An Index of Prohibited Books (1840)/Part 10 - Remarks
REMARKS
ON
SOME PARTS OF THE REV. T. L. GREEN's IId. LETTER TO THE VEN. ARCHDEACON HODSON.
Nihil est quod absque argento Romana curia dedat. Nam et ipsæ manus impoaitiones, et Spiritus Sancti dona venduntur. Nee pecoatorum venia nisi nummatis impenditur. Æn. . Sylvii Ep. LXVI. p. 549. Opp. Basil. 1571.
In this Letter Mr. Green has honoured me with a notice, for which he is entitled to my best thanks; and not the less for the opportunity which he has afforded me, p. 22, of correcting an oversight into which I had fallen in my Venal Indulgences, &c. p. 105, where, in a note, meaning to refer to Bellarmine de Indul. 1, ix. I had cited the cardinal as adjoining the remission of culpa, at least venlalis, to the Plenissima Indulgentia. He disclaims the opinion himself; while he attests it as that quorundam. My monitor therefore has given me plural for singular. I have accordingly in the first line of the note, after plenissima, added in MS. for any future edition, the words — "according to the opinion of some, in his church necessarily, and possibly quite as good as his own, although rejected by himself, as not solid." — Lines 5 and 6 I alter thus — "They will probably kick away any of their advocates for the turn." —
My obligation does not end here. Mr. G. has attracted the attention of the public to a subject of mighty importance, particularly at the present crisis; and he may be assured, that the reading and better judging part of that public will not rest satisfied with interested, superficial and partial views of it. If the effect be such as I anticipate from his criticism of my own small works, and his intention were in accordance, I ought to express my gratitude to him for much good will.
For my own subordinate concern in the burthen of two years' gestation, of which Mr. G. has just been happily delivered, I should be perfectly contented to throw myself on the re-perusal by any candid and competent reader of the works which Mr. G. would appear to have shaken. Those works, the Spiritual Venality of Rome, giving a particular account of the Spiritual Taxes of the Papal church, and the Venal Indulgences and Pardons of the same church, I presume, from the skill and pains discoverable in his pretermissions, he has perhaps read through. Although he must be acquainted with, he has failed to notice, another publication, which originally appeared in a Quarterly periodical,—Rome's Traffic in Pardons substantiated. This I the rather regret, because it contains information respecting his own church of some importance, especially on one of the subjects handled by him, and from his own church's authors, principally from Amort, which to all appearance he has yet to acquire. If the omission were intentional it cannot be denied to be prudent. Had he ventured to give its established conclusions with any fidelity he would have had a very different tale to produce to the public. It is a right pleasant thing for a smooth, plausible priest of Rome to select from the variations of his own church a line, or collection of eminent doctors, who all teach a doctrine perfectly uniform, without a single interference of dissent or opposition, and make his humble and trustful flock believe, that this, and no other, is the doctrine of "the catholic church" — while at the very time he knows, or shame to him if he does not, that upon almost every doctrine which he esteems vital, and particularly on that of Indulgences, his great doctors are all to pieces, some differing pretty diametrically, others by shades and conundrums, but all of them in their degrees much about as harmonious as the tongues of the builders at the dispersion of Babel. These differences indeed did not proceed to blows; for while the fundamental point, the income from Indulgences was satisfactorily forthcoming in its season, mere words and opinions were tolerated. When the opinion of Luther touched this, matters were altered.
The first part of Mr. G.'s letter is no concern of mine, and is evidently intended, or, at least, is only fit, for his own particular adherents, who are bound to trust him for a fraction of his church's vagrant infallibility.
At p. 35 the engineer opens his battery upon the Centum Gravamina, of which any one who knows any thing will at once perceive that the assailant knows next to nothing. However, with his little lie does his best. He finds it too late in the day to repeat the bouncing experiment of instantaneous denial of facts which fair history well attests; but he flees to the convenient refuge of abuses — a name, which will throw a plausible mantle over any crime. And further, they were condemned by the Church. Just as if it were a rare thing for his church to commit and condemn the same thing; or, like a living ornament of the papal Church in Ireland, abjure with one side ofher mouth to one audience, what she sanctions and promotes with the other side to another audience. Tacitus somewhere says, factum esse scelus loquuntur faciuntque. This church has not been set upon her hills so short a time as to be unseen and unknown. This flexible and accommodating entity has prudence if she has not shame; and it is not for her most valued interests that she should herself appear in all her transactions, and bear the occasional infamy of instruments, which her inclination prompts, and her conscience does not forbid, her to employ.
