Back to History Reports
Back to the Way of Life Home Page
Way of Life Literature Online Catalog

THE HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, from the birth of Christ to the 18th Century: including the very interesting account of the Waldenses and Albigenses
By William Jones

First Edition 1812
Fourth Edition 1819
Fifth Edition 1826
London: Printed for the Author by W. Myers, 7, Took’s Court, Castle Street, Holborn

[Note from the publisher. This valuable out-of-print book was carefully formatted for electronic publication by Way of Life Literature. For a catalog of other books, both current and old, in print and electronic format, contact us at P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org (e-mail), http://www.wayoflife.org (web site).]

[Table of Contents for "A History of the Christian Church" by William Jones]

GOTHIC INVASION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE -- THE CITY OF ROME BESIEGED AND PLUNDERED -- SETTLEMENT OF THE BARBARIANS IN THE EMPIRE --ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DOMINION OF THE POPES

A.D. 408-606

On the death of the emperor Theodosius, the government of the Roman world devolved upon his two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, who, by the unanimous consent of their subjects, were saluted as the lawful emperors of the East, and of the West. Arcadius was then about eighteen years of age, and took up his residence at Constantinople, from whence he swayed the scepter over the provinces of Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt, comprising what was termed the Eastern Empire. His brother Honorius assumed, in the eleventh year of his age, the government of Italy, Africa, Gaul, Spain, and Britain, under the denomination of the Western. Their father died in the month of January, 395, and before the end of the winter in the same year, the Gothic nation was in arms; and, from the forests of Scythia, the savage warriors "rolled their ponderous wagons," says one of their Roman poets, "over the broad and icy bank of the indignant river the Danube." But the genius of Rome expired with Theodosius. He was the last of the successors of Augustus and Constantine, who appeared in the field at the head of their armies, and whose authority was universally acknowledged throughout the whole extent of the empire.

Nothing could form a more striking contrast than the character of those Gothic tribes and that of the Romans at the period of which we speak. The Barbarians, as they were called, breathed nothing but war -- their martial spirit was yet in its rigor -- their sword was their right, and they exercised it without remorse as the right of nature. Simple and severe in their manners, they were unacquainted with the name of luxury; any thing was sufficient for their extreme frugality. Inured to exercise and toil, their bodies seemed impervious to disease or pain; they sported with danger, and met death with expressions of joy. The Roman character was then reduced to the reverse of all this. Accustomed to repose and luxury, they had degenerated into a dastardly and effeminate race, overwhelmed with fear and folly, or, what was still more ignominious, with treachery. That enormous fabric, the Roman empire, had, for a succession of ages, groaned under its own unwieldy bulk, and every method had been resorted to, that human wisdom could devise, for the purpose of preventing the superstructure from crumbling into ruins. Theodosius had attempted to appease the invaders by voluntary contributions of money. Tributes were multiplied upon tributes, until the empire was drained of its treasure. Another expedient was then adopted; large bodies of the Barbarians were taken into pay and opposed to other Barbarians. This mode of defense answered for the moment; but it terminated in the subversion of the empire. Already acquainted with the luxuries, the wealth, and the weakness of the Romans, they turned their arms against their masters, inviting their countrymen to come and share with them in the spoils of a people that were unworthy of so many accommodations. [1 Robertson's Hist. Charles V. vol. 1, sect. 1.]

Immense hordes of these savage tribes poured into every part of the empire. Wherever they marched, their route was marked with blood. The most fertile and populous provinces were converted into deserts. The wretched inhabitants of those countries to the south of the Danube, submitted to the calamities, which, in the course of twenty years, were almost grown familiar to their imagination, and the various troops of Barbarians, who gloried in the Gothic name, were irregularly spread from the woody shores of Dalmatia to the walls of Constantinople. Under the bold and enterprising genius of ALARIC, their renowned leader, they traversed without resistance the plains of Macedonia and Thessaly, stretching from east to west, to the edge of the sea shore. "The fertile fields of Phocis and Boeotia," says Gibbon, "were instantly covered by a deluge of Barbarians, who massacred the males of an age to bear arms, and drove away the beautiful females, with the spoil and cattle to the flaming villages. Corinth, Argos, Sparta, yielded without resistance to the arms of the Goths, and the most fortunate of their inhabitants were saved, by death, from beholding the slavery of their families and the conflagration of their cities. This invasion, instead of vindicating the honor, contributed, at least accidentally, to extirpate the last remains of Paganism -- and a system which had then subsisted eighteen hundred years, did not survive the calamities of Greece." [Decline and Fall, vol. 5, ch. 30.]

Having completely ravaged the entire territory of Greece, Alaric proceeded to invade Italy, and the citizens of Rome were thrown into the utmost consternation at his approach. The emperor had taken up his residence in his palace at Milan, where he thought himself secured by the rivers of Italy, which lay between him and the Gothic chief. But the season happened to be remarkably dry, which enabled the Goths to traverse, without impediment, the wide and stony beds, whose center was faintly marked by the course of a shallow stream; and as Alaric approached the walls, or rather the suburbs of Milan, he enjoyed the satisfaction of seeing the emperor of the Romans flying before him. The danger to which the latter had been exposed, now urged him to seek a retreat in some inaccessible fortress of Italy, where he might securely remain, while the open country was covered by a deluge of Barbarians; and in the twentieth year of his age, anxious only for his personal safety, Honorius retired to the perpetual confinement of the walls and morasses of RAVENNA. His example was imitated by his feeble successors, the Gothic kings, and afterwards the Exarchs, who occupied the throne and palace of the emperors; and, till the middle of the eighth century, Ravenna was considered as the seat of government and the capital of Italy.

