[592] Fontanon, Edicts et Ordonnances, IV. 237.—Isambert, XI. 190, 253.
[593] Cornel. Agrippa de Occult. Philos. Lib. I. c. 40; Lib. III. c. 33; Epistt. II. 38, 39, 40, 59; De Vanitate Scientiarum c. xcvi.
[594] Raynald. ann. 1457, No. 90.—P. Vayra, Le Streghe nel Canavese, op. cit. p. 250.—Mall. Maleficar. P. II. Q. i. c. 1, 12.—Ripoll IV. 190.—Pegnæ Append. ad Eymeric. p. 105.—G.F. Pico, La Strega, p. 17.—Prieriat. de Strigimag. Lib. II. c. 1, 5.—Ang. Politian. Lamia, Colon. 1518.
[595] G. de Castro, II Mondo Secreto, IX. 128, 133, 135-6.—Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 440, 617.—Archiv. di Venezia, Misti, Concil. X. Vol. 44, p. 7.
[596] Michelet, La Sorcière, Liv. II. ch. iii.—P. Vayra, op. cit. p. 255.—Annal. Novesiens. ann. 1586 (Martene Ampl. Coll. IV. 717).—Paramo de Orig. Off. S. Inquis. p. 296.
[597] Von der Hardt I. XVI. 829.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Dubius.
[598] R. Bacon Opp., M.R. Series, J.S. Brewer’s Preface, p. xlv.
[599] Op. Minus, M.R Series I. 326-30.—Compend. Studii Philosoph. VII.—Brewer. Preface, p. li.
[600] Brewer, Pref. p. xcviii.—Wadding. ann. 1278, No. 26; ann. 1284, No. 12.—Wood’s Life of Bacon (Brewer, pp. xciv.-xcv.).—C. Müller, Die Anfänge des Minoritenordens, pp. 104-5.
[601] Tocco, L’Heresia nel Medio Evo, p. 2.—J. Scoti Erigenæ de Divis. Naturæ I. 14; IV. 5.—Alberic. Trium Font. ann. 1225.
[602] Tocco, p. 4.
[603] Johann. Saresberiens. Metalog. II. 17.—Tocco, 26, 39, 40, 57.
[604] Bruckeri Instit. Hist. Philos. Ed. 1756, p. 530.—D’Argentré I. II. 258-84, 298, 302-4.—Baluz. et Mansi, II. 293-6.—Isambert, X. 664-72.
[605] D’Argentré I. I. 275, 285-90, 323-30, 337-40; I. II. 249, 255.—R. Lullii Lamentatio Philosophiæ (Opp. Ed. 1651, p. 112).—Erasmi Encom. Moriæ (Ed. Lipsiens. 1828, p. 365).—Maimonides, Guide des Égarés P. III. ch. xxi. (Trad. Munk, III. 155).—Matt. Paris ann. 1201 (Ed. 1644, p. 144).
[606] Renan, Averrhoès et l’Averrhoïsme, 3e Éd. 1866, pp. 152-3, 156-60, 168.
[607] Renan, pp. 22, 29-36, 167-9, 297.
[608] Th. Cantimpr. Bon. Univers. Lib. II. c. 47.—Matt. Paris ann. 1238.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. Y. pp. 339, 349.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 507-8, 782-3.
One of these supposititious Traité des Trois Imposteurs, published at Yverdon in 1768, is written from a pantheistic standpoint, and not without a certain measure of learning. Although it quotes Descartes, there is a somewhat clumsy attempt to represent it as a translation of a tract sent by Frederic II. to Otho of Bavaria.
[609] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxvi. l. 1.—Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1291 c. 8 (Martene Ampliss. Coll. VII. 294).—Renan, pp. 205-16.
[610] Matt. Paris ann. 1243 (p. 415).—S. Bonaventuræ Serm. de decem Præceptia II. (Opp. Venet. 1584, II. 617).—D’Argentré I. I. 158-9, 186-88.
