And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: (Rev 10:1-3)
Let me, in introduction to what follows, remind the reader of that principle of allusive reference, in visions figuring Christ’s revelations of himself to his true Church, to something opposed to it and Him, which we have seen exemplified very strikingly already twice in this Commentary: viz. First, in the sealing vision of Rev. 7, secondly, in the incense offering vision of Rev. 8. Such then having been the case previously, it is natural for the question to arise in the inquirer’s mind, whether perchance there may not be here also, on occasion of this third representation of Christ on the Apocalyptic scene, some such allusive reference and contrast: the rather because there appears in the action of the Angel, whether as regards his planting of his feet on earth and sea, or his roaring as a lion, a singular abruptness and decision: in no way so simply explicable, it might seem, as by the supposition of indignant reference to some signal usurpation of his rights at the time figured, and the triumph of some enemy and rival. Thus we are led to inquire whether, at the epoch just before the Reformation, there was any such signal triumph of anti-christian usurpation and usurper in Christendom? Whether Antichrist, the Antichrist of Daniel, St. Paul, and St. John, had really risen in the Church visible: (for he it is of whom we must needs think when such usurpation is hinted:) and not only advanced pretensions to the place of the Lord Jesus in it, but succeeded in establishing them? Also whether, just at the said epoch, his triumph was so signalized as to furnish any remarkable parallelism of particulars, in contrast with those that accompanied Christ’s emblematic appearance and descent in the vision now before us: parallelisms such as we verified in the cases of the sealing and incense offering visions, from comparison of their details with certain prominent characteristics of the apostasy at the times prefigured.
The which suggestion and inquiry direct us at once to Rome, For with Rome and its seven hills prophecy, we saw, in our early glances of it, prospectively connected Antichrist. There, moreover, and in the person of its bishops, we noticed certain suspicious symptoms of the development of Antichrist, that occurred some nine centuries before the times now under review. There, in the historical sketch prefixed to the vision of the Turkish Woe, we expressed a presumptive belief of his being enthroned and ruling, at the bisecting chronological point of those nine centuries. And though in the sketch of the Middle Ages, given in the chapter last but one preceding this, we did not directly advert to the point, yet it was evident, from the moral and religious corruptions of Western Christendom, as subordinated to Rome, and the support and fostering of those corruptions by the Romish bishops, that everything there noted tended to corroborate the impression, not to negative it.— Thither then let us pass in imagination: and observe what may be enacting at Rome, and by the Pope, at the epoch and crisis that we have supposed alluded to in the vision of the text: Ie. at the crisis that immediately preceded the Reformation.
And behold, the historic records of the times referred to represent to us, just at this epoch, a scene in that seven hill city of high triumph and festival. There had been in it very recently a new election to the Papal throne. The announcement was made at the time from the window of the conclave of Cardinals: “I tell you tidings of great joy: a new Pope is elected, Leo the X:” and the festivities began, on his coronation at St. Peter’s, immediately after. But the grander ceremonial of his going to take possession of the church of his bishopric, St. John Lateran,— that church by the bishopric of which, as the mother and mistress of all churches, he was to be constituted not only Bishop of Rome, but, by consequence, of the Church Universal,— was delayed for a month, to allow of the proper pomp attending it. And now the day is come for its celebration. The city is thronged with visitors on the occasion. Besides the hierarchy of Rome, there appear many of the independent princes of Italy: ambassadors also from most of the states of Western Christendom: and moreover the episcopal and ecclesiastical deputies that have assembled to represent the Church Universal in the General Council now holden at the Lateran: a Council convoked a year since by Pope Julius, (in opposition to the French king’s Counciliabulum, or Private Council, held at the time at Pisa,) and which has already been advanced through five Sessions.— The concourse from early morn has been to the great square before St. Peter’s. There the procession forms on horseback, and thence puts itself in motion: its course being across the bridge of St. Angelo, through the heart of the city, to the Lateran church at its opposite extremity. First in order is a troop of cavalry: then a long line of the gentry and nobility: then, after sundry lesser officials in gayest livery, and with badges of office, a file of Florentine citizens and other provincials, the Pope’s bodyguard, and a second file of provincial barons and gentry: then the envoys from Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, and other parts of Christendom: then abbots, bishops, archbishops, and patriarchs, about 250: then cardinals:— the ecclesiastical dignitaries wearing their jeweled mitres and their copes: the rest dress in richest costumes, and with banners streaming, as on a day of Jubilee:— then, at length, thus preceded, and duly followed, and closed in by a troop of military, Himself the Hero (might we not rather say the God) of the day. Himself the Pope! The horses of the bishops and cardinals, preceding him, are covered from head to foot with white trappings. He comes forth Himself too on a white horse: a cope of richest embroidery mantling him: the ring of espousal with the Universal Church glittering on his right hand ring finger; and on his head the regno, or imperial tiara of three crowns. A canopy is borne over him by the chief Roman authorities. The streets are strewed with tapestry and flowers for him to pass over. The welkin rings with acclamations of welcome. The multitudes fall on their knees, as he approaches, to receive his benediction. “It seemed to me,” says the narrator of the pageant, “that it was the Redeemer of mankind on the Palm Sunday going to Jerusalem: there being substituted only for the cry of Hosanna to the Son of David, the acclamation, Viva Papa Leon! Life to the Pope, the Lion!” 
Strange similitude: although that indeed which his very guise, and pomp, and popular reception, might well have suggested!— But is it really the case, that the people regard him as filling the place of Christ to them: and to be looked to as their Redeemer and Savior? The answer is ready in every one’s mouth. They dwell on the exalted station of the Pope, even yet more than on the personal character of Leo: its authority, power, sacredness: a station high above that of the kings of this world: as being divine rather than human, indeed that of the very Vicar of Christ and God. At the same time that Leo’s personal virtues also are not forgotten:— his prudence, firmness, decorum of manners, conservancy with worldly affairs, love of splendor, and taste for classic literature and the arts:— all fitting him for applying the matchless authority of his office as Christ’s Vicegerent, to the glory of Rome, the amelioration of the evils which from without and from within have long afflicted Christendom, and the introduction of a brighter age.
But the devices and paintings that everywhere, on triumphal arches, columns, and other decorated erections for the occasion, meet the eye, as it passes onward with the procession, will be the most faithful as well as most graphic expositors of the general state of thought and feeling respecting him.— Are they not splendid, those decorations? And do they not speak, with indubious evidence, the revival of the arts in Italy?— Alas! That they should speak also as clearly of its fondly cherished heathenism! For mark the strange mixture in them of things sacred and profane, of Christian saints and heathen demigods: Peter and Paul, Moses and Aaron, Saints Cosmo and Damian, intermingling with Apollos, Mercury, and Minerva! Does it not well illustrate what has been said of the homogenous and natural fellowship of the demons of Rome modern and Papal, with those of old Pagan Rome? Does it not exhibit to the very eye what has been called the invincible Paganism of Italy: but which was rather the invincible Paganism of apostate Christendom?
But to the point in hand:— the expression of the mind and spirit of the age respecting its newly elected Pope Leo. And doubtless there are some of the pictures, and devices, that depict him with reference simply to his personal character. Such is that where Justice is introduced with her balance, and Virtue as assaulted by various serpent formed vices, but delivered by a Lion: such that too where the Arts and Literature are represented as rejoicing in their Patron being made Lord of the world.— Again there is another painting that depicts him as exercising patriarchal functions: I mean that which represents the lately convened General Council in the Lateran Church: the Cardinals and Bishops appearing seated in it, and the Popes throne high among them: with the legend, “Thou shalt put an end to the Council, and be called the Reformer of the Church.”— But generally the allusion is to his acting as Christ’s representative: insomuch that there is the application to him alike of the history, titles, and offices of Christ our Savior: just as if he were indeed, as they say, his very impersonator on earth. So, as regards Christ’s history in that picture of the three Kings of Christendom, like the magi of old, fixing their eyes intently on a star in the East: the morning star evidently, not of Christ, but Leo: and with the legend, “The true light shineth in darkness:”— so in that of Pope Leo sitting, and many Kings kneeling, and presenting gold and silver to him as their offering:— so in another where he sits youthful in age, and in cardinals dress, disputing with aged doctors and conquering:— so in yet another, where Christ is represented receiving baptism: and in which the notification of John the Baptist as the Patron Saint of Florence, the presence of Saints Cosmo and Damian, saints of the Medici family, and that of two lions holding the scroll, plainly indicate that in the Christ there depicted Pope Leo is signified, his supposed impersonator: and in which picture even Christ’s Godhead is ascribed to Leo: the titular legend inscribed being, “A God wonderful among his saints! Then again as to Christ’s offices: see where Leo is portrayed at an altar, sacrificing, surrounded by his cardinals and bishops: and with a scroll above reading thus, “Tanquam Aaron:” also in another opposite, where he appears at an altar, kneeling: with troops armed behind him, and the words written above, “Tanquam Moses.” He is in these represented as, in Christ’s place, alike the High Priest, and the Governor and Captain of the Church. And the legends beneath tell the expected happy results: the one, “Thine eye is on the ceremonial of divine worship, and now Religion shall have its due observance:” the other, “Thou art the intimate of the Deity, and the enemies of the Christian name shall yield to thee.”— We may further notice that in which he is represented in the guise of a shepherd fishing: and, having lighted a great fire, as casting into it the bad fish he has drawn in his net, and returning the good into the river: the legend, “Non desinam usque ad unum,” declaring that he will do that which the Son of Man has asserted it his prerogative to do: viz. To separate between the good and bad, and of the latter to leave not an individual undetected and judged to the fire.— As to the general hopes of prosperity and happiness they are elsewhere thus symbolized. From a hall, the heraldic ensign of Leo, two branches appear to spring: and from the one an ear of wheat, from the other a grape cluster, of size extraordinary: such as poets describe to have been produced in the fabled Saturnian age and such perhaps as, according to the traditional report of Papias, might answer to St. John’s prediction of the fruitfulness of the earth in the millennium:— the legend beneath indicating this new Vicegerent of Christ as its author, and that now at length its golden age was come.
There are yet three other paintings of him in this character, which, on account of their singularly illustrative bearing on the prophecy before us, demand a separate and particular attention.— First, that in the Genoese arc between the castle of St. Angelo and the Vatican. Here behold the azure heaven represented. On its verge, refulgent with glory like as of the new risen sun, stands portrayed the Pope: a rainbow in the air reflects its cheering radiance on a landscape of land and water, men and women, just emerged apparently out of night and tempest below and the sentence appears written underneath, “The world hath been unveiled to light: the King of glory has come forth”— Next comes that painting in the arc of the Florentines: The Pope is here represented with one foot on the land, the other on the sea: having a key moreover in his right hand with which he opens heaven, and in the other another key: the key of hell, or rather of purgatory, and beneath, the legend, as the voice of Florence, “In the hand I behold the empire of earth, and sea, and heaven.” Have we not in these two pictures of the pageant the very counterpart to the opening emblems of the vision before us?— Yet again the lion there, as here, appears prominently and repeatedly as a symbol in the devices. For instance, in the triumphal arc near the bridge of St. Angelo, there appear two lions, each with one foot on the Papal insignia, to designate that it is the Pope they symbolize, the other on the mundane globe: and with the legends, as the cry uttered by them, “The prey is worthy of my glory” and, “To me the charge
belongs.”With which last we may associate that in the Via Pontificum, where a Pope sits enthroned, and two kings, having cast their crowns before him, kneel and worship. These a lion is represented as blandly licking and fondling. But on other two, which appear armed and hostile in the distance, another lion seems as about to spring: and the motto, “Prostratis placidus, Rebellibus ferox,” proclaims, as with lion’s roar, that submission, implicit submission, is the law of the pontifical empire.
Such is the triplet of counterpart paintings, in this Leo’s pageant, in contrast with the Apocalyptic triplet of symbols in the vision before us. And from their mere specification the Reader will see that it was not without reason that I spoke of them as demanding a full and separate consideration.— Before entering on this, however, let us just trace the processional to its termination. And let us mark, in doing so, the almost ostentatious exhibition in it of Christ’s degradation and nothingness, as contrasted with the Pope’s exaltation:— him whom having now viewed not only as head of the apostasy, but as the blasphemous usurper also of Christ’s place in the church, we need no longer hesitate to call the Papal Antichrist. I say, let us mark the contrast exhibited between them, for Christ too is present, they tell us, to swell the triumph of the day. His place they point out under yon canopy, upon the white palfrey, just before the line of bishops: some five and twenty attendants being disposed round him, each with kindled wax light, and the sacristan as his guard behind. It is that box, they say, which the gold brocade covers, that holds him. There is the holy Eucharist,— the consecrated wafer. That is Christ,— Oh foul dishonor to their Lord! He appears but as a state prisoner, the creation at will of the Pope and his priests, to add to the brilliancy of the pageant: a puppet in the hands of the priesthood!