During a period of six hundred and nineteen years, the city of Rome, the seat of government, had never been violated by the presence of a foreign enemy; but in the year 408, Alaric commenced the blockade of this proud metropolis.* By a skillful disposition of his numerous forces, he encompassed the walls, commanded the twelve principal gates, intercepted all communication with the adjacent country, and vigilantly guarded the navigation of the river Tyber, from which the Romans derived the surest and most plentiful supply of provisions. The first emotions of the nobles, and of the people, were those of surprise and indignation, that a vile Barbarian should dare to insult the capital of the world; but their arrogance was soon humbled by misfortune. The unfortunate city gradually experienced the distress of scarcity, and at length the horrid calamities of famine. The daily allowance of three pounds of bread, was reduced to one half -- to one third -- to nothing; and the price of corn still continued to rise in a rapid and extravagant proportion. The poorer citizens, unable to procure the necessaries of life, solicited the precarious charity of the rich; but private and occasional donations were insufficient to appease the hunger of a numerous people. The food the most repugnant to sense or imagination, the aliments the most unwholesome and pernicious to the constitution, were eagerly devoured, and fiercely disputed by the rage of hunger. A dark suspicion was entertained that some wretches fed on the bodies of their fellow creatures, whom they had secretly murdered, and even mothers are said to have tasted the flesh of their slaughtered infants! Many thousands of the inhabitants of Rome expired in their own houses, or in the streets, for want of sustenance; and as the public sepulchers without the walls were in the power of the enemy, the stench which arose from so many putrid and unburied carcasses, infected the air; and the miseries of famine were succeeded and augmented by the contagion of a pestilential disease, and the proud and insolent Romans were at length compelled to seek relief in the clemency, or at least in the moderation of the king of the Goths.

[* We seem in general to entertain a very inadequate idea in the present day of what was the extent and magnificence of the city of Rome, at the period of which we are now treating. The subject is somewhat foreign to the object of this work: yet I flatter myself a few hints may be pardoned by the reader, were it merely on the score of exciting attention to a subject of considerable curiosity. When the capital of the empire was besieged by the Goths, the circuit of the walls was accurately measured by Ammonius, the mathematician, who found it equal to twenty-one miles. The form of the city was almost that of a circle. It probably covered a less space of ground than the metropolis of Great Britain; but it contained about one-fifth more inhabitants; for "we may fairly estimate the number of inhabitants," says Mr. Gibbon, referring to this period, "at twelve hundred thousand." The total number of houses, in the fourteen regions of the city, amounted to forty-eight thousand, three hundred, and eighty-two -- a number inferior to those of the British capital; but that is accounted for from the loftiness of the buildings, which were carried to such an enormous elevation, that it was repeatedly enacted, by Augustus, as well as by Nero, in consequence of the frequent and fatal accidents which happened through the hastiness of their erection, and the insufficiency of their materials, that the height of private edifices, within the walls of Rome, should not exceed the measure of SEVENTY FEET from the ground! House rent was immoderately dear -- the rich acquired, at an enormous expense, the ground which they covered with palaces and gardens; but the bulk of the common people was crowded into a narrow space, and the different floors and apartments of the same house were divided among several families. There were seventeen hundred and eighty superb mansions, the residence of wealthy and honorable citizens. No doubt the language of one of their own poets (Claudius Rutilius), who lived at the time of the Gothic invasion, is to be understood as indulging in poetic license, when it describes "each palace as equal to a city, since it included within its own precincts, every thing which could be subservient either to use or luxury; markets race-courses, temples, fountains, baths, porticoes, shady groves, and artificial aviaries." Of the riches and luxury of these nobles, we may form an estimate from this circumstance; that several examples are recorded in the age of Honorius, of persons who celebrated the year of their praetorship by a festival which lasted seven days, and cost above one hundred thousand pounds sterling. Before the Dioclesian persecution, which commenced A.D. 303 the places of Christian worship in Rome were augmented to more than forty in number; and the pastors and teachers to upwards of an hundred and fifty. -- Gibbon's Rome, vol. 8, ch. 31, and Optatus de Schism. Donat. lib. 2, p. 40.]

The senate appointed two ambassadors to negotiate with the enemy. When introduced into his presence, they declared, perhaps in a more lofty style than became their abject condition, that the Romans were resolved to maintain their dignity either in peace or war; and that if Alaric refused them a fair and honorable capitulation, he might sound his trumpets and prepare for battle with an innumerable people, exercised in arms and animated by despair. "The thicker the hay, the easier it is mowed," was the concise reply of the Barbarian, accompanied by a loud and insulting laugh, expressive of his contempt for the threats of an unwarlike populace, enervated by luxury before they were emaciated by famine. He then condescended to fix the ransom which he would receive as the price of his retreat from the walls of Rome. It was ALL the gold and silver in the city, whether it were the property of the state or of individuals; ALL the rich and precious moveables; and ALL the slaves that could prove their title to the name of Barbarians. "If such, O king, are your demands," said they, "what do you intend to leave us?" "Your lives," replied the haughty conqueror! They trembled and retired.

