History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe
by W. E. H. Lecky
Footnotes to Chapter IV.
1:12. As St. Thomas Aquinas says, 'Si falsarii pecuniæ vel alii malefactores statim per seculares principes juste morti traduntur, multo magus hæretici statim, ex quo de hæresi convincuntur, possunt non solum excommunicari sed et juste occidi.' (Summa, pars ii. qu. xi. art. iii.)
1:15. For their details see Parnell, Penal Laws. In common parlance, the 'penal laws' date from the treaty of Limerick, but the legislative assaults on Irish Catholicism began with Elizabeth.
1:16. The very curious life of Bedell, by his son-in-law, Alexander Clogy, which was written in 1641-'2, and which formed the basis of the narrative of Burnet, was printed from the MSS. in the British Museum in 1862. We have an amusing instance of the uncompromising Protestantism of Bedell in the fact that when the insurgents who retained him prisoner gave him permission to perform the Anglican service freely with his friends, he availed himself of that permission to celebrate the thanksgiving for the 5th of November.
1:17. I have endeavoured to trace them in a book called The Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland.
1:18. See a note in Buckle, History of Civilisation, vol. i. p. 385.
1:20. This was the opinion expressed by Charles James Fox. 'The only foundation for toleration,' he said, 'is a degree of scepticism, and without it there can be none. For if a man believes in the saving of souls, he must soon think about the means; and if by cutting off one generation he can save many future ones from hell fire, it is his duty to do it.' (Rogers, Recollections, p. 49.)
1:21. On the influence of this command on Christian persecution, see Bayle, Contrains-les d'entrer, pt. ii. ch. iv., and some striking remarks in Renan, Vie de Jésus, pp. 412, 413; to which I may add as an illustration the following passage of Simancas: -- 'Hæretici pertinaces publice in conspectu populi comburendi sunt; et id fieri solet extra portas civitatis: quemadmodum olim, in Deut. cap. xvii., idolatra educebatur ad portas civitatis, et lapidibus obruebatur.' (De Cathol. Instit. p. 375.) Taylor, in noticing this argument, finely says that Christ, by refusing to permit his apostles to call down fire like Elias on the misbeliever, clearly indicated his separation from the intolerance of Judaism. (Liberty of Prophesying, sec. 22.)
2:21. Apol. cap. xxiv.
3:21. Ad Auxentium.
4:21. The reader may find a full statement of the passages from the Fathers favourable to toleration in Whitby, On Laws against Heretics (1723, published anonymously); Taylor, Liberty of Prophesying; Bayle, Contrains-les d'entrer; and many other books. The other side of the question has been developed, among other writers, by Palmer, On the Church; Muzzarelli, Simancas, Paramo, and all the other old writers on the Inquisition. There is, I think an impartial view of the whole subject in Milman, History of Christianity. See, too, Blackstone's Commentaries, b. iv. ch. iv.
5:21. Inst. lib. v. c. xx. Lactantius embraced Christianity during the persecution of Diocletian, but it appears almost certain that his Institutions were mainly written, or at least published, at Trèves during the reign of Constantine, and he never abandoned the tolerant maxims he proclaimed. This was especially creditable to him, as he was tutor to the son of Constantine, and consequently singularly tempted to avail himself of the arm of power. Unfortunately, this very eloquent writer, who was certainly one of the ablest in the early Church, possessed comparatively little influence on account of his passion for paradox. He maintained that no Christian might engage in warfare, or execute a capital sentence; he was one of the strongest assertors of the opinion that God the Father had a figure (a controversy raised by Origen), and he was accused of denying the personality of the Holy Ghost. 'Lactantius,' said Jerome, 'quasi quidam fluvius eloquentiæ Tullianæ, utinam tam nostra confirmare potuisset, quam facile aliena destruxit!' (Epist. lib. ii. epist. 14). The works of Lactantius were condemned by a council presided over by Pope Gelasius in the 5th century. See Alexandri, Hist. Ecclesiastica (Paris, 1699), tom. iv. pp. 100-103; Ampère, Hist. Littéraire de la France, tom. i. pp. 218-223. Some of the peculiar notions of Lactantius appeared at a later period among the Waldenses.
1:22. Socrates, lib. iv. c. xvi. The Donatists were also fierce persecutors and Nestorius showed his sentiments clearly enough when he said to the Emperor, 'Give me the earth purged from heretics, and I will give you heaven.' The Spanish Arians seem to have originated the intense intolerance that has been perpetuated from generation to generation in Spain.
