A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

CHAP. VII. (Book 7)

An Account of the Contests between the Divines of Paris, and the Dominican Friars: And of the Writings of William de Saint Amour.

IN the Year 1229, during the Minority of King Lewis the Saint, and the Regency of Queen * 1.1 Blanche of Castile, the University of Paris not being able to have Justice done them, for the Death of some of its Scholars, who had been Kill'd by the Soldiers, left off their Publick Lectures, and retir'd part to Rheims and part to Angers, according to the Grant which they pretended to have for so doing in such Cases, by the Bull of Gregory IX. In the absence of the Secular Doctors, the Do∣minicans who had not hitherto taken the Degree, apply'd themselves to the Bishop of Paris and to the Chancellor of the University, to be admitted Doctors, and took Possession of one of the Divinity-Chairs. Four Years after the University being Re-establish'd in Paris, and Regulated by Order from the Holy See, the Dominicans not only kept what they were in Possession of, but likewise set up another Divinity-Professorship among them in spight of the Chancellor of the University. They afterwards spread themselves in the other Cities of France, and there open'd Publick Schools. The University of Paris fearing the Consequences of these New Establishments, and that other Regulars would likewise set up two Divinity-Professorships, which would put a stop to the Profession of the Se∣cular Doctors; made a Decree, whereby it was order'd, That none of the Regulars for the future might have two Divinity-Professorships at one and the same time. The Dominicans stood out against this Decree, and the University being again oblig'd in the Year 1250, to cease its Lectures, because they could not get Justice done them for the Injuries done to their Scholars (some of whom were Im∣prison'd, others Beaten, and others Kill'd) the Dominicans declar'd, That they would not put this Prohibition in Execution, unless the University would Grant them two Professorships by an Authen∣tick Deed. The University Remonstrated to them, That their Concern was not about two Divini∣ty-Professorships, nor about the particular interests of the Members of the University; but about an Injury offer'd to the whole Body; and that they had done very ill in making their Advantages by the Misfortunes of the University. These Contests lasted about two Months; but at last the Uni∣versity having obtain'd the Satisfaction which they requir'd, and being at quiet, came to another Re∣solution; whereby it was resolv'd, That no Person should for the future be Promoted to a Doctor's Degree, till he had first taken a Solemn Oath to observe the Decrees and Constitutions of the Uni∣versity: And that the Dominicans might make no scruple of taking of it, 'tis added.

Provided there be nothing in these Statutes Prohibited by the Rule of the Dominican Friars which I Profess, nor any thing dishonourable, or contrary to the Salvation of Souls, to Humane and Divine Right, to the Publick Interest, or to the Holy Church of God.

Notwithstanding this, the Dominicans re∣fus'd to take that Oath, unless the University would Grant them two Professorships in Divinity. The University to Chastise their Disobedience, after fifteen day's Delay and divers Admonitions, Expell'd •…•…em from their Society, by a Solemn Decree which was Publish'd in all the Colleges. The Dominicans petition'd Pope Innocent IV. to Re-establish them, and obtain'd of him a Commission Directed to the Bishop of Evreux for their Re-establishment in their University, with Authority of making use of Eccle∣siastical Censures against the Members of the University who oppos'd their Re-establishment. The University being advertiz'd thereof, apply'd themselves to the Count of Poitiers who Govern'd the Kingdom jointly with Queen Blanche in the Absence of King Saint Lewis her Brother who was in the Holy Land, and Remonstrated to him, That out of respect to the Holy See, they were ready to re∣ceive the Dominicans, Provided their Statutes remain'd in full force, till the Pope, who Determin'd this Affair without Hearing both Parties, should order otherwise. However the Dominicans prevail'd upon the Bishop of Evreux to Delegate for the Executing the Bull which was directed to him, a Canon of Paris Nam'd Luke which they back'd by a Letter immediately directed to him in Person, in pur∣suance whereof, that Canon Suspended all the Members of the University from their Functions, and order'd this Decree of Suspension to be Publish'd, notwithstanding the Appeal made to the Holy See. The University for their parts caus'd the Decree for the Expulsion of the Dominicans to be Publish'd, and in the Year 1253, Wrote a circular Letter to all the Prelates of the Kingdom, to prevail upon them to succor them in the Oppression under which they groan'd. At last in the Year 1254, Pope Innocent IV. having by his Decre••al restrain'd the Pretensions of Regulars, by prohibiting them from admitting Parishioners into their Churches on Sundays and Holy-Days, and Administring the Sacrament of Pennance without the leave of the Curates, from Preaching in their Churches during the time of the Parochial Divine Service, and from Preaching in Parish-Churches, unless invited thereto by the Curates, or had obtain'd their leave, and from performing any other Hierarchical Office in

