Opuscula theologica G M L Wette Editor

Visit to download the full and correct content document:

https://ebookstep.com/product/opuscula-theologica-g-m-l-wette-editor/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Anatomia umana Frederic H Martini L Cocco Editor E

Gaudio Editor L Manzoli Editor G Zummo Editor

https://ebookstep.com/product/anatomia-umana-frederic-h-martini-
l-cocco-editor-e-gaudio-editor-l-manzoli-editor-g-zummo-editor/

Inside Toliman 1st Edition Faustine Teisseire M G

Caroline L

https://ebookstep.com/product/inside-toliman-1st-edition-
faustine-teisseire-m-g-caroline-l/

Die Wette 1st Edition Tara Crescent

https://ebookstep.com/product/die-wette-1st-edition-tara-
crescent/

Aquorea Inspira M G Ferrey

https://ebookstep.com/product/aquorea-inspira-m-g-ferrey/
Biologische Verhaltensforschung am Menschen Volker
Johst Editor H Behrens Editor G Dörner Editor

https://ebookstep.com/product/biologische-verhaltensforschung-am-
menschen-volker-johst-editor-h-behrens-editor-g-dorner-editor/

Farmacología básica y clínica Bertram G. Katzung

(Editor)

https://ebookstep.com/product/farmacologia-basica-y-clinica-
bertram-g-katzung-editor/

L enfer au paradis 1st Edition Sylvie G

https://ebookstep.com/product/l-enfer-au-paradis-1st-edition-
sylvie-g/

Familienunternehmen beraten Positionen und

Praxisbeispiele Klaus G Deissler Editor

https://ebookstep.com/product/familienunternehmen-beraten-
positionen-und-praxisbeispiele-klaus-g-deissler-editor/

Lash Anjos Caídos 1 1st Edition L G Castillo

https://ebookstep.com/product/lash-anjos-caidos-1-1st-edition-l-
g-castillo/
 OPVSCVLA

THEOLOGICA.

I V N C TI M EDIDIT

G. M. L. DE W E T T E , DR.

TU F. OI, O G V S n A S II-E E NSIS.

BEROLINI,
A P V D G. R E I M E R V M.

RI D C C C X X X.
 P R A E F A T I O.

Commentationis mcae de morte Iesu Chri-

sti expiatoria exemplis omnibus divcndids,
suasit iam ante aliquot annos bibliopola, ut
noyam cius editionem pararem. Ego vero
diu haesitavi et reluctanti animo manum
ad rem admovi. Nam sunt quaedam in isto
libello, quae mihi iam meliora edocto dis-
plicent et ab iis qui doctrinae christianae
placita a maioribus accepta religiosius ser-
vant, in crimen versa sunt. Dicta Iesu
Christi de mortis suae Consilio ita esplica-
vi, ut quae Apostoli de ca exponunt, longe
a Salvatoris mente abesse et ad supcrsti-
tioncm Iudaicam pertinere viderentur: et
licet etiamnum inter Iesu Christi et Apo-
stolorum scntentiam discrimen aliquod in-
teresse statuam, tarnen id non tantum est,
 — IV —

quantum ex iis, quae tum (lisserai, appa-

ret. Minus fuissct offensioni scntentia mea,
si, in exponcndis Iesu Christi dictis non
acquiescens, doctrinae Apostolorum accu-
rate expositae comparationem instituis-
sem: intcllexisscnt enim lcctores clarius,
me earn non prorsus repudiare, sed in ea
agnosccre aliquid veritati et Christi menti
consentaneum : nam ex quo in tlieologia ali-
quid sapere coepi, Pauli Apostoli sublime
de iustificatione placitum recte perspexi et
fundamentum rcligionis christianae agno vi.
Attamen vel sic sententiam meam jjs, qui
salvatoris mortem pio sensu amplectuntur,
non satisfacturam fuisse libenter fateor.
Laborat illa mea disputatio vitiis quibus-
dam, quae paucis indicare difficile est,
difficilius levi manu libellum retractando
medela affertur. S ufficiai notasse, me non
satis eorum, quae in religione minus cogi-
tatione quam sensu percipi possunt, ratio-
nem habuisse, unde factum est, ut cani
 — v —

mortis Iesu Cliristi considcrandae ratio-

iicm, qua pio animo peccatorum conscien-
tia turbato tranquillitas et pax affertur,
a Paulo Apostolo potissimum commenda-
tain , in ipsis Iesu dictis, maxime in loco
Ioh. Ill, 15. (quem tamquam dubium pror-
sus omisi) latere non viderem. Hodieque
contendo, Iesum mortis, quam obiturus
erat, vim potissimum in eo posuisse, utea
doetrinam et dignitatem suam confirmaret,
et adseclis summi amoris argumentum et
exemplum pracberet. Sed haec moralis
cius potestas prope abest ab eius vi expia-
toria, quam saltern cum innuissc iain turn
concessi. Nam Christiani liominis devotio,
qua magistrum suum imitaturus mortem
obit, vel ad earn obeundam semper para-
tus est, cernitur etiam pictate, qua ex eius
morte, pro sua salute oppetita, solatium
animi peccatorum conscientia territi capit;
et amor, quo ductus morti se dcvovet, fini-
tiinus est fiduciae, quam in amore Dei et
 — VI —

indulgentia erga peccatorcs ponit. Quo-

minus doctrinam de mortc I. Chr. expiato-
ria recte tractarem, obfuit quoque falsa,
quam conceperam, de natura sacrificiorum
sententia: etenim mefugiebat, his ritibus
ab eorum primordiis subfuisse aliquid,
quod sensum vere pium aleret, cosque non
nisi procedente tempore apud vulgus in su-
perstitionem cessisse, potuissc igitur Chri-
stum et Apostolos eorum vim primitivam
in rem suam convertere. Distinxi paulo
subtilius inter proprium et allcgoricum
siye symbolicum cogitandi dicendique ge-
nus, ñeque tertium illud, quod medium
locum obtinet agnovi, quo pii animi sen-
sa obscure quidem, nec tamen continuo
superstitiose significantur. Nam ea est
í'eligionis natura, ut in rebus humanis,
in sensum cadentibus et in facto positis,
divina quasi oculis intueri amet; et eius-
modi imago, qua intuenda Christianis per-
suasum est de Deo peccatoribus reconcilia-
to, Christi mors est.
 VII

Alius locus est in isto libello, qui in eo-

rum, qui Christum superstitiosius colunt,
vituperationem incidebat, nec prorsus im-
merito *). Dico locum, qui est de ratione ac
via, qualesuseo pervenerit, ut necessita-
tem mortis obeundae sibi impositam intelli-
geret. Rem studui explicare ex humana
natura ita, utlesu errorem tribuerem, etsi
nontalem, qui ex pravitate animi, sed ex
nimia erga homines benevolentia ortus fue-
rit. Tragica mihi videbatur et videtur $al-
vatorismors, talis inquam, quam cum re-
bus adversis colluctatus urgenti rerum ne-
cessitati sponte cedens oppetiverit. Eam
auteni necessitatem quaerebam non solum
in inimicorum odio, sed etiam in amico-
rum pra vis opinionibus, quas Christus cor-
rigere frustra studuerit et facile correctu-
rum se esse speraverit. Quam coniectu-

*) Offenderunt tarnen quidam oh inscitiam linguae lati-

ìiac in locutione de Christo adhibita, cui nihil indigni inest.
D i x i , Jesum personam Messine suscej)isse, quod sensu nostri:
eine Rolle spielen, perceperunt.
 •— Vili —
ram si quis sancta Icsu persona indignami
dixerit, ego nunc non contradicam; sed
non valde me poenitet explications infelici
quidem successu, tarnen non sine veri stu-
dio tentatae, quam adhuc simili modo ten-
tandam censeo. Nani si vere Iesus homo
fuit, Theologo non solum facultas data,
verum etiam officium iniunctum est vitae,
quam ille in his terris egit, rationem ad le-
ges humanae naturae revocandi: qua in
re ornnino cavendum est, ne divina eius
natura evertatur, Quoquo autem modo
rem institueris, vix ac ne vix quidem vi-
tuperationem eorum evitabis, qui magis
Iesu Christi divinitatem, quam eius huma-
nitatem tuendam esse censent: id quod nu-
pereHASio, viro ingeniosissimo, accidisse
video, qui in narratione rerum a Icsu Chri-
sto gestarum suspicatus est, Iesum priinum
regni theocratici condendi spem aluisse,
neque nisi hac spe frustrata mortis oppe-
tendae ccpisse consilium. Ilacc res maxi-
 — IX —

me in causa fuit, cur novam cdiiioncin li-

belli detrcctarem. Vérebar, ne quae de
Christo liberius sensissem et quae auferri
non potuissent, nisi magna disputationis
parte novata, iterum emissa vituperatori-
bus meis denuo bileni movcrcnt : quocirca
aliquando consilium fuit rem intactam re-
quere.
At reputanti mihi, haud pauca in hoc
libello recte tractata esse, ad quae in
aliis scriptis meis lectorem brevitatis cau-
sa ablegare consueverim; ab aliis scri-
ptoribus passim laudari, et cuilibet operi
auctoris cuiusque non piane contemncndi
smini, quem semel obtinuerit, in orbe lit-
terario locum servandum esse, satius vi-
sum est iis, qui eo uti vellent, libelli co-
piam facere, et quae minus probanda es-
sent nec facile emendari possent, iudicio
relinquere doctorum hominum. Itaque
prelo eum permisi, sed eundem, etiam iis
locis quae facilius emendare potuissem, ut
 pristinam piene rctincret formam, dictione
tarnen passim correcta.
Adieci duos alios libellos et voluminis
et ponderis minori», quos tarnen, cum nul-
libi prostent, nonnullos forte litterarum
Hebraearum amicos iuvabit possidere. Eos
quoque tales, quales suo tempore prodie-
runt, edidiiterum, quo manerent, qualia-
cunque sint, studiorum meorum documen-
ta. Dissertationis de Deuteronomio di-
ctionem identidem emendavi, iuvenilis
tarnen infacundiae colorem delere ncque
potui ncque volui.

Scribebam Basileae m. Iulio 1830.

 DESIGNATIO ARGYMENTI.

Pag.
Commentatici de morte Iesu Christi expiatoria, S. V.
Theologis Vratislaviensibus ob summos in theologia
honores sponte in nie collatos gratias agendi causa
scripta Berolini a. 1 8 1 3 . . . ' 1
Prooemiunt . : 3
Par8 prior. Nuin Iudaei Iesu et Apostolorum
actate eiusmodi Messiam exspectavexint, qui pas-
sione ac morte populi peccata cxpiaturus esset G
Sectio prior. Utrum in V. T . libris doctrinae de
Messia, passione ac morte peccata populi expia-
turo, vestigia deprehendantur 9
Cap. I. An Hebraei antiqui in universum pecca-
torum expiationem a Messia qualicunque modo
consununandam cxspectaverint 10
Cap. II. An Messiae cum fortuna adversa collu-
ctandum mortemquc subeundam esse existima-
verint Hebraei . . . . 14
Cap. III. An pro peccatorum venia impetranda
Messiam passurum vel adeo moriturum esse sibi
persuaserint Hebraei 19
Sectio posterior. Num Iudaei Iesu et Aposto-
lorum aetate eiusmodi Messiam cxspectaverint,
qui passione et morte populi peccata expiaturus
esset 48
Cap. I. De fontibus, unde hauriendum sit . 48
Cap. II. An Novum Testamentuni doceat, lu-
 — XII —
Pag.
dacos Icsu tempore Mcssiam passurum ac mori-
turum exspectasse 71
Cap. III. Examinantur, quae Iudaeoruin recen-
tiorum Christologia de passione ac morte Mes-
siae docet g^
Par 8 posterior. Qaonam Consilio Iesus Chri-
stus mortem subierit, quidque de hac re ipse
professus. sit 122
Sectio prior. De Consilio mortis Iesu . . . 122
Sectio posterior. Quid Icsus de morte sua pro-
fessus sit 138
H. Dissertatio, qua Deuteronomium a prioribus Pen-
tateuchi libris diver sum, alius cuiusdam recenlioris
opus esse monstratur, pro venia legendi publice de-
fensa Ienae a. 1 8 0 5 149
III. De prophetarum in Vet. Testamenti Ecclesia et
Doclorum Tlieologiae in Ecclesia Evangelica ra Ito-
ne atque similitudine. Programma ad indicandos
summos in Theologia honores in S. V. NEANDRVM
confcrcndos 169
 CO M M E N T A T I O

DE MORTE I E S ü CHRISTI

E X P I A T O R I A .