It is rather amusing to find Mr. G. p. 37, resorting to the condition expressed pro forma in the billets of Indulgences, and in other documents, "truly contrite and confessed," or to the same effect, as proof that the condition was literally enforced or required; when by the application of his technical explanations, and his annexation of the terms "not properly," at pleasure, he has completely emasculated his own argument. I am quite satisfied, that his "ingenious device" is far more applicable to these conditions than to the spiritual graces granted by the author or authors of the Indulgences. These Indulgences, by those who issued them, were well enough known to be base coin; they were nevertheless put into circulation as true and legal. The church, from whose mint they came, did mean to deceive; but she did not mean to be detected in the attempt, and exposed. Such abuses do not now exist — why? — because they cannot. The trade of the Great Impostor is up; "for no man buyeth her merchandise any more." — Rev. xviii. 2.
At p. 46, in order to gain some advantage to his cause, the present champion makes a scape-goat of poor Tetzel. This is, indeed, only the way in which his brethren treat their own most sacred Breviary, and its stupendous miracles — one grand mark of the true church. But poor Tetzel! what a return, as he himself feelingly complained, for all his honest and laborious efforts for the catholic church, and even for her tenderest part, her purse! His "Puffs" in the virtuous indignation of the rather ungrateful censor so called, were good orthodox pleadings at the time, and would never have been esteemed otherwise by the rulers of Rome had not their effectual exposure thrown back disgrace upon the zealous official, which threatened to go on and terminate in the disgrace of the church and its head which employed him, unless prompt measures were used to avert it. Tetzel is no favourite with protestants of course; but to be abandoned by those, who pretend to be true sons of that church, which he devoted his great, approved, and for a time, rewarded labours, even to the sacrifice of conscience, to serve, is hard indeed; and shews that Rome has little pity for those of her servants whose zeal and labour are not rewarded with success. Had he succeeded always, as at first, all would have been well — the Dominican (and noticed with real respect in the Bibliotheca of the Fraternity by Quetif and Echard, ii. 40, 1;) Inquisitor General; Sub-commissary; and for his merits promoted by Albert, Archbp. of Magdeburgh, to the honour of Commissary and Special Inquisitor; and loaded with no moral vice but such as he shared in abundance with popes, cardinals, and father confessors; and this man, for his final failure, is so furiously rated by another, and no better servant of his master, Miltitz, that he sank under it, and in his last hours had none to pity him but Luther!
I perceive by the same note, that the Summary which I have given in the original at length of the Indulgences for the repair of the Cathedral of Saintes in Saintogne, somewhat discomposes Mr. G.'s serenity; and I do not wonder; for it contains a faithful and graphic description of his church and her doings. In puerile imprudence he lets out his wrath against the Commissary, Raymond Peraudi, who, let him remember, was a purpled ornament of his church, and as pains-taking a gentleman as Mr. G. himself. Yet of him he says — He was, in all probability, as accomplished a questor as the celebrated Tetzel himself. And the Summary is worthy of its author." He was, in all probability, as worthy a man as the priest who should solemnly deny "that he knows of his own personal knowledge," or,"so that he may tell" (according to Tresham's Treatise of Equivocation, or Soto's instruction, see Mason's New Art of Lying, p. 27.) what in all Ireland and the Breviary is as obtrusive on the view as the light of the sun at mid-day.
Mr. G. might have spared the second edition of his imaginary wit about "six folio volumes," had he foreseen that he himself would designate the places in Labbé's Councils by folia. He should have written columns; and any of the young gentlemen of Oscott would tell him, that in one folium there are four columns. I may here suitably enough introduce another specimen of the habits in which Romish controvertists familiarly allow themselves. Archdeacon Hodson quoted from Bp. Stillingfleet an Indulgence which contained a remission of all sins to those who in the article of death should devoutly commend their souls to God, &c. without referring to the authority. This made Mr. G. particularly urgent to obtain the reference. The call, however, suddenly dropped. Why? Be. cause Mr. G., in exploring Ferrari's Prompta Bibliotheca under Indulgentia, found three distinct copies of Indulgences containing precisely the same form — one by Benedict XIII. the other two by Benedict XIV. See iv. 525-8, and Addenda p. 35, ed. Venet. 1782.