Defiance to the Ordinaries, tho' it pronounc'd nothing about the Affair of the University of Paris; this Decree render'd the Dominicans more moderate in the pursuit of their Pretensions. But Innocent IV. Dying December 13. 1254. His Successor Alexander IV. revok'd the Decretal of Innocent on Christ-mas-Day the same Year, and on the Fourteenth of April 1255, he Publish'd the Bull which begun with these Words, Quasi Lignum Vitae, by which he order'd the Academicks of Paris to admit all the Dominicans, especially those who were Advanc'd to the Divinty-Professorships, into their Society, to permit them to enjoy all their Rights and Privileges, and to have as many Professorships as they pleas'd. And for the more speedy Execution of this Bull, he sent another the same Day to the Bi∣shops of Orleans and Auxerre, by which he Granted them a Commission to see that the former was ob∣serv'd, with Power of using Ecclesiastical Censures against those who oppos'd it. Those two Bishops in pursuance of that Bull, Proceeded against the Seculars of the University, who being retir'd for a time from their Colleges, and being return'd again to the City; return'd Answer, That they were no longer of the University, and consequently that the Pope's Bull did not reach them. However they wrote a Letter to the Pope, whereby they declar'd to him, That not being willing to oppose his Bull, tho' they had several Lawful Exceptions to offer against it, that they might not be engag'd in such Processes as were not agreeable to their Profession; but that considering that it was more for their Advantage to be depriv'd of the Rights and Privileges of the University, than to join in one Body with the Dominicans, which by Experience they knew would be prejudicial to them, and which they were afraid would prove Pernicious to the whole Church; they had withdrawn themselves and renounc'd the Rights and Privileges of the University, that they might not have any thing to do with the Dominicans, yet without contradicting the Bull of his Holiness: That having recourse to his Clemency, they humbly pray him to revoke the Sentence of Excommunication issued out against them, and to Re-place them in the same Liberty and Condition in which they were before; assuring him at the same time, that they were so far perswaded that they could not in Conscience admit the Do∣minicans, that they would rather Transplant their Schools into another Kingdom, or go back to their own Country, where they might have their Liberty; than be put under the intolerable Yoke of a forc'd and disadvantagious Society. Before this Letter came to the Hands of the Pope, the Dominicans obtain'd three Bulls, almost the same Day, directed to the Bishops of Orleans and Aux∣erre, which order'd the Execution of the First Bull, and enjoin'd these two Commissioners to declare all the Members of the University who would not admit the Dominicans, and even those who were retir'd to avoid entring into a Society with them, to have forfeited all their Offices and Benefices. The Execution of these Bulls was stop'd by the Order of King Saint Lewis, who was minded to restore Peace to the University, and suppress these Contests. To attain this, he join'd his Remonstrances with those of the Bishops Conven'd at Paris, to engage the Secular Doctors and Dominicans to refer themselves to the Arch-Bishops of Bourges, Rheims, Sens and Roan. These Four Prelates having Heard both Parties, and Consulted with other Bishops, put an end at last to this Contest the First of March 1256, by an Accommodation, in which the Seculars consented, that the Dominicans should for ever enjoy the two Divinity-Professorships, upon Condition, That those Monks remain'd sepa∣rate from the Scholastical Society of the Secular Doctors and Scholars of Paris, provided that they renounc'd the Bulls which they had, or might obtain contrary to these Conditions; that they would endeavour to have them revok'd, and that they would no more set upon the whole University, or any of its Members. This Treaty one would have thought should have restor'd Peace to the Univer∣sity, but at Rome they were not inclin'd to suffer a stop to be thus put to several Bulls, by an Accom∣modation in which the Holy See had no Hand. At the same time the Treaty was concluded Alexan∣der made a Bull, by which he order'd the Bishop of Paris to Excommunicate all those who hindred the Dominicans from Confessing, Preaching, Teaching, or being admitted into the Schools of others. Sometime after (in the beginning of May) he order'd by another Bull, directed to all the Members of the University of Paris, the Execution of the former Bulls, and by a Second Dated the same Day, he enjoin'd the Bishop of Paris to make use of Canonical Penalties to oblige those of the University who had molested the Dominicans, to give them satisfaction, by calling in, if need were, the Secular Power. He exhorted King Saint Lewis by a Third Bull, To succour the Bishop of Paris in quelling the Insolence of those who oppos'd the Execution of the Bulls. The Dominicans, not willing that it should seem they had any Hand in the Non-Execution of the Treaty, requested the Pope, That he would Revoke his Bulls, and Approve of the Accommodation. But the Pope on the contrary in his Bull Dated June 18, 1256, declar'd, that, That Treaty having been made without his knowledge, and to the Prejudice of what he had order'd, he Disapprov'd it, and by Name declar'd William of Saint Amour, Odo of Doway, Doctors in Divinity, Master Nicholas de Bar-sur-Aube, and Christian Canon of Beauvais, as the Principal Authors of this Disturbance, to have forfeited all their Dignities and Benefices: He forbids their Teaching, and all manner of Persons from Hearing their Lectures; order'd, That they should be Banish'd the Kingdom; declar'd, That he would inflict the same Pu∣nishment on the rest, if they did not submit within Fifteen Days after the Publication of his Bulls, and enjoin'd the Bishop of Paris to Excommunicate them, and to give away their Benefices. He Re∣viv'd and Confirm'd those very Orders by two other Bulls Issu'd out about the end of the same Month.