The stern features of Alaric, however, became insensibly relaxed, and he abated much of the rigor of his terms; for he at length consented to raise the siege on the immediate payment of five thousand pounds of gold -- of thirty thousand pounds of silver -- of four thousand robes of silk -- of three thousand pieces of fine scarlet cloth -- and of three thousand pounds weight of pepper. But the public treasury was exhausted; the annual rents of the nobles were intercepted by the calamities of war, the gold and gems had been exchanged, during the famine, for the vilest sustenance. Recourse was, therefore, obliged to be had to the hoards of secret wealth which had been concealed by the obstinacy of avarice, and some remains of consecrated spoils, which afforded the only means of averting the impending ruin of the city. As soon as the Romans had satisfied the rapacious demands of Alaric, they were restored, in some measure, to the enjoyment of peace and plenty. [Gibbon’s Rome, vol. 5, ch. 23.]

Before he withdrew his army from the gates of Rome, Alaric had stipulated for the payment of an annual subsidy of corn and money, which the treacherous Romans now sought to evade, and in the following year (409) the Gothic chief, resolving to punish their perfidy, a second time laid siege to their city. On this occasion, however, instead of assaulting the capital, he directed his efforts against the port of Ostia, one of the boldest and most stupendous works of Roman magnificence. This port or harbor, which was undertaken by Julius Caesar, and finished in the reign of Claudian, where the corn of Africa was deposited in spacious granaries for the use of the capital, had, by this time, insensibly swelled to the size of an episcopal city. As soon as Alaric was in possession of that important place, he summoned the city to surrender, declaring that a refusal, or even a delay, should be instantly followed by the destruction of the magazines, on which the lives of the Roman people depended. The clamors of the people, and the terror of famine, subdued the pride of the senate -- they listened without reluctance to the proposal which Alaric made them, of placing a new emperor on the throne of the Caesars in place of the unworthy Honorius, and the suffrage of the Gothic conqueror bestowed the purple on Attalus, praefect of the city.

Attalus, however, was not long in evincing his incompetency for the duties of the high station to which he had been raised; and in the following year Alaric publicly despoiled him of the ensigns of royalty, and sent them as the pledge of peace and friendship, to Honorins at Ravenna. Some favorable occurrence, however, happening to turn up in the fortunes of this latter prince, just at that moment, the insolence of his ministers returned with it; and, instead of accepting the friendly overture of Alaric, a body of three hundred soldiers were ordered to sally out of the gates of Ravenna, who surprised and cut in pieces a considerable party of Goths, after which they re-entered the city in triumph. The crime and folly of the court of Ravenna was expiated a third time by the calamities of Rome. Alaric, who now no longer dissembled his appetite for plunder and revenge, appeared in arms under the walls of the capital, and the trembling senate, without any hopes of relief, prepared by a desperate resistance, to delay the ruin of their country. But they were unable to guard against the secret conspiracy of their slaves and domestics, who, either from birth or interest, were attached to the cause of the enemy. At the hour of midnight, the Salarian gate was silently opened, and the inhabitants were awakened by the tremendous sound of the Gothic trumpet.* In the year 410, eleven hundred and sixty-three years after the foundation of Rome, the imperial city, which had subdued and civilized so considerable a part of mankind, was delivered to the licentious fury of the tribes of Germany and Scythia, who, during six days, pillaged the city of all its gold and jewels, stripped the palaces of their splendid furniture - the sideboards of their massy plate, and the wardrobes of their silk and purple, which were loaded on wagons to follow the march of the Gothic army - the most cruel slaughter was made of the Romans - the streets of the city were filled with dead bodies - the females were delivered up to the brutal lust of the soldiers - and many of the noblest edifices of the city destroyed by fire.

[* There is a very eloquent passage referring to this particular subject, in a letter written by PELAGIUS, the author of the Pelagian heresy, to a Roman lady of the name of Demetrias, and it deserves insertion in this place, were it only to exhibit to the reader a specimen of the superior talents which were possessed by that apostate from the doctrines of grace. Pelagius, whose original name was Morgan, was a native of Wales, and by profession a monk. He was far advanced in life before he began publicly to propagate his heretical sentiments, and until that period it seems that he sustained a blameless reputation; for Augustine, who was contemporary with him, and combated all his errors, does him the justice to own that "he had the esteem of being a very pious man, and a Christian of no vulgar rank." Pelagius happened to be at Rome when that city was besieged by the Goths, and was probably a spectator of all that passed during the sacking of that metropolis. Soon after it was taken he set sail for Africa, and from thence wrote to the Lady Demetrias the letter, of which the following is an extract, referring to the Gothic invasion. "This dismal calamity is but just over, and you yourself are a witness how Rome that commanded the world was astonished at the alarm of the Gothic trumpet, when that barbarous and victorious nation stormed her walls, and made her way through the breach. Where were then the privileges of birth, and the distinctions of quality? Were not all ranks and degrees leveled at that time, and promiscuously huddled together? Every house was then a scene of misery, and equally filled with grief and confusion. The slave and the man of quality were in the same circumstances, and every where the terror of death and slaughter was the same, unless we may say the fright made the greater impression on those who got the most by living. Now, if flesh and blood has such power over our fears, and mortal men can terrify us to this degree, what will become of us when the trumpet sounds from the sky, and the Arch-angel summons us to judgment; when we are not attacked by sword, or lance, or any thing so feeble as a human enemy: but when all the terrors of nature, the artillery of heaven, and the militia, if I may so speak, of Almighty God, are let loose upon us?" -- In the Letters of Augustine, No. 142.]