DE WETTE Opuscula. A
 P R O O E M I U M .

§• i.
E x quo liberum rationis usum in disquisitioni-
bus ad religionem pertinentibus admitiere coepe-
runt theologi, nullum religionis Ciiristianae do-
gma magis in dubium est vocatum atque huc illuc
disputationibus tractum, quam dogma de morte
Iesu Ckristi expiatoria s. vicaria. Fuerunt, qui
dubitarent, num haec doctrina cum sanae philo-
sophiae placitis et necessariis ethices legibus con-
ciliari queat, quique liberalis N. T . interpretatio-
nis subsidio evincere studerent, Iesum Christum.
et Apostolos eam non proposuisse talem, qualis
ab Ecclesia recepta et sancita sit, in eaque pro-
ponenda ad vulgares aequalium et popularium opi-
niones descendisse t neque voluisse dogma perpe-
tuo servandum stabilire; fuerunt contra, qui do-
ctrinam ecclesiasticam cum lesu et Apostolorum
dictis piane congruere, rationi vero et inorum pro-
bitati non repugnare affirmarent *) ; neque piane

1 ) E x iis, qui vel libértate vel liccntia in doctrinam de

expiatione inquisiverunt, praecipue nominandi sunt: A M M O -
A 2
 — 4 —

composita ea Us videtur. Acta igitur acturos nos

non putavimus, si liane doctrinam denuo in exa-
men vocaremus. Ne autem limites, quibus libel-
lus circumscribendus erat, excederet disputatio no-
stra, in ampio huius doctrinae campo non late ex-
currendum, sed in aliqua parte subsistendum esse
duximus. Constituimns igitur in originem doctri-
nae inquirere, ea ratione, ut primo exploraremus,
an eius vestigia in Cliristologia Iudaeorum, qui
Iesu Christi tempore vixerunt, depreliendantur,
deinde de Consilio, quo Iesus mortem obierit, vi-
deremus: cetera, quae de hac re in medium pro-
ferre possemus, ad alium locum et aliud tempus
servantes. Neque enim rei periti ignorant, in
iis, quae nobis tractanda sumsimus, rei summ am
esse positam, neque de tota doctrina recte iudi-
cari posse, priusquam liaec eius pars ad liquidum
perducta sit. Omnium prima est quaestio, an Ie-
sus eo Consilio mortuus sit, ut peccata generis Im-
mani sanguine suo expiaret; ut autem recte iu-
dicemus de mortis Iesu Consilio, magni refert
scire, utrum exspectationi aequalium satisfactu-
rus mortem subierit, an aliis ductus rationibus.

NIVS, BAHRDTIVS , BAVERVS , CANNABICHIVS , EBERIIAR-

DIVS, ECKERMANNVS, FLATTIVS, LÖFFLERVS, PAVLVS, TIEF-

TRVNKIVS. Doctrinam ecclesiasticam defenilerunt STORRIVS,

IACOBIVS, S E I L E R V S , alii.
Fort itaque res, ut tractatum nostrum in duas
partes! dividamus, quarum prior quidem versabi-
tur in quaestione, 71 um lud a ei Iesu et Apo-
stolorum aetate einsmodi Messiam ecc-
spectaverint, qui passione ac morte
peccata eacpiaturus esset, posterior vero
exponet, quonarn Consilio Jesus Christus
mortem suiierit, quidque de hac re ipse
professus sit.
 P A R S P R I O R .

Num Iudaei lem et Apostolorwn actate Mes-

siam e&spectaverint, qui passione ac morte po-
puli peccata, eccpìaturus esset.

% 2.
Quemadmodum universa de morte lesti expia-
toria doctrina maxima virorum doctorum dubi-
tatione ac dissensione laborat : ita liac de re
diversa atque contraria statuuntur. Affirmant
alii, Messiam, qui mortem expiatoriam subitu-
rus esset, a Iudaeis illius temporis exspecta-
tum esse; negant alii. Ab illorum parte stare
video non solum SCHOETTGENIVM aliosque reli-
gionis Christianae adversus ludaeos yindices et
theologiae Iudaicae indagatores, quorum doctri-
liae Christianae et Iudaicae antiqua«? concordiam
quibuscunque argumentis demonstrandi et ludaeos
recentiores ex ea refutandi perversum studium
iarn dudum explosum est 2) ; sed etiam recentio-

2 ) Quae apud Galatinvm, de Voisin, Muellervm,

Maivm, praccipueque in libro Gali Razia inveniuntur, eius-
ruin Theologorum haud panel, ex quibus lo. E.
3 4
CHB. SCHMIDTIVM ), STAEVDLINIVM ), POELIZ-

ZIVM 5 ) , A . T H . HARTMANNVM 6
) , BERTHOLDTVM 7
)

honoris causa nomino, lxuic sententiue adstipu-

lantur. Ili W . DD. rem probare studuerunt tum
locis e libris Iudaicis decerptis, tuin aliis argu-
mentis haud contemnendis, quamquam ingenue
fateor, novissimum de Cliristologia Iudaica seri-
ptorem B E R T H O L D T Y M , a quo Iucem liuic rei per*

jiiodi argumenta e libris Rabbinorum et Cabbalistarum aliata,

magna ex parte vel minus accurate adhibita, vel male intel-
lccta, vel falsa et ficta sunt. Ncque S C H O E T T G E N I V S , licet
cavere sibi voluerit, ne recentiora cum antiquis misceret (vid.
Hör. Hebr. T. II. de Messia C. I I I . p. 3 9 . J , in perscrutart-
dis veterum Iudaeorum de Messia opinionibus ita versatus
est, ut severioribus veritatis amicis satisfaceret. Vid. idem
iudiciuin de his scriptoribus ferentes C O R R O D I V I « krit. Gesch.
d. Chiliasm. P . I . p. 2 9 0 . et Io. E. C H R . S C H M I D T I V M christo-
log. Fragm. in Biblioth. für Kritik u. Exegese des N. T. T . I.
p. 3. Auctorem libri Gali Razia (qui fuit I V L , C O N R A D V S
O T T O , Iudaeus conversus, postea vero ad rcligionem patriam
regressus), graviter accusarli S O M M E R V S in theolog. Soharica
p. 1 6 . et W A G E N S E I L I V S in notis ad Sota p. 7 0 5 .
3 ) Christol. Fragm. p. 18 sqq.
4 ) lieber den Zweck u. d. Wirkungen des Todes Iesu
in Gotting. Biblioth. d. neuesten theol. Liter. T. I. p. 2 3 9 sqq.
5 ) De gravissimia theologiae seriorum Iudaeorum de-
cretis p. 43. n. 80.
6 ) Blicke in den Geist des Urchristenthums p. 2 4 sqq.
7) Christologia Iudaeorum Iesu Apostolorumque aetale
§. 29.
 obscurae allatum iri merito speraveram, exspe-
ctationi meae parum satisfecisse. Alii yero vel
simpliciter sententiam suam enuntiaverunt, quasi
probatione non indigeret 8 ), vel tantum repetie-
r u n t , quae illi attulerant, quasi re confecta 9 );
qualis quidem rerum tractandarum modus ad ve-
rum explorandum parum conducit. Proxime ad
illam sententiam accedit C O R R O D I V S , qui quam-
quam Iudaeorum recentiorum de Messia patiente
doctrinam pro antiqua liabet, eius tamen a Chri-
stiana baud levem differentiam recte observât 10 ).
l i , qui ab altera stant parte, ut B O E D E R L I N I Y S H ) ,
12 14
AMMONIVS ), SKILERYS 13) 5 B A V E R V S ), GABLE-

Rvs ECKERMANNTS 16) } nescio cur id, quod

persuasum habebant, argumentis idoneis firmare

8 ) Ut ille, qui sub nomine OTMARJS SECVNDI scripsit

Beiträge zur hist. Ausleg. d. N. T. in HENKII N. Magaz. T.
Iii. part. 2.
9 ) Sic KVINOEUVS in STAEVDLIKII sententia acquievit
in Comment. in Matth. X X , 2 8 .
10) L. 1. p. 2 8 4 sqq.
1 1 ) Ad les. L. III. ed. tert.
1 2 ) Bihl. theol. T. II. p. 140.
13) Die Weissagung und ihre Erfüllung in ihren Grün-
den aus der heil. Schrift dargestellt p. 1 5 0 sq., 2 1 0 sq., 2 1 3 .
14) Eibl. Theol. des N, T. T. I. p. 2 5 9 sq. In Theol.
vero Vet. Test. p. 4 0 7 . contrariae sententiac adstipulatus erat.
1 5 ) I n p r o g r . pasch. Ien. an. 1 8 0 8 , cui inest Meletem.
I. in loc. loh. I, 29. p. 10.
1 6 ) Theol. Beiträge T. I. p. 2 0 9 .
et contra adversariorum argumenta tueri plane
omiserint. Yel simpliciter negant, opinionem de
Messia patiente aequalibus Iesu cognitam fuisse,
Tel pauca tantum argumenta afferunt. Miror ma-
xime doleoque, doctissimum GABLERYM hanc rem
ab instituti sui ratione haud alienam sibi non
sumsisse accuratius investigandam et ad liquidum
perducendam. In tanta YV. DD. hac de re dis-
sensione ac controversia, equidem certi aliquid
inventurum me esse plane despero, praesertim
cum, qui in liane difficillimam quaestionem de-
scendere velit, eum tanta litterarum Cabbalistica-
rum et Rabbinicarum cognitione instructum esse
oporteat, quanta milii certe gloriari non licet.
duoniam vero instituti ratio postulat, ut in hac
re tractanda qualemcunque operam ponam, hoc
negotio ita perfungar, ut quae a viris doctis in
utramque partem disputata sunt, diligenter recen-
seam atque in ordinem redigam, pauca, quae ad
rem facere videbuntur, de meis adiecturus.j

S E C T I O P R I O R .
Num in V. T. libris doctrinae de Messia, passione ac morte
peccata populi expiaturo, vestigia deprehendantur.

Cum omnis seriorum Iudaeorum tlieologia

Yet. Testamenti libris, tamquam fundamento, ni-
 — 10 —

tatur: ante omuia nos oportet inquirere, nam in his

iibris doctrinae de passione ac morte Messiae ex-
piatoria vestigia sint. Ut Vero accuratius in hac
re versemur, neve quicquam, quod ad earn per-
tineat, praetermittamus, plura Iiuias doctrinae
distinguenda sunt momenta, quorum unum et al-
terum vel separatim occurrere possit. Scilicet
considerandum primum est, an llebraei antiqui
generatiin peccatorum expiationem a Messia qua-
licunque modo perficiendam exspectaverint ; delu-
de an liuic futurae felicitatis auctori cum fortuna
adversa conflictandum et mortem subeundam esse
existimaverint ; denù/ue an pro ilia peccatorum
venia impetranda passurum eum esse vel adeo
inoriturum sibi persuaserint.

CAPUT I.
An Hebraei antiqui in universum peccatorum expiationem u Mea-
da qualicunque modo consummandam exspectaverint.

