The Power of the Popes

THE POWER OF THE POPES is eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at hp://www.gutenberg.org/license. Title: e Power Of e Popes Author: Pierre Claude François Daunou Release Date: Mar , [EBook #] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF- *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE POWER OF THE POPES*** Produced by David Widger. ii THE POWER OF THE POPES By Pierre Claude François Daunou AN HISTORICAL ESSAY ON THEIR TEMPORAL DOMINION, AND THE ABUSE OF THEIR SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY Two Volumes in One CONTENTS TRANSLATORS PREFACE ADVERTISEMENT TO THE THIRD EDITION, ORIGINAL CHAPTER I. ORIGIN OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES CHAPTER II. ENTERPRIZES OF THE POPES OF THE NINTH CENTURY CHAPTER III. TENTH CENTURY CHAPTER IV. ENTERPRISES OF THE POPES OF THE ELEVENTH CEN- TURY CHAPTER V. CONTESTS BETWEEN THE POPES AND THE SOVEREIGNS OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY CHAPTER VI. POWER OF THE POPES OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY CHAPTER VII. FOURTEENTH CENTURY CHAPTER VIII. FIFTEENTH CENTURY CHAPTER IX. POLICY OF THE POPES OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY CHAPTER X. ATTEMPTS OF THE POPES OF THE SEVENTEENTH CEN- TURY CHAPTER XII. RECAPITULATION CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE ENDNOTES AND iv TO THE REV. RICHARD T. P. POPE, AT WHOSE SUGGESTION IT WAS UNDERTAKEN, THIS TRANSLATION OF THE PAPAL POWER IS INSCRIBED, AS A SMALL TRIBUTE OF RESPET AND REGARD BY HIS AFFECTIONATE FRIEND, THE TRANSLATOR. TRANSLATORS PREFACE HE Work of whi the following is a translation, had its origin in the trans- T actions whi took place between Pius VII. and the Fren Emperor, relative and subsequent to the restoration of the Roman Catholic religion in France. Its object appears to have been, to exhibit to the world the unreasonable pretensions of the Roman Court, and to appeal to public opinion for support in resisting claims deemed incompatible with the independence of the civil power, and derogatory to the honour of the Fren throne. In pursuance of this object, an investigation was entered into, to ascertain with precision the line of demarcation whi separated the recognized authority of the Papal See in France, from the rights appertaining to the civil power, and the indisputable privileges of the Fren Chur. is investigation naturally led the enquiry up to a remote period, and the present work may be considered an epitome of the political history of the Roman Court, and of its relations with the other Courts of Europe, from the period in whi its spiritual authority began to merge into temporal power, down to the occasion of the present essay in the pontificate of Pius VII. In the former period of this enquiry, the pages of early history afforded the materials from whi the requisite information was to have been derived. is source was open to all; and the merit of the work is here confined to the discrimina- tion exercised in the selection of the scaered parts, and the judgment with whi they may be found combined into an uniform whole. In the laer period, the advantages possessed by the author were peculiar and important. Access to the papal arives appears to have opened to him abundant sources of information, whi a patient investigation enabled him to avail himself of, in applying those documents, otherwise perhaps destined to oblivion, to the il- lustration of the object whi he had in view. ese documents give to this portion of the work a peculiar interest. For, though the period to whi they relate is recent, the circumstances in whi Europe was placed during the transactions more imme- vi diately referred to, and the extraordinary revolutions to whi both public opinion and political institutions were subjected, not only give to it the arm of novelty, but confer on it an interest similar to that derived from the dust of antiquity. What- ever the defects of the translation, it will I trust be found a valuable addition to our historical records, and a source of mu useful and interesting information. R. T. H. Montmorenci, . ADVERTISEMENT TO THE THIRD EDITION, ORIGINAL E have introduced into this ird Edition some developments whi were W not in the two former. We have inserted many justificatory pieces, some of whi have never before been published. ese pieces, and the reflections induced by them, occupy the second volume, whi is divided into three parts, containing: . Exposition of the Maxims of the Court of Rome, since the fabrication of the False Decretals, and especially from the time of Gregory VII. to the present day: . Exposition of the Maxims of the Gallican Chur, from St. Louis to the Em- peror Napoleon: . Exposal of the actual conduct of Pius VII. with some observations on the effects it may produce. CHAPTER I. ORIGIN OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES HOEVER has read the Gospel, knows that Jesus Christ founded no temporal W power, no political sovereignty. He declares that his kingdom is not of this world;¹ he arges his apostles not to confound the mission he gives them, with the power exercised by the princes of the earth.