the papacy from being owned as decifive, through Europe. At the fame time, it must be confeffed, that the middle path, which first had the sanction of Gregory, and was afterwards confirmed by the Carolin books and the council of Frankfort, naturally paved the way for the gradual establishment of idolatry.

CHAP.

CHA P. IV.

THE CASE OF GOTTESCHALCUS.

HE fubject of predeftination and grace had been formerly controverted, in the churches. of France, with a confiderable degree of acuteness and ingenuity, and what is ftill more pleafing to a Christian mind, with seriousness, candour, and charity*. We have feen with what zeal the doctrine of divine grace had been defended and illuftrated by the followers of Auguftine, and what a falutary influence had attended that doctrine on the knowledge, the fpirit, and the lives of Chriftians. It has appeared alfo, that many, who, partly through an ill-grounded fear of pernicious confequences, and partly through a misunderstanding of the nature of the fubject, were averfe to the fentiments of Auguftine, did ftill fincerely abhor Pelagianifm, and, with an happy inconfiftency, lived humbly dependent on divine grace alone, though they maintained Semi-Pelagianifm in their fentiments. But, as fuperftition, idolatry, and ignorance increased, the truly evangelical views of Auguftine were more and more thrown into the fhade, and the cafe of Gottefchalcus fhewed, that it was now no longer permitted to a divine to promulge the fentiments of the bishop of Hippo with impunity.

Gottefchalcus was born in Germany: from early life he had been a monk; and had devoted himself to theological enquiries. He was peculiarly fond of the writings of Auguftine, and entered with much

See p. 589. of Vol. II.

A.D.

much zeal into his fentiments*. That he really held the doctrines of that father, feems evident from the account, which is tranfmitted to us, though it be but fcanty. He expressly owned, that the wicked were condemned for their own demerits: and, if he was charged with making God the author of fin, it is no more than what befel the bishop of Hippo; and Fleury himself owns, that he was mifrepresented by his adverfaries. The moft culpable thing, which I find in him, if indeed a certain confeffion of faith, ascribed to him, be genuine, is this, that he offered to undergo a trial by fire, on this condition, that if he was preserved unhurt, his doctrine thould be allowed to be divine. If he was really guilty of this enthufiaftic prefumption, the iffue of the perfecution, which he afterwards underwent, was calculated to humble him, and caufe him to learn more practically than he had ever done, the real power of thofe doctrines, for which he honestly suffered.

About the year 846, he left his monastery, and 846. went into Dalmatia and Pannonia, where he spread the doctrines of Auguftine, under a pretence, it

was faid by his enemies, of preaching the Gospel A.D. to the infidels. At his return, he remained fome 847. time in Lombardy, and in 847, he held a conference with Notingus, bishop of Vienne, concerning predeftination. His zeal gave offence to the bishop, who prevailed on Rabanus, the archbishop

* I have extracted the best account of this perfon which I could, from Fleury and Du Pin, both Roman Catholic writers: I have availed myself alfo of the remarks of Mofheim: from the writings of the Magdubergenfian Centuriators, where I might have expected the most equitable and the most just account, I could collect nothing. They handle the fubject briefly and confusedly, and join with the enemies of Gottefchalcus in condemning him, without affording their readers any proper materials, on which they might form a judgment for themselves.

of Mentz, to undertake the confutation of the novel herefy, as it was now decreed. Rabanus calumniated Gottefchalcus with thofe monstrous and licentious confequences, with which the doctrines of divine grace have in all ages been afperfed, and from which St. Paul himself was not exempted: and having dreffed the fentiments of his adversary in the most odious colours, he found it no hard tafk, to expofe him to infamy. The learned monk undertook to defend himself in writing, and propofed the fubject to the confideration of the most able men of his time; and, against the great credit and authority of his adverfary, he opposed the renowned name of Auguftine. But no caufe ever appeared with more difadvantage in our times than that of Gotteschalcus. For we have not his treatife, compofed against Rabanus; only fome fragments of it have been preserved to us, by Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, who, the reader will foon be convinced, was not a man fit to be trufted with the care of the reputation of Gottefchalcus. In a fynod held at Mentz, the latter was condemned; and Rabanus obferving that the monk was of the diocefe of Soiffons, which was fubject to the archbishop of Rheims, fent him to Hincmar, calling him a vagabond, and declaring that he had feduced feveral perfons, who were become lefs careful of their falvation, fince they had learned from Gottefchalcus to say, why should I labour for my falvation? If I am predeftinated to damnation, I cannot avoid it; and, on the contrary, if I am predeftinated to falvation, whatever fins I am guilty of, I fhall certainly be faved*. Thus have I in a few words, faid he, fhewed you his doctrine.

Hincmar

It is evident, that fuch reafoning as this, might, with equal plaufibility, be alleged against the doctrine of the 1xth Chap.

Hincmar entered fully into the views of Rabanus; and, in a council of bishops, examined Gotteschalcus, who still maintained his doctrine with firmness. On this account, the Monk was condemned as an heretic, degraded from the priesthood, and ordered to be beaten with rods and imprisoned. As nothing, however, was proved against him, except his adherence to the fentiments of Auguftine, which were ftill held in eftimation in the Church, this fhews, fays Du Pin, that he was an injured man.

And now the prefumptuous boafts of Gottefchalcus, if they were his boafts indeed, inet with an humiliating check. For, while he was whipped in the prefence of the emperor Charles and the bishops with great feverity, and was given to understand that he muft caft into the fire with his own hand a writing, in which he had made a collection of Scripture-texts, in order to prove his opinion, he, at length, overpowered by his fufferings, dropped the book into the flames; after which he was kept clofe prifoner by Hincmar in a monaftery. This method of convincing an heretic of his errors, feems, however, to have been by no means fatisfactory to him, who had made use of it. For Hincmar ftill took pains to perfuade Gottefchalcus to retract his fentiments, but in vain. The injured paftor maintained, with his last breath, the doctrine for which he fuffered, and died in prifon in the year 870*.

Hincmar, hearing that he lay at the point of death, sent him a formulary, which he was to fubscribe,

to the Romans. Whoever would fee this method of argumentation fifted to the bottom, may confult the admirable Analogy of Butler. C. VI. Part 1. who, though no predeftinarian in his fentiments, candidly admits, and, I think, irrefragably proves, the fallacy of the vulgar objections.

* Cave.