§. 4.
Communis est omnium, qui ad sublimiorem
rerum contemplationem adscendere non possunt,
opinio, omnia, quae eveniant, ex lege talionis
evenire, ita ut cum hominum factis fortuna eo-
rum accurate compensetur. Q,uod in civitate
aequis legibus temperata fieri solet, ut male facta
poenae, bene facta praemia sequantur, id etiam
 — 11 —

in rerum universitate, taraquam Dei regno , fieri

existimant. In quam sententiam eo magis incli-
nabant Hebraei, quod eorum religio cum civita-
tis institutis intima coniuncta erat necessitudine,
et notionibus politicis imbuta. Cluotiescunque
igitur rempublicam calamitatibus premi videbant,
poenam peccatorum adesse rati sunt; a rege coe-
lesti sibi inflictam, nec posse se ab his malis li-
berari, nisi peccatorum poenis solutis, sive venia
a Deo impetrata. Sic peccatis suis populum exi-
lii Baby Ionici poenam meruisse, et cum patriae
redditus esset, satis poenarum dedisse et Deum
iratum placasse opinio erat. (Ies. L, 1.; XL, 1.
Ps. LXXXV, 3.) Sic Dan. IX, 24. finis calami-
tatum a reatus expiatione pendere dicitur 17). Ad
huius opinionis, tamquam legis certae, normam
Hebraeorum liistorici, imprimis libri Iudicum au-
ctor, res gestas redegerunt, unde error ille na-
tus est, populum Hebraicum peculiari Dei cura
et tutela gavisum fuisse, quem ne recentiores

1 7 ) Eiusdem opinionis vestigia sunt in libris V. T. apo-

cryphis. Debellatis Syrorum copiis, Iudas Maccabaeus une-
GTQiiptv 0QY7]V ano 'IaQur/k, 1 Macc. III, 8. coli. 2 Macc.
VIII, 5. Ibidem v. 2 7 . clades Nicanoris UQ/J] ¿Xeovg dicitur,
et v. 3 9 . Iudaei lehovam precantur, ut iil gratiam cum po-
pulo suo redeat, i. e. saluteni iis praestet. Vid. B E R T H O J . O T .
Daniel aus dem Hebräisch-Aramäischen übersetzt, T. 11.
p. 6 1 7 .
 — 12 —

quidem tlieologi onines deposuisse videntur. Ea-

dem opinione ducti prophetae populo peccatis de-
dito perniciem minari, resipiscenti vero et corre-
cto salutem polliceri soliti sunt. Atque cum He-
braei in illam de Messia reipublicae restitutore
novaeque felicitatis auctore futuro spem adducti
sint calamitatibus continuis, quibus respublica ve-
xabatur: non est mirum, quod felicitati a Messia
parandae populi a peccatis purgationem anteces-
suram esse putaverint; id quod eo magis sibi
persuadere poterant, quod nou solum salutis pu-
blicae restitutionem, sed etiam morum pietatisque
emendaiionem et perfectionem, idololatriae ex-
stirpationem veraeque religionis triumphum in
praecipuis numerabant beneficiis a Messia exspe-
ctandis. Q,uare] ubi proplietae, pravis popula-
rium inoribus perstrictis et misero reipublicae
statu deplorato, ad meliora tempora praesignifi-
canda transeunt, solent annuntiare iudicium de
populo habendum, quo malis reipublicae civibus
et damnatis et exstirpatis, bonisque relictis, prisca
iustitia, probitas, pietas felicitasque reditura sit
(Ies. I, 25 sqq., Maleacli. I l l , 19 sqq. al.). Eze-
clviel fractos exulum animos non solum spe eri-
gitin patriam redeundi, et omnibus populi tribu-
bus collectis amiceque coniunctis, pace beata
frucndi, sed etiam ab idololatria omnibusque pec-
catis liberationem promittit (Ezecli. XXXVII, 21
 — 13 —

sqq.). Zacharias, Davidis filio adveniente, rca-

tum populi remotum iri dicit (Zach. III, 9.), sirai-
literque, qui sub eius nomine latet, propheta di-
cit, calamitatibus priorum temporum superatis,
fontem Hierosolymis exorturum esse, ad peccata
omnemque immunditiem populi et familiae Davi-
dicae lustrandam (Zach. XIII, 1.) 18 ). Quonam
vero modo liaec lustratio efficienda esset, pro-
phetae non declarant ; quod si alia eorum di-
eta caque non pauca, quibus ad poenitentiam
morumque emendationem hortantur, contuleris,
non poteris dubitare, quin hanc populi emenda-
tionem, Deo quidem et Messia iuvante, propriis
viribus perficiendam, oraculis significare volue-
rint. Neque enim tali imbuti erant superstitione,
ut ritibus quibusdam externis, vel lavationibus
vel piaculis, peccata doleri posse opinarentur,
sed, quod Iesus Christus dilucidius doeuit, ritus
externos sine interna animi pietate nihil valere,
identidem professi sunt (1 Sam. XY, 22 sq. Ps.L.
coli. X L , 7 — 9 . I e s . I , 1 1 — 1 8 . J j X V I , 3 . Ier. V I ,
20. VII, 21 sq. Hos. VI, 6. Am. V, 21 sqq. Mich.

1 8 ) Vaticinia Zach. I X — X I V , quae a priorllius dictio-

n e , argumento totaque indole maximc differunt, a Zacharia
scripta esse noil posse, demonstravit FLVEGGIVS (Weissagun-
gen , welche den Schriften de» Zacharias leigebogen sind,
p. 7 0 sqq.) et EICHHORMUS , qui ea Zachariae vindieaverat,
postea idem agnorit. Vid. eius Introd. in V. T. T.III, p. 3 6 7 .
 — 14 —

VI, 6 sqq. Prov. XXI, 3.). Multi contra ex ple-

b e , qui rebus esterais adhaerebnnt, eiusmodi
oracula sensu proprio accipientes, iu animum in-
ducere poterant, lustrationem illara solo Messiae
beneficio perfectum iri; ex cuius erroris fonte
Messiae peccata expiantis informatio oriri pote-
rai. Eam vero apud priscos Hebraeos iam obti-
nuisse, merito dubitari potest; certe in V e t Test,
libris vestigia eius nulla sunt.

C A P U T II.
An Messiae cum fortuna diversa conflictandum morlemque siileun-
dam esse existimaverint Hebraeì.

§. 5.
Cum humanarum rerum ea sit conditio, ut
boni fere nihil sine difficultate fieri possiti quid
mirum, si regnum Messiae quoque magno labore
et contentione condendum esse putaverint Iiebraei.
Sed quominus in liane opinionem concederent, ira-
pediebat spes laetissimis prophetarum vaticiniis
data, fore, ut singular! Dei auxilio felix illa re-
rum mutatio perficeretur. Nam quotiescunque
prophetae Messiae eiusque regni vel futurae feli-
citati^ in universum mentionem iniiciunt, solatìi
popularibus praebendi causa id faciunt; itaque
laetis omnia coloribus pingùnt. Praeterea pro-
plietarum non est, quas praesignificant, res futu-
 — 15 —

ras tam accurate describere, ut qua ratione even-

turae sint, ordine enarrent. Sunt tarnen aliquot
prophetarum loca, quibus tristiora de futuris Mes-
siae temporibus significantur. Pseudonymus ille
propheta, cuius de lustratione eiFatum modo lau-
davimus, priusquam ad felicem rerum conversio-
nem venit, non solum magnos bellicos tumultus,
Hierosolymorum obsidionem hostiumque ingen-
tem cladem pingit, sed etiam magnum in populo
luctum fore de duce aliquo egregio, hostium
gladio perfosso, praedicit (Zach. X I I , 10.) * 9 ).

1 9 ) Sequimur Iectlonem v h n , quam fiolam, nostra sen-

tentìa, orationis contextus admittit. Etiamsi enim largia-
mur, quod tamen usu loquendi nullo modo potest probari,
verlmm sensu tropico laedere, proùria lacessere signi-
ficare posse : ea tamen significalo locum hic non habet,
cum , quae de luctu eius, quem ¡npT, sequuntur nimis ar-
tificiose de poenitentia improborum, qui Deum irritaverint,
intelligantur. Possuntne, qui de numine laeso doleant, lu-
gere dici, sicut de filio unigenito? Praeterea sequens vSv
cum lectione ISM conciliari non potest, et tertiam personam
V S N efllagitat ; nam cum D A T H I O ad h. 1 . , L E S S I O (Auferste-
hungsgesch. p. 1 0 3 . ) » aliisque hoc suffixum neutraliter su-
mere nos vêtant leges grammaticae. Ceterum lectio mul-
torum Codd. aliorumque testium auctoritate firmatur (vid. DE
R O S S I ad h. 1 . ) , quamquam mirandum est, earn veterum inter-
prctum omnium testimonio destituì. Neque facile est explica-
t u , quoniodo lectio vulgaris, si, quod vide tur, falsa est, in
texturn irrepserit. Recte enim DE Rossi ad h. 1. observât,
multo facilius a sacris criticis et librariis contextus analogiam
sectantibus "»b« mutari potuisse in r^N, quod bina sequentia
 — 16 —

Nam etsi neque antiquae illi interpretation!,

secundum quam crucifixi Iesu Christi vel lateris
eius Iancea puncti praesignificationem in hoc ora-
culo invenerunt 2 0 ), accedere possum, neque de
Messia ipso eiusque caede sermonem hoc loco
esse puto: tamen universum hoc oraculum ad
eam rerum conversionem, quam alii prophetae
Messiae tribiiunt, referendum esse persuasum ha-
beo. Certe equidem non video, de quanam re
melius explicari possit. Merito G H O T I I aliorum-
que coniectura, quae ad Antiochi tempora hoc
oraculum referri iubet, a viris doctis improbata
est eam potissimum ob causam, quod de Hiero-
solymis obsessis propheta noster dicat, Macca-
baeorum autem aetate Hierosolyma expugnata et
spoliata sint 21 ). Neque cum alio quodam histo-
riarum ludaicarum tempore reipublicae status,
qui a Nostro describitur, convenire videtur. De
futuris rebus, praesagienti animo obversantibus,

postulare videntur, quam ii^n in "i^N, quod contextui re-

pugnat. lure etiam ille Criticus Iudaeos a corruptae hoc loco
scripturae crimine liberat. Num fortasse mutatis punctis vo-
calibus legendum est quod cuni sequenti pronomine IIUN
coniunctum eum sensum admittit, quem contextus flagitat?
Cui tamen coniecturae particula fix obstat, quae non permit-
tit, ut ihn cum liL'M coniungatur.
2 0 ) Vid. I. H. MICHAEL, in Bibl. Hal. ad h. I. VITRINGA
Olservatt. s. L. II. c. 9. p. 172.
21) V i d . BAVERI s c h o l . a d h . I.
 — 17 —

nominatim de aevo Messiano, Nostrum vaticinar!,

cum inde colligitur, quod tam generaliter de omni-
bus, imprimis de hostibus loquitur, ut, quinam
illi sint, ne coniicere quidem liceat, tum ex simili
argumento aliorum eiusdem prophetae oraculo-
rum apparet. Nimirum quae inde a cap. XIII, 7.
sequuntur, et quae difficilius adhuc ad res in fa-
cto positas referuntur, imaginem felicissimi tern-
poris futuri, miraculis Deique praesentis auxilio
conspicui, exhibent; eiusmodi autem futurae fe-
licitatis descriptiones, etiamsi Messiae ipsius men-
tionem diserte non faciunt, numero oraculprum
habendae sunt, quae communi nomine Messiana
appellare licet. Neque cap. IX. eiusdem prophe-
tae aliter mihi explicanduin videtur: vers. 9. et
sqq. Messiae in urbem Hierosolyma introitum eius-
que felix imperium designari verosimilius mihi
videtur, quam ulla ex historiis petita interpreta-
tio, quae mihi hactenus innotuit. Videtur Noster
tempore vixisse, quo Messiae sive felicissimae re-
rum conversionis exspectationi maxime indulge-
baut Hebraei 22 ). Q,uodsi oraculum nostrum ad