1:23. Cod. Theod. lib. xvi. tit. 8. The apostate 'sustinebit meritas pnas.' Constantius afterwards made the penalty confiscation of goods. A Jew who married a Christian incurred the penalty of death. See, on this department of legislation, Bédarride, Hist. des Juifs, pp. 16-20.
2:23. Milman, History of Christianity, vol. ii. pp. 372-375. See also the review of these measures in Palmer, On the Church, vol. ii. p. 250. The Arians had to pay ten times the taxes of the orthodox. The first law that has come down to us, in which the penalty of death is annexed to the simple profession of a heresy, is law 9 De Hæreticis in the Theodosian Code. It was made by Theodosius the Great, and was applicable only to some sects of Manichæans. It is worthy of notice that this is also the first law in which we meet the title of 'Inquisitors of the Faith.' Optatus in the reign of Constantine advocated the massacre of the Donatists on the ground of the Old Testament precedents (see Milman).
1:24. 'Addite aras publicas atque delubra, et cousuetudinis vestræ celebrate solemnia: nec enim prohibemus preteritæ usurpationis officia libera luce tractari.' -- Cod. Th. lib. ix. tit. 16, cc. i. ii.
2:24. The first emperor who refused it was Gratian (Zosimus, book iv.).
3:24. Eusebius, Vita Const. lib. ii. c. xliv. xlv.
4:24. See Eusebius, Vita Const. lib. it. c. xliv, xlv., lib. iv. c. xxiii.; Theodoret, lib. vi. c. xxi.; Sozomen, lib. iii. c. xvii. Eusebius repeats this assertion over and over again; see Milman, History of Christianity, vol. ii. pp. 460-464 (ed. 1840).
5:24. Speaking of his youth, Libanius says: 'Plus apud Deos quam apud homines in terra convresabatur, tametsi lex prohiberet, quam audenti violare capitis pna fuit. Verumtamen cum illis ipsis vitam agens et iniquam legem et impium legislatorem deridebat.' (De Vita sua, Libanii Opera [ed. 1627], vol. ii. p. 11.) However in his oration Pro Templis, Libanius says distinctly that Constantine did not disturb the worship of the temples. It is hard to reconcile these two passages and the last with the statements of Eusebius, but I suppose the fact is that the law was made, but was generally suffered to be inoperative.
1:25. See a great deal of evidence of this in Beugnot, Décadence du Polythéisme. But it is absurd to speak of Constantine, as M. Beugnot does, as an apostle of tolerance. 'Connivance,' as Burke once said, 'is the relaxation of tyranny, and not the definition of liberty.' One of Constantine's proclamations of tolerance seems to have been posterior to the prohibition of public sacrifices.
2:25. Cod. Th. xvi. 10, 2-4. The terms of one of these laws seem to imply that Constantine had made a similar enactment: 'Cesset superstitio: sacrificiorum aboleatur insania. Nam quicunque contra legem divi Principis Parentis nostri, et hanc nostræ mansuetudinis jussionem, ausus fuerit sacrificia celebrare, competens in eum vindicta et præsens sententia exeratur.' For a full discussion of this very perplexing subject see Milman, Hist. of Christianity, and Gibbon, ch. xxi.
3:25. Thus, for example, the pagan Zosimus tells us expressly that in the beginning of the reign of Theodosius his coreligionists were still at liberty to worship in the temples. The history is in a great measure a repetition of that of the persecution which the Christians had themselves endured. Generally they had been allowed freely to celebrate their worship, but from that time, either through popular indignation or imperial suspicions, there were sudden outbursts of fearful persecution.
1:26. See the laws De Templis.
1:27. Pro Templis.
2:27. It is said, however, that, notwithstanding these laws, the Novatians (probably on account of the extremely slight difference that separated them from the orthodox) were allowed to celebrate their worship till A.D. 525, when the Bishop of Rome succeeded in procuring their suppression. (Taylor, Liberty of Prophesying, epistle dedicatory.)
1:28. 'Neither let those who refuse to obey their bishops and priests think within themselves that they are in the way of life and of salvation, for the Lord God says in Deuteronomy, "Whoever will act presumptuously, and will not hear the priest or the judge, whoever he may be in those days, he shall die, and the people will hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously." God commanded those to be slain who would not obey the priests or the judges set over them for a time. Then, indeed, they were slain with the sword while the carnal circumcision still remained; but now, since the spiritual circumcision has begun amid the servants of God, the proud and contumacious are killed when they are cast out of the Church. For they cannot live without it; for the house of God is one, and there can be salvation for no one except in the Church.' (Cypriani Epist., lib. i. ep. 11.) That excommunication is a severer penalty than death, and that the Church, having the power of inflicting the first, may also inflict the second, was one of the arguments of Bellarmine in favour of persecution, and was answered by Taylor, Liberty of Prophesying, sec. 14.
