Roman Catholicism, old and new, from the standpoint of the infallibility Doctrine...

Preface

WHEN fifteen years ago I left the Church of Home, it was expected that I should publish to the world my reasons for taking that important step. However just these expectations may have appeared to some, I was compelled to disappoint them, considering that controversy is not the field for a new convert, because it is apt to drive him to the opposite extreme, and to lead him to form in haste judgments which require the most mature consideration.

Besides, after the mental crisis through which I had passed and which lasted for some years, I felt that my mind needed rest, and that the anxieties of a religious controversy would rather disturb me in making progress in the cause of the truth. I still think that, instead of being beneficial to myself and others, it would have been detrimental in more than one respect.

My Roman Catholic friends must not think that it was fear of possible defeat that kept me from entering the arena of theological strife. When I took the final step of leaving the Eoman communion I was fully convinced that I was doing what was right — following the dictates of my conscience ; I believed also that I was able to defend what I had done.

But in truth the crisis was not yet over ; I was still battling with myself in more than one sense, and did not feel disposed to fight with those whom I esteemed as my former friends. I had passed only through the negative part of the crisis, throwing overboard what I considered erroneous in the Soman system, and even casting aside the very foundation of the whole structure, I mean the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church. I had made the final plunge out of Eome, without knowing where to land, and I found myself in the atmosphere of Protestantism which from my youth up I had been taught to hate, and whose divisions I scorned and abominated as signs of a self-willed and anti-Christian spirit. Surely, then, I was not in a fit state of mind to enter the field of controversy.

There were, besides, other powerful reasons which kept me in retirement. I had experienced the greatest kindness, not only from Eoman Catholics individually, but from the Church itself. I remembered the happy years I had spent in the city of Eome. Propaganda College was to me a quiet retreat from the turmoils and cares of the world, and I gratefully thought of the pains which my kind-hearted superiors and professors had taken with my education. I had a high regard for Pius IX., not only for his amiable and Christian qualities, but also for his personal kindness to me. I found in the Bishop and clergy of the diocese where I laboured, as priest and professor, sincere and attached friends, I knew that the step I had taken had erected, in their eyes, a painful barrier between us, and I was afraid that the heat of controversy would not only widen the breach, but degenerate into the bitterness and rancour of bigotry almost inseparable from religious polemics. "With these feelings it is not to be wondered at that I shrank from the task of rushing into print and of needlessly arousing the ire of my former co-religionists.

And even though I had firmly rejected Eomanism as such, the love of the truth often compelled me, both in private and public, to stand up as the champion of Eoman Catholics and to defend them against the unfair attacks and prejudices of over-zealous Protestants. For, it cannot be denied that, although intelligent Protestants understand the fundamental errors of Eome, yet there are many things in that Church which are misunderstood by the general Protestant public.

My experience as layman, priest, and Divinity professor convinced me that all God has revealed to mankind is accepted by the Church of Eome ; but my eyes were also opened to the fact that, in course of time, revealed truths had become incrusted and obscured by manifold errors. In a word, I had to distinguish and separate the purely Roman from the purely Catholic, rejecting the former and adhering to the latter.

And, in looking around me among the different Churches, I found that the Church of England professed to have followed the same process. This was the reason which, at that time, determined me to join her communion. I have laboured now, for the last thirteen years, as a clergyman of that Church, and have never had occasion to regret the step I have taken. I united myself with her also, because I thought to find there a greater field of employment for my past experience, which might enable me, in my sphere, to stem the Eomeward current within her pale. But I find that this current is more apparent than real ; it is rather a love for " Catholicism" than a tendency towards "Bomanism" However, much that is contained in these pages may indirectly serve to correct some views and doctrines savouring of what I consider a mistaken Catholicism.

I am glad now that I kept silence during these many years. Having lived the life both of a consistent Eoman Catholic and of a sincere Protestant, my experience on both sides, whilst it enables me to speak with mature judgment, entitles me also to be heard patiently by both parties.

What induces me to write at the present juncture is that I cannot resist the controversial current of our day. The atmosphere of the civilized world grows heavy with the momentous conflict. The movement is a.n important one, and pregnant with great results. The question, " What is truth t" is re-echoed on all sides. All who are able to do so, are bound to look it squarely in the face. The very foundations of social and religious order are at stake. The minimizing defence of liberal Eoman Catholics is here of no avail. Minimism is a vain refuge, and it cannot save Eomanism in the great religious crisis upon which we appear to be entering.