The Contest between the Body of the University and the Dominicans, became at last a Private * 1.2 Quarrel, between the Monks and William de Saint Amour Doctor of the Sorbonne, and Divinity-Professor, one of the most zealous Defenders of the Privileges of the University, and of the greatest Adversaries the Dominicans had to deal with. In the Year 1254, they Accus'd him of having ad∣vanc'd several things contrary to the Honour of the Holy See, and of having made a Scandalous Li∣bel

against the Pope. This Charge being brought before the King upon the Complaints of Cregory the Apostolick Nuncio, the matter was referr'd to the Bishop of Paris, before whom William of Saint Amour clearly Prov'd his Innocence, and the falsity of that Accusation. The Dominicans afterwards invented another, and under pretence of several Propositions, which the University of Paris had ad∣vanc'd against the lusty Mendicants, without Naming any Person, they Accus'd William of Saint Amour of Calumniating their Order, and Presented to the King a Writing containing several Errone∣ous Propositions, which they imputed to him. William of Saint Amour having procur'd a Copy thereof, prov'd in a Sermon which he Preach'd in the Church of Innocents, That he had never Taught those Errors, and had only advanc'd such Truths as were maintainable by several Passages of the Holy Scri∣ptures. Sometime after he Compos'd his Book concerning The Perils of the Last Times, which occa∣sion'd the Dominicans to renew their Complaints against him. He Compos'd it, as 'tis said, by the Order of several Bishops, to discover by Holy Writ the Character of the False Prophets, who were to come in the Last Times, and to oppose the Book call'd The Eternal Gospel, the Doctrine of which began to spread it self. Pope Alexander IV. in rejecting the Accommodation made between the University and the Dominicans, Condemn'd by Name William of Saint Amour, the principal Au∣thor of that Treaty, depriv'd him of a Chappel which he had, prohibited him from Teaching, de∣clar'd him to have forfeited all the Offices and Benefices which he might have, and requir'd that he should be Banish'd the Kingdom. This Sentence was not Executed against him, William of Saint Amour was not Proscrib'd, but still liv'd at Paris. The Dominicans Delated him before the Bishops of the Provinces of Sens and Rheims, who met at Paris in the Year 1256, and Accus'd him of having advanc'd several False and Erroneous Propositions, contrary to good Manners and the Honour of their Order. William of Saint Amour Appear'd before those Prelates, and declar'd to them, That he had never advanc'd any Proposition contrary to Truth and to the Salvation of Souls, that he had not Con∣demn'd any Order, that had been Approv'd by the Church of Rome; that he was ready to main∣tain what he had advanc'd, or to correct and retract, if they thought it proper. Those Bishops offer'd the Dominicans and William of Saint Amour to Hold a Council, and to Invite thither the Bishops of the Neighbouring Provinces and several Learned Doctors, to Try their Contests. William of Saint Amour and his Party accepted of the Proposal; but the Dominicans would not refer themselves to the Determination of the Council, so the Affair remain'd Un-decided, and the Quarrel rose high∣erthan ever. Then the University thought it was their Duty to send Deputies to Rome in their own Defence. They made choice of William of Saint Amour, Odo of Doway, Nicholas de Bar-Sur-Aube, John of Gastiville, and John Bellin, to demand the Re-establishment of the Peace of the University, and with Orders to maintain the Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times, made by William of Saint Amour, and to urge the Condemnation of the Book call'd The Everlasting Gospel. These De∣puties procur'd Recommendatory Letters from the Chapters of the Churches of the Province of Rheims, and prepar'd for their Journey to Rome; but the Dominicans were before-hand with them, and having sent the Book concerning the Perils of the last Times to the Pope, it was examin'd by the Cardinals, and afterwards condemn'd by Alexander IV. as containing perverse Opinions, contrary to the Power and Authority of the Pope and of other Bishops, contrary to the Honour of those who make Profession of Poverty for God's sake, and who do a great deal of good in the Church by their Zeal; contrary to the Salutary State of poor Mendicant Friars, especially the Dominican and Minor Friars; lastly, as a Book capable of raising great Scandals and Disturbances, of causing the ruin of several Souls, and of diverting the Faithful from Devotion and Charity, from Conversion and Embracing Religi∣on. 'Tis upon these Grounds that the Pope declares this Book to be Wicked, Criminal and Execra∣ble, and Prohibits all manner of Persons from approving, maintaining, reading and keeping it by them. He wrote at the same time to the King and to the Bishops of France several Bulls against this Book full of Expressions of Indignation, and exhorted the University to treat the Dominicans kindly, and to condemn sincerely the Book of William of St. Amour. But because he was afraid, that his Orders would not punctually be executed, he heap'd Bulls upon Bulls, and made use of all the Methods he could to get them to be executed. However the Deputies of the University not in the least startled at all these Efforts, continu'd their Journey; but being come to Anagnia where the Pope then was, there was only William of St. Amour who stood firm, the other three condemn'd his Book: As for his part he defended himself so well that the Pope sent him away Absolv'd. How∣ever he was no sooner gon and return'd Sick from Rome, but the Pope sent him a Letter, by which he forbad him to go into France, under the Penalty of Excommunication and of losing all his Be∣nefices, and debarr'd him from ever Teaching or Preaching as a punishment of several Faults, espe∣cially for having compos'd the Abominable and Pernicious Book concerning the Perils of the last Times. At the same time he sent several other Bulls into France, to procure at any rate the Execution of his Decree, against the Book and Person of William of St. Amour, and drew up an Act containing all the Points which he would have to be Executed in the University of Paris about the Mendicant Friars, which are (1.) That they shall be admitted into the Body of the University, and that the Bull Quasi Lignum Vitae, shall be Executed according to the Form and Tenor thereof without any Opposition. (2.) That the Dominican and Minor Friars, especially Thomas Aquinas and Bonadventure shall be admitted bonâ fide among the Doctors and Professors of the Faculty. (3.) That they shall not force the Mendicant Friars to take any Oath, or make any Treaty contrary to this Order. (4.) That the University of Paris shall not be allow'd to Translate themselves elsewhere under any Pretence whatsoever. (5.) That they shall Preach and Teach in Paris, that the Book condemn'd by the Pope deserves it; That the Pope may send Preachers and Confessors where he pleases without the consent of the Inferior Prelates or Curates: That the Arch-bishops and Bishops may likewise do

