Berenger was anxious for the reputation of a great Reformer, and perhaps sincerely zealous for the extirpation of what he considered a revolting corruption-but he did not aspire to the glory of martyrdom. And when he presented himself at four successive councils, under the obligation either to defend or retract his opinions, we cannot doubt that, as he saw the former course to be useless as well as dangerous, he went there calmly prepared to debase himself by an insincere and perjured humiliation. Perhaps he preserved his property, or prolonged his life for a few years, by such reiterated sin and degradation; but if his latest days were passed in remorse and bitter penitence, his gain was not great, and the moments which he added to his existence were taken away from his happiness. His followers were not, probably, very numerous *; and they were chilled by his weakness and confounded by his frequent recantations. His fortitude and constancy would have confirmed and multiplied and perpetuated them. We admire his talents, we respect his virtues, and venerate the cause in which he displayed them; but in that age the defence of that cause demanded (as it deserved) a character of sterner materials and more rigid consistency than was that of Berenger.

From the moderation which Gregory used towards the person of that Reformer, it has been inferred that he secretly favoured his opinions; and this may be so far true, that he generally inculcated an adherence to the words of scripture†; and discouraged any curious researches and positive decisions respecting the manner of Christ's presence at the Eucharist. And as a real spiritual (or intellectual †) presence was probably admitted by Berenger himself, who professed only to follow the opinions of John Scotus §, there could remain no ground for any violent difference between the pope and the heretic.

Establishment of the Latin Liturgy.

II. But if we are to consider the doctrine of transubstantiation to have been effectually established, rather through the obstinate zeal of his ecclesiastics, than by the favour of Gregory, we shall have no hesitation in attributing to his personal exertions a contemporary corruption in the ceremonies of the church. It was the will of Hildebrand that the liturgy of the Universal Church should be delivered in Latin only; and having once adopted that scheme, as in every other object which he thought proper to pursue, he neglected no imaginable means to carry it into effect. The use of Latin as the vulgar tongue, which had prevailed throughout the southern provinces of Europe, gradually ceased during the course of the ninth century; and the language of the first conquerors insensibly gave place to the barbarous jargon of the second. Latin thus became a subject of study, and all knowledge of it was presently confined to the priesthood. Still it seems clear that, in France as well as in Italy, the services of the church con

tants as to the opinions in which Berenger actually died. The truth appears to be that he died a penitent,-and the former attribute to the consciousness of his heresy that remorse which the latter much more probably ascribe to his perjury.

*We mean that they formed a very trifling proportion to the whole body of the church. They contained no individual of any great eminence, nor do they appear to have existed as a sect after the death of Berenger.

+ Mosheim, cent. xi.

Hist. Litt. de la France, Vie de Berenger.

Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine are the Fathers on whose authority Berenger chiefly rests his defence. Lanfranc, before he became Archbishop of Canterbury, was his most distinguished opponent.

tinued to be performed entirely in Latin, and even that sermons were for some time delivered in that tongue to an audience most imperfectly acquainted with it. But in Spain, the Gothic missal had gradually supplanted the Roman, and at the middle of the eleventh century was universally prevalent in that church. Soon after that time, by the united influence (as is said) of Richard, the papal legate, and Constance, Queen of Leon (who had brought with her from France an attachment to the forms of her native church), Alfonso, the sixth of Leon and first of Castile, was persuaded to propose the introduction of the Roman liturgy. The nobility and the people, and even the majority of the clergy, warmly supported the established form, and after some heats had been excited on both sides, a day was finally appointed to decide on the perfections of the rival missals. To this effect, recourse was had, according to the customs of those days, to the judgments of God,' and the trial to which they were first submitted was that by combat. Two knights contended in the presence of a vast assembly, and the Gothic champion prevailed. The king, dissatisfied with this result, subjected the missals to a second proof, which they were qualified to sustain in their own persons-—the trial by fire. The Gothic liturgy resisted the flames, and was taken out unhurt, while the Roman yielded, and was consumed. The triumph o the former appeared now to be complete, when it was discovered that the ashes of the latter had curled to the top of the flames, and leaped out of them. By this strange phenomenon the scales were again turned, or at least the victory was held to be so doubtful, that the king, to preserve a show of impartiality, established the use of both liturgies. It then became very easy, by an exclusive encouragement of the Roman, effectually, though gradually, to banish its competitor *.