I have endeavoured to treat the whole question in its entirety and to present it to the public in as brief a compass as possible. Although since the Vatican Council Eoman Catholicism has been changed into popery pure and simple, yet I had to treat of Church-infallibility in all its extent, not only because it is the root of papal infallibility, but also because it is held by the liberal Catholics of all countries, the Old Catholics of Germany, and, in a modified form, though unconsciously, even by some Protestants. In this sense the reader will understand the title of this book.

In writing the work I have laboured under many difficulties. Not only does the pastoral charge of an extensive parish occupy nearly all my time, distracting the mind from literary labours ; but living in a secluded part of the country I have been deprived of all access to good libraries for consultation. However, the few works I have made use of are thoroughly reliable as to accuracy. Besides other historical works, I have consulted "Mosheims Church History" which is admitted to be just and fair ; I am indebted to that excellent work, " The Pope and the Council, by Janus," for many data in regard to papal infallibility, and have found Dr. Barrow's " Treatise on the Pope's Supremacy" to be a repertory of trustworthy authorities. I have endeavoured to acknowledge, in the proper places, the assistance derived from the different authors of whose works I have availed myself.

Although I am aware of the many imperfections of this little book, yet I tru§t that it may prove useful both to Protestants and Eoman Catholics, for whilst I refute errors, I endeavour also to establish the solid foundation of the truth.

J. SCHULTE.

Tort Burwclly August, 1875.

Part I. THE THEORY OF INFALLIBILITY IN REGARD TO THE CHURCH OF CHRIST

LECTURE I.— Introduction.

The strange phenomenon which the Church of Rome presents to thoughtful Protestants. Reasons which induce intelligent men to go over to Rome. Literature of the Roman controversy ; its faults ; how it should be carried on. Renewal of the struggle with Rome in our days. The question stated. In what does Romanism not consist ? In what does it consist ? The doctrine of Church-infallibility the essence of Romanism. Its influence on the whole system Connection between Church-infallibility and papal infallibility Page 35

LECTURE II.

THE LIVING VOICE OF THE CHURCH AND THE BIBLE.

Attachment of the Roman Catholic to his Church. Definition of the Church. Inward and outward element. Preponderance of the external element in the Church of Rome. The Church of Christ infallible in the inward element. In the Roman system infallibility resides in the outward element, that is> in the living voice of the Church. What part of the Church is believed by them to be infallible, and how ? Infallibility not an inspiration but an assistance of the Holy Ghost. Division of the Roman Catholic treatises on infallibility. Church infallibility does not meet the object for which it is proposed ; not self-evident ; requires to be demonstrated. Human demonstration cannot imbue the mind with an infallible faith. The Roman system essentially tainted with rationalism. The Bible our infallible element. The way by which we establish its divine authority is altogether different from that of Roman Catholics. First argument in favor of Church-infallibility. Did the Church exist prior to the Bible? Page 45

LECTUEE III.

CONSIDERATION OF THE SCRIPTURE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR

OF INFALLIBILITY.

Minimizing system of reducing infallibility to a central point. The bishops'not the successors of the Apostles ; nor the representatives of the Church ; therefore cannot claim infallibility. Circulus vitiosus in proving the infallibility of the Church by the Bible, and the inspiration of the Bible by the infallible teaching of the Church. They cannot overcome this difficulty by considering the Bible merely as a book of human authority. Such argumentation leads into a labyrinth of doubt and uncertainty. Argument from the promises of Christ. The Holy Ghost operated differently with the Apostles and with the post- Apostolic Church. How was He with the Apostles ? How with the post- Apostolic Church ? Difference between certainty and infallibility. Certainty is all we want. Roman Catholics aim too high by endeavoring to give the human mind an infallible knowledge. Providential significance of the Bible as the only infallible element of the Church. Office of the Church of Christ in relation to the Bible. The bishops of the first ages did not claim infallibility. Rise and progress of this claim. The history of the episcopate excludes the notion of infallibility. Statement of the argument drawn from the office of the Church as witness-bearer % 4 Page 65

LECTUEE IV.

REVIEW OF THE ARGUMENTS DRAWN FROM THE CHURCH'S OFFICE AS WITNESS-BEARER. — TRADITION.