2 2 ) S i de aetate incerti huius prophetae coniecturae est

l o c u s , eum Haggaei et Zachariae aequalera fuisse existimem.
Patet enim ex nonnullis istorum prophetarum eftatis ( H a g g . II,
6 — 9 . 2 1 — 2 3 . Zach. II, 9 — 1 3 . III, 8 — 1 0 . VI, 1 2 . ) ,
Messiae adventum proxime instantem tunc temporis in spe
fuisse. Neque vero r e p u g n o , si alii seriorcm aetatein ei ad-
DE WETTE Opuscula. B
 — 18 —

Messiam et regnuin eîua referre liceat, colligere

inde possis, opinionem fuisse apud Ilebraeos,
regnuin Messianum non nisi maximis laboribus
exantlatis conditum iri; id quod eo probabilius
est, quod in altero similis argumenti oraculo (XIII,
7. — XIV.), sicut in nostro, ad futuram salutem
promittendam transitum a calamitatibus descri-
ptis, civitati illatis, animadvertimus. Quid? quod
in utroque de caede ducis cuiusdam sermo est, qua
via ad felicitatem panditur. In hanc sententiam
accipi item potest Dan. XII, 1., ubi diserte dici-
tur, ante redemtionem populi tempora fore cala-
mitosissima 23 ). Verum enim vero liaec omnia ad
passionem Messiae trahi non possunt, sed perti-
nent potius ad opinionem, miseris communem,

signare velint. Miror, quod EJCHHORKIVS ex Ephraimitarum

et Assyriorum mcntione facta colligit, vaticinium c. I X . et X .
ad tempus referendum esse, quo regna Samaritanorum et As-
syriorum nondum eversa essent. Non vidit vir doctissimus,
de decern tribubus, ex captivitate in patriain reversis, et cum
tribu Iuda et Beniamin rcconciliatis, sermonem hie esse; quae
cuin ab Assyriis in exilium abductae essent, et in Assyria et-
iamnunc magna ex parte remanerent, pocta commode Ioqui
poterat de Assyriae tyrannide opprimenda (v- 1 1 . ) . Quod
autem Aegyptii et exulum inde reducendorum mentio fit (v. 1 0 .
1 1 . ) id cogit nos hoc oraculum ad tempora exilii Babylonici
referre, cum tunc demum Israelitas in Aegyptum migrassc
constet.
23) -»is n i ' n c n n \ i 3 nh rm ny n n ^ i
.ijtay BSBI nya? n^nn nivi
 — li) —
salutera eo propìus instare, quo maior sit caïami-
tas, quam Hebraei eo magis animo imbibere pot-
erant, quod prophetae, calamitatibus praesentis
temporis descriptis, in futurae felicitatis imagi-
nibus acquiescere solebant. Ortum inde est serio-
rum Iudaeorum decretimi de doloribus Messiae,
munon i^sn, quod diversum piane esse a doctrina
de passione Messiae infra videbimus. Non in-
commode igitur ABARBANEL in Maschmia Ie-
schua 24) Zach. X I I I , 9. ad dolores Messiae refert,
observans: mwsyn manm n*mn h» -wisS iöw*
:niu7» ^nn onu? m^ìi yûp F1^ "mn* Pot-
est de maquis calamitatibus et malis eocpliccvri,
quae tempore collectionis captiuorum erunt,
quae sunt dolores Messiae.

CAPUT III.
An pro pecealorum venia impetranda Messiam passurum vel adeo
moriturum esse sili persuaserint Hebraei.

S- 6-

Priusquam ad tertiam baue eamque prima-

riam quaestionem solvendam aggrediamur, baud
abs re erit, Hebraeorum de peccatorum expiatio-
ne notiones cognoscere, a quibus doctrinam de
passione ac morte Messiae expiatoria, si talem

2 4 ) Fol. 75. c. 1. in vers. Mau p. 506-

B 2
 — 20 —

habuerint llebraei, pendere oportet. Neqiie ubi

tane doctrinam apud Ilebraeos non invenerimus,
eas cognovisse pigebit.
A c primum quidem in vulgus notum est,
apud Hebraeos peccata, quorum nulla legitime
constituta erat poena, vel quae ita comparata
erant, ut publicae animadversioni se subtralie-
rent et conscientiae hominum relinquenda essent^
sacrificiis piacularibus expianda fuisse 25 ). Sci-

2 5 ) Sacrificîum piaculare apud Hebraeos erat r e l nNan

v e l DtëN, de cuius discriminis ratione parum constat. Quae
deutroque sacrificiorum genere exstant leges ( L e v . V I , 2 5 — 3 0 .
de sacrificio pro peccato, et cap. V i l , 1 — 1 0 . de sacrificio pro
r e a t u ) , nihil lucis adferunt; quare ad coniecturas latus cam-
pus apertus est. Post I. D. MICHAELEM nonnullis antiquita-
tum Hebraicarum scriptoribus (WARNEKROSIO, BABORIO, IAH-
N i o , al.) placuit hoc discrimen ita explicare, ut sacrifieium ,
DNan dictum, pro crimine commisso, illud v e r o , quod Etèt*
appellatur, pro debito omisso offerri debuisse statuèrent, quam
coniecturam bene refutavit GF.SENIVS in Lex. Hebr. s. v. ÛTTJN.
Eoilem iure GROTIVS (ad Lev. Y , 1 . ) contrarium posuit. Quod
alii statuunt ( R E L A N D V S , VENEMA, CREMERVS, BVDDEVS,
SCHVLZIVS , SCHWARZIVS [de nexu doctrinae de sacrificio Le-
vitico et Christi p. 2 0 - ] , BAVERVS [Beschreibung der gottes-
àienstl. Verfass. d. alten Hebr. T . I. p. 1 4 8 s q q . ] ) sacrificia
nicirM praescripta fuisse i l i i , cuius peccatum praeter ipsum
constaret nemini, neque ab ullo argui posset, qui conscien-
tiae v i ductus sui ipsius accusator fieret; sacrificia niNBfi
contra ab illo oblata fuisse, qui per testes criminis convince-
retur: id IOSEPHI quidem (Ant. lud. L. III. c . l X . §. 3., et P H I -
IONIS (de victimis p. 8 4 4 . ed. Paris.) testimoniis et locis Lev.
i y , 2 3 . 2 8 . V , 3. 4. probatur, sed non omnibus casibus, in
 —. 21 —

licet cum omnium, quae homines facerent pate-

renturque, perfectam compensationem fieri, Ile-
braeis persuasum esset (§. 4.) : peccata quaeque
vel poena ipsa vel re eius vicem supplente lui
debere, et tunc demum condonari, sive, ut aie-
bant, folli et ter/i 2 6 ) posse existimabant. Vicem
vero poenae supplebant piacula, quibus peccato-
rum venia impetrabatur (Lev. Y , 13.) 27). Du-

quibus^ sacrifìcia haec diversa offerri necesse erat, consenta-

neuin est. E x . gr. eiusmodi discrimen inter DWM et n m j n ,
quae Nasiraeo diversa occasione offercrida erant (Num. VI, 1 2 .
1 4 - ) , non intercedebat. Aliae coniecturae, quas BAVERVS
(1.1. p. 1 4 6 . ) et BVDDEVS (Hist, eccles. V. T . , T . I. p. 5 7 6
s q . ) recensent, minus etiam placent. Mihi quidem de discri-
mine hoc constituendo piane desperandum videtur. Cogitar!
potest, discriminis, quod inter ilia sacrifìcia ab initio inter-
ccsserat, veram rationem seriore tempore in oblivionem v e -
nisse et neglectam fuisse, discrimine tarnen ipso non prorsus
abolito. Ceterum hoc discrimen ad nostram rem non pertinet.
Utrumque enim piaculorum genus in eo convenit, quod eius-
niodi peccata, quae iurisdictioni publicae obnoxia non essent,
illis oblatis expiari solebant.
26) De vocibus, quibus Hebraei peccatorum remissio-
nem significant, bene disserit SVESKINDIVS (Ist unter Sün-
denvergebung, welche das N. T. verspricht, Aufhebung der
Strafen zu verstehen, inFtAXTii Magaz. Part. III. p. 1 9 6 sqq.),
27) Sacrifìcia muletae loco fuisse I. D. MICHAELIS, ad
politica omnia torquentis, neque res sanetas saneta mente
tractantis, infelix est coniectura, rnultis tarnen ' v . c. SCHVL-
ZIO , IAIIMO ) probata. Neque vero ilia a legislatore sapien-
tissimo eo Consilio instituta sunt, ut peccata re vera iis ex-
piarentur aut abolerentur, licet postea in superstitionem ver-
 — 22 —

bium omnitio est, nura sacrificiorum piacularium

pro poena debita substitutionem talem sibi He-
braei finxerint, ut victimas pro peccatore offeren-
te, cui moriendum fuisset secundum legem, mor-
tem subire vicariam existimaverint. Sunt, qui
piacula tamquam munera üjxanxa tantum oblata
2S
fuisse censeant ). Certe nusquam in sacro co-
dice diserte dicitur, victimae piacularis morte
mortem peccatoris repraesentari : nam quem pro
argumenta afferre soliti sunt ritum victimae ma-
nus imponendi, ludaeis risico dictum, eum, cum
omnibus sacriiìciis communis esset, non peccato-
rum in victimam translationem, sed generatim
eius consecrationem denotasse, iam inter omnes
antiquitatum Hebraicarum interpretes constat 29).

terint, sed ut symbola essent ethica, quae conscientiam ad-

nionercnt. Recte P H I L O L. I I I . de vita Mosis p. 6 6 9 . : ov
Xvariv uaunzr^iarcov, u)j' V7ioiirr:Cstv IriyttCnviut.
2 8 ) Hanc substitutionem praecipue ncgat S Y K E S I V S ( V e r -
such über die Natur, Absicht u. d. Ursprung der Opfer) ob
id a SF.MLERO in notis, eius Iibro adspersis, iure reprehensus.
2 9 ) Latius tarnen ritus significationem patere, ita ut ge-
neratim finem oblationis et meutern oft'erentis, in sacriiiciis
fi^oW gratiaruin actionem, in sacriiiciis riNtan et EUTN con-
demnationem, denotaverit, sine ratione sumit S C H V L Z I V S
(Compend. Arch. Hebr. p. 2 7 6 . ) - Quid sibi voluerint, qui
liunc ritum in omnibus sacriiiciis substitutionem victimae pro
offercnte denotasse statuerunt, equidem non adsequor. Cum
manuum impositio locunt etiam habuerit in supplicio de malefico
sumendo: I . D . M I C H A E L I S {typ. Gottesgel. p. 5 9 . ) eam inde
 — 23 —

Ncque formula confessionis , quae in olusmodi

sacrificiis recitata esse traditur 30 ), quicquam ha-
bet de liac translatione. Non desunt tamen ra-
tiones, quibus victimarum piacularium pro pecca-
tore substitutio probari possit, quarum gravissi-
mae hae sunt:
1) Sacrificiorum piacularium materies ritus-
que eam innuere videntur. Cruenta enim esse
debebant, nisi, qui offerebat illa, paupertate ita
laborabat, ut ne columbas quidem oiferendi facul-
tas esset, ubi fertam e farina compositum pro pia-
culo offerre licebat (Lev. Y, 11—13.) 31). Cuius
instituti rationem esplicai locus Lev. XVII, 11.:

ad sacrifìci» piacularia translatant esse coniecit. Verum illic

quoque consecrationem, capitis scilicet, deuotabat. Vid.
Sïeskindivm I. 1. p. 214-
30) A Maimomde in Maase Korban cap. III. hoc modo
traditur: w m 1 ID • " n w Tiyu-'s w w -»fiNEn swn na«
TiiìD Vi n a w r o . Exstat apud Carpzov. App. hist. crit.
Antiqq. p. 711. et Ovtram. de sacri/. L. I.e. 15. §. 6. p. 158-
E.mi vero non esse antiquam, dictio arguit. Carpzovivs 1.1.
haec adiicit: „Nullus aatem dubito, quin olim, quando pu-
rior Iudaeis constabat religio, clariorque sacrifìcii mediatori!
Christi cognitio, explicatior et amplior fuerit admissorum de-
precatio, ac disertam fìdei fecerit mentionem et translations
culpae in liostiam coram Deo unice yalentem, Messiam etc."
Similis est formula illa, quae die expiationis recitabatur, quam
vid. apud Goodwin, in Mos. et Aaron. L. III. c. 8. §• 6. p. 6 1 9 .
ed. H o t t i n g .
3 1 ) Nimium inde colligit Sykesivs; contra quei» vide
Schwarzivm 1. I. p. 2 5 .
 — 24 —

anima carnis est in sanguine) et dcdi cum vo-

bis in altare ad eccpiwidas animas vestras; nam
sanguis expiât animam; unde patet, sacrificia
piacularia non potuisse simpliciter tamquam mu·

sanguinem, culpa peccatoris in eas translata,

impurura esse factum 32). Accedit, quod nonnul-
la horum sacrificiorum, ea scilicet, quae pro pec-
cato Pontificis Maximi et totius populi offereban-
tur, extra castra concrenianda erant (Lev. IV.);
quo quidem ritu haud dubie significabatur, pec-
catorum immunditiem in ea transiisse atque igne
deieri.
2) Sacrificiis piacularibus poenam, cui öfte-
ren s obnoxius esset, adumbratam fuisse, ex alio-
rum sacrificiorum ratione apparet. In sacrificio
foederis vitulus in duas partes dissecabatur, per
quas ex adverso liumi positas foederati trans-

