the Jews, as did also Porchetus Salvaticus, whose treatise, entitled The Triumph of Faith, is chiefly borrowed from the writings of Raymond Martin. Both these writers are much inferior to Theophanes, whose Book against the Jews, and his Harmony between the Old and New Testament, contain many observations that are by no means contemp

tible.

State of the controversy between the

name.

IX. During this century, there were some promising appearances of a reconciliation between the Greeks and Latins. For the former apprehending they Greeks and should want the assistance of the Latins to set Latins. bounds to the power of the Turks, which about this time was continually increasing, often pretended a willingness to submit to the Latin canons. Accordingly, A. D. 1339, Andronicus the Younger sent Barlaam as his ambassador into the West, to desire a reconciliation in his In the year 1349, another Grecian embassy was sent to Clement VI. for the same purpose, and in 1356, a third was despatched upon a like errand to Innocent VI. who resided at Avignon. Nor was this all; for in the year 1367, the Grecian patriarch arrived at Rome, in order to negotiate this important matter, and was followed, in the year 1569, by the emperor himself, John Palæologus, who undertook a journey into Italy, and in order to conciliate the friendship and good will of the Latins, published a confession of his faith, which was agreeable to the sentiments of the Roman pontiff. But notwithstanding these prudent and pacific measures, the major part of the Greeks could not be persuaded by any means to drop the controversy, or to be reconciled to the church of Rome, though several of them, from views of interest or ambition, expressed a readiness to submit to its demands; so that this whole century was spent partly in furious debates, and partly in fruitless negotiations.*

The conten

x. In the year 1384, a furious controversy arose at Paris between the university there and the Dotion between minican order. The author of it was John de Montesono, a native of Arragon, a Dominican friar and professor of divinity, who, pursuant to

the universi

ty of Paris

and the Dominicans.

k See Henr. Canisii Lectiones Antiquæ, tom.fiv. p. 369. Leo Allatius, De perpetua consensione eccles. Orient et Occident. lib. ii. cap. xvi. xvii. p. 782. Luc. Waddingus, Annal. Minor. tom. viii. p. 29, 40, 107, 201, 289, 303, 312. Steph. Baluzii Vita Pontif Avenion. tom. i. p. 348, 380, 388, 403, 407, 410, 772.

the decisions and doctrine of his order, publicly denied that the blessed Virgin Mary was conceived without any stain of original sin; and moreover asserted, that all who believed the immaculate conception were enemies

nus.

Occasioned

of the true faith. The quarrel occasioned by this by Montesoproceeding would certainly have been soon compromised, had not John, in a public discourse, delivered some time in the year 1387, revived this opinion with more violence than ever. For this reason the college of divines, and afterward the whole university, condemned this, and some other tenets of Montesonus. For it may be proper to inform the reader, that the university of Paris, principally induced thereto by the discourses of John Duns Scotus, had from the beginning almost of this century, publicly adopted the doctrine of the sinless conception of the holy Virgin. Upon this, the Dominicans, together with their champion Montesonus, appealed from the sentence of the university to pope Clement VII. at Avignon, and raised an outcry, that St. Thomas himself was condemned by the judgment passed upon their brother. But before the pope could decide the affair, the accused friar fled from the court of Avignon, went over to the party of Urban VI. who resided at Rome, and thus, during his absence, was excommunicated. Whether or not the pope approved the sentence of the university of Paris, we cannot say. The Dominicans however deny that he did, and affirm that Montesonus was condemned purely on account of his flight; though there are many others, who assert that his opinion was also condemned. And as the Dominicans would not acknowledge the sentence of the university to be valid, they were expelled in the year 1389, and were not restored to their ancient honours in that learned body till the year 1404."

1 See Waddingi Annal. Minor. tom. vi. p. 52, s.

m See Jac. Echardi Scriptor. Prædicator. tom. i. p. 691.

n Cæs. Egass. De Boulay, Hist. Acad. Paris. tom. iv. p. 599, 618, 638. Steph. Baluzii Vita Pontif. Avenion. tom. i. p. 521, tom. ii. p. 992. Argentre, Collectio judicior. de novis errorib. tom. i. p. 61. Jac. de Longueval, Hist. de l'Eglise Gallicane, tom. xiv. p.

347.

CHAPTER IV.

CONCERNING THE RITES AND CEREMONIES USED IN THE CHURCH DURING

The altera

bilee.

THIS CENTURY.

1. WE must confine ourselves to a general and superficial view of the alterations that were introduced tion into the ritual of the church during this century, since it cannot reasonably be expected we should insist largely upon this subject, within the narrow limits of such a work as this. One of the principal circumstances that strikes us here, is the change that was made in the time of celebrating the jubilee. In the year 1350, Clement VI. in compliance with the requests of the people of Rome, enacted, that the Jubilee, which Boniface VIII. had ordered to be held every hundredth year, should be celebrated twice in every century. In favour of this alteration, he might have assigned a very plausible pretext, since it is well known that the Jews, whom the Roman pontiffs were always ready to imitate in whatever related to pomp and majesty, celebrated this sacred solemnity every fiftieth year. But Urban VI. Sixtus VI. and other popes, who ordered a more frequent celebration of this salutary and profitable institution, would have had more difficulty in attempting to satisfy those who might have demanded sufficient reasons to justify this inconstancy. II. Innocent V. instituted festivals sacred to the memory of the lance with which our Saviour's side was pierced, and the nails that fastened him to the cross; and the crown of thorns he wore at his death.P This, though evidently absurd, was nevertheless pardonable upon the whole, considering the gross ignorance and stupidity of the times. But nothing can excuse the impious fanaticism and superstition of Benedict XII. who, by appointing a festival in honour of the marks of Christ's wounds, which the Franciscans tell us, were imprinted upon the body of their chief and founder by a miraculous inter

