6. I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful.
7. Likewise, that the saints, reigning together with Christ, are to be honoured and invocated, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be respected.
8. I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, of the mother of God, ever virgin, and also of the saints, ought to be had and retained, and that due honour and veneration is to be given them.
9. I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people.
10. I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church for the mother and mistress of all churches; and I promise true obedience to the Bishop of Rome, successor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ.
11. I likewise undoubtedly receive and profess all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred Canons, and general Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent.
12. And I condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto, and all heresies whatsoever, condemned, rejected, and anathematized by the Church.
This true Catholic faith, without which no one can be saved, I N.N. do at this present freely confess and sincerely hold; and I promise most constantly to retain, and confess the same entire and unviolated, with God's assistance, to the end of my life. Amen.
N. B.--(1) To this was added, Dec. 8, 1854, the new article of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, to be believed as necessary to salvation.
N. B.--(2) To which was added (December, 1864) the whole Syllabus.
N. B.--(3) To which was added (July 18, 1870) the new dogma of Infallibility.
Observe, this "Creed" is imposed on all in the Roman Obedience, and especially on those who enter it from other communions, as that without which no one can be saved. The Catholic Creed of Nicæa is not sufficient. But the Seventh Canon of Ephesus not only forbids the composition of any other creed, but especially adds: "Those who shall presume to compose another creed, or to produce or offer it to persons desiring to return to the acknowledgment of the truth...from any heresy whatever, shall be deposed...if bishops or other clergy, and if they be laymen they shall be anathematized."
[2884] See his genuine Epistle, vol. i. p. 1, this series. Compare vol. i. pp. 69, 416, with vii. p. 478.
[2885] 1 Pet. v. 1-4. The Bishops of Rome have only to restore themselves to the spirit of St. Peter as here set forth, and the schisms of the churches will be at an end. For Tertullian's testimony, see vol. iii. p. 258, note 9.
[2886] De Maistre, thinking to overthrow the Anglicans, and imagining the Thirty-nine Articles to be "terms of communion" in the Anglican Church, where they never were, commits himself rashly to the following position: "If a people possess one of these Codes of Belief, we may be sure of this: that the religion of such a people is false." No people on earth has such as enormous Code of Belief as those who profess the creed of Pius the Fourth, and who accept the decrees of Pius the Ninth. See De Maistre, Le Principe Générateur, etc., p. 20, Paris, 1852. This Trent Creed is the fruit of the Decretals.
II.
(Donation of Constantine, p. 607.)
On this stupendous fraud I quote from Dupin, as follows:--
"Among the number of Constantine's edicts I do not place the Donation which goes under his name. Some have attributed this false monument to the author of the collection (Decretals) ascribed to Isidore, he being a notorious forger of such kind of writings; and this conjecture is more probable than some others.
"By this Donation, Constantine is supposed to give to the Bishops of Rome the sovereignty of the city, and of the provinces of the Western Empire. I note some of the reasons which clearly prove this instrument to be a forgery:--
"(1) Not one of the ancients mentions this pretended liberality of the emperor. How could Eusebius, and all the other historians who wrote about Constantine, have passed over in silence, had it been a reality, the gift of a Western Empire to the Bishop of Rome?
"(2) Not one of the Bishops of Rome ever refers to such a donation, though it would have been much to their advantage so to do.
"(3) It is dated falsely, and under consuls who flourished when Constantine was unbaptized; yet his baptism is referred to in this instrument. Again, the city of Constantinople is mentioned in it, although it was called Byzantium for ten years subsequent to its date.
"(4) Not only is the style very different from the genuine edicts of the emperor, but it is full of terms and phrases that came into use much after the time of Constantine.
"(5) How comes it that he should have given one-half of his empire to the Bishop of Rome, including the city of Rome itself, without any one ever hearing of it for hundreds of years after?
"(6) The falsities and absurdities of this edict demonstrate that it was composed by an ignorant impostor. Thus by it, for example, the Pope is permitted to wear a crown of gold, and a fabulous history is given of the emperor's baptism by Sylvester: also, it contains a history of the emperor's miraculous cure of leprosy by Sylvester, all which do plainly prove the forgery. It is certain that the city of Rome was governed by the emperor, and that the Bishops of Rome were subject to him, and obeyed him, as all his other subjects.
"All that we have said plainly shows that the edict of Donation that bears the name of Constantine is wholly supposititious; but it is not so easy to find out who was the author. However it be, this document has neither any use nor authority." [2887]
[2887] Dupin, ut supra, p. 17. See also Bryce's Holy Roman Empire, pp. 43 and 100. He pronounces "the Donation of Constantine" to be "the most stupendous of all the mediæval forgeries. The Decretals certainly surpass it in their nature and their effects; but Mr. Bryce's reference to these is very feeble and unsatisfactory, after Dupin. See p. 156 of his work, ed. Macmillan, 1880.
Memoirs of Edessa And Other Ancient Syriac Documents
Memoirs of Edessa
And Other Ancient Syriac Documents.
[Translated by the Rev. B. P. Pratten, B.A.]
Introductory Notice
to
Memoirs of Edessa and Other Syriac Documents.