I have been induced to go more into detail on this subject, than I should otherwise have done, for the sake of giving the uninformed reader some general notion of the misery which resulted from the irruption of these Barbarian hordes into the Roman empire; and, because it ultimately proved the means of its subversion; but it is incompatible with my plan to pursue the matter further than just to add, that new invaders, from regions more remote and barbarous, drove out or exterminated the former colonists, and Europe was successively ravaged, till the countries which had poured forth their myriads, were drained of people, and the sword of slaughter weary of destroying. "If a man were called," says Dr. Robertson, "to fix upon the period in the history of the world, during which the condition of the human race was most calamitous and afflicted, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Theodosius the Great (A.D. 395) to the establishment of the Lombards in Italy, (A.D. 571). The contemporary authors, who beheld that scene of desolation, labor, and are at a loss for expression, to describe the horror of it. The scourge of God, the destroyer of nations, are the dreadful epithets by which they distinguish the most noted of the barbarous leaders; and they compare the ruin which they had brought on the world, to the havoc occasioned by earthquakes, conflagrations, or deluges -- the most formidable and fatal calamities which the imagination of man can conceive." [History of Charles V. vol. 1, sect. 1.]

The overwhelming progress of the Barbarians soon diffused its powerful effects throughout every part of Europe. In the course of the fifth century, the Visigoths took possession of Spain; the Franks of Gaul; the Saxons of England; the Huns of Pannonia; the Ostrogoths of Italy, and the adjacent provinces. New governments, laws, languages; new manners, customs, dresses; new names of men and countries prevailed, and an almost total change took place in the state of Europe. It is, no doubt, much to be lamented, that this revolution was the work of nations so little enlightened by science, or polished by civilization; for the Roman laws, though imperfect, were in general the best that human wisdom had then framed, and its arts and literature infinitely surpassed any thing found among rude nations, or which those who despised them produced for many ages. Many of the Gothic chiefs were men of great talents, and some of them not wholly ignorant of the policy and literature of the Romans; but they were afraid of the contagious influence of Roman example, and they therefore studied to avoid every thing allied to that name, whether hurtful or beneficial. They erected a cottage in the vicinity of a palace, breaking down the stately building, and burying in its ruins the finest works of human ingenuity. They ate out of vessels of wood, and made their captives be served in vessels of silver. They prohibited their children from acquiring a knowledge of literature and of the elegant arts, because they concluded from the dastardly behavior of the Romans, that learning tends to enervate the mind, and that he who has trembled under the rod of a schoolmaster, will never dare to meet a sword with an undaunted eye. Upon the same principle they rejected the Roman code of laws; it reserved nothing to the vengeance of man -- they, therefore inferred, that it would rob him of his active powers. Nor could they conceive how the person who received an injury could rest satisfied, but by pouring out his fury upon the author of the injustice. Hence arose all those judicial combats, and private wars which, for many ages, desolated Europe.

In one particular only did these barbarian tribes condescend to conform to the institutions of those different nations among whom they settled, viz. in RELIGION. The conquerors submitted to the religion of the conquered, which at this period, indeed, in its established form, approximated closely to the superstition and idolatry of the ancient heathen. But whatever shades of difference there might be found among the numerous kingdoms in which the Roman Western Empire was at this time divided, whether in the forms of their government, or their civil and political institutions; they unanimously agreed to support the hierarchy of the church of Rome, and to defend and maintain it as the established religion of their respective states. Nor is the circumstance altogether unworthy of notice, that when Alaric forced his entrance into Rome, he issued a proclamation which discovered some regard for the laws of humanity and religion. He encouraged his troops boldly to seize the rewards of valor, and to enrich themselves with the spoils of the citizens; but he exhorted them to spare the lives of the unresisting, and to respect the churches of the apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, as holy and inviolable sanctuaries. [This is the circumstance which gave rise to that ponderous folio volume of St. Augustine, intitled, "THE CITY OF GOD." The writer’s object is to justify the ways of Providence in the destruction of the Roman greatness; and he celebrates with peculiar satisfaction, this memorable occurrence, while he insultingly challenges his adversaries to produce one similar example of a town taken by storm, in which the fabulous gods of antiquity had been able to protect either themselves or their deluded votaries -- appealing particularly to the examples of Troy, Syracuse, and Tarentum. Had the life of this great luminary been prolonged about half a century beyond this time, he might have been instructed, by facts and experience, how fallacious his vaunting was. In the year 455, Genseric, a Vandal warrior, invaded Italy, and once more sacked the city of Rome. "The pillage lasted fourteen days and nights, and all that yet remained of public or private wealth, of sacred or profane treasure, was diligently transported to the vessels of Genseric." Among the spoils were the holy instruments of the Jewish worship,--the golden table, the golden candlesticks with seven branches, etc. which four hundred years before Titus had brought from Jerusalem, and which had been since deposited in the Temple of Peace. He also stripped the Christian churches of every article of plate and grandeur that was moveable.]

