We shall transcribe in vol. 2, the letter of Louis to the pope, announcing that the edict of March, 1632, would not be executed.

This letter is dated, as is that of the bishops, on the 14th of Sept 1693.

4 See page 302.

Happily, the other orders of the state upheld with perseverance the four maxims of the clergy, against the clergy itself, and the interests of the throne, almost forgotten by the declining monarch. Among the magistrates to whom the Gallican church owes the maintenance of her ancient doctrine, at this era, the advocate general Talon is distinguished, author of a treatise on the authority of kings in the administration of the church, one of the best works published on this subject. He professed the same principles in the exercise of his duties, and especially in a request preferred in 1688. We shall terminate this chapter by some extracts from this requisition.:

"In an a.s.sembly held on the subject matter of "the regale, the bishops, aware that the ultramon- "tane doctors, and the emissaries of the Court of "Rome, omitted no care to spread through the "kingdom the new doctrines of the pope's infalli- "bility, and of the indirect power which Rome en- "deavours to usurp over the temporal power of the "king, this a.s.sembly, we say, does not pretend to "make a decision on a doubtful point of contro- "versy, but, to render publie and authentic testi- "mony to an established truth, taught by all the "fathers of the church; confirmed by all the coun- "cils, and especially by those of Constance and "Basle.

"We have seen however with astonishment, that "the pope looks on this declaration as an insult "offered to his authority; insmuch that the king, "having nominated to the episcopacy some of those "who were present at this a.s.sembly, and who are "as meritorious from their piety and virtue as from "their knowledge and learning, of which they have "on various occasions given proof, he has refused "the bulls, under pretence that they do not make "profession of a sound doctrine.

"This refusal which has not the appearance of "reason, does not fail to occasion great scandal, and "to produce irregularities we can scarcely express.

"Who could ever suppose that the pope, whom "we have held up to us as the model of sanct.i.ty "and of virtue, should remain so wedded to opinions, "and so jealous of the shadow of an imaginary au- "thority, that he leaves the third of the churches of "France vacant, because we are not disposed to ac- "knowledge his infallibility?

"Those who imbue the pope with these ideas, "do they imagine they can make us change our "sentiments? and are they so blind, that they do "not perceive we are no longer in those wretched "times, when the grossest ignorance, united to the "weakness of governments, and false prejudices, "rendered the decrees of the pope so terrific, how- "ever unjust they may have been; and, that these "disputes and bickerings, far from augmenting their "power, can only serve to excite enquiry into the "origin of their usurpations, and diminish rather "than encrease the veneration of the people.

"We shall say more: the bad use the popes have "made on so many occasions of the authority of "which they are the depositories, in prescribing no "bounds to it but that of their will, has been the "source of the almost innumerable evils with which "the church has been afflicted, and the most speci- "ous pretext for the heresies and schisms which have "sprung up in the last century, as the theologians "a.s.sembled by direction of Paul III. honestly con- "fessed, and even, at present, the idea alone of "the infallibility and indirect power, which the com- "plaisance of the Italian doctors confers on the See "of Rome over the * temporal* of kings, is one of "the greatest obstacles which is opposed to the con- "version, not of individuals alone, but, whole provin- "ces; and we cannot too strongly impress, that "these new opinions are no part of the doctrine of "the universal church....

"The thunders of the Vatican have nothing terri- "ble in them; these are transient fires which go out "in smoke, and which do neither ill nor prejudice "but to those who launch them.

"The refusal of the pope to grant the bulls to the "bishops nominated by the king, causes a derange- "ment which encreases daily, and which requires a "prompt and efficacious remedy. The councils of "Constance and of Basle having laboured to reduce "to some moderation the usurpations of the court of "Rome, and the confusion which was introduced in "the distribution of benefices, the pragmatic sanction "was subsequently compiled from the decrees of these "councils. But the popes, seeing their authority "diminished by it, exerted eveiy artifice to cause "its abolition; and by the concordat entered into "between Francis I. and pope Leo X., the mode of "appointing to the vacant sees and abbeys was re- "gulated: not only the devolution, or right of pre- "sentation by lapse, but the reversion, was granted "to the pope, with power to admit resignations in fa- "vour of individuals, and many other articles; which "were very burdensome on the ordinary collators, "and altogether opposed to the ancient canons.