Statement of the argument. In what does the witness -bearing of the Church consist ? She needs no infallibility for its faithful discharge. Roman Catholics, in requiring this gift, involve themselves in a maze of difficulties. They are compelled to admit Oral Tradition and endow it with infallibility, also the uncertainty of oral tradition has been felt from the very beginning of man's history ; hence a surer way was invented of handing down history to future generations. Writing a Providential gift of God to perpetuate His revealed truths. Roman Catholics concede that oral tradition has been written down. Roman Catholic test of truth as applied to written tradition : Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Practical impossibility of this rule ; its difficulties must overwhelm the sincere enquirer after truth. Nor can they solve the difficulty by saying that the Church performs the office of enquiry for every one. Circulus vitiosus in proving the infallibility of the Church by tradition, and the infallibility of tradition by the Church. The doctrine of Apostolical succession cannot extricate them from this difficulty. The very nature of tradition compels us to believe that God has not made use of it as a rule of faith. Christ inveighed against tradition. Analogy between the Jewish system of tradition and that of the Church of Rome. Analogy between the rule of faith in the 0. T. and in the N. T Page 67

LECTURE Y.

TRADITION AND SCRIPTURE. — REVIEW OF THE ARGUMENTS DRAWN FROM THE CHURCH'S OFFICE AS GUARDIAN AND KEEPER OF THE BIBLE.

The commission Christ gave His Apostles to preach the Gospel does not prove the system of oral tradition. In what sense the oral teaching of the Apostles would be a rule of faith. Preaching must be based on some depository ; we could not prove the orthodoxy of preaching by appealing to oral tradition ; but it is easily ascertained by comparing it with the Bible. Scripture proofs which seem to favour tradition reviewed. Arguments from the alleged insufficiency of Scripture considered. Catholic character of the Bible. Who has given us the Bible ? The Prophets and Apostles the founders of the Church. Can we know, without the testimony of the Church, that it is inspired ? Internal evidence of the inspiration of the Bible. External arguments. The Church as an historic society bears true witness of the Canon and of the inspiration of the Bible Page 79

LECTURE VI.

EXAMINATION OF THE ARGUMENTS DRAWN FROM THE church's OFFICE AS INTERPRETER OF THE BIBLE.

Statement of the Roman Catholic argument. The Church can perform the office of interpreter of the Bible without the gift of infallibility. The difficulty of the Bible greatly exaggerated by the advocates of infallibility. The Church's interpretation full of difficulties. No infallible interpreter in the Old Dispensation ; a fortiori none in the New Testament ; Christians have greater advantages for the understanding of the Word than the JeWs. No need of an infallible interpreter ; the Bible was written for men of sound common sense who are expected to use their God-given reason. The simplicity of style and language manifests the design of God. The very fact that God has given us the Bible shows that it is an intelligible book. The Bible promotes enlightenment ; the system of Church-infallibility covers nations with the veil of darkness. The Bible was sufficiently understood, in the first ages, without an infallible interpreter ; why not afterwards ? The difficulties of the Bible do not demand an infallible interpreter. Different classes of the truths of the Bible and their respective difficulties. Whosoever is not satisfied with the Bible must likewise be discontented with the doctrine of Church - infallibility. Men attached to a system and fond of systematizing find it difficult to interpret the Bible. Origin of denominationalism. How to gather truth from the Bible. The Bible not a dead letter, but the living Word of God. What makes it intelligible to man ? Page 90

LECTURE VII.

REVIEW OF THE ARGUMENTS DRAWN FROM THE CHURCH'S OFFICE AS JUDGE OF CONTROVERSIES.

Statement of the Roman Catholic argument. The office of judging infallibly in doctrinal disputes is neither directly nor indirectly mentioned in the Bible ; quite the contrary can be proved. Individual conviction of the mind necessary for finally settling controversies of faith. The Church, as the kingdom of the truth, settles controversies by the Bible, the only standard of revealed truth. Roman Catholics exaggerate doctrinal difficulties. Three classes of controversial differences : 1, in regard to disciplinary points, where divergencies are allowable, perhaps desirable. 2, In regard to doctrinal points, that may be held either one way or the other, without injury to faith and charity. Truth is many-sided. Liberty of conscience ; its nature and use in God's economy of revealed truths. 3, Differences inimical to purity of faith ; no infallible tribunal required to settle them. They are trials of faith. The Bible and God's Spirit guide the lover of the truth. Champions of the truth both in the Jewish and Christian Dispensations. Their providential office. Difficulties of the Roman hypothesis. How are controversies of faith settled de jure ? How de facto f Page 102

LECTURE VIII.

INFALLIBILITY NOT NECESSARY FOR THE UNITY OF THE

CHURCH.