"In ages of ignorance and credulity," says Dr. Robertson, "the ministers of religion are the objects of superstitious veneration. When the Barbarians who overran the Roman empire first embraced the Christian faith, they found the clergy in possession of considerable power; and they naturally transferred to those new guides the profound submission and reverence, which they were accustomed to yield to the priests of that religion which they had forsaken. They deemed their persons to be equally sacred with their function, and would have considered it as impious to subject them to the profane jurisdiction of the laity. The clergy were not blind to these advantages which the weakness of mankind afforded them. They established courts, in which every question relating to their own character, their function, and their property, was tried. They pleaded, and obtained an almost total exemption from the authority of civil judges. Upon different pretexts, and by a multiplicity of artifices, they communicated the privilege to so many persons, and extended their jurisdiction to such a variety of cases, that the greater part of those affairs which gave rise to contest and litigation, was drawn under the cognizance of the spiritual courts." [History of Charles V. vol. 1, sect. 1.]

The claims to supremacy, which, during the preceding centuries, had been asserted by the bishops of Rome, were at first faintly urged, and promoted by artful and almost imperceptible means. They now, however, began to insist upon superiority as a divine right attached to their see, which, they contended, had been founded by the apostle Peter; and this arrogant claim, which had appeared conspicuously enough in the conduct of the bishops of Rome of the preceding century, was now no longer concealed, or cautiously promulgated. But, however violent their claims, or extensive their authority in affairs both ecclesiastical and civil, they still remained subject, first to the jurisdiction of the Gothic kings, and, upon the retaking of Rome, to the emperors of Constantinople. Such, however, was the extensive influence of the papal intrigues, that there were few among the princes of the Western Empire, that were not virtually brought into a state of subjection to the authority of the bishops of Rome, before the close of the fifth century.

A station so elevated, which lay open to the ambition of numbers, was eagerly contested, and often obtained by fraud, chicanery, or the practice of whatever was most opposite to the spirit of the gospel. During the sixth century, the peace of the catholic church was thrice disturbed by the contests and squabbles of the rival pontiffs. Symmachus and Laurentins, who had been elevated to the vacant see by different parties, continued, for several years, to assert their discordant claims. After repeated struggles, the former, at length, prevailed. In this contest he was materially assisted by the pen of Ennodius, bishop of Pavia, who employed the most abject flattery in behalf of Symmachus, whom he blasphemously styles "Judge in the place of God, and Vicegerent of the Most High." The church was again divided by the reciprocal claims of Boniface and Dioscorus; the premature death of the latter, however, terminated this clerical war. But the century did not close without a scene alike disgraceful. A prelate of the name of Vigilius, intrigued at court to procure the deposition of the reigning bishop Silverus. The latter was, in consequence, deprived of his dignities and banished. He appealed to the emperor Justinian, who interfered in his behalf, and encouraged him to return to Rome, with the delusive expectation of regaining his rights; but the artifices of Vigilius prevailed -- his antagonist was resigned to his power, and immediately confined by him in the islands of Pontus and Pandatara, where, in penury and affliction, he terminated his wretched existence.

The advantages attendant upon the acquisition of such enormous power, induced the bishops of Constantinople, who were scarcely less arrogant and ambitious than their brethren at Rome, to refuse acknowledging their preeminence, and prompted them to lay claim to similar authority. The arrogant pretensions of these rival sees involved them in continual dissensions; which were prodigiously increased by the conduct of John, the faster, a prelate distinguished for his authority; who, in a council held at Constantinople in the year 588, assumed THE TITLE OF UNIVERSAL BISHOP, which was confirmed to him by the council. This appellation, which implied a pre-eminence difficult to be endured by those who were as ambitious as himself, was opposed vehemently by Pelagius II, then bishop of Rome, who called it an execrable, profane, and diabolical procedure; but his invectives were disregarded, and he died soon after. In the year 560, he was succeeded by GREGORY THE GREAT, as he is usually termed; a voluminous writer, and, though superstitious in the extreme, not altogether destitute of talents. His works are still extant, and in high reputation with the Catholics. The following letter written by him to the emperor Maurice, at Constantinople, in consequence of John, the patriarch of that city, assuming the name of "Universal Bishop," casts so much light upon the history of that age, that it cannot, without injury to the subject, be omitted.

