the arms of Charlemagne prevailed over the Saxons, and eventually, at least, facilitated the labours of Liefuvyn, who continued to preach among this people till his death.

*

Villehad, an English priest, born in Northumberland, was abundantly successful in the conversion of the Saxons. It is true, that he taught under the protection and auspices of Charlemagne. But, whatever may be thought of the motives of the latter, the views of the missionary might be, and probably were, upright and spiritual. Certainly he underwent great hazards, overcame the ferocious spirits of the infidels by his meekness, and spread among them the knowledge of the gospel. A persecution drove him once out of the country; but, by the power of the emperor, he again returned and prosecuted his labours. After various contests, the Saxons were obliged to submit to Charlemagne, and to become nominal christians in general. But, that this was universally the case, or even nearly so, the pious laboriousness of a number of missionaries renders very improbable.

Villehad was bishop of Bremen, and was called the apostle of Saxony. He had begun his mission in Dockum, where Boniface was murdered. He was the first missionary, who passed the Elbe. His attention to the scriptures appears from his copying the epistles of St. Paul. He died in Friezeland, after he had laboured 35 years, and had been bishop of Bremen upwards of two years. To his weeping friends, he said in his dying moments, "Withhold me not from

message from God convinces and overawes the serious hearer, and, by its internal excellence, makes itself a way into the conscience. If Liefuvyn had preached mere morals, I should no more have expected such consequences to have attended his harangues, than they did the lectures of the Greek philosophers.

* Once when he was in danger of being put to death by the pagan Frisons, some of them, struck with his innocence and probity, and doubting whether the religion which he preached might not be divine, said, "let us cast lots whether we shall put him to death, or dismiss him." It was done so, and the lot decided in his favour. Fleury, xlv. 15. The custom of deciding cases of this nature by lot, was remarkably German. The classical reader may recollect a similar instance in Cesar's Comm. toward the end of lib. i. De Bell. Gall.

..........

going to God: these sheep I recommend to him, who intrusted them to me, and whose mercy is able to protect them." See Alban Butler, vol. xi.

This was an age of missionaries: their character and their success form, indeed, almost the only shining picture in this century. Firmin, a Frenchman, preached the gospel, under various difficulties,* in Alsace, Bavaria, and Switzerland, and inspected a number of monasteries. After all, the arms of Charlemagne contributed more than any thing else to the external reception of christianity; and Alcuin, his favourite, laments, that more pains were taken to exact from the Saxons the payment of tithes, than to inform them of the nature of true religion. Teachers, who were merely secular, drenched in the vices of human nature and of the times, would doubtless act in this manner. But, I have atttempted, from very confused and imperfect memoirs, to present to the reader, those, who were indeed sent of God, and laboured, in demonstration of the Spirit, in the north of Europe.

Rumold, a native either of England or of Ireland, should be added to the list. He travelled into Lower Germany, went into Brabant, diffused much light in the neighbourhood of Mechlin, and was made an itinerant episcopal missionary. In 775, he was murdered by two persons, one of whom he had reproved for adultery.†

Silvin, of Auchy, born in Toulouse,‡ was first a courtier, then a religious person, and afterwards appointed bishop among the infidels. His labours were, chiefly, in Terouanne, the north of France, which was, in this century, full of pagans and merely nominal christians. He gathered in a large harvest, having preached for many years. He died at Auchy, in the county of Artois.

* Mosh. cent. viii.

See Alban Butler's Lives of Saints.

† A. Butler, vol, vii.

CHAP. V.

Authors of this Century.