Roman Catholic argument. Nature of true unity. Centralization not unity ; too complicated and inconvenient ; too despotic ; contains the germs of dissolution. The government of the Church not monarchical. Genesis of Roman Catholic unity. What is true organic unity ? What does Scripture teach in regard to the Church's unity ? Unity must be eminently catholic. Relation between the Church of mankind and the Christian Church. The Bible the source and centre of all Christian unity. Roman Catholic objection. What kind of unity was there in the first ages of Christianity ? Present divisions of Protestants. Liberty in unity ; completely destroyed by Romanism ; difficulties in the way of restoring it. Have we unity ill Protestantism ? Symptoms of unity. Protestant denominations ; how may they be unified ? Sting of denominationalism. Page 114

Part II

THE PRACTICAL WORKING OF THE INFALLIBILITY- DOCTRINE IN THE CHURCH OF ROME.

LECTURE I.

THE DOCTRINE OF CHURCH-INFALLIBILITY HAS NOT SETTLED CONTROVERSIES OF FAITH.

Introduction to the second part of this course. Good Roman Catholic and Protestant Christians have the same faith and spirit all the world over ; caution to our bigotry. The Roman hierarchy unable to settle controversies of faith. Their starting point is wrong ; they doubt the sincerity and insult the character of the accused party before he is heard. The judge of controversy, being one of the contending parties, cannot be impartial. The character of the judges not calculated to inspire confidence like that of our judge, the Bible. The procedure of the trial wrong ; they exclude discussion ; demand blind and unreserved submission ; refuse the benefit of defence. Despotism of these infallible lords ; fills the Church of Rome with hypocrites and hidden unbelievers. Difference between secular and spiritual tribunals. Internal conviction required. The nature of the decrees and definitions of this tribunal is such that they cannot settle controversy ; obscure language ; giving rise to new controversies ; requiring another interpreter. Difficulty of access to the infallible tribunal. The living voice a chimera. Written documents of councils and popes really their only rule of faith ; these are their Bible; its peculiarities ; a rival and enemy of the true Bible. The means of enforcing their decrees tend to perpetuate controversies. Excommunication ; its nature and effects Page 1 29

LECTURE II.

THE COERCIVE POWER OF THE ROMAN CHURCH MILITATES AGAINST HER CLAIM TO INFALLIBILITY.

The Church of Rome has essentially a persecuting spirit. She not only claims to hold control over all spiritual matters, but over soul and body also. Vain efforts to throw the abuses of the coercive power on the secular power. Connection between Church and State. The Church herself claims to possess temporal coercive power. How does she prove it ? The Church a terror to all her members. The system of infallibility leads to exclusiveness, bigotry, and cruelty. The coercive power impedes the settlement of controversies. The excommunicated person is handed over to the secular arm ; which is compelled to execute the Church's decrees of temporal punishment. The Church accountable for the cruelties of the State in punishing heretics. The coercive power unable to settle controversies inforo interno. The Church of Rome full of hidden heretics and unbelievers. The spy-system essential to Rome. The Inquisition an offshoot of the coercive power. Its terrible nature. Character of the Inquisitorial judges. Victims of the Inquisition. Its procedure most unjust, heartless, and cruel. Picture of the Inquisition. It still exists. It is a condemnation of the infallibility-system. The Church asserts the power of condemning heretics to death. The claim to coercive power glaringly contradicts Rome's doctrine on the conscience. The Church of Rome a despotic kingdom of this world. Suspicion of heresy ; how easily entertained and to what it leads. Rome's coercive power in abeyance in mixed communities ; would fully exercise it if she had the opportunity. Spiritual despotism cannot be divested of cruelty Page 141

LECTUEE III.

INFALLIBILITY NOT THE PRINCIPLE OF UNITY IN THE CHURCH

OF ROME.

Rome's maxim : Without infallibility no unity. The mere authority of the teaching body can preserve unity only among an ignorant people. Rome and education, both popular and higher. In what light her educational efforts ought to be viewed. Her struggles for obtaining the sole control of all education. The pope's edicts. Separate schools ; their nature. Why this great ado of the hierarchy about education ? An enlightened people demands a unity based on the truth, not on the principle of hierarchical infallibility. Higher education ; how managed ; a certain kind of metaphysics dovetailing with their theology. " Catholics on principle " not united with the Church by the power of ecclesiastical infallibility. The doctrine of infallibility does aot prevent disunion ; but has been the cause of disunion within the Church. It makes the Church stationary and unyielding. Society progressive. Rome cannot be at the head of social movements. Her obscurantism ; ignores the signs of the times. Rome and modern civilization. The hierarchy a selfish caste ; having no sympathy with modern social aspirations. In endeavouring to pull back the car of social progress, they constrain peoples and nations to separate themselves from the Church. The system of infallibility is so cumbersome that disruption cannot be prevented in time. Difficulties before the Vatican Council. The Vatican decrees rather increase the danger of disunion. The system of infallibility produces torpor and inactivity, and therefore is a source of disunion. Reason of a unity within the Church of Rome. Actual divisions within that Church ; compared with the divisions of Protestant Christendom Page 155

LECTURE IV.