"Our most religious lord, whom God hath placed over us, among other weighty cares belonging to the empire, labors, according to the just rule of the sacred writings, to preserve peace and charity among the clergy. He truly and piously considers, that no man can well govern temporal matters, unless he manages with propriety things divine also; and that the peace and tranquillity of the commonwealth depend upon the quiet of the Universal church. For, most gracious sovereign, what human power or strength would presume to lift up irreligious hands against your most christian majesty, if the clergy, being at unity amongst themselves, would seriously pray to our Savior Christ to preserve you who have merited so highly from us? Or what nation is there so barbarous as to exercise such cruelty against the faithful, unless the lives of us who are called Priests, but in truth are not such, were most wicked and depraved? But whilst we leave those things which more immediately concern us, and embrace those things for which we are wholly unfit, we excite the Barbarians against us, and our offenses sharpen the swords of our enemies, by which means the commonwealth is weakened. For what can we say for ourselves, if the people of God, over whom, however unworthily we are placed, be oppressed through the multitude of our offenses; if our example destroys that which our preaching should build; and our actions, as it were, give the lie to our doctrine? Our bones are worn with fasting, but our minds are puffed up! Our bodies are covered with mean attire, but in our hearts we are quite elated! We lie groveling in the ashes, yet we aim at things exceedingly high! We are teachers of humility, but patterns of pride, hiding the teeth of wolves under a sheep’s countenance! The end of all is, to make a fair appearance before men, but God knoweth the truth! Therefore our most pious sovereign hath been prudently careful to place the church at unity, that he might the better compose the tumults of war and join their hearts together. This verily is my wish also, and for my own part I yield due obedience to your sovereign commands. However, since it is not my cause, but God’s, it is not myself only but the whole church that is troubled, because religious laws, venerable synods, and the very precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ, are disobeyed by the invention of a proud and pompous speech. My desire is, that our most religious sovereign would lance this sore, and that he would bind with the cords of his imperial authority the party affected, in case he makes any resistance. By restraining him the commonwealth will be eased; and by the paring away of such excrescences the empire is enlarged. Every man that has read the gospel knows that, even by the very words of our Lord, the care of the whole church is committed to St. Peter, the apostle -- the prince of all the apostles. For to him it is said, ‘Peter, lovest thou me? Feed my sheep.’ ‘Behold, Satan hath desired to winnow thee as wheat; but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith should not fail.’ And, ‘thou being at the last converted, confirm thy brethren.’ To him it is said, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou bindest on earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.’ Behold! he hath the keys of the kingdom, and the power of binding and loosing is committed to him. The care and the principality of the whole Church is committed to him; and yet he is not called ‘Universal Apostle’ -- though this holy man, John, my fellow priest, labors to be called ‘Universal Bishop!’ I am compelled to cry out, ‘O the corruption of times and manners?’ Behold the Barbarians are become lords of all Europe: cities are destroyed [Gregory here seems to refer to the irruption of the Goths into the Roman empire, and its total subversion by those Barbarians -- Author] -- castles are beaten down -- provinces depopulated -- there is no husbandman to till the ground -- Idolaters rage and domineer over Christians; and yet priests, who ought to lie weeping upon the pavement, in sackcloth and ashes, covet names of vanity, and glory in new and profane titles. Do I, most religious sovereign, in this plead my own cause? Do I vindicate a wrong done to myself, and not maintain the cause of Almighty God, and of the church universal? Who is he that presumes to usurp this new name against both the law of the gospel and of the canons? I would to God there might be one called universal without doing injustice to others. We know, that many priests of the church of Constantinople have been not only heretics, but even the chief leaders of them. Out of that school proceeded Nestorius, who, thinking it impossible that God should be made man, believed that Jesus Christ, the mediator between God and man, was two persons, and went as far in infidelity as the Jews themselves. Thence came Macedonius, who denied the Holy Ghost, consubstantial to the Father and the Son, to be God. If, then, every one in that church assumes the name by which he makes himself the head of all good men, the catholic church, which God forbid should ever be the case, must needs be overthrown when he falls who is called UNIVERSAL. But, far from Christians be this blasphemous name, by which all honor is taken from all other priests, while it is foolishly arrogated by one. It was offered to the bishop of Rome by the reverend council of Chalcedon, in honor of St. Peter, prince of the apostles; but none of them either assumed or consented to use it, lest, while this privilege should be given to one, all others should be deprived of that honor which is due unto them. Why should WE refuse this title when it was offered, and another assume it without any offer at all? This man (John) contemning obedience to the Canons, should be humbled by the commands of our most pious sovereign. He should be chastised who does an injury to the holy catholic church! whose heart is puffed up, who seeks to please himself by a name of singularity, by which he would elevate himself above the emperor! We are all scandalized at this. Let the author of this scandal reform himself, and all differences in the church will cease. I am the servant of all priests, so long as they live like themselves -- but if any shall vainly set up his bristles, contrary to God Almighty, and to the Canons of the Fathers, I hope in God that he will never succeed in bringing my neck under his yoke -- not even by force of arms. The things that have happened in this city, in consequence of this new title, I have particularly declared to Sabinianus, the deacon, my agent. Let therefore my religious sovereigns think of me their servant, whom they have always cherished and upheld more than others, as one who desired to yield them obedience, and yet am afraid to be found guilty of negligence in my duty at the last awful day of judgment. Let our most pious Sovereign either vouchsafe to determine the affair, according to the petition of the aforesaid Sabinianus, the deacon, or cause the man, so often mentioned to renounce his claim. In case he submits to your most just sentence, or your favorable admonitions, we will give thanks to Almighty God, and rejoice for the peace of the church, procured by your clemency. But if he persist in this contention, we shall hold the saying to be most true, ‘Every one that exalteth himself shall be abased.’ And again it is written, ‘Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.’ In obedience to my sovereign, I have written to my brother priest both gently and humbly, urging him to desist from this vain glory. If he gives ear unto me, he hath a brother devoted unto him, but if he continue in his pride, I foresee what will befall him -- he will make himself His enemy of whom it is written, ‘God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.’ [Epist. Greg. Mag. Ep. 32.]