It was one of the latest acts of Alexander II. especially to prohibit the Bohemians from performing service in their native Sclavonian, and to impose on them the Roman missal; and about seven years afterwards Gregory prosecuted, as pope, the enterprise which, as archdeacon, he had doubtless originated. Little serious resistance appears to have been opposed to this and similar attempts; and it may be asserted without dispute, that before the conclusion of the eleventh century, the Latin liturgy was very generally received in the western churches.

The motivet of the popes for this vexatious exertion of ecclesiastical tyranny

* See Dr. Macrie's History of the Progress and Suppression of the Reformation in Spain. The contest between the liturgies began during the pontificate of Alexander II., between the years 1060 and 1068; but one of the first acts of Gregory was to give his strenuous and effectual support to the Roman. See Pagi, Vit. Alex. II. et Greg. VII.

The reason, which Gregory fairly avowed in his answer to Vratislaus, Duke of Bohemia, was the impolicy of making the scriptures too public; and, in this document, it is curious to observe with what ease, when it suited his purpose, he could dispense (like Gregory the Great) with the authority of the primitive church, so conclusive and venerable when it was expedient to follow it. The expressions of so great a pontiff deserve to be recorded:-' Quia Nobilitas tua postulavit, quod secundum Sclavonicam linguam apud vos divinum celebrari annueremus officium, scias nos huic petitioni tuæ nequaquam posse favere. Ex hoc nempe sæpe volventibus liquet non immerito Sacram Scripturam omnipotenti Deo placuisse quibusdam locis esse occultam, ne, si ad liquidum cunctis pateret, forte vilesceret et subjaceret despectui, aut pravè intellecta a mediocribus in errorem induceret. Neque enim ad excusationem juvet, quod quidam religiosi viri hoc quod simpliciter populus quæsivit, patienter tulerunt, seu incorrectum dimiserunt; cum Primitiva Ecclesia multa dissimulaverit, quæ a sanctis Patribus, postmodum firmata Christianitate et religione crescente, subtili examinatione correcta sunt. Unde ne id fiat, quod a vestris imprudenter exposcitur, auctoritate B. Petri inhibemus, atque ad honorem omnipotentis Dei huic vanæ temeritati viribus totis resistere præcipimus.'

was undoubtedly their ardour for the Unity of the church, as one body under one head; and to this end it certainly conduced, that she should speak to all her children, of all nations and races, in one language only. It was also necessary that that language should be Latin, because it thus became a chain which not only united to each other the extremities of the North and the West, but also bound them in universal allegiance to a common Sovereign. But this policy, like some other of the profoundest schemes of the Vatican, was calculated on the continuation of general ignorance, and the stability of principles which the slightest efforts of reason were sufficient to overturn.

We should add, however, that a similar custom prevails among certain other nations and creeds, which cannot have originated in similar motives, but is rather to be attributed to the superstitious veneration for antiquity, so common where the understanding has been little cultivated. The Ægyptians or Jacobites performed their service in Coptic; the Nestorians in Syriac; the Abyssinians in the old Ethiopic; and the prayers which are offered to the god of the Mahometans are universally addressed in Arabic. But the usage was entirely contrary to the practice of the early Christian church, which permitted every variety of language in its ceremonies; a practice which received the positive confirmation of the Council of Francfort at the end of the eighth century, and which was not entirely subverted till the pontificate of Gregory and of his immediate successors.

NOTE AT THE END OF PART III.

(1.) In an early part of this work (Chap. V. p. 63), Justin Martyr is accused of error in having given to Simon Magus a statue which, in fact, was dedicated to Semo Sangus, a Sabine deity. The question, however, is involved in some uncertainty; for it appears that the inscription found in 1574 was not engraved on a statue (as above asserted), but on a stone, bearing resemblance, indeed, to the basis of a statue, yet so small, that it could scarcely have supported any representation of the human body. Such is the account of Baronius, (Ann. 44.) which at the time had escaped the author. Under these circumstances, whatever may be the leaning of our own private judgment, we are historically bound to admit the direct affirmation of Justin, who expressly asserts that the statue existed in his time. If we believe Baronius, that this stone cannot reasonably be considered as a pedestal, we must also believe Justin; otherwise we are compelled to suppose that the Father deliberately called that a statue which has no part, or even support, of a statue, but a mere stone consecrated to rude Pagan divinity. At any rate, the direct evidence is all on one side, with only a bare, and as many will think, unreasonable supposition on the other.

* You may have observed (says Fleury) that the offices of the church were then in the language most used in each country, that is to say, in Latin through all the West, and in Greek through all the East, except in the remoter provinces, as in Thebais where the Egyptian was spoken, and in Upper Syria where Syriac was used.......The Armenians have, from the very beginning, performed divine service in their own tongue. If the nations were of a mixed kind, there were in the church interpreters to explain what was read.....In Palestine, St. Sabas and St. Theodosius had in their monasteries many churches, wherein the monks of different nations had their liturgy, each in his own language.'