PERNICIOUS INFLUENCE OF THE INFALLIBILITY- DOCTRINE ON THE OFFICE OF THE CHURCH AS WITNESS-BEARER.

This doctrine not only distorts and obscures revealed truths, but superadds the traditions of men. Difficulties of this system. The hierarchy cannot prove their Apostolical succession. Petitio principii. They are compelled to reduce their oral tradition to written documents. Flagrant contradictions of their system. Roman Catholic doctrine in regard to new definitions. Assistance not inspiration. Bishops must study the entire range of tradition. Their qualifications. Their practice contradicts their theory. The aid which theologians afford the bishops ; to what does it amount ? Another contra^ iction. Qualification of theologians. Process by which the Church draws the treasure of divine revelation from tradition. Very few of her priests are capable even of attempting the task. They cannot be impartial in their studies. Always on the defensive. A superhuman task. They meet with difficulties on all sides in rightly understanding the documents of tradition. Are the fathers competent witnesses of the catholicity of a doctrine ? Page 173

LECTURE V.

THE DOCTRINE OF DEVELOPMENT A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE INFALLIBILITY-THEORY.

Origin of this doctrine. Its nature ; explicit and implicit belief. Dr. Newman on development. Refutation of this doctrine. Petitio principii. Contradiction of their rule of Catholicity ; additions and amplifications. The source of multiplying dogmas ad infinitum. How new dogmas are fabricated. Importance of the scholce iheologorum ; they are the working bees. Two strange phenomena. Popular belief different from that of the scholce. Sudden surprises of the laity. The Church of Rome is too slippery for an honest Protestant controversialist. Changeableness of the Roman Catholic belief. What kind of doctrines are principally developed. True development. Difference between subjective and objective development. The Abbe Michaud on this theory Page 186

LECTURE VI.

SACERDOTALISM : ITS CONNECTION WITH THE INFALLIBILITY- SYSTEM.

Position of sacerdotalism in regard to Christianity. Its nature. Mediatorship between God and man. A sacrificing priesthood. The mass. Refutation. Ignorance respecting the nature of sacrifice. Sacramentarianism. Roman Catholic sacraments. The mass the centre of all the sacraments. Minor religious observances. Ritualism the satellite of sacerdotalism. Its character and origin. Its pernicious influence on the people. Its vanity and unreality. Historical outline of the gradual development of sacerdotalism and ritualism. A word in season addressed to ritualists in Protestant Churches Page 197

Part III. THE PAPAOY AND INFALLIBILITY

LECTURE I.

THE PRIMACY OF PETER.

The papacy the outgrowth of sacerdotalism, and the result of development. The system of clerical aristocracy or high-churchism tends to popery. Claims of the papacy. What are its title deeds ? St. Peter's supposed primacy. Argument from Matt, xvi., 18. The metaphor rock differently interpreted by the fathers. Neither the other Apostles, nor Peter, nor Christ understood it in the Roman sense. If Peter be meant by rock, it cannot mean government. Peter received here no power proper to him alone, and as superior to the other Apostles. Obvious and true interpretation of the metaphor rock. Argument from the metaphor keys. Its true interpretation. Special pleading of Roman Catholics. Argument from John xxi., 15-17. Its true interpretation. No trace of Peter's primacy of jurisdiction in the New Testament ; nowhere distinctly mentioned ; no distinct name given to it ; Christ nowhere distinctly explained its nature, or laid down rules for its guidance. No sign of Peter's supreme authority in his two epistles. In all controversies no appeal to Peter's judgment Page 213

LECTURE II.

THE POPE'S SUPREMACY CONSIDERED.