32) B V D D E V S Hist. Ecoles. V. T. T . I . p. 575. huius

singularis rigoris in sacrificiis piacularibus adhibendi rationem
arcessit inde, quod haec sacrifìcia ad pcccatum originale na-
turalemque, quae inde oriatur, hoiuinum immunditiem respe-
ctum Imbuisse videantur.
 — 25 —

ibant, significantes, se velie, u t , si periurii rei

forent, eandem sortem subirent, quam victima
subiisset (lerem. X X X I V , 18 sqq.) ; quo ritu vi-
ctimae morte poenam sacrificantium, futuram il-
lam quidem, repraesentatam esse quis nonvidet?
Q,uemadmodum autem in hoc sacrificiorum genere
victimae sacrificantium quasi vicem supplebant,
quippe quarum nex futuram poenam repraesenta-
r e t : ita etiam in piacularibus in eorum Iocuin
substitui poterant, ita ut poenam cummaxime tol-
Jendam significarent. Hue pertinet etiam alias
ritus. Caedes, cuius patrator ignotus erat, ita
expiabatur, ut seniores et iudices oppidi proxime
vicini super iuvencam mactatam manus lavarent,
testificantes, se sanguinem illum non effudisse
(Deut. X X I , 1—9.); qua caeriinonia quid manuum
lavatio super victimam facta denotarit; dubium
esse non potest. Scilicet abluebatur culpa, et in
victimam transferebatur. duodsi enim liaec vi-
ctima nihil nisi munus íXaorixov fuisset ñeque in
earn culpa translata esset, equidem ritum manus
super eam lavandi prorsus non intelligerem. Prae-
terea peccata in victimam transferendi symboluin
notum fuisse, docet ritus liirci emissarii, in cu-
ius caput omnia totius populi peccata reiicieban-
tur (Lev. XYI, 21.). Dubitatili- quidem, utrum
liaec translati o facta sit in eum linem, ut hircus
peecatorum poenas populi loco lueret, an ut ea
 — 26 —

tantum in desertum auferret 33 ). Verum quod-

cunque statueris, peccatorum translationem agnos-
cas, nobisque concedas oportebit, earn potuissc
ctiam adhiberi in sacrificiis vere piacularibus.
3 ) Victimarum piacularium substitutionem
in locum peccatorum recte probat S C H W A R Z I V S ) 3 4

significatioue verbi Ntsn, de expiatione usitati,

metapliorica restituere f/tioddesideratiti sive aliud
in eius locum substitucre, quae Gen. X X X I , 3 9 .
occurrit. Certe liuic verbo restituendi notio non
potuisset inferri, nisi in eo substitutionis notio.
infuisset. Eadem vocis icb est ratio, quae qui-
dem de sacrifìciis non adhibetur, cognata autem

3 3 ) lllud affirmai B A V E R V S (Beschr. etc. T . I. p. 1 6 6 . et

Bibl. Theol. des N. T. T. IV. p. 128.); hoc S V E S K I N D I V S (1.1.
p. 2 1 7 . in not.), quod et mihi probatur. Sed accedere ei non
possum, quod negat, hircum mactatum expiasse emissum al-
terum, quod v. 10. diserte dicitur. Quam phraseos vby 1£D*J
dat explication««, leges grammaticae non admittunt. Ex an-
tiquioribus baud male de hac re iudicat H E R R M . W I T S I V S , qui
in Oecon. Foederum lib. IV. c. VI. p. 5 4 3 . immolatura hircum
adumbrasse censet veram peccatorum expiationem, quae fiat
effusione sanguinis; emissum vero, consequens et effectuai
buius expiationis, in abolitione peccati, ne amplius coram
Deo compareat. Cf. C A R P Z O V . 1. c. p. 4 4 1 . Rectc S P E K C E R V S
de legg. ritual. Heir. p. 1 0 5 1 . ed. P f a f f . hunc ritum expli-
candum censet e ritu lustrationis leprosi Lev. XIV, 4 sqq.,
in quo duo passereg adhibebantur, alter mactandus, alter li-
ber emittendus, isque baud dubic eo Consilio, ut immunditiem
auferret.
3 4 ) De nexu doctr. de sacri/. Lev. et Christi p. 2 1 .
 — 27 —

est verbo expiare. ibb denotatici, quo aliud

compensator, quod eiusdem pretii est. E x gr.
ubi bos servum alterius ita cornibus percusserat,
ut moreretur, possessor bovis solvere illi debe-
bat triginta siclos, quod erat pretium servi legi-
time constitutum (Exod. XXI, 31.). Caedem con-
tra ab liomine patratam eiusmodi XVTQW expiari
vetat lex Num. X X X Y , 33., quia culpa maioris
aestimabatur, quam ut pretium ullum earn aequi-
pararet 35 ).
4) Apud alios antiquitatis populos lmius su-
perstitionis certiora exstant vestigia. Victimis
piacularibus Deorum iram atque imminentein cala-
mitatela ita averti credebant, ut sacrificantis vice
illae poenam debitam luerent; id quod docet ri-
tus diras piacuìis imprecandi, non solum Aegy-
ptiis, sed aliis etiam populis solennis. Aegyptios
tradit HERODOTVS 3 S ) victimarum capita exsecrari
bis verbis: ehre uslloi ij ayiOL ZOLOI &vovoi, i)
Aiyvnna rrj ovvanaoi] xuxov ysvsod-ai, eig xecpa-
1 R\v ravxijv TQANSADAI : additque, liunc more in per
universam Aegyptum, y.axa rag XEcpa'Laq zcov &vo~
fievav Y.rrp>mv, obtinuisse 37). De Gallis I. CAESAR

3 5 ) Substitutionis notio aperte expressa est voce -iab

Ics. X L I I I , 3 . P r o v . X X I , 1 8 - , in quo utroque loco TM *ób
respondet n n n .
36) Lib. il, 39.
3 7 ) Quodsi BOCHARTI, WITSII, DEYLINGH, al. sentcn-
 — 28 —

liaec refert ss): Natio est omnis Gallorum ad-

modum dedita relirjionibus. Atque ob earn cau-

sam, qui sunt affecti gravioribus morbis, qui-

que in praelus periculisque versantur, aut pro

uic'imis homines immolant, aut se immolaturos

vovent, administrisqne ad ea sacrijicia Druidi-

bus utuntur, quod p r o v i t a hominis n i s i

v i t a hominis r e d d a t u r , non posse ali-

tor D e o r u m i m m o r t a l i u m N urn en p l a -

c a r i a r b i t r a n t u r . Eadem Romanos de sacri-

fices sensisse ex OVIDIO 39) discimus, qui rem
his verbis exponit:
Parcite, pro parvo victima parva cadit;

Cor pro corde precor, pro fibris stmiifefibras,

Hanc animam vobis pro meliore damns.

Idem eloquitur auctor disticliorum, quae CAT OA is

uomen prae se ferunt 4 o ):

tia probar! posset, qui hunc ritum ab Israeliris ad Acgyptios

niaiiasse contendunt, sane non esset, quoil alia argumenta
quaererenius. Ñeque vero minus rem nostrum iuvant SPEN-
CERVSal., qui ritus Mosaicos ab Aegyptiis aliisque gentilibus
dcducunt. Instituta sacra Israelitarum et aliorum populo-
j u m , praecipue Aegyptiorum, aliqua inter se iuncta esse a f -
finitate, hodie nemo est, qui neget. Recte igitur ex his ilia
illustramus.

3 8 ) De bello Gallico L . V I . c. 1 5 .
3 9 ) Fast. L . V I , 1 6 0 . Vid. SCHWARZ. 1. I. p. 2 4 .
4 0 ) Vid. GKOT. de salts/actione c. 10. LOMEIEK. de lu-
st rat. p. 6.
 — 29 —

Cum sis ipse nocens, moritur air vidima

pro tei
Bene etiam rem illustrat locus apud POIIPHY-
RIVM41): To TIQODXOV ovx èd-vezo zoiQ -d-eoig ovdev
t./LilfW/OV, u)X' ovds VOIiOQ T]V TCSQl TOVXOV, ÒiCt Till
VOIM;) (pvoiJtM xsxoolvo&AI. 'TTCO ds xwaq XAIQOVG

7TQIOTOV IkQSlOV &VO(U fiVdsVOVTat, If'V/JjV CCVTt IjlV-

42
airovfisvovg ).
Quibus argumentis etiamsi iis, qui sacrificia
piacularia tamquam munera, Dei iram lenientia,
oblata fuisse contendunt, de eorum substitutione
in locum offerentium persuadere non potuerimus :
lioc tamen facile nobis concedent, potuisse ea
munera, quia non nisi ex sanguine et vita con-
sta bant, ad vitam offerentium redimendam refer-
ri : quod factum esse locus e Levitico supra al-
latiis docet. Hinc autem successu temporis oriri
poterai opinio de morte victimarum succedanea,
quam re vera apud recentiores Iudaeos inveni-
mus. Constans est doctorum Iudaicorum senten-
tia, victimam pro offerente, animal pro anima
oblatum esse, cuius rei testis est auctor libri 11 c-

41) De Abslinent. I. IV. c. 15., quem attulit WITSIVS

Misceli. Sacr. T. 11. exercit. XX. de theol. gentil, in nego-
tio iustificat. §. 1 4 .
42) Id genus plura suppeditant W I T S I V S 1.1. et in Aegypt.
L . I I . C. I X . §. 6 . G R O T I V S 1. 1. C. X . DEYLING. Oiservatt.
sacr., observat. X V I I I . LOMEIER. 1.1. e. X X I . p. 265 sqq.
 — 30 —

scJiith chochma c. I I I . : Nttin d i n ì i ¡r>rr "mfo

o unnp S^p" 1 ^ Nin n t » m t r r a n p-^p N U S n m i
D-»OM M A N N ^ N NÌ>ON W N NNTSINN WWRR JRVO P N N

WÖJ nnh U7Ö3 NINI NN'PN "»ON. Sì r/iäs pec-

caverat, et offerebat sacrificiiim, misericordiae

divinae erat proprietas, quod acccptaretwr eins
oblatio; iustitiae enim decretum erat: anima,
quae peccaverit, ipsa monetar. Verum secun-
dum misericordiae suae decretum dixit Deus :
off erat anima animal pro se Eius generis ex-
piationem etiamnum celebrant Iudaei, qui ante
diem expiationis gallum gallinaceum, si sunt viri,
gallinam vero, si sunt foeminae, mactant, for-
m u l a m liane pronuntiantes : IN ITINH M IRIOISN NT
Dy D-aiu DimS ^ S n u n i nrTOS Viwiftii i m c o
f»M SNIVJI bz. Hie sit permutatio pro me, hie
galius ibit in mortem, ego autcm ad vitam fe-
licem sum iturus cum toto Israèle. Amen 44f).

