besides. the full and vigorous exercise of reason and will was too recent and still too frequent in the church, for her to fal! into so entire an oblivion. She did not affirm that truth had a right to employ constraint; on the contrary, she incessantly repeated that spiritual arms were the only arms of which she could and ought to avail herself. But this principle, if I may so express myself, was only upon the surface of minds, and evaporated from day to day. The idea that truth, one and universal, had a right to pursue by force the consequences of its unity and universality, became from day to day the dominant, active, and efficacious idea. Of the two conditions of spiritual society, the rational unity of doctrine, and the actual unity of minds, the first almost solely occu~ pied the church; the second was incessantly forgotten or violated.

Many centuries were necessary in order to give to it its place and power, that is to say, to bring out the true nature of spiritual society, its complete nature, and the harmony of its elements. It was long the general error to believe that the empire of truth-that is, of universal reason-could be established without the free exercise of individual reason, without respect to its right. Thus they misunderstood spiritual society, even in announcing it; they exposed it to the risk of being but a lying illusion. The employment of force does far more than stain it, it kills it; in order that its unity may be, not only pure, but real, it is necessary that it shine forth in he midst of the development of all intellects and all liberties, It will be the honour of our times to have penetrated into the essence of spiritual society much further than the world has ever yet done, to have much more completely known and asserted it. We now know that it has two conditions: 1st, the presence of a general and absolute truth, a rule of doctrines and human action; 2nd, the full development of all intellects, in face of this truth, and the free adhesion of souls to its power. Let not one of these conditions ever allow us to forget the other; let not the idea of the liberty of minds weaken in us that of the unity of spiritual society: because individual convictions should be clear and free, let Es not be tempted to believe that there is no universal truth which has a right to command; in respecting the reason each, do not lose sight of the one and sovereign reason /

The history of human society has hitherto passed alternately from one to the other of these dispositions. At certain epochs men have been peculiarly struck with the nature and rights of this universal and absolute truth, the legitimate master to whose reign they aspired: they flattered themselves that at last they had encountered and possessed it, and in their foolish confidence they accorded to it the absolute power which soon and inevitably engendered tyranny. After having long submitted to and respected it, man recognised it; he saw the name and rights of truth usurped by ignorant or perverse force; then he was more irritated with the idols than occupied with God himself; the unity of divine reason, if I may be permitted to use the expression, was no longer the object of his habitual contemplation; he above all thought upon the right of human reason in the relations of men, and often finished by forgetting that, if it is free, the will is not arbitrary; that if there is a right of inquiry for individual reason, it is still subordinate to that general reason which serves for the measure and touchstone of all minds. And even as in the first instance there was tyranny, so in the second there was anarchy, that is to say, the absence of general and powerful belief, the absence of principles in the soul, and of union in society. One may hope that our time is called to avoid each of these sand-banks, for it is, if I may so speak, in possession of the chart which points them both out. The development of civilization must be accomplished hereafter under the simultaneous influence of a two-fold reverence; universal reason will be sought as the supreme law, the final aim; individual reason will be free, and invoked to develop itself as the best means of attaining to universal reason. And if spiritual society be never complete and pure-the imperfection of humanity will not allow it—at least its unity will no longer run the risk of being factitious and fraudulent. You have had a glance at the state of minds concerning this great idea, at the epoch upon which we are occupied: let us pass to the state of facts, and see what practical consequence had already been produced by that unity of the church, of which we have just described the rational characteristics.

It was seen above all in the ecclesiastical legislation, and it was so much the more conspicuous there, from being in contradiction to all that passed elsewhere. We have studied

in our last lectures civil legislation from the fifth to the eighth century; and diversity, which gradually increased, has appeared to us its fundamental trait. The tendency of religious society is very different; it aspired to a unity in laws, and attained it. And it is not that she exclusively drew her laws from the primitive monuments of religion, from the sacred books, always and everywhere the same: in proportion as she was developed, new desires were manifested, new laws were necessary, or a new legislator. Who should it be? The east was separated from the west, the west was daily parcelled out into distinct and independent states. Should there be, for the church thus dispersed, many legislators? Shall the councils of Gaul, Spain, or Italy, give them religious laws? No; there shall be an universal and sole legislation for the whole church, superior to all the diversities of national churches and councils, and to all the differences which are necessarily introduced into discipline, worship, and usages. The decrees of the general councils shall everywhere be obligatory and accepted. From the fourth to the eighth century there were six œcumenical or general councils; they were all held in the east, by the bishops of the east, and under the influence of the eastern emperors; there were scarcely any bishops from the west among them. Yet, despite so many causes for misunderstanding and separation, despite the diversity of languages, governments, and manners, and moreover, despite the rivalry of the patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, and Alexandria, the legislation of the general councils was everywhere adopted; the west and the east