1:30. See his Retract. lib. ii. c. v.; Epist. xciii. (in some editions xlviii.) cxxvii. clxxxv.; Contra Gaudentium, c. xxv.; Contra Epist. Parmeniani, c. vii. There are many other passages on the subject scattered through his writings.
1:31. Epist. 1. Bonifacio.
1:32. See especially Epist. c. clviii, clix. clx. On the other hand, Augustine bases the right of punishing heresy on the enormity of the crime, which he considered greater than any other. (Contra Gaudentium, lib. i. c. xix.) He assimilates heresy to blasphemy, and says that blasphemy is justly punished by death. (Epist. cv., otherwise clxvi.) He adduces as applicable precedents all the worst Old Testament persecutions, and he defends the condemnation of some Donatists to death by Constantine, on the ground of justice, though he applauds on the ground of mercy the remission of the sentence. (Contra Parmenianum, lib. i. c. viii.) His general view seems to have been that heretics might justly be punished by death, but that the orthodox should not exact strict justice. However, he vacillated a good deal, and both moderate and extreme persecutors find much in their defence in his writings. Religious liberty he emphatically cursed. 'Quid est enim pejor mors animæ quam libertas erroris?' (Epist. clxvi.)
2:32. 'Quis enim nostrum, quis vestrum non laudat leges ab imperatoribus datas contra sacrificia paganorum? Et certe longe ibi pna severior constituta est; illius quippe impietatis capitale supplicium est.' (Epist. xciii., in some editions xcviii.) See Gibbon, ch. xxviii.
1:33. Ampère, Hist. Littéraire de la France, tom. i. pp. 319, 320; Milman, vol. iii. p. 60; Taylor, Liberty of Prophesying, sec. 14. St. Martin, however, was one of the most active in destroying the pagan temples, and used in that employment to range over his diocese at the head of a perfect army of monks. (See Gibbon.)
1:34. The history of this has been written in a very striking book called La Tolérance Ecclésiastique et Civile, by Thaddeus de Trautsmandorff. The author was a canon of Olmutz, and afterwards Bishop of Konigsgratz in Bohemia. The work appeared in Latin, at Pavia, in 1783, and was translated into French in 1796. It is one of the most remarkable books in favour of tolerance produced by any priest in the 18th century. See, too, on the form of intercession employed by the Inquisitors, Limborch, Historia Inguisitionis (Amsterdam, 1692), pp. 365-367, 372.
2:34. On the influence of the Councils see Palmer, vol. ii. p. 333; Muzarelli, Sur l'Inquisition.
1:35. Vide St. Jerome, passim.
1:36. Natalis Alexander, Historia Ecclesiastica, tom. v. p. 337. The following are all the cases Simaucas could collect: 'Antiquissima est pna ignis adversus impios et hæreticos, ut ex actis Chalcedonensis concilii satis constare potest. Illic enim episcopus Alexandrinus dixisse traditur: "Si Eutyches præter dogmata ecclesiæ sapit non solum pna dignus est sed et igne." Anatolium quoque hæreticum igni vivum combusserunt, ut Nicephorus prodidit, lib. xviii. Eccl. Hist. c. 4. Gregorius quoque, lib. i. Dialogorum, refert Basilium magum Romæ fuisse combustum et rem gestam laudat. Et propter impiam atque scelestam disciplinam Templarii concremati fuerunt.... Et Basilius hæreticus communi suffragio combustus fuit, sicuti Zonaras retulit in imperio Alexii Comneni; alibi quoque hæretici jam olim vivi cremati sunt, quemadmodum Paulus Æmilius, lib. vi. de Rebus Francorum, retulit. Item constitutionibus Siculis cavetur ut vivi hæretici in conspectu populi comburantur, flammarum commissi judicio. Quod legibus quoque Hispanis constitutum et consuetudine jam pridem receptum est.' (De Catholicis Institutionibus [Romæ, 1575], pp. 363, 364.)
1:38. The Fourth Council of the Lateran is esteemed cumenical in the Church of Rome, and exercised very great influence both on this account and because it was the council which first defined the doctrine of transubstantiation. Its decree on persecution, however, had been anticipated by the Council of Avignon, in 1209, which enjoined all bishops to call upon the civil power to exterminate heretics. (Rohrbacher, Hist. de l'Eglise Catholique, tom. xvii. p. 220.) The bull of Innocent III. threatened any prince who refused to extirpate heretics from his realm, with excommunication, and with the forfeiture of his dominions. See the text in Eymericus, Directorium Inquisitorum (Romæ, 1578), p. 60.