[611] D’Argentré I. I. 177-83.
[612] D’Argentré I. I. 185, 212-13, 234.
[613] D’Argentré I. I. 214-15, 235-6.—Renan, pp. 467-70.—Eymeric. pp. 238, 241.
[614] Renan, pp. 318-20, 322, 325, 339, 342, 345-6.—Molinier, Études sur quelques MSS. des Bibliothèques d’Italie, p. 103.—Petrarchi Lib. sine Titulo Epist. XVIII. Ejusd. contra Medicum Lib. II. (Ed. Basil. 1581, p. 1098).—Decamerone, Giorn. I. Nov. 3.—Marina, Théorie des Cortès, Trad. Fleury, Paris, 1822, II, 515.
[615] Gerson. sup. Magnificat. Tract, IX. (Ed. 1489, 89f, 9lf).—Renan, p. 314.
[616] D’Argentré I. II. 342.—Alph. de Castro adv. Hæreses, Lib. II. s. v. Angelus.
[617] For a luminous presentation of the influence of Humanism on the policy of the Church in the fifteenth century, see Creighton’s History of the Popes, II. 333 sqq. It was one of the complaints of Savonarola that learning and culture had supplanted religion in the minds of those to whom the destinies of Christianity were confided until they had become infidels—“Vattene a Roma e per tutto il Cristianesimo; nelle case de’ gran prelati e de’ gran maestri non s’attende se non a poesie e ad arte oratoria ...Essi hanno introdotto fra noi le feste del diavolo; essi non credono a Dio, e si fanno beffe dei misteri della nostra religione” (Villari, Storia di Savonarola, Ed. 1887, I. 197, 199).
[618] Laurent. Vallæ in Donat. Constant. Declam. (Fasciculus Rer. Expetendar. L. 132, Ed. 1690).—Bayle, s. v. Valle.—Raynald. ann. 1446, No. 9.—Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inq. p. 297.—Wagenmann, Real-Encykl. VIII. 492-3.—Creighton’s Hist. of the Popes, II. 340.—Æn. Sylv. Comment. in Dict. et Fact. Alfonsi Regis Lib. I.—Erasmi Epistt. Lib. IV. Ep. 7; Lib. VII. Ep. 3.—Reusch, Der Index der Verbotenen Bücher, I. 227.
The immediate conviction wrought by Valla’s criticism of the Donation of Constantine is shown in Æneas Sylvius’s defence of the temporal power, where he abandons Constantine entirely, basing the territorial claims of the Holy See on the gifts of Charlemagne, and its authority over kings on the power of the keys and the headship granted to Peter (Æn. Sylvii Opp. inedd. pp. 571-81). Yet the Church soon rallied and renewed its claims. Arnaldo Albertino, Inquisitor of Valencia, in alluding to the Donation of Constantine, says, in 1533, that Lorenzo Valla endeavored to dispute its truth, but that every one else is united in maintaining it, so that to deny it is to come near heresy (Arn. Albertini Repetitio nova, Valentiæ, 1534, col. 32-3). Curiously enough, he adds that it is asserted in the bull Unam Sanctam, which is not the case (I. Extrav. Commun. Lib. I. Tit. viii.). In fact, Boniface VIII. founded his claims on Christ, and a reference to Constantine would only weaken them.
Valla’s bitter and captious criticisms provoked sundry epigrams after his death.
[619] Raynald. ann. 1459, No. 31; ann. 1461, No. 9, 10.—Æn. Sylvii Opp. inedd. pp. 453, 506-7, 524, 653.—B. Platinæ Vit. Pauli III.—Creighton, Hist. of the Popes, II. 440; III. 39.
[620] Gregor. Heymburg. Confut. Primatus Papæ (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. II. 117).—B. Platinæ Vit. Pauli II.—Cantù, I. 186-7, 198.