And if the Letter-writer had not determined to spoil some sheets of clean paper, he might have eased himself of the labour of collections from various councils condemnatory of the abuses of the Quaestors — all very right, with a good meaning of many individuals, and to save appearances by the rest. We ever admit, that there have been conscientious and even good men at all times in the Roman apostacy, or we should never have had the reformation. The fact contended for is denied by none, and the proof superfluous. Even Trent made bold demonstrations amounting to nothing. The thing was still secured, and the control was all in the hands of the Pope. He and his certainly wished the affair to be managed decently; but fhe rule was
Rem,
Si possis, recte, &c.
To close the first part of the subject, Venal Indulgences, I will simply observe, that Mr. G. has done what is done by most in the same predicament — he has mixed some truth with his fiction, as much as would do him no harm, and would save or assist his credit, and the credit of the prevailing fiction. He has pretty adroitly selected what accorded with this plan. He has performed various contortions to extricate himself from the net in which he felt himself caught. But his main contrivance and refuge has been pretermission. Of the plain grammatical meaning of the indulgences in question — of the necessarily popular interpretation of the expression of that popular interpretation in the jingling, proverbial phrase, tantum donant quantam sonant — of the naturally consequent disputes among the doctors of the church herself respecting the honesty or knavery of that church; and lastly and eminently, of those interesting and little known forms, the Confessionals, of which I have given both a fac-simile specimen and so extended an account, with the priced varieties of spiritual graces contained in them, particularly the optional confessors — he has preserved a profound and very prudent silence. In fact, I fear that Mr. G. has throughout been fighting against his own convictions; and that he inwardly feels, because he knows, that he is incapable of facing, much less of confuting, a single substantial statement in what I have written on the subject of his Church's Veual Indulgences.
At p. 66 and onwards Mr. G., with his two years' preparation, "boldly" enters upon the subject of the Penitentiary Taxes of Rome as presented in my Spiritual Venality. He will readily agree with me, if he has any experience in such cases, that works and children of darkness do not ordinarily court the light. From the offenders and their friends, as is evident in the proceedings of every court of justice, it is with the utmost difficulty, that any thing in the shape of criminating evidence can be wrung. So that the friends of truth and equity are often under the necesssity of satisfying themselves with evidence of a broken and deficient character — accidental and apparently involuntary both admission and disclosures — the light mutually reflected by different and distant admitted facts upon each other, and various other proofs weaker or stronger — seldom sufficient for conviction absolutely legal, and yet quite sufficient for personal and moral assurance of the truth of the particular charge — quite sufficient to exclude all reasonable doubt.
This is precisely the case of the Church of Rome as respects the iniquities charged upon her, particularly that under consideration.
I have done my best to collect and present all the evidence, weighing its value as I could, extant upon the subject. Kven an advocate of Rome would riot expect me to invent evidence; this at least is not the practice with protestants. Had I allowed myself such liberty I might have made out a much clearer, indeed a perfectly clear case —
totus teres atque rotundus,
Externi ne quid valeat per leve morari.
I have given my materials as I found them in their natural order: some of them new, others improved or enlarged, all pertinent, many important. It is needless to say what I have done, as any reader who chuses may have recourse to my volume.
It is more to my purpose to shew what my opponent has done, and likewise what he has not done.
He has done as follows: — He has given a long detail of exextracts from the Venality, with the effect, whatever were the intention, of appearing to present an extended and fair statement of the argument oppugned. But with this he has intermingled passages selected to favour his purpose from different parts, and some of them rather obtusely perverted: and assuming, that my cause is answerable for all the imperfections and variations in the documents — facts, not denied but openly and carefully stated — with nothing but a protestant though valuable re-print, and another, in his own possession, he feels himself warranted to come to the bold conclusion, — "Now, Sir, whether I can reasonably be called upon to defend or reply to any of the individual charges in documents so strangely discordant with each other, and so totally destitute of valid authentication, I may fearlessly leave to the judgment of the reader." To this piece of flippancy it would be sufficient to answer, that particulars in the documents concerned may vary with times, places, and persons, and not be discordant; and if they were, there may be good reasons for preferring one to another. And as for valid authentication, I believe I have displayed more than the priest resident in Tixall quite relishes, and more than is usually found in such dark cases as those in which papal iniquity abounds. Let me add, that I apprehend the fearless writer will on reflexion feel that he has committed somewhat of an oversight in bringing, as he has done, to the acquaintance of his own people, so large a portion of the contents of my volume — thinking rather fondly, that he is doing no more than helping forward his own object, forgetting, at the same time, their very suspicious character, and exciting the almost irrepressible inquiry — what can all this mean? — can such things have originated in nothing? — in what point do the converging lines unite?