"Besides, our ancestors for a long period have re- "monstrated against the concordat: the ordonnance "of Orleans had restored the elections; and it would "be very advantageous if all ecclesiastical affairs were "arranged in the kingdom, without being obliged to "have recourse to Rome. In the sequel, however, "the concordat was acted on faithfully by us, and "we cannot conceive that the pope by an invincible "obstinacy, wishes now to compel us to deprive him "of the advantages which the court of Rome derives "from a treaty so advantageous to it....

"After all, those who, before the concordat, were "elected by the clergy and people, and afterwards "by the chapters, in presence of a king's commissioner, "were they not ordained by the metropolitan, "a.s.sisted by the bishops of the province, after the "king had approved of the election? The right "acquired by the king in the concordat, authorised "in this case by the tacit consent of all the Gallican "church, and confirmed by a possession of near two "hundred years, ought so much the less be subject- "ed to change or attack, as, during the four first ages "of the monarchy, they did not resort to Rome to "ask for appointments to benefices; the bishops dis- "posed of all those which became vacant in their "dioceses, and our monarchs almost invariably nomi- "nated to the bishop.r.i.c.ks; and, if they occasionally "granted to the clergy or the people, the privilege of "electing a pastor, they more frequently reserved the "selection to themselves; and without the pope "having any concern in it, those who they "elected were immediately consecrated. What "prevents us from following these examples, founded "on this excellent principle, that the right, which all "the faithful had originally in the appointment of a "head, when it could no longer be so exercised, "should pa.s.s into the hands of the sovereign, on "whom the people had conferred the government of "the state, of which the church is the n.o.bler "part."

"But, with respect to the pope, since he declines "to grant to the king's nomination the concurrence "of his authority, we may presume that he is de- "sirous of relieving himself from a part of the painful "burden which oppresses him; and, that his infir- "mities not permitting his extending his pastoral vigi- "lance overevery part of his universal church, the lapse "which sometimes takes place in cases of negli- "gence, even of the superior to the inferior, may "authorize bishops to confer the imposition of hands "on those whom the king shall nominate to the "prelacies."

CHAPTER XI. EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

IF the temporal power of the popes has subsisted later than the year 1701, it is princ.i.p.ally because no one was concerned to accelerate its inevitable fall. Placed between Milan and Naples, as a barrier to the preponderance of either Austria or the Bourbons over Italy, the feeble States of the Holy See seemed to belong to the political system of Europe, and to contribute to the maintenance of the general equilibrium.

Each prince being interested in not suffering another to invade them, all concurred to r.e.t.a.r.d a revolution, which the progress of general knowledge would soon bring about, which would be accomplished of its own accord, from the moment they would cease to prevent it, and which, at a future time, other circ.u.mstances perhaps would render more reconcilable with the situation of European affairs.

Besides the general cause which we have pointed out, three particular causes have perpetuated, during the eighteenth century, the temporal sovereignty of the Roman pontiffs; at first, the ill-enlightened devotion of Louis XIV. from 1700 to 1715; in the second place, the influence of the Jesuits, as well during these first fifteen years as under the ministry of cardinal Fleury from 1726 to 1743; finally, the wisdom of the two popes, Lambertini and Ganganelli of whom the one governed the church from 1740 to 1758, the other from 1769 to 1774. If, like these two, the other popes of the eighteenth century had known how to manage and circ.u.mscribe their power, they would have preserved, perhaps confirmed it: but they aspired to aggrandize it, the spiritual arms have continued to serve as instruments to pontifical ambition; while they have dared to reproduce the silly doctrines of the supremacy and infallibility of the popes; and the Holy See, which might have remained a power of the third order, has fallen even below this rank in aspiring to rea.s.sume the first.

Clement XI. taking advantage of the circ.u.mstances in which the king, the clergy, the government, and the people of France found themselves, published the bull 'Vineam Domini' in 1705, the bull 'Unigenitus' in 1713.5 It is well known what an uproar the latter excited the Holy See and the Jesuits had the misfortune to triumph; a defeat had been less injurious to them than such a victory. Clement XI. nevertheless conceived so high an idea of his own power, that he engaged in a long dispute with Victor Amadeus king of Sicily: he re-claimed over the Sicilies the same rights in the 18th century, which had been relinquished by Urban II. a pope of the eleventh, and the almost immediate successor of Hildehrand; he confirmed the excommunications launched by the Sicilian bishops against the magistrates of this country; he abolished by a const.i.tution, in 1715, a tribunal which for six hundred years had exercised the right of deciding sovereignly, within this kingdom, many kinds of ecclesiastical affairs.-But this const.i.tution which attacked a prince, had not the success of the 'Unigenitug' which a monarch was pledged to support. Clement died without having humbled Victor Amadeus.