Creighton (Hist. of the Popes, III. 276 sqq.) has printed from a Cambridge MS. a curious correspondence between Pomponio, while imprisoned in the Castle of Sant’ Angelo, and his jailer, Rodrigo de Arevalo, afterwards Bishop of Zamora. It shows how fragile was the philosophy of the Platonists when exposed to real privations.
[621] Marsil. Ficin. Epistt. Libb. VIII., XI., XII. (Opp. Ed. 1561, I. 866-7, 931, 946, 962-3); De Christ. Relig. c. 11, 13, 22, 24, 26 (I. 15, 18, 25, 29); De Vita Cœlitus comparanda Lib. III. c. 1, 2 (I. 532-33); In Platonem (II. 1390); In Plotinum c. 6, 7, 12, 15 (II. 1620-22, 1633, 1636).—Cantù, I. 179.
Yet we find him attributing a fever and diarrhœa to the influence of Saturn in the house of Cancer, for Saturn had been in his geniture from the beginning; and his cure he ascribes to a vow made to the Virgin.—Epistt. Opp. I. 644, 733.
[622] D’Argentré I. II. 250.—Cantù, I. 182, III. 699-700.
[623] J. Pic. Mirand. Vita, Conclusiones, Apologia, Alexand. PP. VI. Bull. Omnium Catholicor. (Opp. Basil. 1572). Cf. Cantù, I. 185.
[624] Concil. Lateran. V. Sess. VIII. (Harduin. IX. 1719).—Ripoll IV. 373.—Renan, pp. 53, 363.—P. Pomponatii Tract. de Immort. Animæ c. xiv.—Cantù, I. 179-81.—Bayle, s. v. Pomponace, Note D.
The device by which philosophers escaped responsibility for their philosophy is illustrated by the concluding words of Agostino Nifo’s treatise De Cœlo et Mundo, in 1514: “In qua omnibus pateat me ornnia esse locutum ut phylosophum: quæ vero viderentur Sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ dissonare illico revocamus, asserentes ea incuria nostra proficisci non autem a malitia, quare nostras bas interprætationes omnes et quascunque alias in quibusvis libris editis Sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ submittimus.”
And so Marsilio Ficino—“Nos autem in omnibus quæ scribimus eatenus affirmari a nobis aliisque volumus quatenus Christianorum theologorum concilio videatur”—De Immort. Animæ, Lib. XVIII. c. 5.
Pomponazio winds up his treatise on the immortality of the soul with “Hæc itaque sunt quæ mihi in hac materia dicenda videntur. Semper tamen in hoc et in aliis subjiciendo sedi Apostolicæ”—De Immort. Animæ c. xv.
[625] P. Pomponatii Tract. de Immort. Animæ c. iv., viii., xiv., xiv.—Prieriat. de Strigimagar. Lib. I. c. iv., v.—Llorente, Hist. de l’Inq. d’Espagne, ch. xv. Art. ii. No. 4.
[626] Renan, pp. 367-72.—Cantù, I. 183.
[627] Villari, Frà Girolamo Savonarola, Ed. 1887, T. II. p. 3.
[628] Cartas de D. Fr. Feyjoo, Carta XXII. (T. I. p. 180).
[629] Historia General de Mallorca, III. 40-2 (Palma, 1841).—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 514-15.—Nic. Anton. Bibl. Hispan. Lib. IX. c. iii. No. 73.
[630] Mariana, Hist. de España, Lib. XV. c. 4.—Hist. Gen. de Mallorca, I. 601, III. 44-6.—Nic. Anton. l. c. No. 74.—Wadding. ann. 1275, No. 12.
[631] Wadding. ann. 1293, No. 3; ann. 1215, No. 2, 5.—C. 1. Clement. v. 1.—Nic. Anton. I. c. No. 76.—Hist. Gen. de Mallorca, II. 1058-9, 1063; III. 64-5, 72.