(2.) In Chapter X, p. 153, a passage is cited from St. Eligius, a bishop of Noyon, contemporary of Gregory the Great. The sense, and even the words in question, had been previously retailed both by Robertson and Jortin; and the original Latin is quoted by Mosheim, whom the latter of those writers has followed. The author of this work, who had also confided in the same guide, has been lately led to look more particularly into the 'Life of Eligius,' as it is published in the Spicilegium Dacherii (vol. v., p. 147-304); and he was pleased to discover many excellent precepts and pious exhortations scattered among the strange matter with which it abounds. But at the same time, it was with great sorrow and some shame, that he ascertained the treachery of his historical conductor. The expressions cited by Mosheim, and cited too with a direct reference to the Spicilegium, are forcibly brought together by a very unpardonable mutilation of his authority. They are to be found, indeed, in a sermon preached by the bishop; but found in the society of so many good and Christian maxims, that it had been charitable entirely to overlook them, as it was certainly unfair to weed them out and heap them together, without notice of the rich harvest that surrounds them. In justice, then, to the character both of St. Eligius and his church, and that the exact extent of the historian's delinquency may be known, we shall here subjoin the entire passage which Mosheim has disfigured; and we are glad of the occasion to present even this short specimen of the discourses, which were delivered to a Christian people in the age of its darkest igno

rance.

Wherefore, my brethren, love your friends in God, and love your enemies on account of God, for he who loveth his neighbour (saith the apostle) hath fulfilled the law; for the man who would be a true Christian must observe the precepts, since he who observes not circumvents himself. He, then, is a good Christian, who believes not in charms or inventions of the devil, but places the whole of his hope in Christ alone; who receives the stranger with joy, as though he were receiving Christ himself; since it was He who said, "I was a stranger, and ye took me in," and "inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." He, I say, is a good Christian, who washes the feet of the strangers, and cherishes them as his beloved parents; who gives alms to the poor in proportion to his possessions; who goes frequently to church and makes his oblations at God's altar; who never tastes of his own fruit until he hath presented some to God; who has no deceitful balances, nor deceitful measures; who has never lent his money on usury; who both lives chastely himself, and teaches his children and his neighbours to live chastely and in the fear of God; and who for many days before the festivals observes strict chastity, though he be married, that he may approach the altar with a safe conscience; lastly, who can repeat the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, and teaches the same to his children and his family. He who is such as this, without any doubt is a true Christian, and Christ dwells in him.'

'Behold! ye have heard, my brethren, what sort of people good Christians are; wherefore strive as much as you are able, with the help of God, that the name of Christ may not be false in you; but to the end that ye be true Christians, always ponder the precepts of Christ in your mind, and also fulfil them in your practice. Redeem your souls from punishment whilst you have it in your power; give alms according to your means; keep peace and charity; recall the contentious to concord;

avoid lies; tremble at perjury; bear not false witness; commit no theft; offer your free gifts and tithes to the churches; contribute towards the luminaries in the holy places; repeat the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, and teach it to your children; instruct and correct even your god-chil. dren, and recollect that you are their sponsors with God. Repair frequently to church, and humbly implore the protection of the saints; observe the Lord's day, through reverence for Christ's resurrection, without any bodily work; piously celebrate the solemnities of the saints; love your neighbours as yourselves, and do as you would be done by; and what you wish not to be done to yourselves, that do to no man. Observe charity before all things, because charity covers a multitude of sins; be hospitable, humble, placing all your solicitude in God, since he hath care of you. Visit the infirm, seek out those who are in prison, take charge of strangers, feed the hungry, clothe the naked. Despise jugglers and magicians; be just in your measures; require of no man more than your due; and on no account exact usury. If you observe these things, you may appear boldly at God's tribunal in the day of judgment, and say, Give, Lord, as we have given; show compassion even as we have shown it; we have fulfilled what thou hast commanded, do thou now reward us as thou hast promised.'

The sentences printed in italics are those which Mosheim has selected and strung together, without any notice of the context. The impression which, by this method, he conveys to his readers, is wholly false; and the calumny thus indirectly cast upon his author is not the less reprehensible, because it falls on one of the obscurest saints in the Roman calendar. If the very essence of history be truth, and if any deliberate violation of that be sinful in the profane annalist, still less can it deserve pardon or mercy in the historian of the Church of Christ.

END OF PART III.