or no reference to the place he occupies, chronologically, in the series. To render our notions, in this instance, as definite as possible, I would look at the subject in different lights, and in doing so, I find only one respect in which the influence of time is clearly to be traced, in rendering the doctrine and practice of religious celibacy of a later age, unlike what they had been at an earlier time; and this, which I have already alluded to, relates to those ecclesiastical enactments, and points of discipline, which, from time to time, were found to be indispensable, as corrective of the abuses whereto the system was obnoxious. These changes, or amendments, it would serve no purpose as related to our present argument, to specify. Let it be remembered however, that although they may have implied some stretches of tyranny, they are not, generally, of the nature of progressive corruptions. In every other respect, time made nothing essentially worse than it had been almost from the first. To come to instances :if we are thinking of those abject and frivolous observances that have attached to the monastic modes of life, and to the devotional routine of the monastery, I would request any who may be inclined to demur at my representations, to compare whatever descriptions he may choose to select of the mummeries of the monasticism of the twelfth century, with the institutes of Cassian, which contain the principles and the minute details of the monastic institution, as it had already been digested, and then long practised, in the east, and the west, so early as the fourth century. There may be variations, distinguishing the two schemes of life; but will a reasonable man affirm that there is anything to prefer, in the more ancient model? There is no degradation of the intellect, no bondage of the moral sentiments, no substitution of forms for realities; there is no drivelling belonging to the monkery of the middle ages, that may not be matched, to the full, in the monkery of the bright times of Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Augustine. I here put the question to any opponent What is it that you precisely mean by the corruptions of popery,' in respect to the monastic system? or in other words, 'Can you make it appear, to the satisfaction of thinking men, that this same system had become more frivolous, and therefore, in a religious sense, more pernicious, in the twelfth century, than it was at the opening of the fourth?' I am tempted here to cite the very words of Cassian, who, in stickling, with great seriousness, for some inanity of the monkish daily ritual, says, . . . qui modus antiquitus constitutus, idcirco per tot sæcula penes cuncta monasteria intemeratus nunc usque perdurat; quia non humana adinventione statutus à senioribus affirmatur, sed cœlitus angeli magisterio patribus fuisse delatus. These observances then could have been no novelties.* But again; if we think of those enormous follies and impious whims, which, connected as they always were with the monastic life, imposed a mask, sometimes of idiotcy and sometimes of madness, upon the bright face of christianity, I ask whether this sort of corruption was more extreme in a later age, than it had been in an earlier; or, if any think so, I would send them no further than to the Lausaic history of the pious and really respectable Palladius, a bishop, a man of some learning, and the intimate friend of the illustrious Chrysostom, and the companion of his exile. I am not about to cite any samples of the utter nonsense and the spiritual ribaldry of this book. Let those refer to it, and satisfy themselves, who are still clinging to the fond idea of a golden age of christianity. The legends collected by Palladius, relate, for the most part, to an earlier age than his own; and romances of like quality are to be found in Eusebius, Ephrem, Jerome, Sozomen, and Theodoret, and as belonging to the times of the heathen persecutions. No one, I am sure, who really knows what he is talking about, will dare, with such documents before him, to play the quixote, and break a lance in defence of the honour of the ancient monkery. Or, if we were to make inquiry concerning the half-confessed, and yet sufficiently attested more serious evils and horrors that have disgraced the institute of religious celibacy, I think that those who have been used to look into the fathers will admit there to be reason enough for believing that the natural consequences of this institute, when it came to include promiscuous masses of the religious body, developed themselves fully, from almost the first. On this point, I will not put the clue into any one's hand: but leave the broad assertion to be contradicted by Cassian. Inst. lib. ii. c. 4. " * those who may think it discreet to dare me to the proof. One hint only I will drop, and must do so in anticipation of what it would give me no surprise (whatever disgust) to witness;-I mean a modest, sentimental, plausible endeavour, to feel the religious pulse, in reference to the celestial and apostolic' practice of vowing virginity to the Lord.' In any such case there would be no more room for compromise, but evidence must be instantly spread out before all eyes, showing what have, in every age, and from the first, been the deplorable consequences of this pernicious custom. Some may smile at the mere supposition that any such endeavour should be made-out of the pale of the romish communion. For my own part (unless I may have had the honour of suggesting a little