4 3 ) V i d . SCHWARZIVM I. 1. p . 2 2 .
4 4 ) VID. Sepher Minhagim (Amstelod. 1 6 6 2 . ) fol. 4 5 .
c. 2 . BVXTORF. Synag. Iud. c. X X V . p. 5 0 8 . CARPZOV. Ap-
parat. 4 3 9 sq.
De substitutione victimarum piacularium in utramque
partern disputatumj est a viris doctis, quos recenset BAVE-
KVS liibl Theol. d. N. T. T. IV. p. 1 2 3 sq. SVESKINDIVS
1. 1. p. 2 1 2 sqq. hanc substitutionem negat, concedit tamen
mortem yictimae fuisse symbolum poenae offerenti solvendae.
Hoc autem concesso, illud quoque concedendum est. Si enim
victimae mors peccatoris poenam signiticabat, illa huius vice
 — 31 —

7.
Iam cum pecudum morte interposta pecca-
torum veniam impetrari Deumque iratum placari
posse, in opinione Ilcbraeorum fuerit : quaeritur,
num per homines quoque, in aliorum vicem mala
mortemque subeuntes, expiationem fieri posse
rati sint? Exsecrandam homines ad expianda pec-
cata immolandi superstitionem, omnibus fere an-
tiquis populis communem, Cananitis vero impri-
mis usitatam 4 5 ), Ilebraeis severe interdictam
fuisse, neque tamen inter eos prorsus aboleri po-
tuisse, constat. Potuit inde manare opinio de
passione ac morte hominis espiatoria, Quemad-
modum vero superstitio ilia a patria religione pror-
sus aliena erat, ita etiam haec opinio in puram
et, utitadicam, orthodoxam religionis doctrinam
adscisci, prophetisque, religionis doctoribus et cu-
stodibus, probari non poterai. Exstant de hac re
praeclara verba M I C H A E (VI, 6 — 8 . ) , quibus po-
pulo, ad poenitentiam verso anxiaque mente repu-
tanti, quonam modo quibusque piaculis iram Dei
placet, et interroganti, num primogenitus pro

fungcbatur symbolice. Neque alio nisi sensu simbolico vi-

ctimarum substitutio in locum offercntis sumi potest, licet
postca, sicut omnia symbola, in superstitionem vcrterit.
4 5 ) Larga de hac re collectanea suppeilitat I. BRYANT
in libello de reterum sacrificiis humanis, a I. D. MICHAEI.K
Gcrmanice edito, Gotting. 1 7 7 4 .
peccato expiando devovendus s i t , ita responde-
tur: Notimi tibi est, o homo, fjìtid boimm; et
quid postulai a te 1chova, nisi iustifiam et pie-
tatem et humilitatemì d u o quidem eftàto omnis
ex hoc genere superstitio evertitur. Neque sa-
crae historiae quicquam referunt de hominis de-
vot ione, qualis Deciorum fuit. Q u o d enim 2 Sam.
X X I . legimus de fame supplicio septem iìliorum
Saulis a v e r s a , hue non pertinet, sed ex more
Ilebraeorum, caedis poenain ab homicidae po-
stcris expetendi, aestimandum est. Sunt tarnen
duo loca, quae de hominis pro altero substitu-
tione, ad eius salutem redimendam, facta, ex-
po nere videntur. Prov. X X I , 18. proverbium hoc
legimus : Improbus pro insto IVTQOV est, et loco
intcf/rorum irnpius, i. e. Iustus a malis liberatur,
improbo in eius locum substituto. Kum autem
liaec eo sensu dicta esse putemus, ut quae suis
peccatis mala meritus sit iustus, ea improbus ex-
pianda in se suscipiat et ita eius piaculum fiat?
Q u i sensus plane ineptus est; nam si iustus poe-
nas meruit, iustus non est Neque proverbii
sententia esse potest, iustum liberari improbi sub-
stitutione tamquam Xvz()<O ; si enim XVTQIÚ eget,
pro iusto non habendus est. Vera sententia est:
iustus a malis liberabitur, poenas debitas iniustus

4 0 ) Praeterea *ìsb nun quam de piaculis adhibetur.

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Karl visited Rome again in 781, and it is this visit that from one
point of view most concerns us, for it most concerned the course of
Alcuin’s life.
Karl had been to Rome again in the year 787, to visit Pope Adrian
and settle terms with the Duchy of Beneventum. He had purposed to
devastate the duchy, its bishoprics, and its monasteries; but in
council with his bishops and chief men he determined to accept
hostages, including the two sons of the hostile Duke, who did not
himself dare to see the angry face of Karl. Karl completed his visit by
adoring the tombs of the blessed Apostles, and paying there his
vows; another sign that the great object of visits to Rome was to visit
the tombs of the twin princes of the Apostles, Peter and Paul. He
then returned to France and rejoined his wife Fastrada, his sons and
daughters, and his court, at Worms.
The all-important visit to Rome came at the end of the year 800.
Pope Leo III, elected in 795, had been seized in the spring of 799 by
his opponents, among whom two nephews of the late Pope, Adrian,
played a leading part, and an attempt had been made to put out his
eyes and cut out his tongue. He recovered[172] and escaped, and
was called—or fled—to Karl at Paderborn. Leo had on his
consecration sent to Karl, as the Patrician, the standard of Rome,
the keys of Rome, and even the keys of the tomb of St. Peter, in
recognition of his supremacy, the Eastern Emperor Constantine VI
being disregarded. Karl was therefore doubly bound to take
cognisance of the Pope’s case. There were very grave charges
against Leo. Alcuin names[173] adultery and perjury; but he writes
very strongly against subjecting Leo to trial on these charges. He
has read, he says, that by a canon of the blessed Silvester there
must be not less than seventy-two adverse witnesses of blameless
life if a pontiff was to be brought to trial. He has read in other canons
that the Apostolic See judges, is not judged. What pastor, he asks, in
the Church of Christ can be immune, if he who is the head of all the
churches is overthrown by malefactors?
We may compare with this the reasons which another member of
the trilogy of Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastics and scholars, St. Aldhelm,
gave at Rome against condemning the Pope of his time, Sergius, for
alleged immoral practices. The reasons were three. First, it was a
wretchedly base thing to suspect their own pontiff of crimes. Next,
what influence could the Roman pontiff have with the Britons and
other nations across the seas, if he was attacked by his own
citizens? Lastly, it did not seem likely, it could not be true, that one
who remembered that he was set over the whole world would
entangle himself in such a sin as this. Unhappily, for long periods in
the history of the Papacy, it not only was likely, it was undoubtedly
and overtly true.
Leo was received by Karl with great honour, and was sent back to
Rome to resume his high office. Karl followed him[174] towards the
end of the next year, 800, and was received by him at the twelfth
milestone from Rome “with the greatest humility and the greatest
honour”. This was on November 23. The next day Leo with great
pomp received Karl on the steps of the basilica of St. Peter, made an
oration to him, and led him into the church. Seven days later, on
December 1, Karl convoked an assembly, and expounded to them
his reasons for coming to Rome, the first and most difficult being the
need of a judicial inquiry into the charges against the Pope. It turned
out that no witness appeared to substantiate the charges; but that
seems to have been regarded as insufficient, and a formal abjuration
was made by Leo. The Pope, Eginhart[175] says, in the presence of
all the people, in the basilica of the blessed Peter the Apostle,
carrying in his hands the Gospel, ascended the ambo, and invoking
the name of the Holy Trinity, purged himself by oath from the crimes
laid against him[176].
On the most sacred day of the Nativity of the Lord, Karl attended
Mass at St. Peter’s. As he rose from prayer before the Confessio[177]
of the Apostle, Leo placed on his head a crown, the whole Roman
people acclaiming—“To Charles Augustus, crowned by God the
great and pacific Emperor of the Romans, life and victory!” After
which the Pope adored him, that is, prostrated himself before the
emperor and kissed his feet, as had been the custom with the former
emperors. The title of Patrician was abandoned, and Charlemagne
became Imperator and Augustus.
 This is not the occasion for discussing the debated question
whether the Pope acted on an impulse of gratitude, or was guided by
a desire to interpose the most powerful personage in the West
between Rome and the Emperor of the East; or the equally debated
question whether Karl was an active and understanding receiver of
the new burden of honour and responsibility; or the question what
sort of right the Pope had to take such a step. To my mind the most
pointed question is whether the Pope skilfully forestalled Charles by
suddenly crowning him, in order to prevent his making himself
emperor and crowning himself. But we cannot pass by without a
word of comment the remarkable fact that the Pope performed the
barbaric, Byzantine, humiliating, ceremony of prostration before the
emperor and kissing his feet in adoration, as earlier Popes had had
to do to earlier emperors. It is this same barbaric custom of what is
technically called adoration, that the Popes, who used to perform it
to their imperial superiors, have now for some centuries expected
others to perform to them—the kissing of the Pope’s toe as it is
called by some, of the Pope’s foot by others. The state of the foot of
the great bronze figure of St. Peter in his church at Rome certainly
renders the former the more accurate phrase.
It is clear that Karl had for many months been carefully
considering the question of assuming the imperial crown in asserted
succession to the Emperors of the West, who had come to an end
three centuries and a half before.
This is the letter which Alcuin wrote to Karl at this Ep. 114.
most critical point in the history of Europe, a letter
which has been described as the most important of all which Alcuin
is known to have written. His remark that Karl’s position was higher
and his power for good greater than that of the Emperor of the East
and that of the Pope, has been understood to mean that Karl would
do well to restore in his own person the Empire of the West, so as to
be supreme in title as well as in fact. The date is May 799.
“To the peace-making Lord David the king, Flaccus Albinus
greeting.
 “We give thanks to thy goodness, most clement, most sweet
David, that thou hast deigned to have in mind our littleness, and to
note down for us that which thy faithful servant hath told us by word
of mouth. And not for this only do we give continual thanks to thy
piety, but for all the boons which thou hast conferred upon me from
the day on which my littleness became known to thee. Thou didst
begin with the very best for me, thou hast gone on to better still.
Wherefore with continual prayers I pray the mercy of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that having granted thee all that is best in earthly felicity, He
may deign to grant to thee eternally the far realms of everlasting
beatitude.
“If I were present with thee I would urge very many things on thy
venerable dignity, if opportunity were afforded for thee to hear and
for me to speak. For the pen of love is often wont to stir the deep
things of my heart, to treat of the prosperity of thy excellency, the
stability of the kingdom to thee by God given, and the profit of the
holy Church of Christ. The Church is perturbed by the multiform
wickedness of evil men, and stained by the nefarious attempts of the
vilest, not of ignoble persons only, but of some also among the
greatest and highest. This is matter for deep fear.
“Up to this time, there have been three loftiest persons in the
world. One, the apostolical sublimity, which is wont to rule by vicarial
office the see of the blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles. What has
been done against him who has been the ruler of that see, thy
venerated goodness has taken care to make known to me. Another,
the imperial dignity and secular power of the second Rome. How
impiously the governor of that empire has been deposed, not by
those of another race, but by his own people and fellow citizens, is
becoming known everywhere. [This was Constantine VI, Emperor of
the East, who had been affianced to Karl’s daughter Rotrudis some
eighteen years before, but had been forced by his mother Irene to
break the contract. In 797, two years before Alcuin’s letter, Irene had
deposed him and put out his eyes; she was now reigning alone.] The
third is the royal dignity, in which the dispensation of our Lord Jesus
Christ has placed thee, more excelling in power than the other
dignities named, more clear in wisdom, more sublime in dignity of
reign. Lo, on thee alone the whole safety of the churches of Christ
has fallen and rests. Thou art the punisher of crimes, thou the guide
of the erring, thou the consoler of them that mourn, thou the exalter
of good men.
“Is it not the case that in the see of Rome, where the greatest piety
of religion once shone clear, the very worst examples of impiety have
burst forth into view? They themselves, blinded in their own hearts,
have blinded their own Head. There is not seen there fear of God, or
wisdom, or love: what good thing can be there if nothing of these
three is found there? If there had been fear of God they would not
have dared, if there had been wisdom they would never have
wished, if there had been love they would by no means have done,
what they have done. These are the perilous times, foretold of old by
the very Truth, because the love of many grows cold.
“The care of the head must never be neglected; it is a less evil that
the feet suffer than the head.
“Let peace be made with those wicked Saxons, if that can be
done. Let threats be to some extent relaxed, so that men may not be
hardened and driven away, but may be kept in hope until by
wholesome counsel they be brought back to peace. Hold on to what
has been won from them, lest if they are allowed to gain a little, the
larger part be lost. Keep safe your own sheep-fold, that the ravening
wolf devour not it. Let such labour be spent on outside affairs that no
loss be suffered in your own affairs. Some time ago I spoke to your
piety about the exaction of tithes: that it is decidedly better to abstain
from the exaction, even for a considerable time, until the faith has
got its roots fixed in the hearts, if indeed that Saxon land be held
worthy of the choice of God. Those who have gone away were the
best Christians, as is well known; and those who remained have
continued in the dregs of wickedness. For by reason of the sins of
the people, Babylon has become the habitation of devils, as it is said
in the prophets.
“None of these things can have been overlooked by thy wisdom;
for we know how well learned thou art in the sacred scriptures and in
secular histories. From all of these full knowledge has been given to
thee by God, that by thee the holy Church of God among a Christian
people may be ruled, exalted, and preserved. What reward may be
given by God to thy best devotion, who is able to say? For eye hath
not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man,
the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.”
Alcuin ends his letter with a pair of hexameters and some
elegiacs, both because Karl was interested in his versification, and—
we may suppose—because high-flown compliments, from which Karl
was not averse, come better in so-called poetry than in prose.

