The Statutes of the Fourth General Council of Lateran

A VERY few words, it is trusted, will suffice to put the reader in possession of the object of the present work, and also of the method pursued in order to attain that object. It has been asserted, that "THE STATUTES OF THE FOURTH GBNERAL COUNCIL OF LATERAN" were first published, as such, in the year 1538, just three hundred and twenty three years after the said Council was held; the object of the following sheets is to shew that these Statutes were well known, and. Recognized, AS "STATUTES OF THE FOURTH GENERAL COUNCIL OF LATERAN," by successive Councils and Synods, from the year 1223 down to the Council of Trent, which com. menced its sessions in the year 1545, and which fully recognizes the Statutes in question. Such is the object of the present work, and in order to attain that object, the following method has been pursued. In fairness to those who have taken a different view of the case, the witnesses, upon whose testimony they rely for proof that the Council passed no acts at all, have been brought forward, and allowed to tell their own story; the reader will, probably, be of opinion that, instead of invalidating the authenticity and genuineness of the Statutes in question, these witnesses bear no slight testimony in their favour, and that a cross examination of their evidence was quite unnecessary. The evidence of Matthew Paris can only be made available, to discredit the Canons of the Fourth General Council of Lateran, by omitting his statement that the Canons seemed pleasing to some, and burdensome to others of the Fathers assembled in Council; and so also with regard to the testimony of Platina and Nauclerus, from which a very important qualification must be left out altogether; Du Pin is strongly in favour of the Canons, and Collier's evidence is as clear as evidence can be he states, and very truly, that the Mazarine copy of the Canons is coeval with the Council in which statement he is borne out by. Labbe and Cossart, no incompetent judges in this matter. Collier is particularly mentioned as repudiating. the THIRD CANON, and this merely on account of an unguarded expression, respecting its not being found in the Mazarine copy that the expression was unguarded, the reader will easily perceive, by inspecting the Canon itself, which is given as it stands in the work of Labbe and Cossart; so far, however, was Collier from repudiating it, that it is one of the Canons which he selects to lay before his readers, and he is, moreover, at some pains to explain its several clauses. Rigordus, who has been mentioned as ascribing the Canons to Innocent rather than to the Council, says nothing about the matter at all.