1:40. Llorente, Hist, de l'Inquisition, tom. iv. pp. 271, 272. This does not include those who perished by the branches of the Spanish Inquisition in Mexico, Lima, Carthagena, the Indies, Sicily, Sardinia, Oran, and Malta. Llorente having been himself at one time secretary in the Inquisition, and having during the occupation by the French had access to all the secret papers of the tribunal, will always be the highest authority. One would fain hope, however (and it is very probable), that these figures are overstated, and Prescott has detected two or three instances of exaggeration in the calculations on which they are based. (Ferdinand and Isabella, vol. iii. pp. 492, 493.) At the same time Llorente has adduced some fearful evidence of particular instances of persecution, which serve to show that his grand total is scarcely as improbable as might be supposed. Thus Mariana says that 2,000 persons were burnt in Andalusia in 1482, the year of the establishment of the Inquisition. An old historian, named Bernaldez, says that 700 were burnt at Seville between 1482 and 1489; and an inscription placed over the door of the Inquisition of Seville in 1524, declares that nearly 1,000 persons had been burnt since the expulsion of the Jews in 1492. (Llorente, tom. i. pp. 273-275.)
1:41. Sarpi, Hist. of Council of Trent. Grotius says 100,000.
2:41. 'Upon the 16th of February, 1568, a sentence of the Holy Office condemned all the inhabitants of the Netherlands to death as heretics. From this universal doom only a few persons especially named were excepted. A proclamation of the king, dated ten days later, confirmed this decree of the Inquisition, and ordered it to be carried into instant execution.... Three millions of people, men, women, and children, were sentenced to the scaffold in three lines.' (Motley's Rise of the Dutch Republic, vol. ii. p. 155.)
3:41. One of the advantages of this being that the victim had more time for repentance. The following edifying anecdote is from Eymericus: 'In Cathalonia, in civitate Barchinon, fuerunt tres hæretici, ut impenitentes sed non relapsi, traditi brachio sæculari; et cum unus eorum qui erat sacerdos fuisset igni expositus, et ex uno latere jam aliqualiter adustus, clamavit quod educeretur quia volebat abjurare, et pnitebat. Et sic factum est: verum si bene vel male, nescio.' (Directorium Inquisitorum, p. 335.) Castellio notices in his time the bitter complaints of some zealous theologians 'si quem videant strangulari, ac non vivum lentâ flammâ torreri.' (Cluten, De Hæreticis persequendis : Preface of Martin Bellius.) See for a very horrible instance (produced, however, by aggravated circumstances), Sessa, De Judæis (Turin, 1717), p. 96. I may mention here that Eymericus was an Inquisitor in Aragon about 1368. His Directorium was printed at Barcelona as early as 1503; it passed through a great many editions, and with the Commentaries of Pegna was long the standing guide of the Inquisition. The admiring biographer of Eymericus sums up his claims upon posterity in one happy sentence: 'Hæc magna est et postrema viri laus, eum acri odio hæreticos omnes habuisse.' Independently of its value as throwing light upon the Inquisition in its earlier stages, this book is remarkable as giving a singularly clear view of the heresies of the time. I have not met anywhere else with so satisfactory a review of the opinions of Averroes. In addition to the brief sketch prefixed to the Directorium, there is a full history of the life of Eymericus (which was rather remarkable) in Touron, Hist. des Hommes Illustres de l'Ordre de St. Dominique.
1:42. The tortures of the Inquisition I have noticed in the last chapter; but I may add that this mode of examination was expressly enjoined by Pope Innocent IV. in a bull beginning: 'Teneatur præterea potestas seu rector omnes hæreticos quos captas habuerit cogere citra membri diminutionem et mortis periculum tanquam vere latrones et homicidas animarum, et fures Sacramentorum Dei et fidei Christianæ, errores suos expresse fateri et accusare alios hæreticos.' Clement IV. issued a bull nearly in the same terms (Eymericus, Appendix, p. 9). It was decided by the Inquisitors that even a heretic who confessed his guilt might be tortured to discover his accomplices (Carena, De Inquisitione [Lugduni, 1649], pp. 69-73). The rule was that the tortures were not to be repeated, but it was decided that they might be continued through three days: 'Si quæstionatus decenter noluerit fateri veritatem ... poterit ad terrorem, vel etiam ad veritatem, secunda dies vel tertia assignari ad continuandum tormenta, non ad iterandum, quia iterari non debent, nisi novis supervenientibus indiciis contra eum, quia tunc possunt; sed continuari non prohibentur.' (Eymericus, p. 314.) Paramo, a Sicilian Inquisitor, assures us that the Inquisition was like the good Samaritan, pouring into its wounded country the wine of a wholesome severity mingled with the oil of mercy. He was also of opinion that it resembled the Jewish tabernacle, in which the rod of Aaron and the manna (of mercy) lay side by side. (De Origin. Inq. p. 153.)