[632] Nic. Anton. 1. c. No. 87-154.—Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 68, 70, 96-8.—R. Lullii Art. Mag. P. IX. c. 52 (Opp. Ed. Argentorati, 1651, p. 438).
For an account of Lully’s poetical works, see Chabaneau (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, x. 379).
[633] Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 71, 78.—Pelayo, I. 530, 535, 537, 539.—Nic. Anton. 1. c. No. 82.—Gersoni Epist. ad. Bart. Carthus; Ejusd. De Exam. Doctr. P. II. Consid. 1.—Corn. Agrippæ de Vanitate Scient. c. 9.—Hieron. Cardan, de Subtil. Rer. Lib. xv.—Mariana, Lib. xv. c. 4.
[634] Pelayo, I. 519-23.—R. Lullii Lamentat. Philosoph.
[635] Pelayo, I. 499, 528.—Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 85.—D’Argentré I. I. 256-7, 259—Pegnæ Append. ad Eymeric. pp. 67-8.—Bofarull. Documentos, VI. 360.
[636] Eymeric. Direct. pp. 255-61.
Pegna says (p. 262) that in the MSS. of Eymerich’s work the list of errors is fewer than in the printed text, and this is confirmed by Father Denifle (Archiv. für Litt.-u. K. 1885, p. 143). Apparently the Dominicans of the fifteenth century, when they printed the Directorium, interpolated errors to aid them in the controversy over Lully.
[637] D’Argentré I. I. 258, 260.—Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 82-4.—Pelayo, I. 784-5.
[638] Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 59, 83-6.—Pelayo, I. 498, 787-88.—D’Argentré I. I. 259-61.—Nic. Anton. I. c. No. 78.—Ripoll II. 290.
[639] Hist. Gen. de Mall. III. 65-6, 92, 94-5.—Gabrieli Prateoli Elenchus Hæret. Colon. 1608, p. 423.—D’Argentré I. I. 259, 261.—Reusch, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher, I. 27-33.—Benedict. PP. XIV. De Servorum Dei Beatif. Lib. I. c. xl. § 4.—Raynald. ann. 1372, No. 35.
In 1533 Arnaldo Albertino, Inquisitor of Valencia, complained bitterly of the injustice which ranked as a heretic such a man as Lully, who was inspired by God and was rather to be worshipped as a saint.—Albertini Repetitio nova, Valentia, 1534, col. 406.
The publication of a complete critical edition of Lully’s works has recently been commenced at Padua by D. Jerón. Roselló, under the patronage of the Archduke Ludwig Salvator of Austria.
[640] S. Augustin, De Genesi ad litteram Lib. XII. c. 35, 36; De Civ. Dei Lib. XXII. c. 29. Cf. De Doctr. Christ. Lib. I. c. 31; Epistt. cxviii. § 14, clxix. § 3 (Ed. Benedict.).—Matt. Paris ann. 1243 (p. 415).—Th. Aquinat. Sum. Suppl. Q. xcii.—S. Bonavent. Breviloq. VII. 5, 7; Centiloq. III. 50; Pharetræ IV. 50.—W. Preger, Zeitschrift für die histor. Theol. 1869, pp. 41-2.
[641] C. 3, Clem. v. iii.—Ripoll II. 172.—Wadding. ann. 1331, No. 5.—Paul Lang. Chron. Citicens. (Pistor, I. 1207, 1210).—Gob. Person. Cosmodr. Æt. VI. c. 71.—D’Argentré I. I. 315 sqq.—P. de Herenthals Vit. Joann. XXII. ann. 1333 (Muratori S. R. I. III. II. 501).—Guill. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1331.—Villani, X. 226.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1331.
