longer a question in our days, from what || themselves masters of Egypt, oppressed the source these methods of deciding dubious cases Greeks, and granted to the Monophysites such and accusations derived their origin; all agree a powerful protection, as enabled them to rethat they were mere delusions, drawn from duce under their jurisdiction almost all the the barbarous rites of paganism, and not only churches that had been established in Egypt.* opposite to the precepts of the Gospel, but ab- II. The Greeks, during the greatest part solutely destructive of the spirit of true reli- of this century, were engaged in a most bitter gion. The pontiffs, however, and the inferior controversy, or, to speak more properly, in a clergy, encouraged these odious superstitions, bloody and barbarous war with the Paulicians, and went so far as to accompany the practice a sect that may be considered as a branch of of them with the celebration of the Lord's the Manichæans, and which resided principally Supper and other rites, in order to give them in Armenia. This pernicious sect is said to a Christian aspect, and to recommend them to have been formed by two brothers, Paul and the veneration and confidence of the multitude. John, sons of Callinices, and inhabitants of Samosata, from the former of whom it derived its name; though others are of opinion that the Paulicians were so called from another CHAPTER V. Concerning the Divisions and Heresies that trou-Paul, an Armenian by birth, who lived under bled the Church during this Century. I THE sects, that had sprung up in the earlier ages of the church, subsisted still, with little change in their situations or circumstances. Such of them as were considerably numerous, fixed their settlements beyond the limits both of the Greek and Latin empires, and thus out of the reach of their enemies. The Nestorians more especially, and the Monophysites, secure under the protection of the Arabians, were extremely industrious in maintaining their credit, and also discovered a warm and active zeal in the propagation of Christianity among those who were yet unacquainted with that divine religion. Some learned men are of opinion, that it was only in this century that the Abyssinians or Ethiopians embraced the sentiments of the Monophysites, in consequence of the exhortations addressed to them by the doctors of that sect who resided in Egypt. But this is undoubtedly an erroneous account of the matter; for it is certain, that the Abyssinians, who were accustomed to receive their spiritual guides from the bishop of Alexandria, commenced Monophysites in the seventh century, if not sooner; for in that period the Arabians made played a trick of much the same nature in the fifth century. The trial by the cross was made by obliging the contending parties to stretch out their arms, and he that continued the longest in this posture gained his cause. Jo. Loccenii Antiquit. Sueo-Gothicæ, lib. ii. cap. vii. viii. p. 144. This barbarous method of deciding controversies by duel was practised even by the clergy. See Just. Hen. Bohmeri Jus Eccles. Protestantium, tom. v. p. 88. Petr. Lambecius, Res Hamburg. lib. ii. p. 39.Usserii Sylloge Epistol. Hibernic. p. 81.-Johnson, Leges Eccles. Britanniæ.-Michael de la Roche, Memoires Liter. de la Grande Bretagne, tom. viii. p. 391. § See Agobardus, contra Judicium Dei, tom. i. op. et contra Legem Gundobaldi, cap. ix. p. 114.-Hier. Bignonius, ad Formulas Marculphi, cap. xii.-Baluzius, ad Agobardum, p. 104. Strabo tells us, in the fifth book of his Geography, that, while the sacred rites of the goddess Ferona were celebrated in a grove not far from mount Soracte, several persons, transported with the imagmary presence of this pretended divinity, fell into fits of enthusiasm, and walked bare-footed over heaps of burning coals without receiving the least damage. The historian adds, that a spectacle so extraordinary drew a prodigious concourse of people to this annual solemnity. Pliny relates something of the same nature concerning the Hirpii. See his Nat. Hist. bc ok vii. chap. ii. the reign of Justinian II. Be that as it may, a certain zealot called Constantine revived, in the seventh century, under the government of Constans, this drooping faction, which had suffered deeply from the violence of its adversaries, and was ready to expire under the severity of the imperial edicts, and of those penal laws which were executed against its adherents with the utmost rigor. Constans, Justinian II., and Leo the Isaurian, exerted their zeal against the Paulicians with a peculiar degree of bitterness and fury, left no method of oppression unemployed, and neglected no means of accomplishing their ruin; but their efforts were ineffectual, nor could all their power, or all their barbarity, exhaust the patience or conquer the obstinacy of that inflexible people, who, with a fortitude worthy of a better cause, seemed to despise the calamities to which their erroneous doctrine exposed them. The face of things changed, however, to their advantage toward the commencement of this century; and their affairs wore a more prosperous aspect under the protection of the emperor Nicephorus, who favoured them in a particular manner, and restored to them their civil privileges, as well as their religious liberty.