his instructions is not defensible, and fully deserves the stern rebuke administered in the review of these transactions by Clarus. The members of the Reformed Church within the Palatinate of the Rhine also made frequent complaints of acts of oppres sion, which they claimed they had suffered at the hands of the Catholic House of Neuburg of the Palatinate.' But whether their hardships were real or imaginary, they were mild in comparison of those suffered either by the Hugenots after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes or by the Dissi dents of Poland, in consequence of the interference of for eign powers in the internal affairs of that country. While the Catholics of the British Empire were under the restriction of laws of the most despotic severity, Joseph II. of Austria issued an Edict of Toleration (1781), granting freedom of wor ship to all Protestants, Deists alone excepted. After the conquest of Silesia by Frederic 11., both Catholics and Protestants were placed on a footing of perfect equality (1742), though the former were decidedly in the worse condition, by reason of the confiscation of the estates belonging to their convents. As mixed marriages between Catholics and Protestants were becoming daily more frequent, in consequence of the increas ing intercourse between the members of both denominations, they gave rise to serious difficulties as years went on. Protestants, now in the enjoyment of the fullest political franchise, laid claims also to privileges which the Catholic Church reserves for her own children; and when marrying Catholics demanded the blessing of the priest, while professing to believe that marriage was not a Sacrament. Although the question was then an open one among theologians, the doctrine held at Rome was that the contracting parties are the real ministers of the Sacrament of marriage, and not the priest who gives the marriage blessing, still Benedict XIV., following the 1 Planck, New Hist. of Religion, Pt. II., pp. 125-226, with Proofs and Ill trations. 2 See p. 281. 3 Huth, Vol. II., p. 233–241. Walch, Pt. VII., p. 7-160. The Interpretes Conc. Trid. declared on the 31st of July, 1752: "Accedit, parochum in matrimoniis nullam exercere jurisdictionem, cum ex veriori et rt eriptable principles of the Church, when questioned he subject by bishops, and notably by those of Holland land, returned the uniform answer contained in the gnae nobis admirationis (issued June 29, 1748), namely, xed marriages could be tolerated only on certain conthe most important of which is that the children them be brought up in the Catholic Church; but that uld never receive such color of approval as a formal tical function would imply. Far, however, from these conditions to serve as a sort of clandestine apor proselytism, popes, bishops, and zealous ecclesie at all times dissuaded against such marriages as al alike to the happiness of the family and the inreligion.2 ntia ipse non sit minister magni hujus sacramenti matrimonii, qui ibus certam reddat ecclesiam, hunc atque illam matrimonium conx hac quoque ratione abesse videatur quaestio de jurisdictione a subdelegando." (Thesaurus resolution. sacr. Congr. Conc. Trid., 1752, pp. 91, 92.) ■ Calvin held a very different opinion on this subject, declaring emorabilia, Vol. VII., Pt. I., p. 137 sq.; Pt. II., p. 1–179. § 385. The Russian Church under the Permanent Synod. (Cf. § 359.) Pichler, Hist. of the Schism between the East and the West, Vol. II., p. 144 sq., with reference to the new works of Theiner, Gagarin, Harthausen, and others. Philaret, Hist. of the Russian Church, Frkft. 1872, 2 vols. It has been already stated that even from a political point of view the growing power of the Patriarch of Moscow had roused the jealousy of Peter the Great, who was apprehensive that possibly this ecclesiastical dignitary might some day resist the arbitrary demands of a despotic Tzar. He formed the design, therefore, of abolishing the patriarchate, and substituting in its stead an ecclesiastical organization, from whose opposition the government would have nothing to fear in carrying out its projects. The undertaking was surrounded with no ordinary dangers, as the people were much attached to the patriarchal constitution, and hence it was necessary for the Tzar to proceed with great prudence and caution. On the death of the eleventh Patriarch, in 1702, Peter employed all manner of pretexts to put off the appointment of his successor, and, as a temporary provision, placed the administration of the patriarchate in the hands of the metropolitan of Riazan, who, being but a mere exarch, neither commanded the respect nor possessed the fulness of authority belonging to the lawful incumbent of the patriarchal office. During this interval the interference of the Tzar in ecclesiastical affairs was in the highest degree arbitrary. He levied taxes upon the estates of convents and bishops; abolished the titles and dignities attached to bishoprics, whose incumbents had given him offense; and, when these sees fell vacant, directed the exarch to fill them with simple bishops, whose pastoral prerogatives he attenuated to the verge of extinction. He soon began to introduce radical reforms in the convents of men and women, as is shown by the series of ordinances on this subject drawn up in 1702 and succeeding years. The Tzar