Until 1130 the order had no written statutes. Then the fifth prior of the Chartreuse, Guigo, compiled the ConsnetwKnet CartuniB, Bernard de la Tour collected, in 1258, the resolutions of all general chapters which had been held since 1141. This collection was con- firmed by the General Chapter of 1259, and bears the title Statuta antiqua. Another collection, Statuia no- va^ was added in 1867. A third collection, TerUa com^ piiaHo ttatutarum^ dates from the year 1509 ; a fourth. Nova coUectio ttatutorum ordinis Cartfuiemu, from the year 1581. The characteristic of the statutes of this order is, that it aims, in the first place, at precluding the members f^m all intSercourse with the world, and even, as far as possible, from all intercourse with each other ; secondly, at separating the projeari from the lay brothers, who occupy in no other order an equally low position, and are divided into three classes, Con- vertif Donatiy and Redditi; thirdly, at separating every single Carthusian monastery from the whole surround-
ing region and population; and, lastly, at preventiDg all connection of the order with other monastic oirdera, and any direct influence on the world or the Church. Thus the whole order, and each individual memtier, is like a petrifaction from the Middle Ages. The monks wear a hair-doth shirt, a white cassock, and oyer it, when they go out, a black doak. They never eat flesh, and on Friday take only bread and water. Tliey are not allowed to go out of their cells except to church, nor to speak to any person, eren their own brother, without leave of thdr superior. Some o^ the convents are magnificent, especially thoee of Naples and Pavia, which have a world-wide renown for their ornaments and riches. In 1848 the order had 8 hMises in France, 8 in Italy, and 2 in Switxerland.
Carthoflan Monk— «t Home. Carthndan Nun— «t Homa.
There are also houses of Carthusian nuns, but the date of their origin is not known. They were always very few in number. Father Helyot, the historian of monachism, knew only of the existence of five, all of which perished by the French Revolution. In 1820 they re-established their first house near Gre- noble, in France, and this is still their only establish- ment.
A history of the order was commenced by fiitber Masson, general of the order, and voL i published in 1687 ; but, for unknown reasons, the order forbade the continuance of the work. See also Morstius, The- atrvm Chronohgicum 8. Ordinis Carthusiensit (Taur. 1681) ; Corbin, Hietoire sacr^ de tordre des CTtartrtuz (Paris, 1653, 4to) ; Helyot (ed. Migne), Did. de$ Ordret Re&g. i, 872 ; Febr, Getdnchte der Mdncktorden^i, 78 sq.
Cart-'wheel (rpdxog afiaKvc^ a chariot wheel (Ecclus. xxxili, 5). See Cart ; Wheel.
Cartwright, Thomas, a learned and eminent Puritan divine; bom in Herts about 1585. He was educated at St. John*s College, Cambridge, where he became a fellow in 1560. A few years afterward he was removed to a feUowsbip at Trinity College, of which he became one of the senior fellows. In 1564, when Queen Elizabeth visited the University, he ap- pears to have distinguished himself in the disputations held before her majesty. He took his B.D. degree in 1567, and three years afterward was chosen Lady Mar- garet's divinity professor. He was a thorough Protes- tant In his lectures he criticised the polity of the Church of England with great acuteness and learning. It was his conviction that the reformation of the Church had not gone far enough ; and he advocated his views with a clearness and boldness which none could mistake. The following statement of the doc- trines for which he was expelled firom the University is given by Hook, in vindication of the severity with which Cartwright was treated. It will be seen that, with a
CARTWRIGHT
135
CARVE
§BW exceptions, they are vitm in which moet moder- ate men in tiie Church of England would now agree wilh other Christians. " He maintained that, in re- forming the Church, it was necessary to reduce all thmgs to tlie apostolical institntion ; that no one ought to be admitted into the Christian ministry who was vnable to preach ; that those only who ministered the word ought to pray publicly in the Church, or admin- ister the sacraments ; that popish ordinations were not Tslid ; that only canonical Scripture ought to be read publicly in the Ch^h; that the public liturgy ought to be 80 framed that there might be no private praying or reading in the Church, but that all the people should attend to the prayers of the minister ; that the service of burying the dead did not belong any more to the mhusterial office than to the rest of the Church ; that equal reverence was due to all canonical Scripture, and to aU the names of God : there was, therefore, no reason why the people should stand at the reading of the Gospel, or bow at the name of Jesus; that it was 88 lawful to sit at the Lord^s table as to kneel or stand ; that the Lord's Supper ought not to be administered hi private, nor bapHsm admimttered by. womm or lay- mm; that the sign of the cross in baptism was super- stitioas; that it was reasonable and proper that the parent should offer his own child to baptism, making confession of that fidth in which he intended to edu- cate it, without being obliged to answer in the child's name, 'I wHl,' * I will not,' * I believe,* etc., nor ought women or persons under age to be sponsors ; that, in giving names to children, it was convenient to avoid p^ganiwn^ ag well as the names and offices of Christ and angels ; that it was papistical to forbid marriages at any particular time of the year, and to grant licenses at those times was intolerable ; that private marriages, or such as were not published in the congregation, were highly inconvenient,'' etc.