonged, therefore in his late Council of the Lateran (Conc. Lateran. sub Julio et Leone, Sess. xi.) gave strait commandment unto all preachers, that no man should dare once to speak of the coming of Antichrist." Defence, p. 413.]

[This passage, while it evinces BERNARD'S honest boldness in condemning the great men of his day, furnishes an amusing illustration of the bad taste of the age, infesting even his writings: in the original it is a tissue of puns. Episcopi, quibus nunc commissa est Ecclesia DEI, non doctores sunt, sed seductores; non pastores, sed impostores ; non prælati, sed Pilati." (Ad Eugenium.) Lady Bacon's genuine Saxon nearly hides this glare of false wit; but it might be displayed to the reader in modern English thus: "They are not doctors, but seducers; not pastors, but impostors; not prelates, but Pilates."

In the Defence, (p. 415,) JEWELL quotes equally strong passages relative to the lives of the clergy, in support of BERNARD, from Cardinal VITALIS, ALBERTUS MAGNUS, WILLIAM HOLCOT, and JOHN OF SALIRBURY.]

e

should. For the Church of God is set upon a high and glistering place, in the top of a hill," and "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets." "There," saith AUGUSTINE, "let us seek the Church: there let us try our matters." d And, as he saith again in another place: "The Church must be showed out of the holy and canonical Scriptures: and that which cannot be showed out of them, is not the Church." Yet for all this, I wot not how, whether it be for fear, or for conscience, or despair of victory, these men alway abhor and fly the word of God, even as the thief flieth the gallows. And no wonder truly. For, like as men say the cantharus [the dung beetle] by and by perisheth, as soon as it is laid in balm; notwithstanding balm be otherwise a most sweet smelling ointment: even so these men will see, their own matter is damned and destroyed in the word of God, as if it were in poison. Therefore the Holy Scriptures, which our Saviour JESUS CHRIST did not only use for authority in all his speech, but did also at last seal up the same with his own blood, these men, to the intent they might with less business drive the people from the same, as from a thing dangerous and deadly, have used to call “ a bare letter, uncer

b Matth. v. 14. Isa. ii. 2. Micah iv. 2.

Ephes. ii. 20.

d "Ibi quæramus Ecclesiam: ibi discutiamus causam nostram." AUGUST. de Unitate Ecclesiæ, cap. iii.

"Ecclesia ex sacris et canonicis Scripturis ostendenda est: quæque ex illis ostendi non potest, non est Ecclesia." AUGUST. de Unit. Eccles. c. iv.

["Likewise saith S. CHRYSOSTOM, (in Opere Imperfect. Hom. 49.) 'Now can no man know which is the true Church of CHRIST, but only by the Scriptures. Again he saith in the like form of words: (Ibid.) 'If a man be desirous to know which is the true Church of CHRIST, how can he know it, in such a confusion of likeness, but only by the Scriptures?"-Defence, p. 417.] [This word, as it here occurs, illustrates its use in the English translation of the New Testament. Both here and there, it is precisely equivalent to the word 'condemn.' Colloquial usage has in process of time confined the application of the verb 'damn' (with the single exception of the rejection of a play) and the noun 'damnation' to the condemnation of the wicked in a future state. In consequence of this, such passages as 1 Cor. xi. 29, 1 Tim. v. 12, Rom. xiii. 2. xiv. 23, and 2 Pet. ii. 1, are very frequently misunderstood. Let the words 'condemnation' be substituted for 'damnation,' and 'condemnable' for 'damnable,' (with which they were perfectly equivalent in the estimation of the Translators) and all will be perfectly plain.]

VOL. III.-12 ·