‡ of short duration; it was a transient scene that III. Their tranquillity, however, was but was soon to be succeeded by yet more dreadful sufferings than they had hitherto experienced. The cruel rage of persecution, which had for some years been suspended, broke forth with redoubled violence under the reigns of Michael Curopalates, and Leo the Armenian, who caused the strictest search to be made after the Paulicians in all the provinces of the Grecian empire, and inflicted capital punishment upon such of them as refused to return to the bosom of the church. This rigorous decree turned the afflictions of the Paulicians, who dwelt in Armenia, into vengeance, and drove them into the most desperate measures. They massacred Thomas, bishop of New Cæsarea, and also the magistrates and judges whom the emperors had established in Armenia: and, *Nouveaux Memoires de la Compagnie de Jesus dans le Levant, tom. iv. p. 283, 284.-Le Grand, Dissert. iv.-Lobo, Voyage Historique de l'Abyssinie, tom. ii. p. 18. Photius, lib. i. contra Manichæos, p. 74, in B Wolfii Anecdotis Græcis, tom. i. See Georg. Cedrenus, Compend. I'istoriar. tom. ii after avenging themselves thus cruelly, they || Bulgarians their pestilential doctrines, which took refuge in the countries that were governed were received with docility, and took root by the Saracens, and thence infested the speedily, as might naturally be expected, neighbouring states of Greece with perpetual among a barbarous people, recently converted incursions.* After these reciprocal acts of to the Christian faith.* cruelty and vengeance, the Paulicians, as it would seem, enjoyed an interval of tranquillity, and returned to their habitations in the Grecian provinces. IV. But the most dreadful scene of persecution that was exhibited against these wretched heretics, arose from the furious and inconsiderate zeal of the empress Theodora. This impetuous woman, who was regent of the empire during the minority of her son, issued out a decree, which placed the Paulicians in the perplexing alternative either of abandoning their principles, or of perishing by fire and sword. The decree was severe; but the cruelty with which it was put in execution by those who were sent into Armenia for that purpose, was horrible beyond expression; for these ministers of wrath, after confiscating the goods of above a hundred thousand of that miserable people, put their possessors to death in the most barbarous manner, and made them expire slowly in a variety of the most exquisite tortures. Such as escaped destruction fled for protection and refuge to the Saracens, who received them with compassion and humanity, and permitted them to build a city for their residence, which was called Tibrica. Upon this they entered into a league with the Saracens; and, choosing for their chief an officer of the greatest resolution and valour, whose name was Carbeas, they declared against the Greeks a war which was carried on with the utmost vehemence and fury. This war continued during the whole century; the victory seemed often doubtful, but the slaughter was terrible, and the numbers that perished on both sides prodigious. Many of the Grecian provinces felt, in a more particular manner, the dire effects of this cruel contest, and exhibited the most affecting scenes of desolation and misery. During these commotions, some Paulicians, toward the conclusion of the century, spread abroad among the * Photius, lib. i. contra Manichæos, p. 125.-Petri Siculi Historia Manichæorum, p. 71. † Georg. Cedrenus, Compend. Hist. p. 541, edit. Paris.-Zonoras, Annal. lib. xvi. The principal authors who have given accounts of the Paulicians are Photius, lib. i. contra Manichæos, and Petrus Siculus, whose history of the Manichæans Matth. Raderus published in Greek and Latin in 1604. By the account of Petrus Siculus that is given by himself, we learn that, in 870, under the reign of Basilius the Macedonian, he was sent ambassador to the Paulicians at Tibrica, to treat with them for the exchange of prisoners, and lived among them during the space of nine months; this is sufficient to give us a high idea of the power and prosperity of the Paulicians at that time. It is from this eminent writer that Cedrenus seems to have taken what he has advanced in his Compend. Histor. p. 431. What we learn concerning the Paulicians from the more modern writers, (such as Bayle, in his Dictionary, and B. Jo. Christ. Wolfius, in his Manichæismus ante Manichæos, p. 247,) seems to be derived from Bossuet's Histoire des Variations des Eglises Protestantes, tom. ii. p. 129. But this authority is highly exceptionable; for Bossuet did not consult the true sources of knowledge upon this point; and, what is still worse, the spirit of party seems to have led him into voluntary errors. VOL. I.