5 The bull 'Unigenitus' is one of those in which the king of France is not designated 'king of Navarre.'

At the instigation of the Jesuits, Benedict XIII.. in 1729, re-canonized the much celebrated Hildebrand, whom Gregory XIII. and Paul V. had already inscribed in the catalogue of the blessed. The liturgy was enriched by Benedict XIII. with an office to be celebrated the 25th of May each year, in honour of St. Hildebrand or St. Gregory VII. A legend inserted in this office relates the high achievements of this exemplary pontiff:

"how he "knew how to oppose with generous and athletic "intrepidity, the impious attempts of the emperor "Henry IV. how, like an impenetrable wall, he de- "fended the house of Israel; how he plunged this "same Henry in the deep abyss of misery; how "he excluded him from the communion of the faith- "ful, dethroned him, proscribed him, and absolved "from their duty towards him the subjects who had "pledged fidelity to him."

Such are the Christian words which Benedict XIII. directed to be recited or sung in the churches, for the edification of the faithful and instruction of kings. But the parliament of Paris took offence at this very pious legend, condemned it as seditious, and forbade its publication.-The parliaments of Metz, of Rennes, and Bourdeaux, opposed themselves, not less vigorously, to the insertion in the breviaries of this novel style of praying to G.o.d. There were even French bishops, those of Montpelier, Troyes, Metz, Verdun, and Auxerre, who would not recognize this new supplement to the divine office, and published directions, to refuse expressly the worship of St. Hildebrand. It may be proper to observe, that Cardinal Fleury, who then ruled France, abstained from mingling his voice with that of those who remonstrated against this canonization: in truth, he did not take up more openly the defence of the legend;6 but he knew where to find the members of the parliament who had rejected it; he obliged them to register, on the 3rd of April 1730, without any modification, the bull 'Unigenitus', which was not a whit more pleasing to them. In France then they were quit for this bull; and the government did not compel the celebration of the sainted pontiff who had dethroned an emperor. Benedict was obliged to content himself with establishing this devout practice in Italy, where, since 1729, all the churches pay religious adoration annually to Gregory VII. The sovereigns of Europe are either ignorant of it, or disdain to complain of it.

6 He contented himself with neutralizing as much as he could, the effects of the resistance of the bishops, and the resolutions of the parliament. The 18th of February 1730, he wrote to the council "that it sufficed in the present circ.u.mstances that the essential, that is, the maxims of the kingdom be secured. Prudence requires that we seek not to encrease the evil rather than cure it. The king desires especially that no mention be made of the mandate of the bishop of Auxerre; he ought to know that it was his duty, before its publication, to have made himself acquainted with the intentions of H. M. on so delicate an affair, and have come to concert the mode in which it should have been expounded."

In a letter to the first president, dated 24th of February, the same year, Fleury testifies 'much joy' that kings pa.s.sed off so well in the parliament with respect to the decree by which the briefs of Benedict XIII. had been condemned and suppressed; but the cardinal adds: "I have forgotten to represent to you, that it would not be suitable that this decree should be cried about the streets, for fear of wrong interpretations, and the noise that the ill-disposed might make about it."

We cannot avoid remarking, that in this affair the bishop of Auxerre and the parliaments defended the rights of the throne and the independence of the royal authority, and that their opponent was the prime minister of the monarch. Behold the peril to which a young prince was exposed in yielding such unlimited confidence to a cardinal.

After Benedict XIII. Clement XII. reigned ten years; an economical and charitable pontiff, who did good to his subjects, and little ill to foreigners. His successor Lambertini, or Benedict XIV. merits greater praise: he was one of the best men and wisest princes that the eighteenth century produced. Me mounted the chair of St. Peter the same time as Frederick II. the throne of Prussia; and for eighteen years they were the two sovereigns the most distinguished by their personal qualifications. Frederick, separated as he was from the communion of the Holy See, rendered to Benedict those testimonies of esteem which did honour to both. Lambertini inspired the schismatic Elizabeth Petrowna, empress of Russia, with similar sentiments; and the English, attracted to Rome by the celebrity of this pontiff, as well as by the love of the arts, of which he was the protector, praised him with enthusiasm when they wished to paint him with truth. His amiable mind and gentle manners obtained the more approbation, from his knowing how to combine the talents and the graces of his age, with the austere virtues of his office, and the practice of every religious duty. Benedict XIV. had reconciled Europe to the papacy: in beholding him, it were impossible to recall to memory a Gregory VII. an Alexander VI. or even a Benedict XIII. His evangelical toleration confirmed, in a reasoning age, the pontifical throne, shaken by the restless ambition of his predecessors; and his successors had needed only to have copied his example, in order to secure their temporal enjoyments by the benefits of their pastoral office.