next gave his attention to the secular clergy, and was good enough to write out with his own hand a pastoral instruction, in twenty-six articles, called a spiritual regulction, 1 See p. 470. prescribing the qualifications of candidates going up for orders and of bishops for consecration, and treating other cognate subjects, and this, in his character of Supreme Bishop, he addressed to the bishops of his obedience for their guid ance and edification. The Russian Church was then organized as follows: Every cathedral or episcopal church was to have one protopope, or, as we should say, dean, two treasurers, five popes (i. e. fathers), one protodeacon, four deacons, two readers, two sacristans, and thirty-two choristers to sing the service. In the principal parish-churches there were to be one protopope. two popes, two deacons, two chanters, and two sacristans; in other more considerable parish-churches, two popes, two deacons, two chanters, and two sacristans; and in parishes of two or three hundred families, three priests, three deacons, and three sacristans were charged with the care of public worship. If there were too many clergy at one church, part of them were sent where their services were more needed. By these measures the Tzar accustomed both clergy and people to yield a passive obedience to the behests of his powerful will, and thus advancing step by step ended by abolishing the office of Patriarch. In a solemn assembly of bishops he finally declared that, in his opinion, the Patriarchate was no longer necessary, either for the government of the Church or the well-being of the State; that, since the extent of the Empire rendered supreme spiritual authority perilous when committed to a single individual, and inefficient when vested in a general council, he had determined to introduce a form of ecclesiastical government that would combine the elements of both, without the dangers or inconveniences of either; and that this should consist in a small, select, and permanent synod, with full authority to regulate all ecclesiastical affairs. When some of the bishops, by way of remonstrance, ventured to state that the patriarchate of Kiev and that of all the Russias had been established only by the authority of the Patriarch of the East, the Tzar, assuming an authoritive air, and striking his breast, replied, "Behold here your Patriarch "" As the event proved, the Tzar knew his men, for it was not long until there were to be found among them ecclesiastics and bishops cowardly and base enough to take upon them to justify the imperial measure, and to sacrifice to a wicked. ambition the independence and freedom of the Church they professed to serve. At the head of this troop of ecclesiastical poltroons was Theophanes Procopovicz, since 1718 Bishop of Pskov and Narva. After these preparatory measures, Peter submitted at the last Council of Moscow, in 1720, his "Ecclesiastical Regulation," as corrected by his own hand, for the approbation and signature of the bishops, archimandrites, and hegumenes of the principal monasteries. This council also enacted that the "Holy Synod" should be permanent, and enjoy supreme ecclesiastical authority, and that its decisions should be final in all matters appertaining to the Church. The "Regulation" also set forth the motives which impelled the Tzar to establish a Holy Synod, whose functions should be legislative and whose sittings permanent. Some of these are of remarkable astuteness and subtlety. Not long after this coup de grace the Holy Synod was solemnly opened (February 25, 1721) by a discourse from its vice president, Archbishop Theophanes. It was composed of eleven members, namely, a president, two vice-presidents, four councillors, and four assessors; but this number was increased to fourteen in 1722. The knowledge and capacity of the first members of this Synod, in whose selection the Tzar had exhibited an unusual degree of political prudence, gave to that body a consideration throughout the Empire which it would not otherwise have 11. A synod is more capable than a single individual to form a judgment and to give decisions; 2. The decisions of such a body are of greater weight and more commanding authority than those of any one man; 3. As the synod convenes by the order and under the supervision of the Tzar, there need be no suspicion of either partiality or unfairness, as the Tzar will always put the public good before any private interest (?); 4. The transaction of business will not be interrupted either by disease or death; 5. In a synod like this, whose members are taken from the different orders, there is little ground to appre bend the influence either of passion or of corruption; 6. A number of persons participating in a single act will not be as easily deterred as an individual acting alone would be, from doing their duty, because in dread of the vengeance of the powerful; 7. Revolts and insurrections are for this reason prevented; 8. If the president of a synod makes mistakes or acts unwisely, he may be cor. rected by his brethren, but a patriarch would not submit his acts to the bishops subordinate to him; 9. A synodal government of this sort would become, in course of time, a nursery of able and distinguished ecclesiastics, and the assessors would in consequence acquire a knowledge of ecclesiastical adininistration. |