-30 V. The Greeks treated the Paulicians, of whom we have now been speaking, as Manichæans; though, if we may credit the testimony of Photius, the Paulicians expressed the utmost abhorrence of Manes and his doctrine.† Most evident it is, that they were not altoge ther Manichæans, though they embraced some opinions that resembled certain tenets of that abominable sect. They had not, like the Manichæans, an ecclesiastical government administered by bishops, priests, and deacons: they had no sacred order of men distinguished by their manner of life, their habit, or any other circumstance from the rest of the assembly; nor had councils, synods, or the like institutions, any place in their religious polity. They had certain doctors whom they called Synecdemi, i. e. companions in the journey of life, and also Notarii. Among these, there reigned a perfect equality; and they had no peculiar rites or privileges, nor any external mark of dignity to distinguish them from the people.t The only singularity that attended their promotion to the doctorial rank was, that they changed their lay-names for Scripture ones, as if there had been something peculiarly venerable in the names of the holy men, whose lives and actions are recorded in the sacred writings. They received all the books of the New Testament, except the two Epistles of St. Peter, which they rejected for reasons unknown to us; and their copies of the Gospel were exactly the same with those used by all other Christians, without the least interpolation of the sacred text; in which respect also they differed considerably from the Manichæans.§ They moreover recommended to the people without exception, with the most affecting and ardent zeal, the constant and assiduous perusal of the Scriptures, and expressed the utmost indignation against the Greeks, who allowed to priests alone an access to these sacred fountains of divine knowledge.|| In explaining, however, the doctrines of the Gospel, they often departed from the literal sense and the natural signification of the words, and interpreted them in a forced and allegorical manner, when they opposed their favourite opinions and tenets; and such more especially were the delusive and erroneous ex plications which they gave of what is said con It is not improbable that there are yet, in Thrace and Bulgaria, Paulicians, or Paulians as they are called by some. It appears at least certain, that in the seventeenth century some of that sect still subsisted, and dwelt at Nicopolis, as we learn from the testimony of Urb. Cerri, who tells us, in his Etat present de l'Eglise Romaine, that Peter Deodati, archbishop of Sophia, caused them to aban. don their errors, and return to the Catholic faith: but whether the latter part of the account be true or false, is more than we shall pretend to determine. † Photius, lib. i. contra Manichæos, p. 17, 56, 65 Petr. Siculus, Hist. Manich. p. 43. Photius, 1. c. p. 31, 32.-Petr. Sicu). p. 44-Ce drenus, 1. c. p. 431. § Photius, p. 11.-Petr. Sicul. p. 19. cerning the institutions of baptism and the || Lord's Supper, and the divine authority of the Old Testament, all which they obstinately rejected. Beside the books of the New Testament, they treated with a particular veneration certain epistles of Sergius, the most eminent and illustrious doctor of their sect. only fell into the sentiments of the Valentinians, and held, that Christ passed through the womb of the Virgin, as the pure stream of limpid water passes through a conduit, and that Mary did not preserve her virginity to the end of her days; all which assertions the Greeks rejected with the utmost antipathy and abhorrence. 3. "They refused to cele"brate the holy institution of the Lord's Sup "per;" for, as they imagined many precepts and injunctions of the Gospel to be of a merely figurative and parabolical nature, so they understood, by the bread and wine which Christ is said to have administered to his disciples at his last supper, the divine discourses and exhortations of the Saviour, which are a spiritual food and nourishment to the soul, and fill it with repose, satisfaction, and delight.