Meanwhile in all the pomp of the processional, and with each of the magnificent decorations that adorn it symbolizing his glory, with every eye fixed upon him, and every knee bent before him, the Pope advances on his triumph.— And so, at length, the Lateran is arrived at: that Church with which the Papal episcopate is connected, and in the portico of which, as justification of its asserted universal jurisdiction, an old marble records its dignity as the mother and head of all churches. And as, on the setting out, his studied mimicry of Christ was observable, and the paintings too, and the legends, reminded the passer by that “the heaven sent One,” “the King of Glory,” was gone forth, so at this close of the procession, the studied mimicry continues. Dismounting at the church vestibule, the Pope takes sitting for a moment, as if in great humility, on a lowly seat placed for the occasion, then, amidst the chanting of, “He raised the poor from the dust, to make him inherit the throne of glory,” he is raised from it by some of the officials of the church: led up the nave: and seated on the Papal throne within. They call it his assumption, or taking up: as if like that of One before him, to the elevation, not of a mere earthly throne, but a heavenly: and with all power given to him in heaven and on earth.
And now I revert to the three remarkable symbolization of the Papal Antichrist above noted. And, considering how exactly they answer to the triple symbolization of Christ, in the Apocalyptic vision before us his face too being depicted as the sun, his investing crown a rainbow, his feet as planted on land and sea, his voice as a lions roaring,— considering further the chronological coincidence of the one emblematic figuration and the other, the one in the prophecy, the other in history,— and yet again the fact, already twice exemplified, of allusive contrast to that which might at any particular epoch be specially opposed to and usurpatory of his prerogative, being a feature observable in the chief Apocalyptic prefigurations of Christ’s intervention,— considering all this, I might perhaps at once make my appeal to the Reader, and ask, without fear of contradiction, Is it credible that the parallel and the contrast were in this case either unforeseen, or unintended, by the Eternal Spirit?— But the full signification of the three devices needs yet to be unfolded. Also it needs to be shown that what they signified, as to the Papal prerogative, was not the mere exaggeration of popular fancy or feeling at Rome, on a festival day of excitement, but realities, such as the Apocalyptic vision, when allusive, can alone allude to. To this therefore I shall now address myself: although to do it, and to furnish in each case the illustrative historical facts requisite, will necessarily occupy some considerable time. But the time will not be misspent. Indeed I feel that I should scarce do justice to my subject, without thus more fully developing these anti-Apocalyptic devices. For it is impossible that anything could exhibit to us more strikingly than these do the extent of the Papal usurpation of Christ’s glory and prerogatives, just before his glorious intervention in the Reformation: and the crisis too of Papal triumph, in regard alike of things temporal and things spiritual, of this world and the next.
I. First then as to the meaning, and the acting out, of that emblematic painting which represented the Pope as the new risen sun, the King of glory, beaming from heaven on this earth, and with the rainbow, the covenant rainbow, as his accompaniment.
Now we are not to suppose that there was merely meant by this a symbolization of the Pope’s supreme dignity, and of the happy promise of his reign: so as the symbol of a rising sun and rainbow might have been applied, in the hyperbole of painting or poetry, to designate the hopes entertained from the reign of any other mighty sovereign on his accession. No doubt this was included, and the general expectation of happiness from Leo’s reign signified by the emblem:  on the scale however of the golden age, whether as fabled or predicted, for its measure and its character. But let it be well observed, as inferable both from the accompanying emblem of the rainbow, and from the title of “The King of glory,” given to the Pope in the picture, that it was as Christ’s representative chiefly that the symbol was applied to him: and thus that, as Christ is the sun in the Christian system, so the symbol was meant to designate Pope Leo.— Now of Christ the symbol indicated both the inherent divine luster, as Him in whom was light,— the light of life, truth, and holiness,— and in whom no darkness at all: also how out of this light, treasured in infinite fullness in Himself, it pleased Him to impart to the children of men: as He said, “I am the light of the world: he that follows me shall have the light of life.” In this character his glory was recognized, while on earth, as the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth: and was sung of long previously, in Hebrew prophecy, as that of the Sun of Righteousness.— In these same senses, then, we might expect that the symbol was intended to apply to Leo. And, in point of fact, in the writings of the time we find them all expressly noted. We shall presently see how the Portuguese orator addressed him as dispersing the mists of his mind by the sun-beams of his divine countenance. In similar tone in the Lateran, in presence of the general Council of Christendom, his countenance is spoken of by the chosen orator Puccius, as “beaming from it the insupportable luster of divine majesty.’’ By one of the poets of the day a splendor, dazzling as the sun, is described as flashing from his triple crown: with reference to the divine glory attached to it, of an empire over earth, hell, and heaven. By the same poet he is else where depicted as the sun’s dwelling place, because of the light of wisdom that dwelt with him. The Maronite Patriarch, and another of the Oriental ecclesiastics, address him in their letters as like the sun or the moon, full of truth; and again as the sun refulgent in holiness.— Further he is represented as, like the sun, imparting out of this his treasure house of light to the children of men: not only otherwise as their enlightener, but chiefly as their illuminator in matters of faith:— revealing and opening to men the way to heaven: and also shedding a healing influence with his beams on the darkness and woes of humanity. In the influence last ascribed to the light of the Papal countenance we see the exact counterpart to that which is ascribed to Christ in Malachi’s beautiful prophecy, just before alluded to:— I mean that in which he speaks of Him as the Sun of Righteousness, rising on them that fear Him with healing in his wings.
Thus it appears that, besides the inherent glory of majesty, wisdom, and holiness supposed to reside in the Pope, the sun of Roman Christendom, there were also two principal points of view in which, like Christ, he was believed to shed forth from himself this light and glory on mankind: viz. As the dispenser to them of the light of truth, Ie. the true faith: and the dispenser too of the light of grace and salvation. And, to show the Pope’s actual exercise in real life of the prerogatives thus falsely assigned him, it needs only that 1 remind the reader, with reference to the first, that in all disputed matters of religious faith and doctrine the ultimate reference was to him, his decision considered final, and even the Bible statements supposed to derive their authority from him, not his from the Bible: also, in regard to the second, that it was from him, as the recognized fountain of divine grace and mercy, that those indulgences proceeded of which I have more than once already spoken: and whereby not the temporal punishments only due to sin were remitted, but the eternal: its guilt blotted out, innocence restored to the sinner, and salvation ensured.— Of the exercise of either of these two supposed Papal prerogatives it is obviously quite impossible to over-estimate the tremendous efficacy, in support of the system of superstition and error then established. As to that of the latter, more especially, it seems from the accompaniment of the covenant rainbow to have been so expressly intended by the painter, and is in itself so extraordinary, so characteristic of the Papal usurpation of Christ’s most glorious spiritual prerogative, and so illustrative, by force of contrast, of the emblematic outburst of the true Sun of Righteousness in the prefigurative vision before us, and of its glorious fulfillment in the Reformation, that I cannot but pause to give the reader a detailed view in real life of the whole process.
For so it was, that just after Leo’s assumption to the Papal throne, there arose an occasion very notable for the exercise of this divine prerogative of mercy. The design of building St. Peter’s on a scale of magnificence suited to the Cathedral of Christendom, had devolved to him from his predecessors in the Papacy, and met in his mind with a ready welcome. From the revival of the arts in Italy, and with Michael Angelo, Raphael, and a host of other artists of eminence round him, he found ready at hand all that could be needed of skill and genius for its execution. Money alone was wanting. And whence procurable? He had not, says Michelet, the mines of Mexico. But he had one as productive. His mine was the old superstition, and old superstitious credulity, of the people. To it, therefore, he determined to recur, and thence to draw the treasures needed. Accordingly (for such was the occasion, and such the object), he issued bulls of grace and plenary indulgence into all the several countries of Western Christendom: containing grants the most lavish of forgiveness of sin and salvation to each recipiant. One condition only was attached: that was, that they must purchase them. The grace was not to be conferred without money.
It was in Germany, more especially, that the great excitement was arising. It seemed as if a vast fair had been opened in its tranquil towns, one after another: the merchandise offered for sale being the salvation of souls. The Papal commissary here appointed was Tetzel. He was a Dominican, a functionary of the Holy Inquisition, already long practiced in the traffic. In the fulfillment of his present commission, his habit was to travel from town to town, in pomp, and with a retinue, as one of the nobles of the land. Into each town, as he approached it, the message was sent, “The grace of God is at your gates.” Forthwith the town council and the clergy, the monks and nuns from the convents, the schools and trades, hastened to form into procession: and with standards and wax lights in hand, and ringing of the church bells, advanced to meet it; there being as much show of honor paid to it, it is said, as if it had been God himself. On returning, the course of the procession was to the principal church in the town. The Papal Bull was borne on a rich velvet cushion, or cloth of gold: a red cross elevated near it by the commissary: and the chanting of prayers and hymns, and fuming of incense, kept up as its accompaniment. Arrived at the church, it was received with the sound of the organ. Then, the red cross and Papal arms having been placed before the great altar, the commissary mounted the pulpit. And this is related as the style of his addresses to the assembled people. “Now is the heaven opened. Now is grace and salvation offered. Christ, acting no more himself as God, has resigned all his power to the Pope. Hence the present dispensation of mercy. Happy are your eyes that see the things that ye see. By virtue of the letters bearing the Papal seal that I offer you, not only is the guilt of past sins remitted, but that of sins that you may wish to commit in future. None is so great, but that pardon is ensured to the purchaser. And not the sins of the having only, but of the dead in purgatory. As soon as the money sounds in the receiving box, the soul of the purchaser’s relative flies from purgatory to heaven. Now is the accepted time, now the day of salvation whoso insensate, who so hard hearted, as not to profit by it? Soon I shall remove the cross, shut the gate of heaven, extinguish the bright sunbeams of grace that shine before you. How shall they escape that neglect so great salvation?”
Then the confessionals are set, each with the Papal arms attached. The confessors dilate on the virtue of the indulgences. The penitents crowd to the purchase. For the mass are sunk in superstition and ignorance: the willing slaves of delusion. And others there are too with whom, amidst all their superstition, the voice of conscience is awake: and whom the fear of death, and distress at God’s hiding Himself, impel to seek as they may for pardon and reconciliation. Was not Myconius’s case the case of many like him? To such it seemed indeed strange that the grace of God should be purchased for money. And some, revolted by it, turned away. But with others the doubt was silenced by the thought of the indulgence coming from God’s Vicar, the Pope: even yet more than by the influence of long established custom. Could the Vicar of Christ deceive, or err?— So they crowd to the purchase. The price is from 25 ducats to a half florin, according to the rank and opulence of the purchaser. The money box of the Dominican is filled. Having deducted his own percentage for agency, and paid his reckoning at the inn with indulgences for the deliverance of four or more souls out of purgatory according to its greater or less amount, he transmits the surplus to the Prince Archbishop of Mayence and Magdeburgh, whose agent he is, and whose rules he has been following in the business: then proceeds on the same blasphemous mission to another town. And, as between the Archbishop and the Pope there has been an agreement for the bi-partition of the receipts from this part of Germany, the moiety of the money flows to Rome:— the price of the merchandise of souls.— Thus the cheat has been consummated. The rays of this mock Sun of Righteousness (may I not well say, this Antichrist? For the Pope’s pretensions on this head were but the very realization of what both ancient Patristic, and even later Papal Doctors, had anticipated as a characteristic of the real Antichrist), have gone forth only to fructify in his own coffers. Meanwhile the poor deluded people, cherishing the indulgences they have purchased as a guarantee of forgiveness and salvation, live, and perhaps die, with a lie in their right hand. And as regards Jesus, robbed as he has been by the Usurper of his own most glorious attribute of mercy, oh, who shall tell the magnitude of the insult put upon Him?