1:43. The following is part of the sentence pronounced upon the relapsed heretic: 'Tu in reprobum sensum datus, maligno spiritu ductus pariter et seductus, præeligisti torqueri diris et perpetuis cruciatibus in infernum, et hic temporalibus ignibus corporaliter consumari, quam adhærendo consilio saniori ab erroribus damnabilibus ac pestiferis resilire.' (Eymericus, p. 337.)
1:44. It was the invariable rule to confiscate the entire property of the impenitent heretic, a rule which Paramo justifies on the ground that the crime of the heretic is so great that something of his impurity falls upon all related to him, and that the Almighty (whom he blasphemously terms the First Inquisitor) deprived both Adam and his descendants of the Garden of Eden. The children of the heretic were thus left absolutely destitute, and with a stigma upon them that in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was sufficient to shut them out from all sympathy, from all charity, and from all hope. The thought that those who were most dear to him would probably be abandoned either to starvation or to the life of the prostitute, was doubtless one of most acute pangs of the martyr, and the hope of preventing such a catastrophe one of the most powerful inducements to recant. In this rule we have also an explanation of those trials of dead men for heresy which the Catholic clergy so frequently instituted. Protestants sometimes regard these simply as displays of impotent malice. Nothing, however, can be more false. They had the very intelligible object of robbing the children of the dead. 'Juste enim proceditur contra defunctos hæreticos. Primo, ut memoria ejus damnatur. Secundo, ut bona illius per fiscum ab hæredibus defuncti seu a quibuslibet aliis possessoribus auferantur.' (Paramo, De Orig. et Progressu Sancti Inquisitionis [Madrid, 1598], p. 588.) The confiscation af the goods of the heretic was authorised by a bull of Innocent III. (on the ground thst children are in the Divine judgments often punished for the offences of their fathers), and again by Alexander IV. (Eymericus, pp. 58, 59, 64.) The following passage from an old ecclesiastical lawyer gives a vivid picture of the ferocity displayed towards the children of heretics: 'Ipsi filii hæreticorum adeo sunt effecti a jure incapaces et inhabiles ad succedendum patri, quod illi etiam in uno nummo suecedere non possunt: immo semper debent in miseria et egestate sordescere sicut filii reorum criminis læsæ majestatis humanæ, adeo quod nihil aliud eis sit relinquendnm, nisi sola vita quæ ex misericordia largitur, et tales esse debent in hoc mundo ut eis vita sit supplicium et mors solatium.' (Farinacius, De Delictis et Pnis, p. 205; Venice, 1619.) However, it was provided that children who betrayed their parents preserved their inheritance. On the laws resulting from these notions, see Prescott, Ferdinand and Isabella, vol. i. pp. 262, 263.
1:45. Before operating in any district, the Inquisitors always made a proclamation offering pardon under certain conditions to those who confessed and retracted their heresies within thirty or forty days. Mariana says that when this proclamation was made, on the first establishment of the Inquisition in Andalusia, 17,000 recantations followed. (De Rebus Hispanicis, lib. xxiv. c. 17.)
1:47. Hallam, Const. Hist.
2:47. Ibid. And then in 1562 it was enacted, that all who had ever graduated at the universities or received holy orders, all lawyers, all magistrates, must take the oath of supremacy when tendered to them, under pain of forfeiture or imprisonment during the royal pleasure; and if after three months they refused to take the oath when again tendered to them, they were guilty of high treason and condemned to death. Now the discontent of the Catholics might be a very good reason for making them take the oath of allegiance, which is simply a test of loyalty. It might even be a reason for making the oath of supremacy obligatory on those who for the future aspired to offices of importance -- in other words, for excluding the Catholics from such offices; but to pass a retrospective law which made almost every educated Roman Catholic, if he refused to take an oath which was absolutely and confessedly irreconcilable with the doctrines of his Church, liable to be punished with death, was as sweeping a measure of persecution as any that history records. And this was done many years before the bull which deposed Elizabeth. The misconceptions which ignorance, and worse than ignorance, accumulated around this subject have been so completely dispelled by Hallam and Macaulay that I will only add one remark. The principal apology which was published for the policy of Elizabeth towards the Catholics, was Bishop Bilson's Christian Subjection, in 1585. In that work the coercive laws were openly justified on the ground of the absolute sinfulness of toleration (pp. 16-29). Nor was it merely the public profession of error which was rightly prohibited. This distinction the Bishop indignantly repudiates. 'No corner is so secret,' he says, addressing the Catholics, 'no prison so close, but your impiety there suffered doth offend God, infect others, and confirm your own frowardness. If your religion be good, why should it lack churches? If it be naught, why should it have chambers? A Christian prince may not pardon or wink at your falsehood' (p. 26). See also on the duty of intolerance, pp. 16-29. Milner, in his Letters to a Prebendary, has collected much evidence on the subject. There is much truth as well as bitter eloquence in the taunt of an old persecuted Puritan, when he denounced Anglicanism as 'the Church that is planted in the blood of her mother.'