But he was succeeded in 1758 by Rezzonico, whose narrow mind and incurable self-sufficiency, plunged again the Roman court into the most fatal disrepute. He was a second Benedict XIII. a pope of the middle ages, cast by mistake into the midst of modern knowledge, inaccessible to its influence, and even incapable of perceiving its presence. When Portugal, Spain, France, and Naples, bitterly accused the Jesuits, and got rid of them but too late, Clement XIII. persevered in upholding and falling with them; he seemed to connect with the cause of the Holy See, that of a society whose rebellion monarchs would no longer endure. In Portugal they had attempted the life of the king, and three Jesuits were among the number of those detected; the court of Lisbon asked permission of that of Rome to try them in the same manner as their accomplices, by the ordinary tribunals; Clement would not allow it. They were obliged to accuse one of the three Jesuits, Malagrida, of heresy, not of high treason; to seek in writings he had before published, for certain mystical errors and extravagant visions, and to deliver him to the inquisition, which had him burned as a false prophet, without deigning to question him as to the attempt on the life of the monarch. It was impossible to acc.u.mulate more fully all the iniquities calculated to rouse the indignation of Eufope. Priests suspected strongly of the most horrible crimes escaped from the secular tribunals, the throne was not avenged, but the Inquisition burned a poor enthusiast; Rome exacted the impunity of a parricide, and Malagrida, without a trial, perished the victim of superst.i.tion, and of a detestable policy.

About the same time Ferdinand of Bourbon, duke of Parma, reformed the inveterate abuses in the churclies and monasteries, and disregarded the rights which the pope arrogated to himself, of conferring benefices, and deciding all suits in the territories of Parma, Placentia and Guastalla.

Clement a.s.sembled the cardinals: in the midst of them he condemned as sacrilege all the acts of Ferdinand's administration; he declared unlawful whatever he had dared to do in a duchy which appertained to the Holy See "in ducatu nostto" he annulled the edicts published by the dukes; he directed the anathemas of the 'holy thursday bull', "in cna Domini," against those who drew up these edicts, those who executed them, and whoever adhered to them. Ferdinand, by new decrees, suppressed the pope's brief and banished the Jesuits. Naples, Venice, Spain, Austria, France, all Europe, took up the duke of Parma's cause against the holy father. The brief is condemned as invasive of the independent rights of sovereigns; the parliament of Paris extends this condemnation to the bull of holy thursday and, while the king of Naples makes himself master of Beneventum and Ponte Corvo, Louis XV. like Louis XIV. resumes possession of the Comtat Venaissin; the parliament of Aix declares this territory to belong to France, and the count de Rochechouart arrives, and thus addresses the vice-legate, governor of Avignon:

"Sir, the king commands me "to replace Avignon in his hands, and you are so- "licited to withdraw:"

this was the usual formula in such cases. They spoke also of obliging the pope to restore Ronciglione; Portugal thought of appointing for herself a patriarch: the Romans themselves murmured; and they had in all probability taken very decisive measures, if Clement had not departed this life the 3d of February 1769,7 and behold wherefore those arms are directed against the church, with which sovereigns are only armed to defend her; behold the cause why they dare to attack with arms in their hands the pastor of the flock of Jesus Christ, even to seduce the people from the authority of their only legitimate sovereign, to invade our states, and a patrimony, which is not ours, but that of St. Peter, of the church, and of "G.o.d." He alludes to Beneventum, Ponte-Corvo, Avignon, &c. and these domains he here calls in direct terms, 'the patrimony of G.o.d.'

7 The 19th of June 1768, he wrote, with his own hands, to Maria Theresa, to implore the a.s.sistance of this princess against the other sovereigns of Europe. "Thank G.o.d," said he, "we have resisted with a sacerdotal heart unworthy collusions."