the same without the consent of the Curates: That a State of Poverty embrac'd for the sake of Je∣sus Christ, is a State of Salvation and Perfection: That the Poor Monks who have forsaken their All for the sake of Jesus Christ may Beg for their living without Working with their Hands, tho' they be strong and lusty, especially those who are employ'd in Reading, Preaching and Expounding the Word of God: That it shall be declar'd, That what is said in that Book, concerning False Prophets, false Apostles, forerunners of Anti-Christ who crept into Houses, ought not to be understood of the Orders of the Dominican and Minor Friars: And that lastly, it shall be acknowledg'd, That there have been Miracles wrought by the Saints who have been of those two Orders. The Pope order'd the Cardinals to draw up this Writing, and sent it to the Bishop of Paris, with Orders to get it Approv'd of and Executed by Odo of Doway, and Christian Canon of Beauvais, and in case they would not do it, to declare them Perjur'd. Notwithstanding all these Bulls, the Secular Doctors of the Faculty of Paris would not Admit the Dominicans, and persever'd in their Separation from the Regulars, tho' William of Saint Amour to avoid the Storm that threatned him, retir'd into his Village of Saint Amour in the Franche-County. Alexander IV. thundred out fresh Bulls against them in the Year 1259, directed to the Bishop of Paris, and carry'd the Point so far by his Threats and Censures, That he oblig'd most of the Members of the University to Re-unite themselves with the Mendicants who were Admitted into the Body of the University, by a Decree Dated February 21. 1259, upon Condition, That they should always have the lowest Place in the Acts and Assemblies, even after those of the other Regular Orders. At last the Pope Dy'd on the 24th. of June in the Year 1261, after he had Granted above Forty Bulls in favour of the Dominicans, against the University of Paris, or against its Members. After his Death there was a little Quiet in the University of Paris. William of St. Amour return'd thither, and to justify himself, he alter'd the Title and the method of his Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times, and sent it to Pope Clement IV. that he might Examine it. That Pope return'd him Answer, That he ought to forget what was pass'd, and beware of falling into the same Extravagan∣cies: That the Book which he had sent him contain'd the same in substance as his First, tho' a little disguis'd; but that not having Read it quite through, he could not give him his Opinion of it, as he would do when he had made an end of Reading it. and had confer'd with Persons of Judgment about it. This Letter bears Date October 17, 1266. The Year of the Death of William of Saint Amour has never yet been taken notice of by any Author. But his Epitaph which is in the Church of Saint Amour in the County of Burgundy where he was Interr'd, informs us, that he Dy'd in the Year 1272. The Funeral Register-Book of the Church of Mascon, informs us that it was the Thirteenth of Septem∣ber. This was communicated to us by Monsieur Francatel who made search after it. The Works of William of Saint Amour were Printed in the Year 1632, by the care of a certain Doctor of the Sorbon∣ne, who has conceal'd his Name under that of Alitophilus; as well as the Name of the City where they were Printed, and the Printer's Name, under this Enigma, Constantiae ad Insigne bonae fidei apud Alitophilos.

The Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times, is preceeded by a Preface on the Book of Psalms, * 1.3 an imperfect Commentary on the First Psalm, and a Sermon on the Parable of the Publican and Pha∣risee, in which William of Saint Amour describes the Characters of the Pharisees set down in Scri∣pture, and applies them to the Hypocrites of his Time,