1:48. Elrington, Life of Usher, vol. i. p. 73.
2:48. For the circumstances of the persecution in Scotland, see Wodrow's History; and for a summary of the laws against Nonconformists in England, Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. ii. pp. 695, 696.
1:49. Buckle, Hist., vol. ii. p. 231; McKenzie, Laws of Scotland.
2:49. McCrie, Life of Knox (ed. 1840), p. 246.
3:49. Much evidence of this is collected in Buckle, vol. i. pp. 509-523.
4:49. Macaulay, Essays, vol. ii. p. 140; Laing, Sweden.
5:49. See the history, in Bancroft.
1:50. Temple, On the United Provinces.
2:50. Bayle, art. Augustine, note H. See, too, on the general intolerance of the Dutch clergy, Hallam, Hist. of Lit., vol. iii. p. 289.
3:50. Biog. Univ., art. Descartes; Voltaire, Lettres Philosophiques, xiv. Considering the writings of Descartes, this is perhaps the most preposterous accusation ever brought against a philosopher, if we except one of which Linnæus was the victim. Some good people in Sweden desired, it is said, to have his system of botany suppressed, because it was based upon the discovery of the sexes of the plants, and was therefore calculated to inflame the minds of youth. (Gioja, Filosofia della Statistica, tom. ii. p. 389.)
4:50. Palmer, On the Church, vol. i. p. 380.
5:50. And also in reply to the Wittenberg theologians. At an earlier period, when his translation of the New Testament was proscribed, he had advocated toleration. For a full view of his sentiments, see Henry's Life of Calvin, vol. ii. pp. 232-242.
6:50. McCrie's Life of Knox, p. 246. It is in his Appellation that this great apostle of murder most fully expounded his views: 'None provoking the people to idolatrie oght to be exempted from the punishment of death.... The whole tribes did in verie dede execute that sharp judgement against the tribe of Benjamin for a lesse offense than for idolatrie. And the same oght to be done wheresoever Christ Jesus and his Evangill is so receaved in any realme province or citie that the magistrates and people have solemnly avowed and promised to defend the same, as under King Edward of late days was done in England. In such places, I say, it is not only lawful to punish to the death such as labour to subvert the true religion, but the magistrates and people are bound to do so onless they wil provoke the wrath of God against themselves.... And therefore, my Lordes, to return to you, seing that God hath armed your handes with the sworde of justice, seing that His law most streatly commandeth idolaters and fals prophetes to be punished with death, and that you be placed above your subjects to reigne as fathers over their children, and further seing that not only I, but with me manie thousand famous, godlie, and learned persons, accuse your Byshoppes and the whole rabble of the Papistical clergie of idolatrie, of murther, and of blasphemie against God committed: it appertaineth to your Honours to be vigilant and carefull in so weightie a matter. The question is not of earthly substance, but of the glorie of God, and of the salvation of yourselves.' (Knox's Works, Laing's edition, vol. iv. pp. 500-515.) In a debate in the House of Lords, July 15, 1864, Lord Houghton stated, on the authority of Mr. Froude, that that gentleman in the course of his researches had discovered addresses from both houses of Convocation to Queen Elizabeth, requesting her to put Mary Queen of Scots to death as quickly as possible, which she might justly do, Mary 'being an idolater.'
1:51. Neal's History of the Puritans (ed. 1754), vol. i. pp. 40, 41.
2:51. This is noticed by Hallam and other writers.
3:51. Thus, for example, Jurieu, the great antagonist of Bossuet, the most eminent French minister in Holland (he was pastor of Rotterdam), and certainly one of the most distinguished Protestants of his day, calls universal toleration, 'ce dogme Socinien, le plus dangereux de tons ceux de la secte Socinienne, puisqu'il va à ruiner le Christianisme et à établir l'indifférence des religions.' (Droits des deux Souverains en Matière de Religion, la Conscience et l'Expérience [Rotterdam, 1687], p. 14.) This work is anonymous, but there is, I believe, no doubt about its authorship. It was written in reply to the Contrains-les d'entrer of Bayle, with the rather unnecessary object of showing that the French Protestants repudiated the tolerant maxims of that great writer.