[642] W. Preger, Die Politik des Pabstes Johann XXII. pp. 14, 66, 69.—Alphons. de Spina Fortalic. Fidei Lib. II. Consid. xii.—Vitodurani Chron. (Eccard. Corp. Hist. I. 1806-7).—Martene Thesaur. I. 1383.—D’Argentré I. I. 316-17. 319-22.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Franç. IV. 387.—Guillel. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1333.—Raynald. ann. 1334, No. 27, 37, etc.—Wadding. ann. 1334, No. 14.—Villani, XI. 19.—Baluz. et Mansi, III. 350.—Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1334 (V. 97).
[643] Molinier, Études sur quelques MSS. des Bibliothèques d’Italie, p. 116.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1334.—Benedict. XII Vit. Tert. ann. 1335-6 (Muratori S. R. I. III. II. 539-41).—Ejusd. Vit. Prim. ann. 1338 (Ibid. p. 534).—Eymeric. p. 421.—Concil. Florent. ann. 1439 P. II. Union. Decret. (Harduin. IX. 986).
A remark of Æneas Sylvius in 1453 shows that, notwithstanding these authoritative definitions, the old belief still lingered that the glory of the saints was postponed till the Day of Judgment (Opp. inedd.—Atti della Accad. dei Lincei, 1883, p. 567).
[644] S. Anselmi Cur Deus Homo Lib. II. c. xvi.; Ejusd. Lib. de Conceptu Virginali.—S. Bernardi Epist. 174, ad Canon. Lugdun.—D’Argentré I. II. 60.—Pet. Lombardi Sententt. Lib. III. Dist. iii. Q. 1.—Innoc. PP. III. Sermo XII. in Purif. S. Mariæ.
[645] Pet. Blesens. Sermo XII., XXXIII.,XXXVIII.—S. Bonavent. Speculi Beatæ Virginis c. i., ii., viii., ix.—The mediæval conception of the Virgin, as the intercessor between God and man and the source of all good, is expressed by Fazio degli Uberti—
[646] Thom. Aquin. Summ. I. ii. Q. 81, Art. 4; III. Q. 14, Art. 4, Q. 27.—D’Argentré I. I. 275.—Alvar. Pelag. de Planctu Eccles. Lib. II. Art 52.—Chron. de Saint-Just (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 225).—Concil. Londin. ann. 1328 c. 2 (Harduin. VII. 1538).
The epitaph of Duns Scotus gives him the credit of defending the Immaculate Conception.
[647] Religieux de S. Denis, Hist. de Charles VI. VII. 5; VIII. 2, 14; XXIII. 5.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 536.
[648] Wadding. Addit. ad T. V. No. 16 (T. VII. p. 491); ann. 1439, No. 47-8.—Concil. Basil. Sess. XXXVI. (Harduin. IX. 1160).—Concil. Florent. Decr. pro Jacobinis (Harduin. IX. 1024-5).
[649] Concil. Avenionens. ann. 1457 (Harduin. IX. 1388).—D’Argentré I. II. 252.
[650] Wadding. ann. 1477, No. 1; ann. 1479, No. 17-18.—C. 1, 2, Extrav. Commun. III. xii.
[651] D’Argentré I. II. 331-5, 343-3.—Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1498.—Wadding. ann. 1500, No. 29.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1501.
[652] Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1497.—D’Argentré I. II. 336-40, 347.—Ripoll IV. 267.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s.v. Hæresis, No. 23.
[653] I have followed a contemporary account of this curious affair—“De Quatuor Hæresiarchis in civitate Bernensi nuper combustis, A.D. 1509,” 4to, sine nota (Strassburg, 1509), attributed to Thomas Murner. It accords sufficiently with the briefer reports of Trithemius (Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1509) and Sebastian Brandt (Pauli Langii Chron. Citicens. ann. 1509), and that of the Chron. Glassberger ann. 1501, 1506, 1507, 1509.—Garibay, Compendio Historial de España, Lib. xx. cap. 13.