We transcribe these lines from one of the ten Authentic registers which contain the letters of Clement XIII. to the sovereigns. These letters contain the pleadings on behalf of the Jesuits, for the bull 'In cna Domini' and for the omnipotence of the Holy See: invectives against the Jansenists, the parliaments and laical authority; much lamentations, mysticisms and trifles.

We shall publish in our Second Volume, the allocation p.r.o.nounced by the same pope, the 3d of September 1762, in secret consistory, to abrogate all the acts of the parliaments of France against the Jesuits. This ma.n.u.script was found enclosed in a second paper, on which was to be read the following note of the keeper of the Archives, Garampi:

"Allocation which his holiness, our lord the pope, held in his secret consistory, the 3d of September 1762, in abrogation of all the acts and proceedings of the parliaments of France for the expulsion of the Jesuits; which his holiness commanded me to preserve sealed in the office of Archives in the castle of St Angelo with the secrets of the holy office, and which was to be opened by no one without the special authority (oracolo) of his holiness, or of his successors in faith, this 24th day of August 1763." Joseph C. Garampi, prefect of the secret office of Archives of the Vatican, and that of the castle of St. Angelo, with my proper hand.

The conduct of Ganganelli or Clement XIV. was so judicious and so pure that Avignon, Ponte-Corvo, and Beneventum, were restored to him. The prejudices, but too legitimately entertained against the court of Rome, once more began to yield, in the minds of both sovereigns and people, and the temporal power of the popes began again to appear compatible with the peace of Europe. Two great acts have peculiarly done honor to this pontificate; the bull 'In cna Domini,' and the suppression of the Jesuits. This society had existed now two hundred and thirty years, and had never ceased to be the enemy of kings and people. The particular interests which it cultivated attached it only to the court of Rome; it embraced by its establishments every country subject to the Holy See, and recognized itself, no other country save the church, no other sovereign but the pope. Its ambition was to exercise, under the protection of Rome, an active influence over courts, families, the clergy, youth, and literature. Having become odious since 1610, by serious and unjustifiable enterprises, it felt the necessity of uniting, with its political intrigues, the affectation of learned labour and literary employment. We behold it devoting itself to public education, and cultivating every department of literature, obtaining scarcely in any an eminent distinction, but producing in almost all a great number of men who filled and did honour to the second rank. This success restored it, and conferred on it a power which it abused in various ways from 1685 to 1750: and its fall, demanded by the people and determined by kings, might have drawn after it that of the temporal power of the popes, if Ganganelli had not detached the interests of the Holy See from those of the Jesuits, and, finally, consummated their abolition. When he died, some months after their suppression, they were accused of having shortened his days. If it were true that he fell the victim of their implacable resentment, as is generally believed, they have by this last crime hastened by many years the extreme decrepitude, and hour of dissolution, of that pontifical power of which they had been the supports. Apparently they were unwilling it should survive them; they immolated the man who alone rendered it tolerable. Since the year 1774, it has done little else than wander about, exhaust itself, fall into agonies, and expire.

CHAPTER XII. RECAPITULATION

CHRISTIANITY had for a period of seven hundred years, glorified G.o.d, sanctified man, and given consolation to the earth, before any minister of the gospel ever thought of erecting himself into a temporal prince.

This ambition sprung up in the eighth century, after the dissolution of the Roman empire, and the ravages of the barbarians, in the bosom of universal ignorance, and of troubles which overturned Europe, but in an especial manner rent and divided Italy. But the popes had scarcely obtained the exercise of a precarious civil power when, corrupted by functions so foreign to their apostolic ministry, unfaithful vicars of Christ and of the sovereign, they aspired to be no longer dependent, and speedily to rule. Menacing in the ninth century and dissolute in the tenth, the pontifical court had weakened itself by the publicity of its vices, when the stern Gregory VII. conceived the idea of a universal theocracy: an audacious enterprize, weakly sustained by most of the pontiffs of the twelfth century, but which Innocent III. realized at the opening of the thirteenth; this is the era of the greatest display of the spiritual and temporal supremacy of the bishops of Rome.-Their residence within the walls of Avignon in the fourteenth century, and the schism which was prolonged to the middle of the fifteenth, abated their power and even their ambition; after the year 1450, the popes no longer thought of any thing but the aggrandizement of their families. Julius II. came too late to attempt anew the subjugation of kings; his successors during the sixteenth century, to prevent being too much humbled themselves, had need of an address which those of the seventeenth did not inherit; and the foil of the temporal power of the popes has been only r.e.t.a.r.ded, since the year 1700, by the wise conduct of two pontiffs and the little attention which the errors of others claimed.