1:52. I commend the following passage to the special attention of my readers: 'Peut-on nier que le paganisme est tombé dans le monde par l'autorité des empereurs Romains? On peut assurer sans témérité que le paganisme seroit encore debout, et que les trois quarts de l'Europe seroient encore payens si Constantin et ses successeurs n'avoient emploié leur autorité pour l'abolir. Mais, je vous prie, de quelles voies Dieu s'est-il servi dans ces derniers siècles pour rétablir la véritable religion dans l'Occident? Les rois de Suède, ceux de Danemarck, ceux d'Angieterre, les magistrates souverains de Suisse, des Païs-Bas, des villes libres d'Allemagne, les princes électeurs, et autres princes souverains de l'empire, n'ont-ils pas emploié leur autorité pour abbatre le Papisme? ... En vérité il faut être bien téméraire pour condamner des voies dont la Providence s'est constamment servi pour établir la véritable religion; excepté le premier établissement du Christianisme, et sa conservation, dans laquelle Dieu a voulu qu'il y eût un miracle sensible; c'est pourquoi il n'a pas voulu que l'autorité s'en mélât; excepté, dis-je, cet endroit de l'histoire de l'Église, on voit constamment partout que Dieu fait entrer l'autorité pour établir la véritable religion et pour ruiner les fausses.' (Droit des deus Souverains, pp. 280-282.)
2:52. Hallam, Hist. of Literature, vol. i. p. 554.
3:52. See the collection of approbations quoted by Beza, De Hæreticis; McKenzie, Life of Calvin, pp. 79-89; and the remarks in Coleridge, Notes on English Divines, vol. i. p. 49.
1:53. His name was originally Châtillon or Châteillon, which, after the fashion of the age, he latinised into Castellio; but at the beginning of his career, some one having called him by mistake Castalio, he was so charmed by the name, which, by reminding him of the Castalian fount, seemed a good augury for his literary career, that he adopted it. See, for a full account of his life, Bayle, art. Casalio, and Henry, Life of Calvin; and, for a short notice, Hallam, Hist. of Literature, vol. i. p. 557. Besides the works I have noticed in the text, Castalio translated the dialogues of the famous Socinian Ochino, and an anonymous German work of the mystical school of Tauler, edited the Sibylline verses (his preface is given to the recent edition by Alexander [Paris, 1846]), wrote a defence of his translation of the Bible (which translation seems to have been an indifferent performance), and published some minor essays or dialogues.
2:53. From which he somewhat rashly concluded that it ought not to be retained in the Bible. 'For my part,' said Niebuhr, when a young German pastor expressed his scruples about reading what he believed to be simply a love song; 'I should deem the Bible itself imperfect if it did not include an expression of the deepest and strongest passion of humanity.' The history of the interpretations of the Song of Solomon would be long and curious -- from the Jewish Cabalists, who, regarding heaven as the union of man with the Deity by love, and death as the 'kiss of God,' esteemed the Song of Solomon the highest expression of this transcendental union, to the somewhat fantastic criticisms of M. Renan.
1:54. On which Beza comments: 'Hac impietate quid tandem magis impium aut diabolicum ipse unquam inferiorum portæ exhalarunt.' (De Hæreticis a Civili Magistratu puniendis: Libellus adversus Martini Bellii farraginem et Novorum Academicorum sectam , p. 58)
1:55. 'Quis non putet Christum aliquem esse Molochum aut ejus generis aliquem Deum si sibi vivos homines immolari, comburique velit? Quis velit servire Christo eâ conditione, ut si in aliquâ re inter tot controversias ab iis dissideat, qui habent in alios potestatem, vivus comburatur ipsius Christi jussu crudelius quam in tauro Phalaridis, etiamsi in mediis flammis Christum magnâ voce concelebret, et se in eum pleno ore credere vociferetur?' (Preface of Martin Bellius in Joachim Cluten's De Hæreticis persequendis, ed. 1610.) This work consists of a collection of passages from different authors (two of them by Castellio) in favour of toleration.