The Bernese community was piously devoted to the Virgin. In 1489 a certain Nicholas Rotelfinger was inconsiderate enough to declare that she helped the wicked as well as the good. For this he was obliged to stand a whole day in an iron collar and to make oath that he would personally seek the pope and bring home a written absolution.—Valerius Anshelm, Berner-Chronik, Bern, 1884, I. 355.
[654] Revocatio fratris Vuygandi Vuirt (apud Trebotes, sine anno).
[655] De Beatæ Virginia Conceptione Ducentorum et sexdecim Doctorum vera, tuta, et tenenda Sententia (sine nota. sed. c. 1500).—Concil. Trident. Sess. v. Decr. de Orig. Peccat. § 5.—Pauli PP. IV. Bull. Super speculum (Mag. Bull. Rom. II. 343).—Pauli PP. V. Bull. Regis pacifici (Ibid. p. 392).—Ejusd. Constit. Sanctissimus (Ib. p. 400).—Gregor. PP. XV. Constit. Sanctissimus (Ib. p. 477).—Ejusd. Bull. Eximii (Ib. p. 478).—Prattica del Modo da procedersi nelle Cause del S. Offitio, cap. xix. (MSS. Bib. Reg. Monachens. Cod. Ital. 598.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds italien, 139).—Gage, New Survey of the West Indies, London, 1677, p. 266.
[656] Alph. de Castro de justa Hæret. Punitione Lib. I. c. viii. Dub. 4.—Carenæ Tract. de Modo procedendi Tit. XVII. § 9.
Yet in Spain the intense popular devotion to the Virgin rendered the Inquisition very sensitive in its reverence for her. In 1642 an inquisitor, Diego de Narbona, in his Annales Tractatus Juris alluded to an assertion of Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, Lib. VII.) that some persons believed that after the Nativity the Virgin was inspected by the midwife to prove her virginity. Although he condemned the statement as most indecent and dishonoring to the Virgin, his work was denounced to the Inquisition of Granada, which referred it to the Inquisitor-general. Narbona in vain endeavored to defend himself. It was shown that in the Index Expurgatorius of 1640 the passage of Clement, as well as those in all other authors alluding to it, had been ordered to be borrado, or expunged, so that the very memory of so scandalous a tale might be lost. Narbona alleged in his defence a passage in Padre Basilio Ponce de Leon, but the Inquisition showed that this had likewise been borrado, and, as every one who possessed a copy of a book containing a prohibited passage was bound to blot it out and render it illegible, he was culpable in not having done so.—MSS. Bibl. Bodleian. Arch S. 130.
[657] Reusch, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher, II. 843, 986.—Addis and Arnold’s Catholic Dictionary s. v. Immaculate.
[658] Reusch, op. cit. II. 989.
[659] Mosheim de Beghardis, pp. 368, 378.—Eymeric. pp. 311-16.
[660] Albertini Repertor. Inquis. s. vv. Libri, Scriptura.—Raynald. ann. 1501, No. 36.
[661] Concil. Lateran. V. Sess. IX. (Harduin. IX. 1779-81).
These rules were probably enforced only where there was an Inquisition in working order. In the edition of Nifo’s work, De Cœlo et Mundo, printed at Naples in 1517, there is an imprimatur by Antonio Caietano, prior of the Dominican convent, reciting the conciliar decree, and stating that in the absence of the inquisitor he had been deputed by the Vicar of Naples to examine the work, in which he found no evil.
In the Venice editions of Joachim of Flora, printed in 1516 and 1517, there is not only the permission of the inquisitor and of the Patriarch of Venice, but also that of the Council of Ten, showing that the press was subjected to no little impediment.
In the contemporaneous Lyons edition of Alvaro Pelayo’s De Planctu Ecclesiœ (1517), however, there is no imprimatur, and evidently there was no censorship, and the same is the case in such German books of the period as I have had an opportunity of examining.
[662] S. Raymondi Summ. I. VI. i.—I. Extrav. Commun. I. viii.—Lib. Carolin. III. 1, 3.—Harduin. Concil. IV. 131, 453-4, 747, 775, 970.—Hartzheim Concil. German. I. 390-6.—Eymeric. p. 325.—Tocco, L’Eresia nel Medio Evo, pp. 389-90.—C. 9, 11, Extra, I. xi.
When Sigismund of Austria, in his quarrel with Nicholas of Cusa over the bishopric of Brixen, refused to observe the interdict cast on his territories, Pius II., in 1460, summoned him to trial within sixty days as a heretic, because his disobedience showed him to be notoriously guilty of that heresy of heresies, disbelief in the article of the Creed, “Credo in unam sanctam Catholicam et Apostolicam ecclesiam” (Freher et Struv. II. 192).
[663] Innoc. PP. III. Regest. VII. 47.—Batthyani Legg. Eccles. Hung. II. 355-6.—Ripoll I. 70-1, 186.—Wadding. ann. 1351, No. 8; ann. 1354, No. 4, 5.
[664] Innoc. PP. III.. Regest. VII. 2-12, 121, 152-4, 164, 203-5; IX. 243-6; X. 49-51.
[665] C. 35 Decr. P. II. Caus. xxiv. Q. 9.—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 573, 1817.—Raynald. ann. 1233, No. 1-15.—Epistt. Sæculi XIII. T. I. No. 725 (Pertz).—Buchon, Recherches et Matériaux, pp. 31, 40-2.
[666] Theiner Monument. Slavor. Meridional. I. 120.—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 2058, 4053, 4750, 4769.—Barb, de’ Mironi, Hist. Eccles. di Vicenza II. 102.—Thomas, Registres de Boniface VIII. No. 613-4.—Raynald. ann. 1318, No. 57.—Ripoll II. 172, 482.—B. Guidon. Practica P. II. No. 9; P. V. No. 11.—Eymeric. p. 303.—Harduin. VII. 1700, 1709, 1720.
The relations between the races in the Levant were not such as to win over the Greeks. A writer of the middle of the thirteenth century, who was zealous for the reunion of the churches, repeatedly alludes to the repulsion caused by the tyranny and injustice of the Latins towards the Greeks. Even the lowest of the former treated the Greeks with contempt, pulling them by the beard and stigmatizing them as dogs.—Opusc. Tripartiti P. II. c. xi., xvii. (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 215, 216, 221).
[667] Raynald. ann. 1373, No. 18; ann. 1375, No. 25.
[668] Raynald. ann. 1449, No. 10.—Ripoll IV. 72.
In 1718 the congregation of the Propaganda permitted the erection of a Greek episcopate in Calabria, to supply the spiritual needs of the Greek population. The Greeks in the Island of Sicily complained of the expense of sending their youths to Calabria or to Rome for ordination, and in 1784, at the instance of Ferdinand III., Pius VI. authorized the establishment of another Greek bishop in Palermo.—Gallo, Codice Ecclesiastico Siculo, IV. 47 (Palermo, 1852).
[669] Th. Cantimprat. Bonum Universale, Lib. II. c. 2.—Humb. de Roman. Tract. in Concil. Lugdun. P. III. c. 8. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VII. 197). Cf. Opusc. Tripart. P. III. c. viii. (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 227).
William Langland sets forth the popular appreciation of the Quæstuarii with sufficient distinctness—
[670] C. xi. § 2 Sexto v. ii.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Ed. Douais, p. 199).—Eymeric. pp. 107, 564.—Coll. Doat, XXVI. 314.
[671] 2 Clement, v. ix.—Concil. Senonens. ann. 1485, Art. II. c. 8 (D’Achery, I. 758).—C. Trident. Sess. xxi. De Reform. c. 9.
[672] Bertholdi a Ratispona Sermones, Monachii, 1882, p. 93.