“From lofty heaven may Christ in mercy mild

Thee rule, exalt, defend, adorn, and love.

The holy stars of the sky, the grasses of the green earth,
All things together cry, May David prosper alway.
The earth and the sky and the sea, the men and the birds and the
beasts,
Cry with concordant voice, Father be it well with thee.”

As we are dealing with the relations of the Papacy with the Franks,
it may be well to say here something that ought to be said about the
demands of the Popes for money and territories. The two demands
which may on the whole be called the most monstrous of all the long
series, were made, the one probably, the other certainly, in Alcuin’s
time: one by Hadrian, to influence Karl, the other by one of his
predecessors to influence Karl’s father, Pepin.
A ridiculous document was produced by the Popes, probably
about the middle of this eighth century, with which we are dealing. It
was called the Imperial Edict of Donation. Its alleged author was
Constantine the Great. It professed to give to Silvester, the Bishop of
Rome in Constantine’s time, and to his successors, the Imperial
Palace (that is, the Lateran) and the City of Rome; all the provinces,
districts, and cities of the whole of Italy; and, in the Latin copy of the
forgery, all islands. The islands are absent from the Greek copy of
the forgery. It was on the strength of this forged donation of islands
that a later Hadrian, the one English Pope, Hadrian IV, professed to
be the owner of Ireland, and gave it to our king Henry II just four
centuries after the time with which we are dealing. Muratori was of
opinion that this audacious forgery was concocted between 755 and
766, that is, when Alcuin was from twenty to thirty years of age, and
while Offa was king of Mercia. In 774, when Karl had conquered the
Lombards, he went to Rome, as we have seen; ratified the donation
of his father Pepin, of which we must next speak, and laid the deed
of donation on the altar or on the tomb of St. Peter in the ancient
basilica of St. Peter. The original deed of Karl’s donation has, so far
as is known, long since perished; its terms are at best only vaguely
known. It is said to have comprehended the whole of Italy, the
exarchate of Ravenna, from Istria to the frontiers of Naples, and the
island of Corsica. Karl, then, ratified the forged Donation of
Constantine, at that time a quite recent forgery. The whole story,
however, is very vague, and historians differ considerably in the
deductions which they draw from the inadequate records. They differ
almost more widely as to the date at which the document was first
brought forward, the dates ranging from 760 to 1105. Of the fact of
the forgery there is no question; it cannot be denied, and so far as I
know no one of the Romans now is bold enough to deny that it is a
forgery. There is one point in the forgery which has an important
bearing on a very important question, namely, the true basis of the
reputation of the city of Rome as the chief ecclesiastical centre of the
Church of the West. Constantine is made to declare, in this forged
donation, that it was by the merits of St. Peter and St. Paul that he
emerged from the font at baptism cleansed of his sins. More than
that, he is made to declare that he makes this enormous donation to
the blessed chiefs of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, and through them
to Silvester, the Bishop of Rome. Either, then, at the time of the
forgery it was completely recognized as a fact that the Popes
claimed their sovereignty on the twin authority, in the twin name, by
the twin princeship, of Peter and Paul; or it was completely
recognized at the time of the forgery that in the earliest times, and
notably in the time of Constantine the Great, whose baptism took
place in the year 337, Rome did base its claims to pre-eminence on
its possession of the relics of St. Peter and St. Paul, and on the twin
supremacy of those two princes of the Apostles, and, therefore, that
it might stand the test of the touchstone of history, it was essential to
use the twin names of Peter and Paul; if it had been Peter alone, it
would have been detected as a forgery. See Appendix D.
When we come to the document which was produced for the
purpose of influencing Pepin, Karl’s father, we pass out of the
atmosphere of vagueness, and find ourselves face to face with a
scandalous, an impious, fact. Pope Stephen II[178], who held the
Papacy from 752 to 757, was reduced to extremities by the arms of
the Lombard kings of North Italy. He went in person to Pepin, king of
the Franks, to entreat him to come over and succour the city of
Rome and the domain of St. Peter. To show how difficult it is to be
sure about facts of history when the chroniclers have a partisan bias,
it may be mentioned that the Italian chronicler states that Pepin went
to meet Stephen, and on meeting him dismounted from his horse,
prostrated himself on the ground before the Pope, and then walked
to the royal residence by the side of the Pope’s palfrey. The Frankish
chroniclers say that the Pope and his clergy, with ashes on their
heads and sackcloth on their bodies, prostrated themselves as
suppliants at the feet of Pepin, and would not rise till he had
promised his aid against the Lombards.
The king lodged Stephen in the monastery of St. Denys for the
winter, and well on into the next summer. There Stephen was
attacked by an illness so dangerous that his recovery was regarded
as a miracle, due to the intercessions of St. Dionys, St. Peter, and
St. Paul; where again we notice the twinship of St. Peter and St.
Paul as regards the protection of the Pope, with the local saint
added. After the return of the Pope to Rome, he was besieged by the
Lombard king, who vowed not to leave him a scrap of territory the
size of the palm of his hand. The Pope sent to Pepin a letter of
entreaty and threat. The king, he said, hazarded eternal
condemnation. He had vowed to secure to St. Peter the vast
donation to which reference has been made, and St. Peter had
promised to him eternal life. If the king was not faithful to his word,
the Saint kept firmly the donation, as it were the sign manual of the
king, and this he would produce against him at the day of judgement.
[179] The envoys came late in the year, and the king could not
conduct an army into Italy in the winter. In February, 755, or a little
earlier, Stephen wrote another letter, with a literally awe-full account
of the horrors of the siege, which had then lasted fifty-five days. He
conjured Pepin to come and help, “by God and his holy Mother, by
the powers of the heavens, by the apostles Peter and Paul, and by
the last day.” The collocation and the order of these adjurations is
significant. Still Pepin did not come. The Pope then resorted to the
blasphemous proceeding which it has seemed necessary to
describe. We may suppose that the Pope’s metaphorical statement
—that St. Peter had Pepin’s sign manual to a document which would
be produced against him at the day of judgement—had suggested to
the harassed mind of the Pope the idea that an immediate letter from
St. Peter himself would be more effective than the threat to produce
signatures at the day of judgement; and that if the letter was
addressed to the Franks at large, and not as the former letter to
Pepin and his sons, the whole nation would be terrified into prompt
action. However that may have been, a letter[180] was written with
the heading: “Peter, called to be an Apostle by Jesus Christ the Son
of the living God ... and [after a long paragraph] Stephen the prelate
of the catholic and apostolic Roman Church, ... to the most excellent
kings Pepin, Charles, and Carloman, with all the bishops, abbats,
priests, and all monks; all judges, dukes, counts, military officers,
and the whole people of the Franks.” The letter begins with the
words “Ego Petrus Apostolus”, I, Peter the Apostle. In it St. Peter
adjures those whom he addresses to rescue Rome from the
Lombards, making a special appeal that his own body, which
suffered torture for the Lord Jesus Christ, may be preserved from
desecration. “With me,” he proceeds, “the Mother of God likewise
adjures you, and admonishes and commands you, she as well as
the thrones and dominions and all the host of heaven, to save the
beloved city of Rome from the detested Lombards. If ye hasten, I,
Peter the Apostle, promise you my protection in this life and the next;
I will prepare for you the most glorious mansions in heaven; I will
bestow upon you the everlasting joys of paradise. Make common
cause with my people of Rome, and I will grant whatsoever ye may
pray for. I conjure you not to yield up this city to be lacerated and
tormented by the Lombards, lest your own souls be lacerated and
tormented in hell with the devil and his pestilential angels. Of all
nations under heaven, the Franks are highest in the esteem of St.
Peter; to me you owe all your victories. Obey, and obey speedily,
and, by my suffrage, our Lord Jesus Christ will give you in this life
length of days, security, victory; in the life to come, will multiply His
blessings upon you, among His saints and angels.” That little
summary is only about a twelfth part of the length of the letter itself.
The letter brought Pepin with a great host; he overcame the
Lombard king; and he bestowed on the Pope as a donation, by right
—it would appear—of conquest, not only what are called the States
of the Church, but also—and that in the teeth of the ambassador of
Constantine Copronymus, the Emperor of Constantinople, who
demanded its restoration to the Eastern Empire—the whole
exarchate of Ravenna. Thus it was that the Pope became a temporal
sovereign over vast portions of Italy. St. Peter’s letter was probably
the most important letter never written.
 CHAPTER XII
Alcuin retires to the Abbey and School of Tours.—Sends to York for more
advanced books.—Begs for old wine from Orleans.—Karl calls Tours a smoky
place.—Fees charged to the students.—History and remains of the Abbey Church
of St. Martin.—The tombs of St. Martin and six other Saints.—The Public Library of
Tours.—A famous Book of the Gospels.—St. Martin’s secularised.—Martinensian
bishops.