II. Next, would we learn the meaning, and its realization in actual life, of that most striking representation of the Pope in the Florentine triumphal arc, as fixing one foot on the land and another on the sea, how can we better satisfy ourselves than by marking what passed at Rome in the second year of Leo’s pontificate, on occasion of an embassy arriving from the king of Portugal? The ambassador was a General celebrated for his part in the late conquests of the Portuguese in the far Indies. In testimony of them he brought, among other most magnificent presents to Pope Leo various wild animals from the East, a leopard, panther, and elephant:— animals unknown to the citizens of Rome since the time and shows of its imperial grandeur. And great was the popular admiration as these presents were led in procession through the streets of Rome: more especially when, on arrival before the pontifical presence, the elephant, as if with more than instinct, stop, and knelt, and thrice bowed himself as in act of adoration to the ground.”— But listen to the orator of the embassy. For a moment he hesitates, as overcome by a sense of the majesty of him he is addressing. “Fear and trembling,” he exclaims, “have come over me, and a horrible darkness overwhelmed me.” Then, reassured by the Pope’s serene aspect towards him —“that divine countenance, which shining,” he says, “as the sun, had dispersed the mists of his mind,”— he proceeds to the objects of his mission: narrates the eastern conquests of the Portuguese arms, addresses the Pope as the Supreme Lord of all: and speaks of those conquests as the incipient fulfillment of God’s sure promises, “Thou shalt rule from sea to sea, and from the Tyber river to the world’s end;” “the kings of Arabia and Saba shall bring gifts to thee: yea, all princes shall worship thee, all nations shall serve thee:” and, under thy auspices, “there shall be one fold and one shepherd.” That is, he explains the promised universal latter day subjection of the world to Christ, as meant of its subjection to the Pope: and the Portuguese discoveries and victories over the heathen, as signs that that consummation was at hand.— Thus does he well illustrate to us what was intended by the Florentine device under consideration. And he concludes in the same spirit, by a solemn act of adoration to the Pope, as his King’s Lord and Master: “Thee, as the true Vicar of Christ and God, the Ruler of the whole Christian Republic, we recognize, confess, profess obedience to, and adore: in thy name adoring Christ, whose representative thou art.”
As to the acting out by the Pope of this prerogative of universal earthly supremacy, thus by both painter and orator assigned him, we might be sure, even prior to examination, that such must have been the case, when it was so obsequiously confessed to, and with such expressions of personal fealty, not by an immediately subject people only, but by a powerful and distant monarch, like him of Portugal. And it needs indeed only to look into European history to find the proof.
Already, four centuries before, Gregory VII had put forward pretensions to authority, as Christ’s Vicar, over the kings and kingdoms of the world. Nor, in the course of those four centuries, had examples very remarkable been wanting of the application of this Papal prerogative, within, and even beyond, the limits of the old Roman earth, European Christendom. So, for instance, in that fateful Bull of Pope Adrian IV, AD. 1155, whereby on petition of English King Henry, permission was granted him, agreeably with what was recognized as the Pope’s undoubted right and prerogative over all professedly Christian lands, to subjugate Ireland: on condition only of an annual quit-rent to the Roman See, of one penny for each house inhabited within it And so again, about the middle of the 14th century, in the grant of the Canary Islands, not long before discovered, though beyond the pale of European Christendom, to Prince Lewis of Spain by the Pontiff Clement VI.— But the Portuguese discoveries along the African coast towards the Cape of Good Hope, and so towards India, begun about the middle of the 15th century, and yet more that memorable one by the Spaniards, some fifty years afterwards, of a new world beyond the Western Ocean, gave scope and occasion for its exercise in far distant seas, on a scale immensely larger. For were not the heathen promised to Christ (I e. to Christ’s Vicar) for an inheritance, and the utmost parts of earth and sea for a possession? The application came first from Prince Henry of Portugal to the then reigning Pope. The premise that, as Christ’s Vicar, all kingdoms of the earth were subject to him, he prayed him, in virtue of that authority, to confer on the Portuguese Crown a right to all countries inhabited by infidels that they, the Portuguese, might discover: promise being added that he would spread the Christian religion in them, establish the Papal authority, and so increase the flock of the universal pastor. So was the opportunity given, and it was instantly seized on by the Pope, thus magnificently to exercise his supposed prerogative. A Bull was issued granting to the Portuguese all they might discover, from Cape Non to India.— In 1493, after Columbus discovered America, a similar application was made by Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain to Pope Alexander VI:— the same pleas and promises accompanying it of extending the Pope’s empire. And again the grant was made, and in terms still more presumptuous and striking: the Bull enacting, in order that it might not interfere with the grant previously made to the King of Portugal, that an imaginary line from Pole to Pole, drawn so as to pass 100 leagues westward of the Azores, should be the limit between the two nations, and all westward belong to the Spaniards, all eastward to the Portuguese. And what is very observable is, that in the judgment of the Princes of Western Christendom, these pontifical grants constituted to both nations a title unimpeachable, and a guarantee against interference or attack.
When some English merchants were about to open a trade with the coast of Guinea, the Portuguese King having laid before King Edward IV the Pope’s Bull, as entitling him to it, Edward, satisfied on the point, prohibited his subjects from making the voyage. This was before the discovery of America, and that of the passage by the Cape of Good Hope. And after them, and in evidence that the same title still guaranteed to Spain and Portugal those their later conquests, it would seem that this was the cause of the first efforts of English colonization being directed to the North American coasts, and avoiding those of South America, as belonging rightfully to Spain.— Thus it was not without reason that King Emanuel did fealty to the Pope on the occasion we are considering, and acknowledged his supremacy by whose grant he held his conquests. Nor is it wonderful, substantially superseded as the Lord Jesus had long been, for the most part, by Rome and its Papal Antichrist, even in the world of thought and imagination, throughout Western Europe, that in this extension of the Papal dominion over so many newly discovered countries, men should have fancied an incipient fulfillment of the Scripture prophecies referred to. It was quite natural. We see exemplified in it the settled anti-Christian spirit of the age.— Thus, reverting to the Florentine painting exhibited on the day of Pope Leo’s ascension, we have seen enough to convince us that, instead of its being an absurd or exaggerated device, it was only a graphic symbolization of a prerogative already exercised, as well as asserted, by the Popes. And, in evidence of the strict chronological propriety both of it, and of its Apocalyptic counterpart, we may note the fact that Pope Leo himself also now acted out what the painting symbolized. Pleased with the devoutness of the Portuguese king, he made a donation to him, in terms more ample than those of the original grant to Prince Henry, of all countries, provinces, and islands, which he might recover from the infidels, not only from Capes Bojador and Non to the Indies, but in the parts yet undiscovered and unknown even to the Pontiff himself. So did he plant one foot on the land, the other on the sea and the countries in it, even where the mists of distance, and imperfect geographical knowledge, might as yet hide them from view: distributing them, as their undoubted and supreme lord, to whom he would. And both in doing so, and in accepting the appropriation to the Papacy of the latter day prophecies,— indeed himself in his own medals appropriating them, he stood forth before Christendom, in all that concerned this world’s dominion, as a daring and gigantic usurper of the rights of Christ.
III. Once more I have to exhibit, in the actual realities of life, that voice of the Pope in guise and character as a Lion, asserting the world as his prey, claiming to himself its government, and threatening destruction against opponents or rebels,— to the figuration of which I invited attention in the third place, from among the devices in the Leo pageant, as another of the almost counterpart paintings there exhibited, in honor of the usurping Antichrist, to that in the Apocalyptic vision of the true Christ, now in place of religion.— Nor was there wanting to the local scene the solemn undefined charm of association with antiquity A part the most ancient of the Church, as well as the Baptistry adjoining, recalled the name of the great Constantine, as its founder. And so that high antiquity was suggested, which, on them that were willing to forget Jerusalem, might be palmed as a sufficient reason for giving to it, at least in Western Europe, the proud title of Mother, as well as Mistress, of all churches.
But on the occasion I am to speak of, was not the mere architectural grandeur of the scene, and the remembrance of other far distant times associated with it, that made it so imposing. Behold gathered within its walls, and sitting in ordered array, some 200 or 300 archbishops, bishops, and abbots, etc. arrived as representatives from England, from Spain, from Portugal, from the Germanic empire, from Savoy, and from the lesser states of Italy: together with Ambassadors, Generals of the religious orders, the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch, and not a few other ecclesiastics from beyond the seas:— the whole, under Pope Leo’s presidency, constituting the Council General, as they say, or representative body of the Church Universal. Considered in this light, where was ever assembly of pretensions more august?— The Bishops appear arrayed in their rich vestments of office, and with their jeweled miters on the head. The Pope too,— who sits alone upon a throne high and lifted up, as becomes his dignity,— appears in the scarlet and gold of his pontifical: and bears on his head that pontifical miter, whence he claims, as its appendage, universal empire. And, let me ask, as he sits there, and receives the adoration of the assembly, and ascription to him, as we shall see presently, of the divine titles, offices, and functions, does it not seem the very fulfillment of that ancient prophecy which declared of Antichrist, that sitting in the temple of God he would show himself as God? For should the words “temple of God” be literally taken, so as by some of the fathers, the Lateran Church, according to the ideas then received, was, as the mother, the representative, if I may so say, of all Christian Churches or Temples. And, if taken figuratively, which doubtless is a sense included, viz. As symbolizing the constituency of the professing Christian Church, it was before an assembly which represented that whole professing Church that he now thus showed himself.
The Council has been convened by the Papal Bull for the extirpation of the schisms and heresies that have divided the Church:— its union, reformation, and exaltation. And this is the arrangement for its proceedings: that before it transact official business, and the Papal Lion, who is using it as his instrument, speak his and its enactments, the mass be first celebrated, the litanies, gospel, and hymn “Veni Creator Spiritus,” chanted, and a sermon or oration, bearing on the business, pronounced by a selected member of the Council. Nor will it be well to pass to its enactments, in other words to the voice of Leo, which concluded its Sessions, without observing in the first instance the spirit and sentiments of this Council of the Christian Church, as exhibited in the orations of these its appointed preachers. It will be seen how they ascribe to the Pope the dignity, titles, and relations to the Church of the Lord Jesus,— just like the parties of whom I have before spoken: similarly make appeals to him (founded on this his character of Vice-Christ), as the hope and Savior of the Church: and similarly express their expectation of the fulfillment in his person and reign, of the latter day prophecies respecting the final blessedness, universality, and oneness of Christ’s kingdom.
So, for example, in that of the 4th Session, by the Venetian prelate Marcellus, Apostolic Prothonotary. After notice of the corruptions, divisions, and dangers of the Christian Church, he describes her as seeking refuge with the Roman Pontiff, and, prostrate at his most holy feet, thus addressing him. “I have compassed sea and land, and found none but thee to care for my preservation and dignity. Unhappy, degraded by wicked hands from my original high elevation, and with my heavenly beauty defiled by earthly pollution’s, I come to thee as my true Lord and Husband: beseeching thee to look to it that thy bride be renewed in her beauty. And see too that the flock committed to thee be nourished with the best and spiritual aliment: the fold united in one which is now divided: and the sickness healed which has afflicted the whole world. For thou art our Shepherd, our Physician, in short a second God on the earth.” In similar strain, in the 6th Session, the Bishop of Modrusium, figuring the Holy Roman Church as the heavenly Jerusalem, and the bride of Christ, each a favorite emblem with the orators, and after confessing the almost total extinction, at the time then being, of faith and piety in it, thus proceeds to express himself. “Is this Jerusalem, that city of perfect beauty, the daughter of Zion, the spouse of Christ? But weep not, daughter of Zion: for God hath raised up a Savior for thee. The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, hath come, and shall save thee from all thy enemies. On thee, most blessed Leo, we have fixed our hopes as the promised Savior,”
And then follows the supplication and appeal to him, in which other orators also unite that follow. “Vindicate the tent of thy spouse, that has been violated by the wicked! Purify what is polluted in the Church! Amend what is wrong! Against the infidels (Ie. against the Turks), gird thy sword upon thy thigh, thou most mighty! Is not all power given to thee in heaven and on earth? Then by the fire and burning of the pastor’s office, extinguish schism and heresy! That so, the great and ultimate reform and renovation having been accomplished in the Church,” and the world brought into the true faith,— religion, justice, and piety may flourish, the golden age revive, thine inheritance be restored to thee, the Church escape from the great tribulation, the completed sabbatism begin,— all which, from the computation of times, seems close at hand:— and those prophecies, so perpetually of late the theme of conversation, be fulfilled: Thou shalt rule from sea to sea, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd;—I saw the New Jerusalem come down out of heaven prepared as a bride for her husband: —and again, It shall come to pass in the last days that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established on the top of the mountains, and all nations flow to it — there being meant by that mountain of the Lord’s house the plenitude of the power of his anointed one, his Christ, in the Apostolic See.”
Such, we see, is the appeal in these orations to the Leo, the Papal Lion of Rome: such the titles and offices, prophecies and hopes, attached to him and his Pontificate. And now hearken to the lion’s voice, of which we were inquiring, as in answer. Accepting the deification, and the ascription to him of every title and office of Christ, as that which was indeed but his due, his first and preliminary act, in assertion of that sovereignty over the world, and fulfillment of that office of its administration, which thus in the Council, as in the painting, had been assigned him,— is the citation of the adherents of the Pisan Council and Pragmatic Sanction, as schismatics and rebels. And, behold, at the very threatening of his voice, both the schismatic cardinals, and the French king, hasten in public humiliation to renounce alike the one and the other, and to ask for absolution. On which (according to the legend, “Prostratis placidus,” “Supplices generos exaudio”), the absolution is granted; and, in the confessed subjection of all the kingdoms of Western Christendom to the Papal supremacy, the schism healed.— Next against the Bohemian heretics, the only ones apparently recognized as remaining, a citation is issued: with similar promise of consideration and clemency, in case of submission.— And when, as was avowed in triumphal tone by the preacher in the Session following, no schismatic, heretic, or maintainer of his own private opinion against the Pope’s, seemed for the present any more forthcoming, but all hushed in submission, (“Jam nemo reclamat, nullus obsistit”),— then and with a view to prevent any fresh rising of heresy or schism, and so to ensure the continued unity of his bride the Church, without spot or wrinkle, in continued subjection to himself, the Papal Lion thus again from the height of his apostolic office, as from the top of Mount Zion, issues his voice of command:— 1. That for as much as ‘printing, that wonderful recently invented art, might be used to disseminate heretical notions, no books be printed without the previous censorship of the Papal inquisitor in the district;— 2. That no preaching be allowed, or explantation of the Scriptures, except in conformity with that of the recognized fathers and doctors of the church: and no mention moreover made by them of Antichrist, or speculations mooted as to the time (since it was altogether hidden from man) of the final predicted judgment:—3. That the inquisitors fail not to exercise vigilance, and proceed with all zeal against heretics, wherever afresh arising, in order to their utter elimination from the congregation of the faithful.— So much for the preservation of the unity of the Church.— As to its reformation,— that for which so many cries had arisen for centuries, so many efforts been made, and hopes even now expressed of there being at length the grand and final one,— he undertakes it as that which, like the rest, belonged to his province as supreme administrator (“mihi curae est”): and accordingly issues enactments limiting pluralities, and forbidding a few other external abuses: but passes over, as needing no reform, and so adopts, and covers with the broad arrow of the Papal sanction, the whole doctrinal system of the apostasy, its demonolatry, sorceries, and religious thefts and murders.— Finally, in order to the effecting of the last and chief object of the Council, the exaltation of the Church, Ie. of the Church of Rome, he solemnly repeats and confirms the famous Bull “Unam Sanctam,” of Pope Boniface VIII: in which Bull the unity of the Church is defined as that of one body under one head, the Roman Pontiff, Christ’s representative: and of which this is the conclusion, “We declare, define, and pronounce, that it is essential to the salvation of every human being that he be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Prefixing thereto the declaration, “Whosoever obeys not, as the Scripture declares, let him die the death!” Such is the voice of the Pope, the “Leo Papa,” like as of a lion roaring (itself the fulfillment of another patristic anticipation respecting Antichrist): and the whole Christian Church, by its representatives in Council, assents and consents to it.— On which, each object of its assembling having, as they view it, been accomplished, the Roman Church by the reforming Council canons been renovated as the heavenly Jerusalem, by the extinction of heresies and schisms made one, and by the universal subjection of secular princes elevated as Mount Zion on the top of the mountains, a Te Deum of thanksgiving is chanted, and the Council concludes: and, in order to the increase of the joy of its members at this its auspicious ending, a plenary remission of sins and indulgence is granted to each one of them by the Pope, once in life, and in the article of death.
Thus have I shown the realization, or acting out in real life, by the Roman Bishop Leo X, of those prerogatives and functions of Christ, which were attributed to him in the three remarkable paintings before mentioned, as exhibited before Christendom in the pageant of his enthronment. And now at length we are prepared to revert with abundant advantage to the Apocalyptic vision of the Covenant Angel’s descent, and the glorious events that it presignified.
For so it was, that just when the Roman Antichrist seemed to have completed his triumph, and when, not only without opposition in Christendom, but with Christendom consenting, applauding, admiring, and in the Papal exaltation and reign anticipating the fulfillment of Christ’s promised reign with his saints, this Usurper acted out the character of Christ, and exercised, or professed to exercise, in regard to both worlds, Christ’s own god like functions and prerogatives:
Just when, especially, as if himself the heaven sent one, mighty to save, he made pretense of opening heaven to all believers in the Papal magic charms, however laden they might be with guilt and sin, and exhibited himself to them as the dispenser of the mercies of the covenant, the Fountain of grace, the Savior, the Justifier, the Sun of Righteousness;
Just when, as if the appointed heir of the world, and who was to have all things put under his feet, he claimed as his own the kingdoms of the earth (not those of the Roman earth only, but those too in the mighty seas beyond it) and, receiving homage for each grant that he made from the princes of the world, assigned them as sovereign lord to whom he would;
Just when, after, assuming Christ’s title of lion, agreeably with the old patriotic anticipations respecting Antichrist, even as if the lion of the tribe of Judah, he had in acts and mandates, framed with a view to secure the church and world in subjection to him, begun to roar as it were over his prey, and threaten every opposer;
Just when, on the day of his ascension, as on a day of high festival, there were exhibited paintings, amidst the applause of congregated Christendom, on which art seemed to have lavished all its ingenuity of decoration: and which, as the devices that might best symbolize these his threefold prerogatives and functions as Christ’s Vicar and impersonator, represented this same usurping Antichrist, in one part as beaming like the new risen sun from heaven upon earth, together with a rainbow to reflect his brightness,— in another as planting one foot on the land and the other on the sea,— in a third as looking and roaring, with the world in his clutch, even as when a lion roars on his prey Just at this very time it was that there occurred the fulfillment of another symbolic figuration, devised by higher than human art, and evidently in purposed contrast to the former, though pictured above 1400 years before it:— a figuration which, in the visions of Patmos, exhibited Christ to St. John as now at length intervening, after long forbearance, in vindication of his own rights, truth, and people:— revealing Himself as the true Covenant Angel from heaven, with his face shining as the sun, and a rainbow about his head, planting moreover his right foot on the sea, his left on the land, and crying with a loud voice, as when a lion roars. “Like as a lion roaring on his prey, when a multitude of shepherds is called forth against him, he will not be afraid of their voice, nor abase himself for the noise of them,” so was the Lord represented as now “coming down to fight for Mount Zion,” against Antichrist and Antichrist’s assembled Council.
And whereas the Papal lion’s voice, in vindication of his usurping claims on the church and world, and to counteract all opposition, enacted decrees, as we have seen, preventive of the printing of all books on religion except as approved by him, and especially of God’s book the Bible,— preventive also of all preaching, except in accordance with the established Roman interpretations of Scripture,— and further enjoining that there should be no mention by them of the coming of Antichrist, or of the time of the great final judgment:
So in the Apocalyptic vision there was prefigured, as what would take place at the same precise epoch, Christ’s own opening to the world of that forbidden book of God,— his revival of that forbidden gospel preaching,— his exposure of Antichrist, as even then alive in the Popes,— and revelation too (so far as man might know it) of the time of the fated judgment, as involving the Papal destruction, and placed at but one Apocalyptic Trumpet’s interval from the chronological epoch of the intervention here symbolized.— All these things, I say, were foreshadowed in the vision before us: and in the Protestant Reformation all these things, as we shall see, were done.
Finally, as the Papal lion spoke enactments in its roaring with a view to eliminate, and cast out of the company of the faithful, all heretics, or those that dissented from the Roman apostasy and Roman Antichrist,— so there was prefigured in the Apocalyptic vision a solemn casting out from Christ’s true church, and the communion of the faithful of Papal Rome, with its Bishop, ministers, and church, as apostate and anti-christian.— And this too had its fulfillment in the same great event: and, together with a certain political revolution accompanying, viz. The fall of a tenth part of the mystic Babylon, as if prelusively of its final entire fall,— it appeared, both in the prophecy and in the history, as what may be called the completing act of the Reformation,
To show this, we must now pass on to that memorable history. With the Apocalyptic vision before us as our guide, we we shall find ourselves called to notice, just in this very order the commencement, progress and each grand epoch of the great and glorious Reformation of the 16th century.
See Vol. i. pp. 278—285.
See Vol, i. pp. 326—345.
In the contrast of God’s 144,000 sealed ones in Apoc. xiv, and the Beast’s sealed ones in Apoc. xiii,—that of Babylon and Jerusalem,—and that of the Bride and the Harlot,—we see the same principle of contrast kept up after wards also: only in these latter cases expressly, not allusively.
Vol. i. pp. 229, 230, 387—39-5. Of course a fuller inquiry will be needed into these prophecies of Antichrist: and it will be given in the next, or 4th part of my Work.
Vol. i. 411—414.
Vol. i. pp. 472—474.
March 10, AD. 1512.
Gaudium magnum nuncio vobis. Papam habemus Reverendissimum Dominura Johannem de Medicis, qui. . . vocatur Leo Decimus.” This was the usual form of announcement. Roscoe’s Leo X, ii. 174, 409. (3rd Ed.) It is curious that on Leo’s promotion to the Cardinalate, when only thirteen years old, some 25 years before, Ficinus thus wrote: “Semen Johannis ejusdem,” (viz. of Lorenzo of Medici) “in quo benediccntur omncs jjentes, est Johannes Laurentife o-enitus: cui, adhuc adolescentulo, divina Providentia mirabiliter cardineam contulit dignitatem, futuri Pontificii augurium.” Epist. ix. p. 159; (Venet. 1495;) given in M’Crie’s Italy, p. 11.
For authority in regard of this ceremonial, the reader is referred to the interesting, curious, and full account .given by a Florentine physical of Piero Ridolphi, and sister to Leo X. Roscoe gives it in the Appendix to his Leo X, No. LXX, from a copy preserved in the Vatican.—It had been previously given in the ” Storia De’ Solenni Possessi De’ Sommi Pontefici” by Francesco Cancellieri: p. 67: (Rom. 1802:) a book full of curious and interesting antiquarian information respecting the Papal ceremonials. Cancellieri took it from a copy in the Bibliotheca Corsini; and speaks of it as of an extreme rarity. If, says he, fortune had not seconded my unwearied researches by the discovery of it, ” quante belle ed interessanti notizie di questa nobilissima funzione ci sarebbero rimaste ignote!” He gives also another, but much less full account, written at the time in Latin.
Of the bishops’ horses it is said, “cavalli coperti tutti di guarnello bianco: excepto li occhi, donde vedeano.” Of the cardinals’: “cavalli coperti, fino in terra, di tatfetto biancho.” lb. 415. It was white for the occasion, and of course by Papal order. The usual color for the cardinals’ horse-trappings was now scarlet. The privilege had been accorded by Paul II, in 1464, to the cardinals, to use this color. Wadd. Iii. 273. Compare, generally, on this subject of the processional, the Order for a new Pope’s inauguration given in Martene, De Rit. ii. 88—90. The comparison will be both interesting and elucidatory.— Compare too, generally, the copious and interesting accounts of other Papal inauguratory Processions, from A.D. 795 to 1801, in Cancellieri.
Penni does not give the colour of the ” richissimo piviale ” of the Pope. Martene’ s description might seem to imply that the same white robe was still worn that was previously worn by him in a preliminary service at St. Peter’s. For, on occasion of his public sitting in the vestibule of St. Peter’s, in the interval between the service and the procession, he states the custom of the Cardinal Deacon disrobing him of his pontifical mitre, and placing on his head the crown or regno, instead: but does not mention any other disrobing. The white, however, was not invariable: and the richissimo of Penni may rather perhaps indicate the rich purple which the Pope often wore in his processions. So Bernard’s description, in his De Considerat. iv. 3, addrest to Pope Eugenius: “Etsi purpuratus, etsi deaui’atus incedens,..gemmis ornatus, vectus equo alba.” Comp. Apoc. xix. 11—14. ” I saw heaven opened: and behold a white horse, and him that sate upon it….And on his head were many crowns….And he was clothed in a garment dipped in blood …. and the armies of heaven followed him upon white horses,” &c. Corn, a Lapide, on Apoc. vi. 2, p. 119, notices the parallelism with the white horse and rider of 1st Seal. ” Romte, die omnium maxime festo, quo novus Pontifcx ad Lateranum, Pontificatus possessionem accepturus, deducitur in communi urbis et orbis applausu, omnes Pra;sules in equis albis ei adequitare Solent. At(iue hoc forsan, et multa alia, sumptum est ex Apocalyiisi hoc loco: sc. Ut reprajsentent hunc equum album, cujus sessor est Christus, [oujus] Vicarius et successor est novus Pontifcx.” It would have been more apposite had he made the notice on Apoc. xix. 11—14.
This was put on the ring-finger of the right hand in the preceding ceremonial service: and is expressly specified by Martene as to be worn by the newly-elected Pope in the procession: ” Papa habebit annulum Fontijicalem.”—As to the ceremony of putting it on, we thus read: ” Consecratione manuum facta, consecrator immittit annulum in digitum annularem dextne mauus Pap;e consecrati, dicens: ‘ Acoipe annulum, fidei scilicet signaculum: quatcnus spoiisam Dei, viz. Sauctam univer.suluin ecclesiam, intenierattl tide ornatus illibatc custodias.”
“Con un regnio in testa adornato di tre corone aui-ee, et di moltre altre gioje et pietre pretiose.” (Penni p. 415.) On this regno, or Papal Imperial crown, see Ducange’s Dictionary in verb, and also his Supplement. I abstract from thence mainly what follows. It has been said by some that this was originally given the Pope, about A.D. 500, by the Frank king Clovis: and that from thenceforward the Popes used it in public processions. But this, says G. Rhodig. de Litiirg. is incorrect: and that it was not so used by them till after the seventh century. In Baronius ad Ann. 1159, it is described as “mitra turbinata ctim corona.” Alexander III had just then added the first corona to the mitra: in an Epistle of which Pope, soon alter, it is described as ” regnum quod ad similitudincm cassidis ex albo fit indumento.” Afterwards a second crown was added to it by Boniface VIII, about 1303: and a third by Urban V, A.D. 1362. And so it became a triple crown: as the Roman Cereraoniale has it: ” Tiaram, quani regnum appellant, triplici corona ornatam.” — It was regarded as signifying the Pope’s imperial dignity, in contradistinction to the mitre signifying his sacerdotal dignity: and was accordingly never worn by the Pope “in divinis,” in church, but only in going to and from it. So Innocent III writes, about A.D. 1200: ” In signum spiritualium contulit mihi mitram: in signum temporalium coronam: mitram pro sacerdotio, coronam pro regno:” and again; “Mitra semper et ubique utitur; regno nee ubique, nee semper; quia pontihcalis auctoritas et prior est, et dignior, quam imperialis.” Mr. Clarke, in his Treatise on the Dragon and the Beast, p. 180, describes its splendour from Platina. Also Ferrario in his Costumi, ii. 428: and, more fully, Cancellieri p. 126: and Bonanni Num. Pontif. i. 121—123.
“Mi parea quel di che il Redemptore della humana natura ando in Hicrusalem el di delle palme et, per iscambio de dire Osanna Fill David, gridavano. Viva Papa Leone; et, per cambio de ulivi et palme, veste et panni per le strade si vedea.” lb. ap. Roscoe, ii. 430.
Aldus Manutius, in the dedication of his Plato, printed A.D. 1513, to Pope Leo, thus describes the general feeling on the occasion we speak of.—”Cum primiini creatus es Pontifex Maximus, tantam ceperunt voluptatem Christiani omnes ut dicerent, priedicarent, affirmarent, alter alteri, cessatura brevi mala omnia quibus opprimimur, futura bona quse seculo aureo fuisse cnnimeniorant; quandoquidem Principem, Pastorem, Patrem nacti sumus qualem expectabuinus, quo nobis miserrimis his tomporibus maxima opus erat. Audivi ipse mcis auribus illis ipsis diebus, ubicunque fui, omnes hiec eadem uno ore dicere et prsedicare.” He notices, among the grounds of the hopes thus entertained from Leo’s Pontificate, his respectability of personal character, high family, vigour of age, the late wonderful geographical discoveries, &c. lb. App. xcii. p. 482.
See Supra.—The following from an Ode of Guido Silvester to the Manes of Popes Alexander and Julius, on Leo’s accession, given in Roscoe, App. Ixxii., will further illustrate this union. Christe potons rerura, tuque illius innuba Mater, Qua; Capitolini verticis alta tones: Et Vaticana; pater ac vetus accola rupis, Pctrc, PaliBstino proxima cura Jovi: Dique Deteque omnes, quibus es.sc vel infima cordi Nunc Leo, qui vcstro est do grege, signa dcdit: Ne rcvocate precor steilis, &c. Sunt modo apud superos tot millia multa piorum.
Ce qui etait du pays, ce qui ne pent changer, c’est cet inAancible paganisme qui a toujours subsiste en Italie.” Michelet’s Luther, i. 13.—But it was not of Italy locally, only. We have seen that it was the Paganism of all Christendom at the time.—For further examples see Roscoe, iii. 150, 254, 284.
lb. ii. 434, 420, 432.
lb. p. 427.
I take this not from Penni, but from a medal struck at Rome, most probably, I think, on this occasion, and given in Bonanni’s Numismata Pontificum, i. 162, 173. The three kings would be those of Germany, France, Spain: as in another picture. Penni, p. 426.
Penni, p. 417.
ib. 427.—It is necessary to the understanding of this to remember that Leo was made Cardinal at the youthful age of thirteen! Roscoe, i. 24.
Mirabilis Dcus in Sanctis suis.” Roscoe, ii. 422.—Even the Lord’s Supper was similarly travestied in another painting: Pope Leo being evidently meant by the Christ, and the Cardinals by the Apostles round him. lb. 423. For, as Pierre D’Ailly, the friend of Gerson, argues, the Cardinals were to be considered “the legitimate representatives of the Apostles: and as the Council of the representative of Christ.” Wadd. iii. 325.
Lb. 426, 427. The reference in the latter of the two designs seems to be to Moses effecting by prayer tlie destruction of Amalek.—Similarly Clement VI , in his famous Bull Unigenitus, annunciative of the Jubilee of 1350, “se comparat cum Moyse et Aarone:” as Seckendorf observes in his History of the Reformation, p. 9.
lb. p. 427.
lb. p 425.
” Aureaeque vitse sseculum.” 426.
lb. 417. “Era il Papa in un cielo infra dui rami di palme: et dalla dextra mano un Saucto Piefro et un Saucto Paulo, die parlavan col dicto Papa: et da I’altra mano si vedea un angelo sonare una tromba; et havea nella banderiola della ti’omba I’arme Pontiticia. Sotto a questo si vedea uno arco, ciofe Iris, et .sotto I’arco montagnie, fiumi, pianure, arbori, bomini, et donne: et un breviccUo cbe dicea, Apertus est orbis, et exivit Rex Glo)-i(c.” Penni does not mention what kind of glory attached to the Pope in the picture: but that it was the solar glory is plainly implied in the explanatory legend. For the opening and unveiling of the world, is a poetical phrase to express the emergence of the terrene landscape into light and visibility, on the sun-rising. ” Sol orbem radiis retegit, aperit, &c., ” will be remembered by the classic reader, as common Latin phrases. The exit too seems borrowed from what is said of the sun’s going forth in Psalm xix. 6: and the solar rainbow implied the solar shining. To understand the consistency and connection with the above device of Christ title, “the King of Glory,” applied in the legend to the Pope, it might suffice to remember that the sun too is a frequent Scripture emblem of Christ. Besides which I would further remind the reader that in the Paganized phraseology of the day, to which I have already alluded, the divine Son was blasphemously denominated Apollo, (as God the Father was Jupiter,) doubtless as being God of the world. (Roscoe iii. 150.) Nothing can better illustrate and confirm what has been above said of the device in the Genoese painting, than the ode of Zenobius Acciaiolus, given by Roscoe, App. No. cci. It is entitled, ” Ode qua Leo X, Luminare majus Ecclesia’.’Soli seu Apollini comparatur.” The following verses occur in it. I shall have to quote others afterwards, in developing the sense of the symbol. Flecte nunc versus, age mens canenti, Numen ut sacri recinam Leonis: Quern parem Dio, similemque Soli, Mundus adorat …. Nempe cum visens Laterana templa, Movit ex imo veniens ad altos Romuli colles, manifesta Solis Fulsit imago. Compare the legend respecting “The true light as shining in darkness” cited p. 55: also the language of Cardinal ^gidius: ” Videmus te Leone principe fieri, quae fecit, cum se terris osiendit, Leo de tribu Judse, &c.:” quoted by Bonanni i. 168:—and the verse, Quam primum nostro illuxit Leo Maximus orbi: in the piece entitled Simla ad Leonem, Roscoe Appendix, Ixxxviii.
lb. 426. “Nel primo octangulo si vedea un Papa che tenea un piede sopra la terra et I’altro nel mare: et havea nella man dextra una chiave coUa quale apriva el cielo, et uella sinistra un’ altra chiave: et drieto a lui si vedea la nobile citta Florida elevata in acre: et| sotto a questo di tal tenore il breve era: Elevata sum, quia penes te pafriee, parentum, maris, terrce, ccelique regnum esse conspicio.
Penni (418) calls this a palla, or ball, but is plainly mistaken. The legends decide the symbol. It was no heraldic ball that could be a prey worthy of the Papal glory, but the ball of the earth only.*(Eckhel, viii. 148, notices a similar mistake on the put of Nicephorus, respecting a golden globe in Constautine’s hand; which he calls μηλον χρυσεον, a golden apple.)—In another leonine painting in the pageant, (p. 420,) one in which a Lion appeared to have delivered Virtue assaulted by serpent formed Vices, an angel was represented as crowning the Lion. Bonanni gives a medal, struck at Rome on the occasion, in which the two devices are united:—viz. that of the lion having his paw on the terrine globe, and of the angel’s crowning him. Of this, as a very interesting illustration of our subject, especially because of the legend round it, (the Lion of the tribe of Judah, &c.,) I append a copy. Also one depicting the three royal magi, referred to p. 55.
See Vol 1.
Sequia una bianchissima cbinea, at quella sopra del dorso suo havea un tabernaciiletto adornato di brochato d’oro, nel qual dentro si posava la sacra Eucharistia: et di sopra era un bellissimo baldacchino, et circumcirca forsa vinticinque parafrenieri, con torce di purissima cera biancha accense in mano, et drieto li il sacrista con un baculo ligneo in mano, per custodia di Christo,” lb. 414.—So, argued the anti- Hussite Coctors, was fulfilled Christ’s promise of being ever with his”Chxu-ch. Foxe iii. 413.
Guicciardini observes on this festival, that it was universally believed that Rome had never seen a more superb and magnificent day since the inundation of the barbarians: that the expense was not less than 100,000 ducats: and that the magnificent parade confirmed the vulgar in their expectations of happiness, under the Pontificate of one who so abounded in liberality, and delighted in splendour. Vol. vi. p- 116. (Eng. Transl.)
The following is the inscription: Dogmate Papali datur, et simul imperiali, Ut sim cunctarum mater et caput ecclesiarum. Also the words ” Sacrosancta ecclesia Lateranensis omnium ecclesiarum mater et caput.” Moreri Diet. Art. Latran.
“Leo X. Pont. Opt. Be Cielo Ilisso Gentiles Civesque Sui Merito Nuraini Ejus Devoti,” was the legend of one of the Florentine paintings. Roscoe, 423. The representation of Leo as a special envoy from heaven, was a frequent conceit of the times: e. g. in Vitalis Castalio’s Verses on this occasion: (lb. App. Ixxi:) Jam novus in terras alto descendit Olympo Jupiter.
The scat so used (distinct from two others, perforated, of porphyry, which were also used) was called siercoracea, (!) in order to answer to the Vulgate, “De stercore erigit pauperem.” See Martene ii. 89.—Cancellieri, pp. 236—240, gives a curious account of it: with some extraordinary points mooted in connection, bearing on the common hut false report of there having been once a woman Pope: that same to which I have alluded in my Vol. i. p. 473. It seems that all the three were after Leo X’s time removed into the Cloisters of the Lateran: and thence by Pius VI into the Museo Pio Clcmcutino. Whence in fine they were carried off in the trouble times of the French invasion, A.D. 1796.
The verse is from Hannah’s song, 1 Sam. ii. 8: which song, from the mention of God’s anointed in verse 10, and from the Virgin Mary’s appropriation of much of it in h(!r hymn of praise on the annunciaticm, has both by Rabbinical conimentatoi-s, as Kimchi, and also by Christian, as Augustine, been generally supposed to have a reference to Christ. See Patrick’s Note.
Assumption is the usual word applied to the elevation of the Papal dignity. So in the French King’s mandate in the Lateran Council: ” Leone … ad summi Apostolatus apicem, atque universalis ecclesisB regimen, assumpto.” (Hard. ix. 1710, 1729.) In the ” Glyptiques et Numismatiques” by Achille Collas, lately published at Paris, there is given a medal struck in France, on occasion of Leo’s election to the Pontificate, in which Leo’s head is on one side, the Papal arms on the obverse, with the Legend Gloria et honore coronasti eion:” and the notice added, “Ex ejus assumptione universa Resp. Christiana maximam percepit voluptatem.” The application of the word to the Virgin Mary’s supposed assumption, and to Christ’s, will remind the reader of its general indication, when used by itself, of a heavenly ascension. And considering that it is continually thus applied by itself to the Papal elevation, and also the almost universal appropriation of things concerning Christ to the Popes, we can scarcely be wrong in here construing the term as intended to suggest the allusion noted in the text. Compare Phil. ii. 7—9. It is from the portico of the Lateran Church that the Pope blesses the people on the festival-day of Christ’s Ascension. Nibbi Itin. de Rome, i. 183.
Viz. that depicted in the Sealing Vision of Apoc. vii., and that in the incense offering vision of Apoc. viii. 3. Of course the contrast, whether allusive or direct, in the symbolic figuration, would only express the contrast actually manifested in each case on the world’s theater, in the real intervention.
In his Decretals, Pope Innocent III declared the Emperor’s power to be as inferior to the Pope’s, as the moon is interior to the sun. This was one of the propositions extracted from them by Luther, when he burnt the Decretals. Lib. i. Tit. 33, chap. vi.
So in the elegant Sylva of Johannes Philomusus Novocomensis, written on Leo’se election, and given in Roscoe, App. No. LXix; medio tu sol clarissimus orbe Largiris patriiw insigni luccmque caloremque.
See the quotation from Aldus Manutius subjoined to p. 54. Very similar are the hopeful prognostications of Vitalis Castalio, in Roscoe, App. Lxxi.—In the quotation from Aldus, I mentioned among the reasons for all these hopes from Leo’s Pontificate the fact, as yet quite recent, of those wonderful discoveries and conquests almost contemporaneously with his accession, of countries hitherto unknown, by the kings of Spain and Portugal. This excited the hope, he tells us,—and we find it perpetually dwelt on by the Italian writers of the time,—that under his presidency there would at length be the fulfilment of that ancient prophecy, that there should be finally throughout the world one fold and one shepherd. If Christian kings would but unite, he adds, against the infidels, ” paucis annis omnes homines ubique terrarum Deum verum cognoscerent, in Jesum coustanter crederent, eumque solum supplices adorarent: sed cognoscent, credent, adorabunt, te Pontijice:’ lb. xcii. p. 484.— I suspect the ” apertus orbis ” of the Genoese Painting had some reference to this auspicious opening of the world before Leo.
(Divina; niajestatis tua) conspectus, rutilanti cujus fulgore imbecilles oculi meicaligant, This was in the ninth Session of the Council. Hard. ix. p. 1760.
I refer to the Ode of Zenobius Acciaiolus, addressed to Leo as the “Luminare majus Ecclesiae,” and in which he is compared to Apollo, or the Sun: from which ode.
Sub pedibus sanctissimi Patris nostri, sanctitate ut sol renitentis.” Again,” Leo Papa…. sol refulgens, luna plena veritatis.” The Epistles of the Monk Elia Band Maronite Patriarch are given in Harduin ix. 1864, 1867. Compare the following from the Apology of Ficus of Mirandola, given in the Mores Catholici’Ym. 296: ” These things (viz. his books) . . the Holy See will judge:and, sitting thereupon, Innocent VIII: to resist whose judgment is impious. He is the Supreme judge on earth, who represents Him that is judge of quick and dead. He is the dispenser and treasurer of truth, who stands in the place of Him that is truth itself.” Innocent VIII died 1492: so that the era only just preceded that of LeoX.
“Noctem oculis, noctem menti excute,” is the invocation of the Papal Deity, (“Numen,”) by Franciscus Philomusus. Roscoe, ii. 400.
“Quello illuminatore della fede Christiana.” lb. p. 415.—It has been already mentioned, at p. 55, that on Leo’s gold coin with the device of a star, and three kings (of France, Spain, Germany, so ib. p. 426) as the three Magi gazing intently, and advancing towards it, there is the motto, ” Lux Vera in Tenehris lueet.
So in the Sylva of F. Philomusus Novocomensis, already quoted from: Salve! magne Parens hominum, cui summa potestas, Suramus honos, triplici frontem diaderaate cingit. oujus de luce suprema Celsum iter ad summum nobis aperitur Olympum: Quemque Deus dedit esse Deum mortalibus yegris. I must not omit the comment furnished by the Maronite Patriarch, on this ascription to the Pope of the opening of the way to heaven. “Leoni, plcno raisericordiae, Vicario Bei…quem Deus scqui nos voluit, januam et indicem via reetce…qui videt animas peccatrices, quas ct potest e pcenis eripere: cui pro salute, proque via salutis, geimflectunt sensus.” Hard, ix. 1857. And let me add too the earlier testimony of Huss, to the effect of this being in his time the common doctrine of the doctors of the Romish church. “Ye preachers who preach that the Pope is the God of the earth …. that he is the well spring from which flow all virtue and goodness: that he is the sun of the Holy Church.” Ap. Foxe, iii. 502. The reader will not tail to observe how perpetually the Pope was addressed as God. Of this more here after utis, geimflectunt sensus.” Hard, ix. 1857. And let me add too the earlier testimony of Huss, to the effect of this being in his time the common doctrine of the doctors of the Romish church. “Ye preachers who preach that the Pope is the God of the earth …. that he is the well spring from which flow all virtue and goodness: that he is the sun of the Holy Church.” Ap. Foxe, iii. 502. The reader will not tail to observe how perpetually the Pope was addressed as God. Of this more hereafter.
In the ode of Zenobius, addressed to Pope Leo as Apollo, the double idea of hi as the God of light and of healing is constantly kept in view. So too Yitalis: (ib. 436:) Quique prius morbi ingruerant mortalibus segris Luce Leonini pelluntur ApoUinis alma.
See the exemplification of this in Luther’ s own appeals and deference to the Pope, at the coranieuceraent of the Reformation.—In the 15th century, the question had been raised whether the ultimate appeal in questions of faith, as well as of discipline, was to the Pope or to a General Council. The prerogative was now generally accorded to the Pope. And, even supposing that it attached to a General Council, the Pope, without whom it could not exist, had such influence over it, that it only spoke as he prompted. See my Chapter on the Image of the Beast, Apoc. xiii. In after-times, and especially among the Jansenists, there arose the distinction of questions (of faith and of fact).
So the Dominican Priorias, head of the Inquisitors at Rome, in his condemnation of Luther’s Theses. Merle i. 307- This was one of the Articles from the Decretals burnt by Luther, in 1520, with the Pope’s Bull. Another was; The Pope has the power to interpret Scripture, and to teach, as he pleases; and no one may interpret differently. Scott’s Luther i. 121.
“They bereave the Church, the spouse of Christ, of her true comfort, as taking away the sun out of the world.” So P. Hamilton the Reformer, in his Common Places; quoted in Middleton’s Biography. Evangel, i. 76.
The building of St. Peter’s (begin on a scale of great magnificence by Julius II) is expressly mentioned in the Papal Brief as the object of this issue of indulgences. Roscoe iii. 136.
See on the general subject of Indulgences my earlier notices, Vol. i. 409, ii. 17.
In what follows I abridge from M. Merle D’Aubigne’s very interesting History of the Reformation, i. 229, &c. See also Waddington’s Hist, of’ Reform, i. 24, &c.
He had been employed in the sale of Indulgences from the year 1502.
“Le Seigneur notre Dieu n’est plus Dieu. II a remis tout pouvoii- au Pape.” Merle D’Aub. i. 233.
Waddington ib. 27 marks this strongly
Pudet referri,” says Fabroiii, “quie ipse (Tetzel) et dixit et fecit; quasi legatus e cceIo missus fuisset, ad qiiodlibet piaculum expiandum atque purgaiidum.” So Fabroni, cited by Roscoe iii. 158. But in all this Tetzel acted under the instructions and the eye of the Archbishop, the Pope’s copartner;by whom, even after Luther’s appeal to him, no disapprobation of them was expressed. Indeed by Cardinal Cajetan, after the matter had proceeded so far as to induce the direct Papal interference in the matter, nothing was objected to Tetzel. Instead of this he expressly asserted and confirmed the received doctrine of indulgences.—See my Note 4 p. 17 supra, on the subject of the Papal power of Indulgences. And see too Seckendorfs notice (p. 9, in the Introduction to his History of the Reformation) of Clement the VI’s declaration, in his Bidl of 1343, proclaiming the coming Jubilee, respecting the Pope’s power to grant them: as the divinely appointed dispenser of the treasure of the supererogatory merits of Christ and the saints
Compare the painting of the Pope with the two keys of heaven and purgatory in his hand. Also the Maronite Patriarch’s description of him, as “qui videt auira. is peccatrices, quas et potest e pamis eripere,” given in a Note preceding, p. 64.
This was at Annaberg, and is related by Myconius. ” Bientot je fermcrai la Srtf dn cinl, j’etcindrai l’eclat de ce wleil de grme qui reluit a vos ycux.” Merle ‘Aub. p. 243.
See the History in Merle D’Aub. ib.
i.e. from £6, if ducats of silver, to Is. lb. 236. Tetzel was famous for his discrimination of the purchaser’s rank, and proportioning the price accordingly.
So (ib. 251) he paid for his pallium, some 30,000 florins. See p. 20 supra.
Ambrose Ansbert. Referring to Teitan, one appellative of tJie iSun, and which contains in its letters the number 666, as very possibly the intended name of the Beast, Antichrist, he remarks as follows. “Nee absurdum habet intellectum ut damnatus ille homo tunc solem iejmtiti(e asserat, ac lucem veram quaj illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum: cum sit in eo apostata augelus transiigurans se in angelum lucis, suadens honiinibus se lucem veram protiteri, quos vult a luce justitise separare.” B. P. M. xiii. 552. 2. T. Aquuias. ” Etfudit phialam iu solum: id est Antichristum: qui se solem existimabit, et dicet mundum illuminatum per eum esse. Ipse euim sibi usm-pabit noraen veri solis, id est Christi: de quo dicitui-, ego sum lux mundi.” De Antichristo, p. 103. (Rome, 1840.)