Table of the General Councils from the Fourth to the Eighth Century.

alike yielded to it; a few only of the decrees of the fifth council were for a moment contested. So powerful already was the idea of unity in the church; such was the spiritual tie dominating all things!

With regard to the second principle of spiritual society, liberty of minds, some distinction must be made between the east and the west; the state of facts was not the same in them.

In setting forth the state of the church in the fourth and fifth centuries, I have made you acquainted with the disposition of the legislation, and of minds generally, with regard to heresy. The principle of persecution, you will recollect, was neither clearly established, nor constantly dominant; still it gradually prevailed; in spite of the generous protestations of some bishops, in spite of the variety of cases, the laws of Theodosius, the persecution of the Arians, the Donatists, the Pelagians, and the punishment of the Priscillianists, do not admit a doubt of this.

Dating from the sixth century, and in the Empire of the east, the true successor and continuator of the Roman empire, events and ideas followed the same course; the principle of persecution was developed; the history of the Monophysites, and Monothelites, that of many other heresies, and the legislation of Justinian, give proof of this.

In the west, the invasion and all its consequences for some time delayed its progress; almost all intellectual movement came to a stand still. Amidst the incessant confusion of life, what room could be left for contemplation and study? Heresies were rare; the contest continued between the Arians and the orthodox; but we see but few new doctrines arise, and those which attempted to introduce themselves were scarcely anything more than a weak echo of the heresies of the east. Persecution, therefore, so to speak, wanted matter and occasion. Besides, the bishops did not in any way provoke it; more pressing affairs occupied them; the situation of the church was perilous; she not only was under the necessity of occupying herself about her temporal interests, but her safety, her very existence, was in danger; they cared little for minor varieties of opinion. Fiftyfour councils were held in Gaul in the sixth century; two only, that of Orange and that of Valencia, in 529, occupied

themselves with dogmas; they condemned the heresy of the semi-Pelagians, which the fifth century had bequeathed to

them.

Lastly, the barbaric kings, the new masters of the soil, took but little interest, and rarely any part in such debates. The emperors of the east were theologians as well as bishops; they had been born and bred in theology; they had personal and fixed opinions concerning its problems and quarrels. Justinian and Heraclius willingly engaged upon their own account in the suppression of heresy. Unless impelled by some powerful political motive, neither Gondebald, Chilpiric, nor Gontran, troubled themselves in the matter. Numerous actions and words have come down to us of the Burgundian, Gothic, and Frank kings, which prove how little they were disposed to exert their power in such causes. "We cannot command religion," said Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths; "no one can be forced to believe, in spite of himself." "Since the Deity suffers various religions," said king Theodobat, "we dare not prescribe a single one. We remember having read that God must be sacrificed to willingly, and not under the constraint of a master. Those, therefore, who attempt to do otherwise, evidently oppose themselves to the divine commands." 2

Doubtless, Cassiodorus here lends to the two Gothic kings the superiority of his reason; but they adopted his language; and in many other cases, whether it be ignorance or good sense, we find the barbaric princes manifesting the same dis position.

In fact, therefore, from the concurrence of various causes, the second condition of spiritual society, liberty of minds, was at this epoch less violated in the west than in the east. It is necessary, however, not to be mistaken in this matter; it was but an accident, the temporary effect of external circumstances; at bottom, the principle was equally overlooked, and the general course of things tended equally to bring about the prevalence of persecution.

You see, that, in spite of some differences, the unity of the church, with all the consequences attached thereto, was everywhere the dominant fact, alike in the west and in

2 Cassiod. Vartar. Ep. 1. xi. ep. 27.

2 Ibid. 1. x. ep. 26