and chiefly (says he) to those who pretend by their Habit and outward Behaviour, by a more Austere Life, and by Spiritual Exercises which they have Invented and Establish'd by their Traditions, to an External semblance of Sanctity and Religion in order to be Prais'd and had in Honour by Men: These are (adds he) the Impostor-Monks, as may be prov'd by their Works, as it is Written by St. Matthew Chap. 7. You shall know them by their Fruits: I do not mean by those Works which they show to make themselves believ'd to be Holy: For they seem to be good, and for that Reason it is, that 'tis observ'd in the Glossary on that Place, That in the Eyes of Men they seem to be Righteous by their Fasts, their Prayers, and their Alms; but these are not their Fruits, because these Works are imputed to them as Sinful, by reason of that Vain-glory, which they aim at: Therefore they are known by the Works which they do not show, tho' they do them to obtain the Glory and Pleasures of the World; because there are some among them, who, as the Apostle says, in the Second Epistle to Timothy Chap. 3. are rather Lovers of Plea∣sure than Lovers of God. He afterwards sets down Four infallible Signs whereby to discover them, taken out of the same Gospel: They love the first Places in the Feasts, the chief Seats in the Synago∣gues, to be saluted in publick Places, and to be call'd by Men Rabbi. He afterwards explains those To∣kens after the following manner: On the First (says he) it ought to be observ'd, That they may be said to love the First Places in Feasts, who frequent the Tables of Kings, Princes and Prelates, who are the first at them to get the best of the Treat; which is unbecoming Regulars, and especial∣ly Preachers, &c.

He likewise adds another Proof of the Love they have to the Uppermost Places in Feasts, viz. The Curiosity they have of diving into the Affairs of Great Men, and of intermed∣dling with them: Upon the second token, which is the Loving of the Uppermost Seats in the Syna∣gogues; he observes, That they are justly to be charg'd with this, who get themselves to be nomi∣nated by the Secular Powers for to Preach in Churches on the Great Festivals, without having any deference to the Authority of the Bishops and other Prelates, who intrude themselves into the Mini∣stery without being Call'd thereto, and who aim more at shewing their own Parts and Eloquence, that at Preaching the Word of God. Upon the Third Sign or Token of Loving to be Saluted in the Publick Places, he applies it to the Regulars, who get themselves to be summon'd into the Con∣sistories of Princes and Prelates, who frequent them, who concern themselves in giving their Judg∣ments and Counsels in them, in order to attract the Respect of those who have any Business there. Last∣ly, on the Last Token, viz. Their Desire of being Call'd Rabbi, Rabbi, he Observes, That it is very

Applicable to the Regulars who make use of Excommunication, and raise a Scandal in the Church in order to obtain the Quality of Masters.

This Discourse is only an Introduction of that which William of Saint Amour establishes in his Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times. In the First Chapter he Proves from that Place of St. Paul, 2 Tim. 2. 1. That at the Latter End of the Church there should happen Perilous Times. In the Second he describes the Characters of those who shall be the Cause of those Perils, as they are set down in the same Place: Men Lovers of themselves, Coveteous, Boasters, Proud, Blasphemers, Disobedient to Pa∣rents and Superiors, Unthankful, Unholy, Unnatural, false Accusers, Incontinent, without Charity, Tray∣tors, Heady, High-minded, Lovers of Pleasure more than Lovers of God: Such as creep into Houses, &c. He adds, That they are those false Teachers, and false Prophets foretold by our Saviour, which he ap∣plies to those who Preach without a Call, without a Mission, and without the leave of the Curates, under Pretence, That they have Permission from the Pope, or the Bishop. He observes, That he would not Dispute the Authority of the Pope, or of the Diocesan Bishop; but that the Licence which they Grant to some to Preach, signifies only in case they be Invited thereto; since the Bishops them∣selves can do nothing out of their own Diocess, unless call'd by their Brethren, and that 'tis not to be suppos'd, That the Pope Grants a Power to a great many Persons of Preaching to one and the same Auditory, if they be not invited to it by the Curates. In the Third he demonstrates what those Cha∣racters were by which those Dangerous Men shall sow those Disorders, Namely, a semblance of Piety, Religion and Charity, which shall make them to pass for true Christians. In the Fourth he ex∣plains the Perils to which the Faithful shall be expos'd by the Imposture of those false Preachers, who shall resist the Truth as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, that is to say, who shall seduce Princes and the Christian People by their shew of Wisdom, and shall divert them from obeying the Counsels of their Lawful Superiors in order to follow their Corrupt Maxims and Morals. In the Fifth he shews the ways which they shall make use of to seduce them; viz. by creeping into Houses, by making them discover their Secrets in Confessions, by seducing Women and the Simple; by making themselves Lords and Masters of their Souls, and by forcing them to make Vows; and by diverting them from the Submission which they ow to their Pastors. In the Sixth he says, that those who shall not fore∣see those Perils shall be in danger of perishing by them. He proves in the Seventh, That those who are the Cause of them shall perish. In the Eighth he endeavours to prove by the Signs set down in Scripture, That these Perils are not far off. In the Ninth he shews, That it chiefly belongs to the Prelats to foresee, discover, and divert those Perils. In the Tenth he demonstrates the Punishments to which they are liable in this World and the next, if they do not oppose them. In the Eleventh he proves, That tho' those Perils have been foretold, yet they might be diverted for a time, if vigorously op∣pos'd. In the Twelfth he explains the Methods which ought to be made use of in order to divert them: Which are, (1.) To consider who those Persons are who creep into Houses, and whether there be any such in the Church. (2.) When one shall have discover'd them, to inform others of them. (3.) To Injoyn them to avoid such. (4.) To hinder them from Preaching and Teaching. (5.) To oblige those who are of their Sect to withdraw themselves from them. (6.) To hinder others from entring into their Sect, and in general to shun the False Prophets, the Idle who will not work with their Hands, and the Inquisitive. He in this place oppugns the Practice of begging when one is strong and Lusty, and when a Man may get his Living by his Labour, and says, That 'tis a piece of In∣justice. In the Thirteenth he examines among what sort of Persons we ought to search after these Seducers, and pretends, That 'tis not among the Pagans, nor among the Wicked or Ignorant Chri∣stians that this Search ought to be made; but amongst the Wise Persons, among those who profess to follow the Dictates of Jesus Christ, who seem to be most Holy and most Prudent, that one would think them to be the Elect of Jesus Christ. In a word, in the last Chapter he reckons up Forty one Marks to distinguish the False Apostles from the True, of which, says he, some are Infallible, and others Probable. In the beginning he protests that he had no Design of advancing any thing against any particular Person, or against any State or Order of Men, but only in general to declaim against the Sins of the Wicked, and the Perils of the Church: However 'tis easy to see, that he means the Dominican Friars, and that 'tis at them he aims, and whom he sets upon in this Book which he sub∣mits to the Correction of the Church.