It is difficult to determine whether the finesse of the politician, or the envy of the priest, be most prevalent in this artful letter. It does not, however, appear to have produced any good effect. John, indeed, was soon afterwards removed by death from his archiepiscopal dignity; but Cynacus, who succeeded him as bishop of Constantinople, adopted the same pompous title as his predecessor. Having had occasion to dispatch some agents to Rome, in the letter which he wrote to the Roman Pontiff Gregory, he so much displeased him by assuming the appellation of "Universal Bishop," that the latter withheld from the agents somewhat of the courtesy to which they considered themselves entitled, and, of course, complaint was made to the emperor Maurice of the neglect which had been shown them. This circumstance extorted a letter from the emperor at Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome, in which he advises him to treat them, in future, in a more friendly manner, and not to insist so far on punctilios of style, as to create a scandal about a title, and fall out about a few syllables. To this Gregory replies, "that the innovation in the style did not consist much in the quantity and alphabet; but the bulk of the iniquity was weighty enough to sink and destroy all. And, therefore, I am bold to say," says he, "that whoever adopts, or affects the title of ‘UNIVERSAL BISHOP,’ has the pride and character of Antichrist, and is in some manner his fore-runner in this haughty quality of elevating himself above the rest of his order. And, indeed, both the one and the other seem to split upon the same rock; for, as pride makes Antichrist strain his pretensions up to Godhead, so whoever is ambitious to be called the only or Universal Prelate, arrogates to himself a distinguished superiority, and rises, as it were, upon the ruins of the rest." [Epist. Greg. 1. 6. Ep. 30.]

But though Gregory artfully disclaimed for himself, and refused to his aspiring brother the title of Universal Bishop, he exercised an authority, says bishop Hurd [Introductory Sermons to the Study of Prophecy, Vol. 2, Serm. 7], that can only belong to that exalted character. Gregory died in the year 604, and was succeeded by POPE BONIFACE III, who had no scruples about adopting this proud title. He readily accepted, or rather importunately begged it from the emperor Phocas, with the privilege also of transmitting it to all his successors. The profligate emperor, to gratify the inordinate ambition of this court sycophant, deprived the bishop of Constantinople of the title which he had hitherto borne, and conferred it upon Boniface, at the same time declaring the church of Rome to be the head of all other churches.

APPENDIX TO SECTION 4

A Respectable writer in one of our Monthly Journals, and, as I am informed, a Classical Tutor in one of our Dissenting Academies, appears to think that, in animadverting on the characters of some of the luminaries of the Catholic church, I have not made sufficient allowance for the darkness of the period in which they lived. His words are, "We apprehend, that Mr. Jones has not quite enough attended to the infelicity of times, the want of a free communication of knowledge, the power of educational prejudices, and the effect of usages venerated as apostolic. Under circumstances so disadvantageous, it is not, we hope, unreasonable to believe that many who in their hearts loved the Redeemer, and in their lives served him, according to the light they had, were found dragged in the train of those who wandered after the beast. Painful and humbling fact! That such men as Athanasius and Gregory, Anselm and Bernard, should have defiled their garments with the blood of persecution, and bowed their knees before relics and wafers."

The Gregory referred to in this quotation, I understand to be "Gregory the Great," as he is commonly termed; the first of the Roman pontiffs of that name; the man to whose exploits the preceding pages refer. He is the only prelate of the Roman church, of that appellation, who, so far as I know, has ever been considered by Protestants to have had any pretensions to the character of a Christian; and his history, certainly, well assorts with that of Athanasius and Bernard; which confirms me in the supposition that he is the person referred to. Now, granting the correctness of this conjecture, I beg leave, with all becoming deference to my critical supervisor, to offer a few remarks by way of apology.

I feel not the smallest disposition to dispute the truth of this very respectable writer’s remark, that I have "not sufficiently studied that humiliating part of the philosophy of man, his strange inconsistencies." And I am ready to admit that I may not have made the proper allowances for the infelicity of times, etc. Yea, further; that in the darkest periods of the church, there were individuals dragged in the train of those who wandered after the beast, who, nevertheless, in their hearts loved the Redeemer, and in their lives served him, according to the light they had, is a sentiment to which I cheerfully subscribe, but am not aware that I have said any thing that militates against it in this work. The only disputable point between us is, how far the character of Gregory entitles him to this favorable judgment.

The reader has already seen the fulsome and adulatory strains in which this pontiff addressed the emperor Maurice, in consequence of the patriarch of Constantinople arrogating to himself the title of "Universal Bishop." He styles the emperor his "most religious Lord" -- his "most gracious Sovereign" -- his "most Christian Majesty" -- his "most religious Sovereign," against whom it would be the height of impiety to lift a finger, etc. Let us now mark what followed. Gregory with all his flattery was unable to prevail on the emperor Maurice to second his views; and the former, as might be expected, became not a little dissatisfied with his "most religious Lord." Soon after this the emperor was dethroned by one of his centurions, who first murdered him, and then usurped his crown. This wretch, whose name was Phocas, was one of the vilest of the human race -- a monster, stained with those vices that serve most to blacken human nature. Other tyrants, have been cruel from policy; the cruelties of Phocas are not to be accounted for, but on the hypothesis of the most diabolical and disinterested malice. He caused five of the children of the emperor Maurice to be massacred before the eyes of their unhappy father, whom he reserved to the last, that he might be a spectator of the destruction of his children before his own death. There still remained, however, a brother and son of the emperor’s, both of whom he caused to be put to death, together with all the patricians who adhered to the interest of the unhappy monarch. The empress Constantine and her three daughters had taken refuge in one of the churches of the city, under sanction of the patriarch of Constantinople, who defended them for a time with great spirit and resolution, not permitting them to be dragged by force from their asylum. The tyrant, one of the most vindictive and inexorable of mankind, not wishing to alarm the church at the outset of his reign, now had recourse to dissimulation; and by means of the most solemn oaths and promises of safety, at length prevailed on the females to quit their asylum. The consequence was, that they instantly became the helpless victims of his fury, and suffered on the same spot on which the late emperor and five of his sons had been recently murdered. So much for the character of Phocas: now what should we expect would be the reception which the account of all this series of horrid cruelty would meet with at Rome, from a man so renowned for piety, equity, and mildness of disposition as Pope Gregory was? If we look into his letters of congratulation, we find them stuffed with the vilest and most venal flattery; insomuch, that were we to learn the character of Phocas only from this pontiff’s letters, we should certainly conclude him to have been rather an angel than a man. He recites the murder of "his most religious Lord" with as much coolness as though religion and morality could be nowise affected by such enormities. Mark how the sanctity of a Gregory congratulates the blood-thirsty rebellious regicide and usurper. Thus he begins -- "Glory to God in the highest; who, according as it is written, changes times and transfers kingdoms. And because he would have that made known to all men, which he hath vouchsafed to speak by his own prophets, saying, that the Most High rules in the kingdoms of men, and to whom he will he gives it." He then goes on to observe, that God in his incomprehensible providence, sometimes sends kings to afflict his people and punish them for their sins. This, says he, we have known of late to our woeful experience.