* 4 They loaded the cross of Christ with con "tempt and reproach;" by which we are only to understand, that they refused to follow the absurd and superstitious practice of the Greeks, who paid to the pretended wood of the cross a certain sort of religious homage. As the Paulicians believed that Christ was clothed with an ethereal, impassable, and celestial body, they could by no means grant that he was really nailed to the cross, or that he expired, in effect, upon that ignominious tree: and hence naturally arose that treatment of the cross, of which the Greeks accused them. 5. "They rejected, after the example "of the greatest part of the Gnostics, the "books of the Old Testament, and looked VI. The Greek writers, instead of giving a complete view of the Paulician system, which was undoubtedly composed of a great variety of tenets, content themselves with mentioning SIX monstrous errors, which, in their estimation, rendered the Paulicians unworthy of enjoying either the comforts of this world, or the happiness of the next. These errors are as follow: 1. "They denied that this inferior "and visible world was the production of the Supreme Being, and they distinguished the Creator of this world, and of human bodies," "from the most high God, who dwells in the "heavens." It was principally on account of this odious doctrine, which was, however, adopted by all the Gnostic sects, that the Paulicians were deemed Manichæans by the Greeks. But what their sentiments were concerning the creator of this world, and whether they considered him as a being distinct from the evil principle, are matters that no writer has hitherto explained in a satisfactory manner. We learn only from Photius, that, according to the Paulician doctrine, the evil principle was engendered by darkness and fire; whence it plainly follows that he was neither self-originated, nor eternal.* 2. "They "treated contemptuously the Virgin Mary;" that is to say, according to the manner of speaking usual among the Greeks, they refused to adore and worship her. They maintained, indeed, that Christ was the son of Mary, and was born of her (although they maintained, as appears from the express testimony of their adversaries, that the divine Saviour brought with him from heaven his human nature, and that Mary, after the birth of Christ, had other children by Joseph;) they upon the writers of that sacred history as in"spired by the Creator of this world, and not "by the Supreme God." 6. "They entirely "excluded presbyters and lay-elders from the "administration of the church." By this, however, no more can be meant, than that they refused to call their doctors by the name of presbyters, a name which had its origin among the Jews, and was peculiar to that odious people, who persecuted Jesus Christ, and attempted, as the Paulicians speak, to put him to death.t * Photius, lib. ii. contra Manichæos, p. 147. It is evident, beyond all contradiction, that the Paulicians, in imitation of the oriental philosophers from whom the Gnostic and Manichæans derived their *The Greeks do not charge the Paulicians with origin, considered eternal matter as the seat and any error concerning baptism; it is, however, cersource of all evil; but they believed, at the same tain, that the accounts of that sacred institution, time, like many of the Gnostics, that this matter, which are given in Scripture, were allegorically exendued from all eternity with life and motion, had plained by this extravagant sect; and Photius, in his produced an active principle, which was the foun- first book against the Manichæans, expressly asserts tain of vice, misery, and disorder. This principle, that the Paŭlicians treated baptism as a mere alleaccording to them, is the author of all material sub-gorical ceremony, and by the baptismal water unstances, while God is the Creator and Father of spirits. These tenets resemble, no doubt, the Manichæan doctrine; yet they differ from it in several points. The Paulicians seem to have emanated from one of the old Gnostic sects, and to have been very numerous and diversified; and, though persecuted and oppressed from age to age in the most rigorous mer by many emperors, they could never attire y surprend or extirpated. derstood the Gospel. †These six famous errors of the Paulicians I have taken from the Manichæan history of Petrus Sicu lus, with whom Photius and Cedrenus agree, although their accounts of these opinions be less perspicuous and distinct. The explanatory remarks that I have added, are the result of my own reflections upon the Paulician system, and the doctrine of the Greeks. THE TENTH CENTURY. PART I. THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. CHAPTER I. Concerning the Prosperous Events which hap II. The prince of that country, whom the Nestorians converted to the Christian faith, assumed, if we may give credit to the vulgar tradition, the name of John after his baptism, to which he added the surname of Presbyter, from a principle of modesty. Hence it was, as some learned men imagine, that the successors of this monarch retained these names until the time of Genghiz-Khan, who flourished in the fourteenth century,† and were each of them called Prester John. But all this has a very fabulous air; at least it is advanced without any solid proof; it even appears evident, on the contrary, that the famous Prester John, who made so much noise in the world, did not begin to reign in that part of Asia before the conclusion of the eleventh century. It is, however, certain beyond all contradiction, that * Assemani Bibliotheca Oriental. Vatic. tom. iii. part ii. p. 482.