caution to certain parties) it is nothing but what I think we are to look for, as the next move in the game. There yet remains, however, one other point of view, whence the same subject may be regarded, and that is the bearing of the institute of celibacy upon the religious principle, which was appealed to for giving it support: now, without anticipating what will more properly find a place, a little way on, I will state the fact that, at a very early time, a false maxim of spiritual computation had become so inveterate, as that the most sedate and judicious divines, without hesitation, employed it, in the estimates they formed of the comparative excellence of different religious conditions. That is to say, a rule of spiritual eminence is appealed to, which overlooks all reference to what is truly spiritual, or, in any genuine sense, moral; and puts in its room what is formal, visible, or ecclesiastical. I will refer, in this instance, to the sober-minded Isidore of Pelusium, also, a bishop, and the personal friend of Chrysostom, and whose expositions of scripture are frequently such as to deserve respectful attention. We have seen in what way Tertullian, Cyprian, and, with not more absurdity, St. Bernard, pervert the plain sense of scripture, for the purpose of hitching the virgins of Christ upon the loftiest pinnacle of the ecclesiastical structure. Now for Isidore, who, to do him justice, inserts a frequent awayɛ, when there appears to be a danger lest, in his recommendation of celibacy, matrimony should be despoiled of its due honours. .... .... 'The warfare of virginity is indeed great, glorious, and divine; yet does it (when successfully waged) diminish the arduousness of our conflict with other of our spiritual adversaries . . . . as high as the heaven is above the earth, and as far as the soul excels the body, so does the state of virginity surpass the state of matrimony. . . . . Wherefore let the contemners of virginity cease their prating, and henceforward acknowledge, dutifully, its princesslike dignity, and submit themselves to its behests; placing themselves under its protection, and availing themselves of its mediatorial (or intercessory) office. And, if I may employ celestial emblems, I must compare those who embrace the virgin state, to the sun; while those who only observe continence, are to be likened to the moon; and those living in honourable wedlock, to the stars; and so, as the divine Paul reckons the degrees of dignity, and says-there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars!' * Now it is no matter to us, whether Isidore be right or wrong in the relative position which he assigns to the three estates; but it is of real importance, to our present argument, to observe the fact that, so utterly fallacious and fatally erroneous a principle of religious feeling had, at this time, come to be universally received, and admitted, by even the most judicious divines; and that, in accordance with this principle, the piety and purity of the heart had come to be subordinated to the visible and ecclesiastical condition, and that continence was regarded as mere moonshine, when placed in the same heavens with the solar effulgence of the virginity of the nun. Meantime whatever might be the personal godliness, or the purity, or the solid virtues of the christian matron, all were, at the best, but as the faint twinkling of a star! Now, as it seems to me, all this is not mere rodomontade, which one may smile at, and let pass; but it is substantially false doctrine, and of most putrid quality, in regard to piety and morals: it is the indication of an ulcer-a bad condition of the vitals of the christian system, and a condition which had then become inveterate. Isidore's theology is not popery; nor was it his own scheme of doctrine; but the inheritance which he had come into : it was the boasted apostolic catholicity, which all his contemporaries had assented to, and which was scrupulously watched over, and handed down, to the next age. If Gregory I. may fairly be regarded as the father of popery, using the term in its proper sense, I am sure he does not, on the point now before us, advance any thing which may not find its parallel on the pages of the best writers of the fourth century: but the proof of this assertion cannot be necessary to my immediate argument. I shall then on the whole assume, as not to be denied, the general affirmation embodied in my first proposition, That the lapse of many centuries exhibits no essential change, or progression, in reference to the principles, the practices, or the abuses of religious celibacy. ANTIQUITY OF THE OPINIONS CONCERNING RELIGIOUS CELIBACY. I HAVE undertaken to adduce proof of the assertion, not only that the doctrine of the merit of celibacy, and the consequent practices, are found in a mature state at an early age; but also That, at the earliest period at which we find this doctrine, and these practices, distinctly mentioned, they are referred to in such a manner as to make it certain that they were, at that time, no novelties, or recent innovations. Now I am aware that a statement such as this, if it shall appear to be borne out by evidence, will excite alarm in some minds. The dissipation of erroneous impressions is always a somewhat perilous operation; nevertheless dangers much more to be feared, are incurred by a refusal to admit the full and simple truth. Yet the alarm that may be felt in this instance, at the first, may soon be removed; for although it were to appear |