But I must tell the reader what Mr. G. has not done. I do pot say that he has altogether omitted, but he has done what perhaps is quite the same thing for effect, he has deprived of their prominence, he has thrown into the back ground, the main supports of the charge against his church — the copy of the Penitentiary Taxes which I have reprinted — the most authentic recognition which they have received by their being reprinted repeatedly in the body of law, the Oceanus Juxis, published in Venice, the volume in which it is found being dedicated to the reigning pope — and the celebrated passage in Claude d'Espense, fixing upon the document the awful and indelible character, which not all the ingenious processes of the most expert of Rome's artizans can erase or expunge. No, no: whatever postern doors may have been provided as an escape from detection, Rome is openly convicted of having carried on a profligate trade in the souls of men, their crimes and their pardons, for many long centuries. The respectable Richer, Historian of the General Councils, knew what he said, when he charged her with "making the sins of men her golden harvest;" and Pius II. before he was Pope, and saw better, than when at the last year of his life he was made to recant, felt himself secure against contradiction when he wrote, that at Rome "not even the pardon of sin could be obtained without being paid for in solid cash.
Mr. G., however, is disposed to nibble and quibble a little, and complains, pp. 88, &c. of the words "of sinning" being added to the word licentia in d'Espense. They were added, because they ap. peared necessary; and so, from the current of thought and argument in the author, and the following context, I still think — moved by either the philological or logical finesse of Mr. G. His assertion, p. 89, that protestants industriously circulate a book, in which more wickedness may be learned than in all the Tax-tables, has no doubt reference to the Whole Duty of Man. The writer, indulgently, I suppose, adds, that he "need not specify it." This is the very matter which led the Hon. and Rev. Mr. Spencer into a labyrinth of puerile blunders. The Rector of Sutton Coldfield put him to complete rout and shame on the subject; and the publication of his own Letters on Auricular Confession, together with those of his opponent, who, characteristically enough, had published his own separately by themselves, has demonstrated not only the vile iniquity of the Confessional, but the utter impotence of the new comparative argument set up in its defence. If Mr. G. could have pointed to a popular manual among us, containing the filthy pages which dis. grace a popular manual well-known by himself, the "Garden of the Soul" — pages, of which the intrinsic uncleanness is the slightest part of their guilt; for they acquire a satanic virulence by the practical consequences which can hardly fail to follow the atrocious instructions of such "sure guides" as Dens and others, — pages, so revolting as to render it expedient that another book should be provided as a substitute for decent Romanists, females especially — could he have done this, he would have done something; but he knows he cannot.
It may be my defect of sagacity, but I can discern no other quality than that of quibbling in the note p. 92, on the phrase in foro conscientiæ; and apprehend, that in the presence of leading arguments it is worth little, and may be left to its own insignificance; at least so I am content to leave it.
What I read in p. 88, referring the reader to the Taxæ in the Bullarium as "the genuine Taxæ," might have occasioned surprise, if any thing in modern Papal tactics could. The things themselves are the most inpocuous in all directions that can be imagined. I had expressly guarded against them as a common fallacy in my Venality, p.5, and hardly expected that any champion of Rome had forehead enough to attempt to palm them upon the public as the genuine, and only, or principal Taxæ of the Roman see. They are, except for the cupidity which characterises them, perfectly innocent matters, and have no appearance of being intended for deception, presenting, however, strong temptation in such times as the present to those who have an interest in so employing them. It is rather unfortunate that, when I had done my best to warn the public, particularly Romanists, of the danger, Mr. G. should spontaneously step into the not very honourable niche which I had unconsciously cut out for such indiscreet and not very high principled adventurers. But as long as Popery exists, her impostors will.