This Treatise is follow'd by two Pieces wherein he resolves two Queries, viz. In the First, Whe∣ther it be lawful to give all one's Estate to the Poor and be reduc'd to Beggery? In the Second, Whe∣ther one ought to bestow any Alms on a lusty Mendicant? He resolves both in the Negative, founds his Resolutions on several Passages out of the Scriptures and Fathers, and proposes to himself the Ob∣jections which might be made to it, to which he returns his Answers. He concludes the Second Query by asserting, That the Preachers ought not to ask any Money lest it be an occasion to them of Cove∣tousness, and lest they should seem to be guilty of Simony.

Those Writings are follow'd by the Answers which William of St. Amour made to the Erroneous Propositions which were laid to his Charge. He therein shews either that he never had advanc'd any such thing, or that they had put a false Construction on what he had said; or that they had added to and perverted his Expressions. (1.) They accus'd him of having said, That he who Preaches com∣mits a Mortal Sin, if he receives or asks any thing of those to whom he Preaches. He replies, That he had never advanc'd this Proposition; that on the contrary he had said, That the Preacher who has a Lawful Mission may receive for his Subsistence, and that 'tis his Due. (2.) Of having said, That the Monks may not be Doctors nor hold Dignities. He replies, That he had not said that; but had on∣ly said, That the Monks who have abandon'd the World, ought not to be over-sollicitous in being made Doctors, as they ought not to hunt after the Riches, Honours, and Pleasures of the World. (3.) Of