[673] Carmina Burana, Breslau, 1883, pp. 22-3.—This was a favorite theme with the poetasters of the time—
| “Cardinales ut prædixi novo jure crucifixi vendunt patrimoniam. |
Petrus foris, intus Nero, intus lupus, foris vero sicut agni ovium” (Ib. p. 18), |
and this pervaded the whole Church—
The honest Franciscan, John of Winterthur, attributed all the evils which oppressed the Church to its venality—
[674] C. 7, 20, 21 Decr. P. II. Caus. 1, Q. 1.—Th. Aquin. Summ. Sec. Sec. Q. 100, Art. 1.—Gloss. Bernardi; Gloss. Hostiens. (Eymeric. pp. 138, 143, 165).—Eymeric. p. 318.—Berger, Registres d’Inn. IV. No. 2977, 3010, 4668, 4718.—Thomas, Reg. de Boniface VIII. No. 547, 554, 557-8, 644, 726, 747.—Taxæ Sac. Pœnitent. Ed. Friedrichs, p. 35; Ed. Gibbings, p. 3 (cf. Van Espen, Dissert. in Jus Canon. noviss. P. III. p. 699).—Durandi Specul. Juris Lib. IV. Partic. iv. Rubr. de Simonia.
Clement IV. was exceptional in seeking to repress the acquisitiveness of the curia. When, in 1266, Jean de Courtenai was elected Archbishop of Reims, and encumbered his see with a debt of twelve thousand livres to pay the Sacred College, Clement promptly excommunicated him and summoned him to reveal the names of all who participated in the spoils. Yet Clement had no scruple in following the example of his predecessor, Urban IV., in the negotiations which resulted in the crusade of Charles of Anjou against Manfred. Simon, Cardinal of S. Cecilia, sent to France for the purpose, was furnished with special powers to dispense for defects of age or birth or other irregularities in the acquisition of benefices, for holding pluralities, and for marriage within the prohibited grades, and was instructed to distribute these favors so as to remove obstacles to the enterprise (Urbani PP. IV. Epistt. 32-35, 40, 64-5, 68; Clement. PP. IV. Epistt. 8, 19, 20, 41, 383.—ap. Martene Thesaur. II.).
[675] Von der Hardt, I. XVI. 841.—D’Argentré I. II. 228.—Theod. a Niem de Schismate Lib. II. c. xiv.; Ejusd. Nemor. Unionis Tract. VI. c. 36, 37, 39.—Poggii Bracciol. Dialogus contra Hypocrisim.—Gobelini Personæ Cosmodrom. Æt. V. c. 85.
The question as to the possibility of a pope committing simony was long under discussion. At the Council of Lyons, in 1245, Guiard, Bishop of Cambrai, was asked by a cardinal if he believed it possible, when he rendered a most emphatic answer in the affirmative (Th. Cantimprat. Bonum Universale, Lib. II. c. 2). Thomas Aquinas not only asserts it, but adds that the higher the position of the offender the greater the sin (Summ. Sec. Sec. Q. 100, Art. 1, No. 7). Yet the venality of the Holy See was too notorious for concealment, and arguments were framed to prove that the pope had a right to sell preferments, for which see the Aureum Speculum Papœ, P. II. c. 1, written in 1404, under Boniface IX., and the laborious effort of William of Ockham to controvert the assertion. The ingenious methods of the curia to extract the last penny from applicants are described in P. I. c. v. of the Speculum. The author has no hesitation in pronouncing the curia to be in a state of damnation (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 63, 70, 81, 461). All who deplored the condition of the Church instinctively turned to the Holy See as the source of corruption and demoralization. Nothing can well be conceived more terrible than the account of it given about this time by Cardinal Matthew of Krokow in his tract De Squaloribus Romanœ Curiœ (Ib. II. 584-607).
[676] Gersoni Tract. de Symonia.—D’Argentré I. II. 234.—Goldast. Constit. Imp. I. 402.
In La déploration de l’Église militante of Jean Boucher, in 1512, simony is described as the chief source of trouble—