I now travel back to pp. 76-9 in order to notice an argument which should not escape. It belongs to an approved canon of sophistry, to wit, that of breaking the force of, or evading, a charge by a parallel, or similarity, meant to be complete as far as the argument is concerned. Mr. G. has found a parallel, and therefore a justification to his church, in the pecuniary provisions of the Anglican. This line the author has adapted from Dr. Milner, C. Butler, Esq. and Dr. Doyle, without naming either, and rather disguising his obligations. He has acted prudently. At least he might know, that in my Venality, pp. 80 — 6, I had given that fallacy due consideration, and I believe, a death's blow. And it is curious to observe how, of two mutually destructive defences of the Church of Rome, that of Fees of Office is exchanged in Mr. G.'s epistle for the more general and evasive term "compensation for services" — services, not likely to be extravagantly taxed, if rated at the valuation of Mr G., or according to the real worth of the trumpery published in the Romish annuals; but calling for very high esteem, and very costly remuneration, when understood in the good orthodox sense, as a release from sin, and a passport to the joys of paradise.
The class of Tax to which I have confined myself is that of the Penitentiary. In a catalogue, as authentic as authentic can be, to be discovered and published against the will and efforts of its authors, absolutions for various sins are included, and a price annexed to them. It is notorious, that such absolutions, and indulgences containing them, were put to sale, and vast sums collected in consequence. Those individuals who had, value received,-in spiritual graces, doubtless thought them worth something, as, if they were not deceived, they must do; and it is historically certain, that armies, (" truly penitent and contrite," as most armies, particularly Crusaders, must be!) went to the field of battle with the gay assurance, that, if they fell, their church's indulgences would blot out all their sin?, and carry them clean and straight to heaven. But it seems they reckoned without their host; for their host had a salro, which, were he called to account, he would be sure to produce. He had contrived certain reservations to save his credit. Just as if a banking company, with no capital, should issue fictitious notes to an enormous amount, thinking it quite enough to provide secret technical forms invented and used by themselves, such as would enable them to prove in a court of law, if called upon, that the said notes were worth just so much waste paper. The whole indeed of Rome's defence is that of the Jew, whose razors were not made to shave but to sell.
It is plainly to be perceived, that the present popular method with Romish apologists is, to approach as near as possible to heretical protestancy. They can put a good face upon their religion, either wholly, or in its parts, only by assuming this mask. Their generally rigid, but occasionally most elastic principles allow them in this hypocrisy, for a season, and for a purpose. To attain that purpose they will virtually renounce, perhaps verbally abjure, all that constitutes their existence as a church, — their supreme sovereignty; their intolerant exclusiveness; their duty of persecution; their transubstantiation; their paramount tradition; their splendid adolatries; the canonized heroes of their breviary; and, as Mr. G. here does, the richest treasures of this rich church, her Indulgences and Remissions, total, of all sins, full, fuller, and fullest, from guilt as well as from punishment,[1] made sure against accidents by being ready for use in the article of death, or as often as that danger occurs, — the whole secured on the inexhaustible fund of merits, human and divine, in the hands of the vicegerent of heaven on earth, whether Alexander VI. or Gregory XVI — they will thus, for justification, or advancement, renounce or abjure the absolute substance and vitality of their Popery. O! if this transformation which truth and conscience as well as policy extort — if this hypocrisy — were converted into sincerity and reality, idolaters and heretics would become Christians and our real brethren. But the father and mother of lies forbid the union: they cannot part with their children — at least as yet; and we must wait till "the spirit be poured out from on high," and all will be united to one another by being united in the abandonment of religious error, and the reception of divine truth.
Here then I close, regretting that I have been engaged in an occupation which may be considered as superfluous; and promising, as far as I can, that I shall not easily be led to repeat the apparent indiscretion. Mr. G. has not shaken one material position in my books; he has not, he cannot, and he knows it. I have anticipated his dialectic manœuvres, and have provided antecedently for the dispersion of his mystifications, and those ingenious tortuosities which have retired from every other profession than that of Roman controvertists. He will please to bear in mind, that the charge against his church is, not that she herself declares — trust her for that — but that from doings of her own proved upon her, it may legitimately be inferred, that in every single item of the spiritual articles in which she deals, she is saleable when her price is bid. Mr. G. therefore will excuse me if to his ineffective exculpation, I prefer the opinion of two of his betters in his church — that of the Pope, who affirms — Nee peccatorum venia nisi nummatis impenditur, and the tuneful Carmelite, a second Mantuan, who, with much more to the same purpose, sings — Sacra sunt venalia Romœ.