-Herbelot, Bibliotheque Orientale, p. 256. Dr. Mosheim, and his translator, ought to have said, the thirteenth century. EDIT. † See Assemani Biblioth. tom. iii. part ii. p. 282. the monarchs of the nation called Karit (which gul, and is by some denominated a tribe of the makes a large part of the empire of the MoTurks, and, by others, of the Tartars,) embraced Christianity in this century; and that a considerable part of Tartary, or Asiatic Scythia, lived under the spiritual jurisdiction of bishops who were sent among them by the Nestorian pontiff.* III. If we turn our eyes to the western world, we shall find the Gospel making its way with more or less rapidity among the most rude and uncivilized nations. The famous arch-pirate Rollo, son of a Norwegian count, being banished from his native land,f had, in the preceding century, put himself at the head of a resolute band of Normans, and seized one of the maratime provinces of France, whence he infested the neighbouring country with perpetual incursions and depredations. In 912, this valiant chief, with his whole army, embraced the Christian faith, on the following occasion. Charles the Simple, who wanted both resolution and power to drive this warlike and intrepid invader out of his dominions, was obliged to have recourse to negotiation. He accordingly offered to make over to Rollo a considerable part of his territories, on condition that the latter would consent to a peace, espouse his daughter Gisela, and embrace Christianity. These terms were accepted by Rollo without the least hesitation; and his army, following the example of their leader, professed a religion of which they were totally ignorant.§ These Norman pirates, as appears from many authentic records, were absolutely without religion of any kind, and therefore were not restrained, by the power of prejudice, from embracing a religion which presented to them the most advantageous prospects. They knew no distinction between interest and duty, and they estimated truth and virtue only by the profits with which they were attended. It *The late learned Sigefred Bayer, in his Preface design to give the world an accurate account of to the Museum Sinicum, p. 145, informed us of his the Nestorian churches established in Tartary and China, drawn from some curious ancient records public. His work was to have been entitled Historia and monuments, that have not been as yet made Ecclesiarum Sinicarum, et Septentrionalis Asiæ; but death prevented the execution of this interesting plan, and also of several others, which this great thrown a new light upon the history of the Asiatic man had formed, and which would undoubtedly have Christians. † Holbergi Historia Danorum Navalis in Scriptis Societat. Scient. Hafniens. part iii. p. 357. Other writers more politely represent the of. fer of Gisela as one of the methods that Charles em. ployed to obtain a peace with Rollo. § Boulay, Hist. Acad. Paris. tom. i. p. 296- Danie Hist. de France. tom. ii. p. 587. was from this Rollo, who received at his bap-|| tism the name of Robert, that the famous line of Norman dukes derived its origin; for the province of Bretagne, and a part of Neustria, which Charles the Simple conveyed to his sonin-law by a solemn grant, were from this time known by the name of Normandy, which || they derived from their new possessors. we have, at least, no account of any compulsion or violence being employed in their conversion; and this is the true date of the entire establishment of Christianity among that people. Wlodomir and his duchess were placed in the highest order of the Russian saints, and are still worshipped at Kiow (where they were interred) with the greatest devotion. The Latins, however, paid no such respect to the nemory of Wlodomir, whom they represented as absolutely unworthy of saintly honours.