As time went on, Alcuin felt that he must withdraw from the varied
and heavy work which he was accustomed to do at the court,
whether at Aachen or elsewhere, and must retire to work quietly at
one of his abbeys. He obtained the king’s leave[181]. In 796 he wrote
to inform Karl that he had, in accordance with the king’s wish,
opened the school at Tours; that he must send to York for books; and
that he hoped the king would order the palace youths to continue to
attend the palace school which he had now left.
“I, your Flaccus, in accordance with your desire Ep. 78. a.d. 796.
and good pleasure, am busy with ministering,
under the roof of the holy Martin, to some the honey[182] of the holy
Scriptures; others I seek to inebriate with the old wine of ancient
disciplines; others I shall begin to nourish with the apples of
grammatical subtlety; some I purpose to illumine with the order of the
stars, as the painter nobly adorns the roof of the house of God. I
become very many things to very many men, that I may educate
very many to the profit of the holy Church of God and the honour of
your imperial realm, that no grace of Almighty God in me be
unemployed, and no part of thy bounty be without fruit.
“But I, your poor servant, need some of the more abstruse books
of scholastic learning which I had in my own land by the devoted
labour of my master[183], and to some extent of myself. I say this to
your excellency that you may be pleased to allow me to send some
of our young men to pick out what I need, and bring to France the
flowers of Britain; that not in York only there may be a garden
enclosed[184], but in Tours also the scions of paradise may bear fruit;
that the south wind may come and blow through the gardens by the
river Loire, and the spices thereof may flow out. I take as a parable
of the acquisition of wisdom the exhortation of Isaiah[185], ‘Ho, every
one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money;
come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without
money[186] and without price.’ Your most noble mind knows well that
there is nothing loftier that can be acquired for a happy life, nothing
more joyous as an exercise, nothing stronger against vices, nothing
more laudable in all dignity. As the philosophers have told us, there
is nothing more necessary for the ruling of a people, no better guide
of the life to the very best principles, than the glory of wisdom, the
praise of discipline, the efficacy of learning. To the earnest study and
daily exercise of wisdom, exhort, O king, the youths of your
excellency’s palace, that they may so advance while in the bloom of
youth that they may be held worthy to bring to honour their grey
hairs, and by wisdom may attain to perpetual happiness. To sow the
seeds of wisdom in these parts, I, so far as my poor intellect enables
me, shall not be found slack. In the morning of life, in the vigour of
study, I sowed in Britain; now, my blood running cold, as in the
evening of life, I cease not to sow in France. To me, shattered in
body, an expression of the holy Jerome, in his letter to Nepotianus, is
a solace: ‘Almost all the powers of the body are changed in old men.
Wisdom alone continues to increase; all the rest decrease.’ And a
little further on he says, ‘The old age of those that have trained their
youth in honourable arts, and have meditated in the law of God day
and night, grows more learned with age, more expert with use, more
wise with the process of time; it gathers the very sweetest fruits of
former studies.’”
The brethren of St. Martin of Tours had not a high character for
propriety of conduct. There are many evidences of this. It is
interesting to know that the earliest letter of Alcuin to which we can
reasonably assign a date is a letter appealing for a lapsed brother of
this same abbey of St. Martin of Tours, over which Alcuin was now
called to preside as an old man. The abbat to whom Alcuin
addressed this letter was Wulfhard, of whom the life of Hadrian I, as
printed by Muratori (iii. 1, 184, Rer. Ital. Script.), states that he was
sent along with Albinus, that is, Alcuin, to Hadrian, by Karl in 773.
[187] The letter was probably written in 774.

“To the pious father Uulfhard the abbat Albinus Ep. 1. a.d. 774.
the humble levite wishes health.
“I found this poor lamb wandering through the rough places of
neglect. Moved by pity, I brought him by sedulous admonition to the
home of our discipline, binding up his wounds, pouring in wine and
oil. To your piety, gentlest of fathers, I send him back, beseeching
you to receive him for the love of Him who, amid the joy of the
angels, has brought back on His own shoulders into the home of His
delights all of us, who were wandering among the precipices of sins.
Do not in austerity repel from thee one whom Christ has for pity
gathered back to Himself, nay, has met penitent, has run to and
embraced, has brought back to the house of feasting. And if any
envious man advise you to reject him, let such an one fear lest he
himself be rejected by Him who has said, ‘With what measure ye
mete, it shall be measured to you again.’... And though he have
sinned ten times, have not we sinned an hundred times; and though
he owe an hundred pence, do we not owe ten thousand talents?...”
Alcuin had a high regard for the wines of the Loire, and he
particularly liked them old. The best wine of that time would appear
to have been grown about the city of Orleans, and to have been kept
under the charge of the Bishop of Orleans as the chief owner of the
terraced lands on which the vines grew.[188] Here is a frolicsome
letter about a present of wine from Orleans. It is full of quotations
from the Song of Songs applied to local conditions, for the most part
rather obscure. When he comes to his concluding words, there is no
obscurity in his request that if wine is coming, good old wine may be
sent.
“To Theodulf, bishop of Orleans. Ep. 153. a.d. 796-
800.
“To the great pontiff and father of vineyards,
Teodulf[189], Albinus sends greeting.
 “We read in the Chronicles[190] that in the time of David, the king
most loved of God, Zabdi was over the wine-cellars of the vineyards.
Now, by the mercy of God, a second David [Karl] rules over a better
people, and under him a nobler Zabdi [Theodulf] is over the wine-
cellars of the vineyards. The king has brought him into the house of
wine and set over him the banner of love, that students may stay him
with flowers and fill him full of the apples of them that languish with
love,[191] that is, love of that which maketh glad the heart of man.
“Now even though there be a lack of that which strengthens,
namely bread, there is perhaps no lack of that which maketh glad,
namely wine, in the cellars of Orleans; for our hope is set on a
thriving vineyard and not on a fig-tree dried up. Wherefore Jonathan,
the counsellor of David, a man of letters,[192] sends unto Zabdi,
saying: Let us get up early: let us see how well the vineyard of
Sorech thrives: to them that chant the treaders’ cry therein the
streams of the cellarer are dispersed abroad. But now that the
storehouse is opened with the key of love, let this verse be sung by
the ruler of the vineyard in the towers of Orleans:[193] Eat with me,
my friends; drink, and drink abundantly: come ye and take wine and
milk without price. My throat is as the best wine meet for the drinking
of my beloved, to be tasted by his lips. I am my beloved’s and my
beloved is mine.
“It must not be replied—I have put off my coat, how shall I put it
on? I have washed my feet, how shall I defile them?[194] I cannot
rise and give to thee.[195] If by chance the three loaves are not at
hand, which were lacking in the store-houses of Gibeon,[196] by the
blessing of Christ the seven water-pots are full of the best wine,
which has been kept till now. Who does not know that some of this
wine, according to the command of the Virgin’s Son,[197] is to be
borne to the ruler of the feast of the city of Tours? But remember this:
You must not put new wine into old skins. No one, having drunk old
wine, straightway desireth new; for he saith—The old is better.
“Blessed is he that speaks to an attentive ear.”
 Tours was not in Alcuin’s time the bright place which it is now.
When Karl endeavoured to persuade Alcuin to accompany him to
Rome in 779, Alcuin begged that he might be excused. The journey
was long, and he wished to remain at Tours. It is evident that Karl in
his reply spoke of the splendours of Rome and contrasted them with
“the smoky dwellings” of Tours.
This is what Alcuin had said to the king:—
“Now about that long and laborious undertaking Ep. 118. a.d. 799.
of going to Rome. I cannot in any way think that
this poor little body of my frailty—weak and shattered with daily pains
—could accomplish the journey. I should have earnestly desired to
do it, if I had had the strength. I therefore entreat the most clement
benevolence of your paternity that you leave me to aid your journey
by the faithful and earnest prayers of myself and of those who with
me serve God at St. Martin’s.”
Karl’s answer we have not got. Alcuin’s rejoinder to it contains this
passage:—
“With regard to that with which it is your will to Ep. 119. a.d. 799.
upbraid me, that I prefer the houses of Tours,
sordid with smoke, to the gilded citadels of the Romans, I know that
your prudence has read that elogium of Solomon’s, ‘it is better to
dwell in a corner of the house-top, than with a brawling woman in a
wide house’.[198]
“And, if I may be pardoned for saying it, the sword hurts the eyes
more than smoke does. For Tours, content in its smoky houses, by
the gift of God through the providence of your goodness dwells in
peace. But Rome, which is given up to fraternal strife, ceases not to
hold the implanted venom of dissension, and now compels the
power of your venerated dignity to hasten from the sweet dwellings
of Germany to restrain this pernicious plague.”
From the foundation of the School of Tours, the students paid fees.
The great endowments of the abbey, much enlarged by Karl in 774
when he granted to Abbat Wulfhard a large amount of property in the
neighbourhood of Pavia, do not appear to have been applied to the
maintenance of the School. A change was made about forty years
after Alcuin, and then the education of the school was given free. We
learn that after Alcuin’s death the school continued to flourish under
Abbats Wulfhard II, Fridugisus, and Adalard, the masters of the
school receiving stipends from the fees of the students. This
“mercantile” arrangement was hateful to Abbat Adalard, and the
change came in his time, and by his order; but it was not financed
from the regular income of the abbey. The master at the time was
Amalric, who afterwards became Archbishop of Tours, dying in 855.
He gave to the abbey from his own private property certain funds for
the payment of the teachers, and in August, 841, it was decreed that
the schooling should be free. Amalric had many students under his
tuition who rose to important positions, of whom Paul the Archbishop
of Rouen, and Joseph the Chancellor of Aquitaine, are specially
mentioned. He was a good example of the “school master bishops”
with whom the Church of England was well stocked a generation
ago.

Plate I
The Abbey Church of St. Martin of Tours, before the pillage. To face p. 210.
 Plate II
St. Martin’s, Tours; the Horloge. To face p. 211.
The church of St. Martin, so magnificent in the times of the
historian Archbishop Gregory of Tours (573-94), became more and
more magnificent after several destructions by fire. It had reached its
greatest splendour when it was pillaged by the Huguenots. Tours
claims to have originated the name of those destructive people, who
in the beginning used to steal out for secret meetings at night
beyond the walls of the city, flitting about like the local bogey le roi
Hugon.[199] And Tours possesses to this day in the name of one of
its streets a reminiscence of the early hunting down of the
Huguenots as a highly enjoyable form of the chasse aux renards.
When their time came, they wreaked a savage revenge, and
practically destroyed the noble Abbey Church. A reproduction of its
appearance in the perfection of symmetry has been prepared from
plans and drawings, and is shown in Plate I. The only remains left by
the Revolution and by the necessity for new streets are the south-
west tower, called of St. Martin,[200] or of the Horloge, and a tower of
the north transept, called of Charlemagne.[201] They are of 12th-
century foundation, but the latter has a capital of earlier date still
clinging to it. Louis XI had surrounded the shrine of St. Martin with a
rich and very massive gallery of solid silver, but his needy successor
Francis was beforehand with the Huguenots and coined it into crown
pieces.
The tombs of St. Martin and the Saints who lay near him were
destroyed by the Huguenots, and their relics were burned. Portions
were saved, and in the new basilica of St. Martin, close to the site of
the old basilica, there is a noble crypt with a reproduction of the
massive tomb of St. Martin.[202] On the wall is an inscription to the
following effect:

Nomina corporum sanctorum quæ hic sepulta erant circa

tumulum Beati Martini.
SS. Briccius, Spanus, Perpetuus, Gregorius Tur.,
Eustochius, Eufronius, quorum venerabiles reliquiæ in capsis
existentes ab hæreticis impiissime in dicta ecclesia fuerunt
combustæ anno 1562.

Eustochius Briccius
Perpetuus MARTINUS Spanus martyr
Gregorius Eufronius
 Sic erant corpora horum in ecclesia B. Martini Tur. ordinata.

The Rue des Halles runs right through the site of the old basilica.
The new basilica lies at right angles to the old one, its axis lying
north and south, an arrangement which places the modern
confessio, with its reproduction of the old tomb, practically on the site
of the old confessio.
The connexion of St. Martin with Tours came about in this way. He
was born about 316, a native of Lower Hungary; had a taste for the
monastic life; was compelled by edict to become a soldier; served for
three years up to the age of eighteen; went to visit Hilary at Poitiers;
after some years came again to Hilary, and founded the monastery
of Lugugé, near Poitiers, said to have been the first monastic
institution in Gaul. His reputation stood so high that in 371 he was
elected by the populace to the bishopric of Tours, much against his
will. He built the monastery of Marmoutier, Maius Monasterium,
about two miles to the north-east of the walls of Tours, where a large
number of students received an education in such learning as then
was known. His time was mostly spent in conversion of the pagans
in his diocese. At the age of eighty, in 396, he was called to Condate
to settle an ecclesiastical dispute, was seized with fever, and died. It
was just at that time that his great admirer, Ninian, was finishing his
stone church at Whithern, in Galloway, and to Martin he dedicated it.
From that time, and owing to the connexion between Britain and
Gaul, dedications to St. Martin were frequent, as is instanced by the
old British church of St. Martin at Canterbury.
 Plate III
St. Martin’s, Tours; the Tour Charlemagne, with the dome of the new St. Martin’s
on the left. To face p. 212.