Festivals.

o Baluzii Vita Pontif. Avenion. tom. i. p. 247, 287, 312, 887. Muratorii Antiquit. Ital. tom. iii. p. 344, 481.

p See Jo. Henr. a Seelen, Diss. de festo Lanceæ et clavorum Christi. Baluzii Vit. Pontif. Avenion. tom. i. p. 328, Miscellan. tom. i. p. 417,

position of the divine power, gave credit to that grossly ridiculous and blasphemous fable. Pope John

XXII. beside the sanction he gave to many other Prayers. superstitions, ordered Christians to add to their prayers those words with which the angel Gabriel saluted the Virgin Mary.

CHAPTER V.

CONCERNING THE DIVISIONS AND HERESIES THAT TROUBLED THE CHURCH DURING THIS CENTURY.

excited by

I. DURING Some part of this century the Hesychasts, or as the Latins call them, the Quietists, gave the Greek church a great deal of trouble. To assign Controversie the true source of it, we must observe, that Bar- Quietists." laam, a native of Calabria, who was a monk of St. Basil, and afterward bishop of Gieraci, in Calabria, made a progress through Greece to inspect the behaviour of the monks, among whom he found many things highly reprehensible. He was more especially offended at the Hesychasts of mount Athos in Thessaly, who were the same with the mystics, or more perfect monks, and who, by a long course of intense contemplation, endeavoured to arrive at a tranquillity of mind entirely free from every degree of tumult and perturbation. These Quietists, in compliance with an ancient opinion of their principal doctors, who imagined that there was a celestial light concealed in the deepest retirements of the mind, used to sit every day, during a certain space of time, in a solitary corner, with their eyes eagerly and immoveably fixed upon the middle region of the belly, or navel; and boasted, that while they remained in this posture, they found in effect, a divine light beaming forth from the soul, which diffused through their hearts inexpressible sensations of pleasure and delight."

q We have no reason to be surprised at, and much less to disbelieve this account. For it is a fundamental rule with all those people in the castern world, whether Christians, Mahometans, or pagans, who maintain the necessity of abstracting the mind from the body, in order to hold communion with God, which is exactly the same thing with the contemplative and mystic life among the Latins, that the eyes must be steadily fixed every day for some hours upon some particular object; and that he who com plies with this precept will be thrown into an ecstasy, in which, being united to God, he will see wonderful things, and be entertained with ineffable delights. See what is said concerning the Siamese monks and Mystics by Engelb Kampfer, in his History of Ja63

VOL. II.

To such as inquired what kind of light this was, they replied by way of illustration, that it was the glory of God, the same celestial radiance that surrounded Christ during his transfiguration on the mount. Barlaam, entirely unacquainted with the customs and manners of the mystics, looked upon all this as highly absurd and fanatical, and therefore styled the monks who adhered to this institution, Massalians, and Euchites,' and also gave them the new name of Umbilicani. On the other hand, Gregory Palamas, archbishop of Thessalonica, defended the cause of these monks against Barlaam.'

controversy be

tween the Hesy

laamites.

II. In order to put an end to this dissension, a counsil was held at Constantinople in the year 1341, The state of the in which the emperor himself, Andronicus the chasts and Bar younger, and the patriarch presided. Here Palamas and the monks triumphed over Barlaam, who was condemned by the council; whereupon he left Greece, and returned to Italy. Not long after this, another monk, named Gregory Acindynus, renewed the controversy, and in opposition to the opinion maintained by Palamas, denied that God dwelt in an eternal light distinct from his essence, as also that such a light was beheld by the disciples on mount Tabor. The dispute was now no longer concerning the monks, but turned upon the light seen at mount Tabor, and also upon the nature and residence of the Deity. Nevertheless, he was condemned as a follower of Barlaam, in another council held at Constantinople.

pan, tom. i. p. 30, and also concerning those of India, in the Voyages of Bernier, tom. ii. p. 127. Indeed, I can easily admit, that they who continue long in the above-mentioned posture, will imagine they behold many things which no man in his senses ever beheld or thought of. For certainly the combinations they form of the unconnected notions that arise to their fancy while their minds are in this odd and unnatural state, must be most singular and whimsical; and that so much the more, as the rule itself which prescribes the contemplation of a certain object as a means of arriving at a vision of the Deity, absolutely forbids all use of the faculty of reason during that ecstatic and sublime interval. This total suspension of reason and reflection, during the period of contemplation, was not however peculiar to the eastern Quietists; the Latin Mystics observed the same rule, and inculcated it upon their disciples. And from hence we may safely conclude, that the many surprising visions, of which these fanatics boast, are fables utterly destitute of reason and probability. But this is not the proper place for enlarging upon prodigies of this nature.

Ir The Massalians, so called from a Hebrew word which signifies prayer, as Euchites from a Greek word of the same signification, formed themselves into a sect, during the fourth century, under the reign of Constantius. Their tenets resembled those of the Quietists in several respects.

ο Ομφαλόψυχοι.

t For an account of these two famous men, Barlaam and Gregory Palamas, see, in preference to all other writers, Jo. Alb. Fabricius, Biblioth. Græca, tom. x. p, 427, anti

454: