That indefinable character which is neither ecclesiastical nor secular, which we call abbé, is unknown in England; the ecclesiastics there are generally respected, and for the greater part pedants. When the latter learn, that in France young men distinguished by their debaucheries, and raised to the prelacy by the intrigues of women, publicly make love; vie with each other in the composition of love songs; give luxurious suppers every day, from which they arise to implore the light of the Holy Spirit, and boldly call themselves the apostles' successors-they thank God that they are protestants. But what then? They are vile heretics, and fit only for burning, as master Francis Rabelais says, "with all the devils." Hence I drop the subject. CHURCH PROPERTY. THE gospel forbids those who would attain to perfection, to amass treasures, and to preserve their tem poral goods: Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal."*“ If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor."+"And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundred-fold, and shall inherit everlasting life." I The apostles and their first successors would not receive estates; they only accepted the value, and after having provided what was necessary for their subsistence, they distributed the rest among the poor. Sapphira and Ananias did not give their goods to St. Peter, but they sold them and brought him the price: "Vendæ quæ habes et da pauperibus." The church already possessed considerable property at the close of the third century, since Dioclesian and Maximin had pronounced the confiscation of it, in 302. As soon as Constantine was upon the throne, he * St. Matthew, chap. vi. v. 19. permitted the churcehs to be endowed like the temples of the ancient religion, and from that time the church acquired rich estates. St. Jerome complains of it in one of his letters to Eustochius : "When you see them," says he, "accost the rich widows whom they meet with a soft and sanctified air, you would think that their hands were only extended to give them their blessing; but it is, on the contrary, to receive the price of their hypocrisy." The holy priests received without claiming. Valentinian I. thought it right to forbid the ecclesiastics from receiving anything from widows and women, by will or otherwise.* This law, which is found in the Theodosian code, was revoked by Marcian and Justinian. Justinian, to favour the ecclesiastics, forbad the judges, by his new code xviii. chap. ii. to annul the wills made in favour of the church, even when executed without the formalities prescribed by the laws.t Anastasius had enacted in 471, that church property should be held by a prescription, or title, of forty years' duration. Justinian inserted this law in his code;f but this prince, who was continually changing his jurisprudence, subsequently extended this prescription to a century. Immediately, several ecclesiastics, unworthy of their profession, forged false titles,§ and drew out of the dust old testaments, void by the ancient laws, but valid according to the new. Citizens were deprived of their patrimonies by fraud; and possessions, which until then were considered inviolable, were usurped by the church. In short, the abuse was so crying, that Justinian himself was obliged to re-establish the dispositions of the law of Anastasius, by his novel cxxxi. chap. vi. The possessions of the church during the five first The effect of priestly influence over the timorous and pious sex, as Hume denominates the fair part of the creation, has been and is similar in all ages and countries.-T. Fine death-bed pickings !-T. Cod. tit. de fund. patrimon. Cod. loi xxiv. de sacro sanctis ecclesiis, centuries of our era were regulated by deacons, who distributed them to the clergy and to the poor. This community ceased at the end of the fifth century, and church property was divided into four parts; one being given to the bishops, another to the clergy, a third to the place of worship, and the fourth to the poor. Soon after this division, the bishops alone took charge of the whole four portions, and this is the reason why the inferior clergy are generally very poor. Monks possessing Slaves. What is still more melancholy, the Benedictines, Bernardines, and even the Chartreux, are permitted to have mortmains and slaves. Under their domination in several provinces of France and Germany are still recognised Personal slavery, Slavery of property, and Slavery of person and property. Slavery of the person consists in the incapacity of a man's disposing of his property in favour of his children, if they have not always lived with their father in the same house, and at the same table, in which case all belongs to the monks. The fortune of an inhabitant of Mount Jura, put into the hands of a notary, becomes, even in Paris, the prey of those who have originally embraced evangelical poverty at Mount Jura. The son asks alms at the door of the house which his father has built; and the monks, far from giving them, even arrogate to themselves the right of not paying his father's creditors, and of regarding as void all the mortgages on the house of which they take possession. In vain the widow throws herself at their feet, to obtain a part of her dowry. This dowry, these debts, this paternal property, all belong by divine right to the monks. The creditors, the widow, and the children, are all left to die in beggary. Real slavery is that which is effected by residence. Whoever occupies a house within the domain of these monks, and lives in it a year and a day, becomes their serf for life. It has sometimes happened that a French VOL. II. merchant, and father of a family, led by his business into this barbarous country, has taken a house for a year. Dying afterwards in his own country, in another province of France, his widow and children have been quite astonished to see officers armed with writs come and take away their furniture, sell it in the name of St. Claude, and drive away a whole family from the house of their father. Mixed slavery is that which, being composed of the two, is, of all that rapacity has ever invented, the most execrable, and beyond the conception even of freebooters. There are, then, Christian people groaning in a triple slavery under monks, who have taken the vow of humility and poverty. You will ask how governments suffer these fatal contradictions? It is because the monks are rich and their vassals are poor. It is because the monks, to preserve their Hunnish rights, make presents to the commissaries and to the mistresses of those who might interpose their authority, to put down their oppression. The strong always crush the weak: but why must monks be the strongest ?* CICERO. Ir is at a time when, in France, the fine arts are in a state of decline; in an age of paradox, and amidst the degradation and persecution of literature and philosophy; that an attempt is made to tarnish the name of Cicero. And who is the man who thus endeavours to throw disgrace upon his memory? It is one who lends his services in defence of persons accused like himself; it is an advocate, who has studied eloquence under that great master; it is a citizen who appears to We need not say, that all this is now done away in France, but it existed in the days of Voltaire, and hence the vast utility of his exertions. We retain this article to show the nature of the fraud, imposture, and oppression which this great and spirited writer laboured so zealously to overthrow. And be it understood, too, that it is the ascendancy of animals like these monks, that still makes such a mental pesthouse of unhappy Spain.-T. be, like Cicero, animated by devotion to the public good.* In a book entitled " Navigable Canals," a book abounding in grand and patriotic rather than practical views, we feel no small astonishment at finding the following philippic against Cicero, who was never concerned in digging canals : "The most glorious trait in the history of Cicero is the destruction of Catiline's conspiracy; which, regarded in its true light, produced little sensation at Rome, except in consequence of his affecting to give it importance. The danger existed much more in his discourses than in the affair itself. It was an enterprise of debauchees, which it was easy to disconcert. Neither the principal nor the accomplices had taken the slightest measure to ensure the success of their guilty attempt. There was nothing astonishing in this singular matter, but the blustering which attended all the proceedings of the consul, and the facility with which he was permitted to sacrifice to his self-love so many scions of illustrious families. Besides, the life of Cicero abounds in traits of meanness. His eloquence was as venal as his soul was pusillanimous. If his tongue was not guided by interest, it was guided by fear or hope. The desire of obtaining partisans led him to the tribune, to defend, without a blush, men more dishonourable, and incal * M. Linguet. This disposition to satirise Cicero is the effect of that secret bias which induces many writers to controvert, not public prejudices, but the opinions of enlightened men. They appear to say, like Cæsar, I would rather be the first man' in a country town than the second in Rome. To acquire any glory in the track of distinguished men, it is necessary to add new truths to those which they have established, to seize what escaped their notice, to see better and farther than they did. It is necessary to be born with genius, to cultivate it by assiduous study, to be devoted to indefatigable labour, and finally to wait for reputation instead of attempting to anticipate it. Whereas, in controverting their opinions, a man may, by an easier purchase, obtain a more speedy and a more brilliant fame; and if he be rather disposed to number votes than to weigh them, there cannot be any hesitation as to which of the two methods he should adopt.-Note of French Editor. |