Gratuitous supposition that the Bishop of Rome is the successor to St. Peter's primacy. Whatever prerogatives Peter received were personal; and all embraced in his Apostolical office; therefore incommunicable to successors. In what sense bishops may be said to be the successors of the Apostles. The powers of the Apostles extraordinary and unlimited. St. Peter's office not that of an ordinary bishop, he having pastoral charge over the universal Church as his diocese. The laws of succession should be clearly and distinctly laid down. Deep silence reigns in Scripture concerning this important poiat. Third supposition. Peter was not the ordinary local bishop of Rome. Was he ever at Rome ? The office of an Apostle and that of an ordinary local bishop incompatible. Peter's Apostolical labours preclude the supposition that he ever was local pastor of Rome. It would also have been a lowering of the Apostolical dignity. If Peter had been ordinary bishop of Rome, he would have violated several good ecclesiastical rules. How to explain those ancient writers who say that Peter was Bishop of Rome, Fourth supposition. Would succession to Peter's supposed Roman bishopric imply also succession to his primacy? Roman Catholic rule of succession arbitrary ; unknown to Roman civil society ; to the teaching of the fathers. Scripture is silent about it. Roman Catholic reasoning contradictory. They assert that it was Peter's will that the bishop of Rome should succeed him in the primacy. How do they prove this ? It would have been unfair towards the surviving Apostles ; unjust towards the whole Church at Rome, because depriving her of the right of electing her ordinary supreme pastor. The history of the succession of the Roman bishops a standing scandal in Christendom. The papacy defectible. History and tradition silent about the supremacy of the bishop of Rome Page 226

LECTURE III.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY. THE ROMAN BISHOPRIC IN

THE UNDIVIDED CHURCH.

The government of the Church in the first century. Development of the episcopacy. Clerical aristocracy. Gradual suppression of the rights of the clergy and people by the bishops. Influence of Constantine's conversion on the government of the Church. Church and state. The primatial jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome as yet unknown. Ambition of the bishops and their lordly pride. Circumstances favoured the prelate of Rome. The importance of his episcopal city. His influence with the emperors. Nature of the growth of spiritual power. The canons of Sardica. The imprudence of the emperors and the precipitate action of bishops enlarged his power. The state of the Church during the first eight centuries assisted his ambition. Prelatical quarrels. Contentions of the patriarchs. Influence of the monks. The contest for supremacy finally reduced to a struggle between two rivals, the bishops of Rome and of Constantinople. Circumstances favourable to Rome in this rivalry.- The Roman clergy and the bishops of the West. Splendour of the papal court. Political convulsions, disposition of thfe invading barbarians and their druidism, all favouring the aggrandizement of Rome. The schism between East and West the consequence of papal ambition Page 239

LECTURE IV.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY AFTER THE GREAT SCHISM.

The West the only field for papal ambition. Opposition to papal encroachments. Extraordinary liberality of the barbarian nations. Bishops become temporal princes. The temporal power of the pope. Pepin and Pope Zachary. Charlemagne. Restoration of the Roman empire. Influence of the popes in conferring the imperial dignity. The exaggerated views of the invading nations regarding the effects of excommunication assisted in the enlargement of papal authority. The papacy profits by the disturbed state of the empire. It becomes a political institution. It gathers strength in the gross ignorance and superstition which covered Europe. Growth of its influence in civil affairs. Its encroachments on the rights of the bishops and councils of the Church. Rome justifies its pretensions by forgeries. Early forgeries. Ambition of Nicholas I. Opposition to the pseudo Isidorian decretals. They changed the constitution of the Church. The Hildebrandine era. Leo IX. The new school. The universal theoretic priest-kingdom. Gregory VII. Co-operators in the Gregorian system of Church-law. Gregory VII. enforces his claims with boldness, and against all opposition. Clerical celibacy. Contentions about the investiture of bishops. From Gregory VII. to Boniface VIII. the papacy at the zenith of its power and glory. Character of this period. The papal chair occupied by monks who governed like monks. Alexander III. and Frederick Barbarossa. Innocent III., and his extraordinary reign. Boniface VIII. ; his enormous pretensions ; his quarrel with Philip the Fair. Causes which, after Gregory VII., contributed to increase and consolidate papal absolutism. Revival of the Roman law. Study of canon law. Gratian's Decretum. The Crusades. The Universities of Paris and Bologna. Mendicant friars. Military orders. Removal of the papal residence to Avignon. The long Schism. The Councils of Constance and Basle. Why did not the nations throw off the yoke of the papacy after having experienced its curse ? The papacy incorrigible. The Reformation ; its crippled papal absolutism. Henceforth the claim to infallibility comes prominently in the foreground Page 253