OCR Text |
Show IMPOSTORS The False Sebastian, and Demetrius, John Dee. In the light of the recent north pole controversy, contro-versy, the article on Impostors in the Catholic Encyclopedia, En-cyclopedia, by Herbert Thurston, is intensely interesting. in-teresting. Under this heading the author briefly considers the various frauds who have sought at different times to foist themselves on the credulity of their generation. After considering some of the earlier impostors the author goes on to say: Two similar pretenders to royalty, however, are of more consequence; and the impersonation, if impersonation im-personation it was, is buried in deeper mystery. When King Sebastian of Portugal in 1578 fought his last desperate battle against the Moors upon African soil, there was some conflict of evidence regarding the manner of his death, and though what, purported to be his dead body was brought back and interred in Portugal, rumors persistently circulated cir-culated that he had escaped and was still alive. Influenced In-fluenced by the fact that Philip II of Spain now-claimed now-claimed and occupied the throne of the sister kingdom, king-dom, a whole series of pretenders ajteared, each averring that he Avas in truth the Sebastian whom men believed to have perished. The first three of these claimants were vulgar rogues, but the fourth played his part with extraordinary firmness and consummate ability. He obtained recognition from a number of people who had known Sebastian well, and though the Spanish Viceroy of Naples seized him and sent him to the galleys, he seems to have been treated by the Spanish authorities with a curious cu-rious degree of consideration. Even now it cannot be affirmed with absolute certainty that his story was a false one, though nearly all historians pronounce pro-nounce against him. Still more doubtful is the case of "the false Demetrius.' The true Demetrius, the son of Czar Ivan, the Terrible, was murdered in 1592. Muscovy Mus-covy after Ivan's death fell into terrible anarchy, and not long afterwards there appeared in Poland a young man who declared that he was Demetrius who had escaped the massacre and that he now meant to press his claim to the throne of the Czars. Sigismund, King of Poland, lent him his support. He made himself master of Moscow and was generally received with enthusiasm, although he made no secret of the fact that during his residence resi-dence in Poland he had adopted the Roman Faith. Probably the merits of the historical controversy as to his identity have never been quite fairly judged, because all have agreed in describing him as a tool of the Jesuits and have consequently taken it for granted that the whole claim was a political coup devised by them to draw Russia over to the Roman obedience. Tt has, however, been clearly shown how doubtful is the assumption that Demet rius was really an impostor. (See Pierling, I "Rome et Demetrius." Paris, 1878; and "La Russie et le Saint Siege' of the same author. ) Of th other royal pretenders and notably of the six various va-rious adventurers who came forward in the character char-acter of the Dauphin Louis, the son of Louis XVI, there is no need to say anything. Neither need we linger over such fantastic personages as Paracelsus (Philip Bombast von Hohenheim, 1493-1541), who, despite his parade of cabbalistic formulae and his pretence of Divine inspiration, Avas really for his age a scientific genius, or Nostradamus (1503-1566), the Parisian astrologer and prophet, who also practiced prac-ticed as a physician, or Cagoliostro (Giuseppe Bal-samo, Bal-samo, 1743-1795), who died in the dungeons of the Castle of Sant' Angelo after an almost unprecedented unprece-dented career of fraud, in which a sort of freemasonry, freema-sonry, called "Egyptian Masonry," invented by him in England, played a notable part. Such English Eng-lish astrologers on the other hand as John Dee (1527-1608), whose life has recently been written by C. F. Smith (1909), William Lily (1602-1681), and John Gadbury (1627-1704), seem to have been sincere believers in their own strange science, and that curious character Valentine Greatrakes (1629-1683). (1629-1683). Avas not a mere charlatan but undoubtedly possessed some naturr.l gift of healing. More to our purpose are a number of feigned or deluded ex-staticas ex-staticas who often traded upon the popular credulity cred-ulity in countries like Spain that Avere ready to Avel-eome Avel-eome the miraculous. Amongst the most famous of these Avas Magdalena de la Cruz (1487-1500), a Franciscan nun of Cordova, who for many years Avas honored as a saint. She Avas believed to haA-e the stigmata and to take no other food than the Holy Eucharist. The Blessed Sacrament Avas said to fly to her tongue from the hand of the priest Avho Ava's giAing Holy Communion aul it seemed at such moments mo-ments that she Avas raised from the ground. The same miraculous leA iation took place during her es-stasies es-stasies at which time also she was radiant with supernatural su-pernatural light. So universal Avas the popular veneration, that ladies of the highest rank, when about to be confined, sent to her the cradles or garments gar-ments prepared for the expected child, that she might bless them. This Avasdone by the Empress Isabel, in 1527, before the birth of Philip II. On the other hand St. Ignatius Loyola had ahvays regarded re-garded her Avith suspicion. Falling dangerously ill in 1543, Magdalena confessed to a long career of hypoericy, ascribing most of the marvels to the action ac-tion of demons by Avhich 'she Avas possessed, but maintaining their reality. She Avas sentenced to the Inquisition, in an auto da fe at Cordova in 1546, to perpetual imprisonment in a conx-ent of her or-ider, or-ider, and there she is believed to have ended her days most piously amid marks of the sineerest repentance re-pentance (see Gorres, "Mystik," V, 168-174; Lea, "Chapters from Relig. Hist, of Spain," 330-335). A large number of similar cases haA-e been discussed in considerable detail by Lea both in his "Chapters" "Chap-ters" just cited, and also in the fourth volume of the "History of the Inquisition of Spain," but Lea, though indefatigable as a compiler, is not to be relied re-lied on in the conclusions and inferences he draws. |