2:55. See Bayle and Henry. Castellio, when publishing his edition of the Bible, made the preface the vehicle of a warm appeal for toleration (which is given in Cluten). Calvin, among other things, accused him of stealing wood for his fire -- an accusation which was solemnly refuted. Bayle has collected much evidence to show that Castellio was a man of spotless character, singularly loved by those about him, intensely amiable, keenly sensible of the attacks of which he was the object. Castellio has himself made a collection of the epithets Calvin in one short work heaped upon him: 'Vocas me subinde in Gallico libello: blasphemum, calumniatorem, malignum, canem latrantem, plenum ignorantiæ et bestialitatis, sacrarum literatum impurum corruptorem, Dei prorsus derisorem, omnis religionis contemptorem, impudentem, impurum canem, impium, obscnum, torti perversique ingenii, vagum, balatronem, nebulonem vero appellas octies; et hæc omnia longe copiosius quam a me recensentur facis in libello duorum foliorum et quidem perparvorum.'
1:56. Essais, liv. i. c. 34.
2:56. Beza, Vita Calvini.
3:56. It is sufficiently refuted by Beza himself in his answer to Castellio, when he speaks of those who objected to the burning of Servetus (he calls them 'emissaries of Satan') as amounting to a sect. He also specifies two or three writers, of whom the principal seems to have been Clebergius. I have never been able to meet with the work of this author, but Beza represents him as objecting absolutely to all forms of persecution, and basing this objection on the absolute innocence of honest error; which doctrine again he rested on the impossibility of ascertaining certainly religious truths, as demonstrated by the continuance of controversy. The following passages quoted by Beza are extremely remarkable for the age: 'De controversiis nondum certo constat; si enim constaret disputari defuisset,' 'Nonne Deus eos amabit qui id quod verum esse putant defenderint bonâ fide? Etiam si forte erraverint, nonne eis veniam dabit?' (Beza, pp. 65, 93.) Hallam has also exhumed three or four books or pamphlets that were written at the same time in favour of toleration. Acontius (Acanacio) seems to have been one of the most distinguished of these authors. Hallam says (Hist. of Literature) his book is, 'perhaps, the first wherein the limitation of fundamental articles of Christianity to a small number is laid down at considerable length. He instances among doctrines which he does not reckon fundamental, those of the Real Presence and of the Trinity.' Acontius was born at Trent. He adopted sceptical or indifferent opinions, verging on Socinianism; he took refuge in England, and received a pension from Elizabeth. There is a full notice of him in an anonymous French history of Socinianism of very great research (1723), ascribed to Guichard or to Lamy (pp. 261-264). The hand of Socinus was suspected in some of these works. That of Bellius was by some ascribed to him. So, too, was a work now attributed to an author named Minos Celso, concerning whom scarcely anything is known, except that, like Socinus, he was born at Sienna. (See Biog. Univ., arts. Servetus and Celso.
1:59. If this language should appear startling to any reader, I commend to his attention the following passage from an historian who was accustomed to weigh well his expressions: 'At the end of the sixteenth century the simple proposition, that men for holding or declaring heterodox opinions in religion should not be burned alive or otherwise put to death, was itself little else than a sort of heterodoxy; and though many privately must have been persuaded of its truth, the Protestant churches were as far from acknowledging it as that of Rome. No one had yet pretended to assert the general right of religious worship, which, in fact, was rarely or never conceded to the Romanists in a Protestant country, though the Huguenots shed oceans of blood to secure the same privilege for themselves.' (Hallam, Hist. of Literature, vol. i. p. 559.) The same judicious historian elsewhere says: 'Persecution is the deadly original sin of the Reformed churches, that which cools every honest man's zeal for their cause in proportion as his reading becomes more extensive.' (Const. Hist. vol. i. ch. 2.)
1:60. 'La discipline de nos Réformés permet aussi le recours au bras séculier en certains cas, et on trouve parmi les articles de la discipline de l'Église de Genève que les ministres doivent déférer au magistrat les incorrigibles qui méprisent les peines spirituelles, et en particulier ceux qui enseignent de nouveaux dogmes sans distinction. Et encore aujourd'hui celui de tous les auteurs Calvinistes qui reproche le plus aigrement à l'Église Romaine la cruauté de sa doctrine, en demeure d'accord dans le fond, puisqu'il permet l'exercice de la puissance du glaive dans les matières de la religion et de la conscience (Jurieu, Syst. ii. ch. 22, 23, &c.); chose aussi qui ne peut être révoquée en doute sans énerver et comme estropier la puissance publique; de sorte qu'il n'y a point d'illusion plus dangereuse que de donner la souffrance pour un caractère de la vraie Église, et je ne connois parmi les Chrétiens que les Sociniens et les Anabaptistes qui s'opposent à cette doctrine.' (Variations Protestantes, liv. x. c. 56.) The Anabaptists, however, were not always so tolerant, and one of the earliest rallying cries of the insurgents of Münster was: 'Que tons non rebaptisez fussent mis à mort comme payens et meschans.' (Sleidan, liv. x.)