The following was the general form of Tetzel’s Indulgences, as given by Dr. Robertson; and also by Waddington Hist, of Church iii. 344, Hist, of Reform.!. 27. “May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy upon thee, and absolve thee, by the merits of his most holy passion! And I by his authority, and that of his blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of the most holy See, granted and committed to me iu these parts, do absolve thee, first, from all ecclesiastical censures, in whatever manner they have been incurred: and then from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they may be, even from such as are reserved for the cognizance of the Apostolic see. And, as far as the keys of the church extend, I remit to you all punishment which you deserve in purgatory on their account. And I restore you to the holy sacraments of the church, to the unity of the faithful, and to that innocence and purity which you possessed at baptism: so that, if you should die now, the gates of punishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight shall be opened. And, if you shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force when you are on the point of death. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. F. B. J. Tetzel, Sub-commissaries.” The apparent ambiguity of one or two clauses, as Dr. Waddington observes, is abundantly done away with by the decisive language of others. Even in the most ambiguous, “in so far as the keys of the church extend,” there would appear little ambiguity to the people. For, as the Florentine painting represented the Pope with one key opening heaven, and having in the other hand another key, that of purgatory, so it was not doubted by the people at that time, that the Pope’s power of the keys was absolute, even to the extent Tetzel’s stated.—Luther’s Table-Talk, Ch. xxiii, on Antichrist, furnishes an excellent illustration. ” In the time of my being at Rome a disputation was openly held (at which attended thirty learned masters besides myself) against the Pope’s power; who boasted that with his right hand he commanded the angels in heaven, with his left drew souls out of purgatory, and that his person was mix or mingled with the Godhead. Calixtus disputed against the same: and showed that power was only given to the Pope to bind and loose on earth. When the other outrageously opposed him, Calixtus said, that he spoke it only by way of disputation, and not that he held it so.” ii. 31. (Ed. 1840).
 It was on March 25, 1514, that audience was given to the embassy. The envoy’s name was Tristano Cugna. Roscoe ii. 300.
This is celebrated by Aurelius Serenus in his Thcatrum Capitolinura, given No.Ixxxiv. in Roscoe’s Appendix, ii. 460; “Ut docile animal,” he says, “supplextuuni niiraen sentiret adoraietque.”
Pacecchi. The oration, which was the subject of high commendation, both from the Pope himself, and from the Roman writers and literati, is given in full by Roscoe. Appendix, No. ci.
Apud majestatem tuam, in sublimi solio sedentem,..inter sacrosancta; ecclesia’ Ronianie cardines, ac tot clarissima mundi lumina, quasi solem inter sua sidera micantem,…venerunt timor et tremor super me, et contexerunt tenebra?.”
“In tanto fluctuantis animi iestu hrorerem procul dubio, nisi serenus iste divinusque Tultus tuus, discusso mentis nubilo, omnes jam ditficultates pervinceret.
So Pacecchi. lb. 508.
Te verum Christi Vicarium, maximum Romanse ecclesiae Pontificem, totius Christianse Rcipublicie Prajsulcm, recognoscimus, fatemur, adoramus.” Earlier in his oration he had said: “ Venimus ab ultimo Lusitaniic recessu, ut te Dei Vicarium, Christiante reUgionis summum Antistitem, unicuni Romanje ecclesia gregisque Dominici Pastorem veneremur, colamus, atque in tuo nomine Christum, cujus vicem geri.s, adoremus.”—A letter from the King of Portugal accompanied; addressed, “Ad Kauclum Patrem et Dominuni nostrum Leonem X.” Roscoe ii. 300, 503.
The Bull is given Harduin vi. ii. 1333. After praising his ambitious design, as if arising from the pious wish of teaching the Christian Faith more perfectly to the island’s rude inhabitants, it speaks thus of Papal rights. “Sane Iliberniani et omnes insulas quibus sol justitice Christus illuxit, et quit; documenta fidei Christianas ceperunt, ad jus beati Petri, ct sacrosanctas Romana? ecclesiie (quod tua et nobilitas recognoscit) non est dubium pertinere.” And then Henry’s offer of the annual payment is mentioned: and the permission sued for granted on the express understanding that this bribe should be paid:”jure nimirum ecclesiastico illilato ct integio pcrmancnte; et salva beato Petro, et sacrosanctae Romanse ecclesiae, de singulis domibus annuS unius denarii pensione.”
Robertson’s America i. .54. In Mr. F. Faber’s Sights and Thoughts, p. 52, it is mentioned that Philip was accordingly crowned King of the Canary Isles at Avignon, whore Pope Clement then resided: and walked about the streets afterward with a crown on his head, a scepter in hand, and a resplendent train attending him.
Hence the sea in Pope Calistus’ modal, (struck AD. 1456,) overlooked by the Papal tiara elevated on a cross. Given in my vol. iii. P. IV. ch. v.
Robertson ib. 68.
lb. p. 160. Zeal for propagating the Christian faith is specified in the Papal Bull, as Alexander’s chief motive in granting it. Accordingly missionary friars were sent out with Columbus on his second voyage, one being the Apostolic Legate. Count Bossi, in his Italian Translation of Roscoe, observes that Alexander VI, besides this grant to Ferdinand, conferred on him the dominions of the king of Navarre: a king whom Alexander had excommunicated previously, and Ferdinand conquered. Roscoe ii. 304. Dr. S. R. Maitland thinks it strange that no notice should have been taken in the Apocalypse of the discovery of America, supposing it a prophecy of the history of Christendom. (Remarks on Christian Guardian, p. 120.) If I am correct in my understanding of the vision before us, the supposed omission does not exist.
It was not till 1497 that the Portuguese, under Vasco di Gama, discovered and passed the Cape of Good Hope, towards the Indies. The fifty or sixty years preceding, they had, as Robertson observes, been creeping along the coast from Cape Non to Cape de Verd, the latter only twelve degrees south of the former.—Columbus’ discovery of America, in 1492, just preceded that of the Cape of Good Hope.
See Robertson’s America, Vol. iv. p. 141, citing Rymer’s Feedera.—This only applies, of course, to the earliest English attempts at colonization made before Elizabeth: by which Princess the grant by Papal Bull was held (see p. 75, Note 1 ) little sacred.
Seneca’s lines were also referred to: Venient annis Saecula seris, quibus Oceanus Vincula rerum laxet, et ingens Pateat tellus, Tethysque*(Some read Tiphys, Bonanni (i. 132) Siphys.) novos Detegat orbes, nee sit terris Ultima Thule.
Roscoe ii. 304.—Under Elizabeth however, as might be expected, the validity of the grant was not admitted. On the Spanish ambassador’s reclamation against Drake, A.D. 1580, for having navigated seas which were in the dominion of Spain, Elizabeth’s answer was, ” que les Anglois ne reconnaissaient en aucune maniere la propriete que le Roi d’Espagne s’en attribuait, ni le don pretendu d’lm Pape, qui n’avoit en aucun droit de disposer des pais et des mers qui ne lui apparteuaient pas.” Rapin ad ann. 1580.
Bonanni gives a medal struck by Pope Leo soon after his accession, with his head on the obverse, the five balls, his heraldic insignia, on the reverse, and the legend, ” Gloria et honore coronasti eum:”—a passage, as Bonanni observes, from the 8th Psalm, and prophetic of Messiah’s ultimate universal empire on earth. Compare Heb. ii. 7, 8.—See too the one given by me supra.
The eloquence of Madame de Stael is vainly spent, in attempting to show identity between these two things that are so essentially different. See Corinne, Book X., Chap, iv., v., &c.
The name seems originally to have been derived from Plautiiis Lateranus, whose palace occupied the spot in Nero’s time: which emperor put him to death, as an accomplice in Piso’s conspiracy. After which it appears to have become an imperial property. We read in the Historian Augusta that M. Aurelius was educated at Rome on the Coelian Hill, in his grandfather’s house, “juxta ledes Laterani.” Capitolin. 1.
The Emperor Constantine, on his conversion, is said to have given to the Bishop of Rome first the Lateran Palace, and then the Lateran Church built near it: which latter, after building, he richly endowed for the support of lamps and ministers. So Anastasia the Librarian reports the tradition, in his work on the Magnificence of Constantine: a writer of the 9th century. Already in tlie 4th and 5th centuries it appears that this church was one of popular resort. Jerome in his Epist. xxx, De Morte Eabiolae, (written about A.D. 400,) speaking of her, tells how in her widowhood, “Ante diem Paschiie in Basilica quondam Laterani, qui C;esariano truncatus est gladio, staret in ordine pcenitentium: ” &c. Again, writing against Symmachus, Prudentius has the line: Catibus aut magnis Lateranas cun-it ad ades. See Moreri, Art. Lateran; also Burton’s Rome, ii. 170.—No doubt it is this which Pope Martin refers to, in his Letter to Theodorus, as that in which he was seized by the soldiers of the Greek Emperor A.D. 650: “in ecclesia qua; cognomiuatur Constantiniana: quse prima in toto muudo constructa et stabilita est a beatiE memoriie Constantino Imperatore, et est juxta episcopium.” (Ilarduin iii. 677.)
Of subscribed names I observe 162 in the 9th Session: and it is added that there were present “alii qnamplures domini ecclesiastici et seculares.” Hard. ix. 1732.
” Universaltm repraioeutuuiis ecciesiam:” Sth Session. Ilarduin Coucil. Ix 1715, &c.—Bossuet, and others of the Gallican Church, endeavoured subsequently to make out that this was not a Universal Council: the abrogation of the Pragmatic Sanction which constituted, as we shall see, a very important part of its proceedings, having excited their aversion to it. But, convened as it was in proper form, and, after the adhesion of the French king in the 8th Session, with all the states of Western Christendom as parties consenting and acting in it, the objection is evidently quite untenable.
“Intravcrunt cardinales, patriarchae, archiepiscopi, episcopi, abbates, &c., ornati pluvialibus, planetis, et dalmaticis, juxta ordinis qualitateni, et mitris, locum in medio Lateranensis ecclesia3 pro celebratione concilii hujusmodi paratum.” So Harduiu ix. 1-574, of the 1st Session: adding also: ” cum suis subselliis, tabulatis, clausuris, altaribus, Pontifical! cathedra, ornamentis, et ordinibus, quie in hujusmodi sacrorum conciliorum celebrationibus servari et fieri consuevisse reperiimtur.” Compare the description in Harduin vii. 378, 687, of the arrangement and order observed, in the first and second General Councils at Lyons, held A.D. 1245, 1274. On occasion of this Lateran Council sitting, it is said that the arrangements and order observed were the same as usual. Hard. ix. 1574.—Compare too my copy of a Romish picture of the earliest Council held at Rome, given in my 3rd Volume, Part IV. ch. vii.
See Pope Innocent’s observation on the Papal mitre p. 53, Note 1 supra.
Compare the saying of Gerhert Archbishop of Rheims, (or perhaps of Arnulph Bishop of Orleans,) “in the Sjmod of Rheims, A.D. 991. ” What do you conceive this man, sitting on a lofty throne, glittering in purple and gold….If he be destitute of charity, and puffed up by knowledge alone, he is Antichrist sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself that he is God.” See Bishop Newton, p. 574, (Ed. 1827,) and Maitland’s Inquiry, p. 59. Maitland suggests that the then accused Bishop of Rheims, rather than the Pope, may have been meant. But did a Bishop glitter in purple, as his distinctive?
See Vol. i. pp. 389—391
“Ad ecclesias exaltationem, unitatem, et reforraationem: schismatum vero et hoeresum totalera extirpationcm.” So in Pope Julius’ second Bull of Convocation. Ilarduin, ix. 1591. The Bull was issued by him ” auctoritate Uumipoteutis Dei, qua in terris fungimur.” lb. 1590.
Ad tuos sanctissimos devoluta pedes iu hunc modum opem huniiliter implorare videtur. Ten’as et raaria circuivi, et iiuUuni prietei’ te, ..Pontifex beatissime, qui me magis diligeret, digiiitatemque meam et salutem magis curaret, inveni…Ad te igitur supplex, tanquam ad verum principem, protectorera, et spousxim, accedo…Cura, Pater beatissime, ut sponsiB tuie forma decorque redeat: &c. Cura ut salutem qaam dedisti nobis, et vitam, et spiritum, non amittamus. Tu enim pastor, tu medicus, tu gubernator,..tu denique alter Beus in tenis.” Hai’d. ib. col. 1651. The Pope is by others also addressed as the sponsus of the Church. So in Sess. vi. Col. 1687; Sess. is. col. 1765, “ego te ut ecclesiifi uuiversse priepositum sponsum amplector: ” &c. (Compare the account of the Pope’s marriage to it given p. 52 supra.)—The first quotation, being in the 4th Session, was addressed to Leo’s predecessor Julius II: and shows that it was to the Pope as Pope, not to the individual, that the blasphemous flatteries as to prerogative were applied: though it was on the individual Pope Leo X, that the hopes rested as the fulfill er of the prophecies of the latter day.—Let the address “tu alter Beus,” &c. not be overlooked.