The political revolutions which followed the dethronement of Augustulus; the elevation of Pepin to the throne of France, and of Charlemagne to the empire; the weakness of Louis le Debonnaire, and the part.i.tion of his states among his children; the imprudence of some kings who solicited against one another the thunders of the Vatican; the fabrication of the decretals; the propagation of a canonical jurisprudence contrary to the ancient laws of the church; the rivalry of two houses in Germany; the schemes of independence adopted, by some Italian cities; the crusades, the inquisition, and the innumerable mult.i.tude of monastic establishments: such were the causes which produced, confirmed, extended, and for so long a period sustained the temporal power of the popes, and favoured the abuse of their spiritual functions.

This power had for its effects the corruption of manners, the vices of the clergy, heresies, schisms, civil wars, eternal commotions, the deepest misery in the states immediately under the government of the popes, and the most terrible disasters to those which they aspired to rule. The popes of the first seven centuries generally set an example of the Christian and sacerdotal virtues: the generality of their successors have proved bad princes without being good bishops. We have rendered our homage to some: for instance, to a Gregory II. in the eighth century; a Leo IV. in the ninth; to Calixtus II. Honorius II. and Alexander III. in the twelfth; to Nicholas V. in the fifteenth; to Leo X. in the sixteenth; and to Benedict XIV. and Clement XIV. in the eighteenth. We would have been pleased in having much more opportunity to praise; but when we reflect on the confused mixture of the sacred ministry with political power, upon this amalgamation so calculated to deprave both of these heterogeneous elements, we are not astonished at finding much fewer good governors in the catalogue of popes than in the list of any other description of sovereigns.

All these bitter fruits of pontifical dominion have contributed to destroy it: eventually, so many abuses, excesses, and scandals, rendered Christian Europe justly indignant. But, causes more direct, and which we have in succession noted, have since the middle of the thirteenth century shaken the edifice of this intolerable tyranny: let it suffice that we here recall a few of them; the holy opposition of Louis IX. the firmness of Philip the Fair; the frenzy of Boniface VIII. the irregularities of the court of Avignon; the schism of the West; the pragmatic sanction of Charles VII. the restoration of letters; the invention of printing; the despotism of the popes of the fifteenth century; the ambitious designs of Sixtus IV. the crimes of Alexander VI.

the ascendancy of Charles V. the progress of heresy in Germany, England, and other countries; the troubles in France under the son of Hemy II.

the wise administration of Henry IV. the Edict of Nantes; the Four Articles of 1682; the dissensions arising from the formulary of Alexander VII. and the bull, 'Unigenitus,' of Clement XI.; lastly, the Quixotic enterprises of Benedict XIII., Clement XIII. and other pontiffs of the eighteenth century. No! the Papal power can never survive so much disgrace: its hour is come; and there remains no alternative to the popes, but to become, as they had been during the first seven centuries, humble pastors, edifying apostles: it is a destiny abundantly n.o.ble.

Once relieved from the burden of temporal affairs, and devoted to their evangelical ministry, they would be so much the less tempted to abuse their sacred office; as there exists to bound their spiritual authority, efficacious means which have been taught by experience. It would even be superfluous to revert to the decrees of the councils of Constance and Basle; or to the pragmatic sanction of 1439: the Four Articles of 1682 are sufficient.

The king of France, Henry IV. had given the example of another security against the pontifical enterprises, when, by his edict of Nantes, he permitted the free exercise of a religion which was not that of the state, and of which he had the happiness to acknowledge and abjure the errors. Toleration of all modes of adoring the Deity is a debt due from sovereigns to their subjects; the gospel which directs the preaching of truths and the enlightening those who are in error, forbids by this very act itself the persecuting of them; for persecution must rather confirm in heresy or extort hypocritical abjurations, which deprave morality and outrage religion. All the Christian kings who have hara.s.sed religious sects, have been in their turn disturbed by the popes, and obliged to resist them: St. Louis himself did not escape this just ordination of Providence. To know how far a prince yields to the yoke of the pontiffs; we have only to look to what degree he limits the consciences of his subjects; his own independence is to be measured by the religious liberty which he permits to them: it is necessary, if he wish not to be subjected himself, that he inflexibly refuse to priests, or to the prince of priests, the proscription of modes of worship which differ from the dominant church.