PART II. is yet by no means destitute of probability, since CENT. XI. the hypothesis of the nominalists might be very successfully employed in defending the doctrine of Berenger, concerning the sacrament of the Lord's supper. IX. The sect of the nominalists had for their chief a certain person called John, who, on account of his logical subtilty, was sirnamed the Sophist, which is the only circumstance we know of his history. His principal disciples were Robert of Paris, Roscelin of Compiegne, and Arnoul of Laon, who propagated his doctrine with industry and success, to whom we may add, with some probability, Raimbert, the master of a famous school at Lisle in Flanders, who is said, according to the quibbling humour of the times, to have read nominal logic to his disciples, while Odo, whom we have already had occasion to mention, instructed his scholars in reality. The most renowned of all the nominal philosophers of this age was Roscelin; and hence • This account we have from the unknown author of the Fragmentum Historiæ Francicæ, a Roberto rege ad mortem Philippi I. which is published in Du Chesne's Scriptores Historiæ Francicæ, tom. iv. p. 90, whose words are as follows. "In Dialectica hi potentes extiterunt Sophiste, Johannes, qui artem Sophisticam vocalem esse disseruit," &c. Du Bou lay, Hist, Academ. Paris, tom. i. p. 443, et 612, conjectures that this John the Sophist was the same person with John of Chartres, sirnamed the Deaf, who was first physician to Henry I. king of France, and had acquired a high degree of renown by his genius and erudition. The same author, p. 377, tells us, that John had for his master, Giraldus of Orleans, who was an incomparable poet, and an excellent rhetorician, but he advances this without any proof. Mabillon, on the other hand, in his Annal. Benedict. tom. v. lib. lxvii. § lxxviii. p. 261, supposes that John the Nominalist was the same person who made known to Anselm the error of Roscelinus concerning the three persons in the godhead. The passage in the original is "Qui dialecticam clericis suis in voce. legebat, quum Odo in re discipulis legeret." See Herimannus, Histor. restaurationis Monasterii Sti. Martini Tornacens. in Dacherii Spicilegio Veter. Scripter. tom. ii. p. 889. CENT. XL. it is that many have considered him as the chief PART II and founder of that sect, and that he is still con sidered as such by several learned men. 1 CHAPTER II. CONCERNING THE DOCTORS AND MINISTERS OF THE CHURCH, AND tion of the of The corrup 1. ALL the records of this century loudly com clergy. plain of the vices that reigned among the rulers of the church, and in general, among all the sacerdotal orders; they also deplore that universal decay of piety and discipline, that was the consequence this corruption in a set of men, who were bound to support, by their example, their authority, and their instructions, the sacred interests of religion and virtue. The western bishops were no sooner elevated to the rank of dukes, counts, and nobles, and enriched with ample territories, than they gave themselves up entirely to the dominion of pleasure and ambition, and wholly employed in displaying the magnificence of their temporal stations, fre quented the courts of princes, accompanied always with a splendid train of attendants and domestics," The inferior orders of the clergy were also licen tious in their own way; few among them preserved any remains of piety and virtue, we might add of See among other examples of this episcopal grandeur, that of Adalbert in Adam. Bremens. lib. iii. cap. xxiii. p. 38, lib. iv. cap. xxxv. p. 52, that of Gunther, in the Lectiones Antique of Canisius, tom. iii. pars i. p. 185, and that of Manasses, in the Museum Italicum of Mabillon, tom. i. p. 114. Add to all these Muratorii Antiq. Ital. medii ævi, tom. vi. p. 72. PART 11. decency and discretion. While their rulers were CENT. XI. wallowing in luxury, and basking in the beams of worldly pomp and splendour, they were indulging themselves, without the least sense of shame, in fraudulent practices, in impure and lascivious gratifications, and even in the commission of the most flagitious crimes. The Grecian clergy were somewhat less chargeable with these shocking irregularities, as the calamities under which their country groaned, imposed a restraint upon their passions, and gave a check to their licentiousness. Yet, notwithstanding these salutary restraints, there were few examples of piety and virtue to be found among them. of the Roman II. The authority and lustre of the Latin church, The authority or to speak more properly, the power and domin- pontiff's. ion of the Roman pontiffs, arose in this century to their highest period, though they arose by degrees, and had much opposition and many difficulties to conquer. In the preceding age, the pontiffs had acquired a great degree of authority in religious mat ters, and in every thing that related to the govern ment of the church; and their credit and influence increased prodigiously toward the commencement of this century. For then they received the pompous titles of masters of the