THE most learned writer of this century, if we may except our countryman Bede, seems to have been John of Damascus. He was one of the first, who mingled the aristotelian or peripatetic philosophy with the christian religion.* This philosophy was gradually supplanting the authority of the platonic. It makes no part of my subject, to explain the difference of the systems of Plato and Aristotle. Suffice it to say, that they were both very foreign to christianity, and each, in their turn, corrupted it extremely. John was a voluminous writer, and became, among the Greeks, what Thomas Aquinas afterwards was among the Latins. He seems to have defended the system, commonly called the arminian notion of freewill, in opposition to the doctrine of effectual grace. This† was a natural consequence of his philosophizing spirit. For, all the philosophers of antiquity, amidst their endless discordancies, agreed in teaching man to rely on himself. This is the dangerous philosophy, which St. Paul warns us to beware of. It hitherto wore, chiefly, the garb of Plato: it was now assuming that of Aristotle. In both these dresses, it was still "the wisdom of this world, which is foolishness with God;" and even at this day, among all who lean to their own understanding, to the disparagement of revelation, its nature is the same, however varnished with the polish of christian phraseology.

In the doctrine of the Trinity, John appears to have been orthodox: in other respects, he was one of the most powerful supporters of error. He was an advocate for the practice of praying for the dead, which he regarded as effectual for the remission of sins. This

* Fleur. xlii. 44.

† Du Pin. 8th cent. John of Damascus.

was a deplorable article of superstition, which had been growing in the church, and wanted the sanction of a genius like that of John, to give it lasting celebrity. I can find no evidences of his real knowledge or practice of godliness. And the reader will think he has been detained sufficiently by this Grecian author, after he has learned, that the eloquent and learned pen of John of Damascus, defended the detestable doctrine of image worship, and contributed more than that of any other author, to establish the practice of it in the east. In the mean time there arose no evangelical luminary, who might combat his arguments with sufficient ability. The scripture itself, indeed, was more than half buried under the load of superstitions. The learning of this eastern father was probably more accurate and refined than that of Bede. In the latter, however, we have seen the fullest evidence of christian light and humility: in the former, as far as respects true wisdom, all is dark and dreary; and the baleful influence of his unscriptural opinions, however respectable he might be in a literary view, has seldom been exceeded by that of any other writer in the history of the church.

I have already taken notice of the opposition made in the west, to the progress of image worship, by the authority of Charlemagne. The Carolin books, published in his name, were powerful checks against the growing evil; and it is more probable, that such a prince as Charlemagne was carried along by the current of the times, than that he directed the sentiments of the western churches by his own theological studies. Political and secular reasons unhappily retained these churches in the Roman communion, and, in process of time, the abominations of idolatry overspread them all. It is, however, a pleasing circumstance, that the labours of missionaries in the north of Europe, which form the most shining part of christian history in this century, were all conducted by christians of the west, and particularly by those, who were the most remote from idolatry, those of our own country espeVOL. III.

25

cially. There is, therefore, good reason to believe, that the new churches in the north were taught to worship the living God, through the one Mediator Christ. For the British churches expressed the most marked detestation of the second council of Nice.* And Alcuin, the preceptor of Charlemagne, disproved its decrees in a letter, by express authorities of scripture. It is too true, that our ancestors, like the rest of Europe, learned at length to worship idols. For religious movements among churches are generally retrograde. Intirely distinct from human institutions of science, christian views are most perfect at first, as being derived from the divine word, and impressed on the hearts of men by divine grace: the wisdom of this world, aided by the natural propensities of mankind, corrupts them afterwards by degrees, and too often leaves them, at length, neither root nor branch of evangelical light and purity.

Alcuin, who has been just mentioned, was born in England; and was a deacon of the church of York. He was sent ambassador into France by Offa, king of the Mercians, in the year 790. On this occasion, he gained the esteem of Charlemagne, and persuaded that monarch to found the universities of Paris and Pavia. He was looked upon as one of the wisest and most learned men of his time. He read public lectures in the emperor's palace, and in other places. He wrote, in an orthodox manner, on the Trinity, and, in particular, confuted the notions of Felix, bishop of Urgel, of whom it is sufficient to say, that he revived something like the nestorian heresy, by separating the humanity from the divinity of the Son of God. Alcuin showed himself a master of his subject, and wrote in a candid and moderate spirit. He died in 804.

Even Italy itself was not disposed altogether to obey the pope, in regard to image worship. Some Italian bishops assisted at the council of Frankfort, before mentioned; and Paulinus, of Aquileia, bore a distin