² St. Peter and his colleagues are sent not to govern but to instruct³ and the authority with whi they are clothed, consists only in the knowledge and the benefits they are to bestow. Faithful to confining themselves within the bounds of so pure an apostolat, far from erecting themselves into rivals of the civil power, they, on the contrary, pro- claimed its independence and the sacredness of its rights:⁴ obedience to sovereigns is one of the first precepts of their pious morality. To resist governments is, they say, to offend the Ruler of the world, and take up arms against God himself.⁵ e successors of the apostles for a long time held the same language: they anowledged no power superior to that of sovereigns but Divine Providence itself.⁶ ey subjected to kings all the ministers of the altar, levites, pontiffs, evangelists, and even prophets.⁷ God alone was, immediately and without mediator, the only judge of kings; to him alone belonged their condemnation: the Chur addressed to ¹John xviii. ²Luke xxii. ³Ma, xxviii. ⁴Rom. xiii. ⁵i resistit potestati, Dei ordinationi resistit; qui autem fesistunt, ipsi sibi damnationem acquirunt. ⁶Chrysostom. Comm, on Epistle to the Romans. ⁷Deum esse solum in cujus solius, imperatores sunt potestate, à quo sunt secundi, post quem primi ante omnes.— Colimus imperatorem ut hominem à Deo secundum, solo Deo minorem.—Tertull. ix them only supplications or respectful advice.⁸ She exercised empire only through the medium of her virtues⁹ and possessed no other inheritance than that of faith.¹⁰ ese are the very expressions of the holy fathers, not only during the three first centuries, but subsequent to Constantine, and even aer the time of Charlemagne. Every one knows, that previous to Constantine, the Christian ures had been but individual associations, too frequently proscribed, and at all times uncon- nected with the state. e popes, in these times of persecution and of ferment, most assuredly were far from aspiring to the government of provinces: they were con- tented in being permied to be virtuous with impunity; and they obtained no crown on earth save that of martyrdom. From the year , Constantine allowed the ures to acquire landed prop- erty, and individuals to enri them by legacies. Here we behold, in all probability, says the President Henault, what has given rise to the supposition of Constantine’s donation.¹¹ is donation preserved its credit for su a lapse of time, that in some Christians were burned at Strasburgh for daring to question its authenticity. In the twelh century, Gratian and eodore Balsamon copied it into their canonical compilations; and St. Bernard did not consider if apocryphal.¹² It had its origin before the tenth century, notwithstanding what many critics say: for in Pope Adrian avails himself of it in an exhortation to Charlemagne. But, in , Stephen II. had also an open to make use of it, as we shall shortly see; but as he neither mentions it, nor refers to it in any way, it follows that it was unknown to him as it had been to all his predecessors. It was therefore aer the middle, and before the end of the eighth century, that it must have been fabricated. For the rest, the falsity of this piece is according to Fleury more universally recognized than that of the decretals of Isidore: and if the donation of Constantine could still preserve any credit, to strip it of su credit, it would be sufficient to transcribe it: here follow some lines: “We attribute to the see of St. Peter all the dig- “nity, all the glory, all the authority of the imperial ⁸od rex delinquit, soli Deo reus est.—Cassiodoi'us, Si quis de nobis, rex, justitiæ tram item tran- scendere volu-erit, à te corrigi potest: si verô tu excesseris, quis te corripiet, quis te condemnabit, nisi is qui se pronunciavit esse justitiam? —Gregor, Turon. ad Chilpericum. Reges non sunt à nobis graviter exasperandi, divino judiciô sunt reservandi.—Yvo. Carnot. See Bossuet’s reflections on these various texts of Scripture, and of the fathers. De(. Cler. Gail. par. b. , , , , . ⁹Pelag. Concilior. vol. p. Greg. Mag. vol. p. , , . ¹⁰Nihil ecclesia sibi nisi fidem possidet.—Ambros. Op. tom. , p. ¹¹Abr. Chron. History of France, years , , . ¹²De Consider, ad Eugen. book . .—Dante de Monariâ, book , proves that this donation could not bind the successors of Constantine; he declares it null, but without disputing its authenticity.

Load more