world,and popes, i. e. universal fathers; they presided also every where in the councils by their legates; assumed the authority of supreme arbiters in all controversies that arose concerning religion or church discipline; and maintained the pretended rights of the church against the encroachments and usurpations of kings and princes. Their authority however was confined within certain limits; for, on the one hand, it was restrained by sovereign princes, that it might not arrogantly aim at civil dominion; and on the other, it was opposed by the bishops themselves, that it might not arise to a spiritual despotism, and utterly destroy the liberty and privileges of synods. CENT. XI. and councils." From the time of Leo IX. the PART 11. popes employed every method, which the most artful ambition could suggest, to remove these limits, and to render their dominion both despotic and universal. They not only aspired to the character of supreme legislators in the church, to an unlimited jurisdiction over all synods and councils, whether general or provincial, to the sole distribution of all ecclesiastical honours and benefices as divinely authorized and appointed for that purpose, but they carried their insolent pretensions so far as to give themselves out for lords of the universe, arbiters of the fate of kingdoms and empires, and supreme rulers over the kings and princes of the earth. Before Leo IX. no pope was so enormously impudent as to claim this unbounded authority, or to assume the power of transferring territories and provinces from their lawful possessors to new masters. This pontiff gave the example of such an amazing pretension to his holy successors, by granting to the Normans, who had settled in Italy, the lands and territories which they had already usurped, or were employed in forcing out of the hands of the Greeks and Saracens. The ambition however of the aspiring popes was opposed by the emperors, the kings of France, by William the Conqueror, who was now seated on the throne of England, and was the boldest assertor of the rights and privileges of royalty against the high claims of w The very learned Launoy, in his Assertio contra Privilegium Sti. Medardi pars ii. cap. xxxi. opp. tom. iii. pars i. p. 307, has given us an accurate account of the ecclesiastical laws, and of the power of the hierarchy during this century, which he collected from the letters of pope Gregory VII. from which account it appears, that Gregory, ambitious as he was, did not pretend to a supreme and despotic authority in the church. * See Gaufr. Mallaterra Hist. Sicula, lib. i. cap. xiv. p. 553, tom. v. Scriptor. Ital. Muratorii. The translator has here incorporated the note of the original into the text. PART II. the apostolic see, and also by several other princes. CENT. XL Nor did the bishops, particularly those of France and Germany, sit tamely silent under the papal yoke; many of them endeavoured to maintain their rights and the privileges of the church; but as many, seduced by the allurements of interest or the dictates of superstition, sacrificed their liber ties, and yielded to the pontiffs. Hence it happened, that these imperious lords of the church, though they did not entirely gain their point, nor satisfy to the full their raging ambition, yet obtained vast augmentations of power, and extended their authority from day to day. III. The see of Rome, after the death of Silvester II. which happened in the year 1003, was filled successively by John XVII. John XVIII. and Sergius IV. none of whose pontificates were distinguished by any memorable events; it is however proper to observe, that these three popes were y See Eadmeri Historia novorum, lib. i. p. 29, which is published at the end of the works of Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury. It is proper to observe here, that if it is true on the one hand, that William the Conqueror opposed, on many occasions, with the utmost vehemence and zeal the growing power of the Roman pontiffs, and of the aspiring bishops; it is no less certain, on the other, that to accomplish his ambitious views, he, like many other European princes, had recourse to the influence of the pontiffs upon the minds of the multitude, and thereby nourished and encouraged the pride and ambition of the court of Rome. For while he was preparing all things for his expedition into England, he sent ambassadors to pope Alexander II. "in order," as Matthew Paris says, Hist. Major, lib. i. p. 2, "to have his undertaking approved and justified by apostolical authority; and the pope, having considered the claims of the contending parties, sent a standard to William as the omen of his approaching royalty." It is highly probable, that the Normans in Italy had made the same humble request to Leo IX. and demanded his confirmation both of the possessions they had acquired, and of those they designed to usurp. And when we consider all this, it will not appear so surprising that the popes aimed at universal empire, since they were encouraged to this by the mean submissions and servile homage of the European princes. |