having said, That 'tis not lawful for Monks to reside in the Courts of Princes and Prelates. He Replies, That he had only said, that it was dangerous for them. (4.) Of having said, That he who presents himself to Preach without being call'd thereto, is guilty of a Mortal Sin. He replies, that he had only said, That one ought not to intrude into that Ministery without being Call'd thereto. (5.) That he who admitted another's Parishoner to Confession, was guilty of a Mortal Sin: To which, he replies, That he had added, without the Permission of the Superior, (6.) That a Bishop who Preaches out of his own Diocess, commits a Mortal Sin. He Replies, That he had never said thus; but had only said, That 'tis not Lawful for a Bishop to Execute his Episcopal Functions out of his own Diocess, without the leave of the Ordinary. (7.) Of having said, That he who gives away his whole Estate to live himself upon Charity, is not in a State of Sal∣vation. He Replies, That he had only said, That a Man in Health, who has not wherewithal to live, ought to Work with his Hands to get himself a Livelyhood: And to give a full Resolution to this Head, he declares, That he who is not Skill'd in any Trade, may Beg till he has Learn'd a Trade: That those who are naturally incapable of Working, such as Children, Aged, and Infirm Persons might likewise Beg: That the same might be extended to those who are Habitually render'd inca∣pable of Working; that those who cannot get Work, or cannot get a Livelyhood by Working, may likewise Beg. Lastly, That those who by their Duty being Employ'd in Spiritual Functions have not Time to Work, may likewise Beg. (8.) Of having Asserted, That all those who are in an Order, who have no Revenue, who are able to Work and do not, but Live on Alms; are not in a State of Salvation, and cannot be excus'd upon the Account of Preaching. He Replies, That he had on∣ly said this upon the Account of the great number of Mendicants who are in the Nation, and especi∣ally upon the Account of certain Young Persons who were call'd Bons-Valets, and of certain Nuns, call'd Beguines, who are not of any Order Approv'd by the Holy See. (9.) Of having said, That the Handsomness of Habits is not profitable nor unprofitable to Salvation. He Replies, That he ne∣ver said this, but only, That it was Lawful to wear a Fine Habit, provided it were not above the Qua∣lity of him who wears it, and against the Custom of the Country. (10.) Of having said, That he who wears a mean Habit beneath his Quality, sins more than he that wears one above his Qua∣lity. He Replies, That he had never said this, but, That there might be something of Pride in wear∣ing a Habit beneath one's Quality, and that this Pride is a greater Sin because of the Hypocrisy that attends it. That moreover in these two Articles, he aims at the Beguines and Bons-Valets, who say, That one may not wear a fine Habit without endangering one's Salvation. (11.) Of having said before the Bishop of Mascon, That the Spiritual Functions do not excuse a lusty Mendicant, who lives upon Alms. He Replies, That he had already Answer'd that Head. (12.) Of having said, That Women who take upon them the Religious Habit, or cut off their Hair, and still lead a Secular Life, Sin heinous∣ly. He Replies, That he never said this, but only, That it was not Lawful to take upon them an Habit different from that of their Profession. (13.) Of having said, That Jesus Christ and the Apostles did not Beg. He Replies, That he had never Read in Scripture, that they had any Right of Re∣ceiving of those to whom they Preach'd, things necessary for this Life: That after the Re∣surrection of Jesus Christ, the Apostles Preach'd, and that they Receiv'd what was voluntarily offer'd to them, with a great deal of Difficulty. (14.) Of having advanc'd several things against the Pope's Decree, by which it was order'd to admit the Dominicans into the University of Paris, and such things as were prejudicial to that Order, and of having declar'd, That he was afraid, that they were the Men who crept into Houses, who are Idle and Inquisitive, who would be call'd Rabbi, Rabbi, &c. He Replies, That it was true, that he was present at the Treaty which was made between the Mendi∣cants and the University; that he had heard those Objections started by those who Defended the Cause of the University; but that he had not Propos'd them, as being neither the Proctor nor the Gover∣nor of the University. (15.) Of having said, That they could not Condemn the Books of Abbot Joachim, because there were several Persons who supported him. He Replies, That he never said this, but only, That several Errors of that Abbot had been already Condemn'd, and that the others could not as yet have been condemn'd, because they could not be Detected in so short a time, by Reason of the great number of them, of the Business of those who were Em∣ploy'd to Examine them, and of the Credit of those who maintain'd them. I omit the following Heads, which contain only either general Reproaches, or particular matters of Fact, or are only a Re∣petition of what relates to the Habits and Poverty: And shall only speak of that which relates to the Preaching and Mission of the Mendicant Friars. They had Accus'd him of having maintain'd, That all those who Preach'd without being Call'd by the Curates, tho' Approv'd by the Pope, were False Prophets. He Replies, That he never said this, but only of those who had no Mission either from their Ordinaries or the Pope. They Accus'd him likewise of having said, That tho' the Priests Approv'd by the Bishop may Confess, yet they may not Administer the Sacrament of Pennance. He Replies, That he had only said, That none but those who have the Charge of Souls, or who have receiv'd their Mission from them, may Confer the Sacrament of Pennance. They farther Ac∣cus'd him of having said, That the Bishop in Collating a Curacy, granted the Whole, and retain'd the Whole. He Replies, That he had said, That where a Bishop gives a Cure to a Priest, the Priest has the immediate Jurisdiction thereof, and that the Bishop has it mediante Presbytero; tho' he might sometimes Exercise it immediately by himself, and that the Priest discharges the Bishop non à toto sed à tanto. Lastly, he clear'd himself of the Charge laid against him, That he had advanc'd a great ma∣ny Propositions against the false Prophets of his Time who crept into Houses, not only before Men of Learning, but also before the Simple and Ignorant, and when the Seculars and Regulars were at Va∣riance: He clear'd himself, I say, of this Charge, by declaring, That he had no Design of saying

these things against the Order of the Dominicans, nor against their Persons, but only in General against all the false Prophers who crept into Houses: That it was a very Scandalous thing for those Religious to say, That they were pointed at by the Works of these false Prophets, because they could not pretend any such thing, if those Works did not in some measure appear in their Actions: That tho' it might have been apply'd to them, yet the Truth ought not to be silenc'd upon that Account; and that the Scandal which they said would ensue thereon ought to be no hindrance for Publishing the Truth. That moreover with respect to the Book which they said had been Condemn'd by the Pope, and of which they made him the Author, it was Compos'd by the Doctors of Divinity, and in Justification of the University of Paris, to satisfy the Prelates of the Gallican Church, who being admonish'd to beware of the Perils which should happen in the Last Times, had desir'd that a Collection should be made of the Passages of Scripture, wherein those Perils were denoted; that he had set upon this Work jointly with several other Doctors, and reduc'd those Passages under different Heads: That it had been Alter'd Five times, and that it was the Third Edition which had been Disapprov'd by the Cardinals which had been Corrected in the Two next: That the Pope had only Disapprov'd of the Form of the Composure; that he was perswaded, that if he had seen the Fourth and Fifth Editions, he would never have Condemn'd them: And that Lastly, in the beginning of ••ach Edition, they submitted the Work to the Correction of the Church, the Pope and the other Prelates: That the Authors had Cor∣rected it themselves, and had no Design of maintaining the things which the Pope had Con∣demn'd.

The largest Collection of William of Saint Amour on this Subject is that which he made during his Exile, and which he sent to Pope Clement IV. It is divided into Five Parts.