The former specially in Cardinal Cajetan’s Sermon, (Session 2,) on the test, ” I saw that holy city the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven: ” in which, considering the Church Catholic, with Rome as its head, as the Jerusalem intended, he illustrates the five points, viz. its being a city or state,—holy,—Jerusalem,—new, — heavenly: the new being explained by contrast with the Jewish Church, which was of the older dispensation:—also in the Sermon by the Archbishop of Patras in the 10th Session, on the text, ” Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised in the City of our God,” &c., (Psalm xlvi. 1,) fi’om which extracts are given in some Notes following: and which distinctly refers the heavenly state of the New Jerusalem to the reformed state of the Romish Church, now about to be accomplished. Hard. 1618, 1786. The Cardinal Cajetan of the 2nd Session, was the same De Vio that became so well known after wards, from his conference as Papal Legate with Luther. 1 beg the reader to refer to my observations Vol. i. p. 266, on the earliest transfer to the Church earthly and visible, of the Scripture language and promises respecting Christ’s true Church, invisible in its corporate character, and spiritual. It is a point very important.
“Tsedet vero pigetque fidem, pietatem, religionem, nostris temporibus ita tepuisse, et psne diserim contabuisse videri, ut vis earum uUa vestigia sint reliqua.” Hard. 1686.
“Ne flevei’is, filia Sion: quia ecce venit Leo de tribu Juda, radis David: suscitavit tibi Deus Salvatorem….Te, Leo Beatissime, Salvatorem vcnturum speravimus.” 1887. The Saviour that was to come:τον ερχομενον The language is indeed strange: but the allusion cannot be mistaken. Compare Matt. xi. 3, Heb. x. 37, Apoc. i. 4, &c.
This expression is from the oration in the 7th Session: in which various similar profane applications of texts belonging to Christ occur: for example, “I, if I be lifted up, shall draw all men unto me,” which is applied to the expected effects of Leo’s assumption to the Popedom. Again; “Of them that thou hast given mo, have I lost none.” Hard. cols. 1701, 1705.
“Serpeutem veros; evissimi schismatis hydram caritatis igne, et pastoralis ofBcii adustione, extinguite.” ib. 1687- This burning by the Pope, in his pastoral office and character, illustrates, and is illustrated by, the painting of the shepherd fishing and casting the bad fish into the fire: p. 56, supra.
“Convenerunt in hoc sacrosancto Lateranensi Concilio ad reformationem turn ecclesiae, turn orbis rmiversi, pro gloria regni Christi, et suaj sanctfe RomauiE ecclesinc et Apostolic;e sedis exaltatione: que de proximo, juxta temporum computationem, pro secvmda sabbati fieri debet in magna et ultima reformatione,” &c. Sess. x. Hard, col. 1786. The secunda sabbati is enlarged on here and elsewhere as the era of the completion of the sabbatism of promise: the phrase prima sabbati being used for the time of its commencement at Christ’s first coming. (Ducange, on the word Sabbatum, overlooks this use of the phrase.)—To this too is applied the palm-bearing vision of Apoc. vii., in Sess. ix.
This last clause is from the conclusion of the oration of the 4th Session:• ” Ita namque restituetur tibi hcereditas tua:..redibunt aurea secula: tuoque flante Spiritu effluent aqute, et in-oratione tua terra pinguescet.” The reader will mark how expressly it makes the Pope heir of the World, in place of Christ: and also its blasphemous ascription to him of sending forth the Divine Spirit as his own. Ibid. 1651.
ib. 1667, &c.
This last quotation is from the Sermon of the Archbishop of Patras in the 10th Session: ” Sed ubi laudabitur? Dicat Propheta: in civitate Dei: in saneta utique immaculata eeclesia Dei, et, quod fortius et dignius est, in monte sancto Apostolic* sedis ejus: de quo Isaias, Et erit in novissimis diebus mons preparatus in domo Domini super verticem omnium montium: qui est potestas plenitudinis Christi ejus in sede Apostolica.” Hard. col. 1786.—He notices the number X attached to Leo’s title, as suiting the conclusion and winding up of the dispensation. ” Hoc tempore magnaj reformationis . . te canonice electum existimo, ut sis Leo in sede Petri, non a.b re decimus, pro Christi regno nostro tempore, si volueris, toto orbe terrarum innovando assumptus.” lb. 1784.
It is to be remembered that the Acts of the Council, including the orations, were published with his approbation and sanction.—”If,” says Dr. Maitland, (Answer to Cunningham, p. 42,) “the Pope accepted and approved them, (viz. Blasphemous appellations, as that or God he was guilty: ” i. e. of blaspheme. Such was now notably the case. See the examples, pp. 80, 65, &c.—His acceptance of them was the more marked, because the authentic copy of the Acts of the Council, including the orations or sermons delivered in it, was revised carefully under his direction, and published with the sanction of his hand and his Preface. See Hard. ix. 1562, 1563.
” Praeda digna me;B glorias! “—” Mihi cur;B est.”
“Pragmatic sanction was a general term for all important ordinances of church or state: those perhaps more properly, which were enacted in public assemblies with the counsel of eminent juris consults or Pragmatici.” Waddington, iii. 160. —That to which the title attached by way of eminence, and which is referred to continually in the history of the papal negotiations with France for the last half of the fifteenth century, as well as in the proceedings of this Lateran Council, was passed in the Council of Bourges, A.D. 1438:—a Council of the Galilean Church, but attended by a papal legate, and one too from the Council General of Basle, which was then sitting. By it the Pope was declared, 1st, to have no authority in France over temporal: whereby the clergy were relieved from pecuniary contributions continually exacted by the Popes, more especially the annates or first year’s produce of benefices: and 2ndly, in spirituals, though the lord suzerain, yet to be restricted and controlled by the canons and regulations of the ancient Church Councils. 3rdly, The authority of the General Council of Basle was recognized in it: and so the great principle of both it, and the Council of Constance before it, that the Pope was subordinate to a General Council. The Bull of Leo, which assailed this Pragmatic Sanction as unlawful and schismatic, and disparaged also the Councils (conciliabula) of Bourges and Basle, was followed by a Concordat between the Pope and the King of France, Francis I: in which he Pope’s temporal jurisdiction over the Galilean church was allowed, and the annates exnot tacitly (as Dean Waddington says by mistake, iii. 301) but expressly restored to him. Tit. xliii. Hard. ix. 1886, and 1812, &c.—This Concordat continued in force, till the new arrangement brought about by Bossuet in 1682.
See the account in Eoscoe ii. 231—236. Also the notice of it in a letter from Cardinal Bembo to the Emperor Maximilian. lb. App. Ixxxv. In it he speaks of the penitent schismatics as “aura zephyri coelestis afflati.” See p. 37 Note 3 supra.
Sess. viii. Of this more in a subsequent chapter on the death of the Witnesses.
“In banc insipientiam cadimt (sc. hsresis) quicumque ad cognoscendam veritatem aliquo impediuntur obscuro: et non ad propheticas voces, Apostolicas literas, evangelicas auctoritates, sed semetipsos recurrunt.” Oration of Bernard Zane, Sess. I. Hard. col. 1604.
” Ecclesia sponsa nostra.” lb. 1810, 1830.
“in sancta unione sine ruga et macula.” lb. 1810.
In the introduction of his Bull of the ninth session, Leo speaks of looking to the fulfilment of his charge over the universal church, “ex summo apostolatus apice, tanquam ex vertice Montis Sion.” Hard. 1742.
This was in the tenth session, Hard. 1780. In the Bull the complaint is noticed as prevalent, ” quod nonnulli artis imprimendi magistri, in diversis mundi partibus, libros tam Graecte, Arabica;, et Chald8B» linguarum in Latinum translatos, quam alios Latino ac vulgari sermone editos, errores etiam in fide, ac perniciosa dogmata religioni christianse contraria, iraprimere ac publice vendere praesumunt: ” and that hence arose a necessity for the papal censorship of the press.—It was not the first papal enactment of the kind. Within the forty years preceding, Sixtiis IV and Alexander VI had anticipated Leo in it. But I presume it was considered more stringent than former ones: being singled out for approbation subsequently by the Council of Trent. The specification, among what were objectionable, of translations from the Hebrew and the Greek into the vulgar tongues, recalls to our minds the old antibibical edict of Pope Alexander V, still unrepealed, and now resuntioned. See p. 22 Note, supra. Roscoe (ii. 291) suggests that this act should be regarded as rather originating from the Council than from Leo of his own accord. This does not effect my view of it. It was the policy of Rome. Further, he suggests Leo’s encouragement of Biblical, as of Oriental literature generally: exemplifying in Cardinal Ximenes’ famous Polyglot, or rather Triglot, published under Leo’s sanction, and dedicated to him. But this was quite consistent with the policy of shutting out the Bible ft-om the common people. The Triglot was in the learned languages, Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Indeed Cardinal Ximenes, in his preface, declares that it ought to be confined to those three, as the three in which the inscription on the cross was written. Let me add, that having placed the Latin in the middle column, the Hebrew and Septuagint Greek on the sides, he speaks of the latter two as representing respectively the Jewish synagogue and Eastern or Greek Church: which, like the two thieves, were the one on the right, the other on the left: while Jesus, that is the Roman Church, represented by the Vulgate, was in the middle! M’Crie’s Reform, in Spain, 69—72.
“Mandantes omnibus qui hoc onus (prjedicandi) sustinent,..ut evangelicam veritatem, et sanctam scripturam, juxta interpretationem…doctorum quos ecclesia vel usus diuturnus approbait,…pradicent et explaneut.” Hard. 1808.
usus diuturnus approbait,..pradicent et explaneut.” Hard. 1808. 2 “Tempus quoque pra-fixum futurorum malorum, vel Antichristi adventum, aut certum diem judicii, priedicare vel asserere nequaquam praesumant.” This, as well as the enactment previous, was in the 11th session. Hard. ib.
“Ut omnes ficti Christiani, ac de fide male sentientes, cujuscumque generis aut nationis fiierint, necnon hiretici, seu aliqua haresis labe polluti, a Chiisti fidelium ccetu penitus elimineutur.” Sess. ix.: ib. col. 1757.
There is one true doctrine asserted, it may be said, viz. the immortality of the soul; and a wholesome canon passed in the condemnation of philosophers, who (whether as disciples of Averroes, or any other) denied it. But let it he remembered that this was an error which, if admitted into the popular creed, would have destroyed not only religion but Romanism: for it would have done away with purgatory and hell: and so with the whole system of established priest craft.
Hard. ix. 1830. See on this Bull,” Waddington, ii. 315.
“Quibus (i. e. Vicariis Petri) ex Libri llegum testimonio ita obedire necesse est, ut qui non obedierit morte moriatur.” This is at the head of the same Bull, for the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction. Hard. ix. 1826.
” Leo Episcopus, servus servorum Dei,” stands at the head of all the decrees. They are drawn up too in the first person plural as his decrees: a note being subjoined at the end, of the assent of the Council.
“As then the Lord Jesus Christ, for the royal and glorious principle of his nature, was beforehand preached of as a lion, in the same manner have the Scriptures spoken beforehand of the Antichrist also as a lion, for his tyrannical and violent nature. For the deceiver wishes to liken himself in respect of all things to the Son of God. The Christ is a lion, and the Antichrist is a lion. The Christ is a king, and the Antichrist is a king.” So Hippolytus, De Antichristo: quoted by Greswell, Vol. i. p. 376. He adds: ” The Saviour was manifested as a lamb, and he likewise shall appear as a lamb, being within a wolf, &c. And it is observable that De Pennis in his Tract, when about to describe Pope Leo’s progress, compares him as well to the lamb as to the lion. ” II nostro Leone assai piu umile ed immaculato che il puro agnello.” Roscoe ii. 407.
There were now and then a few that individually expressed disagreement. But the number was very small;—from 1 to 5, 10, and once 19.
“Et ut ad propria aliquibus spiritualibus muneribus refecti curaulatiori gaudio remeare possint, illis eorumque faniiliaribus plenariam omnium peccatorum suorum remissionem et indulgentiam, semel in vita et in mortis articulo, elargimur.” Hard, p. 1861.
Isa. xixi. 4.