Should Mr. G. be inclined again to try his skill in the art, familiar to the defenders of his church, of confuting an opponent by omitting his main strength, he may become the unintentional occasion of exposing to the English public, more fully than has hitherto been done, the kind of "services" for which the Roman Penitentiary and her Tax-tables prescribe the pecuniary "compensation."
Sutton Coldfield, Oct. 14, 1840.
P.S. The reader may consult with advantage a review of my Venal Indulgences in the Church of England Quarterly Review for 1840, pp. 138–152, where he will see the old doctrines of Rome on the subject made the present by Dr. Murray's sanction of Dens's Moral and Dogmatic Theology. I take this opportunity to observe, that the Confessionals, as bills of pardon, &c. are distinctly mentioned in the Card. Poli Mandatum de Confessionalibus, &c. 1557, as faculties or licenses, called Confessionals, obtained from the Pope, or the Penitentiary office, by letter, or breve, or otherwise. See Wilkins's Council. Maj. Brit. iv., 14. See likewise Catal. Lib. MSS. M. Parker a Nasmith, No. cxi. 1610, p. 132.
In my Index of Gregory XVI., at the end of the note p. 68, add — The mistaken date is rectified by the fact, that Vergerio's Latin translation of the de Idolo Lauretano was first published in 1554; and the Epistle is addressed Othoni Henrico Palatine Rheni, dated Kal. Septembris, 1534, while in the 2d edition the Dedication, which is nearly the same, is Wolfgango Palatino Rheni, pridie Kal. Octobris, 1556. The Rev. Mr. Gibbings, who gave me this information, has mentioned the earlier edition in his Index of Brasichellen, Preface p. xvii.
By the same friend I am admonished, that before I treated Gerardus Busdragus as an ens rationis]], p. 82, I should have consulted Possevin, who, I find in his App. Sac. thus notices him, Lucensis, et Episcopus Argolicensis Lecturam super Canone, de Consecratione Dist 3 De aqua benedicta. An edition was published of this book Wiliorbani 1594, 8vo. A copy is in the British Museum. The Dedication, dated Padua, 1554, at the beginning has the words, sed cordialissimè sum gavisus, cùm nuper vidissem catalogum et libros vestros. The place, Padua, connects with the date of the Exemplum Literarum and the Bishop addressed.
I can make the present trifle useful, by adding, at the suggestion of another friend, to the purport of the note ending p. 107, a passage of the breve of Benedict XIV. prefixed to his Index, and constantly repeated to the last — atque ab omnibus, et singulis personis, ubicunque locorum existentibus, inviolabiliter, et inconcusse observari prœcipimus, et mandamus sub pœnis, &c.
In fugam vacui, I add the valuable and pertinent lines of Cowper in his Expostulation, suppressed by amiable feelings, but honestly restored by Southey. The British nation is addressed: —
Hast thou admitted with a blind fond trust,
The lie that burn'd thy fathers' bones to dust,
That first adjudged them heretics, then sent
Their souls to heaven, and cursed them as they went?
The lie that scripture strips of its disguise,
And execrates above all other lies;
The lie that claps a lock on mercy's plan,
And gives the key to yon infirm old man,
Who once ensconced in Apostolic Chair,
is deified, and sits omniscient there;
The lie that knows no kindred, owns no friend
But him that makes its progress his chief end,
That having spilt much blood makes that a boast,
And canonizes him that sheds the most.
Away with charity that soothes a lie
And thrusts the truth with scorn and anger by!
Shame on the candour and the gracious smile
Bestowed on them that light the martyr's pile,
While insolent disdain in frowns expressed,
Attends the tenets that endured the test!
Grant them the rights of men, and while they cease
To vex the peace of others grant them peace;
But trusting bigots, whose false zeal has made
Treachery their duty, thou art self-betrayed.
We might almost imagine Cowper were now living, and had written the above in these bright days of liberal bigotry.
- ↑ In the palmy days of Rome they were not at all coy on this subject. In the 12th book of Gio. Villani's Cronica, the author mentions the founder of the Jubilee, Boniface VIII., as pardoning colpa e pena; and his brother Matteo, who continued his Chronicle, in book i. cap. Hi., writes, that Clement VI., in a time of pestilence gave grandi indulgenzie di colpa e di penadi tutti i peccati, &c.