In the First he Examines who those false Prophets are of whom he speaks, and shews how dange∣rous they are to the Church in general. In particular he shews in this Part, That the Honour, Ju∣risdiction, Order and Peace of the Church consist chiefly in maintaining the Rights of the Ordina∣ries, so that there be but one Bishop in a Diocess, one Arch-Deacon in an Arch-Deaconry, and one Curate in a Parish. That 'tis true, that in Cases of Necessity one may have recourse to extraordinary Supplies, and that the Pope who is the Superior of Bishops and the Ordinary of Ordinaries; may upon Lawful Occasions, send into several Churches Persons to Preach the Gospel, and to Preside o∣ver others. But that if he gave to a great many Persons a General Commission of Preaching and Administring the Sacrament of Pennance, it was not probable that by this General Grant he would give them Liberty of Exercising those Functions in all Churches without asking leave of the Prelates, and even in Defiance of them: That this would be to overthrow the Order of the Church, to di∣sturb its Peace and subvert its Laws. As to the Maintenance of those Preachers, he owns, That he who Preaches has a Right to receive of those to whom he Preaches the Gospel wherewithal to Live; but he says, That the Ordinaries, that is, the Bishops and Curates have a Right to take what is necessa∣ry for them, as the Reward of their Labour: That those who are Delegated by the Pope, may like∣wise receive their Subsistence from those to whom they are sent; but that those who are sent by the Bishops or by the other Prelates who have settled Revenues for the Cure of Souls, ought to be maintain'd by those who send them. That moreover it is not probable, That the Pope intended to send an in∣finite number of Preachers who should be a Charge to the People, and the rather because Preaching and Administration of the Sacraments is forbidden to the Monks by the Canons, and reserv'd to the Prelates: That the General Licence which the Pope Grants to an infinite Number of Regulars, of whom he has no knowledge, can signify no more than to render them capable of Preaching and Ad∣ministring the Sacraments, when they shall be Invited, and Employed by the Ordinaries in Case of Necessity.

In the Second Part, he Treats of the Idleness and Begging of those New Apostles. He maintains, That it is not Lawful for Persons in Health who can get their Living by their Labour, to live Idle and to Beg. He owns, that Ecclesiastical Employments dispense Men from Working with their Hands, but he particularizes several sorts of Spiritual Employments: Those of Prelates and Curates who have a Right of Receiving their Subsistence of those who are under their Care: Those of the Monks in their Churches and Monasteries, who ought to Live of their Revenues, and for whom the Bishop in case they have not enough may provide: Those of Persons who study to render themselves Ser∣viceable to the Church; such as Secular Students, who ought to be assisted, and may require it in case they are not provided for: That Persons who are strong and in a Condition of getting their Living by their Work, do Sin so long as they are Idle, and that Begging engages them in such Cir∣cumstances, as render them in danger of their Salvation. That the Monks and Regular Clerks who attend at Prayers, Preaching and Study, are not thereby excus'd from Working with their Hands, and have no Right to Beg: That Jesus Christ and his Apostles did never Beg. He speaks likewise by the way, against the Monks being familiar with Women. Lastly, he demonstrates by several Arguments, That Labour is requisite to a Monastick Life, opposes the Curiosity and Ambitus of the Monks.

The Third Part contains the Methods which those false Teachers make use of to insinuate them∣selves into the Affections of the Simple, which are Disguises, Hypocrisy, the affectation of a singu∣lar Sanctity, the meaness of their Habit, and the Austerity in their way of Living.

The Fourth Part contains the Marks whereby the false Prophets might be known, and the Me∣thods, of Distinguishing them from the true Teachers, which are Fifty in all.

Lastly in the last Part he relates the means of preventing those Perils, and shows the Obligation which the Bishops and Pastors lie under of applying a Remedy thereto, and how they shall be Pu∣nish'd who are negligent therein.

There is likewise a Sermon of William of Saint Amour on the same Subject, Preach'd on the Festi∣val of St. Philip and St. James, which contains the same Maxims.

The Style of that Author is plain, he Advances nothing but what he Confirms by a Passage of Scripture, or of the Ordinary Comment, or of the Canon-Law. In his great Work he likewise Cites the Fathers, particularly the Treatise of Saint Augustine about the Labour of Monks, Saint Jerome, Saint Gregory, Saint Isiodore, Saint Anselm, the Prophecies of Saint Hildegarda, &c. The Abstract of his Works which we have already given you, and the Answers to the Objections made against him, are enough to acquaint us of his Real Sentiments; but one cannot tell how to justify the Malicious Application which he made of the Passages of Holy Writ to the Orders of the Mendi∣cant Friars approv'd by the Holy See, and chiefly to that of the Dominicans: For tho' he declar'd, that he did not aim at them, yet the occasion of his Writing, and the Motive of undertaking th•••• Task put it out of all question, that he had them in his Eye, and that 'tis them he attacks without naming them, but by describing them in a way wherein he could hardly be blamed.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The Contests be∣tween the Di∣vines of Paris and the Domi∣nican Friars.
• * 1.2

  The Contests be∣tween William of St. Amour and the Domi∣nicans.
• * 1.3

  The Works of William of St. Amour.