------------------------
The Syriac Documents here subjoined are to be regarded as interesting relics of the primitive ages, but neither wholly genuine nor in details authentic. They have been interpolated and corrupted so as to reflect, in some particulars, ideas wholly repugnant to those of Christian antiquity, and which first received currency in the period of the Iconoclastic controversy. [2888] Yet the pages of Eusebius bear witness to the Edessene legends as of very early origin, and it is reasonable to suppose that they rest on some inquiries made by the contemporary Abgar concerning the great Prophet who had appeared in Galilee. The visit of the Wise Men from the East, and the history of Naaman the Syrian, lend antecedent probability to the idea that such inquiries may have been made. The mission of Thaddæus seems a historical fact; and if he found Abgar predisposed to believe, and familiar with the story of the Christ, the growth of the whole fable is sufficiently accounted for. Let me quote Wake in the Preliminary Discourse to his Apostolic Fathers. He says: [2889] "That both the intercourse reported by Eusebius between our Saviour and this prince (Abgarus), and the report of the picture being brought to him, have been received as a matter of unquestionable truth in those parts, the authority of Gregorius Abulpharagius [2890] will not suffer us to doubt....But Gelasius [2891] pronounced the epistle of our Saviour to be apocryphal....Natalis Alexander judges both it and the reply of Abgar supposititious; and Dupin, after him, yet more solidly convicts it of such manifest errors as may satisfy all considering persons that Eusebius and Ephraem were too easy of belief in this particular, and did not sufficiently examine into it." [2892]
But I cannot do better than refer the inquirer to Jones' work On the Canon, [2893] where, even in early youth, I found the whole matter, and the story of the portrait of our Saviour, attractive reading. I owe to that work my initiation into the study of what I am now endeavouring to elucidate, in some degree, for others. I subjoin the words of Lardner, [2894] in concluding his candid examination of the matter, as follows: "The whole history is the fiction of some Christian at Edessa, in the time of Eusebius or not long before. The people of Edessa were then generally Christians; and they valued themselves upon it, and were willing to do themselves the honour of a very early conversion to the Christian faith. By some one of them, or more united together, this history was formed, and was so far received by Eusebius as to be thought by him not improper to be inserted in his Ecclesiastical History."
I conclude that Eusebius was led to put some confidence in it by the antecedent probability to which I have referred, favouring the idea that some knowledge of Christ had penetrated the mind and heart of Abgar even in our Saviour's lifetime. This idea receives some countenance from the fact recorded by St. Matthew: [2895] "His fame went throughout all Syria; and they brought unto Him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases," etc.
The remarks I have quoted from the learned will sufficiently prepare the reader for the other Syriac Documents which follow these Edessene Memoirs, as I find it convenient to call them.
Here follows the Introductory Notice by the translator:--
These Documents were selected by the late Dr. Cureton, from manuscripts acquired by the British Museum from the Nitrian Monastery in Lower Egypt, of which the first portion arrived in 1841, the second in 1843, and a third in 1847. The preparation of them for publication occupied the closing days of his life. It is to be regretted that his death occurred before he was able to write a preface: the more so because, to use the words of Dr. W. Wright, the editor of the posthumous work, "he had studied the questions connected with this volume for years and from every point of view." In a note occurring in the preface to his Festal Letters of Athanasius, [2896] he says: "I have found among the Syriac mss. in the British Museum a considerable portion of the original Aramaic document which Eusebius cites as preserved in the archives of Edessa, and various passages from it quoted by several authors, with other testimonies which seem to be sufficient to establish the fact of the early conversion of the inhabitants of that city, and among them of the king himself, although his successors afterwards relapsed into paganism. These, together with accounts of the martyrdom of some of the first bishops of that city, forming a most interesting accession to our knowledge of the early propagation of Christianity in the East down to about a.d. 300, I have already transcribed, and hope to publish." "He was himself firmly persuaded," adds Dr. Wright, "of the genuineness of the Epistles attributed to Abgar, king of Edessa, and our Lord: an opinion which he shared with such illustrious scholars as Baronius, Tillemont, Cave, R. Mountague (Bishop of Norwich), and Grabe."
Without attempting here to decide what degree of historical value belongs to these Documents, it may be proper to observe that the several matters contained in them are so far distinct from one another that they do not necessarily stand or fall together. Such matters are: the celebrated Epistles, the conversion of King Abgar Uchomo, the visit of Thaddæus, and the early prevalence of Christianity at Edessa. With regard to the letters said to have passed between Abgar and our Lord, it seems sufficient, without referring to the internal evidence, to remark, with Lardner and Neander, that it is inconceivable how anything written by Christ should have remained down to the time of Eusebius unknown to the rest of the world [2897] The conversion of Abgar is a distinct matter of inquiry. But on this again, doubt, to say the least, is cast by the statement that Abgar Bar Manu, who reigned between the years 160 and 170 a.d., is the first king of Edessa on whose coins the usual symbols of the Baal-worship of the country are wanting, these being replaced in his case by the sign of the Cross. [2898] If this refers to a complete series of the coins of Edessa, the evidence afforded must be considered very strong. For although, to take a parallel instance, "we seek in vain for Christian emblems on the coinage of Constantine, the first Christian emperor," [2899] this may readily be accounted for by his preference of military distinction to the humbler honours conferred by his new faith, whilst it does not appear that anti-Christian emblems are found, and on the coins of his son and successor Christian emblems do make their appearance. The other two subjects referred to do not lie under the same suspicion. There is nothing in the nature of the case to disprove the visit of Thaddæus (or Addæus)--nothing improbable in the fact itself, whatever judgment may be formed of the details of it presented to us here. If, however, the visit of Thaddæus also should have to be ranked among apocryphal stories, this would not affect the remaining point--that with which we are chiefly concerned in these Documents. "It is certain," says Neander, "that Christianity was early diffused in this country." How early, is not so certain. But the evidence furnished by the later portions of these Documents, which there is nothing to contradict and much to confirm, proves that early in the second century Christianity had already made many converts there. The martyrdoms of Sharbil and Barsamya are said to have occurred a.d. 113, [2900] the year in which Trajan conquered the Parthian kingdom, of which Edessa was a part; and, whilst the pagan element was plainly predominant, we find the Christians sufficiently numerous to have a bishop and presbyters and deacons. This sufficiently falls in with the proof already adduced of the conversion of even a king of Edessa about fifty years later.