† IV. The Christian religion was introduced into Poland by the zealous efforts of female piety. Dambrowska, daughter of Boleslaus, duke of Bohemia, persuaded, by the force of VI. The Hungarians and Ávari had receiv repeated exhortations, her husband Micislaus, ed some faint notions of Christianity under the duke of Poland, to abandon paganism; and,|| reign of Charlemagne, in consequence of the in 965, he embraced the Gospel. The account measures that had been taken by that zealous of this agreeable event was no sooner brought|| prince for the propagation of the Gospel.to Rome, than the pontiff, John XIII., sent into These notions, however, were soon and easily Poland Ægidius, bishop of Tusculum, attend-extinguished by various circumstances, which ed with a numerous train of ecclesiastics, in|| order to second the pious efforts of the duke and duchess, who desired, with impatience, the conversion of their subjects. The exhortations and endeavours of these devout missionaries, who were unacquainted with the language of the people they came to instruct, would have been entirely without effect, had they not been accompanied with the edicts and penal laws, the promises and threats of Micislaus, which dejected the courage, and conquered the obstinacy of the reluctant Poles. When therefore the fear of punishment, and the hope of reward, had laid the foundations of Christianity in Poland, two national arch bishops and seven bishops were consecrated ie the ministry, whose zeal and labours were followed with such success, that the whole body of the people abandoned, by degrees, their ancient superstitions, and made public profession of the religion of Jesus. It was, indeed, no more than an external profession; for that inward change of affections and principles, which|| the Gospel requires, was far from being an object of attention in this barbarous age. took their rise from the death of Charlemagne: and it was not before the century of which we now write that the Christian religion obtained a fixed settlement among these warlike nations. Toward the middle of this century, Bulosudes and Gyula or Gylas, two Turkish chiefs, whose governments lay upon the banks of the Danube,§ made public profession of Christianity, and were baptized at Constanti nople. The former apostatized soon after to the religion of his ancestors, while the latter not only persevered steadfastly in his new profession, but also showed the most zealous concern for the conversion of his subjects, who, in consequence of his express order, were in structed in the doctrines and precepts of the Gospel by Hierotheus, a learned prelate, by whom he had been accompanied in his journey to Constantinople. Sarolta, the daughter of Gylas, was afterwards given in marriage to Geysa, the chief of the Hungarian nation, whom she persuaded to embrace the divine re ligion in which she had been educated. The faith, however, of this new convert was feeble and unsteady, and he retained a strong propensi V. The Christian religion was established in ty to the superstition which he had been engag Russia by means similar to those that had oc- ed to forsake; but his apostasy was prevented casioned its propagation in Poland; for we must by the pious remonstrances of Adalbert, archnot lay any stress upon the proselytes that bishop of Prague, who went into Hungary towere made to Christianity among the Russians ward the conclusion of this century, and by in the preceding century, since those conver- whom also Stephen, the son of Geysa, was sions were neither permanent nor solid, and baptized with great pomp and solemnity. It since it appears evidently, that such of that na- was to this young prince that the Gospel was tion, as, under the reign of Basilius the Mace- principally indebted for its propagation and esdonian, had embraced the doctrine of the tablishment among the Hungarians, whose geGreek church, relapsed soon after into the su- neral conversion was the fruit of his zeal for perstition of their ancestors. Wlodomir, duke the cause of Christ; for he perfected what his of Russia and Moscovy, married, in 961, Anne,|| father and grandfather had only begun; fixed sister of Basilius, the second Grecian emperor bishops, with large revenues, in various places; of that name; and this zealous princess, by her erected magnificent temples for divine worship; repeated entreaties and her pious importunity, and, by the influence of instructions, threatenat length persuaded her reluctant spouse to re-ings, rewards, and punishments, brought his ceive the Christian faith, and he was accordingly baptized, in 987, assuming on that occasion the name of Basilius. The Russians spontaneously followed the example of their prince; It was Neustria, and not Bretagne, that received the name of Normandy, from the Normans who chose Rollo for their chief. † Duglossi Historia Polonica, lib. ii. p. 91, lib. iii. 95, 239.-Regenvolscii Historia Eccles. Slavon. lib. i cap. i. p. 8.—Henr. Canisii Lectiones Antiquæ, tom. ii. Dar i. p. 41.-Solignac, Hist. de Pologne, tom. i. B. 71. subjects, almost without exception, to abandon the wretched superstition of their idola * See Anton. Pagi Critica in Baron. tom. iv. ad annum 987, p. 55, et. ad an. 1015, p. 110.-Car. du Fresne, Famil. Byzant. p. 143. † Ditmari. Merseb. Episcopi, Chronic, lib. vii. Ca. ronic. p. 417, tom. i. Scriptor. Brunsvic. Leibnitii. Pauli Debrezeni Historia Eccles. Reformator. in Ungaria, part i. cap. iii. p. 19. The Hungarians and Transylvanians were, a this time, known to the Grecians by the name of Turks. |