Sometimes, on the other hand, God, in his mercy, raises good men to the throne, for the relief and exultation of his servants. Then applying this remark to existing circumstances, he adds: "In the abundance of our exultation, on which account, we think ourselves the more speedily confirmed, rejoicing to find the gentleness of your piety equal to your imperial dignity." Then breaking out into a rapture, no longer to be restrained, he exclaims, "Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad; and, for your illustrious deeds, let the people of every realm, hitherto so vehemently afflicted, now be filled with gladness. May the necks of your enemies be subjected to the yoke of your supreme rule; and the hearts of your subjects, hitherto broken and depressed, be relieved by your clemency." Proceeding to paint their former miseries, he concludes, with wishing that the commonwealth may long enjoy its present happiness. Thus, in language evidently borrowed from the inspired writers, and in which they anticipate the joy and gladness that should pervade universal nature at the birth of the Messiah, does this pope celebrate the march of the tyrant and usurper through seas of blood to the imperial throne. "As a subject and a Christian," says Gibbon, "it was the duty of Gregory to acquiesce in the established government; but the joyful applause with which he salutes the fortune of the assassin, has sullied, with indelible disgrace, the character of the saint. The successor of the apostles might have inculcated with decent firmness the guilt of blood, and the necessity of repentance: he is content to celebrate the deliverance of the people, and the fall of the oppressor; to rejoice that the piety and benignity of Phocas have been raised by Providence to the imperial throne; to pray that his hands may be strengthened against all his enemies; and to express a wish, that, after a long triumphant reign, he may be transferred from a temporal to an everlasting kingdom." -- "I have traced," says the same writer, "the steps of a revolution, so pleasing in Gregory’s opinion both to heaven and earth, and Phocas does not appear less hateful in the exercise than in the acquisition of power. The pencil of an impartial historian has delineated the portrait of a monster; his diminutive and deformed person, etc. Ignorant of letters, of laws, and even of arms, he indulged, even in the supreme rank, a more ample privilege of lust and drunkenness; and his brutal pleasures were either injurious to his subjects, or disgraceful to himself. Without assuming the office of a prince, he renounced the profession of a soldier; and the reign of Phocas afflicted Europe with ignominious peace, and Asia with desolating war. His savage temper was inflamed by passion, hardened by fear, and exasperated by resistance or reproach. The flight of Theodosius, the only surviving son of the emperor Maurice, to the Persian court, had been intercepted by a rapid pursuit, or a deceitful message: he was beheaded at Nice; and the last hours of the young prince were soothed by the comforts of religion and the consciousness of innocence." [Decline and Fall, ch. 46.]

Now, if there be any thing of either truth or justice in these remarks on the character of Phocas, what are we to think of that of Gregory, who could stoop to the vile practice of panegyrising such a monster; and, with all due deference, I humbly submit it to the consideration of my discreet monitor, "What valuable end can possibly be answered, by shutting our eyes against such flagrant enormities, and eulogizing the men who have perpetuated them?" "To me," says a late candid writer, "Gregory appears to have been a man, whose understanding, though rather above the middle rate, was much warped by the errors and prejudices of the times in which he lived. His piety was deeply tinctured with superstition, and his morals with monkery. His zeal was not pure, in regard to either its nature or its object. In the former respect, it was often intolerant; and in regard to the latter, he evinced an attachment more to the form than to the power of religion, to the name than to the thing. His zeal was exactly that of the Pharisees, who compassed sea and land to make a proselyte, which, when they had accomplished, they rendered him two-fold more a child of hell than before. He was ever holding forth the prerogatives of St. Peter, nor did he make any ceremony of signifying, that this prime minister of Jesus Christ, like all other prime ministers, would be most liberal of his favors to those who were most assiduous in making court to him, especially to them who were most liberal to his foundation at Rome, and that most advanced its dignity and power. So much for St. Gregory, and for the nature and extent of Roman Papal virtue." [Campbell’s Lectures on Eccles. History, vol. 2, p. 79.]